# ROG Crosshair VII overclocking thread



## elmor

Crosshair VII

Crosshair VII is here, and plenty of feedback from OCN has made it into the product. It's not revolutionary, but there are a lot of small little tweaks that in the end makes a big difference.


Key highlights:

- CPU/SOC VRM reconfigured to 10+2 and upgraded to IR3555 Power Stages. Additionally the SOC phases are placed between the CPU phases for lower temperatures.

- Supports Asynchronous eCLK mode, which allows you to overclock the CPU reference clock independently from Fabric/DRAM and PCI-E.

- Performance Enhancer option can increase or disable XFR power and current limits allowing you to boost higher and longer. Together with reference clock adjustments this means you can get up to ~4.5 GHz in single threaded loads and 4.2-4.3 GHz in multi threaded. @The Stilt is the original author of this function.

- Much improved voltage monitoring both in software and at ProbeIt points with differential sensing for CPU Core Voltage, CPU SOC Voltage, DRAM Voltage and EPS12V.

- Stealth mode which easily disables Aura and on-board LEDs completely, including the power button and Q-Code display.


For further details, check the attached PDF brief. Or ask in the thread 


BIOS

Latest releases available here: http://www.mediafire.com/folder/jkoxu4r003qu7/Release

*C7H/WIFI BIOS 0601*

- First release on OCN

http://www.mediafire.com/file/lyc7if2402j4203/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-0601.zip sha256 d0d54fe84bf4cacc6cce5abbb071f83166ab4a4ada3d97749632cde1aa50b1e6
http://www.mediafire.com/file/dhf3sqmbg4sh3pj/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0601.zip sha256 28bbc18cf2ec9166feb3776eaffee1d4c17f02e59d11f542bb6568071e1011fb


----------



## MrXL

Nice ! 

Hopefully this thread will be as productive and usefull as the C6H thread is


----------



## lordzed83

Here I am waiting for gifts to test out  If it comes first ill test how my 1700x is on C7H since no cips till 29th of march on silicone lottery


----------



## Infuriare

Crosshair VII Apex when?


----------



## Brko

So now, we can spam it and double post every single day, no matter what so we can get Crosshair VIII Hero in a year, top 8 spammers  ?


----------



## lordzed83

@elmor I had a read of PDF file. Some fantastic things upgraded/fixed !!!! XFR finally will be working like I wanted it to on Zen 1 for WoW in 3D player like myself 1 core going that high is EPIC. As it basically runs on 1 core and many games need 1 core when on 3d due to how software is :/

OO ace You been playing around with der8auer


----------



## Shiftstealth

Super excited i bought this board now that i see the performance enhancer feature along with ref clock overclocking. Hopefully balanced mode works right since it appears that that is required for performance enhancer.


----------



## asdkj1740

i think lots of reviews need to be revisiting the "Performance Enhancer" function.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

im seeing this price right>?

seeing all the problems the previous one had still have issues and problems even the wifi version (sarcastic) only 2 oficial bios available.

are you serious asus>?


----------



## AlphaC

@ zGunBLADEz , the VRM is (more) solid this time so we'll see how it all pans out.

When you compare it against the CH VI Extreme it looks like a bargain.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

AlphaC said:


> @ zGunBLADEz , the VRM is (more) solid this time so we'll see how it all pans out.
> 
> When you compare it against the CH VI Extreme it looks like a bargain.


I have tried different mobos as good the vrm is in the CHVI to my eyes its a total dissapointment. My B350-I Strix walks all over her honestly speaking with less.
Vrm is not even a issue pushing 1.45v+ on that one.

Im also waiting answers on the Strix Z370-G from asus as well.

Somebody has to call them out.


----------



## Shiftstealth

I don't know why everyone is upset. I just received my board. Obviously i haven't had it long, but it seems like a fantastic board.


----------



## Shiftstealth

@elmor I haven't got my 2700X yet, but i've got my 1700 in my CH VII. So just asking about the performance enhancer for when i get my 2700x tomorrow. Should i use the windows ryzen balanced, or just balanced?

Thanks!


----------



## MrXL

^ 
Congrats, Think it will be a great board if you have to get on the train now. 

Not a board to necessarily upgrade to from C6H as Elmor himself honestly says: "It's not revolutionary, but there are a lot of small little tweaks that in the end makes a big difference." 

Overall I expect C7H to be a really nice board. And I do seen many small improvements which overall make the experience better.


----------



## Shiftstealth

MrXL said:


> ^
> Congrats, Think it will be a great board if you have to get on the train now.
> 
> Not a board to necessarily upgrade to from C6H as Elmor himself honestly says: "It's not revolutionary, but there are a lot of small little tweaks that in the end makes a big difference."
> 
> Overall I expect C7H to be a really nice board. And I do seen many small improvements which overall make the experience better.


Thanks. My x370 board was the Prime Pro, but i had a potato 1700 which only went to 3.8. With performance enhancer i should see a nice boost all around if i can force a nice 4.1Ghz all core boost.


----------



## Gettz8488

lordzed83 said:


> @elmor I had a read of PDF file. Some fantastic things upgraded/fixed !!!! XFR finally will be working like I wanted it to on Zen 1 for WoW in 3D player like myself 1 core going that high is EPIC. As it basically runs on 1 core and many games need 1 core when on 3d due to how software is :/
> 
> 
> 
> OO ace You been playing around with der8auer
> 
> https://youtu.be/ogYess5WelY




You might have to teach me to eclk overclock never done it 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## lordzed83

asdkj1740 said:


> i think lots of reviews need to be revisiting the "Performance Enhancer" function.


Have You not noticed most so called Reviewers got less idea how to test Hardware than most of us here. All they do quick multi increse no memory overclocking and thats about it...
Its like giving thema ferrari and for Test drive they go Tesco to pick up some pepsi instead goign track or b road


----------



## asdkj1740

lordzed83 said:


> Have You not noticed most so called Reviewers got less idea how to test Hardware than most of us here. All they do quick multi increse no memory overclocking and thats about it...
> Its like giving thema ferrari and for Test drive they go Tesco to pick up some pepsi instead goign track or b road


it is really hard for reviewers to know everything in advance without insiders information , like the new xfr2.0+pbo settings.
not to mention most of them are extremely time limited on testing new product like new ryzen this time.
no offense, even on c7h wifi, there are few earlier bios versions that dont even support performance echance option. at least what i was told is that the 0207 version of c7h wifi was the latest one (before nda) and will be using on the first wave of retails versison.

not less idea, but not enought time and support. 
elmor makes the latest bios but not all asus over the world get the same one at the same time, lots of delay...
without elmor clarification on his highlights pdf, we still know **** about the proper oc method on new ryzen on new x470 before nda.


----------



## orlfman

i know with first generation ryzen with my 1800x i needed to run soc around 1.1-1.15v's on the soc, but with ryzen+ now having 2933 officially supported, can i just leave soc voltage on auto for my 2700x or do i need to bump it up? right now on auto its running at ~0.900v's (gskill - samsung single rank).


----------



## Shiftstealth

orlfman said:


> i know with first generation ryzen with my 1800x i needed to run soc around 1.1-1.15v's on the soc, but with ryzen+ now having 2933 officially supported, can i just leave soc voltage on auto for my 2700x or do i need to bump it up? right now on auto its running at ~0.900v's (gskill - samsung single rank).


I thought 1.1v was default on X470. In any event i'd still run 1.1v, maybe 1.0v.


----------



## orlfman

Shiftstealth said:


> I thought 1.1v was default on X470. In any event i'd still run 1.1v, maybe 1.0v.


yeah i went ahead and manually set it to 1.1v's. anything less than 1.0v seems low but i thought i just ask since it is refresh ryzen.


----------



## MrXL

Nice post regarding Zen+ from The Stilt at Anand: 

https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/ryzen-strictly-technical.2500572/page-72#post-39391302


----------



## lordzed83

asdkj1740 said:


> it is really hard for reviewers to know everything in advance without insiders information , like the new xfr2.0+pbo settings.
> not to mention most of them are extremely time limited on testing new product like new ryzen this time.
> no offense, even on c7h wifi, there are few earlier bios versions that dont even support performance echance option. at least what i was told is that the 0207 version of c7h wifi was the latest one (before nda) and will be using on the first wave of retails versison.
> 
> not less idea, but not enought time and support.
> elmor makes the latest bios but not all asus over the world get the same one at the same time, lots of delay...
> without elmor clarification on his highlights pdf, we still know **** about the proper oc method on new ryzen on new x470 before nda.


I know and thats why reviews are crap nowadays.
How many of them have Re-Review after few months when bioses and drivers are fixed up ?? 1-2 ?? Does it affect sales ?? NO cause when someone types in google motherboard test he will be bombed with day 1 resoults and on that he will decide on purchase. Tell me I'm wrong ??


----------



## crakej

I'd be very interested to know how Ryzen 1 chips perform in the MB. I have Prime x370 atm and always had trouble with ram oc only getting to an often unreliable 3200. Does the new boost work on the original chips?


----------



## Shiftstealth

crakej said:


> I'd be very interested to know how Ryzen 1 chips perform in the MB. I have Prime x370 atm and always had trouble with ram oc only getting to an often unreliable 3200. Does the new boost work on the original chips?


Only supports up to 3200 on Ryzen 1000. Usually memory limits on Ryzen are up to the IMC.


----------



## asdkj1740

lordzed83 said:


> I know and thats why reviews are crap nowadays.
> How many of them have Re-Review after few months when bioses and drivers are fixed up ?? 1-2 ?? Does it affect sales ?? NO cause when someone types in google motherboard test he will be bombed with day 1 resoults and on that he will decide on purchase. Tell me I'm wrong ??


reviewers in gerneal dont even know when they should revisit the product. the best example is vega. vega non ref cards were all suck because of the previous amd drivers only favoring ref design cards. the non ref vega cards were very difficult to reach 1500mhz stable at that time while reference model can get 1600mhz very easily. and it took amd almost half a year to finally launch a driver with normal support to non ref vega cards.
amd/gpu vendors in general of course wont tell you the bios/driver is still broken, and keep saying everything is fine and getting better. reviewing prodcuts takes lots of time (and money), cant expect every reviewers keep re-reviewing every time when new bios/driver is out, unless they are paid to do so.

this time some oc experts suggest maximizing new ryzen performance by not using traditional oc method (locking all core at the same frequency) but start playing xfr2.0 with pbo to achieve higher single thread performance (which ryzen really needs this).
its probably a new changes on the bios to some reviewers that this changes require times to test out and learn from that, without experts/insiders advice, it is a realy pain to try and error given limited time.

the asus exclusive performance enhancer really helps to implement the xfr2.0 & pbo in a super easy way. go check other vendors bios and you will see how hard for end users to understand how to tweak the settings to get xfr2.0 plus pbo to work properly.


----------



## FlanK3r

Thanks for support and this is one of the best "Asynchronous eCLK mode" features.


----------



## crakej

Shiftstealth said:


> Only supports up to 3200 on Ryzen 1000. Usually memory limits on Ryzen are up to the IMC.


Still interested to hear actual performance - many could already do more than 3200 on the CH6 - and the memory circuits have been redesigned with more efficient MB traces. I would think this gives some benefit, but how much?

Also interested to see how the boost feature worked with Ver 1 chips - supposed to be better than XFR1 - even on V1s


----------



## Shiftstealth

crakej said:


> Still interested to hear actual performance - many could already do more than 3200 on the CH6 - and the memory circuits have been redesigned with more efficient MB traces. I would think this gives some benefit, but how much?
> 
> Also interested to see how the boost feature worked with Ver 1 chips - supposed to be better than XFR1 - even on V1s



I have my 1700 in my CH VII right now, and boost does not appear to be any different. I get my 2700X tonight, and won't be testing after work so i can't comment on the memory differences.


----------



## crakej

Shiftstealth said:


> I have my 1700 in my CH VII right now, and boost does not appear to be any different. I get my 2700X tonight, and won't be testing after work so i can't comment on the memory differences.


Thanks - I'm thinking of getting one of these as my Prime Pro really isn't great, never really been happy with it - others with my ram get much better OCing than me and the sound died on it about a month after I got it 

Are you able to adjust the boost/XFR settings in bios?
@elmor are the different memory implementations between P x370 Pro and CH7 significant?


----------



## Shiftstealth

crakej said:


> Thanks - I'm thinking of getting one of these as my Prime Pro really isn't great, never really been happy with it - others with my ram get much better OCing than me and the sound died on it about a month after I got it
> 
> Are you able to adjust the boost/XFR settings in bios?


Sorry to disappoint you, but i don't think i'll get around to testing that. I'm about to get off work. (I've been up for 19 hours) I'm going to sleep for 6-8 hours until my 2700X arrives then i'm going to pop it in real quick before i go back to work tonight. Sorry man


----------



## sbakic

I have 1700x and C6H WIFI, everything was fine only that boot ram training bug, which is fixed finally with MEMORY CLEAR: disabled. But I don't care about 1700x anymore and I want to buy 2700x with x470. I just want to have boost to 4ghz to all cores with new chip and x470 and no more RAM TRAINING BUG. Is that possible with current UEFI version and new chip?

I want to point that C6H has one BIOS version up to C6H WIFI, but now C7H WIFI has one bios version up to C7H. Which is nice, because I need WIFI.


----------



## crakej

NP @Shiftstealth Def seems you should get to bed! I'm sure someone else will be able to help me.


----------



## lordzed83

@asdkj1740 yup and thats why AMD is in place where it is as they tend to release products with beta state software on it....


----------



## sbakic

It looks like I don't need new x470 motherboard? With new BIOS 6004 C6H WIFI we have xfr2 which means 2700x 4.0ghz at all cores. Is this true?


----------



## FlanK3r

Two weeks ago I was at small event organized by technical university in my city. I had there a little "oldschool" X99 platform and i7-5960X and LN2. After the event I have left around the 5 liters of LN2. And because I had fresh Ryzen 7 2700X in my hands...it was clear  I had no experience with Pinnacle Ridge, bud I assumed the basic principlas are similar as for Summit Ridge.

temporary home workplace 



For cooling of the CPU I used KIngpin Venom pot. But where is AM4 bracket for it? Old series of the pot?...So I put it down at processor heatspreader  Weight is solid, so this contact could be not big issue.


AMD Pinnacle Ridge has not the coldbug, thats means you can cool downd how you want to do  I stayed in BIOS until -150 C and fater saved the new settings and booted to the Windows. As I said, 5 liters of LN2 is not much, not for me with average skills. Maybe for Elmor,, Der8auer or for Dancop is a lot for to do some WRs . But I had one issue with my memory GSkill FlareX. I thought, it is some BIOS issue, but few days later I checked it with support team and one module in kit was broked... So memory worked only at JEDEC 2400MHz and I can increase clock only via BCLK ( timings were impossible to change cause this module error). 
RAMs are now at RMA, so next LN2 session in May will be done with new kit  

Started with GPUPI,and Cinebenchs...The best fun for me were Cinebenchs.


Wprime:


Cinebench at 5375 MHz, 5400 MHz run was so close, but I had no more of LN2 



After I changed quickly memory kit for another one and tried run SUperpi 32M on fumes and hoped for results...



Afterall extreme overlcocking will be always fun for me and Im looking for next one session with Ryzen 7 2700X and retesting 1800X at new Crosshair VII


----------



## Targonis

I am still waiting on my C7H and 2700X, but I have to ask, why did they put a PS/2 connector on the board? Shouldn't PS/2 be dead and recycled(I'm not into dumping potentially toxic materials in the ground by burying old tech products)?


----------



## FlanK3r

you need PS2 example for extreme overlcokers. Its better way or for more easy instalation of Windows7 on X470 (some users do not want Win8/10) and some benchmarks are also better at Windows 7


----------



## crakej

So, I did much thinking today and have talked myself into ordering myself a Crosshair vii Hero -I won't be happy with anything less! Arrives tomorrow


----------



## Shiftstealth

Is anyone else experiencing high temps in HWINFO with BIOS 0509? My idle Tdie is like 40-50C. I have Performance Enhancer on, but im at 2.2Ghz, and it still won't idle lower. Wondering if this is a bug, or i should re-apply TIM.

Thanks!


----------



## lordzed83

Shiftstealth said:


> Is anyone else experiencing high temps in HWINFO with BIOS 0509? My idle Tdie is like 40-50C. I have Performance Enhancer on, but im at 2.2Ghz, and it still won't idle lower. Wondering if this is a bug, or i should re-apply TIM.
> 
> Thanks!


TTL said there is a fixed version 08xx so maybe start there??


----------



## Shiftstealth

lordzed83 said:


> TTL said there is a fixed version 08xx so maybe start there??


Fixed version of HWINFO, or the BIOS? I only saw BIOS 0509 on ASUS's site.


----------



## coreykill99

I Think I seen on the Crosshair VI thread Mumak mentioned you need to update HWINFO to a beta state ATM to get the most accurate readings.


----------



## Shiftstealth

Is anyone aware of the CH VII shutting down, and the power button won't turn it back on, you have to remove the power plug for a few seconds to allow it to turn back on. Wonder what could be causing that. Happened both with my 1700, and 2700X on different BIOS's


----------



## BoMbY

elmor said:


> It's the only way to achieve 2x M.2 at x4 PCIE Gen 3 without a PCI-E bridge chip (very expensive).


A little bit late, but: Funny how a PLX isn't too expensive for Intel products in the same price category, like the Asus Z270-WS, or any of these from your competitors?

Edit: And instead of the PEX 8747 a much smaller PEX 8712 should've been enough for the M.2 slots.


----------



## wingman99

What are the 2700X average overclocking on this motherboard?


----------



## AlphaC

Need liquid cooler over around 4.25GHz...

https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8602/amd-ryzen-7-2700x-5-2600x-review/index10.html
https://overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/asus_rog_x470_crosshair_vii_hero_review/4
https://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/asus_rog_crosshair_vii_hero_(wifi)_review,28.html
https://www.profesionalreview.com/2018/04/19/asus-rog-crosshair-vii-hero-review/
http://lab501.ro/procesoare-chipseturi/pinnacle-ridge-amd-ryzen-7-2700x-part-iii-overclocking/2 4.45GHz @ 1.48V , 4.2GHz @1.406V


----------



## sbakic

Shiftstealth said:


> Is anyone aware of the CH VII shutting down, and the power button won't turn it back on, you have to remove the power plug for a few seconds to allow it to turn back on. Wonder what could be causing that. Happened both with my 1700, and 2700X on different BIOS's


I just ordered 2700x and C7H WIFI don't scare me please.


----------



## Shiftstealth

sbakic said:


> I just ordered 2700x and C7H WIFI don't scare me please.


I think it was more the board than the combo. Maybe even a windows update, but the fact that i have to pull the power makes me think its a board thing. Just a bug. I used all of my old hardware from my X370 PRIME PRO that was stable for months. PSU/GPU/RAM, Then today i wake up when my 2700X gets here, go downstairs, and i need to pull the power on the 1700 in the CH VII for it to reboot. Then enter the 2700X, and it just shuts down while im playing wow. I did have performance enhancer on level 3, and the Stilts 3200Mhz fast timings on on the 2700X so maybe it was that. It's been on for 2 hours now without issues. I did have a windows update roughly 30 minutes before it went down without rebooting on the 1700, but again this feels like a hardware thing since it needed the power pulled to reboot.


----------



## ocacc19

@Shiftstealth
It shuts down as if you'd just pull the power plug, right?
I had the same issue but with a PRIME X370-A, the C6H worked fine (both with 2x16GB FlareX 3200/14). Now I'm worried a bit about the C7H..

I'm wondering if RAM issues can even cause a shutdown and not just a reset.


----------



## sbakic

Man I am sick of C6H failed ram training, i don't want any bug related to ram with c7h wifi thanks.


----------



## Shiftstealth

ocacc19 said:


> @Shiftstealth
> It shuts down as if you'd just pull the power plug, right?
> I had the same issue but with a PRIME X370-A, the C6H worked fine (both with 2x16GB FlareX 3200/14). Now I'm worried a bit about the C7H..
> 
> I'm wondering if RAM issues can even cause a shutdown and not just a reset.


Yep, just goes down hard. Then i have to pull the power and plug it back in for the power button to even work. How'd you fix it on your PRIME X370-A?


----------



## kundica

Shiftstealth said:


> I think it was more the board than the combo. Maybe even a windows update, but the fact that i have to pull the power makes me think its a board thing. Just a bug. I used all of my old hardware from my X370 PRIME PRO that was stable for months. PSU/GPU/RAM, Then today i wake up when my 2700X gets here, go downstairs, and i need to pull the power on the 1700 in the CH VII for it to reboot. Then enter the 2700X, and it just shuts down while im playing wow. I did have performance enhancer on level 3, and the Stilts 3200Mhz fast timings on on the 2700X so maybe it was that. It's been on for 2 hours now without issues. I did have a windows update roughly 30 minutes before it went down without rebooting on the 1700, but again this feels like a hardware thing since it needed the power pulled to reboot.


Performance Enhance 3(and 4) is an OC so you might not be able to run auto voltage when using it.


----------



## Shiftstealth

kundica said:


> Performance Enhance 3(and 4) is an OC so you might not be able to run auto voltage when using it.


It literally just happened at stock everything. Even the RAM was at 2400CL15.


----------



## Syldon

Not a happy bunny here. When I bought the CH6 on release it took 7 weeks before I could use it because the board failed, and then had to be sent back under RMA. 

I installed the CH7 today with a 2700x, and it hit code 8 (initialisation), then stop. I tried the bios update available on the Asus site. I don't know if it is a new revision or just a copy of the original, because I cant get to the bios screen. Still the same though, stop at code 8. I swapped the 2700x for my 1800x and nothing changed. I took everything off the board and just powered it with CPU and no memory, still nothing. It is painful to have a second dead board.

Has anyone else come to this, and found a tweak to get past it before I RMA the board?

As a btw, the 2700x is working fine in my old CH6, so I know it had nothing to do with the CPU.


----------



## Shiftstealth

Syldon said:


> Not a happy bunny here. When I bought the CH6 on release it took 7 weeks before I could use it because the board failed, and then had to be sent back under RMA.
> 
> I installed the CH7 today with a 2700x, and it hit code 8 (initialisation), then stop. I tried the bios update available on the Asus site. I don't know if it is a new revision or just a copy of the original, because I cant get to the bios screen. Still the same though, stop at code 8. I swapped the 2700x for my 1800x and nothing changed. I took everything off the board and just powered it with CPU and no memory, still nothing. It is painful to have a second dead board.
> 
> Has anyone else come to this, and found a tweak to get past it before I RMA the board?
> 
> As a btw, the 2700x is working fine in my old CH6, so I know it had nothing to do with the CPU.


Hopefully @elmor gets on soon to answer both of our questions


----------



## mito1172

If you have CH6, it is unnecessary to buy CH7. and if you have 1800x you do not need to get 2700x


----------



## Shiftstealth

mito1172 said:


> If you have CH6, it is unnecessary to buy CH7. and if you have 1800x you do not need to get 2700x


Wow, helpful.


----------



## crakej

Shiftstealth said:


> Yep, just goes down hard. Then i have to pull the power and plug it back in for the power button to even work. How'd you fix it on your PRIME X370-A?


Do you have HPET disabled? If so, try enable it - had bug similar to this on Prime Pro and this at least allowed the machine to reboot. Does it do this if you try restart from Windows? That's what happened to me, I also had crashes in Windows that would go to reboot but screen just stayed black and had to power off.


----------



## Shiftstealth

crakej said:


> Do you have HPET disabled? If so, try enable it - had bug similar to this on Prime Pro and this at least allowed the machine to reboot. Does it do this if you try restart from Windows? That's what happened to me, I also had crashes in Windows that would go to reboot but screen just stayed black and had to power off.


Thanks for the tip. If i restart from windows it works fine. I think it could be my power supply, but its odd that it just went bad when i replaced the motherboard. In any event i ordered a new PSU and will have it tomorrow. I also tried your tip, and will test and see if that resolves it or not. Maybe i'll be able to cancel my order.


----------



## usoldier

Shiftstealth said:


> Thanks for the tip. If i restart from windows it works fine. I think it could be my power supply, but its odd that it just went bad when i replaced the motherboard. In any event i ordered a new PSU and will have it tomorrow. I also tried your tip, and will test and see if that resolves it or not. Maybe i'll be able to cancel my order.


re-check all cables maybe a bad conection on one of the pins doesnt hurt to try i had a issue once tha the main power cable to the board looked like it was properly seated and it wasnt caused me issues too


----------



## Syldon

deleted


----------



## Shiftstealth

usoldier said:


> re-check all cables maybe a bad conection on one of the pins doesnt hurt to try i had a issue once tha the main power cable to the board looked like it was properly seated and it wasnt caused me issues too


Yeah, i need to do that, thanks for the tip. The crappy thing is im at work. So while i have remote access via RDP i don't have access locally atm


----------



## Shiftstealth

crakej said:


> Do you have HPET disabled? If so, try enable it - had bug similar to this on Prime Pro and this at least allowed the machine to reboot. Does it do this if you try restart from Windows? That's what happened to me, I also had crashes in Windows that would go to reboot but screen just stayed black and had to power off.


1 Hour realbench stable at stock so far since this change. Hopefully this was it.


----------



## CCoR

P-State OC @ 4.2


----------



## Shiftstealth

CCoR said:


> P-State OC @ 4.2


That's some sexy memory latency.


----------



## NBrock

Do any of you guys mind running the CPU-Z 2017.1 benchmark and let me know what single core score is? Overclocked or not. Preferably both


----------



## wingman99

Shiftstealth said:


> 1 Hour realbench stable at stock so far since this change. Hopefully this was it.


I have not used Realbench that much. If the PC reboots running RealBench is it the memory overclock or CPU overclock that is unstable?


----------



## Shiftstealth

wingman99 said:


> I have not used Realbench that much. If the PC reboots running RealBench is it the memory overclock or CPU overclock that is unstable?


My pc was going down hard at stock while idle for what seemed like no reason. I removed windows updates, and enabled HPET and to see if my PC is stable now im using realbench.


----------



## Gettz8488

Is it normal for voltage to spike up to 1.45+ ch7 2700X? Temps when gaming anywhere from 50-62-63 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Esenel

CCoR said:


> P-State OC @ 4.2


Already stable?
Or just benched 

thx


----------



## crakej

Gettz8488 said:


> Is it normal for voltage to spike up to 1.45+ ch7 2700X? Temps when gaming anywhere from 50-62-63
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


I would think so yes - it's completely safe - it does that when it boosts the clocks.


----------



## AlphaC

Gettz8488 said:


> Is it normal for voltage to spike up to 1.45+ ch7 2700X? Temps when gaming anywhere from 50-62-63
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


At stock that's likely normal XFR behavior.

When you have a few threads working it is able to boost voltage without making power to the CPU ludicrous.

You might want to validate your voltages and LLC though.


----------



## crakej

Board arrived today but think I will install tomorrow - I ran out of Liquid Metal and only have some MasterGel paste which just isn't as good so waiting impatiently for some more LM to arrive tomorrow...


----------



## Gettz8488

This is a super noob question but I seriously can’t find the setting for XMP on my ch7 my brother gigabyte has an XMP setting but ch7 has docp that clocks whole system


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## crakej

Gettz8488 said:


> This is a super noob question but I seriously can’t find the setting for XMP on my ch7 my brother gigabyte has an XMP setting but ch7 has docp that clocks whole system
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


DOCP is our ver of XMP and overclocks the memory using the XMP profile - prob not with the settings you want though so you will have to adjust them manually.


----------



## wingman99

crakej said:


> DOCP is our ver of XMP and overclocks the memory using the XMP profile - prob not with the settings you want though so you will have to adjust them manually.


What do you mean by the not with the settings you want?


----------



## crakej

wingman99 said:


> What do you mean by the not with the settings you want?


It might select really loose timings that you can improve on a lot - I was getting settings for 3200 19 19 19 19 which I got down to 14 13 13 13 26


----------



## wingman99

crakej said:


> It might select really loose timings that you can improve on a lot - I was getting settings for 3200 19 19 19 19 which I got down to 14 13 13 13 26


Thanks for the information, that sounds good.


----------



## MrPhilo

crakej said:


> Board arrived today but think I will install tomorrow - I ran out of Liquid Metal and only have some MasterGel paste which just isn't as good so waiting impatiently for some more LM to arrive tomorrow...


Yo

I also decided to get the Crosshair VII as well - Are you planning to use your 1700x on it? Look forward to your RAM OC, see if the motherboard makes any difference compared to Prime  (Even though its mostly IMC)


----------



## Shiftstealth

Shiftstealth said:


> I think it was more the board than the combo. Maybe even a windows update, but the fact that i have to pull the power makes me think its a board thing. Just a bug. I used all of my old hardware from my X370 PRIME PRO that was stable for months. PSU/GPU/RAM, Then today i wake up when my 2700X gets here, go downstairs, and i need to pull the power on the 1700 in the CH VII for it to reboot. Then enter the 2700X, and it just shuts down while im playing wow. I did have performance enhancer on level 3, and the Stilts 3200Mhz fast timings on on the 2700X so maybe it was that. It's been on for 2 hours now without issues. I did have a windows update roughly 30 minutes before it went down without rebooting on the 1700, but again this feels like a hardware thing since it needed the power pulled to reboot.


After uninstalling some windows updates, and enabling HPET i was 17 hours stable in real bench. Trying PE 3 again. Might have been a strange software issue.


----------



## chakku

Seems only the WiFi model is available here at the moment, is BIOS development going to be the same with X470 as it was previously where the C6H was the main development board while the C6H WiFi and C6E got BIOS updates much less frequently?


----------



## crakej

MrPhilo said:


> Yo
> 
> I also decided to get the Crosshair VII as well - Are you planning to use your 1700x on it? Look forward to your RAM OC, see if the motherboard makes any difference compared to Prime  (Even though its mostly IMC)


Yes, keeping my 1700x - it did cost me nearly an arm and a leg so just want a more up to date, better quality MB - i'll be happy if I can run 3200MTs without messing around...

Build quality of the board is very high - can't wait to install it tomorrow.


----------



## Gettz8488

Should I disable temp skew here since everything is reporting 10+ C?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Shiftstealth

These chips really are clocked to the max. After enabling PE 3, i crashed after about 90 minutes of Real bench. Needs more volts to be stable at full boosts for extended periods. Wow.


----------



## Gettz8488

Is svi2 still the most correct voltage reading in the ch7? Svi2 and vcore on the motherboard section of hwinfo are different 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Shiftstealth

Gettz8488 said:


> Is svi2 still the most correct voltage reading in the ch7? Svi2 and vcore on the motherboard section of hwinfo are different
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Yes, SVI2.


----------



## Gettz8488

Shiftstealth said:


> Yes, SVI2.


 hmm i did a manual overclock and couldn't get the CPU to downvolt from 1.35 i tried offset and i tried pstates


----------



## ocacc19

Shiftstealth said:


> Yep, just goes down hard. Then i have to pull the power and plug it back in for the power button to even work. How'd you fix it on your PRIME X370-A?


I didn't fix it but threw the MB away and bought the C6H.

Please keep us updated on that issue. I remember to have switched RAM and PSU and not overclocking which all didn't help.

I'm still wondering: Can RAM issues even cause a complete shutdown? I guess it depends on the MB/BIOS..


----------



## Gettz8488

AlphaC said:


> At stock that's likely normal XFR behavior.
> 
> When you have a few threads working it is able to boost voltage without making power to the CPU ludicrous.
> 
> You might want to validate your voltages and LLC though.




What do you mean validate my voltages how do I do that?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Shiftstealth

ocacc19 said:


> I didn't fix it but threw the MB away and bought the C6H.
> 
> Please keep us updated on that issue. I remember to have switched RAM and PSU and not overclocking which all didn't help.
> 
> I'm still wondering: Can RAM issues even cause a complete shutdown? I guess it depends on the MB/BIOS..


I uninstalled windows updates, and enabled HPET in windows. Was stable for 17 hours in Real Bench. I have since rebooted it to try precision boost overdrive again. While testing PB2-OD i received a normal lockup. I'm at work right now so i haven't tested any further. 

Before removing windows updates, and enabling HPET i was crashing like every 3 hours.


----------



## Gettz8488

Kinda nervous running everything stock voltages are spiking to 1.54ish everything on auto 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Shiftstealth

Gettz8488 said:


> Kinda nervous running everything stock voltages are spiking to 1.54ish everything on auto
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


It's fine. CPU's degrade from current, not voltage spikes. AMD has modeled the data, and determined the life expectancy of the CPU's at those voltages with boost. If the CPU's all start to die in 3 years i'm sure there would be a class action against them.


----------



## Gettz8488

Shiftstealth said:


> It's fine. CPU's degrade from current, not voltage spikes. AMD has modeled the data, and determined the life expectancy of the CPU's at those voltages with boost. If the CPU's all start to die in 3 years i'm sure there would be a class action against them.




If using the auto OC mode level 3 do you recommend running voltages on auto as well?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Shiftstealth

Gettz8488 said:


> If using the auto OC mode level 3 do you recommend running voltages on auto as well?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


I actually was not stable at OC level 3 with default voltages. I made it through like 60m of Real Bench before it locked up (RAM was at default). I've applied a voltage offset of +0.025, but haven't been able to test it yet as i'm at work.


----------



## Gettz8488

Shiftstealth said:


> I actually was not stable at OC level 3 with default voltages. I made it through like 60m of Real Bench before it locked up (RAM was at default). I've applied a voltage offset of +0.025, but haven't been able to test it yet as i'm at work.




Can you inform me if your cpu downvolts with an offset? I’m not sure I tried a manual OC through pstatea and no downvolting 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Shiftstealth

Gettz8488 said:


> Can you inform me if your cpu downvolts with an offset? I’m not sure I tried a manual OC through pstatea and no downvolting
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


I didn't do Pstate overclocking. I have Performance Enhancer set to 3, and i have an offset of +0.025, and yes it downvolts. 2.2Ghz @ 0.796v.


----------



## AlphaC

Gettz8488 said:


> What do you mean validate my voltages how do I do that?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


If you have a multimeter there's voltage read points at the edge of the board. Also you can monitor it via software such as hwinfo64 and Ryzen Master.

Do note I've read quite a few reviews that state essentially the automatic XFR pushes over 1.45V to the CPU when only a few threads are being used. It is a similar situation with XFR on 1st gen.


----------



## Shiftstealth

AlphaC said:


> If you have a multimeter there's voltage read points at the edge of the board. Also you can monitor it via software such as hwinfo64 and Ryzen Master.
> 
> Do note I've read quite a few reviews that state essentially the automatic XFR pushes over 1.45V to the CPU when only a few threads are being used. It is a similar situation with XFR on 1st gen.


Are you aware of how much this can damage the CPU? Obviously AMD feels it's safe, but i'm concerned about applying an offset to make my all core boost with PE3. I added +0.025, and might go to +0.0375 if it isn't stable, but i was curious to get your input since you seem to be well informed. I would think that little addition won't cause significant damage, but since XFR takes it over 1.45 to start concerns me a little. My all core with +0.025 in CPUZ is 1.275v so i'd think i'm beyond safe. I don't push more than 74A through the CPU (Not including the SOC).


----------



## AlphaC

1.45V to 2 cores is less stressful current and power wise compared to 1.45V to 8 of them due to leakage variance with temperature. Depending on leakage of your particular CPU it could be 20W-23W or so and you want to keep it at a minimum. XFR tapers off around 4 cores now instead of at 2 cores , with the 2nd gen Ryzen.

Of course if you plan on keeping the CPU extremely long I'd play it more conservative along 1.35V.

CPU power loading, default:







(source: https://www.anandtech.com/show/12625/amd-second-generation-ryzen-7-2700x-2700-ryzen-5-2600x-2600/5)

I believe you're fine as long as the temperature, current, and other parameters are in check. The Stilt noted the following parameters as default:


> “FIT” as the name suggest is a feature to monitor / track the fitness of the silicon and adjust the operating parameters to maintain the specified and expected reliability. Many semiconductor manufacturers utilize such feature to eke out every last bit of performance, in an ERA where most of the semiconductors are process bound in terms of performance. In short: FIT feature allows the manufacturers to push their designs to the very limit out of the box, without jeopardizing the reliability of the silicon. A practical example would be the knock sensors on an engine. The control unit of the engine always tries to advance the ignition timing as much as possible, to produce the best possible power / torque figures. The purpose of the knock sensors is to listen if knocking occurs and tell the ECU to reduce the timing advance when it does, in order to protect the engine.
> 
> To see what the actual maximum voltage FIT allows the CPU to run at in various different scenarios is, I disabled all of the other limiters and safe guards. With every other limiter / safe guard disabled, the reliability (FIT) becomes the only restrain. The voltage command which the CPU sends to the VRM regulator via the SVI2 interface and the actual effective voltage were then recorded in various scenarios. In stock configuration the sustained maximum effective voltage during all-core stress allowed by FIT was =< 1.330V. Meanwhile, in single core workloads the sustained maximum was =< 1.425V. When the “FIT” parameters were adjusted by increasing the scalar value from the default 1x to the maximum allowed value of 10x, the maximum all-core voltage became 1.380V, while the maximum single core voltage increased to 1.480V. The recorded figures appear to fall very well in line with the seen and known behavior, frequency, power and thermal scaling wise.
> 
> The seen behavior suggests that the full silicon reliability can be maintained up to around 1.330V in all-core workloads (i.e. high current) and up to 1.425V in single core workloads (i.e. low current). Use of higher voltages is definitely possible (as FIT will allow up to 1.380V / 1.480V when scalar is increased by 10x), but it more than likely results in reduced silicon lifetime / reliability. By how much? Only the good folks at AMD who have access to the simulation data will know for sure.


https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/ryzen-strictly-technical.2500572/page-72#post-39391302


----------



## Gettz8488

Not sure if anyone can help me out but I can’t seem to downvolt my cpu if I manually overclock it. I’ve tried just changing Pstate with auto voltage still doesn’t downvolt same story with offset voltage. And I’ve also tried 42 core ratio with offset no downvolting according to svi2


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Brko

Shiftstealth said:


> Thanks for the tip. If i restart from windows it works fine. I think it could be my power supply, but its odd that it just went bad when i replaced the motherboard. In any event i ordered a new PSU and will have it tomorrow. I also tried your tip, and will test and see if that resolves it or not. Maybe i'll be able to cancel my order.


I had similar problem on C6H. But instead of power off, my problem was power up. When l could getting it started, works fine. But many times wont do a reboot or cold power up. So l had to pull the cord out, rapidly switching 0 and 1 ... afterall, PSU was faulty.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk


----------



## Shiftstealth

Brko said:


> I had similar problem on C6H. But instead of power off, my problem was power up. When l could getting it started, works fine. But many times wont do a reboot or cold power up. So l had to pull the cord out, rapidly switching 0 and 1 ... afterall, PSU was faulty.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk


This helps make me feel a bit better. I'm at work, and my remote connection just dropped again so it looks like it just went down again. That being said though this time i had PE 3 on, so i don't know if it just wasn't stable, or if it went dark again. PSU is only 2 years old, but i have a new one i can replace it with when i get him in 5 hours.


----------



## Brko

Glad l could help even a little bit  
I also thought that my Seasonic SS-760KM is bulletproof and l blamed the board.
But then l switched to some cheapish (cheap regarding Seasonic SS-760KM PSU pricing) Fortron 550W and it worked for couple of days, until Seasonic didnt sent me brand new SS-750KM3.

From that moment, never again l had any similar problem.

But, nevertheless, if this will repeat with new PSU, maybe your board is faulty so try to RMA it. Once l had DFI LanParty nF4 Ultra D, bought it immediately after release and it was half dead. Get a new one from RMA and had it for almost 3 years. 

Best of luck and l hope you will manage to solve these issues.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk


----------



## Shiftstealth

Brko said:


> Glad l could help even a little bit
> I also thought that my Seasonic SS-760KM is bulletproof and l blamed the board.
> But then l switched to some cheapish (cheap regarding Seasonic SS-760KM PSU pricing) Fortron 550W and it worked for couple of days, until Seasonic didnt sent me brand new SS-750KM3.
> 
> From that moment, never again l had any similar problem.
> 
> But, nevertheless, if this will repeat with new PSU, maybe your board is faulty so try to RMA it. Once l had DFI LanParty nF4 Ultra D, bought it immediately after release and it was half dead. Get a new one from RMA and had it for almost 3 years.
> 
> Best of luck and l hope you will manage to solve these issues.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk


Appreciate it, hopefully i don't have to return it. I just bought it.


----------



## crakej

Anyone know why on the ROG forums - which I've never posted to, says that I'm banned, and that my ban will NEVER be lifted??? Have tried emailing admin, but no response yet.


----------



## Brko

crakej said:


> Anyone know why on the ROG forums - which I've never posted to, says that I'm banned, and that my ban will NEVER be lifted??? Have tried emailing admin, but no response yet.


They've seen your future posts in crystal ball and than banned you.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk


----------



## ocacc19

Shiftstealth said:


> I uninstalled windows updates, and enabled HPET in windows. Was stable for 17 hours in Real Bench. I have since rebooted it to try precision boost overdrive again. While testing PB2-OD i received a normal lockup. I'm at work right now so i haven't tested any further.
> 
> Before removing windows updates, and enabling HPET i was crashing like every 3 hours.


From what I remember, the shutdowns occured much more often in IDLE, and especially when the PC was booted for the first time on that day or after the PSU was without power for a while.
And I never touched the PB or HPET settings anywhere.


----------



## Gettz8488

Does anyone know if the PE level 3 is safe at those voltages? Getting 1.5+ spikes the temps are completely fine Tdie won’t go past 55C while gaming and stress test are around 70C but those spikes honestly trip me out on single cores it’s hovering at 1.45-1.55 @elmor insight would be great here 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## usoldier

Gettz8488 said:


> Does anyone know if the PE level 3 is safe at those voltages? Getting 1.5+ spikes the temps are completely fine Tdie won’t go past 55C while gaming and stress test are around 70C but those spikes honestly trip me out on single cores it’s hovering at 1.45-1.55
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Same here but on CH6 would love some info on these spikes too


----------



## Gettz8488

Also for some reason my Auto xfr is maxing our at like 4.125 even though my temp is 50C every temp software though is reading it with the +10C offset is there a way to get more aggressive boost without the voltage increase? Until I for sure know these voltages are safe I would not like to xfr atm 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## sbakic

Gettz8488 said:


> Also for some reason my Auto xfr is maxing our at like 4.125 even though my temp is 50C every temp software though is reading it with the +10C offset is there a way to get more aggressive boost without the voltage increase? Until I for sure know these voltages are safe I would not like to xfr atm
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Point is that by default 2700x will make all cores at load run at 40.25x with XFR it will boost to 41.25x as i see from your case. So you are fine. Only at 4 cores you can get 4.1Ghz with XFR 4.2Gz with two cores you can get 4,2Ghz, or XFR 4.3Ghz with one core you can get 4.3Ghz with XFR 4.325GHz, my even 4.4Ghz not sure.

Am I right people with this XFR thing?


----------



## muffins

Gettz8488 said:


> Does anyone know if the PE level 3 is safe at those voltages? Getting 1.5+ spikes the temps are completely fine Tdie won’t go past 55C while gaming and stress test are around 70C but those spikes honestly trip me out on single cores it’s hovering at 1.45-1.55 @elmor insight would be great here
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


i ended up swapping my crosshair vii for a gigabyte x470 gaming 7 as i ordered both to try. gaming 7 isn't as aggressive with the voltage with xfr. i remember reading a few reviews that stated asus made their tuning more aggressive. xfr by design will use high voltages into the 1.4v range but asus does appear to making it more aggressive and causing more frequent 1.5+ volts. on my x470 gaming 7 it hovers around 1.3 - 1.44v's.


----------



## Gettz8488

muffins said:


> i ended up swapping my crosshair vii for a gigabyte x470 gaming 7 as i ordered both to try. gaming 7 isn't as aggressive with the voltage with xfr. i remember reading a few reviews that stated asus made their tuning more aggressive. xfr by design will use high voltages into the 1.4v range but asus does appear to making it more aggressive and causing more frequent 1.5+ volts. on my x470 gaming 7 it hovers around 1.3 - 1.44v's.




I completely love the new board ch7 I think wolf of just need the answer to some questions about xfr2 overclock safe voltages and so on. Everything is at stock for me for the time being can’t risk burning the cpu although I have warranty 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Shiftstealth

muffins said:


> i ended up swapping my crosshair vii for a gigabyte x470 gaming 7 as i ordered both to try. gaming 7 isn't as aggressive with the voltage with xfr. i remember reading a few reviews that stated asus made their tuning more aggressive. xfr by design will use high voltages into the 1.4v range but asus does appear to making it more aggressive and causing more frequent 1.5+ volts. on my x470 gaming 7 it hovers around 1.3 - 1.44v's.


The CPU requests the volts, not the motherboard. I would wager that the measurements are just wrong on the CH VII, not that it's supplying too much voltage.


----------



## usoldier

Shiftstealth said:


> The CPU requests the volts, not the motherboard. I would wager that the measurements are just wrong on the CH VII, not that it's supplying too much voltage.


I Have same voltages on my CH6 scares me seeing 1.5v


----------



## Timur Born

Did anyone check if the C7H's VRM section emits less audible noise than the one on the C6H?


----------



## Safetytrousers

Timur Born said:


> Did anyone check if the C7H's VRM section emits less audible noise than the one on the C6H?


I've never heard the VRM on my C6H.


----------



## Safetytrousers

Shiftstealth said:


> I would wager that the measurements are just wrong on the CH VII, not that it's supplying too much voltage.


That's disappointing if so, I'm pretty sure voltages get reported wrongly on the C6H and I'd hoped they would have fixed that on the C7H.


----------



## crakej

Right, I'm up and running on my C7H - lots to learn! Running nice and smooth at stock...... Love all the new bios options!

I'm I right that SenseMi/Skew needs disabling? Is there anything else I need to know or do (other than update bios) before I go OCing my new board?

I did have a quick go at getting my 1700x to run at 4.2 GHz like it did on Prime x370 Pro, but seems to be a no-go....using the same settings anyway.

Too tired right now so going to do my OC from beginning tomorrow.... there's bound to be differences I need to take into account....


----------



## MNMadman

Timur Born said:


> Did anyone check if the C7H's VRM section emits less audible noise than the one on the C6H?


Had two C6H boards at launch; neither one made any noise at all. Wouldn't expect C7H to either.


----------



## Gettz8488

crakej said:


> Right, I'm up and running on my C7H - lots to learn! Running nice and smooth at stock...... Love all the new bios options!
> 
> I'm I right that SenseMi/Skew needs disabling? Is there anything else I need to know or do (other than update bios) before I go OCing my new board?
> 
> I did have a quick go at getting my 1700x to run at 4.2 GHz like it did on Prime x370 Pro, but seems to be a no-go....using the same settings anyway.
> 
> Too tired right now so going to do my OC from beginning tomorrow.... there's bound to be differences I need to take into account....


If you are able to manually overclock and get the cpu to downvolt pls inform me on how you did so. also you have the 1700x so i'm not sure it still applies but what are your temps spiking at if you were to use XFR. i attached a file of whats happening to my Vcore while its manually overclocked it won't downvolt.


----------



## Gettz8488

This a screenshot of me using Performance Enhancer 1. Spiking up to 1.494. More or less the same thing on auto.


----------



## Ramad

Gettz8488 said:


> If you are able to manually overclock and get the cpu to downvolt pls inform me on how you did so. also you have the 1700x so i'm not sure it still applies but what are your temps spiking at if you were to use XFR. i attached a file of whats happening to my Vcore while its manually overclocked it won't downvolt.


Looks like your CPU is downvolting. See CPU Core VID, this should show if the CPU is downvolting or not. You should not expect correct reading of all sensor's data on earlier versions of motherboards and CPU, maybe on later and more refined BIOS versions.


----------



## Gettz8488

Ramad said:


> Looks like your CPU is downvolting. See CPU Core VID, this should show if the CPU is downvolting or not. You should not expect correct reading of all sensor's data on earlier versions of motherboards and CPU, maybe on later and more refined BIOS versions.


Thanks for this reassurance thing is only the VID of those 2 cores drop all others stay the same guess i have to wait for further bios versions.


----------



## Gettz8488

Just had this super weird issue where my pc just shut off completely. No warning or anything just shut down. So its happening whenever i don't run default settings in bios. even running Performance Enhancer 1 caused it to shut off without warning just shuts off like if it were unplugged Mobo lights stay on. not sure what can be the cause.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Shiftstealth

Gettz8488 said:


> Just had this super weird issue where my pc just shut off completely. No warning or anything just shut down. So its happening whenever i don't run default settings in bios. even running Performance Enhancer 1 caused it to shut off without warning just shuts off like if it were unplugged Mobo lights stay on. not sure what can be the cause.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Did you have to remove the power plug for the power button to work? That was what my issue was. Which MOBO do you have?


----------



## Gettz8488

Shiftstealth said:


> Did you have to remove the power plug for the power button to work? That was what my issue was. Which MOBO do you have?


 i had to turn off the PSU for it to work not remove it. CH7 MOBO how did you fix it?


----------



## Shiftstealth

Gettz8488 said:


> i had to turn off the PSU for it to work not remove it. CH7 MOBO how did you fix it?


Turning off the PSU for some time worked as well(Had to wait about 10s for power to drain etc). I bought a new PSU, and i've been stable for 14 hours, but my issue was so sporadic i'm not sure that its fixed yet. Somtimes it would take 1 hour to pop up sometimes it took 17 hours. Happened stock, and OC'd. You were OCing right? What settings were you using?


----------



## Gettz8488

Shiftstealth said:


> Turning off the PSU for some time worked as well(Had to wait about 10s for power to drain etc). I bought a new PSU, and i've been stable for 14 hours, but my issue was so sporadic i'm not sure that its fixed yet. Somtimes it would take 1 hour to pop up sometimes it took 17 hours. Happened stock, and OC'd. You were OCing right? What settings were you using?




I was over locking when it happens it’s also sporadic I have an evga 850 fully modular but it’s not even a year old. It happens with a manual overclock to 4.12 and Under performance enhancer 1 which I don’t think should have caused it not quite sure what’s happened hopefully it’s not the psu if it happens again I’ll try to reseat cables if not rma time 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Shiftstealth

Gettz8488 said:


> I was over locking when it happens it’s also sporadic I have an evga 850 fully modular but it’s not even a year old. It happens with a manual overclock to 4.12 and Under performance enhancer 1 which I don’t think should have caused it not quite sure what’s happened hopefully it’s not the psu if it happens again I’ll try to reseat cables if not rma time
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Yeah, if my new PSU doesn't resolve this its RMA time.


----------



## Gettz8488

@Shiftstealth What mobo did you have btw?


----------



## Gettz8488

So my pc powered off again with everything on Auto don't think its a bios issue. I have reseated PSU Cables VGA Sata i've reseated the ram and reseated the Psu connection to the mobo. if it happens again i imagin it's rma time. I have an evga 850 Gold fully modula to the mobo i have 1 whole cable connected for the 8pin and half of 1 cable connected for the 4 pin i assume this is okay?


----------



## Gettz8488

After reseating the cable my pc **** off again no warning. Next step I’ll be doing is leaving it on with the bios screen if it doesn’t shut off I think I can rule out power supply and start looking at ram or sata connection


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## elmor

I added the latest BIOS 0601 for C7H/WIFI to the OP.




crakej said:


> Thanks - I'm thinking of getting one of these as my Prime Pro really isn't great, never really been happy with it - others with my ram get much better OCing than me and the sound died on it about a month after I got it
> 
> Are you able to adjust the boost/XFR settings in bios?
> 
> @elmor are the different memory implementations between P x370 Pro and CH7 significant?



I'm not working with the Prime so wouldn't know. I believe it would be a similar change as from C6H, better optimized for using 2 DIMMs but worse for 4 DIMMs.




chakku said:


> Seems only the WiFi model is available here at the moment, is BIOS development going to be the same with X470 as it was previously where the C6H was the main development board while the C6H WiFi and C6E got BIOS updates much less frequently?



Our primary development board is the C7H WIFI.




Gettz8488 said:


> Not sure if anyone can help me out but I can’t seem to downvolt my cpu if I manually overclock it. I’ve tried just changing Pstate with auto voltage still doesn’t downvolt same story with offset voltage. And I’ve also tried 42 core ratio with offset no downvolting according to svi2
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro



Make sure Advanced\AMD CBS\Zen Common Options\Global C-States Control is Enabled and that your OS power profile has a low enough value set for the minimum processor state.




Gettz8488 said:


> Does anyone know if the PE level 3 is safe at those voltages? Getting 1.5+ spikes the temps are completely fine Tdie won’t go past 55C while gaming and stress test are around 70C but those spikes honestly trip me out on single cores it’s hovering at 1.45-1.55 @elmor insight would be great here
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro



Check the SVI2 TFN Core Voltage reading in HWInfo. Up to at least 1.5V in low load scenarios (few threads used) should be ok.




Safetytrousers said:


> That's disappointing if so, I'm pretty sure voltages get reported wrongly on the C6H and I'd hoped they would have fixed that on the C7H.



We've implemented several things to fix this. BIOS and AiSuite is already very accurate if you're on BIOS 0505 or later. Third party software does not have all the fixes yet.




Gettz8488 said:


> Just had this super weird issue where my pc just shut off completely. No warning or anything just shut down. So its happening whenever i don't run default settings in bios. even running Performance Enhancer 1 caused it to shut off without warning just shuts off like if it were unplugged Mobo lights stay on. not sure what can be the cause.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro





Shiftstealth said:


> Is anyone aware of the CH VII shutting down, and the power button won't turn it back on, you have to remove the power plug for a few seconds to allow it to turn back on. Wonder what could be causing that. Happened both with my 1700, and 2700X on different BIOS's



Any red LEDs lighting up on the board? Can you test it on BIOS 0601 I just uploaded?


----------



## Shiftstealth

elmor said:


> I added the latest BIOS 0601 for C7H/WIFI to the OP.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not working with the Prime so wouldn't know. I believe it would be a similar change as from C6H, better optimized for using 2 DIMMs but worse for 4 DIMMs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Our primary development board is the C7H WIFI.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Make sure Advanced\AMD CBS\Zen Common Options\Global C-States Control is Enabled and that your OS power profile has a low enough value set for the minimum processor state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Check the SVI2 TFN Core Voltage reading in HWInfo. Up to at least 1.5V in low load scenarios (few threads used) should be ok.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We've implemented several things to fix this. BIOS and AiSuite is already very accurate if you're on BIOS 0505 or later. Third party software does not have all the fixes yet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any red LEDs lighting up on the board? Can you test it on BIOS 0601 I just uploaded?




Appreciate the support on the new BIOS. I ended up getting so frustrated i tore down my whole rig, everything. Put in my X370 prime, and my old 1700. Wouldn't complete booting. USB Over Current it said. Cycle through to unplugging all my USB devices, KB/Mouse/Kraken X52/ Front panel. Still says it. I think i have a ground on my case somewhere. I've got my board just sitting on my glass desk atm not touching anything, and not using the kraken either. Testing for stability now. 

Aside from the crashes i was getting stuttering in wow, and driver crashes with my 1080 Ti. 

NONE of this happened last week with EVERY part i have now except the Mobo CPU. I even experienced some system halts with the 1700 in the CH VII. So it has to be something contacting it IMO. I feel that if the board was that defective it wouldn't lock up the PSU so i had to unplug it to reboot. 

If you have any input on where i should start i'd appreciate it. I already replaced the PSU.


----------



## SwiperNoSwiping

@elmor @The Stilt

Can you guys provide a little bit more in-depth information about how exactly the new Performance Enhancer feature works? Some questions I have after reading the PDF: 

- What's the difference between level 3 and level 4? (level 1 and 2 as well, for that matter)

- Balanced power plan, as in DEFAULT win 10 balanced, correct? I assume "Ryzen Balanced" is not a thing anymore?

- I assume voltage is handled automatically in this mode, and gives cores as much voltage as CPU requests? 

- To continue previous question - looking at PDF the sample CPU boosted all the way to 4.5 GHz on a single core, I guess that required quite a lot of voltage? Definitely more than 1.4v which are considered "safe" among the community? Will it have any impact on the longevity of CPU, or not really, since for load of this kind current will not really be high enough, while voltage is pretty high? 

If there are any specific tips you guys can give to start getting into this new kind of "overclocking" I'd really appreciate them. Thanks for another great board!


----------



## ocacc19

Gettz8488 said:


> Just had this super weird issue where my pc just shut off completely. No warning or anything just shut down. So its happening whenever i don't run default settings in bios. even running Performance Enhancer 1 caused it to shut off without warning just shuts off like if it were unplugged Mobo lights stay on. not sure what can be the cause.


Wow, the next one with this weird "sudden shutdown" issue.
I really hope ASUS will investigate.


----------



## Shiftstealth

ocacc19 said:


> Wow, the next one with this weird "sudden shutdown" issue.
> I really hope ASUS will investigate.


If you read my post above i think my issue was related to my Case/PSU. I was having all sorts of issues. I think my mobo was grounded in my case. Maybe not, but i'm testing now. I can update you tomorrow if you remind me.


----------



## crakej

So, anybody know what best settings are for SenseMi/Skew?


----------



## Timur Born

crakej said:


> So, anybody know what best settings are for SenseMi/Skew?


Off.


----------



## crakej

Do I need to put my M.2 drive on M.2_1 to retain lane width of x16 for my gpu? I put it on the slot where the heatspreader was (M.2_2)

Does my RX580 need 16 lanes?


----------



## crakej

Timur Born said:


> Off.


Thanks - both of them? Can you point me to anything about SenseMi - don't really know how these affect the board - must do some reading up!


----------



## Zimatcher

Anyone know if the x470 Crosshair VII Hero supports the EK monoblock meant for the X370 Crosshair VI Hero ? Looking to buy a VII but don't want to without the monoblock.


----------



## FlanK3r

SwiperNoSwiping said:


> @elmor @The Stilt
> 
> Can you guys provide a little bit more in-depth information about how exactly the new Performance Enhancer feature works? Some questions I have after reading the PDF:
> 
> - What's the difference between level 3 and level 4? (level 1 and 2 as well, for that matter)
> 
> - Balanced power plan, as in DEFAULT win 10 balanced, correct? I assume "Ryzen Balanced" is not a thing anymore?
> 
> - I assume voltage is handled automatically in this mode, and gives cores as much voltage as CPU requests?
> 
> - To continue previous question - looking at PDF the sample CPU boosted all the way to 4.5 GHz on a single core, I guess that required quite a lot of voltage? Definitely more than 1.4v which are considered "safe" among the community? Will it have any impact on the longevity of CPU, or not really, since for load of this kind current will not really be high enough, while voltage is pretty high?
> 
> If there are any specific tips you guys can give to start getting into this new kind of "overclocking" I'd really appreciate them. Thanks for another great board!


"To continue previous question - looking at PDF the sample CPU boosted all the way to 4.5 GHz on a single core, I guess that required quite a lot of voltage? Definitely more than 1.4v which are considered "safe" among the community"

U can go up to 1.425V by AMD. Personally, Im using 1.45V with AIO cooler long time at first gen Summit Ridge for all cores load. Keep in mind, the boost of XFR has by default (AMD) 1.55V at cores-you can easily check it with HWinfo sensoring. Its OK for load at 2 cores only via XFR/XFR2 boost.


----------



## elmor

Shiftstealth said:


> Appreciate the support on the new BIOS. I ended up getting so frustrated i tore down my whole rig, everything. Put in my X370 prime, and my old 1700. Wouldn't complete booting. USB Over Current it said. Cycle through to unplugging all my USB devices, KB/Mouse/Kraken X52/ Front panel. Still says it. I think i have a ground on my case somewhere. I've got my board just sitting on my glass desk atm not touching anything, and not using the kraken either. Testing for stability now.
> 
> Aside from the crashes i was getting stuttering in wow, and driver crashes with my 1080 Ti.
> 
> NONE of this happened last week with EVERY part i have now except the Mobo CPU. I even experienced some system halts with the 1700 in the CH VII. So it has to be something contacting it IMO. I feel that if the board was that defective it wouldn't lock up the PSU so i had to unplug it to reboot.
> 
> If you have any input on where i should start i'd appreciate it. I already replaced the PSU.





Shiftstealth said:


> If you read my post above i think my issue was related to my Case/PSU. I was having all sorts of issues. I think my mobo was grounded in my case. Maybe not, but i'm testing now. I can update you tomorrow if you remind me.



Good idea to test everything outside the case first. Hopefully everything works well like that and you can start debugging by making a change at a time.




SwiperNoSwiping said:


> @elmor @The Stilt
> 
> Can you guys provide a little bit more in-depth information about how exactly the new Performance Enhancer feature works? Some questions I have after reading the PDF:
> 
> - What's the difference between level 3 and level 4? (level 1 and 2 as well, for that matter)
> 
> - Balanced power plan, as in DEFAULT win 10 balanced, correct? I assume "Ryzen Balanced" is not a thing anymore?
> 
> - I assume voltage is handled automatically in this mode, and gives cores as much voltage as CPU requests?
> 
> - To continue previous question - looking at PDF the sample CPU boosted all the way to 4.5 GHz on a single core, I guess that required quite a lot of voltage? Definitely more than 1.4v which are considered "safe" among the community? Will it have any impact on the longevity of CPU, or not really, since for load of this kind current will not really be high enough, while voltage is pretty high?
> 
> If there are any specific tips you guys can give to start getting into this new kind of "overclocking" I'd really appreciate them. Thanks for another great board!



1)

*Level 1*

PPT Limit = 1000W
TDC Limit = 1000A
EDC Limit = 150A
Customized Precision Overdrive (Scalar) = 10X

*Level 2*

PPT Limit = 1000W
TDC Limit = 1000A
EDC Limit = 1000A
Customized Precision Overdrive (Scalar) = 10X

*Level 3 (OC)*

Tweak from The Stilt which disables the power and current calculation, you might see the SMU calculated power/current in HWInfo showing 0 when using it.

*Level 4 (OC)*

The tweak from The Stilt + Level 2 XFR2 settings. I think Level 4 is way higher than most will be able to run, typically yielding something like 4.35G 1T and 4.30G nT frequency.

2) Yes, default Windows 10 balanced. The Ryzen Balanced profile has the minimum processor state set a bit too high for Level 3/4 to work properly.
3) Voltage requests are sent from the CPU just like at default, so this mode is best used with CPU Core Voltage = Offset mode
4) The settings are listed in there as well, +50mV offset to whatever the CPU requested and will depend on the specific CPU sample. IIRC on one of the chips I tested that resulted in 1.48V in 1T scenarios and 1.36V when fully loaded




crakej said:


> Do I need to put my M.2 drive on M.2_1 to retain lane width of x16 for my gpu? I put it on the slot where the heatspreader was (M.2_2)
> 
> Does my RX580 need 16 lanes?



Yes. I believe you can move the heatspreader from M.2_2 to M.2_1.

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/graphics-performance-myths-debunked,3739-3.html

https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/2488-pci-e-3-x8-vs-x16-performance-impact-on-gpus


----------



## Gettz8488

I left my pc on overnight in the bios screen and no shutdown so it’s happening in windows only. Not sure if I can rule out psu yet


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## crakej

My fans are not smooth on 0601 - they jump up and down - and my temp follow suit.....anyone else got this?


----------



## stevets

Gettz8488 said:


> Just had this super weird issue where my pc just shut off completely. No warning or anything just shut down. So its happening whenever i don't run default settings in bios. even running Performance Enhancer 1 caused it to shut off without warning just shuts off like if it were unplugged Mobo lights stay on. not sure what can be the cause.



The same thing started happening to me. I can reproduce it on bios 0509 by changing the fan profiles in AI Suite 3. If I switch to any of the fan profiles, my system shuts down. This is with system at stock, with the exception of RAM which is running at it's XMP profile - 3200 CL14. 

Just updated to 0601 this morning. I'll give it another test later tonight to see if the problem remains.


----------



## Gettz8488

stevets said:


> The same thing started happening to me. I can reproduce it on bios 0509 by changing the fan profiles in AI Suite 3. If I switch to any of the fan profiles, my system shuts down. This is with system at stock, with the exception of RAM which is running at it's XMP profile - 3200 CL14.
> 
> Just updated to 0601 this morning. I'll give it another test later tonight to see if the problem remains.


 Was it happening randomly and you found a way to reproduce it? or does it only happen with use of ai suite?Okay its starting to look like this may be a mobo issue. chances of it happening too 3 different ppl are really low although Stealths issue was a bit different then mine that his whole system acts up with usb and stuff. mine just shuts off. at the moment i've disconnected my SSD to see if that may be the cause i doubt my PSU is it's not even a year old. It's happened on both 0601 and 0509 Bios. Going to try to reproduce it on ai suite.


----------



## stevets

Gettz8488 said:


> Was it happening randomly and you found a way to reproduce it? or does it only happen with use of ai suite?Okay its starting to look like this may be a mobo issue. chances of it happening too 3 different ppl are really low although Stealths issue was a bit different then mine that his whole system acts up with usb and stuff. mine just shuts off. at the moment i've disconnected my SSD to see if that may be the cause i doubt my PSU is it's not even a year old. It's happened on both 0601 and 0509 Bios. Going to try to reproduce it on ai suite.


It was happening when I would either run the fan tuner in AIS3 or when I would switch to a fan profile; turbo, standard, etc - the system would immediately halt and power off. At that point, I would also be in a situation where all of the Aura LEDs were pulsing in their default config and the chassis power button would not power on the system. To recover, I had to flip the PSU switch to off and hold the power button until all LEDs on the board went out, then I flipped the PSU back to on and powered the system on via chassis power button. 

I am at work, but when I return home I'll test it out. I need to install AIS3 again too. 

My PSU is a brand new Seasonic SSR-750TR, for what it's worth.


----------



## Gettz8488

stevets said:


> It was happening when I would either run the fan tuner in AIS3 or when I would switch to a fan profile; turbo, standard, etc - the system would immediately halt and power off. At that point, I would also be in a situation where all of the Aura LEDs were pulsing in their default config and the chassis power button would not power on the system. To recover, I had to flip the PSU switch to off and hold the power button until all LEDs on the board went out, then I flipped the PSU back to on and powered the system on via chassis power button.
> 
> 
> 
> I am at work, but when I return home I'll test it out. I need to install AIS3 again too.
> 
> 
> 
> My PSU is a brand new Seasonic SSR-750TR, for what it's worth.




Your system powers off exactly like mine with the default pulsing lights and the flipping of the psu. What is your cooling solution? I was able to get it to shut down once while running fan tuner when I hit stop on it but I’m not able to replicate it again so not sure if it was pure coincidence or not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Gettz8488

@elmor also it didn’t shut down in over 10+ hours while sitting in bios so it only happens in windows going to try a windows reinstall but not sure where else to look I don’t think it’s psu I’m using the same exact parts I did when I had my 1700X and ch6 it has to be either mobo or cpu 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## crakej

@elmor I powered off my machine, moved the NVMe to m.2_1 and it took me a cmos reset and nearly 10 minutes to boot - it just sat there at qcode 64 for ages until eventually it booted, but into some kind go slow mode!

In the bios mouse was unusable, and keystrokes were only recognised after about a second, if they were recognised. I rebooted and waited to see what would happen if it booted, which it did eventually, but again everything just stopped every few seconds. I tried cmos reset button, I tried the retry button, I tried moving the drive back, I tried taking it out - non of which worked.

I decided to reflash from UEFI - bit scary as it stopped every few seconds for 1 to 3 seconds, but it completed successfully.... eventually! This has fixed it - I have no idea what happened, unless I had made a mistake in my settings somewhere, but I thought the bios would have re detected the NVMe in its new place.

One other thing I noticed - on my old board, Prime Pro, it recognised 2 keyboards for some reason. My C7H reports that I have 3! I'm guessing this is because my keyboard is USB, and I also have an MS wireless mouse, so guess something on the dongle might be detected as keyboard, and now I have PS/2 connector which must count as 3 right? Don't think it causes a problem - just confusing when I'm only using 1..

I'm on bios 0601


----------



## Gettz8488

crakej said:


> @elmor I powered off my machine, moved the NVMe to m.2_1 and it took me a cmos reset and nearly 10 minutes to boot - it just sat there at qcode 64 for ages until eventually it booted, but into some kind go slow mode!
> 
> 
> 
> In the bios mouse was unusable, and keystrokes were only recognised after about a second, if they were recognised. I rebooted and waited to see what would happen if it booted, which it did eventually, but again everything just stopped every few seconds. I tried cmos reset button, I tried the retry button, I tried moving the drive back, I tried taking it out - non of which worked.
> 
> 
> 
> I decided to reflash from UEFI - bit scary as it stopped every few seconds for 1 to 3 seconds, but it completed successfully.... eventually! This has fixed it - I have no idea what happened, unless I had made a mistake in my settings somewhere, but I thought the bios would have re detected the NVMe in its new place.
> 
> 
> 
> One other thing I noticed - on my old board, Prime Pro, it recognised 2 keyboards for some reason. My C7H reports that I have 3! I'm guessing this is because my keyboard is USB, and I also have an MS wireless mouse, so guess something on the dongle might be detected as keyboard, and now I have PS/2 connector which must count as 3 right? Don't think it causes a problem - just confusing when I'm only using 1..
> 
> 
> 
> I'm on bios 0601




Sorry if I’m asking to much can you try running fan expert on AI suite? Some of us have been able to reproduce the system shutting down. I did it once and it seems like Steve up there can consistently do it. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## crakej

It would be really useful guys if you could put your build components in your sig - makes it much easier to work out whats what!


----------



## crakej

Gettz8488 said:


> Sorry if I’m asking to much can you try running fan expert on AI suite? Some of us have been able to reproduce the system shutting down. I did it once and it seems like Steve up there can consistently do it.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Funnily enough I tried it as soon as I read about it - works ok for me - do you all have 2xxx CPUs?

I do have probs with fans jumping up and down too quickly, but couldn't crash it


----------



## Gettz8488

crakej said:


> Funnily enough I tried it as soon as I read about it - works ok for me - do you all have 2xxx CPUs?




2700X and CH7


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## crakej

Really - it would help everyone, not least Elmor, to put all your components down in the sig, make for much faster problem solving! Just click on *Tools>QuickLinks>Edit Signature* above - took me ages to work out how to do it!

I'm happy to help whenever I can - you should never be afraid to ask, thats what this is here for!


----------



## Gettz8488

crakej said:


> Really - it would help everyone, not least Elmor, to put all your components down in the sig, make for much faster problem solving! Just click on *Tools>QuickLinks>Edit Signature* above - took me ages to work out how to do it!
> 
> I'm happy to help whenever I can - you should never be afraid to ask, thats what this is here for!


 Done thank you couldn't find it before.


----------



## stevets

crakej said:


> Really - it would help everyone, not least Elmor, to put all your components down in the sig, make for much faster problem solving! Just click on *Tools>QuickLinks>Edit Signature* above - took me ages to work out how to do it!
> 
> I'm happy to help whenever I can - you should never be afraid to ask, thats what this is here for!


Done.


----------



## Gettz8488

Steps i've taken to Attempt fix on shut down issue.

Step 1 Reseated all cables and connections to make sure it wasn't a cable
Step 2 Disconnect SSD From psu/Sata to verify it wasn't that cable
Step 3 The step i'm currently on reinstalled windows left all fans on auto, did not download corsair link have an eerie feeling about this being it since it reads temp at 90+, set ram to 3200 CL 16 manually, Set offset voltage to -0.0500 so far so good will continue to test.

Bios Version 0601


----------



## crakej

Gettz8488 said:


> Steps i've taken to Attempt fix on shut down issue.
> 
> Step 1 Reseated all cables and connections to make sure it wasn't a cable
> Step 2 Disconnect SSD From psu/Sata to verify it wasn't that cable
> Step 3 The step i'm currently on reinstalled windows left all fans on auto, did not download corsair link have an eerie feeling about this being it since it reads temp at 90+, set ram to 3200 CL 16 manually, Set offset voltage to -0.0500 so far so good will continue to test.
> 
> Bios Version 0601


Wow - 90c? where was that temp? in your power supply? Wherever it is it's quite high!


----------



## sonic2911

Hi, I’m going to switch to Red team, this mobo is just in stock, so is it good time to get it or keep waiting for 1-2 months reviews so far.
Thanks


----------



## Gettz8488

crakej said:


> Wow - 90c? where was that temp? in your power supply? Wherever it is it's quite high!


 Corsair link is the only software reading 90C all other are reading 40-50C thats why i think it may be a software issue we will see


----------



## crakej

sonic2911 said:


> Hi, I’m going to switch to Red team, this mobo is just in stock, so is it good time to get it or keep waiting for 1-2 months reviews so far.
> Thanks


It's a great board - needs a bit of work, but there is active development with ASUS people looking in to this forum.


----------



## crakej

Gettz8488 said:


> Corsair link is the only software reading 90C all other are reading 40-50C thats why i think it may be a software issue we will see


I've never used Corsair Link - but if it's reporting 90c then that does seem high. I know my RM850 rarely uses it's fan, but without link I've never known what temp it is any way...


----------



## Gettz8488

crakej said:


> I've never used Corsair Link - but if it's reporting 90c then that does seem high. I know my RM850 rarely uses it's fan, but without link I've never known what temp it is any way...


 The only corsair thing i have in my pc is ram and aio. i haven't gotten any shutdowns yet hopefully it stays this way until more bios versions come out. and more updates for cosair link


----------



## stevets

Gettz8488 said:


> The only corsair thing i have in my pc is ram and aio. i haven't gotten any shutdowns yet hopefully it stays this way until more bios versions come out. and more updates for cosair link


I also see crazy temp readouts (like 90-105C on CPU) from Corsair Link and the NZXT CAM software. The only thing that has been accurate thus far is AIS3 or HWinfo. This has been consistent on the 0509 BIOS, but I haven't checked 0601. 

I think someone mentioned earlier in the thread that 3rd party software isn't working at the moment, but that it will in the future. So I'm not sweating it too much.


----------



## Gettz8488

stevets said:


> I also see crazy temp readouts (like 90-105C on CPU) from Corsair Link and the NZXT CAM software. The only thing that has been accurate thus far is AIS3 or HWinfo. This has been consistent on the 0509 BIOS, but I haven't checked 0601.
> 
> I think someone mentioned earlier in the thread that 3rd party software isn't working at the moment, but that it will in the future. So I'm not sweating it too much.


I've reinstalled windows and didn't install corsair link or change fan curved so far so good. will update you if no more shutdowns. HWinfo reads the correct temps so sticking to that.


----------



## crakej

stevets said:


> I also see crazy temp readouts (like 90-105C on CPU) from Corsair Link and the NZXT CAM software. The only thing that has been accurate thus far is AIS3 or HWinfo. This has been consistent on the 0509 BIOS, but I haven't checked 0601.
> 
> I think someone mentioned earlier in the thread that 3rd party software isn't working at the moment, but that it will in the future. So I'm not sweating it too much.


Deff worth updating your bios


----------



## sonic2911

crakej said:


> It's a great board - needs a bit of work, but there is active development with ASUS people looking in to this forum.




So are there any issues so far on this board?


----------



## Ethan_Ryu

When i start ryzen master i get error D3 is that normal?


----------



## QuadJunkyx

sonic2911 said:


> crakej said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's a great board - needs a bit of work, but there is active development with ASUS people looking in to this forum.
> 
> 
> 
> So are there any issues so far on this board?
Click to expand...

For me memory tweaking and testing has been a nightmare I randomly lose both network cards yet it runs prefect other wise. Random locks ups when atempting to enter the bios or hangs pre windows. 

Been great if left stock after I correct the above issues but who buys a c7h to run it stock


----------



## Gettz8488

sonic2911 said:


> So are there any issues so far on this board?




There might be a random shut down issue it’s to soon to tell. I don’t believe so but 3 of us on here have it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## sonic2911

Gettz8488 said:


> There might be a random shut down issue it’s to soon to tell. I don’t believe so but 3 of us on here have it.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro




Maybe I should wait for couple weeks, hmm...



QuadJunkyx said:


> For me memory tweaking and testing has been a nightmare I randomly lose both network cards yet it runs prefect other wise. Random locks ups when atempting to enter the bios or hangs pre windows.
> 
> Been great if left stock after I correct the above issues but who buys a c7h to run it stock





Yes, memory is the most concern about ryzen, gskill will release some kits for ryzen 2 on the end of April. Maybe it’ll better for tweaking


----------



## Rusakova

Gettz8488 said:


> There might be a random shut down issue it’s to soon to tell. I don’t believe so but 3 of us on here have it.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


No random shut down issues here.

2700X, EVGA SC2 1080Ti, F4 3200C14D-32GTZ ram, AIO cooler, 1x960 EVO (moved to slot 2.1 for full x16 PCIe 3.0 - cooling plate fits nicely), 2xSSD, 1x4 TB HDD. 
All in a Fractal Design Define C case. My board came with bios 0207 which could run ran @ 3200 MHz. Updated to 0509 and ram was unstable.
So I lowered Ram voltage to 1.3450 and SOC to Offset - 0.1250 (ProcODT_SM, RTT and CAD the same as before) and now it's humming along nicely.
I also had the fan up / down issue. But after tweaking fan profile it's more "normal" now.


----------



## Gettz8488

Rusakova said:


> No random shut down issues here.
> 
> 2700X, EVGA SC2 1080Ti, F4 3200C14D-32GTZ ram, AIO cooler, 1x960 EVO (moved to slot 2.1 for full x16 PCIe 3.0 - cooling plate fits nicely), 2xSSD, 1x4 TB HDD.
> All in a Fractal Design Define C case. My board came with bios 0207 which could run ran @ 3200 MHz. Updated to 0509 and ram was unstable.
> So I lowered Ram voltage to 1.3450 and SOC to Offset - 0.1250 (ProcODT_SM, RTT and CAD the same as before) and now it's humming along nicely.
> I also had the fan up / down issue. But after tweaking fan profile it's more "normal" now.


 Few questions did you download your aio software for example corsair link? have you adjusted any fan curves in bios? so far i don't have shut downs since i reinstalled windows. but have to let it keep going for a few more hours to see if it shuts down again.


----------



## QuadJunkyx

sonic2911 said:


> Yes, memory is the most concern about ryzen, gskill will release some kits for ryzen 2 on the end of April. Maybe it’ll better for tweaking


The current kit I I can tweak fine except if I can one setting wrong(not sure which) the wifi / bluetooth/network card die. If i am lucky I can reset and they come back to life other wise it requires flashing the bios to get them back. IDK maybe I am doing it wrong last time I tinkered this much was when I owned an Athlon T-bird with a a 1 pound copper heatsink and vantex tornado fans 8D Maybe it is an early bios issue xfingers


----------



## Rusakova

Gettz8488 said:


> Few questions did you download your aio software for example corsair link? have you adjusted any fan curves in bios? so far i don't have shut downs since i reinstalled windows. but have to let it keep going for a few more hours to see if it shuts down again.


No I'm not using CorsAir link. I did use it on my first Ryzen build, but had so many problems with the USB driver I just gave up.
My AIO is a CorsAir 110i GT where I changed the fans to two Noctua PWM fans. Yes, I have adjusted fan curve in BIOS.


----------



## Gettz8488

Rusakova said:


> No I'm not using CorsAir link. I did use it on my first Ryzen build, but had so many problems with the USB driver I just gave up.
> 
> My AIO is a CorsAir 110i GT where I changed the fans to two Noctua PWM fans. Yes, I have adjusted fan curve in BIOS.




I have the same aio pretty much with two noctua fans.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## sonic2911

QuadJunkyx said:


> The current kit I I can tweak fine except if I can one setting wrong(not sure which) the wifi / bluetooth/network card die. If i am lucky I can reset and they come back to life other wise it requires flashing the bios to get them back. IDK maybe I am doing it wrong last time I tinkered this much was when I owned an Athlon T-bird with a a 1 pound copper heatsink and vantex tornado fans 8D Maybe it is an early bios issue xfingers




Why do the wifi/bt card die easily?


----------



## QuadJunkyx

Well I had a random shutdown, when attempting to reboot it hung at 3E q code now i am stuck with no network as both do not show up in windows.

Anyone have an idea?

Edit: flashing bios 0207 got the network cards going again.....


----------



## Shiftstealth

QuadJunkyx said:


> Well I had a random shutdown, when attempting to reboot it hung at 3E q code now i am stuck with no network as both do not show up in windows.
> 
> Anyone have an idea?


Did you have to pull your power cable to push the power button back on, or did it just turn back on?


----------



## QuadJunkyx

Shiftstealth said:


> Did you have to pull your power cable to push the power button back on, or did it just turn back on?


Pulling the cord did not work(3 times waited on mobo lights to go out), I kept rebooting it too see where it hung same code each time 3E - Post-Memory PCH intialization is started
ax860i did not show a short I got it to boot after remembering seeing a safe boot button lucky it booted after pressing it. 

After it booted I still did not have network or wifi thankfully i downloaded every bios from the asus site going back to 0207 got the wifi back so far back too 0401.


----------



## Gettz8488

@Shiftstealth @StevePete have had no shutdowns since I reinstalled windows let me tell you the things I’ve done differently. 

Made sure Ssd power cables were fit nice and snug, reinstall windows, declined Grid Asus software install. Did not install any Asus software. Did not install Corsair link<- I feel like this might be the culprit. So far so good don’t want to jinx it but if I don’t get any more shut downs we can assume my issue was software based 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Rusakova

Gettz8488 said:


> @Shiftstealth @StevePete have had no shutdowns since I reinstalled windows let me tell you the things I’ve done differently.
> 
> Made sure Ssd power cables were fit nice and snug, reinstall windows, declined Grid Asus software install. Did not install any Asus software. Did not install Corsair link<- I feel like this might be the culprit. So far so good don’t want to jinx it but if I don’t get any more shut downs we can assume my issue was software based
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


I cross my fingers for you  I find it weird that the installation of the Asus Grid software is defined in the BIOS.


----------



## Shiftstealth

Gettz8488 said:


> @Shiftstealth @StevePete have had no shutdowns since I reinstalled windows let me tell you the things I’ve done differently.
> 
> Made sure Ssd power cables were fit nice and snug, reinstall windows, declined Grid Asus software install. Did not install any Asus software. Did not install Corsair link<- I feel like this might be the culprit. So far so good don’t want to jinx it but if I don’t get any more shut downs we can assume my issue was software based
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


I'm fairly certain at this point the issue was my case. When i had my PC in the case the old PSU would just shut off, probably for protection, and the new one would start spinning excessively loud when i was playing wow. I was also getting driver crashes, and stuttering in WOW. I then put my old X370 Prime Pro in the case, and it wouldn't boot. USB over current it said even though i had no USB devices plugged in, or even my case front panel anymore. So i decided to set up my rig naked on my glass desk. It has been pretty much stable since then. I did have 2 BSOD's but they seem to be related to me opening HWINFO. When i opened HWINFO i got memory management BSOD's so i'm testing my memory now. It's at 500%, and no errors. So i think HWINFO just caused some issues. Furthermore my new PSU no longer spins up excessively loud. What concerns me is that there are some markings on the back of the mobo now, presumably from the short. It looks like water marks, but its probably from the short as i don't think my NZXT Kraken was leaking. In any event though, i am on the stock cooler now, and it seems fine.


----------



## wingman99

Shiftstealth said:


> I'm fairly certain at this point the issue was my case. When i had my PC in the case the old PSU would just shut off, probably for protection, and the new one would start spinning excessively loud when i was playing wow. I was also getting driver crashes, and stuttering in WOW. I then put my old X370 Prime Pro in the case, and it wouldn't boot. USB over current it said even though i had no USB devices plugged in, or even my case front panel anymore. So i decided to set up my rig naked on my glass desk. It has been pretty much stable since then. I did have 2 BSOD's but they seem to be related to me opening HWINFO. When i opened HWINFO i got memory management BSOD's so i'm testing my memory now. It's at 500%, and no errors. So i think HWINFO just caused some issues. Furthermore my new PSU no longer spins up excessively loud. What concerns me is that there are some markings on the back of the mobo now, presumably from the short. It looks like water marks, but its probably from the short as i don't think my NZXT Kraken was leaking. In any event though, i am on the stock cooler now, and it seems fine.


Did you see where it is was shorting in the case?


----------



## Shiftstealth

wingman99 said:


> Did you see where it is was shorting in the case?


No idea. I just put the case in storage, and i'm so frustrated i don't want to touch it. I mean, i feel like it could have been the Kraken since there are some marks pushing out from the mounting holes on the back of the mobo. But the front is completely fine. So i can't think it was the kraken. It was vertical, and i feel like it would have ran down the front, and onto the video card as well. So i feel like the marks on the back of the mobo are from ESD. It wasn't shorting my X370 Prime Pro the day before i put the CH VII in. So i don't know what i could have moved in the case that would have shorted it. I ended up ordering a Corsair Carbide Air 540 since it's a plastic case mostly.


The Phanteks Evolv i had was basically just a sheet of metal.


----------



## Gettz8488

Shiftstealth said:


> No idea. I just put the case in storage, and i'm so frustrated i don't want to touch it. I mean, i feel like it could have been the Kraken since there are some marks pushing out from the mounting holes on the back of the mobo. But the front is completely fine. So i can't think it was the kraken. It was vertical, and i feel like it would have ran down the front, and onto the video card as well. So i feel like the marks on the back of the mobo are from ESD. It wasn't shorting my X370 Prime Pro the day before i put the CH VII in. So i don't know what i could have moved in the case that would have shorted it. I ended up ordering a Corsair Carbide Air 540 since it's a plastic case mostly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Phanteks Evolv i had was basically just a sheet of metal.




Ironically I have a phanteks enthoo luxe tempered glass I don’t think my shut downs were due to shortage though I wasn’t having any driver issues or usb issues it would just completely power down for no apparent reason. I’m going on like 10 hours right now with no shut off so I’m praying. Trying to figure out a problem like that would make me lose my mind I would literally rma every piece of my system. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Shiftstealth

Gettz8488 said:


> Ironically I have a phanteks enthoo luxe tempered glass I don’t think my shut downs were due to shortage though I wasn’t having any driver issues or usb issues it would just completely power down for no apparent reason. I’m going on like 10 hours right now with no shut off so I’m praying. Trying to figure out a problem like that would make me lose my mind I would literally rma every piece of my system.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


When you're in windows what is displayed on your Q-Code? Idk if its normal, but since its out in the open for me to look at it just shows d3. Not sure if this represents any kind of issue, or not.


----------



## Gettz8488

Shiftstealth said:


> I'm fairly certain at this point the issue was my case. When i had my PC in the case the old PSU would just shut off, probably for protection, and the new one would start spinning excessively loud when i was playing wow. I was also getting driver crashes, and stuttering in WOW. I then put my old X370 Prime Pro in the case, and it wouldn't boot. USB over current it said even though i had no USB devices plugged in, or even my case front panel anymore. So i decided to set up my rig naked on my glass desk. It has been pretty much stable since then. I did have 2 BSOD's but they seem to be related to me opening HWINFO. When i opened HWINFO i got memory management BSOD's so i'm testing my memory now. It's at 500%, and no errors. So i think HWINFO just caused some issues. Furthermore my new PSU no longer spins up excessively loud. What concerns me is that there are some markings on the back of the mobo now, presumably from the short. It looks like water marks, but its probably from the short as i don't think my NZXT Kraken was leaking. In any event though, i am on the stock cooler now, and it seems fine.




I haven’t had any problem booting and even attempted before I reinstalled windows I left my pc ON an entire night but loaded onto the bios no shut down. The next day load into windows played around a bit boom shutdown. So somewhere there either Corsair link or new grid Asus software possibly a loose ssd cable causes my issue


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Gettz8488

Shiftstealth said:


> When you're in windows what is displayed on your Q-Code? Idk if its normal, but since its out in the open for me to look at it just shows d3. Not sure if this represents any kind of issue, or not.




I’ll check tomorrow as I’d get my head chopped off if pay even more attention to the system instead of the wifey 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## elmor

stevets said:


> The same thing started happening to me. I can reproduce it on bios 0509 by changing the fan profiles in AI Suite 3. If I switch to any of the fan profiles, my system shuts down. This is with system at stock, with the exception of RAM which is running at it's XMP profile - 3200 CL14.
> 
> Just updated to 0601 this morning. I'll give it another test later tonight to see if the problem remains.





Gettz8488 said:


> Your system powers off exactly like mine with the default pulsing lights and the flipping of the psu. What is your cooling solution? I was able to get it to shut down once while running fan tuner when I hit stop on it but I’m not able to replicate it again so not sure if it was pure coincidence or not.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro





Gettz8488 said:


> Steps i've taken to Attempt fix on shut down issue.
> 
> Step 1 Reseated all cables and connections to make sure it wasn't a cable
> Step 2 Disconnect SSD From psu/Sata to verify it wasn't that cable
> Step 3 The step i'm currently on reinstalled windows left all fans on auto, did not download corsair link have an eerie feeling about this being it since it reads temp at 90+, set ram to 3200 CL 16 manually, Set offset voltage to -0.0500 so far so good will continue to test.
> 
> Bios Version 0601



Trying to find the reason this is happening. A basic system with AiSuite 3 installed doesn't show this issue. Seems like you all are using Corsair Link? Or similar software from NZXT?

*edit: Installed Corsair Link, then as soon as I changed the Fan Profile in AiSuite the board shuts down.*

I suggest you refrain from using any of those software (remove either AiSuite or others) until we've solved this.




crakej said:


> Really - it would help everyone, not least Elmor, to put all your components down in the sig, make for much faster problem solving! Just click on *Tools>QuickLinks>Edit Signature* above - took me ages to work out how to do it!
> 
> I'm happy to help whenever I can - you should never be afraid to ask, thats what this is here for!



Lol, too much hardware around here for debugging.


----------



## Shiftstealth

elmor said:


> Trying to find the reason this is happening. A basic system with AiSuite 3 installed doesn't show this issue. Seems like you all are using Corsair Link? Or similar software from NZXT?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lol, too much hardware around here for debugging.


 @elmor is it normal for the board to display the d3 Q-code when in windows?

Thanks!


----------



## Shiftstealth

Shiftstealth said:


> @elmor is it normal for the board to display the d3 Q-code when in windows?
> 
> Thanks!


Newegg just agreed to cross-ship me a replacement for my CH VII since it appears to have electrical damage from the short on the back. Major, major props to newegg. I think the new one works fine now, but since it shut down a few times i just don't trust it.


----------



## chakku

Where is the Performance Enhancer in BIOS 0601? I can't seem to find it.
Scratch that the BIOS didn't flash properly, what do we need to name the .CAP file for flash back on this board? C7H seems to not work.

On another note I also can't seem to hit the same memory overclock that I could on my C6H with dual rank Hynix M-die.. I thought 1DPC was meant to be easier with this board.
Works the same after flashing 0601, nevermind.
Barely works, doesn't like cold boots. 3066 seems to work flawlessly though.


----------



## Mumak

Shiftstealth said:


> I'm fairly certain at this point the issue was my case. When i had my PC in the case the old PSU would just shut off, probably for protection, and the new one would start spinning excessively loud when i was playing wow. I was also getting driver crashes, and stuttering in WOW. I then put my old X370 Prime Pro in the case, and it wouldn't boot. USB over current it said even though i had no USB devices plugged in, or even my case front panel anymore. So i decided to set up my rig naked on my glass desk. It has been pretty much stable since then. I did have 2 BSOD's but they seem to be related to me opening HWINFO. When i opened HWINFO i got memory management BSOD's so i'm testing my memory now. It's at 500%, and no errors. So i think HWINFO just caused some issues. Furthermore my new PSU no longer spins up excessively loud. What concerns me is that there are some markings on the back of the mobo now, presumably from the short. It looks like water marks, but its probably from the short as i don't think my NZXT Kraken was leaking. In any event though, i am on the stock cooler now, and it seems fine.


If you're still getting a BSOD when running HWiNFO, enable Debug Mode and after reboot post the HWiNFO Debug File created. I will have a look at that.


----------



## Shiftstealth

Mumak said:


> If you're still getting a BSOD when running HWiNFO, enable Debug Mode and after reboot post the HWiNFO Debug File created. I will have a look at that.


I'll give that a whirl, and let you know if i have anymore crashes.

Thanks!


----------



## Gettz8488

Shiftstealth said:


> Newegg just agreed to cross-ship me a replacement for my CH VII since it appears to have electrical damage from the short on the back. Major, major props to newegg. I think the new one works fine now, but since it shut down a few times i just don't trust it.




What did you say to get it cross shipped? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Shiftstealth

Gettz8488 said:


> What did you say to get it cross shipped?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


I mean, i was just polite, and didn't really demand it, i told them i was asking them a favor, and that i've been a customer for 10 years. "I know i'm asking a lot, i'm hoping the fact i've been a customer for 10 years earns me *some* trust"


----------



## Ethan_Ryu

@elmor
While memory is working ok (3600 15 / 3330 cl14) booting and running without problems, every time i run ryzen master i get d3 everything seems to keep working tho, voltage on auto was getting way way too high when checking ryzenmaster (1.45V even going 1.5+V) with performance 3 giving a lot of clock but asking from time to time an insane amount of V.
So i changed to auto performance with offset mode with "-" "0.1" and it s been going 1.41-1.43 max, motherboard shipped with the old bios tried the 5xxx one and the 6xxx from here, performance:temps ratio got worst, on top of that i have problem with intel burn test reporting error or crashing and aida reporting cpu temp 30C diode 90C. What should i use to monitor voltage and temps? HWiNFO Aida and RyzenMaster give different readings.


----------



## BoMbY

@elmor:

To reiterate on what I wrote earlier: Since there have been boards for Intel CPUs with a big PLX in the same price range, the price shouldn't be a real issue to use an additional small PLX on an AM4 board.

From the specs even the following should be possible with a small PLX: 










And in addition to that you could still use the PCIe 2.0 lanes from the X470 chipset ... but I guess now it is to late, and the x570 next year probably comes with PCIe 4.0.


----------



## crakej

@elmor my fans are not smooth at all which isn't helping my performance or OCing - when running something like IBT they go up, then straight down, then back up a bit higher, back down, back up even higher...you get the picture

I tried adding smoothing using AISuite, but that doesn't help. It looks like at least part of it is because the temp readout are jumping about - 30c to 60c - nothing in between - down to 40c, up to 68c. Any idea what's going on?

I've got SenseMi disabled and Skew is at 0 - is that anything to do with it?

My OC was at 4GHz 1.306v LLC5 (is it wiser to reduce LLC and up volts?) 3200MTs Stilt fast settings


----------



## FlanK3r

PCIe 4.0 next year? No, Im sure not next year...


----------



## asdkj1740

@elmor, is it possible to have 4.5g for few cores while having the rest at 4.3g at the same time, for gaming purpose?? 
or, how to set the minimum cores' frequencies on 2700x/2600x on x470 c7h?

i follow your suggested settings on the highlight (pe=3, bclk 103.4)and i found that 2700x wont achieve 4.3g(for multi cores) and 4.5g(for signle/dual core) at the same time. either all cores are on 4.3g, or few cores 4.5g but the rest dropped to ~2g.
the gaming performance has no improvement over the oc settings of all core locked 4.3g, or even slightly worse.

on cinebench/cpuz bench, the single core performance did improved 2~4% over the oc settings of all core locked at 4.3g. so would you give me some suggestion about how to improve gamnig performance while using pe and bclk overclocking? 

thanks!


----------



## VPII

asdkj1740 said:


> @elmor, is it possible to have 4.5g for few cores while having the rest at 4.3g, for gaming purpose??
> or, how to set the minimum cores' frequencies on 2700x/2600x on x470 c7h?
> 
> i follow your suggested settings on the highlight (pe=3, bclk 103.4)and i found that 2700x wont achieve 4.3g(for multi cores) and 4.5g(for signle/dual core) at the same time. either all cores are on 4.3g, or few cores 4.5g but the rest dropped to ~2g.
> the gaming performance has no improvement over the oc settings of all core locked 4.3g, or even slightly worse.
> 
> on cinebench/cpuz bench, the single core performance did has improved 2~4% over the oc settings of all core locked at 4.3g. so would you give me some suggestion about how to improve gamnig performance while using pe and bclk overclocking?
> 
> thanks!


 @elmor can possibly correct me on this, but from what I understand and was told CPB stops working at any multiplier past 37. So if you overclock your 2700X it will not boost if your multiplier is at 38 or more. I'll see whether I can test it tonight, but unfortunately only with a X370 board.


----------



## stevets

Gettz8488 said:


> There might be a random shut down issue it’s to soon to tell. I don’t believe so but 3 of us on here have it.


Updating my bios to 0601 fixed the shutdown issue that I was running into with fan control software and that type of thing. I can't reproduce that issue like I could on 0509.


----------



## crakej

Back with my Prime Pro, bios 34xx I could run my CPU at 4.2GHz, memory at 3200 fast. - So far the ram tested ok on it's own, I do need to do more testing and I need to know more about new options, but even with 4GHz, ram 3200 fast my machine crashed twice.

I've had to use the computer so not had much time for testing thoroughly yet but I will get there!

I have noticed, even at stock settings, that my mouse movements are a bit jerky at times - tested on the USB3.1 and 2.0 at btm of the board connected to my front panel. Will test rear ports later.


----------



## The Stilt

SwiperNoSwiping said:


> @elmor @The Stilt
> 
> Can you guys provide a little bit more in-depth information about how exactly the new Performance Enhancer feature works? Some questions I have after reading the PDF:
> 
> - What's the difference between level 3 and level 4? (level 1 and 2 as well, for that matter)
> 
> - Balanced power plan, as in DEFAULT win 10 balanced, correct? I assume "Ryzen Balanced" is not a thing anymore?
> 
> - I assume voltage is handled automatically in this mode, and gives cores as much voltage as CPU requests?
> 
> - To continue previous question - looking at PDF the sample CPU boosted all the way to 4.5 GHz on a single core, I guess that required quite a lot of voltage? Definitely more than 1.4v which are considered "safe" among the community? Will it have any impact on the longevity of CPU, or not really, since for load of this kind current will not really be high enough, while voltage is pretty high?
> 
> If there are any specific tips you guys can give to start getting into this new kind of "overclocking" I'd really appreciate them. Thanks for another great board!


- The difference between LVL3 & 4 is the "Precision Boost Override Scalar", which for LVL3 is 1x and 10x for LVL4. Increasing the scalar value will relax the voltage limiting rules of FIT monitoring.
- Yes, Windows Balanced. The key here is to provide sufficiently low "minimum processor state" value to allow the boost to activate (25% of the cores have to reside in C6 for the ST boost to kick in fully). The Ryzen Balanced profile for 1000-series Ryzens won't work as its minimum is 90%.
- The CPU is always in control of the voltage, unless "OC-Mode" is activated (ratio set manually to higher than base ratio) or the voltage is set to "manual mode" (i.e. override from the controller side).
- The voltage curve on Zen CPUs is extremely steep at high frequencies and Pinnacle Ridge is not an exception. Based on "FIT" testing I made, up to ~1.42V (single core workloads) provides 100% silicon reliability, while up to ~1.48V provides slightly reduced reliability (similar to FIT rules set to 10x). These are actual voltages mind you ("CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN" in HWInfo).


----------



## Gettz8488

The Stilt said:


> - The difference between LVL3 & 4 is the "Precision Boost Override Scalar", which for LVL3 is 1x and 10x for LVL4. Increasing the scalar value will relax the voltage limiting rules of FIT monitoring.
> 
> - Yes, Windows Balanced. The key here is to provide sufficiently low "minimum processor state" value to allow the boost to activate (25% of the cores have to reside in C6 for the ST boost to kick in fully). The Ryzen Balanced profile for 1000-series Ryzens won't work as its minimum is 90%.
> 
> - The CPU is always in control of the voltage, unless "OC-Mode" is activated (ratio set manually to higher than base ratio) or the voltage is set to "manual mode" (i.e. override from the controller side).
> 
> - The voltage curve on Zen CPUs is extremely steep at high frequencies and Pinnacle Ridge is not an exception. Based on "FIT" testing I made, up to ~1.42V (single core workloads) provides 100% silicon reliability, while up to ~1.48V provides slightly reduced reliability (similar to FIT rules set to 10x). These are actual voltages mind you ("CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN" in HWInfo).




By reliability do you mean voltages that won’t degrade the silicon? Find it unusual seeing as everything on default voltages can spike to 1.5


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## stevets

I can't seem to get past 101.6 bclk. The highest I've been able to attain and stabilize is 101.6 blck with a + .0375v offset. I have my ram running at ~3252 14-14-14-34

With pe=3 set, single and dual core performance will boost to 4422mhz, while all cores can simultaneously boost to 4.2ghz. 

I've tried 102 bclk with up to a + .05v offset, but that locks up almost right after boot. 

Performance and thermals where I'm at now are pretty good though. Peak temps have been around 66C. Single threaded tests in SuperPi and Cinebench had vcore all the way up to 1.537 during single core benchmarks, but temps averaged in the 50s. Will play with the memory timings a bit to see if I can get the clock a bit higher.


----------



## asdkj1740

The Stilt said:


> - The difference between LVL3 & 4 is the "Precision Boost Override Scalar", which for LVL3 is 1x and 10x for LVL4. Increasing the scalar value will relax the voltage limiting rules of FIT monitoring.
> - Yes, Windows Balanced. The key here is to provide sufficiently low "minimum processor state" value to allow the boost to activate (25% of the cores have to reside in C6 for the ST boost to kick in fully). The Ryzen Balanced profile for 1000-series Ryzens won't work as its minimum is 90%.
> - The CPU is always in control of the voltage, unless "OC-Mode" is activated (ratio set manually to higher than base ratio) or the voltage is set to "manual mode" (i.e. override from the controller side).
> - The voltage curve on Zen CPUs is extremely steep at high frequencies and Pinnacle Ridge is not an exception. Based on "FIT" testing I made, up to ~1.42V (single core workloads) provides 100% silicon reliability, while up to ~1.48V provides slightly reduced reliability (similar to FIT rules set to 10x). These are actual voltages mind you ("CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN" in HWInfo).


hi stilt, would you recommand pe4 over pe3 for 24/7 ?


----------



## The Stilt

Gettz8488 said:


> By reliability do you mean voltages that won’t degrade the silicon? Find it unusual seeing as everything on default voltages can spike to 1.5
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Yes.

The requests can be extremely high, however the CPU will monitor the actual effective voltage.
Try adjusting the load-line and you should see the request to decrease.


----------



## The Stilt

asdkj1740 said:


> hi stilt, would you recommand pe4 over pe3 for 24/7 ?


Even with PE4 the voltage will remain in the constrains AMD is willing to allow these parts to run at (through overclocking).

Both PE3 & PE4 involve overclocking, so use whatever works best for you.

There is plenty of silicon variance with Pinnacle Ridge, so you need to test out and see which works the best.


----------



## Gettz8488

The Stilt said:


> Even with PE4 the voltage will remain in the constrains AMD is willing to allow these parts to run at (through overclocking).
> 
> 
> 
> Both PE3 & PE4 involve overclocking, so use whatever works best for you.
> 
> 
> 
> There is plenty of silicon variance with Pinnacle Ridge, so you need to test out and see which works the best.




So even under PE3-4 it stays within amd voltage limits? What’s the best way to reduce voltage spikes LLC and offset? PE 3 takes me up too 1.55+


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## asdkj1740

The Stilt said:


> Even with PE4 the voltage will remain in the constrains AMD is willing to allow these parts to run at (through overclocking).
> 
> Both PE3 & PE4 involve overclocking, so use whatever works best for you.
> 
> There is plenty of silicon variance with Pinnacle Ridge, so you need to test out and see which works the best.


some users report the pe4 would boost the voltage to >1.55v which is siad to be unsafe for the long run.
i just want to maximize the single core performance for gaming purpose, but i found that when single core is boosted to 4.4g~4.5g, the rest were just <3ghz....any suggestion to raise those rest cores frequecenies while having highest single core frequencies at the same time??

thanks i will try pe4 tmr


----------



## haydn-j

I’m having some issues with getting my RAM to run at any respectable speed on this motherboard. The kit I’m using is F4-3600C15D-16GTZ (3600mhz C15 Samsung B-die) but nothing above 2133mhz is stable. I’ve tried the D.O.C.P (spelling? In class currently) settings but the machine wont post with them. On BIOS 0601 I can’t even post with 3000mhz C16. On 05XX (cant remember #) I can post at C16 3000mhz but Windows10 immediately blue screens. I’ve tried various settings but none seem to be stable except 2133 with something like C15 timings. I’ve tried the built in profiles (The Stilts and the rest) but cant seem to make any progress. What am I doing wrong? Is there a guide I can be pointed to?

Edit: forgot to mention I have a 2700x.


----------



## The Stilt

asdkj1740 said:


> some users report the pe4 would boost the voltage to >1.55v which is siad to be unsafe for the long run.
> i just want to maximize the single core performance for gaming purpose, but i found that when single core is boosted to 4.4g~4.5g, the rest were just <3ghz....any suggestion to raise those rest cores frequecenies while having highest single core frequencies at the same time??
> 
> thanks i will try pe4 tmr


This is what I wrote few days ago:



> The maximum safe voltages for CPUs are an eternal riddle, as neither of the two manufacturers release this information for public consumption. Public or even the NDA documents generally specify a vague limit, which most of the time relates to a point where the catastrophic failures become more common instead of specifying the voltage that is safe to sustain without causing any damage to the silicon. Such limit is admittingly rather hard to specify, as the limit will vary between the different CPU specimens (silicon variance, SIDD) and operating scenarios (peak current in different utilization scenarios, temperature, etc.).
> 
> In order to get the most accurate answer for this question I ended up “asking” the CPU itself. As stated previously, the CPU features various different limiters / safe guards (Package Power Tracking: PPT, Thermal Design Current: TDC, Electrical Design Current: EDC, thermal protection and FIT).
> 
> “FIT” as the name suggest is a feature to monitor / track the fitness of the silicon and adjust the operating parameters to maintain the specified and expected reliability. Many semiconductor manufacturers utilize such feature to eke out every last bit of performance, in an ERA where most of the semiconductors are process bound in terms of performance. In short: FIT feature allows the manufacturers to push their designs to the very limit out of the box, without jeopardizing the reliability of the silicon. A practical example would be the knock sensors on an engine. The control unit of the engine always tries to advance the ignition timing as much as possible, to produce the best possible power / torque figures. The purpose of the knock sensors is to listen if knocking occurs and tell the ECU to reduce the timing advance when it does, in order to protect the engine.
> 
> To see what the actual maximum voltage FIT allows the CPU to run at in various different scenarios is, I disabled all of the other limiters and safe guards. With every other limiter / safe guard disabled, the reliability (FIT) becomes the only restrain. The voltage command which the CPU sends to the VRM regulator via the SVI2 interface and the actual effective voltage were then recorded in various scenarios. In stock configuration the sustained maximum effective voltage during all-core stress allowed by FIT was =< 1.330V. Meanwhile, in single core workloads the sustained maximum was =< 1.425V. When the “FIT” parameters were adjusted by increasing the scalar value from the default 1x to the maximum allowed value of 10x, the maximum all-core voltage became 1.380V, while the maximum single core voltage increased to 1.480V. The recorded figures appear to fall very well in line with the seen and known behavior, frequency, power and thermal scaling wise.
> 
> The seen behavior suggests that the full silicon reliability can be maintained up to around 1.330V in all-core workloads (i.e. high current) and up to 1.425V in single core workloads (i.e. low current). Use of higher voltages is definitely possible (as FIT will allow up to 1.380V / 1.480V when scalar is increased by 10x), but it more than likely results in reduced silicon lifetime / reliability. By how much? Only the good folks at AMD who have access to the simulation data will know for sure.
> 
> These figures will almost certainly vary between the different CPU specimens (due to SIDD and other silicon specific factors), however the recorded values were almost identical on all of the tested samples (within 20mV, lowest-highest leaking specimen).
> 
> Also note that the figures stated here relate to the actual effective voltage, and not to the voltage requested by the CPU. The CPU is aware of the actual effective voltage, so things like load-line adjustments and voltage offsets will modify the CPUs voltage request from the VRM controller accordingly. The most accurate method to measure the effective voltage on AM4 platform is to monitor the “VDDCR_CPU SVI2 TFN” voltage, which is available in HWInfo. This reading is sourced directly from the VRM controller (through SVI2 interface) and generally it is the most accurate reading available to end-users by far. As a side note, while the TFN (“telemetry function”) voltage readings are always generic (and accurate), never blindly trust the reported current and power readings (as every motherboard model needs separate calibration).


The voltage requests you are seeing are irrelevant, only the actual voltage matters.
Look at the TFN voltage figure and nothing else.

The voltage will vary depending on several things. In single threaded workloads it varies heavily based on the core the workload is being scheduled on.

Here's some figures with PE3:

ST workload scheduled on the best core of the CPU (Core 2):



Spoiler















Peak voltage 1.451V, while the average being 1.372V.

ST workload scheduled on the worst core of the CPU (Core 7):



Spoiler















Peak voltage 1.503V, while the average being 1.472V.

All-core workload:



Spoiler















Peak voltage 1.297V, while the average being 1.259V.

VDDCR_CPU is the same reading as "CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN" under HWInfo, while the "command" value is what the CPU is requesting.

Since the CPU remains in control of the voltage at all times, the actual voltage will depend on the core the workload gets utilized and on the CPU specimen itself.
If you are seeing constantly over 1.5V SVI2 TFN voltages with PE4 enabled, in single threaded workloads then I suggest that you don't use PE4 on your CPU.


----------



## Ethan_Ryu

haydn-j said:


> I’m having some issues with getting my RAM to run at any respectable speed on this motherboard. The kit I’m using is F4-3600C15D-16GTZ (3600mhz C15 Samsung B-die) but nothing above 2133mhz is stable. I’ve tried the D.O.C.P (spelling? In class currently) settings but the machine wont post with them. On BIOS 0601 I can’t even post with 3000mhz C16. On 05XX (cant remember #) I can post at C16 3000mhz but Windows10 immediately blue screens. I’ve tried various settings but none seem to be stable except 2133 with something like C15 timings. I’ve tried the built in profiles (The Stilts and the rest) but cant seem to make any progress. What am I doing wrong? Is there a guide I can be pointed to?


I have the same ram be sure to put 1.35 volts to the ram , frequency as 3600 and start placing the rest from the xmp on the last bios page there is one option that show that to you, i m running Stilts fast with 3330 atm cl14 both works. 
Only issue i have with 3600 cl15 is that CAS# latency is at 16 , rest is 15. DRAM efficency score 81174 if that matters anything.
@*The Stilt *what's in your opinion the reason why CL goes to 16? as a side question d3 code while in ryzen master with all on auto is that normal?


----------



## The Stilt

Ethan_Ryu said:


> @*The Stilt *what's in your opinion the reason why CL goes to 16? as a side question d3 code while in ryzen master with all on auto is that normal?


GearDownMode must be disabled for the odd tCL latencies to work.
Otherwise the PMU will round up all odd latencies to the next even one.


----------



## FlanK3r

The Stilt said:


> Even with PE4 the voltage will remain in the constrains AMD is willing to allow these parts to run at (through overclocking).
> 
> Both PE3 & PE4 involve overclocking, so use whatever works best for you.
> 
> There is plenty of silicon variance with Pinnacle Ridge, so you need to test out and see which works the best.


Hy friend, how many chips did you tested (quickly tests also)? Im unhappy with my first retail, so Il try some binning from 10 pieces.


----------



## haydn-j

Ethan_Ryu said:


> I have the same ram be sure to put 1.35 volts to the ram , frequency as 3600 and start placing the rest from the xmp on the last bios page there is one option that show that to you, i m running Stilts fast with 3330 atm cl14 both works.
> Only issue i have with 3600 cl15 is that CAS# latency is at 16 , rest is 15. DRAM efficency score 81174 if that matters anything.
> @*The Stilt *what's in your opinion the reason why CL goes to 16? as a side question d3 code while in ryzen master with all on auto is that normal?


I’ll give that a shot as soon as I get back from class. Can you clarify what you mean by “the last bios page”? I’ll also give the Ryzen DRAM calculator a try as well.


----------



## Ethan_Ryu

Tool->Asus SPD


----------



## The Stilt

FlanK3r said:


> Hy friend, how many chips did you tested (quickly tests also)? Im unhappy with my first retail, so Il try some binning from 10 pieces.


Hi Michal

Eight so far.


----------



## PeerlessGirl

haydn-j said:


> I’m having some issues with getting my RAM to run at any respectable speed on this motherboard. The kit I’m using is F4-3600C15D-16GTZ (3600mhz C15 Samsung B-die) but nothing above 2133mhz is stable. I’ve tried the D.O.C.P (spelling? In class currently) settings but the machine wont post with them. On BIOS 0601 I can’t even post with 3000mhz C16. On 05XX (cant remember #) I can post at C16 3000mhz but Windows10 immediately blue screens. I’ve tried various settings but none seem to be stable except 2133 with something like C15 timings. I’ve tried the built in profiles (The Stilts and the rest) but cant seem to make any progress. What am I doing wrong? Is there a guide I can be pointed to?
> 
> Edit: forgot to mention I have a 2700x.





Ethan_Ryu said:


> I have the same ram be sure to put 1.35 volts to the ram , frequency as 3600 and start placing the rest from the xmp on the last bios page there is one option that show that to you, i m running Stilts fast with 3330 atm cl14 both works.
> Only issue i have with 3600 cl15 is that CAS# latency is at 16 , rest is 15. DRAM efficency score 81174 if that matters anything.
> @*The Stilt *what's in your opinion the reason why CL goes to 16?


I have this same RAM and am having quite a bit of difficulty with it myself. Looks like some of it is geardown mode for those latencies, I'll try doing more manual entering.


----------



## Ethan_Ryu

*@PeerlessGirl*

15-15-15-35 (CL-RCD-RP-RAS) / 50-631-469-289-10-7-44 (RC-RFC1-RFC2-RFC4-RRDL-RRDS-FAW) with 1.35V and 3600 as frequency everything else on auto, booted without any issue (putting only 15-15-15-35 will boot but you get better if you follow it all).

At the moment running CL14 3333


Spoiler


----------



## QuadJunkyx

@*elmor*

Maybe you can shed some light on why when testing ram settings even with no errors I randomly will lose all of the onboard networking. 
This wouldn't be an issue if it didn't take hours of tinkering to get it back even flashing the bios does not always fix it. 
What am I missing? is there a simple way to get it back or do I need to RMA this board? I've spent more time fixing the on board networking then anything else these past few days. 

Edit: In USB Configuration -> USB Controllers: Normally shows 3 = all onboard network card will be functioning. Losing one and it showing 2 = no onboard networking.


----------



## Ethan_Ryu

After more than 6 hours of gaming, while taking a break (so no cpu, ram load) computer shutdown with reset not working


----------



## sonic2911

Ethan_Ryu said:


> After more than 6 hours of gaming, while taking a break (so no cpu, ram load) computer shutdown with reset not working




Shut down with reset? What do u mean?


----------



## Ethan_Ryu

i had to use the switch on the psu, reset function does not work, lights are on


----------



## Gettz8488

Ethan_Ryu said:


> After more than 6 hours of gaming, while taking a break (so no cpu, ram load) computer shutdown with reset not working




So I have gotten any more shut downs thankfully!! For those that are wondering how to reduce voltage spikes I was able to get them to a max spike of 1.44 which is safe I believe seeing as auto is up to 1.5 

Settings 
Performance enhancer 2
Vcore offset -0.1000
LLC 1

Stable in all test so far average voltage is about 1.32-34 Max voltage on single core 1.44 all core voltage around 1.3 



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Gettz8488

Ethan_Ryu said:


> After more than 6 hours of gaming, while taking a break (so no cpu, ram load) computer shutdown with reset not working




This was happening to me as well. I fixed it with a windows reinstall and did not install software like Corsair link or the grid Asus software. do you have Corsair link installed?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Ethan_Ryu

Gettz8488 said:


> This was happening to me as well do you have Corsair link installed?


i have it plugged but not installed(just uninstall tho),should i unplug? do you get "d3" if you run ryzen master?


----------



## Gettz8488

Ethan_Ryu said:


> i have it plugged but not installed ,should i unplug? do you get "d3" if you run ryzen master?




I have it plugged In as well just not installed. And no Ryzen master works just fine. Did you reinstall windows when you switched parts? Do you have the ASUS grid software?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Gettz8488

@Ethan_Ryu how long did you have to wait before tour first shut down?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Ethan_Ryu

Gettz8488 said:


> I have it plugged In as well just not installed. And no Ryzen master works just fine. Did you reinstall windows when you switched parts? Do you have the ASUS grid software?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


the code on my motherboard goes from 24 to d3 , i did a clean windows install , uninstalled all asus stuff except memtweakit but it s greyed out.
EDIT: I had the first shutdown with the asus fan program , uninstalled it , had a second shutdown with a stress test (thermals were ok tho) , one with ram pushed too far , and now this , havent changed voltage going up actually lowered it. the only thing that matters to me right now is to understand that d3 error on ryzen master, just after i run it and with no crash.


----------



## Gettz8488

Ethan_Ryu said:


> the code on my motherboard goes from 24 to d3 , i did a clean windows install , uninstalled all asus stuff except memtweakit but it s greyed out



I would bring this issue up to @elmor you’re the 3rd person including me having a random shut down issue I think it’s safe to assume something’s worth investigating. My advice is to reinstall windows again do not install any and I mean any Asus software or Corsair link so far it’s worked for me. How long did you go before your first shut down?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Ethan_Ryu

@Gettz8488 will do a clean install tomorrow
@*elmor *do i need to RMA if i get d3 Q-code after i launch ryzen master?
EDIT: QuadJunkyx get d3 Q-code as well


----------



## QuadJunkyx

Ethan_Ryu said:


> @Gettz8488 will do a clean install tomorrow
> @*elmor *do i need to RMA if i get d3 Q-code after i launch ryzen master?
> EDIT: QuadJunkyx get d3 Q-code as well


It does seem odd that all of us with shut down / strange behavior have corsair products connected via usb be it a PSU or an AIO.


----------



## Shiftstealth

sonic2911 said:


> Maybe I should wait for couple weeks, hmm...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, memory is the most concern about ryzen, gskill will release some kits for ryzen 2 on the end of April. Maybe it’ll better for tweaking


My random shutdown was from my board being shorted by my case. I removed my build from my case, and haven't had a random shutdown in 2 days. Due to some markings on the back i'm still having newegg replace my board which arrives tomorrow, and should work just fine.


----------



## haydn-j

No matter what DRAM settings I've tried I can't get my machine to post unless its the default "safe" settings. I've tried the XMP values, Stilts profiles, the other built in profiles, I've brought the SoC voltage up to 1.1V, the DRAM voltage up to 1.4V, the Ryzen DRAM calculator timings don't work, I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong. I have not been following the conversations about the other board issues very closely but I should say that I am using a Corsair PSU and when I use Ryzen Master my Q-code does change from 24 to d3. I have not had any crashing yet (except the few times my computer actually posted at 3000mhz ram then blue screened on login) however. If I understand Ethan right Ryzen Master works just fine, the Q-code simply changes from 24 to d3--at least this is the case for me. I've tried 0509 bios and the 0601 but nothing is working on either. Any ideas?


----------



## Gettz8488

Shiftstealth said:


> My random shutdown was from my board being shorted by my case. I removed my build from my case, and haven't had a random shutdown in 2 days. Due to some markings on the back i'm still having newegg replace my board which arrives tomorrow, and should work just fine.




Yea yours was definitely shortage mine on the other hand along with Pete’s and the person above are for different reasons I’m unaware of atm just trying to nail it down Corsair link is what I’m leaning too. I’ve had no shut downs since reinstall 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Ethan_Ryu

haydn-j said:


> No matter what DRAM settings I've tried I can't get my machine to post unless its the default "safe" settings. I've tried the XMP values, Stilts profiles, the other built in profiles, I've brought the SoC voltage up to 1.1V, the DRAM voltage up to 1.4V, the Ryzen DRAM calculator timings don't work, I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong. I have not been following the conversations about the other board issues but I should say that I am using a Corsair PSU and when I use Ryzen Master my Q-code does change from 24 to d3. I have not had any crashing yet (except the few times my computer actually posted at 3000mhz ram then blue screened on login) however. If I understand Ethan right Ryzen Master works just fine, the Q-code simply changes from 24 to d3--at least this is the case for me. I've tried 0509 bios and the 0601 but nothing is working on either. Any ideas?


it just goes d3 nothing else , as it seems many(if not everyone) are affected so its probably not a big deal , but i ask to be sure it s not an actual defect


----------



## sonic2911

Shiftstealth said:


> My random shutdown was from my board being shorted by my case. I removed my build from my case, and haven't had a random shutdown in 2 days. Due to some markings on the back i'm still having newegg replace my board which arrives tomorrow, and should work just fine.




Oh i see now


----------



## haydn-j

@*elmor* do you have any idea what could be the cause of my problems with my RAM? @*Ethan_Ryu* has the same exact kit as me (F4-3600C15D-16GTZ) but mine refuses to operate at anything other than the "safe" defaults. With stock motherboard settings putting DRAM voltage to 1.35 at frequency to 3600mhz with auto timings it wont post. It will post with 1.35V and auto timings at 3000mhz but immediately blue screens. BIOS 0509 vs 0601 seems to make no difference. I really hope this isn't an issue with the board itself as RMA'ing stuff is a pain in the ass.

EDIT:
I seem to have fixed my problem. I moved the DIMM's from B1/A1 to B2/A2 and instantly everything worked... Should I have known that they needed to be in those two slots?? If so I'll be pretty disappointed in myself. I do have a question about the timings however. Would there be any considerable difference between 3200 C14 (3333mhz Stilts fast profile on the board) and 3600 14-15-15-30?​


----------



## Shiftstealth

The Stilt said:


> - The difference between LVL3 & 4 is the "Precision Boost Override Scalar", which for LVL3 is 1x and 10x for LVL4. Increasing the scalar value will relax the voltage limiting rules of FIT monitoring.
> - Yes, Windows Balanced. The key here is to provide sufficiently low "minimum processor state" value to allow the boost to activate (25% of the cores have to reside in C6 for the ST boost to kick in fully). The Ryzen Balanced profile for 1000-series Ryzens won't work as its minimum is 90%.
> - The CPU is always in control of the voltage, unless "OC-Mode" is activated (ratio set manually to higher than base ratio) or the voltage is set to "manual mode" (i.e. override from the controller side).
> - The voltage curve on Zen CPUs is extremely steep at high frequencies and Pinnacle Ridge is not an exception. Based on "FIT" testing I made, up to ~1.42V (single core workloads) provides 100% silicon reliability, while up to ~1.48V provides slightly reduced reliability (similar to FIT rules set to 10x). These are actual voltages mind you ("CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN" in HWInfo).


What has this community ever done to deserve someone as helpful as you.

Thanks for everything


----------



## neur0cide

haydn-j said:


> seem to have fixed my problem. I moved the DIMM's from B1/A1 to B2/A2 and instantly everything worked... Should I have known that they needed to be in those two slots?? If so I'll be pretty disappointed in myself. I do have a question about the timings however. Would there be any considerable difference between 3200 C14 (3333mhz Stilts fast profile on the board) and 3600 14-15-15-30?


You should have. It's in the f...n manual. 
But I doubt that your choice of slots was the reason for your problems. More likely one of your DIMMs wasn't seated correctly or had some residue on the contacts. The behaviour you described is typical for this scenario.

Sure there'd be some difference between 3200-14 and 3600-14. The question is: can you do 3600-14-15-15-30?


----------



## datspike

haydn-j said:


> I seem to have fixed my problem. I moved the DIMM's from B1/A1 to B2/A2 and instantly everything worked... Should I have known that they needed to be in those two slots?? If so I'll be pretty disappointed in myself. I do have a question about the timings however. Would there be any considerable difference between 3200 C14 (3333mhz Stilts fast profile on the board) and 3600 14-15-15-30?​


edit. *I'm on the C6H, did not realize that I'm in the wrong thread, sorry*

Yup, the manual explicitly says to use A2B2 ram slots 
If you want to mess with ram a bit more - try to change the sticks between slots and figure out which combination works better. It yielded me another 66Mhz with my old 1600. 

However now, with 2600X the same kit as you have does not want to work at all at 3666 and more, while 3600C14 tight configuration is stable. I can boot windows up to 3866Mhz, even run Aida memory speed test without any issues, but the memory refuses to be stable no matter what I try, fails at the very start of memory tests at 3666 and 3866.
The ryzen 1xxx works in another way for me, stability was going at such low "values" (if I can say that) that windows froze on boot or I was not being able to pass aida speed test. Seems like C6H is bottlenecking here.


----------



## Ethan_Ryu

@datspike
What voltage/settings you used for 3600 cl14?


----------



## datspike

Ethan_Ryu said:


> @datspike
> What voltage/settings you used for 3600 cl14?


It's for the C6H not the C7H, but see if it helps


Spoiler


----------



## crakej

You may remember I mentioned that my mouse was a bit jerky - I decided to find out why...

Turns out (after looking in the manual) that all the USB3.1 ports are for data storage only. Devices should preferably be plugged to the socket they were designed for. With my mouse now in one of the USB2 ports, it works perfectly.

There's something to be learned from this tale.... check the manual first! 

Edit: I spoke too soon - mouse is jerky again - but nowhere bad as it was on USB3xx


----------



## zulex

I wonder why Asus uses Realtek WIFI bluetooth module for MBs. 
Gigabyte X470 Wifi boards are Intel bluetooth module.
Intel seems much better than Realtek. Isn't it?


----------



## sbakic

zulex said:


> I wonder why Asus uses Realtek WIFI bluetooth module for MBs.
> Gigabyte X470 Wifi boards are Intel bluetooth module.
> Intel seems much better than Realtek. Isn't it?


This is I think wifi model that Asus uses for it's motherboards as C6H https://www.qualcomm.com/products/qca6174a-dual-band-wi-fi. Qualcomm means the best chipset and the most mature. But I am not sure for C7H, I will check when i get my motherboard, but i think it's the same chipset. 

For example Asus makes routes with Broadcom chipset which is good but it doesn't support MU-MIMO even if they say, it does. So I bought Asus router without MU-MIMO because it has Broadcom chipset. And I am sure that these motherboard comes with Qualcomm which support MU-MIMO, which is the future of gaming and 4k video streaming through wifi. So you only need a few more devices with Qualcomm chipset and MU-MIMO to get full use of MU-MIMO.


----------



## QuadJunkyx

sbakic said:


> This is I think wifi model that Asus uses for it's motherboards as C6H https://www.qualcomm.com/products/qca6174a-dual-band-wi-fi. Qualcomm means the best chipset and the most mature. But I am not sure for C7H, I will check when i get my motherboard, but i think it's the same chipset.
> 
> For example Asus makes routes with Broadcom chipset which is good but it doesn't support MU-MIMO even if they say, it does. So I bought Asus router without MU-MIMO because it has Broadcom chipset. And I am sure that these motherboard comes with Qualcomm which support MU-MIMO, which is the future of gaming and 4k video streaming through wifi. So you only need a few more devices with Qualcomm chipset and MU-MIMO to get full use of MU-MIMO.


It is a realtek 8822BE


----------



## Rusakova

crakej said:


> You may remember I mentioned that my mouse was a bit jerky - I decided to find out why...
> 
> Turns out (after looking in the manual) that all the USB3.1 ports are for data storage only. Devices should preferably be plugged to the socket they were designed for. With my mouse now in one of the USB2 ports, it works perfectly.
> 
> There's something to be learned from this tale.... check the manual first!
> 
> Edit: I spoke too soon - mouse is jerky again - but nowhere bad as it was on USB3xx


It doesn't say the ports are for data storage only it says : "USB 3.1 Gen 1/ Gen 2 devices can only be used as data storage only" end quote.
So if your mouse is USB 2 or 3 it should work just fine. I have no problems with my mouse.
I'm using a SteelSeries Rival 300 USB mouse.


----------



## QuadJunkyx

Another random shutdown today.... @Shiftstealth where on the case was it shorted? I have an evolv as well...


----------



## zulex

QuadJunkyx said:


> It is a realtek 8822BE


I dont think its Qualcomm but rather Realtek.
We all think Intel is better than realtek. Same applies here in bluetooth module.
Realtek is cheap.


----------



## zulex

sbakic said:


> This is I think wifi model that Asus uses for it's motherboards as C6H https://www.qualcomm.com/products/qca6174a-dual-band-wi-fi. Qualcomm means the best chipset and the most mature. But I am not sure for C7H, I will check when i get my motherboard, but i think it's the same chipset.
> 
> For example Asus makes routes with Broadcom chipset which is good but it doesn't support MU-MIMO even if they say, it does. So I bought Asus router without MU-MIMO because it has Broadcom chipset. And I am sure that these motherboard comes with Qualcomm which support MU-MIMO, which is the future of gaming and 4k video streaming through wifi. So you only need a few more devices with Qualcomm chipset and MU-MIMO to get full use of MU-MIMO.


I visited Realtek website and saw realtek 8822BE spec. And it says this chipset is bluetooth 4.1 not 4.2.

http://www.realtek.com/products/productsView.aspx?Langid=1&PNid=21&PFid=60&Level=5&Conn=4&ProdID=380


----------



## crakej

Rusakova said:


> It doesn't say the ports are for data storage only it says : "USB 3.1 Gen 1/ Gen 2 devices can only be used as data storage only" end quote.
> So if your mouse is USB 2 or 3 it should work just fine. I have no problems with my mouse.
> I'm using a SteelSeries Rival 300 USB mouse.


I don't get your point - that what I said 'data storage only'? *Theoretically* you should be able to plug into any port, but the manual goes on to say 'Please connect your USB3.1 Gen 1 devices to USB3.1 Gen 1 ports, and your USB Gen 2 devices to the USB3.1 Gen 2 ports for faster and better performance of your devices'.

Things often work like this with different hardware - one user with mouse a. will have their experience, but someone with different hardware is quite possibly going to have a different experience to you.

I have an MS Wireless Mouse 4000 - it worked fine on my last motherboard, but not on this one - it doesn't work on any USB3 ports - so I will report it.


----------



## Rusakova

crakej said:


> I don't get your point - that what I said 'data storage only'? *Theoretically* you should be able to plug into any port, but the manual goes on to say 'Please connect your USB3.1 Gen 1 devices to USB3.1 Gen 1 ports, and your USB Gen 2 devices to the USB3.1 Gen 2 ports for faster and better performance of your devices'.
> 
> Things often work like this with different hardware - one user with mouse a. will have their experience, but someone with different hardware is quite possibly going to have a different experience to you.
> 
> I have an MS Wireless Mouse 4000 - it worked fine on my last motherboard, but not on this one - it doesn't work on any USB3 ports - so I will report it.


I understood your post differently then. I thought you meant the manual said the USB 3.1 ports were only for data storage devices and nothing else


crakej said:


> that all the USB3.1 ports are for data storage only


Whereas the manual says that USB 3.1 *devices* "can only" be used as data storage devices. 
(Chapter 2: Basic Installation - Page 2-16)


----------



## crakej

Rusakova said:


> I understood your post differently then. I thought you meant the manual said the USB 3.1 ports were only for data storage devices and nothing else
> 
> 
> Whereas the manual says that USB 3.1 *devices* "can only" be used as data storage devices.
> (Chapter 2: Basic Installation - Page 2-16)


They're covering their asses I guess. Makes sense to avoid tech support requests that are due to devices that deviate from the proper protocol. So they are (quite strongly!) recommending we avoid this by using the right port for the right device thereby avoiding possible incompatibilities - including just using USB3.xx for storage. Maybe elmore or Stilt could educate us as to exactly what the manual mean? 

Meanwhile, my mouse continues to be annoyingly jerky - was fine on old MB - and less than a year old..... but that doesn't mean the mouse itself isn't the problem - going to swap to my wired mouse see what happens.

Edit: I meant to say - My Logitek webcam works just fine on the USB3 ports


----------



## crakej

Today I've started with a simple CPU OC:

Multiplier is 40, voltage 1.331 LLC3. Seems stable, but DPC latency doubles at over 1000us. When I run defaults my latency is 500us or less. All I did was changed the multiplier, voltage, LLC, SenseMi and Skew. On previous board this didn't happen, I had it running at 4.1/4.2 with latency around 500us.

This bios is quite different from the 'old' Prime Pro - what can I do to to achieve nice smooth OC on this board without sacrificing latency, that would be helpful. I'm going to work on this memory on its own today as well, but I haven't got it stable at 3200 since AGESA 1000a came out, but not had proper time until today to play with it. If it's a no go I might put my Vengeance in and see how that goes.


----------



## Gettz8488

QuadJunkyx said:


> Another random shutdown today.... @Shiftstealth where on the case was it shorted? I have an evolv as well...




You have Corsair link downloaded or Asus software? I was getting shutdowns as well and a windows reinstall without installing Corsair link and Asus software stopped it 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## QuadJunkyx

Gettz8488 said:


> You have Corsair link downloaded or Asus software? I was getting shutdowns as well and a windows reinstall without installing Corsair link and Asus software stopped it
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


I have them installed but I remove the usb connected to my psu... I will give uninstalling them a shot


----------



## crakej

I have AISuite loaded and have no shutdowns. I don't load the desktop app most of the time except when adjusting fans. Seems like Corsair Link is definitely a problem at the moment - ASUS are aware of it and say not to use it for now.


----------



## Timur Born

elmor said:


> 2) Yes, default Windows 10 balanced. The Ryzen Balanced profile has the minimum processor state set a bit too high for Level 3/4 to work properly.


Are you sure about this connection? "Minimum Processor State" is a pure P-state setting, aka frequency under load. As such it has no impact on C-states, albeit the "AMD Ryzen Balanced" power profile is likely is more aggressive in switching out of C-states.

In some other post you wrote that C6 is needed for cores to (deep) sleep and thus allow PB to push single/dual-core frequencies. Is this really C6, or would C3 suffice? Are there any plans to implement control over C-states in UEFI, other than just on/off. Usually I prefer to disable C6+ and only use C3.


----------



## kundica

Timur Born said:


> Are you sure about this connection? "Minimum Processor State" is a pure P-state setting, aka frequency under load. As such it has no impact on C-states, albeit the "AMD Ryzen Balanced" power profile is likely is more aggressive in switching out of C-states.
> 
> In some other post you wrote that C6 is needed for cores to (deep) sleep and thus allow PB to push single/dual-core frequencies. Is this really C6, or would C3 suffice? Are there any plans to implement control over C-states in UEFI, other than just on/off. Usually I prefer to disable C6+ and only use C3.


You could manually edit the minimum processor state in the Ryzen Balanced Profile(or High Performance profile for that matter), he's just making easy for people. In order for PE3/PE4 to function properly the cores need to be able to downclock below the 50% threshold. Ryzen Balance is currently 90% min and High Perf is fully maxed at 100%.

I haven't read what you mentioned regarding his statements on C6, so it's possibly that HP or Ryzen Bal have an impact on that. I've been testing all 3 profiles since launch with Ryzen bal, balanced, and HP with Ryzen bal and HP set to 5% I have no difference in results between the 3 when running PE3.

Edit: From Stilt and why C6 states matters: "25% of the cores have to reside in C6 for the ST boost to kick in fully"


----------



## Shiftstealth

QuadJunkyx said:


> Another random shutdown today.... @Shiftstealth where on the case was it shorted? I have an evolv as well...


I never figured that out. I just pitched the case, and went Corsair Carbide 540.


----------



## QuadJunkyx

Oops


----------



## Timur Born

kundica said:


> In order for PE3/PE4 to function properly the cores need to be able to downclock below the 50% threshold.


Why is that so? I would expect C-states to be needed, not lower P-states?


----------



## Gettz8488

crakej said:


> I have AISuite loaded and have no shutdowns. I don't load the desktop app most of the time except when adjusting fans. Seems like Corsair Link is definitely a problem at the moment - ASUS are aware of it and say not to use it for now.




They confirmed the issue?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Gettz8488

kundica said:


> You could manually edit the minimum processor state in the Ryzen Balanced Profile(or High Performance profile for that matter), he's just making easy for people. In order for PE3/PE4 to function properly the cores need to be able to downclock below the 50% threshold. Ryzen Balance is currently 90% min and High Perf is fully maxed at 100%.
> 
> 
> 
> I haven't read what you mentioned regarding his statements on C6, so it's possibly that HP or Ryzen Bal have an impact on that. I've been testing all 3 profiles since launch with Ryzen bal, balanced, and HP with Ryzen bal and HP set to 5% I have no difference in results between the 3 when running PE3.
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: From Stilt and why C6 states matters: "25% of the cores have to reside in C6 for the ST boost to kick in fully"




There’s many more hidden settings that are different from bal and Ryzen balanced. Ryzen balance tends too clock up much more frequently then regular balanced


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Shiftstealth

Gettz8488 said:


> They confirmed the issue?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Elmor confirmed the issue last night.


----------



## kundica

Timur Born said:


> Why is that so? I would expect C-states to be needed, not lower P-states?


Idk, I edited my post to reflect cstates. Stilt says 25% of the cores need to reside in C6 for the boost to properly happen. Perhaps a core needs to be below the threshold to properly enter that state.

Sent from my LG V30 using Tapatalk


----------



## Timur Born

Normally a core is able to enter C-states from any given P-state/frequency. Using Core Parking I can make my 1800X switch to one-core PB at 4.1 GHz right from 100% minimum state. So the minimum state statement is confusing to me.


----------



## Gettz8488

Shiftstealth said:


> Elmor confirmed the issue last night.




Can’t find it can you quote it lmao?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## DDSZ

elmor said:


> Trying to find the reason this is happening. A basic system with AiSuite 3 installed doesn't show this issue. Seems like you all are using Corsair Link? Or similar software from NZXT?
> 
> *edit: Installed Corsair Link, then as soon as I changed the Fan Profile in AiSuite the board shuts down.*
> 
> I suggest you refrain from using any of those software (remove either AiSuite or others) until we've solved this.


This is the confirmation I guess


----------



## Ethan_Ryu

today no crashes


----------



## Timur Born

So how much better is PB2 (+XFR2) for single/dual-core loads in practice?

I did a quick test on my 1800X using the Cinebench Single-Core benchmark. The 1800X does 4.1 GHz single/dual-core and 3.7 GHz all-core PB1 + XFR1. All tests using the AMD Ryzen Balanced power profile.

No core parking: 154
Core parking 50%: 156
Core parking 100% (min 1 core unparked): 159

More cores parked means PB1 being more active in its highest frequency single/dual-core state. This can lead to better performance for any load that doesn't sum up to more than 1-2 cores total.

All cores overclocked to 3.95 GHz (no parking): 161

The latter is interesting, because it demonstrated that even with all those core parking tricks PB1 still falls out of single/dual-core mode too often to reach the single-core score of the all-core overclock (at nominally lower frequency).


----------



## Gettz8488

Ethan_Ryu said:


> today no crashes




My suggestion solves it then? Just saw elmor pretty much confirmed my suspicion 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Gettz8488

DDSZ said:


> This is the confirmation I guess




Thank you my suspicion was correct then.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## majestynl

Hi everybody.. just subscribed to this thread! Will receive my Hero VII on Monday (thanks to elmor)!
Like with the Hero VI, i will be active over here for testing/sharing.. ! Wish everybody success with another promising product from ASUS!
cheers!


----------



## lordzed83

My first test on C7H is complete


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> My first test on C7H is complete


Great share! What kind of performance / Temp / Vcore etc difference you see compared with last results on the CH6 ?
maybe saved same screenie on the CH6?


----------



## Anty

C7H X470 Motherboard Review by Buildzoid


----------



## Gettz8488

Anyone having a cold boot issue where your of turns on but screen and usb stays off? I’m completely stable with my offset voltage do no idea why I wouldn’t turn on 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Shiftstealth

Gettz8488 said:


> Anyone having a cold boot issue where your of turns on but screen and usb stays off? I’m completely stable with my offset voltage do no idea why I wouldn’t turn on
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Could be with the BIOS you are beta'ing. I'm on 0509, and fine (on my new board).


----------



## hurricane28

Hi guys Asus Crosshair vii Wifi owner here! 

I am very very happy with the board as some changes solved my issues with temp and voltages which are now correct displayed instead of doing some mathematical calculations to actually calculate the temp of voltage myself lol.

It also seems a lot more stable at lower volts but i still have to do a lot of testing. Soon i will make an review of this board, i don't know if i am going to do an written or video review yet. 

I can't thank you enough Elmor for all your hard work and excellent support!


----------



## lordzed83

hurricane28 said:


> Hi guys Asus Crosshair vii Wifi owner here!
> 
> I am very very happy with the board as some changes solved my issues with temp and voltages which are now correct displayed instead of doing some mathematical calculations to actually calculate the temp of voltage myself lol.
> 
> It also seems a lot more stable at lower volts but i still have to do a lot of testing. Soon i will make an review of this board, i don't know if i am going to do an written or video review yet.
> 
> I can't thank you enough Elmor for all your hard work and excellent support!


So It's not only me seems more stable at lower LLC Ill try going CL14 have memtest running atm while i'm at work. @elmor Also I noticed You added shielded memory ports 

@majestynl This is it as You see trying to get 3466cl14 on this board and MORE VOLTS :] in to SoC and DDR was no chance on C6H more volts tahn 1.42=errors in my case. Ill try to play around with this for now till I get CPUs upgrade . If I can get CL14 going will be Win 
Most Important I have not lost Performance just swapped boards installed drivers thats it. Will do fresh Windows when I get 2700x


----------



## crakej

Is no one else having trouble with fans spinning up, then down then up too much?

I'm on 1700x, doesn't matter what I do with fan profiles in bios or AIS, ASUS profiles do it as well. It's preventing me running my OC properly because the cpu heats up, the fans go up, then they come down too quickly to cool the cpu enough, then it does the same again, up and down, up and down. I'm running defaults atm because the fans are too irritating! Can you help @elmor?


----------



## hurricane28

lordzed83 said:


> So It's not only me seems more stable at lower LLC Ill try going CL14 have memtest running atm while i'm at work. @elmor Also I noticed You added shielded memory ports
> 
> 
> @majestynl This is it as You see trying to get 3466cl14 on this board and MORE VOLTS :] in to SoC and DDR was no chance on C6H more volts tahn 1.42=errors in my case. Ill try to play around with this for now till I get CPUs upgrade . If I can get CL14 going will be Win
> Most Important I have not lost Performance just swapped boards installed drivers thats it. Will do fresh Windows when I get 2700x


Nope, i was wrong. I am hitting the silicon overclocking sealing it appears as i can't get 4 GHz stable at reasonable volts.. this CPU is utter crap it appears, i might wait for silicon lottery chip as i am done with these low binned CPU's from my country. I have had more than 4 CPU's going from the FX era to this Ryzen and they all are mediocre at best.


----------



## lordzed83

hurricane28 said:


> lordzed83 said:
> 
> 
> 
> So It's not only me seems more stable at lower LLC Ill try going CL14 have memtest running atm while i'm at work. @elmor Also I noticed You added shielded memory ports /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> 
> @majestynl This is it as You see trying to get 3466cl14 on this board and MORE VOLTS :] in to SoC and DDR was no chance on C6H more volts tahn 1.42=errors in my case. Ill try to play around with this for now till I get CPUs upgrade /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif. If I can get CL14 going will be Win /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> Most Important I have not lost Performance just swapped boards installed drivers thats it. Will do fresh Windows when I get 2700x /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> 
> 
> Nope, i was wrong. I am hitting the silicon overclocking sealing it appears as i can't get 4 GHz stable at reasonable volts.. this CPU is utter crap it appears, i might wait for silicon lottery chip as i am done with these low binned CPU's from my country. I have had more than 4 CPU's going from the FX era to this Ryzen and they all are mediocre at best.
Click to expand...

Told ya its not Asus its crap cpus we got. Hope with import tax can get those binned 2700x around 400.
Just no luck with silicone so better buy binned and thats that


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> Told ya its not Asus its crap cpus we got. Hope with import tax can get those binned 2700x around 400


Are you having any fan problems? Your OC looks good - mine is unstable because of the damn fans....


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> lordzed83 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Told ya its not Asus its crap cpus we got. Hope with import tax can get those binned 2700x around 400
> 
> 
> 
> Are you having any fan problems? Your OC looks good - mine is unstable because of the damn fans....
Click to expand...

Actually qfan works like it should in.my case. My oc is what yhis cpu can do thats it i can throw 1.5 volts and still wont have 4ghz stable 😞

I noticed small bug tho. Cpu fan speed limit is set at 60%@70c once I hit 60c+ fan goea 100% does not bother me as thats only Benching situation 🙂 and not looked in to it maybe i can juat change cpus temperature to max abd that sorts it out. I assume it uses cpu offset temperature and thats the problem?? @elmor what temperature does cou fan read Real one or the +20c one??


----------



## crakej

Are you using AISuite? or just bios?

Look at this - fan should be at zero - but it's spinning at 1400rpm - I have to click on 'auto fan stop' turn it off then on and apply, then fan behaves. I think it might be easier to film what happens with OC so you can hear it - i'm calling it the 'wailing PC'! I've tried playing with fan smoothing but it doesn't seem to do anything. I'm wondering if it just me with Ryzen 1 having this problem or if it's something else. Maybe AISuite didn't update properly - might try removing, trying without and re-installing see if it helps.


----------



## crakej

@elmor Found a way to demonstrate what my fans are doing when benching with IBT AVX. Obviously they are as smooth as a gravel pit - when they go down - temps rise, fans rise, temp starts to drop, fans drop down, temp goes up.... this happens even if I do a modest OC like 3.8GHZ. This chip used to run fine at 4.1 and then 4.2 GHz all day and was able to pass IBT at 4.2. now can't even pass at 4.0.

I have to say AISuite could be damn useful if only you could enlarge or maximize the app - you can only see tiny bits of the info at the bottom because you have to scroll that tiny frame to see what's there. I didn't even know these displays existed!


----------



## Esenel

hurricane28 said:


> Nope, i was wrong. I am hitting the silicon overclocking sealing it appears as i can't get 4 GHz stable at reasonable volts.. this CPU is utter crap it appears, i might wait for silicon lottery chip as i am done with these low binned CPU's from my country. I have had more than 4 CPU's going from the FX era to this Ryzen and they all are mediocre at best.


I have the same issue.
Either I have the worst CPU (2700X) ever and it barely passed QA for the specs.... or as one one stated in the C6H thread that I just should use all on Auto and use a -Offset on Auto. Maybe the bios or AGESA are the issue in that case.
Because elmor, Stilt, der8auer and all reviewers state that all CPUs should be able to do 4 Ghz at lower volts. Like <=1.3V. And I am not able to achieve stable 4.0Ghz or 4.1Ghz even with 1.4V LLC4.

And it happens to so many people in both threads here that they do not have a stable system when outside of auto functions and volts.

I will give it a try today.
If nothing changes i will send mine back as well.

Hope you have luck!


----------



## crakej

Here are my settings from yesterday, memory is stable but not the cpu due to my fan problem. I'm testing today with CPU at 4.2GHz 1.4v LLC3 (instead of 1.38 LLC5) - VCore never goes above 1.39! - Different to how the old Prime Pro did LLC! Hoping that lowering my LLC will help bring the CPU and memory OC working better together.



Spoiler



[2018/04/26 14:19:41]
Ai Overclock Tuner [D.O.C.P. Standard]
D.O.C.P. [D.O.C.P DDR4-4273 19-19-19-39-1.40V]
BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
BCLK_Divider [Auto]
CPU Core Ratio [42.00]
Performance Bias [Auto]
Memory Frequency [DDR4-3200MHz]
Core Performance Boost [Disabled]
SMT Mode [Auto]
EPU Power Saving Mode [Disabled]
TPU [Keep Current Settings]
CPU Core Voltage [Manual mode]
- CPU Core Voltage Override [1.38750]
CPU SOC Voltage [Auto]
DRAM Voltage [1.40000]
1.8V PLL Voltage [1.83000]
1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
Target TDP [Auto]

Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto]
DRAM CAS# Latency [14]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [13]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [13]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [13]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [28]
Trc [42]
TrrdS [6]
TrrdL [9]
Tfaw [36]
TwtrS [4]
TwtrL [12]
Twr [10]
Trcpage [Auto]
TrdrdScl [2]
TwrwrScl [2]
Trfc [256]
Trfc2 [190]
Trfc4 [117]
Tcwl [14]
Trtp [8]
Trdwr [6]
Twrrd [3]
TwrwrSc [1]
TwrwrSd [7]
TwrwrDd [7]
TrdrdSc [1]
TrdrdSd [5]
TrdrdDd [5]
Tcke [9]
ProcODT [Auto]
Cmd2T [1T]
Gear Down Mode [Disabled]
Power Down Enable [Disabled]
RttNom [Auto]
RttWr [Auto]
RttPark [RZQ/5]
MemAddrCmdSetup [0]
MemCsOdtSetup [0]
MemCkeSetup [0]
MemCadBusClkDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [Auto]
VTTDDR Voltage [0.71250]
VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
VDDP Voltage [0.96000]
1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
PLL reference voltage [Auto]
T Offset [Auto]
Sense MI Skew [Disabled]
Sense MI Offset [0]
Promontory presence [Auto]
Clock Amplitude [Auto]
CLDO VDDP voltage [Auto]
CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 5]
CPU Current Capability [130%]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
CPU Voltage Frequency [400]
CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
CPU Power Phase Control [Extreme]
CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 4]
VDDSOC Current Capability [130%]
VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Auto]
VDDSOC Phase Control [Extreme]
DRAM Current Capability [120%]
DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [300]
DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.40000]
Security Device Support [Enable]
Firmware TPM [Disable]
Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
PSS Support [Auto]
SVM Mode [Enabled]

CPU Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [200 RPM]
CPU Fan Profile [Manual]
CPU Upper Temperature [70]
CPU Fan Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
CPU Middle Temperature [25]
CPU Fan Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [46]
CPU Lower Temperature [20]
CPU Fan Min. Duty Cycle (%) [46]
AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Manual]
Chassis Fan 1 Upper Temperature [70]
Chassis Fan 1 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Chassis Fan 1 Middle Temperature [25]
Chassis Fan 1 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [21]
Chassis Fan 1 Lower Temperature [20]
Chassis Fan 1 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [21]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Manual]
Chassis Fan 2 Upper Temperature [70]
Chassis Fan 2 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Chassis Fan 2 Middle Temperature [25]
Chassis Fan 2 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [20]
Chassis Fan 2 Lower Temperature [20]
Chassis Fan 2 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [10]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 3 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Manual]
Chassis Fan 3 Upper Temperature [70]
Chassis Fan 3 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Chassis Fan 3 Middle Temperature [45]
Chassis Fan 3 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
Chassis Fan 3 Lower Temperature [40]
Chassis Fan 3 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
Allow Fan Stop [Enabled]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Source [CPU]
HAMP Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
HAMP Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
HAMP Fan Profile [Manual]
HAMP Fan Upper Temperature [70]
HAMP Fan Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
HAMP Fan Middle Temperature [45]
HAMP Fan Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
HAMP Fan Lower Temperature [40]
HAMP Fan Min. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
Allow Fan Stop [Enabled]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 1 Profile [Manual]
Extension Fan 1 Upper Temperature [70]
Extension Fan 1 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Extension Fan 1 Middle Temperature [45]
Extension Fan 1 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
Extension Fan 1 Lower Temperature [40]
Extension Fan 1 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
Allow Fan Stop [Enabled]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 2 Profile [Manual]
Extension Fan 2 Upper Temperature [70]
Extension Fan 2 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Extension Fan 2 Middle Temperature [45]
Extension Fan 2 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
Extension Fan 2 Lower Temperature [40]
Extension Fan 2 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
Allow Fan Stop [Enabled]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 3 Profile [Manual]
Extension Fan 3 Upper Temperature [70]
Extension Fan 3 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Extension Fan 3 Middle Temperature [45]
Extension Fan 3 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
Extension Fan 3 Lower Temperature [40]
Extension Fan 3 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
Allow Fan Stop [Enabled]


----------



## gupsterg

@crakej

I was viewing some of your posts. I couldn't help noticing you've got SOC at [Auto], due to the memory clock used and the UEFI "auto rule" for SOC, your SOC is ~1.15V from ref'ing your HWINFO screenie. This seems excessive to me.

Several of the R7 1700/1800X I owned did not need >1.05V SOC for 3200MHz with Samsung B die 2x 8GB. This experience was on C6H, but I plan to not use SOC: [Auto] on C7H either. I noted all the CPU I had, at UEFI defaults were ~0.875-0.925V. So all I decided to "tune" SOC manually. Most for even 3333MHz didn't need 1.1V, usually ~1.075V.

For 2700/X owners (aware you not have that) The Stilt has shared this in his post on Anand.



> There are clear differences in how the memory controller behaves on the different CPU specimens. The majority of the CPUs will do 3466MHz or higher at 1.050V SoC voltage, however the difference lies in how the different specimens react to the voltage. Some of the specimens seem scale with the increased SoC voltage, while the others simply refuse to scale at all or in some cases even illustrate negative scaling. All of the tested samples illustrated negative scaling (i.e. more errors or failures to train) when higher than 1.150V SoC was used. In all cases the maximum memory frequency was achieved at =< 1.100V SoC voltage.


Even on gen 1 Ryzen The Stilt recommended =<1.1V.

Also any CPU I haven't changed SOC LLC from [Auto], TBH even for VCORE I use LLC [Auto]. Perhaps overshoot from LLC changes are hurting the stability of OC.


----------



## PeerlessGirl

For those with fan issues:

I had random up-down ramping of my fans as well (though on C6H rather than C7H). Changing my PLL Reference Voltage to 56-60 seems to have settled it down normally for me, so if you haven't done that yet, try that. Start at 60, test it, and back it off, no further down than 56, it also tends to drop temps, and handle those random temp jumps and spikes.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> @crakej
> 
> I was viewing some of your posts. I couldn't help noticing you've got SOC at [Auto], due to the memory clock used and the UEFI "auto rule" for SOC, your SOC is ~1.15V from ref'ing your HWINFO screenie. This seems excessive to me.
> 
> Several of the R7 1700/1800X I owned did not need >1.05V SOC for 3200MHz with Samsung B die 2x 8GB. This experience was on C6H, but I plan to not use SOC: [Auto] on C7H either. I noted all the CPU I had, at UEFI defaults were ~0.875-0.925V. So all I decided to "tune" SOC manually. Most for even 3333MHz didn't need 1.1V, usually ~1.075V.
> 
> For 2700/X owners (aware you not have that) The Stilt has shared this in his post on Anand.
> 
> 
> Even on gen 1 Ryzen The Stilt recommended =<1.1V.
> 
> Also any CPU I haven't changed SOC LLC from [Auto], TBH even for VCORE I use LLC [Auto]. Perhaps overshoot from LLC changes are hurting the stability of OC.


Thanks for the info - I do want to get these voltages down so this give me hope.

This was literally the first day I had to do anything properly. On my Prime Pro I could not raise SoC above 0.95v LLC4 or it was unstable - I also couldn't run my ram at 1.4v it just didn't work. I will of course tune things, and one of the first thing I want to try reduce is SoC voltage and ram voltage. It's never really made any sense to me why you would even need to increase SoC to get ram stable - not that much...


----------



## crakej

PeerlessGirl said:


> For those with fan issues:
> 
> I had random up-down ramping of my fans as well (though on C6H rather than C7H). Changing my PLL Reference Voltage to 56-60 seems to have settled it down normally for me, so if you haven't done that yet, try that. Start at 60, test it, and back it off, no further down than 56, it also tends to drop temps, and handle those random temp jumps and spikes.


Interesting - thanks 

I will try this. Do you know ifincreasing PLL voltage cause this as well? I think I might have increased it.... on my old board it helped...

Edit: I still have it at 1.83v - will try lowering it as well


----------



## PeerlessGirl

crakej said:


> Interesting - thanks
> 
> I will try this. Do you know ifincreasing PLL voltage cause this as well? I think I might have increased it.... on my old board it helped...
> 
> Edit: I still have it at 1.83v - will try lowering it as well



Specifically it's "PLL Reference Voltage" you want, not the other PLL actual volt reading. I just know the range of 56-60 was said to be the best for it, and both 56 AND 60 have stopped my own weird fan and temperature jumps.


----------



## lordzed83

@crakej nope just Qfan in bios read below PLL 1.8 manual in bios always been best setting it messes up readings in general. @elmor sorted ramp up to max ptoblem. Turns out if I have 60% max on middle and high temperature it just goes 100% after passing Middle mark. Set up High temp to 75 fan speed 75. Nice and Quiet when Benchng 

VRM section on C7H is even bigger beast than c6H since I got 1 fan blowing and other pulling air around VRM section plus fan facing DDR at ffull blast. I never see them going to 50 EVER .
@gupsterg what You said on auto this board pumped 1.25 on SOC oO and my best stable voltage on this CPU is 1.05 more becomes unstable


----------



## lordzed83

Fantastic upgrade was moving the crosshair light logo deeoer in to.motherboard so finally rear fan is not covering it.

Black and red allll the way 🙂


----------



## Batman1982

Have anyone a 4 dimm Kit stable with 32Gb? 
I‘ve a gskill 3600 c16 32gtzr rgb ram and want settle up to ryzen 2700x with CH7 
( coming from 7700k) 
Is it possible with stable 3200 or no chance?


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> @crakej nope just Qfan in bios read below PLL 1.8 manual in bios always been best setting it messes up readings in general.
> @elmor sorted ramp up to max ptoblem. Turns out if I have 60% max on middle and high temperature it just goes 100% after passing Middle mark. Set up High temp to 75 fan speed 75. Nice and Quiet when Benchng
> 
> VRM section on C7H is even bigger beast than c6H since I got 1 fan blowing and other pulling air around VRM section plus fan facing DDR at ffull blast. I never see them going to 50 EVER .
> 
> @gupsterg what You said on auto this board pumped 1.25 on SOC oO and my best stable voltage on this CPU is 1.05 more becomes unstable


PLL ref didn't do the trick for me.  was worth a go though....

Are you saying I need to set PLL to 1.8, or leave on Auto which always seems below 1.8v


----------



## sonic2911

I have question about memory compatible with CH7, is it stable with the gskill 3200c14 kit? when I use xmp profile? and between 3200c14 vs 3400/3466c16 (or more) which is better?


----------



## QuadJunkyx

Batman1982 said:


> Have anyone a 4 dimm Kit stable with 32Gb?
> I‘ve a gskill 3600 c16 32gtzr rgb ram and want settle up to ryzen 2700x with CH7
> ( coming from 7700k)
> Is it possible with stable 3200 or no chance?


I have not run any memtest as of yet... but working on it......


----------



## Syldon

Batman1982 said:


> Have anyone a 4 dimm Kit stable with 32Gb?
> I‘ve a gskill 3600 c16 32gtzr rgb ram and want settle up to ryzen 2700x with CH7
> ( coming from 7700k)
> Is it possible with stable 3200 or no chance?


I am running CH6. But the board are comparable.

3200 should be very doable. I think 3333 will be your best on 4 X 8 with current Agesa. I have ran 3466 on previously, but as the revisions have matured I haven't found a setting to get there again. 

I added my setting to my sig. Or you could try 1smus calculator.


----------



## Gettz8488

Esenel said:


> I have the same issue.
> 
> Either I have the worst CPU (2700X) ever and it barely passed QA for the specs.... or as one one stated in the C6H thread that I just should use all on Auto and use a -Offset on Auto. Maybe the bios or AGESA are the issue in that case.
> 
> Because elmor, Stilt, der8auer and all reviewers state that all CPUs should be able to do 4 Ghz at lower volts. Like <=1.3V. And I am not able to achieve stable 4.0Ghz or 4.1Ghz even with 1.4V LLC4.
> 
> 
> 
> And it happens to so many people in both threads here that they do not have a stable system when outside of auto functions and volts.
> 
> 
> 
> I will give it a try today.
> 
> If nothing changes i will send mine back as well.
> 
> 
> 
> Hope you have luck!




I was stable at 4.125 1.35 Vcore


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Gettz8488

I cannot for the life of me get my board to downbolt where i manually set Core Ratio and do offset voltage no sure what i can do to have it downvolt while idle.


----------



## VPII

I finally got my Crosshait VII hero to give my 2700x a go. I've been using a Asus ROG Strix X370-F Gaming which worked really well.

So yesterday I got the board and some dry ice. Unfortunately no stability at 4.3ghz as I had with the Strix at 1.3125vcore. Even 1.4vcore is a no go quick fail.

So right now Im running dice with cpu at 4.929ghz on the Strix.

Not sure what the issue is but the ch7 is not up to it.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## Crest

Got my Crosshair 7 in. Was on an X370 Prime and ever since I got it on launch I could never go over 2933 stable. 3066 would boot and crashe, 3133 rarely booted, 3200 basically never did. When I got the 2700x, literally zero difference.

On this board I just hit DOCP 3200 and it booted right up zero issues so far on HCI, but will run overnight. This is also on 2x16GB Dual Rank B-Die. So I'm glad this seems to be doing much better.

F4-3200C14D-32GTZKW is the kit.

Oop, got a memory error a few hours in, might first try bumping ram v


----------



## crakej

Morning!

I was just trying to find out why my fans are ramping up and down - even at idle - noticed that during IBT some cores are dropping below 100% load - this did not used to happen on old board! So looks like because load falls, temp drop, fans back off, but most cores still at 100% (see below). This is driving me crazy - starting to wonder if I have a fault on this board, but might try an older bios see if I have the problem there...


----------



## Asylumpwnz

.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Morning!
> 
> I was just trying to find out why my fans are ramping up and down - even at idle - noticed that during IBT some cores are dropping below 100% load - this did not used to happen on old board! So looks like because load falls, temp drop, fans back off, but most cores still at 100% (see below). This is driving me crazy - starting to wonder if I have a fault on this board, but might try an older bios see if I have the problem there...


Simple solution lower temperature on high setting to below drop off temperature and sorted. Worked for me.

I use low as my idle temp medium as my daily use load temp and high onstress test benching 🙂


----------



## Mumak

FYI - I'm adding reporting of Core Performance Order (Pinnacle Ridge only). Will be available in the next build:


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> Simple solution lower temperature on high setting to below drop off temperature and sorted. Worked for me.
> 
> I use low as my idle temp medium as my daily use load temp and high onstress test benching 🙂


Thanks for trying to help me, much appreciated!

Exactly which settings are you referring to? I'm new to the Hero bios and feel a bit lost!

Drop off temp?

Apologies if I'm being thick.... I just don't get why fans are so reactive and smoothing doesn't work either... getting frustrated lol - going to go out for a walk and come back fresh and chilled!


----------



## lordzed83

@crakej well for starters I dont use Asus AI suit AT ALL only working at bios level or registry windows edits ect. Like my system clean. Afterr full boot i got 14300 free ram from my 16 gigs.


----------



## FlanK3r

for fan,my first two CPUs (will continue with more chips in May/June):
1810SUS - relatively hot chip, not much good overclockable (bellow average). Max R15 4250 MHz 1.45V real vcore.
1803SUS 1.375Vcore - 11C lower temps in rendering than batch before (all settings in BIOS were the same, compared at 4200 Mhz)! Max R15 4300 MHz 1.375V, 4330 MHz 1.45V (real meassured voltage at probes)


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> @crakej well for starters I dont use Asus AI suit AT ALL only working at bios level or registry windows edits ect. Like my system clean. Afterr full boot i got 14300 free ram from my 16 gigs.


Once I set up fans, I don't load it either - have the same free at boot as you

So you were referring to bios settings in the Monitor menu??


----------



## crakej

So I'm going to try removing AISuite (which I shouldn't have to) to see where that get's me. Before I do that, have a look at this pic - I'm running at defaults, CPU fan is set to go no lower than 60% (1500rpm approx) - but you can see the bright dot showing what is really happening. The paler dot at the top is where it should be, the lower bright dot is what it's doing! I have often had to resort to using the bios controls, but it would be much more convenient if AISuite just did what its meant to!

Update: thanks @lordzed83 - having looked in the bios the numbers it had chosen were strange to say the least - they didn't make sense. I removed ASUS fan service, then dialled in what I wanted manually in to the bios.

Only thing is that in IBT it still does the same thing, just not quite so bad..... but the cores are NOT staying at 100% - just as they did when I ran it on my last motherboard. Why could this be? With anything up to all cores dropping to somewhere in the 90s for usage%, the fans slow down, back up to 100%, fans go back up.

I can pass RamTest, I can pass AIDA64 cpu+mem stress test and the same with OCCT - only IBT displays this behaviour. Question is, do I ignore that?


----------



## ScomComputers

Hi crakej!
Uninstall all asus programs and set the everythink in the bios.
The Ai Suite is a very buggy program ...


----------



## Gettz8488

Asylumpwnz said:


> hello, i just got my Crosshair VII hero a couple days ago, everything seems good. I'm able to run corsair link without my computer powering off randomly like other people have claimed. (knocks on wood). overclocking on the X470 does seem to be better then the X370 (at least from my experience). Before with my c6h I wasn't able to push very far past 3466 cl14. but with the 7 I've managed to get 3600 cl14 pretty stable so far although i haven't spent a lot of time with it yet, plus I haven't gotten around to use a proper stability test i only ran prime 95 for like 15 mins before I couldn't be bothered and went on to something else..maybe this weekend ill let it go longer and submit my results.. but for now.. this is what i got. it really does seems like a big improvement vs first gen... watch out Intel.




Is this a manual overclock or a performance enhancer overclock? If it’s manual how are you getting your chip to downvolt while idle no matter what I try it stays stuck at whatever I set it too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## crakej

ScomComputers said:


> Hi crakej!
> Uninstall all asus programs and set the everythink in the bios.
> The Ai Suite is a very buggy program ...


Already done that, see update above... I don't usually run the Suite - just the fan service - never had this problem


----------



## VPII

FlanK3r said:


> for fan,my first two CPUs (will continue with more chips in May/June):
> 1810SUS - relatively hot chip, not much good overclockable (bellow average). Max R15 4250 MHz 1.45V real vcore.
> 1803SUS 1.375Vcore - 11C lower temps in rendering than batch before (all settings in BIOS were the same, compared at 4200 Mhz)! Max R15 4300 MHz 1.375V, 4330 MHz 1.45V (real meassured voltage at probes)


FlanK3r maybe you can give some input. I finally got my cpu to run at 4.3ghz in the CHVII using 1.3875vcore set in bios with llc set to 5. What I do not understand, before the CHVII I was using a STRIX X370F Gaming with which I could run the cpu 4.34ghz with 1.3375vcore set in bios. I notice the vdroop is alot more with the CHVII than the Strix, but then again I check it with Hwinfo not measuring real voltage on the mobo. It is just really funny that I cannot use the same vcore with the CHVII. At least I can run 4.2ghz with 1.25vcore set in bios and the chip runs without an issue, even Aida64 stress test.


----------



## gupsterg

@Mumak

Query on new core performance order. Is this showing order of cores determined best?

@crakej

What Lordzed was highlighting was he changed the upper temp value/PWM. Which I think you have done now. You'll also see a fan smoothing option in UEFI there. On my C6H which is air rig I use 3.8s to smooth out fan ramping. Note this is screenie from ZE, as I have yet to build the C7H which came today  , but C6H/ZE have same options.



Spoiler




View attachment 1 CPU Fan menu.BMP




PLL 1.8V I set always as 1.8V manually on C6H/ZE. I have not noted it change when left from [Auto] to more or less based on another option being changed. In UEFI/monitoring app 1.8V may not show as it, this is due to how the granularity is 21.8mV (see page 7 of C7H highlights PDF in OP). From information before shared on how good the ASUS boards are for voltage regulation, trust what you set it as is what it is getting. If you use a multimeter you should see [Auto] or manual 1.8V is ~1.8V. The ProbeIt point for PLL is single ended, so AFAIK probably still not as accurate as how the differential points are (VCORE/SOC/DRAM).

The reason I set it manually is we found on C6H if Sense MI Skew was [Enabled] the PLL voltage change would skew temperature values for CPU falsely. I'm aware you have Sense MI Skew [Disabled], as side note when it is disabled the Sense MI offset doesn't apply even if changed from [Auto].

PLL Reference Voltage I have not touched from [Auto] for an OC to be stable either or for it to improve fan, etc aspect of boards related to Ryzen I have had.

You will find in the OP of C6H a OC guide, on page 5 2nd half, you'll see case situation where changing these values would help. Which I don't think apply in your case.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> @Mumak
> 
> Query on new core performance order. Is this showing order of cores determined best?
> 
> @crakej
> 
> What Lordzed was highlighting was he changed the upper temp value/PWM. Which I think you have done now. You'll also see a fan smoothing option in UEFI there. On my C6H which is air rig I use 3.8s to smooth out fan ramping. Note this is screenie from ZE, as I have yet to build the C7H which came today  , but C6H/ZE have same options.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 166145
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PLL 1.8V I set always as 1.8V manually on C6H/ZE. I have not noted it change when left from [Auto] to more or less based on another option being changed. In UEFI/monitoring app 1.8V may not show as it, this is due to how the granularity is 21.8mV (see page 7 of C7H highlights PDF in OP). From information before shared on how good the ASUS boards are for voltage regulation, trust what you set it as is what it is getting. If you use a multimeter you should see [Auto] or manual 1.8V is ~1.8V.
> 
> The reason I set it manually is we found on C6H if Sense MI Skew was [Enabled] the PLL voltage change would skew temperature values for CPU falsely. I'm aware you have Sense MI Skew [Disabled], as side note when it is disabled the Sense MI offset doesn't apply even if changed from [Auto].
> 
> PLL Reference Voltage I have not touched from [Auto] for an OC to be stable either or for it to improve fan, etc aspect of boards related to Ryzen I have had.
> 
> You will find in the OP of C6H a OC guide, on page 5 2nd half, you'll see case situation where changing these values would help. Which I don't think apply in your case.


Thank @gupsterg - this is a great help to me as many of these settings were not available on the Prime Pro. My PLL voltage does waver around a bit - nothing huge, but is does change usually being a bit under 1.8v (reading from bios). Might as well have it where it should be even though I've turned off Sense Mi.

I'll update this shortly with the bios reading for that - but surely this can't be stopping IBT from utilizing 100% of the CPU - which all the other benching software manages to do....

Update: Wow - didn't expect or see this before! Second image is when I rebooted, so it was on auto 2.xv! then image 1 I show it after I set it to 1.8v - still not 1.80v! Is this the problem I'm having I wonder? Then when I'm booted up HWInfo says the same as the bios....


----------



## gupsterg

I haven't ran IBT in a while. I used to have in issue on C6H where if I used Win 7 IBT AVX greater than "high" had issues. Same UEFI, HW and profile, but when using Win 10 it passed. If P95, Y-Cruncher, RealBench, [email protected], Bionic and other uses pass on my rig I ignore IBT AVX TBH.

The C7H has been improved for voltage readback in UEFI/SW/ProbeIt points, ref the PDF in OP here, page 7. Where ever you see 10.9mV that is the lowest value of granularity the SuperIO chip supports.

SVI2 TFN has 6.25mV, that is why Elmor, The Stilt and Mumak would state to ref those values. There were a few members that also checked voltages at the socket and compared with SVI2 TFN and they were the tightest match. Be aware as these come from the CPU telemetry back to VRM, AFAIK losses between say CPU/socket are accounted for where as reading at the back of socket wouldn't AFAIK. Also polling rate of UEFI/SW monitoring plays a big role in how "we" see accurate voltages. Lower polling rates could keep reading back just at that point where voltage dipped just a little and due to the SuperIO chip have a +0.02V granularity for some values it would seem as the swing is happening more often than not and with bigger disparity.

Use any software reported voltages as guide. This is not because HWINFO, etc are badly programmed, it's just some things they rely on are not as accurate and polling delays etc can "cloud" the situation.

*** edit ***

Those 2V reads could be erroneous read backs. A member in the C6H thread had a board which was quite nutty. Caused him real frustration for a while. Few months in a UEFI update solved his issue. I would test with a multimeter, even the ProbeIt point shouldn't be that out at all in my experience.


----------



## Safetytrousers

sonic2911 said:


> I have question about memory compatible with CH7, is it stable with the gskill 3200c14 kit? when I use xmp profile? and between 3200c14 vs 3400/3466c16 (or more) which is better?


I have GSkill c14 3200Mhz and the Stilt's fast single sided xmp is stable on my C7H. It wasn't stable on my C6H.
I'm also at 4.25 Ghz stable on the CPU at 1.35 volts. I was stable at 1.3 volts at 4.2Ghz (didn't try lower volts) and I can do 4.3Ghz at 1.4 volts (bit too hot though for me).
Voltage readouts are now what I set in BIOS unlike on my C6H. AI Suite is totally stable for me.
Cryptonight mining has gone from a high of 530 on my C6H to a high of 760 on my C7H.


----------



## gupsterg

@crakej

Note this is ZE, manually set PLL 1.8V, it is reported as under when it isn't. The filenames show the seconds count of time.



Spoiler




View attachment 180427192109.BMP


View attachment 180427192116.BMP


View attachment 180427192130.BMP




Here's HWINFO 750ms polling rate.



Spoiler














My C6H is similar. Not working on C7H till Monday, will aim to update this post only, with DMM readings as not to pollute thread with other mobo data.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> I haven't ran IBT in a while. I used to have in issue on C6H where if I used Win 7 IBT AVX greater than "high" had issues. Same UEFI, HW and profile, but when using Win 10 it passed. If P95, Y-Cruncher, RealBench, [email protected], Bionic and other uses pass on my rig I ignore IBT AVX TBH.
> 
> The C7H has been improved for voltage readback in UEFI/SW/ProbeIt points, ref the PDF in OP here, page 7. Where ever you see 10.9mV that is the lowest value of granularity the SuperIO chip supports.
> 
> SVI2 TFN has 6.25mV, that is why Elmor, The Stilt and Mumak would state to ref those values. There were a few members that also checked voltages at the socket and compared with SVI2 TFN and they were the tightest match. Be aware as these come from the CPU telemetry back to VRM, AFAIK losses between say CPU/socket are accounted for where as reading at the back of socket wouldn't AFAIK. Also polling rate of UEFI/SW monitoring plays a big role in how "we" see accurate voltages. Lower polling rates could keep reading back just at that point where voltage dipped just a little and due to the SuperIO chip have a +0.02V granularity for some values it would seem as the swing is happening more often than not and with bigger disparity.
> 
> Use any software reported voltages as guide. This is not because HWINFO, etc are badly programmed, it's just some things they rely on are not as accurate and polling delays etc can "cloud" the situation.
> 
> *** edit ***
> 
> Those 2V reads could be erroneous read backs. A member in the C6H thread had a board which was quite nutty. Caused him real frustration for a while. Few months in a UEFI update solved his issue. I would test with a multimeter, even the ProbeIt point shouldn't be that out at all in my experience.


OK - very helpful. I've always used it as a quick and dirty, but after what you've said I feel a bit better knowing that IBT behaves differently on different set ups. I've learned that you can only use software as a guide - now I have probe-it points I will use them if problems persist. Ill be keeping an eye on that PLL for a while... I'll go back to just P95 and OCCT and ditch IBT. If PLL really is that much out I can just set it higher?


----------



## gupsterg

I'd use 1.8V, see the C6H OC guide, page 5, 2nd half. IMO that should clear up if you need to meddle with PLL voltage and or Ref of it.

I just checked on C6H, 1.8V PLL in UEFI manually set, no meddling with ref, etc. HWINFO on 750ms polling shows 1.788V to 1.809V swinging pretty much constantly at rig idle. DMM shows rock stable 1.804V for it at idle.

I'll get a loaded rig read in a mo, but be aware the way the ProbeIt points on C6H are they show slightly higher values when under load than actual is, as it takes into context load line effect on power plane. In OP of my Ryzen thread in sig is info on this, check section *C6H ProbeIt VCORE point vs measuring at socket*.

Hopefully Elmor/The Stilt will spill further beans on how the ProbeIt points are on C7H.


----------



## crakej

Thanks again - I will stick with my 1.8v - I appreciated you doing that for me. I will go back and read these things - When I read them before I disregarded anything I couldn't do on Prime Pro so will undoubtedly learn something more!


----------



## sonic2911

oops, the price of ch7 was back to $299 on newegg, i feel it's overpriced a bit


----------



## lordzed83

@gupsterg C6H learned me to thrust what I set not what is messured. C7H is much better on sensors readout tho 
I'm using IBT very high as benchmark tbh takes quite a while to finish 10 loops and its to go by completion time
Just finished messing around with my new memory timing setup









Managed to shave off 5 seconds on IBT run 
@crakej PLL is 1.8 SET AND FORGET thing. Only thing I noticed with cahnging it up or down was. CPU temperature output no stability gain or loose either way. Tested up to 130bclk.
If it goes for fan raming up do what gupsterg said set rampup speed to 3 or 5 seconds that fixes that problem.


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> @gupsterg C6H learned me to thrust what I set not what is messured. C7H is much better on sensors readout tho
> I'm using IBT very high as benchmark tbh takes quite a while to finish 10 loops and its to go by completion time
> Just finished messing around with my new memory timing setup
> 
> Managed to shave off 5 seconds on IBT run
> 
> @crakej PLL is 1.8 SET AND FORGET thing. Only thing I noticed with cahnging it up or down was. CPU temperature output no stability gain or loose either way. Tested up to 130bclk.
> If it goes for fan raming up do what gupsterg said set rampup speed to 3 or 5 seconds that fixes that problem.


Thanks man - all is working much better - apart from IBT not running right.... also noticed when I run OCCT for ex., it says CPU is at 100%, windows says - 98%. Again, that didn't happen on my last board....


----------



## Asylumpwnz

.


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> Thanks again - I will stick with my 1.8v - I appreciated you doing that for me. I will go back and read these things - When I read them before I disregarded anything I couldn't do on Prime Pro so will undoubtedly learn something more!


NP  .

C6H manual 1.8V PLL, read from ProbeIt point on DMM, is 1.806V rock solid, load was P95 8K FFT in place. HWINFO's read from SuperIO chip swinging as idle read in previous post. This was R7 1800X @ 4.0GHz 1.375V VID in PState 0 OC.

ZE manual 1.8V PLL, read from ProbeIt point on DMM, is 1.806V rock solid, load was P95 8K FFT in place. HWINFO's read from SuperIO chip no swing, but 1.788V as shown in previous post. This was 1950X stock, 32 threads 3.55GHz @ ~1.1V VID in HWINFO. I have once in the past caned 3.9GHz @ 1.3xV VID on CPU with high loads. VRM got toasty as I had side panel on and setup is a bit low air flow due to having front/top rad in case. ASUS boards IMO solid :thumb: .

Da _ASUS Ryzen Trinity_ :wheee: ...



Spoiler














All boards I don't change LLC for VCORE or SOC from [Auto] (ie AMD stock).



lordzed83 said:


> @gupsterg C6H learned me to thrust what I set not what is messured. C7H is much better on sensors readout tho
> I'm using IBT very high as benchmark tbh takes quite a while to finish 10 loops and its to go by completion time
> Just finished messing around with my new memory timing setup
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Managed to shave off 5 seconds on IBT run


:thumb: .

Dump that DangWang HCI. It is old version besides being "pirate" :h34r-smi.

Either purchase HCI MemTest 6.0 or get https://www.karhusoftware.com/ramtest/. Latter is :clock: The Stilt :clock: approved  , link.

OCN thread is also good read as well, on app conception, testing, etc.


----------



## Gettz8488

Asylumpwnz said:


> I'm overclocking using PE mode and messing around with various timings and crap like that. I haven't tried to manually OC yet but I'm not doing anything special to get it to throttle down however I did make sure in power options the min processor state was set to under 50% (I set mine to 40%) other than that it's stated that it takes about ~1 min for p-states to activate. This might sound kinda dumb but try switching over to power saver mode then back again to balanced mode, once in a while that gets throttling to work again for some reason; it could be something running in the background preventing throttling from happening. Hope I could help man.




I do the same it doenvolts just fine with PE but not with a manual OC even though it doenclocks. Still says 100% silicon reliability for single thread is 1.42 and the Lowest I can get it too with offset is 1.456 stable with PE2 but since the clock is more agreesive with PE2 that means some cores are almost constantly getting 1.43-1.45 Vcore do I’m on edge about it. Right now I’m running auto with a -0.0935 offset and it doesn’t peak above 1.425


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Crest

Crest said:


> Got my Crosshair 7 in. Was on an X370 Prime and ever since I got it on launch I could never go over 2933 stable. 3066 would boot and crashe, 3133 rarely booted, 3200 basically never did. When I got the 2700x, literally zero difference.
> 
> On this board I just hit DOCP 3200 and it booted right up zero issues so far on HCI, but will run overnight. This is also on 2x16GB Dual Rank B-Die. So I'm glad this seems to be doing much better.
> 
> F4-3200C14D-32GTZKW is the kit.
> 
> Oop, got a memory error a few hours in, might first try bumping ram v


Went into BIOS, noticed that it showed ram voltage set to 1.35, but running at 1.34... So I pushed it to 1.4, which now reads 1.384. Ran Memtest overnight on about 28GB of my memory in Windows and got to <1200% coverage overnight with no errors. So I think that solves the issue. So seems rock solid right now. Will save my settings and go back into the timings to see if there is anything I can tighten up.


----------



## lordzed83

gupsterg said:


> NP /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif .
> 
> C6H manual 1.8V PLL, read from ProbeIt point on DMM, is 1.806V rock solid, load was P95 8K FFT in place. HWINFO's read from SuperIO chip swinging as idle read in previous post. This was R7 1800X @ 4.0GHz 1.375V VID in PState 0 OC.
> 
> ZE manual 1.8V PLL, read from ProbeIt point on DMM, is 1.806V rock solid, load was P95 8K FFT in place. HWINFO's read from SuperIO chip no swing, but 1.788V as shown in previous post. This was 1950X stock, 32 threads 3.55GHz @ ~1.1V VID in HWINFO. I have once in the past caned 3.9GHz @ 1.3xV VID on CPU with high loads. VRM got toasty as I had side panel on and setup is a bit low air flow due to having front/top rad in case. ASUS boards IMO solid /forum/images/smilies/thumb.gif .
> 
> Da _ASUS Ryzen Trinity_ /forum/images/smilies//wheee.gif ...
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 166321
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All boards I don't change LLC for VCORE or SOC from [Auto] (ie AMD stock).
> 
> 
> 
> /forum/images/smilies/thumb.gif .
> 
> Dump that DangWang HCI. It is old version besides being "pirate" /forum/images/smilies/ph34r-smiley.gif.
> 
> Either purchase HCI MemTest 6.0 or get https://www.karhusoftware.com/ramtest/. Latter is /forum/images/smilies/post-flame-small.png The Stilt /forum/images/smilies/post-flame-small.png approved /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif , link.
> 
> OCN thread is also good read as well, on app conception, testing, etc.


I'w been pirating when i wa 8 copying taapes for my C64 its in my blood. Hardly anything on my PC is legit. I Torrent and crack games I purchased on steam /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif








Its lime I got Cineworld monthly ticket. But cant be asked to go cinema so download cams and watch em even to im paying unlimited cinema haha

I got original memtest but thing cant start up instant 16 instances ... So I'm using pirate version Yurppp
I like this more as i can have 0 errors on memory but after HOURS of constant load IMC can fail and thats what im after. If it passes 2-3 hours of HCI i know i got 0 errors and IMC can handle those settings also. I can get tighter timings with 0 errors but IMC cant handle it with my cpu overclock 😕

Just start memtest get weight and get on with Training while watching procents fly. Sometimes 4 hours of cardio sometimes 7 depends whats the plan hehe. Not in a rush After all got nothign better to do than testing settings over and over again /forum/images/smilies/tongue.gif


----------



## Mumak

gupsterg said:


> @Mumak
> Query on new core performance order. Is this showing order of cores determined best?


Sort of 'quality' order of cores - better ones (lower index) should reach higher clock at a given voltage.


----------



## lordzed83

Mumak said:


> gupsterg said:
> 
> 
> 
> @Mumak
> Query on new core performance order. Is this showing order of cores determined best?
> 
> 
> 
> Sort of 'quality' order of cores - better ones (lower index) should reach higher clock at a given voltage.
Click to expand...


Oooo cool. What sort of magic You are using to get info what cores are better than others. This got me intesested 🙂

Btw you got some paypal or somerhing for donations?? Trully best monitoring software out there. Deffo worrh spending money on and supporring 🙂


----------



## Mumak

lordzed83 said:


> Oooo cool. What sort of magic You are using to get info what cores are better than others. This got me intesested 🙂
> 
> Btw you got some paypal or somerhing for donations?? Trully best monitoring software out there. Deffo worrh spending money on and supporring 🙂


I cannot release details how to retrieve that information, but the order is defined by AMD. This information is not to be taken as a guarantee, rather a guideline.

At bottom on the main HWiNFO page is a link for PayPal donations. Thanks !


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> NP  .
> 
> All boards I don't change LLC for VCORE or SOC from [Auto] (ie AMD stock).


I'm learning to lower this now I have this board - Prime Pro we found LLC5 was best for top performance, and the spike were not too much. This board is not the same! Seems I have probably been overvolting a bit without even realizing!


----------



## Ethan_Ryu

what do you think of my cpu? (yes i need a cooler)


Spoiler














Is CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN showing spikes? Or should i check on ryzen master? haven t touched LLC for now , Vcore offset "-" "0.1" .
wondering if core 7 could do 4.350, is it ok for perf3 to show 1.244 volts fixed? atm my only eyes is SVI2 TFN.
Would it be safe for a gaming, editing workload?
If you guys have any suggestion let me know , gonna stick to a more relaxed preset as i wait bios to be more stable.


----------



## Rusakova

sonic2911 said:


> I have question about memory compatible with CH7, is it stable with the gskill 3200c14 kit? when I use xmp profile? and between 3200c14 vs 3400/3466c16 (or more) which is better?


I couldn't get my F4-320014D-32GTZ (2 x 16 GB dual rank) stable using DOCP (XMP).
But after selecting 3200 MHz manually and keying in all the timings and setting
VSOC to -0.1250, it's been running like a champ.

I'm using:
ClkDrvbStren = 40.0 Ohm
AddrCmdDrvStren = 20.0 Ohm
CsOdtDrvStren = 40.0 Ohm
CkeDrvStren = 40.0 Ohm

RttNom = RZQ/3 (use auto for RttNom with 64GB)
RttWr = RZQ/3
RttPark = RZQ/1 

ProcODT_SM 60 ohm

VSOC set for offset [-] 0.1250v

Gear Down [Enabled]

Dram voltage 1.3500v
Dram boot voltage 1.3500

Currently running 14-14-14-14-26 CR1
The trick for getting it stable was the -0.1250 VSOC.


----------



## Syldon

For those who have just moved from the CH6. I and probably many others would be really interested on an opinion about the benefits of a CH7 over a CH6.


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> So It's not only me seems more stable at lower LLC Ill try going CL14 have memtest running atm while i'm at work. @elmor Also I noticed You added shielded memory ports
> 
> 
> @majestynl This is it as You see trying to get 3466cl14 on this board and MORE VOLTS :] in to SoC and DDR was no chance on C6H more volts tahn 1.42=errors in my case. Ill try to play around with this for now till I get CPUs upgrade . If I can get CL14 going will be Win
> Most Important I have not lost Performance just swapped boards installed drivers thats it. Will do fresh Windows when I get 2700x



great..looking forward for further test results. I don't have any issues on the CH6 with high voltages on mem. Im going to directly install my new 2700x on the CH7. Can't make equal comparisons  will see and share what the new rig will do..


----------



## lordzed83

majestynl said:


> great..looking forward for further test results. I don't have any issues on the CH6 with high voltages on mem. Im going to directly install my new 2700x on the CH7. Can't make equal comparisons  will see and share what the new rig will do..


I noticed that I can pump Volts in DDR without geting errors from it... SOOOO close of getting CL14 but cpu just cant handle it 
@Mumak Cool so AMD marks it somehow good enough was just curious if . Sent You some euros over. I R a Pirate but always got money to support fantastic software


----------



## JYYJ

I tried posted in rog forum regarding my c7h wifi, 2700x randomly reboot on idle.. But don't get a response.. Thus trying my luck here..

It's only happens when it's idle.. Roughly about 1h to 1 hrs 30 mins mark leaving it idle it will automagically shut down without an blue screen or q code.. GPU pcie power indicator, mobo etc still have power led on.. Couldn't power up by pressing the power button on the case or even the mobo start button.. 

Had to manually power off my psu and it would power up normally using case power button or mobo start button.. Really weird issues.. 

I highly doubt it's my psu or anything.. As my superflower leadex ii gold 650w was working perfectly before I upgraded to ryzen platform.. Heck.. I could even stress test, games and no shut down..

Bios setting is basically default with docp enable for my 3200Mhz Gskill trident z rgb, cpu phase > Asus optimized, APM> ErP enabled s4/s5.

It happens on 0509 and 0601 bios.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Shiftstealth

JYYJ said:


> I tried posted in rog forum regarding my c7h, 2700x randomly reboot on idle.. But don't get a response.. Thus trying my luck here..
> 
> It's only happens when it's idle.. Roughly about 1h to 1 hrs 30 mins market leaving it idle it will automagically shut down without an blue screen or q code.. GPU pcie power indicator, mobo etc still have power led on.. Couldn't power up by pressing the power button on the case or even the mobo start button..
> 
> Had to manually power off my psu and it would power up normally using case power button or mobo start button.. Really weird issues..
> 
> I highly doubt it's my psu or anything.. As my superflower leadex ii gold 650w was working perfectly before I upgraded to ryzen platform.. Heck.. I could even stress test, games and no shut down..
> 
> Bios setting is basically default with docp enable for my 3200Mhz Gskill trident z rgb, cpu phase > Asus optimized, APM> ErP enabled s4/s5.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk



I had this same issue. It ended up being something in my case. I removed it from my case, and it worked fine on the test bench. Was grounded or something. Weird issue. Bought a new case, and everything is fine now.

Edit: It could have been my Kraken X52 grounding it in one of the mounting holes too somehow as i'm using the stock cooler now as well.


----------



## JYYJ

Shiftstealth said:


> I had this same issue. It ended up being something in my case. I removed it from my case, and it worked fine on the test bench. Was grounded or something. Weird issue. Bought a new case, and everything is fine now.
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: It could have been my Kraken X52 grounding it in one of the mounting holes too somehow as i'm using the stock cooler now as well.




What was the *thing* you removed?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## lordzed83

@gupsterg You've paid €9.99 EUR to Karhu Software  cant have enough of test software. Maybe I'm surviving on minimum wage job but since Asus been so generous to Us I can squeeze some cash out here and there. You not been around but thus January my bigest lifetime dream got destroyed crash My Integra reason I moved to UK thing I'w invested 8 years of all my savings and hundreds of hours of work. Cause Damn kid ran on road and wrote it off @20mph. Been to Hospital with infection for operation now got nasty looking scar from operation.. At stage in life when I'm thinking... WHAT'S NEXT.

Anyhow nevermind waiting for download link will see how this Ram test is


----------



## gupsterg

lordzed83 said:


> I'w been pirating when i wa 8 copying taapes for my C64 its in my blood. Hardly anything on my PC is legit. I Torrent and crack games I purchased on steam /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its lime I got Cineworld monthly ticket. But cant be asked to go cinema so download cams and watch em even to im paying unlimited cinema haha
> 
> I got original memtest but thing cant start up instant 16 instances ... So I'm using pirate version Yurppp
> I like this more as i can have 0 errors on memory but after HOURS of constant load IMC can fail and thats what im after. If it passes 2-3 hours of HCI i know i got 0 errors and IMC can handle those settings also. I can get tighter timings with 0 errors but IMC cant handle it with my cpu overclock 😕
> 
> Just start memtest get weight and get on with Training while watching procents fly. Sometimes 4 hours of cardio sometimes 7 depends whats the plan hehe. Not in a rush After all got nothign better to do than testing settings over and over again /forum/images/smilies/tongue.gif


Let's but aside the "piracy" aspect for a moment. In my sentence my first concern was that it is older version of HCI, newer will be better IMO.



> Dump that DangWang HCI. It is old version besides being "pirate".


If you own HCI Memtest:-

Program to launch many instances, etc of HCI Memtest by OCN member Frikencio

Program to launch many instances, etc of HCI Memtest by OCN member Bartouille.

I am collating things relating to C7H in a thread on ROG forum and not OCN this time, link.



Mumak said:


> Sort of 'quality' order of cores - better ones (lower index) should reach higher clock at a given voltage.


Thank you, I had read The Stilt highlighting this info is available on Pinnacle Ridge. Even better to see HWINFO continues to have a "1up" on other apps  . AFAIK latest Ryzen Master will only show best core (denoted by gold star) and 2nd best (denoted with silver star).



crakej said:


> I'm learning to lower this now I have this board - Prime Pro we found LLC5 was best for top performance, and the spike were not too much. This board is not the same! Seems I have probably been overvolting a bit without even realizing!


NP  , overshooting voltage can be just as bad as undershoot.



Ethan_Ryu said:


> what do you think of my cpu? (yes i need a cooler)
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN showing spikes? Or should i check on ryzen master? haven t touched LLC for now , Vcore offset "-" "0.1" .
> wondering if core 7 could do 4.350, is it ok for perf3 to show 1.244 volts fixed? atm my only eyes is SVI2 TFN.
> Would it be safe for a gaming, editing workload?
> If you guys have any suggestion let me know , gonna stick to a more relaxed preset as i wait bios to be more stable.


Looks like VID monitoring info is stuck (ie 1.244V). As SVI2 TFN and VCORE reading from SuperIO is showing downvolting, etc. This VID quirk could be from:-



Using PBO.
SMU FW, could well be resolved in later release of AGESA.

Should have a 2700X to use with C7H on Monday, so will share what I see ASAP  .


----------



## lordzed83

@gupsterg Cool I'm there also hehe just not checking as often not much going on there 

Thanks for Luncher link Works like a CHARM


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> I noticed that I can pump Volts in DDR without geting errors from it... SOOOO close of getting CL14 but cpu just cant handle it
> 
> @Mumak Cool so AMD marks it somehow good enough was just curious if . Sent You some euros over. I R a Pirate but always got money to support fantastic software


Try to pump some extra volts to your CPU or lower 25/50mhz 
memory oc could ask more from you CPU..



JYYJ said:


> I tried posted in rog forum regarding my c7h wifi, 2700x randomly reboot on idle.. But don't get a response.. Thus trying my luck here..
> 
> It's only happens when it's idle.. Roughly about 1h to 1 hrs 30 mins mark leaving it idle it will automagically shut down without an blue screen or q code.. GPU pcie power indicator, mobo etc still have power led on.. Couldn't power up by pressing the power button on the case or even the mobo start button..
> 
> Had to manually power off my psu and it would power up normally using case power button or mobo start button.. Really weird issues..
> 
> I highly doubt it's my psu or anything.. As my superflower leadex ii gold 650w was working perfectly before I upgraded to ryzen platform.. Heck.. I could even stress test, games and no shut down..
> 
> Bios setting is basically default with docp enable for my 3200Mhz Gskill trident z rgb, cpu phase > Asus optimized, APM> ErP enabled s4/s5.
> 
> It happens on 0509 and 0601 bios.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Just to be sure, I would check and reconnect your cables. If still happens then try with another PSU. I found a lot faulty PSU's on new systems while it was working in another....


----------



## hurricane28

Hi folks, i thought on posting some pictures here:


----------



## crakej

I've managed to get my CPU (+Ram 3200MTs fast) stable at 4.125GHz auto LLC - Couldn't get my 4.2 without LLC and 1.41/1.425v. I think LLC would need to be 3. Maybe 2 - but I will leave that for a while. The CPU is taking more voltage than my last board - but we'll see how it goes. I want to see what I can do with ram now - also running totally differently to how it was on old board - used to have SoC at 0.95v and ram at 1.355 for 3200 fast settings - having ram at 1.4 would never have worked on that board but it's working on C7H... Going to try lower them next though - then start ramping the speed.


----------



## JYYJ

majestynl said:


> Try to pump some extra volts to your CPU or lower 25/50mhz
> memory oc could ask more from you CPU..
> 
> 
> 
> Just to be sure, I would check and reconnect your cables. If still happens then try with another PSU. I found a lot faulty PSU's on new systems while it was working in another....


If it's really psu issues.. Wouldn't it shut down during stress? I had had run real bench for fews hours with no issues.. It's only happens during idle.. 

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk


----------



## majestynl

JYYJ said:


> If it's really psu issues.. Wouldn't it shut down during stress? I had had run real bench for fews hours with no issues.. It's only happens during idle..
> 
> Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk


I understand your point but again, not everything is logical as expected. A psu can also show issues on idle watts. If you have spare psu just give it a try so you know it for sure...


----------



## JYYJ

majestynl said:


> I understand your point but again, not everything is logical as expected. A psu can also show issues on idle watts. If you have spare psu just give it a try so you know it for sure...


Alright.. I will get a new psu and try. 

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk


----------



## Safetytrousers

*Deleted*


----------



## crakej

My my first efforts at RAM OC are not going as well as I'd hoped. I already know that just using DOCP and selecting 3466 (or up to about 3800) works completely stable, but I though I would try the Stilts 3466 preset. I couldn't get it to boot, increased VTDDR slightly and that got me a bit further being able to boot, but rebooting before the desktop loaded.

So I thought I'd try my CPU OC with DOCP 3466 defaulting to 20,19,19,19,39,81. ALL other settings auto. So I now have 4.124GHz 3466cl20 which is a great start - performance is actually not too bad, i'm getting about what I got on old board with 4.2 CPU and 3200MTs fast settings. You can see there is much scope for OCing those timings, and it looks like I might be stuck with geardown=on or I can't boot higher speeds - anyone think that's a problem?

When I tried using timings from the calculator for safe 3400, it just wouldn't boot (Geardown was disabled). I'm wondering what settings might be best to tune on this board and in what order - any advice would be great!


----------



## lordzed83

@gupsterg thanks for this new Ram test its got things I NEED Cache stability test and FPU so its all in one. Guess it is My to go test now


----------



## lordzed83

@crakej start from bios preset 3200 fast and see if that works.
Drop us a calculator screenshot of what it gives You we can have a look with @1usmus and see why it does not boot


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> @crakej start from bios preset 3200 fast and see if that works.
> Drop us a calculator screenshot of what it gives You we can have a look with @1usmus and see why it does not boot


You think it should boot with geardown=off?

3200 fast runs great - will be trying to creep up from there, but also useful knowing it can boot and run at higher speeds - and without any other special settings or voltages.

I'm so happy with this board so far - I'm quietly confident I will at last be able to use my ram much better! Totally worth upgrading from the Prime Pro - for me anyway. I don't think that board could drive my sticks like this one 

Does anyone use many of the settings in tweakers paradise?


----------



## gupsterg

@lordzed83

NP  , glad launchers work, been sweet for me  . Yes RAM Test is great app, purchasing myself to use on C7H  .
@crakej

I would expect your F4-4266C19-8GTZR to work with geardown off and higher than 3200MHz. They are Samsung B die which Ryzen favours.

The Stilt's 3466MHz preset is CL15, so for that to apply you need Gear Down Mode off, or else it gets rounded to 16.

As you state using D.O.C.P 3466MHz to 3800MHz is "stable", I'm presuming your getting to OS. So you weren't hitting a memory hole when using 3466MHz The Stilt.

Perhaps try using 3333MHz or 3400MHz with the 3466MHz The Stilt preset. That may aid you to get VDIMM/SOC or other settings close to what you need for 3466MHz The Stilt to work.

ProcODT changes may also help resolve post/OS stability issues when meddling with RAM. For me 53.3Ω or 60Ω worked well with Samsung B die single rank/sided 8GB sticks. Be aware what others may use for ProODT (or the suggestions in OP of my Ryzen thread) may not be right for your HW sample, you may find another value that works best for you, so that is correct for your setup.

Another thing to play with is CAD Bus settings (bottom of Extreme Tweaker > DRAM Timings Control):-

MemCadBusClkDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [Auto]

Tend to find don't help with post/getting into OS, but more so with aiding stability in OS.


----------



## Gettz8488

majestynl said:


> Try to pump some extra volts to your CPU or lower 25/50mhz
> 
> memory oc could ask more from you CPU..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just to be sure, I would check and reconnect your cables. If still happens then try with another PSU. I found a lot faulty PSU's on new systems while it was working in another....




Do you by chance have Corsair link installed?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Lupo91

Hi everyone, sorry for my English

I've just installed the CH7 on my system, and the ram does not rise above 2133Mhz with no settings

I installed a 2700X with ram Gskill Ripjaws Cl15 (Samsung B-Die)

I also tried the last bios of Elmore, 0601

Any suggestions ??

Thanks


----------



## Mumak

lordzed83 said:


> @Mumak Cool so AMD marks it somehow good enough was just curious if . Sent You some euros over. I R a Pirate but always got money to support fantastic software


Thanks!


----------



## majestynl

Lupo91 said:


> Hi everyone, sorry for my English
> 
> I've just installed the CH7 on my system, and the ram does not rise above 2133Mhz with no settings
> 
> I installed a 2700X with ram Gskill Ripjaws Cl15 (Samsung B-Die)
> 
> I also tried the last bios of Elmore, 0601
> 
> Any suggestions ??
> 
> Thanks


Most of the rams will do more then 2133mhz (ddr4 default) even crap kits. So I assume you are doing something wrong. To help you better please share what you already tried. 




Gettz8488 said:


> Do you by chance have Corsair link installed?
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


No sorry, I'm not using it. I'm doing most things in the bios as far as it possible.


----------



## Ethan_Ryu

Lupo91 said:


> Hi everyone, sorry for my English
> 
> I've just installed the CH7 on my system, and the ram does not rise above 2133Mhz with no settings
> 
> I installed a 2700X with ram Gskill Ripjaws Cl15 (Samsung B-Die)
> 
> I also tried the last bios of Elmore, 0601
> 
> Any suggestions ??
> 
> Thanks


Check ram voltage , default is low , your cl15 rating is probably at 1.35V . Use slot 2 and 4. manually select ram frequency and when you are in bios start changing the timings from auto to your xmp profile


----------



## Lupo91

majestynl said:


> Most of the rams will do more then 2133mhz (ddr4 default) even crap kits. So I assume you are doing something wrong. To help you better please share what you already tried.


I simply mounted the RAMs in slot 2 and 4, enabled the The Stilt Safe 3200Mhz profile in the bios,but not Boot,error F9

I also tried to reduce the frequency up to 2666Mhz but don't boot anyway

Boot only 2133Mhz


----------



## Lupo91

Ethan_Ryu said:


> Check ram voltage , default is low , your cl15 rating is probably at 1.35V . Use slot 2 and 4. manually select ram frequency and when you are in bios start changing the timings from auto to your xmp profile


The voltage of the ram is set at 1.40v, and the Boot Dram at 1.40v

it's strange, because with the ASrock K4 X370, which I had before, they went quietly to 2993Cl14


----------



## knightriot

hell yeah , good mainboard. 
CPU Auto all + PE3 , sometime go 4.3
samsung bdie 3533 , 1.44v :3


----------



## Lupo91

majestynl said:


> Most of the rams will do more then 2133mhz (ddr4 default) even crap kits. So I assume you are doing something wrong. To help you better please share what you already tried.


I put the 1700X and the ram go quietly to 3200Cl14, then I put the 2700X and now the ram go to 3200Cl14 with him, but it's incredible ... boh


----------



## Shawn Shutt jr

Haven't looked at all the pages yet but i just picked up as asus crosshair VII hero x470 to replace me C6H x370 and a 2700x to replace my 1700. so with the x370/1700 i could get 3000mhz 16-17-17-35-1T but with the new CPU/mobo i get stuck at 2133mhz with 15-15-15-36-2T and i cant get it to boot at anything over stock memory settings. XMP profile doesn't work nothing. memory kit is CMD32GX4m2B3000C15 (corsair dominator platinum) Yes i understand its hynix i got it for a good deal before ram prices spiked and it could cost me an extra $200+ just to swap now.


----------



## GmanP42

Hey, Had a Crosshair 6 extreme moving to the Crosshair 7 Hero with a 2700x

On Bios 601 I have some bugs (i think) First one, the voltage is low on boot -+ 1.03v to 1.00v then after 2 to 3 seconds it will go to the "normal" value. Second is on PLL Voltage ones you're on Manual Voltage it will go to 2.01v in the bios and in OS. If it's in Offset mode that does not happen. The last one is odd the BCLK on bios 601 (CPU core ratio on Auto) 3700mhz the BCLK will not add up after BCLK 100.8 to show you the new CPU speed. So you will go 100 = 3700Mhz 100.2 = 3707Mhz 100.4 = 3714Mhz 100.6 = 3722Mhz then 100.8 is 3704Mhz ??? if i set the CPU core ratio then it works fine.

On the motherboard will we get the option to show the temp on the Q code on a future bios?


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> I would expect your F4-4266C19-8GTZR to work with geardown off and higher than 3200MHz. They are Samsung B die which Ryzen favours.
> 
> The Stilt's 3466MHz preset is CL15, so for that to apply you need Gear Down Mode off, or else it gets rounded to 16.
> 
> As you state using D.O.C.P 3466MHz to 3800MHz is "stable", I'm presuming your getting to OS. So you weren't hitting a memory hole when using 3466MHz The Stilt.
> 
> Perhaps try using 3333MHz or 3400MHz with the 3466MHz The Stilt preset. That may aid you to get VDIMM/SOC or other settings close to what you need for 3466MHz The Stilt to work.
> 
> ProcODT changes may also help resolve post/OS stability issues when meddling with RAM. For me 53.3Ω or 60Ω worked well with Samsung B die single rank/sided 8GB sticks. Be aware what others may use for ProODT (or the suggestions in OP of my Ryzen thread) may not be right for your HW sample, you may find another value that works best for you, so that is correct for your setup.
> 
> Another thing to play with is CAD Bus settings (bottom of Extreme Tweaker > DRAM Timings Control):-
> 
> MemCadBusClkDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [Auto]
> 
> Tend to find don't help with post/getting into OS, but more so with aiding stability in OS.


Thanks again  Spent an hour just (re)reading. I'm not used to my b-die behaving like it is - because my last board didn't work with it. I was at ProcODT 48ohm on Prime pro, but previously it had been 53, but the new AGESA changed everything on that board.

I'll do a few more experiments this evening with geardown=off then and see how I get on.

My ram booted and ran stable up to 3533. I could boot to the desktop up to 3800, but very unreliable lol.

I had the Stilts timings loaded for 3466 and geardown was off - didn't try booting it with geardown on. Well happy that I will be able to get better ram speed at last. It's a shame my CPU doesn't seem to be able to do 4.2 without some LLC, but saying that, Stilt says up to 1.45 VCore is acceptable for day to day use - I'm not sure it would need quite that much anyway. Sticking with 4.125GHz auto LLC for now.


----------



## Lupo91

Shawn Shutt jr said:


> Haven't looked at all the pages yet but i just picked up as asus crosshair VII hero x470 to replace me C6H x370 and a 2700x to replace my 1700. so with the x370/1700 i could get 3000mhz 16-17-17-35-1T but with the new CPU/mobo i get stuck at 2133mhz with 15-15-15-36-2T and i cant get it to boot at anything over stock memory settings. XMP profile doesn't work nothing. memory kit is CMD32GX4m2B3000C15 (corsair dominator platinum) Yes i understand its hynix i got it for a good deal before ram prices spiked and it could cost me an extra $200+ just to swap now.


Try pulling down the cpu, and put it back, I've solved that


----------



## Safetytrousers

crakej said:


> Thanks again  It's a shame my CPU doesn't seem to be able to do 4.2 without some LLC, but saying that, Stilt says up to 1.45 VCore is acceptable for day to day use - I'm not sure it would need quite that much anyway. Sticking with 4.125GHz auto LLC for now.


From readings in OCCT the 2700x on C7H has significant vdroop (and a YouTube video shows this also on the Gigabyte x470 board), at least when manually overclocked. I've seen it go down by as much as .4 volts and still be stable. But you need to keep volts up for full performance of your clock setting as I've observed in Cryptonight mining. I've found only LLC 5 keeps the voltage close to what I have set in BIOS as reported in HWInfo when under strong load (voltage always goes lower than set under load). I haven't seen any voltage overshoots.


----------



## ocacc19

JYYJ said:


> Alright.. I will get a new psu and try.


Keep us up to date please. There are quite some people with the same "sudden shutdown" issue, and it's annoying as hell (for me it makes the system unusable productively so I'd like to trash it *mad*).

Be sure to use the most default BIOS settings possible.
I remember there's some setting where you can declare extra low idle power consumption, don't remember the name (maybe that helps the PSU to stay ON).


----------



## Shawn Shutt jr

Lupo91 said:


> Try pulling down the cpu, and put it back, I've solved that


i cant get the ram to run at 3000mhz even with stock CPU settings. if everything is set to auto and then i turn on the xmp profile ill get a boot loop and then an error saying my ram was reset because it failed to boot. even with 1.4v (rated for 3000mhz @1.35v) even with lower speeds


----------



## Ethan_Ryu

Today i measured the vcore with the multimeter 0.729V from probeit points , on HWiNFO (CPU core voltage SVI2 TFN) was showing 0.731V.Seems accurate enough to me


----------



## lordzed83

@majestynl tbh I think its this memory Kit. Its stable at 3400hmz cl14 BUT Latency goes from 67.9 to almost 70ns lol.
Its not perfect for ryzen use kinda cause it can do [email protected] volts can do 4000cl12 with 2 volts haha.
It must be disigned for high frequency not low timings.
Would love to have a play with those gskill [email protected] still think its best kit for Ryzen


----------



## crakej

Very strange - My stable OC from earlier is nowhere near stable now  I think I'm too tired for this now!

I was wondering, is there any disadvantage besides no odd CLs with having geardown=on?


----------



## Shawn Shutt jr

so after reading around for abit, i shut down my PC. pulled the ram out, put it into A2-B2 and booted it up and turned on xmp profile overclocked the CPU to 4.2ghz and boom. PC boots fine no problems. now for testing.



is it normal for Package temp's to be high? i dont remember my 1700 being so high. it sits at around 80c-90c


----------



## crakej

`duplicate!


----------



## Shiftstealth

JYYJ said:


> What was the *thing* you removed?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I removed my entire build from the case, and used the wraith prism cooler. Power supply, mobo, etc it was all sitting on my glass desk. Worked fine. When it was in the case it would randomly power off as you described.


----------



## JYYJ

Gettz8488 said:


> Do you by chance have Corsair link installed?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Not.. But Nzxt cam.. As I'm using cryorig quad lumi.


ocacc19 said:


> Keep us up to date please. There are quite some people with the same "sudden shutdown" issue, and it's annoying as hell (for me it makes the system unusable productively so I'd like to trash it *mad*).
> 
> Be sure to use the most default BIOS settings possible.
> I remember there's some setting where you can declare extra low idle power consumption, don't remember the name (maybe that helps the PSU to stay ON).


Will definitely updates no worries..


Shiftstealth said:


> I removed my entire build from the case, and used the wraith prism cooler. Power supply, mobo, etc it was all sitting on my glass desk. Worked fine. When it was in the case it would randomly power off as you described.


That's pretty weird.. I have an phanteks eclipse p300 though.. 

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk


----------



## Gettz8488

JYYJ said:


> Not.. But Nzxt cam.. As I'm using cryorig quad lumi. Will definitely updates no worries.. That's pretty weird.. I have an phanteks eclipse p300 though..
> 
> Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk




Uninstall nzxt elmor confirmed my suspicion about third party software like Corsair link and nzxt causing shutdown 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Shawn Shutt jr

is it normal for Package temp's to be high? i dont remember my 1700 being so high. it sits at around 80c-90c

below are picture of my 1700x/C6H and 2700x C7H


----------



## JYYJ

Gettz8488 said:


> Uninstall nzxt elmor confirmed my suspicion about third party software like Corsair link and nzxt causing shutdown
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Will do.. Do I need to remove the USB 2.0 cables? 

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk


----------



## Gettz8488

Shawn Shutt jr said:


> is it normal for Package temp's to be high? i dont remember my 1700 being so high. it sits at around 80c-90c
> 
> 
> 
> below are picture of my 1700x/C6H and 2700x C7H




Use HWinfo for temps link is wrong and I would uninstall it if I were you it’s causing random shut downs 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Gettz8488

JYYJ said:


> Will do.. Do I need to remove the USB 2.0 cables?
> 
> Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk




I have them on just fine only the software I believe I did do a windows reinstall though so not sure if you will have to do it as well 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Shawn Shutt jr

Gettz8488 said:


> Use HWinfo for temps link is wrong and I would uninstall it if I were you it’s causing random shut downs
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


i havent had any issues with it yet. just the package temp being super high lol hits 130c during benching XD i used it for RGB on my AIO but meh. might drop it here soon


----------



## Gettz8488

Shawn Shutt jr said:


> i havent had any issues with it yet. just the package temp being super high lol hits 130c during benching XD i used it for RGB on my AIO but meh. might drop it here soon




I was using it as well and the temps were reading 90C + hwinfo read 30-40C soon as I removed it I had no shut downs 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## JYYJ

Alright will do! For peace of mind.. i will removed the usb 2.0 cable and uninstalled cam software and see how it goes! Will report back again!


----------



## Shawn Shutt jr

Gettz8488 said:


> I was using it as well and the temps were reading 90C + hwinfo read 30-40C soon as I removed it I had no shut downs
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro



listen here you wizard! i haven't had a single shut down all day! and the second i say i haven't had the issue and that im using corsair link. IT SHUTS DOWN! "mind blown" lol i removed it. thanks


----------



## Gettz8488

Shawn Shutt jr said:


> listen here you wizard! i haven't had a single shut down all day! and the second i say i haven't had the issue and that im using corsair link. IT SHUTS DOWN! "mind blown" lol i removed it. thanks




Lmao no problems we are all here to help each other out 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## majestynl

Lupo91 said:


> majestynl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Most of the rams will do more then 2133mhz (ddr4 default) even crap kits. So I assume you are doing something wrong. To help you better please share what you already tried.
> 
> 
> 
> I put the 1700X and the ram go quietly to 3200Cl14, then I put the 2700X and now the ram go to 3200Cl14 with him, but it's incredible ... boh
Click to expand...

Haha great, I remember a same situation before. When i reinstalled my CPU it worked. Probably it was not seated well. 



Shawn Shutt jr said:


> Lupo91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Try pulling down the cpu, and put it back, I've solved that
> 
> 
> 
> i cant get the ram to run at 3000mhz even with stock CPU settings. if everything is set to auto and then i turn on the xmp profile ill get a boot loop and then an error saying my ram was reset because it failed to boot. even with 1.4v (rated for 3000mhz @1.35v) even with lower speeds
Click to expand...

Dont know why people trust THAT much on xmp profiles. I found those working more like a chance. Just start with stock/fabric timings then voltage / soc / ProcODT etc. If success then tune your timings. 



lordzed83 said:


> @majestynl tbh I think its this memory Kit. Its stable at 3400hmz cl14 BUT Latency goes from 67.9 to almost 70ns lol.
> Its not perfect for ryzen use kinda cause it can do [email protected] volts can do 4000cl12 with 2 volts haha.
> It must be disigned for high frequency not low timings.
> Would love to have a play with those gskill [email protected] still think its best kit for Ryzen /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif


Hahaha yeah 2 volts 🙂
I think I will purchase some new GSkill 4000+ CL 19 to see how far we can go.. 



crakej said:


> Very strange - My stable OC from earlier is nowhere near stable now /forum/images/smilies/frown.gif I think I'm too tired for this now!
> 
> I was wondering, is there any disadvantage besides no odd CLs with having geardown=on?


On my ch6 with 1800x and Gskill 3200cl14 I never got them booted without 
Geardown mode off. Very strange, tried for weeks 🙂 after I compared my scores with others who had turned it off I left it ON. Memscores where beautiful even compared to people with GD off I saw on the CH6 thread.


----------



## QuadJunkyx

JYYJ said:


> Will do.. Do I need to remove the USB 2.0 cables?
> 
> Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk


I disabled all asus and corslink services and disabled all asus and corsair software from starting and I have not had another shut down been 3-4 days now.


----------



## VPII

I'm slowly getting the hand of this board coming from an Asus ROG Strix X370-F Gaming. The Strix gaming worked really well in that I needed less vcore on the cpu to get the speeds I'm able to get the the 2700X. But still, I figured the vcore is not that much more so I'll give it a go. I've only ran CB15R as it shows the impact memory and other settings has on the score but also proportionally climb with higher cpu core speed. At present I had to leave BCLK at 100, even with Async as the system just wont work if I change it. At present the highest I can get the memory to run is 3333mhz with the G.Skill 4F 3200 TridentZ RGB set using the Stilt fast present for the speed but dropping the dropping the TRCD and TRP to 13. Unfortunately in my screenshots I forgot to add the Ryzen Timer so I took a separate screengrab of it to show the mem in all 3 runs.

firstly cpu vcore set to 1.268v using high 5 LLC memory I use 1.5vdimm as it should be fine up to 1.55v for everyday use. CPU speed 200 x 42.25 = 4225mhz but with the fluctuation in bclk you get 4217mhz.

http://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=168201&thumb=1

Secondly cpu vcore set to 1.4v memory the same and cpu speed 100 x 43.25 = 4325mhz but actual 4316mhz

http://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=168209&thumb=1

Lastly I tried a little higher with 1.45vcore on the cpu, memroy the same cpu speed 100 x 43.75 = 4375mhz

http://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=168217&thumb=1

Below is just a screenshot of the Ryzen Timer app to show timings

http://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=168225&thumb=1

I am able to boot into windows at 4.4ghz using 1.4875vcore but not stable.

The cpu itself can do 4.9ghz under dry ice, even boot into windows at 5.05ghz but not stable all using the Strix X3. I'll try in a week or two to get some LN2 action going to see what this cpu can do, but at present I still need to learn and understand this motherboard.


----------



## Gettz8488

@The Stilt not sure who else to ask on this I read your research on FiT voltages and I’m quite curious. While on auto my cpu can spike up to 1.512 Vcore I solved this by adding a -offset. But with PErformance enhancer 2 and a -0.075Offset I spike up to 1.475 and it runs around 1.36Vcore on average over hours of us and around 1.3 under full load. I know you can’t give me a straight answer as no one really knows but would you consider this as okay for 24/7 does it provide silicon reliability?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## hurricane28

Now i tried Aida64 again to do an cash benchmark but within 15 minutes the fans start to ramp up to 100% again... 
I have no other program open and i did restart with hardwareinfo64 disabled from startup.. 
@elmor, i thought you fixed this?


----------



## knightriot

hurricane28 said:


> Now i tried Aida64 again to do an cash benchmark but within 15 minutes the fans start to ramp up to 100% again...
> I have no other program open and i did restart with hardwareinfo64 disabled from startup..
> 
> @elmor, i thought you fixed this?


 @hurricane28
My 2700X +C7H not stable at stock too. So i do something,hope can help you:
_ update 0601 bios
_ clear cmos
_ Disable Fastboot + CSM + Memory Clear
_ Always turn on DOCP , after that set your ram freq + ram volt and don't touch geardown or etc behind 
_Enable Skew MI + offset 282
_ Enable PE3
_ Save + reboot
Note: Try to test by IBT, if IBT pass, you can go Aida64 or prime95 or RealBench. 
and sorry about my bad English
My result:


----------



## Shiftstealth

QuadJunkyx said:


> I disabled all asus and corslink services and disabled all asus and corsair software from starting and I have not had another shut down been 3-4 days now.


I think this might affect HWinfo as well as i had another random shutdown with the program open. Before that i was up for 36 hours without issue.


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> On my ch6 with 1800x and Gskill 3200cl14 I never got them booted without
> Geardown mode off. Very strange, tried for weeks 🙂 after I compared my scores with others who had turned it off I left it ON. Memscores where beautiful even compared to people with GD off I saw on the CH6 thread.


I couldn't use geardown=on with the Prime Pro either - I just wondered if this setting had to be off for some reason. I will happily experiment with geardown=on as well as off then.


----------



## Louis_SunKing

About the sudden shutdown: My experience, might help to figure out what is happening:
The 3 or 4 times I had a sudden immediate shutdown, I was always playing with the fan settings in the ai suite, since I uninstalled the ai suite, I didn't have any sudden shutdowns anymore.
extra information: I do not have any corsair link software and I also updated to 601 bios in the meantime.

I have 2 questions: 
* I have a 2700x and flare x F4-3200C14 memory. In the bios exterme tweaker setting is set to manual and memory is set to stilts 3466 memory preset. Performance enhancer is set to level 2. All other settings are on Auto
This is all running very stable, but in hw info I see sometimes the bus clock going higher.(blck is on auto in the bios) 
Most often(after an hour of prime 95) the max is on 101 or 102 but once I saw it on 113(see image). Is this a glitch or is this automatic overclocking that isn't documented?
This also has an influence on memory frequences. I am assuming it is a glitch.....

* Should I be worried that my CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN goes higher then 1.5 volts? Basically the same question as @*Gettz8488* had today at 12:02 AM
Most seem to set an offset, But I would assume that this not needed because asus thinks this safe. Or is that wrong asumption?


----------



## Hiromachi

Gettz8488 said:


> @The Stilt not sure who else to ask on this I read your research on FiT voltages and I’m quite curious. While on auto my cpu can spike up to 1.512 Vcore I solved this by adding a -offset. But with PErformance enhancer 2 and a -0.075Offset I spike up to 1.475 and it runs around 1.36Vcore on average over hours of us and around 1.3 under full load. I know you can’t give me a straight answer as no one really knows but would you consider this as okay for 24/7 does it provide silicon reliability?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Since its my first post, hello everyone!

I'm in a similar situation with similar concerns. I've received this mobo and cpu two days ago and since then been playing and tweaking it. The thing that caught my attention were those voltage spikes, seeing 1.512 V on SVI2 TFN just scares me. Furthermore I've pushed RAM to 3600 mhz and adjusted timings using simply Stilts 3466 mhz preset which works best for me. Perhaps I will tighten something later on.
Right now I'm running 2700X with PE3 and voltage offset of - 0.0125 which seems to work stable. 3 hours of Prime95 and no freeze or crash so for a brief testing that's fine. All core turbo during Cb run is about 4,073 Mhz at 1.281 V, at idle cpu sits at 0.813 V and single core boost of 4,349 Mhz pushes it to 1.462 to 1.512 (highest I've seen is 1.531 V). But if all core tortutre tests and ram tests work fine I'm simply trying to figure if its safe to run with such 1.5 V spikes and bursts during gaming. I play a few poorly optimized single threaded games and during yesterday tests I've noticed that SVI2 TFN was jumping from 1.47 to 1.512 V and sitting around 1.5 V quite a bit. It's obvious that XFR pushes cores to the limit and calls for a lot of power. But with three to four gaming sessions during the week I just wish to know if such situation is safe or I should feel concerned. Even with PE2 I had such spikes which is a non-oc profile, so compared to my previous cpu - 2600k I was surprised to see stuff like that.
Here are two benches I use for basic testing if anyone would be interested:


Spoiler


----------



## majestynl

Louis_SunKing said:


> About the sudden shutdown: My experience, might help to figure out what is happening:
> The 3 or 4 times I had a sudden immediate shutdown, I was always playing with the fan settings in the ai suite, since I uninstalled the ai suite, I didn't have any sudden shutdowns anymore.
> extra information: I do not have any corsair link software and I also updated to 601 bios in the meantime.
> 
> I have 2 questions:
> * I have a 2700x and flare x F4-3200C14 memory. In the bios exterme tweaker setting is set to manual and memory is set to stilts 3466 memory preset. Performance enhancer is set to level 2. All other settings are on Auto
> This is all running very stable, but in hw info I see sometimes the bus clock going higher.(blck is on auto in the bios)
> Most often(after an hour of prime 95) the max is on 101 or 102 but once I saw it on 113(see image). Is this a glitch or is this automatic overclocking that isn't documented?
> This also has an influence on memory frequences. I am assuming it is a glitch.....
> 
> * Should I be worried that my CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN goes higher then 1.5 volts? Basically the same question as @*Gettz8488* had today at 12:02 AM
> Most seem to set an offset, But I would assume that this not needed because asus thinks this safe. Or is that wrong asumption?


Fluctuating Busclock (Blck) probably happened because of Performance enhancer on. Same happened with Core Performance Boost(CPB) on ryzen 1. Don't think it's a Big issue. If bothering then try manual Blck and set to 100.

Same goes for 1.5v on Core. I don't believe it's an issue, probably those are spikes and not happening on all cores. 

Give a try on manual OC and see if you get those values again. Just to see. 🙂


----------



## Louis_SunKing

majestynl said:


> Fluctuating Busclock (Blck) probably happened because of Performance enhancer on. Same happened with Core Performance Boost(CPB) on ryzen 1. Don't think it's a Big issue. If bothering then try manual Blck and set to 100.
> 
> Same goes for 1.5v on Core. I don't believe it's an issue, probably those are spikes and not happening on all cores.
> 
> Give a try on manual OC and see if you get those values again. Just to see. 🙂


Setting it on 100 or on auto, doesn't seem to make a difference, i get those busclock fluctuations in any case. But is does take a while before they occur. 
I wonder if other people see them as well. Furthermore I wonder if it is just hwInfo that sees these(readout glitch) or if the fluctuations are really happening.

concerning the vcore voltage: I did set an offset of -0.05 and everything still seems stable, so now the max voltage spike I saw was 1.488. I feel much more comfortable with that. I leave it at that just to feel safer.


----------



## majestynl

Louis_SunKing said:


> majestynl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fluctuating Busclock (Blck) probably happened because of Performance enhancer on. Same happened with Core Performance Boost(CPB) on ryzen 1. Don't think it's a Big issue. If bothering then try manual Blck and set to 100.
> 
> Same goes for 1.5v on Core. I don't believe it's an issue, probably those are spikes and not happening on all cores.
> 
> Give a try on manual OC and see if you get those values again. Just to see. 🙂
> 
> 
> 
> Setting it on 100 or on auto, doesn't seem to make a difference, i get those busclock fluctuations in any case. But is does take a while before they occur.
> I wonder if other people see them as well. Furthermore I wonder if it is just hwInfo that sees these(readout glitch) or if the fluctuations are really happening.
> 
> concerning the vcore voltage: I did set an offset of -0.05 and everything still seems stable, so now the max voltage spike I saw was 1.488. I feel much more comfortable with that. I leave it at that just to feel safer.
Click to expand...

Did you also try with PE off and manual OC like I suggested? 

Don't know if Hwinfo is the issue. But if it is, you can ask the Dev(mumak). He is really fast and dedicated. He makes Great software TBH. 

You could also try playing with polling rate in the settings to see if that's the issue.


----------



## QuadJunkyx

I though I had the sudden shut issue resolved but drinking my morning coffee and watching some youtube it struck again.... Had to wait for something to cool down...... disconnecting power, safe boot, retry etc nothing worked until it sat for 5mins or so and it just boot like nothing happened


----------



## gupsterg

@hurricane28

https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8...-hero-amd-x470-motherboard-review/index4.html

https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8...-hero-amd-x370-motherboard-review/index4.html

The same SuperIO chip is used on C7H as C6H. As stated before some of it's implementation has been changed in regard to voltage reads. AIDA64 can send PWM bad on my C6H and ZE. I recently posted a 24hr+ run of stability testing in a ZE thread, where at each point when I stopped stability testing I did PWM check, all was fine. When I use AIDA64, even latest beta versions, C6H and ZE will have PWM issues. To me it is the application. As stated in the C6H thread multiple times. The SuperIO chip a) doesn't like multiple apps accessing it b) some apps like AIDA64 need to be updated by authors to solve issue.
@Louis_SunKing

Ryzen has no hardware to read BCLK back correctly. Other methods are employed, which can lead to it being seen as fluctuating but it does not.

IMO some CPUs/combo of HW, exhibit this fluctuation more than others. Putting aside Ryzen for a moment I know this can also occur on Intel. For example I had same Intel HW as another poster on OCN/ROG forum. His HW did the fluctuation, mine did not.

Solution for AMD/Intel CPUs that do not have hardware to readback BCLK?

For HWINFO click Settings on launch window, go to tab in image, uncheck option with red box in image.


----------



## majestynl

QuadJunkyx said:


> I though I had the sudden shut issue resolved but drinking my morning coffee and watching some youtube it struck again.... Had to wait for something to cool down...... disconnecting power, safe boot, retry etc nothing worked until it sat for 5mins or so and it just boot like nothing happened


Did you try playing with T Offset ? Like setting it to "64". Saw some people fixed this issue.
See also : http://www.overclock.net/forum/27279113-post36567.html


----------



## Louis_SunKing

gupsterg said:


> ...
> 
> @*Louis_SunKing*
> 
> Ryzen has no hardware to read BCLK back correctly. Other methods are employed, which can lead to it being seen as fluctuating but it does not.
> ...


Ok Thx for the info. I guess this is the reason, 

@majestynl thx, For your input, I will try doing a manual overclock later on, And I will keep an eye on busclock to confirm, but as gpsterg pointed out it is a readout glitch.





In meantime I was playing around with level 3 OC of performance enhancer, and it seems the voltage are a lot lower compared with level 2. I guess this is an improvement done by @Stilt.
At the moment my setup seems to be stable with level 3 with a negative offset of -0.05 vcore voltage. Which results in a a lot lower temps ,which is great!!!!


----------



## JYYJ

Well.. Seems like definitely more to the random shutdown.. I had gotten a new psu today.. Cam software was not installed. It just shut down randomly again at the 1 hrs - 1hrs 30mins mark. Prior to that I have open Aida64 and hwinfo 64. Could this monitor software be bug too? 

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk


----------



## majestynl

Louis_SunKing said:


> Ok Thx for the info. I guess this is the reason,
> 
> @majestynl thx, For your input, I will try doing a manual overclock later on, And I will keep an eye on busclock to confirm, but as gpsterg pointed out it is a readout glitch.
> 
> In meantime I was playing around with level 3 OC of performance enhancer, and it seems the voltage are a lot lower compared with level 2. I guess this is an improvement done by @Stilt.
> At the moment my setup seems to be stable with level 3 with a negative offset of -0.05 vcore voltage. Which results in a a lot lower temps ,which is great!!!!


NP, Yep Gup could be right, like i also suggested playing with the PR from Hwinfo on post :http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...-vii-overclocking-thread-42.html#post27279233

Im just curious about manual OC. Tomorrow im starting to install the 2700 on my new CH7.. Will share results and differences in OC methods!


----------



## crakej

What's the score with spread spectrum on this board? I have it disabled.

Been playing with geardown=on and it seems to have stabilized my memory, but - when running RamTest it would usually use 100% of the CPU. Not when you have geardown on, cores drop to 98/99ish% often. It doesn't seem to have affected anything though - with very brief testing, but it looks very positive. If there is any performance hit, it's imperceivable in bench tests....might be a bit more in games. My latency is marginally better as well.

I'm out for a while, but will continue testing when I'm back.


----------



## gupsterg

Settings with "Spread spectrum" in them basically are ones where frequency of x is varied to comply with EMI regs, etc. See in heading *Spread-spectrum clock signal generation* near the end some info, here.

As I have yet to power on C7H I don't know if it has only VRM Spread Spectrum setting in External Digi+ menu like C6H. That setting does this:-



> The VRM Spread Spectrum setting modulates the VRM switching frequency around the set point. Most suggest disabling VRM Spread Spectrum under the erroneous assumption that it has an affect on BLCK. VRM Spread Spectrum alters the switching frequency of the VRM circuit. This has no impact on BCLK frequency. However, with VRM Spread Spectrum being enabled the transient response of the circuit during load is altered and this can have a negative impact on stability depending on the voltage margin available.


Quoted information in C6H thread, posted by :clock: Praz :clock:.


----------



## The Stilt

Gettz8488 said:


> @The Stilt not sure who else to ask on this I read your research on FiT voltages and I’m quite curious. While on auto my cpu can spike up to 1.512 Vcore I solved this by adding a -offset. But with PErformance enhancer 2 and a -0.075Offset I spike up to 1.475 and it runs around 1.36Vcore on average over hours of us and around 1.3 under full load. I know you can’t give me a straight answer as no one really knows but would you consider this as okay for 24/7 does it provide silicon reliability?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


So with "Performance Enhancement" set to "Default" and everything else at stock as well (Voltage "Auto", Load-Line "Auto", Precision Boost Override Scalar 1x) you are seeing 1.512V for "CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN" in HWInfo?

The worst core of the CPU is always requesting the highest voltage, but I've never seen the CPU exceeding 1.43V in stock configuration.
The worse cores also have a lower frequency ceiling by default and that obviously is changing when you enable e.g. "Performance Enhancement" Level 3 (all cores will have the same ceiling, 4.35GHz).


----------



## QuadJunkyx

Shiftstealth said:


> I think this might affect HWinfo as well as i had another random shutdown with the program open. Before that i was up for 36 hours without issue.


Very possible, all I had open this morning was firefox and spotify watching some youtube and drinking coffee. I just had to wait after trying the typical unplugging, safe bott, etc nothing worked until i let it sit for idk maybe 5 mins then it booted right up.


----------



## Timur Born

So I got the mainboard from Elmor/Asus, took apart my old C6H rig, cleaned the old thermal paste and then looked stupid. The C7H does not have AM3+ mounting holes anymore and I wasn't able to find the AM4 retention kit for my AIO (which I received last September). So I will have to wait for a new retention kit to arrive before I can build the C7H.


----------



## Gettz8488

The Stilt said:


> So with "Performance Enhancement" set to "Default" and everything else at stock as well (Voltage "Auto", Load-Line "Auto", Precision Boost Override Scalar 1x) you are seeing 1.512V for "CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN" in HWInfo?
> 
> 
> 
> The worst core of the CPU is always requesting the highest voltage, but I've never seen the CPU exceeding 1.43V in stock configuration.
> 
> The worse cores also have a lower frequency ceiling by default and that obviously is changing when you enable e.g. "Performance Enhancement" Level 3 (all cores will have the same ceiling, 4.35GHz).




Correct everything at stock configuration it will spike up too 1.512Vcore in single threaded loads for example League of legends is one I use to test it. It isn’t sustained at 1.512 it’s usually between 1.46-1.512 then dips to 1.1 1.2 and so on and this 100% at stock. Just to be clear my average Vcore according to hwinfo over a few hours is 1.2ish when at stock. But quite curious as to how they can allow spikes up to 1.512 or above 1.42 when FIT is set up

Also found a reddit post with amd Robert hallock talking about Ryzen first gen. People were asking why xfr was pushing voltages up to 1.5 he said it’s intended transient burst to 1.5 Is 100% safe and intended he said if you use the computer a few hours and notice hwinfo will have the average Vcore at 1.1-1.2 it’s safer for your cpu then for example manually setting your voltage to 1.35 and have it running at 1.35 24/7 I’ll try to find the post 

https://amp.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/6dawyw/overclock_ryzen_1800x_vs_relying_on_turbo/di1h591/ the post from Robert is on there 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## gupsterg

That was a cool feature of C6H, but I guess as it's been a year since Ryzen released, ASUS R&D probably thought it's an unneeded feature.


----------



## crakej

Now I wish I could work out why I need geardown=on for my memory =>3200MTs, but I'm happy that I can now get over 3200 

10,000% on RamTest should be enough......on to higher speeds!


----------



## Gettz8488

Shiftstealth said:


> I think this might affect HWinfo as well as i had another random shutdown with the program open. Before that i was up for 36 hours without issue.




Another shutdown even with no cam software?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## haydn-j

Alright guys I think I was being an idiot once again (previously spent days thinking something was broken in my system when I had RAM in A1/B1 rather than A2/B2). So is the voltage reported in Ryzen master the requested voltage? I thought my negative offset for Vcore was being ignored as Ryzen Master was still reporting > 1.53 (Performance enhancer LVL3) voltages even with a -0.075 offset. Finally look at HWiNFO/CPU-Z and see no voltages above 1.48. This is indicating that the offset is working, correct? Now I have something else happening. With Performance Enhancer set to LVL3, Vcore with -0.075 offset, and everything else on default (except for RAM timings and VSoC) HWiNFO is showing me that the voltages of my individual cores (Core #{0-7} VID) are locked at 1.275. SVI2 TFN will fluctuate as expected, anywhere from 0.762 to 1.475. Anyone know why this is happening?

EDIT:
Restarted my computer and brought up HWiNFO/Cinebench/Ryzen Master as I usually do and the individual core voltage fluctuated for a bit and stopped. Restarting HWiNFO did not fix the problem.

EDIT 2:
Just saw ShiftStealth's post about HWiNFO. I've had one random crash and it was while opening HWiNFO.

EDIT 65490365468:
The voltage displayment issue doesn't appear to be happening with Performance Enhancer LVL2.


----------



## lordzed83

Binned 2700x ordered 
https://siliconlottery.com/collections/pinnacleridge/products/2700x42g
[email protected] 250mhz jump from my 1700x


----------



## MacG32

lordzed83 said:


> Binned 2700x ordered
> https://siliconlottery.com/collections/pinnacleridge/products/2700x42g
> [email protected] 250mhz jump from my 1700x



Because I saw your post about it earlier in the VI thread, I got in on this business as well. +virtual REP :thumb: I'm looking forward to see what this binned chip can do. I'm ordering my VII right now. Hopefully they'll arrive together and ASUS will have a new BIOS out that will work with the Corsair Link software.


----------



## The Stilt

Gettz8488 said:


> Correct everything at stock configuration it will spike up too 1.512Vcore in single threaded loads for example League of legends is one I use to test it. It isn’t sustained at 1.512 it’s usually between 1.46-1.512 then dips to 1.1 1.2 and so on and this 100% at stock. Just to be clear my average Vcore according to hwinfo over a few hours is 1.2ish when at stock. But quite curious as to how they can allow spikes up to 1.512 or above 1.42 when FIT is set up
> 
> Also found a reddit post with amd Robert hallock talking about Ryzen first gen. People were asking why xfr was pushing voltages up to 1.5 he said it’s intended transient burst to 1.5 Is 100% safe and intended he said if you use the computer a few hours and notice hwinfo will have the average Vcore at 1.1-1.2 it’s safer for your cpu then for example manually setting your voltage to 1.35 and have it running at 1.35 24/7 I’ll try to find the post
> 
> https://amp.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/6dawyw/overclock_ryzen_1800x_vs_relying_on_turbo/di1h591/ the post from Robert is on there
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


I guess it is possible, but the voltage is way higher I've seen on any specimen so far (either on my own or at forums).

Could you check what's the worst core on your CPU using HWInfo and then start Cinebench R15 single thread test.
After the test has started, change the affinity for Cinebench to the worst core and open HWInfo sensors (showing Core Voltage SVI2 TFN).

e.g. if your worst core is core six, set the affinity to core 12 (core number * 2) from the task manager.


----------



## Gettz8488

The Stilt said:


> I guess it is possible, but the voltage is way higher I've seen on any specimen so far (either on my own or at forums).
> 
> 
> 
> Could you check what's the worst core on your CPU using HWInfo and then start Cinebench R15 single thread test.
> 
> After the test has started, change the affinity for Cinebench to the worst core and open HWInfo sensors (showing Core Voltage SVI2 TFN).
> 
> 
> 
> e.g. if your worst core is core six, set the affinity to core 12 (core number * 2) from the task manager.




I’ll try it out in a few hours since I’m at work but since we’re on the topic @Hiromachi @Louis_SunKing are seeing the same voltages at stock along with many others on this forum I assumed this was a normal occurrence. With you saying it’s the first time you see it makes me
a bit uneasy now 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## The Stilt

Gettz8488 said:


> With you saying it’s the first time you see it makes me a bit uneasy now
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


There is no need for that.
Unless some of the protections are manually disabled the CPU won't allow voltages which could cause damage.


----------



## Gettz8488

The Stilt said:


> There is no need for that.
> 
> Unless some of the protections are manually disabled the CPU won't allow voltages which could cause damage.




Makes me feel a bit better. Usually I don’t mind pushing the limits of hardware but strapped for cash lately. Would you consider this okay to run? In your honest opinion would you expect any degradation getting spikes up to 1.5? At the moment I’m doing PE2 with offset so spikes are 1.47 max for single core workloads. I know there’s never a guarantee just curious as to your opinion 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## crakej

So with geardown=on I'm already running 3466 reliably with cpu OC. My latency is much better as well. I'm using the Stilts' preset and I'm sure I can tune to get more out of it. My CB15 score is one point lower than i had with my cpu at 2.4GHz and 3200 fast timings on my X370. Could not do anything over 3200 on x370 so updating to C7H has worked out very good for me! 

There's still plenty to do, lots of stuff I can tidy up and i'm pretty sure I will get 4.2GHz with 3533 (hopefully) CL14


----------



## The Stilt

Gettz8488 said:


> Makes me feel a bit better. Usually I don’t mind pushing the limits of hardware but strapped for cash lately. Would you consider this okay to run? In your honest opinion would you expect any degradation getting spikes up to 1.5? At the moment I’m doing PE2 with offset so spikes are 1.47 max for single core workloads. I know there’s never a guarantee just curious as to your opinion
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


If the CPU itself request these voltage levels, then they are absolutely safe to use as they are.
The voltage is calculated by the CPU itself based on the silicon characteristics. FIT will always limit the voltages to levels which satisfy the required reliability (simulation based).
Increasing FIT scalar will loosen the rules and therefore allow higher voltages and frequencies.

However, if the CPU is requesting voltages this high already at stock I probably wouldn't be using PE3 or PE4 on it.


----------



## Pilotasso

lordzed83 said:


> Binned 2700x ordered
> https://siliconlottery.com/collections/pinnacleridge/products/2700x42g
> [email protected] 250mhz jump from my 1700x


I think mine is pretty close to that. CPU V =1.4V but LLC=3 on my CH6


----------



## Gettz8488

The Stilt said:


> If the CPU itself request these voltage levels, then they are absolutely safe to use as they are.
> 
> The voltage is calculated by the CPU itself based on the silicon characteristics. FIT will always limit the voltages to levels which satisfy the required reliability (simulation based).
> 
> Increasing FIT scalar will loosen the rules and therefore allow higher voltages and frequencies.
> 
> 
> 
> However, if the CPU is requesting voltages this high already at stock I probably wouldn't be using PE3 or PE4 on it.




Great to hear thanks for all the work you do for the community.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## lordzed83

Pilotasso said:


> I think mine is pretty close to that. CPU V =1.4V but LLC=3 on my CH6


is it 8 hours prime stable ??


----------



## Gettz8488

@elmor quick question, earlier in the thread I saw level 1 and level 2 performance enhancer have scalar X10. Is it possible to set performance enhancer while disabling scalar so that FIT is still doing its work? I tried disabling scalar while Level 2 was selected but according to hwinfo my voltages are exactly the same.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Shawn Shutt jr

Pilotasso said:


> I think mine is pretty close to that. CPU V =1.4V but LLC=3 on my CH6


Nice scores, my goal is hit 1900 but i think my biggest hold back is my ram. i got my kit a year ago and didnt think to much about it. Corsair Dominator Platinum 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4-3000 Memory. pushing it over 3000mhz is going to be rough.


----------



## Hiromachi

The Stilt said:


> I guess it is possible, but the voltage is way higher I've seen on any specimen so far (either on my own or at forums).
> 
> Could you check what's the worst core on your CPU using HWInfo and then start Cinebench R15 single thread test.
> After the test has started, change the affinity for Cinebench to the worst core and open HWInfo sensors (showing Core Voltage SVI2 TFN).
> 
> e.g. if your worst core is core six, set the affinity to core 12 (core number * 2) from the task manager.


I think I will have to try this. I must have lost the silicon lottery because it appears that despite my initial assumption, chip is not as stable. At least not in games which I play. I tend to play Il-2 Battle of Stalingrad and DCS, both of which are not multithreaded (first uses one core only, other uses two cores) and that meant that load was parked on one or two cores for prolonged times at 80-95 % and specific core was constantly on 1.48 - 1.512 V. What I've encountered however is that both games crashed on me. In random situations, but usually involving a lot of action on screen. First I messed with afterburner and reduced OC on a gpu, then switched back to PE2 from PE3 and set Voltage to default in bios. After 7-8th time I simply went back to Bios and set SoC to 1.1 and set a + offset of 0.0125 V with a PE2. Now I cant say for 100 % that those issues were not on a software side of things, but after the voltage bump I've tried playing around for half an hour and no crash occured. 
So what I'm trying to figure out if my chip is that bad that even at PE2 it needs a voltage bump for specific loads and if so, how to test it?


----------



## Ethan_Ryu

*@The Stilt *Performance Enhancer on level 2, SVI2 TFN goes up to 1.450V , on level 3 it goes to 1.406V.
Is the negative offset not working on level 2?
EDIT:nvm i was reading it wrong , max is kinda the same on both.(should it be like this?)


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> So with geardown=on I'm already running 3466 reliably with cpu OC. My latency is much better as well. I'm using the Stilts' preset and I'm sure I can tune to get more out of it. My CB15 score is one point lower than i had with my cpu at 2.4GHz and 3200 fast timings on my X370. Could not do anything over 3200 on x370 so updating to C7H has worked out very good for me!
> 
> There's still plenty to do, lots of stuff I can tidy up and i'm pretty sure I will get 4.2GHz with 3533 (hopefully) CL14


That is looking might fine IMO. You've also lowered SOC besides gaining 3466MHz with decent timings. I wouldn't worry too much that your using GDM. This wepage is good in explaining GDM.


----------



## Pilotasso

lordzed83 said:


> is it 8 hours prime stable ??


I only tested 2 hours, will have to find time to do 8, but that requires some attention during the run in case something bad occurs.


----------



## Mech0z

Are dual rank worth anything on Crosshair 7 yet? 
I am choosing between Flare-X 2x8GB 3200CL14 or Trident-Z 2x16GB 3200CL14

If I get the dual rank I guess there is no chance of running the stilts 3466 setting, which might not make it worthwhile


----------



## Gettz8488

Ethan_Ryu said:


> *@The Stilt *Performance Enhancer on level 2, SVI2 TFN goes up to 1.450V , on level 3 it goes to 1.406V.
> Is the negative offset not working on level 2?
> EDIT:nvm i was reading it wrong , max is kinda the same on both.(should it be like this?)




What’s your Max spike voltage on auto? Curious as to what some others see mine is 1.512 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Ethan_Ryu

Gettz8488 said:


> What’s your Max spike voltage on auto? Curious as to what some others see mine is 1.512
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


i have a voltage offset of "-" "0.1", i had a spike with perf 3 reading in ryzen master with no offset of something like 1.55 , as i saw that i turned off the pc and placed the offset and it s been stable so far.
auto keeps it really cool(what i use the most), perf 2 / 3 get it more hot(so more noise), i get cb single score 179 with perf 2 , 181 with perf 3


----------



## Shawn Shutt jr

Still doing tests but i was playing alittle pubg and i would get random shutting, during so my CPU usage drops. what could this be? lack of volts? OC not stable enough?


----------



## Gettz8488

Ethan_Ryu said:


> i have a voltage offset of "-" "0.1", i had a spike with perf 3 reading in ryzen master with no offset of something like 1.55 , as i saw that i turned off the pc and placed the offset and it s been stable so far.
> auto keeps it really cool(what i use the most), perf 2 / 3 get it more hot(so more noise), i get cb single score 179 with perf 2 , 181 with perf 3




0.1 won’t post for me I was able to get PE 2 hitting a max of 1.47 with an offset of 0.081 but it was still to high for me 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Shawn Shutt jr

Best test yet! i could boot at 4.4ghz but only run for like 2sec for benching lol ill stick with 4.2ghz tho. about to run prime/memtest64 tests to make sure everything is stable. still getting shuttering tho. not sure what it is.


----------



## Kernel-Debugger

CH6 was able to do more on all 4 DIMMs, so far unable to get beyond 3200Mhz on Flare-X 3200 chips. (When using 4x8GB) Memory aside I am able to run 4.2Ghz @ a manual 1.3875 (CH7 & 2700X) And the Ekwb Monoblock that was designed for the CH6 is working on the CH7 but with some flaws. Asus no longer has the RGB header in the same place so an extension cable is required. You also lose the fan header due to the monoblock covering it (bottom left under cpu socket)


----------



## Shawn Shutt jr

Kernel-Debugger said:


> CH6 was able to do more on all 4 DIMMs, so far unable to get beyond 3200Mhz on Flare-X 3200 chips. (When using 4x8GB) Memory aside I am able to run 4.2Ghz @ a manual 1.3875 (CH7 & 2700X) And the Ekwb Monoblock that was designed for the CH6 is working on the CH7 but with some flaws. Asus no longer has the RGB header in the same place so an extension cable is required. You also lose the fan header due to the monoblock covering it (bottom left under cpu socket)


Thanks for the heads up on the monoblock, i was looking at going open loop here in a month. ill make sure i grab an extension cable and a Fan controller just to be safe.



also do you have any weird shuttering? like random freezing happens for a second and goes back to normal?


----------



## Tactix

Hi all
Just curious why some seem to indicate the importance of running off of the M.2_1 vs M.2_2
Aren’t they both 4x and tied directly into the cpu bypassing PCIE ?
I installed my 960evo into the default heat sink slot M.2_2 and am getting full PCIE x16 3.0 indications from NVnspector, anyone able to clear this up thank you


----------



## Shiftstealth

Tactix said:


> Hi all
> Just curious why some seem to indicate the importance of running off of the M.2_1 vs M.2_2
> Aren’t they both 4x and tied directly into the cpu bypassing PCIE ?
> I installed my 960evo into the default heat sink slot M.2_2 and am getting full PCIE x16 3.0 indications from NVnspector, anyone able to clear this up thank you


It has to do with the PCIE lanes off of the 2nd PCIE slot if you're running 2 cards i believe.


----------



## Tactix

Shiftstealth said:


> Tactix said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi all
> Just curious why some seem to indicate the importance of running off of the M.2_1 vs M.2_2
> Aren’t they both 4x and tied directly into the cpu bypassing PCIE ?
> I installed my 960evo into the default heat sink slot M.2_2 and am getting full PCIE x16 3.0 indications from NVnspector, anyone able to clear this up thank you
> 
> 
> 
> It has to do with the PCIE lanes off of the 2nd PCIE slot if you're running 2 cards i believe.
Click to expand...

Ok this is what I assumed thanks
I only read to around post 281, did you get your shutdown issues sorted/solved?


----------



## VPII

I ran some Aida64 stress test for about 20 minutes. From what I've read it shows pretty quickly any instability issues which is why I saw that I need to drop my memory speed down to stock 3200 or 3266 to get stability. The 3333 will not run and I did not want to increase the vdimm too high. So at present my 24/7 overclock is 4.22ghz using 1.268vcore set in bios. I did set LLC to 5 as I noticed some drastic vdroop and I'd prefer to have it stable all through. The cpu itself did 4.2ghz with on 1.23vcore when in the Asus Strix X370-F motherboard. I'm still able to get the cpu up to 4.36ghz stable for benching but it needs 1.45vcore set in bios where as I did the same speed in the X370 Strix using only 1.4125vcore.

Still I am happy that I got the cpu running with a decent overclock at lowish vcore.


----------



## Shiftstealth

Tactix said:


> Ok this is what I assumed thanks
> I only read to around post 281, did you get your shutdown issues sorted/solved?


Most of my shutdowns were related to PSU overcurrent protection of some sort. I think everything is sorted now. I think my old board was touching my case in a bad way that was shorting the PSU tripping over protection. When i moved to a new PSU the fan was spinning at like 3000 RPM. Once i took it out of the case it settled down. I have since bought a new case. I think my problems are isolated, but the Corsair Link/CAM/HWinfo crashes are still transpiring.


----------



## Tactix

Shiftstealth said:


> Tactix said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ok this is what I assumed thanks
> I only read to around post 281, did you get your shutdown issues sorted/solved?
> 
> 
> 
> Most of my shutdowns were related to PSU overcurrent protection of some sort. I think everything is sorted now. I think my old board was touching my case in a bad way that was shorting the PSU tripping over protection. When i moved to a new PSU the fan was spinning at like 3000 RPM. Once i took it out of the case it settled down. I have since bought a new case. I think my problems are isolated, but the Corsair Link/CAM/HWinfo crashes are still transpiring.
Click to expand...

I have a Corsair 350D airflow case 
I did experience one hard shutdown with the need to hard disconnect power issue, this happens after messing with fan curves in the AI FanExpert tunner utiltity. 
I recall the MSI M7 ac having explicit warning on the back of the board warning about potential shorts, I wonder if it could be related to the ASUS?


----------



## gupsterg

Just wondering what batch numbers people getting?

Mine is UA 1805 SUS.

UA [YY][WW] [1][2][3]

YY -> Year
WW -> Week

1 -> ATMP Location ([P]enang, Malaysia or uzhou, China)
2 -> Last letters of ATMP location.
3 -> Wafer Production (aratoga or [T]exas)



Spoiler


----------



## VPII

gupsterg said:


> Just wondering what batch numbers people getting?
> 
> Mine is UA 1805 SUS.
> 
> UA [YY][WW] [1][2][3]
> 
> YY -> Year
> WW -> Week
> 
> 1 -> ATMP Location ([P]enang, Malaysia or uzhou, China)
> 2 -> Last letters of ATMP location.
> 3 -> Wafer Production (aratoga or [T]exas)
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 169425





Not a photographer so excuse the quality. You'll notice in earlier posts what the cpu can do and at what vcore.


----------



## hurricane28

Nice! I can now "stabilize" 360 MHz RAM.


----------



## Jaju123

My 3600 cl15 kit does not seem stable at XMP settings or at anything above 3333 mhz. Running 3333 mhz with "extreme" timings from calculator just fine though.
Tried voltages up to 1.5V but errors occur almost instantly at 3600, and occur after 5 or 10 mins at 3400 or 3466. Running C7H and 2700x @ stock.


----------



## elmor

crakej said:


> Thank @gupsterg - this is a great help to me as many of these settings were not available on the Prime Pro. My PLL voltage does waver around a bit - nothing huge, but is does change usually being a bit under 1.8v (reading from bios). Might as well have it where it should be even though I've turned off Sense Mi.
> 
> I'll update this shortly with the bios reading for that - but surely this can't be stopping IBT from utilizing 100% of the CPU - which all the other benching software manages to do....
> 
> Update: Wow - didn't expect or see this before! Second image is when I rebooted, so it was on auto 2.xv! then image 1 I show it after I set it to 1.8v - still not 1.80v! Is this the problem I'm having I wonder? Then when I'm booted up HWInfo says the same as the bios....





GmanP42 said:


> Hey, Had a Crosshair 6 extreme moving to the Crosshair 7 Hero with a 2700x
> 
> On Bios 601 I have some bugs (i think) First one, the voltage is low on boot -+ 1.03v to 1.00v then after 2 to 3 seconds it will go to the "normal" value. Second is on PLL Voltage ones you're on Manual Voltage it will go to 2.01v in the bios and in OS. If it's in Offset mode that does not happen. The last one is odd the BCLK on bios 601 (CPU core ratio on Auto) 3700mhz the BCLK will not add up after BCLK 100.8 to show you the new CPU speed. So you will go 100 = 3700Mhz 100.2 = 3707Mhz 100.4 = 3714Mhz 100.6 = 3722Mhz then 100.8 is 3704Mhz ??? if i set the CPU core ratio then it works fine.
> 
> On the motherboard will we get the option to show the temp on the Q code on a future bios?



I believe there's an auto rule when increasing CPU Core Ratio that will also increase 1.8V PLL up to ~2.0V. You can manually set it to 1.8V if you prefer.




gupsterg said:


> I'd use 1.8V, see the C6H OC guide, page 5, 2nd half. IMO that should clear up if you need to meddle with PLL voltage and or Ref of it.
> 
> I just checked on C6H, 1.8V PLL in UEFI manually set, no meddling with ref, etc. HWINFO on 750ms polling shows 1.788V to 1.809V swinging pretty much constantly at rig idle. DMM shows rock stable 1.804V for it at idle.
> 
> I'll get a loaded rig read in a mo, but be aware the way the ProbeIt points on C6H are they show slightly higher values when under load than actual is, as it takes into context load line effect on power plane. In OP of my Ryzen thread in sig is info on this, check section *C6H ProbeIt VCORE point vs measuring at socket*.
> 
> Hopefully Elmor/The Stilt will spill further beans on how the ProbeIt points are on C7H.



ProbeIt points for Vcore/SOC/DRAM are using differential die-sense or as close as possible to the load. They are very accurate on C7H, even better than measuring at the MLCCs.




hurricane28 said:


> Now i tried Aida64 again to do an cash benchmark but within 15 minutes the fans start to ramp up to 100% again...
> I have no other program open and i did restart with hardwareinfo64 disabled from startup..
> 
> @elmor, i thought you fixed this?



It's a software fix, and it has not been released yet.




Gettz8488 said:


> @elmor quick question, earlier in the thread I saw level 1 and level 2 performance enhancer have scalar X10. Is it possible to set performance enhancer while disabling scalar so that FIT is still doing its work? I tried disabling scalar while Level 2 was selected but according to hwinfo my voltages are exactly the same.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro



Will try to think of a solution.


----------



## gupsterg

@VPII

Thank you, yes I have been reading your exploits and appreciate them  .
@hurricane28

Sweet  .
@elmor

Thank you for the information  , will add to my C7H thread OP  .


----------



## VPII

If I may ask.... why so much fuss about using llc. I've seen a number of people mentioning that it is better to keep llc on auto. For me it is an issue as the voltage drop from what is set is to much.

Ive checked the vrm temps and it seems okay.... never going very high. Highest Ive seen was 60+c but it most likely because the power draw for my cpu is 135watt max while stress test with aida64 with cpu at 4.225ghz using 1.268vcore.

Yes it may be my cpu that is better than average but then Ill rather keep using llc 5 set.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## Esenel

Jaju123 said:


> My 3600 cl15 kit does not seem stable at XMP settings or at anything above 3333 mhz. Running 3333 mhz with "extreme" timings from calculator just fine though.
> Tried voltages up to 1.5V but errors occur almost instantly at 3600, and occur after 5 or 10 mins at 3400 or 3466. Running C7H and 2700x @ stock.


Exact same issue with 2700X and 3600CL15 kit on the C6H.
You just got a poor CPU like I did.

Try SOC 1.05 and DRAM Voltage 1.40 for 3466CL15 Stilt Preset.
Reducing SOC and DRAM Voltage seems to be better for the new CPU.
Survived until 150%.
Maybe you have more luck.


----------



## hurricane28

gupsterg said:


> @VPII
> 
> Thank you, yes I have been reading your exploits and appreciate them  .
> 
> @hurricane28
> 
> Sweet  .
> 
> @elmor
> 
> Thank you for the information  , will add to my C7H thread OP  .


Thnx dude, idk how stable it is but as of now i haven't had any issues so far.


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> Just wondering what batch numbers people getting?
> 
> Mine is UA 1805 SUS.
> 
> UA [YY][WW] [1][2][3]
> 
> YY -> Year
> WW -> Week
> 
> 1 -> ATMP Location ([P]enang, Malaysia or uzhou, China)
> 2 -> Last letters of ATMP location.
> 3 -> Wafer Production (aratoga or [T]exas)
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 169425




And here it is:

UA 1807 SUS



hurricane28 said:


> Nice! I can now "stabilize" 360 MHz RAM.


Nice !!! Maybe also a Ryzen Timer screenie for some who needs it?


----------



## gupsterg

@hurricane28

No worries  , look forward to updates on your exploits  .

@majestynl

Cheers chap! look forward to shares how yours is for you  .



VPII said:


> If I may ask.... why so much fuss about using llc. I've seen a number of people mentioning that it is better to keep llc on auto. For me it is an issue as the voltage drop from what is set is to much.
> 
> Ive checked the vrm temps and it seems okay.... never going very high. Highest Ive seen was 60+c but it most likely because the power draw for my cpu is 135watt max while stress test with aida64 with cpu at 4.225ghz using 1.268vcore.
> 
> Yes it may be my cpu that is better than average but then Ill rather keep using llc 5 set.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


AM4 LLC spec is loose, this is highlighted in C6H thread and the Ryzen thread in my sig, posted info by The Stilt.

Using SW or even DMM may not show the overshoot of voltage when CPU is loaded and becomes unloaded, oscilloscope would. In the Ryzen thread OP is some info by [email protected]

Use Statuscore, this allows easy loading of 1 core or more. You should see at 1 thread load "VDROOP" is non existent, even on LLC [Auto] (ie AMD stock). As you increase loading it will occur, but this is just how LL is on AM4 and as stated to will make overshoot occurrence less to none.


----------



## hurricane28

Thnx chaps, will post more in the coming days, will do review of the CH7 soon.


----------



## Pilotasso

mine is UA 1805SUS


----------



## lordzed83

Pilotasso said:


> I only tested 2 hours, will have to find time to do 8, but that requires some attention during the run in case something bad occurs.


Sounds good to me then  You got the longer straw than shorter then. I just leave my ebchmarks runns sometimes full load for 2 days and go visit somewhere.


----------



## lordzed83

VPII said:


> If I may ask.... why so much fuss about using llc. I've seen a number of people mentioning that it is better to keep llc on auto. For me it is an issue as the voltage drop from what is set is to much.
> 
> Ive checked the vrm temps and it seems okay.... never going very high. Highest Ive seen was 60+c but it most likely because the power draw for my cpu is 135watt max while stress test with aida64 with cpu at 4.225ghz using 1.268vcore.
> 
> Yes it may be my cpu that is better than average but then Ill rather keep using llc 5 set.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


Not a Clue I'm using 3 for Soc 4 for CPU


----------



## VPII

lordzed83 said:


> Not a Clue I'm using 3 for Soc 4 for CPU


Thanks... I only actually use for CPU nothing for anything else, may go that route seen that I struggle to get my memory stable higher than stock 3200, but I am however bench stable 3333 stilt timings and dropping even lower on TRCD and TRP by 1 which works.


----------



## gupsterg

@Pilotasso

Cheers  .
@VPII

Besides playing with SOC/VDIMM/RAM Timings/ProcODT/CAD Bus to gain improved RAM MHz, some members share info that changes in VTT have helped them. Usually a setting below or above 50% of VDIMM.


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> Sounds good to me then  You got the longer straw than shorter then. I just leave my ebchmarks runns sometimes full load for 2 days and go visit somewhere.


Hahah sounds a bit overkill to ME! When did you used your system on full load for 2 days in real life? Or are you rendering the new "Avengers Movie" for Marvel Studios in 8K ? Joking around 
Im thinking 8hr is more then OK, and by the way dont forget mostly your system or used SW can correct errors from RAM etc instead of stopping like a stability tester does! 
anyways.. just wanted to say it as a joke,,,dont want to start a discussing about what or when its stable for somebody. At the end, everybody can do what he likes with their system 

btw: Good luck with your new binned 2700x! 

Cheers!


----------



## crakej

So I've only had my board a week and i'm already running 4.125GHz, 1.39v, LLC auto, memory 3533CL14 fast setting. 1904 CB15.

Since I enabled geardown, I haven't needed to change any other settings to remain stable, most are on auto.

I believe this gives me some headroom to play - I know my cpu can do 4.2, but this MB want more volts to do it. I think I can prob get it with 1.425v, LLC1/maybe 2.

As far as ram goes, I think I can get this profile faster, but I will be seeing how far I can go. Going to play with voltages lots today, all my tests yesterday up to 3533 use SoC of 1.1v Ram was 1.4. Will see how low I can get those today.


----------



## Hiromachi

The Stilt said:


> I guess it is possible, but the voltage is way higher I've seen on any specimen so far (either on my own or at forums).
> 
> Could you check what's the worst core on your CPU using HWInfo and then start Cinebench R15 single thread test.
> After the test has started, change the affinity for Cinebench to the worst core and open HWInfo sensors (showing Core Voltage SVI2 TFN).
> 
> e.g. if your worst core is core six, set the affinity to core 12 (core number * 2) from the task manager.


I've actually tried that (setting everything back to deafult), though not sure whether I should record average, current or perhaps max voltage spikes. There was natually some fluctuation so I've recorded min, max and avg results. But regardless, this is what I have for:
Min / Max / Avg 
Core 0 - 1.406 1.444 1.425
Core 1 - 1.400 1.437 1.423 
Core 2 - 1.406 1.450 1.426
Core 3 - 1.412 1.456 1.429
Core 4 - 1.419 1.56 1.431
Core 5 - 1.400 1.444 1.429
Core 6 - 1.412 1.456 1.430
Core 7 - 1.412 1.450 1.428

Frankly, I couldnt follow recommendations from Enthusiast Highlights from page one even for 102 bclk. Tried PE3 with 102 bclk with + 0.050 offset but that cause freeze in Cb. SVI2 TFN hit 1.567 V for a brief moment. 
Did I seriously loose silicon lottery or what ?


----------



## hurricane28

Guess its quite stable, if it can handle Sisiftsandra for 1,5 hour i consider myself stable. 

Here is my score, not too shabby to be honest:
I also did a run of Firestrike just for the fun of it: 

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/15436723


----------



## VPII

gupsterg said:


> @Pilotasso
> 
> Cheers  .
> 
> @VPII
> 
> Besides playing with SOC/VDIMM/RAM Timings/ProcODT/CAD Bus to gain improved RAM MHz, some members share info that changes in VTT have helped them. Usually a setting below or above 50% of VDIMM.


Thanks...I'll give it a go.


----------



## kazablanka

crakej said:


> So I've only had my board a week and i'm already running 4.125GHz, 1.39v, LLC auto, memory 3533CL14 fast setting. 1904 CB15.
> 
> Since I enabled geardown, I haven't needed to change any other settings to remain stable, most are on auto.
> 
> I believe this gives me some headroom to play - I know my cpu can do 4.2, but this MB want more volts to do it. I think I can prob get it with 1.425v, LLC1/maybe 2.
> 
> As far as ram goes, I think I can get this profile faster, but I will be seeing how far I can go. Going to play with voltages lots today, all my tests yesterday up to 3533 use SoC of 1.1v Ram was 1.4. Will see how low I can get those today.


Nice! I will get the board on thursday or friday (i hope). So i think i will succeed in this memory overclocking too.


----------



## larrydavid

Tactix said:


> Hi all
> Just curious why some seem to indicate the importance of running off of the M.2_1 vs M.2_2
> Aren’t they both 4x and tied directly into the cpu bypassing PCIE ?
> I installed my 960evo into the default heat sink slot M.2_2 and am getting full PCIE x16 3.0 indications from NVnspector, anyone able to clear this up thank you


Hmm. I thought the same thing. The manual implies that the PCIEX16_1 will run in 8x mode if you put a PCI-E SSD in M.2_2. I don't see where else it could get the PCI-E 3.0 lanes from. I actually bought a PCI-E slot adapter for my SSD to put in the in PCIE4_3 to avoid running my 1080Ti at 8x.
@elmor Any chance you have any more info on this?


----------



## Gettz8488

VPII said:


> If I may ask.... why so much fuss about using llc. I've seen a number of people mentioning that it is better to keep llc on auto. For me it is an issue as the voltage drop from what is set is to much.
> 
> Ive checked the vrm temps and it seems okay.... never going very high. Highest Ive seen was 60+c but it most likely because the power draw for my cpu is 135watt max while stress test with aida64 with cpu at 4.225ghz using 1.268vcore.
> 
> Yes it may be my cpu that is better than average but then Ill rather keep using llc 5 set.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk




Never mind gupsterg had a much better reply I didn’t read.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Gettz8488

Hiromachi said:


> I've actually tried that (setting everything back to deafult), though not sure whether I should record average, current or perhaps max voltage spikes. There was natually some fluctuation so I've recorded min, max and avg results. But regardless, this is what I have for:
> 
> Min / Max / Avg
> 
> Core 0 - 1.406 1.444 1.425
> 
> Core 1 - 1.400 1.437 1.423
> 
> Core 2 - 1.406 1.450 1.426
> 
> Core 3 - 1.412 1.456 1.429
> 
> Core 4 - 1.419 1.56 1.431
> 
> Core 5 - 1.400 1.444 1.429
> 
> Core 6 - 1.412 1.456 1.430
> 
> Core 7 - 1.412 1.450 1.428
> 
> 
> 
> Frankly, I couldnt follow recommendations from Enthusiast Highlights from page one even for 102 bclk. Tried PE3 with 102 bclk with + 0.050 offset but that cause freeze in Cb. SVI2 TFN hit 1.567 V for a brief moment.
> 
> Did I seriously loose silicon lottery or what ?




Did you try with ram at default to rule it out? Your chip seems similar to mine I can PE3 with a -offset just fine bclk is at 100 though so not the exact same thing. But if could be your ram might as well rule it out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Gettz8488

Double post by accident


----------



## The Stilt

I made a small app to make it easier to standardize the voltage test method among the users.

There are several different conditions, of which some are enforced and some are not.

- Admin rights
- R7 2700X only *
- SMT needs to be enabled *
- Performance Enhancer = Default
- Stock configuration only (fixed / offset voltage and load-line adjustments disallowed) *
- No other monitoring app running simultaneously (e.g. AiTweaker, CPU-Z, HWInfo, AIDA, etc)
- System needs to be at IDLE
- Windows "Balanced" Power Plan (NOT "Ryzen Balanced")

* Enforced

https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ag6oE4SOsCmDhS85TinQjsyIbOlG

I suggest that you restart your system and close all unnecessary applications after the system has restarted.
You should wait at least two minutes until you launch the app.

- Extract the archive
- Right click CPO_Test.exe and select "Run as Admin"
- Do not close the windows or perform any other actions while it executes (takes ~80 seconds in total).
- Once completed take a screenshot of the window which remains open.

Keep in mind that whatever the reported delta between the best and the worst core is, at stock there is a frequency delta as well.
The worst core will always run at lower speeds than the best one. Since in PE3 / PE4 mode there is no frequency delta between the cores, the voltage on the worst core will raise significantly compared to stock.
The voltage on the best core will raise as well, but usually not as much as the voltage on the worst core does.


----------



## majestynl

The Stilt said:


> I made a small app to make it easier to standardize the voltage test method among the users.
> 
> There are several different conditions, of which some are enforced and some are not.
> 
> - Admin rights
> - R7 2700X only *
> - SMT needs to be enabled *
> - Performance Enhancer = Default
> - Stock configuration only (fixed / offset voltage and load-line adjustments disallowed) *
> - No other monitoring app running simultaneously (e.g. AiTweaker, CPU-Z, HWInfo, AIDA, etc)
> - System needs to be at IDLE
> - Windows "Balanced" Power Plan (NOT "Ryzen Balanced")
> 
> * Enforced
> 
> https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ag6oE4SOsCmDhS85TinQjsyIbOlG
> 
> I suggest that you restart your system and close all unnecessary applications after the system has restarted.
> You should wait at least two minutes until you launch the app.
> 
> - Extract the archive
> - Right click CPO_Test.exe and select "Run as Admin"
> - Do not close the windows or perform any other actions while it executes (takes ~80 seconds in total).
> - Once completed take a screenshot of the window which remains open.
> 
> Keep in mind that whatever the reported delta between the best and the worst core is, at stock there is a frequency delta as well.
> The worst core will always run at lower speeds than the best one. Since in PE3 / PE4 mode there is no frequency delta between the cores, the voltage on the worst core will raise significantly compared to stock.
> The voltage on the best core will raise as well, but usually not as much as the voltage on the worst core does.


Great work again Stilt! Easy for those who needs it! Im now shutting this system off to install the new mobo + 2700x. Need to drain/flush the WC installation first!! 
will test the app tomorrow!!!


----------



## hurricane28

The Stilt said:


> I made a small app to make it easier to standardize the voltage test method among the users.
> 
> There are several different conditions, of which some are enforced and some are not.
> 
> - Admin rights
> - R7 2700X only *
> - SMT needs to be enabled *
> - Performance Enhancer = Default
> - Stock configuration only (fixed / offset voltage and load-line adjustments disallowed) *
> - No other monitoring app running simultaneously (e.g. AiTweaker, CPU-Z, HWInfo, AIDA, etc)
> - System needs to be at IDLE
> - Windows "Balanced" Power Plan (NOT "Ryzen Balanced")
> 
> * Enforced
> 
> https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ag6oE4SOsCmDhS85TinQjsyIbOlG
> 
> I suggest that you restart your system and close all unnecessary applications after the system has restarted.
> You should wait at least two minutes until you launch the app.
> 
> - Extract the archive
> - Right click CPO_Test.exe and select "Run as Admin"
> - Do not close the windows or perform any other actions while it executes (takes ~80 seconds in total).
> - Once completed take a screenshot of the window which remains open.
> 
> Keep in mind that whatever the reported delta between the best and the worst core is, at stock there is a frequency delta as well.
> The worst core will always run at lower speeds than the best one. Since in PE3 / PE4 mode there is no frequency delta between the cores, the voltage on the worst core will raise significantly compared to stock.
> The voltage on the best core will raise as well, but usually not as much as the voltage on the worst core does.



Need, this can come in handy when i decide to get an 2700x. 

As for now, can you assist me with a problem with Aida64 here? As we discussed before in the CH6 thread and via PM, the pwm problem still persist on the CH7.. This result in that i am not able to use Aida64 for anything which is very inconvenient because i can;t even do an cash benchmark without the fans going nuts. 

Aida64 is the only program that this happens so its Aida64. I asked over there but they offer no support which i ask here and you. 

thnx in regard.


----------



## Butthurt Beluga

Hey guys, I just ordered the Asus ROG Crosshair VII Hero WiFi and am pairing it with the 2700X with G.Skill Flare X (F4-3200C14D-16GFX) memory.
This is samsung b-die memory, however when I checked Asus' QVL memory list, (http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb...emory-QVL-Ryzen-2nd-Generation-Processors.pdf) this kit is not supported on that list.

Should I get a different kit in that case? Or should I be good with this particular kit? Any better kits people have been able to push to something like CL14 3466/3600 VLL?

Thanks


----------



## Ethan_Ryu

@*The Stilt *Is it good , is it bad?


----------



## The Stilt

Ethan_Ryu said:


> @*The Stilt *Is it good , is it bad?


We'll see once we have more data.

Currently the silicon characteristics appear to be all over the place.
Which is no wonder, because the 12nm LP hasn't been in production very long.

The smallest difference my parts have had is 36mV at stock.


----------



## Ethan_Ryu

The Stilt said:


> We'll see once we have more data.
> 
> Currently the silicon characteristics appear to be all over the place.
> Which is no wonder, because the 12nm LP hasn't been in production very long.
> 
> The smallest difference my parts have had is 36mV at stock.


What's the lowest average voltage you got?
Because the Delta is small , does that mean every core overclock is similar to the other? so if one is good all are good and if one is bad all are bad?


----------



## The Stilt

Ethan_Ryu said:


> What's the lowest average voltage you got?
> Because the Delta is small , does that mean every core overclock is similar to the other? so if one is good all are good and if one is bad all are bad?


The minimum voltage is mostly dictated by the SIDD (static leakage) of the silicon.
Obviously there is also better and worse silicon even within the same leakage characteristics.
Worse quality silicon with high leakage needs higher voltage than better quality silicon with the same exact leakage characteristics.

The best chip I currently have has rather high leakage and has ~1.365V for the best core and 1.404V for the worst one.
Despite that even the worst core is Prime95 stable at 4.35GHz (PE3) at 1.34V (only the specific core tested).


----------



## gupsterg

@The Stilt

As always thank you for your time & support :thumb: . Did not get time to build 2700X+C7H today, but as soon as done will supply info from your app.



Butthurt Beluga said:


> Hey guys, I just ordered the Asus ROG Crosshair VII Hero WiFi and am pairing it with the 2700X with G.Skill Flare X (F4-3200C14D-16GFX) memory.
> This is samsung b-die memory, however when I checked Asus' QVL memory list, (http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb...emory-QVL-Ryzen-2nd-Generation-Processors.pdf) this kit is not supported on that list.
> 
> Should I get a different kit in that case? Or should I be good with this particular kit? Any better kits people have been able to push to something like CL14 3466/3600 VLL?
> 
> Thanks


You'll be good to go. Ryzen favours the most Samsung B die and single sided/rank kit, which that is  .


----------



## Mech0z

The Stilt said:


> We'll see once we have more data.
> 
> Currently the silicon characteristics appear to be all over the place.
> Which is no wonder, because the 12nm LP hasn't been in production very long.
> 
> The smallest difference my parts have had is 36mV at stock.


Would you guess that later 2700x models will work better ? I would presume they start cherry picking the best chips for Threadripper 2 soon?


----------



## Louis_SunKing

The Stilt said:


> I made a small app to make it easier to standardize the voltage test method among the users.
> 
> ...
> .


@*The Stilt *no idea what this means, I only see a big difference between best and worst core

(How do you mention someone in this forum, I am trying with the @ sign, no idea if it does anything)


----------



## Shawn Shutt jr

How do i deal with this mobo running my 1080 TI in PCI-E x4? i have the m.2 in the top slot, a 1080 TI in the top PCI-E x16 and another 1080 TI in the 2nd PCI-E x16. anyway i can run 1 1080 TI in 16, a 1080 ti in 8 and the m.2 in x4?


----------



## Hiromachi

Gettz8488 said:


> Did you try with ram at default to rule it out? Your chip seems similar to mine I can PE3 with a -offset just fine bclk is at 100 though so not the exact same thing. But if could be your ram might as well rule it out.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Yes, RAM indeed is a part of a problem. I fixed a bunch of memtests and got a number of errors so went back to deafult with everything. Then I started climbing back up (with CPU at deafult) to 2XXX, 3200, 3466 and 3533 which is the last stable frequency for me. I have a G.Skill 3600 Mhz Cl 15 (F4-3600C15D-16GTZ) but I couldnt run 3600 Mhz at 15-15-15-35 at 1.35V (as on box). For 3200 that was fine but for 3466 I had to raise Dram voltage to 1.37V and set SoC to 1.1. For 3533 Mhz I need 1.38V. When I bought that Ram set I was hoping that I could get it easily to 3600 and perhaps to 3800 mhz but right now when I try with the same 1.38V 3600 mhz (and same box timings) memtest just starts spitting errors. Not sure whether I should loosen timings or hit it with 1.4V. 

Here is my test, I'm not sure what to think of it. Doesnt seem like I will have much headroom for any OC:


----------



## Ethan_Ryu

Hiromachi said:


> Yes, RAM indeed is a part of a problem. I fixed a bunch of memtests and got a number of errors so went back to deafult with everything. Then I started climbing back up (with CPU at deafult) to 2XXX, 3200, 3466 and 3533 which is the last stable frequency for me. I have a G.Skill 3600 Mhz Cl 15 (F4-3600C15D-16GTZ) but I couldnt run 3600 Mhz at 15-15-15-35 at 1.35V (as on box). For 3200 that was fine but for 3466 I had to raise Dram voltage to 1.37V and set SoC to 1.1. For 3533 Mhz I need 1.38V. When I bought that Ram set I was hoping that I could get it easily to 3600 and perhaps to 3800 mhz but right now when I try with the same 1.38V 3600 mhz (and same box timings) memtest just starts spitting errors. Not sure whether I should loosen timings or hit it with 1.4V.


Because i have the same ram, and they started right away without problem, could be related to the 2700x? i applied already twice the thermal paste and don't really want to check the date/batch , but i would say it could be some batch keeps ram going without any effort, either that or the ram, do you have the wifi or the non wifi? i could pass you my profile i use them at 3333 cl14 1.35v as of now tho.


----------



## nappydrew

*Anyone carryover a 2700X from Prime X370 Pro?*

I'm currently running a 2700X on the Prime X370 Pro mobo. I seem to have at least a decent chip. I'm currently running at 4.32 GHz, Prime stable @ 1.45Vcore, 1.12v SOC, LLC 4 on CPU and LLC 3 on SOC. But highest memory kit I have is 3200 Flare X. And highest Speed I can reach with that (not 100% stable is 3466).

Have a couple questions:

Has anyone used a 2700X on both boards? If so what changes have you observed? Specifically interested in any improvements or decreases in the ability to reach same CPU clock speed & any improvements in RAM speeds, with all other variables being equal? Have you noted any memory compatibility differences?

I'm seeing people using G.Skill 4133 & 4266 CL19 B-die (2x8) kits and they're running them between 3600-3800 MHz, CL16-CL18, with what seems like relative ease. Anyone have input on this? Do I need a kit that fast to touch 3600+ MHz, with 'low' CL (assuming my IMC is up to the task)?

An guidance would be appreciated. Is it worth the upgrade to the CH7, in terms of memory Oc'ing range and stability?

This (below) is about the best I can eek out of my current rig. This particular run is at 3200 CL14, and 1.4v DRAM.

I'd really appreciate any feedback. Very conflicted about whether or not to go X470, at this point. Maybe I should buy faster RAM first, or will the CH7 help me push my current RAM higher?


----------



## Hiromachi

Ethan_Ryu said:


> Because i have the same ram, and they started right away without problem, could be related to the 2700x? i applied already twice the thermal paste and don't really want to check the date/batch , but i would say it could be some batch keeps ram going without any effort, either that or the ram, do you have the wifi or the non wifi? i could pass you my profile i use them at 3333 cl14 1.35v as of now tho.


Well, either chip, ram or both. I was about to do the same but I dont have any kryonaut around so that will have to wait until the end of the week. Hopefully by then they will deliver ram cooling so I will pick one or two small tubes of paste. 
Its non-wifi Strix with 0601 Bios. And yeah, sure, I can try your profile though I'm pursuing frequencies mostly since the two games that Ive indicated before seem to benefit more from it than from tight timings. But we can see if I can maintain it. I will also do a simple swap of the two. Sometimes silly things make the difference.


----------



## Shiftstealth

nappydrew said:


> I'm currently running a 2700X on the Prime X370 Pro mobo. I seem to have at least a decent chip. I'm currently running at 4.32 GHz, Prime stable @ 1.45Vcore, 1.12v SOC, LLC 4 on CPU and LLC 3 on SOC. But highest memory kit I have is 3200 Flare X. And highest Speed I can reach with that (not 100% stable is 3466).
> 
> Have a couple questions:
> 
> Has anyone used a 2700X on both boards? If so what changes have you observed? Specifically interested in any improvements or decreases in the ability to reach same CPU clock speed & any improvements in RAM speeds, with all other variables being equal? Have you noted any memory compatibility differences?
> 
> I'm seeing people using G.Skill 4133 & 4266 CL19 B-die (2x8) kits and they're running them between 3600-3800 MHz, CL16-CL18, with what seems like relative ease. Anyone have input on this? Do I need a kit that fast to touch 3600+ MHz, with 'low' CL (assuming my IMC is up to the task)?
> 
> An guidance would be appreciated. Is it worth the upgrade to the CH7, in terms of memory Oc'ing range and stability?
> 
> This (below) is about the best I can eek out of my current rig. This particular run is at 3200 CL14, and 1.4v DRAM.
> 
> I'd really appreciate any feedback. Very conflicted about whether or not to go X470, at this point. Maybe I should buy faster RAM first, or will the CH7 help me push my current RAM higher?


Not every 2700X is guaranteed to hit 3466Mhz memory. The Stilt tested like 8 cpus? and one of them was only stable at 3400Mhz. I suspect this is likely why AMD shipped the review kids with 3400Mhz memory, as they'd expect every CPU to be capable of that.


----------



## Shawn Shutt jr

What are the odds you can push a 3000mhz CL15 kit to 3400? lol slim? i should have just gotten a 3600mhz kit and then i would have been happy with 3400mhz


----------



## The Stilt

Shawn Shutt jr said:


> What are the odds you can push a 3000mhz CL15 kit to 3400? lol slim? i should have just gotten a 3600mhz kit and then i would have been happy with 3400mhz


Next to none.
They're either Hynix AFR or MFR.
Both of the Hynix ICs are tricky on Ryzen, but at least AFR allows you to run xSCL timings at 2 CLK (similar to B-die), which give you a nice performance boost.
Higher than 3200MHz is rather wishful thinking on Hynix thou.


----------



## AlphaC

The Stilt said:


> We'll see once we have more data.
> 
> Currently the silicon characteristics appear to be all over the place.
> Which is no wonder, because the 12nm LP hasn't been in production very long.
> 
> The smallest difference my parts have had is 36mV at stock.


Hey the Stilt, do you think Silicon Lottery could use this info? I think they use CH VII Hero to bin. He's likely just pushing manual voltage and then testing it.


----------



## The Stilt

AlphaC said:


> Hey the Stilt, do you think Silicon Lottery could use this info? I think they use CH VII Hero to bin. He's likely just pushing manual voltage and then testing it.


Manual testing is not the best (or the quickest) way to initially bin the CPUs, but I guess it wouldn't hurt.
At least we might get some additional data from it.


----------



## VPII

The Stilt said:


> Manual testing is not the best (or the quickest) way to initially bin the CPUs, but I guess it wouldn't hurt.
> At least we might get some additional data from it.


I noticed that the cpu test result will vary. Unfortunately I did not take a screenshot of the very first run which showed the best core sitting at 1.38v and the worst at 1.44v.

I must say that the voltages it states tie up with my 4.36ghz overclock vcore requirement. But what I found also pleasing was to run the Aida64 stress test to see the vcore applied at stock for the 3.995 - 4.050 cpu speed. It was hovering around 1.225 core which also ties up with my 4.2ghz at 1.268vcore everyday overclock as it is also Aida64 stress test stable.


----------



## DeeJayBump

For those experiencing occasional random power-downs, here is another possible cause/fix [courtesy of Kyle @ Hardocp]:



> Some Odd Failures
> 
> I ran into some failures using PB2 and I was able to track these down to NOT being PB2's issue, but rather a Windows Bug. We are using the latest version of Windows 10 64-bit and all its updates that were available on April 17th. We knew we were going to be doing a lot of testing, so we froze our OS updates at that point. What I was finding is that I would get these random power-downs using Cinebench, HWinfo64, and CPUz at the same time. I could not replicate the error without these three programs running simultaneously. At time I just assumed that I was beating on the CPU hard enough to make it fail, until it went into a hard power-down while sitting idle at the desktop, and I could replicate this issue at idle. Talking with AMD and ASUS about this, they asked me to work through the other power profiles we were not using. We use "High Power" for all our testing here. I moved to the Balanced profile, and it still happened. I then moved to the Ryzen Balanced profile, and it was still happening. Once I moved back to the High Performance profile again, I could not repeat the error. I could not replicate the error in Balanced or Ryzen Balanced either. ASUS let me know that there has been a Windows bug identified with this issue. The current solution to the issues seems to be to switch power profiles one or two times and it will correct itself. So if you are having some odd shutdowns, do not assume it is anything hardware or heat related.


----------



## GmanP42

Forgot to quote lol


----------



## GmanP42

Shawn Shutt jr said:


> How do i deal with this mobo running my 1080 TI in PCI-E x4? i have the m.2 in the top slot, a 1080 TI in the top PCI-E x16 and another 1080 TI in the 2nd PCI-E x16. anyway i can run 1 1080 TI in 16, a 1080 ti in 8 and the m.2 in x4?


Hey on that you will have to use M.2_1 at the bottom of the motherboard as the M.2_2 (top one) shears PCI-E lanes with PCI-E16 top slot. if you have a GPU at the top with a Nvme SSD at the top the GPU will run at x8 Speed. 

For your config put the Nvme at the bottom (heat shink will go with and it fits) and the GPU's on the normal places. See manual page 1-8 top under PCIe operating mode.

If you want to add another Nvme you will have to get an adaptor for the bottom slot (to run it on the chipset at x4 speed) or you will have to run the Nvme's at x2 speed

Sorry forgot to add you can only get - GPU top X8 GPU middle X8 and Nvme X4


----------



## VPII

I've done some testing to find a 24/7 overclock and at first I was using 42.25 x 100 which was lying around 4216mhz. I decided to up the multi little by little and I was able to run Aida64 stress test 15 minutes at 42.75 x 100 which is basically 4266mhz. All of this was with the vcore set to 1.268v in the bios using llc 5 as I really do not like the vdroops without using it. Interestingly I found that running prime95 small fft will raise the cpu temps to 78.3c where as Aida64 stress test will take it all the way to 83.8c. This perfectly lines up with what I was told..... if you want to really see the highest temps you run Aida64 Stress test. Right now, just because Prime95 hang around 10 minutes into the test with the same settings I decided to drop down to 42.5 x 100 which is still pretty decent considering the vcore. Looking at the vcore in cpuz compared to what is shown in Hwinfo I do believe Hwinfo to be a little more accurate.


----------



## GmanP42

nappydrew said:


> I'm currently running a 2700X on the Prime X370 Pro mobo. I seem to have at least a decent chip. I'm currently running at 4.32 GHz, Prime stable @ 1.45Vcore, 1.12v SOC, LLC 4 on CPU and LLC 3 on SOC. But highest memory kit I have is 3200 Flare X. And highest Speed I can reach with that (not 100% stable is 3466).
> 
> Have a couple questions:
> 
> Has anyone used a 2700X on both boards? If so what changes have you observed? Specifically interested in any improvements or decreases in the ability to reach same CPU clock speed & any improvements in RAM speeds, with all other variables being equal? Have you noted any memory compatibility differences?
> 
> I'm seeing people using G.Skill 4133 & 4266 CL19 B-die (2x8) kits and they're running them between 3600-3800 MHz, CL16-CL18, with what seems like relative ease. Anyone have input on this? Do I need a kit that fast to touch 3600+ MHz, with 'low' CL (assuming my IMC is up to the task)?
> 
> An guidance would be appreciated. Is it worth the upgrade to the CH7, in terms of memory Oc'ing range and stability?
> 
> This (below) is about the best I can eek out of my current rig. This particular run is at 3200 CL14, and 1.4v DRAM.
> 
> I'd really appreciate any feedback. Very conflicted about whether or not to go X470, at this point. Maybe I should buy faster RAM first, or will the CH7 help me push my current RAM higher?


The ram will not help you that much form 3200Mhz you can do 3600Mhz on most Samsung Dimms with 1.5v with 85% success (from all the kits I have tested using Slit's ram timings. Thanks Slit:thumb Will add the Corsair RAM at 4000Mhz can also do that.

The new motherboards form my testing do give you the ability to do push the RAM more at present. But bios updates on the old x370 have made the difference very small.

If you want to get a better MB then get the Hero as then its easier to get the timings form the bios. As from my memory Slits settings are only on the Hero MB's and up. (plz correct me if I'm wrong)

With the score, you have don't expect more your CPU is a good one.

Hope it helps.


----------



## manangel

Hi Stilt,

I am using your oc profile (level 3) and the single core can run at 4.35ghz. Thanks for your efforts!

However, when I run Prime95 with 2 threads, it crashed easily (I mean, the screen just got freezed). Could you help with this?


----------



## manangel

The Stilt said:


> Manual testing is not the best (or the quickest) way to initially bin the CPUs, but I guess it wouldn't hurt.
> At least we might get some additional data from it.


Hi Stilt,

I am using your oc profile (level 3) and the single core can run at 4.35ghz. Thanks for your efforts!

However, when I run Prime95 with 2 threads, it crashed easily (I mean, the screen just got freezed). Could you help with this?


----------



## gupsterg

VPII said:


> I've done some testing to find a 24/7 overclock and at first I was using 42.25 x 100 which was lying around 4216mhz. I decided to up the multi little by little and I was able to run Aida64 stress test 15 minutes at 42.75 x 100 which is basically 4266mhz. All of this was with the vcore set to 1.268v in the bios using llc 5 as I really do not like the vdroops without using it. Interestingly I found that running prime95 small fft will raise the cpu temps to 78.3c where as Aida64 stress test will take it all the way to 83.8c. This perfectly lines up with what I was told..... if you want to really see the highest temps you run Aida64 Stress test. Right now, just because Prime95 hang around 10 minutes into the test with the same settings I decided to drop down to 42.5 x 100 which is still pretty decent considering the vcore. Looking at the vcore in cpuz compared to what is shown in Hwinfo I do believe Hwinfo to be a little more accurate.


Curious which version of P95 you used and which test setup? cheers  .


----------



## Arat

Hi there,
I would like to contribute my results with the conditions mentioned by The Stilt.



The Stilt said:


> I made a small app to make it easier to standardize the voltage test method among the users.


I did several text runs. Is a delta with a negative value expected?


----------



## Shiftstealth

@elmor 

Do you ever intend on letting us edit the fan above 75C on the CH VII? When it hits 75C, even if its for 2s, it spins my fans up to 100%. Would be hoping i could set the curve to be a little less steep up that high. 

For what its worth i've tried to install the ASUS Suite software multiple times, but when i run the .exe it doesn't open anything.


----------



## VPII

gupsterg said:


> Curious which version of P95 you used and which test setup? cheers  .


Whne I open it it states Version 29.4, not sure what you mean with test setup?


----------



## gupsterg

@VPII

Ref image below, it shows torture test selection/setup.



Spoiler


----------



## VPII

gupsterg said:


> @VPII
> 
> Ref image below, it shows torture test selection/setup.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 170785


Same problem at lower clocks..... system hung 15 minutes into the test... no errors just hung basically. I'll give OCCT a try now.


----------



## majestynl

Shiftstealth said:


> @elmor
> 
> Do you ever intend on letting us edit the fan above 75C on the CH VII? When it hits 75C, even if its for 2s, it spins my fans up to 100%. Would be hoping i could set the curve to be a little less steep up that high.
> 
> For what its worth i've tried to install the ASUS Suite software multiple times, but when i run the .exe it doesn't open anything.


Fans:
There is an option @ the Fan Tuning Page in the bios where you can set a time (in seconds) for hysteric fan behavior 

AI Suite:

This worked for me in the past:

1) Open the AI Suite folder in your installed folder
2) -Right click on EVERY .exe file you find (incl. all sub-folders),
-right bottom corner click Unblock file
-TAB Properities: select "run as Administrator"

3) Try again to open.
(If you allready tried to open AI Suite before you followed the above instructions:
Kill "axinst.exe" and all other AI Suite processes first!)


----------



## Tactix

Wondering about the linked 0601 bios, is this an official release because i dont see it listed on the ASUS support site?

Thanks


----------



## crakej

Shiftstealth said:


> @elmor
> 
> Do you ever intend on letting us edit the fan above 75C on the CH VII? When it hits 75C, even if its for 2s, it spins my fans up to 100%. Would be hoping i could set the curve to be a little less steep up that high.
> 
> For what its worth i've tried to install the ASUS Suite software multiple times, but when i run the .exe it doesn't open anything.


Or even easier is to right click on the zip file, properties, select unblock, ok. Then it will install normally - I have no idea why they do it like this!


----------



## lordzed83

Anyone reinstalled with April windows that came out Yestarday ??


----------



## majestynl

Tactix said:


> Wondering about the linked 0601 bios, is this an official release because i dont see it listed on the ASUS support site?
> 
> Thanks


Its stated as "First release on OCN"  elmor mostly released a new bios including betas on big forums. After a while it will show up on the ASUS Support site.
Probably waiting for reviews before releasing it to the big crowd!


----------



## Tactix

majestynl said:


> Its stated as "First release on OCN"  elmor mostly released a new bios including betas on big forums. After a while it will show up on the ASUS Support site.
> Probably waiting for reviews before releasing it to the big crowd!


Ah ok thanks for clarifying.


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> Anyone reinstalled with April windows that came out Yestarday ??


Not yet will definitely do! Yesterday i have drained my LC system and flushed it the whole night with distilled water. Today im going to install the CH7 and 2700x probably with a fresh Windows.
Keep updating............


----------



## The Stilt

manangel said:


> Hi Stilt,
> 
> I am using your oc profile (level 3) and the single core can run at 4.35ghz. Thanks for your efforts!
> 
> However, when I run Prime95 with 2 threads, it crashed easily (I mean, the screen just got freezed). Could you help with this?


What are the voltages for the best and the worst cores while using PE3?

"Running Prime95 with 2 threads" is that with affinity set to specific cores / threads or with automatic scheduling?
Check which core is the worst and try stressing it separately (manual affinity).


----------



## Shawn Shutt jr

The Stilt said:


> Shawn Shutt jr said:
> 
> 
> 
> What are the odds you can push a 3000mhz CL15 kit to 3400? lol slim? i should have just gotten a 3600mhz kit and then i would have been happy with 3400mhz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Next to none.
> They're either Hynix AFR or MFR.
> Both of the Hynix ICs are tricky on Ryzen, but at least AFR allows you to run xSCL timings at 2 CLK (similar to B-die), which give you a nice performance boost.
> Higher than 3200MHz is rather wishful thinking on Hynix thou.
Click to expand...

Yeah its MFR so im screwed, ill end up buying a new kit.



GmanP42 said:


> Shawn Shutt jr said:
> 
> 
> 
> How do i deal with this mobo running my 1080 TI in PCI-E x4? i have the m.2 in the top slot, a 1080 TI in the top PCI-E x16 and another 1080 TI in the 2nd PCI-E x16. anyway i can run 1 1080 TI in 16, a 1080 ti in 8 and the m.2 in x4?
> 
> 
> 
> Hey on that you will have to use M.2_1 at the bottom of the motherboard as the M.2_2 (top one) shears PCI-E lanes with PCI-E16 top slot. if you have a GPU at the top with a Nvme SSD at the top the GPU will run at x8 Speed.
> 
> For your config put the Nvme at the bottom (heat shink will go with and it fits) and the GPU's on the normal places. See manual page 1-8 top under PCIe operating mode.
> 
> If you want to add another Nvme you will have to get an adaptor for the bottom slot (to run it on the chipset at x4 speed) or you will have to run the Nvme's at x2 speed
> 
> Sorry forgot to add you can only get - GPU top X8 GPU middle X8 and Nvme X4
Click to expand...

Thanks aton, i looked at the manual and couldnt tell what it was telling me xD ill have to pull the m.2 out and out it in the buttom slot


----------



## Jaju123

I'd also like to know if the 0601 bios is recommended to be used/is stable?


----------



## crakej

So I got to 3600 MTs last night - until now, i've just put the timings in from @The Stilt or enter timings from the Ryzen Calculator by @1usmus which can be really useful as a guide which you can then tune. Only other settings I changed were ram speed, ram voltage and SoC which has spent most of the time at 1.1. Last night I could not pass 400% RamTest.... so

This morning I have entered in addition, rtt 7, disabled, 5. The Mem interleaving Tweaks - channel, 512, enable. ProcODT is still auto, and CadBus Timings are 0,0,0 respectfully and finally 20,20,20,20 in the CadBus Block.

I now have over 1000% on RamTest, though P95 managed to break it quite easily with core 1 and both threads failing 5 mins in. Does anyone have any ideas that might stop those threads from dropping?

Stilt - I have realized quite quickly the you always leave one of the timings on auto. I'm continuing to do this as it tends to be where I see different figures from each controller, on tRDWR I think? - like one is 7 and the other is 8. Will this be a problem for me as I try to get higher speeds? Anyone figured out why it does it? It did it on my last board as well.


----------



## manangel

The Stilt said:


> What are the voltages for the best and the worst cores while using PE3?
> 
> "Running Prime95 with 2 threads" is that with affinity set to specific cores / threads or with automatic scheduling?
> Check which core is the worst and try stressing it separately (manual affinity).


Thank you for your reply!

Automatic scheduling I guess. When two cores were overclocked to 4.35ghz, the CPU voltage may go up to 1.517v and the system crashed immediately. 

Another problem is, I am using Samsung B die memory (Trident Z RGB). Without the OC profile, it can run at 3200mhz with 14-14-34. But when the OC profile is enabled, it can be stable only at 3133mhz and 14-16-36. 3200 failed even at 18-18-38. (By 'stable' I mean passing Memtest 200%).


----------



## Tactix

Question about SOC voltage
With all settings default DOCP standard 3200mhz 16-18-18-36
I’m seeing an auto SOC voltage of around 1.15v
Should I attempt to keep this closer to 1.05 on the 2700x with C7H?


----------



## The Stilt

manangel said:


> Thank you for your reply!
> 
> Automatic scheduling I guess. When two cores were overclocked to 4.35ghz, the CPU voltage may go up to 1.517v and the system crashed immediately.
> 
> Another problem is, I am using Samsung B die memory (Trident Z RGB). Without the OC profile, it can run at 3200mhz with 14-14-34. But when the OC profile is enabled, it can be stable only at 3133mhz and 14-16-36. 3200 failed even at 18-18-38. (By 'stable' I mean passing Memtest 200%).


In that case I suggest you avoid using other than the standard Performance Enhancer settings.
PE3 & PE4 are essentially the same thing as overclocking, and not all CPUs can sustain those settings. If the CPU crashes even at 1.5V+ then obviously it cannot do those frequencies.

What exactly you mean with "OC Profile"?
The memory presets which are located in the bios?


----------



## Hiromachi

I've just spend 5 hours trying to get into 3600 mhz but even with timings like 18-18-18-38 and 1.45V memtest was giving me errors. 
Current stable and tested setting is this: 








I honestly dont know if this is a very bad chip or perhaps something with memory, but have no other system to try out those gskills. I'll try to get tighten them a little bit and then will get back to playing with PE2 or PE3.


----------



## Johan45

Probably the IMC, they're pretty iffy for stability around 3600 and it takes a lot of time to get it working. Looking at what you have for timings, you'd be better off running slower and tighter.


----------



## i_max2k2

Hi guys,

just switching to the dark side after a long spell with the 2600k. Mobo gets to me Thursday, following is the setup I'll have

2700x + Supremacy EVO +C7H (no wifi)
Two kits of 2x8gb Team Nighthawk 3200Mhz 16-18-18-38 (most likely not b die memory), I'm just hoping I can run them at stock speeds.
2xGTX 1080's under water. AX1200i.

I was wondering how the memory compatibility might be with these new chips and X470. Do you guys think, I'd be able to run these sticks on stock clocks/timings. 

Also anything specific I should do first, once I put the system together?


----------



## manangel

The Stilt said:


> In that case I suggest you avoid using other than the standard Performance Enhancer settings.
> PE3 & PE4 are essentially the same thing as overclocking, and not all CPUs can sustain those settings. If the CPU crashes even at 1.5V+ then obviously it cannot do those frequencies.
> 
> What exactly you mean with "OC Profile"?
> The memory presets which are located in the bios?


The PE3. Looks like the overclocking would have a negative impact on memory overclocking?


----------



## The Stilt

manangel said:


> The PE3. Looks like the overclocking would have a negative impact on memory overclocking?


It shouldn't have any impact, unless the CPU is overheating.

Are you setting the memory related parameters (memory & SoC voltage, timings) manually in both cases?


----------



## Safetytrousers

lordzed83 said:


> Binned 2700x ordered
> https://siliconlottery.com/collections/pinnacleridge/products/2700x42g
> [email protected] 250mhz jump from my 1700x


A 2700x that couldn't do 4.2Ghz at 1.425v would be very poor indeed. 4.2Ghz at less than 1.4v I think is standard for the 2700x.
Mine does 4.3Ghz at 1.4v.


----------



## manangel

The Stilt said:


> It shouldn't have any impact, unless the CPU is overheating.
> 
> Are you setting the memory related parameters (memory & SoC voltage, timings) manually in both cases?


I set all voltages to auto. (The memory voltage is 1.35v by auto.) And I only manually adjusted the timings. 

Do you think it is due to overheating? I am using the stock cooler.


----------



## The Stilt

manangel said:


> I set all voltages to auto. (The memory voltage is 1.35v by auto.) And I only manually adjusted the timings.
> 
> Do you think it is due to overheating? I am using the stock cooler.


Set the memory to 1.350V (both options) and SoC to 1.05V - 1.10V (manual mode).
Over 1.50V average voltage (i.e. not just for the worst core) during Prime95 seems to indicate a weak CPU.


----------



## Hiromachi

Using help provided by Dram calculator I managed to get here:


Spoiler














However, out of seven open memtests, second was throwing at me an occasional error. While all others went smooth to 200%, second gave me 7 errors so it seems this config is a bit too much (shame, as scores in Passmark, Aida and others started looking really nice  ).
And suggestion where to possibly step down a bit ?


----------



## sr1030nx

manangel said:


> Hi Stilt,
> 
> 
> 
> I am using your oc profile (level 3) and the single core can run at 4.35ghz. Thanks for your efforts!
> 
> 
> 
> However, when I run Prime95 with 2 threads, it crashed easily (I mean, the screen just got freezed). Could you help with this?




I have a similar issue. Windows would freeze after a couple mins of realbench on any of levels 1-3. Never tried 4.
Ram is stable tested using 3 seperate programs.


----------



## larrydavid

Hiromachi said:


> Using help provided by Dram calculator I managed to get here:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> However, out of seven open memtests, second was throwing at me an occasional error. While all others went smooth to 200%, second gave me 7 errors so it seems this config is a bit too much (shame, as scores in Passmark, Aida and others started looking really nice  ).
> And suggestion where to possibly step down a bit ?


Does raising the DRAM voltage or adjusting the SoC voltage seem to help?

Try raising your vttddr to slightly above 50%.

Enabling geardown mode may make you stable at the cost of a bit of gaming performance.


----------



## Shawn Shutt jr

GmanP42 said:


> Hey on that you will have to use M.2_1 at the bottom of the motherboard as the M.2_2 (top one) shears PCI-E lanes with PCI-E16 top slot. if you have a GPU at the top with a Nvme SSD at the top the GPU will run at x8 Speed.
> 
> For your config put the Nvme at the bottom (heat shink will go with and it fits) and the GPU's on the normal places. See manual page 1-8 top under PCIe operating mode.
> 
> If you want to add another Nvme you will have to get an adaptor for the bottom slot (to run it on the chipset at x4 speed) or you will have to run the Nvme's at x2 speed
> 
> Sorry forgot to add you can only get - GPU top X8 GPU middle X8 and Nvme X4



mmk so i did this and GPU-Z is telling me card is running in x4 3.0 and card 2 is running in x8 3.0. i moved the m.2 to the bottom slot.


----------



## Gettz8488

i_max2k2 said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> 
> 
> just switching to the dark side after a long spell with the 2600k. Mobo gets to me Thursday, following is the setup I'll have
> 
> 
> 
> 2700x + Supremacy EVO +C7H (no wifi)
> 
> Two kits of 2x8gb Team Nighthawk 3200Mhz 16-18-18-38 (most likely not b die memory), I'm just hoping I can run them at stock speeds.
> 
> 2xGTX 1080's under water. AX1200i.
> 
> 
> 
> I was wondering how the memory compatibility might be with these new chips and X470. Do you guys think, I'd be able to run these sticks on stock clocks/timings.
> 
> 
> 
> Also anything specific I should do first, once I put the system together?




I’m running 3200 Hynix Just fine think you should be okay at stock 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Gettz8488

The Stilt said:


> Set the memory to 1.350V (both options) and SoC to 1.05V - 1.10V (manual mode).
> 
> Over 1.50V average voltage (i.e. not just for the worst core) during Prime95 seems to indicate a weak CPU.




I’ve been able to stabilize my chip on PE 2 with a 0.075 - offset it can even do PE 3 but one of my cores isn’t to good I was able to see it’s the one that request 1.5+ at stock for 4.35 ghz the rest request around 1.42-1.43 thought I had a terrible chip but it isn’t too bad might just run it at stock until Elmor adds a way to disable Scalar while using PE I want to run PE 2 with auto voltage but it increases scalar and pumps more Volts 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## i_max2k2

Shawn Shutt jr said:


> mmk so i did this and GPU-Z is telling me card is running in x4 3.0 and card 2 is running in x8 3.0. i moved the m.2 to the bottom slot.


I'd recommend reset settings once, and see if it still happens.


----------



## Shawn Shutt jr

i_max2k2 said:


> I'd recommend reset settings once, and see if it still happens.



what do you mean reset settings? i went into the bios, loaded default, restarted the PC. went back into the bios. still showed my SC2 air (top card) as x4 and my SC2 hybrid (bottom card as x8) all display ports running off SC2 air btw.


----------



## Tactix

The Stilt said:


> manangel said:
> 
> 
> 
> I set all voltages to auto. (The memory voltage is 1.35v by auto.) And I only manually adjusted the timings.
> 
> Do you think it is due to overheating? I am using the stock cooler.
> 
> 
> 
> Set the memory to 1.350V (both options) and SoC to 1.05V - 1.10V (manual mode).
> Over 1.50V average voltage (i.e. not just for the worst core) during Prime95 seems to indicate a weak CPU.
Click to expand...

Could you clarify what you mean by 
“Set the memory to 1.350v (both options)” I only have one v setting for DRAM. 
Thank you


----------



## Tactix

Shawn Shutt jr said:


> what do you mean reset settings? i went into the bios, loaded default, restarted the PC. went back into the bios. still showed my SC2 air (top card) as x4 and my SC2 hybrid (bottom card as x8) all display ports running off SC2 air btw.


Try loading Optimized defaults from the Exit tab i believe.


----------



## crakej

Shawn Shutt jr said:


> what do you mean reset settings? i went into the bios, loaded default, restarted the PC. went back into the bios. still showed my SC2 air (top card) as x4 and my SC2 hybrid (bottom card as x8) all display ports running off SC2 air btw.


Go to the Advanced tab in bios, then Hardware, then you can see the setting for pcie, which if you have your nvme drive in the bottom slot and display card in top slot - change setting to Disabled X8, that should do it.

I can't remember the exact setting name, but you should be able to find it.


----------



## elmor

larrydavid said:


> Hmm. I thought the same thing. The manual implies that the PCIEX16_1 will run in 8x mode if you put a PCI-E SSD in M.2_2. I don't see where else it could get the PCI-E 3.0 lanes from. I actually bought a PCI-E slot adapter for my SSD to put in the in PCIE4_3 to avoid running my 1080Ti at 8x.
> 
> @elmor Any chance you have any more info on this?



Both slots are from the CPU. Using M.2_2 will drop PCIEX16_1 to x8.




Shiftstealth said:


> @elmor
> 
> Do you ever intend on letting us edit the fan above 75C on the CH VII? When it hits 75C, even if its for 2s, it spins my fans up to 100%. Would be hoping i could set the curve to be a little less steep up that high.
> 
> For what its worth i've tried to install the ASUS Suite software multiple times, but when i run the .exe it doesn't open anything.



Not that I'm aware of.


----------



## r0l4n

Results of CPO_Test in my machine.


----------



## Shawn Shutt jr

crakej said:


> Shawn Shutt jr said:
> 
> 
> 
> what do you mean reset settings? i went into the bios, loaded default, restarted the PC. went back into the bios. still showed my SC2 air (top card) as x4 and my SC2 hybrid (bottom card as x8) all display ports running off SC2 air btw.[/quote
> 
> Go to the Advanced tab in bios, then Hardware, then you can see the setting for pcie, which if you have your nvme drive in the bottom slot and display card in top slot - change setting to Disabled X8, that should do it.
> 
> I can't remember the exact setting name, but you should be able to find it.
> 
> 
> 
> Mmk I know what setting youre talking about, ill check that in the bios later. Do i need to go into the bios and set the m.2 before i instal windows?
Click to expand...


----------



## Tactix

Shawn Shutt jr said:


> crakej said:
> 
> 
> 
> Mmk I know what setting youre talking about, ill check that in the bios later. Do i need to go into the bios and set the m.2 before i instal windows?
> 
> 
> 
> I had no issues moving it after an install, just had to adjust boot priority but may as well if you have not loaded up windows yet.
Click to expand...


----------



## lordzed83

Safetytrousers said:


> A 2700x that couldn't do 4.2Ghz at 1.425v would be very poor indeed. 4.2Ghz at less than 1.4v I think is standard for the 2700x.
> Mine does 4.3Ghz at 1.4v.


Well Just called Customs my cpu should be up and running tomorow evening. Will see how it is 

Considering they got 4.2 4.15 and 4.1 wont cost me as much extra as iw spend on buying and returning 3 ryzen cpus. And still not having 4ghz one !!!


----------



## r0l4n

How do you guys test stability at the 4350MHz mark? Is playing with p95v266 and affinity a good method?


----------



## MacG32

Yes, Prime95 is an excellent stability testing tool. Here's the latest version: ftp://ftp.mersenne.org/gimps/p95v294b8.win64.zip

OCCT is also recommended: http://www.ocbase.com/index.php/download


----------



## crakej

Shawn Shutt jr said:


> crakej said:
> 
> 
> 
> Mmk I know what setting youre talking about, ill check that in the bios later. Do i need to go into the bios and set the m.2 before i instal windows?
> 
> 
> 
> Sure
> 
> Go to Advanced>On Board Devices Configuration>M.2_2 PCIE Bandwidth Configuration. Set it to Disabled(X8 mode)
> 
> It shuts off M.2_2 so you will get your x16 for your GPU - it should set it automatically, but I found I needed to set it - I had done the same as you and installed it where the heat spreader was and needed to set it, though I'm sure loading defaults with F5 should do the job too.
Click to expand...


----------



## The Stilt

Tactix said:


> Could you clarify what you mean by
> “Set the memory to 1.350v (both options)” I only have one v setting for DRAM.
> Thank you


Extreme Tweaker \ DRAM Voltage
External Digi+ Power Control \ DRAM VBoot Voltage

Always set them to the same value.


----------



## DDSZ

All the reviewers had "Wi-Fi" mobo, so I can't find any info on that... Does non-wifi version of it have m2 slot for wifi module? Are there any other differences between wifi and non-wifi versions?


----------



## MacG32

DDSZ said:


> All the reviewers had "Wi-Fi" mobo, so I can't find any info on that... Does non-wifi version of it have m2 slot for wifi module? Are there any other differences between wifi and non-wifi versions?



I see no slot or holes to add a Wi-Fi module in the non Wi-Fi version. I see no difference between the models, except Wi-Fi.


----------



## DDSZ

Well, thats sad


----------



## lordzed83

DDSZ said:


> All the reviewers had "Wi-Fi" mobo, so I can't find any info on that... Does non-wifi version of it have m2 slot for wifi module? Are there any other differences between wifi and non-wifi versions?


Why sad ?? You need WiFi You buy wifi board simple. Same as it was with Crosshair VI. Besides that whos using WiFi in desktop


----------



## sandiegoskyline

I must admit that it has been a while since I've been on OCN. I recently bought a 2700X/CH7 to replace my old 1700/AB350M Pro4.

I'm currently running PE Level 2 with a -0.05v undervolt, BCLK 101. The chip will hit single core frequencies of 4.4GHz and sustained all core of 4.1GHz.

1) What power plan should I be running? Benchmarks appear higher under "high performance" but the chip remains at 1.45-1.475V all the time. Under "balanced", benchmarks are lower but the chip fluctuates between 0.78 and 1.5V.

2) These voltages seem...high. Forgive me but my prior is that voltages should be in the 1.1-1.4V range (given my experience on Zen 1). Am I doing something wrong? Does undervolting with a negative offset even do anything?


----------



## DDSZ

lordzed83 said:


> Why sad ?? You need WiFi You buy wifi board simple. Same as it was with Crosshair VI. Besides that whos using WiFi in desktop


Non-WiFi Crosshair VI had m2 slot for a wifi module


----------



## Gettz8488

sandiegoskyline said:


> I must admit that it has been a while since I've been on OCN. I recently bought a 2700X/CH7 to replace my old 1700/AB350M Pro4.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm currently running PE Level 2 with a -0.05v undervolt, BCLK 101. The chip will hit single core frequencies of 4.4GHz and sustained all core of 4.1GHz.
> 
> 
> 
> 1) What power plan should I be running? Benchmarks appear higher under "high performance" but the chip remains at 1.45-1.475V all the time. Under "balanced", benchmarks are lower but the chip fluctuates between 0.78 and 1.5V.
> 
> 
> 
> 2) These voltages seem...high. Forgive me but my prior is that voltages should be in the 1.1-1.4V range (given my experience on Zen 1). Am I doing something wrong? Does undervolting with a negative offset even do anything?




To sustain the speeds you’re seeing on the cpu it doesn’t surprise me. PE turns up the cpu scalar X10 which loosens FIT this is the code already built in the chip that handles voltages and sets parameters to keep silicon reliability @The Stilt has a great article on this. For now I run everything at default with a -0.075 offset until @elmor can add a way to disable scalar and keep FIT at default even while using PE3.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Ethan_Ryu

Balanced is the best for ryzen for the long term , you can try increasing the undervolt , i have -0.1V but i havent touched bclk


----------



## Gettz8488

Ethan_Ryu said:


> Balanced is the best for ryzen for the long term , you can try increasing the undervolt , i have -0.1V but i havent touched bclk




Unfortunately can’t run anything more then a 0.75 offset 0.1 won’t post for me


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## sandiegoskyline

Gettz8488 said:


> Unfortunately can’t run anything more then a 0.75 offset 0.1 won’t post for me
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


It's the same with me--it'll crash when loading Windows at a -0.1v offset. I've kept it at -0.05v even though the limit is likely somewhere in between.

I may turn PE off until we get more clarity or control over voltages.


----------



## Gettz8488

sandiegoskyline said:


> It's the same with me--it'll crash when loading Windows at a -0.1v offset. I've kept it at -0.05v even though the limit is likely somewhere in between.
> 
> 
> 
> I may turn PE off until we get more clarity or control over voltages.




Pretty much this. Don’t have much control over voltages so I just set it at stock with a -offset doesn’t go above 1.43 usually 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## majestynl

sandiegoskyline said:


> I must admit that it has been a while since I've been on OCN. I recently bought a 2700X/CH7 to replace my old 1700/AB350M Pro4.
> 
> I'm currently running PE Level 2 with a -0.05v undervolt, BCLK 101. The chip will hit single core frequencies of 4.4GHz and sustained all core of 4.1GHz.
> 
> 1) What power plan should I be running? Benchmarks appear higher under "high performance" but the chip remains at 1.45-1.475V all the time. Under "balanced", benchmarks are lower but the chip fluctuates between 0.78 and 1.5V.
> 
> 2) These voltages seem...high. Forgive me but my prior is that voltages should be in the 1.1-1.4V range (given my experience on Zen 1). Am I doing something wrong? Does undervolting with a negative offset even do anything?






Gettz8488 said:


> Unfortunately can’t run anything more then a 0.75 offset 0.1 won’t post for me
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro





sandiegoskyline said:


> It's the same with me--it'll crash when loading Windows at a -0.1v offset. I've kept it at -0.05v even though the limit is likely somewhere in between.
> 
> I may turn PE off until we get more clarity or control over voltages.



I can run -0.1v with PE3 but it will wont pass AVX! -0.05 is working fine for now.
4348Mhz on Balanced and 4074Mhz with High Performance. But i dont see any difference in CB scores yet. 
BTW for now i dont like the scores, my 1800x scored the same with 4Ghz (Pstates OC). 
Im going for a fresh windows install and try to tweak/test further from there

What i also dont like is the biiiiiig vdrooooooooooooooop!! 
Do you guys manually set LLC or is it allready managed by PE modus from Stilt?


----------



## Louis_SunKing

sandiegoskyline said:


> It's the same with me--it'll crash when loading Windows at a -0.1v offset. I've kept it at -0.05v even though the limit is likely somewhere in between.
> 
> I may turn PE off until we get more clarity or control over voltages.


I am running on PE2 on -0.075v offset. I seems to be the best solution for my chip. Max voltages spikes go to 1.456v.
I get 1.435ghz boost on 1 core and sometimes even on more than 1 core. Once saw 6cores running at 1.435Ghz (Could be a visual glitch of hwinfo or my imagination .....)
The all core boost often is on 1.42ghz but then slowly drops towards 1.41ghz. It depends on if I am gaming or benchmarking/stressing.
Overal PE2 seems to be working better for me than PE3.


----------



## os2wiz

r0l4n said:


> How do you guys test stability at the 4350MHz mark? Is playing with p95v266 and affinity a good method?


Good luck running stability at 4.35 GHZ. My guess is maybe 5% of 2700X chips would be up to muster at that speed even with the best cooling.4.3 GHZ is a more realistic speed on all 8 cores for stability. Probably close to 50% of 2700X chips with excellent cooling might pass stability tetsing at that speed. My everyday speed is 4.175 to 4.2 GHZ. I can keep the voltage around 1.36 to 1.38 v at that speed on all 8 cores.


----------



## lordzed83

os2wiz said:


> r0l4n said:
> 
> 
> 
> How do you guys test stability at the 4350MHz mark? Is playing with p95v266 and affinity a good method?
> 
> 
> 
> Good luck running stability at 4.35 GHZ. My guess is maybe 5% of 2700X chips would be up to muster at that speed even with the best cooling.4.3 GHZ is a more realistic speed on all 8 cores for stability. Probably close to 50% of 2700X chips with excellent cooling might pass stability tetsing at that speed. My everyday speed is 4.175 to 4.2 GHZ. I can keep the voltage around 1.36 to 1.38 v at that speed on all 8 cores.
Click to expand...

Nope no go even 4.3 by looks of it. If silicone lottery cant sell binned 4.25 should be indicator of what zen+ got limit at 😞
My binned cpu should be in tomorrow so i will see how far can i push it with my memory at 3466 that is limit if 1700x i got.


----------



## stevets

Adding data to the pile:


----------



## i_max2k2

Shawn Shutt jr said:


> what do you mean reset settings? i went into the bios, loaded default, restarted the PC. went back into the bios. still showed my SC2 air (top card) as x4 and my SC2 hybrid (bottom card as x8) all display ports running off SC2 air btw.


Thats what I meant, do you have anything in the other M.2 slot?


----------



## r0l4n

os2wiz said:


> Good luck running stability at 4.35 GHZ. My guess is maybe 5% of 2700X chips would be up to muster at that speed even with the best cooling.4.3 GHZ is a more realistic speed on all 8 cores for stability. Probably close to 50% of 2700X chips with excellent cooling might pass stability tetsing at that speed. My everyday speed is 4.175 to 4.2 GHZ. I can keep the voltage around 1.36 to 1.38 v at that speed on all 8 cores.





lordzed83 said:


> Nope no go even 4.3 by looks of it. If silicone lottery cant sell binned 4.25 should be indicator of what zen+ got limit at 😞
> My binned cpu should be in tomorrow so i will see how far can i push it with my memory at 3466 that is limit if 1700x i got.


There must be a workload, similar enough to what AMD uses, that could help us figure out whether the CPU is stable during those spikes to 4350 or not. Not being able to assess stability at boost conditions makes CPB+PE tuning very difficult, specially if one cares about stability.


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> Nope no go even 4.3 by looks of it. If silicone lottery cant sell binned 4.25 should be indicator of what zen+ got limit at 😞
> My binned cpu should be in tomorrow so i will see how far can i push it with my memory at 3466 that is limit if 1700x i got.


Have you tried enabling geardown? I did, now running my ram at 3600 with my 1700x


----------



## Pilotasso

lordzed83 said:


> Nope no go even 4.3 by looks of it. If silicone lottery cant sell binned 4.25 should be indicator of what zen+ got limit at 😞
> My binned cpu should be in tomorrow so i will see how far can i push it with my memory at 3466 that is limit if 1700x i got.


You should be able to do 3600. Gamers nexus had a video showing 3666 seems to be where most chips will top at (using 2 sticks 2x8)


----------



## lordzed83

DDSZ said:


> Non-WiFi Crosshair VI had m2 slot for a wifi module


But AFAIK you could not buy the module could You ?? At lest not asus one


----------



## Shawn Shutt jr

i_max2k2 said:


> Thats what I meant, do you have anything in the other M.2 slot?


nope, M.2 in bottom slot, both GPU's in standard slots. GPU-z and bios still showing top slot in x4 and bottom gpu in x8. disabled the top m.2 still showed x4. i got no clue why


----------



## sr1030nx

sandiegoskyline said:


> It's the same with me--it'll crash when loading Windows at a -0.1v offset. I've kept it at -0.05v even though the limit is likely somewhere in between.
> 
> 
> 
> I may turn PE off until we get more clarity or control over voltages.




For me -0.1 crashes fast but-0.075 works great.

Any level of PE crashes or freezes on me using 0509 bios, heck PE4 with even +0.1 volts will crash on idle desktop.


----------



## crakej

Shawn Shutt jr said:


> nope, M.2 in bottom slot, both GPU's in standard slots. GPU-z and bios still showing top slot in x4 and bottom gpu in x8. disabled the top m.2 still showed x4. i got no clue why


and you selected *Disabled (x8) *in the bios (middle selection)


----------



## Shawn Shutt jr

crakej said:


> and you selected *Disabled (x8) *in the bios (middle selection)


Yup! see pictures.


----------



## HolyFist

Shawn Shutt jr said:


> Yup! see pictures.


I think the problem might be in the BIOS, i have a problem with the C6H where i'm only using one GPU and is stuck at x8 no matter what.

What happens if you only use one GPU?

I'm using the 2700X and a GTX1080 btw.


----------



## Shawn Shutt jr

HolyFist said:


> I think the problem might be in the BIOS, i have a problem with the C6H where i'm only using one GPU and is stuck at x8 no matter what.
> 
> What happens if you only use one GPU?
> 
> I'm using the 2700X and a GTX1080 btw.



hmm not sure tbh, i might try that and see if it fixes the issue. maybe reflash the bios might help?


----------



## HolyFist

Shawn Shutt jr said:


> hmm not sure tbh, i might try that and see if it fixes the issue. maybe reflash the bios might help?


I did that, on the Crosshair VI Hero both BIOS 6004 and 6101 have the same problem, Clear CMOS and Flash after does nothing either.

I've tried to force all other PCIe to run at lowest GEN possible and still nothing. Which i'm not even using any other PCIe/M.2/NVMe anyway.


----------



## crakej

Shawn Shutt jr said:


> Yup! see pictures.


Try using different software to see whats happening - like Aida64

V frustrating! I would also try one card in top slot see how that goes. I checked in my bios and it shows mine as being at x16


----------



## crakej

couple of things.......has anyone updated to Spring Update for Windows and has it affected their OC in any way? My CPU seems to want a lot more juice for same OC.

Also since AGESA 1.0.0.0.a, it's needed more voltage but not as bad as this - is this a problem is it just how it is now?


----------



## The Stilt

Pilotasso said:


> You should be able to do 3600. Gamers nexus had a video showing 3666 seems to be where most chips will top at (using 2 sticks 2x8)


None of the chips I've tested have been able to do 3600MHz.
1/8 was limited to 3400MHz, 2/8 to 3466MHz and 5/8 did 3533MHz.

Unless of course you're interested in frequencies which aren't stable.


----------



## Shiftstealth

The Stilt said:


> None of the chips I've tested have been able to do 3600MHz.
> 1/8 was limited to 3400MHz, 2/8 to 3466MHz and 5/8 did 3533MHz.
> 
> Unless of course you're interested in frequencies which aren't stable.


This right here is probably why AMD sent their review samples with 3400Mhz RAM.


----------



## Kernel-Debugger

I'm having a very strange issue on the CH7: Maybe Elmor or someone could shed some light; that is not already widely available on Code 8 issues.

Very Stable with DOCP 3200Mhz and a 42 ratio with 1.3925 manual voltage. Any attempt to modify memory beyond 3200 causes an instant code 8 (after saving changes / restart) no post: that requires a clear cmos and power disconnect to resolve. I am tracking a documented 3333 stability on 4x8 and 3466 with 2x8. (Had no issues running 3600 on the CH6, and no issues running the 2700X on the CH6.

Both Flare X sets of 2x8 pass memtest // 1000% on CH6 and CH7 @ 3200

To clarify: Yellow flashing Code LED & code 8 // not 08










2700X on a standard CH7 (Non-Wifi)
Flare X 3200: 4x8 or 2x8 // same issue
Bios 0509 and 0601: // same issue
Ekwb monoblock and Supremacy Evo with 2700X and 1800X // same issue
(Tried 3 different styles of back plates, so we can rule that out of the equation as well)
GPU is a 1080ti with an Ekwb block and has been reseated multiple times // same issue
Bare essentials with just keyboard and mouse on USB // same issue

All of Stilts presets fail, and all prior ways to achieve 3466 and 3600 on the CH6 also fail with code 8 (2x8)

I have also powered up the board on a test bench with the same result, and another PSU. Both PSU's are digital Axi series 860w and above. CPU pressure and cable connection gremlins have been fully verified to not be causing this issue. No issues if I keep the memory at DOCP or default / Auto. Any ideas?


----------



## sandiegoskyline

Anyone here able to get a 32GB (2x16Gb DR) B-die kit stable at 3400?


----------



## mightyrepooc

sandiegoskyline said:


> Anyone here able to get a 32GB (2x16Gb DR) B-die kit stable at 3400?


Currently running my b-die DR 2x16 GB kit with 3333 mhz und D.O.C.P recommended settings. Tried 3466 as next step which gives error in Memtest, did not tried 3400 yet. Does anyone have experience with The Stilt settings and Dual Rank memory? Not even the save ones worked for me


----------



## hurricane28

The Stilt said:


> None of the chips I've tested have been able to do 3600MHz.
> 1/8 was limited to 3400MHz, 2/8 to 3466MHz and 5/8 did 3533MHz.
> 
> Unless of course you're interested in frequencies which aren't stable.


Weird, i run my sticks at 3600 MHz for over a week now without any problems. 

Had BSOD before but after some more tweaking i believe they are quite stable, have to test more of course but as of now it looks very promising.


----------



## hurricane28

That being said, i do not notice any difference between 3466 MHz and 3600 MHz, i just want to see if its stable and if it is i probably back off to 3466 MHz as i think its more snappy in Windows and games.


----------



## 3200MHz




----------



## HolyFist

hurricane28 said:


> Weird, i run my sticks at 3600 MHz for over a week now without any problems.
> 
> Had BSOD before but after some more tweaking i believe they are quite stable, have to test more of course but as of now it looks very promising.


I was able to boot 3600Mhz first try on the 2700X just by putting CL16 standard timings with 1.4V and it ran fine til i started the benchmarks, i didn't go over tweaking as i'm trying to get 3466MHz to be stable with low CL.

But compared to the 1700 i had it didn't even boot with 3466Mhz without some serious tweaks, tho as you can see in the sig my specs might be different, just replying regarding ships not being able to do 3600MHz.

If we're talking 100% stable yeah probably gonna be hard for most people unless AGESA updates help.


----------



## lordzed83

Well after work running training will be joining Zen+ squad and get on with testing


----------



## Esenel

lordzed83 said:


> Well after work running training will be joining Zen+ squad and get on with testing


I wish you a lot of fun tweaking around with it. 
But you as an owner of a maxed out Ryzen 1000 will be disappointed I guess.
At least I was.

You gain nearly nothing in Games. And as the Stilt stated, Memory support is mostly the same.

Here the guy did a video about it. For my personal experience it looked the same. I had 0 to 3.3% increase in fps at 3466CL14 on both.






But have fun tweaking


----------



## hurricane28

Indeed, i want to upgrade to Ryzen 2 but i don't really think its worth it performance wise. I think its better to wait for 2019.


----------



## lordzed83

Esenel said:


> lordzed83 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well after work running training will be joining Zen+ squad and get on with testing /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> 
> 
> I wish you a lot of fun tweaking around with it. 🙂
> But you as an owner of a maxed out Ryzen 1000 will be disappointed I guess.
> At least I was.
> 
> You gain nearly nothing in Games. And as the Stilt stated, Memory support is mostly the same.
> 
> Here the guy did a video about it. For my personal experience it looked the same. I had 0 to 3.3% increase in fps at 3466CL14 on both.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But have fun tweaking
Click to expand...

I upgrade every year just for fun. Maybe played 5 hours of games in last 2 weeks. Spend more time tweeking setting and working out watching memtest hahahah

Same with my car i keep buying upgrades and working on it. And I drive it once a week sometimes once in 2 weeks.

Joys of being permament single. Spending money on stuff u titalky dont need. And since i hate holidays. Its pcs cars training gear and chemicals 😛


----------



## Esenel

lordzed83 said:


> I upgrade every year just for fun. Maybe played 5 hours of games in last 2 weeks. Spend more time tweeking setting and working out watching memtest hahahah
> 
> Same with my car i keep buying upgrades and working on it. And I drive it once a week sometimes once in 2 weeks.


That is the reason why I wish you a lot of fun with tweaking 

But in my opinion you could say Ryzen 1000 was the beta product for Ryzen+ which is a great out of the box solution which features everything we used to figure out and tweak around the last year to make it work.
But to upgrade from a maxed out Ryzen 1000 is not worth the money performance wise. But for the fun of course ;-)


----------



## sandiegoskyline

mightyrepooc said:


> sandiegoskyline said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone here able to get a 32GB (2x16Gb DR) B-die kit stable at 3400?
> 
> 
> 
> Currently running my b-die DR 2x16 GB kit with 3333 mhz und D.O.C.P recommended settings. Tried 3466 as next step which gives error in Memtest, did not tried 3400 yet. Does anyone have experience with The Stilt settings and Dual Rank memory? Not even the save ones worked for me /forum/images/smilies/redface.gif
Click to expand...

I was able to run 3232 (3200 strap with a 101 bclk) with the Stilts “safe” timings at 1.35V and 1.05V SOC.


----------



## larrydavid

sandiegoskyline said:


> I was able to run 3232 (3200 strap with a 101 bclk) with the Stilts “safe” timings at 1.35V and 1.05V SOC.


Hmm. I'm about to put together my build with 2x16GB B-Die DR, so that's a bit disappointing. Not many people are running DR B-Die, so perhaps there's room for improvement with us discovering the right settings.


----------



## mightyrepooc

larrydavid said:


> Hmm. I'm about to put together my build with 2x16GB B-Die DR, so that's a bit disappointing. Not many people are running DR B-Die, so perhaps there's room for improvement with us discovering the right settings.


I think most people who share the timings are up to the best benchmark results and therefor don't use Dual Rank RAM. I used the Gskill F4-3600C17D-32GTZR for my build and was suprised as it had run with 3200 Mhz out of the box (all settings on auto). Pretty sure i can pump does numbers up, those are rookie numbers


----------



## larrydavid

mightyrepooc said:


> I think most people who share the timings are up to the best benchmark results and therefor don't use Dual Rank RAM. I used the Gskill F4-3600C17D-32GTZR for my build and was suprised as it had run with 3200 Mhz out of the box (all settings on auto). Pretty sure i can pump does numbers up, those are rookie numbers


Nice!

We may not be able to clock quite as high as single rank, but dual rank does bench a lot better in games, so we won't have to


----------



## Onijin

Just got everything set up on my rig. Got everything stable and seems to be running well and now it's time for fine tuning. Can someone have a look at these timings and tell me if they spot anything should be altered?
Edit : Almost forgot. The kit is G-SKILL F4-3600C15D-16GTZ


----------



## gupsterg

@Kernel-Debugger

Code 8 with flashing Q-LED and slight audible "yoyo" buzzing on C6H was pretty much equally rig unstable. So I'd be checking settings for profile. From reading your post what's perplexing is:-



You have used the CPU/RAM on C6H and non issue for targeted settings on C7H.


As you're a C6H owner I'd assume you have EK gasket which is not capacitive, so can't be causing issue.



@Onijin

Nice  , any stability testing screenies, elaboration on "stable".


----------



## Mr Splash

So glad this thread is here, just want to say thanks for everyone sharing this stuff. I sent back my ASRock and have the ASUS CH VII x470 coming friday and I am behind in knowledge of the newer stuff, heck even Win10 I'm still on 7 right now but all this info is going to help alot with my schooling lets say. So thanks & peace .... Splash


----------



## lordzed83

Esenel said:


> lordzed83 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I upgrade every year just for fun. Maybe played 5 hours of games in last 2 weeks. Spend more time tweeking setting and working out watching memtest hahahah
> 
> Same with my car i keep buying upgrades and working on it. And I drive it once a week sometimes once in 2 weeks.
> 
> 
> 
> That is the reason why I wish you a lot of fun with tweaking 🙂
> 
> But in my opinion you could say Ryzen 1000 was the beta product for Ryzen+ which is a great out of the box solution which features everything we used to figure out and tweak around the last year to make it work.
> But to upgrade from a maxed out Ryzen 1000 is not worth the money performance wise. But for the fun of course ;-)
Click to expand...

True was not planing on upgrade but with guft from Asus i can fkog c6h and 1700x and have tjis at sensible cost 🙂


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> Well after work running training will be joining Zen+ squad and get on with testing


Have fun with your new CPU. Looking forward for your results!





hurricane28 said:


> Indeed, i want to upgrade to Ryzen 2 but i don't really think its worth it performance wise. I think its better to wait for 2019.



Think you are right! If i dont got this Ch7 from elmor probably i never bought the 2700x.
gave my sweet 1800x to my nephew.. he is probably more happy then me coming from a FX


----------



## hurricane28

majestynl said:


> Have fun with your new CPU. Looking forward for your results!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Think you are right! If i dont got this Ch7 from elmor probably i never bought the 2700x.
> gave my sweet 1800x to my nephew.. he is probably more happy then me coming from a FX


I hear ya. 

I really like to get the new 2600x CPU but i really can't justify it. There isn't much difference and speed gain from my 1600 to be honest. It is faster yes but not much faster and overclocking is a joke anyway on Ryzen. 

I think i wait for next year and see what 7 nm brings.


----------



## lordzed83

2700x survived trip from usa and its running now time to put pc back to standard position and let the fun begin 🙂


----------



## Ethan_Ryu

lordzed83 said:


> 2700x survived trip from usa and its running now time to put pc back to standard position and let the fun begin 🙂


Really curious to see how it will perform in the CPO_Test


----------



## Pilotasso

The Stilt said:


> None of the chips I've tested have been able to do 3600MHz.
> 1/8 was limited to 3400MHz, 2/8 to 3466MHz and 5/8 did 3533MHz.
> 
> Unless of course you're interested in frequencies which aren't stable.


A little bit of context is necessary here as I was referring to LordZed's unit that's is binned off from silicon lottery online store.


----------



## lordzed83

Right base run done


----------



## sonic2911

A little bit OT but I have a question about M2 slot, I read the review on TweakTown they said that if we use the top m2 slot, which has hs, then then the first pcie 3.0 x16 will decrease to 8x, it it correct? Not SLI also, just 1 card.


----------



## Esenel

Pilotasso said:


> A little bit of context is necessary here as I was referring to LordZed's unit that's is binned off from silicon lottery online store.


But you did not read the details. Especially the QVL:

Memory:
Dual Channel DDR4-2133 (2x4GB, 2x8GB, 2x16GB, 4x4GB, 4x8GB, 4x16GB)
Dual Channel DDR4-2400 (2x4GB, 2x8GB, 2x16GB, 4x4GB, 4x8GB, 4x16GB)
Dual Channel DDR4-2666 (2x4GB, 2x8GB, 2x16GB, 4x4GB, 4x8GB, 4x16GB)
Dual Channel DDR4-2800 (2x4GB, 2x8GB, 2x16GB, 4x4GB, 4x8GB)
Dual Channel DDR4-2933 (2x4GB, 2x8GB, 2x16GB, 4x4GB, 4x8GB)
Dual Channel DDR4-3000 (2x4GB, 2x8GB)

Even if you get the best CPU which is able to do +4.2 GHz, you can get the worst IMC and then you are stuck with "slow" RAM.

My 2700X was only able to perform in Stock settings paired with RAM of 3400CL14.
Huge disappointment. So I sent it back.

My 1700X on the other side is able to do 3466CL14.

But I wish lordzed83 all the luck that he got a good chip ;-)


----------



## majestynl

sonic2911 said:


> A little bit OT but I have a question about M2 slot, I read the review on TweakTown they said that if we use the top m2 slot, which has hs, then then the first pcie 3.0 x16 will decrease to 8x, it it correct? Not SLI also, just 1 card.


No issues over here! Probably with more cards installed!


----------



## sbakic

Ethan_Ryu said:


> *@PeerlessGirl*
> 
> 15-15-15-35 (CL-RCD-RP-RAS) / 50-631-469-289-10-7-44 (RC-RFC1-RFC2-RFC4-RRDL-RRDS-FAW) with 1.35V and 3600 as frequency everything else on auto, booted without any issue (putting only 15-15-15-35 will boot but you get better if you follow it all).
> 
> At the moment running CL14 3333
> 
> 
> Spoiler


aida64 memory benchmark please, wanna see read and writes with latency. thanks


----------



## MacG32

sonic2911 said:


> A little bit OT but I have a question about M2 slot, I read the review on TweakTown they said that if we use the top m2 slot, which has hs, then then the first pcie 3.0 x16 will decrease to 8x, it it correct? Not SLI also, just 1 card.



I had that happen. I moved it to the bottom slot and x16 returned. You can move the heat sink to the bottom M.2 slot.


----------



## i_max2k2

Guys do we have any co-relation between batch #s to better overclock ability yet, I have two boxes of 2700x, sending one back soon. Trying to see if one might be better then the other if at all.

Thanks!


----------



## lordzed83

Things a beast lol doing dirty pe3 oc


----------



## sbakic

Asylumpwnz said:


> hello, i just got my Crosshair VII hero a couple days ago, everything seems good. I'm able to run corsair link without my computer powering off randomly like other people have claimed. (knocks on wood). overclocking on the X470 does seem to be better then the X370 (at least from my experience). Before with my c6h I wasn't able to push very far past 3466 cl14. but with the 7 I've managed to get 3600 cl14 pretty stable so far although i haven't spent a lot of time with it yet, plus I haven't gotten around to use a proper stability test i only ran prime 95 for like 15 mins before I couldn't be bothered and went on to something else..maybe this weekend ill let it go longer and submit my results.. but for now.. this is what i got. it really does seems like a big improvement vs first gen... watch out Intel.


Ok guys, this is how you should overclock new ryzen. bios settings please thanks


----------



## sonic2911

MacG32 said:


> I had that happen. I moved it to the bottom slot and x16 returned. You can move the heat sink to the bottom M.2 slot.


oh so the hs will work on both right? thanks


----------



## majestynl

*Just Playing around with this new CH7 with a 2700x!*

Tried PE3 and PE4 as said before, max speed on 7/8 cores = *4348Mhz* / 1Stoned silly core is doing 4323Mhz 

Played today with Manual OC, im now Basic stable with all cores @ *4200Mhz* / 1.3875!
I think i can push this more but for now im saving this profile. And start from there to tune more...

_Again this is just basic basic Stable (Multiple CB Benchruns / RB pass 30minutes 8GB / AVX Standard / Played quick few games and more) Will share more results in upcoming days. Including OC with Pstates!_

Memory is running currenlty on a basic OC *3400Mhz* @ 1.4v with basic timing tuning. Need to run long memtest, but first im playing around with the CPU.

keep in mind people, i made this mistake (again): When you manual OC and then change settings in Pstates. The setting over there are taken from your manual OC you did before.
So if you then try to offset + your vcore because you thought the VID from Pstates menu was set on default. You will get an overshoot 
Just telling , dont be silly and always calculate hex values to double check!!!

@elmor

- Thanks again for the board. Its working ok for now. Couldnt get the ram same speed as the CH6 but i believe this will tuned in upcoming bioses like the CH6
- Yesterday got suddenly a shutdown. The only thing i did before the shutdown : Opened multiple CPU-Z windows and HwInfo was also open. Will try to reproduce in upcoming days. Hopefully i can find some info
- I installed a temp sensor for my liquid and plugged this in the T-sensor. My temps are not increasing frequently like on AIO temp sensors. Is there any polling rate on these sensors? Or maybe i need to plug it in another sensor input?
- Will be there any USB drivers on the download page (Asus support) in the future?


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> Things a beast lol doing dirty pe3 oc


Beast!! Can you share a Hwinfo screened while you passed CB with PE3. Want to do some comparison..
Thanks


----------



## Ethan_Ryu

sbakic said:


> aida64 memory benchmark please, wanna see read and writes with latency. thanks











mind you it's 1.35V


----------



## lordzed83

@elmor

















Vegeta what does the scouter say about Power level ???
Its OVER TWOHUNDRED hahahaha


Well boots and works like it should here


----------



## Pilotasso

lordzed83 said:


> @elmor
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vegeta what does the scouter say about Power level ???
> Its OVER TWOHUNDRED hahahaha
> 
> 
> Well boots and works like it should here


ooph 200W? is that right?

Mine reads 110W on the CH6 with 1.4V LLC3. I got same version of HWinfo.

Nice cinebench score. My max is 1922 multi /177 single with all cores locked to 4.2 Ghz


----------



## lordzed83

Its same 1.387v under load that i had on my 1700x. Cant use liquid metal on chip from silicone lottery so temps will be higher than on 1700 by 2-3c once kryonaut melts down.
But as instructed by SL 1.425 set vcore.
Ofc using llc3 can do 1.4 with llc4 same volts under load as on llc3.


Atm testing 3533cl15 one step up from what my 1700x could do


----------



## crakej

Lookin good man! Seems Silicone Lottery paid off!


----------



## Pilotasso

3533 CL15 wasnt stable for me. Had to go up to 16. Good luck!


----------



## Tactix

Could someone explain what memory "training" means?


----------



## gagac1971

this is not the wright thread but...
hello guys i need your help...i have asus crosshair 6 hero and three samsung ssd two are the same and the bigger one is diferent...
ok from there my question is can i use all three ssd on this board?
when i tried to use all 3 and reebooted the pc didnt wanted to boot again.all was been messed up...then i disabled the third one and everything was back to normal.
help me guys please...i am not in raid mode...
if you want you can send me an private message also...
thank you for your help.


----------



## lordzed83

Well with ramtest had 1 error at 1100% did bit tweekeing will see hci memtest and go to bed getting up in 6 hours


----------



## Shiftstealth

lordzed83 said:


> Well with ramtest had 1 error at 1100% did bit tweekeing will see hci memtest and go to bed getting up in 6 hours




So close to 2000 man.


----------



## Gettz8488

Should sensi mi SKEW be disabled on this CH7? or enabled?


----------



## Gettz8488

@lordzed83 are you setting manual Voltage for that OC? What Vdroop are you getting with a 1.4 Vcore?


----------



## CJMitsuki

SO, I just got my CH7 and a new set of TridentZ this week. I had preordered the 2700x but cancelled at the last moment as I was wanting to see more in depth analysis on the changes to memory, more specifically on the latency side of things. I am very satisfied with my CH7 and my f4-4133c19. Currently running it @ 3466mhzC14 with super tight subtimings, Pics included below. Im wondering since i rarely see much on the subject from reviews, How has the 2700x affected memory over the 1700x using a CH7? Im using a week 8 1700x with the segfault bug which I have just started the RMA process for another CPU. What types of latency gains can I expect compared to my current performance? (taking into account that the 1700x is one of the bugged ones from a year ago and I can tell it has some weakness to it.)

Im weighing whether I should just sell the new 1700x I get from my RMA and buy the 2700x or just hold out until next year...



First Pic is Stock, Next one is nearly final timings in safe mode, last one is final timings @3466 in OS. This is pretty much what I got to work as fast as possible @ 1000% using RamTest. I can push higher frequencies but that will take more work to be beneficial over what Im currently showing which I could probably tighten a couple more things with this setup as well but Im reaching the end of being able to tighten this frequency.


Spoiler



























A few random pics of CH7 upgrade


Spoiler







































Finding out my CPU was segfault bugged a couple of nights ago which explains a few things about crashing at high load/stress tests above 4.0 ghz


Spoiler


----------



## Shiftstealth

CJMitsuki said:


> SO, I just got my CH7 and a new set of TridentZ this week. I had preordered the 2700x but cancelled at the last moment as I was wanting to see more in depth analysis on the changes to memory, more specifically on the latency side of things. I am very satisfied with my CH7 and my f4-4133c19. Currently running it @ 3466mhzC14 with super tight subtimings, Pics included below. Im wondering since i rarely see much on the subject from reviews, How has the 2700x affected memory over the 1700x using a CH7? Im using a week 8 1700x with the segfault bug which I have just started the RMA process for another CPU. What types of latency gains can I expect compared to my current performance? (taking into account that the 1700x is one of the bugged ones from a year ago and I can tell it has some weakness to it.)
> 
> Im weighing whether I should just sell the new 1700x I get from my RMA and buy the 2700x or just hold out until next year...
> 
> 
> 
> First Pic is Stock, Next one is nearly final timings in safe mode, last one is final timings @3466 in OS. This is pretty much what I got to work as fast as possible @ 1000% using RamTest. I can push higher frequencies but that will take more work to be beneficial over what Im currently showing which I could probably tighten a couple more things with this setup as well but Im reaching the end of being able to tighten this frequency.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 174449
> View attachment 174457
> View attachment 174465
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A few random pics of CH7 upgrade
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 174481
> View attachment 174489
> View attachment 174497
> View attachment 174505
> View attachment 174513
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Finding out my CPU was segfault bugged a couple of nights ago which explains a few things about crashing at high load/stress tests above 4.0 ghz
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 174521




You had some pretty good memory clocks on that 1700x. Your scores are almost identical to my 2700X scores @3400Mhz except mine is 1ns fater on the RAM, and 0.7ns faster on L3 Cache. I'm not going to tell you if you should buy it or not as that is up to you. I do however much enjoy seeing my 2700X boost up to 4350Mhz while i'm playing wow. With my CH VII i get 4300Mhz on 4 threads while gaming (World of warcraft). While playing most other games i get 4200-4250 Mhz. While playing BF1 i get around 4100Mhz boost. This is all with precision boost overdrive settings within AMD's limits. So those clocks aren't with "unsafe" voltages, or currents outside of AMD's limits.


----------



## nappydrew

So...
I'm running 2700X on Asus Prime X370 Pro board. 
Should I just stick with my current board, or will some CH7 voodoo help my memory speeds at all? (Currently running 3200 CL14 16gb Flare X)
Would higher binned B-die (like the 4266 CL19 Trident Z kit) help me push higher? Or should I maybe just try slapping that RAM in my X370?
Any thoughts appreciated.


----------



## lordzed83

Well thats rock solid


----------



## gupsterg

@Tactix

At power on IMC "communicates" with RAM, based on their "little chat" they set parameters which would/should be optimal for "setup" of RAM system. These parameters are ones which we have no control on, the ones which we have control on in UEFI will affect their "little chat" and could lead to issues.

If settings and or hardware can not take the settings being targeted memory training process will fail. Sometimes the settings are not so wildly out that system will post, but stability under load in OS will be compromised.

I do not know the in and outs of memory training. This is how I understand it and would explain it.

@CJMitsuki

You maybe happily surprised by your segfault RMA CPU. Many of the shares I have read stated a good experience with later batch silicon. Mine also echos this, I have been doing 4.0GHz with >3200MHz for ~4mths now. I do a lot of hours of stability testing, etc. Latest C6H UEFI foray with 4.0GHz & 3400MHz link.

@lordzed83

Looking damn sweet :thumb: .


----------



## FlanK3r

lordzed83 said:


> Well after work running training will be joining Zen+ squad and get on with testing


Im looking forward, what this chip can to do as maximum MHz in Cinebench (4300-4350MHz?). Can you test it? Thank you man 

4250 Mhz rock stable seems very nice


----------



## lordzed83

@FlanK3r deffo can pas 4300 on cb15 but its not stable crashed on 3rd IBT Very High pass. Bet if I drop 1.45 it could pass 4350 but not muich gain on clockspeed in CB 15. Going from 4250 to 4300 gave... 11 points... so You can expect 10points/50mhz.
Never been interested in BENCHABLE setting its useless more of Maximum 24/7 i will use.
Had a play with PE3 but getting high memory clock and getting it stable for rendering can be impossible


----------



## Esenel

lordzed83 said:


> Well thats rock solid


Very nice, congrats on the good chip ;-)


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> @FlanK3r deffo can pas 4300 on cb15 but its not stable crashed on 3rd IBT Very High pass. Bet if I drop 1.45 it could pass 4350 but not muich gain on clockspeed in CB 15. Going from 4250 to 4300 gave... 11 points... so You can expect 10points/50mhz.
> Never been interested in BENCHABLE setting its useless more of Maximum 24/7 i will use.
> Had a play with PE3 but getting high memory clock and getting it stable for rendering can be impossible


That's exactly what happening on these chips. Almost no gain above a certain voltage, i think mostly of temperature limits!
My opinion is to find the highest sweetest performance for 1.3-1.4volts. Above 1.4v almost no gain only temps are rising to the sky!

Im currently @4.2Ghz with 1.387v / Will try today playing with BCLK to get the best performance with 1.4v-1.42v max!
Then im going to start playing with memory!


----------



## usoldier

lordzed83 said:


> Well thats rock solid


Is your PLL voltage Auto ou manual set ?


----------



## HolyFist

CJMitsuki said:


> First Pic is Stock, Next one is nearly final timings in safe mode, last one is final timings @3466 in OS. This is pretty much what I got to work as fast as possible @ 1000% using RamTest. I can push higher frequencies but that will take more work to be beneficial over what Im currently showing which I could probably tighten a couple more things with this setup as well but Im reaching the end of being able to tighten this frequency.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 174449
> View attachment 174457
> View attachment 174465
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A few random pics of CH7 upgrade
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 174481
> View attachment 174489
> View attachment 174497
> View attachment 174505
> View attachment 174513
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Finding out my CPU was segfault bugged a couple of nights ago which explains a few things about crashing at high load/stress tests above 4.0 ghz
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 174521


I got same RAM, how are u getting such low tRFC? I can't even do 400 at that speed on the 2700X, is there a setting that has impact on this?

Can you post pics of your BIOS settings please?


----------



## FlanK3r

lordzed83 said:


> @FlanK3r deffo can pas 4300 on cb15 but its not stable crashed on 3rd IBT Very High pass. Bet if I drop 1.45 it could pass 4350 but not muich gain on clockspeed in CB 15. Going from 4250 to 4300 gave... 11 points... so You can expect 10points/50mhz.
> Never been interested in BENCHABLE setting its useless more of Maximum 24/7 i will use.
> Had a play with PE3 but getting high memory clock and getting it stable for rendering can be impossible


Thank you, it is simillar at my side. 4340 is maximum for my better chip.


----------



## Jaguell

Hello guys, some problems with my stability.

I'm currently @ 4.2
ram @ 3600 (corsair rgb 3600 2*8 cas 18)
Crosshair VII of course

OCCT cpu only = Ok
Memtest = 0 errors
OCCT linpack or IBT = OCCT always crash between 10-11min, and IBT can't achieve the first pass.

That run me crazy ! i have tried everything. setting auto, manual, gearmode on/off. I'm out of ideas.

Any ideas or settings that can help me?

(Sorry for my english).


----------



## Jaguell

Oops double post.


----------



## zulex

elmor,

I want to know whether PCIEX1_1 and PCIEX1_2 slots are integrated with CPU or chipset. If I attach a PCIex card on either of these slots, will it reduce the speed of my VGA card sticked to the first PCIx 3.0 x 16 slot to 8x?


----------



## lordzed83

usoldier said:


> Is your PLL voltage Auto ou manual set ?


I got EVERYTHING i can on manual even **** that does not need manual.

thats why I got crosshair boards. More stuff to change from auto to manual. Whats the point of owning board with so many options and running it on auto ??
@majestynl almost  like I said Ill stick to my 1.425 as daily cvore temps i dont care not passing 71 now and thats on IBT nothing pumps more temps thana that. After 5 hours of cruncher it was maxing at 66c


----------



## kazablanka

Does anyone knows ,why i cant run without crash performance bias on this board? With prime x370 pro i could run everything with performance bias set to cb11.5 ,but with this board i cant. 
Cpu: r7 1700 @4GHz


----------



## kazablanka

Jaguell said:


> Hello guys, some problems with my stability.
> 
> I'm currently @ 4.2
> ram @ 3600 (corsair rgb 3600 2*8 cas 18)
> Crosshair VII of course
> 
> OCCT cpu only = Ok
> Memtest = 0 errors
> OCCT linpack or IBT = OCCT always crash between 10-11min, and IBT can't achieve the first pass.
> 
> That run me crazy ! i have tried everything. setting auto, manual, gearmode on/off. I'm out of ideas.
> 
> Any ideas or settings that can help me?
> 
> (Sorry for my english).


I think that you have to find the right vsoc


----------



## lordzed83

Jaguell said:


> Hello guys, some problems with my stability.
> 
> I'm currently @ 4.2
> ram @ 3600 (corsair rgb 3600 2*8 cas 18)
> Crosshair VII of course
> 
> OCCT cpu only = Ok
> Memtest = 0 errors
> OCCT linpack or IBT = OCCT always crash between 10-11min, and IBT can't achieve the first pass.
> 
> That run me crazy ! i have tried everything. setting auto, manual, gearmode on/off. I'm out of ideas.
> 
> Any ideas or settings that can help me?
> 
> (Sorry for my english).


Well 3600 on memory is problem for starters and whats SV12 Vcore under load ??


----------



## majestynl

Jaguell said:


> Hello guys, some problems with my stability.
> 
> I'm currently @ 4.2
> ram @ 3600 (corsair rgb 3600 2*8 cas 18)
> Crosshair VII of course
> 
> OCCT cpu only = Ok
> Memtest = 0 errors
> OCCT linpack or IBT = OCCT always crash between 10-11min, and IBT can't achieve the first pass.
> 
> That run me crazy ! i have tried everything. setting auto, manual, gearmode on/off. I'm out of ideas.
> 
> Any ideas or settings that can help me?
> 
> (Sorry for my english).


Can you share more info pls. Maybe some screenies with Hwinfo etc.
We dont know what voltage you are running.

And by the way 3600 is hard for now. Just get it stable around 3200 and work yourself up.!


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> @majestynl almost  like I said Ill stick to my 1.425 as daily cvore temps i dont care not passing 71 now and thats on IBT nothing pumps more temps thana that. After 5 hours of cruncher it was maxing at 66c


Yeap...got ya! 1.425 looks fine like you suggest! Good look with your new toys!


----------



## kazablanka

This board is a beast for memory overclock.


----------



## Jaguell

kazablanka said:


> I think that you have to find the right vsoc


I just LOVE you. I'm so dumb... 
I tested so much stuff that I forgot the basics. I am now 100% stable in 3600 cas 16 !!!

Now i will try to push the cpu. I would put screens when evrithing will be good.

Thank you all for your quick answers guys.


----------



## Nighthog

kazablanka said:


> This board is a beast for memory overclock.


I think people are interested to know what kind of memory kits can achieve such results. 
Do share I guess?


----------



## hurricane28

Jaguell said:


> I just LOVE you. I'm so dumb...
> I tested so much stuff that I forgot the basics. I am now 100% stable in 3600 cas 16 !!!
> 
> Now i will try to push the cpu. I would put screens when evrithing will be good.
> 
> Thank you all for your quick answers guys.


How you know your RAM is 100% stable? 
You can only say that if you run memtest86 overnight without any errors...


----------



## DrumAndBass

Read the whole thread and found no answers for a problem which three (at least) users have experienced with the board.

In post #241 http://www.overclock.net/forum/27244177-post241.html @QuadJunkyx @Ethan_Ryu have d3 Q-code and in post #243 http://www.overclock.net/forum/27244553-post243.html @haydn-j says he has same problem.

Was there a solution to such behavior of the board that i missed? I'm deciding between hero 7 and gigabytes 7 version right now so every bit of information is critical as it's concerns stability of the system. I also didn't like the info on sudden shutdowns, even from users with glass cases, which cant cause short circuit.

I already have 2700x and 32gb dual rank b-die ready, deciding on the board now. Sadly Gigabyte's thread is very quiet on the matter.


----------



## Mr Splash

My ASUS board just got here, and man what a nice board it even looks tight. It hurt spending that much but the ram almost cost as much so figured hell lets go for it. Now to school myself and read, read, read. Glad I sent that ASRock back now. Thanks for making me think about it AlphaC I owe ya.


----------



## MacG32

DrumAndBass said:


> Read the whole thread and found no answers for a problem which three (at least) users have experienced with the board.
> 
> In post #241 http://www.overclock.net/forum/27244177-post241.html @QuadJunkyx @Ethan_Ryu have d3 Q-code and in post #243 http://www.overclock.net/forum/27244553-post243.html @haydn-j says he has same problem.
> 
> Was there a solution to such behavior of the board that i missed? I'm deciding between hero 7 and gigabytes 7 version right now so every bit of information is critical as it's concerns stability of the system. I also didn't like the info on sudden shutdowns, even from users with glass cases, which cant cause short circuit.
> 
> I already have 2700x and 32gb dual rank b-die ready, deciding on the board now. Sadly Gigabyte's thread is very quiet on the matter.



Q-Code D3 Some of the Architectural Protocols are not available. This has nothing to do with stability and happens when running the program Ryzen Master. I'm certain there was an update to the program recently. Gigabyte's component quality can not even compare to this board. If you look in the VI board's thread, those people helped ASUS slightly redesign this board to run cooler and be more proficient. There are active ASUS Reps in this thread. ASUS posts BIOS updates here first. So, the quality, people, and support are all here. You can't get any better than that.


----------



## CJMitsuki

kazablanka said:


> This board is a beast for memory overclock.


I think I will try higher frequencies tonight but I want to skip 3600mhz entirely. It seems there is some type of memory hole there that no matter what settings I choose I cannot post so hopefully I can hit 3800mhz and hop over the hole and be stable around C17-18. 4000mhz stable would also be amazing if there is headroom to adjust sub-timings. That’s my rule, if there is no room for adjustment to subs then I don’t bother. A step lower with tight timings will beat it everytime.


----------



## CJMitsuki

HolyFist said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> First Pic is Stock, Next one is nearly final timings in safe mode, last one is final timings @3466 in OS. This is pretty much what I got to work as fast as possible @ 1000% using RamTest. I can push higher frequencies but that will take more work to be beneficial over what Im currently showing which I could probably tighten a couple more things with this setup as well but Im reaching the end of being able to tighten this frequency.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 174449
> View attachment 174457
> View attachment 174465
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A few random pics of CH7 upgrade
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 174481
> View attachment 174489
> View attachment 174497
> View attachment 174505
> View attachment 174513
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Finding out my CPU was segfault bugged a couple of nights ago which explains a few things about crashing at high load/stress tests above 4.0 ghz
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 174521
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I got same RAM, how are u getting such low tRFC? I can't even do 400 at that speed on the 2700X, is there a setting that has impact on this?
> 
> Can you post pics of your BIOS settings please? /forum/images/smilies/redface.gif
Click to expand...

I do not change much in the bios besides certain voltages and memory interleaving settings. Once I get home from work I will lay out how I go through timings and some rules that I picked up that do seem to hold true most of the time, at least for BDie anyways. I think arriving at lower timings has a lot to do with the tightening process and tweaking certain voltages and settings that increase stability. I will say that rfc is one of the things I adjust right after the primaries since it seems to be a key player in performance from what I have noticed from this set of BDie and the former 3200mhz set I have in my Asus Prime board which had nearly the same timings as you see from my above post. I’m hoping to hit mid 50ns latencies once I get my 2700x and bios revisions progress further. I want every bit of the advertised 4133 kit and I will get it no matter what, even if this ram isn’t on QVL (who pays attn to QVL anyways?) 😆


----------



## Ethan_Ryu

@*DrumAndBass* 
As @*MacG32* said the code does not affect stability or anything (i did uninstall ryzen master tho because i couldn't stand it ), as the board goes i'm really happy i went from Rog to Rog.
Some people had memory issues (but those are likely to be processor related as swapping fixed it for some), there are still some improvement that could be made bios wise , and i do get cold boot bug but it s not really an issue (like 10 sec on first boot). Overall i would recommend it.


----------



## Ethan_Ryu

The Stilt said:


> I made a small app to make it easier to standardize the voltage test method among the users.
> 
> There are several different conditions, of which some are enforced and some are not.
> 
> - Admin rights
> - R7 2700X only *
> - SMT needs to be enabled *
> - Performance Enhancer = Default
> - Stock configuration only (fixed / offset voltage and load-line adjustments disallowed) *
> - No other monitoring app running simultaneously (e.g. AiTweaker, CPU-Z, HWInfo, AIDA, etc)
> - System needs to be at IDLE
> - Windows "Balanced" Power Plan (NOT "Ryzen Balanced")
> 
> * Enforced
> 
> https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ag6oE4SOsCmDhS85TinQjsyIbOlG
> 
> I suggest that you restart your system and close all unnecessary applications after the system has restarted.
> You should wait at least two minutes until you launch the app.
> 
> - Extract the archive
> - Right click CPO_Test.exe and select "Run as Admin"
> - Do not close the windows or perform any other actions while it executes (takes ~80 seconds in total).
> - Once completed take a screenshot of the window which remains open.
> 
> Keep in mind that whatever the reported delta between the best and the worst core is, at stock there is a frequency delta as well.
> The worst core will always run at lower speeds than the best one. Since in PE3 / PE4 mode there is no frequency delta between the cores, the voltage on the worst core will raise significantly compared to stock.
> The voltage on the best core will raise as well, but usually not as much as the voltage on the worst core does.


 @lordzed83 if you find time can you check that out? i really would like to see how binned performs.


----------



## kazablanka

Nighthog said:


> I think people are interested to know what kind of memory kits can achieve such results.
> Do share I guess?


It's Gskill TridentZ F4 4000C18D 16GB. Its not a stable overclock.


----------



## kazablanka

CJMitsuki said:


> I think I will try higher frequencies tonight but I want to skip 3600mhz entirely. It seems there is some type of memory hole there that no matter what settings I choose I cannot post so hopefully I can hit 3800mhz and hop over the hole and be stable around C17-18. 4000mhz stable would also be amazing if there is headroom to adjust sub-timings. That’s my rule, if there is no room for adjustment to subs then I don’t bother. A step lower with tight timings will beat it everytime.


I dont think that we with first gen ryzen can go above 3600 stable but you can try ,to achive 3800 with fast timings it needed 1.5v dram and 1.2vsoc ,voltages that is not for 24/7 use.
I bougth the mobo yesterday so i have alot to lern on how i can tweak it ,there are so many settings we can play with


----------



## larrydavid

Jaguell said:


> I just LOVE you. I'm so dumb...
> I tested so much stuff that I forgot the basics. I am now 100% stable in 3600 cas 16 !!!
> 
> Now i will try to push the cpu. I would put screens when evrithing will be good.
> 
> Thank you all for your quick answers guys.


What's your SoC voltage?


----------



## crakej

kazablanka said:


> I dont think that we with first gen ryzen can go above 3600 stable but you can try ,to achive 3800 with fast timings it needed 1.5v dram and 1.2vsoc ,voltages that is not for 24/7 use.
> I bougth the mobo yesterday so i have alot to lern on how i can tweak it ,there are so many settings we can play with


You never know! My machine booted at 3800 and I got to my desktop - before it rebooted, but I did have to turn on geardown mode to boot >3200.

Still lots more playing around to do. My CPU aint gonna do 4.2 without some LLC - will experiment to see what I can do there, but it also takes more voltage on this board than my previous one.


----------



## crakej

does anyone know what the bios setting *SoC Overclock VID* is and how you might use it? why might you use it?

also, what is *mode 0* bios setting?


----------



## nappydrew

*What memory kit is that?*



kazablanka said:


> This board is a beast for memory overclock.


What specific RAM kit are you using to obtain that OC? I'm sure it's a well binned B-die kit, and likely Trident Z, but which one exactly?


----------



## sbakic

I got question related to CPU. So currently I am testing everything on default. On stock setting room temp is ~27C but CPU at idle constantly is between 27 and 35 even if its at 0% and Vcore is const 0.8V. At load for AIDA64 and stock settings temps are 62-65C at Vcore of 1.275V-1.285V with multiplier 39.8x, 40.5x. Do you guys experience the same?

I am asking this because I have krakenx62 and I made little hole there by screw. It's not a big hole but not micro hole too, that's why am i concerned. Maybe this hole cant make CPU at idle to stay at 27C as it was with 1700x where it stayed to min temp not fluctuating. And is it 62-65C too high for 1.275V at full load for 40.0x multiplier for all cores, again that hole? Because I had 1700x at 39.5x Vcore at 1.35V and it was at 80C

Update:
For prime95 8K test temp is at 72C 39.5x multiplier Vcore 1.262-1.269. What are your temps? This is krakenx62

I tested kill ryzen script with ubuntu 18.04 for ~44h no shutdowns, but when i tested AIDA64 on win10 over the night I think it turn off after ~5h not sure why. What I was seeing at the start it would go up and down with temp like 70-75 with aida64 something was wrong there not sure what. Any issues with that, anyone?


----------



## lordzed83

Ethan_Ryu said:


> @lordzed83 if you find time can you check that out? i really would like to see how binned performs.


Will load system default and see what that gives 


Anyhow Kryonout melted down max temp after ibt went down from 71 to 68 and its warmer day today !!!


----------



## lordzed83

*core*

best worst test thing


----------



## HolyFist

CJMitsuki said:


> I do not change much in the bios besides certain voltages and memory interleaving settings. Once I get home from work I will lay out how I go through timings and some rules that I picked up that do seem to hold true most of the time, at least for BDie anyways. I think arriving at lower timings has a lot to do with the tightening process and tweaking certain voltages and settings that increase stability. I will say that rfc is one of the things I adjust right after the primaries since it seems to be a key player in performance from what I have noticed from this set of BDie and the former 3200mhz set I have in my Asus Prime board which had nearly the same timings as you see from my above post. I’m hoping to hit mid 50ns latencies once I get my 2700x and bios revisions progress further. I want every bit of the advertised 4133 kit and I will get it no matter what, even if this ram isn’t on QVL (who pays attn to QVL anyways?) 😆


Thanks, i don't know what voltages those could be outside RAM and VSOC, even then i had trouble running some overclocks and the cause was actually the voltage being higher rather than lower than it should, i use vsoc of 1.05 atm at 3333MHz with CL4 and using this RAM 1.35V.


----------



## lordzed83

@elmor
Rog truck is here


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> does anyone know what the bios setting *SoC Overclock VID* is and how you might use it? why might you use it?


SOC overclock VID is a hexadecimal value representing the SOC voltage in microvolts, like PState VID found in AMD CBS menus.

Personally I'd avoid using SOC overclock VID and just adjust SOC as needed on Extreme Tweaker page.



sbakic said:


> I got question related to CPU. So currently I am testing everything on default. On stock setting room temp is ~27C but CPU at idle constantly is between 27 and 35 even if its at 0% and Vcore is const 0.8V. At load for AIDA64 and stock settings temps are 62-65C at Vcore of 1.275V-1.285V with multiplier 39.8x, 40.5x. Do you guys experience the same?
> 
> I am asking this because I have krakenx62 and I made little hole there by screw. It's not a big hole but not micro hole too, that's why am i concerned. Maybe this hole cant make CPU at idle to stay at 27C as it was with 1700x where it stayed to min temp not fluctuating. And is it 62-65C too high for 1.275V at full load for 40.0x multiplier for all cores, again that hole? Because I had 1700x at 39.5x Vcore at 1.35V and it was at 80C
> 
> Update:
> For prime95 8K test temp is at 72C 39.5x multiplier Vcore 1.262-1.269. What are your temps? This is krakenx62
> 
> I tested kill ryzen script with ubuntu 18.04 for ~44h no shutdowns, but when i tested AIDA64 on win10 over the night I think it turn off after ~5h not sure why. What I was seeing at the start it would go up and down with temp like 70-75 with aida64 something was wrong there not sure what. Any issues with that, anyone?


So far not had a Ryzen CPU which does not "bounce" temperature at idle or load. Even the TR1950X I have, at stock, 2x 360mm slim rads as cooling, has temp bounce.

Ryzen has ~20 on die temperature sensors, some rotating occurs and highest value is shown. So it is inevitable IMO that we'll see bounce.


----------



## majestynl

sbakic said:


> I got question related to CPU. So currently I am testing everything on default. On stock setting room temp is ~27C but CPU at idle constantly is between 27 and 35 even if its at 0% and Vcore is const 0.8V. At load for AIDA64 and stock settings temps are 62-65C at Vcore of 1.275V-1.285V with multiplier 39.8x, 40.5x. Do you guys experience the same?
> 
> I am asking this because I have krakenx62 and I made little hole there by screw. It's not a big hole but not micro hole too, that's why am i concerned. Maybe this hole cant make CPU at idle to stay at 27C as it was with 1700x where it stayed to min temp not fluctuating. And is it 62-65C too high for 1.275V at full load for 40.0x multiplier for all cores, again that hole? Because I had 1700x at 39.5x Vcore at 1.35V and it was at 80C
> 
> Update:
> For prime95 8K test temp is at 72C 39.5x multiplier Vcore 1.262-1.269. What are your temps? This is krakenx62
> 
> I tested kill ryzen script with ubuntu 18.04 for ~44h no shutdowns, but when i tested AIDA64 on win10 over the night I think it turn off after ~5h not sure why. What I was seeing at the start it would go up and down with temp like 70-75 with aida64 something was wrong there not sure what. Any issues with that, anyone?


Fluctuating temps are normal behavior on ryzen system with stock settings. On my 1800x I saw +/-10c fluctuations. Playing with some sensor like SensMi and the offsets you can change that behavior.

Those temp differences with Aida could be normal. When you are stress testing, the used SW is applying differend loads and actions.

Don't know why it stopped but maybe it was of instability or maybe a power management kicked in?


----------



## crakej

Thanks Gupsterg - I figured it might be that..... no ideas about mode 0?

I'm trying to work on my Ram today. I'm trying to work out why I need to engage geardown for =>3200MTs. I'm happy geardown has made it so easy to OC my memory, currently at 3533CL14, but of course I'd like to get the max out of it. Perhaps my IMC needs geardown? Or could it be something to do with my particular b-die and how it's been binned? I did used to run it at 3200 extreme 14,13,13,13,26 on old board before AGESA 1000a came along on my Prime x370 Pro.

I'll do a few more tests with geardown disabled to see if I can get it working, but I have a feeling I just need to accept it's only going to go higher with it enabled.

I've also had a problem with Windows, most often when testing settings - I reboot, change settings, save and reboot. Just before Windows finishes booting it hangs and I have to reboot and it works. I forgot to have a look at qcode but will update later if this problem persists


----------



## QuadJunkyx

Has anyone else had issues with the chip set pcie slots/lanes? 
Randomly(after a restart, cold boot, complete reboot) I will lose all connectivity to anything that is using the chipset pcie(1x slots) which also included the onboard network cards both wired and wireless? Overclocked or defaults it just happens.
The only way I can get them working is power down, press retry rinse repeat until qcode 3E. 

I have this feeling I need to RMA this board....


----------



## gupsterg

@crakej

NP  .

No idea why you need GDM for >3200MHz, couldn't say if it's IMC/RAM "thing". Ryzen was my first experience of DDR4, still learning/"swotting up".

Any chance of screenie of this "Mode 0" option? Sorry still not built my 2700X+C7H, still tinkering with 1800X+C6H, but I got further with the build. I have managed to install CPU  .



Spoiler


----------



## crakej

It's below the SoC OC VID...


----------



## sbakic

majestynl said:


> Fluctuating temps are normal behavior on ryzen system with stock settings. On my 1800x I saw +/-10c fluctuations. Playing with some sensor like SensMi and the offsets you can change that behavior.
> 
> Those temp differences with Aida could be normal. When you are stress testing, the used SW is applying differend loads and actions.
> 
> Don't know why it stopped but maybe it was of instability or maybe a power management kicked in?


Ok guys so I got one more shutdown during OCCT large, so it is something related to random shutdowns that people have. I dont have any nzxt or crossair software but I installed aura set it and unsintalled. What to do?

UPDATE: So i change only motherboard to C7H and cpu to 2700x, so problem is with C7H. Whether its bios or software.. with linux ubutnu 18.10 it lasted 44h before I turned off. So bios is not a problem. I think it's new windows10 update or some software installed on it. What you guys think?


----------



## sandiegoskyline

Anyone with a BCLK overclock care to share their settings? Particularly voltages, PE level, etc?

I’m having some trouble at 102 bclk—the chip stays locked at a 37.5X multiplier and won’t clock up...101 bclk behaves as expected.


----------



## QuadJunkyx

Might have to redo my paste again


----------



## kazablanka

crakej said:


> You never know! My machine booted at 3800 and I got to my desktop - before it rebooted, but I did have to turn on geardown mode to boot >3200.
> 
> Still lots more playing around to do. My CPU aint gonna do 4.2 without some LLC - will experiment to see what I can do there, but it also takes more voltage on this board than my previous one.


I know i post an aida memory benchmark from me in the previous page @3800cl16 but i dont know if it's possible to make ram full stable at this speeds.

I need more vcore too with this board.

I am pretty stable @3600cl15 ,1.42v dram - 1.31v soc / cpu stock


----------



## CJMitsuki

sandiegoskyline said:


> Anyone with a BCLK overclock care to share their settings? Particularly voltages, PE level, etc?
> 
> I’m having some trouble at 102 bclk—the chip stays locked at a 37.5X multiplier and won’t clock up...101 bclk behaves as expected.


Ive went to 102 with no problems but I bumped PLL voltage a small amount for stability. 102 was the only way I could take my RAM to 3600 as I could hit 3533 C14 easily but 3600 would not boot even with c19 but could boot at 3533 with bclk OC. Very odd behaving RAM at that speed. Hopefully that will change when I swap my 1700x out.


----------



## dreckschmeck

Hello to the OCN community! First I wanted to say thanks for this great thread! been reading it from the beginning and could extract all the good stuff for optimizing performance on this great motherboard!

and here comes the BUT!

I'm really dying here with a ryzen 2700x and some G.Skill F4-4113CL19 RAM. No matter what I do, no matter the timings, RAM speed, overclock, no overclock, all auto bios settings, i'm getting 145 ns RAM latency and 22ns L3 Cache latency.

After initial testing(CB, prime gaming) I dind't realize it first. When I boot up Windows AIDA shows very good RAM latency 60-65 ns, depends on clock and timings ofc. The CB scores are great too. After loading up some stress test/hours of gaming, the latency degrades to 145 ns RAM and 22ns L3 Cache latency.

currenty I'm at @stock and after running 5 min of prime FTT the issue occurs. After that I loose 100 CB points due to latency and gaming gets "micro-stutters".

couldmt find ANY information on the damn internet, never had such issues with any rig of mine( doing this since AMD Barton times...)

My last try will be some abysmal 2133 ram settings with high CL. What could this be? RAM faulty? CPU? Motherboard? 
CPU/Board itself is really stable even at PE3/4 with 360 AIO RAD

any hint would be great! ordered some F4-3600CL15 ram to verify if thats the issue...

PS: one thing seems curious my current this 2x8 RAM kit mentioned above.. When I use ryzen dram checker the two DIMMs seems to have different base timings (for instance tCL CAS of 8.750 and 9.176)










thanks in advance!
regards


----------



## The Stilt

Many of you still seem to use Linpack to evaluate the stability.

Linpack is a pretty poor stability test, unless you're able use extremely large problems sizes.
The CPU basically sits idle around 20% of the total time spent for the computation of each loop (memory alloc & dealloc).

If you want to test the true stability of the CPU, use Prime95 28.10 for Ryzen: http://www.mersenne.org/ftp_root/gimps/p95v2810.win64.zip with custom 128/128 in-place settings.
Newer P95 versions are less stressful to the CPU, so use the 28.10 instead.

Linpack no doubt "tests" (stresses) the memory better (more) than Prime95 does, however to determine the memory stability you should be using a dedicated utility from the get-go (Ram Test or HCI).

Personally, I wouldn't use a system which is just Linpack stable for anything productive.


----------



## hurricane28

Thnx for the heads up Stilt, will do proper test from now on. 

I thought Asus Realbench is a good program to test, what do you think?


----------



## sbakic

hurricane28 said:


> Thnx for the heads up Stilt, will do proper test from now on.
> 
> I thought Asus Realbench is a good program to test, what do you think?


There is no best test you need to go through all stress tests as I did or don't overclock. You need to pass realbench 8h, aida 8h, occt large 8h, occt small 8h, occt linpack 8h, intel burn test 10x on max(32GB -> means 30GB ram for me), prime95 small 8h, prime95 in-place 8h, prime95 blend custom(90% ram) 24h, hci memtest 1000%, memtest86 4x, mprime(linux) 24h, gsat 1h. Don't overclock if you dont want too pass all of these.

As Stilt says occt linpack is not good for finding stability or error it's rather to see whether your cpu has enogh Voltage to work. But better and faster test for voltage is occt small.

I did this for 1700x and C6H WIFI, but with C7H and 2700x I have some random shudowns. It looks like it's because of windows or some software installed on it, not related to BIOS. But I need to test it. I think it's software because I changed only C7H and 2700x everything other is the same and I went ~44h with ryzen kill script on ubuntu 18.04 no shut downs. I went to windows 10 aida64 ~5h and shutdown on stock settings, same with occt after 15 mins. I need tu turn off PSU and turn on to be able to turn on motherboard again.


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> It's below the SoC OC VID...


No idea what Mode0 below SoC Overclock VID is . Hopefully The Stilt or Elmor can let us know  .


----------



## The Stilt

gupsterg said:


> No idea what Mode0 below SoC Overclock VID is . Hopefully The Stilt or Elmor can let us know  .


Mode0 was somehow Linux related, but I have no additional info on that.

SoC Overclock VID allows you to override the default (static) VID the SoC domain requests from the VRM controller.

OC VID in HEX = ((1.55 - "the desired voltage") * 160).


----------



## sbakic

The Stilt said:


> Mode0 was somehow Linux related, but I have no additional info on that.
> 
> SoC Overclock VID allows you to override the default (static) VID the SoC domain requests from the VRM controller.
> 
> OC VID in HEX = ((1.55 - "the desired voltage") * 160).


Dear Stilt, what do you think is the problem with my case.

C7H with 0509 UEFI, ubuntu 18.04-> run ryzen kill script (it's cpu at 100% load but with temps about 50C so it's not real 100% load) for ~44h
C7H with 0509 UEFI, win10 1803 build(new one) -> random shutdown while stress test, cpu temps are fine, So it shutdown, can't turn on pc need to turn off/turn on PSU and then I can turn on PC. I can't stress test more than 5h, it worked like even 8h after 2nd shutdown, but after than I run occt small and it did it again after 15 mins. so it's random maybe even related to some of stress test software which i don't think is the case.

So is it windows problem or bios or motherboard?

UPDATE: I reinstalled windows10 and there is an asus automatic updater that pops up and i don't want to install it. It's like red box. Anyone got this too?


----------



## The Stilt

sbakic said:


> Dear Stilt, what do you think is the problem with my case.
> 
> C7H with 0509 UEFI, ubuntu 18.04-> run ryzen kill script (it's cpu at 100% load but with temps about 50C so it's not real 100% load) for ~44h
> C7H with 0509 UEFI, win10 1803 build(new one) -> random shutdown while stress test, cpu temps are fine, So it shutdown, can't turn on pc need to turn off/turn on PSU and then I can turn on PC. I can't stress test more than 5h, it worked like even 8h after 2nd shutdown, but after than I run occt small and it did it again after 15 mins. so it's random maybe even related to some of stress test software which i don't think is the case.
> 
> So is it windows problem or bios or motherboard?
> 
> UPDATE: I reinstalled windows10 and there is an asus automatic updater that pops up and i don't want to install it. It's like red box. Anyone got this too?


Set the memory frequency to 2400MHz and test with Prime95 under Linux.
If it doesn't fail then its Win 10 related issue, which frankly wouldn't surprise me the slightest.


----------



## lordzed83

sbakic said:


> The Stilt said:
> 
> 
> 
> Mode0 was somehow Linux related, but I have no additional info on that.
> 
> SoC Overclock VID allows you to override the default (static) VID the SoC domain requests from the VRM controller.
> 
> OC VID in HEX = ((1.55 - "the desired voltage") * 160).
> 
> 
> 
> Dear Stilt, what do you think is the problem with my case.
> 
> C7H with 0509 UEFI, ubuntu 18.04-> run ryzen kill script (it's cpu at 100% load but with temps about 50C so it's not real 100% load) for ~44h
> C7H with 0509 UEFI, win10 1803 build(new one) -> random shutdown while stress test, cpu temps are fine, So it shutdown, can't turn on pc need to turn off/turn on PSU and then I can turn on PC. I can't stress test more than 5h, it worked like even 8h after 2nd shutdown, but after than I run occt small and it did it again after 15 mins. so it's random maybe even related to some of stress test software which i don't think is the case.
> 
> So is it windows problem or bios or motherboard?
> 
> UPDATE: I reinstalled windows10 and there is an asus automatic updater that pops up and i don't want to install it. It's like red box. Anyone got this too?
Click to expand...

Everyone with c7h gotit?? Its new thing on c7h bet u not even looked in option to turn it off. Hint there is one.


----------



## sbakic

The Stilt said:


> Set the memory frequency to 2400MHz and test with Prime95 under Linux.
> If it doesn't fail then its Win 10 related issue, which frankly wouldn't surprise me the slightest.


It was with 2133, it is safer than 2400, everything stock only changed in bios: virtualization enabled ,normal boot, with csm disabled and secure boot win10. So it's win10 ?

Strange thing is that i tested with realbench 2h, prime small 1h, prime in-place 1h, and nothing happend till i did occt small. So I am testing now Intel burn test 5x, but i didn't installed any drivers from C7H site this time.

UPDATE: with stock it passed 5x intel burn test it's was up for about 5h, now i am testing 8h prime95 blend custom with 90% ram. It was probably some software installed issue, but still it could be Aida64 and occt


----------



## Ethan_Ryu

*@The Stilt *considering lordzed83 binned cpu is doing best core average 1.43V and worst 1.44V with a delta of 4.5mV, does the CPO test have any value? Is delta the key?


----------



## The Stilt

Ethan_Ryu said:


> *@The Stilt *considering lordzed83 binned cpu is doing best core average 1.43V and worst 1.44V with a delta of 4.5mV, does the CPO test have any value? Is delta the key?


Hard to say.
The best CPUs I have have a pretty hefty delta between the cores.

Also, 4.2GHz @ 1.425V is IMO a hardly binned CPU at all.
I'd be surprised if all CPUs cannot do that, given the cooling is sufficient to run at such an extreme voltage.


----------



## kazablanka

I have a problem with this board ,any previous overclock i could achive stable with prime x370 pro seems imposible with this board ! 
Is there any possibility of problematic board? Even the tpu fails...


----------



## MacG32

@The Stilt I tried to run it in the Safe Mode, but it didn't recognize the motherboard. Anyway, I hope it helps or something good.


----------



## majestynl

sandiegoskyline said:


> Anyone with a BCLK overclock care to share their settings? Particularly voltages, PE level, etc?
> 
> I’m having some trouble at 102 bclk—the chip stays locked at a 37.5X multiplier and won’t clock up...101 bclk behaves as expected.


I couldn't also got 102 working. Booting windows took me 10min. with it. I know from ryzen 1 me and many others had a certain hole. So there could be a big change you can run higher bclk. Try a higher value but with a lower multiplier. Don't forget to check your ram speed while increasing bclk!!!



The Stilt said:


> Hard to say.
> The best CPUs I have have a pretty hefty delta between the cores.
> 
> Also, 4.2GHz @ 1.425V is IMO a hardly binned CPU at all.
> I'd be surprised if all CPUs cannot do that, given the cooling is sufficient to run at such an extreme voltage.


I didn't wanted to say that but I looks like I'm sharing your thoughts on this. My CPU can run 4.2 on all cores with 1.387v. Will do the prime stress test like you suggested but can almost certainly say it will be stable below 1.425v.

Don't know why thet sell him as a binned CPU if most of us can reach the same..


----------



## gupsterg

The Stilt said:


> Mode0 was somehow Linux related, but I have no additional info on that.
> 
> SoC Overclock VID allows you to override the default (static) VID the SoC domain requests from the VRM controller.
> 
> OC VID in HEX = ((1.55 - "the desired voltage") * 160).


:cheers: .



lordzed83 said:


> Everyone with c7h gotit?? Its new thing on c7h bet u not even looked in option to turn it off. Hint there is one.


:headscrat C6H also has those settings and sorta confused with your response.


----------



## MacG32

BIOS reset to defaults. Used 42 as the multiplier, added 100 BCLK, and put 1.425V in Vcore. Even with any LLC, the voltage doesn't go past 1.406V as read under Vcore in HWiNFO and CPU-Z. The Core # VIDs in HWiNFO all show 1.425V. Is there a setting or something I'm missing here to "unlock" the Vcore. This is my first overclock attempt on AMD hardware.


----------



## The Stilt

MacG32 said:


> BIOS reset to defaults. Used 42 as the multiplier, added 100 BCLK, and put 1.425V in Vcore. Even with any LLC, the voltage doesn't go past 1.406V as read under Vcore in HWiNFO and CPU-Z. The Core # VIDs in HWiNFO all show 1.425V. Is there a setting or something I'm missing here to "unlock" the Vcore. This is my first overclock attempt on AMD hardware.


Manual voltage is broken LLC wise in 0601 bios.
Or not broken, but the control doesn't work as it should.


----------



## Keith Myers

*What does Mode 0 do?*



The Stilt said:


> Mode0 was somehow Linux related, but I have no additional info on that.
> 
> SoC Overclock VID allows you to override the default (static) VID the SoC domain requests from the VRM controller.
> 
> OC VID in HEX = ((1.55 - "the desired voltage") * 160).


 @The Stilt. Could I impose on you to ask your ASUS BIOS colleagues what the Mode 0 does for Linux users? I have that setting in the 4008 and 4011 BIOS' for my X370 Prime Pro boards and use Linux. Been wondering what it does also and came here for the answer.


----------



## gupsterg

The Stilt said:


> Many of you still seem to use Linpack to evaluate the stability.
> 
> Linpack is a pretty poor stability test, unless you're able use extremely large problems sizes.
> The CPU basically sits idle around 20% of the total time spent for the computation of each loop (memory alloc & dealloc).
> 
> If you want to test the true stability of the CPU, use Prime95 28.10 for Ryzen: http://www.mersenne.org/ftp_root/gimps/p95v2810.win64.zip with custom 128/128 in-place settings.
> Newer P95 versions are less stressful to the CPU, so use the 28.10 instead.
> 
> Linpack no doubt "tests" (stresses) the memory better (more) than Prime95 does, however to determine the memory stability you should be using a dedicated utility from the get-go (Ram Test or HCI).
> 
> Personally, I wouldn't use a system which is just Linpack stable for anything productive.


Not tried on C7H. Seeing ~10% greater load with v28.10B1 vs v29.4B8 for test as you guide. This was using wall plug readings and also comparing SVI2 Power readings.


----------



## MacG32

The Stilt said:


> Manual voltage is broken LLC wise in 0601 bios.
> Or not broken, but the control doesn't work as it should.



Thank you. I switched to BIOS 0509 and it's still doing the same thing. My Vcore will not go over 1.406V. I've never experienced a problem like this before...

Ai Overclock Tuner: Manual
BCLK Frequency: 100
CPU Core Ratio: 42
CPU Core Voltage: Manual
CPU Core Voltage Override: 1.425
LLC: 5


----------



## parameshvara

Found a couple of oddities today on a ryzen 1700x + crosshair vii x470 + corsair mem ram
Mind you I didn't install hdd, sdd or OS yet. Just plugged the cpu, mem ram, (vga), psu to test them out. So no stability or further tests beyond a simple successful posting.

My cpu can go into 4.1ghz @ 1.32v, bclk 100 multi 41 (soc @1.2v) with a NH-d15 (temps seemed fine... at least idle in the bios, low 40's ºC) but it doesn't give a scrap more. 4.125 @1.45v doesn't even post. I found this quite baffling. I know this doesn't mean much without even booting into windows (or another stability tests), but my only available testing methodology for now is posting or fail.
The ram, 32gb x4 (vengeance 3600 cl18; already confirmed it's a b-die), can run (it posts) at that 4.1ghz clock @ 3333mhz, 14-14-14-16-34-50, 1.35v (+other tweaked values, mainly 60ohm, 1t, gear down off) but it doesn't give in any more on tightening the timings nor increased freq, even at 1.5v it doesn't post for 3400mhz; or cl13 for that matter.
I also tried to tighten the timings under 3200mhz, but it also wouldn't (as far as 1.45v not even 13-14-14, etc).

Other things, did anyone else notice the ridiculous voltages in the optimized defaults AND safe boot in the Crosshair VII. 1.46v, 1.45+ (for 3.4ghz~ default clock for the 1700x).
Also, for some reason I couldn't find out how to maintain the manual values entries unless running TPU II option (auto OC tuning) first, and then changing to manual over it otherwise the auto tuning kicks in and override all of your values, which you had to set to manual to even enter them. Which was also a bit strange.

I can't remember the bios version, the motherboard came in today and it's the one that came out of the box. The system is already disassembled, since I need its gpu (and the psu cable, not the psu) for this one.

Yes, I'm a noob in Overcloking, and was simply trying out the cpu and ram before I finish my system later. Any ideas?


----------



## MacG32

lordzed83 said:


> Well thats rock solid



May I ask what all of your BIOS settings were for that overclock and what BIOS you're using?


----------



## warpuck

The only thing that disappoints me is apparently there is not video out for 2200G/2500G. It might be fun to see how just much one of those would do on LN.


----------



## Butthurt Beluga

Just adding to the data dump.

Right now just using the plain jane AMD box cooler (very sexy I might add) because my Swiftech H320 X2 is getting new coolant, so no real CPU OCing and the voltage spikes I was seeing in Ryzen Master was a little scary, spikes of 1.5 but had no issues getting 4.35 on a single core.

I will say I tested CL14 3466 settings (14-14-14-28) and ran memtest overnight with no errors but, I'll be honest Asus boards and DRAM OCing beyond XMPs is all new to me so not sure what is actually stable for DRAM (not as obvious as CPU/GPU I think) so I've been trying to sponge as much information from the vets as much as possible. 

Also where did the post emoitcons disappear to?


----------



## VPII

Well I've overclocked my 2700X since I got it, at first on an Asus ROG Strix X370-F Gaming which unfortunately do not have the performance enhancements you get with the Asus Crosshair VII Hero, so my overclocked stayed and I was happy that I was sitting with 4.216ghz using only 1.268vcore. SOC etc I've manually set to the stock 1.05v and all seemed good. SO this morning I decided I wanted to see what the cpu can do when I load default bios settings and change the performance enhancement from Auto to 1 or 2 as 3 did not work before. But I decided to give 3 a go to see what I get. I was amazed when I ran Stilt's CPO test - see first screenshot below.

Performance enhancer 3
CPU Speed 41.75 x 100 = 4160mhz all cores
Hwbot Vcore: 1.28v
Cpuz Vcore: 1.21v which is the closest to actual reading with a multimeter

I then went on to try out performance enhancer 4. Now understand this, I have clocked my cpu up to 4.36ghz using 1.45vcore and I was able to do so with even less vcore for running benchmarks, more so when I was using the X370 board. With this board I'm able to run the cpu at 4.3ghz using only 1.4vcore set in bios with LLC set to 5. But this is what I got from performance enhancer 4.

CPU Speed 43 x 100 = 4.29ghz
Hwbot vcore: 1.369v
CPUz Vcore: 1.352v
Actual reading with multimeter in picture below: 1.32vcore


----------



## i_max2k2

Got my CH7 Friday and put it all together today. My CH7 came with 0207 bios, and I used my old Windows 10 SSD, with no issues after the first boot took about 15 mins or so. Everything is faster coming from a 2600k @ 4.8Ghz. Boot up is super quick, shutdowns are great. My memory which is Team Nighthawk 3200Mhz 16-18-18-38, turned out to be B.Die, its probably a case of Extreme YMMV, since most reviewers had stated that Team could change the memory IC down the road.



That said, I have been out of CPU/Memory overclocking for a while, where should I start to and try and see how far this memory could go? What are the safe voltages to use with Ryzen DRAM calculator, any other voltage setting that could be used to ensure stability of Memory OC?

Something weird I noticed, when I set BCLK to 101.5 and undervolt to cpu to -0.050 the system was IBT stable on Very High setting on 0207, when I updated bios and set the same settings it failed the Very High Stress test on 0601 as well as Bios 0509, so I reverted back to 0207 and this time tried Maximum stress setting on IBT and it passed again. Not sure what the difference is between these bios are and why one setting stable on one bios is failing on another.

I also did the stilt's test, however each run seems to be lowering the delta voltage. This was run 4.


----------



## Tactix

How are peeps getting along with the 0601 bios posted ?
What are the changes/improvements?>

Thanks


----------



## Tactix

i_max2k2 said:


> Got my CH7 Friday and put it all together today. My CH7 came with 0207 bios, and I used my old Windows 10 SSD, with no issues after the first boot took about 15 mins or so. Everything is faster coming from a 2600k @ 4.8Ghz. Boot up is super quick, shutdowns are great. My memory which is Team Nighthawk 3200Mhz 16-18-18-38, turned out to be B.Die, its probably a case of Extreme YMMV, since most reviewers had stated that Team could change the memory IC down the road.
> 
> That said, I have been out of CPU/Memory overclocking for a while, where should I start to and try and see how far this memory could go? What are the safe voltages to use with Ryzen DRAM calculator, any other voltage setting that could be used to ensure stability of Memory OC?
> 
> Something weird I noticed, when I set BCLK to 101.5 and undervolt to cpu to -0.050 the system was IBT stable on Very High setting on 0207, when I updated bios and set the same settings it failed the Very High Stress test on 0601 as well as Bios 0509, so I reverted back to 0207 and this time tried Maximum stress setting on IBT and it passed again. Not sure what the difference is between these bios are and why one setting stable on one bios is failing on another.


Been wondering about the new 0601 bios as well, concerning to hear you are having better results with 0207.


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> Everyone with c7h gotit?? Its new thing on c7h bet u not even looked in option to turn it off. Hint there is one.


I know it can go on/off - had these settings on old board as well, just wanted to know exactly what they do


----------



## Rusakova

Tactix said:


> Been wondering about the new 0601 bios as well, concerning to hear you are having better results with 0207.


My board also came with 0207. It was able to run my ram at higher clocks than I'm capable to do on 0601.
I have no idea what the difference is. But 0207 seems to be where Hero VI was and newer versions seems to be
more Hero VII specific. It's a new platform so a little patience is required. I have no stability issues with 0601.


----------



## kazablanka

Rusakova said:


> My board also came with 0207. It was able to run my ram at higher clocks than I'm capable to do on 0601.
> I have no idea what the difference is. But 0207 seems to be where Hero VI was and newer versions seems to be
> more Hero VII specific. It's a new platform so a little patience is required. I have no stability issues with 0601.


where can i find 6001 bios ?


----------



## knightriot

kazablanka said:


> where can i find 6001 bios ?


here bro,and 0601 not 6001
http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...09-rog-crosshair-vii-overclocking-thread.html


----------



## sbakic

stock settings -> Ok guys so I run prime95 blend(90% ram) for 9.5 hours, after that intel burn test 5x 90% ram, after that hci memtest 200%. Then I switched to AIDA64. You can see that there are some jumps while stress testing aida64. I didn't have this experience with 1700x line was straight, not 68C to 75C. After that I switched to OCCT and just opened the program PC shut down ( needed to turn off - turn on PSU to turn on PC). So the problem is with version of aida64 for these new motherboards/cpu. It could be even OCCT problem too.

What do you guys think? But i will not run anymore ADIA64 stress test for this configuration.


----------



## Ethan_Ryu

VPII said:


> Well I've overclocked my 2700X since I got it, at first on an Asus ROG Strix X370-F Gaming which unfortunately do not have the performance enhancements you get with the Asus Crosshair VII Hero, so my overclocked stayed and I was happy that I was sitting with 4.216ghz using only 1.268vcore. SOC etc I've manually set to the stock 1.05v and all seemed good. SO this morning I decided I wanted to see what the cpu can do when I load default bios settings and change the performance enhancement from Auto to 1 or 2 as 3 did not work before. But I decided to give 3 a go to see what I get. I was amazed when I ran Stilt's CPO test - see first screenshot below.
> 
> Performance enhancer 3
> CPU Speed 41.75 x 100 = 4160mhz all cores
> Hwbot Vcore: 1.28v
> Cpuz Vcore: 1.21v which is the closest to actual reading with a multimeter
> 
> I then went on to try out performance enhancer 4. Now understand this, I have clocked my cpu up to 4.36ghz using 1.45vcore and I was able to do so with even less vcore for running benchmarks, more so when I was using the X370 board. With this board I'm able to run the cpu at 4.3ghz using only 1.4vcore set in bios with LLC set to 5. But this is what I got from performance enhancer 4.
> 
> CPU Speed 43 x 100 = 4.29ghz
> Hwbot vcore: 1.369v
> CPUz Vcore: 1.352v
> Actual reading with multimeter in picture below: 1.32vcore


You need to do the test this way else is kinda pointless:
- Admin rights
- R7 2700X only *
- SMT needs to be enabled *
- Performance Enhancer = Default
- Stock configuration only (fixed / offset voltage and load-line adjustments disallowed) *
- No other monitoring app running simultaneously (e.g. AiTweaker, CPU-Z, HWInfo, AIDA, etc)
- System needs to be at IDLE
- Windows "Balanced" Power Plan (NOT "Ryzen Balanced")

as Vcore reading goes, my reading with multimeter were off by 0.003V


----------



## VPII

Ethan_Ryu said:


> You need to do the test this way else is kinda pointless:
> - Admin rights
> - R7 2700X only *
> - SMT needs to be enabled *
> - Performance Enhancer = Default
> - Stock configuration only (fixed / offset voltage and load-line adjustments disallowed) *
> - No other monitoring app running simultaneously (e.g. AiTweaker, CPU-Z, HWInfo, AIDA, etc)
> - System needs to be at IDLE
> - Windows "Balanced" Power Plan (NOT "Ryzen Balanced")
> 
> as Vcore reading goes, my reading with multimeter were off by 0.003V


My good sir.... trust me, I have done all of the above and results posted before. This was plain and simple a test to see what it can do. And 4.29ghz stable at 1.32vcore is pretty good Ill say.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## Ethan_Ryu

VPII said:


> My good sir.... trust me, I have done all of the above and results posted before. This was plain and simple a test to see what it can do. And 4.29ghz stable at 1.32vcore is pretty good Ill say.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


it was more about the voltage reading than anything else, as overclocking goes if you are stable with 1.32vcore its a really good cpu, do you know the week-wafer production location? Cinebench score?


----------



## VPII

Ethan_Ryu said:


> it was more about the voltage reading than anything else, as overclocking goes if you are stable with 1.32vcore its a really good cpu, do you know the week-wafer production location? Cinebench score?


Im heading to a wedding will post cb15 score... was 2014 highest without extreme cooling. Will check batch on cpu.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## majestynl

guys when you are all talking about your speeds and voltages please don't only tell the numbers. Other people over here can be confused while comparing. 
There is a big difference between OC all core clocks vs XFR clocks for some cores. 

It will help if you can also mention which kind of OC you are using And also the clocks on all cores on same time or not. Also don't forget to mention the vcore while idle vs load or even the spikes we got from XFR boost. 

Thanks..


----------



## kazablanka

knightriot said:


> here bro,and 0601 not 6001
> http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...09-rog-crosshair-vii-overclocking-thread.html


You are perfect ,thanks alot


----------



## elmor

zulex said:


> elmor,
> 
> I want to know whether PCIEX1_1 and PCIEX1_2 slots are integrated with CPU or chipset. If I attach a PCIex card on either of these slots, will it reduce the speed of my VGA card sticked to the first PCIx 3.0 x 16 slot to 8x?



Please read "C7H Enthusiast Highlights v03.pdf"




MacG32 said:


> Thank you. I switched to BIOS 0509 and it's still doing the same thing. My Vcore will not go over 1.406V. I've never experienced a problem like this before...
> 
> Ai Overclock Tuner: Manual
> BCLK Frequency: 100
> CPU Core Ratio: 42
> CPU Core Voltage: Manual
> CPU Core Voltage Override: 1.425
> LLC: 5



It's an issue with the SIO provided Vcore reading. Rely on the SVI2 TFN Core Voltage reading for accurate results.


----------



## QuadJunkyx

@elmor

Had another random reboot last night , this time the pc was completely idle as I went to go eat dinner. It powered right back up it had been 25-45 mins it did not require any unplugging, safe boot etc to get it running again. 
This is a fresh windows install with no asus, corsair, nzxt etc software installed. I was reading there is a bug with power plan in windows that could be causing random shutdown but for the life of me I cannot find the link.


----------



## elmor

QuadJunkyx said:


> @elmor
> 
> Had another random reboot last night , this time the pc was completely idle as I went to go eat dinner. It powered right back up it had been 25-45 mins it did not require any unplugging, safe boot etc to get it running again.
> This is a fresh windows install with no asus, corsair, nzxt etc software installed. I was reading there is a bug with power plan in windows that could be causing random shutdown but for the life of me I cannot find the link.



Sorry not up to date on this power plan bug. Maybe someone else in this thread has better information.


----------



## majestynl

QuadJunkyx said:


> @elmor
> 
> Had another random reboot last night , this time the pc was completely idle as I went to go eat dinner. It powered right back up it had been 25-45 mins it did not require any unplugging, safe boot etc to get it running again.
> This is a fresh windows install with no asus, corsair, nzxt etc software installed. I was reading there is a bug with power plan in windows that could be causing random shutdown but for the life of me I cannot find the link.


If I remember it well it was fixed with the April update. If it's not a big issue maybe you can do a fresh install with newest windows? I had 1x shutdown but since fresh install never had one till now.


----------



## QuadJunkyx

majestynl said:


> If I remember it well it was fixed with the April update. If it's not a big issue maybe you can do a fresh install with newest windows? I had 1x shutdown but since fresh install never had one till now.


Just preformed a fresh install.... But since my post this morning while in the bois I had another shut down that required pulling the plug, clear cmos and a safe boot to get it going again. After two weeks I think its time to just rma this board something is not right, I lose the chipset pcie slots or the onboard networking or both at the same time. I cannot figure out why and the random shutdowns does not help the issue.


----------



## knightriot

2 days with 2700X + C7H, i have something:
_ Turn PE2, offset -0.1v , and others auto, i got ~1890~1910 in CB (i using bitlocker and too much programs in startup) , pass IBT, pass realbench stress , ram can up 3533 C14. XFR2 work perfectly in games., low heat.
_ Manual OC, only [email protected] , got ~1910 in CB ,pass IBT, realbench too but more heat (~+5~10*c when fullload).
So i really confused haha


----------



## i_max2k2

Have you guys gone back to 0207 bios to see if your system has more stability, out of 0207/0509/0601 my system has has the most stability on the first bios. Have yet to try 04xx bios. 
I have had very limited luck trying to overclock my ram so far. I have used the DRAM calculator numbers for Fast OC, and my system won't boot. so does that mean that even though the ram is Samsung B Die its just low binned b-die? I have just ordered F4-3200C14D-32GVK which is a 2x16gb dual rank 3200Mhz 14-14-14-34 kit. Even at stock I believe the performance should be much better I have read.


----------



## sbakic

How do I know if PE1,2,3,4 is too much? I can run all settings and pass cinebench which is weak, but still at PE4 all core boost to 42.5x with Vcore at load 1.395V~1.4V with prime95 FFTs 8K. which is ok probably. How do I know what is too much for my cpu?


----------



## sbakic

i_max2k2 said:


> Have you guys gone back to 0207 bios to see if your system has more stability, out of 0207/0509/0601 my system has has the most stability on the first bios. Have yet to try 04xx bios.
> I have had very limited luck trying to overclock my ram so far. I have used the DRAM calculator numbers for Fast OC, and my system won't boot. so does that mean that even though the ram is Samsung B Die its just low binned b-die? I have just ordered F4-3200C14D-32GVK which is a 2x16gb dual rank 3200Mhz 14-14-14-34 kit. Even at stock I believe the performance should be much better I have read.


I can run that kit @3333 with timings for safe 3200 by ryzen dram calculator. I am not sure whether is that stable. I can even run 3400MHz CL14 again just benchmark stable didn't run through stress test.


----------



## kazablanka

i_max2k2 said:


> Have you guys gone back to 0207 bios to see if your system has more stability, out of 0207/0509/0601 my system has has the most stability on the first bios. Have yet to try 04xx bios.
> I have had very limited luck trying to overclock my ram so far. I have used the DRAM calculator numbers for Fast OC, and my system won't boot. so does that mean that even though the ram is Samsung B Die its just low binned b-die? I have just ordered F4-3200C14D-32GVK which is a 2x16gb dual rank 3200Mhz 14-14-14-34 kit. Even at stock I believe the performance should be much better I have read.


i have gone back to 0207 ,cpu overclock is more stable than newer bioses but there are some problems with bios voltages ,as an example i set 1.44v dram and the bios report 1.418v ,this problem appears with all voltages (cpu ,soc, etc) .

My ram is full stable with all bios except 0207(i think the problem is the inaccurate voltages) at 3600mhz cl14-15-15-15-30-46 but my cpu is a first gen ryzen


----------



## Rusakova

i_max2k2 said:


> Have you guys gone back to 0207 bios to see if your system has more stability, out of 0207/0509/0601 my system has has the most stability on the first bios. Have yet to try 04xx bios.
> I have had very limited luck trying to overclock my ram so far. I have used the DRAM calculator numbers for Fast OC, and my system won't boot. so does that mean that even though the ram is Samsung B Die its just low binned b-die? I have just ordered F4-3200C14D-32GVK which is a 2x16gb dual rank 3200Mhz 14-14-14-34 kit. Even at stock I believe the performance should be much better I have read.


I'm still on 0601, with ram running 3133 MHz with very tight timings, which gives almost the same bandwidth as running 3200 mHz.
I cannot pas RAM test (https://www.karhusoftware.com/ramtest/) beyond 1200% running at 3200 mHz. With 3133 it goes to infinity and beyond.
I'm using G.Skill Trident Z F4-3200C14D-32GTZ. I have never gotten it to run with any of the settings in ram calculator.
Using D.O.C.P is a no go for me, it simply doesn't work. I just select the ram speed and that's that

I currently use...:
(still working on 3200 MHz)

VSOC Voltage -0.1250

ProcODT_SM 60 ohm

ClkDrvbStren = 40.0 Ohm
AddrCmdDrvStren = 20.0 Ohm
CsOdtDrvStren = 40.0 Ohm
CkeDrvStren = 40.0 Ohm

RttNom = RZQ/3
RttWr = RZQ/3
RttPark = RZQ/1


----------



## i_max2k2

Rusakova said:


> I'm still on 0601, with ram running 3133 MHz with very tight timings, which gives almost the same bandwidth as running 3200 mHz.
> I cannot pas RAM test (https://www.karhusoftware.com/ramtest/) beyond 1200% running at 3200 mHz. With 3133 it goes to infinity and beyond.
> I'm using G.Skill Trident Z F4-3200C14D-32GTZ. I have never gotten it to run with any of the settings in ram calculator.
> Using D.O.C.P is a no go for me, it simply doesn't work. I just select the ram speed and that's that
> 
> I currently use...:
> (still working on 3200 MHz)
> 
> VSOC Voltage -0.1250
> 
> ProcODT_SM 60 ohm
> 
> ClkDrvbStren = 40.0 Ohm
> AddrCmdDrvStren = 20.0 Ohm
> CsOdtDrvStren = 40.0 Ohm
> CkeDrvStren = 40.0 Ohm
> 
> RttNom = RZQ/3
> RttWr = RZQ/3
> RttPark = RZQ/1


I believe my ripjaws are the same exact ram with different cooling/looks, I checked they have same exact jdec specs as well. Once I get it I'll start trying to stabilize them. This would be a good start, thank you!. You should try running the ram on 0207 see if they get stable there.


----------



## majestynl

Rusakova said:


> I'm still on 0601, with ram running 3133 MHz with very tight timings, which gives almost the same bandwidth as running 3200 mHz.
> I cannot pas RAM test (https://www.karhusoftware.com/ramtest/) beyond 1200% running at 3200 mHz. With 3133 it goes to infinity and beyond.
> I'm using G.Skill Trident Z F4-3200C14D-32GTZ. I have never gotten it to run with any of the settings in ram calculator.
> Using D.O.C.P is a no go for me, it simply doesn't work. I just select the ram speed and that's that
> 
> I currently use...:
> (still working on 3200 MHz)
> 
> VSOC Voltage -0.1250
> 
> ProcODT_SM 60 ohm
> 
> ClkDrvbStren = 40.0 Ohm
> AddrCmdDrvStren = 20.0 Ohm
> CsOdtDrvStren = 40.0 Ohm
> CkeDrvStren = 40.0 Ohm
> 
> RttNom = RZQ/3
> RttWr = RZQ/3
> RttPark = RZQ/1


Im currently doing some test with ram. So i thought i share some info. 
What voltage are you using, and why did you - offset your soc. Any reason? 
For what i know since begin of ryzen 1 soc voltage is important while finding RAM stability.
And again with some test results and notes i made today i see the same.

Running 3466Mhz with TT(tight timings). And testing with Ramtest karhusoftware

Test 1: 1.4v Ram +Ramboot / 1.15v Soc = MemTest 216% 1 error
Test 2: 1.42v Ram +Ramboot / 1.15v Soc = MemTest 835% 1 error
Test 3: 1.435v Ram +Ramboot / Auto Soc (~1.13v) = MemTest 254% 1 error
Test 4: 1.435v Ram +Ramboot / 1.15v Soc = MemTest 313% 1 error
Test 5: 1.42v Ram +Ramboot / 1.175v Soc = MemTest 1794% 1 error

As you can see, highering the voltage didnt helpt but increasing soc helped me get over 1700%!!!
Exactly the same what i saw on CH6+1800x. Again i need to find the sweet spot for my MemOC. And this doesnt meen high ram voltage helps always.

Soc did a lot in the past, and it looks like it does it again. 
Will share more results soon! 

Below a screenshot of Aida, and 1 from the test 5 while it was on running. Keep in mind 
it spew a error on 1794%!


----------



## kazablanka

majestynl said:


> Im currently doing some test with ram. So i thought i share some info.
> What voltage are you using, and why did you - offset your soc. Any reason?
> For what i know since begin of ryzen 1 soc voltage is important while finding RAM stability.
> And again with some test results and notes i made today i see the same.
> 
> Running 3466Mhz with TT(tight timings). And testing with Ramtest karhusoftware
> 
> Test 1: 1.4v Ram +Ramboot / 1.15v Soc = MemTest 216% 1 error
> Test 2: 1.42v Ram +Ramboot / 1.15v Soc = MemTest 835% 1 error
> Test 3: 1.435v Ram +Ramboot / Auto Soc (~1.13v) = MemTest 254% 1 error
> Test 4: 1.435v Ram +Ramboot / 1.15v Soc = MemTest 313% 1 error
> Test 5: 1.42v Ram +Ramboot / 1.175v Soc = MemTest 1794% 1 error
> 
> As you can see, highering the voltage didnt helpt but increasing soc helped me get over 1700%!!!
> Exactly the same what i saw on CH6+1800x. Again i need to find the sweet spot for my MemOC. And this doesnt meen high ram voltage helps always.
> 
> Soc did a lot in the past, and it looks like it does it again.
> Will share more results soon!
> 
> Below a screenshot of Aida, and 1 from the test 5 while it was on running. Keep in mind
> it spew a error on 1794%!



In my case for a stable overclock for 6 hours with no error at tpu memtset ,helped rtt values by calculator (7/off/5) and cad bus (20/20/20/20)


----------



## Ethan_Ryu

*@elmor* i was using windows without crash , plugged the mouse to wired mode to put in on charge(g403) and no mouse movement no keyboard (they were connected to 2.0) , i press the power button and windows was actually working.
Now neither USB2.0 ports or frontal panel usb 3 are working , while back usb 3.0 still works , mouse and keyboard works on 3.0, what could have caused this and how can i fix it?


----------



## Gettz8488

Would like some help I can’t seem to figure out why my cpu won’t downvolt if I set Pstate OC I set P0 changed to A5 then voltage to 25 When to extreme tweaked tab and set my voltage to offset +0.005 I get downclocking whole idle but not downvolting SVI2 will not move from 1.325 @elmor any thought on what it could be?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## masterkaj

This may sound like an odd question, but the enthusiast highlight states the source for the top 4 blue USB ports are the CPU, while the bottom 4 are the X470 chipset. Is the "top" in the normal tower (vertical) or horizontal orientation? I assume it's vertical because that's when the labels are right-side up.


----------



## elmor

Gettz8488 said:


> Would like some help I can’t seem to figure out why my cpu won’t downvolt if I set Pstate OC I set P0 changed to A5 then voltage to 25 When to extreme tweaked tab and set my voltage to offset +0.005 I get downclocking whole idle but not downvolting SVI2 will not move from 1.325 @elmor any thought on what it could be?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro



SVI2 TFN is not able to detect downvolting. In that state, several core functions are turned off including updating this value. Use the SIO reading which is fully external to detect it.




majestynl said:


> If I remember it well it was fixed with the April update. If it's not a big issue maybe you can do a fresh install with newest windows? I had 1x shutdown but since fresh install never had one till now.



Found this, I'm not sure how accurate it is though.

https://www.hardocp.com/article/2018/04/30/amd_precision_boost_2_wraith_prism_deep_dive/6

"I ran into some failures using PB2 and I was able to track these down to NOT being PB2's issue, but rather a Windows Bug. We are using the latest version of Windows 10 64-bit and all its updates that were available on April 17th. We knew we were going to be doing a lot of testing, so we froze our OS updates at that point. What I was finding is that I would get these random power-downs using Cinebench, HWinfo64, and CPUz at the same time. I could not replicate the error without these three programs running simultaneously. At time I just assumed that I was beating on the CPU hard enough to make it fail, until it went into a hard power-down while sitting idle at the desktop, and I could replicate this issue at idle. Talking with AMD and ASUS about this, they asked me to work through the other power profiles we were not using. We use "High Power" for all our testing here. I moved to the Balanced profile, and it still happened. I then moved to the Ryzen Balanced profile, and it was still happening. Once I moved back to the High Performance profile again, I could not repeat the error. I could not replicate the error in Balanced or Ryzen Balanced either. ASUS let me know that there has been a Windows bug identified with this issue. The current solution to the issues seems to be to switch power profiles one or two times and it will correct itself. So if you are having some odd shutdowns, do not assume it is anything hardware or heat related."




masterkaj said:


> This may sound like an odd question, but the enthusiast highlight states the source for the top 4 blue USB ports are the CPU, while the bottom 4 are the X470 chipset. Is the "top" in the normal tower (vertical) or horizontal orientation? I assume it's vertical because that's when the labels are right-side up.



As in when mounted in a normal tower case, yes.


----------



## Gettz8488

@elmor the sio reading you said it was external like on the mobo itself? Or with hwinfo sorry if it’s a dumb question honestly just don’t know. Is this the vcore reading under mobo in hwinfo?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## mickeykool

Anyone have the link for the ram test program? I've seen few posts people using it to test their ram. 

Thanks


----------



## MacG32

mickeykool said:


> Anyone have the link for the ram test program? I've seen few posts people using it to test their ram.
> 
> Thanks



http://hcidesign.com/memtest/


----------



## Gettz8488

@elmor would this also apply if I were to set the core ratio to 42 and set an offset voltage? Because I don’t see downvolting with svi2 like that either 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Tactix

Well had to do a Full Reinstall as windows started having very odd issues, which from previous experience usually points to RAM. 

After watching this video 





Im going to return my current kit and am looking at these, guessing these must be B-die as they are CL14, any thoughts?
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232530


----------



## DeeJayBump

mickeykool said:


> Anyone have the link for the ram test program? I've seen few posts people using it to test their ram.
> 
> Thanks


https://www.karhusoftware.com/ramtest/


----------



## Gettz8488

Does anyone know where I can get the sio voltage reading that elmor mentioned? Is that the one under the motherboard tab in HWinfo labeled Vcore?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## chakku

@elmor I noticed you added a Q-Code temp display option for ZenStates, any chance of this option being implemented in a future BIOS as well?


----------



## elmor

Gettz8488 said:


> @elmor the sio reading you said it was external like on the mobo itself? Or with hwinfo sorry if it’s a dumb question honestly just don’t know. Is this the vcore reading under mobo in hwinfo?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro



In HWInfo under the motherboard section "CROSSHAIR VII HERO", or for example the CPU-Z Voltage reading.




Gettz8488 said:


> @elmor would this also apply if I were to set the core ratio to 42 and set an offset voltage? Because I don’t see downvolting with svi2 like that either
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro



Yes, any readings using SVI2 TFN.




chakku said:


> @elmor I noticed you added a Q-Code temp display option for ZenStates, any chance of this option being implemented in a future BIOS as well?



Only possible through software.


----------



## Butthurt Beluga

Tactix said:


> Well had to do a Full Reinstall as windows started having very odd issues, which from previous experience usually points to RAM.
> 
> After watching this video
> https://youtu.be/m6RWEnUsLSY
> 
> Im going to return my current kit and am looking at these, guessing these must be B-die as they are CL14, any thoughts?
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232530


Yes that is a Samsung B-Die kit.
I have this kit, the 3200CL14 profile works right out the box and I get massive gains from stock 2400MHz to 3200MHz.
Am able to 3466 CL14 running but not stable in memtest, still learning the timings (Ryzen DRAM Calculator hasn't worked well for me) but I have no problems at least booting in 3466 CL14 and 3600 CL14/15 and running things like Cinebench/games, still not stable with memtest though


----------



## Gettz8488

elmor said:


> In HWInfo under the motherboard section "CROSSHAIR VII HERO", or for example the CPU-Z Voltage reading.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, any readings using SVI2 TFN.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only possible through software.



@elmor thanks for clearing that app it looks like downvolting does happen according to cpu Z and Vcore reading under ch7 in hwinfo thanks for. Do you have any update on we can possibly install the third party softwares with no shutdowns yet?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## toxick

After one week of testing with GSkill 3866 I decide to go back to GSkill 3733 and voila!!!!
I mention that with GSkill 3866 I can't pass 3333.


----------



## Tactix

Butthurt Beluga said:


> Yes that is a Samsung B-Die kit.
> I have this kit, the 3200CL14 profile works right out the box and I get massive gains from stock 2400MHz to 3200MHz.
> Am able to 3466 CL14 running but not stable in memtest, still learning the timings (Ryzen DRAM Calculator hasn't worked well for me) but I have no problems at least booting in 3466 CL14 and 3600 CL14/15 and running things like Cinebench/games, still not stable with memtest though


Awesome thanks for sharing.


----------



## lordzed83

@elmor thanks for clearing up the SV12 v9oltage noticed same thing it used to monitor vdrop on C6H but who cares as long as it drops 
Rendered while mining on gpu for 7 hours 










First Rave footage Rendered on Crosshair VII :]


Spoiler


----------



## mickeykool

DeeJayBump said:


> https://www.karhusoftware.com/ramtest/


Thanks, that was the one i was looking for.


----------



## Esenel

majestynl said:


> Im currently doing some test with ram. So i thought i share some info.
> What voltage are you using, and why did you - offset your soc. Any reason?
> For what i know since begin of ryzen 1 soc voltage is important while finding RAM stability.
> And again with some test results and notes i made today i see the same.
> 
> Running 3466Mhz with TT(tight timings). And testing with Ramtest karhusoftware
> 
> Test 1: 1.4v Ram +Ramboot / 1.15v Soc = MemTest 216% 1 error
> Test 2: 1.42v Ram +Ramboot / 1.15v Soc = MemTest 835% 1 error
> Test 3: 1.435v Ram +Ramboot / Auto Soc (~1.13v) = MemTest 254% 1 error
> Test 4: 1.435v Ram +Ramboot / 1.15v Soc = MemTest 313% 1 error
> Test 5: 1.42v Ram +Ramboot / 1.175v Soc = MemTest 1794% 1 error
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> As you can see, highering the voltage didnt helpt but increasing soc helped me get over 1700%!!!
> Exactly the same what i saw on CH6+1800x. Again i need to find the sweet spot for my MemOC. And this doesnt meen high ram voltage helps always.
> 
> Soc did a lot in the past, and it looks like it does it again.
> Will share more results soon!
> 
> Below a screenshot of Aida, and 1 from the test 5 while it was on running. Keep in mind
> it spew a error on 1794%!


Hi majestynl,

could you redo your AIDA Latency Benchmark with the latest AIDA version 5.97? 
For me it showed a loss of 2ns in latency. Would be interesting if you see the same and it would be better for comparison 

Thanks!


----------



## sbakic

How to know what preformance enhancement is too much for my cpu?


----------



## majestynl

elmor said:


> Found this, I'm not sure how accurate it is though.
> 
> https://www.hardocp.com/article/2018/04/30/amd_precision_boost_2_wraith_prism_deep_dive/6


Yeap! That's the one! Cant say for sure but like i said, didn't had the issue anymore and few users also mentioned they didn't had it anymore.
You are right, people are complaining to fast on the hardware instead of looking further 



Esenel said:


> Hi majestynl,
> 
> could you redo your AIDA Latency Benchmark with the latest AIDA version 5.97?
> For me it showed a loss of 2ns in latency. Would be interesting if you see the same and it would be better for comparison
> 
> Thanks!


Sure np, will do later today...



sbakic said:


> How to know what preformance enhancement is too much for my cpu?


Probably just try and see  There is a certain security feature build in who is detecting if its running between save walls for your CPU. But if you want to know it for sure, just check your voltages.
Don't be fooled by the Voltage spike you see in IDLE mode. Most important is your voltage on full load!


----------



## lordzed83

@majestynl try what i use. 1.05 llc2 vrm at 400khz phase at asus optimised. Good up to 3533 on my chip.

Btw found where silicone looses stability 74-75c on zen1 it was 68-69 on my cooling. So Aim below that under IBT load with volts


----------



## gupsterg

*PSA C7H Peeps*

*SB voltage on [Auto] IMO seems crazy excessive on UEFI 0601.*

My build was uneventful up til posting and using UEFI.

I flashbacked UEFI 0601 prior to 1st powerup, removed power from board, then did clear CMOS. I then powered up, went to do screen shot of Main page and CPU page, rig rebooted . I tried again and it rebooted . I stopped taking screen shots via F12.

Checked UEFI and found SB voltage readout at 1.094V, applied a DMM to ProbeIt point and it read back as 1.115V  . A manual setting of 1V yielded in 1.064/5V, same as what my C6H would be when set at 1.05V or [Auto] in UEFI and when measured at ProbeIt point.

SOC was read lower in UEFI than Ryzen Gen 1, using DMM on ProbeIt it was ~0.800V. Near enough 0.075V-0.125V lower than several Ryzen Gen 1 CPUs I used on C6H. So SOC [Auto] was as it should be.

RAM [Auto] was 1.202V on ProbeIt point, all good.

PLL [Auto] I never measured, but 1.8V manually set was read back via DMM on ProbeIt point as 1.8V steady as it was on my C6H.


----------



## crakej

I had two shutdown>reboots today - machine had been running happily since yesterday, slept the night, worked for a couple of hours, then bam! buzzzz, black screen, reboot.  Finished the reboot as I was in the middle of something - started typing and bam! Same thing happens again within 2 minutes, so this time I thought I know, I'll load defaults so I can get my work done....

Defaults saved, reboot, then just before Windows login appears it stops, fans slowly slow down a bit, screen stay black, then I have to reset. Load Windows, same thing happened again! This is at defaults remember - totally default everything. This has also occurred when OCing.

I'm thinking I might go back to 509 as I didn't run it very long before I updated to 601, see if that's a bit better.

I did have AISuite running in the background, but it's never caused me any problems before, I've had this reboot before when I wasn't running AISuite, so put it down to something else. I only have 1700x so nothing to do with PE.

I was running cpu @ 4.125 (it can do 4.2), no LLC 1.4v. With LLC not working properly on this bios I haven't tried it. Sadly my memory dump was not written - I've changed that setting to Kernel Mem Dump from mini dump.

Anyone care to speculate? I'll load 0509 in a while and do some tests on that see how it goes ancd report back, but any help would be gratefully received!


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> *PSA C7H Peeps*
> 
> *SB voltage on [Auto] IMO seems crazy excessive on UEFI 0601.*
> 
> My build was uneventful up til posting and using UEFI.
> 
> I flashbacked UEFI 0601 prior to 1st powerup, removed power from board, then did clear CMOS. I then powered up, went to do screen shot of Main page and CPU page, rig rebooted . I tried again and it rebooted . I stopped taking screen shots via F12.
> 
> Checked UEFI and found SB voltage readout at 1.094V, applied a DMM to ProbeIt point and it read back as 1.115V  . A manual setting of 1V yielded in 1.064/5V, same as what my C6H would be when set at 1.05V or [Auto] in UEFI and when measured at ProbeIt point.
> 
> SOC was read lower in UEFI than Ryzen Gen 1, using DMM on ProbeIt it was ~0.800V. Near enough 0.075V-0.125V lower than several Ryzen Gen 1 CPUs I used on C6H. So SOC [Auto] was as it should be.
> 
> RAM [Auto] was 1.202V on ProbeIt point, all good.
> 
> PLL [Auto] I never measured, but 1.8V manually set was read back via DMM on ProbeIt point as 1.8V steady as it was on my C6H.


I've noticed a lot of my voltages looking wrong, mostly under-volting but some over - I put it down to UEFI/SIO reporting it incorrectly, but it does seem odd. With my 1700x on old board, you set voltages and they appeared for the most part as you would expect them to. On this board, everything reports back as lower than the settings. I've not had a chance to test with DMM, but I will do it soon, just wanted to point out I am having similar 'problems'. Will do it before I downgrade to 509 as well so I can see any differences.


----------



## gupsterg

After setting SB to 1V seems sound so far, I've taken at least 20 screenies using F12. Leaving rig sat in UEFI whilst I dupe a SSD on another.



Spoiler




View attachment 180508003017.BMP




I've also set Performance Enhancer to Default instead of [Auto].

View attachment 0601_Base_Profile_setting.txt




crakej said:


> I've noticed a lot of my voltages looking wrong, mostly under-volting but some over - I put it down to UEFI/SIO reporting it incorrectly, but it does seem odd. With my 1700x on old board, you set voltages and they appeared for the most part as you would expect them to. On this board, everything reports back as lower than the settings. I've not had a chance to test with DMM, but I will do it soon, just wanted to point out I am having similar 'problems'. Will do it before I downgrade to 509 as well so I can see any differences.


Yeah defo get a DMM. I also have IR gun and power meter. Must haves for tinkering IMO, IIRC total was £20 for all on Amazon UK. Not the best kit out there by a long shot, but more than adequate for amateur escapades IMO, like I am :glasses .


----------



## sbakic

majestynl said:


> Yeap! That's the one! Cant say for sure but like i said, didn't had the issue anymore and few users also mentioned they didn't had it anymore.
> You are right, people are complaining to fast on the hardware instead of looking further
> 
> 
> 
> Sure np, will do later today...
> 
> 
> 
> Probably just try and see  There is a certain security feature build in who is detecting if its running between save walls for your CPU. But if you want to know it for sure, just check your voltages.
> Don't be fooled by the Voltage spike you see in IDLE mode. Most important is your voltage on full load!


I asked this because Stilt said if you have spikes on idle beyond 1.5V don't use it. On full load for PE4 (every other settings is stock) for 42.5x is 1.395V -1.4V with prime95 in-place 8K is it too much or fine?


----------



## Gettz8488

lordzed83 said:


> @majestynl try what i use. 1.05 llc2 vrm at 400khz phase at asus optimised. Good up to 3533 on my chip.
> 
> 
> 
> Btw found where silicone looses stability 74-75c on zen1 it was 68-69 on my cooling. So Aim below that under IBT load with volts




I had jumps up to 76C under ibt didn’t really lose stability but I only ran IBT once 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Shaav

Hey guys,

could submit your RAM oc results in this excel sheet so that we have a nice overview which settings everbody used for his RAM? Most sheets are missing some very important informationion and I hope this one will include all necessairy one and will therfore help people with their overclocking:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1HKPVfDcFO-aieAOXHFQZp15rwWadbPTVDNgO8vtyDCM/edit#gid=0


----------



## Gettz8488

sbakic said:


> I asked this because Stilt said if you have spikes on idle beyond 1.5V don't use it. On full load for PE4 (every other settings is stock) for 42.5x is 1.395V -1.4V with prime95 in-place 8K is it too much or fine?




The stilt never said don’t use auto voltage if everything left on auto. If you use PE4 and it spikes above 1.5 that’s when you should be concerned but on auto I get 1.5+ spikes for a second which according to Robert hallock it’s intended. Just be clear do newcomers don’t get confused 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> After setting SB to 1V seems sound so far, I've taken at least 20 screenies using F12. Leaving rig sat in UEFI whilst I dupe a SSD on another.
> 
> I've also set Performance Enhancer to Default instead of [Auto].
> 
> Yeah defo get a DMM. I also have IR gun and power meter. Must haves for tinkering IMO, IIRC total was £20 for all on Amazon UK. Not the best kit out there by a long shot, but more than adequate for amateur escapades IMO, like I am :glasses .


My SB was identical to yours! Elmor or Stilt did mention something about voltage the other day when I reported my PLL voltage as low - seemed to think it was most likely a readout error. Maybe one of them can clear this up for us. Do your other voltages report as you would expect?

I have my DMM - will have a test in a while and report back.


----------



## Arat

Gettz8488 said:


> The stilt never said don’t use auto voltage if everything left on auto. If you use PE4 and it spikes above 1.5 that’s when you should be concerned but on auto I get 1.5+ spikes for a second which according to Robert hallock it’s intended. Just be clear do newcomers don’t get confused


Now you got me confused.
Spikes above 1.5 V should concerne me but spikes above 1.5+ V should not? Could you please elaborate? Thanks.


----------



## DeeJayBump

mickeykool said:


> Thanks, that was the one i was looking for.


You're welcome.


----------



## lordzed83

@gupsterg i got PLL set to 1.8 but motherboard readout says 1.850 hmmm ill try tos et 1.795 and See what it say


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> My SB was identical to yours! Elmor or Stilt did mention something about voltage the other day when I reported my PLL voltage as low - seemed to think it was most likely a readout error. Maybe one of them can clear this up for us. Do your other voltages report as you would expect?
> 
> I have my DMM - will have a test in a while and report back.


I've managed now ~40 screenies in UEFI using F12 and no issues.

OS I didn't do fresh (yet), I was being lazy. Imaged 1800X+C6H W7P x64 on TR/ZE for backup of data. Then connected to 2700X+C7H, loaded safe mode, uninstalled drivers, etc. Rebooted to standard mode, did some changes, installed AMD Chipset/Video driver. I spent ~20min or so in OS doing all this.

Now setting up HWINFO and clocked up ~7min idling, as posting, doing other things.

In below screenie I was typing in 1.8V PLL and 1.05 SB voltage, so it is as [Auto] really. The voltage read back in UEFI for [Auto] 1.05 SB is ~1.097V, on ProbeIt point it was ~1.115V. 1.8V PLL [Auto] is read back as 1.809V, DMM on ProbeIt was ~1.806V. Off of ProbeIt points SOC was ~0.800V, RAM ~1.202V, VCORE ~1.425V.



Spoiler




View attachment 180507235222.BMP




So basically for me 1.05V SB [Auto] is way out. I need to set as 1V in UEFI to have ~1.064/5 on ProbeIt. Below is screenie while later with manual set (ie as txt dump in previous post), this setup gives me SB (ie PCH) voltage as it should be.



Spoiler




View attachment 180508004925.BMP




On C6H setting 1.05V in UEFI gained read back of ~1.05V, ProbeIt point was 1.06V. Now with 1V there C7H is the same in this context.

Rig seems more stable in UEFI.


----------



## Gettz8488

Arat said:


> Now you got me confused.
> Spikes above 1.5 V should concerne me but spikes above 1.5+ V should not? Could you please elaborate? Thanks.




Sorry for the confusion. Spikes above 1.5 Happen even when the cpu is on stock that should not concern you because it’s meant to work this and only spikes to 1.5 in transient burst. If you’re hitting 1.5+ using PE which increases the scalar x10 then you should be worried the clock are more aggressive running PE meaning your voltage will be at 1.5 consistently 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> @majestynl try what i use. 1.05 llc2 vrm at 400khz phase at asus optimised. Good up to 3533 on my chip.
> Btw found where silicone looses stability 74-75c on zen1 it was 68-69 on my cooling. So Aim below that under IBT load with volts


Will give it a try with some other tweaks i have in mind! Thanks super saiyan 




gupsterg said:


> *PSA C7H Peeps*
> 
> *SB voltage on [Auto] IMO seems crazy excessive on UEFI 0601.*
> 
> My build was uneventful up til posting and using UEFI.
> 
> I flashbacked UEFI 0601 prior to 1st powerup, removed power from board, then did clear CMOS. I then powered up, went to do screen shot of Main page and CPU page, rig rebooted . I tried again and it rebooted . I stopped taking screen shots via F12.
> 
> Checked UEFI and found SB voltage readout at 1.094V, applied a DMM to ProbeIt point and it read back as 1.115V  . A manual setting of 1V yielded in 1.064/5V, same as what my C6H would be when set at 1.05V or [Auto] in UEFI and when measured at ProbeIt point.
> 
> SOC was read lower in UEFI than Ryzen Gen 1, using DMM on ProbeIt it was ~0.800V. Near enough 0.075V-0.125V lower than several Ryzen Gen 1 CPUs I used on C6H. So SOC [Auto] was as it should be.
> 
> RAM [Auto] was 1.202V on ProbeIt point, all good.
> 
> PLL [Auto] I never measured, but 1.8V manually set was read back via DMM on ProbeIt point as 1.8V steady as it was on my C6H.



Nice gup! Interesting! 



sbakic said:


> I asked this because Stilt said if you have spikes on idle beyond 1.5V don't use it. On full load for PE4 (every other settings is stock) for 42.5x is 1.395V -1.4V with prime95 in-place 8K is it too much or fine?



If thats the case we can all sent our Ryzen2 back to AMD, cause it happends also on stock  What i remember was a quote to somebody who didnt get 4.35Ghz over 1.5v on core, and he said then dont use it! anyways.. those spikes are not on load and all cores on same time, so doesnt look
dangerous to me. And that safety feature will keep me calm...



Shaav said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> could submit your RAM oc results in this excel sheet so that we have a nice overview which settings everbody used for his RAM? Most sheets are missing some very important informationion and I hope this one will include all necessairy one and will therfore help people with their overclocking:
> 
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1HKPVfDcFO-aieAOXHFQZp15rwWadbPTVDNgO8vtyDCM/edit#gid=0



Great one! You could ask @elmor if he can add that one to first post! 

edit: Dont think its good if we mix mobo's. I got different scenarios between my CH6 and CH7. Just my thoughts!


----------



## larrydavid

If any of you are running dual rank B-Die and have some optimized sub-timings and other settings to share, that'd be great.

I'm working on trying getting 3333 or 3200 working with 100% stability before I move onto optimizing the subtimings.


----------



## Shaav

> Great one! You could ask @elmor if he can add that one to first post!


That's a good idea. I thought, if people like it a lot, I will create a separate thread. That would probably be less confusing.



> edit: Dont think its good if we mix mobo's. I got different scenarios between my CH6 and CH7. Just my thoughts!


I know. Different mainboards work differently. But not everybody has a CH6/7 so these people should also have a chance to find another submission where the exact same mainboard was used. I mean, you can filter the spread sheet by your needs so there is no real downside for you if we include more boards.



> If any of you are running dual rank B-Die and have some optimized sub-timings and other settings to share, that'd be great.


I have. See the link below and take a look at the validation screenshot from "Shaav" https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/0/
These values are not 100% optimised but from experience I can telll you that SCL4 or less is not possible and tRFC will probably bei aroung 400-450. The other timings are either optimised or dont have a huge inpact on performence.


----------



## lordzed83

@gupsterg @elmor
Seems same thing with sb volts here. Manual 1.05 was giving 1.113 set it to 1.0 and now its 1.05-1.06

Pll is different got set at 1.8 and reads 1.860 - 1.870


----------



## gupsterg

@The Stilt

CPO data.



Spoiler



W7P x64 (recycled )
UEFI 0601 as per txt
R7 2700X UA 1805SUS

View attachment 0601_Base_Profile_setting.txt






























majestynl said:


> Nice gup! Interesting!


NP , she's holding sound now  .



lordzed83 said:


> @gupsterg @elmor
> Seems same thing with sb volts here. Manual 1.05 was giving 1.113 set it to 1.0 and now its 1.05-1.06
> 
> Pll is different got set at 1.8 and reads 1.860 - 1.870


Check with DMM if you have.

At 750ms polling rate this is how HWINFO is for me.



Spoiler














Idle TCTL/TDIE seems more bouncy than R7 1800X, even when that was 4.0GHz PState 0 @ 1.387V VID  . 

2700X as per txt attached for The Stilt (ie stock), is scoring less in CB15 than R7 1800X 4.0GHz  , only beats it in single core.



Spoiler


----------



## DrumAndBass

The Stilt said:


> Manual voltage is broken LLC wise in 0601 bios.
> Or not broken, but the control doesn't work as it should.


This is sad. Have someone performed LLC tests/confirmations too? Can someone with voltmeter test difference between several LLC levels, like Buildzoid did in his latest video?  @VPII when you have spare time - please test VCore with your voltmeter different LLC levels. I as many others here would really appreciate it!


----------



## gupsterg

UEFI 0601 settings as attached txt, *but* manually set VBOOT/VDIMM 1.35V and SOC 0.900V

View attachment 0601_Base_Profile_setting.txt


Screenie 1 captured at 22:11:31
Screenie 2 captured at 22:11:53
Screenie 3 captured at 22:12:07



Spoiler




View attachment 180507221131.BMP


View attachment 180507221153.BMP


View attachment 180507221207.BMP




ProbeIt points:-

VCORE: 1.425-8V
SOC: 0.893 (steady)
RAM: 1.354/5V
1.8V PLL: 1.802/4V
1.05V SB: 1.060/2V

*Note:* Even when sat in UEFI a load is created on CPU.

OS let idle for ~15min then capture, Balanced stock OS power plan.



Spoiler














ProbeIt points:-

VCORE: 0.596-0.916V (as expected for stock CPU)
SOC: 0.892/6V
RAM: 1.354V (steady)
1.8V PLL: 1.803/5V
1.05V SB: 1.052/3V

Now running HCI v6.0, 3200MHz The Stilt Safe, but TRC 44 TRFC 256. The SOC of 0.900 for 3200MHz is quite low compared with 5x Ryzen gen 1 tested on C6H. I could get some to OS, but no way HCI active. Currently using F4-3200C14D-16GTZ, what I used the most on C6H.



Spoiler














ProbeIt points:-

VCORE: 1.308/20V (as expected for stock CPU)
SOC: 0.888/9V
RAM: 1.353/4V
1.8V PLL: 1.805/7V
1.05V SB: 1.057/9V

ProbeIt points to me seem much improved than C6H for sure. Basis for this is readings of idle vs load. For example RAM I used to see a LL effect just like on VCORE, SOC, IIRC only PLL/SB didn't have it.


----------



## elyas10

Hey guys I am new to the forums and new to this motherboard.

I am currently having issues raising my BCLK over 101.4, anything over 101.4 will cause an unstable overclock (my computer freezing in Windows after running prime95/Cinebench).
I uploaded pictures of my current BIOS settings.
https://imgur.com/a/0Nkx0aD

Things I have tried:
-If I lower the performance enhancer level to default it will be stable but I want to boost for single threaded applications.
-I set the offset voltage as high as +0.075 and it doesn't even allow a stable 102 let alone 101.8 BCLK. Thus changing the voltage really had no effect in going past a stable 101.4 BCLK
-I have tried 102 BCLK with stock memory settings (and all other settings stock) with just performance enhancer level 3, boost enabled, and offset voltage +0.075. The result was the same as with all of my memory settings and other settings.

Also I have an image of HWiNFO during a stress test (this is with 101.6 BCLK, +0.025 offset voltage, performance level3, and enabled precision boost):
https://i.imgur.com/bD1O3AS.png
This stress test later proved to be unstable when it froze not too long after.

I have a noctua DH-15 inside my Meshify C for cooling. I have 2 140mm intake fans, 2 fans on top (120mm and 140mm) and one 120mm fan in the back.

My current theory is that my motherboard needs the extra 4pin CPU power cable (currently I only have the 8pin CPU power cable), but it was my understanding I only really need that cable for LN2 overclocking?


----------



## majestynl

elyas10 said:


> Hey guys I am new to the forums and new to this motherboard.
> 
> I am currently having issues raising my BCLK over 101.4, anything over 101.4 will cause an unstable overclock (my computer freezing in Windows after running prime95/Cinebench).
> I uploaded pictures of my current BIOS settings.
> https://imgur.com/a/0Nkx0aD
> 
> Things I have tried:
> -If I lower the performance enhancer level to default it will be stable but I want to boost for single threaded applications.
> -I set the offset voltage as high as +0.075 and it doesn't even allow a stable 102 let alone 101.8 BCLK. Thus changing the voltage really had no effect in going past a stable 101.4 BCLK
> -I have tried 102 BCLK with stock memory settings (and all other settings stock) with just performance enhancer level 3, boost enabled, and offset voltage +0.075. The result was the same as with all of my memory settings and other settings.
> 
> Also I have an image of HWiNFO during a stress test (this is with 101.6 BCLK, +0.025 offset voltage, performance level3, and enabled precision boost):
> https://i.imgur.com/bD1O3AS.png
> This stress test later proved to be unstable when it froze not too long after.
> 
> I have a noctua DH-15 inside my Meshify C for cooling. I have 2 140mm intake fans, 2 fans on top (120mm and 140mm) and one 120mm fan in the back.
> 
> My current theory is that my motherboard needs the extra 4pin CPU power cable (currently I only have the 8pin CPU power cable), but it was my understanding I only really need that cable for LN2 overclocking?


Same goes for me, but I have tried it with Manual OC. 102 BCLK takes ages for booting windows and then eventually when loaded 10+min, Its totally laggy and freezes then. 100-101 works fine. Never tried 101.6 
Also tried 103+ etc, with no success booting at all. 

And by the way: I have both power cables plugged in so no need to try. Doesn't make sense anyways..


----------



## Rusakova

elyas10 said:


> Hey guys I am new to the forums and new to this motherboard.
> 
> I am currently having issues raising my BCLK over 101.4, anything over 101.4 will cause an unstable overclock (my computer freezing in Windows after running prime95/Cinebench).
> I uploaded pictures of my current BIOS settings.
> https://imgur.com/a/0Nkx0aD
> 
> Things I have tried:
> -If I lower the performance enhancer level to default it will be stable but I want to boost for single threaded applications.
> -I set the offset voltage as high as +0.075 and it doesn't even allow a stable 102 let alone 101.8 BCLK. Thus changing the voltage really had no effect in going past a stable 101.4 BCLK
> -I have tried 102 BCLK with stock memory settings (and all other settings stock) with just performance enhancer level 3, boost enabled, and offset voltage +0.075. The result was the same as with all of my memory settings and other settings.
> 
> Also I have an image of HWiNFO during a stress test (this is with 101.6 BCLK, +0.025 offset voltage, performance level3, and enabled precision boost):
> https://i.imgur.com/bD1O3AS.png
> This stress test later proved to be unstable when it froze not too long after.
> 
> I have a noctua DH-15 inside my Meshify C for cooling. I have 2 140mm intake fans, 2 fans on top (120mm and 140mm) and one 120mm fan in the back.
> 
> My current theory is that my motherboard needs the extra 4pin CPU power cable (currently I only have the 8pin CPU power cable), but it was my understanding I only really need that cable for LN2 overclocking?


Is your memory stable at 3500 MHz ? Have you tested it at that speed ?
Why are you running your ram with 1.48v ?


----------



## gupsterg

elyas10 said:


> My current theory is that my motherboard needs the extra 4pin CPU power cable (currently I only have the 8pin CPU power cable), but it was my understanding I only really need that cable for LN2 overclocking?


The 8 pin is more than ample. Both of those are wired in parallel to the power plane.

http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...r-vi-overclocking-thread-18.html#post25909381

http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...on-regarding-power-delivery.html#post25924359


----------



## majestynl

Esenel said:


> Hi majestynl,
> 
> could you redo your AIDA Latency Benchmark with the latest AIDA version 5.97?
> For me it showed a loss of 2ns in latency. Would be interesting if you see the same and it would be better for comparison
> 
> Thanks!


And here it is, as promised! No difference for me...sorry


----------



## elyas10

Rusakova said:


> Is your memory stable at 3500 MHz ? Have you tested it at that speed ?
> Why are you running your ram with 1.48v ?


My memory is stable (30min of memtest and LinX) with anything below 3550MHz 14-14-14-28 timings 

Is that bad I have 1.48v?
I was following the Ryzen DRAM calculator.
https://i.imgur.com/FFnyhYz.png


My memory isn't the problem though, I can't get past 101.4 BCLK with 2133 MHz with default timings.




gupsterg said:


> The 8 pin is more than ample. Both of those are wired in parallel to the power plane.
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...r-vi-overclocking-thread-18.html#post25909381
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...on-regarding-power-delivery.html#post25924359



Okay that's good to know. Hopefully, someone knows why I can't go past 101.4 BCLK


----------



## gupsterg

Well calling it a night. Impressed how easily 3200MHz was achieved for HCI and the lowness of SOC. I just picked a random figure of 900mV to use, may see how low I can go to pass HCI before moving on to P95, RB, etc. CB15 got a nice boost from MEMCLK/IFCLK increase  , CPU-Z seemed unaffected.



Spoiler






































Just in case others want Raja posted before in C6H thread a C7H wallpaper, link.



elyas10 said:


> Okay that's good to know. Hopefully, someone knows why I can't go past 101.4 BCLK


I used to find at x BCLK on C6H my WiFi dropped, perhaps something you have "connected" is causing issue.

Personally I don't tinker with BCLK. Perhaps by changing eCLK to async may help, but it has a latency hit, check PDF in OP.


----------



## elyas10

gupsterg said:


> Well calling it a night. Impressed how easily 3200MHz was achieved for HCI and the lowness of SOC. I just picked a random figure of 900mV to use, may see how low I can go to pass HCI before moving on to P95, RB, etc. CB15 got a nice boost from MEMCLK/IFCLK increase  , CPU-Z seemed unaffected.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 179481
> 
> 
> View attachment 179489
> 
> 
> View attachment 179497
> 
> 
> View attachment 179505
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just in case others want Raja posted before in C6H thread a C7H wallpaper, link.
> 
> I used to find at x BCLK on C6H my WiFi dropped, perhaps something you have "connected" is causing issue.
> 
> Personally I don't tinker with BCLK. Perhaps by changing eCLK to async may help, but it has a latency hit, check PDF in OP.


I will test this and come back to you. It don't plan to use async but using this feature should rule out some possibilities. 

What do you mean by something I have "connected"? Like my my GPU or RAM? I have a EVGA GTX 1080 FTW, besides that I only have a slow Crucial SSD and a 3TB mechanical HDD. Also I have the non-wifi version of the motherboard.

EDIT:

I used async and I still couldn't run 102Mhz BCLK 
https://i.imgur.com/IS1xcV6.jpg


----------



## i_max2k2

I'm have been able to stablize my cpu on 4.3Ghz all cores, with 1.394v showing in HW Info beta version as the vid. With IBT @ very high, and temps around 75c. I doubt I'd do anything in my 24/7 stuff that will be that CPU intensive. I believe I'm i bios 0401. Are there voltage discrepancies in that bios as well? Apart from the cpu volts, all other voltages are on auto. What could be ways to lower the cpu voltage, like PLL voltage? 

I can boot on all auto voltages at 4.4Ghz, and run Cinebench once or twice but the autovoltage are close to 1.46v at that point, which I guess is a little too high for Ryzen 2?


----------



## Gettz8488

i_max2k2 said:


> I'm have been able to stablize my cpu on 4.3Ghz all cores, with 1.394v showing in HW Info beta version as the vid. With IBT @ very high, and temps around 75c. I doubt I'd do anything in my 24/7 stuff that will be that CPU intensive. I believe I'm i bios 0401. Are there voltage discrepancies in that bios as well? Apart from the cpu volts, all other voltages are on auto. What could be ways to lower the cpu voltage, like PLL voltage?
> 
> 
> 
> I can boot on all auto voltages at 4.4Ghz, and run Cinebench once or twice but the autovoltage are close to 1.46v at that point, which I guess is a little too high for Ryzen 2?




Are you looking at SVI2 Voltage on hwinfo? I doubt it’s hitting 4.4 at 1.46 Vcore


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## i_max2k2

Gettz8488 said:


> Are you looking at SVI2 Voltage on hwinfo? I doubt it’s hitting 4.4 at 1.46 Vcore
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


You're right its 1.49v.



Spoiler















This is with ram at the default speed, 2133mhz or something.


----------



## Gettz8488

i_max2k2 said:


> You're right its 1.49v.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is with ram at the default speed, 2133mhz or something.




1.494 is way to high you don’t want more then 1.42 spikes imo if you’re using PE


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## i_max2k2

I agree, but PE states were disabled when I was trying this, and voltage was on Auto. I think on 0207 and 0401 they aren't present. I see them in 0601.


----------



## Esenel

majestynl said:


> Esenel said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi majestynl,
> 
> could you redo your AIDA Latency Benchmark with the latest AIDA version 5.97? 🙂
> For me it showed a loss of 2ns in latency. Would be interesting if you see the same and it would be better for comparison 🙂
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> 
> 
> And here it is, as promised! No difference for me...sorry
Click to expand...

That is even better 🙂
You bet the 60ns barrier 😉


----------



## Gettz8488

I think I’ve gotten a stable OC at 4.1 Ghz and Offset voltage at +0.13125 for a total 1.344 Vcore LLC3 under heavy load my Vcore is 1.319 seems like the best I can do atm even with my h115I and noctua fans since I can’t download Corsair link and adjust it I spike up to 78C


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## gupsterg

Good morning, _Vietnam!!!_ 

Nice sweet post even with room at 19C, IIRC some gen 1 CPUs had cold boot issues. Quick little 30min circuit on RB with tweaked RAM as done last night. Stock 2700X is impressing me a bit more than yesterday, ~3.95GHz in RB, below is 29 of 30min.



Spoiler














What was more impressive was how it held so well MHz in Y-Cruncher. Captured each test, but VST as attention got diverted by breakfast  . Comparing VID and SVI2 seems like no VDROOP :headscrat , using LLC [Auto] for CPU/SOC, so would think is AMD stock.



Spoiler






































































@elmor

My bug list for UEFI 0601:-


1.05V SB [Auto] is 1.115V on ProbeIt, stock settings. Using 1V manually gets me ~1.06V on ProbeIt when in UEFI and ~1.05V in OS at idle/load.

Bluetooth disabled in UEFI is still detected in OS and functional.


----------



## hurricane28

Hi guys, 

I just did a fresh install of Windows 10 pro build 1803 but when i go to the Asus CH7 hero Wifi page to download drivers, i saw that there are some missing... 

I see no USB drivers, now my USB isn't working properly and i can't find the driver anywhere...


----------



## elmor

gupsterg said:


> *PSA C7H Peeps*
> 
> *SB voltage on [Auto] IMO seems crazy excessive on UEFI 0601.*
> 
> My build was uneventful up til posting and using UEFI.
> 
> I flashbacked UEFI 0601 prior to 1st powerup, removed power from board, then did clear CMOS. I then powered up, went to do screen shot of Main page and CPU page, rig rebooted . I tried again and it rebooted . I stopped taking screen shots via F12.
> 
> Checked UEFI and found SB voltage readout at 1.094V, applied a DMM to ProbeIt point and it read back as 1.115V  . A manual setting of 1V yielded in 1.064/5V, same as what my C6H would be when set at 1.05V or [Auto] in UEFI and when measured at ProbeIt point.
> 
> SOC was read lower in UEFI than Ryzen Gen 1, using DMM on ProbeIt it was ~0.800V. Near enough 0.075V-0.125V lower than several Ryzen Gen 1 CPUs I used on C6H. So SOC [Auto] was as it should be.
> 
> RAM [Auto] was 1.202V on ProbeIt point, all good.
> 
> PLL [Auto] I never measured, but 1.8V manually set was read back via DMM on ProbeIt point as 1.8V steady as it was on my C6H.





crakej said:


> My SB was identical to yours! Elmor or Stilt did mention something about voltage the other day when I reported my PLL voltage as low - seemed to think it was most likely a readout error. Maybe one of them can clear this up for us. Do your other voltages report as you would expect?
> 
> I have my DMM - will have a test in a while and report back.



There's a small issue on the first batches of boards where the droop from the VRM output to the SB input is a relatively large (~50mV). The read point for both software and ProbeIt is at the VRM output, so it will read higher (before droop). Ie the VRM is outputting ~50mV higher than what the SB is actually getting. Not pretty but it shouldn't be a cause for concern. If you set it to ~1.0V in BIOS to get a 1.05V readout, technically you're undervolting the rail.


----------



## Gettz8488

elmor said:


> There's a small issue on the first batches of boards where the droop from the VRM output to the SB input is a relatively large (~50mV). The read point for both software and ProbeIt is at the VRM output, so it will read higher (before droop). Ie the VRM is outputting ~50mV higher than what the SB is actually getting. Not pretty but it shouldn't be a cause for concern. If you set it to ~1.0V in BIOS to get a 1.05V readout, technically you're undervolting the rail.




So is it a readout error or is it actually giving the voltage the extra .5? Pretty sure I’m one of the first to purchase ch7 so I assume it’s the same on my board 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## lordzed83

elmor said:


> There's a small issue on the first batches of boards where the droop from the VRM output to the SB input is a relatively large (~50mV). The read point for both software and ProbeIt is at the VRM output, so it will read higher (before droop). Ie the VRM is outputting ~50mV higher than what the SB is actually getting. Not pretty but it shouldn't be a cause for concern. If you set it to ~1.0V in BIOS to get a 1.05V readout, technically you're undervolting the rail.


AAA cool thanks for clearing this up. Undervolting not my thing haha
Ill see if i can dig in to my rig with multimeter and see whats the deal with my PLL since got me curious. Knowing life its also readout error that it says 1.875 when set to 1.800 on manual and on auto. I know that when i changed to 1.7 stability went out of window so ye


----------



## gupsterg

elmor said:


> There's a small issue on the first batches of boards where the droop from the VRM output to the SB input is a relatively large (~50mV). The read point for both software and ProbeIt is at the VRM output, so it will read higher (before droop). Ie the VRM is outputting ~50mV higher than what the SB is actually getting. Not pretty but it shouldn't be a cause for concern. If you set it to ~1.0V in BIOS to get a 1.05V readout, technically you're undervolting the rail.


Cheers  for clarification, will account for this and roll back to 1.05V. Strange it aided my freezes in UEFI, probably intial build gremlins  .

All in all the Batman-esque darker theme of board is growing on me  . ProbeIt points sweet, albeit my board being early with the SB voltage snag for ProbeIt/SW readout :doh: . VRM temps do look better than C6H, not apples to apples compare below. R7 1800X @ 4.0GHz 1.381V VID, ~22C room, 2700X stock ~21C room, same case, cooling and fan profile.



Spoiler


----------



## crakej

So my probe it points are not accessible due to my rather untidy wiring. I think I'm going to get a set of those nice flexible cables - I just can't move in my case - the wires are so stiff.

My PLL is set at 1.8v and reports as 1.766 in the bios and HWInfo. My SB 1.05v I also have to set to 1.0 to get the right voltage.

I will try get access to my probe it point later, in the meantime i'm going back to 509 to see if it's any better.

Edit - thanks for letting us know Elmor I'm still going to go for 509 though as I still have booting problem and random crash/shutdown/reboots when OCed


----------



## gupsterg

@crakej

All my ProbeIt points seem on the £, except 1.05V SB.

SW seems ~20mV out on RAM, ~20mV out on SOC, PLL is bang on, VID/SVI2 seems sweet even on [Auto] LLC.

So on 1.05V SB I am seeing what Elmor has stated. ie the VRM is outputting ~50mV more at [Auto] or manual 1.05V, as it is accounting for VDROOP across power plane (ie resistances, losses, etc). The ProbeIt/SW is showing the LL affected value and not actual, like the other points are. So UEFI set to [Auto] or manual 1.05V will show ~1.1V for 1.05V SB in UEFI readback, HWINFO and DMM, but the PCH/Chipset is getting ~1.05V.

So we account for ~50mV when measuring on ProbeIt for 1.05V SB if have early batch mobo. HWINFO you can modify 1.05V SB with an offset of ~50mV so it reads right. We will just always see ~+50mV in UEFI read back or monitoring which we can't adjust out the ~50mV.


----------



## crakej

How come i seem to be the only one with PLL reading out 1.76 in bios and HWIfno - even when set to 1.8v - I don't get why mine is so different to everyone else - is it my memory, is it that I have a Ryzen 1xxx?

Same readouts in 0509 with everything on auto.


----------



## Tactix

Curious what others are using for SOCv 
Running 3200mhz memory and auto SOCv is around 1.125v 
Thanks


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> @majestynl try what i use. 1.05 llc2 vrm at 400khz phase at asus optimised. Good up to 3533 on my chip.
> 
> Btw found where silicone looses stability 74-75c on zen1 it was 68-69 on my cooling. So Aim below that under IBT load with volts


Didnt helped me, After some x testst yesterday 3466 RAM with TT passed +3500% RAMTest  Cadbus setting 30ohm did the trick. Will show results and info later today!




gupsterg said:


> I used to find at x BCLK on C6H my WiFi dropped, perhaps something you have "connected" is causing issue.
> Personally I don't tinker with BCLK. Perhaps by changing eCLK to async may help, but it has a latency hit, check PDF in OP.


I have the same issue on BCLK, i have double checked the SATA devices etc. All connected to the right ports.
Also tried Async with no luck. Curious who has the same issue? Maybe if you have time you could try it also?



Gettz8488 said:


> 1.494 is way to high you don’t want more then 1.42 spikes imo if you’re using PE


As stated before, the short spikes are no issue. Check all screenshots from others. We all have spikes above 1.5v o stock and PE modes. But those are not on full load on all cores!
People will get confused... Most important are the voltages on load! Or all cores together with high voltages!



Esenel said:


> That is even better 🙂
> You bet the 60ns barrier 😉


Just a lil bit  Will try to tighten some extra timings today and share the info later. Yesterday i passed 3500% with these setting before i hit the Stop button! (RAMTest)



hurricane28 said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> I just did a fresh install of Windows 10 pro build 1803 but when i go to the Asus CH7 hero Wifi page to download drivers, i saw that there are some missing...
> 
> I see no USB drivers, now my USB isn't working properly and i can't find the driver anywhere...


I already asked elmor for this, but probably he missed my message on this. I dont have any USB issues with fresh install of windows they got recognized properly (ASUS).


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> How come i seem to be the only one with PLL reading out 1.76 in bios and HWIfno - even when set to 1.8v - I don't get why mine is so different to everyone else - is it my memory, is it that I have a Ryzen 1xxx?
> 
> Same readouts in 0509 with everything on auto.


Well mine says 1.875 step down 1.775. Bet those are readout errors.

C6H learned me to trust what i set not what it reads 🙂
@Majestyni same im on 30 on all forgot to mention 24 was giving me error here and there 20 even more 😛


----------



## hurricane28

majestynl said:


> Didnt helped me, After some x testst yesterday 3466 RAM with TT passed +3500% RAMTest  Cadbus setting 30ohm did the trick. Will show results and info later today!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have the same issue on BCLK, i have double checked the SATA devices etc. All connected to the right ports.
> Also tried Async with no luck. Curious who has the same issue? Maybe if you have time you could try it also?
> 
> 
> 
> As stated before, the short spikes are no issue. Check all screenshots from others. We all have spikes above 1.5v o stock and PE modes. But those are not on full load on all cores!
> People will get confused... Most important are the voltages on load! Or all cores together with high voltages!
> 
> 
> 
> Just a lil bit  Will try to tighten some extra timings today and share the info later. Yesterday i passed 3500% with these setting before i hit the Stop button! (RAMTest)
> 
> 
> 
> I already asked elmor for this, but probably he missed my message on this. I dont have any USB issues with fresh install of windows they got recognized properly (ASUS).


Weird man. I was looking on the Asus CH6 website which has the same controller so i thought but that is the gen 1 controller while we are running the gen 2 controller which is different i think and needs different drivers. 
Maybe its so new that there are no drivers for it yet as i can't find any on the driver CD either Lol, weird man.


----------



## hurricane28

@elmor, why are you hiding the USB driver? lol.


----------



## elmor

hurricane28 said:


> @elmor, why are you hiding the USB driver? lol.



Try this (x64 only): http://www.mediafire.com/file/z83zbsqsyva63sl/X470 USB.zip


----------



## hurricane28

elmor said:


> Try this (x64 only): http://www.mediafire.com/file/z83zbsqsyva63sl/X470 USB.zip


Thnx, it took a while in order for the hardware to accept the drivers but they finally worked. 

Looks like everything works properly again:


----------



## Rusakova

elmor said:


> There's a small issue on the first batches of boards where the droop from the VRM output to the SB input is a relatively large (~50mV). The read point for both software and ProbeIt is at the VRM output, so it will read higher (before droop). Ie the VRM is outputting ~50mV higher than what the SB is actually getting. Not pretty but it shouldn't be a cause for concern. If you set it to ~1.0V in BIOS to get a 1.05V readout, technically you're undervolting the rail.


Is this something that will be fixed in an upcoming BIOS (readout value adjusted) ?
Will ASUS accept RMA's based on this ?


----------



## zulex

Hello.

My C7HWIFI MB just arrived today. 
Im going to overclock my 2700x with this mobo today.
Could you please recommend which bios runs best in overclocking?
0509 or 0601?


----------



## elmor

Rusakova said:


> Is this something that will be fixed in an upcoming BIOS (readout value adjusted) ?
> Will ASUS accept RMA's based on this ?



No, it's not something that should be of concern.


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> How come i seem to be the only one with PLL reading out 1.76 in bios and HWIfno - even when set to 1.8v - I don't get why mine is so different to everyone else - is it my memory, is it that I have a Ryzen 1xxx?
> 
> Same readouts in 0509 with everything on auto.



Shouldn't be due to RAM/CPU. What's ProbeIt point saying?



Tactix said:


> Curious what others are using for SOCv
> Running 3200mhz memory and auto SOCv is around 1.125v
> Thanks


Check few posts back. I'm using 0.9V. Passed 2.5hrs HCI v6.0, 30min RealBench, 1.5hrs Y-Cruncher, when I left home it was on P95 8K 4096K 13.5GB, will be checking on it in ~30min.


----------



## raucous

Hi

I'm looking at purchasing parts for a Ryzen system and I'm seeking the best gaming performance.

I am looking at getting the Crosshair VII mobo

My questions are:

1) Which is the best memory to use with the Crosshair VII (for maximum FPS in games)?
2) Can the wifi signal on the Crosshair VII mobo (wifi version) be permanently disabled in BIOS if it is not needed?
3) Does the Crosshair VII have easy to use auto overclocking for memory as I'm no expert.

Thanks


----------



## sbakic

raucous said:


> Hi
> 
> I'm looking at purchasing parts for a Ryzen system and I'm seeking the best gaming performance.
> 
> I am looking at getting the Crosshair VII mobo
> 
> My questions are:
> 
> 1) Which is the best memory to use with the Crosshair VII (for maximum FPS in games)?
> 2) Can the wifi signal on the Crosshair VII mobo (wifi version) be permanently disabled in BIOS if it is not needed?
> 3) Does the Crosshair VII have easy to use auto overclocking for memory as I'm no expert.
> 
> Thanks


1. F4-3200C14D-16GTZR or F4-3200C14D-16GTZ
2. probably buy none wifi version
3. yes it's called performance enhancement: you can choose between level 1,2,3(oc) and 4(oc) but buy my experience it will not boost single core beyond 43.5 in my case.


----------



## gupsterg

:heart: this currently, even if CPU stock.

UEFI 0601
R7 2700X UA 1805SUS
F4-3200C14D-16GTZ using 3200MHz The Stilt Safe but TRC 44 TRFC 256
SOC: 0.900V, VBOOT/VDIMM: 1.35V









_And_ with undervolted chipset :wheee: .

@Mumak

Was just wondering is VDDP not available for monitoring on C7H? What is VIN5?



raucous said:


> Hi
> 
> I'm looking at purchasing parts for a Ryzen system and I'm seeking the best gaming performance.
> 
> I am looking at getting the Crosshair VII mobo
> 
> My questions are:
> 
> 1) Which is the best memory to use with the Crosshair VII (for maximum FPS in games)?
> 2) Can the wifi signal on the Crosshair VII mobo (wifi version) be permanently disabled in BIOS if it is not needed?
> 3) Does the Crosshair VII have easy to use auto overclocking for memory as I'm no expert.
> 
> Thanks


1) Anything with Samsung B die will make your life easy with Ryzen, check this and see officially supported speeds here.

2) Yes.

3) I got 3200MHz C14 1T in 3 steps, drop me a PM or post and we'll get you up to _SPEEEDD!_  .


----------



## hurricane28

gupsterg said:


> :heart: this currently, even if CPU stock.
> 
> UEFI 0601
> R7 2700X UA 1807SUS
> F4-3200C14D-16GTZ using 3200MHz The Stilt Safe but TRC 44 TRFC 256
> SOC: 0.900V, VBOOT/VDIMM: 1.35V
> 
> View attachment 179913
> 
> 
> _And_ with undervolted chipset :wheee: .
> 
> 
> 
> 1) Anything with Samsung B die will make your life easy with Ryzen, check this and see officially supported speeds here.
> 
> 2) Yes.
> 
> 3) I got 3200MHz C14 1T in 3 steps, drop me a PM or post and we'll get you up to _SPEEEDD!_  .


This is overclock.net man, not undervolt.net LOL. 

Kidding, seems like you have a good CPU man.


----------



## Anty

gupsterg - maybe you want some nice noname undervolting PSU? you know - less voltage in less heat out


----------



## gupsterg

You guys made my LOL! :grouphug: .

Just _breaking her in_ chaps! :devil-smi .


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> Shouldn't be due to RAM/CPU. What's ProbeIt point saying?


Not managed to probe it yet as wiring in the way of the points, but everyone else reports their PLL being over in bios and HWInfo, mine is under - 1.75 atm


----------



## lordzed83

hurricane28 said:


> This is overclock.net man, not undervolt.net LOL.
> 
> Kidding, seems like you have a good CPU man.


Overclockers > Undervolters

Well today I can try and see at what volts i coukld pass 10x ibt very high : 4300 just for fun bet jump is massive  ATM stable with 1.419 so one step down from recommended


----------



## larrydavid

lordzed83 said:


> Overclockers > Undervolters
> 
> Well today I can try and see at what volts i coukld pass 10x ibt very high : 4300 just for fun bet jump is massive  ATM stable with 1.419 so one step down from recommended


You're going to make me regret not getting a Silicon Lottery binned chip!


----------



## gupsterg

@4.5hrs of P95 I got itch to increase RAM MHz. In UEFI set 3333MHz The Stilt Fast, VDBOOT/VDIMM: 1.365V _and_ :yessir: .



Spoiler














Still SOC: 0.9V and _undervolt chipset_  :wheee: .



crakej said:


> Not managed to probe it yet as wiring in the way of the points, but everyone else reports their PLL being over in bios and HWInfo, mine is under - 1.75 atm


OK  , waiting for update when you get chance  . Setting 1.365V VDIMM is showing as ~1.369V on ProbeIt, ie same small differential as when set 1.35V. Will let you know what SW shows when get to that stage.


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> @4.5hrs of P95 I got itch to increase RAM MHz. In UEFI set 3333MHz The Stilt Fast, VDBOOT/VDIMM: 1.365V _and_ :yessir: .
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 179993
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still SOC: 0.9V and _undervolt chipset_  :wheee: .


Nice Gup! Just some info from my experience when i bumped the RAM above 3400, maybe it will safe your time if you get instability:

- Increased RAM voltage + boot
- Increased Soc (don't know if this one is needed for you, my sticks just love 1.15v, same happened with same stick on the CH6)
- Cadbus to 30ohm (did the trick to pass 1500% RAM Test, yesterday stopped around 3000%)


----------



## gupsterg

@majestynl

Cheers  , she feels as she's shaping up nicely for RAM.









I'm using HCI v6.0, 400% is ~2.5hrs on it, it has differing % over time compared with older versions. May just buy RAM Test as well, but TBH HCI/GSAT has covered it for me.

I'm hoping I get 3400MHz C15 lower level SOC/VDIMM as my R7 1800X managed, even when core was OC'd to 4.0GHz. That used 1.031V in UEFI and 1.365V for these sticks. You'd be surprised when I swapped the F4-3200C14D-16GTZ on C6H to F4-3200C14Q-32GVK, I only needed 1 step up in SOC and ProcODT to gain P95 stability, HCI only needed the SOC.


----------



## Gettz8488

lordzed83 said:


> Overclockers > Undervolters
> 
> 
> 
> Well today I can try and see at what volts i coukld pass 10x ibt very high : 4300 just for fun bet jump is massive  ATM stable with 1.419 so one step down from recommended




What is your vdroop for your 4.3?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Gettz8488

gupsterg said:


> @4.5hrs of P95 I got itch to increase RAM MHz. In UEFI set 3333MHz The Stilt Fast, VDBOOT/VDIMM: 1.365V _and_ :yessir: .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 179993
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still SOC: 0.9V and _undervolt chipset_  :wheee: .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OK [emoji4] , waiting for update when you get chance [emoji4] . Setting 1.365V VDIMM is showing as ~1.369V on ProbeIt, ie same small differential as when set 1.35V. Will let you know what SW shows when get to that stage.




Are you using LLC? Wondering if anyone can confirm if llc is working I think it is but I keep hearing some ppl say it isn’t and I don’t have a meter for testing 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> @majestynl
> 
> Cheers  , she feels as she's shaping up nicely for RAM.
> 
> View attachment 180033
> 
> 
> I'm using HCI v6.0, 400% is ~2.5hrs on it, it has differing % over time compared with older versions. May just buy RAM Test as well, but TBH HCI/GSAT has covered it for me.
> 
> I'm hoping I get 3400MHz C15 lower level SOC/VDIMM as my R7 1800X managed, even when core was OC'd to 4.0GHz. That used 1.031V in UEFI and 1.365V for these sticks. You'd be surprised when I swapped the F4-3200C14D-16GTZ on C6H to F4-3200C14Q-32GVK, I only needed 1 step up in SOC and ProcODT to gain P95 stability, HCI only needed the SOC.


Yep i know about the %  Dont need to buy , will give you my license. Its up to 5 pc installs! Will PM you!
Thats really suprising for swapping to a 32Gb yeah!


----------



## Gettz8488

Wondering if anyone with a multimeter can verify something for me. I ordered mine but it hadn’t come in yet. When you manually OC it disables a few things on the cpu. Can anyone verify if the voltages are accurate if you use the following settings. Core ratio 41 Offset Voltage +0.13125 LLC 3 doesn’t have to be exact settings just want to make sure the Voltage readings on hwinfo are accurate 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## gupsterg

@Gettz8488

Don't know, not played with LLC. I did my OC on C6H with LLC: [Auto] for VCORE/SOC as it was guided this is AMD stock LLC. So proceeding the same on C7H.

View attachment 0601_Base_Profile_setting.txt


My C7H is set as txt above, only thing not in txt is I set BankGroupSwap as [Disabled]. UEFI seems to be setting this aspect correctly AFAIK on [Auto] for RAM config in use, but I like to set it.

Then for 3200MHz I just load The Stilt 3200MHz Safe preset, set TRC 44 & TRFC 256, set RAM MHz on Extreme Tweaker as 3200MHz, edit VBOOT/VDIMM to 1.35V and set SOC: 0.900V manually. That profile IMO passed ALPHA stability testing, still BETA phase as need to get some real world usage out of it.

Then for 3333MHz I just load The Stilt 3333MHz Fast preset, set 3333MHz on Extreme Tweaker, edit VBOOT/VDIMM to 1.365V, SOC is already there at 0.900V. This is still in ALPHA phase  .

@majestynl

Yeah you could have knocked me down with a feather when I got HCI pass and later P95. It just felt too easy getting the [email protected] C15 on that R7+C6H setup. It's now used as nerd porn, sitting in a box  .

Ahhh, I appreciate the offer chap :thumb: , but I'm gonna decline the offer of you PM'ing me key. I have near enough 2 live builds and the R7+C6H sitting in wings. I could eat up your licenses inadvertently. So I'll get my own when need them.


----------



## Gettz8488

gupsterg said:


> @Gettz8488
> 
> 
> 
> Don't know, not played with LLC. I did my OC on C6H with LLC: [Auto] for VCORE/SOC as it was guided this is AMD stock LLC.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 180041
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My C7H is set as txt above, only thing not in txt is I set BankGroupSwap as [Disabled]. UEFI seems to be setting this aspect correctly AFAIL on [Auto] but I like to set it.
> 
> 
> 
> Then for 3200MHz I just load The Stilt 3200MHz Safe preset, set TRC 44 & TRFC 256, set RAM MHz on Extreme Tweaker as 3200MHz, edit VBOOT/VDIMM to 1.35V and set SOC: 0.900V manually. That profile IMO passed ALPHA stability testing, still BETA phase as need to get some real world usage out of it.
> 
> 
> 
> Then for 3333MHz I just load The Stilt 3333MHz Fast preset, set 3333MHz on Extreme Tweaker, edit VBOOT/VDIMM to 1.365V, SOC is already there at 0.900V. This is still in ALPHA phase [emoji6] .




Good stuff gupsterg. My only problem with my manual OC is I can’t get 4.1ghz without llc if I use auto llc I need 1.395 cus of the vdroop but I have it stable at 1.344 with llc3 as it only droops to 1.319 I just want to make sure I’m getting the right voltages and not frying the thing but I don’t have a multimeter to test yet. So was wondering if someone else can test voltages on the board with similar settings 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## i_max2k2

lordzed83 said:


> Overclockers > Undervolters
> 
> Well today I can try and see at what volts i coukld pass 10x ibt very high : 4300 just for fun bet jump is massive  ATM stable with 1.419 so one step down from recommended



This is what mine needed



Spoiler















What clocks/volts are you doing right now?

This was PE4, probably could do with fewer volts.



Spoiler


----------



## gupsterg

Gettz8488 said:


> Good stuff gupsterg. My only problem with my manual OC is I can’t get 4.1ghz without llc if I use auto llc I need 1.395 cus of the vdroop but I have it stable at 1.344 with llc3 as it only droops to 1.319 I just want to make sure I’m getting the right voltages and not frying the thing but I don’t have a multimeter to test yet. So was wondering if someone else can test voltages on the board with similar settings.


NP , at the moment the rig is tied up in testing. I may get the chance later today to test and measure, if I do I'll post  .


----------



## Gettz8488

gupsterg said:


> NP , at the moment the rig is tied up in testing. I may get the chance later today to test and measure, if I do I'll post  .




Thank you I’ll be eagerly waiting 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Mumak

gupsterg said:


> @Mumak
> Was just wondering is VDDP not available for monitoring on C7H? What is VIN5?


No, VDDP is not available on C7H. VIN5 is most probably an invalid readout of a floating input.


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> @majestynl
> 
> Yeah you could have knocked me down with a feather when I got HCI pass and later P95. It just felt too easy getting the [email protected] C15 on that R7+C6H setup. It's now used as nerd porn, sitting in a box  .
> 
> Ahhh, I appreciate the offer chap :thumb: , but I'm gonna decline the offer of you PM'ing me key. I have near enough 2 live builds and the R7+C6H sitting in wings. I could eat up your licenses inadvertently. So I'll get my own when need them.


hahah yeah you earned that feather!!!
No problemo mate! Was just an offer  Just pm when needed!

Just a reminder from prev post: If you have any spare time, can you please check the BCLK 102. If its working on your test?
Thanks


----------



## gupsterg

@Gettz8488

NP  .
@Mumak

Thanks for swift confirmation  .
@majestynl

Thank you as always  . Will do BCLK test ASAP & share info  .


----------



## sr1030nx

crakej said:


> How come i seem to be the only one with PLL reading out 1.76 in bios and HWIfno - even when set to 1.8v - I don't get why mine is so different to everyone else - is it my memory, is it that I have a Ryzen 1xxx?
> 
> 
> 
> Same readouts in 0509 with everything on auto.




I have the same thing on 0509


----------



## lordzed83

i_max2k2 said:


> This is what mine needed
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What clocks/volts are you doing right now?
> 
> This was PE4, probably could do with fewer volts.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


for starters You are using WRONG IBT... Its not AVX one AVX pumps extra 7c out and is 2x faster on calculation.

@gupsterg have You tried passing 3dmark stress test by any chance ?? Had a play and everything isgreat on cpu side all stable ect with lower than 1.05 Soc but does not work with cpu+gpu stress tests BOOM.

So try some stress tests that use Cpu and gpu and have a look


----------



## lordzed83

Gettz8488 said:


> What is your vdroop for your 4.3?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


no go with 4.3 not with memory at 3533 can do 2 passes max and it hangs does not matter what volts.


----------



## i_max2k2

lordzed83 said:


> for starters You are using WRONG IBT... Its not AVX one AVX pumps extra 7c out and is 2x faster on calculation.


Thanks, I didn't know, How do we set it to AVX? I have been out of this (ocing) for quite a while.

EDIT: I did run Prime 95 128/128 for about an hour as well. Probably not long enough.


----------



## lordzed83

i_max2k2 said:


> Thanks, I didn't know, How do we set it to AVX? I have been out of this (ocing) for quite a while.
> 
> EDIT: I did run Prime 95 128/128 for about an hour as well. Probably not long enough.


Cool had same thing last year when testing my 1700x was like damn its nice and stable posted screenshot Wrong IBT old one. Got AVX one and crashed on second loop
https://quickfileshare.org/488/IBT_AVX.rar

Uploaded You the AVX version have a go


----------



## i_max2k2

lordzed83 said:


> Cool had same thing last year when testing my 1700x was like damn its nice and stable posted screenshot Wrong IBT old one. Got AVX one and crashed on second loop
> https://quickfileshare.org/488/IBT_AVX.rar
> 
> Uploaded You the AVX version have a go


Thank you Sir!


----------



## Gettz8488

@lordzed83 have you confirmed if llc is working as intended on this board with a multimeter? I know the ch6 has some issues with llc


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## CJMitsuki

Finally got my 2700x and got my segfault bugged 1700x sent off and 2700x mounted and initial benchmark with no changes from my 1700x are looking decent at [email protected]@3466c14


----------



## sbakic

So I was trying to overclock with pe ofc, no one anymore wanna overclock with p-state or manual no point there. Because you lose your single core speed. Bottom tests have single core at 43.5x.

cinebenchr15 | prime95 8k in-place | ibt 90% ram (multiplier at load / vcore at load)
DEFAUL : 39.8x / 1.275V | 39.5x / 1.269V | 38,5-38.8 / 1.212V 
PE1: 40.3x-40.5x / 1.312| 40x-40.3x / 1.306V | 40x / 1.294V
PE2: 40.8x / 1.362V | 40.5x/ 1.35V-1.356V | 40x-40.3x/ 1.294V
PE3: 41.3x / 1.294V | 41.3x / 1.287V | 41.3x / 1.275V
PE4: 42.5x / 1.381V | 42.5x/ 1.375V | 42.5x / XXX

So as you can see CPU vcore was on auto for every test.. PE4 didn't pass IBT, others were run for 1min just to see Vcore it doesn't mean it's stable at that voltages.

The point is that PE2 adds to much voltage for low multiplier temp went to 80C, but it can run fine for a few minutes at lower voltages as you can see from PE3.

What I did I set PE2 and set vcore offset to -0.10625 it gives me for every stress test multiplier of 41x and vcore ~1.3V which is better than PE2 with auto Vcore and more stable than PE3 because it has higher voltages. I want to add here that single core Vcore at load is 1.435V which is fine again, better than auto vcore which can go to 1.475V-1.494V.

P.S. I got q-code 19 after cold boot for PE3 auto vcore and PE2 vcore -0.1250V which means this auto voltages by PE3 are too low to run this cpu at multiplier of 41x. So for your info if you get 19 while booting bump the vcore. From this i think 41x should be fine with +1.3V so up from that. I still need to test it.


----------



## Gettz8488

sbakic said:


> So I was trying to overclock with pe ofc, no one anymore wanna overclock with p-state or manual no point there. Because you lose your single core speed. Bottom tests have single core at 43.5x.
> 
> 
> 
> cinebenchr15 | prime95 8k in-place | ibt 90% ram (multiplier at load / vcore at load)
> 
> DEFAUL : 39.8x / 1.275V | 39.5x / 1.269V | 38,5-38.8 / 1.212V
> 
> PE1: 40.3x-40.5x / 1.312| 40x-40.3x / 1.306V | 40x / 1.294V
> 
> PE2: 40.8x / 1.362V | 40.5x/ 1.35V-1.356V | 40x-40.3x/ 1.294V
> 
> PE3: 41.3x / 1.294V | 41.3x / 1.287V | 41.3x / 1.275V
> 
> PE4: 42.5x / 1.381V | 42.5x/ 1.375V | 42.5x / XXX
> 
> 
> 
> So as you can see CPU vcore was on auto for every test.. PE4 didn't pass IBT, others were run for 1min just to see Vcore it doesn't mean it's stable at that voltages.
> 
> 
> 
> The point is that PE2 adds to much voltage for low multiplier temp went to 80C, but it can run fine for a few minutes at lower voltages as you can see from PE3.
> 
> 
> 
> What I did I set PE2 and set vcore offset to -0.10625 it gives me for every stress test multiplier of 41x and vcore ~1.3V which is better than PE2 with auto Vcore and more stable than PE3 because it has higher voltages. I want to add here that single core Vcore at load is 1.435V which is fine again, better than auto vcore which can go to 1.475V-1.494V.
> 
> 
> 
> P.S. I got q-code 19 after cold boot for PE3 auto vcore and PE2 vcore -0.1250V which means this auto voltages by PE3 are too low to run this cpu at multiplier of 41x. So for your info if you get 19 while booting bump the vcore. From this i think 41x should be fine with +1.3V so up from that. I still need to test it.




Are you using llc? My cpu won’t boot at -0.1 so if yours can that’s impressive 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## majestynl

sbakic said:


> So I was trying to overclock with pe ofc, no one anymore wanna overclock with p-state or manual no point there. Because you lose your single core speed.


No one? Sorry but can't agree with that. Please share me a screen who did get 4350mhz on all cores with a save voltage and without LNC? So both methods has there own pros and cons I believe. 

You don't loose single core speed but I think you mean : you get higher single core boost. With manual or Pstate you can OC all cores together. Currently I can get higher benchmarks with Manual Vs PE on multicore tests. 

But anyways... Thanks for your test numbers


----------



## gupsterg

@Gettz8488

Ran out of time today to test LLC.

@lordzed83

2700X stock, 3333MHz Fast, ran 3DM SD combined on loop (~40min), as only got a Sapphire HD5850 Toxic in this rig  . Non issue see screenie in linked zip.

@crakej

See ZIP for mod to HWINFO.

Organise files in folder 3333MHz by date.

I was getting no errors in HCI whilst it ran, see PASS 100% & 250%, when I stopped at 450% I had errors. Seen this with HCI before, sucks when it happens. So I then adjusted 1.05V SB in UEFI to 1.05V to discount that as cause. Still error (HCI T3333SF 0.9 1.365 FAIL 250% error end.jpg). Bumped VDIMM to pass HCI at end. Y-Cruncher fail, bumped SOC to get stable.

Ref Y 0.912 1.37 SOC HWINFO setup.jpg. At that point I changed multiplier within HWINFO to sync averages for SOC & VDIMM with ProbeIt reads, discrepancy on averages is ~0.001V-0.002V. Chipset voltage as I reverted to 1.05V in UEFI was ~1.115V on DMM, so as Elmor stated I synced HWINFO to ~-50mV.

@majestynl and another poster who was after BCLK testing (sorry late now here, can't recall your username).

See folder BCLK within 3333MHz.

All I did was kept SOC, VDIMM, etc as for my 3333MHz Fast profile. I dropped RAM MHz to 3200MHz, so as I increased BCLK I wasn't gonna "break out" of good settings. I then tinkered with PState 0 to bring CPU to higher speed. Was a nice surprise to see R7 2700X PState 0 default ceiling VID is lower than R7 1800X.

Will tinker some more tomorrow  .

*ZIP LINK*


----------



## CJMitsuki

Sitting @ 4.3ghz 1.35v stable. Gets to around 70c in OCCT with my small H60 Corsair liquid cooler and Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut. I dont really overclock CPUs so I dont know what is safe and what isnt. I usually stick to memory so I feel like 4.3ghz stable is fine at 1.35v.


----------



## Gettz8488

CJMitsuki said:


> Sitting @ 4.3ghz 1.35v stable. Gets to around 70c in OCCT with my small H60 Corsair liquid cooler and Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut. I dont really overclock CPUs so I dont know what is safe and what isnt. I usually stick to memory so I feel like 4.3ghz stable is fine at 1.35v.




I highly doubt you’re hitting 4.3 and 1.35 and only 70C when I have a h115 with noctua fans I thay hits 75C at 4.1GHz ibt with a full load of 1.312. What is your svi2 voltage when tuning test?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Gettz8488

For those of you having trouble keeping voltage under control I was able to find a stable setting with PE1 and PE2 with a -0.1 Offset Voltage just set LLC to at least 3 it wouldn’t post at all before with the same settings and auto LLC now it does completely fine the problem doesn’t seem to be the single core but the multi thread been completely stable so far with ram at defaults will change that after a few more test 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## elyas10

gupsterg said:


> @Gettz8488
> 
> Ran out of time today to test LLC.
> 
> @lordzed83
> 
> 2700X stock, 3333MHz Fast, ran 3DM SD combined on loop (~40min), as only got a Sapphire HD5850 Toxic in this rig  . Non issue see screenie in linked zip.
> 
> @crakej
> 
> See ZIP for mod to HWINFO.
> 
> Organise files in folder 3333MHz by date.
> 
> I was getting no errors in HCI whilst it ran, see PASS 100% & 250%, when I stopped at 450% I had errors. Seen this with HCI before, sucks when it happens. So I then adjusted 1.05V SB in UEFI to 1.05V to discount that as cause. Still error (HCI T3333SF 0.9 1.365 FAIL 250% error end.jpg). Bumped VDIMM to pass HCI at end. Y-Cruncher fail, bumped SOC to get stable.
> 
> Ref Y 0.912 1.37 SOC HWINFO setup.jpg. At that point I changed multiplier within HWINFO to sync averages for SOC & VDIMM with ProbeIt reads, discrepancy on averages is ~0.001V-0.002V. Chipset voltage as I reverted to 1.05V in UEFI was ~1.115V on DMM, so as Elmor stated I synced HWINFO to ~-50mV.
> 
> @majestynl and another poster who was after BCLK testing (sorry late now here, can't recall your username).
> 
> See folder BCLK within 3333MHz.
> 
> All I did was kept SOC, VDIMM, etc as for my 3333MHz Fast profile. I dropped RAM MHz to 3200MHz, so as I increased BCLK I wasn't gonna "break out" of good settings. I then tinkered with PState 0 to bring CPU to higher speed. Was a nice surprise to see R7 2700X PState 0 default ceiling VID is lower than R7 1800X.
> 
> Will tinker some more tomorrow  .
> 
> *ZIP LINK*


Thanks, I will take a look at this!

Although I installed the new 970 evo nvme ssd today and that caused other issues I need to fix before getting back to my BCLK overclocking issues.


----------



## lordzed83

Gettz8488 said:


> For those of you having trouble keeping voltage under control I was able to find a stable setting with PE1 and PE2 with a -0.1 Offset Voltage just set LLC to at least 3 it wouldn’t post at all before with the same settings and auto LLC now it does completely fine the problem doesn’t seem to be the single core but the multi thread been completely stable so far with ram at defaults will change that after a few more test
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


I never bothered with LLC Auto always on LLC3 or LLC4. Audo Vdrops like crazy


----------



## lordzed83

Gettz8488 said:


> I highly doubt you’re hitting 4.3 and 1.35 and only 70C when I have a h115 with noctua fans I thay hits 75C at 4.1GHz ibt with a full load of 1.312. What is your svi2 voltage when tuning test?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


I know that seems like Impossible not at 1.35. ECT Not with that cooling


----------



## Esenel

CJMitsuki said:


> Sitting @ 4.3ghz 1.35v stable. Gets to around 70c in OCCT with my small H60 Corsair liquid cooler and Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut. I dont really overclock CPUs so I dont know what is safe and what isnt. I usually stick to memory so I feel like 4.3ghz stable is fine at 1.35v.


I doubt that.
Please show screenshots of your stresstests. You can state everything without a screenshot.


----------



## sbakic

CJMitsuki said:


> Sitting @ 4.3ghz 1.35v stable. Gets to around 70c in OCCT with my small H60 Corsair liquid cooler and Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut. I dont really overclock CPUs so I dont know what is safe and what isnt. I usually stick to memory so I feel like 4.3ghz stable is fine at 1.35v.


I can't even test OCCT and AIDA64 pc shutdowns I talked about. In my case it's ether cpu/motherobard or bios 0509


----------



## sbakic

Gettz8488 said:


> Are you using llc? My cpu won’t boot at -0.1 so if yours can that’s impressive
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


llc auto



majestynl said:


> No one? Sorry but can't agree with that. Please share me a screen who did get 4350mhz on all cores with a save voltage and without LNC? So both methods has there own pros and cons I believe.
> 
> You don't loose single core speed but I think you mean : you get higher single core boost. With manual or Pstate you can OC all cores together. Currently I can get higher benchmarks with Manual Vs PE on multicore tests.
> 
> But anyways... Thanks for your test numbers


so with pe4 I get 42.5x with all cores, single core is still i thnk 43.5x, but it's not stable at 1.395V at full load with max ram.


----------



## lordzed83

Esenel said:


> I doubt that.
> Please show screenshots of your stresstests. You can state everything without a screenshot.


ran quick b4 work see how my temps qare since it cooled down in uk.


----------



## Gettz8488

@elmor having an extremely weird issue right now I’m running things on auto with a -Offset of 0.075 but I’m having this super weird issue when I try even lower offsets for example I try 0.1 it boots and post completely okay I’m in windows run all Stress test 100% stable I restart the pc and windows freezes up before I’m able to log in. Same thing happens with all voltages up to 0.075 - offset usually if it’s not stable it will crash and not work at all but it works and I’ve ran 20+ hours of stress test at -0.1 but freezes on windows load screen not sure what it can be 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Albert1007

Hi,

Is anyone able to use BCLK for overclocking? My system crashes during Blender even at 100.2, it works fine just at 100.00 (tried up to 102).

It crashes even if I get via BCLK to the same values that I have set in manual with the 100.000 bus clock (4.125Ghz and the RAM at 3466)

Any idea??

Many thanks,

A.


----------



## gupsterg

Morning fellow C7H'ers!  .

Well I think I can say I've closed into BETA phase for R7 2700X stock + 3333MHz Fast. 

View attachment 0601_Base_Profile_setting.txt


Setup as above txt but:-



1.05V SB set as 1.05V manually in UEFI
3333MHz RAM Frequency with 3333MHz The Stilt Fast timings
SOC: 0.912 VDIMM: 1.37V

Besides surviving tests yesterday on same settings I have ~6.45hrs PASS in P95 v29.4B8 (Custom 8K 4096K 13GB). Room ambient has been varying over run.



Spoiler

















elyas10 said:


> Thanks, I will take a look at this!
> 
> Although I installed the new 970 evo nvme ssd today and that caused other issues I need to fix before getting back to my BCLK overclocking issues.


NP  , sorry I couldn't recall your username last night.

I'll do some more testing today, I used BCLK 102MHz (eCLK sync mode) and also BCLK 102.8MHz, with meddling on PState 0 as well. I'm just using SATA SSD, also have a SATA ODD, didn't notice any IO disappear, as I dump screenies onto USB, etc.



Gettz8488 said:


> @elmor having an extremely weird issue right now I’m running things on auto with a -Offset of 0.075 but I’m having this super weird issue when I try even lower offsets for example I try 0.1 it boots and post completely okay I’m in windows run all Stress test 100% stable I restart the pc and windows freezes up before I’m able to log in. Same thing happens with all voltages up to 0.075 - offset usually if it’s not stable it will crash and not work at all but it works and I’ve ran 20+ hours of stress test at -0.1 but freezes on windows load screen not sure what it can be


Reference a post you'll find by The Stilt on Anandtech, Ryzen Strictly Technical. He highlights that some cores just will not like the undervolt. Each time I've read Ryzen Gen 1 or Threadripper Gen 1 users sharing experience on say keeping stock behaviour (ie PB/XFR active) and then undervolting using an offset they run into issues. Freezes like you say or loaded rig is fine, but bombs on idle.

Only situation I've read where they may succeed is setting up an all cores setup.

Once P95 reaches ~7.5hrs run I'll be switching to see what all cores setup I get on CPU within the stock ceiling VID of PState 0. I'll play with LLC and report info as you want. Even if DMM captures LL effect, from what I understand from information shared before in C6H thread, it will still not capture overshoots of voltage down to LL effect when CPU go from loaded to idle; only oscilloscope does.


----------



## lordzed83

@gupsterg so still stability goes down the higher Memory speed is  1.05 is minimum what I need to have 3533cl15 with 1.425. Can do 3400cl14 on lower ddr volts that could possibly work with PE3 with some tweeks.


----------



## gupsterg

lordzed83 said:


> @gupsterg so still stability goes down the higher Memory speed is  1.05 is minimum what I need to have 3533cl15 with 1.425. Can do 3400cl14 on lower ddr volts that could possibly work with PE3 with some tweeks.


1.05V is on Southbridge, aka PCH, the Chipset  .

3200MHz with it undervolted was fine. 3333MHz I think would also be fine. It was just that before I increased VDIMM and SOC I set PCH voltage back to 1.05V manually, so to make sure that was not cause. If you reference the ZIP I linked last night I still had fail, I needed bump of VDIMM (+0.05V) to pass HCI from start to end, then SOC (+0.012V) to make Y-Cruncher stable, this setup survived then BCLK+PState 0 tinkering and P95.

My SOC at present scales like this when set in UEFI :-

3200MHz = 0.900V
3333MHz = 0.912V

I will test lower SOC on 3200MHz when get a chance, as looking at what was needed for 3333MHz I maybe able to snag it lower. If I get the chance today I'll gun for 3400MHz C15  . I know my dimms tested with lower VDIMM for that than 3333MHz C14 Fast on R7+C6H  .


----------



## elmor

Albert1007 said:


> Hi,
> 
> Is anyone able to use BCLK for overclocking? My system crashes during Blender even at 100.2, it works fine just at 100.00 (tried up to 102).
> 
> It crashes even if I get via BCLK to the same values that I have set in manual with the 100.000 bus clock (4.125Ghz and the RAM at 3466)
> 
> Any idea??
> 
> Many thanks,
> 
> A.



Are you using the top 2 SATA-ports? They have issues with increased BCLK (even 100.2 MHz).


----------



## lordzed83

@elmor
I noticed something Weird last 2 days. On rare ocasion if i reboot my system USB's are not powering up... At least keyboard and mouse ones. Need to power down and up and its all good. It started after I turned Fast boot off. Need to investigate have a look at USB settings in bios.


----------



## elyas10

@gupsterg I set the BCLK to 101.4 and it was stable, changing it to 101.6 proved unstable with your pstate overclock. However, I went in and lowered the Pstate0 VID to 20 and 100.6 was able to run cinebench without freezing! Hopefully this isn't a fluke and I am going to continue testing. Thanks!




Albert1007 said:


> Hi,
> 
> Is anyone able to use BCLK for overclocking? My system crashes during Blender even at 100.2, it works fine just at 100.00 (tried up to 102).
> 
> It crashes even if I get via BCLK to the same values that I have set in manual with the 100.000 bus clock (4.125Ghz and the RAM at 3466)
> 
> Any idea??
> 
> Many thanks,
> 
> A.


Make sure when you do these tests your not running your RAM at 3466, because when you increase the BCLK your RAM speed goes up as well and may become unstable. Also in your RAM timings there is something called tRFC, tRFC 2, and tRFC 4, increase each of those by roughly 10 and decrease your ram clock speed by 200Mhz when you do these tests. 

If that doesn't work then you can save your BIOS to a profile and reset ALL your BIOS settings then ONLY change BCLK to 100.2Mhz (leave performance enhancer to auto and core boost to auto) AND set a CPU vcore offset voltage of +0.025 AND set CPU multiplier to 37. If these settings work then slowly add your old bios settings one or two at a time so you know what combination of settings is causing the issue.


----------



## sbakic

gupsterg said:


> 1.05V is on Southbridge, aka PCH, the Chipset  .
> 
> 3200MHz with it undervolted was fine. 3333MHz I think would also be fine. It was just that before I increased VDIMM and SOC I set PCH voltage back to 1.05V manually, so to make sure that was not cause. If you reference the ZIP I linked last night I still had fail, I needed bump of VDIMM (+0.05V) to pass HCI from start to end, then SOC (+0.012V) to make Y-Cruncher stable, this setup survived then BCLK+PState 0 tinkering and P95.
> 
> My SOC at present scales like this when set in UEFI :-
> 
> 3200MHz = 0.900V
> 3333MHz = 0.912V
> 
> I will test lower SOC on 3200MHz when get a chance, as looking at what was needed for 3333MHz I maybe able to snag it lower. If I get the chance today I'll gun for 3400MHz C15  . I know my dimms tested with lower VDIMM for that than 3333MHz C14 Fast on R7+C6H  .


I can run stress test 3200CL14 with soc of 0.9V but it fail at boot, not enough voltage for CPU to make this RAM to work so anything above SOC 0.95V should work for me.

Btw 3200 with cl14 with 14-14-34-48 timing and tREF 560, has 45GB/s RAM read with 66.5ns latency, 3200 cl14 with 14-14-14-34-48 with tREF 307 and other timings tweaked got 49.7GB/s RAM read with latency 65.1ns,
3333 with tweaked timings (14-14-14-34-48 tREF 307) has 51GB/s RAM read with 63.4ns latency. So scores for RAMS goes this way 10000s / latency * read => first 6800GB - second 7600GB -> third 8100GB . This shows how much RAM can read GB in some interval.

There is no point with 3466cl14 if you don't tweak timings.

P.S. for my purpose I would not see difference between 3200cl14 and 3200cl14 with tweaked timings (like tREF at 307), difference is 1.5ns with higher bandwidth for memory still not noticeable.


----------



## Esenel

CJMitsuki said:


> Sitting @ 4.3ghz 1.35v stable. Gets to around 70c in OCCT with my small H60 Corsair liquid cooler and Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut. I dont really overclock CPUs so I dont know what is safe and what isnt. I usually stick to memory so I feel like 4.3ghz stable is fine at 1.35v.





lordzed83 said:


> ran quick b4 work see how my temps qare since it cooled down in uk.


1.419V for 4.25 Ghz seems much more reasonable compared to 1.35V for 4.3 Ghz.
Also with your cooling lordzed83, your temps seem reasonable.

He is stating he has not much experience with OC, but also claims that he is stable at 1.35V.


It would be great if all people - who state some stable OC - would post along screenshots of their stress testing like you, gupsterg and others are doing it.

Stating mega OCs with no proof are super annoying and also misleading for others.


----------



## gupsterg

elyas10 said:


> @gupsterg I set the BCLK to 101.4 and it was stable, changing it to 101.6 proved unstable with your pstate overclock. However, I went in and lowered the Pstate0 VID to 20 and 100.6 was able to run cinebench without freezing! Hopefully this isn't a fluke and I am going to continue testing. Thanks!



Great to read you got some BCLK tweaking done  .



sbakic said:


> I can run stress test 3200CL14 with soc of 0.9V but it fail at boot, not enough voltage for CPU to make this RAM to work so anything above SOC 0.95V should work for me.
> 
> Btw 3200 with cl14 with 14-14-34-48 timing and tREF 560, has 45GB/s RAM read with 66.5ns latency, 3200 cl14 with 14-14-14-34-48 with tREF 307 and other timings tweaked got 49.7GB/s RAM read with latency 65.1ns,
> 3333 with tweaked timings (14-14-14-34-48 tREF 307) has 51GB/s RAM read with 63.4ns latency. So scores for RAMS goes this way 10000s / latency * read => first 6800GB - second 7600GB -> third 8100GB . This shows how much RAM can read GB in some interval.
> 
> There is no point with 3466cl14 if you don't tweak timings.
> 
> P.S. for my purpose I would not see difference between 3200cl14 and 3200cl14 with tweaked timings (like tREF at 307), difference is 1.5ns with higher bandwidth for memory still not noticeable.


Thanks for share of info  .

I would not say what works for me on SOC, etc will work for all. I'm just sharing my samples scaling  .

I agree timings play a role, I have in the past seen The Stilt data, AMD article and also my own testing, some testing here. In that thread OP has The Stilt's data, section is RAM MHz king?, lower down in benches section I have some CB15 test data on very early R7+C6H AGESA.

Loosely speaking what The Stilt presets do is target the timings that gain you the most, but also aim to keep some aspects relative as you jump up MHz, so the RAM can take it. So with 3466MHz C15 you may not be gaining much over 3333MHz or 3200MHz Fast but a "load" that takes advantage of the Infinity Fabric MHz increase as RAM MHz increased will show a benefit.

I have gone to HCI with SOC 0.925V VDIMM: 1.37V 3400MHz using The Stilt 3466MHz timings.



Spoiler














Just gonna stop this run in 15min to see if error at end, then rerun for double the length.

SOC of 0.925V in UEFI is ~0.912V on Probeit point when HCI running, 0.912V was ~0.902V, 0.900V was ~0.888V. All LLC is [Auto].


----------



## crakej

Gettz8488 said:


> @elmor having an extremely weird issue right now I’m running things on auto with a -Offset of 0.075 but I’m having this super weird issue when I try even lower offsets for example I try 0.1 it boots and post completely okay I’m in windows run all Stress test 100% stable I restart the pc and windows freezes up before I’m able to log in. Same thing happens with all voltages up to 0.075 - offset usually if it’s not stable it will crash and not work at all but it works and I’ve ran 20+ hours of stress test at -0.1 but freezes on windows load screen not sure what it can be
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


I have freezes just before windows log in screen appears as well, but it's happened on defaults on 509 and 601 - as well as with OC...


----------



## gupsterg

@crakej

Both of you guys W10? not noting on W7 for my profiles/testing, yet to try W10, also have Linux in the wings to use.


----------



## lordzed83

Esenel said:


> 1.419V for 4.25 Ghz seems much more reasonable compared to 1.35V for 4.3 Ghz.
> Also with your cooling lordzed83, your temps seem reasonable.
> 
> He is stating he has not much experience with OC, but also claims that he is stable at 1.35V.
> 
> 
> It would be great if all people - who state some stable OC - would post along screenshots of their stress testing like you, gupsterg and others are doing it.
> 
> Stating mega OCs with no proof are super annoying and also misleading for others.


Thats why i checked. Ofc warm water kinda cause mining cpu+gpu 24/7 but idle 23c hehe. Using normal Tim over Liquid metal is not perfect either thats 2c up just there :/


----------



## lordzed83

gupsterg said:


> @crakej
> 
> Both of you guys W10? not noting on W7 for my profiles/testing, yet to try W10, also have Linux in the wings to use.


Just had an email from MS that in few days new Insider build for test will be out. Thinking about trying that one out  I'm still running November insider windows was not bothered to format C after swapping motherboard and cpu.
You know the rule or at lest my rule every SECOND windows install is good so why break it


----------



## lordzed83

sbakic said:


> I can run stress test 3200CL14 with soc of 0.9V but it fail at boot, not enough voltage for CPU to make this RAM to work so anything above SOC 0.95V should work for me.
> 
> Btw 3200 with cl14 with 14-14-34-48 timing and tREF 560, has 45GB/s RAM read with 66.5ns latency, 3200 cl14 with 14-14-14-34-48 with tREF 307 and other timings tweaked got 49.7GB/s RAM read with latency 65.1ns,
> 3333 with tweaked timings (14-14-14-34-48 tREF 307) has 51GB/s RAM read with 63.4ns latency. So scores for RAMS goes this way 10000s / latency * read => first 6800GB - second 7600GB -> third 8100GB . This shows how much RAM can read GB in some interval.
> 
> There is no point with 3466cl14 if you don't tweak timings.
> 
> P.S. for my purpose I would not see difference between 3200cl14 and 3200cl14 with tweaked timings (like tREF at 307), difference is 1.5ns with higher bandwidth for memory still not noticeable.


True 3400cl14 tweeked is about as fast as tweeked 3533cl15. But Loose on Infinity fabric speed  So tempted to get Teamgroup 4500cl18 memory just to have a playwont be much gains but fun is there 
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/team...4500mhz-dual-channel-kit-black-my-09a-tg.html


----------



## sandiegoskyline

What's the factory SOC voltage setting/spec?


----------



## CJMitsuki

Esenel said:


> 1.419V for 4.25 Ghz seems much more reasonable compared to 1.35V for 4.3 Ghz.
> Also with your cooling lordzed83, your temps seem reasonable.
> 
> He is stating he has not much experience with OC, but also claims that he is stable at 1.35V.
> 
> 
> It would be great if all people - who state some stable OC - would post along screenshots of their stress testing like you, gupsterg and others are doing it.
> 
> Stating mega OCs with no proof are super annoying and also misleading for others.



I actually thought I posted a screenshot of my OCCT but I guess it didnt and I hadnt realized it. Ill run another stress test today and post it. If youll look at any post I have made I pretty much post a screenshot anytime I make a claim with my memory OC.


----------



## Gettz8488

@gupsterg yea thanks it seems I’ll have to run it at higher voltages. Quick question I have LLC set to 3 but SVI2 isn’t showing overvoltage it just shows the same voltage I set with higher all core load voltages is this as intended? Without a multimeter I can’t really tell 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## toxick

QuadJunkyx said:


> Just preformed a fresh install.... But since my post this morning while in the bois I had another shut down that required pulling the plug, clear cmos and a safe boot to get it going again. After two weeks I think its time to just rma this board something is not right, I lose the chipset pcie slots or the onboard networking or both at the same time. I cannot figure out why and the random shutdowns does not help the issue.


Fresh install, I clear the cmos, set everything on auto, but I can't pass 10 min Prime95, it shut down. To restart it, I must unplugged the power supply.
On normal use I receive random shut down with everything on auto.
Before that, I used for one year 1800X/CH6 W/O no issue.
Specs on signature.


----------



## sbakic

toxick said:


> Fresh install, I clear the cmos, set everything on auto, but I can't pass 10 min Prime95, it shut down. To restart it, I must unplugged the power supply.
> On normal use I receive random shut down with everything on auto.
> Before that, I used for one year 1800X/CH6 W/O no issue.
> Specs on signature.


I can pass prime95 9.5h blend with 90% ram but can't pass any occt and aida64 test. same thing it's something related to bios/windows10 i think


----------



## Esenel

CJMitsuki said:


> I actually thought I posted a screenshot of my OCCT but I guess it didnt and I hadnt realized it. Ill run another stress test today and post it. If youll look at any post I have made I pretty much post a screenshot anytime I make a claim with my memory OC.


Hi,
I went through all your 66 posts.
The screenshots you provided are in over 90% RTC and AIDA latency benchmark.

These are no stress tests.

I also have a screenshot of 3600CL14.
Is this stable? no way :-D

As long as you are not providing any screenshots of e.g. HCI MemTest >400%, Prime95 >1h, IBT etc. these values are not stable.


----------



## gupsterg

Just an update on my end. So 3400MHz C15 is progressing smoothly so far.

Profile is:-

View attachment 0601_Base_Profile_setting.txt



 The Stilt 3466MHz preset timing with 3400MHz RAM Frequency.
 VBOOT/VDIMM: 1.37V, SOC: 0.925V

ZIP link (edited to final ZIP with more data)

Place files in date order, HCI was stopped on 1st run to check if it error at end, then run extended and still sound; then testing proceeded to RB, Y-Cruncher. ~1-2hrs will stop Y-Cruncher and initiate P95.



sandiegoskyline said:


> What's the factory SOC voltage setting/spec?


On Ryzen gen 1 I noted 0.875-0.925V on ProbeIt point, whilst rig in UEFI, which at defaults would mean PB/XFR active and occurring. I used 5x Ryzen gen 1 on same C6H.

My 1st Ryzen gen 2 is showing ~0.802V in same case test.



Gettz8488 said:


> @gupsterg yea thanks it seems I’ll have to run it at higher voltages. Quick question I have LLC set to 3 but SVI2 isn’t showing overvoltage it just shows the same voltage I set with higher all core load voltages is this as intended? Without a multimeter I can’t really tell


SW may not capture the "event" of overshoot from LLC change. Just think of it happening so fast when changes of loading occur. So over the course of usage the averaged voltage would be higher as well. So what you tend to find is people increasing LLC use less VCORE. They think "ahh I'm using less as VDROOP is not occurring". What their not seeing (knowing) is the graphed voltage has changed.

As stated before a multimeter may not capture overshoot.

I will definitely this evening have some data for you  , as to how much it will help dunno.


----------



## Gettz8488

gupsterg said:


> Just an update on my end. So 3400MHz C15 is progressing smoothly so far.
> 
> 
> 
> Profile is:-
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 181337
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Stilt 3466MHz preset timing with 3400MHz RAM Frequency.
> 
> VBOOT/VDIMM: 1.37V, SOC: 0.925V
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ZIP link
> 
> 
> 
> Place files in date order, HCI was stopped on 1st run to check if it error at end, then run extended and still sound; then testing proceeded to RB, Y-Cruncher. ~1-2hrs will stop Y-Cruncher and initiate P95.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Ryzen gen 1 I noted 0.875-0.925V on ProbeIt point, whilst rig in UEFI, which at defaults would mean PB/XFR active and occurring. I used 5x Ryzen gen 1 on same C6H.
> 
> 
> 
> My 1st Ryzen gen 2 is showing ~0.802V in same case test.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SW may not capture the "event" of overshoot from LLC change. Just think of it happening so fast when changes of loading occur. So over the course of usage the averaged voltage would be higher as well. So what you tend to find is people increasing LLC use less VCORE. They think "ahh I'm using less as VDROOP is not occurring". What their not seeing (knowing) is the graphed voltage has changed.
> 
> 
> 
> As stated before a multimeter may not capture overshoot.
> 
> 
> 
> I will definitely this evening have some data for you  , as to how much it will help dunno.




Thanks for all your help I’ll be waiting. Since I didn’t see any overshooting I also kept my llc at 3 and was only seeing increased load voltages it would be great if llc did work this way 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## larrydavid

Dual rank 2x16GB B-die update. 3266 C14 with safe timings looks to be stable with karhusoftware's Ram Test. I've been unsuccessful with the Fast timings. What would likely allow me to be more aggressive with the subtimings? More RAM voltage, SoC voltage adjustment, memory termination settings, etc?


----------



## crakej

I've gone back to 0509 as had a few problems on 0601.

I've just concentrated on cpu OC today. I found I can have 4.150GHz at 1.39v LLC2. On old Prime Pro, I could ruin 4.2 at LLC5 - but at least we'd had testing on that board which showed there were probably no voltage overshoots going on. Many of us ran reliably with LLC 5 for a year on that board. Until there is any evidence of how LLC works on this board I'm keeping it to LLC2.

It's hard getting used to how things work on this board - I'm used to seeing (at idle) the VCore I've set in the bios appear as the VCore on HWInfo (or higher) - but on this board VCore in HWInfo shows slightly lower voltage than SVI2 TFN, and even lower than my bios shows. It never goes above the set VCore as on the Prime Pro. It's VID that seems to show correct voltage on this board at idle.

Now I'm getting used to how this board works I've got an CPU OC i'm happy with I will again get back to ram....


----------



## spyshagg

Is the latest bios the one on the website? 
Version 0509
2018/04/19


----------



## Gettz8488

crakej said:


> I've gone back to 0509 as Elmor reported LLC not working properly on 0601.
> 
> 
> 
> I've just concentrated on cpu OC today. I found I can have 4.150GHz at 1.39v LLC2. On old Prime Pro, I could ruin 4.2 at LLC5 - but at least we'd had testing on that board which showed there were probably no voltage overshoots going on. Many of us ran reliably with LLC 5 for a year on that board. Until there is any evidence of how LLC works on this board I'm keeping it to LLC2.
> 
> 
> 
> It's hard getting used to how things work on this board - I'm used to seeing (at idle) the VCore I've set in the bios appear as the VCore on HWInfo (or higher) - but on this board VCore in HWInfo shows slightly lower voltage than SVI2 TFN, and even lower than my bios shows. It never goes above the set VCore as on the Prime Pro. It's VID that seems to show correct voltage on this board at idle.
> 
> 
> 
> Now I'm getting used to how this board works I've got an CPU OC i'm happy with I will again get back to ram....




I’m also wondering if there’s voltage overshoot on this board on 0601 I don’t notice any and honestly I would prefer it that way. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## crakej

spyshagg said:


> Is the latest bios the one on the website?
> Version 0509
> 2018/04/19


0509 is the latest non-beta bios

0601 is in the OP of this thread - I think this is the one you want if you have a 2xxx series CPU, but it is beta.


----------



## spyshagg

crakej said:


> 0509 is the latest non-beta bios
> 
> 0601 is in the OP of this thread - I think this is the one you want if you have a 2xxx series CPU, but it is beta.


thanks

is there any other software other than AIDA64 to measure b/w and latency?


----------



## crakej

I've always used Aida64 for checking latency / bandwidth


----------



## sandiegoskyline

larrydavid said:


> Dual rank 2x16GB B-die update. 3266 C14 with safe timings looks to be stable with karhusoftware's Ram Test. I've been unsuccessful with the Fast timings. What would likely allow me to be more aggressive with the subtimings? More RAM voltage, SoC voltage adjustment, memory termination settings, etc?


I'm exactly here with my 2x16 DR B-die kit. Haven't bothered pushing further as things are snappy enough and I'm only running 1.35V. What's your SOC voltage?


----------



## larrydavid

sandiegoskyline said:


> I'm exactly here with my 2x16 DR B-die kit. Haven't bothered pushing further as things are snappy enough and I'm only running 1.35V. What's your SOC voltage?


I'm running an offset of -0.0500 on the SoC. I still have a lot of playing around to do.


----------



## lordzed83

PE3 STABLE









Took a while lost bit of MT gained on ST.


----------



## hurricane28

I was doing some benches and i noticed this:

What's with this 2.0 vcore reading? And Windows still can't report the CPU clock correctly. Forgive me if this is asked and posted before but i can't really keep up how fast this thread is going atm. Too much stuff.


----------



## usoldier

lordzed83 said:


> PE3 STABLE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Took a while lost bit of MT gained on ST.


Great Job lordzed83 your planing to run 24/7 like that ?


----------



## lordzed83

bumped bclk by another 0.2 so now im few MHZ over what i had stable 








@usoldier possibly


----------



## PeerlessGirl

elmor said:


> Are you using the top 2 SATA-ports? They have issues with increased BCLK (even 100.2 MHz).


Out of curiosity Elmor, is this also true of the C6H or just the C7H? When you say "top 2" ports, which ones specifically do you mean (by number)?


----------



## Gettz8488

lordzed83 said:


> bumped bclk by another 0.2 so now im few MHZ over what i had stable
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @usoldier possibly




What voltage setting are you using offset or manual?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Gettz8488

@elmor Curious as to how LLC is working on 0601 I set LLC to 3 but svi2 detects no over volting while idle which is great. But it does detect the higher heavy load Voltages is that because LLC on this board only decreases vdroop and does not increase peak Voltages? If that’s the case it would honestly be great 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## lordzed83

Gettz8488 said:


> What voltage setting are you using offset or manual?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


offset took 2 hours to figure out how to get it at my volts with offset and LLC4 cant get LLC3 to work without massive overvolts when single core boosts talking 1.6 here 
I dont do DIRTY overclock everything needs to work downlocking undervolting. Could lock voltages turn all power saving options off and run chip at 4.3 on all cores. But where is fun in that ??

Will start mining in a second till morning to see how that goes


----------



## lordzed83

Gettz8488 said:


> @elmor Curious as to how LLC is working on 0601 I set LLC to 3 but svi2 detects no over volting while idle which is great. But it does detect the higher heavy load Voltages is that because LLC on this board only decreases vdroop and does not increase peak Voltages? If that’s the case it would honestly be great
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Christ man it works same way as it did on C6H was running llc 4 for YEAR of constant torture. This board is even stronger on VRM section so i give even less **** about LLC


----------



## PeerlessGirl

The Stilt said:


> So with "Performance Enhancement" set to "Default" and everything else at stock as well (Voltage "Auto", Load-Line "Auto", Precision Boost Override Scalar 1x) you are seeing 1.512V for "CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN" in HWInfo?
> 
> The worst core of the CPU is always requesting the highest voltage, but I've never seen the CPU exceeding 1.43V in stock configuration.
> The worse cores also have a lower frequency ceiling by default and that obviously is changing when you enable e.g. "Performance Enhancement" Level 3 (all cores will have the same ceiling, 4.35GHz).



Stilt, 

I have on my own 2600x seen maximum reported volts by HWinfo64 on Stock settings (everything auto, besides XMP memory profile for 3200) seen max reported volts at 1.519v. Does this mean we have particularly bad "worst" cores? Should this be RMA territory?


----------



## Gettz8488

lordzed83 said:


> offset took 2 hours to figure out how to get it at my volts with offset and LLC4 cant get LLC3 to work without massive overvolts when single core boosts talking 1.6 here
> 
> I dont do DIRTY overclock everything needs to work downlocking undervolting. Could lock voltages turn all power saving options off and run chip at 4.3 on all cores. But where is fun in that ??
> 
> 
> 
> Will start mining in a second till morning to see how that goes




What bios are you using? When I set LLC to 3-4 I don’t detect overvoltibg on svi2 only detect higher full load Coltages which is what I wanted 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## lordzed83

PeerlessGirl said:


> Stilt,
> 
> I have on my own 2600x seen maximum reported volts by HWinfo64 on Stock settings (everything auto, besides XMP memory profile for 3200) seen max reported volts at 1.519v. Does this mean we have particularly bad "worst" cores? Should this be RMA territory?


You cant RMA a working product... If its not crashing what you gonna say ?? I lost silicone lottery and want better chip ?? Well should have spent extra like me and gotten binned one then....

Want RMA ?? FRY THE CHIP with volts simple


----------



## lordzed83

Gettz8488 said:


> What bios are you using? When I set LLC to 3-4 I don’t detect overvoltibg on svi2 only detect higher full load Coltages which is what I wanted
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


eeee beta one they overvol ALL OVERVOLT you cant detect it with anythign else than osciloscope even multimeter does not catch voltage spikes when load hits. that enough answer for You ??
If ui remember asus rdoes not recommend going above LLC3 for daily use due to spikes at lest on C6H


----------



## lordzed83

Gettz8488 said:


> What bios are you using? When I set LLC to 3-4 I don’t detect overvoltibg on svi2 only detect higher full load Coltages which is what I wanted
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


well wasted 20 minutes of my life to find u the post so wont have to read the LLC question here over and over again. Go by rule IF YOU ARE AFRAID TO FRY SOMETHING DONT OVERCLOCK IT  Over years i blew up few PSUs 3 graphic cards 2 ram sticks 6 motherboards. Cpu is still to Join my FRY UP list. Nothing beats me killing 3 hour old 7950 with a Drill  stripped cooler's screw cause would not wanted to go.. And I'm not running a GPU without waterblock on it.
So was like **** YOU im getting drill out. Well all was good till it slid off and made massive scratch over PCB. Well that was 300 quid gone in 60 seconds. 

Kids dont use drills on GPU'S 
http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...-vi-overclocking-thread-212.html#post26005246

@[email protected] @elmor how does it look for C7H ??
Maybe @1usmus got tools to messure it dont think many here will have something to check this.


----------



## crakej

So I definitely can't go over 3200MTs without geardown=on for whatever reason, though I'm guessing imc. I loaded The Stilts' 3466 1.4v b-die, set the speed and boots fine.

I run P95 and about 10-12 minutes in it just crashed back to desktop, no error, nothing. It's V29.3 build 1 - anyone else had this?


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> So I definitely can't go over 3200MTs without geardown=on for whatever reason, though I'm guessing imc. I loaded The Stilts' 3466 1.4v b-die, set the speed and boots fine.
> 
> I run P95 and about 10-12 minutes in it just crashed back to desktop, no error, nothing. It's V29.3 build 1 - anyone else had this?


U using 3466 setting for 3200 ??


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> U using 3466 setting for 3200 ??


No, using 3466 setting for 3466


----------



## MacG32

crakej said:


> So I definitely can't go over 3200MTs without geardown=on for whatever reason, though I'm guessing imc. I loaded The Stilts' 3466 1.4v b-die, set the speed and boots fine.
> 
> I run P95 and about 10-12 minutes in it just crashed back to desktop, no error, nothing. It's V29.3 build 1 - anyone else had this?



ftp://ftp.mersenne.org/gimps/p95v294b8.win64.zip v29.4 build 8 is the latest. Maybe that might help. :thinking:


----------



## elmor

PeerlessGirl said:


> Out of curiosity Elmor, is this also true of the C6H or just the C7H? When you say "top 2" ports, which ones specifically do you mean (by number)?



Check the Enthusiast Highlights document. SATA6G_56.




crakej said:


> I've gone back to 0509 as Elmor reported LLC not working properly on 0601.
> 
> I've just concentrated on cpu OC today. I found I can have 4.150GHz at 1.39v LLC2. On old Prime Pro, I could ruin 4.2 at LLC5 - but at least we'd had testing on that board which showed there were probably no voltage overshoots going on. Many of us ran reliably with LLC 5 for a year on that board. Until there is any evidence of how LLC works on this board I'm keeping it to LLC2.
> 
> It's hard getting used to how things work on this board - I'm used to seeing (at idle) the VCore I've set in the bios appear as the VCore on HWInfo (or higher) - but on this board VCore in HWInfo shows slightly lower voltage than SVI2 TFN, and even lower than my bios shows. It never goes above the set VCore as on the Prime Pro. It's VID that seems to show correct voltage on this board at idle.
> 
> Now I'm getting used to how this board works I've got an CPU OC i'm happy with I will again get back to ram....



Which post are you referring to? I don't think there's any issue with Load-line Calibration.


----------



## larrydavid

@elmor How do I run my memory in Bank Group Swap Mode, but not the Alt mode? Enabled and Auto only enabled Alt mode. I'm running 2x16GB dual rank B-Die. From what I understand, I should be using BGS with dual rank memory.


----------



## WilVidz

*help?*

hey guys, I know this is an overclocking thread but I have search google and the forums and didn't find anything for the Crosshair VII Hero WIFI. My C7H WIFI doesn't detect the onboard LAN/WIFI adapters if I sleep/shutdown my system. It works again after clearing CMOS and flipping the switch on my psu, but comes back again after sleep/shutdown.
I have looked all all 90+ pages in this thread and have seen a couple of you had this problem. anybody found a fix?

I have tried changing the power settings to high performance. Tried different bios/reinstalled drivers and windows 10 many times.

again sorry for posting this but hope I can maybe get some help here. Its just bugging me that I have to clear cmos everytime I start my computer.

On topic though, I have OC'd to 4.2Ghz All cores and running 3200mhz on 4 dimms of Gskill trident Z. LOL


----------



## Gettz8488

@elmor should overvolting I’m higher LLC be detected under svi2? I don’t see it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Tactix

So just installed the Gskill F4-3200C14D-16GFX
loaded the DOCP profile for 3200 14/14/14/34
And it fails to post and resets ram configuration.
Everything else is in defaults, any ideas or suggestions?
Bios 0509
Also noticing it reboots several times after clearing CMOS almost like the default settings aren’t working either ?
Did not have this issue with the Corsair Hynix ram I was using previously 
Thanks


----------



## Tactix

Yep default settings keep failing to post also, says ram settings failed press F1 for setup.
Did I just get a bad kit here?
Odd though if I let it just boot to windows I can run prime blend with no issue for 10 mins


----------



## VPII

I've never posted my overclock running Prime95 so last night I gave it a go. Funny thing was my normal 4.216ghz at 1.268vcore went on for 45 minutes or so and when I went to go and check I saw the system restarted. When I open prime95 it just wanted to continue where it stopped, but I did not take that as a success. It appears windows were busy loading updates and probably restarted by itself.

The ones I did manage to run were as follow:


----------



## lordzed83

@elmor small question Maybe You will know. As mentioned Got a but that on rare ocansions on re-boot mouse/keyboard ports dont power up for whatever reason. Had a look in bios plenty of USB settings. Question is. How are those 2 ports labeled/what number are they ?? I was thinking about changing them from Auto to Enabled and that should fix this 
@Gettz8488 have You even read that post from Raja how does LLC work on asus boards and that You will NEVER see overshots ??


----------



## Gettz8488

lordzed83 said:


> @elmor small question Maybe You will know. As mentioned Got a but that on rare ocansions on re-boot mouse/keyboard ports dont power up for whatever reason. Had a look in bios plenty of USB settings. Question is. How are those 2 ports labeled/what number are they ?? I was thinking about changing them from Auto to Enabled and that should fix this
> 
> 
> @Gettz8488 have You even read that post from Raja how does LLC work on asus boards and that You will NEVER see overshots ??




The thing is on my CH6 I did see the overshots. And this board I notice no difference in voltages between LLC and auto 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## chakku

elmor said:


> Only possible through software.


Thanks for clarifying that, unfortunate but can't be helped.

Are you able to clarify the PCI-E lane designations on the C7H with the new M.2_2 slot there? I understand having the M.2_2 slot occupied will drop the PCIEX16/8_1 slot to x8, but what happens if both the M.2_2 slot and PCIEX8_2 are occupied? As on the C6H the PCIEX8_2 slot being occupied would drop PCIEX16/8_1 to x8.

Or basically what I actually seek is whether or not PCIEX8_2 being occupied still drops the PCIEX16/8_1 to x8 speed with this new layout on the C7H.


----------



## crakej

elmor said:


> Which post are you referring to? I don't think there's any issue with Load-line Calibration.


I thought I'd read a few pages back that LLC wasn't working with manual set voltages on 0601? My apologies Elmor - I'm reading so many threads at once! 


Edit - I tried to check but can't - I will edit my post to reflect this.


----------



## gupsterg

Morning ROG'ers  .

Firstly apologies @Gettz8488 I did not get the chance to check LLC yesterday . P95 had got to ~4.5hrs, when time in my day could allow differing testing, but I thought I'd let it continue  . I'm aiming to test manual CORE OC and VCORE/LLC today.

Testing ZIP of 3400MHz C15 on:-

UEFI 0601
R7 2700X UA 1805SUS
F4-3200C14D-16GTZ

Organise files via time order to see how run was. Between screenie:-

HCI T3466S 0.925 1.37 PASS 150% end.jpg
HCI T3466S 0.925 1.37 PASS 410%.jpg

I did a repost. As stated by The Stilt in C6H thread memory training is complicated on Ryzen. I and others used to find you could be stable on x post and not on another. I do believe as time went on and AGESA/UEFI developed this happened less or we just got better at setting up our rigs  . So I still do some reposts at times within testing of a profile. The POST process on C6H differed depending on if POST was from shutdown, restart, resume from sleep; I would assume the same of C7H.

Final screenie shows ~20hrs uptime, total time on profile was ~21hrs IIRC.



spyshagg said:


> thanks
> 
> is there any other software other than AIDA64 to measure b/w and latency?


Intel Memory Latency Checker  .



hurricane28 said:


> I was doing some benches and i noticed this:
> 
> What's with this 2.0 vcore reading? And Windows still can't report the CPU clock correctly. Forgive me if this is asked and posted before but i can't really keep up how fast this thread is going atm. Too much stuff.


Not seen that chap  .



crakej said:


> So I definitely can't go over 3200MTs without geardown=on for whatever reason, though I'm guessing imc. I loaded The Stilts' 3466 1.4v b-die, set the speed and boots fine.
> 
> I run P95 and about 10-12 minutes in it just crashed back to desktop, no error, nothing. It's V29.3 build 1 - anyone else had this?


Dunno why geardown off is an issue for your setup :headscrat, all my testing so far is with it off. Our dimms are using same IC, besides being same density.

I'm sticking to v29.4B8 at present for testing, as that is latest. But when I do meddle with core I'm gonna go v28.10B1 as The Stilt guides. I saw ~10% greater power draw from wall vs later version.

The Stilt was highlighting an issue of LLC control in UEFI 0601.



MacG32 said:


> BIOS reset to defaults. Used 42 as the multiplier, added 100 BCLK, and put 1.425V in Vcore. Even with any LLC, the voltage doesn't go past 1.406V as read under Vcore in HWiNFO and CPU-Z. The Core # VIDs in HWiNFO all show 1.425V. Is there a setting or something I'm missing here to "unlock" the Vcore. This is my first overclock attempt on AMD hardware.
> 
> 
> The Stilt said:
> 
> 
> 
> Manual voltage is broken LLC wise in 0601 bios.
> Or not broken, but the control doesn't work as it should.
Click to expand...


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> Morning ROG'ers  .
> 
> Dunno why geardown off is an issue for your setup :headscrat, all my testing so far is with it off. Our dimms are using same IC, besides being same density.
> 
> I'm sticking to v29.4B8 at present for testing, as that is latest. But when I do meddle with core I'm gonna go v28.10B1 as The Stilt guides. I saw ~10% greater power draw from wall vs later version.
> 
> The Stilt was highlighting an issue of LLC control in UEFI 0601.


Thanks gupsterg! Thought I was going mad.

I don't get why I have to use geardown - maybe I should try geardown=off with some different CadBus values.... I've been trying to use the defaults others have used as a guide, but as they stand I'm not able to boot as easily as others. Maybe there's some setting I'm missing out that you guys apply as standard, but I've shared enough of my timings and no one has reported anything unusual. On old board, geardown=on would mean failed mem training, without fail!


----------



## lordzed83

Cant start a day without some tests so while playing around did this small video showing how this PE3 XFR2 actually works






As you see One core is not constantly FRIED load jumps from one to another I assume it jumps to coolest core at the time that would make sence 
Scored more than my [email protected] like quite allot more 

@Gettz8488 You must have been unlucky then. Not seen any on my C6H its stuff You dont want to see. You dont see IT you dont worry about it less on mind. Not like You can do Anything about it can ya ??


@gupsterg could be why I dont have any LLC problems as I only use offset voltages not fixed. Worked great with changing volts in P0 overclocking


----------



## crakej

MacG32 said:


> ftp://ftp.mersenne.org/gimps/p95v294b8.win64.zip v29.4 build 8 is the latest. Maybe that might help. :thinking:


thanks - that fixed it nicely!


----------



## hurricane28

gupsterg said:


> Morning ROG'ers  .
> 
> Firstly apologies @Gettz8488 I did not get the chance to check LLC yesterday . P95 had got to ~4.5hrs, when time in my day could allow differing testing, but I thought I'd let it continue  . I'm aiming to test manual CORE OC and VCORE/LLC today.
> 
> Testing ZIP of 3400MHz C15 on:-
> 
> UEFI 0601
> R7 2700X UA 1805SUS
> F4-3200C14D-16GTZ
> 
> Organise files via time order to see how run was. Between screenie:-
> 
> HCI T3466S 0.925 1.37 PASS 150% end.jpg
> HCI T3466S 0.925 1.37 PASS 410%.jpg
> 
> I did a repost. As stated by The Stilt in C6H thread memory training is complicated on Ryzen. I and others used to find you could be stable on x post and not on another. I do believe as time went on and AGESA/UEFI developed this happened less or we just got better at setting up our rigs  . So I still do some reposts at times within testing of a profile. The POST process on C6H differed depending on if POST was from shutdown, restart, resume from sleep; I would assume the same of C7H.
> 
> Final screenie shows ~20hrs uptime, total time on profile was ~21hrs IIRC.
> 
> 
> 
> Intel Memory Latency Checker  .
> 
> 
> 
> Not seen that chap  .
> 
> 
> 
> Dunno why geardown off is an issue for your setup :headscrat, all my testing so far is with it off. Our dimms are using same IC, besides being same density.
> 
> I'm sticking to v29.4B8 at present for testing, as that is latest. But when I do meddle with core I'm gonna go v28.10B1 as The Stilt guides. I saw ~10% greater power draw from wall vs later version.
> 
> The Stilt was highlighting an issue of LLC control in UEFI 0601.


Alright, well it doesn't matter because its normal again lol. Probably a CPU-Z glitch or something.


----------



## gupsterg

@crakej

Correct me if I'm wrong.

The same R7 1700X, as well as RAM kit, on ASUS Prime X370-Pro, with GDM=On, was failure to post. But using same CPU+RAM on C7H, GDM=Off is failure to post?

Can't say I've experienced CAD bus aiding post stability. ProcODT when vastly out of whack = failure to post for me, CAD bus aids me in stability testing within OS, usually tests where both CPU & RAM are loaded.

@lordzed83

Cheers for info  .

@Gettz8488

So profile as 3400MHz C15.

View attachment 0601_T3400SG_V1_setting.txt


Only changes are:-


Core Performance Boost: [Disabled] 
PState 0 set to 4.0GHz VID 1.281V

(*Note:* CPB should disable automatically when do core OC, but it's my habit to set manually, see OP of Ryzen Ess. thread in my sig)

In UEFI, which creates load on CPU (you'll see even when CPU default it will PB/XFR in UEFI), I saw ~1.274V steady on DMM applied to ProbeIt point. UEFI readback box was bouncing, at and ever so slightly below VID set.

In OS whilst I had P95 loading CPU with custom 128K 128K in place FFT I saw ~1.208V on DMM applied to ProbeIt point, later screenie ProbeIt is reading the same as before.



Spoiler






















Above is LLC [Auto] for VCORE/SOC.

To me all is making sense as it should.

Light load (ie UEFI) VDROOP was less, as when CPU come off load it is not gonna overshoot wildly. Heavy load led to more VDROOP, which again makes sense. As when using stock LLC it should be this way, so I get less of an overshoot when CPU come off load vs increased LLC.

View video below by :clock: der8auer :clock:, yeah makes overclocking look sexy  .



Spoiler











Next please read these posts by :clock: The Stilt :clock:.

i) AM4 LL spec by AMD and info on dLDO.

ii) LLC on C6H, link 2.

iii) How to calculate VDROOP.

iv) Tool to see LL (not yet tested on C7H, but I reckon it uses same VRM chip).

v) P95 usage guide (was posted by him again in this thread recently).


----------



## Esenel

VPII said:


> I've never posted my overclock running Prime95 so last night I gave it a go. Funny thing was my normal 4.216ghz at 1.268vcore went on for 45 minutes or so and when I went to go and check I saw the system restarted. When I open prime95 it just wanted to continue where it stopped, but I did not take that as a success. It appears windows were busy loading updates and probably restarted by itself.
> 
> The ones I did manage to run were as follow:


Yeah, same happened to me as well yesterday evening :-D
Although I postponed the update.
I have a screenshot from my Prime95 run (128-128 FFT) from over 1 hour.
When I came back, there was the windows login screen.
I checked the result file and there it stated only success for 1 hour 45 minutes and then the file just ends.
And the update section in Windows did not show anymore the update/restart stuff.
So I assume it went automatically in update mode :-/
Annoying.


----------



## spyshagg

This entire ecosystem is a mess and frustrating as hell.

The board makers chose all kinds of nomenclatures for their RAM timings in the BIOS. 
The software tool makers chose all kinds of nomenclatures for their RAM timings in their software.

right now trying to use Ryzen Dram Calculator with this board is a nightmare.

Pick a standard.


----------



## spyshagg

Where is VDDCR_SOC in this board? is the name different as well?


----------



## chakku

spyshagg said:


> Where is VDDCR_SOC in this board? is the name different as well?


Common sense would tell you it's "CPU SOC Voltage", the only parameter for SoC voltage outside the AMD CBS.


----------



## spyshagg

chakku said:


> Common sense would tell you it's "CPU SOC Voltage", the only parameter for SoC voltage outside the AMD CBS.


not common sense no, but thanks


----------



## gupsterg

spyshagg said:


> right now trying to use Ryzen Dram Calculator with this board is a nightmare.


Hi ya chap.

You'll find RTC matches DRAM Timings Control page very well.

There are also presets already within DRAM section which yield good gains.

All in all for me C6H/C7H/ZE are the best labelled, implemented UEFIs.


----------



## spyshagg

gupsterg said:


> Hi ya chap.
> 
> You'll find RTC matches DRAM Timings Control page very well.
> 
> There are also presets already within DRAM section which yield good gains.
> 
> All in all for me C6H/C7H/ZE are the best labelled, implemented UEFIs.


Hello Gups

The presets are for samsung B-die only. I have hynix M die rual rank so I have to guide myself from known working configurations from other users / tools. The naming mismatch is an added headache, even though I came from the X370 prime.


did anyone notice that simply touching the BCLK from 100 to 102mhz disables xfr?


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> @crakej
> 
> Correct me if I'm wrong.
> 
> The same R7 1700X, as well as RAM kit, on ASUS Prime X370-Pro, with GDM=On, was failure to post. But using same CPU+RAM on C7H, GDM=Off is failure to post?
> 
> Can't say I've experienced CAD bus aiding post stability. ProcODT when vastly out of whack = failure to post for me, CAD bus aids me in stability testing within OS, usually tests where both CPU & RAM are loaded.


You are correct! Any speeds above 3200 won't boot with geardown=off. I will experiment with ProcODT - it may be that my ram needs different termination. My understanding is that geardown means that there are 2 clock signals generated where there would normally be one, making it easier for the handshakes to take place at 1T - hence some call it 1.5T.

If in the end I have to use it, it's not that bad, but it does seem odd, doesn't it? Thanks for posting those links.


----------



## kazablanka

so iam a little confused with voltage readings... I have set in bios 1.425vcore ,llc auto

In hwinfo i take three different readings for vcore and none of them is exactly the vcore i have set, so which of them is the correct reading? 
I have also set vdRAM @ 1.44v but the readings in bios and in hwinfo is way lower. what is going on with this board?

The motherboard's reading in hwinfo is almost identical to my previous mobo's reading for vcore @ svi2 reading to this board.


----------



## crakej

spyshagg said:


> This entire ecosystem is a mess and frustrating as hell.
> 
> The board makers chose all kinds of nomenclatures for their RAM timings in the BIOS.
> The software tool makers chose all kinds of nomenclatures for their RAM timings in their software.
> 
> right now trying to use Ryzen Dram Calculator with this board is a nightmare.
> 
> Pick a standard.


Check this out - http://www.overclock.net/forum/13-a...r-1-1-0-beta-2-overclocking-dram-am4-173.html

Near bottom of page someone discusses e-die - might help.


----------



## crakej

kazablanka said:


> so iam a little confused with voltage readings... I have set in bios 1.425vcore ,llc auto
> 
> In hwinfo i take three different readings for vcore and none of them is exactly the vcore i have set, so which of them is the correct reading?
> I have also set vdRAM @ 1.44v but the readings in bios and in hwinfo is way lower. what is going on with this board?
> 
> The motherboard's reading in hwinfo is almost identical to my previous mobo's reading for vcore @ svi2 reading to this board.


Same here - VCore is lower than SVI2 TFN - but I'm assuming this is because this board works differently from my previous board....


----------



## crakej

Speaking of power - what power phases are people using on this board? I always go for extreme when i'm OCing. 1usmus suggests when trying for =>3600 to use optimized instead - why might this be?


----------



## kazablanka

crakej said:


> kazablanka said:
> 
> 
> 
> so iam a little confused with voltage readings... I have set in bios 1.425vcore ,llc auto
> 
> In hwinfo i take three different readings for vcore and none of them is exactly the vcore i have set, so which of them is the correct reading?
> I have also set vdRAM @ 1.44v but the readings in bios and in hwinfo is way lower. what is going on with this board?
> 
> The motherboard's reading in hwinfo is almost identical to my previous mobo's reading for vcore @ svi2 reading to this board.
> 
> 
> 
> Same here - VCore is lower than SVI2 TFN - but I'm assuming this is because this board works differently from my previous board....
Click to expand...

Ok but how we know what exactly voltage we sent to cpu??? Which reading is most accurate? 

For cpu i use manual regular ,for soc/ram i use extreme


----------



## kazablanka

crakej said:


> Speaking of power - what power phases are people using on this board? I always go for extreme when i'm OCing. 1usmus suggests when trying for =>3600 to use optimized instead - why might this be?


I think this is for lower vrm noise.


----------



## hurricane28

I found a problem again today.. 

When i was benching and fooling around with my system i found out that my GPU is stuck at x8 instead of x16.. 

It happens on the CH6 too.. 

I don't think i am affected by it much in games but it can affect benchmark scores, i scored a few hundred points lower at the same GPU clocks as before.


----------



## HolyFist

hurricane28 said:


> I found a problem again today..
> 
> When i was benching and fooling around with my system i found out that my GPU is stuck at x8 instead of x16..
> 
> It happens on the CH6 too..
> 
> I don't think i am affected by it much in games but it can affect benchmark scores, i scored a few hundred points lower at the same GPU clocks as before.


It's not a readings bug like i told you in the C6H thread, if you have something in PCIEX8_2 it becomes x4 and then you'll see the difference in scores/FPS that there's no way that difference is just a readings issue, now i wonder how many people have this problem and didn't notice and went to blame GPU Drivers and Win10 updates 

My scores on the C6H (at x4 is if i put anything in PCIEX8_2 even a capture card, doesn't need to be another GPU):

FFXIV x4 PCIe: 16316
FFXIV x8 PCIe: 16371
Dawn of War III x4 PCIe: 64 Min, 112 Avg, 202 Max
Dawn of War III x8 PCIe: 73 Min, 112 Avg, 195 Max
Deus Ex MD (Medium) x4: 87 Min, 114 Average, 149 Max
Deus Ex MD (Medium) x8: 92 Min, 118 Average, 154 Max
Total War Warhammer (Ultra) x4: 100 Average
Total War Warhammer (Ultra) x8: 109 Average

https://imgur.com/a/bZYSKdy

Anyway i'm glad i keep buzz around this issue, cause i know it exists in this board too, look here: http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...-vii-overclocking-thread-60.html#post27306265


----------



## spyshagg

The Auto SoC voltage on this board is quite high. It reads 1.131v 

This Auto value appears to change according to the DRAM frequency. 
At 2133mhz it reads 0.8v
At 3066 it reads 1.131v as mentioned above.

Most guides mention between 1.0v and 1.05v and my X370 Prime overclocking notes from one year ago mention 1.1v as the max safe voltage.


----------



## Tactix

spyshagg said:


> The Auto SoC voltage on this board is quite high. It reads 1.131v
> 
> This Auto value appears to change according to the DRAM frequency.
> At 2133mhz it reads 0.8v
> At 3066 it reads 1.131v as mentioned above.
> 
> Most guides mention between 1.0v and 1.05v and my X370 Prime overclocking notes from one year ago mention 1.1v as the max safe voltage.


Same here, manually lowering it doesn’t seem to reduce stability so not sure what’s going on here


----------



## wisepds

I have update to last bios 0509 and now NZXT cam show this....All in auto....my cpu is at 36ºC (Hwinfo) and bios ( I have kraken x72 with 6 Corsair 120 MLPRO)

with last bios 0209 cam works well... ¿Why?
I think is a failure from CAM software... again....


----------



## larrydavid

Tactix said:


> Yep default settings keep failing to post also, says ram settings failed press F1 for setup.
> Did I just get a bad kit here?
> Odd though if I let it just boot to windows I can run prime blend with no issue for 10 mins


Try manually setting the timings instead of using the DOCP profile.


----------



## crakej

HolyFist said:


> Anyway i'm glad i keep buzz around this issue, cause i know it exists in this board too, look here: http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...-vii-overclocking-thread-60.html#post27306265


The issue on this board is the M.2_2 shares with the slots - I had to select the middle setting - Disabled(x8 mode) to force mine back to x16 after putting the M.2 drive in the M.2_2 in error


----------



## crakej

I just had a strange shutdown while writing above post.

Computer just turned off - instantly like the power was turned off. Had to power it back on as it didn't reboot which is what it usually does.... just browser running. This has never happened before....

Using Stilt preset for 1.4v 3466 with CPU at 41.5x 1.39v LLC2


----------



## crakej

spyshagg said:


> The Auto SoC voltage on this board is quite high. It reads 1.131v
> 
> This Auto value appears to change according to the DRAM frequency.
> At 2133mhz it reads 0.8v
> At 3066 it reads 1.131v as mentioned above.
> 
> Most guides mention between 1.0v and 1.05v and my X370 Prime overclocking notes from one year ago mention 1.1v as the max safe voltage.


Apparently it can go as high as 1.2v but i've never seen anyone need that. Seems good between 0.95 and 1.05v


----------



## Tactix

Tried that and many other things, just got some bad sticks it seems. They will be on there way back to amazon this afternoon


----------



## kazablanka

crakej said:


> I just had a strange shutdown while writing above post.
> 
> Computer just turned off - instantly like the power was turned off. Had to power it back on as it didn't reboot which is what it usually does.... just browser running. This has never happened before....
> 
> Using Stilt preset for 1.4v 3466 with CPU at 41.5x 1.39v LLC2


Do you use offset voltage for vcore or manual, when i set over 0.1875v offset my cpu drops frequency at 1500mhz. When i set it manual there is no problem.


----------



## spyshagg

bloody hell. Using the Dram Calculator Hynix fast *sub timings ONLY*, increased 8GB/s on all AIDA64 ram tests.

But I had to change one setting at a time and reboot. It wouldn't post when changing more than 2 or 3 settings at a time. Even when all settings are working, the board can take sometime to boot.

Congrats to 1usmus!


----------



## Gettz8488

crakej said:


> Same here - VCore is lower than SVI2 TFN - but I'm assuming this is because this board works differently from my previous board....




There is a difference because that sensor is located in a different location Svi2 should be the only one you’re looking st I think the Vcore has a -/+20mv difference


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## crakej

kazablanka said:


> Do you use offset voltage for vcore or manual, when i set over 0.1875v offset my cpu drops frequency at 1500mhz. When i set it manual there is no problem.


I'm using manual - usually I convert to offset when i've done OCing but I was having problems with it as well, cpu booting at 2.2GHz  (bios 0509)


----------



## Gettz8488

crakej said:


> I just had a strange shutdown while writing above post.
> 
> 
> 
> Computer just turned off - instantly like the power was turned off. Had to power it back on as it didn't reboot which is what it usually does.... just browser running. This has never happened before....
> 
> 
> 
> Using Stilt preset for 1.4v 3466 with CPU at 41.5x 1.39v LLC2




What software did you have open?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## nappydrew

kazablanka said:


> so iam a little confused with voltage readings... I have set in bios 1.425vcore ,llc auto
> 
> In hwinfo i take three different readings for vcore and none of them is exactly the vcore i have set, so which of them is the correct reading?
> I have also set vdRAM @ 1.44v but the readings in bios and in hwinfo is way lower. what is going on with this board?
> 
> The motherboard's reading in hwinfo is almost identical to my previous mobo's reading for vcore @ svi2 reading to this board.


HWINFO - V Vore (SVI2 TFN) is the most accurate value, in relation to real-world voltage.


----------



## ryzenoverclock

hello guys, I already read almost all the pages here but couldn't find a solution for my problem, I had a ryzen 1600x with a asus prime, and could get 3,9 with 1,4v using LLC3 and extreme vrm, in AIDA64 I got almost 80C in full load with an AIO capitan deepcool 120x, 

I sold the motherboard an the ryzen to buy the new one, ryzen 2700x with the crosshair VII and started the game...

now I have two problems, and maybe some one could help me please ( I have only one day to send back my board if it's broken audio ) 

the first is, even with everything as stock ( auto ), I have rudge sttutering sound when using the onboard output audio, in games, I already tried to reinstall windows, with or without the drivers from the asus site, and already tried disable wifi or/and bluetooth in bios, and already tried to install only the drivers in realtek site, without success, is it my board "broken" ? I want to know because my last day to send back to the market will be tomorrow, after that I'll have to do a RMA...

let me explain a little bit more, during the game play I got some stuttering that is normal, and already had in my old rig ( I'm using a gtx 1080 ), fps sometimes drops 2-5 frames and the image stutter, it's normal, but the problem is if I use the motherboard audio output ( backplate ) or even the front panel audio ( connected to the motherboard as well ) the sound Stutter for a secound when the image stutter, if I use the monitor output ( GPU ones ) only the image stutter and the sound is cleary and smooth as it should, do I have a broken audio board ? it didn't happened in my old rig, please help me it's getting me crazy and I don't whant to pay this value to a "supreme" sound and couldn't use it.


----------



## mightyrepooc

I'm done tweaking and trying my ram overclock. The only settings for me which are pretty stable are these: 

I have no idea which settings i can tweak to get more then 3200 mhz. Any doof hints for me where to start?


----------



## HolyFist

ryzenoverclock said:


> hello guys, I already read almost all the pages here but couldn't find a solution for my problem, I had a ryzen 1600x with a asus prime, and could get 3,9 with 1,4v using LLC3 and extreme vrm, in AIDA64 I got almost 80C in full load with an AIO capitan deepcool 120x,
> 
> I sold the motherboard an the ryzen to buy the new one, ryzen 2700x with the crosshair VII and started the game...
> 
> now I have two problems, and maybe some one could help me please ( I have only one day to send back my board if it's broken audio )
> 
> the first is, even with everything as stock ( auto ), I have rudge sttutering sound when using the onboard output audio, in games, I already tried to reinstall windows, with or without the drivers from the asus site, and already tried disable wifi or/and bluetooth in bios, and already tried to install only the drivers in realtek site, without success, is it my board "broken" ? I want to know because my last day to send back to the market will be tomorrow, after that I'll have to do a RMA...
> 
> let me explain a little bit more, during the game play I got some stuttering that is normal, and already had in my old rig ( I'm using a gtx 1080 ), fps sometimes drops 2-5 frames and the image stutter, it's normal, but the problem is if I use the motherboard audio output ( backplate ) or even the front panel audio ( connected to the motherboard as well ) the sound Stutter for a secound when the image stutter, if I use the monitor output ( GPU ones ) only the image stutter and the sound is cleary and smooth as it should, do I have a broken audio board ? it didn't happened in my old rig, please help me it's getting me crazy and I don't whant to pay this value to a "supreme" sound and couldn't use it.


Are you running any kind of application that reads hardware sensors? HWiNFO, AIDA64, MSi Afterburner etc?

I have this problem too on the Crosshair VI, the only way i got this fixed was to install the latest Windows version from scratch (You can download windows here https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/software-download/windows10)

However after installing some drivers and software it seems to come back, i'm still unsure if this is related to the sensors of the Motherboards and/or Software that's reading from them or something else.

Apart from Installing Windows 10 1803 and start over, there's two things you can try (and i recommend to do them first if you decide to install Windows 10 1803):

- Check DPC Latency: https://linustechtips.com/main/topi...ency-after-switching-to-ryzen-audio-glitches/
- Fix for Windows 10 standby memory issue: https://www.reddit.com/r/Windows10/...by_memory_issue_causing_stutters_on_creators/


----------



## majestynl

Great video for those who needs it. Also explaining PCIe lane distribution on the CH7!!!!


----------



## gupsterg

@spyshagg

:doh: sorry chap assumed you had Samsung B die.

I keep most essential info gathered in this thread, link.
@crakej

Really odd how GDM is behaving between Prime X370 Pro and C7H for you. No idea what to suggest as not been in this situation or seen a share to impart.

Yeah VCORE reading in HWINFO is not correct. VID/SVI2 is, I'd just ignore VCORE from SIO.
@kazablanka

Stock LLC is behaving as it should for you.

I think you have yet not grasped concept of LLC. Use application Statuscore, link. Keep same settings as you posted for the IBT run. Using Statuscore load 1 thread, then try more, you'll see as you load CPU more you get more VDROOP from set voltage. As [Auto] LLC follows AMD spec this is correct response. This is so when CPU becomes unloaded the overshoot from voltage is not extreme. Reference links I post only recently (also in OP of ROG C7H thread).


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> @crakej
> 
> Really odd how GDM is behaving between Prime X370 Pro and C7H for you. No idea what to suggest as not been in this situation or seen a share to impart..


Not really odd  Same happening to me an at least few people I saw before. Also on ch6 and a 1800x with same memsticks I had same behaviour. When I disable GDM I get auto 2T, and when I set it manually to 1T i can't boot to Windows etc. So I doubt it's the CPU or mobo. It's the ram itself.


----------



## ryzenoverclock

ryzenoverclock said:


> hello guys, I already read almost all the pages here but couldn't find a solution for my problem ...


my second problem is with the temperatures, 

I tried to use my ryzen 2700x with a [email protected] it's stable I assume, due to game play and some other works are pretty smooth. but the temperatures rapidly rise to 86 in AIDA64 and reaches 89-90 as a Tdie temperature ( the other one shows +10C), with x37 PE2 and auto voltage same temperatures, and x37 PE3 it shut down due to overheat.
tried at stock everything ( all in auto) and got 80c full load in aid64, I already change my thermal paste to artic silver 5 one, I'm using a whater cooler AIO deepcool capitan 120x, but I already tried to do some benchs with stock cooler, almost the same temperatures, in normal gameplay it's showing maximum of 80C I already tried ryzen master hwinfo and another one that I couldn't remember now, all of then shows the same temperature ( same as aida64 ), I'm in the last bios available in asus site, is my ryzen chip really that bad ? it it broke in some way ? 

sorry about big text I'll try to put some pictures here today on aida64


----------



## hurricane28

majestynl said:


> https://youtu.be/S0mR4IoNWkQ
> 
> Great video for those who needs it. Also explaining PCIe lane distribution on the CH7!!!!


Nice catch dude, watching it now!


----------



## ryzenoverclock

HolyFist said:


> Are you running any kind of application that reads hardware sensors? HWiNFO, AIDA64, MSi Afterburner etc?
> 
> I have this problem too on the Crosshair VI, the only way i got this fixed was to install the latest Windows version from scratch (You can download windows here https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/software-download/windows10)
> [/url]



thank you for your recommendation, no, nothing running in background, it's really strange that if I use the GPU audio it's smooth, the problem is with the onboard audio, 

I already tried a full new windows installation, and already tried to not install anything but the stutter sound stills there, and I already tried to reinstall windows and install everything in asus site support but it stills there, it's really annoying, but I'll try to check my dpc and check the site you said, it happens a lot in need for speed payback and some times in far cry 5 and assassins origins, I tried to do a research but saw nothing about CH7, so I assume no one have this issue ...maybe I'll have to just send my board back and try a new one


----------



## HolyFist

ryzenoverclock said:


> thank you for your recommendation, no, nothing running in background, it's really strange that if I use the GPU audio it's smooth, the problem is with the onboard audio,
> 
> I already tried a full new windows installation, and already tried to not install anything but the stutter sound stills there, and I already tried to reinstall windows and install everything in asus site support but it stills there, it's really annoying, but I'll try to check my dpc and check the site you said, it happens a lot in need for speed payback and some times in far cry 5 and assassins origins, I tried to do a research but saw nothing about CH7, so I assume no one have this issue ...maybe I'll have to just send my board back and try a new one


Did you install the Audio from ASUS website with Sonic Studio?

I think i've tried uninstall those, reboot, and install default driver from Realtek and the issue remained, but i don't remember for sure. Maybe give it a try?

I do know that now it happens much less than the 1700 a few months ago, the driver was also older and so were the BIOS, don't know the exact cause so far.


----------



## kidchunk

yep, thanks for the link... (majestynl) :thumb:


----------



## equyst

nice review, thanks for sharing


----------



## ryzenoverclock

HolyFist said:


> Did you install the Audio from ASUS website with Sonic Studio?
> 
> I think i've tried uninstall those, reboot, and install default driver from Realtek and the issue remained, but i don't remember for sure. Maybe give it a try?
> 
> I do know that now it happens much less than the 1700 a few months ago, the driver was also older and so were the BIOS, don't know the exact cause so far.


yep I already tried all this things, still with the problem, tried all the 4 bios available for CH7, I think I'll have to return the board, 

about my high temperature issue, I think I have something out of my control, but do not know what is the problem, because a 80C in aida64 with everything stock and with a AIO 120x deepcol is not a good temperature .... it rises to 85-90 if I try something more than 1,35V and I saw a lot of screenshots with temperature bellow 80C in stress test AIDA64, if I try only PE3 and voltage offset +0,06 ( if set V auto PC freezes ) with everything in auto my board shuts down after some minutes in the stress test due to overheat... already tried with cooler box, same problem, maybe I have got a bad binned cpu ?! the maximum stable profile is with PE2 auto voltage maximum temperature around 88


----------



## hurricane28

I concur, i changed my M.2 drive from the top to the bottom M.2 slot and now my GPU gets x16 again, now see if i notice any difference.


----------



## gupsterg

Just wondering what VID/SVI2 VCORE people seeing/using for all cores OC.

I used profile in txt below.

View attachment 0601_T3400SG_V1_setting.txt


But PState 0 OC of 4.075GHz reached with 1.281V. 4.1GHz froze within 2min when testing with P95 128K FFT in place. Gonna see what jump of VID I need for 4.1GHz.

Link to ZIP of testing.
@majestynl

Thanks for link, added to OP of ROG C7H thread  . Also added a simple graphic on load line just now if any members wish to ref.


----------



## Tactix

May try swapping Power profiles a few times, seems that had a bug and could cause random power down


----------



## Esenel

hurricane28 said:


> I concur, i changed my M.2 drive from the top to the bottom M.2 slot and now my GPU gets x16 again, now see if i notice any difference.


Also here in this thread for all 
But that should be known by every C7H owner.
That is due to design.

Here also a schema shown by der8auer:
https://youtu.be/S0mR4IoNWkQ?t=2m32s


----------



## Tactix

majestynl said:


> https://youtu.be/S0mR4IoNWkQ
> 
> Great video for those who needs it. Also explaining PCIe lane distribution on the CH7!!!!


Wow that was fantastic thanks for sharing.


----------



## toxick

This is what I found on the back of CH7 motherboard.
It's because of poor quality control!
After I cleaned all residue(solder) with alcohol, I have almost half an hour in Prime95 W/O any restart.


----------



## chakku

majestynl said:


> https://youtu.be/S0mR4IoNWkQ
> 
> Great video for those who needs it. Also explaining PCIe lane distribution on the CH7!!!!


Great timing on that coming out, right after I asked elmor about it! I was hoping the new configuration would only have the new M.2 slot sharing lanes with the second PCI-E slot so I could run the top one at x16 while having an NVMe drive in the second x8 slot.

Probably need to look into using an M.2 drive as my boot drive to avoid using that second slot and getting the full x16 but there don't seem to be any good M.2 drives out there, the 760p is TLC NAND.. Is there anything in the M.2 form-factor that is equivalent to a 750 series? Performance consistency, reliability, etc (so no to Samsung ones).


----------



## Tactix

chakku said:


> Great timing on that coming out, right after I asked elmor about it! I was hoping the new configuration would only have the new M.2 slot sharing lanes with the second PCI-E slot so I could run the top one at x16 while having an NVMe drive in the second x8 slot.
> 
> Probably need to look into using an M.2 drive as my boot drive to avoid using that second slot and getting the full x16 but there don't seem to be any good M.2 drives out there, the 760p is TLC NAND.. Is there anything in the M.2 form-factor that is equivalent to a 750 series? Performance consistency, reliability, etc (so no to Samsung ones).


Oh boy i have to ask, what reliability issues to Samsung drives have as i just picked up the 960 EVO for this build.


----------



## Tactix

1803SUS very happy with the end result and this setup.
In the end just decided to stick with the loser timed Ram.
So nice to see comp in the market again!


----------



## AlphaC

(*ASUS CROSSHAIR VII HERO - Everything You Need To Know! X470 In Depth Review*)


----------



## kidwolf909

chakku said:


> Great timing on that coming out, right after I asked elmor about it! I was hoping the new configuration would only have the new M.2 slot sharing lanes with the second PCI-E slot so I could run the top one at x16 while having an NVMe drive in the second x8 slot.
> 
> Probably need to look into using an M.2 drive as my boot drive to avoid using that second slot and getting the full x16 but there don't seem to be any good M.2 drives out there, the 760p is TLC NAND.. Is there anything in the M.2 form-factor that is equivalent to a 750 series? Performance consistency, reliability, etc (so no to Samsung ones).


I just picked up an HP EX920 3D TLC drive for my Ryzen 2700X build. Seems like a great alternative to Samsung drives if you're opposed to them. Pretty much matches/exceeds the 970 EVO in all benchmarks over at Tom's.


----------



## crakej

Gettz8488 said:


> What software did you have open?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Firefox and Thunderbird - that's all.


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> Not really odd  Same happening to me an at least few people I saw before. Also on ch6 and a 1800x with same memsticks I had same behaviour. When I disable GDM I get auto 2T, and when I set it manually to 1T i can't boot to Windows etc. So I doubt it's the CPU or mobo. It's the ram itself.


This is good to know! I've not come across anyone else that had experienced this.


----------



## HolyFist

Tactix said:


> 1803SUS very happy with the end result and this setup.
> In the end just decided to stick with the loser timed Ram.
> So nice to see comp in the market again!


My Ryzen 2700X is the 1806SUT, but if i Google it only the normal 2700 comes up with that Batch code, CPU-Z also shows 2700X and the clocks match (seen all cores go to 4.3, normal 4270 due to temps but i have seen 4299), sadly i don't know how much this one can OC like this.

It boots and runs AIDA64 a few minutes at 1.38, a few more mins at 1.39, at 1.4 i didn't test because i'm on stock cooler since the pump of my H100i stop working and i OC the RAM which raises the temps even more, but i did 2 Cinebench 15 and play around 2 hours and it didn't crash, obviously this isn't a sign of stability but i can't test it with the cooling i have :/

Anyone knows if the EKWB Phoenix 360 is a good choice or should i save 100€ and get the Kraken x62/something else instead?


----------



## toxick

toxick said:


> This is what I found on the back of CH7 motherboard.
> It's because of poor quality control!
> After I cleaned all residue(solder) with alcohol, I have almost half an hour in Prime95 W/O any restart.


I came back to CH6, after two weeks of hell with CH7 and here it is!!!
I think that the shop sold me a used and damaged CH7.


----------



## chakku

kidwolf909 said:


> I just picked up an HP EX920 3D TLC drive for my Ryzen 2700X build. Seems like a great alternative to Samsung drives if you're opposed to them. Pretty much matches/exceeds the 970 EVO in all benchmarks over at Tom's.


Would much rather go for an MLC drive, may have to look to Toshiba/OCZ or wait for Optane drives to lower in price/grow in capacity.


----------



## lordzed83

@gupsterg im reading this topic and as i see it there are few options.
1. We are so good with ryzen after hell in first weeks of its existance that we sort our problems out in seconds
2. We got fantastic hardware on psu.memory and cpu side and stuff just works.
3. @elmor was like... Damn those guys had very alpha state C6Hs and ill hand pick and test best ones to send them 😁

All i see is people havig problems besides me and You ..

Anyhow found out interesting problem or instanility i cant figure out when using PE overclock.
Cant pass realbench like not even 30 seconds inatant Blender instability detected.
Like ran ibt few times passes x10
Loads of cb15 an cb 11.5
Prime no problem
Ramtest 1000% hci 400% know ots stable its on slower clock than with all core oc.
My Final stability test that always crashed unstable cpu or memory aka 2 hour long rendering project. Remdered no problem.
So im like maybe its gpu plus cpu load. So left 3dmark running benchmark plus demo on loop for 2 hours nothing.
Aida all good.
So shot down psu off cmos clear with powe rbutton capacitors disscharge loaded profile back. Realbench still wont last 30 seconds.
Even dialed back 50mhz on cpu still same more volts same.

ITS A RYZEN THING 🙂


----------



## lordzed83

My point is...
Hard to help people with problems when You have not had any of them!! 
On C6H we had like most of not all problems and we found aolutions and workarounds. Here hmm my.only problem.is that usbs not powered up 3 times in few weeks of reboota and constant operarion.
Bet most wish had only this sort of problems.

Btw of it goes for Aida I noticed myself it pumps out heat lime nothing on 2700x!!!
When with IBT i get 71 tops after runs and runs. Aida 3 minutes maxed at 80.

So chap with stock cooler and thermal shotdown YES IT PUMPS SO MUCH HEAT.


----------



## majestynl

hurricane28 said:


> Nice catch dude, watching it now!


NP chap.. 




gupsterg said:


> @majestynl
> 
> Thanks for link, added to OP of ROG C7H thread  . Also added a simple graphic on load line just now if any members wish to ref.


NP mate!! After I got tired from MemOC I started to OC reference clock (BCLK) with PE mode 3 like the video. 

Found out if you leave the core on Auto while you switched to Manual Mode to bump the ref clock, it will stuck on 3700mhz  that's probably the issue people are saying sometimes. Hmm

You also need to manually enable CPB otherwise it won't boost to high clocks. So don't leave on Auto. 
A bit strange cause with only PE mode both can be leaved on Auto. Confusing for people.

The used settings for the PE modes are all invisible for the user.(Auto) So that makes it a bit confusing. You can't know what's enabled or tuned. 

Im a bit curious what settings stilt has used for the presets (PE). Cause I prefer more control about them. Or at least some info about TDM etc etc in CBS Menu.




lordzed83 said:


> @gupsterg
> All i see is people havig problems besides me and You ..
> 
> Anyhow found out interesting problem or instanility i cant figure out when using PE overclock.
> Cant pass realbench like not even 30 seconds inatant Blender instability detected.
> Like ran ibt few times passes x10
> Loads of cb15 an cb 11.5
> Prime no problem
> Ramtest 1000% hci 400% know ots stable its on slower clock than with all core oc.
> My Final stability test that always crashed unstable cpu or memory aka 2 hour long rendering project. Remdered no problem.
> So im like maybe its gpu plus cpu load. So left 3dmark running benchmark plus demo on loop for 2 hours nothing.
> Aida all good.
> So shot down psu off cmos clear with powe rbutton capacitors disscharge loaded profile back. Realbench still wont last 30 seconds.
> Even dialed back 50mhz on cpu still same more volts same.
> 
> ITS A RYZEN THING 🙂


I also have no issues with my CH7  Just testing the bios over here and checking OC possibilities !!

Coming back to your story! Test your ram better mate! I spent the last 3 days testing RAM OC and super tight timings etc..
*1000% RAM Test or 400% HCI is definitely not enough!* Most of my ram errors came between 1500-3000% on RAM Test ! Below one of the screenshots where you can see the error came at 3500% 

After so much tweaks i did on the bios, even my stable profiles got messed up. Voltages who worked before didnt worked anymore. 
I know now for sure wiping CMOS doesn't clear everything. This is the same behaviour i saw on the CH6.
Mostly when i got confused with these kind of things i just re-flash the bios and re-enter my values and suddenly they are working proper again. *Just a tip for everybody!!!!*


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> This is good to know! I've not come across anyone else that had experienced this.


yeah I did.. at least a few on the ch6 thread. A bit frustrating but don't panic you dont loose noticible performance.

@lordzed83 just to compare :
If I remember you did bumped reference clock with PE mode right? How much extra offset you used for 4.5 boost? Did you use any LLC.? With offset 0.05 I can't bench.. It freezes on single core tests etc.? I could bump the offset more but those spikes are already on stock 1.5v..haha I'm sure they will jump near 1.6v. Even it's not a biggie it doesn't feel right..


----------



## PeerlessGirl

elmor said:


> Check the Enthusiast Highlights document. SATA6G_56.


Does that also apply to the C6H, or only the C7H, @elmor?

I am getting a C7H shortly upgraded from my C6H, should be in the next few days!


----------



## sbakic

What is min stable soc voltage if I get RAM 3200 14-14-14-34-48, others default with 1.35V and cpu pe2-pe3 with probably 1.3V for 4.1Ghz? 

I tried 0.9V it didn't work it can't boot every time, I tried 0.925V same thing. So 0.95+V? Should 1V be enough? I think 1.025V or 1.05 is too much for this or even 1.1V?


----------



## chakku

Currently running the following timings with 1.05V SoC & 1.35V DRAM voltage on my new dual rank B-Die in a C7H/2700X system. Any tips on pushing this to 3333MT/s? I tried some settings I found from the C6H thread to no avail, not sure if it was a memory hole or bad settings elsewhere, didn't get much of a chance to play with the CLDO voltage.



Spoiler


----------



## Aston78

Did not buy this MB yet. Have a question - could i place M.2 radiator from top slot to bottom?


----------



## VPII

lordzed83 said:


> My point is...
> Hard to help people with problems when You have not had any of them!!
> On C6H we had like most of not all problems and we found aolutions and workarounds. Here hmm my.only problem.is that usbs not powered up 3 times in few weeks of reboota and constant operarion.
> Bet most wish had only this sort of problems.
> 
> Btw of it goes for Aida I noticed myself it pumps out heat lime nothing on 2700x!!!
> When with IBT i get 71 tops after runs and runs. Aida 3 minutes maxed at 80.
> 
> So chap with stock cooler and thermal shotdown YES IT PUMPS SO MUCH HEAT.


I have to agree, Aida stress test heats your cpu up more than any other stress test. It is a really good indication of how efficient your cooling is running. Tonight and maybe tomorrow morning I'll give my 2700X and C7H a go with dry ice. Previous run with dry ice was when I was using an Asus Strix X370 which worked great, but I want to break the 5ghz barrier. Was able to boot up at 5Ghz but is wasn't stable and it may be due to me using too high vcore.


----------



## lordzed83

majestynl said:


> NP chap..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NP mate!! After I got tired from MemOC I started to OC reference clock (BCLK) with PE mode 3 like the video.
> 
> Found out if you leave the core on Auto while you switched to Manual Mode to bump the ref clock, it will stuck on 3700mhz  that's probably the issue people are saying sometimes. Hmm
> 
> You also need to manually enable CPB otherwise it won't boost to high clocks. So don't leave on Auto.
> A bit strange cause with only PE mode both can be leaved on Auto. Confusing for people.
> 
> The used settings for the PE modes are all invisible for the user.(Auto) So that makes it a bit confusing. You can't know what's enabled or tuned.
> 
> Im a bit curious what settings stilt has used for the presets (PE). Cause I prefer more control about them. Or at least some info about TDM etc etc in CBS Menu.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I also have no issues with my CH7  Just testing the bios over here and checking OC possibilities !!
> 
> Coming back to your story! Test your ram better mate! I spent the last 3 days testing RAM OC and super tight timings etc..
> *1000% RAM Test or 400% HCI is definitely not enough!* Most of my ram errors came between 1500-3000% on RAM Test ! Below one of the screenshots where you can see the error came at 3500%
> 
> After so much tweaks i did on the bios, even my stable profiles got messed up. Voltages who worked before didnt worked anymore.
> I know now for sure wiping CMOS doesn't clear everything. This is the same behaviour i saw on the CH6.
> Mostly when i got confused with these kind of things i just re-flash the bios and re-enter my values and suddenly they are working proper again. *Just a tip for everybody!!!!*


This ram kit with TIGHTER timings must have about 50 hours of memtests in them. Had 3000 or 4000% pass on 3533 now its on 3418 haha.
Only realbench seems to not work. Like does not even start stress testing. Aida frying cpu and memory no problem.
Could be problem with Process lasso and how it manages cores with PE3 overclock. I just does not even start stress testing instant error. When I had any instability on normal oc od zen1 it did always start working for at lest 1 loop. Just does not want to start stress testing lol. Sure It's an software problem by now. 
But what can one expect from auto overclocking option?? cant beat good old normal oc on all cores loose 200mhz single boost but everything passes no problem.

On other hadn i ran 10 times realbench Benchmark no problem.

found an interesting bug kida with this PE3 overclock. Sometimes after reboot multiplyer goes 41.25 instead of 41.50 and boosts 30mhz less.......


----------



## lordzed83

majestynl said:


> yeah I did.. at least a few on the ch6 thread. A bit frustrating but don't panic you dont loose noticible performance.
> 
> @lordzed83 just to compare :
> If I remember you did bumped reference clock with PE mode right? How much extra offset you used for 4.5 boost? Did you use any LLC.? With offset 0.05 I can't bench.. It freezes on single core tests etc.? I could bump the offset more but those spikes are already on stock 1.5v..haha I'm sure they will jump near 1.6v. Even it's not a biggie it doesn't feel right..


LLC4


----------



## elyas10

majestynl said:


> NP chap..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NP mate!! After I got tired from MemOC I started to OC reference clock (BCLK) with PE mode 3 like the video.
> 
> Found out if you leave the core on Auto while you switched to Manual Mode to bump the ref clock, it will stuck on 3700mhz  that's probably the issue people are saying sometimes. Hmm
> 
> You also need to manually enable CPB otherwise it won't boost to high clocks. So don't leave on Auto.
> A bit strange cause with only PE mode both can be leaved on Auto. Confusing for people.
> 
> The used settings for the PE modes are all invisible for the user.(Auto) So that makes it a bit confusing. You can't know what's enabled or tuned.
> 
> Im a bit curious what settings stilt has used for the presets (PE). Cause I prefer more control about them. Or at least some info about TDM etc etc in CBS Menu.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I also have no issues with my CH7  Just testing the bios over here and checking OC possibilities !!
> 
> Coming back to your story! Test your ram better mate! I spent the last 3 days testing RAM OC and super tight timings etc..
> *1000% RAM Test or 400% HCI is definitely not enough!* Most of my ram errors came between 1500-3000% on RAM Test ! Below one of the screenshots where you can see the error came at 3500%
> 
> After so much tweaks i did on the bios, even my stable profiles got messed up. Voltages who worked before didnt worked anymore.
> I know now for sure wiping CMOS doesn't clear everything. This is the same behaviour i saw on the CH6.
> Mostly when i got confused with these kind of things i just re-flash the bios and re-enter my values and suddenly they are working proper again. *Just a tip for everybody!!!!*


Where can I get that "RAM Test" software? Sorry if this question was asked already...

I am trying to see if my timings are stable, they are looking preeeetty good









Also @gupsterg, the pstate OC didn't help me get to 102mhz, I tried everything. Right now I am trying level 4 LLC and minus .00625 voltage vcore offset and it doesn't crash cinebench at least but I will see how it goes.


----------



## lordzed83

elyas10 said:


> Where can I get that "RAM Test" software? Sorry if this question was asked already...
> 
> I am trying to see if my timings are stable, they are looking preeeetty good
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also @gupsterg, the pstate OC didn't help me get to 102mhz, I tried everything. Right now I am trying level 4 LLC and minus .00625 voltage vcore offset and it doesn't crash cinebench at least but I will see how it goes.


here 10 euros
https://www.karhusoftware.com/ramtest/

What memkit You are running ?? 3533cl14 looks very good hehe


----------



## elyas10

@lordzed83 
The memory is F4-3600C15D-16GTZ (G skill tridentz B-die)
It is technically 3603Mhz because of the 102Mhz BCLK OC

Thanks for the link to the software!


----------



## VPII

lordzed83 said:


> found an interesting bug kida with this PE3 overclock. Sometimes after reboot multiplyer goes 41.25 instead of 41.50 and boosts 30mhz less.......


I stand to be corrected on this, but I found the same issue and think it may be related to cpu temps. 

In an earlier post I posted my PE4 overclock which runs without CPB but it clocks my cpu straight to 43 x 100 which is around 4.29ghz with the cpu vcore on AUTO gives 1.35v which reads 1.32v when measuring with a multimeter. 

At one point it only clocked the cpu to 4.13ghz and when I was in the bios I noticed that the cpu temps show 60C. In the end I found that when measuring the vcore with my multi I accidentally disconnected the cpu fan on the rad....ha ha ha. Connected the fan and let the cpu cool down to normal 30c in bios restarted again with PE4 set and it was back with the 43x multi.


----------



## crakej

Aston78 said:


> Did not buy this MB yet. Have a question - could i place M.2 radiator from top slot to bottom?


Yes  That's the slot to use first anyway.


----------



## Mumak

Check HWiNFO build 3435, it adds reporting of Core Performance Order (Pinnacle Ridge only).
Not sure if this will be of any use for you guys, maybe...


----------



## majestynl

elyas10 said:


> Where can I get that "RAM Test" software? Sorry if this question was asked already...
> 
> I am trying to see if my timings are stable, they are looking preeeetty good
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also @gupsterg, the pstate OC didn't help me get to 102mhz, I tried everything. Right now I am trying level 4 LLC and minus .00625 voltage vcore offset and it doesn't crash cinebench at least but I will see how it goes.


- Those 2 screenshots are from different RamSpeed you know that right ? 
- RAMTest from Karhu Software
- About 102Mhz: What happened? Did you go back to main page en set OC to manual and set Reference clock (BCLK) to 102.?
What i also needed to do is, setting base clock multiplier to 37.00 on first page. This was needed for PE with higher BCLK, didn't test the last for Pstates.



Mumak said:


> Check HWiNFO build 3435, it adds reporting of Core Performance Order (Pinnacle Ridge only).
> Not sure if this will be of any use for you guys, maybe...


Thanks again Mumak!!


----------



## lordzed83

elyas10 said:


> @lordzed83
> The memory is F4-3600C15D-16GTZ (G skill tridentz B-die)
> It is technically 3603Mhz because of the 102Mhz BCLK OC
> 
> Thanks for the link to the software!


A ye those are great kits


----------



## lordzed83

VPII said:


> lordzed83 said:
> 
> 
> 
> found an interesting bug kida with this PE3 overclock. Sometimes after reboot multiplyer goes 41.25 instead of 41.50 and boosts 30mhz less.......
> 
> 
> 
> I stand to be corrected on this, but I found the same issue and think it may be related to cpu temps.
> 
> In an earlier post I posted my PE4 overclock which runs without CPB but it clocks my cpu straight to 43 x 100 which is around 4.29ghz with the cpu vcore on AUTO gives 1.35v which reads 1.32v when measuring with a multimeter.
> 
> At one point it only clocked the cpu to 4.13ghz and when I was in the bios I noticed that the cpu temps show 60C. In the end I found that when measuring the vcore with my multi I accidentally disconnected the cpu fan on the rad....ha ha ha. Connected the fan and let the cpu cool down to normal 30c in bios restarted again with PE4 set and it was back with the 43x multi.
Click to expand...


Naa its not temps not when ya rebotti g and u got 33c on cpus die in bios lol.


----------



## lordzed83

Mumak said:


> Check HWiNFO build 3435, it adds reporting of Core Performance Order (Pinnacle Ridge only).
> Not sure if this will be of any use for you guys, maybe...


Updated yeaterday but with way xfr2 works not much use for it tbh since it does not boost best cores constantly but keeps core rotation at least with process lasso 🙂


----------



## spyshagg

anyone dealt with blackscreen with code 8 on the board?


----------



## gupsterg

Morning peeps  .

Well quite liking the ACB 4.075GHz OC, performance seems good. The other aspects are improved temps, lower voltage used on average and increased MHz for ACB. Minor possible loss on 1T performance (gotta try some SuperPi to see this better).



Spoiler














Moved on to testing 3466MHz The Stilt whilst on 4.075GHz ACB. I have decided to bump VID for OC from tested 1.281V to 1.287V to guard against any issues which my testing of ~5hrs may not have revealed. SOC I was tempted to bump again only +12.5mV from last used but decided I'll go with a +18.75mV. So currently my SOC voltage/RAM MHz attained is looking like this:-

3200MHz with 0.900V set in UEFI, used The Stilt 3200MHz Safe timings, but TRC 44 TRFC 256 (VDIMM: 1.35V).
3333MHz with 0.912V set in UEFI, used The Stilt 3333MHz Fast timings (VDIMM: 1.37V).
3400MHz with 0.925V set in UEFI, used The Stilt 3466MHz timings (VDIMM: 1.37V).
3466MHz with 0.943V set in UEFI, used The Stilt 3466MHz timings (VDIMM: 1.37V).

*Notes:* All of above 1T GDM: Off, starting point of 0.900V was just picked, 3466MHz still under testing. 

@toxick

OMG, I know my C6H, C7H and ZE have been really clean, soldering looked all sound, out of all 3 board only 1 has 1 slightly skewed inductor placement.

@crakej

I wouldn't spend too much time chasing getting GDM: Off working.

All I can say is I used 5 differing CPUs on C6H and all accepted 1T GDM: Off, all reached 3333MHz and 3 reached 3466MHz, 1 reached ~3500MHz 2T C16. Same RAM kit and another used on TR+ZE has also worked 1T GDM: Off on upto 3466MHz The Stilt. The C7H has had the F4-3200C14D-16GTZ now upto 3466MHz 1T GDM: Off The Stilt setup.

@Mumak

Thank you as always. VCORE and SOC SVI2 looks on the £ to me  , DRAM from SIO chip I adjusted a few days ago in HWINFO and is sound so far.

UEFI is set at VID: 1.287V SOC: 0.943V DRAM: 1.37V, polling rate: 750ms



Spoiler






























@spyshagg

Code 8 on C7H was instability due to targeted setup, if occurs on a tested OC profile then something was overlooked and instability occurred. It could be various things related to setup, that just made instability occur.


----------



## spyshagg

gupsterg said:


> @spyshagg
> 
> Code 8 on C7H was instability due to targeted setup, if occurs on a tested OC profile then something was overlooked and instability occurred. It could be various things related to setup, that just made instability occur.


I see.

It started to happen after testing some tighter subtimings on my stable profile. Blackscreens and HCI errors started to pop. 
I rolled back to the stable profile and it kept happening. 

I asked on another thread if somehow ram IC's degrade when testing unstable timings.


----------



## gupsterg

I don't think RAM IC degrade with timings they can't sustain, pretty sure of that; increased voltage is it AFAIK.

Another aspect (which I fully don't understand or had time to look in to) is some IMC will not like DRAM voltage too high. Seen this mentioned by a few who had several CPUs to bin/use. It's similar to how The Stilt shared his experience that excessive SOC voltage leads to negative RAM MHz attainment.


----------



## spyshagg

Well some retention effect must have been in place, as my fastest stable profile became unstable after tightening some subtimings. I'm now doing memory training with my stable profile with a slower speed to see If it fixes it. So far so good.


Yes, in my MFR DR hynix I get negative scaling above 1.4v. It seems heat related.

SoC is strange in a different way. Lower values help me with boot stability, but high values are still required for my fastest preset to work.

980mv 3200mhz = boots fine
1.137mv 3200mhz = no boot


----------



## hurricane28

gupsterg said:


> Morning peeps  .
> 
> Well quite liking the ACB 4.075GHz OC, performance seems good. The other aspects are improved temps, lower voltage used on average and increased MHz for ACB. Minor possible loss on 1T performance (gotta try some SuperPi to see this better).
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 183545
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moved on to testing 3466MHz The Stilt whilst on 4.075GHz ACB. I have decided to bump VID for OC from tested 1.281V to 1.287V to guard against any issues which my testing of ~5hrs may not have revealed. SOC I was tempted to bump again only +12.5mV from last used but decided I'll go with a +18.75mV. So currently my SOC voltage/RAM MHz attained is looking like this:-
> 
> 3200MHz with 0.900V set in UEFI, used The Stilt 3200MHz Safe timings, but TRC 44 TRFC 256 (VDIMM: 1.35V).
> 3333MHz with 0.912V set in UEFI, used The Stilt 3333MHz Fast timings (VDIMM: 1.37V).
> 3400MHz with 0.925V set in UEFI, used The Stilt 3466MHz timings (VDIMM: 1.37V).
> 3466MHz with 0.943V set in UEFI, used The Stilt 3466MHz timings (VDIMM: 1.37V).
> 
> *Notes:* All of above 1T GDM: Off, starting point of 0.900V was just picked, 3466MHz still under testing.
> 
> @toxick
> 
> OMG, I know my C6H, C7H and ZE have been really clean, soldering looked all sound, out of all 3 board only 1 has 1 slightly skewed inductor placement.
> 
> @crakej
> 
> I wouldn't spend too much time chasing getting GDM: Off working.
> 
> All I can say is I used 5 differing CPUs on C6H and all accepted 1T GDM: Off, all reached 3333MHz and 3 reached 3466MHz, 1 reached ~3500MHz 2T C16. Same RAM kit and another used on TR+ZE has also worked 1T GDM: Off on upto 3466MHz The Stilt. The C7H has had the F4-3200C14D-16GTZ now upto 3466MHz 1T GDM: Off The Stilt setup.
> 
> @Mumak
> 
> Thank you as always. VCORE and SOC SVI2 looks on the £ to me  , DRAM from SIO chip I adjusted a few days ago in HWINFO and is sound so far.
> 
> UEFI is set at VID: 1.287V SOC: 0.943V DRAM: 1.37V, polling rate: 750ms
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 183513
> 
> 
> View attachment 183521
> 
> 
> View attachment 183529
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @spyshagg
> 
> Code 8 on C7H was instability due to targeted setup, if occurs on a tested OC profile then something was overlooked and instability occurred. It could be various things related to setup, that just made instability occur.


Bit high temps and volts imo man, what cooler are you running btw? 

They seem to have fixed the voltage readings finally! I am getting +- 0,10mv difference between hardwareinfo64 and probelt.


----------



## lordzed83

gupsterg said:


> I don't think RAM IC degrade with timings they can't sustain, pretty sure of that; increased voltage is it AFAIK.
> 
> Another aspect (which I fully don't understand or had time to look in to) is some IMC will not like DRAM voltage too high. Seen this mentioned by a few who had several CPUs to bin/use. It's similar to how The Stilt shared his experience that excessive SOC voltage leads to negative RAM MHz attainment.


Sure do my kit does not like volts pass 1.425-1.440 starts poping errors when on lower its all fine even tho i have them very cool.

Ill have play with SoC and memory after work when working out


----------



## majestynl

spyshagg said:


> I see.
> 
> It started to happen after testing some tighter subtimings on my stable profile. Blackscreens and HCI errors started to pop.
> I rolled back to the stable profile and it kept happening.
> 
> I asked on another thread if somehow ram IC's degrade when testing unstable timings.


Wrote this a few times , you can try to reflash your Bios and set your settings who has worked before.
I have several test scenarios where the bios got messed up while i did a lot of testings and tweakings. Stable profiles got messud up.
After reflashing bios all perfect again!



lordzed83 said:


> Sure do my kit does not like volts pass 1.425-1.440 starts poping errors when on lower its all fine even tho i have them very cool.
> 
> Ill have play with SoC and memory after work when working out


Can agree this! I have test cases where higher mem voltages gave me errors. Lowering fixed those!

@gupsterg Nice results mate! Whats difference between those 2 screenies. Pstates vs PE Mode?



lordzed83 said:


> LLC4


Hmm makes sense!


----------



## gupsterg

:doh: wrong screenie in post 1033, originally posted 4.0GHz R7 1800X C6H vs stock 2700X C7H :doh:

Updated it now to left side as 2700X C7H stock, PE is set to [Default], right is ACB 4.075GHz, both using same RAM setup, etc, room temp variance between both Y-Cruncher runs 0.3C.

@hurricane28

ThermalRight Archon IB-E X2, lapped base, AS5. Seems right for load.

@lordzed83

Cool, look forward to results.

@majestynl

Sorry chap, just updated post to correct screenie. Look forward to your view/comment.


----------



## crakej

spyshagg said:


> I see.
> 
> It started to happen after testing some tighter subtimings on my stable profile. Blackscreens and HCI errors started to pop.
> I rolled back to the stable profile and it kept happening.


I just hit F5 in the bios to load defaults and allow a full reboot. Works for me


----------



## spyshagg

majestynl said:


> Wrote this a few times , you can try to reflash your Bios and set your settings who has worked before.
> I have several test scenarios where the bios got messed up while i did a lot of testings and tweakings. Stable profiles got messud up.
> After reflashing bios all perfect again!





crakej said:


> I just hit F5 in the bios to load defaults and allow a full reboot. Works for me


good tips! will try! thanks


----------



## VicsPC

ONE OF US, ONE OF US.


----------



## knightriot

Can someone help me where is TPM HEADER on C7H????? Asus removed?


----------



## gupsterg

This is regarding how VTTDDR helped me out with 3466MHz The Stilt  .

Link to ZIP.

Organise files by time.

View attachment 0601_T3400SG_V1_setting.txt


So changes from above txt was just frequency initially. ~32min in Y-Cruncher failed (4.075 1.287 3466S 0.943 1.37 Y FAIL room 23.1C.jpg). I proceeded to bump SOC by 1 step, less the 8min fail.

Kept bumped SOC and changed ProcODT to 60 and all CAD Bus 30, again fail, HWINFO in screenie shows 15min but fail was like <8min, I was away from PC.

I drop back to ProcODT 53 (ie what Auto was) keep bump on SOC and CAD Bus, test lasted ~24min. So defo need ProcODT 53.3, dropped SOC back by a step again as that bump hadn't helped, added 1 step VDIMM, fail <8min (4.075 1.287 3466S 0.943 1.375 Y fail.jpg).

So looking at what went on and what was used to pass HCI ~100% (~30min) I knew the settings I was playing with were not helping. As I knew CPU OC was fine due to testing and setting a step higher than tested there was something memory related I was missing on tuning up.

The answer was VTTDDR  , set to 0.687 = ~2hrs and counting Y-Crunching  . With the VTTDDR tweak all settings were as the HCI pass, SOC: 0.943V, VDIMM: 1.37V, etc, etc.



Spoiler














@VicsPC

Nice to see you here  .

@knightriot

Damn, nooo! no TPM header :/ .


----------



## sr1030nx

Aston78 said:


> Did not buy this MB yet. Have a question - could i place M.2 radiator from top slot to bottom?




Yes, I did that myself.
To be honest that's where it should have been from factory as using it in the top spot drops your pci-x16 slot to x8.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## elyas10

@majestynl




























Didn't survive prime95 after 30min, either because of high temps or voltage idk


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> @majestynl
> 
> Sorry chap, just updated post to correct screenie. Look forward to your view/comment.


hehe np...Looking pretty good mate! If i set PE3 i got ~4075-4095 (all cores running together) with 1.275V stable! So your voltages looks the same as for me! Your Temps are looking normal for me! Using 2 rads on this bench?

btw: Good remembering about VTTDDR! Never set that value on the CH6! Will give it a try when i test some memtweaks again! (combination with lowering voltages)
Will let you know!



gupsterg said:


> I don't think RAM IC degrade with timings they can't sustain, pretty sure of that; increased voltage is it AFAIK.
> 
> Another aspect (which I fully don't understand or had time to look in to) is some IMC will not like DRAM voltage too high. Seen this mentioned by a few who had several CPUs to bin/use. It's similar to how The Stilt shared his experience that excessive SOC voltage leads to negative RAM MHz attainment.


Yeap im one of those! And 1 thing i could ad on this : I switched from CPU + Mobo but it looks like having the same behavior on this system. I use the same ramkit. So it looks like something with my ram!!



spyshagg said:


> good tips! will try! thanks


NP. Let us know if it helped!



elyas10 said:


> @majestynl
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Didn't survive prime95 after 30min, either because of high temps or voltage idk


Bump your vcore a bit more...+ 0.00625v is almost nothing 
Remember video from der8auer. He needed 0.05v for 103.4. And he used probably his golden CPU. I though i saw somewhere he had 8 of them 
Try also to set your vsoc on auto with a small + offset!!

Check video around 15:40. Below link again!



Spoiler



https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYAg4bYdyqENxEyHUX7t1FA


----------



## masterkaj

Just got this board with my 2700x and had a few questions:
1. Is PE2 roughly equal to going into the CBS menu and enabling PBO? Seems like I get the same voltage, clock speeds, and voltage for both. 
2. I plugged my EVGA CLC into the USB15 header which is part of the ROG_EXT or something like that. However, it doesn’t pick it up in windows so it doesn’t seem to work. Is there a bios setting I need to change to enable that header? The same CLC works on the USB header on my Taichi X370.
3. Is there a bios option to disable HPET? I was getting small freezes every few minutes in LoL on my old taichi and disabling HPET was the only thing that fixed it.


----------



## majestynl

masterkaj said:


> Just got this board with my 2700x and had a few questions:
> 1. Is PE2 roughly equal to going into the CBS menu and enabling PBO? Seems like I get the same voltage, clock speeds, and voltage for both.
> 2. I plugged my EVGA CLC into the USB15 header which is part of the ROG_EXT or something like that. However, it doesn’t pick it up in windows so it doesn’t seem to work. Is there a bios setting I need to change to enable that header? The same CLC works on the USB header on my Taichi X370.
> 3. Is there a bios option to disable HPET? I was getting small freezes every few minutes in LoL on my old taichi and disabling HPET was the only thing that fixed it.


1. Dont know for sure. PE1 and PE2 are made by AMD. PE3 and PE4 by asus (stilt), i can say for sure the last to have more tweaks included. Like most of the limits are bumped there to get higher clocks
2. Read page 9. from C7H Enthusiast Highlights v03.pdf. The Front ROG_EXT USB2.0 X470 = Only the bottom pins are routed!

Download PDF: http://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=154289&d=1524143181
You could also try to install USB drivers from elmor: https://www.mediafire.com/folder/jkoxu4r003qu7/Release

3. I "thought" i saw the option in the bios. Im not behind my system. Cant say for sure which menu!
Read also this: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/8ed47q/hpet_on_ryzen_2000_series/


----------



## lordzed83

elyas10 said:


> @majestynl
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Didn't survive prime95 after 30min, either because of high temps or voltage idk


0.006?? Yhats not enough im at 0.043 llc4 and that BARELY cuts it when load hits!!!


----------



## MacG32

masterkaj said:


> Just got this board with my 2700x and had a few questions:
> 1. Is PE2 roughly equal to going into the CBS menu and enabling PBO? Seems like I get the same voltage, clock speeds, and voltage for both.
> 2. I plugged my EVGA CLC into the USB15 header which is part of the ROG_EXT or something like that. However, it doesn’t pick it up in windows so it doesn’t seem to work. Is there a bios setting I need to change to enable that header? The same CLC works on the USB header on my Taichi X370.
> 3. Is there a bios option to disable HPET? I was getting small freezes every few minutes in LoL on my old taichi and disabling HPET was the only thing that fixed it.



Tap on the Windows-key, enter cmd, right-click cmd.exe in the results listing and select to run the command prompt with administrative privileges.
To disable HPET in Windows run the command: bcdedit /deletevalue useplatformclock
Restart your computer :thumb:


----------



## lordzed83

@gupsterg
3550 with my timings said its not ram :/

For anyone interested its 1.05 soc 1.425 ddr


----------



## kazablanka

3600MHZ(auto timings) testing with 1.415v and 3600cl15 (optimized timings) with 1.42v DRAM ,I will try to tight timings as lower as i can without exceeding 1.44v DRAM


----------



## VicsPC

kazablanka said:


> 3600MHZ(auto timings) testing with 1.415v and 3600cl15 (optimized timings) with 1.42v DRAM ,I will try to tight timings as lower as i can without exceeding 1.44v DRAM


I've been using 1.45v on my corsair dram for the past year or so on my crosshair VI and hasn't been an issue. You're pretty much safe at 1.45v without an issue with good cooling.


----------



## kazablanka

VicsPC said:


> I've been using 1.45v on my corsair dram for the past year or so on my crosshair VI and hasn't been an issue. You're pretty much safe at 1.45v without an issue with good cooling.


Ι know but my ram kit seems that dislike voltages above 1.44v for some reason ,i had to figure it out. Iam trying now 3600cl14 fast timings with 1.42v DRAM ,its going quite good until now


----------



## Shiftstealth

kazablanka said:


> Ι know but my ram kit seems that dislike voltages above 1.44v for some reason ,i had to figure it out. Iam trying now 3600cl14 fast timings with 1.42v DRAM ,its going quite good until now


You'd be lucky to get 3600Mhz stable. The Stilt tested 8 chips, and none of them had the IMC to get 3600Mhz stable.


----------



## crakej

So P95 - most recent version - just bombed to the desktop again (V28 did it earlier too). Event log says exception 05 so seems to be stability even though most other stuff is checking out - including 5000% RamTest with ram at 3466CL14 fast timings from calculator. 1.375v SoC 0.96v. Have had 3533 with v similar settings and can boot up to 3800MTs, just unusable.... (for now!)

I still need more experimentation to get the best out of my ram as still using some auto settings, so there's much more I can do - DrvSrt and CadBus - also need to play with memory interleaving.


----------



## crakej

kazablanka said:


> Ι know but my ram kit seems that dislike voltages above 1.44v for some reason ,i had to figure it out. Iam trying now 3600cl14 fast timings with 1.42v DRAM ,its going quite good until now


mine doesn't seem to like it either - ram gets less stable


----------



## Shiftstealth

crakej said:


> So P95 - most recent version - just bombed to the desktop again (V28 did it earlier too). Event log says exception 05 so seems to be stability even though most other stuff is checking out - including 5000% RamTest with ram at 3466CL14 fast timings from calculator. 1.375v SoC 0.96v. Have had 3533 with v similar settings and can boot up to 3800MTs, just unusable.... (for now!)
> 
> I still need more experimentation to get the best out of my ram as still using some auto settings, so there's much more I can do - DrvSrt and CadBus - also need to play with memory interleaving.





crakej said:


> mine doesn't seem to like it either - ram gets less stable




Only 5 out of 8 CPU's tested by The Stilt had 3533 Stable, and none of the 8 were stable at 3600. I wouldn't be entirely surprised if you can't get 3533 stable. Mine couldn't get 3533CL16 Stable either, only 3466 on 2x8 B-Die. (Stock 3200CL14, Running @ 3466CL15) If i were you i'd be happy with 3466CL14


----------



## hsn

kazablanka said:


> 3600MHZ(auto timings) testing with 1.415v and 3600cl15 (optimized timings) with 1.42v DRAM ,I will try to tight timings as lower as i can without exceeding 1.44v DRAM


how can CL 15?
mine still read CL16 even i change from bios.

i use gksill 16gb ddr4 3600 cl15


----------



## Shiftstealth

hsn said:


> how can CL 15?
> mine still read CL16 even i change from bios.
> 
> i use gksill 16gb ddr4 3600 cl15


You have to disable geardownmode to use odd ram timings.


----------



## i_max2k2

Guys I'm trying to get my memory F4-3200C14D-32GVK 2x16gb 3200Mhz C14 to be stable. So far I have tried the Ryzen Dram Calc safe settings, but I can't get beyond 2x runs of IBT AVX. Is there any guide to look at, so as to determine which settings to play/tweak to get to them to be stable, what are safe voltages for the Dual Rank Samsung B die for the G.Skill Ripjaws V?

Thanks


----------



## Shiftstealth

i_max2k2 said:


> Guys I'm trying to get my memory F4-3200C14D-32GVK 2x16gb 3200Mhz C14 to be stable. So far I have tried the Ryzen Dram Calc safe settings, but I can't get beyond 2x runs of IBT AVX. Is there any guide to look at, so as to determine which settings to play/tweak to get to them to be stable, what are safe voltages for the Dual Rank Samsung B die for the G.Skill Ripjaws V?
> 
> Thanks


Dual Rank isn't supported to 3200Mhz i don't think. You might have to turn that down to 2933.


----------



## i_max2k2

Shiftstealth said:


> Dual Rank isn't supported to 3200Mhz i don't think. You might have to turn that down to 2933.


Some people did get it stable even with 64gb kits on CH6.

http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...duel-rank-2-x-f4-3200c14d-32gtz-kit-64gb.html

I do want to give it a try. But I haven't seen a lot places talking about exact settings to tweak to try to stabilize them.


----------



## chakku

i_max2k2 said:


> Guys I'm trying to get my memory F4-3200C14D-32GVK 2x16gb 3200Mhz C14 to be stable. So far I have tried the Ryzen Dram Calc safe settings, but I can't get beyond 2x runs of IBT AVX. Is there any guide to look at, so as to determine which settings to play/tweak to get to them to be stable, what are safe voltages for the Dual Rank Samsung B die for the G.Skill Ripjaws V?
> 
> Thanks


I'm using the following timings on the exact same kit: (1.35V DRAM, 1.025V SoC) Your luck may vary, but for me the XMP profile worked out of the box as well.



Spoiler















Didn't test with IBT but I'm happy with the memtest result from last night at least, maybe leave it running longer when I'm away from the system more:



Spoiler


----------



## i_max2k2

chakku said:


> I'm using the following timings on the exact same kit: (1.35V DRAM, 1.025V SoC) Your luck may vary, but for me the XMP profile worked out of the box as well.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Didn't test with IBT but I'm happy with the memtest result from last night at least, maybe leave it running longer when I'm away from the system more:
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Thank you, I'll give these settings a try.


----------



## kazablanka

crakej said:


> mine doesn't seem to like it either - ram gets less stable


Which bios do you think is better for memory stability? i think 0207 was better than 0509 and 0601. For every bios i need different soc voltage.
Cadbus settings and rrt settings still does not seems that helps my memory stability as with our previous motherboard. Leaving them to auto is the best for me.


----------



## lordzed83

i_max2k2 said:


> Some people did get it stable even with 64gb kits on CH6.
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...duel-rank-2-x-f4-3200c14d-32gtz-kit-64gb.html
> 
> I do want to give it a try. But I haven't seen a lot places talking about exact settings to tweak to try to stabilize them.


From MANUAL
5. Memory overclocking 
DIMMs per channel DIMM Rank Typical configuration Minimum Maximum 1 DPC Single 2x8GB 3466 MHz 3733 MHz 1 DPC Dual 2x16GB 3333 MHz 3466 MHz


----------



## crakej

Shiftstealth said:


> Only 5 out of 8 CPU's tested by The Stilt had 3533 Stable, and none of the 8 were stable at 3600. I wouldn't be entirely surprised if you can't get 3533 stable. Mine couldn't get 3533CL16 Stable either, only 3466 on 2x8 B-Die. (Stock 3200CL14, Running @ 3466CL15) If i were you i'd be happy with 3466CL14


I've never had this problem with P95 before, under any testing situation. Usually it crashes the system completely. It's happened at 3200 as well.


----------



## kazablanka

crakej said:


> I've never had this problem with P95 before, under any testing situation. Usually it crashes the system completely. It's happened at 3200 as well.


Do some test at first with docp enabled ,set memory frequency at 3600mhz an leave everything to auto except DRAM voltage try 1.42v and check if you are stable


----------



## crakej

kazablanka said:


> Which bios do you think is better for memory stability? i think 0207 was better than 0509 and 0601. For every bios i need different soc voltage.
> Cadbus settings and rrt settings still does not seems that helps my memory stability as with our previous motherboard. Leaving them to auto is the best for me.


I've only really run 0509 and 0601 - still need more testing - but these 2 seem the same....


----------



## crakej

kazablanka said:


> Do some test at first with docp enabled ,set memory frequency at 3600mhz an leave everything to auto except DRAM voltage try 1.42v and check if you are stable


No, that wasn't quite stable for me, but I didn't try tweaking it at all yet. Boots to desktop, some things run but really not tried tweaking it yet.


----------



## kazablanka

crakej said:


> No, that wasn't quite stable for me, but I didn't try tweaking it at all yet. Boots to desktop, some things run but really not tried tweaking it yet.


Some thinks that i have found until now are that ,the lower timings i set the most vcore, vram and vsoc i need , 1.15vsoc (1.131v with vdroop) setted in bios is the least for me to be stable at 3600mhz with ,cad bus rtt all on auto or else i take errors. I have not touch yet amd cbs options.


----------



## zulex

Even if I set my llc to level 5, my cpu voltage drops little bit downward during full load. This is the problem with this motherboard.


----------



## Shiftstealth

zulex said:


> Even if I set my llc to level 5, my cpu voltage drops little bit downward during full load. This is the problem with this motherboard.


It isn't a problem. It is how it is designed. So you don't blow out your CPU. There should always be some droop.


----------



## zulex

Shiftstealth said:


> zulex said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even if I set my llc to level 5, my cpu voltage drops little bit downward during full load. This is the problem with this motherboard.
> 
> 
> 
> It isn't a problem. It is how it is designed. So you don't blow out your CPU. There should always be some droop.
Click to expand...

At least one of the llc should retain the current voltage if it cannot go higher than that. Almost all MBs do that.


----------



## Luminair

Shiftstealth said:


> Dual Rank isn't supported to 3200Mhz i don't think. You might have to turn that down to 2933.


It's supported IF you got a lucky chip with a really good memory controller  He'll have to turn it down yeah.


----------



## i_max2k2

lordzed83 said:


> From MANUAL
> 5. Memory overclocking
> DIMMs per channel DIMM Rank Typical configuration Minimum Maximum 1 DPC Single 2x8GB 3466 MHz 3733 MHz 1 DPC Dual 2x16GB 3333 MHz 3466 MHz


Indeed, I did get it atleast 10x Very High IBT AVX stable last night. I had to clear cmos, load up settings all again and keep a lower SoC 1.025V. So far no test has crashed, but in AIDA64 I'm getting really low RAM Read/Write results, like 25000~Mbps read. I'm wondering if there is a AIDA64 setting that I'm not changing.


----------



## Gettz8488

Have a few questions anyone if free to answer. What peak Voltages are you guys seeing at these 3 settings - Default, PE1, PE2 with Vcore on auto


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## kazablanka

So after a lot of testing i find my stable settings for my cpu and ram overclock. I wish i could use offset voltage for vcore but unfortunately i can't.


----------



## crakej

Nice! I like how you just went for 3600.... I might experiment later.

what voltages did you enter?


----------



## ScomComputers

2700X+Gtx1080Ti Gaming Test...


----------



## gupsterg

Greetings fellow owners  .

So I just wanted to share/round off 3466MHz The Stilt. Out of all RAM MHz profiled so far, this has been a task, see complete ZIP.

Organise files by time.

Phase 1 has a lot of fails, this has files linked in ZIP of post 1045 where setting VTTDDR had enhanced stability of profile in Y-Cruncher. Phase 2, latter files is where I crack the profile, phase 3 minor tweak to SOC, for profile to work with ACB OC of 4.075GHz.

Highlights of this ~2 day escapade with 3466MHz The Stilt were these:-

HCI was easy pass, yes it was short run but plan to do a length test now.

Y-Cruncher was failed within 30min with settings that passed HCI ~40min. Crucial change to aid profile stability was VTTDDT set to 0.687V (VBOOT/VDIMM: 1.37V).So the profile of 4.075GHz 1.287V VID, SOC: 0.943V, VDIMM: 1.37V lasted nearly 3 hours before failing. I tried a CAD Bus tweak to 30 ohms on all and still failed ~2hrs later. So I decided it was time to move to P95 to speed up profiling.

What was passing ~2hrs+ of Y-Cruncher was failing P95 8K 4096K 13.5GB in <15min. By this I do not mean to say Y-Cruncher is poorer stability test, I have found some CPUs/profiles can sometimes fall over quicker on x program than y. Now began an onslaught of changing various things to make 3466MHz The Stilt 1T GDM: Off pass P95. After trying so many permutations the cracking of profile came with ProcODT tweak  .

48Ω yielded great increase in stability for my HW combo :drum: .

All I'm seeing now is upto 3400MHz I could keep profile simple, needed less tweaks. By 3466MHz keeping 1T and GDM: Off, meant more tweaks. I had done 2 tests of 1T+GDM and 2T without GDME and that was easy to setup (see ZIP).

Anyhow here are final screenies moving me to BETA stage of profile  .

Stock CPU, SOC: 0.956V, VDIMM: 1.37V, VTTDDR: 0.687, ProcODT: 48Ω, link.

4.075GHz ACB, PState 0 VID: 1.287V, SOC: 0.968V, VDIMM: 1.37V, VTTDDR: 0.687, ProcODT: 48Ω, link (this screenie not in ZIP as testing is ongoing).

All in all 3466MHz The Stilt was task, but an enjoyable one, as through the failures I learnt how to tweak the profile. This Pinnacle Ridge CPU has shown no signs of memory holes, has been way more forgiving than any 5 Ryzen CPUs I used with same RAM kit but C6H.

All in all happy with how it has come along on SOC/VDIMM, I know on gen 1 I'd be looking at higher values of each for this RAM setup.


----------



## kazablanka

crakej said:


> Nice! I like how you just went for 3600.... I might experiment later.
> 
> what voltages did you enter?


1.387v /llc4 for cpu, 1.44v for ram and 1.175v for soc. Power phase and llc settings except cpu's is left to auto.
I have to mention that the system needs less vcore with 3600mhz and default timings. The more i tight the timings the most vcore and vsoc i need with this memory speed to pass ibt. With 3466mhz and the stilts timings i need 1.3625vcore with llc4. 

I have tested also 3466 with stilts timings ,was pretty stable but i wanted more 

I do some test with 3733 and 3800 but seems that my cpu cant handle these speeds. I can run some bencmarks but i need high memory and soc voltages with fast timings.


----------



## gupsterg

lordzed83 said:


> @gupsterg
> 3550 with my timings said its not ram :/
> 
> For anyone interested its 1.05 soc 1.425 ddr


Sorry, I couldn't make sense from post, what was purpose of post.

Viewing your AIDA64 window, it seems your 3533MHz setup is not running optimally. I have added 3466MHz The Stilt is for me in AIDA64 with your screenie, link.


----------



## lordzed83

gupsterg said:


> lordzed83 said:
> 
> 
> 
> @gupsterg
> 3550 with my timings said its not ram 😕
> 
> For anyone interested its 1.05 soc 1.425 ddr
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, I couldn't make sense from post, what was purpose of post.
> 
> Viewing your AIDA64 window, it seems your 3533MHz setup is not running optimally. I have added 3466MHz The Stilt is for me in AIDA64 with your screenie, link.
Click to expand...


Iw ran aida test with ramtest still running to see if that will crash ot hahah thats why acoees messed up so.much look at l3 latwncy. Anyhow 5000% ramtest pass with no error with that extra cpu stress turned on. Srsly cnat figure out why realbench instant crash pccurs. Could be process lasso and how it manages tasks with pe3 bclk 0verclock god knows.

But normally i get 55000 54000 50000 61ns with this 3533 or something pike that. 

With my ram kit 3400cl14 is absolute maximum without errors 3533cl is just faster. Ofc with those timings cant go any lower on them either.


----------



## sbakic

Guys I got question related to single core stability.

So I run IBT 10x 90% ram and it passed with ~1.3 all core, but it failed to cinebench single core benchmark for 4th and 5th core.. so I needed to bump vcore to pass that single core test (I set affinity to one of these cores at the time). It needs 1.456V for single core benchmark for these 2 cores.

Is it important to pass this test, or I can lower Vcore as I have tested with IBT? Because I tested with offset of -0.11250V but to work for these 2 core at single core benchmark i need to set to -0.08750V which will give me for ~1.3v to 1.325V for all cores. 

Question is it important for cpu to be stable at these single core tests? Coz i think if I run single core test without affinity cpu will use other cores efficiently, and at the end it will give better result. For every single core with affinity i got 169 points, but without when it uses all cores i got 180. So what to do?


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Greetings fellow owners  .
> 
> So I just wanted to share/round off 3466MHz The Stilt. Out of all RAM MHz profiled so far, this has been a task, see complete ZIP.
> 
> Organise files by time.
> 
> Phase 1 has a lot of fails, this has files linked in ZIP of post 1045 where setting VTTDDR had enhanced stability of profile in Y-Cruncher. Phase 2, latter files is where I crack the profile, phase 3 minor tweak to SOC, for profile to work with ACB OC of 4.075GHz.
> 
> Highlights of this ~2 day escapade with 3466MHz The Stilt were these:-
> 
> HCI was easy pass, yes it was short run but plan to do a length test now.
> 
> Y-Cruncher was failed within 30min with settings that passed HCI ~40min. Crucial change to aid profile stability was VTTDDT set to 0.687V (VBOOT/VDIMM: 1.37V).So the profile of 4.075GHz 1.287V VID, SOC: 0.943V, VDIMM: 1.37V lasted nearly 3 hours before failing. I tried a CAD Bus tweak to 30 ohms on all and still failed ~2hrs later. So I decided it was time to move to P95 to speed up profiling.
> 
> What was passing ~2hrs+ of Y-Cruncher was failing P95 8K 4096K 13.5GB in <15min. By this I do not mean to say Y-Cruncher is poorer stability test, I have found some CPUs/profiles can sometimes fall over quicker on x program than y. Now began an onslaught of changing various things to make 3466MHz The Stilt 1T GDM: Off pass P95. After trying so many permutations the cracking of profile came with ProcODT tweak  .
> 
> 48Ω yielded great increase in stability for my HW combo :drum: .
> 
> All I'm seeing now is upto 3400MHz I could keep profile simple, needed less tweaks. By 3466MHz keeping 1T and GDM: Off, meant more tweaks. I had done 2 tests of 1T+GDM and 2T without GDME and that was easy to setup (see ZIP).
> 
> Anyhow here are final screenies moving me to BETA stage of profile  .
> 
> Stock CPU, SOC: 0.956V, VDIMM: 1.37V, VTTDDR: 0.687, ProcODT: 48Ω, link.
> 
> 4.075GHz ACB, PState 0 VID: 1.287V, SOC: 0.968V, VDIMM: 1.37V, VTTDDR: 0.687, ProcODT: 48Ω, link (this screenie not in ZIP as testing is ongoing).
> 
> All in all 3466MHz The Stilt was task, but an enjoyable one, as through the failures I learnt how to tweak the profile. This Pinnacle Ridge CPU has shown no signs of memory holes, has been way more forgiving than any 5 Ryzen CPUs I used with same RAM kit but C6H.
> 
> All in all happy with how it has come along on SOC/VDIMM, I know on gen 1 I'd be looking at higher values of each for this RAM setup.



great post gup. nice shares. I was also trying to crack 3466 last few days. . Have done dozen of testings, very frustrating when Ramstest failed above 3000%..tried Al lot of things but learned a lot about this system.. . Finally got it stable, multiple success test results. Will share detailed info tomorrow...currently on my phone, got tired from Al tweaks 

Funny part is, got it stable with 1.3875v on ram and 1.05 on soc. 

will download your files tomorrow... Take care..


----------



## crakej

kazablanka said:


> 1.387v /llc4 for cpu, 1.44v for ram and 1.175v for soc. Power phase and llc settings except cpu's is left to auto.
> I have to mention that the system needs less vcore with 3600mhz and default timings. The more i tight the timings the most vcore and vsoc i need with this memory speed to pass ibt. With 3466mhz and the stilts timings i need 1.3625vcore with llc4.
> 
> I have tested also 3466 with stilts timings ,was pretty stable but i wanted more
> 
> I do some test with 3733 and 3800 but seems that my cpu cant handle these speeds. I can run some bencmarks but i need high memory and soc voltages with fast timings.


Cool - almost stable for me too! - but I have to use 2T - but could still be worth it if I can tighten things up a bit.

I experimented a LOT today with 3466 and 3533 - 3466 nearly got my extreme settings to work which would mean faster than 3600CL16 2T. More playing tomorrow


----------



## Syldon

Upgraded to the CH7. I actually ordered one of these on release but it turned out to be a knacker. I hummed and harred for a couple of days this week, and decided to just grab one for giggles anyways.
I am finding it a lot more stable than the CH6, or rather a lot less fussy. 6101 on the CH6 came back as unstable even at 3200. It doesn't crash, but it still left me without confidence. I have used earlier releases with better stable results. [email protected] worked best for me.

Differences I am seeing. 4 X 8 is a non event. Comes back unstable even at 3200. 2 X 8 runs very sweet. 3466 more or less straight out the box with near my CH6 settings. Voltages are off though. I gained 3ns in latency, but the 3466 on the CH6 wasnt stable with tests so it isnt really apples for apples.

I spent more time on CPU voltages than setting memory, which I found strange. Elmor once posted that set Vcore to offset +0.5v. He wasnt far out for me on PE3 (+0.4125). This was the lowest I could get without crashing in IBT or Vdroop. There is no prime 95 screenshot in the image. Gimme a break I only get one day off this weekend.

Am I happy I swapped for the CH7 over the 6? Yeah I suppose I am. It feels a lot better than the 6, even when using the 6 on earlier revisions. I have had the 2700 in the 6 since release so I can make a back to back comparison.


My only gripe is LLC. Someone forgot to turn it add to switch to turn it on.


----------



## VPII

Okay I've never ran my cpu at stock really but this morning I wanted to see up to where it boosts single core when at stock with a bump in the bclk and for some reason the highest was roughly 4.277ghz. My reason for testing this is that I found my single core CB15 result being really low. With this specific run it was like 148 which is a little concerning, but I also found that with the complete overclock all cores 4.36ghz it is also lower than what it should be. Any advice?


----------



## gupsterg

@lordzed83

:doh: , :specool: .

@sbakic

I used IBT AVX quite a bit on Ryzen gen 1/C6H. I used to set to ~90% RAM usage on 16GB setup, anything else is waste of time. Within W7P x64 (clean install and bloatfree) I could not pass anything but very high. Same OC profile, etc, but W10P x64 could pass multiples of 10 ~90% RAM usage without issue. In Sep 17 I dropped using IBT AVX, it's just too old of a program now IMO and that difference between how it behaved in differing OS discouraged me on relying on it. The OC profile that passed IBT AVX in W10P x64 was determined by using HCI, RB, Y-Cruncher and P95.

As stated before in a post of mine I also check OC profile on reposts, to make sure it isn't failing. I also let rig idle at times, I recall few times on Ryzen gen 1 that rig would be idling and crash with code 8. How I saw it was perhaps some voltage drooped at idle vs load and created instability, leading to code 8.

So aim to make your testing varied, as you go higher on CPU/RAM more length, before moving on.

@majestynl

Cheers man!  .

Luv'ing the SOC/VDIMM on my present setup  . 0.968V is crazy low for 3466MHz IMO, none of Ryzen Gen 1 would use that for that setup. Even VDIMM is so damn sweet  . Well pleased with profile will keep that for 24/7 use, unless I gain 3533MHz  .

Initially I felt not that impressed with PR and TBH even C7H.

Taking all aspects into account PR is vastly better than SR. The UEFI of C7H feels like home as it's identical as C6H. The darker board theme has grown on me. Luv how much better the ProbeIt points are. I was very happy to see in the review by der8auer that VRM temp is actually from powerstages and not a sensor located close to them. So I am getting more impressed with C7H. I think more has gone on with C7H than is visible on the surface  . 

Anyhow moar data! .

C7H UEFI 0601
2700X UA 1805SUS (4.075GHz PState 0 VID: 1.287V SOC: 0.687V)
F4-3200C14D-16GTZ (3466MHz The Stilt VDIMM: 1.37V VTT: 0.687V)

So P95 8K 4096K 13.5GB ran for ~11.25hrs before I stopped it. Then did HCI v6.0 ~3hrs and shut rig down, reposted, doing 2hrs RB currently.



Spoiler














































@VPII

148 1T in CB15 is too low. UEFI defaults and PE set to "Default" I get ~174, power plan Balanced (default).



Spoiler



2133MHz









3200MHz









3333MHz









3400MHz











Perhaps you have app running in background?


----------



## sbakic

gupsterg said:


> @sbakic
> 
> I used IBT AVX quite a bit on Ryzen gen 1/C6H. I used to set to ~90% RAM usage on 16GB setup, anything else is waste of time. Within W7P x64 (clean install and bloatfree) I could not pass anything but very high. Same OC profile, etc, but W10P x64 could pass multiples of 10 ~90% RAM usage without issue. In Sep 17 I dropped using IBT AVX, it's just too old of a program now IMO and that difference between how it behaved in differing OS discouraged me on relying on it. The OC profile that passed IBT AVX in W10P x64 was determined by using HCI, RB, Y-Cruncher and P95.
> 
> As stated before in a post of mine I also check OC profile on reposts, to make sure it isn't failing. I also let rig idle at times, I recall few times on Ryzen gen 1 that rig would be idling and crash with code 8. How I saw it was perhaps some voltage drooped at idle vs load and created instability, leading to code 8.
> 
> So aim to make your testing varied, as you go higher on CPU/RAM more length, before moving on.
> 
> Perhaps you have app running in background?


Point is that it passed realbench 8h 32gbs, and 8h of prime95 small and IBT. And I never tested single bench test because i had 1700x with multiplier for all cores. Now 2700x has boost to 43.5x for every core and for single core task it needs 1.456V to pass for 1 of 8 cores and because of that core i need to bump vcore. So I had like -0.11250 offset which is at load of all cores 1.3V with load of single core 1.435V. So i needed to bump vcore to be as high as 1.456V to pass single core test. But as you can see all cores for prime95 small was fine with ~1.3V at 40.8x now it will not go below 1.319V because i bumped vcore to offset -0.8750.

P.S. it has enough voltage for all cores load, but because vcore is between 1.294V to 1.438V it's not stable for single test. It needs 1.456V for single core which means min Vcore will be like 1.312V or 1.319V which will result in higher temps.

P.S.S I run hci memtest it made error for RAM @3200 1.35V 14-14-14-34-48 with SoC of 0.95V i bumped to 0.975V and will continue to test it. So I don't know how you can get stable RAM with SoC below 0.95V really...


----------



## gupsterg

@sbakic

I understand what you posted  .

Your keeping PB/XFR active, so you have higher single core  . Running 8hrs RB, where it is loading all cores was futile, so was 8hrs P95.

You needed to do testing where you were loading each single core. For example using a custom setup of P95, testing each core by setting manual affinity. Once your adjusted voltage is correct for this testing then you needed to move on to testing all cores loads.


----------



## sbakic

gupsterg said:


> @sbakic
> 
> I understand what you posted  .
> 
> Your keeping PB/XFR active, so you have higher single core  . Running 8hrs RB, where it is loading all cores was futile, so was 8hrs P95.
> 
> You needed to do testing where you were loading each single core. For example using a custom setup of P95, testing each core by setting manual affinity. Once your adjusted voltage is correct for this testing then you needed to move on to testing all cores loads.


So what stress test should I use for single core like the best/strongest one? prime95 small, in -place? And how much to run for each core?


----------



## crakej

@elmor I just noticed my machine was extra quiet - great, but I have my cpu fan set at a min of 1400rpm at lowest temps as it fairly quiet and means I can attack heat very aggressively. This has happened before, with AISuite and without.

When my machine wakes from sleep, I expect fans to return to where they should be, but they're not - you can see in this image that the orange dot is way below where it should be. When I ran IBT for some temp, it did work again, but not quick enough!


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> @[MENTION=530402]majestynl
> 
> Cheers man!  .
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Luv'ing the SOC/VDIMM on my present setup  . 0.968V is crazy low for 3466MHz IMO, none of Ryzen Gen 1 would use that for that setup. Even VDIMM is so damn sweet  . Well pleased with profile will keep that for 24/7 use, unless I gain 3533MHz  .
> 
> Initially I felt not that impressed with PR and TBH even C7H.
> 
> Taking all aspects into account PR is vastly better than SR. The UEFI of C7H feels like home as it's identical as C6H. The darker board theme has grown on me. Luv how much better the ProbeIt points are. I was very happy to see in the review by der8auer that VRM temp is actually from powerstages and not a sensor located close to them. So I am getting more impressed with C7H. I think more has gone on with C7H than is visible on the surface  .
> 
> Anyhow moar data! .
> 
> C7H UEFI 0601
> 2700X UA 1805SUS (4.075GHz PState 0 VID: 1.287V SOC: 0.687V)
> F4-3200C14D-16GTZ (3466MHz The Stilt VDIMM: 1.37V VTT: 0.687V)
> 
> So P95 8K 4096K 13.5GB ran for ~11.25hrs before I stopped it. Then did HCI v6.0 ~3hrs and shut rig down, reposted, doing 2hrs RB currently.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 185985
> 
> 
> View attachment 185993
> 
> 
> View attachment 186001
> 
> 
> View attachment 186009
> 
> 
> View attachment 186017


NP Mate! Nice results and looking stable over there 
Curious about your testresults for 3466 with 14 14 14 28 and TT!


Have done a lot of tests for at least 3/4 days. Its like i'm knowing the DNA of my RAMKits.
Got tired from it!! 

*And as promised below my results for 3466 Ram and TT, calling it STABLE:*

*CPU:* 2700x
*Mobo:* CH7 for sure
*Ram:* 2x8GB / F4-3200C14-8GTZ(R)
*Cooling:* EK CL / 360+240Rad
*OS:* Fresh Windows 10 with April updates installed!
*OC CPU:* PE3 with all settings on auto, no extra voltage etc. (this is not my own profile, just used for below so im sure nothing effected my RamOC test!)
*OC Ram:* 3466 14 14 14 28 42 @ 1.385v and 1.05soc / all other settings on auto

*Notes:* Using same ramkit as on my CH6 setup where i was since release of Ryzen1 and the CH6, 
i know GD Off doesn't work with this kit. If i disable GD my ram runs ons 2T, and when i set it manually to 1, Windows doesn't boot. 
Also low values for tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSCL gives me errors on long Ramtests!

*Next few things im going to test:*
- PE3 with much higher BCLK and getting the right stable settings for it!
- Playing more with Pstates
- Trying to get 3533Mhz with TT on ram stable
- Trying to get tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSC lower and stable for long runs! 
(Allready tried: Higher voltage / Higher soc / Different ProcODT / CAD Bus to 30ohm / VTTDR / Power phases / Switching freq / all with no succes for now)


*Basic tests i did while got tired from 3466:*
- Ram on 3533Mhz with TT will probably work with more tweaks and test time! Did some basic testing only!
- Ram on 3600Mhz needs a lot of voltage to boot but isn't stable at all!

I'm really concerned people are saying 3600Mhz on RAM is stable. Even stilt didn't get it with a lot of hardware he has...hmm
Maybe with high timings but that isn't something i go for!!!
I would suggest to those people, to test there ram better/longer. A good and fast software i recommend is RAMTest from Karhu Software!
Also see my info below, got errors around 2000-3000%! So ~1000% is not yet stable peeps!

*Info for others:*
- if higher voltage on RAm doesnt work, try also lowering it while testing for stability
- Test also with different Ramtesting software. Where HCI / Aida / Memtest passed for high time runs Ramtest gave me errors
- When you are using RAM Test or HCI, test multiple times after success. And don't be fooled by passing 1000% on Ramtest. tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSC on 2/3 gave me errors around ~2000%. And tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSC on 3/4 around ~3000%
- If you got confused about a working profile but after tweaking more and more those profiles didnt get you stable anymore: Re-Flash your bios and set your setting again! Helped me few times! Im suspecting clearcmos is not wiping everything always!


*Files i got collected:*
Below some screenshots i grabbed from results from test-cases! I also add a zip file where you can find more screenshots while i was getting the
stable settings for above! Also a txt doc with settings and error or pass moments while running RAMTest!

Good luck everybody!


----------



## crakej

Thanks for posting that - very helpful!


----------



## hurricane28

majestynl said:


> NP Mate! Nice results and looking stable over there
> Curious about your testresults for 3466 with 14 14 14 28 and TT!
> 
> 
> Have done a lot of tests for at least 3/4 days. Its like i'm knowing the DNA of my RAMKits.
> Got tired from it!!
> 
> *And as promised below my results for 3466 Ram and TT, calling it STABLE:*
> 
> *CPU:* 2700x
> *Mobo:* CH7 for sure
> *Ram:* 2x8GB / F4-3200C14-8GTZ(R)
> *Cooling:* EK CL / 360+240Rad
> *OS:* Fresh Windows 10 with April updates installed!
> *OC CPU:* PE3 with all settings on auto, no extra voltage etc. (this is not my own profile, just used for below so im sure nothing effected my RamOC test!)
> *OC Ram:* 3466 14 14 14 28 42 @ 1.385v and 1.05soc / all other settings on auto
> 
> *Notes:* Using same ramkit as on my CH6 setup where i was since release of Ryzen1 and the CH6,
> i know GD Off doesn't work with this kit. If i disable GD my ram runs ons 2T, and when i set it manually to 1, Windows doesn't boot.
> Also low values for tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSCL gives me errors on long Ramtests!
> 
> *Next few things im going to test:*
> - PE3 with much higher BCLK and getting the right stable settings for it!
> - Playing more with Pstates
> - Trying to get 3533Mhz with TT on ram stable
> - Trying to get tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSC lower and stable for long runs!
> (Allready tried: Higher voltage / Higher soc / Different ProcODT / CAD Bus to 30ohm / VTTDR / Power phases / Switching freq / all with no succes for now)
> 
> 
> *Basic tests i did while got tired from 3466:*
> - Ram on 3533Mhz with TT will probably work with more tweaks and test time! Did some basic testing only!
> - Ram on 3600Mhz needs a lot of voltage to boot but isn't stable at all!
> 
> I'm really concerned people are saying 3600Mhz on RAM is stable. Even stilt didn't get it with a lot of hardware he has...hmm
> Maybe with high timings but that isn't something i go for!!!
> I would suggest to those people, to test there ram better/longer. A good and fast software i recommend is RAMTest from Karhu Software!
> Also see my info below, got errors around 2000-3000%! So ~1000% is not yet stable peeps!
> 
> *Info for others:*
> - if higher voltage on RAm doesnt work, try also lowering it while testing for stability
> - Test also with different Ramtesting software. Where HCI / Aida / Memtest passed for high time runs Ramtest gave me errors
> - When you are using RAM Test or HCI, test multiple times after success. And don't be fooled by passing 1000% on Ramtest. tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSC on 2/3 gave me errors around ~2000%. And tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSC on 3/4 around ~3000%
> - If you got confused about a working profile but after tweaking more and more those profiles didnt get you stable anymore: Re-Flash your bios and set your setting again! Helped me few times! Im suspecting clearcmos is not wiping everything always!
> 
> 
> *Files i got collected:*
> Below some screenshots i grabbed from results from test-cases! I also add a zip file where you can find more screenshots while i was getting the
> stable settings for above! Also a txt doc with settings and error or pass moments while running RAMTest!
> 
> Good luck everybody!


Looks good man, congrats. How long did you test your RAM in order to call it stable? I hope its more than 1.5 hours?


----------



## crakej

What's the first thing you think of when you're testing and the screen freezes - no reboot, just sits there frozen, hitting reset works. Do you think 'not enough power', 'too much power' or 'timings'

My brain is becoming a bit of a soup! I tried so many settings yesterday to get 3466 stable, and 3533 - if anything 3533 is more stable than 3466.

I'm trying to keep as much auto as I can, but in the power section I have LLC2 on CPU and Extreme power phases - what else is everyone else using in the power section? I note some use auto and some Optimized, but which is best for OCing?

Last - is anyone disabling Spread Spectrum?


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> Thanks for posting that - very helpful!


NP! Thats one the intentions of my testings! 



hurricane28 said:


> Looks good man, congrats. How long did you test your RAM in order to call it stable? I hope its more than 1.5 hours?


hehe did you read my post and checked my screenies (also more in zip file) ??? 
you know me longer, if i say stable then you need to know i tested a lot!
anyways, did multiple HCI runs and stopped around ~1000%, few quick tests with Memtest64 (techpowerup), aida etc etc.
But most important multiple RAMTest ~8000% (stopped there), also made screens while running available around ~6000% i believe
Why RAMTest was important is because only this SW found errors around ~3000-4000%. Found out i was low timings for tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSC i used. (also wrote this in my post) 




crakej said:


> What's the first thing you think of when you're testing and the screen freezes - no reboot, just sits there frozen, hitting reset works. Do you think 'not enough power', 'too much power' or 'timings'
> 
> My brain is becoming a bit of a soup! I tried so many settings yesterday to get 3466 stable, and 3533 - if anything 3533 is more stable than 3466.
> 
> I'm trying to keep as much auto as I can, but in the power section I have LLC2 on CPU and Extreme power phases - what else is everyone else using in the power section? I note some use auto and some Optimized, but which is best for OCing?
> 
> Last - is anyone disabling Spread Spectrum?


1) I only got those freezings while i was OCing my CPU, and it didnt get enough Vcore!
2) Share some screens / Timings / HwInfo / etc. Info about Dram voltage and tweaks you did. Maybe we can suggest something!
3) I left most on auto , only ram is Extreme (stock) ! Tried a lot of them non made a difference while finding stable setting for RAM. The only thing im changing is the CPU power when i OC Manual or Pstates. 

I disable spread centrum when i do manual or Pstates OC!


----------



## hurricane28

majestynl said:


> NP! Thats one the intentions of my testings!
> 
> 
> 
> hehe did you read my post and checked my screenies (also more in zip file) ???
> you know me longer, if i say stable then you need to know i tested a lot!
> anyways, did multiple HCI runs and stopped around ~1000%, few quick tests with Memtest64 (techpowerup), aida etc etc.
> But most important multiple RAMTest ~8000% (stopped there), also made screens while running available around ~6000% i believe
> Why RAMTest was important is because only this SW found errors around ~3000-4000%. Found out i was low timings for tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSC i used. (also wrote this in my post)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1) I only got those freezings while i was OCing my CPU, and it didnt get enough Vcore!
> 2) Share some screens / Timings / HwInfo / etc. Info about Dram voltage and tweaks you did. Maybe we can suggest something!
> 3) I left most on auto , only ram is Extreme (stock) ! Tried a lot of them non made a difference while finding stable setting for RAM. The only thing im changing is the CPU power when i OC Manual or Pstates.
> 
> I disable spread centrum when i do manual or Pstates OC!


Yeah, was just asking. Didn't see the screens as i was on my phone. Nevertheless, good clocks mate.


----------



## majestynl

hurricane28 said:


> Yeah, was just asking. Didn't see the screens as i was on my phone. Nevertheless, good clocks mate.


aah makes sense  PNG's are loading slow on mobile version of overclock.net. I always enable "Desktop version" while on my mobile. Much better experience. Only need to zoom 
Thanks mate!


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> 1) I only got those freezings while i was OCing my CPU, and it didnt get enough Vcore!
> 2) Share some screens / Timings / HwInfo / etc. Info about Dram voltage and tweaks you did. Maybe we can suggest something!
> 3) I left most on auto , only ram is Extreme (stock) ! Tried a lot of them non made a difference while finding stable setting for RAM. The only thing im changing is the CPU power when i OC Manual or Pstates.
> 
> I disable spread centrum when i do manual or Pstates OC!


1) Thought so.... just was at the point where I was thinking, am I doing this the right way round?
2) I will - I'm a bit concerned that pretty much all my voltages to not reflect their settings and I keep forgetting, or adding or subtracting the wrong thing
3) Interesting - you would think that Optimized or Extreme would be needed when pushing things - I may try leaving this to the MB as well

Thanks!


----------



## gupsterg

@majestynl

Thanks for share mate :thumb: .

@crakej

The screen freeze you describe I have had, just like majestynl states, due to lack of VCORE. See ZIP below, VID of 1.3V for PState 0 4.1GHz is screen frozen at ~8min in P95 128K in place FFT whilst on 3466MHz profile.

View attachment 4.1_1.3V_3466S.zip


1.312V passed 2 runs, 1 of 60min and rerun for 82min.



Spoiler






















To me I'm liking my 4.075GHz ACB OC, performs better for multithread only small difference in single core that I tested. As shown in a compare of Y-Cruncher running on stock vs 4.075GHz ACB, I have ~10% lower average temp. Now I'm moving to 4.1GHz 3466MHz 1T for daily use. After testing that more I will gun for 3533MHz RAM  .

4.075GHz ACB has screen freeze ~52min of P95 128K testing. 1.281V was sound for a lot of testing, but I was using 1.287V later as wanted some extra juice for stability I may not have tested.

4.1GHz ACB has screen frozen quickly with anything below 1.306V, 1.306V can last ~51min, 1.312V has passed two reruns as shared above. I may just use 1.318V to improve stability I may not have tested.



sbakic said:


> P.S.S I run hci memtest it made error for RAM @3200 1.35V 14-14-14-34-48 with SoC of 0.95V i bumped to 0.975V and will continue to test it. So I don't know how you can get stable RAM with SoC below 0.95V really...


I am not sharing results which are made up. Let's say I'm rendering screenshots, do you think I'd also create HWINFO CSV logs which I have shared in ZIPs?

As stated before each person's HW combination could mean somewhat differing results. I do not expect my settings to work for all, but I am just sharing what my HW samples/combo is doing  .

If you would like a video of me running a stability test and having DMM on view I am happy to do that  .



sbakic said:


> So what stress test should I use for single core like the best/strongest one? prime95 small, in -place? And how much to run for each core?


Below P95 setup I used today for some testing.



Spoiler












W10 in Task Manager click "Details" tab, find prime95.exe, right click and select "Set affinity" and you will see similar screenie as above.



Any value greater than -0.100mV offset results in failed posts for me. UEFI was setup as I have been testing for 3466MHz The Stilt, but no OC and PE was set to "Default".

At stock I see ~1.4V to 1.435V, -100mV I see ~1.38V to 1.4V on ProbeIt points. Doesn't seem as if offset is reducing voltage as it should.



> The CPU is aware of the actual effective voltage, so things like load-line adjustments and voltage offsets will modify the CPUs voltage request from the VRM controller accordingly.


Quote source link.

If I have read and understood this correctly does it mean CPU disregards offset some what :headscrat , because testing is pointing to this :thinking:.


----------



## Gettz8488

Weird issue today where my pc would not power on unless i pressed the start button on MOBO then it powered on normally with the button after that. not sure what that could be.


----------



## crakej

So I was just having a last go at 3600 before I go stabilize 3466. I had not been able to get past 36% RamTest but..... decided to give IBT a go - and it only passed! (Standard)

Thought I may as well go for Very High and it got half way through! Did not expect that at all! You can see my failed RamTest ad i've included HWInfo readout from when I was running the Very High test.

I've noticed my PLL seems to go quite high (left it on auto) when on 3600. My timings are not right (obviously) but I think I might be able to get this stab;e at some point.

I did raise my VCore to 1.4 which meant this test didn't freeze like before, and reduced some timings in effort to reduce the amount of volts the ram needs.

Switching back to 3466 for now


----------



## haydn-j

When I enable PE LVL3+ my per core voltage reporting stops working, does anyone else experience this? I've found that PE LVL3 is giving me temps better than or equal to than the previous levels with better Cinebench scores, but I'd like to know what my per core voltage is to make sure I'm not going to fry my CPU. A -0.075V offset seems to be stable (still need to do more extensive testing) so I think I'm fine given the overall SVI2 voltage and temps but I'd like to be certain. Another question: is there a reason that tighter timings on RAM requires higher VCore?


----------



## gupsterg

@crakej

Last time we were discussing PLL being ~2.0V I thought it was perhaps an errored read back. Elmor did state that if PLL is [Auto], if CPU ratio is raised it may increase PLL. See this post.


----------



## Gettz8488

@gupsterg It's crazy that your cpu at stock only hits 1.435 when mine hits 1.512 on single thread sometimes.


----------



## lordzed83

Gettz8488 said:


> @gupsterg It's crazy that your cpu at stock only hits 1.435 when mine hits 1.512 on single thread sometimes.


You tried thst software that tests best and worse core??


----------



## Gettz8488

lordzed83 said:


> You tried thst software that tests best and worse core??


I have not which software is this?


----------



## majestynl

Gettz8488 said:


> @gupsterg It's crazy that your cpu at stock only hits 1.435 when mine hits 1.512 on single thread sometimes.


Where did you saw this? As far as I know he is running ACB (all cores boost) on his last test results.
And as far as I know we all get spikes around 1.5 with XFR. Don't be worried its normal. Exact how its designed. As long as you don't get it under full load on all cores together. It's mentioned a lot over here..

AMD designed a lot of safety features, it's checking automatically what voltages , frequenties and voltages your CPU needs/can do between safe walls. 

and if you are still worried about it, go OC manual or pstates with all cores together. 2700 can run easily nice freqs with low voltages.

Will share tomorrow more results with pstates. Or go Investigate some of gup's he made on his last posts. 




Gettz8488 said:


> I have not which software is this?



http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...-vii-overclocking-thread-50.html#post27289721


----------



## gupsterg

Gettz8488 said:


> @gupsterg It's crazy that your cpu at stock only hits 1.435 when mine hits 1.512 on single thread sometimes.


Dunno, I do get it sometimes.

Stock 2700X (ie PE= "Default"), 3466MHz The Stilt, P95 v29.4B8 128K FFT in place, testing worst quality core. 1st screenie is from start, 2nd I reset counter whilst on load to gain more "current" values for all columns.



Spoiler






















Same test as before but P95 v28.10B1 128K FFT in place.



Spoiler






















But I have some screenies where better cores hit higher MHz and have ~1.5V.



Spoiler














I will test these better "quality" cores soon.

My latest daily setup  .

4.1GHz PState 0 VID: 1.312V LLC: Auto, SOC: 0.968V LLC: Auto
3466MHz :clock: The Stilt :clock: VDIMM: 1.37V, VTT: 0.687V



Spoiler














I have yet to bench this. I'm hoping it gets me closer to scores of stock single thread bench, multi thread I beat even on 4.075GHz vs stock.


----------



## Gettz8488

gupsterg said:


> Dunno, I do get it sometimes.
> 
> 
> 
> Stock 2700X (ie PE= "Default"), 3466MHz The Stilt, P95 v29.4B8 128K FFT in place, testing worst quality core. 1st screenie is from start, 2nd I reset counter whilst on load to gain more "current" values for all columns.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 186969
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 186977
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Same test as before but P95 v28.10B1 128K FFT in place.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 186985
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 186993
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But I have some screenies where better cores hit higher MHz and have ~1.5V.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 187009
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I will test these better "quality" cores soon.
> 
> 
> 
> My latest daily setup  .
> 
> 
> 
> 4.1GHz PState 0 VID: 1.312V LLC: Auto, SOC: 0.968V LLC: Auto
> 
> 3466MHz :clock: The Stilt :clock: VDIMM: 1.37V, VTT: 0.687V
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 187001
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have yet to bench this. I'm hoping it gets me closer to scores of stock single thread bench, multi thread I beat even on 4.075GHz vs stock.




Quick question when you set up your pstate Overclock do you see downvolting on the svi2 reading? i only see it on SIO reading. Pretty sure I lost the silicone lottery for 4.1 the lowest I’ve been able to do is 1.344 Vcore LLC3 I forgot the offset I set but it was 1.344 after I set it. I heard someone say on here that higher llcs might not be safe so I’m kind of just waiting for some things to clear up 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## zulex

Giga has updated AGESA 1.0.0.2c already.. but C7H is still in AGESA 1.0.0.2..


----------



## VPII

gupsterg said:


> @VPII
> 
> 148 1T in CB15 is too low. UEFI defaults and PE set to "Default" I get ~174, power plan Balanced (default).
> 
> Perhaps you have app running in background?


I'm trying to find the source. This weekend I tried to do another Dry Ice run and with the same clocks 4.93ghz all of my results were lower, a lot lower than before. I could not even get the same results with the same clocks for normal daily bench overclock. The only results which did increase was 3dmark Time Spy, but for this I found that when using core park pro setting the power plan to bitsum performance and setting core park to 50% it really helps with Time Spy and probably most 3d benchmarks.

It could also be that the Asus Strix X370-F Gaming I used before for the Dry Ice run performs better than the CH7. But then why can I not even get the 2014 in CB15R at 4.36ghz - same settings as it was saved in my bios with the same CH7 board?

Not sure if it may have been the Windows update which came through a couple days ago.


----------



## Syldon

haydn-j said:


> When I enable PE LVL3+ my per core voltage reporting stops working, does anyone else experience this? I've found that PE LVL3 is giving me temps better than or equal to than the previous levels with better Cinebench scores, but I'd like to know what my per core voltage is to make sure I'm not going to fry my CPU. A -0.075V offset seems to be stable (still need to do more extensive testing) so I think I'm fine given the overall SVI2 voltage and temps but I'd like to be certain. Another question: is there a reason that tighter timings on RAM requires higher VCore?



You are getting better temps because you are getting vdroop. To run PE3 I have to set mine to +0.4125v. LLC does nothing btw on any of the settings, it isnt working properly. The Vdroop is causing some of your cores to drop off and this is why you are getting lower temps.


Use HWinfo for monitoring per core. Try setting vcore manually to 1.33v and set LLC to any setting. If you run a CPU stress test to push some drive through the CPU, Keep an eye on the voltage per core. If you have vdroop then you will it drop off. Also the frequencies of each core should drop to compensate for the lack of power. If you have enough power then the cores will not drop off.

Check to min and max voltages, along with core frequencies on this Shot. they remain static through out a quick 2 minute IBT run. I did some longer runs, but this is the screen I captured.


----------



## hurricane28

Hey ROG fellas. 

I was looking on the Asus CH7 wifi page for drivers and saw that last Friday a new BIOS was posted? listed as 0601 this is weird as i am running my board on that BIOS since the beginning... 

I look in CPU-Z and indeed there is 0601 BIOS but the date is 04-19-2018 which is the same as 0509 BIOS... so wth man lol. Is this BIOS posted on Friday really a new BIOS or what?

Thnx.


----------



## gupsterg

Update on 4.1GHz 3466MHz :clock: The Stilt :clock: .

~6hrs in lost a thread , another went ~9hrs in  , total run ~11.66hrs.



Spoiler














TXT of windows that bombed  .

View attachment P95 RAM 4.1 1.312 0.968 3466 1.37 0.687 48 room 19.8C fail 6hrs 9hrs run 11.66hrs.txt


I reckon I need a bump in VID. I reckon as I'm on LLC: [Auto] (ie AMD spec) VCORE drooped a bit more than silicon needed to hold OC. Currently I'm not of the mind SOC or something RAM related needs a tweak, as quite a lot of testing was done for that.

So will update as soon as nail this profile  .



Gettz8488 said:


> Quick question when you set up your pstate Overclock do you see downvolting on the svi2 reading? i only see it on SIO reading. Pretty sure I lost the silicone lottery for 4.1 the lowest I’ve been able to do is 1.344 Vcore LLC3 I forgot the offset I set but it was 1.344 after I set it. I heard someone say on here that higher llcs might not be safe so I’m kind of just waiting for some things to clear up


SVI2 will not downvolt as far as VCORE, this was the same on Ryzen Gen 1 and C6H. Elmor also posted this information as reply to another member several pages back.



Spoiler














Today I will be adding this and several other things to the FAQ in OP of ROG forum C7H Essential thread  , so check it in several hours time.

I'm sticking to using LLC: [Auto]. I have placed all info regarding LLC within the ROG C7H thread in OP, if it was incorrect I'm sure Elmor, [email protected] and or The Stilt would have stated so. So you would be seeing spikes higher than 1.344V when CPU go off load to idle, how high past if you used stock LLC I don't know.

If I take the only 2 core OC data points I have done, 4.075GHz 1.287V and 4.1GHz ~1.312V the CPU has needed ~25mV for 25MHz. This is pretty similar to Ryzen gen 1 IMO. Loosely speaking for each 100MHz OC "we" needed ~+100mV step from last.

I do believe on the front of CPU IMC my current sample is performing well for MEMCLK vs voltage needed. It will be interesting to see how it reacts to 4x8GB SR/SS Samsung B die setup. A profile on R7 1800X+C6H which I determined on 2x8GB only needed a bump in SOC and ProcODT by 1 step each to stabilise 4x8GB.

My best gen 1 sample needed 1.387V VID for 4.0GHz, with the air cooling. Let's say VID 1.318V passes reruns of testing, of length, for 4.1GHz on the 2700X. I'd say the gen 2 CPU is better, as I can (IMO) safely add a step of voltage to add extra "guard band", where as I feel the R7 1800X was really at the end of what I'd like to give it for 24/7 usage.



VPII said:


> I'm trying to find the source.


Good luck and hope you suss it  .

4.1GHz has gained me slightly closer to CB15 of ~1900, perhaps if I gain 4.125GHz and or 3533MHz I'll be there  .



Spoiler


----------



## spyshagg

In PE 3 and 4, how normal is to see full single thread loads resulting in sustained >1.55 vcore on hwinfo64?

Everything stock except bclk to 101mhz.


----------



## zulex

hurricane28 said:


> Hey ROG fellas.
> 
> I was looking on the Asus CH7 wifi page for drivers and saw that last Friday a new BIOS was posted? listed as 0601 this is weird as i am running my board on that BIOS since the beginning...
> 
> I look in CPU-Z and indeed there is 0601 BIOS but the date is 04-19-2018 which is the same as 0509 BIOS... so wth man lol. Is this BIOS posted on Friday really a new BIOS or what?
> 
> Thnx.


0601 beta and 0601 new bios on the official ASUS website are identical. Both of them are same bios dated 04-19-2018.


----------



## hurricane28

Thnx for clearing that up. 

Its rather confusing that my 0601 BIOS is from the same date as the 0509 BIOS..

Anywho, looking forward to new AGESA, it appears that Gigabyte already has it..


----------



## VicsPC

hurricane28 said:


> Thnx for clearing that up.
> 
> Its rather confusing that my 0601 BIOS is from the same date as the 0509 BIOS..
> 
> Anywho, looking forward to new AGESA, it appears that Gigabyte already has it..


I thik the 601 is for the wifi and 509 for the non wifi, i looked up the C7H without wifi and that's still on 0509. 

Quick question for everyone (its been ages since I bought my c6h and 1700x), is it possible to use BIOS flashback without a cpu or ram in the system? I could hook up my c7h to a spare PSU and use flashback to update the BIOS but when i do it on my c6 i do notice that once i boot it up it updates the BIOS again for a couple secs so not sure i want to risk it.


----------



## gupsterg

@VicsPC

0601 is available for both versions of C7H, see OP.

Board only need power to allow flashback to be used.


----------



## kidwolf909

spyshagg said:


> In PE 3 and 4, how normal is to see full single thread loads resulting in sustained >1.55 vcore on hwinfo64?
> 
> Everything stock except bclk to 101mhz.


Seems like those 1.5+ voltages are perfectly normal and expected for Ryzen 1/2xxx...

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/commen...22f23_with_ryzen_gen_1_on_gbt_gaming/dyxmc02/


----------



## VicsPC

gupsterg said:


> @VicsPC
> 
> 0601 is available for both versions of C7H, see OP.
> 
> Board only need power to allow flashback to be used.


yea i saw that it's just not up on the Asus site is what i meant, so far. I may try to flash it plugging it into a PSU then if it shouldn't be a problem.


----------



## crakej

With help from this thread I'm nearly stable at 3466CL14 - I've had to up my VCore more than I wanted but still all within decent parameters and temps still below 70c at load. LLC2

One thing I like about IBT is that as you get closer to the right settings, be that voltage and/timings, you will see you performance improve as you home in on the right settings. On my last test, I only increased VCore by one on every boot - the first attempt I was getting 170gflop, but as VCore increased it went up to 188gflops. You'll find it levels off at which point you need to back off or stay on those settings before moving onto the next setting.

On the test below (obviously) passed IBT V High but RamTest had a wobble at 1115% - i'm thinkning this might be a ram voltage thing or timing, but will try another bump in VCore just to see what happens.... (HWInfo was not running while IBT ran - on this occasion - will do it properly next time!


----------



## spyshagg

kidwolf909 said:


> Seems like those 1.5+ voltages are perfectly normal and expected for Ryzen 1/2xxx...
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/commen...22f23_with_ryzen_gen_1_on_gbt_gaming/dyxmc02/


Thanks. He mentions Peaks. I'm wondering if sustained values are normal as well.


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> With help from this thread I'm nearly stable at 3466CL14 - I've had to up my VCore more than I wanted but still all within decent parameters and temps still below 70c at load. LLC2
> 
> One thing I like about IBT is that as you get closer to the right settings, be that voltage and/timings, you will see you performance improve as you home in on the right settings. On my last test, I only increased VCore by one on every boot - the first attempt I was getting 170gflop, but as VCore increased it went up to 188gflops. You'll find it levels off at which point you need to back off or stay on those settings before moving onto the next setting.
> 
> On the test below (obviously) passed IBT V High but RamTest had a wobble at 1115% - i'm thinkning this might be a ram voltage thing or timing, but will try another bump in VCore just to see what happens.... (HWInfo was not running while IBT ran - on this occasion - will do it properly next time!


Nice! You are closely  heheh but that doesn't mean you will find it fast. I needed 1/2 days extra after i was at same place as you. Tweaked a lot of thing before i got the weak spot!
See post: http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...vii-overclocking-thread-110.html#post27382089

Maybe to win you some time i can suggest the below. Cause i don't think its your cpu vcore!

- make the same Ramtest but now with 1.3875 voltage on Ram and check results. If you got around ~3000% then,
- try to tweak some timings from tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSC! Start with both on 7 and if succes then you can lower these again step by step!


----------



## Fichte

*PState OC*

Hi all!

First post here on OCnet, but I've been an avid reader of this thread as I have recently bought into the 2700X + CH7 hype 

While I see that I can probably get the best performance figures by leaving PBO and XFR2 to do its thing (maybe by giving some extra push by mildly increasing the BCLK), I do not really need that extra bit of "oomph" for the games I am currently playing.
I am nevertheless interested in finding the best results when it comes to performance/noise level. I believe that I should be able to achieve that by working out PState overclocking on the CH7.

Right now, I have my processor working at 4.1 GHz with a Vcore of 1.3. I believe that I might be able to downvolt it even further, but due to the Vdroop and the LLC not properly working, I fear it might get unstable pretty quickly.
The problem I have is, that if I activate P0 and leave it to do its work up to 4.1 GHz, my system never actually reduces the voltage. It just stays up there right at 1.3V.

I made the following changes compared to stock:
- changes to Memory Timings and Memory Clock
- Manual adjustment of SOC to 1.05V
- Manual adjustment of RAM to 1.40V
- Changes to the fan curves
- HD Audio and Bluetooth disabled (which still shows up in Win10 for some reason)
- Enable CState
- Enable P0 with 4.1 GHz

I am running Windows 10 Home with the most current update, a Corsair RM650X PSU, a KFA² 1080Ti (Accelero 3X) and a Noctua NH-D15 to "tame the beast".

Could someone maybe enlighten me as to what I am doing wrong? I followed the guides for the CH6, are there any differences that I need to take into account?

Thanks a lot for your help in advance. I am still fiddling with memory stability, as soon as I have it rock-stable, I will post my results and how I got there!

Cheers
Fichte


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> Update on 4.1GHz 3466MHz :clock: The Stilt :clock:


Nice gup!



gupsterg said:


> If I take the only 2 core OC data points I have done, 4.075GHz 1.287V and 4.1GHz ~1.312V the CPU has needed ~25mV for 25MHz. This is pretty similar to Ryzen gen 1 IMO. Loosely speaking for each 100MHz OC "we" needed ~+100mV step from last.


The curve will get steeper after 4125-4150Mhz!!



gupsterg said:


> 4.1GHz has gained me slightly closer to CB15 of ~1900, perhaps if I gain 4.125GHz and or 3533MHz I'll be there  .


Probably you need 4150mhz for ~1900 with 3466 Ram! But 4125Mhz with 3533Mhz on ram will aslo bring you around ~1900. 
But dont know if we can run 3533Mhz with TT (CL14) so easily ?!


----------



## majestynl

Fichte said:


> Hi all!
> 
> First post here on OCnet, but I've been an avid reader of this thread as I have recently bought into the 2700X + CH7 hype


Welcome!



Fichte said:


> While I see that I can probably get the best performance figures by leaving PBO and XFR2 to do its thing (maybe by giving some extra push by mildly increasing the BCLK), I do not really need that extra bit of "oomph" for the games I am currently playing.
> I am nevertheless interested in finding the best results when it comes to performance/noise level. I believe that I should be able to achieve that by working out PState overclocking on the CH7.


Yesterday i quickly tested 2 games with PE3 vs Pstates. PE3 Was running a higher BCLK so it was comparable with single core performance again my Pstates OC from ~4150Mhz.
I didnt saw any difference in FPS in those 2 games. Really non! Probably most of new games are also more GPU dependent if you have a new CPU!



Fichte said:


> Right now, I have my processor working at 4.1 GHz with a Vcore of 1.3. I believe that I might be able to downvolt it even further, but due to the Vdroop and the LLC not properly working, I fear it might get unstable pretty quickly.
> The problem I have is, that if I activate P0 and leave it to do its work up to 4.1 GHz, my system never actually reduces the voltage. It just stays up there right at 1.3V.


This is normal behavior. Also mentioned a few times in this thread. Dont get me wrong but I suggest you read whole threat just to learn and understand it better if you prefer. 
Read also comment from "gupsterg" to " Gettz8488" : http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...vii-overclocking-thread-113.html#post27387105

Its not that important i think. What effects a cpu is the voltage it gets while loaded! Thats what i know. 



Fichte said:


> I made the following changes compared to stock:
> - changes to Memory Timings and Memory Clock
> - Manual adjustment of SOC to 1.05V
> - Manual adjustment of RAM to 1.40V
> - Changes to the fan curves
> - HD Audio and Bluetooth disabled (which still shows up in Win10 for some reason)
> - Enable CState
> - Enable P0 with 4.1 GHz
> 
> I am running Windows 10 Home with the most current update, a Corsair RM650X PSU, a KFA² 1080Ti (Accelero 3X) and a Noctua NH-D15 to "tame the beast".
> 
> Could someone maybe enlighten me as to what I am doing wrong? I followed the guides for the CH6, are there any differences that I need to take into account?
> 
> Thanks a lot for your help in advance. I am still fiddling with memory stability, as soon as I have it rock-stable, I will post my results and how I got there!
> 
> Cheers
> Fichte


Dont really now what you are asking above, but if it is the downvolting while downclocking, i already answered it. 

Cheers and good luck with your new system!


----------



## ryan92084

knightriot said:


> Can someone help me where is TPM HEADER on C7H????? Asus removed?


Only fTPM is available. So no headers for the modules.


----------



## sbakic

What is the latest version of Super Pi that you use guys?


----------



## gupsterg

@VicsPC

NP  .

@crakej

IBT AVX at the settings you've used is waste of time IMO.

@majestynl

Agree mate the MHz/Voltage curve gets steeper, thus I stated "loosely speaking"  .

Will see how 4.1GHz+ is and or 3533MHz  . At present done rerun of 4.1GHz 3466MHz profile, but VID: 1.318V. Passed so far ~4hrs Y-Cruncher and ~3.9hrs P95 v28.10B1 8K 4096K 13.5GB.


----------



## MacG32

sbakic said:


> What is the latest version of Super Pi that you use guys?



You can find the latest and greatest here: https://hwbot.org/benchmarks


----------



## masterkaj

spyshagg said:


> Thanks. He mentions Peaks. I'm wondering if sustained values are normal as well.


I think it’s well known that peaks of +1.5v is ok. I’m also curious if loading prime95 on 1 core for sustained periods of time at that same high voltage is considered normal too. 

Just feel a bit uneasy testing 1-3 thread stability in p95 and seeing really high voltage beind held. I suppose the load moves from 1 core to the next though.


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> Nice! You are closely  heheh but that doesn't mean you will find it fast. I needed 1/2 days extra after i was at same place as you. Tweaked a lot of thing before i got the weak spot!
> See post: http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...vii-overclocking-thread-110.html#post27382089
> 
> Maybe to win you some time i can suggest the below. Cause i don't think its your cpu vcore!
> 
> - make the same Ramtest but now with 1.3875 voltage on Ram and check results. If you got around ~3000% then,
> - try to tweak some timings from tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSC! Start with both on 7 and if succes then you can lower these again step by step!


Thanks - your work helped me a lot! I also figure I don't need any more vcore - will continue experimenting in a while and will try mem voltage first - so close though


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> @crakej
> IBT AVX at the settings you've used is waste of time IMO.


I agree is's not too useful for full stability testing, but it does give you clues - quite quickly. For example, if you can't pass IBT on normal level, something is likely wrong. That's why I like RamTest as well, it often fails very early on when something is wrong.

Which settings do you mean?


----------



## spyshagg

masterkaj said:


> I think it’s well known that peaks of +1.5v is ok. I’m also curious if loading prime95 on 1 core for sustained periods of time at that same high voltage is considered normal too.
> 
> Just feel a bit uneasy testing 1-3 thread stability in p95 and seeing really high voltage beind held. I suppose the load moves from 1 core to the next though.


I play a lot of assetto corsa which is 2-threaded. With PE4 i see constant 1.55-1.56v. With PE3 its about 1.50v.

Its a tricky situation because In order to get >4.25ghz in all cores stable I do need to enable PE4 and the ~1.45v it provides, but then the single core will blast 1.55v which I'm yet to find if its acceptable or not.


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> I agree is's not too useful for full stability testing, but it does give you clues - quite quickly. For example, if you can't pass IBT on normal level, something is likely wrong. That's why I like RamTest as well, it often fails very early on when something is wrong.
> 
> Which settings do you mean?


Use custom in IBT AVX, set at least ~90% RAM. It will still be pretty quick test, but it will be more relevant if your after worthwhile profile.

Below is last CPU I ran IBT AVX, as stated in thread before I just found it a) too old an app b) same OC profile on 2 differing CPUs had issue in W7P x64 but W10P x64 all good. Which I could never understand why. All I could ever manage in W7P was very high, custom or maximum always failed.



Spoiler


----------



## sbakic

Karhu RAM test is not free? how to download it


----------



## Fichte

majestynl said:


> This is normal behavior. Also mentioned a few times in this thread. Dont get me wrong but I suggest you read whole threat just to learn and understand it better if you prefer.
> Read also comment from "gupsterg" to " Gettz8488" : http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...vii-overclocking-thread-113.html#post27387105
> 
> Its not that important i think. What effects a cpu is the voltage it gets while loaded! Thats what i know.


Thanks for your input. I have checked out your link and while gupsterg states that the SVI2 voltage does not go as low as the Vcore in HWInfo, mine does not budge at all.
I sit at my 1.3V even with all cores idling at 2.050 MHz. This does not have a massive effect on the temperature, but it should still decrease the voltage a bit?
My understanding was that the decreased voltage was part of the idea of PState overclocking?

Cheers
Uli


----------



## crakej

Fichte said:


> Thanks for your input. I have checked out your link and while gupsterg states that the SVI2 voltage does not go as low as the Vcore in HWInfo, mine does not budge at all.
> I sit at my 1.3V even with all cores idling at 2.050 MHz. This does not have a massive effect on the temperature, but it should still decrease the voltage a bit?
> My understanding was that the decreased voltage was part of the idea of PState overclocking?
> 
> Cheers
> Uli


You should see voltage drop on VID - not SVI2 TFN


----------



## lordzed83

sbakic said:


> Karhu RAM test is not free? how to download it


You pay 10 euros and get it emailed with yours key simple


----------



## Fichte

My voltage is 1.3, whether I look at Core #n VID, CPU Core Voltage (SVI2 TFN) or Vcore. There are some slight variations in between all these 3 expressions, but we are talking about 10 mV.
I expected my voltage to go down to somewhere in between 0.8 and 0.9 V, that's why I am so keen on understanding what I have might set up wrongly in the BIOS.

Cheers
Fichte

EDIT: When I say "my voltage is 1.3", I mean over a measuring period of > 4 hours in HWInfo with a lot of idle time where my cores were all sitting there doing nothing.


----------



## lordzed83

gupsterg said:


> Use custom in IBT AVX, set at least ~90% RAM. It will still be pretty quick test, but it will be more relevant if your after worthwhile profile.
> 
> Below is last CPU I ran IBT AVX, as stated in thread before I just found it a) too old an app b) same OC profile on 2 differing CPUs had issue in W7P x64 but W10P x64 all good. Which I could never understand why. All I could ever manage in W7P was very high, custom or maximum always failed.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 187825


I always go with Answer that. Ryzen should be used on W10 platform especially Zen+ as its not really W7 supported cpu is it


----------



## gupsterg

@Fichte

What power profile are you using in OS?

Perhaps share a screenshot of HWINFO? also you can dump your UEFI settings by going to Tool page, ASUS User Profile, Load/Save to USB, then press [CTRL+F2] to dump to txt.

@lordzed83

LOL.

So say M$, but works perfectly well  .

Anyhow people who are running IBT AVX, use Task Manager, watch CPU usage. What happens is ~1/2 the time of a "loop" IBT AVX is doing "report" on "loop" (ie checking results from loop). So if you ran IBT AVX for 30min, ~15min of it CPU was not under full sustained load.

Runs of "less" then custom (~90% free/usable RAM) or Maximum, are so quick to execute you didn't really "exercise" the HW.

*** edit ***

IBT vs Y-Cruncher









Thought I had same time lengths screenies of each on same rig, but don't  .


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> Use custom in IBT AVX, set at least ~90% RAM. It will still be pretty quick test, but it will be more relevant if your after worthwhile profile.
> 
> Below is last CPU I ran IBT AVX, as stated in thread before I just found it a) too old an app b) same OC profile on 2 differing CPUs had issue in W7P x64 but W10P x64 all good. Which I could never understand why. All I could ever manage in W7P was very high, custom or maximum always failed.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 187825


Thanks for the info - Will give it a go next time... I've found IBT AVX runs very differently on this platform compared to my Prime Pro. I don't trust it for stability because it's flaky - I can have IBT failing where P95, RamTest, OCCT, Aida all pass!


----------



## haydn-j

Syldon said:


> You are getting better temps because you are getting vdroop. To run PE3 I have to set mine to +0.4125v. LLC does nothing btw on any of the settings, it isnt working properly. The Vdroop is causing some of your cores to drop off and this is why you are getting lower temps.
> 
> 
> Use HWinfo for monitoring per core. Try setting vcore manually to 1.33v and set LLC to any setting. If you run a CPU stress test to push some drive through the CPU, Keep an eye on the voltage per core. If you have vdroop then you will it drop off. Also the frequencies of each core should drop to compensate for the lack of power. If you have enough power then the cores will not drop off.
> 
> Check to min and max voltages, along with core frequencies on this Shot. they remain static through out a quick 2 minute IBT run. I did some longer runs, but this is the screen I captured.



Thanks for clearing that up, that certainly makes more sense. I remember someone saying that LLC was broken with certain settings, maybe elmore?, so hopefully they get that fixed. Does LLC work with PE2?


----------



## crakej

haydn-j said:


> Thanks for clearing that up, that certainly makes more sense. I remember someone saying that LLC was broken with certain settings, maybe elmore?, so hopefully they get that fixed. Does LLC work with PE2?


The Stilt mentioned it - that it doesn't work properly with manual voltage - offset is ok, applies only to 0601 bios.


----------



## gupsterg

@crakej

NP  .

For me my testing is as such:-

i) HCI / GSAT / RAM Test
ii) RB Stress mode
iii) Y-Cruncher
iv) P95 8K 4096K 13GB

The RAM tests are easier to complete even if CPU not fully stable (loosely speaking). RB tends to exercise rig less, but some CPUs I've used are sensitive to it when OC'd. Y-Cruncher usually knocks out a profile sussed on RB, then usually P95 fails on what Y-Cruncher passed, but I have also had it other way around.

The Stilt's P95 v28.10B1 128K 128K FFT I have been using now on past 2 CPUs, has been handy IMO. First thing I run when meddling with core OC. If meddling with RAM then RAM tests are first.

The higher I go the more length I wanna add TBH. I also do testing with posts from shutdown, restarts, etc. A profile for me must last in W7/W10 both, recently I've also been dabbling in Linux, so again multi OS stability is what I'm after.

As stated IBT AVX in the past varied depending on OS used, P95/Y-Cruncher/RB, etc didn't, so it got shelved.


----------



## hurricane28

Still no USB 3.1 drivers on the C7H page? 

I mean, its on the ROG strix x470 page... 

Look:

O and don't bother installing the Strix driver as it doesn't work although its the same controller..


----------



## mtrai

hurricane28 said:


> Still no USB 3.1 drivers on the C7H page?
> 
> I mean, its on the ROG strix x470 page...
> 
> Look:
> 
> O and don't bother installing the Strix driver as it doesn't work although its the same controller..


That is odd it should work.

See here for ASMedia USB 3.1 1.16.51.1 newer anyhow. http://ftp2.station-drivers.com/ind...ory&Itemid=352&func=startdown&id=3361&lang=fr


----------



## sonic2911

Hi guys, I have just finished my build, ch7 with 2700x. I want to ask which one is the most stable bios until now, and do I have to do anything before install windows? Long time since my last amd “phenom 4 b50” so I have no idea about amd now, I see a lot of config I didn’t see when I use my xeon e3 
Thanks


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> - make the same Ramtest but now with 1.3875 voltage on Ram and check results. If you got around ~3000% then,
> - try to tweak some timings from tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSC! Start with both on 7 and if succes then you can lower these again step by step!


So.... Increased Ram volts by one to 1.390 (as you can see in bios pic I was on 1.385 already though you wouldn't know if from readings!) and have passed 4000% coverage. Sweet! The test is actually continuing in the background as I only have one PC and need to do stuff - already over 5000% and counting - while firefox is open and watching online tv!  RDRD and WRWR SCL are still at 2. Next is IBT and P95 but will have to wait a while.

I suspect I can back off on SoC, but again those tests will have to wait. What I do know is that on old board my SoC didn't even like going over 1.0v. With 3200 extreme settings I had it at 0.96v

Edit: RamTest just failed at 5729% - but I expected it to fail sooner with all the other stuff I'm running so i'm pretty happy.


----------



## Gettz8488

Fichte said:


> Thanks for your input. I have checked out your link and while gupsterg states that the SVI2 voltage does not go as low as the Vcore in HWInfo, mine does not budge at all.
> 
> I sit at my 1.3V even with all cores idling at 2.050 MHz. This does not have a massive effect on the temperature, but it should still decrease the voltage a bit?
> 
> My understanding was that the decreased voltage was part of the idea of PState overclocking?
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Uli




According to @elmor you won’t see downvolting on the svi2 reading you will see it on the SIO reading under the mobo in hwinfo 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## MacG32

hurricane28 said:


> Still no USB 3.1 drivers on the C7H page?
> 
> I mean, its on the ROG strix x470 page...
> 
> Look:
> 
> O and don't bother installing the Strix driver as it doesn't work although its the same controller..



It's because Microsoft released a new driver on the 10th of April. See attached image.



sonic2911 said:


> Hi guys, I have just finished my build, ch7 with 2700x. I want to ask which one is the most stable bios until now, and do I have to do anything before install windows? Long time since my last amd “phenom 4 b50” so I have no idea about amd now, I see a lot of config I didn’t see when I use my xeon e3
> Thanks



0601 would be the one you want. Maybe get the latest drivers from the motherboard support page. You'll need the AMD chipset drivers as well: https://support.amd.com/en-us/download/chipset?os=Windows+10+-+64 That should get you started.


----------



## Gettz8488

@elmor is there any update on when you think the Monitoring software shutdown issue may be solved? Just wondering because i can't edit my aio fan speeds or pump speed.


----------



## MacG32

Gettz8488 said:


> @elmor is there any update on when you think the Monitoring software shutdown issue may be solved? Just wondering because i can't edit my aio fan speeds or pump speed.



You can program the speeds in to the device itself. There's no need to ever have the software constantly running. Corsair Link, Options | Devices, then click "Use current settings as default".


----------



## sonic2911

MacG32 said:


> It's because Microsoft released a new driver on the 10th of April. See attached image.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 0601 would be the one you want. Maybe get the latest drivers from the motherboard support page. You'll need the AMD chipset drivers as well: https://support.amd.com/en-us/download/chipset?os=Windows+10+-+64 That should get you started.




Oh thanks a lot, how about uefi, secure boot...same as intel? Also the shut down issue, do we find the resolution yet?


----------



## Gettz8488

MacG32 said:


> You can program the speeds in to the device itself. There's no need to ever have the software constantly running. Corsair Link, Options | Devices, then click "Use current settings as default".




I’m iffy about downloading the software because of the shutdowns I was getting I don’t know if installing it causes it or not 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## MacG32

sonic2911 said:


> Oh thanks a lot, how about uefi, secure boot...same as intel? Also the shut down issue, do we find the resolution yet?



UEFI and Secure Boot are the same. It has to do with leaving Corsair Link running while other monitoring programs are running. I don't use Asus software, so I've never experienced the problem. Others had shutdowns due to improper temperature readings. Seems everything's being taken care of and we should soon have a new BIOS release with the potential fixes.



Gettz8488 said:


> I’m iffy about downloading the software because of the shutdowns I was getting I don’t know if installing it causes it or not
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro



I've had the software installed the whole time and haven't experienced any shutdowns. I've ran it a few times to adjust things and closed it. Just make sure there's no other monitoring/adjustment software running at the same time. You should be good then.


----------



## sbakic

Guys I asked before but i want to ask again. How to test stable single core for every core?

Should I run stress test or performance test and which one?
Should I run for 2 threads or 1 thread. Because each core has 2 threads. So if I want to test 4th core I need to set affinity to 6 and 7 core because first is 0,1 second 2, 3 and so on? Or should I pick only 6th or only 7th for core 4?
What are you min vcore at single core load. Do you even care for that?

What I have experienced is that I passed all stress test like ~40 hours of prime95 ibt realbench memtest, hci ram, and it failed at cinebench single core which is performance not even stress test when I set affinity to 4th or 5th core for two threads. When I test prime95 8k or 128k 2 threads it doesn't even go to 43.5x it's at 42.5x, but with cinebench it's at 43.5x?

Point is that when you set offset with vcore you have some range for cpu voltage for example PE2 with offset of -0.11250 you will get min vcore at full load of all cores 1.281V (at 40.8x) or ~1.3 for (41x), with full load of single core (which is always the same 43.5x) it can got to 1.437V and when you bump offset to like -0.08750V it will move min to 1.319V for same 40.8x and single will be 43.5x at 1.456V. And there is case where my 4th core need 1.444V when run cinebench, and 5th which is the worst need I think more than 1.456V because i run 3x times cinebench for that core so it's 8 and 9 thread it passed 2/3 times. So probably i need more Vcore for single load. If I bump voltage to 1.48V for single core it will not lower vcore for all load at ~1.3V it will be like 1.344V which is too high for 40.8x so I will probably need to use PE3 (which will result 41.3x at full load) and i don't need it.

with PE1 and auto voltage single core can go up to 1.513V it's peak but still..


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> So.... Increased Ram volts by one to 1.390 (as you can see in bios pic I was on 1.385 already though you wouldn't know if from readings!) and have passed 4000% coverage. Sweet! The test is actually continuing in the background as I only have one PC and need to do stuff - already over 5000% and counting - while firefox is open and watching online tv!  RDRD and WRWR SCL are still at 2. Next is IBT and P95 but will have to wait a while.
> 
> I suspect I can back off on SoC, but again those tests will have to wait. What I do know is that on old board my SoC didn't even like going over 1.0v. With 3200 extreme settings I had it at 0.96v
> 
> Edit: RamTest just failed at 5729% - but I expected it to fail sooner with all the other stuff I'm running so i'm pretty happy.


Good news it helped get you get a step closer! First of all i never use the system while stress-testing  so im sure nothing effects it!

Secondly, i didn't knew you where running a 1700! I thought you where on a 2700x. So looking at your voltages and clocks you have a golden CPU or it isn't stable as you are thinking?!
Did you stress-test it longer then the avx you mentioned, with different SW's ? The reason why im asking this is because we need to know your CPU is stable!
But again, you can now do 3 things:

- Run same test without using your PC
- Re-test CPU Stability or just for testing your RAM stability lower your clocks to 4000Mhz without touching the voltages. Just to see if you pass Ramtest!
- Try the tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSC i mentioned earlier!

good luck!


----------



## lordzed83

Decided to give windows insider a go since im on november build installing latest one 🙂


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> Good news it helped get you get a step closer! First of all i never use the system while stress-testing  so im sure nothing effects it!
> 
> Secondly, i didn't knew you where running a 1700! I thought you where on a 2700x. So looking at your voltages and clocks you have a golden CPU or it isn't stable as you are thinking?!
> Did you stress-test it longer then the avx you mentioned, with different SW's ? The reason why im asking this is because we need to know your CPU is stable!
> But again, you can now do 3 things:
> 
> - Run same test without using your PC
> - Re-test CPU Stability or just for testing your RAM stability lower your clocks to 4000Mhz without touching the voltages. Just to see if you pass Ramtest!
> - Try the tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSC i mentioned earlier!
> 
> good luck!


I could have just stopped at 4000%, thought it would be interesting to see how far it got once I started doing things. Never do proper testing with anything running! I will re-run RamTest when I have a chance.

Yes, I have a 1700x - it was the one I got after RMA and is a good chip  It could run 24/7 at 4.2GHz on my Prime Pro with LLC5 1.389v but backed off to 4.1`to leave some headroom and reduce voltage to 1.33v. Was doing 3200 extreme on the memory until AGESA 1.0.0.0a came along and I could no longer do that reliably. Getting this board has opened so much up for me memory-wise.


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> I could have just stopped at 4000%, thought it would be interesting to see how far it got once I started doing things. Never do proper testing with anything running! I will re-run RamTest when I have a chance.
> 
> Yes, I have a 1700x - it was the one I got after RMA and is a good chip  It could run 24/7 at 4.2GHz on my Prime Pro with LLC5 1.389v but backed off to 4.1`to leave some headroom and reduce voltage to 1.33v. Was doing 3200 extreme on the memory until AGESA 1.0.0.0a came along and I could no longer do that reliably. Getting this board has opened so much up for me memory-wise.


No dont stop on 4000%. I got often errors around 3000-4000%! At least test above 6000%. When i passed that number i could run it to the sky 
aah that makes sense! I just have experience on ryzen 1 chips around launch. There are not many people who could run those clocks on that voltage. My 1800x and 1700 needed 1.4 for 4050Mhz! 
Nice chip!


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> No dont stop on 4000%. I got often errors around 3000-4000%! At least test above 6000%. When i passed that number i could run it to the sky
> aah that makes sense! I just have experience on ryzen 1 chips around launch. There are not many people who could run those clocks on that voltage. My 1800x and 1700 needed 1.4 for 4050Mhz!
> Nice chip!


I wouldn't normally, just really needed to use PC! I am really happy I did the RMA, got a much better chip - old one could barely do 40.25x at 1.42v. Seems to need a little more juice on this MB, but I can live with that.

I've already exceeded 1900 CB15, and also been able to boot up to desktop at 3800 (V unreliable!) so hopeful i'll get reasonable timings at 3600, which I wasn't far from last night using 2T. One step at a time though!


----------



## lordzed83

Ok guys... Updated windows and...
While playing around....
Started 3dmark
Pc shot down like totaly had 2 turn psu off!!!

So ye this new windows version is ****ed someone had this random shotdowns here. Well found problem in 2 hours....

Ill roll back to my previous version..

Aaaa also another problem. Ibt scores 14/run less. Used to calculate around 545 seconds for 10 runs went up to 561.


----------



## lordzed83

Also power draw went 6-7 watts down when running ibt ran it 3 times when i was maxing at 213-214 now max was 206. Could by why it scores Less..


----------



## sr1030nx

*Power plan testing*

I ran across an article that let me enable the ultimate power plan on windows 10, so I thought i'd run a few tests.
https://www.ghacks.net/2018/04/13/enable-the-ultimate-power-plan-on-windows-10-pro-or-home/

Firstly all testing done was done with the hardware in my signature, all power plans had min processor state at 40%, latest version of windows 1803, and with all regular backround programs running.
The process in which I ran was: start pc, wait 2mins, run programs with about 30sec in between, change power plan, reboot


ultimate power plan
1414 / 1410 / 1413 cinebench
6194.7 passmark
http://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=188481&thumb=1


high performance
1380 / 1414 / 1410 cinebench
6184.3 passmark
http://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=188473&thumb=1


ryzen balanced 
1412 / 1411 / 1416 cinebench
6137.6 passmark
http://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=188489&thumb=1


All plans appear more or less equal with two exceptions: the odd outlier on the high performance CB run, and the L2 cache read + copy results on the amd ryzen plan


----------



## VPII

gupsterg said:


> Good luck and hope you suss it  .
> 
> 4.1GHz has gained me slightly closer to CB15 of ~1900, perhaps if I gain 4.125GHz and or 3533MHz I'll be there  .
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 187401
> 
> 
> View attachment 187409
> 
> 
> View attachment 187417


Still not 100% there as single core better but not where it should be but multicore climbed a bit for same speed. Played around with apps and some priority settings.


----------



## Gettz8488

Installed Corsair link only adjusted the fans and closed the app never turned it back on pc shut off randomly after a few hours. Do not download aio software or risk shutdowns 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## CJMitsuki

Had quite a past couple days buckling down on my memory overclocking and I was making great progress as I had 3666c14 and 3733c15 on the cusp of stable but I would always get these stray errors no matter what I did. I thought something was off when I pushed 1.6v and still no change so I booted up old faithful MemTest86 for a diagnosis and sure enough the whole time Ive had 2 bits flipping so it had to be a hardware issue. I pulled the RAM and clean it up and clean the DIMM slots to no avail. I started to get frustrated but had a thought...I would check Thaiphoon Burner and compare SPD data in the Hex Editor. Well, lets just say that my RAM had more than enough corruption from the 16 hour session yesterday as well as all the other torture ever since receiving this 4133mhz kit. I must say though, for the abuse Ive put it through the past couple weeks, the RAM has help up very well. Consistently pushing up to 1.6v to check my available headroom etc. Well, I had this same problem when I did my 3200mhz kit the same way but once they reply back about my write function being disabled in Thaiphoon Ill rewrite the SPD and 100% will have 3666c15 100% stable and fairly certain ill have the same to say for 3733mhz since I was close before discovering the corruption. Although the 3666 with tight timings is going to smoke 3733mhz. Already did a small couple benches with 3666 and it was performing very well. Even with the corruption I had a 20 point increase in C15 and gained a couple hundred points in 3dMark Firestrike benchmark.

Ill also post some of my stable 3466 and 3533mhz screenshots as well but I cant wait to get back to testing 3666. My particular IMC is really picky above 3533, each step is completely different on what will stabilize it. 3666mhz would have tons of errors no matter what until my Cad_Bus settings were at 24ohm and SoC was at 1.13. Once I trained the memory then I could use other settings to further aid stability and tighten the subtimings rather nicely. 3733mhz wanted 60ohm Proc Odt combined with 2.62 VPP_Mem and 913 CLDO_VDDP. Took forever to find the right settings but once I did it was smooth sailing afterwards. The corruption was unfortunate and stopped me for the night until I can fix it. Hopefully another couple Bios updates and 4000mhz+ can be a thing.

*3466mhz CL14 @ 4.2ghz*


Spoiler




























 *
3533mhz CL14 @ 4.25-4.3ghz*


Spoiler






































*3666mhz CL14 @ 4.3ghz
*


Spoiler



















*

How is everyone else faring with 2nd Gen Ryzen?

*


----------



## crakej

Am I being thick? Where is the setting for c-states? Only just realized that I don't have any significan't down-volting...


----------



## Esenel

Esenel said:


> Hi,
> I went through all your 66 posts.
> The screenshots you provided are in over 90% RTC and AIDA latency benchmark.
> 
> These are no stress tests.
> 
> I also have a screenshot of 3600CL14.
> Is this stable? no way :-D
> 
> As long as you are not providing any screenshots of e.g. HCI MemTest >400%, Prime95 >1h, IBT etc. these values are not stable.





CJMitsuki said:


> Had quite a past couple days buckling down on my memory overclocking and I was making great progress as I had 3666c14 and 3733c15 on the cusp of stable but I would always get these stray errors no matter what I did. I thought something was off when I pushed 1.6v and still no change so I booted up old faithful MemTest86 for a diagnosis and sure enough the whole time Ive had 2 bits flipping so it had to be a hardware issue. I pulled the RAM and clean it up and clean the DIMM slots to no avail. I started to get frustrated but had a thought...I would check Thaiphoon Burner and compare SPD data in the Hex Editor. Well, lets just say that my RAM had more than enough corruption from the 16 hour session yesterday as well as all the other torture ever since receiving this 4133mhz kit. I must say though, for the abuse Ive put it through the past couple weeks, the RAM has help up very well. Consistently pushing up to 1.6v to check my available headroom etc. Well, I had this same problem when I did my 3200mhz kit the same way but once they reply back about my write function being disabled in Thaiphoon Ill rewrite the SPD and 100% will have 3666c15 100% stable and fairly certain ill have the same to say for 3733mhz since I was close before discovering the corruption. Although the 3666 with tight timings is going to smoke 3733mhz. Already did a small couple benches with 3666 and it was performing very well. Even with the corruption I had a 20 point increase in C15 and gained a couple hundred points in 3dMark Firestrike benchmark.
> 
> Ill also post some of my stable 3466 and 3533mhz screenshots as well but I cant wait to get back to testing 3666. My particular IMC is really picky above 3533, each step is completely different on what will stabilize it. 3666mhz would have tons of errors no matter what until my Cad_Bus settings were at 24ohm and SoC was at 1.13. Once I trained the memory then I could use other settings to further aid stability and tighten the subtimings rather nicely. 3733mhz wanted 60ohm Proc Odt combined with 2.62 VPP_Mem and 913 CLDO_VDDP. Took forever to find the right settings but once I did it was smooth sailing afterwards. The corruption was unfortunate and stopped me for the night until I can fix it. Hopefully another couple Bios updates and 4000mhz+ can be a thing.
> 
> *3466mhz CL14 @ 4.2ghz*
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 188721
> 
> View attachment 188729
> 
> View attachment 188737
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 3533mhz CL14 @ 4.25-4.3ghz*
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 188665
> View attachment 188673
> View attachment 188681
> View attachment 188689
> View attachment 188697
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *3666mhz CL14 @ 4.3ghz
> *
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 188705
> View attachment 188713
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> How is everyone else faring with 2nd Gen Ryzen?
> 
> *


Again you didn't provide any RAM TEST screenshot.
And just one of IBT standard. Actually that is your first post with at least one stress test tool.

As long as you do not provide any screenshot of Ramtest or HCI MemTest I highly doubt your achievements.
Sorry, but this is just misleading other people.

Take an example on gupsterg and majestynl.
These results you can trust, because they share their results properly.


----------



## gupsterg

Well for me 4.1GHz PState 0 VID: 1.318V SOC: 0.968V, 3466MHz :clock: The Stilt :clock: VDIMM: 1.37V VTTDDR: 0.687V ProcODT: 48Ω is a wrap  .



Spoiler












View attachment 0601_4.1_3466S_setting.txt


View attachment 180515072212.BMP




ZIP link with more screenies, organise by time. Liked how there was some variation on room ambient to test profile.

Testing of 4.075GHz VID: 1.287V with P95 v28.10B1 128K FFT in place showed ~1.206V on ProbeIt point for VCORE. Same test 4.1GHz VID: 1.318V is ~1.236V. Average of SVI2 in HWINFO also decent enough IMO for various tests so far.

https://valid.x86.fr/d2lppm

@Gettz8488

Post 1106 had a screenie of how I setup test. Also added to ROG C7H Essential thread, link. Will be aiming to add more info there ASAP  .

@VPII

Glad to read your getting there  .

@crakej

Advanced > AMD CBS > Zen Common Options > Global C-State Control


----------



## Shiftstealth

Gettz8488 said:


> Installed Corsair link only adjusted the fans and closed the app never turned it back on pc shut off randomly after a few hours. Do not download aio software or risk shutdowns
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


It'd be nice if @elmor could let us know if a fix is on the way for this.


----------



## lordzed83

Shiftstealth said:


> It'd be nice if @elmor could let us know if a fix is on the way for this.


Depends who needs to fix Asus or Corsair ??


----------



## hurricane28

MacG32 said:


> It's because Microsoft released a new driver on the 10th of April. See attached image.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 0601 would be the one you want. Maybe get the latest drivers from the motherboard support page. You'll need the AMD chipset drivers as well: https://support.amd.com/en-us/download/chipset?os=Windows+10+-+64 That should get you started.


So because MS released an USB driver Asus doesn't upload to C7H but does on the Strix website? Or do you mean why it doesn't want to install?


----------



## CJMitsuki

Esenel said:


> Again you didn't provide any RAM TEST screenshot.
> And just one of IBT standard. Actually that is your first post with at least one stress test tool.
> 
> As long as you do not provide any screenshot of Ramtest or HCI MemTest I highly doubt your achievements.
> Sorry, but this is just misleading other people.
> 
> Take an example on gupsterg and majestynl.
> These results you can trust, because they share their results properly.



If you solely rely on RamTest or HCI Memtest then you shouldnt trust any of that as it only tests a portion of the memory. You should be running bootable Memtests before you ever even boot into your OS to make sure there is enough stability so you wont corrupt system files, display drivers, etc.

With that being said, you obviously skimmed through the post instead of actually reading it or you wouldve known that I had corrupted the SPD data of the RAM itself and was waiting on an email from THaiphoon Burner support since I have switched motherboards I would need a new license to be able to rewrite the SPD or else it will always fail any MemTest because the errors were internal to the RAM. That was the reason for the bit flipping in MemTest86 no matter the frequency or settings, always the same 2 bits in error which would indicate to me, at least, that there is a hardware issue which happened to be the RAM itself. I just now got the license and I can now start full stability testing bc I dont test 1000%+ while trying to reach higher frequencies. Maybe a couple full passes in MemTest86 or MemTest64 to 300% before booting into Windows. Again, if you are overclocking ram and boot into Windows anytime you want to test stability it will eventually lead to system corruption.

Maybe next time you will take the time to read a post in its entirety before you make any type of accusation rather than skimming it and hurling your insults. Your negativity in no way helps. Once I get off of work this evening and there is enough stability testing I will run it by you and you can scan it and police the information before it is posted, so that it is to your liking of course. Now if you will excuse me, I am starting my work day


----------



## Shiftstealth

lordzed83 said:


> Depends who needs to fix Asus or Corsair ??


 Well, it doesn't happen on other boards. So my money is on Asus.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> @crakej
> 
> Advanced > AMD CBS > Zen Common Options > Global C-State Control


Thank you! Dyslexia struck again - I just couldn't see it!

This is what happened when I turned C-States on - voltage at idle is *higher* at idle (before it down-volts) - does this mean I can lower my VCore a bit?

Edit: I should also say that at load, the cores were all using the same voltage 1.337


----------



## Esenel

CJMitsuki said:


> I just now got the license and I can now start full stability testing bc I dont test 1000%+ while trying to reach higher frequencies. Maybe a couple full passes in MemTest86 or MemTest64 to 300% before booting into Windows. Again, if you are overclocking ram and boot into Windows anytime you want to test stability it will eventually lead to system corruption.


Testing further than 1000% while aiming for higher frequency I wouldn't do as well.
I rely on HCI MemTest's release statement:
"testing to 100% will catch all errors except for intermittent failures; to detect intermittent problems test to 400%."

So I for myself see the memory stable at 400%. 100-200% I do while testing stuff.

So I hope you can fix your SPD and will provide us soon good insights.
This helps all of us 

Have fun at work and tweaking afterwards.


----------



## crakej

@elmor I'm still having ASUS Fan Service not loading fan profiles properly at startup and waking from sleep. Profile is there, but fans running (way) below their settings.


----------



## VicsPC

Esenel said:


> Testing further than 1000% while aiming for higher frequency I wouldn't do as well.
> I rely on HCI MemTest's release statement:
> "testing to 100% will catch all errors except for intermittent failures; to detect intermittent problems test to 400%."
> 
> So I for myself see the memory stable at 400%. 100-200% I do while testing stuff.
> 
> So I hope you can fix your SPD and will provide us soon good insights.
> This helps all of us
> 
> Have fun at work and tweaking afterwards.


Same here, i go to 400% and that's it. Usually ill get errors at anywhere between 0-200%, after that I've never pulled a single error.


----------



## VPII

I would like to confirm something. If I were to use PE3 or PE4 will CPB/FFR still function? Obviously multiplier will be left on AUTO / Default. I may play around with the BCLK but I need to confirm as when I tried it last my overclock seem to stay as is with no bump in clock for single core performance.

Maybe it is something I did not set.


----------



## majestynl

VPII said:


> I would like to confirm something. If I were to use PE3 or PE4 will CPB/FFR still function? Obviously multiplier will be left on AUTO / Default. I may play around with the BCLK but I need to confirm as when I tried it last my overclock seem to stay as is with no bump in clock for single core performance.
> 
> Maybe it is something I did not set.


Yes it will work!
Set it On Manual and don't forget to Set your Cpu Core Ratio to 37.00 including core performance boost enabled


----------



## crakej

So turning on C-States broke my OC so turned it off for now. Are others using it?

With my voltage showing as 1.425v I don't really want to go any higher - even if that readout is not correct I'd rather not be right on the edge. I could try increasing LLC to 3 see if that helps, or maybe I'm just going to back off to 4.1 as this board wants extra VCore for high mem OCs. While playing with 3600 2T I notice it takes less volts for 2T than 1T, but I would like to get 3466 with decent timings at 1T.

Trying LLC3 now which seems fairly stable - 20 mins P95 and 500% RamTest - all settings the same for 3466. Decided to give memtest86 a go and it FAILED immediately! hundreds of errors just scrolling by.... WTH?

Still got P95 going while I loaded browser to type this in - no crashes - so here I am on the verge of stable - just about to embark on proper length tests, then that happened in Memtest86. I will update in case it a problem with memtest, but I'm sure it's not. 

Update: P95 lost a couple of threads after an hour - not bad considering memtest told me none of my ram was working! Going back to it to see whats going on!

Update2: updated memtest - testing now.


----------



## VPII

majestynl said:


> Yes it will work!
> Set it On Manual and don't forget to Set your Cpu Core Ratio to 37.00 including core performance boost enabled


Thanks alot.... I'll give it a shot tonight.


----------



## gupsterg

Linux testing is going well so far  . Using Linux Mint Cinnamon, the C6H install worked as is for C7H, gotta just update user to reflect kit in use  . 4.1GHz PState 0 VID: 1.318V, SOC: 0.968V, 3466MHz The Stilt VDIMM: 1.37V, VTT: 0.687V, ProcODT: 48.

GSAT was done for ~1hr. P95 I ran for ~2hrs, screenie is only for ~1hr of it. I-Nex seems to be showing incorrect temps AFAIK, gonna see if there's an update or contact author.



Spoiler
































































crakej said:


> Thank you! Dyslexia struck again - I just couldn't see it!
> 
> This is what happened when I turned C-States on - voltage at idle is *higher* at idle (before it down-volts) - does this mean I can lower my VCore a bit?
> 
> Edit: I should also say that at load, the cores were all using the same voltage 1.337


NP  .

Don't know why you see what you see  .



crakej said:


> So turning on C-States broke my OC so turned it off for now. Are others using it?


Used to when UEFI made [Auto] default to [Disabled]. So far on C7H [Auto] with my settings defaults to [Enabled] IMO. So all my PState 0 OC have been using it.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> NP  .
> 
> Used to when UEFI made [Auto] default to [Disabled]. So far on C7H [Auto] with my settings defaults to [Enabled] IMO. So all my PState 0 OC have been using it.


Hmmm - mine is defaulting to off with fixed OC. Dont like seeing higher voltages on VID ... just not used to it!

Lowering voltage and upping to LLC3 seems to work, but it's not ideal.

Memtest86 v7.5 crashes my computer, and 7.3 was useless - had to make do with v4 which seems to be ok still.

As far as testing inside and outside of Windows, I think it's a must to test in Windows as that's the environment you will be using. Windows will be allocating your memory for you and stability relies partly on Windows being able to do that efficiently with your settings. If you test only outside of Windows I think you could still run into problems. The memtest86 environment is very very different from Windows, and while it can test your hardware well, it cannot test how well your Windows setup/settings will work, so I don't think you can just rely on memtest86 Dos, or even UEFI.


----------



## i_max2k2

majestynl said:


> Yes it will work!
> Set it On Manual and don't forget to Set your Cpu Core Ratio to 37.00 including core performance boost enabled


I just tried this however CPU vcore stays at 1.275, on PE3 or PE4, so on PE4 its not stable, and the voltage never decreases. Anyway to make it so that on low clocks the voltage drops as well?

Thanks!

EDIT: Realized, voltages have to be offset for them to drop.


----------



## lordzed83

Gettz8488 said:


> I’m iffy about downloading the software because of the shutdowns I was getting I don’t know if installing it causes it or not
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


You are STILL NOT READING THIS TOPIC

Its the Windows !!!! As soon as I updated to new version last night had my first EVER random shotdown and i dont use any crappy corsair software at all.

@CJMitsuki
Hmm somehow over 10 or 15 years of benching and ram testing my system files never got corrupted not a single time. Only time they died was when OCZ ssd packed up while I was playing WoW LOL


@gupsterg
Anyhow on my side yesterday I passed 2500% ramtest 3600cl15 1.465 on memories. I had 1 error around 1500% with 1.55 so bumped and all nice. But Infinity fabric cant handle it at 4250.... Ill try pumping more volts in to cpu maybe that will help. Any ideas ??


----------



## VicsPC

lordzed83 said:


> You are STILL NOT READING THIS TOPIC
> 
> Its the ******* Windows !!!! As soon as I updated to new version last night had my first EVER random shotdown and i dont use any crappy corsair software at all.
> 
> @CJMitsuki
> Hmm somehow over 10 or 15 years of benching and ram testing my system files never got corrupted not a single time. Only time they died was when OCZ ssd packed up while I was playing WoW LOL
> 
> 
> 
> Anyhow on my side yesterday I passed 2500% ramtest 3600cl15 1.465 on memories. I had 1 error around 1500% with 1.55 so bumped and all nice. But Infinity fabric cant handle it at 4250.... Ill try pumping more volts in to cpu maybe that will help. Any ideas anyone ??


its funny you say that lol, i seem to be way more stable on 1803 then 1709 haha. Guess it's luck of the draw with that as well.


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> Hmmm - mine is defaulting to off with fixed OC. Dont like seeing higher voltages on VID ... just not used to it!
> 
> Lowering voltage and upping to LLC3 seems to work, but it's not ideal.
> 
> Memtest86 v7.5 crashes my computer, and 7.3 was useless - had to make do with v4 which seems to be ok still.
> 
> As far as testing inside and outside of Windows, I think it's a must to test in Windows as that's the environment you will be using. Windows will be allocating your memory for you and stability relies partly on Windows being able to do that efficiently with your settings. If you test only outside of Windows I think you could still run into problems. The memtest86 environment is very very different from Windows, and while it can test your hardware well, it cannot test how well your Windows setup/settings will work, so I don't think you can just rely on memtest86 Dos, or even UEFI.


AFAIK when fixed OC is done CPU still does power gating when not under load, this is it's own "mechanisms".

I only ever used LLC other than [Auto] when did some HWBOT subs way back when Ryzen Gen 1 launched. For daily use [Auto] is all I use.

Never used Memtest86 in probably over a decade. I only do RAM testing within an OS.


----------



## MacG32

hurricane28 said:


> So because MS released an USB driver Asus doesn't upload to C7H but does on the Strix website? Or do you mean why it doesn't want to install?



That's correct. It will be automatically installed by Windows. The Strix driver is a generic driver and should work. Did you ever think that maybe your ASMedia USB 3.1 is faulty, if no driver will install, and that you need a replacement motherboard? Many people have had faulty motherboards since release.

My first board had, after pulling it out and fully inspecting it, a few unsoldered points, flux on it, the socket lever clicked very loudly when opening and closing it, and obviously wouldn't overclock correctly. I made sure to thoroughly inspect my replacement motherboard for any obvious QA/QC problems before installing it.


----------



## dreckschmeck

VPII said:


> Okay I've never ran my cpu at stock really but this morning I wanted to see up to where it boosts single core when at stock with a bump in the bclk and for some reason the highest was roughly 4.277ghz. My reason for testing this is that I found my single core CB15 result being really low. With this specific run it was like 148 which is a little concerning, but I also found that with the complete overclock all cores 4.36ghz it is also lower than what it should be. Any advice?


do you use the correct power plan? you can use ryzen balanced but need to adjust the "frequency scaling" to <50% in order to get the headroom for 1-2 cores to boost to the maxium freq!


----------



## Safetytrousers

Syldon said:


> LLC does nothing btw on any of the settings, it isnt working properly.


Then why do I see my Vdroop incrementally decrease the further I go up the LLC scale until at LLC 5 the voltage reads out as solidly staying at the exact setting I set in BIOS (as read in HWinfo and OCCT stress test)?


----------



## Mandarb

Well, I just came over from a C6H that went bad insofar that I was even having trouble booting at stock RAM settings.

Since I need my PC, I ordered a C7H with the intent of selling the C6H once I received the replacement.

So I just put in the C7H, everything awesome, no more issues with booting, smooth sailing but.. wait.. front USB 2.0 panel isn't working. When I put it into the USB15 header (left of the USB 3.1 header at the bottom) nothing gets recognised, not in OS, not in BIOS.
When I connect the front USB 2.0 to the USB1112 header (left of USB15 on the bottom, with the plastic connector) everything works fine.

Everything seems to be enabled. Is there maybe some setting I need to change somewhere to get it to work? Or have I just been shafted twice in a game with statistically about a 1% DoA chance?

Currently on 0509, I'll try the new BIOS from the frontpage now, let's see what happens.


----------



## VPII

Safetytrousers said:


> Then why do I see my Vdroop incrementally decrease the further I go up the LLC scale until at LLC 5 the voltage reads out as solidly staying at the exact setting I set in BIOS (as read in HWinfo and OCCT stress test)?


I have to agree .... saw the same. Still not exactly what was set in bios when measuring with multi but better than without llc set.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## Mandarb

Yes, it's official. One of the USB2 rows from USB15 is dead. When I plug the header into USB1112, both USB 2.0 front connectors work.

Really JUUUUST slightly pissed. First thought with my C6H that it was a new platform and needed to mature. Spent so much time trying to get it stable, but it got worse and worse. Then I am finally sure that it is the C6H that is the problem (probably a capacitor in the oscillating circuit is bad and losing capacity). Now I buy a C7H that I'm not without a PC for 2-4 weeks and that board has a dead USB 2 connector. Just. Great. At least with the C7H I didn't waste days trying to fix it thinking something was wrong with my settings. They should at least send me a tube of Kryonaut, I reseated the RAM and the CPU a twice to make sure it has nothing to do with my installation...


----------



## majestynl

Safetytrousers said:


> Then why do I see my Vdroop incrementally decrease the further I go up the LLC scale until at LLC 5 the voltage reads out as solidly staying at the exact setting I set in BIOS (as read in HWinfo and OCCT stress test)?


LLC works also proper on my side! LLC5 gives me a steady voltage of whats it set!




Mandarb said:


> Yes, it's official. One of the USB2 rows from USB15 is dead. When I plug the header into USB1112, both USB 2.0 front connectors work.
> 
> Really JUUUUST slightly pissed. First thought with my C6H that it was a new platform and needed to mature. Spent so much time trying to get it stable, but it got worse and worse. Then I am finally sure that it is the C6H that is the problem (probably a capacitor in the oscillating circuit is bad and losing capacity). Now I buy a C7H that I'm not without a PC for 2-4 weeks and that board has a dead USB 2 connector. Just. Great. At least with the C7H I didn't waste days trying to fix it thinking something was wrong with my settings. They should at least send me a tube of Kryonaut, I reseated the RAM and the CPU a twice to make sure it has nothing to do with my installation...



Its not dead i think  Check the "ENTHUSIAST HIGHLIGHTS PDF" where you find "Only the bottom pins are routed" for ROG_EXT!
And the normal CH7 manual says: USB 2.0 Port (USB15) at mid board shares with ROG Extension (ROG_EXT) port!

Info @ CH7 Manual: Page 1-17
Info @ Enthusiast Highlights: Last Page


----------



## Mandarb

majestynl said:


> Its not dead i think  Check the "ENTHUSIAST HIGHLIGHTS PDF" where you find "Only the bottom pins are routed" for ROG_EXT!
> And the normal CH7 manual says: USB 2.0 Port (USB15) at mid board shares with ROG Extension (ROG_EXT) port!
> 
> Info @ CH7 Manual: Page 1-17
> Info @ Enthusiast Highlights: Last Page


*Picard Facepalm*

Oh man... now I feel so stupid. Thanks! They could have mentioned that fact already in the IO overview under point 17 however. ^^


----------



## hurricane28

MacG32 said:


> That's correct. It will be automatically installed by Windows. The Strix driver is a generic driver and should work. Did you ever think that maybe your ASMedia USB 3.1 is faulty, if no driver will install, and that you need a replacement motherboard? Many people have had faulty motherboards since release.
> 
> My first board had, after pulling it out and fully inspecting it, a few unsoldered points, flux on it, the socket lever clicked very loudly when opening and closing it, and obviously wouldn't overclock correctly. I made sure to thoroughly inspect my replacement motherboard for any obvious QA/QC problems before installing it.


Weird man, perhaps it isn't the same controller after all? 

I got some drivers from Elmor and all my USB ports are working so nothing wrong with them luckily. 

I am a bit confused tho, i have AMD USB 3.1 and ASmedia 3.1 USB ports? 

This is what i get in device manager:


----------



## wisepds

What temp is safe for 24/7 on ryzen 2700x? I think under 80ºC is enought..¿Right?


----------



## hurricane28

This is what it says when i try to install the ASmedia 3.1 USB driver:


----------



## wisepds

hurricane28 said:


> This is what it says when i try to install the ASmedia 3.1 USB driver:


I have installed the driver because i have a USB 3.1 gen 2 (10GBps) 3,5" case and works fine for me... I can install without problems... Windows 10 Pro N April Update...


----------



## mtrai

hurricane28 said:


> This is what it says when i try to install the ASmedia 3.1 USB driver:


Try the latest off station-drivers

THey have a newer version anyhow....1.16.51.1 http://www.station-drivers.com/inde...tory&Itemid=352&func=fileinfo&id=3361&lang=fr


----------



## hurricane28

Nope, the installer tells me that it is installed but when i look in to device manager the old driver from 2016 is still installed installed... rebooted the PC too.


----------



## Syldon

Safetytrousers said:


> Then why do I see my Vdroop incrementally decrease the further I go up the LLC scale until at LLC 5 the voltage reads out as solidly staying at the exact setting I set in BIOS (as read in HWinfo and OCCT stress test)?



I rechecked this morning. Vdroop is very easy to identify on a 30 seconds test. This isn't a stability test. It was just a look to see if core speeds hold their own, and how the VRMs react. I watched the results in HWinfo while using an ITB run. I did not use a DMM. This isn't about the credibility of the sensors; it is only about how the system reacts to those sensors.



On PE3, LLC auto, offset +0.4125v


Spoiler










 My system holds its own. No Vdroop visible.



Test setting @ Manual 1.4v and PE2


LLC auto


Spoiler










 - 2815Mhz to 4248Mhz highest/lowest from all cores. Voltage stays at 1.4v.

LLC 1


Spoiler










 - 3524Mhz to 4223Mhz highest/lowest from all cores. Voltage differ 1.306v to 1.337v.

LLC 2


Spoiler










 - 3424Mhz to 4348Mhz highest/lowest from all cores. Voltage differ 1.325V to 1.394v.

LLC 3


Spoiler










 - 3149Mhz to 4298Mhz highest/lowest from all cores. Voltage differ 1.363v to 1.4v.

LLC 4


Spoiler










 - 3024Mhz to 4298Mhz highest/lowest from all cores. Voltage differ 1.375v to 1.4v.

LLC5


Spoiler










 - 2832v to 4248Mhz highest/lowest from all cores. Voltage differ none stays at 1.4v.



1.4v is considered the top end of the voltage setting. My normal setting proves this CPU runs at 4123Mhz consistently with 1.35v across all cores.

On every single LLC setting the CPU cores droop in unison, sometimes as low as 2800Mhz. Auto and LLC5 gave very similar results. I think you can consider LLC5 = auto. 

Using LLC on a manual voltage is making my system run at a much higher overall voltage with a huge decrease in performance. From what I am seeing LLC is not pushing the voltage back up across the cores on any setting, therefore using it is redundant. The offset setting is working however.

I openly admit I am on a learning curve when it comes to the more techie stuff. I am open to the fact I missed something.


----------



## lordzed83

hurricane28 said:


> Nope, the installer tells me that it is installed but when i look in to device manager the old driver from 2016 is still installed installed... rebooted the PC too.



Sometimes I just facepam at Yours pists. I remeber You claiming to be pro system overclocker with 10+ years of xp and You cant figure out how to Force install usb drivers?? Or You just realised that rhere are few controlers operatiglng usbs??

Let me make it simple for You

There are few usbs controled by cpu few by x470 chipset and few ny asmedia controler.

So as shocking as it can be there are 3 sources of usbs on this board!!!


----------



## lordzed83

Syldon said:


> Safetytrousers said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then why do I see my Vdroop incrementally decrease the further I go up the LLC scale until at LLC 5 the voltage reads out as solidly staying at the exact setting I set in BIOS (as read in HWinfo and OCCT stress test)?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I rechecked this morning. Vdroop is very easy to identify on a 30 seconds test. This isn't a stability test. It was just a look to see if core speeds hold their own, and how the VRMs react. I watched the results in HWinfo while using an ITB run. I did not use a DMM. This isn't about the credibility of the sensors; it is only about how the system reacts to those sensors.
> 
> 
> 
> On PE3, LLC auto, offset +0.4125v
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My system holds its own. No Vdroop visible.
> 
> 
> 
> Test setting @ Manual 1.4v and PE2
> 
> 
> LLC auto
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - 2815Mhz to 4248Mhz highest/lowest from all cores. Voltage stays at 1.4v.
> 
> LLC 1
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - 3524Mhz to 4223Mhz highest/lowest from all cores. Voltage differ 1.306v to 1.337v.
> 
> LLC 2
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - 3424Mhz to 4348Mhz highest/lowest from all cores. Voltage differ 1.325V to 1.394v.
> 
> LLC 3
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - 3149Mhz to 4298Mhz highest/lowest from all cores. Voltage differ 1.363v to 1.4v.
> 
> LLC 4
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - 3024Mhz to 4298Mhz highest/lowest from all cores. Voltage differ 1.375v to 1.4v.
> 
> LLC5
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - 2832v to 4248Mhz highest/lowest from all cores. Voltage differ none stays at 1.4v.
> 
> 
> 
> 1.4v is considered the top end of the voltage setting. My normal setting proves this CPU runs at 4123Mhz consistently with 1.35v across all cores.
> 
> On every single LLC setting the CPU cores droop in unison, sometimes as low as 2800Mhz. Auto and LLC5 gave very similar results. I think you can consider LLC5 = auto.
> 
> Using LLC on a manual voltage is making my system run at a much higher overall voltage with a huge decrease in performance. From what I am seeing LLC is not pushing the voltage back up across the cores on any setting, therefore using it is redundant. The offset setting is working however.
> 
> I openly admit I am on a learning curve when it comes to the more techie stuff. I am open to the fact I missed something.
Click to expand...

Very nice post started thinking about llc auto test now. Always used 3 or 4 behe

Update just tested Auto vdrop so big ibt got error on 3rd loop... Passes every time at llc3.
Maybe it does not work good with pstate overclocking??


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> AFAIK when fixed OC is done CPU still does power gating when not under load, this is it's own "mechanisms".
> 
> I only ever used LLC other than [Auto] when did some HWBOT subs way back when Ryzen Gen 1 launched. For daily use [Auto] is all I use.
> 
> Never used Memtest86 in probably over a decade. I only do RAM testing within an OS.


Gone back to auto - LLC3 just made more heat...... that, and I had forgotten to put the side back on my case. I've pulled back to 4.1GHz OC in the interest of getting higher speed reliable ram speeds and keeping temps down. I'm at 1.387v now and will have to re-do some testing to get things just right.....at least I know timings are ok.

There is a problem with LLC when using fixed voltages, but only on bios 0601 as far as I know...


----------



## MacG32

hurricane28 said:


> Weird man, perhaps it isn't the same controller after all?
> 
> I got some drivers from Elmor and all my USB ports are working so nothing wrong with them luckily.
> 
> I am a bit confused tho, i have AMD USB 3.1 and ASmedia 3.1 USB ports?
> 
> This is what i get in device manager:



Seems you have the older drivers from ASMedia installed. If they're working, I wouldn't worry about them at all. Newer drivers should be on the CD that came with the motherboard. The newest ASMedia drivers from Station Drivers have been posted. Mine are all using more recent Microsoft drivers.


----------



## Keith Myers

gupsterg said:


> Linux testing is going well so far  . Using Linux Mint Cinnamon, the C6H install worked as is for C7H, gotta just update user to reflect kit in use  . 4.1GHz PState 0 VID: 1.318V, SOC: 0.968V, 3466MHz The Stilt VDIMM: 1.37V, VTT: 0.687V, ProcODT: 48.
> 
> GSAT was done for ~1hr. P95 I ran for ~2hrs, screenie is only for ~1hr of it. I-Nex seems to be showing incorrect temps AFAIK, gonna see if there's an update or contact author.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 189065
> 
> 
> View attachment 189081
> 
> 
> View attachment 189089
> 
> 
> View attachment 189097
> 
> 
> View attachment 189105
> 
> 
> View attachment 189113
> 
> 
> View attachment 189121
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NP  .
> 
> Don't know why you see what you see  .
> 
> 
> 
> Used to when UEFI made [Auto] default to [Disabled]. So far on C7H [Auto] with my settings defaults to [Enabled] IMO. So all my PState 0 OC have been using it.


I hadn't heard of I-Nex before. I have been using the it87 driver to get access to the sensors on my ASUS Prime Pro motherboard. I am hoping that the Crosshair VII Hero uses the same ITE8665E SIO controller so I can use the it87 driver still. Is the I-Nex app the only one you use for system identification so far?


----------



## Spawn32

Hi @MacG32 
The thing is, it's still an old 1.10 driver, it only gets it's build number updated when you install a new Windows 10 release (Insider ?), the strix and others are up to 1.16 i think, but they do not fix the problem on the Crosshair VII,
i have a nice usb c to 3x usb ports and sdcard / mmc reader, it haven't been working since i upgraded from my old X370 pro board :/

The MS drivers just dont show my hub / devices and the 1.16 driver tells me it cant load...


----------



## lordzed83

MacG32 said:


> hurricane28 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Weird man, perhaps it isn't the same controller after all?
> 
> I got some drivers from Elmor and all my USB ports are working so nothing wrong with them luckily.
> 
> I am a bit confused tho, i have AMD USB 3.1 and ASmedia 3.1 USB ports?
> 
> This is what i get in device manager:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seems you have the older drivers from ASMedia installed. If they're working, I wouldn't worry about them at all. Newer drivers should be on the CD that came with the motherboard. The newest ASMedia drivers from Station Drivers have been posted. Mine are all using more recent Microsoft drivers.
Click to expand...

In my case everything installed itself using that new feature that installs with mothweboard over wifi when i was putting rig vmbacj tofether with only monitor connectes lol.


----------



## lordzed83

Spawn32 said:


> Hi @MacG32 /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> The thing is, it's still an old 1.10 driver, it only gets it's build number updated when you install a new Windows 10 release (Insider ?), the strix and others are up to 1.16 i think, but they do not fix the problem on the Crosshair VII,
> i have a nice usb c to 3x usb ports and sdcard / mmc reader, it haven't been working since i upgraded from my old X370 pro board 😕
> 
> The MS drivers just dont show my hub / devices and the 1.16 driver tells me it cant load...


This new insiders build as I tested yesterday does not look giid at all scores went down even turned spectre update off to check if that is problem but no everythi g scores less and had first random shotdown for no reason on top. Just need 2 find forcw in me to do full proper windows reinstal feom 0 as i planned to do with rhis new insider build but now not sure if i want this new version...


----------



## lordzed83

@hurricane28 one more question have You done freah windows with format c?? Or just swaped motherboard and cpu like em. And do you have that new asus thing for installing drivers automaticly??


----------



## crakej

Just passed an hour of 3466CL14 P95, RamTest is next. VCore is set in bios at 1.39v LLC auto, at SVI2 it shows as 1.38v. SoC is at just *0.96v*. Ram is set in bios at 1.39v (HWInfo shows about 1.373v min)

It's also passed standard IBT AVX, but not relying on this any way, and certainly not at standard setting.

It's a shame my cpu seems to need more juice on this board, but given the extra ram speeds possible i'm not too surprised... or upset


----------



## crakej

My USB seems to be working fine - apart from my wireless mouse not working smoothly. Windows just installed drivers automatically - Microsoft ones..... I''ll just wait until the official ones come out.


----------



## MacG32

Spawn32 said:


> Hi @MacG32
> The thing is, it's still an old 1.10 driver, it only gets it's build number updated when you install a new Windows 10 release (Insider ?), the strix and others are up to 1.16 i think, but they do not fix the problem on the Crosshair VII,
> i have a nice usb c to 3x usb ports and sdcard / mmc reader, it haven't been working since i upgraded from my old X370 pro board :/
> 
> The MS drivers just dont show my hub / devices and the 1.16 driver tells me it cant load...



I looked through the AMD Drivers and they don't include USB 3.0 or 3.10 eXtensible Host Controller drivers for Windows 10. You could try the drivers listed here for Ryzen: A. AMD USB 3.0/3.1 Drivers | for AMD Zeppelin Chipsets (with Ryzen CPU): https://www.win-raid.com/t834f25-USB-Drivers-original-and-modded.html They also have: B. ASMedia USB 3.0/3.1 Drivers | b) complete Drivers and Software Set: Good luck.


----------



## crakej

And just got nearly 6000% on RamTest so this is more than likely stable enough for me, but I will experiment more!

Same settings as above post.
Edit: here are the Aida numbers:


----------



## Gettz8488

lordzed83 said:


> You are STILL NOT READING THIS TOPIC
> 
> 
> 
> Its the Windows !!!! As soon as I updated to new version last night had my first EVER random shotdown and i dont use any crappy corsair software at all.
> 
> 
> 
> @CJMitsuki
> 
> Hmm somehow over 10 or 15 years of benching and ram testing my system files never got corrupted not a single time. Only time they died was when OCZ ssd packed up while I was playing WoW LOL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @gupsterg
> 
> Anyhow on my side yesterday I passed 2500% ramtest 3600cl15 1.465 on memories. I had 1 error around 1500% with 1.55 so bumped and all nice. But Infinity fabric cant handle it at 4250.... Ill try pumping more volts in to cpu maybe that will help. Any ideas ??




For my specific case it’s not windows. I had 0 shutdowns in over a week soon as I downloaded Corsair link it shut down in a few hours.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Gettz8488

lordzed83 said:


> Very nice post started thinking about llc auto test now. Always used 3 or 4 behe
> 
> Update just tested Auto vdrop so big ibt got error on 3rd loop... Passes every time at llc3.
> Maybe it does not work good with pstate overclocking??




Same here I’m stable at 4.1 1.344 Offset Vcore with llc 3 I get instant crash on bit with auto llc


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## hurricane28

lordzed83 said:


> Sometimes I just facepam at Yours pists. I remeber You claiming to be pro system overclocker with 10+ years of xp and You cant figure out how to Force install usb drivers?? Or You just realised that rhere are few controlers operatiglng usbs??
> 
> Let me make it simple for You
> 
> There are few usbs controled by cpu few by x470 chipset and few ny asmedia controler.
> 
> So as shocking as it can be there are 3 sources of usbs on this board!!!


Really dude, YOU face palm at MY posts...? 

I never claimed to be 10+ years of xp and pro system overclocker man... stop this nonsense.. stay away from the cool aid dude.


----------



## wisepds

I had two sudden shutdowns today. I have to remove the power cord and put it back in. Does this happen to anyone else?


----------



## gupsterg

sr1030nx said:


> I ran across an article that let me enable the ultimate power plan on windows 10, so I thought i'd run a few tests.
> https://www.ghacks.net/2018/04/13/enable-the-ultimate-power-plan-on-windows-10-pro-or-home/
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Firstly all testing done was done with the hardware in my signature, all power plans had min processor state at 40%, latest version of windows 1803, and with all regular backround programs running.
> The process in which I ran was: start pc, wait 2mins, run programs with about 30sec in between, change power plan, reboot
> 
> 
> ultimate power plan
> 1414 / 1410 / 1413 cinebench
> 6194.7 passmark
> http://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=188481&thumb=1
> 
> 
> high performance
> 1380 / 1414 / 1410 cinebench
> 6184.3 passmark
> http://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=188473&thumb=1
> 
> 
> ryzen balanced
> 1412 / 1411 / 1416 cinebench
> 6137.6 passmark
> http://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=188489&thumb=1
> 
> 
> All plans appear more or less equal with two exceptions: the odd outlier on the high performance CB run, and the L2 cache read + copy results on the amd ryzen plan


Thanks for share, I had seen this PP when nosing around in registry, will have to try it out.



dreckschmeck said:


> do you use the correct power plan? you can use ryzen balanced but need to adjust the "frequency scaling" to <50% in order to get the headroom for 1-2 cores to boost to the maxium freq!


Nice looking app, will have to try it  . There is also a reg edit that gain excessive amounts of parameters to be able to tweak in WinOS. Will fish out link.



Syldon said:


> ...
> I openly admit I am on a learning curve when it comes to the more techie stuff. I am open to the fact I missed something.


You did not miss anything. You are not wrong in this context, that manual voltage+LLC changes do not work correctly, link.



crakej said:


> Gone back to auto - LLC3 just made more heat...... that, and I had forgotten to put the side back on my case. I've pulled back to 4.1GHz OC in the interest of getting higher speed reliable ram speeds and keeping temps down. I'm at 1.387v now and will have to re-do some testing to get things just right.....at least I know timings are ok.


I did a post attempt yesterday at 3533MHz, I had Q-Code: F9, AFAIK memory training issue. I believe when combined with 4.1GHz CPU OC I'm failing at 3533MHz posting successfully. I recall on same timings but 4.075GHz I did gain post into OS with 3533MHz.



Spoiler
























Keith Myers said:


> I hadn't heard of I-Nex before. I have been using the it87 driver to get access to the sensors on my ASUS Prime Pro motherboard. I am hoping that the Crosshair VII Hero uses the same ITE8665E SIO controller so I can use the it87 driver still. Is the I-Nex app the only one you use for system identification so far?


I-Nex is all I've used so far.Yes C7H uses same SIO as the other ASUS AMD AM4/sTR4 boards (well which ever models I have been checking images, etc of  ) . 



crakej said:


> My USB seems to be working fine - apart from my wireless mouse not working smoothly. Windows just installed drivers automatically - Microsoft ones..... I''ll just wait until the official ones come out.


W7P x64 I just install AMD Chipset drivers, using only USB 2.0 headers off mobo and all rear IO USBs, they seem to work hunky dory for me. Linux Mint Cinnamon, non issue as well. The WiFi module needs a driver, as I was in a rush I installed another WiFi card that I knew it would pick up. 



crakej said:


> And just got nearly 6000% on RamTest so this is more than likely stable enough for me, but I will experiment more!
> 
> Same settings as above post.
> Edit: here are the Aida numbers:


Looking good  .


----------



## majestynl

Mandarb said:


> *Picard Facepalm*
> 
> Oh man... now I feel so stupid. Thanks! They could have mentioned that fact already in the IO overview under point 17 however. ^^


haha no problem! Your welcome! Yeap agree they could note it slightly better 




crakej said:


> Just passed an hour of 3466CL14 P95, RamTest is next. VCore is set in bios at 1.39v LLC auto, at SVI2 it shows as 1.38v. SoC is at just *0.96v*. Ram is set in bios at 1.39v (HWInfo shows about 1.373v min)
> 
> It's also passed standard IBT AVX, but not relying on this any way, and certainly not at standard setting.
> 
> It's a shame my cpu seems to need more juice on this board, but given the extra ram speeds possible i'm not too surprised... or upset


Looking good nice!



crakej said:


> My USB seems to be working fine - apart from my wireless mouse not working smoothly. Windows just installed drivers automatically - Microsoft ones..... I''ll just wait until the official ones come out.


Which mouse brand are you using ? Razer? Anyways, if my mouse isnt smooth i always disable some power save features at the Device Manager - Universal Serial Bus controllers:
uncheck "Allow the computer to turn off his device to save power" for all usb ports. It helped often!

Sometimes its soooo smooth that my eyes cant catch the cursor on brights spots...heheh, need to move the mouse hysterically to catch him 



crakej said:


> And just got nearly 6000% on RamTest so this is more than likely stable enough for me, but I will experiment more!
> 
> Same settings as above post.
> Edit: here are the Aida numbers:


Looking stable  im happy you got it!



Gettz8488 said:


> For my specific case it’s not windows. I had 0 shutdowns in over a week soon as I downloaded Corsair link it shut down in a few hours.





wisepds said:


> I had two sudden shutdowns today. I have to remove the power cord and put it back in. Does this happen to anyone else?



Dont thinks its windows. Happened on older version 1x. And also on the newest windows happened 1x!
Im highly suspecting with CPU-Z / Hwinfo etc..Maybe there is still something with the SPD !

Every time the shutdown happened CPU-z was open at the Memory/SPD tab. Im only opening CPUZ to make screenshots. So will try to replicate this.
Mentioned before in this thread ! 



hurricane28 said:


> Really dude, YOU face palm at MY posts...?
> 
> I never claimed to be 10+ years of xp and pro system overclocker man... stop this nonsense.. stay away from the cool aid dude.


hehehe 

About USB: I dont have any issues with USB drivers. There are more USB controllers on this board (different suppliers) like mentioned before. What i did after a fresh windows install was:
first installing al AMD chipset drivers. Never installed drivers from asus etc. Rest is default windows drivers!


----------



## gupsterg

majestynl said:


> Dont thinks its windows. Happened on older version 1x. And also on the newest windows happened 1x!
> Im highly suspecting with CPU-Z / Hwinfo etc..Maybe there is still something with the SPD !
> 
> Every time the shutdown happened CPU-z was open at the Memory/SPD tab. Im only opening CPUZ to make screenshots. So will try to replicate this.
> Mentioned before in this thread !


CPU-Z v1.84.0 I think I'm on, non issue for me. HWINFO latest, again non issue. AIDA64 again latest beta, but only used for RAM bench, again non issue. I have done a AIDA64 bench, CPU-Z bench, CB15 and then stability tested for x hrs, as seen in screenie zips I have at time on same post had HWINFO open and multiple CPU-Z showing board/SPD info and no shutdowns. I have done also multiple times screenie with HWINFO+CPU-Z on a single post as well.

So far W7P x64, Linux Mint, on my OC profiles or stock CPU and OC RAM, had zero shutdowns.

My only issue with board misbehaving was on intial post, each time I took screenies in UEFI board reboot but not shutdown. As stated in thread I thought it was excessive chipset voltage. As Elmor cleared that up I believe it was just intial post gremlins, as not had the same occur again. So besides this board been flawless so far  .


----------



## hurricane28

majestynl said:


> haha no problem! Your welcome! Yeap agree they could note it slightly better
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Looking good nice!
> 
> 
> 
> Which mouse brand are you using ? Razer? Anyways, if my mouse isnt smooth i always disable some power save features at the Device Manager - Universal Serial Bus controllers:
> uncheck "Allow the computer to turn off his device to save power" for all usb ports. It helped often!
> 
> Sometimes its soooo smooth that my eyes cant catch the cursor on brights spots...heheh, need to move the mouse hysterically to catch him
> 
> 
> 
> Looking stable  im happy you got it!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dont thinks its windows. Happened on older version 1x. And also on the newest windows happened 1x!
> Im highly suspecting with CPU-Z / Hwinfo etc..Maybe there is still something with the SPD !
> 
> Every time the shutdown happened CPU-z was open at the Memory/SPD tab. Im only opening CPUZ to make screenshots. So will try to replicate this.
> Mentioned before in this thread !
> 
> 
> 
> hehehe
> 
> About USB: I dont have any issues with USB drivers. There are more USB controllers on this board (different suppliers) like mentioned before. What i did after a fresh windows install was:
> first installing al AMD chipset drivers. Never installed drivers from asus etc. Rest is default windows drivers!


Well good for you man, but the problem is that there are no USB drivers on my driver disc or on the Internet for this or non Wifi version which i find is weird. I also did fresh install of Windows 10 Pro and do the same as you described always. 

I tried different drivers but they all install the driver from 2016 which is version 1.16.38.1. All USB ports working and have no noticeable difference if there is an MS or ASmedia driver installed so its no biggie, but these little things bug me and could be an indication of something wrong. 

Perhaps @elmor can shed a light on this?


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> I did a post attempt yesterday at 3533MHz, I had Q-Code: F9, AFAIK memory training issue. I believe when combined with 4.1GHz CPU OC I'm failing at 3533MHz posting successfully. I recall on same timings but 4.075GHz I did gain post into OS with 3533MHz.
> 
> W7P x64 I just install AMD Chipset drivers, using only USB 2.0 headers off mobo and all rear IO USBs, they seem to work hunky dory for me. Linux Mint Cinnamon, non issue as well. The WiFi module needs a driver, as I was in a rush I installed another WiFi card that I knew it would pick up.


I did exactly the same as you for USB.

I'm running 3533 this morning with new cpu settings - will not boot with geardown=off - it just stops at the 'Press F2 or Del for Bios' screen with code 0D.

done a few basic tests - IBT basic test, running P95 now in background just to get an idea of stability (instability lol),, did an Aida speed test which looked ok, but not much better than 3466CL14

So, running tests @ 3533CL14,15,15,15,30,46 CPU @ 1.39v LLC auto. SoC is still at 0.96v and tRFC 339 (191ns) - This kit seems to like tRFC at 190ns even though spec is 350ns. I do wonder if this might be part of the unique way Ryzen uses DDR4.

P95 still going well 10 minutes in. Will report later.

Update: P95 lost workers after 20 mins - still, not bad for my first go, it's not totally unstable at all! I wonder if that more VCore that's wanted, of if I need more SoC? .... I will find out!


----------



## spyshagg

Are PE levels modifiable?

Can I set a max multiplier for all-core boost and a max multiplier for single-core boost for any given PE ?

If not, with the tools we have in the bios, how closely could this be achieved? 



PE4 boosts all-core voltage the right amount. But also boosts single-core voltage way to high. 
I would like to have single-core voltage from PE3 while maintaining all-core voltage from PE4, or, like I asked above, customize my PE3 level to increase all-core multiplier and voltage while maintaining the single-core config intact.


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> Which mouse brand are you using ? Razer? Anyways, if my mouse isnt smooth i always disable some power save features at the Device Manager - Universal Serial Bus controllers:
> uncheck "Allow the computer to turn off his device to save power" for all usb ports. It helped often!
> 
> Sometimes its soooo smooth that my eyes cant catch the cursor on brights spots...heheh, need to move the mouse hysterically to catch him
> 
> Looking stable  im happy you got it!


I'll try this see what happens. I have a Microsoft Wireless Mobile Mouse 4000 if that means anything lol


----------



## villason

Hello,

I am running Google stressapptest and found something interesting. I am running in the tool under the native Ubuntu shell that comes with Windows. In the Balanced power plan I get hardware errors such as:



Code:


Log: Region mask: 0x1
Report Error: miscompare : DIMM Unknown : 1 : 38s
Page Error: miscompare on CPU 12(0x4) at 0x7f515906a000(0x0:DIMM Unknown): read:0x0000000000000000, reread:0x0000000000000000 expected:0x1616161616161616
Report Error: miscompare : DIMM Unknown : 1 : 38s
Page Error: miscompare on CPU 12(0x4) at 0x7f515906a008(0x0:DIMM Unknown): read:0x0000000000000000, reread:0x0000000000000000 expected:0x1616161616161616
Report Error: miscompare : DIMM Unknown : 1 : 38s
Page Error: miscompare on CPU 12(0x4) at 0x7f515906a010(0x0:DIMM Unknown): read:0x0000000000000000, reread:0x0000000000000000 expected:0x1616161616161616
Report Error: miscompare : DIMM Unknown : 1 : 38s
Page Error: miscompare on CPU 12(0x4) at 0x7f515906a018(0x0:DIMM Unknown): read:0x0000000000000000, reread:0x0000000000000000 expected:0x1616161616161616
Report Error: miscompare : DIMM Unknown : 1 : 38s
Page Error: miscompare on CPU 12(0x4) at 0x7f515906a020(0x0:DIMM Unknown): read:0x0000000000000000, reread:0x0000000000000000 expected:0x1616161616161616
Report Error: miscompare : DIMM Unknown : 1 : 38s
Page Error: miscompare on CPU 12(0x4) at 0x7f515906a028(0x0:DIMM Unknown): read:0x0000000000000000, reread:0x0000000000000000 expected:0x1616161616161616
Report Error: miscompare : DIMM Unknown : 1 : 38s
Page Error: miscompare on CPU 12(0x4) at 0x7f515906a030(0x0:DIMM Unknown): read:0x0000000000000000, reread:0x0000000000000000 expected:0x1616161616161616

Those errors appear at the beginning.

But if switch back to High performance power plan, no errors are found.

Any idea what's going on?


----------



## lordzed83

wisepds said:


> I had two sudden shutdowns today. I have to remove the power cord and put it back in. Does this happen to anyone else?


 @elmor
Me once iw upgraded to 18xx windows version using PE3 overclock. Fired up 3d mark like always do for benchmark. Instant shotdown power button not working CMOS clear button not working. Only RGB on Motherboard lit up.

Im back to running normal Power state overclock after playing around with PE3. It's more stable at same clocks scores same and dont see those nasty LOOKING 1.5+ volts in single core.


----------



## spyshagg

the BLCK overclock affected SATA ports are a permanent issue or was it addressed as fixable?


----------



## wisepds

spyshagg said:


> the BLCK overclock affected SATA ports are a permanent issue or was it addressed as fixable?


What are you talking about affected sata? I'm interesting in that because i have shutdowns on my pc... is for Sata ports?


----------



## majestynl

wisepds said:


> What are you talking about affected sata? I'm interesting in that because i have shutdowns on my pc... is for Sata ports?


See post: http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...-vii-overclocking-thread-89.html#post27352857
Also stated the the "C7H Enthusiast Highlights v03.pdf " as * "SATA6G_56 6 Gb/s X470 Don't use if adjusting PCI-E Frequency"*
I dont use those ports and still had 1 shutdown. So nothing to do with those. I believe you only get a boot issue with a Q-code if you increase BCLK while you use those ports!

*For everybody who didn't do this: I highly recommend to read the " C7H Enthusiast Highlights" link: http://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=154289&d=1524143181
Many questions/issues etc we are answering are all well documented in the pdf above!*



gupsterg said:


> CPU-Z v1.84.0 I think I'm on, non issue for me. HWINFO latest, again non issue. AIDA64 again latest beta, but only used for RAM bench, again non issue. I have done a AIDA64 bench, CPU-Z bench, CB15 and then stability tested for x hrs, as seen in screenie zips I have at time on same post had HWINFO open and multiple CPU-Z showing board/SPD info and no shutdowns. I have done also multiple times screenie with HWINFO+CPU-Z on a single post as well.
> 
> So far W7P x64, Linux Mint, on my OC profiles or stock CPU and OC RAM, had zero shutdowns.
> 
> My only issue with board misbehaving was on intial post, each time I took screenies in UEFI board reboot but not shutdown. As stated in thread I thought it was excessive chipset voltage. As Elmor cleared that up I believe it was just intial post gremlins, as not had the same occur again. So besides this board been flawless so far  .


Yep i see gup , but it is so coincidental only happend 2 times with cpu-z open (memory/spd tab)! But again can't say it for sure, will try to replicate or find it! 
Im also running alot benchmarks/test without any issue. Happened while idle only those SW's open. Strange anyways...  



hurricane28 said:


> Well good for you man, but the problem is that there are no USB drivers on my driver disc or on the Internet for this or non Wifi version which i find is weird. I also did fresh install of Windows 10 Pro and do the same as you described always.
> 
> I tried different drivers but they all install the driver from 2016 which is version 1.16.38.1. All USB ports working and have no noticeable difference if there is an MS or ASmedia driver installed so its no biggie, but these little things bug me and could be an indication of something wrong.
> 
> Perhaps @elmor can shed a light on this?


I got ya mate! But if its working then leave it.. hehe  Let me check when im behind that system which driver versions i have.!!



spyshagg said:


> Are PE levels modifiable?
> 
> Can I set a max multiplier for all-core boost and a max multiplier for single-core boost for any given PE ?
> If not, with the tools we have in the bios, how closely could this be achieved?
> PE4 boosts all-core voltage the right amount. But also boosts single-core voltage way to high.
> I would like to have single-core voltage from PE3 while maintaining all-core voltage from PE4, or, like I asked above, customize my PE3 level to increase all-core multiplier and voltage while maintaining the single-core config intact.


As far as i know you can tweak values in the CPB menu! But stilt and Asus already did the job for you in the PE presets they offer. 
Don't know if we can tweak on a later stage where we adjust the clocks for multi and single clock boost.
But this is exactly what SensMi and XFR are doing automatically. Those build in features (Nice AMD Magic) are checking and communicating between Mobo and CPU what your particular setup (eg: your silicon and vrm) can reach between safety walls! 



crakej said:


> I'll try this see what happens. I have a Microsoft Wireless Mobile Mouse 4000 if that means anything lol


Cool! Keep us updated!


----------



## wisepds

majestynl said:


> See post: http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...-vii-overclocking-thread-89.html#post27352857
> Also stated the the "C7H Enthusiast Highlights v03.pdf " as * "SATA6G_56 6 Gb/s X470 Don't use if adjusting PCI-E Frequency"*
> I dont use those ports and still had 1 shutdown. So nothing to do with those. I believe you only get a boot issue with a Q-code if you increase BCLK while you use those ports!
> 
> *For everybody who didn't do this: I highly recommend to read the " C7H Enthusiast Highlights" link: http://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=154289&d=1524143181
> Many questions/issues etc we are answering are all well documented in the pdf above!*
> 
> 
> 
> Yep i see gup , but it is so coincidental only happend 2 times with cpu-z open (memory/spd tab)! But again can't say it for sure, will try to replicate or find it!
> Im also running alot benchmarks/test without any issue. Happened while idle only those SW's open. Strange anyways...
> 
> 
> 
> I got ya mate! But if its working then leave it.. hehe  Let me check when im behind that system which driver versions i have.!!
> 
> 
> 
> As far as i know you can tweak values in the CPB menu! But stilt and Asus already did the job for you in the PE presets they offer.
> Don't know if we can tweak on a later stage where we adjust the clocks for multi and single clock boost.
> But this is exactly what SensMi and XFR are doing automatically. Those build in features (Nice AMD Magic) are checking and communicating between Mobo and CPU what your particular setup (eg: your silicon and vrm) can reach between safety walls!
> 
> 
> 
> Cool! Keep us updated!


Thank you!!! I'm going to read it!!!


----------



## wisepds

Nothing about shutdowns in that document... very interesting, right... but, why my pc shutdown?


----------



## Arat

crakej said:


> I'll try this see what happens. I have a Microsoft Wireless Mobile Mouse 4000 if that means anything lol


Maybe you know about that already: Sometimes there is an interference between USB 3 port frequencies and wireless transceivers resulting into choppy movements of mice. If you haven't excluded this possibility try an USB 2 port or even better try an USB 2 extension cord for the USB dongle of your mouse.


----------



## majestynl

wisepds said:


> Thank you!!! I'm going to read it!!!


YW  



wisepds said:


> Nothing about shutdowns in that document... very interesting, right... but, why my pc shutdown?


Thats exactly what i wrote! Nothing to do with shutdowns 
We don't know for now! We are trying to find the issue(s). Im very interested in more info while this happens.? 
Can you share more info, such as which SW was running etc etc. If everybody can share it we can find or replicate it sooner!
Thanks!




gupsterg said:


> I did a post attempt yesterday at 3533MHz, I had Q-Code: F9, AFAIK memory training issue. I believe when combined with 4.1GHz CPU OC I'm failing at 3533MHz posting successfully. I recall on same timings but 4.075GHz I did gain post into OS with 3533MHz.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 190465
> 
> 
> View attachment 190473


I also got those quick errors with 3533Mhz but i tried to run it with 14 14 14 14 28 42 TT! 
Will continue soon to crack 3533mhz down!

Just a quicky after i saw your screenie: did you increased your cad bus settings to 30Ohm on 3533 by purpose? or was it already on 30ohm on 3466?
While i was busy with 3466 finding the stable settings, cas bus didnt do the trick for me. I left it on 24ohm!


----------



## crakej

Arat said:


> Maybe you know about that already: Sometimes there is an interference between USB 3 port frequencies and wireless transceivers resulting into choppy movements of mice. If you haven't excluded this possibility try an USB 2 port or even better try an USB 2 extension cord for the USB dongle of your mouse.


Thanks - will try... I have tried before on USB2 and it was slightly better, but USB3 ports are really close by... glad it's not just me.


----------



## wisepds

*I don't know why*



majestynl said:


> YW
> 
> 
> 
> Thats exactly what i wrote! Nothing to do with shutdowns
> We don't know for now! We are trying to find the issue(s). Im very interested in more info while this happens.?
> Can you share more info, such as which SW was running etc etc. If everybody can share it we can find or replicate it sooner!
> Thanks!


In my case, all on auto, PE in level 2 (Not OC), and 8gb x 4 DDR4 3200 CL14 Samsung B-die with all timings from Ryzen Dram Calculator... rest of MB on AUTO, Windows 10 1803 install from 0, not an update. I have installed Asmedia USB 3.1 driver. AIO Kraken x72 on push and pull, ambient temp 22ºC and liquid temp 26ºC, CPU 31ºC (+/-). PSU Seasonic 80+ Titanium 750w. Ryzen 2700x. 

And shutdown doing NOTHING... i was on livingroom, and yesterday's shutdown was testing the cpu with Y-crunch . (No sense....)


----------



## spyshagg

majestynl said:


> See post: http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...-vii-overclocking-thread-89.html#post27352857
> Also stated the the "C7H Enthusiast Highlights v03.pdf " as * "SATA6G_56 6 Gb/s X470 Don't use if adjusting PCI-E Frequency"*
> I dont use those ports and still had 1 shutdown. So nothing to do with those. I believe you only get a boot issue with a Q-code if you increase BCLK while you use those ports!
> 
> *For everybody who didn't do this: I highly recommend to read the " C7H Enthusiast Highlights" link: http://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=154289&d=1524143181
> Many questions/issues etc we are answering are all well documented in the pdf above!*
> 
> 
> 
> Yep i see gup , but it is so coincidental only happend 2 times with cpu-z open (memory/spd tab)! But again can't say it for sure, will try to replicate or find it!
> Im also running alot benchmarks/test without any issue. Happened while idle only those SW's open. Strange anyways...
> 
> 
> 
> I got ya mate! But if its working then leave it.. hehe  Let me check when im behind that system which driver versions i have.!!
> 
> 
> 
> As far as i know you can tweak values in the CPB menu! But stilt and Asus already did the job for you in the PE presets they offer.
> Don't know if we can tweak on a later stage where we adjust the clocks for multi and single clock boost.
> But this is exactly what SensMi and XFR are doing automatically. Those build in features (Nice AMD Magic) are checking and communicating between Mobo and CPU what your particular setup (eg: your silicon and vrm) can reach between safety walls!
> 
> 
> 
> Cool! Keep us updated!


I'll check the CPB menu, thanks!


Its a shame about the SATA ports. I really need 5 working ports. I'm stuck at 101 BCLK because of this need. 
The alternative is to downgrade my RAID0 down from 4 to 3 SSD's only, or boot my computer without my 4TB HDD on and rely on hotplug.

A bit of an hassle. It was a pain already to drop 2 ports from the x370 prime (had 8) to the CH7


----------



## Gettz8488

@lordzed83 @gupsterg I like the testing you’ve done with llc my only question is with so many differentiating opinions on how llc works do both of you consider higher LLC safe to use? Keep in my mind I don’t have a custom loop I have a h115ai with noctua fans 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## lordzed83

Gettz8488 said:


> @lordzed83 @gupsterg I like the testing you’ve done with llc my only question is with so many differentiating opinions on how llc works do both of you consider higher LLC safe to use? Keep in my mind I don’t have a custom loop I have a h115ai with noctua fans
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


I generaly dont give a crap if it fries its on warranty and since i change stuff every year nothing ever blows up.

As long as temperatures on ibt stay sub 75c i consider it safe does not matter if its llc auto or 5.


----------



## lordzed83

spyshagg said:


> majestynl said:
> 
> 
> 
> See post: http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...-vii-overclocking-thread-89.html#post27352857
> Also stated the the "C7H Enthusiast Highlights v03.pdf " as * "SATA6G_56 6 Gb/s X470 Don't use if adjusting PCI-E Frequency"*
> I dont use those ports and still had 1 shutdown. So nothing to do with those. I believe you only get a boot issue with a Q-code if you increase BCLK while you use those ports!
> 
> *For everybody who didn't do this: I highly recommend to read the " C7H Enthusiast Highlights" link: http://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=154289&d=1524143181
> Many questions/issues etc we are answering are all well documented in the pdf above!*
> 
> 
> 
> Yep i see gup /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif, but it is so coincidental only happend 2 times with cpu-z open (memory/spd tab)! But again can't say it for sure, will try to replicate or find it!
> Im also running alot benchmarks/test without any issue. Happened while idle only those SW's open. Strange anyways... /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> 
> 
> I got ya mate! But if its working then leave it.. hehe /forum/images/smilies/tongue.gif Let me check when im behind that system which driver versions i have.!!
> 
> 
> 
> As far as i know you can tweak values in the CPB menu! But stilt and Asus already did the job for you in the PE presets they offer.
> Don't know if we can tweak on a later stage where we adjust the clocks for multi and single clock boost.
> But this is exactly what SensMi and XFR are doing automatically. Those build in features (Nice AMD Magic) are checking and communicating between Mobo and CPU what your particular setup (eg: your silicon and vrm) can reach between safety walls!
> 
> 
> 
> Cool! Keep us updated!
> 
> 
> 
> I'll check the CPB menu, thanks!
> 
> 
> Its a shame about the SATA ports. I really need 5 working ports. I'm stuck at 101 BCLK because of this need.
> The alternative is to downgrade my RAID0 down from 4 to 3 SSD's only, or boot my computer without my 4TB HDD on and rely on hotplug.
> 
> A bit of an hassle. It was a pain already to drop 2 ports from the x370 prime (had 😎 to the CH7
Click to expand...

Thing is i could bet that there is less than 10 people on ryzen using 4 ssd raid. Those type of users are on threadripper that got more pcie lines.


----------



## Gettz8488

So I’ve got a stable overclock at 1.344Vcore set with offset + and llc 3 today at 3200 cl 14. My temps in IBT max out at around 74C my cpu Watts go up to a max for 175Watts this is under avx load at 4.1ghz would you consider this safe for 24:7?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## kidchunk

*The Stilt: The memory controller*

"Despite the extremely welcome latency improvement in Pinnacle Ridge, the memory latency is unfortunately still < 38% higher on average (2133-3466MHz) than on its closest rival from Intel (Coffee Lake).

While the changes to the memory controller in Pinnacle Ridge do provide lower latency, unfortunately the highest achievable memory frequency seems to be exactly the same as on Summit and Raven Ridge parts. *A realistic expectation would be 3400 - 3533MHz* depending on the silicon quality, the motherboard and the DRAM modules used. Some CPU specimens featuring an exceptional memory controller might be able to reach 3600MHz while maintaining true stability, however all of the tested 2700X samples were limited to 3400 - 3533MHz on both Crosshair VII Hero and MSI B350I PRO AC motherboards, regardless of the settings or the memory modules used. The stability was determined using “Ram Test” utility, which obviously sets the bar for stability a lot higher than the tests methods other reviewers typically use to deem the memory as “stable” at certain frequency.

On the tested samples, the distribution of the maximum achievable memory frequency was following:

3400MHz – 12.5% of the samples
3466MHz – 25.0% of the samples
3533MHz – 62.5% of the samples

There are clear differences in how the memory controller behaves on the different CPU specimens. The majority of the CPUs will do 3466MHz or higher at 1.050V SoC voltage, however the difference lies in how the different specimens react to the voltage. Some of the specimens seem scale with the increased SoC voltage, while the others simply refuse to scale at all or in some cases even illustrate negative scaling. All of the tested samples illustrated negative scaling (i.e. more errors or failures to train) when higher than 1.150V SoC was used. In all cases the maximum memory frequency was achieved at =< 1.100V SoC voltage.

AMD has revised the memory layout design guidance with Pinnacle Ridge targeting motherboards (i.e. 400-series) in an effort to potentially make the higher memory frequencies possible.

While this might theoretically improve the frequencies on some motherboards, generally the frequency limiting factor is the memory controller itself and not the topology the motherboard uses for memory signaling. Because of that, the newer 400-series motherboards alone should not be expected to provide improved memory frequencies at least by a significant margin."

*Source:* https://forums.anandtech.com/posts/39391302/


----------



## Mandarb

So far I am happy. I'd say my RAM is running stable 😄

http://imgur.com/gallery/SDOTPe1

This is 2x Trident Z 16GB 3200MHz CL14 running at Ryzen DRAM calc V1 settings with tight Trfc timings. SOC is at 1.025V and RAM at 1.365V.

But most importantly: no cold boot issues and getting stuck on the ROC splash screen anymore. C6H is on it's way into warranty service. 

CPU is running at PE2 with auto and -0.075V offset. Tested 30min all core and single core (2 threads) on my worst core (#8).

I have had so many issues with my C6H that I thought was due to immature BIOS, but got worse over time, that I'm just glad I can push a button and boot instead of cursing for 30min to 1h.


----------



## gupsterg

majestynl said:


> Yep i see gup , but it is so coincidental only happend 2 times with cpu-z open (memory/spd tab)! But again can't say it for sure, will try to replicate or find it!
> Im also running alot benchmarks/test without any issue. Happened while idle only those SW's open. Strange anyways...


I agree strange  .

Do you by any chance have AURA or something else like that installed/running in background?



crakej said:


> I did exactly the same as you for USB.
> 
> I'm running 3533 this morning with new cpu settings - will not boot with geardown=off - it just stops at the 'Press F2 or Del for Bios' screen with code 0D.
> 
> done a few basic tests - IBT basic test, running P95 now in background just to get an idea of stability (instability lol),, did an Aida speed test which looked ok, but not much better than 3466CL14
> 
> So, running tests @ 3533CL14,15,15,15,30,46 CPU @ 1.39v LLC auto. SoC is still at 0.96v and tRFC 339 (191ns) - This kit seems to like tRFC at 190ns even though spec is 350ns. I do wonder if this might be part of the unique way Ryzen uses DDR4.
> 
> P95 still going well 10 minutes in. Will report later.
> 
> Update: P95 lost workers after 20 mins - still, not bad for my first go, it's not totally unstable at all! I wonder if that more VCore that's wanted, of if I need more SoC? .... I will find out!


I think you'll crack it soon  .



Gettz8488 said:


> @lordzed83 @gupsterg I like the testing you’ve done with llc my only question is with so many differentiating opinions on how llc works do both of you consider higher LLC safe to use? Keep in my mind I don’t have a custom loop I have a h115ai with noctua fans


Personally for 24/7 use no I don't wish to use LLC above [Auto], as to how safe x setting is I dunno. The image below is based on my CPU being set at 1.281V as I used for 4.075GHz for quite a bit of testing. Now you can see as loading increase from an app VDROOP occurs more. As stated below this is following the specification by AMD that motherboard maker has done.

Imagine the drooped voltage as a rubber band, so once you have that loading and CPU come of load, the VRM may not react quick enough, it will still be trying to compensate for the original load, so voltage for xx microseconds will bounce up like a rubber band. This bounce up is what will cause damage. Now you'd think to yourself ahh this is only microseconds, but imagine how many times through normal usage the CPU changes between loaded and unloaded. So over the course of running it you perhaps will have inadvertently been firing excessive voltage.

Buildzoid has a video on youtube, he fried a VEGA GPU by his hard mods. What was happening was at initial boot of GPU for very small time it was getting zapped with excessive voltage. Then by the time the GPU started acting freaky and he decided to investigate it was too late, the GPU became dead very soon after that.









I'm happy running my CPU on [Auto] LLC for 24/7 use. I set VID as needed. Using increased LLC fools a user into thinking they used lower VID. You stated before your OC breaks when you set LLC at [Auto], do an experiment, findout what voltage you need to stabilise CPU with LLC [Auto], this will somewhat give you an idea how LLC increase is affecting VCORE  .


----------



## Gettz8488

gupsterg said:


> I agree strange [emoji4] .
> 
> 
> 
> Do you by any chance have AURA or something else like that installed/running in background?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think you'll crack it soon [emoji4] .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Personally for 24/7 use no I don't wish to use LLC above [Auto], as to how safe x setting is I dunno. The image below is based on my CPU being set at 1.281V as I used for 4.075GHz for quite a bit of testing. Now you can see as loading increase from an app VDROOP occurs more. As stated below this is following the specification by AMD that motherboard maker has done.
> 
> 
> 
> Imagine the drooped voltage as a rubber band, so once you have that loading and CPU come of load, the VRM may not react quick enough, it will still be trying to compensate for the original load, so voltage for xx microseconds will bounce up like a rubber band. This bounce up is what will cause damage. Now you'd think to yourself ahh this is only microseconds, but imagine how many times through normal usage the CPU changes between loaded and unloaded. So over the course of running it you perhaps will have inadvertently been firing excessive voltage.
> 
> 
> 
> Buildzoid has a video on youtube, he fried a VEGA GPU by his hard mods. What was happening was at initial boot of GPU for very small time it was getting zapped with excessive voltage. Then by the time the GPU started acting freaky and he decided to investigate it was too late, the GPU became dead very soon after that.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 191129
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm happy running my CPU on [Auto] LLC for 24/7 use. I set VID as needed. Using increased LLC fools a user into thinking they used lower VID. You stated before your OC breaks when you set LLC at [Auto], do an experiment, findout what voltage you need to stabilise CPU with LLC [Auto], this will somewhat give you an idea how LLC increase is affecting VCORE [emoji6] .




Thanks for the thorough explanation I believe for 4.1 my cpu will at least need 1.4 Vcore Offset I don’t have a very good chip that’s with auto llc For stable 4.1 my vdroop needs to be 1.312 under full load to be stable llc 3 is the closes llc to auto giving me 1.3 under 100% load it might be better to just leave it on auto for my chip idk my chip boost to 4ghz on auto 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Gettz8488

Double post


----------



## CJMitsuki

lordzed83 said:


> You are STILL NOT READING THIS TOPIC
> 
> Its the Windows !!!! As soon as I updated to new version last night had my first EVER random shotdown and i dont use any crappy corsair software at all.
> 
> @*CJMitsuki*
> Hmm somehow over 10 or 15 years of benching and ram testing my system files never got corrupted not a single time. Only time they died was when OCZ ssd packed up while I was playing WoW LOL
> 
> 
> @*gupsterg*
> Anyhow on my side yesterday I passed 2500% ramtest 3600cl15 1.465 on memories. I had 1 error around 1500% with 1.55 so bumped and all nice. But Infinity fabric cant handle it at 4250.... Ill try pumping more volts in to cpu maybe that will help. Any ideas ??


Well, there are plenty of documented cases all over the internet of it happening but It could very well be the same problems with the tridentz rgb and lighting software that was supposedly fixed awhile back because I rewrote the SPD only to see that it got corrupted almost immediately last night. Im uninstalling every piece of software related to rgb and we will see if it happens again. If it does happen to be the RGB then I will not get the RGB versions of TridentZ memory again. It happened with my 3200mhz kit too about 6 months ago. The CRC in the hex editor looked like XMas lights from all of the errors in the SPD.

Below is my corrupted data in hex editor, hopefully getting rid of the rgb software will fix the issue...


----------



## crakej

CJMitsuki said:


> Well, there are plenty of documented cases all over the internet of it happening but It could very well be the same problems with the tridentz rgb and lighting software that was supposedly fixed awhile back because I rewrote the SPD only to see that it got corrupted almost immediately last night. Im uninstalling every piece of software related to rgb and we will see if it happens again. If it does happen to be the RGB then I will not get the RGB versions of TridentZ memory again. It happened with my 3200mhz kit too about 6 months ago. The CRC in the hex editor looked like XMas lights from all of the errors in the SPD.
> 
> Below is my corrupted data in hex editor, hopefully getting rid of the rgb software will fix the issue...


You know what, I had this a while back and it's most definitely Aura - uninstall it and you will find your SPD is normal. You can set Aura to what you want then remove it. SPD looks like it's changing as the colours change!


----------



## chakku

Can I call my timings stable with 2000% on HCI Memtest with dual rank? I set it to stop at 2000% but didn't realize it would actually close all the instances so couldn't get a screenshot, but up to ~1950% on all 16 of them there were zero errors.


----------



## VicsPC

chakku said:


> Can I call my timings stable with 2000% on HCI Memtest with dual rank? I set it to stop at 2000% but didn't realize it would actually close all the instances so couldn't get a screenshot, but up to ~1950% on all 16 of them there were zero errors.


Yes that is MORE then enough. Just make sure to check for WHEA errors as well and you're good to go. Even HCI themselves say that 400% is plenty. 2000% just means it did 20 passes so it's more then enough. I myself only do it to 400% and have never ever had any issues. All memory testers are different but HCI seems to work very well. I usually HCI mem test then do a real bench for 30mins then just use it as i normally would. The biggest hint that there might be a problem is WHEA errors.


----------



## CJMitsuki

crakej said:


> You know what, I had this a while back and it's most definitely Aura - uninstall it and you will find your SPD is normal. You can set Aura to what you want then remove it. SPD looks like it's changing as the colours change!


Funny thing is that I dont use Aura and never use any RGB software but when it is installed it also installs a service that is set on Automatic Start (with delay) so even if you never even use it the service will still be accessing the SPD. Honestly its a horrible design for controlling RGB on memory. It should be controlled with a completely separate chip unrelated to the SPD accessed with the software. As much as these companies are making on memory right now they wouldnt even notice the extra manufacturing cost.


----------



## VPII

gupsterg said:


> I agree strange  .
> 
> Do you by any chance have AURA or something else like that installed/running in background?
> 
> 
> 
> I think you'll crack it soon  .
> 
> 
> 
> Personally for 24/7 use no I don't wish to use LLC above [Auto], as to how safe x setting is I dunno. The image below is based on my CPU being set at 1.281V as I used for 4.075GHz for quite a bit of testing. Now you can see as loading increase from an app VDROOP occurs more. As stated below this is following the specification by AMD that motherboard maker has done.
> 
> Imagine the drooped voltage as a rubber band, so once you have that loading and CPU come of load, the VRM may not react quick enough, it will still be trying to compensate for the original load, so voltage for xx microseconds will bounce up like a rubber band. This bounce up is what will cause damage. Now you'd think to yourself ahh this is only microseconds, but imagine how many times through normal usage the CPU changes between loaded and unloaded. So over the course of running it you perhaps will have inadvertently been firing excessive voltage.
> 
> Buildzoid has a video on youtube, he fried a VEGA GPU by his hard mods. What was happening was at initial boot of GPU for very small time it was getting zapped with excessive voltage. Then by the time the GPU started acting freaky and he decided to investigate it was too late, the GPU became dead very soon after that.
> 
> View attachment 191129
> 
> 
> I'm happy running my CPU on [Auto] LLC for 24/7 use. I set VID as needed. Using increased LLC fools a user into thinking they used lower VID. You stated before your OC breaks when you set LLC at [Auto], do an experiment, findout what voltage you need to stabilise CPU with LLC [Auto], this will somewhat give you an idea how LLC increase is affecting VCORE  .


 @gupsterg I really do value your input and I appreciate all that you share here. I've done an experiment with my multimeter and various LLC settings and what I found was as follow. Now understand I use LLC 5 as a good friend of mine (been in the industry for years) told me to use it and after using it I found that my overclock is rock solid. My cpu is clocked as follow:

BCLK - 100.4 x 42.5 = 4266mhz

Vcore in bios set at 1.325V

LLC Auto - Vcore under P95 load fluctuate between 1.318 and 1.319V
LLC Auto - Vcore without any load fluctuate between 1.312 and 1.317V

LLC 1 - I did not test as LLC2 failed soon after starting P95

LLC 2 - Vcore under P95 dropped to 1.241v and soon there after the system hanged
LLC 2 - Vcore without any load stayed at 1.312V

LLC 3 - Vcore under P95 dropped to 1.276 but system stable for few minutes
LLC 3 - Vcore without any load stayed at 1.312V

LLC 4 - Vcore under P95 load dropped to 1.293V
LLC 4 - Vcore without any load stayed at 1.312V

LLC 5 - Vcore under P95 load climbed to 1.318V but stayed there all through
LLC 5 - Vcore without any load stayed at 1.312V

As I've stated all these readings was done with a multimeter on the power belt. Now I've run this overclock for more that 1 Hour P95 stable using LLC 5. I'll drop now to LLC4 to see whether it is still stable and then work from there to find the lowest stable vcore for this overclock. What is a little concerning to me about LLC set to Auto is that the vcore jump around without any load, almost up to the point where it sits under full load.


----------



## PeerlessGirl

Hey guys,

Probably simple question but:

How do you move the M.2 heatsink from the top to the bottom slot? It looks like the screws it uses are longer and use a different threading than the standard M.2 screws. Do I need to try and "unscrew" the stand-offs it screws into and move those down also?


----------



## VPII

PeerlessGirl said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> Probably simple question but:
> 
> How do you move the M.2 heatsink from the top to the bottom slot? It looks like the screws it uses are longer and use a different threading than the standard M.2 screws. Do I need to try and "unscrew" the stand-offs it screws into and move those down also?


Thread I thinkis the same.... I just swopped it down to the other slot with my M.2 ssd connected in it. It should work.


----------



## hurricane28

PeerlessGirl said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> Probably simple question but:
> 
> How do you move the M.2 heatsink from the top to the bottom slot? It looks like the screws it uses are longer and use a different threading than the standard M.2 screws. Do I need to try and "unscrew" the stand-offs it screws into and move those down also?


Its the same, i moved my Nvme drive to the bottom slot and could mount the heat sink too, no problems there.


----------



## Mandarb

VPII said:


> @gupsterg I really do value your input and I appreciate all that you share here. I've done an experiment with my multimeter and various LLC settings and what I found was as follow. Now understand I use LLC 5 as a good friend of mine (been in the industry for years) told me to use it and after using it I found that my overclock is rock solid. My cpu is clocked as follow:
> 
> BCLK - 100.4 x 42.5 = 4266mhz
> 
> Vcore in bios set at 1.325V
> 
> LLC Auto - Vcore under P95 load fluctuate between 1.318 and 1.319V
> LLC Auto - Vcore without any load fluctuate between 1.312 and 1.317V
> 
> LLC 1 - I did not test as LLC2 failed soon after starting P95
> 
> LLC 2 - Vcore under P95 dropped to 1.241v and soon there after the system hanged
> LLC 2 - Vcore without any load stayed at 1.312V
> 
> LLC 3 - Vcore under P95 dropped to 1.276 but system stable for few minutes
> LLC 3 - Vcore without any load stayed at 1.312V
> 
> LLC 4 - Vcore under P95 load dropped to 1.293V
> LLC 4 - Vcore without any load stayed at 1.312V
> 
> LLC 5 - Vcore under P95 load climbed to 1.318V but stayed there all through
> LLC 5 - Vcore without any load stayed at 1.312V
> 
> As I've stated all these readings was done with a multimeter on the power belt. Now I've run this overclock for more that 1 Hour P95 stable using LLC 5. I'll drop now to LLC4 to see whether it is still stable and then work from there to find the lowest stable vcore for this overclock. What is a little concerning to me about LLC set to Auto is that the vcore jump around without any load, almost up to the point where it sits under full load.



Just keep in mind that a DMM is inherently inert, meaning it won't show you ripples or spikes. You would actually need an oscilloscope to capture this. 

All the voltages you provided were measured at the probelt point?

If so you should check the software Vcore and compare it to what you measure, which should be close or equal to the TVI_SV12 Vcore reading. 

Your droop is between Vcore (what the VRMs deliver and the measurement/TVI_SV12, as that is what arrives in the CPU.


----------



## majestynl

Mandarb said:


> Just keep in mind that a DMM is inherently inert, meaning it won't show you ripples or spikes. You would actually need an oscilloscope to capture this.
> 
> All the voltages you provided were measured at the probelt point?
> 
> If so you should check the software Vcore and compare it to what you measure, which should be close or equal to the TVI_SV12 Vcore reading.
> 
> Your droop is between Vcore (what the VRMs deliver and the measurement/TVI_SV12, as that is what arrives in the CPU.


Thats Correct! 

And this subject is coming back and back again...heheh... Using LLC "could" bring some risk with it as everybody knows this. But their are more things while OC'ing that could bring some extra risks  This subject is mentioned 100x by gup/stilt etc etc! You can check those out and decide for yourself!

But from my side of view, i'm overclocking so i take risks. I have a lot of systems and for me its not really important if something happens bad. I already fried al lot of HW'S.(Not that many CPU's).

I have been building PCs for 20 years now, and OC around 10 years. Most of my OC's are with using of LLC, never had any issues with it so far. Some of them i build for my nephews and they literally abusing it with 24/7 hardcore gaming and or streaming etc. None of them had any issues or CPU degradation's. I don't say GO USE LLC. Its your own choice!!!! 

So again its a choice for yourself. If you want to do it more save, then don't use it. If you only have 1pc for 24/7 use and you cant effort a new one..Then again don't use it. But for those i would say: Don't OC  If you don't give a s..t , then its your choice again.... Im doing this for fun and i'm fully aware of the potential risks with it.....

Also ask these 2 questions for yourself: 1) Why none of the manufacturers ever explain the real risks of LLC ? Probably because the whole OC thing brings naturally extra risks or degradations 
2) Why manufacturers build the LLC option for us? Probably because it helps in some cases....

So can we please leave this subject for what it is...


----------



## gupsterg

Gettz8488 said:


> Thanks for the thorough explanation I believe for 4.1 my cpu will at least need 1.4 Vcore Offset I don’t have a very good chip that’s with auto llc For stable 4.1 my vdroop needs to be 1.312 under full load to be stable llc 3 is the closes llc to auto giving me 1.3 under 100% load it might be better to just leave it on auto for my chip idk my chip boost to 4ghz on auto


NP  .

Note in the graphic differing apps load the CPU differently. So greater the loading equals greater amps/watts drawn, this makes VDROOP occur more. So if using LLC: [Auto] you have to target biggest drawing app IMO, so then you've accounted for worst case. Other lower loads fall in to place then.

You may find when you use LLC 3 you get VDROOPED voltage of 1.312V in most if not all load situations of CPU. So when you go to LLC [Auto] and you want VDROOPED voltage of 1.312V you will most probably need to set ~1.4V VID.

For example VID of 1.318V set in UEFI for PState 0 results in ~1.23xV on ProbeIt point when CPU loaded with P95 v28.10B1 128K FFT in place.



CJMitsuki said:


> Well, there are plenty of documented cases all over the internet of it happening but It could very well be the same problems with the tridentz rgb and lighting software that was supposedly fixed awhile back because I rewrote the SPD only to see that it got corrupted almost immediately last night. Im uninstalling every piece of software related to rgb and we will see if it happens again. If it does happen to be the RGB then I will not get the RGB versions of TridentZ memory again. It happened with my 3200mhz kit too about 6 months ago. The CRC in the hex editor looked like XMas lights from all of the errors in the SPD.
> 
> Below is my corrupted data in hex editor, hopefully getting rid of the rgb software will fix the issue...


Elmor had AURA fixed way back when this issue was happening on C6H. You did use latest AURA?



VPII said:


> @gupsterg I really do value your input and I appreciate all that you share here. I've done an experiment with my multimeter and various LLC settings and what I found was as follow. Now understand I use LLC 5 as a good friend of mine (been in the industry for years) told me to use it and after using it I found that my overclock is rock solid. My cpu is clocked as follow:
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> BCLK - 100.4 x 42.5 = 4266mhz
> 
> Vcore in bios set at 1.325V
> 
> LLC Auto - Vcore under P95 load fluctuate between 1.318 and 1.319V
> LLC Auto - Vcore without any load fluctuate between 1.312 and 1.317V
> 
> LLC 1 - I did not test as LLC2 failed soon after starting P95
> 
> LLC 2 - Vcore under P95 dropped to 1.241v and soon there after the system hanged
> LLC 2 - Vcore without any load stayed at 1.312V
> 
> LLC 3 - Vcore under P95 dropped to 1.276 but system stable for few minutes
> LLC 3 - Vcore without any load stayed at 1.312V
> 
> LLC 4 - Vcore under P95 load dropped to 1.293V
> LLC 4 - Vcore without any load stayed at 1.312V
> 
> LLC 5 - Vcore under P95 load climbed to 1.318V but stayed there all through
> LLC 5 - Vcore without any load stayed at 1.312V
> 
> 
> 
> As I've stated all these readings was done with a multimeter on the power belt. Now I've run this overclock for more that 1 Hour P95 stable using LLC 5. I'll drop now to LLC4 to see whether it is still stable and then work from there to find the lowest stable vcore for this overclock. What is a little concerning to me about LLC set to Auto is that the vcore jump around without any load, almost up to the point where it sits under full load.


I only know that people in the "industry" have many a time explained what LLC does and it's affects. The information imparted regarded AM4 has come from The Stilt and [email protected] Unless you are using really high end measuring equipment, like say a 5.5 digit DMM or oscilloscope you may not see the overshoot. 

I do apologise, but I must stop with LLC discussion, it goes over and over in each thread. I have linked what I regard great information regarding the AM4 LL spec as shared by The Stilt previously in this thread and the ROG C7H OP has it. Just in case you are unaware of his history with AMD see some of this past activities.

https://translate.google.com/transl...md-trinity-makin-mendekati-8-ghz/&prev=search

https://www.techpowerup.com/186056/amd-super-pi-history-to-be-rewritten-courtesy-the-stilt

https://www.techpowerup.com/204656/the-stilt-drives-amd-fx-8370-to-8722-78-mhz

This wiki on LLC is also good.


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> NP  .
> 
> I do apologise, but I must stop with LLC discussion, it goes over and over in each thread.


Agree! me2 



gupsterg said:


> I agree strange  .
> Do you by any chance have AURA or something else like that installed/running in background?
> I think you'll crack it soon  .


No i haven't installed any AURA SW on this bench! Only few bench/test sw and 2 games to test 


ps: Lets talk about something else...Any updates regarding 3533Mhz Ram?... 
Last night i was busy with BCLK.. will share soon some info and results.
But first need to install some new fans and drain/refill the WC again


----------



## CJMitsuki

gupsterg said:


> NP  .
> 
> Note in the graphic differing apps load the CPU differently. So greater the loading equals greater amps/watts drawn, this makes VDROOP occur more. So if using LLC: [Auto] you have to target biggest drawing app IMO, so then you've accounted for worst case. Other lower loads fall in to place then.
> 
> You may find when you use LLC 3 you get VDROOPED voltage of 1.312V in most if not all load situations of CPU. So when you go to LLC [Auto] and you want VDROOPED voltage of 1.312V you will most probably need to set ~1.4V VID.
> 
> For example VID of 1.318V set in UEFI for PState 0 results in ~1.23xV on ProbeIt point when CPU loaded with P95 v28.10B1 128K FFT in place.
> 
> 
> 
> Elmor had AURA fixed way back when this issue was happening on C6H. You did use latest AURA?
> 
> 
> 
> I only know that people in the "industry" have many a time explained what LLC does and it's affects. The information imparted regarded AM4 has come from The Stilt and [email protected] Unless you are using really high end measuring equipment, like say a 5.5 digit DMM or oscilloscope you may not see the overshoot.
> 
> I do apologise, but I must stop with LLC discussion, it goes over and over in each thread. I have linked what I regard great information regarding the AM4 LL spec as shared by The Stilt previously in this thread and the ROG C7H OP has it. Just in case you are unaware of his history with AMD see some of this past activities.
> 
> https://translate.google.com/transl...md-trinity-makin-mendekati-8-ghz/&prev=search
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/186056/amd-super-pi-history-to-be-rewritten-courtesy-the-stilt
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/204656/the-stilt-drives-amd-fx-8370-to-8722-78-mhz
> 
> This wiki on LLC is also good.



Yes, it is latest Aura downloaded from Grid app but I cant be certain yet that it is Aura until I give it some time without the app and then it could very well be another RGB app. I doubt Razer Synapse would even have a way to interact with the RAM lighting though. I have repaired the SPD so we shall see what happens throughout the week.


----------



## crakej

CJMitsuki said:


> Yes, it is latest Aura downloaded from Grid app but I cant be certain yet that it is Aura until I give it some time without the app and then it could very well be another RGB app. I doubt Razer Synapse would even have a way to interact with the RAM lighting though. I have repaired the SPD so we shall see what happens throughout the week.


I found I still had problems after the Aura fix - not sure it's just an Aura problem....

I found that when Aura software was removed, I then got correct readings from Thaiphoon - instantly. For me, it only looked like the SPD information was corrupt *while* Aura was running. Aura was not actually messing it up at all - it just looked like it when it was running.

Did you check for the corruption after you removed Aura? I never had to fix my SPD in the end - Thaiphoon could read it fine with Aura off.


----------



## gupsterg

majestynl said:


> No i haven't installed any AURA SW on this bench! Only few bench/test sw and 2 games to test
> 
> 
> ps: Lets talk about something else...Any updates regarding 3533Mhz Ram?...
> Last night i was busy with BCLK.. will share soon some info and results.
> But first need to install some new fans and drain/refill the WC again


OK, I'm gonna install AURA today to get rid of RGB rainbow on board and set to static red. Will image my OS first, install AURA and then revert back to image.

No other OC progress on my end yet. I've more just been using rig for WinOS/Linux TBH. I've been tinkering with Threadripper past day or so now. I will tinker with C7H soon  . Somewhat interested in trying my own PE setups as well besides using the presets. How's it going with you, any further gains?



CJMitsuki said:


> Yes, it is latest Aura downloaded from Grid app but I cant be certain yet that it is Aura until I give it some time without the app and then it could very well be another RGB app. I doubt Razer Synapse would even have a way to interact with the RAM lighting though. I have repaired the SPD so we shall see what happens throughout the week.


OK, cheers for info  . Dunno what else it could be  .


----------



## VPII

gupsterg said:


> NP  .
> 
> Note in the graphic differing apps load the CPU differently. So greater the loading equals greater amps/watts drawn, this makes VDROOP occur more. So if using LLC: [Auto] you have to target biggest drawing app IMO, so then you've accounted for worst case. Other lower loads fall in to place then.
> 
> You may find when you use LLC 3 you get VDROOPED voltage of 1.312V in most if not all load situations of CPU. So when you go to LLC [Auto] and you want VDROOPED voltage of 1.312V you will most probably need to set ~1.4V VID.
> 
> For example VID of 1.318V set in UEFI for PState 0 results in ~1.23xV on ProbeIt point when CPU loaded with P95 v28.10B1 128K FFT in place.
> 
> 
> 
> Elmor had AURA fixed way back when this issue was happening on C6H. You did use latest AURA?
> 
> 
> 
> I only know that people in the "industry" have many a time explained what LLC does and it's affects. The information imparted regarded AM4 has come from The Stilt and [email protected] Unless you are using really high end measuring equipment, like say a 5.5 digit DMM or oscilloscope you may not see the overshoot.
> 
> I do apologise, but I must stop with LLC discussion, it goes over and over in each thread. I have linked what I regard great information regarding the AM4 LL spec as shared by The Stilt previously in this thread and the ROG C7H OP has it. Just in case you are unaware of his history with AMD see some of this past activities.
> 
> https://translate.google.com/transl...md-trinity-makin-mendekati-8-ghz/&prev=search
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/186056/amd-super-pi-history-to-be-rewritten-courtesy-the-stilt
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/204656/the-stilt-drives-amd-fx-8370-to-8722-78-mhz
> 
> This wiki on LLC is also good.


I think the point of my post was missed... a couple days ago I was asked by another member to do the test with the multi which is why I've done it.

Whether I agree with using the " L " word thing is irrelevant. Oh Happy days....

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## ScomComputers

2700X vs. 8700K...face to face...


----------



## sonic2911

Never had smooth bios update with my c7h. Bios updating loop, or just stay there forever (at least one night), enter the bios with different qcode everytime it’s stuck...totally crap -,- my old board even more stable


----------



## VicsPC

So ive got my C7H on the box with my 1700x in it, flashback was done and worked but i cannot get the board to power up at all. Everything is plugged in and pressing the start button does nothing. All the LEDs are flashing, i just tested the PSU with my dmm and getting 12/5/3v when shorting out the green wire and ground but when hooked up to the motherboard just does not power up. Am i missing something?


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> OK, I'm gonna install AURA today to get rid of RGB rainbow on board and set to static red. Will image my OS first, install AURA and then revert back to image.
> 
> No other OC progress on my end yet. I've more just been using rig for WinOS/Linux TBH. I've been tinkering with Threadripper past day or so now. I will tinker with C7H soon  . Somewhat interested in trying my own PE setups as well besides using the presets. How's it going with you, any further gains?


Aha oke! NP! I was busy with BCLK with PE, after that going to see what i can do with PB settings! 
maybe if i got bored, i will try the memory again. But will keep updating... 

Good luck mate!




sonic2911 said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Never had smooth bios update with my c7h. Bios updating loop, or just stay there forever (at least one night), enter the bios with different qcode everytime it’s stuck...totally crap -,- my old board even more stable


Are you using the same windows/os install USB for flashing the BIOS? Cant say for sure if that's OK? But I always use a clean formatted FAT32 (standard) when i update in EZ Flash (bios), never had issues.
What you also could try is to flash true the back of the mobo!


----------



## majestynl

VicsPC said:


> So ive got my C7H on the box with my 1700x in it, flashback was done and worked but i cannot get the board to power up at all. Everything is plugged in and pressing the start button does nothing. All the LEDs are flashing, i just tested the PSU with my dmm and getting 12/5/3v when shorting out the green wire and ground but when hooked up to the motherboard just does not power up. Am i missing something?


Re-seat your CPU and memory pls! Check all cables again! and update us!


----------



## kazablanka

Guys does anyone know if asynchronous mode is locked in bios for the first gen ryzen ?


----------



## sonic2911

majestynl said:


> Aha oke! NP! I was busy with BCLK with PE, after that going to see what i can do with PB settings!
> 
> maybe if i got bored, i will try the memory again. But will keep updating...
> 
> 
> 
> Good luck mate!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you using the same windows/os install USB for flashing the BIOS? Cant say for sure if that's OK? But I always use a clean formatted FAT32 (standard) when i update in EZ Flash (bios), never had issues.
> 
> What you also could try is to flash true the back of the mobo!




I did use the same os usb, even file on ssd/hdd. But I think because of the beta 0601 version. I have just tried again, latest bios on asus site, and flashback method. It works now!!!


----------



## crakej

Continuing with my 3533 tests this morning - just looking to see if I can stabilize with SoC and/or VCore, if not I will have to try some other magic! It's really close though, passing 3000% RamTest and 30 mins P95 before a couple of threads dropped out. Will update as I go.


----------



## sonic2911

Nvm


----------



## majestynl

sonic2911 said:


> I did use the same os usb, even file on ssd/hdd. But I think because of the beta 0601 version. I have just tried again, latest bios on asus site, and flashback method. It works now!!!


Dont think it has something to do with 0601. I flashed that bios at least 10x in EZFlash and flashback method. Maybe the pre-installed bios had an issue or again your USB was the issue. Cause for flashback you needed to rename the bios file! Anyways.. you are OK now ... Good luck!



sonic2911 said:


> Do you guys use the asus grid?


Nope! don't want any unnecessary sw over here!



crakej said:


> Continuing with my 3533 tests this morning - just looking to see if I can stabilize with SoC and/or VCore, if not I will have to try some other magic! It's really close though, passing 3000% RamTest and 30 mins P95 before a couple of threads dropped out. Will update as I go.


Thats good news! What voltage/soc and timings are you using. Able to make some screenies?


----------



## VicsPC

majestynl said:


> Re-seat your CPU and memory pls! Check all cables again! and update us!


Well turns out the start button is completely useless unless the power header is attached lol. I moved it closer to my case, plugged in the HD/RESET/POWER/LED header into the board, pressed the power button on my case and turned right on, pressed the start button the board as well and that turned on. A bit odd that it didn't boot up without being attached to that, but it booted up into BIOS detected my CPU and ram no problem. So at least it's not DOA, now will have to wait for my 2700x and will throw it into the case. Such a weird one.


----------



## majestynl

VicsPC said:


> Well turns out the start button is completely useless unless the power header is attached lol. I moved it closer to my case, plugged in the HD/RESET/POWER/LED header into the board, pressed the power button on my case and turned right on, pressed the start button the board as well and that turned on. A bit odd that it didn't boot up without being attached to that, but it booted up into BIOS detected my CPU and ram no problem. So at least it's not DOA, now will have to wait for my 2700x and will throw it into the case. Such a weird one.


hmm yeap normally it doesn't need those pins to attach you would say if the mobo has a power button, didn't try this on this board!
but what i know for sure is, when i had those shutdowns. None of my buttons worked. Needed to unplug power cable from psu, wait few seconds and then plug power cable back so i can boot again! Even when the leds where burning on the mobo 

anyways...you are up and running... good luck!


----------



## VicsPC

majestynl said:


> hmm yeap normally it doesn't need those pins to attach you would say if the mobo has a power button, didn't try this on this board!
> but what i know for sure is, when i had those shutdowns. None of my buttons worked. Needed to unplug power cable from psu, wait few seconds and then plug power cable back so i can boot again! Even when the leds where burning on the mobo
> 
> anyways...you are up and running... good luck!


Well I'm back on my crosshair VI for now, just wanted to update the BIOS on this and make sure it wasn't DOA. All the LEDs came on which i found weird if the PSU was at fault haha. START button even lit up so was so weird it wouldnt turn on, even tried shorting out the +/- for the power button and that didn't even make it boot so it was very awkward. I'm hoping it's not another issue or something but did boot, did shut off and the start button worked once the front IO header was plugged in so i have no idea.


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> Thats good news! What voltage/soc and timings are you using. Able to make some screenies?


Have to pop out for a bit, but testing with CPU at 1.393 (same as 3466) and a bump of SoC to just over 1.0v and a bump in RAM volts to 1.4100v - extra CPU v made it crash.

Have just completed over an hour of P95 and going to leave it doing RamTest, but here's what I have so far...


----------



## Skanic

I have a 2700X, memory C16 3266mhz and a NZXT Kraken X62 and when I use the XFR 2 override I don't get any boosts for example, all cores will always stay on 4,075 ghz this is on 100 BCLK, 37 Multiplier and Performancer enhancer on level 3 active and Core Performance boost enabled. 
I am using the Ryzen Balanced powerplan, and I never see the cpu downclock to like say 1.3 ghz or boost the single core up to 4.35ghz when benching in CB15 on single core. I compared my scores to the ones i saw in der8auer's video, and I always score much lower than him.


----------



## MacG32

Skanic said:


> I have a 2700X, memory C16 3266mhz and a NZXT Kraken X62 and when I use the XFR 2 override I don't get any boosts for example, all cores will always stay on 4,075 ghz this is on 100 BCLK, 37 Multiplier and Performancer enhancer on level 3 active and Core Performance boost enabled.
> I am using the Ryzen Balanced powerplan, and I never see the cpu downclock to like say 1.3 ghz or boost the single core up to 4.35ghz when benching in CB15 on single core. I compared my scores to the ones i saw in der8auer's video, and I always score much lower than him.



Check pages 5 and 6 of the "C7H Enthusiast Highlights v03.pdf" posted at the bottom of the first post of the thread. There are the BIOS settings used on page 6 and the power profile to use on page 5.


----------



## masterkaj

I read this tip earlier but I finally needed to use it: Reset your bios to default optimized settings if you find that your previously stable overclock is now BSODing or freezing. I then reloaded the exact same profile and haven't had any instability for a week.

I've also found that running Prime95 custom blend with 80% memory load and running my GPU miner has found instability where just running P95 by itself would not find. I was P95 stable for overnight runs, but when I loaded my GPU I had threads dropping within 20 minutes.


----------



## sonic2911

Black screen and code A9 when I try to access uefi. Or even A2, 7A


----------



## sonic2911

Crashy UEFI BIOS(es) on Crosshair VII
https://r.tapatalk.com/shareLink?sh...om/forum/showthread.php?t=101885&share_type=t

My issue is exactly like this ^


----------



## majestynl

Skanic said:


> I have a 2700X, memory C16 3266mhz and a NZXT Kraken X62 and when I use the XFR 2 override I don't get any boosts for example, all cores will always stay on 4,075 ghz this is on 100 BCLK, 37 Multiplier and Performancer enhancer on level 3 active and Core Performance boost enabled.
> I am using the Ryzen Balanced powerplan, and I never see the cpu downclock to like say 1.3 ghz or boost the single core up to 4.35ghz when benching in CB15 on single core. I compared my scores to the ones i saw in der8auer's video, and I always score much lower than him.





MacG32 said:


> Check pages 5 and 6 of the "C7H Enthusiast Highlights v03.pdf" posted at the bottom of the first post of the thread. There are the BIOS settings used on page 6 and the power profile to use on page 5.


Yep use the balanced powerplan from Windows! And by the way, those numbers from the screenshot are not what you will get.
Their could be 2 things:

1) 1936 Points from R15Multi on second line is a typo i think (copy from bottom line, what i suspect) / You will get higher points compared with 150mhz higher Freq on multi 
I believe you will get ~1860-1880 on the second line!
2) Or/and he used R15 Bias option in the bios together with running Cinebench at a higher process priority!


----------



## lordzed83

@gupsterg how do you have pstate oc set up that llc auto works?? 
Thats how my llc auto looks 
https://youtu.be/8Oy6u8KBzLA

Almost 100mv vdrop. I got vid set to 1.425. Maybe i shoquld go with vid of 1.5 as i need 1.375 after v drop for stability hahaha

How do You got voltage set up?? Offset or auto??


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> Have to pop out for a bit, but testing with CPU at 1.393 (same as 3466) and a bump of SoC to just over 1.0v and a bump in RAM volts to 1.4100v - extra CPU v made it crash.
> 
> Have just completed over an hour of P95 and going to leave it doing RamTest, but here's what I have so far...


Nice share mate! Good luck with RamTest!



masterkaj said:


> I read this tip earlier but I finally needed to use it: Reset your bios to default optimized settings if you find that your previously stable overclock is now BSODing or freezing. I then reloaded the exact same profile and haven't had any instability for a week.


Yep i wrote that few times! Using that trick many times


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> Nice share mate! Good luck with RamTest!


RamTest failed at 600% after I went out  V annoying, but I did learn something.
@elmor - When my machine powers off the displays, my Ch2 fans *spin up!* Not really fast, but they do spin up - guessing to about 1000rpm. As soon as I wake the display up, they come back down!

I also noticed that my CPU fans managed to slow down to *below their min setting!?* And that's without going to sleep! I had restarted RamTest when I realized it was too quiet! Power Plan settings were both set to *Never* and I was using the Performance plan.


----------



## sbakic

Why is on asus site for C7HWIFI bios version 0601 and for C7H 0503? When will they include 0601 for C7H, because for WIFI they included it before a week. And is this file at the start of thread beat 0601 or we can use it because it dates from 4/23, and for WIFI they included it 5/11?


----------



## Skanic

sonic2911 said:


> Phanteks Case


Case buddies 


Also i changed my power plan minimum state to 50% and I can already see a massive change in performance especially on the Single Core.


----------



## MacG32

sonic2911 said:


> Crashy UEFI BIOS(es) on Crosshair VII
> https://r.tapatalk.com/shareLink?sh...om/forum/showthread.php?t=101885&share_type=t
> 
> My issue is exactly like this ^



Sounds like you have a faulty motherboard. I'd return it and get another one.



sbakic said:


> Why is on asus site for C7HWIFI bios version 0601 and for C7H 0503? When will they include 0601 for C7H, because for WIFI they included it before a week. And is this file at the start of thread beat 0601 or we can use it because it dates from 4/23, and for WIFI they included it 5/11?



The BIOSes in the first post are the same as 0601 on the Asus' website.


----------



## sonic2911

i still don't understand why, I can't enter BIOS without reset it. But the system is stable in windows, and the next time I can't enter bios, either hit DEL at boot or restart to uefi by windows, also the bios sometimes it's laggy and delay when I move mouse or hit arrows. So weird!!! This is my first asus board, high end too...and disappointed




MacG32 said:


> Sounds like you have a faulty motherboard. I'd return it and get another one.


I bought this board on ebay from newegg store, but afaik they don't accept return product there.


----------



## MacG32

sonic2911 said:


> i still don't understand why, I can't enter BIOS without reset it. But the system is stable in windows, and the next time I can't enter bios, either hit DEL at boot or restart to uefi by windows, also the bios sometimes it's laggy and delay when I move mouse or hit arrows. So weird!!! This is my first asus board, high end too...and disappointed
> 
> 
> 
> I bought this board on ebay from newegg store, but afaik they don't accept return product there.



Sorry you're having issues. I had problems with my first motherboard. Newegg did an advanced RMA for a replacement. Try not to be disappointed. This happens sometimes.


----------



## sonic2911

MacG32 said:


> Sorry you're having issues. I had problems with my first motherboard. Newegg did an advanced RMA for a replacement. Try not to be disappointed. This happens sometimes.


yes I know they do advance rma but not sure on ebay


----------



## sbakic

Which PE level will make this:
43.5x 1 core
43.0x 2 cores
41.0x 4 cores
41.05x 6 cores
40.0x 8 cores

?


----------



## Skanic

I've tried to overclock the bclk in async mode however, everytime the P states kick in the pc freezes and it doesn't change even with higher voltages. Any Ideas?


----------



## lordzed83

sonic2911 said:


> i still don't understand why, I can't enter BIOS without reset it. But the system is stable in windows, and the next time I can't enter bios, either hit DEL at boot or restart to uefi by windows, also the bios sometimes it's laggy and delay when I move mouse or hit arrows. So weird!!! This is my first asus board, high end too...and disappointed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MacG32 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds like you have a faulty motherboard. I'd return it and get another one.
> 
> 
> 
> I bought this board on ebay from newegg store, but afaik they don't accept return product there.
Click to expand...

Hmm RMA only option. Someone here had crappy c7h also with solders made by 5 year old looking at photos...

Why u went ebay not store ?


----------



## lordzed83

Skanic said:


> I've tried to overclock the bclk in async mode however, everytime the P states kick in the pc freezes and it doesn't change even with higher voltages. Any Ideas?


Not sure if it works with pstate oc and atm 15ns extra ddr lag is not worth it anyway.


----------



## lordzed83

sbakic said:


> Which PE level will make this:
> 43.5x 1 core
> 43.0x 2 cores
> 41.0x 4 cores
> 41.05x 6 cores
> 40.0x 8 cores
> 
> ?


Think pe2


----------



## sonic2911

lordzed83 said:


> Hmm RMA only option. Someone here had crappy c7h also with solders made by 5 year old looking at photos...
> 
> Why u went ebay not store ?


because of 15% sale off, it's newegg store on ebay anyway. the QC of asus is so crap -,- even high end product


----------



## mito1172

sonic2911 said:


> yes I know they do advance rma but not sure on ebay


Contact Asus service


----------



## MacG32

@elmor Can we get G.Skill X Flare support in the next BIOS release? My kit works perfectly with my 1800X, but doesn't work at 3200MHz with my 2700X. Doesn't make any sense to me at all. I've have to downclock it to 3066MHz for stability.


----------



## sonic2911

mito1172 said:


> Contact Asus service




So asus will do the advanced rma, not newegg? Where can I contact them?


----------



## sonic2911

MacG32 said:


> @elmor Can we get G.Skill X Flare support in the next BIOS release? My kit works perfectly with my 1800X, but doesn't work at 3200MHz with my 2700X. Doesn't make any sense to me at all. I have to downclock it to 3133MHz for stability.




Do you use the timing preset in the bios?


----------



## MacG32

sonic2911 said:


> Do you use the timing preset in the bios?



No, I put in the timings manually from the actual XMP profile.

Newegg will do an advanced RMA. You're still in the window to have Newegg handle it. Contact them directly through their website. https://help.newegg.com/ContactUs


----------



## Kernel-Debugger

MacG32 said:


> No, I put in the timings manually from the actual XMP profile.


I can confirm the issues. I've been testing 2x8 and 4x8 on Flare-X 3200. DOCP 3200 is the only stable option. 3466 will boot but without stability. I was able to go all the way to 3600 without any issues on CH6 & 1800X

Good Luck! And if you find the holy grail of settings... do share.


----------



## mito1172

sonic2911 said:


> So asus will do the advanced rma, not newegg? Where can I contact them?


From the area where you live you can write ASUS website. NewEgg is problematic.

help on the left on this page. https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VI-HERO/HelpDesk_Download/


----------



## sonic2911

mito1172 said:


> From the area where you live you can write ASUS website. NewEgg is problematic.
> 
> 
> 
> help on the left on this page. https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VI-HERO/HelpDesk_Download/




Haiz, newegg replied they will refund me, not replace...too bad, It’s my good deal (


----------



## Mr Splash

I just got my build going and I'm not as advanced as alot of you guys, my board has Bio's 0207. I haven't had chance to play with anything yet I needed to get caught up on house stuff, so question I don't know if I should stay or is the new Bio's better? ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO BIOS 0509 Update AGESA 1.0.0.2a is the new 1 available at ASUS site for my board. I have 16 gig 2x8 G. Skill Flare 3200 CL14 ram. Just wondering if I should just update or wait to see if I will have any problems anyone with any info on this would be great everything just on default right now. I mean I'm assuming new Bio's are out for a reason but I don't want to jump the gun unless It's obvious I should. Thanks guys I really appreciate & I'll try not to ask to many stupid questions in here but I'll probably need a few answered eventually. Splash


----------



## sonic2911

Mr Splash said:


> I just got my build going and I'm not as advanced as alot of you guys, my board has Bio's 0207. I haven't had chance to play with anything yet I needed to get caught up on house stuff, so question I don't know if I should stay or is the new Bio's better? ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO BIOS 0509 Update AGESA 1.0.0.2a is the new 1 available at ASUS site for my board. I have 16 gig 2x8 G. Skill Flare 3200 CL14 ram. Just wondering if I should just update or wait to see if I will have any problems anyone with any info on this would be great everything just on default right now. I mean I'm assuming new Bio's are out for a reason but I don't want to jump the gun unless It's obvious I should. Thanks guys I really appreciate & I'll try not to ask to many stupid questions in here but I'll probably need a few answered eventually. Splash




Update to the latest 0601


----------



## Mr Splash

I don't see that 1 on site, I don't have the Wi-Fi board also I know there numbers are different.


----------



## CJMitsuki

gupsterg said:


> OK, I'm gonna install AURA today to get rid of RGB rainbow on board and set to static red. Will image my OS first, install AURA and then revert back to image.
> 
> No other OC progress on my end yet. I've more just been using rig for WinOS/Linux TBH. I've been tinkering with Threadripper past day or so now. I will tinker with C7H soon  . Somewhat interested in trying my own PE setups as well besides using the presets. How's it going with you, any further gains?
> 
> 
> 
> OK, cheers for info  . Dunno what else it could be  .



Well, i can confirm it is definitely not the RGB software unless it did permanent damage to the sticks. I performed a clean windows install and rewrote the SPD once again with Thaiphoon Burner and ran MemTest64 while I was at work today to come home to errors but some of the lettering was changed into random odd characters so the RAM immediately soaked up more corruption than there was previously and behaving like there wasnt an ounce of stability left. I ran through very loose settings with mild voltages and everything in between and I could not notice a change in stability which confirmed to me that there is some type of physical damage that Im assuming I did during OC but I suppose there is some slight chance that the software could have permanently damaged the RAM beyond a state of repair but Im going to assume the more obvious outcome which is that in my overclocking I may have gotten a bit aggressive trying to stabilize the 3800+ frequencies and even though RAM can handle well over the 1.65v I would occaasionally feed it, maybe something just gave up the ghost. It still works with shaky stability which I have taken out and put my 3200c14 kit I was using with my 1700x back in. 



Surprisingly, I never tested this kit with 2nd gen bc I was salivating over my new RAM and between working 50 hours a week in a server room and being a single father, obsessing over this Mem OC Ive gotten like 3-4 hours sleep a night on average. I am going to do what I should have done upon seeing the first consistent bit flip errors and get my evidence of the corruption from Thaiphoon and RMA it before it completely dies. Should be a no questions asked RMA with the corrupted SPD data. It will give me some of a break so I can get a bit of sleep. 

On second thought, I wonder how far this 3200mhz kit will push? :devil: Actually nearly meeting the performance of what I was getting from 3533mhz on the 4133 kit...minus the bandwidth of course but a better latency is much more valuable. When I get the RMA back ill just start using the higher binned kit for researching high frequency behaviors and probably keep the 3200mhz kit in primarily simce it was actually quite a good kit with my 1700x. It was damn fun murdering that RAM though, I get so obsessed with pushing RAM and trying to find that magical setting at high frequencies that just auto stabilizes everything but I can be running tests and changing timings and ill look up and 8-12 hours has gone by and its time to get in the shower for work then come home and do it again. Right now, I can barely stay awake but im thinking of making coffee and staying up on this kit.


----------



## gupsterg

VPII said:


> I think the point of my post was missed... a couple days ago I was asked by another member to do the test with the multi which is why I've done it.
> 
> Whether I agree with using the " L " word thing is irrelevant. Oh Happy days....


It's not a problem  , no offence meant or taken. As you addressed me in post I replied and I just didn't want to keep going over the same topic.











kazablanka said:


> Guys does anyone know if asynchronous mode is locked in bios for the first gen ryzen ?


Only supported on gen 2.



lordzed83 said:


> @gupsterg how do you have pstate oc set up that llc auto works??
> Thats how my llc auto looks
> https://youtu.be/8Oy6u8KBzLA
> 
> Almost 100mv vdrop. I got vid set to 1.425. Maybe i shoquld go with vid of 1.5 as i need 1.375 after v drop for stability hahaha
> 
> How do You got voltage set up?? Offset or auto??


Reference txt/BMP in spoiler  . Yes I also can have upto ~100mV VDROOP from VID depending on what I load CPU with. Using 4.1GHz PState 0 VID: 1.318V LLC: [Auto], loading CPU with P95 v28.10B1 128K 128K in place FFT I see ~1.236V on ProbeIt point for VCORE. Using 1.287V and 4.075GHz I see ~1.206V.



Spoiler




View attachment 180515072212.BMP


View attachment 0601_4.1_3466S_setting.txt






CJMitsuki said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Well, i can confirm it is definitely not the RGB software unless it did permanent damage to the sticks. I performed a clean windows install and rewrote the SPD once again with Thaiphoon Burner and ran MemTest64 while I was at work today to come home to errors but some of the lettering was changed into random odd characters so the RAM immediately soaked up more corruption than there was previously and behaving like there wasnt an ounce of stability left. I ran through very loose settings with mild voltages and everything in between and I could not notice a change in stability which confirmed to me that there is some type of physical damage that Im assuming I did during OC but I suppose there is some slight chance that the software could have permanently damaged the RAM beyond a state of repair but Im going to assume the more obvious outcome which is that in my overclocking I may have gotten a bit aggressive trying to stabilize the 3800+ frequencies and even though RAM can handle well over the 1.65v I would occaasionally feed it, maybe something just gave up the ghost. It still works with shaky stability which I have taken out and put my 3200c14 kit I was using with my 1700x back in.
> 
> 
> 
> Surprisingly, I never tested this kit with 2nd gen bc I was salivating over my new RAM and between working 50 hours a week in a server room and being a single father, obsessing over this Mem OC Ive gotten like 3-4 hours sleep a night on average. I am going to do what I should have done upon seeing the first consistent bit flip errors and get my evidence of the corruption from Thaiphoon and RMA it before it completely dies. Should be a no questions asked RMA with the corrupted SPD data. It will give me some of a break so I can get a bit of sleep.
> 
> On second thought, I wonder how far this 3200mhz kit will push? :devil: Actually nearly meeting the performance of what I was getting from 3533mhz on the 4133 kit...minus the bandwidth of course but a better latency is much more valuable. When I get the RMA back ill just start using the higher binned kit for researching high frequency behaviors and probably keep the 3200mhz kit in primarily simce it was actually quite a good kit with my 1700x. It was damn fun murdering that RAM though, I get so obsessed with pushing RAM and trying to find that magical setting at high frequencies that just auto stabilizes everything but I can be running tests and changing timings and ill look up and 8-12 hours has gone by and its time to get in the shower for work then come home and do it again. Right now, I can barely stay awake but im thinking of making coffee and staying up on this kit.


Sorry to read you may have HW issues, good luck with RMA, G.Skill were great regarding a set I have swapped.


----------



## crakej

CJMitsuki said:


> Well, i can confirm it is definitely not the RGB software unless it did permanent damage to the sticks. I performed a clean windows install and rewrote the SPD once again with Thaiphoon Burner and ran MemTest64 while I was at work today to come home to errors but some of the lettering was changed into random odd characters so the RAM immediately soaked up more corruption than there was previously and behaving like there wasnt an ounce of stability left. I ran through very loose settings with mild voltages and everything in between and I could not notice a change in stability which confirmed to me that there is some type of physical damage that Im assuming I did during OC but I suppose there is some slight chance that the software could have permanently damaged the RAM beyond a state of repair but Im going to assume the more obvious outcome which is that in my overclocking I may have gotten a bit aggressive trying to stabilize the 3800+ frequencies and even though RAM can handle well over the 1.65v I would occaasionally feed it, maybe something just gave up the ghost. It still works with shaky stability which I have taken out and put my 3200c14 kit I was using with my 1700x back in.
> 
> Surprisingly, I never tested this kit with 2nd gen bc I was salivating over my new RAM and between working 50 hours a week in a server room and being a single father, obsessing over this Mem OC Ive gotten like 3-4 hours sleep a night on average. I am going to do what I should have done upon seeing the first consistent bit flip errors and get my evidence of the corruption from Thaiphoon and RMA it before it completely dies. Should be a no questions asked RMA with the corrupted SPD data. It will give me some of a break so I can get a bit of sleep.
> 
> On second thought, I wonder how far this 3200mhz kit will push? :devil: Actually nearly meeting the performance of what I was getting from 3533mhz on the 4133 kit...minus the bandwidth of course but a better latency is much more valuable. When I get the RMA back ill just start using the higher binned kit for researching high frequency behaviors and probably keep the 3200mhz kit in primarily simce it was actually quite a good kit with my 1700x. It was damn fun murdering that RAM though, I get so obsessed with pushing RAM and trying to find that magical setting at high frequencies that just auto stabilizes everything but I can be running tests and changing timings and ill look up and 8-12 hours has gone by and its time to get in the shower for work then come home and do it again. Right now, I can barely stay awake but im thinking of making coffee and staying up on this kit.


I'm curious - what speed did you test the ram at?

Did you turn Aura off in the bios?


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> Hmm RMA only option. Someone here had crappy c7h also with solders made by 5 year old looking at photos...
> 
> Why u went ebay not store ?





lordzed83 said:


> Not sure if it works with pstate oc and atm 15ns extra ddr lag is not worth it anyway.





lordzed83 said:


> Think pe2


*lordzed83* can you please merge your comments if you write them in same time as long as its possible/readable!
i only see your face-picture while scrolling!!  Are you expecting the new CH8 or what


----------



## Jaju123

https://www.kitguru.net/components/leo-waldock/asus-rog-crosshair-vii-hero-wi-fi-review/5/

8601 bios is mentioned here. Hopefully it will come soon


----------



## sonic2911

This makes me crazy ^


----------



## VicsPC

Jaju123 said:


> https://www.kitguru.net/components/leo-waldock/asus-rog-crosshair-vii-hero-wi-fi-review/5/
> 
> 8601 bios is mentioned here. Hopefully it will come soon


Yea i think thats a typo, pretty sure they meant 0601 lol. 




sonic2911 said:


> https://youtu.be/hZKi15iNUSo
> 
> This makes me crazy ^


I had the same issue with mine freezing but on my C6H and at the splash screen right after the BIOS screen. A cmos reset, pulling out the CMOS battery and draining the system of power would probably fix his issue, fixed mine and been fine since, its probably been about 2 weeks and I've even unplugged my PC yesterday and it booted righ tup no issues.


----------



## matzemoerk

I had the same problem when overclocking the base clock while having an sata m.2 in the lower m.2 port. It showed the same problem for base clocks over 102.

Gesendet von meinem CLT-L29 mit Tapatalk


----------



## sonic2911

VicsPC said:


> Yea i think thats a typo, pretty sure they meant 0601 lol.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I had the same issue with mine freezing but on my C6H and at the splash screen right after the BIOS screen. A cmos reset, pulling out the CMOS battery and draining the system of power would probably fix his issue, fixed mine and been fine since, its probably been about 2 weeks and I've even unplugged my PC yesterday and it booted righ tup no issues.




The problem is after I reset cmos, turn off psu for 5mins then turn it back on, it’s fine. But the next time when I want to enter bios, that freeze happen again


----------



## VicsPC

sonic2911 said:


> The problem is after I reset cmos, turn off psu for 5mins then turn it back on, it’s fine. But the next time when I want to enter bios, that freeze happen again


Have you tried reflashing the BIOS again using the flashback port on the back? Flash it then clear CMOS right afterwards a couple times then power up, if you still have the issue I'd def RMA it might be something wrong with the BIOS chip or something. Maybe try to run it without any SATA plugged in and see if u still get the issue.


----------



## sonic2911

I reflashed bios couple time, any versions still get same problem, the worst is 0207. It’s fine now in windows after I clear cmos. Everything is stock, not OC yet
Newegg offered me return for refund, what should I do now?


----------



## Fitzcaraldo

sonic2911 said:


> I reflashed bios couple time, any versions still get same problem, the worst is 0207. It’s fine now in windows after I clear cmos. Everything is stock, not OC yet
> Newegg offered me return for refund, what should I do now?


Set the POST to the actual report instead of the splashscreen so that you get told where the actual freeze happens (if it's on a particular step). Also, disable fastboot in windows/UEFI if you havent already.


----------



## sonic2911

Fitzcaraldo said:


> Set the POST to the actual report instead of the splashscreen so that you get told where the actual freeze happens (if it's on a particular step). Also, disable fastboot in windows/UEFI if you havent already.




The code is changed, not the same everytime, but do we need fastboot off?


----------



## crakej

sonic2911 said:


> The code is changed, not the same everytime, but do we need fastboot off?


Yes - we need that off


----------



## crakej

sonic2911 said:


> The problem is after I reset cmos, turn off psu for 5mins then turn it back on, it’s fine. But the next time when I want to enter bios, that freeze happen again


I have this happen occasionally and I've done no BCLK OCing. I just keep hitting reset until it boots - or power off and try again. Failing that, use the Safe Boot button

I think the last time I needed to remove the cmos battery was more than a year ago!


----------



## zulex

No new bios yet?


----------



## sonic2911

I think I found out the problem, CSM mode. I always set it off, but now just leave it enable, and it's fine so far, also disable fast boot. Boot time is slower than my old rig, xeon e3 1230-3 with B85 mobo, ridiculous )
Hmm, I set my ram to 3200, Stilt's preset cas14 safe, and 1.4v (is it high?). It passes more than 400% memtest. So can I call it stable?


----------



## VicsPC

I have fastboot enabled on my c6 and haven't had a single issue with that, not sure why some of you are having issues with it enabled.


----------



## sonic2911

VicsPC said:


> I have fastboot enabled on my c6 and haven't had a single issue with that, not sure why some of you are having issues with it enabled.


CSM, you leave it enable or not?


----------



## VicsPC

sonic2911 said:


> CSM, you leave it enable or not?


Not sure what CSM is but Ill have to take a look and see what happens.


----------



## dreckschmeck

as soon as you use m.2 you need to have CSM enabled or no boot to windows is possible. Also some old legacy video cards won't work


----------



## sonic2911

dreckschmeck said:


> as soon as you use m.2 you need to have CSM enabled or no boot to windows is possible. Also some old legacy video cards won't work




Do we need csm for m2? I never hear that before. My gpu is 1070 so I think that’s not a problem. Buy after I enable CSM, everything is good now.


----------



## lordzed83

forgot to post thats how 3600cl15 scores @gupsterg










SHOULD be gaming stable










Can even pass IBT










But its not Realbench 16gb stable.


----------



## Safetytrousers

LLC Auto is the same as LLC5 - both hold voltage perfectly:


----------



## Fitzcaraldo

VicsPC said:


> I have fastboot enabled on my c6 and haven't had a single issue with that, not sure why some of you are having issues with it enabled.


Fastboot disabled is for troubleshooting reasons. If your system is stable and working, there is no reason to not use it. Sometimes you want to have it disabled, tho, to enforce stuff like proper memory training (IIRC, memory training profiles get stored as part of the fastboot functionality).


----------



## lordzed83

*Teamgroup*

http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/te...r4-memory-for-amd-ryzen-cpus-at-3466-mhz.html


We got NEW kit to try TeamGroup [email protected]
Possible I will buy it and have a play :] if i'm happy with it could sell my 3733 Xtream kit  as you see its Very good on Ryzen


----------



## lordzed83

Fitzcaraldo said:


> Fastboot disabled is for troubleshooting reasons. If your system is stable and working, there is no reason to not use it. Sometimes you want to have it disabled, tho, to enforce stuff like proper memory training (IIRC, memory training profiles get stored as part of the fastboot functionality).


There is a Reason not to have fast boot on Ryzen 







Not sure about other GPUs but extra few seconds boot time is not worth it. Like how many times do You actually reboot a day ?? 10 ?? and thats allot


----------



## crakej

So, I'm still working on 3533MTs

I got to a point where I'm pretty certain that I could just give more VCore and it might get me stable. Wanting to try avoid raising it when I don't need to, I've stopped where I am for now voltage-wise, and decided to see if another settings could help me.

So I was getting 600%, 1600% max when I decided to enter the settings for CadBus, rtt etc using the figure from the calculator. CadBus is 0,0,0 and rtt is 7,off,5 and CadBus Block at 20,20,20,20ohm. This allowed RamTest to get to 2000%. As that was a positive, I entered the settings for memory interleaving selecting Channel, 512k, Channel Hash=enable.

This also had a positive result letting RamTest go up to 3633%, which is where I am now. Trying to decide if I should now try increasing VCore, or play more with the CadBus Block. Still have everything at auto in Paradise (Except SenseMi which is off), ProcODT is auto and everything else is the same as yesterday.


----------



## VicsPC

lordzed83 said:


> There is a Reason not to have fast boot on Ryzen
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0YywksRWaM
> 
> 
> Not sure about other GPUs but extra few seconds boot time is not worth it. Like how many times do You actually reboot a day ?? 10 ?? and thats allot


I think this issue is for people who actually put their PC to sleep though no? From the few comments that seems to be the issue. For me his core clock looks exactly the same between both sides so not sure what the issue he's having is. I have no such issue with mine with fast startup enabled.


----------



## sonic2911

I don't get it why do we have to enable CSM to boot with M2.NVME? I think nvme is a next-gen standard, not like other legacy, just asus only? Because I can run full UEFI on my old mobo with sata ssd.


----------



## harkinsteven

sonic2911 said:


> I don't get it why do we have to enable CSM to boot with M2.NVME? I think nvme is a next-gen standard, not like other legacy, just asus only? Because I can run full UEFI on my old mobo with sata ssd.


Disconnect all other drives and only have the NVMe drive installed. Run windows installer and it should install the correct driver.


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> forgot to post thats how 3600cl15 scores  @gupsterg
> SHOULD be gaming stable
> 
> Can even pass IBT
> 
> But its not Realbench 16gb stable.


Looking good! Care to share your settings?


----------



## crakej

sonic2911 said:


> I don't get it why do we have to enable CSM to boot with M2.NVME? I think nvme is a next-gen standard, not like other legacy, just asus only? Because I can run full UEFI on my old mobo with sata ssd.


You don't need it enabled for NVME - maybe M.2 sata but not even sure you need it for that. I was able to choose the right drive for installation, but as it says above just remove the other drives if you're having problems, you can reconnect them once you're installed.


----------



## sonic2911

harkinsteven said:


> Disconnect all other drives and only have the NVMe drive installed. Run windows installer and it should install the correct driver.


I have no problem with installing windows. After that if I disable CSM, I can't boot to windows unless I clear cmos, that's it. And the boot time from NVME is slower than SATA SSD.


----------



## majestynl

Safetytrousers said:


> LLC Auto is the same as LLC5 - both hold voltage perfectly:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UqBk9gSGK64



not completely true, only if you set manual voltage.!
"LLC auto" wil droop with core on auto voltage or when you set a Pstate vid!


----------



## Fitzcaraldo

lordzed83 said:


> There is a Reason not to have fast boot on Ryzen
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0YywksRWaM
> 
> 
> Not sure about other GPUs but extra few seconds boot time is not worth it. Like how many times do You actually reboot a day ?? 10 ?? and thats allot


That's for VEGA GPUs. not specific for Ryzen CPUs. But I am sure if we dig around long enough we find a case where fastboot also caused issues with Ryzen for someone.


----------



## lordzed83

majestynl said:


> not completely true, only if you set manual voltage.!
> "LLC auto" wil droop with core on auto voltage or when you set a Pstate vid!


 @Safetytrousers
Yup think LLC auto does not work with those 2. Seen my video i assume when i get 90-100mv Vdrop with auto. Its USELESS...



Think I cracked 3600cl15 setting Stable enough for daily use !!! Passes IBT very high and Y-cruncher loop. On previous atempts ware crushing always. trick was to get Soc from llc2 to lvl3 and ddr frequency from 300 to 400khz.


----------



## wisepds

Why with last bios my P-STATES OC (Same configuration as always) my vcore is always the same. Speed is 4100 and down to 2199 mhz, but now VCORE is now forever on 1.319v. Only on 0601 bios... Before that vcore was 0,8v at 2100 mhz..


----------



## gupsterg

@lordzed83

Sweeeettt! :thumb:.

@majestynl

Preliminary ground work for 3533MHz using :clock: The Stilt :clock: 3466MHz timings was looking good , so now on secondary stage .









SOC: 0.987V with stock LLC...



Safetytrousers said:


> LLC Auto is the same as LLC5 - both hold voltage perfectly:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UqBk9gSGK64
> 
> 
> 
> majestynl said:
> 
> 
> 
> not completely true, only if you set manual voltage.!
> "LLC auto" wil droop with core on auto voltage or when you set a Pstate vid!
Click to expand...

Is here  , so LLC: [Auto] not equal to [lvl5] .


----------



## lordzed83

@gupsterg man i got it cracked by looks of it !!! 4250 + 3600cl15. Memtest pass IBT like 30 times CB15 Papp went for bath (long after training) and left Y-Cruncher running


----------



## gupsterg

Looking good zed!  .

Gotta say gen 2 is much nicer on RAM for sure  . I've done approx. 1.5hrs GSAT & HCI, 1hr Y-Cruncher, now leaving her on P95 v28.10B1 8K 4096K 13GB, so far approx. 1hr pass  .


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> not completely true, only if you set manual voltage.!
> "LLC auto" wil droop with core on auto voltage or when you set a Pstate vid!


Is that not just on bios 0601? I'm on 0509 and seems to be drooping normally....


----------



## Gettz8488

crakej said:


> Is that not just on bios 0601? I'm on 0509 and seems to be drooping normally....




Are you using manual voltage? If using offset then should be seeing a droop 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## lordzed83

gupsterg said:


> Looking good zed! /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif .
> 
> Gotta say gen 2 is much nicer on RAM for sure /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif . I've done approx. 1.5hrs GSAT & HCI, 1hr Y-Cruncher, now leaving her on P95 v28.10B1 8K 4096K 13GB, so far approx. 1hr pass /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif .
> 
> View attachment 193337



What did trick for me was changing frequency to 400khz from auto on cpu aoc and ddr. Plus going llc3 on aoc from llc2 🙂

With my cooling uts all about hardware limit 🙂

Anyhow in my case anything lower than 1.05 on soc and system is stuttering mini freezes ect tried 1.025 and 1.000 its plain unuseable.

But i look at it different this cpu is rated [email protected] and im running it at 4250. 4275 and more is not stable even with 1.435 and mwmory at 3333 so no point of going that direction.

Another thing is thqt my kit is rated 3733cl18 so 3600cl15 is plain great!! On c6h any more volts than 1.425 was just droping errors c7h got so much better power delivery and shielded ports tha i can finally run this kit at 1.45 that ia top rated voltage for this kit 🙂


Sooo tempted to see whats the deal with that 3466 zen+ optimised one. If it does cl14 on xmp with 1.35... What would it do with 1.45 hehe 3600cr14 maybe 🙂


----------



## lordzed83

Gettz8488 said:


> crakej said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is that not just on bios 0601? I'm on 0509 and seems to be drooping normally....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you using manual voltage? If using offset then should be seeing a droop
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Click to expand...

He wont see it cause not reading topic and what elmor said... Aka display error.. Or u think that cpu can idle at 18 watts with 1.425 going in to.it lool.


Guys look at package watts not volts...


----------



## CJMitsuki

How long should you bench OCCT before it is considered to have a stable overclock on your CPU?


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> @gupsterg man i got it cracked by looks of it !!! 4250 + 3600cl15. Memtest pass IBT like 30 times CB15 Papp went for bath (long after training) and left Y-Cruncher running
> 
> 
> Spoiler



Nice lordzed! Good progress!



gupsterg said:


> @lordzed83
> 
> Sweeeettt! :thumb:.
> 
> @majestynl
> 
> Preliminary ground work for 3533MHz using :clock: The Stilt :clock: 3466MHz timings was looking good , so now on secondary stage .
> 
> View attachment 193289


Great!!!  Thats looking really good! Good luck with stage 2 !! Keep us updated!

Got new fans installed and refilled and looped the LC on this system!
Im now going further with RAM on 3533Ghz, i have a saved profile from last week. Lets see! Will share more info later!
Yesterday i managed to get 5Ghz on Boost with PE! Not fully stable but looking promising for that OC type! Only those spikes in voltage are ugly for the eyez


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> He wont see it cause not reading topic and what elmor said... Aka display error.. Or u think that cpu can idle at 18 watts with 1.425 going in to.it lool.
> 
> 
> Guys look at package watts not volts...


I was talking about the problem which The Stilt pointed out about LLC not working properly on 0601 using manual voltage - not talking about watts? My CPU is set at 1.393 in the bios, reported at SVI TFN as 1.387v, which droops to 1.3v. With LLC 5 it stays at 1.387v, so in 0509 it is all working as expected


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> Gotta say gen 2 is much nicer on RAM for sure  . I've done approx. 1.5hrs GSAT & HCI, 1hr Y-Cruncher, now leaving her on P95 v28.10B1 8K 4096K 13GB, so far approx. 1hr pass  .


Looking good Gupsterg. I gotta say new x470 boards much nicer for ram too! I couldn't do anything like I'm doing now with old MB. I got a good 1700x, but still, doing much better on this board


----------



## Mr Splash

OK, got my ram up too 3200 now and that was easy..lol Hey guys, what program is more accurate for Temp, Clocks & Voltage? I hope HWINFO is because the readings in that look way better than anything else I've tried CPU-ID, HW Monitor ect. I'm liking my 2700 She sits at little over 4.0 and Boosts to 4.3. performance enhancer off. But can I manually set voltage with offset ect and get same results wich I don't know how to do, I'm not use to all these settings..lol ? Or does that take you into manal overclocking and disable the boost stuff? I don't want to disable what the chip was meant to do seems stupid too I just would like to get my temps down a little my highest temp I've seen and taking 10c off is 54c.I know with stuff on auto the voltage is up a little past whats needed I've read. Appreciate any help I just passed 1000% on HCI test so I know I'm stable there DRam 1.35 and SOC is topping at 1.12 wich from what I've read it could go down there too. If I got something wrong plz let me know. Peace, Splash


----------



## Safetytrousers

gupsterg said:


> so LLC: [Auto] not equal to [lvl5] .


OK, so the video is misleading on that point. Perhaps some of you might want to point this out to Buildzoid.
But I think it does prove a point about LLC5.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Got home from work and had been running MemTest64 all day on my backup 3200mhz kit to make sure there wasnt a mobo problem that made my 4133mhz kit go crazy and it looks safe, thank goodness. Although, that RAM cost just as much as the mobo 


Spoiler















With some stable RAM I thought Id play around with OC on my 2700x since Ive not much experience with it and see how it went. 4.3ghz goes nearly 7 min until it froze and I had to get pictures with my phone so sorry about the trash quality. Im running that at 1.425v and Im gonna research and see how high I can safely go bc I dont want to destroy my 2700x yet. How long is considered stable when benching a CPU?




Spoiler


----------



## majestynl

Safetytrousers said:


> OK, so the video is misleading on that point. Perhaps some of you might want to point this out to Buildzoid.
> But I think it does prove a point about LLC5.


already told him!!  but about LLC5 is true, keeps voltage flat!




CJMitsuki said:


> Got home from work and had been running MemTest64 all day on my backup 3200mhz kit to make sure there wasnt a mobo problem that made my 4133mhz kit go crazy and it looks safe, thank goodness. Although, that RAM cost just as much as the mobo
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 193393
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With some stable RAM I thought Id play around with OC on my 2700x since Ive not much experience with it and see how it went. 4.3ghz goes nearly 7 min until it froze and I had to get pictures with my phone so sorry about the trash quality. Im running that at 1.425v and Im gonna research and see how high I can safely go bc I dont want to destroy my 2700x yet. How long is considered stable when benching a CPU?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 193385
> View attachment 193401


What are u trying? Manual OC all cores @ 4300mhz ?
Then don't waste your time...


----------



## CJMitsuki

majestynl said:


> already told him!!  but about LLC5 is true, keeps voltage flat!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are u trying? Manual OC all cores @ 4300mhz ?
> Then don't waste your time...



Yeah, manual all cores...I quickly found that out when I bumped it to 1.43v and the same thing happened at 6.5 min but its weird because there wasnt a sign of instability or anything besides my GPU blipped for a second and went to full speed at the same moment everything froze. I did manage to get 4.25ghz stable at 1.4v and i figure ill just keep dropping vcore and see how low it will go and be happy with that. Seems like 4.3 stable leads you into unsafe territories and Id rather avoid that with my CPU. Another .5 ghz doesnt seem worth another .5v+ and potential CPU death but Im not educated on it enough to be sure of that.


Spoiler


----------



## Keith Myers

*Only one fan speed visible*



gupsterg said:


> I-Nex is all I've used so far.Yes C7H uses same SIO as the other ASUS AMD AM4/sTR4 boards (well which ever models I have been checking images, etc of  ) .


I'm disappointed that the it87.ko driver only picks up *1* fan speed, the CPU fan, out of all the headers on the motherboard. I have 6 fans visible on the X370 Prime Pro motherboard with the same driver.:thumbsdow:thumbsdow


----------



## VPII

I've never really played around with the memory to see how high I can go with it. My memory is G.Skill F4-3200C14D TridentZ and 3200 works without any issues and is 100% stable. Unfortunately the Stilt preset for 3466 does not work....cannot even get boot. Which is funny as 3466 worked when I was using same memory and cpu but on the Asus Strix X370-F Gaming motherboard. I generally ran my memory for benching using 3333mhz set for memory but with CL14-13-13-28 1T timings as per the third screenshot. So I thought I'll just see if Stilts 3600 present would work, the one using 1.4vdimm. And low and behold it works, but unfortunately with 2T command rate. Interestingly it is still better than the 3333mhz mem with the low timings as you'll see in the 4th screenshot. I've actually gone a little further and dropped TRCD and TRP to 15 and it gave me a little bump in performance but I cannot say that this is 100% stable.

I've run the Stilt's preset 3600 for a complete memtest86 without any issues. I then ran IBT max memory used with the cpu at stock speed, I then ran Prime95 for almost 2 hours cpu at 4.2ghz without any issues. The next screenshots is basically just the performance difference shown with CB15 and Aida64 memory benchmark


----------



## chakku

Is there any reason to enable PBO if you're using PE3/4? From what I understand PE3/4 achieve the same thing?


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> Yeah, manual all cores...I quickly found that out when I bumped it to 1.43v and the same thing happened at 6.5 min but its weird because there wasnt a sign of instability or anything besides my GPU blipped for a second and went to full speed at the same moment everything froze. I did manage to get 4.25ghz stable at 1.4v and i figure ill just keep dropping vcore and see how low it will go and be happy with that. Seems like 4.3 stable leads you into unsafe territories and Id rather avoid that with my CPU. Another .5 ghz doesnt seem worth another .5v+ and potential CPU death but Im not educated on it enough to be sure of that.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 193433


I tell ya a secred.... 2700x CANT DO 4300 stable.... I got Binned Chip and it Cant do it and if Yours is random then Thats that


----------



## lordzed83

Phase change cooling tested also


----------



## kamikatze13

here stood a wall of text about how i can't raise the bclk to any meaningful level, switched over to asynchronous, and saw boosts like 4558 in hwinfo during cinebench single-core at 104.8 freq.

now, i _actually bothered to read_ the bios info carefully, where it says BCLK1 is pcie and ram, whereas BCLK2 is the cpu. result being, i tweaked the wrong value apparently :applaud:

now the question - is hwinfo reading the wrong frequency?

PS: i just tried to hit F10 to save the comment. i need a break.


----------



## majestynl

VPII said:


> I've never really played around with the memory to see how high I can go with it. My memory is G.Skill F4-3200C14D TridentZ and 3200 works without any issues and is 100% stable. Unfortunately the Stilt preset for 3466 does not work....cannot even get boot. Which is funny as 3466 worked when I was using same memory and cpu but on the Asus Strix X370-F Gaming motherboard. I generally ran my memory for benching using 3333mhz set for memory but with CL14-13-13-28 1T timings as per the third screenshot. So I thought I'll just see if Stilts 3600 present would work, the one using 1.4vdimm. And low and behold it works, but unfortunately with 2T command rate. Interestingly it is still better than the 3333mhz mem with the low timings as you'll see in the 4th screenshot. I've actually gone a little further and dropped TRCD and TRP to 15 and it gave me a little bump in performance but I cannot say that this is 100% stable.
> 
> I've run the Stilt's preset 3600 for a complete memtest86 without any issues. I then ran IBT max memory used with the cpu at stock speed, I then ran Prime95 for almost 2 hours cpu at 4.2ghz without any issues. The next screenshots is basically just the performance difference shown with CB15 and Aida64 memory benchmark


My ram is sensitive to those presets. After many tests i found out it was GDM =OFF, with this option disabled i boot into windows with 2T automatically, but when i set it manually on 1T i cant boot into Windows!
Second one where my ram got unstable is low settings for tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSCL!

Both of above are used in the fast presets! Maybe you try if this is same for. My suggestion helped a few people! Maybe you are lucky to.
What i suggest is to copy the timings from presets and then make your own profile without above instructions!


----------



## lordzed83

Installed Windows 10 RS5 17666.1000.180504-1501 that came out 2 days ago or so.
My scores went up almost to 17025 build level


----------



## sonic2911

I tried to disable CSM last night and the issue came back. So I think CSM is the root cause and still don’t understand why.
My devices: 970 evo, 2 HDDs and all of them are GPT. Msi gtx 1070, I used DP also.


----------



## crakej

Today's update: 3533 pretty damn near stable - I've run many tests, and best result today is over 5000% RamTest, and over an hour of P95, which would probably pass for day to day use, but I will try and improve it. I've not enabled any Performance bias settings yet but have managed to keep my CL14 settings  Also, my SoC is still much happier below 1.0v - at 0.975 currently.

I'm having a bit of a break then going to play with 3600 which is already quite different with 2T and slightly lower voltages for it......exciting!

Update: - decided to give it a rest tonight so loaded up my 3533 settings. I thought I'd convert my manual voltages to offsets - that's the only thing I did. When I boot up, instead of CPU running at x41 it's running at x22. Ram is where it should be at 3533. Says 4100MHz in bios. Anyone got any ideas?


----------



## sonic2911

Asus have just released the official 0601 for non wifi version


----------



## majestynl

hey @gupsterg

remember i was telling about the random shutdown with Idle while hwinfo and cpu-z was open. Saw an interesting article on HardOCP telling exactly the same. And its true Cinebench was also open over here 
Never happened again, but like asus is saying, switch between power plans. Exactly what i do often  
Check it out:https://www.hardocp.com/article/2018/04/30/amd_precision_boost_2_wraith_prism_deep_dive/6

_*Some Odd Failures*
I ran into some failures using PB2 and I was able to track these down to NOT being PB2's issue, but rather a Windows Bug. We are using the latest version of Windows 10 64-bit and all its updates that were available on April 17th. We knew we were going to be doing a lot of testing, so we froze our OS updates at that point. What I was finding is that I would get these random power-downs using Cinebench, HWinfo64, and CPUz at the same time. I could not replicate the error without these three programs running simultaneously. At time I just assumed that I was beating on the CPU hard enough to make it fail, until it went into a hard power-down while sitting idle at the desktop, and I could replicate this issue at idle. Talking with AMD and ASUS about this, they asked me to work through the other power profiles we were not using. We use "High Power" for all our testing here. I moved to the Balanced profile, and it still happened. I then moved to the Ryzen Balanced profile, and it was still happening. Once I moved back to the High Performance profile again, I could not repeat the error. I could not replicate the error in Balanced or Ryzen Balanced either. ASUS let me know that there has been a Windows bug identified with this issue. The current solution to the issues seems to be to switch power profiles one or two times and it will correct itself. So if you are having some odd shutdowns, do not assume it is anything hardware or heat related._


----------



## gonagi

Latest bios, all defualt settings.
2700x 3200mhz gskill
Stock CPU cooler.

Problem: bios temps reads 40-50's
Changed thermal paste cleared cmos still high bios temps. Does anyone know why or 40 is normal on bios everything stock? Thanks


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> Today's update: 3533 pretty damn near stable - I've run many tests, and best result today is over 5000% RamTest, and over an hour of P95, which would probably pass for day to day use, but I will try and improve it. I've not enabled any Performance bias settings yet but have managed to keep my CL14 settings  Also, my SoC is still much happier below 1.0v - at 0.975 currently.
> 
> I'm having a bit of a break then going to play with 3600 which is already quite different with 2T and slightly lower voltages for it......exciting!
> 
> Update: - decided to give it a rest tonight so loaded up my 3533 settings. I thought I'd convert my manual voltages to offsets - that's the only thing I did. When I boot up, instead of CPU running at x41 it's running at x22. Ram is where it should be at 3533. Says 4100MHz in bios. Anyone got any ideas?


Nice! 3533 with CL14 is a way different story on my 2700x and the CH7  Very annoying to get it fully stable! Cant even say if its possible with current bios! 
Never saw any post somebody managed 3533 TT CL14 full stable!

About your update: how did you convert to offset? With Pstates + offset, or just straight away? You are saying bios says 4100Mhz so i assume Pstates? 
Cause then your settings are wrong! Share screens we can assist! Save screenies in bios!




gonagi said:


> Latest bios, all defualt settings.
> 2700x 3200mhz gskill
> Stock CPU cooler.
> 
> Problem: bios temps reads 40-50's
> Changed thermal paste cleared cmos still high bios temps. Does anyone know why or 40 is normal on bios everything stock? Thanks


Dont worry no issue! Same for everybody! Their is slightly a load while in bios for certain reasons i believe!
Same on CH6 with my 1800x and 1700!


----------



## sonic2911

Stable yet?


----------



## zulex

C7H Bios update is so slow compared to previous C6H.


----------



## minal

@*gupsterg* @Keith Myers 

There is also CPU-X for linux, similar to CPU-Z for Windows, and looks like an alternative to I-Nex: https://github.com/X0rg/CPU-X 

Do you know of tools that read Vcore or other voltages in linux? CPU-X has Vcore, but I don't know how accurate it is.

"sensors" and psensor show CPU, GPU, and HDD temperatures. CPU fan speed is detected... as 0 rpm. 

I haven't tried it87 yet. Are there configuration instructions specific for 2700X?

Then there is CoreFreq that has a lot of measurements/features, but support for Ryzen2 is just being added. It's nice for seeing core frequencies under load. https://github.com/cyring/CoreFreq

Any other useful sensor tools for linux?


----------



## wisepds

@lordzed83 Do you know why my vcore is always at 1.319v with P-states overclocking and speed fluctuating between 4100 mhz and 2990 mhz? Cpu down core speed well, but Vcore is blocked at 1.319v.
In last bios works well 0501, but in 0601 my vcore is always the same at same configuration.
Thanks for help!


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> Nice! 3533 with CL14 is a way different story on my 2700x and the CH7  Very annoying to get it fully stable! Cant even say if its possible with current bios!
> Never saw any post somebody managed 3533 TT CL14 full stable!
> 
> About your update: how did you convert to offset? With Pstates + offset, or just straight away? You are saying bios says 4100Mhz so i assume Pstates?
> Cause then your settings are wrong! Share screens we can assist! Save screenies in bios!


Nope - no p-states, just changed _manual_ voltage to _offset_ and put in appropriate numbers for the voltage I wanted - that's literally all I did! Will get a screenshot for you asap  I also noticed that when i used offsets, my voltages appear correctly in the bios and at the SVI2TFN readouts in HWInfo. I'm going to have to rearrange things so I can access probit points....


----------



## gupsterg

lordzed83 said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> What did trick for me was changing frequency to 400khz from auto on cpu aoc and ddr. Plus going llc3 on aoc from llc2 🙂
> 
> With my cooling uts all about hardware limit 🙂
> 
> Anyhow in my case anything lower than 1.05 on soc and system is stuttering mini freezes ect tried 1.025 and 1.000 its plain unuseable.
> 
> But i look at it different this cpu is rated [email protected] and im running it at 4250. 4275 and more is not stable even with 1.435 and mwmory at 3333 so no point of going that direction.
> 
> Another thing is thqt my kit is rated 3733cl18 so 3600cl15 is plain great!! On c6h any more volts than 1.425 was just droping errors c7h got so much better power delivery and shielded ports tha i can finally run this kit at 1.45 that ia top rated voltage for this kit 🙂
> 
> 
> Sooo tempted to see whats the deal with that 3466 zen+ optimised one. If it does cl14 on xmp with 1.35... What would it do with 1.45 hehe 3600cr14 maybe 🙂


I try to keep tweaks to a minimum. So I have not changed aspects of VRM frequency, etc. Will bare in mind your experience  



majestynl said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Great!!!  Thats looking really good! Good luck with stage 2 !! Keep us updated!
> 
> Got new fans installed and refilled and looped the LC on this system!
> Im now going further with RAM on 3533Ghz, i have a saved profile from last week. Lets see! Will share more info later!
> Yesterday i managed to get 5Ghz on Boost with PE! Not fully stable but looking promising for that OC type! Only those spikes in voltage are ugly for the eyez


Stage 2 has crashed and burned  ...

When I initially posted 3533MHz using The Stilt 3466MHz timings and CPU 4.1GHz I let it run til morning. I lost only one thread at ~3.66hrs over a run of ~9.25hrs.



Spoiler














I thought wow I'll nail this with some minor tweaks like SOC. I was totally wrong  . Any combo of changes in CPU VID, SOC, VDIMM, VTT, ProcODT and CAD Bus, yielded no improved stability  .

3533MHz intermittently will go to Q-Code: F9 on posts in all situations. If I use ProcODT 53.3 this is resolved, but then OS stability testing is compromised. Using lower than 48 is post issue, anything higher than 53.3 is greater OS instability. CAD Bus all set to 30 improves stability, any higher is an issue, but still not enough stability gained to pass testing. Even tried single CAD Bus value increases. Lower than 30 or 24 is an issue. It is a similar story with CPU VID/SOC and VDIMM/VTT, changes up/down cause more issues than solve  .

I even undid CPU OC and used just 3.7GHz stock with no PB/XFR and no joy  . I can pass RAM tests, but can not repeat pass Y-Cruncher or P95. Spent yesterday virtually all day on it.

Up to 3400MHz was cruising it, basic tweaks of SOC/VDIMM. 3466MHz needed lowered ProcODT (from [Auto] 53.3 to 48) and VTT of 0.687, besides SOC tweak, VDIMM I was able to keep the 1.37V used for 3400MHz. 3533MHz is seemingly like a total different ball game to stabilise!

I will be having a crack again today, otherwise I will go back to 4.1GHz 3466MHz til new UEFI is released and go for 3533MHz again. I retested the 4.1GHz 3466MHz profile, it has zero issues in usage, HCI, GSAT, RB, Y-Cruncher, Prime95. Even if I use WinOS or Linux it is sound profile. Posting from shutdown with or without power to board again non issue. I can default UEFI and go straight to profile and again zero issues.

Hoping you have better luck :thumb: .



crakej said:


> Looking good Gupsterg. I gotta say new x470 boards much nicer for ram too! I couldn't do anything like I'm doing now with old MB. I got a good 1700x, but still, doing much better on this board


Putting aside 3533MHz, yes for sure it has been a cruising situation with PR+C7H. Even now I just loaded the 4.1 3466S, did ~1hr P95 v28.10B1 8K 4096K 13GB and RB without a hitch. Changed to 3533MHz, bumped SOC/VDIMM only 1 step each and have ~30min and counting pass in GSAT. Sodding CPU+RAM loads is where I'm getting the PITA  .



Keith Myers said:


> I'm disappointed that the it87.ko driver only picks up *1* fan speed, the CPU fan, out of all the headers on the motherboard. I have 6 fans visible on the X370 Prime Pro motherboard with the same driver.:thumbsdow:thumbsdow


Dunno, even though I use GSAT, mPrime and Y-Cruncher (Dynamic) in Linux Mint I don't actively look for monitoring tools/aspects as WinOS data already gave me idea where I'd be. Still would really like so many of the WinOS apps or similar in Linux for this context.



VPII said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I've never really played around with the memory to see how high I can go with it. My memory is G.Skill F4-3200C14D TridentZ and 3200 works without any issues and is 100% stable. Unfortunately the Stilt preset for 3466 does not work....cannot even get boot. Which is funny as 3466 worked when I was using same memory and cpu but on the Asus Strix X370-F Gaming motherboard. I generally ran my memory for benching using 3333mhz set for memory but with CL14-13-13-28 1T timings as per the third screenshot. So I thought I'll just see if Stilts 3600 present would work, the one using 1.4vdimm. And low and behold it works, but unfortunately with 2T command rate. Interestingly it is still better than the 3333mhz mem with the low timings as you'll see in the 4th screenshot. I've actually gone a little further and dropped TRCD and TRP to 15 and it gave me a little bump in performance but I cannot say that this is 100% stable.
> 
> I've run the Stilt's preset 3600 for a complete memtest86 without any issues. I then ran IBT max memory used with the cpu at stock speed, I then ran Prime95 for almost 2 hours cpu at 4.2ghz without any issues. The next screenshots is basically just the performance difference shown with CB15 and Aida64 memory benchmark


Cheers for share  . I'm using same RAM on C7H and non issue for The Stilts presets for upto 3466MHz. Dunno why you can't emulate similar on C7H as Strix. Perhaps next UEFI will aid us  .



chakku said:


> Is there any reason to enable PBO if you're using PE3/4? From what I understand PE3/4 achieve the same thing?


PE presets on Extremer Tweaker are presets for Precision Boost Override/Overdrive. I have seen options are available in AMD CBS to create your own setup for PBO, not yet tried it.



crakej said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Today's update: 3533 pretty damn near stable - I've run many tests, and best result today is over 5000% RamTest, and over an hour of P95, which would probably pass for day to day use, but I will try and improve it. I've not enabled any Performance bias settings yet but have managed to keep my CL14 settings  Also, my SoC is still much happier below 1.0v - at 0.975 currently.
> 
> I'm having a bit of a break then going to play with 3600 which is already quite different with 2T and slightly lower voltages for it......exciting!
> 
> Update: - decided to give it a rest tonight so loaded up my 3533 settings. I thought I'd convert my manual voltages to offsets - that's the only thing I did. When I boot up, instead of CPU running at x41 it's running at x22. Ram is where it should be at 3533. Says 4100MHz in bios. Anyone got any ideas?


Nice you gained 3533MHz C14  , looking forward to any more testing you get done.

Perhaps a UEFI bug in regard to CPU stuck at 22x.



majestynl said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> hey @gupsterg
> 
> remember i was telling about the random shutdown with Idle while hwinfo and cpu-z was open. Saw an interesting article on HardOCP telling exactly the same. And its true Cinebench was also open over here
> Never happened again, but like asus is saying, switch between power plans. Exactly what i do often
> Check it out:https://www.hardocp.com/article/2018/04/30/amd_precision_boost_2_wraith_prism_deep_dive/6
> 
> _*Some Odd Failures*
> I ran into some failures using PB2 and I was able to track these down to NOT being PB2's issue, but rather a Windows Bug. We are using the latest version of Windows 10 64-bit and all its updates that were available on April 17th. We knew we were going to be doing a lot of testing, so we froze our OS updates at that point. What I was finding is that I would get these random power-downs using Cinebench, HWinfo64, and CPUz at the same time. I could not replicate the error without these three programs running simultaneously. At time I just assumed that I was beating on the CPU hard enough to make it fail, until it went into a hard power-down while sitting idle at the desktop, and I could replicate this issue at idle. Talking with AMD and ASUS about this, they asked me to work through the other power profiles we were not using. We use "High Power" for all our testing here. I moved to the Balanced profile, and it still happened. I then moved to the Ryzen Balanced profile, and it was still happening. Once I moved back to the High Performance profile again, I could not repeat the error. I could not replicate the error in Balanced or Ryzen Balanced either. ASUS let me know that there has been a Windows bug identified with this issue. The current solution to the issues seems to be to switch power profiles one or two times and it will correct itself. So if you are having some odd shutdowns, do not assume it is anything hardware or heat related._


Cheers  .

Yep seen that, I will add to FAQ OP on ROG forum for C7H  . I have not gone to W10 yet, only dual booting W7P x64/Linux Mint 18.3 x64 (latest kernel, etc).

Other than having board restarting when taking UEFI screenies on initial build/post I've had zero shutdowns or issues. Only issues have been if OC profile is borked, even then no shutdowns. It's either app crash in OS, OS freeze, etc.



minal said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> @*gupsterg* @Keith Myers
> 
> There is also CPU-X for linux, similar to CPU-Z for Windows, and looks like an alternative to I-Nex: https://github.com/X0rg/CPU-X
> 
> Do you know of tools that read Vcore or other voltages in linux? CPU-X has Vcore, but I don't know how accurate it is.
> 
> "sensors" and psensor show CPU, GPU, and HDD temperatures. CPU fan speed is detected... as 0 rpm.
> 
> I haven't tried it87 yet. Are there configuration instructions specific for 2700X?
> 
> Then there is CoreFreq that has a lot of measurements/features, but support for Ryzen2 is just being added. It's nice for seeing core frequencies under load. https://github.com/cyring/CoreFreq
> 
> Any other useful sensor tools for linux?


Will check that out, thank you  . I only dabble in Linux and am not a real power user TBH. I am going to add a Linux Mint section within the OP of ROG C7H thread.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> Nice you gained 3533MHz C14  , looking forward to any more testing you get done.
> 
> Perhaps a UEFI bug in regard to CPU stuck at 22x.


I'm happy to get here, but it does need a little more work to be 100% stable - I will of course post updates.

Will re-test using offsets - maybe it's already fixed in 0601 - maybe something for me to check out....


----------



## spyshagg

@elmor

I'd like to report a bug to Asus.


Above a certain BCLK overclock, the hotplug function of SATA ports 5 and 6 only works with SSD drives. HDD's are not detected. At stock BCLK, both SSDs and HDDs are detected.


Bios 6001


----------



## majestynl

sonic2911 said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stable yet?


Looks stable! What are your subtimings ? You can use Ryzen Timing checker APP for this!



zulex said:


> C7H Bios update is so slow compared to previous C6H.


CH6 is mature! With release it was also much slower then its now! Just give it a time.! The baby is growing. And probably will do faster!! 



wisepds said:


> @lordzed83 Do you know why my vcore is always at 1.319v with P-states overclocking and speed fluctuating between 4100 mhz and 2990 mhz? Cpu down core speed well, but Vcore is blocked at 1.319v.
> In last bios works well 0501, but in 0601 my vcore is always the same at same configuration.
> Thanks for help!


If you dont want down-clocking with Pstates use High performance power plan!




crakej said:


> Nope - no p-states, just changed _manual_ voltage to _offset_ and put in appropriate numbers for the voltage I wanted - that's literally all I did! Will get a screenshot for you asap  I also noticed that when i used offsets, my voltages appear correctly in the bios and at the SVI2TFN readouts in HWInfo. I'm going to have to rearrange things so I can access probit points....


Oke will wait for your Screenies! Probelt points are very accurate compared with SW on the CH7! not really needed!




gupsterg said:


> Cheers  .
> 
> Yep seen that, I will add to FAQ OP on ROG forum for C7H


NP 




spyshagg said:


> @elmor
> 
> I'd like to report a bug to Asus.
> 
> 
> Above a certain BCLK overclock, the hotplug function of SATA ports 5 and 6 only works with SSD drives. HDD's are not detected. At stock BCLK, both SSDs and HDDs are detected.
> 
> 
> Bios 6001


He is aware of that! Read the C7H Enthusiast Highlights v03.pdf !!


----------



## spyshagg

majestynl said:


> Looks stable! What are your subtimings ? You can use Ryzen Timing checker APP for this!
> 
> 
> 
> CH6 is mature! With release it was also much slower then its now! Just give it a time.! The baby is growing. And probably will do faster!!
> 
> 
> 
> If you dont want down-clocking with Pstates use High performance power plan!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oke will wait for your Screenies! Probelt points are very accurate compared with SW on the CH7! not really needed!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NP
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He is aware of that! Read the C7H Enthusiast Highlights v03.pdf !!


I'm not talking about the boot problem. Its about the hotswap/hotplug.


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> Stage 2 has crashed and burned  ...
> 
> When I initially posted 3533MHz using The Stilt 3466MHz timings and CPU 4.1GHz I let it run til morning. I lost only one thread at ~3.66hrs over a run of ~9.25hrs.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 194849
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I thought wow I'll nail this with some minor tweaks like SOC. I was totally wrong  . Any combo of changes in CPU VID, SOC, VDIMM, VTT, ProcODT and CAD Bus, yielded no improved stability  .
> 
> 3533MHz intermittently will go to Q-Code: F9 on posts in all situations. If I use ProcODT 53.3 this is resolved, but then OS stability testing is compromised. Using lower than 48 is post issue, anything higher than 53.3 is greater OS instability. CAD Bus all set to 30 improves stability, any higher is an issue, but still not enough stability gained to pass testing. Even tried single CAD Bus value increases. Lower than 30 or 24 is an issue. It is a similar story with CPU VID/SOC and VDIMM/VTT, changes up/down cause more issues than solve  .
> 
> I even undid CPU OC and used just 3.7GHz stock with no PB/XFR and no joy  . I can pass RAM tests, but can not repeat pass Y-Cruncher or P95. Spent yesterday virtually all day on it.
> 
> Up to 3400MHz was cruising it, basic tweaks of SOC/VDIMM. 3466MHz needed lowered ProcODT (from [Auto] 53.3 to 48) and VTT of 0.687, besides SOC tweak, VDIMM I was able to keep the 1.37V used for 3400MHz. 3533MHz is seemingly like a total different ball game to stabilise!
> 
> I will be having a crack again today, otherwise I will go back to 4.1GHz 3466MHz til new UEFI is released and go for 3533MHz again. I retested the 4.1GHz 3466MHz profile, it has zero issues in usage, HCI, GSAT, RB, Y-Cruncher, Prime95. Even if I use WinOS or Linux it is sound profile. Posting from shutdown with or without power to board again non issue. I can default UEFI and go straight to profile and again zero issues.
> 
> Hoping you have better luck :thumb: .



haha i know mate! Its damn annoying to get it stable on 3533! Im trying it with CL14. Dont want to go higher, doesnt make sense if i got 3466 stable with CL14! 
Also wrote same thing to @crakej yesterday!
See post: http://www.overclock.net/forum/27428177-post1390.html

Tried almost everything like you! CAS Bus / ProcODT / Lower CPU Clocks / Different profiles etc etc. By the way: If i got errors in stability test, the next time i wanted to go in the bios i got bootissues etc. Random things happening. So i found a workarround.
Every time when i changed/or tweaked something and it wasn't working i cleared the cmos before i try something else. This reflected in less boot issues etc! Even some of them got booted after clearcmos while it didn't before without a clearcmos! 

My ram is also sensitive for to much voltage for certain speeds. Its like he only want the exact amount of voltage for every Ram-clocks. What a bastard! 
But i managed to trick it with a lower Boot-voltage 

Anyways, im tired of 3533! I dont have any hope for now! If i remember it well, didnt see any post from somebody got it fully stable with low timings?!!
Probably i will wait for a new bios to give it a try again!!!!

Check out some of my papernotes i made while tweaking! Just for 3533 TT stability!


----------



## hurricane28

I can get 3600 MHz stable  

I only see no gains and in some applications i see downgrade so i run 3466 MHz CL14 again and is rock solid so far. 

I am planning on getting a new CPU, perhaps an 2600x or 2700x and i hope the newer generation is just as good if not better than my current 1600 IMC.


----------



## majestynl

hurricane28 said:


> I can get 3600 MHz stable
> 
> I only see no gains and in some applications i see downgrade so i run 3466 MHz CL14 again and is rock solid so far.
> 
> I am planning on getting a new CPU, perhaps an 2600x or 2700x and i hope the newer generation is just as good if not better than my current 1600 IMC.


yep i know you do mate.. and some others too. But 3533 with TT CL14 on a 2700x with CH7 nobody I think 
That's what I'm trying to get stable....not not not easy on this bios release...


----------



## hurricane28

majestynl said:


> yep i know you do mate.. and some others too. But 3533 with TT CL14 on a 2700x with CH7 nobody I think
> That's what I'm trying to get stable....not not not easy on this bios release...


I tin to get mediocre clocking chips but most of them have had good IMC. My 8350 could do 2400 MHz which was decent at the time but could " only" get to 4.8 GHz. 

I also figured that stability is in the eye of the beholder. I mean, if it crashes in Memtest86 it doesn't mean that you are unstable, its only unstable in that program. Its an good idea to run the program obviously but take it with a grain of salt. 

I can do anything with my rig and haven't had odd behavior or crashes in weeks now when running 3466 MHz CL14. When i run Memtest86 it sometimes gives errors but other days its completely stable... 

My guess is to run Memtest86 for an hour and if it doesn't crash just try your everyday tasks and keep an eye on Windows if it doesn't do weird stuff and doesn't crash or any odd behavior i guess you are stable. No need to stress for hours and hours on end, this only stresses the system unnecessary long and is no good indication of stability imo.


----------



## spyshagg

Many bugs in this bios. Many many bugs.


@elmor 


*1* - Changing DIGI+ POWER cpu phase from stock -> EXTREME "breaks" PE3. 



*Stock DIGI+ POWER CPU="T-probe":*

All-core boost :









Single-core result:












*Changed DIGI+ POWER CPU="EXTREME"*

All-core boost broken. Only 4 will boost to highest state:









Single-core result: Does boost the clock correctly, but the actual performance is lower. Only 446:














*2* - After testing the problem above (T-probe -> extreme), I noticed my PE3 now only boosts up to 40.25x and 42.75 instead of 40.5x and 43.5x. 

I have erased the BIOS, I have reflashed the bios, I introduced every setting manually. My PE3 will no longer boost up to 40.5x and 43.5x. I dont know what to do.




*3* - Exported bios OC profiles dont save the settings under "Monitor"



*4* - Above 101mhz BCLK (102mhz), having the same Dram boot voltage as you main Dram voltage disables XFR/PE boosting.



*5* - Above 101mhz BCLK (102mhz)with CPU voltage on AUTO, causes the cpu to have the same problem as Nº1 I posted above. Setting from AUTO -> offset positive fixes the issue.


*6* - Power On Light on the PC case does not stay turned on when overclocking the board. The board appears to cycle 3 times before actually posting, and does so with the power on light OFF. If the board is 100% stock, the board posts immediately and the light stays ON.


----------



## crakej

Memtest86 just can't give any guarantees that you will be stable in Windows - all stability testing needs to be done on the OS you will be using.


----------



## gupsterg

@majestynl

I can taste 3533MHz with 3466MHz The Stilt's timings /forum/images/smilies/tongue.gif . Benches well in AIDA64, CB15, etc. I see gains.

I'm now doing a differing approach /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif . I'm using BCLK to lower CPU/DDR, with BCLK 99MHz, so CPU ~ 4.06GHz (VID: 1.318V as needed for 4.1GHz), DDR ~3497MHz. Hasn't shown post issues even when keeping ProcODT 48 and CAD Bus all 24. VDIMM is 1.375V as in 1st P95 run of 3533MHz where I lost only a thread over ~9.25hrs. Just bumped SOC so far. This has yielded some stability in P95. I'm "repeating/rinsing" and then gonna bump BCLK to see how I need to tweak.


----------



## CJMitsuki

lordzed83 said:


> I tell ya a secred.... 2700x CANT DO 4300 stable.... I got Binned Chip and it Cant do it and if Yours is random then Thats that




Ill tell you another "secred" there are going to be chips that come randomly that will beat these "binned" chips. Even the Stilt even said earlier on in this thread he would hardly call those "binned" chips binned at all. My so called random chip easily runs 4.25ghz at or below 1.4v so what is the real difference in the binned and random chips? Not much at all, if anything besides the price that was paid.


----------



## sonic2911

Still stock, around 50* when run memtest, 4GHz boost 8 cores, is it high?
Do we have any faster way to test memory?


----------



## Martin778

Are the C7H and C7H-WiFi 100% identical besides the WiFi module? Just want to be sure both will get the same amount of BIOS'es and support...


----------



## Onijin

majestynl said:


> yep i know you do mate.. and some others too. But 3533 with TT CL14 on a 2700x with CH7 nobody I think
> That's what I'm trying to get stable....not not not easy on this bios release...


Don't give up, bro. It's doable. I don't know how tight you're gunning for on your secondary and tertiary timings but here's what I'm using with some higher binned 3600.

-Edit- This is on BIOS 0509 BTW.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Onijin said:


> Don't give up, bro. It's doable. I don't know how tight you're gunning for on your secondary and tertiary timings but here's what I'm using with some higher binned 3600.
> 
> -Edit- This is on BIOS 0509 BTW.



Have you tested 8+ hours in memtest64 or 86? or at least with HCI memtest or Ramtest in OS to around 5000% or so? To be 99% sure there are no errors? Personally outside of OS testing is much better but Ramtest to 5000% you can be 99% sure there are no errors.


----------



## CJMitsuki

crakej said:


> Memtest86 just can't give any guarantees that you will be stable in Windows - all stability testing needs to be done on the OS you will be using.



I think you misunderstand the reason for running MemTest86 or HCI MemTest64 and the need for testing outside of your operating system BEFORE you carry your testing into your operating system. 



Testing with those 2 are to let you know it is safe to boot into your operating system as when you go into your OS, system memory is used therefore you are unable to test that memory. If you notice in RamTest, HCI memtest pro, etc you test around 80-85% of the memory at any given time. So, no matter if you run 5000% or 10000000% you can only be sure of that 80-85% of the memory you tested. Outside of the operating system however, MemTest64 (HCI) and MemTest86 test 99.6% of your memory at any given time. Bios reserves memory so you can never test 100% of the memory but the best testing is done outside of the operating system. Stability is determined by errors since even 1 error means that your system IS NOT stable. When you boot into your operating system with memory errors you are running the risk of those errors corrupting system files, drivers, etc and once any of those files are corrupted then not only has your operating system been made unstable even after your fix the memory errors, it can be an utter nightmare troubleshooting and fixing corrupted files without doing a clean OS install since scannow doesnt always find the corruption and DISM often is one of the first things that gets corrupted from my own experiences. 



While I think RamTest and HCI MemTest Pro are great programs for testing memory fast and I use them for testing out very slight changes to timings, they absolutely cant replace running outside of the OS with the above mentioned programs for 8+ hours. RamTest and HCI MemTest Pro use the CPU cache to speed up memory testing and can also cause false positives as a drawback to being so fast, something to keep in mind. Any big changes to memory timings, speed, and for final stability confirmation should always be done away from the operating system so that as much of the memory as possible is free to test slowly and thoroughly. I hate waiting that long for confirmation as everyone does but it is necessary to have the most confidence that your system is error free :thumb:


----------



## Keith Myers

*Other useful Linux testing apps*



minal said:


> @*gupsterg* @Keith Myers
> 
> There is also CPU-X for linux, similar to CPU-Z for Windows, and looks like an alternative to I-Nex: https://github.com/X0rg/CPU-X
> 
> Do you know of tools that read Vcore or other voltages in linux? CPU-X has Vcore, but I don't know how accurate it is.
> 
> "sensors" and psensor show CPU, GPU, and HDD temperatures. CPU fan speed is detected... as 0 rpm.
> 
> I haven't tried it87 yet. Are there configuration instructions specific for 2700X?
> 
> Then there is CoreFreq that has a lot of measurements/features, but support for Ryzen2 is just being added. It's nice for seeing core frequencies under load. https://github.com/cyring/CoreFreq
> 
> Any other useful sensor tools for linux?


I gave the mentioned I-NEX a look. Other than looking like the main page of CPU-Z, it really doesn't have similar features of what is exposes. I'll pass on it. Will have to look for the CPU-X mentioned next.

On the 2700X on the new system, it loads the K10-temp driver which reports the cpu Tctl temp. Useful if you just mentally deduct the 20° offset. The it87 driver picks up just about everything that the SIO chip throws out. Most voltages are meaningless because scaling needs to be performed. Vddcr is reported just the same as in Windows. Fan speeds are all spot on. Temps seem to be spot on also. Just have determine what each label is actually attached to either by stopping a fan or using a blow dryer or cool pack on the part to change the temp and see which label has changed. Then change the label in Psensor or GKrellm to something meaningful to you like physical location.

No special configurations necessary for 2700X. I just grab the latest github build clone and download it and compile and install the driver.

I'll have to revisit CoreFreq, I looked at it back last year and it couldn't handle Ryzen. Right now if I want to monitor cpu core frequencies, I just pull up a terminal and do



Code:


watch -n1 "cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep 'MHz'"

It is interesting to watch the cores bounce around with the cpufreq governor set to OnDemand with general workloads and then lock in when loading all cores with mprime for example.

The only other Linux programs that I have found useful are hardinfo which only does a summary of the system and a token benchmark. For better benchmarks either you can use Geekbench4 or the multitude of tests in the Phoronix Test suite. Intel Memory Latency Checker is good for determining effects of memory tweaks.:thumb:


----------



## Onijin

CJMitsuki said:


> Have you tested 8+ hours in memtest64 or 86? or at least with HCI memtest or Ramtest in OS to around 5000% or so? To be 99% sure there are no errors? Personally outside of OS testing is much better but Ramtest to 5000% you can be 99% sure there are no errors.


Yes and yes, respectively. Memtest left overnight with no errors and HCI overnight the next night with 16 threads and no errors.


----------



## wisepds

majestynl said:


> Looks stable! What are your subtimings ? You can use Ryzen Timing checker APP for this!
> 
> 
> 
> CH6 is mature! With release it was also much slower then its now! Just give it a time.! The baby is growing. And probably will do faster!!
> 
> 
> 
> If you dont want down-clocking with Pstates use High performance power plan!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oke will wait for your Screenies! Probelt points are very accurate compared with SW on the CH7! not really needed!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NP
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He is aware of that! Read the C7H Enthusiast Highlights v03.pdf !!


I want down-clocking....to 0,8v at 2800 mhz.... always was like that... until 0601 bios.


----------



## wisepds

@majestynl I want that vcore at 1.319 with 4100 and 0,8v at 2199 mhz. 
It is the same settings as in the previous BIOS. In bios 0509 the processor dropped in voltage when it was at 2199 mhz. Now it's not.


----------



## minal

gupsterg said:


> Will check that out, thank you  . I only dabble in Linux and am not a real power user TBH. I am going to add a Linux Mint section within the OP of ROG C7H thread.


Great. Could you perhaps compare the voltage reported by CPU-X vs other Windows tools to get a sense of its accuracy? 



Keith Myers said:


> I gave the mentioned I-NEX a look. Other than looking like the main page of CPU-Z, it really doesn't have similar features of what is exposes. I'll pass on it. Will have to look for the CPU-X mentioned next.
> 
> On the 2700X on the new system, it loads the K10-temp driver which reports the cpu Tctl temp. Useful if you just mentally deduct the 20° offset. The it87 driver picks up just about everything that the SIO chip throws out. Most voltages are meaningless because scaling needs to be performed. Vddcr is reported just the same as in Windows. Fan speeds are all spot on. Temps seem to be spot on also. Just have determine what each label is actually attached to either by stopping a fan or using a blow dryer or cool pack on the part to change the temp and see which label has changed. Then change the label in Psensor or GKrellm to something meaningful to you like physical location.
> 
> No special configurations necessary for 2700X. I just grab the latest github build clone and download it and compile and install the driver.
> 
> I'll have to revisit CoreFreq, I looked at it back last year and it couldn't handle Ryzen. Right now if I want to monitor cpu core frequencies, I just pull up a terminal and do
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> watch -n1 "cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep 'MHz'"
> 
> It is interesting to watch the cores bounce around with the cpufreq governor set to OnDemand with general workloads and then lock in when loading all cores with mprime for example.
> 
> The only other Linux programs that I have found useful are hardinfo which only does a summary of the system and a token benchmark. For better benchmarks either you can use Geekbench4 or the multitude of tests in the Phoronix Test suite. Intel Memory Latency Checker is good for determining effects of memory tweaks.:thumb:


Great info! I'll definitely check out it87. It would be great to have more sensor info that sensors/psensor currently provide.

Kernel 4.16.6 fixed the 49C or 59C offset issue with the 2700X.

I see we use similar tools; I've been using:


Code:


watch -n1 "cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpufreq/scaling_cur_freq"

CoreFreq doesn't yet properly handle Ryzen 2, but there is an open issue on github and the developer is currently adding the functionality for temperature readings.


----------



## majestynl

hurricane28 said:


> I tin to get mediocre clocking chips but most of them have had good IMC. My 8350 could do 2400 MHz which was decent at the time but could " only" get to 4.8 GHz.
> 
> I also figured that stability is in the eye of the beholder. I mean, if it crashes in Memtest86 it doesn't mean that you are unstable, its only unstable in that program. Its an good idea to run the program obviously but take it with a grain of salt.
> 
> I can do anything with my rig and haven't had odd behavior or crashes in weeks now when running 3466 MHz CL14. When i run Memtest86 it sometimes gives errors but other days its completely stable...
> 
> My guess is to run Memtest86 for an hour and if it doesn't crash just try your everyday tasks and keep an eye on Windows if it doesn't do weird stuff and doesn't crash or any odd behavior i guess you are stable. No need to stress for hours and hours on end, this only stresses the system unnecessary long and is no good indication of stability imo.


yeap i know, but i want my memory always full stable. I can say from past if memory is not full stable i can get weird issues in SW or Games! 
For cpu is not a biggie if you dont got it 100% stable in all stresstests for hours or overnight!




gupsterg said:


> @majestynl
> 
> I can taste 3533MHz with 3466MHz The Stilt's timings /forum/images/smilies/tongue.gif . Benches well in AIDA64, CB15, etc. I see gains.
> 
> I'm now doing a differing approach /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif . I'm using BCLK to lower CPU/DDR, with BCLK 99MHz, so CPU ~ 4.06GHz (VID: 1.318V as needed for 4.1GHz), DDR ~3497MHz. Hasn't shown post issues even when keeping ProcODT 48 and CAD Bus all 24. VDIMM is 1.375V as in 1st P95 run of 3533MHz where I lost only a thread over ~9.25hrs. Just bumped SOC so far. This has yielded some stability in P95. I'm "repeating/rinsing" and then gonna bump BCLK to see how I need to tweak.


haha yeah i allready tasted it. I saw really good results in AIDA64. And CB15 etc is not showing any issues only good results. But when it comes to RamStresstesting it fails between 100-900% (RAMtest)! 
also a Good trick with BCLK..nice! 



Onijin said:


> Don't give up, bro. It's doable. I don't know how tight you're gunning for on your secondary and tertiary timings but here's what I'm using with some higher binned 3600.
> 
> -Edit- This is on BIOS 0509 BTW.


i dont know mate...its frustating and takes ages for testing. 3466 cl14 with TT was allready few days before i got it fully fully stable. But with that one i saw some hope when i did some tweaks.. 
Al last tests for 3533+CL14 TT failed around 500-1000%...even with Ramtest its to long to tweak. For every small tweak i need to wait that long and allready had so many shots without succes.
As said before...i dont think its doable with very tight timings. I need to see at least 1 or 2 persons with a screenshot! 




wisepds said:


> @majestynl I want that vcore at 1.319 with 4100 and 0,8v at 2199 mhz.
> It is the same settings as in the previous BIOS. In bios 0509 the processor dropped in voltage when it was at 2199 mhz. Now it's not.


I skipped 0509 but with current bios its not down-volting for the SV12 sensor! If i remember it well this was confirmed by elmor!
Which sensor are u checking btw? Cause the vcore under Mainboard sensor and the CORE vid under your CPU sensor(top Hwinfo) is down-volting over here!

But i dont think its a big issue, you know the voltage isnt that important if the cpu is not under load right?


----------



## hurricane28

majestynl said:


> yeap i know, but i want my memory always full stable. I can say from past if memory is not full stable i can get weird issues in SW or Games!
> For cpu is not a biggie if you dont got it 100% stable in all stresstests for hours or overnight!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> haha yeah i allready tasted it. I saw really good results in AIDA64. And CB15 etc is not showing any issues only good results. But when it comes to RamStresstesting it fails between 100-900% (RAMtest)!
> also a Good trick with BCLK..nice!
> 
> 
> 
> i dont know mate...its frustating and takes ages for testing. 3466 cl14 with TT was allready few days before i got it fully fully stable. But with that one i saw some hope when i did some tweaks..
> Al last tests for 3533+CL14 TT failed around 500-1000%...even with Ramtest its to long to tweak. For every small tweak i need to wait that long and allready had so many shots without succes.
> As said before...i dont think its doable with very tight timings. I need to see at least 1 or 2 persons with a screenshot!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I skipped 0509 but with current bios its not down-volting for the SV12 sensor! If i remember it well this was confirmed by elmor!
> Which sensor are u checking btw? Cause the vcore under Mainboard sensor and the CORE vid under your CPU sensor(top Hwinfo) is down-volting over here!
> 
> But i dont think its a big issue, you know the voltage isnt that important if the cpu is not under load right?


I hear ya man. Its also much harder to get RAM stable than CPU. Its indeed more important to have stable RAM as i too have seen very weird behavior when RAM isn't stable. 

That being said, those things also happened when i was stable in Memtest86 overnight.. I tested again and it failed.. This Ryzen platform is still very unstable and unreliable when it comes to overclocking it seems. Hopefully we will get more stability with new BIOS releases.


----------



## wisepds

majestynl said:


> I skipped 0509 but with current bios its not down-volting for the SV12 sensor! If i remember it well this was confirmed by elmor!
> Which sensor are u checking btw? Cause the vcore under Mainboard sensor and the CORE vid under your CPU sensor(top Hwinfo) is down-volting over here!
> 
> But i dont think its a big issue, you know the voltage isnt that important if the cpu is not under load right?


Ok, i will wait until next bios... but for now all run fine... Thanks majestynl


----------



## PeerlessGirl

hurricane28 said:


> Its the same, i moved my Nvme drive to the bottom slot and could mount the heat sink too, no problems there.


Maybe I just mis-threaded the screw, I'll give it another shot. I assume I want to peel that backing tape off and stick it to my M.2 after I test fit it? Stupid question, but I figured I'd ask...



Martin778 said:


> Are the C7H and C7H-WiFi 100% identical besides the WiFi module? Just want to be sure both will get the same amount of BIOS'es and support...


I believe they are, except that I know @elmor said the Wi-fi version is the current production development board, so if you want to be right there for immediate beta BIOSes, the WiFi is more guaranteed.


----------



## crakej

CJMitsuki said:


> I think you misunderstand the reason for running MemTest86 or HCI MemTest64 and the need for testing outside of your operating system BEFORE you carry your testing into your operating system.
> 
> Testing with those 2 are to let you know it is safe to boot into your operating system as when you go into your OS, system memory is used therefore you are unable to test that memory. If you notice in RamTest, HCI memtest pro, etc you test around 80-85% of the memory at any given time. So, no matter if you run 5000% or 10000000% you can only be sure of that 80-85% of the memory you tested. Outside of the operating system however, MemTest64 (HCI) and MemTest86 test 99.6% of your memory at any given time. Bios reserves memory so you can never test 100% of the memory but the best testing is done outside of the operating system. Stability is determined by errors since even 1 error means that your system IS NOT stable. When you boot into your operating system with memory errors you are running the risk of those errors corrupting system files, drivers, etc and once any of those files are corrupted then not only has your operating system been made unstable even after your fix the memory errors, it can be an utter nightmare troubleshooting and fixing corrupted files without doing a clean OS install since scannow doesnt always find the corruption and DISM often is one of the first things that gets corrupted from my own experiences.
> 
> While I think RamTest and HCI MemTest Pro are great programs for testing memory fast and I use them for testing out very slight changes to timings, they absolutely cant replace running outside of the OS with the above mentioned programs for 8+ hours. RamTest and HCI MemTest Pro use the CPU cache to speed up memory testing and can also cause false positives as a drawback to being so fast, something to keep in mind. Any big changes to memory timings, speed, and for final stability confirmation should always be done away from the operating system so that as much of the memory as possible is free to test slowly and thoroughly. I hate waiting that long for confirmation as everyone does but it is necessary to have the most confidence that your system is error free :thumb:


Actually, I do understand, but I don't place the same value as you do on it. If it passes 400% Memtest86 it's stable enough to go on to your operating system. If you try tuning everything just to make memtest pass, you may well run into problems when your OS is running - things that you will never see with memtest. Also, I have one computer - why waste a night on memtest when I can go straight to RamTest which is very sensitive.

I only enter timings that have a good chance of running - that way I have never corrupted my OS, and I have rarely needed to clear my cmos (let alone remove the battery!). I think the last time I did it was over year ago. If you're taking your time and only making small adjustments there is no need to run memtest again and again.

If I was installing a mission critical server (which I have done before) then yes, memtest is very important, but for most of us here, if you can boot to your desktop, and run anything for hours, it's likely the memory your OS is using is fine

Your operating system takes care of the managing of ram and can make things very different to how memtest sees it. I had memtest throw thousands of errors on my perfectly stable 3466 CL14 last week, I panicked, but booted perfectly when I reset, so on top of my preference for in OS testing, I don't really trust it any more.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> @majestynl
> 
> I can taste 3533MHz with 3466MHz The Stilt's timings /forum/images/smilies/tongue.gif . Benches well in AIDA64, CB15, etc. I see gains.
> 
> I'm now doing a differing approach /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif . I'm using BCLK to lower CPU/DDR, with BCLK 99MHz, so CPU ~ 4.06GHz (VID: 1.318V as needed for 4.1GHz), DDR ~3497MHz. Hasn't shown post issues even when keeping ProcODT 48 and CAD Bus all 24. VDIMM is 1.375V as in 1st P95 run of 3533MHz where I lost only a thread over ~9.25hrs. Just bumped SOC so far. This has yielded some stability in P95. I'm "repeating/rinsing" and then gonna bump BCLK to see how I need to tweak.


Damn close! I've not gone onto BCLK yet - I spent the day experimenting with CadBus settings but currently the best test I've had was the other day with +5000% RamTest - so far.

I tried all at 20Ohm, 30ohm (which only got to 200%) and my last test was with 40,auto,auto,auto which got 3222%. Going to try going a bit higher before I resign myself to this setting being best at all auto(24ohms) - will try all at 40 etc, but will also try ClkDrvStr with higher levels as I've seen some have some results like that. ProcODT (for me) has to stay at 53.3 - though I will give a try booting with geardown=off and ProcODT 48ohm....

I've not used LLC either, but can see a time that I might use it when trying to get 3600 stable without losing my cpu OC of 4.1GHz. So far at 3600 (2T) it's the same or very slightly slower than 3533CL14. I might spend some time tommorrow just working on the RAM OCs without the CPU at the same time as reckon it will be easier to stabilize (if it's going to!) and can rule out cpu settings causing problems.

My SoC is still at 0.975, and I also find my ram very sensitive to voltage - literally one setting up or down and it becomes unstable


----------



## hurricane28

PeerlessGirl said:


> Maybe I just mis-threaded the screw, I'll give it another shot. I assume I want to peel that backing tape off and stick it to my M.2 after I test fit it? Stupid question, but I figured I'd ask...
> 
> 
> 
> I believe they are, except that I know @elmor said the Wi-fi version is the current production development board, so if you want to be right there for immediate beta BIOSes, the WiFi is more guaranteed.


I guess so, i have mounted it perfectly. It should as its the same slot lol. It would be pretty weird if the bottom slot is longer or shorter lol. 

Yeah, you can peel that off carefully, i didn't do it though, i just screwed it in.


----------



## crakej

*Converting voltages from Manual to Offset Not working*

I promised a couple of pics Re: Using offset voltages causes cpu to down-clock from x41 to x22 in Windows.... all I changed was the CPU and SoC from _Manual_ to _Offset_ and the numbers put in to get voltages I wanted.

Also worth noting is that when I changed to using Offset voltages, they displayed correctly in the bios and in HWInfo - when they were on manual they always showed lower values than those set in the bios.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Onijin said:


> Yes and yes, respectively. Memtest left overnight with no errors and HCI overnight the next night with 16 threads and no errors.



Very nice, I am initially stable, barring an overnight test which ill run tomorrow while at work. Im not quite as low as tight as your timings are but I am also running a f4-3200c14 kit as well. I was surprised the 3200mhz kit would even get close to 3533mhz stable at c14, especially at 1.43v and the performance jump from 3400 was pretty amazing although I had to adjust the r1-r4 to 40 instead of 63 or else it would not run without error. I suppose that is the fun of Mem OC, finding the quirks about each kit and being rewarded foir determination. I finally was able to get 2000 on Cinebench because of 3533mhz. It runs beautifully, although I think this will be the limit of this particular 3200mhz kit it has surpassed my expectations for sure. I could probably get 3600 stable but the timings would end up being loose to the point that 3533 would outperform it im sure. Do yo umind posting some of your benchmarks with those timings?


----------



## Onijin

CJMitsuki said:


> Very nice, I am initially stable, barring an overnight test which ill run tomorrow while at work. Im not quite as low as tight as your timings are but I am also running a f4-3200c14 kit as well. I was surprised the 3200mhz kit would even get close to 3533mhz stable at c14, especially at 1.43v and the performance jump from 3400 was pretty amazing although I had to adjust the r1-r4 to 40 instead of 63 or else it would not run without error. I suppose that is the fun of Mem OC, finding the quirks about each kit and being rewarded foir determination. I finally was able to get 2000 on Cinebench because of 3533mhz. It runs beautifully, although I think this will be the limit of this particular 3200mhz kit it has surpassed my expectations for sure. I could probably get 3600 stable but the timings would end up being loose to the point that 3533 would outperform it im sure. Do yo umind posting some of your benchmarks with those timings?


Sure. What benchmarks are you interested in seeing? I'll be leaving for work in a few minutes here but I'd be happy to run a couple passes at whatever in the morning.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Onijin said:


> Sure. What benchmarks are you interested in seeing? I'll be leaving for work in a few minutes here but I'd be happy to run a couple passes at whatever in the morning.



Oh, I was just interested in seeing what your Aida64 CacheMem bench was or Passmark Performance, anything really. I like to have something similar to compare to my own benchmarking numbers to see if I need to put more work into it or if Im fine where Im at. It feels great and I doubt I can squeeze more from this speed without a lot more voltage but something to compare to is always welcome. Until I get this other 4133mhz kit RMA'd I am enjoying my old 3200mhz kit which, until my 4133 kit had problems was only used on first gen with x370 board and could only hit 3333mhz with loose timings and 1.45v so x470 and 2nd gen was a massive improvement over the prior.


----------



## Onijin

CJMitsuki said:


> Oh, I was just interested in seeing what your Aida64 CacheMem bench was or Passmark Performance, anything really. I like to have something similar to compare to my own benchmarking numbers to see if I need to put more work into it or if Im fine where Im at. It feels great and I doubt I can squeeze more from this speed without a lot more voltage but something to compare to is always welcome. Until I get this other 4133mhz kit RMA'd I am enjoying my old 3200mhz kit which, until my 4133 kit had problems was only used on first gen with x370 board and could only hit 3333mhz with loose timings and 1.45v so x470 and 2nd gen was a massive improvement over the prior.


No problem. I'll run passes and post screens in the morning.


----------



## gupsterg

sonic2911 said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still stock, around 50* when run memtest, 4GHz boost 8 cores, is it high?
> Do we have any faster way to test memory?


~4GHz is normal for context of usage. You could try RAM Test, dunno how much faster that is as haven't purchased it. GSAT can be used in BASH for windows, but I prefer using it in Linux Mint.



Keith Myers said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I gave the mentioned I-NEX a look. Other than looking like the main page of CPU-Z, it really doesn't have similar features of what is exposes. I'll pass on it. Will have to look for the CPU-X mentioned next.
> 
> On the 2700X on the new system, it loads the K10-temp driver which reports the cpu Tctl temp. Useful if you just mentally deduct the 20° offset. The it87 driver picks up just about everything that the SIO chip throws out. Most voltages are meaningless because scaling needs to be performed. Vddcr is reported just the same as in Windows. Fan speeds are all spot on. Temps seem to be spot on also. Just have determine what each label is actually attached to either by stopping a fan or using a blow dryer or cool pack on the part to change the temp and see which label has changed. Then change the label in Psensor or GKrellm to something meaningful to you like physical location.
> 
> No special configurations necessary for 2700X. I just grab the latest github build clone and download it and compile and install the driver.
> 
> I'll have to revisit CoreFreq, I looked at it back last year and it couldn't handle Ryzen. Right now if I want to monitor cpu core frequencies, I just pull up a terminal and do
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> watch -n1 "cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep 'MHz'"
> 
> It is interesting to watch the cores bounce around with the cpufreq governor set to OnDemand with general workloads and then lock in when loading all cores with mprime for example.
> 
> The only other Linux programs that I have found useful are hardinfo which only does a summary of the system and a token benchmark. For better benchmarks either you can use Geekbench4 or the multitude of tests in the Phoronix Test suite. Intel Memory Latency Checker is good for determining effects of memory tweaks.:thumb:


Appreciate your post Keith, somewhat Linux n00b here  , so mentioned meddling I will try and enjoy for sure  . I blew my weekend with trying to get 3533MHz nailed, which I failed again at  (LOL). 



minal said:


> Great. Could you perhaps compare the voltage reported by CPU-X vs other Windows tools to get a sense of its accuracy?


Will do, ASAP  . 



majestynl said:


> haha yeah i allready tasted it. I saw really good results in AIDA64. And CB15 etc is not showing any issues only good results. But when it comes to RamStresstesting it fails between 100-900% (RAMtest)!
> also a Good trick with BCLK..nice!


Crashed and burned v2.0 yesterday :laugher: .

For 4.1GHz 3466MHz The Stilt I use:-

VID: 1.318V
SOC: 0.968V
VDIMM: 1.37V
VTT: 0.687
ProcODT: 48
CAD Bus: [Auto] = 24 for all
LLC is [Auto] for CORE/SOC

Even this morning with ~18C room, 1st post of the day is sweet. I really can't say I've encountered an issue using the profile in multiple OS, etc. Below left is stock CPU (PE: Default not Auto) with 3400MHz and right 4.1GHz 3466MHz, as stated before is nicer on peak voltages, temps, etc than stock, only lose minor single core performance IMO.



Spoiler














3533MHz testing is based on above settings and changes as below gave me stated results.

BCLK 99.0MHz using 4.1GHz PState and 3533MHz setup = ~4.06GHz CPU ~3497MHz DDR I only need to bump SOC/VDIMM to gain stability in P95 v28.10B1 8K 4096K 13GB. I need 0.993V and 1.38V after testing few reruns for upto ~1hr. BCLK 99.2MHz = ~4.07GHz CPU ~3505MHz DDR passes with same setup.

BCLK 99.4MHz is where it all goes to pot  .

This targets ~4.08GHz CPU ~3511MHz DDR. I start getting the intermittent post issues. Raising ProcODT to 53.3 solves that. I need to change CAD Bus to 30 for all values or stability is affected in P95. Increasing SOC to 1.018V allows >30min and upto 1hr stability in P95. Only lose 1 worker and this was higher than norm room ambient of ~26C.

If I increase SOC to 1.031V I have quicker fail. Lowering SOC back to 1.018V and upping ProcODT to 60 I again reach >30min and upto 1hr stability in P95. Jumping to ProcODT 68 I lost 8 workers in <1min  .

Backing down to ProcODT 60 gains me back stability, deviating from CAD bus 30 (up or down) again loses stability. All in all need at least ProcODT 53 or 60 to aid posting/P95 stability, CAD Bus 30 only for P95 stability. Changes again to SOC/VDIMM lose me stability, up or down, changing VTT also loses me stability, up or down. I started seeing lost threads within <5min with any deviation on SOC/VDIMM/VTT  .

I also tried setting CTRL Ref and VDDP from [Auto] to stock values manually thinking perhaps something like that is getting setup wrong. Also set RTT values manually for what RTC has been showing [Auto] to be.

Either I have reached the limit of my CPU IMC or my own tweaking ability or need to wait for a newer UEFI with perhaps a differing IMC FW that may help.



crakej said:


> Damn close! I've not gone onto BCLK yet - I spent the day experimenting with CadBus settings but currently the best test I've had was the other day with +5000% RamTest - so far.
> 
> I tried all at 20Ohm, 30ohm (which only got to 200%) and my last test was with 40,auto,auto,auto which got 3222%. Going to try going a bit higher before I resign myself to this setting being best at all auto(24ohms) - will try all at 40 etc, but will also try ClkDrvStr with higher levels as I've seen some have some results like that. ProcODT (for me) has to stay at 53.3 - though I will give a try booting with geardown=off and ProcODT 48ohm....
> 
> I've not used LLC either, but can see a time that I might use it when trying to get 3600 stable without losing my cpu OC of 4.1GHz. So far at 3600 (2T) it's the same or very slightly slower than 3533CL14. I might spend some time tommorrow just working on the RAM OCs without the CPU at the same time as reckon it will be easier to stabilize (if it's going to!) and can rule out cpu settings causing problems.
> 
> My SoC is still at 0.975, and I also find my ram very sensitive to voltage - literally one setting up or down and it becomes unstable


For me it doesn't seem CPU MHz is issue, it's just DDR MHz. I think I have ran out of options to solve 3533MHz for CPU+RAM loads, only RAM tests pass for me.



crakej said:


> I promised a couple of pics Re: Using offset voltages causes cpu to down-clock from x41 to x22 in Windows.... all I changed was the CPU and SoC from _Manual_ to _Offset_ and the numbers put in to get voltages I wanted.
> 
> Also worth noting is that when I changed to using Offset voltages, they displayed correctly in the bios and in HWInfo - when they were on manual they always showed lower values than those set in the bios.


IIRC this bug occurred on X370 with some gen 1 CPUs if voltage was manually set to xyz. So your issues is similar but also different.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> For me it doesn't seem CPU MHz is issue, it's just DDR MHz. I think I have ran out of options to solve 3533MHz for CPU+RAM loads, only RAM tests pass for me.
> 
> IIRC this bug occurred on X370 with some gen 1 CPUs if voltage was manually set to xyz. So your issues is similar but also different.


Yes, I remember a bug similar to this on x370 - quite possible it's fixed on 0601 which I might give another go on using offsets, but I'm guessing another bios is coming soon so might hang on see what happens.


----------



## crakej

*Aura makes SPD appear corrupt on ram with Aura lighting*

Thought I'd do some checking this morning Re: Aura causing SPD to appear corrupt.

I installed Aura, ran it, and Aura itself warned about the problem. My SDP looked a bit wrong but after removing Aura (presumable just stopping it will work too) it was back to normal.

So I can confirm that what I said before was correct - and now tested. If you have Aura mem sticks the best thing to do is read the information you need from Thaiphoon before you install Aura. If you're already running it then you need to stop it before you use Thaiphoon. If you want to change your lighting, you can just load Aura, change your lighting, then remove it.

If you've read your SPD (on Aura RGB rams) in Thaiphoon and they look corrupt, they're not - just stop or remove Aura and your SPD will be read correctly.


----------



## lordzed83

And I'm playing around with Windows versions atm Tested April RS3 RS4 RS5 shame I dont have RS1 iso anymore seems it was best. Others cant get to that performance level by looks of it.

Fastest by looks of it is RS5


----------



## spyshagg

crakej said:


> I promised a couple of pics Re: Using offset voltages causes cpu to down-clock from x41 to x22 in Windows.... all I changed was the CPU and SoC from _Manual_ to _Offset_ and the numbers put in to get voltages I wanted.
> 
> Also worth noting is that when I changed to using Offset voltages, they displayed correctly in the bios and in HWInfo - when they were on manual they always showed lower values than those set in the bios.


Yes, cpu voltage offsets caused me havoc on the board behavior while on PE.

also, for some reason using the same Dram boot voltage as your Main Dram voltage causes XFR/PE to be disabled entirely, if you happen to be above 101mhz BCLK.


The bugs are countless. Some of these issues never happened on my previous reflash of the same 6001 BIOS.


Its a miracle I reached a stable 103mhz BCKL profile with everything working and boosting properly. It took me two hours do diagnose the DRAM boot voltage canceling my XFR above 101mhz BCLK


----------



## knightriot

gupsterg said:


> IIRC this bug occurred on X370 with some gen 1 CPUs if voltage was manually set to xyz. So your issues is similar but also different.


try enable CPB bro


----------



## kazablanka

Guys the official 0601 bios from asus webpage is the same with the 0601 in the first page here ,or there have been any changes?


----------



## crakej

kazablanka said:


> Guys the official 0601 bios from asus webpage is the same with the 0601 in the first page here ,or there have been any changes?


Yes, the same - they will increase version number if there are changes.


----------



## crakej

knightriot said:


> try enable CPB bro


That wouldn't be wise with CPU running at 4.1GHz!


----------



## kazablanka

crakej said:


> Yes, the same - they will increase version number if there are changes.


Thanks crakej!

So how is it going with your ram overclocking? Have you find stability above 3466mhz?


----------



## sonic2911

kazablanka said:


> Thanks crakej!
> 
> 
> 
> So how is it going with your ram overclocking? Have you find stability above 3466mhz?




I can only do [email protected] cas 15


----------



## kazablanka

sonic2911 said:


> I can only do [email protected] cas 15


Ηave you try 3600cl16 with auto subtimings and all the other memory settings to make a start with?

I need 1.4v for ram and 1.1vsoc (with llc3 for soc) and i can pass everything with this settings. If i set soc llc to auto the voltge drops to 1.087v and i cant pass ibt. When i set it to llc3 it drops at 1.094v and it can pass everything. So try to set everything to auto to find the rigt soc and memory voltage and then tigth your timings.


----------



## crakej

kazablanka said:


> Thanks crakej!
> 
> So how is it going with your ram overclocking? Have you find stability above 3466mhz?


99% stable at 3533 I think. I have it now so can pass RamTest over 5000%, but it did fail at about 5500%, did an hour and a half of P95 as well, but it's not enough for 100% stability for me, so still working on it. Using this profile day to day and not had any crashes, but still hoping I can get it to just pass RamTest a bit better - I'd rather have to stop it myself than have an error a 5500%, but so far have failed to do that.

I'm starting to think I need more VCore but I'm already close to that 1.425v limit AMD suggests not passing. I feel confident if I was to pull back cpu to 4.0GHz I would do a LOT better - it only needs 1.33v for that so it would leave lots of headroom, but I'm determined to keep my 4.1OC.... I love the challenge of getting the most I can, just can't help myself. Nearly finished my CadBus testing which so far has reduced my reliability

Also think I will do an LLC experiment to see if that can stabilize me. Plan on testing up to LLC2 as that's deemed as not to risky...


----------



## kazablanka

crakej said:


> 99% stable at 3533 I think. I have it now so can pass RamTest over 5000%, but it did fail at about 5500%, did an hour and a half of P95 as well, but it's not enough for 100% stability for me, so still working on it. Using this profile day to day and not had any crashes, but still hoping I can get it to just pass RamTest a bit better - I'd rather have to stop it myself than have an error a 5500%, but so far have failed to do that.
> 
> I'm starting to think I need more VCore but I'm already close to that 1.425v limit AMD suggests not passing. I feel confident if I was to pull back cpu to 4.0GHz I would do a LOT better - it only needs 1.33v for that so it would leave lots of headroom, but I'm determined to keep my 4.1OC.... I love the challenge of getting the most I can, just can't help myself. Nearly finished my CadBus testing which so far has reduced my reliability
> 
> Also think I will do an LLC experiment to see if that can stabilize me. Plan on testing up to LLC2 as that's deemed as not to risky...


I need more vcore too with high memory fraquency and low timings.

For 4ghz and 3466mhz ram i need 1.3625vcore llc4 and for 4ghz and 3600mhz on ram i need 1.3825v. 

Good luck man keep in mind that 3466mhz with good sub timings performs almost equal with 3600mhz cl14

Some testing i have done:
https://www.insomnia.gr/forums/topic/676130-ryzen-and-memory-performance-scalling/


----------



## MacG32

@elmor With my main power being off all night, when I power up and turn on, after a few minutes my computer locks up and my music continually repeats the last 5-10 seconds. When I hit reset and it starts back up, everything's fine. I'm using 2 sticks of RAM, no CPU overclock, everything on Optimized Default settings, except memory overclocked to 3466 Fast + some Alts Preset (see below) and 3 case fans on Turbo and the rest on the lowest or off settings in F6. BIOS 0601.


----------



## minal

@*Keith Myers* @*gupsterg* 

it87 seems to work nicely. Any clues what the sensors are? My guess is in0 is Vcore and temp3 is VRM? temp1 looks like cpu but k10temp is more accurate as it fluctuates more sharply/frequently and goes higher. 

fan1 is the cpu fan, but fan5 isn't reporting. Does it87 work only with PWM fans? 

The values can be monitored with "watch" on the command line or "xsensors" in a gui.




Code:


$ sensors
asus-isa-0000
Adapter: ISA adapter
cpu_fan:        0 RPM

nouveau-pci-0900
Adapter: PCI adapter
temp1:        +42.0°C  (high = +95.0°C, hyst =  +3.0°C)
                       (crit = +105.0°C, hyst =  +5.0°C)
                       (emerg = +135.0°C, hyst =  +5.0°C)

it8665-isa-0290
Adapter: ISA adapter
in0:          +1.50 V  (min =  +2.75 V, max =  +2.70 V)
in1:          +1.34 V  (min =  +1.92 V, max =  +0.97 V)
in2:          +2.39 V  (min =  +1.34 V, max =  +2.70 V)
in3:          +2.00 V  (min =  +0.68 V, max =  +0.87 V)
in4:          +1.12 V  (min =  +1.20 V, max =  +2.26 V)
in5:          +0.55 V  (min =  +2.23 V, max =  +2.26 V)
in6:          +0.91 V  (min =  +1.68 V, max =  +1.01 V)
3VSB:         +3.33 V  (min =  +5.49 V, max =  +5.47 V)
Vbat:         +3.25 V  
+3.3V:        +3.33 V  
fan1:         325 RPM  (min =   13 RPM)
fan5:           0 RPM  (min =   -1 RPM)  ALARM
temp1:        +53.0°C  (low  = +126.0°C, high = +119.0°C)
temp2:        +27.0°C  (low  = -12.0°C, high = +80.0°C)  sensor = thermistor
temp3:        +41.0°C  (low  = +48.0°C, high = -60.0°C)  sensor = thermistor
intrusion0:  ALARM

k10temp-pci-00c3
Adapter: PCI adapter
temp1:        +51.0°C  (high = +70.0°C)

For stress testing with mprime, do you use default settings (test 1, 2, or 3)? I didn't notice how to change FFT size or RAM usage.

For cpu affinity, there's "taskset", but for some reason the -c option was still being interpreted as a mask and not cpu list.

Is there a way to identify best cores / core ranking in linux?


----------



## Keith Myers

For my ASUS X370 Prime Pro, I have deduced that in0 is the cpu voltage and is the only one useful. The cpu temp is temp1. The temp_sensor probe header on the motherboard is temp2. The PCH sensor is temp3.

For my ASUS Crosshair VII Hero, I have deduced that the labels are the same. I expected the same since they both use the same SIO ITE8665E chip. I would like to find out what you see for fan labels and reported sensor outputs. All I get is fan1 and fan5 reported and only fan1 reports a value and that is the cpu_fan header. I wonder if whether having the fan controls disabled in the BIOS affects the fan outputs for the Hero. I normally run all fans at full 12V output. I do the same for the Prime Pro so don't know why the Hero would be any different. I get fan1- fan6 reporting for the Prime Pro.

I like to use mprime option 15 Torture test. When that menu populates, it also offer sub-menu choices 11,12,13 to set the desired FFT size. I like sub-option 11 which gets me 8K - 28K FFT size and the ability to set the desired RAM usage and length for each FFT run. I set the RAM usage to 13GB and FFT run to 3 minutes. Then just let it run for a couple of hours. That will push the kind of heat and usage that BOINC does and what each machine's main purpose is. BOINC is my ultimate stress test. I can pass mprime and GSAT for hours and days and BOINC will take the machine down in a couple of hours if settings are pushed too far.

For cpu affinity I like to use an app called schedtool from the repository. With it I set the physical cores to process cpu tasks and the HT cores to process the gpu tasks. I also use it to raise the gpu applications to 20 or High Priority and set the cpu applications to 5 or Low Priority.


----------



## crakej

kazablanka said:


> I need more vcore too with high memory fraquency and low timings.
> 
> For 4ghz and 3466mhz ram i need 1.3625vcore llc4 and for 4ghz and 3600mhz on ram i need 1.3825v.
> 
> Good luck man keep in mind that 3466mhz with good sub timings performs almost equal with 3600mhz cl14
> 
> Some testing i have done:
> 
> https://www.insomnia.gr/forums/topic/676130-ryzen-and-memory-performance-scalling/?page=1


Yeah, mine is still a bit slower than my 3466 lol!....but I'm sure we'll get there eventually 

Edit Hmmmm 3600CL14 would be amazing wouldn't it


----------



## DoctorNick

Hello fellow OCN'ers. I found a strange bug on this board. If you disable ASUS Grid auto launcher in bios, when installing windows you will experience sound crackling. Fix: Enable GRID launcher in bios boot - let the PC boot up into windows - restart and disable again in bios. Now the crackling is gone. Conclusion - to fix the issue you most start windows once with auto-grid launcher enabled. After that it dosen't matter


----------



## gupsterg

@majestynl @crakej

*Tonight I* :drink: :laugher:...



Spoiler


















View attachment 0601_4.1_3533S_RT_setting.txt


Ref filenames of screenie with txt (right click thumb, open in new tab, save to see) and thee shall find the setting that allows improved stability with nice SOC/VDIMM. I shall test further and see if I can lower SOC/VDIMM  . Note also between above screenies a repost has been done, see uptime in task manager in final screenie



@elmor

May I say this reinforces to me who has the *no 1* UEFIs :thumb: .




minal said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> @*Keith Myers* @*gupsterg*
> 
> it87 seems to work nicely. Any clues what the sensors are? My guess is in0 is Vcore and temp3 is VRM? temp1 looks like cpu but k10temp is more accurate as it fluctuates more sharply/frequently and goes higher.
> 
> fan1 is the cpu fan, but fan5 isn't reporting. Does it87 work only with PWM fans?
> 
> The values can be monitored with "watch" on the command line or "xsensors" in a gui.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> $ sensors
> asus-isa-0000
> Adapter: ISA adapter
> cpu_fan:        0 RPM
> 
> nouveau-pci-0900
> Adapter: PCI adapter
> temp1:        +42.0°C  (high = +95.0°C, hyst =  +3.0°C)
> (crit = +105.0°C, hyst =  +5.0°C)
> (emerg = +135.0°C, hyst =  +5.0°C)
> 
> it8665-isa-0290
> Adapter: ISA adapter
> in0:          +1.50 V  (min =  +2.75 V, max =  +2.70 V)
> in1:          +1.34 V  (min =  +1.92 V, max =  +0.97 V)
> in2:          +2.39 V  (min =  +1.34 V, max =  +2.70 V)
> in3:          +2.00 V  (min =  +0.68 V, max =  +0.87 V)
> in4:          +1.12 V  (min =  +1.20 V, max =  +2.26 V)
> in5:          +0.55 V  (min =  +2.23 V, max =  +2.26 V)
> in6:          +0.91 V  (min =  +1.68 V, max =  +1.01 V)
> 3VSB:         +3.33 V  (min =  +5.49 V, max =  +5.47 V)
> Vbat:         +3.25 V
> +3.3V:        +3.33 V
> fan1:         325 RPM  (min =   13 RPM)
> fan5:           0 RPM  (min =   -1 RPM)  ALARM
> temp1:        +53.0°C  (low  = +126.0°C, high = +119.0°C)
> temp2:        +27.0°C  (low  = -12.0°C, high = +80.0°C)  sensor = thermistor
> temp3:        +41.0°C  (low  = +48.0°C, high = -60.0°C)  sensor = thermistor
> intrusion0:  ALARM
> 
> k10temp-pci-00c3
> Adapter: PCI adapter
> temp1:        +51.0°C  (high = +70.0°C)
> 
> For stress testing with mprime, do you use default settings (test 1, 2, or 3)? I didn't notice how to change FFT size or RAM usage.
> 
> For cpu affinity, there's "taskset", but for some reason the -c option was still being interpreted as a mask and not cpu list.
> 
> Is there a way to identify best cores / core ranking in linux?


What Keith states seems on the money regarding temps. I shall do a compare between OS soon, sorry just had rig tied up with other things .

I use mPrime menu as Keith states but I use 128K 128K in place FFT if testing voltage setup for CPU core. Then the other setup I use to exercise rig more is 8K 4096K 13GB. As stated before n00b in Linux, I have not delved into setting affinity, usually that kinda of testing I do in WinOS.

I also do [email protected] and Bionic. If I have done the kinda stability testing I do with HCI/GSAT/RB/Y-Cruncher/P95 then TBH [email protected] and Bionic haven't given me issues. As always "our" methods can differ so experience shares will differ that way IMO, so by no means do I detract value from another's experience share.



Keith Myers said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> For my ASUS X370 Prime Pro, I have deduced that in0 is the cpu voltage and is the only one useful. The cpu temp is temp1. The temp_sensor probe header on the motherboard is temp2. The PCH sensor is temp3.
> 
> For my ASUS Crosshair VII Hero, I have deduced that the labels are the same. I expected the same since they both use the same SIO ITE8665E chip. I would like to find out what you see for fan labels and reported sensor outputs. All I get is fan1 and fan5 reported and only fan1 reports a value and that is the cpu_fan header. I wonder if whether having the fan controls disabled in the BIOS affects the fan outputs for the Hero. I normally run all fans at full 12V output. I do the same for the Prime Pro so don't know why the Hero would be any different. I get fan1- fan6 reporting for the Prime Pro.
> 
> I like to use mprime option 15 Torture test. When that menu populates, it also offer sub-menu choices 11,12,13 to set the desired FFT size. I like sub-option 11 which gets me 8K - 28K FFT size and the ability to set the desired RAM usage and length for each FFT run. I set the RAM usage to 13GB and FFT run to 3 minutes. Then just let it run for a couple of hours. That will push the kind of heat and usage that BOINC does and what each machine's main purpose is. BOINC is my ultimate stress test. I can pass mprime and GSAT for hours and days and BOINC will take the machine down in a couple of hours if settings are pushed too far.
> 
> For cpu affinity I like to use an app called schedtool from the repository. With it I set the physical cores to process cpu tasks and the HT cores to process the gpu tasks. I also use it to raise the gpu applications to 20 or High Priority and set the cpu applications to 5 or Low Priority.


Thanks again Keith, finding your shares on Linux invaluable :thumb: .


----------



## sonic2911

kazablanka said:


> Ηave you try 3600cl16 with auto subtimings and all the other memory settings to make a start with?
> 
> I need 1.4v for ram and 1.1vsoc (with llc3 for soc) and i can pass everything with this settings. If i set soc llc to auto the voltge drops to 1.087v and i cant pass ibt. When i set it to llc3 it drops at 1.094v and it can pass everything. So try to set everything to auto to find the rigt soc and memory voltage and then tigth your timings.


I haven't tried it yet. My target is 3466cl14 but I can't make it stable now. I need the proper timings. I want to stable with RAM first then push the BCLK to 103 104.


----------



## sonic2911

kazablanka said:


> Ηave you try 3600cl16 with auto subtimings and all the other memory settings to make a start with?
> 
> I need 1.4v for ram and 1.1vsoc (with llc3 for soc) and i can pass everything with this settings. If i set soc llc to auto the voltge drops to 1.087v and i cant pass ibt. When i set it to llc3 it drops at 1.094v and it can pass everything. So try to set everything to auto to find the rigt soc and memory voltage and then tigth your timings.


I haven't tried it yet. My goal is 3466cl14 but I can't make it stable now. I need the proper timings. I want to stable with RAM first then push the BCLK to 103 104.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> @majestynl @crakej
> 
> *Tonight I* :drink: :laugher:...
> 
> Ref filenames of screenie with txt (right click thumb, open in new tab, save to see) and thee shall find the setting that allows improved stability with nice SOC/VDIMM. I shall test further and see if I can lower SOC/VDIMM  . Note also between above screenies a repost has been done, see uptime in task manager in final screenie[/SPOILER]


Nice one! What's the performance like at CL15?


----------



## Keith Myers

*Sensors page from GKrellm on Prime Pro*

This is the screenshot of GKrellm sensors page showing what the it87 driver exposes on the Prime Pro.



Spoiler



Screenshot from GKrellm Sensors



As you can see I have all of my fans reporting. I don't know why there is only fan1 and fan5 on the C7H and then only fan1 reports anything. I haven't done a thorough investigation yet though. There might be an ACPI conflict buried in the dmesg logs. Or possibly, the fan sensors have some extra massaging on the Hero that the Prime Pro doesn't and is in between the sensor output and what the it87 driver can access. Mystery still unsolved so far.

This is the code that I use to set affinities and priorities for SETI applications.



Code:


#Run in root terminal, NOT sudo


nvidia-smi -pm 1

for (( ; ; ))
do
  # Assign CPU Priority (19=Nice/LowPriority, 0=Normal, -20=HighPriority)
 # This was code Petri gave out
 # GPU Tasks get high Priority
  schedtool -n -20 `pidof setiathome_x41p_zi3v_x86_64-pc-linux-gnu_cuda90`
  schedtool -n -20 `pidof astropulse_7.08_x86_64-pc-linux-gnu__opencl_nvidia_100`
 # CPU Tasks get (a little) Below Normal Priority (0 being normal) to make sure it doesn't choke the OS
  schedtool -n   5 `pidof ap_7.05r2728_sse3_linux64`
  schedtool -n   5 `pidof MBv8_8.22r3711_sse41_x86_64-pc-linux-gnu`

  # Assign CPU Usage Threads (0-7)
 # Brent added this to Petri's code
 # Keep GPU tasks on threads 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15
  schedtool -a 1,3,5,7,9,11,13,15 `pidof setiathome_x41p_zi3v_x86_64-pc-linux-gnu_cuda90`
  schedtool -a 1,3,5,7,9,11,13,15 `pidof astropulse_7.08_x86_64-pc-linux-gnu__opencl_nvidia_100`
 # Keep CPU tasks on threads 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
  schedtool -a 0,2,4,6,8,10,12,14 `pidof MBv8_8.22r3711_sse41_x86_64-pc-linux-gnu`
  schedtool -a 0,2,4,6,8,10,12,14 `pidof ap_7.05r2728_sse3_linux64`


  #    CPU Priority Assignment Script
  date
  # lscpu | grep MHz
  sleep 5
  echo  "  CPU Priority and Assignment Script (8 Threads)" 
done

You can see how I use the schedtool app to set the affinities and priorities for the various applications. It is just run from a root terminal that you start and then minimize.

Hope this might give others doing distributed processing an idea for their own projects.


----------



## Gettz8488

@gupsterg i just realized that your pstate overclock was with a bus clock of 99.0 I did a few test and I’m able to run 1.32Vcore auto llc at 4.075ghz on my chip 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> @majestynl @crakej
> 
> *Tonight I* :drink: :laugher:....


Hehehe I was Just starting to write back to your previous post but then i saw this one..

Congrats mate... :drink:. Nice one..
Saw you put all your experience in to it from previous post info..

I can't run cl15 because of GDM and i really don't want to run 16 
Just ordered new ram kit, same as what I use now for testing but with a X at the end. (F4-3200C14Q-32GTZRX) Supposed to be special for ryzen. Don't know what's true or what will be the difference .hehe will share tomorrow. 

I want to run 3533 on CL14, and see what 3600 can do 

Cheers..


----------



## MacG32

3466MHz CL14 tight timings 3 Hours P95 Stable. They're a keeper.


----------



## Keith Myers

I might have missed the comment earlier but the k10temp driver has been updated at Github. I just installed it and it now reports properly labelled Tctl and Tdie sensor outputs from the sensors dialog. So Tctl is showing the correct +10° C. offset to Tdie. Now [email protected]/temp1 = [email protected]/temp1. [email protected]/temp1 DOES seem to update faster than the [email protected]/temp1.

You can get the new driver code here


----------



## minal

@*Keith Myers* @*gupsterg* 

More great info. Thanks. I used the mprime menus so often and quickly that I forgot about the 11, 12, 13 options! haha. 

For the cpu affinity I found my previous error: I was using the PID of the mprime process, not the worker process. Both show up as 100% cpu load when stress testing, but only targetting the worker process with `taskset` or `schedtool` works to change which cpu it's on. Btw, both commands seemed to work for me without root or sudo. `shedtool` has the -N flag which I think resets affinity to normal, meanwhile with `taskset` I set the affinity to all 0-15 when I wanted to reset. Not sure if that's the proper way to do it.

For the k10temp module is there a way to check the version? modinfo reports "vermagic: 4.16.7-200.fc27.x86_64 SMP mod_unload" for me. I believe it comes with the 4.16.7 kernel. Which distro/version are you using? I used to be on Ubuntu but decided to try Fedora because I wanted the latest kernels with new hardware. And since 4.16.6 the k10temp offset was fixed. Previously there was a +10C or 10+49C offset for 2700X. It matches temp1 from it87, but k10temp seems to respond faster and spikes higher, while temp1 looks more stepwise and more smoothed from extreme values.

A picture is worth 1000 words:









For the fan5 are your other fans DC or PWM. I noticed it87 documentation mentions PWM but not DC, and my case fans are DC so I figured maybe that's why they don't get reported.

EDIT: Nvm, I see what you mean. The latest k10temp module now reports 2 values: Tctl and Tdie with +10C between them. It's a bit scary because Tdie and Tctl now report higher values than temp1 from it87, and higher spikes than what k10temp used to report. Eg of a quick test:


----------



## croaker8

Have any of you gotten an M.2 to run at PciE 3.0 x4 WITH a single GPU running at x16 in the PciE16_01 slot, on this board?

I've only tried the M.2_2 slot so far, which states it shares bandwidth with the PciEx8_2 slot. But, it seems to be borrowing lanes from the PciE16_01 slot, and forcing it into x8.

If the the M.2_1 slot (bottom m.2) doesn't have this issue, I'd love to know.


----------



## minal

croaker8 said:


> Have any of you gotten an M.2 to run at PciE 3.0 x4 WITH a single GPU running at x16 in the PciE16_01 slot?
> 
> I've only tried the M.2_2 slot so far, which states it shares bandwidth with the PciEx8_2 slot. But, it seems to be borrowing lanes from the PciE16_01 slot, and forcing it into x8.
> 
> If the the M.2_1 slot (bottom m.2) doesn't have this issue, I'd love to know.


Yes, use the bottom M.2_1 slot and the top PCIE slot will remain x16.


----------



## croaker8

minal said:


> Yes, use the bottom M.2_1 slot and the top PCIE slot will remain x16.


Awesome ty! Wanted to make sure it was worth the time first. Cheers


----------



## Keith Myers

Thanks for the psensor charts. I haven't seen that kind of discrepancy between the it87 cpu temp1 sensor and the k10temp1 sensor. They correlate exactly with about a 2 second lag in the it87 sensor and the k10temp sensor looks to have better resolution by a digit.

I tried to set the fans to DC control instead of disabled in the BIOS and that had zero effect on the reported fans other than running them at the expected much slower speeds tied to actual cpu temps.

I have all 4 pin PWM fans so I should try the PWM settings for them in the BIOS and see if that changes anything. I will post back my results.

I am just on the recently released Ubuntu 18.04 LTS distribution which shipped with kernel 4.15.0-20. It also came with the k10temp driver loaded by default. I had to add the it87 driver in with a modprobe. I wanted to get at least some of the mainstreamed Ryzen fixes that have been developed since Ubuntu 16.04 LTS which my first Ryzen machine is still on. The machine was converted from Windows7. I am doing my last Windows 7 >> Ryzen 2700X/Linux machine tomorrow once I finish up the last of my SETI work. I will have 4 out of 5 of my crunchers on Linux in a few days and only one token Windows 10 machine left in my farm.

Looking forward to the stable 4.16.0 kernel whenever it ships out through the automatic updates.


----------



## minal

Nice, can't wait to see what you find with PWM mode.

Interesting, I don't have any lag with k10temp vs it87 that you mentioned. Just higher sensitivity with k10temp. You can see the readings match on the low end and slower moving parts of the chart, but that k10temp spikes higher while it87 temp1 stays averaged lower while still tracking the same values. 

It's also puzzling because we seem to be on the same hardware. Just to confirm, you're using 2700X + C7H(WIFI)?

You're right that k10temp reports a decimal place while it87 seems to report only integer values for temperature.

Btw, have you found any way to evaluate best/worst cores in linux?

With Ubuntu and LTS in particular, I'm not sure how soon you'll get newer kernels. There's been a fair bit of development for Ryzen in recent minor point releases of the 4.16.x kernel and I didn't want to bother with installing mainline kernels, which is why I'm evaluating Fedora now. 

I thought I'd really miss the Debian repos, but it hasn't been too bad so far. The Fedora repos are more fragmented and there are a few annoying lacks, but I've managed to find other repos or compile from github, so I've managed. On the other hand I quite like the more minimalist approach Fedora takes. So far so good. And by trying something other than a flavor of Ubuntu, it has freed me mentally to try even more distros later.


----------



## kazablanka

crakej said:


> Yeah, mine is still a bit slower than my 3466 lol!....but I'm sure we'll get there eventually
> 
> Edit Hmmmm 3600CL14 would be amazing wouldn't it


Yes but 3670cl14 is better  (but not full stable)


----------



## kazablanka

MacG32 said:


> 3466MHz CL14 tight timings 3 Hours P95 Stable. They're a keeper.


These timings are super fast... have you try GD disabled ?


----------



## crakej

kazablanka said:


> Yes but 3670cl14 is better  (but not full stable)


Very nice though! Will be v jealous if you get that stable


----------



## kazablanka

crakej said:


> Very nice though! Will be v jealous if you get that stable


Ιt will be very hard if not impossible


----------



## kazablanka

crakej said:


> Very nice though! Will be v jealous if you get that stable


 @crakej Something important that i didn't mention earlier... If you testing your memory or cpu overclock with performance bias cb 15r/11,5r ,just dont, leave it on auto ,it leads to instability under stressful programs like ibt, memtest, prime etc. And bare in mind that performance bias needs more vsoc and maybe more vcore to be the system stable but this more soc voltage may drives your ram overclock to fail.


----------



## minal

kazablanka said:


> @*crakej* Something important that i didn't mention earlier... If you testing your memory or cpu overclock with performance bias cb 15r/11,5r ,just dont, leave it on auto ,it leads to instability under stressful programs like ibt, memtest, prime etc. And bare in mind that performance bias needs more vsoc to be the system stable but this more soc voltage may drives your ram overclock to fail.


If looking for system stability and not benchmark high scores, is it better to turn Performance Bias off? or Auto?


----------



## kazablanka

minal said:


> If looking for system stability and not benchmark high scores, is it better to turn Performance Bias off? or Auto?


 leaving it to auto is the same as setting it to none so leave it to auto. You can find your stable settings with performance bias to auto ,and after that you can enable it to see if the system is stable or not. But don't try to find stability with pb enabled . This is for first gen ryzen ,i don't know how it works with ryzen 2xxx


----------



## crakej

kazablanka said:


> @crakej Something important that i didn't mention earlier... If you testing your memory or cpu overclock with performance bias cb 15r/11,5r ,just dont, leave it on auto ,it leads to instability under stressful programs like ibt, memtest, prime etc. And bare in mind that performance bias needs more vsoc and maybe more vcore to be the system stable but this more soc voltage may drives your ram overclock to fail.


I never stress test with Perf Bias - I get things stable, then add it, then test again to see if it's made it unstable. I leave it on *None* - just to be sure it's off.


----------



## majestynl

minal said:


> If looking for system stability and not benchmark high scores, is it better to turn Performance Bias off? or Auto?


always turn those bias functions off for daily use/ stability tests! its intended for bench marking. Some magic with functions and i believe with caching happening while enabled!


----------



## minal

Thanks, good to know! It's strange that the default for Performance Bias is Auto. I thought of turning it off but left it on Auto since I have no idea what it actually does and since I didn't want to make too many changes. Now I'll turn it off.

And while we're on the subject, are there any other defaults that need to be changed for daily/stable use?


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> always turn those bias functions off for daily use/ stability tests! its intended for bench marking. Some magic with functions and i believe with caching happening while enabled!


I seem to remember that Performance Bias were named as such because they were meant to be options to make the cache more efficient, but because they (ASUS) couldn't guarantee these functions would work for everyone's hardware combinations they included them as the Performance Bias options. They can in fact help your performance quite a lot but it's trial and error to see which one, if any, work with your hardware. I'm sure Elmor or Stilt can confirm this.


----------



## Anty

majestynl said:


> always turn those bias functions off for daily use/ stability tests! its intended for bench marking. Some magic with functions and i believe with caching happening while enabled!


nah - I run with PB turned on for months without problems


----------



## Onijin

CJMitsuki said:


> Oh, I was just interested in seeing what your Aida64 CacheMem bench was or Passmark Performance, anything really. I like to have something similar to compare to my own benchmarking numbers to see if I need to put more work into it or if Im fine where Im at. It feels great and I doubt I can squeeze more from this speed without a lot more voltage but something to compare to is always welcome. Until I get this other 4133mhz kit RMA'd I am enjoying my old 3200mhz kit which, until my 4133 kit had problems was only used on first gen with x370 board and could only hit 3333mhz with loose timings and 1.45v so x470 and 2nd gen was a massive improvement over the prior.


Sorry for being a day late. Work ****ed me up.

Here's AIDA64 and Passmark. For reference, CPU has voltage and damned near everything at auto, except for PBO/PE Lvl3. It does CB runs at 1876 at 3533mhz and 1940 at 3600 with timings relaxed. Apparently CB is more bandwidth than latency sensitive.


----------



## minal

crakej said:


> I seem to remember that Performance Bias were named as such because they were meant to be options to make the cache more efficient, but because they (ASUS) couldn't guarantee these functions would work for everyone's hardware combinations they included them as the Performance Bias options. They can in fact help your performance quite a lot but it's trial and error to see which one, if any, work with your hardware. I'm sure Elmor or Stilt can confirm this.


It would be nice to get a confirmation from @elmor or @The Stilt on the recommended setting for daily use.

In the meantime, maybe "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" applies.


----------



## MacG32

kazablanka said:


> These timings are super fast... have you try GD disabled ?



I'm testing it out disabled right now. Seems BGS has mixed results, depending on what you're mainly using your system for. I've tightened the timings a bit more for my final approach on 3466. I'm closing in on 2 hours P95 stable. We'll see what happens.


----------



## MacG32

Here are my final settings. I might try 3533 or 3600 sometime later, but I'm content with what I have right now.

I started out with Asus' 3466 memory settings in the BIOS, lowered a few settings using RDC's Fast Preset, lowered a few more settings using Spartan's timings, lowered even more settings using MindBlank Tech's timings, and lowered the last using RDC's Extreme Preset.

It took a little over 3 days of trial, error, and 5 additional days of testing, but here it is. 



















MacG32's_3466_Tight_Timings.txt

Edit: Changed SoC to Auto, DRAM to 1.42V, and Boot DRAM to 1.43V for *extreme* 24 hour stability testing. Passed multiple concurrent testing. This overclock is with G.Skill - Flare X 16GB (2x8GB) 3200MHz F4-3200C14D-16GFX. Samsung B-Die Single Rank. Defaults to 2400MHz CL16 at 1.2V. XMP is 3200MHZ CL14 at 1.35V.


----------



## lordzed83

Im running PB cb15 always. From tests we did on zen1 it added performance.. EVERYWHERE ofc its hardee to have system stable with it hehe. But thats the fun part for me. Get everything on the edge of stability


----------



## Ricey20

I see some people with Ryzen 2000/x470 doing SOC voltage of 1.13125-1.175. Anyone know what's the max safe voltage for SOC? Still in the middle of tweaking but might start playing with SOC voltage.


----------



## mtrai

lordzed83 said:


> Im running PB cb15 always. From tests we did on zen1 it added performance.. EVERYWHERE ofc its hardee to have system stable with it hehe. But thats the fun part for me. Get everything on the edge of stability


Yep I am with you...still on the 1700X and c6h since my 2700x started acting wierd so I sent it back. BUt of course I do not do anything mission critical.


----------



## crakej

minal said:


> It would be nice to get a confirmation from @elmor or @The Stilt on the recommended setting for daily use.
> 
> In the meantime, maybe "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" applies.


There is no daily use setting - if it works for you, it works for you.


----------



## Jaju123

MacG32 said:


> Here are my final settings. I might try 3533 or 3600 sometime later, but I'm content with what I have right now.
> 
> I started out with Asus' 3466 memory settings in the BIOS, lowered a few settings using RDC's Fast Preset, lowered a few more settings using Spartan's timings, lowered even more settings using MindBlank Tech's timings, and lowered the last using RDC's Extreme Preset.
> 
> It took a little over 3 days of trial, error, and testing, but here it is.


How have you tested the stability of this? Those are the timings and speeds I'm aiming for but am struggling with anything over 3333mhz. Unfortunately my RAM is only stable at 1.4V or below, and going above actually causes errors. I have a 16gb 3600mhz c15 kit so it should be doable.


----------



## MrPhilo

Anyone with a 4266CL19 kit, what's the highest/fastest ram you got it to?

My crosshair vii and 2700x comes tomorrow! So can't wait to test my ram kit out... Hopefully it'll perform good.


----------



## crakej

MrPhilo said:


> Anyone with a 4266CL19 kit, what's the highest/fastest ram you got it to?
> 
> My crosshair vii and 2700x comes tomorrow! So can't wait to test my ram kit out... Hopefully it'll perform good.


Me! I've nearly got 3533CL14 with my 1700x and geardown=on

3600 may be possible, especially with Ryzen 2xxx


----------



## kamikatze13

Any suggestions for BCLK stability? i have two 2700X here and one of them is not even doing 100.6 - the other one is currently in testing (and is currently doing 1.531 volts in cinebench 1T with PE3 enabled and auto voltage lol), but also seems to be a dud. Most of the time the issue i see is freezing - is it somehow indicative as to where the issue lies? 

Also, just a reality check - BCLK1 (upper) is ram/pcie and BCLK2 (lower) is cpu-only in async mode?


So, yeah, since i really seem to suck at silicon lottery, i tried messing with ram (F4-3200C14-16GTZR kit, K4A8G085WB-BCPB b dies) and here's what happened:

> 3466 Fast from Ryzen DRAM Calc, which is fairly stable
> 3600 preset from the stilt (i guess, it's not labeled as that, but it's the bottom-most one), which has thrown 10 errors overnight.

so, question is: do i tighten up the 3466? do i stabilize 3600? do i ditch everything i purchased and go back to 4670k cause bclk seems to be a ***** here as it has always have been?


----------



## spyshagg

Doing 103mhz here with no problems (except those two sata ports). 

PE3 + minimum positive offset possible (+0.06 I think), its boosting up to 4480mhz single-core and 4170mhz all-core. Voltages between 1.3v and 1.55v


----------



## kamikatze13

appreciate the input. if someone also is rocking a bclk oc, plz let me know, i need a baseline of where i'm at.

as to the voltages, my self-imposed limit was 1.48 for 1 core, since there's silicon degradation already, according to the stilt. should i just let the cpu do its thing and allow it as much voltage as 1.5v at peak draws?

ADDENDUM: cleared cmos, dialed in 104.8 BCLK (sync) - system boots fine, max multiplier is now 35.5 since i left it on auto. If i were to torture the rig now and it stays stable - that would result in the mainboard and peripherals/gpu not to be the limiting factors on my bclk issues, am i correct in this assumption?


----------



## VicsPC

Just ordered my 2700x for 285€ instead of 330€, my french retailer has a deal of the day with 45€ off. This is why i usually wait to order, they always have some sick deals. Cannot wait to get it on water and see what she does at stock speeds before i even try messing with it.


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> I seem to remember that Performance Bias were named as such because they were meant to be options to make the cache more efficient, but because they (ASUS) couldn't guarantee these functions would work for everyone's hardware combinations they included them as the Performance Bias options. They can in fact help your performance quite a lot but it's trial and error to see which one, if any, work with your hardware. I'm sure Elmor or Stilt can confirm this.





Anty said:


> nah - I run with PB turned on for months without problems


Just saying, don't want to discuss  but check out the OC PDF from elmor on the CH6: _When bench marking use the Performance Bias option or OS tool for best results.!_
But if something isn't broken (suggested by yourself), then who cares do what you want to do!  No one will stop you.



Ricey20 said:


> I see some people with Ryzen 2000/x470 doing SOC voltage of 1.13125-1.175. Anyone know what's the max safe voltage for SOC? Still in the middle of tweaking but might start playing with SOC voltage.


On auto i have ~1.131. The whole issue from high SOC came from release of the CH6. With to high soc you could risk to brick the first batch of mobos (ch6). But this has been fixed long time ago. I run my 1800x with 1.15+ without any issues. And even got it above 1.20v for a while. Again its always a difficult question about voltages. This also really depends on your silicons!



crakej said:


> Me! I've nearly got 3533CL14 with my 1700x and geardown=on
> 
> 3600 may be possible, especially with Ryzen 2xxx


Got yesterday a new kit from Gskill, labeled as Special optimized for Ryzen bla bla bla. Its the same kit what i use right now Cl14 but a different label! 
It totally didnt make any different! Exact same as my first one bought last year.
Also with GD mode off and manually setting to 1T = NO BOOT to windows! , and lowering tRDRDSCL and rWRWRSCL to 2 gave me errors in Ramtest! heheh nothing different.
With Aida i got even lower benchmarks compared to my first set!

The fun part is, on my 1800x with a CH6 i also couldn't get tRDRDSCL and rWRWRSCL lower! and GDM gave me same issues! very strange, 2 total different systems and now even with a New RAMKit!! But if i compare my Bench-results with others most of the time i have better or at least equal score results etc.. 

And about better results on a Ryzen 2....hmm cant really agree for NOW. Its running the same compared with last bios versions of the CH6 and my 1800x and 1700!
The only thing is a comparision with day 1 from Ryzen 1 vs day 1 from Ryzen2!
I think what we are getting now from ryzen 2 is how we needed to get it last year! Its amazing right now 




spyshagg said:


> Doing 103mhz here with no problems (except those two sata ports).
> PE3 + minimum positive offset possible (+0.06 I think), its boosting up to 4480mhz single-core and 4170mhz all-core. Voltages between 1.3v and 1.55v


I have done a lot of test with PE3 with raised BCLK (will share all results soon), but i got your clocks with a 101.6 BCLK! Got it stable with most of the stress-test SW's. The only thing i found out it sometimes got freezes. Even when i passed Prime etc etc.

The suggestion i have is, when its Boosting that high, voltages are not enough when its activating more then 2 cores! Cause stress-testing Prime etc doesn't boost all cores that high. But some of the games are using the max boost 4.4 on 4/5 cores. And then 1.55 is probably not enough!

Im getting the feeling my silicon can handle very high clocks. But with that voltages 1.55+ i can get instability if it uses to much cores boosted. I dont want to push more then 0.05v offset! 



kamikatze13 said:


> appreciate the input. if someone also is rocking a bclk oc, plz let me know, i need a baseline of where i'm at.
> 
> as to the voltages, my self-imposed limit was 1.48 for 1 core, since there's silicon degradation already, according to the stilt. should i just let the cpu do its thing and allow it as much voltage as 1.5v at peak draws?
> 
> ADDENDUM: cleared cmos, dialed in 104.8 BCLK (sync) - system boots fine, max multiplier is now 35.5 since i left it on auto. If i were to torture the rig now and it stays stable - that would result in the mainboard and peripherals/gpu not to be the limiting factors on my bclk issues, am i correct in this assumption?


Where did you read those degradation's info from Stilt?



VicsPC said:


> Just ordered my 2700x for 285€ instead of 330€, my french retailer has a deal of the day with 45€ off. This is why i usually wait to order, they always have some sick deals. Cannot wait to get it on water and see what she does at stock speeds before i even try messing with it.


Do you have a link from french dealer  ??


----------



## VPII

If I may ask.... I see everybody uses Memtest HCI. It is a little annoying that you need to run a couple to try and cover most of your ram so I downloaded Memtest64 which I felt worked really great. Is there a big difference between the two and if so what is the difference?

My reason for asking is that yesterday I dropped my timings on my 3600 preset to CL15-15-15-38 2T.... cannot seem to get 1T to boot and the results with 2T is still better that my previous 3333mhz 14-13-13-28 1T. So I ran memtest64 for 7 hours and 29 minutes last night and I got no errors. I tried upping the memory speed on notch higher same timings and memtest within a few minutes picked up 2 errors so it seems to work. 

My plan is to play now with the BCLK and see if I can up the memory speed a little for some more performance, but I am a little limited with a clash between too high bclk and my M2.0 SSD.


----------



## majestynl

VPII said:


> If I may ask.... I see everybody uses Memtest HCI. It is a little annoying that you need to run a couple to try and cover most of your ram so I downloaded Memtest64 which I felt worked really great. Is there a big difference between the two and if so what is the difference?
> 
> My reason for asking is that yesterday I dropped my timings on my 3600 preset to CL15-15-15-38 2T.... cannot seem to get 1T to boot and the results with 2T is still better that my previous 3333mhz 14-13-13-28 1T. So I ran memtest64 for 7 hours and 29 minutes last night and I got no errors. I tried upping the memory speed on notch higher same timings and memtest within a few minutes picked up 2 errors so it seems to work.
> 
> My plan is to play now with the BCLK and see if I can up the memory speed a little for some more performance, but I am a little limited with a clash between too high bclk and my M2.0 SSD.


Use the launcher from post: http://www.overclock.net/forum/10-a...memory-stability-thread-102.html#post26419580
Much easier!

Raising BCLK "CAN" bring lots of other issues with it! Not a big fan of it!


----------



## kamikatze13

majestynl said:


> Where did you read those degradation's info from Stilt?


this very thread



The Stilt said:


> - The voltage curve on Zen CPUs is extremely steep at high frequencies and Pinnacle Ridge is not an exception. Based on "FIT" testing I made, up to ~1.42V (single core workloads) provides 100% silicon reliability, while up to ~1.48V provides slightly reduced reliability (similar to FIT rules set to 10x). These are actual voltages mind you ("CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN" in HWInfo).


so either i misunderstood - or voltages


<1.42 do not affect the cpu
>1.42 but <1.48 introduce a slight degradation
>1.48 introduce unknown levels of degradation, assuming more than "slight"



VPII said:


> If I may ask.... I see everybody uses Memtest HCI. It is a little annoying that you need to run a couple to try and cover most of your ram


logitech keyboard user here, i just went ahead and wrote two macros:
one launches memtest
the other goes "leftclick-enter-8-6-0-enter-enter"

so basically i need to press the first one 16 times. then spam the second one. pretty sure it can be completely automated with autohotkey


----------



## majestynl

kamikatze13 said:


> this very thread
> 
> so either i misunderstood - or voltages
> 
> 
> <1.42 do not affect the cpu
> >1.42 but <1.48 introduce a slight degradation
> >1.48 introduce unknown levels of degradation, assuming more than "slight"


aha yeap saw that post before. But have read it differently 
do not know what he meant with "reliability", cant say for sure if he meant degradation or stability...

But if it was degradation, then 1.42v is really low.!!! 
You could also ask yourself..are you keeping that CPU for 10+ years?


----------



## kamikatze13

majestynl said:


> do not know what he meant with "reliability", cant say for sure if he meant degradation or stability...


would be invaluable if we could clarify, so here we go:

Q:


Gettz8488 said:


> By reliability do you mean voltages that won’t degrade the silicon? Find it unusual seeing as everything on default voltages can spike to 1.5


A:


The Stilt said:


> Yes.
> 
> The requests can be extremely high, however the CPU will monitor the actual effective voltage.
> Try adjusting the load-line and you should see the request to decrease.


-----



majestynl said:


> You could also ask yourself..are you keeping that CPU for 10+ years?


well, i'm definitely going for the zen2 the moment it hits the shelves, that's for sure :upsidedwn

but then again, i want the cpu to survive this long =P and seeing him talking about "realms unknown" beyond the 1.48 made me ... well uneasy at least.

but then again he said voltages encountered on PE3 and PE4 would be within amd engineered margins:



The Stilt said:


> Even with PE4 the voltage will remain in the constrains AMD is willing to allow these parts to run at (through overclocking).


So just to recap, none of you guys run negative offsets to stay below 1.5 volts?


----------



## majestynl

kamikatze13 said:


> would be invaluable if we could clarify =P
> 
> sure, if that makes you comfortable





kamikatze13 said:


> well, i'm definitely going for the zen2 the moment it hits the shelves, that's for sure :upsidedwn
> 
> but then again, i want the cpu to survive this long =P and seeing him talking about "realms unknown" beyond the voltage made me quite uncomfortable.


Yeap ZEN2 design is ready told by AMD on last CES! But probably will be released in 2019! I agree with them. No rush needed for now  they gave us some toys to play with for now.. 



kamikatze13 said:


> but then again he said voltages encountered on PE3 and PE4 would be within amd engineered margins:


Exactly!!! wrote this a few times over here.. XFR/PB2 etc has build in safety features! but like you are saying above.. that high voltages doesn't make you more comfortable 
have not fried any cpu for many years... maybe I get a little bit of itching


----------



## kamikatze13

Gettz8488 said:


> have not fried any cpu for many years... maybe I get a little bit of itching


have not fried one ever (would like to keep it that way, hence i'm here), and i begun my oc career with a phenom 2 x4 965 black edition - what was it? 180W tdp? :devil:

EDIT: ok it was 140, now that i looked it up again, but boy this thing ran _hot_.

BTT: one question comes to mind, though: the cpu is in control of voltage when the voltage is not modified manually and the cpu multiplier is not above spec. does that include setting the multiplier manually to stock, i.e. 37 on a 2700x? cause if i leave it on 'auto' the maximum multiplier i see is 35.odd


----------



## Syldon

kamikatze13 said:


> logitech keyboard user here, i just went ahead and wrote two macros:
> one launches memtest
> the other goes "leftclick-enter-8-6-0-enter-enter"
> 
> so basically i need to press the first one 16 times. then spam the second one. pretty sure it can be completely automated with autohotkey


I wrote a macro up for a corsair keyboard. Opens all the windows one by one , and then arranges each window into a grid.


Spoiler












One of the last windows fails here. But remember I dont usually record a memtest running.


----------



## spyshagg

kamikatze13 said:


> So just to recap, none of you guys run negative offsets to stay below 1.5 volts?


The information from @The Stilt is confusing. 


a) First he says up to 1.42v CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN is the limit. 

b) Later he says the requests can be extremely high, however the CPU will monitor the actual *effective* voltage, not even in PE4 they will be surpassed...

I don't know how B fits into A in the above statements.


Then we have AMD_Robert from reddit saying the cpu will never request unsafe voltages also.

Meanwhile, while I play Assetto Corsa (2 threads) the SVI2 TFN is constantly between 1.48v and 1.545v, in PE3 with only +0.006v offset.


----------



## kamikatze13

spyshagg said:


> The information from @The Stilt is confusing.
> 
> 
> a) First he says up to 1.42v CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN is the limit.
> 
> b) Later he says the requests can be extremely high, however the CPU will monitor the actual *effective* voltage, not even in PE4 they will be surpassed...
> 
> I don't know how B fits into A in the above statements.
> 
> 
> Then we have AMD_Robert from reddit saying the cpu will never request unsafe voltages also.
> 
> Meanwhile, while I play Assetto Corsa (2 threads) the SVI2 TFN is constantly between 1.48v and 1.545v, in PE3 with only +0.006v offset.


Isn't PE4 supposed to be for LN2 cooling? maybe he took that into account? but yeah, i agree, the information is confusing.


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> Got yesterday a new kit from Gskill, labeled as Special optimized for Ryzen bla bla bla. Its the same kit what i use right now Cl14 but a different label!
> It totally didnt make any different! Exact same as my first one bought last year.
> Also with GD mode off and manually setting to 1T = NO BOOT to windows! , and lowering tRDRDSCL and rWRWRSCL to 2 gave me errors in Ramtest! heheh nothing different.
> With Aida i got even lower benchmarks compared to my first set!
> 
> The fun part is, on my 1800x with a CH6 i also couldn't get tRDRDSCL and rWRWRSCL lower! and GDM gave me same issues! very strange, 2 total different systems and now even with a New RAMKit!! But if i compare my Bench-results with others most of the time i have better or at least equal score results etc..


I did wonder if they might just re-labelling and giving you timings they know work with Ryzen.

I may need to explore different timings, slightly looser then my current settings to get stable at 3533. I may have to try putting tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSCL up a bit as well. Not had much of a chance to do much last couple of days..

Think I might update bios to 0601 as well as offsets are not working for me on 0509, and manual voltages mean my clocks stay high and voltages stay high


----------



## VicsPC

majestynl said:


> Just saying, don't want to discuss  but check out the OC PDF from elmor on the CH6: _When bench marking use the Performance Bias option or OS tool for best results.!_
> But if something isn't broken (suggested by yourself), then who cares do what you want to do!  No one will stop you.
> 
> 
> 
> On auto i have ~1.131. The whole issue from high SOC came from release of the CH6. With to high soc you could risk to brick the first batch of mobos (ch6). But this has been fixed long time ago. I run my 1800x with 1.15+ without any issues. And even got it above 1.20v for a while. Again its always a difficult question about voltages. This also really depends on your silicons!
> 
> 
> 
> Got yesterday a new kit from Gskill, labeled as Special optimized for Ryzen bla bla bla. Its the same kit what i use right now Cl14 but a different label!
> It totally didnt make any different! Exact same as my first one bought last year.
> Also with GD mode off and manually setting to 1T = NO BOOT to windows! , and lowering tRDRDSCL and rWRWRSCL to 2 gave me errors in Ramtest! heheh nothing different.
> With Aida i got even lower benchmarks compared to my first set!
> 
> The fun part is, on my 1800x with a CH6 i also couldn't get tRDRDSCL and rWRWRSCL lower! and GDM gave me same issues! very strange, 2 total different systems and now even with a New RAMKit!! But if i compare my Bench-results with others most of the time i have better or at least equal score results etc..
> 
> And about better results on a Ryzen 2....hmm cant really agree for NOW. Its running the same compared with last bios versions of the CH6 and my 1800x and 1700!
> The only thing is a comparision with day 1 from Ryzen 1 vs day 1 from Ryzen2!
> I think what we are getting now from ryzen 2 is how we needed to get it last year! Its amazing right now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have done a lot of test with PE3 with raised BCLK (will share all results soon), but i got your clocks with a 101.6 BCLK! Got it stable with most of the stress-test SW's. The only thing i found out it sometimes got freezes. Even when i passed Prime etc etc.
> 
> The suggestion i have is, when its Boosting that high, voltages are not enough when its activating more then 2 cores! Cause stress-testing Prime etc doesn't boost all cores that high. But some of the games are using the max boost 4.4 on 4/5 cores. And then 1.55 is probably not enough!
> 
> Im getting the feeling my silicon can handle very high clocks. But with that voltages 1.55+ i can get instability if it uses to much cores boosted. I dont want to push more then 0.05v offset!
> 
> 
> 
> Where did you read those degradation's info from Stilt?
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have a link from french dealer  ??


I do yea but the deal is today only and not sure they ship to the netherlands, there is a belgium one as well you might have luck with them. The code is geek4 when you add it to cart. 

https://www.ldlc.com/fiche/PB00247997.html


----------



## MacG32

Jaju123 said:


> How have you tested the stability of this? Those are the timings and speeds I'm aiming for but am struggling with anything over 3333mhz. Unfortunately my RAM is only stable at 1.4V or below, and going above actually causes errors. I have a 16gb 3600mhz c15 kit so it should be doable.



I ran Prime95 for 24 hours and plan on running MemTestPro just for the heck of it this evening. I'm running Samsung B-Die SR that defaults to 2400MHz CL16 at 1.2V. It's XMP is 3200MHz CL14 at 1.35V and overclocks very well. Those timings will be hit or miss with other kits. I provided the sources of all the different timings I used, so they can be used, just in case the end timings are too tight for other kits. Have fun!


----------



## lordzed83

After hours of testing. I confirm that 17666 windows build does not random shot down or reboot like april update and 1712u did.


----------



## hurricane28

This 2600x plus C7H is fantastic man!


----------



## ryzenoverclock

hello friends, I had some problems with crappy sound in games, that stopped the audio for about 1 second when I had stuttering at the same time, I found the problem, it was the DPC latency, tried a lot of solutions and don't know what but one of then solved my problem, no crappy sound anymore ! 

now I'm trying to solve my temperature problem, with everything in stock, I saw 78-80 c in Aida64 stress teste ( cpu + cache + fpu ) when tryiend to push a PE 3 with all other things on auto the CPU turn off itself with the stock air cooler when the aida pass 94 c after some minutes, when I set an offset of 0,07 in core voltage the cpu don't turnoff but the temperatures stay at dangerous 90 C, with prime stress test it gets about 5 Celsius less then aida64, I already tried to re apply termal paste the cpu cooler a hundred times, I got a fault cpu or the temperatures are like that with yours ? 

I'm planning to buy a water cooler, and probably choose between cooler master ML240L or deep cool capitain 240x


----------



## sonic2911

Spoiler















I’m so crazy with newegg, the mobo is still in stock on newegg.


----------



## crakej

I just updated to bios 0601 and thought I'd have a little look at how things run at default settings, and discovered something pretty cool...

My 1700X boosting to 3.9GHz single core, and doing it quite a lot. On my old x370 Prime Pro I was lucky if one core even boosted to 3.7 let alone 3.8.


----------



## crakej

sonic2911 said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I’m so crazy with newegg, the mobo is still in stock on newegg.


That's crazy! Did you send them an image of the site with the mobo in stock? Maybe just order one and pursue the refund?


----------



## sonic2911

crakej said:


> That's crazy! Did you send them an image of the site with the mobo in stock? Maybe just order one and pursue the refund?




I did show them but the price is different when I bought on ebay. I made a return request for replacement at first, but they accept it for refund. Then I said no, I need replacement and they told me CLOSE the request on ebay by myself, and they will work with ebay to replace it for me. I did what they told me and now they said out of stock while it’s still there. Liar!


----------



## sonic2911

Spoiler















Omg -,- I can’t believe it’s newegg


----------



## mtrai

@sonic2911 Please for the love of everything put your pics in spoilers...and anyhow what does this have to do with C7H this is an Ebay and Newegg issue? Which are 2 separate places to purchase from with totally different terms and conditions. And yes the Newegg marketplace on Ebay is separate from newegg.com


----------



## sonic2911

mtrai said:


> @sonic2911 Please for the love of everything put your pics in spoilers...and anyhow what does this have to do with C7H this is an Ebay and Newegg issue? Which are 2 separate places to purchase from with totally different terms and conditions. And yes the Newegg marketplace on Ebay is separate from newegg.com


I don't think it's newegg marketplace on ebay. It's newegg, the main company. For any reasons they don't want to replace it with the one they still have.


----------



## minal

sonic2911 said:


> I don't think it's newegg marketplace on ebay. It's newegg, the main company. For any reasons they don't want to replace it with the one they still have.


I found newegg is very insistent on distinguishing between their ebay storefront and newegg's own site. They often have very appealing deals on ebay, but they absolutely refuse to price match the identical item on their own site. It's a matter of their policy.

Even more confusing is the warranty situation: ebay newegg storefront says X years warranty through manufacturer, but manufacturers say no warranties for items bought on auction sites, etc. So is there any warranty? I still haven't gotten a straight answer. 

Because of this, I hesitate to buy anything of significant value from ebay even if it is newegg's own storefront.. even though the savings can be quite tempting.


----------



## VPII

majestynl said:


> Use the launcher from post: http://www.overclock.net/forum/10-a...memory-stability-thread-102.html#post26419580
> Much easier!
> 
> Raising BCLK "CAN" bring lots of other issues with it! Not a big fan of it!


Hi @majestynl thanks for directing me to that link. I've read around and I found Stilt recommending the memory test software from Karhu Software. He stated in a thread where they were discussing various memory test utilities that this one worked the best and it helped him a lot during the time Ryzen was first released. Here is the link, not sure if it is the same.

https://www.karhusoftware.com/ramtest/

I went ahead and I bought the utility as I want a test I know will work when I leave it for 8 to 10 hours during the night.


----------



## kamikatze13

i'd like to report/get more info on an issue i could reproduce 100% of the time for the past week:

reproduction steps:
have a BCLK above 100.0 and have the system freeze
hit safe_mode button on the lower edge of the mb
system reboots, get greeted with "safe mode press F1" prompt

expected behaiour:
see uefi screen

experienced:
nothing happens, qcode is 0d

workaround:
hit reset button
spam 'DEL'
get greeted by uefi screen


----------



## zulex

What's wrong with ELMOR? He has not been active for weeks...


----------



## hurricane28

What is with these new CPU's? 

3Dmark reports very low Physics score and CPUZ validation shows that i am running my CPU at 3.3 GHz at 1.33 vcore lol. 

More people with similar problems?


----------



## Martin778

zulex said:


> What's wrong with ELMOR? He has not been active for weeks...


Maybe preparing ASUS Crosshair VII Extreme, sigh...


----------



## crakej

and/or working on our next bios


----------



## hurricane28

@ Mumak , 

Can you plz explain what the following temps mean? On previous C6H board it were all the same but on this C7H they are different. 

Thank you.


----------



## lordzed83

hurricane28 said:


> @ Mumak ,
> 
> Can you plz explain what the following temps mean? On previous C6H board it were all the same but on this C7H they are different.
> 
> Thank you.


Motherboard temperature


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> I did wonder if they might just re-labelling and giving you timings they know work with Ryzen.
> 
> I may need to explore different timings, slightly looser then my current settings to get stable at 3533. I may have to try putting tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSCL up a bit as well. Not had much of a chance to do much last couple of days..
> 
> Think I might update bios to 0601 as well as offsets are not working for me on 0509, and manual voltages mean my clocks stay high and voltages stay high


I already pushed the ram-sticks to another system! As far as i saw the SPD etc, it was al the same! Will check again soon to be sure! 
Your could give tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSCL a try! But im a bit confused again.. Cause yesterday i rechecked my stable profiles who passed triple+ times Ramtest above 8000+,
and now i got errors around 1000%..... got this also few times at launch and also on my CH6! As stated before, a flashback helped before! Need to check again! 
Otherwise i'm suspecting maybe the ram gets high temperatures! ??? While i stress-test its approx ~43c! (ambient 22c) Whats yours while stress-testing?



VicsPC said:


> I do yea but the deal is today only and not sure they ship to the netherlands, there is a belgium one as well you might have luck with them. The code is geek4 when you add it to cart.
> 
> https://www.ldlc.com/fiche/PB00247997.html


Thanks!



hurricane28 said:


> This 2600x plus C7H is fantastic man!


Great 



VPII said:


> Hi @majestynl thanks for directing me to that link. I've read around and I found Stilt recommending the memory test software from Karhu Software. He stated in a thread where they were discussing various memory test utilities that this one worked the best and it helped him a lot during the time Ryzen was first released. Here is the link, not sure if it is the same.
> 
> https://www.karhusoftware.com/ramtest/
> 
> I went ahead and I bought the utility as I want a test I know will work when I leave it for 8 to 10 hours during the night.


Your welcome! Yes im also using RAMTest for a while, did al my stress-testing on CH7 mostly on that SW because its faster then HCI! I only suggested you to use the launcher because you asked about HCI 



kamikatze13 said:


> i'd like to report/get more info on an issue i could reproduce 100% of the time for the past week:
> 
> reproduction steps:
> have a BCLK above 100.0 and have the system freeze
> hit safe_mode button on the lower edge of the mb
> system reboots, get greeted with "safe mode press F1" prompt
> 
> expected behaiour:
> see uefi screen
> 
> experienced:
> nothing happens, qcode is 0d
> 
> workaround:
> hit reset button
> spam 'DEL'
> get greeted by uefi screen


Nothing really special. This is how it works for now. Tip: I always clear cmos on the backbutton when i have a freeze or instability while testing and i need to restart!
don't use the safe mode if its not needed! Just clear cmos with button!



hurricane28 said:


> What is with these new CPU's?
> 
> 3Dmark reports very low Physics score and CPUZ validation shows that i am running my CPU at 3.3 GHz at 1.33 vcore lol.
> 
> More people with similar problems?


hehe its not a problem! Windows/CPU-z is always reporting your base clocks if you use stock XFR/PB.
It will report different clocks if you manually set your clocks e.g with Pstates etc!


----------



## VicsPC

majestynl said:


> I already pushed the ram-sticks to another system! As far as i saw the SPD etc, it was al the same! Will check again soon to be sure!
> Your could give tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSCL a try! But im a bit confused again.. Cause yesterday i rechecked my stable profiles who passed triple+ times Ramtest above 8000+,
> and now i got errors around 1000%..... got this also few times at launch and also on my CH6! As stated before, a flashback helped before! Need to check again!
> Otherwise i'm suspecting maybe the ram gets high temperatures! ??? While i stress-test its approx ~43c! (ambient 22c) Whats yours while stress-testing?
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> 
> 
> Great
> 
> 
> 
> Your welcome! Yes im also using RAMTest for a while, did al my stress-testing on CH7 mostly on that SW because its faster then HCI! I only suggested you to use the launcher because you asked about HCI
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing really special. This is how it works for now. Tip: I always clear cmos on the backbutton when i have a freeze or instability while testing and i need to restart!
> don't use the safe mode if its not needed! Just clear cmos with button!
> 
> 
> 
> hehe its not a problem! Windows/CPU-z is always reporting your base clocks if you use stock XFR/PB.
> It will report different clocks if you manually set your clocks e.g with Pstates etc!


No problem, mine is shipping today so I'll have it either tomorrow or saturday morning, should be fun. I may leave it untouched for now and see how it performs, if it's better stock then OCed then stock it's going to stay.



zulex said:


> What's wrong with ELMOR? He has not been active for weeks...


He's active he just doesn't post as often as people would like. My guess is he's probably working on a new BIOS, i do believe AGESA 1.0.0.3 is being released but it's possible he's also gone to another show.


----------



## hurricane28

majestynl said:


> I already pushed the ram-sticks to another system! As far as i saw the SPD etc, it was al the same! Will check again soon to be sure!
> Your could give tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSCL a try! But im a bit confused again.. Cause yesterday i rechecked my stable profiles who passed triple+ times Ramtest above 8000+,
> and now i got errors around 1000%..... got this also few times at launch and also on my CH6! As stated before, a flashback helped before! Need to check again!
> Otherwise i'm suspecting maybe the ram gets high temperatures! ??? While i stress-test its approx ~43c! (ambient 22c) Whats yours while stress-testing?
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> 
> 
> Great
> 
> 
> 
> Your welcome! Yes im also using RAMTest for a while, did al my stress-testing on CH7 mostly on that SW because its faster then HCI! I only suggested you to use the launcher because you asked about HCI
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing really special. This is how it works for now. Tip: I always clear cmos on the backbutton when i have a freeze or instability while testing and i need to restart!
> don't use the safe mode if its not needed! Just clear cmos with button!
> 
> 
> 
> hehe its not a problem! Windows/CPU-z is always reporting your base clocks if you use stock XFR/PB.
> It will report different clocks if you manually set your clocks e.g with Pstates etc!



I hear ya but it is a problem because i get very very low Physics score in 3Dmark. I guess something got screwed with latest update. 

I will try to uninstall it and reinstall it again, thnx anyway.


----------



## lordzed83

For interested all Binned Zen+ cpus are gone. They said they wont be doing many of those as very litte to gain from it


----------



## majestynl

VicsPC said:


> No problem, mine is shipping today so I'll have it either tomorrow or saturday morning, should be fun. I may leave it untouched for now and see how it performs, if it's better stock then OCed then stock it's going to stay.


Good luck with it! share your experience asap 



hurricane28 said:


> I hear ya but it is a problem because i get very very low Physics score in 3Dmark. I guess something got screwed with latest update.
> I will try to uninstall it and reinstall it again, thnx anyway.


NP Mate! But with what are you comparing the results ? With your ryzen1? or something else?



lordzed83 said:


> For interested all Binned Zen+ cpus are gone. They said they wont be doing many of those as very litte to gain from it


I even don't know why they sold them as binned in the first place! As far as i saw from members, most of them could run 4.2Ghz around 1.4 volts! Im running mine easily at ~1.40


----------



## hurricane28

majestynl said:


> Good luck with it! share your experience asap
> 
> 
> 
> NP Mate! But with what are you comparing the results ? With your ryzen1? or something else?
> 
> 
> 
> I even don't know why they sold them as binned in the first place! As far as i saw from members, most of them could run 4.2Ghz around 1.4 volts! Im running mine easily at ~1.40



Exactly man, i compared my 2600x to an friends 2600x and its almost the same.. Not much in the binning. I can hit 4.25 Ghz with 1.350 vcore in BIOS LLC level 3 and 3466 MHz CL14 with no problems. 

I compare the scores to a friends 2600x which has much higher at the same clock and my 1600 @ 3.950 GHz wast higher than 17K so 4.25 GHz should net a lot more performance than 15 or 16K physics. I am talking about pure physics, nothing more. GPU is not important.


----------



## VicsPC

hurricane28 said:


> Exactly man, i compared my 2600x to an friends 2600x and its almost the same.. Not much in the binning. I can hit 4.25 Ghz with 1.350 vcore in BIOS LLC level 3 and 3466 MHz CL14 with no problems.
> 
> I compare the scores to a friends 2600x which has much higher at the same clock and my 1600 @ 3.950 GHz wast higher than 17K so 4.25 GHz should net a lot more performance than 15 or 16K physics. I am talking about pure physics, nothing more. GPU is not important.


I think Windows has done something to the power tables in the latest windows update. My CPU now downclocks on its own if i put it in balanced mode (1700x though) and i don't have pstates set at all its just a straight offset oc at 3.8. Balanced mode used to be 50% core parking now it's 100%. There's also this for all PRO users, doesn't work in the home edition. I'm very VERY curious to see what it entails. 

https://www.extremetech.com/computing/264016-windows-10-getting-new-ultimate-performance-mode-users


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> I already pushed the ram-sticks to another system! As far as i saw the SPD etc, it was al the same! Will check again soon to be sure!
> Your could give tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSCL a try! But im a bit confused again.. Cause yesterday i rechecked my stable profiles who passed triple+ times Ramtest above 8000+,
> and now i got errors around 1000%..... got this also few times at launch and also on my CH6! As stated before, a flashback helped before! Need to check again!
> Otherwise i'm suspecting maybe the ram gets high temperatures! ??? While i stress-test its approx ~43c! (ambient 22c) Whats yours while stress-testing?


I have had the same problem - even clearing re-loading settings I'm still getting stops at about 1100% RamTest - when it gets past that, it's gets to over 5000% so it's just still not stable. I've updated bios to 601 and testing just Ram OC (3533) with same settings and it failed again at 1100% - cpu was on auto everything. It may well be that I just need to up the cpu a bit to help with the ram OC. Going to do more tests with Ram OC only see what differences there might be. Will try experiments later with CPU as well - should be able to do a bit better if offset voltages work without messing with my multiplier.

My ram temps are way warmer than yours, but I thought they were ok? Mine are idling at 35c and going to 50c+ under load.

I's good to see PB2 and/or CPB working so well with my CPU - boosting a single core up to 3.9 all the time - MUCH better than on old X370 board.


----------



## lordzed83

@majestynl ye they had. I'm alwys willing to pay extra for TESTED binned ect hardware. All memory kits I'w sold from my Zen1 platform i got extra 15 for over store price for providing TESTED settings on ryzen platform.

There is market for tested Hardware not big but it exists 

Thats why I'm tempted to sell my ddr kit and get another one. Not like I would loose money on it as postal worker got free shipping as a perk but that evens up with poor wages we are getting paid.


----------



## kamikatze13

majestynl said:


> Nothing really special. This is how it works for now. Tip: I always clear cmos on the backbutton when i have a freeze or instability while testing and i need to restart!
> don't use the safe mode if its not needed! Just clear cmos with button!


figured as much, thanks. the placement of the retry and safemode buttons is ... well let's call it unfortunate anyways :sozo:


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> I have had the same problem - even clearing re-loading settings I'm still getting stops at about 1100% RamTest - when it gets past that, it's gets to over 5000% so it's just still not stable. I've updated bios to 601 and testing just Ram OC (3533) with same settings and it failed again at 1100% - cpu was on auto everything. It may well be that I just need to up the cpu a bit to help with the ram OC. Going to do more tests with Ram OC only see what differences there might be. Will try experiments later with CPU as well - should be able to do a bit better if offset voltages work without messing with my multiplier.
> 
> My ram temps are way warmer than yours, but I thought they were ok? Mine are idling at 35c and going to 50c+ under load.
> 
> I's good to see PB2 and/or CPB working so well with my CPU - boosting a single core up to 3.9 all the time - MUCH better than on old X370 board.


Like i said, i had this behavior also on my CH6 + 1800x tests! But with a complete flashback or new bios i passed them easily with same settings again.
Also same on this rig, while it passed x times above 8000%, then suddenly next time it wont pass +1100%. But i play a lot with the bios, so it could be also some of my trial settings are still not completely wiped after clearcmos/back to defaults etc! Cant say for sure! But definitely makes no sense...  Cause now i cant say for sure if all my days of testing for 3533+TT whether it was reliable or not..

Anyways.. will do more tests tonight, first i'm going to do exactly the same tests with a big noctua industrial blowing on the RAMsticks 
after that, i will re-flash bios and set same settings again to see if that will pass because this helped before! 
Will update you...

by the way: The profiles im using for testing are all passing x times Prime95 / RealBench / AVX / Aida and all other small apps!
I also tried to up the vcore just to be sure with no luck! So dont waste your time on that i would say


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> @majestynl ye they had. I'm alwys willing to pay extra for TESTED binned ect hardware. All memory kits I'w sold from my Zen1 platform i got extra 15 for over store price for providing TESTED settings on ryzen platform.
> 
> There is market for tested Hardware not big but it exists
> 
> Thats why I'm tempted to sell my ddr kit and get another one. Not like I would loose money on it as postal worker got free shipping as a perk but that evens up with poor wages we are getting paid.


hahah i see... you just love to play with toys! I would suggest just buy your CPU's at the stores and get that extra excitement like you are opening a "kinder surprise egg"


----------



## VicsPC

Do you guys think its worth reinstalling windows going from c6/1700x to c7/2700x? I noticed that literally all the drivers and what not are the same except for the addition of the wifi module. Even the audio drivers are the same.


----------



## hokeyplyr48

Been having a terrible time over the past week trying to get anything stable on this board. I have read every post in this thread over the past few days to see if there are any ideas / known issues that I may be stumbling into. I have a 2700x and F4-3200C14D-32GTZR (dual rank 2 x 16GB). 

I initially was having random shut downs, not blue screens, but just black screen and it's out. I did have Corsair Link installed, so I turned that off and the black screen shut downs stopped, however no I just get the windows 10 sad face blue screen.

I was initially going for anything higher than 3200 and was shooting for 3333 or 3400 even with the DRAM calculator safe timings but kept getting errors on HCI memtest. Bumped it down to 3200 but haven't gotten past 50% before I get a sad face. There have been four mentions of dual rank memory in this thread so far and I tried the one person's timings but still couldn't get the computer to stay on. I've pushed DRAM voltage up to 1.45 and SOC up to 1.1 but still couldn't get it to be stable even at 3200.

As a last ditch effort, went into the BIOS, F5 load defaults, RAM at 2133, PE off, and still getting sad face in windows. 

Is windows completely messed up? I can't find an ISO of 1733 which is what lordzed was recommending to use. Or is something wrong hardware wise (memory/mobo/cpu)? I saw the one person's mention of bad SPD in their RAM due to Aura, but not entirely sure how to check if that's an issue. Any suggestions would be great, because at this point I have no idea what's wrong as I can't get this box to be stable at 2133...


----------



## MacG32

VicsPC said:


> Do you guys think its worth reinstalling windows going from c6/1700x to c7/2700x? I noticed that literally all the drivers and what not are the same except for the addition of the wifi module. Even the audio drivers are the same.



I used Windows Media Creation Tool, made a Windows USB, and reinstalled through Windows, so it kept all my installed programs and files. It may not have needed it, but I did it just in case. It didn't take long. I also uninstalled and reinstalled AMD's Chipset Drivers. Everything else was smooth sailing after that. 



hokeyplyr48 said:


> Been having a terrible time over the past week trying to get anything stable on this board. I have read every post in this thread over the past few days to see if there are any ideas / known issues that I may be stumbling into. I have a 2700x and F4-3200C14D-32GTZR (dual rank 2 x 16GB).
> 
> I initially was having random shut downs, not blue screens, but just black screen and it's out. I did have Corsair Link installed, so I turned that off and the black screen shut downs stopped, however no I just get the windows 10 sad face blue screen.
> 
> I was initially going for anything higher than 3200 and was shooting for 3333 or 3400 even with the DRAM calculator safe timings but kept getting errors on HCI memtest. Bumped it down to 3200 but haven't gotten past 50% before I get a sad face. There have been four mentions of dual rank memory in this thread so far and I tried the one person's timings but still couldn't get the computer to stay on. I've pushed DRAM voltage up to 1.45 and SOC up to 1.1 but still couldn't get it to be stable even at 3200.
> 
> As a last ditch effort, went into the BIOS, F5 load defaults, RAM at 2133, PE off, and still getting sad face in windows.
> 
> Is windows completely messed up? I can't find an ISO of 1733 which is what lordzed was recommending to use. Or is something wrong hardware wise (memory/mobo/cpu)? I saw the one person's mention of bad SPD in their RAM due to Aura, but not entirely sure how to check if that's an issue. Any suggestions would be great, because at this point I have no idea what's wrong as I can't get this box to be stable at 2133...



Make sure your memory is in the second and forth slots from the left (See picture). Sounds like you may have some bad RAM. Get MemTest86 and make a bootable USB using Rufus. Make sure everything in the BIOS is set to default and boot from the USB. Run the tests and see what happens. Try that first and if they pass, you could try uninstalling anything Asus related, because most of it interferes with day to day operations. Check the above response for the latest Windows and AMD Chipset Drivers.


----------



## Cadman597

hokeyplyr48 said:


> Been having a terrible time over the past week trying to get anything stable on this board. I have read every post in this thread over the past few days to see if there are any ideas / known issues that I may be stumbling into. I have a 2700x and F4-3200C14D-32GTZR (dual rank 2 x 16GB).
> 
> I initially was having random shut downs, not blue screens, but just black screen and it's out. I did have Corsair Link installed, so I turned that off and the black screen shut downs stopped, however no I just get the windows 10 sad face blue screen.
> 
> I was initially going for anything higher than 3200 and was shooting for 3333 or 3400 even with the DRAM calculator safe timings but kept getting errors on HCI memtest. Bumped it down to 3200 but haven't gotten past 50% before I get a sad face. There have been four mentions of dual rank memory in this thread so far and I tried the one person's timings but still couldn't get the computer to stay on. I've pushed DRAM voltage up to 1.45 and SOC up to 1.1 but still couldn't get it to be stable even at 3200.
> 
> As a last ditch effort, went into the BIOS, F5 load defaults, RAM at 2133, PE off, and still getting sad face in windows.
> 
> Is windows completely messed up? I can't find an ISO of 1733 which is what lordzed was recommending to use. Or is something wrong hardware wise (memory/mobo/cpu)? I saw the one person's mention of bad SPD in their RAM due to Aura, but not entirely sure how to check if that's an issue. Any suggestions would be great, because at this point I have no idea what's wrong as I can't get this box to be stable at 2133...


I also had stability issues with a 2700X and F4-3600C17D-32GTZR. I had to reflash the bios to get anything above 2133 stable. Also reseating the ram may work.


----------



## hurricane28

VicsPC said:


> I think Windows has done something to the power tables in the latest windows update. My CPU now downclocks on its own if i put it in balanced mode (1700x though) and i don't have pstates set at all its just a straight offset oc at 3.8. Balanced mode used to be 50% core parking now it's 100%. There's also this for all PRO users, doesn't work in the home edition. I'm very VERY curious to see what it entails.
> 
> https://www.extremetech.com/computing/264016-windows-10-getting-new-ultimate-performance-mode-users


I think so too man. 

When i looked at CPU Speed Firestrike reports clocks as low as 3.3 GHz.. Doesn't make any sense as my 2600x at stock is 3.6 GHz lol. I am on Ultimate performance, idk if it did anything but it doesn't help with 3Dmark man. I also tried maximum performance, nothing worked.


----------



## VicsPC

Cadman597 said:


> I also had stability issues with a 2700X and F4-3600C17D-32GTZR. I had to reflash the bios to get anything above 2133 stable. Also reseating the ram may work.


On my C6 mine would freeze after the BIOS and freeze at the UEFI splash screen, i reset cmos, disconnected the psu, left it off for a while and pulled the CMOS battery. I have not had an issue since and system has been very stable. I think for the gremlins people just need to start fresh and just clear the board of power and memory.


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> Nice one! What's the performance like at CL15?


I'm running some better comparatives soon so will let you know.

The other aspect is even after having played with DRAM Tune R1-R4 I still encounter issues at greater than 1-1.5hrs when do reruns  . I'm all out of ideas on making 3533MHz stable with 3466MHz The Stilt timings.

I also tried 2T, slightly looser timings, upto 1.1V SOC and 1.4V VDIMM. As before increased SOC and or VDIMM makes fails occur quicker  .

I'm back on 4.1GHz 3466MHz The Stilt. I'm now testing pairs of dimms out of F4-3200C14Q-32GVK, then all 4. So far they react the same as F4-3200C14D-16GTZ.



Gettz8488 said:


> @gupsterg i just realized that your pstate overclock was with a bus clock of 99.0 I did a few test and I’m able to run 1.32Vcore auto llc at 4.075ghz on my chip


I use BCLK 100MHz for normal use. As I was trying to diagnose why 3533MHz isn't stable in CPU+RAM loads I was increasing BCLK in steps from 99.0MHz. At 99.4MHz (ie ~3500MHz+) the profile needs so much work to move it to >1hr stability in CPU+RAM loads. RAM only test is not a problem for me. 



majestynl said:


> Hehehe I was Just starting to write back to your previous pos
> t but then i saw this one..
> 
> Congrats mate... :drink:. Nice one..
> Saw you put all your experience in to it from previous post info..
> 
> I can't run cl15 because of GDM and i really don't want to run 16
> Just ordered new ram kit, same as what I use now for testing but with a X at the end. (F4-3200C14Q-32GTZRX) Supposed to be special for ryzen. Don't know what's true or what will be the difference .hehe will share tomorrow.
> 
> I want to run 3533 on CL14, and see what 3600 can do
> 
> Cheers..


Cheers mate  , euphoria lasted ~1 day or so, following day found 3533MHz with 3466MHz The Stilt timings was still erratic after the 1-1.5hrs mark . 3466MHz seems the limit for my HW / capabilities of tweaking.

Look forward to info on X RAM. I would assume it is the same RAM IC and PCB in use as non X. When Flare X came out (which also has an X at the end). Information from Voodoo Jungle (author of Thaiphoon Burner) was, it's the same RAM IC/PCB as Trident Z (Intel kits), IIRC only the SPD lacks XMP profile. You can cross flash with SPD data of non X kit to make it have XMP profile.



minal said:


> Thanks, good to know! It's strange that the default for Performance Bias is Auto. I thought of turning it off but left it on Auto since I have no idea what it actually does and since I didn't want to make too many changes. Now I'll turn it off.
> 
> And while we're on the subject, are there any other defaults that need to be changed for daily/stable use?
> 
> 
> 
> minal said:
> 
> 
> 
> It would be nice to get a confirmation from @elmor or @The Stilt on the recommended setting for daily use.
> 
> In the meantime, maybe "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" applies.
Click to expand...

I can't find the post at the moment, but it was stated a few times in the C6H OC thread that it changed cache timings. Hence improved results. All CPUs could not take this "tightening". I had one CPU that went nuts prior to OS load when PB CB15 was selected and all other took it in their stride. When any were stability tested with PB activated on a known good OC profile they would fail. IIRC Timur Born found on his CPU that didn't get into OS with a PB, increasing SOC solved issue.

I did recently try PB on my 2700X, it goes to OS and runs benches without issue. But just like a gen 1 CPU, on know good OC profile it will not pass a stability test.

For example I have done so many reruns of 4.1GHz 3466MHz now, so know the profile is sound. If I enable PB CB15 I can only pass a stability test for ~1hr, then I may have crash, frozen rig, etc.

It also seems to me that the gains with PB CB15 on gen 2 are less than gains on gen 1. To me this makes sense as already gen 2 is tighter on cache, etc.

I do not know of any app that allows info on core quality in Linux. Even for WinOS we only really have HWINFO, Ryzen Master only tells 1st/2nd best cores and The Stilts CPO app only tells best and worst, AFAIK in the form released to us.



Ricey20 said:


> I see some people with Ryzen 2000/x470 doing SOC voltage of 1.13125-1.175. Anyone know what's the max safe voltage for SOC? Still in the middle of tweaking but might start playing with SOC voltage.


For Ryzen gen 1, gen 2 and Threadripper The Stilt's info is the same, see info here.



hurricane28 said:


> @ Mumak ,
> 
> Can you plz explain what the following temps mean? On previous C6H board it were all the same but on this C7H they are different.
> 
> Thank you.


It maybe some of those are VRM temps. I'll check mine. Why I say that is on C7H the VRM temperature is not a thermistor located close to VRM, but readings from the IR3555M (the mosfets). I noted in a post of The Stilt on Anand he had SOC VRM temp via his own "tools". See spoilers in this post.


----------



## lordzed83

@gupsterg
Told You i got 3600 stable on memory side its infinity fabric that cant handle those speeds.
So what i can pass 1000% hci 0 errors if cpu us not stable?? Better off kaxing timings sub 3500


Another factor is windows version. April update is SLOWER than 17666 im running so its more stable at higher clocks. But in reality cpu is slower.
Remember whehn i said i could not get 3600cl15 runing ?? I was on FASTEST windows 10 build 17024.
On that build 3466cl15 is faster than 3600cl15 same subtimings by 6gflops on ibt and 10 points CB15. To put it n perspective thats like around extra 40mhz on cpu !!!
so 3600cl15 was fully stable on 17127 windows build but my average ibt gflops ware 205-206
now with 17666 build and 3533 im arund 2010-2011 
SAME overclock profile fresh windows instals and clears.
Invested 3 days of rinstalling windows versions to confirm it with just my NVME drive.

Biggest pain is that i lost 17025 RS1 windows build iso  it was fastest and super stable ect. New version is stable but not as fast 2 days now messing around and cant get to speeds I USED to gave/


----------



## MrPhilo

Anyone soundcard on there VII has like a few discolouration on the metal square thing?


----------



## hurricane28

gupsterg said:


> I'm running some better comparatives soon so will let you know.
> 
> The other aspect is even after having played with DRAM Tune R1-R4 I still encounter issues at greater than 1-1.5hrs when do reruns  . I'm all out of ideas on making 3533MHz stable with 3466MHz The Stilt timings.
> 
> I also tried 2T, slightly looser timings, upto 1.1V SOC and 1.4V VDIMM. As before increased SOC and or VDIMM makes fails occur quicker  .
> 
> I'm back on 4.1GHz 3466MHz The Stilt. I'm now testing pairs of dimms out of F4-3200C14Q-32GVK, then all 4. So far they react the same as F4-3200C14D-16GTZ.
> 
> 
> 
> I use BCLK 100MHz for normal use. As I was trying to diagnose why 3533MHz isn't stable in CPU+RAM loads I was increasing BCLK in steps from 99.0MHz. At 99.4MHz (ie ~3500MHz+) the profile needs so much work to move it to >1hr stability in CPU+RAM loads. RAM only test is not a problem for me.
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers mate  , euphoria lasted ~1 day or so, following day found 3533MHz with 3466MHz The Stilt timings was still erratic after the 1-1.5hrs mark . 3466MHz seems the limit for my HW / capabilities of tweaking.
> 
> Look forward to info on X RAM. I would assume it is the same RAM IC and PCB in use as non X. When Flare X came out (which also has an X at the end). Information from Voodoo Jungle (author of Thaiphoon Burner) was, it's the same RAM IC/PCB as Trident Z (Intel kits), IIRC only the SPD lacks XMP profile. You can cross flash with SPD data of non X kit to make it have XMP profile.
> 
> 
> 
> I can't find the post at the moment, but it was stated a few times in the C6H OC thread that it changed cache timings. Hence improved results. All CPUs could not take this "tightening". I had one CPU that went nuts prior to OS load when PB CB15 was selected and all other took it in their stride. When any were stability tested with PB activated on a known good OC profile they would fail. IIRC Timur Born found on his CPU that didn't get into OS with a PB, increasing SOC solved issue.
> 
> I did recently try PB on my 2700X, it goes to OS and runs benches without issue. But just like a gen 1 CPU, on know good OC profile it will not pass a stability test.
> 
> For example I have done so many reruns of 4.1GHz 3466MHz now, so know the profile is sound. If I enable PB CB15 I can only pass a stability test for ~1hr, then I may have crash, frozen rig, etc.
> 
> It also seems to me that the gains with PB CB15 on gen 2 are less than gains on gen 1. To me this makes sense as already gen 2 is tighter on cache, etc.
> 
> I do not know of any app that allows info on core quality in Linux. Even for WinOS we only really have HWINFO, Ryzen Master only tells 1st/2nd best cores and The Stilts CPO app only tells best and worst, AFAIK in the form released to us.
> 
> 
> 
> For Ryzen gen 1, gen 2 and Threadripper The Stilt's info is the same, see info here.
> 
> 
> 
> It maybe some of those are VRM temps. I'll check mine. Why I say that is on C7H the VRM temperature is not a thermistor located close to VRM, but readings from the IR3555M (the mosfets). I noted in a post of The Stilt on Anand he had SOC VRM temp via his own "tools". See spoilers in this post.


Nah man, vrm's don't get hot here besides, i am only running an 2600 x which isn't even working the vrm's hard. 

Its the bost XFR thing that isn't working correctly.. It doesn't holds its boost. When i set performance enhancer to level 3 i get best performance but only on auto volts. I guess manual overclocking is still king after all.


----------



## gupsterg

@majestynl

:heart: the art! 
@lordzed83

Dunno about W10, not yet tried on C7H. Linux Mint/W7P x64 so far sound for me.
@hurricane28

For me seems like VRM temperature 4 5 6.


Spoiler




View attachment 199801


View attachment 199817


View attachment 199809


----------



## Martin778

MrPhilo said:


> Anyone soundcard on there VII has like a few discolouration on the metal square thing?


You can clean it off with window cleaner / alcohol.


----------



## lordzed83

@gupsterg its like anoying my SLOW 3600 that could pass EVERYTHING is not stable anymore but now 3533 is faster than 3600 and stable both slower than 3466 on 17025 build hahahaha.
but at lest PE overclock does not shot down the pc... But its useless in VR PE oc adds tinny stutter every now and then when playing in VR thats from core jumping atound i bet....

all in all dont use PE overclocking no more lol


----------



## minal

Do memory settings affect CPU temps? 

Aiming for undervolting to reduce temps with PE3, CPB, PBO enabled, and DOCP set for the F4-3200C14D-32GTZ (3200, 1.35V, 14-14-14-14-34). 

Tried -100mV CPU undervolt and often failed to boot. -93.75mV seemed fine and passed several hours of mprime in-place FFT 128K as suggested by @gupsterg . (Aside: I ran this with 1 core with the reasoning that it would allow the highest boosting and voltage. Is this correct? However the single thread was bouncing over many different cores, so does affinity also need to be set to a single core? Which?)

mprime in-place FFT 8K to 4096K with 25GB RAM out of 32GB failed. Does this indicate CPU/voltage or memory problems, or both?

To rule out memory I removed DOCP and set to default. (2133, 1.2V, 15s). This resulted in a big drop of ~10C in CPU temps, reaching as low as 32C at idle! (25C ambient, NH-D15) What caused this?

Can undervolting CPU cause memory instability? Can DOCP interfere with undervolting? 



gupsterg said:


> I can't find the post at the moment, but it was stated a few times in the C6H OC thread that it changed cache timings. Hence improved results. All CPUs could not take this "tightening". I had one CPU that went nuts prior to OS load when PB CB15 was selected and all other took it in their stride. When any were stability tested with PB activated on a known good OC profile they would fail. IIRC Timur Born found on his CPU that didn't get into OS with a PB, increasing SOC solved issue.
> 
> I did recently try PB on my 2700X, it goes to OS and runs benches without issue. But just like a gen 1 CPU, on know good OC profile it will not pass a stability test.
> 
> For example I have done so many reruns of 4.1GHz 3466MHz now, so know the profile is sound. If I enable PB CB15 I can only pass a stability test for ~1hr, then I may have crash, frozen rig, etc.
> 
> It also seems to me that the gains with PB CB15 on gen 2 are less than gains on gen 1. To me this makes sense as already gen 2 is tighter on cache, etc.
> 
> I do not know of any app that allows info on core quality in Linux. Even for WinOS we only really have HWINFO, Ryzen Master only tells 1st/2nd best cores and The Stilts CPO app only tells best and worst, AFAIK in the form released to us.


Does Auto mean PB is enabled? 

How is best/worst core defined? Maybe it can be added to some linux tools.



MrPhilo said:


> Anyone soundcard on there VII has like a few discolouration on the metal square thing?


Is it really white with spots or is that a reflection/lighting issue? Mine had 'waterspots' (bugged me the moment I saw it) that I wiped off with alcohol.


----------



## minal

lordzed83 said:


> but at lest PE overclock does not shot down the pc... But its useless in VR PE oc adds tinny stutter every now and then when playing in VR thats from core jumping atound i bet....
> 
> all in all dont use PE overclocking no more lol


Don't use PE at all? Or not more than level 2?


----------



## lordzed83

minal said:


> lordzed83 said:
> 
> 
> 
> but at lest PE overclock does not shot down the pc... But its useless in VR PE oc adds tinny stutter every now and then when playing in VR thats from core jumping atound i bet....
> 
> all in all dont use PE overclocking no more lol
> 
> 
> 
> Don't use PE at all? Or not more than level 2?
Click to expand...

I dont use it at all now care about extra 200mhz on 2 cores when it messes up with all sort of stability. This stuff is not good for max overclock benchmark stress stable systems.. Just running 4250 all core . maybe cpould run 4300 with mempry at just 3333 but not going lower than 3466cl15 that iw been using on my zen 1 for last 6-7 months lol


----------



## lordzed83

Not living in cavw age even WoW runs on 3 cores and next xpack is dx12 so lol


----------



## gupsterg

@hurricane28

Seems like temperature 4 5 6 is duplicate of CPU socket sensor, so hiding it as before. Ran a test with them there from start of run.



Spoiler




View attachment 200017




Will still contact Mumak/The Stilt if there is SOC VRM temp and if it can be added to HWINFO.

@lordzed83

Not using OC with PE at present.

@minal

If testing a single/not all cores core then yes set affinity to one/ones you wish to test.

I also found using negative offset of over 100mV lead to post issues. Equal to or less than 100mV I could get post. Effective voltage did not drop inline with offset set. Have you checked with digital multimeter how yours behaves?

I have no clue on "programming" aspect to gain core quality info. The Stilt and Mumak would know, just be aware they have NDAs, etc with involved companies so no idea if it can be made public knowledge.

For me never noted memory settings creating increased CPU temp. Perhaps I didn't pay enough attention. I did earlier a run of 3400MHz using 3466MHz The Stilt timings, now using same VID/SOC/VDIMM, etc for 3466MHz, any difference is run to run variance IMO. Compare screenie in this post with last post for hurricane28.

If 128K 128K in place passed and then 8K 4096K xxGB (max ram) failed it is likely SOC or VDIMM is issue, but other settings can play a role. Like VTTDDR or ProcODT, CAD Bus. As I was doing before, try using a lower BCLK and bringing it up to see where the break point for profile is. Sometimes it's easier to solve issue with settings that way.

Performance Bias on [Auto] has always defaulted to [Disabled] on C6H, C7H and ZE. Even when left on [Auto] due to another changed UEFI setting I have not seen [Auto] behave as it is another settings. Basically the [auto] set is fixed to [Disabled], it has no "auto rule" to change based on another UEFI change. For example SOC voltage when left on [Auto] changes based on "auto rule" when you increase RAM MHz.

*** edit ***

Yeah average CPU temps is within run to ran variance where I change only RAM MHz. Compared screenie of 3400MHz in post 1547 to one in this where it's now 3466MHz. When finish this test run will try a vastly lower RAM MHz but same voltages, etc.


----------



## majestynl

*This is literally mind blowing*

In my previous posts i mentioned about something confusing with RamStabilty. See post
My settings for 3466Mhz + Tight Timings who where stable for me (tested multiple times with Ramtest +8000% / +1000% Hci + many other stress succeed)
could get instable the next day!!! They suddenly didn't passed 1000% sometimes. This happened a few times and mostly i got it back after a full flashback like the next day and just re-entered my stable settings again! (Same).
I always thought it was something with bios!

So few days ago i bought some new ramsticks (same one) just for testing, and loaded my profiles and they didnt passed 200% Ramtest. So i thought maybe they need different settings, but mainly i wanted to test GDM off and lower my tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSC!
No success!! Just same behavior as my first stick! So i put them away...and pushed back my own sticks again. Just to be sure i started Ramtest and this time my own sticks including my stable profiles also didn't pass 200% anymore..

This made me thinking their must be something else....i checked my Ram-Temperatures while stress testing and they where around ~43c! Felt a bit to much just for 1.385v! So i thought maybe that's the issue!
I pulled a Noctua industrial from the shelve and directed this exactly to my sticks and started Ramtest!!! *Surprisingly it passed immediately +4000%!* See attachments!

And on top of that, i went to bios, upped my Ram to 3533mhz and just quickly only added some juice to it (1.395v) and BAMM i got +1500%! See attachments!
Very strange, cause members from here know, i tried to get my Ram fully stable on 3533+TT for days with no succes. It never passed 500% and 1 time it was near 1000%. Have spent almost 4 days trying with no luck.
And now just with a simple fan blowing i got already 1500%. Stopped the test because i wanted to write this  Now i know i can get this 3533mhz+TT stable 

But the strange parts is, why is this happening!!! 
[highlight]Im kindly asking people to test this together with me. Just put an fan blowing on the ramsticks and see if you get better results.!![/highlight]

PS: don't think you will suddenly get your ram stable with a fan if you are using unstable setting in first place. This is just for those who got confused if their stable setting didn't passed the next day. Or for those who want to push more out of their stable OC.


*Few extra info:*
- Tested with my 100% stable Pstates 4200mhz profile!
- Just to be sure, i add 1 notch extra vcore on cpu so i know for sure my test wasnt effected by my CPU !
- With my Noctua 140mm Industrial blowing on the ramstick i didnt get temperatures higher than 32c on my RAM
- Using my own TT timings.
- For the 3533 quick test, i used same TT from my 3466 profile!
- Screenshots made while testing! Forgot to ad Ryzen Timer checker, so included that separatly!

@gupsterg @crakej


----------



## gupsterg

@majestynl

Sweeeettt!  .

I'm game to try another fan on my setup, I'll strap a 2.5K TY143 to the RAM!  . Will bring back the memories of Vantec Tornados  .


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> Cheers mate  , euphoria lasted ~1 day or so, following day found 3533MHz with 3466MHz The Stilt timings was still erratic after the 1-1.5hrs mark . 3466MHz seems the limit for my HW / capabilities of tweaking.
> 
> Look forward to info on X RAM. I would assume it is the same RAM IC and PCB in use as non X. When Flare X came out (which also has an X at the end). Information from Voodoo Jungle (author of Thaiphoon Burner) was, it's the same RAM IC/PCB as Trident Z (Intel kits), IIRC only the SPD lacks XMP profile. You can cross flash with SPD data of non X kit to make it have XMP profile.
> .


Np  didn't get any difference with new sticks. Exactly how you say it's the same thing.. strange that I also couldn't boot into windows with GDM off +1T and lower tRDRDsCl / tRWRWSCL values, look like clone of my first sticks 







gupsterg said:


> @majestynl
> 
> :heart: the art!


 Hehehe




gupsterg said:


> @majestynl
> 
> Sweeeettt!  .
> 
> I'm game to try another fan on my setup, I'll strap a 2.5K TY143 to the RAM!  . Will bring back the memories of Vantec Tornados  .


Hahahah exciting!!!

Yes give it a try.. 
Al those testings from me for 3533 for nothing 

Will start soon again with fans. Let's see


----------



## VicsPC

majestynl said:


> *This is literally mind blowing*
> 
> In my previous posts i mentioned about something confusing with RamStabilty. See post
> My settings for 3466Mhz + Tight Timings who where stable for me (tested multiple times with Ramtest +8000% / +1000% Hci + many other stress succeed)
> could get instable the next day!!! They suddenly didn't passed 1000% sometimes. This happened a few times and mostly i got it back after a full flashback like the next day and just re-entered my stable settings again! (Same).
> I always thought it was something with bios!
> 
> So few days ago i bought some new ramsticks (same one) just for testing, and loaded my profiles and they didnt passed 200% Ramtest. So i thought maybe they need different settings, but mainly i wanted to test GDM off and lower my tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSC!
> No success!! Just same behavior as my first stick! So i put them away...and pushed back my own sticks again. Just to be sure i started Ramtest and this time my own sticks including my stable profiles also didn't pass 200% anymore..
> 
> This made me thinking their must be something else....i checked my Ram-Temperatures while stress testing and they where around ~43c! Felt a bit to much just for 1.385v! So i thought maybe that's the issue!
> I pulled a Noctua industrial from the shelve and directed this exactly to my sticks and started Ramtest!!! *Surprisingly it passed immediately +4000%!* See attachments!
> 
> And on top of that, i went to bios, upped my Ram to 3533mhz and just quickly only added some juice to it (1.395v) and BAMM i got +1500%! See attachments!
> Very strange, cause members from here know, i tried to get my Ram fully stable on 3533+TT for days with no succes. It never passed 500% and 1 time it was near 1000%. Have spent almost 4 days trying with no luck.
> And now just with a simple fan blowing i got already 1500%. Stopped the test because i wanted to write this  Now i know i can get this 3533mhz+TT stable
> 
> But the strange parts is, why is this happening!!!
> [highlight]Im kindly asking people to test this together with me. Just put an fan blowing on the ramsticks and see if you get better results.!![/highlight]
> 
> PS: don't think you will suddenly get your ram stable with a fan if you are using unstable setting in first place. This is just for those who got confused if their stable setting didn't passed the next day. Or for those who want to push more out of their stable OC.
> 
> 
> *Few extra info:*
> - Tested with my 100% stable Pstates 4200mhz profile!
> - Just to be sure, i add 1 notch extra vcore on cpu so i know for sure my test wasnt effected by my CPU !
> - With my Noctua 140mm Industrial blowing on the ramstick i didnt get temperatures higher than 32c on my RAM
> - Using my own TT timings.
> - For the 3533 quick test, i used same TT from my 3466 profile!
> - Screenshots made while testing! Forgot to ad Ryzen Timer checker, so included that separatly!
> 
> @gupsterg @crakej


Very interesting, in my case i have 3 140mms fans blowing literally over my ram sticks. Very old pic, but where the 240mm rad is up top i now have 3 140mm fans up there as intakes. Could be why i can get my hynix ram down to 14/16 instead of 16/18 even with 1.45v. Makes me wanna water cool my ram now haha, maybe when i get my gskill 3600mhz kit.


----------



## hokeyplyr48

MacG32 said:


> I used Windows Media Creation Tool, made a Windows USB, and reinstalled through Windows, so it kept all my installed programs and files. It may not have needed it, but I did it just in case. It didn't take long. I also uninstalled and reinstalled AMD's Chipset Drivers. Everything else was smooth sailing after that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Make sure your memory is in the second and forth slots from the left (See picture). Sounds like you may have some bad RAM. Get MemTest86 and make a bootable USB using Rufus. Make sure everything in the BIOS is set to default and boot from the USB. Run the tests and see what happens. Try that first and if they pass, you could try uninstalling anything Asus related, because most of it interferes with day to day operations. Check the above response for the latest Windows and AMD Chipset Drivers.


Yea already had them in A2/B2. Just ran a round of MemTest86+ with no errors. Cleared the CMOS, reseated/swapped RAM, and left RAM at default of 2133 and uninstalled Aura from Windows. Giving HCI memtest another go. If this fails, I'll reinstall windows, install nothing, then see if I can get it to pass at least at 2133. Current DIMM temps are high 30's so nothing extreme.

Everything should work at stock correct? I shouldn't need to bump VCORE or DRAM voltages since it's dual rank right? I'd assume at loose timings and 2133 literally anything should work...

Just bought Karhu RAM Test and am running that instead since it is supposed to go a lot faster and I'm getting a bit impatient


----------



## MacG32

hokeyplyr48 said:


> Yea already had them in A2/B2. Just ran a round of MemTest86+ with no errors. Cleared the CMOS, reseated/swapped RAM, and left RAM at default of 2133 and uninstalled Aura from Windows. Giving HCI memtest another go. If this fails, I'll reinstall windows, install nothing, then see if I can get it to pass at least at 2133. Current DIMM temps are high 30's so nothing extreme.
> 
> Everything should work at stock correct? I shouldn't need to bump VCORE or DRAM voltages since it's dual rank right? I'd assume at loose timings and 2133 literally anything should work...



Everything should work normally at stock. If you have AIDA64 Extreme, you can get the correct timings for your RAM's XMP under Motherboard | SPD. You could try a reflash to 0601 or disconnect all power and pull the battery for 15 minutes to see if any of that helps. I had a motherboard that had soldier missing and flux on the back of it. It wouldn't do anything right, obviously. I just trusted not to thoroughly inspect it before installing it. Had to RMA it. Maybe it's slightly shorting out somewhere. You could try pulling it out of the case, put it on cardboard, fire it up, and see if it's stable then. It should be 100% stable at stock. Good luck.


----------



## lordzed83

majestynl said:


> *This is literally mind blowing*
> 
> In my previous posts i mentioned about something confusing with RamStabilty. See post
> My settings for 3466Mhz + Tight Timings who where stable for me (tested multiple times with Ramtest +8000% / +1000% Hci + many other stress succeed)
> could get instable the next day!!! They suddenly didn't passed 1000% sometimes. This happened a few times and mostly i got it back after a full flashback like the next day and just re-entered my stable settings again! (Same).
> I always thought it was something with bios!
> 
> So few days ago i bought some new ramsticks (same one) just for testing, and loaded my profiles and they didnt passed 200% Ramtest. So i thought maybe they need different settings, but mainly i wanted to test GDM off and lower my tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSC!
> No success!! Just same behavior as my first stick! So i put them away...and pushed back my own sticks again. Just to be sure i started Ramtest and this time my own sticks including my stable profiles also didn't pass 200% anymore..
> 
> This made me thinking their must be something else....i checked my Ram-Temperatures while stress testing and they where around ~43c! Felt a bit to much just for 1.385v! So i thought maybe that's the issue!
> I pulled a Noctua industrial from the shelve and directed this exactly to my sticks and started Ramtest!!! *Surprisingly it passed immediately +4000%!* See attachments!
> 
> And on top of that, i went to bios, upped my Ram to 3533mhz and just quickly only added some juice to it (1.395v) and BAMM i got +1500%! See attachments!
> Very strange, cause members from here know, i tried to get my Ram fully stable on 3533+TT for days with no succes. It never passed 500% and 1 time it was near 1000%. Have spent almost 4 days trying with no luck.
> And now just with a simple fan blowing i got already 1500%. Stopped the test because i wanted to write this /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif Now i know i can get this 3533mhz+TT stable /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> But the strange parts is, why is this happening!!!
> [highlight]Im kindly asking people to test this together with me. Just put an fan blowing on the ramsticks and see if you get better results.!![/highlight]
> 
> PS: don't think you will suddenly get your ram stable with a fan if you are using unstable setting in first place. This is just for those who got confused if their stable setting didn't passed the next day. Or for those who want to push more out of their stable OC.
> 
> 
> *Few extra info:*
> - Tested with my 100% stable Pstates 4200mhz profile!
> - Just to be sure, i add 1 notch extra vcore on cpu so i know for sure my test wasnt effected by my CPU !
> - With my Noctua 140mm Industrial blowing on the ramstick i didnt get temperatures higher than 32c on my RAM
> - Using my own TT timings.
> - For the 3533 quick test, i used same TT from my 3466 profile!
> - Screenshots made while testing! Forgot to ad Ryzen Timer checker, so included that separatly!
> 
> @gupsterg @crakej



Eee kinda lol me and 1usmus had fans blowing on ddrs for 7 months now. Was sure everyone fugured out that it gets u stable cloxks haha 

Photo of fan standing on backplate of my titan hahaha


----------



## lordzed83

gupsterg said:


> @majestynl
> 
> Sweeeettt! /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif .
> 
> I'm game to try another fan on my setup, I'll strap a 2.5K TY143 to the RAM! /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif . Will bring back the memories of Vantec Tornados /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif .


Go all out 12000rpm delta just watch id it wont push sticks out of case


----------



## crakej

I thought memory was ok up to 85c?

I'm getting my fan out now......but really surprised ram at 50c is a problem. Will report my findings


----------



## hurricane28

seriously, what is wrong with Firestrike lately?

My Physics score is all over the place: https://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/15597687/fs/15597639/fs/15597631/fs/15597622#

Everything is on max performance in BIOS and Windows 10. A friend of mine has much higher score than me on the same clocks... 3466 MHz RAM and 4.250 GHz CPU..


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> I thought memory was ok up to 85c?
> 
> I'm getting my fan out now......but really surprised ram at 50c is a problem. Will report my findings /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif


It is vut not when u pushing pass 1.4 volts my teamgroups dont have temp meter but u loose pass 35 if i remember


----------



## lordzed83

hurricane28 said:


> seriously, what is wrong with Firestrike lately?
> 
> My Physics score is all over the place: https://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/15597687/fs/15597639/fs/15597631/fs/15597622#
> 
> Everything is on max performance in BIOS and Windows 10. A friend of mine has much higher score than me on the same clocks... 3466 MHz RAM and 4.250 GHz CPU..



Windows versions?? U tried ultimate power plan??


----------



## majestynl

VicsPC said:


> Very interesting, in my case i have 3 140mms fans blowing literally over my ram sticks. Very old pic, but where the 240mm rad is up top i now have 3 140mm fans up there as intakes. Could be why i can get my hynix ram down to 14/16 instead of 16/18 even with 1.45v. Makes me wanna water cool my ram now haha, maybe when i get my gskill 3600mhz kit.


Since launch i never closed my sidepanels of the case, so dont quite understand why this was needed. Its an open bench right now 
anyways, im checking to buy this : https://www.gskill.com/en/product/ftb-3500c5-dr
or maybe will expand my loop with a RAM WC!



lordzed83 said:


> Eee kinda lol me and 1usmus had fans blowing on ddrs for 7 months now. Was sure everyone fugured out that it gets u stable cloxks haha
> Photo of fan standing on backplate of my titan hahaha


Sorry but nobody mentioned we needed this! I saw your pictures before but thought that's just because how your setup was. And btw, when i got hot RAMS, even 3200mhz was not stable!
43c its kind of to Hot to me for just 1.385v on ram!



crakej said:


> I thought memory was ok up to 85c?
> 
> I'm getting my fan out now......but really surprised ram at 50c is a problem. Will report my findings


Never had any issues with temperatures on RAMOC, never really paid attention on it! But like i said above, if my rams get above 38c, its even getting unstable for low clocks!
Its more needed then ever, im curious why it gets that hot. Will also check if some settings from Power page will effect the temps!



lordzed83 said:


> It is vut not when u pushing pass 1.4 volts my teamgroups dont have temp meter but u loose pass 35 if i remember


lol! Huh ? can you explain this better pls. I tried to read it couple of times but its like Chinese men


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> It is vut not when u pushing pass 1.4 volts my teamgroups dont have temp meter but u loose pass 35 if i remember


Mine idle at 35c, 1.41v and load 50c (3533)

At default bios settings idle is about 34c, 1.2v and load around 41c (2133)

Update - none of my fans are suitable, and I again realize that these horrible stiff cables are blocking up airflow inside my case. Can anyone recommend some reasonably priced replacement cables?
I'm also going to find some fans - maybe mini ones for the ram... Are there any 'easy' solutions to cooling the ram?

Other things I notice is that GPU backplate is pretty warm even though GPU is doing nothing - might try letting it's fans go on as it might reduce the heat rising up onto my ram sticks.... I'd have done this ages ago if I'd known it could help!


----------



## hurricane28

lordzed83 said:


> Windows versions?? U tried ultimate power plan??


latest build with latest drivers etc. 

I am on Ultimate performance power plan. 

I just flashed the BIOS again because my PC shuts down when i do Time Spy CPU test at stock setting...


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> Mine idle at 35c, 1.41v and load 50c (3533)
> 
> At default bios settings idle is about 34c, 1.2v and load around 41c (2133)
> 
> Update - none of my fans are suitable, and I again realize that these horrible stiff cables are blocking up airflow inside my case. Can anyone recommend some reasonably priced replacement cables?
> I'm also going to find some fans - maybe mini ones for the ram... Are there any 'easy' solutions to cooling the ram?
> 
> Other things I notice is that GPU backplate is pretty warm even though GPU is doing nothing - might try letting it's fans go on as it might reduce the heat rising up onto my ram sticks.... I'd have done this ages ago if I'd known it could help!


Already mentioned about a solution in my prev post  : https://www.gskill.com/en/product/ftb-3500c5-dr
Some other brands also have nice products but more expensive, eg:
https://www.corsair.com/us/en/Categ...y/DOMINATOR®-Airflow-PLATINUM-LED-Fan/p/CMDAF

Temps @ me with ambient around ~21c:

No cooling: IDLE ~32c
No cooling load 10-15min Remtest: +43c

Noctua Industrial 140mm blowing on the rams: IDLE ~24c
Noctua Industrial 140mm blowing on the rams: Load ~32c , not getting really higher even after 1hr!


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> Already mentioned about a solution in my prev post  : https://www.gskill.com/en/product/ftb-3500c5-dr


Thanks! I knew I'd seen this somewhere - coming tomorrow.

Just need to sort out these ridiculous cables now - such a mess and so inflexible!


----------



## crakej

Nice one ASUS - You gave me a 20% discount from cablemod - which I can't use on the Euro site!


----------



## VicsPC

crakej said:


> Nice one ASUS - You gave me a 20% discount from cablemod - which I can't use on the Euro site!


Damn that's a shame. Maybe if we all write to them they can give us one that actually works.


----------



## lordzed83

hurricane28 said:


> latest build with latest drivers etc.
> 
> I am on Ultimate performance power plan.
> 
> I just flashed the BIOS again because my PC shuts down when i do Time Spy CPU test at stock setting...


Like insider build ??? Said April build is CRAP


----------



## hurricane28

Nah, just regular newest build. 

I think i know what the issue was, it was the BIOS itself man. 

I flashed a fresh 1601 downloaded from the Asus site and all seems better now. Seems like my 1600 settings were not completely deleted? Idk man, its working like it should again. 

Boost clock is 4.250 GHz out of the box!


----------



## Mandarb

Did we find out what is up with PE3 clocking to 4075MHz constantly? I remember somebody posting about it a while back. Am on 0601 BIOS. PE3 and PE4 have static frequencies for me.


----------



## majestynl

Mandarb said:


> Did we find out what is up with PE3 clocking to 4075MHz constantly? I remember somebody posting about it a while back. Am on 0601 BIOS. PE3 and PE4 have static frequencies for me.


Nothing strange with PE!!

If you first start and boot into windows, the clocks are showing a fixed clock (All core clocks). But you need to wait till it downclocks (could take few minutes) and then you will notice some of the cores will boost. If you don't see some cores are boosting then try to switch from power plan to high performance and then switch back to Balanced again. While doing this keep an eye on your clocks in hwinfo.

If above is not happening then their must be something wrong with your settings. Please then show some screenshots.(BIOS and hwinfo)



crakej said:


> Thanks! I knew I'd seen this somewhere - coming tomorrow.
> 
> Just need to sort out these ridiculous cables now - such a mess and so inflexible!


NP


----------



## Keith Myers

Well, finished my second Ryzen+ 2700X C7H upgrade. That computer shows the same thing as the first. Only Fan1 and Fan5 showing with only Fan1 showing any values. Doesn't matter what fan control setting you try in the BIOS, DC, PWM, Manual, Auto, nothing enables more fan outputs than Fan1 and 5.

So back to my original assumption that there is something sufficiently different with the C7H motherboards use of the ITE8665E SIO chip compared to the X370 Prime Pro. I would be curious to hear of anyone using the new X470 Prime Pro motherboard and the IT87 drivers to see if they still see the same number of fan outputs as with the X370 Prime Pro. Or whether it is the X470 chipset that is changing the behavior of the IT87 driver output.


----------



## Syldon

majestynl said:


> Since launch i never closed my sidepanels of the case, so dont quite understand why this was needed. Its an open bench right now
> anyways, im checking to buy this : https://www.gskill.com/en/product/ftb-3500c5-dr
> or maybe will expand my loop with a RAM WC!



I bought that about 7 months ago. I tried it for a bit and saw no gains. I was running 4 sticks at the time, so it is harder to blow air between the sticks. I recognised this at the time, but was too tight to drop 2 sticks.


I have only 2 sticks in atm. I also have a 3533 setting that consistantly fails at 50% HCImemtest. It would be great if this solves it. I will dig it out out tomorrow. I will dig it out and try.


----------



## Mandarb

majestynl said:


> Nothing strange with PE!!
> 
> If you first start and boot into windows, the clocks are showing a fixed clock (All core clocks). But you need to wait till it downclocks (could take few minutes) and then you will notice some of the cores will boost. If you don't see some cores are boosting then try to switch from power plan to high performance and then switch back to Balanced again. While doing this keep an eye on your clocks in hwinfo.
> 
> If above is not happening then their must be something wrong with your settings. Please then show some screenshots.
> 
> NP /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif


The weird part is on ballanced (non ryzen) plan PE1 and 2 are working fine, clocks going up and down, but on PE3 it just stays static. No changes otherwise.

Cinebench single runs 4075MHz, multi too.

It did work on the initial BIOS (0509?) before the Windows update (1803?).


----------



## minal

gupsterg said:


> @*minal*
> 
> If testing a single/not all cores core then yes set affinity to one/ones you wish to test.
> 
> I also found using negative offset of over 100mV lead to post issues. Equal to or less than 100mV I could get post. Effective voltage did not drop inline with offset set. Have you checked with digital multimeter how yours behaves?
> 
> I have no clue on "programming" aspect to gain core quality info. The Stilt and Mumak would know, just be aware they have NDAs, etc with involved companies so no idea if it can be made public knowledge.
> 
> For me never noted memory settings creating increased CPU temp. Perhaps I didn't pay enough attention. I did earlier a run of 3400MHz using 3466MHz The Stilt timings, now using same VID/SOC/VDIMM, etc for 3466MHz, any difference is run to run variance IMO. Compare screenie in this post with last post for hurricane28.
> 
> If 128K 128K in place passed and then 8K 4096K xxGB (max ram) failed it is likely SOC or VDIMM is issue, but other settings can play a role. Like VTTDDR or ProcODT, CAD Bus. As I was doing before, try using a lower BCLK and bringing it up to see where the break point for profile is. Sometimes it's easier to solve issue with settings that way.
> 
> Performance Bias on [Auto] has always defaulted to [Disabled] on C6H, C7H and ZE. Even when left on [Auto] due to another changed UEFI setting I have not seen [Auto] behave as it is another settings. Basically the [auto] set is fixed to [Disabled], it has no "auto rule" to change based on another UEFI change. For example SOC voltage when left on [Auto] changes based on "auto rule" when you increase RAM MHz.
> 
> *** edit ***
> 
> Yeah average CPU temps is within run to ran variance where I change only RAM MHz. Compared screenie of 3400MHz in post 1547 to one in this where it's now 3466MHz. When finish this test run will try a vastly lower RAM MHz but same voltages, etc.


I have just a cheap DMM that is not currently serviceable--needs new leads and battery. Plus my system is in a case and the ProbeIt points are nearly inaccessible. :/ Reading Vcore (if that's what in0 is) from it87 seems to show ~100mV difference: with undervolting it peaks ~1.42V while without it's 1.5xV though no idea how reliable these readings are.

Regardless of programming, what is the idea behind core "quality"? Highest frequency? Lowest voltage at a given frequency? Some other metric? It might be possible to match the results if the principle is understood.

After clearing CMOS and reflashing BIOS I can't replicate the 32C idle with undervolt and 2133 anymore, even though I originally verified it at the time by switching back and forth between 3200 (DOCP, 1.5V) and 2133 (Default, 1.2V).  

This firmware situation is crazy. As I started testing settings, the UEFI interface got unusably laggy. I reset CMOS and was re-entering my fan curves and the interface froze on me (has happened several times). Booting and system behavior got strangely glitchy.. So I reset CMOS, unplugged power, removed CMOS battery, left it half an hour and then reflashed BIOS. This seems to be standard operating procedure every so often. Incredible.

I still notice a small(er) difference in idling CPU temps (consider 1-2C margin of error for all range endpoints). At ambient 27C and -93.75mV Vcore offset: 
41C-55C @ 3200, DOCP, 1.35V VDIMM (38GB/s copy with GSAT)
42C-51C @ 2933, 1.35V (35GB/s)
38C-49C @ 2133, 1.35V (25GB/s)
36C-48C @ 2133, 1.2V (25GB/s)
38C-48C @ 2133, 1.2V, PE3 (25GB/s)
42C-52C @ 3200, 1.35, PE3, 0.9V SOC (38GB/s)

VDIMM and memory frequency seem to have a few degrees of impact.

I'd really rather not touch BCLK given stability concerns with that. All I want is to find what is roughly the max performance for my setup and take it down a couple of notches for set-it-and-forget-it stability ever after.

Your tips are invaluable. Where can I read about which parameters (VDIMM, SOC, VTTDDR, ProcODT, CAD Bus) might need adjustment based on which types of stress test failures? I don't know anything about them and the fewer changes the better.



Keith Myers said:


> Well, finished my second Ryzen+ 2700X C7H upgrade. That computer shows the same thing as the first. Only Fan1 and Fan5 showing with only Fan1 showing any values. Doesn't matter what fan control setting you try in the BIOS, DC, PWM, Manual, Auto, nothing enables more fan outputs than Fan1 and 5.
> 
> So back to my original assumption that there is something sufficiently different with the C7H motherboards use of the ITE8665E SIO chip compared to the X370 Prime Pro. I would be curious to hear of anyone using the new X470 Prime Pro motherboard and the IT87 drivers to see if they still see the same number of fan outputs as with the X370 Prime Pro. Or whether it is the X470 chipset that is changing the behavior of the IT87 driver output.


That's disappointing about the fan and sensors on C7H.. I read about a X370 Prime Pro owner who also had similar readouts but don't know if they tried it87. Between the BIOS bugs and sensor weirdness, the Asrock X470 Taichi is tempting. It has cpu/pch/wifi/etc temps, voltages, and multiple fan rpm readouts in linux out of the box (lm-sensors works). I have half a mind to return the C7H and get the Taichi.



Mandarb said:


> The weird part is on ballanced (non ryzen) plan PE1 and 2 are working fine, clocks going up and down, but on PE3 it just stays static. No changes otherwise.
> 
> Cinebench single runs 4075MHz, multi too.
> 
> It did work on the initial BIOS (0509?) before the Windows update (1803?).


Reflash BIOS (from USB) after clearing CMOS, removing battery, unplugging power. It's becoming clear this has to be part of C7H owners' routine.


----------



## Keith Myers

*Need to contact it87 driver developer*



minal said:


> That's disappointing about the fan and sensors on C7H.. I read about a X370 Prime Pro owner who also had similar readouts but don't know if they tried it87. Between the BIOS bugs and sensor weirdness, the Asrock X470 Taichi is tempting. It has cpu/pch/wifi/etc temps, voltages, and multiple fan rpm readouts in linux out of the box (lm-sensors works). I have half a mind to return the C7H and get the Taichi.


I think I will post to the Github it87 section and ask the developer if he has received any other complaints about the lack of fan sensor outputs from the C7H and his driver.

Or if he has any insight as to why only Fan1 and Fan5 show up. Something must be going on with the C7H specifically since it works so well with the X370 Prime Pro and if you are correct with the X470 Taichi. And both of us using the C7H and the latest it87 driver probably means that is isn't a localized issue to just either of us.


----------



## minal

Keith Myers said:


> I think I will post to the Github it87 section and ask the developer if he has received any other complaints about the lack of fan sensor outputs from the C7H and his driver.
> 
> Or if he has any insight as to why only Fan1 and Fan5 show up. Something must be going on with the C7H specifically since it works so well with the X370 Prime Pro and if you are correct with the X470 Taichi. And both of us using the C7H and the latest it87 driver probably means that is isn't a localized issue to just either of us.


Perusing the developer's comments on github issues I got the impression that Asus isn't too friendly towards linux or open about their specifications. Asrock seems better on that front. But the X470 Taichi is probably using a different sensor chip as well. The screenshot I saw indicated "nct-6779". Temptation..


----------



## VPII

Interestingly I went about doing the same (fan over memory modules) yesterday to test my memory at 3600 cl16 16 16 38 2t as previously it gave an error with Karhu Software mem test at 2600% or there about.

So I dropped my vdimm and set performance bias to none and ran mem test. I stopped the test at 10400% as I felt it is good. 

Ill upload pics as soon as network up again at work.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## Syldon

I added the memory fan. I tried some settings for 3533 that have got me a little way just to check temps.

without the fan: 43c
with the fan : 35c


----------



## majestynl

Syldon said:


> I bought that about 7 months ago. I tried it for a bit and saw no gains. I was running 4 sticks at the time, so it is harder to blow air between the sticks. I recognised this at the time, but was too tight to drop 2 sticks.
> 
> 
> I have only 2 sticks in atm. I also have a 3533 setting that consistantly fails at 50% HCImemtest. It would be great if this solves it. I will dig it out out tomorrow. I will dig it out and try.


What gain you didn't saw ? Temperature difference between fan and without fan or performance capabilities?




Mandarb said:


> The weird part is on ballanced (non ryzen) plan PE1 and 2 are working fine, clocks going up and down, but on PE3 it just stays static. No changes otherwise.
> 
> Cinebench single runs 4075MHz, multi too.
> 
> It did work on the initial BIOS (0509?) before the Windows update (1803?).


Strange, and can you try one of these :
- change voltage from Auto to offset, then + 0,0125v 
- change bclk to 100,2 ( don't forget to set to manual, then multiplier to 37.00 and CPB enabled. I would also apply an offset like suggestion 1!

And again share screenshots pls.


----------



## majestynl

Deleted double post..


----------



## majestynl

Deleted triple post..


----------



## VicsPC

Syldon said:


> I added the memory fan. I tried some settings for 3533 that have got me a little way just to check temps.
> 
> without the fan: 43c
> with the fan : 35c


I love that you guys have actual RAM temps, my corsair sticks dont do that. I could always stick a flat sensor in there but not sure it would read the same or even accurately. I have fans blowing over my ram because of my setup and run 1.45v and have never had a stability issue, then again I'm only running factory timings but even when i ran 14/16 instead of 16/18 timings i didn't have an issue. I think i was stable to 2000% on an older BIOS. Haven't tried on my c7 and 2700x though, not sure i will till i buy 3600c15 gskill.


----------



## Syldon

VicsPC said:


> I love that you guys have actual RAM temps, my corsair sticks dont do that. I could always stick a flat sensor in there but not sure it would read the same or even accurately. I have fans blowing over my ram because of my setup and run 1.45v and have never had a stability issue, then again I'm only running factory timings but even when i ran 14/16 instead of 16/18 timings i didn't have an issue. I think i was stable to 2000% on an older BIOS. Haven't tried on my c7 and 2700x though, not sure i will till i buy 3600c15 gskill.


You can buy a infrared thermometer for about £15 that will tell you what your temps are.


----------



## crakej

My ram fan will arrive today - can't wait!

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00NAENYEM/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1


----------



## VPII

majestynl said:


> What gain you didn't saw ? Temperature difference between fan and without fan or performance capabilities?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Strange, and can you try one of these :
> - change voltage from Auto to offset, then + 0,0125v
> - change bclk to 100,2 ( don't forget to set to manual, then multiplier to 37.00 and CPB enabled. I would also apply an offset like suggestion 1!
> 
> And again share screenshots pls.


Did you see my post earlier about running mem test and how a fan did the trick as you asked.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## netman

Mandarb said:


> The weird part is on ballanced (non ryzen) plan PE1 and 2 are working fine, clocks going up and down, but on PE3 it just stays static. No changes otherwise.
> 
> Cinebench single runs 4075MHz, multi too.
> 
> It did work on the initial BIOS (0509?) before the Windows update (1803?).



i have the exact same problem - but i did not try with older bios then 601 und windows always was 1803... 




minal said:


> Reflash BIOS (from USB) after clearing CMOS, removing battery, unplugging power. It's becoming clear this has to be part of C7H owners' routine.





majestynl said:


> Strange, and can you try one of these :
> - change voltage from Auto to offset, then + 0,0125v
> - change bclk to 100,2 ( don't forget to set to manual, then multiplier to 37.00 and CPB enabled. I would also apply an offset like suggestion 1!


did all the things you suggested but no luck - in pe 1 and 2 all is fine but in pe3 i am stuck @4,xxx


----------



## gupsterg

Well 2 dimms from F4-3200C14Q-32GVK reached 3466MHz The Stilt with a bump in SOC/ProcODT vs F4-3200C14D-16GTZ. Did bump in ProcODT first when same settings as GTZ failed, then I was lazy and bumped SOC by 2 steps instead of 1. As using 0.968V I was having a dropped thread or two in P95 ~>2hrs and or rig freezes. Link to screenie of PASS ~8.5hrs.



minal said:


> I have just a cheap DMM that is not currently serviceable--needs new leads and battery. Plus my system is in a case and the ProbeIt points are nearly inaccessible. :/ Reading Vcore (if that's what in0 is) from it87 seems to show ~100mV difference: with undervolting it peaks ~1.42V while without it's 1.5xV though no idea how reliable these readings are.
> 
> Regardless of programming, what is the idea behind core "quality"? Highest frequency? Lowest voltage at a given frequency? Some other metric? It might be possible to match the results if the principle is understood.
> 
> After clearing CMOS and reflashing BIOS I can't replicate the 32C idle with undervolt and 2133 anymore, even though I originally verified it at the time by switching back and forth between 3200 (DOCP, 1.5V) and 2133 (Default, 1.2V).
> 
> This firmware situation is crazy. As I started testing settings, the UEFI interface got unusably laggy. I reset CMOS and was re-entering my fan curves and the interface froze on me (has happened several times). Booting and system behavior got strangely glitchy.. So I reset CMOS, unplugged power, removed CMOS battery, left it half an hour and then reflashed BIOS. This seems to be standard operating procedure every so often. Incredible.
> 
> I still notice a small(er) difference in idling CPU temps (consider 1-2C margin of error for all range endpoints). At ambient 27C and -93.75mV Vcore offset:
> 41C-55C @ 3200, DOCP, 1.35V VDIMM (38GB/s copy with GSAT)
> 42C-51C @ 2933, 1.35V (35GB/s)
> 38C-49C @ 2133, 1.35V (25GB/s)
> 36C-48C @ 2133, 1.2V (25GB/s)
> 38C-48C @ 2133, 1.2V, PE3 (25GB/s)
> 42C-52C @ 3200, 1.35, PE3, 0.9V SOC (38GB/s)
> 
> VDIMM and memory frequency seem to have a few degrees of impact.
> 
> I'd really rather not touch BCLK given stability concerns with that. All I want is to find what is roughly the max performance for my setup and take it down a couple of notches for set-it-and-forget-it stability ever after.
> 
> Your tips are invaluable. Where can I read about which parameters (VDIMM, SOC, VTTDDR, ProcODT, CAD Bus) might need adjustment based on which types of stress test failures? I don't know anything about them and the fewer changes the better.


The principle for core "quality" is basically all cores are not the same. The SMU is profiling what cores are best and will aim to boost those as high as possible within algorithm parameters. If we use Performance Enhancer/Precision Boost Override we "move the goalposts" for algorithm and SMU will be more aggressive on boosting.

The way the SMU profiles must be based on electrical characteristics IMO. It could possible even have some error detection methodology which trims MHz down on per core basis. IDK, as this last part is pure speculation on my part.

Dunno about UEFI getting laggy, very occasionally I have experienced that on ZE but IIRC never on C6H/C7H.

Yeah BCLK +100MHz can lead to issues, so I don't increase BCLK above 100MHz. Decreases don't causes issues for me, so I do you use lowered at times for diagnosis as highlighted before.

My profiles I aim to keep as simple as possible. I really can't sorta give a "how to" on my process or guide if I see x failure I approach it y way and if I see differing one I do a differing thing. Increasing VID/SOC/VDIMM is usually a last step to stabilise profile, by that I don't mean to say I do not use "guesstimates" to set some VID/SOC/VDIMM. As I work with the CPU/RAM combo I sorta build up experience on how/what it may need.

For example, in my past posts you would have seen that upto and equal to 3400MHz all I did was increase SOC/VDIMM. I kept things like ProcODT, CAD Bus, VTT, etc all [Auto]. SOC I always start a little above what is detected at UEFI defaults. So as the 2700X was ~0.825V I arbitrarily picked 0.900V setting when targetting 3200MHz as my 1st RAM profile. I knew my RAM sticks would cruise that MHz with stock VDIMM and using The Stilt's appropriate timings.

Then when I targetted 3466MHz I passed RAM tests with just SOC/VDIMM changes. I tried then Y-Cruncher and had fail, I choose to tweak VTT before I tried anything else. Setting it to 0.687V stabilised the profile from <10min to ~3hrs of Y-Crunching. Due to how dramatic a change in stability this single setting gained me; I assessed it is a key change for my profile/HW combo. Then I used P95 8K 4096K 13GB, I had a fail within <10min. Again I choose not to raise SOC/VDIMM, I played with increases in CAD Bus and as that made profile not any more stable I knew it was not needed changed. I increased ProcODT and profile failed quicker. Lowering it made profile go from fails of <10min to >60min, again a key change IMO. At this point I deemed I had as optimal ProcODT/CAD Bus/VTT as my skills would allow me to tune. At this point I choose to increase SOC as I had plenty of headroom left on that. 0.943V was what I used for initial tests, 0.956V was where I finished if CPU was stock and 0.968V if using 4.1GHz ACB.



VicsPC said:


> I love that you guys have actual RAM temps, my corsair sticks dont do that. I could always stick a flat sensor in there but not sure it would read the same or even accurately. I have fans blowing over my ram because of my setup and run 1.45v and have never had a stability issue, then again I'm only running factory timings but even when i ran 14/16 instead of 16/18 timings i didn't have an issue. I think i was stable to 2000% on an older BIOS. Haven't tried on my c7 and 2700x though, not sure i will till i buy 3600c15 gskill.


RAM ICs don't have a temperature sensor. AFAIK SPD does and it's more like RAM PCB temp we see.

Link 1 and 2.


----------



## hurricane28

I thought this was interesting for some people: 




So far, i really like my 2600 x and C7H although there are some problems but i am not sure what is the cause, more testing to come. 

So far i am running 4.248 GHz at 1.375 Vcore LLC level 3 and 3466 MHz CL14. Not too shabby.


----------



## majestynl

VPII said:


> Interestingly I went about doing the same (fan over memory modules) yesterday to test my memory at 3600 cl16 16 16 38 2t as previously it gave an error with Karhu Software mem test at 2600% or there about.
> 
> So I dropped my vdimm and set performance bias to none and ran mem test. I stopped the test at 10400% as I felt it is good.
> 
> Ill upload pics as soon as network up again at work.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


Wauw perfect! Exactly what i expected! Yesterday i quickly checked the Ram temps on the CH6 and same model ramkit, that one didnt passed 38c with same ambient en that one was a closed case...hmm
Maybe the ram gets hotter on the CH7 ?? Need more info to compare!
Looking forward to your screenies!



VicsPC said:


> I love that you guys have actual RAM temps, my corsair sticks dont do that. I could always stick a flat sensor in there but not sure it would read the same or even accurately. I have fans blowing over my ram because of my setup and run 1.45v and have never had a stability issue, then again I'm only running factory timings but even when i ran 14/16 instead of 16/18 timings i didn't have an issue. I think i was stable to 2000% on an older BIOS. Haven't tried on my c7 and 2700x though, not sure i will till i buy 3600c15 gskill.


Dont want to be rude or disrespecting  but im checking and testing it differently then you. As i wrote earlier, my stable 3466mhz Ram with very tight sub timings where stable. It passed at least 3x +8000%. Then it passed multiple other stress-tests on top of it. This is normally more then stable! The next day suddenly sometimes it couldn't pass 1000% with same settings anymore! And same profile but with 3533-TT passed 1500+ (stopped the test, will leave it run longer today). I never saw somebody over here having his ram stable at 3533 with super tight timings cl14! Asked many times to share srceens if im wrong 

And like you are saying you didn't test it on the CH7, im now doing all test on this bench. 2700x with the Ch7 

note: 2000% doesn't mean its stable! I got my most errors around ~3500%!



crakej said:


> My ram fan will arrive today - can't wait!
> 
> https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00NAENYEM/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1


Waiting for your test-results mate! 



gupsterg said:


> RAM ICs don't have a temperature sensor. AFAIK SPD does and it's more like RAM PCB temp we see.
> 
> Link 1 and 2.


AFAIK some do! Check Thaipoon Burner SPD info! I know few of them don' t have it, but if it still appears in Hwinfo its a predicted/estimated value by the processor!

Included a srceenie from my SPD. Check topright!


----------



## raucous

I have assembled my new Ryzen system consisting of

- ROG Crosshair VII
- 2700X
- G.Skill Flare-X F4-3200C14D-16GFX 16GB (2x8GB) Ryzen DDR4.

I updated the BIOS to the latest version and installed the chipset driver. I'm looking to increase my knowledge of overclocking. 

Can I safely test the Stilts 3466 memory preset and the Gamers' OC profile?


----------



## VicsPC

gupsterg said:


> Well 2 dimms from F4-3200C14Q-32GVK reached 3466MHz The Stilt with a bump in SOC/ProcODT vs F4-3200C14D-16GTZ. Did bump in ProcODT first when same settings as GTZ failed, then I was lazy and bumped SOC by 2 steps instead of 1. As using 0.968V I was having a dropped thread or two in P95 ~>2hrs and or rig freezes. Link to screenie of PASS ~8.5hrs.
> 
> The principle for core "quality" is basically all cores are not the same. The SMU is profiling what cores are best and will aim to boost those as high as possible within algorithm parameters. If we use Performance Enhancer/Precision Boost Override we "move the goalposts" for algorithm and SMU will be more aggressive on boosting.
> 
> The way the SMU profiles must be based on electrical characteristics IMO. It could possible even have some error detection methodology which trims MHz down on per core basis. IDK, as this last part is pure speculation on my part.
> 
> Dunno about UEFI getting laggy, very occasionally I have experienced that on ZE but IIRC never on C6H/C7H.
> 
> Yeah BCLK +100MHz can lead to issues, so I don't increase BCLK above 100MHz. Decreases don't causes issues for me, so I do you use lowered at times for diagnosis as highlighted before.
> 
> My profiles I aim to keep as simple as possible. I really can't sorta give a "how to" on my process or guide if I see x failure I approach it y way and if I see differing one I do a differing thing. Increasing VID/SOC/VDIMM is usually a last step to stabilise profile, by that I don't mean to say I do not use "guesstimates" to set some VID/SOC/VDIMM. As I work with the CPU/RAM combo I sorta build up experience on how/what it may need.
> 
> For example, in my past posts you would have seen that upto and equal to 3400MHz all I did was increase SOC/VDIMM. I kept things like ProcODT, CAD Bus, VTT, etc all [Auto]. SOC I always start a little above what is detected at UEFI defaults. So as the 2700X was ~0.825V I arbitrarily picked 0.900V setting when targetting 3200MHz as my 1st RAM profile. I knew my RAM sticks would cruise that MHz with stock VDIMM and using The Stilt's appropriate timings.
> 
> Then when I targetted 3466MHz I passed RAM tests with just SOC/VDIMM changes. I tried then Y-Cruncher and had fail, I choose to tweak VTT before I tried anything else. Setting it to 0.687V stabilised the profile from <10min to ~3hrs of Y-Crunching. Due to how dramatic a change in stability this single setting gained me; I assessed it is a key change for my profile/HW combo. Then I used P95 8K 4096K 13GB, I had a fail within <10min. Again I choose not to raise SOC/VDIMM, I played with increases in CAD Bus and as that made profile not any more stable I knew it was not needed changed. I increased ProcODT and profile failed quicker. Lowering it made profile go from fails of <10min to >60min, again a key change IMO. At this point I deemed I had as optimal ProcODT/CAD Bus/VTT as my skills would allow me to tune. At this point I choose to increase SOC as I had plenty of headroom left on that. 0.943V was what I used for initial tests, 0.956V was where I finished if CPU was stock and 0.968V if using 4.1GHz ACB.
> 
> RAM ICs don't have a temperature sensor. AFAIK SPD does and it's more like RAM PCB temp we see.
> 
> Link 1 and 2.


I believe the gskills has but the corsair doesn't. I may stick a sensor in it but i plan on purchasing faster ram anyways at some point so not worth the hassle.



majestynl said:


> Wauw perfect! Exactly what i expected! Yesterday i quickly checked the Ram temps on the CH6 and same model ramkit, that one didnt passed 38c with same ambient en that one was a closed case...hmm
> Maybe the ram gets hotter on the CH7 ?? Need more info to compare!
> Looking forward to your screenies!
> 
> Dont want to be rude or disrespecting  but im checking and testing it differently then you. As i wrote earlier, my stable 3466mhz Ram with very tight sub timings where stable. It passed at least 3x +8000%. Then it passed multiple other stress-tests on top of it. This is normally more then stable! The next day suddenly sometimes it couldn't pass 1000% with same settings anymore! And same profile but with 3533-TT passed 1500+ (stopped the test, will leave it run longer today). I never saw somebody over here having his ram stable at 3533 with super tight timings cl14! Asked many times to share srceens if im wrong
> 
> And like you are saying you didn't test it on the CH7, im now doing all test on this bench. 2700x with the Ch7
> 
> note: 2000% doesn't mean its stable! I got my most errors around ~3500%!
> 
> Waiting for your test-results mate!
> 
> AFAIK some do! Check Thaipoon Burner SPD info! I know few of them don' t have it, but if it still appears in Hwinfo its a predicted/estimated value by the processor!
> 
> Included a srceenie from my SPD. Check topright!


Oh I've let mine go like mad too that's not an issue but going by what HCI wrote on the test method, most ram error occur at anything below 400%. Ive gotten em as low as 115% with geardown mode off. I've let HCI go to 2-3000% and had no errors, then of course i run some realbench and check for WHEA errors but it hasn't been a problem and that was on Hynix tightened timings from 16-18-36 to 14-16-34 but i do use 1.45v. I may have posted it stable ages ago when i first got the board.

It's why i plan on going with CL15 right off the bat and not 16. Yes it's in French but probably the one I'll be going with. https://www.ldlc.com/fiche/PB00208001.html
I did also receive my 2700x came in 2 days can't complain for 45€ off msrp. Problem is my account is in dollars so I end up paying around 335$ for a 2700x. It's close to US MSRP but without the coupon id be at 390$, quite a big difference.


----------



## majestynl

raucous said:


> I have assembled my new Ryzen system consisting of
> 
> - ROG Crosshair VII
> - 2700X
> - G.Skill Flare-X F4-3200C14D-16GFX 16GB (2x8GB) Ryzen DDR4.
> 
> I updated the BIOS to the latest version and installed the chipset driver. I'm looking to increase my knowledge of overclocking.
> 
> Can I safely test the Stilts 3466 memory preset and the Gamers' OC profile?


Congrats!

I wouldn't test the CPU and RAM OC together! It will be difficult to know if you get instability which one it was!
I personally never use presets, but i also don't say they don't work or whatever. I just prefer for manual settings cause most of the HW are not identical to each!
Again, you can safely try those cause they are a good general basic!

If i was you i would start first with your CPU OC, like using the Performance Enhancement (PE) presets. Try PE3 and see if its stable with it! Run some stress tests etc.!
After you got it stable you can start with your RAM!



VicsPC said:


> Oh I've let mine go like mad too that's not an issue but going by what HCI wrote on the test method, most ram error occur at anything below 400%. Ive gotten em as low as 115% with geardown mode off. I've let HCI go to 2-3000% and had no errors, then of course i run some realbench and check for WHEA errors but it hasn't been a problem and that was on Hynix tightened timings from 16-18-36 to 14-16-34 but i do use 1.45v. I may have posted it stable ages ago when i first got the board.
> 
> It's why i plan on going with CL15 right off the bat and not 16. Yes it's in French but probably the one I'll be going with. https://www.ldlc.com/fiche/PB00208001.html
> I did also receive my 2700x came in 2 days can't complain for 45€ off msrp. Problem is my account is in dollars so I end up paying around 335$ for a 2700x. It's close to US MSRP but without the coupon id be at 390$, quite a big difference.


aha i thought your where talking about Ramtest %  Sorry for that. But again im running it with Super TT and cl14 on a ch7... maybe not really comparable. And i also didnt have this with my CH6!

Looking forward for your testresults with a 2700x! Good luck with it!


----------



## VicsPC

majestynl said:


> Congrats!
> 
> I wouldn't test the CPU and RAM OC together! It will be difficult to know if you get instability which one it was!
> I personally never use presets, but i also don't say they don't work or whatever. I just prefer for manual settings cause most of the HW are not identical to each!
> Again, you can safely try those cause they are a good general basic!
> 
> If i was you i would start first with your CPU OC, like using the Performance Enhancement (PE) presets. Try PE3 and see if its stable with it! Run some stress tests etc.!
> After you got it stable you can start with your RAM!
> 
> 
> 
> aha i thought your where talking about Ramtest %  Sorry for that. But again im running it with Super TT and cl14 on a ch7... maybe not really comparable. And i also didnt have this with my CH6!
> 
> Looking forward for your testresults with a 2700x! Good luck with it!


yea I've noticed everyone is using ramtest now but I've found HCI to be quite alright. I'm also shocked that on the c6 1700x and my corsair 16gb 3200mhz ram i was able to tighten timings like i was. Most people i gave my timings too weren't able to even with 1.45v so I'm guessing the temperature is def causing an issue. The timings i used are below. I didn't mess with subtimings at all and this was on BIOS 1107 or 1201. Everything else past that i couldnt get TT on ram again so i stayed on 1107, I'm on 6101 now but no point trying to tighten timings on it, may not even bother on my c7 till i get new ram.


----------



## gupsterg

majestynl said:


> AFAIK some do! Check Thaipoon Burner SPD info! I know few of them don' t have it, but if it still appears in Hwinfo its a predicted/estimated value by the processor!
> 
> Included a srceenie from my SPD. Check topright!



Giantec GT34TS04 datasheet  .


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> Giantec GT34TS04 datasheet  .


Uuuh 34 pages gup.. thanks hehe 
I'm now tanning in the garden it's 32c over here... Left the bench running ramtest 3533mhz with a blowing fan and powered the air-conditioning on 18c there.. let's see


----------



## gupsterg

Enjoy chap  .

You see when I got my F4-3200C14D-16GTZ to use with C6H back in March 17 I wanted to know what I was looking at in regard to "DIMM Temperature". So I did do research  . The Ripjaw V uses differing SPD chip, but again is the "temperature sensor".



Spoiler


----------



## hurricane28

Soo, i was playing with RAM speed but it seems that i am stuck at 3466 MHz CL 14... Anything higher doesn't boot or isn't even remotely stable.. I saw no gain in Firestrike nor Time Spy zo i guess its okay lol. 

And if i remember correctly, there is no noticeable difference in Aida64 either.


----------



## MrPhilo

Installing my crosshair vii ATM, I moved the m.2 heatsink to below one as it has a 4x lane on it owns instead of the above one. Anyone else moved the heatsink below?


----------



## netman

i moved mine to the M2_1 Slot too


----------



## hurricane28

MrPhilo said:


> Installing my crosshair vii ATM, I moved the m.2 heatsink to below one as it has a 4x lane on it owns instead of the above one. Anyone else moved the heatsink below?


Both have x4 lanes but the bottom won't steal from the GPU... 

Yes i moved to the bottom slot as well with the heat sink, no problems.


----------



## ClintLeo

MrPhilo said:


> Installing my crosshair vii ATM, I moved the m.2 heatsink to below one as it has a 4x lane on it owns instead of the above one. Anyone else moved the heatsink below?


I moved it there as well because it wouldn't affect the gpu.


----------



## Syldon

majestynl said:


> What gain you didn't saw ? Temperature difference between fan and without fan or performance capabilities?


I saw very little difference in Dram temps. I was running 3600 at the time, which without a doubt would fail memory stability testing, but I was fairly new to configuring Ryzen at the time. At 3600 it never ever crashed on me, so I used them. 

The idea of the fan was to see if I could wangle 3733. I never got it to boot. And since the temp difference was so little (I dont remember how much), I just put the kit back in the box and put it away. The temp difference was so little was because I had 4 sticks running. There is no real air gap between the sticks. With 2 sticks the idling difference on a stable 3466 is about 5 degrees. I dropped from 33c to 28c. With 3533 testing without a fan it hits 43c, and that is where is failed the HCI test. 

The post I made regarding temps earlier was half arsed, and wasn't meant to have been sent. I was halfway through writing that I was making head way again at 3533. I looked up and the HCI memtest hit its first error at 150%+. I have never gotten beyond 50% before. Anyways I closed the browser on the laptop, and came back to the PC to try new tweaks. When I logged back into the site later to find half a post sitting there.

The settings that had taken me the furthest previously failed abysmally. And after trying some stuff I decided to start over. I have found a few settings now that take me well into the 100%. I am fairly confident that I can get this set up at 3533 with a half decent stability test result, because I am seeing so many results beyond 100%.

What I recommend is, if you get a fan is start from scratch. It very much looks like the temp issues had affected what could be stable settings.


It should also be pointed out that 1usmus mentioned this halfway through last year. I believe he got shot down.


----------



## majestynl

*Finally Got the Ram Stable at 3533Mhz CL 14 + TT Timings*

After days of tweaking and tweaking i couldn't get this Memstrap stable. I gave it up for a while but after i got new ram-sticks i discovered something with
ram-temperatures. That made me thinking ram "can" get unstable (on higher straps) if temperatures getting higher. Now im cooling the Ram active and yes yes, got 3533Mhz stable 

*Link* to older post for 3466Mhz+TT stable : http://www.overclock.net/forum/27382089-post1098.html
*Link* where i posted the findings about ram temperature: http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...vii-overclocking-thread-156.html#post27458305

Testing Bench:

*CPU:* 2700x
*Mobo:* CH7 for sure
*Ram:* 2x8GB / F4-3200C14-8GTZ(R)
*Cooling:* EK CL / 360Rad Push Pull +240Rad Push
*OS:* Fresh Windows 10 with April updates installed!
*OC CPU:* Pstates @ 4200Mhz
*OC Ram:* 3533 Strap / 14 14 14 28 42 + TT @ 1.4v and Auto Soc
*Active Ram cooling:* Now using a Noctua 140mm / Will change this to a ramfan kit from Gskill or just a block from EK 
*Remtemp:* Max load 33c / Idle 28c

*Notes:*_ Using same ramkit as on my CH6 setup where i was since release of Ryzen1 and the CH6, 
i know GD Off doesn't work with this kit. If i disable GD my ram runs ons 2T, and when i set it manually to 1, Windows doesn't boot. 
Also low values for tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSCL gives me errors on long Ramtests!_

*Next few things im going to test:*
- Trying to get 3600Mhz with TT on ram stable
- Find out why lower tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSC are effecting that much!

*Files i got collected:*
Below some screenshots i grabbed from results from test and bench cases! Be aware i ad 1 extra notch vcore just to be sure my CPU OC wasn't effecting the test!
And i changed SOC from 1.05 who worked like a charm on the 3466, i changed this to auto otherwise it wasn't booting properly on 3533Mhz. Will probably tweak this later to a lower value!

Check out the Aida64 Mem Latency of 59ms  Nice!

Good luck everybody, hope my info will help others to go beyond their current profiles!!!


----------



## hurricane28

majestynl said:


> *Finally Got the Ram Stable at 3533Mhz CL 14 + TT Timings*
> 
> After days of tweaking and tweaking i couldn't get this Memstrap stable. I gave it up for a while but after i got new ram-sticks i discovered something with
> ram-temperatures. That made me thinking ram "can" get unstable (on higher straps) if temperatures getting higher. Now im cooling the Ram active and yes yes, got 3533Mhz stable
> 
> *Link* to older post for 3466Mhz+TT stable : http://www.overclock.net/forum/27382089-post1098.html
> *Link* where i posted the findings about ram temperature: http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...vii-overclocking-thread-156.html#post27458305
> 
> Testing Bench:
> 
> *CPU:* 2700x
> *Mobo:* CH7 for sure
> *Ram:* 2x8GB / F4-3200C14-8GTZ(R)
> *Cooling:* EK CL / 360Rad Push Pull +240Rad Push
> *OS:* Fresh Windows 10 with April updates installed!
> *OC CPU:* Pstates @ 4200Mhz
> *OC Ram:* 3533 Strap / 14 14 14 28 42 + TT @ 1.4v and Auto Soc
> *Active Ram cooling:* Now using a Noctua 140mm / Will change this to a ramfan kit from Gskill or just a block from EK
> *Remtemp:* Max load 33c / Idle 28c
> 
> *Notes:*_ Using same ramkit as on my CH6 setup where i was since release of Ryzen1 and the CH6,
> i know GD Off doesn't work with this kit. If i disable GD my ram runs ons 2T, and when i set it manually to 1, Windows doesn't boot.
> Also low values for tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSCL gives me errors on long Ramtests!_
> 
> *Next few things im going to test:*
> - Trying to get 3600Mhz with TT on ram stable
> - Find out why lower tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSC are effecting that much!
> 
> *Files i got collected:*
> Below some screenshots i grabbed from results from test and bench cases! Be aware i ad 1 extra notch vcore just to be sure my CPU OC wasn't effecting the test!
> And i changed SOC from 1.05 who worked like a charm on the 3466, i changed this to auto otherwise it wasn't booting properly on 3533Mhz. Will probably tweak this later to a lower value!
> 
> Check out the Aida64 Mem Latency of 59ms  Nice!
> 
> Good luck everybody, hope my info will help others to go beyond their current profiles!!!


That's a wall of text man lol. 

Anyway, thnx for the feedback!


----------



## AlphaC

majestynl , any reason why you run 7 for the two bottom left values?


From the RAM calculator and every single RTC result I've seen with tuned timings they don't go more than 4 for B-die. In fact even for Hynix MFR / AFR I believe you can run tight as 5 or 4.




zulex said:


> What's wrong with ELMOR? He has not been active for weeks...


Computex is coming and so is z390


----------



## MrPhilo

Anyone know where I can buy a 4 pin cpu/PSU module cable for Corsair PSU. I know that the 8pin is enough but my annoying OCD kicked in wanting me to find a cable for it.


----------



## Keith Myers

minal said:


> Perusing the developer's comments on github issues I got the impression that Asus isn't too friendly towards linux or open about their specifications. Asrock seems better on that front. But the X470 Taichi is probably using a different sensor chip as well. The screenshot I saw indicated "nct-6779". Temptation..


Well the main problem is the chip manufacturer not releasing the chip's data sheets regularly or sometimes never. So the developers have to figure it out on their own.

ASUS does hold things close to the vest though, I agree.

If you go with the Taichi, then you will likely have to use the GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX="acpi_enforce_resources=lax" in the grub.cfg file. I had to do that with my ASUS Intel motherboard X99-E-10G-WS because it uses the the nct-6775 chip and I believe the nct-6779 is in the same family and handled by the same nct6775 driver. Until I did that, none of the sensors showed up because of the ACPI conflict.


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> Enjoy chap  .
> 
> You see when I got my F4-3200C14D-16GTZ to use with C6H back in March 17 I wanted to know what I was looking at in regard to "DIMM Temperature". So I did do research  . The Ripjaw V uses differing SPD chip, but again is the "temperature sensor".
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


aaah that makes sense chap ! Thanks for knowledge!
check out my prev post btw  cheers to 3533 CL14 !!!



hurricane28 said:


> Soo, i was playing with RAM speed but it seems that i am stuck at 3466 MHz CL 14... Anything higher doesn't boot or isn't even remotely stable.. I saw no gain in Firestrike nor Time Spy zo i guess its okay lol.
> And if i remember correctly, there is no noticeable difference in Aida64 either.


Their are some differences in Aida64, shared some screenies in my prev posts!



MrPhilo said:


> Installing my crosshair vii ATM, I moved the m.2 heatsink to below one as it has a 4x lane on it owns instead of the above one. Anyone else moved the heatsink below?


Yep!!!



Syldon said:


> I saw very little difference in Dram temps.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I was running 3600 at the time, which without a doubt would fail memory stability testing, but I was fairly new to configuring Ryzen at the time. At 3600 it never ever crashed on me, so I used them.
> 
> The idea of the fan was to see if I could wangle 3733. I never got it to boot. And since the temp difference was so little (I dont remember how much), I just put the kit back in the box and put it away. The temp difference was so little was because I had 4 sticks running. There is no real air gap between the sticks. With 2 sticks the idling difference on a stable 3466 is about 5 degrees. I dropped from 33c to 28c. With 3533 testing without a fan it hits 43c, and that is where is failed the HCI test.
> 
> The post I made regarding temps earlier was half arsed, and wasn't meant to have been sent. I was halfway through writing that I was making head way again at 3533. I looked up and the HCI memtest hit its first error at 150%+. I have never gotten beyond 50% before. Anyways I closed the browser on the laptop, and came back to the PC to try new tweaks. When I logged back into the site later to find half a post sitting there.
> 
> The settings that had taken me the furthest previously failed abysmally. And after trying some stuff I decided to start over. I have found a few settings now that take me well into the 100%. I am fairly confident that I can get this set up at 3533 with a half decent stability test result, because I am seeing so many results beyond 100%.
> 
> What I recommend is, if you get a fan is start from scratch. It very much looks like the temp issues had affected what could be stable settings.
> 
> 
> It should also be pointed out that 1usmus mentioned this halfway through last year. I believe he got shot down.


I have at least 10c difference but this with a wind turbine noctua  Doesn't make sense to us it like know (aesthetics and sounds), but it gives you the temps needed  Will buy a decent cooler/wb later!
Will believe you will get 3533 stable! Good luck!



hurricane28 said:


> That's a wall of text man lol.
> 
> Anyway, thnx for the feedback!


Sorry but the road was painful!



AlphaC said:


> majestynl , any reason why you run 7 for the two bottom left values?
> 
> 
> From the RAM calculator and every single RTC result I've seen with tuned timings they don't go more than 4 for B-die. In fact even for Hynix MFR / AFR I believe you can run tight as 5 or 4.


Yes wrote that few times over here and also mentioned in the long post ! 
Im using the MajestyTimings 
Since launch of Ryzen 1 (CH6+1800x) with this ram-kit i cant get those values on 2. Changed to CH7 with a 2700x but same ram-kit same issue!
On the CH6 i was eventually running them on 3/4 but now with CH7 most of the values are throwing errors in RAMTest.

Last week i bought a new kit same model, that one has exactly same behavior! I also saw few other people with same results!
But it doesn't hurt that much. I compared a lot of test-results from others and im not walking behind with latencies.
Check out a quick test i did with those values on 2. Only loosing in Read/Write/Copy! Not latency or any other benchmark.. Better said, i get always good latencies!


----------



## seansplayin

just built a second Gen Ryzen system and I'm having tons of trouble getting a decent memory speed. New system is C7H with 2700x and uses the same memory as my C6h+1800x system which is G-skill F4-4266C19D-16GTZKW 16GB. 
Ryzen Dram Calculator fails, Stilt's 3466 profile fails, 3600 profile fails no matter what I try I can't get this system stable. I've left CPU completely stock, I've tried SOC1-1.15v, Dram 1.4-1.51 with 1.5v being the most stable. VTTDDR set at 1 and 2 increments above 50%dram voltage. VDDP at 2.53, 1.8V PLL at 1.9v, ProcODT 48-68ohms, CLDO 400-950mv and basically every variation listed in Ryzen Dram Calculator in versions 1.1.0 beta2 and 1.2.0 beta2 for Tertiary, CAD buss and voltage pages. Changing digi+ setting of Current limit, VRM frequency and LLC for SOC and Dram deson't seem to make any difference. 
honestly the only thing I can think of is the VDDP voltage in AI suite shows 0.4v and even though I entered .900mv in Bios. On my C6H/1800x system AI Suite actually implements the voltage I enter in the bios where it seems the C7H does not.
the C7H also seems to have some imput lag in bios sometimes taking over 10 seconds just to change from one field to another, is anyone else experiencing this. when I built this system one week ago I flashed the latest bios v.0601. 

My 1800 system on the other hand runs like a champ scoring 173/1913 in Cinebench and 5079/28190 in Geekbench
If anyone can think of something I haven't tried please please reply


----------



## majestynl

seansplayin said:


> just built a second Gen Ryzen system and I'm having tons of trouble getting a decent memory speed. New system is C7H with 2700x and uses the same memory as my C6h+1800x system which is G-skill F4-4266C19D-16GTZKW 16GB.
> Ryzen Dram Calculator fails, Stilt's 3466 profile fails, 3600 profile fails no matter what I try I can't get this system stable. I've left CPU completely stock, I've tried SOC1-1.15v, Dram 1.4-1.51 with 1.5v being the most stable. VTTDDR set at 1 and 2 increments above 50%dram voltage. VDDP at 2.53, 1.8V PLL at 1.9v, ProcODT 48-68ohms, CLDO 400-950mv and basically every variation listed in Ryzen Dram Calculator in versions 1.1.0 beta2 and 1.2.0 beta2 for Tertiary, CAD buss and voltage pages. Changing digi+ setting of Current limit, VRM frequency and LLC for SOC and Dram deson't seem to make any difference.
> honestly the only thing I can think of is the VDDP voltage in AI suite shows 0.4v and even though I entered .900mv in Bios. On my C6H/1800x system AI Suite actually implements the voltage I enter in the bios where it seems the C7H does not.
> the C7H also seems to have some imput lag in bios sometimes taking over 10 seconds just to change from one field to another, is anyone else experiencing this. when I built this system one week ago I flashed the latest bios v.0601.
> 
> My 1800 system on the other hand runs like a champ scoring 173/1913 in Cinebench and 5079/28190 in Geekbench
> If anyone can think of something I haven't tried please please reply


i See your are trying presets, did you ever try from scratch with your timings. Eg: 14 14 14 14 34 - All rest timings and settings on auto ? Try the 3200mhz strap with 1.375-1.385v / soc auto 
if thats succeed you can start entering lower timings manually. I would suggest make groups to know where the weak spot is!


----------



## seansplayin

where the memory is 4266 it's DOCP profile puts in pretty loose timings, that said I have loaded the DOCP profile but have not tried at any memory speed lower than 3400. I will try lower tho.
thanks,


----------



## majestynl

seansplayin said:


> where the memory is 4266 it's DOCP profile puts in pretty loose timings, that said I have loaded the DOCP profile but have not tried at any memory speed lower than 3400. I will try lower tho.
> thanks,


Your welcome! But i would just do it manually to exclude things! Its pretty simple, i wouldn't use DOCP either, thats also a preset! 

1) Choose your memstrap 3200
2) Enter Memory voltage 
3) Go to timings en enter in the first timings boxes from top to bottom: 14 14 14 14 34
4) Im also using a Retry value of 3 always (top box on timings page)
leave rest on auto! and go!


----------



## crakej

seansplayin said:


> where the memory is 4266 it's DOCP profile puts in pretty loose timings, that said I have loaded the DOCP profile but have not tried at any memory speed lower than 3400. I will try lower tho.
> thanks,


I have same memory with 1700x - I can load the 3466 Stilt preset, set ram v to 1.35/1.355v, SoC to 0.95v, everything else auto.

You shouldn't be getting those delays in the bios though - what else is plugged in to the motherboard?


----------



## seansplayin

trying now 
what do you think about the VDDP voltage being .4 on the C7H and not responding to what I've entered in the bios, it defaults to 0.8v on the C6H.


----------



## minal

gupsterg said:


> Well 2 dimms from F4-3200C14Q-32GVK reached 3466MHz The Stilt with a bump in SOC/ProcODT vs F4-3200C14D-16GTZ. Did bump in ProcODT first when same settings as GTZ failed, then I was lazy and bumped SOC by 2 steps instead of 1. As using 0.968V I was having a dropped thread or two in P95 ~>2hrs and or rig freezes. Link to screenie of PASS ~8.5hrs.
> 
> The principle for core "quality" is basically all cores are not the same. The SMU is profiling what cores are best and will aim to boost those as high as possible within algorithm parameters. If we use Performance Enhancer/Precision Boost Override we "move the goalposts" for algorithm and SMU will be more aggressive on boosting.
> 
> The way the SMU profiles must be based on electrical characteristics IMO. It could possible even have some error detection methodology which trims MHz down on per core basis. IDK, as this last part is pure speculation on my part.
> 
> Dunno about UEFI getting laggy, very occasionally I have experienced that on ZE but IIRC never on C6H/C7H.
> 
> Yeah BCLK +100MHz can lead to issues, so I don't increase BCLK above 100MHz. Decreases don't causes issues for me, so I do you use lowered at times for diagnosis as highlighted before.
> 
> My profiles I aim to keep as simple as possible. I really can't sorta give a "how to" on my process or guide if I see x failure I approach it y way and if I see differing one I do a differing thing. Increasing VID/SOC/VDIMM is usually a last step to stabilise profile, by that I don't mean to say I do not use "guesstimates" to set some VID/SOC/VDIMM. As I work with the CPU/RAM combo I sorta build up experience on how/what it may need.
> 
> For example, in my past posts you would have seen that upto and equal to 3400MHz all I did was increase SOC/VDIMM. I kept things like ProcODT, CAD Bus, VTT, etc all [Auto]. SOC I always start a little above what is detected at UEFI defaults. So as the 2700X was ~0.825V I arbitrarily picked 0.900V setting when targetting 3200MHz as my 1st RAM profile. I knew my RAM sticks would cruise that MHz with stock VDIMM and using The Stilt's appropriate timings.
> 
> Then when I targetted 3466MHz I passed RAM tests with just SOC/VDIMM changes. I tried then Y-Cruncher and had fail, I choose to tweak VTT before I tried anything else. Setting it to 0.687V stabilised the profile from <10min to ~3hrs of Y-Crunching. Due to how dramatic a change in stability this single setting gained me; I assessed it is a key change for my profile/HW combo. Then I used P95 8K 4096K 13GB, I had a fail within <10min. Again I choose not to raise SOC/VDIMM, I played with increases in CAD Bus and as that made profile not any more stable I knew it was not needed changed. I increased ProcODT and profile failed quicker. Lowering it made profile go from fails of <10min to >60min, again a key change IMO. At this point I deemed I had as optimal ProcODT/CAD Bus/VTT as my skills would allow me to tune. At this point I choose to increase SOC as I had plenty of headroom left on that. 0.943V was what I used for initial tests, 0.956V was where I finished if CPU was stock and 0.968V if using 4.1GHz ACB.
> 
> RAM ICs don't have a temperature sensor. AFAIK SPD does and it's more like RAM PCB temp we see.
> 
> Link 1 and 2.


Thanks so much for explaining your reasoning. I know it must be tedious to write all that. It's really helpful (more so than typical guides) for the uninitiated. I'll be consulting it repeatedly, just like your sticky on the ROG forum.

Is this a reasonable goal? 4.35GHz single core, 4.1GHz all core, temps/vcore low enough to be totally inaudible at idle and low loads (i.e. cpu fan ~300rpm with NH-D15), and quiet under full load (ideally 1k rpm or less), memory at 3200MT/s (or better), and of course completely mprime/y-cruncher/GSAT 24/7 stable.

Can memory bandwidth results be compared between AIDA64 and GSAT? I see lots of 50+GB/s AIDA results here (OCed though), but with GSAT I've seen 25GB/s (2133) to 38GB/s (3200) consistently.

Are there any memory presets by The Stilt applicable or adaptable to dual ranked/sided memory? If I recall correctly they all mentioned single sided.



Keith Myers said:


> Well the main problem is the chip manufacturer not releasing the chip's data sheets regularly or sometimes never. So the developers have to figure it out on their own.
> 
> ASUS does hold things close to the vest though, I agree.
> 
> If you go with the Taichi, then you will likely have to use the GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX="acpi_enforce_resources=lax" in the grub.cfg file. I had to do that with my ASUS Intel motherboard X99-E-10G-WS because it uses the the nct-6775 chip and I believe the nct-6779 is in the same family and handled by the same nct6775 driver. Until I did that, none of the sensors showed up because of the ACPI conflict.


Good info. It may be that recent kernels have improved things. My impression was that sensors worked out of the box, without workarounds like kernel parameters. But I'm not certain.

Have you experienced UEFI freezing/lagging, glitchiness that requires reflashing BIOS to properly reflect settings etc? It's so frustrating when that happens that I want return and get the Taichi, but then other times when it's working fine I don't want to create extra work for myself, especially as I'm getting more familiar with the C7H.


----------



## gupsterg

AlphaC said:


> majestynl , any reason why you run 7 for the two bottom left values?


The SCL timings lowered to 2 give significant gains. IIRC higher CPU MHz seems to affect Latency section in AIDA64.



Spoiler

















majestynl said:


> aaah that makes sense chap ! Thanks for knowledge!
> check out my prev post btw  cheers to 3533 CL14 !!!


Glad you now know that temperature is not from RAM IC  .

Nice result  , soon will try with fan on RAM. I know on C6H when I had high ambient temps I had RAM stability issues and had to roll down.

BTW IBT AVX very high is weak test for CPU+RAM load.



minal said:


> Thanks so much for explaining your reasoning. I know it must be tedious to write all that. It's really helpful (more so than typical guides) for the uninitiated. I'll be consulting it repeatedly, just like your sticky on the ROG forum.
> 
> 
> Is this a reasonable goal? 4.35GHz single core, 4.1GHz all core, temps/vcore low enough to be totally inaudible at idle and low loads (i.e. cpu fan ~300rpm with NH-D15), and quiet under full load (ideally 1k rpm or less), memory at 3200MT/s (or better), and of course completely mprime/y-cruncher/GSAT 24/7 stable.
> 
> 
> Can memory bandwidth results be compared between AIDA64 and GSAT? I see lots of 50+GB/s AIDA results here (OCed though), but with GSAT I've seen 25GB/s (2133) to 38GB/s (3200) consistently.
> 
> 
> Are there any memory presets by The Stilt applicable or adaptable to dual ranked/sided memory? If I recall correctly they all mentioned single sided.


NP  . Got to update the ROG thread with info, just not had time yet.

I have done very little on 2700X at stock or with PE presets, but that seems like a very attainable setup of CPU MHz.

The GSAT GB/s shown at end of test is nonsense. It seems to change based on duration of a run, etc. Intel Memory Latency checker works on Ryzen/Linux, try that and IIRC compares well to AIDA64.

Don't think there are any DR timings by The Stilt. There may have been the odd post of x setup of DR in the C6H thread.


----------



## seansplayin

RX580 and Sandisk ultra2 480GB SSD, USB3 hub with keyboard,mouse,webcam,xbox wireless control and logitech headset.
super basic.


----------



## crakej

I've just got home.... ram fans are here!

The weather has just got MUCH warmer here! When I went out my ram was about 35c with a light load - but when I got back they were at 40c light load - it is much warmer in here though.

So I hooked the fans up and they brought me back down to 35c and up to max of 40c while at load - not too bad, but I'm still at default CPU settings/ram 3533CL14TT. Will report back when I've done some tests 

That's a 10 degrees c improvement.


----------



## gupsterg

@AlphaC

It's the cache tests that get affected in AIDA64 with increased CPU MHz.



Spoiler

















crakej said:


> I've just got home.... ram fans are here!
> 
> The weather has just got MUCH warmer here! When I went out my ram was about 35c with a light load - but when I got back they were at 40c light load - it is much warmer in here though.
> 
> So I hooked the fans up and they brought me back down to 35c and up to max of 40c while at load - not too bad, but I'm still at default settings! Will report back when I've done some tests


I placed the F4-3200C14D-16GTZ in my TR rig, as it has rads front/top airflow is naff. Even with ~5C higher RAM temps than C7H setup and increase voltage I have 3466S.



Spoiler















ZE rig setup



Spoiler















C7H rig setup



Spoiler















The front intake fans are on same pwm signal as HS, so RAM gets nice airflow IMO already. Will still be trying an extra fan on RAM to see if it does help with 3533MHz. Even on 2 of the 4 Ripjaw V dimms I can't get 3533MHz with The Stilt 3466MHz timings. May try the other 2 dimms.


----------



## AlphaC

I figured as much because when I was messing with BCLK, even with 1st gen Ryzen at 3.9GHz vs 4.1GHz it seemed that the memory latency was within 1 ns.


----------



## Keith Myers

*No glitches for me in the UEFI*



minal said:


> Good info. It may be that recent kernels have improved things. My impression was that sensors worked out of the box, without workarounds like kernel parameters. But I'm not certain.
> 
> 
> Have you experienced UEFI freezing/lagging, glitchiness that requires reflashing BIOS to properly reflect settings etc? It's so frustrating when that happens that I want return and get the Taichi, but then other times when it's working fine I don't want to create extra work for myself, especially as I'm getting more familiar with the C7H.


The need to use the kernel parameter has nothing to do with the sensors configuration. It is solely because the ACPI address is already in use by something else when you try to add the nct6775 module. That conflict is why you need to use the kernel parameter. There is a warning that it might be dangerous because two devices might try to access that address at the same time but in practice that doesn't seem to happen to me or many others anecdotally. So it is needed to get access to the SIO chip outputs and benign in practice.

No, I have not seen any lags in the UEFI when I have been setting system configurations on either of my C7H motherboards. I have not had any glitches in the UEFI. All is good for me.:thumb:


----------



## minal

gupsterg said:


> NP  . Got to update the ROG thread with info, just not had time yet.
> 
> I have done very little on 2700X at stock or with PE presets, but that seems like a very attainable setup of CPU MHz.
> 
> The GSAT GB/s shown at end of test is nonsense. It seems to change based on duration of a run, etc. Intel Memory Latency checker works on Ryzen/Linux, try that and IIRC compares well to AIDA64.
> 
> Don't think there are any DR timings by The Stilt. There may have been the odd post of x setup of DR in the C6H thread.



Nice. Intel MLC. Didn't know about that. Maybe you could add a note in your ROG thread about it working with linux too.




Keith Myers said:


> The need to use the kernel parameter has nothing to do with the sensors configuration. It is solely because the ACPI address is already in use by something else when you try to add the nct6775 module. That conflict is why you need to use the kernel parameter. There is a warning that it might be dangerous because two devices might try to access that address at the same time but in practice that doesn't seem to happen to me or many others anecdotally. So it is needed to get access to the SIO chip outputs and benign in practice.
> 
> No, I have not seen any lags in the UEFI when I have been setting system configurations on either of my C7H motherboards. I have not had any glitches in the UEFI. All is good for me.:thumb:



More good info. Good to hear your C7Hs don't have issues. Makes me wonder if it's worth RMAing for this, but I have no idea if it's hardware or software/settings related. Certainly several others have the unstable UEFI experience.


----------



## MrPhilo

Is this a common thing that A slot ram are less stable than b slot? With b slot I'm able to post 3600 while a it fails to post 3200


----------



## seansplayin

minal said:


> Nice. Intel MLC. Didn't know about that. Maybe you could add a note in your ROG thread about it working with linux too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More good info. Good to hear your C7Hs don't have issues. Makes me wonder if it's worth RMAing for this, but I have no idea if it's hardware or software/settings related. Certainly several others have the unstable UEFI experience.


I'm having some kind of extreme input lag in the Bios on my C7H sometimes. sometimes it takes around 10 seconds just to change to the next field. If I hold the key down it may jump several fields when it decided to work again, is this what you are experiencing? IM on bios 0601


----------



## minal

seansplayin said:


> I'm having some kind of extreme input lag in the Bios on my C7H sometimes. sometimes it takes around 10 seconds just to change to the next field. If I hold the key down it may jump several fields when it decided to work again, is this what you are experiencing? IM on bios 0601



Yes, exactly, except that the lag gets increasingly longer until it effectively just freezes. I'm on 0601, but I had it on version 0207 it shipped with and with 0509 too.


Something is unstable. Shutting down fully (instead of rebooting) sometimes makes it better. It also gives me doubts about whether UEFI settings are saved/cleared properly.


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> *Finally Got the Ram Stable at 3533Mhz CL 14 + TT Timings*


Well done!

I've now passed over 5000% at 3533 extreme settings 14,13,13,13,26,42 - no cpu OC yet but I'm happy! Test is still running even though I loaded FF so I could leave this update. Ram is at 1.41v, Soc 0.986v max 40c under load. Going to try turning off Aura led see if that's any cooler as well. Time to OC that CPU!


----------



## MrPhilo

I either have the worse 2700x or my motherboard is faulty lol. My 2700x gets errors on 3200 cl14 or even stilt 3200 safe. My 1700 did better. I'm gonna put my 1700 in tomorrow and see if it's the motherboard or CPU. 

My 1700 was running really tight timings and was fine for 2000% and I never crashed for the 1-2 month on it. So can't be the ram. Hopefully it's the 2700x not the motherboard (could be faulty).

I do have VII, not updated Sig yet


----------



## crakej

seansplayin said:


> I'm having some kind of extreme input lag in the Bios on my C7H sometimes. sometimes it takes around 10 seconds just to change to the next field. If I hold the key down it may jump several fields when it decided to work again, is this what you are experiencing? IM on bios 0601


I would unplug your hub only connect keyboard and mouse, and make note of which ports you use (I would just use the top 2 usb2 ports) - then see how things are in the bios - if things improve than there is something going on with your usb3 ports and/or something connected to that hub.

This behaviour is just not normal, so booting with minimal hardware may help you find a problem.


----------



## sr1030nx

netman said:


> i moved mine to the M2_1 Slot too



Everyone who actually reads the instruction manual does it. [emoji16]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## CJMitsuki

I think I finally got 4.275ghz all core stable on my 2700x although Im not 100% sure what else I would have to do to prove stability. I just went with IntelBurn since most opinions say it is the most rigorous in testing the CPU stability. I wasnt able to get it fully stable until today when my new Noctua NF-A14 iPPC 3000 fans came in. I must say that ive never seen a fan push as much air as those do. I thought my computer was going to lift off of my desk and fly when they went to 100%. Although with a better water cooler than my H115i the fans probably wouldnt need to hit 100%. Any suggestions?



Spoiler















Also got my RAM to 3533mhz C14 with fairly decent timings. I should be able to tighten them a hair further but its going to take awhile. I also need to run RamTest for a lengthy period as Ive only run MemTest64 for 10 hours but Im fairly certain it is stable at those timings.


Spoiler


----------



## crakej

Using offset is NOT working for me on the CPU - gives strange voltages - I'm OCing so default is 1.35 right? then add offset of 0.1 and it was showing something like 1.2v when I rebooted - when IO went in to Windows my CPU multiplier appeared to be stuck at x22, but it shows as 41 in bios.. I will test more tomorrow, but here are some pics. Seems to be working for SoC.

No voltages show correctly in the bios - none of them - and also in HWInfo. CPU Core SVI2 TFN shows min 1.306, max 1.4v.... I've even had VCore showing LOWER voltage than SVI2/VID - how can that happen???

Another interesting thing to report is that I used AISuite to adjust a fan curve - which I very rarely do - touched a setting and poof! Machine powered off! Only time it's happened to me.

I've seen some of you refer to setting VID - but you can't set that directly can you?

Bed is calling me!


----------



## lordzed83

MrPhilo said:


> Is this a common thing that A slot ram are less stable than b slot? With b slot I'm able to post 3600 while a it fails to post 3200



Got an idea.... Use A2 B2 slots like it says in manual haha


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> I think I finally got 4.275ghz all core stable on my 2700x although Im not 100% sure what else I would have to do to prove stability. I just went with IntelBurn since most opinions say it is the most rigorous in testing the CPU stability. I wasnt able to get it fully stable until today when my new Noctua NF-A14 iPPC 3000 fans came in. I must say that ive never seen a fan push as much air as those do. I thought my computer was going to lift off of my desk and fly when they went to 100%. Although with a better water cooler than my H115i the fans probably wouldnt need to hit 100%. Any suggestions?
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 200842
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also got my RAM to 3533mhz C14 with fairly decent timings. I should be able to tighten them a hair further but its going to take awhile. I also need to run RamTest for a lengthy period as Ive only run MemTest64 for 10 hours but Im fairly certain it is stable at those timings.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 200844
> View attachment 200846
> View attachment 200848
> View attachment 200850


Nice. One thing that got me thinking. Ya on 3533 like me but cl14 yet ypu got 2ns higher latency. I had same xp with cl14 thats why i dont even bother with it.
Do You have pll on auto ?? Pumps 1.944 hmm maybe thats where You can get more stability than standard 1.8 interesting. On zen1 it was not giving anything.

What vddt vtage u use??


----------



## lordzed83

Aaaa had a closer look and. 
You are not running t1 but t1.5 thats why 2ns slower 🙂

Btw can ya ran few loops of ibt very high?? Want to see how many gflops you are getting compared to me. Ill run high once im home to have a look and compare hehe.


----------



## Keith Myers

minal said:


> Nice. Intel MLC. Didn't know about that. Maybe you could add a note in your ROG thread about it working with linux too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More good info. Good to hear your C7Hs don't have issues. Makes me wonder if it's worth RMAing for this, but I have no idea if it's hardware or software/settings related. Certainly several others have the unstable UEFI experience.


Got a reply already from the it87 developer asking for register dumps and logs. But this post has me guessing that what he suggests might be what is happening.

"Note that an online review states "We find a ROG chip that seems to expand fan control and other ROG features and a TPU chip that should enhance monitoring and OC features". This suggests that there may be an undocumented/proprietary chip handling the additional fans."

I forgot there are a bunch of external fan headers on the front edge of the motherboard and there probably IS a proprietary ROG chip that controls them. I think there is but I would have to pull out the manual again and look at the features diagram to be sure. It could very well be that the fan normal PWM fan headers 2-6 could be controlled by that chip and the it87 driver would have no idea of it or how to expose the outputs.

So we might be out of luck there. The comment about the TPU chip would not have anything to do with the fans, that works with the thermal and power limits of the mobo.


----------



## crakej

Before bed I managed to pass over 5000% with my CPU OCed to 4.1GHz. Still some scope to reduce tRFC and various voltages. I've changed nothing in tweakers Paradise except SenseMi=off and ram settings are as in my last post. What a difference cooling the ram makes!

I've also come to realize not only do I need decent cables, but I need a new case - as it's too cramped in mine!


----------



## CJMitsuki

lordzed83 said:


> Aaaa had a closer look and.
> You are not running t1 but t1.5 thats why 2ns slower 🙂
> 
> Btw can ya ran few loops of ibt very high?? Want to see how many gflops you are getting compared to me. Ill run high once im home to have a look and compare hehe.



Yeah, T1 is too much of a headache for my kit to run and 1.5 is easy mode since my 3200 kit ceiling is going to be 3600mhz but the timings that i will have to run wont be worth it so Ill more than likely stick with 3533mhz with tight timings because I dont see the tiny bit of bandwidth and frequency gains from 3600 worth the latency loss from the loosened timings but that is just speculation for now. As for the PLL Ill have to check on it, I used to have it set to 1.9 but im not positive if I kept it or set it back to auto.



Ill run a couple loops on very high and post back in a bit.


Edit: You were right about 4.3ghz being impossible for now...well, its possible but not without dangerous vCore and I dont plan on trying that.


----------



## Gettz8488

crakej said:


> Using offset is NOT working for me on the CPU - gives strange voltages - I'm OCing so default is 1.35 right? then add offset of 0.1 and it was showing something like 1.2v when I rebooted - when IO went in to Windows my CPU multiplier appeared to be stuck at x22, but it shows as 41 in bios.. I will test more tomorrow, but here are some pics. Seems to be working for SoC.
> 
> 
> 
> No voltages show correctly in the bios - none of them - and also in HWInfo. CPU Core SVI2 TFN shows min 1.306, max 1.4v.... I've even had VCore showing LOWER voltage than SVI2/VID - how can that happen???
> 
> 
> 
> Another interesting thing to report is that I used AISuite to adjust a fan curve - which I very rarely do - touched a setting and poof! Machine powered off! Only time it's happened to me.
> 
> 
> 
> I've seen some of you refer to setting VID - but you can't set that directly can you?
> 
> 
> 
> Bed is calling me!




I think default is 1.2 it takes my offer of +0.113 to get 1.319 Vcore 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## minal

Keith Myers said:


> Got a reply already from the it87 developer asking for register dumps and logs. But this post has me guessing that what he suggests might be what is happening.
> 
> "Note that an online review states "We find a ROG chip that seems to expand fan control and other ROG features and a TPU chip that should enhance monitoring and OC features". This suggests that there may be an undocumented/proprietary chip handling the additional fans."
> 
> I forgot there are a bunch of external fan headers on the front edge of the motherboard and there probably IS a proprietary ROG chip that controls them. I think there is but I would have to pull out the manual again and look at the features diagram to be sure. It could very well be that the fan normal PWM fan headers 2-6 could be controlled by that chip and the it87 driver would have no idea of it or how to expose the outputs.
> 
> So we might be out of luck there. The comment about the TPU chip would not have anything to do with the fans, that works with the thermal and power limits of the mobo.



Good news. I figured out that fan5 is the H_AMP fan header and it87 gets RPM readings just fine. I should have asked this before trying but... is that high amp header fine for regular DC/PWM fans? And for that matter, are W_PUMP+ and AIO_PUMP also usable for regular fans? Though that would not be desirable since they'd be on full speed and not controllable by Q-Fan fan curves.



Nothing for CHA_FAN 1-3 though. Or the cpu fan reading from asus-isa-0000.


And you're right: there's a ROG chip labeled on the diagram on page 1-2 of the manual, as well as a TPU chip. With proprietary implementations our chances of success are reduced, but I don't mind helping out if there's a possibility.


Also, any idea what TPU actually does? I haven't touched that setting in UEFI. Really wish the many features were better explained.


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> lordzed83 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Aaaa had a closer look and.
> You are not running t1 but t1.5 thats why 2ns slower 🙂
> 
> Btw can ya ran few loops of ibt very high?? Want to see how many gflops you are getting compared to me. Ill run high once im home to have a look and compare hehe.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, T1 is too much of a headache for my kit to run and 1.5 is easy mode since my 3200 kit ceiling is going to be 3600mhz but the timings that i will have to run wont be worth it so Ill more than likely stick with 3533mhz with tight timings because I dont see the tiny bit of bandwidth and frequency gains from 3600 worth the latency loss from the loosened timings but that is just speculation for now. As for the PLL Ill have to check on it, I used to have it set to 1.9 but im not positive if I kept it or set it back to auto.
> 
> 
> 
> Ill run a couple loops on very high and post back in a bit.
> 
> 
> Edit: You were right about 4.3ghz being impossible for now...well, its possible but not without dangerous vCore and I dont plan on trying that.
Click to expand...

U should try t1 3466cl15 preset with t1 and 3533see how that works

And ye 4.3 is there but not with power beeded to get it. Bet like hmm 225 watts and temperature kust skyrockets that does not help with stability long therm


----------



## seansplayin

crakej said:


> Well done!
> 
> I've now passed over 5000% at 3533 extreme settings 14,13,13,13,26,42 - no cpu OC yet but I'm happy! Test is still running even though I loaded FF so I could leave this update. Ram is at 1.41v, Soc 0.986v max 40c under load. Going to try turning off Aura led see if that's any cooler as well. Time to OC that CPU!


these are some excellent timings, definitely this lowest I've seen at 3533, would you mind going into your bios and exporting your settings please.


----------



## Shiftstealth

Is anyone able to confirm if BIOS 0601 fixes the shutdowns from HWINFO, and Corsair Link?


----------



## Keith Myers

minal said:


> Good news. I figured out that fan5 is the H_AMP fan header and it87 gets RPM readings just fine. I should have asked this before trying but... is that high amp header fine for regular DC/PWM fans? And for that matter, are W_PUMP+ and AIO_PUMP also usable for regular fans? Though that would not be desirable since they'd be on full speed and not controllable by Q-Fan fan curves.
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing for CHA_FAN 1-3 though. Or the cpu fan reading from asus-isa-0000.
> 
> 
> And you're right: there's a ROG chip labeled on the diagram on page 1-2 of the manual, as well as a TPU chip. With proprietary implementations our chances of success are reduced, but I don't mind helping out if there's a possibility.
> 
> 
> Also, any idea what TPU actually does? I haven't touched that setting in UEFI. Really wish the many features were better explained.


I see that I should have been more thorough in moving the fan leads around the motherboard. I should have picked up on the Fan5/H_amp header. Yes all fan headers can be used for fans, even the AIO and W_Pump+ headers. They can be DC controlled in Manual through duty cycle control.


----------



## gupsterg

Well I'm out on adding a fan to RAM. Firstly I believe I have nice tunnel effect of airflow going on on RAM any how. 2x TY143 140mm fans supply unimpeded air to RAM, then flow across board, etc. Then the 2x TY143 on the Thermalright Archon IB-E X2 are pulling air over the RAM. All four T143 fans share same PWM from CPU_FAN header so ramp based on CPU temp.

Looking at crakej temps I have similar even without fan on RAM. Then I ran 3466MHz The Stilt on my TR/ZE rig for ~9hrs with P95 v28.10B1 8K 4096K 13GB, I had dimm temps of ~45C and non issue. Link to combined screenies of Crakej on left, middle is 2x 3533MHz without fan on RAM my rig, right os ZE is higher dimm temps.


----------



## crakej

Shiftstealth said:


> Is anyone able to confirm if BIOS 0601 fixes the shutdowns from HWINFO, and Corsair Link?


Not fixed yet. I had one in AISuite yesterday when adjusting fans.


----------



## hurricane28

Why do we need a fan over the RAM all of a sudden..? I don't understand, my RAM never gets hotter than 40 c.


----------



## crakej

Then you're probably ok - mine was going up to 50c but my case has bad airflow.....


----------



## VicsPC

hurricane28 said:


> Why do we need a fan over the RAM all of a sudden..? I don't understand, my RAM never gets hotter than 40 c.


It's for people who have poor case airflow indeed. Idk what my ram temp gets to but considering my intake fans are right above my ram and my motherboard sits horizontal I dont think i have a heat issues. I got my hynix down to 14/16 at one point instead of 16/18 with geardown mode enabled and was running 1.45v and didn't have any problems. I don't have ram sensors but when i get my gskill 3600cl15 I'm sure those have a sensor already.


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> Yeah, T1 is too much of a headache for my kit to run and 1.5 is easy mode since my 3200 kit ceiling is going to be 3600mhz but the timings that i will have to run wont be worth it so Ill more than likely stick with 3533mhz with tight timings because I dont see the tiny bit of bandwidth and frequency gains from 3600 worth the latency loss from the loosened timings but that is just speculation for now. As for the PLL Ill have to check on it, I used to have it set to 1.9 but im not positive if I kept it or set it back to auto.
> 
> 
> 
> Ill run a couple loops on very high and post back in a bit.
> 
> 
> Edit: You were right about 4.3ghz being impossible for now...well, its possible but not without dangerous vCore and I dont plan on trying that.


Annn now i now whats the deal.. You are not using AVX IBT.....








Look at time/loop You are on 25 seconds/loop im at 12 HAHAHHA

So if You want to show us its STABLE pass 10x Very High on the correct IBT that actually stresses cpu out. Uploaded it for You:
https://quickfileshare.org/9uw/IBT_AVX.rar


my system can pass this all day long


----------



## lordzed83

hurricane28 said:


> Why do we need a fan over the RAM all of a sudden..? I don't understand, my RAM never gets hotter than 40 c.


Mate we needed one since March 2017 you think how me and @1usmus got HIGH memory clocks ?? I had fan since JUNE gave me extra 133mhz with 200mv lower. And thats with MY EPIC dailty cooling hahahaah. Remember I dont have any heat from cpu or GPU on my case. Just 4 fans for 1 in for vrm 1 out for VRM 1 for memory 1 for Chipset/ssd in front of case.

Some should have a read how temperature effects silicone degradation.
http://www.overclockers.com/forums/showthread.php/723980-Truth-about-CPU-degradation

Its all about this volts kill cpu faster bull****. Reality if cpu on stock cooler/stock volts is at 70c under load and and overclocked voltss with good cooling at 65 under load. Overclocked system will live as long if not longer than stock cpu with crap cooler. Remember my 8 2500k that is still running back in Poland at [email protected] still stable no degradation so far afaik. Not as molested nopw cause my dad jhas it after my sister upgraded 

And that goes for basically all electronics as its made from silicone. So thats SSD's DDR's CPU's GPU's basically any chips.
Wrapping it up if memory at 1.35 is running at 40c under load and at 35c on 1.45 under load with fan. Then second scenario will provide more stability and same lifespan


----------



## VicsPC

lordzed83 said:


> Annn now i now whats the deal.. You are not using AVX IBT.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look at time/loop You are on 25 seconds/loop im at 12 HAHAHHA
> 
> So if You want to show us its STABLE pass 10x Very High on the correct IBT that actually stresses cpu out. Uploaded it for You:
> https://quickfileshare.org/9uw/IBT_AVX.rar
> 
> 
> my system can pass this all day long


Oh man please don't start this whole discussion again about stress tests and what not. My PC can pass this this and that for 365days straight without errors lol. A PC is stable when the stability test goes with what the PC is used for. I don't run IBT because we all know it's unrealistic in 99.5% of cases, i run realbench for 30mins (stresses all 3 major components at once), if i don't get any WHEA errors or crashes then it's stable, and guess what? I've done it this way for 10 years have never ever had a PC crash on me because of instability. You guys running your CPU for 8hrs straight doing a stress test are just destroying your CPU. 

I won't argue with you how you do your stress testing but it's from case to case, I won't run IBT for 8 hours just to please some random guy on the internet lol.


----------



## lordzed83

@VicsPC Claiming stability with NON AVX ibt is like runing realbench with 4gb setting Right or wrong ??

like My system is SUPER stable at 3600 claim passes Realbench NO PROBLEM here:










REALITY





So going by Yours post @CJMitsuki can You drop us a screenshot of 30 minute 16gb pass of Realbench instead of IBT ??  
link from asus 
http://dlcdnmkt.asus.com/rog/RealBe...50.636852167.1527427604-1504233893.1527226706


----------



## VicsPC

lordzed83 said:


> @VicsPC Claiming stability with NON AVX ibt is like runing realbench with 4gb setting Right or wrong ??
> 
> like My system is SUPER stable here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Easy pass on 3600c15
> 
> 
> O wait its 4gb cant even get half pass with 16gb hahaah
> 
> 
> So going by Yours post @CJMitsuki can You drop us a screenshot of 30 minute 16gb pass of Realbench instead of IBT ??
> link from asus
> http://dlcdnmkt.asus.com/rog/RealBe...50.636852167.1527427604-1504233893.1527226706


I have 16gb why on earth would i run it with 4gb lol. Ive had rigs pass ibt/realbench blah blah just to have em completely and utterly fail when launching a game or running cpu intensive apps, it's rare but it does happen. It's why i use my PC for a couple months after my stress tests before i call i stable. I don't call it stable right after a stress test lol.


----------



## lordzed83

VicsPC said:


> I have 16gb why on earth would i run it with 4gb lol. Ive had rigs pass ibt/realbench blah blah just to have em completely and utterly fail when launching a game or running cpu intensive apps, it's rare but it does happen. It's why i use my PC for a couple months after my stress tests before i call i stable. I don't call it stable right after a stress test lol.


well its same situation with IBT init ?? running NON AVX IBT for stress test instead of AVVX IBT is like running realbench at 4gb ibnstead of 16. Hardly any stress as you see  I'm not talking about You but the GENERAL stability claims with crappy tests... I think @gupsterg would back me up on this. When I say It's stable it actually is like can pass at lest 1 hour of y-cruncher P95 ect.

Then someone new shows up and posts some silly results like 4.3: lets say 1,38 volts and says My system is stable and only thing he posts is CB15 pass/score LOL


----------



## VicsPC

lordzed83 said:


> well its same situation with IBT init ?? running NON AVX IBT for stress test instead of AVVX IBT is like running realbench at 4gb ibnstead of 16. Hardly any stress as you see  I'm not talking about You but the GENERAL stability claims with crappy tests... I think @gupsterg would back me up on this. When I say It's stable it actually is like can pass at lest 1 hour of y-cruncher P95 ect.
> 
> Then someone new shows up and posts some silly results like 4.3: lets say 1,38 volts and says My system is stable and only thing he posts is CB15 pass/score LOL


Oh yea totally agree with that last sentence haha. But usually in general excessive IBT or realbench really isn't necessary. I forgot which review i read where they said they reached 4.4 on all cores but reviewers hardly EVER stability test, it's why i don't trust any online/youtube hardware/software review they are usually TRASH. Ie my 1700x does 3.8 at 1.26v, passed realbench for 30mins, multiple times haha. I had no crashes just WHEA errors so kept upping the vcore. Was the same going from 2933 to 3200, needed an extra .40mv to get it remotely stable. But yea just a cinebench score doesn't do anything for me, then again I don't really care about other peoples rigs or calling em out on the internet. All i know is, if my system is stable for what i use it daily for then i have no issues. Got my 1700x on release day, my Gigabyte G5 crapped out after 4 days bought a C6, i have not had a single stability issue since day 1 and i OCed it on day 1. I do some very light encoding, mostly gaming and photo editing. No issues on this end, no WHEA errors (unless its a crap BIOS lol). But I have nothing wrong with your methods but it's not necessary for everyone, just my vicstwocents (see what i did there)


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> The SCL timings lowered to 2 give significant gains. IIRC higher CPU MHz seems to affect Latency section in AIDA64.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


yeap Its effecting read/write/copy....but latency ns is nice tho!



gupsterg said:


> Glad you now know that temperature is not from RAM IC  .
> 
> Nice result  , soon will try with fan on RAM. I know on C6H when I had high ambient temps I had RAM stability issues and had to roll down.
> 
> BTW IBT AVX very high is weak test for CPU+RAM load.


Yep but most important is the temperature value over there... its definitely effecting high mem stability if its lower on temps there!

I know about IBT AVX VH, but the mention of the tests where more for pure RAM stability. Just did some fast general tests so people wouldn't asked me  
Will follow more test soon in combination with different Profiles i have.
Normally i did all my RAM/CPU tests with the PE3 profiles. The last test where with my Pstates profiles who is currently in progress (cpu oc)!

Will share more soon! I just enjoyed the nice weather here in the Netherlands yesterday 

Cheers mate!



crakej said:


> Well done!
> 
> I've now passed over 5000% at 3533 extreme settings 14,13,13,13,26,42 - no cpu OC yet but I'm happy! Test is still running even though I loaded FF so I could leave this update. Ram is at 1.41v, Soc 0.986v max 40c under load. Going to try turning off Aura led see if that's any cooler as well. Time to OC that CPU!


Thanks! You 2 mate! Nice impressive timings  Will see if i go further with timings or just try 3600...hmmm 



gupsterg said:


> Well I'm out on adding a fan to RAM. Firstly I believe I have nice tunnel effect of airflow going on on RAM any how. 2x TY143 140mm fans supply unimpeded air to RAM, then flow across board, etc. Then the 2x TY143 on the Thermalright Archon IB-E X2 are pulling air over the RAM. All four T143 fans share same PWM from CPU_FAN header so ramp based on CPU temp.
> 
> Looking at crakej temps I have similar even without fan on RAM. Then I ran 3466MHz The Stilt on my TR/ZE rig for ~9hrs with P95 v28.10B1 8K 4096K 13GB, I had dimm temps of ~45C and non issue. Link to combined screenies of Crakej on left, middle is 2x 3533MHz without fan on RAM my rig, right os ZE is higher dimm temps.


NP Chap! Bit AFAIK you where running the 3466Mhz with CL15 right? I also dont have any issues with 3466. But sometimes it just gave errors the next day. Very strange because 1 day before i could pass triple 8000%.
And the 3533 CL14 gave me always errors around 500%. After i lowered those temps, it was easy to pass multiple times. 

BTW: my cpu temps aren't getting high while stressing the ram. Eg with Ramtest. So don't know if that helps perfect if your fan with PWM are depending on cpu temp?!



hurricane28 said:


> Why do we need a fan over the RAM all of a sudden..? I don't understand, my RAM never gets hotter than 40 c.


Its not needed normally, but i wrote in me prev post it helped me alot above certain Mhz with TT! It also helped @crakej. And on top of that @lordzed83 mentioned he and @1usmus are doing this for a while...soo their is certainly a gain for some at least!



crakej said:


> Then you're probably ok - mine was going up to 50c but my case has bad airflow.....


I couldn't pass 3533+TT with temps between 40-43c! 



VicsPC said:


> It's for people who have poor case airflow indeed. Idk what my ram temp gets to but considering my intake fans are right above my ram and my motherboard sits horizontal I dont think i have a heat issues. I got my hynix down to 14/16 at one point instead of 16/18 with geardown mode enabled and was running 1.45v and didn't have any problems. I don't have ram sensors but when i get my gskill 3600cl15 I'm sure those have a sensor already.


As said above! I got issues with 40-43c with an open bench... Going higher with ram needs them lower i think! Active cooling directly on top of the HW helps more then just an airflow swinging around the board!


----------



## VicsPC

majestynl said:


> yeap Its effecting read/write/copy....but latency ns is nice tho!
> 
> 
> 
> Yep but most important is the temperature value over there... its definitely effecting high mem stability if its lower on temps there!
> 
> I know about IBT AVX, but the mention of the tests where more mentioned for RAM stability. Will follow more test soon in combination with different Profiles i have.
> Normally i did all my RAM/CPU tests with the PE3 profiles. The last test where with my Pstates profiles who is currently in progress (cpu oc)!
> 
> Will share more soon! I just enjoyed the nice weather here in the Netherlands yesterday
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks! You 2 mate! Nice impressive timings  Will see if i go further with timings or just try 3600...hmmm
> 
> 
> 
> NP Chap! Bit AFAIK you where running the 3466Mhz with CL15 right? I also dont have any issues with 3466. But sometimes it just gave errors the next day. Very strange because 1 day before i could pass triple 8000%.
> And the 3533 CL14 gave me always errors around 500%. After i lowered those temps, it was easy to pass multiple times.
> 
> 
> 
> Its not needed normally, but i wrote in me prev post it helped me alot above certain Mhz with TT! It also helped @crakej. And on top of that @lordzed83 mentioned he and @1usmus are doing this for a while...soo their is certainly a gain for some at least!
> 
> 
> 
> I couldn't pass 3533+TT with temps between 40-43c!
> 
> 
> 
> As said above! I got issues with 40-43c with an open bench... Going higher with ram needs them lower i think! Active cooling directly on top of the HW helps more then just an airflow swinging around the board!


Agreed, my intake fans are right above my ram sticks so guessing it's working just fine. Unfortunately i have no way of measuring temps for my RAM.


----------



## gupsterg

majestynl said:


> I know about IBT AVX VH, but the mention of the tests where more for pure RAM stability. Just did some fast general tests so people wouldn't asked me
> Will follow more test soon in combination with different Profiles i have.
> Normally i did all my RAM/CPU tests with the PE3 profiles. The last test where with my Pstates profiles who is currently in progress (cpu oc)!
> 
> Will share more soon! I just enjoyed the nice weather here in the Netherlands yesterday
> 
> Cheers mate!


:specool:



majestynl said:


> NP Chap! Bit AFAIK you where running the 3466Mhz with CL15 right? I also dont have any issues with 3466. But sometimes it just gave errors the next day. Very strange because 1 day before i could pass triple 8000%.
> And the 3533 CL14 gave me always errors around 500%. After i lowered those temps, it was easy to pass multiple times.
> 
> BTW: my cpu temps aren't getting high while stressing the ram. Eg with Ramtest. So don't know if that helps perfect if your fan with PWM are depending on cpu temp?!


RAM tests for 3533MHz using The Stilt setup is non issue. I can do reruns even in high ambient and not have an issue in GSAT/HCI.

CPU+RAM tests, ie P95 is an issue for 3533MHz. So fans on front/HS/rear all would be "reacting".

Load temps even in room ambient of ~25C are below ~40C on RAM, ie match Crakej when recently sharing pass on 3533MHz when using a fan over RAM. The screenies I added in last post was my setup in the middle, 2x runs of P95 at 4.1 3533MHz in ~25C room ambient and dimm temps matches Crakej when using a fan over RAM.

3466MHz using The Stilt setup is non issues for reruns, so I know I don't have an issue. Reruns of 3533MHz for only CPU+RAM tests do not last longer than 1-1.5hrs...


----------



## minal

Keith Myers said:


> I see that I should have been more thorough in moving the fan leads around the motherboard. I should have picked up on the Fan5/H_amp header. Yes all fan headers can be used for fans, even the AIO and W_Pump+ headers. They can be DC controlled in Manual through duty cycle control.



I just saw that fan control could be enabled for AIO/W_Pump headers in the Monitoring section of UEFI. So the only things they're missing are fan smoothing, minimum RPMs, and preset fan curves.


This means there are 8 controllable fan headers, not counting the 3 expansion headers. Nice, plenty of choice.


----------



## crakej

So at last I'm happy that I'm stable at 3533 extreme settings - 14,13,13,13,26,42 and using LLC2 on CPU and SoC to avoid high voltages - still need to convert to using offset for the CPU. I've completed over 12000% RamTest and over an hour P95. CPU running at 4.1GHz. I'm guessing I can't get as fast as others because I have old CPU? Doesn't seem to matter what I do I can't get latency less than 63ns. I've not tried it in safe mode yet. Any other suggestions on how I might improve this?

My room is hot!!


----------



## datspike

Hi guys. I'm kinda hijacking on the thread with C6H, anyway.
Anyone had a strange issue with PE3 when it always boosts all the cores to the maximum boost frequency?
I.e. i have a 2600X and setting core ratio 36.00, PE3 and precision boost enabled makes all of my cores stick to the 4250Mhz under any kind of nT load.

I was thinking it should maintain a little bit lower than max boost on all core loads.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> So at last I'm happy that I'm stable at 3533 extreme settings - 14,13,13,13,26,42 and using LLC2 on CPU and SoC to avoid high voltages - still need to convert to using offset for the CPU. I've completed over 12000% RamTest and over an hour P95. CPU running at 4.1GHz. I'm guessing I can't get as fast as others because I have old CPU? Doesn't seem to matter what I do I can't get latency less than 63ns. I've not tried it in safe mode yet. Any other suggestions on how I might improve this?
> 
> My room is hot!!


Man you got one of best 1700x iw seen around here 4.1 + 3533cl14 stsble on zen 1 is FANTASTIC. I could not get even 4ghz out of 3 iw had.


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> Man you got one of best 1700x iw seen around here 4.1 + 3533cl14 stsble on zen 1 is FANTASTIC. I could not get even 4ghz out of 3 iw had.


Yep!  Very happy!

It can do 4.2GHz, but not sure what ram speed I will get. Would prob need LLC 5 to be at reasonable voltage. Of course good cooling would help me there so I am looking to move to a better case with better airflow around the board, everything is really cramped in my current case.

I will try for 3600 tomorrow - I can do it, just not sure how stable and not sure it will bring me anything extra. Can't help wondering if I can have CL14 at 3533, maybe I can improve 'slower' ram speeds timings more than I thought...

but yeah - very happy!


----------



## VPII

@majestynl I've put the screenshots on a flash disk to upload it when I have a chance as the network at home is still down.

Firstly I ran the Karhu Software Memory Test to see if the normal stilt DDR4 3600 preset would work as is. Unfortunately it gave an error at 2623%. This was with vdimm set to 1.45v and performance bias on auto. I'm stating this as it may also have had an influence.

So the first screenie show the errors at 2623%

I then changed performance bias to none and set the vdimm to 1.4 in the bios as well as placing a fan blowing over the memory dimms. Low and behold 10400% and I stopped it.

I then left all of the settings as is except for changing TRP, TRCD and another setting together with them from 16 to 15 but I left CL16. I also dropped TRFC from 360 as per preset to 312 and when running the memory test I stopped it at 10800% which you'll see in the last screenie. I can actually boot into windows with these timings raising the memory speed to 3666 and it works, but only bench stable.


----------



## kazablanka

crakej said:


> So at last I'm happy that I'm stable at 3533 extreme settings - 14,13,13,13,26,42 and using LLC2 on CPU and SoC to avoid high voltages - still need to convert to using offset for the CPU. I've completed over 12000% RamTest and over an hour P95. CPU running at 4.1GHz. I'm guessing I can't get as fast as others because I have old CPU? Doesn't seem to matter what I do I can't get latency less than 63ns. I've not tried it in safe mode yet. Any other suggestions on how I might improve this?
> 
> My room is hot!!



great news crakej! Stable with very low voltages well done


----------



## crakej

Thanks 

I've just been trying to use voltage offset for the CPU and again it's failed. Windows Sees my CPU base speed as being 4.1GHz but it's running running at 2.1 and no more?!?!?! I'm running P95 in this pic!

Also, to get 1.4v on the CPU I'm having to add 0.4 offset - but this can't be right surely? I though CPU voltage locked at 1.35 when in OC mode? I'm thinking this might have something to do with the above....


----------



## majestynl

VPII said:


> @majestynl I've put the screenshots on a flash disk to upload it when I have a chance as the network at home is still down.
> 
> Firstly I ran the Karhu Software Memory Test to see if the normal stilt DDR4 3600 preset would work as is. Unfortunately it gave an error at 2623%. This was with vdimm set to 1.45v and performance bias on auto. I'm stating this as it may also have had an influence.
> 
> So the first screenie show the errors at 2623%
> 
> I then changed performance bias to none and set the vdimm to 1.4 in the bios as well as placing a fan blowing over the memory dimms. Low and behold 10400% and I stopped it.
> 
> I then left all of the settings as is except for changing TRP, TRCD and another setting together with them from 16 to 15 but I left CL16. I also dropped TRFC from 360 as per preset to 312 and when running the memory test I stopped it at 10800% which you'll see in the last screenie. I can actually boot into windows with these timings raising the memory speed to 3666 and it works, but only bench stable.


Looking awesome! Yes to much voltage can also lead to instability! I have 3 Gskill kits and its like they exactly need a certain voltage for a specific speed. Like a engine, it gets drowned 
And enabling Performance Bias for daily use was also a discussing over here, enabling this can also lead to instability while stress-testing. Probably the user(s) didn't believe me 

3600 and more is still a nightmare...needs a lot of tweakings i gues.... 




crakej said:


> Thanks
> 
> I've just been trying to use voltage offset for the CPU and again it's failed. Windows Sees my CPU base speed as being 4.1GHz but it's running running at 2.1 and no more?!?!?! I'm running P95 in this pic!
> 
> Also, to get 1.4v on the CPU I'm having to add 0.4 offset - but this can't be right surely? I though CPU voltage locked at 1.35 when in OC mode? I'm thinking this might have something to do with the above....


Can you explain a bit more how you're trying the offset? With P-states or manual OC? Maybe some screenshots of bios.
The offset value is pure calculated above the base voltage. Or if you work with Pstates, its the calculation above the VID (voltage) value!

Yesterday i was trying some Prime95 Memory testings, and while doing that i saw my clocks running at 2.1! Didn't checked further but maybe it has something to do with Balanced Profile?
Or what i know from the CH6 is: If you have entered wrong values in P-states etc, you clocks are getting locked at those low speeds!

Looking forward for more info from you!!


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> Can you explain a bit more how you're trying the offset? With P-states or manual OC? Maybe some screenshots of bios.
> The offset value is pure calculated above the base voltage. Or if you work with Pstates, its the calculation above the VID (voltage) value!
> 
> Yesterday i was trying some Prime95 Memory testings, and while doing that i saw my clocks running at 2.1! Didn't checked further but maybe it has something to do with Balanced Profile?
> Or what i know from the CH6 is: If you have entered wrong values in P-states etc, you clocks are getting locked at those low speeds!
> 
> Looking forward for more info from you!!


Sorry! Forgot to mention those things! Manual OC multi set to 41. I thought the base voltage was 1.35v? Have screenshot I forgot as well!

Was using Ryzen Balanced and High Performance power profiles.


----------



## VPII

I see many people stating that they use offset for CPU vcore. If I may ask, what is the advantage compared to setting a specific voltage. My reason for asking, to have my cpu stable at 4.25-4.26 ghz (100.2 x 42.5) I set my vcore to 1.3v and measuring the actual voltage it is more like 1.29v. This is basically perfectly stable as shown in my previous post...although that was not CPU stress test but more memory testing.


----------



## crakej

VPII said:


> I see many people stating that they use offset for CPU vcore. If I may ask, what is the advantage compared to setting a specific voltage. My reason for asking, to have my cpu stable at 4.25-4.26 ghz (100.2 x 42.5) I set my vcore to 1.3v and measuring the actual voltage it is more like 1.29v. This is basically perfectly stable as shown in my previous post...although that was not CPU stress test but more memory testing.


Using offset allows the cores to down-clock dynamically when less CPU is required.....just not working for me and my 1700x.

This is with offset of 0.1v...


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> Sorry! Forgot to mention those things! Manual OC multi set to 41. I thought the base voltage was 1.35v? Have screenshot I forgot as well!
> 
> Was using Ryzen Balanced and High Performance power profiles.


NP! Base voltage 1.35 was for the 1800x! I believe 1700(x) has different ones! You can easily check those.
Go to bios and press "back to defaults", just to be sure restart pc, then go back to bios again.
In the AMD CBS menu >> Zen Common Options > Then something with throttling blablabla (Pstates page), enable Pstates0, then you will see default settings for VID etc. See Attachment!
Im not at home so needed to find a image, dont look at the values, just to give you idea where its stated 

Also from your screenshot, i saw the up-time was 4min. Do you start your stress-test apps immediately after you start the pc?
I saw some strange behaviors with clocks if i do that. Mostly i leave the pc at least for 2-3 minutes after booting into windows before i do something with apps..


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> NP! Base voltage 1.35 was for the 1800x! I believe 1700(x) has different ones! You can easily check those.
> Go to bios and press "back to defaults", just to be sure restart pc, then go back to bios again.
> In the AMD CBS menu >> Zen Common Options > Then something with throttling blablabla (Pstates page), enable Pstates0, then you will see default settings for VID etc. See Attachment!
> Im not at home so needed to find a image, dont look at the values, just to give you idea where its stated
> 
> Also from your screenshot, i saw the up-time was 4min. Do you start your stress-test apps immediately after you start the pc?
> I saw some strange behaviors with clocks if i do that. Mostly i leave the pc at least for 2-3 minutes after booting into windows before i do something with apps..


Going to do some testing soon. default voltage on my cpu has always been 1.35v so it's really frustrating I can't work it out.

I will look where you showed me - pic is fine... I know where to look now.

I'm also having some coldboot issues - sometimes I get the 3 beeps of training, sometimes nothing - it just shuts off and reboots. Sometimes get to point just before Windows login appears and it hangs there. Sometimes end up at at the bios Safe Mode greeting. Yet if I enter bios, or find myself there, I can just boot from there - successfully. Most settings are at *Auto*.

I only started P95 quickly to show how only half of each core was being used - not to test anything


----------



## lordzed83

VPII said:


> I see many people stating that they use offset for CPU vcore. If I may ask, what is the advantage compared to setting a specific voltage. My reason for asking, to have my cpu stable at 4.25-4.26 ghz (100.2 x 42.5) I set my vcore to 1.3v and measuring the actual voltage it is more like 1.29v. This is basically perfectly stable as shown in my previous post...although that was not CPU stress test but more memory testing.


I'w been using offset mode since start of Ryzen its harder to get system stable = more fun


----------



## minal

What needs to be adjusted if y-cruncher fails? It's usually N32 or N64 test that does it. This was with PE3, CPB, PBO, SOC @ 0.9V, and -93.75mV offset on Vcore. Also failed with -87.5mV offset. RAM was at 3200 DOCP, but I tried at 2133 Auto settings (but forgot VDIMM/VBoot @ 1.35V) and it still failed.



I tried PE2 with above settings and it passed for 11 hours. But I don't like PE2 :S Compared to PE3, it runs at lower frequencies (single core up to 4.3GHz, but typically 4.15GHz on stress tests; PE3 does 4.35GHz), higher voltage (not sure if readings are reliable, but 1.3V Vcore on all core load vs 1.2V with PE3?), a solid 5C hotter under load, and thus louder as well. All around just worse.


Btw, does PE3 have built-in undervolting? It does say OC, but it runs cooler. I noticed -100mV often doesn't boot with PE3, but usually boots with PE2.







lordzed83 said:


> I'w been using offset mode since start of Ryzen its harder to get system stable = more fun



Tips to spare undervolters who aren't into that kind of fun? :/


----------



## minal

majestynl said:


> And enabling Performance Bias for daily use was also a discussing over here, enabling this can also lead to instability while stress-testing. Probably the user(s) didn't believe me







 

In the middle of so much testing I forgot, I will test PB=disabled next!


----------



## crakej

@elmor - I'm using 1700x on this board. If I set my CPU voltage to offset, whatever I set it looks like base voltage is only 1v - I had to enter 0.4v to get 1.4v. If I only added 0.1v, I got 1.1v!? In windows it shows base frequency as 4.1GHz but the multiplier as 21. You can see that each core can only go at 50% load

Thanks to @majestynl reminding me about p-states I've had to convert my OC to p-states to get my CPU cores to down-clock and down-volt properly. I've only used p-state 0 but already things are much better. I've always used offset with man OC previously.

I'm still struggling a bit with not being able to see clearly what voltages I current;y have set due to none of them being displayed as set in bios - in fact AISuite does a better job of reading the values correctly!

Can someone tell me (and others!) how to add images in-line or put them in a


Spoiler



block please? I hate using loads of space for images or long quotes


----------



## lordzed83

minal said:


> What needs to be adjusted if y-cruncher fails? It's usually N32 or N64 test that does it. This was with PE3, CPB, PBO, SOC @ 0.9V, and -93.75mV offset on Vcore. Also failed with -87.5mV offset. RAM was at 3200 DOCP, but I tried at 2133 Auto settings (but forgot VDIMM/VBoot @ 1.35V) and it still failed.
> 
> 
> 
> I tried PE2 with above settings and it passed for 11 hours. But I don't like PE2 :S Compared to PE3, it runs at lower frequencies (single core up to 4.3GHz, but typically 4.15GHz on stress tests; PE3 does 4.35GHz), higher voltage (not sure if readings are reliable, but 1.3V Vcore on all core load vs 1.2V with PE3?), a solid 5C hotter under load, and thus louder as well. All around just worse.
> 
> 
> Btw, does PE3 have built-in undervolting? It does say OC, but it runs cooler. I noticed -100mV often doesn't boot with PE3, but usually boots with PE2.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tips to spare undervolters who aren't into that kind of fun? :/


Id b like.
Why you using negative offset ?? when I'm running PE3 + 102.4bclk i use +0.043. So i assume +0.000 should be for just plain PE3 without extra bclk.


----------



## minal

lordzed83 said:


> Id b like.
> Why you using negative offset ?? when I'm running PE3 + 102.4bclk i use +0.043. So i assume +0.000 should be for just plain PE3 without extra bclk.



My goal is optimal performance with the constraint of total silence (idle + low/daily load) and stability . Hence the undervolting to reduce temps.


----------



## majestynl

minal said:


> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3PSX6ogpFY
> 
> In the middle of so much testing I forgot, I will test PB=disabled next!


LOL  and good luck!



crakej said:


> Going to do some testing soon. default voltage on my cpu has always been 1.35v so it's really frustrating I can't work it out.
> 
> I will look where you showed me - pic is fine... I know where to look now.
> 
> I'm also having some coldboot issues - sometimes I get the 3 beeps of training, sometimes nothing - it just shuts off and reboots. Sometimes get to point just before Windows login appears and it hangs there. Sometimes end up at at the bios Safe Mode greeting. Yet if I enter bios, or find myself there, I can just boot from there - successfully. Most settings are at *Auto*.
> 
> I only started P95 quickly to show how only half of each core was being used - not to test anything


Great! 

About cold-boot: I often got that and now with 3533 even more. Its most likely you have too low voltages for your ram. I had it almost every time when i restarted the PC. Fixed by adding 1 notch extra voltage on the ram. Now using 1.41 instead of 1.4v. And no issues with booting for now!
if that doesnt help you, try it together with different soc voltages!


----------



## lordzed83

minal said:


> lordzed83 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Id b like.
> Why you using negative offset ?? when I'm running PE3 + 102.4bclk i use +0.043. So i assume +0.000 should be for just plain PE3 without extra bclk.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My goal is optimal performance with the constraint of total silence (idle + low/daily load) and stability . Hence the undervolting to reduce temps.
Click to expand...

Ye but obvious u need.volts so.maybe start from stable and go down to find what u need 2 pass stress test. I know my cpu needs 1.381 after vdrop.on load to have 4250stable. You are on lower cloxk so 1.360 should cut it i think.


----------



## minal

lordzed83 said:


> Ye but obvious u need.volts so.maybe start from stable and go down to find what u need 2 pass stress test. I know my cpu needs 1.381 after vdrop.on load to have 4250stable. You are on lower cloxk so 1.360 should cut it i think.


Are you suggesting finding an optimal fixed manual Vcore? Why?

Instead I've been trying to find an optimal offset. Equivalent but allows the cpu to adjust voltage as needed? 

In linux there's a voltage reading (don't know how accurate, and whether it's Vcore, VID, etc) whose relative values I've been comparing to assess configurations. 


With PE3 and -87.5mV offset, peaks (single core) are ~1.42V and all core load is ~1.2V. 

With PE2 and -100mV offset, peaks are also ~1.42 but all core load was ~1.3V. 

PE2 is 5-10C hotter under load and therefore louder... while being slower. Has anyone else noticed this too? Would be nice to know what kind of magic PE3 uses.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Spoiler






lordzed83 said:


> Annn now i now whats the deal.. You are not using AVX IBT.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look at time/loop You are on 25 seconds/loop im at 12 HAHAHHA
> 
> So if You want to show us its STABLE pass 10x Very High on the correct IBT that actually stresses cpu out. Uploaded it for You:
> https://quickfileshare.org/9uw/IBT_AVX.rar
> 
> 
> my system can pass this all day long







So what am i doing different? ok, I didnt know there was another version. Ill try it out. I have been testing all night in SiSandra which is pretty taxing as well...took about 30 min just for the processor bench. how are your gflops so high? Is it the different version or something?


----------



## Mandarb

@majestynl cleared CMOS and PE3 started moving from 4075MHz.

Anyways, I seem to be getting Silicone turds when buying AMD.. 1800X couldn't do anything above 3.9GHz at any sane voltage (meaning below 1.4V), and my 2700X is just another turd. Can't stabilise an all core OC at 4.2GHz with 1.4V under load. I get like 0.09V drop whith LLC on auto, -0.07V LLC2, and -0.035V with LLC3. Wished I had LLC 2.5 to get about a 0.05V drop.

With PE3 single core is run at 1.51V, Multicore at about 1.36V. No chance to undervolt to get the super high single core voltages down.

I just hope I get my replacement Crosshair VI Hero back soon before those aren't worth anything anymore, as that was the biggest turd of them all and caused my so many headaches by sloooowly slooowly failing while BIOS got better with me having constantly cold boot issues that I tried to make go away. At first it got better, then worse until I finally realised it must be the motherboard as I got hangs on boot and in BIOS even at stock memory settings. *le sigh*


----------



## minal

With Performance Bias disabled, I got 5.5 hours of y-cruncher before the system totally froze. Don't know what's to blame. :/ No error messages in journalctl. PE3, CPB, PBO, Vcore @ -0.0875V offset, [email protected], SOC @ 0.9V. Really getting tired.



Mandarb said:


> I just hope I get my replacement Crosshair VI Hero back soon before those aren't worth anything anymore, as that was the biggest turd of them all and caused my so many headaches by sloooowly slooowly failing while BIOS got better with me having constantly cold boot issues that I tried to make go away. At first it got better, then worse until I finally realised it must be the motherboard as I got hangs on boot and in BIOS even at stock memory settings. *le sigh*


Uhoh, sounds familiar... :S


----------



## wisepds

@elmor Today, one shutdown more passing IBT. 100x41 at 1,31 vcore (1,275v under load) max temp 68°C, all on auto except vcore offset, multiplier (100 x 41) and memories (3200 cl 14 with timmings from Dram calculator)

What the hell is going on with this bios/Mobo?

Please, help!!!!!!!!!!!!?


----------



## hurricane28

wisepds said:


> @elmor Today, one shutdown more passing IBT. 100x41 at 1,31 vcore (1,275v under load) max temp 68°C, all on auto except vcore offset, multiplier (100 x 41) and memories (3200 cl 14 with timmings from Dram calculator)
> 
> What the hell is going on with this bios/Mobo?
> 
> Please, help!!!!!!!!!!!!?


What happens when you run stock vcore?


----------



## wisepds

hurricane28 said:


> What happens when you run stock vcore?


I have got shutdown even with all on auto, but now, is passing ibt perfect... one shutdown at week only, but i hate it..after that Computer works very well...


----------



## hurricane28

wisepds said:


> I have got shutdown even with all on auto, but now, is passing ibt perfect... one shutdown at week only, but i hate it..after that Computer works very well...


I need more info in order to help you man. 

What are your system specs? And perhaps BIOS screens and Hardwareinfo64 screens?


----------



## CJMitsuki

Spoiler






lordzed83 said:


> Annn now i now whats the deal.. You are not using AVX IBT.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look at time/loop You are on 25 seconds/loop im at 12 HAHAHHA
> 
> So if You want to show us its STABLE pass 10x Very High on the correct IBT that actually stresses cpu out. Uploaded it for You:
> https://quickfileshare.org/9uw/IBT_AVX.rar
> 
> 
> my system can pass this all day long








There you go, I had no idea there were 2 different IBT versions. This one runs about 5c hotter than the other but is still stable. I Imagine if I were to get a better water cooler it would be low 70c. Either way, its stable in my eyes and im not going to buy a custom loop so I can run IBT for 12 hours. If it doesnt crash in that test then with cooling suitable to the level of testing it will go on to do the same in the next test. Which means the CPU is stable at that speed. Now that Ive shown you that test, its only fair that you show me your high stress IBT run with your CPU at something higher than 4.25ghz 



Spoiler


----------



## wisepds

hurricane28 said:


> I need more info in order to help you man.
> 
> What are your system specs? And perhaps BIOS screens and Hardwareinfo64 screens?


I have passed 1 hour of IBT at Max. 

Here is my system at full Load (Captura.jpg):

Thanks!

2700X
Crosshair VII
Seasonic Titanium 750 
1080 Ti
Kraken x72 push pull with Magentic levitation Corsair fans (6)
Gskil 32 gb 8gb x 4 3200 Cl14 on Fast (Dram ryzen calculator from u1smus 1000% hci without errors)
Corsair case 750D airflow with 5 fans ML from Corsair
M2 Samsung 960 Pro

I have attached another capture with 10 minuts Aida Stress Test with voltages and temps..


----------



## majestynl

Mandarb said:


> @majestynl cleared CMOS and PE3 started moving from 4075MHz.
> 
> Anyways, I seem to be getting Silicone turds when buying AMD.. 1800X couldn't do anything above 3.9GHz at any sane voltage (meaning below 1.4V), and my 2700X is just another turd. Can't stabilise an all core OC at 4.2GHz with 1.4V under load. I get like 0.09V drop whith LLC on auto, -0.07V LLC2, and -0.035V with LLC3. Wished I had LLC 2.5 to get about a 0.05V drop.
> 
> With PE3 single core is run at 1.51V, Multicore at about 1.36V. No chance to undervolt to get the super high single core voltages down.
> 
> I just hope I get my replacement Crosshair VI Hero back soon before those aren't worth anything anymore, as that was the biggest turd of them all and caused my so many headaches by sloooowly slooowly failing while BIOS got better with me having constantly cold boot issues that I tried to make go away. At first it got better, then worse until I finally realised it must be the motherboard as I got hangs on boot and in BIOS even at stock memory settings. *le sigh*


I personally would not be that down!! Those voltages for single core boost 1.51 are really no issue. I never saw one with high boost below 1.5 from stock! If it was a issue then we cant sent all our CPUs back to AMD 
This is how XFR/PB2 is build! All silicones have their own characteristics! Its checking magically what capabilities yours have and steering it between those safety/temp walls. The one uses more juice then the other. I still strongly believe that the biggest enemy of electrics is heat! So a good cooling system is a pre if you ask me!

And yeah, you know what i think about LLC(♡) so don't want to say more about it cause this will start discussions over and over!  



minal said:


> With Performance Bias disabled, I got 5.5 hours of y-cruncher before the system totally froze. Don't know what's to blame. :/ No error messages in journalctl. PE3, CPB, PBO, Vcore @ -0.0875V offset, [email protected], SOC @ 0.9V. Really getting tired.


uhmmm not enough vcore  ??!!



wisepds said:


> @elmor Today, one shutdown more passing IBT. 100x41 at 1,31 vcore (1,275v under load) max temp 68°C, all on auto except vcore offset, multiplier (100 x 41) and memories (3200 cl 14 with timmings from Dram calculator)
> 
> What the hell is going on with this bios/Mobo?
> 
> Please, help!!!!!!!!!!!!?


Did you had any software running eg: CPU-Z and Hwinfo?


----------



## wisepds

majestynl said:


> I personally would not be that down!! Those voltages for single core boost 1.51 are really no issue. I never saw one with high boost below 1.5 from stock! If it was a issue then we cant sent all our CPUs back to AMD
> This is how XFR/PB2 is build! All silicones have their own characteristics! Its checking magically what capabilities yours have and steering it between those safety/temp walls. The one uses more juice then the other. I still strongly believe that the biggest enemy of electrics is heat! So a good cooling system is a pre if you ask me!
> 
> And yeah, you know what i think about LLC(♡) so don't want to say more about it cause this will start discussions over and over!
> 
> 
> 
> uhmmm not enough vcore  ??!!
> 
> 
> 
> Did you had any software running eg: CPU-Z and Hwinfo?


Yes, usually use Hwinfo at same time that Y-crunch or IBT for example... why? I have disconected ASUS EC Sensor from HWinfo


----------



## majestynl

wisepds said:


> Yes, usually use Hwinfo at same time that Y-crunch or IBT for example... why? I have disconected ASUS EC Sensor from HWinfo


Only Hwinfo? Btw did you saw my post: http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...vii-overclocking-thread-139.html#post27428097

I dont have any shutdowns anymore..im preventing it by opening those SW's together. Dont know if this is the case with you but i can replicate it!


----------



## wisepds

majestynl said:


> Only Hwinfo? Btw did you saw my post: http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...vii-overclocking-thread-139.html#post27428097
> 
> I dont have any shutdowns anymore..im preventing it by opening those SW's together. Dont know if this is the case with you but i can replicate it!


Umm, yes i always use hwinfo, but not cpu-z...interesting...


----------



## crakej

I just had an instant power off on my machine. Only had browser and tv app open, had closed HWInfo 2 mins before it happened.

I'm mystified to what this could be.....there was minimal load at the time and I didn't have CPUz or RealBench or CB open... This is the 2nd time this has happened to me. I was on High Performance power profile.

Still having cold boot probs - my ram is at 1.41v - boot voltage is a notch higher. Will report back and let you know what cures it.


----------



## crakej

Grrrr.....keep losing posts when I post them, and there's no going back and finding your text either.....so, once again.....

I just had an unexpected power down - no shutdown, just off. 2nd time it's happened to me. I had closed HWInfo 2 mins before and only had browser and tv app open so nice low load. A bit mystified why it's happening. I presume the system is detecting a voltage spike or something similar ...

Trying to solve my cold boot problems - ram already at 1.41v (3533) and boot v at one notch above that. I will report back when I find out what what cures it for me.

*Apologies for the double post - 1st one just wasn't there even if I reloaded the page *


----------



## lordzed83

@elmor You'w been quiet here for a while cooking something new to testy ??


----------



## Anty

I'm pretty sure there will be new beta before June 2019


----------



## wisepds

@lordzed83 What is 40 Code on Mobo? Sometimes i have code 24 other 40....

Edit: Resolved... if fastboot is power on under windows and Fast boot enabled on bios too, code 40 appears.. Pc power on from a S4 state.. no totally off.
But if you power down Fastboot on windows /bios Code 24 appears.

So... code 40 is not a failure...


----------



## VicsPC

wisepds said:


> @lordzed83 What is 40 Code on Mobo? Sometimes i have code 24 other 40....
> 
> Edit: Resolved... if fastboot is power on under windows and Fast boot enabled on bios too, code 40 appears.. Pc power on from a S4 state.. no totally off.
> But if you power down Fastboot on windows /bios Code 24 appears.
> 
> So... code 40 is not a failure...


Yea code 40 is fine, i believe it means the CPU is OCed. i get 40 and 24 on my C6 and both are fine. If you have no problems with fastboot just leave it enabled.


----------



## raucous

majestynl said:


> Congrats!
> 
> I wouldn't test the CPU and RAM OC together! It will be difficult to know if you get instability which one it was!
> I personally never use presets, but i also don't say they don't work or whatever. I just prefer for manual settings cause most of the HW are not identical to each!
> Again, you can safely try those cause they are a good general basic!
> 
> If i was you i would start first with your CPU OC, like using the Performance Enhancement (PE) presets. Try PE3 and see if its stable with it! Run some stress tests etc.!
> After you got it stable you can start with your RAM!
> 
> Looking forward for your testresults with a 2700x! Good luck with it!


Hi majestynl, thanks - I will test the PE3 preset soon when I go on holiday.

Unfortunately I installed my NVM SSD into the M2.2. Over the weekend I removed it and reinstalled it into the M2.1 slot together with the heatsink. I understand this is better for performance.

I found this video on the different methods for overclocking Ryzen and their affects on system performance. It is for a 2600X but he stated that he will be releasing another video for the 2700X shortly.


----------



## crakej

@elmor - I still can't use my Microsoft USB wireless mouse - on any port. It will work perfectly for the fist 30 seconds or even a minute or 2, then becomes unusable because it's so jerky. I hope you can help us soon with our growing list!


----------



## Mandarb

@majestynl Still trying to stabilise PE3, auto voltages crash on multicore, just tested auto +0.05V, still not stable. Am approaching 1.6V single core boost fast, really don't like the prospect of it.

Wished there was a way to define multi and single core voltages separately.

Edit: Well, can forget PE3. Single core is up to 1.603V while multi sits at 1.337V @4.125GHz and crashes in Prime95. 😕


----------



## zulex

When will we have bios for AGESA 1002c??? It is very ridiculous that ELMOR released bios of this AGESA version for previous CROSSHAIR VI prior to CROSSHAIR VII.... 
Please show respect to the customers... and think why we have upgrade to CROSSHAIR VII by spending extra penny on this MB.


----------



## mtrai

zulex said:


> When will we have bios for AGESA 1002c??? It is very ridiculous that ELMOR released bios of this AGESA version for previous CROSSHAIR VI prior to CROSSHAIR VII....
> Please show respect to the customers... and think why we have upgrade to CROSSHAIR VII by spending extra penny on this MB.


Seriously???? Entitled much? He has no control of when the bios teams provide him beta bios and further has no control of which boards bios he gets. The fact that he does release them at all is very welcome.


----------



## VicsPC

mtrai said:


> Seriously???? Entitled much? He has no control of when the bios teams provide him beta bios and further has no control of which boards bios he gets. The fact that he does release them at all is very welcome.


Yup that exactly what i wrote before. People nitpick like mad it's insane. IT'S A NEW ARCHITECTURE, NEW TECHNOLOGY. Me it's the reason i jumped on it, I knew there would be issues and problems.


----------



## lordzed83

wisepds said:


> @lordzed83 What is 40 Code on Mobo? Sometimes i have code 24 other 40....
> 
> Edit: Resolved... if fastboot is power on under windows and Fast boot enabled on bios too, code 40 appears.. Pc power on from a S4 state.. no totally off.
> But if you power down Fastboot on windows /bios Code 24 appears.
> 
> So... code 40 is not a failure...


see You found out 24 and 40 is fine. If it bothers You turn off post display in bios


----------



## crakej

zulex said:


> When will we have bios for AGESA 1002c??? It is very ridiculous that ELMOR released bios of this AGESA version for previous CROSSHAIR VI prior to CROSSHAIR VII....
> Please show respect to the customers... and think why we have upgrade to CROSSHAIR VII by spending extra penny on this MB.


When it's ready for us! We are lucky to have Elmor, he checks in when he can and sees what we need help with. We can't make demands. It doesn't say on the box 'with support from Elmor whenever you want it'

Chill.... Bios is coming!


----------



## crakej

I'm testing 3600, geardown=on, T1, CL14,14,15,14,28,42 - can pass 2000% RamTest so far, it looks promising. Will have to see if I can get it working well enough to make it quicker than my 3533 profile. Still having to use p-states as offset is not working. Will report back when (if!) I get it stable.


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> I just had an instant power off on my machine. Only had browser and tv app open, had closed HWInfo 2 mins before it happened.
> 
> I'm mystified to what this could be.....there was minimal load at the time and I didn't have CPUz or RealBench or CB open... This is the 2nd time this has happened to me. I was on High Performance power profile.
> 
> Still having cold boot probs - my ram is at 1.41v - boot voltage is a notch higher. Will report back and let you know what cures it.


So today went back to home and had boot issues with my current profile for 3533. No issues with 3466 profile. I thought
1 notch higher on ram did the trick yesterday but nottttttt 

So I focussed just alone on proper booting and after testing few options I hope I fixed it. Upping procODT to 60 is booting perfect for now. Have at least booted 25 times. Complete shutoff, boot again / Pulling DC cable from PSU / restart / Back to default and load profile again... So as you can see, tried most of boot situations.

And it booted perfect each time...Higher ram probably needed different procODT ohm!

Let's see if this will keep perfect booting...


----------



## VicsPC

crakej said:


> I'm testing 3600, geardown=on, T1, CL14,14,15,14,28,42 - can pass 2000% RamTest so far, it looks promising. Will have to see if I can get it working well enough to make it quicker than my 3533 profile. Still having to use p-states as offset is not working. Will report back when (if!) I get it stable.


You can run that ram in 1T? I reach on the 3600CL15 it will do 2T so not sure if i want to buy it at this point.


----------



## Mumak

majestynl said:


> Only Hwinfo? Btw did you saw my post: http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...vii-overclocking-thread-139.html#post27428097
> 
> I dont have any shutdowns anymore..im preventing it by opening those SW's together. Dont know if this is the case with you but i can replicate it!


We're currently checking this issue with Franck (CPU-Z) and elmor. It looks like the problem is indeed when both are running together.
I have one solution for this, which is currently in testing, Franck might also need to update CPU-Z.
Also there's a new sensor interface cooked that when used (currently only HWiNFO supports it) should resolve this problem as well. For C6H such BIOS was already released (see the C6H thread), but not sure if the same happened for C7H too.


----------



## crakej

Lookin' good for 3600! Seems T1 is fine (with geardown=on) - I tried previously with GD=off and T2 but wasn't doing so well..... Still got P95 tests to do, but I'm well happy! 

So far only needed to raise SoC to 1.012v - RamTest is still running!


----------



## crakej

Just ended RamTest - over 12000% @ 3600 - will update this post when P95 finishes!


----------



## CJMitsuki

Mumak said:


> We're currently checking this issue with Franck (CPU-Z) and elmor. It looks like the problem is indeed when both are running together.
> I have one solution for this, which is currently in testing, Franck might also need to update CPU-Z.
> Also there's a new sensor interface cooked that when used (currently only HWiNFO supports it) should resolve this problem as well. For C6H such BIOS was already released (see the C6H thread), but not sure if the same happened for C7H too.



Will this in any way positively affect how that garbage software Corsair Link interacts with HWinfo in regards to the random shutdowns? I wouldnt use it at all but its the only way to get my h115i pump to run at max speed of 2850rpm. I think its the USB driver that Corsair installs because Ive fully uninstalled Link software after running it so that the pump goes to top speed and the only thing left was the USB Driver.


----------



## Mumak

CJMitsuki said:


> Will this in any way positively affect how that garbage software Corsair Link interacts with HWinfo in regards to the random shutdowns? I wouldnt use it at all but its the only way to get my h115i pump to run at max speed of 2850rpm. I think its the USB driver that Corsair installs because Ive fully uninstalled Link software after running it so that the pump goes to top speed and the only thing left was the USB Driver.


Not 100% sure, but I think there's a high chance it will resolve it. Corsair Link uses the CPUID (CPU-Z) SDK for monitoring.
If you want to participate in testing, try this HWiNFO build: www.hwinfo.com/beta/hwi64_585_3454.zip
This is only an update on side of HWiNFO to mitigate this problem, but not yet verified. See if you see any difference maybe..


----------



## CJMitsuki

Mumak said:


> Not 100% sure, but I think there's a high chance it will resolve it. Corsair Link uses the CPUID (CPU-Z) SDK for monitoring.
> If you want to participate in testing, try this HWiNFO build: www.hwinfo.com/beta/hwi64_585_3454.zip
> This is only an update on side of HWiNFO to mitigate this problem, but not yet verified. See if you see any difference maybe..



I most certainly will test it. Thank You @*Mumak
*


Edit: Its been running for about 1 hour now with no problems. Its never made it that long before so I think you guys are definitely onto something :thumb:
I will update on HWiNFO forums on the status in another day or so if no problems before then.




Spoiler


----------



## seansplayin

*My bad*



seansplayin said:


> I'm having some kind of extreme input lag in the Bios on my C7H sometimes. sometimes it takes around 10 seconds just to change to the next field. If I hold the key down it may jump several fields when it decided to work again, is this what you are experiencing? IM on bios 0601


So I have to own up to this at the expense of my pride. The stuttering in the bios is caused by the logitech keyboard and not any problem with the bios.... yep I feel dumb. I haven't noticed the problem in windows but it's possible it's happening there too. I have the logitech unified receiver around 8" away from the keyboard but when it starts stuttering if I move the keyboard any closer to the receiver it immediately starts working. 
anyways user error this time.


----------



## Mumak

CJMitsuki said:


> I most certainly will test it. Thank You @*Mumak
> *
> 
> 
> Edit: Its been running for about 1 hour now with no problems. Its never made it that long before so I think you guys are definitely onto something :thumb:
> I will update on HWiNFO forums on the status in another day or so if no problems before then.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 201250


Thanks for the feedback. Out tests show the same - it looks good now


----------



## minal

seansplayin said:


> So I have to own up to this at the expense of my pride. The stuttering in the bios is caused by the logitech keyboard and not any problem with the bios.... yep I feel dumb. I haven't noticed the problem in windows but it's possible it's happening there too. I have the logitech unified receiver around 8" away from the keyboard but when it starts stuttering if I move the keyboard any closer to the receiver it immediately starts working.
> anyways user error this time.



Hmm... I have a logitech wireless keyboard too. But I also use a wired mouse and it lags/freezes too. The clock in BIOS stops as well when that happens. So maybe it could be due to some interaction with the keyboard or unifying receiver, but I'm not so sure. I did have the receiver in a USB3 port and moved it to a USB2 port in case that helps. In any case, I'll be trying an RMA.


----------



## crakej

Although I managed to pass 12000% RamTest, it's looking a bit harder to stabilize the CPU with 3600 ram - I keep getting threads dropping fairly early in P95. CPU voltage is at 1.412v and don't really want to go much further so am seeing if I can use something else to stabilize it. 

Update: I seem to be stable! I needed a little more SoC - 1.012v *and* VCore which is at 1.412v

I am going to work on it a bit more and see what I can tighten up, and re-test when I have a chance. I can't believe it's stable! Yay!


----------



## neur0cide

Can you guys confirm, that BankGroupSwap is disabled entirely on X470? Or is it perhaps possible to activate/enable BGS via loading an edited BIOS dump txt file?
I was told that the option is still present in the CBS, but that enabling BGS doesn't take effect.





zulex said:


> When will we have bios for AGESA 1002c??? It is very ridiculous that ELMOR released bios of this AGESA version for previous CROSSHAIR VI prior to CROSSHAIR VII....
> Please show respect to the customers... and think why we have upgrade to CROSSHAIR VII by spending extra penny on this MB.


I also spent a lot of money on my C6H and we had to live with the sensor issue for quite some time longer than you C7H users. Let the much larger C6H user base sort out the kinks and enjoy the benefits on your C7H later.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Although I managed to pass 12000% RamTest, it's looking a bit harder to stabilize the CPU with 3600 ram - I keep getting threads dropping fairly early in P95. CPU voltage is at 1.412v and don't really want to go much further so am seeing if I can use something else to stabilize it. /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> Update: I seem to be stable! I needed a little more SoC - 1.012v *and* VCore which is at 1.412v
> 
> I am going to work on it a bit more and see what I can tighten up, and re-test when I have a chance. I can't believe it's stable! Yay! /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif


Ye i gave 3600 a pass. Cpu not stable even tho memory is 😕 maybe with better kit and lower volts on ddr i could get it going hmm. Or would need lower cpu oc. Rather srick to 4250 and best mempry settings i can get hehe


----------



## mtrai

@Mumak Just letting you know if you have a crossfire system and leave HWinfo running it has a slow memory leak.  This also occurs in Aida64, how does not occur in techpowerup hwmonitor. It is something specific to HWinfo and Aidi64, as other monitoring programs do not have the memory leak. AMD has been made aware. Yes it is true if you disable crossfire no memory leak.

Also Thanks again for the hard work.


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> Ye i gave 3600 a pass. Cpu not stable even tho memory is 😕 maybe with better kit and lower volts on ddr i could get it going hmm. Or would need lower cpu oc. Rather srick to 4250 and best mempry settings i can get hehe


I'm definitely on the edge - I'll be doing some testing to see if I'm better off with 4.1/4.2GHz and 3466 possibly. I'm also wondering if I could get my 3200 settings down to CL12? If I can have 3600 at CL14 maybe it is possible?

If I were to go higher on my ram, even if it worked I would have to reduce CPU speed and/or increase CPU volts.... and I'm pretty sure I would not be able to get CL14 any higher than this (3600). I'm quite keen to go back and improve on the slower speeds as well and see what performance I can get.


----------



## Mumak

mtrai said:


> @Mumak Just letting you know if you have a crossfire system and leave HWinfo running it has a slow memory leak. This also occurs in Aida64, how does not occur in techpowerup hwmonitor. It is something specific to HWinfo and Aidi64, as other monitoring programs do not have the memory leak. AMD has been made aware. Yes it is true if you disable crossfire no memory leak.
> 
> Also Thanks again for the hard work.


I know about this issue for quite a long time and have also notified AMD about it. I believe the problem is in their libraries/drivers. They were hunting for this leak since we discovered it, but it looks like there's either not enough will on their side or whoever knows....


----------



## JayC72

Hey ROG owners!
I have just joined the CH7 bandwagon as well.
It has been many years since I was on an AMD platform. 
Have taken several days to read this whole thread from page 1.

Just wanted to say Thanks to @gupsterg, @majestynl, @Gettz8488 and many others.
Your initial trials will come in handy when I start tweaking my CH7, ram and 2700x.

Just waiting on a few more components to arrive before I can power this up and run some tests.
Waiting on an AM4 bracket for my EK Supremacy EVO block and a 970 Pro NVMe.


----------



## gupsterg

@JayC72

Enjoy your new HW :thumb: .

@crakej

Sweeettt!  .

Yeah X CPU PState VID for stock is 1.35V.

@wisepds

Q-Code 40 denotes board "resumed" from Windows Fast Startup. It's like "Hybrid Sleep".

Q-Code 30 denotes broad "resumed" from "Sleep".

Q-Code 24 pretty much denotes OS has loaded with fresh kernel. You see if you use Windows Fast Startup and then restart rig, as this forces a fresh kernel to be used (ie isn't a resumed state) you will have Q-Code 24. If you don't use Windows Fast Startup as always it will be a fresh kernel you get Q-Code 24.

@majestynl

In my past posts I highlighted I needed increased ProcODT to resolve intermittent post issues on 3533MHz. Give that a try  . You may find you also may improve the stability of the profile using an increased value. This may lead to not needing increases to SOC/VDIMM voltages.

@neur0cide

Yeah BGS options changes has no effect on C7H UEFI 0601 as far as I can tell.

@minal

I reckon once you find a negative offset that allows lengthy stability testing passes, you'll probably think wasn't worth the time testing  .


----------



## mtrai

zulex said:


> You lost your point. I did not insult Hurricane. My post was not address to him and yet he said words such as shut up. Why dont you point out which bothers you? You seem to be just blinded by this stuff "contribution". I did not attack him and I just dont want to stay calm when somebody attacks me by saying shut up.


This is where it started. You posted this


zulex said:


> When will we have bios for AGESA 1002c??? It is very ridiculous that ELMOR released bios of this AGESA version for previous CROSSHAIR VI prior to CROSSHAIR VII....
> Please show respect to the customers... and think why we have upgrade to CROSSHAIR VII by spending extra penny on this MB.


As I asked do you feel entitled much? I even explained to you how the beta bios process works. I guess you just do not understand. @elmor is under no obligation to provide any beta bios to us at all. IT is a favor to us. It does not help to attack him at all. While you might feel a certain way, attacking him or any other member is here is a violation of the rules. No I did not lose my point. Keep in mind you do not have any rights to express yourself however you wish here, you have agreed to the TOS.

You started by attacking @elmor and then others...all these people are highly respected here. YOU ARE NOT.

@all Can we all just please ignore this troll going forward and get back on topic. We all have been through people like this before..not the first nor will it be the last.


----------



## Gettz8488

JayC72 said:


> Hey ROG owners!
> 
> I have just joined the CH7 bandwagon as well.
> 
> It has been many years since I was on an AMD platform.
> 
> Have taken several days to read this whole thread from page 1.
> 
> 
> 
> Just wanted to say Thanks to @gupsterg, @majestynl, @Gettz8488 and many others.
> 
> Your initial trials will come in handy when I start tweaking my CH7, ram and 2700x.
> 
> 
> 
> Just waiting on a few more components to arrive before I can power this up and run some tests.
> 
> Waiting on an AM4 bracket for my EK Supremacy EVO block and a 970 Pro NVMe.




Glad to have you onboard 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## ryan92084

Reminder to stay on topic, keep it clean, and to report posts you find disrespectful rather than respond in kind. Thank you.


----------



## minal

gupsterg said:


> @*minal*
> 
> I reckon once you find a negative offset that allows lengthy stability testing passes, you'll probably think wasn't worth the time testing.


You mean a stable negative offset is likely to be very small? You're right I'm getting tired and it's taking so long.

At Auto Vcore, temps are 50-60C at idle (~26C ambient) with a browser and some monitoring programs open. I find that really hot and it causes fans to spin up quickly without doing much. 

RAM at 3200 also seems to get the cpu hotter than 2133, but I'm getting tired of running 2133 :/

y-cruncher failed in 1.5hrs with a small -0.025V Vcore offset and RAM at 3200 (1.35V VDIMM&VBOOT) with only 14-14-14-14-34 timings entered (all else on Auto). The fails seem to happen before or after N64 test where the temperature really spikes (as high as 96C!) when the coming off the load of N32 or N64. Not using LLC or anything...


----------



## zulex

mtrai said:


> This is where it started. You posted this
> 
> As I asked do you feel entitled much? I even explained to you how the beta bios process works. I guess you just do not understand. @elmor is under no obligation to provide any beta bios to us at all. IT is a favor to us. It does not help to attack him at all. While you might feel a certain way, attacking him or any other member is here is a violation of the rules. No I did not lose my point. Keep in mind you do not have any rights to express yourself however you wish here, you have agreed to the TOS.
> 
> You started by attacking @elmor and then others...all these people are highly respected here. YOU ARE NOT.
> 
> @all Can we all just please ignore this troll going forward and get back on topic. We all have been through people like this before..not the first nor will it be the last.


Elmor has no obligation. Yes right. However, my opinion is that bios releases should be given more priority to the newer MBs because we spend more bucks to the manufacturers. And how this my expression could be violating someone? I did not attack Elmor but criticizing on this situation. Stop saying foolish expressions like "respected". Those people are active users. Yes. But I dont respect anybody who says "shut up". This is a free country with freedom of expression. I did not utter any malicious words and have right to criticize... even to those people who you worship as "highly respected people" GEEZ!


----------



## mito1172

zulex said:


> When will we have bios for AGESA 1002c??? It is very ridiculous that ELMOR released bios of this AGESA version for previous CROSSHAIR VI prior to CROSSHAIR VII....
> Please show respect to the customers... and think why we have upgrade to CROSSHAIR VII by spending extra penny on this MB.


we waited for 1 year. You should wait when the time comes bios is given. :thumb: your writing is absurd


----------



## VPII

@zulex , I'm not a very active member here, I only pop in every now and then as I gain a lot from what the people share around here. I did not follow your entire contribution around here so I cannot comment. What I find interesting is when I read your last few comments it seems as though you are trying to prove something which does not require any proving and in doing so it may appear to some that you are trying to stir something. I've grown up learning that when you can't say anything good about someone it is best to say nothing at all. I do not think there is anything wrong with your question regarding a new bios for the Crosshair VII Hero, but the added part in comparing what was released for an older motherboard does seem as though you may not understand the process involved in getting a perfectly working bios released.


----------



## crakej

Personally I prefer having a bios when I know that it's not going to trash my data or melt my CPU!


----------



## zulex

VPII said:


> @zulex , I'm not a very active member here, I only pop in every now and then as I gain a lot from what the people share around here. I did not follow your entire contribution around here so I cannot comment. What I find interesting is when I read your last few comments it seems as though you are trying to prove something which does not require any proving and in doing so it may appear to some that you are trying to stir something. I've grown up learning that when you can't say anything good about someone it is best to say nothing at all. I do not think there is anything wrong with your question regarding a new bios for the Crosshair VII Hero, but the added part in comparing what was released for an older motherboard does seem as though you may not understand the process involved in getting a perfectly working bios released.


Thank you. I appreciate your comment. I am not trying to prove anything. Yes I may have had complains on bios issues however we should not judge people by whichever he chooses whether to stand up or to do nothing.


----------



## VPII

I'd like to share a find.... maybe to those that did not know. I played around with stock configurations and in the bios I enabled Core Performance Boost under extreme settings. Then I found under Advance settings CBS the following:

NBIO COMMON OPTIONS - Precision Boost Overdrive Configuration

Under here I did the following:

Precision Boost Enable
Precision Boost Overdrive Scala - set to manual and select X4

This was the outcome at Stock

Oh and the only reason for the 1.5+ vcore reading is the X4 scalar set. Normal stock it does not touch 1.5vcore


----------



## minal

VPII said:


> I'd like to share a find.... maybe to those that did not know. I played around with stock configurations and in the bios I enabled Core Performance Boost under extreme settings. Then I found under Advance settings CBS the following:
> 
> NBIO COMMON OPTIONS - Precision Boost Overdrive Configuration
> 
> Under here I did the following:
> 
> Precision Boost Enable
> Precision Boost Overdrive Scala - set to manual and select X4
> 
> This was the outcome at Stock
> 
> Oh and the only reason for the 1.5+ vcore reading is the X4 scalar set. Normal stock it does not touch 1.5vcore


My understanding from previous posts by The Stilt and other articles is that:

- Core Performance Boost = XFR
- Performance Enhancer = Precision Boost
- Performance Enhance level 3 and 4 allow equal frequency (eg. 4.35GHz) on all cores potentially resulting in higher voltages on weaker cores, while PE2 and less might limit frequency on weaker cores.
- Difference between PE 3 and 4 is that PE3 has Scalar = X1 and PE4 has Scalar = X10.

Not clear what else PE3+ change. If that's the only change, you've essentially used PE3.4


----------



## majestynl

Mumak said:


> We're currently checking this issue with Franck (CPU-Z) and elmor. It looks like the problem is indeed when both are running together.
> I have one solution for this, which is currently in testing, Franck might also need to update CPU-Z.
> Also there's a new sensor interface cooked that when used (currently only HWiNFO supports it) should resolve this problem as well. For C6H such BIOS was already released (see the C6H thread), but not sure if the same happened for C7H too.


Yes found that issue early, told elmor etc but nobody really was familar with it! Anyways im glad you guys are working on it! 
Thanks again mumak!




crakej said:


> Although I managed to pass 12000% RamTest, it's looking a bit harder to stabilize the CPU with 3600 ram - I keep getting threads dropping fairly early in P95. CPU voltage is at 1.412v and don't really want to go much further so am seeing if I can use something else to stabilize it.
> 
> Update: I seem to be stable! I needed a little more SoC - 1.012v *and* VCore which is at 1.412v
> 
> I am going to work on it a bit more and see what I can tighten up, and re-test when I have a chance. I can't believe it's stable! Yay!


Nice mate! I did had the same issues with P95 448>4096 @ 3533TT + 4.2Ghz CPU! Upping the vcore didn't helped, also tried to lower clocks with same voltage with no luck! 
After i made some changes to power options it passed ~1 hr! Need to do more testings to know the fix for sure, but its tooooo ☀☀☀ HOT ☀☀☀ here in the NL! When i get home after a full day with a PC, its not that fine to do the same at home 
Im just starting some stress-test while im downstairs!!



JayC72 said:


> Hey ROG owners!
> I have just joined the CH7 bandwagon as well.
> It has been many years since I was on an AMD platform.
> Have taken several days to read this whole thread from page 1.
> 
> Just wanted to say Thanks to @gupsterg, @majestynl, @Gettz8488 and many others.
> Your initial trials will come in handy when I start tweaking my CH7, ram and 2700x.
> 
> Just waiting on a few more components to arrive before I can power this up and run some tests.
> Waiting on an AM4 bracket for my EK Supremacy EVO block and a 970 Pro NVMe.


Your welcome! and good luck with your entry on this platform. Feel free to ask if you have any questions.
There are lot of good members who are willing to help/assist you over here!



VPII said:


> I'd like to share a find.... maybe to those that did not know. I played around with stock configurations and in the bios I enabled Core Performance Boost under extreme settings. Then I found under Advance settings CBS the following:
> 
> NBIO COMMON OPTIONS - Precision Boost Overdrive Configuration
> 
> Under here I did the following:
> 
> Precision Boost Enable
> Precision Boost Overdrive Scala - set to manual and select X4
> 
> This was the outcome at Stock
> 
> Oh and the only reason for the 1.5+ vcore reading is the X4 scalar set. Normal stock it does not touch 1.5vcore


Yep played few times with those options. Im just waiting AMD/ASUS is expanding those settings over there!



gupsterg said:


> @majestynl
> 
> In my past posts I highlighted I needed increased ProcODT to resolve intermittent post issues on 3533MHz. Give that a try  . You may find you also may improve the stability of the profile using an increased value. This may lead to not needing increases to SOC/VDIMM voltages.


My bad missed your post! But then you missed mine, already fixed with same solution as you yesterday 
Thanks anyways..

I almost got the whole profile stable.. Only getting WHEA erros with RB.. need to fix those! Hope it doesnt came with the bootfix... 
Need more time on RB error free...but like i said above...its toooo hot here 

Cheers chap!


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Just ended RamTest - over 12000% @ 3600 - will update this post when P95 finishes!


On my home pc and noticed You are not testing full ram. I personally go for 14000-14300. As after windows loads everything I got 14330 free physical memory so makes sence i think 

So far I'm sticking to 3533cl15. Passes all it needs to. Shame my kit cant do 3466cl14 i consider that sweet spot for performance of memory and cpu still overclocks good.


----------



## VicsPC

lordzed83 said:


> On my home pc and noticed You are not testing full ram. I personally go for 14000-14300. As after windows loads everything I got 14330 free physical memory so makes sence i think
> 
> So far I'm sticking to 3533cl15. Passes all it needs to. Shame my kit cant do 3466cl14 i consider that sweet spot for performance of memory and cpu still overclocks good.


Oh memtest i do 950x16 so something like 15,200mb of ram gets tested. I don't care if it makes my PC lag since I usually don't use it while doing a ram test. I cannot wait to get my 3600cl15 though would love to get 3533cl14 if possible, and i don't see why not.


----------



## boatmurder

Alright guys, i jumped the gun an ordered a CH7, along with 2700x and GSkill F4-3200C14D-32GVR.
Dual Rank RAM. Gave it some thought, been gobbling up more and more of my current 16GB (DDR3) for increasingly productive workloads and desired the extra headroom 32GB would provide.
But still. Not Single Rank RAM.

Give it to me straight, how screwed am I in regards to making it actually run 3200MHz 14CL or better on this platform?
I've made it about halfway through the thread so far (how can i increase posts shown per page?) and reports have been sparse.


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> On my home pc and noticed You are not testing full ram. I personally go for 14000-14300. As after windows loads everything I got 14330 free physical memory so makes sence i think
> 
> So far I'm sticking to 3533cl15. Passes all it needs to. Shame my kit cant do 3466cl14 i consider that sweet spot for performance of memory and cpu still overclocks good.


This was the second test I had run, I stupidly closed it 1st time before the screen shot so just re-ran it - I will be re testing once I get things as tight as possible though.

I have found something interesting through all this testing though - not just on 3600, but on 3533 as well, I found that there was a point where I could tighten timings a bit more, but was not getting any extra performance.. For example, 3533 CL14,13,13,13,26 - was not any quicker in CB15, Aida etc than CL14,14,14,28... even with secondary timings tightened up as well, there just wasn't any discernable improvement in performance as I saw in slower - in fact I think I reached a point where tightening things any further was actually detrimental and caused a bit more temp and (v slightly less) less performance.

I used IBT avx not to test stability, but to give me a quick idea of performance, where I saw a drop of approx 5gflops when I tried tightening my timings too much. I have a feeling I *might* be able to run my ram even faster - might try experimenting with no CPU OC to see how far I can push it without worrying about CPU/SoC voltages, thought not sure how far i'll get with the max rating of 1.5v for my ram though. I wonder if I can get better performance by having my ram really fast and the cpu at default with XFR2.....

Really enjoying playing with this board.....and actually getting results! Help from people here has been invaluable


----------



## crakej

duplicate


----------



## DavePDX

boatmurder said:


> Alright guys, i jumped the gun an ordered a CH7, along with 2700x and GSkill F4-3200C14D-32GVR.
> Dual Rank RAM. Gave it some thought, been gobbling up more and more of my current 16GB (DDR3) for increasingly productive workloads and desired the extra headroom 32GB would provide.
> But still. Not Single Rank RAM.
> 
> Give it to me straight, how screwed am I in regards to making it actually run 3200MHz 14CL or better on this platform?
> I've made it about halfway through the thread so far (how can i increase posts shown per page?) and reports have been sparse.


I'm not anywhere near as skilled as the vast majority of the people posting here (consider me a rookie) but I was able to load the XMP settings on a similar setup with the G.Skill F4-3200C14D-32GTZ Dual rank RAM. It took trying to load the XMP settings 3 times but it then booted fine at that point. I then ran HCI Memtest Pro to just over 1000% coverage with zero errors. I've not had any time to do further testing or tweaking but I am very happy with having 32 GB of memory at 14CL on my CH7. So far I've had no stability issues at all in 5 days of use.


----------



## Mandarb

boatmurder said:


> Alright guys, i jumped the gun an ordered a CH7, along with 2700x and GSkill F4-3200C14D-32GVR.
> Dual Rank RAM. Gave it some thought, been gobbling up more and more of my current 16GB (DDR3) for increasingly productive workloads and desired the extra headroom 32GB would provide.
> But still. Not Single Rank RAM.
> 
> Give it to me straight, how screwed am I in regards to making it actually run 3200MHz 14CL or better on this platform?
> I've made it about halfway through the thread so far (how can i increase posts shown per page?) and reports have been sparse.


I'm running 2x 16GB G.Skill Trident Z 3200 CL14 (F4-3200C14D-32GTZ), which afaik is the identical memory to yours, with exception of optics.

These are my current timings, ran through 6h of Ram Test (I think about 10000% coverage?) stable: https://imgur.com/gallery/LitpA4Y

Edit: no cold boots, no issues, used DRAM Calculator and dialled in fast settings, tightened tRFC a tiny bit, called it a day. Will probably try and squeeze out some more, had a Crosshair VI Hero that went bad and I got more and more coldboots until even stock was hardly booting. So I'm currently just happy it runs nicely, wasted too many hours on the defective board.


----------



## CJMitsuki

So since I had the week off from work I decided since I have found my maximum stable CPU and Mem OC I would see how much further I could optimize the performance. I was kind of surprised at the results since I have fairly decent timings on 3533mhz but I found that having to run with Gear Down enabled gimped it. I dropped down to 3466mhz and just ran 2T so I could tighten the RFC further than I had done previously running at this frequency thinking, "WTH? Why not try it?" and it ended up netting me much better performance not only on my memory latency but once I was able to get it sub 60ns the CPU performance seemed to jump quite a bit. I did lose a small amount of bandwidth but I feel that is a fine trade for shaving 3-4ns off of latency and dropping sub 12sec on some IBT AVX passes with the extra Gflops. Below is the differences in benchmarks. The 3533mhz was running all core overclock and I switched to P State overclocking with 3466mhz so Im able to idle. Im actually impressed with the way Ryzen uses memory but it seems like Ryzen prefers latency drops over frequency gains, or at least at higher frequencies.


[email protected] (All Core OC)



Spoiler




View attachment 201392
View attachment 201394
View attachment 201396





[email protected] (P State OC) +.2125v offset




Spoiler

































Feels like Ive reached the limit of my setup at least until there is a major update for the bios but I am happy with where the performance is sitting at the moment.


----------



## gupsterg

minal said:


> You mean a stable negative offset is likely to be very small? You're right I'm getting tired and it's taking so long.
> 
> At Auto Vcore, temps are 50-60C at idle (~26C ambient) with a browser and some monitoring programs open. I find that really hot and it causes fans to spin up quickly without doing much.
> 
> RAM at 3200 also seems to get the cpu hotter than 2133, but I'm getting tired of running 2133 :/
> 
> y-cruncher failed in 1.5hrs with a small -0.025V Vcore offset and RAM at 3200 (1.35V VDIMM&VBOOT) with only 14-14-14-14-34 timings entered (all else on Auto). The fails seem to happen before or after N64 test where the temperature really spikes (as high as 96C!) when the coming off the load of N32 or N64. Not using LLC or anything...


Yes, you'll find you end up using such a small offset.

Ryzen has 20 on die temperature sensors. AFAIK we see the hottest reading and some rotating goes on, so we do see jumps and oddities. Even then idle/very light load temperature of 50-60C seems excessive to me. I'll check on mine soon. Peaks of ~96C in Y-Cruncher also seems excessive.

I did do a rerun of 4.1GHz 3466MHz yesterday, I had ~25C room ambient at start/most of the test, only really latter ~3hrs was less than ~25C room. ~1.5hrs in screenie, room temp was ~25C, link. ~9.5hrs in, room ~22.9C, link. I'm preferring the all cores OC rather than stock, I have seen peaks of ~77C on CPU, when stock and running Y-Cruncher. P95 8K 4096K 13GB is same stock or OC'd for peaks, average is similar as well. This is stock CPU but 3400MHz (as later testing is all pretty much ACB OC CPU), upto 7.5hrs was ~24C room(link), only the latter ~7hrs of ~14hr run was ~22C, (link).

This is Y-Cruncher, link. Left side is stock CPU and again 3400MHz, right is 4.1GHz 3466MHz. VDIMM is same for each, besides CPU voltage SOC differs, 0.925V vs 0.968V. Average temp is close, considering room temp variance, peak is much better on ACB OC.

Y-Cruncher failing can be SOC/RAM settings related as well as VCORE. I find it difficult to guide someone to do in this context, only suggestion I have is tinker with those besides VCORE offset. In a previous post I shared how setting VTT gained be ~3hrs Y-Cruncher stability where as prior same setup failed <15min in. 



VPII said:


> I'd like to share a find.... maybe to those that did not know. I played around with stock configurations and in the bios I enabled Core Performance Boost under extreme settings. Then I found under Advance settings CBS the following:
> 
> NBIO COMMON OPTIONS - Precision Boost Overdrive Configuration
> 
> Under here I did the following:
> 
> Precision Boost Enable
> Precision Boost Overdrive Scala - set to manual and select X4
> 
> This was the outcome at Stock
> 
> Oh and the only reason for the 1.5+ vcore reading is the X4 scalar set. Normal stock it does not touch 1.5vcore


Thanks  .



majestynl said:


> Yes found that issue early, told elmor etc but nobody really was familar with it! Anyways im glad you guys are working on it!
> Thanks again mumak!


Strange I used 2 instances of CPU-Z momentarily 4 times yesterday on same post of system, perhaps a W10 vs W7 difference. None the less glad Mumak and all on the case  . The P95 run I linked to minal I did CPU-Z 2 instances whilst HWINFO open at ~1.5hrs, ~3.25hrs, ~5hrs and ~9.25hrs.




majestynl said:


> My bad missed your post! But then you missed mine, already fixed with same solution as you yesterday
> Thanks anyways..
> 
> I almost got the whole profile stable.. Only getting WHEA erros with RB.. need to fix those! Hope it doesnt came with the bootfix...
> Need more time on RB error free...but like i said above...its toooo hot here
> 
> Cheers chap!


:doh: nope my bad! LOL  .

Glad your getting there chap :cheers: , curious to know the WHEA error in RB?

Last time I had those on a OC on gen 1 I had to up VCORE to stabilise OC or dial back OC.

*** edit ***

ROG C7H thread OP updated with some info collated on Performance Enhancer/Precision Boost Override Configuration.


----------



## Mumak

FYI, I have just released v5.85-3455 Beta:
- Fixed a possible collision with CPU-Z or CorsairLink on ASUS Ryzen systems.
- Fixed a possible crash when monitoring multiple machines remotely.
- Enhanced reporting of some sensors via ASUS WMI interface.


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> On my home pc and noticed You are not testing full ram. I personally go for 14000-14300. As after windows loads everything I got 14330 free physical memory so makes sence i think
> 
> So far I'm sticking to 3533cl15. Passes all it needs to. Shame my kit cant do 3466cl14 i consider that sweet spot for performance of memory and cpu still overclocks good.


I would stick on max. 90% of available RAM! Its makes it more risky for failing if you use all available ram.
eg: Check out also the recommendation from RAMtest if you open the sw, it shows ~90% as default setting. 
From my experience with HCI i got sooner errors if i used too much mem!



crakej said:


> This was the second test I had run, I stupidly closed it 1st time before the screen shot so just re-ran it - I will be re testing once I get things as tight as possible though.
> 
> I have found something interesting through all this testing though - not just on 3600, but on 3533 as well, I found that there was a point where I could tighten timings a bit more, but was not getting any extra performance.. For example, 3533 CL14,13,13,13,26 - was not any quicker in CB15, Aida etc than CL14,14,14,28... even with secondary timings tightened up as well, there just wasn't any discernable improvement in performance as I saw in slower - in fact I think I reached a point where tightening things any further was actually detrimental and caused a bit more temp and (v slightly less) less performance.


Agree! Found same things while i was testing some different straps in combination with looser timings etc! Dont know if CB15/AIDA cant handle it right or its really no improvement with some certain timings.
What i do know is, if a certain timing is unstable it can be disadvantageous for performance because of calculations / inessential waiting's in memory !!!!




gupsterg said:


> Strange I used 2 instances of CPU-Z momentarily 4 times yesterday on same post of system, perhaps a W10 vs W7 difference. None the less glad Mumak and all on the case  . The P95 run I linked to minal I did CPU-Z 2 instances whilst HWINFO open at ~1.5hrs, ~3.25hrs, ~5hrs and ~9.25hrs.


Dunno mate about difference between win7/win10. But what i do know is, its happened all the time while i was on IDLE for a certain time! So system was not loaded!



gupsterg said:


> :doh: nope my bad! LOL  .
> 
> Glad your getting there chap :cheers: , curious to know the WHEA error in RB?
> 
> Last time I had those on a OC on gen 1 I had to up VCORE to stabilise OC or dial back OC.


NP  !! Already tried to up vcore and also dialing back to 4175 with no luck!

Thanks... sure will update you. Yesterday Night i finally got 1 successful run without any issue. But was to tired to check more... Used CAD Bus 30ohm!
Need to test further today before i can say it DID THE TRICK! 

So 3466Mhz was fine with auto ProcODT and CAD bus! Probably 3533 needs more tweaks! 



Mumak said:


> FYI, I have just released v5.85-3455 Beta:
> - Fixed a possible collision with CPU-Z or CorsairLink on ASUS Ryzen systems.
> - Fixed a possible crash when monitoring multiple machines remotely.
> - Enhanced reporting of some sensors via ASUS WMI interface.


Thanks! will test today...


----------



## hurricane28

Mumak said:


> FYI, I have just released v5.85-3455 Beta:
> - Fixed a possible collision with CPU-Z or CorsairLink on ASUS Ryzen systems.
> - Fixed a possible crash when monitoring multiple machines remotely.
> - Enhanced reporting of some sensors via ASUS WMI interface.


Nice man! 

You're the best. 

I wish Asus could hire you in order to fix their sensor problem man.


----------



## Mumak

hurricane28 said:


> Nice man!
> 
> You're the best.
> 
> I wish Asus could hire you in order to fix their sensor problem man.


I don't want to move to Taiwan  But I'm sure they will resolve it soon.


----------



## hurricane28

Mumak said:


> I don't want to move to Taiwan  But I'm sure they will resolve it soon.


I hear ya man, me neither lol. 

I think so too, they fixed a lot of things already.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> This was the second test I had run, I stupidly closed it 1st time before the screen shot so just re-ran it - I will be re testing once I get things as tight as possible though.
> 
> I have found something interesting through all this testing though - not just on 3600, but on 3533 as well, I found that there was a point where I could tighten timings a bit more, but was not getting any extra performance.. For example, 3533 CL14,13,13,13,26 - was not any quicker in CB15, Aida etc than CL14,14,14,28... even with secondary timings tightened up as well, there just wasn't any discernable improvement in performance as I saw in slower - in fact I think I reached a point where tightening things any further was actually detrimental and caused a bit more temp and (v slightly less) less performance.
> 
> I used IBT avx not to test stability, but to give me a quick idea of performance, where I saw a drop of approx 5gflops when I tried tightening my timings too much. I have a feeling I *might* be able to run my ram even faster - might try experimenting with no CPU OC to see how far I can push it without worrying about CPU/SoC voltages, thought not sure how far i'll get with the max rating of 1.5v for my ram though. I wonder if I can get better performance by having my ram really fast and the cpu at default with XFR2.....
> 
> Really enjoying playing with this board.....and actually getting results! Help from people here has been invaluable


Same here man. Think IMC just starts having diminishing returns. Remember when I tested super tight cl14 and cl15 was just faster in every situation thats why I'm not fighting for cl14


----------



## minal

gupsterg said:


> Yes, you'll find you end up using such a small offset.
> 
> Ryzen has 20 on die temperature sensors. AFAIK we see the hottest reading and some rotating goes on, so we do see jumps and oddities. Even then idle/very light load temperature of 50-60C seems excessive to me. I'll check on mine soon. Peaks of ~96C in Y-Cruncher also seems excessive.
> 
> I did do a rerun of 4.1GHz 3466MHz yesterday, I had ~25C room ambient at start/most of the test, only really latter ~3hrs was less than ~25C room. ~1.5hrs in screenie, room temp was ~25C, link. ~9.5hrs in, room ~22.9C, link. I'm preferring the all cores OC rather than stock, I have seen peaks of ~77C on CPU, when stock and running Y-Cruncher. P95 8K 4096K 13GB is same stock or OC'd for peaks, average is similar as well. This is stock CPU but 3400MHz (as later testing is all pretty much ACB OC CPU), upto 7.5hrs was ~24C room(link), only the latter ~7hrs of ~14hr run was ~22C, (link).
> 
> This is Y-Cruncher, link. Left side is stock CPU and again 3400MHz, right is 4.1GHz 3466MHz. VDIMM is same for each, besides CPU voltage SOC differs, 0.925V vs 0.968V. Average temp is close, considering room temp variance, peak is much better on ACB OC.
> 
> Y-Cruncher failing can be SOC/RAM settings related as well as VCORE. I find it difficult to guide someone to do in this context, only suggestion I have is tinker with those besides VCORE offset. In a previous post I shared how setting VTT gained be ~3hrs Y-Cruncher stability where as prior same setup failed <15min in.


Thanks for the extensive testing. Memory doesn't seem to make any difference to your temps. I do wonder if your ambient temps and cooling (watercooled right?) have something to do with it. And maybe just the fact that you know what you're doing with memory settings.

I got a replacement motherboard due to the UEFI issues. Updated to 0601 before installing CPU or RAM, and kept all default settings. Didn't even change fan curves.

Passed 6.5hrs y-cruncher with everything on Auto (CPU, memory 2133, etc). Intel MLC measures ~90ms latency and 29GB/s read.

Passed 8hs y-cruncher with only memory set to 3200 and some timing settings found on the ROG forums by someone with the same dual rank memory. Tdie spikes to 85C with ambient ~29-30C. Intel MLC: 71ns latency, 47GB/s read.

Is this normal? -> With memory at 3200 DOCP or manual settings/timings, if PC is shut down and PSU switch is turned off, then when starting up it goes through some Q-codes for a few seconds then reboots on its own, tries again and boots fine. It doesn't get stuck and is relatively quick, but still makes me nervous to see this. Doesn't happen with reboots. I noticed the same on the previous motherboard as well. It would also happen with default memory settings but CPU on PE3 and some undervolt. But it doesn't happen with with everything on stock, so...


----------



## gupsterg

minal said:


> Thanks for the extensive testing. Memory doesn't seem to make any difference to your temps. I do wonder if your ambient temps and cooling (watercooled right?) have something to do with it. And maybe just the fact that you know what you're doing with memory settings.
> 
> I got a replacement motherboard due to the UEFI issues. Updated to 0601 before installing CPU or RAM, and kept all default settings. Didn't even change fan curves.
> 
> Passed 6.5hrs y-cruncher with everything on Auto (CPU, memory 2133, etc). Intel MLC measures ~90ms latency and 29GB/s read.
> 
> Passed 8hs y-cruncher with only memory set to 3200 and some timing settings found on the ROG forums by someone with the same dual rank memory. Tdie spikes to 85C with ambient ~29-30C. Intel MLC: 71ns latency, 47GB/s read.
> 
> Is this normal? -> With memory at 3200 DOCP or manual settings/timings, if PC is shut down and PSU switch is turned off, then when starting up it goes through some Q-codes for a few seconds then reboots on its own, tries again and boots fine. It doesn't get stuck and is relatively quick, but still makes me nervous to see this. Doesn't happen with reboots. I noticed the same on the previous motherboard as well. It would also happen with default memory settings but CPU on PE3 and some undervolt. But it doesn't happen with with everything on stock, so...


NP  , I'll check some of the lower RAM clocks with stock CPU, but doubt there was a difference in CPU temp down to lowered SOC/RAM MHz.

The 2700X+C7H is air cooled rig. I use a ThermalRight Archon IB-E X2 with lapped base plus 2x TY143 fans. TIM is AS5, applied by spreading over IHS with plastic card strip. The case is a SilverStone TJ06, modded in twin 140mm intake fan mounts, twin 92mm exhaust fan mounts on storage rack, twin 2.5" mounts on storage rack, side panel has partial mesh mod, 5.25" bays as well mesh mod.



Spoiler















Yes I get double post on board when PSU has power removed prior to post, IIRC between 3200MHz-3400MHz RAM MHz.

I get triple boot on equal to and greater than 3466MHz. I haven't checked at lower RAM MHz than 3200MHz.

Besides RAM MHz some other settings can cause this. It is normal, sometimes these posts are needed for correct initialisation of board due to settings used. The C6H did this also, so does the ZE, my M7R (Intel board) also. So I wouldn't worry about it  .


----------



## minal

@gupsterg I see you tune the hardware as carefully as your RAM timings.  Does the inverted orientation help with temps? 



I have some decade-old AS5, but I just used the NT-H1 that came with the Noctua. I find the NT-H1's viscosity is higher and less consistent than the AS5. My guess is 30C ambient doesn't make things easy. At idle after boot it manages to stay 10C or less above ambient, but my "effective idle" with a browser and monitoring programs running keep it fluctuating 10-25C above ambient. 



Huge relief that the double (or triple) boot is normal. Huge! UEFI still froze on me a few times as I was editing fan curves... but haven't seen the lagginess issue yet. 



For stability, I'm tempted to keep default settings other than RAM at 3200MT/s, SVM, fan curves, though it is kinda disappointing to see max 4.2/3.95GHz under sustained single/all core loads. With a focus on stability, any suggestions for settings to reduce temperatures at similar performance, or better performance at similar temperatures?


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> So since I had the week off from work I decided since I have found my maximum stable CPU and Mem OC I would see how much further I could optimize the performance. I was kind of surprised at the results since I have fairly decent timings on 3533mhz but I found that having to run with Gear Down enabled gimped it. I dropped down to 3466mhz and just ran 2T so I could tighten the RFC further than I had done previously running at this frequency thinking, "WTH? Why not try it?" and it ended up netting me much better performance not only on my memory latency but once I was able to get it sub 60ns the CPU performance seemed to jump quite a bit. I did lose a small amount of bandwidth but I feel that is a fine trade for shaving 3-4ns off of latency and dropping sub 12sec on some IBT AVX passes with the extra Gflops. Below is the differences in benchmarks. The 3533mhz was running all core overclock and I switched to P State overclocking with 3466mhz so Im able to idle. Im actually impressed with the way Ryzen uses memory but it seems like Ryzen prefers latency drops over frequency gains, or at least at higher frequencies.
> 
> 
> [email protected] (All Core OC)
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 201392
> View attachment 201394
> View attachment 201396
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [email protected] (P State OC) +.2125v offset
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 201398
> View attachment 201402
> View attachment 201404
> View attachment 201406
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Feels like Ive reached the limit of my setup at least until there is a major update for the bios but I am happy with where the performance is sitting at the moment.


Nice. Im Stuck due to Ram cant get more out of kit I'w got


----------



## majestynl

*Curious about if anyone saw some clock degradation with Performance Enhancer mode ?*

Running PE3 with stock BCLK(99,8):
I bet i saw when first installed the CPU the multi-core clocks at 4124mhz and Single Boost clocks to 4340Mhz!
After a while i landed on 4096mhz - 4340mhz!
But since yesterday it doesn't do more then 4066mhz - 4290mhz/4340mhz!

Tried several things including re-flashing bios! No effect! I hope its because of higher ambient temp. Dont think so!
Just ordered a new 2700x!


----------



## kazablanka

lordzed83 said:


> Same here man. Think IMC just starts having diminishing returns. Remember when I tested super tight cl14 and cl15 was just faster in every situation thats why I'm not fighting for cl14


lower primary timings gives better results ,very low subtimings may lead to lose performance.


----------



## kazablanka

crakej said:


> This was the second test I had run, I stupidly closed it 1st time before the screen shot so just re-ran it - I will be re testing once I get things as tight as possible though.
> 
> I have found something interesting through all this testing though - not just on 3600, but on 3533 as well, I found that there was a point where I could tighten timings a bit more, but was not getting any extra performance.. For example, 3533 CL14,13,13,13,26 - was not any quicker in CB15, Aida etc than CL14,14,14,28... even with secondary timings tightened up as well, there just wasn't any discernable improvement in performance as I saw in slower - in fact I think I reached a point where tightening things any further was actually detrimental and caused a bit more temp and (v slightly less) less performance.
> 
> I used IBT avx not to test stability, but to give me a quick idea of performance, where I saw a drop of approx 5gflops when I tried tightening my timings too much. I have a feeling I *might* be able to run my ram even faster - might try experimenting with no CPU OC to see how far I can push it without worrying about CPU/SoC voltages, thought not sure how far i'll get with the max rating of 1.5v for my ram though. I wonder if I can get better performance by having my ram really fast and the cpu at default with XFR2.....
> 
> Really enjoying playing with this board.....and actually getting results! Help from people here has been invaluable


aida is just a bandwidth benchmark ,cinebench performance have not alot gain from timings ,run gaming benchmarks or 3d mark physics benchmarks and you will find the performance increasement you can find from cinebench and aida


----------



## crakej

kazablanka said:


> lower primary timings gives better results ,very low subtimings may lead to lose performance.


This is true for the most part, but not always. I found at 3600MTs tightening my primary timings did not increase performance at all, anywhere - as it had at lower speeds.


----------



## crakej

kazablanka said:


> aida is just a bandwidth benchmark ,cinebench performance have not alot gain from timings ,run gaming benchmarks or 3d mark physics benchmarks and you will find the performance increasement you can find from cinebench and aida


I know  But they are a useful guide. I will redo some experiments tomorrow and show you results, including 3dMark. I will try finally to find what works best with my 3600 ram OC!


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> This is true for the most part, but not always. I found at 3600MTs tightening my primary timings did not increase performance at all, anywhere - as it had at lower speeds.


I hope everyone is keeping in mind...the higher we go with raw ram speed the less benefits you are gonna get lowering subtimings at a certain point ...we are now reaching max speeds with our current ram. Somewhere in my head is the right analogy, I just can't get my finger on it...too much vodka this afternoon.


----------



## kazablanka

crakej said:


> I know  But they are a useful guide. I will redo some experiments tomorrow and show you results, including 3dMark. I will try finally to find what works best with my 3600 ram OC!


Yes i know, cinebench likes the memory bandwidth but gaming / gaming benchmarks likes lower memory latency ,aida likes both for example ,i have much better results at 3600cl14 than 3600cl15 and i have also better results with trfc 288 than 346 but with trfc 288 i need more vcore and vsoc to pass ibt for some reason


----------



## majestynl

mtrai said:


> I hope everyone is keeping in mind...the higher we go with raw ram speed the less benefits you are gonna get lowering subtimings at a certain point ...we are now reaching max speeds with our current ram. Somewhere in my head is the right analogy, I just can't get my finger on it...too much vodka this afternoon.


I see the vodka is typing.  
Lowering subtiming will always increase performance if it's pure stable.. but the point is getting them stable at higher speeds is more difficult or even in some cases impossible with current agesa... 

Maybe you wanted to say, TT with a lower strap can be more effective instead of higher strap with looser timings?

I see people talking about high memory speed with TT but most of them aren't stable. So there is a possibility you wont fully see the performance increasment...



kazablanka said:


> Yes i know, cinebench likes the memory bandwidth but gaming / gaming benchmarks likes lower memory latency ,aida likes both for example ,i have much better results at 3600cl14 than 3600cl15 and i have also better results with trfc 288 than 346 but with trfc 288 i need more vcore and vsoc to pass ibt for some reason


As above, if your 3600 CL14 is stable, it will be faster then the CL15 for sure.. it's logical 

And btw I never saw somebody running 3600 CL14 with TT running it stable... Are u ?


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> I see the vodka is typing.
> Lowering subtiming will always increase performance if it's pure stable.. but the point is getting them stable at higher speeds is more difficult or even in some cases impossible with current agesa...
> 
> Maybe you wanted to say, TT with a lower strap can be more effective instead of higher strap with looser timings?
> 
> I see people talking about high memory speed with TT but most of them aren't stable. So there is a possibility you wont fully see the performance increasment...
> 
> As above, if your 3600 CL14 is stable, it will be faster then the CL15 for sure.. it's logical
> 
> And btw I never saw somebody running 3600 CL14 with TT running it stable... Are u ?


I will be posting all my results tomorrow for 3600MTs. I'll be testing CL14,13,13,13,26 and CL14,14,14,14,28 - Both passed P95 for an hours and >5000% on RamTest. I didn't do proper screenies the other day because I just didn't expect it to work! I will also share any benchmarking that I do including CB15, Aida and IBT AVX.

Remember, I'm on 1700x, so while they're the best results i've ever had, I will never be able to get the <60ns access times some of you are getting, but I'm not that far off! Fastest time I've logged so far was 62ns. Transfer rate was >560GB (3533 gave me 550GB). Who knows what future updates may bring to the party - what speeds/latencies do you think we'll be getting in 6 - 12 months?....


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> I will be posting all my results tomorrow for 3600MTs. I'll be testing CL14,13,13,13,26 and CL14,14,14,14,28 - Both passed P95 for an hours and >5000% on RamTest. I didn't do proper screenies the other day because I just didn't expect it to work! I will also share any benchmarking that I do including CB15, Aida and IBT AVX.
> 
> Remember, I'm on 1700x, so while they're the best results i've ever had, I will never be able to get the <60ns access times some of you are getting, but I'm not that far off! Fastest time I've logged so far was 62ns. Transfer rate was >560GB (3533 gave me 550GB). Who knows what future updates may bring to the party - what speeds/latencies do you think we'll be getting in 6 - 12 months?....


Sure NP! I wasn't particularly talking about you or any person. But in general. And yes it was not mentioned for 1000 series.

Anyways..that doesn't mean I'm not interested in your results.  
Always looking forward for great results.

I got the 3533TT profile RB etc error free, but while testing that saw some interesting clock degardation in PE mode I wrote earlier. Need to find out what's happening their. 
In meanwhile waiting for the 2nd 2700x for comparison.


----------



## usoldier

majestynl said:


> *Curious about if anyone saw some clock degradation with Performance Enhancer mode ?*
> 
> Running PE3 with stock BCLK(99,8):
> I bet i saw when first installed the CPU the multi-core clocks at 4124mhz and Single Boost clocks to 4340Mhz!
> After a while i landed on 4096mhz - 4340mhz!
> But since yesterday it doesn't do more then 4066mhz - 4290mhz/4340mhz!
> 
> Tried several things including re-flashing bios! No effect! I hope its because of higher ambient temp. Dont think so!
> Just ordered a new 2700x!


Hey majestynl i have had that problem also tho iam using a CH6 i think the cause for it is messing arround / tweaking alot i think it scranbles something with the PE part or the bios. To have it working correctly again in my case i load setup defaults save and turn of the machine , then i clear cmos and leave every thing at default exept the PE just change it to the desired one and reboot. 

Let it boot to windows and check boost and all core load it should go back to normal gain. Then you can go head and reaply all the normal settings by hand , imo loading profiles might also cause the issue.

I can give you my example that PE2 was all core boosting to 4174 and 1 core boost to 4274 ( was also giving strange high temps) , going to bios and changing to PE3 was doing all core boost 4070 and 1 core to 4350. 

My Default PE3 is 4125 all cores and Boosts at 4350 

Give it a try hope it helps


----------



## kazablanka

majestynl said:


> I see the vodka is typing.
> Lowering subtiming will always increase performance if it's pure stable.. but the point is getting them stable at higher speeds is more difficult or even in some cases impossible with current agesa...
> 
> Maybe you wanted to say, TT with a lower strap can be more effective instead of higher strap with looser timings?
> 
> I see people talking about high memory speed with TT but most of them aren't stable. So there is a possibility you wont fully see the performance increasment...
> 
> 
> 
> As above, if your 3600 CL14 is stable, it will be faster then the CL15 for sure.. it's logical
> 
> And btw I never saw somebody running 3600 CL14 with TT running it stable... Are u ?


The lowest timings i can run stable are these. (ryzen 1700)

1.44v DRAM , 1.106 vsoc

The max ram frequency i have achieve is 3800mhz but definitely not stable with 1.2v soc and 1.48v dram


----------



## kazablanka

double post


----------



## majestynl

usoldier said:


> Hey majestynl i have had that problem also tho iam using a CH6 i think the cause for it is messing arround / tweaking alot i think it scranbles something with the PE part or the bios. To have it working correctly again in my case i load setup defaults save and turn of the machine , then i clear cmos and leave every thing at default exept the PE just change it to the desired one and reboot.
> 
> Let it boot to windows and check boost and all core load it should go back to normal gain. Then you can go head and reaply all the normal settings by hand , imo loading profiles might also cause the issue.
> 
> I can give you my example that PE2 was all core boosting to 4174 and 1 core boost to 4274 ( was also giving strange high temps) , going to bios and changing to PE3 was doing all core boost 4070 and 1 core to 4350.
> 
> My Default PE3 is 4125 all cores and Boosts at 4350
> 
> Give it a try hope it helps


That's what I tried in first place but no luck.. I hope it's not a cpu degradation  I also had suddenly issues with my pstates profile. Needed more vcore.. hmm will investigate it..

Thanks anyway...



kazablanka said:


> The lowest timings i can run stable are these. (ryzen 1700)
> 
> 1.44v DRAM , 1.106 vsoc
> 
> The max ram frequency i have achieve is 3800mhz but definitely not stable with 1.2v soc and 1.48v dram


Nice results but I was talking about 2000 series. Maybe I wasn't clear enough. My bad. I need to realize this platform is also used by 1000 series


----------



## kazablanka

majestynl said:


> That's what I tried in first place but no luck.. I hope it's not a cpu degradation  I also had suddenly issues with my pstates profile. Needed more vcore.. hmm will investigate it..
> 
> Thanks anyway...
> 
> 
> 
> Nice results but I was talking about 2000 series. Maybe I wasn't clear enough. My bad. I need to realize this platform is also used by 1000 series


I just answer to your quote ,i didn't realize you were only interested in ryzen 2xxx


----------



## majestynl

kazablanka said:


> I just answer to your quote ,i didn't realize you were only interested in ryzen 2xxx


Not at all, your results are great. But even if they say 2000 series has better ram support, I never saw anybody running 3600 stable with CL14+TT... 


But my second 2700 has just arrived, will play with it later tonight 🙂


----------



## kazablanka

majestynl said:


> Not at all, your results are great. But even if they say 2000 series has better ram support, I never saw anybody running 3600 stable with CL14+TT...
> 
> 
> But my second 2700 has just arrived, will play with it later tonight 🙂


Maybe because ryzen 2 runs over 4ghz , 4200mhz+ on cpu and 3600mhz on ram i think is too hard for imc. Good luck with your new cpu!


----------



## crakej

kazablanka said:


> Maybe because ryzen 2 runs over 4ghz , 4200mhz+ on cpu and 3600mhz on ram i think is too hard for imc. Good luck with your new cpu!


I think you hit the nail on the head. 2xxx chips have better latency but it is the same IMC.

I've not had a chance to run any tests today, hopefully will have some time tomorrow...

I must admit, sometimes this thread is feeling like the Ryzen 2xxx club, but I won't be updating my CPU for at least a year so will continue to post my experiences here


----------



## lordzed83

usoldier said:


> Hey majestynl i have had that problem also tho iam using a CH6 i think the cause for it is messing arround / tweaking alot i think it scranbles something with the PE part or the bios. To have it working correctly again in my case i load setup defaults save and turn of the machine , then i clear cmos and leave every thing at default exept the PE just change it to the desired one and reboot.
> 
> Let it boot to windows and check boost and all core load it should go back to normal gain. Then you can go head and reaply all the normal settings by hand , imo loading profiles might also cause the issue.
> 
> I can give you my example that PE2 was all core boosting to 4174 and 1 core boost to 4274 ( was also giving strange high temps) , going to bios and changing to PE3 was doing all core boost 4070 and 1 core to 4350.
> 
> My Default PE3 is 4125 all cores and Boosts at 4350
> 
> Give it a try hope it helps


Ye im sure its microcode something is not right for sure noticed it while ago when messing artound with memory timinghs. Somethimes it boots up ect but when i run aida its around 70ns instead of 60ns more or less for no reason reboot and its back to normal.

Its like with PE3 sometimes booted with 41.5 multiplier like it should reboot it boots up witj 41.25 and to get back to 41.5 had to change bclk up and down save reboot.
@elmor read above but i think its AMD not Asus again :/


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> I think you hit the nail on the head. 2xxx chips have better latency but it is the same IMC.
> 
> I've not had a chance to run any tests today, hopefully will have some time tomorrow...
> 
> I must admit, sometimes this thread is feeling like the Ryzen 2xxx club, but I won't be updating my CPU for at least a year so will continue to post my experiences here


Yup its a tradeoff gain some ns but IMC cant handle higher clock in exchange. MAybe if one would drop to 4150 but then againwhats the point of zen+ 

Hope new microcode makes it bit better. Deffo improved allot on first gen but not expecting magic as its just polished up version heh


----------



## usoldier

lordzed83 said:


> Ye im sure its microcode something is not right for sure noticed it while ago when messing artound with memory timinghs. Somethimes it boots up ect but when i run aida its around 70ns instead of 60ns more or less for no reason reboot and its back to normal.
> 
> Its like with PE3 sometimes booted with 41.5 multiplier like it should reboot it boots up witj 41.25 and to get back to 41.5 had to change bclk up and down save reboot.
> 
> @elmor read above but i think its AMD not Asus again :/


Just want to confirm this i just got back and Multi is now diferent rebooted and went up with bclk and its back to normal. Thanks for the tip with the bclk change lordzed83

@elmor Heads up iam using a CH6 aparently CH7 has same behavior, thanks.


----------



## majestynl

kazablanka said:


> Maybe because ryzen 2 runs over 4ghz , 4200mhz+ on cpu and 3600mhz on ram i think is too hard for imc. Good luck with your new cpu!


Yeah maybe for current agesa versions. Thanks will update results soon. The batchcode is 1803SUS.



crakej said:


> I think you hit the nail on the head. 2xxx chips have better latency but it is the same IMC.
> 
> I've not had a chance to run any tests today, hopefully will have some time tomorrow...
> 
> I must admit, sometimes this thread is feeling like the Ryzen 2xxx club, but I won't be updating my CPU for at least a year so will continue to post my experiences here


Hehe. Yeap keep posting chap... Cheers!



lordzed83 said:


> Ye im sure its microcode something is not right for sure noticed it while ago when messing artound with memory timinghs. Somethimes it boots up ect but when i run aida its around 70ns instead of 60ns more or less for no reason reboot and its back to normal.
> 
> Its like with PE3 sometimes booted with 41.5 multiplier like it should reboot it boots up witj 41.25 and to get back to 41.5 had to change bclk up and down save reboot.


Dunno but i got gradually twice a lowering of approx 30mhz. Will do some tests with current CPU before I swap it with new one..

Btw: never saw a difference in latency ns!


----------



## CJMitsuki

Maybe Im late to the party on this one but I never knew there were hidden options in the bios that are only accessible through the search function. Unless Im just blind, I have never seen the HPET options in the bios menus but I typed it in and 2 options popped up. If im not mistaken and they are actually hidden and only accessible that way then I wonder what else can be accessed through the search function. I do feel like Im going crazy and Ive overlooked those options a million times running through the menus though.


View attachment 180601230909.BMP


----------



## hurricane28

CJMitsuki said:


> Maybe Im late to the party on this one but I never knew there were hidden options in the bios that are only accessible through the search function. Unless Im just blind, I have never seen the HPET options in the bios menus but I typed it in and 2 options popped up. If im not mistaken and they are actually hidden and only accessible that way then I wonder what else can be accessed through the search function. I do feel like Im going crazy and Ive overlooked those options a million times running through the menus though.
> 
> 
> View attachment 201670


Good find man, i never knew there was a search function in BIOS lol. 

That being said, when i disable the HPET PC won't boot.. Stuck at 0D code.


----------



## Esenel

majestynl said:


> Yeah maybe for current agesa versions. Thanks will update results soon. The batchcode is 1803SUS.


It seems you got a very early CPU here.
What batchcode has your other 2700X?

Mine had 1806SUT and was crap :-(

Wish you luck!



CJMitsuki said:


> Maybe Im late to the party on this one but I never knew there were hidden options in the bios that are only accessible through the search function. Unless Im just blind, I have never seen the HPET options in the bios menus but I typed it in and 2 options popped up. If im not mistaken and they are actually hidden and only accessible that way then I wonder what else can be accessed through the search function. I do feel like Im going crazy and Ive overlooked those options a million times running through the menus though.


Haha very nice.
Didn't know there was a search function XD
Someone never stops learning ;-)


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> Maybe Im late to the party on this one but I never knew there were hidden options in the bios that are only accessible through the search function. Unless Im just blind, I have never seen the HPET options in the bios menus but I typed it in and 2 options popped up. If im not mistaken and they are actually hidden and only accessible that way then I wonder what else can be accessed through the search function. I do feel like Im going crazy and Ive overlooked those options a million times running through the menus though.
> 
> 
> View attachment 201670


Nice find never considered that It would go in to Hidden option on search. So can turn off HPET and Spectrum for SB 
@hurricane28 boots fine here


----------



## gupsterg

minal said:


> @gupsterg I see you tune the hardware as carefully as your RAM timings.  Does the inverted orientation help with temps?
> 
> I have some decade-old AS5, but I just used the NT-H1 that came with the Noctua. I find the NT-H1's viscosity is higher and less consistent than the AS5. My guess is 30C ambient doesn't make things easy. At idle after boot it manages to stay 10C or less above ambient, but my "effective idle" with a browser and monitoring programs running keep it fluctuating 10-25C above ambient.
> 
> Huge relief that the double (or triple) boot is normal. Huge! UEFI still froze on me a few times as I was editing fan curves... but haven't seen the lagginess issue yet.
> 
> For stability, I'm tempted to keep default settings other than RAM at 3200MT/s, SVM, fan curves, though it is kinda disappointing to see max 4.2/3.95GHz under sustained single/all core loads. With a focus on stability, any suggestions for settings to reduce temperatures at similar performance, or better performance at similar temperatures?


Possibly on GPU, as heatsink would be ideal way up IMO. CPU HS I doubt the inverted orientation makes a difference. More so I think the way interior allows airflow back to front without drive cages impeding airflow helps CPU/MB/RAM/GPU temps.

When I experienced ~30C room ambient temp, I had to tone down RAM MHz (besides having higher CPU temps). I was finding in lengthy testing of RAM I'd get a error or 2 at > 4hrs. This was on C6H last year when the UK experienced a heat wave for a while.

Dunno if it's combination of HW that causes UEFI to be laggy. I'll be honest on C6H/C7H not experienced this. On the ZE I can, it's intermittent and rare though. When I experience it on the ZE the monitoring data in UEFI will all be knocked out. It will return at some point if I stay in UEFI, but I will still have lag. Usually a repost resolves issue.

My only suggestion would be to try an OC setup. On the 4.1GHz setup I lose some single core, but do gain improved multicore. Peak temps are reduced by ~10%, average for like testing is only a degree or 2 difference. Peak CPU voltage and averages seem improved. For example Y-Cruncher average VCORE is ~30mV lower than stock, but ACB is 4.1GHz vs ~3.9GHz when stock, P95 for same example is ~20mV lower.



majestynl said:


> But my second 2700 has just arrived, will play with it later tonight


Look forward to results share  , thanks for batch info.

I can't say yet I have seen OC shift on need for VID, etc. When I do change to stock with PE set to "Default" again all seems as first noted. Real shame if your original CPU has degraded and somewhat worrying...



CJMitsuki said:


> Maybe Im late to the party on this one but I never knew there were hidden options in the bios that are only accessible through the search function. Unless Im just blind, I have never seen the HPET options in the bios menus but I typed it in and 2 options popped up. *If im not mistaken and they are actually hidden and only accessible that way then I wonder what else can be accessed through the search function.* I do feel like Im going crazy and Ive overlooked those options a million times running through the menus though.


Should be whatever you can see in settings txt when dumped from UEFI.


----------



## VicsPC

Esenel said:


> It seems you got a very early CPU here.
> What batchcode has your other 2700X?
> 
> Mine had 1806SUT and was crap :-(
> 
> Wish you luck!
> 
> 
> 
> Haha very nice.
> Didn't know there was a search function XD
> Someone never stops learning ;-)


Yea just chcked mine its batch 1803SUS as well.


----------



## mtrai

CJMitsuki said:


> Maybe Im late to the party on this one but I never knew there were hidden options in the bios that are only accessible through the search function. Unless Im just blind, I have never seen the HPET options in the bios menus but I typed it in and 2 options popped up. If im not mistaken and they are actually hidden and only accessible that way then I wonder what else can be accessed through the search function. I do feel like Im going crazy and Ive overlooked those options a million times running through the menus though.
> 
> 
> View attachment 201670


WOW!! ANyhow...I can't seem to get search to work. C6H here.

Here are some things you can look for:

I can't seem to get photos to post anymore.

https://imgur.com/a/1iXZ5EZ


----------



## hurricane28

lordzed83 said:


> Nice find never considered that It would go in to Hidden option on search. So can turn off HPET and Spectrum for SB
> 
> @hurricane28 boots fine here


You disabled both? When i disabled them i couldn't boot man, stuck at code 0D.


----------



## Martin778

I get code F9 when I load D O C P on my 2x8GB TridentZ Bdie 3200 C14. Is it normal? I have the 2700X and C7H-WiFi with the latest BIOS.

What do you think about the temps on this BeQuiet Silent Loop 360? I think it lacks a little more pressure.


Spoiler


----------



## sonic2911

I ended up returning the bad board, then I buy it again, different store. Now everything is so far so good, not a hiccup when boot, it doesn’t matter csm on or off now. Great!



Spoiler















Can you tell me which one is the correct cpu temp? 
Thanks


----------



## minal

sonic2911 said:


> I ended up returning the bad board, then I buy it again, different store. Now everything is so far so good, not a hiccup when boot, it doesn’t matter csm on or off now. Great!


Good to hear. My 2nd board also seems to be behaving better so far.




sonic2911 said:


> Can you tell me which one is the correct cpu temp?
> Thanks


Tdie


----------



## sonic2911

minal said:


> Good to hear. My 2nd board also seems to be behaving better so far.
> 
> 
> Tdie




Oh ok thanks. After 35 mins prime95, max tdie is 73, @3.95 x 8 cores. Is it normal with noctua d15?


----------



## gupsterg

Martin778 said:


> I get code F9 when I load D O C P on my 2x8GB TridentZ Bdie 3200 C14. Is it normal? I have the 2700X and C7H-WiFi with the latest BIOS.
> 
> What do you think about the temps on this BeQuiet Silent Loop 360? I think it lacks a little more pressure.
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Perhaps hitting a memory hole (try an adjustment on CLDO_VDDP), it would be shocking if on that RAM kit you can't get D.O.C.P to work.

Hmm for a 360mm AIO I'd be feeling underwhelmed by that. I originally got a ThermalRight Archon SB-E X2 for ~£16 delivered off ebay, used. Sold that at same cost as IB-E version, as needed the slight offset on heatpipes when moved from Intel board to AM4. That maintains similar temp as your setup.



sonic2911 said:


> I ended up returning the bad board, then I buy it again, different store. Now everything is so far so good, not a hiccup when boot, it doesn’t matter csm on or off now. Great!
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you tell me which one is the correct cpu temp?
> Thanks


Tdie and or CPU under ROG C7H heading.


----------



## majestynl

Esenel said:


> It seems you got a very early CPU here.
> What batchcode has your other 2700X?
> 
> Mine had 1806SUT and was crap :-(
> 
> Wish you luck!


Thanks, the other CPU had 1807SUS! Checked around and mostly what i found people with 1803SUS had good binning! Dont know if thats the case with all 
Hopefully this one too!




gupsterg said:


> Look forward to results share  , thanks for batch info.
> 
> I can't say yet I have seen OC shift on need for VID, etc. When I do change to stock with PE set to "Default" again all seems as first noted. Real shame if your original CPU has degraded and somewhat worrying...


Yep checked again also playing with BCLK etc no luck... 
I i literally saw it lowering since day one! Just installed new one and multi-core clocks with PE3 was ~4116mhz i believe! and boost 4340mhz
Lets see, im now checking my profiles! First impression is great!

Will load some profiles and report later!



VicsPC said:


> Yea just chcked mine its batch 1803SUS as well.


Nice! Can you tell a bit more? Like whats the multi-core clocks with PE3 ? (all clocks boost)
Did you ever try 4200mhz ? If yes, what voltage it needed?

btw: i cant get Stilts CPO Test running, i see a quick message with something expired bla bla .. and it closes itself!


----------



## usoldier

This random boot multi going up and down is realy bugging me :/


----------



## Martin778

@majestynl
Forgot that AMD uses the memory slots farther from the CPU


----------



## minal

majestynl said:


> Thanks, the other CPU had 1807SUS! Checked around and mostly what i found people with 1803SUS had good binning! Dont know if thats the case with all
> Hopefully this one too!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep checked again also playing with BCLK etc no luck...
> I i literally saw it lowering since day one! Just installed new one and multi-core clocks with PE3 was ~4140mhz i believe! and boost 4340mhz
> Lets see, im now checking my profiles! First impression is great!
> 
> Will load some profiles and report later!
> 
> 
> 
> Nice! Can you tell a bit more? Like whats the multi-core clocks with PE3 ? (all clocks boost)
> Did you ever try 4200mhz ? If yes, what voltage it needed?
> 
> btw: i cant get Stilts CPO Test running, i see a quick message with something expired bla bla .. and it closes itself!



1811SUS here. I think the first time I tested PE3 I got 4.35GHz single and 4.11-4.14GHz multi-core. PE4 got 4.35-4.36GHz single and 4.24GHz multi-core.. and crashed. But lately I see typically only 4.09GHz on multi-core with PE3. 



gupsterg said:


> Possibly on GPU, as heatsink would be ideal way up IMO. CPU HS I doubt the inverted orientation makes a difference. More so I think the way interior allows airflow back to front without drive cages impeding airflow helps CPU/MB/RAM/GPU temps.
> 
> When I experienced ~30C room ambient temp, I had to tone down RAM MHz (besides having higher CPU temps). I was finding in lengthy testing of RAM I'd get a error or 2 at > 4hrs. This was on C6H last year when the UK experienced a heat wave for a while.
> 
> Dunno if it's combination of HW that causes UEFI to be laggy. I'll be honest on C6H/C7H not experienced this. On the ZE I can, it's intermittent and rare though. When I experience it on the ZE the monitoring data in UEFI will all be knocked out. It will return at some point if I stay in UEFI, but I will still have lag. Usually a repost resolves issue.
> 
> My only suggestion would be to try an OC setup. On the 4.1GHz setup I lose some single core, but do gain improved multicore. Peak temps are reduced by ~10%, average for like testing is only a degree or 2 difference. Peak CPU voltage and averages seem improved. For example Y-Cruncher average VCORE is ~30mV lower than stock, but ACB is 4.1GHz vs ~3.9GHz when stock, P95 for same example is ~20mV lower.


On my 2nd C7H, I haven't had the lag/freeze issue yet. Somehow it "feels" better from the very first boot with the new board. I'll update if that changes. So far the only problem has been the crashes while editing fan curves in UEFI.

I got the 2700X with the idea that it will OC itself so I don't have to deal with tuning. Sounds funny now. Not sure I want to keep a manual OC setup, but I might be curious enough to try your settings. Did you compare results with PE3, which gets ACB to 4.09+GHz and single core at 4.35GHz?

So at least defaults work but who am I kidding, I can't resist at least testing some other parameters before settling on my final choice. 



 {[PE, CPB, PBO, Vcore] = Auto; memory = 3200, 1.35V; SOC = 1.025V; Performance Bias = Auto}
Memory: 71ns, 47GB/s.
Passed 8hrs y-cruncher and 7.5hrs mprime 8/4096K, separately, until stopped.
​
 {[PE, Vcore] = Auto; [CPB, PBO] = Enabled; memory = 3200, 1.35V; SOC = 1.025V; PB = None}
The only fail I got so far was with mprime 8/4096K: one worker failed after 8.75hrs, the remaining 15 threads passed passed 16hrs until I stopped it. Ambient went up to 32C while testing. But a fail is a fail right?
​
 {PE = PE3; [CPB, PBO, Vcore] = Auto; memory = 3200, 1.35V; SOC = 1.025V; PB = None}
Passed 9.5hrs of y-cruncher until stopped.
​*Observation: When changing PBO from Auto to Enabled, the Save Settings dialog which summarizes changes in UEFI did not mention any change. Switching to Disabled does bring a mention. Does that mean Auto = Enabled, or that the dialog is just funky?


----------



## VicsPC

majestynl said:


> Thanks, the other CPU had 1807SUS! Checked around and mostly what i found people with 1803SUS had good binning! Dont know if thats the case with all
> Hopefully this one too!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep checked again also playing with BCLK etc no luck...
> I i literally saw it lowering since day one! Just installed new one and multi-core clocks with PE3 was ~4116mhz i believe! and boost 4340mhz
> Lets see, im now checking my profiles! First impression is great!
> 
> Will load some profiles and report later!
> 
> 
> 
> Nice! Can you tell a bit more? Like whats the multi-core clocks with PE3 ? (all clocks boost)
> Did you ever try 4200mhz ? If yes, what voltage it needed?
> 
> btw: i cant get Stilts CPO Test running, i see a quick message with something expired bla bla .. and it closes itself!


I would but i have not even put it into my case yet lol, my C7 and 2700x are sitting on my shelf. i dread the stability testing especially ram testing with my Hynix just haven't gotten around to it. Are people just using PE3 and leaving everything else on auto not touching offset and core ratio or is this more OCing like the c6 and 1700x would be? If it's just set to PE3 and see what it boosts to, I'm on water with 2 rads in push/pull so should be alright.


----------



## majestynl

minal said:


> 1811SUS here. I think the first time I tested PE3 I got 4.35GHz single and 4.11-4.14GHz multi-core. PE4 got 4.35-4.36GHz single and 4.24GHz multi-core.. and crashed. But lately I see typically only 4.09GHz on multi-core with PE3.


Keep an eye on it!!! As said first CPU went down to 4066mhz multicore freq on PE3 after a while!



Martin778 said:


> @majestynl
> Forgot that AMD uses the memory slots farther from the CPU


LOL! Sorry confused... but can you explain.. did i missed something or did you forgot to quote 1 of my messages!! 



VicsPC said:


> I would but i have not even put it into my case yet lol, my C7 and 2700x are sitting on my shelf. i dread the stability testing especially ram testing with my Hynix just haven't gotten around to it. Are people just using PE3 and leaving everything else on auto not touching offset and core ratio or is this more OCing like the c6 and 1700x would be? If it's just set to PE3 and see what it boosts to, I'm on water with 2 rads in push/pull so should be alright.


aah LOL! Im using different profiles. PE3 and Pstates. But i haven't use the pc for daily things...im just playing and testing around!
I used Pstates with CH6 and 1800x but now on the 2700x we finally could met the real XFR/PB... i would say get that thing from the shelf and start!! lots of things to discover


----------



## Martin778

Nah, It was me - I've installed the memory in the 1st and 3rd slot from the left. Turns out it should be the opposite - 1st and 3rd from the right. 
I don't think I will even bother OCíng this CPU I think...it runs 3950-4350 out of the box by itself. Just loaded Stilt's 3333MHz fast timings and she runs.


----------



## minal

majestynl said:


> Keep an eye on it!!! As said first CPU went down to 4066mhz multicore freq on PE3 after a while!



I will. PE3 with Auto Vcore runs hotter than I'd like. 96C peak on y-cruncher, fans spinning up more easily with normal use. I think I'll either leave PE to Auto or see if PE3 can be stable undervolted.


Btw, I don't see much if any difference between PE on Auto, Default, level 1, or level 2.


----------



## majestynl

Martin778 said:


> Nah, It was me - I've installed the memory in the 1st and 3rd slot from the left. Turns out it should be the opposite - 1st and 3rd from the right.
> I don't think I will even bother OCíng this CPU I think...it runs 3950-4350 out of the box by itself. Just loaded Stilt's 3333MHz fast timings and she runs.


oke np  !!! Yes those are the slots to use with 2 sticks. Also marked with different colors! 

sure why not, its already pushed closely to the limits by AMD! Plug and play 



minal said:


> I will. PE3 with Auto Vcore runs hotter than I'd like. 96C peak on y-cruncher, fans spinning up more easily with normal use. I think I'll either leave PE to Auto or see if PE3 can be stable undervolted.
> 
> 
> Btw, I don't see much if any difference between PE on Auto, Default, level 1, or level 2.


I thinks its because of the peak voltage you see for the Boost! Undervolting has effect on both, multicore clocks and boost clock! Mostly it will crash/freeze with PE3!
Would be perfect if we had more control over both freqs/voltages


----------



## minal

majestynl said:


> I thinks its because of the peak voltage you see for the Boost! Undervolting has effect on both, multicore clocks and boost clock! Mostly it will crash/freeze with PE3!
> Would be perfect if we had more control over both freqs/voltages


 I think so too. PE3 spikes higher in voltage and temperature. But the voltage under sustained load (eg. all core load) is often less with PE3 than other settings, and at higher frequencies! 

It seems everything is better about PE3 except those spikes when starting/ending loads.


----------



## majestynl

PE3 is fine but those spikes are just not pretty to the eyez right  ....yeah we dont know for long term..

Anyways... just testing the new CPU... looks promising. Did some quick test with AVX / Realbench / Aida @ 4200Mhz its needs less compared to my first CPU. With 1.31v it held down in many tests!
Didnt tested with long stability tests runs yet! Just quick ones!

And below a quick CB run with 4.3Ghz @ 1.41v (no stress-tests done)! again this chip looks much much beter 
Will share more info soon in combination with proper stability tests! For now im just quickly checking what kind of silicon i have here...

edit: typo's


----------



## CJMitsuki

hurricane28 said:


> You disabled both? When i disabled them i couldn't boot man, stuck at code 0D.



Yeah, it seems to boot fine after a shutdown but just a normal restart I will get the 0d post code as well. Im not sure there is a performance difference with the HPET disabled though so it may not be worth changing from auto. It is apparently a problem with other boards as well. Also I noticed some other options that are hidden but it was 5am and I was tired if looking at the screen so I will check more today and maybe test to see if any options provides anything worthwhile to consider. Initial reactions to HPET disabled as far as performance is concerned seems to be no visible change but I only ran a couple of tests.


----------



## hurricane28

CJMitsuki said:


> Yeah, it seems to boot fine after a shutdown but just a normal restart I will get the 0d post code as well. Im not sure there is a performance difference with the HPET disabled though so it may not be worth changing from auto. It is apparently a problem with other boards as well. Also I noticed some other options that are hidden but it was 5am and I was tired if looking at the screen so I will check more today and maybe test to see if any options provides anything worthwhile to consider. Initial reactions to HPET disabled as far as performance is concerned seems to be no visible change but I only ran a couple of tests.


Weird man. I disable HPET a while back and didn't see any performance increase or degradation so i leave it than. I just wanted to know how it went but i can't even boot when i disable those options.


----------



## VicsPC

majestynl said:


> Keep an eye on it!!! As said first CPU went down to 4066mhz multicore freq on PE3 after a while!
> 
> 
> 
> LOL! Sorry confused... but can you explain.. did i missed something or did you forgot to quote 1 of my messages!!
> 
> 
> 
> aah LOL! Im using different profiles. PE3 and Pstates. But i haven't use the pc for daily things...im just playing and testing around!
> I used Pstates with CH6 and 1800x but now on the 2700x we finally could met the real XFR/PB... i would say get that thing from the shelf and start!! lots of things to discover


Well i dont use pstates on my 1700x, ive recently started using balanced power profile to try out core parking and my cpu was downlclocking on its own. I'm guessing for the 2700x i can just set PE3 and use balanced with 50% core parking and it should be a beast of a cpu. Not sure what it's going to boost to but considering my 1700x on my setup only reach about 48°C peak it shouldn't be an issue.


----------



## VPII

I need some assistance here.... I had a pretty decent dry ice run but had to stop for a while as I needed to attend to other things.

Second run went on for 20 to 30 minutes then I got the 08 qcode after restart and system won't switch on. Had it before and it means I need to leave the system and let it dry out. All good and I left it.

Unfortunately now I get the F9 q code which basically means recovery capsule us not found. This only happens if I set the memory speed above 2133mhz. I tried to do a bios flashback but still the same. If I run 1 memory module in A2 no problem it works at speed set. But with 2 dimms it is a no go.

Any solutions would be great.

And just to show that my dry ice run wasn't too bad....


----------



## VPII

Okay..... update. It appears as though the B1 and B2 banks for the motherboard has failed. So I'll see whether I can get the board replaced.


----------



## gupsterg

@minal

I have only used PE: Default, ACB OCs of 4.075GHz (VID: 1.281) and 4.1GHz (VID: 1.318). I may try PE presets soon  .

Out of your stated testing in recent post. 2nd setup I'd think a bump in SOC would possibly suss the single dropped thread. 3rd setup seems what you would be after, ie "automatic OC" and as it passed decent hours of Y-Cruncher I'd be tempted to throw whatever else you would to determine stability at "profile" and see how it goes  . That 32C ambient must be a killer for OC'ing ....

@VPII

Q-Code: F9 from what I have noted = memory training failed.

There was a post in the C6H thread where Elmor highlighted some of what we see on display/in manual is status codes at post and some are errors. And the error codes where not listed correctly in C6H manual. For example F9 is stated as "recovery capsule is not found", but if you check his OC guide it's stated as memory training failure.


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> @VPII
> 
> Q-Code: F9 from what I have noted = memory training failed.
> 
> There was a post in the C6H thread where Elmor highlighted some of what we see on display/in manual is status codes at post and some are errors. And the error codes where not listed correctly in C6H manual. For example F9 is stated as "recovery capsule is not found", but if you check his OC guide it's stated as memory training failure.


Correct! 



VicsPC said:


> Well i dont use pstates on my 1700x, ive recently started using balanced power profile to try out core parking and my cpu was downlclocking on its own. I'm guessing for the 2700x i can just set PE3 and use balanced with 50% core parking and it should be a beast of a cpu. Not sure what it's going to boost to but considering my 1700x on my setup only reach about 48°C peak it shouldn't be an issue.


yep, balanced is 50% core parking as default! 2700x is a beast yeah  Im now checking manual oc 4.2Ghz @ ~1.3! Just played few matches (Ghostwar) and temp are great max ~51c
i got the feeling im now really enjoying the 2700x. First cpu wasn't that great compared to this one! 




VPII said:


> I need some assistance here.... I had a pretty decent dry ice run but had to stop for a while as I needed to attend to other things.
> 
> Second run went on for 20 to 30 minutes then I got the 08 qcode after restart and system won't switch on. Had it before and it means I need to leave the system and let it dry out. All good and I left it.
> 
> Unfortunately now I get the F9 q code which basically means recovery capsule us not found. This only happens if I set the memory speed above 2133mhz. I tried to do a bios flashback but still the same. If I run 1 memory module in A2 no problem it works at speed set. But with 2 dimms it is a no go.
> 
> Any solutions would be great.
> 
> And just to show that my dry ice run wasn't too bad....





VPII said:


> Okay..... update. It appears as though the B1 and B2 banks for the motherboard has failed. So I'll see whether I can get the board replaced.


Nice run chap! have you double checked the banks? Sometimes just switching helped on other platforms... if those failed for sure then its  

@gupsterg

ever tried manual oc with manual voltages! ? Its holding the vcore ~flat with set voltage. No droop ?! Probably its already using a LLC as default!
This silicon is much better... Will try to test/tweak memory further tonight. Now running 3533/3466 (14 14 14 14 28 42 260) without any issue like first cpu! 

btw: Im curious about tRDRDSCL / tWRWRSCL values with this one, dont think it will work but i already switched mobo/ram/ 2x CPU... none of them let me run those
values on 2 with long ramtest runs... hehe lol.. maybe i need to switch myself


----------



## VPII

majestynl said:


> Correct!
> 
> 
> 
> yep, balanced is 50% core parking as default! 2700x is a beast yeah  Im now checking manual oc 4.2Ghz @ ~1.3! Just played few matches (Ghostwar) and temp are great max ~51c
> i got the feeling im now really enjoying the 2700x. First cpu wasn't that great compared to this one!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nice run chap! have you double checked the banks? Sometimes just switching helped on other platforms... if those failed for sure then its
> 
> @gupsterg
> 
> ever tried manual oc with manual voltages! ? Its holding the vcore ~flat with set voltage. No droop ?! Probably its already using a LLC as default!
> This silicon is much better... Will try to test/tweak memory further tonight. Now running 3533/3466 (14 14 14 14 28 42 260) without any issue like first cpu!
> 
> btw: Im curious about tRDRDSCL / tWRWRSCL values with this one, dont think it will work but i already switched mobo/ram/ 2x CPU... none of them let me run those
> values on 2 with long ramtest runs... hehe lol.. maybe i need to switch myself


Yup swopping gave same f9.... I tested both sticks in A1 and A2 and both work but single channel.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## VicsPC

majestynl said:


> Correct!
> 
> 
> 
> yep, balanced is 50% core parking as default! 2700x is a beast yeah  Im now checking manual oc 4.2Ghz @ ~1.3! Just played few matches (Ghostwar) and temp are great max ~51c
> i got the feeling im now really enjoying the 2700x. First cpu wasn't that great compared to this one!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nice run chap! have you double checked the banks? Sometimes just switching helped on other platforms... if those failed for sure then its
> 
> @gupsterg
> 
> ever tried manual oc with manual voltages! ? Its holding the vcore ~flat with set voltage. No droop ?! Probably its already using a LLC as default!
> This silicon is much better... Will try to test/tweak memory further tonight. Now running 3533/3466 (14 14 14 14 28 42 260) without any issue like first cpu!
> 
> btw: Im curious about tRDRDSCL / tWRWRSCL values with this one, dont think it will work but i already switched mobo/ram/ 2x CPU... none of them let me run those
> values on 2 with long ramtest runs... hehe lol.. maybe i need to switch myself


I checked balanced (windows not ryzen balanced) and it was at 100% core parking on balanced, weird yours was at 50 but I'm guessing you're using the ryzen balanced power plan?


----------



## gupsterg

majestynl said:


> @gupsterg
> 
> ever tried manual oc with manual voltages! ? Its holding the vcore ~flat with set voltage. No droop ?! Probably its already using a LLC as default!
> This silicon is much better... Will try to test/tweak memory further tonight. Now running 3533/3466 (14 14 14 14 28 42 260) without any issue like first cpu!
> 
> btw: Im curious about tRDRDSCL / tWRWRSCL values with this one, dont think it will work but i already switched mobo/ram/ 2x CPU... none of them let me run those
> values on 2 with long ramtest runs... hehe lol.. maybe i need to switch myself


Nope, only PState 0 VID set. As highlighted before by The Stilt and another owner, manual voltage on UEFI 0601 has issues of LLC control, link.

Looking good on new CPU so far  . I'd think the tighter SCL timings being an issue must be an IMC thing.

4.1GHz 3466MHz The Stilt is sound for me. Done too many reruns in differing room ambients and non issue for me. So basically this would be my go to profile on any new UEFI and then see if I gain any more RAM MHz. Sorta tempted to try higher core.

I also have a new set of RAM coming on Monday. Doubt that RAM is the issue stopping me gaining 3533MHz. Will be interesting to see what another set of B die is like though.


----------



## lordzed83

usoldier said:


> This random boot multi going up and down is realy bugging me :/


God damn anoying init ?? Thats why I scrapped PE overclocking like main reason for it. And over 1.5 volts on cores that dont give much gains in games cant see it worth it :/


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> Nope, only PState 0 VID set. As highlighted before by The Stilt and another owner, manual voltage on UEFI 0601 has issues of LLC control, link.
> 
> Looking good on new CPU so far  . I'd think the tighter SCL timings being an issue must be an IMC thing.
> 
> 4.1GHz 3466MHz The Stilt is sound for me. Done too many reruns in differing room ambients and non issue for me. So basically this would be my go to profile on any new UEFI and then see if I gain any more RAM MHz. Sorta tempted to try higher core.
> 
> I also have a new set of RAM coming on Monday. Doubt that RAM is the issue stopping me gaining 3533MHz. Will be interesting to see what another set of B die is like though.


You're right! Saw the post but thought setting a LLC wasn't working for some... Didn't really knew it was already applying llc on auto... misunderstand the post probably  

Yeap, yours running great chap! Enjoy it! Some parts of my brains say stop and wait for new UEFI but cant keep my hands from tuning if you understand! 

Good luck with your new ram !!!



lordzed83 said:


> God damn anoying init ?? Thats why I scrapped PE overclocking like main reason for it. And over 1.5 volts on cores that dont give much gains in games cant see it worth it :/


Agree about gain in games, didnt saw any major difference compared to Manual/Pstates! But upping the BCLK will have some improvements. Not a huge fan of it... would be perfect if we could manually
set the clocks eg: 4200Mhz all cores and single boost 4.350-4400mhz!

But those 1.5 spikes arent a issue said by AMD. Better said it was designed that way!!! Finally found the link: https://community.amd.com/thread/228343

----------------------------------------
*by amdmatt Employee* on May 11, 2018 2:33 AM
Robert Hallock from AMD explained this perfectly.

_The CPU is programmed to use these voltages automatically. We know it's safe, because we designed it that way. The CPU cannot and does not use voltages that are unsafe for the silicon.

The key thing that people forget in these cases is time and temperature. Running 1.4V or 1.5V here and there is not a big deal, because the CPU will eventually back down according to its pre-programmed model. Or if you have great cooling, that also offsets the thermal effect of voltage. In either case, you're seeing momentary blips of voltage that are offset by the hours per day your CPU is probably doing nothing at all--at a very low voltage.

The average vcore for Ryzen over time is around 1.25V (give or take).

tl;dr: leave the CPU alone, let it do its thing, don't worry. We designed the CPU to do this._

----------------------------------------

Btw: Any updates on your side? Still running 4250mhz ? voltage ? llc?


----------



## crakej

I've been running quite a few tests for 3600MTs ram, and have found something really interesting....

I loaded the exact same settings which went over 5000% ramtest 1st run then over 7000% 2nd run + over an hour of P95 (I did post those results) - but it won't work now. The voltages are latching on to slightly different values to what they were the other day! I can change settings up or down, but I can't get the same voltages as before and I can't pass any of the tests again. The voltages are only different by a small amount, but it's obviously making a difference. The cpu and SoC voltage is 0.006 lower than on my last run a few days ago. Is it possible the change in ambient temp is causing this? - I know the CPU calculates the voltage it needs rather than using look up tables but have never seen this happen before! 

I am going to have a go at 3600 with T2 and geardown off to see if thats any better, but not just now as the weather in Brighton is Just amazing today  Time for the garden!


----------



## gupsterg

majestynl said:


> You're right! Saw the post but thought setting a LLC wasn't working for some... Didn't really knew it was already applying llc on auto... misunderstand the post probably
> 
> Yeap, yours running great chap! Enjoy it! Some parts of my brains say stop and wait for new UEFI but cant keep my hands from tuning if you understand!


NP  .

Well I jumped to 4.125GHz 3466MHz The Stilt just for P95 v28.10B1 128K 128K in place FFT. Surprised me that I actually am lowering VID from a guesstimated setup I went for at first.

1.337V VID, PASS ~0.5hr, room ~24.9C at time of screenie.



Spoiler















CB15 run no PB



Spoiler















1.331V VID, PASS ~1hr, room ~25.8C at the time of screenie.



Spoiler















Been testing 1.325V VID for ~15min so far, no dropped threads.

Going over my notes/screenies I see upto 3400MHz I used CPU stock. At 3400MHz after setting up profile for it I then did CPU OC PState 0 4.075GHz. This needed 1.281V and later I just bumped it to 1.287V to build in "headroom".

3466MHz profile was initially tested with 4.075GHz. Then I went back to stock CPU in the middle of testing, as felt CPU OC may affect profile setting for RAM MHz. Finally I went to 4.1GHz with the 3466MHz, testing showed I could use lower than 1.318V but could encounter intermittent issues an hour or so into testing.

It seems I have no record of checking if 4.125GHz was possible after all settings were finalised for 3466MHz The Stilt. I got side tracked with trying for 3533MHz.


----------



## masterkaj

crakej said:


> I've been running quite a few tests for 3600MTs ram, and have found something really interesting....
> 
> I loaded the exact same settings which went over 5000% ramtest 1st run then over 7000% 2nd run + over an hour of P95 (I did post those results) - but it won't work now. The voltages are latching on to slightly different values to what they were the other day! I can change settings up or down, but I can't get the same voltages as before and I can't pass any of the tests again. The voltages are only different by a small amount, but it's obviously making a difference. The cpu and SoC voltage is 0.006 lower than on my last run a few days ago. Is it possible the change in ambient temp is causing this? - I know the CPU calculates the voltage it needs rather than using look up tables but have never seen this happen before!
> 
> I am going to have a go at 3600 with T2 and geardown off to see if thats any better, but not just now as the weather in Brighton is Just amazing today  Time for the garden!


Reload default bios settings and save. Then reload your saved OC profile. I’ve had to do this a few times now. It’s some odd bug that I haven’t been able to replicate consistently.


----------



## crakej

masterkaj said:


> Reload default bios settings and save. Then reload your saved OC profile. I’ve had to do this a few times now. It’s some odd bug that I haven’t been able to replicate consistently.


I thought that would fix it too, but no.... 

I will try those settings again when it's a bit cooler.....all my other profiles work as expected, so not the end of the world, just very strange how voltages are different....


----------



## Martin778

I've added another ring under the mounting springs on my BeQuiet AIO (seems like the springs do wear out quite quickly?) and with the latest Prime95 I'm around 65*C peak Tdie w. Gelid GC-Extreme TIM and ~50% fan RPM the rad is still barely warm.

Should I still bother or is this what's to be expected? I'm running the CPU stock and RAM at 3333 @ The Stilt's Fast timings but it drops threads.
https://i.imgur.com/3MWuLB4.png


----------



## majestynl

VPII said:


> Yup swopping gave same f9.... I tested both sticks in A1 and A2 and both work but single channel.


 



VicsPC said:


> I checked balanced (windows not ryzen balanced) and it was at 100% core parking on balanced, weird yours was at 50 but I'm guessing you're using the ryzen balanced power plan?


Fresh newest windows balanced profile! Not using ryzen balanced! Dunno, its on 50% cant remember i tweaked something so its default as far as i know!



crakej said:


> I've been running quite a few tests for 3600MTs ram, and have found something really interesting....
> 
> I loaded the exact same settings which went over 5000% ramtest 1st run then over 7000% 2nd run + over an hour of P95 (I did post those results) - but it won't work now. The voltages are latching on to slightly different values to what they were the other day! I can change settings up or down, but I can't get the same voltages as before and I can't pass any of the tests again. The voltages are only different by a small amount, but it's obviously making a difference. The cpu and SoC voltage is 0.006 lower than on my last run a few days ago. Is it possible the change in ambient temp is causing this? - I know the CPU calculates the voltage it needs rather than using look up tables but have never seen this happen before!
> 
> I am going to have a go at 3600 with T2 and geardown off to see if thats any better, but not just now as the weather in Brighton is Just amazing today  Time for the garden!


LOL! Remember my post ??!! Dont think those voltages are the issue, its way to small difference if you ask me! I never checked THAT closely when it happened to me!



gupsterg said:


> NP  .
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Well I jumped to 4.125GHz 3466MHz The Stilt just for P95 v28.10B1 128K 128K in place FFT. Surprised me that I actually am lowering VID from a guesstimated setup I went for at first.
> 
> 1.337V VID, PASS ~0.5hr, room ~24.9C at time of screenie.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CB15 run no PB
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.331V VID, PASS ~1hr, room ~25.8C at the time of screenie.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Been testing 1.325V VID for ~15min so far, no dropped threads.
> 
> Going over my notes/screenies I see upto 3400MHz I used CPU stock. At 3400MHz after setting up profile for it I then did CPU OC PState 0 4.075GHz. This needed 1.281V and later I just bumped it to 1.287V to build in "headroom".
> 
> 3466MHz profile was initially tested with 4.075GHz. Then I went back to stock CPU in the middle of testing, as felt CPU OC may affect profile setting for RAM MHz. Finally I went to 4.1GHz with the 3466MHz, testing showed I could use lower than 1.318V but could encounter intermittent issues an hour or so into testing.
> 
> It seems I have no record of checking if 4.125GHz was possible after all settings were finalised for 3466MHz The Stilt. I got side tracked with trying for 3533MHz.


Nice, lower is allways better ...hehe .. Great CB score for 4125mhz tho!

And how it ended above run? Dont know why you have issues running 3533mhz? Did you ever try it with less tuned subtimings?



crakej said:


> I thought that would fix it too, but no....
> 
> I will try those settings again when it's a bit cooler.....all my other profiles work as expected, so not the end of the world, just very strange how voltages are different....


Still having fans blowing on the rams?


----------



## majestynl

*Yeah..*Finally managed to get tRDRDSCL / tWRWRSCL lower on this CPU  
Currently running the 3533 strap CL14 +TT with 1.385 on dimm and 1.05 on soc! it passed the crucial 3500% point, will test/tweak further tomorrow!

men i hate my old 2700x, lost days of tuning and this one is soo easy!

edit: ad some extra screenshots for those who are interested! Stopped the test around 4000%..


----------



## VicsPC

majestynl said:


> Fresh newest windows balanced profile! Not using ryzen balanced! Dunno, its on 50% cant remember i tweaked something so its default as far as i know!
> 
> 
> 
> LOL! Remember my post ??!! Dont think those voltages are the issue, its way to small difference if you ask me! I never checked THAT closely when it happened to me!
> 
> 
> 
> Nice, lower is allways better ...hehe .. Great CB score for 4125mhz tho!
> 
> And how it ended above run? Dont know why you have issues running 3533mhz? Did you ever try it with less tuned subtimings?
> 
> 
> 
> Still having fans blowing on the rams?


Very interesting, for me on my c6/1700x its 100% in balanced, even when i reset to default.


----------



## HarryC93

Hi guys, sorry im not as advanced in this stuff as many of you here, im new to Ryzen. I have been having a weird issue with the Performance enhancer though, When i first built my system i tried all the levels and settled for 2 at that time being as 3 was pushing the voltage and heat up on my system. I have now gone back to try and use level 3 and its completely changed how it acts for me. 

Now i dont know how accurate HWInfo can be but i get some very odd results compared to my previous testing of Level 3.
The core VIDs stay locked to 1.313v under any load the CPU core voltage maxes itself at 1.344 under any loads even when the system is clocking all cores at near 4.1GHz. and due to all this my temps now never reach over 50c. I;m just very confused on whats maybe happening.


----------



## crakej

I managed to get my SoC voltage the same as my last 3600 test, but I can't get the cpu voltage right, it just isn't the same as it was on my last test. I even tried going back to manual cpu voltage but still couldn't get it exactly as it was before. I know from when I first tuned in 3600 that it was v sensitive - one notch up or down and I couldn't get past 7% ramtest. Now whatever I do, it will not work as it did the other day. All cooling is working well including the ram fans.

Only plausible thing I can think of is that I had built up to 3600 that day quite slowly, and without going back to defaults before I went from 3533 to 3600, so maybe something from my last configuration stuck?... we do know that loading other profiles often doesn't work without properly loading defaults and starting again. Then they work - so something fishy is going on with settings sticking or behaving differently from boot to boot and profile to profile. For me going back to defaults didn't work - but I got past 7%.....to 22%!

I'm going to leave 3600 until new bios comes and go back to 3466 or 3533, see if I can get them quicker.


----------



## datspike

@crakej try setting tWRRD to 3. It's the key to 3600C14 and 3533C13 for me and I was experiencing the same instability from reboot to reboot as you.


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> I managed to get my SoC voltage the same as my last 3600 test, but I can't get the cpu voltage right, it just isn't the same as it was on my last test. I even tried going back to manual cpu voltage but still couldn't get it exactly as it was before. I know from when I first tuned in 3600 that it was v sensitive - one notch up or down and I couldn't get past 7% ramtest. Now whatever I do, it will not work as it did the other day. All cooling is working well including the ram fans.
> 
> Only plausible thing I can think of is that I had built up to 3600 that day quite slowly, and without going back to defaults before I went from 3533 to 3600, so maybe something from my last configuration stuck?... we do know that loading other profiles often doesn't work without properly loading defaults and starting again. Then they work - so something fishy is going on with settings sticking or behaving differently from boot to boot and profile to profile. For me going back to defaults didn't work - but I got past 7%.....to 22%!
> 
> I'm going to leave 3600 until new bios comes and go back to 3466 or 3533, see if I can get them quicker.


First of all dont quite get the CPU voltage part ? Cause at the end of the message you are talking about % from Ramtest/HCI i believe? 
Testing CPU/RAM combo needs to be done in a different Stress-test sw! Anyway.. maybe you mention RAM voltage?

And yes, i had several times this same issue with profiles who worked before and suddenly it didn't. Maybe the bios settings are getting messed-up and it doesn't cleaned that well with defaults..!?
Clear cmos was not enough for me! I have several times re-flashed the bios and re-entered my settings!


----------



## lordzed83

majestynl said:


> *Yeah..*Finally managed to get tRDRDSCL / tWRWRSCL lower on this CPU
> Currently running the 3533 strap CL14 +TT with 1.385 on dimm and 1.05 on soc! it passed the crucial 3500% point, will test/tweak further tomorrow!
> 
> men i hate my old 2700x, lost days of tuning and this one is soo easy!
> 
> edit: ad some extra screenshots for those who are interested! Stopped the test around 4000%..


Nice.

Update on windows Insider build 17677 NOT STABLE. Cant pass 1 loop of Realbench even at defaults :S

Shiet shame I'w not kept that 17025 build so far nothing comes close to it  Fast and stable was scoring 1965 cb with 3466cl15 :/


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> Nice.
> 
> Update on windows Insider build 17677 NOT STABLE. Cant pass 1 loop of Realbench even at defaults :S
> 
> Shiet shame I'w not kept that 17025 build so far nothing comes close to it  Fast and stable was scoring 1965 cb with 3466cl15 :/


Thanks!

Realbench is acting a bit strange on the newest windows version if you ask me. Eg: if its stable in most Stress-test SW's it could throw errors or freeze in RB! PE3 with stock settings no issue! Maybe its something with high all clocks OC... also Upped vcore with at least 0.05 on top of stable voltage, still got WHEA errors on old CPU  i have not tested RealBench on current cpu, will give it a try later.... 

i would not focus too much on CB scores. Dont think the margin is that big right ? CB is effected a lot with running background processes. Maybe that specific win version didn't loaded that many processes or maybe 1 process that runs currently has a disadvantaged effect on scores?

Did you ever tried running windows on diagnostic mode and running CB?


----------



## usoldier

majestynl said:


> Thanks!
> 
> Realbench is acting a bit strange on the newest windows version if you ask me. Eg: if its stable in most Stress-test SW's it could throw errors or freeze in RB! PE3 with stock settings no issue! Maybe its something with high all clocks OC... also Upped vcore with at least 0.05 on top of stable voltage, still got WHEA errors on old CPU  i have not tested RealBench on current cpu, will give it a try later....
> 
> i would not focus too much on CB scores. Dont think the margin is that big right ? CB is effected a lot with running background processes. Maybe that specific win version didn't loaded that many processes or maybe 1 process that runs currently has a disadvantaged effect on scores?
> 
> Did you ever tried running windows on diagnostic mode and running CB?


You added 0.05v on top of stable volts , what was the boost voltage on PE3 then ?


----------



## majestynl

usoldier said:


> You added 0.05v on top of stable volts , what was the boost voltage on PE3 then ?


No not specific while testing that issue. As i wrote i had no issue with RB and PE3. It was on all core OC (Pstate).
But with my BCLK OC test with PE3 mode, i tried 0.05v on core, boost voltage was ~1.56-1.574v i believe!


----------



## usoldier

majestynl said:


> No not specific while testing that issue. As i wrote i had no issue with RB and PE3. It was on all core OC (Pstate).
> But with my BCLK OC test with PE3 mode, i tried 0.05v on core, boost voltage was ~1.56-1.574v i believe!


Yeah i though so i have my PE3 stable with max boost @ 1.56v , temps are good ive been running like this for a 5 days now might be my 24/7 setting. I hope it doesnt hurt the cpu


----------



## majestynl

usoldier said:


> Yeah i though so i have my PE3 stable with max boost @ 1.56v , temps are good ive been running like this for a 5 days now might be my 24/7 setting. I hope it doesnt hurt the cpu


Did you OC BCLK on top of it ? Cause i dont need any offset for PE3 to be stable! 

Btw: Cant say for sure but i think we need to believe *Robert Hallock from AMD*: https://community.amd.com/thread/228343
Again im still not 100% comfortable but maybe this because we never saw such thing before. Its the new Ryzen Design


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> First of all dont quite get the CPU voltage part ? Cause at the end of the message you are talking about % from Ramtest/HCI i believe?
> Testing CPU/RAM combo needs to be done in a different Stress-test sw! Anyway.. maybe you mention RAM voltage?
> 
> And yes, i had several times this same issue with profiles who worked before and suddenly it didn't. Maybe the bios settings are getting messed-up and it doesn't cleaned that well with defaults..!?
> Clear cmos was not enough for me! I have several times re-flashed the bios and re-entered my settings!


Sorry guys - I know I'm not very clear sometimes! When I passed RamTest over 7000% (AND >5000%) last week running 3600, the voltage ranges for CPU and SoC were slightly different - they are not the same now, whatever I do.

I have no idea whats going on now - i've spent some time trying to re-tune but still can't pass RamTest even once at >5000% - like I did *twice* last week. I can only think that somehow settings are not loading in the same way they were last week.....or clearing - without proper loading and booting of defaults - many of us have experienced things like this now. I'm leaving it here - will try to dial in with T2, geardown=off tonight/tomorrow. The last thing I tried was reducing my ram volts one notch at a time - when I got to 1..41v I got my best result at >500%, so that doesn't make sense either, ram was at 1.43 for tests last week but this week same voltage get you >25% 

Going to spend a little time tuning the slower settings see what I can get


----------



## lordzed83

Bored of my ram kit now. Tried everything top get 3466cl14 working maximum iw gotten was 600% and error :/ guess i stick to this


----------



## kidchunk

Robert's original comment: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/commen...22f23_with_ryzen_gen_1_on_gbt_gaming/dyxmc02/


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> Sorry guys - I know I'm not very clear sometimes! When I passed RamTest over 7000% (AND >5000%) last week running 3600, the voltage ranges for CPU and SoC were slightly different - they are not the same now, whatever I do.
> 
> I have no idea whats going on now - i've spent some time trying to re-tune but still can't pass RamTest even once at >5000% - like I did *twice* last week. I can only think that somehow settings are not loading in the same way they were last week.....or clearing - without proper loading and booting of defaults - many of us have experienced things like this now. I'm leaving it here - will try to dial in with T2, geardown=off tonight/tomorrow. The last thing I tried was reducing my ram volts one notch at a time - when I got to 1..41v I got my best result at >500%, so that doesn't make sense either, ram was at 1.43 for tests last week but this week same voltage get you >25%
> 
> Going to spend a little time tuning the slower settings see what I can get





lordzed83 said:


> Bored of my ram kit now. Tried everything top get 3466cl14 working maximum iw gotten was 600% and error :/ guess i stick to this
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Guys what i do understand from this situation is: Above 3466 the ram-stability gets wonky. I can at least count 4 people with same issue including me.
One day it can pass x amounts of Ramtest/HCI runs then the other day it fails lets say at 500% - 1000%! Most of the time a fresh Bios flash will help but then if you play to much with settings or just randomly the next it can fail again.

For now i'm suspecting the bios/agesa. Its not fully ready for those speeds i think! Some situations are like a dejavu from Ryzen 1 with CH6. We can loose time to find the issue but i dont think we will find it because its beyond our capabilities i think... and the situation makes no sense sometimes, on my first cpu a really spend days on it, tried almost all settings available for RAM 

Same happened for booting up! When i load a fully stable ram profile and immediately enter a higher strap it boots perfect! But then when i try to restart(windows) without completely powering off, the system shuts itself full down and then it gets in trouble with booting.
A higher ProcODT helps to boot every time perfect but this can also get instability with Ramtest! What also helps is setting the Failcount for booting above 4x!

so maybe its better to run a bit slower but full stable and just wait for @elmor and report our findings!


----------



## minal

gupsterg said:


> @*minal*
> 
> I have only used PE: Default, ACB OCs of 4.075GHz (VID: 1.281) and 4.1GHz (VID: 1.318). I may try PE presets soon  .
> 
> Out of your stated testing in recent post. 2nd setup I'd think a bump in SOC would possibly suss the single dropped thread. 3rd setup seems what you would be after, ie "automatic OC" and as it passed decent hours of Y-Cruncher I'd be tempted to throw whatever else you would to determine stability at "profile" and see how it goes  . That 32C ambient must be a killer for OC'ing ....


Between the 1st and 2nd setups, the 2nd ran hotter but not any faster, so I don't find it so appealing. The 3rd setup is the goal, aside from temp peaks. For now I just left things on the 1st setup, i.e. mostly auto and just memory at 3200, since I had other things to do. There is something to be said for stability. 

The 32C ambient is a killer for the computer... and me! But now with ambient much lower ~23C, it would be difficult to equate testing results.

Curious to see your PE tuning. 



gupsterg said:


> There was a post in the C6H thread where Elmor highlighted some of what we see on display/in manual is status codes at post and some are errors. And the error codes where not listed correctly in C6H manual. For example F9 is stated as "recovery capsule is not found", but if you check his OC guide it's stated as memory training failure.


:O could we get an erratum??



majestynl said:


> men i hate my old 2700x, lost days of tuning and this one is soo easy!


Did you buy a second 2700x or did you replace the first one somehow?


----------



## majestynl

minal said:


> Did you buy a second 2700x or did you replace the first one somehow?


Second one..


----------



## minal

majestynl said:


> Second one..


Dedication ^^


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> Guys what i do understand from this situation is: Above 3466 the ram-stability gets wonky. I can at least count 4 people with same issue including me.
> One day it can pass x amounts of Ramtest/HCI runs then the other day it fails lets say at 500% - 1000%! Most of the time a fresh Bios flash will help but then if you play to much with settings or just randomly the next it can fail again.
> 
> For now i'm suspecting the bios/agesa. Its not fully ready for those speeds i think! Some situations are like a dejavu from Ryzen 1 with CH6. We can loose time to find the issue but i dont think we will find it because its beyond our capabilities i think... and the situation makes no sense sometimes, on my first cpu a really spend days on it, tried almost all settings available for RAM
> 
> Same happened for booting up! When i load a fully stable ram profile and immediately enter a higher strap it boots perfect! But then when i try to restart(windows) without completely powering off, the system shuts itself full down and then it gets in trouble with booting.
> A higher ProcODT helps to boot every time perfect but this can also get instability with Ramtest! What also helps is setting the Failcount for booting above 4x!
> 
> so maybe its better to run a bit slower but full stable and just wait for @elmor and report our findings!


Indeed - however (lol) before I went back down to 3533 I thought I'd give 3600 a chance with T2 and geardown=off. It took one more notch up on VCore, but I've already done over 5000% RamTest  Will post more when I get P95 results....

In my case it was definitely a voltage thing going on as that's the only thing I could see different - still running same timings here. I'm sure next bios will give us some help


----------



## lordzed83

majestynl said:


> minal said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did you buy a second 2700x or did you replace the first one somehow?
> 
> 
> 
> Second one..
Click to expand...


Ye it all went to crap when i UPDATED from 17025 to later versions.. Had realbench 16gb running 3533 stable bo problem. Newest cant pass 1 loop on default with 21ee memory lol. Then i run Aida ibt whatever no problem lol.

We need to wait for better bios i think.


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> Ye it all went to crap when i UPDATED from 17025 to later versions.. Had realbench 16gb running 3533 stable bo problem. Newest cant pass 1 loop on default with 21ee memory lol. Then i run Aida ibt whatever no problem lol.
> 
> We need to wait for better bios i think.


Frustrating how Windows versions change things - I'm still on official release - which definitely slowed things down a bit....


----------



## majestynl

minal said:


> Dedication ^^


LOL... It's like a Scratch card thing 




crakej said:


> Indeed - however (lol) before I went back down to 3533 I thought I'd give 3600 a chance with T2 and geardown=off. It took one more notch up on VCore, but I've already done over 5000% RamTest  Will post more when I get P95 results....
> 
> In my case it was definitely a voltage thing going on as that's the only thing I could see different - still running same timings here. I'm sure next bios will give us some help


Haha it's so unpredictable men..really. We are pushing it to the limits for now 

So far I'm happy with 3533 CL14 + TT. Also Played few hours Wildlands perfectly. No difference in FPS compared with light timings OC tho.

Btw: had few successful ramtest runs today. Just upped the voltage cause I had one failed. Don't think I'm going to stick more time in 3533. It's working great for now. If I start on 3600 i want it on same subs as current profile and don't think it will be possible on current bios. And don't want to waste to much time...




lordzed83 said:


> Ye it all went to crap when i UPDATED from 17025 to later versions.. Had realbench 16gb running 3533 stable bo problem. Newest cant pass 1 loop on default with 21ee memory lol. Then i run Aida ibt whatever no problem lol.
> 
> We need to wait for better bios i think.


Yeap, also reported it last week in a conversation with gupsterg. I think it's happening while its on all core OC. Cause I have no issue with RB on PE3 mode. Do you ?

Sure new bios will bring more maturity.. this is I believe just the second bios..


----------



## Gettz8488

@elmor Do you have any update on the shutdown issues caused by third party monitoring software?


----------



## HarryC93

Think i messed my last post up adding images and it may have not been accepted, my apologies if it does pop up though. 

When i first built my system (2700x + CH7) i tried all the PE modes out and settled on 2 as it kept the voltages and fans down to a reasonable level for the time being. I have now gone back into the BIOS and wanting to switch to level 3 as i read that the voltage increases in PE3 are ok and not damaging. But now it acts so incredibly different to when i tried it last. It locks my Core VID to 1.313, my Core voltage holds at 1.275v under load, but seems to hold 4.1Ghz perfectly fine. I wouldn't have questioned it at all apart from the fact that it appears to run alot better than the PE2 option that i have been using. it runs at least 7 degrees cooler (64c on PE2, 54c on PE3) and the voltages run alot lower, under PE2 i had more sustained reading of 1.4-1.5v+. But i also noticed under PE2 the core vid would drop below 1v in idle but on this PE3 its 1.313 through thick and thin. 

Sorry if this is not making much sense but i find it odd that when i first tried PE3 i could instantly see the higher voltages and heat production, but now when i use it, the voltages and temperature are lower than PE2 but the performance is still improved. I just feel like theres some error and i'm actually hurting something on the chip/board somewhere. 


I am not as advanced as you guys on this platform or in overclocking in general so please accept my apologies if this is normal behaviour.


----------



## minal

HarryC93 said:


> Think i messed my last post up adding images and it may have not been accepted, my apologies if it does pop up though.
> 
> When i first built my system (2700x + CH7) i tried all the PE modes out and settled on 2 as it kept the voltages and fans down to a reasonable level for the time being. I have now gone back into the BIOS and wanting to switch to level 3 as i read that the voltage increases in PE3 are ok and not damaging. But now it acts so incredibly different to when i tried it last. It locks my Core VID to 1.313, my Core voltage holds at 1.275v under load, but seems to hold 4.1Ghz perfectly fine. I wouldn't have questioned it at all apart from the fact that it appears to run alot better than the PE2 option that i have been using. it runs at least 7 degrees cooler (64c on PE2, 54c on PE3) and the voltages run alot lower, under PE2 i had more sustained reading of 1.4-1.5v+. But i also noticed under PE2 the core vid would drop below 1v in idle but on this PE3 its 1.313 through thick and thin.
> 
> Sorry if this is not making much sense but i find it odd that when i first tried PE3 i could instantly see the higher voltages and heat production, but now when i use it, the voltages and temperature are lower than PE2 but the performance is still improved. I just feel like theres some error and i'm actually hurting something on the chip/board somewhere.
> 
> 
> I am not as advanced as you guys on this platform or in overclocking in general so please accept my apologies if this is normal behaviour.


You're not alone in your observations. There's something a bit mysterious about PE3. 

I didn't see specifically what you described, but in my case PE3 seems better in voltages, sustained temperatures, and frequency/performance, with the only issue being higher voltage spikes and peak temperatures.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Frustrating how Windows versions change things - I'm still on official release - which definitely slowed things down a bit....


Yup its like Fake stability kinda. I was like Yay 3600 is stable ran benchmarks and its like 2% slower at any given speed. So its more stable cause.... its slower and thats slower by quite allot ....
@majestynl not basic setting just pe3 + 102.4 bclk but ofc wont pass its more like WONT even run !!!


----------



## lordzed83

I could use one of those kits


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I could use one of those kits


Oh yes man! I want that! .....not that my cpu could even handle it!


----------



## pschorr1123

Hello all long time lurker here. I have a question for those using the Ram Test by Karhu software. I got around 4000% in the Karhu test but it fails memtest hcl 78-200%. I used the exact same settings for both tests so did I waste $12.50 on the Karhu License to get placebo memory stable or did I not set something right? I left the settings on default for the Karhu test. I only bought the Karhu Soft since a few experienced users in here and elsewhere has testified its praise. So all you with really fast tight memory passing Karhu @ 4000-6000% can you get 1000% in memtest hcl? IDK so far I can't run my memory any faster stable than I could on my old 1700 and the false positive from the Karhu sweet had me excited for 12 hours or so...


----------



## pschorr1123

@lordzed83 any idea when the 10nm Samsung ICs will be available? I assume the pic you posted must surly be the new 10nm stuff. Very tempted along with the new phase change cpu cooler "loop" announced at Computex. That will be my next cooler when it goes on sale.


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I could use one of those kits


Nice kit but doesn't make difference with current bios/agesa I believe..




pschorr1123 said:


> Hello all long time lurker here. I have a question for those using the Ram Test by Karhu software. I got around 4000% in the Karhu test but it fails memtest hcl 78-200%. I used the exact same settings for both tests so did I waste $12.50 on the Karhu License to get placebo memory stable or did I not set something right? I left the settings on default for the Karhu test. I only bought the Karhu Soft since a few experienced users in here and elsewhere has testified its praise. So all you with really fast tight memory passing Karhu @ 4000-6000% can you get 1000% in memtest hcl? IDK so far I can't run my memory any faster stable than I could on my old 1700 and the false positive from the Karhu sweet had me excited for 12 hours or so...


I'm also using HCI without any markable differences between those..only RAMTest is faster..

Can you try to use less memory. Try opening 14 instances of 850mb...

Edit: Looking closer to your screenshot i saw 99% @ the Ram meter (right side) while testing... its logical it fails you only have 144mb left 
Test 80-90% of AVAILABLE ram. And i never use the pc while stress-testing! its to risky from my experience. Can't rule out whats wrong if i get errors!


----------



## CJMitsuki

majestynl said:


> pschorr1123 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hello all long time lurker here. I have a question for those using the Ram Test by Karhu software. I got around 4000% in the Karhu test but it fails memtest hcl 78-200%. I used the exact same settings for both tests so did I waste $12.50 on the Karhu License to get placebo memory stable or did I not set something right? I left the settings on default for the Karhu test. I only bought the Karhu Soft since a few experienced users in here and elsewhere has testified its praise. So all you with really fast tight memory passing Karhu @ 4000-6000% can you get 1000% in memtest hcl? IDK so far I can't run my memory any faster stable than I could on my old 1700 and the false positive from the Karhu sweet had me excited for 12 hours or so...
> 
> 
> 
> I'm also using HCI without any markable differences between those..only RAMTest is faster..
> 
> Can you try to use less memory. Try opening 14 instances of 850mb...
> 
> Edit: Looking closer to your screenshot i saw 99% @ the Ram meter (right side) while testing... its logical it fails you only have 144mb left /forum/images/smilies/tongue.gif
> Test 80-90% of AVAILABLE ram. And i never use the pc while stress-testing! its to risky from my experience. Can't rule out whats wrong if i get errors! /forum/images/smilies/wink.gif
Click to expand...

Also running that much ram causes big problems if you have a crash as your page file isn’t large enough to handle the literal dump it’s going to take. If you do happen to run into corruption or programs acting oddly the easiest thing you can do to rule out corruption causing problems is opening acme as admin and typing “sfc /scannow” without quotes and it will check for corruption and fix what it can through the install.wim file but in the rare instance that becomes corrupted you can use DISM commands and a windows install disk to pull the files out of the installation media to restore your OS back to new just as FYI. Sometimes those corruptions are also causing memory errors to show up and they can cause other files to become corrupt. Like a domino effect but is easy to solve, and fast.


----------



## minal

majestynl said:


> Nice kit but doesn't make difference with current bios/agesa I believe..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm also using HCI without any markable differences between those..only RAMTest is faster..
> 
> Can you try to use less memory. Try opening 14 instances of 850mb...
> 
> Edit: Looking closer to your screenshot i saw 99% @ the Ram meter (right side) while testing... its logical it fails you only have 144mb left
> Test 80-90% of AVAILABLE ram. And i never use the pc while stress-testing! its to risky from my experience. Can't rule out whats wrong if i get errors!





CJMitsuki said:


> Also running that much ram causes big problems if you have a crash as your page file isn’t large enough to handle the literal dump it’s going to take. If you do happen to run into corruption or programs acting oddly the easiest thing you can do to rule out corruption causing problems is opening acme as admin and typing “sfc /scannow” without quotes and it will check for corruption and fix what it can through the install.wim file but in the rare instance that becomes corrupted you can use DISM commands and a windows install disk to pull the files out of the installation media to restore your OS back to new just as FYI. Sometimes those corruptions are also causing memory errors to show up and they can cause other files to become corrupt. Like a domino effect but is easy to solve, and fast.



Why would running out of RAM cause memory errors? I can understand it would slow down, start swapping, and even crash, but memory errors?


----------



## majestynl

minal said:


> Why would running out of RAM cause memory errors? I can understand it would slow down, start swapping, and even crash, but memory errors?


It's because of reducing operational impact. You are running it in a OS. And check his screenshots.
99% ram !!.. If you want to test full ram then use MemTest outside OS.
I accidentally located to much ram many times and got quickly errors with HCI.

And btw: if it wasn't an issue why RamTest and techpower up asks for amount of ram?They could skip the box and just test auto detected available ram..


----------



## minal

majestynl said:


> It's because of reducing operational impact. You are running it in a OS. And check his screenshots.
> 99% ram !!.. If you want to test full ram then use MemTest outside OS.
> I accidentally located to much ram many times and got quickly errors with HCI.


99% ram, I run into that often enough :S. And 13% page file... that's gotta hurt. 

But again, that will slow things down. Unless the memory or OS are unstable why would it cause *memory errors*? I can understand programs could crash or the OS kills them, but I would not expect memory errors.


----------



## majestynl

minal said:


> 99% ram, I run into that often enough :S. And 13% page file... that's gotta hurt.
> 
> But again, that will slow things down. Unless the memory or OS are unstable why would it cause *memory errors*? I can understand programs could crash or the OS kills them, but I would not expect memory errors.


Again, you are running it in the OS! So there are background processes running...its to risky! OS ramtest softwares are just "TO GO" test methods. A 100% proper way to test ram is using it outside the OS. 
dont know why they throw errors but i got it often and they are very sensitive. Probably with any small issue they just spits out an general error.

did you ever compared the errors?.. HCI= memory error found copying ?? uhu .  
Ramtest= "count" error found !! Not really specific


----------



## hurricane28

majestynl said:


> Nice kit but doesn't make difference with current bios/agesa I believe..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm also using HCI without any markable differences between those..only RAMTest is faster..
> 
> Can you try to use less memory. Try opening 14 instances of 850mb...
> 
> Edit: Looking closer to your screenshot i saw 99% @ the Ram meter (right side) while testing... its logical it fails you only have 144mb left
> Test 80-90% of AVAILABLE ram. And i never use the pc while stress-testing! its to risky from my experience. Can't rule out whats wrong if i get errors!


Its not only Agesa or BIOS mate, these damn chips can barely handle 3600 MHz lol. It doesn't make any difference tho, 3466 MHz low latency is still king even on Intel. These kits are only made to show us what they can do basically. No one is going to buy these kits unless you are hardcore overclocker with LN2 and a super binned chip and motherboard.


----------



## VicsPC

majestynl said:


> Again, you are running it in the OS! So there are background processes running...its to risky! OS ramtest softwares are just "TO GO" test methods. A 100% proper way to test ram is using it outside the OS.
> dont know why they throw errors but i got it often and they are very sensitive. Probably with any small issue they just spits out an general error.
> 
> did you ever compared the errors?.. HCI= memory error found copying ?? uhu .
> Ramtest= "count" error found !! Not really specific


I agree but you still need to test ram inside the OS, it's not just ram that has to be stable so does the cpu and OS with the build. Running outside OS is fine for checking actual errors but that won't help much when running inside the OS. I run mine at 950x16 meaning only 800mb free and i have not had an issue yet with stability. Did 700% with memtest using tight timings on hynix. Went from 16-18 to 14-16 using 1.45v. This picture shows 860x16 but ive done it with 950x16 without issues. This is on the c6 with BIOS 1107/1201 i believe. Core is at 1.262 3.8ghz with offset. Youd be surprised how much windows will disallocate from windows when running memtest. Its possible ramtest is different but I've had no issues running high ram usage. The problem comes when i disable geardown, then it fails at like 100%.

This is why i tell people that just running ramtests and synthetic benchmarks doesn't prove stability. You gotta use your PC as you normally would and see what happens then.


----------



## majestynl

VicsPC said:


> I agree but you still need to test ram inside the OS, it's not just ram that has to be stable so does the cpu and OS with the build. Running outside OS is fine for checking actual errors but that won't help much when running inside the OS. I run mine at 950x16 meaning only 800mb free and i have not had an issue yet with stability. Did 700% with memtest using tight timings on hynix. Went from 16-18 to 14-16 using 1.45v. This picture shows 860x16 but ive done it with 950x16 without issues. This is on the c6 with BIOS 1107/1201 i believe. Core is at 1.262 3.8ghz with offset. Youd be surprised how much windows will disallocate from windows when running memtest. Its possible ramtest is different but I've had no issues running high ram usage. The problem comes when i disable geardown, then it fails at like 100%.
> 
> This is why i tell people that just running ramtests and synthetic benchmarks doesn't prove stability. You gotta use your PC as you normally would and see what happens then.


Sure ..I'm not saying not  , but the whole discussing started because someone got errors while using 99% of ram.. and then blaimed Ramtest.

Btw: 800mb free is still not 99%.. or did you installed 78GB 
800 is enough for most background processes. But seen from his screenshots he was very busy using his PC 

I had same issues with GD off on different setups. Not tried with current...


----------



## lordzed83

majestynl said:


> It's because of reducing operational impact. You are running it in a OS. And check his screenshots.
> 99% ram !!.. If you want to test full ram then use MemTest outside OS.
> I accidentally located to much ram many times and got quickly errors with HCI.
> 
> And btw: if it wasn't an issue why RamTest and techpower up asks for amount of ram?They could skip the box and just test auto detected available ram..


Nowadays im doing quick 200% RamTest then mote to HCI.
HCI is still better like passed 3000% on Ramtest yesterday error free with extra stability option as always. So moved in to ?HCI and around 120% BSOD as pc was not stable added extra 100mv to ddr (was running on lower for test) and boom HCI 1000% pass NO Bsod or errors.

So in my tests/opinion Ramtest is good for quick 200-400% check for errors then moving to HCI to get at elst 400% error bsot reboot free. I'm always using 95% memory in my tests not to just test memory but to also test if system is stable with that setting. Asn You know Error free memory=/= stable imc/cpu with those settings.

so what If i can pass 5000% ramtest if system WILL reboot under heavy memory and cpu workloads. Dont want that when PC is Mining coinzzz 16 hour's a day :]


----------



## CJMitsuki

minal said:


> majestynl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nice kit but doesn't make difference with current bios/agesa I believe..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm also using HCI without any markable differences between those..only RAMTest is faster..
> 
> Can you try to use less memory. Try opening 14 instances of 850mb...
> 
> Edit: Looking closer to your screenshot i saw 99% @ the Ram meter (right side) while testing... its logical it fails you only have 144mb left /forum/images/smilies/tongue.gif
> Test 80-90% of AVAILABLE ram. And i never use the pc while stress-testing! its to risky from my experience. Can't rule out whats wrong if i get errors! /forum/images/smilies/wink.gif
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Also running that much ram causes big problems if you have a crash as your page file isn’t large enough to handle the literal dump it’s going to take. If you do happen to run into corruption or programs acting oddly the easiest thing you can do to rule out corruption causing problems is opening acme as admin and typing “sfc /scannow” without quotes and it will check for corruption and fix what it can through the install.wim file but in the rare instance that becomes corrupted you can use DISM commands and a windows install disk to pull the files out of the installation media to restore your OS back to new just as FYI. Sometimes those corruptions are also causing memory errors to show up and they can cause other files to become corrupt. Like a domino effect but is easy to solve, and fast.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why would running out of RAM cause memory errors? I can understand it would slow down, start swapping, and even crash, but memory errors?
Click to expand...

Sorry, let me clarify as I may not have worded that clearly. I was on my phone at lunch while at work as I am now. I didn’t mean that the corruptions would make the errors but they would end up making them interact with the memory errors through the dump once 15-16gb of memory crashes. those corruptions can spread and cause many more problems. In short, the memory errors are already there but they can be possibly safely tested without interacting with the files but if the Ramtest crashes and all of that memory dumps along with the errors and possible file corruptions then it may elevate already present problems, hence my advice to run the sfc command since it is better to be sure that files are safe rather than finding out later that they weren’t. 

Also, if you run Ramtest with default or Enabled then you are likely to cause false positives in your testing. Even the developer said that. That is the drawback to using the cpu and the cache to quicken the test. A more thorough test is one that is done outside the OS and slowly without using the CPU threads and cache for acceleration. It is great for very quickly running through memory but it is by no means a reason to stop doing 8-12 hour testing outside of the OS with MemTest86 or even better MemTest64 which is included in the HCI MemTest deluxe version. 1000% is roughly a 10 hour test and that assures me that my memory is clean.



minal said:


> majestynl said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's because of reducing operational impact. You are running it in a OS. And check his screenshots.
> 99% ram !!.. If you want to test full ram then use MemTest outside OS.
> I accidentally located to much ram many times and got quickly errors with HCI.
> 
> 
> 
> 99% ram, I run into that often enough :S. And 13% page file... that's gotta hurt.
> 
> But again, that will slow things down. Unless the memory or OS are unstable why would it cause *memory errors*? I can understand programs could crash or the OS kills them, but I would not expect memory errors.
Click to expand...

I don’t think he means real errors, rather a false positive being thrown by the program due to the stress the system is under. Remember the program is trying to run, meanwhile you are running at 99% memory while system services and everything else is also trying to use that memory. It’s only logical that you will encounter problems with the program while that is going on.


----------



## pschorr1123

Thanks for the responses guys, my Internet was down all day yesterday shortly after I posted so I am just now going to try your suggestions and post back. But basically I was testing too much memory? Not sure what number i should use per instance as I had read on the Memory stability forum that for 16GB you need to run 16 instances of memtest hcl and I had 850MB per instance. I had nothing else running besides the OS. I pass mem test hcl @3200 14,14,14,28,42 to 1000% I was just surprised to passed the Karhu test then error-ed out so fast on hcl. I'm a noob so I figured I could just use the faster Karhu test and be set but from what I'm reading I should only use that for quick and dirty to get it to pass an hour of that before moving on to hcl which will tie up the pc. 

Next time I will compare the errors but The Karhu test did not give any errors only the hcl test did which turns out to be a user error or IO error (idiot operator) The kit is good I have is the Gskill Ripjaws V 3600 16,16,16,36 (B-Dies) I'm just trying to get stable at Higher speeds is all since I upgraded to the 2700x.

So my question is how many MB per hcl instance should I use to test 16GB?


----------



## CJMitsuki

pschorr1123 said:


> Thanks for the responses guys, my Internet was down all day yesterday shortly after I posted so I am just now going to try your suggestions and post back. But basically I was testing too much memory? Not sure what number i should use per instance as I had read on the Memory stability forum that for 16GB you need to run 16 instances of memtest hcl and I had 850MB per instance. I had nothing else running besides the OS. I pass mem test hcl @3200 14,14,14,28,42 to 1000% I was just surprised to passed the Karhu test then error-ed out so fast on hcl. I'm a noob so I figured I could just use the faster Karhu test and be set but from what I'm reading I should only use that for quick and dirty to get it to pass an hour of that before moving on to hcl which will tie up the pc.
> 
> Next time I will compare the errors but The Karhu test did not give any errors only the hcl test did which turns out to be a user error or IO error (idiot operator) The kit is good I have is the Gskill Ripjaws V 3600 16,16,16,36 (B-Dies) I'm just trying to get stable at Higher speeds is all since I upgraded to the 2700x.
> 
> So my question is how many MB per hcl instance should I use to test 16GB?


That depends on the amount of free ram you have. For instance, if I have 15gb free bc OS is using some etc. then I want to keep 1gb free for background processes etc to do their thing if need be. That means I can use 14gb with HCI so I take 14000 and divide that by 16 then open 16 instances of HCI and input the number into each one and start them. That’s assuming you have 16 threads of course. With a 12 thread cpu you would divide by 12 and open 12 instances, so on and so forth.

Here’s my opinion on that though. You are only testing the free ram and you’ll never be able to say your are fully stable as far as memory is concerned. You need to remove the OS from the equation and test outside of the OS while you work/sleep. In the OS I can test 14gb of ram which is fine for what it is but outside of OS I can test 15.93gb of my ram which is 99.6% of my ram being tested vs 87.5% of my ram being tested. I’d rather be 99.6% sure my ram is error free than 87.5% sure 😊


----------



## pschorr1123

majestynl said:


> Nice kit but doesn't make difference with current bios/agesa I believe..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm also using HCI without any markable differences between those..only RAMTest is faster..
> 
> Can you try to use less memory. Try opening 14 instances of 850mb...
> 
> Edit: Looking closer to your screenshot i saw 99% @ the Ram meter (right side) while testing... its logical it fails you only have 144mb left
> Test 80-90% of AVAILABLE ram. And i never use the pc while stress-testing! its to risky from my experience. Can't rule out whats wrong if i get errors!





majestynl said:


> It's because of reducing operational impact. You are running it in a OS. And check his screenshots.
> 99% ram !!.. If you want to test full ram then use MemTest outside OS.
> I accidentally located to much ram many times and got quickly errors with HCI.
> 
> And btw: if it wasn't an issue why RamTest and techpower up asks for amount of ram?They could skip the box and just test auto detected available ram..





majestynl said:


> Again, you are running it in the OS! So there are background processes running...its to risky! OS ramtest softwares are just "TO GO" test methods. A 100% proper way to test ram is using it outside the OS.
> dont know why they throw errors but i got it often and they are very sensitive. Probably with any small issue they just spits out an general error.
> 
> did you ever compared the errors?.. HCI= memory error found copying ?? uhu .
> Ramtest= "count" error found !! Not really specific





VicsPC said:


> I agree but you still need to test ram inside the OS, it's not just ram that has to be stable so does the cpu and OS with the build. Running outside OS is fine for checking actual errors but that won't help much when running inside the OS. I run mine at 950x16 meaning only 800mb free and i have not had an issue yet with stability. Did 700% with memtest using tight timings on hynix. Went from 16-18 to 14-16 using 1.45v. This picture shows 860x16 but ive done it with 950x16 without issues. This is on the c6 with BIOS 1107/1201 i believe. Core is at 1.262 3.8ghz with offset. Youd be surprised how much windows will disallocate from windows when running memtest. Its possible ramtest is different but I've had no issues running high ram usage. The problem comes when i disable geardown, then it fails at like 100%.
> 
> This is why i tell people that just running ramtests and synthetic benchmarks doesn't prove stability. You gotta use your PC as you normally would and see what happens then.





majestynl said:


> Sure ..I'm not saying not  , but the whole discussing started because someone got errors while using 99% of ram.. and then blaimed Ramtest.
> 
> Btw: 800mb free is still not 99%.. or did you installed 78GB
> 800 is enough for most background processes. But seen from his screenshots he was very busy using his PC
> 
> I had same issues with GD off on different setups. Not tried with current...





CJMitsuki said:


> That depends on the amount of free ram you have. For instance, if I have 15gb free bc OS is using some etc. then I want to keep 1gb free for background processes etc to do their thing if need be. That means I can use 14gb with HCI so I take 14000 and divide that by 16 then open 16 instances of HCI and input the number into each one and start them. That’s assuming you have 16 threads of course. With a 12 thread cpu you would divide by 12 and open 12 instances, so on and so forth.
> 
> Here’s my opinion on that though. You are only testing the free ram and you’ll never be able to say your are fully stable as far as memory is concerned. You need to remove the OS from the equation and test outside of the OS while you work/sleep. In the OS I can test 14gb of ram which is fine for what it is but outside of OS I can test 15.93gb of my ram which is 99.6% of my ram being tested vs 87.5% of my ram being tested. I’d rather be 99.6% sure my ram is error free than 87.5% sure 😊



Thanks I think my problem was I had my browsers open and stuff because the Karhu test let me still use the pc while HCL slows it down big time forcing me to use my laptop. Like a moron I thought that if I pass one test @4000% then it should pass the other with flying colors. I figured I was doing something wrong. Anyways thanks again for the help. I am going to test again properly following your suggestions and report back. 

Also I did the sfc and came back all good. Better safe than sorry.


----------



## boatmurder

Got my new toys yesterday.
C7H, 2700X, F4-3200C14D-32GVR.
Booted with XMP (Or OHCP or whatever fancy acronym they came up with now) without issue.
Booted with 3200 13-13-13-28-64 gear down off, but latency increased slightly instead of going down
As well as 3400 at default 3200 timings.
Didn't boot at Ryzen DRAM calc extreme for 3200 or safe at 3600, me increasing voltages in SOC or RAM did not impress it at all, maybe there is a different parameter to tweak first on this platform?

Not certain of stability yet, Ran into errors with in OS testing. But I've also been unable to reboot or install new chipset drivers with the new hw, probably need to do a clean install (expected) and/or my "97%" System SSD is finally about to croak its last. 
Which wouldn't be cool, but i just ordered a 512gb 970 pro using a VAT back offer so i was going to reinstall either way.

I have left the memory running at base clock in memtest86 4.7 while at work and came back to find 0 errors, so clearly that parts not ****ed. Just got back and am now 15 minutes into the fancier memtest86 7.5 with XMP and 0 errors *knock on wood*

Memtest86 also came out claiming a 57ns latency as opposed to 67ns reported by the in OS benchmark I've seen you guys using, not sure what to make of that


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> pschorr1123 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for the responses guys, my Internet was down all day yesterday shortly after I posted so I am just now going to try your suggestions and post back. But basically I was testing too much memory? Not sure what number i should use per instance as I had read on the Memory stability forum that for 16GB you need to run 16 instances of memtest hcl and I had 850MB per instance. I had nothing else running besides the OS. I pass mem test hcl @3200 14,14,14,28,42 to 1000% I was just surprised to passed the Karhu test then error-ed out so fast on hcl. I'm a noob so I figured I could just use the faster Karhu test and be set but from what I'm reading I should only use that for quick and dirty to get it to pass an hour of that before moving on to hcl which will tie up the pc.
> 
> Next time I will compare the errors but The Karhu test did not give any errors only the hcl test did which turns out to be a user error or IO error (idiot operator) The kit is good I have is the Gskill Ripjaws V 3600 16,16,16,36 (B-Dies) I'm just trying to get stable at Higher speeds is all since I upgraded to the 2700x.
> 
> So my question is how many MB per hcl instance should I use to test 16GB?
> 
> 
> 
> That depends on the amount of free ram you have. For instance, if I have 15gb free bc OS is using some etc. then I want to keep 1gb free for background processes etc to do their thing if need be. That means I can use 14gb with HCI so I take 14000 and divide that by 16 then open 16 instances of HCI and input the number into each one and start them. That’s assuming you have 16 threads of course. With a 12 thread cpu you would divide by 12 and open 12 instances, so on and so forth.
> 
> Here’s my opinion on that though. You are only testing the free ram and you’ll never be able to say your are fully stable as far as memory is concerned. You need to remove the OS from the equation and test outside of the OS while you work/sleep. In the OS I can test 14gb of ram which is fine for what it is but outside of OS I can test 15.93gb of my ram which is 99.6% of my ram being tested vs 87.5% of my ram being tested. I’d rather be 99.6% sure my ram is error free than 87.5% sure 😊
Click to expand...


I got question out of intrest. 
How many times you had no errors on kets say 800% hci in wi dows to find errors when running memtesti6 from boktable drive?? Just curious


----------



## CJMitsuki

lordzed83 said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pschorr1123 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for the responses guys, my Internet was down all day yesterday shortly after I posted so I am just now going to try your suggestions and post back. But basically I was testing too much memory? Not sure what number i should use per instance as I had read on the Memory stability forum that for 16GB you need to run 16 instances of memtest hcl and I had 850MB per instance. I had nothing else running besides the OS. I pass mem test hcl @3200 14,14,14,28,42 to 1000% I was just surprised to passed the Karhu test then error-ed out so fast on hcl. I'm a noob so I figured I could just use the faster Karhu test and be set but from what I'm reading I should only use that for quick and dirty to get it to pass an hour of that before moving on to hcl which will tie up the pc.
> 
> Next time I will compare the errors but The Karhu test did not give any errors only the hcl test did which turns out to be a user error or IO error (idiot operator) The kit is good I have is the Gskill Ripjaws V 3600 16,16,16,36 (B-Dies) I'm just trying to get stable at Higher speeds is all since I upgraded to the 2700x.
> 
> So my question is how many MB per hcl instance should I use to test 16GB?
> 
> 
> 
> That depends on the amount of free ram you have. For instance, if I have 15gb free bc OS is using some etc. then I want to keep 1gb free for background processes etc to do their thing if need be. That means I can use 14gb with HCI so I take 14000 and divide that by 16 then open 16 instances of HCI and input the number into each one and start them. That’s assuming you have 16 threads of course. With a 12 thread cpu you would divide by 12 and open 12 instances, so on and so forth.
> 
> Here’s my opinion on that though. You are only testing the free ram and you’ll never be able to say your are fully stable as far as memory is concerned. You need to remove the OS from the equation and test outside of the OS while you work/sleep. In the OS I can test 14gb of ram which is fine for what it is but outside of OS I can test 15.93gb of my ram which is 99.6% of my ram being tested vs 87.5% of my ram being tested. I’d rather be 99.6% sure my ram is error free than 87.5% sure 😊
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I got question out of intrest.
> How many times you had no errors on kets say 800% hci in wi dows to find errors when running memtesti6 from boktable drive?? Just curious
Click to expand...

Very rarely but it’s still a possibility, enough of a possibility to make me want to do it. If I’m at work or sleeping while it is running then it isn’t a problem for me. If I get 800%+ in HCI or even 2000% in Ramtest I will use computer normally for the night and then before sleep or before work in the morning I will fire up MemTest64 and go about my day. I don’t let the small possibility stop me from using my computer until then though. So I get what you are saying and I agree the chance is small and unlikely that there is an error hiding but it gives me peace of mind and doesn’t inconvenience me to run the test while I’m away.


----------



## lordzed83

@CJMitsuki in my case when im kot using pc its mining so im not making extra cash hehe 2000 ramtest and 800 hci does the job. Then my rendering stress test and good to go 🙂


----------



## usoldier

You guys are all bad overclockers , i mean just look at this guy running 4600 Ram kit easypizi ;D






Sry for offtopic i had to


----------



## majestynl

CJMitsuki said:


> I don’t think he means real errors, rather a false positive being thrown by the program due to the stress the system is under. Remember the program is trying to run, meanwhile you are running at 99% memory while system services and everything else is also trying to use that memory. It’s only logical that you will encounter problems with the program while that is going on.


TY  finally somebody who did understand the whole point!



pschorr1123 said:


> Thanks I think my problem was I had my browsers open and stuff because the Karhu test let me still use the pc while HCL slows it down big time forcing me to use my laptop. Like a moron I thought that if I pass one test @4000% then it should pass the other with flying colors. I figured I was doing something wrong. Anyways thanks again for the help. I am going to test again properly following your suggestions and report back.
> 
> Also I did the sfc and came back all good. Better safe than sorry.


LOL! 



usoldier said:


> You guys are all bad overclockers , i mean just look at this guy running 4600 Ram kit easypizi ;D
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRwu5dOU_wA&t=54s
> 
> Sry for offtopic i had to


Really ? and u believe that ?! LOL


----------



## usoldier

@majestynl you need to fix your sarcasm meter


----------



## majestynl

usoldier said:


> @majestynl you need to fix your sarcasm meter


Wowww yeah heheh...sssssuurry 
Skewed the sensor over here..


----------



## crakej

So this evening I though I'd have another go at 3600 - went back to T1 with geardown=on. CPU 4.1GHz 1.406v SoC 1.0124v, CL14,15,14,14,28,42 - exact same timings I passed on before, but with manual OC instead of p-states. Voltages are very slightly different!

*Success!*  Obviously only had a chance to run through everything once and have yet to see what happens when I reboot! I will save these and see if I can get my extreme timings to pass as well (again!). I used no performance enhancing settings in this test run and will update once I've tested with those. I'm fairly happy, though when running IBT (which I don't use for stability testing) there was a little freeze detected which isn't ideal, but I think it's prob fixable - timings most likely. Not doing any more time consuming tests tonight. I'm actually quite sure I can tune this better - especially now I know it's not a fluke that it passed. One point of note - while playing around I can tell you that some tests done while using T2 showed more speed and latency than I've had so far with this setup (T1, geardown=on)

Update: Grrrr! Just noticed that I didn't bring RamTest back to the front before I took the screenshot!  I'm sure most of you will know I don't brag about non existent results, so please accept my apologies. I stopped the test at 6600%.....if you don't want to believe me, that's ok!


----------



## majestynl

So im now stopping with stability testing of the Ram @ 3533 strap CL14 + TT. 
It succeed multiple times/days with RamTest. And today i did a long run with HCI for those who love that sw 
Ramtest results in previous posts! Below screenshot from HCI and Aida!
Going to use this as daily setup!

Final settings:

*Ram Strap:* 3533Mhz
*Timings:* 14 14 14 28 42 + TT (own timings)
*Ram voltage:* 1.4v
*Soc voltage:* 1.05v
*Cadbus:* 30 ohm
*ProcODT:* 68.6 ohm (needed for booting perfect each time)
*Memory switching freq:* 400
*Ram cooling:* Active, Gskill turbulence III
*Test cpu profile:* Ryzen 2700x Manual OC @ 4.2Ghz 

Now going to play with CPU again


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> So im now stopping with stability testing of the Ram @ 3533 strap CL14 + TT.
> It succeed multiple times/days with RamTest. And today i did a long run with HCI for those who love that sw
> Ramtest results in previous posts! Below screenshot from HCI and Aida!
> Going to use this as daily setup!
> 
> Final settings:
> 
> *Ram Strap:* 3533Mhz
> *Timings:* 14 14 14 28 42 + TT (own timings)
> *Ram voltage:* 1.4v
> *Soc voltage:* 1.05v
> *Cadbus:* 30 ohm
> *ProcODT:* 68.6 ohm (needed for booting perfect each time)
> *Memory switching freq:* 400
> *Ram cooling:* Active, Gskill turbulence III
> *Test cpu profile:* Ryzen 2700x Manual OC @ 4.2Ghz
> 
> Now going to play with CPU again


Very good! Did you use any performance enhancers? Which setting works best for you?


----------



## JayC72

*VDDP & CLDO_VDDP Voltages*

Hi CH7 owners,

Does anyone know :
1) what VDDP and CLDO_VDDP Voltages do?
2) what are the default values for VDDP and CLDO_VDDP Voltages ?

Background:
So I'm on this adventure that some of you are also on ... overclocking DRAM. So far, pushing my GSKill 3600 Trident Z RGB 16Gb B-Die ram from 3200 to 3466 has been relatively easy. But I've hit a slight bump at 3533.
I'm currently stressing 3533Mhz at CL14, and getting 1 error in HCi Memtest at roughly around 1900% (14hours). All other benchmarks and tests have been fine (ie. fine for the length of time I have run them). IntelBurnTest, Asus Real Bench, Cinebench15, Aida64. Have not run Prime95 yet. I usually run it after HCi memtest overnight run.

BTW, I believe there is no such thing as 100% stable. It just means that you have not found an app/program that stress it to the point of crashing the PC yet, *or *you have not run the stress app/program for long enough.
There is only, '_what you feel is sufficiently stable for your everyday use_'. It doesn't mean it's 100% stable for everything. 

So I'm almost there with what I'd call "stable" (ie. enough for my liking). Otherwise I'd be forever stress testing, and never actually use the PC for anything else. 


My DRAM voltage is 1.39v - 
VDDSOC Voltage Override is 0.9875v,
VTTDDR voltage is 0.71v,
ProcODT 53.3 ohm,
the 4 MemCadBus settings are on 24

Can someone help me with what VDDP and CLDO_VDDP are/do?

Thanks in advance.


----------



## JayC72

hurricane28 said:


> Weird man. I disable HPET a while back and didn't see any performance increase or degradation so i leave it than. I just wanted to know how it went but i can't even boot when i disable those options.


Just on this HPET thing...
If you disable it in UEFI, you might have to disable it in Windows first.
To enable HPET as the only timer run the command _bcdedit /set useplatformclock true_
To disable HPET in Windows run the command _bcdedit /deletevalue useplatformclock_

Maybe you might be crashing because windows is expecting it ??


----------



## chakku

HPET is disabled by default anyway and used only when required so disabling it in BIOS/Windows shouldn't make any difference.


----------



## JayC72

majestynl said:


> *Memory switching freq:* 400


Well done!

Quick question what does Memory switching Freq at 400 do?


----------



## boatmurder

boatmurder said:


> Got my new toys yesterday.
> C7H, 2700X, F4-3200C14D-32GVR.
> Booted with XMP (Or OHCP or whatever fancy acronym they came up with now) without issue.
> 
> I have left the memory running at base clock in memtest86 4.7 while at work and came back to find 0 errors, so clearly that parts not ****ed. Just got back and am now 15 minutes into the fancier memtest86 7.5 with XMP and 0 errors *knock on wood*
> 
> Memtest86 also came out claiming a 57ns latency as opposed to 67ns reported by the in OS benchmark I've seen you guys using, not sure what to make of that


Got 2 good passes on memtest 86 with the XMP.

Tinkered for a bit, increasing Ram voltage to 1.38 improved time from power on to the ASUS Splashscreen, probably had some undesired cycling going there previously.

Left it on Extreme timings memtest86 overnight, froze at 88% in rowhammer during the first pass for a total of 1h20 before freezing -meh!

Will probably be able to pick up my m.2 at the post office and get a clean windows install this evening; looking forward to mess with it some more, see if i can convince it to run at higher freq with Cl15/16.


----------



## Syldon

JayC72 said:


> Hi CH7 owners,
> 
> Does anyone know :
> 1) what VDDP and CLDO_VDDP Voltages do?
> 2) what are the default values for VDDP and CLDO_VDDP Voltages ?



Acronyms explained here

Gupsterg has some info on VDDP here


----------



## Martin778

Do you guys OC the CPU just by setting multi and fixed voltage or something else?


----------



## lsguru85

*Stability problems*

Hi folks,

as much as I want to love this platform, because it's wonderfully fast in threaded workloads (kernel compilations under WSL, financial analysis, video encoding, etc.), and as much as I want to overclock it, I'm still struggling to get my Ryzen build stable, even on default settings.

I've got the Ryzen 2700x + C7H, latest BIOS (0601), Win 10 Pro, other components top notch too (Seasonic Platinum PSU, Samsung PRO NVMe, etc.). First time, I've had some Crucial Ballistix Elite 4x8GB 3466 kits, and they weren't stable at all, either on auto or with manual settings from Ryzen Calc. Couldn't get them to work, they simply had to leave after many days of unsuccessful tweaking. Next, I had the 4x8GB G Skill 3200 Trident Z RGB kits and they seemed stable (no other tweaks, just 3200 Mhz D.O.C.P.). However, from the future point of view (possible upgrades to 64GB) and cheaper price, I've switched over to the 2x16GB 3200 Trident Z kits (F4-3200C14D-32GTZ). Set them to D.O.C.P 3200 Mhz (no other tweaks, DIMM slots A2+B2 as recommended in manual), successfully passed 15+ hours of Memtest86+, 10+ hours of Prime95, 10+ hours of Furmark, etc. - for the past week it just seemed stable and I've been enjoying the overall smooth experience and hoped that the stability problems are gone forever.

Not so. Yesterday was full of surprises - first after being unable to copy 10+GB RAR archives from my backup USB 3.0 stick to my network NAS (which never occured before), followed by many unsuccessful verifications of Macrium image backups of my NVMe boot disk (at random blocks), random Chrome crashes and finally failing to test some 50+GB RAR archives locally (always failing at random archive contents), I don't know what to think right now, totally confused.

So I've switched from D.O.C.P. 3200 Mhz to completely auto settings in BIOS. Now the RAM is running at 2133 Mhz  and while the system currently seems to be less responsive than on 3200 Mhz, it "seems" stable - everything I've mentioned that was failing is now passing successfully on 2133 Mhz. But I'm still unsure if stability problems are not going to happen again...

I've paid some premium bucks for this new build and running downclocked for the sake of "possible" stability feels a little bit strange (you probably know what I mean).

What do you think? Shall I play with the Ryzen Calc and manually tweak the BIOS settings to death (although it's an extremely time consuming task and possibly a hit or miss game)? Wait for new BIOS/AGESA to magically fix my problems? Shall I return back to my previous 4x8GB kits? I simply don't know.

Many thanks in advance for any suggestions. I don't want to give up this wonderful platform. I still believe it's possible to run stable at 3200 Mhz 2x16GB ...


----------



## Jaju123

lsguru85 said:


> Hi folks,
> 
> as much as I want to love this platform, because it's wonderfully fast in threaded workloads (kernel compilations under WSL, financial analysis, video encoding, etc.), and as much as I want to overclock it, I'm still struggling to get my Ryzen build stable, even on default settings.
> 
> I've got the Ryzen 2700x + C7H, latest BIOS (0601), Win 10 Pro, other components top notch too (Seasonic Platinum PSU, Samsung PRO NVMe, etc.). First time, I've had some Crucial Ballistix Elite 4x8GB 3466 kits, and they weren't stable at all, either on auto or with manual settings from Ryzen Calc. Couldn't get them to work, they simply had to leave after many days of unsuccessful tweaking. Next, I had the 4x8GB G Skill 3200 Trident Z RGB kits and they seemed stable (no other tweaks, just 3200 Mhz D.O.C.P.). However, from the future point of view (possible upgrades to 64GB) and cheaper price, I've switched over to the 2x16GB 3200 Trident Z kits (F4-3200C14D-32GTZ). Set them to D.O.C.P 3200 Mhz (no other tweaks, DIMM slots A2+B2 as recommended in manual), successfully passed 15+ hours of Memtest86+, 10+ hours of Prime95, 10+ hours of Furmark, etc. - for the past week it just seemed stable and I've been enjoying the overall smooth experience and hoped that the stability problems are gone forever.
> 
> Not so. Yesterday was full of surprises - first after being unable to copy 10+GB RAR archives from my backup USB 3.0 stick to my network NAS (which never occured before), followed by many unsuccessful verifications of Macrium image backups of my NVMe boot disk (at random blocks), random Chrome crashes and finally failing to test some 50+GB RAR archives locally (always failing at random archive contents), I don't know what to think right now, totally confused.
> 
> So I've switched from D.O.C.P. 3200 Mhz to completely auto settings in BIOS. Now the RAM is running at 2133 Mhz  and while the system currently seems to be less responsive than on 3200 Mhz, it "seems" stable - everything I've mentioned that was failing is now passing successfully on 2133 Mhz. But I'm still unsure if stability problems are not going to happen again...
> 
> I've paid some premium bucks for this new build and running downclocked for the sake of "possible" stability feels a little bit strange (you probably know what I mean).
> 
> What do you think? Shall I play with the Ryzen Calc and manually tweak the BIOS settings to death (although it's an extremely time consuming task and possibly a hit or miss game)? Wait for new BIOS/AGESA to magically fix my problems? Shall I return back to my previous 4x8GB kits? I simply don't know.
> 
> Many thanks in advance for any suggestions. I don't want to give up this wonderful platform. I still believe it's possible to run stable at 3200 Mhz 2x16GB ...



You can probably get 2933mhz or 3000mhz, but 3200mhz might be too much with 4 ram sticks. The IMC doesn't go as high with all the slots filled.


----------



## lsguru85

Jaju123 said:


> You can probably get 2933mhz or 3000mhz, but 3200mhz might be too much with 4 ram sticks. The IMC doesn't go as high with all the slots filled.


I don't have all slots filled - as I've mentioned in my post, I finally went with 2x16GB sticks in A2+B2 slots.


----------



## JayC72

Syldon said:


> Acronyms explained here
> 
> Gupsterg has some info on VDDP here


Thanks Slydon.
Slightly closer to understanding.
I learnt that VDDP is for BCLK stability, so not what i need here for DRAM stability. But useful for the next phase of overclocking the CPU.

Also learnt that CLDO_VDDP is what I want to try. 
"somewhat counterintuitively, lowering VDDP can often be more beneficial for stability than raising CLDO_VDDP. cannot not be set to a value greater than VDIMM-0.1V (not to exceed 1.05V)."
But the question is what should I try first?
My instinct says, if it is not to exceed 1.05v, then 0.800v to 0.900v is a good place to start.
Or in UEFI terms, values of 800mv to 900mv.

I am taking a guess that Auto settings have used 1.05V since VDimm - 0.1v is over 1.05v.


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> So this evening I though I'd have another go at 3600 - went back to T1 with geardown=on. CPU 4.1GHz 1.406v SoC 1.0124v, CL14,15,14,14,28,42 - exact same timings I passed on before, but with manual OC instead of p-states. Voltages are very slightly different!
> 
> *Success!*  Obviously only had a chance to run through everything once and have yet to see what happens when I reboot! I will save these and see if I can get my extreme timings to pass as well (again!). I used no performance enhancing settings in this test run and will update once I've tested with those. I'm fairly happy, though when running IBT (which I don't use for stability testing) there was a little freeze detected which isn't ideal, but I think it's prob fixable - timings most likely. Not doing any more time consuming tests tonight. I'm actually quite sure I can tune this better - especially now I know it's not a fluke that it passed. One point of note - while playing around I can tell you that some tests done while using T2 showed more speed and latency than I've had so far with this setup (T1, geardown=on)
> 
> Update: Grrrr! Just noticed that I didn't bring RamTest back to the front before I took the screenshot!  I'm sure most of you will know I don't brag about non existent results, so please accept my apologies. I stopped the test at 6600%.....
> 
> 
> if you don't want to believe me, that's ok!


We believe you.. no worries  Nice results tho!



crakej said:


> Very good! Did you use any performance enhancers? Which setting works best for you?


Thanks! PE3 works great over here, has always been.. Didn't try PE4 with new CPU! Im a bit more careful with this one  Im still suspecting i degraded the first 2700x 



JayC72 said:


> Well done!
> 
> Quick question what does Memory switching Freq at 400 do?


Thanks. I think below video will explain you everything. Its interesting for those who dont know what these options do:








lsguru85 said:


> Hi folks,
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> as much as I want to love this platform, because it's wonderfully fast in threaded workloads (kernel compilations under WSL, financial analysis, video encoding, etc.), and as much as I want to overclock it, I'm still struggling to get my Ryzen build stable, even on default settings.
> 
> I've got the Ryzen 2700x + C7H, latest BIOS (0601), Win 10 Pro, other components top notch too (Seasonic Platinum PSU, Samsung PRO NVMe, etc.). First time, I've had some Crucial Ballistix Elite 4x8GB 3466 kits, and they weren't stable at all, either on auto or with manual settings from Ryzen Calc. Couldn't get them to work, they simply had to leave after many days of unsuccessful tweaking. Next, I had the 4x8GB G Skill 3200 Trident Z RGB kits and they seemed stable (no other tweaks, just 3200 Mhz D.O.C.P.). However, from the future point of view (possible upgrades to 64GB) and cheaper price, I've switched over to the 2x16GB 3200 Trident Z kits (F4-3200C14D-32GTZ). Set them to D.O.C.P 3200 Mhz (no other tweaks, DIMM slots A2+B2 as recommended in manual), successfully passed 15+ hours of Memtest86+, 10+ hours of Prime95, 10+ hours of Furmark, etc. - for the past week it just seemed stable and I've been enjoying the overall smooth experience and hoped that the stability problems are gone forever.
> 
> Not so. Yesterday was full of surprises - first after being unable to copy 10+GB RAR archives from my backup USB 3.0 stick to my network NAS (which never occured before), followed by many unsuccessful verifications of Macrium image backups of my NVMe boot disk (at random blocks), random Chrome crashes and finally failing to test some 50+GB RAR archives locally (always failing at random archive contents), I don't know what to think right now, totally confused.
> 
> So I've switched from D.O.C.P. 3200 Mhz to completely auto settings in BIOS. Now the RAM is running at 2133 Mhz  and while the system currently seems to be less responsive than on 3200 Mhz, it "seems" stable - everything I've mentioned that was failing is now passing successfully on 2133 Mhz. But I'm still unsure if stability problems are not going to happen again...
> 
> I've paid some premium bucks for this new build and running downclocked for the sake of "possible" stability feels a little bit strange (you probably know what I mean).
> 
> What do you think? Shall I play with the Ryzen Calc and manually tweak the BIOS settings to death (although it's an extremely time consuming task and possibly a hit or miss game)? Wait for new BIOS/AGESA to magically fix my problems? Shall I return back to my previous 4x8GB kits? I simply don't know.
> 
> Many thanks in advance for any suggestions. I don't want to give up this wonderful platform. I still believe it's possible to run stable at 3200 Mhz 2x16GB ...


If you dont want to waste time (like you suggesting), then dont OC sub-timings! The calculator is mentioned to push the limits and not for TO GO!
If i was you i would just select your ram strap (speed), enter a ram voltage and enter the first timings(factory) and leave rest on auto!

OC'ing ram is time-consuming if you want them to be super-stable!


----------



## Martin778

I also don't understand the Tdie temp. sensor on the 2700X. It peaks around 70*C anyways, tried reseating the cooler and got a nice TIM imprint both of the times and the rad gets barely warm. If the pomp was bad etc. then the block would have gotten hot but thats not the case.
70c peak and 35-40*C idle cannot be, impossible unless the sensor is wonky.


----------



## majestynl

Martin778 said:


> I also don't understand the Tdie temp. sensor on the 2700X. It peaks around 70*C anyways, tried reseating the cooler and got a nice TIM imprint both of the times and the rad gets barely warm.
> 70c peak and 35-40*C idle cannot be, impossible unless the sensor is wonky.


Dont worry! Its OK! the 2700x is a hot chip! This MOBO has great sensors and ASUS did put a lot of time on it because of CH6!
Just to relax you: My temps with a custom loop with a 360 rad (push/pull) and a 240 (push) in a open bench: 

*IDLE:* 27c
*Full load with testing:* ~68c-72c
*Gaming for hours:* peaks ~58c / average under 50c
*Ambient:* ~24c
*TIM:* Kryonaut, spread out with card!

Above are roughly the temps with my manual OC @4.2ghz with ~1.312v on vcore!

If you are using XFR/PBO functions (stock or PE) sometimes your temps can go a bit higher(peaks) because of the boost voltages!

edit: some extra notes!


----------



## VicsPC

majestynl said:


> Dont worry! Its OK! the 2700x is a hot chip! This MOBO has great sensors and ASUS did put a lot of time on it because of CH6!
> Just to relax you: My temps with a custom loop with a 360 rad (push/pull) and a 240 (push) in a open bench:
> 
> *IDLE:* 27c
> *Full load with testing:* ~68c-72c
> *Gaming for hours:* ~58c
> *Ambient:* ~24c
> *TIM:* Kryonaut, spread out with card!
> 
> Above are roughly the temps with my manual OC @4.2ghz with ~1.312v on vcore!
> 
> If you are using XFR/PBO functions (stock or PE) sometimes your temps can go a bit higher(peaks) because of the boost voltages!


That's quite warm for 58°C under gaming. I think my 1700x with 1.262v only hits like 40°C while gaming. Same setup as yours for cooling too.


----------



## majestynl

VicsPC said:


> That's quite warm for 58°C under gaming. I think my 1700x with 1.262v only hits like 40°C while gaming. Same setup as yours for cooling too.


Thats the max peak temp, average is under 50c! 
and dont forget im running a a 2700x and you 1700x. And 1.262v vs 1.312v


----------



## Martin778

majestynl said:


> Dont worry! Its OK! the 2700x is a hot chip! This MOBO has great sensors and ASUS did put a lot of time on it because of CH6!
> Just to relax you: My temps with a custom loop with a 360 rad (push/pull) and a 240 (push) in a open bench:
> 
> *IDLE:* 27c
> *Full load with testing:* ~68c-72c
> *Gaming for hours:* ~58c
> *Ambient:* ~24c
> *TIM:* Kryonaut, spread out with card!
> 
> Above are roughly the temps with my manual OC @4.2ghz with ~1.312v on vcore!
> 
> If you are using XFR/PBO functions (stock or PE) sometimes your temps can go a bit higher(peaks) because of the boost voltages!


Yes, I run indeed XFR, saw it boosting to 4.35 sometimes. The 70c was under Prime95 AVX so pretty much the absolute max.
I've tried Kryonaut and now Gelid GC Extreme (spreads much easier) and the temps are pretty much identical.


----------



## minal

lsguru85 said:


> Hi folks,
> 
> as much as I want to love this platform, because it's wonderfully fast in threaded workloads (kernel compilations under WSL, financial analysis, video encoding, etc.), and as much as I want to overclock it, I'm still struggling to get my Ryzen build stable, even on default settings.
> 
> I've got the Ryzen 2700x + C7H, latest BIOS (0601), Win 10 Pro, other components top notch too (Seasonic Platinum PSU, Samsung PRO NVMe, etc.). First time, I've had some Crucial Ballistix Elite 4x8GB 3466 kits, and they weren't stable at all, either on auto or with manual settings from Ryzen Calc. Couldn't get them to work, they simply had to leave after many days of unsuccessful tweaking. Next, I had the 4x8GB G Skill 3200 Trident Z RGB kits and they seemed stable (no other tweaks, just 3200 Mhz D.O.C.P.). However, from the future point of view (possible upgrades to 64GB) and cheaper price, I've switched over to the 2x16GB 3200 Trident Z kits (F4-3200C14D-32GTZ). Set them to D.O.C.P 3200 Mhz (no other tweaks, DIMM slots A2+B2 as recommended in manual), successfully passed 15+ hours of Memtest86+, 10+ hours of Prime95, 10+ hours of Furmark, etc. - for the past week it just seemed stable and I've been enjoying the overall smooth experience and hoped that the stability problems are gone forever.
> 
> Not so. Yesterday was full of surprises - first after being unable to copy 10+GB RAR archives from my backup USB 3.0 stick to my network NAS (which never occured before), followed by many unsuccessful verifications of Macrium image backups of my NVMe boot disk (at random blocks), random Chrome crashes and finally failing to test some 50+GB RAR archives locally (always failing at random archive contents), I don't know what to think right now, totally confused.
> 
> So I've switched from D.O.C.P. 3200 Mhz to completely auto settings in BIOS. Now the RAM is running at 2133 Mhz  and while the system currently seems to be less responsive than on 3200 Mhz, it "seems" stable - everything I've mentioned that was failing is now passing successfully on 2133 Mhz. But I'm still unsure if stability problems are not going to happen again...
> 
> I've paid some premium bucks for this new build and running downclocked for the sake of "possible" stability feels a little bit strange (you probably know what I mean).
> 
> What do you think? Shall I play with the Ryzen Calc and manually tweak the BIOS settings to death (although it's an extremely time consuming task and possibly a hit or miss game)? Wait for new BIOS/AGESA to magically fix my problems? Shall I return back to my previous 4x8GB kits? I simply don't know.
> 
> Many thanks in advance for any suggestions. I don't want to give up this wonderful platform. I still believe it's possible to run stable at 3200 Mhz 2x16GB ...



I hear you. Try these settings: https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...ules-for-Crosshair-VII-2700X/page2#post719511


I also wanted a set and forget 3200 experience. That has been stable for me so far with stress tests and normal usage.


----------



## JayC72

JayC72 said:


> Also learnt that CLDO_VDDP is what I want to try.
> "somewhat counterintuitively, lowering VDDP can often be more beneficial for stability than raising CLDO_VDDP. cannot not be set to a value greater than VDIMM-0.1V (not to exceed 1.05V)."
> But the question is what should I try first?
> My instinct says, if it is not to exceed 1.05v, then 0.800v to 0.900v is a good place to start.
> Or in UEFI terms, values of 800mv to 900mv.
> 
> I am taking a guess that Auto settings have used 1.05V since VDimm - 0.1v is over 1.05v.




Okay, CDLO_VDDP did nothing for my stability. Made it worse actually. Memtest error-ed a lot earlier.

Back to testing the 4 Cadbus settings.


----------



## Jaju123

lsguru85 said:


> I don't have all slots filled - as I've mentioned in my post, I finally went with 2x16GB sticks in A2+B2 slots.


Ok, in that case they are dual rank which means at the same ram speeds and timings as a single rank kit they will still have higher bandwidth. However, you won't be able to clock them as high.


----------



## lsguru85

majestynl said:


> If you dont want to waste time (like you suggesting), then dont OC sub-timings! The calculator is mentioned to push the limits and not for TO GO!
> If i was you i would just select your ram strap (speed), enter a ram voltage and enter the first timings(factory) and leave rest on auto!
> 
> OC'ing ram is time-consuming if you want them to be super-stable!


Isn't D.O.C.P. Standard option in Extreme Tweaker submenu supposed to do this? Afaik, it sets the BCLK (100MHz), first timings and DRAM voltage, everything else is on Auto. It's really strange it was running stable last week and yesterday that sudden instability occurred...


----------



## VicsPC

majestynl said:


> Thats the max peak temp, average is under 50c!
> and dont forget im running a a 2700x and you 1700x. And 1.262v vs 1.312v


Oh alright i was gonna say if 58°C was average id be a bit concerned lol. I usually avg under 40°C in most games I'm hoping to get about the same or close with my 2700x.


----------



## majestynl

lsguru85 said:


> Isn't D.O.C.P. Standard option in Extreme Tweaker submenu supposed to do this? Afaik, it sets the BCLK (100MHz), first timings and DRAM voltage, everything else is on Auto. It's really strange it was running stable last week and yesterday that sudden instability occurred...


D.O.C.P are presets for general use, if those work then its OKE, but your potential RAMspeeds are very dependent on your own chips e.g. Integrated Memory Controller/CPU/RAM!
I never use those, always entering manually speeds/voltages/timings! Very simple!

And btw: keep in mind, if the BCLK is changed from stock (99.8) it could happen your vcore needs to be bumped a bit for BCLK 100!



VicsPC said:


> Oh alright i was gonna say if 58°C was average id be a bit concerned lol. I usually avg under 40°C in most games I'm hoping to get about the same or close with my 2700x.


hehe np! Most likely the 2700x will run hotter! if you are not going to under-clock it


----------



## VicsPC

majestynl said:


> D.O.C.P are presets for general use, if those work then its OKE, but your potential RAMspeeds are very dependent on your own chips e.g. Integrated Memory Controller/CPU/RAM!
> I never use those, always entering manually speeds/voltages/timings! Very simple!
> 
> And btw: keep in mind, if the BCLK is changed from stock (99.8) it could happen your vcore needs to be bumped a bit for BCLK 100!
> 
> 
> 
> hehe np! Most likely the 2700x will run hotter! if you are not going to under-clock it


I have not even put it together, its not even that hard just remove old mobo put in new one lol. I may try all auto and try pe3 see what happens, ram timings ill leave factory for now till i get my new ram and try it at 1.35v with geardown off if it fails memtest ill turn it on, if it fails again ill try 1.4-1.45v. It's what i have now and hve no issues, i haven't gone back to tighter timings since i cap my fps at 73 for freesync the tighter timings didnt seem to make much difference, even in R6S where i leave it uncapped didn't do much.


----------



## Syldon

JayC72 said:


> Thanks Slydon.
> Slightly closer to understanding.
> I learnt that VDDP is for BCLK stability, so not what i need here for DRAM stability. But useful for the next phase of overclocking the CPU.
> 
> Also learnt that CLDO_VDDP is what I want to try.
> "somewhat counterintuitively, lowering VDDP can often be more beneficial for stability than raising CLDO_VDDP. cannot not be set to a value greater than VDIMM-0.1V (not to exceed 1.05V)."
> But the question is what should I try first?
> My instinct says, if it is not to exceed 1.05v, then 0.800v to 0.900v is a good place to start.
> Or in UEFI terms, values of 800mv to 900mv.
> 
> I am taking a guess that Auto settings have used 1.05V since VDimm - 0.1v is over 1.05v.




VDDP: There used to be an issue on the CH6 where system passed stability testing on many programme, but then used to fail in games. lowering the VDDP to around 0.9v used to solve this. On the CH6 I always set mine to 0.885v. I have tried from 0.8v to 0.99v and saw little to no effect from VDDP on this board. 


CLDO_VDDP: is a setting that is great for removing memory speed holes. Where as you find you can get stable at say 2933mhz and 3333mhz, but nothing works inbetween. I remember reading somewhere that it works because it changes the signals emitted by the CPU clock (no source sorry). 

I did keep a copy of a post I once saw. I have no idea who posted it, but I would not have kept this if I felt it did not have credability. It basically gave a list of voltage points to try when adjusting th CLDO_VDDP. This list was based on the CH6, so I dont think the same numbers will apply to the CH7. The range was from 0.720 to 0.973. So I would guess this is your safe areas to look at.



The speed you are aiming at is showing some very inconsistent result on my system. If you got 14 hour of HCI memtest with only one error then I would see that as usable. Remember the CH7 does not use ECC memory. It is designed to run with the occasional error. The best I saw with 3533 was 700% on HCI memtest, but even then this gave me some blue screens if I left it running. I decided the gain from 3466 to 3533 is so small it is not worth the chase for anything more than kudos. I will wait for the next revision before I push it any further.


----------



## boatmurder

Back home, but without my new drive.
Left memtest86 running, 6h 20min, 4 passes 0 errors with default XMP 3200.
At this point I am convinced my old win 10 install is the culprit in memtest errors, so I'm just gonna do a quick reinstall on the old SSD. Hopefully resulting in a stable, rebootable System X)


----------



## CJMitsuki

Syldon said:


> Remember the CH7 does not use ECC memory. It is designed to run with the occasional error.


While I agree that one error in 8+ hours may be usable for normal home use, I don’t agree that the CH7 was designed to run with memory errors. Can it? Sure. Is it advisable if you value your data? No. ECC memory is for systems where data is of the utmost importance as they do not want it lost due to a memory error. I would think the gamer or the home user would not see much value in ECC memory anyway as the performance is not nearly as good as unbuffered non-ECC. With one error you may not see any trouble for a long time or it could happen quite fast, that’s a chance you have to decide if you are willing to take.


----------



## VPII

majestynl said:


> D.O.C.P are presets for general use, if those work then its OKE, but your potential RAMspeeds are very dependent on your own chips e.g. Integrated Memory Controller/CPU/RAM!
> I never use those, always entering manually speeds/voltages/timings! Very simple!
> 
> And btw: keep in mind, if the BCLK is changed from stock (99.8) it could happen your vcore needs to be bumped a bit for BCLK 100!
> 
> 
> 
> hehe np! Most likely the 2700x will run hotter! if you are not going to under-clock it


Sorry to reply to this post of yours. My pc back running seems as normal after new ch7 board I got today. Not rma will wait on that. Replacement will be stripped for ln2 or dice only. So happy cpu is fine.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## Johan45

VPII said:


> Sorry to reply to this post of yours. My pc back running seems as normal after new ch7 board I got today. Not rma will wait on that. Replacement will be stripped for ln2 or dice only. So happy cpu is fine.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk



I read your post about the DICE, then letting the PC sit for a bit and came back to it. If you can try very hard not to do that. Using those types of sub-ambient cooling the cold will creep outwards from the pot even more so when it's left sitting. My opinion is it's quite likely you got moisture in the outer RAM slots and that's what caused that channel to fail


----------



## Syldon

CJMitsuki said:


> While I agree that one error in 8+ hours may be usable for normal home use, I don’t agree that the CH7 was designed to run with memory errors. Can it?


All computer systems have the potential to throw out errors. The difference with ECC memory is that it resolves that error. ECC actually stands for Error Correction Code. Software for critical systems on CISC proccessors accept this risk and embed checksums. Windows 10 throws you a blue screen if it finds a checksum error, and then displays that error for you before it reboots.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Syldon said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> While I agree that one error in 8+ hours may be usable for normal home use, I don’t agree that the CH7 was designed to run with memory errors. Can it?
> 
> 
> 
> All computer systems have the potential to throw out errors. The difference with ECC memory is that it resolves that error. ECC actually stands for Error Correction Code. Software for critical systems on CISC proccessors accept this risk and embed checksums. Windows 10 throws you a blue screen if it finds a checksum error, and then displays that error for you before it reboots.
Click to expand...

The system displays the error as well as makes a dump file so you can view the details and point you in the direction of the error because it should be corrected because those errors can cause damage to system files and it is a toll of the dice as to whether that file is critical enough to cause the system to become unable to boot. Even 1 memory error can cause that. That’s why there is a need for ECC memory in the first place. If you have servers with vital data you must have the system error free all the time. Same with the home user that wants his data protected or his system stable. I keep all of my important data on a cloud so it doesn’t bother me to lose data but I like a stable system. Who wants to be in the middle of something only to have a blue screen then find out a critical .dll became corrupted then you have to perform recovery on the system. It’s a hassle over 1 tiny error that with a bit of time and effort can be worked out. Like I said, it’s a risk you have to assess whether you’re willing to take as it’s a roll of the dice. The error could not show for a very long time or it could cause problems immediately. No way to predict that. That’s why I’m my opinion 1 error isn’t acceptable. It’s not worth the possible frustrations they can cause. But that is up to the individual, if they want to take the risk then so be it.


----------



## Syldon

CJMitsuki said:


> That’s why I’m my opinion 1 error isn’t acceptable. It’s not worth the possible frustrations they can cause. But that is up to the individual, if they want to take the risk then so be it.


It is unreasonable to expect a system to not have errors in a system that is designed to have them. The best stability you can gain is if you give your system room to correct itself when it fails those checksums. So if stability is your highest priority, I would not work for the highest OCs.

You may be able to balance the system so that it can sustain a stability test for very long durations, but if you do this at your highest OC, then over time you will not be able to continously reproduce that result with the same speeds. Electromigration and decay within the system will change signal corruption. So you will find someone could probable get higher memory/CPU OCs when a system is new, and then degrade as the system wears down. So running at the finest point OC may not last a long time.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Syldon said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> That’s why I’m my opinion 1 error isn’t acceptable. It’s not worth the possible frustrations they can cause. But that is up to the individual, if they want to take the risk then so be it.
> 
> 
> 
> It is unreasonable to expect a system to not have errors in a system that is designed to have them. The best stability you can gain is if you give your system room to correct itself when it fails those checksums. So if stability is your highest priority, I would not work for the highest OCs.
> 
> You may be able to balance the system so that it can sustain a stability test for very long durations, but if you do this at your highest OC, then over time you will not be able to continously reproduce that result with the same speeds. Electromigration and decay within the system will change signal corruption. So you will find someone could probable get higher memory/CPU OCs when a system is new, and then degrade as the system wears down. So running at the finest point OC may not last a long time.
Click to expand...

Well, anyone overclocking should know that. That is pretty much the definition of overclocking. Running the hardware beyond its normal capabilities. Anything eventually wears out in time, whether it is overclocked or not. That does not mean you should leave errors uncorrected for long term use. If your use is to get the highest overclock to beat records then sure errors are going to more than likely be a part of it to attain the highest speeds but if that is your daily machine then you won’t run it at its highest speed 24/7. That’s a bad idea anyway as we know that higher memory speed doesn’t equate to better performance. I can run 3533 or 3600mhz all day but why would I when 3466mhz can outperform them? That’s why I say it is up to the user if an error is acceptable. Is it a machine that is purely an overclocking machine only for numbers? Or is it something that you want to use daily and have the best performance as well as last? If it is the latter then I’d say not having errors that are 100% correctable is the ideal choice for that scenario which will be your typical scenario. As long as the user knows the risk of a memory errors and they assume said risk then I say go for it. One thing I won’t do is say that 1 error is safe and that these machines were intended to have errors and designed with such intentions because it is absolutely not true.


----------



## majestynl

VicsPC said:


> I have not even put it together, its not even that hard just remove old mobo put in new one lol. I may try all auto and try pe3 see what happens, ram timings ill leave factory for now till i get my new ram and try it at 1.35v with geardown off if it fails memtest ill turn it on, if it fails again ill try 1.4-1.45v. It's what i have now and hve no issues, i haven't gone back to tighter timings since i cap my fps at 73 for freesync the tighter timings didnt seem to make much difference, even in R6S where i leave it uncapped didn't do much.


aha then i wish you good luck with installing your new toys  let us know what results you gained!



CJMitsuki said:


> While I agree that one error in 8+ hours may be usable for normal home use, I don’t agree that the CH7 was designed to run with memory errors. Can it? Sure. Is it advisable if you value your data? No. ECC memory is for systems where data is of the utmost importance as they do not want it lost due to a memory error. I would think the gamer or the home user would not see much value in ECC memory anyway as the performance is not nearly as good as unbuffered non-ECC. With one error you may not see any trouble for a long time or it could happen quite fast, that’s a chance you have to decide if you are willing to take.


Agree!!


----------



## CJMitsuki

lordzed83 said:


> @*CJMitsuki* in my case when im kot using pc its mining so im not making extra cash hehe 2000 ramtest and 800 hci does the job. Then my rendering stress test and good to go 🙂



Oh well if the PC is making cash then the slight chance of an error wouldnt get me to stop mining for 12 hours either


----------



## VPII

Johan45 said:


> I read your post about the DICE, then letting the PC sit for a bit and came back to it. If you can try very hard not to do that. Using those types of sub-ambient cooling the cold will creep outwards from the pot even more so when it's left sitting. My opinion is it's quite likely you got moisture in the outer RAM slots and that's what caused that channel to fail


Johan, that is more than likely what happened. But if I mean leave the pc, I mean remove the cooling first and let it sit outside in the sun to dry properly without the pot on it.


----------



## JayC72

Syldon said:


> VDDP: There used to be an issue on the CH6 where system passed stability testing on many programme, but then used to fail in games. lowering the VDDP to around 0.9v used to solve this. On the CH6 I always set mine to 0.885v. I have tried from 0.8v to 0.99v and saw little to no effect from VDDP on this board.
> 
> CLDO_VDDP: is a setting that is great for removing memory speed holes. Where as you find you can get stable at say 2933mhz and 3333mhz, but nothing works inbetween. I remember reading somewhere that it works because it changes the signals emitted by the CPU clock (no source sorry).
> 
> I did keep a copy of a post I once saw. I have no idea who posted it, but I would not have kept this if I felt it did not have credability. It basically gave a list of voltage points to try when adjusting th CLDO_VDDP. This list was based on the CH6, so I dont think the same numbers will apply to the CH7. The range was from 0.720 to 0.973. So I would guess this is your safe areas to look at.
> 
> The speed you are aiming at is showing some very inconsistent result on my system. If you got 14 hour of HCI memtest with only one error then I would see that as usable. Remember the CH7 does not use ECC memory. It is designed to run with the occasional error. The best I saw with 3533 was 700% on HCI memtest, but even then this gave me some blue screens if I left it running. I decided the gain from 3466 to 3533 is so small it is not worth the chase for anything more than kudos. I will wait for the next revision before I push it any further.


Thanks Slydon. That was very helpful. VDDP and CLDO_VDDP didn't help me in this case. And I tried a few settings under these two areas. While it didn't help me in this case it wasn't a complete waste of time. At least I knew that's not my problem and needed to look else where.
1 error after 14 hours of HCI memtest (or over 2500%) was impressive especially with under 1.4v DRAM voltage. I would have normally stopped testing at 1000%, but I left it and forgot about it until the next day.

And since I know I'm so close to removing that 1 error, I'm going to push through to find the solution.
And push through I did.
Tried upping DRAM voltage from 1.390v to 1.395v, and
changed the 4 cadbus settings from 24 to 30.

HCI Memtest ran 24 hours until this morning, all 16 instances using 850 were well over 3500% with NO errors! Woo hoo!!:specool:

Need to run Prime 95 overnight now.



CJMitsuki said:


> While I agree that one error in 8+ hours may be usable for normal home use, I don't agree that the CH7 was designed to run with memory errors. Can it? Sure. Is it advisable if you value your data? No. ECC memory is for systems where data is of the utmost importance as they do not want it lost due to a memory error. I would think the gamer or the home user would not see much value in ECC memory anyway as the performance is not nearly as good as unbuffered non-ECC. With one error you may not see any trouble for a long time or it could happen quite fast, that's a chance you have to decide if you are willing to take.


Yeah, I was knew I was close to finding a solution, so I'm not going to stop at accepting 1 error.
You and Slydon both have valid points. In fact all the points both of you raised are technically correct. 
So hopefully you are not having an argument over something I raised , but just a heated, constructive debate.
I wouldn't have known about the 1 error after 14 hours if I had not forgotten that I left HCI memtest running overnight. I would have normally stopped HCI Memtest a lot earlier and considered it "stable".

But I'm glad I found the error. And I wasn't too far off to finding more stability. As I mentioned above, it's now 24 hour stable at 3533 CL14.
Is it 100% stable? I can't guarantee it. It might have error-ed at the 25th hour. I'm not chasing 25 hour stability on memtest or Prime95 or <insert stress test app here>.
So I'm happy this system is reasonably reliable (notice I avoided using the word stable) with games, Office, emails, web browsing and videos.

HAHA, and yes, I'm now at a point of pushing purely for the numbers. 3533 CL14 sounds a whole lot better than 3466 CL14. Yes, all the same subtimings. I wasn't going to wimp out and settle for a lower number. 
This is Overclockers.net afterall, not wimpout.net. :thumb:


----------



## Syldon

Congrats on getting it running without errors. Can we have a settings dump, so we can see what you have used Versus others here.



JayC72 said:


> Yeah, I was knew I was close to finding a solution, so I'm not going to stop at accepting 1 error.
> You and Slydon both have valid points. In fact all the points both of you raised are technically correct.
> So hopefully you are not having an argument over something I raised , but just a heated, constructive debate.
> I wouldn't have known about the 1 error after 14 hours if I had not forgotten that I left HCI memtest running overnight. I would have normally stopped HCI Memtest a lot earlier and considered it "stable".


It is an opinion nothing more then that.. You can't take things personally when you post here. I never meant anything derogatory, and I very much doubt CJMitsuki did either. All is good in the wood at my end.


----------



## hurricane28

New chipset drivers fellas: https://support.amd.com/en-us/download/chipset?os=Windows 10 - 64


----------



## lordzed83

hurricane28 said:


> New chipset drivers fellas: https://support.amd.com/en-us/download/chipset?os=Windows 10 - 64


thanks


----------



## majestynl

hurricane28 said:


> New chipset drivers fellas: https://support.amd.com/en-us/download/chipset?os=Windows 10 - 64


Thanks chap... Hate when they don't publish release notes !!


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> lordzed83 said:
> 
> 
> 
> @*CJMitsuki* in my case when im kot using pc its mining so im not making extra cash hehe 2000 ramtest and 800 hci does the job. Then my rendering stress test and good to go 🙂
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh well if the PC is making cash then the slight chance of an error wouldnt get me to stop mining for 12 hours either /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif
Click to expand...


Well my my pascal titan paid otself back 6 months ago made 600 pounds profit since then. Basically my pc mining 18h a day pays my whole electric gas and water bills and since i swap hardware 2 months before warsanty goes whatever hehe.

You must be unlucky with system corruption tho. Never had system packing up or getting corrupted. Had 2 SSDs dying ofc on warranty lol. Same as You keep my important data in cloud. With streaming i dont even keep porn collection on pc nowadays 😛


----------



## hurricane28

Np fellas, i discovered that there is nothing to update? I ran the installer and it said that everything is up to date lol. Than why release " new" chipset driver...?


----------



## lordzed83

majestynl said:


> hurricane28 said:
> 
> 
> 
> New chipset drivers fellas: https://support.amd.com/en-us/download/chipset?os=Windows 10 - 64
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks chap... Hate when they don't publish release notes !!
Click to expand...

Dont think they need to. Or you would like to see something like. Minor tweeks and increaed preformance.. Every single time haha


----------



## kamikatze13

QuickQuestion™:


does a custom p-state 0 disable single-core XFR boost?


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> Dont think they need to. Or you would like to see something like. Minor tweeks and increaed preformance.. Every single time haha


haha yep same s..t i know, but they are doing it with Radeon


----------



## lordzed83

kamikatze13 said:


> QuickQuestion™️:
> 
> 
> does a custom p-state 0 disable single-core XFR boost?


Yes


----------



## lordzed83

Delete


----------



## lordzed83

kamikatze13 said:


> QuickQuestion™️:
> 
> 
> does a custom p-state 0 disable single-core XFR boost?


Yes. Would be great if we could do 1 core max boost and volts clock 2 cores boost and volts 4 cores boost and volts and all vores like now.


----------



## CJMitsuki

lordzed83 said:


> kamikatze13 said:
> 
> 
> 
> QuickQuestion™️:
> 
> 
> does a custom p-state 0 disable single-core XFR boost?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes. Would be great if we could do 1 core max boost and volts clock 2 cores boost and volts 4 cores boost and volts and all vores like now.
Click to expand...

Now that is something that would be great. Much better than XFR with much more control. PState 0 (1,2,4,6,8 core clock) different dropdown for each set.


----------



## majestynl

CJMitsuki said:


> Now that is something that would be great. Much better than XFR with much more control. PState 0 (1,2,4,6,8 core clock) different dropdown for each set.


Yeap nice feature to see! Ever tried Pstate 1 etc with this board? Last time i quickly checked it but clocks where locked. Didn't tried more.. just curious if someone did try those! ?


----------



## Johan45

VPII said:


> Johan, that is more than likely what happened. But if I mean leave the pc, I mean remove the cooling first and let it sit outside in the sun to dry properly without the pot on it.


Ah, I misunderstood. I leave them a minimum of 24 hours warm and dry without the battery in. Usually more like a week. The sun works but the inside of a vehicle parked in the sun works better. If I'm in a hurry a hairdryer works well or even in an oven on very low heat.


----------



## robersoc

Hello, got recently CH7 Wifi and 2700x and wondering if all is working properly regarding the mobo.

Is it normal that slow post every time i reboot pc? Im talking about 5-8 seconds prepost and if its cold boot it even boot and stop 3 times till going to load windows taking like 20+ seconds.

Im on last bios 0601 and flashed it using flashback.

About ram im using 2x8gb bdie gskill 4400 c19, right now testing 3466 c14, but that slow post happens even with some stilt preset completely stable.

Im using sli too.

There should be some option to disable/ignore dram training but cant see it on bios.

Thanks!


----------



## MacG32

Update to AMD Chipset Drivers v18.10.0601: https://support.amd.com/en-us/download/chipset?os=Windows+10+-+64 It never overwrites the older version, so uninstall the old version completely, then install the new version. :thumb:


----------



## majestynl

robersoc said:


> Hello, got recently CH7 Wifi and 2700x and wondering if all is working properly regarding the mobo.
> 
> Is it normal that slow post every time i reboot pc? Im talking about 5-8 seconds prepost and if its cold boot it even boot and stop 3 times till going to load windows taking like 20+ seconds.
> 
> Im on last bios 0601 and flashed it using flashback.
> 
> About ram im using 2x8gb bdie gskill 4400 c19, right now testing 3466 c14, but that slow post happens even with some stilt preset completely stable.
> 
> Im using sli too.
> 
> There should be some option to disable/ignore dram training but cant see it on bios.
> 
> Thanks!


There are 2 kind of boot situations, 1 where it boots with full memory training and 1 without. Seeing from your 3x reboot, your training fails so this will take more time!
I fixed this with ProcODT: 68.6 ohm for 3533mhz CL14+TT. 3433 didn't need any ProcODT change from default with my setup!
See also link: http://www.overclock.net/forum/27483436-post1884.html

In general first release of bios are mostly a bit slower in booting. Probably the boot time can change in later bios version! Same happened with CH6!


----------



## larrydavid

Do you guys find that PE3 performs better than PE2? The results at Hardocp were instability and really not any performance gain.

I know some of you here are running PE3, and have said the temperatures are even less than PE2?


----------



## hurricane28

MacG32 said:


> Update to AMD Chipset Drivers v18.10.0601: https://support.amd.com/en-us/download/chipset?os=Windows+10+-+64 It never overwrites the older version, so uninstall the old version completely, then install the new version. :thumb:


Yeah, but there is nothing new in this "new" chipset driver.. you can see that if you do express install and hover above the to install programs, it will tell you that most updated version is already installed.


----------



## CJMitsuki

majestynl said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now that is something that would be great. Much better than XFR with much more control. PState 0 (1,2,4,6,8 core clock) different dropdown for each set.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeap nice feature to see! Ever tried Pstate 1 etc with this board? Last time i quickly checked it but clocks where locked. Didn't tried more.. just curious if someone did try those! ?
Click to expand...

Yes, I have had PState 1 working before but for me it is better just to set PState 1 and the others to Auto since they are configured decently already, down to 700mhz if I remember correctly. That is if you allow that in your Power State settings within the OS and Bios. PState 1 is around 2.1ghz for me and it lets my machine axle at pretty much whatever the ambient is in their room. Usually 22c, or around 72f since I live in the States. Only time I ever use Celsius is in my PC. Feels weird to use Fahrenheit when speaking about electronics temperatures.



hurricane28 said:


> MacG32 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Update to AMD Chipset Drivers v18.10.0601: https://support.amd.com/en-us/download/chipset?os=Windows+10+-+64 It never overwrites the older version, so uninstall the old version completely, then install the new version. /forum/images/smilies/thumb.gif
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, but there is nothing new in this "new" chipset driver.. you can see that if you do express install and hover above the to install programs, it will tell you that most updated version is already installed.
Click to expand...

I noticed that even if you go to update the drivers in windows, sometimes it will say you have the best drivers installed but you really won’t. You have to manually do it and uncheck “Use compatible drivers” then point it to the AMD drivers. That’s especially true if you are trying to replace a Microsoft driver as MS thinks their drivers are the best, always and don’t want you replacing them. I had problems trying to replace their SATA controller until I did that. Then I noticed a fair amount of drivers don’t get replaced or even seen automatically by the system because of that checkbox. To install my monitor driver I even had to boot into advanced startup with driver signatures disabled as it did not have a certificate. Microsoft can be a real pain in the ass sometimes. Their Sata driver is garbage, made my Samsung SSDs 100-150mb per second slower on sequential read/write than the Amd controller.
Also, there are many more drivers inside of installer packages within the actual extracted files other than what you see on the AMD installer. I just extract it to C:/AMD and manually check every driver because it could just be one driver in the SMBus package or something like that, that changes the chipset version.


----------



## robersoc

majestynl said:


> There are 2 kind of boot situations, 1 where it boots with full memory training and 1 without. Seeing from your 3x reboot, your training fails so this will take more time!
> I fixed this with ProcODT: 68.6 ohm for 3533mhz CL14+TT. 3433 didn't need any ProcODT change from default with my setup!
> See also link: http://www.overclock.net/forum/27483436-post1884.html
> 
> In general first release of bios are mostly a bit slower in booting. Probably the boot time can change in later bios version! Same happened with CH6!


Thanks! That 3533 tighted looks very good, congrats! Right now testing it but 3533 insta crashed, changed to 3466 and testing with hci. Anyway i think my chips will be much easier to get totally stable at 3466 tighted than any higher. Will continue testing.

Happy tweaking!


----------



## CJMitsuki

robersoc said:


> majestynl said:
> 
> 
> 
> There are 2 kind of boot situations, 1 where it boots with full memory training and 1 without. Seeing from your 3x reboot, your training fails so this will take more time!
> I fixed this with ProcODT: 68.6 ohm for 3533mhz CL14+TT. 3433 didn't need any ProcODT change from default with my setup!
> See also link: http://www.overclock.net/forum/27483436-post1884.html
> 
> In general first release of bios are mostly a bit slower in booting. Probably the boot time can change in later bios version! Same happened with CH6!
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks! That 3533 tighted looks very good, congrats! Right now testing it but 3533 insta crashed, changed to 3466 and testing with hci. Anyway i think my chips will be much easier to get totally stable at 3466 tighted than any higher. Will continue testing.
> 
> Happy tweaking!
Click to expand...

I got 3533mhz tightened down really nicely and latency was looking good and bandwidth as well but for some reason, no matter what, my Cinenbench scores and other benchmarks were lower in regards to the CPU as opposed to 3466mhz with tightened timings. Even though the latency and bandwidth was a bit better on 3533mhz. I expected a 1995+ at 4.25ghz in Cinebench but was about 20 points lower than my 1987 at 4.25ghz with 3466mhz. What it looks like it that single core performance got a small increase but multi core dropped with 3533. Very puzzling behavior out of the IMC at higher frequencies, maybe has something to do with GD and 2T and how they react with the CPU? Or possibly a certain group of timings? I want to test further but I think it will lead to frustration, I think I will just try to further refine 3466mhz and get 1T stable. I should be able to get a 2000+ in Cinebench at 4.275ghz and close to it with 4.25ghz. I like 4.25 much better as the vCore needed to sustain 4.275ghz is not worth the minute performance gain over 4.25ghz. The heat bounces around too much for my liking since I need 1.41 vCore and 4.25 I need like 1.33 or lower. It’s quite the difference in heat at full load. I can run 4.35ghz too but is not IBT stable due to me not being able to control the temps with my h115i on liquid metal. If I could keep temps around 70c I’m sure it would be stable at 1.425v. Normal use I can run 4.35ghz all day though. Even run benchmarks. Cinebench I was getting 2015+ scores.


----------



## robersoc

CJMitsuki said:


> I got 3533mhz tightened down really nicely and latency was looking good and bandwidth as well but for some reason, no matter what, my Cinenbench scores and other benchmarks were lower in regards to the CPU as opposed to 3466mhz with tightened timings. Even though the latency and bandwidth was a bit better on 3533mhz. I expected a 1995+ at 4.25ghz in Cinebench but was about 20 points lower than my 1987 at 4.25ghz with 3466mhz. What it looks like it that single core performance got a small increase but multi core dropped with 3533. Very puzzling behavior out of the IMC at higher frequencies, maybe has something to do with GD and 2T and how they react with the CPU? Or possibly a certain group of timings? I want to test further but I think it will lead to frustration, I think I will just try to further refine 3466mhz and get 1T stable. I should be able to get a 2000+ in Cinebench at 4.275ghz and close to it with 4.25ghz. I like 4.25 much better as the vCore needed to sustain 4.275ghz is not worth the minute performance gain over 4.25ghz. The heat bounces around too much for my liking since I need 1.41 vCore and 4.25 I need like 1.33 or lower. It’s quite the difference in heat at full load. I can run 4.35ghz too but is not IBT stable due to me not being able to control the temps with my h115i on liquid metal. If I could keep temps around 70c I’m sure it would be stable at 1.425v. Normal use I can run 4.35ghz all day though. Even run benchmarks. Cinebench I was getting 2015+ scores.


Maybe that 3533 preset wasn´t 100% stable. When RAM isn´t 100% stable you can wait lower performance and not smooth gameplay. I think will stick on 3466 strap and will tight it at max. 

You could try adding some voltage to Vdimm and Vsoc for 3533 even some fan on it.

About frequency i want to look for some 1.35V ish setting, still dunno how good is this chip. CoreTemp says VID 1.2125 V and revision Pir-B2. Little tests was all core x40 with 1.20V and x42 1.35V and looked stable, no bsods, apps crashing, whea loggers and all that but still need more testing. Just have this system 1.5 days.

Those CB numbers seems very good, max I´ve seen is 1840 but just mounted the Noctua, time to more testings.


----------



## Neoony

majestynl said:


> Thanks chap... Hate when they don't publish release notes !!


Actually, I just realized you can check the release notes in the folder of each driver.

So you can just go to the extracted folder [Default: C:\AMD\AMD-Chipset-Drivers] and do a search for "Release" "*.txt" and it will show you all the text files with notes:









*NOTE:* When searching for the Release notes text files, it might be better to search for "*.txt" because some of them are named "README.txt" :doh:

You can see the "Date modified" for easy recognition if it updated at all.

I have yet to notice any change in this latest release xD 
hmm...there should be some easy way to compare all of the files with the previous release...
...search for "*" and sort by date 
Latest folders:








Latest files:








The 30-May date goes for all the .msi files and ends there.

So I think this was only some installer update. Maybe the conditions/terms changed? GDPR?

But anyways, this also just really means, that they are simply too lazy to put the changes out with the download in some organized way. 
We need something like GDPR, but for change logs 

[ This post is also posted in C6H thread: http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...vi-overclocking-thread-3765.html#post27487020 ]


----------



## hurricane28

CJMitsuki said:


> Yes, I have had PState 1 working before but for me it is better just to set PState 1 and the others to Auto since they are configured decently already, down to 700mhz if I remember correctly. That is if you allow that in your Power State settings within the OS and Bios. PState 1 is around 2.1ghz for me and it lets my machine axle at pretty much whatever the ambient is in their room. Usually 22c, or around 72f since I live in the States. Only time I ever use Celsius is in my PC. Feels weird to use Fahrenheit when speaking about electronics temperatures.
> 
> 
> 
> I noticed that even if you go to update the drivers in windows, sometimes it will say you have the best drivers installed but you really won’t. You have to manually do it and uncheck “Use compatible drivers” then point it to the AMD drivers. That’s especially true if you are trying to replace a Microsoft driver as MS thinks their drivers are the best, always and don’t want you replacing them. I had problems trying to replace their SATA controller until I did that. Then I noticed a fair amount of drivers don’t get replaced or even seen automatically by the system because of that checkbox. To install my monitor driver I even had to boot into advanced startup with driver signatures disabled as it did not have a certificate. Microsoft can be a real pain in the ass sometimes. Their Sata driver is garbage, made my Samsung SSDs 100-150mb per second slower on sequential read/write than the Amd controller.
> Also, there are many more drivers inside of installer packages within the actual extracted files other than what you see on the AMD installer. I just extract it to C:/AMD and manually check every driver because it could just be one driver in the SMBus package or something like that, that changes the chipset version.


I know what you are saying but i checked the versions and there is no newer version in this new release compared to what i could see in device manager...


----------



## hurricane28

Neoony said:


> Actually, I just realized you can check the release notes in the folder of each driver.
> 
> So you can just go to the extracted folder [Default: C:\AMD\AMD-Chipset-Drivers] and do a search for "Release" and it will show you all the text files with notes:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can see the "Date modified" for easy recognition if it updated at all.
> 
> I have yet to notice any change in this latest release xD
> hmm...there should be some easy way to compare all of the files with the previous release...
> ...search for "*" and sort by date
> Latest folders:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Latest files:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The 30-May date goes for all the .msi files and ends there.
> 
> So I think this was only some installer update. Maybe the conditions/terms changed? GDPR?
> 
> But anyways, this also just really means, that they are simply too lazy to put the changes out with the download in some organized way.
> We need something like GDPR, but for change logs
> 
> [ This post is also posted in C6H thread: http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...vi-overclocking-thread-3765.html#post27487020 ]


That's quite need man, never knew this, Thnx for this info!


----------



## Neoony

Actually correction.
I somehow missed a bunch of files that are modified before 30-May after April.
Not exactly sure when was previous version of chipset released, but it should be somewhere before 15-May [thats when I downloaded it]

Here are the files: https://i.imgur.com/hX0w5Fe.png

Inf files:
AMD I2S Audio Information file : amdi2safd.inf - 24-May
AMD HD Audio Information file : AtihdWT3.inf - 24-May
AMD HD Audio Information file : AtihdWT6.inf - 24-May
AMD I2C Controller : amdi2c.inf - 13-May [Iam guessing this is the last thing, or maybe it was already in previous release]

*NOTE:* When searching for the Release notes text files, it might be better to search for "*.txt" because some of them are named "README.txt" :doh:


----------



## MacG32

hurricane28 said:


> Yeah, but there is nothing new in this "new" chipset driver.. you can see that if you do express install and hover above the to install programs, it will tell you that most updated version is already installed.



Do you think that AMD releases drivers that are not updated? I explained exactly what you need to do, as the installer will not overwrite older drivers. That pretty much explains that the installer is crippled/not programed correctly. The initial April release has been updated since then. That's the whole point of issuing an updated release that's dated 06JUN18. You do whatever you feel is necessary for your system and knowledge level. I know for a fact that these drivers are updated and have chosen to uninstall the old drivers and install the new drivers. I just brought the news of the updated drivers. Do as you wish...


----------



## CJMitsuki

robersoc said:


> Maybe that 3533 preset wasn´t 100% stable. When RAM isn´t 100% stable you can wait lower performance and not smooth gameplay. I think will stick on 3466 strap and will tight it at max.
> 
> You could try adding some voltage to Vdimm and Vsoc for 3533 even some fan on it.
> 
> About frequency i want to look for some 1.35V ish setting, still dunno how good is this chip. CoreTemp says VID 1.2125 V and revision Pir-B2. Little tests was all core x40 with 1.20V and x42 1.35V and looked stable, no bsods, apps crashing, whea loggers and all that but still need more testing. Just have this system 1.5 days.
> 
> Those CB numbers seems very good, max I´ve seen is 1840 but just mounted the Noctua, time to more testings.


No, it is stable, it passed 10 hours MemTest64 deluxe outside of OS on 2 separate occasions. I’ve tried pretty much tweaking all voltages but my SoC on this kit will not run on anything but 1.05v it runs amazing on it though. If I go up or down on the SoC it starts throwing errors on any speed. I think 3466mhz is just a sweet spot but hopefully once we are able to go to much higher frequencies that there is another spot my ram loves. Probably won’t be with this CPU though. Maybe 2nd Gen. Still have my 1700x sitting on my desk and hasn’t even been opened since I got it from my segfault RMA. Don’t have a clue what I want to do with it and the other x370 board I have.


----------



## Neoony

MacG32 said:


> Do you think that AMD releases drivers that are not updated? I explained exactly what you need to do, as the installer will not overwrite older drivers. That pretty much explains that the installer is crippled/not programed correctly. The initial April release has been updated since then. That's the whole point of issuing an updated release that's dated 06JUN18. You do whatever you feel is necessary for your system and knowledge level. I know for a fact that these drivers are updated and have chosen to uninstall the old drivers and install the new drivers. I just brought the news of the updated drivers. Do as you wish...


Usually the installer mentions when there is something new:

















None of those are updated in the new chipset version, so they are the same version.

I did have the issue you mentioned, but usually with notebooks or older platforms.
At least on C6H, Win10, AMD Chipset seems to update just fine and also update the drivers when it mentions that there is a new version, as you can see in the pictures. [pictures are from previous release]
So I personally had no need to uninstall it, or remove the folder, or manually update the drivers.
Last few chipset updates always had at least one thing updated [could be seen while installing in custom mode and hovering mouse over the driver, just like in the pictures above].


----------



## crakej

Guys - the driver may not contain any updates - *for your setup*, but it will for others. Remember x470 is not the only chipset (and/or cpu) serviced by this driver. Simple 

It's also completely untrue that the driver package doesn't actually update anything - it does!

I advise everyone to update the chipset drivers - It will let you know if you need anything (as above).


----------



## CJMitsuki

Figured Id post this and give everyone a chance to laugh as hard as I did :lachen:


----------



## hurricane28

CJMitsuki said:


> Figured Id post this and give everyone a chance to laugh as hard as I did :lachen:https://youtu.be/ozcEel1rNKM


Yeah, Intel finally lost its mind.. The sad part is is that most techreview sites believed the hype...


----------



## 1usmus

Does the new board have an old topology? why such low overclocking results? 3533 is the frequency that can be obtained on the T topology
please explain to me what is happening now

ps I'm going to bring the calculator to a new level and I need information from you


----------



## VPII

hurricane28 said:


> Yeah, Intel finally lost its mind.. The sad part is is that most techreview sites believed the hype...



In all honesty, I won't be too quick to diss Intel. We don't really know what this 28 core cpu can or will do. I mean 6 channel memory might just proof to be massive.


----------



## crakej

Good to see you @1usmus!

I'm running 3600, basically calc 3600 fast settings, but everything else on auto except CadBus timings which are all 0. Geardown is on and using T1. Also experimented with T2 geardown=off which seemed to give better performance, but either way, I am also not seeing the performance gain I would expect, so presume something isn't quite right as my bandwidth and latency are reported as better than 3533, but things like CB15, IBT are showing slightly lower numbers than 3533.


----------



## CJMitsuki

crakej said:


> VPII said:
> 
> 
> 
> In all honesty, I won't be too quick to diss Intel. We don't really know what this 28 core cpu can or will do. I mean 6 channel memory might just proof to be massive.
> 
> 
> 
> Good to see you 1usmus!
> 
> I'm running 3600, basically calc 3600 fast settings, but everything else on auto except CadBus timings which are all 0. Geardown is on and using T1. Also experimented with T2 geardown=off which seemed to give better performance, but either way, I am also not seeing the performance gain I would expect, so presume something isn't quite right as my bandwidth and latency are reported as better than 3533, but things like CB15, IBT are showing slightly lower numbers than 3533.
Click to expand...

Higher frequency isn’t always going to translate into higher CPU performance. Especially with how young this bios is, my 3466 strap runs so much faster than 3533 and 3600 it’s ridiculous. I think that may change with bios updates though. I think 1usmus just wants to see how high we can push frequencies so I’m going to start relaxing Cas to see how far it can go frequency-wise.


----------



## crakej

I know, just wanted to report my experience to help build our knowledge  I'm actually very happy so far, considering how new this bios is. For me 3533 is the faster one at the moment, but i want to nail my 3600 settings and get that extra performance if I can!

Well, I got as far as 3800 without doing anything except loading DOCP - CL19 - but didn't do any more experimenting than that - it was pretty unstable but could load Windows. I might give the calculator settings a go at 3800 see what happens, but I'm pretty sure 3600 is the last freq I'll be able to do CL14!


----------



## CJMitsuki

crakej said:


> I know, just wanted to report my experience to help build our knowledge /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif I'm actually very happy so far, considering how new this bios is. For me 3533 is the faster one at the moment, but i want to nail my 3600 settings and get that extra performance if I can!
> 
> Well, I got as far as 3800 without doing anything except loading DOCP - CL19 - but didn't do any more experimenting than that - it was pretty unstable but could load Windows. I might give the calculator settings a go at 3800 see what happens, but I'm pretty sure 3600 is the last freq I'll be able to do CL14!


Have you tried 3600c15 to see how far you could tighten the timings and see how performance compared to c14?


----------



## crakej

CJMitsuki said:


> Have you tried 3600c15 to see how far you could tighten the timings and see how performance compared to c14?


I think that's my next stop - it may well work better than CL14 and therefore give me better performance, in the same way T2 appeared to do - sticking with T1 for now though


----------



## VicsPC

So finally installed the new board and cpu, would not boot into windows and had to see why. On auto even at 3200mhz it used 1.2v, just was not enough to even boot into windows, kept getting BSODs lol. Glad i didn't try to reinstall windows and went into BIOS to check. Gave it 1.4v (i used to run 1.45v on my c6), but it is picking up all 16gb at 3200mhz. Since it's hynix ram i left the timings as is for now. Will run cinebench and see what she does, but on all auto i seem to be getting 4.34 on a few cores, 1.512v on SVI2.

So Ive gone from about 155 to 175 cb single score, and now 1800 in multicore was at 1690 or so. This is all auto settings except for ram. Seems to hit about 4.05 in stock settings on all core. Running it on balanced power mode with 50% core parking, at default its still set to 100% for some reason so i changed it to 50%, not sure if it makes ANY difference at all like it did in ryzen 1 but oh well.

P.S. Not sure who had issues with their GPU running at x8 but for me in gpuz it shows 16x3.0, i have it manually set to gen3 and it doesnt go down to 1.1 like it would if it's in auto ( i havent tried but its what my c6 used to do).


----------



## lordzed83

@crakej @CJMitsuki Curious what is maximum overclock calculator gives You on memory ?? My kit it says 3533


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> @crakej @CJMitsuki Curious what is maximum overclock calculator gives You on memory ?? My kit it says 3533


It used to say 3733, now most of the time is says 3533, but occasionally it says 3666 (like when you look at timings for 3733)


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> lordzed83 said:
> 
> 
> 
> @crakej @CJMitsuki Curious what is maximum overclock calculator gives You on memory ?? My kit it says 3533
> 
> 
> 
> It used to say 3733, now most of the time is says 3533, but occasionally it says 3666 (like when you look at timings for 3733)
Click to expand...

Went over benchmarks with 3733 safe ofc slower but fast wont boot up aame situation as with stilts 3466cl15 preset wont boot. And had this situation on both teamgroup memory kits.
Rl could use 4000+ kit heh not like i need to 😛


----------



## VPII

I'm battling at present to get my old memory speed stable and now I'm even battling to get it stable at stock. This after I picked up my new C7H two days ago. I'm busy investigating to see whether I've missed a setting or something and then I noticed that my 1.8v PLL which I set to be 1.8 stays around 0.89 to 0.98. When I leave it on Auto it will sit at 1.0V. Can somebody explain to me why is this happening? Not sure if this would impact the memory stability but still I'd like voltages to be around where I set it.


----------



## CJMitsuki

VPII said:


> I'm battling at present to get my old memory speed stable and now I'm even battling to get it stable at stock. This after I picked up my new C7H two days ago. I'm busy investigating to see whether I've missed a setting or something and then I noticed that my 1.8v PLL which I set to be 1.8 stays around 0.89 to 0.98. When I leave it on Auto it will sit at 1.0V. Can somebody explain to me why is this happening? Not sure if this would impact the memory stability but still I'd like voltages to be around where I set it.


Could be a misreading. I set my PLL to 1.9v and yes it does affect stability for cpu and mem. It wouldn’t hurt to open a command prompt and run a system file corruption check right quick as well. If you have been testing unstable frequencies in your OS a couple of system files could’ve gotten corrupted and that will cause false positives in a memory testing software. I just had to fix that a few moments ago bc it was throwing errors and nothing I did at 3600 would slow the errors. Did “sfc /scannow” command and sure enough there were corruptions in the disk image. Easy enough fix. Sometimes if you get a message saying it couldn’t fix all of the corruption then you just download the relevant media creation tool from Microsoft and burn to disk, then there are some DISM commands to use the “install.wim” file to repair the corruption when sfc is unable to. That usually happens when windows update gets corrupted since it uses that initially to perform the repair online. You’d be surprised how many times I’ve seen memory errors not really be errors due to this.


----------



## VPII

CJMitsuki said:


> Could be a misreading. I set my PLL to 1.9v and yes it does affect stability for cpu and mem. It wouldn’t hurt to open a command prompt and run a system file corruption check right quick as well. If you have been testing unstable frequencies in your OS a couple of system files could’ve gotten corrupted and that will cause false positives in a memory testing software. I just had to fix that a few moments ago bc it was throwing errors and nothing I did at 3600 would slow the errors. Did “sfc /scannow” command and sure enough there were corruptions in the disk image. Easy enough fix. Sometimes if you get a message saying it couldn’t fix all of the corruption then you just download the relevant media creation tool from Microsoft and burn to disk, then there are some DISM commands to use the “install.wim” file to repair the corruption when sfc is unable to. That usually happens when windows update gets corrupted since it uses that initially to perform the repair online. You’d be surprised how many times I’ve seen memory errors not really be errors due to this.


Thanks I'm busy checking for errors / corrupt files. I doubt that it is what causes the PLL voltage to be so low as even in the bios it reads at that voltage.


----------



## CJMitsuki

VPII said:


> Thanks I'm busy checking for errors / corrupt files. I doubt that it is what causes the PLL voltage to be so low as even in the bios it reads at that voltage.


I agree, doesn’t hurt to check though. I check anytime I see something that is a bit off just to rule out that possibility. You can always hit f5 and load optimized defaults and see if that solves the PLL problem. Then re-enter all of your settings, could be a glitch or setting that is hung up. If nothing else works you could also reflash Bios as well.
I will say that my PLL is never what I set it at, nor in the bios. It’s set to 1.9 but always sits at 1.94 in bios and pretty much the same in OS.


----------



## VPII

CJMitsuki said:


> I agree, doesn’t hurt to check though. I check anytime I see something that is a bit off just to rule out that possibility. You can always hit f5 and load optimized defaults and see if that solves the PLL problem. Then re-enter all of your settings, could be a glitch or setting that is hung up. If nothing else works you could also reflash Bios as well.
> I will say that my PLL is never what I set it at, nor in the bios. It’s set to 1.9 but always sits at 1.94 in bios and pretty much the same in OS.


Thank you my brother.... I'll give the reflash a go when I get a memtest error now.


----------



## CJMitsuki

VPII said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> I agree, doesn’t hurt to check though. I check anytime I see something that is a bit off just to rule out that possibility. You can always hit f5 and load optimized defaults and see if that solves the PLL problem. Then re-enter all of your settings, could be a glitch or setting that is hung up. If nothing else works you could also reflash Bios as well.
> I will say that my PLL is never what I set it at, nor in the bios. It’s set to 1.9 but always sits at 1.94 in bios and pretty much the same in OS.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you my brother.... I'll give the reflash a go when I get a memtest error now.
Click to expand...

No problem, the scan should have said “Did not find any integrity violations” hopefully it was clean.


----------



## VPII

CJMitsuki said:


> No problem, the scan should have said “Did not find any integrity violations” hopefully it was clean.


No problem with scan, but your bios reflash suggestion fixed the PLL voltage problem... Thanks


----------



## CJMitsuki

VPII said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> No problem, the scan should have said “Did not find any integrity violations” hopefully it was clean.
> 
> 
> 
> No problem with scan, but your bios reflash suggestion fixed the PLL voltage problem... Thanks
Click to expand...

Good deal, must’ve just been a minor glitch with the sensor or something.


----------



## crakej

I can boot 3733 but it's very unstable, it is a little faster transfer rate, but not much more performance, if any - who knows, with new bios and right settings we might get more.... 3666 seems within reach though.

I've left PLL on auto - it increases the higher memory OC you go for - currently, my 3600 OC it reads 1.983. No voltages read out correctly for me except the SVI2 TFN reading for cpu/soc voltage and VID. PLL, Dram, VCore are all wrong - a bit lower than they actually are set in the bios.


----------



## CJMitsuki

crakej said:


> I can boot 3733 but it's very unstable, it is a little faster transfer rate, but not much more performance, if any - who knows, with new bios and right settings we might get more.... 3666 seems within reach though.
> 
> I've left PLL on auto - it increases the higher memory OC you go for - currently, my 3600 OC it reads 1.983. No voltages read out correctly for me except the SVI2 TFN reading for cpu/soc voltage and VID. PLL, Dram, VCore are all wrong - a bit lower than they actually are set in the bios.


. 
The slight drops are probably due to where the readings are taken and the drop associated with a reading taken closer to the source and one taken farther away on another sensor. VID isn’t really a voltage reading, it’s what the CPU is requesting be sent to it, from what I understand.


----------



## crakej

CJMitsuki said:


> .
> The slight drops are probably due to where the readings are taken and the drop associated with a reading taken closer to the source and one taken farther away on another sensor. VID isn’t really a voltage reading, it’s what the CPU is requesting be sent to it, from what I understand.


My last ASUS board was much better (Prime Pro) - readouts were pretty accurate/what was set in bios..... Indeed you are right, VID is what's requested, but at least it's showing (requesting) the (correct) voltage I have set in the bios. The PLL, VCore and Dram readings had me on a wild goose chase until it was confirmed they were displaying lower than bios settings. Now i go by what I've set and not the read-outs.


----------



## lordzed83

My pll auto is over 2v LOL


----------



## VPII

CJMitsuki said:


> Good deal, must’ve just been a minor glitch with the sensor or something.


Usually the Karhu memtest I'm running would fail around 700 to 800% and I'm already at 3000% and still going strong. I usually take it to about 10800% or more. Well that was where it went the last time with ddr 3600 CL16-15-15-38 T2. Geardown disable...


----------



## majestynl

CJMitsuki said:


> Yes, I have had PState 1 working before but for me it is better just to set PState 1 and the others to Auto since they are configured decently already, down to 700mhz if I remember correctly. That is if you allow that in your Power State settings within the OS and Bios. PState 1 is around 2.1ghz for me and it lets my machine axle at pretty much whatever the ambient is in their room. Usually 22c, or around 72f since I live in the States. Only time I ever use Celsius is in my PC. Feels weird to use Fahrenheit when speaking about electronics temperatures.


You mean you are only using Pstate 1 and not Pstate0?



robersoc said:


> Thanks! That 3533 tighted looks very good, congrats! Right now testing it but 3533 insta crashed, changed to 3466 and testing with hci. Anyway i think my chips will be much easier to get totally stable at 3466 tighted than any higher. Will continue testing.
> 
> Happy tweaking!


NP Thanks! Good luck!



CJMitsuki said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I got 3533mhz tightened down really nicely and latency was looking good and bandwidth as well but for some reason, no matter what, my Cinenbench scores and other benchmarks were lower in regards to the CPU as opposed to 3466mhz with tightened timings. Even though the latency and bandwidth was a bit better on 3533mhz. I expected a 1995+ at 4.25ghz in Cinebench but was about 20 points lower than my 1987 at 4.25ghz with 3466mhz. What it looks like it that single core performance got a small increase but multi core dropped with 3533. Very puzzling behavior out of the IMC at higher frequencies, maybe has something to do with GD and 2T and how they react with the CPU? Or possibly a certain group of timings? I want to test further but I think it will lead to frustration, I think I will just try to further refine 3466mhz and get 1T stable. I should be able to get a 2000+ in Cinebench at 4.275ghz and close to it with 4.25ghz. I like 4.25 much better as the vCore needed to sustain 4.275ghz is not worth the minute performance gain over 4.25ghz. The heat bounces around too much for my liking since I need 1.41 vCore and 4.25 I need like 1.33 or lower. It’s quite the difference in heat at full load. I can run 4.35ghz too but is not IBT stable due to me not being able to control the temps with my h115i on liquid metal. If I could keep temps around 70c I’m sure it would be stable at 1.425v. Normal use I can run 4.35ghz all day though. Even run benchmarks. Cinebench I was getting 2015+ scores.


Hmm thats strange, i definitely didn't loose any performance with CB, also not a big gain there 
And about vcore, i wouldn't go far behind 1.4 for now... those small clock increases are not worth the extra ~0.08v if you ask me!



VPII said:


> In all honesty, I won't be too quick to diss Intel. We don't really know what this 28 core cpu can or will do. I mean 6 channel memory might just proof to be massive.


I doesn't need to, cause its already diss itself. Just to give AMD and answer, but look at their answer ... LOL




lordzed83 said:


> My pll auto is over 2v LOL


Mine 2, if i run higher clocks!


----------



## VicsPC

So here's what i get after 40mins or so of playing Rust, not too bad for all auto settings except ram lol. Haven't even tried PE3 yet.


----------



## VicsPC

Has anyone else noticed that if you use +10db boost and use the front audio ports it doesnt work right? I open up discord and i almost sound like im -10db and people can't hear me, if i got into the realtek audio manager turn it from 10 to 20 then back to 10 it works fine UNTIL i close discord then it glitches again and doesn't work. It/s fine at 20db but it picks up everything and its fine at 0db. I tried reinstalling the driver 2 and no available. It also does the same in windows settings, mic will pick up at 10db as soon as i close the windows settings window and open it back up it doesnt pick up the mic one bit.


----------



## VPII

I'm sitting with a slight problem... I got a new Asus Crosshair VII Hero last week Thursday, I installed the motherboard and was happy to see that my cpu and memory is fine. So I set the previous memory speed I used - 3600 CL16-15-15-38 T2 - which passed 10800% Karhu Software memtest.

When I ran memtest again it would give me an error pretty quickly. The highest I was able to go was 2280% and it would give me an error. I've tried the memory at stock DOCP but it still would give an error. So I decided to run memtest86 last night and it ran for about 7 to 8 hours without any errors. I've done SFC scan to see if I have any corrupted windows files but no errors found. I know that I can try to increase vdimm (1.4v at poresent) and see if it passes. SOC is set to 1.075v but actual voltage is more like 1.062v.

What could be the cause?


----------



## CJMitsuki

VPII said:


> I'm sitting with a slight problem... I got a new Asus Crosshair VII Hero last week Thursday, I installed the motherboard and was happy to see that my cpu and memory is fine. So I set the previous memory speed I used - 3600 CL16-15-15-38 T2 - which passed 10800% Karhu Software memtest.
> 
> When I ran memtest again it would give me an error pretty quickly. The highest I was able to go was 2280% and it would give me an error. I've tried the memory at stock DOCP but it still would give an error. So I decided to run memtest86 last night and it ran for about 7 to 8 hours without any errors. I've done SFC scan to see if I have any corrupted windows files but no errors found. I know that I can try to increase vdimm (1.4v at poresent) and see if it passes. SOC is set to 1.075v but actual voltage is more like 1.062v.
> 
> What could be the cause?



There are many, many things that could be the problem but honestly if I were you I would drop to 3533mhz and tune it tighter bc 9/10 times it will perform better than 3600 at mediocre timings. It may not look like it will if you are going by only the raw numbers in AIDA64 but those numbers dont always mean better real world performance. Even dropping to 3466 and hitting Cas 14 with tight timings are going to more than likely out perform 3600 with Cas 16 by a great deal.


----------



## majestynl

VPII said:


> I'm sitting with a slight problem... I got a new Asus Crosshair VII Hero last week Thursday, I installed the motherboard and was happy to see that my cpu and memory is fine. So I set the previous memory speed I used - 3600 CL16-15-15-38 T2 - which passed 10800% Karhu Software memtest.
> 
> When I ran memtest again it would give me an error pretty quickly. The highest I was able to go was 2280% and it would give me an error. I've tried the memory at stock DOCP but it still would give an error. So I decided to run memtest86 last night and it ran for about 7 to 8 hours without any errors. I've done SFC scan to see if I have any corrupted windows files but no errors found. I know that I can try to increase vdimm (1.4v at poresent) and see if it passes. SOC is set to 1.075v but actual voltage is more like 1.062v.
> 
> What could be the cause?


Error around those percentages are mostly small things:

- Try a different CADbus 
- Try it also with a auto soc, you could always lower later
- Try higher ramvoltage

You could also try to just test again with same setting to see if it fails around same percentages, as i said many times. Something could effected your test!




CJMitsuki said:


> There are many, many things that could be the problem but honestly if I were you I would drop to 3533mhz and tune it tighter bc 9/10 times it will perform better than 3600 at mediocre timings. It may not look like it will if you are going by only the raw numbers in AIDA64 but those numbers dont always mean better real world performance. Even dropping to 3466 and hitting Cas 14 with tight timings are going to more than likely out perform 3600 with Cas 16 by a great deal.


Agree! I would run 3466 or 3533 with tighter main-timings! Only saw people running 3600 with CL15+ ! And like you suggested 3533/3466 with TT will run faster!
Yesterday i managed to get 3600CL14+TT passing tests with no big luck so far, it ask a lot of precision tweaks. Gives me errors around 1000%... Still thinking to wait for next bios release


----------



## CJMitsuki

majestynl said:


> Agree! I would run 3466 or 3533 with tighter main-timings! Only saw people running 3600 with CL15+ ! And like you suggested 3533/3466 with TT will run faster!
> Yesterday i managed to get 3600CL14+TT passing tests with no big luck so far, it ask a lot of precision tweaks. Gives me errors around 1000%... Still thinking to wait for next bios release



Same, You have to get everything perfect or it will not be stable. I dont think it is worth it right now because if it has added performance, it isnt much compared to 3533mhz tuned. I agree, as bios ages we should be hitting 3600-3733 with decent enough timings to justify going further but I think 3466 and 3533mhz is the perfect spot for Ryzen+ at this current time. I am going to get 1T/GDM disabled working with tight timings on 3533 this evening. Took a break over the weekend to reset my brain, too much memory OC as of late.


----------



## VPII

CJMitsuki said:


> Same, You have to get everything perfect or it will not be stable. I dont think it is worth it right now because if it has added performance, it isnt much compared to 3533mhz tuned. I agree, as bios ages we should be hitting 3600-3733 with decent enough timings to justify going further but I think 3466 and 3533mhz is the perfect spot for Ryzen+ at this current time. I am going to get 1T/GDM disabled working with tight timings on 3533 this evening. Took a break over the weekend to reset my brain, too much memory OC as of late.


I think I'm sitting with a memory hole as 3466 won't boot it just reset my memory and then enter the bios. I'll try it again. I have not tried 3533 so cannot comment on it, but I'll give it a shot.


----------



## majestynl

CJMitsuki said:


> Same, You have to get everything perfect or it will not be stable. I dont think it is worth it right now because if it has added performance, it isnt much compared to 3533mhz tuned. I agree, as bios ages we should be hitting 3600-3733 with decent enough timings to justify going further but I think 3466 and 3533mhz is the perfect spot for Ryzen+ at this current time. I am going to get 1T/GDM disabled working with tight timings on 3533 this evening. Took a break over the weekend to reset my brain, too much memory OC as of late.


Yes 3533 is the sweet spot for now  Running great performances in benhmarks and real life! 
Good luck with GDM disabled! Lost weeks on it! No luck with CH6 / CH7 / 2 Different CPU's and 2 Different Rams 
With my current new cpu i even didn't try it anymore...got a bit of hating it !



VPII said:


> I think I'm sitting with a memory hole as 3466 won't boot it just reset my memory and then enter the bios. I'll try it again. I have not tried 3533 so cannot comment on it, but I'll give it a shot.


Memory hole at 3466 strap is a bit of rare if you ask me.. What Ram-sticks are you using ? Did you ever tried playing with a higher ProcODT ?
and can you explain what happens exactly while it doesn't boot ? last Qcode ? Are you using a retry multiplier for ramtraining?


----------



## VPII

majestynl said:


> Yes 3533 is the sweet spot for now  Running great performances in benhmarks and real life!
> Good luck with GDM disabled! Lost weeks on it! No luck with CH6 / CH7 / 2 Different CPU's and 2 Different Rams
> With my current new cpu i even didn't try it anymore...got a bit of hating it !
> 
> 
> 
> Memory hole at 3466 strap is a bit of rare if you ask me.. What Ram-sticks are you using ? Did you ever tried playing with a higher ProcODT ?
> and can you explain what happens exactly while it doesn't boot ? last Qcode ? Are you using a retry multiplier for ramtraining?



Please explain.... ProcODT what should I try and where can I find it? Secondly how do I use a retry multiplier. Sorry if I ask obvious questions but I'm still learning having come from Intel after being a huge AMD fan for many years.


----------



## VicsPC

VPII said:


> Please explain.... ProcODT what should I try and where can I find it? Secondly how do I use a retry multiplier. Sorry if I ask obvious questions but I'm still learning having come from Intel after being a huge AMD fan for many years.


Retry multiplier is under DRAM timings i believe, procODT should be under AMD options buried in the BIOS somewhere. I set my retraining to 5 but honestly with the latest BIOS on both the C6 and C7 i have had zero retraining issues or cold boot problems for that matter. It's a welcome sight.


----------



## crakej

ProcODT is under memory timings, near the bottom. I've had mine at 53ohm all the time, but that's what seems to suit my ram - at any speed.


----------



## robersoc

I´m testing 3533, finally seems the best spot for me too. What I really want is GDM disabled and for this I must use quite relaxed timmings but anyway the system and games feels much more better with GDM disabled than GDM enabled with tighted timmings. Right now must use 3600 safe preset and 3533 strap to get stability but games works really good with GDM disabled.

GDM enabled gives lota stability, but thats because is forcing to run 2T instead 1T even if you set 1T on bios, correct me if I wrong.

About CPU, what settings are you using daily, for gaming, working, surfing, ... Ive been testing PBO, performance enhancer lvl 1 and 2, but im seeing sometimes voltages higher than 1.50V, thing that dont like. Just curious about how you are sticking your cpus. I´ve seen lota people using pstate x42 with 1.35V ish. I´ve been testing pstate x40 with 1.20V and x42 1.35V but gaming didnt feel as smooth as when all is auto. Seems like these chips like good juice to work smooth.


----------



## crakej

For those that haven't already, it makes it SO much easier for us to answer questions if we know what your components are!

Either go to RigBuilder and then add it to your sig, or just edit your sig and put it there. To edit your sig, click on Tools>Quick Links>Edit Signature on the menu at the top of the screen.

GearDown mode is kinda like T1.5 - it sends the clock signal twice to make it easier for ram to run at higher MTs. There is a slight performance penalty, but usually unnoticeable. So yes, in theory GD=off is best, but you just might find you can clock a lot higher with it enabled - it's got me to 3600. It isn't T2 mode at all which will wait an extra system 'tick' for ram to respond, adding to access times. Even with T2, you can get some decent performance, dependant on your workload.

I have 1700x, so can't use PE, but my understanding is that it will go above 1.5v intermittently and that this is quite normal, and safe.

For a 'normal' OC, personally I will spend a lot of time testing what the min voltage required is for the settings i want - so if it's working well at 1.35v, I would keep dropping one setting until it doesn't work reliably, then keep going up/down one until you get the best setting that can pass testing. I would guess that if your gaming isn't as smooth as it should be, you may need more juice to get it properly stable and smooth.


----------



## VPII

VicsPC said:


> Retry multiplier is under DRAM timings i believe, procODT should be under AMD options buried in the BIOS somewhere. I set my retraining to 5 but honestly with the latest BIOS on both the C6 and C7 i have had zero retraining issues or cold boot problems for that matter. It's a welcome sight.


Tried procodt and it fails quicker.... left it on auto and bumped vdimm by 0.025 to 1.425 and left soc v on auto. What I noticed now previously Ill sit with 0.87% at most per second and now it is 1.075% per second. At present 1209% after 20 minutes. Not there yet as I like to go past 10000%.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## minal

Has anyone else noticed varying high frequency noises coming from the C7H? Both my original and RMA replacement boards have it. It's difficult to localize the sounds but it seems like it's from the top left area of the board, maybe around the VRMs.


----------



## VicsPC

crakej said:


> For those that haven't already, it makes it SO much easier for us to answer questions if we know what your components are!
> 
> Either go to RigBuilder and then add it to your sig, or just edit your sig and put it there. To edit your sig, click on Tools>Quick Links>Edit Signature on the menu at the top of the screen.
> 
> GearDown mode is kinda like T1.5 - it sends the clock signal twice to make it easier for ram to run at higher MTs. There is a slight performance penalty, but usually unnoticeable. So yes, in theory GD=off is best, but you just might find you can clock a lot higher with it enabled - it's got me to 3600. It isn't T2 mode at all which will wait an extra system 'tick' for ram to respond, adding to access times. Even with T2, you can get some decent performance, dependant on your workload.
> 
> I have 1700x, so can't use PE, but my understanding is that it will go above 1.5v intermittently and that this is quite normal, and safe.
> 
> For a 'normal' OC, personally I will spend a lot of time testing what the min voltage required is for the settings i want - so if it's working well at 1.35v, I would keep dropping one setting until it doesn't work reliably, then keep going up/down one until you get the best setting that can pass testing. I would guess that if your gaming isn't as smooth as it should be, you may need more juice to get it properly stable and smooth.


Yea correct, was the same for the 1700/1800 series. My 2700x hit about 1.525 but averages around 1.3v or so . Playing Origins (very cpu demanding, almost on all threads even), i was sitting around 47°C or so on watercooled. Not sure why but i think im getting a bug in hwinfo, my bus clock goes to 123mhz giving me a core clock of 5ghz across all cores haha. Pretty sure this isn't accurate at all since its also giving me 3600mhz in memory haha.


----------



## CJMitsuki

VPII said:


> majestynl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes 3533 is the sweet spot for now /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif Running great performances in benhmarks and real life!
> Good luck with GDM disabled! Lost weeks on it! No luck with CH6 / CH7 / 2 Different CPU's and 2 Different Rams /forum/images/smilies/tongue.gif
> With my current new cpu i even didn't try it anymore...got a bit of hating it !
> 
> 
> 
> Memory hole at 3466 strap is a bit of rare if you ask me.. What Ram-sticks are you using ? Did you ever tried playing with a higher ProcODT ?
> and can you explain what happens exactly while it doesn't boot ? last Qcode ? Are you using a retry multiplier for ramtraining?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please explain.... ProcODT what should I try and where can I find it? Secondly how do I use a retry multiplier. Sorry if I ask obvious questions but I'm still learning having come from Intel after being a huge AMD fan for many years.
Click to expand...

If it actually is a real memory hole then CLDO_VDDC has been claimed to move memory holes around. You could see if that helps you out by playing with that a bit. It’s impossible to tell though unless you absolutely can’t boot 3466 but can easily get 3533 running then you may have one.

With the problems you are having I would (if it were me) do a completely clean install of windows and also a clean flash of the bios just to rule both of those out. I know that is a bit of a mess to use to do but it can only help, it can’t make it any worse.

I would also download Thaiphoon Burner and read the eeprom and then dump to hex editor and compare CRC with a clean one from the SPD browser. CRC could have errors.


----------



## lordzed83

minal said:


> Has anyone else noticed varying high frequency noises coming from the C7H? Both my original and RMA replacement boards have it. It's difficult to localize the sounds but it seems like it's from the top left area of the board, maybe around the VRMs.


Ita vrm noise its normal.
Lock vrm frequency at 400khz and it stops if it bothers You


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> For those that haven't already, it makes it SO much easier for us to answer questions if we know what your components are!
> 
> Either go to RigBuilder and then add it to your sig, or just edit your sig and put it there. To edit your sig, click on Tools>Quick Links>Edit Signature on the menu at the top of the screen.
> 
> GearDown mode is kinda like T1.5 - it sends the clock signal twice to make it easier for ram to run at higher MTs. There is a slight performance penalty, but usually unnoticeable. So yes, in theory GD=off is best, but you just might find you can clock a lot higher with it enabled - it's got me to 3600. It isn't T2 mode at all which will wait an extra system 'tick' for ram to respond, adding to access times. Even with T2, you can get some decent performance, dependant on your workload.
> 
> I have 1700x, so can't use PE, but my understanding is that it will go above 1.5v intermittently and that this is quite normal, and safe.
> 
> For a 'normal' OC, personally I will spend a lot of time testing what the min voltage required is for the settings i want - so if it's working well at 1.35v, I would keep dropping one setting until it doesn't work reliably, then keep going up/down one until you get the best setting that can pass testing. I would guess that if your gaming isn't as smooth as it should be, you may need more juice to get it properly stable and smooth. /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif


But have You noticed performance drop wirh volts?? I sure do.
Can pass stress tests at lower volts than Im using but extra 20-50mv also gives me better scores 🙂


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> But have You noticed performance drop wirh volts?? I sure do.
> Can pass stress tests at lower volts than Im using but extra 20-50mv also gives me better scores 🙂


Yes, i've seen this too - I've noticed performance can suffer if voltages are not quite optimal - slightly too high or low can give this problem - that's why it's always good to play with the voltages yourself - so you know you're getting best performance... and voltages


----------



## Bigdog302

*G.Skill 3600 memory*

Has anyone tried this new G.Skill 3600 memory with a Ryzen 2000 series chip and a Asus CH7 yet? https://www.gskill.com/en/press/vie...zen™-2000-series-processors-and-x470-platform

I am considering upgrading my CH6 to a CH7 due to the improved VRM and all the other little tweaks. I have a 2700X installed and a older G.Skill 3600 B-die memory set and the best I can get out of it is 3333 with the Stilt's fast timings. it will not go up to 3466 let alone 3600. I am thinking the motherboard I currently have is holding it back some. I also notice on sustained heavy loads there must be some VRM throttling going on during such as the physics benchmark in firestrike. it starts off at 78 FPS then drops down to the high 60's to low 70's in framerate. I had it finish between 71 to 75 FPS at the end of that run. the cpu never gets above the mid to high 60's in Celsius.

this memory kit is said to only work on the CH7 mobo and and Ryzen 2000 series chips. that memory speed would sure give my 2700X a good shot in the arm.


----------



## crakej

Bigdog302 said:


> Has anyone tried this new G.Skill 3600 memory with a Ryzen 2000 series chip and a Asus CH7 yet? https://www.gskill.com/en/press/vie...zen™-2000-series-processors-and-x470-platform
> 
> I am considering upgrading my CH6 to a CH7 due to the improved VRM and all the other little tweaks. I have a 2700X installed and a older G.Skill 3600 B-die memory set and the best I can get out of it is 3333 with the Stilt's fast timings. it will not go up to 3466 let alone 3600. I am thinking the motherboard I currently have is holding it back some. I also notice on sustained heavy loads there must be some VRM throttling going on during such as the physics benchmark in firestrike. it starts off at 78 FPS then drops down to the high 60's to low 70's in framerate. I had it finish between 71 to 75 FPS at the end of that run. the cpu never gets above the mid to high 60's in Celsius.
> 
> this memory kit is said to only work on the CH7 mobo and and Ryzen 2000 series chips. that memory speed would sure give my 2700X a good shot in the arm.


Try enabling geardown in the timings menu with speeds over 3200 - I can't go over 3200 without it.


----------



## VicsPC

crakej said:


> Try enabling geardown in the timings menu with speeds over 3200 - I can't go over 3200 without it.


Someone said ur better off running 2T then geardown mode, from what ive seen from all the RAM ive looked at (way too many) anything above 3200mhz seems to be rated at 2T, even gskill bdie 3600CL15 (what i may buy) is rated at 2T. Id be inclined to try that first rather then geardown mode.


----------



## hurricane28

Bigdog302 said:


> Has anyone tried this new G.Skill 3600 memory with a Ryzen 2000 series chip and a Asus CH7 yet? https://www.gskill.com/en/press/vie...zen™-2000-series-processors-and-x470-platform
> 
> I am considering upgrading my CH6 to a CH7 due to the improved VRM and all the other little tweaks. I have a 2700X installed and a older G.Skill 3600 B-die memory set and the best I can get out of it is 3333 with the Stilt's fast timings. it will not go up to 3466 let alone 3600. I am thinking the motherboard I currently have is holding it back some. I also notice on sustained heavy loads there must be some VRM throttling going on during such as the physics benchmark in firestrike. it starts off at 78 FPS then drops down to the high 60's to low 70's in framerate. I had it finish between 71 to 75 FPS at the end of that run. the cpu never gets above the mid to high 60's in Celsius.
> 
> this memory kit is said to only work on the CH7 mobo and and Ryzen 2000 series chips. that memory speed would sure give my 2700X a good shot in the arm.


It can also be your chip that is holding you back man. This is weird because both my 1600 and 2600x are more than capable of running 3466 MHz CL 14, i can even do 3600 MHz but 3466 MHz CL 14 gives me better response in Windows so i leave it there. Might give it a shot later on with new BIOS. 

We need more information about your issues. Perhaps you can run hardwareinfo64 when running an benchmark so we can see temps and volts?


----------



## VicsPC

Bigdog302 said:


> Has anyone tried this new G.Skill 3600 memory with a Ryzen 2000 series chip and a Asus CH7 yet? https://www.gskill.com/en/press/vie...zen™-2000-series-processors-and-x470-platform
> 
> I am considering upgrading my CH6 to a CH7 due to the improved VRM and all the other little tweaks. I have a 2700X installed and a older G.Skill 3600 B-die memory set and the best I can get out of it is 3333 with the Stilt's fast timings. it will not go up to 3466 let alone 3600. I am thinking the motherboard I currently have is holding it back some. I also notice on sustained heavy loads there must be some VRM throttling going on during such as the physics benchmark in firestrike. it starts off at 78 FPS then drops down to the high 60's to low 70's in framerate. I had it finish between 71 to 75 FPS at the end of that run. the cpu never gets above the mid to high 60's in Celsius.
> 
> this memory kit is said to only work on the CH7 mobo and and Ryzen 2000 series chips. that memory speed would sure give my 2700X a good shot in the arm.


Please stop using firestrike lol. Its so old and outdated honestly, i cringe when people use that. My Vega 64 hits higher core clocks in god damn Euro Truck Simulator 2 over firestrike, i mean come on its ETS2 and probably dx9 lol.


----------



## minal

lordzed83 said:


> Ita vrm noise its normal.
> Lock vrm frequency at 400khz and it stops if it bothers You


I tried setting VRM switching frequency to Manual->400, but I don't notice any difference. I didn't change other switching frequency options (SOC, etc). 

It's not a huge deal, but I am going for a quiet system and it's a bit funny when electrical noise is the loudest part of the system at idle. The case blocks high frequency noise pretty well, so if I close the top Moduvent I won't hear it even from up close. 

At least it's normal... So you do hear a constant high frequency that changes pitch, plus some on/off "buzzing" that sounds like crackling/sizzling vibrational noises? And they don't bother you?


----------



## crakej

VicsPC said:


> Someone said ur better off running 2T then geardown mode, from what ive seen from all the RAM ive looked at (way too many) anything above 3200mhz seems to be rated at 2T, even gskill bdie 3600CL15 (what i may buy) is rated at 2T. Id be inclined to try that first rather then geardown mode.


This isn't true. geardown=on still uses T1 and is more efficient than T2. The real advantage of keeping geardown off is a behaviour of Ryzen which means you can only select an odd number for your CL if geardown is off. If you're running 3466 CL14 and it's not working, you would probably try CL15 next, but you can only do that with geardown off, otherwise the bios would substitute the CL15 for CL16 (slower).

My ram is not rated at T2 and neither is the ram you linked to - over 3200 does not necessarily mean it's T2


----------



## lordzed83

Bigdog302 said:


> Has anyone tried this new G.Skill 3600 memory with a Ryzen 2000 series chip and a Asus CH7 yet? https://www.gskill.com/en/press/vie...zen™-2000-series-processors-and-x470-platform
> 
> I am considering upgrading my CH6 to a CH7 due to the improved VRM and all the other little tweaks. I have a 2700X installed and a older G.Skill 3600 B-die memory set and the best I can get out of it is 3333 with the Stilt's fast timings. it will not go up to 3466 let alone 3600. I am thinking the motherboard I currently have is holding it back some. I also notice on sustained heavy loads there must be some VRM throttling going on during such as the physics benchmark in firestrike. it starts off at 78 FPS then drops down to the high 60's to low 70's in framerate. I had it finish between 71 to 75 FPS at the end of that run. the cpu never gets above the mid to high 60's in Celsius.
> 
> this memory kit is said to only work on the CH7 mobo and and Ryzen 2000 series chips. that memory speed would sure give my 2700X a good shot in the arm.


Look at the **** timings those kits come with. 








let me quick check for you how SLOW it it buhahah

Stilts 3333 fast is faster than this rubbish 3600 cl18-22-22-22-42 
I had 3733cl118 running and that was super slow...


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> Look at the **** timings those kits come with.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> let me quick check for you how SLOW it it buhahah
> 
> Stilts 3333 fast is faster than this rubbish 3600 cl18-22-22-22-42
> I had 3733cl118 running and that was super slow...


That and the fact that many of these so called 'for Ryzen' memory modules are just like any other DDR4 module, just with Ryzen printed on them. Same spec.

Edit: That pic is funny.... 'New DDR4 specification' - WHAT???!!! You can't just give DDR4 a new specification - it's either DDR4 or it's not.


----------



## VicsPC

crakej said:


> This isn't true. geardown=on still uses T1 and is more efficient than T2. The real advantage of keeping geardown off is a behaviour of Ryzen which means you can only select an odd number for your CL if geardown is off. If you're running 3466 CL14 and it's not working, you would probably try CL15 next, but you can only do that with geardown off, otherwise the bios would substitute the CL15 for CL16 (slower).
> 
> My ram is not rated at T2 and neither is the ram you linked to - over 3200 does not necessarily mean it's T2


Sorry to break it to you lol. That's the gskill 3600CL15. Clearly rated at 2T, i wouldn't post it if it wasn't true mate sorry. And for gaming, geardown is worse then 2T, plenty of people have tested and geardown mode has higher latency when the timings are the same. Same kid, tweaktowns review is still 2T. I'm guessing a lot of people are having ram issues because they are trying very tight timings on 1T with GD instead of 2T. I don't have a 3600mhz ram kit to try yet but will do soon enough. As i said, they are clearly rated at 2T. 

https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/7...6gb-dual-channel-memory-kit-review/index.html










P.S. Ive looked at 2 dozen kits at 3433-3600 and even some above, the majority of them (and all of them were gskil as i want a bdie samsung kit) are rated at 2T. Could not find a single one that was rated 1T. I'd love to know what kit you have and i can bet it's still a 2T kit lol. If I'm wrong about your kit then that's the one I'#d buy.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> That and the fact that many of these so called 'for Ryzen' memory modules are just like any other DDR4 module, just with Ryzen printed on them. Same spec.
> 
> Edit: That pic is funny.... 'New DDR4 specification' - WHAT???!!! You can't just give DDR4 a new specification - it's either DDR4 or it's not.


for fun and 2 show what im on about with those RYZEN epic timings 
@1usmus that what u wanted to see ??









@VicsPC my kit is 3733lc18 T1 rated


----------



## VicsPC

lordzed83 said:


> for fun and 2 show what im on about with those RYZEN epic timings
> @1usmus that what u wanted to see ??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @VicsPC my kit is 3733lc18 T1 rated


Is it 1T rated or is 1T what you run it at lol. This is a great review, they're rated at 2T but can but can be run at 1T (on Intel though), since Ryzen is much pickier tighter timing ram is more then likely more often then not going to be 2T. I suspect anything CL17 and up is probably 1T and anything CL16 and below 2T at 3600mhz kits. I could be completely wrong but from what I've searched at gskill it seems to be the trend on their end. Your kit btw is still rated at 2T you're just running it at 1T lol. 

Btw if you look at this review and their benchmarks, the difference between 2T and 1T is ridiculously minimal and I'd rather take stability over a tiny amount of gain. I know it's for intel platform but since no one has done one for ryzen i can't exactly check. 

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...-z-ddr4-3600-16gb-low-latency-kit-review.html


----------



## lordzed83

VicsPC said:


> lordzed83 said:
> 
> 
> 
> for fun and 2 show what im on about with those RYZEN epic timings /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif
> @1usmus that what u wanted to see ??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @VicsPC my kit is 3733lc18 T1 rated
> 
> 
> 
> Is it 1T rated or is 1T what you run it at lol. This is a great review, they're rated at 2T but can but can be run at 1T (on Intel though), since Ryzen is much pickier tighter timing ram is more then likely more often then not going to be 2T. I suspect anything CL17 and up is probably 1T and anything CL16 and below 2T at 3600mhz kits. I could be completely wrong but from what I've searched at gskill it seems to be the trend on their end. Your kit btw is still rated at 2T you're just running it at 1T lol.
> 
> Btw if you look at this review and their benchmarks, the difference between 2T and 1T is ridiculously minimal and I'd rather take stability over a tiny amount of gain. I know it's for intel platform but since no one has done one for ryzen i can't exactly check.
> 
> http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...-z-ddr4-3600-16gb-low-latency-kit-review.html
Click to expand...

Mine is actually T1 rqted. I still think teamgroup kits are better than gskill on ryzen.platform. if i had 240 pounds to blow up i pick up 4233 kit and see whats the deal. I bet I could get 3600cl14cout of it if i can get 3600cl15 pass 2000% t1


----------



## VicsPC

lordzed83 said:


> Mine is actually T1 rqted. I still think teamgroup kits are better than gskill on ryzen.platform. if i had 240 pounds to blow up i pick up 4233 kit and see whats the deal. I bet I could get 3600cl14cout of it if i can get 3600cl15 pass 2000% t1


Ok wasn't sure, i figured it was either teamgroup or gskill, the gskills are all rated at 2T even the CL18. ill take the look at teamgroup, not much about em here in France but ill take a peek on amazon.fr. They use samsung bdie as well from what i've heard. Reading that review there's so little difference between 1T and 2T i bet 2T is much more stable. I'd love to see someone review it for ryzen in both 1T and 2T, even if it's not stable I'd love to see if there's any difference at all. Ill take a look at teamgroup though, going to replace my corsair hynix.


----------



## lordzed83

VicsPC said:


> lordzed83 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Mine is actually T1 rqted. I still think teamgroup kits are better than gskill on ryzen.platform. if i had 240 pounds to blow up i pick up 4233 kit and see whats the deal. I bet I could get 3600cl14cout of it if i can get 3600cl15 pass 2000% t1
> 
> 
> 
> Ok wasn't sure, i figured it was either teamgroup or gskill, the gskills are all rated at 2T even the CL18. ill take the look at teamgroup, not much about em here in France but ill take a peek on amazon.fr. They use samsung bdie as well from what i've heard. Reading that review there's so little difference between 1T and 2T i bet 2T is much more stable. I'd love to see someone review it for ryzen in both 1T and 2T, even if it's not stable I'd love to see if there's any difference at all. Ill take a look at teamgroup though, going to replace my corsair hynix.
Click to expand...


It was theirs top 16gb kit when I upgraded from theirs 3200. Now they got this

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/team...4500mhz-dual-channel-kit-black-my-09a-tg.html


Anyone got spare 290 pounds??
Im remaping my 350z in 2-3 weeks that will be around 500 pounds for 15hp so not spending cash on stuff i wont nottice.

Since i got this kit stable at 3533cl14/15/15/15/42 cant complain can i 😛


----------



## lordzed83

VicsPC said:


> lordzed83 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Mine is actually T1 rqted. I still think teamgroup kits are better than gskill on ryzen.platform. if i had 240 pounds to blow up i pick up 4233 kit and see whats the deal. I bet I could get 3600cl14cout of it if i can get 3600cl15 pass 2000% t1
> 
> 
> 
> Ok wasn't sure, i figured it was either teamgroup or gskill, the gskills are all rated at 2T even the CL18. ill take the look at teamgroup, not much about em here in France but ill take a peek on amazon.fr. They use samsung bdie as well from what i've heard. Reading that review there's so little difference between 1T and 2T i bet 2T is much more stable. I'd love to see someone review it for ryzen in both 1T and 2T, even if it's not stable I'd love to see if there's any difference at all. Ill take a look at teamgroup though, going to replace my corsair hynix.
Click to expand...

If it goes for t1 vs t2 tests here been done. If anyone can get 3466 with tTFC at super low number t2 is better. Talking low 200


----------



## lordzed83

VicsPC said:


> lordzed83 said:
> 
> 
> 
> for fun and 2 show what im on about with those RYZEN epic timings /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif
> @1usmus that what u wanted to see ??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @VicsPC my kit is 3733lc18 T1 rated
> 
> 
> 
> Is it 1T rated or is 1T what you run it at lol. This is a great review, they're rated at 2T but can but can be run at 1T (on Intel though), since Ryzen is much pickier tighter timing ram is more then likely more often then not going to be 2T. I suspect anything CL17 and up is probably 1T and anything CL16 and below 2T at 3600mhz kits. I could be completely wrong but from what I've searched at gskill it seems to be the trend on their end. Your kit btw is still rated at 2T you're just running it at 1T lol.
> 
> Btw if you look at this review and their benchmarks, the difference between 2T and 1T is ridiculously minimal and I'd rather take stability over a tiny amount of gain. I know it's for intel platform but since no one has done one for ryzen i can't exactly check.
> 
> http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...-z-ddr4-3600-16gb-low-latency-kit-review.html
Click to expand...


Also Patriot viper elite is great
https://www.google.com/shopping/pro...X&ved=0ahUKEwjU1Iro7szbAhXHaFAKHf_RDYEQ8wIIDA


Been in contact with TeamGroup PR department got chance for theirs zen2 3466 sample sent over for tests/review.


----------



## crakej

VicsPC said:


> Sorry to break it to you lol. That's the gskill 3600CL15. Clearly rated at 2T, i wouldn't post it if it wasn't true mate sorry. And for gaming, geardown is worse then 2T, plenty of people have tested and geardown mode has higher latency when the timings are the same. Same kid, tweaktowns review is still 2T. I'm guessing a lot of people are having ram issues because they are trying very tight timings on 1T with GD instead of 2T. I don't have a 3600mhz ram kit to try yet but will do soon enough. As i said, they are clearly rated at 2T.
> 
> https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/7...6gb-dual-channel-memory-kit-review/index.html
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P.S. Ive looked at 2 dozen kits at 3433-3600 and even some above, the majority of them (and all of them were gskil as i want a bdie samsung kit) are rated at 2T. Could not find a single one that was rated 1T. I'd love to know what kit you have and i can bet it's still a 2T kit lol. If I'm wrong about your kit then that's the one I'#d buy.


Sorry to break it to you, but with all due respect, I do know a _little_ bit about this. Most of us here have memory (mine is in my rig, just below this if you look) that is T1, which is preferable. I also already stated that geardown affects performance by a tiny bit, but T2 affects it (a little) more. You would never use T2 at a lower speed because it is - slower, but it can make higher speed ram work which can bring overall benefits - depending on the type of system load.

I'd also like to point out that the ram you linked to, uses T1.

I am running my ram right now at 3600MTs CL14, T1


----------



## VicsPC

crakej said:


> Sorry to break it to you, but with all due respect, I do know a _little_ bit about this. Most of us here have memory (mine is in my rig, just below this if you look) that is T1, which is preferable. I also already stated that geardown affects performance by a tiny bit, but T2 affects it (a little) more. You would never use T2 at a lower speed because it is - slower, but it can make higher speed ram work which can bring overall benefits - depending on the type of system load.
> 
> I'd also like to point out that the ram you linked to, uses T1.
> 
> I am running my ram right now at 3600MTs CL14, T1


From gskill themselves and all the reviews Ive read for gskill 3600CL15 all say it's 2T or 2N on french sites. My corsair also says its 1T but without gd enabled it fails miserably at any stress test. 

Btw i know at the end they run it at 2T BUT that's not what i said, i said RATED not what it can run at that's quite a big difference. Mine is rated at 16-18 hynix, it was fully stable on memtest at 800% running 14-16-34 timings without issue (albeit at 1.45v), so yes i know what you guys think rated means but I'm going by manufacturer rated not what we can actually run em at. If the articles and gskill themselves are wrong about their ratings then you should probably send em a message , otherwise I'm going by what's on their site. 

As i said I'm only going by what i read, apparently for gaming 1T+GD is worse then 2T. Now if anyone else has actual benchmark proof I don't mind looking at it, knowledge is power. I did start out tinkering with the 1700x and C6 on release day so i've been around with ryzen i know what's going on haha. But I'll end it here, be the bigger man I'm not here to argue with the good folks, as i said just going by gskills own website.


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> It was theirs top 16gb kit when I upgraded from theirs 3200. Now they got this
> 
> https://www.overclockers.co.uk/team...4500mhz-dual-channel-kit-black-my-09a-tg.html
> 
> Anyone got spare 290 pounds??
> Im remaping my 350z in 2-3 weeks that will be around 500 pounds for 15hp so not spending cash on stuff i wont nottice.
> 
> Since i got this kit stable at 3533cl14/15/15/15/42 cant complain can i 😛


[email protected] as well - better than my 4266s then (CL19) - might be able to go over 3733+ with those....


----------



## VPII

Finally... all it took was playing around with the Vdimm. The latency in Aida not that great as cpu is running stock. Second pick is latency with normal OC but I forgot that I left performance bias on NONE


----------



## gupsterg

Bigdog302 said:


> Has anyone tried this new G.Skill 3600 memory with a Ryzen 2000 series chip and a Asus CH7 yet? https://www.gskill.com/en/press/vie...zen™-2000-series-processors-and-x470-platform
> 
> I am considering upgrading my CH6 to a CH7 due to the improved VRM and all the other little tweaks. I have a 2700X installed and a older G.Skill 3600 B-die memory set and the best I can get out of it is 3333 with the Stilt's fast timings. it will not go up to 3466 let alone 3600. I am thinking the motherboard I currently have is holding it back some. I also notice on sustained heavy loads there must be some VRM throttling going on during such as the physics benchmark in firestrike. it starts off at 78 FPS then drops down to the high 60's to low 70's in framerate. I had it finish between 71 to 75 FPS at the end of that run. the cpu never gets above the mid to high 60's in Celsius.
> 
> this memory kit is said to only work on the CH7 mobo and and Ryzen 2000 series chips. that memory speed would sure give my 2700X a good shot in the arm.


Looking at a past post you have F4-3600C16D-16GTZR. I wouldn't waste time/money on getting the new X470 "specification" DDR4 3600MHz C18. If you have the spare cash then I'd get another CPU to try.



VicsPC said:


> Please stop using firestrike lol. Its so old and outdated honestly, i cringe when people use that. My Vega 64 hits higher core clocks in god damn Euro Truck Simulator 2 over firestrike, i mean come on its ETS2 and probably dx9 lol.


:doh:

You are aware VEGA will do higher frequency based on application loading GPU, besides other aspects? So the compare between ETS2/3DM FS is invalid.


----------



## VicsPC

gupsterg said:


> Looking at a past post you have F4-3600C16D-16GTZR. I wouldn't waste time/money on getting the new X470 "specification" DDR4 3600MHz C18. If you have the spare cash then I'd get another CPU to try.
> 
> 
> 
> :doh:
> 
> You are aware VEGA will do higher frequency based on application loading GPU, besides other aspects? So the compare between ETS2/3DM FS is invalid.


Yea i know that very well, i also know that even though they said it would, firestrike doesn't load up an 8 core CPU at all. I get much better scores running 50% core parking then 100 ie a 4c/8t cpu rather then 8c/16t. People need to stop using outdated software that's not even kept up with the times, same way you wouldn't the original tomb raider on pc to do a benchmark lol.


----------



## robersoc

Try those presets with stress app, I thought was stable cos no errors from hci but this test was randomly crashing, usually after the 1800 seconds spike, and many times some minutes before completing. 

http://www.overclock.net/forum/10-a...-ryzen-ddr4-24-7-memory-stability-thread.html


----------



## majestynl

VPII said:


> Please explain.... ProcODT what should I try and where can I find it? Secondly how do I use a retry multiplier. Sorry if I ask obvious questions but I'm still learning having come from Intel after being a huge AMD fan for many years.


saw it was already answered. They are all on the timings page!



crakej said:


> This isn't true. geardown=on still uses T1 and is more efficient than T2. The real advantage of keeping geardown off is a behaviour of Ryzen which means you can only select an odd number for your CL if geardown is off. If you're running 3466 CL14 and it's not working, you would probably try CL15 next, but you can only do that with geardown off, otherwise the bios would substitute the CL15 for CL16 (slower).
> 
> My ram is not rated at T2 and neither is the ram you linked to - over 3200 does not necessarily mean it's T2


Yes, geardown=on is like 1.5T!



crakej said:


> Yes, i've seen this too - I've noticed performance can suffer if voltages are not quite optimal - slightly too high or low can give this problem - that's why it's always good to play with the voltages yourself - so you know you're getting best performance... and voltages


Have seen this too...said many times over here.. again nobody took it serious before 



minal said:


> I tried setting VRM switching frequency to Manual->400, but I don't notice any difference. I didn't change other switching frequency options (SOC, etc).
> 
> It's not a huge deal, but I am going for a quiet system and it's a bit funny when electrical noise is the loudest part of the system at idle. The case blocks high frequency noise pretty well, so if I close the top Moduvent I won't hear it even from up close.
> 
> At least it's normal... So you do hear a constant high frequency that changes pitch, plus some on/off "buzzing" that sounds like crackling/sizzling vibrational noises? And they don't bother you?


Cant hear 400 !! There are more things in the case making more noise! like fans etc..



crakej said:


> That and the fact that many of these so called 'for Ryzen' memory modules are just like any other DDR4 module, just with Ryzen printed on them. Same spec.
> 
> Edit: That pic is funny.... 'New DDR4 specification' - WHAT???!!! You can't just give DDR4 a new specification - it's either DDR4 or it's not.


Yup! Bought the labeled Gskill RGB Ryzen special.... hahah its a joke.. same as my kit bought last year without a ryzen label! gupsterg said maybe their is a slightlt difference SPD data. But those can be copied easiliy.
Didnt check it!



lordzed83 said:


> Mine is actually T1 rqted. I still think teamgroup kits are better than gskill on ryzen.platform. if i had 240 pounds to blow up i pick up 4233 kit and see whats the deal. I bet I could get 3600cl14cout of it if i can get 3600cl15 pass 2000% t1


Why you think teamgroup is better ? explain pls.
And go try 3600 cl14+TT.... its definitely not that easy mate! Will speak you later when u have it stable! Its totally not comparable with 3600 CL15 !!
First of all if i can remember you couldnt get 3533/3466+CL14 stable right? 



gupsterg said:


> Looking at a past post you have F4-3600C16D-16GTZR. I wouldn't waste time/money on getting the new X470 "specification" DDR4 3600MHz C18. If you have the spare cash then I'd get another CPU to try.


Yep agree, invest in CPU or something else what matters more!


----------



## lordzed83

@majestynl upped my game running 1.46-1.48 volts as DAILY ddr volts from 1.44 before that calculator was giving me. Had to do C14 but 15 rest to get c14 going but works great.

If it goes for its better It was and is running just better. Had 3466cl15 running on SECOND bios for Ryzen 1 when everyone could not boot/pass 3333.
PCB design is different and VERY fussy.Theirs kit WILL NOT BOOT with Stilts 3466/3600 no matter what volts or CLDO. They are not Easy kits to work with sometime they just wont boot. Once it boots GAME IS ON 

Damn I wish I had Ryzen 3200cl14 kit of theirs out of box fantastic timings or 4266+ kit.

This is what I got Daily now








6000% Ramtest and 1600 HCI error free


----------



## VPII

I see many people mention memory speed CL14 +TT. Sorry for maybe a silly question but what do you mean by TT?


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> @majestynl upped my game running 1.46-1.48 volts as DAILY ddr volts from 1.44 before that calculator was giving me. Had to do C14 but 15 rest to get c14 going but works great.


Wauw...your ram is very hungry men!! 3466 @ 1.385v and 3533 @ 1.4v over here!!



lordzed83 said:


> If it goes for its better It was and is running just better. Had 3466cl15 running on SECOND bios for Ryzen 1 when everyone could not boot/pass 3333.


hehe uhmmm you forgot me from Ryzen 1 CH6 Thread 



lordzed83 said:


> PCB design is different and VERY fussy.Theirs kit WILL NOT BOOT with Stilts 3466/3600 no matter what volts or CLDO. They are not Easy kits to work with sometime they just wont boot. Once it boots GAME IS ON
> Damn I wish I had Ryzen 3200cl14 kit of theirs out of box fantastic timings or 4266+ kit.
> 
> This is what I got Daily now
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 6000% Ramtest and 1600 HCI error free


I just ordered a new Gskill Ram kit, this time a 3200CL15 intsead of all my CL14's, will share results !

Nice AIDA results tho! 




VPII said:


> I see many people mention memory speed CL14 +TT. Sorry for maybe a silly question but what do you mean by TT?


Nothing silly mate! its just Tight Timings! ... that easy


----------



## VicsPC

VPII said:


> I see many people mention memory speed CL14 +TT. Sorry for maybe a silly question but what do you mean by TT?


Tight timings, ie secondary timings, the first 5-6 18-36 are primaries, the others are secondaries, they are a lot harder to get stable as its usually recommended to change em one at a time and retest. Unfortunately as i love the stilts timings, since no 2 CPUs are the same its still a trial and error even with his timings. Its the most tedious thing to get right but when you do there's some good gains to be had, some are for bragging right and some are actually helpful.


----------



## gupsterg

VicsPC said:


> Yea i know that very well, i also know that even though they said it would, firestrike doesn't load up an 8 core CPU at all. I get much better scores running 50% core parking then 100 ie a 4c/8t cpu rather then 8c/16t. People need to stop using outdated software that's not even kept up with the times, same way you wouldn't the original tomb raider on pc to do a benchmark lol.


I use CP 100%, but in W7 and in W10 50%. But always W7 benches better to me, so would you not say that the way the OS handles threading, etc is at play?

I do not consider Firestrike outdated. TBH I use it quite a bit, to make compares with my own rigs and others. The issue of AMD Ryzen/Threadripper not going to 100% usage in the CPU oriented tests in FireStrike I have no idea why and that I would say is down to FM programming, GPU oriented tests don't seem affected.


----------



## lordzed83

@majestynl yup i had 3733cl16 running at 1.48 passing 200% ramtest just for fun see if it errors as its SLOW. Normally with not enough volts i get Errors by 50%. Yes theirs design likes volts but look at size os heatspreaders. Compared to Gskills Trident Z they feel almost twice as heavy LOL
@gupsterg but Win7 cant even run forza 7 so its useless kinda 

Remember I actually use My pc for gaming and making videos besides benching and testing while I'm training 
Love Forza7 I drive my 350Z in game without breaking my 350z normally and learnign to drive it better. Hard compared to my FWD DC2 tho


----------



## VicsPC

gupsterg said:


> I use CP 100%, but in W7 and in W10 50%. But always W7 benches better to me, so would you not say that the way the OS handles threading, etc is at play?
> 
> I do not consider Firestrike outdated. TBH I use it quite a bit, to make compares with my own rigs and others. The issue of AMD Ryzen/Threadripper not going to 100% usage in the CPU oriented tests in FireStrike I have no idea why and that I would say is down to FM programming, GPU oriented tests don't seem affected.


I used 100% with my 1700x but right now trying out 50% with my 2700x. If something is going to use more then 4cores anyways it's going to use it whether it's at 100 or 50%, i think it being infinity fabric in some applications it's probably better to use 50% then 100 hoping it's using one CCX and not using 2+2 and just using 4+0. I did remember on my 1700x getting WAY better combined scores with 50% cp. I have not tried it on my 2700x yet as I'm not really bothered by firestrike lol. It does seem to do better in Origins and FC5, 2 games that are very cpu demanding. Playing some origins all my cores peak at 100% and core multiplier ends up being something like 43.5x peak. I may give it a go later and reset hwinfo and see what i get for averages after a good toasty session.


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> Yes, geardown=on is like 1.5T!
> 
> Have seen this too...said many times over here.. again nobody took it serious before
> 
> Yup! Bought the labeled Gskill RGB Ryzen special.... hahah its a joke.. same as my kit bought last year without a ryzen label! gupsterg said maybe their is a slightlt difference SPD data. But those can be copied easiliy.
> Didnt check it!


Thank you @majestynl - I try to give people good advice, when I know what I'm talking about..... waste of my time when someone just doesn't want to hear it. I just stop answering those people.


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> @majestynl yup i had 3733cl16 running at 1.48 passing 200% ramtest just for fun see if it errors as its SLOW. Normally with not enough volts i get Errors by 50%. Yes theirs design likes volts but look at size os heatspreaders. Compared to Gskills Trident Z they feel almost twice as heavy LOL
> 
> @gupsterg but Win7 cant even run forza 7 so its useless kinda
> 
> Remember I actually use My pc for gaming and making videos besides benching and testing while I'm training
> Love Forza7 I drive my 350Z in game without breaking my 350z normally and learnign to drive it better. Hard compared to my FWD DC2 tho
> 
> 
> Spoiler


That game looks amazing....I might have to check it out......

Edit: downloading now!!!


----------



## VicsPC

crakej said:


> That game looks amazing....I might have to check it out......
> 
> Edit: downloading now!!!


I LOVE racing games, problem is when i tried forza 3 (wtv that free one was) it was running so poorly from the windows store i was getting headaches playing it around, its a real shame. I am however going to get a copy of Crew 2 to write as a review so should be interesting. May also get the first Madden to come out on PC in a decade, Madden 19.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> That game looks amazing....I might have to check it out......
> 
> Edit: downloading now!!!


For comparison









If all goes good I'll be doing first Track time in 350z on 30th June so training in forza.


----------



## Krisztias

@majestynl

Did you find out why the CPU in PE3 does not boost that much anymore in all core workload? I think i have the same problem... The first time i saw it, i made a cmos reset, reapplied my settings and it was good. But now no cmos reset or bios reflash works. I'm worried that my silicon has degraded after a month. I must say, i didn't done a lots of stress test only a few in the first couple of days, then left it alone with RAM at 3333MHz CL14 an a core voltage offset of -0.0250


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> For comparison
> If all goes good I'll be doing first Track time in 350z on 30th June so training in forza.


Beautiful car man! The game is amazing....yes, you can still tell it's computer generated, but bloody realistic. I might have to shell out for a driving wheel controller now!

I'm sure the real thing is just bloody amazing.....sadly I will have to stick with the digital version


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> lordzed83 said:
> 
> 
> 
> For comparison
> If all goes good I'll be doing first Track time in 350z on 30th June so training in forza.
> 
> 
> 
> Beautiful car man! The game is amazing....yes, you can still tell it's computer generated, but bloody realistic. I might have to shell out for a driving wheel controller now!
> 
> I'm sure the real thing is just bloody amazing.....sadly I will have to stick with the digital version /forum/images/smilies/frown.gif
Click to expand...

Ye i got wheel nothing fancy but comparing how my dc2 drove around track and how it handled in forza 7 wirh exacly aamw hp mods and aerup i know its VERY close to reality 🙂

Anyhow testing soc 1.05 with extreme instead of optymised and 500khz @elmor Any news You not posted here for ages. I noticed that soc vrm frequency tooltip says 300-500 but when i change to manual its 400-600 is it a display error??









Seems to work fine thats 0.025 lower than before no reboot or error.


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> @majestynl yup i had 3733cl16 running at 1.48 passing 200% ramtest just for fun see if it errors as its SLOW. Normally with not enough volts i get Errors by 50%. Yes theirs design likes volts but look at size os heatspreaders. Compared to Gskills Trident Z they feel almost twice as heavy LOL


hungry as hell yeah!!! Dunno men, love the aesthetics of Gskill Trident z!



crakej said:


> Thank you @majestynl - I try to give people good advice, when I know what I'm talking about..... waste of my time when someone just doesn't want to hear it. I just stop answering those people.


YW mate! you are totally right! 



Krisztias said:


> @majestynl
> 
> Did you find out why the CPU in PE3 does not boost that much anymore in all core workload? I think i have the same problem... The first time i saw it, i made a cmos reset, reapplied my settings and it was good. But now no cmos reset or bios reflash works. I'm worried that my silicon has degraded after a month. I must say, i didn't done a lots of stress test only a few in the first couple of days, then left it alone with RAM at 3333MHz CL14 an a core voltage offset of -0.0250


No it never came back to first dayz! I switched to my new CPU, now running Manual OC, will check later if this one does the same or not! 
Reflash/clear cmos etc etc didn't work for me either! I hope its not degraded, cant really believe it if you didn't do anything extreme!
I did a lot of tests and really pushed limits..but then again its not normal.. Lets hope its not.. will keep an eye on this new one..
Good luck!



lordzed83 said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seems to work fine thats 0.025 lower than before no reboot or error.


uhu lordzed whats seems to work my mate ?!! you covered the Memclocks! we cant see your full magic.. LOL  ..


----------



## VicsPC

lordzed83 said:


> Ye i got wheel nothing fancy but comparing how my dc2 drove around track and how it handled in forza 7 wirh exacly aamw hp mods and aerup i know its VERY close to reality 🙂
> 
> Anyhow testing soc 1.05 with extreme instead of optymised and 500khz @elmor Any news You not posted here for ages. I noticed that soc vrm frequency tooltip says 300-500 but when i change to manual its 400-600 is it a display error??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seems to work fine thats 0.025 lower than before no reboot or error.


Oh man DC2>350/370z any day of the week haha. I had DC5 but US spec and had 180k before i moved, bought it new in 02 sold it in 2013 before i moved to France. That car was amazing, friend has one with 650bhp turboed its ridiculous. I moved and wanted something unique bought a 2012 Swift Sport, put an airbox on it and that thing is a go cart.


----------



## minal

majestynl said:


> Cant hear 400 !! There are more things in the case making more noise! like fans etc..


I didn't hear any difference with that setting.

My case and CPU fans are inaudible (~500 RPM at idle), no HDDs, passive fanless video card, semi-passive PSU whose fan has never turned on even during stress tests... the motherboard is the loudest component at idle! 



lordzed83 said:


>


Nice car and color.


----------



## JayC72

Got a quick question regarding Power plans...

I'm using Windows "Balanced" plan with the following settings using "CPU Core Parking Manager 3":
Core Parking Index 55%
Turbo Boost Index 100%
Frequency Scaling Index 80%

Wanted to know what everyone else is using.
Is my settings a good balance of power saving and boosting to Max frequency and speeds?

Not too sure what the Turbo Boost index does in relation to Freq Scaling index.
Yes, i read the explanation on the tool's homepage. I don't understand it.
I noticed that any higher in Frequency Scaling than 80% will not drop Vcore when CPU is idle. Higher numbers here seem to keep the CPU speeds at max and vcore voltage doesn't drop. I''d like the 2700X to boost as high as possible will also retaining the idle voltage drop.

Any know how to adjust that ?


----------



## lordzed83

JayC72 said:


> Got a quick question regarding Power plans...
> 
> I'm using Windows "Balanced" plan with the following settings using "CPU Core Parking Manager 3":
> Core Parking Index 55%
> Turbo Boost Index 100%
> Frequency Scaling Index 80%
> 
> Wanted to know what everyone else is using.
> Is my settings a good balance of power saving and boosting to Max frequency and speeds?
> 
> Not too sure what the Turbo Boost index does in relation to Freq Scaling index.
> Yes, i read the explanation on the tool's homepage. I don't understand it.
> I noticed that any higher in Frequency Scaling than 80% will not drop Vcore when CPU is idle. Higher numbers here seem to keep the CPU speeds at max and vcore voltage doesn't drop. I''d like the 2700X to boost as high as possible will also retaining the idle voltage drop.
> 
> Any know how to adjust that ?


I'm using Process lasso  that shifts power plans priorities cores allocation ect. 
Everyone hee should give it a go 
https://bitsum.com/get-lasso-pro/
Free version is not bad I'w got pro after using free for a while decided its worth the extra 

@VicsPC
Mannn I miss my Dc2 was most fun thing I'w owned a proper good all around toy. Tracked Her for 8 years never been good at it but was fun god damn kid made me write her off @ 15mph  8 years of dumping all my moneys in to her fully build engine gearbox carbon stuff ect.
















Race in peace in car heven


----------



## VicsPC

lordzed83 said:


> I'm using Process lasso  that shifts power plans priorities cores allocation ect.
> Everyone hee should give it a go
> https://bitsum.com/get-lasso-pro/
> Free version is not bad I'w got pro after using free for a while decided its worth the extra
> 
> 
> @VicsPC
> Mannn I miss my Dc2 was most fun thing I'w owned a proper good all around toy. Tracked Her for 8 years never been good at it but was fun god damn kid made me write her off @ 15mph  8 years of dumping all my moneys in to her fully build engine gearbox carbon stuff ect.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://youtu.be/ldjCVBlRBbg
> 
> Race in peace in car heven


Yea i see the type-r front end conversion as well, was never a fan of those rounded headlights. 

As far as core parking, i did a registry edit so i can just do it under processor power management. Under the registry and power plan you can actually unlock EVERYTHING and the possibilities are absolutely insane. I think there's an opion for how long cores stay parked as well. If you look at the pic, that entire left side is all power management settings. I highlighted one so you can see what it does. This is is why i always tell people there's much more to a power plan then balanced/hp/ryzen and all that, it really does get insanely in depth.

P.S. Does anyone else have their busclock change in hwinfo? I'm on 5.84-3450 and my busclock routinely peaks at 120+ mhz, i doubt my cpu is hitting 5ghz so I'm hoping the beta version is more stable in that regard?


----------



## lordzed83

@VicsPC it was Legit Imported from Japan lightest spec 96spec so no AC no electrics besides windows. hated double headlights I was paying extra 30% insurance for an import.

Dont think its wort messing about with them Power options just try process lasso 
do you have SSD registry hack for unlocking downtime in power options?? Makes it run 100% all the time :]


----------



## hurricane28

lordzed83 said:


> I'm using Process lasso  that shifts power plans priorities cores allocation ect.
> Everyone hee should give it a go
> https://bitsum.com/get-lasso-pro/
> Free version is not bad I'w got pro after using free for a while decided its worth the extra
> 
> 
> @VicsPC
> Mannn I miss my Dc2 was most fun thing I'w owned a proper good all around toy. Tracked Her for 8 years never been good at it but was fun god damn kid made me write her off @ 15mph  8 years of dumping all my moneys in to her fully build engine gearbox carbon stuff ect.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://youtu.be/ldjCVBlRBbg
> 
> Race in peace in car heven


Whats with that stupid music man.. Want to hear the Integra instead lol.


----------



## Krisztias

majestynl said:


> hungry as hell yeah!!! Dunno men, love the aesthetics of Gskill Trident z!
> 
> 
> 
> YW mate! you are totally right!
> 
> 
> 
> No it never came back to first dayz! I switched to my new CPU, now running Manual OC, will check later if this one does the same or not!
> Reflash/clear cmos etc etc didn't work for me either! I hope its not degraded, cant really believe it if you didn't do anything extreme!
> I did a lot of tests and really pushed limits..but then again its not normal.. Lets hope its not.. will keep an eye on this new one..
> Good luck!


Thanks, i hope it's just some bios bug/CPU AI or due to ambient temperature... but i have custom loop, so... i don't know... It will be very-very sad, if the first OC setting (PE3) would degrade the chip in so short period of time...


----------



## lordzed83

hurricane28 said:


> Whats with that stupid music man.. Want to hear the Integra instead lol.


Well you cant hear sound in speeded up videos. Ill educate You its called PSYTRANCE 
There you go pull to end of 4th gear





Anyway back on topic one of guys from ocuk just finished putting together 2700x c7h and teamgroup 4000 kit ill see what he gets


----------



## springs113

Krisztias said:


> Thanks, i hope it's just some bios bug/CPU AI or due to ambient temperature... but i have custom loop, so... i don't know... It will be very-very sad, if the first OC setting (PE3) would degrade the chip in so short period of time...


I don't think that is the case at all, my friend who has a 2700x at stock don't boost higher than 3.9 when doing things like cinebench or gaming but if he leaves his sytem at idle or just browse the net it boost well into the 4.3 range.


----------



## VicsPC

springs113 said:


> I don't think that is the case at all, my friend who has a 2700x at stock don't boost higher than 3.9 when doing things like cinebench or gaming but if he leaves his sytem at idle or just browse the net it boost well into the 4.3 range.


Mines stops at around 4.35 (theres a bug for me in hwinfo where the busclock changes giving me a false reading of 5ghz on 4 cores lol), but i also get around 4.2-4.35ghz in some demanding games, ie Origins and Far Cry 5. This is on all auto, i have not changed a single thing except ram timings, DRAM voltage/boot voltage. Cinebench and firestrike won't ever hit peak CPU usages i don't think not designed for that.


----------



## lordzed83

springs113 said:


> Krisztias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks, i hope it's just some bios bug/CPU AI or due to ambient temperature... but i have custom loop, so... i don't know... It will be very-very sad, if the first OC setting (PE3) would degrade the chip in so short period of time...
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think that is the case at all, my friend who has a 2700x at stock don't boost higher than 3.9 when doing things like cinebench or gaming but if he leaves his sytem at idle or just browse the net it boost well into the 4.3 range.
Click to expand...


All depends on temperature and power limits if it goes for auto boost afaik.


----------



## CJMitsuki

VicsPC said:


> As far as core parking, i did a registry edit so i can just do it under processor power management. Under the registry and power plan you can actually unlock EVERYTHING and the possibilities are absolutely insane. I think there's an opion for how long cores stay parked as well. If you look at the pic, that entire left side is all power management settings. I highlighted one so you can see what it does. This is is why i always tell people there's much more to a power plan then balanced/hp/ryzen and all that, it really does get insanely in depth


I just used a console command to unlock Ultimate performance profile. Gonna rest and see if it makes a difference tonight in benchmarks. 
@lordzed83 I used to use Project Lasso, it was useful but at the time I didn’t really use it much. What is the difference in the Pro Version?


----------



## hurricane28

lordzed83 said:


> Well you cant hear sound in speeded up videos. Ill educate You its called PSYTRANCE
> There you go pull to end of 4th gear
> https://youtu.be/6dYrnLcheDQ
> 
> Anyway back on topic one of guys from ocuk just finished putting together 2700x c7h and teamgroup 4000 kit ill see what he gets


Cool, how much HP does it have? Sounds like stock man.


----------



## lordzed83

hurricane28 said:


> lordzed83 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well you cant hear sound in speeded up videos. Ill educate You its called PSYTRANCE /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> There you go pull to end of 4th gear
> https://youtu.be/6dYrnLcheDQ
> 
> Anyway back on topic one of guys from ocuk just finished putting together 2700x c7h and teamgroup 4000 kit ill see what he gets /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> 
> 
> Cool, how much HP does it have? Sounds like stock man.
Click to expand...

Had said its crashed 229 after map 1.8na with fuel cut at 9200 and shift point 8800. Sounds atock well if you consider 123db stock then yes lol uswd to have earplugs for passengers. Weight was 1021kg with half tank of gas. In general iw put around 18 000 pounds in to that car over years. Thats why i have not had ANY holidays in last 10 years. Car upgrades always first. This year had full respray and more suspension upgrades planned for another 2500 poinds.

@CJMitsuki you get extra powe management prifiles on fly with power profiles/aolkication ect. Gets every last juice out of system and core management. Best 25 bucks soent on software. I got profiles for mining for gaming for benching. Core parking.
Windows cou management is total junk in comparisson cant even select what cores what application ises or if it uses hyperthreading ect.


----------



## Krisztias

springs113 said:


> I don't think that is the case at all, my friend who has a 2700x at stock don't boost higher than 3.9 when doing things like cinebench or gaming but if he leaves his sytem at idle or just browse the net it boost well into the 4.3 range.


The problem is, that my CPU boosted all cores for two weeks under CB15 to 4115Mhz, butnow it boost to "only" 4090MHz with PE3. The first time i saw this i reseted the cmos, applied my settings and it was good again. But this method not functioning anymore, it stays at 4090MHz after cmos reset and/or bios flashback. Single core boost is 4350MHz every time, with all cores.


----------



## Krisztias

double post


----------



## minal

Krisztias said:


> The problem is, that my CPU boosted all cores for two weeks under CB15 to 4115Mhz, but now it boost to "only" 4090MHz with PE3. The first time i saw this i reseted the cmos, applied my settings and it was good again. But this method not functioning anymore, it stays at 4090MHz after cmos reset and/or bios flashback. Single core boost is 4350MHz every time, with all cores.


I noticed exactly the same behavior with PE3. 

For silence/temperatures and fear of degradation, I'm just running on Auto now. It still boosts up to 4.35GHz but cannot sustain it under heavy load.


----------



## hurricane28

Anyway, where is Elmor at? Haven't seem him for a while here, i know its been busy weeks with CES but for the C6H there is an BIOS with the fan issue fix while we still with 0601 BIOS.. There is a new BIOS released soon which is 0702 but when it hits us i have no clue, hopefully very very soon.


----------



## springs113

lordzed83 said:


> All depends on temperature and power limits if it goes for auto boost afaik.


 I'm on water and I don't boost higher than 3.9. I have to set it manually.


----------



## VicsPC

springs113 said:


> I'm on water and I don't boost higher than 3.9. I have to set it manually.


I'm on water with a 240/360 setup and boost past 3.9 all the time. I'm on all auto but in games i reach around 4.1-4.25 consistently without an issue and it holds that speed. I average around 4.2ghz in a game like Origins with temps anywhere beween 40-50°C average probably around 45°C.


----------



## toreko

Guys, I bought CH7 because I heard only good things about it and for the love of god since I got it all I had but trouble with it.


The aida64 will cause my pump for cpu/gpu or fans to shutdown and can easily kill my vega/2700x and whenever my cpu reach 75c my fans start to go 5k rpm making everyone deaf and apparently you cant fix that, its the only mobo in the entire market that does not allow you to increase that threshold and why is it even that low to begin with whenits an enthusiastic mobo for 300$ and not low end one.


Is there any news from the dev team that they will let you put the threshold on the 75cpu higher? because its ******ed(sorry but it litteraly is) that my gpu fans that cooling gpu fans will start going 5k rpm and make a turbo jet because my cpu reach 76c from time to time while my cpu fans all work 100% 24/7 already including the case fans as they are the silent fans.


Honestly big disappointment for a 300$ motherboard, this is honestly very unprofessional :/ or am I missing something here?


Hell even if I wanted to buy a dedicated fan controller to fix that problem I cant because it will shut down my sensors and start putting -100 temperatures on my cpu thanks to the super sensor chip they put in there.


----------



## crakej

toreko said:


> Guys, I bought CH7 because I heard only good things about it and for the love of god since I got it all I had but trouble with it.
> 
> 
> The aida64 will cause my pump for cpu/gpu or fans to shutdown and can easily kill my vega/2700x and whenever my cpu reach 75c my fans start to go 5k rpm making everyone deaf and apparently you cant fix that, its the only mobo in the entire market that does not allow you to increase that threshold and why is it even that low to begin with whenits an enthusiastic mobo for 300$ and not low end one.
> 
> 
> Is there any news from the dev team that they will let you put the threshold on the 75cpu higher? because its ******ed(sorry but it litteraly is) that my gpu fans that cooling gpu fans will start going 5k rpm and make a turbo jet because my cpu reach 76c from time to time while my cpu fans all work 100% 24/7 already including the case fans as they are the silent fans.
> 
> 
> Honestly big disappointment for a 300$ motherboard, this is honestly very unprofessional :/ or am I missing something here?
> 
> 
> Hell even if I wanted to buy a dedicated fan controller to fix that problem I cant because it will shut down my sensors and start putting -100 temperatures on my cpu thanks to the super sensor chip they put in there.


This is a really good board.....so yes, you're probably missing something!

Have to calibrated the fans in the bios? Are you running default settings? Which bios are you using?

The reason the max temp is 75 is that Ryzen does not work well over 75c, and you should never get that high under normal (or OCed) use.

Have you OCed anything?


----------



## toreko

crakej said:


> This is a really good board.....so yes, you're probably missing something!
> 
> Have to calibrated the fans in the bios? Are you running default settings? Which bios are you using?
> 
> The reason the max temp is 75 is that Ryzen does not work well over 75c, and you should never get that high under normal (or OCed) use.
> 
> Have you OCed anything?



I just run default settings with pbo2 and undervolt of 0.1 with h100i v2 .


I am running the latest bios, the problems I listed are knowned problems on asus forums and all motherboards have it.



Did calibrate the fans and that wont do anything as the problem with the board is the sensor chip it has so if you have any sensor software running it will cause pumps/fans to stop spinning or sometimes even make fans spinn at 100% for no reason.


The 75c temperature is honestly not that bad as AMD themself stated ryzen runs fine at 80c and ASUS actually has same problem on Intel motherboards with 75c limit.


----------



## VicsPC

toreko said:


> I just run default settings with pbo2 and undervolt of 0.1.
> 
> 
> Did calibrate the fans and that wont do anything as the problem with the board is the sensor chip it has so if you have any sensor software running it will cause pumps/fans to stop spinning or sometimes even make fans spinn at 100% for no reason.
> 
> 
> The 75c temperature is honestly not that bad as AMD themself stated ryzen runs fine at 80c and ASUS actually has same problem on Intel motherboards with 75c limit.


Ive run my D5 on both the c6 and now the c7. I run it in DC mode and not PWM as i like to keep it at speed without it going up and down. I've not had any issues with my pump turning off or ramping up and down (although for some reason both boards don't seem to read the RPM of the pump so i can't see it in hwinfo). It's possible it's a pwm problem, have you guys tried setting it to DC mode and just running em at constant speed?


----------



## toreko

VicsPC said:


> Ive run my D5 on both the c6 and now the c7. I run it in DC mode and not PWM as i like to keep it at speed without it going up and down. I've not had any issues with my pump turning off or ramping up and down (although for some reason both boards don't seem to read the RPM of the pump so i can't see it in hwinfo). It's possible it's a pwm problem, have you guys tried setting it to DC mode and just running em at constant speed?



Do you use any software like aida64 or corsair link or hwinfo? those things cause fans and pumps to stop spinning because the sensor chip goes nutz, its on official forum of asus, lots of people have it and its something that is on all boards.


I put my fans on dc aswell but I can not switch off the 75c 100% crap as thats a function that cant be changed, people complain on the asus forum about that too but not one dev responds about it over there.


This is me running my pc in cold weather, what will happen once I start playing in hot summer when its 30-40c over here ? though I will be using ac but you get my point :/


This is a high end board that is mainly built to overclock but you cant even change 75c threshold that is totally safe to run 24/7, I find it unacceptable I have to hear my fans spin like crazy and unable to run aida64 to see my computer information.


----------



## VicsPC

toreko said:


> Do you use any software like aida64 or corsair link or hwinfo? those things cause fans and pumps to stop spinning because the sensor chip goes nutz, its on official forum of asus, lots of people have it and its something that is on all boards.
> 
> 
> I put my fans on dc aswell but I can not switch off the 75c 100% crap as thats a function that cant be changed, people complain on the asus forum about that too but not one dev responds about it over there.
> 
> 
> This is me running my pc in cold weather, what will happen once I start playing in hot summer when its 30-40c over here ? though I will be using ac but you get my point :/
> 
> 
> This is a high end board that is mainly built to overclock but you cant even change 75c threshold that is totally safe to run 24/7, I find it unacceptable I have to hear my fans spin like crazy and unable to run aida64 to see my computer information.


Yup I'm running hwinfo right now and have never had a problem with my pump going up or down, then again like i said I can't check the rpm unfortunately but Id know if my pump has gone down in speed. My water to ambient delta has always been the same, my GPU/CPU temps have always been the same. Since i have dozen fans (2rads in push/pull) none of my fans are on my mobo except for my rear exhaust fan which i keep at a constant 70%. Ive monitored it and i remember on my c6 once in a while it would stay at full speed instead of 70% i set it to. I think on 6101/6201 i didn't have that problem. As far as 75°C being an issue? I've not hit that temperature yet and that's with ambients of 25°C here and no AC. I'm on water so doubt it will ever hit 75°C so no way of checking lol. But as Ive said ive never heard my pump go faster (id know as my case would vibrate if it did), as far as going down pwm was an issue, changing it to DC and it stayed stationary on my C6. 

Not sure what's causing the issue, it's possible that it's only a certain amount of people with a bad batch of sensors, if that's the case i dont think a BIOS would fix that unless they change the offset in the BIOS directly. It was supposed to be fixed with the last update though so will have to keep an eye on it. No issue on my c7 though with the pump.


----------



## toreko

Okey apparently the fans start to go off at Tctl and not Tdie.


My cpu is actually at 66c while Tctl is at 76c using aida64 stress.


This is even more of a mess then.


----------



## toreko

VicsPC said:


> Yup I'm running hwinfo right now and have never had a problem with my pump going up or down, then again like i said I can't check the rpm unfortunately but Id know if my pump has gone down in speed. My water to ambient delta has always been the same, my GPU/CPU temps have always been the same. Since i have dozen fans (2rads in push/pull) none of my fans are on my mobo except for my rear exhaust fan which i keep at a constant 70%. Ive monitored it and i remember on my c6 once in a while it would stay at full speed instead of 70% i set it to. I think on 6101/6201 i didn't have that problem. As far as 75°C being an issue? I've not hit that temperature yet and that's with ambients of 25°C here and no AC. I'm on water so doubt it will ever hit 75°C so no way of checking lol. But as Ive said ive never heard my pump go faster (id know as my case would vibrate if it did), as far as going down pwm was an issue, changing it to DC and it stayed stationary on my C6.
> 
> Not sure what's causing the issue, it's possible that it's only a certain amount of people with a bad batch of sensors, if that's the case i dont think a BIOS would fix that unless they change the offset in the BIOS directly. It was supposed to be fixed with the last update though so will have to keep an eye on it. No issue on my c7 though with the pump.





do you have aura running in background? with hwinfo to start doing the issue you need to run corsair link with hwinfo or aura with either of them to cause the issue.


Aida64 causes problem by itself I think though.


----------



## toreko

VicsPC said:


> Yup I'm running hwinfo right now and have never had a problem with my pump going up or down, then again like i said I can't check the rpm unfortunately but Id know if my pump has gone down in speed. My water to ambient delta has always been the same, my GPU/CPU temps have always been the same. Since i have dozen fans (2rads in push/pull) none of my fans are on my mobo except for my rear exhaust fan which i keep at a constant 70%. Ive monitored it and i remember on my c6 once in a while it would stay at full speed instead of 70% i set it to. I think on 6101/6201 i didn't have that problem. As far as 75°C being an issue? I've not hit that temperature yet and that's with ambients of 25°C here and no AC. I'm on water so doubt it will ever hit 75°C so no way of checking lol. But as Ive said ive never heard my pump go faster (id know as my case would vibrate if it did), as far as going down pwm was an issue, changing it to DC and it stayed stationary on my C6.
> 
> Not sure what's causing the issue, it's possible that it's only a certain amount of people with a bad batch of sensors, if that's the case i dont think a BIOS would fix that unless they change the offset in the BIOS directly. It was supposed to be fixed with the last update though so will have to keep an eye on it. No issue on my c7 though with the pump.



Do you use aura sync? or can you try and running aida64 for few days and see if something goes wrong?


I know there is not a single person on asus forums that says they don't have the problem that use aida64 or crosshair link with hwinfo or aurasync.


crap sorry for double post I thought it didnt post my previous one.


----------



## VPII

toreko said:


> Okey apparently the fans start to go off at Tctl and not Tdie.
> 
> 
> My cpu is actually at 66c while Tctl is at 76c using aida64 stress.
> 
> 
> This is even more of a mess then.


Are your fans plugged into the h100i or mobo. Are you running corsair link software? Im asking as I know there is issues with the corsair link software and mobo. Further more I stand to be corrected but fan limits can be set in bios based on cpu temp. Ive got the Asus rog plug in front panel and I know that mobo reads tdie temps and fan speed is adjusted according to that.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## crakej

toreko said:


> I just run default settings with pbo2 and undervolt of 0.1 with h100i v2 .
> 
> 
> I am running the latest bios, the problems I listed are knowned problems on asus forums and all motherboards have it.
> 
> 
> 
> Did calibrate the fans and that wont do anything as the problem with the board is the sensor chip it has so if you have any sensor software running it will cause pumps/fans to stop spinning or sometimes even make fans spinn at 100% for no reason.
> 
> 
> The 75c temperature is honestly not that bad as AMD themself stated ryzen runs fine at 80c and ASUS actually has same problem on Intel motherboards with 75c limit.


It's true some have an incomparability with software from corsair and others - they are aware of the problem and a fix should be coming soon. It's recommended to remove the Corsair software (or other) for the time being.

Oh, and not everybody has this problem - I don't. Also, Aura should be removed after selecting what you want.


----------



## gupsterg

@VicsPC

The reason for BCLK swing in SW monitoring on Ryzen has been stated many a time in C6H thread and a few times in this. Reference the Ryzen Essential OP in my signature or the ROG C7H OP.

@toreko

AIDA64 when ran on a motherboard with Super IO chip ITE8665E = PWM issues. Again known issue on any motherboard that uses it, author needs to solve his SW AFAIK because in extensive testing on C6H, C7H and ZE it is only AIDA64 that seems to kill my PWM always.

The temperature that is used for fan control is the one seen under ASUS ROG C7H heading in HWINFO (ie Super IO chip reading TCTL and accounting for offset). You may find using fan smoothing option in UEFI helps when CPU temp jumps erratically.


----------



## toreko

VPII said:


> Are your fans plugged into the h100i or mobo. Are you running corsair link software? Im asking as I know there is issues wiyh the corsair link software and mobo. Further more I stand to be corrected but fan limits can be set in bios based on cpu temp. Ive got the Asus rog plug in panel and I know thst mobo reads tfie temps snd fsn speed is adjusted according to that.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk





CPU fans -> CPU_Fan + CPU_FanOpt at 90%



H100i pump -> AIO near the CPU_Fan at 100%



GPU Pump -> W_Pump at 100%



GPU Fans -> Cha_Fan2 at 34% 



Case Fans -> Cha_Fan3 at 100%


I get problems with just aida64 running but my sensor goes into -temp if both aida64 and corsshair work together.


The option that I can see are limited up to 75c and cant go above that.


What I find more weird why its Tctl based and not Tdie.


----------



## VicsPC

toreko said:


> Do you use aura sync? or can you try and running aida64 for few days and see if something goes wrong?
> 
> 
> I know there is not a single person on asus forums that says they don't have the problem that use aida64 or crosshair link with hwinfo or aurasync.
> 
> 
> crap sorry for double post I thought it didnt post my previous one.


I dont use aura or corsair link don't have the need for either, all i have for Corsair is cue. 



gupsterg said:


> @VicsPC
> 
> The reason for BCLK swing in SW monitoring on Ryzen has been stated many a time in C6H thread and a few times in this. Reference the Ryzen Essential OP in my signature or the ROG C7H OP.
> 
> @toreko
> 
> AIDA64 when ran on a motherboard with Super IO chip ITE8665E = PWM issues. Again known issue on any motherboard that uses it, author needs to solve his SW AFAIK because in extensive testing on C6H, C7H and ZE it is only AIDA64 that seems to kill my PWM always.


Well considering Ive NEVER had the issue with my C6 not sure why it's happening now but Ill take a peek.


----------



## toreko

crakej said:


> It's true some have an incomparability with software from corsair and others - they are aware of the problem and a fix should be coming soon. It's recommended to remove the Corsair software (or other) for the time being.
> 
> Oh, and not everybody has this problem - I don't. Also, Aura should be removed after selecting what you want.





You are running hwinfo only, that does not cause the issue.


I was wrong about aura , its the aida64 causes it alone.


----------



## gupsterg

VicsPC said:


> Well considering Ive NEVER had the issue with my C6 not sure why it's happening now but Ill take a peek.


You just never probably captured it. I can show you several posts of mine and others, where if HWINFO is not set as needed for a CPU which has no hardware for accurate BCLK readback, BCLK swing can occur in SW monitoring when in reality it did not.

As stated within the C6H thread Martin and Elmor highlighted Ryzen does not have HW for accurate BCLK and Martin stated the fix I have in both linked threads  .


----------



## VicsPC

gupsterg said:


> You just never probably captured it. I can show you several posts of mine and others, where if HWINFO is not set as needed for a CPU which has no hardware for accurate BCLK readback, BCLK swing can occur in SW monitoring when in reality it did not.
> 
> As stated within the C6H thread Martin and Elmor highlighted Ryzen does not have HW for accurate BCLK and Martin stated the fix I have in both linked threads  .


Yea i think I'd notice if my max bclk was 121mhz in hwinfo lol. I didn't even reinstall windows so its still the same hwinfo version i had on my c6. I did have that manually set to 100mhz so that might be why it never fluctuated but I'm not bothered by it.


----------



## toreko

Okey I checked everything, forget the Tctl thing, there is a 10c-12c difference between aida64 stress and primetest so It confused me a bit when I run them differently with hwinfo.


My cpu with primetest sits on 67c nicely.


But I guess ill have to remove aida64 from my system, crap  as my rainmeter addons are all run with it.


Thanks a lot btw , love the community here.


----------



## crakej

toreko said:


> You are running hwinfo only, that does not cause the issue.
> 
> 
> I was wrong about aura , its the aida64 causes it alone.


It's good practise to not run more than one monitoring program at once, but Corsair Link definitely causes problems. See the start of this thread.


----------



## toreko

crakej said:


> It's good practise to not run more than one monitoring program at once, but Corsair Link definitely causes problems. See the start of this thread.



is there a way to increase the 75c Tdie treshold? I have bf1 and hunt showdown hit those temps sometimes and it cause my fans to spin to 100%.


I forgot about that lol.


----------



## VicsPC

toreko said:


> is there a way to increase the 75c Tdie treshold? I have bf1 and hunt showdown hit those temps sometimes and it cause my fans to spin to 100%.
> 
> 
> I forgot about that lol.


If you're reading tdie thats TCTL of 95°C and yea i wouldn't want to get close to that. But temp readings are always weird even with ryzen 2. The way i do it is i have miskew or wtv its called set to enable (even though its enabled on auto, does not seem to work) and i get the temps I should be getting under tctl. I don't use tdie as that ends up reading below ambient.


----------



## toreko

VicsPC said:


> If you're reading tdie thats TCTL of 95°C and yea i wouldn't want to get close to that. But temp readings are always weird even with ryzen 2. The way i do it is i have miskew or wtv its called set to enable (even though its enabled on auto, does not seem to work) and i get the temps I should be getting under tctl. I don't use tdie as that ends up reading below ambient.



my TCTL is 10c above my Tdie which is 88c in aida64 stress and 76c in primetest.


I am just trying to fix the 100% fans boost atm, forget aida64 lol ill just uninstall it and try to modify my rainmeter to suit hwinfo or some other program.


anyone know away to set the threshold higher? I cant enable DC on my gpu fans btw because then they will be loud.


----------



## gupsterg

VicsPC said:


> Yea i think I'd notice if my max bclk was 121mhz in hwinfo lol. I didn't even reinstall windows so its still the same hwinfo version i had on my c6. I did have that manually set to 100mhz so that might be why it never fluctuated but I'm not bothered by it.


There could have been a time you did not have SW monitoring active so never saw BCLK swing.

It does not matter if you manually set BCLK or use [Auto].

*As stated before the CPU does not have hardware for software to accurately read back BCLK.*

So no matter what you setup in UEFI, SW monitoring will have BCLK swing unless SW does not periodically poll it.


----------



## VicsPC

gupsterg said:


> There could have been a time you did not have SW monitoring active so never saw BCLK swing.
> 
> It does not matter if you manually set BCLK or use [Auto].
> 
> *As stated before the CPU does not have hardware for software to accurately read back BCLK.*
> 
> So no matter what you setup in UEFI, SW monitoring will have BCLK swing unless SW does not periodically poll it.


Yea considering i ran it for 12hrs a day without resetting it, i did not see it at all on my C6 i can atest to that for sure. I don't need to lie either it just never ever happened on my C6. Attached a pic of when i ran a memtest, that was running for over an hr and didn't have the issue, on the c7 i can run it for 10mins while playing a game and it'll go to like 120-121mhz.

P.S. I have never changed a single setting in hwinfo until i just checked your c7 guide and changed periodic polling. Before that nothing has ever been changed in the settings.


----------



## warpuck

Is there any reason to get a Crosshair besides overclocking? I think so:

The thing I like the most about the CH7 is all the USB ports. 11 on the rear. ports 2.0 to gen 3.1 type C and more internal more, just more. I use one of them to charge my cell phone.
Flare ram just works on it. Kinda like it was designed for it?
Compared the CH6 to a b350, the 350 can almost do the same things the CH6 does. The Ch6/7 does without you having to fiddle with CH6/7.
Seems kinda silly, but a enthusiast board that gives you a head start over a B350? or a B450? I bet the CH7 will deliver the same thing and will still the be a stable board. It has no problem with a 9% overclock running all day, stressed, with the stock cooler on a 1600 in the 64-65C. I would pretty much expect the same thing out of a 2700.
Also the VRMs run cooler. The audio is better,
That means if you have 1080 Ti or 2 running or a Vega or 2, you have board that can handle the wattage (heat) and still have the vid cards doing their # crunch thing
It puts out a pretty light show, but that is not what I got for. Just wanted something will still be good enough for a 4700 or whatever it gets called in 2020.
I am a non wifi guy also because there are 60 wifi systems within 100 meters. CAT 5 is all I need and just works better.
The biggest difference between the x470-F, I can see is the number of usb and sata points.
So yeah it does make sense to use it as workstation or even as a small office server board.


----------



## gupsterg

toreko said:


> my TCTL is 10c above my Tdie which is 88c in aida64 stress and 76c in primetest.
> 
> 
> I am just trying to fix the 100% fans boost atm, forget aida64 lol ill just uninstall it and try to modify my rainmeter to suit hwinfo or some other program.
> 
> 
> anyone know away to set the threshold higher? I cant enable DC on my gpu fans btw because then they will be loud.


Personally I wouldn't suggest you use Sense MI Skew as stated by another member. If it is enabled and you were to change 1.8V PLL it will skew temps further. Again tested/seen by my multiple members on Ryzen+C6H.

Your TCTL/TDIE difference is as it should be.

As stated before if the jumps to >70C are sporadic then use the fan smoothing option. You will see it in UEFI per fan header, I use 3.8s.



VicsPC said:


> Yea considering i ran it for 12hrs a day without resetting it, i did not see it at all on my C6 i can atest to that for sure. I don't need to lie either it just never ever happened on my C6. Attached a pic of when i ran a memtest, that was running for over an hr and didn't have the issue, on the c7 i can run it for 10mins while playing a game and it'll go to like 120-121mhz.
> 
> P.S. I have never changed a single setting in hwinfo until i just checked your c7 guide and changed periodic polling. Before that nothing has ever been changed in the settings.


I never suggested or stated you are lying.

Have you considered that as other methods are employed so SW monitoring has BCLK reading that the variation between HW/HW combo could lead to some having their HW exhibit issue more than others? I have seen this a few times not just on Ryzen but on Intel CPUs which don't have HW for BCLK read back. 

I'm now going to stop posting on this subject.


----------



## CJMitsuki

toreko said:


> VicsPC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ive run my D5 on both the c6 and now the c7. I run it in DC mode and not PWM as i like to keep it at speed without it going up and down. I've not had any issues with my pump turning off or ramping up and down (although for some reason both boards don't seem to read the RPM of the pump so i can't see it in hwinfo). It's possible it's a pwm problem, have you guys tried setting it to DC mode and just running em at constant speed?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you use any software like aida64 or corsair link or hwinfo? those things cause fans and pumps to stop spinning because the sensor chip goes nutz, its on official forum of asus, lots of people have it and its something that is on all boards.
> 
> 
> I put my fans on dc aswell but I can not switch off the 75c 100% crap as thats a function that cant be changed, people complain on the asus forum about that too but not one dev responds about it over there.
> 
> 
> This is me running my pc in cold weather, what will happen once I start playing in hot summer when its 30-40c over here ? though I will be using ac but you get my point 😕
> 
> 
> This is a high end board that is mainly built to overclock but you cant even change 75c threshold that is totally safe to run 24/7, I find it unacceptable I have to hear my fans spin like crazy and unable to run aida64 to see my computer information.
Click to expand...

Never had a single problem like you are desc I bing and I run all of those programs. So apparently doesn’t affect all CH7.


----------



## toreko

gupsterg said:


> Personally I wouldn't suggest you use Sense MI Skew as stated by another member. If it is enabled and you were to change 1.8V PLL it will skew temps further. Again tested/seen by my multiple members on Ryzen+C6H.
> 
> Your TCTL/TDIE difference is as it should be.
> 
> As stated before if the jumps to >70C are sporadic then use the fan smoothing option. You will see it in UEFI per fan header, I use 3.8s.
> 
> 
> 
> I never suggested or stated you are lying.
> 
> Have you considered that as other methods are employed so SW monitoring has BCLK reading that the variation between HW/HW combo could lead to some having their HW exhibit issue more than others? I have seen this a few times not just on Ryzen but on Intel CPUs which don't have HW for BCLK read back.
> 
> I'm now going to stop posting on this subject.



Thanks the fan smoothing helped, I put it at 200+ sec lol because my fans are 5k rpmg and last thing I want is for fans to run that high.


----------



## toreko

CJMitsuki said:


> Never had a single problem like you are desc I bing and I run all of those programs. So apparently doesn’t affect all CH7.





You use aida64?


----------



## CJMitsuki

toreko said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Never had a single problem like you are desc I bing and I run all of those programs. So apparently doesn’t affect all CH7.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You use aida64?
Click to expand...

Yes


----------



## toreko

CJMitsuki said:


> Yes



Then ill send my mobo to replacement for being faulty.


----------



## spyshagg

I would like to report a bug.


Once activated, *windows Bitlocker * complaints the hardware has changed when you shutdown and start the computer again, requiring you to introduce the very long encryption key by hand.

It doesn't happen on simple reboots. Only overnight shutdowns


----------



## hurricane28

toreko said:


> Then ill send my mobo to replacement for being faulty.


No need as there is a fix on its way as mentioned before over and over again. 

Here is the thread from Aida64:https://forums.aida64.com/topic/398...-crosshair-vi-hero/?tab=comments&_fromLogin=1


----------



## toreko

hurricane28 said:


> No need as there is a fix on its way as mentioned before over and over again.
> 
> Here is the thread from Aida64:https://forums.aida64.com/topic/398...-crosshair-vi-hero/?tab=comments&_fromLogin=1



Oh thanks! thats nice to hear!


----------



## CJMitsuki

hurricane28 said:


> toreko said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then ill send my mobo to replacement for being faulty.
> 
> 
> 
> No need as there is a fix on its way as mentioned before over and over again.
> 
> Here is the thread from Aida64:https://forums.aida64.com/topic/398...-crosshair-vi-hero/?tab=comments&_fromLogin=1
Click to expand...

There is also a fix for the conflicts HWiNFO had with Corsair Link and other software in the newest update so everyone should get that if you don’t have it. I think it was the random shutdown bug.


----------



## minal

toreko said:


> Thanks the fan smoothing helped, I put it at 200+ sec lol because my fans are 5k rpmg and last thing I want is for fans to run that high.


 You really want to delay your fans 3 and 1/3 minutes? I guess it's different with watercooling, but I would still hesistate..

It's normal that Tclt is 10C higher than Tdie, perhaps to account for the sudden 10C+ jumps in temperatures that are normal with the 2700X. I'm not sure, but I might have seen a BIOS option for setting the cpu thermal limit... but I doubt it would be a good idea to change it.


----------



## majestynl

hurricane28 said:


> No need as there is a fix on its way as mentioned before over and over again.
> 
> Here is the thread from Aida64:https://forums.aida64.com/topic/398...-crosshair-vi-hero/?tab=comments&_fromLogin=1


Yeap mumak explained this very well ! All companies need to update their Softwares...
i reported these issues in very begin!



minal said:


> You really want to delay your fans 3 and 1/3 minutes? I guess it's different with watercooling, but I would still hesistate..
> 
> It's normal that Tclt is 10C higher than Tdie, perhaps to account for the sudden 10C+ jumps in temperatures that are normal with the 2700X. I'm not sure, but I might have seen a BIOS option for setting the cpu thermal limit... but I doubt it would be a good idea to change it.


LOL 200sec sound a bit optimistic yeah


----------



## CJMitsuki

lordzed83 said:


> @ CJMitsuki you get extra powe management prifiles on fly with power profiles/aolkication ect. Gets every last juice out of system and core management. Best 25 bucks soent on software. I got profiles for mining for gaming for benching. Core parking.
> Windows cou management is total junk in comparisson cant even select what cores what application ises or if it uses hyperthreading ect.


Im thinking about it bc I would like to have profiles for Cinebench single core among other profiles but the bad thing is I would like to have a bios to where i could manually set my single core speed and 2,4,6 cores as well as voltage for them. Then that software would be so beast. 4.5ghz+ single core without ever having to jump in bios again. Maybe Elmor will see this and it will happen 

In other news I got my first Cinebench 2000 score using 100% IBT stable settings. I can use up to 4.4ghz in benchmarking with safe voltages and not crash but ill crash in stress tests :thumbsdow


----------



## hurricane28

majestynl said:


> Yeap mumak explained this very well ! All companies need to update their Softwares...
> i reported these issues in very begin!
> 
> 
> 
> LOL 200sec sound a bit optimistic yeah


Yes but its not all other software problems, its Asus as well.. You can update the software as often as you want but if Asus keeps implementing the Sensors wrong there is no beginning nor end to it. 
I am glad that they found a " fix" and i hope this really works.


----------



## lordzed83

@elmor hope ya good and all not posted for ages 

Giga****e and MSI crap s ocant even boot to windows. C7H Plug and play 
https://youtu.be/BT06E79Wk5o?t=94


----------



## VicsPC

lordzed83 said:


> @elmor hope ya good and all not posted for ages
> 
> Giga****e and MSI crap s ocant even boot to windows. C7H Plug and play
> https://youtu.be/BT06E79Wk5o?t=94


I think he forgot to put a ryzen 1 cpu in there and update the BIOS so it actually boots with the 2700x, i think some of the other boards that was the issue. With Asus you can use flashback so it's not a problem.


----------



## Martin778

Nah, they are X470's = supports 2xxx out of the box.


----------



## VicsPC

Martin778 said:


> Nah, they are X470's = supports 2xxx out of the box.


Well it's supposed to, i can't picture 5 motherboards all having the same exact issue, just sounds incredibly far fetched. I upgraded my BIOS before even getting my 2700x just used flashback but yea i get what you're saying, just makes zero sense.

Just looked at the Asus site, 2700x is supported at BIOS 0509 and up, on the BIOS page they have BIOS 0401 and 0207 so while it sounds like it supports out of the box it's possible those had some BIOS that probably wasn't updated, just a thought.


----------



## dreckschmeck

just wanted letting you all know my stable settings with propably a bad IMC(chip).

I'll post all my BIOS settings for everyone who is struggeling getting a RAM OC stable. 
all other not mentioned settings are set on AUTO.

equipment:
Board:	Asus CH7 wifi
CPU:	Ryzen 2700x
Ramkit: Gskill F4-3600C15D-16GTZ (B-die)

OC mode: manual
Performance bias: none
Performance enhancer: level 3(OC)
vcore: +0.40 offset (this is NEEDED to get PE3 AND Ram OC stable simultaniously)
vsoc: 1.00625
CPU LLC: 4
vsoc LLC: 4
VRM spred spectrum: disabled
Sense MI Skew: disabled
PLL: 1,83
vdimm: 1.45
RAM frequency: 3400 mhz
CMD rate: 1T
GDM: disabled
PowerDown: disabled
Timings: CL14 ->ryzen RAM calculator: extreme present see pic
CB15 multi score: 1909
CB15 single score: 182
Aida64 Ram latency: 61.8ns

verified with RAMTEST around 4500%

I'm OK with the results. Unfortunatly can't get the ram clock any higher, it's just not stable no matter the volts. RAMTEST fails at 400-800% every time

Hope this helps anyone for future overclock tests. Also perhaps someone has an optimization tip


----------



## hurricane28

lordzed83 said:


> @elmor hope ya good and all not posted for ages
> 
> Giga****e and MSI crap s ocant even boot to windows. C7H Plug and play
> https://youtu.be/BT06E79Wk5o?t=94


I am for 100% positive he did something wrong man.. A friend of mine owns this board and runs just fine...


----------



## musty2018

@elmor. Still the cold boot issue with memory I see on this board. 

Also how come the CH6 has the agesa 1.0.0.2c. But for the CH7 I can't seem to find it anywhere ?? 

Some information would be nice please as if I ain't heard nothing back from you by the 25th June 2018 and no change or no beta bios then I'll be sending the board back and getting a refund as yet again it's a product released by Asus and in my eyes it's not fit for purpose.


----------



## VicsPC

musty2018 said:


> @elmor. Still the cold boot issue with memory I see on this board.
> 
> Also how come the CH6 has the agesa 1.0.0.2c. But for the CH7 I can't seem to find it anywhere ??
> 
> Some information would be nice please as if I ain't heard nothing back from you by the 25th June 2018 and no change or no beta bios then I'll be sending the board back and getting a refund as yet again it's a product released by Asus and in my eyes it's not fit for purpose.


Neither my C6 nor C7 have had a cold boot issue in about a couple months now, sigh of relief. If you're still having cold boot issues then I'd try upping DRAM voltage a bit, both boot and running.


----------



## Johan45

lordzed83 said:


> @elmor hope ya good and all not posted for ages
> 
> Giga****e and MSI crap s ocant even boot to windows. C7H Plug and play
> https://youtu.be/BT06E79Wk5o?t=94





hurricane28 said:


> I am for 100% positive he did something wrong man.. A friend of mine owns this board and runs just fine...


I'm with Hurricane on this one. I tested both those boards at release and they work just fine.
Just watched the vid and They're not the same boards, I have the High end Gaming M7 and Aorus Gaming 7 which both worked. I still find it odd that neither one of those boards would get to Windows. Fingers crossed should have my CHVII this Aft


----------



## hurricane28

Johan45 said:


> I'm with Hurricane on this one. I tested both those boards at release and they work just fine.
> Just watched the vid and They're not the same boards, I have the High end Gaming M7 and Aorus Gaming 7 which both worked. I still find it odd that neither one of those boards would get to Windows. Fingers crossed should have my CHVII this Aft


Yeah, it simply doesn't make sense man. I know Gigabyte can have some issues but not booting is a noob thing as far as i'm concerned. 

You will be very happy with the C7H man, i really like it so far.


----------



## musty2018

Got this board today used ryzen dram calculator for both 3466 and 3600 on fast and safe timings. If power is kept to power supplies turns on and boots fine if the power supply is turned off at the back for like moving pc from friends place to home. Which I done today


When i got home memory timings was still there but pc turned on and off 3 times but boots on the 3rd time. 

Memory is team group extreme 4000mhz kit samsung b die.

Brand new PSU. Also on the ch6 had same problem with 2 x cpus being 1700x and 2700x and 4 different memory kits. 

AND it's clearly a cold boot memory issue because if I set the memory frequency to 3200mhz and 1.35v it's turns on 1st time on cold boot.


----------



## minal

musty2018 said:


> Got this board today used ryzen dram calculator for both 3466 and 3600 on fast and safe timings. If power is kept to power supplies turns on and boots fine if the power supply is turned off at the back for like moving pc from friends place to home. Which I done today
> 
> 
> When i got home memory timings was still there but pc turned on and off 3 times but boots on the 3rd time.
> 
> Memory is team group extreme 4000mhz kit samsung b die.
> 
> Brand new PSU. Also on the ch6 had same problem with 2 x cpus being 1700x and 2700x and 4 different memory kits.
> 
> AND it's clearly a cold boot memory issue because if I set the memory frequency to 3200mhz and 1.35v it's turns on 1st time on cold boot.



Apparently that's normal on the C6H and C7H depending on memory settings.


----------



## musty2018

Oh also bear in mind the 3466 with ryzen dram timing stress tested with aida 64 for 1 hour and completely fine in Windows.


----------



## musty2018

minal said:


> musty2018 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Got this board today used ryzen dram calculator for both 3466 and 3600 on fast and safe timings. If power is kept to power supplies turns on and boots fine if the power supply is turned off at the back for like moving pc from friends place to home. Which I done today
> 
> 
> When i got home memory timings was still there but pc turned on and off 3 times but boots on the 3rd time.
> 
> Memory is team group extreme 4000mhz kit samsung b die.
> 
> Brand new PSU. Also on the ch6 had same problem with 2 x cpus being 1700x and 2700x and 4 different memory kits.
> 
> AND it's clearly a cold boot memory issue because if I set the memory frequency to 3200mhz and 1.35v it's turns on 1st time on cold boot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently that's normal on the C6H and C7H depending on memory settings.
Click to expand...


Where did u find this out ? It's the only am4 motherboard I know to do it. Friend had the Asus prime x370 pro that never done it.


----------



## minal

musty2018 said:


> Where did u find this out ? It's the only am4 motherboard I know to do it. Friend had the Asus prime x370 pro that never done it.



I had the same same question with it restarting itself once during the boot process with 3200 DOCP. @gupsterg mentioned these boards can single or double reboot for memory training after power is interrupted.


As for any official response... good luck.


----------



## musty2018

minal said:


> musty2018 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Got this board today used ryzen dram calculator for both 3466 and 3600 on fast and safe timings. If power is kept to power supplies turns on and boots fine if the power supply is turned off at the back for like moving pc from friends place to home. Which I done today
> 
> 
> When i got home memory timings was still there but pc turned on and off 3 times but boots on the 3rd time.
> 
> Memory is team group extreme 4000mhz kit samsung b die.
> 
> Brand new PSU. Also on the ch6 had same problem with 2 x cpus being 1700x and 2700x and 4 different memory kits.
> 
> AND it's clearly a cold boot memory issue because if I set the memory frequency to 3200mhz and 1.35v it's turns on 1st time on cold boot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently that's normal on the C6H and C7H depending on memory settings.
Click to expand...


Also if that's the case when I set the memory frequency to 3200mhz and vram to 1.35v and let it guess the timings boots 1st time that's with them settings set and shutdown pc and turn psu off for 5 mins and the back on and turn pc on. Doesn't make sense to me. How with putting tighter timings and increasing vram will make the system wanna turn on and off 3 times when at same frequency guessing the timings boots 1st time.


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> @elmor hope ya good and all not posted for ages
> 
> Giga****e and MSI crap s ocant even boot to windows. C7H Plug and play
> https://youtu.be/BT06E79Wk5o?t=94


Strange, cause I bought the MSI board for my workstation at the office, just because of a entry price for a X470 chipset. No issues. Working as it should be. Even with a Gskill CL15 it was plug and play. Running now 4.1ghz (2600 ryzen) and 3400 CL14.. didn't push further yet. But board is working flawless for it's price..

Tip: also used a very cheap priced AIO for this system. And the performance is really great for his very low price. Just 75 euro. Corsair H100x


----------



## majestynl

minal said:


> I had the same same question with it restarting itself once during the boot process with 3200 DOCP. @gupsterg mentioned these boards can single or double reboot for memory training after power is interrupted.
> 
> 
> As for any official response... good luck.


Probably your OC is not fully boot stable. You can try to play with higher procODT (helped to me for 3533CL14+TT). 

Or just hope a new UEFI brings more luck. We saw same happening with CH6. After most new versions the ram gots better support with higher freqs.



musty2018 said:


> Also if that's the case when I set the memory frequency to 3200mhz and vram to 1.35v and let it guess the timings boots 1st time that's with them settings set and shutdown pc and turn psu off for 5 mins and the back on and turn pc on. Doesn't make sense to me. How with putting tighter timings and increasing vram will make the system wanna turn on and off 3 times when at same frequency guessing the timings boots 1st time.


Sometimes the boards doesn't make a full memory training when you just make "small" changes. Eg if you have running a certain freq and after a reboot or restart you go to bios to up the freq without major other changes you don't get a full training boot cycle. And the next boot it suddenly boots with a full memory training it could get issues and you will get in to the retry you setup or fails if it doesn't train well.


----------



## musty2018

majestynl said:


> minal said:
> 
> 
> 
> I had the same same question with it restarting itself once during the boot process with 3200 DOCP. @gupsterg mentioned these boards can single or double reboot for memory training after power is interrupted.
> 
> 
> As for any official response... good luck.
> 
> 
> 
> Probably your OC is not fully boot stable. You can try to play with higher procODT (helped to me for 3533CL14+TT).
> 
> Or just hope a new UEFI brings more luck. We saw same happening with CH6. After most new versions the ram gots better support with higher freqs.
> 
> 
> 
> musty2018 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Also if that's the case when I set the memory frequency to 3200mhz and vram to 1.35v and let it guess the timings boots 1st time that's with them settings set and shutdown pc and turn psu off for 5 mins and the back on and turn pc on. Doesn't make sense to me. How with putting tighter timings and increasing vram will make the system wanna turn on and off 3 times when at same frequency guessing the timings boots 1st time.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sometimes the boards doesn't make a full memory training when you just make "small" changes. Eg if you have running a certain freq and after a reboot or restart you go to bios to up the freq without major other changes you don't get a full training boot cycle. And the next boot it suddenly boots with a full memory training it could get issues and you will get in to the retry you setup or fails if it doesn't train well.
Click to expand...


This the same using the Asus presets aswell.


----------



## majestynl

musty2018 said:


> This the same using the Asus presets aswell.


Yeah logical, those are also presets, so in your case you need to tweak them. Those are not guaranteed working for everybody.

I would suggest to build your own. Start with base timings and get them stable before you start on subtimings. If you do it in steps you can find the issues/not working values much better.


----------



## minal

majestynl said:


> Probably your OC is not fully boot stable. You can try to play with higher procODT (helped to me for 3533CL14+TT).
> 
> Or just hope a new UEFI brings more luck. We saw same happening with CH6. After most new versions the ram gots better support with higher freqs.
> 
> 
> 
> Sometimes the boards doesn't make a full memory training when you just make "small" changes. Eg if you have running a certain freq and after a reboot or restart you go to bios to up the freq without major other changes you don't get a full training boot cycle. And the next boot it suddenly boots with a full memory training it could get issues and you will get in to the retry you setup or fails if it doesn't train well.



I'm confused. Is the double/triple boot after (and only after) power interruption normal or not? I have had no problems including with stress tests. I forget my testing results but I think I had a double boot with power interruption with any memory frequency more than 2133.


----------



## musty2018

minal said:


> majestynl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Probably your OC is not fully boot stable. You can try to play with higher procODT (helped to me for 3533CL14+TT).
> 
> Or just hope a new UEFI brings more luck. We saw same happening with CH6. After most new versions the ram gots better support with higher freqs.
> 
> 
> 
> Sometimes the boards doesn't make a full memory training when you just make "small" changes. Eg if you have running a certain freq and after a reboot or restart you go to bios to up the freq without major other changes you don't get a full training boot cycle. And the next boot it suddenly boots with a full memory training it could get issues and you will get in to the retry you setup or fails if it doesn't train well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm confused. Is the double/triple boot after (and only after) power interruption normal or not? I have had no problems including with stress tests. I forget my testing results but I think I had a double boot with power interruption with any memory frequency more than 2133.
Click to expand...



Yeah only after complete power loss. If system has power all the time it's fine and it's fine on default bios settings. Just soon as I go 3200 upwards with ryzen dram calculator safe or fast timings and after complete power loss this happens. But doesn't explain why the latest agesa isn't out for this board.


----------



## musty2018

musty2018 said:


> minal said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> majestynl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Probably your OC is not fully boot stable. You can try to play with higher procODT (helped to me for 3533CL14+TT).
> 
> Or just hope a new UEFI brings more luck. We saw same happening with CH6. After most new versions the ram gots better support with higher freqs.
> 
> 
> 
> Sometimes the boards doesn't make a full memory training when you just make "small" changes. Eg if you have running a certain freq and after a reboot or restart you go to bios to up the freq without major other changes you don't get a full training boot cycle. And the next boot it suddenly boots with a full memory training it could get issues and you will get in to the retry you setup or fails if it doesn't train well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm confused. Is the double/triple boot after (and only after) power interruption normal or not? I have had no problems including with stress tests. I forget my testing results but I think I had a double boot with power interruption with any memory frequency more than 2133.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah only after complete power loss. If system has power all the time it's fine and it's fine on default bios settings. Just soon as I go 3200 upwards with ryzen dram calculator safe or fast timings and after complete power loss this happens. But doesn't explain why the latest agesa isn't out for this board.
Click to expand...


Complete power loss being no power to the power supply.


----------



## musty2018

musty2018 said:


> musty2018 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> minal said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> majestynl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Probably your OC is not fully boot stable. You can try to play with higher procODT (helped to me for 3533CL14+TT).
> 
> Or just hope a new UEFI brings more luck. We saw same happening with CH6. After most new versions the ram gots better support with higher freqs.
> 
> 
> 
> Sometimes the boards doesn't make a full memory training when you just make "small" changes. Eg if you have running a certain freq and after a reboot or restart you go to bios to up the freq without major other changes you don't get a full training boot cycle. And the next boot it suddenly boots with a full memory training it could get issues and you will get in to the retry you setup or fails if it doesn't train well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm confused. Is the double/triple boot after (and only after) power interruption normal or not? I have had no problems including with stress tests. I forget my testing results but I think I had a double boot with power interruption with any memory frequency more than 2133.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah only after complete power loss. If system has power all the time it's fine and it's fine on default bios settings. Just soon as I go 3200 upwards with ryzen dram calculator safe or fast timings and after complete power loss this happens. But doesn't explain why the latest agesa isn't out for this board.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Complete power loss being no power to the power supply.
Click to expand...

After power loss no power to power supply when I turn on psu and power pc on with 3200 or 3466 with dram timings calculator safe or fast timings. It will turn on and then turn off does that twice and on the 3rd time turning back on it boots into Windows.


----------



## VicsPC

musty2018 said:


> After power loss no power to power supply when I turn on psu and power pc on with 3200 or 3466 with dram timings calculator safe or fast timings. It will turn on and then turn off does that twice and on the 3rd time turning back on it boots into Windows.


I think that's normal(ish) for a board losing power, my c6 used to do it as well. Would try to train 5x then boot up. Considering i only unplug my pc to drain my loop or theres a power outage it doesn't happen very often.


----------



## crakej

failed memory training is normal behaviour - normally you would get 3 beeps, then reboot. You can set the number of times training will happen - i think setting is near top of ram timings.

I've noticed my board sometimes reboots without the 3 beeps (or single beep for the last attempt) - but I'm assuming that's memory training just not getting the normal beeps with it...

As mentioned above training will start from new with a cold boot.... it can happen on warm reboot if settings have changed significantly, or with some settings that need a power off cycle just to latch properly. This all happens so that we can play with settings and OC to our hearts content. Speeds of 3200 or less can usually run with default settings.....anything above that you are likely to need to tune the settings as suggested above.


----------



## CJMitsuki

musty2018 said:


> After power loss no power to power supply when I turn on psu and power pc on with 3200 or 3466 with dram timings calculator safe or fast timings. It will turn on and then turn off does that twice and on the 3rd time turning back on it boots into Windows.


Those cold boot "bugs" arent bugs at all they are almost guaranteed to be a voltage or another memory setting that isnt optimal that is causing it to do that. Ive experienced the same symptoms on every speed from 3200-3600 and every single one was resolved through playing with either voltages that relate to the memory or stability settings such as ProcODT or Cad_Bus. I found the most success from DRAM, PLL, ProcODT, and Rtt. But there are several voltages that can be tweaked to get rid of this behavior so it isnt a bug. Its settings that arent optimized perfectly and need to be gone through and thoroughly tested. If you are running at the very edge of stability for your IMC you may not be able to work it out unless you dial back the frequency and tune from there. I havent found a strap that I wasnt able to work out that behavior from though. If you do lose power suddenly though the memory is going to run through training regardless but just booting up cold it wont if you have your settings and voltages tuned properly for your timings.

As for the AGESA update, be a bit more patient about it. Who cares if the VI got it before the VII, if you look at some of the stuff that is directed at Elmor its no wonder he doesnt come in here more often. He is probably busy working on it and if he were to come in here he would get pelted with complaints, which half of them arent even legitimately an Asus or an AMD problem. The bios update will come when it is ready so stop trying to rush it. You wouldnt want an update filled with problems so let them work on it and show some patience.

This isnt just at you Musty, I just quoted you because I was too lazy to quote and edit all of them.


----------



## Whatisthisfor

lordzed83 said:


> @elmor hope ya good and all not posted for ages
> 
> Giga****e and MSI crap s ocant even boot to windows. C7H Plug and play
> https://youtu.be/BT06E79Wk5o?t=94


Why you cant get the M7 to boot to windows? Its the fault of MSI board or its your fault?


----------



## CJMitsuki

Whatisthisfor said:


> Why you cant get the M7 to boot to windows? Its the fault of MSI board or its your fault?


He was referring to the guy in the YouTube video unable to boot with those boards.


----------



## crakej

Also meant to add that PLL is best left alone when OCing - mine is on auto and for 3600 it's at 2v


----------



## CJMitsuki

crakej said:


> Also meant to add that PLL is best left alone when OCing - mine is on auto and for 3600 it's at 2v


I like to manage most voltages myself, I have mine set at 2.12v, 2.5 SB at 2.64v, and VPP_MEM at 2.55v.


----------



## VicsPC

Does PLL voltage still change temperature readings like it used to on the C6?


----------



## CJMitsuki

VicsPC said:


> Does PLL voltage still change temperature readings like it used to on the C6?


I thought that was only with SenseMi Skew enabled. I dunno about C6H, I didnt have one. PLL left on auto changes anyway so unless you manually set it to 1.8v it would change. My temps seem to be fine though.


----------



## VicsPC

CJMitsuki said:


> I thought that was only with SenseMi Skew enabled. I dunno about C6H, I didnt have one. PLL left on auto changes anyway so unless you manually set it to 1.8v it would change. My temps seem to be fine though.


I keep mine enabled as it gives out the correct temperature reading. If i leave it on auto or disabled i end up getting 10°C higher, i could always disable it and use tdie if need be though.


----------



## gupsterg

minal said:


> I'm confused. Is the double/triple boot after (and only after) power interruption normal or not? I have had no problems including with stress tests. I forget my testing results but I think I had a double boot with power interruption with any memory frequency more than 2133.


I think majestynl's post has confused you. Prior to that what you said to musty2018 was correct.



musty2018 said:


> Got this board today used ryzen dram calculator for both 3466 and 3600 on fast and safe timings. If power is kept to power supplies turns on and boots fine if the power supply is turned off at the back for like moving pc from friends place to home. Which I done today
> 
> 
> When i got home memory timings was still there but pc turned on and off 3 times but boots on the 3rd time.
> 
> Memory is team group extreme 4000mhz kit samsung b die.
> 
> Brand new PSU. Also on the ch6 had same problem with 2 x cpus being 1700x and 2700x and 4 different memory kits.
> 
> AND it's clearly a cold boot memory issue because if I set the memory frequency to 3200mhz and 1.35v it's turns on 1st time on cold boot.
> 
> 
> 
> musty2018 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Where did u find this out ? It's the only am4 motherboard I know to do it. Friend had the Asus prime x370 pro that never done it.
Click to expand...

My C6H, C7H and ZE all do this  . Even my Intel board ASUS Maximus VII Ranger did this. My ancient ASUS P5K Premium does this.

When power is removed from board (ie PSU has power switched off) the multiple posts are needed to setup the EC. How many times the board posts after when power is removed from power supply does depend on settings.

For example for 3466MHz my C6H and ZE need 2 posts, my C7H is 3.

*IF* these multiple posts were memory training fails, you usually would:-

i) hear high pitch "triple beeps" on mobo speaker (if connected) and just as board resets memory setup a differing toned beep.

ii) have a Q-Code: F9.

Just going to add this to ASUS ROG forum C7H thread OP, I shall also place some links of posts of [email protected] where he states it's normal on AMD/Intel boards.


----------



## VicsPC

gupsterg said:


> I think majestynl's post has confused you. Prior to that what you said to musty2018 was correct.
> 
> 
> 
> My C6H, C7H and ZE all do this  . Even my Intel board ASUS Maximus VII Ranger did this. My ancient ASUS P5K Premium does this.
> 
> When power is removed from board (ie PSU has power switched off) the multiple posts are needed to setup the EC. How many times the board posts after when power is removed from power supply does depend on settings.
> 
> For example for 3466MHz my C6H and ZE need 2 posts, my C7H is 3.
> 
> *IF* these multiple posts were memory training fails, you usually would:-
> 
> i) hear high pitch "double beeps" on mobo speaker (if connected) and just as board resets memory setup a differing toned beep.
> 
> ii) have a Q-Code: F9.
> 
> Just going to add this to ASUS ROG forum C7H thread OP, I shall also place some links of posts of [email protected] where he states it's normal on AMD/Intel boards.


This. And if you're getting cold boot issues without turning off power/unplugging your PSU it's a totally different issue. Although with the latest C6 BIOSes i haven't had any issues booting up my board after power is unplugged. It does tend to retrain immediately.


----------



## gupsterg

@minal and @musty2018

This thread (see post 8) contains what I think is best detailed post by [email protected] regarding multiple posts boards need when power is removed from power supply/board.

Also take note of Praz's post, link. Besides Praz having decent first hand HW experience he is also a mod on that forum, so probably reads it a lot  . Adding this and finding the specific post by Raja on C6H as well  .


----------



## crakej

its 3 beeps for mem training - last attempt it will do one beep (if it fails), shutdown and reboot to safe mode


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> its 3 beeps for mem training - last attempt it will do one beep (if it fails), shutdown and reboot to safe mode


Usual is 3 attempts at post before fail.

Each time I always hear a higher pitched "double beep" per attempt plus Q-Code: F9. Then on final attempt it is a differing beep when reset occurs and another post cycle occurs.

It is same beeping method on C6H and ZE.

If someone has changed Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto] in DRAM Timings Control then that value determines attempts before reset. So that's why I just described what type of beep/q-code occurs in my initial post.

On C6H initially Fail_CNT was the setting exposed to allow modification of count before reset, was within AMD CBS. Later as integration between AMD code/ASUS code improved we had Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto] in DRAM Timings Control as well. Then as more development occurred in FW Fail_CNT was renamed and moved again within AMD CBS and we still had the option on DRAM Timings Control.


----------



## crakej

I get *3* beeps each time mem training fails (just checked to be sure), and one the last time it fails....if it fails. Was same on my Prime Pro, but on CH7 you sometimes don't hear a beep, it just reboots, when it does this I think it's just rebooting to re-latch some other setting that's on auto or that needs re-latching after your previous settings.

Interestingly, when I rebooted to check this - I loaded my 3700 profile which I know fails - it failed (beep beep beep) so re-loaded my working 3600CL14 profile. Normally it would do mem training at least once if I pwr off, but it just works now - 1st boot! I wonder is the slightly lower ambient we're having (the ram and other temps are at least 2 or 3 degrees cooler at the moment) has improved things....

Where has the sun gone? It's so dark outside!


----------



## gupsterg

I'll make a video of mine.

As stated before I get a higher pitched double beep at the end of each attempt and Q-Code: F9 denoting memory training failed. If it is a triple beep per attempt I may have not heard it correctly then . When the final attempt occurs it's a differing sounding beep, again different to failed attempt or successful usual post beep. As stated before C6H, C7H and ZE do the same, if I have time I'll make a video of all 3.

When it is just "relatching"/"setting up itself" *ie* no issue, for example when we change a UEFI setting relevant to this context or as discussed before when power is removed from board. I get only the usual post beep on final post and the usual Q-Code post cycle, *ie* no errors/issues.


----------



## hurricane28

Hi fellas, 

I have a strange issue here. 

My previous settings that were 100% stable aren't stable anymore all of a sudden... I changed, upgraded or whatever nothing at all. Only change was Windows update, are more people having this issue with latest MS update? 

This is weird as my current settings were rock stable before and all of a sudden my mouse does weird things and cursor kinda sticks when i move it fast, and IBT AVX crashes after 6 runs very high.. Everything else runs fine.


----------



## CJMitsuki

hurricane28 said:


> Hi fellas,
> 
> I have a strange issue here.
> 
> My previous settings that were 100% stable aren't stable anymore all of a sudden... I changed, upgraded or whatever nothing at all. Only change was Windows update, are more people having this issue with latest MS update?
> 
> This is weird as my current settings were rock stable before and all of a sudden my mouse does weird things and cursor kinda sticks when i move it fast, and IBT AVX crashes after 6 runs very high.. Everything else runs fine.


This is the reason I stopped Windows update and Cortana and all the unnecessary mess that Microsoft tries to make you have. Its ridiculous how they lock everything so that you have to accept their bs updates unless you can do a work around to turn it off. Now I only download the update once it is deemed safe by the community and not until then. I even deleted half of the services and all of the default programs Microsoft loads onto your system. CPU rarely even hits 1% as I am just doing normal tasks on the internet. Before, it would kick up to 3-4% every so often bc of unnecessary Microsoft services logging everything and whatever else it was doing. Computer runs ridiculously cool now unless Im benchmarking or running multiple programs and watching videos at the same time. As I type this its still just sitting right above ambient temps at 25c.


----------



## gupsterg

@crakej

Yes I need hearing test  .

i) Triple beep on failed memory training attempt with Q-Code: F9.

ii) When memory setup is reset single beep, which is differing tone to normal no errors post beep.

I have updated ROG C7H OP as is.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> @crakej
> 
> Yes I need hearing test  .
> 
> i) Triple beep on failed memory training attempt with Q-Code: F9.
> 
> ii) When memory setup is reset single beep, which is differing tone to normal no errors post beep.
> 
> I have updated ROG C7H OP as is.


Phew! - I thought you were going to report back that I was losing it lol


----------



## knightriot

when C7h have new agesa bios?


----------



## CJMitsuki

knightriot said:


> when C7h have new agesa bios? /forum/images/smilies/frown.gif


Just as soon as it is ready.


----------



## lordzed83

hurricane28 said:


> Hi fellas,
> 
> I have a strange issue here.
> 
> My previous settings that were 100% stable aren't stable anymore all of a sudden... I changed, upgraded or whatever nothing at all. Only change was Windows update, are more people having this issue with latest MS update?
> 
> This is weird as my current settings were rock stable before and all of a sudden my mouse does weird things and cursor kinda sticks when i move it fast, and IBT AVX crashes after 6 runs very high.. Everything else runs fine.



Remember my windows version tests?? Well thats it every version update is different on w10 scores can go from ibt 205 to 215 on same settings.

Welcome to looking for new stable settings in new windows version.


And thats why i sit on latest insuders build with windows stripped to nothing in every possible way.


----------



## CJMitsuki

lordzed83 said:


> Remember my windows version tests?? Well thats it every version update is different on w10 scores can go from ibt 205 to 215 on same settings.
> 
> Welcome to looking for new stable settings in new windows version.
> 
> 
> And thats why i sit on latest insuders build with windows stripped to nothing in every possible way.


Anyone wanting to strip their Win 10 as much as possible and also disable Cortana as well as stop auto Windows Updates and download them when you wish, check this link out. Im not telling you to do this but Im telling you that this made a world of difference to my Win 10 Pro and performance is much better as well. It has commands to disable the mentioned features as well as delete services that are unnecessary and all windows bloatware. If you want to do this then I suggest you read everything very carefully and do everything EXACTLY as it says. Not responsible if you screw your OS up doing it incorrectly but it is a wonderful thing not having Cortana logging your every move and 50 Windows processes constantly making your CPU work needlessly.

~~~~~~~~~> HERE <~~~~~~~~~~~

Notice my CPU usage and tempsm with Firefox open, HWiNFO open with 500ms updates, and the snipping tool. Also I have a couple of background programs that monitor and clean ram. Thats what I sit at unless I have several tabs running with YouTube playing a video at 1080p or 4k then it does go up but thats not bad with Windows stripped down and not running all the unnecessary bs Microsoft includes.


----------



## minal

This should get a post-of-the-month award:



gupsterg said:


> @*minal* and @*musty2018*
> 
> This thread (see post 8) contains what I think is best detailed post by [email protected] regarding multiple posts boards need when power is removed from power supply/board.
> 
> Also take note of Praz's post, link. Besides Praz having decent first hand HW experience he is also a mod on that forum, so probably reads it a lot  . Adding this and finding the specific post by Raja on C6H as well  .


At last, some authoritative answers and explanations, including from Asus employees and support, with confirmation from Asus HQ. So, depending on settings, *multiple posts are normal when power is removed from the board/PSU.*



CJMitsuki said:


> Those cold boot "bugs" arent bugs at all they are almost guaranteed to be a voltage or another memory setting that isnt optimal that is causing it to do that. Ive experienced the same symptoms on every speed from 3200-3600 and every single one was resolved through playing with either voltages that relate to the memory or stability settings such as ProcODT or Cad_Bus. I found the most success from DRAM, PLL, ProcODT, and Rtt. But there are several voltages that can be tweaked to get rid of this behavior so it isnt a bug. Its settings that arent optimized perfectly and need to be gone through and thoroughly tested. If you are running at the very edge of stability for your IMC you may not be able to work it out unless you dial back the frequency and tune from there. I havent found a strap that I wasnt able to work out that behavior from though. *If you do lose power suddenly though the memory is going to run through training regardless* but just booting up cold it wont if you have your settings and voltages tuned properly for your timings.





VicsPC said:


> This. And if you're getting cold boot issues without turning off power/unplugging your PSU it's a totally different issue. Although with the latest C6 BIOSes i haven't had any issues booting up my board after power is unplugged. It does tend to retrain immediately.


I think @CJMitsuki @VicsPC and others understand, but the explanations are confusing since they mix the issue of retraining due to memory settings vs behavior on power loss.

What I previously asked about and what I think @musty2018 asked about relates only to multiple posts on the first boot after power loss.

It is confusing that the term "cold boot" is used without a clear definition. 

It seems people here mean it as: "To perform a cold boot (also called a "hard boot") means to start up a computer that is turned off. It is often used in contrast to a warm boot, which refers to restarting a computer once it has been turned on" https://techterms.com/definition/cold_boot

But this other reference is confusing by including two definitions, presumably not what is meant on this thread: "Cold boot is the process of starting a computer from shutdown *or* a powerless state and setting it to normal working condition." https://www.techopedia.com/definition/3332/cold-boot


----------



## crakej

minal said:


> It is confusing that the term "cold boot" is used without a clear definition.
> 
> It seems people here mean it as: "To perform a cold boot (also called a "hard boot") means to start up a computer that is turned off. It is often used in contrast to a warm boot, which refers to restarting a computer once it has been turned on" https://techterms.com/definition/cold_boot
> 
> But this other reference is confusing by including two definitions, presumably not what is meant on this thread: "Cold boot is the process of starting a computer from shutdown *or* a powerless state and setting it to normal working condition." https://www.techopedia.com/definition/3332/cold-boot


Both are appropriate - cold boot is starting your computer when it was not running before, either it was shut down, or it was shut down and power turned off, neither to be confused with rebooting which means to restart the computer, no shut down or power off.


----------



## chakku

No new BIOS yet? Been almost 3 weeks since the new beta BIOS for the C6H, the fan calibration fix still isn't on the C7H yet is it?


----------



## minal

crakej said:


> Both are appropriate - cold boot is starting your computer when it was not running before, either it was shut down, or it was shut down and power turned off, neither to be confused with rebooting which means to restart the computer, no shut down or power off.


Maybe both are equivalent for some situations, but not all. Considering that we have established differences in behavior between the two definitions of "cold boot", I think for clarity they should not be used interchangeably. At least it should be mentioned what is meant.


----------



## Zorgon

Strix X470-I owner coming in peace. I was wondering if any of you guys have experienced an issue where after a failed OC/bench run and reverting to previous settings, cold boot, etc., the 2700X temperatures are ridiculously high for no apparent reason even at idle. After crashing at Performance Enhancer Level 4, my temps are like 60C-70C at idle regardless of the steps I've taken to remedy.


----------



## crakej

minal said:


> Maybe both are equivalent for some situations, but not all. Considering that we have established differences in behavior between the two definitions of "cold boot", I think for clarity they should not be used interchangeably. At least it should be mentioned what is meant.


You will find that it is used in the way I have explained.


----------



## crakej

chakku said:


> No new BIOS yet? Been almost 3 weeks since the new beta BIOS for the C6H, the fan calibration fix still isn't on the C7H yet is it?


Not yet, but I'm sure we'll have a new bios soon


----------



## gupsterg

@crakej

:specool:

@minal

NP  .

I agree there needs to be a distinction, but it is as crakej states.

The board posts in 4 differing methods AFAIK.

i) prior to board posting from shutdown if power supply did not have power from wall socket.

ii) prior to board posting from shutdown if power supply had power from wall socket.

iii) reset/restarted whilst powered.

iv) resumed from sleep state.

For lengthy while it was not possible to use post method (i) with greater than 2666MHz on C6H.

For lengthy while I used post method (iv) on C6H as greater than 2666MHz I used to encounter rare intermittent memory training failure.

As AGESA/UEFI developed same combined HW had no issues. I'm assuming you could add a fifth post method, Windows Fast Startup. You'll note the Q-Code display will show a 40 instead of 30 or 24. 30 is denoting resume from usual sleep and 24 "fresh" post.

I think add some of this to ROG C7H thread OP  .


----------



## musty2018

Right this is now sorted found out what was causing and issue no longer there. If people have got that issue I've talked it's either board or ram. But I'd say board as had the ch6 and done the same thing now sorted on the ch7.


----------



## musty2018

But let me point out my ch6 would do that without what the issue I had was and on default so if ur board is doing it on default settings id rma it as it shouldn't be doing that 3 cycle loop from cold. If power supply loses power.


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> lordzed83 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Remember my windows version tests?? Well thats it every version update is different on w10 scores can go from ibt 205 to 215 on same settings.
> 
> Welcome to looking for new stable settings in new windows version.
> 
> 
> And thats why i sit on latest insuders build with windows stripped to nothing in every possible way.
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone wanting to strip their Win 10 as much as possible and also disable Cortana as well as stop auto Windows Updates and download them when you wish, check this link out. Im not telling you to do this but Im telling you that this made a world of difference to my Win 10 Pro and performance is much better as well. It has commands to disable the mentioned features as well as delete services that are unnecessary and all windows bloatware. If you want to do this then I suggest you read everything very carefully and do everything EXACTLY as it says. Not responsible if you screw your OS up doing it incorrectly but it is a wonderful thing not having Cortana logging your every move and 50 Windows processes constantly making your CPU work needlessly.
> 
> ~~~~~~~~~> HERE <~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> Notice my CPU usage and tempsm with Firefox open, HWiNFO open with 500ms updates, and the snipping tool. Also I have a couple of background programs that monitor and clean ram. Thats what I sit at unless I have several tabs running with YouTube playing a video at 1080p or 4k then it does go up but thats not bad with Windows stripped down and not running all the unnecessary bs Microsoft includes.
> View attachment 203264
Click to expand...

I use windows10 privacy plus windows10 tweeker does same registry mods and more. Most important can export settings sonafter reinstall import reboot done. Have a look for it cool soft.

Only thing i found very anoying is if i turn files encryption off forza does not work :/

anyhow have a look
https://www.winprivacy.de/deutsch-start/download/


----------



## Syldon

musty2018 said:


> But let me point out my ch6 would do that without what the issue I had was and on default so if ur board is doing it on default settings id rma it as it shouldn't be doing that 3 cycle loop from cold. If power supply loses power.


The cold reboot is memory training, and eventually failing on the third attempt. If you are getting this, then you need to set up your memory to what the board finds as an acceptable condition. If you are getting this at many straps below the rated speed then sure, but you cant justify sending a board back because you have not set it up properly. Some vendors charge if they cannot find a fault.


----------



## webwilli

@all with multiple-cold-boot-problem

What is your setting for ErP in UEFI?


I set the ErP from "S4 + S5" to "S5-only" and now it seemes to work.
The first boot after 5 hours Power-Off was successfully.

My USB-Devices are now powered when the System is turned off, but this is better then the Tripple-Boot for me.


----------



## Spartoi

I have 4x8GB of TridentZ RAM. F4-3600C16Q-32GTZR 

I haven't been able to get the RAM to cold boot without failing a couple of times. I'm considering switching to an ASRock mobo (Taichi) as from my experience with Ryzen, they usually have the better RAM compatibility/stability compared to ASUS. However, I would prefer to keep the C7H as it has more hardware features that I like (temp sensors, water flow, and I/O plate preinstalled) but I can't live with my computer taking so long to boot up. 

So, I was hoping if anyone has this RAM kit or a similar configuration (4x8GB) and can cold boot fine if they could share their settings with me? 
I've tried using the XMP profile as well as the Ryzen DRAM calculator with 3200-3600 SAFE timings and they all either fail to cold boot or boot at all.


----------



## Syldon

Spartoi said:


> I have 4x8GB of TridentZ RAM. F4-3600C16Q-32GTZR
> 
> I haven't been able to get the RAM to cold boot without failing a couple of times. I'm considering switching to an ASRock mobo (Taichi) as from my experience with Ryzen, they usually have the better RAM compatibility/stability compared to ASUS. However, I would prefer to keep the C7H as it has more hardware features that I like (temp sensors, water flow, and I/O plate preinstalled) but I can't live with my computer taking so long to boot up.
> 
> So, I was hoping if anyone has this RAM kit or a similar configuration (4x8GB) and can cold boot fine if they could share their settings with me?
> I've tried using the XMP profile as well as the Ryzen DRAM calculator with 3200-3600 SAFE timings and they all either fail to cold boot or boot at all.


I couldnt get 4 sticks to run at all even at 3200 with any sort of stability. I gave up and have 2X8 running. We are all waiting for the bios revision that will fix these problems. There is a revision long overdue for this board. But tbf running memory at 4X8 is likely to be of low priority compared to some of the voltage application issues on this board. LLC is not working as it should, 1.05v has an offset that differs to actual and vcore manual voltage doesn't apply correctly. I am sure there are many other points that I have missed.

Elmor said that CH7 would be better with 2x16 rather than 4x8 for 32gb set ups. The CH6 runs 4x8 much better.


----------



## MacG32

Spartoi said:


> I have 4x8GB of TridentZ RAM. F4-3600C16Q-32GTZR
> 
> I haven't been able to get the RAM to cold boot without failing a couple of times. I'm considering switching to an ASRock mobo (Taichi) as from my experience with Ryzen, they usually have the better RAM compatibility/stability compared to ASUS. However, I would prefer to keep the C7H as it has more hardware features that I like (temp sensors, water flow, and I/O plate preinstalled) but I can't live with my computer taking so long to boot up.
> 
> So, I was hoping if anyone has this RAM kit or a similar configuration (4x8GB) and can cold boot fine if they could share their settings with me?
> I've tried using the XMP profile as well as the Ryzen DRAM calculator with 3200-3600 SAFE timings and they all either fail to cold boot or boot at all.



The file "C7H Enthusiast Highlights v03.pdf" in the first post explains memory configurations on page 7. I have to run my 32GB (4x8GB) 3200MHz at 3066MHz Fast preset of the Ryzen DRAM Calculator. Anything higher fails any test. I'm not sure if ASUS or AMD need to release support for larger memory configurations, as my 1800X supported 32GB 3200MHz before any released support for faster RAM. The IMCs of these latest processors seem to be more miss than hit for 32+GB RAM at faster speeds. Good luck.


----------



## Iceman1985

Spartoi said:


> I have 4x8GB of TridentZ RAM. F4-3600C16Q-32GTZR
> 
> I haven't been able to get the RAM to cold boot without failing a couple of times. I'm considering switching to an ASRock mobo (Taichi) as from my experience with Ryzen, they usually have the better RAM compatibility/stability compared to ASUS. However, I would prefer to keep the C7H as it has more hardware features that I like (temp sensors, water flow, and I/O plate preinstalled) but I can't live with my computer taking so long to boot up.
> 
> So, I was hoping if anyone has this RAM kit or a similar configuration (4x8GB) and can cold boot fine if they could share their settings with me?
> I've tried using the XMP profile as well as the Ryzen DRAM calculator with 3200-3600 SAFE timings and they all either fail to cold boot or boot at all.


Hi there, i'm running F4-3200C14Q-32GTZR @ 3200Mhz cl14 right now, passed 1000% HCI and 4 hours of Realbench without issues. Also running PE3 with BCLK 102 with cpu vcore offset +0.060. System runs really great with these settings. Although i cannot run my kit any faster than this, then i get instant errors.

I can share my settings when i get home from work.  Btw i used 1usmus calculator and inserted every single value i could find.

Forgot to mention: C7H bios 0601 + 2700X


----------



## crakej

Iceman1985 said:


> Hi there, i'm running F4-3200C14Q-32GTZR @ 3200Mhz cl14 right now, passed 1000% HCI and 4 hours of Realbench without issues. Also running PE3 with BCLK 102 with cpu vcore offset +0.060. System runs really great with these settings. Although i cannot run my kit any faster than this, then i get instant errors.
> 
> I can share my settings when i get home from work.  Btw i used 1usmus calculator and inserted every single value i could find.
> 
> Forgot to mention: C7H bios 0601 + 2700X


Try enabling geardown - it's in the memory timings menu near the bottom - it might allow you to go a bit higher.

Remember, when using the Stilts' presets that they don't change any voltage settings - that's up to you


----------



## VPII

Not sure if this is the best place to ask as it relates to extreme cooling. I finally managed to get a Dewar and about 25 litres of LN2. 

So over the weekend I gave it a go to see what I can manage to get out of my cpu. Unfortunately I ran into some cold bug issues. I did enable LN2 switch on the motherboard and tried various voltages, higher than normal but the problem persisted. I finally got my cpu up to 5.1ghz but only briefly as I again lost one of my memory banks after which I switched off, disconnected and removed the pot. After two dishwashing cycles on the board and letting it dry I switched on and everything back to normal. I gave it another go, but ran into the same problems. 

Currently the board appears to be back to normal, but will do a proper test tonight. I have some LN2 left but don't want to try it again if I'm going to get the same result.


----------



## Iceman1985

These are my settings: https://imgur.com/95EHN1q

I have to have Geardown mode enabled it feels like.


----------



## lordzed83

hurricane28 said:


> Hi fellas,
> 
> I have a strange issue here.
> 
> My previous settings that were 100% stable aren't stable anymore all of a sudden... I changed, upgraded or whatever nothing at all. Only change was Windows update, are more people having this issue with latest MS update?
> 
> This is weird as my current settings were rock stable before and all of a sudden my mouse does weird things and cursor kinda sticks when i move it fast, and IBT AVX crashes after 6 runs very high.. Everything else runs fine.


Update is that 2 more people from ocuk lost stability after this windows update...

Great job MS


----------



## chakku

crakej said:


> Try enabling geardown - it's in the memory timings menu near the bottom - it might allow you to go a bit higher.
> 
> Remember, when using the Stilts' presets that they don't change any voltage settings - that's up to you


Geardown is enabled by default, if he disabled it he probably wouldn't be stable or running at all on 3200 dual rank.


----------



## Spartoi

Iceman1985 said:


> Hi there, i'm running F4-3200C14Q-32GTZR @ 3200Mhz cl14 right now, passed 1000% HCI and 4 hours of Realbench without issues. Also running PE3 with BCLK 102 with cpu vcore offset +0.060. System runs really great with these settings. Although i cannot run my kit any faster than this, then i get instant errors.
> 
> I can share my settings when i get home from work.  Btw i used 1usmus calculator and inserted every single value i could find.
> 
> Forgot to mention: C7H bios 0601 + 2700X


So you can cold boot without any fails during the memory training? That's my primary issue that I'm trying to fix.



Iceman1985 said:


> These are my settings: https://imgur.com/95EHN1q
> 
> I have to have Geardown mode enabled it feels like.


Also could you share your DRAM Voltage/Boot Voltage?


----------



## hurricane28

lordzed83 said:


> Update is that 2 more people from ocuk lost stability after this windows update...
> 
> Great job MS


O i didn't know that, so its not my system or me after all.. Thnx for the update.


----------



## crakej

chakku said:


> Geardown is enabled by default, if he disabled it he probably wouldn't be stable or running at all on 3200 dual rank.


His memory is Single Rank


----------



## crakej

Iceman1985 said:


> These are my settings: https://imgur.com/95EHN1q
> 
> I have to have Geardown mode enabled it feels like.


You have to have it for 3200? It's not the end of the world, you will still get decent performance. I reckon you're probably doing quite well as you've got 4 dimms - I'm sure there are others here with 4 dimms that may be able to help you.

If you're using GD already then you will definitely need it for higher speeds, though you can also try T2.


----------



## lordzed83

hurricane28 said:


> lordzed83 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Update is that 2 more people from ocuk lost stability after this windows update...
> 
> Great job MS
> 
> 
> 
> O i didn't know that, so its not my system or me after all.. Thnx for the update.
Click to expand...

Just instal latest insiders build and ya sorted till fall


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> Just instal latest insiders build and ya sorted till fall


So latest public release bugged it out for you?

I have same problems as you @hurricane28 with my wireless mouse, but since upgrading to C7H - worked perfectly before...


----------



## Iceman1985

Spartoi said:


> So you can cold boot without any fails during the memory training? That's my primary issue that I'm trying to fix.
> 
> 
> 
> Also could you share your DRAM Voltage/Boot Voltage?


Here are the three pages of settings that i use. Although i use 1.35V Vboot and Vdimm just to be more "safe".

https://imgur.com/UjAXkSH
https://imgur.com/uSJ4h22
https://imgur.com/KLKW62n

This is for 4x8gb G.Skill F4-3200C14Q-32GTZR fully stable @ 3200c14.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

Hi all!


Does this Board offer any Overvoltage Protection and/or Enhanced DRAM Overcurrent Protection?


It's impossible *for me* to find that info or any evidence on the internet...https://www.asus.com/Product-Compar...6L8DGny,UgEiSzqGYsO9120M,6lB9vJMaTVouDtha&b=0


Greetings


----------



## lordzed83

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> Hi all!
> 
> 
> Does this Board offer any Overvoltage Protection and/or Enhanced DRAM Overcurrent Protection?
> 
> 
> It's impossible *for me* to find that info or any evidence on the internet...https://www.asus.com/Product-Compar...6L8DGny,UgEiSzqGYsO9120M,6lB9vJMaTVouDtha&b=0
> 
> 
> Greetings


You can sellect up to 130% of ddr courent thats it afaik


----------



## chakku

crakej said:


> His memory is Single Rank


Well it's 2DPC it's not going to run like 1DPC SR.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Spartoi said:


> So you can cold boot without any fails during the memory training? That's my primary issue that I'm trying to fix.
> 
> Also could you share your DRAM Voltage/Boot Voltage?


Cold boot fails arent only associated to DRAM and vSoC, they are related to many different things in stability settings and various voltages from PLL, VPP_MEM, CLDO_VDDP, 2.5v SB, Proc ODT, Cad_Bus settings and others. Its isnt always going to be as simple as DRAM voltage or SoC voltage. Ive always kept DRAM and Boot Voltage the same and solved cold boot issues through other means such as stated above. You can tune it out of pretty much every strap unless you have your ram overclocked to its very edge then you should probably drop a strap and tune from there. I have a theory that these cold boot issues are coming from mostly just raising DRAM and SoC voltages when going up in frequency when its very likely that most can run those frequencies at much lower voltages with the right settings tweaked. Its just much easier to pound it with voltage and go from there because tweaking stability settings can be arduous with all the tweaking and recording notes and long hours of testing involved. Later on though when the bios matures more and higher frequencies are attainable there will be many at the limits of safe voltages with nowhere to safely push into those frequencies. I used to run at 1.5v until I backed off and started other means of finding that stability I needed. Now I can hit 3600 with 1.4v, I cant tighten timings enough to warrant running that frequency yet but thats more due to the bios than anything else since nothing I do will let me tighten further and voltage makes it worse. Once we have more memory compatibility though Ill still have the voltage room necessary to move forward rather than being at the limits of safe voltage. Point being that there are many other places to solve these various stability issues that many are having and I suspect that the fair majority of them arent due to hardware issues but rather overclock settings arent properly tuned...that and Microsofts bs "updates". Which is why they will not update my machine for me anymore until I choose to let them. They are the worst when it comes to testing an update before releasing it to the masses and forcing them to download it. If Linux had more support from programs I would use it but I cant be bothered to until support is more widespread which is on its way.

Edit: On a completely different note there are some decent Ryzen numbers being put up in my thread if anyone wants to share or just check it out. Someone is using XFR and PBO and putting up some really nice Cinebench scares with what looks like some bclk overclocking. Makes me want to check out XFR overclocking again as my first run with it was disappointing. *<<<<<<<<My Ryzen Overclocking Thread>>>>>>>>*


----------



## CJMitsuki

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> Hi all!
> 
> 
> Does this Board offer any Overvoltage Protection and/or Enhanced DRAM Overcurrent Protection?
> 
> 
> It's impossible *for me* to find that info or any evidence on the internet...https://www.asus.com/Product-Compar...6L8DGny,UgEiSzqGYsO9120M,6lB9vJMaTVouDtha&b=0
> 
> 
> Greetings


Most good PSUs will have overcurrent protection on the multi-rail side if you have one that supports that.

Edit: Sorry for double post...Doing 10 things at once and didnt notice


----------



## Keith Myers

*What ? ? ?*



crakej said:


> Try enabling geardown - it's in the memory timings menu near the bottom - it might allow you to go a bit higher.
> 
> Remember, when using the Stilts' presets that they don't change any voltage settings - that's up to you


I challenge that assertion. Both times on my two new Hero/2700X installations, when I selected the The Stilt's 3466Mhz @ 1.4V preset timing choice in the BIOS, it set the memory Vdimm voltage and memory boot voltage settings to 1.4V all on its own. I did nothing.

It runs stable at full load and I have not played with any memory setting in the BIOS at all. I see your posts about reducing the memory voltage and still being stable but I have not felt the desire to experiment yet. I'm currently following the "if it ain't broke . . . . don't fix it" axiom.


----------



## Spartoi

Iceman1985 said:


> Here are the three pages of settings that i use. Although i use 1.35V Vboot and Vdimm just to be more "safe".
> 
> https://imgur.com/UjAXkSH
> https://imgur.com/uSJ4h22
> https://imgur.com/KLKW62n
> 
> This is for 4x8gb G.Skill F4-3200C14Q-32GTZR fully stable @ 3200c14.


Thanks, but I still have cold boot issues. Guess I'll have to change motherboards after all.



CJMitsuki said:


> Cold boot fails arent only associated to DRAM and vSoC, they are related to many different things in stability settings and various voltages from PLL, VPP_MEM, CLDO_VDDP, 2.5v SB, Proc ODT, Cad_Bus settings and others. Its isnt always going to be as simple as DRAM voltage or SoC voltage. Ive always kept DRAM and Boot Voltage the same and solved cold boot issues through other means such as stated above. You can tune it out of pretty much every strap unless you have your ram overclocked to its very edge then you should probably drop a strap and tune from there. I have a theory that these cold boot issues are coming from mostly just raising DRAM and SoC voltages when going up in frequency when its very likely that most can run those frequencies at much lower voltages with the right settings tweaked. Its just much easier to pound it with voltage and go from there because tweaking stability settings can be arduous with all the tweaking and recording notes and long hours of testing involved. Later on though when the bios matures more and higher frequencies are attainable there will be many at the limits of safe voltages with nowhere to safely push into those frequencies. I used to run at 1.5v until I backed off and started other means of finding that stability I needed. Now I can hit 3600 with 1.4v, I cant tighten timings enough to warrant running that frequency yet but thats more due to the bios than anything else since nothing I do will let me tighten further and voltage makes it worse. Once we have more memory compatibility though Ill still have the voltage room necessary to move forward rather than being at the limits of safe voltage. Point being that there are many other places to solve these various stability issues that many are having and I suspect that the fair majority of them arent due to hardware issues but rather overclock settings arent properly tuned...that and Microsofts bs "updates". Which is why they will not update my machine for me anymore until I choose to let them. They are the worst when it comes to testing an update before releasing it to the masses and forcing them to download it. If Linux had more support from programs I would use it but I cant be bothered to until support is more widespread which is on its way.
> 
> Edit: On a completely different note there are some decent Ryzen numbers being put up in my thread if anyone wants to share or just check it out. Someone is using XFR and PBO and putting up some really nice Cinebench scares with what looks like some bclk overclocking. Makes me want to check out XFR overclocking again as my first run with it was disappointing. *<<<<<<<<My Ryzen Overclocking Thread>>>>>>>>*


Well regardless, I'm not able to cold boot without failing a few times after trying a variety of settings. So, I've given up on this motherboard.


----------



## Iceman1985

Spartoi said:


> Thanks, but I still have cold boot issues. Guess I'll have to change motherboards after all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well regardless, I'm not able to cold boot without failing a few times after trying a variety of settings. So, I've given up on this motherboard.


Sorry to hear that. I don't have any cold boot issues what so ever. Had a nightmare with 4! previous Ryzen builds running the C6H. This board only makes me happy.


----------



## hurricane28

crakej said:


> So latest public release bugged it out for you?
> 
> I have same problems as you @hurricane28 with my wireless mouse, but since upgrading to C7H - worked perfectly before...


Weird man, it worked very good before but after the Windows update it behaves little strange some times.


----------



## crakej

Keith Myers said:


> I challenge that assertion. Both times on my two new Hero/2700X installations, when I selected the The Stilt's 3466Mhz @ 1.4V preset timing choice in the BIOS, it set the memory Vdimm voltage and memory boot voltage settings to 1.4V all on its own. I did nothing.
> 
> It runs stable at full load and I have not played with any memory setting in the BIOS at all. I see your posts about reducing the memory voltage and still being stable but I have not felt the desire to experiment yet. I'm currently following the "if it ain't broke . . . . don't fix it" axiom.


Sorry! - should have been clearer - it will only give you default voltages, if you need more, you have to figure that out for yourself, so if you set 3600 preset, you will likely find you have to adjust voltages from the default. Thanks for pointing this out - I was just trying to point out that not everyone can select a preset and expect it to just work - it doesn't mean your board is broken.


----------



## crakej

chakku said:


> Well it's 2DPC it's not going to run like 1DPC SR.


Yes, but his settings are spot on for SR memory - he might even get a bit more if hes lucky, but if it had been DR it would have been very different!


----------



## mikochu

Is it normal for this the C7H to take 5-10 seconds to get to POST? I've got a matched pair of G.Skill TridentZ 16GB 3200mhz C14 B-Die sticks using DOCP/XMP.


----------



## majestynl

Tip: New benchmark tool, looks great.. Checking it now!

https://www.basemark.com/products/basemark-gpu/


----------



## Martin778

mikochu said:


> Is it normal for this the C7H to take 5-10 seconds to get to POST? I've got a matched pair of G.Skill TridentZ 16GB 3200mhz C14 B-Die sticks using DOCP/XMP.


Yes, when cold booting it's like it's retrying 1-2 times...


----------



## CJMitsuki

mikochu said:


> Is it normal for this the C7H to take 5-10 seconds to get to POST? I've got a matched pair of G.Skill TridentZ 16GB 3200mhz C14 B-Die sticks using DOCP/XMP.


 Usually if its taking unusually long to post then the timings need to be adjusted as they could be just outside of optimal for you. Ive noticed that during tweaking timings, once you get it just right there is a sweet spot for me and I time it with one of my monitors display timing out. The monitor led will blink after a set amount of time once the system is powered on and if I post before it starts blinking then Im getting close to running at good timings, barring it being error free of course. Usually if I have bad timings or its throwing errors my system will post well after my monitor led blinks. Its a weird way to time it but it works for me and its consistent since the monitor has the same exact timeout everytime so I can gauge it. I would tweak timings a bit and see if you can tune it to boot faster.





majestynl said:


> Tip: New benchmark tool, looks great.. Checking it now!
> 
> https://www.basemark.com/products/basemark-gpu/


 I checked it out and it does look great but wasnt impressed by its functionality and until it gets improvements I wouldnt pay for it.




Martin778 said:


> Yes, when cold booting it's like it's retrying 1-2 times...



Those behaviors can usually be tuned out through memory settings.


----------



## Vlada011

I could imagine successor of Zenith Extreme for second gen of Threadripper.
I would build and mATX Threadripper, ROG Gene is BACK.
two x16 PCI-E, single x4 PCI-E. Wi-Fi, 8+8 pin. 8 xDIMM slots.


----------



## Iceman1985

I'm getting a kit of F4-3600C15D-16GTZ for my 2700x + C7H, should i go with Ryzen Ram Calculator or can anyone share some agressive settings i can try? 

Aiming for at least 3466VLL or 3533LL.


----------



## ClintLeo

Sorry for the noob Q.

Whats VLL and LL?


----------



## Onijin

I have that kit. These timings are the best I've been able to wring out of it so far. 3533mhz at 14-14-14-14-28-1t at 1.44v.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Iceman1985 said:


> I'm getting a kit of F4-3600C15D-16GTZ for my 2700x + C7H, should i go with Ryzen Ram Calculator or can anyone share some agressive settings i can try? /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> Aiming for at least 3466VLL or 3533LL.


That’s a really nicely binned kit, just as good as the 3200c14 kits from what I’ve seen. You shouldnt have much trouble getting good timings at 3533mhz but I wouldn’t get my hopes up for good timings at frequencies any higher than that right now. I run 14-14-[email protected]2T with Gear Down disabled, 53.3 ProcOdt, 1.43v DRAM, 1.05v SoC, 2.12v PLL, 2.64v SB(2.5v), 866 CLDO_VDDC, that’s all I can remember off the top of my head since I’m not at home but you should be able to hit those timings with a halfway decent IMC and if not then they will also work for 3466mhz but I drop to 1.4v DRAM. Everything else is pretty much the same. Performance isn’t much less than 3533 either.



ClintLeo said:


> Sorry for the noob Q.
> Whats VLL and LL?


It’s short for Very Low Latency and Low Latency. He’s just referring to how tight he wants to get the timings.



Onijin said:


> I have that kit. These timings are the best I've been able to wring out of it so far. 3533mhz at 14-14-14-14-28-1t at 1.44v.


You are probably near the edge of how tight you can get them anyway without hurting performance. You might get the tRAS down a hair more if anything but from what I’ve seen once you hit 22-24 on tRAS then you are riding the thin line of peak performance and a sharp drop in performance. Next option beyond that will be going up in frequency when the bios update comes out hopefully. I’d like to get 3600 or 3733 down to 15-15-15-24-39 if I am unable to get 3600 @CL14 with tight timings.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

ok i understood!


Thank you guys !

With my Enermax Platimax 850EWT i think i'm safe !hopefully 


Buying this board with a 2700x , i hope it likes my 16gb kit from crucial ballistix 3000 [15-16-16-35] cause i bought them already !


----------



## Whatisthisfor

Onijin said:


> I have that kit. These timings are the best I've been able to wring out of it so far. 3533mhz at 14-14-14-14-28-1t at 1.44v.


Is that a stable setting tested with Ram test or similar tools?


----------



## Chronicles

Looks like new bios out today:
Version 0702
2018/06/228.11 MBytes
ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) BIOS 0702
Update Agesa Code to 1.0.0.2c.
Update compatibility protocol for 3rd party hardware monitoring software.
Fixed miscellaneous issues with fan calibration/options.
Improve memory compatibility.


----------



## hurricane28

Chronicles said:


> Looks like new bios out today:
> Version 0702
> 2018/06/228.11 MBytes
> ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) BIOS 0702
> Update Agesa Code to 1.0.0.2c.
> Update compatibility protocol for 3rd party hardware monitoring software.
> Fixed miscellaneous issues with fan calibration/options.
> Improve memory compatibility.


Nice! finally, going to flash later. Thnx for the update man.


----------



## Flexarius

Hi,

link?


----------



## Chronicles

Flexarius said:


> Hi,
> 
> link?


https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WI-FI/HelpDesk_BIOS/


----------



## crakej

I was hoping we'd get it for the weekend!

Now to go almost back to the start and do it all again ha ha!


----------



## Jaju123

http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb...VII-HERO/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-0702.zip

Direct link for non-wifi version


----------



## CJMitsuki

Chronicles said:


> Looks like new bios out today:
> Version 0702
> 2018/06/228.11 MBytes
> ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) BIOS 0702
> Update Agesa Code to 1.0.0.2c.
> Update compatibility protocol for 3rd party hardware monitoring software.
> Fixed miscellaneous issues with fan calibration/options.
> Improve memory compatibility.


Already salivating over the improved mem compatibility. Got a 2055 in Cinebench last night and submitted to HWBOT,hoping to hit 2100 soon with my little 280 AIO. Hoping this new bios will help. Looks like many hours of memory timings this weekend.


----------



## crakej

I can confirm that offset mode for CPU voltage is now working properly. This has given me more headroom with the CPU voltage - I might be able to get my 4.2GHz back  Voltages for the CPU are now reporting as I would expect in HWInfo when using offset.

Loaded up my old 3600 timings and all is running well - only difference is using offset. Will report back when I've experimented more


----------



## HolyFist

I have the GSkill F4-4133C19D-16GTZR, it can boot fine with default settings at 3600MHz but i'm trying to get it stable at 3466MHz CL14, between 40 and 50% i get error on memtest, 1.385V and SOC 1.025, Cmd2T i left auto, i only touch tRFC, ProcODT and disable Gear and PowerDown.

At 3533MHz it happens the same with 1.41v between but at 10 and 20%.

*So my question is, in terms of RAM overclock where do i need to touch first for better stability, Voltage or timings?*


----------



## CJMitsuki

CPU performance for me went up quite a bit with bios update as well as a small increase to memory performance. Cinebench at my IBT stable settings would consistently run anywhere from 1985-1990 with the occasional 2000 score if ambient was low and it was first boot up of the day. Now It is consistent 2000+ scores with a 1-2 point fluctuation. This is in Win 10, will report back after some testing in Win 7 at 4.4ghz, maybe higher if the CPU is as stable as its feeling right now. Right now first impressions are that they get an A+ on this bios update, I cant wait to see how much memory stability went up.


----------



## mikochu

I'm having issues with G.Skill TridentZ F4-3200C14D-32GTZR on my C7H with a 2700x. I tried using DOCP and POSTing is hit or miss with waking from sleep mostly miss. I tried using the Ryzen DRAM Calculator, but I can't even get a setting to POST. Any insight would be appreciated.

Thanks!


----------



## Chronicles

Having fast boot on now results in:

Reboot and Select proper Boot device
or Insert Boot Media in selected Boot device and press a key

Code shows: AE

disabling fast boot lets me boot windows


----------



## hurricane28

I flashed the new 0702 BIOS and so far its working very good, there are only a few things i noticed right of the bat. 

SenseMI is nowhere to be seen.. Looked all over the BIOS but i couldn't find it. 

Also, in Windows i get this error message: AMLI: ACPI BIOS is attempting to read from an illegal IO port address (0x40), which lies in the 0x40 - 0x43 protected address range. This could lead to system instability. Please contact your system vendor for technical assistance.


----------



## wisepds

I have flashed new bios, but P-states overclocking don't undervolting...underclocking yes, but not undervolting on idle..I mean... mi p-states is 4100 mhz and downclock to 2199mhz, but vcore is alwais at 1.30v


----------



## crakej

I've found fan speed readouts in HWInfo are sticking - only way to fix is to re-load HWInfo - will check see if there is new beta....


----------



## crakej

wisepds said:


> I have flashed new bios, but P-states overclocking don't undervolting...underclocking yes, but not undervolting on idle..I mean... mi p-states is 4100 mhz and downclock to 2199mhz, but vcore is alwais at 1.30v


what cpu and ram do you have? Are you using offset voltage?


----------



## wisepds

crakej said:


> what cpu and ram do you have? Are you using offset voltage?


Gskil 3200 mhz CL14 8GBx4, Ryzen 2700X... and yes.. i'm using Offset...is for offset voltage? Now at 4.0 GHZ pstates OC.

Edit... with offset and without offset... Vcore on idle alwais on 1.30v


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> CPU performance for me went up quite a bit with bios update as well as a small increase to memory performance. Cinebench at my IBT stable settings would consistently run anywhere from 1985-1990 with the occasional 2000 score if ambient was low and it was first boot up of the day. Now It is consistent 2000+ scores with a 1-2 point fluctuation. This is in Win 10, will report back after some testing in Win 7 at 4.4ghz, maybe higher if the CPU is as stable as its feeling right now. Right now first impressions are that they get an A+ on this bios update, I cant wait to see how much memory stability went up.



Wassup flashed this morning testing hows it behaving compared to 0602 same aettings ofs with my ibt very high stable settings on latest win10 17677 build. Cant see any gains in speed tbh.

10loops of ibt on 602 was 547-548 on 702 its same time range.

If Ya get chance drop us a text file with bios settings ill see what different we got. Cant get much more due to.my ram kit i guess.


----------



## VicsPC

wisepds said:


> Gskil 3200 mhz CL14 8GBx4, Ryzen 2700X... and yes.. i'm using Offset...is for offset voltage? Now at 4.0 GHZ pstates OC.
> 
> Edit... with offset and without offset... Vcore on idle alwais on 1.30v


Hopefully you're using a balanced power plan and it should be downvolting as well unless you've set something up wrong. I'm not bothering with overclocking my 2700x, gets a steady 4.3 on 4 cores and 4.0-4.1 on 6-8 cores. Sticks around 4.1 on 6 cores and 4.0 or so on 8 cores. Only way it would be beneficial is if i can get all 8 cores to 4.2-4.3, I'm on water so temps and voltages aren't an issue. I may give it a go but from what I've seen so far theres much better gains from memory+TT, so ill be spending time on buying new ram and tweaking that instead.


----------



## Syldon

I did some quick runs of IBT. I was only looking to see how voltages carried through under load with all CPU settings in auto. I noticed on different reboots that the time outputs of IBT were varying with a 0.06 differ over a quick pass. This resulted in a 3 second differ on full runs between reboots. It seemed quite a variance.

I tried various reboots to let the system settle. The variance continued throughout. The times were also being reflected to the speed differ of the bus clock that was being output through HWinfo. I initially put the variance of the bus clock down to how HPET and the TSC works with each other, but it seems that leaving the AI tuner in auto does not lock the bus clock speed to a consistent default value.

I would normally go straight to setting to 100 bus clock to lock it down, but decided to see how the system worked with auto voltages and values with only adjustments to the memory timings. I was just a bit amazed to see this is still an issue with people who leave everything on auto.

Simply changing AI tuner to manual without changing anything else from auto is enough to lock the bus clock down to a default value of 100. 

I know many are not changing the PE from auto now, since the CPU boost gains in auto can be better than any PE setting. But if you want the CPU as AMD default, at the very least look to locking down the bus clock.


----------



## wisepds

VicsPC said:


> Hopefully you're using a balanced power plan and it should be downvolting as well unless you've set something up wrong. I'm not bothering with overclocking my 2700x, gets a steady 4.3 on 4 cores and 4.0-4.1 on 6-8 cores. Sticks around 4.1 on 6 cores and 4.0 or so on 8 cores. Only way it would be beneficial is if i can get all 8 cores to 4.2-4.3, I'm on water so temps and voltages aren't an issue. I may give it a go but from what I've seen so far theres much better gains from memory+TT, so ill be spending time on buying new ram and tweaking that instead.


Nop, i'm on ryzen power plan...why?


----------



## wisepds

VicsPC said:


> Hopefully you're using a balanced power plan and it should be downvolting as well unless you've set something up wrong. I'm not bothering with overclocking my 2700x, gets a steady 4.3 on 4 cores and 4.0-4.1 on 6-8 cores. Sticks around 4.1 on 6 cores and 4.0 or so on 8 cores. Only way it would be beneficial is if i can get all 8 cores to 4.2-4.3, I'm on water so temps and voltages aren't an issue. I may give it a go but from what I've seen so far theres much better gains from memory+TT, so ill be spending time on buying new ram and tweaking that instead.


What configuration do you use( PE 1,2,OC 3,4)? What liquid cooler have you got? What max temp with IBT do you have?
Thanks!!


----------



## VicsPC

wisepds said:


> What configuration do you use( PE 1,2,OC 3,4)? What liquid cooler have you got? What max temp with IBT do you have?
> Thanks!!


IBT? No thanks lol, pointless and unreal temps haha. I'm on auto not using any PE at all, i have a custom loop with 2 rads both in push/pull a 360 and a 240. Hottest I've seen it is around 65°C or so, average is closer to 48-50°C. I went from 155 on my 1700x to 175 on my 2700x in CB15, and multi went from 1700 to 1825. CB doesnt seem to stress out my cores like Origins or Far Cry 5 does, i hit way higher clocks during gaming then i do with CB. Ill have to give realbench a go but my temps are alright, cores stay pretty steady anywhere between 4.1 to 4.35 as i stated so XFR seems to work really well.


----------



## lordzed83

VicsPC said:


> IBT? No thanks lol, pointless and unreal temps haha. I'm on auto not using any PE at all, i have a custom loop with 2 rads both in push/pull a 360 and a 240. Hottest I've seen it is around 65°C or so, average is closer to 48-50°C. I went from 155 on my 1700x to 175 on my 2700x in CB15, and multi went from 1700 to 1825. CB doesnt seem to stress out my cores like Origins or Far Cry 5 does, i hit way higher clocks during gaming then i do with CB. Ill have to give realbench a go but my temps are alright, cores stay pretty steady anywhere between 4.1 to 4.35 as i stated so XFR seems to work really well.


Unreal temps You say ?? Try Aida64 stres test if youw ant to see unreal temps


----------



## VicsPC

lordzed83 said:


> Unreal temps You say ?? Try Aida64 stres test if youw ant to see unreal temps


Ive tried em all, they all get the temps around me using the PC like a normally do lol. Realbench for 30mins gets to around 67°C, a bunch of CB runs gets to around 64°C. 

I tried Aida 64 on my 1700x was about the same as everything else, i did a clean install of Windows recently and haven't reinstalled programs I dont use haha. Only stress test i go by is one that will stress gpu/cpu at the same time, just stressing the cpu and raising my water temp by 1°C won't make my peak temps show up. GPU/CPU i get my temps to a delta of 9°C above case ambient so that's what i go by.


----------



## crakej

wisepds said:


> Nop, i'm on ryzen power plan...why?


You need to be on Balanced power plan - Ryzen plan doesn't work for Ryzen 2xxx


----------



## VicsPC

crakej said:


> You need to be on Balanced power plan - Ryzen plan doesn't work for Ryzen 2xxx


How so? I figured it's just the same with slightly different tweaks, unless they've somhow changed the voltage drop in idle compared to windows balanced. I stopped using Ryzen plan when i had my 1700x and it gave poor scores in everything lol.


----------



## wisepds

crakej said:


> You need to be on Balanced power plan - Ryzen plan doesn't work for Ryzen 2xxx


Oh! I didn't know!!!!! Thanks!!!


----------



## wisepds

VicsPC said:


> Ive tried em all, they all get the temps around me using the PC like a normally do lol. Realbench for 30mins gets to around 67°C, a bunch of CB runs gets to around 64°C.
> 
> I tried Aida 64 on my 1700x was about the same as everything else, i did a clean install of Windows recently and haven't reinstalled programs I dont use haha. Only stress test i go by is one that will stress gpu/cpu at the same time, just stressing the cpu and raising my water temp by 1°C won't make my peak temps show up. GPU/CPU i get my temps to a delta of 9°C above case ambient so that's what i go by.


Oh, i only have kraken x72 on push and pull...you have a reqlly good cooler, but do for me, what max temp passing IBT or Y-Crunch? Ah! And..what ambient temp? I'm from Seville...today is 45°C on street!!!!


----------



## VicsPC

wisepds said:


> Oh, i only have kraken x72 on push and pull...you have a reqlly good cooler, but do for me, what max temp passing IBT or Y-Crunch? Ah! And..what ambient temp? I'm from Seville...today is 45°C on street!!!!


Yea that's going to be the big difference. I'm in Nice on the riviera, not as hot as Spain today is around 24°C with chilly wind couple days ago was 27°C. We don't use 35°C here in summer, maybe around 32°C.


----------



## crakej

VicsPC said:


> How so? I figured it's just the same with slightly different tweaks, unless they've somhow changed the voltage drop in idle compared to windows balanced. I stopped using Ryzen plan when i had my 1700x and it gave poor scores in everything lol.


I have 1700x and Ryzen balanced work well for me - once I have a stable OC - that's what I use. It's designed for 1xxx CPUs and works best for me. On this board, XFR works very well - I've seen up to 4 cores on 4.1 depending on load, while the other cores are not being used, so it keeps temps and voltages as low as possible.

Early on in this thread users of 2xxx CPUs were advised not to use Ryzen Balanced otherwise you will not get best performance.


----------



## crakej

wisepds said:


> Oh, i only have kraken x72 on push and pull...you have a reqlly good cooler, but do for me, what max temp passing IBT or Y-Crunch? Ah! And..what ambient temp? I'm from Seville...today is 45°C on street!!!!


What temps do you get? Mine go up to about 70c when stress testing, around 50/60c when playing a game, and I only have a 240 AIO with 2 fans blowing out the top. (I know, many of you think this doesn't work very well, but for me, blowing out the top works best.....I can draw lots of cold air in the front.


----------



## VicsPC

crakej said:


> I have 1700x and Ryzen balanced work well for me - once I have a stable OC - that's what I use. It's designed for 1xxx CPUs and works best for me. On this board, XFR works very well - I've seen up to 4 cores on 4.1 depending on load, while the other cores are not being used, so it keeps temps and voltages as low as possible.
> 
> Early on in this thread users of 2xxx CPUs were advised not to use Ryzen Balanced otherwise you will not get best performance.


Yea its a big leap over my 1700x at 3.8 on all cores, i have core parking set to 50% in windows balanced power plan. i hit about 4.25-4.3 but I'm on water with good temps so it's not bad. I was surprised seeing it hit that to be honest.


----------



## crakej

On my x370, I had my OC at 4.1/4.2GHz - when on Ryzen balanced, I would rarely get even 4.1 on 1 core, so this board is much more efficient for our 1st gen CPUs

It's a shame they didn't do a version of PE for Ryzen 1 as well - I know it couldn't work exactly the same, but maybe better than just XFR2...


----------



## wisepds

crakej said:


> What temps do you get? Mine go up to about 70c when stress testing, around 50/60c when playing a game, and I only have a 240 AIO with 2 fans blowing out the top. (I know, many of you think this doesn't work very well, but for me, blowing out the top works best.....I can draw lots of cold air in the front.


With OC at 4.1GHz on all cores i get 70°C with y-crunch or IBT...gaming...about 45-60°C, but my ambient temp is 26°C inside house (Maybe 24 with AC), 40-45°C outside... seville is a hell right now.

This is my fan configuration (All fans Corsair ML with 4 ml static pressure!!) 2 X140 top, 1x 120 rear, 6x120 front.


----------



## wisepds

VicsPC said:


> Yea that's going to be the big difference. I'm in Nice on the riviera, not as hot as Spain today is around 24°C with chilly wind couple days ago was 27°C. We don't use 35°C here in summer, maybe around 32°C.


32°C hahaha!!! We have 32°C at 2 A.M on the middle of the night!!!!!!

THIS IS SEVILLE!!!! 
And my AIO suffer...


----------



## crakej

wisepds said:


> 32°C hahaha!!! We have 32°C at 2 A.M on the middle of the night!!!!!!
> 
> THIS IS SEVILLE!!!!
> And my AIO suffer...


I'd say you're doing ok then..... Not as warm in UK, but getting there - mid 20s now but getting hotter.

It must be awful living in the south of Spain, lovely beaches, warm sea....  42 is pretty damn warm though...


----------



## minal

Just updated to BIOS 0702.


I'm not sure if it's a coincidence, but kernel module it87 no longer loads. "modprobe: ERROR: could not insert 'it87': Device or resource busy"


Could @Keith Myers or other linux users confirm?


----------



## Keith Myers

*Just re-compile and install the driver*



minal said:


> Just updated to BIOS 0702.
> 
> 
> I'm not sure if it's a coincidence, but kernel module it87 no longer loads. "modprobe: ERROR: could not insert 'it87': Device or resource busy"
> 
> 
> Could @Keith Myers or other linux users confirm?


It wasn't the update to BIOS 0702 that caused the issue. You must have recompiled the kernel. Every time the kernel gets recompiled, you will lose both the it87 and k10temp driver because they never got loaded to modules-load.d directory or modified the modules.conf file to add those modules in automatically after any kernel recompile.

The easy solution is to just go through the make clean, make and make install commands in the it87 directory. Then your sudo modprobe it87 command will find the driver. You can also modify the modules.conf file in the modules-load.d directory so that it adds the it87 module after any initramfs directory kernel reload. You can also copy the dkms.conf file that is provided in the it87-master directory to the /usr/src directory so that the it87 driver is always installed into new kernels.

https://help.ubuntu.com/community/DKMS


----------



## Keith Myers

*You must have recompiled a new kernel*



minal said:


> Just updated to BIOS 0702.
> 
> 
> I'm not sure if it's a coincidence, but kernel module it87 no longer loads. "modprobe: ERROR: could not insert 'it87': Device or resource busy"
> 
> 
> Could @Keith Myers or other linux users confirm?


It wasn't the update to BIOS 0702 that caused the issue. You must have recompiled the kernel. Every time the kernel gets recompiled, you will lose both the it87 and k10temp driver because they never got loaded to modules-load.d directory or modified the modules.conf file to add those modules in automatically after any kernel recompile.

The easy solution is to just go through the make clean, make and make install commands in the it87 directory. Then your sudo modprobe it87 command will find the driver. You can also modify the modules.conf file in the modules-load.d directory so that it adds the it87 module after any initramfs directory kernel reload. You can also copy the dkms.conf file that is provided in the it87-master directory to the /usr/src directory so that the it87 driver is always installed into new kernels.

https://help.ubuntu.com/community/DKMS


----------



## crakej

minal said:


> Just updated to BIOS 0702.
> 
> 
> I'm not sure if it's a coincidence, but kernel module it87 no longer loads. "modprobe: ERROR: could not insert 'it87': Device or resource busy"
> 
> 
> Could @Keith Myers or other linux users confirm?


Didn't see Keith had answered....


----------



## minal

Keith Myers said:


> It wasn't the update to BIOS 0702 that caused the issue. You must have recompiled the kernel. Every time the kernel gets recompiled, you will lose both the it87 and k10temp driver because they never got loaded to modules-load.d directory or modified the modules.conf file to add those modules in automatically after any kernel recompile.
> 
> The easy solution is to just go through the make clean, make and make install commands in the it87 directory. Then your sudo modprobe it87 command will find the driver. You can also modify the modules.conf file in the modules-load.d directory so that it adds the it87 module after any initramfs directory kernel reload. You can also copy the dkms.conf file that is provided in the it87-master directory to the /usr/src directory so that the it87 driver is always installed into new kernels.
> 
> https://help.ubuntu.com/community/DKMS


The it87 module's Makefile can also install with dkms configuration using "make dkms" (and the github repo contains a dkms.conf file). https://github.com/groeck/it87 I've had no problems with it87 loading after the past couple of kernel updates. 

But now, it87 won't load. I tried removing, cleaning, and re-making the module, but it's always the same error with modprobe about "device or resource busy".

"journalctl -xe" has this to say:


Code:


-- Unit systemd-modules-load.service has begun starting up.
Jun 23 19:55:37 ssb2 kernel: it87: it87 driver version v1.0-46-gbfbaf88
Jun 23 19:55:37 ssb2 kernel: it87: Found IT8665E chip at 0x290, revision 6
Jun 23 19:55:37 ssb2 kernel: it87: Beeping is supported
Jun 23 19:55:37 ssb2 kernel: ACPI Warning: SystemIO range 0x0000000000000295-0x0000000000000296 conflicts with OpRegion 0x0000000000000290-0x0000000000000299 (\AMW0.HWM) (20180105/utaddress-247)
Jun 23 19:55:37 ssb2 kernel: ACPI: If an ACPI driver is available for this device, you should use it instead of the native driver
Jun 23 19:55:37 ssb2 systemd-modules-load[14493]: Failed to insert 'it87': Device or resource busy
Jun 23 19:55:37 ssb2 systemd[1]: systemd-modules-load.service: Main process exited, code=exited, status=1/FAILURE
Jun 23 19:55:37 ssb2 systemd[1]: systemd-modules-load.service: Failed with result 'exit-code'.
Jun 23 19:55:37 ssb2 systemd[1]: Failed to start Load Kernel Modules.

How can I get more info on that OpRegion conflict?

======

Well I'm confused. It's working now. 

I tried booting with the kernel parameter acpi_enforce_resources=lax and mode0 enabled in the BIOS, and it87 loaded without problems. Then I shutdown. Restored mode0 to Auto, did not use the acpi_enforce_resources=lax paramter... and it87 still worked. Not a clue why. The only thing I can think of is that I had not shut down (vs restart) since flashing the BIOS, though I don't know if that is of any significance.

And on that note has anyone figured out what mode0 does?


----------



## Keith Myers

minal said:


> The it87 module's Makefile can also install with dkms configuration using "make dkms" (and the github repo contains a dkms.conf file). https://github.com/groeck/it87 I've had no problems with it87 loading after the past couple of kernel updates.
> 
> But now, it87 won't load. I tried removing, cleaning, and re-making the module, but it's always the same error with modprobe about "device or resource busy".
> 
> "journalctl -xe" has this to say:
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> -- Unit systemd-modules-load.service has begun starting up.
> Jun 23 19:55:37 ssb2 kernel: it87: it87 driver version v1.0-46-gbfbaf88
> Jun 23 19:55:37 ssb2 kernel: it87: Found IT8665E chip at 0x290, revision 6
> Jun 23 19:55:37 ssb2 kernel: it87: Beeping is supported
> Jun 23 19:55:37 ssb2 kernel: ACPI Warning: SystemIO range 0x0000000000000295-0x0000000000000296 conflicts with OpRegion 0x0000000000000290-0x0000000000000299 (\AMW0.HWM) (20180105/utaddress-247)
> Jun 23 19:55:37 ssb2 kernel: ACPI: If an ACPI driver is available for this device, you should use it instead of the native driver
> Jun 23 19:55:37 ssb2 systemd-modules-load[14493]: Failed to insert 'it87': Device or resource busy
> Jun 23 19:55:37 ssb2 systemd[1]: systemd-modules-load.service: Main process exited, code=exited, status=1/FAILURE
> Jun 23 19:55:37 ssb2 systemd[1]: systemd-modules-load.service: Failed with result 'exit-code'.
> Jun 23 19:55:37 ssb2 systemd[1]: Failed to start Load Kernel Modules.
> 
> How can I get more info on that OpRegion conflict?
> 
> ======
> 
> Well I'm confused. It's working now.
> 
> I tried booting with the kernel parameter acpi_enforce_resources=lax and mode0 enabled in the BIOS, and it87 loaded without problems. Then I shutdown. Restored mode0 to Auto, did not use the acpi_enforce_resources=lax paramter... and it87 still worked. Not a clue why. The only thing I can think of is that I had not shut down (vs restart) since flashing the BIOS, though I don't know if that is of any significance.
> 
> And on that note has anyone figured out what mode0 does?


Yes, that business about ACPI conflict is familiar. I run into that with the nct6775 driver on the X99 system and have to use the resources=lax parameter.

I will watch out for that when I get around to updating BIOS to 0702. Haven't had a chance to read anything about it yet. Did anything change dramatically? Figured the usual silence on ASUS' part with no comment about changelogs or anything.


----------



## minal

Keith Myers said:


> Yes, that business about ACPI conflict is familiar. I run into that with the nct6775 driver on the X99 system and have to use the resources=lax parameter.
> 
> I will watch out for that when I get around to updating BIOS to 0702. Haven't had a chance to read anything about it yet. Did anything change dramatically? Figured the usual silence on ASUS' part with no comment about changelogs or anything.


 I know the lax parameter has to be used in some cases. Since the C7H worked without it on 0601, it would be a regression if 0702 required it. Let's see what happens over the next several days/restarts/etc.

No detailed changelog but still hard to pass up:


> ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) BIOS 0702
> Update Agesa Code to 1.0.0.2c.
> Update compatibility protocol for 3rd party hardware monitoring software.
> Fixed miscellaneous issues with fan calibration/options.
> Improve memory compatibility.


https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WI-FI/HelpDesk_BIOS/

Info on mode0 in BIOS would be nice too.


----------



## Keith Myers

minal said:


> I know the lax parameter has to be used in some cases. Since the C7H worked without it on 0601, it would be a regression if 0702 required it. Let's see what happens over the next several days/restarts/etc.
> 
> No detailed changelog but still hard to pass up:
> https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WI-FI/HelpDesk_BIOS/
> 
> Info on mode0 in BIOS would be nice too.


I asked a while back in another thread if anyone could explain just what the heck is "Mode 0" in the BIOS . . . . . . and never got any response from anyone.

So, OCN'ers, anyone want to chime in with what this does?

I missed those points on the download page. Probably will give the Win 10 2700X system the job of guinea pig for the 0702 BIOS before I try it on the Linux systems.


----------



## VicsPC

Oddity number unknown, started by PC up and was wondering why all my cores were peaked while at idle on the main screen. Still in balanced mode, turned out somehow windows changed processor min state from 5 too 100% on its own.


----------



## CJMitsuki

lordzed83 said:


> Wassup flashed this morning testing hows it behaving compared to 0602 same aettings ofs with my ibt very high stable settings on latest win10 17677 build. Cant see any gains in speed tbh.
> 
> 10loops of ibt on 602 was 547-548 on 702 its same time range.
> 
> If Ya get chance drop us a text file with bios settings ill see what different we got. Cant get much more due to.my ram kit i guess.



Yeah, ill get a txt file and edit the post with it. I did notice something very different though, The options that were only visible through the search option are no longer visible. They must have had some options in there they didnt want anyone playing with. I know there are settings that are potentially useful but just havent tested them. Like generic mode, whatever that is, and Chipset power saving features which are enabled by default and I had them disabled. Something to do with Clock Interrupt and Clock Tick...I cant remember most of them. I have a printout with them on there though. I know some had to do with compression settings. I wonder if they were just bugged like some were getting with disabling hpet in bios during a restart? It does make me wonder why they made them completely invisible now. Maybe they can be unlocked through a bios mod?


----------



## CJMitsuki

VicsPC said:


> Hopefully you're using a balanced power plan and it should be downvolting as well unless you've set something up wrong. I'm not bothering with overclocking my 2700x, gets a steady 4.3 on 4 cores and 4.0-4.1 on 6-8 cores. Sticks around 4.1 on 6 cores and 4.0 or so on 8 cores. Only way it would be beneficial is if i can get all 8 cores to 4.2-4.3, I'm on water so temps and voltages aren't an issue. I may give it a go but from what I've seen so far theres much better gains from memory+TT, so ill be spending time on buying new ram and tweaking that instead.



If you are PState OC then you dont really want to use balanced, I use Ultimate Performance and just change a couple of settings with one being minimum processor state. That is sufficient enough to allow downvolting while keeping performance at max. Balanced gives horrible performance with a PState OC.


----------



## VicsPC

CJMitsuki said:


> If you are PState OC then you dont really want to use balanced, I use Ultimate Performance and just change a couple of settings with one being minimum processor state. That is sufficient enough to allow downvolting while keeping performance at max. Balanced gives horrible performance with a PState OC.


Nope i am on all auto, considering i can do 4 cores at 4.3-4.35 and 4.0-4.1 in 8 cores unless i can do 4.2ghz all 8 cores it's kind of pointless to OC for me. I may try eventually but guess that's one of the perks being on water. If i can do 4.3 at 1.35-1.4v should be alright but considering what I've seen here seems to be a golden/platinum chip. Not sure how some reviewers got 4.4 but possible those were just CB15 stable.


----------



## CJMitsuki

VicsPC said:


> Nope i am on all auto, considering i can do 4 cores at 4.3-4.35 and 4.0-4.1 in 8 cores unless i can do 4.2ghz all 8 cores it's kind of pointless to OC for me. I may try eventually but guess that's one of the perks being on water. If i can do 4.3 at 1.35-1.4v should be alright but considering what I've seen here seems to be a golden/platinum chip. Not sure how some reviewers got 4.4 but possible those were just CB15 stable.



I was referring to what you said to Wise about hoping he was using balanced power plan when he was using a PState OC. I can get 4.275ghz on all cores IBT stable and 4.4ghz CB15 stable. I could go higher than 4.4ghz but I dont want to raise voltage that high. I would have to go above 1.5v and while I can control the temps easy enough, I dont know if the voltage would possibly hurt the cpu. I dont even hit 70c in CB15 at 4.4ghz on my 280mm h115i Pro AIO so You could sustain 4.25ghz easily with your custom loop across all cores providing your cpu can do it. Right now I run 4.3ghz daily on PState OC, it actually does very well and wont use all cores unless it needs to. It gives much more control but the only drawback is that XFR/PBO give better single core numbers.


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> Yeah, ill get a txt file and edit the post with it. I did notice something very different though, The options that were only visible through the search option are no longer visible. They must have had some options in there they didnt want anyone playing with. I know there are settings that are potentially useful but just havent tested them. Like generic mode, whatever that is, and Chipset power saving features which are enabled by default and I had them disabled. Something to do with Clock Interrupt and Clock Tick...I cant remember most of them. I have a printout with them on there though. I know some had to do with compression settings. I wonder if they were just bugged like some were getting with disabling hpet in bios during a restart? It does make me wonder why they made them completely invisible now. Maybe they can be unlocked through a bios mod?


Ye also noticed that :/ had to drop my 3533 to 3466 as I could not pass IBT x10 no matter what same settings. But scores about saome as old bios. So It is faster. Need more testing

@1usmus would you have time and look in to 0701 bioss for some unlocks Please


----------



## boatmurder

mikochu said:


> I'm having issues with G.Skill TridentZ F4-3200C14D-32GTZR on my C7H with a 2700x. I tried using DOCP and POSTing is hit or miss with waking from sleep mostly miss. I tried using the Ryzen DRAM Calculator, but I can't even get a setting to POST. Any insight would be appreciated.
> 
> Thanks!


My kit of 32gb also took some time to POST using DOCP.
I got it to boot up reliably by increasing DDR Voltage. For me it's set to 1.38 now.

Among the first overclocking reviews (air/water) with RAM, somebody also mentioned that all their samples reached best performance at <= 1.1V SOC. 
My C7H autos this voltage to 1.14. I set that one down to manual 1.08V.

Two more things :
- i was also completely unable to boot at the values suggested by Ryzen DRAM Calculator.
- DOCP was not applying the full XMP profile of my kit. Came out at, for example, tRC 74 instead of 48. I manually adjusted these without problem: https://imgur.com/CEGeVPX

edit: my current settings:








I marked which i actually adjusted. For timings, it's down from autos towards, but short of, Ryzen DRAM Calculator suggestions.
I have not touched the resistance settings yet, need to do some reading to at least get a rough idea of what i'm dealing with here.


----------



## VicsPC

CJMitsuki said:


> I was referring to what you said to Wise about hoping he was using balanced power plan when he was using a PState OC. I can get 4.275ghz on all cores IBT stable and 4.4ghz CB15 stable. I could go higher than 4.4ghz but I dont want to raise voltage that high. I would have to go above 1.5v and while I can control the temps easy enough, I dont know if the voltage would possibly hurt the cpu. I dont even hit 70c in CB15 at 4.4ghz on my 280mm h115i Pro AIO so You could sustain 4.25ghz easily with your custom loop across all cores providing your cpu can do it. Right now I run 4.3ghz daily on PState OC, it actually does very well and wont use all cores unless it needs to. It gives much more control but the only drawback is that XFR/PBO give better single core numbers.


Yea i can give it a go. I did notice that on my 1700x with the new windows update if i ran balanced plan i didn't even need to use pstate, it downclocked on its own and kept my OC at 3.8. If i did it on my 2700x id either keep it full beans all the time or just use offset and balanced and hope that it downclocks like the 1700x did. Right now im not too fussed though seems to be alright, i hit around 63°C peak and that's with 1.519v on auto lol. I think witha 240/360 both in push/pull i should be alright.


----------



## wisepds

VicsPC said:


> Yea i can give it a go. I did notice that on my 1700x with the new windows update if i ran balanced plan i didn't even need to use pstate, it downclocked on its own and kept my OC at 3.8. If i did it on my 2700x id either keep it full beans all the time or just use offset and balanced and hope that it downclocks like the 1700x did. Right now im not too fussed though seems to be alright, i hit around 63°C peak and that's with 1.519v on auto lol. I think witha 240/360 both in push/pull i should be alright.


So....balanced plan, ryzen plan, pstates or normal OC?


----------



## VicsPC

wisepds said:


> So....balanced plan, ryzen plan, pstates or normal OC?


For my 1700x if i wanted downclock/downvolt i did offset OC no pstates and used balanced power plan and it worked just fine. People seem to be having issues with offset/manual OC and balanced and Mitsuki said balanced with pstates didn't work out too well.


----------



## Onijin

Whatisthisfor said:


> Is that a stable setting tested with Ram test or similar tools?


Yes, but not 100%. I've tested these settings overnight with Memtest and Ramtest on two occasions. One it cleared 8 hours in Memtest and failed Ramtest, the other it failed after 6 hours in Memtest but cleared a Ramtest run. This rig isn't used for anything mission critical (mostly gaming, streaming and memes) so I call it a win.


----------



## crakej

So, this is what is fixed in new bios:

*ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO BIOS 0702
Update Agesa Code to 1.0.0.2c.
Update compatibility protocol for 3rd party hardware monitoring software.
Fixed miscellaneous issues with fan calibration/options.
Improve memory compatibility.*

AGESA version shows as 1.0.0.2 in Aida and has same microcode ver as 0601 - 08001137h

I'm having much more problems with monitoring s/w, in particular HWInfo64. Values for fans keep getting stuck. This happens when running Aida64 or AISuite (didn't happen before) - in fact I left HWInfo running all night and woke up to find nothing was updating and Windows task manager said 'not responding'. In Aida 64 and AISuite i've seen phantom fans - labelled CPU Opt - but nothing is connected there, shows something like 6000rpm, then vanishes again. In AISuite I saw my CPU voltage go up to *9.x volts!* which I can only assume is a software problem - HWInfo was running, didn't capture it, but for all I know it was not updating anyway. After closing AISuite and HWInfo, I now find that neither program will load properly. HWInfo just says not responding in task manager, and you can see what happens on-screen below (detecting cpu #15), AISuite shows as running, but its launcher is not there and neither is AISuite. I suspect they will load after a reboot. *Update:*, AISuite appeared after ten minutes, but unusable.

My Fans are still not calibrating correctly. My cpu fans share the same connector - when calibration happens, one of them does not spin down to 0 so it can't calibrate correctly. It rarely does this on the cpu fans, but all the time on the CH2 fans. Same in AISuite - only work-around is to stop the fans myself at the right time during calibration so bios gets a proper zero reading. Will try running them from different connectors, but would prefer all my cpu fans to be on the cpu fan header. If you keep trying you eventually get a good calibration, but that could take hours.

As for mem compatibility - I don't really know, but I'm still running at 3600CL14 so happy with that. I might be able to increase my CPU OC as offset voltages now working properly which has given me more headroom than I had without it.


----------



## VicsPC

crakej said:


> So, this is what is fixed in new bios:
> 
> *ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO BIOS 0702
> Update Agesa Code to 1.0.0.2c.
> Update compatibility protocol for 3rd party hardware monitoring software.
> Fixed miscellaneous issues with fan calibration/options.
> Improve memory compatibility.*
> 
> AGESA version shows as 1.0.0.2 in Aida and has same microcode ver as 0601 - 08001137h
> 
> I'm having much more problems with monitoring s/w, in particular HWInfo64. Values for fans keep getting stuck. This happens when running Aida64 or AISuite (didn't happen before) - in fact I left HWInfo running all night and woke up to find nothing was updating and Windows task manager said 'not responding'. In Aida 64 and AISuite i've seen phantom fans - labelled CPU Opt - but nothing is connected there, shows something like 6000rpm, then vanishes again. In AISuite I saw my CPU voltage go up to *9.x volts!* which I can only assume is a software problem - HWInfo was running, didn't capture it, but for all I know it was not updating anyway. After closing AISuite and HWInfo, I now find that neither program will load properly. HWInfo just says not responding in task manager, and you can see what happens on-screen below, AISuite shows as running, but its launcher is not there and neither is AISuite. I suspect they will load after a reboot. *Update:*, AISuite appeared after ten minutes, but unusable.
> 
> My Fans are still not calibrating correctly. My cpu fans share the same connector - when calibration happens, one of them does not spin down to 0 so it can't calibrate correctly. It rarely does this on the cpu fans, but all the time on the CH2 fans. Same in AISuite - only work-around is to stop the fans myself at the right time during calibration so bios gets a proper zero reading. Will try running them from different connectors, but would prefer all my cpu fans to be on the cpu fan header. If you keep trying you eventually get a good calibration, but that could take hours.
> 
> As for mem compatibility - I don't really know, but I'm still running at 3600CL14 so happy with that. I might be able to increase my CPU OC as offset voltages now working properly which has given me more headroom than I had without it.


Yea hwinfo for me on the c7 seems to be utter trash, my mins get stuck at 0, i get sensors that don't even exist for my Vega 64, have no idea what is going on with hwinfo lately.


----------



## crakej

VicsPC said:


> Yea hwinfo for me on the c7 seems to be utter trash, my mins get stuck at 0, i get sensors that don't even exist for my Vega 64, have no idea what is going on with hwinfo lately.


It has to be the update for monitoring s/w - it worked ok on bios 0601


----------



## VicsPC

crakej said:


> It has to be the update for monitoring s/w - it worked ok on bios 0601


I'm on 0601 lol. Works fine for everything but the gpu. I'm guessing it's not just hwinfo though cuz afterburner also gives me 0°C min for HBM and VRMs, maybe they're conflicting each other I'm not sure.


----------



## wisepds

What's the diferencie between P-states OC and Multiplier OC? What's is the best way? For example 100x41mhz Multiplier OC, or A4 on P-states menu (4100mhz)?


----------



## Onijin

wisepds said:


> What's the diferencie between P-states OC and Multiplier OC? What's is the best way? For example 100x41mhz Multiplier OC, or A4 on P-states menu (4100mhz)?


Multiplier OC is static, stays locked at the frequency you set it. A properly done P-state OC will only push to 4100mhz when the CPU is getting hammered and clock down when idling.


----------



## crakej

OC is only static if *not* using offset voltage, in which case it will down-clock/volt when windows is set to Ryzen Balanced (For 1xxx CPUs) or Balanced for 2xxx CPUs. Don't really need P-State if you've got offset voltage and static max OC.


----------



## wisepds

crakej said:


> OC is only static if *not* using offset voltage, in which case it will down-clock/volt when windows is set to Ryzen Balanced (For 1xxx CPUs) or Balanced for 2xxx CPUs. Don't really need P-State if you've got offset voltage and static max OC.


Ok, thanks...I was using P-states until now, but i think i'm going to try offset...


----------



## CJMitsuki

wisepds said:


> crakej said:
> 
> 
> 
> OC is only static if *not* using offset voltage, in which case it will down-clock/volt when windows is set to Ryzen Balanced (For 1xxx CPUs) or Balanced for 2xxx CPUs. Don't really need P-State if you've got offset voltage and static max OC.
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, thanks...I was using P-states until now, but i think i'm going to try offset...
Click to expand...

 I use PState with a + .2125 offset for my 4.3ghz profile and it will downclock to 700ghz at nearly no voltage. You just set PState0 to what you want your max clock to be and set your offset voltage to what you want it to be and then use high perf or ultimate perf power profile and set minimum processor to whatever you want. I use 50% when benching and processor drops to 2.1ghz at .07v and my temps go to 21c at idle unless I’m using my little modification to blow cold air into the rad then it drops to 12c. Lol


*EDIT: My quick mod is below...Just made an adapter for the front radiator and Ill pull the front grill off and the other end is attached to a vent on my cold A/C system for my home and one end has mesh and the other end has a HEPA filter so im not blowing dust into my PC, only cold air. Detaches in 5 sec then pop the front grill back on and just like normal again.*




Spoiler


----------



## mikochu

crakej said:


> It has to be the update for monitoring s/w - it worked ok on bios 0601


Are you guys using the latest beta (v5.85-3460)? "Fixed a possible collision with CPU-Z or CorsairLink on ASUS Ryzen systems." I've been using this version and haven't had any problems...


----------



## wisepds

Now, i'm using normal OC with offset, but my cpu goes from 4100 all cores, to 2100mhz on idle, but vcore is alwais at 1,295v..not downvolting to 0,8v as previous bios..why? Not in Pstates oc, neither on normal OC, but..if i use all in auto with PE, the cpu downvolting to 0,8v at 2000mhz on idle...why?


----------



## CJMitsuki

wisepds said:


> Now, i'm using normal OC with offset, but my cpu goes from 4100 all cores, to 2100mhz on idle, but vcore is alwais at 1,295v..not downvolting to 0,8v as previous bios..why? Not in Pstates oc, neither on normal OC, but..if i use all in auto with PE, the cpu downvolting to 0,8v at 2000mhz on idle...why?



Copy your bios settings to text file and post it in a spoiler on here. Voltage should be dropping on PState OC, youve changed something that is affecting it.


Note my voltages in HWiNFO and I am PState OC as well


Spoiler


----------



## wisepds

CJMitsuki said:


> Copy your bios settings to text file and post it in a spoiler on here. Voltage should be dropping on PState OC, youve changed something that is affecting it.
> 
> 
> Note my voltages in HWiNFO and I am PState OC as well
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 203944


Ok, i'll do it tomorrow..thanks!!


----------



## wisepds

wisepds said:


> Ok, i'll do it tomorrow..thanks!!


That are my values after 30 minutes of IBT... as you can see my cpu does underclocking, but not undervolting...








[/url]


----------



## CJMitsuki

lordzed83 said:


> Ye also noticed that :/ had to drop my 3533 to 3466 as I could not pass IBT x10 no matter what same settings. But scores about saome as old bios. So It is faster. Need more testing
> 
> @*1usmus* would you have time and look in to 0701 bioss for some unlocks Please



I seem to be more stable but I would like the ability to test those settings out and see what benefits, if any, they may have. I do seem to be more stable as far as the CPU and memory though as I can maintain 4.3ghz stable in IBT AVX now 




Spoiler


----------



## hahler2

Hey guys. I just pulled the trigger tonight on a 2700X and Crosshair Hero 7! Very excited and can't wait to receive my parts. I am upgrading from a 4790k on a Gigabyte Z97 board. I also bought 16 gigabyte of GSkill Trident Z ram. It's 3200 CL14. Made very sure that it's B-die RAM. Hoping I can just enable some of the stilts ram profiles and be good to go. I am obviously new to Ryzen and want to make sure I get things set up properly to maximize my gaming performance with my 1080ti. 

First question. I see in this thread that I should run in Windows Balanced power mode and not use Ryzen Balanced mode. I assume that I still need to install chipset drivers from AMD though right? Along those lines I also read that people have had issues with the AI Suite and Asus Grid. Should I not install those programs and just download and install all drivers manually from Asus website?

Second question. What's the best way to overclock the processor? I'm going to be running in a custom loop. My initial plan was to get the stilts ram timing running. Then enable performance enhancer. Is it worth it to mess with the base clock at all? Or should I just do a standard multiplier overclock? Also, will it be necessary to do a voltage offset or LLC when using performance enhancer?

Sorry if these are dumb questions. I'm pretty new to this! Thanks for any advice!


----------



## crakej

I'm testing latest HWInfo64 5.85.3460 (thanks for reminding us) to see what happens - I though it had already been fixed, hopefully this will do the job - I know it's updated pretty quickly when something changes. There's an update to AISuite too which i also installed. I hope I don't see 9v on my cpu again!

*Update:* Sadly, within a few minutes of loading AISuite, the fan readouts on HWInfo are stuck. AUSuite still working properly. Will try again without AISute. EEk! The whole ASUS EC section is stuck.


----------



## wisepds

CJMitsuki said:


> Copy your bios settings to text file and post it in a spoiler on here. Voltage should be dropping on PState OC, youve changed something that is affecting it.
> 
> 
> Note my voltages in HWiNFO and I am PState OC as well
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 203944


Here is my configuration (Attached file)

I hope you find the reason to not do downvolting!!


----------



## CJMitsuki

crakej said:


> I'm testing latest HWInfo64 5.85.3460 (thanks for reminding us) to see what happens - I though it had already been fixed, hopefully this will do the job - I know it's updated pretty quickly when something changes. There's an update to AISuite too which i also installed. I hope I don't see 9v on my cpu again!
> 
> *Update:* Sadly, within a few minutes of loading AISuite, the fan readouts on HWInfo are stuck. AUSuite still working properly. Will try again without AISute. EEk! The whole ASUS EC section is stuck.



AI SUITE has been nothing but a huge dung heap since it was implemented, it has caused me nothing but problems so I will never use it again. I dont think its good for a program to be able to reach into the Bios and adjust settings on the fly anyway just like Gigabytes dual bios software or pretty much any bios update software. Always good to change all of that stuff in the bios.




wisepds said:


> Here is my configuration (Attached file)
> 
> I hope you find the reason to not do downvolting!!


I found a couple settings that dont necessarily keep it from downvolting but I would change them. Core performance boost to Auto, CPU Core Ratio to AUTO, Performance Bias to CB 11.5 and go back to PStates and set PState0 to custom and only set the FID value for the cpu speed you want and then set your offset to what you want then post me those settings. Also what performance plan do you run in windows and what is the minimum processor state within the advanced settings for that power profile?


----------



## ClintLeo

CJMitsuki said:


> It’s short for Very Low Latency and Low Latency. He’s just referring to how tight he wants to get the timings.


Thanx,makes sense


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> I'm testing latest HWInfo64 5.85.3460 (thanks for reminding us) to see what happens - I though it had already been fixed, hopefully this will do the job - I know it's updated pretty quickly when something changes. There's an update to AISuite too which i also installed. I hope I don't see 9v on my cpu again!
> 
> *Update:* Sadly, within a few minutes of loading AISuite, the fan readouts on HWInfo are stuck. AUSuite still working properly. Will try again without AISute. EEk! The whole ASUS EC section is stuck.


Question is why are You installing Virus called AISuite lol


----------



## crakej

CJMitsuki said:


> AI SUITE has been nothing but a huge dung heap since it was implemented, it has caused me nothing but problems so I will never use it again. I dont think its good for a program to be able to reach into the Bios and adjust settings on the fly anyway just like Gigabytes dual bios software or pretty much any bios update software. Always good to change all of that stuff in the bios.


Ah yes, the dreaded AISuite - never really been a problem for me, it's _almost_ really useful as well. 

While I can set things in the bios, I find it much easier to get fans running exactly as I want them without rebooting - I do enough of that  I rarely leave it running once i'm tuned, but the fan service continues running, usually reliably. I've only really had problems when i've had it running with any other similar s/w - OCCT, Aida, HWInfo etc etc. The real problem we've had is how programs access the necessary hardware concurrently, which has affected each program differently. Hopefully when this fix is ....well, fixed - this problem will behind us all and we'll be able to run whatever we want whenever we want.

Another thing I really like about AISuite is that ability to tune some bios stuff like you mention - I don't use it often, but at the moment it gives me the settings I actually put in the bios, so I know exactly what I am changing as bios does not give me right readouts for voltages. There is some useful stuff there, just wish they'd fix this problem once and for`all!

We're meant to be able to be able to run these software programs together, and I'd like that, as I do find AISuite useful. Run alone, I get no crashes, everything is reported properly. As for my fan problem, I don't think it's caused by AISuite or any other s/w - I think it's bios problem still. Unreliable calibration and my fans still jump around where they really shouldn't be.

Tempted to try putting the 2 CPU fans on different headers so they calibrate separately.... CPU and CPU Opt...

Edit: I should say I have exactly same problems if I run HWInfo and Aida....


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> I seem to be more stable but I would like the ability to test those settings out and see what benefits, if any, they may have. I do seem to be more stable as far as the CPU and memory though as I can maintain 4.3ghz stable in IBT AVX now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 203952


I need to have VERY HIGH stable or rendering will crash few hours in so thats not Stable enough for me. As long as its stable enough for You.
coppied all settings an played around cant pass Very high at 3533. Flashed back 0602 loaded profile Passes and in general its quicker cause its 3533 not 3466.

How many instances of Very High can You pass ?? I crash around 3rd.

Noticed You are using SoC 1.115 and You dropped PLL to 1.8 I'm right ??
On previous bios i was using 2v on this noticed upping it makes system crash. Hmm

Still waiting for test file to ahve a look what Ya been up 2 in bios ill upload mine later. 
Mixed feeling about this update so far tbh. Maybe Ill try upping soc and dropping PLL like You got Still need to mess around Especially in power section settings I'm interested what You got set there.


----------



## CJMitsuki

lordzed83 said:


> I need to have VERY HIGH stable or rendering will crash few hours in so thats not Stable enough for me. As long as its stable enough for You.
> coppied all settings an played around cant pass Very high at 3533. Flashed back 0602 loaded profile Passes and in general its quicker cause its 3533 not 3466.
> 
> How many instances of Very High can You pass ?? I crash around 3rd.
> 
> Noticed You are using SoC 1.115 and You dropped PLL to 1.8 I'm right ??
> On previous bios i was using 2v on this noticed upping it makes system crash. Hmm
> 
> Still waiting for test file to ahve a look what Ya been up 2 in bios ill upload mine later.
> Mixed feeling about this update so far tbh. Maybe Ill try upping soc and dropping PLL like You got Still need to mess around Especially in power section settings I'm interested what You got set there.



Heres my settings...Ill run very high and see what i get...I may have enough time before i have to leave for work
View attachment 123_setting.txt



EDIT: I only was able to get 5 passes at very high with 4.3ghz so ill need to evaluate my memory more thoroughly and see if it was a problem bc i was only at 70c max


----------



## ClintLeo

Hi

I'm hoping someone can help me.
I have a 2700x with the C7H and my ram is running at 3400 c15,I used's The Stilts fast 3333 settings but had to increase to 15-14-14.

What I would like to know is,is there a way for the cpu to downclock more? it drops to 2,2Ghz but would like it to drop to 700\800Mhz like my old 7700k would.
I would also like to keep the boost speeds,While gaming I've seen some cores boost to 4,5 Ghz,although I'm sure only for a split second,most times it's 4,35Ghz.


----------



## CJMitsuki

ClintLeo said:


> Hi
> 
> I'm hoping someone can help me.
> I have a 2700x with the C7H and my ram is running at 3400 c15,I used's The Stilts fast 3333 settings but had to increase to 15-14-14.
> 
> What I would like to know is,is there a way for the cpu to downclock more? it drops to 2,2Ghz but would like it to drop to 700\800Mhz like my old 7700k would.
> I would also like to keep the boost speeds,While gaming I've seen some cores boost to 4,5 Ghz,although I'm sure only for a split second,most times it's 4,35Ghz.



I would have to know what kind of power profile you are using and what the minimum processor state is set to in that power profile and also look at your settings for PState1 and PState2 you can probably configure Pstate 1 to drop to something lower bc its probably the state that is running at 2.2 if your power profile isnt the one keeping it from going lower. If you minimum processor state is at 50% then drop it lower in the power profile and see what that does.


----------



## ClintLeo

Hi

Where would I configure the PState?
I.m using the balanced power profile with the cpu % of 5 min and 100 max.


----------



## spyshagg

This board has serious issues with windows BITLOCKER. 

windows can either recognize the key @ first boot or it can take 10+ resets in order to detect it.


----------



## CJMitsuki

ClintLeo said:


> Hi
> 
> Where would I configure the PState?
> I.m using the balanced power profile with the cpu % of 5 min and 100 max.


Advanced>AMD CBS>Zen>PState


----------



## mikochu

crakej said:


> I'm testing latest HWInfo64 5.85.3460 (thanks for reminding us) to see what happens - I though it had already been fixed, hopefully this will do the job - I know it's updated pretty quickly when something changes. There's an update to AISuite too which i also installed. I hope I don't see 9v on my cpu again!
> 
> *Update:* Sadly, within a few minutes of loading AISuite, the fan readouts on HWInfo are stuck. AUSuite still working properly. Will try again without AISute. EEk! The whole ASUS EC section is stuck.


Just a heads-up, I'm regression testing my memory settings using RAMTest and it seems like HWInfo 5.85-3460 + Corsair Utility Engine (iCUE) + 7020 BIOS is causing a hard shutdown. I shutdown HWInfo and my last test ran to 7000% without issue.


----------



## wisepds

CJMitsuki said:


> AI SUITE has been nothing but a huge dung heap since it was implemented, it has caused me nothing but problems so I will never use it again. I dont think its good for a program to be able to reach into the Bios and adjust settings on the fly anyway just like Gigabytes dual bios software or pretty much any bios update software. Always good to change all of that stuff in the bios.
> 
> 
> 
> I found a couple settings that dont necessarily keep it from downvolting but I would change them. Core performance boost to Auto, CPU Core Ratio to AUTO, Performance Bias to CB 11.5 and go back to PStates and set PState0 to custom and only set the FID value for the cpu speed you want and then set your offset to what you want then post me those settings. Also what performance plan do you run in windows and what is the minimum processor state within the advanced settings for that power profile?


I'll try..thanks..


----------



## ClintLeo

I went in and found 8 PStates,when i went into Pstate 1 and 2 of the boxes are greyed out.
It does say that PcdOcDisable=False,I can't find it.


----------



## CJMitsuki

ClintLeo said:


> I went in and found 8 PStates,when i went into Pstate 1 and 2 of the boxes are greyed out.
> It does say that PcdOcDisable=False,I can't find it.


The top one will be grayed out. It only shows you the clock of the processor in that state in MHz. If you ever use PState oc you only ever want to change FID as that relates to the clock speed. It used hex values. What does the grayed out box say on PState 1?


----------



## ClintLeo

I took a Pic,
1st box 2250
2nd Vol 993750
87
C
59


----------



## CJMitsuki

ClintLeo said:


> I took a Pic,
> 1st box 2250
> 2nd Vol 993750
> 87
> C
> 59


So you should be downclocking to 2250mhz at .993v is that about right? Well, your offset affects this as well. If your cpu is set to just auto then you would downvolt to .993v.


----------



## CJMitsuki

wisepds said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> AI SUITE has been nothing but a huge dung heap since it was implemented, it has caused me nothing but problems so I will never use it again. I dont think its good for a program to be able to reach into the Bios and adjust settings on the fly anyway just like Gigabytes dual bios software or pretty much any bios update software. Always good to change all of that stuff in the bios.
> 
> 
> 
> I found a couple settings that dont necessarily keep it from downvolting but I would change them. Core performance boost to Auto, CPU Core Ratio to AUTO, Performance Bias to CB 11.5 and go back to PStates and set PState0 to custom and only set the FID value for the cpu speed you want and then set your offset to what you want then post me those settings. Also what performance plan do you run in windows and what is the minimum processor state within the advanced settings for that power profile?
> 
> 
> 
> I'll try..thanks..
Click to expand...

Wise, don’t touch it. Just tell me what speed you want the processor to run at. Is it the 4.1ghz you had on the cpu ratio?


----------



## ClintLeo

Looking at HWinfo, it drops between 2139 and 2199 and voltage to 0.750


----------



## crakej

I have had a couple of bluescreens - was not running anything when one of them happened so guessing my OC is not stable with 0702. I wish they had put this out as a beta when they built it in May (nearly a month ago) - we could have had a head-start on testing it... going to try going back to 3533 and/or lowering CPU. Will also test CPU OC with offset on it's own as it's first time it's worked for me on 0702

When offset wasn't working for me, if I set 1.4v for CPU then VID would be 1.4v max, though that would down-volt. now with offset, VID is 1.344v max - does that mean I can push voltage further? ...even beyond 1.425v on CPU Core? SVI2 TFN shows as 1.406v while CPU Core voltage is at 1.4v

Edit: Also still not working is my wireless mouse which was working fine on last board.


----------



## wisepds

CJMitsuki said:


> Wise, don’t touch it. Just tell me what speed you want the processor to run at. Is it the 4.1ghz you had on the cpu ratio?


Yes, now it's a 4.1 ghz...i only want downvolting... Max tem with ibt 66°C... For now all run fine...but not perfect because my vcore is alwais the same...


----------



## wisepds

CJMitsuki said:


> Wise, don’t touch it. Just tell me what speed you want the processor to run at. Is it the 4.1ghz you had on the cpu ratio?


What vcore (offset) and llc have you for 4.3ghz and max temp with IBT (And ambient temp)?


----------



## crakej

Aida and the new HWInfo now seem to be playing nicely together - not seen any problems I was seeing before I updated. Checking OCCT next...


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> Heres my settings...Ill run very high and see what i get...I may have enough time before i have to leave for work
> View attachment 204008
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: I only was able to get 5 passes at very high with 4.3ghz so ill need to evaluate my memory more thoroughly and see if it was a problem bc i was only at 70c max


LLC5 damnnn lol not went over 4


----------



## ClintLeo

CJMitsuki said:


> So you should be downclocking to 2250mhz at .993v is that about right? Well, your offset affects this as well. If your cpu is set to just auto then you would downvolt to .993v.


This is the pic I took.

https://ibb.co/k5zWqT


----------



## wisepds

CJMitsuki said:


> AI SUITE has been nothing but a huge dung heap since it was implemented, it has caused me nothing but problems so I will never use it again. I dont think its good for a program to be able to reach into the Bios and adjust settings on the fly anyway just like Gigabytes dual bios software or pretty much any bios update software. Always good to change all of that stuff in the bios.
> 
> 
> 
> I found a couple settings that dont necessarily keep it from downvolting but I would change them. Core performance boost to Auto, CPU Core Ratio to AUTO, Performance Bias to CB 11.5 and go back to PStates and set PState0 to custom and only set the FID value for the cpu speed you want and then set your offset to what you want then post me those settings. Also what performance plan do you run in windows and what is the minimum processor state within the advanced settings for that power profile?


Doing what you say, no undervolting and no downclocking... Nope, that's not a valid configuration for my PC...sorry...
Thanks..


----------



## CJMitsuki

ClintLeo said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you should be downclocking to 2250mhz at .993v is that about right? Well, your offset affects this as well. If your cpu is set to just auto then you would downvolt to .993v.
> 
> 
> 
> This is the pic I took.
> 
> https://ibb.co/k5zWqT
Click to expand...

ok Wise heres what I can do, you tell me what you want your cpu clock to be. I’m assuming 4.1 maximum, then let me know what you want that voltage to be for 4.1ghz or whatever you want for max clock. Then I want you to open PState0 and take me a pic of it then let me have all of that information and when I get home ai will write out the settings you need to input and the offset you’ll need to apply and you’ll be setting everything back to default before you do thesis as well so we can get the bios back to basic config. Once we have you downclocking then you can set everything else up as you wish and you’ll be set. I will look over your settings too once more and see if anything there I missed. I will be home in roughly 4 hours from now as I am at work. Which will be 5pm my time. If you get me all that info I will get your bios set for downvolting. If it doesn’t downvolt after that then it is in your OS but I would imagine it will downclocking and down bolt as mine does once we get it right. Just get me that picture and the rest of the information and I will do what I can.


----------



## crakej

Running OCCT while HWInfo is open results in the below - I don't have a CPU Opt fan connected, yet as soon as OCCT runs, it appears in HWInfo, sometimes doing 55,000 odd rpm!

If you then exit OCCT, HWInfo stays the same - you have to restart the program to get rid of the phantom fan. For now I will just try disabling all fans that are not connected. I think it's safe to assume that not all monitoring software will work together - still.


----------



## wisepds

CJMitsuki said:


> ok Wise heres what I can do, you tell me what you want your cpu clock to be. I’m assuming 4.1 maximum, then let me know what you want that voltage to be for 4.1ghz or whatever you want for max clock. Then I want you to open PState0 and take me a pic of it then let me have all of that information and when I get home ai will write out the settings you need to input and the offset you’ll need to apply and you’ll be setting everything back to default before you do thesis as well so we can get the bios back to basic config. Once we have you downclocking then you can set everything else up as you wish and you’ll be set. I will look over your settings too once more and see if anything there I missed. I will be home in roughly 4 hours from now as I am at work. Which will be 5pm my time. If you get me all that info I will get your bios set for downvolting. If it doesn’t downvolt after that then it is in your OS but I would imagine it will downclocking and down bolt as mine does once we get it right. Just get me that picture and the rest of the information and I will do what I can.


Ok, im going to do that.. and yes..4.1 ghz is my target but when all is auto with PE 1,2 OC(3 or4) system downvolting well...
Thank you very much!


----------



## lordzed83

@CJMitsuki extra JUICE sorted 3533 thing ;P


----------



## wisepds

@CJMitsuki Here is my actual stable profile at 4.1ghz (offset)


----------



## minal

@wisepds Btw, F12 takes screenshots in BIOS/UEFI.


----------



## wisepds

minal said:


> @wisepds Btw, F12 takes screenshots in BIOS/UEFI.


I know..but right now i'm ill...no time to f12, sorry.


----------



## lordzed83

wisepds said:


> @CJMitsuki Here is my actual stable profile at 4.1ghz (offset)


is that downclocking ?? 
for Pstate oc 4100 should be hmmm A0 is 4000 so i assume A4 to be the number.


----------



## wisepds

Yes, is dowclocking well, but not downvolting... I have 2 ways to get 4100 mhz...1) multipier x41 and offset for vcore... 
2) P-states A4 (4,1Ghz) and set vcore on p-states menu..


----------



## CJMitsuki

wisepds said:


> @CJMitsuki Here is my actual stable profile at 4.1ghz (offset)





wisepds said:


> Yes, is dowclocking well, but not downvolting... I have 2 ways to get 4100 mhz...1) multipier x41 and offset for vcore...
> 2) P-states A4 (4,1Ghz) and set vcore on p-states menu..


No, you don’t set the vCore in the PStates menu. You only input a4 then you do the offset in the main screen as you have it. You ONLY set the FID value to A4 for 4.1ghz. If you change anything else it ruins it. Leave the other PStates on auto. I did that my first time and I had to reset to default values, save, re enter bios and then do it correctly. That’s why I need a screen shot of the default values of PState0 so I can make sure your offset matches your current stable one.


----------



## majestynl

wisepds said:


> @CJMitsuki Here is my actual stable profile at 4.1ghz (offset)
> 
> 
> Spoiler


You have not enabled Pstates! You need to enter the right values on Pstate0!

*1)*At the Ai overclocker tab/page set your CPU voltage core to "Auto" and not 41!
*2)*Enable Custom Pstates0! 
Pstate0 FID = A4 (4100mhz)
Pstate0 DID = 8
Pstate0 VID = Base voltage in HEX (see attachment for a help table i included under Voltage calculation / bios value!)

*3)*You can play with offset voltages on top of your VID value (entered in Pstates) where needed for your (on the Ai overclocker tab/page!)
*4)*Dont forget to set your Windows Power plan on balanced if you want downclocking+downvolting!
_*If you boot into windows you CPU usage will be high so you will see 4100mhz! Wait for a while and you will notice the downclocking!_


----------



## CJMitsuki

majestynl said:


> wisepds said:
> 
> 
> 
> @CJMitsuki Here is my actual stable profile at 4.1ghz (offset)
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have not enabled Pstates! You need to enter the right values on Pstate!
> 
> 1) At the Ai overclocker tab/page set your CPU voltage core to "Auto" and not 41!
> 2)Enable Custom Pstates0!
> Pstate0 FID = A4 (4100mhz)
> Pstate0 DID = 8
> Pstate0 VID = Your desired base voltage (see attachment for a help table i included under Voltage calculation / bios value!)
> 
> 3)You can play with offset voltages on top of your VID value (entered in Pstates) where needed for your (on the Ai overclocker tab/page!)
> 4)Dont forget to set your Windows Power plan on balanced if you want downclocking+downvolting!
Click to expand...

Majesty is correct but when I change the VID it breaks PStates for me and it turns into a manual all core OC. Also you don’t have to set you plan to balanced, you can use any plan you want as long as the minimum processor state is set to desired drop. I use Ultimate Performance plan and only Change minimum processor state to 50% and I drop to 2150mhz at idle but my vCore drops to like .6v


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> No, you don’t set the vCore in the PStates menu. You only input a4 then you do the offset in the main screen as you have it. You ONLY set the FID value to A4 for 4.1ghz. If you change anything else it ruins it. Leave the other PStates on auto. I did that my first time and I had to reset to default values, save, re enter bios and then do it correctly. That’s why I need a screen shot of the default values of PState0 so I can make sure your offset matches your current stable one.


actually volts work in my case i got 18 thats 1.4 and just adding offset of 250mw 

but on 1700x i had issue that changing volts on P0 would end up with bootloop on both C6H and C7H so i think its up to cpu.


----------



## CJMitsuki

lordzed83 said:


> actually volts work in my case i got 18 thats 1.4 and just adding offset of 250mw



Hmm, I havent tested since 0601 was early released so maybe the microcode update for the official 0601 release fixed it? Ill test it again soon but I just got home and I cant be bothered with it. Im used to my offset anyways.


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> Hmm, I havent tested since 0601 was early released so maybe the microcode update for the official 0601 release fixed it? Ill test it again soon but I just got home and I cant be bothered with it. Im used to my offset anyways.


was plug and play day 1 for me. Have a look whats the deal


----------



## Keith Myers

*The Stilts 3466 B-die single-sided settings work out of the box*



hahler2 said:


> Hey guys. I just pulled the trigger tonight on a 2700X and Crosshair Hero 7! Very excited and can't wait to receive my parts. I am upgrading from a 4790k on a Gigabyte Z97 board. I also bought 16 gigabyte of GSkill Trident Z ram. It's 3200 CL14. Made very sure that it's B-die RAM. Hoping I can just enable some of the stilts ram profiles and be good to go. I am obviously new to Ryzen and want to make sure I get things set up properly to maximize my gaming performance with my 1080ti.
> 
> First question. I see in this thread that I should run in Windows Balanced power mode and not use Ryzen Balanced mode. I assume that I still need to install chipset drivers from AMD though right? Along those lines I also read that people have had issues with the AI Suite and Asus Grid. Should I not install those programs and just download and install all drivers manually from Asus website?
> 
> Second question. What's the best way to overclock the processor? I'm going to be running in a custom loop. My initial plan was to get the stilts ram timing running. Then enable performance enhancer. Is it worth it to mess with the base clock at all? Or should I just do a standard multiplier overclock? Also, will it be necessary to do a voltage offset or LLC when using performance enhancer?
> 
> Sorry if these are dumb questions. I'm pretty new to this! Thanks for any advice!


I've done three C7H/2700X upgrades so far. Painless, right out of the box. Set 40 multiplier and The Stilts' 3466 B-die 1.4V Single-sided preset and was done with it. Using nothing but G. Skill TridentZ of minimum 3200CL14 and one 3600CL16 kit. You should have an easy upgrade.


----------



## Keith Myers

*The Stilts 3466 B-die single-sided settings work out of the box*



hahler2 said:


> Hey guys. I just pulled the trigger tonight on a 2700X and Crosshair Hero 7! Very excited and can't wait to receive my parts. I am upgrading from a 4790k on a Gigabyte Z97 board. I also bought 16 gigabyte of GSkill Trident Z ram. It's 3200 CL14. Made very sure that it's B-die RAM. Hoping I can just enable some of the stilts ram profiles and be good to go. I am obviously new to Ryzen and want to make sure I get things set up properly to maximize my gaming performance with my 1080ti.
> 
> First question. I see in this thread that I should run in Windows Balanced power mode and not use Ryzen Balanced mode. I assume that I still need to install chipset drivers from AMD though right? Along those lines I also read that people have had issues with the AI Suite and Asus Grid. Should I not install those programs and just download and install all drivers manually from Asus website?
> 
> Second question. What's the best way to overclock the processor? I'm going to be running in a custom loop. My initial plan was to get the stilts ram timing running. Then enable performance enhancer. Is it worth it to mess with the base clock at all? Or should I just do a standard multiplier overclock? Also, will it be necessary to do a voltage offset or LLC when using performance enhancer?
> 
> Sorry if these are dumb questions. I'm pretty new to this! Thanks for any advice!


I've done three C7H/2700X upgrades so far. Painless, right out of the box. Set 40 multiplier and The Stilts' 3466 B-die 1.4V Single-sided preset and was done with it. Using nothing but G. Skill TridentZ of minimum 3200CL14 and one 3600CL16 kit. I run all cores flat out all the time running BOINC and don't bother with any PE or voltages. Just Auto for everything other than the memory preset and fixed multiplier. You should have an easy upgrade.


----------



## minal

Keith Myers said:


> I've done three C7H/2700X upgrades so far. Painless, right out of the box. Set 40 multiplier and The Stilts' 3466 B-die 1.4V Single-sided preset and was done with it. Using nothing but G. Skill TridentZ of minimum 3200CL14 and one 3600CL16 kit. I run all cores flat out all the time running BOINC and don't bother with any PE or voltages. Just Auto for everything other than the memory preset and fixed multiplier. You should have an easy upgrade.



I'm guessing you have 8GB modules? I hope The Stilt comes out with presets for 16GB modules.


Before setting 40 multiplier, did you see how fast all cores ran under load at default Auto settings?


----------



## Keith Myers

*F4-3200DCL14-8GTZ modules and F4-3600DCL16-8GTZ modules*



minal said:


> I'm guessing you have 8GB modules? I hope The Stilt comes out with presets for 16GB modules.
> 
> 
> Before setting 40 multiplier, did you see how fast all cores ran under load at default Auto settings?


Yes I tried Auto at first since I had been reading about all you folk getting 4.1-4.3 out of the cores. Unfortunately, all I got was stock 3700Mhz out of all cores. I tried messing around with PE and all the other things that was supposed to work in Gen. 2 Probably works for anyone that just wants one or two cores to overclock. I need all cores at full overclock all the time. So Auto it is with Performance Boost on Auto and 40 multiplier. All of the systems end up at around 1.29V for Vcore. When I tried 4.1Ghz, I got 1.35V Vcore but that was too much temp on the H105 AIO and I didn't feel comfortable with it running right up to thermal max, so I backed it down. I have two 2700X systems on AIO's but the latest conversion is on a new custom loop with dual 360mm rads. I have it running at 4Ghz too since I put the upgrade together. But I have lots of temp headroom now so I am pretty sure it will go to at least 4.1 all core and still have really decent temps. If the GTX 1080Ti wasn't in the loop, it probably would go higher still. The 1080Ti was the reason to add the second radiator.


----------



## F3r0x

Does anyone know if Ram timings from The Stilt work for Samsung b die 16gb modules? Im putting together a rig for a friend with a 2700x and he insisted on having 32gb of ram.


----------



## minal

Keith Myers said:


> Yes I tried Auto at first since I had been reading about all you folk getting 4.1-4.3 out of the cores. Unfortunately, all I got was stock 3700Mhz out of all cores. I tried messing around with PE and all the other things that was supposed to work in Gen. 2 Probably works for anyone that just wants one or two cores to overclock. I need all cores at full overclock all the time. So Auto it is with Performance Boost on Auto and 40 multiplier. All of the systems end up at around 1.29V for Vcore. When I tried 4.1Ghz, I got 1.35V Vcore but that was too much temp on the H105 AIO and I didn't feel comfortable with it running right up to thermal max, so I backed it down. I have two 2700X systems on AIO's but the latest conversion is on a new custom loop with dual 360mm rads. I have it running at 4Ghz too since I put the upgrade together. But I have lots of temp headroom now so I am pretty sure it will go to at least 4.1 all core and still have really decent temps. If the GTX 1080Ti wasn't in the loop, it probably would go higher still. The 1080Ti was the reason to add the second radiator.


That's odd, I have *never* seen 3.7GHz. I'm using all Auto now for CPU/PE/PBO/CPB/etc in favor of lower temps and silence. For all cores, stressapptest shows ~3.94GHz and 1.29V Vcore, mprime blend shows ~3.9GHz at 1.25V, mprime small FFT shows ~3.85GHz at 1.18V. 

Also with Auto, the cores are not all at the same frequency. With PE they are forced which means the weaker cores will require more voltage and thus generate more heat.

In single/few core(s) I still see 4.3GHz on lighter loads or 4.2GHz sustained heavier loads.

What I've learned is that the various enhancement options just allow mostly the same frequencies but for higher loads, voltages, and temperatures. This is exactly the description for things like PE/PBO. 

In the end, since I really value silence and stability and I'm happy with the performance, I decided to endure the mental "pain" of <4.3/4.0GHz on single/all cores and stick with Auto for now. I'm really loving the silence at idle, light load, and even some full loads (eg stressapptest). Even with most all core loads, my system makes only about as much noise as my previous laptop did at idle or light loads.

For your use case, a manual all core overclock might make sense though.



F3r0x said:


> Does anyone know if Ram timings from The Stilt work for Samsung b die 16gb modules? Im putting together a rig for a friend with a 2700x and he insisted on having 32gb of ram.


I haven't tried, but I don't think so. They all mention single rank IIRC. But I do hope dual rank presets will show up eventually.


----------



## Keith Myers

minal said:


> That's odd, I have *never* seen 3.7GHz. I'm using all Auto now for CPU/PE/PBO/CPB/etc in favor of lower temps and silence. For all cores, stressapptest shows ~3.94GHz and 1.29V Vcore, mprime blend shows ~3.9GHz at 1.25V, mprime small FFT shows ~3.85GHz at 1.18V.
> 
> Also with Auto, the cores are not all at the same frequency. With PE they are forced which means the weaker cores will require more voltage and thus generate more heat.
> 
> In single/few core(s) I still see 4.3GHz on lighter loads or 4.2GHz sustained heavier loads.
> 
> What I've learned is that the various enhancement options just allow mostly the same frequencies but for higher loads, voltages, and temperatures. This is exactly the description for things like PE/PBO.
> 
> In the end, since I really value silence and stability and I'm happy with the performance, I decided to endure the mental "pain" of <4.3/4.0GHz on single/all cores and stick with Auto for now. I'm really loving the silence at idle, light load, and even some full loads (eg stressapptest). Even with most all core loads, my system makes only about as much noise as my previous laptop did at idle or light loads.
> 
> For your use case, a manual all core overclock might make sense though.
> 
> 
> I haven't tried, but I don't think so. They all mention single rank IIRC. But I do hope dual rank presets will show up eventually.


Yes, all the "normal" stress tests run all the cores with the same clock speed. But BOINC is a whole different animal and is always my penultimate stress test. When I run BOINC all cores, I drop down to 3.7Ghz. I do see a very different clock speed behavior on the same clock speed governor when comparing the i7-6850K and either the 1800X or 2700X. The 6850K is locked down and I mean solidly locked down to 4250Mhz and only varies a few khz between all cores at full 100% utilization. The Ryzens on the other hand wander quite a bit around the 4000Mhz set clock speed. I can see some cores boost up to 4005 or 4008 some times and others float around 3991-3999 at times, and other cores, particularly when they transition from full load on completion of a task and picking up the next task, can drop their clock speed down to the 3400-3600 Mhz range briefly. I assume that is just the Performance Boost/XFR2 thing doing its hardwired function on board the chip and ignoring anything the OS tells it to do with the Performance governor.

I can also see a very different loading on the Linux systems which run a SSE41 app and the Windows 10 system which only has a AVX app available for it. The SSE41 app destroys the AVX app in completion times. Wish I could figure out how to compile a SSE41 app for Windows64, The Ryzens also kick the 6850K's butt even though it has a 250Mhz advantage. The math capabilities of the Ryzens are a couple generations ahead of Broadwell-E.


----------



## Keith Myers

*Idle, what's idle*



> In the end, since I really value silence and stability and I'm happy with the performance, I decided to endure the mental "pain" of <4.3/4.0GHz on single/all cores and stick with Auto for now. I'm really loving the silence at idle, light load, and even some full loads (eg stressapptest). Even with most all core loads, my system makes only about as much noise as my previous laptop did at idle or light loads.


What's this IDLE thing you speak of . . .LOL. You have to raise your voice to be heard when you walk into the bedroom with the 3 crunchers running to be heard over the fan noise.


----------



## minal

Keith Myers said:


> Yes, all the "normal" stress tests run all the cores with the same clock speed. But BOINC is a whole different animal and is always my penultimate stress test. When I run BOINC all cores, I drop down to 3.7Ghz. I do see a very different clock speed behavior on the same clock speed governor when comparing the i7-6850K and either the 1800X or 2700X. The 6850K is locked down and I mean solidly locked down to 4250Mhz and only varies a few khz between all cores at full 100% utilization. The Ryzens on the other hand wander quite a bit around the 4000Mhz set clock speed. I can see some cores boost up to 4005 or 4008 some times and others float around 3991-3999 at times, and other cores, particularly when they transition from full load on completion of a task and picking up the next task, can drop their clock speed down to the 3400-3600 Mhz range briefly. I assume that is just the Performance Boost/XFR2 thing doing its hardwired function on board the chip and ignoring anything the OS tells it to do with the Performance governor.
> 
> I can also see a very different loading on the Linux systems which run a SSE41 app and the Windows 10 system which only has a AVX app available for it. The SSE41 app destroys the AVX app in completion times. Wish I could figure out how to compile a SSE41 app for Windows64, The Ryzens also kick the 6850K's butt even though it has a 250Mhz advantage. The math capabilities of the Ryzens are a couple generations ahead of Broadwell-E.


Interesting that there are heavier workloads that will bring it down to 3.7GHz. Did you test the frequencies with other stress tests (mprime, y-cruncher, etc) with Auto CPU settings? 



 (sorry couldn't help it )


Keith Myers said:


> What's this IDLE thing you speak of . . .LOL. You have to raise your voice to be heard when you walk into the bedroom with the 3 crunchers running to be heard over the fan noise.


My sympathies for the level of sleep quality. Silence was a priority for my build which is also in the bedroom. Now with the success... I get increased awareness of outside noise pollution.


----------



## wisepds

CJMitsuki said:


> No, you don’t set the vCore in the PStates menu. You only input a4 then you do the offset in the main screen as you have it. You ONLY set the FID value to A4 for 4.1ghz. If you change anything else it ruins it. Leave the other PStates on auto. I did that my first time and I had to reset to default values, save, re enter bios and then do it correctly. That’s why I need a screen shot of the default values of PState0 so I can make sure your offset matches your current stable one.


I know!!! But in p-states i don't have "Auto" i vcore value...i have 36 default... I'm going to do a default reset bios and start again..


----------



## Keith Myers

minal said:


> Interesting that there are heavier workloads that will bring it down to 3.7GHz. Did you test the frequencies with other stress tests (mprime, y-cruncher, etc) with Auto CPU settings? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBLpdEFwqvo (sorry couldn't help it )
> 
> My sympathies for the level of sleep quality. Silence was a priority for my build which is also in the bedroom. Now with the success... I get increased awareness of outside noise pollution.


LOL, got a kick out that clip. Yes, I always hit a new cpu and installation with mprime blend 14GB to mimic BOINC. Then mprime small FFT to see where the thermal max for the system is. Also give the memory a good workout with stressappest and finally when I am convinced it will be stable on BOINC at my set clocks, I run it through geekbench4 and post the results to my account for future reference and a log of what those clocks benchmark. That way I can see whether a push in clocks actually does anything other than raise temps.

I only have two systems in my sleeping bedroom. But I have worn ear plugs for sleep for the last 30 years, ever since the Navy when my bunk was on the other side of the wall for the #2 Fireroom Induction chute. That and the 5"-54 gun outside the berthing space. I need quiet and dark for any decent chance of sound sleep.


----------



## Keith Myers

*Ear plugs are mandatory*



minal said:


> Interesting that there are heavier workloads that will bring it down to 3.7GHz. Did you test the frequencies with other stress tests (mprime, y-cruncher, etc) with Auto CPU settings? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBLpdEFwqvo (sorry couldn't help it )
> 
> My sympathies for the level of sleep quality. Silence was a priority for my build which is also in the bedroom. Now with the success... I get increased awareness of outside noise pollution.


LOL, got a kick out that clip. Yes, I always hit a new cpu and installation with mprime blend 14GB to mimic BOINC. Then mprime small FFT to see where the thermal max for the system is. Also give the memory a good workout with stressappest and finally when I am convinced it will be stable on BOINC at my set clocks, I run it through geekbench4 and post the results to my account for future reference and a log of what those clocks benchmark. That way I can see whether a push in clocks actually does anything other than raise temps.

I only have two systems in my sleeping bedroom. But I have worn ear plugs for sleep for the last 30 years, ever since the Navy when my bunk was on the other side of the wall for the #2 Fireroom Induction chute. That and the 5"-54 gun outside the berthing space. I need quiet and dark for any decent chance of sound sleep.


----------



## Syldon

wisepds said:


> Here is my configuration (Attached file)
> 
> I hope you find the reason to not do downvolting!!


1.05V SB Voltage [1.05000] is wrong mate. Elmor told everyone that it is bugged atm and needs to be set so that it reads 0.05v higher. If you leave it on auto, it will adjust to 1.1v. Elmor said this is normal.


----------



## wisepds

Syldon said:


> 1.05V SB Voltage [1.05000] is wrong mate. Elmor told everyone that it is bugged atm and needs to be set so that it reads 0.05v higher. If you leave it on auto, it will adjust to 1.1v. Elmor said this is normal.


That 1.05v is from Ryzen dram calculator!!! Ok, roger that!
@CJMitsuki I have reset bios and configure from 0. This is my actual configuration. All auto, except Ram timmings, and offset, P-states default except A4 for 4.1 ghz as you say me. But nothing...downcloking yes...downvolting...nope!


----------



## JayC72

So, what's the verdict with the new 0702 uefi and getting better memory overclocks?

:specool: or :thumbsdow or


----------



## CJMitsuki

wisepds said:


> Syldon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 1.05V SB Voltage [1.05000] is wrong mate. Elmor told everyone that it is bugged atm and needs to be set so that it reads 0.05v higher. If you leave it on auto, it will adjust to 1.1v. Elmor said this is normal.
> 
> 
> 
> That 1.05v is from Ryzen dram calculator!!! Ok, roger that!
> 
> @CJMitsuki I have reset bios and configure from 0. This is my actual configuration. All auto, except Ram timmings, and offset, P-states default except A4 for 4.1 ghz as you say me. But nothing...downcloking yes...downvolting...nope!
Click to expand...

Then I would say it is inside your OS the problem lies. There is something keeping it from enabling downvolting and it can only be Bios or OS. A program maybe or possibly a setting. If it were me I would back up important stuff and do a fresh install and keep no programs, just important documents etc


----------



## mikochu

F3r0x said:


> Does anyone know if Ram timings from The Stilt work for Samsung b die 16gb modules? Im putting together a rig for a friend with a 2700x and he insisted on having 32gb of ram.


I had some success using The Stilt's presets on my dual rank b die 16GB modules, but I had to step down the clock speed. So, for the 3333mhz fast preset, I used 3200mhz.

Ultimately, I stuck with tweaking the Ryzen DRAM Calc settings.


----------



## wisepds

CJMitsuki said:


> Then I would say it is inside your OS the problem lies. There is something keeping it from enabling downvolting and it can only be Bios or OS. A program maybe or possibly a setting. If it were me I would back up important stuff and do a fresh install and keep no programs, just important documents etc


But, why when i choose all in auto with PE i have downclocking and downvolting?


----------



## CJMitsuki

wisepds said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then I would say it is inside your OS the problem lies. There is something keeping it from enabling downvolting and it can only be Bios or OS. A program maybe or possibly a setting. If it were me I would back up important stuff and do a fresh install and keep no programs, just important documents etc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But, why when i choose all in auto with PE i have downclocking and downvolting?
Click to expand...

Not sure, I assume you have flashed your bios trying to fix it?


----------



## wisepds

You mean Re-flash bios to test?

Can you post your .txt configuration? I want to see diferences..


----------



## mikochu

Anyone encountering random shutdowns with 0702 that require your PSU to be power cycled to boot the computer back up? I've been regression testing my RAM on 0702 and it was going well. Ran RAM Test overnight for 8 hours without error. Aida64 and CorsairService (iCUE) were running in the background, then I launched HWInfo (beta 3460) as Aida64 was reporting a -10° C for CPU. I verified HWInfo was reporting correctly, then browsed the web for a few minutes, then BAM! random shutdown. Cycled the power on the PSU, rebooted, RAM POSTed fine, made sure HWInfo and Aida64 were closed, then ran RAM Test again, took a shower, came back and it was off again. Went through the motions again, RAM POSTed fine, made sure HWInfo and Aida64 were closed, manually stopped CorsairService, started RAM Test again. It's been over an hour since I've been at work and my wife let me know the system is still chugging along so far. Any insight would be appreciated!

Thanks!


----------



## CJMitsuki

mikochu said:


> Anyone encountering random shutdowns with 0702 that require your PSU to be power cycled to boot the computer back up? I've been regression testing my RAM on 0702 and it was going well. Ran RAM Test overnight for 8 hours without error. Aida64 and CorsairService (iCUE) were running in the background, then I launched HWInfo (beta 3460) as Aida64 was reporting a -10° C for CPU. I verified HWInfo was reporting correctly, then browsed the web for a few minutes, then BAM! random shutdown. Cycled the power on the PSU, rebooted, RAM POSTed fine, made sure HWInfo and Aida64 were closed, then ran RAM Test again, took a shower, came back and it was off again. Went through the motions again, RAM POSTed fine, made sure HWInfo and Aida64 were closed, manually stopped CorsairService, started RAM Test again. It's been over an hour since I've been at work and my wife let me know the system is still chugging along so far. Any insight would be appreciated!
> 
> Thanks!


You need to update to the beta of HWiNFO as there is a fix for that. It was a incompatibility with certain drivers, I think. Mostly due to Corsair link and a couple other programs not working well together.


----------



## mikochu

CJMitsuki said:


> You need to update to the beta of HWiNFO as there is a fix for that. It was a incompatibility with certain drivers, I think. Mostly due to Corsair link and a couple other programs not working well together.


I think I have the latest beta. I'll check Mumak's thread.


----------



## crakej

mikochu said:


> I think I have the latest beta. I'll check Mumak's thread.


I think you have most recent version - I would say for now that we can still not run more than one monitoring program at a time. While HWInfo *is* updated, the others are not and still cause errors as I've reported.


----------



## hurricane28

Aida64 and Hardwareinfo64 both have worked with Asus regarding a fix for the sensors and fan issues. I tested this and as far as i know there are no issues with those programs anymore and readings are better than they ever were. 

If people have issues with this new BIOS, its advised to completely reset the motherboard and pull the battery (after its powered down obviously) and let it sit for a couple of minutes in order to reset everything and than boot again and try again. This worked for me when my fans were going nuts because of Aida64 and hardwareinfo64 wouldn't cooperate with the sensors which is been fixed now.

Btw there is a new version of hardwarinfo: https://www.hwinfo.com/news.php


----------



## CJMitsuki

wisepds said:


> You mean Re-flash bios to test?
> 
> Can you post your .txt configuration? I want to see diferences..


If you check some of my posts on here yesterday I posted my bios configuration in response to Zed. Just scroll back up a bit and there is a txt attachment as it will be at least 5 hours until ai am home.


----------



## CJMitsuki

crakej said:


> mikochu said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think I have the latest beta. I'll check Mumak's thread.
> 
> 
> 
> I think you have most recent version - I would say for now that we can still not run more than one monitoring program at a time. While HWInfo *is* updated, the others are not and still cause errors as I've reported.
Click to expand...

I’ve gotten no errors and sometimes I have HWiNFO, AIDA, Corsair Link monitoring services running as well as CPU-Z all at the same time.


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> wisepds said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then I would say it is inside your OS the problem lies. There is something keeping it from enabling downvolting and it can only be Bios or OS. A program maybe or possibly a setting. If it were me I would back up important stuff and do a fresh install and keep no programs, just important documents etc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But, why when i choose all in auto with PE i have downclocking and downvolting?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not sure, I assume you have flashed your bios trying to fix it?
Click to expand...

Just had a look and it seems that downvolting does not work on ky system either on this bios. Drops core clock but not volts


----------



## minal

Keith Myers said:


> LOL, got a kick out that clip. Yes, I always hit a new cpu and installation with mprime blend 14GB to mimic BOINC. Then mprime small FFT to see where the thermal max for the system is. Also give the memory a good workout with stressappest and finally when I am convinced it will be stable on BOINC at my set clocks, I run it through geekbench4 and post the results to my account for future reference and a log of what those clocks benchmark. That way I can see whether a push in clocks actually does anything other than raise temps.
> 
> I only have two systems in my sleeping bedroom. But I have worn ear plugs for sleep for the last 30 years, ever since the Navy when my bunk was on the other side of the wall for the #2 Fireroom Induction chute. That and the 5"-54 gun outside the berthing space. I need quiet and dark for any decent chance of sound sleep.


That's a nice workflow, I'll keep it in mind. 

And those must be some serious earplugs.


----------



## Keith Myers

minal said:


> That's a nice workflow, I'll keep it in mind.
> 
> And those must be some serious earplugs.


Standard 31 dB shooters plugs, Just buy the 10 pair pack every 6 months or so. Always use them. Absolute muscle memory, don't even have to think about them. Last thing I do before crawling under the covers.

Yes, that workflow seems to work the best for me and is fairly quick. The max I let any test run is one hour. If it is stable without errors for that, then it is a candidate for BOINC running. That still is my final arbiter. It had better run non-stop for a week without errors or I don't consider it stable and I will revisit settings to find real stability. I often find systems that haven't needed a reboot or caused any errors for several weeks to months. The only time a system normally gets rebooted is when there has been a kernel update.


----------



## Mandarb

Any of you guys had issues on 0601 with the front speaker out? I had it happen that, after unplugging my headphones, I wouldn't have any sound. After a restart it was usually back

Clean uninstalled and then reinstalled all audio drivers, worked a bit. Then it happened again.

Found with the audio test that all speakers save front worked. Then tested front speaker when plugged into my smartphone, worked there. Couldn't get them to work with a restart either.

Upgraded to 0701 and they are currently working.

Would be floored if my Crosshair VII Hero was broken. My Crosshair VI Hero was broken too, bootable RAM frequency dropped and dropped until even 2133MHz was unbootable. Bought the VII and sent the VI in, took 27 days for my replacement VI to arrive. Would be absolutely pissed to go through this hole stuff again. Considering I really need to write uni papers and am streaming. Plus getting sick of pulling apart my computer. Especially since these are supposed to be premium motherboards with premium components...


----------



## Keith Myers

*Does your USB15 header work?*

Just tried to connect my HX1000i power supply to the USB15 header as the USB1112 header was already used by the case front panel USB2.0 ports. Found that my USB15 header is non-functional by making sure it was enabled in the BIOS. Swapped the case front panel USB cables to USB15 which became non-functional and also connected the power supply directly to the case USB 2.0 ports with a mini-USB cable. Also plugged the power supply USB cable into USB1112 header and it works there.

So either the USB15 header doesn't really work on the motherboard or my motherboard is defective.

Can anyone check their C7H for a functional USB15 header and post back to me please.


----------



## Mandarb

Keith Myers said:


> Just tried to connect my HX1000i power supply to the USB15 header as the USB1112 header was already used by the case front panel USB2.0 ports. Found that my USB15 header is non-functional by making sure it was enabled in the BIOS. Swapped the case front panel USB cables to USB15 which became non-functional and also connected the power supply directly to the case USB 2.0 ports with a mini-USB cable. Also plugged the power supply USB cable into USB1112 header and it works there.
> 
> So either the USB15 header doesn't really work on the motherboard or my motherboard is defective.
> 
> Can anyone check their C7H for a functional USB15 header and post back to me please./forum/images/smilies/mad.gif


This is the information you are looking for: https://imgur.com/gallery/KUgqD5w


----------



## CJMitsuki

Mandarb said:


> Keith Myers said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just tried to connect my HX1000i power supply to the USB15 header as the USB1112 header was already used by the case front panel USB2.0 ports. Found that my USB15 header is non-functional by making sure it was enabled in the BIOS. Swapped the case front panel USB cables to USB15 which became non-functional and also connected the power supply directly to the case USB 2.0 ports with a mini-USB cable. Also plugged the power supply USB cable into USB1112 header and it works there.
> 
> So either the USB15 header doesn't really work on the motherboard or my motherboard is defective.
> 
> Can anyone check their C7H for a functional USB15 header and post back to me please./forum/images/smilies/mad.gif
> 
> 
> 
> This is the information you are looking for: https://imgur.com/gallery/KUgqD5w
Click to expand...

I pictured Keith doing the Picard facepalm as soon as I read the imgur. 
In other new I’m pretty sure I just stumbled onto 3600mhz initial stability 2000% so far in RamTest gives me something to work with when before I could not get past 50% and the answer was so simple...drop voltages and 1.1v SoC was key, not one tick more or less or it would throw errors within 100% and had to lower secondaries. Now I can tweak timings once RamTest satisfies me then start doing 10 hour tests with HCI MemTest 6.0...Not gonna push it but I’m crossing fingers for 3666 after I dial in 3600.


----------



## Keith Myers

*Thanks a bunch!*



Mandarb said:


> This is the information you are looking for: https://imgur.com/gallery/KUgqD5w


Wow, definitely Picard facepalm. I looked at that drawing many times. Just never bothered looking at the provided stock Corsair USB cable. It is pinned out for that top row of pins.

Just so used to the case USB 2.0 cables having the full 9 pins populated to support two USB 2.0 ports on the case normally.

I can fix that, I'll just repin the Corsair cable for the front row. Thanks a bunch Mandarb. Right now I have kludged a Mini-USB cable out the back through a PCIe slot to plug into one of the back motherboard ports. Looks like I will be taking the system apart for the umpteenth time again to get access to that header. I have a gpu covering it up normally.:thumb:


----------



## Mandarb

Keith Myers said:


> Mandarb said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is the information you are looking for: https://imgur.com/gallery/KUgqD5w
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, definitely Picard facepalm. I looked at that drawing many times. Just never bothered looking at the provided stock Corsair USB cable. It is pinned out for that top row of pins.
> 
> Just so used to the case USB 2.0 cables having the full 9 pins populated to support two USB 2.0 ports on the case normally.
> 
> I can fix that, I'll just repin the Corsair cable for the front row. Thanks a bunch Mandarb. Right now I have kludged a Mini-USB cable out the back through a PCIe slot to plug into one of the back motherboard ports. Looks like I will be taking the system apart for the umpteenth time again to get access to that header. I have a gpu covering it up normally./forum/images/smilies/thumb.gif
Click to expand...

You have no idea how I Picard facepalmed after already filing a DOA with my shop. 🤣


----------



## mikochu

CJMitsuki said:


> I pictured Keith doing the Picard facepalm as soon as I read the imgur.
> In other new I’m pretty sure I just stumbled onto 3600mhz initial stability 2000% so far in RamTest gives me something to work with when before I could not get past 50% and the answer was so simple...drop voltages and 1.1v SoC was key, not one tick more or less or it would throw errors within 100% and had to lower secondaries. Now I can tweak timings once RamTest satisfies me then start doing 10 hour tests with HCI MemTest 6.0...Not gonna push it but I’m crossing fingers for 3666 after I dial in 3600.


Interesting. So, set SoC manual to 1.1v and forget it? I have it on Auto right now and RAM Test has been giving me an error 20-50 minutes into my regression test. This morning, I left the computer running RAM Test at 2133mhz just as a sanity check, as recommended by @boatmurder. I hope to come home from work with no errors, then I'll get back to tweaking.


----------



## gupsterg

wisepds said:


> Here is my configuration (Attached file)
> 
> I hope you find the reason to not do downvolting!!
> 
> 
> 
> Syldon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 1.05V SB Voltage [1.05000] is wrong mate. Elmor told everyone that it is bugged atm and needs to be set so that it reads 0.05v higher. If you leave it on auto, it will adjust to 1.1v. Elmor said this is normal.
Click to expand...

There is nothing wrong with manually setting SB voltage as 1.05V.

What Elmor has highlighted is early batch of C7H have an issue where that voltage in monitoring/probeit point is shown ~50mV higher than what it actually is.

So setting 1.05V manually or using [Auto] will show above 1.05V in monitoring/probeit point, but it is actually ~1.05V.


----------



## wisepds

gupsterg said:


> There is nothing wrong with manually setting SB voltage as 1.05V.
> 
> What Elmor has highlighted is early batch of C7H have an issue where that voltage in monitoring/probeit point is shown ~50mV higher than what it actually is.
> 
> So setting 1.05V manually or using [Auto] will show above 1.05V in monitoring/probeit point, but it is actually ~1.05V.


It's good to know it... Do you know why my P-STATES oc doesn't do downvolting? The same configuration as first bios... but now i have downclocking but not downvolting... why?


----------



## lordzed83

wisepds said:


> It's good to know it... Do you know why my P-STATES oc doesn't do downvolting? The same configuration as first bios... but now i have downclocking but not downvolting... why?


 @elmor
Bios bug simple mine does not downvolt either on new bios used to do on previous.


----------



## Krisztias

lordzed83 said:


> @elmor
> Bios bug simple mine does not downvolt either on new bios used to do on previous.


C6H has the same issue


----------



## wisepds

lordzed83 said:


> @elmor
> Bios bug simple mine does not downvolt either on new bios used to do on previous.


THANKS!!! IT'S NOT JUST ME. UFFFFFF


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> I pictured Keith doing the Picard facepalm as soon as I read the imgur.
> In other new I’m pretty sure I just stumbled onto 3600mhz initial stability 2000% so far in RamTest gives me something to work with when before I could not get past 50% and the answer was so simple...drop voltages and 1.1v SoC was key, not one tick more or less or it would throw errors within 100% and had to lower secondaries. Now I can tweak timings once RamTest satisfies me then start doing 10 hour tests with HCI MemTest 6.0...Not gonna push it but I’m crossing fingers for 3666 after I dial in 3600.


I got something to Try for You.
On cpu set LLC3 phase Extreme and offset that after Vdrop You are at 1.387 as minimum. In My case its more stable than what You use  Rest same just them 3. See how ya get on with IBT ect.


----------



## CJMitsuki

lordzed83 said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> I pictured Keith doing the Picard facepalm as soon as I read the imgur.
> In other new I’m pretty sure I just stumbled onto 3600mhz initial stability 2000% so far in RamTest gives me something to work with when before I could not get past 50% and the answer was so simple...drop voltages and 1.1v SoC was key, not one tick more or less or it would throw errors within 100% and had to lower secondaries. Now I can tweak timings once RamTest satisfies me then start doing 10 hour tests with HCI MemTest 6.0...Not gonna push it but I’m crossing fingers for 3666 after I dial in 3600.
> 
> 
> 
> I got something to Try for You.
> On cpu set LLC3 phase Extreme and offset that after Vdrop You are at 1.387 as minimum. In My case its more stable than what You use /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif Rest same just them 3. See how ya get on with IBT ect.
Click to expand...

I never tested LLC or vdroop in depth bc LLC 5 worked and the VRMs never even hit 40c even when I’m running 4.4ghz at 1.48v. VRMs can handle fully maxed out LLC np on C7H. Doesn’t even sweat


----------



## hurricane28

CJMitsuki said:


> I never tested LLC or vdroop in depth bc LLC 5 worked and the VRMs never even hit 40c even when I’m running 4.4ghz at 1.48v. VRMs can handle fully maxed out LLC np on C7H. Doesn’t even sweat


The vrm's indeed don't break sweat but i don't think it a good idea to run your system at LLC 5 all the time man.. Since you said you never actually looked in to LLC or vdroop, i want to point out that overclocking it with high vcore and LLC level you fry your chip in pretty short order due to voltage spikes which you can't measure, only with oscilloscope.

My advice for 24/7 use is not to exceed 1.375 vcore with LLC 4 IF you want your chip to last a long time.


----------



## CJMitsuki

hurricane28 said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> I never tested LLC or vdroop in depth bc LLC 5 worked and the VRMs never even hit 40c even when I’m running 4.4ghz at 1.48v. VRMs can handle fully maxed out LLC np on C7H. Doesn’t even sweat
> 
> 
> 
> The vrm's indeed don't break sweat but i don't think it a good idea to run your system at LLC 5 all the time man.. Since you said you never actually looked in to LLC or vdroop, i want to point out that overclocking it with high vcore and LLC level you fry your chip in pretty short order due to voltage spikes which you can't measure, only with oscilloscope.
> 
> My advice for 24/7 use is not to exceed 1.375 vcore with LLC 4 IF you want your chip to last a long time.
Click to expand...

VCore is safe 25/7 up to 1.425v and I don’t run 1.48v except for benching runs when I’m going to submit to HWBOT. It was an example denoting the superior heat sink the VRMs have. You can run higher voltages in short runs without worry as long as you control the thermals. Thx for the advice though. My chip needs to only last until Zen 2 and I have a 1700x still in unopened box if the chip happens to get destroyed. I will check in on the LLC though once I get this 3600mhz dialed in fully. It’s pretty particular to what it wants and will not run 100% stable without those perfect settings. I’m up to 3000% Ramtest which I will see if I can get it to 5000% before I run more extensive testing out of the OS. Either way the bandwidth is the same for me as with the 3533 strap but latency has dropped to 57-58ns although that may change once it’s dialed in properly. Once timings are dialed in I will need to work on ironing out the double training that’s happening during boot up. Shouldn’t be that difficult.


----------



## Keith Myers

*Done deal. USB15 working as expected*



Mandarb said:


> You have no idea how I Picard facepalmed after already filing a DOA with my shop. 🤣


Repinned the Corsair HX1000i USB cable and plugged it into the USB15 motherboard header. Working fine. Thanks Mandarb for showing me my inattention to the manual pinout drawing. Now have to go fix my ROG forum post about my issue that was none in fact.:specool:


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> I never tested LLC or vdroop in depth bc LLC 5 worked and the VRMs never even hit 40c even when I’m running 4.4ghz at 1.48v. VRMs can handle fully maxed out LLC np on C7H. Doesn’t even sweat


Well all I can say with llc3 10xibt ends always 1-2 seconds faster than llc5 and very fast frequency. Not a clue how it works but on my cpu its Faster and more stable Oo CAB VRM got 2x120+1x140 for VRM cooling never seen them get pas 54c even tho its been very hot around Nottingham compared to when iw gotten 2700x.

Ryzen is so funny with volts lol


On other hand You got AC hax in my case ambient is up by 8c can see those extra 8c on my system hitting 82 with llc5 haha

But with llc3 cpu temps are 9c lower than llc5 so that adds extra stabilyty and speed i guess. As You know pass 70c on cores gets bit unstable/needs extra juice and that just adds head hehe.


And yes Llc5 does produce voltage overshot with every load change if i remember it was like 200mv extra. So still should be ok at 1.425 llc5 as absolute maxomum


----------



## lordzed83

We need phase change coolers tbh


----------



## CJMitsuki

lordzed83 said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> I never tested LLC or vdroop in depth bc LLC 5 worked and the VRMs never even hit 40c even when I’m running 4.4ghz at 1.48v. VRMs can handle fully maxed out LLC np on C7H. Doesn’t even sweat
> 
> 
> 
> Well all I can say with llc3 10xibt ends always 1-2 seconds faster than llc5 and very fast frequency. Not a clue how it works but on my cpu its Faster and more stable Oo CAB VRM got 2x120+1x140 for VRM cooling never seen them get pas 54c even tho its been very hot around Nottingham compared to when iw gotten 2700x.
> 
> Ryzen is so funny with volts lol
> 
> 
> On other hand You got AC hax in my case ambient is up by 8c can see those extra 8c on my system hitting 82 with llc5 haha
> 
> But with llc3 cpu temps are 9c lower than llc5 so that adds extra stabilyty and speed i guess. As You know pass 70c on cores gets bit unstable/needs extra juice and that just adds head hehe.
> 
> 
> And yes Llc5 does produce voltage overshot with every load change if i remember it was like 200mv extra. So still should be ok at 1.425 llc5 as absolute maxomum
Click to expand...

It’s worth a look and see how voltages act on my board. I have to wear a hoodie to stay warm in my home, when I know I’m going to hop into Win7 and bench I turn AC down to 65f not sure off hand what that is in Celsius...ah, skynet...err, google says 18.333, roughly an hour beforehand so I can get smoother runs and it does help quite a bit. If I use the homemade attachment to blow the cold air straight into the case the exit air temps are like 12c lol. I wouldn’t dare turn AC off here. I live in southern portion of the US and on a cool day is like 29.5c/85f and so humid is like a jungle outside. Normally my home stays at 22c/72f though. Speaking of Ryzen acting funny with settings this 3600 strap has me going crazy. It’s so damn picky about everything. I will probably have to test every voltage and setting so it won’t be on auto since it seems to cause instability if at least any of the voltages are auto so far and there is no range in the voltage. It likes one number and nothing more or less will satisfy.


----------



## VPII

I was a big supporter of LLC5 but at a request from a member I measured the difference in actually voltage measured on the probelt and I found that there is almost no difference between LLC5 set in bios and leaving it on Auto. LLC4 gives a slight drop in vcore from what you've set in the bios and so it continues to drop from LLC3 to LLC1. As for the VRM temps, it is funny when I hear what you guys say about the vrm temps and the great heat spreader on the board. Well I have two C7H boards. One which is basically stripped of back cover, and vrm heat spreader which I use for extreme clocking and the other my 24/7 board complete with all bells and whistles still attached. Obviously when you have a full pot of LN2 the cold creeps in and the vrm cools down as well. The extreme clocking board is mostly covered in Vaseline (petroleum jelly) for insulation but the board has been through the dishwasher on 3 occasions when I needed to clean it and it is still working as normal.


----------



## hurricane28

@elmor, can you shed a light on this?

AMLI: ACPI BIOS is attempting to write to an illegal IO port address (0x40), which lies in the 0x40 - 0x43 protected address range. This could lead to system instability. Please contact your system vendor for technical assistance.

I thought this was fixed in the new BIOS?

If i could i would post an screenshot but for some weird reason i can't upload anything atm.


----------



## crakej

hurricane28 said:


> Aida64 and Hardwareinfo64 both have worked with Asus regarding a fix for the sensors and fan issues. I tested this and as far as i know there are no issues with those programs anymore and readings are better than they ever were.
> 
> If people have issues with this new BIOS, its advised to completely reset the motherboard and pull the battery (after its powered down obviously) and let it sit for a couple of minutes in order to reset everything and than boot again and try again. This worked for me when my fans were going nuts because of Aida64 and hardwareinfo64 wouldn't cooperate with the sensors which is been fixed now.
> 
> Btw there is a new version of hardwarinfo: https://www.hwinfo.com/news.php


Well, you can see my screenshots - I'm not making it up - I tested these for a few hours! Also, I've never said my fans were going nuts - never happened to me.

Aida is (asI said) the one that works best with HWInfo - If you read our posts, you would see that both of us have a later (beta) version than the one you posted thanks. The one you posted does NOT work properly with Aida, as I posted a couple of pages back.

I'm well versed in flashing new bios and wiping the previous one properly - I use Afueifix to do this.

So, as I said before, if you use the latest HWInfo (https://www.fosshub.com/HWiNFO.html) v5.85 3465 You will have much better results. It is still safe to say most other s/w has NOT been updated properly so still safe to assume they _could_ be causing problems. After all, its a very quick test to turn off all your monitoring software and see what happens, before pulling batteries etc etc.


----------



## crakej

hurricane28 said:


> @elmor, can you shed a light on this?
> 
> AMLI: ACPI BIOS is attempting to write to an illegal IO port address (0x40), which lies in the 0x40 - 0x43 protected address range. This could lead to system instability. Please contact your system vendor for technical assistance.
> 
> I thought this was fixed in the new BIOS?
> 
> If i could i would post an screenshot but for some weird reason i can't upload anything atm.


I had an error similar to this first time I booted with this bios, but since then, been ok...


----------



## GlowingBurrito

hurricane28 said:


> @elmor, can you shed a light on this?
> 
> AMLI: ACPI BIOS is attempting to write to an illegal IO port address (0x40), which lies in the 0x40 - 0x43 protected address range. This could lead to system instability. Please contact your system vendor for technical assistance.
> 
> I thought this was fixed in the new BIOS?
> 
> If i could i would post an screenshot but for some weird reason i can't upload anything atm.


I seem to only get that error in Event Viewer when starting up HWInfo.


----------



## crakej

GlowingBurrito said:


> I seem to only get that error in Event Viewer when starting up HWInfo.


You're on version 5.85 3465 beta? I don't get any errors from it now.


----------



## Krisztias

What do you guys think, wich kit should i buy from G.Skill? The Trident Z 3600C15 or the 4000C17?


----------



## lordzed83

Krisztias said:


> What do you guys think, wich kit should i buy from G.Skill? The Trident Z 3600C15 or the 4000C17?


I know those 3600cl15 can get very nice timings.
Ornjust buy 3200cl15 flarex 🙂


----------



## Krisztias

lordzed83 said:


> I know those 3600cl15 can get very nice timings.
> Ornjust buy 3200cl15 flarex 🙂


I got the 3200C14 Flare X, but i can't stabilize it over 3333MHz. 3333 extreme preset is stable, but nothing above that. 3533MHz is bootable, but the suggested timings from calculator gaves me every time error by 7% in ramtest. I think i should replace it with some better binned kit to achieve higher frequencies with tight timings.


----------



## HolyFist

Krisztias said:


> What do you guys think, wich kit should i buy from G.Skill? The Trident Z 3600C15 or the 4000C17?


I don't know how much those cost for you, but the 4133CL19/17 cost less than the 4000CL17 for me altho the 4133CL17 is out of stock, i have the 4133MHz CL19 at 3533MHz CL14 on this board and a 2700X.

I didn't even tweak the timings at all, just base latency and tRFC this last one being usually the most annoying for me.

When i bought the 1700 i bought the 4133MHz as an investment and is finally paying, with Ryzen 2 i'm assume it can go up to 4GHz but i wonder if by then 4000MHz DDR4 actually makes that much of a difference for games for example since the latency will increase as speed goes up.

Here's a screenshot of the GSkill 4133MHz CL19 at 3533MHz CL14 with most stuff on auto, just basic latency and tRFC tweaks:


----------



## CJMitsuki

Krisztias said:


> What do you guys think, wich kit should i buy from G.Skill? The Trident Z 3600C15 or the 4000C17?


I wouldn’t bother with the 4000c17 at all. 3200c14 or 3600c15 are just about the best dies you will find. Make sure you get the single rank kits or you are going to have a hard time overclocking.
I have my 3200c14 kit at 3600c14 now 57ns Latency and 57k read 56k write. Runs nicely but is quite a pain in the a** to get to 3600mhz as will be the case with most kits no matter the quality of die. That’s just Ryzen at the moment.


----------



## crakej

I have the 4266CL19s running at 3600CL14 Geardown=on - which wasd great until this bios came along, now I get bluescreens.....haven't had one of those in years! Admittedly can prob tweak to get it back, but going to drop to 3533 and tighten those timings up a bit....


----------



## larrydavid

What's the verdict on 0702 so far?


----------



## HolyFist

crakej said:


> I have the 4266CL19s running at 3600CL14 Geardown=on - which wasd great until this bios came along, now I get bluescreens.....haven't had one of those in years! Admittedly can prob tweak to get it back, but going to drop to 3533 and tighten those timings up a bit....


What voltage are you using on RAM and Soc that gives you bluescreens? Try to leave tRFC on auto and test to see if that still happens, then from there if it doesn't you just need to find the best tRFC.


--


I don't know why but sometimes my system doesn't even boot if i set command rate to 1, leaving it on auto causes it to be 2 but allows to boot and stress tests fine, anyone knows why this might be happening?


----------



## crakej

HolyFist said:


> What voltage are you using on RAM and Soc that gives you bluescreens? Try to leave tRFC on auto and test to see if that still happens, then from there if it doesn't you just need to find the best tRFC.
> --
> I don't know why but sometimes my system doesn't even boot if i set command rate to 1, leaving it on auto causes it to be 2 but allows to boot and stress tests fine, anyone knows why this might be happening?


I didn't have any blue screens on 0601 

Ram is 1.43v, SoC is 1.012v.... Sadly, tRFC is not the culprit this time.

CR2 is a slightly less efficient way of communicating with the ram - (simply) it waits 2 clocks for a response from memory, but can allow you to clock higher than CR1 (which is preferable). You can try enabling GearDown mode with CR1 as well, which technically is slightly better than CR2. Somewhere between CR1 and CR2.


----------



## CJMitsuki

crakej said:


> HolyFist said:
> 
> 
> 
> What voltage are you using on RAM and Soc that gives you bluescreens? Try to leave tRFC on auto and test to see if that still happens, then from there if it doesn't you just need to find the best tRFC.
> --
> I don't know why but sometimes my system doesn't even boot if i set command rate to 1, leaving it on auto causes it to be 2 but allows to boot and stress tests fine, anyone knows why this might be happening?
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't have any blue screens on 0601 /forum/images/smilies/frown.gif
> 
> Ram is 1.43v, SoC is 1.012v.... Sadly, tRFC is not the culprit this time.
> 
> CR2 is a slightly less efficient way of communicating with the ram - (simply) it waits 2 clocks for a response from memory, but can allow you to clock higher than CR1 (which is preferable). You can try enabling GearDown mode with CR1 as well, which technically is slightly better than CR2. Somewhere between CR1 and CR2.
Click to expand...

I’ve got 3600 running quite well with gd on and 2T. Even lowered dram voltage to 1.41v. I’ve found that loosening up timingshas been giving me more bandwidth and lowering latency along with added stability. At 57ns at the moment around 57-58k read. What really increased stability dramatically was raising VPP_mem and 2.5 SB voltages


----------



## Krisztias

Thanks guys for the reply, i think i will go with the 3600C15 kit.


----------



## hurricane28

crakej said:


> Well, you can see my screenshots - I'm not making it up - I tested these for a few hours! Also, I've never said my fans were going nuts - never happened to me.
> 
> Aida is (asI said) the one that works best with HWInfo - If you read our posts, you would see that both of us have a later (beta) version than the one you posted thanks. The one you posted does NOT work properly with Aida, as I posted a couple of pages back.
> 
> I'm well versed in flashing new bios and wiping the previous one properly - I use Afueifix to do this.
> 
> So, as I said before, if you use the latest HWInfo (https://www.fosshub.com/HWiNFO.html) v5.85 3465 You will have much better results. It is still safe to say most other s/w has NOT been updated properly so still safe to assume they _could_ be causing problems. After all, its a very quick test to turn off all your monitoring software and see what happens, before pulling batteries etc etc.



What are you talking about man? I am using the latest versions of all my software's including BIOS.. I have no problems as i said. I dealt with this problem via PM with Elmor and The Stilt many many times so i am pretty sure know what i am talking about here, thank you. 

Why would you wipe the previous BIOS..? Doesn't make sense man, there is no need to do that. There are steps n how to properly flash BIOS in the beginning of this thread of the C6H thread. 

Best procedure " bullet proof" method is to load factory defaults in BIOS and reboot in BIOS. IF all is well push reset button and hold it for like 4 seconds in order to give it more time to properly wipe everything. Than power down PC and pull power cord from the PSU and pull the battery out and let it sit like that for like 5 minutes or so. Than insert your USB drive with the BIOS on it in the BIOS USB port located on the back side of the board and flash the new BIOS in BIOS itself or the button on the back of the board, after its done you should be golden. 

Again, i know what i am talking about here regarding the sensor issue.. plz re-read what i said earlier and you can look up my posts in search by typing EC Sensor in the C6H thread. Its discussed over and over again and now there is a BIOS and software fix which is implemented in the newer monitoring softwares.


----------



## mtrai

CJMitsuki said:


> I’ve got 3600 running quite well with gd on and 2T. Even lowered dram voltage to 1.41v. I’ve found that loosening up timingshas been giving me more bandwidth and lowering latency along with added stability. At 57ns at the moment around 57-58k read. What really increased stability dramatically was raising VPP_mem and 2.5 SB voltages


Can you post your settings...both Ryzen timing checker and a bios setting dump pretty please.


----------



## HolyFist

crakej said:


> I didn't have any blue screens on 0601
> 
> Ram is 1.43v, SoC is 1.012v.... Sadly, tRFC is not the culprit this time.
> 
> CR2 is a slightly less efficient way of communicating with the ram - (simply) it waits 2 clocks for a response from memory, but can allow you to clock higher than CR1 (which is preferable). You can try enabling GearDown mode with CR1 as well, which technically is slightly better than CR2. Somewhere between CR1 and CR2.


Yeah with GearDown enabled i seem to be able to use CR1 fine, i've tried your CL numbers as they were pretty much about the same of what i was using but at 3466MHz instead and tRFC 333, and MemTest 110% because i don't have much patience to stand there waiting lol.

I don't know if MemTest is that good, but i run stress tests on my Windows account with some stuff running in background that can lead to issues that wouldn't be there otherwise.

I find MemTest failing easier than AIDA64 Stress Test on memory so i use MT instead with 6 instances of 2048.

I'll try 3533MHz tomorrow with same timings and let you know if it works for me even tho my ram is the 4133CL19, but i noticed RAM tests to fail if tRFC is low even if the margin to fix it is also a very low difference.

Also the reason i like to disable GearDown is because back then the benchmarks for Ryzen have shown that pretty much every game had FPS improvements with it off however not something that big and the latency isn't that much of an improvement with CR1 anyway over CR2 for what i've tested with AIDA64.

PS: For me Ryzen RAM Calculator doesn't seem to work be it with manual set from default XMP on the app or with the HTML report of my RAM, my system freezes at POST Logo or during startup and i can only get it to boot again by shutdown button and be off for at least 5 seconds, be it 3466 FAST or 3533 FAST.

Anyway i wouldn't mind too much if 3533MHz isn't the best since latency is better than a few extra Hz, the lower the frequency the better timings we are able to achieve, have you tried CL13 at 3466?


----------



## crakej

hurricane28 said:


> What are you talking about man? I am using the latest versions of all my software's including BIOS.. I have no problems as i said. I dealt with this problem via PM with Elmor and The Stilt many many times so i am pretty sure know what i am talking about here, thank you.
> 
> Why would you wipe the previous BIOS..? Doesn't make sense man, there is no need to do that. There are steps n how to properly flash BIOS in the beginning of this thread of the C6H thread.
> 
> Best procedure " bullet proof" method is to load factory defaults in BIOS and reboot in BIOS. IF all is well push reset button and hold it for like 4 seconds in order to give it more time to properly wipe everything. Than power down PC and pull power cord from the PSU and pull the battery out and let it sit like that for like 5 minutes or so. Than insert your USB drive with the BIOS on it in the BIOS USB port located on the back side of the board and flash the new BIOS in BIOS itself or the button on the back of the board, after its done you should be golden.
> 
> Again, i know what i am talking about here regarding the sensor issue.. plz re-read what i said earlier and you can look up my posts in search by typing EC Sensor in the C6H thread. Its discussed over and over again and now there is a BIOS and software fix which is implemented in the newer monitoring softwares.


Ha! You make me laugh....hope you enjoy it up on that pedestal. 

I do not 'wipe previous bios'! When did I say that? Though that is exactly what the flashing does, it wipes the bios before flashing the new one. I use the UEFI method because you can make sure the the NVRam is properly wiped when doing so. I flash form hard disk as it saves bothering with usb anything, but I would recommend to anyone else to use the flashback or bios methods.

You can be v helpful sometimes, but you do not know everything. I did tests and posted results, that's what we do here, try to be helpful. Prove me wrong, fine, but you clearly did not read all my posts.

Which programs have you tested with HWInfo? (5.85 3465 beta)?

You don't even know how to reset the machine properly without pulling the battery! I haven't pulled a battery from a motherboard for years. No need. It's the *POWER* button you hold in after turning power off - *NOT* reset - and it doesn't clear anything except voltages and capacitors.

I do not know everything, but I know what I reported - with screen shots - did I photoshop them?


----------



## crakej

HolyFist said:


> Yeah with GearDown enabled i seem to be able to use CR1 fine, i've tried your CL numbers as they were pretty much about the same of what i was using but at 3466MHz instead and tRFC 333, and MemTest 110% because i don't have much patience to stand there waiting lol.
> 
> I don't know if MemTest is that good, but i run stress tests on my Windows account with some stuff running in background that can lead to issues that wouldn't be there otherwise.
> 
> I find MemTest failing easier than AIDA64 Stress Test on memory so i use MT instead with 6 instances of 2048.
> 
> I'll try 3533MHz tomorrow with same timings and let you know if it works for me even tho my ram is the 4133CL19, but i noticed RAM tests to fail if tRFC is low even if the margin to fix it is also a very low difference.
> 
> Also the reason i like to disable GearDown is because back then the benchmarks for Ryzen have shown that pretty much every game had FPS improvements with it off however not something that big and the latency isn't that much of an improvement with CR1 anyway over CR2 for what i've tested with AIDA64.
> 
> PS: For me Ryzen RAM Calculator doesn't seem to work be it with manual set from default XMP on the app or with the HTML report of my RAM, my system freezes at POST Logo or during startup and i can only get it to boot again by shutdown button and be off for at least 5 seconds, be it 3466 FAST or 3533 FAST.
> 
> Anyway i wouldn't mind too much if 3533MHz isn't the best since latency is better than a few extra Hz, the lower the frequency the better timings we are able to achieve, have you tried CL13 at 3466?


The calculator can be a good guide, but you're likely to have to tune something. i had to engage GearDown on everything over 3200, though I can do 3600CL14 CR2 and GearDown=off which I will revisit when I have time.

I must admit when I got to 3600CL14 it did occur to me that 3200CL13 may well be doable - maybe 3466 with 0702. Not had time lately....and its been so sunny! Try calculator timings but with geardown=on for faster speeds you might have more luck.


----------



## crakej

CJMitsuki said:


> I’ve got 3600 running quite well with gd on and 2T. Even lowered dram voltage to 1.41v. I’ve found that loosening up timingshas been giving me more bandwidth and lowering latency along with added stability. At 57ns at the moment around 57-58k read. What really increased stability dramatically was raising VPP_mem and 2.5 SB voltages


I need to experiment a bit more with 2T, just haven't had a chance, though the small amount of testing I did do seemed hopeful. Thanks for the tips..... Loving you latency!


----------



## CJMitsuki

mtrai said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> I’ve got 3600 running quite well with gd on and 2T. Even lowered dram voltage to 1.41v. I’ve found that loosening up timingshas been giving me more bandwidth and lowering latency along with added stability. At 57ns at the moment around 57-58k read. What really increased stability dramatically was raising VPP_mem and 2.5 SB voltages
> 
> 
> 
> Can you post your settings...both Ryzen timing checker and a bios setting dump pretty please.
Click to expand...

 Yes, I will post them here in a bit. Trying to iron out that memory training bug or whatever it is so I don’t have to deal with it on startup.


Here you go @mtrai I had to do away with the Vpp_Mem and 2.5 SB voltages bc they were causing the memory training issues but I ironed out a lot of the instabilities but it isnt 100% stable but to be fair it wasnt with the voltage bumps either but i could do 5000% ramtest even though I dont trust ramtest anymore until it is updated. It has wild inconsistencies for me now but HCI Memtest doesnt and I can get 800% in HCI before an error and it feels quite stable and is very responsive and my Cinebench score went up by a couple points and other benches seemed to gain more from the added speed. Im using it nonetheless, You are welcome to take it and play around with it but Im just going crazy messing with this strap and I need to reinstall my Win7 so I can get back to HWBOT benching since ive replaced my dead harddrive with a new ssd just for Win7. I forgot to get the txt dump but will edit post with it here momentarily. Cache latencies at 3600 are sexy though.




Spoiler


----------



## majestynl

CJMitsuki said:


> VCore is safe 25/7 up to 1.425v and I don’t run 1.48v except for benching runs when I’m going to submit to HWBOT. It was an example denoting the superior heat sink the VRMs have. You can run higher voltages in short runs without worry as long as you control the thermals. Thx for the advice though. My chip needs to only last until Zen 2 and I have a 1700x still in unopened box if the chip happens to get destroyed. I will check in on the LLC though once I get this 3600mhz dialed in fully. It’s pretty particular to what it wants and will not run 100% stable without those perfect settings. I’m up to 3000% Ramtest which I will see if I can get it to 5000% before I run more extensive testing out of the OS. Either way the bandwidth is the same for me as with the 3533 strap but latency has dropped to 57-58ns although that may change once it’s dialed in properly. Once timings are dialed in I will need to work on ironing out the double training that’s happening during boot up. Shouldn’t be that difficult.


Agree, thermals are most important! These chips can handle voltages well, but mostly thermal limitations are coming in to the game. Saying it again but If those spikes where an issue then what about those nice 1.5v spikes from Auto AMD settings? Hehe lol , we even don't need a oscilloscope to spot them. 

LLC5 is same as Auto on manual OC. With Pstates etc Auto LLC did had droop on my testings.

High strap Rams in combination with TT needs really accurate tweaked settings. Good luck. I already spent days on those. And yes most of the times every strap needed his exact voltage otherwise it wasn't fully stable with long memtests.

I fixed my double or triple boots on high straps playing with ProcODt. Maybe you could try that out!


I'm now on holidays in Bali so don't have any hardware stress  

Good luck...


----------



## HolyFist

Yes like i said CR2 seems to allow me to use higher clocks, or rather i just leave it on Auto that then makes it 2.

GearDown was also something i notice to cause instability and errors at 3466MHZ+ (i don't test bellow this anyway at this point) in Memtest along PowerDown, but PowerDown there seems to be little info on what it actually does leaving just theory based on the name of that function, and i tend to leave that on Auto despite RAM Calculator recommending to disable it.



crakej said:


> The calculator can be a good guide, but you're likely to have to tune something. i had to engage GearDown on everything over 3200, though I can do 3600CL14 CR2 and GearDown=off which I will revisit when I have time.
> 
> I must admit when I got to 3600CL14 it did occur to me that 3200CL13 may well be doable - maybe 3466 with 0702. Not had time lately....and its been so sunny! Try calculator timings but with geardown=on for faster speeds you might have more luck.


I don't know much about BIOS versions on this board, i had issues with the C6H that it has defective PCIe slot stuck at x8 and the stutter is gone in games, that is the extra stutter caused by that, i still bought another ASUS board and is fine on this one no experience at all wioth different BIOS but i'm using 0702 and seems to be good for RAM OC.

As for the calculator i had bad experience with it, i think it's and i repeat again, related to CR1 instead of being 2 and likely GearDown disabled, because also like i mentioned these two are the reasons that with CR1 and GearDown off didn't even allow me to boot with tight timings while being 2 and GearDown forced on, allows me to run MemTest 100% so the difference on these two settings seems to be quite huge when it comes to stability.



PS: Anyone noticed sometimes when they play/watch videos or listen to music there's a hiccup and the sound kind of glitches for 1 second and then is normal? I think this is DPC latency but i wasn't able to figure out what yet, i know that using AIDA64 raises DPC latency even with latest Beta as of this post. This happen with the 1700 on the C6H, with the 2700X on the C6H and happens now with the 2700X on the C7H, last time i had to install Windows again and it was gone but is back, i suspect is related to sensors reading as i use HWiNFO64 all the time from startup to get extra stats on RivaTuner.


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> Agree, thermals are most important! These chips can handle voltages well, but mostly thermal limitations are coming in to the game. Saying it again but If those spikes where an issue then what about those nice 1.5v spikes from Auto AMD settings? Hehe lol , we even don't need a oscilloscope to spot them.
> 
> LLC5 is same as Auto on manual OC. With Pstates etc Auto LLC did had droop on my testings.
> 
> High strap Rams in combination with TT needs really accurate tweaked settings. Good luck. I already spent days on those. And yes most of the times every strap needed his exact voltage otherwise it wasn't fully stable with long memtests.
> 
> I fixed my double or triple boots on high straps playing with ProcODt. Maybe you could try that out!
> 
> 
> I'm now on holidays in Bali so don't have any hardware stress
> 
> Good luck...


I've always thought that if LLC was causing any spikes you would see them at some point - even without a scope, but I guess there is a small chance there could be very, very brief spikes that can't be much higher than we see with PE modes if at all. Ran my last board on LLC5 for a year. I haven't tested LLC on 0702 manual mode but it works with offset.

Have a great time on holiday - I'm sure you will....hard not to in Bali


----------



## crakej

I might do some further experiments with 0702 and start from scratch (near enough) to see if voltage/timing requirements have changed at all. my stable 3600CL14 settings are no longer stable with this bios - I kept getting blue screens which I don't often get lol - To me, looks like something might be being over-volted.

Hopefully I'll be able to sus out what some of the differences are on this bios. What a shame Ryzen 1 is left out of PE all together, but XFR2 does work MUCH better to be fair. With Ryzen balanced plan I was seeing it boost at least 4 threads to max (4.1GHz), so will look at this again too. Hopefully I will get a chance today and will post results.


----------



## gupsterg

wisepds said:


> It's good to know it... Do you know why my P-STATES oc doesn't do downvolting? The same configuration as first bios... but now i have downclocking but not downvolting... why?


I set PState 0 as 4.1GHz, with VID 1.318V, in AMD CBS (no other changes there from defaults). I have down clocking and volting in W7P x64 / Linux Mint.

My settings in spoiler below.

HW:-

C7H UEFI 0602
2700X Batch UA 1805 SUS
ThermalRight Archon IB-E X2 with 2x TY143, lapped base, AS5
F4-3200C14D-16GTZ

Sapphire Toxic HD5850
Samsung EVO 840 250GB

Cooler Master V650



Spoiler



[2018/05/15 07:21:32]
Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
eCLK Mode [Synchronous mode]
BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
BCLK_Divider [Auto]
Performance Enhancer [Default]
CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
Performance Bias [None]
Memory Frequency [DDR4-3466MHz]
Core Performance Boost [Disabled]
SMT Mode [Enabled]
TPU [Keep Current Settings]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
- VDDSOC Voltage Override [0.96875]
DRAM Voltage [1.37000]
1.8V PLL Voltage [1.80000]
1.05V SB Voltage [1.05000]
Target TDP [Auto]
TRC_EOM [Auto]
TRTP_EOM [Auto]
TRRS_S_EOM [Auto]
TRRS_L_EOM [Auto]
TWTR_EOM [Auto]
TWTR_L_EOM [Auto]
TWCL_EOM [Auto]
TWR_EOM [Auto]
TFAW_EOM [Auto]
TRCT_EOM [Auto]
TREFI_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_DD_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SD_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SC_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SCL_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_DD_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SD_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SC_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SCL_EOM [Auto]
TWRRD_EOM [Auto]
TRDWR_EOM [Auto]
TWRRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto]
DRAM CAS# Latency [15]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [15]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [15]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [15]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [35]
Trc [54]
TrrdS [6]
TrrdL [9]
Tfaw [36]
TwtrS [4]
TwtrL [12]
Twr [12]
Trcpage [Auto]
TrdrdScl [2]
TwrwrScl [2]
Trfc [333]
Trfc2 [Auto]
Trfc4 [Auto]
Tcwl [14]
Trtp [8]
Trdwr [Auto]
Twrrd [3]
TwrwrSc [1]
TwrwrSd [7]
TwrwrDd [7]
TrdrdSc [1]
TrdrdSd [5]
TrdrdDd [5]
Tcke [6]
ProcODT [48 ohm]
Cmd2T [1T]
Gear Down Mode [Disabled]
Power Down Enable [Disabled]
RttNom [Auto]
RttWr [Auto]
RttPark [Auto]
MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
MemCkeSetup [Auto]
MemCadBusClkDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [Auto]
VTTDDR Voltage [0.68750]
VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
VDDP Voltage [Auto]
1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
PLL reference voltage [Auto]
T Offset [Auto]
Sense MI Skew [Disabled]
Sense MI Offset [Auto]
Promontory presence [Auto]
Clock Amplitude [Auto]
CLDO VDDP voltage [Auto]
CPU Load-line Calibration [Auto]
CPU Current Capability [Auto]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Auto]
VRM Spread Spectrum [Disabled]
Active Frequency Mode [Disabled]
CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
CPU Power Phase Control [Auto]
CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Auto]
VDDSOC Current Capability [Auto]
VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Auto]
VDDSOC Phase Control [Auto]
DRAM Current Capability [100%]
DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
DRAM Switching Frequency [Auto]
DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.37000]
Security Device Support [Enable]
Firmware TPM [Disable]
Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
PSS Support [Auto]
SVM Mode [Disabled]
PT XHCI GEN1 [Auto]
PT XHCI GEN2 [Auto]
PT USB Equalization4 [Auto]
PT USB Redriver [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 0 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 1 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 2 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 3 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 4 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 5 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 6 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 7 [Auto]
PT SATA PORT 0 Enable [Auto]
PT SATA PORT 1 Enable [Auto]
PT SATA PORT 2 Enable [Auto]
PT SATA PORT 3 Enable [Auto]
PT SATA PORT 4 Enable [Auto]
PT SATA PORT 5 Enable [Auto]
PT SATA PORT 6 Enable [Auto]
PT SATA PORT 7 Enable [Auto]
Onboard PCIE LAN PXE ROM [Enabled]
AMD CRB EHCI Debug port switch [Disabled]
Onboard LED [Enabled]
Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
Primary Video Device [PCIE / PCI Video]
SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
SATA Mode [AHCI]
NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
SMART Self Test [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
ErP Ready [Disabled]
Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
Power On By RTC [Disabled]
HD Audio Controller [Disabled]
M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
SB Link Mode [Auto]
Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
When system is in working state [On]
When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [On]
Intel LAN Controller [Disabled]
Wi-Fi Controller [Enabled]
Bluetooth Controller [Enabled]
Network Stack [Disabled]
Debug Port Table [Disabled]
Debug Port Table 2 [Disabled]
Device [Samsung SSD 840 EVO 250GB]
Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
USB Mass Storage Driver Support [Enabled]
KingstonDataTraveler 108PMAP [Auto]
U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
U31G1_5 [Enabled]
U31G1_6 [Enabled]
U31G1_7 [Enabled]
U31G1_8 [Enabled]
U31G1_9 [Enabled]
U31G1_10 [Enabled]
USB11 [Enabled]
USB12 [Enabled]
USB13 [Enabled]
USB14 [Enabled]
USB15 [Enabled]
CPU Temperature [Monitor]
MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
VRM Temperature [Monitor]
PCH Temperature [Monitor]
T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
5V Voltage [Monitor]
12V Voltage [Monitor]
CPU Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [3.8 sec]
CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [200 RPM]
CPU Fan Profile [Manual]
CPU Upper Temperature [70]
CPU Fan Max. Duty Cycle (%) [70]
CPU Middle Temperature [60]
CPU Fan Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [50]
CPU Lower Temperature [30]
CPU Fan Min. Duty Cycle (%) [40]
AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [3.8 sec]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Turbo]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 3 Smoothing Up/Down Time [3.8 sec]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Turbo]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
OnChip SATA Channel [Auto]
OnChip SATA Type [AHCI]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
IR Config [RX & TX0 Only]
SdForce18 Enable [Disabled]
SD Mode configuration [AMDA]
Uart 0 Enable [Enabled]
Uart 1 Enable [Enabled]
I2C 0 Enable [Enabled]
I2C 1 Enable [Enabled]
I2C 2 Enable [Disabled]
I2C 3 Enable [Disabled]
GPIO Devices Support [Auto]
ESATA Port On Port 0 [Auto]
ESATA Port On Port 1 [Auto]
ESATA Port On Port 2 [Auto]
ESATA Port On Port 3 [Auto]
ESATA Port On Port 4 [Auto]
ESATA Port On Port 5 [Auto]
ESATA Port On Port 6 [Auto]
ESATA Port On Port 7 [Auto]
SATA Power On Port 0 [Auto]
SATA Power On Port 1 [Auto]
SATA Power On Port 2 [Auto]
SATA Power On Port 3 [Auto]
SATA Power On Port 4 [Auto]
SATA Power On Port 5 [Auto]
SATA Power On Port 6 [Auto]
SATA Power On Port 7 [Auto]
SATA Port 0 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 1 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 2 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 3 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 4 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 5 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 6 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 7 MODE [Auto]
SATA Hot-Removable Support [Auto]
SATA 6 AHCI Support [Auto]
Int. Clk Differential Spread [Auto]
SATA MAXGEN2 CAP OPTION [Auto]
SATA CLK Mode Option [Auto]
Aggressive Link PM Capability [Auto]
Port Multiplier Capability [Auto]
SATA Ports Auto Clock Control [Auto]
SATA Partial State Capability [Auto]
SATA FIS Based Switching [Auto]
SATA Command Completion Coalescing Support [Auto]
SATA Slumber State Capability [Auto]
SATA MSI Capability Support [Auto]
SATA Target Support 8 Devices [Auto]
Generic Mode [Auto]
SATA AHCI Enclosure [Auto]
SATA SGPIO 0 [Auto]
SATA SGPIO 1 [Disabled]
SATA PHY PLL [Auto]
AC/DC Change Message Delivery [Disabled]
TimerTick Tracking [Auto]
Clock Interrupt Tag [Auto]
EHCI Traffic Handling [Disabled]
Fusion Message C Multi-Core [Disabled]
Fusion Message C State [Disabled]
SPI Read Mode [Auto]
SPI 100MHz Support [Auto]
SPI Normal Speed [Auto]
SPI Fast Read Speed [Auto]
SPI Burst Write [Auto]
I2C 0 D3 Support [Auto]
I2C 1 D3 Support [Auto]
I2C 2 D3 Support [Auto]
I2C 3 D3 Support [Auto]
I2C 4 D3 Support [Auto]
I2C 5 D3 Support [Auto]
UART 0 D3 Support [Auto]
UART 1 D3 Support [Auto]
UART 2 D3 Support [Auto]
UART 3 D3 Support [Auto]
SATA D3 Support [Auto]
EHCI D3 Support [Auto]
XHCI D3 Support [Auto]
SD D3 Support [Auto]
S0I3 [Auto]
Chipset Power Saving Features [Enabled]
SB Clock Spread Spectrum [Auto]
SB Clock Spread Spectrum Option [-0.375%]
HPET In SB [Auto]
MsiDis in HPET [Auto]
_OSC For PCI0 [Auto]
USB Phy Power Down [Auto]
PCIB_CLK_Stop Override [0]
USB MSI Option [Auto]
LPC MSI Option [Auto]
PCIBridge MSI Option [Auto]
AB MSI Option [Auto]
SB C1E Support [Auto]
SB Hardware Reduced Support [Auto]
GPP Serial Debug Bus Enable [Auto]
PSPP Policy [Auto]
Memory Clock [Auto]
Bank Interleaving [Enabled]
Channel Interleaving [Enabled]
Memory Clear [Disabled]
Fast Boot [Enabled]
Next Boot after AC Power Loss [Normal Boot]
Boot Logo Display [Auto]
POST Delay Time [3 sec]
Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
Launch CSM [Enabled]
Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
OS Type [Other OS]
Setup Animator [Disabled]
ASUS Grid Install Service [Enabled]
Load from Profile [5]
Profile Name [4.1_3466S]
Save to Profile [3]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
BCLK Frequency [Auto]
CPU Ratio [Auto]
Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]



Recent small runs of P95 8K 4096K, 49min, 30min, ~25C room. 19hr run when set profile.

You'll see CPU Core Voltage (SVI2 TFN) will not lower past x point, as the sensor will stop responding when CPU is idle. So reference VID/VCORE.


----------



## lordzed83

gupsterg said:


> I set PState 0 as 4.1GHz, with VID 1.318V, in AMD CBS (no other changes there from defaults). I have down clocking and volting in W7P x64 / Linux Mint.
> 
> My settings in spoiler below.
> 
> HW:-
> 
> C7H UEFI 0602
> 2700X Batch UA 1805 SUS
> ThermalRight Archon IB-E X2 with 2x TY143, lapped base, AS5
> F4-3200C14D-16GTZ
> 
> Sapphire Toxic HD5850
> Samsung EVO 840 250GB
> 
> Cooler Master V650
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> [2018/05/15 07:21:32]
> Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
> eCLK Mode [Synchronous mode]
> BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
> BCLK_Divider [Auto]
> Performance Enhancer [Default]
> CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
> Performance Bias [None]
> Memory Frequency [DDR4-3466MHz]
> Core Performance Boost [Disabled]
> SMT Mode [Enabled]
> TPU [Keep Current Settings]
> CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
> CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
> - VDDSOC Voltage Override [0.96875]
> DRAM Voltage [1.37000]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [1.80000]
> 1.05V SB Voltage [1.05000]
> Target TDP [Auto]
> TRC_EOM [Auto]
> TRTP_EOM [Auto]
> TRRS_S_EOM [Auto]
> TRRS_L_EOM [Auto]
> TWTR_EOM [Auto]
> TWTR_L_EOM [Auto]
> TWCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWR_EOM [Auto]
> TFAW_EOM [Auto]
> TRCT_EOM [Auto]
> TREFI_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_DD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SC_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_DD_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SD_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SC_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWRRD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDWR_EOM [Auto]
> TWRRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto]
> DRAM CAS# Latency [15]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [15]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [15]
> DRAM RAS# PRE Time [15]
> DRAM RAS# ACT Time [35]
> Trc [54]
> TrrdS [6]
> TrrdL [9]
> Tfaw [36]
> TwtrS [4]
> TwtrL [12]
> Twr [12]
> Trcpage [Auto]
> TrdrdScl [2]
> TwrwrScl [2]
> Trfc [333]
> Trfc2 [Auto]
> Trfc4 [Auto]
> Tcwl [14]
> Trtp [8]
> Trdwr [Auto]
> Twrrd [3]
> TwrwrSc [1]
> TwrwrSd [7]
> TwrwrDd [7]
> TrdrdSc [1]
> TrdrdSd [5]
> TrdrdDd [5]
> Tcke [6]
> ProcODT [48 ohm]
> Cmd2T [1T]
> Gear Down Mode [Disabled]
> Power Down Enable [Disabled]
> RttNom [Auto]
> RttWr [Auto]
> RttPark [Auto]
> MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
> MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
> MemCkeSetup [Auto]
> MemCadBusClkDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [Auto]
> VTTDDR Voltage [0.68750]
> VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
> VDDP Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
> CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
> 2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
> PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
> PLL reference voltage [Auto]
> T Offset [Auto]
> Sense MI Skew [Disabled]
> Sense MI Offset [Auto]
> Promontory presence [Auto]
> Clock Amplitude [Auto]
> CLDO VDDP voltage [Auto]
> CPU Load-line Calibration [Auto]
> CPU Current Capability [Auto]
> CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Auto]
> VRM Spread Spectrum [Disabled]
> Active Frequency Mode [Disabled]
> CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
> CPU Power Phase Control [Auto]
> CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
> VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Auto]
> VDDSOC Current Capability [Auto]
> VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Auto]
> VDDSOC Phase Control [Auto]
> DRAM Current Capability [100%]
> DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
> DRAM Switching Frequency [Auto]
> DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.37000]
> Security Device Support [Enable]
> Firmware TPM [Disable]
> Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
> PSS Support [Auto]
> SVM Mode [Disabled]
> PT XHCI GEN1 [Auto]
> PT XHCI GEN2 [Auto]
> PT USB Equalization4 [Auto]
> PT USB Redriver [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 0 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 1 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 2 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 3 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 4 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 5 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 6 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 7 [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 0 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 1 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 2 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 3 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 4 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 5 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 6 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 7 Enable [Auto]
> Onboard PCIE LAN PXE ROM [Enabled]
> AMD CRB EHCI Debug port switch [Disabled]
> Onboard LED [Enabled]
> Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
> Primary Video Device [PCIE / PCI Video]
> SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
> SATA Mode [AHCI]
> NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
> SMART Self Test [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> ErP Ready [Disabled]
> Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
> Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
> Power On By RTC [Disabled]
> HD Audio Controller [Disabled]
> M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
> PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
> PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
> M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
> M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
> SB Link Mode [Auto]
> Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
> USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
> When system is in working state [On]
> When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [On]
> Intel LAN Controller [Disabled]
> Wi-Fi Controller [Enabled]
> Bluetooth Controller [Enabled]
> Network Stack [Disabled]
> Debug Port Table [Disabled]
> Debug Port Table 2 [Disabled]
> Device [Samsung SSD 840 EVO 250GB]
> Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
> XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
> USB Mass Storage Driver Support [Enabled]
> KingstonDataTraveler 108PMAP [Auto]
> U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
> U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
> U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> U31G1_5 [Enabled]
> U31G1_6 [Enabled]
> U31G1_7 [Enabled]
> U31G1_8 [Enabled]
> U31G1_9 [Enabled]
> U31G1_10 [Enabled]
> USB11 [Enabled]
> USB12 [Enabled]
> USB13 [Enabled]
> USB14 [Enabled]
> USB15 [Enabled]
> CPU Temperature [Monitor]
> MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
> VRM Temperature [Monitor]
> PCH Temperature [Monitor]
> T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
> CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
> AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
> W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
> W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
> HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
> CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
> 3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
> 5V Voltage [Monitor]
> 12V Voltage [Monitor]
> CPU Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [3.8 sec]
> CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [200 RPM]
> CPU Fan Profile [Manual]
> CPU Upper Temperature [70]
> CPU Fan Max. Duty Cycle (%) [70]
> CPU Middle Temperature [60]
> CPU Fan Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [50]
> CPU Lower Temperature [30]
> CPU Fan Min. Duty Cycle (%) [40]
> AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [3.8 sec]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Turbo]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 3 Smoothing Up/Down Time [3.8 sec]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Turbo]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> OnChip SATA Channel [Auto]
> OnChip SATA Type [AHCI]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> IR Config [RX & TX0 Only]
> SdForce18 Enable [Disabled]
> SD Mode configuration [AMDA]
> Uart 0 Enable [Enabled]
> Uart 1 Enable [Enabled]
> I2C 0 Enable [Enabled]
> I2C 1 Enable [Enabled]
> I2C 2 Enable [Disabled]
> I2C 3 Enable [Disabled]
> GPIO Devices Support [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 0 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 1 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 2 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 3 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 4 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 5 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 6 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 7 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 0 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 1 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 2 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 3 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 4 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 5 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 6 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 7 [Auto]
> SATA Port 0 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 1 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 2 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 3 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 4 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 5 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 6 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 7 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Hot-Removable Support [Auto]
> SATA 6 AHCI Support [Auto]
> Int. Clk Differential Spread [Auto]
> SATA MAXGEN2 CAP OPTION [Auto]
> SATA CLK Mode Option [Auto]
> Aggressive Link PM Capability [Auto]
> Port Multiplier Capability [Auto]
> SATA Ports Auto Clock Control [Auto]
> SATA Partial State Capability [Auto]
> SATA FIS Based Switching [Auto]
> SATA Command Completion Coalescing Support [Auto]
> SATA Slumber State Capability [Auto]
> SATA MSI Capability Support [Auto]
> SATA Target Support 8 Devices [Auto]
> Generic Mode [Auto]
> SATA AHCI Enclosure [Auto]
> SATA SGPIO 0 [Auto]
> SATA SGPIO 1 [Disabled]
> SATA PHY PLL [Auto]
> AC/DC Change Message Delivery [Disabled]
> TimerTick Tracking [Auto]
> Clock Interrupt Tag [Auto]
> EHCI Traffic Handling [Disabled]
> Fusion Message C Multi-Core [Disabled]
> Fusion Message C State [Disabled]
> SPI Read Mode [Auto]
> SPI 100MHz Support [Auto]
> SPI Normal Speed [Auto]
> SPI Fast Read Speed [Auto]
> SPI Burst Write [Auto]
> I2C 0 D3 Support [Auto]
> I2C 1 D3 Support [Auto]
> I2C 2 D3 Support [Auto]
> I2C 3 D3 Support [Auto]
> I2C 4 D3 Support [Auto]
> I2C 5 D3 Support [Auto]
> UART 0 D3 Support [Auto]
> UART 1 D3 Support [Auto]
> UART 2 D3 Support [Auto]
> UART 3 D3 Support [Auto]
> SATA D3 Support [Auto]
> EHCI D3 Support [Auto]
> XHCI D3 Support [Auto]
> SD D3 Support [Auto]
> S0I3 [Auto]
> Chipset Power Saving Features [Enabled]
> SB Clock Spread Spectrum [Auto]
> SB Clock Spread Spectrum Option [-0.375%]
> HPET In SB [Auto]
> MsiDis in HPET [Auto]
> _OSC For PCI0 [Auto]
> USB Phy Power Down [Auto]
> PCIB_CLK_Stop Override [0]
> USB MSI Option [Auto]
> LPC MSI Option [Auto]
> PCIBridge MSI Option [Auto]
> AB MSI Option [Auto]
> SB C1E Support [Auto]
> SB Hardware Reduced Support [Auto]
> GPP Serial Debug Bus Enable [Auto]
> PSPP Policy [Auto]
> Memory Clock [Auto]
> Bank Interleaving [Enabled]
> Channel Interleaving [Enabled]
> Memory Clear [Disabled]
> Fast Boot [Enabled]
> Next Boot after AC Power Loss [Normal Boot]
> Boot Logo Display [Auto]
> POST Delay Time [3 sec]
> Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
> Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
> Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
> Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
> Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
> Launch CSM [Enabled]
> Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
> Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
> Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
> Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
> OS Type [Other OS]
> Setup Animator [Disabled]
> ASUS Grid Install Service [Enabled]
> Load from Profile [5]
> Profile Name [4.1_3466S]
> Save to Profile [3]
> CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
> VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> BCLK Frequency [Auto]
> CPU Ratio [Auto]
> Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
> 
> 
> 
> Recent small runs of P95 8K 4096K, 49min, 30min, ~25C room. 19hr run when set profile.
> 
> You'll see CPU Core Voltage (SVI2 TFN) will not lower past x point, as the sensor will stop responding when CPU is idle. So reference VID/VCORE.


You are on OLD bios new one Downvolting does not work :/
On previous bios when it downclocked i was around 14-15w now lowest I seen is 28w. Idling 5c higher cause its on 1.43 volts lol


----------



## CJMitsuki

lordzed83 said:


> You are on OLD bios new one Downvolting does not work :/
> On previous bios when it downclocked i was around 14-15w now lowest I seen is 28w. Idling 5c higher cause its on 1.43 volts lol



I works for me and im on new bios...Something is quite strange here for it affect certain users and not others. I cant seem to spot the problem though.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> I've always thought that if LLC was causing any spikes you would see them at some point - even without a scope, but I guess there is a small chance there could be very, very brief spikes that can't be much higher than we see with PE modes if at all. Ran my last board on LLC5 for a year. I haven't tested LLC on 0702 manual mode but it works with offset.
> 
> Have a great time on holiday - I'm sure you will....hard not to in Bali


Ye jump is around 200mv over what You et when load hits.


----------



## gupsterg

lordzed83 said:


> You are on OLD bios new one Downvolting does not work :/
> On previous bios when it downclocked i was around 14-15w now lowest I seen is 28w. Idling 5c higher cause its on 1.43 volts lol


LOOL.

Just for you, link (had been on HCI prior). On new UEFI with WMI implementation voltages with (VRM) under the ASUS EC section now are correct for me, no need to customise them.

Why I hadn't updated before to 0702 was because I have 10 sticks of Samsung B die 3200MHz C14 RAM and wanted to see what I could get out of them. Linked screenie is using 2 dimms from F4-3200C14Q-32GTZSW, CPU/mobo setup is as posted before but just got these upto 3400MHz so far and will be aiming to see what more I can get.



lordzed83 said:


> @elmor
> Bios bug simple mine does not downvolt either on new bios used to do on previous.
> 
> 
> 
> Krisztias said:
> 
> 
> 
> C6H has the same issue
> 
> 
> 
> wisepds said:
> 
> 
> 
> THANKS!!! IT'S NOT JUST ME. UFFFFFF
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Again non issue, link.

CPU Core Voltage (SVI2 TFN) will not go as low as VID/VCORE, as at idle sensor is not reporting back to SW.


----------



## wisepds

I have test all configuration, and mine doesn't undervolting... no mater what i do....


----------



## wisepds

gupsterg said:


> LOOL.
> 
> Just for you, link (had been on HCI prior). On new UEFI with WMI implementation voltages with (VRM) under the ASUS EC section now are correct for me, no need to customise them.
> 
> Why I hadn't updated before to 0702 was because I have 10 sticks of Samsung B die 3200MHz C14 RAM and wanted to see what I could get out of them. Linked screenie is using 2 dimms from F4-3200C14Q-32GTZSW, CPU/mobo setup is as posted before but just got these upto 3400MHz so far and will be aiming to see what more I can get.
> 
> 
> 
> Again non issue, link.
> 
> CPU Core Voltage (SVI2 TFN) will not go as low as VID/VCORE, as at idle sensor is not reporting back to SW.


Tell me one configuration you want to test and i'll test for you on my computer to check if something happens...(I mean Downvolting).


----------



## lordzed83

wisepds said:


> Tell me one configuration you want to test and i'll test for you on my computer to check if something happens...(I mean Downvolting).


**** Me mate have You read that hes on old bios that it worked ??? Over a week You are looking for fix that DOES NOT EXIST.

Want downwvolting just flash 0602 and deal with problems that bios got instead.


----------



## lordzed83

gupsterg said:


> LOOL.
> 
> Just for you, link (had been on HCI prior). On new UEFI with WMI implementation voltages with (VRM) under the ASUS EC section now are correct for me, no need to customise them.
> 
> Why I hadn't updated before to 0702 was because I have 10 sticks of Samsung B die 3200MHz C14 RAM and wanted to see what I could get out of them. Linked screenie is using 2 dimms from F4-3200C14Q-32GTZSW, CPU/mobo setup is as posted before but just got these upto 3400MHz so far and will be aiming to see what more I can get.
> 
> 
> 
> Again non issue, link.
> 
> CPU Core Voltage (SVI2 TFN) will not go as low as VID/VCORE, as at idle sensor is not reporting back to SW.


Not sure about this new bios after week on it. It's not faster cant see it fixing Anything. Need More volts for same scores. Anddoes not drop volts like 0602 did :/
I think @crakej got same exepirience with this bios :/


----------



## lordzed83

@gupsterg
look here pstate oc with + offset same as on 0602









Vid stays 1.425 no matter what power plan offset setting or P0 volts setting. Just sits at 1.425


----------



## gupsterg

@lordzed83

Last post as a reply to you, I'm on UEFI 0702.
@wisepds

I'll look at your settings file in past post. Please share a HWINFO screenie like I did.


----------



## wisepds

gupsterg said:


> @lordzed83
> 
> Last post as a reply to you, I'm on UEFI 0702.
> 
> @wisepds
> 
> I'll look at your settings file in past post. Please share a HWINFO screenie like I did.


Ok, i'll do it


----------



## crakej

0702 for me so far...

My voltages in ASUS EC Section are still not displaying what I've set in the bios. SVI2 TFN seems the only reliable source for me - though I have figured out the differences now it can be very confusing. Had this on 0601 as well.

Fixed OC with offset voltage is working for me (not tried p-states as not needed them) - did not work on 0601

My 'best' OC with 3600 ram no longer works - bluescreens twice a day. This didn't happen on 0601

Downclocking AND downvolting works for me with Ryzen Balanced P Plan (For Ryzen 1xxx) so no need for p-states.

Remember I'm Ryzen 1 so there could (almost certainly) be differences between the different cpu types.

More testing over next couple of days....haven't had a proper chance with this bios yet really! 

I must just pay for some nice cables so I can access my probe-it points safely. Credit card me thinks....


----------



## gupsterg

wisepds said:


> Here is my configuration (Attached file)
> 
> I hope you find the reason to not do downvolting!!


I compared your attached log file to mine. Your dump of settings has a lot of extra information that normally isn't in a settings txt. I have no answer why it is as such.

Here is short video of me comparing your settings file with mine, left mine, right yours.



Spoiler













wisepds said:


> Ok, i'll do it


Also post the motherboard page screen and CPU configuration page.


----------



## wisepds

gupsterg said:


> I compared your attached log file to mine. Your dump of settings has a lot of extra information that normally isn't in a settings txt. I have no answer why it is as such.
> 
> Here is short video of me comparing your settings file with mine, left mine, right yours.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> https://youtu.be/fqzURdJut50
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also post the motherboard page screen and CPU configuration page.


I don't know why....
Ok, i'm going to do it...


----------



## wisepds

gupsterg said:


> I compared your attached log file to mine. Your dump of settings has a lot of extra information that normally isn't in a settings txt. I have no answer why it is as such.
> 
> Here is short video of me comparing your settings file with mine, left mine, right yours.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> https://youtu.be/fqzURdJut50
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also post the motherboard page screen and CPU configuration page.


Thanks for your help. Here are the screenshots:


----------



## MNKyDeth

Ordered a 2700x and CH7 without wifi last night. Super excited to do this build!

Is there a definitive guide on overclocking Ryzen? I have been looking but cant seem to find one. Should I stick to that ram overclocking guide and this thread only for reference?

I should get the parts Tuesday, possibly Wednesday July 3-4. Just trying to do my homework so I have an idea of whats going on before I get them.



Also, my build will have a GTX 1070ti and a Samsung 970 pro nvme. Can I populate any of the other pci-e slots without effecting performance? I was hoping to populate the bottom slot with a Blackmagic Design Intensity Pro 4K that is a 4x card. If I populate the middle pci-e slot with this card I believe it will take my gpu down to 8x correct?
I do have a Asus Xonar STX that I really enjoy using in Linux. Not sure if the onboard audio on this board works with Linux or not but I figured it was worth the gamble.


----------



## mito1172

wisepds said:


> Thanks for your help. Here are the screenshots:


why ram 2133? What is ram MHz?


----------



## wisepds

mito1172 said:


> why ram 2133? What is ram MHz?


Because i'm testing with all auto except cpu OC

Now it's at 3200 Mhz Cl14


----------



## mito1172

wisepds said:


> Because i'm testing with all auto except cpu OC
> 
> Now it's at 3200 Mhz Cl14


Okay understood :thumb:


----------



## crakej

Interesting note.... I ran HWInfo 3.....4 hours ago and just realised it's stopped updating. Nothing I can do fixes it! Strangely, I can disable, then re-enable each sensor group, but nothing changes. All displayed readings are stuck. Time on HWInfo clock - 0:08:26. So just eight minutes in. Clicking the clock does't work either, had to close and re-open.

No other programs were actively monitoring


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> I've always thought that if LLC was causing any spikes you would see them at some point - even without a scope, but I guess there is a small chance there could be very, very brief spikes that can't be much higher than we see with PE modes if at all. Ran my last board on LLC5 for a year. I haven't tested LLC on 0702 manual mode but it works with offset.
> 
> Have a great time on holiday - I'm sure you will....hard not to in Bali


Hehe thanks a lot..yes it's great over here! 

I dunno about the spikes, don't have any oscilloscope. But I definitly trust on the words of stilt on that. Only don't know if those are really a concern for me. I'm more then happy if my hardware is still installed in a system for couple of years. Mostly not 

I also watched many videos from Buildzoid doing some tests with oscilloscope. Didn't catch him talking about any spikes with LLC, maybe missed something ?!! Anyways... Good luck over there..cheers


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> I compared your attached log file to mine. Your dump of settings has a lot of extra information that normally isn't in a settings txt. I have no answer why it is as such..


Hey gup mate hope u are well..

I can almost certainly say that's happening if you play a lot with bios settings/profiles mixing without doing a proper Clear cmos sometimes.

That's why I recommended that many times. My dump is clean as yours always. I'm always clearing it before I do Major changes or testings. I even Clear before any profile change to be sure nothing effects it..


----------



## lordzed83

@gupsterg ye i know but what Overclock You use ?? Just multiplyer and offset ?? Pstate + ofset ?? Or either with fixed Voltage ??
As You see mine Does not drop volts on 0702 :/ spend one day trying to figure out ***. Flashed back 0602 loaded profile Works back to 0702 NO GO


BTW new windows insider build is out 17704 testing time.


----------



## gupsterg

0702 4.1 3400 Alpha testing zip

@lordzed83

PState 0 OC, see ZIP above.

As stated before C6H or C7H I have down volting/clocking, non issue for me on 0601 or 0702.

As stated and shown in screenshots before, I am using UEFI 0702. You will see CPU-Z right near the bottom showing Mainboard and SPD pages in screenies.

Please I can not keep repeating the same information over and over again.

@crakej

HWINFO working after even 8.5hrs for me, even if I lost 1 thread in test  .

@majestynl

All good chap  , hope you well  .

It seems as 0702 with later AEGA/ASUS improvements is dumping more settings in txt  , liking this for sure  .

@wisepds

Ref zip  .

We have same mobo EC FWs, same CPU, etc  and as just stated above new UEFI dumps more settings in txt  . So we now have an answer on the difference I saw before  .

Definitely CPU is not down volting on your setup, thank you for providing information as requested  .

Do CMOSCLR and try settings on Extreme Tweaker page:-

Performance Enhancer [Default]
Core Performance Boost [Disabled]

Then set PState 0 OC like I have within AMD CBS:-

Custom Pstate0 [Custom]
Pstate0 FID [a4]
Pstate0 DID [8]
Pstate0 VID [25]

Leave Global C-state Control as [Auto]. When you change Pstate0 VID, you will see near the top of screen a grey box highlighting the VID to be used, so set as you need  .

Please provide a screenshot of power plan page in OS. As I'm on W7P ignore I use High Performance plan/Core parking, need to see the "Processor power management" sections.

I also noted you are using:-

DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A1]

Not that it should matter for issue of down volting, but I would use DIMM slots A2 and B2, as those are primary slots for each channel.


----------



## wisepds

gupsterg said:


> 0702 4.1 3400 Alpha testing zip
> 
> @lordzed83
> 
> PState 0 OC, see ZIP above.
> 
> As stated before C6H or C7H I have down volting/clocking, non issue for me on 0601 or 0702.
> 
> As stated and shown in screenshots before, I am using UEFI 0702. You will see CPU-Z right near the bottom showing Mainboard and SPD pages in screenies.
> 
> Please I can not keep repeating the same information over and over again.
> 
> @crakej
> 
> HWINFO working after even 8.5hrs for me, even if I lost 1 thread in test  .
> 
> @majestynl
> 
> All good chap  , hope you well  .
> 
> It seems as 0702 with later AEGA/ASUS improvements is dumping more settings in txt  , liking this for sure  .
> 
> @wisepds
> 
> Ref zip  .
> 
> We have same mobo EC FWs, same CPU, etc  and as just stated above new UEFI dumps more settings in txt  . So we now have an answer on the difference I saw before  .
> 
> Definitely CPU is not down volting on your setup, thank you for providing information as requested  .
> 
> Do CMOSCLR and try settings on Extreme Tweaker page:-
> 
> Performance Enhancer [Default]
> Core Performance Boost [Disabled]
> 
> Then set PState 0 OC like I have within AMD CBS:-
> 
> Custom Pstate0 [Custom]
> Pstate0 FID [a4]
> Pstate0 DID [8]
> Pstate0 VID [25]
> 
> Leave Global C-state Control as [Auto]. When you change Pstate0 VID, you will see near the top of screen a grey box highlighting the VID to be used, so set as you need  .
> 
> Please provide a screenshot of power plan page in OS. As I'm on W7P ignore I use High Performance plan/Core parking, need to see the "Processor power management" sections.
> 
> I also noted you are using:-
> 
> DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A1]
> 
> Not that it should matter for issue of down volting, but I would use DIMM slots A2 and B2, as those are primary slots for each channel.


Ok!! I'll do it.. i have 4x8gb ddr 3200 cl14 samsung b-die...


----------



## lordzed83

@gupsterg I got no clue *** is wrong. Reflashed bios again on default downvolts as soon as i make ONLY change put AA ain P0 to have 4.25 downvolting is out of window.


----------



## gupsterg

wisepds said:


> Ok!! I'll do it.. i have 4x8gb ddr 3200 cl14 samsung b-die...


Cheers  , sorry I should have known from HWINFO screenshot  , was just looking at CPU voltages  .



lordzed83 said:


> @gupsterg I got no clue *** is wrong. Reflashed bios again on default downvolts as soon as i make ONLY change put AA ain P0 to have 4.25 downvolting is out of window.


As long as OS settings are correct, the only thing I can think is it's some kinda AGESA bug, that affects some CPUs then. Hopefully working closer with wisepds we have something that Elmor can use/try to replicate.

I made further changes to my setup and still have down volting/clocking. I will be doing further tests to see if I lose down volting/clocking.


----------



## Syldon

gupsterg said:


> As long as OS settings are correct, the only thing I can think is it's some kinda AGESA bug, that affects some CPUs then. Hopefully working closer with wisepds we have something that Elmor can use/try to replicate.



Forum is soo buggy.
Ignore what was written here 2 mins ago.

I can see the system downvolting on startup. Once everything is loaded it stops downvolting.

What chipset driver are you using Gupsterg? I am on 18.10 from AMD site. I get the same issue as lordz.


----------



## gupsterg

@Syldon

a) How does that differ from what I have stated!?

b) Read my posts prior to Elmor's post to get more context on his reply  .

Chipset voltage is supposed to be 1.05V at UEFI defaults or even [Auto]. When I saw >1.05V in software monitoring/probeit point I thought board is overvolting. Elmor than explained it is an error'd read back from early batch of motherboards. UEFI defaults / [Auto] will show ~50mV above 1.05V but the chipset is getting 1.05V. So when I set 1.0V to have 1.05V in SW monitoring/probit points I was undervolting. Now I set as 1.05V manually and will see ~1.09V in SW monitoring/probeit point *but chipset is getting 1.05V.*

I only use ever AMD site driver, deffo a 18.10 edition, will check and update post.

@wisepds @lordzed83

The only way so far I have down volting/clocking on C7H UEFI 0702 is by using PState 0 OC. If I use CPU Core Ratio on Extreme Tweaker I have down clocking but no down volting. It does not matter if I use CPU Core Voltage on Extreme Tweaker is Offset +/- or Manual I do not have down volting.


----------



## lordzed83

gupsterg said:


> @Syldon
> 
> a) How does that differ from what I have stated!?
> 
> b) Read my posts prior to Elmor's post to get more context on his reply /forum/images/smilies/wink.gif .
> 
> Chipset voltage is supposed to be 1.05V at UEFI defaults or even [Auto]. When I saw >1.05V in software monitoring/probeit point I thought board is overvolting. Elmor than explained it is an error'd read back from early batch of motherboards. UEFI defaults / [Auto] will show ~50mV above 1.05V but the chipset is getting 1.05V. So when I set 1.0V to have 1.05V in SW monitoring/probit points I was undervolting. Now I set as 1.05V manually and will see ~1.09V in SW monitoring/probeit point *but chipset is getting 1.05V.*
> 
> I only use ever AMD site driver, deffo a 18.10 edition, will check and update post.
> 
> @wisepds @lordzed83
> 
> The only way so far I have down volting/clocking on C7H UEFI 0702 is by using PState 0 OC. If I use CPU Core Ratio on Extreme Tweaker I have down clocking but no down volting. It does not matter if I use CPU Core Voltage on Extreme Tweaker is Offset +/- or Manual I do not have down volting.


Guess new bios dorles not like adding extra volts then. Its working fine on previous bios.

Once Im back from track ill try to set pstate volts to 1.43 thats around 13 of i remember and see how llc auto behaves then.


Btw how ya getting on qith ram tests??


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> @majestynl
> 
> All good chap  , hope you well  .
> 
> It seems as 0702 with later AEGA/ASUS improvements is dumping more settings in txt  , liking this for sure  .


Great!! ..yeap thanks everything alright.just enjoying on holidays 



gupsterg said:


> @wisepds @lordzed83
> 
> The only way so far I have down volting/clocking on C7H UEFI 0702 is by using PState 0 OC. If I use CPU Core Ratio on Extreme Tweaker I have down clocking but no down volting. It does not matter if I use CPU Core Voltage on Extreme Tweaker is Offset +/- or Manual I do not have down volting.


LOL..Would be very funny if they still use core ratio on ET page... Told them all few pages back..

https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-232.html#post27511588


----------



## gupsterg

lordzed83 said:


> Guess new bios dorles not like adding extra volts then. Its working fine on previous bios.
> 
> Once Im back from track ill try to set pstate volts to 1.43 thats around 13 of i remember and see how llc auto behaves then.
> 
> 
> Btw how ya getting on qith ram tests??


Something has changed IMO. As using offset mode should allow down volting. I will reconfirm with other boards when they are not under stability testing.

Slow stage of testing for RAM. Just think I've snagged 3400MHz on 2 dimms of F4-3200C14Q-32GTZSW. Next stage be 3466MHz.

2 dimms out of F4-3200C14Q-32GVK I can attain 3466MHz The Stilt like F4-3200C14D-16GTZ, but 3533MHz still out of reach .

I do know I can gain 4.15GHz on CPU on air ~1.356V VID, LLC: [AUTO]. May soon water cool the chip and see what more I can get as I really don't wanna see peaks above ~70C. IIRC on ait I'm hoovering around there for peaks.



majestynl said:


> Great!! ..yeap thanks everything alright.just enjoying on holidays


Nice :thumb: . Scorching here in the UK, luv'ing it in the garden with a :drink:.



majestynl said:


> LOL..Would be very funny if they still use core ratio on ET page... Told them all few pages back..
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-232.html#post27511588


Even on 0601 I used PState 0 OC, dunno what others were using, will try core ratio change, etc on it soon.

CPU Core Ratio change on Extreme Tweaker with offset voltage does down clock/volt on C6H/ZE. Not used gen 2 CPU on them.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> @Syldon
> 
> Chipset voltage is supposed to be 1.05V at UEFI defaults or even [Auto]. When I saw >1.05V in software monitoring/probeit point I thought board is overvolting. Elmor than explained it is an error'd read back from early batch of motherboards. UEFI defaults / [Auto] will show ~50mV above 1.05V but the chipset is getting 1.05V. So when I set 1.0V to have 1.05V in SW monitoring/probit points I was undervolting. Now I set as 1.05V manually and will see ~1.09V in SW monitoring/probeit point *but chipset is getting 1.05V.*
> 
> The only way so far I have down volting/clocking on C7H UEFI 0702 is by using PState 0 OC. If I use CPU Core Ratio on Extreme Tweaker I have down clocking but no down volting. It does not matter if I use CPU Core Voltage on Extreme Tweaker is Offset +/- or Manual I do not have down volting.


I have this 'problem' as well - my 1.05 shows as 1.08/9 - so just ignore it now... most of the voltages in the EC section are display incorrectly for me.

Downclocking and volting is working well for me (Ryzen 1xxx) with fixed ratio, Ryzen Balanced power plan and offset voltage (on 0702). Wasn't working before. Just doing more experiments, starting from defaults to try see how it's all working.


----------



## hurricane28

gupsterg said:


> Cheers  , sorry I should have known from HWINFO screenshot  , was just looking at CPU voltages  .
> 
> 
> 
> As long as OS settings are correct, the only thing I can think is it's some kinda AGESA bug, that affects some CPUs then. Hopefully working closer with wisepds we have something that Elmor can use/try to replicate.
> 
> I made further changes to my setup and still have down volting/clocking. I will be doing further tests to see if I lose down volting/clocking.


Its been a while since Elmor posted here or in the C6H thread man, i think he doesn't work for Asus anymore or something.. I tagged him among other users here but we got no response.


----------



## mtrai

hurricane28 said:


> Its been a while since Elmor posted here or in the C6H thread man, i think he doesn't work for Asus anymore or something.. I tagged him among other users here but we got no response.


He posted just the other day in the Asus ZenStates thread.


----------



## Syldon

gupsterg said:


> @Syldon
> 
> a) How does that differ from what I have stated!?
> 
> b) Read my posts prior to Elmor's post to get more context on his reply  .


Forum is buggy it picked up on what I wrote, and abandoned last week. I abandoned that post because on second look at the screenie of the OP he had 1.05v selected, but it still showed 1.10v as actual reading. The bios is written to ignore that sort of attempt to downvolt. The same goes for 1.8v, which on mine defaults 1.83v. I have to drop below 1.8 to get it to downvolt. If I set it to 1.8v, it still comes back as 1.83v.

Anyways, that was not on the screen when I submitted. As I said the forum is buggy. Fortunately I reread my post, which I quite often don't if I have previewed it. 


If you look back at my post. I edited it to reflect what I wanted to ask.


----------



## wisepds

gupsterg said:


> 0702 4.1 3400 Alpha testing zip
> 
> @lordzed83
> 
> PState 0 OC, see ZIP above.
> 
> As stated before C6H or C7H I have down volting/clocking, non issue for me on 0601 or 0702.
> 
> As stated and shown in screenshots before, I am using UEFI 0702. You will see CPU-Z right near the bottom showing Mainboard and SPD pages in screenies.
> 
> Please I can not keep repeating the same information over and over again.
> 
> @crakej
> 
> HWINFO working after even 8.5hrs for me, even if I lost 1 thread in test  .
> 
> @majestynl
> 
> All good chap  , hope you well  .
> 
> It seems as 0702 with later AEGA/ASUS improvements is dumping more settings in txt  , liking this for sure  .
> 
> @wisepds
> 
> Ref zip  .
> 
> We have same mobo EC FWs, same CPU, etc  and as just stated above new UEFI dumps more settings in txt  . So we now have an answer on the difference I saw before  .
> 
> Definitely CPU is not down volting on your setup, thank you for providing information as requested  .
> 
> Do CMOSCLR and try settings on Extreme Tweaker page:-
> 
> Performance Enhancer [Default]
> Core Performance Boost [Disabled]
> 
> Then set PState 0 OC like I have within AMD CBS:-
> 
> Custom Pstate0 [Custom]
> Pstate0 FID [a4]
> Pstate0 DID [8]
> Pstate0 VID [25]
> 
> Leave Global C-state Control as [Auto]. When you change Pstate0 VID, you will see near the top of screen a grey box highlighting the VID to be used, so set as you need  .
> 
> Please provide a screenshot of power plan page in OS. As I'm on W7P ignore I use High Performance plan/Core parking, need to see the "Processor power management" sections.
> 
> I also noted you are using:-
> 
> DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A1]
> 
> Not that it should matter for issue of down volting, but I would use DIMM slots A2 and B2, as those are primary slots for each channel.


Done! But we are in the same point.. No downvolting:

HWINFO CAPTURE:


My balanced power plan capture:


CPU-Z Capture 


I think for me is impossible to get Downvolting...


----------



## gupsterg

wisepds said:


> My balanced power plan capture:
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Change parameter Estado minimo del procesador Configuracion to 5% and report back  .


----------



## wisepds

Done! No changes... at the moment..


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> Nice :thumb: . Scorching here in the UK, luv'ing it in the garden with a :drink:.


Thanks... Hehe great. Enjoy it mate !!




wisepds said:


> Done! No changes... at the moment..


Yep strange.. but just to be sure can you pls share screenies of
Extreme Tweaker and Pstates Page. 

And did you ever try 1 older bios version ?


----------



## wisepds

majestynl said:


> Thanks... Hehe great. Enjoy it mate !!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep strange.. but just to be sure can you pls share screenies of
> Extreme Tweaker and Pstates Page.
> 
> And did you ever try 1 older bios version ?


ok. I haven't tried old version...


----------



## majestynl

wisepds said:


> ok. I haven't tried old version...


After loading your screenshots to here pls go try that bios with exact same settings so we can exclude things...


----------



## gupsterg

@majestynl

:thumb:
@wisepds

Share UEFI settings dump, so can confirm you have PState 0 OC and not one on Extreme Tweaker and or using CPU voltage adjustment on that section of UEFI.


----------



## wisepds

Hehe a lot of homeworks for today!!!


----------



## wisepds

Unitl now, i was running this configuration at 4.1 stable at 1000000% but i haven't got downvolting...
Here is my dump and a lot of captures (BIOS 0702):
















After that i'm testing same configuration on 0501 BIOS... and as you can see (BIOS 0501):



No downvolting, but yes downclocking.


----------



## wisepds

Another experiment BIOS (0509):

All auto except: Memory (Timmings from Ryzen Dram calculator), Vram y Vboot ram (1.365v)

PE: 3 (OC)
All on AUTO...
I have attached my dump for test...

And... I HAVE DOWNVOLTING....


----------



## majestynl

wisepds said:


> Unitl now, i was running...


Oke, can you try with a fresh clear defaults and then:

- On Extreme tweaker page: leave Ai overclock tuner on auto,
Core performance boost on disabled, and use only your offset for vcore!
- Digi+ power control page: VRM spread centrum on disabled
- Use your settings in Pstates page


And just leave rest on auto just to test above base settings.

Please report back..

If fails, I can suggest 1 last thing, I had issues before with Pstates locking clocks with certain VID values. So maybe you can try another VID value, eg 1.4v in hex.with no extra offset!

Edit: see my previous post with VID hex values table in attachment.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-232.html#post27511588


----------



## wisepds

majestynl said:


> Oke, can you try with a fresh clear defaults and then:
> 
> - On Extreme tweaker page: leave Ai overclock tuner on auto,
> Core performance boost on disabled, and use only your offset for vcore!
> - Digi+ power control page: VRM spread centrum on disabled
> - Use your settings in Pstates page
> 
> 
> And just leave rest on auto just to test above base settings.
> 
> Please report back..
> 
> If fails, I can suggest 1 last thing, I had issues before with Pstates locking clocks with certain VID values. So maybe you can try another VID value, eg 1.4v in hex.with no extra offset!
> 
> Edit: see my previous post with VID hex values table in attachment.
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-232.html#post27511588



Done, but all the same than previous test... 
I have done a full Clear Cmos and only touch what you say..
I have tried other VID values and nothing... i have tried all i can... i think that i'm losting my time because is a Bios bug...


----------



## majestynl

wisepds said:


> Done, but all the same than previous test...
> I have done a full Clear Cmos and only touch what you say..
> I have tried other VID values and nothing... i have tried all i can... i think that i'm losting my time because is a Bios bug...


Hmm yeah I see.. sorry can't suggest more for now.. I tried Pstates on 0601 without any issue for 10000%. On the newest bios i haven't tried yet, will do when I'm back at home. But gupsterg has no issues. If this is a bios issue then definitely it doesn't effect everybody!


----------



## gupsterg

@wisepds

Please I can not keep repeating information  .

For Ryzen gen 2 on UEFI 0702.

i) *You can not use offset mode for CPU Core Voltage if you want down volting.* It does not matter if you use positive or negative offset, *you can not use this*.

ii) *You can not use manual mode for CPU Core Voltage if you want down volting.*

(Note: Above testing was done by using CPU Core Ratio of 41, ie not a PE/PBO OC or PState OC.)

*Leave CPU Core Voltage on [Auto].

* Leave CPU Core Ratio on [Auto].

*Simply please use PState 0 setup within AMD CBS.* Here is my example, link.

Change *PState0 FID* and you will see at top in Frequency (MHz) what you are setting as.

Change *PState0 VID* and you will see at top in Voltage (uV) what you are setting as. (Note: FID/VID input is hexadecimal values.)

i) So please do *CMOSCLR*.

ii) *Set only PState0* as you need OC to be.

iii) Go to OS, as long as power plan is set as stated before you should see down volting as well as down clocking.


----------



## wisepds

gupsterg said:


> @wisepds
> 
> Please I can not keeping repeating information  .
> 
> *You can not use offset mode for CPU Core Voltage if you want down volting on UEFI 0702.* It does not matter if you use positive or negative offset, *you can not use this*.
> 
> *You can not use manual mode for CPU Core Voltage if you want down volting on UEFI 0702.*
> 
> Simply please use PState 0 setup within AMD CBS. Here is my example, link. Change *PState0 FID* and you will see at top in Frequency (MHz) what you are setting as. Change *PState0 VID* and you will see at top in Voltage (uV) what you are setting as.
> 
> i) So please do CMOSCLR.
> 
> ii) Set only PState0 as you need OC to be.
> 
> iii) Go to OS, as long as power plan is set as stated before you should see down volting as well as down clocking.


Ok, give 2 minutes and i'll try...


----------



## majestynl

wisepds said:


> Ok, give 2 minutes and i'll try...


LOL I thought you tried 1.4v at Pstates settings like I suggested ? Don't say you also put the extra offset on top of it ? Hehe sorry maybe I needed to be more clear on that but I thought it was logical if you using a higher voltage..


----------



## wisepds

gupsterg said:


> @wisepds
> 
> Please I can not keep repeating information  .
> 
> For Ryzen gen 2 on UEFI 0702.
> 
> i) *You can not use offset mode for CPU Core Voltage if you want down volting.* It does not matter if you use positive or negative offset, *you can not use this*.
> 
> ii) *You can not use manual mode for CPU Core Voltage if you want down volting.*
> 
> (Note: Above testing was done by using CPU Core Ratio of 41, ie not a PE/PBO OC or PState OC.)
> 
> *Leave CPU Core Voltage on [Auto].* Leave CPU Core Ratio on [Auto]. *Simply please use PState 0 setup within AMD CBS.* Here is my example, link. Change *PState0 FID* and you will see at top in Frequency (MHz) what you are setting as. Change *PState0 VID* and you will see at top in Voltage (uV) what you are setting as. (Note: FID/VID input is hexadecimal values.)
> 
> i) So please do *CMOSCLR*.
> 
> ii) *Set only PState0* as you need OC to be.
> 
> iii) Go to OS, as long as power plan is set as stated before you should see down volting as well as down clocking.


Done. Clear CMOS and only Pstates configuration and Ram configuration to 3200 mhz. A4 (4100) and 23 (1,33v) and nothing... no downvolting...


----------



## wisepds

majestynl said:


> LOL I thought you tried 1.4v at Pstates settings like I suggested ? Don't say you also put the extra offset on top of it ? Hehe sorry maybe I needed to be more clear on that but I thought it was logical if you using a higher voltage..


For my CPU with 1.297 v under load (1.33 on idle) i can pass IBT, Prime, Aida64, Y-crunch, Real Bench, OCCTV... I don't need 1.4v for 4.1Ghz...


----------



## gupsterg

@wisepds
*
You are looking at wrong sensor  .*

Again I am repeating information  .

Please see my image  , link.

*CPU Core Voltage (SVI2 TFN) at idle will not respond to SW monitoring, so an old value is shown.*

Only VID and VCORE (as highlighted in *green boxes*) will respond when CPU is idle.


----------



## majestynl

wisepds said:


> For my CPU with 1.297 v under load (1.33 on idle) i can pass IBT, Prime, Aida64, Y-crunch, Real Bench, OCCTV... I don't need 1.4v for 4.1Ghz...


I understand but it was just for testing scenario.. needed to know if it was the applied offset and/or the Pstates issue I experienced before..


----------



## wisepds

I understand, but.... i haven't downvolting...


----------



## gupsterg

Only thing I can suggest is update your HWINFO version.

https://www.hwinfo.com/files/hwi_585_3465.zip

As what I have highlighted should gain you down volting. If I do not do as I have guided you my CPU will not down volt on UEFI 0702.


----------



## majestynl

wisepds said:


> I understand, but.... i haven't downvolting...


Seeing from this screenshot you have again used manual cause your base clock is 100 again..

If you are trying all our suggestion with your own profiles or mixing things up we will get confused or things won't work... that's why we suggest to clear cmos and just fill up the base settings...


----------



## wisepds

majestynl said:


> Seeing from this screenshot you have again used manual cause your base clock is 100 again..
> 
> If you are trying all our suggestion with your own profiles or mixing things up we will get confused or things won't work... that's why we suggest to clear cmos and just fill up the base settings...


I know..but i have tested all configurations...for me it's IMPOSSIBLE to have undervolting, but, hey!! computer run fine...


----------



## Conenubi701

What's up fellas. I've been trying to get my single core XFR boost up to 4.5 or 4.6 like Der8aur's video with Performance Enhancer and Refclock boosting.

But when I try to do it my clocks only go up to 3700. Any suggestions? or is this something that was disabled with the latest BIOS update?


----------



## gupsterg

@Conenubi701

Not played with BCLK to gain higher single core. I just prefer ACB OC TBH.

Quite impressed how 2700X/C7H has held up with higher room ambient for RAM MHz (well in the context of UK). I recall I had to lower RAM MHz on C6H with gen 1 CPU, when a heatwave struck.

Will be moving on to 3466MHz The Stilt now. The 2 dimms from F4-3200C14Q-32GTZSW have achieved 3400MHz at 1.37V VDIMM and low SOC of 0.931V. Very similar to F4-3200C14D-16GTZ. ZIP of screenies/settings (settings dump was from earlier testing with SOC 0.943).


----------



## Conenubi701

Yeah I'm just trying to get the XFR to overclock a bit higher, but it seems like something is bugging out or I'm doing something incorrectly.


----------



## Conenubi701

Here's the der8auer link. At 9 minutes he shows what he does


----------



## CJMitsuki

gupsterg said:


> @*wisepds*
> 
> Please I can not keep repeating information  .
> 
> For Ryzen gen 2 on UEFI 0702.
> 
> i) *You can not use offset mode for CPU Core Voltage if you want down volting.* It does not matter if you use positive or negative offset, *you can not use this*.
> 
> ii) *You can not use manual mode for CPU Core Voltage if you want down volting.*
> 
> (Note: Above testing was done by using CPU Core Ratio of 41, ie not a PE/PBO OC or PState OC.)
> 
> *Leave CPU Core Voltage on [Auto].
> 
> * Leave CPU Core Ratio on [Auto].
> 
> *Simply please use PState 0 setup within AMD CBS.* Here is my example, link.
> 
> Change *PState0 FID* and you will see at top in Frequency (MHz) what you are setting as.
> 
> Change *PState0 VID* and you will see at top in Voltage (uV) what you are setting as. (Note: FID/VID input is hexadecimal values.)
> 
> i) So please do *CMOSCLR*.
> 
> ii) *Set only PState0* as you need OC to be.
> 
> iii) Go to OS, as long as power plan is set as stated before you should see down volting as well as down clocking.




@gupsterg I use offset voltage for CPU on PState and it downvolts just fine and has since before 0601 and I still have no issue with it downvolting. It drops to .6v when idling for me, im not sure why some are having problems with it. It has to be some kind of problem aside from the bios. I think its possibly software or a setting in the OS but if I am downvolting and there are others downvolting then the problem has to lie soewhere besides the bios unless there was an issue with the flash (doubtful). But as far as offsets and downvolting, it works perfectly for me. I can show my bios txt file and HWiNFO if needed to prove it works for me.


----------



## majestynl

Conenubi701 said:


> What's up fellas. I've been trying to get my single core XFR boost up to 4.5 or 4.6 like Der8aur's video with Performance Enhancer and Refclock boosting.
> 
> But when I try to do it my clocks only go up to 3700. Any suggestions? or is this something that was disabled with the latest BIOS update?


Probably you forgot to set your core multiplier to value : 37

PS: you could also search this thread for my earlier posts, if I remember well I explained to few people in steps.


----------



## hahler2

Ok So I got my 2700X and CH7 system built and running. Just trying things out and getting a feel for how my processor handles things. First I got my RAM running using the Stilts 3333 fast timings. Worked great. Rock solid. Next I started messing with the performance enhancer setting. At level 3 and no changes to voltage it runs fine in game. When I loaded up cinebench it locked up. So I went into the bios and set a voltage offset of .05. Haven't had time to fully stress it since then but I did notice that with that offset it is running 1.3 or so volts during Cinebench multicore. When I run the single thread test it is running 1.5 to 1.538 volts! This is according to Ryzen Master. That seems like a lot to me. Should I remove that offset and drop down to level 2? I am running in a full loop and temps are never getting over 75. 

Also, any other suggestions for getting the best performance out of this for gaming? There's a lot of stuff to tinker with and it's kind of overwhelming to an overclocking noob!


----------



## Conenubi701

majestynl said:


> Conenubi701 said:
> 
> 
> 
> What's up fellas. I've been trying to get my single core XFR boost up to 4.5 or 4.6 like Der8aur's video with Performance Enhancer and Refclock boosting.
> 
> But when I try to do it my clocks only go up to 3700. Any suggestions? or is this something that was disabled with the latest BIOS update?
> 
> 
> 
> Probably you forgot to set your core multiplier to value : 37
> 
> PS: you could also search this thread for my earlier posts, if I remember well I explained to few people in steps.
Click to expand...

Thanks! I will definitely search for your posts.


----------



## majestynl

hahler2 said:


> Ok So I got my 2700X and CH7 system built and running. Just trying things out and getting a feel for how my processor handles things. First I got my RAM running using the Stilts 3333 fast timings. Worked great. Rock solid. Next I started messing with the performance enhancer setting. At level 3 and no changes to voltage it runs fine in game. When I loaded up cinebench it locked up. So I went into the bios and set a voltage offset of .05. Haven't had time to fully stress it since then but I did notice that with that offset it is running 1.3 or so volts during Cinebench multicore. When I run the single thread test it is running 1.5 to 1.538 volts! This is according to Ryzen Master. That seems like a lot to me. Should I remove that offset and drop down to level 2? I am running in a full loop and temps are never getting over 75.
> 
> Also, any other suggestions for getting the best performance out of this for gaming? There's a lot of stuff to tinker with and it's kind of overwhelming to an overclocking noob!


I have tested PE3 vs All cores boost OC several times but personally don't saw any noticeable difference in gaming. Don't get fooled by the high single core clock spikes you see. Most new games are using more cores these days.

Because you are not stable with default PE3 and needed extra offset, i wouldn't go for lower PE3 but just OC all clocks.
You can try 4200mhz with 1.4v and check stability, then lower voltage slowly to the point it gets instable to find your voltage!

After that you can leave on manual or go for Pstates OC and enter the right voltage you found stability from your tests.

Good luck!


----------



## hahler2

Thanks majestynl! I'll give that a try. I'll check a manual overclock and run a few benchmarks and see what gives me my best performance. What is a safe voltage for everyday use? I thought I read somewhere that the stilt said not to go over 1.425 for daily usage.


----------



## majestynl

hahler2 said:


> Thanks majestynl! I'll give that a try. I'll check a manual overclock and run a few benchmarks and see what gives me my best performance. What is a safe voltage for everyday use? I thought I read somewhere that the stilt said not to go over 1.425 for daily usage.


No problem...the 2700 gets quickly hot so just keep an eye on the temps in first place. I wouldnt advice to others to go higher then 1.425 with all cores OC. In general your max voltage depends on your silicon cause temps will play a huge part. The voltage/clocks graph gets steeper above 4150mhz. E.g. it's not worth to ad a lot of extra voltage for few extra MHz. Just write down the clockspeeds and needed voltages from your stability test results and decide what's best for your setup/hardware.

It will be great if you can get 4200mhz on all cores OC with voltages below 1.4!!!


----------



## wisepds

CJMitsuki said:


> @gupsterg I use offset voltage for CPU on PState and it downvolts just fine and has since before 0601 and I still have no issue with it downvolting. It drops to .6v when idling for me, im not sure why some are having problems with it. It has to be some kind of problem aside from the bios. I think its possibly software or a setting in the OS but if I am downvolting and there are others downvolting then the problem has to lie soewhere besides the bios unless there was an issue with the flash (doubtful). But as far as offsets and downvolting, it works perfectly for me. I can show my bios txt file and HWiNFO if needed to prove it works for me.


Yes please, post your txt...i want to replicate your configurqtion o test..


----------



## wisepds

majestynl said:


> No problem...the 2700 gets quickly hot so just keep an eye on the temps in first place. I wouldnt advice to others to go higher then 1.425 with all cores OC. In general your max voltage depends on your silicon cause temps will play a huge part. The voltage/clocks graph gets steeper above 4150mhz. E.g. it's not worth to ad a lot of extra voltage for few extra MHz. Just write down the clockspeeds and needed voltages from your stability test results and decide what's best for your setup/hardware.
> 
> It will be great if you can get 4200mhz on all cores OC with voltages below 1.4!!!


What is for you a safe temp for 4200 mhz? I mean, max temp for daily use..24/7


----------



## gupsterg

CJMitsuki said:


> @gupsterg I use offset voltage for CPU on PState and it downvolts just fine and has since before 0601 and I still have no issue with it downvolting. It drops to .6v when idling for me, im not sure why some are having problems with it. It has to be some kind of problem aside from the bios. I think its possibly software or a setting in the OS but if I am downvolting and there are others downvolting then the problem has to lie soewhere besides the bios unless there was an issue with the flash (doubtful). But as far as offsets and downvolting, it works perfectly for me. I can show my bios txt file and HWiNFO if needed to prove it works for me.


As stated my test setup was using CPU Core Ratio of 41 on Extreme Tweaker page, not PState.



> (Note: Above testing was done by using CPU Core Ratio of 41, ie not a PE/PBO OC or PState OC.)


The reason was as wisepds was showing screenies, etc of having used that setup.

Personally if I've set a PState 0 OC I wouldn't wish to use offset mode CPU voltage, I'd use VID. Why I opt for this method is due to experience with gen 1/C6H.

Core Performance Boost (aka PB/XFR) is disabled when you OC, even when on [Auto]. But if an OC is reset, [Auto] will = [Enabled]. Let's say you used an offset on Extreme Tweaker page. Then let's say you have memory training issues, which let to "reset" of settings. What would happen is "AMD CBS section" would reset, ie your PState 0 OC would disappear. So the CPU could do PB/XFR, ie ~1.5V. As the offset is done via ASUS code, it would not have reset. You could be using an offset of say +50-100mV and when added to the ~1.5V you could have excessive voltage going through CPU.

Due to above experience I also manually set Core Performance Boost to [Disabled] when I OC on C6H/C7H.


----------



## majestynl

wisepds said:


> What is for you a safe temp for 4200 mhz? I mean, max temp for daily use..24/7


I would aim max for 65c gaming, and long stress testing not exceed 75-80c.

And please note above is just what I would aim for daily use systems on a 2700x! Others could have other aims or suggestions!!!


----------



## wisepds

majestynl said:


> I would aim max for 65c gaming, and long stress testing not exceed 75-80c.
> 
> And please note above is just what I would aim for daily use systems on a 2700x! Others could have other aims or suggestions!!!


Ok, thanks..


----------



## lordzed83

Ye i like to keep temps sub 80c on ibt runsm since its hot at uk its higher ambient by allot heh


----------



## crakej

Got round to doing a bit of testing with 0702 (With my 1700X)

Tried out CPU only OC, to find I could not reach 4.2GHz without temps exceeding 75c in torture testing, which I'm trying to stay below, that and it wanted more volts than before (3.88v with LLC5) or > 1.412 on LLC2.

Using LLC brings slightly more temperature than just upping voltage - testing at LLC5 topped out at 79c, and about 76c with LLC2 and more voltage (IBT AVX). Please note, I was not testing stability, though I was using figures that gave best stability in previous experiments on this and previous bios.

I've also noticed that despite the ambient temp being that much warmer, idle temps remain about the same.....just a tiny bit higher...

I'm currently running an untested 3533CL14 setup with 4.1GHz, other than offset mode working properly for me, and slightly higher voltages needed, can't see any other differences - yet. Am going to test memory configs next, with and without CPU OC. It looks like higher VCore is required for _every_ bump in RAM speed, so I'm running out of VCore to add before I reach the mythical 1.425v best not to exceed on VCore. I might b able to reach 3800MTs if I'm lucky... Also need to experiment with VPP_Mem as others have had some luck using that.

One other experiment I did (from a default bios) was to set DOCP on in the bios and selected the speed I wanted - just wanted to see how far it would get on it's own. I started at 3533 and watched as speed went up - saw the rubbish timings the bios was using! Anyway, I got to 3800MTs, hit F10 and rebooted.... It just booted! Previously, I managed to get to windows once, but I couldn't run anything. This time, I could load stuff but it was unreliable - RTC loaded, then 4 mins later just vanished. Aida ran but hung when I did the ram speed tests - the ones it completed were really slow - slower than 3533 lol, but it was almost useable! It automatically selected CR1 with GearDown=on so maybe i'll have some luck using CR2 and GD off... I'm going to try get my 3600 stable again, I think it might actually want slightly less voltage as it was bluescreening which didn't happen on 0601.


----------



## VPII

crakej said:


> I'm going to try get my 3600 stable again, I think it might actually want slightly less voltage as it was bluescreening which didn't happen on 0601.


One odd thing I noticed since going to 0702 bios was that my previous memory overclock would no longer work. I cannot even get the system to boot it would just fail with F9 Q-post code 2 or 3 times and then reset my memory, which is memory training failure. It could potentially be a combination of issues, maybe not even the bios. I had an LN2 session just before I got another C7H board for everyday use and I may have hurt the IMC for the cpu or perhaps the memory although I did not run any extremely high memory voltages. As for the CPU IMC, I actually doubt that it would have gotten hurt as it is really difficult to get it to fail and if it still runs the stock DDR4 3200 with Stilt's fast timings I doubt that the IMC and maybe even the memory is at fault. I'll give the old bios a go tonight to see whether I could get my old memory speed working again and if so I'll keep the old bios for now. The cpu itself is still good for 4.26ghz using 1.3 to 1.325vcore set in bios with LLC left Auto.


----------



## Trender

So im using Precion Boost with stock settings and cpu v offset -, should I set it auto and performance enhancer lvl 3?


----------



## gupsterg

0702 for me using F4-3200C14D-16GTZ needs exact same setup for 3466MHz :clock: The Stilt :clock:, link to ~1hr P95 v28.10B1 8K 4096K 13GB; room ambient ~28C.

From this result I believe the 2 dimms from F4-3200C14Q-32GVK will also use same settings as when tested on UEFI 0601 for 3466MHz :clock: The Stilt :clock:.

It's been sorta surprising how each differing set of dimms needs differing ProcODT when used on same CPU/board. For example GTZ need 48Ω for 3466MHz, GVK 53Ω for 3466MHz and on the GTZSW I need 68Ω for 3400MHz (yet to gain 3466MHz on them). Then SOC seems to change as well, the GTZ will nail 3466MHz with 0.968V set in UEFI, GVK 3466MHz with 0.981V and the GTZSW 0.931V for 3400MHz which is only 6mV more than GTZ for same MEMCLK.

Then these dimms seem to react differently on C7H than ZE. I was planning on using the 2700X with C6H, but as UEFI 0702 was released I thought I'd gave that a whirl before moving the CPU.

*** edit ***
@Mumak

I think motherboard temperature is socket temperature, is this an issue with v5.85-3465?


----------



## lordzed83

@gupsterg and thats why its hard to give someone timing's advice everyone needs to play with what they got  I found that all memory calculatort versions Ryzen DRAM Calculator 1.0.0 Beta3 is best on my sticks. Gives working stable settings. And I got hmm 7 versions or something


----------



## darkdavid08

Can anyone provide a decent starting template of settings for the C7H bios and Ryzen Master Utility? 
Want to get my feet wet with a decent Auto-OC to compliment my 2700x and Corsair H150i Pro 360mm AIO Water Cooler.


Also I'm a little unsure about DRAM Overclocking. 
Am I supposed to Manually set the speed (3200mhz) and apply the matching Stilt's Timings, or is there a way to set it up to Auto-Overclock when it needs to and then downclock back down, just like the Auto Overclock settings for the CPU and Ryzen Master Utility achieve?


I'm used to overclocking 10+ year old platforms, so I'm still figuring out what settings/features have become automated over the last decade.


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> Got round to doing a bit of testing with 0702 (With my 1700X)
> .........
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Tried out CPU only OC, to find I could not reach 4.2GHz without temps exceeding 75c in torture testing, which I'm trying to stay below, that and it wanted more volts than before (3.88v with LLC5) or > 1.412 on LLC2.
> 
> Using LLC brings slightly more temperature than just upping voltage - testing at LLC5 topped out at 79c, and about 76c with LLC2 and more voltage (IBT AVX). Please note, I was not testing stability, though I was using figures that gave best stability in previous experiments on this and previous bios.
> 
> I've also noticed that despite the ambient temp being that much warmer, idle temps remain about the same.....just a tiny bit higher...
> 
> I'm currently running an untested 3533CL14 setup with 4.1GHz, other than offset mode working properly for me, and slightly higher voltages needed, can't see any other differences - yet. Am going to test memory configs next, with and without CPU OC. It looks like higher VCore is required for _every_ bump in RAM speed, so I'm running out of VCore to add before I reach the mythical 1.425v best not to exceed on VCore. I might b able to reach 3800MTs if I'm lucky... Also need to experiment with VPP_Mem as others have had some luck using that.
> 
> One other experiment I did (from a default bios) was to set DOCP on in the bios and selected the speed I wanted - just wanted to see how far it would get on it's own. I started at 3533 and watched as speed went up - saw the rubbish timings the bios was using! Anyway, I got to 3800MTs, hit F10 and rebooted.... It just booted! Previously, I managed to get to windows once, but I couldn't run anything. This time, I could load stuff but it was unreliable - RTC loaded, then 4 mins later just vanished. Aida ran but hung when I did the ram speed tests - the ones it completed were really slow - slower than 3533 lol, but it was almost useable! It automatically selected CR1 with GearDown=on so maybe i'll have some luck using CR2 and GD off... I'm going to try get my 3600 stable again, I think it might actually want slightly less voltage as it was bluescreening which didn't happen on 0601


Thanks for sharing!
Personally I wouldn't give much attention on how far you got Into the OS with very unstable ram speeds/settings. That can differ a lot. It's just when are the errors to much/fatal to serve you instability / blue screens or even performance degardation. Sometimes it happens at startup and sometimes it will be randomly when u open a application or service... 

I'm also able to boot into windows with 3800+ but definitely unusable...  And on some systems it even don't pass the pre-login loader screen...




gupsterg said:


> 0702 for me using F4-3200C14D-16GTZ needs exact same setup for 3466MHz :clock: The Stilt :clock:, link to ~1hr P95 v28.10B1 8K 4096K 13GB; room ambient ~28C.
> 
> From this result I believe the 2 dimms from F4-3200C14Q-32GVK will also use same settings as when tested on UEFI 0601 for 3466MHz :clock: The Stilt :clock:.
> 
> It's been sorta surprising how each differing set of dimms needs differing ProcODT when used on same CPU/board. For example GTZ need 48Ω for 3466MHz, GVK 53Ω for 3466MHz and on the GTZSW I need 68Ω for 3400MHz (yet to gain 3466MHz on them). Then SOC seems to change as well, the GTZ will nail 3466MHz with 0.968V set in UEFI, GVK 3466MHz with 0.981V and the GTZSW 0.931V for 3400MHz which is only 6mV more than GTZ for same MEMCLK.
> 
> Then these dimms seem to react differently on C7H than ZE. I was planning on using the 2700X with C6H, but as UEFI 0702 was released I thought I'd gave that a whirl before moving the CPU.


Thanks for sharing chap!! 

I'm also using same settings from 0601 on the 0702 without any issues! 3533TT on both bios versions same settings.

I'm not really surprised cause you are changing hardware. Those are working as a team. Mobo/Cpu/Ram. Switch one of them and you could need a slightly different setting 

And i also switched one of my Ram set on 4 different setups, all needed different settings like yours CH7 / ZE!! Even voltage was slightly different!! 




lordzed83 said:


> @gupsterg and thats why its hard to give someone timing's advice everyone needs to play with what they got  I found that all memory calculatort versions Ryzen DRAM Calculator 1.0.0 Beta3 is best on my sticks. Gives working stable settings. And I got hmm 7 versions or something


Isn't Dram Calculater also a advice ?!?!?! 
For a quick help on subtimings it's oke, but when it comes to procOdt / CadBus / Voltages etc it gives multiple suggestions. So it's more like a handbook 



darkdavid08 said:


> Can anyone provide a decent starting template of settings for the C7H bios and Ryzen Master Utility?
> Want to get my feet wet with a decent Auto-OC to compliment my 2700x and Corsair H150i Pro 360mm AIO Water Cooler.
> 
> 
> Also I'm a little unsure about DRAM Overclocking.
> Am I supposed to Manually set the speed (3200mhz) and apply the matching Stilt's Timings, or is there a way to set it up to Auto-Overclock when it needs to and then downclock back down, just like the Auto Overclock settings for the CPU and Ryzen Master Utility achieve?
> 
> 
> I'm used to overclocking 10+ year old platforms, so I'm still figuring out what settings/features have become automated over the last decade.


Even if you wait 10 more years, a manual setup will beat
a preset. All silicons / hardware have their own characteristics.

To help you better we need slightly more info. What's your Aim? What's the purpose of your setup? Only CPU OC or also RAM OC ?

Their are many friendly and experienced users who will help you if you provide more info..


----------



## darkdavid08

*thanks*



majestynl said:


> Even if you wait 10 more years, a manual setup will beat
> a preset. All silicons / hardware have their own characteristics.
> 
> To help you better we need slightly more info. What's your Aim? What's the purpose of your setup? Only CPU OC or also RAM OC ?
> 
> Their are many friendly and experienced users who will help you if you provide more info..


Appreciate the reply! I realize that manual OC would probably yield a higher score on cinebench, ect.

I'm aiming for daily 24/7 moderate gaming/watching web media at the same time.
CPU OC + Want to take advantage of my low timing 3200mhz Samsung B-Die Ram Set. Thanks again!


----------



## majestynl

darkdavid08 said:


> Appreciate the reply! I realize that manual OC would probably yield a higher score on cinebench, ect.
> 
> I'm aiming for daily 24/7 moderate gaming/watching web media at the same time.
> CPU OC + Want to take advantage of my low timing 3200mhz Samsung B-Die Ram Set. Thanks again!


Np 

So you can use different OC methods for your Ryzen 2700:

*Method 1) PE OC *

In bios on the extreme tweaker page, set "performance enhancer" to PE3. Leave rest on auto. Load OS and run some tests eg Cinebench to start with. Keep an eye on your clocks with HwInfo. You will see all core clocks around 4100-4150mhz (while running Cinebench multitest) and in idle mode: open eg YouTube etc you will see single core clocks boosting to approx 4350mhz.

Don't forget to use Balanced Power plan in windows.! Or at least another plan with min. Cpu stage of 20% so that XFR can kick in.

Above is the most simple version (PE OC). You can try to play some games etc to see if it's base stable. Later you can start doing some stresstests to see if it's really stable. Eg with : Realbench / Aida64 / IBT / Prime95 etc etc..

Also don't forget to check if you are not getting WHEA errors. Again these can been seen in HwInfo or in windows Event viewer. If you are stable you can always do a "-" offset. But If you are not stable you need to ad some "+" offset voltage for your vcore.

If you are applying offset voltages please do it step by step. You can use easily your keyboard + or - keys when you select the input field/box of the voltage option in the bios.

While doing everything keep always an eye on your temps. Personally I would think your cooling setup can handle this well!!

*Method 2) Manual OC*

So be sure you cleared cmos or your have pressed back to defaults in th bios before you start.

In the extreme tweaker page: 

- Set cpu core multiplier to 42, 
- Disable core performance boost,
- Go down the page and set vcore to manual. Enter a manual voltage of 1.4v. 

Save and load OS. Do exact the same as above with PE mode: just basic testing and later some longer stresstests.

If you are stable, you can lower your vcore step by step. If you are not, then you can do 2 things. Or apply a bit more vcore if you prefer to ad more juice, or you can lower your multiplier and do the same tests again. 

Note: Manual OC doesn't downclocks/downvolts while in idle. For that you can use Pstates OC. But first you need to find what voltage you CPU needs for certain clocks. Exactly what you can manage to find with my steps above. Please read few pages back where we explain how to Pstates OC if needed.

*Memory OC *

This can be more time consuming. So for a start you can try to enter stilt's timings and apply a voltage for memory and soc to see if that will work for your setup. You have chosen the right memory so 3466mhz with tight timings is probably no problem for you. After you apply your memory timings and voltages you can start doing some stresstesting for memory with HCI or Ramtest software.

If you find errors with testing please report back or read this forum cause their can be several things to try/tweak. Will be to much to write down, for now you got enough work to do 

Please note: above are the most basic settings, later you can tweak or edit more where needed. It's now already a long post 


*More helpful info *

More info / software links and detailed information can be found on the following thread made by a great guy over here 
Gupsterg!!

https://www.overclock.net/forum/10-amd-cpus/1625015-ryzen-essential-info-link-owners-info-db.html

Good luck


----------



## VPII

So yesterday I flashed back to 0601 and I started up at DDR4 3600 set in bios with Stilt timings without an issue. So for me 0702 is clearly the cause of the issues I had running my previous stable memory clocks. With 0702 I cannot even get my system to boot with 3600 mem speed set in the bios as it would fail memory training. I have not tested stability but played games for about 2 hours without any issues. I'll keep testing but as soon as I get my other set of memory (Galax HOF DDR4 4000) I'll test again with both 0702 and 0601 to see if I'm stuck with the same issue.


----------



## majestynl

VPII said:


> So yesterday I flashed back to 0601 and I started up at DDR4 3600 set in bios with Stilt timings without an issue. So for me 0702 is clearly the cause of the issues I had running my previous stable memory clocks. With 0702 I cannot even get my system to boot with 3600 mem speed set in the bios as it would fail memory training. I have not tested stability but played games for about 2 hours without any issues. I'll keep testing but as soon as I get my other set of memory (Galax HOF DDR4 4000) I'll test again with both 0702 and 0601 to see if I'm stuck with the same issue.


From my own experience with a lot of kits laying around and what I saw from many others 3600mhz is not YET easy to achieve... especially with tighter timings..

I still do believe you can get it working on the new bios if you got it stable in previous bios. Their must be some small tweak(s) you need to make I think.

What did you try to change compared to settings who worked on prev. bios?


----------



## VPII

majestynl said:


> From my own experience with a lot of kits laying around and what I saw from many others 3600mhz is not YET easy to achieve... especially with tighter timings..
> 
> I still do believe you can get it working on the new bios if you got it stable in previous bios. Their must be some small tweak(s) you need to make I think.
> 
> What did you try to change compared to settings who worked on prev. bios?


What worked before was 3600 set with Stilt timings in bios, dropping TRP, TRCD etc from 16 to 15 and dropping the TRFC to 312 instead of the 360 set by the Stilt timings. This was perfectly stable. Now if I do the same with setting 3600 memory speed and just load the Stilt timings without dropping the TRP, TRCD and TRFC it will not even post. It will restart twice and everytime restart hanging with the F9 qpost code which is memory training failing. No such issue when I use the 0601 bios. I do not actually touch any other settings.


----------



## majestynl

VPII said:


> What worked before was 3600 set with Stilt timings in bios, dropping TRP, TRCD etc from 16 to 15 and dropping the TRFC to 312 instead of the 360 set by the Stilt timings. This was perfectly stable. Now if I do the same with setting 3600 memory speed and just load the Stilt timings without dropping the TRP, TRCD and TRFC it will not even post. It will restart twice and everytime restart hanging with the F9 qpost code which is memory training failing. No such issue when I use the 0601 bios. I do not actually touch any other settings.


I mean what did you already tried to get it also working for new bios ? If nothing then give a try with higher ProcOdt or CadBus settings. A new bios/agesa version could need slightly different settings. And even more chance on high straps..

And also set your memory training retry let's say on 6x. Let's see if it gets trained after more retrying...


----------



## VPII

majestynl said:


> I mean what did you already tried to get it also working for new bios ? If nothing then give a try with higher ProcOdt or CadBus settings. A new bios/agesa version could need slightly different settings. And even more chance on high straps..
> 
> And also set your memory training retry let's say on 6x. Let's see if it gets trained after more retrying...


Sorry for probably an ignorant question, but where in the bios do I set the memory retry higher?


----------



## majestynl

VPII said:


> Sorry for probably an ignorant question, but where in the bios do I set the memory retry higher?


Not at all.. it's on top of your memory timings page..


----------



## CJMitsuki

VPII said:


> majestynl said:
> 
> 
> 
> From my own experience with a lot of kits laying around and what I saw from many others 3600mhz is not YET easy to achieve... especially with tighter timings..
> 
> I still do believe you can get it working on the new bios if you got it stable in previous bios. Their must be some small tweak(s) you need to make I think.
> 
> What did you try to change compared to settings who worked on prev. bios?
> 
> 
> 
> What worked before was 3600 set with Stilt timings in bios, dropping TRP, TRCD etc from 16 to 15 and dropping the TRFC to 312 instead of the 360 set by the Stilt timings. This was perfectly stable. Now if I do the same with setting 3600 memory speed and just load the Stilt timings without dropping the TRP, TRCD and TRFC it will not even post. It will restart twice and everytime restart hanging with the F9 qpost code which is memory training failing. No such issue when I use the 0601 bios. I do not actually touch any other settings.
Click to expand...

It will run with enough voltage, providing the sticks can stay cool. I’m toying with the notion of running mine at 3400c12 at 1.55v and I can do 3533c12 at 1.6v but I’m not sure I want to push to 1.6v for daily use. I’ve seen buildzoid and several others say it’s fine for daily use but I think I’ll set my limit at 1.55v for daily. 3400c12 is very responsive and outperforms 3600c14 by quite a bit as well. Plus 3600 is a pain to get stable for what little performance upgrades it gives.


----------



## HolyFist

is there a reason why i can't test CL13 at 3466MHz? It keeps revert the main value to 14 :/

I'm using 14-13-13 atm because it reverts to 14, but if it was to work i'm sure it would work fine.

I remember had this issue before where it would revert to 14 from 15 and then i fixed it but don't remember how, i load defaults, save and rebbot, load new profile, save and reboot and it stays at 14


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> It will run with enough voltage, providing the sticks can stay cool. I’m toying with the notion of running mine at 3400c12 at 1.55v and I can do 3533c12 at 1.6v but I’m not sure I want to push to 1.6v for daily use. I’ve seen buildzoid and several others say it’s fine for daily use but I think I’ll set my limit at 1.55v for daily. 3400c12 is very responsive and outperforms 3600c14 by quite a bit as well. Plus 3600 is a pain to get stable for what little performance upgrades it gives.


Ye I'd rather run lower memory speed with TT. IMC on ryzen was build for 3200max so that we are runing it pass 3466 stable is an achievement on Asus amd and our side lol


----------



## Syldon

HolyFist said:


> is there a reason why i can't test CL13 at 3466MHz? It keeps revert the main value to 14 :/
> 
> I'm using 14-13-13 atm because it reverts to 14, but if it was to work i'm sure it would work fine.
> 
> I remember had this issue before where it would revert to 14 from 15 and then i fixed it but don't remember how, i load defaults, save and rebbot, load new profile, save and reboot and it stays at 14


To use odd numbers above 2666mhz, you have to enable "Geardown" mode, or it will always round up to the next even number.


----------



## gupsterg

lordzed83 said:


> @gupsterg and thats why its hard to give someone timing's advice everyone needs to play with what they got  I found that all memory calculatort versions Ryzen DRAM Calculator 1.0.0 Beta3 is best on my sticks. Gives working stable settings. And I got hmm 7 versions or something


:thumb: .



majestynl said:


> Thanks for sharing chap!!
> 
> I'm also using same settings from 0601 on the 0702 without any issues! 3533TT on both bios versions same settings.
> 
> I'm not really surprised cause you are changing hardware. Those are working as a team. Mobo/Cpu/Ram. Switch one of them and you could need a slightly different setting
> 
> And i also switched one of my Ram set on 4 different setups, all needed different settings like yours CH7 / ZE!! Even voltage was slightly different!!


I was surprised as I didn't think there would be that much variation when I'm essentially using same bin of RAM IC, other than heat spreader difference the kits are the same. All those results were same VDIMM is as well, 1.37V.

It will be interesting to see what occurs with 2700X and RAM kits on C7H  .

Still can't get 3533MHz stable here  . Using The Stilt's 3466MHz timings, 1T, Gear Down Mode Off. When I setup "the profile" as that post does the 3 cycles of training (ie not post cycle of on/off, but when Q-LEDs do 3 or so cycles) I will have stability, as soon as I do a soft reset and board does 1 cycle of training the profile fails  . Played with so many variables now, sorta think my HW just can't attain 3533MHz  . 



HolyFist said:


> is there a reason why i can't test CL13 at 3466MHz? It keeps revert the main value to 14 :/
> 
> I'm using 14-13-13 atm because it reverts to 14, but if it was to work i'm sure it would work fine.
> 
> I remember had this issue before where it would revert to 14 from 15 and then i fixed it but don't remember how, i load defaults, save and rebbot, load new profile, save and reboot and it stays at 14
> 
> 
> 
> Syldon said:
> 
> 
> 
> To use odd numbers above 2666mhz, you have to enable "Geardown" mode, or it will always round up to the next even number.
Click to expand...

Disable Gear Down Mode to use odd CL.


----------



## majestynl

HolyFist said:


> is there a reason why i can't test CL13 at 3466MHz? It keeps revert the main value to 14 :/
> 
> I'm using 14-13-13 atm because it reverts to 14, but if it was to work i'm sure it would work fine.
> 
> I remember had this issue before where it would revert to 14 from 15 and then i fixed it but don't remember how, i load defaults, save and rebbot, load new profile, save and reboot and it stays at 14





Syldon said:


> To use odd numbers above 2666mhz, you have to enable "Geardown" mode, or it will always round up to the next even number.


It's exact the opposite.. you need to disable gear down to use uneven numbers... otherwise it will be rounded up to a even number.



gupsterg said:


> I was surprised as I didn't think there would be that much variation when I'm essentially using same bin of RAM IC, other than heat spreader difference the kits are the same. All those results were same VDIMM is as well, 1.37V.
> 
> It will be interesting to see what occurs with 2700X and RAM kits on C7H  .
> 
> Still can't get 3533MHz stable here  . Using The Stilt's 3466MHz timings, 1T, Gear Down Mode Off. When I setup "the profile" as that post does the 3 cycles of training (ie not post cycle of on/off, but when Q-LEDs do 3 or so cycles) I will have stability, as soon as I do a soft reset and board does 1 cycle of training the profile fails  . Played with so many variables now, sorta think my HW just can't attain 3533MHz  .


Hehe understand, the Ram department on a Ryzen is a big world with many options/tweaks/ sometimes odd behaviors and suprises. 

Remember I can't disable gdm mode and use the value 2 for tRDRDSCL/tWRWRSCL on 4 different systems. Even when I switch and mix parts... 

I had same issue with 3533TT, higher ProcODT ( 68.6 ohm)fixed my multiple boot that happened sometimes. CAD bus settings to 30ohm and Mem switching freq on 400 fixed to get it fully stable with long tests. I needed all of them on top of my accurate ram voltage setting. I notch higher or lower voltage failed also.

But you probably tried them already. If Not you could give those settings a try setting them together.


----------



## lordzed83

@gupsterg thing with 3533+ is that well digging in power options is a must from what i see. Auto does not cut it its or unstable or no boot.
**** my stable 3533 setting from previous bios was totally crap on new one. Needed extra volts in soc.. 1.075 would not cut it no more had to upp it to 1.15 qent step by step test and anything less on this bios is crap.


----------



## hahler2

majestynl said:


> I have tested PE3 vs All cores boost OC several times but personally don't saw any noticeable difference in gaming. Don't get fooled by the high single core clock spikes you see. Most new games are using more cores these days.
> 
> Because you are not stable with default PE3 and needed extra offset, i wouldn't go for lower PE3 but just OC all clocks.
> You can try 4200mhz with 1.4v and check stability, then lower voltage slowly to the point it gets instable to find your voltage!
> 
> After that you can leave on manual or go for Pstates OC and enter the right voltage you found stability from your tests.
> 
> Good luck!


So with much testing I think I must have lost the silicon lottery pretty hard! I can get 4.2 stable but I have to run at 1.40 volts to do so. At that voltage, I'm getting 90 C when running Aida64. Seems too hot to me. When running PE level 3 I'm showing 4.075 to 4.1 in game. Not worth 100 mhz for all that extra heat and voltage I don't think. I did forget to disable PE when I was running a manual overclock though so I may give it a try again later.

One last question. I'm running the latest bios and I'm running the latest version of Hwinfo64. But none of the readings for my motherboard are showing up. They just have a red X beside them. Any ideas?


----------



## HolyFist

gupsterg said:


> :thumb: .
> 
> 
> 
> I was surprised as I didn't think there would be that much variation when I'm essentially using same bin of RAM IC, other than heat spreader difference the kits are the same. All those results were same VDIMM is as well, 1.37V.
> 
> It will be interesting to see what occurs with 2700X and RAM kits on C7H  .
> 
> Still can't get 3533MHz stable here  . Using The Stilt's 3466MHz timings, 1T, Gear Down Mode Off. When I setup "the profile" as that post does the 3 cycles of training (ie not post cycle of on/off, but when Q-LEDs do 3 or so cycles) I will have stability, as soon as I do a soft reset and board does 1 cycle of training the profile fails  . Played with so many variables now, sorta think my HW just can't attain 3533MHz  .
> 
> 
> 
> Disable Gear Down Mode to use odd CL.


Ah so it needs to be disabled, i have it enabled, altho i'm able to get better stability and higher frequency with it enabled, ***

What's a good tRFC for 3466MHz btw? I'm using 270 and latency between 62 and 63 :/


----------



## crakej

hahler2 said:


> So with much testing I think I must have lost the silicon lottery pretty hard! I can get 4.2 stable but I have to run at 1.40 volts to do so. At that voltage, I'm getting 90 C when running Aida64. Seems too hot to me. When running PE level 3 I'm showing 4.075 to 4.1 in game. Not worth 100 mhz for all that extra heat and voltage I don't think. I did forget to disable PE when I was running a manual overclock though so I may give it a try again later.
> 
> One last question. I'm running the latest bios and I'm running the latest version of Hwinfo64. But none of the readings for my motherboard are showing up. They just have a red X beside them. Any ideas?


Right hand click where it says '*ASUS EC*' and then *Enable Monitoring*


----------



## majestynl

hahler2 said:


> So with much testing I think I must have lost the silicon lottery pretty hard! I can get 4.2 stable but I have to run at 1.40 volts to do so. At that voltage, I'm getting 90 C when running Aida64. Seems too hot to me. When running PE level 3 I'm showing 4.075 to 4.1 in game. Not worth 100 mhz for all that extra heat and voltage I don't think. I did forget to disable PE when I was running a manual overclock though so I may give it a try again later.
> 
> One last question. I'm running the latest bios and I'm running the latest version of Hwinfo64. But none of the readings for my motherboard are showing up. They just have a red X beside them. Any ideas?


Just to be sure... are you looking to the right temperature sensor ? Sent some screenshot with HwInfo open while running Aida pls. (Manual OC mode)

If I'm right XFR etc gets auto disabled when in OC mode (manual). To be save keep it disabled but don't think it makes a difference.. 

What clocks do you see while running Cinebench In PE mode? Please sent screens cause I'm curious if you have a cooling bottleneck.

About your last question: when you first opened HwInfo you got a warning popup. You clicked to disable those sensors 

crakej already helped you to enable again...


----------



## hahler2

Ah thank you! I am using cpu tdie sensor in hwinfo64. I will run some tests and take some screenshots and post them on here.


----------



## hahler2

majestynl said:


> Just to be sure... are you looking to the right temperature sensor ? Sent some screenshot with HwInfo open while running Aida pls. (Manual OC mode)
> 
> If I'm right XFR etc gets auto disabled when in OC mode (manual). To be save keep it disabled but don't think it makes a difference..
> 
> What clocks do you see while running Cinebench In PE mode? Please sent screens cause I'm curious if you have a cooling bottleneck.
> 
> About your last question: when you first opened HwInfo you got a warning popup. You clicked to disable those sensors
> 
> crakej already helped you to enable again...


Ok here's some screenshots while running cinebench on my PE3 settings.

https://imgur.com/a/64SvjcJ

Running 4.05 at 68 C


----------



## hahler2

Hmm.. Something isn't right with my cooling. Now when I overclock to 4.2 with 1.4 volts I'm hitting 105 quickly and then it's shutting down. I'm going to repaste my CPU and try again. If that doesn't work I'm going to disassemble my CPU block and make sure it isn't plugged.


----------



## hahler2

Ok, redoing my thermal paste helped a bunch. It's not instantly hitting 105 and shutting down. Still running really warm though. I'm wondering if I need to take my CPU block apart and check things out. Which temp should I be going off? What the motherboard is reporting or off of tdie?

https://imgur.com/a/9K2kJz0


----------



## lordzed83

hahler2 said:


> Ok, redoing my thermal paste helped a bunch. It's not instantly hitting 105 and shutting down. Still running really warm though. I'm wondering if I need to take my CPU block apart and check things out. Which temp should I be going off? What the motherboard is reporting or off of tdie?
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/9K2kJz0


88c one. Thats super hot for just 1.4 !!!!


----------



## hahler2

lordzed83 said:


> 88c one. Thats super hot for just 1.4 !!!!


My thoughts too. Guess it's time to drain and check my block. I did install a new radiator when I built this system. I rinsed it several times with distilled water. But I'm wondering if I didn't get it cleaned well enough and a chunk went into my cpu block as it's right after that radiator in the loop.


----------



## wisepds

One question...¿Can i modified PE values? My oc only need 1,297v to 4.1. PE2 used 1.35v


----------



## hahler2

Ok so I took my loop apart. CPU block was pretty clean, but I cleaned it anyways. Scrubbed it with a toothbrush and rinsed with distilled water. Reassembled my loop. On PE3 and LLC 3 I'm getting 67 C in Aida64. Those temps seem a little bit more normal? Only thing I can think of was either I didn't have my block seated properly or I had an air bubble still in the system that I got worked out now. At first I thought it might be my pump but it seems to prime fine when filling and my GPU temps are very good.


----------



## hurricane28

wisepds said:


> One question...¿Can i modified PE values? My oc only need 1,297v to 4.1. PE2 used 1.35v


I don't think so. You can set max voltage and let the multiplier do its think but that's about it i guess.


----------



## hahler2

So I got my 4.2 overclock back. Still running upper 86-88 during Aida64. Not sure what's going on, but that seems awfully hot to me.


----------



## Martin778

Another board driving me insane with failing memory training on otherwise rock stable memory, same way as the 1800X/C6H did....randomly it would just not POST and revert back to safe mode and if you turn the PC off with the button (hard shutdown) or hard reboot it will ALWAYS fail memory training, as many times as you set up in BIOS.


----------



## wisepds

hurricane28 said:


> I don't think so. You can set max voltage and let the multiplier do its think but that's about it i guess.


Oh! For me PE uses too much vcore...


----------



## CJMitsuki

hahler2 said:


> Ok so I took my loop apart. CPU block was pretty clean, but I cleaned it anyways. Scrubbed it with a toothbrush and rinsed with distilled water. Reassembled my loop. On PE3 and LLC 3 I'm getting 67 C in Aida64. Those temps seem a little bit more normal? Only thing I can think of was either I didn't have my block seated properly or I had an air bubble still in the system that I got worked out now. At first I thought it might be my pump but it seems to prime fine when filling and my GPU temps are very good.



Which thermal compound do you use?




wisepds said:


> Oh! For me PE uses too much vcore...



As long as your temps are fine then VCore isnt a problem. Temperature is what will degrade the components, not the voltage(within reason). Ive been running my CPU all weekend on 1.53+ and benching for hours with 4k rendering, Pi calculations, you name it. I just made sure to keep my temperatures at a safe level, also running DRAM around 1.55-1.6v, again keeping temps under control. I havent noticed anything out of the ordinary, cpu running beautifully still.


----------



## majestynl

wisepds said:


> Oh! For me PE uses too much vcore...


Have you ever tried doing a - offset  ?!?!



hahler2 said:


> So I got my 4.2 overclock back. Still running upper 86-88 during Aida64. Not sure what's going on, but that seems awfully hot to me.


86-88 is still on the high side. I know Aida can run hot!
Are your fans ramping up properly. Airflow oke ?

Otherwise lower your multiplier to 41.75 and lower voltage to a stable point!


----------



## CJMitsuki

majestynl said:


> Have you ever tried doing a - offset  ?!?!



I wish I could just get XFR+PBO+refclck OC running correctly. It never boosts higher than the turbo freq. Ive ran with default settings too and still no dice. Ive seen impressive single core results with that method but cant get it correct.


----------



## majestynl

CJMitsuki said:


> I wish I could just get XFR+PBO+refclck OC running correctly. It never boosts higher than the turbo freq. Ive ran with default settings too and still no dice. Ive seen impressive single core results with that method but cant get it correct.


Why not ? Was working perfectly on 6101 for me. Did you setup correctly? Temps to high ?


----------



## CJMitsuki

majestynl said:


> Why not ? Was working perfectly on 6101 for me. Did you setup correctly? Temps to high ?



idk if i was setting it up correctly, apparently i wasnt doing something right. Temps never really moved since it would only boost to 3.8ghz. I tried everything i could think of and looked around for settings i was missing. Had 104 bclk too so everything was set up nicely for a good OC, just never came lol. I never hit 80c even when im OCed to 4.45ghz so temps never will be a problem.


----------



## majestynl

CJMitsuki said:


> idk if i was setting it up correctly, apparently i wasnt doing something right. Temps never really moved since it would only boost to 3.8ghz. I tried everything i could think of and looked around for settings i was missing. Had 104 bclk too so everything was set up nicely for a good OC, just never came lol. I never hit 80c even when im OCed to 4.45ghz so temps never will be a problem.


Yes you are missing definitely something 

Did you enter a multiplier of 37 ? Cause that's needed.
Or do you have any screenshots from settings you used ?


----------



## CJMitsuki

majestynl said:


> Yes you are missing definitely something
> 
> Did you enter a multiplier of 37 ? Cause that's needed.
> Or do you have any screenshots from settings you used ?



tried a multiplier of 37x as well as tried autowith the multiplier at 37 i was getting 3.8ghz boost with 104 refclk


pbo and pe was on as well
offset was -.05 i think


----------



## majestynl

CJMitsuki said:


> tried a multiplier of 37x as well as tried autowith the multiplier at 37 i was getting 3.8ghz boost with 104 refclk
> 
> 
> pbo and pe was on as well
> offset was -.05 i think


Strange cause the one time I was locked at 3800mhz it was the multiplier 37 I forgot. And many users here have fixed it with that forgotten value. It's 100% needed. 

To be sure always start from clear defaults or clear cmos!

- Ai overclocker tuner on manual
- performabce enhancer to PE3
- CPU core ratio on 37
- Core performance boost on enabled
- Bus ref clock on what you whish. I would start first with 101-102

Don't use any offset yet.. you can do that later if it's working!

Save and boot into OS. Check for right power plan! Or min. Cpu stage. You need to see your clocks have raised compared to stock PE3!


----------



## hahler2

majestynl said:


> Have you ever tried doing a - offset  ?!?!
> 
> 
> 
> 86-88 is still on the high side. I know Aida can run hot!
> Are your fans ramping up properly. Airflow oke ?
> 
> Otherwise lower your multiplier to 41.75 and lower voltage to a stable point!


It's fully stable. Lowered voltage to 1.38 and temps dropped a tiny bit. Still stable just runs really hot. Airflow is good and fans are ramping up just like they should. I'm going to try switching my fans on my top radiator to intake instead of exhaust. Only problem then is all fans will be intake and no exhaust fans.


----------



## hahler2

CJMitsuki said:


> Which thermal compound do you use?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As long as your temps are fine then VCore isnt a problem. Temperature is what will degrade the components, not the voltage(within reason). Ive been running my CPU all weekend on 1.53+ and benching for hours with 4k rendering, Pi calculations, you name it. I just made sure to keep my temperatures at a safe level, also running DRAM around 1.55-1.6v, again keeping temps under control. I havent noticed anything out of the ordinary, cpu running beautifully still.



I'm using thermal grizzly cryonaut


----------



## hahler2

majestynl said:


> Strange cause the one time I was locked at 3800mhz it was the multiplier 37 I forgot. And many users here have fixed it with that forgotten value. It's 100% needed.
> 
> To be sure always start from clear defaults or clear cmos!
> 
> - Ai overclocker tuner on manual
> - performabce enhancer to PE3
> - CPU core ratio on 37
> - Core performance boost on enabled
> - Bus ref clock on what you whish. I would start first with 101-102
> 
> Don't use any offset yet.. you can do that later if it's working!
> 
> Save and boot into OS. Check for right power plan! Or min. Cpu stage. You need to see your clocks have raised compared to stock PE3!


I've thought about messing with a reference clock overclock. Don't you need to set it to asynchronous also? Also, I read somewhere that it's not recommended to do this if you're using a NVME drive. Is that correct?


----------



## majestynl

hahler2 said:


> It's fully stable. Lowered voltage to 1.38 and temps dropped a tiny bit. Still stable just runs really hot. Airflow is good and fans are ramping up just like they should. I'm going to try switching my fans on my top radiator to intake instead of exhaust. Only problem then is all fans will be intake and no exhaust fans.


Yes best way is to try multiple methods to see what suits your setup the best. I would also try testing with open case!



hahler2 said:


> I've thought about messing with a reference clock overclock. Don't you need to set it to asynchronous also? Also, I read somewhere that it's not recommended to do this if you're using a NVME drive. Is that correct?


It all depends on your pcie hardware. The only way to know is to try and see. E.g. Most new gpu's can handle it easily. But till approx 104 its mostly oke for most of us.

If you get issues you can activate async mode. But keep in mind you will loose some performance in memory department 

Personally I'm not a huge fan of ref clock OC. It often got me more issues...


----------



## hurricane28

wisepds said:


> Oh! For me PE uses too much vcore...


What do you mean by too much vcore? The CPU can and will never ask unsave voltages as stated by The Stilt or Elmor if i am correct. 

If it runs too hot than you can set manual vcore like i did. I am running 1.375 v at 4.2 GHz.


----------



## wisepds

hurricane28 said:


> What do you mean by too much vcore? The CPU can and will never ask unsave voltages as stated by The Stilt or Elmor if i am correct.
> 
> If it runs too hot than you can set manual vcore like i did. I am running 1.375 v at 4.2 GHz.


My manual OC is 4.1 ghz with 1,297v 100% estable. PE uses 1,35v for 4.1ghz, same speed, more voltage more temp.


----------



## majestynl

wisepds said:


> My manual OC is 4.1 ghz with 1,297v 100% estable. PE uses 1,35v for 4.1ghz, same speed, more voltage more temp.


Hmm on my newest 2700, PE3 with all cores 4125-4150mhz it uses around 1.275v and it's fully stable.

I'm running manual OC 4200mhz @ 1.325-1.35v

Are you comparing PE voltages before droop vs Manual without droop cause manual uses LLC?. Even when it's set on auto!!!


----------



## spyshagg

My PE3 with stock offset asks 1.3+ for all core (~4.15ghz) and 1.55+ for single core (4.350). 

It doesn't only "peak" at 1.55v. It can stay there all the time if its loaded.


----------



## wisepds

majestynl said:


> Hmm on my newest 2700, PE3 with all cores 4125-4150mhz it uses around 1.275v and it's fully stable.
> 
> I'm running manual OC 4200mhz @ 1.325-1.35v
> 
> Are you comparing PE voltages before droop vs Manual without droop cause manual uses LLC?. Even when it's set on auto!!!


I'll test again..


----------



## zulex

Elmor... so quiet... I know you have "Elmor's Kids" here but seems deadly silent after keeping your kids shut up by feeding them with C7H..


----------



## wingman99

zulex said:


> Elmor... so quiet... I know you have "Elmor's Kids" here but seems deadly silent after keeping your kids shut up by feeding them with C7H..


I read that Elmor does not work for ASUS anymore.


----------



## hahler2

hurricane28 said:


> wisepds said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh! For me PE uses too much vcore...
> 
> 
> 
> What do you mean by too much vcore? The CPU can and will never ask unsave voltages as stated by The Stilt or Elmor if i am correct.
> 
> If it runs too hot than you can set manual vcore like i did. I am running 1.375 v at 4.2 GHz.
Click to expand...

What kind of temps do you get at that voltage? That’s about where mine needs to run to get 4.2 stable. 

I tried doing a reference clock overclock but couldn’t get it stable even at 101. That was with no offset and llc set to level 3.


----------



## hurricane28

hahler2 said:


> What kind of temps do you get at that voltage? That’s about where mine needs to run to get 4.2 stable.
> 
> I tried doing a reference clock overclock but couldn’t get it stable even at 101. That was with no offset and llc set to level 3.


I am getting around 55-63c under heavy load, IBT AVX, Aida64 FPU test etc. Normally i am between mid 40s. I do want to point out that these temps are in high ambient 25 c with 360 mm cooler with fans spinning at only 1400 rps.. Can do a lot better but temps are fine and way below max save so i am good. 

I think these chips are binned to the max already, especially the "X" series of chips, they all tin to clock the same at the same voltage..


----------



## hurricane28

wingman99 said:


> I read that Elmor does not work for ASUS anymore.


Really? Where have you read that?


----------



## wingman99

hurricane28 said:


> Really? Where have you read that?


In the ROG Crosshair VI thread.


----------



## darkdavid08

Thanks a ton @majestynl , that write up helped me out tremendously, appreciate the time to write a guide around the things I was unsure of!


----------



## hahler2

hurricane28 said:


> hahler2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> What kind of temps do you get at that voltage? That’s about where mine needs to run to get 4.2 stable.
> 
> I tried doing a reference clock overclock but couldn’t get it stable even at 101. That was with no offset and llc set to level 3.
> 
> 
> 
> I am getting around 55-63c under heavy load, IBT AVX, Aida64 FPU test etc. Normally i am between mid 40s. I do want to point out that these temps are in high ambient 25 c with 360 mm cooler with fans spinning at only 1400 rps.. Can do a lot better but temps are fine and way below max save so i am good.
> 
> I think these chips are binned to the max already, especially the "X" series of chips, they all tin to clock the same at the same voltage..
Click to expand...

Ok something definitely wrong with my setup. I’m 20 to 30 c higher than that and I’ve got 2 360mm rads!!! Got to be either my cpu block or my pump is not working properly


----------



## majestynl

darkdavid08 said:


> Thanks a ton @majestynl , that write up helped me out tremendously, appreciate the time to write a guide around the things I was unsure of!


Np! I'm happy it helped you get started! And don't forget to share results / info etc on this thread so this will also help others!! 



hahler2 said:


> Ok something definitely wrong with my setup. I’m 20 to 30 c higher than that and I’ve got 2 360mm rads!!! Got to be either my cpu block or my pump is not working properly


Don't panic to soon, 54-63c with a ambient of 25 under heavy load in stresstests is really low. Maybe he has a hurricane blowing in his room 

I have a 360 push in push out + 240 push with high performance fans and I never saw low temps like that under heavy stress testing load. Even not with lower vcore. I also live in the Netherlands!

Tested with multiple CPUs.

Maybe your are a bit on the high side with +30c but his temps are really low!!


----------



## CJMitsuki

hahler2 said:


> Ok something definitely wrong with my setup. I’m 20 to 30 c higher than that and I’ve got 2 360mm rads!!! Got to be either my cpu block or my pump is not working properly



There definitely is something amiss with your rig. Im running a small h115i pro 240mm and I often run benching runs for hours on end at over 1.5v and you are hitting much higher temps than me. Granted my ambient temps are very cool and I use liquid metal thermal compound but you shouldnt be getting anywhere near those temps with your setup. What are the environmental conditions around the case? Ambient, in direct sunlight, etc? You mentioned Kryonaught and ive heard its a decent compound so maybe block not mounted correctly? Possible inadequate pump for the size of the setup or damaged pump? You need to eliminate areas of concern, do you have another cooler laying around? Even if its the stock Wraith or something you should swap it out and see how it compares. If it runs the same temps or cooler then the problem is the cooler, if not then move to another area of concern such as thermal compound application and block mounting methods. If that doesnt yield anything conclusive then I would have to buy an IR temp sensor and see if there is possible sensor malfunctions on the mobo. Finally if none of those have produced a result then Im afraid the cpu is probably a bad bin or possibly defective. I would say that the cooler is probably your best bet though. What are the coolant temps and the actual flow sensors reading? Is this custom or AIO? So many things could cause your temps to be that high and we hope its no a cpu issue and is some other malfunction. Also, what is the fan setup on your case like? We can isolate and rule out possible areas of concern and find an answer im sure.




hurricane28 said:


> I am getting around 55-63c under heavy load, IBT AVX, Aida64 FPU test etc. Normally i am between mid 40s. I do want to point out that these temps are in high ambient 25 c with 360 mm cooler with fans spinning at only 1400 rps.. Can do a lot better but temps are fine and way below max save so i am good.
> 
> I think these chips are binned to the max already, especially the "X" series of chips, they all tin to clock the same at the same voltage..



Id like to know your setup getting those temps in IBT AVX @25c ambient and 40c idle. What frequency and vCore are you running? Even when I have 20c ambient running [email protected] I am higher than that but you do have a larger rad. I need to invest in something with more cooling capacity so I can control my temps above 1.6v and 4.5ghz. I can only do 4.45ghz @ 1.53ish. Id have to look up my benching results to know exactly but I generally hit 70-75c in Cinebench at that setup with around 13-15c ambient(I have to wear a hoodie when I bench bc my room is quite cool) :lachen:


----------



## hahler2

CJMitsuki said:


> There definitely is something amiss with your rig. Im running a small h115i pro 240mm and I often run benching runs for hours on end at over 1.5v and you are hitting much higher temps than me. Granted my ambient temps are very cool and I use liquid metal thermal compound but you shouldnt be getting anywhere near those temps with your setup. What are the environmental conditions around the case? Ambient, in direct sunlight, etc? You mentioned Kryonaught and ive heard its a decent compound so maybe block not mounted correctly? Possible inadequate pump for the size of the setup or damaged pump? You need to eliminate areas of concern, do you have another cooler laying around? Even if its the stock Wraith or something you should swap it out and see how it compares. If it runs the same temps or cooler then the problem is the cooler, if not then move to another area of concern such as thermal compound application and block mounting methods. If that doesnt yield anything conclusive then I would have to buy an IR temp sensor and see if there is possible sensor malfunctions on the mobo. Finally if none of those have produced a result then Im afraid the cpu is probably a bad bin or possibly defective. I would say that the cooler is probably your best bet though. What are the coolant temps and the actual flow sensors reading? Is this custom or AIO? So many things could cause your temps to be that high and we hope its no a cpu issue and is some other malfunction. Also, what is the fan setup on your case like? We can isolate and rule out possible areas of concern and find an answer im sure.



Ok well I'll go over my setup with you and what I've tried and let's see what we can figure out! This is definitely bugging me big time!

So I have a Define R6. I have a Hardware Labs GTS 360 in the front with EK Vardar EVO fans as intake. There's a second GTS 360 in the top with Vardar's as exhaust. My pump is a XSPC Photon 170 D5. Set to level 5 so its running at almost 4500 rpm. CPU block is a Heatkiller IV Pro. GPU block is a EK waterblock on a 1080ti. I have drained my loop and taken apart and cleaned my cpu block (it was fine btw). I have also re done the thermal paste and remounted my block twice. I have also triple checked to make sure I have my loop in the correct order and all is good there. Right now I'm running my CPU with performance enhancer set to level 3. Voltage offset of -.05. And LLC level 3. After running Aida64 for 20 minutes my cpu temps will be in the high 70's. Gaming my temps are in the 50's. My GPU runs between 44 and 49 C during gaming depending on the game I'm running. My case is not in direct sunlight and is actually right below my vent for my central air. Air is set to 71 degrees F so ambient should be roughly 22 or 23 C depending on how well A/C is keeping up. Coolant temp at idle is 29 C. I do not have a flow meter on my loop. CPU is idling at around 33 and GPU is at 31.

Tomorrow I'm going to try switching my top radiator from exhaust to intake. Wondering if that top rad is getting heat soaked and causing issues. I don't expect this to fix anything though as my loop order goes Pump>intake radiator>CPU>exhaust radiator>GPU>and back to pump. I am beginning to believe that there's something not right with my CPU block. A lot of these parts were carried over from a previous build. Before this I had a 4790k in a different case. I had some temperature issues with the 4790k too. It would run around 65 in game and stress test would push it to high 80's pretty easy. I always attributed it to typical intel i7 and running hot. However, my cpu temps did go up when I went from an AIO to a custom loop. I then bought a conversion kit from Watercool to switch my block from an Intel mount to an AM4 mount. It seems to be making very good contact as I'm getting a good spread on my thermal paste. I just wonder if something has always been wrong with my block and it's not transferring heat like it should. I'm very tempted to get a different block and try that. Only other thing I can think of is that it's my pump not working like it should. But it seems to move fluid very quickly when I'm filling and priming. And I don't have any issues with GPU temps. So I don't think it's my pump.

Let me know what you think and if you need any other info.


----------



## hahler2

majestynl said:


> Np! I'm happy it helped you get started! And don't forget to share results / info etc on this thread so this will also help others!!
> 
> 
> 
> Don't panic to soon, 54-63c with a ambient of 25 under heavy load in stresstests is really low. Maybe he has a hurricane blowing in his room
> 
> I have a 360 push in push out + 240 push with high performance fans and I never saw low temps like that under heavy stress testing load. Even not with lower vcore. I also live in the Netherlands!
> 
> Tested with multiple CPUs.
> 
> Maybe your are a bit on the high side with +30c but his temps are really low!!


I'm not panicking, just something doesn't seem right here to me. What kind of temps would you see with a vcore at 1.375 and stress testing with Aida64? I'm just trying to get a feel for what should be "normal" for this processor. I went over all my specs and what kind of temps I'm seeing in the post above this. If there's anything else you want to know let me know.


----------



## CJMitsuki

hahler2 said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> There definitely is something amiss with your rig. Im running a small h115i pro 240mm and I often run benching runs for hours on end at over 1.5v and you are hitting much higher temps than me. Granted my ambient temps are very cool and I use liquid metal thermal compound but you shouldnt be getting anywhere near those temps with your setup. What are the environmental conditions around the case? Ambient, in direct sunlight, etc? You mentioned Kryonaught and ive heard its a decent compound so maybe block not mounted correctly? Possible inadequate pump for the size of the setup or damaged pump? You need to eliminate areas of concern, do you have another cooler laying around? Even if its the stock Wraith or something you should swap it out and see how it compares. If it runs the same temps or cooler then the problem is the cooler, if not then move to another area of concern such as thermal compound application and block mounting methods. If that doesnt yield anything conclusive then I would have to buy an IR temp sensor and see if there is possible sensor malfunctions on the mobo. Finally if none of those have produced a result then Im afraid the cpu is probably a bad bin or possibly defective. I would say that the cooler is probably your best bet though. What are the coolant temps and the actual flow sensors reading? Is this custom or AIO? So many things could cause your temps to be that high and we hope its no a cpu issue and is some other malfunction. Also, what is the fan setup on your case like? We can isolate and rule out possible areas of concern and find an answer im sure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ok well I'll go over my setup with you and what I've tried and let's see what we can figure out! This is definitely bugging me big time!
> 
> So I have a Define R6. I have a Hardware Labs GTS 360 in the front with EK Vardar EVO fans as intake. There's a second GTS 360 in the top with Vardar's as exhaust. My pump is a XSPC Photon 170 D5. Set to level 5 so its running at almost 4500 rpm. CPU block is a Heatkiller IV Pro. GPU block is a EK waterblock on a 1080ti. I have drained my loop and taken apart and cleaned my cpu block (it was fine btw). I have also re done the thermal paste and remounted my block twice. I have also triple checked to make sure I have my loop in the correct order and all is good there. Right now I'm running my CPU with performance enhancer set to level 3. Voltage offset of -.05. And LLC level 3. After running Aida64 for 20 minutes my cpu temps will be in the high 70's. Gaming my temps are in the 50's. My GPU runs between 44 and 49 C during gaming depending on the game I'm running. My case is not in direct sunlight and is actually right below my vent for my central air. Air is set to 71 degrees F so ambient should be roughly 22 or 23 C depending on how well A/C is keeping up. Coolant temp at idle is 29 C. I do not have a flow meter on my loop. CPU is idling at around 33 and GPU is at 31.
> 
> Tomorrow I'm going to try switching my top radiator from exhaust to intake. Wondering if that top rad is getting heat soaked and causing issues. I don't expect this to fix anything though as my loop order goes Pump>intake radiator>CPU>exhaust radiator>GPU>and back to pump. I am beginning to believe that there's something not right with my CPU block. A lot of these parts were carried over from a previous build. Before this I had a 4790k in a different case. I had some temperature issues with the 4790k too. It would run around 65 in game and stress test would push it to high 80's pretty easy. I always attributed it to typical intel i7 and running hot. However, my cpu temps did go up when I went from an AIO to a custom loop. I then bought a conversion kit from Watercool to switch my block from an Intel mount to an AM4 mount. It seems to be making very good contact as I'm getting a good spread on my thermal paste. I just wonder if something has always been wrong with my block and it's not transferring heat like it should. I'm very tempted to get a different block and try that. Only other thing I can think of is that it's my pump not working like it should. But it seems to move fluid very quickly when I'm filling and priming. And I don't have any issues with GPU temps. So I don't think it's my pump.
> 
> Let me know what you think and if you need any other info.
Click to expand...

Something that jumps out at me is that coolant temp at idle. Mine at idle runs not too far above ambient and yours is 7c above ambient. I think mine sits around 24c at idle when my ambient is 21-22. That’s with my 280mm AIO and pump at 2800rpm. Either your cpu and gpu are just roasting both of those rads(highly unlikely) or your coolant temps sit unusually high for idle. The block is apparently transferring the heat since your coolant is warm. What type of OC do you run? Is it downvolting at idle? What about the GPU? What are those temps like and is it set to downclock/volt as well? Looks as if those rads aren’t displacing the heat as they should or the pump isn’t providing the proper pressure to circulate it properly. Even if it is running at 4500rpm, if the system pressure is low or the pump has to push the coolant a long distance then the pump will heat up and warm the coolant as well. That also makes me think that your pump could possibly be getting hot running that hard. Have you checked that to make sure the pump isn’t unusually warm? It is running nearly double the rpm of mine.


----------



## hahler2

Both GPU and CPU are downclocking at idle. GPU is essentially a founders edition. Running at power limit maxed, core clock at plus 170, memory clock at plus 650. I have no way to monitor pump temps but I can tell you that the housing doesn't even feel warm to the touch. I could try getting a new pump I guess and see if that's the problem. I just tried running Aida64 for a half hour with my pe3 overclock. Water temp at idle was 30.8. Water temp max was 35.6 and average was 34.5. CPU idle temp was 36.3, high was 86.6, and average was 75.8. CPU Vcore at idle was .794, high was 1.475, and average was 1.259. It was running at 4,041 mhz for the test. Temps were measured using the tdie reading in hwinfo64.


----------



## hahler2

Also, my ambient could be higher than that. I just know that's what my A/C is set to. So my idle coolant temp probably isn't that far off from ambient. I'll figure out a way to check that.


----------



## wisepds

hurricane28 said:


> I am getting around 55-63c under heavy load, IBT AVX, Aida64 FPU test etc. Normally i am between mid 40s. I do want to point out that these temps are in high ambient 25 c with 360 mm cooler with fans spinning at only 1400 rps.. Can do a lot better but temps are fine and way below max save so i am good.
> 
> I think these chips are binned to the max already, especially the "X" series of chips, they all tin to clock the same at the same voltage..


I have an push and pull configuration with 360 rad and 6 Magnetic levitation fans at 2700 rpm with 4 mm h2o static pressure. With 25-27 °C ambient temp i get 70-74 °C(Max peak) with IBT or Y-crunch at 4.1ghz...what cooler have you?


----------



## majestynl

hahler2 said:


> I'm not panicking, just something doesn't seem right here to me. What kind of temps would you see with a vcore at 1.375 and stress testing with Aida64? I'm just trying to get a feel for what should be "normal" for this processor. I went over all my specs and what kind of temps I'm seeing in the post above this. If there's anything else you want to know let me know.


Aida is a bit hotter usual. But I would say around 75c is normal.
Are you testing with open case ? Don't need to change orientation if you just open all sides, just for testing.!

Is that old aio you are talking about still laying around. You could install that one just for cpu for testing if it's the block!


----------



## CJMitsuki

majestynl said:


> hahler2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not panicking, just something doesn't seem right here to me. What kind of temps would you see with a vcore at 1.375 and stress testing with Aida64? I'm just trying to get a feel for what should be "normal" for this processor. I went over all my specs and what kind of temps I'm seeing in the post above this. If there's anything else you want to know let me know.
> 
> 
> 
> Aida is a bit hotter usual. But I would say around 75c is normal.
> Are you testing with open case ? Don't need to change orientation if you just open all sides, just for testing.!
> 
> Is that old aio you are talking about still laying around. You could install that one just for cpu for testing if it's the block!
Click to expand...

Definitely swap it out and see if there is a noticeable difference. If the AIO is anywhere near the cooling capacity of the custom loop then your problem is the loop itself. If your cpu temps spike and run hotter than the loop then your cpu is running way too hot and could be RMA potentially. I feel like your coolant temps are well above normal compared to my AIO. I feel like 2-3c above ambient at idle is about normal. Does your GPU downclock at idle? If not it can easily sit there at 50c+ warming the coolant needlessly.


----------



## Bo55

Hi all, just swapped over to the crosshair 7 wifi from an x370 Prime Pro, im on the latest bios 0702 and noticed it has a cold booting issue, is this the same issue the crosshair 6 has? it will try posting twice before actually booting and everything is fine after that. As for memory overclocking, i mainly bought this board to see if i could get my 3733 B-die kit working on its xmp profile, which it does  matched up with my 2700x, however is not stable unfortunately. Im hoping with a premium board like this, 3733 and up memory straps shouldnt be too hard to achieve with the right bios. As for now, the only memory setting ive found game stable is the 1.4v 3600 cl16 preset in memory timings section in the bios.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Bo55 said:


> Hi all, just swapped over to the crosshair 7 wifi from an x370 Prime Pro, im on the latest bios 0702 and noticed it has a cold booting issue, is this the same issue the crosshair 6 has? it will try posting twice before actually booting and everything is fine after that. As for memory overclocking, i mainly bought this board to see if i could get my 3733 B-die kit working on its xmp profile, which it does /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif matched up with my 2700x, however is not stable unfortunately. Im hoping with a premium board like this, 3733 and up memory straps shouldnt be too hard to achieve with the right bios. As for now, the only memory setting ive found game stable is the 1.4v 3600 cl16 preset in memory timings section in the bios.


There’s no point in those higher frequencies if your timings are too loose to provide any better performance. You’d be better off with 3466c14 or 3533c14 as they will outperform 3600c16 and 3733c18 which is what I assume the XMP profile is. 3466-3533c14 is where you’ll find the sweet spot until 3600c14 is achievable with tight timings in a stable condition.


----------



## majestynl

CJMitsuki said:


> There’s no point in those higher frequencies if your timings are too loose to provide any better performance. You’d be better off with 3466c14 or 3533c14 as they will outperform 3600c16 and 3733c18 which is what I assume the XMP profile is. 3466-3533c14 is where you’ll find the sweet spot until 3600c14 is achievable with tight timings in a stable condition.


Totally Agree!! 3466 CL14 TT is double, 3533 CL14 TT much harder.. above is almost impossible with CL14 TT in current bios versions. Going higher in freq with looser timings is a no go performance wise for current archiveable stable freqs


----------



## hahler2

My old AIO was a Kraken X62. I don't have it around anymore. Only cooler I have available would be the wraith prism that came with the processor.


----------



## VPII

hahler2 said:


> My old AIO was a Kraken X62. I don't have it around anymore. Only cooler I have available would be the wraith prism that came with the processor.


Try the Wraith Prism and see what the temps look like. It should give a quick indication if your current cooling setup is work or not.


----------



## Whatisthisfor

Do you Asus owners have the new Agesa 1.0.04 as beta BIOS yet? I noticed the Asrock X470 Taichi just got an new official version. I wonder what improvements AMD did make in the microcode hopefully regarding memory compatibility as well. Btw. i could not post with my mobile, although i was logged in.

https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/X470 Taichi Ultimate/index.us.asp#BIOS


----------



## majestynl

VPII said:


> hahler2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> My old AIO was a Kraken X62. I don't have it around anymore. Only cooler I have available would be the wraith prism that came with the processor.
> 
> 
> 
> Try the Wraith Prism and see what the temps look like. It should give a quick indication if your current cooling setup is work or not.
Click to expand...

Don't think it will be comparable! He is running a OC and with the prism the temps will raise. And if he lower his OC both (prism vs his block) will be low/mid temp.

So will be difficult to compare if you ask me...




Whatisthisfor said:


> Do you Asus owners have the new Agesa 1.0.04 as beta BIOS yet? I noticed the Asrock X470 Taichi just got an new official version. I wonder what improvements AMD did make in the microcode hopefully regarding memory compatibility as well. Btw. i could not post with my mobile, although i was logged in.
> 
> https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/X470 Taichi Ultimate/index.us.asp#BIOS


Not yet seen! ASRock does always releases bios too quick if you ask me. They don't test it well..often issues and almost untouched code from AMD..! Sometimes I got the feeling they are just doing that to be the first


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> There definitely is something amiss with your rig. Im running a small h115i pro 240mm and I often run benching runs for hours on end at over 1.5v and you are hitting much higher temps than me. Granted my ambient temps are very cool and I use liquid metal thermal compound but you shouldnt be getting anywhere near those temps with your setup. What are the environmental conditions around the case? Ambient, in direct sunlight, etc? You mentioned Kryonaught and ive heard its a decent compound so maybe block not mounted correctly? Possible inadequate pump for the size of the setup or damaged pump? You need to eliminate areas of concern, do you have another cooler laying around? Even if its the stock Wraith or something you should swap it out and see how it compares. If it runs the same temps or cooler then the problem is the cooler, if not then move to another area of concern such as thermal compound application and block mounting methods. If that doesnt yield anything conclusive then I would have to buy an IR temp sensor and see if there is possible sensor malfunctions on the mobo. Finally if none of those have produced a result then Im afraid the cpu is probably a bad bin or possibly defective. I would say that the cooler is probably your best bet though. What are the coolant temps and the actual flow sensors reading? Is this custom or AIO? So many things could cause your temps to be that high and we hope its no a cpu issue and is some other malfunction. Also, what is the fan setup on your case like? We can isolate and rule out possible areas of concern and find an answer im sure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Id like to know your setup getting those temps in IBT AVX @25c ambient and 40c idle. What frequency and vCore are you running? Even when I have 20c ambient running [email protected] I am higher than that but you do have a larger rad. I need to invest in something with more cooling capacity so I can control my temps above 1.6v and 4.5ghz. I can only do 4.45ghz @ 1.53ish. Id have to look up my benching results to know exactly but I generally hit 70-75c in Cinebench at that setup with around 13-15c ambient(I have to wear a hoodie when I bench bc my room is quite cool) :lachen:


For starters Me and Him are not using LLC5. In My case LLC3 with Vdrop ect is 8c cooler than LLC5 thats with 1.425 so if hes runing 1.4 LLC3 yup can see taht happening


----------



## lordzed83

Whatisthisfor said:


> Do you Asus owners have the new Agesa 1.0.04 as beta BIOS yet? I noticed the Asrock X470 Taichi just got an new official version. I wonder what improvements AMD did make in the microcode hopefully regarding memory compatibility as well. Btw. i could not post with my mobile, although i was logged in.
> 
> https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/X470 Taichi Ultimate/index.us.asp#BIOS


Nope we got 1.0.0.2c


----------



## Whatisthisfor

majestynl said:


> Not yet seen! ASRock does always releases bios too quick if you ask me. They don't test it well..often issues and almost untouched code from AMD..! Sometimes I got the feeling they are just doing that to be the first


Didnt know, but i would want it too, at least as beta


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> For starters Me and Him are not using LLC5. In My case LLC3 with Vdrop ect is 8c cooler than LLC5 thats with 1.425 so if hes runing 1.4 LLC3 yup can see taht happening


LOL.. looks.like ..我不明白你在想什麼



Whatisthisfor said:


> Didnt know, but i would want it too, at least as beta


Asus isn't releasing new agesa versions that quick... probably first they want to be sure it's tested well internally as alpha..

Is there any big changes your are expecting or hoping for ?


----------



## CJMitsuki

lordzed83 said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> There definitely is something amiss with your rig. Im running a small h115i pro 240mm and I often run benching runs for hours on end at over 1.5v and you are hitting much higher temps than me. Granted my ambient temps are very cool and I use liquid metal thermal compound but you shouldnt be getting anywhere near those temps with your setup. What are the environmental conditions around the case? Ambient, in direct sunlight, etc? You mentioned Kryonaught and ive heard its a decent compound so maybe block not mounted correctly? Possible inadequate pump for the size of the setup or damaged pump? You need to eliminate areas of concern, do you have another cooler laying around? Even if its the stock Wraith or something you should swap it out and see how it compares. If it runs the same temps or cooler then the problem is the cooler, if not then move to another area of concern such as thermal compound application and block mounting methods. If that doesnt yield anything conclusive then I would have to buy an IR temp sensor and see if there is possible sensor malfunctions on the mobo. Finally if none of those have produced a result then Im afraid the cpu is probably a bad bin or possibly defective. I would say that the cooler is probably your best bet though. What are the coolant temps and the actual flow sensors reading? Is this custom or AIO? So many things could cause your temps to be that high and we hope its no a cpu issue and is some other malfunction. Also, what is the fan setup on your case like? We can isolate and rule out possible areas of concern and find an answer im sure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Id like to know your setup getting those temps in IBT AVX @25c ambient and 40c idle. What frequency and vCore are you running? Even when I have 20c ambient running [email protected] I am higher than that but you do have a larger rad. I need to invest in something with more cooling capacity so I can control my temps above 1.6v and 4.5ghz. I can only do 4.45ghz @ 1.53ish. Id have to look up my benching results to know exactly but I generally hit 70-75c in Cinebench at that setup with around 13-15c ambient(I have to wear a hoodie when I bench bc my room is quite cool) /forum/images/smilies/lachen.gif
> 
> 
> 
> For starters Me and Him are not using LLC5. In My case LLC3 with Vdrop ect is 8c cooler than LLC5 thats with 1.425 so if hes runing 1.4 LLC3 yup can see taht happening /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
Click to expand...

The LLC 5 isn’t for running 1.425v, it’s for when I’m running 1.5v+ bc if I were in the middle of a benchmark run and running a good time and the voltage were to stutter then the run could crash and I would end up having to run a higher voltage to compensate for the vDroop at LLC3 or 4 so it would be a wash in temps. LLC5 has no drop for me at those voltages so it is stable for what I’m using it for. I run it outside of benchmarking bc I just can’t be bothered to change it everytime I swap back to windows 10. The extra temp on the VRMs is negligible so I don’t worry about it. Still have yet to see VRMs hit 40c at LLC5. Doesn’t really matter that much during daily use either since most of the time you aren’t even in PState 0 and voltage drops to .6v. I have enough airflow on the VRMs that there’s not really that much difference in temps for me.


----------



## elmor

I'm still trying to get a 100% fixed version with the ACPI WMI interface (for C6/C7/ZE). I believe Global C-states are disabled when overclocking on the later BIOS versions since it was causing issues with Manual Mode voltage settings being reset. Manually setting Advanced\AMD CBS\Zen Common Options\Global C-states Control = Enabled should bring back "downvolting".


----------



## hahler2

majestynl said:


> Don't think it will be comparable! He is running a OC and with the prism the temps will raise. And if he lower his OC both (prism vs his block) will be low/mid temp.
> 
> So will be difficult to compare if you ask me...
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with you. I didn't get a chance to do anymore testing today. Work ended up being much crazier than I was expecting. I did switch top rad from exhaust to intake. Only lowered temps a couple of degrees. It's either got to be my CPU block or my pump. I think it's the block. Got a 50/50 chance of it being right. Going to order a new CPU block tonight and if that doesn't fix it then I'll keep the one I like the best and sell the other one and try a different pump. It's going to be more money than I wanted to spend but I can't think of any other way to determine what's going on other than to just start replacing stuff.
Click to expand...


----------



## majestynl

elmor said:


> I'm still trying to get a 100% fixed version with the ACPI WMI interface (for C6/C7/ZE). I believe Global C-states are disabled when overclocking on the later BIOS versions since it was causing issues with Manual Mode voltage settings being reset. Manually setting Advanced\AMD CBS\Zen Common Options\Global C-states Control = Enabled should bring back "downvolting".


Great that clears a lot for certain people over here.. Good luck with finding the proper fix 



hahler2 said:


> majestynl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't think it will be comparable! He is running a OC and with the prism the temps will raise. And if he lower his OC both (prism vs his block) will be low/mid temp.
> 
> So will be difficult to compare if you ask me...
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with you. I didn't get a chance to do anymore testing today. Work ended up being much crazier than I was expecting. I did switch top rad from exhaust to intake. Only lowered temps a couple of degrees. It's either got to be my CPU block or my pump. I think it's the block. Got a 50/50 chance of it being right. Going to order a new CPU block tonight and if that doesn't fix it then I'll keep the one I like the best and sell the other one and try a different pump. It's going to be more money than I wanted to spend but I can't think of any other way to determine what's going on other than to just start replacing stuff.
Click to expand...

Yep, or you can get a cheap Cooler Master 240 AIO. Really cheap and doing good jobs for their price, and leave it as an spare unit. I believe those are around 60 euros over here..

Good luck..


----------



## hahler2

Thanks! I hope this does the trick. I see what you're saying about the AIO. However, putting an AIO on doesn't tell me anything I don't already know. If it fixes my cooling problems I'm still at square one of not knowing if it's my CPU block or my pump that's causing the problems. Plus a decent CPU block isn't much more than 60. I could pick up an EK Supremacy for 70 dollars or so.


----------



## majestynl

hahler2 said:


> Thanks! I hope this does the trick. I see what you're saying about the AIO. However, putting an AIO on doesn't tell me anything I don't already know. If it fixes my cooling problems I'm still at square one of not knowing if it's my CPU block or my pump that's causing the problems. Plus a decent CPU block isn't much more than 60. I could pick up an EK Supremacy for 70 dollars or so.


Understand, it only will tell you if it's the block or not. But I just said it because it's always handy if you have a spare aio laying around... 

Anyways..go what suits you best..


----------



## Bo55

CJMitsuki said:


> There’s no point in those higher frequencies if your timings are too loose to provide any better performance. You’d be better off with 3466c14 or 3533c14 as they will outperform 3600c16 and 3733c18 which is what I assume the XMP profile is. 3466-3533c14 is where you’ll find the sweet spot until 3600c14 is achievable with tight timings in a stable condition.


Never assume. Ive tested best combos i can get with almost identical results at c14,3200, c14,3466, c16,3600, c16,3666 and c16,3733 all at 1T, 350 trfc and modified subs using cpu-z's benchmark, 483 single core and about 5205 on multi along with 3dmark Firestrike extreme physics test at 70.4fps across all frequencies. Now theres gotta be something going wrong there because at this point my x370 board was doing better at over 71fps on physics test using the exact timings c14 3200. Surely the lack of performance is just a bios issue :s

Ive tried to upload a screenshot of my aida cache and memory benchmark scores, but for some reason the "drag files here to attach" section doesnt work as my attachment just disappears after dragging it into the box and attaching files under Additional options wont work either, however over 58K reads. Looks like im gonna have to stick with the 1.4v 3600 preset for now.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Bo55 said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> There’s no point in those higher frequencies if your timings are too loose to provide any better performance. You’d be better off with 3466c14 or 3533c14 as they will outperform 3600c16 and 3733c18 which is what I assume the XMP profile is. 3466-3533c14 is where you’ll find the sweet spot until 3600c14 is achievable with tight timings in a stable condition.
> 
> 
> 
> Never assume. Ive tested best combos i can get with almost identical results at c14,3200, c14,3466, c16,3600, c16,3666 and c16,3733 all at 1T, 350 trfc and modified subs using cpu-z's benchmark, 483 single core and about 5205 on multi along with 3dmark Firestrike extreme physics test at 70.4fps across all frequencies. Now theres gotta be something going wrong there because at this point my x370 board was doing better at over 71fps on physics test using the exact timings c14 3200. Surely the lack of performance is just a bios issue :s
> 
> Ive tried to upload a screenshot of my aida cache and memory benchmark scores, but for some reason the "drag files here to attach" section doesnt work as my attachment just disappears after dragging it into the box and attaching files under Additional options wont work either, however over 58K reads. Looks like im gonna have to stick with the 1.4v 3600 preset for now.
Click to expand...

What is your latency? Bandwidth isn’t near as important. If you were getting better results with 3600c16 rather than 3533c14 then you had timings too tight or voltages were off or something bc you’d be the first person that has those results that I have seen. What type of OC were you running on the CPU? Stock?


----------



## Bo55

CJMitsuki said:


> What is your latency? Bandwidth isn’t near as important. If you were getting better results with 3600c16 rather than 3533c14 then you had timings too tight or voltages were off or something bc you’d be the first person that has those results that I have seen. What type of OC were you running on the CPU? Stock?


Latency is about 62.3ns at 3733 using 16-16-16-16-38 1T GD enabled, best was 61, but cant seem to go any lower than that at any frequency or timing combo. Tested 1.4-1.43v max as it shouldnt need anymore than that. OC was 4.25 all core @ 1.41v LLC2 I tried 3866 but it just wouldnt post no matter what i tried.


----------



## wisepds

elmor said:


> I'm still trying to get a 100% fixed version with the ACPI WMI interface (for C6/C7/ZE). I believe Global C-states are disabled when overclocking on the later BIOS versions since it was causing issues with Manual Mode voltage settings being reset. Manually setting Advanced\AMD CBS\Zen Common Options\Global C-states Control = Enabled should bring back "downvolting".


OHH nice notice!! I'm going to try that... i'm one of those with NO downvolting...Thanks Elmor, great read you again!


----------



## wisepds

@elmor 

I have test that you say and nothing, see:


----------



## CJMitsuki

Bo55 said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is your latency? Bandwidth isn’t near as important. If you were getting better results with 3600c16 rather than 3533c14 then you had timings too tight or voltages were off or something bc you’d be the first person that has those results that I have seen. What type of OC were you running on the CPU? Stock?
> 
> 
> 
> Latency is about 62.3ns at 3733 using 16-16-16-16-38 1T GD enabled, best was 61, but cant seem to go any lower than that at any frequency or timing combo. Tested 1.4-1.43v max as it shouldnt need anymore than that. OC was 4.25 all core @ 1.41v LLC2 I tried 3866 but it just wouldnt post no matter what i tried.
Click to expand...

Your latency is one of the problems. At 3533c14 I’m around 59ns then at 3400c12 I’m sitting at around 57ns. 3400c14 I think is around 59ns. I rarely see anything above 59ns. If I do it will affect performance. Usually 9 times out of 10 this formula “Mhz/Cas=X” is always true where as the higher the number for “X” means higher potential performance. It also means the higher that number, the more difficult it is to stabilize. Anything 3600 and up is hit and miss on Ryzen+ right now anyway and doesn’t make sense to run them aside from situational instances.


----------



## hurricane28

elmor said:


> I'm still trying to get a 100% fixed version with the ACPI WMI interface (for C6/C7/ZE). I believe Global C-states are disabled when overclocking on the later BIOS versions since it was causing issues with Manual Mode voltage settings being reset. Manually setting Advanced\AMD CBS\Zen Common Options\Global C-states Control = Enabled should bring back "downvolting".


Glad to hear from you man, most of us thought you were not working for Asus anymore... 

Anyway, Ask Mumak or The Stilt man, they know how to solve software problems.. I really don't understand why this is so hard to solve to be honest. I know several people with Gigabyte and MSI boards which have non of these issues... They have much cheaper boards too... 

Anyway, good luck man and keep us update plz.


----------



## nemiel

hi i tryed to get my new 3200 cl14 rams working on the c7h but with luck they run @ 2666 with 1.4v someone has tryed the rams and has it work ?

Module Manufacturer:	G.Skill
Module Part Number:	F4-3200C14-16GTZR
Module Series:	Trident Z RGB
DRAM Manufacturer:	Samsung
DRAM Components:	K4A8G085WB-BCPB
DRAM Die Revision / Process Node:	B / 20 nm


----------



## Keith Myers

hahler2 said:


> majestynl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't think it will be comparable! He is running a OC and with the prism the temps will raise. And if he lower his OC both (prism vs his block) will be low/mid temp.
> 
> So will be difficult to compare if you ask me...
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with you. I didn't get a chance to do anymore testing today. Work ended up being much crazier than I was expecting. I did switch top rad from exhaust to intake. Only lowered temps a couple of degrees. It's either got to be my CPU block or my pump. I think it's the block. Got a 50/50 chance of it being right. Going to order a new CPU block tonight and if that doesn't fix it then I'll keep the one I like the best and sell the other one and try a different pump. It's going to be more money than I wanted to spend but I can't think of any other way to determine what's going on other than to just start replacing stuff.
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe I'm asking a stupid question but . . . . do you have the cpu block plumbed in correctly for direction of flow?
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## Keith Myers

nemiel said:


> hi i tryed to get my new 3200 cl14 rams working on the c7h but with luck they run @ 2666 with 1.4v someone has tryed the rams and has it work ?
> 
> Module Manufacturer:	G.Skill
> Module Part Number:	F4-3200C14-16GTZR
> Module Series:	Trident Z RGB
> DRAM Manufacturer:	Samsung
> DRAM Components:	K4A8G085WB-BCPB
> DRAM Die Revision / Process Node:	B / 20 nm


I have that same exact kit minus the RGB in two systems. Both run The Stilts 3466 1.4V preset with no issues on first try.:thumb:


----------



## nemiel

what base settings you use?


i dont get the Ram working looks like the 2x 16gb sticks cause issues?


2666 is the max i got with 16 19 19 its realy bad for a cl 14 set with this price


----------



## majestynl

hurricane28 said:


> Glad to hear from you man, most of us thought you were not working for Asus anymore...
> .


Most ? Just one guy said, it was said on a different thread bla bla bla...dont believe so quickly on gossip men 



hurricane28 said:


> Anyway, Ask Mumak or The Stilt man, they know how to solve software problems..
> .


Don't be so naive mate! Because of some people fixed some other issues you compare everything together? Come on..



hurricane28 said:


> I really don't understand why this is so hard to solve to be honest.


I do now know why you don't understand it!!!!  Don't be that rude men. It's easy to talk from the side line!!



hurricane28 said:


> I know several people with Gigabyte and MSI boards which have non of these issues... They have much cheaper boards too...


Again. Don't compare so quickly things...




hurricane28 said:


> Anyway, good luck man and keep us update plz.


Hehehe lol.. good luck and keep us updated ? After you write such a comment.. 

Totally unnecessary your feedback here.. pls dont reply I don't want to start a discussion but just read your comment a few times back and you will understand why I replied..

Just give it a time and things will be fixed...if it was that easy it was already fixed..

Thanks...


----------



## hurricane28

majestynl said:


> Most ? Just one guy said, it was said on a different thread bla bla bla...dont believe so quickly on gossip men  No there were more than just one.. I think to believe it was been said in the C6H thread too but i am not sure..
> 
> 
> 
> Don't be so naive mate! Because of some people fixed some other issues you compare everything together? Come on.. Its not that man, this problem dates from the FX era.. My Sabertooth 990FX R2.0 and R3.0 both suffered from this erratic behavior.. they were fully aware of it but denied it and totally ignored the people over at the ROG forum.. You can go look if you want, its all there.
> 
> 
> I do now know why you don't understand it!!!!  Don't be that rude men. It's easy to talk from the side line!! Its been explained many times how this problem occurs and how to solve it.. Asus simply doesn't want to read differently from the sensor.. Its been explained by The Stilt many times over how this works.. Its really not that hard to fix, but it takes time but 6 years...?! Come on..
> 
> 
> Again. Don't compare so quickly things... I can because i owned Gigabyte myself and never had issues like this.. A friend of mine first had MSI than an Asus board and now he has Gigabyte again with no issues on the Gigabyte and MSI side...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hehehe lol.. good luck and keep us updated ? After you write such a comment..  Of course.. i really hope they can solve it.. myself haven't encounter the problem anymore as i rarely use Aida64 to be honest.
> 
> Totally unnecessary your feedback here.. pls dont reply I don't want to start a discussion but just read your comment a few times back and you will understand why I replied.. I know why you replied and i appreciate your feed back.
> 
> Just give it a time and things will be fixed...if it was that easy it was already fixed.. Its a matter of priority man and i understand that, Asus has many more important things to do i can imagine but this problem must be their absolute number one priority now as a lot of people are fed up with this and selling their boards and buy Gigabyte or MSI because they simply work right of the bat..
> I am not saying this because i want to bash Asus, in the contrary i like Asus and i really want them to step up and fix these issues..
> 
> I really like my board and i am more than happy to get this board for no cost from Asus, that won't stop me from giving feed back though. Giving feed back is why we got this board in the first place mate.
> I am also very happy they fixed the voltage reading on this board, its very accurate and in general it works a lot better than the C6H did.
> 
> 
> Thanks...


These are just my 2cents man, don't want to start anything here.


----------



## elmor

wisepds said:


> @elmor
> 
> I have test that you say and nothing, see:



I'm not sure if the VID reading would reflect it, how about the SIO reading? You also need to manually set CPU Core Voltage Mode to Offset and the OS power plan needs to be set to "Balanced".




hurricane28 said:


> Glad to hear from you man, most of us thought you were not working for Asus anymore...
> 
> Anyway, Ask Mumak or The Stilt man, they know how to solve software problems.. I really don't understand why this is so hard to solve to be honest. I know several people with Gigabyte and MSI boards which have non of these issues... They have much cheaper boards too...
> 
> Anyway, good luck man and keep us update plz.



I know how the cause and how to solve it, that's not the reason it's taken this long.


----------



## wisepds

elmor said:


> I'm not sure if the VID reading would reflect it, how about the SIO reading? You also need to manually set CPU Core Voltage Mode to Offset and the OS power plan needs to be set to "Balanced".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know how the cause and how to solve it, that's not the reason it's taken this long.


 
Voltage core is on offset, and i'm on balanced plan. P-state Oc 4.1. This is my old problem since 2 bios ago...


----------



## hurricane28

elmor said:


> I'm not sure if the VID reading would reflect it, how about the SIO reading? You also need to manually set CPU Core Voltage Mode to Offset and the OS power plan needs to be set to "Balanced".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know how the cause and how to solve it, that's not the reason it's taken this long.


Alright, good to hear. Can you tel us why it is taking this long? And can we do anything to help? The reason i ask is because i hate the feeling of powerlessness while there is a thing we can do in instead. 

If there is anything we can do, pls tell us.


----------



## elmor

wisepds said:


> Voltage core is on offset, and i'm on balanced plan. P-state Oc 4.1. This is my old problem since 2 bios ago...


It works fine here on 0702.

CPU Core Ratio = 40
CPU Core Voltage = Offset mode
CPU Core Voltage Offset = 0.00625

Global C-States Control = Enabled


----------



## wisepds

elmor said:


> It works fine here on 0702.
> 
> CPU Core Ratio = 40
> CPU Core Voltage = Offset mode
> CPU Core Voltage Offset = 0.00625
> 
> Global C-States Control = Enabled


I'm going to test that configuration. Cqn you test with p-states OC? Thanks Elmor!


----------



## elmor

wisepds said:


> elmor said:
> 
> 
> 
> It works fine here on 0702.
> 
> CPU Core Ratio = 40
> CPU Core Voltage = Offset mode
> CPU Core Voltage Offset = 0.00625
> 
> Global C-States Control = Enabled
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm going to test that configuration. Cqn you test with p-states OC? Thanks Elmor!
Click to expand...


Can you specify your exact settings?


----------



## wisepds

elmor said:


> Can you specify your exact settings?


Sure!! Right now i'm out of house, tomorrow i'll post my settings.
Thanks again elmor.


----------



## nemiel

after reading the manual and the full thread here^^ got my rams working with the xmp profile on 3200 14/14


but i have some issues with cinebench someone has a solution for the render lag? means picture stopping display and rendering is done in the background. After the rendering it works normal.


----------



## crakej

wisepds said:


> Sure!! Right now i'm out of house, tomorrow i'll post my settings.
> Thanks again elmor.


why use p-state at all? set `multi to 41 and you're away - surely?


----------



## wisepds

crakej said:


> why use p-state at all? set `multi to 41 and you're away - surely?


What is best method to overclock Multlipier or P-States and why? I don't know well why i use p-states...


----------



## majestynl

nemiel said:


> after reading the manual and the full thread here^^ got my rams working with the xmp profile on 3200 14/14
> 
> 
> but i have some issues with cinebench someone has a solution for the render lag? means picture stopping display and rendering is done in the background. After the rendering it works normal.


 are u running Cinebench process with a higher priority ? Cause then it's normal..


----------



## crakej

wisepds said:


> What is best method to overclock Multlipier or P-States and why? I don't know well why i use p-states...


Well, manual will do what you want - p-states just give you a bit more flexibility to manage cpu power and performance, but I'm 99% certain this will work for you. It's no faster or slower.


----------



## nemiel

no its on normal prio has something to do with the rams / Ram OC


----------



## Bo55

So im trying to get my system setup the same way der8auer did in this video 



 demonstrating the 4.5ghz OC. Ive followed exactly what hes said but for me im getting all cores locked at the same frequency, so im not seeing any boosting or downclocking using ryzen balanced power profile. One thing he didnt mention is if you had to actually enable precision boost overdrive in bios as its left on Auto by default, having said that i tried enabling it and it didn't change anything. Am i missing something here?


----------



## datspike

@Bo55 disable Precision Boost Overdrive in the NBIO AMD CBS settings. For some reason some CPUs require that setting to be disabled for PE3 to work


----------



## lordzed83

elmor said:


> Can you specify your exact settings?


Good You found few minutes to post about this.
Changed from Auto to Enable and Boom Downvolting works  Only few days of looking for solution hahaha
Thanks


----------



## wisepds

@elmor For me, not working... here all screenshots:


----------



## wisepds

lordzed83 said:


> Good You found few minutes to post about this.
> Changed from Auto to Enable and Boom Downvolting works  Only few days of looking for solution hahaha
> Thanks


Why not for me? Arrrggggh!!!


----------



## lordzed83

wisepds said:


> Why not for me? Arrrggggh!!!


You must be blind I can clearly see its downvolting on Yours screenshots !!!!









Everyone including Elmor told You that You are looking at WRONG value and... You are still lookign at wrong value!!!!


----------



## nirurin

I have been having a lot of issues with getting my sticks of ram stable. First off, I'll go through the basics -

- Asus Crosshair VII X470 with 2700x cpu.

- 4x sticks of 8gb GSkills Ripjaws V 3200mhz CL14. So they're Samsung B-Die.

- Ram is stable at stock settings. (Only 2000mhz or 1866 I think, at 'stock')

- XMP is very unstable. XMP is 3200mhz, 14-14-14-34, 1.35v.

So I though I managed to get this stable, using 1.45v and 1.2v SoC, on 3200mhz 14-15-15-40. But after about 5 hours of ram tests it threw an error. That was after a lot of different tests and variations.

I have also used the Ryzen Ram Calculator, but I don't know if it's the motherboard or if its because I'm using 4x sticks, but it doesn't quite seem to manage to stay stable.

SO I'm currently trying to do either -

- 3133mhz, 14-15-15 (at 1.48v and 1.2soc this still threw errors)

- 3000mhz 14-14-14 or 14-15-15

-3200mhz and it would have to go to 18-18-18 cos 16-16-16 seems to be unstable. (Edit: 18-18-18 was unstable).

----

So yeh, if anyone has any tips or ideas for me. Built this computer 2 weeks ago now and have done nothing on it but ram tests for like 8-14hours a day every day. Really appreciate any help!


----------



## wisepds

lordzed83 said:


> You must be blind I can clearly see its downvolting on Yours screenshots !!!!
> 
> Everyone including Elmor told You that You are looking at WRONG value and... You are still lookign at wrong value!!!!


Relax!!!!
Sorry for that, sometimes i don't understand very good what you say.. i don't speak english like native people!! ..But i don't see undervolting as @elmor screenshot, ok, watts are lower, but my core VID IS NOT UNDERVOLTING

how do you explain this:



A HWINFO FAIL? Sensor Fail maybe? Other guys from here tell me that i must check VID value like i said on that photo and my other 1800x undervolts well, my first bios for 2700x undervolts well and this value alwais was 0,4 +/- volts at 2195 mhz...

AH! And i use the same version of HWINFO that Elmor...


----------



## QuadJunkyx

I though VID was what the cpu wants/requesting and SVI2 is the actual voltage being sent to the cpu.
I ask because my SVI2 actually down volts when the vid requests less I have not seen this in any of the recently posted pictures?


----------



## wisepds

QuadJunkyx said:


> I though VID was what the cpu wants/requesting and SVI2 is the actually voltage being sent to the cpu.
> I ask because my SVI2 actually down volts when the vid requests less I have not seen this in any of the recently posted pictures?


That's just what I'm talking about.


----------



## Gettz8488

Is the third part monitoring software like Corsair link fixed on 0702?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Syldon

Gettz8488 said:


> Is the third part monitoring software like Corsair link fixed on 0702?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


The latest version listed on thier site has not changed. It is still v4.9.7.35. 

It looks like Corsair is trying to embed everything into one programme now. ICUE has an information tab regarding fan speeds and temps. You cannot make any adjustment yet though.


----------



## lordzed83

wisepds said:


> QuadJunkyx said:
> 
> 
> 
> I though VID was what the cpu wants/requesting and SVI2 is the actually voltage being sent to the cpu.
> I ask because my SVI2 actually down volts when the vid requests less I have not seen this in any of the recently posted pictures?
> 
> 
> 
> That's just what I'm talking about.
Click to expand...

Do You know how Wats are calculated?? Like most basic electric mathematics.
Look what wats is elmor on and what wats are you on when on idle and use this epic app in windows called calculator . then turn downvolting off and use it again and compare outcome.

If I went from 16-17 wats on core idling to 8wats its obvious volts halved. Basic Mathematics.


----------



## wisepds

lordzed83 said:


> Do You know how Wats are calculated?? Like most basic electric mathematics.
> Look what wats is elmor on and what wats are you on when on idle and use this epic app in windows called calculator . then turn downvolting off and use it again and compare outcome.


P=VxI
i know it lordzed83 and i can do the calculation it's more, I think even that i know more electrical engineering than you so far, so stop bother me..
I asking @elmor why my values aren't the same...only that, lot of people have correct values but not like me, why? And no, the question is not for you, it's for @elmor or someone who wants respond me with respect.


----------



## Gettz8488

Syldon said:


> The latest version listed on thier site has not changed. It is still v4.9.7.35.
> 
> 
> 
> It looks like Corsair is trying to embed everything into one programme now. ICUE has an information tab regarding fan speeds and temps. You cannot make any adjustment yet though.




I’m talking about the bios version. Bios versions before 0702 had shutdoennswhen using monitoring software


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## CJMitsuki

Gettz8488 said:


> Syldon said:
> 
> 
> 
> The latest version listed on thier site has not changed. It is still v4.9.7.35.
> 
> 
> 
> It looks like Corsair is trying to embed everything into one programme now. ICUE has an information tab regarding fan speeds and temps. You cannot make any adjustment yet though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I’m talking about the bios version. Bios versions before 0702 had shutdoennswhen using monitoring software
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Click to expand...

That wasn’t fixed by Corsair. They are too lazy to do anything for their customers. Mumak(HWiNFO) and CPU-z developers worked together to fix it to where Corsairs garbage software won’t do that anymore when interacting with those. I hate that I have to use Link or iCue just to get my pump to go to 2800rpm rather than default 2100. Then there’s the slew of other problems Corsair causes but I’m won’t go into that. Needless to say, I won’t have another AIO they make. Great cooler but their software is offputting and you are forced to use it to get pump to go max speed. I think Aida put out a new version too. Corsair just didn’t but they kept claiming they were trying to work with other developers but they say a lot.


----------



## crakej

Gettz8488 said:


> I’m talking about the bios version. Bios versions before 0702 had shutdoennswhen using monitoring software
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


It was the monitoring software _and_ bios causing problems. HWInfo 5.85 is updated, Aida is mostly OK but not as recently updated, as for the others - I'm not entirely sure. Bios has new spec for accessing these ports and functions.

Running them together was/is the problem, so either use one program at time, or use HWInfo and/or Aida. I'm sure they will all be updated soon to use the new interface - haven't checked in the last couple of weeks.


----------



## crakej

CJMitsuki said:


> That wasn’t fixed by Corsair. They are too lazy to do anything for their customers. Mumak and CPU-z developers worked together to fix it to where Corsairs garbage software won’t do that anymore. I hate that I have to use Link or iCue just to get my pump to go to 2800rpm rather than default 2100. Then there’s the slew of other problems Corsair causes but I’m won’t go into that. Needless to say, I won’t have another AIO they make. Great cooler but their software is offputting and you are forced to use it to get pump to go max speed.


I nearly got this cooler.....glad I didn't now.

It's a shame they don't sort the software out - like AISuite, it could be so cool, but they don't ever finish/fix it


----------



## Gettz8488

crakej said:


> I nearly got this cooler.....glad I didn't now.
> 
> 
> 
> It's a shame they don't sort the software out - like AISuite, it could be so cool, but they don't ever finish/fix it




From my understanding it was on the bios end of things even elmor pointed it out. If you go to 0702 official download page it says something about updated compatibility with third party monitoring hardware stuff. So I’m assuming it’s the shut down issue 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## wisepds

I found that AIDA64 Show well Downvolting...I don't know why my HWinfo not show this like other times, but, hey, now i know that my cpu downvolting well.. uff...


----------



## crakej

Gettz8488 said:


> From my understanding it was on the bios end of things even elmor pointed it out. If you go to 0702 official download page it says something about updated compatibility with third party monitoring hardware stuff. So I’m assuming it’s the shut down issue
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Bios was changed _and_ monitoring s/w needed to change with it. HWInfo was first to do so.


----------



## crakej

wisepds said:


> I found that AIDA64 Show well Downvolting...I don't know why my HWinfo not show this like other times, but, hey, now i know that my cpu downvolting well.. uff...


I see your point and can't for the life of me work out why it's displaying differently for you! You're def on HWInfo 5.85? Like others have said though, your watts are going down correctly...... I think it's v strange as well


----------



## wisepds

crakej said:


> I see your point and can't for the life of me work out why it's displaying differently for you! You're def on HWInfo 5.85? Like others have said though, your watts are going down correctly...... I think it's v strange as well


YES, I have the same version than @elmor. I don't know why doesn't work...can be windows?


----------



## crakej

wisepds said:


> YES, I have the same version than @elmor. I don't know why doesn't work...can be windows?


I doubt it... I've been reading your posts for a while and trying to work it out but just don't see anything.

It could literally be anything. It might just be 1 bios setting that for some reason is doing that, but I doubt it's Windows....

I know people hate it, but if you run AISuite (on it's own) it shows whats happening with downvolting reliably for me.


----------



## nemiel

Someone can confirm that the m2_1 is the primary m2 slot with fixed 4 lanes from cpu?


my 1080 runs only on 8 Lanes 





nvme in m2_1 2x normal sata harddisks in port 1 and 2 and the 1080 in top x16 slot.


but the card only runs on x8


----------



## CJMitsuki

nemiel said:


> Someone can confirm that the m2_1 is the primary m2 slot with fixed 4 lanes from cpu?
> 
> 
> my 1080 runs only on 8 Lanes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nvme in m2_1 2x normal sata harddisks in port 1 and 2 and the 1080 in top x16 slot.
> 
> 
> but the card only runs on x8


Where did you see it runs only on 8 lanes?


----------



## chakku

nemiel said:


> Someone can confirm that the m2_1 is the primary m2 slot with fixed 4 lanes from cpu?
> 
> 
> my 1080 runs only on 8 Lanes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nvme in m2_1 2x normal sata harddisks in port 1 and 2 and the 1080 in top x16 slot.
> 
> 
> but the card only runs on x8


M.2 SSD should be in the bottom slot to use the x4 lanes direct to CPU (not the one the heatsink is preinstalled on).


----------



## QuadJunkyx

lordzed83 said:


> Do You know how Wats are calculated?? Like most basic electric mathematics.
> Look what wats is elmor on and what wats are you on when on idle and use this epic app in windows called calculator . then turn downvolting off and use it again and compare outcome.
> 
> If I went from 16-17 wats on core idling to 8wats its obvious volts halved. Basic Mathematics.



You do know that current plays an equal role in watt calculations or are you just blatantly ignoring ohms law(your basic electric maths) yet trying to call someone out on it? and you can actually watch the current/voltage/watts change in hwinfo in real time right?


Notice the voltage never changing?


----------



## nemiel

CJMitsuki said:


> Where did you see it runs only on 8 lanes?



GPUz says @8 and Bios says it too /tools-> GPU


http://prntscr.com/k4l05s
_


----------



## hurricane28

I was looking on the Asus C7H download page and there are still no USB drivers... I would like to know why..? The C6H drivers don't work as it uses the same controller as on the C7H..


----------



## CJMitsuki

hurricane28 said:


> I was looking on the Asus C7H download page and there are still no USB drivers... I would like to know why..? The C6H drivers don't work as it uses the same controller as on the C7H..


 Arent the USB drivers in the same package with the chipset driver packages?




nemiel said:


> GPUz says @8 and Bios says it too /tools-> GPU
> 
> 
> http://prntscr.com/k4l05s
> _



post your full bios settings, there are options in bios that could do that. should be under advanced i believe.


----------



## nemiel

CJMitsuki said:


> post your full bios settings, there are options in bios that could do that. should be under advanced i believe.



tryed different settings switch all to force gen3 / auto same result gpu slot remains on x8


my nvme is in the bottom slot market as m2_1 no other pci-e slots used.





http://prntscr.com/k4mrrt


----------



## Concopa

I have made it to page 133 of this thread! I am probably more confused than informed at this moment. I am currently working on getting my memory timings dialed in before I mess around with OC the Ryzen. (First AMD in probably 15+ years! Nice to have competition again.)

On stability testing memory. I bought RAM Test and it is working great. For doing Prime95 after RAM Test should I use custom settings? I was getting some mixed answers from Google. Some said Blend test is fine others said do Custom FFT size 448 to 4096 and to increase increase memory in use to 80% of my total ram. How many hours is considered stable? Also is AIDA64 Extreme memory stress test any good? Thanks in advance for any insight to making sure my memory is stable. I will be back for sure with more questions.


----------



## crakej

Concopa said:


> I have made it to page 133 of this thread! I am probably more confused than informed at this moment. I am currently working on getting my memory timings dialed in before I mess around with OC the Ryzen. (First AMD in probably 15+ years! Nice to have competition again.)
> 
> On stability testing memory. I bought RAM Test and it is working great. For doing Prime95 after RAM Test should I use custom settings? I was getting some mixed answers from Google. Some said Blend test is fine others said do Custom FFT size 448 to 4096 and to increase increase memory in use to 80% of my total ram. How many hours is considered stable? Also is AIDA64 Extreme memory stress test any good? Thanks in advance for any insight to making sure my memory is stable. I will be back for sure with more questions.


I've found RamTest to be v reliable at testing Ram, so when I run P95, I usually just let it run at default settings. This is because my machine will never be running at 100% for any length of time - if my machine were doing something critical, I might do as you suggest to make sure all is working with all memory (as some on here need to), but I just don't need it. I expect it to run error free for at _least_ an hour.


----------



## hurricane28

CJMitsuki said:


> Arent the USB drivers in the same package with the chipset driver packages?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> post your full bios settings, there are options in bios that could do that. should be under advanced i believe.


Some are but not all. I meant the ASmedia controller drivers, the AMD USB ports are in the chipset driver obviously but not the ASmedia one.


----------



## rupa

hurricane28 said:


> Some are but not all. I meant the ASmedia controller drivers, the AMD USB ports are in the chipset driver obviously but not the ASmedia one.


Elmor has the link in his first post ....

https://www.mediafire.com/folder/jkoxu4r003qu7/Release


----------



## hurricane28

rupa said:


> Elmor has the link in his first post ....
> 
> https://www.mediafire.com/folder/jkoxu4r003qu7/Release


Yes i know this but its not on the Asus website.. So if you are not on this forum you are screwed...


----------



## wisepds

hurricane28 said:


> Yes i know this but its not on the Asus website.. So if you are not on this forum you are screwed...


You can use EasyDriver... It's works...scan and download the exact driver..


----------



## crakej

wisepds said:


> You can use EasyDriver... It's works...scan and download the exact driver..


That's if Windows doesn't find it for you - which it did for me....


----------



## lordzed83

nemiel said:


> Someone can confirm that the m2_1 is the primary m2 slot with fixed 4 lanes from cpu?
> 
> 
> my 1080 runs only on 8 Lanes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nvme in m2_1 2x normal sata harddisks in port 1 and 2 and the 1080 in top x16 slot.
> 
> 
> but the card only runs on x8


as someone Mentioned b4 me. Use Bottom slot and from auto sellect Gen 3 on PCIE 16.


----------



## nemiel

lordzed83 said:


> as someone Mentioned b4 me. Use Bottom slot and from auto sellect Gen 3 on PCIE 16.



already tryed it result is the same pci-e16/8 locked to x8 



reflashed bios / reset to default remove all OC still x8


----------



## Keith Myers

*Don't use Link . . . USE SIV*



CJMitsuki said:


> That wasn’t fixed by Corsair. They are too lazy to do anything for their customers. Mumak(HWiNFO) and CPU-z developers worked together to fix it to where Corsairs garbage software won’t do that anymore when interacting with those. I hate that I have to use Link or iCue just to get my pump to go to 2800rpm rather than default 2100. Then there’s the slew of other problems Corsair causes but I’m won’t go into that. Needless to say, I won’t have another AIO they make. Great cooler but their software is offputting and you are forced to use it to get pump to go max speed. I think Aida put out a new version too. Corsair just didn’t but they kept claiming they were trying to work with other developers but they say a lot.


Not true. You are not forced to use Corsair Link to control your pump and fan speeds. There is the better alternative of using SIV to control Asetek and CooliT AIO hardware. I've never used Corsair Link. Have used SIV for ten years. Much, much better software.

And it plays nice with any other program accessing the SMB bus. It was Ray that actually discovered the flaw in Corsairs' software and the first to develop a fix for their crappy programs.


----------



## nirurin

Continuing my previous post with more info (didn't get any replies but no point in repeating myself) - 

Currently testing 3133mhz with 15-15-15 timings, with the entire list of timings entered manually using some that were tested by the stilt for ryzen/CH7. 

Tested to 5000% on RAMtest, with zero errors last night, but tested again today and had a single error when I looked at about 1400%. (Thats about 4 hours of testing last night, and one hour today). 

Any tips on what might be worth altering in order to get the ram stable?


----------



## Concopa

I am doing my final long stability test on my ram. Sitting at 5000% in Ram Test, going for 10000% then some Prime95 then maybe 4 passes of Memtest86+ for peace of mind. Now for my question. If it passes should I push for higher frequency? I am pretty thrilled at what I was able to do with my kit so far. 

CORSAIR Vengeance RGB 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4 3000 Model CMR32GX4M2C3000C15. Do I try and push 3000 past 3200 it is at now? I feel like I should count my blessings and be happy at this point.



Spoiler


----------



## wisepds

Keith Myers said:


> Not true. You are not forced to use Corsair Link to control your pump and fan speeds. There is the better alternative of using SIV to control Asetek and CooliT AIO hardware. I've never used Corsair Link. Have used SIV for ten years. Much, much better software.
> 
> And it plays nice with any other program accessing the SMB bus. It was Ray that actually discovered the flaw in Corsairs' software and the first to develop a fix for their crappy programs.


What is SIV?
Is this?
https://www.techworld.com/download/system-desktop-tools/siv-530-3214283/


----------



## lordzed83

nirurin said:


> Continuing my previous post with more info (didn't get any replies but no point in repeating myself) -
> 
> Currently testing 3133mhz with 15-15-15 timings, with the entire list of timings entered manually using some that were tested by the stilt for ryzen/CH7.
> 
> Tested to 5000% on RAMtest, with zero errors last night, but tested again today and had a single error when I looked at about 1400%. (Thats about 4 hours of testing last night, and one hour today).
> 
> Any tips on what might be worth altering in order to get the ram stable?


I'w learned living with it since Zen1 came out. Once OC ges all unstable i reflash bios and load stable profile and goes back to error free .


----------



## elmor

C7H BIOS 0804

- Fully fixed ACPI WMI implementation Still some issues
- Fixed CPU Socket/MB Temperatures swapped
- Still AGESA 1.0.0.2

C7H http://www.mediafire.com/file/58436q88ph49be3/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-0804.zip
C7H WIFI http://www.mediafire.com/file/t3hgg0g9agk9vc9/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0804.zip


Please note that in order to have this BIOS update fix the sensor issues, you need to only use software which relies on our new interface. I'll try to compile a list of what's safe at a later time.

I'm looking into the issues with graphics cards only running at x8, got nothing concrete yet.


----------



## nemiel

elmor said:


> I'm looking into the issues with graphics cards only running at x8, got nothing concrete yet.





checkt the 1080 in other computer there it runs on 16x. 

Flashing / Resetting all on the C7H board remove the nvme / sata drives disable wifi / bt refit the gk result 8x


----------



## CJMitsuki

Keith Myers said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> That wasn’t fixed by Corsair. They are too lazy to do anything for their customers. Mumak(HWiNFO) and CPU-z developers worked together to fix it to where Corsairs garbage software won’t do that anymore when interacting with those. I hate that I have to use Link or iCue just to get my pump to go to 2800rpm rather than default 2100. Then there’s the slew of other problems Corsair causes but I’m won’t go into that. Needless to say, I won’t have another AIO they make. Great cooler but their software is offputting and you are forced to use it to get pump to go max speed. I think Aida put out a new version too. Corsair just didn’t but they kept claiming they were trying to work with other developers but they say a lot.
> 
> 
> 
> Not true. You are not forced to use Corsair Link to control your pump and fan speeds. There is the better alternative of using SIV to control Asetek and CooliT AIO hardware. I've never used Corsair Link. Have used SIV for ten years. Much, much better software.
> 
> And it plays nice with any other program accessing the SMB bus. It was Ray that actually discovered the flaw in Corsairs' software and the first to develop a fix for their crappy programs.
Click to expand...

So I can use SIV and bring the pump to 2800rpm? I only need it to do that since default is 2100rpm.


----------



## Keith Myers

*System Information Viewer*



wisepds said:


> What is SIV?
> Is this?
> https://www.techworld.com/download/system-desktop-tools/siv-530-3214283/


Yes. System Information Viewer


----------



## Keith Myers

*AIO Device Control Guide*



CJMitsuki said:


> So I can use SIV and bring the pump to 2800rpm? I only need it to do that since default is 2100rpm.


Yes. You can do anything that Link can do. More in fact. You can use a four point curve or the default fixed speed categories. Quiet, Balanced, High etc.
AIO Device
Control
Guide


----------



## bMind

Whoa, this tool looks like a real powerhorse :O I feel intimidated by the amount of information


----------



## CJMitsuki

Keith Myers said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> So I can use SIV and bring the pump to 2800rpm? I only need it to do that since default is 2100rpm.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes. You can do anything that Link can do. More in fact. You can use a four point curve or the default fixed speed categories. Quiet, Balanced, High etc.
> AIO Device
> Control
> Guide
Click to expand...

Well, what I say to that is Goodbye Corsair Link and your constant problems. Ty Keith.


----------



## Keith Myers

CJMitsuki said:


> Well, what I say to that is Goodbye Corsair Link and your constant problems. Ty Keith.



SIV can also control fan curves on graphics cards also. About the only thing it doesn't try to do is control case fans. You will either have to use the BIOS to control fans or use another program for case fan control.

SIV is an all-purpose "swiss-army knife" utility. It can tell you more about your system than you could possibly ever know. Once you learn the trick of drilling down through menus, its interface is not that hard to master. And it is fairly configurable. It also is constantly updated to handle the latest hardware hitting the marketplace. You can expect a new point release around the middle of each month with up 30 Beta releases between each major point release. I have been feeding Ray debug files for the C7H to get the fans properly labeled and match the manual descriptors.

I see that I need to get the new 0804 BIOS debug dump to him since Elmor switched things up again.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Keith Myers said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, what I say to that is Goodbye Corsair Link and your constant problems. Ty Keith.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SIV can also control fan curves on graphics cards also. About the only thing it doesn't try to do is control case fans. You will either have to use the BIOS to control fans or use another program for case fan control.
> 
> SIV is an all-purpose "swiss-army knife" utility. It can tell you more about your system than you could possibly ever know. Once you learn the trick of drilling down through menus, its interface is not that hard to master. And it is fairly configurable. It also is constantly updated to handle the latest hardware hitting the marketplace. You can expect a new point release around the middle of each month with up 30 Beta releases between each major point release. I have been feeding Ray debug files for the C7H to get the fans properly labeled and match the manual descriptors.
> 
> I see that I need to get the new 0804 BIOS debug dump to him since Elmor switched things up again.
Click to expand...

100% downloading today to check it out and see how to configure it to suit me. I imagine it’s fine for W764 and XP as well.


----------



## Keith Myers

bMind said:


> Whoa, this tool looks like a real powerhorse :O I feel intimidated by the amount of information


Yes, the amount of information that SIV can provide can be intimidating to the new user. But you don't have to utilize all its functions. I probably only use 10% of its capability all the time. I have SIV permanently loaded and its window open all the time on my desktop. It quickly in one glance tells me everything I need to know about my system since my systems are always on and crunching at 100% for distributed computing projects. SIV even has an interface for BOINC and the Seti project.


----------



## Keith Myers

CJMitsuki said:


> 100% downloading today to check it out and see how to configure it to suit me. I imagine it’s fine for W764 and XP as well.


Yes, it handles both Win32 and Win64 all the way back to XP. Read the AIO control guide pdf file I gave the link for. For simple AIO control, just select the -AIOCTL modifier and restart SIV. Then select either the standard preselect speed definition or select Custom and set the 5-point fan control step points..

For GPU control, set the -GPUCTL modifier and restart SIV and set either the fixed max temp point allowed or set the 6-point Custom curve points for each gpu.:specool:


----------



## wisepds

I have a shutdown with new bios and hwinfo.!!!!


----------



## Keith Myers

wisepds said:


> I have a shutdown with new bios and hwinfo.!!!!


I'm on the new 0804 BIOS and my system is running fine with SIV. No shutdowns. Don't really use HwInfo much except for rare looks for comparisons to SIV reporting.


----------



## wisepds

Keith Myers said:


> I'm on the new 0804 BIOS and my system is running fine with SIV. No shutdowns. Don't really use HwInfo much except for rare looks for comparisons to SIV reporting.


After that shutdown i have been working 3 hours without open hwinfo and perfect...


----------



## CJMitsuki

Keith Myers said:


> Yes, it handles both Win32 and Win64 all the way back to XP. Read the AIO control guide pdf file I gave the link for. For simple AIO control, just select the -AIOCTL modifier and restart SIV. Then select either the standard preselect speed definition or select Custom and set the 5-point fan control step points..
> 
> For GPU control, set the -GPUCTL modifier and restart SIV and set either the fixed max temp point allowed or set the 6-point Custom curve points for each gpu.:specool:



I have to admit, im quite impressed after just downloading it and will spend most of the evening reading and setting it how i want it. Also, im on the fence about downloading new bios as I dont want anything to change my system bc its running so good since I got my memory running 3600 really well. Is 0804 worth flashing? I always completely wipe the bios when i flash instead of flashing over the old bios.


----------



## Keith Myers

CJMitsuki said:


> I have to admit, im quite impressed after just downloading it and will spend most of the evening reading and setting it how i want it. Also, im on the fence about downloading new bios as I dont want anything to change my system bc its running so good since I got my memory running 3600 really well. Is 0804 worth flashing? I always completely wipe the bios when i flash instead of flashing over the old bios.


I really haven't noticed anything different with 0804 and haven't tried to do anything more with it. I usually just F5 Default the BIOS, shutdown, power up again and reflash the new BIOS.

Primarily I did 0804 for Ray and SIV since Elmor said he fixed the ACPI WMI implementation and that was one of the main things that Ray was testing for. He said ASUS got his board to him today but with no cpu. So he needs to buy one still. I sent him the SIV dumps and he reported back that his first attempt at the ACPI interrogation was pretty much spot on. One of the main benefits is that you make a call to the ACPI interface instead of directly to hardware and the other thing is you get exactly the same sensor and value descriptor as what the manufacturer labels it. So no more guesses as to what a value is attached to.

I haven't tried pushing the memory past my stable The Stilt 3466 preset yet on the new 0804. I couldn't get stability at 3533 Fast for BOINC loading on 0702 before. 0804 seems as stable as 0702 on my previous clocks. So more memory testing to follow I guess to see if 3533 achievable.


----------



## lordzed83

wisepds said:


> Keith Myers said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm on the new 0804 BIOS and my system is running fine with SIV. No shutdowns. Don't really use HwInfo much except for rare looks for comparisons to SIV reporting./forum/images/smilies/wink.gif
> 
> 
> 
> After that shutdown i have been working 3 hours without open hwinfo and perfect...
Click to expand...


Sadly You are one of those that by looks of it will always have some problem that other people do not have.
On C6H was Me with Fans never working like thwy shpuld after year worth of bios updates and around 10 winfows reinstalls. After by febuary I knew it wont get fixed.

Not not even mentioning totally messed up voltage readings.


----------



## Keith Myers

lordzed83 said:


> Sadly You are one of those that by looks of it will always have some problem that other people do not have.
> On C6H was Me with Fans never working like thwy shpuld after year worth of bios updates and around 10 winfows reinstalls. After by febuary I knew it wont get fixed.
> 
> Not not even mentioning totally messed up voltage readings.


True, I assuredly don't use my computers the way that most of the forum inhabitants do. So my issues are always going to be very contrary to others. I just accept the fact and work around the issues as best I can with my solutions. I don't use HwInfo mainly because I have been using SIV a LOT longer than before HwInfo was ever around. You use what you are familiar with.

My experience with the C7H/2700X is night and day better than the Prime Pro and 1700X/1800X. I just have to justify mothballing the Prime Pro/1800X system for another C7H/1800X. Or wait for the 3000 series.


----------



## Conenubi701

Nice, going to give this new BIOS a try. Hopefully we get Agesa 1.0.0.4 soon


----------



## minal

Keith Myers said:


> True, I assuredly don't use my computers the way that most of the forum inhabitants do. So my issues are always going to be very contrary to others. I just accept the fact and work around the issues as best I can with my solutions. I don't use HwInfo mainly because I have been using SIV a LOT longer than before HwInfo was ever around. You use what you are familiar with.
> 
> My experience with the C7H/2700X is night and day better than the Prime Pro and 1700X/1800X. I just have to justify mothballing the Prime Pro/1800X system for another C7H/1800X. Or wait for the 3000 series.



I think he was referring to @wisepds's weird downvolting reporting in HwInfo and other confusing issues...


Curious, what night and day differences have you experienced between Zen/X370 and Zen+/X470?


----------



## elmor

Can someone with their PCIEX16/X8_1 running at x8 run this software, take a screenshot and post here?

https://1drv.ms/u/s!Atmpv-6qHr_6n5tBWQJDKcVXQuGNDA


----------



## Keith Myers

*No fuss, no muss. Simple.*



minal said:


> I think he was referring to @wisepds's weird downvolting reporting in HwInfo and other confusing issues...
> 
> 
> Curious, what night and day differences have you experienced between Zen/X370 and Zen+/X470?


Sorry, I thought the post was directed at me. I spent a year getting the X370/1700X/1800X systems to be stable at 3200CL14. I never got the cpus to be stable past about 3.85-3.9Ghz.

I just put in a 40 or 41 multiplier to cpu clock and The Stilt 3466 CL14 Fast on first try in the BIOS and that is exactly what I got. No issues at all. Perfectly stable, no fuss, no fiddling with endless testing. Couldn't have been easier or simpler. That experience is what Ryzen should have been like from Day One.:thumb:


----------



## Keith Myers

elmor said:


> Can someone with their PCIEX16/X8_1 running at x8 run this software, take a screenshot and post here?
> 
> https://1drv.ms/u/s!Atmpv-6qHr_6n5tBWQJDKcVXQuGNDA


I'm assuming you are only asking for people with issue with one graphics card running PCIEX16.X8_1 and not people with 3 graphics cards? I run X8, X8 and X4 but I believe that is what it is supposed to do,


----------



## minal

Keith Myers said:


> Sorry, I thought the post was directed at me. I spent a year getting the X370/1700X/1800X systems to be stable at 3200CL14. I never got the cpus to be stable past about 3.85-3.9Ghz.
> 
> I just put in a 40 or 41 multiplier to cpu clock and The Stilt 3466 CL14 Fast on first try in the BIOS and that is exactly what I got. No issues at all. Perfectly stable, no fuss, no fiddling with endless testing. Couldn't have been easier or simpler. That experience is what Ryzen should have been like from Day One.:thumb:



Ok, so better stability with higher clockspeeds for both memory and CPU. :thumb:


----------



## elmor

Keith Myers said:


> I'm assuming you are only asking for people with issue with one graphics card running PCIEX16.X8_1 and not people with 3 graphics cards? I run X8, X8 and X4 but I believe that is what it is supposed to do,


Yes.


----------



## nemiel

elmor said:


> Can someone with their PCIEX16/X8_1 running at x8 run this software, take a screenshot and post here?
> 
> https://1drv.ms/u/s!Atmpv-6qHr_6n5tBWQJDKcVXQuGNDA





http://prntscr.com/k5g7p9


http://prntscr.com/k5ga1m


http://prntscr.com/k5gagi


hope it helps


----------



## VicsPC

nemiel said:


> http://prntscr.com/k5g7p9
> 
> 
> http://prntscr.com/k5ga1m
> 
> 
> http://prntscr.com/k5gagi
> 
> 
> hope it helps


Mine says native x8 in the BIOS as well but it says 16x in cpuz and 8.0GT/s in hwinfo.


----------



## nemiel

VicsPC said:


> Mine says native x8 in the BIOS as well but it says 16x in cpuz and 8.0GT/s in hwinfo.





https://prnt.sc/k5gjpl 16x Supportet but 8x used @GPUz


----------



## VicsPC

nemiel said:


> https://prnt.sc/k5gjpl 16x Supportet but 8x used @GPUz


Ill take a screenshot of mine, i have it set to Gen3 in the bios so it runs full speed all the time.


----------



## elmor

nemiel said:


> http://prntscr.com/k5g7p9
> 
> 
> http://prntscr.com/k5ga1m
> 
> 
> http://prntscr.com/k5gagi
> 
> 
> hope it helps


Thanks, but the output doesn't show any error. Can you try with version #2 which also checks max/negotiated links? https://1drv.ms/u/s!Atmpv-6qHr_6n5t_o6XtHdvTAMhuhw


----------



## nemiel

elmor said:


> Thanks, but the output doesn't show any error. Can you try with version #2 which also checks max/negotiated links? https://1drv.ms/u/s!Atmpv-6qHr_6n5t_o6XtHdvTAMhuhw







http://prntscr.com/k5j9vc 

ver 2 output


tryed the pcie settings in amd cbs and tweaker paradise no change in lane use.


----------



## lordzed83

@elmor flashed this morning works all fine stable and no shotdown. Installed Latest HWinfo that came out yesterday/today.

I will run that x8/x16 later after work.
@CJMitsuki cooler today Went from 28c to 19c in my room. IBT runs from 83 max to 72.5 haha dropped from 1.42xx to 1.4 and it passes IBT. gotta love High Ambient temp. Anygow 19c is 66f so I'm around Yours now


----------



## crakej

I'm just testing new bios out - using new HWInfo as well - everything default.

GPU is running x16

XFR is boosting 1 core to 3.9 all the time! This is much better than on my x370 board which hardly ever boosted my CPU to 3.9, if at all - just a shame that all core boost is still only x35....i'm sure my 1700x could handle PE mode of some sort.

About to see if I can get my 3600 memory OC back. Will report back if I find anything interesting.

Almost forgot, sleep still isn't working right - when I wake machine, I can't re start HWInfo, it gets stuck identifying cpu #15. Fans still not quite right after sleep either - will do more testing when I have my OC.


----------



## wisepds

OE OE OE!!!!

IT WAS WINDOWS 10!!! I don't know why but.....



I have formatted my PC and now works fine!

I have undervolting like @elmor... Ou YES!!!!


EDIT!!!::: I have installed AMD CHIPSET DRIVER and now downvolting is gone... the guilty software is AMD CHIPSE DRIVER.

Edit 2... Is weird.. windows from 0. Open hwinfo..i have downvolting well..reboot..open hwinfo downvolting is gone.. something is very broken here hehehe i'm testing..i'll find it.


----------



## bMind

Keith Myers said:


> Yes, the amount of information that SIV can provide can be intimidating to the new user. But you don't have to utilize all its functions. I probably only use 10% of its capability all the time. I have SIV permanently loaded and its window open all the time on my desktop. It quickly in one glance tells me everything I need to know about my system since my systems are always on and crunching at 100% for distributed computing projects. SIV even has an interface for BOINC and the Seti project.


Thank you Keith for showing me the tool! For someone like me that loves all those numbers it's like Christmas


----------



## mtrai

wisepds said:


> OE OE OE!!!!
> 
> IT WAS WINDOWS 10!!! I don't know why but.....
> 
> I have formatted my PC and now works fine!
> 
> I have undervolting like @elmor... Ou YES!!!!
> 
> 
> EDIT!!!::: I have installed AMD CHIPSET DRIVER and now downvolting is gone... the guilty software is AMD CHIPSE DRIVER.
> 
> Edit 2... Is weird.. windows from 0. Open hwinfo..i have downvolting well..reboot..open hwinfo downvolting is gone.. something is very broken here hehehe i'm testing..i'll find it.


Check you power plan when you install the amd chipset drivers it or Windows 10 will change your windows power plan.


----------



## wisepds

I'm installing step by step, one by one software from 0. I have create a restauration point...but for now i have downvolting...i don't find what was the problem...for now it's fixed

EDIT: I FOUND IT!!! IT'S Nexus Bar... ufff..... mystery resolved....


----------



## wisepds

Duplicated post, sorry..


----------



## lordzed83

wisepds said:


> I'm installing step by step, one by one software from 0. I have create a restauration point...but for now i have downvolting...i don't find what was the problem...for now it's fixed
> 
> EDIT: I FOUND IT!!! IT'S Nexus Bar... ufff..... mystery resolved....


I knew its User error. When It's worning for Everyone but 1 person there is no other option.
@elmor ran this second program on my rig dont think its any use as i got x16 but


----------



## starrbuck

chakku said:


> M.2 SSD should be in the bottom slot to use the x4 lanes direct to CPU (not the one the heatsink is preinstalled on).


EK makes a nice heat sink for the bottom slot:

https://www.ekwb.com/shop/ek-m-2-nvme-heatsink-black


----------



## chakku

starrbuck said:


> EK makes a nice heat sink for the bottom slot:
> 
> https://www.ekwb.com/shop/ek-m-2-nvme-heatsink-black


You can just move the heatsink that comes with the board from the top slot to the bottom slot.


----------



## Whatisthisfor

Is the new beta BIOS with Agesa 1.0.0.4?


----------



## bMind

Whatisthisfor said:


> Is the new beta BIOS with Agesa 1.0.0.4?


OK, reading trick, you ment beta BIOS 😉


----------



## CJMitsuki

wisepds said:


> I'm installing step by step, one by one software from 0. I have create a restauration point...but for now i have downvolting...i don't find what was the problem...for now it's fixed
> 
> EDIT: I FOUND IT!!! IT'S Nexus Bar... ufff..... mystery resolved....


I told you over a week ago it had to be within your OS. We had already done troubleshooting and determined that was the last place the problem could be. I figured you would’ve done a fresh install.


----------



## crakej

Whatisthisfor said:


> Is the new beta BIOS with Agesa 1.0.0.4?


Nope - Elmor clearly stated it's *NOT* AGESA update - that's coming.


----------



## ryzenoverclock

nemiel said:


> http://prntscr.com/k5j9vc
> 
> ver 2 output
> 
> 
> tryed the pcie settings in amd cbs and tweaker paradise no change in lane use.


i got the same out put, in gpu z it shows x16 supported but x8 used, any ideas how to solve that ?


----------



## ryzenoverclock

flashed the new bios 0804 using only the gpu in the pce slots, still shows x8 running, if i set gen3 in bios I got x8 gen3 in gpuz, and it shows x8 native in bios ( gpu information if i'm not wrong ) very strange, put the gpu in another pc shows x16


----------



## MNKyDeth

So I built my system this past week and spent all day today testing/benching and seeing what I could get stable. Granted I have not run a test long enough for an overnight but so far my results are....

System Specs:
2700X
16gig Team Group (8x8) Samsung B-die
CH7 Hero
MSI GTX 1070Ti "The Duke"
Samsung 970 Pro 1TB NVMe
Swiftech SKF cpu block
EK gpu block
Alphacool monster - 480
Alphacool 60mm - 360
Blackmagic Design Intensity Pro 4k
Asus Xonar STX (Linux compatibility)
SeaSonic 1000w Prime Platinum



4.3Ghz with SMT enabled at 1.375v
3200 Team Group Samsung b-die 14-14-14-31 @ 3400 (didn't have to change any settings just increased ram voltage to 1.4v)
Memory latency in AIDA64 reads 62.0ns
I have 100 bus speed. Unfortunately if I go over even one Mhz, setting 101 bus speed my NIC on the motherboard goes AWOL and ceases to exist. Requires a reload to default in the bios to bring it back.


I can reach 4.4Ghz on the cpu with 1.4v if I disable SMT. Anything over 4.3 or 4.4Ghz is not stable no matter how much I increase the vcore. I can boot at 4.5Ghz no SMT. I increased the voltage manually up to 1.5v. I didn't see any change for the better from 1.375 or 1.4 with or without SMT past those voltages.

Overall I feel happy with my cpu all core overclock at 4.3Ghz with SMT @ 1.375v and 3400Mhz 14-14-14-31 1.4v ram.

I have a custom loop and from what I have seen my max temp I have reached so far is 71c. During normal gaming it seems to hang around 50c with an occasional spike up to 55-57c. I need to test more games yet to see if others make it go higher. I have only really played Dark Souls games on it thus far.


PS: Using bios 0804
Stepping 2
Revision PiR-B2


----------



## elmor

ryzenoverclock said:


> i got the same out put, in gpu z it shows x16 supported but x8 used, any ideas how to solve that ?



This output tells me that the BIOS seems to be configured correctly. I had one system here which only gave me x8 for the first slot, but after re-seating the CPU/GPU and using contact cleaner on the pins/sockets it works fine at x16.


----------



## VPII

Well it appears the problem I had with 0702 bios with my memory 3600 Stilt setting and computer not even wanting to post is sorted with 0804. I've dropped Trcd and Trp to 15 and Trfc to 312 and it still works. I have not done stability tests yet but the systems is running without an issue.


----------



## nemiel

clean the cpu socket too? sounds more than RMA and get a new Board


----------



## hurricane28

I read that there is a new beta BIOS? Can't seem to find it, where is it?


----------



## lcbbcl

hurricane28 said:


> I read that there is a new beta BIOS? Can't seem to find it, where is it?


https://www.overclock.net/forum/27531976-post2636.html


----------



## hurricane28

lcbbcl said:


> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27531976-post2636.html


Thnx dude, i guess i over read it. Will try this BIOS when i get home.


----------



## Conenubi701

@elmor

So I've been having an issue off and on. I'll sometimes get stuck at the ROG splash screen Qcode B4 and nothing will happen. I have to turn off or hit the reset button for it to try again and it'll load into the OS.

I haven't done any overclocking besides manually configuring RAM to 1.35v 3200mhz and 14 14 14 14 34 timings, bumping Performance Enhancer to Level 3, and configuring my Fans via Q fan Control. Once I load into the OS everything works fine, but it's when I restart or try to go into UEFI that I'll randomly get stuck at the splash screen with the B4 code.



Here's my set-up.

2700x
CH7
32GB (4x8GB) G.Skill 3200mhz 14cl (b-die) RAM
Vega 64 Strix in x16 top slot
NVME SSD in the bottom slot
SSD in 1st SATA port
SSD in 2nd SATA port
SSD in 3rd SATA port
HDD1.A in 4th SATA port (as part of a windows/software RAID0)
HDD1.B in 5th SATA port (as part of a windows/software RAID0)
Microsoft Xbox Wi-Fi USB stick On the rear USB port
Mouse on the Rear USB Port 
Keyboard signal to a HUB (allows me to switch KB from one machine to another)
USB3 External drive.

This happened on both 0702 and still happens on 0804

Any Suggestions?


----------



## lordzed83

hurricane28 said:


> Thnx dude, i guess i over read it. Will try this BIOS when i get home.


Nothing special just our personal fav... SENSOR FIXES 
Sensooorrrssss Neverrr ending storyyyyyyy ohohohohohoh never ending story


----------



## lcbbcl

Conenubi701 said:


> @elmor
> 
> So I've been having an issue off and on. I'll sometimes get stuck at the ROG splash screen Qcode B4 and nothing will happen. I have to turn off or hit the reset button for it to try again and it'll load into the OS.
> 
> I haven't done any overclocking besides manually configuring RAM to 1.35v 3200mhz and 14 14 14 14 34 timings, bumping Performance Enhancer to Level 3, and configuring my Fans via Q fan Control. Once I load into the OS everything works fine, but it's when I restart or try to go into UEFI that I'll randomly get stuck at the splash screen with the B4 code.
> 
> 
> 
> Here's my set-up.
> 
> 2700x
> CH7
> 32GB (4x8GB) G.Skill 3200mhz 14cl (b-die) RAM
> Vega 64 Strix in x16 top slot
> NVME SSD in the bottom slot
> SSD in 1st SATA port
> SSD in 2nd SATA port
> SSD in 3rd SATA port
> HDD1.A in 4th SATA port (as part of a windows/software RAID0)
> HDD1.B in 5th SATA port (as part of a windows/software RAID0)
> Microsoft Xbox Wi-Fi USB stick On the rear USB port
> Mouse on the Rear USB Port
> Keyboard signal to a HUB (allows me to switch KB from one machine to another)
> USB3 External drive.
> 
> This happened on both 0702 and still happens on 0804
> 
> Any Suggestions?


I had a similar problem with other board,in my case was a razer nostromo gamepad.
Try to unplug all unnecessary USB devices and see if problem persist,if its ok then plug 1 by 1 until you find what device its causing this problem


----------



## ryzenoverclock

double post


----------



## ryzenoverclock

elmor said:


> This output tells me that the BIOS seems to be configured correctly. I had one system here which only gave me x8 for the first slot, but after re-seating the CPU/GPU and using contact cleaner on the pins/sockets it works fine at x16.


right after a new bios flash ( usb ) it shows x16 native in graphics card information, and shows corretly x16 3.0 in gpuz, but after I set pe3 voltage offset vcore - 0,035 and dcop 3200 it shows x8 nativer after some time and x16 supported and x8 used, if I try to clear clmos or reset all the bios it doesn't change, but after flash the full bios again ( usb ) it returns to x16, tried to set pe3 and all my overclock settings and than it didn't change, really strange ! will try to do everything step by step again try to figure out what is causing the bios to set x8 in pcie


----------



## Conenubi701

lcbbcl said:


> I had a similar problem with other board,in my case was a razer nostromo gamepad.
> Try to unplug all unnecessary USB devices and see if problem persist,if its ok then plug 1 by 1 until you find what device its causing this problem


Alright, thanks. I'll try it out later when I get home.


----------



## hurricane28

lordzed83 said:


> Nothing special just our personal fav... SENSOR FIXES
> Sensooorrrssss Neverrr ending storyyyyyyy ohohohohohoh never ending story


lol, i hear ya man. Did you tried the new BIOS yet? I am planning on flashing it later.


----------



## elguero

Heatsinks for m.2 flash drives are a sham, nand memory is designed to work hot, and cooling it affects it´s reliability.


----------



## lordzed83

elguero said:


> Heatsinks for m.2 flash drives are a sham, nand memory is designed to work hot, and cooling it affects it´s reliability.


They not.... They look GOOD and naked M2 looks well poor  Besides that I had incident with bit of liquid metal going on to it if I did not had the heatsink would be trouble !!!


----------



## VicsPC

elguero said:


> Heatsinks for m.2 flash drives are a sham, nand memory is designed to work hot, and cooling it affects it´s reliability.


Not sure who fed you that load of crap but there's MANY tests done and the cooler the m.2 is the longer it can hold it's sustained speed.


----------



## hurricane28

Soo, i flashed BIOS 0804 and it seems that my system really likes it. Windows feels a tad snappier and programs load faster under the same settings. Fortunately i made an backup of my BIOS settings on the same USB drive i had the BIOS on in order to load them up on the new BIOS and it worked, saved me a ton of work too.


----------



## Bo55

Still more testing to be done but what im working on so far. Im on bios 0702 and im using the precision overboost feature as the PE lvl 3 is the same as running stock 2700x and at lvl4 all cores are locked at 4.45ghz, i can boot to windows but cant run cinebench or do much else so ive left that alone.


----------



## JYYJ

Seems like bios 0802 in fan settings.. No longer have vrm as option for the fan to react to.. 

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk


----------



## gupsterg

hurricane28 said:


> Soo, i flashed BIOS 0804 and it seems that my system really likes it. Windows feels a tad snappier and programs load faster under the same settings. Fortunately i made an backup of my BIOS settings on the same USB drive i had the BIOS on in order to load them up on the new BIOS and it worked, saved me a ton of work too.


That maybe a bug. AFAIK and have experienced you can't load settings file from another UEFI on another one. Currently not using C7H so can't test if I can load a previous UEFI's settings on 0804.


----------



## wisepds

CJMitsuki said:


> I told you over a week ago it had to be within your OS. We had already done troubleshooting and determined that was the last place the problem could be. I figured you would’ve done a fresh install.


Yep, step by step to find the guilty...


----------



## 1usmus

For a long time did not come here, such a cool product and there are no records...is already the 4th month of attempts to fix sensors and fans .... you shock me


----------



## nemiel

since today my board recognized only 1 of 2 Ram Sticks in Bios under Tools Speed he shows me on slot 2 and 4 2x 16 gb but he counts only 16 gb rams


----------



## HolyFist

> AMLI: ACPI BIOS is attempting to read from an illegal IO port address (0x40), which lies in the 0x40 - 0x43 protected address range. This could lead to system instability. Please contact your system vendor for technical assistance.


I still have this even with HWiNFO 5.86-3480 if that is, that it's indeed HWiNFO or whatever sensor that it reads that is causing the problem.

I use BIOS 0702 and as mentioned HWiNFO64 5.86-3480.

I'm not using AI Suite but i used to, i have CAM software but it doesn't start with Windows and it's not running even in the background.

Any idea why this is happening? Because sometimes the system becomes unresponsive like it's at 5FPS and slowly responds but in a very stuttery way and remains like that, the error above can happen multiple times before this happens and i have to reboot to fix it.

Edit; I've tried to disable ASUS EC monitoring as i know this can cause issues from previous experience, let's see.


----------



## lordzed83

1usmus said:


> For a long time did not come here, such a cool product and there are no records...is already the 4th month of attempts to fix sensors and fans .... you shock me


More like ongoing problem with crosshair morherboard for ryzen so id say 15 months or something haha


----------



## hurricane28

gupsterg said:


> That maybe a bug. AFAIK and have experienced you can't load settings file from another UEFI on another one. Currently not using C7H so can't test if I can load a previous UEFI's settings on 0804.


Idk man, I just tried it and it worked, saved me a ton of time lol. All settings are as they were on the previous 0702 BIOS. This " new" 0804 BIOS is the same as 0702 otherwise it simply wouldn't work. I wouldn't call it an bug either lol. Kinda need to do as it saves time and aggravation.


----------



## hurricane28

1usmus said:


> For a long time did not come here, such a cool product and there are no records...is already the 4th month of attempts to fix sensors and fans .... you shock me


I am amazed things like this still shock you.. This is a very hard problem to solve it seems which imo takes too long too but its the price you pay for all this oomph i guess. There are too many settings and sensors on this motherboard, period. They are better off soldering something to the back side of the socket in order for the tweakers among us to hook up probes or measurement devices in order to get accurate readings. They did on the motherboard tho but i have to open my case in order to access it... Readings are A LOT better as on the C6H tho so they made good progress. Readings are waay better than on Gigabyte or MSI board for that matter.


----------



## wisepds

1usmus said:


> For a long time did not come here, such a cool product and there are no records...is already the 4th month of attempts to fix sensors and fans .... you shock me


 @1usmus what max temps have you with Nzxt kraken x62 at 4,2ghz? 
Thanks!


----------



## Safetytrousers

MNKyDeth said:


> I have 100 bus speed. Unfortunately if I go over even one Mhz, setting 101 bus speed my NIC on the motherboard goes AWOL and ceases to exist. Requires a reload to default in the bios to bring it back.


Same for me in 0804, anything more than 100 causes a freeze up. 103.4 won't boot and 101 locks the system up after a few minutes. I was previously using Der8auer's settings with 103.4 on bus which was totally stable. More significantly the OC Level 3 setting doesn't work at all now.
However a slightly higher CPU clock than before done more basically seems stable now.


----------



## lb_felipe

What's the best "safe bet" 32GB kit to run with that board?

I was thinking F4-3200C14Q-32GTZRX (note the X in the end), since it is in the support list for that mobo on the G.Skill website, but it is not found. Also, I think 16GBx2 is preferible to 8GBx4 cause 4 ranks vs 2 ranks.

Update:

What do you think about F4-3600C16Q-32GTZKK with that mobo and a Ryzen 2700X? Is it safe I will be going to achieve 3600MHz 16-16-16-36 (stock XMP) speeds?


----------



## VPII

Sorry if this has been discussed in another topic, but I need some advice. I've had some Hwbot results removed because I did not read the rules so now I need to do a windows 7 installation with my current setup. The obvious problem exist, I do not have a mouse or keyboard during installation from a flash drive. I do not have a PS2 keyboard so I'm actually screwed, unless there is a work around.


----------



## CJMitsuki

VPII said:


> Sorry if this has been discussed in another topic, but I need some advice. I've had some Hwbot results removed because I did not read the rules so now I need to do a windows 7 installation with my current setup. The obvious problem exist, I do not have a mouse or keyboard during installation from a flash drive. I do not have a PS2 keyboard so I'm actually screwed, unless there is a work around.


 Google “Asus EZ Installer” it will take a system image (Windows 7) and put the required drivers into the WIM file for you. After the drivers are there you can make an ISO file from that and burn it to disk or use Rufus utility to make a bootable USB and install. The keyboard and mouse should work during the setup afterwards. Unless you would rather slipstream them yourself, which you can do with several programs. If you aren’t that skilled at cutting a windows install to pieces you may want to try the first option until you have some practice with the 2nd option.


EDIT: found someone on HWBOT that has done the work for you and uploaded the iso https://community.hwbot.org/topic/166612-windows-7-x64-sp1-with-integrated-drivers-for-zen/


----------



## 1usmus

lordzed83 said:


> More like ongoing problem with crosshair morherboard for ryzen so id say 15 months or something haha


I'm with you, my motherboard is in the box and waiting for a miracle 



hurricane28 said:


> I am amazed things like this still shock you.. This is a very hard problem to solve it seems which imo takes too long too but its the price you pay for all this oomph i guess. There are too many settings and sensors on this motherboard, period. They are better off soldering something to the back side of the socket in order for the tweakers among us to hook up probes or measurement devices in order to get accurate readings. They did on the motherboard tho but i have to open my case in order to access it... Readings are A LOT better as on the C6H tho so they made good progress. Readings are waay better than on Gigabyte or MSI board for that matter.


MSI does not have problems with the sensors (on M7 sensors more than CH7), the voltage is very accurate (DIMM,VTT DDR, VDDP, SOC), there are no problems with the fans, LLC works very well + the overclocking of the memory is impressive 
for example 3666CL14 


Spoiler















Sense of many settings that do not work? this is not an advantage

Asus did not give me a CH7, because I would describe all the shortcomings. 
I do not agitate to love another brand, but you must know the truth 



wisepds said:


> @1usmus what max temps have you with Nzxt kraken x62 at 4,2ghz?
> Thanks!


batch 1805 - 47 in games, 69 in CB
batch 1807 - 49 in games, 73 in CB



lb_felipe said:


> What's the best "safe bet" 32GB kit to run with that board?
> 
> I was thinking F4-3200C14Q-32GTZRX (note the X in the end), since it is in the support list for that mobo on the G.Skill website, but it is not found. Also, I think 16GBx2 is preferible to 8GBx4 cause 4 ranks vs 2 ranks.
> 
> Update:
> 
> What do you think about F4-3600C16Q-32GTZKK with that mobo and a Ryzen 2700X? Is it safe I will be going to achieve 3600MHz 16-16-16-36 (stock XMP) speeds?


4*8 have a more flexible adjustment of the impedance, you will get the same 4 rank + higher frequency


----------



## VPII

CJMitsuki said:


> Google “Asus EZ Installer” it will take a system image (Windows 7) and put the required drivers into the WIM file for you. After the drivers are there you can make an ISO file from that and burn it to disk or use Rufus utility to make a bootable USB and install. The keyboard and mouse should work during the setup afterwards. Unless you would rather slipstream them yourself, which you can do with several programs. If you aren’t that skilled at cutting a windows install to pieces you may want to try the first option until you have some practice with the 2nd option.
> 
> 
> EDIT: found someone on HWBOT that has done the work for you and uploaded the iso https://community.hwbot.org/topic/166612-windows-7-x64-sp1-with-integrated-drivers-for-zen/


Thanks my friend.... This should help.


----------



## wisepds

1usmus said:


> batch 1805 - 47 in games, 69 in CB
> batch 1807 - 49 in games, 73 in CB


¿And passing IBT or Y-Crunch? What is your configuration, i want to replicate it on my PC.


----------



## nemiel

Got some Ram issues 



in Bios and Windows he found technicaly 2 Sticks of 16 gb


http://prntscr.com/k6nzoa
http://prntscr.com/k6nzx1


bios and windows say that only 16gb are Aviable (switched ram to other board ) 32GB working fine


Biosreset / removing Batterie reflash different Bios Vers. nothing works


so i have 2 big problems with that Board GPU only works with 8x and Ram not Working (the Ram works for some days on that Board )


what you think RMA the Board ?


----------



## hurricane28

1usmus said:


> I'm with you, my motherboard is in the box and waiting for a miracle
> 
> 
> 
> MSI does not have problems with the sensors (on M7 sensors more than CH7), the voltage is very accurate (DIMM,VTT DDR, VDDP, SOC), there are no problems with the fans, LLC works very well + the overclocking of the memory is impressive
> for example 3666CL14
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sense of many settings that do not work? this is not an advantage
> 
> Asus did not give me a CH7, because I would describe all the shortcomings.
> I do not agitate to love another brand, but you must know the truth
> 
> 
> 
> batch 1805 - 47 in games, 69 in CB
> batch 1807 - 49 in games, 73 in CB
> 
> 
> 
> 4*8 have a more flexible adjustment of the impedance, you will get the same 4 rank + higher frequency



I hear you. Still i would get Asus above anything else and here is why. 

I have no experience with MSI but i do with Gigabyte and its not positive... I had 4 boards and all went bad in short order.. Customer care is a joke and their BIOS is a mess. That is my experience with Gigabyte so far. 

MSI i heard mixed things about. Solid build quality and overclocking but customer support is really really bad, ever went to MSI forums? I did because of my GPU and its the worst forum i ever been on hands down.. The moderators are a joke and simply flat our lying to you with false information etc. etc. 

Now, does this say that Asus is better than other brands? NO, but in most departments they are and certainly the ROG department. Am i happy with this board? Hell yes! Are there problems? Yes sadly there are and even though i got this board for free which is an amazing thing, i won't stop giving criticism about it as it can help them develop even better boards. But imo they worked really hard in order to straighten out the software and hardware readings which are spot on now and the fan issues we were having are non existent anymore it seems because i haven't have it in a while with lots of testing with Aida64 and other programs like hardwareinfo64 and CPU-Z running in the background. 

I am disappointed too that the " fixes" took so long but apparently Asus was very lazy to fix things and now they are working really hard as these problems are very deeply embedded in the motherboard and the software, these things take time. You as an software developer yourself should know how difficult problems are. 

You're tone changed the moment you realized you didn't got an C7H tho. I understand, and probably it isn't fair as you didn't get one because you gave lots of feedback.


----------



## lordzed83

lb_felipe said:


> What's the best "safe bet" 32GB kit to run with that board?
> 
> I was thinking F4-3200C14Q-32GTZRX (note the X in the end), since it is in the support list for that mobo on the G.Skill website, but it is not found. Also, I think 16GBx2 is preferible to 8GBx4 cause 4 ranks vs 2 ranks.
> 
> Update:
> 
> What do you think about F4-3600C16Q-32GTZKK with that mobo and a Ryzen 2700X? Is it safe I will be going to achieve 3600MHz 16-16-16-36 (stock XMP) speeds?


3600cl16?? At max volts of imc and memory...MAYBE


----------



## starrbuck

lb_felipe said:


> What's the best "safe bet" 32GB kit to run with that board?
> 
> I was thinking F4-3200C14Q-32GTZRX (note the X in the end), since it is in the support list for that mobo on the G.Skill website, but it is not found. Also, I think 16GBx2 is preferible to 8GBx4 cause 4 ranks vs 2 ranks.


I had a 16GB GTZRX kit (2x8GB) and it did not go well. Would not run at specs at 3200. Just got a F4-3200C14D-16GTZR kit, however, and it seems to be perfect. I can't speak to 32GB though as I hear that is a different story on the board right now. I'm happy with just 16 for gaming.


----------



## nemiel

For the RMA Board i plan to change my 2x16 GB G.Skill F4-3200C14-16GTZR to F4-3200C14D-16GFX 4x8 GB someone already used it on the board? are 4x8 @3200 possible with that Rams ?


----------



## CJMitsuki

nemiel said:


> For the RMA Board i plan to change my 2x16 GB G.Skill F4-3200C14-16GTZR to F4-3200C14D-16GFX 4x8 GB someone already used it on the board? are 4x8 @3200 possible with that Rams ?



You will more than likely get around the same overclocking headroom with either set. One is dual rank while the other is single rank but 2DPC. The setup that gives the highest overclocking possibility is single rank 1DPC. Which would be 2x8gb set. Is the computer a workstation to where you need 32gb? Or just personal gaming rig?


----------



## lordzed83

nemiel said:


> For the RMA Board i plan to change my 2x16 GB G.Skill F4-3200C14-16GTZR to F4-3200C14D-16GFX 4x8 GB someone already used it on the board? are 4x8 @3200 possible with that Rams ?


Even in manual it says 2x16 is better than 4x8 on c7h by design.


----------



## nemiel

Half a day Workstation and rest of Day Gaming for the Kids ^^


----------



## Syldon

nemiel said:


> For the RMA Board i plan to change my 2x16 GB G.Skill F4-3200C14-16GTZR to F4-3200C14D-16GFX 4x8 GB someone already used it on the board? are 4x8 @3200 possible with that Rams ?



I tried 4X8 with single sided DDR4000 memory. I gave up on trying to get it stable, it just never looked like the board was going to accept 4 sticks. I eventually accepted it as a bad loss and gave the sticks to my son for an old CH6 I was using.
If you really want to use 4X8 then use a CH6. I had fairly good success using 4X8 on the CH6. For the CH7 all the advice has been 2X16 for 32gb set ups.


----------



## nemiel

I not realy sure why the board not accept my 32gb initially it works after some days he lost 1 stick.


i can use 1 16gb stick on all 4 ram slots he found allways 16 gb with 2 sticks he found 16gb too but in bios he shows me 2 sticks a 16gb in slot a2 / b2 but counts only 1 stick.


----------



## EruKaze

I had mine populated to make 32gb. But i did had to cut down the DDR speed tho. Instead of 3200mhz, i either had to cut it down either to 3000mhz or 2933mhz.


----------



## hurricane28

Hey fellas, 

I was looking in my BIOS for several times but no matter how hard i look, i can't find Super I/O Clock Skew anymore... Is it out of the BIOS? And why? 
@elmor, can you shed some licht to this? Thnx.


----------



## Conenubi701

EruKaze said:


> I had mine populated to make 32gb. But i did had to cut down the DDR speed tho. Instead of 3200mhz, i either had to cut it down either to 3000mhz or 2933mhz.


Is that 3200 14? or 16?

I currently have all 4 slots populated with 4 x 8gb 3200 14 and it seems to be running fine at 1.35v


----------



## CJMitsuki

hurricane28 said:


> Hey fellas,
> 
> I was looking in my BIOS for several times but no matter how hard i look, i can't find Super I/O Clock Skew anymore... Is it out of the BIOS? And why?
> 
> @*elmor* , can you shed some licht to this? Thnx.



You used to be able to access that and many other "hidden" options through the bios search function but it seems that they completely took that ability away in 0702. I would like to know the reasoning behind these decisions as some could possibly benefit memory stability among other things. I was going to test all of the settings out and see if there were any benefits when I found out they were searchable on accident. There is at least one that causes problems if you disable it and that was the HPET. It would cause you to have a boot loop if you restarted your computer but you would be fine from a shutdown. I want to say it was throwing an F4 code but that was awhile ago.


----------



## bMind

Since I've finally got all the parts (2700x + C7H + F4-3200C14D-32GTZR) and found time to put all the things together..I have a question. Since I'm on stock cooler, is there any OC I can do, or I should leave it as is until I get some better cooling? Maybe play around with RAM more?


----------



## lordzed83

bMind said:


> Since I've finally got all the parts (2700x + C7H + F4-3200C14D-32GTZR) and found time to put all the things together..I have a question. Since I'm on stock cooler, is there any OC I can do, or I should leave it as is until I get some better cooling? Maybe play around with RAM more?


 on stock cooler id play around with ram


----------



## bMind

lordzed83 said:


> on stock cooler id play around with ram


Makes sense  I'll try to dig sth in the Ryzen memory thread.


----------



## CJMitsuki

bMind said:


> lordzed83 said:
> 
> 
> 
> on stock cooler id play around with ram /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> 
> 
> Makes sense /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif I'll try to dig sth in the Ryzen memory thread.
Click to expand...

I won’t sugar coat it, 3200 c14 kit is a great kit but you are going to find it hard to get a high frequency with 32gb kit. Dual rank shouldn’t be nearly as bad as running 2DPC 32gb setup but most I have seen that run anything different than 16gb SR 1DPC kits are lucky to hit 3400.


----------



## Keith Myers

*BIOS 0804 ASUS WMI sensors report incorrectly*

Just a FYI for anyone using SIV 5.32 Beta-08 or later. With the new WMI method of reporting sensors in SIV 5.32, Ray has determined that there is a bug in BIOS 0804. Likely caused by the BIOS 0804 itself and tied to Elmor's comment about fixing the swapped sensors in WMI. The CPU_Opt sensor and the CPU_VRM_Amps sensor are swapped. The CPU_Opt sensor reports correctly in the BIOS screen but what the board reports in its WMI output is swapped.

Backleveling to BIOS 0702 reports all the sensors correctly in the ASUS_WMI screens in SIV 5.32 Beta-08 or later. ASUS/Elmor has been BCC'd by Ray about the bug. We will just have to wait for Elmor to unfix the "fix" in BIOS 0804 in a later BIOS.


----------



## crakej

4.1GHz 3600MTs OC not working on 0804.

Ran without problems on 0601 - will report back when I catch the bluescreen (which I never used to get) in the act.


----------



## cmapes

Anyone else having issues with stability? I'm having problems with my CH7 Wifi and my 2700x.

I'm getting a hanging issue where the system hangs without any Event Viewer logs or BSOD. It just "hard" hangs (mouse and screen freezes) requiring a hold of the power button to reset it. It does not happen under load and appears to happen when the system is idle or under very low load, like browsing the internet.

I'm running:
Crosshair Hero VII Wifi (0806 Bios)
Ryzen 2700x
Corsair H115i with custom push-pull fan config
2x 16gb dual-rank Samsung B-die 3200mhz DDR4 (F4-3200C14D-16GTZKW)
GTX 980 Video Card
750w EVGA Supernova G2

The strange thing is that it happens when I have the bios settings at "Optimized Defaults" and the memory set at default 2133mhz. So in other words it doesn't work out of the box. It's actually less stable at those default settings than at overclocked OC level 3 settings with PBO enabled. Thermals are around 41c idle when overclocked, and around 27c on the slow "optimized default" settings.

I'm thinking this might be because of some instability introduced by voltage dropping too low when ramping down the cores. I'm not sure. The motherboard shows status 24 when running normally, and it still says 24 when it hangs and crashes.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated as I've been troubleshooting this for two days. I'm considering swapping out my CH7 for my old Gigabyte X370 Gaming K7, but I'm really trying to get this to work.


----------



## chakku

There's an 0806 BIOS?


----------



## MacG32

chakku said:


> There's an 0806 BIOS?



https://www.mediafire.com/folder/jkoxu4r003qu7/Release A link from the first post. :thumb:


----------



## chakku

MacG32 said:


> https://www.mediafire.com/folder/jkoxu4r003qu7/Release A link from the first post. :thumb:


Still not seeing an 0806


----------



## MacG32

chakku said:


> Still not seeing an 0806



0804 is the latest...


----------



## cmapes

Sorry guys, I meant 0804.


----------



## cmapes

As a follow-up, this only happens when using Ryzen Balanced or Balanced. High performance mode is stable.


----------



## Bo55

Ive had this board (wifi version) for about 2 weeks now and i have been furiously trying to get high memory frequency to work properly, the presets in the bios dont work as they all bsod on me during gaming, but after playing around with combinations of rzq and cadbus id say so far this configuration has been very good to me touch wood it wont bsod on me but i have had no errors or crashes of any kind in the last few days. The board still wont cold boot which needs to be fixed considering its a really expensive board but hopefully this can help some of you if you are having issues.

2700x @ 4.36ghz all core using precision boost enabled, turboing some to 4.42ghz
Bios 0702
Dram Voltage 1.4v
SOC Voltage 1.125v
CPU LLC2, 120%
SOC LLC2, 120%
Core Voltage offset + 0.04

If there is a new bios coming, id definitely like to get higher memory frequency going as i still feel there is room for it being a top end board and my G.Skill SR B-die sticks are rated for c17 3733mhz. From what ive tested so far, gains are still to be made the higher the memory frequency goes for both latency and cpu performance, so if the crosshair 6 can get 4000 strap going as i saw quite awhile ago, then this board should be able to do it better and easier.


----------



## wonderiuy

I'm on 804 bios actually and my Corsair Vengenace RGB 3466 now can boot @3466 without BSOD but Prime95 has lots of errors, so i'm back to @3333 profile. So it seems a little step has been made but furthers has to been made.
I ha ve to report that with 804 bios the setting "RGB LED Lightning -> When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states" is not saved and always "On", so the LEDs are turned on when the PF is turned off


----------



## Keith Myers

*An appeal to any SIV users for Save files from the developer*

The developer of SIV is needing Save_Local files from anyone running SIV 5.32 Beta-12 or later and owners of the Strix B450-F (0503, maybe earlier)
and Strix X470-I (0701) motherboards. The C6H and C7H boards are already covered. ASUS has been implementing WMI interrogations of ACPI resources in their latest BIOS. This is to standardize polling of motherboard sensor data across all platforms and to eliminate the conflicts that arise when multiple programs access the sensors at the same time, vis-a-vis the recent issues with HWinfo and AIDA64.

So anyone that might be running SIV could you please update to version 5.32 Beta-12 or later and let the system run for an hour before clicking the Save_Local file function. That creates two debug files that the developer uses to find the bugs in SIV and the ASUS BIOS of which many have been found already. You can send the Save files from within the Save_Local function after the polling finishes and creates the files. Only takes a minute.

Thanks in advance for any responses.

Cheers, Keith


----------



## CJMitsuki

Can anyone explain what I am doing to make my bclk break XFR+PBO? If I use PState 0 at FID 94(3.7ghz) PBO+XFR work great(see below). If I add any amount of Bclk OC to it then it reverts to being locked at 3776 and will not activate XFR+PBO even though they are enabled. My Bios settings are below as well as the difference in results.


Bios Settings




Spoiler




View attachment 180720055948.BMP
View attachment 180720060123.BMP
View attachment 180720060113.BMP
View attachment 180720060045.BMP
View attachment 180720060030.BMP
View attachment 180720060005.BMP





With No Bclk




Spoiler















Same settings as above, only with 102 Bclk added.




Spoiler















Its beginning to get annoying as I know it must be something I am doing wrong but I cannot pinpoint it.


----------



## mtrai

CJMitsuki said:


> Can anyone explain what I am doing to make my bclk break XFR+PBO? If I use PState 0 at FID 94(3.7ghz) PBO+XFR work great(see below). If I add any amount of Bclk OC to it then it reverts to being locked at 3776 and will not activate XFR+PBO even though they are enabled. My Bios settings are below as well as the difference in results.
> 
> 
> Bios Settings
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 206802
> View attachment 206804
> View attachment 206806
> View attachment 206808
> View attachment 206810
> View attachment 206812
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With No Bclk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 206814
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Same settings as above, only with 102 Bclk added.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 206816
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its beginning to get annoying as I know it must be something I am doing wrong but I cannot pinpoint it.


Let me have a couple of cups of coffee, I just woke up and I am groggy. It will take me a bit go through each or your settings...I think I already know...but want to make sure.

LOL it is something very simple you cannot leave your core voltage on Auto or Manual for XFX and PBO to work. You need to set the core voltage to offset mode. And then set your offset.


----------



## CJMitsuki

mtrai said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Can anyone explain what I am doing to make my bclk break XFR+PBO? If I use PState 0 at FID 94(3.7ghz) PBO+XFR work great(see below). If I add any amount of Bclk OC to it then it reverts to being locked at 3776 and will not activate XFR+PBO even though they are enabled. My Bios settings are below as well as the difference in results.
> 
> 
> Bios Settings
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 206802
> View attachment 206804
> View attachment 206806
> View attachment 206808
> View attachment 206810
> View attachment 206812
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With No Bclk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 206814
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Same settings as above, only with 102 Bclk added.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 206816
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its beginning to get annoying as I know it must be something I am doing wrong but I cannot pinpoint it.
> 
> 
> 
> Let me have a couple of cups of coffee, I just woke up and I am groggy. It will take me a bit go through each or your settings...I think I already know...but want to make sure.
Click to expand...

thx @mtrai I’m trying to get my single core benchmarks up and I know this OC has good single core results. Did you ever get the slipstreamed OS thing figured out? I have ISOs that I’ve trimmed as well as windows 10 Enterprise LTSB trimmed a bit. Not that it really needs trimmed. I’m about to start working on custom OS for each benchmark updated and ready to go and saving them to my cloud so I can just format and reload anytime I need. I just need to grab XP and get it trimmed for SuperPi


----------



## mtrai

CJMitsuki said:


> thx @mtrai I’m trying to get my single core benchmarks up and I know this OC has good single core results. Did you ever get the slipstreamed OS thing figured out? I have ISOs that I’ve trimmed as well as windows 10 Enterprise LTSB trimmed a bit. Not that it really needs trimmed. I’m about to start working on custom OS for each benchmark updated and ready to go and saving them to my cloud so I can just format and reload anytime I need. I just need to grab XP and get it trimmed for SuperPi


Yeah I did I needed a Windows 7 ISO. I edited my previous post with the thing I was seeing as the most obvious thing the core voltage setting. IF it was me..I would set my P-state to auto and set the core ratio to 37.


----------



## CJMitsuki

mtrai said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Can anyone explain what I am doing to make my bclk break XFR+PBO? If I use PState 0 at FID 94(3.7ghz) PBO+XFR work great(see below). If I add any amount of Bclk OC to it then it reverts to being locked at 3776 and will not activate XFR+PBO even though they are enabled. My Bios settings are below as well as the difference in results.
> 
> 
> Bios Settings
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 206802
> View attachment 206804
> View attachment 206806
> View attachment 206808
> View attachment 206810
> View attachment 206812
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With No Bclk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 206814
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Same settings as above, only with 102 Bclk added.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 206816
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its beginning to get annoying as I know it must be something I am doing wrong but I cannot pinpoint it.
> 
> 
> 
> Let me have a couple of cups of coffee, I just woke up and I am groggy. It will take me a bit go through each or your settings...I think I already know...but want to make sure.
> 
> LOL it is something very simple you cannot leave your core voltage on Auto or Manual for XFX and PBO to work. You need to set the core voltage to offset mode. And then set your offset.
Click to expand...

I get the same results while using offset as well. Any change to bclk locks the cpu clock


----------



## mtrai

CJMitsuki said:


> I get the same results while using offset as well


Lets start your XFR PBO set up again. Set your P-state to auto, set the PB Overdrive to Auto, 

Then set your core ratio to 37

Leave your performance enhancer as is.

Leave Core Performance boost enabled.

And lastly set you CPU core voltage to offset mode. 

+offset and set it to what you think...I would recomend setting it to +.05 and work from there.

Make sure this works ....then go back to your bios and start upping your bclk.


----------



## lordzed83

@CJMitsuki
Think You must be bored as we found this single core auto OC is well Useless anyway.
Especially with what You got stable


----------



## CJMitsuki

lordzed83 said:


> @CJMitsuki
> Think You must be bored as we found this single core auto OC is well Useless anyway.
> Especially with what You got stable /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif


It’s for HWBOT benchmarking, trying to make builds for several of the benchmarks like SuperPi and wPrime. It’s either this or disable as many cores as possible and try to push 4.5ghz+. My system doesn’t like to stick to one core on single core benches either. It dances from 2 to 4 and sometimes core 6. Pretty sure my Core 2 or 4 is the best. My benches aren’t bad but I want more and I need to get crafty as I don’t run LN2 or DICE yet.
@mtrai I’ll try it when I’m home. I’m at work with a tight deadline. I’ll be at almost 65 hours this week by this time tomorrow.


----------



## mtrai

CJMitsuki said:


> It’s for HWBOT benchmarking, trying to make builds for several of the benchmarks like SuperPi and wPrime. It’s either this or disable as many cores as possible and try to push 4.5ghz+. My system doesn’t like to stick to one core on single core benches either. It dances from 2 to 4 and sometimes core 6. Pretty sure my Core 2 or 4 is the best. My benches aren’t bad but I want more and I need to get crafty as I don’t run LN2 or DICE yet.
> @mtrai I’ll try it when I’m home. I’m at work with a tight deadline. I’ll be at almost 65 hours this week by this time tomorrow.


I understand what and why he is working on... I do the same things myself. I will be around and try to help you.


----------



## boatmurder

mtrai said:


> Lets start your XFR PBO set up again. Set your P-state to auto, set the PB Overdrive to Auto,
> 
> Then set your core ratio to 37


What. That's going to freeze him at 37x, how is that going to help with boosting?


----------



## mtrai

boatmurder said:


> What. That's going to freeze him at 37x, how is that going to help with boosting?


Really? You really think that? Anyhow that is exactly how ASUS told us to use PBO and XFR



Your dram ratio, bclk and core offset can be changed.


----------



## boatmurder

mtrai said:


> Really? You really think that? Anyhow that is exactly how ASUS told us to use PBO and XFR
> 
> Your dram ratio, bclk and core offset can be changed.


if you type in 37 it will literally be constant 37. Just like it will be constant 42 if you set it to 42.
I just went into my bios to check that there is not some black magic ****ery going on.


----------



## mtrai

boatmurder said:


> if you type in 37 it will literally be constant 37. Just like it will be constant 42 if you set it to 42.
> I just went into my bios to check that there is not some black magic ****ery going on.


Not trying to offend you, but while I and other appreciate you trying to give advice...please read up on what your giving advice on and learn how it works. And yes auto will work too on PBO XFR overclocking However, we are trying to narrow down his issue to which setting he is changing in the bios to cause this. SO in this case...we need revert to "defaults" and the defaults for PBO XFR are outlined by ASUS engineers for us.


----------



## Keith Myers

*Might try ProcessLasso*



CJMitsuki said:


> It’s for HWBOT benchmarking, trying to make builds for several of the benchmarks like SuperPi and wPrime. It’s either this or disable as many cores as possible and try to push 4.5ghz+. My system doesn’t like to stick to one core on single core benches either. It dances from 2 to 4 and sometimes core 6. Pretty sure my Core 2 or 4 is the best. My benches aren’t bad but I want more and I need to get crafty as I don’t run LN2 or DICE yet.
> @mtrai I’ll try it when I’m home. I’m at work with a tight deadline. I’ll be at almost 65 hours this week by this time tomorrow.


You might want to try ProcessLasso to lock affinity of your best core to your benchmark application to keep it from dancing around.


----------



## boatmurder

mtrai said:


> Not trying to offend you, but while I and other appreciate you trying to give advice...please read up on what your giving advice on and learn how it works. And yes auto will work too on PBO XFR overclocking However, we are trying to narrow down his issue to which setting he is changing in the bios to cause this. SO in this case...we need revert to "defaults" and the defaults for PBO XFR are outlined by ASUS engineers for us.


I'm not trying to give advice, I'm challenging yours. And if you think the asus engineers achieved a boost of 4498 Mhz by setting core ratio to 37 with 103.4 BCLK you're the one who shouldn't be giving advice.


----------



## mtrai

boatmurder said:


> I'm not trying to give advice, I'm challenging yours. And if you think the asus engineers achieved a boost of 4498 Mhz by setting core ratio to 37 with 103.4 BCLK you're the one who shouldn't be giving advice.


So your telling me...I am not hitting 4410 with PBO XFR overclocking just by setting my Ratio to 37 and setting my BCLK to 101.4. Okay then, I guess it is just reported wrong. Now search my posts.
Yes I am limited to a 101.4 bclk due to my M.2 drive.

/edit Incidentally me and @CJMitsuki have a friendly competition going on with currently I am 7th and he is 8th. We do help each other out to get better scores. We are both competing in HWBOT Challenger Series CHALLENGER 2018 DIV IV ROUND 2. I think we both know a thing or two about what we are doing.

http://oc-esports.io/#!/round/roadtopro_challenger_season4_division4_round2


----------



## CJMitsuki

mtrai said:


> boatmurder said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not trying to give advice, I'm challenging yours. And if you think the asus engineers achieved a boost of 4498 Mhz by setting core ratio to 37 with 103.4 BCLK you're the one who shouldn't be giving advice.
> 
> 
> 
> So your telling me...I am not hitting 4410 with PBO XFR overclocking just by setting my Ratio to 37 and setting my BCLK to 101.4. Okay then, I guess it is just reported wrong. Now search my posts.
> Yes I am limited to a 101.4 bclk due to my M.2 drive.
> 
> /edit Incidentally me and @CJMitsuki have a friendly competition going on with currently I am 7th and he is 8th. We do help each other out to get better scores. We are both competing in HWBOT Challenger Series CHALLENGER 2018 DIV IV ROUND 2. I think we both know a thing or two about what we are doing.
> 
> http://oc-esports.io/#!/round/roadtopro_challenger_season4_division4_round2
Click to expand...

It is completely possible he is getting those over clocks. You can play with offsets and as long as you can keep the temps below the throttling point the extra voltage from the offset will make the frequency go higher. The tricky part is the temps. 1.55v+ starts putting out quite a bit of heat in a long benchmark if you are only using an AIO. I know the basics of XFR and PBO but I’ve used PState OC for awhile and only bothered with XFR shortly. PStates OC is great for multithread but not very efficient for Single Core unless you disable threads, which I’m going to make a build like that as well. I just want several bc one may be good for X benchmark as the other could be better for Y benchmark. Same with Operating systems and even down to certain Windows updates. Pro Overclockers have custom OS and setups for every benchmark which is a lot. It will take awhile to have a custom tuned setup for just the processor benchmarks, let alone GPU and Memory. I’m trying to get a custom bios for C7H unlocking all of those settings that were locked with latest bios so I can test those and see if there are benefits to be discovered. I may end up having to learn how to make my own custom bios 😆


----------



## mtrai

CJMitsuki said:


> It is completely possible he is getting those over clocks. You can play with offsets and as long as you can keep the temps below the throttling point the extra voltage from the offset will make the frequency go higher. The tricky part is the temps. 1.55v+ starts putting out quite a bit of heat in a long benchmark if you are only using an AIO. I know the basics of XFR and PBO but I’ve used PState OC for awhile and only bothered with XFR shortly. PStates OC is great for multithread but not very efficient for Single Core unless you disable threads, which I’m going to make a build like that as well. I just want several bc one may be good for X benchmark as the other could be better for Y benchmark. Same with Operating systems and even down to certain Windows updates. Pro Overclockers have custom OS and setups for every benchmark which is a lot. It will take awhile to have a custom tuned setup for just the processor benchmarks, let alone GPU and Memory. I’m trying to get a custom bios for C7H unlocking all of those settings that were locked with latest bios so I can test those and see if there are benefits to be discovered. I may end up having to learn how to make my own custom bios 😆


I can make the bios ...will look at it tomorrow...I already can do it but been drinking tonight. And someone contested a lot of scores so ranking got all changed..so take a look just saw it. I moved up one...you dropped to 12th.


----------



## CJMitsuki

mtrai said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is completely possible he is getting those over clocks. You can play with offsets and as long as you can keep the temps below the throttling point the extra voltage from the offset will make the frequency go higher. The tricky part is the temps. 1.55v+ starts putting out quite a bit of heat in a long benchmark if you are only using an AIO. I know the basics of XFR and PBO but I’ve used PState OC for awhile and only bothered with XFR shortly. PStates OC is great for multithread but not very efficient for Single Core unless you disable threads, which I’m going to make a build like that as well. I just want several bc one may be good for X benchmark as the other could be better for Y benchmark. Same with Operating systems and even down to certain Windows updates. Pro Overclockers have custom OS and setups for every benchmark which is a lot. It will take awhile to have a custom tuned setup for just the processor benchmarks, let alone GPU and Memory. I’m trying to get a custom bios for C7H unlocking all of those settings that were locked with latest bios so I can test those and see if there are benefits to be discovered. I may end up having to learn how to make my own custom bios 😆
> 
> 
> 
> I can make the bios ...will look at it tomorrow...I already can do it but been drinking tonight. And someone contested a lot of scores so ranking got all changed..so take a look just saw it. I moved up one...you dropped to 12th.
Click to expand...

Yeah, just delaying the inevitable. I’ll get home and rerun firestrike and they will drop back to where they were.


----------



## VPII

I finally managed to get my system to run fine with a full pot of LN2 as well as doing some 2d runs with Window 7. It was some mission to get windows 7 installed, but at least now I have it on a flash disk with the required USB drivers loaded. The runs I did was without any tweaks. One thing I noticed is that my cpu speed in the screenshot is way lower than what it actually is when fully loaded. Why is that? I mean the overclock is manual so I would have though it would show the speed as set in the bios. You'll see in the CB15 result screenshot.


----------



## red-ray

*SIV [ASUS WMI] screen shots*



Keith Myers said:


> The developer of SIV is needing Save_Local files from anyone running SIV 5.32 Beta-14 or later and owners of the Strix B450-F (0503) and Strix X470-I (0701) motherboards. The C6H and C7H boards are already covered.
> 
> So anyone that might be running SIV could you please update to version 5.32 Beta-14 or later and let the system run for an hour before clicking the Save_Local file function. That creates two debug files that the developer uses to find the bugs in SIV and the ASUS BIOS of which many have been found already. You can send the Save files from within the Save_Local function after the polling finishes and creates the files. Only takes a minute.


Thank you for your post but to check if things are working all I really need to see are the *initial SIV screen* + *[Status]* (Menu->Hardware-> Hardware Status) + *[ASUS WMI]* (Menu->System->ACPI + PnP->ASUS WMI) +*[ACPI WMI]* (Menu->System->ACPI + PnP->ACPI WMI) panels, though if there is an issue I may need the *[Save Local]* files. On my C7H they are as attached.

Note that SIV still uses the *Global\Access_ISABUS.HTP.Method* + *Global\Access_EC* locks so it's safe to run SIV 5.32 Beta-14 with old versions of other programs that have not been updated to use *ASUS WMI*.


----------



## Keith Myers

*SIV screens*

Hi Ray, here are my screens


----------



## crakej

red-ray said:


> Thank you for your post but to check if things are working all I really need to see are the *initial SIV screen* + *[Status]* (Menu->Hardware-> Hardware Status) + *[ASUS WMI]* (Menu->System->ACPI + PnP->ASUS WMI) +*[ACPI WMI]* (Menu->System->ACPI + PnP->ACPI WMI) panels, though if there is an issue I may need the *[Save Local]* files. On my C7H they are as attached.
> 
> Note that SIV still uses the *Global\Access_ISABUS.HTP.Method* + *Global\Access_EC* locks so it's safe to run SIV 5.32 Beta-14 with old versions of other programs that have not been updated to use *ASUS WMI*.


Here you go - I had a problem when going for the 2nd (included error for you) screen of info - resulted in having to reboot as I couldn't kill the siv64 process off.


----------



## Dopamin3

Just bought this board and received DOA - my first DOA component I've ever had. Transferred all my parts from an Asrock X370 Taichi and had the system fully built, it turned on and just hung on QCODE 8. Tried putting my 1700X in instead of 2700x, same thing. Re situated power cables, same thing. Tried only one stick of RAM, same thing. Took motherboard out of case and set it on the box, again QCODE 8 with either CPU. 

Transferred all the parts back into my X370 Taichi and booted and worked fine. I've been building PCs for years and was grounded while building it and made no errors. Really disappointing and 5 hours wasted of building and troubleshooting. Bought it from Newegg so going to try to refund, if not guess I'll be receiving a replacement. Hopefully not DOA again ><


----------



## hurricane28

@elmor, I saw that BIOS 0804 is officially downloadable from the Asus website. Is there any change with the official and the one you posted here? 

Thnx.


----------



## crakej

hurricane28 said:


> @elmor, I saw that BIOS 0804 is officially downloadable from the Asus website. Is there any change with the official and the one you posted here?
> 
> Thnx.


If they make any changes, they *have* to change the ver number - otherwise we wouldn't know what to download


----------



## crakej

Dopamin3 said:


> Just bought this board and received DOA - my first DOA component I've ever had. Transferred all my parts from an Asrock X370 Taichi and had the system fully built, it turned on and just hung on QCODE 8. Tried putting my 1700X in instead of 2700x, same thing. Re situated power cables, same thing. Tried only one stick of RAM, same thing. Took motherboard out of case and set it on the box, again QCODE 8 with either CPU.
> 
> Transferred all the parts back into my X370 Taichi and booted and worked fine. I've been building PCs for years and was grounded while building it and made no errors. Really disappointing and 5 hours wasted of building and troubleshooting. Bought it from Newegg so going to try to refund, if not guess I'll be receiving a replacement. Hopefully not DOA again ><


What a shame! This happens to many of us over the years - you're very unlucky. I did see when they first released this board, there were a few that you could actually see were bad but had got through QC.

On the whole I'm happy - has brought me much more performance with my 1700x and much higher ram OC....

Hope you get a good one - have a good look at both sides of the board before installing - just in case!


----------



## hurricane28

crakej said:


> If they make any changes, they *have* to change the ver number - otherwise we wouldn't know what to download


Yeah, sometimes they don't which is why i ask.


----------



## hurricane28

Dopamin3 said:


> Just bought this board and received DOA - my first DOA component I've ever had. Transferred all my parts from an Asrock X370 Taichi and had the system fully built, it turned on and just hung on QCODE 8. Tried putting my 1700X in instead of 2700x, same thing. Re situated power cables, same thing. Tried only one stick of RAM, same thing. Took motherboard out of case and set it on the box, again QCODE 8 with either CPU.
> 
> Transferred all the parts back into my X370 Taichi and booted and worked fine. I've been building PCs for years and was grounded while building it and made no errors. Really disappointing and 5 hours wasted of building and troubleshooting. Bought it from Newegg so going to try to refund, if not guess I'll be receiving a replacement. Hopefully not DOA again ><


Sorry to hear that man.. I have dealt with defective components as well in the past.. good luck with returning and new board.


----------



## red-ray

*410 Second Sensor Stall*



crakej said:


> Here you go - I had a problem when going for the 2nd (included error for you) screen of info - resulted in having to reboot as I couldn't kill the siv64 process off.


Thank you for your post from which I can see SIV reported as I hoped it would, but there is clearly some sort of issue.

On the stalled screen I spotted SIV was reporting a *410 Second Sensor Stall* which indicates SIV was unable to update the sensor information in a timely manor. Is there a file called *SIV_DBGOUT.log* in the SIV folder? If so please can you post it.

Were any other programs also reporting the motherboard sensors and if so which ones? What do *Menu->Help->Lock Usage* + *Menu->Help->Lock Handle* report?

Exactly what happened? I suspect the *410 Seconds ...* was counting up and things got stuck when you tried to exit from SIV.


----------



## gupsterg

hurricane28 said:


> @elmor, I saw that BIOS 0804 is officially downloadable from the Asus website. Is there any change with the official and the one you posted here?
> 
> Thnx.


Byte for byte the same (as it has been in the past). If in doubt easy check see CRC or compare files in HxD.


----------



## hurricane28

gupsterg said:


> Byte for byte the same (as it has been in the past). If in doubt easy check see CRC or compare files in HxD.


Alright, thnx for the info man. I am always kinda anal about these things as i hate missing out on something lol. 

This BIOS seems like the best so far, nets me some good performance/stability ratio. No Aida64 issues anymore and the ACPI error/warning is also gone in event viewer of Windows, i said so many times that fan/ stability issues were related to this message but they said no.. Kinda weird that with this sensor and new WMI interface fix both problems are solved..


----------



## CJMitsuki

So, with the help of @*mtrai* I got XFR + PBO working finally and after many hours I got this far before sleep took over my body and I passed out at my desk  4.5ghz and Im pretty sure I can go a bit fursther but its reaching the limit of my cooling with my AIO so maybe 4.55ghz on XFR? By the way, from what i see it takes the 8700k around 1ghz+ more clock speed to match most of benchmarks the 2700x can do.





Spoiler


----------



## mtrai

CJMitsuki said:


> So, with the help of @*mtrai* I got XFR + PBO working finally and after many hours I got this far before sleep took over my body and I passed out at my desk  4.5ghz and Im pretty sure I can go a bit fursther but its reaching the limit of my cooling with my AIO so maybe 4.55ghz on XFR? By the way, from what i see it takes the 8700k around 1ghz+ more clock speed to match most of benchmarks the 2700x can do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 207112


GRATS MAN. Gonna take a look at the latest bios y'all have and mod it for you. Got involved in a long raid in WoW today.


----------



## crakej

red-ray said:


> Thank you for your post from which I can see SIV reported as I hoped it would, but there is clearly some sort of issue.
> 
> On the stalled screen I spotted SIV was reporting a *410 Second Sensor Stall* which indicates SIV was unable to update the sensor information in a timely manor. Is there a file called *SIV_DBGOUT.log* in the SIV folder? If so please can you post it.
> 
> Were any other programs also reporting the motherboard sensors and if so which ones? What do *Menu->Help->Lock Usage* + *Menu->Help->Lock Handle* report?
> 
> Exactly what happened? I suspect the *410 Seconds ...* was counting up and things got stuck when you tried to exit from SIV.


NP

I literally loaded Siv64 then did your screenies in the order you requested. It may have been a while between Initial and the 1st screen, but I didn't do anything else while I did this. Can't have been too long as screen didn't sleep

Nothing actively trying to access WMI - ASUS fan service is running, but nothing else. Files included as requested 

SIV_DBGOUT.log


Spoiler



2018-07-21 14:27:48 ********** \\AMIGA10 0000000000000000 = GetStdHandle( STD_OUTPUT_HANDLE ) - error 10 - The environment is incorrect.
siv_cleanup_end WAIT_TIMEOUT == WaitForSingleObject( 0000000000000458, 2000 ) for Worker Thread ( )

2018-07-21 14:38:17 ********** \\AMIGA10 0000000000000000 = GetStdHandle( STD_OUTPUT_HANDLE ) - Status 10 - The environment is incorrect.
lck_acquire_eca() Status 258 122 for Global\Access_EC in Thread 13708 (Main Thread) @ 2018-07-21 14:38:17.985 owned by SIV:Sensor
lck_acquire_eca() Status 258 122 for Global\Access_EC in Thread 13708 (Main Thread) @ 2018-07-21 14:38:48.034 owned by SIV:Sensor

2018-07-21 14:39:43 ********** \\AMIGA10 0000000000000000 = GetStdHandle( STD_OUTPUT_HANDLE ) - Status 10 - The environment is incorrect.
lck_acquire_eca() Status 258 0 for Global\Access_EC in Thread 14852 (Main Thread) @ 2018-07-21 14:39:43.824 owned by SIV64X:Sensor
lck_acquire_eca() Status 258 122 for Global\Access_EC in Thread 14852 (Main Thread) @ 2018-07-21 14:40:13.884 owned by SIV64X:Sensor


----------



## red-ray

*The evaluation of the UPEC ACPI method seems to stall with 0804, but 0702 is fine*



crakej said:


> I literally loaded Siv64 then did your screenies in the order you requested. It may have been a while between Initial and the 1st screen, but I didn't do anything else while I did this. Can't have been too long as screen didn't sleep
> 
> Nothing actively trying to access WMI - ASUS fan service is running, but nothing else. Files included as requested
> 
> SIV_DBGOUT.log
> lck_acquire_eca() Status 258 122 for Global\Access_EC in Thread 13708 (Main Thread) @ 2018-07-21 14:38:17.985 owned by SIV:Sensor
> lck_acquire_eca() Status 258 122 for Global\Access_EC in Thread 13708 (Main Thread) @ 2018-07-21 14:38:48.034 owned by SIV:Sensor


Thank you. For *Global\Access_ISABUS.HTP.Method* SIV reported *SIV + 1* please post *Menu->Help->Lock Handle* so I can see what the other program is.

From the messages in SIV_DBGOUT.log I can tell SIV was trying to evaluate the *UPEC* ACPI method so for Beta-15 I have made SIV report this as below.

I managed to get the same effect on my system by running SIV and HWiNFO at the same time and I also needed to force my system to shutdown by holding the power button. With my tests both HWiNFO and SIV got stuck and I suspect HWiNFO was also trying to evaluate the *UPEC* ACPI method when it got stuck.

As you did not have HWiNFO active I suspect it may be the *ASUS COM Service* that triggered the issue. Do you still get the lockup if you run SIV after stopping all the ASUS services please? Ideally update to Beta-15 before doing this.

The ASUS fan service must be accessing the SIO + EC sensors, but I don't know if it uses ASUS WMI or does direct access. Either way I suspect it being active may trigger the issue.

My guess is that if multiple programs try to evaluate the *UPEC* ACPI method at the same time due to a race condition within the ACPI/BIOS code one of the evaluations get's stuck. I also suspect this is the root cause of why the system will not shutdown cleanly.

I have sent an e-mail to ASUS about this effect and will let you know what they say.

*Update 1:* I reverted to the *0702* BIOS and the issue seems to have gone away so I expect there is a bug in the *0804* BIOS. I have attached a screen shot showing both HWiNFO + SIV active, both have been active for over an hour and with the *0804* BIOS the lockup usually happened within a couple of minutes.

*Update 2:* I received a reply from ASUS who said "the current BIOS releases have several issues and it’s best to wait for a fixed version".


----------



## hurricane28

red-ray said:


> Thank you. For *Global\Access_ISABUS.HTP.Method* SIV reported *SIV + 1* please post *Menu->Help->Lock Handle* so I can see what the other program is.
> 
> From the messages in SIV_DBGOUT.log I can tell SIV was trying to evaluate the *UPEC* ACPI method so for Beta-15 I have made SIV report this as below.
> 
> I managed to get the same effect on my system by running SIV and HWiNFO at the same time and I also needed to force my system to shutdown by holding the power button. With my tests both HWiNFO and SIV got stuck and I suspect HWiNFO was also trying to evaluate the *UPEC* ACPI method when it got stuck.
> 
> As you did not have HWiNFO active I suspect it may be the *ASUS COM Service* that triggered the issue. Do you still get the lockup if you run SIV after stopping all the ASUS services please? Ideally update to Beta-15 before doing this.
> 
> The ASUS fan service must be accessing the SIO + EC sensors, but I don't know if it uses ASUS WMI or does direct access. Either way I suspect it being active may trigger the issue.
> 
> My guess is that if multiple programs try to evaluate the *UPEC* ACPI method at the same time due to a race condition within the ACPI/BIOS code one of the evaluations get's stuck. I also suspect this is the root cause of why the system will not shutdown cleanly.
> 
> I have sent an e-mail to ASUS about this effect and will let you know what they say.
> 
> *Update:* I reverted to the *0702* BIOS and the issue seems to have gone away so I expect there is a bug in the *0804* BIOS. I have attached a screen shot showing both HWiNFO + SIV active, both have been active for over an hour and with the *0804* BIOS the lockup usually happened within a couple of minutes.


Holy... So the BIOS that is made to fix things is not causing the exact thing that it should fix in the first place..? Lmao! I am 100% sure there is no fix for this as it is being caused by the faulty IT8665E chip or the implementation of it. This issue is there for a long long time and it started on my 990FX Sabertooth boards 4 years ago which also has an IT chip..


----------



## crakej

red-ray said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you. For *Global\Access_ISABUS.HTP.Method* SIV reported *SIV + 1* please post *Menu->Help->Lock Handle* so I can see what the other program is.
> 
> From the messages in SIV_DBGOUT.log I can tell SIV was trying to evaluate the *UPEC* ACPI method so for Beta-15 I have made SIV report this as below.
> 
> I managed to get the same effect on my system by running SIV and HWiNFO at the same time and I also needed to force my system to shutdown by holding the power button. With my tests both HWiNFO and SIV got stuck and I suspect HWiNFO was also trying to evaluate the *UPEC* ACPI method when it got stuck.
> 
> As you did not have HWiNFO active I suspect it may be the *ASUS COM Service* that triggered the issue. Do you still get the lockup if you run SIV after stopping all the ASUS services please? Ideally update to Beta-15 before doing this.
> 
> The ASUS fan service must be accessing the SIO + EC sensors, but I don't know if it uses ASUS WMI or does direct access. Either way I suspect it being active may trigger the issue.
> 
> My guess is that if multiple programs try to evaluate the *UPEC* ACPI method at the same time due to a race condition within the ACPI/BIOS code one of the evaluations get's stuck. I also suspect this is the root cause of why the system will not shutdown cleanly.
> 
> I have sent an e-mail to ASUS about this effect and will let you know what they say.
> 
> *Update 1:* I reverted to the *0702* BIOS and the issue seems to have gone away so I expect there is a bug in the *0804* BIOS. I have attached a screen shot showing both HWiNFO + SIV active, both have been active for over an hour and with the *0804* BIOS the lockup usually happened within a couple of minutes.
> 
> *Update 2:* I received a reply from ASUS who said "the current BIOS releases have several issues and it’s best to wait for a fixed version".


Here is Lock_Handle screen as requested. Computer is in the same state as previously with same things loaded as previously.

I updated to beta 16 and all is working well. Siv closes nicely - no hanging around for anything and no reboot required. Thanks for your hard work keeping Siv up to date!


----------



## gupsterg

Fitted up the C7H again yesterday. Flashback'd to 0804. Using a "raggedy" W7P x64 OS (it's been yoyo'd between C6H/C7H several times). 4.1GHz 3466MHz :clock: The Stilt :clock: passed several runs of GSAT/HCI and seems P95 stable as well. All settings as used on UEFI 0601 and 0702, except SOC currently I gave 3 bumps. So is 0.987V in UEFI instead of 0.968V, reason being it seemed whilst I had the 2700X on the C6H it must have "broke in" and has been showing signs of needing more SOC than testing in few months of early ownership.









Motherboard/CPU Socket temperature is now aligning correctly in HWINFO, so don't need to swap labels around. Chipset voltage is 1.05V but as early board I have the bugged read back in monitoring. Monitoring data all seems fine, not had any PWM issues so far, been in use since yesterday afternoon.

More and more luv'ing Linux Mint TBH. Runs so flipping fluidly IMO. Will be soon updating from v18.3 to 19, so far any kernal updates on v18.3 been non issue as well. Did get in few hours linux usage yesterday, whilst on UEFI 0804.
@hurricane28

I won't repeat what I posted in the C6H thread recently. I do think ASUS/Elmor have made head way and as per Ray's recent update the clearly are working to resolve it. We have got also some authors of SW making changes ASAP, so again moving in the right direction.


----------



## Bo55

CJMitsuki said:


> So, with the help of @*mtrai* I got XFR + PBO working finally and after many hours I got this far before sleep took over my body and I passed out at my desk  4.5ghz and Im pretty sure I can go a bit fursther but its reaching the limit of my cooling with my AIO so maybe 4.55ghz on XFR? By the way, from what i see it takes the 8700k around 1ghz+ more clock speed to match most of benchmarks the 2700x can do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 207112


Great result. Ive been trying to achieve the same but my system continues to freeze whenever i run Cinebench Single Core or Multi core runs, does not matter which one it just freezes my system and i have to manually power off and then power back on. After ive done that and get back into windows, i have to switch back to Ryzen balanced power plan or any other plan other than "balanced" as it locks all my cores to 4.290 THEN select balance power plan again and only then will my cores start down clocking and then boosting properly, so its very buggy for me. I believe whats causing the freezing is lack of voltage but i could be wrong. I use HWinfo64 to read voltages and so far, my cores are seeing 1.363v using a +0.05 offset, however if i scroll down the list the CPU Core Voltage SV12 TFN is reading 1.45-1.506v so im not sure which is correct? Am i missing anything? Any help much appreciated.


----------



## red-ray

crakej said:


> Here is Lock_Handle screen as requested. Computer is in the same state as previously with same things loaded as previously.
> 
> I updated to beta 16 and all is working well. Siv closes nicely - no hanging around for anything and no reboot required. Thanks for your hard work keeping Siv up to date!


Thank you *atkexComSvc* must be the ASUS fan service, but it's only using *Global\Access_ISABUS.HTP.Method* and should also be using *Global\Access_EC*, I will raise this with ASUS.

Because of this I suspect with the 0804 BIOS sooner or later there will be a lockup. If you change to the 0702 BIOS then all should be OK. I am currently awaiting an alpha BIOS which should fix this.

I would like to get *[Lock Usage]* to report when atkexComSvc is active and need your help to do this. I basically need to know the locks it creates so please will you use SIV to find out? If you look on *Menu->Windows->Processes* if should be listed, assuming so Right/Click on the *PID*, select *Locks* and post that screen.


----------



## Mumak

As you probably already know, the new ASUS WMI interface, which we utilize for monitoring has some issues in current BIOS implementations (despite that it seems to fix some of the other problems).
So I'm forced to disable using this interface from the next (Beta) build. We expect that later BIOSes will fix these problems.


----------



## crakej

red-ray said:


> Thank you *atkexComSvc* must be the ASUS fan service, but it's only using *Global\Access_ISABUS.HTP.Method* and should also be using *Global\Access_EC*, I will raise this with ASUS.
> 
> Because of this I suspect with the 0804 BIOS sooner or later there will be a lockup. If you change to the 0702 BIOS then all should be OK. I am currently awaiting an alpha BIOS which should fix this.
> 
> I would like to get *[Lock Usage]* to report when atkexComSvc is active and need your help to do this. I basically need to know the locks it creates so please will you use SIV to find out? If you look on *Menu->Windows->Processes* if should be listed, assuming so Right/Click on the *PID*, select *Locks* and post that screen.


NP - here you go....I've done the same for AISuite just in case - it's inactive but appears to be loaded anyway...

I've had problems with HWInfo freezing some readings as well, usually the EC readings, but haven't re-tested that recently.

Edit: so yes, it is still getting stuck sometimes. When it is stuck and won't close, I find loading HWInfo failed - getting stuck at detecting cpu-15


----------



## crakej

Mumak said:


> As you probably already know, the new ASUS WMI interface, which we utilize for monitoring has some issues in current BIOS implementations (despite that it seems to fix some of the other problems).
> So I'm forced to disable using this interface from the next (Beta) build. We expect that later BIOSes will fix these problems.


Thanks for keeping us updated - I had noticed a few problems, but put them down to the new interface. Nothing awful, just readings getting stuck - usually the EC section.


----------



## hurricane28

Mumak said:


> As you probably already know, the new ASUS WMI interface, which we utilize for monitoring has some issues in current BIOS implementations (despite that it seems to fix some of the other problems).
> So I'm forced to disable using this interface from the next (Beta) build. We expect that later BIOSes will fix these problems.


Thank you for your answer. I already knew it was Asus Software (BIOS) As No other manufacturer has so many problems with reading and controlling sensors.. Its really mind boggling that such an big manufacturer like Asus still hasn't figured it out yet.. I think They simple don't test it.. Elmor told us that he knows what the problem is.. That's fine and all, but knowing and fixing is completely different.. I mean, if you KNOW the problem its easy to fix most of the time..


----------



## hurricane28

gupsterg said:


> Fitted up the C7H again yesterday. Flashback'd to 0804. Using a "raggedy" W7P x64 OS (it's been yoyo'd between C6H/C7H several times). 4.1GHz 3466MHz :clock: The Stilt :clock: passed several runs of GSAT/HCI and seems P95 stable as well. All settings as used on UEFI 0601 and 0702, except SOC currently I gave 3 bumps. So is 0.987V in UEFI instead of 0.968V, reason being it seemed whilst I had the 2700X on the C6H it must have "broke in" and has been showing signs of needing more SOC than testing in few months of early ownership.
> 
> View attachment 207422
> 
> 
> Motherboard/CPU Socket temperature is now aligning correctly in HWINFO, so don't need to swap labels around. Chipset voltage is 1.05V but as early board I have the bugged read back in monitoring. Monitoring data all seems fine, not had any PWM issues so far, been in use since yesterday afternoon.
> 
> More and more luv'ing Linux Mint TBH. Runs so flipping fluidly IMO. Will be soon updating from v18.3 to 19, so far any kernal updates on v18.3 been non issue as well. Did get in few hours linux usage yesterday, whilst on UEFI 0804.
> 
> @hurricane28
> 
> I won't repeat what I posted in the C6H thread recently. I do think ASUS/Elmor have made head way and as per Ray's recent update the clearly are working to resolve it. We have got also some authors of SW making changes ASAP, so again moving in the right direction.


Yeah, Elmor told us that they are working on a " fix" for over a year now and there still is no fix yet.. As i told you before, there is no fix as its hardware related as i mentioned before. The only fix would be to remove the faulty and buggy IT sensor and replace it by something that works.. That is impossible but that would be the only 100% fix.. Other manufacturers that are not using this IT sensor have no problems like this so the conclusion is simple, don't ever buy sensors/chips from IT as they are nothing but trouble..


----------



## red-ray

*I just hope ASUS release a corrected C7H BIOS soon*



crakej said:


> NP - here you go....I've done the same for AISuite just in case - it's inactive but appears to be loaded anyway...
> 
> I've had problems with HWInfo freezing some readings as well, usually the EC readings, but haven't re-tested that recently.
> 
> Edit: so yes, it is still getting stuck sometimes. When it is stuck and won't close, I find loading HWInfo failed - getting stuck at detecting cpu-15


Thank you, what you posted is ideal and from SIV 5.32 Beta-17 should list *ASUS atkexComSvc* on *[Lock Usage]* under Programs, does it?

With the 0804 BIOS I expect you will get the lockups if the *ASUS atkexComSvc* service is active. To stop them I suspect you could either stop that service or revert to the 0702 BIOS.

I have tested with SIV 5.32 Beta-17 + AIDA64 v4.97.4671 Beta on a C7H with the 0804 BIOS and after an hour both programs are still running OK and there is no lockup. When I told SIV to stop using the locks things got stuck within a minute and the system would not cleanly shutdown. From this I can tell the issue is that if two programs try and evaluate the UPEC ACPI method at the same time one or the other will stall.

I just hope ASUS release a corrected C7H BIOS and until they do advise using the 0702 BIOS if using SIV as with the 0702 BIOS I have never seen a lockup.

BTW When HWiNFO got stuck on my system it also reported CPU-15, but then I checked the .DBG file it was actually trying to update the ASUS WMI sensor information via WMI which would be evaluating the UPHM + UPEC ACPI methods. Note SIV does not use WMI, but rather cut's out the middle man and evaluates the ACPI methods itself. This means an overhead of 0ms per call rather than 3 ms when WMI is used so reduces the SIV startup time by at least 100ms and probably more.


----------



## Mumak

If the decision would be only on Elmor, then it would be implement long ago. It's often not easy to push changes in big companies, where a lot of other priorities and procedures are required.
Sensor monitoring is becoming complicated, several vendors add proprietary solutions, which are much more complex. Also interactions between multiple monitoring components and software tools make this even more complicated.
GIGABYTE for example has much more serious issues with their dual-LPC configuration, which can often cause a complete system crash when one attempts to read sensors..


----------



## lordzed83

@elmor well we or at least Me hopethat next bios we get hands on will have new microcode for testing 🙂


----------



## Johan45

Mumak said:


> If the decision would be only on Elmor, then it would be implement long ago. It's often not easy to push changes in big companies, where a lot of other priorities and procedures are required.
> Sensor monitoring is becoming complicated, several vendors add proprietary solutions, which are much more complex. Also interactions between multiple monitoring components and software tools make this even more complicated.
> GIGABYTE, for example, has much more serious issues with their dual-LPC configuration, which can often cause a complete system crash when one attempts to read sensors..


Thank you, finally a voice of reason. It's been well known for many years not to have too much software asking for info from the same chip even if it runs in the background like FM sysinfo. I keep things simple and never seem to run into these issues like some others do. Why would anyone have HWMonitor and AIDA open at the same time? They both do the same things for the most part. This isn't something new.


----------



## nick name

Can anyone help me get this figured out:

I first had the Asus Prime X470 and was able to get Cinebench stable @ 4.3GHz for 1 - 2 runs (1995 top score). And @ 4.275GHz I was able to do a lot more runs (1987 top score). This was with the same memory kit I am currently running but it was @ 3466MHz on the Prime board. 

I wanted the Crosshair VII for the better everything that it has and now that I am on it I am very pleased. I can run my memory kit @ 3600MHz stable now and I love running the XFR PBO daily. However, that 1995 Cinebench score has me itching to hit 2000 but I can't get my new Crosshair VII board stable enough @ 4.275GHz let alone 4.3GHz to run Cinebench. 

Is it the 3600MHz RAM speed that keeps me from getting it up to 4.275GHz? Am I missing some setting that wasn't present in the Asus Prime BIOS that exists in the Crosshair VII BIOS? I just installed the 804 BIOS, but all of my attempts were on the last 702 build. 

Thank you.


----------



## hurricane28

Johan45 said:


> Thank you, finally a voice of reason. It's been well known for many years not to have too much software asking for info from the same chip even if it runs in the background like FM sysinfo. I keep things simple and never seem to run into these issues like some others do. Why would anyone have HWMonitor and AIDA open at the same time? They both do the same things for the most part. This isn't something new.


Yeah, that is not what my problem was mate. It didn't matter what software i use, the fans and sensors went nuts as soon as i opened hardwareinfo64, Aida64 etc. never with CPU-Z though. It happened with or without more than one monitoring software open and running. It even happens on Asus Alsuite software, their own software... which than is harder to uninstall than malware which is the main reason i won't install it anymore..


----------



## Johan45

hurricane28 said:


> Yeah, that is not what my problem was mate. It didn't matter what software i use, the fans and sensors went nuts as soon as i opened hardwareinfo64, Aida64 etc. never with CPU-Z though. It happened with or without more than one monitoring software open and running. It even happens on Asus Alsuite software, their own software... which than is harder to uninstall than malware which is the main reason i won't install it anymore..


Maybe it's something in the background processes. I have had both the CHVI which I still use for my HTPC updated with an R5 2600 and the CHVII which I'm still using for testing/benching and I can say I have never once encountered this issue. Not saying you're imagining it but it seems to be something that follows you around as you said even from the Sabertooth days.


----------



## gupsterg

I had had a few PMs on installing W7 on C7H, I had been pointing to a video I had in the Ryzen Essentials thread. I have done a section within the C7H thread on ROG forum.

When installing W7, it takes a moment for mouse pointer/keyboard to gain functionality. I used the port by the USB flashback port for Logitech wireless mouse/keyboard receiver. I had no issues uses the top/middle row of USB ports for USB stick with W7 on, did not have time to test others. I only have to add a video on manual install of the RTL8822BE drivers after OS installed (they are integrated to ISO).

For some odd reason the AMD PSP 3.0 Device has a code 37. These are not integrated into ISO, but after OS installed I manually installed using the AMD Chipset drivers. Perhaps once I do an update to W7 SP1 it will resolve itself.

Open to feedback to improve the process if anyone has info to share  .

Also :cheers: to Martin and Ray for their endeavours with ASUS and their apps.



Johan45 said:


> Thank you, finally a voice of reason. It's been well known for many years not to have too much software asking for info from the same chip even if it runs in the background like FM sysinfo. I keep things simple and never seem to run into these issues like some others do. Why would anyone have HWMonitor and AIDA open at the same time? They both do the same things for the most part. This isn't something new.


I agree Johan45  , but there can be instances where it becomes unavoidable to have multiple apps or instances of same accessing Super IO chip. Example when I take a screenie of a run of setup for stability testing, I may have HWINFO open and want CPU-Z tabs for say what mobo/UEFI version, RAM kit, etc.

Like you I really can't say the C6H was a PITA for PWM after Martin updated HWINFO. The ZE only 3-4 times in what 10mths I had PWM issues and couple of those times I forced the issue by purposefully running multiple monitoring tools/instances. The C7H so far not been any issues for me. Just like you, aim to keep OS as clean as I can.



nick name said:


> Can anyone help me get this figured out:
> 
> I first had the Asus Prime X470 and was able to get Cinebench stable @ 4.3GHz for 1 - 2 runs (1995 top score). And @ 4.275GHz I was able to do a lot more runs (1987 top score). This was with the same memory kit I am currently running but it was @ 3466MHz on the Prime board.
> 
> I wanted the Crosshair VII for the better everything that it has and now that I am on it I am very pleased. I can run my memory kit @ 3600MHz stable now and I love running the XFR PBO daily. However, that 1995 Cinebench score has me itching to hit 2000 but I can't get my new Crosshair VII board stable enough @ 4.275GHz let alone 4.3GHz to run Cinebench.
> 
> Is it the 3600MHz RAM speed that keeps me from getting it up to 4.275GHz? Am I missing some setting that wasn't present in the Asus Prime BIOS that exists in the Crosshair VII BIOS? I just installed the 804 BIOS, but all of my attempts were on the last 702 build.
> 
> Thank you.


It could well be the higher RAM clock is needing you to change another aspect to attain as high a CPU clock. As to which no idea.

The other thing is sometimes the combined HW just works better than another setup. For example the 2700X+C7H I have seems to luv the GTZ RAM kit I have, more so than the GVK and GTZSW I have. Even though essentially all the dimms are single rank/sided 8GB Samsung B die.

Keep at it, I'd think you'll crack it :thumb:.


----------



## hurricane28

Johan45 said:


> Maybe it's something in the background processes. I have had both the CHVI which I still use for my HTPC updated with an R5 2600 and the CHVII which I'm still using for testing/benching and I can say I have never once encountered this issue. Not saying you're imagining it but it seems to be something that follows you around as you said even from the Sabertooth days.


That would be highly unlikely because this is an complete new system including SSD and Windows.. Like i said before and i say it again. Its not me or something's fault other than that IT sensor or Asus implementation of it.. As simple as that man.. Nothing else to it really. I did some reading on the ROG forum and there were more guys with the same problem as me even with the 990FX Sabertooth.. 

I discussed this with Elmor and The Stilt and they helped me and spend serious time in to this matter but it seems that no one knows what is happening when this happens. I checked EVERY back ground process in Windows and non of it can control the fans. 

I have 3 possibility's: 

1: Its a faulty board, (unlikely but it can happen) 

2: Its the IT sensor

3: Its the implementation of Asus of this sensor which is causing problems when reading from it. 


Those are the only ones that i can think of and i really suspect last two to be honest or an combination of the two.


----------



## nick name

gupsterg said:


> I had had a few PMs on installing W7 on C7H, I had been pointing to a video I had in the Ryzen Essentials thread. I have done a section within the C7H thread on ROG forum.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It could well be the higher RAM clock is needing you to change another aspect to attain as high a CPU clock. As to which no idea.
> 
> The other thing is sometimes the combined HW just works better than another setup. For example the 2700X+C7H I have seems to luv the GTZ RAM kit I have, more so than the GVK and GTZSW I have. Even though essentially all the dimms are single rank/sided 8GB Samsung B die.
> 
> Keep at it, I'd think you'll crack it :thumb:.


I appreciate the encouragement, but I've failed at lower RAM speeds also. 2133MHz lower. I am beginning to wonder if there has been some degradation during the brief time I've had my CPU. I never ran an OC daily -- only to benchmark, but it takes more voltage to run my RAM at higher speeds than Ryzen DRAM Calculator prescribes for my Samsung b-die kit (TridentZ 3600 15-15-15-35 kit)

But then I question that because sometimes the Level 4 enhancement will run my CPU at 4.3GHz and I can't even manually overclock to 4.275GHz. I am running Level 3 daily, but I am trying anything I can think of to get myself that 2000 Cinebench score. I was sooooo damn close with the Asus Prime and was certain I was gonna get it with the Crosshair VII. And now I can't.


----------



## gupsterg

@nick name

Perhaps there is some degradation or another factor? dunno  .

I recently posted how my CPU seems to be needing more SOC for same CPU/RAM MHz as profiled few months back. I think somewhat the situation was created by myself.

I had been running a SSD with W7/Linux Mint between both the C6H/C7H. It had seen many a BSOD from my meddling  . I had ran system file checker, but not encountered "repairs". I did a fresh W7 install last night. I seem to be back at 4.1GHz 3466MHz The Stilt at only +6mV on VCORE & SOC as originally profiled on all same HW. Even though this is UEFI 0804, UEFI 0601 used for original profile determination; also room ambient is well above original profile determination.









Perhaps room ambient has changed? so far the 2700X+C7H hasn't shown signs of not supporting 3466MHz even in higher room ambient. When a heatwave occurred in the UK last year, I did experience on Ryzen gen 1+C6H, the need to lower RAM MHz as it destabilised with increased ambient temp. 

Besides ASUS WMI implementation in UEFI 0702 & 0804, UEFI 0702 updated ASUS EC FW as well (ie the Super IO Chip ITE8655E). I don't recall if any other changes occurred. Be aware some of the UEFIs can contain also CPU IMC firmware updates, besides CPU mircocode, CPU SMU, etc. Again unsure/don't recall if any of the C7H UEFIs have had a change on this aspect.

LLC at [Auto] (ie AMD stock setup) is loose, perhaps you had some change like that applied to setup on other board?


----------



## nick name

I actually did a fresh install after I installed the Crosshair. I initially didn't because the other board was also X470, but did so because the Crosshair makes the CPU take a little longer to settle in after a boot. And by that I mean it shows all core at the same speed for a bout a minute before the minimum speed drop and the max increases. I didn't realize that at first so I went and re-did my Windows install and all drivers. The I remembered someone from AMD saying it would take about a minute for the CPU to sort out its frequencies -- it just wasn't anything I ever saw on the Prime board. Another thing that is weird is that in Windows Power Options Advanced Settings it doesn't have core parking min cores anymore as it did on the Prime board. 

There is just so much more in the Crosshair UEFI that wasn't in the Prime UEFI that are set to Auto that I am not sure if there is something I need to change to make the Crosshair board behave as the Prime board did. 

I did get 42.75 working again today, but failed at 43. I just want to hit that 2000 Cinebench score and I am in second place when you search Fire Strike scores running a 2700X and 1070 ti. So close to first.

https://www.3dmark.com/search#/?mod...gpuName=NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti&gpuCount=1


----------



## MrPhilo

Hi all

What is the main problem with the Crosshair VII atm?

I have ordered one to replace my x370 Prime Pro (again, my last VII 1 month ago was faulty) and hoping I can finally start seeing a better ram OC finally and tinker around with my 2700x

Only thing I can see that it has sensor issue, is that the only problem atm? My bad for asking, but I have gone back through 20+ pages and read around but it seem to be around the sensor on the board with HWINFO, Corsair Link etc


----------



## gupsterg

Fellow C7H/W7 users  , I updated the ROG forum C7H thread, regarding W7 ISO creation.

The reason original process of driver integration was taking 2 times to install files from USB31_PT, was as I'd left the folder in drivers packs for W7 32bit :doh:. So the shared drivers pack has also been revised/uploaded.

As suspected before, AMD PSP 3.0 Device requires W7 x64 SP1 to have some updates for it not to go code 37. ISO process integrates KB3177467 (Servicing stack update for Windows 7 SP1 and Windows Server 2008 R2 SP1: September 20, 2016) and KB3125574 (Convenience rollup update for Windows 7 SP1 and Windows Server 2008 R2 SP1). This also results in less updates to OS after install.

The YT video for process to make W7 x64 SP1 ISO for usage on C7H has also been updated and shows manual install of drivers for RTL8822BE after OS install. Again you don't need drivers as they were integrated to OS, still not fathomed why OS just does not pick them up correctly :headscrat.



nick name said:


> I actually did a fresh install after I installed the Crosshair. I initially didn't because the other board was also X470, but did so because the Crosshair makes the CPU take a little longer to settle in after a boot. And by that I mean it shows all core at the same speed for a bout a minute before the minimum speed drop and the max increases. I didn't realize that at first so I went and re-did my Windows install and all drivers. The I remembered someone from AMD saying it would take about a minute for the CPU to sort out its frequencies -- it just wasn't anything I ever saw on the Prime board. Another thing that is weird is that in Windows Power Options Advanced Settings it doesn't have core parking min cores anymore as it did on the Prime board.
> 
> There is just so much more in the Crosshair UEFI that wasn't in the Prime UEFI that are set to Auto that I am not sure if there is something I need to change to make the Crosshair board behave as the Prime board did.
> 
> I did get 42.75 working again today, but failed at 43. I just want to hit that 2000 Cinebench score and I am in second place when you search Fire Strike scores running a 2700X and 1070 ti. So close to first.
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/search#/?mod...gpuName=NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti&gpuCount=1


For me also Ryzen gen 1 & 2, Threadripper / C6H & C7H, ZE, takes ~90sec for CPU to go to idle voltages/frequencies after OS loads.

Reg edits to have core parking in power plan are in the Ryzen thread linked in my signature. Will be adding that info to ROG forum thread later today.

Nice results  , I hope you get what you after soon  .



MrPhilo said:


> Hi all
> 
> What is the main problem with the Crosshair VII atm?
> 
> I have ordered one to replace my x370 Prime Pro (again, my last VII 1 month ago was faulty) and hoping I can finally start seeing a better ram OC finally and tinker around with my 2700x
> 
> Only thing I can see that it has sensor issue, is that the only problem atm? My bad for asking, but I have gone back through 20+ pages and read around but it seem to be around the sensor on the board with HWINFO, Corsair Link etc


In my eyes/experience none.

If you happen to get an early batch of C7H, monitoring shows motherboard chipset as getting ~+50mV more than it really gets. I used my board from beginning of May til beginning of July, then tested 2700X with C6H and am back on C7H. Over that period only yesterday near the end of a ~6hr P95 stress test did the fans PWM go nutty. This was UEFI 0804, with the new WMI feature which has some teething issues and should be resolved in next release. I'm sticking to UEFI 0804 regardless for the time being. As I want to know how often/bad could this issue be exhibited on my HW. UEFI 0702 also has the WMI implementation, I used that UEFI little, as it just came out around when I switched to C6H. UEFI 0601 never exhibited PWM issues TBH, doesn't have the WMI implementation though.


----------



## owikh84

2700X C7H-WIFI user here. After a few trials, I can confirm that the motherboard has issue when CPU-Z and HWiNFO64 are running at the same time. I've been experiencing lots of random shutdown & system freeze (without any BSOD) even when stressing at stock clock (everything defaults in the UEFI) with Prime95 v29.4. BIOSes tested are 0601, 0702, and 0804.

This issue didn't occur when I run just the CPU-Z or the HWiNFO alone.


----------



## Mumak

owikh84 said:


> 2700X C7H-WIFI user here. After a few trials, I can confirm that the motherboard has issue when CPU-Z and HWiNFO64 are running at the same time. I've been experiencing lots of random shutdown & system freeze (without any BSOD) even when stressing at stock clock (everything defaults in the UEFI) with Prime95 v29.4. BIOSes tested are 0601, 0702, and 0804.
> 
> This issue didn't occur when I run just the CPU-Z or the HWiNFO alone.


Are you running the latest versions of CPU-Z and HWiNFO? This should be resolved there.


----------



## owikh84

Mumak said:


> Are you running the latest versions of CPU-Z and HWiNFO? This should be resolved there.


Yes, latest HWiNFO64 v5.86-3480 and CPU-Z ROG v1.85.


----------



## red-ray

*I suspect you need HWiNFO64 v5.87-3490 or later*



owikh84 said:


> Yes, latest HWiNFO64 v5.86-3480 and CPU-Z ROG v1.85.


HWiNFO64 v5.86-3480 uses ASUS WMI and fails to use the locks which caused issues when I tested with the 0804 BIOS, but seemed OK with the 0702 BIOS.

I found HWiNFO64 v5.87-3490 OK with the 0804 BIOS, but it uses direct SIO + EC access rather than ASUS WMI.


----------



## marsel

VPII said:


> I've done some testing to find a 24/7 overclock and at first I was using 42.25 x 100 which was lying around 4216mhz. I decided to up the multi little by little and I was able to run Aida64 stress test 15 minutes at 42.75 x 100 which is basically 4266mhz. All of this was with the vcore set to 1.268v in the bios using llc 5 as I really do not like the vdroops without using it. Interestingly I found that running prime95 small fft will raise the cpu temps to 78.3c where as Aida64 stress test will take it all the way to 83.8c. This perfectly lines up with what I was told..... if you want to really see the highest temps you run Aida64 Stress test. Right now, just because Prime95 hang around 10 minutes into the test with the same settings I decided to drop down to 42.5 x 100 which is still pretty decent considering the vcore. Looking at the vcore in cpuz compared to what is shown in Hwinfo I do believe Hwinfo to be a little more accurate.


hey. I have a question about that llc. My 2700x can run 4,2ghz @ 1.350v with auto llc. it can also run 4,2ghz @ 1.300v with llc5. is there an "issue" using llc5 with low voltage like this ? or is there a voltage cap like ~1,4xxv, where u should better go with the auto setting instead of manual ?


----------



## owikh84

red-ray said:


> HWiNFO64 v5.86-3480 uses ASUS WMI and fails to use the locks which caused issues when I tested with the 0804 BIOS, but seemed OK with the 0702 BIOS.
> 
> I found HWiNFO64 v5.87-3490 OK with the 0804 BIOS, but it uses direct SIO + EC access rather than ASUS WMI.


Nice info TQVM! Later I will give HWiNFO64 v5.87-3490 a try together with the CPU-Z v1.85 and BIOS 0804.
Anything I will report here.


----------



## VPII

marsel said:


> hey. I have a question about that llc. My 2700x can run 4,2ghz @ 1.350v with auto llc. it can also run 4,2ghz @ 1.300v with llc5. is there an "issue" using llc5 with low voltage like this ? or is there a voltage cap like ~1,4xxv, where u should better go with the auto setting instead of manual ?


Hi Marsel, in all honesty I've stopped using LLC altogether. I've tested LLC2, 3, 4 and 5 to compair with AUTO and I found that when using LLC2 there is a 0.075 vdrop, LLC3, 0.05 vdrop and LLC4 0.025 vdrop, all using a multi meter on the probelt. The figures given may vary a little but more or less. With LLC5 there was almost no drop which was the same as using AUTO. From what I was told in the forum, the problem with using LLC is that there is some voltage spikes to compensate for the drop which you cannot see with a multimeter only with something like an oscilloscope.

But I must say that when I do extreme overclocking with LN2 I do use LLC5 to try and force a constant voltage.


----------



## oreonutz

*C7H Sudden Shutdowns (My Method of Fixing)*



Shiftstealth said:


> I uninstalled windows updates, and enabled HPET in windows. Was stable for 17 hours in Real Bench. I have since rebooted it to try precision boost overdrive again. While testing PB2-OD i received a normal lockup. I'm at work right now so i haven't tested any further.
> 
> Before removing windows updates, and enabling HPET i was crashing like every 3 hours.


Hey ****ftstealth. I am just now reading through this forum, and am only a about 12 Pages in, and want to know if you ever found the solution to this problem.

I just bought my Own Crosshair VII hero and ran into the same exact problem, and from all my testing I was able to fix it and recreate it, it seems to be a bug with ALL of C7H's BIOS that I have used (Except I haven't tested 0804 so Can't speak to that one) when using HWinfo and CPU-z and Possibly AIDA64 (Although I don't need Aida to do it every time, I do need CPUZ and HWINFO running to Recreate the Bug Every time) then sure enough, within 5 to 7 Minutes of that combo running, My PC will just Hard Shut Down, even at Idle.

To Fix it, and I know this is weird, but it works. Pull power from Power supply, or just turn off the power at the Power Supply, open up your case and pull your BIOS battery out of the MOBO, Hold Down the Power Button for about 60 seconds to drain all power from the CAPS. Then put the Battery Back and plug up your PC, but don't turn it on. Next put any one of the BIOS you want to use on the root of the Flash Drive, obviously name it c7h.cap and use the BIOS Flashback button to flash the BIOS. Then Boot up and use your PC, and because you kind of Need HWinfo to reliably Monitor, STAY AWAY from CPUz until this bug is fixed. I was reading that the new Beta Version of HWinfo fixes this issue because it stops reading WMI from what it calls "ASUS' Flawed Implementation" but that Beta Version then cuts out a LOT of useful sensors, so I am just refraining from Using CPUz, and the Problem has not happened once since. I am sure by now you have probably fixed this, but just in case you haven't, I know someone else said they threw out their old board because of this, so I just wanted to share what has definitely worked for me with you guys.

Coincedently I had a problem with my C6H that I could only fix this way as well, which is how I knew to try it. It also was caused by HWinfo and CPU-z running at the same time, but it wasn't as scary on that board, it would just mess up the ITE Chip, causing my fan Profile to suddenly get locked at a random speed, which was annoying, and the only way to fix it was use this exact method and stay away from using HWinfo and CPUz on the same boot. Anyways, I hope this helps.


----------



## Mumak

oreonutz said:


> Hey ****ftstealth. I am just now reading through this forum, and am only a about 12 Pages in, and want to know if you ever found the solution to this problem.
> 
> I just bought my Own Crosshair VII hero and ran into the same exact problem, and from all my testing I was able to fix it and recreate it, it seems to be a bug with ALL of C7H's BIOS that I have used (Except I haven't tested 0804 so Can't speak to that one) when using HWinfo and CPU-z and Possibly AIDA64 (Although I don't need Aida to do it every time, I do need CPUZ and HWINFO running to Recreate the Bug Every time) then sure enough, within 5 to 7 Minutes of that combo running, My PC will just Hard Shut Down, even at Idle.
> 
> To Fix it, and I know this is weird, but it works. Pull power from Power supply, or just turn off the power at the Power Supply, open up your case and pull your BIOS battery out of the MOBO, Hold Down the Power Button for about 60 seconds to drain all power from the CAPS. Then put the Battery Back and plug up your PC, but don't turn it on. Next put any one of the BIOS you want to use on the root of the Flash Drive, obviously name it c7h.cap and use the BIOS Flashback button to flash the BIOS. Then Boot up and use your PC, and because you kind of Need HWinfo to reliably Monitor, STAY AWAY from CPUz until this bug is fixed. I was reading that the new Beta Version of HWinfo fixes this issue because it stops reading WMI from what it calls "ASUS' Flawed Implementation" but that Beta Version then cuts out a LOT of useful sensors, so I am just refraining from Using CPUz, and the Problem has not happened once since. I am sure by now you have probably fixed this, but just in case you haven't, I know someone else said they threw out their old board because of this, so I just wanted to share what has definitely worked for me with you guys.
> 
> Coincedently I had a problem with my C6H that I could only fix this way as well, which is how I knew to try it. It also was caused by HWinfo and CPU-z running at the same time, but it wasn't as scary on that board, it would just mess up the ITE Chip, causing my fan Profile to suddenly get locked at a random speed, which was annoying, and the only way to fix it was use this exact method and stay away from using HWinfo and CPUz on the same boot. Anyways, I hope this helps.


HWiNFO v5.87-3490 Beta should not cut any sensors, they will just appear different (as before using WMI) because WMI access has been temporarily disabled. If you don't see some sensors check if they are perhaps hidden.


----------



## oreonutz

Mumak said:


> HWiNFO v5.87-3490 Beta should not cut any sensors, they will just appear different (as before using WMI) because WMI access has been temporarily disabled. If you don't see some sensors check if they are perhaps hidden.


I do completely customize HWinfo, which often leads to missing sensors on updates, and every time that happens I have to reset my custom order to get them back. I didn't try that this time, so that could perhaps fix the issue. I am still running BIOS 0702 which seems to work just fine with HWinfo64 v5.86-3480 as long as I don't load CPU-z which I am fine with, so I will just keep it here for now.

I am sure if I reset back to the default order all the sensors would pop up again though, I appreciate your help.


----------



## Terror-Byter

*Grrr...*

That momment when you just wanna headbutt the wall...


Im not an overclocker, and ive had this setup for just over a month now, and been trying to get some good memory speeds with low latency on this board ever since I got it. Ive read about a bazillion posts and threads



This is the first time ive been able to get anything over 3000 mhz at cl14, and just when im trying to take a screenshot, I get that stupid little error come up... back to the drawing board.


----------



## owikh84

red-ray said:


> HWiNFO64 v5.86-3480 uses ASUS WMI and fails to use the locks which caused issues when I tested with the 0804 BIOS, but seemed OK with the 0702 BIOS.
> 
> I found HWiNFO64 v5.87-3490 OK with the 0804 BIOS, but it uses direct SIO + EC access rather than ASUS WMI.





owikh84 said:


> Nice info TQVM! Later I will give HWiNFO64 v5.87-3490 a try together with the CPU-Z v1.85 and BIOS 0804.
> Anything I will report here.


Update: Yeah, HWiNFO64 v5.87-3490 has no problem running together with CPU-Z v1.85. Usually I will get auto-shutdown or system freeze in 5 minutes but now seems to be stable.


----------



## oreonutz

Mumak said:


> HWiNFO v5.87-3490 Beta should not cut any sensors, they will just appear different (as before using WMI) because WMI access has been temporarily disabled. If you don't see some sensors check if they are perhaps hidden.


So you were right, I decided to go ahead and update to 0804 and run v5.87-3490, I went ahead and just reset all my customizations in HWinfo and all the sensors showed up no problem, and it definitely seems to be causing less conflicts (if my Event Log is any indication.) Great Update, I don't know what I would do without your product, so I really appreciate your work.

On a side note, as anyone else experienced an issue with the newest BIOS where after a Cold Boot, with no settings changed in the UEFI, sometimes the PBO is higher on the ALL Core, and some Cold Boots its about 50 MHz lower? For Instance, my Normal PBO that I have dialed in, I get 4250Mhz all core when running loads like Blender or Handbrake, but ever since I updated the BIOS and redialed in my settings, after a Cold Boot it will bring me down to 4200Mhz on all cores during those loads, and I have to reboot 2 or 3 times before it goes back up. Just wondering if anyone else has experienced this? At first I thought it might have been the difference in Temperature, less head room equals less boost, until I looked at my logged sensors and realized that when it boots to the higher all core boost the Temperature is sometimes higher then when it boots with the lower all core. Seems completely random to me...


----------



## Velheibgnar

Hello guys. 

I feel ******ed and need some help. Cannot get any OC on my setup. Speaking about memory that is.
My default/stock is stable but trying to OC memory is unstable beyond 2400Mhz.... I'm already afraid of RMA ;/. 
Predefined configs for my RAM are not working at all.
Please see my stuff in the screens.

































cpu: 2700x psu: seasonic prime 750w

Link to attempt for stilt's 3200 safe. Other profiles won't boot (after short boot loop with f9 code)




It loaded all the CLs but didn't load frequency at all, see here:
https://i.imgur.com/PqtByaL.png
After 2 minutes, my pc lost all power and shutdown.

Any ideas how to go anywhere with this? Or how to diagnose if my stuff is broken?

Another vid from docp standard 1,35 or 1,4v both same fail needed to go default:


----------



## Syldon

2666mhz is the default set up for when your memory fails to train with 2 dims inserted. So the training has failed at the timing loaded and has resorted to base defaults. 

First point is the Dram is located in the wrong slots. It should be in slots A2 and B2.


Next grab a copy of stilts Ryzen timing checker AKA RTC. It is a much better way of showing what settings you are using. A screen drop from System information viewer or HWinfo would go a long way also. The more info you can provide the better.

1smus did a good job with the DRAM calculator. He has some videos in his thread that tells you how to use it. It doesnt work for every one, but it is a great starting point.


*Edited for formatting*


----------



## Velheibgnar

Thanks Syldon. 
I'll try to put what I can from the calculator for 2666. I've relocated to a2 b2... I thought this was no longer a case in 2018 but I'm lucky I was wrong... Gonna check it now.
Will attach screens soon

Edit: man! something worked! This calculator is godlike.









Ok so now. Question:
1. In the calculator tRFC was 255.9 , I 've put 256 since 255.9 would give me 60 oddly. Same for tRFC 2 instead of 190.1 I've put 191. Is this ok??
2. What program should I use to test stability of this now?
3. If I'm missing (alt) values in bios I need to find them and type in or are they not necessary?


----------



## Syldon

Velheibgnar said:


> Ok so now. Question:
> 1. In the calculator tRFC was 255.9 , I 've put 256 since 255.9 would give me 60 oddly. Same for tRFC 2 instead of 190.1 I've put 191. Is this ok??
> 2. What program should I use to test stability of this now?
> 3. If I'm missing (alt) values in bios I need to find them and type in or are they not necessary?


1. I remember somewhere that the stilt stated that you do not have to set TRFC2 and TRFC4 for Ryzen since it works with auto. I still set mine manually but apparently you dont have to. The maths to set it manually is TRFC/1.3*46* = TRFC2 and TRFC2/1.625 = TRFC4.

2. I use HCImemtest. You one instance for each thread and use between 90-95% of your total memory. If you have 16gb memory then setting each instance to 850 is the right amount. Most here are using prime 95, along with cinebench as a meter and extra test.


3. 1smus dram calculator should fill you in with what you need.


----------



## Lupo91

Any news of Agesa 1.0.0.4??


----------



## Conenubi701

Lupo91 said:


> Any news of Agesa 1.0.0.4??


Still waiting. Elmor said earlier in the thread that they're working on implementing it together with some fixes for the next BIOS update


----------



## Shiftstealth

oreonutz said:


> Hey ****ftstealth. I am just now reading through this forum, and am only a about 12 Pages in, and want to know if you ever found the solution to this problem.
> 
> I just bought my Own Crosshair VII hero and ran into the same exact problem, and from all my testing I was able to fix it and recreate it, it seems to be a bug with ALL of C7H's BIOS that I have used (Except I haven't tested 0804 so Can't speak to that one) when using HWinfo and CPU-z and Possibly AIDA64 (Although I don't need Aida to do it every time, I do need CPUZ and HWINFO running to Recreate the Bug Every time) then sure enough, within 5 to 7 Minutes of that combo running, My PC will just Hard Shut Down, even at Idle.
> 
> To Fix it, and I know this is weird, but it works. Pull power from Power supply, or just turn off the power at the Power Supply, open up your case and pull your BIOS battery out of the MOBO, Hold Down the Power Button for about 60 seconds to drain all power from the CAPS. Then put the Battery Back and plug up your PC, but don't turn it on. Next put any one of the BIOS you want to use on the root of the Flash Drive, obviously name it c7h.cap and use the BIOS Flashback button to flash the BIOS. Then Boot up and use your PC, and because you kind of Need HWinfo to reliably Monitor, STAY AWAY from CPUz until this bug is fixed. I was reading that the new Beta Version of HWinfo fixes this issue because it stops reading WMI from what it calls "ASUS' Flawed Implementation" but that Beta Version then cuts out a LOT of useful sensors, so I am just refraining from Using CPUz, and the Problem has not happened once since. I am sure by now you have probably fixed this, but just in case you haven't, I know someone else said they threw out their old board because of this, so I just wanted to share what has definitely worked for me with you guys.
> 
> Coincedently I had a problem with my C6H that I could only fix this way as well, which is how I knew to try it. It also was caused by HWinfo and CPU-z running at the same time, but it wasn't as scary on that board, it would just mess up the ITE Chip, causing my fan Profile to suddenly get locked at a random speed, which was annoying, and the only way to fix it was use this exact method and stay away from using HWinfo and CPUz on the same boot. Anyways, I hope this helps.



First off, thanks for reaching out. Second, i wonder if @elmor can confirm why this fixes the issue. Seems like a strange fix, that in my mind shouldn't fix it. However at the same time i don't know exactly what is broken, and causing the reboots.


----------



## crakej

Syldon said:


> I remember somewhere that the stilt stated that you do not have to set TRFC2 and TRFC4 for Ryzen since it works with auto. I still set mine manually but apparently you dont have to. The maths to set it manually is TRFC/1.325 = TRFC2 and TRFC2/1.625 = TRFC4.


Not quite right! Ex tRFC2 = tRFC/1.*346*, and tRFC4 = tRFC2/1.625 

tRFC is an INTEGER value, so just don't enter anything after decimal point.

We've previously been advised to enter tRFC2 and 4, but now to leave them - not quite sure why, but guess there is a reason. They don't seem to compute _correctly _automatically for me, but not sure if it matters.


----------



## Syldon

crakej said:


> Not quite right! Ex tRFC2 = tRFC/1.*346*, and tRFC4 = tRFC2/1.625


my mistake. I corrected it.


----------



## VPII

I'm finally able to get 3400 going using the Stilt's 3200 safe preset. This is now with my set of 2 x 8gb Galax Hof DDR4 4000 memory. This memory also work with the Stilt 3600 preset, but that is with 2T command rate. I'm still playing around with the memory to see if I can push it a little higher.


----------



## zulex

AGESA 1004.. When? Slowest update from MB vender ASUS...


----------



## oreonutz

Shiftstealth said:


> First off, thanks for reaching out. Second, i wonder if @elmor can confirm why this fixes the issue. Seems like a strange fix, that in my mind shouldn't fix it. However at the same time i don't know exactly what is broken, and causing the reboots.


I was incredibly skeptical the first time I read the fix as well, as it also didn't make sense to me, that if the BIOS was in fact the problem, then why the hell doesn't just using the BIOS Clear Button fix the issue, or just flashing the BIOS with BIOS flashback for that matter, why the hell would you have to do the extra steps of Pulling out the damn Watercooled Graphics Card (Because of where they put the damn BIOS Battery) and then let all the power drain from the board?

I still don't know that anyone every fully satisfied my curiosity. But I remember the best explanation I read said something about the UEFI Chip becoming corrupt due to the way HWinfo and CPU-z both try to pull sensor data from it at the same time, apparently only one Sensor Monitoring program should be used at the same time, and having both, really low level sensor monitoring programs, accessing the BIOS directly for the sensor data, can cause some data corruption in the BIOS Chip Itself, which then manifests in these weird glitches that we are experiencing (IE. The Computer Randomly Shutting Down, Or In my case with the C6H, the Fan Controller Locking Up). So then the only solution is to completely clear that corrupt data from the BIOS, and because of the way BIOS Flashing works, it never fully clears the area of the chip where the corrupt Data sits, so the problem still continues even when flashing a new BIOS. The only way to flush that data is to completely remove Power to that UEFI Chip, which means Physically pulling that battery, and then allowing the time for the caps to drain. Apparently from what I read, allowing the power to drain from the caps could take 10 Minutes to even a few hours in some cases, and thats why People recommend Holding in the Power Button, that somehow Helps the Caps drain faster. Now I am far from an Electrical Engineer, so I have NO IDEA of any of those theories hold any real true Merit, but it was enough of an explanation for me to give it a shot, and when I did those exact steps, it fixed the Problem every time, and is repeatable, even on the C7H, so whether or not the explanation is 100 Percent accurate, I have no idea, but I can personally stand by this method as working on 2 Different ASUS boards now, so whatever the explanation, it definitely seems to work.

I too would love the actual technical explanation as to why this works from Elmor or the Stilt though. 

Have a good one everyone!


----------



## JayC72

New DRAM Calculator v1.3.1 is out.
https://www.overclock.net/forum/13-...lator-1-1-0-beta-2-overclocking-dram-am4.html


----------



## mmurphyj11

Has anything been figured out about the long POST times? I've never had a premium board like this, is it just how it is? Booting is no time at all but I have a 20-25 second POST consistently. Thanks!


----------



## Jaju123

My PC is 100% stable using RAM test to like 10,000% and prime95 for hours at 3466 FAST memory preset, however I'm getting random hard shutdowns when gaming. I then have to completely turn off the PSU to be able to reboot. Does anyone have any idea what it might be?


----------



## Syldon

mmurphyj11 said:


> Has anything been figured out about the long POST times? I've never had a premium board like this, is it just how it is? Booting is no time at all but I have a 20-25 second POST consistently. Thanks!


It came as a free feature. If yours is only taking 20-25 seconds then you are at the top of the pecking order, some are waiting up to a minute for first boot. The time is being used for memory training. Depending on how you are set up, it dependant on how long it takes to accept your settings.




Jaju123 said:


> My PC is 100% stable using RAM test to like 10,000% and prime95 for hours at 3466 FAST memory preset, however I'm getting random hard shutdowns when gaming. I then have to completely turn off the PSU to be able to reboot. Does anyone have any idea what it might be?


There is an issue with diagnostic software trying to read from a sensor which causes the system to crash. I think SIV and HWinfo authors have altered their respective software to not read this WMI sensor. SIV and HWinfo are the only two that I know of that have altered their software to cater for this issue. SO if you have a diagnostic programme running and it isn't the latest version of these two, then this is most likely to be your issue.


----------



## red-ray

*A lot depends on the BIOS and program versions*



Syldon said:


> There is an issue with diagnostic software trying to read from a sensor which causes the system to crash. I think SIV and HWinfo authors have altered their respective software to not read this WMI sensor. SIV and HWinfo are the only two that I know of that have altered their software to cater for this issue. SO if you have a diagnostic programme running and it isn't the latest version of these two, then this is most likely to be your issue.


I lot depends on the BIOS, with 0702 then all was OK, but with 0804 ASUS messed up and broke the BIOS ACPI locking. I found that if two programs try to call ASUS ACPI WMI at the same time then things go wonky unless all the programs use the locks. SIV has always used the locks, AIDA64 was changed to use them and HWiNFO stopped using ASUS ACPI WMI. The bottom line is if you use as below then all should be OK.

>= AIDA64 v4.97.4671 Beta which uses ASUS ACPI WMI and uses the locks. Earlier AIDA64 versions use ASUS ACPI WMI, but fail to use the locks so sooner of later you will get issues.
>= HWiNFO64 v5.87-3490 does not use ASUS ACPI WMI, but does use the locks so should be OK. Earlier HWiNFO64 use ASUS ACPI WMI, but fail to use the locks so sooner of later you will get issues.
>= SIV 5.32 Beta-17 uses ASUS ACPI WMI, but in terms of locking all SIV versions should be OK.

The ASUS software fails to use the locks, so if any ASUS software is active then issues are likely, see https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...-vii-overclocking-thread-70.html#post27546862

I just hope ASUS release a corrected BIOS soon as 0804 is just wrong. I have not seen any issues with the 0702 BIOS.


----------



## hurricane28

Yeah, they really should spend more on R&D man.. This problem should have been fixed 5 years a go.. this problem dates from the 990FX chipset era..


----------



## Jaju123

Syldon said:


> There is an issue with diagnostic software trying to read from a sensor which causes the system to crash. I think SIV and HWinfo authors have altered their respective software to not read this WMI sensor. SIV and HWinfo are the only two that I know of that have altered their software to cater for this issue. SO if you have a diagnostic programme running and it isn't the latest version of these two, then this is most likely to be your issue.


Great, thanks. Ill test this out.


----------



## untouchable247

Sorry for not being able to read all 284 pages and being a Ryzen noob, but...

Overclocking my 2700x on my Crosshair VII is pointless for gaming? It only causes a lot of heat and the CPU isn't really cool anyway. My NH-D15S handles it pretty well but after using 100% of all cores in stress tests it reaches temps close to 70°C quickly in the summer heat. And higher when manually overclocked.


My main concern is: How to I set it up perfectly for CS:GO? Basically what I need is a high clock on fewer cores. According to hwinfo the 2700x boosts up to 4.35 Ghz one core at a time but the cores switch. Sometimes it's core 0, sometimes core 7, sometimes core 3 and so on. Factory settings, only loaded my ram profile (3200 Mhz, Stilt's save profile, fast causes crashes and short blacksscreens ingame).

Should I change my power plan profile? When setting it to high performance the frequency stays the same on all cores all the time, even when it doesn't have anything to do. Close to 4.2 Ghz. Pointless, I guess? Using Ryzen balanced at the moment.


Kinda miss the good old Haswell times. Back then I knew what I was doing. Now I'm just trying things out and don't know what to expect in games. I only know how to overclock for benchmark results (1979 points in cinebench are no problem).


----------



## Whatisthisfor

untouchable247 said:


> Sorry for not being able to read all 284 pages and being a Ryzen noob, but...
> 
> Overclocking my 2700x on my Crosshair VII is pointless for gaming? It only causes a lot of heat and the CPU isn't really cool anyway. My NH-D15S handles it pretty well but after using 100% of all cores in stress tests it reaches temps close to 70°C quickly in the summer heat. And higher when manually overclocked.
> 
> 
> My main concern is: How to I set it up perfectly for CS:GO? Basically what I need is a high clock on fewer cores. According to hwinfo the 2700x boosts up to 4.35 Ghz one core at a time but the cores switch. Sometimes it's core 0, sometimes core 7, sometimes core 3 and so on. Factory settings, only loaded my ram profile (3200 Mhz, Stilt's save profile, fast causes crashes and short blacksscreens ingame).
> 
> Should I change my power plan profile? When setting it to high performance the frequency stays the same on all cores all the time, even when it doesn't have anything to do. Close to 4.2 Ghz. Pointless, I guess? Using Ryzen balanced at the moment.
> 
> 
> Kinda miss the good old Haswell times. Back then I knew what I was doing. Now I'm just trying things out and don't know what to expect in games. I only know how to overclock for benchmark results (1979 points in cinebench are no problem).


AMD already did a good job on this so i dont see the point for manually oclocking Ryzen too. I would try to undervolt it by, say, 0,1V at start and the real challenge is to get the memory stable at reasonable speeds. Unfortunately the memory controller is still subpar compairing with intel.


----------



## gupsterg

Cross posting this here, link.

2 reasons.

Once in the past someone was surprised at voltages, etc I was using for xyz MHz, as another was in another thread I did a video and linking here also.

Secondly I still can't resolve 3533MHz  , so looking for insights.

UEFI is 0804. OS is very clean W7, bare min of apps, etc. Still the same 2700X as I had before. Even after months it's holding PState 0 as 4.1GHz @ 1.318V on LLC [Auto]. So I believe a bump to 1.325V is sufficient.

CPU also is very nice IMO for SOC. I have had passes of HCI even at 0.987V when using 3533MHz. Increases of SOC so far do not help solve post to post variation of training. Even with what I believe is post training variation I do not have Q-Code: F9 , etc. 

If I swap the dimms between slots (ie A2 is moved to B2 and B2 to A2) characteristics somewhat change. For example using ProcODT of 48 for 3466MHz can have post issues (ie Q-Code: F9), but when reswapped 48 is fine to use. Regardless of which dimm is in which "primary" slot 3533MHz has post to post variation. Using higher than 1.375V VDIMM leads to more errors. I do not believe this is the RAM crapping out. This RAM I have used on C6H/ZE with Ryzen/Threadripper gen 1 and it can operate at higher VDIMM at 3466MHz - 3520MHz tested. So I think the IMC is not VDIMM friendly.

I have tried various ProcODT settings, 53 seems the best when targeting 3533MHz. The CPU is very sensitive to CAD BUS changes IMO vs experience on Ryzen/Threadripper gen 1. Setting 30 for all or some can causes issues depending on other settings. So TBH I've come to the conclusion 24 or some at 20 is best. I've also played with CAD Bus timings, for example lower than 24h = no post regardless of other settings, higher timings for CAD seem better, even if go to 3Fh still an issue.

RTTwr changes above 80 (RZQ3) equal no posts. Usually even using 80 results in issues regardless of other combos of settings.

RTTpark 80 (RZQ3) seems to help, it being disabled is no post at all. I tried that as in a Micron DDR4 PDF it highlighted single rank for all 3 RTT settings should prefer all disabled. 34 (RZQ7) is more issues, so 48 to 80 is better on my combo of kit.

RTTnom 80 (RZQ3) seems too much IIRC, 60 seems right, again still testing.

Lowering DRAM phase frequency (ie hoping to attain lower noise) does not help. Highest setting doesn't help either. So testing in between range.

Perhaps I just gotta wait for another UEFI. Perhaps the CPU just can't give me 3533MHz. Again played with some DRAM timings looser and no go.

*** edit ***

May have cracked post to post variation in training, leading to differing results when stability testing in OS.

Why I say maybe is either it's the new settings I'm using or the lowered room ambient. Anyhow will update as soon complete further testing.


----------



## untouchable247

Whatisthisfor said:


> AMD already did a good job on this so i dont see the point for manually oclocking Ryzen too. I would try to undervolt it by, say, 0,1V at start and the real challenge is to get the memory stable at reasonable speeds. Unfortunately the memory controller is still subpar compairing with intel.


Undervolting stops my CPU from reaching a high boost clock, unfortunately. Even the lowest possible value.


----------



## Syldon

gupsterg said:


> I still can't resolve 3533MHz  , so looking for insights.


I keep trying off and on. best I have had is 300% on HCI test, but that was not repeatable. I even went so far as to rejig cooling this weekend to maximise temps. Showing nothing majorly different. I have had this memory running at 3533 on a CH6 with 32gb in. I have since handed 16gb away for someone elses system. But even with 16gb nothing I seem to do is helping. I tried all the usual tricks with voltages and timings no where near. A bit disheartened as you can see.


In the way of temps though I did take a substantial amount off at casual running speed. I set up 12 instances of HCImemtest to boast the temps in a controlled manner. I ran 12 instances, so I had threads spare to could record it. I moved the radiator to front lower as opposed to the top of the case. The difference was 7c. Prior to moving rad 71.8c once HCImemtest hit 20%. After moving the rad 65.9c, and I ran an extra bit of % just to make sure. When I checked the recordings, I had added an extra instance of HCImemtest to boot, which I hadnt noticed until after. I think a major part of this is down to fan control. I cant set variable speeds of the fans on my case: one speed to rule them all it seems. My case fans are 3 into 1 with a simple control box. The CPU fans are variable, due to single source inputs. 












IBT run

Prior to moving the rad, my system would thermal out on PE3 running IBT for a few mins. Now it hovers around 72c and stabilises. PE4 still get too hot too quick for me to like running it.


CPU speed: on 702 I have been running with auto and CPU core set to 37. This moves all core running to about 4000mhz, and peaks on single core at 4200mhz, same speeds as 804. I just tried PE3 again this morning, as I mentioned. It is the first time I have had time to play since revising the bios to 804. PE3 runs all cores at 4075, but also peaks at 4350. Since downvolting is working on this, I am going to run PE3. I will switch to auto just for memory checks.

I cannot under volt as you have there though. If I drop below +0.4125, I get droops. I am set to +0.05.


*EDIT: I added an IBT screenie.* It runs 3c higher, but the day is warming here.


----------



## PhatSV6

Syldon said:


> It came as a free feature. If yours is only taking 20-25 seconds then you are at the top of the pecking order, some are waiting up to a minute for first boot. The time is being used for memory training. Depending on how you are set up, it dependant on how long it takes to accept your settings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is an issue with diagnostic software trying to read from a sensor which causes the system to crash. I think SIV and HWinfo authors have altered their respective software to not read this WMI sensor. SIV and HWinfo are the only two that I know of that have altered their software to cater for this issue. SO if you have a diagnostic programme running and it isn't the latest version of these two, then this is most likely to be your issue.


If you have any sata devices plugged into sata 5 or 6 it will slow you post to 20 or so seconds change your sata port on the board and you will fix the long post issue guaranteed. As I had the same issue


----------



## PhatSV6

Move your sata device to another port not 5 and 6


----------



## lordzed83

gupsterg said:


> Cross posting this here, link.
> 
> 2 reasons.
> 
> Once in the past someone was surprised at voltages, etc I was using for xyz MHz, as another was in another thread I did a video and linking here also.
> 
> Secondly I still can't resolve 3533MHz /forum/images/smilies/redface.gif , so looking for insights.
> 
> UEFI is 0804. OS is very clean W7, bare min of apps, etc. Still the same 2700X as I had before. Even after months it's holding PState 0 as 4.1GHz @ 1.318V on LLC [Auto]. So I believe a bump to 1.325V is sufficient.
> 
> CPU also is very nice IMO for SOC. I have had passes of HCI even at 0.987V when using 3533MHz. Increases of SOC so far do not help solve post to post variation of training. Even with what I believe is post training variation I do not have Q-Code: F9 , etc.
> 
> If I swap the dimms between slots (ie A2 is moved to B2 and B2 to A2) characteristics somewhat change. For example using ProcODT of 48 for 3466MHz can have post issues (ie Q-Code: F9), but when reswapped 48 is fine to use. Regardless of which dimm is in which "primary" slot 3533MHz has post to post variation. Using higher than 1.375V VDIMM leads to more errors. I do not believe this is the RAM crapping out. This RAM I have used on C6H/ZE with Ryzen/Threadripper gen 1 and it can operate at higher VDIMM at 3466MHz - 3520MHz tested. So I think the IMC is not VDIMM friendly.
> 
> I have tried various ProcODT settings, 53 seems the best when targeting 3533MHz. The CPU is very sensitive to CAD BUS changes IMO vs experience on Ryzen/Threadripper gen 1. Setting 30 for all or some can causes issues depending on other settings. So TBH I've come to the conclusion 24 or some at 20 is best. I've also played with CAD Bus timings, for example lower than 24h = no post regardless of other settings, higher timings for CAD seem better, even if go to 3Fh still an issue.
> 
> RTTwr changes above 80 (RZQ3) equal no posts. Usually even using 80 results in issues regardless of other combos of settings.
> 
> RTTpark 80 (RZQ3) seems to help, it being disabled is no post at all. I tried that as in a Micron DDR4 PDF it highlighted single rank for all 3 RTT settings should prefer all disabled. 34 (RZQ7) is more issues, so 48 to 80 is better on my combo of kit.
> 
> RTTnom 80 (RZQ3) seems too much IIRC, 60 seems right, again still testing.
> 
> Lowering DRAM phase frequency (ie hoping to attain lower noise) does not help. Highest setting doesn't help either. So testing in between range.
> 
> Perhaps I just gotta wait for another UEFI. Perhaps the CPU just can't give me 3533MHz. Again played with some DRAM timings looser and no go.
> 
> *** edit ***
> 
> May have cracked post to post variation in training, leading to differing results when stability testing in OS.
> 
> Why I say maybe is either it's the new settings I'm using or the lowered room ambient. Anyhow will update as soon complete further testing.


I could give you my settings file and try that. Seems ii found a sweeet spot. If i change anything ibt fails to pass x10 very high or hci fails. 

Atm waiting for next biosvwith 1.0.0.4
Still dont think change they made since 602 bios ware better. Like i need move of everything to run my system stable. Like almost 200mv more on cpu. Dont feel like messing around more on this bios since next one should be around corner... I hope @elmor ;P


----------



## Whatisthisfor

untouchable247 said:


> Undervolting stops my CPU from reaching a high boost clock, unfortunately. Even the lowest possible value.


Just in case, use offset for undervolting.


----------



## Syldon

PhatSV6 said:


> If you have any sata devices plugged into sata 5 or 6 it will slow you post to 20 or so seconds change your sata port on the board and you will fix the long post issue guaranteed. As I had the same issue



I had to try it out didnt I. There is no difference what so ever no matter which data point you use when it comes to booting.

I rebooted 3 times to get a good approx. Kinda scary how close the boot times were. I used the stop watch on an iPhone.

I moved the cables over. I booted into windows and opened all drives before retesting. The first return came back 3 seconds slower. I guess the hardware was still training.

I boot to an M2 drive, so I tried once with no cables. Since it came back at the exact same time, I saw no point in persevering.

Where exactly did you get this from? What is the reasoning behind it?


----------



## minal

What is the normal Q-code for a successful boot with the C7H? 



With Fedora 28, there are several reports of code 24 once the OS boots, which then turns to and remains at code 00 at/after login (technically, as soon as the desktop environment and login manager load).


----------



## Syldon

minal said:


> What is the normal Q-code for a successful boot with the C7H?
> 
> 
> 
> With Fedora 28, there are several reports of code 24 once the OS boots, which then turns to and remains at code 00 at/after login (technically, as soon as the desktop environment and login manager load).


I think it depends what you boot from. As in either a cold boot from no power, or a warm boot, such as windows reboot.

cold boot = qcode 40 on mine
warm boot = qcode 24


----------



## minal

Syldon said:


> I think it depends what you boot from. As in either a cold boot from no power, or a warm boot, such as windows reboot.
> 
> cold boot = qcode 40 on mine
> warm boot = qcode 24


 I just tested it and always got q-code 24 from:

- rebooting; 
- shutting down and booting; 
- shutting down, switching off PSU, unplugging power cable, waiting ~30 min, then booting.

In each case the code turns to 00 before reaching the login screen.

Side note: I didn't get any memory retraining reboots after removing power. Random luck or due to ambient temps or something else?


----------



## nick name

minal said:


> What is the normal Q-code for a successful boot with the C7H?
> 
> 
> 
> With Fedora 28, there are several reports of code 24 once the OS boots, which then turns to and remains at code 00 at/after login (technically, as soon as the desktop environment and login manager load).


I've don't remember seeing anything other than 24 on my board.


----------



## nick name

Does anyone have a way to set the board up to be consistently between Level 3(OC) and Level 4(OC)? So a Level 3 1/2(OC).

At Level 3(OC) my board sits at 41.3 usually and sometimes just 41.
At Level 4(OC) my board varies from 42.5 to as high as 43. 

My goal is to have it land at 42 consistently. Anyone have a working solution? Or want me to test some settings out?


----------



## Syldon

nick name said:


> Does anyone have a way to set the board up to be consistently between Level 3(OC) and Level 4(OC)? So a Level 3 1/2(OC).
> 
> At Level 3(OC) my board sits at 41.3 usually and sometimes just 41.
> At Level 4(OC) my board varies from 42.5 to as high as 43.
> 
> My goal is to have it land at 42 consistently. Anyone have a working solution? Or want me to test some settings out?



You can just set PE to auto and cpu core ratio to 42 (BCLK @100 ofc).


Or you could add a Pstate oc, and then it should downvolt when it isn't under heavy loads.


----------



## nick name

Syldon said:


> You can just set PE to auto and cpu core ratio to 42 (BCLK @100 ofc).
> 
> 
> Or you could add a Pstate oc, and then it should downvolt when it isn't under heavy loads.



Well I still want it to run through its full range -- up to 43.5 on a single core. I mention this because I was under the impression that changing the multiplier to anything higher than 37 would lock the CPU at that multiplier and not let it clock up and down. Am I incorrect?


----------



## MNMadman

nick name said:


> Well I still want it to run through its full range -- up to 43.5 on a single core. I mention this because I was under the impression that changing the multiplier to anything higher than 37 would lock the CPU at that multiplier and not let it clock up and down. Am I incorrect?


You probably won't get 4350MHz. You _could_ but that's just straight luck.

P-State overclocking allows the CPU to down-clock and down-volt when not loaded. But it only goes up to the multiplier you set, which realistically would be 42 or so.


----------



## gupsterg

@Syldon

Cheers for share/comment  .

Best HCI v6.0 is 1000% then 1 error, total run 1500% (ie ~8hrs). That was 4.1GHz VID: 1.325 SOC: 1.0125 VDIMM: 1.365 VTT: 0.687 ProcODT: 53 RTT: off off 80.

Getting above 400% isn't in issue, what flippng keeps happening is on x post I'll get nice stabilty and then on y post it craps out at low duration of testing.

I have now pulled the GTZ from C7H and trying the GVK I have.
@lordzed83

Cheers for comment  .

Yep please share your txt, will see if I can gain anything from it  .
@minal

Both on C6H & C7H

Q-Code 24 after OS loaded is fresh kernal on Win OS. Q-Code 30 I get when resume from sleep. Q-Code 40 when post rig whilst it has Win OS "Fast boot" which basically is using a hybrid sleep state to make rig post quicker (supposedly!? so not fresh kernal). Q-Code 00 I have when boot system to DOS on USB. Linux I don't currently have on OS as trying to just keep bare min on rig for testing of gaining 3533MHz.


----------



## nick name

MNMadman said:


> You probably won't get 4350MHz. You _could_ but that's just straight luck.
> 
> P-State overclocking allows the CPU to down-clock and down-volt when not loaded. But it only goes up to the multiplier you set, which realistically would be 42 or so.


Well that solves one half with the ability to down-clock, but I don't want to set the multiplier so it has a max lower than 43.5. I don't expect all cores to be able to hit 43.5, but I still want some cores to be able to hit it. I appreciate the input, but I think I will continue to try to tweak those Level 3(OC) and Level 4(OC) Performance Enhancers to try to find a way to get one of them to land and sit at 42.


----------



## MNMadman

nick name said:


> Well that solves one half with the ability to down-clock, but I don't want to set the multiplier so it has a max lower than 43.5. I don't expect all cores to be able to hit 43.5, but I still want some cores to be able to hit it. I appreciate the input, but I think I will continue to try to tweak those Level 3(OC) and Level 4(OC) Performance Enhancers to try to find a way to get one of them to land and sit at 42.


Okay. Don't be too disappointed when it doesn't work.


----------



## nick name

MNMadman said:


> Okay. Don't be too disappointed when it doesn't work.


So do you know that there isn't a way to set it so I can find a middle ground between PE Level 3 and Level 4? 

I wish I knew all the values each level set so I could find something I could set up myself.


----------



## minal

gupsterg said:


> Both on C6H & C7H
> 
> Q-Code 24 after OS loaded is fresh kernal on Win OS. Q-Code 30 I get when resume from sleep. Q-Code 40 when post rig whilst it has Win OS "Fast boot" which basically is using a hybrid sleep state to make rig post quicker (supposedly!? so not fresh kernal). Q-Code 00 I have when boot system to DOS on USB. Linux I don't currently have on OS as trying to just keep bare min on rig for testing of gaining 3533MHz.


Perfect, thanks. Too bad the manual doesn't have this info.


----------



## Syldon

nick name said:


> Well that solves one half with the ability to down-clock, but I don't want to set the multiplier so it has a max lower than 43.5. I don't expect all cores to be able to hit 43.5, but I still want some cores to be able to hit it. I appreciate the input, but I think I will continue to try to tweak those Level 3(OC) and Level 4(OC) Performance Enhancers to try to find a way to get one of them to land and sit at 42.



I am using PE3. It gives 4150mhz on all cores. It also downclocks to 2200mhz when not in use. It also boosts to 4350mhz. I added my bios setting in text and a screen dump. This is about as close as you want it.



Spoiler



[2018/08/06 06:09:54]
Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
eCLK Mode [Synchronous mode]
BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
BCLK_Divider [Auto]
Performance Enhancer [Level 3 (OC)]
CPU Core Ratio [37.00]
Performance Bias [Auto]
Memory Frequency [DDR4-3466MHz]
Core Performance Boost [Enabled]
SMT Mode [Enabled]
TPU [Keep Current Settings]
TRC_EOM [Auto]
TRTP_EOM [Auto]
TRRS_S_EOM [Auto]
TRRS_L_EOM [Auto]
TWTR_EOM [Auto]
TWTR_L_EOM [Auto]
TWCL_EOM [Auto]
TWR_EOM [Auto]
TFAW_EOM [Auto]
TRCT_EOM [Auto]
TREFI_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_DD_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SD_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SC_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SCL_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_DD_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SD_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SC_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SCL_EOM [Auto]
TWRRD_EOM [Auto]
TRDWR_EOM [Auto]
TWRRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto]
DRAM CAS# Latency [14]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [14]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [14]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [14]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [28]
Trc [44]
TrrdS [6]
TrrdL [9]
Tfaw [26]
TwtrS [3]
TwtrL [9]
Twr [12]
Trcpage [Auto]
TrdrdScl [2]
TwrwrScl [2]
Trfc [300]
Trfc2 [223]
Trfc4 [137]
Tcwl [14]
Trtp [8]
Trdwr [7]
Twrrd [3]
TwrwrSc [Auto]
TwrwrSd [Auto]
TwrwrDd [Auto]
TrdrdSc [Auto]
TrdrdSd [Auto]
TrdrdDd [Auto]
Tcke [Auto]
ProcODT [53.3 ohm]
Cmd2T [1T]
Gear Down Mode [Disabled]
Power Down Enable [Disabled]
RttNom [RZQ/7]
RttWr [RZQ/3]
RttPark [RZQ/1]
MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
MemCkeSetup [Auto]
MemCadBusClkDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [20.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [20.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [20.0 Ohm]
CPU Load-line Calibration [Auto]
CPU Current Capability [Auto]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Auto]
VRM Spread Spectrum [Auto]
CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
CPU Power Phase Control [Auto]
CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 2]
VDDSOC Current Capability [Auto]
VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Auto]
VDDSOC Phase Control [Auto]
DRAM Current Capability [100%]
DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
DRAM Switching Frequency [Auto]
DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.37000]
VTTDDR Voltage [Auto]
VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
VDDP Voltage [Auto]
1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
PLL reference voltage [Auto]
T Offset [Auto]
Sense MI Skew [Disabled]
Sense MI Offset [Auto]
Promontory presence [Auto]
Clock Amplitude [Auto]
CLDO VDDP voltage [Auto]
CPU Core Voltage [Offset mode]
CPU Offset Mode Sign [+]
- CPU Core Voltage Offset [0.05000]
CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
- VDDSOC Voltage Override [0.98750]
DRAM Voltage [1.38000]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
Firmware TPM [Disable]
Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
PSS Support [Auto]
SVM Mode [Disabled]
Onboard LED [Enabled]
Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
SATA Mode [AHCI]
NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
SMART Self Test [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
SB Link Mode [Auto]
Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
When system is in working state [On]
When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [On]
Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
ErP Ready [Disabled]
Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
Power On By RTC [Disabled]
Network Stack [Disabled]
Device [Samsung SSD 850 EVO 2TB]
Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
USB Mass Storage Driver Support [Enabled]
KingstonDataTraveler 2.0PMAP [Auto]
U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
U31G1_5 [Enabled]
U31G1_6 [Enabled]
U31G1_7 [Enabled]
U31G1_8 [Enabled]
U31G1_9 [Enabled]
U31G1_10 [Enabled]
USB11 [Enabled]
USB12 [Enabled]
USB13 [Enabled]
USB14 [Enabled]
USB15 [Enabled]
CPU Temperature [Monitor]
MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
PCH Temperature [Monitor]
T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
5V Voltage [Monitor]
12V Voltage [Monitor]
CPU Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [15.9 sec]
CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [200 RPM]
CPU Fan Profile [Manual]
CPU Upper Temperature [65]
CPU Fan Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
CPU Middle Temperature [50]
CPU Fan Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [50]
CPU Lower Temperature [35]
CPU Fan Min. Duty Cycle (%) [20]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [15.9 sec]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [600 RPM]
Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Turbo]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [15.9 sec]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Manual]
Chassis Fan 2 Upper Temperature [60]
Chassis Fan 2 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Chassis Fan 2 Middle Temperature [55]
Chassis Fan 2 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [50]
Chassis Fan 2 Lower Temperature [35]
Chassis Fan 2 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [20]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 3 Smoothing Up/Down Time [15.9 sec]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Turbo]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [Auto]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Source [CPU]
HAMP Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
HAMP Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
HAMP Fan Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 1 Profile [Turbo]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 2 Profile [Manual]
Extension Fan 2 Upper Temperature [65]
Extension Fan 2 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Extension Fan 2 Middle Temperature [55]
Extension Fan 2 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [50]
Extension Fan 2 Lower Temperature [35]
Extension Fan 2 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [20]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 3 Profile [Manual]
Extension Fan 3 Upper Temperature [65]
Extension Fan 3 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Extension Fan 3 Middle Temperature [55]
Extension Fan 3 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [50]
Extension Fan 3 Lower Temperature [35]
Extension Fan 3 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [20]
AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Auto]
Water Pump Upper Temperature [70]
Water Pump Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Water Pump Middle Temperature [45]
Water Pump Middle. Duty Cycle(%) [100]
Water Pump Lower Temperature [40]
Water Pump Min. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
PSPP Policy [Auto]
Fast Boot [Enabled]
Next Boot after AC Power Loss [Normal Boot]
AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
Boot Logo Display [Disabled]
POST Report [1 sec]
Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
Launch CSM [Enabled]
Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
OS Type [Other OS]
Setup Animator [Disabled]
ASUS Grid Install Service [Enabled]
Load from Profile [1]
Profile Name [3466]
Save to Profile [1]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
BCLK Frequency [Auto]
CPU Ratio [Auto]
DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A2]
Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
RedirectForReturnDis [Auto]
L2 TLB Associativity [Auto]
Platform First Error Handling [Auto]
Enable IBS [Disabled]
Global C-state Control [Auto]
Power Supply Idle Control [Auto]
Opcache Control [Auto]
Custom Pstate0 [Auto]
Custom Pstate1 [Auto]
Custom Pstate2 [Auto]
Custom Pstate3 [Auto]
Custom Pstate4 [Auto]
Custom Pstate5 [Auto]
Custom Pstate6 [Auto]
Custom Pstate7 [Auto]
Relaxed EDC throttling [Auto]
Downcore control [Auto]
SMTEN [Auto]
SEV-ES ASID Space Limit [1]
Streaming Stores Control [Auto]
ACPI _CST C1 Declaration [Auto]
L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
DRAM scrub time [Auto]
Redirect scrubber control [Auto]
Disable DF sync flood propagation [Auto]
Freeze DF module queues on error [Auto]
GMI encryption control [Auto]
xGMI encryption control [Auto]
CC6 memory region encryption [Auto]
Location of private memory regions [Auto]
System probe filter [Auto]
Memory interleaving [Auto]
Memory interleaving size [Auto]
Channel interleaving hash [Auto]
Memory Clear [Enabled]
ACPI SLIT Distance Control [Auto]
Power Down Enable [Auto]
Cmd2T [Auto]
Gear Down Mode [Auto]
CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
Data Poisoning [Auto]
DRAM ECC Symbol Size [Auto]
DRAM ECC Enable [Auto]
TSME [Auto]
Data Scramble [Auto]
Chipselect Interleaving [Auto]
BankGroupSwap [Disabled]
Address Hash Bank [Auto]
Address Hash CS [Auto]
MBIST Enable [Disabled]
MBIST Aggressors [Auto]
MBIST Per Bit Slave Die Reporting [Auto]
IOMMU [Auto]
Determinism Slider [Auto]
cTDP Control [Auto]
PSI [Auto]
ACS Enable [Auto]
PCIe ARI Support [Auto]
CLDO_VDDP Control [Auto]
HD Audio Enable [Auto]
Force PCIe gen speed [Auto]
Processor temperature Control [Auto]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [Auto]
SOC OVERCLOCK VID [0]
Mode0 [Auto]
PT SATA Mode [Auto]
PT Aggresive SATA Device Sleep Port 0 [Disable]
PT Aggresive SATA Device Sleep Port 1 [Disable]
PT SATA Port 0 Enable [Auto]
PT SATA Port 1 Enable [Auto]
PT SATA Port 2 Enable [Auto]
PT SATA Port 3 Enable [Auto]
PT SATA Port 4 Enable [Auto]
PT SATA Port 5 Enable [Auto]
PT SATA Port 6 Enable [Auto]
PT SATA Port 7 Enable [Auto]
PT XHCI GEN1 [Auto]
PT XHCI GEN2 [Auto]
PT USB Equalization4 [Auto]
PT USB Redriver [Auto]
PT USB31 PORT0 [Auto]
PT USB31 PORT1 [Auto]
PT USB30 PORT0 [Auto]
PT USB30 PORT1 [Auto]
PT USB30 PORT2 [Auto]
PT USB30 PORT3 [Auto]
PT USB30 PORT4 [Auto]
PT USB30 PORT5 [Auto]
PT USB20 PORT0 [Auto]
PT USB20 PORT1 [Auto]
PT USB20 PORT2 [Auto]
PT USB20 PORT3 [Auto]
PT USB20 PORT4 [Auto]
PT USB20 PORT5 [Auto]
PT USB31 PORT0 [Auto]
PT USB31 PORT1 [Auto]
PT USB30 PORT0 [Auto]
PT USB30 PORT1 [Auto]
PT USB20 PORT0 [Auto]
PT USB20 PORT1 [Auto]
PT USB20 PORT2 [Auto]
PT USB20 PORT3 [Auto]
PT USB20 PORT4 [Auto]
PT USB20 PORT5 [Auto]
PT USB31 PORT0 [Auto]
PT USB31 PORT1 [Auto]
PT USB30 PORT0 [Auto]
PT USB20 PORT0 [Auto]
PT USB20 PORT1 [Auto]
PT USB20 PORT2 [Auto]
PT USB20 PORT3 [Auto]
PT USB20 PORT4 [Auto]
PT USB20 PORT5 [Auto]
PT PCIE Port 0 Enable [Auto]
PT PCIE Port 1 Enable [Auto]
PT PCIE Port 2 Enable [Auto]
PT PCIE Port 3 Enable [Auto]
PT PCIE Port 4 Enable [Auto]
PT PCIE Port 5 Enable [Auto]
PT PCIE Port 6 Enable [Auto]
PT PCIE Port 7 Enable [Auto]
GPP Clock 0 Force Output [Auto]
GPP Clock 1 Force Output [Auto]
GPP Clock 2 Force Output [Auto]
GPP Clock 3 Force Output [Auto]
GPP Clock 4 Force Output [Auto]
GPP Clock 5 Force Output [Auto]
GPP Clock 6 Force Output [Auto]
GPP Clock 7 Force Output [Auto]


----------



## lordzed83

@gupsterg
Quick post b4 work u got txt and profile for quick check

https://quickfileshare.org/aa6/3533.CMO https://quickfileshare.org/aa7/3533_setting.txt


----------



## CJMitsuki

gupsterg said:


> Cross posting this here, link.
> 
> 2 reasons.
> 
> Once in the past someone was surprised at voltages, etc I was using for xyz MHz, as another was in another thread I did a video and linking here also.
> 
> Secondly I still can't resolve 3533MHz  , so looking for insights.
> 
> UEFI is 0804. OS is very clean W7, bare min of apps, etc. Still the same 2700X as I had before. Even after months it's holding PState 0 as 4.1GHz @ 1.318V on LLC [Auto]. So I believe a bump to 1.325V is sufficient.
> 
> CPU also is very nice IMO for SOC. I have had passes of HCI even at 0.987V when using 3533MHz. Increases of SOC so far do not help solve post to post variation of training. Even with what I believe is post training variation I do not have Q-Code: F9 , etc.
> 
> If I swap the dimms between slots (ie A2 is moved to B2 and B2 to A2) characteristics somewhat change. For example using ProcODT of 48 for 3466MHz can have post issues (ie Q-Code: F9), but when reswapped 48 is fine to use. Regardless of which dimm is in which "primary" slot 3533MHz has post to post variation. Using higher than 1.375V VDIMM leads to more errors. I do not believe this is the RAM crapping out. This RAM I have used on C6H/ZE with Ryzen/Threadripper gen 1 and it can operate at higher VDIMM at 3466MHz - 3520MHz tested. So I think the IMC is not VDIMM friendly.
> 
> I have tried various ProcODT settings, 53 seems the best when targeting 3533MHz. The CPU is very sensitive to CAD BUS changes IMO vs experience on Ryzen/Threadripper gen 1. Setting 30 for all or some can causes issues depending on other settings. So TBH I've come to the conclusion 24 or some at 20 is best. I've also played with CAD Bus timings, for example lower than 24h = no post regardless of other settings, higher timings for CAD seem better, even if go to 3Fh still an issue.
> 
> RTTwr changes above 80 (RZQ3) equal no posts. Usually even using 80 results in issues regardless of other combos of settings.
> 
> RTTpark 80 (RZQ3) seems to help, it being disabled is no post at all. I tried that as in a Micron DDR4 PDF it highlighted single rank for all 3 RTT settings should prefer all disabled. 34 (RZQ7) is more issues, so 48 to 80 is better on my combo of kit.
> 
> RTTnom 80 (RZQ3) seems too much IIRC, 60 seems right, again still testing.
> 
> Lowering DRAM phase frequency (ie hoping to attain lower noise) does not help. Highest setting doesn't help either. So testing in between range.
> 
> Perhaps I just gotta wait for another UEFI. Perhaps the CPU just can't give me 3533MHz. Again played with some DRAM timings looser and no go.
> 
> *** edit ***
> 
> May have cracked post to post variation in training, leading to differing results when stability testing in OS.
> 
> Why I say maybe is either it's the new settings I'm using or the lowered room ambient. Anyhow will update as soon complete further testing.



Heres my 3533 setup, maybe you can see if anything there helps you.


Spoiler















I have setups above that freq too if you want but they are at what are deemed "unsafe" voltages which I dont believe about ddr4 since ive ran it 1.65v+ for days with no problems and that was with heavy OC on the cpu. Only thing I dont do is take SoC voltages to unsafe levels as I dont want to hurt the IMC. Ive even had the sticks at near 1.8v for short periods, never overheated and never had a problem with instability due to the voltage. I did have 3600c12 stable though :lachen:
I think your RAM could be more stable using XFR with offsets instead of locking the clock. Even mild bclk OC with an offset would fine if you wanted to go that route. I run daily at 4.4-4.5ghz using that method. I can adjust the OC using the offset voltage. 4.5ghz takes me +.1v and the voltage hits 1.58v at times but its np with decent cooling. Thats all cores being boosted FYI, not only a single core at a time.


EDIT: Overlook the 300 tRFC value, I was playing with timings trying to drop my latency below 58ns and apparently I didnt restore it back to 260


----------



## PhatSV6

hmm interesting.

This board in general is a slow poster but if you have bclk overclock plus data 5 or 6 data plugged in then its extremely slow like minuets slow. 

You may be able to speed it up a bit by disabling cms I think its called.

Just trying to help


----------



## PhatSV6

My basis for this is that I have just built a new pc and have spent days figuring out why my pc took so look to get through post when ever I upped the bclk clock


----------



## Whatisthisfor

CJMitsuki said:


> Heres my 3533 setup, maybe you can see if anything there helps you.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 210154


These are pretty tight settings. I wonder if your system is Ram test stable with them. If so, then it seems the CH VII isnt too far behind the MSI counterpart regarding memory performance.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Whatisthisfor said:


> These are pretty tight settings. I wonder if your system is Ram test stable with them. If so, then it seems the CH VII isnt too far behind the MSI counterpart regarding memory performance.


These aren’t that tight and I don’t use RamTest anymore. That program is too inconsistent.HCI MemTest has always been much more consistent. I could run RamTest and fail at 7%, not change anything and the next test would hit 10000% then back to failing at some low percentage. Meanwhile HCI MemTest will fail you at or near the same percentage of you have errors. Also HCI has an alternate test for testing outside of the OS. Anyway, this setup is what I use for multi core benches and I have 3600 setup for a couple of benchmarks then I have 3533 at 14-14-14-22-36 for Single core benches. C7H has had 3533mhz strap stable at these timings for months now. It’s been at least 3 bios revisions back that we were starting to get it nice and tuned. After learning the roles the resistance values are playing in high freqs it’s np to go to 3600 stable. I just can’t get it tight enough just yet to pass 3533 performance. It’s getting close though.


----------



## Whatisthisfor

CJMitsuki said:


> These aren’t that tight and I don’t use RamTest anymore. That program is too inconsistent.HCI MemTest has always been much more consistent. I could run RamTest and fail at 7%, not change anything and the next test would hit 10000% then back to failing at some low percentage. Meanwhile HCI MemTest will fail you at or near the same percentage of you have errors. Also HCI has an alternate test for testing outside of the OS. Anyway, this setup is what I use for multi core benches and I have 3600 setup for a couple of benchmarks then I have 3533 at 14-14-14-22-36 for Single core benches. C7H has had 3533mhz strap stable at these timings for months now. It’s been at least 3 bios revisions back that we were starting to get it nice and tuned. After learning the roles the resistance values are playing in high freqs it’s np to go to 3600 stable. I just can’t get it tight enough just yet to pass 3533 performance. It’s getting close though.


Yeah i made similar experiences with Ram test. Interesting.


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> These aren’t that tight and I don’t use RamTest anymore. That program is too inconsistent.HCI MemTest has always been much more consistent. I could run RamTest and fail at 7%, not change anything and the next test would hit 10000% then back to failing at some low percentage. Meanwhile HCI MemTest will fail you at or near the same percentage of you have errors. Also HCI has an alternate test for testing outside of the OS. Anyway, this setup is what I use for multi core benches and I have 3600 setup for a couple of benchmarks then I have 3533 at 14-14-14-22-36 for Single core benches. C7H has had 3533mhz strap stable at these timings for months now. It’s been at least 3 bios revisions back that we were starting to get it nice and tuned. After learning the roles the resistance values are playing in high freqs it’s np to go to 3600 stable. I just can’t get it tight enough just yet to pass 3533 performance. It’s getting close though.


Same here. One day passes whole night next day errors 10% other day 250% feels its random.

Hci when gets me an error its always around same coverage % usually below 200%.


----------



## nick name

Syldon said:


> I am using PE3. It gives 4150mhz on all cores. It also downclocks to 2200mhz when not in use. It also boosts to 4350mhz. I added my bios setting in text and a screen dump. This is about as close as you want it.
> 
> --snip--


I appreciate you sharing that. I can't get mine to 41.5 @ PE Level 3. Even with the addition VCORE offset. 

I don't think I will be able to even attempt to accomplish my goal unless I learn exactly what Level 3 and Level 4 set in BIOS. I believe Level 3 sets PBO at 1 and Level 4 sets PBO at 10, but I am sure there is much more to it than that.


----------



## Syldon

nick name said:


> I appreciate you sharing that. I can't get mine to 41.5 @ PE Level 3. Even with the addition VCORE offset.
> 
> I don't think I will be able to even attempt to accomplish my goal unless I learn exactly what Level 3 and Level 4 set in BIOS. I believe Level 3 sets PBO at 1 and Level 4 sets PBO at 10, but I am sure there is much more to it than that.



I really do not know how the maths have been worked for PBO. But does PBO also take temps and efficiency into consideration? 

I have a previous video of running an IBT to see how it downvolts. I got PE3 running consistently at vcore 1.249v at full load. But it shows the speeds at 4123mhz. Amps and watts at 122a and 155w respectively. Temps go into the mid 90s over a short period.

On my system now I get a much lower voltages 1.22v with amps and watts at 120a and 150w. It is fluctuating so if the maths are out, I can only apologise. Atm my temps are 75c on PE3. 

I have managed to drop a significant amount of temps out of my system so it is running a lot more efficient. I seem to remember the PE being something of an intelligent booster. And it will only clock to what the system is programmed to see as feesable.


I am sure someone will correect me if I am wrong on this.


----------



## nick name

Syldon said:


> I really do not know how the maths have been worked for PBO. But does PBO also take temps and efficiency into consideration?
> 
> I have a previous video of running an IBT to see how it downvolts. I got PE3 running consistently at vcore 1.249v at full load. But it shows the speeds at 4123mhz. Amps and watts at 122a and 155w respectively. Temps go into the mid 90s over a short period.
> 
> On my system now I get a much lower voltages 1.22v with amps and watts at 120a and 150w. It is fluctuating so if the maths are out, I can only apologise. Atm my temps are 75c on PE3.
> 
> I have managed to drop a significant amount of temps out of my system so it is running a lot more efficient. I seem to remember the PE being something of an intelligent booster. And it will only clock to what the system is programmed to see as feesable.
> 
> 
> I am sure someone will correect me if I am wrong on this.



The highest my temps got with IBT were 71.8c on PE3.



And I saw an AMD or vendor rep describe XFR/PBO as a triangle on a video somewhere. It may be worth looking for on YouTube.


----------



## wonderiuy

nick name said:


> I appreciate you sharing that. I can't get mine to 41.5 @ PE Level 3. Even with the addition VCORE offset.
> 
> I don't think I will be able to even attempt to accomplish my goal unless I learn exactly what Level 3 and Level 4 set in BIOS. I believe Level 3 sets PBO at 1 and Level 4 sets PBO at 10, but I am sure there is much more to it than that.


Check here:
https://www.overclock.net/forum/27229889-post146.html


----------



## MrPhilo

Finally got my Crosshair VII.

But I am only able to run at 3200 CL14 - anything higher than 3200 I get a BSOD, I tried several of the presets in the bios but still the problem.

Possibly my RAM can't run anything higher than 3200CL14 or am I doing something wrong?

I am using G Skill 4266CL19, 8GB x 2 and the latest bios 804.


----------



## crakej

MrPhilo said:


> Finally got my Crosshair VII.
> 
> But I am only able to run at 3200 CL14 - anything higher than 3200 I get a BSOD, I tried several of the presets in the bios but still the problem.
> 
> Possibly my RAM can't run anything higher than 3200CL14 or am I doing something wrong?
> 
> I am using G Skill 4266CL19, 8GB x 2 and the latest bios 804.


You could try enabling GearDown mode - work for me.....


----------



## MrPhilo

crakej said:


> You could try enabling GearDown mode - work for me.....


Interesting... I have booted up with 3333CL14 and no BSOD atm, by just enabling Geardown and changing TRFC to 267

I am testing it atm with Memtest but it's already showing result.

Any explanation why this is more stable than having it disabled? Could help other people as well on other motherboard like the Asus x370 Prime we had

EDIT: Forgot my manners, thank you! Now I can start playing around with my RAM. Was about to buy another RAM kit, the 3600CL16...


----------



## crakej

MrPhilo said:


> Interesting... I have booted up with 3333CL14 and no BSOD atm, by just enabling Geardown and changing TRFC to 267
> 
> I am testing it atm with Memtest but it's already showing result.
> 
> Any explanation why this is more stable than having it disabled? Could help other people as well on other motherboard like the Asus x370 Prime we had
> 
> EDIT: Forgot my manners, thank you! Now I can start playing around with my RAM. Was about to buy another RAM kit, the 3600CL16...


I really don't know why we need it, but we do! This H/W combo just woks better like this. I've got up to 3600 but it's not reliable enough on this bios. Sticking with 3533 for now. Will play around more when new Bios/AGESA comes out.

I also tried 3600 using geardown=off and cmd rate=T2, but didn't make much difference for me - others have had amazing latencies using T2. Of course I have gen 1 cpu and most have 2, so there are some differences just because of that.


----------



## MrPhilo

crakej said:


> I really don't know why we need it, but we do! This H/W combo just woks better like this. I've got up to 3600 but it's not reliable enough on this bios. Sticking with 3533 for now. Will play around more when new Bios/AGESA comes out.
> 
> I also tried 3600 using geardown=off and cmd rate=T2, but didn't make mych difference for me - others have had amazing latencies using T2. Of course I have gen 1 cpu and most have 2, so there are some differences just because of that.


Yeah it is weird haha, I've always disabled it on my x370 Prime, sometime I wonder if I could have gone higher with it enabled...

I have passed over 450% on 3333CL14 and I'm trying 3466CL14 for now, I know 450% isn't enough on HCI Memtest but I wanna see how far I can get to until I get errors.

You first GEN IMC is holding well though, so it's really good and it's able to OC more than your typical 1st Gen, pretty much a golden chip 

Any chance you can post your 3533 settings?


----------



## Syldon

wonderiuy said:


> Check here:
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27229889-post146.html



thanks for the link, I started to google the acronyms from that link, and found Gup already started a page on the rog forums.



nick name said:


> The highest my temps got with IBT were 71.8c on PE3.
> 
> 
> 
> And I saw an AMD or vendor rep describe XFR/PBO as a triangle on a video somewhere. It may be worth looking for on YouTube.


check out here. Gup has already explained this eslewhere. He even tells you where to set it up manually.

*Edit* I haven't checked this out for my self yet. I may have a look at the week end.


----------



## crakej

MrPhilo said:


> Yeah it is weird haha, I've always disabled it on my x370 Prime, sometime I wonder if I could have gone higher with it enabled...
> 
> I have passed over 450% on 3333CL14 and I'm trying 3466CL14 for now, I know 450% isn't enough on HCI Memtest but I wanna see how far I can get to until I get errors.
> 
> You first GEN IMC is holding well though, so it's really good and it's able to OC more than your typical 1st Gen, pretty much a golden chip
> 
> Any chance you can post your 3533 settings?


No reason you shouldn't be able to use these.....you might need to adjust a bit though.


----------



## gupsterg

@lordzed83

Thank you, will view soon  .

@CJMitsuki

Thank you, again will check out info soon  .

Sorry for delayed response guys, just been busy with things. Any how this linked post has some new testing of 3466MHz.

Strangely just like on the GTZ set, I need more SOC when set ACB OC. Previous testing with default CPU in below spoiler.



Spoiler






















I have managed vastly lower VDIMM than before, old tests was 1.375V and now 1.355V.


----------



## MrPhilo

crakej said:


> No reason you shouldn't be able to use these.....you might need to adjust a bit though.


I need 1.48V (Says 1.485V on the bios box) to stabilise that 3533CL14, it is running memtest atm

EDIT: rip got an error in 300%, gonna try 14-14-14-14 now

I also got 3600CL14 with BLCK to 102, no change in performance for my other storage (SSD) idk about other parts but I got errors within the few 10%

I was able to get to 100% with 1.525V for the 3600CL14 but stopped it and went back to 3533 as I didn't fancy running that much voltage.



gupsterg said:


> @lordzed83
> 
> Thank you, will view soon  .
> 
> @CJMitsuki
> 
> Thank you, again will check out info soon  .
> 
> Sorry for delayed response guys, just been busy with things. Any how this linked post has some new testing of 3466MHz.
> 
> Strangely just like on the GTZ set, I need more SOC when set ACB OC. Previous testing with default CPU in below spoiler.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 210680
> 
> 
> View attachment 210684
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have managed vastly lower VDIMM than before, old tests was 1.375V and now 1.355V.


Suprised how you can run at that low voltage for them RAM. I guess all RAMs are different?


----------



## gupsterg

MrPhilo said:


> Suprised how you can run at that low voltage for them RAM. I guess all RAMs are different?


IMO not the RAM that's "different" (clause being Sams. B die compared), CPU/IMC.

The F4-3200C14D-16GTZ I have owned since Ryzen gen 1 launch, never used as low VDIMM as I am on this gen 2 Ryzen. I have owned 5 Ryzen gen 1 and 1 Threadripper, C6H, C7H and ZE.


The F4-3200C14Q-32GVK kit (2 dimms used from it in last video), I've had since beginning of the year. Again on TR+ZE I need more VDIMM than when use it on Pinnacle Ridge on C7H or C6H.

Then I also have F4-3200C14Q-32GTZSW.


----------



## MrPhilo

crakej said:


> No reason you shouldn't be able to use these.....you might need to adjust a bit though.


Looks like 14-14 etc I got errors after 600%

I have gone to 14-15-15-15 and tighten some other areas of the timing. 

What other settings so you have changed that might effect it? Like what V is your RAM at? Any Cad changes etc, much appreciated if you can help me! Think my goal would be 3533CL14 and extreme timing.

EDIT: Looking at your specs, you have a FAN for the RAM? Were you able to run these settings before the FAN came in?


----------



## nick name

What are safe temperatures for RAM? And I mean safe for stable and not safe for the actual hardware.


----------



## majestynl

Back from holidays. Slowly reading some old posts and today also updated to new bios. The weather over here is killing for stresstesting without a AC.. Let's see...


----------



## CDub07

Nevermind....


----------



## CJMitsuki

Ever since figuring out XFR/bclk OC this machine became something new. I thought it ran great when i used PState OC but this puts that to shame. Memory, CPU, everything runs like a monster. Cant wait for gen 2.


Spoiler


----------



## CJMitsuki

Dont mean to double post but wanted to share so maybe others could possibly benefit from this. I started tinkering with the possibility of running 3533 at a lower tCL but I didnt expect anything to come of it, especially not as easy as it did. First run I used 260 tRFC and 4,4,16 tRRDS, RRDL, tFAW set up with the shown timings and to my surprise it booted first try with no silly multiple training. 1 training then booted away, aida64 wasnt massively impressive and I figured it would be having some errors and that was the reason for just a "meh" Aida64 benchmark. So I went back to the bios and ran the settings below and it booted up ridiculously fast and everything was super snappy. Its very close to stable, 2 errors in 100% of HCI memtest. Ive never had it that easy before so Im thinking that the end of the world might be soon :lachen: Im almost positive that the tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSCL @4 had everything to do with it bc the setup almost mirrors my regular 3533 setup with a couple of minor changes. Im positive it can get much better with a bit of invested time so hopefully armageddon isnt around the corner and I can get it tuned since this will most definitely run better than 3600 and 3666 @c14 and I only have 1.5v DRAM. Nevermind the 3467 number in RTC as I have a 103 bclk which makes it 3570mhz. This also boots and has mostly same results on 3533mhz with no bclk. Hopefully this helps others to get better BDie performance. Im going to investigate the connections with tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSCL as it relates to stability. It seems to be massive stability gains initially for little to no downside, a tiny loss in bandwidth is all I noticed. @*gupsterg* maybe you could get higher freq with the settings i mentioned granting more stability.


Edit- Got 5567 CPUz multicore score and 513 single core and a 2093 Cinebench score on my 4.5ghz setup. The Cinebench score is usually what I get at 4.55ghz when im on Win 7 custom OS pretty much stripped of everything and running in diagnostic mode, I do have a 2102 outlier score on HWBOT too but 2093 is usual. This is in Win10 Enterprise LTSB though and not in diagnostic mode nor have I disabled any services that I normally wouldnt. Its just my daily OS. im running less vCORE positive offset, quite a bit less in fact and I usually run 104.6 bclk when benching for top score. I have yet to get rid of the couple of errors that are floating around but that will happen soon with Rtt tweak or something.





Spoiler


----------



## crakej

MrPhilo said:


> Looks like 14-14 etc I got errors after 600%
> 
> I have gone to 14-15-15-15 and tighten some other areas of the timing.
> 
> What other settings so you have changed that might effect it? Like what V is your RAM at? Any Cad changes etc, much appreciated if you can help me! Think my goal would be 3533CL14 and extreme timing.
> 
> EDIT: Looking at your specs, you have a FAN for the RAM? Were you able to run these settings before the FAN came in?


Can't remember exactly but think ram was about 41c, now with cooler about 10c cooler. I always thought ram could run hotter, but not in this case. My ram voltage is at 1.42v


----------



## CJMitsuki

3533 at c13 Stable. Well, stable enough for me, ill run outside OS later on but I know if it gets that far its fine.


Spoiler


----------



## MrPhilo

CJMitsuki said:


> 3533 at c13 Stable. Well, stable enough for me, ill run outside OS later on but I know if it gets that far its fine.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 210834


I had errors into 800% for 12 x 850mb - Only 1, but it shows it's unstable

Below setting I have gone over 1200%, the best I can get atm, but it's good enough for me  3533CL14 (3542 due to 100.25 BLCK)


----------



## HolyFist

I don't know how accurate Memtest is, if i test as soon as Windows starts it runs fine, if i go play games (no crashes in weeks doing whaveter including Spotify + Chrome open), close the game and anything after and test again it starts giving errors even before 50%.

I'm not sure if the problem is Memtest or Windows.


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> 3533 at c13 Stable. Well, stable enough for me, ill run outside OS later on but I know if it gets that far its fine.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 210834


It sounds like you got a solid CPU out of the lottery. I am jealous.


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> It sounds like you got a solid CPU out of the lottery. I am jealous.


It’s ok, I guess. To get those frequencies I did have to route my A/C vent for my central cooling in my house through my radiator with some small duct and a custom adapter that fits onto the front of my case and I modified the side panel behind the cpu socket to hold a fan and a mount for another duct splitting from the primary. Basically the 240mm rad and my cpu socket is cooled by my homes air conditioning allowing me to run higher voltages. It’s until I can actually afford to do something more exotic like DICE or LN2. Costs me nothing extra, I just pop the adapter on my case when I want to bench at 4.4ghz+ and I never even hit 70c with the cooling that is already running throughout my home. I’m just recycling ????


----------



## wingman99

HolyFist said:


> I don't know how accurate Memtest is, if i test as soon as Windows starts it runs fine, if i go play games (no crashes in weeks doing whaveter including Spotify + Chrome open), close the game and anything after and test again it starts giving errors even before 50%.
> 
> I'm not sure if the problem is Memtest or Windows.


I had the same problem when rebooting the PC the AUTO secondary memory timings would change a little then it would fail Memtest depending on a reboot. After testing a working on it for two months I finally lowered the memory speed to solve the problem.


----------



## HolyFist

wingman99 said:


> I had the same problem when rebooting the PC the AUTO secondary memory timings would change a little then it would fail Memtest depending on a reboot. After testing a working on it for two months I finally lowered the memory speed to solve the problem.


I thought it could be that leftover 1GB+ RAM left due to Windows reserving it that's not used and then gets used after some Windows usage and Memtest would use it by then.


----------



## MrPhilo

CJMitsuki said:


> Ever since figuring out XFR/bclk OC this machine became something new. I thought it ran great when i used PState OC but this puts that to shame. Memory, CPU, everything runs like a monster. Cant wait for gen 2.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 210762


I have a similar setup like this

What is your average VCORE for all your CPU after a while? Mine is around 1.44V, I am using though PE2 + 102.5 BLCK, my RAM is 3553CL14, I get boosted to 4.457Ghz, games feel absolute smooth


----------



## nick name

MrPhilo said:


> I have a similar setup like this
> 
> What is your average VCORE for all your CPU after a while? Mine is around 1.44V, I am using though PE2 + 102.5 BLCK, my RAM is 3553CL14, I get boosted to 4.457Ghz, games feel absolute smooth


How much latency is added to your RAM when you guys change your BCLK? Mine goes up around 10ns and it's why I don't change BCLK.


----------



## neikosr0x

MrPhilo said:


> I have a similar setup like this
> 
> What is your average VCORE for all your CPU after a while? Mine is around 1.44V, I am using though PE2 + 102.5 BLCK, my RAM is 3553CL14, I get boosted to 4.457Ghz, games feel absolute smooth


lol for some reason my cant manually clock my CPU to any more than 100.6 BLCK if i do so my mobo will just freeze during boot. But sometimes when using PE4 my CPU clock itself to 102.4 BLCK and runs perfectly stable... i really don't know what the heck is wrong.


----------



## MrPhilo

nick name said:


> How much latency is added to your RAM when you guys change your BCLK? Mine goes up around 10ns and it's why I don't change BCLK.


Like 0.5-1ns, are you using Async or Sync for the BLCK? I am using Sync which hardly adds any latency, Async does.



neikosr0x said:


> lol for some reason my cant manually clock my CPU to any more than 100.6 BLCK if i do so my mobo will just freeze during boot. But sometimes when using PE4 my CPU clock itself to 102.4 BLCK and runs perfectly stable... i really don't know what the heck is wrong.


Could be your SSD that can't handle the higher BLCK

I can't seem to get my CPU to downvolt when I use Pstate, so I have done my VID and DID to get 4.3Ghz and got my voltage to 1.45V on the next box. I have left the Core Voltage to Auto on the main paige, cpu ratio auto, disabled core boost and performance enhancer on auto.

So in Windows it does go to 4.3Ghz and 1.45V but when it goes down to 2.2Ghz it stays at 1.45V.

I know Zenstates is having problem as mentioned by elmor on his Zenstate topic

'I believe I saw something about a recent change causing OC Mode (ratio increased above default) to always request the P0 voltage. Would someone be able to verify by going back to an older BIOS version?'

Would that also effect the bios?


----------



## Lupo91

I when overclock Bclk Asynchronous, it adds a latency of 15ns in my ram.


I can't do anything about it??


----------



## nick name

Lupo91 said:


> I when overclock Bclk Asynchronous, it adds a latency of 15ns in my ram.
> 
> 
> I can't do anything about it??


I don't think you can and that's why I haven't really done much with BCLK. If you find something that reduces the latency I'd love to know.

Edit:

Actually, I just set my BCLK to 102 and my latency didn't increase. Soooo I don't know what is going on.


----------



## lordzed83

Changing bclk does not add latency reduces if anything... Its more due to messed up trfc not working correct with new bclk value.


----------



## nick name

lordzed83 said:


> Changing bclk does not add latency reduces if anything... Its more due to messed up trfc not working correct with new bclk value.


It was something I heard from someone like Buildzoid or derBauer but I can't remember who it was. Then it was something I saw in mine own testing and so I abandoned it. But now I am not seeing the same results so that is a pleasant surprise. I appreciate you adding more detail.


----------



## Lupo91

lordzed83 said:


> Changing bclk does not add latency reduces if anything... Its more due to messed up trfc not working correct with new bclk value.



Based on the Aida test, the latency has risen from 60ns to 75ns with the asynchronous bclk change


These are my timings


----------



## Domez

Hello everyone,

First of all i'm a beginer in the AMD family so even after some research i'm a bit lost. I recenttly received a crosshair vii ( wifi ) with a Ryzen 2700x and as memory a kit of F4-3000C14D-32GTZR from Gskill ( the everycolor's one ). I assembled everything and now i have some issue.

I had during 4 days my pc which randomly shut down... I found here about the conflict with AI suite and Corsair link and now this issue is fully fixed. Did it damaged the board ? ( Around 10 shut down )

First i got Q code 24. I did some research and found ( here ) that's when windows boot with a new kernel. I already turn of fast boot but the code remains. I found on the asus forum that it's not a big deal and it's not even a problem. I asked Asus what this code means ( no kidding ) Their answer : "First, I inform you that the q code 24 is not identified on our database. Can you send us a photo to see what is it exactly?". I also asked G skill ( after some CPU z screenshoot ) they said the kit is working fine even with this q code, displayed at 1490~ etc. I did some memtest during a night on the 32gig and i get 0 error. So now i ask here with informed people : Is it a big deal, did i miss something, should i care and if yes should i change my kit ( can send it back until this saturday ).

I searched everywhere, about b die etc and this kit seems to be everything needed but i'm a bit scared about something that not working "fine"

If you think my kit is a problem ( or not very good ) what kit do you guys think is good for this mobo ( i need 32gig ) even if it's 4x8Gig. Can't find a real information about if it's really a big deal to use 4 stick of 8 over 2 sticks of 16gig... But you're the pro here so you obivously know.

Last point ( i swear it is ) my cpu is running a big hot even when doing absolutely nothing, full idle, with an opened case and a dark rock pro 4 it's around 45/50°c ( Room 26°c ) with Cooler set à 800-1000rpm. It is at 38°c the second after it is at 52°c, back to 45 etc etc, a lot of variation in a short time without doing anything. The cpu is OC at 4:15Ghz. It seems a bit hot to me... Am i stupid and it's normal or should i check something ?

Thank you very much if you read me, i really hope you'll don't be mad at me if my questions are dumb or already answered ( searched a lot during this week... but bored of people with oposite opinion... ) 

Have a good one !


----------



## Dopamin3

I'm on BIOS 0804. I have 2x Noctua NF-A12x25 connected to the two CPU fan headers- they work fine in PWM control and let me go down to 25% speed in PWM mode. All my fans connected to the channel headers (1 x NF-A12x25 on CHA_1 and 2 x NF-A14 on a PWM compatible splitter on CHA_2) don't let me set the minimum fan speed below 41%. I have tried loading optimized defaults and starting again. In the BIOS they are all set on PWM mode.

edit: I re-ran the QFAN calibration thing and it fixed it lol


----------



## Syldon

Domez said:


> Hello everyone,
> 
> First of all i'm a beginer in the AMD family so even after some research i'm a bit lost. I recenttly received a crosshair vii ( wifi ) with a Ryzen 2700x and as memory a kit of F4-3000C14D-32GTZR from Gskill ( the everycolor's one ). I assembled everything and now i have some issue.
> 
> I had during 4 days my pc which randomly shut down... I found here about the conflict with AI suite and Corsair link and now this issue is fully fixed. Did it damaged the board ? ( Around 10 shut down )
> 
> First i got Q code 24. I did some research and found ( here ) that's when windows boot with a new kernel. I already turn of fast boot but the code remains. I found on the asus forum that it's not a big deal and it's not even a problem. I asked Asus what this code means ( no kidding ) Their answer : "First, I inform you that the q code 24 is not identified on our database. Can you send us a photo to see what is it exactly?". I also asked G skill ( after some CPU z screenshoot ) they said the kit is working fine even with this q code, displayed at 1490~ etc. I did some memtest during a night on the 32gig and i get 0 error. So now i ask here with informed people : Is it a big deal, did i miss something, should i care and if yes should i change my kit ( can send it back until this saturday ).
> 
> I searched everywhere, about b die etc and this kit seems to be everything needed but i'm a bit scared about something that not working "fine"
> 
> If you think my kit is a problem ( or not very good ) what kit do you guys think is good for this mobo ( i need 32gig ) even if it's 4x8Gig. Can't find a real information about if it's really a big deal to use 4 stick of 8 over 2 sticks of 16gig... But you're the pro here so you obivously know.
> 
> Last point ( i swear it is ) my cpu is running a big hot even when doing absolutely nothing, full idle, with an opened case and a dark rock pro 4 it's around 45/50°c ( Room 26°c ) with Cooler set à 800-1000rpm. It is at 38°c the second after it is at 52°c, back to 45 etc etc, a lot of variation in a short time without doing anything. The cpu is OC at 4:15Ghz. It seems a bit hot to me... Am i stupid and it's normal or should i check something ?
> 
> Thank you very much if you read me, i really hope you'll don't be mad at me if my questions are dumb or already answered ( searched a lot during this week... but bored of people with oposite opinion... )
> 
> Have a good one !



For 32gb memory set ups 2 X 16 works best for the CH7. The CH6 works best with 4X8. I used 4X8 for about a year on the CH6. I couldnt get the 4X8 to work on the CH7 at a good speed, and gave 2 sticks away. There are a few posts here with 2 X 16, maybe that will help you find a good set. But if your is working at rated, and you have no errors, I could see no reason to change it. The biggest issue with 32gb is getting it to run at the higher frequencies. 3333mhz seems to be the cap, or at least that is the most I have seen anyone post a comment with here. Since you are running at 3000mhz, I would keep what you have.


Qcode 24 is normal for operating system posts. It depends on how you boot according to gupsterg. I sometimes get 24 or 40 depending on whether I boot from a full power down or not.


Spikes of 50c temps are normal. There is a 10c offset for temp monitoring. This shows up with the TCTL reading 10c higher than TDIE. TDIE being an accurate reading. You also have to remember it is 8 cores and not like a quad core. So when windows sends a few processes to the CPU and all cores fire up in one go, you will get those spikes. Once the processes are complete it drops straight back down. You can actually watch this happening if you use HWinfo or SIV monitoring programmes.


For the best set up set all CPU speeds to auto and volts to offset (+0.050). This was the advice from Elmor. The performance enhancer works fine but expect some higher temps. Also use windows balanced power plan, and not the Ryzen power plan.


----------



## ScottMcCoy

Hi guys,

I'm running Asus boards since years but the C7H really drives me crazy. The board refuses to boot randomly. Here are the main components:

CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 2700x
MB: C7H with BIOS 0804
RAM: 32GB (2x16 GB) G.Skill Trident Z RGB F4-3200C14D-32GTZR (@ 2133







)
VGA: Asus ROG Strix GTX 1080 TI OC
SSD: Samsung 970 Pro 1TB
PSU: Be Quiet! Dark Power Pro 11 – 1000W 80+ Platinum
LCD: Asus ROG Swift PG27VQ (connected via DisplayPort)

I've reflashed the BIOS with 0804 and had no issues for approx. 6 days. Right now the board boots into Windows but the white LED is lit --> no signal. No Q-code. Sometimes I get the Q-codes d6 an 0D. When this happens the boot process stops and both LED's (white and green) are lit. Any advice or suggestions? I've already reseated / reconnected everything and reflashed to 0702. The GPU is running fine in another machine. Can't test CPU or RAM due to ther lack of another AM4 board. Sorry if I'm in the wrong thread!


----------



## Domez

Syldon said:


> For 32gb memory set ups 2 X 16 works best for the CH7. The CH6 works best with 4X8. I used 4X8 for about a year on the CH6. I couldnt get the 4X8 to work on the CH7 at a good speed, and gave 2 sticks away. There are a few posts here with 2 X 16, maybe that will help you find a good set. But if your is working at rated, and you have no errors, I could see no reason to change it. The biggest issue with 32gb is getting it to run at the higher frequencies. 3333mhz seems to be the cap, or at least that is the most I have seen anyone post a comment with here. Since you are running at 3000mhz, I would keep what you have.
> 
> 
> Qcode 24 is normal for operating system posts. It depends on how you boot according to gupsterg. I sometimes get 24 or 40 depending on whether I boot from a full power down or not.
> 
> 
> Spikes of 50c temps are normal. There is a 10c offset for temp monitoring. This shows up with the TCTL reading 10c higher than TDIE. TDIE being an accurate reading. You also have to remember it is 8 cores and not like a quad core. So when windows sends a few processes to the CPU and all cores fire up in one go, you will get those spikes. Once the processes are complete it drops straight back down. You can actually watch this happening if you use HWinfo or SIV monitoring programmes.
> 
> 
> For the best set up set all CPU speeds to auto and volts to offset (+0.050). This was the advice from Elmor. The performance enhancer works fine but expect some higher temps. Also use windows balanced power plan, and not the Ryzen power plan.



Thank you for your answer,


This morning i got for the first time q code 40 ahah so i guess as you said it's fully normal.


I'll try to set my cpu speed as you said. On the bios right ? No software or something ? About the Windows balance power plan i read somewhere to use ryzen balance power... But i'm more confident about advice coming from here rather than a random website. So i'll do it !


About the memory i did some research here but it's pretty hard to find what you want on 3000 posts ahah. I'm just a bit scared because ( again ) i read somewhere amd's memory is very important, more than on intel mobo so now i just want the best for my money... The guy above got a problem with the 3200Mhz kit so i guess i'm ok with mine.


It's sad if he mobo can't handle 4 stick of 8 gig with a decent speed. Asus told me to ask AMD about it and amd answered me : you can go with 2 or 4 stick it should work ( should yes ) and to never go above 2933Mhz to not OC the cpu. Kinda funny. Anyway i'll stick with my kit then if you think it's ok


----------



## lordzed83

Lupo91 said:


> lordzed83 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Changing bclk does not add latency reduces if anything... Its more due to messed up trfc not working correct with new bclk value.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Based on the Aida test, the latency has risen from 60ns to 75ns with the asynchronous bclk change
> 
> 
> These are my timings
Click to expand...

I think You should start from reading manual and first page post pdf...


----------



## PhatSV6

*Errors on Proformance Enhancer level 3 and 4*

Is anyone else getting these errors even when stock but with PE level 3 or 4 enabled.


I do not get these on level 1 or 2.

all other settings are stock.


----------



## gupsterg

Domez said:


> This morning i got for the first time q code 40 ahah so i guess as you said it's fully normal.


Ref this link.

Q-Code: 24 you'll see on a fresh kernel. This will occur on a restart from OS or can even occur on post from shutdown. The time you see it on a post from shutdown is when Windows Fast Startup failed to "resume" successfully. You can see this logged in Event Viewer.

Q-Code: 40 you'll see on a resumed kernel. This should always occur on post from shutdown, unless the shutdown was a "borked" one and or on post an issue was detected not to resume kernel. As highlighted in manual for mobo Q-Code: 40 is also resume from S4 sleep.

Personally I don't Windows Fast Startup, has caused me more issues in the past and really can't say I've noted a real speed difference in getting to desktop with it on or off.



PhatSV6 said:


> Is anyone else getting these errors even when stock but with PE level 3 or 4 enabled.
> 
> 
> I do not get these on level 1 or 2.
> 
> all other settings are stock.


PE 3/4 is an OC, so basically a hardware error was detected and as it was correctable BSOD/Stop Code did not occur. You may need to supply more voltage to CPU/SOC, etc and or tweak some settings if wishing to use PE 3/4.


----------



## Domez

gupsterg said:


> Ref this link.
> 
> Q-Code: 24 you'll see on a fresh kernel. This will occur on a restart from OS or can even occur on post from shutdown. The time you see it on a post from shutdown is when Windows Fast Startup failed to "resume" successfully. You can see this logged in Event Viewer.
> 
> Q-Code: 40 you'll see on a resumed kernel. This should always occur on post from shutdown, unless the shutdown was a "borked" one and or on post an issue was detected not to resume kernel. As highlighted in manual for mobo Q-Code: 40 is also resume from S4 sleep.
> 
> Personally I don't Windows Fast Startup, has caused me more issues in the past and really can't say I've noted a real speed difference in getting to desktop with it on or off.



I already turned of the fast startup ( checked from the website your linked ), i tried to reboot but the code 24 remains. I'm sorry if i sound dumb but i can't understand with what you said if it's a problem or not, it seems not but the fact that it's logged in Even viewer kinda scare me 



Thank you very much anyway !


----------



## PhatSV6

PE 3/4 is an OC, so basically a hardware error was detected and as it was correctable BSOD/Stop Code did not occur. You may need to supply more voltage to CPU/SOC, etc and or tweak some settings if wishing to use PE 3/4.[/QUOTE]

Thank you for your reply.

I have tried adding more voltage. 

I have been all the way up to 1.95 pll and offset +0.10000 separate and together.

I have also tried these with all levels of llc and other settings in that area that are stated better for overclocking but still get the errors.

Its like these profiles are not configured correctly or something as I cannot replicate the errors no matter how high my oc is when using PE level auto, default, 1 or 2.

I'm currently trying to tweak the ppt, tdc and edc to try and get the same type of performance without the errors that come with the level 3 and 4

If anyone can help it would be awesome. I did notice through my testing that the errors don't seem to happen if the power plan is on something like balanced or ryzen power plan that does not let the clock fluctuate. (this also stops the cpu from boosting or down clocking though )


----------



## gupsterg

@Domez

The whole post was within the context of having Windows Fast Startup on. Reread it and I think you will get why you'd see an event for when fresh kernel loaded at post from shutdown when a resumed one should have occurred.

As you have Windows Fast Startup off Q-Code: 24 being displayed after a post from shutdown or post from restart from OS is correct and nothing to worry about. You will have no event logged in OS in connection to this being displayed, etc.
@PhatSV6

PE 3/4 besides tweak to limits have a tweak by The Stilt, link. I have tested it in the past, can't find notes at present. I'll have a quick go again and see what happens on my end  .


----------



## Johan45

@gupsterg
Not that this will help with your RAM training issues but on my CHVI that I use daily, I was experiencing an assortment of "random" issues. Boot drive wouldn't be visible off and on, black screens up till OS so unable to enter BIOS. Everything was functioning normally as I could manipulate the PC blindly but just not image on the screen. Random crashes as well not often but the system is fully tested R5 [email protected] 4.2 low voltage.
What ended up curing all of my woes was two things disabling the fast startup in Windows power plan and also disabling fast boot in BIOS. Been clear sailing for months since I did that.


----------



## Johan45

double post.


----------



## Johan45

Triple post, that was some weird glitch


----------



## PhatSV6

gupsterg said:


> @Domez
> 
> The whole post was within the context of having Windows Fast Startup on. Reread it and I think you will get why you'd see an event for when fresh kernel loaded at post from shutdown when a resumed one should have occurred.
> 
> As you have Windows Fast Startup off Q-Code: 24 being displayed after a post from shutdown or post from restart from OS is correct and nothing to worry about. You will have no event logged in OS in connection to this being displayed, etc.
> 
> @PhatSV6
> 
> PE 3/4 besides tweak to limits have a tweak by The Stilt, link. I have tested it in the past, can't find notes at present. I'll have a quick go again and see what happens on my end  .


 @gupsterg Thank you very much for you help, please let me know how you go and sorry for the late reply wife gave me cleaning duties lol.


----------



## VnnAmed

I have 1 simple question. Do your PCs freeze for like 3-4 sec when running IntelBurnTest? Mine does and it's driving me nuts. Previously it was randomly shutting down but it's gone after the 0804. Sadly now it freezes then works then freezes then works when I BurnTest it. On stock setting of course. I will swap everything except mobo and CPU to my older machine and try to replicate it but maybe it's normal?


----------



## nick name

VnnAmed said:


> I have 1 simple question. Do your PCs freeze for like 3-4 sec when running IntelBurnTest? Mine does and it's driving me nuts. Previously it was randomly shutting down but it's gone after the 0804. Sadly now it freezes then works then freezes then works when I BurnTest it. On stock setting of course. I will swap everything except mobo and CPU to my older machine and try to replicate it but maybe it's normal?


Do you have anything running like EVGA Precision OC? I've experienced video driver issues during testing with it open before. I don't let it start with Windows anymore and haven't had any of those issues since then. 

But I really haven't seen any freezes with IBT in particular.


----------



## gupsterg

@Johan45

I'll try knocking out Fast Boot in UEFI. May even checkout other settings which perhaps I should configure and not leave [Auto], etc.

I've all but pretty much given up on gaining 3533MHz  . You wouldn't believe it a night or so again I emulated exact same settings that got me 1000% error free out something like 1500%, with just 1 error. This time I used SOC: 1.062V vs 1.012V, I still got 1 error at circa 1200% out of 1800%. And again on next post profile fail at 100% .

3466MHz is sound for post to post variation. I've started to testing 4.15GHz more now. Gets me slightly over 1900 points in CB15 without performance bias. Passed so fat HCI/P95 128K in place FFT and now on P95 8K 4096K 12.8GB run.

@PhatSV6

Know that feeling too well when the wife is on my case!  . No bother on delayed reply, I can sometimes be here all day other times maybe gone for a few days. Anyhow I can report on PE 3 with 3466MHz The Stilt SOC: 1.025V VDIMM: 1.35V I had no WHEA errors over the course of ~30mins or so usage. As I'm on air for this setup I only ventured to 4 threads load of P95, ran some CB15, etc. WLAN error I know how to fix, just not got around to it and I think the WMI error is due to UEFI/HWINFO(?), as I'm using older version of app.



Spoiler


----------



## Johan45

I'm not sure if it was the update in the BIOS(for 2xx series) or the new version of Win10 but it was just out of the blue, losing the SSD had me a bit concerned but two simple settings cured a week's worth of hair pulling


----------



## PhatSV6

gupsterg said:


> @Johan45
> 
> I'll try knocking out Fast Boot in UEFI. May even checkout other settings which perhaps I should configure and not leave [Auto], etc.
> 
> I've all but pretty much given up on gaining 3533MHz  . You wouldn't believe it a night or so again I emulated exact same settings that got me 1000% error free out something like 1500%, with just 1 error. This time I used SOC: 1.062V vs 1.012V, I still got 1 error at circa 1200% out of 1800%. And again on next post profile fail at 100% .
> 
> 3466MHz is sound for post to post variation. I've started to testing 4.15GHz more now. Gets me slightly over 1900 points in CB15 without performance bias. Passed so fat HCI/P95 128K in place FFT and now on P95 8K 4096K 12.8GB run.
> 
> @PhatSV6
> 
> Know that feeling too well when the wife is on my case!  . No bother on delayed reply, I can sometimes be here all day other times maybe gone for a few days. Anyhow I can report on PE 3 with 3466MHz The Stilt SOC: 1.025V VDIMM: 1.35V I had no WHEA errors over the course of ~30mins or so usage. As I'm on air for this setup I only ventured to 4 threads load of P95, ran some CB15, etc. WLAN error I know how to fix, just not got around to it and I think the WMI error is due to UEFI/HWINFO(?), as I'm using older version of app.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 211344
> 
> 
> View attachment 211346


USA did a fresh install of os thinking just maybe it’s a driver or something but it’s still there????

As soon as I change to level 3 or 4 bam they start flooding on. What is really strang though is if I put it on the ryzen power plan where it does not fluctuate the clock speeds I don’t get them anymore. It’s like when it uses precision boost and can volt up or don along with clock speed it just cannot do it and throws the error. 
When I run load test across all cores I do not get the errorshardly any errors if any. 

So it’s either scaling of speeds to voltage or maybe a couple of cores cannot handle what it thinks it can.

WARNING INCOMING RAGE

Not sure but I have had this pc for 2 months now And not once been able to use it properly.
It cost me well over 4K aus to build and should have been a flawless process as my 7 year old 2600k intel was.
The amount of broken/ dodgy hardware I had to return was a nightmare.

Finally got my fist amd build done and nothing but instability issues all the time. If I cannot get the ryzen working flawless like it should by time intel release the 8 core I have to switch it’s taking to much of my time  and has damaged my image of amd already.


I appreciate any inside anyone has or help they can give maybe it’s just more faulty hardware and bad luck


----------



## CJMitsuki

PhatSV6 said:


> USA did a fresh install of os thinking just maybe it’s a driver or something but it’s still there????
> 
> As soon as I change to level 3 or 4 bam they start flooding on. What is really strang though is if I put it on the ryzen power plan where it does not fluctuate the clock speeds I don’t get them anymore. It’s like when it uses precision boost and can volt up or don along with clock speed it just cannot do it and throws the error.
> When I run load test across all cores I do not get the errorshardly any errors if any.
> 
> So it’s either scaling of speeds to voltage or maybe a couple of cores cannot handle what it thinks it can.
> 
> WARNING INCOMING RAGE
> 
> Not sure but I have had this pc for 2 months now And not once been able to use it properly.
> It cost me well over 4K aus to build and should have been a flawless process as my 7 year old 2600k intel was.
> The amount of broken/ dodgy hardware I had to return was a nightmare.
> 
> Finally got my fist amd build done and nothing but instability issues all the time. If I cannot get the ryzen working flawless like it should by time intel release the 8 core I have to switch it’s taking to much of my time  and has damaged my image of amd already.
> 
> 
> I appreciate any inside anyone has or help they can give maybe it’s just more faulty hardware and bad luck


If I had any insight to give on your problem I would definitely help. I have had my Ryzen system since they first launched when I got my 1700x then RMA’d it due to the segfault bug and bought a 2700x and the 1700x sits on my desk unopened to this day. I haven’t had any problems like you are having. I have had problems understanding the way things work at times but yours sounds like hardware issues and horrible luck. Amd runs great but it just seems like you are being cursed with a bad luck of the draw. I will scroll back and read about what all is going on and see if there is any way I can help out. Sorry about the hard time you are having.


----------



## Mannekino

Hi,

I'm looking for some advice with regard to overclocking my Ryzen 7 2700X CPU. Here are my specifications:



ASUS ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X
Corsair Hydro Series H110i RGB
G.SKILL Flare X F4-3200C14D-16GFX
MSI Radeon RX 580 Gaming X 8GB
Samsung 970 EVO MZ-V7E500BW
Fractal Design Define C
Seasonic FOCUS Plus Series 550W
EIZO FORIS FS2735
ASUS PCE-AC68 Dual-band Wireless-AC1900 PCI-E Adapter
Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
So far I've gone two different routes:

*Option 1: using Ai Suite 3 to do the overclocking and verifying the settings*

I haven't been a fan of similar tools in the past but I've been out of the "overclocking" game for a while and this is my first new PC in 5 years and I wanted to it a try. I was actually surprised with the results. I got a stable result at full core overclock at 4.275 GHz but I lowered it down to 4.2 GHz. I ran Prime95 for about 90 minutes without any issues. Basically the following was done by Ai Suite 3:



Loaded optimized defaults before starting
Ran Ai Suite 3 overclocking utility with both TPUI and TPUII and the results were the same
Afterwards enabled D.O.C.P. for my memory kit
CPU Core Ratio to 42
CPU Core Voltage to Offset mode
CPU Offset Mode Sign to +
CPU Core Voltage Offset on Auto
*Result in CINEBENCH 1861*
*Option 2: using the Performance Enhancer feature*

I feel like for my needs I won't need a full overclock on all the CPU cores but I rather have the best possible boost when playing games and have the lowest power usage as possible when I'm just doing work or watching some streams on my second monitor while doing other stuff. I've read and watched a bunch of reviews and also did some research like reading the enthousiast PDF linked in this thread. What I changed for this option was



Made sure I have the Balanced power profile set in Windows 10
Loaded optimized defaults
Enabled D.O.C.P. for my memory kit
Performance Enhancer to Level 3 (OC)
CPU Offset Mode Sign to +
CPU Core Voltage Offset on Auto
*Result in CINEBENCH 1842*

With this configuration I'm getting 4.125 GHz in AMD Ryzen Master at a CPU Voltage of 1.30625. I feel like I should be able to get better performance out of the automatic overclocking features. Am I correct this is both XFR2 and Performance Boost 2?

I've tried going all the way to Level 4 (OC) and setting my CPU Core Voltage Offset to 0.05 but then my system freezes after a few seconds into CINEBENCH.

I also tried the same settings as mentioned in the ENTHUSIAST HIGHLIGHTS PDF file but that didn't work at all for me. Somehow the CPU Core Voltage was really low and there was barely any automatic overclocking.

I would love to get some help in further tuning my system to get the best results from the auto overclocking features this board and CPU have to offer.

Thank you.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Mannekino said:


> Hi,
> 
> I'm looking for some advice with regard to overclocking my Ryzen 7 2700X CPU. Here are my specifications:
> 
> 
> 
> ASUS ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO
> AMD Ryzen 7 2700X
> Corsair Hydro Series H110i RGB
> G.SKILL Flare X F4-3200C14D-16GFX
> MSI Radeon RX 580 Gaming X 8GB
> Samsung 970 EVO MZ-V7E500BW
> Fractal Design Define C
> Seasonic FOCUS Plus Series 550W
> EIZO FORIS FS2735
> ASUS PCE-AC68 Dual-band Wireless-AC1900 PCI-E Adapter
> Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
> So far I've gone two different routes:
> 
> *Option 1: using Ai Suite 3 to do the overclocking and verifying the settings*
> 
> I haven't been a fan of similar tools in the past but I've been out of the "overclocking" game for a while and this is my first new PC in 5 years and I wanted to it a try. I was actually surprised with the results. I got a stable result at full core overclock at 4.275 GHz but I lowered it down to 4.2 GHz. I ran Prime95 for about 90 minutes without any issues. Basically the following was done by Ai Suite 3:
> 
> 
> 
> Loaded optimized defaults before starting
> Ran Ai Suite 3 overclocking utility with both TPUI and TPUII and the results were the same
> Afterwards enabled D.O.C.P. for my memory kit
> CPU Core Ratio to 42
> CPU Core Voltage to Offset mode
> CPU Offset Mode Sign to +
> CPU Core Voltage Offset on Auto
> *Result in CINEBENCH 1861*
> *Option 2: using the Performance Enhancer feature*
> 
> I feel like for my needs I won't need a full overclock on all the CPU cores but I rather have the best possible boost when playing games and have the lowest power usage as possible when I'm just doing work or watching some streams on my second monitor while doing other stuff. I've read and watched a bunch of reviews and also did some research like reading the enthousiast PDF linked in this thread. What I changed for this option was
> 
> 
> 
> Loaded optimized defaults
> Enabled D.O.C.P. for my memory kit
> Performance Enhancer to Level 3 (OC)
> CPU Offset Mode Sign to +
> CPU Core Voltage Offset on Auto
> *Result in CINEBENCH 1842*
> 
> With this configuration I'm getting 4.125 GHz in AMD Ryzen Master at a CPU Voltage of 1.30625. I feel like I should be able to get better performance out of the automatic overclocking features. Am I correct this is both XFR2 and Performance Boost 2?
> 
> I've tried going all the way to Level 4 (OC) and setting my CPU Core Voltage Offset to 0.05 but then my system freezes after a few seconds into CINEBENCH.
> 
> I would love to get some help in further tuning my system to get the best results from the auto overclocking features this board and CPU have to offer.
> 
> Thank you.


Add a +.0500v offset with PE4 and a bclk of 102 but once you go to bclk of 102 your memory frequency will jump up. No worries, just go down one frequency strap and you’ll be right where you were before. On PBO I have mine set to auto and the scalar set to 10x. If you want to got even higher then just bump the offset up a bit and as you increase bclk your boost will get pretty insane. At 104 bclk and .1v offset I get 4.522ghz boost on all cores and the Vcore hits 1.58 but it immediately downvolts afterwards. I’m not saying to run my settings but the 102 bclk should be fine. Just make sure you monitor the temps. You’ll probably get 4.35-4.4 ghz boost with 102. Depends on cooling and CPU. With my 104bclk setup I get about 2100 in CB.


----------



## Mannekino

CJMitsuki said:


> Add a +.0500v offset with PE4 and a bclk of 102 but once you go to bclk of 102 your memory frequency will jump up. No worries, just go down one frequency strap and you’ll be right where you were before. On PBO I have mine set to auto and the scalar set to 10x. If you want to got even higher then just bump the offset up a bit and as you increase bclk your boost will get pretty insane. At 104 bclk and .1v offset I get 4.522ghz boost on all cores and the Vcore hits 1.58 but it immediately downvolts afterwards. I’m not saying to run my settings but the 102 bclk should be fine. Just make sure you monitor the temps. You’ll probably get 4.35-4.4 ghz boost with 102. Depends on cooling and CPU. With my 104bclk setup I get about 2100 in CB.


Hi,

Maybe you missed it in my post but I tried going for Level 4 (OC) with an offset of +0.05 but then my system freezes a few second in. Should I try it in combination with a BLCK of 102? Or I am **** out of luck and is this not something that can work for me?


----------



## gupsterg

@PhatSV6

I'm using W7 "High Performance" power plan with core parking disabled and min CPU 5% to allow down clocking/volting. In the past used "Balanced" with again CP disabled, but no need to edit min CPU state. I do not think it is a power plan issue, make min CPU state in Ryzen Balanced lower so down clocking/volting occurs and see if you still have WHEA errors. 

Only my opinion PE 3/4 may not be usable on all CPUs. Which really isn't an AMD Ryzen / ASUS issue but an OC issue/"luck of silicon lottery draw".

Again only my opinion I prefer PState 0 (ACB) OC even though Ryzen gen 2 PB/XFR did appeal to me over gen 1.

I had been on Intel since Q6600 launch and never considered AMD until Ryzen came along, I can't see myself going back TBH.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Mannekino said:


> Hi,
> 
> Maybe you missed it in my post but I tried going for Level 4 (OC) with an offset of +0.05 but then my system freezes a few second in. Should I try it in combination with a BLCK of 102? Or I am **** out of luck and is this not something that can work for me?


If it freezes then it wasn’t enough voltage. Try one tick higher. The bclk changes the boost clocks significantly. It would be like PE4 with default bclk at 4.25ghz boost and 4.35ghz with 102 bclk OC. It’s only a matter of finding the right offset voltages to pair with the increased boost frequency and if you can control the temps that come with the increased voltage. Also, do you run LLC and if so, which levels?
Also, when you run Cinebench drag the picture offscreen where you can still click Run but not see the picture rendering. You’ll get better score and it may help with freezing.


----------



## Mannekino

CJMitsuki said:


> If it freezes then it wasn’t enough voltage. Try one tick higher. The bclk changes the boost clocks significantly. It would be like PE4 with default bclk at 4.25ghz boost and 4.35ghz with 102 bclk OC. It’s only a matter of finding the right offset voltages to pair with the increased boost frequency and if you can control the temps that come with the increased voltage. Also, do you run LLC and if so, which levels?


You're talking just a little bit above my current knowledge of overclocking level, I'm sorry. I know that LLC stands for Load Line Calibration but that's about it, I don't know what it does. Everything else is set what comes with the optimal default settings. I only changed the settings mentioned in my initial comment. I forgot to mention I also tried an offset of +0.625 with Level 4 (OC). It went to that number when I entered 0.6). What do you suggest I try first. Increasing the BLCK to 102 with the Level 3 (OC). Or first try to get Level 4 (OC) working with a higher offset?


----------



## CJMitsuki

Mannekino said:


> You're talking just a little bit above my current knowledge of overclocking level, I'm sorry. I know that LLC stands for Load Line Calibration but that's about it, I don't know what it does. Everything else is set what comes with the optimal default settings. I only changed the settings mentioned in my initial comment. I forgot to mention I also tried an offset of +0.625 with Level 4 (OC). It went to that number when I entered 0.6). What do you suggest I try first. Increasing the BLCK to 102 with the Level 3 (OC). Or first try to get Level 4 (OC) working with a higher offset?


Ok, if you are not experienced at least a little then don’t go with that high of an offset. Your problem is the Load Line Calibration. What ot does is during the moment your CPU has a load it predicts how much the voltage will drop due to the load applied to the cpu during a task and compensates by raising the voltage so that it doesn’t drop below a stable level and crash during load. I think that is what is happening to you. Just go back and add LLC to compensate for the drop in voltage during load and you shouldn’t freeze. Don’t bother with the higher offsets. Until you are familiar with overclocking a bit I wouldn’t go above .05v offset or 102 bclk until you have some experience with temperatures and if your cooling has the ability to sustain it.


----------



## gupsterg

CJMitsuki said:


> What ot does is during the moment your CPU has a load it predicts how much the voltage will drop due to the load applied to the cpu during a task and compensates by raising the voltage so that it doesn’t drop below a stable level and crash during load.


I apologise in advance, but I just can not accept part of that information. The VRM can not predict how much droop will occur.
@Mannekino

See OP here, link. Reference section *Load Line Calibration!?*. You are changing the load line resistance, so the slope will be adjusted, this can introduce overshoot.


----------



## Mannekino

CJMitsuki said:


> Ok, if you are not experienced at least a little then don’t go with that high of an offset. Your problem is the Load Line Calibration. What ot does is during the moment your CPU has a load it predicts how much the voltage will drop due to the load applied to the cpu during a task and compensates by raising the voltage so that it doesn’t drop below a stable level and crash during load. I think that is what is happening to you. Just go back and add LLC to compensate for the drop in voltage during load and you shouldn’t freeze. Don’t bother with the higher offsets. Until you are familiar with overclocking a bit I wouldn’t go above .05v offset or 102 bclk until you have some experience with temperatures and if your cooling has the ability to sustain it.


Well now I feel bad . I'm not inexperienced with overclocking I'm just new to AMD Ryzen. I'm 35 and I had a lot of experience with overclocking in the past. I'm just not familiar with many of the current acronyms you're using. I'm keeping a close eye on my temps using both Corsair iCUE for my coolant temperature and HWiNFO for the core temperatures. Yesterday I ran Prime95 for 90 with the manual all core overclock to 4.2 GHz with an auto CPU offset.

So what do you suggest I try out now? Put my Performance Enhancer on Level 4 (OC) and put back the CPU Core Voltage to full Auto mode or keep it as is and then put LLC on Level 1 and keep increasing until stable?

I added screenshots of my current BIOS settings.



gupsterg said:


> See OP here, link. Reference section *Load Line Calibration!?*. You are changing the load line resistance, so the slope will be adjusted, this can introduce overshoot.


I will give that post a read. My goal is to get the best performance possible out the automatic overclocking features my motherboard and CPU have to offer as mentioned in my first post in this thread. Seems that Performance Enhancer Level 3 or 4 (OC) is the way to achieve that. Hopefully I can get over 1900 in CINEBENCH. Any help is greatly appreciated.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Well, predict was the only word I could think of to explain how it acts. I think a bunch of technical referencing would only confuse more since he explained he was new to this. Of course it can’t predict droop as that would be different for every cpu setup. Sometimes simplifying things for someone can convey things much better than the alternative. Also yes, there will most definitely be overshoot but honestly, we see high voltages through XFR all the time and I literally run them all the time. I think it’s fine at this stage but anyone that doesn’t feel comfortable with it should not do it. I do run 1.5v+ on a daily basis and have for months now. Of course there is downvolting but it does regularly run heavy benchmarks and such. I think the real problem is temperature rather than voltage, to a certain point of course.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Mannekino said:


> Well now I feel bad . I'm not inexperienced with overclocking I'm just new to AMD Ryzen. I'm 35 and I had a lot of experience with overclocking in the past. I'm just not familiar with many of the current acronyms you're using. I'm keeping a close eye on my temps using both Corsair iCUE for my coolant temperature and HWiNFO for the core temperatures. Yesterday I ran Prime95 for 90 with the manual all core overclock to 4.2 GHz with an auto CPU offset.
> 
> So what do you suggest I try out now? Put my Performance Enhancer on Level 4 (OC) and put back the CPU Core Voltage to full Auto mode or keep it as is and then put LLC on Level 1 and keep increasing until stable?
> 
> I added screenshots of my current BIOS settings.
> 
> 
> 
> I will give that post a read. My goal is to get the best performance possible out the automatic overclocking features my motherboard and CPU have to offer as mentioned in my first post in this thread. Seems that Performance Enhancer Level 3 or 4 (OC) is the way to achieve that. Hopefully I can get over 1900 in CINEBENCH. Any help is greatly appreciated.


Ah, ok I see. Well in that case start with the .05v positive offset and the 102 bclk but with maybe a LLC level 4, 130%, pretty much go a step below maxing most settings out in the LLC settings. The VRMs on the C7H is great, I rarely ever see them get hot and don’t ever recall them doing so tbh. 1900 in CB will be fairly easy once you stabilize the cpu with LLC. It’s really up to your cooling but you have h100i. I have 115i pro which not much difference and it’s fine but I also have a little modding to make it cool a bit better than average so just pay attn to it. I don’t want you to harm your cpu is all.


----------



## CJMitsuki

just got this with the settings i mentioned to you so you could probably drop bclk altogether and use positive offset since all you want is 1900




Spoiler


----------



## Mannekino

Hmm, since I failed using Level 4 (OC) with an offset of 0.05 and 0.0625 I upped it to 0.0725 and now CINEBENCH runs and I'm getting 1909. I'm not sure about the high voltage though, see attached screenshots. This is what I'm getting now, where do you recommend I go from here. I'm happy with this result just looking to achieve two things.

Also just to correct you, I have the H110i not the H100i, the H110i is 280mm.

Maybe I should giving the 0.05 offset a try with the LLC you suggested to see if that is stable also.


Get this level of performance with lowest voltage possible.
Make sure it underclocks as normal when I'm not doing any CPU intensive tasks.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Mannekino said:


> Hmm, since I failed using Level 4 (OC) with an offset of 0.05 and 0.0625 I upped it to 0.0725 and now CINEBENCH runs and I'm getting 1909. I'm not sure about the high voltage though, see attached screenshots. This is what I'm getting now, where do you recommend I go from here. I'm happy with this result just looking to achieve two things.
> 
> 
> 
> Get this level of performance with lowest voltage possible.
> Make sure it underclocks as normal when I'm not doing any CPU intensive tasks.


Good first result but you can get voltage lower with some testing. The voltages on XFR will be high when boosting but you should be downvolting immediately once the heavy run is over. In normal day to day tasks it isn’t like that. You’ll get like 2-4 cores boosting to 4.4-4.5 or one core at 4.5 depending on the demand of the task. If you aren’t comfortable with the voltage I would try PState OC so you can dial in the voltage specifically. 1900 is still achievable but more testing with frequency and voltages are required.


----------



## PhatSV6

gupsterg said:


> @PhatSV6
> 
> I'm using W7 "High Performance" power plan with core parking disabled and min CPU 5% to allow down clocking/volting. In the past used "Balanced" with again CP disabled, but no need to edit min CPU state. I do not think it is a power plan issue, make min CPU state in Ryzen Balanced lower so down clocking/volting occurs and see if you still have WHEA errors.
> 
> Only my opinion PE 3/4 may not be usable on all CPUs. Which really isn't an AMD Ryzen / ASUS issue but an OC issue/"luck of silicon lottery draw".
> 
> Again only my opinion I prefer PState 0 (ACB) OC even though Ryzen gen 2 PB/XFR did appeal to me over gen 1.
> 
> I had been on Intel since Q6600 launch and never considered AMD until Ryzen came along, I can't see myself going back TBH.


 @gupsterg appreciate the opinion mate. Not much more I can really try but thanks for the help regardless.


----------



## gupsterg

CJMitsuki said:


> Well, predict was the only word I could think of to explain how it acts. I think a bunch of technical referencing would only confuse more since he explained he was new to this. Of course it can’t predict droop as that would be different for every cpu setup. Sometimes simplifying things for someone can convey things much better than the alternative. Also yes, there will most definitely be overshoot but honestly, we see high voltages through XFR all the time and I literally run them all the time. I think it’s fine at this stage but anyone that doesn’t feel comfortable with it should not do it. I do run 1.5v+ on a daily basis and have for months now. Of course there is downvolting but it does regularly run heavy benchmarks and such. I think the real problem is temperature rather than voltage, to a certain point of course.


Again sorry, but I just felt I needed to state that information.

The thing about what we see when PB/XFR occurs at stock is that it will only occur if headroom is there, when we change PE from default to 1/2/3/4 we have changed parameters. See this extract:-



Spoiler






> To see what the actual maximum voltage FIT allows the CPU to run at in various different scenarios is, I disabled all of the other limiters and safe guards. With every other limiter / safe guard disabled, the reliability (FIT) becomes the only restrain. The voltage command which the CPU sends to the VRM regulator via the SVI2 interface and the actual effective voltage were then recorded in various scenarios. In stock configuration the sustained maximum effective voltage during all-core stress allowed by FIT was =< 1.330V. Meanwhile, in single core workloads the sustained maximum was =< 1.425V. When the “FIT” parameters were adjusted by increasing the scalar value from the default 1x to the maximum allowed value of 10x, the maximum all-core voltage became 1.380V, while the maximum single core voltage increased to 1.480V. The recorded figures appear to fall very well in line with the seen and known behavior, frequency, power and thermal scaling wise.
> 
> The seen behavior suggests that the full silicon reliability can be maintained up to around 1.330V in all-core workloads (i.e. high current) and up to 1.425V in single core workloads (i.e. low current). Use of higher voltages is definitely possible (as FIT will allow up to 1.380V / 1.480V when scalar is increased by 10x), but it more than likely results in reduced silicon lifetime / reliability. By how much? Only the good folks at AMD who have access to the simulation data will know for sure.


Source link



So as we can see single core loads vs multicore "FIT" determination/advise differs. 



Mannekino said:


> Hmm, since I failed using Level 4 (OC) with an offset of 0.05 and 0.0625 I upped it to 0.0725 and now CINEBENCH runs and I'm getting 1909. I'm not sure about the high voltage though, see attached screenshots. This is what I'm getting now, where do you recommend I go from here. I'm happy with this result just looking to achieve two things.
> 
> Also just to correct you, I have the H110i not the H100i, the H110i is 280mm.
> 
> Maybe I should giving the 0.05 offset a try with the LLC you suggested to see if that is stable also.
> 
> 
> Get this level of performance with lowest voltage possible.
> Make sure it underclocks as normal when I'm not doing any CPU intensive tasks.


You have RAM which Ryzen favours. The ASUS board has The Stilt's timings presets within DRAM Timings control I would use those vs D.O.C.P. Later as you gain experience perhaps tweak timings.

You may find PState 0 (ACB) OC isn't lacking in performance but what you will gain is more control on max voltage to CPU. This could lead to better temps/noise profile, etc, etc.

With PState 0 as 4.15GHz at VID: 1.356V using 3466MHz The Stilt (VDIMM: 1.35V) I have ~1905 multicore / 175 single core in CB15 without OS/Performance bias tweaks. I see peaks of ~72C in stress testing on tDIE, average is lower, but most of all I think the voltage is great for longevity. CPU still down clock/volts. I'm using a ThermalRight Archon IB-E X2 with 2x TY-143, has lapped base, AS5 spread by plastic card. This is not yet fully finalised profile, but more so some voltages used in past other testing, etc.



Spoiler
















PhatSV6 said:


> @gupsterg appreciate the opinion mate. Not much more I can really try but thanks for the help regardless.


All is not lost IMO my fellow Ryzen/C7H user  . Why not dabble in your own OC setup?


----------



## Mannekino

gupsterg said:


> You have RAM which Ryzen favours. The ASUS board has The Stilt's timings presets within DRAM Timings control I would use those vs D.O.C.P. Later as you gain experience perhaps tweak timings.
> 
> You may find PState 0 (ACB) OC isn't lacking in performance but what you will gain is more control on max voltage to CPU. This could lead to better temps/noise profile, etc, etc.
> 
> With PState 0 as 4.15GHz at VID: 1.356V using 3466MHz The Stilt (VDIMM: 1.35V) I have ~1905 multicore / 175 single core in CB15 without OS/Performance bias tweaks. I see peaks of ~72C in stress testing on tDIE, average is lower, but most of all I think the voltage is great for longevity. CPU still down clock/volts. I'm using a ThermalRight Archon IB-E X2 with 2x TY-143, has lapped base, AS5 spread by plastic card. This is not yet fully finalised profile, but more so some voltages used in past other testing, etc.


I'm afraid you're losing me here with all the acronyms "ACB", "PState", unfortunately this is a bit too much information for me to proces. I think I'm going to settle with Level 3 (OC) while having a auto voltage offset. I think Level 4 (OC) is stable now also but I have to increase my voltage offset to +0.725 which seems a bit too high. I see 1.4125 in AMD Ryzen Master with this configuration and it's 1.384 in CPU-Z. I'm not getting your performance with your lower voltages.

Also for some weird reason my Bus Clock is at 99.8 MHz all the time instead of 100. Do you know why this is the case?


----------



## PhatSV6

gupsterg said:


> Again sorry, but I just felt I needed to state that information.
> 
> The thing about what we see when PB/XFR occurs at stock is that it will only occur if headroom is there, when we change PE from default to 1/2/3/4 we have changed parameters. See this extract:-
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Source link
> 
> 
> 
> So as we can see single core loads vs multicore "FIT" determination/advise differs.
> 
> 
> 
> You have RAM which Ryzen favours. The ASUS board has The Stilt's timings presets within DRAM Timings control I would use those vs D.O.C.P. Later as you gain experience perhaps tweak timings.
> 
> You may find PState 0 (ACB) OC isn't lacking in performance but what you will gain is more control on max voltage to CPU. This could lead to better temps/noise profile, etc, etc.
> 
> With PState 0 as 4.15GHz at VID: 1.356V using 3466MHz The Stilt (VDIMM: 1.35V) I have ~1905 multicore / 175 single core in CB15 without OS/Performance bias tweaks. I see peaks of ~72C in stress testing on tDIE, average is lower, but most of all I think the voltage is great for longevity. CPU still down clock/volts. I'm using a ThermalRight Archon IB-E X2 with 2x TY-143, has lapped base, AS5 spread by plastic card. This is not yet fully finalised profile, but more so some voltages used in past other testing, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 211524
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All is not lost IMO my fellow Ryzen/C7H user  . Why not dabble in your own OC setup?


 Yeah IMO the precision boost overdrive O.C. is the best of both multi core and single core performance. I have tried ps O.C. and traditional multiplier which are fine with no errors and stable which is what is so strange. Regardless cheers for the help


----------



## gupsterg

Mannekino said:


> I'm afraid you're losing me here with all the acronyms "ACB", "PState", unfortunately this is a bit too much information for me to proces. I think I'm going to settle with Level 3 (OC) while having a auto voltage offset. I think Level 4 (OC) is stable now also but I have to increase my voltage offset to +0.725 which seems a bit too high. I see 1.4125 in AMD Ryzen Master with this configuration and it's 1.384 in CPU-Z. I'm not getting your performance with your lower voltages.
> 
> Also for some weird reason my Bus Clock is at 99.8 MHz all the time instead of 100. Do you know why this is the case?


PState = Power State. On Ryzen changing PState 0 will make the all cores boost (ACB) to what you may want. Precision Boost (PB)/Extended Frequency Range (XFR) will be disabled when change PState 0 by +25MHz than default. This still does not mean the CPU can not and will not use lower states from what I have experienced in the past.

Ryzen has no hardware for accurate BCLK monitoring, so you will see fluctuation/variation that is not there in reality, OP of the ROG C7H thread has info  .



PhatSV6 said:


> Yeah IMO the precision boost overdrive O.C. is the best of both multi core and single core performance. I have tried ps O.C. and traditional multiplier which are fine with no errors and stable which is what is so strange. Regardless cheers for the help


I can't find the screenie at present, I will gain one on this rig ASAP. In the past I have seen when using PC normally that even if PState 0 has been changed you can have CPU not all cores going to max depending upon usage/loading. There is a screenie in the C6H thread when this discussion arose there, posted by me. Shame forum is such nightmare for searching after change it's undergone.

If you have checked in your uses then fair enough the way PE OC is working maybe what you want. For me I still prefer the PState 0 change  .


----------



## neikosr0x

MrPhilo said:


> Like 0.5-1ns, are you using Async or Sync for the BLCK? I am using Sync which hardly adds any latency, Async does.
> 
> 
> 
> Could be your SSD that can't handle the higher BLCK
> 
> I can't seem to get my CPU to downvolt when I use Pstate, so I have done my VID and DID to get 4.3Ghz and got my voltage to 1.45V on the next box. I have left the Core Voltage to Auto on the main paige, cpu ratio auto, disabled core boost and performance enhancer on auto.
> 
> So in Windows it does go to 4.3Ghz and 1.45V but when it goes down to 2.2Ghz it stays at 1.45V.
> 
> I know Zenstates is having problem as mentioned by elmor on his Zenstate topic
> 
> 'I believe I saw something about a recent change causing OC Mode (ratio increased above default) to always request the P0 voltage. Would someone be able to verify by going back to an older BIOS version?'
> 
> Would that also effect the bios?


ohh could be, i have 1 kind of old SSD and another old 2.5/Disc on the PC, Other than that 1 Samsung nvme m.2 and some firecuda sata3 for storage. i will try disconnecting some of them and see, which one is failing. Thanks bro!


----------



## Mannekino

gupsterg said:


> PState = Power State. On Ryzen changing PState 0 will make the all cores boost (ACB) to what you may want. Precision Boost (PB)/Extended Frequency Range (XFR) will be disabled when change PState 0 by +25MHz than default. This still does not mean the CPU can not and will not use lower states from what I have experienced in the past.
> 
> Ryzen has no hardware for accurate BCLK monitoring, so you will see fluctuation/variation that is not there in reality, OP of the ROG C7H thread has info  .
> 
> I can't find the screenie at present, I will gain one on this rig ASAP. In the past I have seen when using PC normally that even if PState 0 has been changed you can have CPU not all cores going to max depending upon usage/loading. There is a screenie in the C6H thread when this discussion arose there, posted by me. Shame forum is such nightmare for searching after change it's undergone.
> 
> If you have checked in your uses then fair enough the way PE OC is working maybe what you want. For me I still prefer the PState 0 change  .



OK, thanks for the information. Do you have any recommendations for wishes/situation and do you agree with my solution for it?

So to reiterate: I would like to have the best possible boosting when I'm playing games and when I'm just doing less CPU intensive tasks I want it to lower the clock speeds. I'm thinking the best way to achieve that is to let XFR2 and Precision Boost 2 do its thing so I'm trying to maximize that with the Performance Enhancer. That's why I spent the extra cash on this high quality motherboard. Right now I have it at Level 4 (OC) with a CPU Core Voltage offset off 0.075. Below is my HWiNFO readout when running Prime95. I would love to read your advice/instructions.

*Edit*

I'm so confused right now, I using the same settings as before when I got the 1909 CINEBENCH score with Level 4 (OC) and an offset of +0.0725 and I'm getting a CINEBENCH score of not even 1600. When I load up AMD Ryzen Master I see that some of my cores are at 2 GHz and something when others are boosted just beyond 4 GHz. Is AMD Ryzen Master ******* with my setting as soon as I open it?


----------



## nick name

Mannekino said:


> OK, thanks for the information. Do you have any recommendations for wishes/situation and do you agree with my solution for it?
> 
> So to reiterate: I would like to have the best possible boosting when I'm playing games and when I'm just doing less CPU intensive tasks I want it to lower the clock speeds. I'm thinking the best way to achieve that is to let XFR2 and Precision Boost 2 do its thing so I'm trying to maximize that with the Performance Enhancer. That's why I spent the extra cash on this high quality motherboard. Right now I have it at Level 4 (OC) with a CPU Core Voltage offset off 0.075. Below is my HWiNFO readout when running Prime95. I would love to read your advice/instructions.
> 
> *Edit*
> 
> I'm so confused right now, I using the same settings as before when I got the 1909 CINEBENCH score with Level 4 (OC) and an offset of +0.0725 and I'm getting a CINEBENCH score of not even 1600. When I load up AMD Ryzen Master I see that some of my cores are at 2 GHz and something when others are boosted just beyond 4 GHz. Is AMD Ryzen Master ******* with my setting as soon as I open it?


Everything looks normal. The cores should be dropping down to 22. It sounds like something else was running in the background as your were making your Cinebench run. How many times did you run Cinebench and did you check task manager for running programs like Steam?


----------



## gupsterg

Mannekino said:


> OK, thanks for the information. Do you have any recommendations for wishes/situation and do you agree with my solution for it?


NP  . The question you pose I have not understood.



Mannekino said:


> So to reiterate: I would like to have the best possible boosting when I'm playing games and when I'm just doing less CPU intensive tasks I want it to lower the clock speeds. I'm thinking the best way to achieve that is to let XFR2 and Precision Boost 2 do its thing so I'm trying to maximize that with the Performance Enhancer. That's why I spent the extra cash on this high quality motherboard. Right now I have it at Level 4 (OC) with a CPU Core Voltage offset off 0.075. Below is my HWiNFO readout when running Prime95. I would love to read your advice/instructions.


Your average CPU Core Voltage (SVI2 TFN) is ~1.38V this is inline with what The Stilt has stated he saw where CPU was running without "limiters", "FIT" doing as it needed regarding voltage, "scalar" had been max'd to 10x (ie 1.55 VID limit IIRC). The max of ~1.487V is again inline with what he's stated, as you have core bounced to 4.34GHz.

Here is my setup to show as example that cores are not all bouncing normal usage to 4.15GHz.



Spoiler
















Mannekino said:


> *Edit*
> 
> I'm so confused right now, I using the same settings as before when I got the 1909 CINEBENCH score with Level 4 (OC) and an offset of +0.0725 and I'm getting a CINEBENCH score of not even 1600. When I load up AMD Ryzen Master I see that some of my cores are at 2 GHz and something when others are boosted just beyond 4 GHz. Is AMD Ryzen Master ******* with my setting as soon as I open it?


Some have experienced this when it can not be explained by another process in OS affecting bench, is it a bug dunno. Personally I don't use Ryzen Master for anything.

This ZIP contains:-

i) 3 runs each of AIDA64, CPU-Z, CB15, 3DM Skydiver Physics benches. All are no OS/Performance bias tweaks.

ii) UEFI settings txt, this is a very "plug'n'play" profile for my HW, minimal changes from UEFI defaults/[Auto].

iii) HWINFO screenie where I have P95 v28.10b1 (128K 128K in place FFT) loading CPU and measured DMM voltages for VCORE, SOC and VDIMM marked on it. HWINFO polling interval 750ms.

iv) Some OS info like PowerPlan, etc. It's just W7P x64 installed from ISO as guided to make in ROG C7H thread. No OS tweaks, etc, so is "daily usage", etc.


----------



## nick name

In my quest to find a Performance Enhancer between Level 3 and Level 4 I got guidance from elmor and The Stilt instructing me to change EDC Current values. However, I can't find anything for EDC other than the Relaxed Throttling option. Does anyone know where I can adjust EDC Current values?

I've checked in BIOS 702 since I couldn't find it in 804, but I couldn't find it in 702 either.


----------



## Mannekino

Hi, I looked at your BIOS configuration but I'm not seeing any overclock settings for the CPU. You are letting it boost all by itself? I don't understand, in CINEBENCH it says 4.15 GHz that means you must have configured the baseclock like that no?


----------



## MrPhilo

gupsterg said:


> Again sorry, but I just felt I needed to state that information.
> 
> The thing about what we see when PB/XFR occurs at stock is that it will only occur if headroom is there, when we change PE from default to 1/2/3/4 we have changed parameters. See this extract:-
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Source link
> 
> 
> 
> So as we can see single core loads vs multicore "FIT" determination/advise differs.
> 
> 
> 
> You have RAM which Ryzen favours. The ASUS board has The Stilt's timings presets within DRAM Timings control I would use those vs D.O.C.P. Later as you gain experience perhaps tweak timings.
> 
> You may find PState 0 (ACB) OC isn't lacking in performance but what you will gain is more control on max voltage to CPU. This could lead to better temps/noise profile, etc, etc.
> 
> With PState 0 as 4.15GHz at VID: 1.356V using 3466MHz The Stilt (VDIMM: 1.35V) I have ~1905 multicore / 175 single core in CB15 without OS/Performance bias tweaks. I see peaks of ~72C in stress testing on tDIE, average is lower, but most of all I think the voltage is great for longevity. CPU still down clock/volts. I'm using a ThermalRight Archon IB-E X2 with 2x TY-143, has lapped base, AS5 spread by plastic card. This is not yet fully finalised profile, but more so some voltages used in past other testing, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 211524
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All is not lost IMO my fellow Ryzen/C7H user  . Why not dabble in your own OC setup?


What bios are you running? As when I use PState my voltage does not go down to lower. (4.3Ghz at 1.45V)

I am using the Pstate 'Voltage' and left the main page voltage on Auto.


----------



## nick name

Mannekino said:


> Hi, I looked at your BIOS configuration but I'm not seeing any overclock settings for the CPU. You are letting it boost all by itself? I don't understand, in CINEBENCH it says 4.15 GHz that means you must have configured the baseclock like that no?


If you set a multiplier higher than 37 or set a manual voltage then the CPU enters overclock mode and you won't be able to take advantage of Precision Boost Overdrive.


----------



## gupsterg

nick name said:


> In my quest to find a Performance Enhancer between Level 3 and Level 4 I got guidance from elmor and The Stilt instructing me to change EDC Current values. However, I can't find anything for EDC other than the Relaxed Throttling option. Does anyone know where I can adjust EDC Current values?
> 
> I've checked in BIOS 702 since I couldn't find it in 804, but I couldn't find it in 702 either.


There is section in ROG OP thread on C7H with below screenie. The ASUS UEFI screenies near top left shows "place" in "tree" of menus.

Advanced > AMD CBS > NBIO Common Options > Precision Boost OverDrive Configuration



Spoiler




View attachment PBO Config page in UEFI.BMP






Mannekino said:


> Hi, I looked at your BIOS configuration but I'm not seeing any overclock settings for the CPU. You are letting it boost all by itself? I don't understand, in CINEBENCH it says 4.15 GHz that means you must have configured the baseclock like that no?


In settings txt:-



Code:


Custom Pstate0 [Custom]
Pstate0 FID [a6]
Pstate0 DID [8]
Pstate0 VID [1f]

As rig is under testing at present I can't boot to UEFI. Reference below screenie of a past setup. The FID/VID input as hexadecimal, in the grey boxes you will see the "targeted" MHz/VID. This will be ceiling settings for state. 



Spoiler




View attachment Pstate 0 4.1GHz 1.318V.BMP






MrPhilo said:


> What bios are you running? As when I use PState my voltage does not go down to lower. (4.3Ghz at 1.45V)
> 
> I am using the Pstate 'Voltage' and left the main page voltage on Auto.


UEFI 0804, is shown in most screenies within zip. Within settings txt:-

Global C-state Control [Enabled]

Found in Advanced > AMD CBS > Zen Common Options

Yes main page is [Auto] for CPU Core Voltage.


----------



## Mannekino

MrPhilo said:


> What bios are you running? As when I use PState my voltage does not go down to lower. (4.3Ghz at 1.45V)
> 
> I am using the Pstate 'Voltage' and left the main page voltage on Auto.


I'm running on the latest BIOS 0804.



nick name said:


> If you set a multiplier higher than 37 or set a manual voltage then the CPU enters overclock mode and you won't be able to take advantage of Precision Boost Overdrive.


Ah, I did not know that. Does this also count if you configure CPU Core Voltage to Offset mode and then have the offset on Auto or manually enter an offset?


----------



## nick name

Mannekino said:


> I'm running on the latest BIOS 0804.
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, I did not know that. Does this also count if you configure CPU Core Voltage to Offset mode and then have the offset on Auto or manually enter an offset?


No, you can set an offset.


----------



## nick name

gupsterg said:


> There is section in ROG OP thread on C7H with below screenie. The ASUS UEFI screenies near top left shows "place" in "tree" of menus.
> 
> Advanced > AMD CBS > NBIO Common Options > Precision Boost OverDrive Configuration
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 211608
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In settings txt:-
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> Custom Pstate0 [Custom]
> Pstate0 FID [a6]
> Pstate0 DID [8]
> Pstate0 VID [1f]
> 
> As rig is under testing at present I can't boot to UEFI. Reference below screenie of a past setup. The FID/VID input as hexadecimal, in the grey boxes you will see the "targeted" MHz/VID. This will be ceiling settings for state.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 211610
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UEFI 0804, is shown in most screenies within zip. Within settings txt:-
> 
> Global C-state Control [Enabled]
> 
> Found in Advanced > AMD CBS > Zen Common Options
> 
> Yes main page is [Auto] for CPU Core Voltage.


Thank you very much.


----------



## MrPhilo

gupsterg said:


> UEFI 0804, is shown in most screenies within zip. Within settings txt:-
> 
> Global C-state Control [Enabled]
> 
> Found in Advanced > AMD CBS > Zen Common Options
> 
> Yes main page is [Auto] for CPU Core Voltage.


Hmm still doesn't downvolt for me

I know someone else had this problem on this and you guys tried to help him and he was still unable to downvolt.

I reset bios via the back and just tried using PState + Global C enabled, doesn't change either, im kinda confused atm.


----------



## gupsterg

nick name said:


> Thank you very much.


NP  .

I've created a section within ROG forum C7H thread *Some of what I do with OC'ing*. Putting into words how I'd set up "Base Profile" and then the earlier shared 4.15GHz PState 0 OC with 3466MHz :clock: *The Stilt* :clock:.



MrPhilo said:


> Hmm still doesn't downvolt for me
> 
> I know someone else had this problem on this and you guys tried to help him and he was still unable to downvolt.
> 
> I reset bios via the back and just tried using PState + Global C enabled, doesn't change either, im kinda confused atm.


That member had an app in OS creating some kinda mild load keeping it from down volting, read from here (linked post is not answer so do read on).


----------



## MrPhilo

gupsterg said:


> NP  .
> 
> That member had an app in OS creating some kinda mild load keeping it from down volting, read from here (linked post is not answer so do read on).


Even around 1-3% load it still at 1.45V, using 'Power Saver' option should force to use the lower volt but it still on 1.45V

I know elmor said theres a bug with Zenstate that it the Pstate keeps requesting the P0 voltage instead of the P1/2. (I am using bios Pstate)

https://www.overclock.net/forum/27565670-post146.html

I asked him if it would effect the bios and he said it would. I'd assume it was for everyone but since your using 804 and it's working fine I'm confused.

I don't think it's my OS as Safe Mode it does the same


----------



## Mannekino

OK, I want to thank everyone for their input today. I'm not really that much further  but I need to do some more reading an testing next weekend. For now I opted to go with Level 3 (OC) and CPU Core Voltage with +auto offset. I think this should actually be fine for me and I doubt I will notice any improved performance in games when going from a CB 1850 to CB 1900 score.

I do have some final questions regarding the software configuration. I'm planning to do a final reinstall of Windows 10 tomorrow and I want to make sure I pick the correct drivers. So some quick fire questions you guys can hopefully answer:



What motherboard drivers should I use, from the ASUS or AMD site?
I have a Radeon RX 580 I assume the best option is always the latest drivers from the AMD site?
I am using an external DAC for my sound and a USB microphone. Should I install the audio drivers from ASUS, use the default Windows 10 drivers or just disable the onboard audio entirely?
Follow up to that question; why the hell is the audio driver ZIP-file 755 MB?! Is there any added value to this driver/software package?
Should I install the Intel LAN drivers from the ASUS site or just use the default Windows 10 drivers?
Do any of you guys use AMD Ryzen Master for anything, and what's your opinion of it?
Any other post-install software/tweaks I should do except for applying te balanced power profile?

Thanks!


----------



## Deyjandi

Mannekino said:


> OK, I want to thank everyone for their input today. I'm not really that much further  but I need to do some more reading an testing next weekend. For now I opted to go with Level 3 (OC) and CPU Core Voltage with +auto offset. I think this should actually be fine for me and I doubt I will notice any improved performance in games when going from a CB 1850 to CB 1900 score.
> 
> I do have some final questions regarding the software configuration. I'm planning to do a final reinstall of Windows 10 tomorrow and I want to make sure I pick the correct drivers. So some quick fire questions you guys can hopefully answer:
> 
> 
> 
> What motherboard drivers should I use, from the ASUS or AMD site?
> I have a Radeon RX 580 I assume the best option is always the latest drivers from the AMD site?
> I am using an external DAC for my sound and a USB microphone. Should I install the audio drivers from ASUS, use the default Windows 10 drivers or just disable the onboard audio entirely?
> Follow up to that question; why the hell is the audio driver ZIP-file 755 MB?! Is there any added value to this driver/software package?
> Should I install the Intel LAN drivers from the ASUS site or just use the default Windows 10 drivers?
> Do any of you guys use AMD Ryzen Master for anything, and what's your opinion of it?
> Any other post-install software/tweaks I should do except for applying te balanced power profile?
> 
> Thanks!


1, 2: always install the latest version of drivers from AMD
3: You should disable the on board audio via bios if you don't make use of it. If at some point you want to use the on board audio you should install the drivers from asus website to take advantage of the sound card features.
4: Asus sound drivers includes the basic realtek drivers which are 400mb on average plus the sonic studio and sonic radar.
5. you should install the latest lan drivers from Intel's website
6. Personally, i don't like overclocking via software. I never used ryzen master.


----------



## wisepds

MrPhilo said:


> Hmm still doesn't downvolt for me
> 
> I know someone else had this problem on this and you guys tried to help him and he was still unable to downvolt.
> 
> I reset bios via the back and just tried using PState + Global C enabled, doesn't change either, im kinda confused atm.


It was me and i found the problem. It was the nexus bar app. Test with an empty fresh windows.


----------



## gupsterg

MrPhilo said:


> Hmm still doesn't downvolt for me
> 
> I know someone else had this problem on this and you guys tried to help him and he was still unable to downvolt.
> 
> I reset bios via the back and just tried using PState + Global C enabled, doesn't change either, im kinda confused atm.


Dunno.

I have used PState 0 OC via UEFI 0601, 0702, 0804 and all have down clocked/volted for me. Plenty of screenies in thread and perhaps in the videos I did.

Currently finalising 4.15GHz 3466MHz The Stilt and when do the lengthy runs of each stability testing I'll make video showing DMM reads, screen with monitoring, etc.



Mannekino said:


> What motherboard drivers should I use, from the ASUS or AMD site?
> I have a Radeon RX 580 I assume the best option is always the latest drivers from the AMD site?
> I am using an external DAC for my sound and a USB microphone. Should I install the audio drivers from ASUS, use the default Windows 10 drivers or just disable the onboard audio entirely?
> Follow up to that question; why the hell is the audio driver ZIP-file 755 MB?! Is there any added value to this driver/software package?
> Should I install the Intel LAN drivers from the ASUS site or just use the default Windows 10 drivers?
> Do any of you guys use AMD Ryzen Master for anything, and what's your opinion of it?
> Any other post-install software/tweaks I should do except for applying te balanced power profile?



 AMD.
 AMD.
 Don't use audio, when I do it's GPU to screen via DP and headphones into screen.
 Dunno.
 Don't use LAN, if I did Intel.
 Nothing, useless to me.
 Declining to reply on this as think it's too much down to individual usage case, etc.


----------



## Mannekino

gupsterg said:


> Dunno.
> 
> 
> AMD.
> AMD.
> Don't use audio, when I do it's GPU to screen via DP and headphones into screen.
> Dunno.
> Don't use LAN, if I did Intel.
> Nothing, useless to me.
> Declining to reply on this as think it's too much down to individual usage case, etc.


Thanks, I decided on a couple of things. My external USB DAC sometimes makes loud popping noises (for example when the PC is booting and the USB ports are initialized). I have a pretty decent DAC (Audioengine D1) but I decided to go another route. I also have the Audioengine A5+ speakers and I noticed I have a USB power port at the back of those speakers. I assume this was put there to power the DAC. So I'm going to use the optical output of my motherboard and connect that to my DAC and then power it through the speakers. Hopefully that way I don't have the USB popping and cracking problems anymore.

I'm wondering if I should still bother with installing the audio drivers in this new configuration of just go with the Windows default drivers.

Also I'm going to read and experiment more next weekend with overclocking my PC. But I did some more last night with weird results. It seems that when I set the CPU Voltage Offset it no longer downvolts and the voltage is actually lower than when I leave it to Auto and consequently I'm getting lower boosts. Not sure why this is the case. I watched this video and tried his overclock settings but they didn't work for me https://youtu.be/S0mR4IoNWkQ?t=902


----------



## gupsterg

@Mannekino

Your best bet for going at OC'ing on Ryzen, especially on gen 2 is first decide what you wish to use, Performance Enhancer or do an all cores OC. This way you'll pick up a facet of it, grow experience/understanding with it and your HW/UEFI settings. Then later try other route.

Why I don't use BCLK changes for daily usage profiles is in the past it has knocked out HW/created issues. So that is an area I don't explore much at all. When I mean knocked out HW I do not mean killed it, some HW just would not work with increased BCLK.

PE setups I don't like as I think I just have no control on CPU voltage.

So for me PState 0 method is best. Yeah I may lose some single core performance but I gain on multicore and in the main multicore is my usage AFAIK.


----------



## MrPhilo

gupsterg said:


> Dunno.
> 
> I have used PState 0 OC via UEFI 0601, 0702, 0804 and all have down clocked/volted for me. Plenty of screenies in thread and perhaps in the videos I did.
> 
> Currently finalising 4.15GHz 3466MHz The Stilt and when do the lengthy runs of each stability testing I'll make video showing DMM reads, screen with monitoring, etc.


Have you disabled anything else in the bios?


----------



## marsel

gupsterg said:


> Code:
> 
> 
> Custom Pstate0 [Custom]
> Pstate0 FID [a6]
> Pstate0 DID [8]
> Pstate0 VID [1f]


when i use your settings i get a strange vcore behavior. the clock speed behaves normal but the vcore stays mostly between 1.331-1.356 for every single core. every 3rd-4th reboot it works like it should, the cores slow down between 0.400-1.356 until i restart my system again. im using the windows balanced profile and rarely i had a similar issue when i used stock bios with performance enhancer 2-3. i had to reset the power plan or switch between them to fix it when i noticed it. any idea what can cause this ?


----------



## gupsterg

MrPhilo said:


> Have you disabled anything else in the bios?


Everything I did is in the settings txt file and placed in words on the ROG forum C7H thread, section *Some of what I do with OC'ing*.

Here is a new video.



Spoiler











Here is the settings txt for video.

View attachment 0804_4.15_3466S_Beta_setting.txt


You will note near end when I exit Y-cruncher that CPU Core Voltage (SVI2 TFN) does not lower, as CPU went low load/idle this will occur as the sensor is not readable state, VID/VCORE has lowered on top left/bottom section right.

Dump your UEFI settings by going to Tool > ASUS User Profile > Load/Save to USB > pressing CTRL+F2.

Download and install Winmerge, open your txt and mine, it will highlight all differences of settings.



marsel said:


> when i use your settings i get a strange vcore behavior. the clock speed behaves normal but the vcore stays mostly between 1.331-1.356 for every single core. every 3rd-4th reboot it works like it should, the cores slow down between 0.400-1.356 until i restart my system again. im using the windows balanced profile and rarely i had a similar issue when i used stock bios with performance enhancer 2-3. i had to reset the power plan or switch between them to fix it when i noticed it. any idea what can cause this ?


i) Please provide UEFI settings txt.

ii) You are using HWINFO? if so please provide screen shot.

The way I am doing OC it has not been an issue for me in W7/Linux, I'll just now start to install W10 on rig.


----------



## marsel

gupsterg said:


> i) Please provide UEFI settings txt.
> 
> ii) You are using HWINFO? if so please provide screen shot.
> 
> The way I am doing OC it has not been an issue for me in W7/Linux, I'll just now start to install W10 on rig.


thx for helping

i changed "VDDSOC Current Capability [120%]" and "VDDSOC Phase Control [Optimized]" but that shouldnt cause the issue. gonna reset everything and try it again with a clean base.


----------



## gupsterg

@marsel

No problem on sharing info/help  .

I can't see a reason why from txt you have supplied that you would not be getting down volting  .

Here is my rig on W10 Pro x64 1803.



Spoiler











Below is registry edit to show core parking in power plan. Change extenstion from txt to reg and merge.

View attachment W10 core parking.txt


----------



## marsel

gupsterg said:


> @marsel
> 
> No problem on sharing info/help  .
> 
> I can't see a reason why from txt you have supplied that you would not be getting down volting  .
> 
> Here is my rig on W10 Pro x64 1803.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> https://youtu.be/erUD0wbqalo
> 
> 
> 
> Below is registry edit to show core parking in power plan. Change extenstion from txt to reg and merge.
> 
> View attachment 211838


core parking doesnt change anything, tested it  dunno what is going on.
im on stock performance lvl 2 now, drops down to 0.400v-0.806v pretty much instantly on all cores, no problems at all.
after i cleared cmos and tried pstate0 oc again, i had it work once until i rebooted my system. i noticed how fast it went up to 1,356v on all cores when i just moved my cursor. i had pretty much instantly 1,356v on all cores by just touching my mouse or my keyboard. it has to be an windows issue, guess i have to reinstall again.


----------



## Syldon

marsel said:


> thx for helping
> 
> i changed "VDDSOC Current Capability [120%]" and "VDDSOC Phase Control [Optimized]" but that shouldnt cause the issue. gonna reset everything and try it again with a clean base.


What are your amp readings?
On my systems it downvolts by reducing the amps not the voltages. Watts =Amps X volts. Reduce either amps or the volts and you reduce the watts going through the cores. It isn't technically downvolting I suppose, but it is reducing the power feed.


I am not electrician, but I think elmor was trying to get this point across to another poster a while back.


----------



## VPII

Syldon said:


> What are your amp readings?
> On my systems it downvolts by reducing the amps not the voltages. Watts =Amps X volts. Reduce either amps or the volts and you reduce the watts going through the cores. It isn't technically downvolting I suppose, but it is reducing the power feed.
> 
> 
> I am not electrician, but I think elmor was trying to get this point across to another poster a while back.


The current (amps) will only be drawn from the processor when under load, and with the increased current you get increased power (watts) which in turn result in increased heat. It is really clear when you do a manual overclock by setting the vcore to a required settings for the overclock. My cpu is running 4.257ghz all day, but when not under full load it will sit between 28c and 32c idle temps. The moment full load is applied to the cpu, you immediaty see the current drawn by the cpu increase together with the wattage and the cpu temp will do up to around 73c using a 1.325vcore which will stay at 1.325v all day.


----------



## Syldon

VPII said:


> The current (amps) will only be drawn from the processor when under load, and with the increased current you get increased power (watts) which in turn result in increased heat. It is really clear when you do a manual overclock by setting the vcore to a required settings for the overclock. My cpu is running 4.257ghz all day, but when not under full load it will sit between 28c and 32c idle temps. The moment full load is applied to the cpu, you immediaty see the current drawn by the cpu increase together with the wattage and the cpu temp will do up to around 73c using a 1.325vcore which will stay at 1.325v all day.



Mine does exactly the same thing. It is undervolting, only it is lowering the amps rather than the voltages. My CPU amps drops to 2a which means there is next to no power moving through the CPU. Where as the volts remains static. The most important thing is the total watts being pushed through the CPU.


----------



## gupsterg

marsel said:


> core parking doesnt change anything, tested it  dunno what is going on.
> im on stock performance lvl 2 now, drops down to 0.400v-0.806v pretty much instantly on all cores, no problems at all.
> after i cleared cmos and tried pstate0 oc again, i had it work once until i rebooted my system. i noticed how fast it went up to 1,356v on all cores when i just moved my cursor. i had pretty much instantly 1,356v on all cores by just touching my mouse or my keyboard. it has to be an windows issue, guess i have to reinstall again.


Dunno if it is an OS thing.

My video was just W10 ISO from MS, stuck on stick and installed. Next I applied AMD GPU/Chipset driver, installed CPU-Z/HWINFO and shot the video. Reason I supplied the core parking reg file was so you could see/know we are setup the same, if you get what I mean. For me as well core parking settings don't affect idle VCORE, etc.

Regardless of which OS I use. Regardless of which UEFI use out of 0601, 0702 and 0804. I have down clocking/volting. I only really do PState 0 OC on CPU.

I do not know what to suggest and have no explanation why we have these differences between our systems  .


----------



## crakej

I'm using manual OC and offset voltage - downvolting works fine for me on 0804.

I must say, it is unusual to have not got another bios build by now, but I'm sure they have their reasons....


----------



## gupsterg

@elmor

I was reading your reply to Bartouille in the ZE bug thread, link. I seem to have post to post variance regarding setups of 3533MHz, regardless of using UEFI 0601, 0702 and 0804 and or other Samsung B die 3200MHz C14 bin sticks.

For example:-

Here I pass ~1000% of 1500% and have 1 error.



Spoiler














I do a restart and rerun test and fail @ <150%.



Spoiler














This is not a one off either. I can change to another set of B die dimms and or increase SOC vastly (say ~1.062V) and have identical occurrence. For instance recently I reran same settings and got 1 error at ~1200% of 1900% and restart and fails <150%.

Would you're answer/suggestions be the same for me as was to Bartouille?


----------



## crakej

could you edit your link please @gupsterg, seems to be broken - sounds interesting....


----------



## gupsterg

Sorry  , sorted it  .

*** edit ***

Looking for feedback on others using SOC overclock VID.

The ASUS UEFI based on a "autorule" increases SOC if left on [Auto] mode. Using Manual mode and the value for manual as [Auto] I still had ASUS "autorule" overiding the manually set VID in AMD CBS menu. If I changed the manual value in manual mode to say 0.900V and had AMD CBS as 0.993V it was being overidden by my manual set value on Extreme Tweaker.

The only way I have SOC overclock VID being the set value is if use SOC as Offset mode with [Auto] offset.

Here is The Stilt's post on setting this value, link.

59 = ~0.984V for me as measured on DMM via Probeit point, 56 = ~1.003V, 52 = ~1.025V and 4E = ~1.05V.


----------



## crakej

Is there any special advantage to using SoC OC VID instead of setting SoC as we usually would?


----------



## gupsterg

This is what I understood from his post.

He states, "Could it be because of SOC voltage? It will be reset to offset mode for training when you press reset or similar. A better option would be to use "SOC OVERCLOCK VID" under AMD CBS\NBIO Common Options."

My understanding would be that the AMD CBS option is "there/sets SOC VID" for when the "training" is occurring, where as using the normal method it could be going to offset mode and causing an issue.

Again I'm just giving my take on it.

If I hook a DMM to SOC point and set board to post I see ~0.95V early on, then ~0.85V and then what I have requested. This goes on whilst the "loops" occur for post. Testing was without removing power from PSU, but say changing a setting in UEFI, which made board go through a full power cycle.


----------



## Mannekino

I saw that AMD released new chipset drivers for the X470. Should I use the AMD Ryzen Balanced Power Plan or stick with the Windows 10 default one? Anyone got some information on the new chipset drivers?


----------



## CJMitsuki

Mannekino said:


> I saw that AMD released new chipset drivers for the X470. Should I use the AMD Ryzen Balanced Power Plan or stick with the Windows 10 default one? Anyone got some information on the new chipset drivers?


I just use the High Performance plan in windows and take the Minimum Processor State to 10% to allow downclocking. It also lets me go in and take it up to 100% when I want to use all core OC instead of XFR boost. I’ve always gotten better performance using that plan rather than the others.
I just extract the drivers from the chipset install and install them manually so the Asus cancer software doesn’t add their services into windows.


----------



## Mannekino

CJMitsuki said:


> I just use the High Performance plan in windows and take the Minimum Processor State to 10% to allow downclocking. It also lets me go in and take it up to 100% when I want to use all core OC instead of XFR boost. I’ve always gotten better performance using that plan rather than the others.
> I just extract the drivers from the chipset install and install them manually so the Asus cancer software doesn’t add their services into windows.


I asked a question earlier in this thread with regard to which drivers I should go with, the AMD or ASUS one, and it was recommend I go the AMD ones for both my videocard and motherboard.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Mannekino said:


> I asked a question earlier in this thread with regard to which drivers I should go with, the AMD or ASUS one, and it was recommend I go the AMD ones for both my videocard and motherboard.


I would agree with that. If you download the chipset drivers from the Asus site they’ll have asus software to install it and it will install some Asus services that will run automatically on boot, essentially slowing boot times. Same with AMD, they have their own services that search for updates and automatically start on boot. That’s why I extract drivers with 7-zip and manually install them. Even NVidia drivers, can’t stand them installing that crap. My system runs with next to no services running. Usually only 4-5% of my 16gb of memory. Cortana and all that mess has to go as soon as I install W10, the amount of unnecessary services is disgusting on a fresh install.


----------



## gupsterg

Mannekino said:


> Should I use the AMD Ryzen Balanced Power Plan or stick with the Windows 10 default one?


I don't use the Ryzen Balanced Power Plan.

IIRC Elmor/The Stilt advise to use OS Balanced if using PE OC, link (point 2 near end).

Last time I/others checked, found Balanced with core parking 50% was best in W10. Try benches, at least 3 runs each IMO to see what gives best results.


----------



## Mannekino

I just did a couple of CINEBENCH runs with the Ryzen Balanced Power Plan and the normal Windows Balanced Power Plan. The scores are pretty similar for me. I'm still with the Performance Enhancer on Level 3 (OC) with only Auto Voltage Offset enabled. I get between 1840 and 1860 CINEBENCH scores.

The only think I notice is with the Ryzen Balanced Power Plan the CPU doesn't go back to 0.800 V it stays high. With the Windows 10 Balanced Power Plan I got down to 0.800 and 2.195 GHz.

Something else I noticed. When I run Prime95 or CINEBENCH my Core Ratio goes to 41.3 x and I get 4.116 GHz at a CPU voltage between 1.262 and 1.269. HWiNFO reports my Bus Clock at 99.8 MHz.

*Is there any way that I can give the CPU a bit more voltage and have it auto boost even higher?*

I feel like I should easily be able to achieve this given my cooling setup. When running Prime95 my Tdie goes to about 57 °C. As I mentioned before, as soon as I switch from the Auto Voltage Offset to a manual Offset of say +0.05 V things go the opposite way. My Core Voltage lowers during CINEBENCH and Prime95 and I get a lower Core Ratio overclock.

Thanks in advance for your advice.


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> @elmor
> 
> I was reading your reply to Bartouille in the ZE bug thread, link. I seem to have post to post variance regarding setups of 3533MHz, regardless of using UEFI 0601, 0702 and 0804 and or other Samsung B die 3200MHz C14 bin sticks.
> 
> For example:-
> 
> Here I pass ~1000% of 1500% and have 1 error.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 211948
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do a restart and rerun test and fail @ <150%.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 211950
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is not a one off either. I can change to another set of B die dimms and or increase SOC vastly (say ~1.062V) and have identical occurrence. For instance recently I reran same settings and got 1 error at ~1200% of 1900% and restart and fails <150%.
> 
> Would you're answer/suggestions be the same for me as was to Bartouille?


Very interesting... i can only share some info what i collected from my experience:
Saw similar behavior while i was doing a lot of Memory-OC testings in the past on various bios versions! Some results from testing and re-testing didn't make any sense to me! If i remember i shared this info over here! 

That's why I changed my approach for testing! After huge setting-changes and with re-testing, i clear the cmos and apply the settings again before i start!!
I only saw the strange behavior with speeds above 3466! By the way, im now using auto soc like i did with the CH6 and i can say.. this works the best for me at least compared to dozen different setups/settings i used!

Currently running 3533 @ CL14 + TT ! PC is still running perfect!


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> This is what I understood from his post.
> 
> He states, "Could it be because of SOC voltage? It will be reset to offset mode for training when you press reset or similar. A better option would be to use "SOC OVERCLOCK VID" under AMD CBS\NBIO Common Options."
> 
> My understanding would be that the AMD CBS option is "there/sets SOC VID" for when the "training" is occurring, where as using the normal method it could be going to offset mode and causing an issue.
> 
> Again I'm just giving my take on it.
> 
> If I hook a DMM to SOC point and set board to post I see ~0.95V early on, then ~0.85V and then what I have requested. This goes on whilst the "loops" occur for post. Testing was without removing power from PSU, but say changing a setting in UEFI, which made board go through a full power cycle.


That actually makes sense..... useful to know....


Ryzen Balanced Power Plan is only for 1st gen chips AFAIK....


----------



## Mannekino

OK, weird again, I just switched from



Level 3 (OC) > Level 4 (OC)
CPU Core Voltage Auto Offset > Manual +0.0625 Offset
I managed to get a CINEBENCH score this time of 1917. 

When I activate Prime95 I see a boost to CPU Core Ratio of 42.8 and my CPU Core Voltage is 1.406 V. My Tdie is currently at 68 °C. Obviously my usage for boosting will be primarily gaming but I noticed when playing StarCraft II the CPU gets a all core boost and not just a couple of cores with a higher frequency. If my system runs stable with this Level 4 (OC) setting should I keep it that way or is this a bit too much to ask with regard to voltage and temperature?


----------



## gupsterg

Mannekino said:


> I just did a couple of CINEBENCH runs with the Ryzen Balanced Power Plan and the normal Windows Balanced Power Plan. The scores are pretty similar for me. I'm still with the Performance Enhancer on Level 3 (OC) with only Auto Voltage Offset enabled. I get between 1840 and 1860 CINEBENCH scores.
> 
> The only think I notice is with the Ryzen Balanced Power Plan the CPU doesn't go back to 0.800 V it stays high. With the Windows 10 Balanced Power Plan I got down to 0.800 and 2.195 GHz.
> 
> Something else I noticed. When I run Prime95 or CINEBENCH my Core Ratio goes to 41.3 x and I get 4.116 GHz at a CPU voltage between 1.262 and 1.269. HWiNFO reports my Bus Clock at 99.8 MHz.
> 
> *Is there any way that I can give the CPU a bit more voltage and have it auto boost even higher?*
> 
> I feel like I should easily be able to achieve this given my cooling setup. When running Prime95 my Tdie goes to about 57 °C. As I mentioned before, as soon as I switch from the Auto Voltage Offset to a manual Offset of say +0.05 V things go the opposite way. My Core Voltage lowers during CINEBENCH and Prime95 and I get a lower Core Ratio overclock.
> 
> Thanks in advance for your advice.


For me in W10 I found Power Plan settings affected 3DM more and I think others also found for a 3D load test it had more difference.

Also the thing about selecting right power plan/tweaking it is not just about multicore performance. As you are using PE it's also about gain single core.

For example look at below slide on gen 1 for highest clock.



Spoiler














If your using PE 3/4 you've already lifted VID to max for "FIT". I would assume only other way is to use an offset, but when I read this:-



> Also note that the figures stated here relate to the actual effective voltage, and not to the voltage requested by the CPU. The CPU is aware of the actual effective voltage, so things like load-line adjustments and voltage offsets will modify the CPUs voltage request from the VRM controller accordingly.


Source link

It's still seems "FIT" would have a say. My testing of PE is next to nothing, sorry .



majestynl said:


> Very interesting... i can only share some info what i collected from my experience:
> Saw similar behavior while i was doing a lot of Memory-OC testings in the past on various bios versions! Some results from testing and re-testing didn't make any sense to me! If i remember i shared this info over here!
> 
> That's why I changed my approach for testing! After huge setting-changes and with re-testing, i clear the cmos and apply the settings again before i start!!
> I only saw the strange behavior with speeds above 3466! By the way, im now using auto soc like i did with the CH6 and i can say.. this works the best for me at least compared to dozen different setups/settings i used!
> 
> Currently running 3533 @ CL14 + TT ! PC is still running perfect!


Dunno chap I really think CPU IMC just can't give me 3533MHz. I have tried too many things now. Even what I explored today has had varying stability post to post .

Shockingly I can use 1.35V set in UEFI for 3466MHz The Stilt. When I originally went to 4.15GHz 3466S I used SOC: 1.062 VDIM: 1.35V when I saw below result I raised VDIMM and VTT a notch each.



Spoiler














Further testing showed it was not SOC/VDIMM/VTT setting issue, but VID. It seems to stabilise 4.15GHz I need way more than past jumps, it could be just due to how the relationship is between frequency/voltage or some cores are lower quality hence needing extra juice. See here now corrected CPU VID and VDIMM/VTT back at 1.35/0.675 and lowered SOC to 1.031.



Spoiler














I will test 4.125GHz for VID next. I have done now P95, etc for length at 4.15GHz, it is on average ~60mV higher VID/VCORE requirement vs 4.1GHz (~1.32V vs ~1.26V under load, depending on load, etc).


----------



## nick name

@Mannekino You can use AMD Ryzen Balanced but you have to change:

Advanced Settings>Processor Power Management>Minimum Processor State>20%

I believe it is 90% by default which works with 1st gen Ryzen.

Windows Balanced default is 20% so it works right off. 

You will sometimes see your cores and power not dropping as they should and this is because the value sometimes reverts to 100% so keep an eye out.


----------



## CJMitsuki

gupsterg said:


> Sorry  , sorted it  .
> 
> *** edit ***
> 
> Looking for feedback on others using SOC overclock VID.
> 
> The ASUS UEFI based on a "autorule" increases SOC if left on [Auto] mode. Using Manual mode and the value for manual as [Auto] I still had ASUS "autorule" overiding the manually set VID in AMD CBS menu. If I changed the manual value in manual mode to say 0.900V and had AMD CBS as 0.993V it was being overidden by my manual set value on Extreme Tweaker.
> 
> The only way I have SOC overclock VID being the set value is if use SOC as Offset mode with [Auto] offset.
> 
> Here is The Stilt's post on setting this value, link.
> 
> 
> 59 = ~0.984V for me as measured on DMM via Probeit point, 56 = ~1.003V, 52 = ~1.025V and 4E = ~1.05V.





For anyone interested here are some of the VID hex codes and the associated voltages
Its also in txt form below the image if you want to save it as a txt document.


----------



## Mannekino

I just experienced some really weird issues this morning. I decided I am fine with the Level 3 (OC) and automatic CPU Voltage Offset adjust. So I reverted the changed and suddenly I had a *lot* of issues. My computer couldn't boot multiple times. My primary monitor stopped working, the power LED starting flashing. I loaded the optimized defaults again after which my PC could boot agan. But as soon as I applied the D.O.C.P. profile things went wrong again. Really weird issues with no consitent way of reproducing.


Eventually I managed to boot with the D.O.C.P. profiles and then I tried Level (3) OC again. Same problems came back with my monitor also. So I turned off everything and just hooked up my second monitor and that worked. Then I switched the DisplayPort cables around and I could boot again with my old stable settings (Level 3 plus auto voltage offset). I have no idea if there is some underlaying issue with my hardware. Maybe the videocard is defective?


----------



## Bo55

Mannekino said:


> OK, weird again, I just switched from
> 
> 
> 
> Level 3 (OC) > Level 4 (OC)
> CPU Core Voltage Auto Offset > Manual +0.0625 Offset
> I managed to get a CINEBENCH score this time of 1917.
> 
> When I activate Prime95 I see a boost to CPU Core Ratio of 42.8 and my CPU Core Voltage is 1.406 V. My Tdie is currently at 68 °C. Obviously my usage for boosting will be primarily gaming but I noticed when playing StarCraft II the CPU gets a all core boost and not just a couple of cores with a higher frequency. If my system runs stable with this Level 4 (OC) setting should I keep it that way or is this a bit too much to ask with regard to voltage and temperature?


What i have found is that PE Level 3 will give you best single core performance, when ive switched to Level 4, i notice a small drop in single core scores however a noticeable jump in multicore scores along with much higher power draw. Also, when running Level 3 my 2700x will only see stability at 102 bclk not 103.4 as suggested by der8auer. It simply freezes and locks up cinebench everytime at that level so i know it cannot do it, i use a voltage offset of +0.056 and have tried up to 0.07 which gained me nothing except higher temps and higher voltage, but for some reason when using level 4, i cannot leave my bclk at 102 as it locks up aswell, so im forced to lower it right down to 100.2 to find stability, but even with a lower bclk, my multicore scores in CPU-Z jumped almost 200 points besting that when using Level 3 with higher bclk so there is a noticeable gain in multicore performance when using Level 4, the only downside at least for myself is that it uses alot of voltage (1.5v+), noticeable power increase and temps are higher than i want them to be, 69 tdie just using the cpu-z bench, 65deg in battlefield 4 using H110i. If i were you, id save a little power and run Level 3 which will give you the higher single core performance you need in games with the nice increase in multicore performance aswell, find your sweet spot with bclk and leave it. Level 4 is overkill imo, i saw voltages of 1.65v when trying to hit 103.4 so for me there is no point. If i want to crack the 2000 cinebench score i just set an all core OC of 43.25, lock in 1.46v and set my mem to 3600 c15 1T with modified subs and it hit a score of 2012 using the aida/geekbench bias. Im happy with that but for everyday use, i use the Level 3 PE with 102bclk. GL


----------



## Mannekino

Bo55 said:


> What i have found is that PE Level 3 will give you best single core performance, when ive switched to Level 4, i notice a small drop in single core scores however a noticeable jump in multicore scores along with much higher power draw. Also, when running Level 3 my 2700x will only see stability at 102 bclk not 103.4 as suggested by der8auer. It simply freezes and locks up cinebench everytime at that level so i know it cannot do it, i use a voltage offset of +0.056 and have tried up to 0.07 which gained me nothing except higher temps and higher voltage, but for some reason when using level 4, i cannot leave my bclk at 102 as it locks up aswell, so im forced to lower it right down to 100.2 to find stability, but even with a lower bclk, my multicore scores in CPU-Z jumped almost 200 points besting that when using Level 3 with higher bclk so there is a noticeable gain in multicore performance when using Level 4, the only downside at least for myself is that it uses alot of voltage (1.5v+), noticeable power increase and temps are higher than i want them to be, 69 tdie just using the cpu-z bench, 65deg in battlefield 4 using H110i. If i were you, id save a little power and run Level 3 which will give you the higher single core performance you need in games with the nice increase in multicore performance aswell, find your sweet spot with bclk and leave it. Level 4 is overkill imo, i saw voltages of 1.65v when trying to hit 103.4 so for me there is no point. If i want to crack the 2000 cinebench score i just set an all core OC of 43.25, lock in 1.46v and set my mem to 3600 c15 1T with modified subs and it hit a score of 2012 using the aida/geekbench bias. Im happy with that but for everyday use, i use the Level 3 PE with 102bclk. GL



Thanks for confirming my own thoughts in this matter. I think for my usage a stable Level 3 (OC) is very acceptable and should give me the best results in gaming performance while keeping my system pretty quiet.


Now I only have to figure out what went wrong this morning as explained in my previous post. Very weird issues that have me worried quite a bit. When I left for work this morning I was able to revert back to Level 3 (OC) and D.O.C.P. enabled with an auto voltage +offset and I did 3 CINEBENCH runs that went well. Will see later today if my PC boots correctly.


*Question:*
Are there any other changes you have done to get the Level 3 (OC) with 102 BLCK? What are your voltage settings and do you need a higher voltage offset with Level 3 and 102 BLCK or is auto sufficient?


----------



## gupsterg

CJMitsuki said:


> For anyone interested here are some of the VID hex codes and the associated voltages
> Its also in txt form below the image if you want to save it as a txt document.


Sweet :thumb: , added to the ROG C7H thread, FAQ section.

Still interested to know if people who have tried this option do they use SOC mode as Offset with Auto value to allow the AMD CBS > NBIO Common Options > SOC Overclock VID to apply.


----------



## marsel

gupsterg said:


> Dunno if it is an OS thing.
> 
> My video was just W10 ISO from MS, stuck on stick and installed. Next I applied AMD GPU/Chipset driver, installed CPU-Z/HWINFO and shot the video. Reason I supplied the core parking reg file was so you could see/know we are setup the same, if you get what I mean. For me as well core parking settings don't affect idle VCORE, etc.
> 
> Regardless of which OS I use. Regardless of which UEFI use out of 0601, 0702 and 0804. I have down clocking/volting. I only really do PState 0 OC on CPU.
> 
> I do not know what to suggest and have no explanation why we have these differences between our systems  .


I found out that it is caused by my backup hard drive, thats so strange. It only appears when i edit the pstates, pretty strange. Works fine when i unplug the sata cable.
Im now on Level 3 (OC), 102bclk, -offset without any problems, guess i stick to it until i replace the hard drive with a new nas storage.

Thanks for looking into my problem


----------



## Bo55

Mannekino said:


> Thanks for confirming my own thoughts in this matter. I think for my usage a stable Level 3 (OC) is very acceptable and should give me the best results in gaming performance while keeping my system pretty quiet.
> 
> 
> Now I only have to figure out what went wrong this morning as explained in my previous post. Very weird issues that have me worried quite a bit. When I left for work this morning I was able to revert back to Level 3 (OC) and D.O.C.P. enabled with an auto voltage +offset and I did 3 CINEBENCH runs that went well. Will see later today if my PC boots correctly.
> 
> 
> *Question:*
> Are there any other changes you have done to get the Level 3 (OC) with 102 BLCK? What are your voltage settings and do you need a higher voltage offset with Level 3 and 102 BLCK or is auto sufficient?


Your black screen DOCP issue could be the ram overclock itself causing your system not to boot/post properly. What is the model of your ram sticks? As someone has already mentioned, you can use the Ryzen balance power plan, i do, i just adjust the minimum processor state to 20% and it will down clock and down volt.

Here are my settings for 4.435ghz

102 bclk
Core ratio - 37
PE Level 3 
Core offset voltage +0.056
Core performance boost - Enabled
Soc voltage - 1.05v 

As for dram frequency i can run it up to 3600mhz and a little over at c15 1t using 1.4v without issue but see what works best for you. Id say for gaming id use around 3466 or slightly higher for best fps when gaming using stilts preset depending on your memory sticks. If you run a AIO, i would tune the fan profile or just simply raise the fan speeds a little as it gets warm pretty quick at that level. Hope that helps


----------



## Mannekino

Bo55 said:


> Your black screen DOCP issue could be the ram overclock itself causing your system not to boot/post properly. What is the model of your ram sticks? As someone has already mentioned, you can use the Ryzen balance power plan, i do, i just adjust the minimum processor state to 20% and it will down clock and down volt.
> 
> Here are my settings for 4.435ghz
> 
> 102 bclk
> PE Level 3
> Core offset voltage +0.056
> Core performance boost - Enabled
> Soc voltage - 1.05v
> 
> As for dram frequency i can run it up to 3600mhz and a little over at c15 1t using 1.4v without issue but see what works best for you. Id say for gaming id use 3466 at minimum for best fps when gaming using stilts preset depending on your memory sticks. If you run a AIO, i would tune the fan profile or just simply raise the fan speeds a little as it gets warm pretty quick at that level. Hope that helps



Thanks, I gave the Ryzen Balanced Power plan a shot and modified the minimum state to 20% and it seemed to work. Although the minimum power state for the Windows 10 Balanced Power Plan is set at 5% for me default.


I have the following memory kit, should be pretty decent I think: G.SKILL Flare X F4-3200C14D-16GFX


I think I'm going to stick with Level 3 with an auto voltage offset. I don't want to risk breaking anything and I doubt I will get any noticiable performance increase.


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> Dunno chap I really think CPU IMC just can't give me 3533MHz. I have tried too many things now. Even what I explored today has had varying stability post to post .
> 
> Shockingly I can use 1.35V set in UEFI for 3466MHz The Stilt. When I originally went to 4.15GHz 3466S I used SOC: 1.062 VDIM: 1.35V when I saw below result I raised VDIMM and VTT a notch each.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 212000
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Further testing showed it was not SOC/VDIMM/VTT setting issue, but VID. It seems to stabilise 4.15GHz I need way more than past jumps, it could be just due to how the relationship is between frequency/voltage or some cores are lower quality hence needing extra juice. See here now corrected CPU VID and VDIMM/VTT back at 1.35/0.675 and lowered SOC to 1.031.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 212002
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I will test 4.125GHz for VID next. I have done now P95, etc for length at 4.15GHz, it is on average ~60mV higher VID/VCORE requirement vs 4.1GHz (~1.32V vs ~1.26V under load, depending on load, etc).


I see! I know you are trying to get 3533Mhz stable for a long time. As you know from my posts and many others, above 3466Mhz needed a lot of time to get it fully stable! We are definitely on the edge, so you could be right your setup will fall on the wrong side! 
I can only tell the combination of settings who worked for me, but i know almost for sure you already tried those together!?:
Ram voltage: 1.4v
Ram bootvoltage: 1.4v
Soc: Auto
Dram switching Freq: 400 khz
ProcODT: 68.6ohm
MemCad: 30Ohm (all of them)

Only with above combination im fully stable with zero-booting issues and also success with multiple re-testing! The values can differ for you but its the combination of settings i have used together!




Mannekino said:


> I just experienced some really weird issues this morning. I decided I am fine with the Level 3 (OC) and automatic CPU Voltage Offset adjust. So I reverted the changed and suddenly I had a *lot* of issues. My computer couldn't boot multiple times. My primary monitor stopped working, the power LED starting flashing. I loaded the optimized defaults again after which my PC could boot agan. But as soon as I applied the D.O.C.P. profile things went wrong again. Really weird issues with no consitent way of reproducing.
> 
> 
> Eventually I managed to boot with the D.O.C.P. profiles and then I tried Level (3) OC again. Same problems came back with my monitor also. So I turned off everything and just hooked up my second monitor and that worked. Then I switched the DisplayPort cables around and I could boot again with my old stable settings (Level 3 plus auto voltage offset). I have no idea if there is some underlaying issue with my hardware. Maybe the videocard is defective?





Bo55 said:


> Your black screen DOCP issue could be the ram overclock itself causing your system not to boot/post properly. What is the model of your ram sticks? As someone has already mentioned, you can use the Ryzen balance power plan, i do, i just adjust the minimum processor state to 20% and it will down clock and down volt.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Here are my settings for 4.435ghz
> 
> 102 bclk
> Core ratio - 37
> PE Level 3
> Core offset voltage +0.056
> Core performance boost - Enabled
> Soc voltage - 1.05v
> 
> As for dram frequency i can run it up to 3600mhz and a little over at c15 1t using 1.4v without issue but see what works best for you. Id say for gaming id use around 3466 or slightly higher for best fps when gaming using stilts preset depending on your memory sticks. If you run a AIO, i would tune the fan profile or just simply raise the fan speeds a little as it gets warm pretty quick at that level. Hope that helps


The Black screens has nothing todo with DOCP! I got this few times on the CH6 and CH7 while messing with OC settings (no DOCP), it got me crazy to find a solution to get it even back in life without a cmos clear. Eventually i tried to switch from monitor with a HDMI cable and saw there was image on the screen.
So no need for clearing cmos etc, just switch from monitor port and you will see its working.. After that you can switch back to your original monitor/cable!

There is some kind of bug/issue in OC mode where some ports are loosing the connection, im suspecting PCIx issues! 
I only saw 1 person reporting this issue before..!!

Will keep an eye on this, and if its happening often, i will do a report to ASUS/ elmor!


----------



## Mannekino

majestynl said:


> The Black screens has nothing todo with DOCP! I got this few times on the CH6 and CH7 while messing with OC settings (no DOCP), it got me crazy to find a solution to get it even back in life without a cmos clear. Eventually i tried to switch from monitor with a HDMI cable and saw there was image on the screen. So no need for clearing cmos etc, just switch from monitor port and you will see its working.. After that you can switch back to your original monitor/cable!
> 
> There is some kind of bug/issue in OC mode where some ports are loosing the connection, im suspecting PCIx issues! I only saw 1 person reporting this issue before..!! Will keep an eye on this, and if its happening often, i will do a report to ASUS/ elmor!



:worriedsm *damn that sounds exactly like my issue...*

It seems to happen when I change any OC related setting. But it didn't happen during the first week and a half or so. However, the first time it happened it continued to occur every time I change a single OC related setting (past 3 days) and I feel like this morning was the worst so far.

Damn, I was thinking maybe my video card was broken (see this thread I made) or maybe the expensive monitor I bought wasn't working properly. It had me worried throughout the day while I was at work because it happened this morning before I had to go.

So this morning I did the following:



First I loaded the Optimized Defaults and booted the system. Wouldn't boot first time (maybe it did but I got a black screen) and did a complete shut down and powered off everything. After that it would boot again.
Then I changed some non-OC settings like disabling boot screen and disabling ASUS Grid and it would boot fine.
After that I applied my D.O.C.P. profiles and I got the same issues and I tried so many things but I couldn't get it to work again. Shut down again and did a restart without any succes.
When I got a black screen where I was supposed to get a Windows 10 login prompt I decided to unplug my main monitor and switch the Display Port cables and what do you think, I saw the login screen!
I logged in and did a couple CINEBENCH runs and a little of Prime95 on my secondary monitor and everything worked fine.
I shut down my computer again and put the Display Port cables back to their original position and no problems since then.
I'm really afraid to touch the BIOS now and I shouldn't be. I dropped a pretty hefty premium for all these parts (particularly the motherboard) to get some nice OC features which I should be able to use. What do you suggest I try next? I'm happy with the current settings but not happy with the state of things that it might go wrong again. Should I re-flash my BIOS?

It's 22:45 now and I got home around 18:00, so I've been using my PC now for almost 5 hours without any issues. I ran about six 3DMark benchmarks and I've been figuring out how WattMan works and how I can get the "OC Mode" of my MSI Radeon RX 580 GAMING X 8G to work.

Thanks!


----------



## MrPhilo

Anyone using Auto for SOC?

My motherboard is using 1.144V for the SoC, it seems to be working well.

I was having trouble getting my 3533CL14 error free with a 4.25Ghz, but using Auto SOC and I have finally passed 1800% on memtest with it , seem to be that 1.00V-1.10V wasn't working for me.


----------



## neikosr0x

Bo55 said:


> Your black screen DOCP issue could be the ram overclock itself causing your system not to boot/post properly. What is the model of your ram sticks? As someone has already mentioned, you can use the Ryzen balance power plan, i do, i just adjust the minimum processor state to 20% and it will down clock and down volt.
> 
> Here are my settings for 4.435ghz
> 
> 102 bclk
> Core ratio - 37
> PE Level 3
> Core offset voltage +0.056
> Core performance boost - Enabled
> Soc voltage - 1.05v
> 
> As for dram frequency i can run it up to 3600mhz and a little over at c15 1t using 1.4v without issue but see what works best for you. Id say for gaming id use around 3466 or slightly higher for best fps when gaming using stilts preset depending on your memory sticks. If you run a AIO, i would tune the fan profile or just simply raise the fan speeds a little as it gets warm pretty quick at that level. Hope that helps


Aren't you getting too much volt on that CPU with +0.56 offset? i got like 1.588 peaks at that settings.


----------



## crakej

neikosr0x said:


> Aren't you getting too much volt on that CPU with +0.56 offset? i got like 1.588 peaks at that settings.


Those peaks are fine and to be expected. It can handle it briefly.


----------



## neikosr0x

crakej said:


> Those peaks are fine and to be expected. It can handle it briefly.


Emmm one last thing mate, do you know anything about a bug on Hwinfo64 where it get stuck? I saw something here the other day but i cant find it now.


----------



## crakej

neikosr0x said:


> Emmm one last thing mate, do you know anything about a bug on Hwinfo64 where it get stuck? I saw something here the other day but i cant find it now.


It's fine now - so long us you're using the most up to date version 5.87 3495


----------



## crakej

I was just doing some experimenting with everything at default...

SB 1.05 shows a bit high at 1.085v, which we know is a bit wonky. However, *all* my other voltages show as slightly under - for example, my DRAM is set at default 1.2v but shows 1.188v - my previous 370 Prime Pro showed the correct voltages. I checked with SiV and it shows exactly the same voltages as HWInfo64.

AISuite actually shows all the *correct *voltages - for example DRAM shows 1.2v which is what it's set at - except for SB 1.05 which it concurs is 1.085v. How is this managing to read things correctly?


----------



## DtEW

nirurin said:


> Continuing my previous post with more info (didn't get any replies but no point in repeating myself) -
> 
> Currently testing 3133mhz with 15-15-15 timings, with the entire list of timings entered manually using some that were tested by the stilt for ryzen/CH7.
> 
> Tested to 5000% on RAMtest, with zero errors last night, but tested again today and had a single error when I looked at about 1400%. (Thats about 4 hours of testing last night, and one hour today).
> 
> Any tips on what might be worth altering in order to get the ram stable?


My copy of CMR32GX4M2C3000C15 rev. 4.31 is working for me at 3200mhz 14-14-14-30 @1.355V on a ASUS Prime X470-Pro w/2700X. >24hr stable w/Prime95, and *fingers crossed* by midnight tonight will be 48hrs stable.

Used The Stilt's numbers as a starting point, but carefully documented (big Excel spreadsheet) the BIOS settings that I entered, and notably those that I left alone to be managed automatically. Yes, you read that right: I did NOT plug-in every single number that came off of the calculator... as I did that a few times (w/varying degrees of desperation) initially, and it didn't work. I intuited that maybe there was something to the QVL-vouched XMP/DOCP settings, and maybe trying too damn hard to bring everything to The Stilt's numbers was a mistake. Then a lot of trial-and-error documenting the settings I forced (and its resulting quality/length of stability). The whole process took about a week, as I even had failures as deep as ~20 hours. (Can you see why I'm testing to 48hrs?)

Looks great now, though. Fingers still crossed.

Edit: Found problems. One thread error took 40 hours in Prime95 to show up.


----------



## Bo55

> The Black screens has nothing todo with DOCP! I got this few times on the CH6 and CH7 while messing with OC settings (no DOCP), it got me crazy to find a solution to get it even back in life without a cmos clear. Eventually i tried to switch from monitor with a HDMI cable and saw there was image on the screen.
> So no need for clearing cmos etc, just switch from monitor port and you will see its working.. After that you can switch back to your original monitor/cable!
> 
> There is some kind of bug/issue in OC mode where some ports are loosing the connection, im suspecting PCIx issues!
> I only saw 1 person reporting this issue before..!!
> 
> Will keep an eye on this, and if its happening often, i will do a report to ASUS/ elmor!


Dont assume Black screens have nothing to do with DOCP, ive had my pc display a black screen because of a memory oc issue so from my experience it does happen.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Bo55 said:


> Dont assume Black screens have nothing to do with DOCP, ive had my pc display a black screen because of a memory oc issue so from my experience it does happen.



Memory errors can corrupt display drivers and can cause display problems due to drivers unable to communicate to the system correctly. It has to be tons of errors usually for that to happen but I have seen it as well awhile back. Also raising the bclk on some systems has a negative affect on PCI devices. I experienced it with an M.2 SSD, specifically an 860 evo. Couldnt read the drive if there were any type of bclk OC.


----------



## Bo55

CJMitsuki said:


> Memory errors can corrupt display drivers and can cause display problems due to drivers unable to communicate to the system correctly. It has to be tons of errors usually for that to happen but I have seen it as well awhile back. Also raising the bclk on some systems has a negative affect on PCI devices. I experienced it with an M.2 SSD, specifically an 860 evo. Couldnt read the drive if there were any type of bclk OC.


Ive also seen this first hand but what im saying is dont assume that it cant happen from that alone, because it can. As far as bclk and m.2 drives go iam at 102 with my 960 evo m.2 and the only negative i see is that my read speeds have dropped a bit in benchmarks, averaging 1800+ to now 1350 give or take no corruption of any kind and doesnt effect my games, having said that i dont plan to go any higher in bclk as there is no need.


----------



## majestynl

Mannekino said:


> :worriedsm *damn that sounds exactly like my issue...*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> It seems to happen when I change any OC related setting. But it didn't happen during the first week and a half or so. However, the first time it happened it continued to occur every time I change a single OC related setting (past 3 days) and I feel like this morning was the worst so far.
> 
> Damn, I was thinking maybe my video card was broken (see this thread I made) or maybe the expensive monitor I bought wasn't working properly. It had me worried throughout the day while I was at work because it happened this morning before I had to go.
> 
> So this morning I did the following:
> 
> 
> 
> First I loaded the Optimized Defaults and booted the system. Wouldn't boot first time (maybe it did but I got a black screen) and did a complete shut down and powered off everything. After that it would boot again.
> Then I changed some non-OC settings like disabling boot screen and disabling ASUS Grid and it would boot fine.
> After that I applied my D.O.C.P. profiles and I got the same issues and I tried so many things but I couldn't get it to work again. Shut down again and did a restart without any succes.
> When I got a black screen where I was supposed to get a Windows 10 login prompt I decided to unplug my main monitor and switch the Display Port cables and what do you think, I saw the login screen!
> I logged in and did a couple CINEBENCH runs and a little of Prime95 on my secondary monitor and everything worked fine.
> I shut down my computer again and put the Display Port cables back to their original position and no problems since then.
> I'm really afraid to touch the BIOS now and I shouldn't be. I dropped a pretty hefty premium for all these parts (particularly the motherboard) to get some nice OC features which I should be able to use. What do you suggest I try next? I'm happy with the current settings but not happy with the state of things that it might go wrong again. Should I re-flash my BIOS?
> 
> It's 22:45 now and I got home around 18:00, so I've been using my PC now for almost 5 hours without any issues. I ran about six 3DMark benchmarks and I've been figuring out how WattMan works and how I can get the "OC Mode" of my MSI Radeon RX 580 GAMING X 8G to work.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks!


Your welcome! For now i cant replicate the "issue". It happened a few times but as said will keep an eye on it. I also don't know if its "really" a bug/issue or just a thing what is happening if you are unstable.
Like sometimes the systems freezes then its loosing connections, and sometimes it restarts. All mostly happening with instability! And the reaction of this can change with different bios version or programs we are using!

It never happened with my stable daily settings, always while i was testing and tweaking settings etc!!



MrPhilo said:


> Anyone using Auto for SOC?
> 
> My motherboard is using 1.144V for the SoC, it seems to be working well.
> 
> I was having trouble getting my 3533CL14 error free with a 4.25Ghz, but using Auto SOC and I have finally passed 1800% on memtest with it , seem to be that 1.00V-1.10V wasn't working for me.


I do!! as mentioned few times, auto soc is working the best for me! 



nirurin said:


> Continuing my previous post with more info (didn't get any replies but no point in repeating myself) -
> 
> Currently testing 3133mhz with 15-15-15 timings, with the entire list of timings entered manually using some that were tested by the stilt for ryzen/CH7.
> 
> Tested to 5000% on RAMtest, with zero errors last night, but tested again today and had a single error when I looked at about 1400%. (Thats about 4 hours of testing last night, and one hour today).
> 
> Any tips on what might be worth altering in order to get the ram stable?


Had this many times, i fixed it with more tweaking in settings. Eg: CAD bus / ProcODT and Mem freq! But only on speeds above 3466mhz. You could try those or read post from gupsterg mentioning about soc value etc few pages back! 



CJMitsuki said:


> Memory errors can corrupt display drivers and can cause display problems due to drivers unable to communicate to the system correctly. It has to be tons of errors usually for that to happen but I have seen it as well awhile back. Also raising the bclk on some systems has a negative affect on PCI devices. I experienced it with an M.2 SSD, specifically an 860 evo. Couldnt read the drive if there were any type of bclk OC.


Thats true but just read my posts! His issue looks exactly what i saw a few times. When i switch a cable/port the screen is back!


----------



## hurricane28

@elmor, where you at my friend? Haven't seen you here in a while. 

How far are you guys with this sensor fix implementation stuff and new BIOS? Plz give us some more feedback about this matter and why it takes this long to fix it. 

Thank you.


----------



## mollikolli

Does anyone know or can someone check with Ryzen Master what the PPT, TDC and EDC values are with different performance enhancer levels? Also does performance enhancer do anything else than adjust those values?



Just curious as the latest version of Ryzen Master allows fiddling with those values now.


----------



## minal

Is it possible to control fan speed in BIOS by GPU temperature? 



Temperatures from CPU, VRM, PCH, and add-on thermal probes were possible targets if I recall correctly.


----------



## Syldon

minal said:


> Is it possible to control fan speed in BIOS by GPU temperature?
> 
> 
> 
> Temperatures from CPU, VRM, PCH, and add-on thermal probes were possible targets if I recall correctly.



No it will not react to the sensor in your GPU. The sensor in your GPU is relayed by driver software. You are asking the bios to read the output from your GPU before the driver is loaded.

These are your only sources.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Syldon said:


> No it will not react to the sensor in your GPU. The sensor in your GPU is relayed by driver software. You are asking the bios to read the output from your GPU before the driver is loaded.
> 
> These are your only sources.


Your best bet is to get a thermo couple and plug into the T Sensor then attach it to your hottest part of the gpu then you can have the fans react to that but it would not be as accurate as the readings from the gpu itself but if you get a good one and attach it with captains tape you should get something that is close enough but you’ll have to take the gpu apart. Isn’t hard though. Might as well shunt and volt mod it while you have it apart too


----------



## minal

Syldon said:


> No it will not react to the sensor in your GPU. The sensor in your GPU is relayed by driver software. You are asking the bios to read the output from your GPU before the driver is loaded.


Ah of course, that makes sense.



CJMitsuki said:


> Your best bet is to get a thermo couple and plug into the T Sensor then attach it to your hottest part of the gpu then you can have the fans react to that but it would not be as accurate as the readings from the gpu itself but if you get a good one and attach it with captains tape you should get something that is close enough but you’ll have to take the gpu apart. Isn’t hard though. Might as well shunt and volt mod it while you have it apart too


 It's really not necessary or a priority, but it might be fun to try the T Sensor approach. How/where does one shop for a suitable thermocouple + connector?

I absolutely won't be dismantling anything, but the VRMs are exposed and I think are the hottest parts of the gpu. I torture tested (with gpu-burn) my poor MSI GT1030 in anticipation of practicing using CUDA with it. It reached a max of ~83C (at ~30C ambient) with GPU clock in the 1300s MHz, while normally its max is ~1500 MHz, and sometimes spikes to the mid 1600s MHz. Funny side note: Nvidia X Server Settings shows max is 1949 MHz, but I've never seen it reach that high.

During the stress test, since only one core of the 2700X was at 100% and the rest idle, my case fans' rpm never increased. So I thought it would be nice for the case fan directly in front of the gpu to increase air flow a little if the gpu is really stressed. Though I think in most realistic situations, both GPU and CPU will be stressed to some degree so it might not matter.

Those gpu temps seem ok right? Especially considering it's passively cooled, in an extreme stress test, and with low rpm case fans, and often high ambient temps. Normally it's in the mid-40s, barely reaching 50s with HD playback or the CUDA demos.


----------



## CJMitsuki

minal said:


> Ah of course, that makes sense.
> 
> 
> It's really not necessary or a priority, but it might be fun to try the T Sensor approach. How/where does one shop for a suitable thermocouple + connector?
> 
> I absolutely won't be dismantling anything, but the VRMs are exposed and I think are the hottest parts of the gpu. I torture tested (with gpu-burn) my poor MSI GT1030 in anticipation of practicing using CUDA with it. It reached a max of ~83C (at ~30C ambient) with GPU clock in the 1300s MHz, while normally its max is ~1500 MHz, and sometimes spikes to the mid 1600s MHz. Funny side note: Nvidia X Server Settings shows max is 1949 MHz, but I've never seen it reach that high.
> 
> During the stress test, since only one core of the 2700X was at 100% and the rest idle, my case fans' rpm never increased. So I thought it would be nice for the case fan directly in front of the gpu to increase air flow a little if the gpu is really stressed. Though I think in most realistic situations, both GPU and CPU will be stressed to some degree so it might not matter.
> 
> Those gpu temps seem ok right? Especially considering it's passively cooled, in an extreme stress test, and with low rpm case fans, and often high ambient temps. Normally it's in the mid-40s, barely reaching 50s with HD playback or the CUDA demos.


These seem to be fine and I would get several. You can place them in a couple places on the gpu heatsinks and have the fans react off of multiple sensors if needed. You could also place one around the case for ambient temp readings inside the case or exiting air temps vs entering air temps. So many things you can do with the sensors.

Thermal Sensor
Kapton Tape

The temps seem ok but if you felt comfortable to disassemble it a little you could replace the thermal compound and the thermal pads with better ones. Taking a GPU apart isnt hard and much simpler than youd think.


----------



## neikosr0x

CJMitsuki said:


> Memory errors can corrupt display drivers and can cause display problems due to drivers unable to communicate to the system correctly. It has to be tons of errors usually for that to happen but I have seen it as well awhile back. Also raising the bclk on some systems has a negative affect on PCI devices. I experienced it with an M.2 SSD, specifically an 860 evo. Couldnt read the drive if there were any type of bclk OC.


Well, i was getting that problem but i decided to test from scratch and i found out that moving all Sata cables to the last connectors fixed the issue, now i can do 102.2 or anything really with no problem.


----------



## minal

CJMitsuki said:


> These seem to be fine and I would get several. You can place them in a couple places on the gpu heatsinks and have the fans react off of multiple sensors if needed. You could also place one around the case for ambient temp readings inside the case or exiting air temps vs entering air temps. So many things you can do with the sensors.
> 
> Thermal Sensor
> Kapton Tape
> 
> The temps seem ok but if you felt comfortable to disassemble it a little you could replace the thermal compound and the thermal pads with better ones. Taking a GPU apart isnt hard and much simpler than youd think.


Having extra sensors sounds fun but isn't there just one T_Sensor header on the C7H? And I wonder if the readout will be available in linux.

For disassembly, it looks quite easy, but I'd rather avoid it during the warranty period. And if the thermals are fine I'm not sure what's to be gained.


----------



## CJMitsuki

minal said:


> Having extra sensors sounds fun but isn't there just one T_Sensor header on the C7H? And I wonder if the readout will be available in linux.
> 
> For disassembly, it looks quite easy, but I'd rather avoid it during the warranty period. And if the thermals are fine I'm not sure what's to be gained.


Ah yes there is just one. I have an NZXT sentry 3 digital fan controller which has a couple on it so that had me thinking there were multiple.





 That is something to look into as well. Give very good control over fans and you can have them react to temps. Its very cheap and looks great as well.


----------



## lordzed83

hurricane28 said:


> @elmor, where you at my friend? Haven't seen you here in a while.
> 
> How far are you guys with this sensor fix implementation stuff and new BIOS? Plz give us some more feedback about this matter and why it takes this long to fix it.
> 
> Thank you.


Quick look after week brake. No new bios to try out no nothing so back on WoW grind. Everything works stable anyway


----------



## hurricane28

lordzed83 said:


> Quick look after week brake. No new bios to try out no nothing so back on WoW grind. Everything works stable anyway


Yeah, nothing new yet. But the problem with the new implementation was an fiasco so i thought they would figure it out already but i guess not. 

I guess Elmor is still busy overclocking based on how many times he is seen with pro overclockers lol.

O well, we wait and see.


----------



## CJMitsuki

hurricane28 said:


> Yeah, nothing new yet. But the problem with the new implementation was an fiasco so i thought they would figure it out already but i guess not.
> 
> I guess Elmor is still busy overclocking based on how many times he is seen with pro overclockers lol.
> 
> O well, we wait and see.


I remember one of them posting about implementing AGESA 1.0.0.4 in the next Bios update along with a fix so the new AGESA may be the hold up?


----------



## hurricane28

CJMitsuki said:


> I remember one of them posting about implementing AGESA 1.0.0.4 in the next Bios update along with a fix so the new AGESA may be the hold up?


Yeah, they already did and it was an fiasco... Harwareinfo64 author pulled the support for WMI because of faulty BIOS.. 

Elmor told us that he know what the issue is.. That's all fine and all but that doesn't solve our issue as i read that people still have issues with fan control etc. I haven't had any problem for over weeks now, fingers crossed, but it would be nice if they resolve this issue.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> It's fine now - so long us you're using the most up to date version 5.87 3495



This feels like a stupid question, but how do I get/install the beta? All I can find are download links for v5.86 which I am already running.


----------



## Johan45

When you click on the DL button it'll show a drop down which had "old versions" at the bottom follow that to this page and you'll find the BETA at the bottom http://www.oldfoss.com/HWiNFO.html


----------



## nick name

Johan45 said:


> When you click on the DL button it'll show a drop down which had "old versions" at the bottom follow that to this page and you'll find the BETA at the bottom http://www.oldfoss.com/HWiNFO.html


Ayyyy, many thanks. I never would have found that.


----------



## nick name

Now that I have HWiNFO64 beta running -- I don't see any difference. It actually shows v5.86. Is the beta v5.87 portable?


----------



## nick name

On a separate note:

I am running PE Lvl 3 with a BCLK of 100.6 and an offset of +.03XX ( I can't remember precisely).

My concern is voltages reaching 1.58v almost 1.6v sometimes. Currently max core current has been 61A and core power has been 82W. Max temp has been 63*C.

I've read that high voltages can be acceptable if current/power is low, but damn near reaching 1.6V is bugging the hell out of me.


----------



## Johan45

That does seem high. What's your load voltage and do you need such an offset to remain stable?


----------



## nick name

Johan45 said:


> That does seem high. What's your load voltage and do you need such an offset to remain stable?



Under a full multi-core load it's sometimes as low as 1.287V ~ 1.3XV (Cinebench). It's the simple single-core tasks that reach those absurdly high voltages.

And yes, unfortunately, I do need that high and offset for stable performance.


----------



## Praetorr

Finally ditching my (garbage) Gigabyte X370 K7, and I ordered the CHVII this afternoon.

Quick question for you guys: Recommended best stable, bug-free BIOS?

I see that 0804 is the most recent up on the official download page. Is that the route you all would take?


----------



## Keith Myers

Praetorr said:


> Finally ditching my (garbage) Gigabyte X370 K7, and I ordered the CHVII this afternoon.
> 
> Quick question for you guys: Recommended best stable, bug-free BIOS?
> 
> I see that 0804 is the most recent up on the official download page. Is that the route you all would take?


Go with 0702. 0804 has too many issues.


----------



## Mannekino

Keith Myers said:


> Go with 0702. 0804 has too many issues.



Care to elaborate? Would love to know list of issues and maybe if any of them relate to the problems I had. 



* Black screen issues after fiddling with OC settings
* Voltages lowering and not boost not working anymore after I manually set a positive CPU Voltage Offset


----------



## zulex

Why AGESA 1004 bios update is so slow?


----------



## Syldon

Praetorr said:


> Finally ditching my (garbage) Gigabyte X370 K7, and I ordered the CHVII this afternoon.
> 
> Quick question for you guys: Recommended best stable, bug-free BIOS?
> 
> I see that 0804 is the most recent up on the official download page. Is that the route you all would take?


Try both the latest two, and see how it goes. The issues you get with both revisions are not consistent to everyone, so it really is a case of suck it and see. Asus does not really give a full synopsis of what has changed in each revision, but there is a very limited write up on the support page.


From memory areas of concern are voltages, LLC, and fans speeds not applying. Memory timings seem to be the same for both revisions. Or at least they are for me, and I dont remember anyone posting anything dramatic between the two revisions.


----------



## crakej

On 0702 manual OC with offset voltage on CPU doesn't work - with gen 1 cpu, not sure about gen 2


----------



## Praetorr

Thanks everyone!

It sounds like I might just go with 0702 and then wait for the next (AGESA 1.0.0.4 perhaps?) stable BIOS.

I don't intend to do a manual OC anyways, as I have a 2700X. I am looking forward to toying around with PBO, however, as Gigabyte in their graces have decided not to implement it on their X370 boards even still. 

I'll be going back and reading as much of this thread as I can later today, if anyone has any general tips I should know about PBO on this board it would be much appreciated.


----------



## crakej

This is a great place to start, updated by @gupsterg regularly. https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?101617-Crosshair-VII-Hero-Essential-Info-Thread

Edit: my memory was also slightly better on 0702 - 3600MTs - on 0804 can only do 3533 reliably, but there isn't much change in performance.


----------



## CJMitsuki

crakej said:


> This is a great place to start, updated by @gupsterg regularly. https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?101617-Crosshair-VII-Hero-Essential-Info-Thread


I run 0702 as mem stability is slightly better. I also run XFR/pbo BCLK OC. I’ll Post my setup when I’m home this evening then you can tune the Ref clock to get the desired boost. I have gotten up to 4.6ghz all cores boost so far. The boosts will also depend on how cool you can keep the cpu. You’ll get 41.5x to 43.5x max depending on temps. That’s why bclk OC is necessary to go beyond 4.35ghz. I think they should have had an option to let the multiplier keep increasing as long as there was cooling headroom. There wouldn’t have been a need to increase the ref clock then.


----------



## Keith Myers

Mannekino said:


> Care to elaborate? Would love to know list of issues and maybe if any of them relate to the problems I had.
> 
> 
> 
> * Black screen issues after fiddling with OC settings
> * Voltages lowering and not boost not working anymore after I manually set a positive CPU Voltage Offset


ACPI address conflict issues in Linux with 0804. Unable to load my normal drivers with 0804. No problem with 0702.


----------



## minal

CJMitsuki said:


> Ah yes there is just one. I have an NZXT sentry 3 digital fan controller which has a couple on it so that had me thinking there were multiple.
> 
> NZXT Sentry3 That is something to look into as well. Give very good control over fans and you can have them react to temps. Its very cheap and looks great as well.


No external drive bays on my Define C.  Out of curiosity, does the display turn off? I like my computer totally dark. 



Keith Myers said:


> ACPI address conflict issues in Linux with 0804. Unable to load my normal drivers with 0804. No problem with 0702.


 Wow, glad I stayed with 0702.. Thanks for reporting.


----------



## Keith Myers

minal said:


> No external drive bays on my Define C.  Out of curiosity, does the display turn off? I like my computer totally dark.
> 
> 
> Wow, glad I stayed with 0702.. Thanks for reporting.


Positive, the WMI change to that BIOS is what causes the issue. You can't run the usual acpi_enforce_resources=lax or the acpi ignore resource conflict=1 parameters they just get ignored and the conflict remains and the drivers won't load.


----------



## hurricane28

I have a new name for Asus, they should change it to Assus and their slogan should be; "Assus, we pioneered no fan technologie" Lmao. 

No seriously, this is nothing to joke about but i couldn't help it.


----------



## CJMitsuki

minal said:


> No external drive bays on my Define C.  Out of curiosity, does the display turn off? I like my computer totally dark.


Im not sure, Ill find the manual and see. Also, I was mistaken about the C7H only having one. You can use the EXT_TS1, 2, and 3 to add more thermal sensors and have them be read by Q Fan in the bios.

They are on the fan header extension in between the connections for the fans

Fan Header



Spoiler


----------



## minal

CJMitsuki said:


> Im not sure, Ill find the manual and see. Also, I was mistaken about the C7H only having one. You can use the EXT_TS1, 2, and 3 to add more thermal sensors and have them be read by Q Fan in the bios.
> 
> They are on the fan header extension in between the connections for the fans
> 
> Fan Header
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 212718


 Nice, the Asus Fan Extension Card is actually available for purchase and would be best since it integrates with Q Fan. 

Interesting that it comes with "3 x thermistor cables"... meaning the sensors? I'll keep this in mind if I go ahead with this project.


----------



## CJMitsuki

minal said:


> Nice, the Asus Fan Extension Card is actually available for purchase and would be best since it integrates with Q Fan.
> 
> Interesting that it comes with "3 x thermistor cables"... meaning the sensors? I'll keep this in mind if I go ahead with this project.


Yes, I would assume they may not be the highest quality but its a thermal sensor...Not sure how "high quality" those particular type go.


----------



## MrPhilo

I'm pretty sure someone had a similar memory behaviour with me before somewhere here

So I did 12 x 850 memtest and no errors for 2900-3000%

I decided to do 5 x 1000 and use the PC as normal as well while they're running in the background

I got an error at 400%, what are some ways to actually stabilisingthe RAM (than loosing timing)? I've tried the calculator and stuff

Like what DIGI setting are the best for a 4.25Ghz OC and a 3533CL14? As I know some digi setting can effect stability

The ram temperature are around 46-48, i did read that anything above 52C is when errors start to happen, so shouldn't be for my case


----------



## nick name

MrPhilo said:


> I'm pretty sure someone had a similar memory behaviour with me before somewhere here
> 
> So I did 12 x 850 memtest and no errors for 2900-3000%
> 
> I decided to do 5 x 1000 and use the PC as normal as well while they're running in the background
> 
> I got an error at 400%, what are some ways to actually stabilisingthe RAM (than loosing timing)? I've tried the calculator and stuff
> 
> Like what DIGI setting are the best for a 4.25Ghz OC and a 3533CL14? As I know some digi setting can effect stability
> 
> The ram temperature are around 46-48, i did read that anything above 52C is when errors start to happen, so shouldn't be for my case


It might be your temperatures. From what I have read temperatures will impact everyone differently based on all the different variables from hardware to your settings.


----------



## CJMitsuki

MrPhilo said:


> I'm pretty sure someone had a similar memory behaviour with me before somewhere here
> 
> So I did 12 x 850 memtest and no errors for 2900-3000%
> 
> I decided to do 5 x 1000 and use the PC as normal as well while they're running in the background
> 
> I got an error at 400%, what are some ways to actually stabilisingthe RAM (than loosing timing)? I've tried the calculator and stuff
> 
> Like what DIGI setting are the best for a 4.25Ghz OC and a 3533CL14? As I know some digi setting can effect stability
> 
> The ram temperature are around 46-48, i did read that anything above 52C is when errors start to happen, so shouldn't be for my case


The temps are more than likely your problem. Take a case fan and zip tie it to your ram so it blows directly on it and let it drop the temps and test again when it has leveled out.


----------



## nick name

Okay this is starting to piss me off. When using either Balanced Power plans the Minimum Processor State keeps changing to 100%. It happens constantly. Does anyone have an idea as to why this keeps adjusting itself?


----------



## gupsterg

@marsel

WOW crazy a SATA drive was cause of CPU not down volting.
@minal

I have the ASUS Fan Extension Card, probes, etc. It comes packaged with ZE. If you need info and when I can, I can test it for you.

@ fellow C7H subscribers  .

Still been on UEFI 0804, still using 2 dimms from F4-3200C14Q-32GVK, ie 2x F4-3200C14-8GVK or F4-3200C14D-16GVK.

Past several days just been tightening up timings really. For testing I did bump CPU VID to 1.343 (using 4.1GHZ PState 0), SOC to 1.025V, but kept the VDIMM as 1.35V. So far below is where I am.









Green boxed timings can not be lowered further as they are the lowest values settable. Orange boxed timings I believe are as tight as they can be. Red boxed timings any dropping of even by 1 equals issues, will retest later.

ZIP link of full testing so far, organise by file date.


----------



## crakej

MrPhilo said:


> I'm pretty sure someone had a similar memory behaviour with me before somewhere here
> 
> So I did 12 x 850 memtest and no errors for 2900-3000%
> 
> I decided to do 5 x 1000 and use the PC as normal as well while they're running in the background
> 
> I got an error at 400%, what are some ways to actually stabilisingthe RAM (than loosing timing)? I've tried the calculator and stuff
> 
> Like what DIGI setting are the best for a 4.25Ghz OC and a 3533CL14? As I know some digi setting can effect stability
> 
> The ram temperature are around 46-48, i did read that anything above 52C is when errors start to happen, so shouldn't be for my case


My ram runs well at 3533 on 0804. Ram temp made a difference for me - anything over about 43c caused OC problems.... much better now with fans on ram...


----------



## minal

gupsterg said:


> I have the ASUS Fan Extension Card, probes, etc. It comes packaged with ZE. If you need info and when I can, I can test it for you.


I don't have any specific questions at the moment, but I'm sure there would be an interest in your impressions.


----------



## kidstronger

_any hve guide oc detail on bios for ryzen 2600x_


----------



## hurricane28

crakej said:


> My ram runs well at 3533 on 0804. Ram temp made a difference for me - anything over about 43c caused OC problems.... much better now with fans on ram...


Wait a second... Could that be.. My issue too? I mean, i saw Mus1Mus posting about it a while back and it seems that my RAM fails when it gets hotter than 42-43 c too.. 

Thnx for that, i am going to test with a fan on it.


----------



## crakej

hurricane28 said:


> Wait a second... Could that be.. My issue too? I mean, i saw Mus1Mus posting about it a while back and it seems that my RAM fails when it gets hotter than 42-43 c too..
> 
> Thnx for that, i am going to test with a fan on it.


Could be - I thought ram could run a lot hotter than that, but since putting the ram fans on and keeping them around 31c, things run MUCH better!


----------



## ryan92084

crakej said:


> This is a great place to start, updated by @gupsterg regularly. https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?101617-Crosshair-VII-Hero-Essential-Info-Thread
> 
> Edit: my memory was also slightly better on 0702 - 3600MTs - on 0804 can only do 3533 reliably, but there isn't much change in performance.


I too just picked up a VII the link is much appreciated. :thumb:


----------



## dreckschmeck

lol just read that about RAM cooling and instantly ordered this:
Corsair CMDAF2 Dominator Platinum Airflow RGB LED
2x 50mm , let's see if this is holding my RAM back.
Currently running a statick overclock 4.275 on all cores, but RAM only at [email protected] timing...


----------



## crakej

dreckschmeck said:


> lol just read that about RAM cooling and instantly ordered this:
> Corsair CMDAF2 Dominator Platinum Airflow RGB LED
> 2x 50mm , let's see if this is holding my RAM back.
> Currently running a statick overclock 4.275 on all cores, but RAM only at [email protected] timing...


If your ram temps are over 40c I think you'll see a difference. Don't forget to try GearDown mode ON - I couldn't get over 3200 without it, but still needed the ram fans.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> If your ram temps are over 40c I think you'll see a difference. Don't forget to try GearDown mode ON - I couldn't get over 3200 without it, but still needed the ram fans.


Do you see lower temps with Geardown mode on?


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> My ram runs well at 3533 on 0804. Ram temp made a difference for me - anything over about 43c caused OC problems.... much better now with fans on ram...





hurricane28 said:


> Wait a second... Could that be.. My issue too? I mean, i saw Mus1Mus posting about it a while back and it seems that my RAM fails when it gets hotter than 42-43 c too..
> 
> Thnx for that, i am going to test with a fan on it.


Wowww Guys.. really ?? Figured that out long time ago.! Check out my posts and pictures.. Again nobody did catch it up!!!

I'm running my Rams at 3533 cl14 TT with fans on top of it...working great..

Links to posts while back:
https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-156.html#post27458305

https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-161.html#post27464660


----------



## hurricane28

majestynl said:


> Wowww Guys.. really ?? Figured that out long time ago.! Check out my posts and pictures.. Again nobody did catch it up!!!
> 
> I'm running my Rams at 3533 cl14 TT with fans on top of it...working great..
> 
> Links to posts while back:
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-156.html#post27458305
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-161.html#post27464660


Yeah, i remember man. Some did pay attention to it though, and Mus1Mus also told us about it but everyone was laughing at him but he was and is right man. 

Anyway, this 0804 BIOS sucks eggs man.. I can't even maintain stability at 3466 MHz CL14 anymore while i could run 3600 MHz at previous BIOS.. 

Hopefully they release new BIOS soon. No word from Elmor either man, this ain't cool at all.


----------



## crakej

I did pay attention...... fortunately


----------



## MrPhilo

Decided to just put it down to 3466CL14, all good so far , will be tightening some more timing! Also I have it running at 1.4V as well, so really good. 

It has passed 2000% hci memtest (12 x 850)

It has passed 1600% hci memtest (5 x 1000) + playing games (stardew valley), browsing chrome etc

Only reason I'm not getting a fan as itll make my pc not look as good , it looks really nice atm plus it's only a small performance boost, not to mention when I can get my voltage to down clock for my CPU instead of staying at 1.4V, i'll be OC'ing it to 4.3Ghz at 1.45V - reason why I'm ocing it as PE2 runs 4.15Ghz at 1.43V, so ya know, I don't mind losing the single core performance for multi-core.

Still no idea how to make it downvolt, seems to work fine on PE2/3 - I know some people are having the same issue.

I have reset bios from the button on the board, just went into PSTATE, 4.25Ghz (AA) + 1.4125V (16) and enabled Global C State and it just sticks on 1.4V, I know some people have mention it can be windows, but I have put it in power saving mode and it still doesn't downvolt, so idk whatsup really


----------



## nick name

MrPhilo said:


> Decided to just put it down to 3466CL14, all good so far , will be tightening some more timing! Also I have it running at 1.4V as well, so really good.
> 
> It has passed 2000% hci memtest (12 x 850)
> 
> It has passed 1600% hci memtest (5 x 1000) + playing games (stardew valley), browsing chrome etc
> 
> Only reason I'm not getting a fan as itll make my pc not look as good , it looks really nice atm plus it's only a small performance boost, not to mention when I can get my voltage to down clock for my CPU instead of staying at 1.4V, i'll be OC'ing it to 4.3Ghz at 1.45V - reason why I'm ocing it as PE2 runs 4.15Ghz at 1.43V, so ya know, I don't mind losing the single core performance for multi-core.
> 
> Still no idea how to make it downvolt, seems to work fine on PE2/3 - I know some people are having the same issue.
> 
> I have reset bios from the button on the board, just went into PSTATE, 4.25Ghz (AA) + 1.4125V (16) and enabled Global C State and it just sticks on 1.4V, I know some people have mention it can be windows, but I have put it in power saving mode and it still doesn't downvolt, so idk whatsup really


If you're actually using power saving mode then that isn't what they are referring to. They are talking about Power Plans and using the Balanced power plan and more specifically making certain that Processor power management>Minimum processor state>20% is the setting used. This can be on Windows Balanced or AMD Ryzen Balanced as long as that value is at 20%.

However, if you manually set a voltage then the CPU enters into OC mode and none of the above would make a difference.


----------



## nick name

So I don't run PBO Lvl 3 with BCLK 101 because Prime95 Small FFTs always fails. (I really want to run PBO Lvl 3 with a BCLK of 101) My question is why is it always Core #2 that fails? Let me add that if I don't add enough +offset the system will simply freeze, but when I do run enough offset to prevent freezing Core #2 will eventually be the one that stops. 

Anyone know? Is that just the weakest core in my CPU? Is there a way to see what causes Prime95 to stop running in a log?


Edit:
So of course because I created this post I finally had different core stop. This time it was Core #1 and not Core #2. And only one thread. When Core #2 stops it's both threads.


----------



## MrPhilo

nick name said:


> If you're actually using power saving mode then that isn't what they are referring to. They are talking about Power Plans and using the Balanced power plan and more specifically making certain that Processor power management>Minimum processor state>20% is the setting used. This can be on Windows Balanced or AMD Ryzen Balanced as long as that value is at 20%.
> 
> However, if you manually set a voltage then the CPU enters into OC mode and none of the above would make a difference.


What I mean I'm trying to force it to downvolt, this works on PE2 using power saving it'll go to the lowest clock and voltage. While using in the Pstate it stays at 1.4v at 2.2ghz.

I use Window Balance Plan daily, power saving was to see it downvolt was working.

Also I'm using PSTATE voltage and Auto voltage on main page so it should downvolt. At least from what I've gathered.


----------



## crakej

Was just having a look at build dates for the bios.... they've been every 6 weeks - give or take a day (0702) so far, so a build is due around now (today). 0804 was built on 9 July.

Of course there is usually some time (testing) before release - who knows, we might get it here as a beta - but I'm pretty sure we''ll have something soon 

I'm happy to wait as it's got new AGESA that will no doubt require more fiddling around..... which I must admit I'm really looking forward to!


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Was just having a look at build dates for the bios.... they've been every 6 weeks - give or take a day (0702) so far, so a build is due around now (today). 0804 was built on 9 July.
> 
> Of course there is usually some time (testing) before release - who knows, we might get it here as a beta - but I'm pretty sure we''ll have something soon
> 
> I'm happy to wait as it's got new AGESA that will no doubt require more fiddling around..... which I must admit I'm really looking forward to!


Man now you have me looking for the new BIOS like its Christmas morning.


----------



## CJMitsuki

MrPhilo said:


> What I mean I'm trying to force it to downvolt, this works on PE2 using power saving it'll go to the lowest clock and voltage. While using in the Pstate it stays at 1.4v at 2.2ghz.
> 
> I use Window Balance Plan daily, power saving was to see it downvolt was working.
> 
> Also I'm using PSTATE voltage and Auto voltage on main page so it should downvolt. At least from what I've gathered.


First, it doesnt have to be set at 20% specifically, I use High performance power plan and only change the processor state to either 5, 10, or 20%. Its only going to drop to what the PStates are at anyway. Post your bios setup file and ill look and see if I can find anything. Im betting it will be in windows as a software doing it but we will see. I always use offset voltage and force the C States by setting to Enable. I used to use PStates before XFR bclk and I never saw issues with it.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Was just having a look at build dates for the bios.... they've been every 6 weeks - give or take a day (0702) so far, so a build is due around now (today). 0804 was built on 9 July.
> 
> Of course there is usually some time (testing) before release - who knows, we might get it here as a beta - but I'm pretty sure we''ll have something soon
> 
> I'm happy to wait as it's got new AGESA that will no doubt require more fiddling around..... which I must admit I'm really looking forward to!


So I noticed that all the release dates were Fridays except one was a Thursday. So if the schedule stays true then maybe this Friday we will see a new BIOS with the new 1004.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> So I noticed that all the release dates were Fridays except one was a Thursday. So if the schedule stays true then maybe this Friday we will see a new BIOS with the new 1004.


Lol..... V funny - bios-aholics! 

To be fair, Elmore has lots of work to do, so many platforms and cpu's now.....


----------



## HolyFist

Does anyone know why sometimes there's a sound glitch in Windows 10? Like i'm listening to music and browsing the web and it's like the system stutters for a split second, if i use Power Saver plan it happens a lot more.

I disabled Fast Startup and C states and it still happens, it used to happen with the C6H also.

When i had the 4670K it never happened, it happened with the 1700 on the C6H and on the C7H, it also happens with the 2700X.


----------



## untouchable247

My Crosshair VII Hero board seems to have the cold start bug (turns on and off 3 times before actually booting) that was common for the VI version. Paired with a 2700x and 2x 8GB G.Skill 3200C14. Any ideas why and how to fix? Bios updates don't do anything, ram speed/timings also don't matter.


----------



## VicsPC

untouchable247 said:


> My Crosshair VII Hero board seems to have the cold start bug (turns on and off 3 times before actually booting) that was common for the VI version. Paired with a 2700x and 2x 8GB G.Skill 3200C14. Any ideas why and how to fix? Bios updates don't do anything, ram speed/timings also don't matter.


I have not had one on my VI or VII with recent BIOS, however i do run my ram at 1.4v boot/dram voltage so its possible it needs more voltage. On my VI i had issues when temperatures were pretty cold in the house, below 18°C in winter but that shouldnt be a problem with the VII. Id start wih more boot voltage, shouldnt be happening at all.


----------



## CJMitsuki

untouchable247 said:


> My Crosshair VII Hero board seems to have the cold start bug (turns on and off 3 times before actually booting) that was common for the VI version. Paired with a 2700x and 2x 8GB G.Skill 3200C14. Any ideas why and how to fix? Bios updates don't do anything, ram speed/timings also don't matter.


It’s in the memory settings. It isn’t a bug at all, rather the resistances and voltages are not optimal. The ram may be stable but using too much voltage to stabilize bc other settings aren’t optimal or using too much SoC or too little. Same with Cad_Bus and ProcODT, etc. Your board wants to train memory every start bc of it. Also setting SoC OC VID instead of plain manual SoC adjustment can help but only if you are using the right SoC voltage. SoC OC VID is in the AMD CBS under NBIO settings. You have to have SoC set to offset and then have the offset on Auto then you input a hex value that corresponds to that specific voltage into the SoC OC VID area. Scroll back a few days and I posted the Hex Codes for everyone. It will apply SoC voltage at boot instead of afterwards from what I gathered. Again though, the resistances and other settings could be problematic as well so it’s just a matter of testing through trial and error for hours until you find the right settings. Keeping a notebook is mandatory so you don’t lose track of what you have tried and what gives more stability etc. I have mountains of notes from before they released the first AGESA ???? It saves time in the long run.


----------



## CJMitsuki

VicsPC said:


> I have not had one on my VI or VII with recent BIOS, however i do run my ram at 1.4v boot/dram voltage so its possible it needs more voltage. On my VI i had issues when temperatures were pretty cold in the house, below 18°C in winter but that shouldnt be a problem with the VII. Id start wih more boot voltage, shouldnt be happening at all.


Don’t throw more voltage at it, that won’t do any good. 1.4v is good up to 3533 with the right settings on an average IMC. It’s how you manage your resistances and how much time you are willing to invest to get it perfect. Hint: It takes fooorrreeevvveeerrrr but I enjoy it so it doesn’t bother me. 

Cold only makes the electronics more efficient at transmitting voltages and signals. SSDs don’t like it too much but CPUs, Memory, VRMs, etc love it. I run mine all the time around 9-11c and runs great.


----------



## gupsterg

minal said:


> I don't have any specific questions at the moment, but I'm sure there would be an interest in your impressions.


Would I pay for it? no, from when I last googled UK price for it there are better products on the market IMO.

Been a bit busy with stuff, managed to take some photos of it and compare the temp sensor physically to another and I prefer the other sensor than the one included with ASUS Fan Extension. Currently not adoring the product TBH, should soon have it linked to board for a test run.



untouchable247 said:


> My Crosshair VII Hero board seems to have the cold start bug (turns on and off 3 times before actually booting) that was common for the VI version. Paired with a 2700x and 2x 8GB G.Skill 3200C14. Any ideas why and how to fix? Bios updates don't do anything, ram speed/timings also don't matter.


When you mean cold start bug, you had power switched off on PSU prior to posting?


----------



## crakej

untouchable247 said:


> My Crosshair VII Hero board seems to have the cold start bug (turns on and off 3 times before actually booting) that was common for the VI version. Paired with a 2700x and 2x 8GB G.Skill 3200C14. Any ideas why and how to fix? Bios updates don't do anything, ram speed/timings also don't matter.


Sounds like memory training.

My ram needs 1.42v for 3533MTs - all ram is different.

Does your machine do this if you do not OC your memory?


----------



## VicsPC

crakej said:


> Sounds like memory training.
> 
> My ram needs 1.42v for 3533MTs - all ram is different.
> 
> Does your machine do this if you do not OC your memory?


Yea exactly, my Hynix needed 1.45v to run tight timings at 3200mhz, anything below 1.45 and those timings wouldnt stick. To be fair i did go from 16-18-36 to 14-15-34 and didnt have any issues with it. So for me 1.45v worked a charm, and considering my VI and VII haven't had cold boot bug in about 3months at least I'd say its either down to BIOS or voltage.


----------



## Terror-Byter

HolyFist said:


> Does anyone know why sometimes there's a sound glitch in Windows 10? Like i'm listening to music and browsing the web and it's like the system stutters for a split second, if i use Power Saver plan it happens a lot more.
> 
> I disabled Fast Startup and C states and it still happens, it used to happen with the C6H also.
> 
> When i had the 4670K it never happened, it happened with the 1700 on the C6H and on the C7H, it also happens with the 2700X.



Im having the exact same issue... watching youtube... watching downloaded movie... listening to music... every so often there is a half sec sound stutter. Been trying to figure this out for some time now. Even tried to run my system at pure stock everything... including the gpu. Still not figured it out.


----------



## Bo55

The cold boot bug is present on this board aswell ive tried being patient with it but after spending $452 AUD on this board, it should at least power on and post immediately as i have no issues with memory (SR B-die) so i know its not a memory issue as it will do it everytime i power up my system and at any voltage or any frequency (2133-3866). Cad bus and/or resistances play no part to fixing this either. This shouldn't be happening at all, this is clearly a board issue that needs to be fixed asap, for someone that decided to try a "high end" board for once, its looking pretty bad so far..


----------



## crakej

Bo55 said:


> The cold boot bug is present on this board aswell ive tried being patient with it but after spending $452 AUD on this board, it should at least power on and post immediately as i have no issues with memory (SR B-die) so i know its not a memory issue as it will do it everytime i power up my system and at any voltage or any frequency (2133-3866). Cad bus and/or resistances play no part to fixing this either. This shouldn't be happening at all, this is clearly a board issue that needs to be fixed asap, for someone that decided to try a "high end" board for once, its looking pretty bad so far..


This is NOT true.

I have not seen anyone else with this problem, and I sure don't have it.


----------



## gupsterg

Bo55 said:


> The cold boot bug is present on this board aswell ive tried being patient with it but after spending $452 AUD on this board, it should at least power on and post immediately as i have no issues with memory (SR B-die) so i know its not a memory issue as it will do it everytime i power up my system and at any voltage or any frequency (2133-3866). Cad bus and/or resistances play no part to fixing this either. This shouldn't be happening at all, this is clearly a board issue that needs to be fixed asap, for someone that decided to try a "high end" board for once, its looking pretty bad so far..


Is this "cold boot bug" when power supply has been switched off from wall socket prior to board posting?


----------



## HolyFist

Terror-Byter said:


> Im having the exact same issue... watching youtube... watching downloaded movie... listening to music... every so often there is a half sec sound stutter. Been trying to figure this out for some time now. Even tried to run my system at pure stock everything... including the gpu. Still not figured it out.


I don't know what is causing it, but DPC Latency spikes sometimes, usually is NVIDIA driver/DirectX driver or Storport.sys

LatencyMon says so at least, but even looking at examples on the internet nothing seems to help, only time it got better was after Windows clean install, then as i install drivers it goes back to the same.


----------



## VicsPC

gupsterg said:


> Is this "cold boot bug" when power supply has been switched off from wall socket prior to board posting?


This. If you're turning off your psu and turning it back on it CAN happen. I've done it a few times though and haven't had a cold boot bug. I haven't had it on my VI or my VII in ages so you guys need to figure out what's happening but seems to be an isolated case.


----------



## hurricane28

Hi peeps, 

I was wondering if there are more people with problems with Bluetooth audio on this motherboard.

I have constant connect and disconnect issues with it using my JBL reflect mini 2.

Btw my Sony dualshock 2 V2 works fine on the other hand, weird.


----------



## CJMitsuki

HolyFist said:


> I don't know what is causing it, but DPC Latency spikes sometimes, usually is NVIDIA driver/DirectX driver or Storport.sys
> 
> LatencyMon says so at least, but even looking at examples on the internet nothing seems to help, only time it got better was after Windows clean install, then as i install drivers it goes back to the same.


Sounds like driver corruption due to memory instability but it could be many other things like the driver having a conflict with a program or another driver. Which Audio device are you using for the audio output?


----------



## CJMitsuki

hurricane28 said:


> Hi peeps,
> 
> I was wondering if there are more people with problems with Bluetooth audio on this motherboard.
> 
> I have constant connect and disconnect issues with it using my JBL reflect mini 2.
> 
> Btw my Sony dualshock 2 V2 works fine on the other hand, weird.


To rule out corruption of system files at least you can use these commands to check and possibly repair the windows image if there is corruption founds. That is unless the Windows Update itself has become corrupted then you have to do some extra things. Open Command Prompt as administrator and input these in order, letting each command finish. 

SFC /Scannow
DISM /Online /Cleanup-Image /CheckHealth
DISM /Online /Cleanup-Image /ScanHealth
DISM /Online /Cleanup-Image /RestoreHealth

If corruption was found and it said it repaired it then reboot and run SFC command again, reboot and repeat SFC command one last time to make sure the corruption is gone. If nothing is found initially then the base system files are fine. If it says that it is unable to repair all of the corruption let me know and I’ll try to walk you through the next steps to repair the corruption manually. These commands are really useful, especially if you OC memory a lot as just having errors on bootup can potentially corrupt a system file or even a boot image file if you are really unlucky. Fortunately they are all repairable but a huge pain to deal with, especially if a bootmgr gets corrupted or anything in the boot files.


----------



## minal

gupsterg said:


> Would I pay for it? no, from when I last googled UK price for it there are better products on the market IMO.
> 
> Been a bit busy with stuff, managed to take some photos of it and compare the temp sensor physically to another and I prefer the other sensor than the one included with ASUS Fan Extension. Currently not adoring the product TBH, should soon have it linked to board for a test run.


:thumb: Those are the most useful kinds of impressions. Take your time, there's no rush. I don't know where you find the time to do all this testing and tuning!


----------



## CJMitsuki

minal said:


> :thumb: Those are the most useful kinds of impressions. Take your time, there's no rush. I don't know where you find the time to do all this testing and tuning!


When you say you aren’t adoring it, do you mean the looks of the product or is there a problem with its functionality? More importantly, it’s accuracy. I was thinking about ordering the Fan Extension myself for the integration to the bios that the sensors have which I really like. If they aren’t accurate then I’ll have to pass. I really want to have an ambient, case air temp, and exiting air temp sensor, and one on one of my Ram sticks to control a memory cooler. Also one for my gpu to control the 200mm Noctua on my side panel. My NZXT can have 2 sensors and control 5 fans but that’s not enough and I’d rather it be integrated into the bios so I can set the curve and not worry about it. Also the ambient and exiting air temps are useful to see how efficient my case is with moving the heat out instead of around the case. I currently have 7 140mm Noctuas and 4 are the industrial ones that can go to 3000rpm if I ever needed them to and the 200mm which is whisper quiet and moves a ton of air. Also have 2 of the 140mm Mag Lev fans from Corsair but I’m not a fan (pun intended) ????


----------



## HolyFist

CJMitsuki said:


> Sounds like driver corruption due to memory instability but it could be many other things like the driver having a conflict with a program or another driver. Which Audio device are you using for the audio output?


I'm using Onboard from the VII.

Can't be memory instability because it happens with everything on default/stock.


----------



## CJMitsuki

HolyFist said:


> I'm using Onboard from the VII.
> 
> Can't be memory instability because it happens with everything on default/stock.


Yes, I understand that but if you previously had memory overclocked and it had errors which caused some form of corruption then even if you revert it back to stock memory settings the corruption would remain until it was fixed.


----------



## Johan45

HolyFist said:


> Does anyone know why sometimes there's a sound glitch in Windows 10? Like i'm listening to music and browsing the web and it's like the system stutters for a split second, if i use Power Saver plan it happens a lot more.
> 
> I disabled Fast Startup and C states and it still happens, it used to happen with the C6H also.
> 
> When i had the 4670K it never happened, it happened with the 1700 on the C6H and on the C7H, it also happens with the 2700X.





Terror-Byter said:


> Im having the exact same issue... watching youtube... watching downloaded movie... listening to music... every so often there is a half sec sound stutter. Been trying to figure this out for some time now. Even tried to run my system at pure stock everything... including the gpu. Still not figured it out.


Common between the CHVI and CHVII is the Spreme FX 1220, if you're using on-board sound then I would look into those drivers


----------



## CJMitsuki

Johan45 said:


> Common between the CHVI and CHVII is the Spreme FX 1220, if you're using on-board sound then I would look into those drivers


That would be the Realtek audio driver. Just uninstall the driver and delete the driver software and download it again from Asus site or Realtek site then install again. I do mine manually so I don’t get all the bloatware bs that Asus loves to include as well as any other motherboard manufacturer


----------



## hurricane28

CJMitsuki said:


> To rule out corruption of system files at least you can use these commands to check and possibly repair the windows image if there is corruption founds. That is unless the Windows Update itself has become corrupted then you have to do some extra things. Open Command Prompt as administrator and input these in order, letting each command finish.
> 
> SFC /Scannow
> DISM /Online /Cleanup-Image /CheckHealth
> DISM /Online /Cleanup-Image /ScanHealth
> DISM /Online /Cleanup-Image /RestoreHealth
> 
> If corruption was found and it said it repaired it then reboot and run SFC command again, reboot and repeat SFC command one last time to make sure the corruption is gone. If nothing is found initially then the base system files are fine. If it says that it is unable to repair all of the corruption let me know and I’ll try to walk you through the next steps to repair the corruption manually. These commands are really useful, especially if you OC memory a lot as just having errors on bootup can potentially corrupt a system file or even a boot image file if you are really unlucky. Fortunately they are all repairable but a huge pain to deal with, especially if a bootmgr gets corrupted or anything in the boot files.


Thnx for your answer but nothing is corrupt, its an update of MS that is causing it apparently. It happened all of a sudden and i scanned with adwcleaner, superantispyware, sfc /scannow and the commands you have me but found nothing.


----------



## CJMitsuki

hurricane28 said:


> Thnx for your answer but nothing is corrupt, its an update of MS that is causing it apparently. It happened all of a sudden and i scanned with adwcleaner, superantispyware, sfc /scannow and the commands you have me but found nothing.


Sounds about right, MS always screwing something up. That’s why I run Windows Enterprise and disable windows update and remove everything else that is non essential. Once in Windows my processes use 3% of my 16gb memory. It’s unreal how much MS robs your performance from useless background processes and programs that are garbage....and Cortana is the worst. Good thing she can be removed too.


----------



## Syldon

hurricane28 said:


> Hi peeps,
> 
> I was wondering if there are more people with problems with Bluetooth audio on this motherboard.
> 
> I have constant connect and disconnect issues with it using my JBL reflect mini 2.
> 
> Btw my Sony dualshock 2 V2 works fine on the other hand, weird.


I had bother with the CH6 where my iphone would just connect/disconnect on every 10-60 seconds erratically. I could not connect a kindle at all and had to look into a wireless option. USB sticks worked ok. I found the answer when I bought the 2700x, I was undervolting the CPU too much. 


On a 1800x I was running at 3.95 with 1.3. I dont get those issues with a 2700x, but I find I cannot just turn off the bluetooth. If I try to swithc it off in windows the system goes into a frozen loop. I have to disconnect the power totally then reapply settings in the bios to get out of it. I just pull the adapter out now when I want the bluetooth switched off.


----------



## nick name

Syldon said:


> I had bother with the CH6 where my iphone would just connect/disconnect on every 10-60 seconds erratically. I could not connect a kindle at all and had to look into a wireless option. USB sticks worked ok. I found the answer when I bought the 2700x, I was undervolting the CPU too much.
> 
> 
> On a 1800x I was running at 3.95 with 1.3. I dont get those issues with a 2700x, but I find I cannot just turn off the bluetooth. If I try to swithc it off in windows the system goes into a frozen loop. I have to disconnect the power totally then reapply settings in the bios to get out of it. I just pull the adapter out now when I want the bluetooth switched off.


Is this with the WiFi version of the board?


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Lol..... V funny - bios-aholics!
> 
> To be fair, Elmore has lots of work to do, so many platforms and cpu's now.....


Alright cross your fingers and hope tonight/tomorrow we see a BIOS update with AGESA 1004.


----------



## Syldon

nick name said:


> Is this with the WiFi version of the board?


Without Wifi. I have a hard wired connection right next to the PC, so I avoid the addition of Wifi that is build into any board.


----------



## Bo55

gupsterg said:


> Bo55 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The cold boot bug is present on this board aswell ive tried being patient with it but after spending $452 AUD on this board, it should at least power on and post immediately as i have no issues with memory (SR B-die) so i know its not a memory issue as it will do it everytime i power up my system and at any voltage or any frequency (2133-3866). Cad bus and/or resistances play no part to fixing this either. This shouldn't be happening at all, this is clearly a board issue that needs to be fixed asap, for someone that decided to try a "high end" board for once, its looking pretty bad so far..
> 
> 
> 
> Is this "cold boot bug" when power supply has been switched off from wall socket prior to board posting?
Click to expand...

Yes correct. Whenever i power down and switch off from wall. Once its completely off i can switch it back on and it will do it again. My apologies, for what its worth i have the wifi version of this board. Its definitely a board issue, took one stick of memory out/switched around and it still does it.


----------



## VicsPC

Bo55 said:


> Yes correct. Whenever i power down and switch off from wall. Once its completely off i can switch it back on and it will do it again. My apologies, for what its worth i have the wifi version of this board. Its definitely a board issue, took one stick of memory out/switched around and it still does it.


Yea Ryzen doesn't like being turned off by the power supply. I think that happens to everyone, i only shut my PSU off if i need to unplug something or change stuff around, otherwise with it off it uses >.1w so might as well leave it on and save the headaches.


----------



## minal

Bo55 said:


> Yes correct. Whenever i power down and switch off from wall. Once its completely off i can switch it back on and it will do it again. My apologies, for what its worth i have the wifi version of this board. Its definitely a board issue, took one stick of memory out/switched around and it still does it.


 This is considered normal. 

See "Q: When power is removed from power supply, multiple posts occur, is this a problem with board/settings?" at https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?101617-Crosshair-VII-Hero-Essential-Info-Thread 

and https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?49146-Fake-boot-on-Maximus-VII-Hero#post417701


----------



## Terror-Byter

HolyFist said:


> Does anyone know why sometimes there's a sound glitch in Windows 10? Like i'm listening to music and browsing the web and it's like the system stutters for a split second, if i use Power Saver plan it happens a lot more.
> 
> I disabled Fast Startup and C states and it still happens, it used to happen with the C6H also.
> 
> When i had the 4670K it never happened, it happened with the 1700 on the C6H and on the C7H, it also happens with the 2700X.



Ok... so after a few googles... and a bit of reading, seems like its has something to do with the HPET(High Precision Event Timer), and Deferred procedure calls (DPC's) Latency.
Here is more info about it, and how to go about diagnosing...


Link 1 - http://www.mikemartin.co/system_guides/hardware/motherboard/disable_high_precision_event_timer_hpet
Link 2 - https://www.ghacks.net/2013/04/18/try-changing-hpet-settings-to-improve-your-pcs-performance


Bassicly you just need to use a couple of apps provided in the Link 2, to messure DPC latency... and one by one disable drivers or apps/services running in the background untill you find the ones that are causing high latency.


For me, I ended up software disabling HPET in windows, and also closing Corsair Link app... seems like Corsair Link adds a ton of DPC latency for some reason... probably due to monitoring nature of the software, not sure.


No more audio micro stutters after that.
Hope it helps


----------



## nick name

Syldon said:


> Without Wifi. I have a hard wired connection right next to the PC, so I avoid the addition of Wifi that is build into any board.


Yeah I am hardwired also, but I got the WiFi for the built in bluetooth.


----------



## cheddle

howdy! im new to this board, and to this thread! I'm running a 2700x - I've just moved from an x470 Taichi to an X470 c7h - the main reason being for finer control over BCLK overclocking with the 'performance enhancer'.

I achieved 102bclk on the Taichi with this cpu.

Problem is, and im hoping someone can throw me a bone here, is that I cant get 102bclk or above - I can only get 101bclk to run... When setting 102bclk or higher I get the RoG splash screen but cant press 'F2' for BIOS and windows never loads... 

I'm on the latest BIOS (0804) - Should I consider rolling back a version? if so what is the recommended one to go with?

thanks in advance.


----------



## nick name

cheddle said:


> howdy! im new to this board, and to this thread! I'm running a 2700x - I've just moved from an x470 Taichi to an X470 c7h - the main reason being for finer control over BCLK overclocking with the 'performance enhancer'.
> 
> I achieved 102bclk on the Taichi with this cpu.
> 
> Problem is, and im hoping someone can throw me a bone here, is that I cant get 102bclk or above - I can only get 101bclk to run... When setting 102bclk or higher I get the RoG splash screen but cant press 'F2' for BIOS and windows never loads...
> 
> I'm on the latest BIOS (0804) - Should I consider rolling back a version? if so what is the recommended one to go with?
> 
> thanks in advance.


What other hardware are you running? 

Also, is your RAM speed the same as it was on the Taichi?


----------



## Terror-Byter

cheddle said:


> howdy! im new to this board, and to this thread! I'm running a 2700x - I've just moved from an x470 Taichi to an X470 c7h - the main reason being for finer control over BCLK overclocking with the 'performance enhancer'.
> 
> I achieved 102bclk on the Taichi with this cpu.
> 
> Problem is, and im hoping someone can throw me a bone here, is that I cant get 102bclk or above - I can only get 101bclk to run... When setting 102bclk or higher I get the RoG splash screen but cant press 'F2' for BIOS and windows never loads...
> 
> I'm on the latest BIOS (0804) - Should I consider rolling back a version? if so what is the recommended one to go with?
> 
> thanks in advance.



Do you have an SSD's or HDD's plugged into SATA ports 3/4/5/6? Especially 5/6?
If so... temporarily unlplug them... and see if that helps. I have found that SSD's and HDD's plugged in those ports dont like BCLK overclocks on this board


----------



## crakej

Bo55 said:


> Yes correct. Whenever i power down and switch off from wall. Once its completely off i can switch it back on and it will do it again. My apologies, for what its worth i have the wifi version of this board. Its definitely a board issue, took one stick of memory out/switched around and it still does it.


Now I found right settings for my ram, I don't have this happening.

Does your machine is doing this even without OCing your memory?


----------



## Bo55

crakej said:


> Bo55 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes correct. Whenever i power down and switch off from wall. Once its completely off i can switch it back on and it will do it again. My apologies, for what its worth i have the wifi version of this board. Its definitely a board issue, took one stick of memory out/switched around and it still does it.
> 
> 
> 
> Now I found right settings for my ram, I don't have this happening.
> 
> Does your machine is doing this even without OCing your memory?
Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply, yes it does it even at stock. My x370 prime never did this whether at stock or OC'd.


----------



## cheddle

Terror-Byter said:


> Do you have an SSD's or HDD's plugged into SATA ports 3/4/5/6? Especially 5/6?
> If so... temporarily unlplug them... and see if that helps. I have found that SSD's and HDD's plugged in those ports dont like BCLK overclocks on this board


Im either using 1 and 2 / or 5 and 6 - ill check later today. I THINK im actually using 5 and 6!

Do I need to disable any form of SATA controller? (i.e is 5 and 6 on a separate controller to 1 thru 4 or are all 6 native?)



nick name said:


> What other hardware are you running?
> 
> Also, is your RAM speed the same as it was on the Taichi?


im runnning the exact same gear as on the taichi (the exception being ive replaced the wraith cooler with an AIO)

Ive actually got the RAM at a lower speed than I had it on the Taichi - I was running 3520c16 on the taichi and im running 3400c16 on the c7h (just to keep memory instability from potentially complicating things) - ive run HCI overnight at that and reached 1000+% without an error.

rough list of things:
2700x
c7h
f4-3600C16D-16GVK
1080ti FE
samsung 950 pro 256gb nvme ssd (m.2_1)
intel 750 1.2tb pcie ssd (pciex4_3)
3tb sata hdd
4tb sata hdd
Corsair commander mini


----------



## Terror-Byter

cheddle said:


> Im either using 1 and 2 / or 5 and 6 - ill check later today. I THINK im actually using 5 and 6!
> 
> Do I need to disable any form of SATA controller? (i.e is 5 and 6 on a separate controller to 1 thru 4 or are all 6 native?)



From what I can gather, I think 1+2+3+4 are fully native... where 5+6 are kind of semi native.


5+6 seems to be running on a somewhat different controller... Im not saying thing beeing 100% certain... but Ive run quite a few benchmarks using various SSD/HDD combos... and 5+6 bench just a tad bid lower than 1+2+3+4... like every so marginaly slower... 2/3%... but Im betting that 5+6 are on a seperate controller which doesnt like bclk overclocks.


This is also confirmed by der8auer during his review of the CH7


Link to der8auer video at the exact time he mentions BCLK and SATA issues. Also worth watching the entire video. Good review​https://youtu.be/S0mR4IoNWkQ?t=640


----------



## HolyFist

Okay regarding the DPC latency thing and the audio stutters.

Yesterday i haven't notice any, i saw another post on this forum mentioning that even if AHCI is enabled in BIOS (which is by default) it seems that for some reason the AMD SATA driver is bugged, and it mentions to disable it so i did.

Which leaves the AHCI driver only, while i haven't played games i did listen to Spotify and browse the web and didn't notice any latency issues or sound stutters.

Also, why doesn't the AMD Chipset drivers include SATA? The RAID driver doesn't install because i'm not doing RAID.

And the *AMD SATA driver has a date of 1 April 2017*, what's up with that? And yes i check for updates and it doesn't, be it scan AMD RAID driver folder or search the Internet from Device Manager,


----------



## HolyFist

sorry double post


----------



## crakej

Bo55 said:


> Thanks for the reply, yes it does it even at stock. My x370 prime never did this whether at stock or OC'd.


It sounds like you're really unlucky then 

So you've replaced to the board already? If so, can't think what's going on for you, this shouldn't be happening at stock!

I would hang on for the next bios update. Other than this problem the machine runs OK?


----------



## cheddle

Thanks for the guidance! Confirming sata port 5/6 were both in use and now that I’ve moved to 1/2 I can post 103.4! Yesss


----------



## Bo55

crakej said:


> It sounds like you're really unlucky then
> 
> So you've replaced to the board already? If so, can't think what's going on for you, this shouldn't be happening at stock!
> 
> I would hang on for the next bios update. Other than this problem the machine runs OK?


No, i havent replaced the board and yes you're right it shouldnt be happening. My machine is fine other than that, hoping next bios or one after will fix it otherwise i may have to get the board replaced.


----------



## nick name

Bo55 said:


> No, i havent replaced the board and yes you're right it shouldnt be happening. My machine is fine other than that, hoping next bios or one after will fix it otherwise i may have to get the board replaced.


I was hoping that next BIOS would drop today after looking at previous release dates, but I guess the AGESA update is gonna take a little longer to work on.


----------



## Terror-Byter

nick name said:


> I was hoping that next BIOS would drop today after looking at previous release dates, but I guess the AGESA update is gonna take a little longer to work on.



Who knows when a new bios update for CH7 will come out... Agesa 1.0.0.4 has been available for some time now... and the latest bios from ASUS seems to have come with more problems than the previous version including not actually fixing what it was meant to fix while not including AGESA 1.0.0.4. I might even go back to Intel when the 9900K chip is released. I might have been mistaken thinking that the 2nd revision of the Ryzen Platform ie. 2700x+X470 would have been a mature implimentation, but clearly its all still very beta.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I was hoping that next BIOS would drop today after looking at previous release dates, but I guess the AGESA update is gonna take a little longer to work on.


I would have thought it might drop next week - they have to do more than a couple of days testing.

I'm taking this time to upgrade my SM961 to an ADATA ASX8200NP-480GT-C - 3.2GB Read and 1.7GB Write..... Will do a sector for sector exact copy to it in the x2 slot before moving new drive to the x4 slot. My _Users_ folder is currently residing on drive D as it outgrew my 256GB drive - want to move it back before I don't know how to do it!

Have ordered my nice cables as well as want easy access to probe-it points and to make things neater for better air flow.


----------



## zulex

Elmor is not working for a new bios. He has been so slow after release of C7H


----------



## nick name

Does anyone use a reduced BCLK?


----------



## untouchable247

CJMitsuki said:


> It’s in the memory settings. It isn’t a bug at all, rather the resistances and voltages are not optimal. The ram may be stable but using too much voltage to stabilize bc other settings aren’t optimal or using too much SoC or too little. Same with Cad_Bus and ProcODT, etc. Your board wants to train memory every start bc of it. Also setting SoC OC VID instead of plain manual SoC adjustment can help but only if you are using the right SoC voltage. SoC OC VID is in the AMD CBS under NBIO settings. You have to have SoC set to offset and then have the offset on Auto then you input a hex value that corresponds to that specific voltage into the SoC OC VID area. Scroll back a few days and I posted the Hex Codes for everyone. It will apply SoC voltage at boot instead of afterwards from what I gathered. Again though, the resistances and other settings could be problematic as well so it’s just a matter of testing through trial and error for hours until you find the right settings. Keeping a notebook is mandatory so you don’t lose track of what you have tried and what gives more stability etc. I have mountains of notes from before they released the first AGESA ???? It saves time in the long run.


Is it worth going through this? No crashes in any applications or games. Not a single one. Completely stable in memtest for 24 hours. Can I turn this "train memory feature" off?



gupsterg said:


> When you mean cold start bug, you had power switched off on PSU prior to posting?


Yeah, it only happens when I switch the power off. (i pull the power cord from the wall outlet as it's easier in my setup than to use the psu's switch) Doesn't matter if it's over night or just for 2 minutes. Happens every single time but never when I restart or start the pc when it's still connected.



crakej said:


> Sounds like memory training.
> 
> My ram needs 1.42v for 3533MTs - all ram is different.
> 
> Does your machine do this if you do not OC your memory?





VicsPC said:


> I have not had one on my VI or VII with recent BIOS, however i do run my ram at 1.4v boot/dram voltage so its possible it needs more voltage. On my VI i had issues when temperatures were pretty cold in the house, below 18°C in winter but that shouldnt be a problem with the VII. Id start wih more boot voltage, shouldnt be happening at all.


My ram sits at 3200Mhz with Stilt's safe 3200 timings at 1.4v for daily use. No crashes whatsoever. Changed ram to 2400Mhz with super loose timing @1.5v, didn't change anything.


----------



## VicsPC

untouchable247 said:


> Is it worth going through this? No crashes in any applications or games. Not a single one. Completely stable in memtest for 24 hours. Can I turn this "train memory feature" off?
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, it only happens when I switch the power off. (i pull the power cord from the wall outlet as it's easier in my setup than to use the psu's switch) Doesn't matter if it's over night or just for 2 minutes. Happens every single time but never when I restart or start the pc when it's still connected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My ram sits at 3200Mhz with Stilt's safe 3200 timings at 1.4v for daily use. No crashes whatsoever. Changed ram to 2400Mhz with super loose timing @1.5v, didn't change anything.


Thats weird, i run my hynix at stock timings and 1.4v. I lost power last night and when it came back on my C7 didnt boot loop at all just started right up.


----------



## VPII

zulex said:


> Elmor is not working for a new bios. He has been so slow after release of C7H


Maybe Elmor is not slow, or even working on a new bios. Do we ever consider the fact that @elmor might have found another job, it would be sad, but I would wish him all the best.


----------



## hurricane28

maybe, imo its very unprofessional to leave people in the dark and don't inform us at all.. 

This is the last Asus product i buy, i swear... Never had such an incompetent and unprofessional support... 

Even The Stilt doesn't comment on this matter anymore and he is quoted several times past months.. 

Yes i am very happy with this C7H board i got for free but other than the readings and vrm's its pretty much the same board as the C6H with the same issues.. So i guess i got this to shut me op or something just like Mus1 Mus said so perhaps he was right after all...?


----------



## hurricane28

I have a new name for Asus, they should change it to Assus and their slogan should be; "Assus, we pioneered no fan technologie" Lmao. 

No seriously, this is nothing to joke about but i couldn't help it.


----------



## Syldon

hurricane28 said:


> maybe, imo its very unprofessional to leave people in the dark and don't inform us at all..
> 
> This is the last Asus product i buy, i swear... Never had such an incompetent and unprofessional support...
> 
> Even The Stilt doesn't comment on this matter anymore and he is quoted several times past months..
> 
> Yes i am very happy with this C7H board i got for free but other than the readings and vrm's its pretty much the same board as the C6H with the same issues.. So i guess i got this to shut me op or something just like Mus1 Mus said so perhaps he was right after all...?





hurricane28 said:


> I have a new name for Asus, they should change it to Assus and their slogan should be; "Assus, we pioneered no fan technologie" Lmao.
> 
> No seriously, this is nothing to joke about but i couldn't help it.


Get a grip. 

1. The Stilt has not been paid for the work he did with the profiling (AFAIK). He has no obligation to support this board.
2. !mus1mus has done loads for the benefit of CH6 users, but you have to admit his table manners needed some adjustment. 
3. A little sugar goes a long way. You got your board for free. Asus knows that you wont return it. What do you gain from mouthing abuse at them? Absolutely nothing.


----------



## zulex

All other major MB distributors such as Gigabyte, Asrock, MSI already released AGESA 1.0.0.4c bios.. But only ASUS did not... I think soon or later I shall contact ASUS support team and complain about this poor support.


----------



## Kildar

I think maybe elmor has jumped a sinking ship...


----------



## kevincs

I've been in contact with Tim from overlay.live, who sells the ROG_EXT module by elmor.

The readings from the ROG_EXT interface are not all correct on AM4 boards (some values are completely incorrect like CPU ratio, the math used to calculate voltage is different than Intel boards, the OPEID is rarely returned, etc), which is what prompted me to contact him.

Tim has been in contact with ASUS, they say they will fix the issue in a future BIOS release.

You can see some programs I wrote to interface with the ROG_EXT on AM4 here: https://github.com/kevinlekiller/rogext


----------



## Rusakova

zulex said:


> All other major MB distributors such as Gigabyte, Asrock, MSI already released AGESA 1.0.0.4c bios.. But only ASUS did not... I think soon or later I shall contact ASUS support team and complain about this poor support.


What exactly are you missing, with the current AGESA (compared to the new one) ?

Just because other MB manufacturers have released a new BIOS, doesn't mean it's perfect. 
It's been said that AGESA 1.0.0.4c had some bugs that needed to be worked out. But I
guess you would rather have bugs, than wait a little longer. The latest BIOS (804) also
have some bugs that needs to be fixed. But just keep complaining to Elmor and ASUS about it,
I'm sure they won't mind. Personally I haven't got a single issue with this board. It just runs.


----------



## lordzed83

@elmor
Small update from me since dont have any new bioses to test and WoW BFA is out in actually playing on this platform.

One month on bclk 102 = 4257 cpu + 3535cl14 memory and Wondows Insider build 17728 rs5.


ZERO PROBLEMS. No cold boots, no blue screens bost stable platform I ever had !!!!

I dont think I will touch anything till Ryzen 3 is out TBH


----------



## MNMadman

Rusakova said:


> Personally I haven't got a single issue with this board. It just runs.


This. Though I've had this board less than a day...

My 2700X is boosting higher than with my previous boards (C6H and MSI B450 Gaming Pro Carbon) and the RAM seems to be stable at higher clocks with tighter timings (still testing that though).

I don't have a cold boot issue, because I don't unplug or turn off my power supply regularly. I will do that when I switch out hardware, but it's not like that happens every day. And even if it happens to need three attempts to boot -- big whoop ... so what? It boots with all of the settings as I want them, so what's the big deal? I would understand people having a problem if it attempted boot several times and then reset the settings to default or something, but it doesn't. It boots fine, just taking a couple of tries. Not an issue to be concerned with at all.

And does anybody know exactly what the newest AGESA actually gives? No? So why do you insist we have it? Did those other boards suddenly become faster and overclock to new heights? It might fix a bug or two, but it might also mess with your overclock stability and add new bugs. On my Threadripper system, the newest AGESA added nothing I needed (as I wasn't running Gen2 Threadripper) and took away stability -- it needed more voltage on CPU and RAM to achieve the same overclocks. I reverted back to the previous version and everything returned to normal.


----------



## zulex

Rusakova said:


> What exactly are you missing, with the current AGESA (compared to the new one) ?
> 
> Just because other MB manufacturers have released a new BIOS, doesn't mean it's perfect.
> It's been said that AGESA 1.0.0.4c had some bugs that needed to be worked out. But I
> guess you would rather have bugs, than wait a little longer. The latest BIOS (804) also
> have some bugs that needs to be fixed. But just keep complaining to Elmor and ASUS about it,
> I'm sure they won't mind. Personally I haven't got a single issue with this board. It just runs.


im not saying its perfect but its behind.. if AGESA 1004 has that many bugs why then other manufacturers release them?


----------



## Praetorr

Having recently migrated from a Gigabyte X370 K7 to this board, I can tell you that while Gigabyte may have an AGESA 1004 update out, that BIOS is a pile of crap. They removed, rather than added, PBO features, introduced tons of bugs (e.g., sleep mode is totally broken), and made no improvements whatsoever. 

Trust me, you don’t know what incompetent BIOS development looks like until you’ve used a Gigabyte AM4 board.


----------



## crakej

I love new bios - it's true! - but have to say this board is brilliant! It's performance and OC ability are second to none.

Yes, there are some things we'd like ironed out, and continued improvement on ram speeds, but there's really not much to complain about. I agree it's a shame we're not getting the attention we used to get at launch of AM4, but it's far from awful. We can all run our machines at default and considerable OC already.

NONE of my voltages read out correctly, but it hasn't stopped me from being able to run at a respectable 4.1GHz and 3533MTs CL14,13,13,26 ram.

I don't think anyone has been given a board to 'shut them up', i'd be VERY happy if I'd not paid for mine  I'm pretty happy with it anyway!

Yes, some up to date information from @elmor or @[email protected] would be nice, but we know that doesn't come by throwing our toys out the pram 

Thanks for the information about your experience with the new AGESA on the X370 K7 @Praetorr - it's useful to know this!


----------



## cheddle

Be careful what you wish for... I have a c7h and a Taichi. I upgraded the Taichi BIOS to 1.0.0.4 and the next day rolled it back to 1.0.0.2c

Features were missing in .4, bugs were introduced and I had no noticeable improvements at all.

For those of us using a timing calc tool I don’t think there are any significant benefits from the newer AGESA at all. X399 hasn’t improved in any meaningful way with the AGESA updates either. I’d prefer ASUS release quality BIOSes that are bug free and work perfectly than to just push them out the door in a semi working state.

And for those complaining that the c7h is a buggy board, I’d encourage you to try the Taichi... This ASUS board is lovley and outside of BCLK overclocking not working when using sata 5/6 it’s perfect.


----------



## cheddle

speaking of a lovley product...

im having issues getting pcie 16x working on slot one - it keeps using 8x.

Ive got an m.2 in slot M2_1 (bottom right of board) and a PCIe ssd in PCIex4_3 (bottom most slot).

Slot 2 and m2_2 are both unoccupied and ive tried forcing disablment of m2_2 in BIOS however im still only getting 8x to the PCIe slot 1.

plz help?


----------



## minal

*Fan calibration bug with Noctua NH-A12x25 PWM*

For the Noctua NH-A12x25 PWM, fan calibration in BIOS calibrates the minimum PWM at >100%. Same result with or without the low noise adapter. This is on the H_AMP header. 

Luckily Q-Fan let me set breakpoints below the "minimum" so thankfully there's no problem in functionality.

In hindsight I thought of debugging by trying different fan headers, and manually finding the minimum PWM % at which the fan still spins. Since it's working I've left it alone.


----------



## zulex

crakej said:


> I love new bios - it's true! - but have to say this board is brilliant! It's performance and OC ability are second to none.
> 
> Yes, there are some things we'd like ironed out, and continued improvement on ram speeds, but there's really not much to complain about. I agree it's a shame we're not getting the attention we used to get at launch of AM4, but it's far from awful. We can all run our machines at default and considerable OC already.
> 
> NONE of my voltages read out correctly, but it hasn't stopped me from being able to run at a respectable 4.1GHz and 3533MTs CL14,13,13,26 ram.
> 
> I don't think anyone has been given a board to 'shut them up', i'd be VERY happy if I'd not paid for mine  I'm pretty happy with it anyway!
> 
> Yes, some up to date information from @elmor or @[email protected] would be nice, but we know that doesn't come by throwing our toys out the pram
> 
> Thanks for the information about your experience with the new AGESA on the X370 K7 @Praetorr - it's useful to know this!


There are several quotes from users that ram overclockability reduced from previous version. There should be room for improvement. It is very obvious that Elmor and Raja's participation in this thread have been unlike before.


----------



## zulex

cheddle said:


> Be careful what you wish for... I have a c7h and a Taichi. I upgraded the Taichi BIOS to 1.0.0.4 and the next day rolled it back to 1.0.0.2c
> 
> Features were missing in .4, bugs were introduced and I had no noticeable improvements at all.
> 
> For those of us using a timing calc tool I don’t think there are any significant benefits from the newer AGESA at all. X399 hasn’t improved in any meaningful way with the AGESA updates either. I’d prefer ASUS release quality BIOSes that are bug free and work perfectly than to just push them out the door in a semi working state.
> 
> And for those complaining that the c7h is a buggy board, I’d encourage you to try the Taichi... This ASUS board is lovley and outside of BCLK overclocking not working when using sata 5/6 it’s perfect.


There are several versions of AGESA 1.0.0.4 and you cant just tell its worse. I have read some positive feedbacks from users even though there may have been some bugs. Why not release it in beta version so we may try it? If you did join C6H thread there have been much more choice of bioses and the participation of Elmor and Raja were more active. Now here it is much like dead thread. You may also check below which I have quoted from another website.

"A few weeks ago AMD released new AGESA 1.0.0.4 microcode for their Ryzen motherboards that brought better memory compatibility and performance towards the Ryzen platform. However some of you might have noticed it already, there are AGESA 1.0.0.4a firmware’s available.

AGESA 1.0.0.4a brings a performance improvement in relation to boot and post times for AMD platforms. Website Golem has tested this with a few motherboards like the MSI X370 Xpower Gaming Titanium which indeed speeds up that process. Also they state that the 4-dimm support now is better, e.g. they can make use of four DIMMs at DDR4 2667 MHz

As mentioned in my reviews, with each update AMD Ryzen will get better. Check your motherboard manufacturer website for more info and availability of AGESA 1.0.0.4a firmware based updates."


----------



## zulex

Praetorr said:


> Having recently migrated from a Gigabyte X370 K7 to this board, I can tell you that while Gigabyte may have an AGESA 1004 update out, that BIOS is a pile of crap. They removed, rather than added, PBO features, introduced tons of bugs (e.g., sleep mode is totally broken), and made no improvements whatsoever.
> 
> Trust me, you don’t know what incompetent BIOS development looks like until you’ve used a Gigabyte AM4 board.


Gigabyte bioses are known to be crap regardless of their AGESA version.


----------



## zulex

cheddle said:


> Be careful what you wish for... I have a c7h and a Taichi. I upgraded the Taichi BIOS to 1.0.0.4 and the next day rolled it back to 1.0.0.2c
> 
> Features were missing in .4, bugs were introduced and I had no noticeable improvements at all.
> 
> For those of us using a timing calc tool I don’t think there are any significant benefits from the newer AGESA at all. X399 hasn’t improved in any meaningful way with the AGESA updates either. I’d prefer ASUS release quality BIOSes that are bug free and work perfectly than to just push them out the door in a semi working state.
> 
> And for those complaining that the c7h is a buggy board, I’d encourage you to try the Taichi... This ASUS board is lovley and outside of BCLK overclocking not working when using sata 5/6 it’s perfect.


My 1.05V SB Voltage always reads 0.05 higher which I have to adjust it manually to fix it. This is a hardware problem which were found by users I guess. Strctly speaking, ASUS should have recalled all these early batch of C7H. What I am trying to say is that we dont have to get crazy about what we have now. There are some room for improvement and ASUS should work for it.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Terror-Byter said:


> Who knows when a new bios update for CH7 will come out... Agesa 1.0.0.4 has been available for some time now... and the latest bios from ASUS seems to have come with more problems than the previous version including not actually fixing what it was meant to fix while not including AGESA 1.0.0.4. I might even go back to Intel when the 9900K chip is released. I might have been mistaken thinking that the 2nd revision of the Ryzen Platform ie. 2700x+X470 would have been a mature implimentation, but clearly its all still very beta.


Clearly you aren’t aware of what “beta” actually is. This is far from beta but also isn’t a perfect architecture as there are bugs to work out. Do you understand how long the Ryzen architecture has been around? It’s literally in its infancy while Intel has rode their current architecture for many, many years and has had plenty of time to work everything out but they are also still encountering numerous security vulnerabilities to this day. Also, quite a bit of this can’t be blamed on AMD but rather the other hardware manufacturers and quite a bit on users overclocking their machines incorrectly and blaming it on the hardware when the problems are literally created by their overclocks without the full understanding of what these overclocks can do if done incorrectly, notably memory overclocks. If left at stock settings like suggested by AMD then I would venture to say that 90% of these “beta” problems wouldn’t actually be problems. I’ve had Ryzen ever since first launch and had encountered a couple of bugs along the way, including segfault bug but recently, aside from bios 0804 screw up everything runs fine. Everyone needs to stop being so impatient on bios updates. Let them finish properly so we don’t get another 0804 problem. I reverted to 0704 and I’ll just wait. If you have hardware problems then take that up with the manufacturer as I don’t see where Ryzen is problematic. Runs beautifully for me. Actually, runs well above expectations and I have abused my 2700x more than most are willing to. I’ve had the chip near 1.7v on AIO cooling without failure and have spent all night running 1.55-1.6v and the chip ran like a beast. If you can get a 2700x near 4.6ghz on AIO cooling now when 4.0ghz on first gen was doing good then Ryzen has grown by leaps and bounds in the 1.5 year old architecture. Far from “beta” bro. 7nm is going to be where AMD really starts showing true potential but honestly, aside from single core performance, Ryzen literally eats Intel. All you have to do is look at HWBOT benchmarks to see that. It takes Intel 1-1.5ghz more to match Ryzen multithreaded performance in nearly all multicore benchmarks and Ryzen isn’t that far behind in single core which is nearing its end of life stages. It won’t be long that single core performance will not matter at all as technology progresses toward using more cores and it’s already dead for multitasking as single core performance means nothing in that area. I’m honestly loving being a part of a growing, successful new architecture. It’s fun to be on the bleeding edge of it and finding its nuances that are still a mystery to many.


----------



## Terror-Byter

CJMitsuki said:


> Clearly you aren’t aware of what “beta” actually is. This is far from beta but also isn’t a perfect architecture as there are bugs to work out. Do you understand how long the Ryzen architecture has been around? It’s literally in its infancy while Intel has rode their current architecture for many, many years and has had plenty of time to work everything out but they are also still encountering numerous security vulnerabilities to this day. Also, quite a bit of this can’t be blamed on AMD but rather the other hardware manufacturers and quite a bit on users overclocking their machines incorrectly and blaming it on the hardware when the problems are literally created by their overclocks without the full understanding of what these overclocks can do if done incorrectly, notably memory overclocks. If left at stock settings like suggested by AMD then I would venture to say that 90% of these “beta” problems wouldn’t actually be problems. I’ve had Ryzen ever since first launch and had encountered a couple of bugs along the way, including segfault bug but recently, aside from bios 0804 screw up everything runs fine. Everyone needs to stop being so impatient on bios updates. Let them finish properly so we don’t get another 0804 problem. I reverted to 0704 and I’ll just wait. If you have hardware problems then take that up with the manufacturer as I don’t see where Ryzen is problematic. Runs beautifully for me. Actually, runs well above expectations and I have abused my 2700x more than most are willing to. I’ve had the chip near 1.7v on AIO cooling without failure and have spent all night running 1.55-1.6v and the chip ran like a beast. If you can get a 2700x near 4.6ghz on AIO cooling now when 4.0ghz on first gen was doing good then Ryzen has grown by leaps and bounds in the 1.5 year old architecture. Far from “beta” bro. 7nm is going to be where AMD really starts showing true potential but honestly, aside from single core performance, Ryzen literally eats Intel.  All you have to do is look at HWBOT benchmarks to see that. It takes Intel 1-1.5ghz more to match Ryzen multithreaded performance in nearly all multicore benchmarks and Ryzen isn’t that far behind in single core which is nearing its end of life stages. It won’t be long that single core performance will not matter at all as technology progresses toward using more cores and it’s already dead for multitasking as single core performance means nothing in that area. I’m honestly loving being a part of a growing, successful new architecture. It’s fun to be on the bleeding edge of it and finding its nuances that are still a mystery to many.



From google... 
beta
ˈbiːtə/
_noun_
noun: *beta*; plural noun: *betas*
the second letter of the Greek alphabet ( *Β*, *β* ), transliterated as ‘b’.



denoting the second of a series of items, categories, forms of a chemical compound, etc.
modifier noun: *beta*
"beta carotene"
British
a second-class mark given for a piece of work or an examination paper.



...and Ryzen+ paired with X470 are both the second in the series of items (Releases), and dont get me wrong, my dissapointment isnt focused only at AMD. Its directed at the platform... and since AMD doesnt make boards... they rely on board vendors such as Asus, MSI, Gigabyte, and so on... they too are responsible for the platform. As far as overclocking... especially memory overclocking... sure there is a ton of user error... but can it be due to the lack of technical information / descriptive literature provided by all those resposible for creating the platform. I have to admit its really great to get all those AMD CBS options open for tinkering... but without proper technical information available who knows what any of that stuff does under the hood... the only guys we are getting some real meat from are from people who dont even work for ASUS... Enthusiats and Overclockers like The Stilt, and 1usmus. On the memory overlocking... there are still so many problems and hoops and hurdles the paying customer has to jump through... and Im not even talking about crazy overclocks like 3800-4133 which there are tons of ram kits rated for that out there... Im talking about low numbers... 3200-3333-4466. How many people including myself cant seem to hit 3200... I dont really consider that a big overclock... especially on kits rated for 3600. AMD's fault? Board partners fault? Dont know whos fault it is... but forking out 1200 bucks on chip board and ram on flagship premium parts kinda gives me the right to expect the best... even if I need to do a little bit of tinkering and reading up on what setting does what (which isnt available)... but instead we are plagued with sensor issues... wmi issues... driver issues...


SB Voltage (among others) still doesnt read right...
WMI reading crashes the system...
Audio stutters without completely disabling HPET...
Raid Drivers opens your system up to anyone on your lan to do whatever the hell they want to your drives...
Ram overclocking requires a PHD on voltage termination...
PCIE slots sometimes only run at 8X...
And then to top it off... this whole 30-60sec ram training thing... so after spending another 300 bucks on the top end NVME to speed up your boot times and a fast OS/APP Drive... then you get hammered for a minute while your bios decides if it will post or not...


So yes my friend... very very beta.


Like you pointed out though... I too believe that 7nm is going to be where Ryzen really shines... my concern is though... will the software thats included and required for the hardware to run (Firmware/Drivers) be up to scratch? It certainly isnt right now.


And with intel soon to retake the multithreaded crown back with the 9900k clocking up to 5.5ghz on all 8 cores... AMD and Partners better pull a shiny unicorn out of a hat with their next release... I really dont want want to see another bulldozer/zambezi 10 year dry spell.


Good Hardware needs good software. Im glad that AMD in now back with some really promising hardware... but I think they need to invest a bit more into their software.


----------



## nick name

So I was on a quest to find a space between Performance Enhancers Level 3 and Level 4. Level 3 usually booted at at multiplier of 41.3 and Level 4 mostly booted at 42.5 (though sometimes much higher). I tried everything in BIOS to get one or the other Level to boot at 42 or 41.8, but failed. I reached out to Elmor and The Stilt and both told me to adjust the EDC value in BIOS, but that didn't have any impact. I noticed that Ryzen Master allows you to adjust the value in its PBO settings so I installed it and gave it a go. Annnnd it worked. The max value for EDC is 168 and I have found that usually increments of 5 translate into your CPU multiplier adjusting in quarter increments. So if my CPU at PE Level 4 boots at 42.5 I can bring it down to 42 by reducing the EDC value to either 165 or 160. Further reducing it brings the CPU multiplier down to 41.8 or 41.5 etc. After you have applied the adjusted EDC value you can then close Ryzen Master until needed again at your next reboot. And because you're using PE Level 4 the multiplier will stick as opposed to Levels 1 or 2 which will downclock. 

So for the folks out there that can't reliably run Performance Enhancer Level 4 then I would strongly encourage you to give this method a try. It gives you a way to fine tune where BIOS will not.


----------



## crakej

ASUS could release a beta of the code they get from AMD, but that would be daft thing to do. I know others might have done it and/or hacked out bits that wouldn't work, but really, our machines run really well compared to others.

If you're still having boot problems then you most likely have not got your OC quite right - especially if your machine boots fine with default settings. In my experience it can take a lot of playing around to get your OC booting nice and quickly.

As much as I hate the wait, I'd rather that over having a crappy bios.

I've migrated to my new ADATA NVMe but have yet to see a read speed of >=3GB. only going up to 2.6GB on a sequential read. Drive is using 4 lanes.... intend to use the old nvme for caching of some sort but don't want to put it in until this one works smoothly.


----------



## VicsPC

Guys if your system runs fine without any issues what do you need a new AGESA for? Honest question. On my VI i was on BIOS 1201 for the longest time as that was the most stable for RAM. I didn't have a single issue with it (besides the cold boot bug from just a regular shutdown) but upgrading to 6101 and the cold boot bug was gone. My ram was fine at factory timings and i didn't have a single issue (DC voltage for the fan control was fixed in that BIOS so not an issue). Just because other manufacturers release a newer BIOS it doesnt mean anything. Games, cars, new phones etc are released every year doesn't make em any better or worse then previous generations. 

I got ryzen the day it came out, the gigabyte BIOS is pretty horrendous. My gaming 5 died after 4 days and i was stuck waiting for 2 weeks just to get a new board (was such a shortage at the time i was just flat out refunded by my retailer). I agree that some of the issues are preposterous, ie the fan issue is just bad for people having that issue (my pump is molex and my 12 fans are on a fan controller), but i did have my rear exhaust fan attached to my mobo and a few times noticed that it would ramp up to full speed. I ended up tossing that on my fan controller as well. It's def an issue that needs fixing.


----------



## zulex

VicsPC said:


> Guys if your system runs fine without any issues what do you need a new AGESA for? Honest question. On my VI i was on BIOS 1201 for the longest time as that was the most stable for RAM. I didn't have a single issue with it (besides the cold boot bug from just a regular shutdown) but upgrading to 6101 and the cold boot bug was gone. My ram was fine at factory timings and i didn't have a single issue (DC voltage for the fan control was fixed in that BIOS so not an issue). Just because other manufacturers release a newer BIOS it doesnt mean anything. Games, cars, new phones etc are released every year doesn't make em any better or worse then previous generations.
> 
> I got ryzen the day it came out, the gigabyte BIOS is pretty horrendous. My gaming 5 died after 4 days and i was stuck waiting for 2 weeks just to get a new board (was such a shortage at the time i was just flat out refunded by my retailer). I agree that some of the issues are preposterous, ie the fan issue is just bad for people having that issue (my pump is molex and my 12 fans are on a fan controller), but i did have my rear exhaust fan attached to my mobo and a few times noticed that it would ramp up to full speed. I ended up tossing that on my fan controller as well. It's def an issue that needs fixing.


Even if you dont have any issues, others may have issues. It is very stupid assumption. It is like saying "i dont have any virus in my pc so why do we update its database". Even Elmor memtioned that there is an issue in the latest bios which he posted in this thread.


----------



## VicsPC

zulex said:


> Even if you dont have any issues, others may have issues. It is very stupid assumption. It is like saying "i dont have any virus in my pc so why do we update its database". Even Elmor memtioned that there is an issue in the latest bios which he posted in this thread.


Read the first sentence. If you don't have any issues, any instabilities then why do you need a new AGESA?


----------



## nick name

VicsPC said:


> Read the first sentence. If you don't have any issues, any instabilities then why do you need a new AGESA?


You realize AGESA updates don't simply correct bugs, right? They bring more levels of performance. Furthermore, asking why people improve things is just asinine. If people thought that way we wouldn't have computers. So if you're just being argumentative then please stop. The last few pages of this thread have been disrupted by arguing and it's getting old.


----------



## numlock66

cheddle said:


> Be careful what you wish for... I have a c7h and a Taichi. I upgraded the Taichi BIOS to 1.0.0.4 and the next day rolled it back to 1.0.0.2c


Have you tried last beta agesa 1.0.0.4 bios for taichi? same problems?

And have you compared memory overclock between these boards? what you found?


----------



## VicsPC

nick name said:


> You realize AGESA updates don't simply correct bugs, right? They bring more levels of performance. Furthermore, asking why people improve things is just asinine. If people thought that way we wouldn't have computers. So if you're just being argumentative then please stop. The last few pages of this thread have been disrupted by arguing and it's getting old.


The performance they offer is minimal at best. In fact Ryzen first gen as the AGESA grew more mature most people lost performance. If Asus hasn't released it then they must have a good reason why. Clearly you're not understanding that other people with other AM4 boards that are on the newer AGESA are having nothing but problems. But i won't argue anymore with people who dont understand that if "it ain't broke don't fix it". 

Here since most people won't do a simple google search. "AMD Generic Encapsulated Software Architecture (AGESA), is a bootstrap protocol by which system devices on AMD64-architecture mainboards are initialized. The AGESA software in the BIOS of such mainboards is responsible for the initialization of the processor cores, memory, and the HyperTransport controller."

Bootstrap protocol. It might bring better memory support but that's the best case scenario. If your board is already booting and getting you memory speeds you want then why risk a newer BIOS that's full of bugs.


----------



## nick name

VicsPC said:


> The performance they offer is minimal at best. In fact Ryzen first gen as the AGESA grew more mature most people lost performance. If Asus hasn't released it then they must have a good reason why. Clearly you're not understanding that other people with other AM4 boards that are on the newer AGESA are having nothing but problems. But i won't argue anymore with people who dont understand that if "it ain't broke don't fix it".
> 
> Here since most people won't do a simple google search. "AMD Generic Encapsulated Software Architecture (AGESA), is a bootstrap protocol by which system devices on AMD64-architecture mainboards are initialized. The AGESA software in the BIOS of such mainboards is responsible for the initialization of the processor cores, memory, and the HyperTransport controller."
> 
> Bootstrap protocol. It might bring better memory support but that's the best case scenario. If your board is already booting and getting you memory speeds you want then why risk a newer BIOS that's full of bugs.


No, it's you that don't get it. If you really subscribed to your "ain't broke" philosophy then why would you be a member of an overclocking forum. And honestly I'd wish you'd go back to your own Crosshair VI thread. If you aren't here to help with the Crosshair VII and are only going to argue over your own flawed opinions then get the eff out.


----------



## Terror-Byter

VicsPC said:


> The performance they offer is minimal at best. In fact Ryzen first gen as the AGESA grew more mature most people lost performance. If Asus hasn't released it then they must have a good reason why. Clearly you're not understanding that other people with other AM4 boards that are on the newer AGESA are having nothing but problems. But i won't argue anymore with people who dont understand that if "it ain't broke don't fix it".
> 
> Here since most people won't do a simple google search. "AMD Generic Encapsulated Software Architecture (AGESA), is a bootstrap protocol by which system devices on AMD64-architecture mainboards are initialized. The AGESA software in the BIOS of such mainboards is responsible for the initialization of the processor cores, memory, and the HyperTransport controller."
> 
> Bootstrap protocol. It might bring better memory support but that's the best case scenario. If your board is already booting and getting you memory speeds you want then why risk a newer BIOS that's full of bugs.



Im sure that the majority of overclockers who specfically come to this forum looking for every drop of performance to squeaze out of their builds would dissagree with you... but more to the point on the statement "it ain't broke don't fix it"... is that IT IS broken... and we are eagerly waiting for a fix... infact multiple fixes. As from sensors not displaying correct values, and WMI related crashes, not to mention better memory overclocking. Infact HWInfo specically updated their software to NOT read from the WMI on the CH7 with the current latest bios 0804 due to errors causing the PC to crash. Most popular monitoring software apps are still showing wrong temperatures (No matter what bios you use), Corsair Link for example, or even MSI Afterburner. And though its true that if ASUS hasnt released an update yet there must be a good reason... but the fact still stands that people using the CH7 are still experiencing multiple issues... while their warranties slowly tick away... and after having paid a premium price for a "premium" board... its a little frustrating and time consuming to have to first commit to fault finding before before you can get on with the reason people buy the top tier ASUS ROG Overclocking board.


----------



## VicsPC

Terror-Byter said:


> Im sure that the majority of overclockers who specfically come to this forum looking for every drop of performance to squeaze out of their builds would dissagree with you... but more to the point on the statement "it ain't broke don't fix it"... is that IT IS broken... and we are eagerly waiting for a fix... infact multiple fixes. As from sensors not displaying correct values, and WMI related crashes, not to mention better memory overclocking. Infact HWInfo specically updated their software to NOT read from the WMI on the CH7 with the current latest bios 0804 due to errors causing the PC to crash. Most popular monitoring software apps are still showing wrong temperatures (No matter what bios you use), Corsair Link for example, or even MSI Afterburner. And though its true that if ASUS hasnt released an update yet there must be a good reason... but the fact still stands that people using the CH7 are still experiencing multiple issues... while their warranties slowly tick away... and after having paid a premium price for a "premium" board... its a little frustrating and time consuming to have to first commit to fault finding before before you can get on with the reason people buy the top tier ASUS ROG Overclocking board.


Software will always measure voltages inaccurately. Even on my z97 msi board whatever was displayed wasn't what I'd measure on my DMM, either at the probeit points or directly measuring at the voltage points of the component, that's a given it's normal. 

As far as temperatures reading incorrectly I'm not sure how people still are confused about the offset or just enabling miskew with an x chip and disabling it with a non x chip. Both my GPU and CPU read temps correctly, i have a temperature sensor in my case and a water temperature sensor in one of my rads, on both my VI and VII I've never had a temperature reading incorrectly unless i disable miskew and then tdie reads wrong, but ive always gone by tctl and that reads it correctly, for the past year at least. 



nick name said:


> No, it's you that don't get it. If you really subscribed to your "ain't broke" philosophy then why would you be a member of an overclocking forum. And honestly I'd wish you'd go back to your own Crosshair VI thread. If you aren't here to help with the Crosshair VII and are only going to argue over your own flawed opinions then get the eff out.


You really need to calm down man. You do know not everyone is having issues with the VII right? There were far more issues with the VI then the VII. People are complaining and complaining and waiting for a BIOS that's not even finished. Elmor/Stilt/Asus have no obligation to provide anyone on here a test/beta BIOS for any reason don't forget that. As people have mentioned in this thread (if you even bothered to read at all), they have different AM4 boards and 1.0.0.4 is full of bugs and people have had to revert back (which btw there is always a chance of bricking a board when upgrading/downgrading a BIOS so take that as it is). 

The only MAJOR issue/bug that seems to be going around is the fan/pumps stopping on people. It's like people would rather have a buggy BIOS quickly then a BIOS done right that takes time. Maybe Asus is skipping 1.0.0.4 have you thought of that?


----------



## Praetorr

While on the topic of bugs, has anyone had Performance Enhancer, in this case Level 3, seemingly “turn off” out of nowhere?

After previously seeing a notable performance boost in, for instance, CPUZ’s benchmark with Level 3 on, I ran it again just earlier and the score was back to stock. No other software was running that would limit CPU performance. The clock speeds were also back to stock for both 1T and 16T. 

So, I went into the BIOS to see if the setting itself reset — And nope! Still said Level 3. So I set it back to stock, then back to Level 3, and saved and quit the BIOS. Suddenly, I’m getting the Level 3 boost in benchmarks again.


----------



## Mannekino

Hi guys,

Reporting back in again. For those who remember my problems, I've been relatively problem free for the past two weeks, up until this weekend. I upgraded my videocard from an RX 580 to a Vega 56 and since then I've been experiencing hard resets. I have Seasonic Focus Plus Gold 550 Watt PSU and read there could be problems with using a single power cord to power the Vega 56. I was recommended to switch to another PSU. Since I need a PSU for my new NAS build I decided to use the Seasonic for my NAS and order a Corsair RM550x for my PC.

Any opinions/information on this problem?

This weekend I re-installed my PC several times but none of the re-installs went without problems. I got a hard reset during the first attempt and after that Windows 10 seemed corrupt in a few ways. For example I got a display driver .dll error when I tried to install the latest AMD GPU drivers and the default Windows 10 drivers weren't installed properly. The second attempt went better but after installing a couple of Windows updates my PC wouldn't show the login prompt anymore. I had to completely turn off my PC two times and then I could login again.

I'm expecting my new PSU tormorrow and I'm thinking to give it one more final reinstall after a secure erase of my NVMe SSD to see if there are no issues.

Also I'm still running on just my D.O.C.P. profile with Performance Enhancer set to Level 3 and a positive automatic CPU voltage offset. Haven't had any issues with my RX 580 using this configuration. I think I'm going to stick stick with Level 3. Seems to give me good enough single core boosts to ~4.3 GHz and low power usage when the system load is low.

I've applied the Ryzen Balanced power profile and put the minimum CPU state to 20%. Is this the correct way to go or should I use the Windows Balanced power profile?



Praetorr said:


> While on the topic of bugs, has anyone had Performance Enhancer, in this case Level 3, seemingly “turn off” out of nowhere?
> 
> After previously seeing a notable performance boost in, for instance, CPUZ’s benchmark with Level 3 on, I ran it again just earlier and the score was back to stock. No other software was running that would limit CPU performance. The clock speeds were also back to stock for both 1T and 16T.
> 
> So, I went into the BIOS to see if the setting itself reset — And nope! Still said Level 3. So I set it back to stock, then back to Level 3, and saved and quit the BIOS. Suddenly, I’m getting the Level 3 boost in benchmarks again.



I think I experienced this also once of twice. I've had a some issues with trying to overclock my system. Once my problems started I had more issues on lower overclocks like simply using the Level 3. But for the past 1,5 week or so everything had worked well and I'm getting about 1850 CB on Level 3.

When you say you set it back to stock, do you mean you load the optimized defaults and then manually configurering your BIOS again, or do you load from a saved profile?


----------



## zulex

VicsPC said:


> Read the first sentence. If you don't have any issues, any instabilities then why do you need a new AGESA?


Whatever you say, AMD will release new AGESA for improved performance and stability. Read whole text not just one sentence. Why not stick to C7H forever if there are no issues of your own?


----------



## zulex

VicsPC said:


> Software will always measure voltages inaccurately. Even on my z97 msi board whatever was displayed wasn't what I'd measure on my DMM, either at the probeit points or directly measuring at the voltage points of the component, that's a given it's normal.
> 
> As far as temperatures reading incorrectly I'm not sure how people still are confused about the offset or just enabling miskew with an x chip and disabling it with a non x chip. Both my GPU and CPU read temps correctly, i have a temperature sensor in my case and a water temperature sensor in one of my rads, on both my VI and VII I've never had a temperature reading incorrectly unless i disable miskew and then tdie reads wrong, but ive always gone by tctl and that reads it correctly, for the past year at least.
> 
> 
> 
> You really need to calm down man. You do know not everyone is having issues with the VII right? There were far more issues with the VI then the VII. People are complaining and complaining and waiting for a BIOS that's not even finished. Elmor/Stilt/Asus have no obligation to provide anyone on here a test/beta BIOS for any reason don't forget that. As people have mentioned in this thread (if you even bothered to read at all), they have different AM4 boards and 1.0.0.4 is full of bugs and people have had to revert back (which btw there is always a chance of bricking a board when upgrading/downgrading a BIOS so take that as it is).
> 
> The only MAJOR issue/bug that seems to be going around is the fan/pumps stopping on people. It's like people would rather have a buggy BIOS quickly then a BIOS done right that takes time. Maybe Asus is skipping 1.0.0.4 have you thought of that?


No obligation. Yes. But we are talking about more support from them. We have our right to ask for more support. What is wrong with it? Why do you want us to shut up in this free country? I am having an issue with SB voltage, and this is not your issue so what? You are saying your personal thought as if it is a truth.


----------



## VicsPC

zulex said:


> Whatever you say, AMD will release new AGESA for improved performance and stability. Read whole text not just one sentence. Why not stick to C7H forever if there are no issues of your own?


Why not? It's been perfectly fine without issues so far, for me anyways. Obviously if you start changing things you shouldn't be changing things can and will happen that's a given. But like i said I'm not here to argue. And yes i know AMD will release new updates for improved performance but as much as i love AMD, any and every hardware software company will have problems, PERIOD. GPU drivers, lan drivers, wifi drivers, bluetooth drivers and so on and so on. There is always a chance that a new one isn't always better or bug free. It's the same for games, same for software and same for anything. Remember how ccleaner all of a sudden had a new update and it couldnt be closed and always ran in the background? People complained and they removed it. 

What people really need to do to get their voices heard (and it's the same thing for Nvidia/AMD GPU drivers), fill in a support form/ticket with your issues. Complaining and whining and whining on a forum that a manufacturer barely visits isn't going to solve the issue for you or anyone having issues. Again I'm not here to argue, I'm not denying that there are issues. But just because a handful of people have problems doesn't mean everyone is, and that's what makes it harder to diagnose. Yes i understand that a premium product shouldn't have these issues, i bought one Gigabyte AM4 board and it completely died after 4 days (and yes i tested it myself with a DMM, with Gigabyte support and so on), completely dead wouldnt turn on. As much a PITA it is stuff happens, remember when Ferrari used glue on their 458 that caught on fire? Pretty sure that costs more then a 300$ motherboard, you get what I'm saying?

Instead of complaining on the board, go to Asus and fill out a ticket/support and go from there. Elmor has no obligation to visit the forums and give support, that's not his job. It's a privilege having him on the forums guys don't forget, it's not our God given right as Asus motherboard owners that he helps.


----------



## crakej

Mannekino said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> Reporting back in again. For those who remember my problems, I've been relatively problem free for the past two weeks, up until this weekend. I upgraded my videocard from an RX 580 to a Vega 56 and since then I've been experiencing hard resets. I have Seasonic Focus Plus Gold 550 Watt PSU and read there could be problems with using a single power cord to power the Vega 56. I was recommended to switch to another PSU. Since I need a PSU for my new NAS build I decided to use the Seasonic for my NAS and order a Corsair RM550x for my PC.
> 
> Any opinions/information on this problem?
> 
> This weekend I re-installed my PC several times but none of the re-installs went without problems. I got a hard reset during the first attempt and after that Windows 10 seemed corrupt in a few ways. For example I got a display driver .dll error when I tried to install the latest AMD GPU drivers and the default Windows 10 drivers weren't installed properly. The second attempt went better but after installing a couple of Windows updates my PC wouldn't show the login prompt anymore. I had to completely turn off my PC two times and then I could login again.
> 
> I'm expecting my new PSU tormorrow and I'm thinking to give it one more final reinstall after a secure erase of my NVMe SSD to see if there are no issues.
> 
> Also I'm still running on just my D.O.C.P. profile with Performance Enhancer set to Level 3 and a positive automatic CPU voltage offset. Haven't had any issues with my RX 580 using this configuration. I think I'm going to stick stick with Level 3. Seems to give me good enough single core boosts to ~4.3 GHz and low power usage when the system load is low.
> 
> I've applied the Ryzen Balanced power profile and put the minimum CPU state to 20%. Is this the correct way to go or should I use the Windows Balanced power profile?
> 
> I think I experienced this also once of twice. I've had a some issues with trying to overclock my system. Once my problems started I had more issues on lower overclocks like simply using the Level 3. But for the past 1,5 week or so everything had worked well and I'm getting about 1850 CB on Level 3.
> 
> When you say you set it back to stock, do you mean you load the optimized defaults and then manually configurering your BIOS again, or do you load from a saved profile?


Are you running any other software like something for your Seatronic or something like that, that could be interfering? If so, try disabling it for now....Hopefully your new PS will fix things for you, do let us know.

There no need to secure erase your ssd - in fact it's better not to as it uses up your SSDs precious life. To blank it, just delete all partitions - that will be good enough for your use and save on wear and tear 

I know here used to be some problems with Vega 56 but thought they were fixed ages ago.....maybe your clean install will improve things driver-wise. Only other thing you could try is popping it in the other slot (but that would only operate at X8 i think)

I think Ryzen Balanced P Plan is meant for Ryzen 1 (not sure why, i may be corrected on this) and that Ryzen 2 can use Windows Balanced fine...... i think!


----------



## zulex

VicsPC said:


> Why not? It's been perfectly fine without issues so far, for me anyways. Obviously if you start changing things you shouldn't be changing things can and will happen that's a given. But like i said I'm not here to argue. And yes i know AMD will release new updates for improved performance but as much as i love AMD, any and every hardware software company will have problems, PERIOD. GPU drivers, lan drivers, wifi drivers, bluetooth drivers and so on and so on. There is always a chance that a new one isn't always better or bug free. It's the same for games, same for software and same for anything. Remember how ccleaner all of a sudden had a new update and it couldnt be closed and always ran in the background? People complained and they removed it.
> 
> What people really need to do to get their voices heard (and it's the same thing for Nvidia/AMD GPU drivers), fill in a support form/ticket with your issues. Complaining and whining and whining on a forum that a manufacturer barely visits isn't going to solve the issue for you or anyone having issues. Again I'm not here to argue, I'm not denying that there are issues. But just because a handful of people have problems doesn't mean everyone is, and that's what makes it harder to diagnose. Yes i understand that a premium product shouldn't have these issues, i bought one Gigabyte AM4 board and it completely died after 4 days (and yes i tested it myself with a DMM, with Gigabyte support and so on), completely dead wouldnt turn on. As much a PITA it is stuff happens, remember when Ferrari used glue on their 458 that caught on fire? Pretty sure that costs more then a 300$ motherboard, you get what I'm saying?
> 
> Instead of complaining on the board, go to Asus and fill out a ticket/support and go from there. Elmor has no obligation to visit the forums and give support, that's not his job. It's a privilege having him on the forums guys don't forget, it's not our God given right as Asus motherboard owners that he helps.


Ridiculous... Elmor is ASUS man... He has been collecting issues and opinions from users and that was what he did in C6H thread. I can contact ASUS but it is my right to say it here too. It sounds so stupid to tell someone to go to somewhere and say this and that. And what is wrong with having complains? Sure we may thank him for what he has done but we can also say negative things when we are not satisfied. Elmor is not my boss(maybe your boss?), and it is not privilege to have him here but rather he created this thread to have more direct contact with users and listen to them. I know you are ASUS boy but dont have to worship it or him or whatsoever.


----------



## Mannekino

zulex said:


> Ridiculous... Elmor is ASUS man... He has been collecting issues and opinions from users and that was what he did in C6H thread. I can contact ASUS but it is my right to say it here too. It sounds so stupid to tell someone to go to somewhere and say this and that. And what is wrong with having complains? Sure we may thank him for what he has done but we can also say negative things when we are not satisfied. Elmor is not my boss(maybe your boss?), and it is not privilege to have him here but rather he created this thread to have more direct contact with users and listen to them. I know you are ASUS boy but dont have to worship it or him or whatsoever.



How you can have any expectations (sounds more like demands) on a platform that is not owned by ASUS? Just because ASUS employees respond here doesn't mean they are obligated to continue to do so. If you have any questions you contact ASUS directly through their support channels. What an ridiculously entitled attitude you have, talking about "your rights". You don't have any "rights" here, the owner of this site determines what goes or not. Stop derailing this thread with your lunacy, you make it sound your constitutional rights are trampled upon here.


----------



## VicsPC

zulex said:


> Ridiculous... Elmor is ASUS man... He has been collecting issues and opinions from users and that was what he did in C6H thread. I can contact ASUS but it is my right to say it here too. It sounds so stupid to tell someone to go to somewhere and say this and that. And what is wrong with having complains? Sure we may thank him for what he has done but we can also say negative things when we are not satisfied. Elmor is not my boss(maybe your boss?), and it is not privilege to have him here but rather he created this thread to have more direct contact with users and listen to them. I know you are ASUS boy but dont have to worship it or him or whatsoever.


I actually don't buy Asus boards, only reason i bought my VI was because at the time it was the only board available after my Gaming 5 failed. They make average decent stuff, when people ask what GPU to buy, i tell them NOT to buy Asus just because of the customer support. They make quality components don't get me wrong, the issue is with the support after. So no, i am as far from an Asus boy as possible. Reason i got a VII? It was pretty much given to me so I'm using it. From what I've heard though and from the many PCs ive built on Ryzen and Ryzen 2nd gen, most of the other boards aren't much better. So yea I kinda do know what I'm talking about. And many manufacturers have created threads here, some even sponsor the site. Some are most useful then others. 

And yes it's a privilege having any manufacturer on the board, they are not obligated to do so, nor do they need to. Yes having Elmor here and especially in the VI thread has been incredibly useful especially for input for the VII, but no Elmor is not Asus. From what i understand he creates/works on the BIOS. He is not customer service or after sales or anything like that. As much as you guys love to bash he is the only one on the forum doing this, I'm sure he gets inundated with people having questions and problems and to be fair it's incredibly difficult to answer them all. I swear some people forget that people don't work 24/7, also pretty sure he's in Taiwan so there is a massive time difference. 

But I'll end it here since everyone seems to have a rebuttal. And if a BIOS isn't working out or its buggy, theres a feature called flashback that no other board has, flashback to an earlier BIOS and done. I've done it about 20x on my VI trying stuff out.



Mannekino said:


> How you can have any expectations (sounds more like demands) on a platform that is not owned by ASUS? Just because ASUS employees respond here doesn't mean they are obligated to continue to do so. If you have any questions you contact ASUS directly through their support channels. What an ridiculously entitled attitude you have, talking about "your rights". You don't have any "rights" here, the owner of this site determines what goes or not. Stop derailing this thread with your lunacy, you make it sound your constitutional rights are trampled upon here.


Thank you very much. I tried to be as clear as possible without sounding like a douche. But i still won't recommend Asus products to people unless they have significant PC knowledge, otherwise it's a pass by. I do agree that Elmor should be more present on VII as he was on VI but hey, stuff happens. He can't be everywhere at all times.


----------



## VicsPC

crakej said:


> Are you running any other software like something for your Seatronic or something like that, that could be interfering? If so, try disabling it for now....Hopefully your new PS will fix things for you, do let us know.
> 
> There no need to secure erase your ssd - in fact it's better not to as it uses up your SSDs precious life. To blank it, just delete all partitions - that will be good enough for your use and save on wear and tear
> 
> I know here used to be some problems with Vega 56 but thought they were fixed ages ago.....maybe your clean install will improve things driver-wise. Only other thing you could try is popping it in the other slot (but that would only operate at X8 i think)
> 
> I think Ryzen Balanced P Plan is meant for Ryzen 1 (not sure why, i may be corrected on this) and that Ryzen 2 can use Windows Balanced fine...... i think!


After doing tons of testing with my 1700x and C6H, i stopped using Ryzen power plan all together. I now use balanced as i have left my cpu on auto (seems to perform quite well on auto while watercooled anyways). If you go into a power plan registry edit and actually look at the amount of functions that can be changed for each power plan it's absolutely mind boggling. Core parking alone has like a dozen different functions. They can all be enabled by the way so they can be changed in the power plan advanced menu but that's way out of my knowledge so i only enabled core parking percentage and run it at 50%.


----------



## zulex

Mannekino said:


> zulex said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ridiculous... Elmor is ASUS man... He has been collecting issues and opinions from users and that was what he did in C6H thread. I can contact ASUS but it is my right to say it here too. It sounds so stupid to tell someone to go to somewhere and say this and that. And what is wrong with having complains? Sure we may thank him for what he has done but we can also say negative things when we are not satisfied. Elmor is not my boss(maybe your boss?), and it is not privilege to have him here but rather he created this thread to have more direct contact with users and listen to them. I know you are ASUS boy but dont have to worship it or him or whatsoever.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How you can have any expectations (sounds more like demands) on a platform that is not owned by ASUS? Just because ASUS employees respond here doesn't mean they are obligated to continue to do so. If you have any questions you contact ASUS directly through their support channels. What an ridiculously entitled attitude you have, talking about "your rights". You don't have any "rights" here, the owner of this site determines what goes or not. Stop derailing this thread with your lunacy, you make it sound your constitutional rights are trampled upon here.
Click to expand...

I did not say anything about obligation. You dont seem to understand ongoing discussion here.


----------



## crakej

VicsPC said:


> After doing tons of testing with my 1700x and C6H, i stopped using Ryzen power plan all together. I now use balanced as i have left my cpu on auto (seems to perform quite well on auto while watercooled anyways). If you go into a power plan registry edit and actually look at the amount of functions that can be changed for each power plan it's absolutely mind boggling. Core parking alone has like a dozen different functions. They can all be enabled by the way so they can be changed in the power plan advanced menu but that's way out of my knowledge so i only enabled core parking percentage and run it at 50%.


I found the same myself - I think MS must have fixed it in Windows as seems to work well, but I stayed with R Balanced as there's no discernable difference for me. Not used parking myself - not sure what what benefits for Ryzen 1 cpus it brings. Will have a look at those functions at some point..... didn't know about those extra functions/settings


----------



## VicsPC

crakej said:


> I found the same myself - I think MS must have fixed it in Windows as seems to work well, but I stayed with R Balanced as there's no discernable difference for me. Not used parking myself - not sure what what benefits for Ryzen 1 cpus it brings. Will have a look at those functions at some point..... didn't know about those extra functions/settings


Yea it's incredibly detailed. At least in the registry it tells you what it is so that's a plus. I think there's a function for core parking min time, max time, min cpu usage, max cpu usage. It's pretty insane. On my 2700x i just use balanced it seems to be a good mix for games and software. If something needs to use more cores it's going to anyways. 50% core parking seems to be the perfect mix for everything. If a game i play only needs 4 cores it only uses 4 without having latency issues between CCXs, although im not sure how the cores are split but I'm hoping 0-3 is on one and 4-7 on the other (yes I'm going by their actual name on hwinfo lol.


----------



## zulex

VicsPC said:


> zulex said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ridiculous... Elmor is ASUS man... He has been collecting issues and opinions from users and that was what he did in C6H thread. I can contact ASUS but it is my right to say it here too. It sounds so stupid to tell someone to go to somewhere and say this and that. And what is wrong with having complains? Sure we may thank him for what he has done but we can also say negative things when we are not satisfied. Elmor is not my boss(maybe your boss?), and it is not privilege to have him here but rather he created this thread to have more direct contact with users and listen to them. I know you are ASUS boy but dont have to worship it or him or whatsoever.
> 
> 
> 
> I actually don't buy Asus boards, only reason i bought my VI was because at the time it was the only board available after my Gaming 5 failed. They make average decent stuff, when people ask what GPU to buy, i tell them NOT to buy Asus just because of the customer support. They make quality components don't get me wrong, the issue is with the support after. So no, i am as far from an Asus boy as possible. Reason i got a VII? It was pretty much given to me so I'm using it. From what I've heard though and from the many PCs ive built on Ryzen and Ryzen 2nd gen, most of the other boards aren't much better. So yea I kinda do know what I'm talking about. And many manufacturers have created threads here, some even sponsor the site. Some are most useful then others.
> 
> And yes it's a privilege having any manufacturer on the board, they are not obligated to do so, nor do they need to. Yes having Elmor here and especially in the VI thread has been incredibly useful especially for input for the VII, but no Elmor is not Asus. From what i understand he creates/works on the BIOS. He is not customer service or after sales or anything like that. As much as you guys love to bash he is the only one on the forum doing this, I'm sure he gets inundated with people having questions and problems and to be fair it's incredibly difficult to answer them all. I swear some people forget that people don't work 24/7, also pretty sure he's in Taiwan so there is a massive time difference.
> 
> But I'll end it here since everyone seems to have a rebuttal. And if a BIOS isn't working out or its buggy, theres a feature called flashback that no other board has, flashback to an earlier BIOS and done. I've done it about 20x on my VI trying stuff out.
> 
> 
> 
> Mannekino said:
> 
> 
> 
> How you can have any expectations (sounds more like demands) on a platform that is not owned by ASUS? Just because ASUS employees respond here doesn't mean they are obligated to continue to do so. If you have any questions you contact ASUS directly through their support channels. What an ridiculously entitled attitude you have, talking about "your rights". You don't have any "rights" here, the owner of this site determines what goes or not. Stop derailing this thread with your lunacy, you make it sound your constitutional rights are trampled upon here.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thank you very much. I tried to be as clear as possible without sounding like a douche. But i still won't recommend Asus products to people unless they have significant PC knowledge, otherwise it's a pass by. I do agree that Elmor should be more present on VII as he was on VI but hey, stuff happens. He can't be everywhere at all times.
Click to expand...

Ok. I will end it now. I believe it is also very important to respect different voices.


----------



## VicsPC

zulex said:


> Ok. I will end it now. I believe it is also very important to respect different voices.


Agreed, and please don't call someone "an Asus boy", when in reality i recommend EVGA for nvidia and sapphire for AMD. In customer builds for the most part it's what i use, that's after a decade if not more of dealing with customer service. And i can tell you that in my case, Asus ranks pretty low. Antec and Corsair among a few others are up top. But as I said, people are all going to have different opinions on customer support and service. Some people say Corsair sucks for customer service but I've done at least a dozen RMAs with em, in 2 different countries and haven't had issues.


----------



## Mannekino

crakej said:


> Are you running any other software like something for your Seatronic or something like that, that could be interfering? If so, try disabling it for now....Hopefully your new PS will fix things for you, do let us know.
> 
> There no need to secure erase your ssd - in fact it's better not to as it uses up your SSDs precious life. To blank it, just delete all partitions - that will be good enough for your use and save on wear and tear
> 
> I know here used to be some problems with Vega 56 but thought they were fixed ages ago.....maybe your clean install will improve things driver-wise. Only other thing you could try is popping it in the other slot (but that would only operate at X8 i think)
> 
> I think Ryzen Balanced P Plan is meant for Ryzen 1 (not sure why, i may be corrected on this) and that Ryzen 2 can use Windows Balanced fine...... i think!



No, it's pretty much a clean installation. The only drivers I installed were the AMD Chipset drivers, AMD Radeon drivers and for my ASUS Wi-Fi card. No other drivers installed, just using the Windows 10 defaults ones for the audio and LAN. Would you recommend installing the ASUS drivers for audio and LAN or should I be just fine with the Windows 10 ones?


I post an update when I get my new PSU. I will do one more (final, final final) reinstall and hopefully that will be it and I can enjoy my new PC after 3-4 weeks of working on it.


----------



## VicsPC

Mannekino said:


> No, it's pretty much a clean installation. The only drivers I installed were the AMD Chipset drivers, AMD Radeon drivers and for my ASUS Wi-Fi card. No other drivers installed, just using the Windows 10 defaults ones for the audio and LAN. Would you recommend installing the ASUS drivers for audio and LAN or should I be just fine with the Windows 10 ones?
> 
> 
> I post an update when I get my new PSU. I will do one more (final, final final) reinstall and hopefully that will be it and I can enjoy my new PC after 3-4 weeks of working on it.


I used the Asus audio ones and the lan/wifi/bluetooth as well. Seems to be alright.


----------



## Syldon

Windows balanced power plans changed on me today without my input. For some reason it changed to 100% on minimum processor state. Maybe an idea to check if your CPU is downvolting.


----------



## VicsPC

Syldon said:


> Windows balanced power plans changed on me today without my input. For some reason it changed to 100% on minimum processor state. Maybe an idea to check if your CPU is downvolting.


Yup I've had the same thing happen to me haha. It only happened once and I'm not even sure why. It's fine now.


----------



## Terror-Byter

Syldon said:


> Windows balanced power plans changed on me today without my input. For some reason it changed to 100% on minimum processor state. Maybe an idea to check if your CPU is downvolting.



I had that happen to me too few days ago... noticed my cpu was running toastier than normal. When I investigated... Ryzen Power Plan had the CPU set to 100%. Still Trying to figure out what could have caused that... really dont like software changing settings by itself.


----------



## Praetorr

Mannekino said:


> I think I experienced this also once of twice. I've had a some issues with trying to overclock my system. Once my problems started I had more issues on lower overclocks like simply using the Level 3. But for the past 1,5 week or so everything had worked well and I'm getting about 1850 CB on Level 3.
> 
> When you say you set it back to stock, do you mean you load the optimized defaults and then manually configurering your BIOS again, or do you load from a saved profile?


I mean I simply toggled it back to default, then back to Level 3.

So, as I said last night, after doing this it was evidently working again (AKA I was getting improved performance as compared to just stock XFR2).

However, after putting the PC to sleep overnight, the Level 3 profile appears to be once again deactivated. This is all on 0702 BTW.


----------



## Praetorr

I found a post in the Crosshairs 6 thread by an Asus rep stating that because Level 3 & 4 are basically a “hack” they don’t work after resuming from sleep. So I guess that’s just how it is.


----------



## Syldon

Praetorr said:


> I found a post in the Crosshairs 6 thread by an Asus rep stating that because Level 3 & 4 are basically a “hack” they don’t work after resuming from sleep. So I guess that’s just how it is.



My system is set not to go to sleep atm. It has been an update applied or something. 


Still a bit overstepping the mark from Microsoft yet again. What does it have to do with them if it was a hack.


----------



## Johan45

Nothing to do with MS, it's just the way ASUS/The Stilt, modified the PBO and it's not "approved" by AMD. Similar to the performance BIAS


----------



## nick name

VicsPC said:


> You really need to calm down man. You do know not everyone is having issues with the VII right? There were far more issues with the VI then the VII. People are complaining and complaining and waiting for a BIOS that's not even finished. Elmor/Stilt/Asus have no obligation to provide anyone on here a test/beta BIOS for any reason don't forget that. As people have mentioned in this thread (if you even bothered to read at all), they have different AM4 boards and 1.0.0.4 is full of bugs and people have had to revert back (which btw there is always a chance of bricking a board when upgrading/downgrading a BIOS so take that as it is).
> 
> The only MAJOR issue/bug that seems to be going around is the fan/pumps stopping on people. It's like people would rather have a buggy BIOS quickly then a BIOS done right that takes time. Maybe Asus is skipping 1.0.0.4 have you thought of that?


This board is full of helpful people that, for the most part, contribute positively. Your involvement in this thread is neither helpful nor wanted. Your arguments are flawed and your stated position asinine. Just go.



Syldon said:


> Windows balanced power plans changed on me today without my input. For some reason it changed to 100% on minimum processor state. Maybe an idea to check if your CPU is downvolting.


This happens to me constantly. And it doesn't matter if I use the AMD Ryzen or Windows Balanced. Sometimes it will happen if I close Explorer and restart Explorer and sometimes it won't. Sometimes upon a reboot and sometimes not. I can't find rhyme or reason to it. It's driving me bonkers because it happens so frequently. And I only catch it because HWiNFO starts at boot and I watch the CPU frequency. And I swear that it'll sometimes change during a normal session with no interference with Explorer.


----------



## VicsPC

nick name said:


> This board is full of helpful people that, for the most part, contribute positively. Your involvement in this thread is neither helpful nor wanted. Your arguments are flawed and your stated position asinine. Just go.


Right, yet i got my VII for free because i was so helpful with the VI and on the Vi thread. So yea, dude who joined a couple months ago, my expertise is useless. Guess everyone else including Asus didn't see it that way. No problem though, i have a block button for people like you who think Asus is entitled to them.


----------



## nick name

VicsPC said:


> Right, yet i got my VII for free because i was so helpful with the VI and on the Vi thread. So yea, dude who joined a couple months ago, my expertise is useless. Guess everyone else included Asus didn't see it that way. No problem though, i have a block button for people like you who think Asus is entitled to them.


Ahhh you do have a Crosshair VII. Well that does change my opinion a bit. However, it still isn't your burden to challenge people that want to express their dissatisfaction. 

And why you think I have any sense of entitlement I have no idea. I haven't complained at all about the progress Asus or anyone has shown with the development of a BIOS with the latest AGESA. My quarrel is with how you're scolding folks for expressing their dissatisfaction. And on top of that telling people they don't need something -- which isn't your place. 

So if you want to pat yourself on the back for getting a free Crosshair VII (which admittedly is kinda awesome) knock yourself out. My observations of your recent behavior, however, are what color my opinion of your contributions to this thread.


----------



## VicsPC

Praetorr said:


> I found a post in the Crosshairs 6 thread by an Asus rep stating that because Level 3 & 4 are basically a “hack” they don’t work after resuming from sleep. So I guess that’s just how it is.


I had an issue with my VI and sleep and i ended up having to reinstall W10 was the only fix. After that i just stopped using sleep entirely.


----------



## nick name

I love the capabilities of this motherboard. One thing I hope they add to it is the ability to adjust the CPU multiplier down. As it is now -- anything set at 37 or lower gets treated the same by the CPU. It's treated as Auto basically. What I'd like to see (and I don't know if it's possible) is being able to set the multiplier from 37 to 34.5 so the CPU's top end is reduced from 43.5 to 40.5. And then couple that with a BCLK of 105 which brings it back to stock speeds. I know that sounds like a wash, but cache latencies seem to improve with the higher BCLK and that's what my aim is. Heck, maybe even a setup like a multiplier of 33.5 with a BCLK of 110. Again, all in an effort to get cache latencies lower. 

I may not have the proper understanding of the CPU multiplier. I am basing this all around Auto being the same as 37 so my math revolves around that. If I am way off please feel free to tell me and crush my dreams.

Edit:
Actually, disregard my idea. I was working off of some flawed assumptions.


----------



## dreckschmeck

majestynl said:


> Wowww Guys.. really ?? Figured that out long time ago.! Check out my posts and pictures.. Again nobody did catch it up!!!
> 
> I'm running my Rams at 3533 cl14 TT with fans on top of it...working great..
> 
> Links to posts while back:
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-156.html#post27458305
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-161.html#post27464660


so after installing the ram coolers, temps dropped by approx. 10C

can do easy 3446 cl14-14-14-28 with extreme timings now, without days of tuning. Just plain DRAM calculator settings smashed in 
also did a quick try of 3553, ramtest runs to 1200-2000%, I guess with time to tune this could be possible too.

tldr: RAM temps DO matter


----------



## majestynl

dreckschmeck said:


> so after installing the ram coolers, temps dropped by approx. 10C
> 
> can do easy 3446 cl14-14-14-28 with extreme timings now, without days of tuning. Just plain DRAM calculator settings smashed in
> also did a quick try of 3553, ramtest runs to 1200-2000%, I guess with time to tune this could be possible too.
> 
> tldr: RAM temps DO matter


Great... said it before.. it helps 

Enjoy mate!!!


----------



## VicsPC

dreckschmeck said:


> so after installing the ram coolers, temps dropped by approx. 10C
> 
> can do easy 3446 cl14-14-14-28 with extreme timings now, without days of tuning. Just plain DRAM calculator settings smashed in
> also did a quick try of 3553, ramtest runs to 1200-2000%, I guess with time to tune this could be possible too.
> 
> tldr: RAM temps DO matter


Yup that's fantastic. I think there might be a certain temperature to where it actually starts to matter, might be like HBM on Vega where if the temps are above 50 or 60°C the timings really loosen up and the performance does as well. I'd love to know what that is for samsung and hynix. I wonder if taking off the heatsinks and just have a fan blow right across em help.


----------



## Syldon

VicsPC said:


> I wonder if taking off the heatsinks and just have a fan blow right across em help.


You will damage your memory. The whole point of a heatsink is that it is always on, and will dissapate heat to the coolest points. Eddies in air flow makes it inefficient and not necassarily moving the heat away from the source. It will create hot spots very, very quickly.


----------



## CJMitsuki

VicsPC said:


> Yup that's fantastic. I think there might be a certain temperature to where it actually starts to matter, might be like HBM on Vega where if the temps are above 50 or 60°C the timings really loosen up and the performance does as well. I'd love to know what that is for samsung and hynix. I wonder if taking off the heatsinks and just have a fan blow right across em help.


The colder a conductor is the more efficient it can transmit electrical signals. That’s why they cool superconductors with things like liquid nitrogen. If you want to cool your pc super cheap then just buy some dryer vent duct and a small filter then fabricate an adapter to fit the small 4” diameter dryer duct to an A/C vent in your floor or wherever it may be and attach the filter so your case doesn’t get dirty and voila! 10-14c temps for little to no cost. Even better if you have liquid cooling as you push the cold air through the rad and cpu runs very cool. Easily .5 ghz bump in performance just from the CPU alone with thermals not even a factor.



Spoiler


































Comes off and reattaches in literally seconds thanks to a few strategically placed Velcro sticky squares. Used the thick cardboard from my new RL06 case to fabricate the adapter that’s fits the front of the case where my radiator is.


Spoiler


----------



## JayC72

CJMitsuki said:


> ... fabricate an adapter to fit the small 4” diameter dryer duct to an A/C vent in your floor or wherever it may be and attach the filter so your case doesn’t get dirty and voila!
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 215072


I have no doubt that works for you to keep the PC cool.
No offence, BUT, that is ugly as F*** !!


----------



## VicsPC

JayC72 said:


> I have no doubt that works for you to keep the PC cool.
> No offence, BUT, that is ugly as F*** !!


Function over form all day any day haha. Mine is water cooled with a portable AC machine couple feet away so it stays plenty cool. The way my case is designed the board sits horizontally with the intake fans right above the motherboard so fresh cool air is always blowing right over the ram sticks. I'm guessing its why i was able to get my hynix ram with tight timings using 1.45v and most other people can't.


----------



## Trender

Praetorr said:


> I found a post in the Crosshairs 6 thread by an Asus rep stating that because Level 3 & 4 are basically a “hack” they don’t work after resuming from sleep. So I guess that’s just how it is.


:/ I uses Level 3 because it runs much cooler with much less voltage than the insane constant 1.4v from amds auto with less ghz and hotter and also it helps my RAM cold boot


----------



## lordzed83

JayC72 said:


> I have no doubt that works for you to keep the PC cool.
> No offence, BUT, that is ugly as F*** !!


Woot its better than 90% of **** LED glass crap cases !!!

You want to watch something ?? Put TV or pornhub on.
PC is not for watching but for working gaming or researching.


----------



## nick name

Trender said:


> :/ I uses Level 3 because it runs much cooler with much less voltage than the insane constant 1.4v from amds auto with less ghz and hotter and also it helps my RAM cold boot


You can squeeze a little more out of PE Level 3 if you use Ryzen Master. Increase EDC in Ryzen Master and you can find the space between PE Level 3 and PE Level 4. And you don't have to leave Ryzen Master open after you apply the EDC change and it doesn't require a restart. It will make on-the-fly changes so you can change your multi-core performance as needed or as temperatures/power dictate.


----------



## Trender

nick name said:


> You can squeeze a little more out of PE Level 3 if you use Ryzen Master. Increase EDC in Ryzen Master and you can find the space between PE Level 3 and PE Level 4. And you don't have to leave Ryzen Master open after you apply the EDC change and it doesn't require a restart. It will make on-the-fly changes so you can change your multi-core performance as needed or as temperatures/power dictate.


Is that just like in BIOS current capability?(using 130% as of now)
Also damn me but I just got this, when I set the PE Level, I run cinebench fine BUT it freezes my pc random and I have to hard button shutdown it. Im just browing i.e and it will freeze even tho it runs fine cinebench. Im even using LLC3


----------



## CJMitsuki

Trender said:


> Is that just like in BIOS current capability?(using 130% as of now)
> Also damn me but I just got this, when I set the PE Level, I run cinebench fine BUT it freezes my pc random and I have to hard button shutdown it. Im just browing i.e and it will freeze even tho it runs fine cinebench. Im even using LLC3


The freezing is from CPU instability. Needs more voltage for the frequency it is running at the time it freezes. Also, you don’t have to use Ryzen Master to bump EDC up. If you just go to the PBO options in bios and put PBO to “enable” instead of Auto it loads the board limits for those values as designated by the motherboard vendor. Personally I don’t use software that can change bios settings on the fly like Ryzen Master or AI Suite does. Always has some type of problems doing so.


----------



## CJMitsuki

JayC72 said:


> I have no doubt that works for you to keep the PC cool.
> No offence, BUT, that is ugly as F*** !!


I agree it is ugly but it can safely run 4.4-4.5 ghz 24/7 and ram at 3533 with watertight timings. It has also got some pretty high scores on HWBOT rivaling overclockers running dry ice. I personally prefer functionality over looks any day of the week and if I had a 1080ti I would put that machine up against any 5000$ rig and I have less than 2k in it. I made that setup in 2 hours but I do plan on taking fiberglass mesh and resin and using the current adapter as a mold for the mesh and resin. Then sand and paint and it will look better with different duct. Total cost for materials I used was like 10$, so 10$ to get a Ryzen 2700x to be able to hit 4.6ghz and 4.4-4.5 for 24/7 use when normally most will barely be able to run 4.35ghz 24/7 on AIO without temps being high or fans being loud with a ridiculous priced custom loop.


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> The freezing is from CPU instability. Needs more voltage for the frequency it is running at the time it freezes. Also, you don’t have to use Ryzen Master to bump EDC up. If you just go to the PBO options in bios and put PBO to “enable” instead of Auto it loads the board limits for those values as designated by the motherboard vendor. Personally I don’t use software that can change bios settings on the fly like Ryzen Master or AI Suite does. Always has some type of problems doing so.


Yeah, Elmor and The Stilt told me to do that initially, but it doesn't work with PE levels active. And Ryzen Master doesn't have to stay open -- you can close it after you change the EDC value. The other benefit is sometimes my PC will boot at different multipliers with Level 3 and Level 4 so I can adjust after I see what multiplier the CPU boots with.


----------



## Trender

CJMitsuki said:


> The freezing is from CPU instability. Needs more voltage for the frequency it is running at the time it freezes. Also, you don’t have to use Ryzen Master to bump EDC up. If you just go to the PBO options in bios and put PBO to “enable” instead of Auto it loads the board limits for those values as designated by the motherboard vendor. Personally I don’t use software that can change bios settings on the fly like Ryzen Master or AI Suite does. Always has some type of problems doing so.


Alright, will try with a +v offset. Also I see on hwinfo with lvl 3 its like stuck at 1.36 something all the cores, wouldn't it be better to go down voltage when a core is like at 2 ghz?


----------



## CJMitsuki

Trender said:


> Alright, will try with a +v offset. Also I see on hwinfo with lvl 3 its like stuck at 1.36 something all the cores, wouldn't it be better to go down voltage when a core is like at 2 ghz?


Is that VCore or are you looking at the VID? Watch the VCore value and see if t is downvolting. VID is basically what the CPU is requesting but that may be different than what the cpu is actually getting. Especially with XFR and PBO from what I have seen. VCore should give you the correct value after vDroop. It should downvolt to something like .8v or close to that. Also make sure CStates are enabled and your windows power plan have minimum processor state set to something like 10% or so. Doesn’t have to be exact since PState values set in Bios determine the downclocking Windows will stop it from downclocking though if that isn’t set to something lower that what PStates is going to set. The windows plan sometimes resets this value back to 100% and I haven’t a clue why but keep an eye out for that.


----------



## nick name

Trender said:


> Alright, will try with a +v offset. Also I see on hwinfo with lvl 3 its like stuck at 1.36 something all the cores, wouldn't it be better to go down voltage when a core is like at 2 ghz?


Under your power plan (you should be using a Balanced Plan) you want to make certain Processor Power Management > Minimum Processor State is less than 45%. That allows your CPU to perform properly. You will then see the CPU multiplier drop down to about 22 and your voltage drop down aroud .8V~.9V. 

And the offset helps most for when your CPU is running on 1 or 2 cores and clocks up to 4.35GHz. That's usually when you will see your PC lock up in something like Chrome.


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> Under your power plan (you should be using a Balanced Plan) you want to make certain Processor Power Management > Minimum Processor State is less than 45%. That allows your CPU to perform properly. You will then see the CPU multiplier drop down to about 22 and your voltage drop down aroud .8V~.9V.
> 
> And the offset helps most for when your CPU is running on 1 or 2 cores and clocks up to 4.35GHz. That's usually when you will see your PC lock up in something like Chrome.


You don’t have to use the balanced plan. I use high performance and just set the minimum processor state and it works the same but with the other options set for high performance. I’ve been checking out registry editing the powercfg since there are tons of options that you never get to see and you have much more control over how power is delivered. It’s just that one wrong move and you can mess the registry up and be unable to boot into the OS unless you replace the registry with a backup through command prompt.


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> You don’t have to use the balanced plan. I use high performance and just set the minimum processor state and it works the same but with the other options set for high performance. I’ve been checking out registry editing the powercfg since there are tons of options that you never get to see and you have much more control over how power is delivered. It’s just that one wrong move and you can mess the registry up and be unable to boot into the OS unless you replace the registry with a backup through command prompt.


This is absolutely true as far as setting the Minimum Processor State under any particular power plan. 

Let us know if you get the registry settings worked out and in a beneficial state.


----------



## mtrai

CJMitsuki said:


> You don’t have to use the balanced plan. I use high performance and just set the minimum processor state and it works the same but with the other options set for high performance. I’ve been checking out registry editing the powercfg since there are tons of options that you never get to see and you have much more control over how power is delivered. It’s just that one wrong move and you can mess the registry up and be unable to boot into the OS unless you replace the registry with a backup through command prompt.


Check your PM sent you one large reg edit that will show almost all the power options. Not gonna post it here since as you said...you can really muck your PC up with these power settings.


----------



## Terror-Byter

Can someone else verify something please. On Bios 0804 in Advanced/AMB CBS/NBIO Common Options/Precision Boost Overdrive Configuration/ and accept the disclamer...



If you manually set the options to anything... for example the values that PE3 sets... or any values

PPT = 1000
TDC = 114
EDC = 145


...and then save and reset... those options do not save. They are not applied after save and exit. Anyone still on 0702 that can check if this also happens?


----------



## nick name

Terror-Byter said:


> Can someone else verify something please. On Bios 0804 in Advanced/AMB CBS/NBIO Common Options/Precision Boost Overdrive Configuration/ and accept the disclamer...
> 
> 
> 
> If you manually set the options to anything... for example the values that PE3 sets... or any values
> 
> PPT = 1000
> TDC = 114
> EDC = 145
> 
> 
> ...and then save and reset... those options do not save. They are not applied after save and exit. Anyone still on 0702 that can check if this also happens?


When I adjusted those values while running a PE Level they wouldn't change. The values remained in BIOS and inputted, but they didn't actually apply. I assumed it was because I changed them in conjunction with running a PE Level. 

I will test without an active PE Level.

Also, elmor and The Stilt are aware of the behavior I described -- if that makes anyone feel better.

Edit:

I can confirm that the levels change, save, and apply on BIOS 702 if you set PE Level to Auto. I confirmed this with Ryzen Master in Windows.

On a separate but related note: I have been using Ryzen Master to adjust EDC values while running PE Level 3. My PC usually boots at 41.3 with Level 3 and 42.5 with Level 4, but I can manipulate that by changing EDC with Ryzen Master. Changing EDC in increments of 5 usually results in .25 multiplier changes. No restart required and you can close Ryzen Master after adjusting.

Edit 2:

Actually I think using increments of 4, when adjusting the EDC, is more precise than using increments of 5. But that also depends on what the starting EDC value is you're starting from.


----------



## Trender

CJMitsuki said:


> You don’t have to use the balanced plan. I use high performance and just set the minimum processor state and it works the same but with the other options set for high performance. I’ve been checking out registry editing the powercfg since there are tons of options that you never get to see and you have much more control over how power is delivered. It’s just that one wrong move and you can mess the registry up and be unable to boot into the OS unless you replace the registry with a backup through command prompt.


Oh I thoud I could see it per core with the VID. So the VCore must be vddcr cpu right?


----------



## Terror-Byter

nick name said:


> When I adjusted those values while running a PE Level they wouldn't change. The values remained in BIOS and inputted, but they didn't actually apply. I assumed it was because I changed them in conjunction with running a PE Level.
> 
> I will test without an active PE Level.
> 
> Also, elmor and The Stilt are aware of the behavior I described -- if that makes anyone feel better.
> 
> Edit:
> 
> I can confirm that the levels change, save, and apply on BIOS 702 if you set PE Level to Auto. I confirmed this with Ryzen Master in Windows.
> 
> On a separate but related note: I have been using Ryzen Master to adjust EDC values while running PE Level 3. My PC usually boots at 41.3 with Level 3 and 42.5 with Level 4, but I can manipulate that by changing EDC with Ryzen Master. Changing EDC in increments of 5 usually results in .25 multiplier changes. No restart required and you can close Ryzen Master after adjusting.
> 
> Edit 2:
> 
> Actually I think using increments of 4, when adjusting the EDC, is more precise than using increments of 5. But that also depends on what the starting EDC value is you're starting from.



Ok thanks for testing... I had already tried changing the PE level to all the other options on bios 0804... which also didnt allow the changes made to PBO to apply via the bios. Good to know it still works on 0702 though... I might have to downgrade to 0702 then... through ryzen master I found that a EDC of 168 yielded my cpu a much higher all core auto overlock and much better bench results without increasing the heat output of the chip too much.


----------



## nick name

Terror-Byter said:


> Ok thanks for testing... I had already tried changing the PE level to all the other options on bios 0804... which also didnt allow the changes made to PBO to apply via the bios. Good to know it still works on 0702 though... I might have to downgrade to 0702 then... through ryzen master I found that a EDC of 168 yielded my cpu a much higher all core auto overlock and much better bench results without increasing the heat output of the chip too much.


The best part about using Ryzen Master instead of BIOS is being able to adjust on-the-fly. If for whatever reason your CPU multiplier boots at a different value than you expected you can adjust accordingly. Whereas setting it in BIOS means needing to reboot.

Also, to clarify: I can only manually adjust PBO settings when PE is set to Auto. Not with an PE level selected.


----------



## Terror-Byter

nick name said:


> The best part about using Ryzen Master instead of BIOS is being able to adjust on-the-fly. If for whatever reason your CPU multiplier boots at a different value than you expected you can adjust accordingly. Whereas setting it in BIOS means needing to reboot.
> 
> Also, to clarify: I can only manually adjust PBO settings when PE is set to Auto. Not with an PE level selected.



Yes ofcourse... using Ryzen Master allows you to do things on the fly... but once you have found something youre comfortable with and willing to use 24/7 I think being able to set it in the bios would be nice... means less clicking around once youre in windows.


Also... I gathered that using AUTO instead of a PE level would be required... since a PE level is a predetermined profile, meaning that there would be inconsitancies in settings... PE profile... manual profile... which would the bios then decide to use.


----------



## nick name

Terror-Byter said:


> Yes ofcourse... using Ryzen Master allows you to do things on the fly... but once you have found something youre comfortable with and willing to use 24/7 I think being able to set it in the bios would be nice... means less clicking around once youre in windows.
> 
> 
> -snip-.



Well if you're like me PE Levels don't always boot up with the same multiplier. My PE Level 3 usually boots at 41.3, but also boots in at 41 occasionally. And PE Level 4 has much wilder swings. Usually boots at 42.5, but it's gone as high as 43.3. So setting a static EDC value in BIOS won't always result in the same multiplier after boot.


----------



## cheddle

Any advice on why I cant get PCIe x16 to work on this board? I seem to always be running 8x even when I set 16x/8x in the BIOS???


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> Well if you're like me PE Levels don't always boot up with the same multiplier. My PE Level 3 usually boots at 41.3, but also boots in at 41 occasionally. And PE Level 4 has much wilder swings. Usually boots at 42.5, but it's gone as high as 43.3. So setting a static EDC value in BIOS won't always result in the same multiplier after boot.


From what I’ve seen, the multiplier relies heavily on PC temps at the time of booting into the OS. I wish it relied on temps but once it got into OS not be lock to that multiplier on All Core or the 4 Core multiplier it sets. If your PC begins to run cooler it should adjust on the fly to a higher multiplier if you have set enough offset voltage to feed it that is or lower the multiplier if you are running a bit warmer at that moment. Another thing they should focus on in the bios is finer tuning for settings such as voltages and multipliers. The voltages should have much finer tuning and the fans should have more than a 3 point curve. That’s just ridiculous to have a 3 point curve on a fan profile. I enjoy the Asus bios but for gods sake can we have some precise tuning on certain settings? On a top tier mobo built for CPU overclocking you’d think that they would’ve included that into a revision by now. Also, what would be even more amazing would be if in the PStates adjustment menu if there were settings to adjust how PStates overclocks when 1 Core is in use, 2 Core, 4 Core, and 8 Core PState control. I literally see no one doing that and it would be awesome for general OC, gaming, and hardcore overclocking as you could let it boost single core around 4.5-.6ghz while if more Core were unparked the nature of the PState would change to 2,4,or 8 core control accordingly and it would give the user a level of control that I’ve personally never seen in a bios before. Even just to have a separate Single Core PState control alongside would be miles better.



cheddle said:


> Any advice on why I cant get PCIe x16 to work on this board? I seem to always be running 8x even when I set 16x/8x in the BIOS???


You’d probably be better off if you posted your bios .txt file so we could see how you’ve set it up and maybe that would give us some info so we could help a bit better. Also when it’s in an idle state the cards sometimes drop to pcie 2.0 until it has a load applied and jumps up to 3.0. But just post that txt file and I’ll look at it when I have a moment.


----------



## Terror-Byter

cheddle said:


> Any advice on why I cant get PCIe x16 to work on this board? I seem to always be running 8x even when I set 16x/8x in the BIOS???



Could you also give us some info about your configuration? What devices you have plugged in and where? ie. PCI-E cards or NVME... and so on.


----------



## neikosr0x

cheddle said:


> Any advice on why I cant get PCIe x16 to work on this board? I seem to always be running 8x even when I set 16x/8x in the BIOS???


you are probably using the m.2 port at the top of the board, if thats the case... just move it to the one at the bottom.


----------



## nick name

Does anyone see this behavior when they attempt to use a high memory clock? 3733MHz~3800MHz

The post codes cycle through Ad F3 14 03 56 dE at about a half-second pace between each code. The LED is yellow. And it just stays like that -- cycling those post codes. On BIOS 702 and 804.


----------



## Trender

Ok so guys is it PE3 really safe lol I mean im checking the voltage and is it really safe that the cores are at 1,53 like jesus


----------



## crakej

Trender said:


> Ok so guys is it PE3 really safe lol I mean im checking the voltage and is it really safe that the cores are at 1,53 like jesus


Perfectly safe! No need to worry.....


----------



## Trender

Hey guys I got some questions then: 

1. Im having this freeze windows problem and as you guys said I've set an offset voltage of 0.16 (which would be 1.37v) but it runs way worse and with BSOD than the Auto voltage which is about 1.35V, how can this be possible? Should I then use even more voltage? 
2. Looks like LLC auto works better than i.e LLC2-3? Maybe Auto uses a higher LLC and its increases a lot of voltage? 
3. Im using current cpu capability of 140% and looks like it helps, but its on red color lol so I doubt it safe? Maybe when i fix the voltage thing I can keep a 120% or 130%


----------



## neikosr0x

Trender said:


> Hey guys I got some questions then:
> 
> 1. Im having this freeze windows problem and as you guys said I've set an offset voltage of 0.16 (which would be 1.37v) but it runs way worse and with BSOD than the Auto voltage which is about 1.35V, how can this be possible? Should I then use even more voltage?
> 2. Looks like LLC auto works better than i.e LLC2-3? Maybe Auto uses a higher LLC and its increases a lot of voltage?
> 3. Im using current cpu capability of 140% and looks like it helps, but its on red color lol so I doubt it safe? Maybe when i fix the voltage thing I can keep a 120% or 130%


i think that the guys would need more details... as it could be many reasons


----------



## Trender

neikosr0x said:


> i think that the guys would need more details... as it could be many reasons


Well Ill check my RAM stability again just to make sure of the bsod and freezes but I didn't had any problem until I enabled the PE3 and had the windows freeze with it


----------



## nick name

Trender said:


> Well Ill check my RAM stability again just to make sure of the bsod and freezes but I didn't had any problem until I enabled the PE3 and had the windows freeze with it


Are you running an +offset on your core voltage? It sounds like something needs more power.


----------



## cheddle

Terror-Byter said:


> Could you also give us some info about your configuration? What devices you have plugged in and where? ie. PCI-E cards or NVME... and so on.


Sure,

PCIEX16/8X_1 = 1080TI
PCIEX1_1 = EMPTY
PCIEX8/X4_2 = EMPTY
PCIEX1_2 = EMPTY
PCIEX4_3 = Intel 750 PCIe 1.2tb SSD
M.2_1 = Samsung 950 Pro 256gb SSD
M.2_2 = EMPTY




neikosr0x said:


> you are probably using the m.2 port at the top of the board, if thats the case... just move it to the one at the bottom.


Thanks for the suggestion however ive only ever used the bottom M.2 slot and the top one is empty - I read the manual before using the board to confirm what M.2 would share lanes with what (im familiar with the concept of CPU vs PCH lanes and the limitations of the platform) 



CJMitsuki said:


> You’d probably be better off if you posted your bios .txt file so we could see how you’ve set it up and maybe that would give us some info so we could help a bit better. Also when it’s in an idle state the cards sometimes drop to pcie 2.0 until it has a load applied and jumps up to 3.0. But just post that txt file and I’ll look at it when I have a moment.


Thanks, I figured id blindly ask with little info to see if this was a common issue so in hind sight I should have provided more detail - once im back at my PC ill get a dump. I've checked it under load and its certainly pcie 3.0 x 8


----------



## nick name

cheddle said:


> Sure,
> 
> PCIEX16/8X_1 = 1080TI
> PCIEX1_1 = EMPTY
> PCIEX8/X4_2 = EMPTY
> PCIEX1_2 = EMPTY
> PCIEX4_3 = Intel 750 PCIe 1.2tb SSD
> M.2_1 = Samsung 950 Pro 256gb SSD
> M.2_2 = EMPTY
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for the suggestion however ive only ever used the bottom M.2 slot and the top one is empty - I read the manual before using the board to confirm what M.2 would share lanes with what (im familiar with the concept of CPU vs PCH lanes and the limitations of the platform)
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks, I figured id blindly ask with little info to see if this was a common issue so in hind sight I should have provided more detail - once im back at my PC ill get a dump. I've checked it under load and its certainly pcie 3.0 x 8



What are you using to verify your PCIe speed?


----------



## Syldon

nick name said:


> What are you using to verify your PCIe speed?



SIV will give you that information. There is also a utility in the bios pic attached. Sorry I don't know how to create a spoiler from uploaded pictures.


----------



## elmor

Posted this in the C6H thread, it's also relevant for C7H

*BIOS/AGESA update*

There are issues with the newer AGESA versions which requires additional patching, QVL and user advisories. The current plan is to base next release on 1.0.0.6 which is not yet available from AMD/AMI. Hopefully it will be ready end of September or early October.

*SIO/Fan issues summary*

- Caused by software accessing the SIO for temp/voltage/fan readings
- AIDA64/AiSuite/CPU-Z/HWInfo/SIV are all affected to various degrees
- Without any monitoring software running, the fans should work as expected
- The fix is to let the monitoring software rely on an ACPI WMI BIOS interface for safe access
- The current ACPI WMI implementation still has issues, I'm waiting for a fully working beta BIOS
- After a fully working BIOS with ACPI WMI is released, all monitoring software is required to use the new interface
- If a monitoring software is not using the new interface, it will still cause issues


----------



## crakej

elmor said:


> Posted this in the C6H thread, it's also relevant for C7H
> 
> *BIOS/AGESA update*
> 
> There are issues with the newer AGESA versions which requires additional patching, QVL and user advisories. The current plan is to base next release on 1.0.0.6 which is not yet available from AMD/AMI. Hopefully it will be ready end of September or early October.
> 
> *SIO/Fan issues summary*
> 
> - Caused by software accessing the SIO for temp/voltage/fan readings
> - AIDA64/AiSuite/CPU-Z/HWInfo/SIV are all affected to various degrees
> - Without any monitoring software running, the fans should work as expected
> - The fix is to let the monitoring software rely on an ACPI WMI BIOS interface for safe access
> - The current ACPI WMI implementation still has issues, I'm waiting for a fully working beta BIOS
> - After a fully working BIOS with ACPI WMI is released, all monitoring software is required to use the new interface
> - If a monitoring software is not using the new interface, it will still cause issues


Thanks Elmor - the update is much appreciated.

How on earth have they managed to screw up so many versions?!? How is it SO bad you're waiting for 1.0.0.6 which isn't even available yet? The plan seems reasonable but some people are just not going to be happy! We have been left hanging for a long time without information.

How is it that things have gone so wrong we can't even use 1.0.0.5?

I know this isn't in your control - but we need to know whats going on!


----------



## cheddle

nick name said:


> What are you using to verify your PCIe speed?


GPUz and the utility as shown by Syldon



Syldon said:


> SIV will give you that information. There is also a utility in the bios pic attached. Sorry I don't know how to create a spoiler from uploaded pictures.






CJMitsuki said:


> You’d probably be better off if you posted your bios .txt file so we could see how you’ve set it up and maybe that would give us some info so we could help a bit better. Also when it’s in an idle state the cards sometimes drop to pcie 2.0 until it has a load applied and jumps up to 3.0. But just post that txt file and I’ll look at it when I have a moment.


im unsure how to get this information - can you tell me how to extract the settings?


----------



## hurricane28

crakej said:


> Thanks Elmor - the update is much appreciated.
> 
> How on earth have they managed to screw up so many versions?!? How is it SO bad you're waiting for 1.0.0.6 which isn't even available yet? The plan seems reasonable but some people are just not going to be happy! We have been left hanging for a long time without information.
> 
> How is it that things have gone so wrong we can't even use 1.0.0.5?
> 
> I know this isn't in your control - but we need to know whats going on!


My words exactly man. 

Were not going to get any answers via OCN man, we need to register our product and ask via Assus themselves.. Elmor and RajaAssus don't want or are not allowed to give us information on this forum, it happened in the C6H thread too.. 

Imo this is indeed unacceptable that they klept silent this long and now Elmor is not coming back until the end of September begin October so yet again silence..


----------



## Syldon

cheddle said:


> im unsure how to get this information - can you tell me how to extract the settings?


In the bios. Tool > Asus user profile > load/save profile from/to USB drive.

You will need a USB stick formatted to FAT32.


----------



## red-ray

*Press the SIV [PCI Bus] button*



cheddle said:


> im unsure how to get this information - can you tell me how to extract the settings?


You need to look at the GPUs and may also need to check the GPP Bridge which on my system is *[ 0 - 03 -1 ]*. If you need help post the screen shot.


----------



## crakej

hurricane28 said:


> My words exactly man.
> 
> Were not going to get any answers via OCN man, we need to register our product and ask via Assus themselves.. Elmor and RajaAssus don't want or are not allowed to give us information on this forum, it happened in the C6H thread too..
> 
> Imo this is indeed unacceptable that they klept silent this long and now Elmor is not coming back until the end of September begin October so yet again silence..


Well, they could have (should have) updated us much sooner. That's the most annoying thing about it!

I'm sure they have their reasons for whatever is going on, but we need to be kept informed - that's part of the reason I bought the premium board this time round. They didn't even update us on their forums.


----------



## cheddle

red-ray said:


> You need to look at the GPUs and may also need to check the GPP Bridge which on my system is *[ 0 - 03 -1 ]*. If you need help post the screen shot.


SIV its friggin bonkers. ive never seen it before!! ive attached the output of SIV


----------



## hurricane28

crakej said:


> Well, they could have (should have) updated us much sooner. That's the most annoying thing about it!
> 
> I'm sure they have their reasons for whatever is going on, but we need to be kept informed - that's part of the reason I bought the premium board this time round. They didn't even update us on their forums.


100% agreed man, which is why i call them Assus from now on... This is unacceptable and Elmor is not entirely free from blame imo... 

This "fix" also should never happen or should have been fixed by now.. Mark my words, this is NEVER going to be fixed..


----------



## red-ray

*I guess you don't wish me to help you*



cheddle said:


> SIV its friggin bonkers.


If that is all you have to say then I guess you don't wish me to try and help you.


----------



## crakej

red-ray said:


> If that is all you have to say then I guess you don't wish me to try and help you.


I'm sure it was at least a compliment!


----------



## Johan45

cheddle said:


> Sure,
> 
> PCIEX16/8X_1 = 1080TI
> PCIEX1_1 = EMPTY
> PCIEX8/X4_2 = EMPTY
> PCIEX1_2 = EMPTY
> PCIEX4_3 = Intel 750 PCIe 1.2tb SSD
> M.2_1 = Samsung 950 Pro 256gb SSD
> M.2_2 = EMPTY
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for the suggestion however ive only ever used the bottom M.2 slot and the top one is empty - I read the manual before using the board to confirm what M.2 would share lanes with what (im familiar with the concept of CPU vs PCH lanes and the limitations of the platform)
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks, I figured id blindly ask with little info to see if this was a common issue so in hind sight I should have provided more detail - once im back at my PC ill get a dump. I've checked it under load and its certainly pcie 3.0 x 8


The top PCIe 3.0x16 slot shares lanes with all other slots/input except for the bottom M.2. So it's the Intel drive that you have installed in the bottom PCIex4 that is causing the top slot to drop back to X8 from X16.


----------



## Terror-Byter

elmor said:


> Posted this in the C6H thread, it's also relevant for C7H
> 
> *BIOS/AGESA update*
> 
> There are issues with the newer AGESA versions which requires additional patching, QVL and user advisories. The current plan is to base next release on 1.0.0.6 which is not yet available from AMD/AMI. Hopefully it will be ready end of September or early October.
> 
> *SIO/Fan issues summary*
> 
> - Caused by software accessing the SIO for temp/voltage/fan readings
> - AIDA64/AiSuite/CPU-Z/HWInfo/SIV are all affected to various degrees
> - Without any monitoring software running, the fans should work as expected
> - The fix is to let the monitoring software rely on an ACPI WMI BIOS interface for safe access
> - The current ACPI WMI implementation still has issues, I'm waiting for a fully working beta BIOS
> - After a fully working BIOS with ACPI WMI is released, all monitoring software is required to use the new interface
> - If a monitoring software is not using the new interface, it will still cause issues



Thanks for the headsup @elmor
Some news is better than no news... we now atleast have a time frame... another month or so :/
But atleast we are not sitting in the dark.


----------



## Terror-Byter

cheddle said:


> Sure,
> 
> PCIEX16/8X_1 = 1080TI
> PCIEX1_1 = EMPTY
> PCIEX8/X4_2 = EMPTY
> PCIEX1_2 = EMPTY
> PCIEX4_3 = Intel 750 PCIe 1.2tb SSD
> M.2_1 = Samsung 950 Pro 256gb SSD
> M.2_2 = EMPTY8



Have you tried unpluggin that Intel PCIe ssd, and trying to run GPU-z, click on the tiny blue question mark next to "Bus Interface" Info box, click on start render test... and then read what the values say for "Bus Interface" before, during, and after running the render test.


----------



## CJMitsuki

cheddle said:


> GPUz and the utility as shown by Syldon
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> im unsure how to get this information - can you tell me how to extract the settings?


You go under where you save user profiles and where it allows you to save the profiles to USB and instead of F2 to save the profile as .CMO you use Ctrl + F2 and it will save a text file to the USB that shows all of your settings.


----------



## crakej

Terror-Byter said:


> Thanks for the headsup @elmor
> Some news is better than no news... we now atleast have a time frame... another month or so :/
> But atleast we are not sitting in the dark.


Thanks - but he posted this a few pages back


----------



## MacG32

Updated drivers from AMD v18.10.0830 dated 04SEP18: https://www.amd.com/en/support/chipsets/amd-socket-am4/x470 I'm just informing you all. You're welcome.


----------



## hurricane28

Thnx man, updating.


----------



## crakej

MacG32 said:


> Updated drivers from AMD v18.10.0830 dated 04SEP18: https://www.amd.com/en/support/chipsets/amd-socket-am4/x470 I'm just informing you all. You're welcome.


Thanks!


----------



## Galresh76

Hello everyone. After much searching I was directed to come here with my problem. Asus and G.Skill have been no help with this. After 9 years I had to build a new computer. I got the Asus Crosshair VII WiFi MB, 2700X, and 2 TridentZ RGB Series F4-3200C16D-32GTZRX. I know I messed up on the ram. I used the G.Skill config and it said I could use this ram, but I forgot to check the Asus QVL. The problem I am having is that when I set the DOCP to 3200 I can boot up ,but after 5 to 10 min I crash. Windows say there was an error and needs to restart then it just goes into an endless cycle of BSOD. I am not an overclocker so don't know what to do. If someone can help please keep answers simple and tell me exactly what to click on and change. Pictures will also help. Thank you in advance. P.S. If this is not the right place to post this let me know where to go.


----------



## nick name

Galresh76 said:


> Hello everyone. After much searching I was directed to come here with my problem. Asus and G.Skill have been no help with this. After 9 years I had to build a new computer. I got the Asus Crosshair VII WiFi MB, 2700X, and 2 TridentZ RGB Series F4-3200C16D-32GTZRX. I know I messed up on the ram. I used the G.Skill config and it said I could use this ram, but I forgot to check the Asus QVL. The problem I am having is that when I set the DOCP to 3200 I can boot up ,but after 5 to 10 min I crash. Windows say there was an error and needs to restart then it just goes into an endless cycle of BSOD. I am not an overclocker so don't know what to do. If someone can help please keep answers simple and tell me exactly what to click on and change. Pictures will also help. Thank you in advance. P.S. If this is not the right place to post this let me know where to go.


Hmmm I had a G.SKILL kit like that and I had no problems running it on the Asus Prime X470 at DOCP settings, but it was a 16GB 2x8GB kit. You can try increasing your DRAM voltage a bit and change your SOC voltage to 1.1V.


----------



## Galresh76

K i set the SOC to Manual and set it at 1.1, I raised the DRAM from 1.35 to 1.4. Still runs for about 5 min then crashes.


----------



## Praetorr

Galresh76 said:


> K i set the SOC to Manual and set it at 1.1, I raised the DRAM from 1.35 to 1.4. Still runs for about 5 min then crashes.


You can try manually lowing the RAM speed as well. E.g., trying 2933mhz instead of 3200mhz.

On an unrelated note, has anyone else seen this before?

https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=216290&thumb=1

Every now and then I see this device as malfunctioning after resuming from sleep. Not every time though.

I'm on BIOS 0702 and have tried multiple chipset drivers (including the ones just posted today in here).


----------



## nick name

Galresh76 said:


> K i set the SOC to Manual and set it at 1.1, I raised the DRAM from 1.35 to 1.4. Still runs for about 5 min then crashes.


It seems you may not be able to reach your desired speeds with that kit then. But keep trying different things. Look up the Ryzen DRAM Calculator and see if that can help guide you.


----------



## nick name

Has anyone else found that the debug LED codes don't actually help debug anything? It's kinda frustrating.


----------



## cheddle

red-ray said:


> If that is all you have to say then I guess you don't wish me to try and help you.


of course I am happy for any assistance you may be able to offer. My response to your request with the screen shot implies this. Perhaps a miscommunication? If I can provide any further detail simply ask it.


----------



## cheddle

Terror-Byter said:


> Have you tried unpluggin that Intel PCIe ssd, and trying to run GPU-z, click on the tiny blue question mark next to "Bus Interface" Info box, click on start render test... and then read what the values say for "Bus Interface" before, during, and after running the render test.


I have indeed. It remains at PCIE 3.0 x 8 at both idle on desktop and also while running the render test.


----------



## cheddle

Johan45 said:


> The top PCIe 3.0x16 slot shares lanes with all other slots/input except for the bottom M.2. So it's the Intel drive that you have installed in the bottom PCIex4 that is causing the top slot to drop back to X8 from X16.


Thats not what the manual suggests - several of the slots are connected to the PCH. See attached.


----------



## chakku

cheddle said:


> Thats not what the manual suggests - several of the slots are connected to the PCH. See attached.


M.2_1 is direct to the CPU - Ryzen has 4 lanes dedicated to M.2 (or interchangeably U.2 on some MSI/Gigabyte motherboards). It has no bearing on the 16 lanes of the top PCI-E slot. M.2_2 does, as illustrated by your screenshot of the manual. The person you replied to was correct. I have a 970 Pro in slot M.2_1 and my 1080 Ti runs at x16, if I were to install it in M.2_1 it would be limited to x8 because the remaining x8 would be used by it and the dedicated 4 lanes from M.2_1 would literally go to waste if not being used as nothing else can use it with the C7Hs setup.


----------



## Syldon

Galresh76 said:


> Hello everyone. After much searching I was directed to come here with my problem. Asus and G.Skill have been no help with this. After 9 years I had to build a new computer. I got the Asus Crosshair VII WiFi MB, 2700X, and 2 TridentZ RGB Series F4-3200C16D-32GTZRX. I know I messed up on the ram. I used the G.Skill config and it said I could use this ram, but I forgot to check the Asus QVL. The problem I am having is that when I set the DOCP to 3200 I can boot up ,but after 5 to 10 min I crash. Windows say there was an error and needs to restart then it just goes into an endless cycle of BSOD. I am not an overclocker so don't know what to do. If someone can help please keep answers simple and tell me exactly what to click on and change. Pictures will also help. Thank you in advance. P.S. If this is not the right place to post this let me know where to go.


First place to try is 1smus Dram calculator

My SOC is set @ .97v, so 1.1v seems excessive for someone who is only aiming at 3200mhz.
Vcore voltage recommendation from Elmor was offset to +0.05v.


If his app doesn't help then try applying your own timings manually. You can get some settings from the bios settings tool. I screenied mine for you.


----------



## Johan45

cheddle said:


> Thats not what the manual suggests - several of the slots are connected to the PCH. See attached.


You're correct, that shouldn't be affecting your graphics speed.


----------



## lordzed83

Johan45 said:


> cheddle said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thats not what the manual suggests - several of the slots are connected to the PCH. See attached.
> 
> 
> 
> You're correct, that shouldn't be affecting your graphics speed.
Click to expand...

How not?? If you have 16 from cpu and you take away 4 from it for ssd then got 12 left. Not know any hous running at 12 so they run at 8. 
Ibwas running my m2 on top slot and was stuck with 8 on gpu till moved to bottom slot


----------



## VicsPC

lordzed83 said:


> How not?? If you have 16 from cpu and you take away 4 from it for ssd then got 12 left. Not know any hous running at 12 so they run at 8.
> Ibwas running my m2 on top slot and was stuck with 8 on gpu till moved to bottom slot


We have 20 pcie lanes to begin with correct? 1x16 and 1x4. It should work at 16x if he has his intel ssd as x4. If he removed the intel ssd completely and it's still at x8 then something else is the issue. I remember a few people having issues with that as well so not sure whats going on. I only have one card in and it reads as x8 in the BIOS but x16 in hwinfo and gpuz.


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> How not?? If you have 16 from cpu and you take away 4 from it for ssd then got 12 left. Not know any hous running at 12 so they run at 8.
> Ibwas running my m2 on top slot and was stuck with 8 on gpu till moved to bottom slot


I concur - plugging anything into that bottom pcie slot is going to cause the gpu to drop to x8 - you can't avoid it.

Meanwhile - I'm going to put my new cable set in my machine to tidy it up a bit - improve airflow and means I can access my probe it points easily.

After that, more experimenting - seeing as how I know I have plenty of time before bios update


----------



## Johan45

lordzed83 said:


> How not?? If you have 16 from cpu and you take away 4 from it for ssd then got 12 left. Not know any hous running at 12 so they run at 8.
> Ibwas running my m2 on top slot and was stuck with 8 on gpu till moved to bottom slot


The drive in question (intel 750) should be running through the x470 chipset which has its own lanes separate from the top PCIe x16 lane. The M.2_1 slot which is occupied also has its own PCIe lanes from the CPU. There's something else going on here. cheddle is correct in thinking the bottom x4 slot shouldn't interfere with the top PCIe x16 slot at all.


----------



## crakej

If you go into pcie 4_3 you are using x4 from the cpu so gpu will reduce to x8
If you go into pcie 4_2 then you're sharing x4 with the chipset and all other devices connected to it. You might be able to turn off all the USB that comes from X470 chipset or something, but it will never be proper x4 from that slot


----------



## VicsPC

crakej said:


> If you go into pcie 4_3 you are using x4 from the cpu so gpu will reduce to x8
> If you go into pcie 4_2 then you're sharing x4 with the chipset and all other devices connected to it. You might be able to turn off all the USB that comes from X470 chipset or something, but it will never be proper x4 from that slot


From the picture he's showing the third pcie slot has its own x4 speed form the cpu, slot 1 and 2 share the same circuit to the cpu. So slow 1x16 and 2 either run in x16 or 2x8 if you have 2 gpus irregardless of what is in slot 3, that has it's own pcie bandwidth from the cpu.


----------



## crakej

VicsPC said:


> From the picture he's showing the third pcie slot has its own x4 speed form the cpu, slot 1 and 2 share the same circuit to the cpu. So slow 1x16 and 2 either run in x16 or 2x8 if you have 2 gpus irregardless of what is in slot 3, that has it's own pcie bandwidth from the cpu.
> 
> 
> Spoiler



He doesn't have 2 gpus - he has 2 NVMe drives and wants to know why the one in the bottom pcie slot isn't x4. This slot comes from the x470 chipset whch is connected only by an x4 connection. This is why he can't get x4 on the Intel drive.


----------



## VicsPC

crakej said:


> [/spoiler]
> 
> He doesn't have 2 gpus - he has 2 NVMe drives and wants to know why the one in the bottom pcie slot isn't x4. This slot comes from the x470 chipset whch is connected only by an x4 connection. This is why he can't get x4 on the Intel drive.


Yea i know he doesnt, his intel drive is getting x4 it's his gpu stuck at x8 that he wants to get to x16. It shouldnt already be at x16 that's the problem he's having. I think you read wrong what his problem is lol.


----------



## crakej

@Johan45 There is a setting in the bios which can force the slot to x16 - I've had to do this before, never did find out why, but it fixed it..... I'll look it up for you and put it here soon.... I seem to remember it's not very intuitive!

Edit: Here it is: Advanced>Onboard Devices Configuration> Make sure M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration is set to: *Disabled(X8 mode)* which will force PCIe 16_1 to run at X16 (well, it should!)


----------



## crakej

So I spent some time yesterday redoing the wiring for my EPS, main power (24 pin) and the wires for the PCIe connectors on my GFX card. Lovely bendable neat(ish!) wires. Ones that came with power supply were awful stiff things that always got in the way. Just need to change the peripheral wires now.

This hasn't solved all my problems though. I've come to the conclusion that my case is not up for the job. I do't want a huge one, but I do want one that's easy to service and has decent space for airflow. Also need to be able to fit more fans in for push/pull which I just can't fit in this box  Oh, I still can't easily get to my Probit points! Doh!

Any recommendations for a decent case to put my CH7 in? I'd prefer something that's easy to get motherboard in/out as well.


----------



## Galresh76

*Thank you.*



Galresh76 said:


> Hello everyone. After much searching I was directed to come here with my problem. Asus and G.Skill have been no help with this. After 9 years I had to build a new computer. I got the Asus Crosshair VII WiFi MB, 2700X, and 2 TridentZ RGB Series F4-3200C16D-32GTZRX. I know I messed up on the ram. I used the G.Skill config and it said I could use this ram, but I forgot to check the Asus QVL. The problem I am having is that when I set the DOCP to 3200 I can boot up ,but after 5 to 10 min I crash. Windows say there was an error and needs to restart then it just goes into an endless cycle of BSOD. I am not an overclocker so don't know what to do. If someone can help please keep answers simple and tell me exactly what to click on and change. Pictures will also help. Thank you in advance. P.S. If this is not the right place to post this let me know where to go.


K I finally got this to work. A different G.Skill Tech got back with me and said that I could only run 1 set of this ram not 2. So I removed the set from A-1 and B-1. Set the D.O.C.P. for 3200 and everything works fine. So now is there a way to run both kits at 3200 or will it always be stuck at 2133?


----------



## Syldon

Galresh76 said:


> K I finally got this to work. A different G.Skill Tech got back with me and said that I could only run 1 set of this ram not 2. So I removed the set from A-1 and B-1. Set the D.O.C.P. for 3200 and everything works fine. So now is there a way to run both kits at 3200 or will it always be stuck at 2133?


Did you try the dram calculator or the settings listed for your memory ?


----------



## Galresh76

Both. DOCP settings work fine the Dram Calc lowered the timings. But both crash if I put the other set of ram in. I have checked both sets and they work fine if I only have one set in.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Galresh76 said:


> Hello everyone. After much searching I was directed to come here with my problem. Asus and G.Skill have been no help with this. After 9 years I had to build a new computer. I got the Asus Crosshair VII WiFi MB, 2700X, and 2 TridentZ RGB Series F4-3200C16D-32GTZRX. I know I messed up on the ram. I used the G.Skill config and it said I could use this ram, but I forgot to check the Asus QVL. The problem I am having is that when I set the DOCP to 3200 I can boot up ,but after 5 to 10 min I crash. Windows say there was an error and needs to restart then it just goes into an endless cycle of BSOD. I am not an overclocker so don't know what to do. If someone can help please keep answers simple and tell me exactly what to click on and change. Pictures will also help. Thank you in advance. P.S. If this is not the right place to post this let me know where to go.


If those are the new C Dies then ive heard they are actually nice but with dual rank dimms you wont get a high frequency. Thats the trade off for doubling the ram quantity, it stresses the IMC more than single rank dimms therefore reducing the overall frequency. Same deal if you run 4 sticks of single rank vs 2, youll get higher freq from the 2 dimm setup rather than the 4. Highest freq is always going to be from 2DPC SR setup rather than the DR setup. Good news is you wont notice a big difference in anything but benchmarks and the DR will have its own strengths over the SR due to the doubled capacity. You can get higher than 2133 but not without plenty of work and testing with manual timings. DOCP is not the way to go for optimum performance but if you dont know much about memory OC and you dont want to take on a big task I would advise against it as it can be daunting and frustrating to someone new to it.



crakej said:


> So I spent some time yesterday redoing the wiring for my EPS, main power (24 pin) and the wires for the PCIe connectors on my GFX card. Lovely bendable neat(ish!) wires. Ones that came with power supply were awful stiff things that always got in the way. Just need to change the peripheral wires now.
> 
> This hasn't solved all my problems though. I've come to the conclusion that my case is not up for the job. I do't want a huge one, but I do want one that's easy to service and has decent space for airflow. Also need to be able to fit more fans in for push/pull which I just can't fit in this box  Oh, I still can't easily get to my Probit points! Doh!
> 
> Any recommendations for a decent case to put my CH7 in? I'd prefer something that's easy to get motherboard in/out as well.


Just go to Gamers Nexus and look at their Air Flow tests for cases and the reviews. I did that and went with Silverstone RL06 and the air flow is amazing for under 100$


----------



## Syldon

Galresh76 said:


> Both. DOCP settings work fine the Dram Calc lowered the timings. But both crash if I put the other set of ram in. I have checked both sets and they work fine if I only have one set in.



And how did the timing match up to your memory's internal settings as shown in the tools page from the bios ?


If you link what your tools page states and what you currently have, maybe some can point in which to try out. You are literally in trial and error mode, but finding which settings is causing your issue maybe easy to spot from people who have gone through this process with their own kits.


You can screen shot your tools page by using a fat 32 usb stick and keyboard short cut F12. You can show your current setting either by using a bios txt dump within the user profile utility or use The Stilt's RTC tool.


----------



## crakej

CJMitsuki said:


> Just go to Gamers Nexus and look at their Air Flow tests for cases and the reviews. I did that and went with Silverstone RL06 and the air flow is amazing for under 100$


Thanks.....that's given me something to think about. I like the RL06, the CM H500p and the NXZT H500 look good too.....


----------



## cheddle

cheddle said:


> Any advice on why I cant get PCIe x16 to work on this board? I seem to always be running 8x even when I set 16x/8x in the BIOS???


RESOLVED: I reverted back to prior bios... no fix... 

tried another GPU and it was getting 16x. I used isopropyl and cleaned the pcie pins on the 1080ti. now its getting 16x! solved.


----------



## VicsPC

cheddle said:


> RESOLVED: I reverted back to prior bios... no fix...
> 
> tried another GPU and it was getting 16x. I used isopropyl and cleaned the pcie pins on the 1080ti. now its getting 16x! solved.


Ah good to know, I've had that issue with my ram but thats because doing my loop i ended up dropping a drop of water in the ram slot. I cleaned it out let it dry but still managed to corrode my stick a bit so it would boot loop. It's why i always tell people not to touch pins, any kind of pin of any sort even on a gpu and if you do clean it up right away. I cringe when youtuber hold em by the pcie connection.


----------



## Syldon

I reduced the max running temp of the memory modules by 2c by changing the monitoring point from CPU to VRM for the case fans and the memory fan.

It has irritated me, that when I run a memory test, I never get the desired fan response to keep my memory cool. This down to the fact I had all my fans running with regards to the temp of the CPU. This is fine if I run an IBT test and the CPU hits its max running temp, but a HCImemtest does not stress the CPU so the fans don't ramp up. The three feasible sensors are CPU, VRM and the PCH points. PCH barely moves even on an IBT run. But VRM hits 50c on full CPU load and 45c on full memory load. This is how my system monitors.

resting
CPU = 34
VRM = 37
Memory = 31

IBT load
CPU = 75
Vrm = 50
Memory = 34

Memory testing
CPU = 53
VRM = 45
Memory = 40

So moving the case and memory fans reaction point away from the CPU to the VRM made more sense to me. I set the case to full load at 50c on the VRM and memory to full load at 45c on the VRM. The result pulled the memory down to 38c. It isn't a huge deal, but just a tweak to get that extra mile.


----------



## Alex K

Can somebody post settings or give a link for the guide for CH7 PBO+UNDERVOLT+BCLK overclock?

Also what voltages considered to be safe for long-term use on RAM?
I have this kit https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3600c16d-16gtz currently running on 3533-14-15-15-30 with 1.42V


----------



## MNMadman

Alex K said:


> Also what voltages considered to be safe for long-term use on RAM?
> I have this kit https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3600c16d-16gtz currently running on 3533-14-15-15-30 with 1.42V


1.45v-1.5v is generally considered the maximum everyday-use voltage for DDR4 as long as you can keep the RAM temps in check.


----------



## Alex K

MNMadman said:


> 1.45v-1.5v is generally considered the maximum everyday-use voltage for DDR4 as long as you can keep the RAM temps in check.


Thanks for the response.
Literally, even with 1.45V, my RAM sticks are sitting at 42-45C.
Also with 1.45-1.46V, I can run up to 3600 with not bad timings.


----------



## hurricane28

Hi guys, i was wondering if more people use the Bluetooth function on this motherboard. 

I have Bluetooth sound issues with this board and my JBL reflect mini 2 ear buds... It some times keeps connecting and disconnecting which is very annoying.. More people with the same problem?


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Hi guys, i was wondering if more people use the Bluetooth function on this motherboard.
> 
> I have Bluetooth sound issues with this board and my JBL reflect mini 2 ear buds... It some times keeps connecting and disconnecting which is very annoying.. More people with the same problem?


I don't know if the bluetooth uses an antenna, but I have the included antenna attached and don't see any issues when using my bluetooth connected devices (controller, keyboard). I don't use the wifi, however.


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> I don't know if the bluetooth uses an antenna, but I have the included antenna attached and don't see any issues when using my bluetooth connected devices (controller, keyboard). I don't use the wifi, however.


I didn't see an antenna for Bluetooth, only Wifi antenna and i am using it too. 

Sometimes it works perfectly and other times it doesn't.. I think its the JBL reflect mini 2 ear buds tho, i had similar on my phone so i return it this evening or tomorrow and see if it happens on other Bluetooth speakers/headphones too.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> I didn't see an antenna for Bluetooth, only Wifi antenna and i am using it too.
> 
> Sometimes it works perfectly and other times it doesn't.. I think its the JBL reflect mini 2 ear buds tho, i had similar on my phone so i return it this evening or tomorrow and see if it happens on other Bluetooth speakers/headphones too.


I assumed the antenna was for WiFi also, but attached it anyways. Sorry that I don't have any relevant experience with audio bluetooth devices.


----------



## neikosr0x

hurricane28 said:


> Hi guys, i was wondering if more people use the Bluetooth function on this motherboard.
> 
> I have Bluetooth sound issues with this board and my JBL reflect mini 2 ear buds... It some times keeps connecting and disconnecting which is very annoying.. More people with the same problem?


Yeah i have the same issue, every time im installing or uninstalling something on windows 10 my logitech bluetooh headset disconnects and reconnects briefly. it is very annoying.


----------



## hurricane28

aha, so there are more people with Bleuetooth issues with this board. Perhaps a new driver can fix stuff but i haven't seen one..


----------



## crakej

Bluetooth can be very fussy - i've found particularly when you're running a wireless network and trying to support older apple devices.


----------



## elmor

While waiting for something better, perhaps a few users could help me test a BIOS with an updated ACPI WMI interface that should fix the previous shortcomings. I only have a version for C7H Wi-Fi: http://www.mediafire.com/file/bj1e7tvzvypa9v8/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0012.zip/file

Updated software versions:

- HWInfo v5.88 or later
- HWMonitor Beta: http://download.cpuid.com/betas/hwm_b17.zip
- SIV 5.32 or later
- CPU-Z Beta: http://download.cpuid.com/betas/cpuz_a0.zip
- AIDA64 v5.98.4800 or later 

If you currently have any of the issues listed below, your feedback would be very valuable.

- Bad SIO temperature readings, things like CPU temperature reading crazy values or not updating anymore
- Fans permanently stopping or getting stuck at some percentage


----------



## crakej

Thanks Elmor - good to see work continuing on that front!

September has turned out to be a waiting game for me..... was meant to have picked up my new car by now, but for one reason or another it's gone wrong and I have to wait at least another couple of weeks  Then, just when I need a bios to spend some time with while I twiddle my thumbs waiting for said new car, that gets delayed on me too!

Cruel twist of fate - I could have tested the bios above with the new WMI, but i odn't have the WiFi version lol

Oh well. I know you can prob cross flash this file, but not going to!


----------



## hurricane28

elmor said:


> While waiting for something better, perhaps a few users could help me test a BIOS with an updated ACPI WMI interface that should fix the previous shortcomings. I only have a version for C7H Wi-Fi: http://www.mediafire.com/file/bj1e7tvzvypa9v8/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0012.zip/file
> 
> Approved software versions:
> 
> - HWInfo v5.88 or later
> - HWMonitor Beta: http://download.cpuid.com/betas/hwm_b17.zip
> - SIV 5.32 or later
> 
> I will update with CPU-Z/AIDA64 versions that support this.
> 
> If you currently have any of the issues listed below, your feedback would be very valuable.
> 
> - Bad SIO temperature readings, things like CPU temperature reading crazy values or not updating anymore
> - Fans permanently stopping or getting stuck at some percentage


For some reason i no longer have issues with either one of the listed programs. 

Can you specify exactly what we can do to replicate the issue?


----------



## nick name

elmor said:


> While waiting for something better, perhaps a few users could help me test a BIOS with an updated ACPI WMI interface that should fix the previous shortcomings. I only have a version for C7H Wi-Fi: http://www.mediafire.com/file/bj1e7tvzvypa9v8/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0012.zip/file
> 
> Approved software versions:
> 
> - HWInfo v5.88 or later
> - HWMonitor Beta: http://download.cpuid.com/betas/hwm_b17.zip
> - SIV 5.32 or later
> 
> I will update with CPU-Z/AIDA64 versions that support this.
> 
> If you currently have any of the issues listed below, your feedback would be very valuable.
> 
> - Bad SIO temperature readings, things like CPU temperature reading crazy values or not updating anymore
> - Fans permanently stopping or getting stuck at some percentage



I will give it a go.

Edit: 
So far so good and HWiNFO now displays all the temp labels again. Instead of simply numbering the sensors.


----------



## MNMadman

elmor said:


> While waiting for something better, perhaps a few users could help me test a BIOS with an updated ACPI WMI interface that should fix the previous shortcomings. I only have a version for C7H Wi-Fi: http://www.mediafire.com/file/bj1e7tvzvypa9v8/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0012.zip/file
> 
> Approved software versions:
> 
> - HWInfo v5.88 or later
> - HWMonitor Beta: http://download.cpuid.com/betas/hwm_b17.zip
> - SIV 5.32 or later
> 
> I will update with CPU-Z/AIDA64 versions that support this.
> 
> If you currently have any of the issues listed below, your feedback would be very valuable.
> 
> - Bad SIO temperature readings, things like CPU temperature reading crazy values or not updating anymore
> - Fans permanently stopping or getting stuck at some percentage


Currently testing BIOS 0012. Had none of those issues with BIOS 0804, and the trend continues with 0012. Had no issues with HWiNFO labels before and still working now.

No immediate issues in evidence. Same RAM tune works with same voltages. Preliminary short-duration stability checks passed -- will need a few days for the longer ones.


----------



## cheddle

Syldon said:


> I reduced the max running temp of the memory modules by 2c by changing the monitoring point from CPU to VRM for the case fans and the memory fan.
> 
> It has irritated me, that when I run a memory test, I never get the desired fan response to keep my memory cool. This down to the fact I had all my fans running with regards to the temp of the CPU. This is fine if I run an IBT test and the CPU hits its max running temp, but a HCImemtest does not stress the CPU so the fans don't ramp up. The three feasible sensors are CPU, VRM and the PCH points. PCH barely moves even on an IBT run. But VRM hits 50c on full CPU load and 45c on full memory load. This is how my system monitors.
> 
> resting
> CPU = 34
> VRM = 37
> Memory = 31
> 
> IBT load
> CPU = 75
> Vrm = 50
> Memory = 34
> 
> Memory testing
> CPU = 53
> VRM = 45
> Memory = 40
> 
> So moving the case and memory fans reaction point away from the CPU to the VRM made more sense to me. I set the case to full load at 50c on the VRM and memory to full load at 45c on the VRM. The result pulled the memory down to 38c. It isn't a huge deal, but just a tweak to get that extra mile.





Alex K said:


> Thanks for the response.
> Literally, even with 1.45V, my RAM sticks are sitting at 42-45C.
> Also with 1.45-1.46V, I can run up to 3600 with not bad timings.



Have either of you guys done testing to see how temps affect memory stability? 

If so what did you find? what temps do you start to see instability?


----------



## nick name

cheddle said:


> Have either of you guys done testing to see how temps affect memory stability?
> 
> If so what did you find? what temps do you start to see instability?


For me it seems temps in the low 40*C will start to cause stability when I am at the tight end of timings or on the edge of a stable speed. If I have some wiggle room on the timings or the speed I can be in the 40*C range and not lose stability.


----------



## edu616

Greetings,

I just received this board today with my 2700X I just have a question I went back a couple of pages and couldn't find the info. I'm trying to locate PBO setting's on this board. Could someone point me towards it? Also how is this board working for you guys in terms of PBO, RAM stability and all just a general question since I have never owned an Asus board before everyone was telling me to try one and well now that I'm upgrading I decided to try it. Thanks.


----------



## nick name

edu616 said:


> Greetings,
> 
> I just received this board today with my 2700X I just have a question I went back a couple of pages and couldn't find the info. I'm trying to locate PBO setting's on this board. Could someone point me towards it? Also how is this board working for you guys in terms of PBO, RAM stability and all just a general question since I have never owned an Asus board before everyone was telling me to try one and well now that I'm upgrading I decided to try it. Thanks.


I would point you towards using Performance Enhancer Level 3 before I would recommend using PBO. But PBO is under Advanced and AMD CBS > NBIO I believe. Let me reboot and check again.


----------



## red-ray

*Specify the -NOWMI-LOCK SIV qualifier*



hurricane28 said:


> For some reason i no longer have issues with either one of the listed programs. Can you specify exactly what we can do to replicate the issue?


With the *0702* BIOS I did not see no lockup issues, but with *0804* there were so we changed our code to interlock our ASUS WMI access with the *Global\Access_EC* + *Global\Access_ISABUS.HTP.Method* mutexes to both circumvent these and also interlock with old programs that fail to use ASUS WMI.

To see the issue with the *0804* BIOS run SIV (ideally 5.33 Beta-15 or later) with the *-NOWMI-LOCK* SIV qualifier (see *[About]*) and then one of the other utilities that report using ASUS WMI. After a while the sensors will stop being updated and the system will fail to cleanly shutdown.

Doing the same with the *0012* BIOS all was OK after over 7 hours of testing with SIV + HWiNFO + HWM + ASUSHW active. ASUSHW is an ASUS test program that does not use *Global\Access_EC* + *Global\Access_ISABUS.HTP.Method*, but I don't know if it's generally available, elmor should know.


----------



## hurricane28

red-ray said:


> With the *0702* BIOS I did not see no lockup issues, but with *0804* there were so we changed our code to interlock our ASUS WMI access with the *Global\Access_EC* + *Global\Access_ISABUS.HTP.Method* mutexes to both circumvent these and also interlock with old programs that fail to use ASUS WMI.
> 
> To see the issue with the *0804* BIOS run SIV (ideally 5.33 Beta-15 or later) with the *-NOWMI-LOCK* SIV qualifier (see *[About]*) and then one of the other utilities that report using ASUS WMI. After a while the sensors will stop being updated and the system will fail to cleanly shutdown.
> 
> Doing the same with the *0012* BIOS all was OK after over 7 hours of testing with SIV + HWiNFO + HWM + ASUSHW active. ASUSHW is an ASUS test program that does not use *Global\Access_EC* + *Global\Access_ISABUS.HTP.Method*, but I don't know if it's generally available, elmor should know.


Thank you, that was very helpful! 

There is a lot more with this 0804 BIOS than sensor and lockup problems. Overclock's are less stable, boot issues etc. but that's another story. 


I will try later when i get home from the gym. 

I also get this warning in event viewer: : "The embedded controller (EC) returned data when none was requested. The BIOS might be trying to access the EC without synchronizing with the operating system. This data will be ignored. No further action is necessary; however, you should check with your computer manufacturer for an upgraded BIOS."

They claim that its not related but it totally is.. When this error occurs the problem is there and when i no longer see this warning no fan or other stability issues.. Its right there that the BIOS is screwing the pwm signals up which is causing the fans to go haywire and Windows detect it. 

On another note, not all people seem to be affected by it and have zero issues they claim. So it could also be that these IT sensor is not only extremely cheap (you can buy 10 of them for only 15 euro's) but also poorly made which means that with every 100 sensors you get several bad ones..?


----------



## Syldon

cheddle said:


> Have either of you guys done testing to see how temps affect memory stability?
> 
> If so what did you find? what temps do you start to see instability?



1smus originally posted about adding fans helped stability early on the CH6. It was picked up again about 4 months ago in the forum. Adding fans can reduce temps down below 40c at full load. A few said that stability improved which allowed them to move on a memory strap to 3533. I still cant obtain 3533, but my temps were in the 40c's previously now they max at 39c on 3533 attempts. 


I think some mentioned 42c at being the start of instability.


----------



## red-ray

*The devil is in the detail*



hurricane28 said:


> I also get this warning in event viewer: : "The embedded controller (EC) returned data when none was requested. The BIOS might be trying to access the EC without synchronizing with the operating system. This data will be ignored. No further action is necessary; however, you should check with your computer manufacturer for an upgraded BIOS."
> 
> They claim that its not related but it totally is.. When this error occurs the problem is there and when i no longer see this warning no fan or other stability issues.. Its right there that the BIOS is screwing the pwm signals up which is causing the fans to go haywire and Windows detect it.


Provided all the reporting programs are using ASUS WMI then these should not happen and if they do then I suspect it's an issue with the ASUS WMI ACPI methods.

I can't find any of these on my C7H system, but then again all the EC access is now done via ASUS WMI. I suspect these only happened when AIDA64 + HWiNFO + SIV were doing direct EC access and when ASUS WMI is used this should no longer happen.

If you just run SIV 5.33 Beta-15 or later do you still get them? If so then we need to get ASUS to look into why. I can only sensibly comment when only SIV is active as I don't know exactly what other utilities do so you need to get their developers involved if you see them when their utilities are active.

Do you have any ASUS software active? Please post *Menu->Help->Lock Usage* + *Menu->Help->Lock Handle* so I can double check what is happening in terms of locking.


----------



## majestynl

cheddle said:


> Have either of you guys done testing to see how temps affect memory stability?
> 
> If so what did you find? what temps do you start to see instability?


Yep, did quite some testings with RAM and posted this months ago. Instability effected around 38c and up!l with high speed memory 3466mhz+


----------



## hurricane28

red-ray said:


> Provided all the reporting programs are using ASUS WMI then these should not happen and if they do then I suspect it's an issue with the ASUS WMI ACPI methods.
> 
> I can't find any of these on my C7H system, but then again all the EC access is now done via ASUS WMI. I suspect these only happened when AIDA64 + HWiNFO + SIV were doing direct EC access and when ASUS WMI is used this should no longer happen.
> 
> If you just run SIV 5.33 Beta-15 or later do you still get them? If so then we need to get ASUS to look into why. I can only sensibly comment when only SIV is active as I don't know exactly what other utilities do so you need to get their developers involved if you see them when their utilities are active.
> 
> Do you have any ASUS software active? Please post *Menu->Help->Lock Usage* + *Menu->Help->Lock Handle* so I can double check what is happening in terms of locking.



There is an issue with the WMI implementation which is why Mumak (author of hardwareinfo64) disabled it in the since the v5.87-3490 Beta release with the following comment: "Disabled ASUS WMI support on current BIOSes due to a faulty BIOS implementation." 


I actually never used SIV to be perfectly honest with you but i am inclined to give it a try. I normally use hardwareinfo64 in the background and whenever i use the EC sensor, doesn't matter what program i get this warning message about the EC returning data etc. when this happens i also notice an slight decrease in performance and snappiness in Windows. When i disable or shut down software monitoring i no longer feel this and get the error in Windows event viewer. Performance also seem to be affected in benchmarks. In Cinebench R15 i seen a drop between 10-40 points if i use the EC sensor or disabled it. Firestrike means 100-300 points less in physics score. 
I never seen this on any other board except Asus boards with this EC sensor. 

The only Asus software i have is Aura lighting but that's about it. Even Alsuite 3 is causing big issues which result in even bigger problems than hardweareinfo64 or any other software monitoring program, it even has a tool to delete all the services because the uninstaller simply won't delete everything..


----------



## hurricane28

I found this nice clip from kitguru: 




Everyone from Asus seems a bit tense if you ask me, especially when Leo asked some critical questions.


----------



## crakej

red-ray said:


> Provided all the reporting programs are using ASUS WMI then these should not happen and if they do then I suspect it's an issue with the ASUS WMI ACPI methods.
> 
> I can't find any of these on my C7H system, but then again all the EC access is now done via ASUS WMI. I suspect these only happened when AIDA64 + HWiNFO + SIV were doing direct EC access and when ASUS WMI is used this should no longer happen.
> 
> If you just run SIV 5.33 Beta-15 or later do you still get them? If so then we need to get ASUS to look into why. I can only sensibly comment when only SIV is active as I don't know exactly what other utilities do so you need to get their developers involved if you see them when their utilities are active.
> 
> Do you have any ASUS software active? Please post *Menu->Help->Lock Usage* + *Menu->Help->Lock Handle* so I can double check what is happening in terms of locking.


Will give it a go when I get back from the dentist.... For last month I have used almost exclusively, only, AISuiote3. Latest version, with ZERO problems. In fact, it seems to give me more accurate voltage readouts which I really don't get. I have used HWInfo a bit, with WMI disabled, and SIV when I want to fnd more detail... and no problems. I'm still on 0804 which seems a little more stable since summer ended - maybe I imagine that!  My machine has been more stable than ever. Zero critical errors.
@hurricane28 I also have those events`in event viewer. *: The embedded controller (EC) returned data when none was requested. The BIOS might blah blah blah....*


----------



## red-ray

*Get back when you have tried SIV*



hurricane28 said:


> I actually never used SIV to be perfectly honest with you but i am inclined to give it a try.


I am told getting started with SIV is a bit of a steep learning curve and suggest you read http://rh-software.com/Using SIV to Control AIO Devices.pdf. A lot of it is about how to setup AIO control, but much of it is generally applicable.

In terms of CPU load then when I was testing after 7 hours SIV had used 3:39 and HWiNFO 9:13 so SIV should have a lesser effect on your Cinebench score.

The ASUS LightingService uses excessive CPU time and leaks handles so many SIV users keep asking me to get SIV to control the motherboard LEDs and at the moment I am looking into doing this. I have SIV32X showing signs of life and am trying to get ASUS to supply the x64 AURA_SDK64.dll that SIV64X needs to use.


----------



## CJMitsuki

hurricane28 said:


> I also get this warning in event viewer: : "The embedded controller (EC) returned data when none was requested. The BIOS might be trying to access the EC without synchronizing with the operating system. This data will be ignored. No further action is necessary; however, you should check with your computer manufacturer for an upgraded BIOS."
> 
> They claim that its not related but it totally is.. When this error occurs the problem is there and when i no longer see this warning no fan or other stability issues.. Its right there that the BIOS is screwing the pwm signals up which is causing the fans to go haywire and Windows detect it.
> 
> On another note, not all people seem to be affected by it and have zero issues they claim. So it could also be that these IT sensor is not only extremely cheap (you can buy 10 of them for only 15 euro's) but also poorly made which means that with every 100 sensors you get several bad ones..?



Try disabling fast startup and turn hibernate off and see if that helps. Also, stop using AI Suite or any software that installs the Asus Com Service. You can also try uninstalling the ACPI device driver in the device manager to see if the errors and bad behavior stops.



hurricane28 said:


> I actually never used SIV to be perfectly honest with you but i am inclined to give it a try. I normally use hardwareinfo64 in the background and whenever i use the EC sensor, doesn't matter what program i get this warning message about the EC returning data etc. when this happens i also notice an slight decrease in performance and snappiness in Windows. When i disable or shut down software monitoring i no longer feel this and get the error in Windows event viewer. Performance also seem to be affected in benchmarks. In Cinebench R15 i seen a drop between 10-40 points if i use the EC sensor or disabled it. Firestrike means 100-300 points less in physics score.
> I never seen this on any other board except Asus boards with this EC sensor.
> 
> The only Asus software i have is Aura lighting but that's about it. Even Alsuite 3 is causing big issues which result in even bigger problems than hardweareinfo64 or any other software monitoring program, it even has a tool to delete all the services because the uninstaller simply won't delete everything..


I like SIV in every way except for one, It needs to be simplified in the UI. I would honetly use it for everything that it can do if the UI were a bit more user friendly. If it were made over with a really nice simplistic UI or even an option for one then I believe more people would use it. Navigating the menus can be a challenge for first time users which could drive some away from using it if they were frustrated. I like the idea of one app controlling everything with minimal interference with the system resources. It just needs to have an option to make it simpler to navigate. Maybe even a way to take some of the readings that are most used and make a custom readout you can have on screen that is small and be able to minimize the main window to tray while being able to monitor voltages, frequencies, temps on a smaller widget type look with the values of your choice. I used to use a 2nd software to do that with HWinfo to create a windows widget with bar graphs that I customized names and colors etc and was very nice besides having to run 2 apps and install another software to adapt widgets back into windows. It got to be too bulky for benching with. Now im in the process of getting digital readouts and mounting them to a panel and soldering connecting wires to ProbeIt points and several other places on the motherboard for and got an IR temp gun so that I can monitor the system without software when it is finished.


----------



## red-ray

*RTFM (read the forgotten manual)*



CJMitsuki said:


> Maybe even a way to take some of the readings that are most used and make a custom readout you can have on screen that is small and be able to minimize the main window to tray while being able to monitor voltages, frequencies, temps on a smaller widget type look with the values of your choice.


Not only is this implemented you can also auto minimise the SIV main window on startup!


----------



## CJMitsuki

red-ray said:


> Not only is this implemented you can also auto minimise the SIV main window on startup!


Hmm, I was reading the manual but to be fair it’s more like a book written for a college course ???? Don’t get me wrong, I love the complexity and the sheer amount of information and effort that is put into this. I didn’t make it as far as the custom window as I was studying just to get gpu and fans customized and I just got impatient I presume. I will take another look into it tonight and see what it takes to get it set up. Now that I’ve eaten my words on the custom window, that only leaves me wanting a simplification of the menu navigation, which does seem daunting at first but maybe there is a pattern to it that is easily learned. Ty for some clarification Ray.


----------



## red-ray

*I find the menus simple, but there are a lot of entries*



CJMitsuki said:


> Now that I’ve eaten my words on the custom window, that only leaves me wanting a simplification of the menu navigation, which does seem daunting at first but maybe there is a pattern to it that is easily learned.


I just checked and there can me almost a 1,000 entries in the menus and about 400 different panels! Given this I suspect many are overwhelmed by the sheer volume.

I find the menu trivial to navigate and pretty much all you need is in *Menu->Tools->...*. Did you find *Menu->Help->View Menus*?


----------



## Lupo91

Hi everyone, I have a problem with my 970 Evo, or rather I think the C7H has it

I changed 2 Samsung 960 Pro and now I currently have the 970 Evo

Today I installed the demo of FH4, the game remains locked in the loading screen, while if I install the game on the Samsung 840, it starts without problems,this happens to me for example with Sleeping Dogs

Since I changed a total of 3 M2, I do not think they are the problem, remains the motherboard, someone has this problem with the M2?

is the fault of the CPU?


----------



## MacG32

elmor said:


> While waiting for something better, perhaps a few users could help me test a BIOS with an updated ACPI WMI interface that should fix the previous shortcomings. I only have a version for C7H Wi-Fi: http://www.mediafire.com/file/bj1e7tvzvypa9v8/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0012.zip/file
> 
> Updated software versions:
> 
> - HWInfo v5.88 or later
> - HWMonitor Beta: http://download.cpuid.com/betas/hwm_b17.zip
> - SIV 5.32 or later
> - CPU-Z Beta: http://download.cpuid.com/betas/cpuz_a0.zip
> 
> I will update with CPU-Z/AIDA64 versions that support this.
> 
> If you currently have any of the issues listed below, your feedback would be very valuable.
> 
> - Bad SIO temperature readings, things like CPU temperature reading crazy values or not updating anymore
> - Fans permanently stopping or getting stuck at some percentage


The Bus Speed in CPU-Z is all over the place, but is stable at 100.0 MHz in HWiNFO as I set it in the BIOS. All the other readings seem stable. The BIOS is stable with my memory settings and tested with Prime95. Will the release version have the latest AGESA?


----------



## edu616

nick name said:


> edu616 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Greetings,
> 
> I just received this board today with my 2700X I just have a question I went back a couple of pages and couldn't find the info. I'm trying to locate PBO setting's on this board. Could someone point me towards it? Also how is this board working for you guys in terms of PBO, RAM stability and all just a general question since I have never owned an Asus board before everyone was telling me to try one and well now that I'm upgrading I decided to try it. Thanks.
> 
> 
> 
> I would point you towards using Performance Enhancer Level 3 before I would recommend using PBO. But PBO is under Advanced and AMD CBS > NBIO I believe. Let me reboot and check again.
Click to expand...


Will try this! Thanks for the advice!


----------



## kazablanka

Guys which are the right settings for T offset ,sense mi skew and sense mi offset?


----------



## crakej

kazablanka said:


> Guys which are the right settings for T offset ,sense mi skew and sense mi offset?


Most of us disable SenseMi Skew


----------



## crakej

red-ray said:


> Provided all the reporting programs are using ASUS WMI then these should not happen and if they do then I suspect it's an issue with the ASUS WMI ACPI methods.
> 
> I can't find any of these on my C7H system, but then again all the EC access is now done via ASUS WMI. I suspect these only happened when AIDA64 + HWiNFO + SIV were doing direct EC access and when ASUS WMI is used this should no longer happen.
> 
> If you just run SIV 5.33 Beta-15 or later do you still get them? If so then we need to get ASUS to look into why. I can only sensibly comment when only SIV is active as I don't know exactly what other utilities do so you need to get their developers involved if you see them when their utilities are active.
> 
> Do you have any ASUS software active? Please post *Menu->Help->Lock Usage* + *Menu->Help->Lock Handle* so I can double check what is happening in terms of locking.


I've been playing with Siv64 on my machine (0804 bios) AISuite is running and behaving in the background. HWInfo seemed ok as well but not used it much.

One thing I've noticed is that AISuite is the only program that gives me correct voltage readings, besides Siv, certainly in one case... Siv said that my Ram V was 1.406 (wrong) yet it also said that Ram V *(EC)*was 1.420v - which is correct. Why are there 2 readings, and why is the one with (EC) correct? In the bios my voltages are not displayed correctly either. I set Ram to 1.42v, it's shown as 1.406 in bios - only AISuite gets it right, and this goes for many of the other voltages. I'm using latest HWInfo (rarely) and latest Siv of course. I wish this stuff would just read out correctly - it makes it difficult when you're playing around with settings!

I've not used HWInfo much lately, bit but will run it and see how they play together. So far all is good.

I too find Menus a bit difficult on Siv, but there is a lot of information. It might make sense to you having developed it, but to the new user it is a bit daunting. That said Siv is brilliant - if there is a setting you can't find, Siv will 99.99999% of the time have that setting and be monitoring it. Wonderful for debugging your system  Just out of interest, what language did you write the code in?


----------



## VicsPC

crakej said:


> Most of us disable SenseMi Skew


Yea for me enabled seems to be the only one that gives me correct readings. Disabled or auto and tctcl reads 10°C+, enabled and it reads correctly. I have a water temp sensor in my rad and at idle my gpu is dead on same temperature, my 2700x is a couple degrees above.


----------



## CJMitsuki

VicsPC said:


> Yea for me enabled seems to be the only one that gives me correct readings. Disabled or auto and tctcl reads 10°C+, enabled and it reads correctly. I have a water temp sensor in my rad and at idle my gpu is dead on same temperature, my 2700x is a couple degrees above.


I believe Enabled is for the “X” variants and Disabled is for the “non X” CPUs.


----------



## red-ray

*ASUS WMI reports some things twice*



crakej said:


> I've been playing with Siv64 on my machine (0804 bios) AISuite is running and behaving in the background. HWInfo seemed ok as well but not used it much.
> 
> One thing I've noticed is that AISuite is the only program that gives me correct voltage readings, besides Siv, certainly in one case... Siv said that my Ram V was 1.406 (wrong) yet it also said that Ram V *(EC)*was 1.420v - which is correct. Why are there 2 readings, and why is the one with (EC) correct? In the bios my voltages are not displayed correctly either. I set Ram to 1.42v, it's shown as 1.406 in bios - only AISuite gets it right, and this goes for many of the other voltages. I'm using latest HWInfo (rarely) and latest Siv of course. I wish this stuff would just read out correctly - it makes it difficult when you're playing around with settings!
> 
> I've not used HWInfo much lately, bit but will run it and see how they play together. So far all is good.
> 
> I too find Menus a bit difficult on Siv, but there is a lot of information. It might make sense to you having developed it, but to the new user it is a bit daunting. That said Siv is brilliant - if there is a setting you can't find, Siv will 99.99999% of the time have that setting and be monitoring it. Wonderful for debugging your system  Just out of interest, what language did you write the code in?


One of the reasons ASUS added ASUS WMI is so that AI Suite could play nicely with such as SIV + HWiNFO, so all should be OK. You are still likely to get issues with such as OHM which AFAIK don't use ASUS WMI. I don't know why the ASUS 0804 BIOS does not lockup on your system, but suspect if you did *SIV64X -NOWMI-LOCK* and then ran HWM or AIDA64 it would. I am not that bothered as the *0012* BIOS fixed the issue on my system.

There are there 2 readings as ASUS WMI reports two, see * Menu->System->ACPI + PnP->ASUS WMI*. The 1.406 is reported via the SIO and the 1.420 via the EC. I wonder if ASUS should change the BIOS to just report the EC one, what do you think? If they don't I could get SIV to only display the EC one.

I can't think how I can make it easier to use otherwise I would have already done this. I get the impression most users find things easier after a while.

SIV is written in C (not C++ and about 462,038 lines in total) as my day job is developing Windows Kernel drivers (WDF/WDM) which usually have to be in C. This is also why SIV also does far more in it's driver than all other similar utilities and why the .SYS files are rather larger. The up side of this is that SIV uses less CPU time.


----------



## MNMadman

crakej said:


> I've been playing with Siv64 on my machine (0804 bios) AISuite is running and behaving in the background. HWInfo seemed ok as well but not used it much.
> 
> One thing I've noticed is that AISuite is the only program that gives me correct voltage readings, besides Siv, certainly in one case... Siv said that my Ram V was 1.406 (wrong) yet it also said that Ram V *(EC)*was 1.420v - which is correct. Why are there 2 readings, and why is the one with (EC) correct? In the bios my voltages are not displayed correctly either. I set Ram to 1.42v, it's shown as 1.406 in bios - only AISuite gets it right, and this goes for many of the other voltages. I'm using latest HWInfo (rarely) and latest Siv of course. I wish this stuff would just read out correctly - it makes it difficult when you're playing around with settings!


I adjust the voltages based on the BIOS live values. I figure the BIOS is more accurate than the software readings.


----------



## red-ray

*Both report the same reading for the same sensor*



MNMadman said:


> I adjust the voltages based on the BIOS live values. I figure the BIOS is more accurate than the software readings.


Both report the same reading for the same sensor. I have no idea why you figure "the BIOS is more accurate than the software" as this is incorrect!

The C7H SIO is an ITE IT8665 and the A-to-D granularity is 0.010900 volts (see *IT8655Ev07.pdf*) so 1.406 is much the same 1.420. I don't know the EC granularity and ASUS fail to specify this, in truth ASUS fail to specify any EC information.


----------



## hurricane28

Readings on the C7H wifi is pretty correct.. you can measure it via the probelt points too.

Voltage readings are spot on, measured myself on the probelt and in hardwareinfo64, both give me the same value.


----------



## MNMadman

red-ray said:


> Both report the same reading for the same sensor. I have no idea why you figure "the BIOS is more accurate than the software" as this is incorrect!


When there is a discrepancy between BIOS real-time values and monitoring software values, I trust the BIOS values. Why? I have seen monitoring software displays obviously (and hilariously) wrong on many occasions. I'm supposed to believe that my 1950X on liquid cooling had a minimum temp of -95C and a maximum temp of 350C, like the monitoring software displayed?? I have yet to see a BIOS real-time value be wrong.

Incorrect or not, it's what I do.


----------



## MrPhilo

CJMitsuki said:


> First, it doesnt have to be set at 20% specifically, I use High performance power plan and only change the processor state to either 5, 10, or 20%. Its only going to drop to what the PStates are at anyway. Post your bios setup file and ill look and see if I can find anything. Im betting it will be in windows as a software doing it but we will see. I always use offset voltage and force the C States by setting to Enable. I used to use PStates before XFR bclk and I never saw issues with it.


It's been awhile, but I hope you're still able to look at my settings on why its not downvolting, hopefully it's a setting that I might have missed or shouldn't have enabled!

If not, could be an windows application (althought default setting it downvolts the CPU).


----------



## CJMitsuki

MrPhilo said:


> It's been awhile, but I hope you're still able to look at my settings on why its not downvolting, hopefully it's a setting that I might have missed or shouldn't have enabled!
> 
> If not, could be an windows application (althought default setting it downvolts the CPU).


Ok, so you have a lot going on in your bios, I see that you want to go with PStates but ill address that in a min. First, on memory settings when you set something like "Gear Down Mode [Enabled]" in the DRAM settings under "Extreme Tweaker" then you DONT need to set them in the "AMD CBS" menu as well. Ive had this cause me problems in the past. Set those particular settings that are in the bios twice, under "Extreme Tweaker" only and leave them alone under "AMD CBS". Next set Streaming Stores Control [Auto] to [Enabled] and the L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto] and L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto] both to [Enabled]. These are unrelated to your problems but they can greatly affect performance, especially Streaming Stores if the bios decides it wants to disable them by being set to Auto. Opcache Control [Auto] to [Enabled] is also a good idea. Fast Boot [Enabled] to [Disabled] as it can cause many different problems. CPU Core Voltage [Auto] to [Offset] and then you can set it to Auto just below the offset option although you may want to set a positive offset to set a specific voltage for your particular PState OC. For instance in PState settings when its set to custom on PState 0 the voltage is set to 1.2125v but looks something like this 121250 or something close to that. Well, at 4.4ghz say I wanted a 1.45v core voltage to go along with that. Well, Id take the 1.2125 and subtract it from 1.45, leaving me .2125 and thats what my positive offset will be set as in "Extreme Tweaker". I suspect this may be one reason it is not downvolting but not positive yet. Ok, next I would set Core Performance Boost [Disabled] back to [Auto], Performance Bias [None] to [CB 11.5], and lastly put Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual] back to [Default]. Let me know if those help and sorry I fogot to answer you back sooner. If they dont change your situation then you need to flash your bios back to 0702 if everything in Windows is ok as far as the Power Settings and no software that can control bios settings or frequencies and voltages like AI Suite or similar programs.


----------



## red-ray

*Post a Screen Shot*



MNMadman said:


> When there is a discrepancy between BIOS real-time values and monitoring software values, I trust the BIOS values. Why? I have seen monitoring software displays obviously (and hilariously) wrong on many occasions. I'm supposed to believe that my 1950X on liquid cooling had a minimum temp of -95C and a maximum temp of 350C, like the monitoring software displayed?? I have yet to see a BIOS real-time value be wrong.
> 
> Incorrect or not, it's what I do.


Often some of the SIO temperature inputs are not connected and software needs to be adjusted to not report them at all, but I have never been 350°C reported. In fact I think it's impossible as the intrinsic range is -128°C to +127°C and feel you need to post a screen shot.

If sensible to check what the BIOS reports to deduce which SIO inputs are connected, but I would find having to look in the BIOS every time I wished to check something a total PITA.

crakej is actually talking about the information reported by ASUS WMI and I have never seen crazy values reported and even if I had this would be caused by a BIOS bug rather than the software.

Yet again the ASUS WMI reports two DRAM voltages which are different and it reporting two is down to the BIOS not the reporting software. Garbage in -> Garbage out.

That said a lot comes down to the software you use and what you have said is appropriate for such crap as Corsair Sink that can't even get the 2700X core/package temperature correct, only reports 3 of the 6 motherboard temperatures, 3 out of 4 fans and totally fails to report my disk temperature. It also uses meaningless names such as Temp #1 + Fan #1 so it's tricky to know what a reading pertains to.


----------



## VicsPC

CJMitsuki said:


> I believe Enabled is for the “X” variants and Disabled is for the “non X” CPUs.


Yea that's what i thought, I've had some people with the x disable it and still get correct temperature readings so not sure what to make of that. All i know is, it worked correctly on both my C6 and C7.


----------



## gupsterg

minal said:


> :thumb: Those are the most useful kinds of impressions. Take your time, there's no rush. I don't know where you find the time to do all this testing and tuning!


Sorry for delayed response  , I had a bit of an accident that put me off my feet  . Now have improved  , but not 100% and so not tinkering with HW as being on my feet is still difficult  .

The main issue with the included temp sensor IMO is how large it is compared with other ones I have. For example you wouldn't be able to get it neatly between say thermal pad/contact point/heatsink.



Bo55 said:


> The cold boot bug is present on this board aswell ive tried being patient with it but after spending $452 AUD on this board, it should at least power on and post immediately as i have no issues with memory (SR B-die) so i know its not a memory issue as it will do it everytime i power up my system and at any voltage or any frequency (2133-3866). Cad bus and/or resistances play no part to fixing this either. This shouldn't be happening at all, this is clearly a board issue that needs to be fixed asap, for someone that decided to try a "high end" board for once, its looking pretty bad so far..
> 
> 
> 
> gupsterg said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is this "cold boot bug" when power supply has been switched off from wall socket prior to board posting?
> 
> 
> 
> Bo55 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes correct. Whenever i power down and switch off from wall. Once its completely off i can switch it back on and it will do it again. My apologies, for what its worth i have the wifi version of this board. Its definitely a board issue, took one stick of memory out/switched around and it still does it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

My reply would be what minal stated.



Spoiler






minal said:


> This is considered normal.
> 
> See "Q: When power is removed from power supply, multiple posts occur, is this a problem with board/settings?" at https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?101617-Crosshair-VII-Hero-Essential-Info-Thread
> 
> and https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?49146-Fake-boot-on-Maximus-VII-Hero#post417701








Bo55 said:


> Thanks for the reply, yes it does it even at stock. My x370 prime never did this whether at stock or OC'd.


Dunno why your Prime X370 differed in this aspect. I can only say my Intel boards and AMD all do this, all ASUS.



MNMadman said:


> I adjust the voltages based on the BIOS live values. I figure the BIOS is more accurate than the software readings.
> 
> 
> 
> red-ray said:
> 
> 
> 
> Both report the same reading for the same sensor. I have no idea why you figure "the BIOS is more accurate than the software" as this is incorrect!
> 
> The C7H SIO is an ITE IT8665 and the A-to-D granularity is 0.010900 volts (see *IT8655Ev07.pdf*) so 1.406 is much the same 1.420. I don't know the EC granularity and ASUS fail to specify this, in truth ASUS fail to specify any EC information.
Click to expand...

 @MNMadman

I'd believe the two biggest factors for difference between BIOS live values and software readings in OS is down to:-

a) Polling interval difference.
b) How system is "loaded" UEFI/OS. Many believe when in UEFI there is zero "load" on system, this is not the case on AM4/sTR4 at all.

@red-ray

IIRC the PDF in OP (C7H highlights) highlights granularity changes between C7H & C6H.



red-ray said:


> Often some of the SIO temperature inputs are not connected and software needs to be adjusted to not report them at all, but I have never been 350°C reported. In fact I think it's impossible as the intrinsic range is -128°C to +127°C and feel you need to post a screen shot.


His TR board is not ASUS, so could well be FW, etc to blame ...



crakej said:


> @hurricane28 I also have those events`in event viewer. *: The embedded controller (EC) returned data when none was requested. The BIOS might blah blah blah....*


Harmless message. I have this on Intel and AMD rigs, Ryzen Essentials OP has link to Mumak's post on this as well.


----------



## hurricane28

gupsterg said:


> Sorry for delayed response  , I had a bit of an accident that put me off my feet  . Now have improved  , but not 100% and so not tinkering with HW as being on my feet is still difficult  .
> 
> The main issue with the included temp sensor IMO is how large it is compared with other ones I have. For example you wouldn't be able to get it neatly between say thermal pad/contact point/heatsink.
> 
> 
> 
> My reply would be what minal stated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dunno why your Prime X370 differed in this aspect. I can only say my Intel boards and AMD all do this, all ASUS.
> 
> 
> 
> @MNMadman
> 
> I'd believe the two biggest factors for difference between BIOS live values and software readings in OS is down to:-
> 
> a) Polling interval difference.
> b) How system is "loaded" UEFI/OS. Many believe when in UEFI there is zero "load" on system, this is not the case on AM4/sTR4 at all.
> 
> @red-ray
> 
> IIRC the PDF in OP (C7H highlights) highlights granularity changes between C7H & C6H.
> 
> 
> 
> His TR board is not ASUS, so could well be FW, etc to blame ...
> 
> 
> 
> Harmless message. I have this on Intel and AMD rigs, Ryzen Essentials OP has link to Mumak's post on this as well.


Accident? Hope you're okay man. 

yeah, although the message about the EC is harmless i do notice that when i reset the cmos and pull the battery out, its no longer there but always comes back after a while. It also is an indication of faulty BIOS implementation as its only a matter of time when the fans start going crazy.


----------



## red-ray

*Where do you set this?*



CJMitsuki said:


> I believe Enabled is for the “X” variants and Disabled is for the “non X” CPUs.





VicsPC said:


> Yea for me enabled seems to be the only one that gives me correct readings. Disabled or auto and tctcl reads 10°C+, enabled and it reads correctly. I have a water temp sensor in my rad and at idle my gpu is dead on same temperature, my 2700x is a couple degrees above.


Please can you tell me where do you set this?

The CPU SMU Data reports the *TCTL Offset* so software should be able to automatically set this correctly.


----------



## gupsterg

@hurricane28

Yeah getting there. At least I'm being waited on my wife these days! (LOL). So I guess every cloud has silver lining.
@red-ray

Extreme Tweaker page > Tweakers Paradise

There is Sense Mi Skew on/off and offset. There is also t_offset, IIRC I have post linked in OP of Ryzen Essential by Elmor stating difference of t_offset cs Sense Mi Skew as well.


----------



## red-ray

*I guess it's a hangover*



gupsterg said:


> @red-ray
> 
> Extreme Tweaker page > Tweakers Paradise
> 
> There is Sense Mi Skew on/off and offset. There is also t_offset, IIRC I have post linked in OP of Ryzen Essential by Elmor stating difference of t_offset cs Sense Mi Skew as well.


Thank you. I guess it's a hangover from before the AGESA was updated to report this in the CPU SMU data


----------



## MNMadman

red-ray said:


> Often some of the SIO temperature inputs are not connected and software needs to be adjusted to not report them at all, but I have never been 350°C reported. In fact I think it's impossible as the intrinsic range is -128°C to +127°C and feel you need to post a screen shot.


Can't. That system is no longer together - it was replaced by *Frankenstein's Monster*.

The weird numbers only happened when the system was fully loaded on all 32 threads. In all other conditions it was accurate. I know it was a bug but I was using it as an example of monitoring software not being the end-all be-all. Like I said, I use monitoring software (at least until I get the system set up like I want) and trust it most of the time. But when there is a discrepancy, I will trust the BIOS live value over monitoring software every time. Once I'm satisfied, I stop using monitoring software on a regular basis. I might re-check every month or two after that.


----------



## hurricane28

gupsterg said:


> @hurricane28
> 
> Yeah getting there. At least I'm being waited on my wife these days! (LOL). So I guess every cloud has silver lining.
> @red-ray
> 
> Extreme Tweaker page > Tweakers Paradise
> 
> There is Sense Mi Skew on/off and offset. There is also t_offset, IIRC I have post linked in OP of Ryzen Essential by Elmor stating difference of t_offset cs Sense Mi Skew as well.


Alright, may i ask what happened?


----------



## MrPhilo

CJMitsuki said:


> Ok, so you have a lot going on in your bios, I see that you want to go with PStates but ill address that in a min. First, on memory settings when you set something like "Gear Down Mode [Enabled]" in the DRAM settings under "Extreme Tweaker" then you DONT need to set them in the "AMD CBS" menu as well. Ive had this cause me problems in the past. Set those particular settings that are in the bios twice, under "Extreme Tweaker" only and leave them alone under "AMD CBS". Next set Streaming Stores Control [Auto] to [Enabled] and the L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto] and L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto] both to [Enabled]. These are unrelated to your problems but they can greatly affect performance, especially Streaming Stores if the bios decides it wants to disable them by being set to Auto. Opcache Control [Auto] to [Enabled] is also a good idea. Fast Boot [Enabled] to [Disabled] as it can cause many different problems. CPU Core Voltage [Auto] to [Offset] and then you can set it to Auto just below the offset option although you may want to set a positive offset to set a specific voltage for your particular PState OC. For instance in PState settings when its set to custom on PState 0 the voltage is set to 1.2125v but looks something like this 121250 or something close to that. Well, at 4.4ghz say I wanted a 1.45v core voltage to go along with that. Well, Id take the 1.2125 and subtract it from 1.45, leaving me .2125 and thats what my positive offset will be set as in "Extreme Tweaker". I suspect this may be one reason it is not downvolting but not positive yet. Ok, next I would set Core Performance Boost [Disabled] back to [Auto], Performance Bias [None] to [CB 11.5], and lastly put Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual] back to [Default]. Let me know if those help and sorry I fogot to answer you back sooner. If they dont change your situation then you need to flash your bios back to 0702 if everything in Windows is ok as far as the Power Settings and no software that can control bios settings or frequencies and voltages like AI Suite or similar programs.


Did not work, it still stays around 1.4V 

I did do your other suggestion though, my system does seem a bit more snappy, could be placebo though. Any reason why 0702 bios would fix it?

I was thinking can't I use the other PState mode to just downvolt?

EDIT: I disabled SMT and change my clock to 4.35Ghz at 1.4v (1.4125v LLC3) and i've tested prime95 for 1 hour and no shutdown yet. Interesting results.


----------



## CJMitsuki

MrPhilo said:


> Did not work, it still stays around 1.4V
> 
> I did do your other suggestion though, my system does seem a bit more snappy, could be placebo though. Any reason why 0702 bios would fix it?
> 
> I was thinking can't I use the other PState mode to just downvolt?


Other PState mode? You mean XFR/PBO? That will downclock according to the Power States as it determines how any downclock in the board will behave, typically. If you want a decent mold XFR/PBO setup let me know and I’ll write up the settings once I’m home and you can see if you like it. I run XFR/PBO bclk OC now as I prefer it to PStates in most situations unless I just have to have the extra quick latency for something vs a single core boost. If you are wanting mild then you won’t use bclk OC and I can get you to boost to 4.35 all cores and 4.4 on 2-4 cores but that may be too much in voltage spikes for you. Let me know what exact cooler you have and I can give you something to test if you want. You can tell me to lower or bump it up afterwards. As far as the system being more snappy, that could be the case but it’s hard to say since we can’t see what the motherboard is setting for those “Auto” values. Some of those setting also heals memory stability while boosting bandwidth a small amount. When I was testing all of the more obscure settings that we rarely touch there was noticeable performance gains but there was also some negative behaviors that were tough to pinpoint. Disabling Streaming Stores literally took my memory bandwidth from 57k to 28k and Opcache helped in benchmarks but I could not see what the hard benefits of it were but I know I was getting higher benchmark scores. Possibly helps with rendering.


----------



## Lupo91

Lupo91 said:


> Hi everyone, I have a problem with my 970 Evo, or rather I think the C7H has it
> 
> I changed 2 Samsung 960 Pro and now I currently have the 970 Evo
> 
> Today I installed the demo of FH4, the game remains locked in the loading screen, while if I install the game on the Samsung 840, it starts without problems,this happens to me for example with Sleeping Dogs
> 
> Since I changed a total of 3 M2, I do not think they are the problem, remains the motherboard, someone has this problem with the M2?
> 
> is the fault of the CPU?



Anyone??


----------



## red-ray

*Please try SIV 5.34 Beta-01 or later*



crakej said:


> Siv said that my Ram V was 1.406 (wrong) yet it also said that Ram V *(EC)*was 1.420v - which is correct.
> 
> Why are there 2 readings, and why is the one with (EC) correct?


I have been pondering what to do about this and for 5.34 Beta-01 I have changed SIV to use EC in preference to SIO voltages for what get's reported on the initial screen.

Please try SIV 5.34 Beta-01 or later and let me know it you think this is an improvement.

There are two readings as ASUS WMI reports two readings, one from the SIO and the other from the EC.


----------



## Praetorr

Lupo91 said:


> Anyone??


Have you installed the NVME driver from Samsung? Have you installed Samsung Magician and updated the firmware to the latest version (assuming there is a more recent firmware)?

If not, I'd try those things. I don't know otherwise.


----------



## Lupo91

Praetorr said:


> Have you installed the NVME driver from Samsung? Have you installed Samsung Magician and updated the firmware to the latest version (assuming there is a more recent firmware)?
> 
> If not, I'd try those things. I don't know otherwise.



Already done everything



According to you is the fault of the card or the cpu ??


----------



## gupsterg

red-ray said:


> Thank you. I guess it's a hangover from before the AGESA was updated to report this in the CPU SMU data


:thumb: .



elmor said:


> While waiting for something better, perhaps a few users could help me test a BIOS with an updated ACPI WMI interface that should fix the previous shortcomings. I only have a version for C7H Wi-Fi: http://www.mediafire.com/file/bj1e7tvzvypa9v8/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0012.zip/file
> 
> Updated software versions:
> 
> - HWInfo v5.88 or later
> - HWMonitor Beta: http://download.cpuid.com/betas/hwm_b17.zip
> - SIV 5.32 or later
> - CPU-Z Beta: http://download.cpuid.com/betas/cpuz_a0.zip
> 
> I will update with CPU-Z/AIDA64 versions that support this.
> 
> If you currently have any of the issues listed below, your feedback would be very valuable.
> 
> - Bad SIO temperature readings, things like CPU temperature reading crazy values or not updating anymore
> - Fans permanently stopping or getting stuck at some percentage


On OC CORE/RAM had no issues in ~6hrs testing so far  .



hurricane28 said:


> Accident? Hope you're okay man.
> 
> yeah, although the message about the EC is harmless i do notice that when i reset the cmos and pull the battery out, its no longer there but always comes back after a while. It also is an indication of faulty BIOS implementation as its only a matter of time when the fans start going crazy.
> 
> 
> 
> hurricane28 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Alright, may i ask what happened?
Click to expand...

Yeah getting there chap  , will PM  .


----------



## minal

gupsterg said:


> Sorry for delayed response  , I had a bit of an accident that put me off my feet  .


 No problem. Get well soon.




gupsterg said:


> The main issue with the included temp sensor IMO is how large it is compared with other ones I have. For example you wouldn't be able to get it neatly between say thermal pad/contact point/heatsink.


 Good to know. Approximately how large is it?

I just bought a digital multimeter and it comes with a temperature probe (looks like ~1mm diameter ball of solder). That should be good enough for me for now. 

It's fun being able to take quick measurements around the case. For example, at idle with 31C ambient, the exhaust temperature +4-5C above ambient, intake is +1-2C, the heatpipes of the CPU heatsink are +5C, and the surface of the heatsinks on the C7H are +7-9C.


----------



## Praetorr

Lupo91 said:


> Already done everything
> 
> 
> 
> According to you is the fault of the card or the cpu ??


What you're describing does sound it could be a hardware malfunction. But I don't have a 970 series SSD, so I'm not certain. Sorry I can't be more helpful.


----------



## crakej

red-ray said:


> I have been pondering what to do about this and for 5.34 Beta-01 I have changed SIV to use EC in preference to SIO voltages for what get's reported on the initial screen.
> 
> Please try SIV 5.34 Beta-01 or later and let me know it you think this is an improvement.
> 
> There are two readings as ASUS WMI reports two readings, one from the SIO and the other from the EC.


Working for me thanks!

I'll have a look at the other voltages i'm having trouble with, think the same is happening..... Kind of figures that ASUS would be using EC values, but that doersn't appear to be the case - except in AISuite.


----------



## edu616

Random question, do you guys use Performance Enhancer or PBO settings and why? I belive both work with you temps overhead to give you the better clocks or how are they different? Thanks and sorry for the noob question.


----------



## CJMitsuki

edu616 said:


> Random question, do you guys use Performance Enhancer or PBO settings and why? I belive both work with you temps overhead to give you the better clocks or how are they different? Thanks and sorry for the noob question.


PBO works with temps but it is not an ever changing boost. From what I have seen, it takes your temperatures during your boot into OS and translates that into a multiplier. Naturally the cooler your cpu is running at the time the higher it will set your multiplier, voltages, etc using some internal algorithm. It seems to range from 41.5x to 43.5x maximum so the most you can achieve is all core 4.35ghz with PBO alone. This is why BCLK OC was incorporated into PBO. Once you want to go higher than 4.35ghz with PBO/XFR you have to add a Base Clock multiplier above 100mhz to it. 

So, if you are running quite cool and you get 43.5x once you boot into windows then a 102bclk will yield roughly a 4.425-4.45 overclock. Now when you start using PBO in this manner you have to add a positive offset voltage as, depending on silicon quality, 4.45ghz uses around 1.5v and 4.5ghz 1.55v for stability in heavy loads during intensive benchmarking. You can get away with less voltage if you are just using the system normally but can crash if cpu takes on a heavy load momentarily. 

Performance Enhancer from what ive gathered just basically assists your overclocks by maintaining boosts longer and being more aggressive with voltages. For the average user that wants above average performance but dont want to go balls deep on overclocking should probably stcik with PE 3 and DO NOT BCLK OC whatsoever. Even at 102 bclk temps and frequencies become much harder to maintain as voltages to keep these freqs stable become exponentially larger. If you can do 4.35ghz all core at 1.45v then you are probably looking at 1.5 core voltage which is roughly 1.48v vCore for 4.4ghz. 4.45v will be 1.52v vcore give or take and 4.55 is going to be 1.6v and around 1.58v or so vCore. After that it got much worse and I started to be unable to control the temps beyond 1.6v so I didnt go any further due to nervousness about temps spiking and cpu becoming unstable. But yeah, for avg user PE3 with PBO enabled and 10x scalar should be nice. Probably a positive offset voltage of .0125v or something...That will be up to your silicon so testing is mandatory. 

You can also go into the pstates menu and there is an often overlooked option to disable edc throttling or something to that effect. It helps a bit as well. Determinism Slider set to performance is another decent one. Streaming Stores enabled and L1 and L2 Prefetch enabled is another ive found benefits me. I also find all of the other voltages in the other menus and see what they are running at through various monitoring software and set them to what they are running once I have my OC set up and I am stable. That reduces the boot to boot variance in stability and performance. Also helps that ridiculous problem of stable memory oc on one boot and errors on the next. The bios can change any Auto option to something that isnt optimal so I try not to leave much to chance in that dept. 
Performance Bias should be CB 11.5 from my testing. Fast boot disabled can cure quite a bit of problems as well as turning fast startup off in windows. These 2 options can be a nightmare in certain situations if they want to cause problems. 

Hmm, thats all i got that I can remember off the top of my head. I may include more. This is what works for my setup so you may want to test and see if it holds true for yours as well. Sorry my typing layout is trash but its 3:30am and ive been at work for 14 hours. Im off to get home and tweak my new 1080ti with a fresh unlocked xoc bios flashed to it :devil: Let me know how it went or if you need help and good luck :thumb:


----------



## edu616

CJMitsuki said:


> edu616 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Random question, do you guys use Performance Enhancer or PBO settings and why? I belive both work with you temps overhead to give you the better clocks or how are they different? Thanks and sorry for the noob question.
> 
> 
> 
> PBO works with temps but it is not an ever changing boost. From what I have seen, it takes your temperatures during your boot into OS and translates that into a multiplier. Naturally the cooler your cpu is running at the time the higher it will set your multiplier, voltages, etc using some internal algorithm. It seems to range from 41.5x to 43.5x maximum so the most you can achieve is all core 4.35ghz with PBO alone. This is why BCLK OC was incorporated into PBO. Once you want to go higher than 4.35ghz with PBO/XFR you have to add a Base Clock multiplier above 100mhz to it.
> 
> So, if you are running quite cool and you get 43.5x once you boot into windows then a 102bclk will yield roughly a 4.425-4.45 overclock. Now when you start using PBO in this manner you have to add a positive offset voltage as, depending on silicon quality, 4.45ghz uses around 1.5v and 4.5ghz 1.55v for stability in heavy loads during intensive benchmarking. You can get away with less voltage if you are just using the system normally but can crash if cpu takes on a heavy load momentarily.
> 
> Performance Enhancer from what ive gathered just basically assists your overclocks by maintaining boosts longer and being more aggressive with voltages. For the average user that wants above average performance but dont want to go balls deep on overclocking should probably stcik with PE 3 and DO NOT BCLK OC whatsoever. Even at 102 bclk temps and frequencies become much harder to maintain as voltages to keep these freqs stable become exponentially larger. If you can do 4.35ghz all core at 1.45v then you are probably looking at 1.5 core voltage which is roughly 1.48v vCore for 4.4ghz. 4.45v will be 1.52v vcore give or take and 4.55 is going to be 1.6v and around 1.58v or so vCore. After that it got much worse and I started to be unable to control the temps beyond 1.6v so I didnt go any further due to nervousness about temps spiking and cpu becoming unstable. But yeah, for avg user PE3 with PBO enabled and 10x scalar should be nice. Probably a positive offset voltage of .0125v or something...That will be up to your silicon so testing is mandatory.
> 
> You can also go into the pstates menu and there is an often overlooked option to disable edc throttling or something to that effect. It helps a bit as well. Determinism Slider set to performance is another decent one. Streaming Stores enabled and L1 and L2 Prefetch enabled is another ive found benefits me. I also find all of the other voltages in the other menus and see what they are running at through various monitoring software and set them to what they are running once I have my OC set up and I am stable. That reduces the boot to boot variance in stability and performance. Also helps that ridiculous problem of stable memory oc on one boot and errors on the next. The bios can change any Auto option to something that isnt optimal so I try not to leave much to chance in that dept.
> Performance Bias should be CB 11.5 from my testing. Fast boot disabled can cure quite a bit of problems as well as turning fast startup off in windows. These 2 options can be a nightmare in certain situations if they want to cause problems.
> 
> Hmm, thats all i got that I can remember off the top of my head. I may include more. This is what works for my setup so you may want to test and see if it holds true for yours as well. Sorry my typing layout is trash but its 3:30am and ive been at work for 14 hours. Im off to get home and tweak my new 1080ti with a fresh unlocked xoc bios flashed to it /forum/images/smilies/devil.gif Let me know how it went or if you need help and good luck /forum/images/smilies/thumb.gif
Click to expand...

This was a great answer since I want to extract every bit of performance I will try PBO with BCLK OC and see how far I can push it will try a positive voltage offset and will report back how it went. Thanks again for your detailed answer!


----------



## CJMitsuki

edu616 said:


> This was a great answer since I want to extract every bit of performance I will try PBO with BCLK OC and see how far I can push it will try a positive voltage offset and will report back how it went. Thanks again for your detailed answer!



do you have decent liquid cooling? I would hope so bc as i stated BCLK OC pushes the clock pretty high. Are you on PE4 too? At 102 bclk and PE4 I usually run like +.075v offset and PE4 with no bclk is around +.0375v or something like that and 104 bclk is around +.0875v to +.1125v depending on which benchmark im running. but those temps are only under control for a short time. Sustained benches arent ideal at that level.


----------



## edu616

CJMitsuki said:


> edu616 said:
> 
> 
> 
> This was a great answer since I want to extract every bit of performance I will try PBO with BCLK OC and see how far I can push it will try a positive voltage offset and will report back how it went. Thanks again for your detailed answer!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> do you have decent liquid cooling? I would hope so bc as i stated BCLK OC pushes the clock pretty high. Are you on PE4 too? At 102 bclk and PE4 I usually run like +.075v offset and PE4 with no bclk is around +.0375v or something like that and 104 bclk is around +.0875v to +.1125v depending on which benchmark im running. but those temps are only under control for a short time. Sustained benches arent ideal at that level.
Click to expand...

I do I have a custom EK loop with a 360 rad so sufficient however I'm also cooling the gpu with it. I have just started tweaking so I'm on PE 3 and with PBO enabled and a scalar of 10x, with a positive offset voltage of .200 also have not touched BCLK as of yet just testing everything to see all the different behaviors of voltages just with these settings.


----------



## CJMitsuki

edu616 said:


> I do I have a custom EK loop with a 360 rad so sufficient however I'm also cooling the gpu with it. I have just started tweaking so I'm on PE 3 and with PBO enabled and a scalar of 10x, with a positive offset voltage of .200 also have not touched BCLK as of yet just testing everything to see all the different behaviors of voltages just with these settings.




Ok, just making sure you keep the cpu safe.


----------



## edu616

CJMitsuki said:


> edu616 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I do I have a custom EK loop with a 360 rad so sufficient however I'm also cooling the gpu with it. I have just started tweaking so I'm on PE 3 and with PBO enabled and a scalar of 10x, with a positive offset voltage of .200 also have not touched BCLK as of yet just testing everything to see all the different behaviors of voltages just with these settings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, just making sure you keep the cpu safe.
Click to expand...

Thanks a lot for your help and concern it has helped me understand a bit more about the behaviors of Ryzen + using all these different settings I had not seen before since not even first gen ryzen had all these new options.


----------



## Praetorr

Wait... my understanding is that enabling performance enhancer level 2 or greater already sets PBO to its maximum settings. Is that not the case? If you’re not interested in anything beyond PE2 or BCLK OCing, what is the ideal setting then?


----------



## nick name

edu616 said:


> I do I have a custom EK loop with a 360 rad so sufficient however I'm also cooling the gpu with it. I have just started tweaking so I'm on PE 3 and with PBO enabled and a scalar of 10x, with a positive offset voltage of .200 also have not touched BCLK as of yet just testing everything to see all the different behaviors of voltages just with these settings.


It is my experience that setting a PE Level will override any values you change under PBO. With that said -- you changing the scalar to 10 is also redundant.

And what are you running such a high voltage offset? What do your core voltages look like?

This is something I wrote up that you might find helpful:

https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...tiplier-adjustments-through-ryzen-master.html


----------



## edu616

Praetorr said:


> Wait... my understanding is that enabling performance enhancer level 2 or greater already sets PBO to its maximum settings. Is that not the case? If you’re not interested in anything beyond PE2 or BCLK OCing, what is the ideal setting then?


With both on I was seeing better clock speeds unless they are behaving different. With PE 3 max I would see was 4.140 while in core heavy applications with both enabled I was seeing 4.2 on the cpu clocks however temps were a bit higher ( as voltage was higher too) not by much! I'm still investigating with different settings to learn by my self and always keeping an eye on voltage and temps!

Edit: With only PBO enable I was seeing 4.160 on my cpu clockspeeds but with not great temps as the voltage is too high for 4.160 at least for my cpu as It was giving 1.37 volts on heavy loads. If I overclock manually I need far less voltage for the same clocks!


----------



## majestynl

*Guys currently investigating the "No downvolt" issue with P-states OC!!!*

Their are few people having this issue here on OCN and other forums and mostly they got answered by us their are doing something wrong etc etc. Even I answered same because I always got the downvolting working with P-states.

Last week I downgraded the bios to 0702 for testing purposes, and today I saw the post from a user having issues with P-states again. So I was thinking to write him back. Before that I just wanted to test the P-states OC again and I was surprised I got same issue. I was more then happy cause now I know it doesn't need to be something with missed settings. It probably happens or not. 

Step by step I tried to debug whats causing the issue. Tried many different combinations and eventually I found out it is the FID setting. If I change it just with 1 grade the downvolting doesn't happen anymore. Downclocking as it should but no downvolting. When I only change the FID back to default setting (3700mhz) its downvolting again. 

So their must be some kind of issue in bios/microcode etc what causing a certain lock. The strange parts is, it doesn't happen to everyone.

I need more time to investigate this. But the good part is, I can replicate this issue now..

Tested system: 2700x with 0702 bios. Before this I was on 0804. And I do no for sure my P-states OC on earlier bios version worked issueless.


----------



## Carolina Roots

Hey everyone!

I'm new to overclocking and this is my first time on here so please forgive anything dumb I may say/do.

I'm having trouble getting my R5 2600 (non-x) to boost higher than 3.9ghz. Is there something with sense mi or t_offset that I'm missing? Corsair Link is showing my CPU temp ~40c higher than it actually is, and its showing the correct CPU temp in a different place. so. that's a thing. I'm on bios 0804. 

I've set the power profile to balanced (not ryzen balance) and set the PE to level 3 and Core Boost to enabled as well. 

Any idea on what i should try next?


----------



## majestynl

Carolina Roots said:


> Hey everyone!
> 
> I'm new to overclocking and this is my first time on here so please forgive anything dumb I may say/do.
> 
> I'm having trouble getting my R5 2600 (non-x) to boost higher than 3.9ghz. Is there something with sense mi or t_offset that I'm missing? Corsair Link is showing my CPU temp ~40c higher than it actually is, and its showing the correct CPU temp in a different place. so. that's a thing. I'm on bios 0804.
> 
> I've set the power profile to balanced (not ryzen balance) and set the PE to level 3 and Core Boost to enabled as well.
> 
> Any idea on what i should try next?


Welcome..

Share some screenshots from your bios pages. Eg extreme tweaker page. You can use F12 I believe while in bios to save Screenies to USB or other Media.

Maybe some HwInfo screens could also help users to assist better.

PS: leave sense mi and toffset on default..no need to touch for now...


----------



## edu616

nick name said:


> edu616 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I do I have a custom EK loop with a 360 rad so sufficient however I'm also cooling the gpu with it. I have just started tweaking so I'm on PE 3 and with PBO enabled and a scalar of 10x, with a positive offset voltage of .200 also have not touched BCLK as of yet just testing everything to see all the different behaviors of voltages just with these settings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is my experience that setting a PE Level will override any values you change under PBO. With that said -- you changing the scalar to 10 is also redundant.
> 
> And what are you running such a high voltage offset? What do your core voltages look like?
> 
> This is something I wrote up that you might find helpful:
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...tiplier-adjustments-through-ryzen-master.html
Click to expand...

Vcore max was 1.45 with both things on however this was for less than a second when playing BF1 Cpu temps got very high though! Tdie I was seeing around 85 not always but it did got toasty!


----------



## Praetorr

edu616 said:


> With both on I was seeing better clock speeds unless they are behaving different. With PE 3 max I would see was 4.140 while in core heavy applications with both enabled I was seeing 4.2 on the cpu clocks however temps were a bit higher ( as voltage was higher too) not by much! I'm still investigating with different settings to learn by my self and always keeping an eye on voltage and temps!
> 
> Edit: With only PBO enable I was seeing 4.160 on my cpu clockspeeds but with not great temps as the voltage is too high for 4.160 at least for my cpu as It was giving 1.37 volts on heavy loads. If I overclock manually I need far less voltage for the same clocks!


Interesting, and thanks for responding.

In some ways the fact that you're using PE3 complicates things, however. That setting (as well as PE4) uses a "hack" to actually overclock beyond what PBO is ordinarily meant to be capable of. 

According to his (linked below) post, PE2 does indeed max out PBO, unless I'm missing something:

https://www.overclock.net/forum/27229889-post146.html


----------



## edu616

If you guys do gaming what has been your temperatures with PE 3 enabled while playing Battlefield 1 in my opinion it gets pretty hot unles I'm just being paranoid I have decent cooling (360 rad for cooling cpu and gpu custom EK loop) and temps reach more than 80 on this particular game and since it get hotter the clock go down with it which is normal but just wondering if you guys have the same problem at least on this game? Thanks!


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> edu616 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I do I have a custom EK loop with a 360 rad so sufficient however I'm also cooling the gpu with it. I have just started tweaking so I'm on PE 3 and with PBO enabled and a scalar of 10x, with a positive offset voltage of .200 also have not touched BCLK as of yet just testing everything to see all the different behaviors of voltages just with these settings.
> 
> 
> 
> It is my experience that setting a PE Level will override any values you change under PBO. With that said -- you changing the scalar to 10 is also redundant.
> 
> And what are you running such a high voltage offset? What do your core voltages look like?
> 
> This is something I wrote up that you might find helpful:
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...tiplier-adjustments-through-ryzen-master.html
Click to expand...

From what I’ve seen when you set PBO to enable it sets the board limits to maximum and PE didn’t override that when I went down to 3 for some testing. The EDC, PPT, and TDP were still maxed out. From what I have seen the PE pushes higher voltages and boosts. Then there is another option in PStates menu at the bottom to relax the EDC throttling. The scalar with PE helps to hold boosts longer as well so not entirely redundant. Either way, if you unlock the hidden power options in Windows for core parking you can adjust how sensitive core parking and boosting is. You can essentially make it boost all core just by moving your mouse if you wanted to. That’s pretty good for latency sensitive benchmarks where the cpu will almost go full idle before the next test kicks in giving slightly better scores.


----------



## Alex K

Anybody having this Ram kit: https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3600c16d-16gtz
working on 2700x + CH7.
Tried almost everything with DRAM Calc, can't get even 3200 CL14 stable.
Seems like this RAM just refuses work with timings lower than CL16.


----------



## neikosr0x

edu616 said:


> If you guys do gaming what has been your temperatures with PE 3 enabled while playing Battlefield 1 in my opinion it gets pretty hot unles I'm just being paranoid I have decent cooling (360 rad for cooling cpu and gpu custom EK loop) and temps reach more than 80 on this particular game and since it get hotter the clock go down with it which is normal but just wondering if you guys have the same problem at least on this game? Thanks!


nope check your volts and so on...

on im 2700x ch7 /Corsair 115i pro 240mm AIO, Currently running it on PE4 tried PE3 for some time and never got more than 70c on FULL load for 1hour+ and while gaming in any game not more than 62c.
So is either room temp/case air flow or just too much volt.


----------



## Carolina Roots

majestynl said:


> Welcome..
> 
> Share some screenshots from your bios pages. Eg extreme tweaker page. You can use F12 I believe while in bios to save Screenies to USB or other Media.
> 
> Maybe some HwInfo screens could also help users to assist better.
> 
> PS: leave sense mi and toffset on default..no need to touch for now...


For some reason im having trouble getting a screen shot of my BIOS. I will have an easier time after i get my USB from the office today. I did get some of my HWInfo stats though.

What would you be looking for first in the BIOS screen shots?


----------



## Carolina Roots

Alex K said:


> Anybody having this Ram kit: https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3600c16d-16gtz
> working on 2700x + CH7.
> Tried almost everything with DRAM Calc, can't get even 3200 CL14 stable.
> Seems like this RAM just refuses work with timings lower than CL16.


What is your SoC voltage at? This may sound strange but when i raise my SoC above 1V my memory seems to lose almost all stability. Try setting your SoC to .9-.9875?


----------



## crakej

Alex K said:


> Anybody having this Ram kit: https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3600c16d-16gtz
> working on 2700x + CH7.
> Tried almost everything with DRAM Calc, can't get even 3200 CL14 stable.
> Seems like this RAM just refuses work with timings lower than CL16.


what voltages are you using? you could try enabling GearDown mode in the bios....


----------



## Alex K

Carolina Roots said:


> What is your SoC voltage at? This may sound strange but when i raise my SoC above 1V my memory seems to lose almost all stability. Try setting your SoC to .9-.9875?


I tired values from ryzen dram calc 1.3.1 on 3200 I tried 1.025 & 1.05.

MB will be a good idea to try lower it even more.
But for example 3533 CL16 is failing to start with SoC below 1.056 in my case.



crakej said:


> what voltages are you using? you could try enabling GearDown mode in the bios....


I tried both disable & enable with the same result.


----------



## edu616

neikosr0x said:


> edu616 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you guys do gaming what has been your temperatures with PE 3 enabled while playing Battlefield 1 in my opinion it gets pretty hot unles I'm just being paranoid I have decent cooling (360 rad for cooling cpu and gpu custom EK loop) and temps reach more than 80 on this particular game and since it get hotter the clock go down with it which is normal but just wondering if you guys have the same problem at least on this game? Thanks!
> 
> 
> 
> nope check your volts and so on...
> 
> on im 2700x ch7 /Corsair 115i pro 240mm AIO, Currently running it on PE4 tried PE3 for some time and never got more than 70c on FULL load for 1hour+ and while gaming in any game not more than 62c.
> So is either room temp/case air flow or just too much volt.
Click to expand...

Just like I said is just on Battlefield 1 any other game that I have played doesn't go up more than 64 degrees, tried Overwatch, Battlefield 4, PUBG, Project Cars so it seems very odd that is only on this game apparently it hammers the cpu more than even doing 9 roundns of Cinabench R15 with my config it's just so weird!


----------



## edu616

I just did a very random test, my friend has a Ryzen 1700 I loaded all the default settings for the bios and put that guy on this board. I got it running stable at 3.9GHz at 1.4 volts. The funny rhing is that even at 1.4 volts temperatures while running Battlefield 1 was only 62-65 degrees max. And when I was running the same game with my 2700X with max volts at 1.32vCore temps were reching more than 80 degrees (Tdie) clockspeeds were higer at aroud 4150-4170MHz but should it be that much hotter with a lot less vCore? It just seems very strange to me and this is why I did this test in the first place!


----------



## VicsPC

edu616 said:


> I just did a very random test, my friend has a Ryzen 1700 I loaded all the default settings for the bios and put that guy on this board. I got it running stable at 3.9GHz at 1.4 volts. The funny rhing is that even at 1.4 volts temperatures while running Battlefield 1 was only 62-65 degrees max. And when I was running the same game with my 2700X with max volts at 1.32vCore temps were reching more than 80 degrees (Tdie) clockspeeds were higer at aroud 4150-4170MHz but should it be that much hotter with a lot less vCore? It just seems very strange to me and this is why I did this test in the first place!


Take 10°C off that you're probably closer to 70°C. I know my 2700x is slightly hotter in gaming then my 1700x, both need miskew enabled to show properly, the 1700 already reads temps correctly but if you have miskew set to auto then your CPU will read 10°C higher. You can check by idle temps, if they're close to room temp then temps are good, if it's not then you have the offset on.


----------



## Baio73

Alex K said:


> Anybody having this Ram kit: https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3600c16d-16gtz
> working on 2700x + CH7.
> Tried almost everything with DRAM Calc, can't get even 3200 CL14 stable.
> Seems like this RAM just refuses work with timings lower than CL16.


Hi Alek,
I don't know if we have the same RAM, as G.Skill uses a bounch of models… Here are mine (just loaded a predefined BIOS setting and then adjusted the speed manually), should be TridentZ F4-3600C15D:



Baio


----------



## edu616

VicsPC said:


> edu616 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I just did a very random test, my friend has a Ryzen 1700 I loaded all the default settings for the bios and put that guy on this board. I got it running stable at 3.9GHz at 1.4 volts. The funny rhing is that even at 1.4 volts temperatures while running Battlefield 1 was only 62-65 degrees max. And when I was running the same game with my 2700X with max volts at 1.32vCore temps were reching more than 80 degrees (Tdie) clockspeeds were higer at aroud 4150-4170MHz but should it be that much hotter with a lot less vCore? It just seems very strange to me and this is why I did this test in the first place!
> 
> 
> 
> Take 10°C off that you're probably closer to 70°C. I know my 2700x is slightly hotter in gaming then my 1700x, both need miskew enabled to show properly, the 1700 already reads temps correctly but if you have miskew set to auto then your CPU will read 10°C higher. You can check by idle temps, if they're close to room temp then temps are good, if it's not then you have the offset on.
Click to expand...

I still have the offset on and I was taking that in to account. I left HWinfo runing on the background to check temps Tdie after gaming and was seeing these temps. And yes I agree it runs a little bit hotter overall than the 1700 but I wouldn't think 20 degrees even tho is only on Battlefield 1 because like I said any other game runs a lot cooler. Thanks for your reply.

Is it Sense MI Skew and should it actually be disabled or enabled for X models because I was reading somewhere else that for X model at least first gen it needed to be disabled? Thanks?


----------



## edu616

majestynl said:


> *Guys currently investigating the "No downvolt" issue with P-states OC!!!*
> 
> Their are few people having this issue here on OCN and other forums and mostly they got answered by us their are doing something wrong etc etc. Even I answered same because I always got the downvolting working with P-states.
> 
> Last week I downgraded the bios to 0702 for testing purposes, and today I saw the post from a user having issues with P-states again. So I was thinking to write him back. Before that I just wanted to test the P-states OC again and I was surprised I got same issue. I was more then happy cause now I know it doesn't need to be something with missed settings. It probably happens or not.
> 
> Step by step I tried to debug whats causing the issue. Tried many different combinations and eventually I found out it is the FID setting. If I change it just with 1 grade the downvolting doesn't happen anymore. Downclocking as it should but no downvolting. When I only change the FID back to default setting (3700mhz) its downvolting again.
> 
> So their must be some kind of issue in bios/microcode etc what causing a certain lock. The strange parts is, it doesn't happen to everyone.
> 
> I need more time to investigate this. But the good part is, I can replicate this issue now..
> 
> Tested system: 2700x with 0702 bios. Before this I was on 0804. And I do no for sure my P-states OC on earlier bios version worked issueless.


I am new to this forum and also this board! So I tried to do Pstate OC and thought I was doing something wrong as I wasn't seeing any down volt. I got it to work as the clocks were down clocking fine not the voltage though! I'm currently on BIOS 0702. So if you ever find the issues let us know. Thanks!


----------



## Alex K

Baio73 said:


> Hi Alek,
> I don't know if we have the same RAM, as G.Skill uses a bounch of models… Here are mine (just loaded a predefined BIOS setting and then adjusted the speed manually), should be TridentZ F4-3600C15D:
> 
> 
> 
> Baio


Mine is CL16 & looks like it has B-DIE chips but low quality chips, tried yesterday SoC Voltage 0.913 & using profile V2 (which is for low quality b-die) from calculator which gives timings >= 16 & seems like got stable at 3446 CL16,
today will test 3533.


----------



## liakou

Alex K said:


> Anybody having this Ram kit: https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3600c16d-16gtz
> working on 2700x + CH7.
> Tried almost everything with DRAM Calc, can't get even 3200 CL14 stable.
> Seems like this RAM just refuses work with timings lower than CL16.


Hey buddy. Check my settings to see if they help you at all. I got the same kit just the RGB model running it stable @3466c14.
[email protected]
DRAM&[email protected]
CLDO [email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]

And my timings:


----------



## VicsPC

edu616 said:


> I still have the offset on and I was taking that in to account. I left HWinfo runing on the background to check temps Tdie after gaming and was seeing these temps. And yes I agree it runs a little bit hotter overall than the 1700 but I wouldn't think 20 degrees even tho is only on Battlefield 1 because like I said any other game runs a lot cooler. Thanks for your reply.
> 
> Is it Sense MI Skew and should it actually be disabled or enabled for X models because I was reading somewhere else that for X model at least first gen it needed to be disabled? Thanks?


For X models it should be enabled from what i gather on this thread, apparently leaving it on Auto is enabled but for me it did not work. As i have a temp sensor in one of my rads i can actually have a rough estimate of what idle temp should be. With it enabled i get around 30°C with a water temp of around 27°C (sill warm on the French Riviera here), with it disabled it's more like 40°C so for me enabled works.


----------



## Alex K

liakou said:


> Hey buddy. Check my settings to see if they help you at all. I got the same kit just the RGB model running it stable @3466c14.
> [email protected]
> DRAM&[email protected]
> CLDO [email protected]
> [email protected]
> [email protected]
> [email protected]
> 
> And my timings:


Probably will try, but it looks very similar to one of the presets I've tried.

How do you check stability?
I usually do about 10 cycles of TM5 with @1usmus config.


----------



## neikosr0x

edu616 said:


> I just did a very random test, my friend has a Ryzen 1700 I loaded all the default settings for the bios and put that guy on this board. I got it running stable at 3.9GHz at 1.4 volts. The funny rhing is that even at 1.4 volts temperatures while running Battlefield 1 was only 62-65 degrees max. And when I was running the same game with my 2700X with max volts at 1.32vCore temps were reching more than 80 degrees (Tdie) clockspeeds were higer at aroud 4150-4170MHz but should it be that much hotter with a lot less vCore? It just seems very strange to me and this is why I did this test in the first place!


ummmm windows maybe? don't know, sounds very very odd as i have bf1 and it was basically the same as all my other games.


----------



## liakou

Alex K said:


> liakou said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey buddy. Check my settings to see if they help you at all. I got the same kit just the RGB model running it stable @3466c14.
> [email protected]
> DRAM&[email protected]
> CLDO [email protected]
> [email protected]
> [email protected]
> [email protected]
> 
> And my timings:
> 
> 
> 
> Probably will try, but it looks very similar to one of the presets I've tried.
> 
> How do you check stability?
> I usually do about 10 cycles of TM5 with @1usmus config.
Click to expand...

I completed 8 passes of memtest86 and all cycles of TM5 with 0 errors.


----------



## MrPhilo

majestynl said:


> *Guys currently investigating the "No downvolt" issue with P-states OC!!!*
> 
> Their are few people having this issue here on OCN and other forums and mostly they got answered by us their are doing something wrong etc etc. Even I answered same because I always got the downvolting working with P-states.
> 
> Last week I downgraded the bios to 0702 for testing purposes, and today I saw the post from a user having issues with P-states again. So I was thinking to write him back. Before that I just wanted to test the P-states OC again and I was surprised I got same issue. I was more then happy cause now I know it doesn't need to be something with missed settings. It probably happens or not.
> 
> Step by step I tried to debug whats causing the issue. Tried many different combinations and eventually I found out it is the FID setting. If I change it just with 1 grade the downvolting doesn't happen anymore. Downclocking as it should but no downvolting. When I only change the FID back to default setting (3700mhz) its downvolting again.
> 
> So their must be some kind of issue in bios/microcode etc what causing a certain lock. The strange parts is, it doesn't happen to everyone.
> 
> I need more time to investigate this. But the good part is, I can replicate this issue now..
> 
> Tested system: 2700x with 0702 bios. Before this I was on 0804. And I do no for sure my P-states OC on earlier bios version worked issueless.


Thought it was weird how some people could downvolt and some couldn't. Hopefully we find a solution for this!


----------



## Keith Myers

*Works fine on The Stilt's [email protected] setting*



Alex K said:


> Anybody having this Ram kit: https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3600c16d-16gtz
> working on 2700x + CH7.
> Tried almost everything with DRAM Calc, can't get even 3200 CL14 stable.
> Seems like this RAM just refuses work with timings lower than CL16.


This was the first G. Skill memory kit I purchased for my 1700X and PrimePro. Working fine on the C7H and 2700X using The Stilt's 3466 CL14 @1.4 setting in the BIOS. No issues at all.:thumb:


----------



## crakej

I have 1700x and always disable Sensmi Skew. My temp reading from Tdie is always 20 degrees lower than Tctl


----------



## MNMadman

Alex K said:


> Anybody having this Ram kit: https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3600c16d-16gtz
> working on 2700x + CH7.
> Tried almost everything with DRAM Calc, can't get even 3200 CL14 stable.
> Seems like this RAM just refuses work with timings lower than CL16.


Got that kit. Sucks with my 2700X and C7H WiFi -- highest stable was 2933.

Got a G.Skill F4-3200C14Q-32GTZRX 4x8GB kit that I split into two 2x8GB kits. Both of them can do use The Stilt's 3466 1.4v preset (but with command rate set to 2T) with no issues. Completely stable using any stress test I throw at them.

Sucks that a 3600 B-die kit can't even do 3200 stable but two 3200 B-die kits can do 3466 (not using all four sticks). Oh well.


----------



## Alex K

liakou said:


> I completed 8 passes of memtest86 and all cycles of TM5 with 0 errors.


Looks like you're more lucky person than I am. Mine PC fails even to post with such low timings & voltage


----------



## Alex K

Keith Myers said:


> This was the first G. Skill memory kit I purchased for my 1700X and PrimePro. Working fine on the C7H and 2700X using The Stilt's 3466 CL14 @1.4 setting in the BIOS. No issues at all.:thumb:


Looks like you got lucky or I'm missing something.
BTW I thought it was stable, until I did 10 cycles with TM5 custom config, where on 7th or 8th cycle I think it failed 2 or 3 tests.


----------



## Alex K

MNMadman said:


> Got that kit. Sucks with my 2700X and C7H WiFi -- highest stable was 2933.
> 
> Got a G.Skill F4-3200C14Q-32GTZRX 4x8GB kit that I split into two 2x8GB kits. Both of them can do use The Stilt's 3466 1.4v preset (but with command rate set to 2T) with no issues. Completely stable using any stress test I throw at them.
> 
> Sucks that a 3600 B-die kit can't even do 3200 stable but two 3200 B-die kits can do 3466 (not using all four sticks). Oh well.


Got it stable on 3466, using V2 profile which is suggested for a low-quality B-DIE with custom SoC voltage at .903125V, but only with CL16 timings

But yeah, sure, a big disappointment for the kit which is positioned like high-end & costs above average.


----------



## MrPhilo

*Bios 0702 > 0804*

So yesterday I decided to go to 0702 as it had better memory performance than 0804, at least thats what most people said.

I was able to go over 2500% with 5 x 1000mb on HCI Memtest + heavy uses, like using chrome, browsing, playing cs go for the whole duration of the memtest.

I have found in my testing that doing 5 x 1000mb and heavy use triggers an error faster than doing 12 x 850mb, this is just from my experience.

3466CL14 Extreme Timing at 1.42v with 4.35Ghz at 1.413 - Temperature is around 44c (excuse the wallpaper )


Spoiler



https://imgur.com/a/6rGDeKq



I decided to go for 3533CL14 with the same setting but failed around 100%

I didn't want to loosen my timing as I just gave up with that and decided to see how far I can go with a BLCK overclock

3508CL14 with the same timings! At 1.44v instead now and the temperature is around 44c. so nothing changed?


Spoiler



https://imgur.com/a/NbTsXjx



So yeah really happy with my result, had good timing on 0804 with 3466CL14 but a lot better now!


----------



## Carolina Roots

I'm having trouble getting my CPU to boost past 3.9ghz. does anyone know what is should do to improve performance? Any settings not shown in these screen shots are set to auto. I've set my offset to +.1675 on my VCore and 1 on my SoC with no increase in performance. My CPU is a R5 2600 and my BIOS is 0804.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Carolina Roots said:


> I'm having trouble getting my CPU to boost past 3.9ghz. does anyone know what is should do to improve performance? Any settings not shown in these screen shots are set to auto. I've set my offset to +.1675 on my VCore and 1 on my SoC with no increase in performance. My CPU is a R5 2600 and my BIOS is 0804.





Go to Tool>Asus User Profile and go to where you save the bios settings to USB then hit Ctrl + F2 to save a .txt file of all the bios options and post that instead of those screen shots....they dont really tell me much. Well besides you arent going to go very far on the CPU voltage you have. 1.326v is low so you are likely held back by that. Change performance Bias to CB 11.5 too. Post that txt file so I can look at what type of setup you have. Dont mess with SoC as it isnt going to help your CPU frequency at all. That is related to the memory controller. Also tell me what you are looking to achieve as far as frequencies go.


----------



## CJMitsuki

MrPhilo said:


> So yesterday I decided to go to 0702 as it had better memory performance than 0804, at least thats what most people said.
> 
> I was able to go over 2500% with 5 x 1000mb on HCI Memtest + heavy uses, like using chrome, browsing, playing cs go for the whole duration of the memtest.
> 
> I have found in my testing that doing 5 x 1000mb and heavy use triggers an error faster than doing 12 x 850mb, this is just from my experience.



I dont know why everyone is so caught up on which program finds errors faster. If the software happens to be flawed and during heavy uses throws a false positive or just throws one every now and then but happens to be the first one to throw errors does that mean it is better? What if you had a corrupt driver or part of the Chrome install has some corruption? Any file being accessed by memory for that matter. If memory accesses a corrupt file it will throw an error but that wont necessarily mean the memory setup is the cause. SFC and DISM commands are great and all but they only look at the system files and windows updates. 3rd party files are left unchecked. I still stand by HCI Memtest Deluxe bootable. Too many things can cause memory errors in the OS. Ill still test within the OS but Im only confident after 10 hours of HCI bootable. It tests 99.8% of the Ram as well, so it gets more of the ram than any other program. Quick programs arent for testing full stability imo, only to test initial stability. To each their own though.


Correction, it only tests 99.5625% of the ram...


----------



## MrPhilo

CJMitsuki said:


> MrPhilo said:
> 
> 
> 
> So yesterday I decided to go to 0702 as it had better memory performance than 0804, at least thats what most people said.
> 
> I was able to go over 2500% with 5 x 1000mb on HCI Memtest + heavy uses, like using chrome, browsing, playing cs go for the whole duration of the memtest.
> 
> I have found in my testing that doing 5 x 1000mb and heavy use triggers an error faster than doing 12 x 850mb, this is just from my experience.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I dont know why everyone is so caught up on which program finds errors faster. If the software happens to be flawed and during heavy uses throws a false positive or just throws one every now and then but happens to be the first one to throw errors does that mean it is better? What if you had a corrupt driver or part of the Chrome install has some corruption? Any file being accessed by memory for that matter. If memory accesses a corrupt file it will throw an error but that wont necessarily mean the memory setup is the cause. SFC and DISM commands are great and all but they only look at the system files and windows updates. 3rd party files are left unchecked. I still stand by HCI Memtest Deluxe bootable. Too many things can cause memory errors in the OS. Ill still test within the OS but Im only confident after 10 hours of HCI bootable. It tests 99.8% of the Ram as well, so it gets more of the ram than any other program. Quick programs arent for testing full stability imo, only to test initial stability. To each their own though.
> 
> 
> Correction, it only tests 99.5625% of the ram...
Click to expand...

Well maybe you have plenty of time but I don't want to be waiting all day to get an error later on. The faster the better, no one wants to waste time and get 1000% coverage then an error after. Plus never said it was the fastest just from my own experience.

Also you still shouldn't be getting errors even with failed installation or corrupt file. You can test this with a 2133mhz ram and try it.


----------



## Carolina Roots

CJMitsuki said:


> Go to Tool>Asus User Profile and go to where you save the bios settings to USB then hit Ctrl + F2 to save a .txt file of all the bios options and post that instead of those screen shots....they dont really tell me much. Well besides you arent going to go very far on the CPU voltage you have. 1.326v is low so you are likely held back by that. Change performance Bias to CB 11.5 too. Post that txt file so I can look at what type of setup you have. Dont mess with SoC as it isnt going to help your CPU frequency at all. That is related to the memory controller. Also tell me what you are looking to achieve as far as frequencies go.


Thanks, the .txt file is a way better way to show my current settings! I made the suggested changes and haven't had any luck.

I'm looking to boost as high as the CPU will allow me to. I can do a manual all core OC to 4.1 ghz so I know there is more to be had in the XFR boost. 

Edit: Grammar and spelling

Edit 2: Uploaded new, current, bios setting .txt (labled 9-22-2018)


----------



## Alex K

BTW, guys, anybody tried this kit: G.Skill FlareX Black 16GB DDR4 Kit 3200 CL14 with 2700x & CH7?
I heard that it easy goes 3466 & even more with tight timings. I think it mb good to change my 3600kit, which even can't do 3200 with CL14-15 timings.


----------



## crakej

Alex K said:


> BTW, guys, anybody tried this kit: G.Skill FlareX Black 16GB DDR4 Kit 3200 CL14 with 2700x & CH7?
> I heard that it easy goes 3466 & even more with tight timings. I think it mb good to change my 3600kit, which even can't do 3200 with CL14-15 timings.


I wouldn't rush too much to dump that kit. At least wait for the next bios release which could make a considerable difference. Also, do you have GearDown enabed?


----------



## nick name

MrPhilo said:


> Well maybe you have plenty of time but I don't want to be waiting all day to get an error later on. The faster the better, no one wants to waste time and get 1000% coverage then an error after. Plus never said it was the fastest just from my own experience.
> 
> Also you still shouldn't be getting errors even with failed installation or corrupt file. You can test this with a 2133mhz ram and try it.


I saw The Stilt recommend using RAM Test by Karhu Software which I believe he said works faster due to it being a more recently produced and optimized program.


----------



## Alex K

crakej said:


> I wouldn't rush too much to dump that kit. At least wait for the next bios release which could make a considerable difference. Also, do you have GearDown enabed?


Nope, I don't want it to be enabled.
But when I was trying to overclock memory with lower timings I tried both enabled & disabled with the same result.


----------



## red-ray

*RTX 2080 USB Type-C Port Policy Controller Error Code 37*

I just installed my RTX 2080s and the USB Type-C Port Policy Controller reports Error Code 37. Has anyone else tried an RTX 2080 and if so do you get the same error code please?

I am running Beta BIOS 0012 08/27/2018, but I doubt this is a factor.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Alex K said:


> Nope, I don't want it to be enabled.
> But when I was trying to overclock memory with lower timings I tried both enabled & disabled with the same result.



Enabling gear down mode is minimal loss in performance with massive stability gains for the vast majority of cases ive seen. Post your specific model and your timings so I can see if theres a noticeable problem or if it could very well be the ram itself. BTW, that 3200c14 kit is a good kit as long as the silicon quality is decent.




Carolina Roots said:


> Thanks, the .txt file is a way better way to show my current settings! I made the suggested changes and haven't had any luck.
> 
> I'm looking to boost as high as the CPU will allow me to. I can do a manual all core OC to 4.1 ghz so I know there is more to be had in the XFR boost.
> 
> Edit: Grammar and spelling
> 
> Edit 2: Uploaded new, current, bios setting .txt (labled 9-22-2018)


 @Carolina Roots Im checking your configuration out, just woke up and looking it over. What memory do you have? Your timings seem good but there are some problems with some settings that may cause problems but I need to know the ram model and such. Im currently looking the cpu settings over, things do look ok for the most part though. That Soc voltage offset will cause stability issues with the memory though. Soc needs to be a set voltage and usually only changing if you need to with a frequency change or tightening timings. Generally memory likes a specific Soc at a specific freq and some like a specific Soc across all freqs. Soc is determined by the silicon therefore I cant give you a set value to work with but from 1.05v to 1.15v is the range you are looking for, favoring the lower end if your memory permits it. Start at 1.05v and then run memory testing, if it fails then bump it up one step and test again until you find the right Soc for that setup. Depending on what memory you are running you can get a decent OC on your memory but your frequency says Auto. Are you running DOCP? If so, then we will have to remedy that as well. Im gonna grab food and coffee and ill have you something to test here shortly. Just get me that info in the meantime.


----------



## Alex K

CJMitsuki said:


> Enabling gear down mode is minimal loss in performance with massive stability gains for the vast majority of cases ive seen. Post your specific model and your timings so I can see if theres a noticeable problem or if it could very well be the ram itself. BTW, that 3200c14 kit is a good kit as long as the silicon quality is decent.


 @CJMitsuki full Thaiphoon report in attached file, only stable @3466 with CL16. Model: G.Skill Trident Z 16GB DDR4 Kit 3600 CL16 (2x8GB) 16GTZ


----------



## CJMitsuki

Alex K said:


> @*CJMitsuki* full Thaiphoon report in attached file, only stable @3466 with CL16. Model: G.Skill Trident Z 16GB DDR4 Kit 3600 CL16 (2x8GB) 16GTZ



Nothing wrong with your ram other than it being the lower quality variant of B Die chips. Thats a respectable OC for that set of ram. If you want more then you may have to upgrade to the high quality B Die such as the flare X set you mentioned. All in all that ram you are running is fine other than what I mentioned.




MrPhilo said:


> Well maybe you have plenty of time but I don't want to be waiting all day to get an error later on. The faster the better, no one wants to waste time and get 1000% coverage then an error after. Plus never said it was the fastest just from my own experience.
> 
> Also you still shouldn't be getting errors even with failed installation or corrupt file. You can test this with a 2133mhz ram and try it.



If you arent testing the full amount of memory then you are never guaranteed to not get an error. Doesnt matter if you run 14gb at 100% or 1000000000% you are still only running 14gb of your ram or whatever the amount you are running is. I dont wait on my ram test, when I am heading to work in the morning I boot the ram test up and head to work. By the time I get home from work my ram is done testing thoroughly. No waiting. When something is sped up as these tests are you will lose something in the process. The tests use cpu caching most of the time to speed up these tests and that can also lead to errors. Ive seen all of this myself many times, faster isnt always the best and it surely doesnt guarantee stability of any kind. While it may be rare to get an error after 3000% testing with HCI or 10000 with RamTest or 10-20 cycles of TM5. I have seen it in all 3. Ive never seen that behavior from testing with the bootable test.


----------



## Alex K

CJMitsuki said:


> Nothing wrong with your ram other than it being the lower quality variant of B Die chips. Thats a respectable OC for that set of ram. If you want more then you may have to upgrade to the high quality B Die such as the flare X set you mentioned. All in all that ram you are running is fine other than what I mentioned.


That's literally the most frustrating part.
This is maximum of this kit. I can't go more on ram speed & I can't go with something like CL14 even on 3200.
So yeah, will think about changing it to Flare.

BTW, @CJMitsuki I have pretty good downvolt on that CPU: it can handle up to -0.08750 passing all tests without OC, right now working with -0.081 to ensure stability.
2 hrs OCCT passed with no errors, but MB always loops 3 times before starting to load on cold start, what can be the problem? 
Downvolt seems stable no matter what I throw in the CPU, tests or 3 hours video encoding it always work stable & no crashes.


----------



## nick name

Alex K said:


> That's literally the most frustrating part.
> This is maximum of this kit. I can't go more on ram speed & I can't go with something like CL14 even on 3200.
> So yeah, will think about changing it to Flare.
> 
> BTW, @CJMitsuki I have pretty good downvolt on that CPU: it can handle up to -0.08750 passing all tests without OC, right now working with -0.081 to ensure stability.
> 2 hrs OCCT passed with no errors, but MB always loops 3 times before starting to load on cold start, what can be the problem?
> Downvolt seems stable no matter what I throw in the CPU, tests or 3 hours video encoding it always work stable & no crashes.


Those boot loops sound like memory training and some people cure that with more DRAM voltage. What voltages are you running? I saw your SOC voltage you posted earlier, but what is the DRAM at? Also, have you tried setting the SOC to 1.1V?


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> Those boot loops sound like memory training and some people cure that with more DRAM voltage. What voltages are you running? I saw your SOC voltage you posted earlier, but what is the DRAM at? Also, have you tried setting the SOC to 1.1V?



Yeah, those are probably related to voltages and resistance values in the DRAM side of things. I had the same problems but tweaking ProcOdt, Cad_Bus, Rtt, and the DRAM and Soc voltages got rid of that.


----------



## Alex K

nick name said:


> Those boot loops sound like memory training and some people cure that with more DRAM voltage. What voltages are you running? I saw your SOC voltage you posted earlier, but what is the DRAM at? Also, have you tried setting the SOC to 1.1V?


I run 1.42V on RAM, less is not working.
Yes I tried different SOC voltages, but the one I'm currently running is the only one, where my RAM is stable. Setting it >1V, makes rum with current settings unstable.


----------



## Alex K

Remeberd when I had PRIME X470 I used another version of calc, 1.2.1 I think.
Downloaded 1.2.0, entered everything except SoC voltage, as my CPU really refuses overclock RAM with SoC higher than 1V.
Voltage on RAM 1.405V, Boot 1.415V.

LOL, less voltage, better timings.
10 cycles of TM5 + 50 min of RunMemtest_3.5. Rock stable. No cold boot loops.
Looks like Dram Calc 1.3.1 digits just do not suite my system.


----------



## Carolina Roots

CJMitsuki
[USER=610506 said:


> @Carolina Roots[/USER] Im checking your configuration out, just woke up and looking it over. What memory do you have? Your timings seem good but there are some problems with some settings that may cause problems but I need to know the ram model and such. Im currently looking the cpu settings over, things do look ok for the most part though. That Soc voltage offset will cause stability issues with the memory though. Soc needs to be a set voltage and usually only changing if you need to with a frequency change or tightening timings. Generally memory likes a specific Soc at a specific freq and some like a specific Soc across all freqs. Soc is determined by the silicon therefore I cant give you a set value to work with but from 1.05v to 1.15v is the range you are looking for, favoring the lower end if your memory permits it. Start at 1.05v and then run memory testing, if it fails then bump it up one step and test again until you find the right Soc for that setup. Depending on what memory you are running you can get a decent OC on your memory but your frequency says Auto. Are you running DOCP? If so, then we will have to remedy that as well. Im gonna grab food and coffee and ill have you something to test here shortly. Just get me that info in the meantime.


 @CJMitsuki You, sir, are a champion of the people.

My memory kit is G.Skill Trident Z RGB 3200Mhz CL14. The model is F4-3200C14D-16GTZRX. The kit is definitely b-die and single rank. I was running DOCP, but then I realized that may be messing with things so I changed to manual and entered all of the DOCP timings, I also tightened a few of them as well, and I set the frequency to 3200Mhz. Do you want me to upload a new .txt file for you to look at? I haven't had any time to do any stress testing, but it seems to have booted fine and there arent any quirks yet. We'll see how it like Total War: Warhammer 2 :upsidedwn


----------



## MNMadman

Carolina Roots said:


> My memory kit is G.Skill Trident Z RGB 3200Mhz CL14. The model is F4-3200C14D-16GTZRX. The kit is definitely b-die and single rank. I was running DOCP, but then I realized that may be messing with things so I changed to manual and entered all of the DOCP timings, I also tightened a few of them as well, and I set the frequency to 3200Mhz. Do you want me to upload a new .txt file for you to look at? I haven't had any time to do any stress testing, but it seems to have booted fine and there arent any quirks yet. We'll see how it like Total War: Warhammer 2 :upsidedwn


I split my F4-3200C14Q-32GTZRX (bought for Threadripper) into two 2x8 kits. Both of the kits (not four sticks at once) run at The Stilt's 3466 1.4v preset, with either Gear Down Mode enabled and 1T command rate (tCL set to 14) or Gear Down Mode disabled and 2T command rate. I have been able to fine-tune other timings down from the preset as well. And yes, I have all of the memory timings set manually. I set everything I can manually in other sections of the BIOS too, as long as the settings are explained well enough.

Give it a try and see whether yours works with The Stilt's 3466 preset.


----------



## elmor

majestynl said:


> *Guys currently investigating the "No downvolt" issue with P-states OC!!!*
> 
> Their are few people having this issue here on OCN and other forums and mostly they got answered by us their are doing something wrong etc etc. Even I answered same because I always got the downvolting working with P-states.
> 
> Last week I downgraded the bios to 0702 for testing purposes, and today I saw the post from a user having issues with P-states again. So I was thinking to write him back. Before that I just wanted to test the P-states OC again and I was surprised I got same issue. I was more then happy cause now I know it doesn't need to be something with missed settings. It probably happens or not.
> 
> Step by step I tried to debug whats causing the issue. Tried many different combinations and eventually I found out it is the FID setting. If I change it just with 1 grade the downvolting doesn't happen anymore. Downclocking as it should but no downvolting. When I only change the FID back to default setting (3700mhz) its downvolting again.
> 
> So their must be some kind of issue in bios/microcode etc what causing a certain lock. The strange parts is, it doesn't happen to everyone.
> 
> I need more time to investigate this. But the good part is, I can replicate this issue now..
> 
> Tested system: 2700x with 0702 bios. Before this I was on 0804. And I do no for sure my P-states OC on earlier bios version worked issueless.



It's a change in the AGESA, now if you enter "OC Mode" (P0 ratio above default) it will lock the VID at the same as P0.


----------



## Carolina Roots

MNMadman said:


> I split my F4-3200C14Q-32GTZRX (bought for Threadripper) into two 2x8 kits. Both of the kits (not four sticks at once) run at The Stilt's 3466 1.4v preset, with either Gear Down Mode enabled and 1T command rate (tCL set to 14) or Gear Down Mode disabled and 2T command rate. I have been able to fine-tune other timings down from the preset as well. And yes, I have all of the memory timings set manually. I set everything I can manually in other sections of the BIOS too, as long as the settings are explained well enough.
> 
> Give it a try and see whether yours works with The Stilt's 3466 preset.


My system was NOT a fan of that. It refused to get past the UEFI screen, let alone make it to the windows boot :doh:


----------



## majestynl

elmor said:


> It's a change in the AGESA, now if you enter "OC Mode" (P0 ratio above default) it will lock the VID at the same as P0.


hehe that explains a lot ! Lol.. i knew it wasn't something with bios settings. Anyways.. Thanks AGESA for spending hours !

Just to be clear... this means there is no downvolting opportunity for Pstates OC anymore! ?


----------



## elmor

majestynl said:


> hehe that explains a lot ! Lol.. i knew it wasn't something with bios settings. Anyways.. Thanks AGESA for spending hours !
> 
> Just to be clear... this means there is no downvolting opportunity for Pstates OC anymore! ?


I think this situation calls for further explanation.

On Ryzen CPUs, at least currently, there are 3 different P-states with different FID/DID (frequency) and VID (voltage). When the frequency is increased above the default base frequency (for example 3.7GHz on 2700X), the CPU will enter "OC Mode" which disables any power limits, CPB, XFR etc. In recent AGESA versions, "OC Mode" also prevents the CPU from requesting a lower VID than what P0 is set to. This means that the CPU will keep switching between the different P-states with different frequencies, but the voltage will be fixed at the P0 VID.

On top of this, there are also C-states. C-states are deeper power saving states which triggers functions like clock gating essentially turning off cores or other parts of the chip. If the chip enters a state where all cores are turned off, the CPU may also request the Vcore VRM output to turn off momentarily. This happens within milliseconds (maybe even microseconds, have not measured it) and is not noticeable to the user. What you will notice that the the reported CPU Core Voltage will read very low values around ~0.4V, which is an average value. If the CPU Core voltage is 0V for 1ms, then ramps up to 0.8V and stays there for 1ms, the average reading will most likely be around 0.4V.

It's still possible to use C-states while in "OC Mode", which means that you can still have some power savings and something that looks like "downvolting" while overclocked. To enable C-states, set AMD CBS\Zen Common Options\Global C-state Control = Enabled in BIOS. A side note on this is that when the CPU requests the Vcore VRM to turn off, it can reset any fixed override voltage that's been set. This means that you should not use Global C-state Control together with Vcore in Manual Mode.


----------



## Deyjandi

I have a problem with HAMP fans and manual fan profile. I m using bios 702. It seems that fans that are connected to HAMP headers are always following cpu temperature even if I set T_Sensor. I want HAMP fans to act according to T_Sensor temperatures. I have a thermal sensor and its reporting temperature correctly. I managed to set the other fan profiles based on the T_Sensor reading except HAMP fans. I never installed AI Suite in my system. I saved my current bios profile -> restored defaults -> reboot -> load my profile -> issue persists

What is going on?!


----------



## CJMitsuki

Carolina Roots said:


> @CJMitsuki You, sir, are a champion of the people.
> 
> My memory kit is G.Skill Trident Z RGB 3200Mhz CL14. The model is F4-3200C14D-16GTZRX. The kit is definitely b-die and single rank. I was running DOCP, but then I realized that may be messing with things so I changed to manual and entered all of the DOCP timings, I also tightened a few of them as well, and I set the frequency to 3200Mhz. Do you want me to upload a new .txt file for you to look at? I haven't had any time to do any stress testing, but it seems to have booted fine and there arent any quirks yet. We'll see how it like Total War: Warhammer 2 :upsidedwn


Sorry about not getting back to you sooner. Was called in to work for an emergency so I will have you something here as soon as I get home. You can upload another if you want but I can work out what the new settings are from your post.


----------



## Sn0ops

Hello Guys,

im quite new to AMD Ryzen, as I used Intel / Nvidia over many years. But im glad I swept over 
The performance especially in Gaming - better frametimes, smoother gameplay etc. is really nice!

-However there is problem with my PC since I got it. Sometimes when booting the system (cold start) - I didnt even reach the BIOS Menue. The system stucks and I get the Qcode error: "0D"
This happens 1 1/2 month ago when I bought the system more often. At the moment the last time I got this error was one week ago.

-> After hitting the reset button. Im getting back to normal boot - i get the message that there was problem with my Memory (RAM). In Bios my Ram Profile is set to 2400 MHZ 1,2V.
After restart again my Ram is back to normal 3200 MHZ DOCP @1.36V

-It also happens when I turned my PC on, it just turns off instantantly and then restarts.

Yesterday my PC was crashing completely. It just turns off completly.

Is this a faulty Motherboard, do I need to RMA? Or what could be the cause for it?

You need further information?

BIOS Version: 804 (CMOS cleared after Update)
Bios Settings changed:

XHCI Handoff = disabled
Ram Settings = docp
Dram Voltage = 1,36
Fast Startup = disabled

This is my Setup:

CPU: RYZEN 2700X
RAM: 16 GB G.Skill Flare X (3200 MhZ - CL 14)
Motherboard: ASUS Crosshair Hero VII
GFX: Saphire RX Vega 56 + Nitro
PSU: Seasonic Prime - 750 Watt 
Cooler: Water Cooled by Artic Liquid Freezer 360
OS: WIN 10 - 1803 (fast startup = disabled)

THAHNKS for your help!


----------



## kazablanka

Sn0ops said:


> Hello Guys,
> 
> im quite new to AMD Ryzen, as I used Intel / Nvidia over many years. But im glad I swept over
> The performance especially in Gaming - better frametimes, smoother gameplay etc. is really nice!
> 
> -However there is problem with my PC since I got it. Sometimes when booting the system (cold start) - I didnt even reach the BIOS Menue. The system stucks and I get the Qcode error: "0D"
> This happens 1 1/2 month ago when I bought the system more often. At the moment the last time I got this error was one week ago.
> 
> -> After hitting the reset button. Im getting back to normal boot - i get the message that there was problem with my Memory (RAM). In Bios my Ram Profile is set to 2400 MHZ 1,2V.
> After restart again my Ram is back to normal 3200 MHZ DOCP @1.36V
> 
> -It also happens when I turned my PC on, it just turns off instantantly and then restarts.
> 
> Yesterday my PC was crashing completely. It just turns off completly.
> 
> Is this a faulty Motherboard, do I need to RMA? Or what could be the cause for it?
> 
> You need further information?
> 
> BIOS Version: 804 (CMOS cleared after Update)
> Bios Settings changed:
> 
> XHCI Handoff = disabled
> Ram Settings = docp
> Dram Voltage = 1,36
> Fast Startup = disabled
> 
> This is my Setup:
> 
> CPU: RYZEN 2700X
> RAM: 16 GB G.Skill Flare X (3200 MhZ - CL 14)
> Motherboard: ASUS Crosshair Hero VII
> GFX: Saphire RX Vega 56 + Nitro
> PSU: Seasonic Prime - 750 Watt
> Cooler: Water Cooled by Artic Liquid Freezer 360
> OS: WIN 10 - 1803 (fast startup = disabled)
> 
> THAHNKS for your help!


In which dimms have you plug your ram sticks? A1-B1 or A2-B2 ?


----------



## Sn0ops

Im using 100% A2 -B2 as stated in the manual


----------



## Syldon

Sn0ops said:


> Hello Guys,
> 
> im quite new to AMD Ryzen, as I used Intel / Nvidia over many years. But im glad I swept over
> The performance especially in Gaming - better frametimes, smoother gameplay etc. is really nice!
> 
> -However there is problem with my PC since I got it. Sometimes when booting the system (cold start) - I didnt even reach the BIOS Menue. The system stucks and I get the Qcode error: "0D"
> This happens 1 1/2 month ago when I bought the system more often. At the moment the last time I got this error was one week ago.
> 
> -> After hitting the reset button. Im getting back to normal boot - i get the message that there was problem with my Memory (RAM). In Bios my Ram Profile is set to 2400 MHZ 1,2V.
> After restart again my Ram is back to normal 3200 MHZ DOCP @1.36V
> 
> -It also happens when I turned my PC on, it just turns off instantantly and then restarts.
> 
> Yesterday my PC was crashing completely. It just turns off completly.
> 
> Is this a faulty Motherboard, do I need to RMA? Or what could be the cause for it?
> 
> You need further information?
> 
> BIOS Version: 804 (CMOS cleared after Update)
> Bios Settings changed:
> 
> XHCI Handoff = disabled
> Ram Settings = docp
> Dram Voltage = 1,36
> Fast Startup = disabled
> 
> This is my Setup:
> 
> CPU: RYZEN 2700X
> RAM: 16 GB G.Skill Flare X (3200 MhZ - CL 14)
> Motherboard: ASUS Crosshair Hero VII
> GFX: Saphire RX Vega 56 + Nitro
> PSU: Seasonic Prime - 750 Watt
> Cooler: Water Cooled by Artic Liquid Freezer 360
> OS: WIN 10 - 1803 (fast startup = disabled)
> 
> THAHNKS for your help!


Try setting memory to 1.37v. I had exactly the same issue. It turned out that the auto setting for memory was undervolting the memroy slightly. Enough to cause boot up errors.


----------



## Sn0ops

Syldon said:


> Try setting memory to 1.37v. I had exactly the same issue. It turned out that the auto setting for memory was undervolting the memroy slightly. Enough to cause boot up errors.


Thanks for the tip! I will try this!


----------



## tekjunkie28

Sn0ops said:


> Hello Guys,
> 
> im quite new to AMD Ryzen, as I used Intel / Nvidia over many years. But im glad I swept over
> The performance especially in Gaming - better frametimes, smoother gameplay etc. is really nice!
> 
> -However there is problem with my PC since I got it. Sometimes when booting the system (cold start) - I didnt even reach the BIOS Menue. The system stucks and I get the Qcode error: "0D"
> This happens 1 1/2 month ago when I bought the system more often. At the moment the last time I got this error was one week ago.
> 
> -> After hitting the reset button. Im getting back to normal boot - i get the message that there was problem with my Memory (RAM). In Bios my Ram Profile is set to 2400 MHZ 1,2V.
> After restart again my Ram is back to normal 3200 MHZ DOCP @1.36V
> 
> -It also happens when I turned my PC on, it just turns off instantantly and then restarts.
> 
> Yesterday my PC was crashing completely. It just turns off completly.
> 
> Is this a faulty Motherboard, do I need to RMA? Or what could be the cause for it?
> 
> You need further information?
> 
> BIOS Version: 804 (CMOS cleared after Update)
> Bios Settings changed:
> 
> XHCI Handoff = disabled
> Ram Settings = docp
> Dram Voltage = 1,36
> Fast Startup = disabled
> 
> This is my Setup:
> 
> CPU: RYZEN 2700X
> RAM: 16 GB G.Skill Flare X (3200 MhZ - CL 14)
> Motherboard: ASUS Crosshair Hero VII
> GFX: Saphire RX Vega 56 + Nitro
> PSU: Seasonic Prime - 750 Watt
> Cooler: Water Cooled by Artic Liquid Freezer 360
> OS: WIN 10 - 1803 (fast startup = disabled)
> 
> THAHNKS for your help!


Me and you have almost the exact same system except I have The H100iv1 and a gtx 1070sc. I was running that ram a 14-14-14-28 with fairly tight subtimings at 1.36V with no issues. Also the SOC and Vcore were undervolted and I was running performance level 2. I am now testing 3466mhz with tight timings and going fairly well. Dram voltage is at 1.4V now but I havnt tested lower yet. SoC voltage is currently running 1.05v.


----------



## edu616

Greetings,

Recently I have been having this issues that when my computer gets out of sleep it gives me q code 06 on the board. I have been running with the same settings for a while now but it started doing this for the past two days. Anyone with the same problemw?


----------



## majestynl

elmor said:


> I think this situation calls for further explanation.
> 
> On Ryzen CPUs, at least currently, there are 3 different P-states with different FID/DID (frequency) and VID (voltage). When the frequency is increased above the default base frequency (for example 3.7GHz on 2700X), the CPU will enter "OC Mode" which disables any power limits, CPB, XFR etc. In recent AGESA versions, "OC Mode" also prevents the CPU from requesting a lower VID than what P0 is set to. This means that the CPU will keep switching between the different P-states with different frequencies, but the voltage will be fixed at the P0 VID.
> 
> On top of this, there are also C-states. C-states are deeper power saving states which triggers functions like clock gating essentially turning off cores or other parts of the chip. If the chip enters a state where all cores are turned off, the CPU may also request the Vcore VRM output to turn off momentarily. This happens within milliseconds (maybe even microseconds, have not measured it) and is not noticeable to the user. What you will notice that the the reported CPU Core Voltage will read very low values around ~0.4V, which is an average value. If the CPU Core voltage is 0V for 1ms, then ramps up to 0.8V and stays there for 1ms, the average reading will most likely be around 0.4V.
> 
> It's still possible to use C-states while in "OC Mode", which means that you can still have some power savings and something that looks like "downvolting" while overclocked. To enable C-states, set AMD CBS\Zen Common Options\Global C-state Control = Enabled in BIOS. A side note on this is that when the CPU requests the Vcore VRM to turn off, it can reset any fixed override voltage that's been set. This means that you should not use Global C-state Control together with Vcore in Manual Mode.


The whole situation began after we heard from several users the downvolting wasn't working as they expected. Because some of us knewed this was working on earlier agesa versions there where a lot of discussions to help those people. 

Anyways.. now we know how the new agesa is handeling the P-states for sure. And you are right about the 0.4v, saw that behavior many times while testing the P-states with C states.

Thanks.


----------



## elmor

C7H BIOS 1001 

- Still AGESA 1.0.0.2
- ACPI WMI sensor interface v2 (should not cause fan lockups together with updated software)
- Fixed HAMP FAN source can't be set properly
- Supposedly fixes issues with some keyboards not working in UEFI
- Other fixes as well, but nothing that was mentioned here IIRC

C7H https://www.mediafire.com/file/o1o1h7qsr7k4hj3/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-1001.zip/file
C7H WIFI https://www.mediafire.com/file/c4464e6d2uemxdd/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-1001.zip/file


----------



## hurricane28

elmor said:


> C7H BIOS 1001
> 
> - Still AGESA 1.0.0.2
> - ACPI WMI sensor interface v2 (should not cause fan lockups together with updated software)
> - Fixed HAMP FAN source can't be set properly
> - Supposedly fixes issues with some keyboards not working in UEFI
> - Other fixes as well, but nothing that was mentioned here IIRC
> 
> C7H https://www.mediafire.com/file/o1o1h7qsr7k4hj3/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-1001.zip/file
> C7H WIFI https://www.mediafire.com/file/c4464e6d2uemxdd/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-1001.zip/file


Thnx Elmor, will test later. Can you tell us why this is still AGESA 02 instead of 04? All other manufacturers are on AGESA 04 except we.


----------



## elmor

hurricane28 said:


> Thnx Elmor, will test later. Can you tell us why this is still AGESA 02 instead of 04? All other manufacturers are on AGESA 04 except we.



We're going straight for 1.0.0.6, target is end of October.


----------



## hurricane28

elmor said:


> We're going straight for 1.0.0.6, target is end of October.


Finally some good news. thnx man, much obliged.

Will flash and test BIOS later.


----------



## crakej

elmor said:


> C7H BIOS 1001
> 
> - Still AGESA 1.0.0.2
> - ACPI WMI sensor interface v2 (should not cause fan lockups together with updated software)
> - Fixed HAMP FAN source can't be set properly
> - Supposedly fixes issues with some keyboards not working in UEFI
> - Other fixes as well, but nothing that was mentioned here IIRC
> 
> C7H https://www.mediafire.com/file/o1o1h7qsr7k4hj3/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-1001.zip/file
> C7H WIFI https://www.mediafire.com/file/c4464e6d2uemxdd/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-1001.zip/file


Thanks @elmor - much appreciated. 

I wanted to ask, what is the problem with sleep not working on these boards? Is it going to be fixed soon?

Edit: I must say, so far all good with WMI - all neat and reporting well - even if my voltages are STILL wrong!


----------



## elmor

crakej said:


> Thanks @elmor - much appreciated. /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> I wanted to ask, what is the problem with sleep not working on these boards? Is it going to be fixed soon?
> 
> Edit: I must say, so far all good with WMI - all neat and reporting well - even if my voltages are STILL wrong!


Pretty sure sleep is working. Something with your specific system? Try with a fresh install if you can.

Which of your voltages are reported wrongly?


----------



## lordzed83

Finally Toysss thanks Elmor


----------



## nick name

elmor said:


> We're going straight for 1.0.0.6, target is end of October.


My birthday is in October. I can't wait to get older now.


----------



## hurricane28

elmor said:


> C7H BIOS 1001
> 
> - Still AGESA 1.0.0.2
> - ACPI WMI sensor interface v2 (should not cause fan lockups together with updated software)
> - Fixed HAMP FAN source can't be set properly
> - Supposedly fixes issues with some keyboards not working in UEFI
> - Other fixes as well, but nothing that was mentioned here IIRC
> 
> C7H https://www.mediafire.com/file/o1o1h7qsr7k4hj3/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-1001.zip/file
> C7H WIFI https://www.mediafire.com/file/c4464e6d2uemxdd/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-1001.zip/file


Running BIOS 1001, seems fine so far. Its not that important, But still this board boots quite slow compared to other ones, is there a way to make it faster? I helped my nephew with his 990FX Sabertooth and boot times are dramatically faster compared to this one. Is there a way to make it faster or is that not possible? Or is it because of all the memory training and all the settings?

Its my birthday too this month, 22 to be precise. Would be awesome if new BIOS released on that day, would be one awesome gift if there is anything to be excited about in the first place lol.


----------



## nick name

Does anyone know what to expect out of AGESA 1.0.0.6? From what I've read -- it's been out a while and a lot of its RAM timing features seem to already be implemented in the CH7 BIOS so what new options should we expect?


----------



## Overspark

crakej said:


> Thanks @elmor - much appreciated.
> 
> I wanted to ask, what is the problem with sleep not working on these boards? Is it going to be fixed soon?


Sleep has been working fine for me in Win10 from the start.

That said, I have a problem where our PC's are too eager to get out of sleep. We have 2 similar PC's here next to each other, one for the wife and one for me, both with a C7H and a 2600X. They both sleep fine, but if you wake one up there's like a 60% chance the other one will wake up within a minute or so as well. They didn't do that before I upgraded the mobo+cpu+ram. Anyone have an idea where to look for a solution? They're currently on BIOS 0804 but have been behaving like this from day one.


----------



## Praetorr

Overspark said:


> Sleep has been working fine for me in Win10 from the start.
> 
> That said, I have a problem where our PC's are too eager to get out of sleep. We have 2 similar PC's here next to each other, one for the wife and one for me, both with a C7H and a 2600X. They both sleep fine, but if you wake one up there's like a 60% chance the other one will wake up within a minute or so as well. They didn't do that before I upgraded the mobo+cpu+ram. Anyone have an idea where to look for a solution? They're currently on BIOS 0804 but have been behaving like this from day one.


For me, the solution was turning wake-on-LAN functionality off on my ethernet port.

e.g., https://www.howtogeek.com/170716/how-to-stop-network-activity-from-waking-your-windows-pc/


----------



## kidstronger

elmor said:


> C7H BIOS 1001
> 
> - Still AGESA 1.0.0.2
> - ACPI WMI sensor interface v2 (should not cause fan lockups together with updated software)
> - Fixed HAMP FAN source can't be set properly
> - Supposedly fixes issues with some keyboards not working in UEFI
> - Other fixes as well, but nothing that was mentioned here IIRC
> 
> C7H https://www.mediafire.com/file/o1o1h7qsr7k4hj3/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-1001.zip/file
> C7H WIFI https://www.mediafire.com/file/c4464e6d2uemxdd/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-1001.zip/file


thanks for share bro


----------



## crakej

elmor said:


> Pretty sure sleep is working. Something with your specific system? Try with a fresh install if you can.
> 
> Which of your voltages are reported wrongly?


Thanks for getting back. As far as voltages go, they were not being reported correctly in the bios or in HWINFO - image attached showing difference between AUSuite and HWINFO. Bios seems fine now (1001) but still this difference in the WMI section. It's fine in the section in blue. On the Prime Pro these (WMI) voltages were reported correctly, so threw me a bit at first.

You may be right about the sleep problem, though I do remember some time back someone recommending not to use sleep or hybrid sleep for some reason. Of course I may be wrong. System doesn't always go to sleep properly, displays do their things and sleep, but machine still running. I have wondered if it might be the GFX driver and my RX580 that's not playing nicely with it..... maybe I need to check if wake on lan is enabled as well as packets from my server might be keeping it awake....


----------



## MacG32

Edited: Wrong information.


----------



## numlock66

MacG32 said:


> https://www.anandtech.com/show/11447/amd-announces-ryzen-agesa-1006-update
> 
> https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=AGESA-1.0.0.6b-Update


This links talk about old agesa already released.


----------



## MacG32

numlock66 said:


> This links talk about old agesa already released.



I answered someone's question. Of course they have already been released, but they are not in the current BIOS for this motherboard. Please read and understand what's been posted. Thanks...


----------



## numlock66

MacG32 said:


> numlock66 said:
> 
> 
> 
> This links talk about old agesa already released.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I answered someone's question. Of course they have already been released, but they are not in the current BIOS for this motherboard. Please read and understand what's been posted. Thanks...
Click to expand...

I understood that he is asking about the promise elmor said about jumping to this agesa, not the old one.


----------



## Praetorr

MacG32 said:


> I answered someone's question. Of course they have already been released, but they are not in the current BIOS for this motherboard. Please read and understand what's been posted. Thanks...


There's a difference between Summit Ridge AGESA (what you posted) and the presently actively updated Pinnacle Pi AGESA...

Please read and understand how AMD AGESA naming works. Thanks...


----------



## MacG32

numlock66 said:


> I understood that he is asking about the promise elmor said about jumping to this agesa, not the old one.



My fault for not looking at the dates of the articles posted, as there are no other returns for searches about AGESA 1.0.0.6. You would think there would be more information posted about PinnaclePI-AM4 AGESA. Sorry for the misinformation.



Praetorr said:


> There's a difference between Summit Ridge AGESA (what you posted) and the presently actively updated Pinnacle Pi AGESA...
> 
> Please read and understand how AMD AGESA naming works. Thanks...



My fault, your mistake...


----------



## Praetorr

Whatever helps you sleep at night.


----------



## Overspark

Praetorr said:


> For me, the solution was turning wake-on-LAN functionality off on my ethernet port.
> 
> e.g., https://www.howtogeek.com/170716/how-to-stop-network-activity-from-waking-your-windows-pc/


Hah, that seems to have done the trick. Thank you very much! Never imagined the defaults would be so stupid, which is why I never checked the WoL settings...


----------



## Elrick

Just need to ask this question regarding this Crosshair VII.

How many hard disk drives can you attach onto this motherboard, if you already have a 2280 Samsung 970 Pro nvme working in the M2_2 slot (next to the first PCiE Graphics Card slot)?

Only another owner would know this and please let me know soon as I have about five, 8TB drives needing desperately to hook up with this motherboard.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Elrick said:


> Just need to ask this question regarding this Crosshair VII.
> 
> How many hard disk drives can you attach onto this motherboard, if you already have a 2280 Samsung 970 Pro nvme working in the M2_2 slot (next to the first PCiE Graphics Card slot)?
> 
> Only another owner would know this and please let me know soon as I have about five, 8TB drives needing desperately to hook up with this motherboard.



Why dont you have it in the M2_1 slot below the chipset? Already have another in that slot? As far as how many you can attach that depends on how you want to connect them. The mobo has 6 sata 3 connections and 2 m.2 connections. Plus you can buy extension cards. As far as maximum support, I think that is determined by your partition table which will have to be GPT and I can guarantee you wont be able to reach that maximum which is something ridiculous like 18 exobytes and 128 partitions. Im pretty sure you are good to go as long as you arent planning on running MBR. If they are sata just hook them up and you should be fine as long as the correct drivers and partition table is used for drives of that size. Other than that, I havent seen any limitations for the motherboard itself.


----------



## Elrick

CJMitsuki said:


> Why dont you have it in the M2_1 slot below the chipset? Already have another in that slot? As far as how many you can attach that depends on how you want to connect them. The mobo has 6 sata 3 connections and 2 m.2 connections.


I've just connected a total of 5 Hard drives plus one Blu-ray burner (have to use).

So all 6 sata connections have shown up on the desktop, using the very first Nvme socket (with OS installed) closest to the CPU.

Thank you for helping.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Elrick said:


> I've just connected a total of 5 Hard drives plus one Blu-ray burner (have to use).
> 
> So all 6 sata connections have shown up on the desktop, using the very first Nvme socket (with OS installed) closest to the CPU.
> 
> Thank you for helping.



The M2_2 slot shares lanes with the top PCIe slot. If you move it to the lower M2_1 slot then you can utilize its full potential without sharing lanes with your GPU.


----------



## Elrick

CJMitsuki said:


> The M2_2 slot shares lanes with the top PCIe slot. If you move it to the lower M2_1 slot then you can utilize its full potential without sharing lanes with your GPU.



I'm not gaming at all, hence no need for full 16x speeds.


Unless of course, future versions of Windows 10 require it :devil-smi .


----------



## elbubi

Hi @elmor!


First of all, thanks for your dedication and support. Happy to see agesa 1.0.0.6 is nearly coming, hope it helps improving memory timmings a bit.

I'm overall satisfied with my CH7 Wi-Fi performance, altough faster boot times would be nice tbh.

The only "bug" I found is that Intel Ethernet port stops responding to WOL magic packets after aprox. 24hs of computer being shutdown in power-off state (S5). In S3 it works just fine no matter how long it has been sleeping, but in S5 it works for some period (sometimes a day, sometimes less/more), but then it stops responding and only physical power-on is possible.

I have another machine on my LAN with asus board and intel nic (olders one though), with exactly same os and settings, and it doesn't behave this way.

Having use Wake on Lan/Wan for more than 10 years, I'm aware of all the "tricks" to make it work under power-off state (green lan, power saving options, windows fast boot, arp/mac fix binding entry on router's side, open ports, ddns, etc.), so I'm 99.9% confident is not an end user issue.

I've tried 5 different driver versions so I kind of ruled that out too, only remaining thing to think of is a BIOS issue.

I post it here cause I really don't know how to reach Asus engineers to have them look at this in order to have it solved.


Kindest regards and thanks in advance!


----------



## ewetzlma

*1700X Questions*

Hi, I just upgraded from a very cheap MSI Tomahawk B350 to this absolutely fantastic and luxury board and i have a few questions. 

Bios Version 0804, Windows installation is the same as with my MSI board (just switched the board and did not install anything new)

1.) I can not finde the "Performance Enhancer" option in the bios. Is this only available for Zen+ ?
2.) when I overclock my memory to eg 3600Mhz, the CPU does not boost to 3.9Ghz anymore. Is this a bug?

Thanks in advance!
Br, 

Erich


----------



## crakej

ewetzlma said:


> Hi, I just upgraded from a very cheap MSI Tomahawk B350 to this absolutely fantastic and luxury board and i have a few questions.
> 
> Bios Version 0804, Windows installation is the same as with my MSI board (just switched the board and did not install anything new)
> 
> 1.) I can not finde the "Performance Enhancer" option in the bios. Is this only available for Zen+ ?
> 2.) when I overclock my memory to eg 3600Mhz, the CPU does not boost to 3.9Ghz anymore. Is this a bug?
> 
> Thanks in advance!
> Br,
> 
> Erich


1) There is no PE mode for us, it's for Zen+
2) Not sure. Have you installed the AMD chipset drivers?


----------



## Elrick

No were else to post this question but here so please be patient with me.

Everything on my Crosshair VII works but did anyone notice that the Network Socket which remains lit as Orange, stays on even when the PC is shut down over night?

Kind of creepy seeing this orange led is left on despite the whole PC being switched off. All of my previous (AMD) MSI, Asrock, Gigabyte and earlier Asus motherboards never had this persistent led on the Network socket, being on permanently.

The only way to shut it off is to disconnect the UPS power going into the PC.

Just would like to know is there now some kind of setting in the Bios that I need to turn off or on, to remove that never ending light on my Network Socket when the PC is turned off?


----------



## HolyFist

Anyone knows what AGESA 1006 does? I mean the new one, cheers!


----------



## ewetzlma

crakej said:


> 1) There is no PE mode for us, it's for Zen+
> 2) Not sure. Have you installed the AMD chipset drivers?


Yes, the chipset driver was/is installed already. I'll try to install Windows on a fresh disk so that I can test if this bug has something to do with not installind Windows new after switching from B350 to X470. 

Second questions: so the best way to overclock a 1700X is to manually set the multiplier and voltage? 

Thanks


----------



## Sn0ops

Latest Bios 1001 which @elmor has given to us is super stable - my random shut downs when having a cold start are comepletly gone! No other problems occured.

I have a serious questions concerning for current Windows Version 1803 with Asus Crosshair Heri VII board and a Ryzen 2700x concerning the following.
My Focus is low input lag gaming with nice audio / video sync.

Which are the best settings for Windows 10 18003 (im running UEFI Mode / GPT) for the following:

useplatformclock
useplatformtick
tscsyncpolicy
disabledynamictick

HPET in Device Manager (enabled / disabled)


So far I just changed bcdedit /set useplatoformclock false - games feels even faster and more responsive on my 240 HZ display.

How ever there is no real guide or even with a technical proofed data which settings are best for AMD Ryzen Processor with Asus board, also regarding that you cannot shut down HPET in Asus Bios.

I hope somebody who is really aware and more deep into this topic could help me !

Thanks in advance.


PS: I guess on Windows 10 Redstone 5 - the answer to my questions would be diffrent, as they change the Queryperformancefrequency to 10 MHZ for Intel and AMD user.

___________________________

My System:

XHCI Handoff = disabled
Ram Settings = docp
Dram Voltage = 1,36
Fast Startup = disabled

This is my Setup:

CPU: RYZEN 2700X
RAM: 16 GB G.Skill Flare X (3200 MhZ - CL 14)
Motherboard: ASUS Crosshair Hero VII
GFX: Saphire RX Vega 56 + Nitro
PSU: Seasonic Prime - 750 Watt 
Cooler: Water Cooled by Artic Liquid Freezer 360
OS: WIN 10 - 1803 (fast startup = disabled)


----------



## kazablanka

Oh they manage to fix the fan problems on their 300euros board! Thank you guys but now i have sold this s..t 
Can you make it overclock the cpu too?


----------



## hurricane28

lol, its not the board that Ryzen doesn't want to overclock dude.. But even then, my 2600x clocks up to 4.250 GHz Stable, that's quite significant from 3.6 GHz stock if you ask me.. Its not Asus, MSI or gigabyte man, its AMD that is holding overclocks back with AGESA and the newer AGESA allows for higher RAM overclocking, not sure on the CPU though. 

A friend of mine who is also an member on this forum also had complaints about his Asus x470 strix board and stability, he went to Gigabyte and he claims no issues anymore. The one thing that is rather annoying is the bus speed change quite a lot compared to other board manufactures which is no biggy but rather annoying. His Gigabyte board doesn't have this and the clock speed is much more stable now. 

Although i do no longer have fan speed issues but when i run Aida64 in the background i do get significant latency with my mouse movement.. I only get this with Aida64 though, hardwareinfo no issues.


----------



## kazablanka

Ι am running the cpu now on a prime x470pro , 4.2ghz with 1.38v , with crosshair i had to push the voltage up to 1.425v to be stable. 
Prime x470 pro : 4.3ghz with 1.46v (just for benchmarking could run every benchmark i tried.
Crosshair :4.3ghz with 1.46v - crashed
4.3ghz with 1.525v one run of cinebench at the second run it crushed... the super high wow overclocking motherboard!!!
As far as memory overclocking prime clocks the memory as high as crosshair.
I sold this board i purchase the prime and i kept the change


----------



## MNMadman

kazablanka said:


> Ι am running the cpu now on a prime x470pro , 4.2ghz with 1.38v , with crosshair i had to push the voltage up to 1.425v to be stable.
> Prime x470 pro : 4.3ghz with 1.46v (just for benchmarking could run every benchmark i tried.
> Crosshair :4.3ghz with 1.46v - crashed
> 4.3ghz with 1.525v one run of cinebench at the second run it crushed... the super high wow overclocking motherboard!!!
> As far as memory overclocking prime clocks the memory as high as crosshair.
> I sold this board i purchase the prime and i kept the change


OMG! THANK YOU for posting this! We're all going to return our C7H boards and switch to the Prime X470 Pro board TODAY!

Glad you had a positive experience with a different board ... now get off our lawn.


----------



## kazablanka

MNMadman said:


> kazablanka said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ι am running the cpu now on a prime x470pro , 4.2ghz with 1.38v , with crosshair i had to push the voltage up to 1.425v to be stable.
> Prime x470 pro : 4.3ghz with 1.46v (just for benchmarking could run every benchmark i tried.
> Crosshair :4.3ghz with 1.46v - crashed
> 4.3ghz with 1.525v one run of cinebench at the second run it crushed... the super high wow overclocking motherboard!!!
> As far as memory overclocking prime clocks the memory as high as crosshair.
> I sold this board i purchase the prime and i kept the change
> 
> 
> 
> OMG! THANK YOU for posting this! We're all going to return our C7H boards and switch to the Prime X470 Pro board TODAY!
> 
> Glad you had a positive experience with a different board ... now get off our lawn. /forum/images/smilies/tongue.gif
Click to expand...

Ι was talking to hurricane 28 not to you mister... if you dont like what iam writting just dont read it...


----------



## nick name

kazablanka said:


> Ι am running the cpu now on a prime x470pro , 4.2ghz with 1.38v , with crosshair i had to push the voltage up to 1.425v to be stable.
> Prime x470 pro : 4.3ghz with 1.46v (just for benchmarking could run every benchmark i tried.
> Crosshair :4.3ghz with 1.46v - crashed
> 4.3ghz with 1.525v one run of cinebench at the second run it crushed... the super high wow overclocking motherboard!!!
> As far as memory overclocking prime clocks the memory as high as crosshair.
> I sold this board i purchase the prime and i kept the change





MNMadman said:


> OMG! THANK YOU for posting this! We're all going to return our C7H boards and switch to the Prime X470 Pro board TODAY!
> 
> Glad you had a positive experience with a different board ... now get off our lawn.



I had the X470 Prime before this board and I could hit higher overclocks on it than I could on my CH7. I actually made a post on it when I first got this board because I figured this CH7 would OC higher than the Prime.


----------



## nick name

kazablanka said:


> Ι am running the cpu now on a prime x470pro , 4.2ghz with 1.38v , with crosshair i had to push the voltage up to 1.425v to be stable.
> Prime x470 pro : 4.3ghz with 1.46v (just for benchmarking could run every benchmark i tried.
> Crosshair :4.3ghz with 1.46v - crashed
> 4.3ghz with 1.525v one run of cinebench at the second run it crushed... the super high wow overclocking motherboard!!!
> As far as memory overclocking prime clocks the memory as high as crosshair.
> I sold this board i purchase the prime and i kept the change





MNMadman said:


> OMG! THANK YOU for posting this! We're all going to return our C7H boards and switch to the Prime X470 Pro board TODAY!
> 
> Glad you had a positive experience with a different board ... now get off our lawn.


I am jealous of those RAM timings and speed. How much did that kit cost?


----------



## Alex K

nick name said:


> I had the X470 Prime before this board and I could hit higher overclocks on it than I could on my CH7. I actually made a post on it when I first got this board because I figured this CH7 would OC higher than the Prime.


Confirmed, can't tell about CPU, but my RAM was overclocking 100000% better on prime than on Crosshair VII. The only reason why I changed to CH7 from Prime 470 is that VRM was cooking on Prime with my 2700x.


----------



## crakej

My OC was a little higher with an earlier bios..... should be remedied with AGESA 1.0.0.6

I'm curios what settings you tried on the CH7 @kazablanka? The Prime Pro may just be filling in settings correctly for you that weren't right on the CH7?

The CH7 has many more settings available, much better VRMs and power delivery and ability to change settings not available to Prime Pro users without a modded bios.


----------



## kazablanka

nick name said:


> I am jealous of those RAM timings and speed. How much did that kit cost?


Its not a stable overclock but is ok for benchmarks ,its gskill tridentz f4 4000c18d costs about 280euros ina my country.



Alex K said:


> Confirmed, can't tell about CPU, but my RAM was overclocking 100000% better on prime than on Crosshair VII. The only reason why I changed to CH7 from Prime 470 is that VRM was cooking on Prime with my 2700x.


 Yes crosshair has super vrm cooling ,but i am about to put an ek monoblock so i dont care about it.



crakej said:


> My OC was a little higher with an earlier bios..... should be remedied with AGESA 1.0.0.6
> 
> I'm curios what settings you tried on the CH7 @kazablanka? The Prime Pro may just be filling in settings correctly for you that weren't right on the CH7?
> 
> The CH7 has many more settings available, much better VRMs and power delivery and ability to change settings not available to Prime Pro users without a modded bios.


Dude do you remember the lower core voltage we needed with the prime x370 pro? So with the prime x470 pro is the same thing. Yes crosshair has better vrms ,but only this for me. Crosshair's bios settings except the bulk ,is all useless for my cpu and memory overclock. There no dram boot voltage in prime but the memory clocks same and better at prime without dram boot voltage and with no need of extra settings
The settings wasn't the problem for the overclock the board was...


----------



## CJMitsuki

kazablanka said:


> nick name said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am jealous of those RAM timings and speed. How much did that kit cost?
> 
> 
> 
> Its not a stable overclock but is ok for benchmarks ,its gskill tridentz f4 4000c18d costs about 280euros ina my country.
> 
> 
> 
> Alex K said:
> 
> 
> 
> Confirmed, can't tell about CPU, but my RAM was overclocking 100000% better on prime than on Crosshair VII. The only reason why I changed to CH7 from Prime 470 is that VRM was cooking on Prime with my 2700x.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes crosshair has super vrm cooling ,but i am about to put an ek monoblock so i dont care about it.
> 
> 
> 
> crakej said:
> 
> 
> 
> My OC was a little higher with an earlier bios..... should be remedied with AGESA 1.0.0.6
> 
> I'm curios what settings you tried on the CH7 @kazablanka? The Prime Pro may just be filling in settings correctly for you that weren't right on the CH7?
> 
> The CH7 has many more settings available, much better VRMs and power delivery and ability to change settings not available to Prime Pro users without a modded bios.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Dude do you remember the lower core voltage we needed with the prime x370 pro? So with the prime x470 pro is the same thing. Yes crosshair has better vrms ,but only this for me. Crosshair's bios settings except the bulk ,is all useless for my cpu and memory overclock. There no dram boot voltage in prime but the memory clocks same and better at prime without dram boot voltage and with no need of extra settings
> The settings wasn't the problem for the overclock the board was...
Click to expand...

Not sure what you guys are smoking before you overclock your cpu but I have my 2700x clocked 4.45ghz daily setup and I frequently run 4.56ghz for hours and hours benching on a Corsair H115i AIO. 4.56ghz takes about 1.58v for a heavy benchmark such as CB15 and 4.45 ghz runs at about 1.44v. Sounds like user error or chip isn’t up to the task. C7H is probably one of the best for high overclocking as it was built for handling high voltages and extreme cooling. I also had a Prime Pro and I now use it to level my desk up on one corner. That’s about all it was good for. If my 2700x were to even get within 5 feet of a Prime Pro the board would probably spontaneously combust. Havent had a problem with memory overclocking either but the C7H isn’t the best choice for memory overclocking. I can still run 3533c14 at tight timings and have been able to ever since the 2700x was released.


----------



## eXteR

CJMitsuki said:


> Not sure what you guys are smoking before you overclock your cpu but I have my 2700x clocked 4.45ghz daily setup and I frequently run 4.56ghz for hours and hours benching on a Corsair H115i AIO. 4.56ghz takes about 1.58v for a heavy benchmark such as CB15 and 4.45 ghz runs at about 1.44v. Sounds like user error or chip isn’t up to the task. C7H is probably one of the best for high overclocking as it was built for handling high voltages and extreme cooling. I also had a Prime Pro and I now use it to level my desk up on one corner. That’s about all it was good for. If my 2700x were to even get within 5 feet of a Prime Pro the board would probably spontaneously combust. Havent had a problem with memory overclocking either but the C7H isn’t the best choice for memory overclocking. I can still run 3533c14 at tight timings and have been able to ever since the 2700x was released.


Since when CB15 is a Heavy Benchmark? 

Realbench is a more suitable benchmark to test real world stability. CB15 only last few seconds.

You can also try to encode a Bluray using Handbrake and then tell us if 4.56Ghz is doable at that voltage and AIO kit.

I highly doubt it.


----------



## kazablanka

CJMitsuki said:


> Not sure what you guys are smoking before you overclock your cpu but I have my 2700x clocked 4.45ghz daily setup and I frequently run 4.56ghz for hours and hours benching on a Corsair H115i AIO. 4.56ghz takes about 1.58v for a heavy benchmark such as CB15 and 4.45 ghz runs at about 1.44v. Sounds like user error or chip isn’t up to the task. C7H is probably one of the best for high overclocking as it was built for handling high voltages and extreme cooling. I also had a Prime Pro and I now use it to level my desk up on one corner. That’s about all it was good for. If my 2700x were to even get within 5 feet of a Prime Pro the board would probably spontaneously combust. Havent had a problem with memory overclocking either but the C7H isn’t the best choice for memory overclocking. I can still run 3533c14 at tight timings and have been able to ever since the 2700x was released.


I am curious to see a screenshot with your 4.45ghz overclock @ 1.44v running prime95


----------



## CJMitsuki

eXteR said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure what you guys are smoking before you overclock your cpu but I have my 2700x clocked 4.45ghz daily setup and I frequently run 4.56ghz for hours and hours benching on a Corsair H115i AIO. 4.56ghz takes about 1.58v for a heavy benchmark such as CB15 and 4.45 ghz runs at about 1.44v. Sounds like user error or chip isn’t up to the task. C7H is probably one of the best for high overclocking as it was built for handling high voltages and extreme cooling. I also had a Prime Pro and I now use it to level my desk up on one corner. That’s about all it was good for. If my 2700x were to even get within 5 feet of a Prime Pro the board would probably spontaneously combust. Havent had a problem with memory overclocking either but the C7H isn’t the best choice for memory overclocking. I can still run 3533c14 at tight timings and have been able to ever since the 2700x was released.
> 
> 
> 
> Since when CB15 is a Heavy Benchmark?
> 
> Realbench is a more suitable benchmark to test real world stability. CB15 only last few seconds.
> 
> You can also try to encode a Bluray using Handbrake and then tell us if 4.56Ghz is doable at that voltage and AIO kit.
> 
> I highly doubt it.
Click to expand...

I run HWBOT x265 4K benchmark that is more intensive than those. CB15 puts a lot of quick stress on the cpu, if it doesn’t have ample voltage it will freeze almost immediately so yes, it is intensive. Prime95 isn’t really that bad. Even IBT is harsher than P95. If you want to see the 4K benchmark proof it’s easily searchable on HWBOT.org. I have the same name on there. Plenty of benchmarks to see and lay your doubts on. Fact is that Ryzen 2700x is easily capable of those clocks if you set it up correctly. There are others on here that do it as well. It’s not like this chip is the only one. The C7H can max out LLC and the VRMs never even get warm. Even Buildzoid said everything about the board is massive overkill. If you still think the x470 Prime is better then not sure what to tell you. It’s probably better at memory OC but to say that it’s better at CPU OC is so far from the truth it’s laughable. It’s not even close.


----------



## kazablanka

CJMitsuki said:


> I run HWBOT x265 4K benchmark that is more intensive than those. CB15 puts a lot of quick stress on the cpu, if it doesn’t have ample voltage it will freeze almost immediately so yes, it is intensive. Prime95 isn’t really that bad. Even IBT is harsher than P95.


So can we have a ss running prime95 for about half an hour


----------



## CJMitsuki

kazablanka said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> I run HWBOT x265 4K benchmark that is more intensive than those. CB15 puts a lot of quick stress on the cpu, if it doesn’t have ample voltage it will freeze almost immediately so yes, it is intensive. Prime95 isn’t really that bad. Even IBT is harsher than P95.
> 
> 
> 
> So can we have a ss running prime95 for about half an hour /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif
Click to expand...

Once I get home this evening I’ll run it for 30 min for you. Not sure what you think is going to happen. Literally been benching this setup almost nightly for the past couple months without problems and no overheating. Even told you where to find the proof. I shouldn’t have taken you seriously once you mentioned Realbench. Thought you were trolling at first but now I realize that’s not the case.


----------



## kazablanka

CJMitsuki said:


> I run HWBOT x265 4K benchmark that is more intensive than those. CB15 puts a lot of quick stress on the cpu, if it doesn’t have ample voltage it will freeze almost immediately so yes, it is intensive. Prime95 isn’t really that bad. Even IBT is harsher than P95. If you want to see the 4K benchmark proof it’s easily searchable on HWBOT.org. I have the same name on there. Plenty of benchmarks to see and lay your doubts on. Fact is that Ryzen 2700x is easily capable of those clocks if you set it up correctly. There are others on here that do it as well. It’s not like this chip is the only one. The C7H can max out LLC and the VRMs never even get warm. Even Buildzoid said everything about the board is massive overkill. If you still think the x470 Prime is better then not sure what to tell you. It’s probably better at memory OC but to say that it’s better at CPU OC is so far from the truth it’s laughable. It’s not even close.


Benchmaking is benchmarking ,stability is something different , an ι could do 4.3ghz with 1.6v with a r7 1700 on a prime x370 pro just for spi and 4.2ghz for some other benchmarks but the chip couldn't be stable over 4ghz. 
With the same 1700 on crosshair the cpu couldn't overclock over 4150mhz 4175mhz ,maybe only my board had issues but i dont know man.

http://hwbot.org/submission/3785296_chris_k_superpi___1m_ryzen_7_1700_8sec_954ms


----------



## kazablanka

double post


----------



## CJMitsuki

kazablanka said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> I run HWBOT x265 4K benchmark that is more intensive than those. CB15 puts a lot of quick stress on the cpu, if it doesn’t have ample voltage it will freeze almost immediately so yes, it is intensive. Prime95 isn’t really that bad. Even IBT is harsher than P95. If you want to see the 4K benchmark proof it’s easily searchable on HWBOT.org. I have the same name on there. Plenty of benchmarks to see and lay your doubts on. Fact is that Ryzen 2700x is easily capable of those clocks if you set it up correctly. There are others on here that do it as well. It’s not like this chip is the only one. The C7H can max out LLC and the VRMs never even get warm. Even Buildzoid said everything about the board is massive overkill. If you still think the x470 Prime is better then not sure what to tell you. It’s probably better at memory OC but to say that it’s better at CPU OC is so far from the truth it’s laughable. It’s not even close.
> 
> 
> 
> Benchmaking is benchmarking ,stability is something different , an ι could do 4.3ghz with 1.6v with a r7 1700 on a prime x370 pro just for spi and 4.2ghz for some other benchmarks but the chip couldn't be stable over 4ghz.
> With the same 1700 on crosshair the cpu couldn't overclock over 4150mhz 4175mhz ,maybe only my board had issues but i dont know man.
> 
> http://hwbot.org/submission/3785296_chris_k_superpi___1m_ryzen_7_1700_8sec_954ms
Click to expand...

Why link a SuperPi 1m benchmark? Go do the same thing with HWBOT x265 at 2x Overkill mode @4k and tell me it doesn’t murder your cpu. That’s literally an 8 second benchmark you linked so it’s not even a fair comparison to any heavy benchmark. Quite possibly one of the lightest benchmarks on HWBOT is SuperPi 1m. Good submission though. I still have a 1700x that I haven’t opened yet. It was a RMA from a segfault bugged one I got during Ryzen launch.


----------



## Johan45

I do understand their point CJ, I'm of the same mind it's close enough for my bench machine, my HTPC, on the other hand, is rock solid just because I don't want to re-install Winders every week as I do on my bench. Here's your requested benchmark but this is not a stable 24/7 overclock.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Johan45 said:


> I do understand their point CJ, I'm of the same mind it's close enough for my bench machine, my HTPC, on the other hand, is rock solid just because I don't want to re-install Winders every week as I do on my bench. Here's your requested benchmark but this is not a stable 24/7 overclock.


I’m just trying to say that the C7H isn’t bad for Cpu OC. The Prime Pro isn’t better, on paper or in the real world. 
You beat my FPS by .44, try the x32 or x64 instruction set with it. I saw better numbers using one of those along with the typical Zen instruction sets. Btw, how is your chiller set up? Homemade?
As far as installing Windows repeatedly I made a decent custom ISO last night and I have some scripts that strip the harder to get rid of things and another script to change the settings to what I want. Install takes like 10 min. It will be less now bc I have it backed up to Acronis and I can just boot into their recovery and slap the clean OS back on the drive in a couple min. I just need a good XP SP3 image but that’s harder than I thought it would be.


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> Not sure what you guys are smoking before you overclock your cpu but I have my 2700x clocked 4.45ghz daily setup and I frequently run 4.56ghz for hours and hours benching on a Corsair H115i AIO. 4.56ghz takes about 1.58v for a heavy benchmark such as CB15 and 4.45 ghz runs at about 1.44v. Sounds like user error or chip isn’t up to the task. C7H is probably one of the best for high overclocking as it was built for handling high voltages and extreme cooling. I also had a Prime Pro and I now use it to level my desk up on one corner. That’s about all it was good for. If my 2700x were to even get within 5 feet of a Prime Pro the board would probably spontaneously combust. Havent had a problem with memory overclocking either but the C7H isn’t the best choice for memory overclocking. I can still run 3533c14 at tight timings and have been able to ever since the 2700x was released.


Yeah I can't get anywhere close to what you can get. I was never able to figure out why my CPU would get to 4.3GHz on my previous Prime board, but I can't get it that high on the CH7 and I gave up asking and searching. I was just hoping to hit 2000 points on cinebench, but I gave up on that too. 

I was using a higher BCLK for a bit, but gave up on that also because of the higher single core boosts above 4.35GHz would lock up my system and I couldn't find enough offset to make it stable.


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure what you guys are smoking before you overclock your cpu but I have my 2700x clocked 4.45ghz daily setup and I frequently run 4.56ghz for hours and hours benching on a Corsair H115i AIO. 4.56ghz takes about 1.58v for a heavy benchmark such as CB15 and 4.45 ghz runs at about 1.44v. Sounds like user error or chip isn’t up to the task. C7H is probably one of the best for high overclocking as it was built for handling high voltages and extreme cooling. I also had a Prime Pro and I now use it to level my desk up on one corner. That’s about all it was good for. If my 2700x were to even get within 5 feet of a Prime Pro the board would probably spontaneously combust. Havent had a problem with memory overclocking either but the C7H isn’t the best choice for memory overclocking. I can still run 3533c14 at tight timings and have been able to ever since the 2700x was released.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah I can't get anywhere close to what you can get. I was never able to figure out why my CPU would get to 4.3GHz on my previous Prime board, but I can't get it that high on the CH7 and I gave up asking and searching. I was just hoping to hit 2000 points on cinebench, but I gave up on that too.
> 
> I was using a higher BCLK for a bit, but gave up on that also because of the higher single core boosts above 4.35GHz would lock up my system and I couldn't find enough offset to make it stable.
Click to expand...

I would’ve RMA the board as it could’ve been a hardware problem. Were you running LLC to stabilize the voltage? What type of PSU were you using? What about the cooling? Was it hitting 80c consistently?


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> I would’ve RMA the board as it could’ve been a hardware problem. Were you running LLC to stabilize the voltage? What type of PSU were you using? What about the cooling? Was it hitting 80c consistently?


Same EVGA 650 G3 and a Thermaltake (Asetek) 360 AIO. And yes I was running LLC on the Prime and my CH7 board. That was honestly the only thing I could think of being a reason for different OC levels. 

And yeah it was hitting 80*C at those higher clocks in cinebench.


----------



## crakej

kazablanka said:


> Dude do you remember the lower core voltage we needed with the prime x370 pro? So with the prime x470 pro is the same thing. Yes crosshair has better vrms ,but only this for me. Crosshair's bios settings except the bulk ,is all useless for my cpu and memory overclock. There no dram boot voltage in prime but the memory clocks same and better at prime without dram boot voltage and with no need of extra settings
> The settings wasn't the problem for the overclock the board was...


Yes, I do, then there was a bios update and suddenly it needed (a little) more voltage....not much more though. X370 wouldn't allow decent ram speeds so higher CPU OC was easier. When I take into account the extra ram speed and the extra voltage needed for that, it's about the same higher voltage than on my x370 Pro after said bios update. I can attain the same 4.2GHz cpu OC I could before if I don't run ram at +=3533.


----------



## crakej

CJMitsuki said:


> I would’ve RMA the board as it could’ve been a hardware problem. Were you running LLC to stabilize the voltage? What type of PSU were you using? What about the cooling? Was it hitting 80c consistently?


I concur - this doesn't sound right at all....


----------



## crakej

kazablanka said:


> Benchmaking is benchmarking ,stability is something different , an ι could do 4.3ghz with 1.6v with a r7 1700 on a prime x370 pro just for spi and 4.2ghz for some other benchmarks but the chip couldn't be stable over 4ghz.
> With the same 1700 on crosshair the cpu couldn't overclock over 4150mhz 4175mhz ,maybe only my board had issues but i dont know man.
> 
> http://hwbot.org/submission/3785296_chris_k_superpi___1m_ryzen_7_1700_8sec_954ms


I can run my 1700x at 4.2GHz stable on the Prime Pro until the bios update I mention elswhere, and I can on this if I don't go over 3466 on the ram. If I were to try 1.5v my cpu would no doubt go quyicker, but I do't have adequate cooling for that.

Temps of 80 degrees are higher than need be.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I concur - this doesn't sound right at all....


That seems to be the only thing that might be "wrong" with the board. I am, otherwise, very happy with it. I can't imagine Asus would deem the board defective simply because it didn't hit the same overclocks as my previous Asus Prime board. I was assuming there was some feature of the CH7 that didn't exist on the Prime I needed to adjust, but never ended up finding it.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> That seems to be the only thing that might be "wrong" with the board. I am, otherwise, very happy with it. I can't imagine Asus would deem the board defective simply because it didn't hit the same overclocks as my previous Asus Prime board. I was assuming there was some feature of the CH7 that didn't exist on the Prime I needed to adjust, but never ended up finding it.


Well, this board is designed for OCers, so it's worth a try. You shouldn't be getting temps as high as 80 though - might be worth trying re-fitting the cooler....i've done this before and it made a huge difference..... I had used too much paste...

It's frustrating I know - but it does seem things aren't working as they should for you.....


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Well, this board is designed for OCers, so it's worth a try. You shouldn't be getting temps as high as 80 though - might be worth trying re-fitting the cooler....i've done this before and it made a huge difference..... I had used too much paste...
> 
> It's frustrating I know - but it does seem things aren't working as they should for you.....


So running at 4.25GHz in Cinebench shouldn't get me 80*C? 1.387V get up to 81*C towards the end of the cinebench run.

I have also re-seated the AIO and re-applied paste several times. I actually spread the paste over the IHS with my finger to ensure full coverage, but not too much paste. And it's good Noctua paste. 

What do your temps get to at similar speeds and voltage in cinebench?



Edit:

Oh and I reached out to Asus and the rep is going to escalate my question/concern to their engineering team and get back to me.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> So running at 4.25GHz in Cinebench shouldn't get me 80*C? 1.387V get up to 81*C towards the end of the cinebench run.
> 
> I have also re-seated the AIO and re-applied paste several times. I actually spread the paste over the IHS with my finger to ensure full coverage, but not too much paste. And it's good Noctua paste.
> 
> What do your temps get to at similar speeds and voltage in cinebench?


In summer I was topping out at about 72 degrees. Less now.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> In summer I was topping out at about 72 degrees. Less now.


Which cooler do you use? And that was on a 2700X?


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> So running at 4.25GHz in Cinebench shouldn't get me 80*C? 1.387V get up to 81*C towards the end of the cinebench run.
> 
> I have also re-seated the AIO and re-applied paste several times. I actually spread the paste over the IHS with my finger to ensure full coverage, but not too much paste. And it's good Noctua paste.
> 
> What do your temps get to at similar speeds and voltage in cinebench?
> 
> 
> 
> Edit:
> 
> Oh and I reached out to Asus and the rep is going to escalate my question/concern to their engineering team and get back to me.


"I actually spread the paste over the IHS with my finger to ensure full coverage, but not too much paste." You did not just say that.. 

There is no need to spread the TIM (thermal interface material) man.. clean the CPU top and clean your waterblock with alcohol and apply a little pea sized dot in the middle of the CPU and just mount the cooler again and let it spread te paste for you. There really is no need to spread the TIM as most of the brands spread easily and if you have thick paste that can't be spread with the cooler its time to get something better in the first place.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> "I actually spread the paste over the IHS with my finger to ensure full coverage, but not too much paste." You did not just say that..
> 
> There is no need to spread the TIM (thermal interface material) man.. clean the CPU top and clean your waterblock with alcohol and apply a little pea sized dot in the middle of the CPU and just mount the cooler again and let it spread te paste for you. There really is no need to spread the TIM as most of the brands spread easily and if you have thick paste that can't be spread with the cooler its time to get something better in the first place.


There is nothing wrong with my application technique. Is it absolutely necessary? No, but there is also nothing wrong with it.

Edit:

And I use Noctua paste.


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> hurricane28 said:
> 
> 
> 
> "I actually spread the paste over the IHS with my finger to ensure full coverage, but not too much paste." You did not just say that..
> 
> There is no need to spread the TIM (thermal interface material) man.. clean the CPU top and clean your waterblock with alcohol and apply a little pea sized dot in the middle of the CPU and just mount the cooler again and let it spread te paste for you. There really is no need to spread the TIM as most of the brands spread easily and if you have thick paste that can't be spread with the cooler its time to get something better in the first place.
> 
> 
> 
> There is nothing wrong with my application technique. Is it absolutely necessary? No, but there is also nothing wrong with it.
> 
> Edit:
> 
> And I use Noctua paste.
Click to expand...

Hmm, those are high temps for sure. Maybe high ambient? I have really low ambient temps and I use Conductanaut on the cpu and Kryonaut on the GPU. I use a Corsair H115i Pro 280mm with 4 Noctua 140mm AF-14 in Push/Pull, 2 of the same fans as a top case exhaust, 1 as a rear case exhaust, and a Noctua AF-20 200mm intake fan on the side. The central A/C in my home blows cool air into the rad and throughout the case assuring it always stays cool. When the A/C is running My idle temps are about 20c on the cpu and I may see 65-70c at 4.56ghz benching but my daily 4.45ghz setup runs nicely even with no A/C. 22 ambient temps usually produce around 40c idle and I see about 75c during heavy benchmarks. My fans are the industrial grade fans that can go to 3000rpm if need be but I have them to run 80% max when the cpu hits 65c. This is all in a Silverstone RL06 case which according to Gamers Nexus is one of the best cases for airflow so I assume the liquid metal with my 7x140mm and 1x200mm Noctuas produce amazing airflow and cooling and even more so once I utilize a nearby A/C vent to route cool air into the case. I also modded the side panel directly behind the cpu socket by cutting a hole the size of a 140mm fan and drilled holes to be able to mount a fan to blow directly onto the back of the cpu socket if need be. Socket temps are fine though so not needed as of yet. With my fans and 1080ti I am probably pushing the limit of my 850watt PSU but I need to measure the wattage at the wall. If you are running a 1080ti with a 2700x and fans etc you could be pushing that 650watt as well but Idk for sure. I’m thinking about just hooking up my secondary 650watt PSU and running some of the hardware on it to make sure I’m not getting voltage instability due to maxing the PSU out. Your instability doesn’t sound like it’s related to voltage but rather temps getting higher than normal and causing instability. You should be very comfortable with temps using that setup at your voltage. Maybe airflow is a factor? I’ve found that it made a huge difference on my temps by having a slightly positive pressure in my case and having my rad on the front pulling in cool air and making sure I had really nice fans capable of pushing a large volume of air if I needed it but whisper quiet at idle. I also have the inner rad fans triggered by the coolant temps and the outer fans on the cpu thermal as well as the rest of the fans monitoring cpu thermals.


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> -Snip-.



I appreciate you being so descriptive. The Thermaltake 360 AIO I have is set up in push/pull also, but I guess there might be something else that isn't up to the task of pulling heat off the IHS. It's the standard Asetek type AIO from 2016 so I was operating under the assumption it would be just as good as any other Asetek made AIO. Perhaps their newer ones perform better?


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Which cooler do you use? And that was on a 2700X?


MasterLiquid 240, Liquid Metal. 1700X

I would also recommend using pea sized (or less) blob in centre of cpu with paste - always been most reliable method for me. It often takes me a couple of applications to get it right. I can't help thinking this could be your problem. If/when you do that, have a look when you remove cooler - the layer of paste should be very very thin. Your cooler is more than adequate.


----------



## Keith Myers

I wish I could get the temps and cpu OC's that you guys are benchmarking. The best I can do is ~4.0 - 4.05Ghz all cores all the time running BOINC/Seti cpu/gpu tasks 24/7. I have mostly Corsair H110i AIO's with Noctua AF-14 IPPC 2000 fans and one custom loop system with dual 360mm rads. I mostly run from 70-80° C. on the 2700X cpus on C7H platforms. The cpus are running around 1.33Vcpu Each system has 3-4 gpus mostly comprising 1070's, 1080's and 1080Ti's. The ambient in the two bedrooms that house the hosts run around 82-85° F. because of the 1500-1800 watts of power consumed by the hosts and their heat output.

That is my definition of overclock stability.


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> I wish I could get the temps and cpu OC's that you guys are benchmarking. The best I can do is ~4.0 - 4.05Ghz all cores all the time running BOINC/Seti cpu/gpu tasks 24/7. I have mostly Corsair H110i AIO's with Noctua AF-14 IPPC 2000 fans and one custom loop system with dual 360mm rads. I mostly run from 70-80° C. on the 2700X cpus on C7H platforms. The cpus are running around 1.33Vcpu Each system has 3-4 gpus mostly comprising 1070's, 1080's and 1080Ti's. The ambient in the two bedrooms that house the hosts run around 82-85° F. because of the 1500-1800 watts of power consumed by the hosts and their heat output.
> 
> That is my definition of overclock stability.


So when the Aliens come and take our World we can blame you? Lol. Yeah, the room with my PC gets up to the mid 80s after the PC has been running for a while with the door closed. Unless I want the rest of the house to be super cold I can't really use the AC to cool the room without making the rest of the house too cold.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> MasterLiquid 240, Liquid Metal. 1700X
> 
> I would also recommend using pea sized (or less) blob in centre of cpu with paste - always been most reliable method for me. It often takes me a couple of applications to get it right. I can't help thinking this could be your problem. If/when you do that, have a look when you remove cooler - the layer of paste should be very very thin. Your cooler is more than adequate.


From everything I have read there isn't a problem with too much paste, but more the coverage you achieve. I use the pea size rule and then spread that out ensuring full coverage over the IHS. I do understand it isn't necessary, but if full coverage is your goal then spreading it out before seating the cold plate seems the way to go.


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> From everything I have read there isn't a problem with too much paste, but more the coverage you achieve. I use the pea size rule and then spread that out ensuring full coverage over the IHS. I do understand it isn't necessary, but if full coverage is your goal then spreading it out before seating the cold plate seems the way to go.



The problems dont arise from the amount of paste but air pockets that can form between the thermal compound and the 2 surfaces. By spreading the paste its giving it more of a chance to trap these pockets of air as the cooler lowers onto the compound. With the pea method the cooler squishes the compound and rolls it outward as it is lowered and the spherical shape of the "pea" gives less of a chance for air pockets to form. Ideally youd want to do it in a perfect vaccum so there would be no chance of that happening but we live in the real world.




Keith Myers said:


> I wish I could get the temps and cpu OC's that you guys are benchmarking. The best I can do is ~4.0 - 4.05Ghz all cores all the time running BOINC/Seti cpu/gpu tasks 24/7. I have mostly Corsair H110i AIO's with Noctua AF-14 IPPC 2000 fans and one custom loop system with dual 360mm rads. I mostly run from 70-80° C. on the 2700X cpus on C7H platforms. The cpus are running around 1.33Vcpu Each system has 3-4 gpus mostly comprising 1070's, 1080's and 1080Ti's. The ambient in the two bedrooms that house the hosts run around 82-85° F. because of the 1500-1800 watts of power consumed by the hosts and their heat output.
> 
> That is my definition of overclock stability.



If you have central Air conditioning then do like I did and go buy some duct that connects your clothes dryer to the dryer vent leading outside and pull the A/C vent (usually comes right out) and I made an adapter from the polystyrene blocks that you usually find used as a packing buffer in water cooling boxes protecting the rad or something. Anyway its a plastic-like compressable foam material and I just cut a block a bit bigger than the vent rectangle and then a hole in the center a bit smaller than the Dryer duct so that I could tightly fit the duct into the foam block as well as have an airtight seal when I push the compressable foam into the rectangular vent. Next was a matter of constructing a crude adapter that I could attach to the intake of my case (front of my case) I did so with some dense and much thicker cardboard than normal from a box my gaming chair arrived in. I just used good packaging tape and measured carefully and constructed the adaprter that I cut two holes and attached the duct to with zip ties. The adapter attaches to the case with velcro squares with a sticky back. Its not beautiful to say the least but Im of the mind of "Function over Fashion". I do plan on making it look much nicer by building the adapter from something better than cardboard, like acrylic or something similar but lightweight and Im still trying to come up with something for the duct besides dryer duct. It was just cheap and easily found at the time I had the idea to build this. Less than 20$ and I went from 4.3 ghz clocks daily at 50c to 4.45 ghz daily at 30c during normal load and under 60 with a medium load and Ive seen no more than 75c with 100% load for around 5 min. It keep everything else in the case very cool too, increasing the ram OC capabilities as well as the GPU and Im already running the A/C anyway so to me its like repurposing or recycling something that is already there in abundance while increasing the lifespan and capabilities of my system. Only difference is that Im focusing the flow of just one vent out of the 8 that my home currently has. I just have one near my desk luckily and also I have a hepa filter modified and attached to it so the air in the case is contaminant free for the most part. I still have the 200mm fan on the side of my case that is intake and unfiltered but its a side panel from anther case that I modified to fit this case as it has a big vent and fan mounts. The original is tempered glass, I just swap in the vented side panel when I want more airflow directly on the GPU, and motherboard. So with the tempered glass and a positive pressure environment the case stays very clean.

Ugly but functional and serves its purpose well


Spoiler


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> So when the Aliens come and take our World we can blame you? Lol. Yeah, the room with my PC gets up to the mid 80s after the PC has been running for a while with the door closed. Unless I want the rest of the house to be super cold I can't really use the AC to cool the room without making the rest of the house too cold.


Your AIO is more than mine, but your ambient is high which made me reduce my cpu OC slightly from 4.2 to 4.1GHz as the thermals just couldn't cope with ambient that high and I did hit 80 degrees, but only when I really hammered it. Luckily much cooler here now so not an issue for me.

I also have decent fans pushing the air trough the rad and out the top - capable of 3000rpm, they move a lot of air. FF5s I think. I have 2 Artic fans on the front sucking cold air in. I'm actually looking for a case now that gives me decent access to the motherboard and it's probe-it points, and with lots of space for airflow. Quite like the look of the ones with the m board lying flat like in a desktop PC - they're almost cubes.

I do still wonder why I need that little bit more power for cpu OC. Might do some cpu OC only testing tomorrow now my ambient is at max 72 degrees and getting cooler!

On another note, I've been quieter than usual as I got my new car at last. Only had it a week and loving it - it's a Seat Ateca 2.0 TDi 1550hp, really great drive. Lots of tech, already looking to see if I can upgrade anything. Would have though Ryzen/Epyc would be wonderful CPU for car systems with all those lovely threads to use.....


----------



## minal

nick name said:


> I actually spread the paste over the IHS with my finger to ensure full coverage, but not too much paste.


 Aside from potentially trapping air, I'd be concerned about finger grease which is damn hard/impossible to remove completely. I would avoid ever touching any active areas, especially electrical contacts. The thermal properties can't be great either.



crakej said:


> Seat Ateca 2.0 TDi 1550hp


 Seems a bit underpowered, no?


----------



## Keith Myers

I have to run the house A/C 10 months of the year anyway. Only December and January are close enough to call Winter months. I had the A/C modified last year to add dedicated ductwork into the two bedrooms that house the computers from the original closed plenum design. Only way to keep ahead of the heat load. If I get any kind of cool north breeze I can open the windows in those rooms and get some cross flow through the house to keep things cooler without running the A/C. I have fans on the door entries of those rooms to help pull the air out of those rooms on 24/7. The computers heat the house during the winter. I only have the central air gas furnace come on briefly for an hour during the coldest early mornings during the Winter. I have solar generation to offset some of the power used during the day but with 5 computers, it is nowhere near enough. It could offset my original two crunchers, but isn't nearly enough now. Just have to pay up each year in the settle up month and budget for that bill accordingly knowing it will be significant.

LOL, we Setizens hope we can hear ET some day and win the toaster prize. I also crunch for Einstein, MilkyWay and GPUGrid.


----------



## crakej

minal said:


> Seems a bit underpowered, no?


Lol  1550hp! 150hp of course - which now really does seem underpowered


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> There is nothing wrong with my application technique. Is it absolutely necessary? No, but there is also nothing wrong with it.
> 
> Edit:
> 
> And I use Noctua paste.


What? Everything is wrong with spreading TIM, especially with your fingers.. I don't know if you know this but your fingers have a sort of acid on them which can be harmful to the TIM.. 

But don't believe me, look at how TIM spreads:


----------



## nick name

minal said:


> Aside from potentially trapping air, I'd be concerned about finger grease which is damn hard/impossible to remove completely. I would avoid ever touching any active areas, especially electrical contacts. The thermal properties can't be great either.
> 
> Seems a bit underpowered, no?


Oh no I wear gloves when I spread the paste.


----------



## Johan45

I sometimes wonder why people get so bent out of shape about TIM application and the type of TIM for that matter. As long as the TIM spreads even and the cooler application is given fairly even pressure it's fine. I don't bother with alcohol just a coffee filter to clean old TIM. Hell, sometimes I don't do that either just add a small dab and re-use the old stuff. Usually, if there's a problem with the mount it's the mount itself not bad or poorly spread TIM. You guys might laugh but this is the stuff I use since I go through so much I cheaped out and honestly it's not much worse than anything else I have used. The only time I use the good stuff now is for LN2. $20 for 500 applications that's what I'm talking about

https://www.newegg.ca/Product/Produ...bx0HonyWUpE2LgMY2f9kvl0s2U8JlN-IaAseUEALw_wcB


----------



## kazablanka

CJMitsuki said:


> Why link a SuperPi 1m benchmark? Go do the same thing with HWBOT x265 at 2x Overkill mode @4k and tell me it doesn’t murder your cpu. That’s literally an 8 second benchmark you linked so it’s not even a fair comparison to any heavy benchmark. Quite possibly one of the lightest benchmarks on HWBOT is SuperPi 1m. Good submission though. I still have a 1700x that I haven’t opened yet. It was a RMA from a segfault bugged one I got during Ryzen launch.


here is the submition so you think that the ability to run x265 benchmark makes the overclock stable? I don't think so dude ,its again far away from real stability. You can check all my 1700 benchmarks on hwbot ,crosshair maybe good for exotic cooling overclocking but i don't think is better on air or water. This is my opinion ,you are not obliged to accept it. All my score with 1700 is with prime x370 pro ,with crosshair i couldn't achieve the same overclock. 

http://hwbot.org/submission/3789443_chris_k_hwbot_x265_benchmark___4k_ryzen_7_1700_12_fps


----------



## CJMitsuki

kazablanka said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why link a SuperPi 1m benchmark? Go do the same thing with HWBOT x265 at 2x Overkill mode @4k and tell me it doesn’t murder your cpu. That’s literally an 8 second benchmark you linked so it’s not even a fair comparison to any heavy benchmark. Quite possibly one of the lightest benchmarks on HWBOT is SuperPi 1m. Good submission though. I still have a 1700x that I haven’t opened yet. It was a RMA from a segfault bugged one I got during Ryzen launch.
> 
> 
> 
> here is the submition so you think that the ability to run x265 benchmark makes the overclock stable? I don't think so dude ,its again far away from real stability. You can check all my 1700 benchmarks on hwbot ,crosshair maybe good for exotic cooling overclocking but i don't think is better on air or water. This is my opinion ,you are not obliged to accept it. All my score with 1700 is with prime x370 pro ,with crosshair i couldn't achieve the same overclock.
> 
> http://hwbot.org/submission/3789443_chris_k_hwbot_x265_benchmark___4k_ryzen_7_1700_12_fps
Click to expand...

So, you are saying that your chip is far from stable running 4.15ghz at over 1.5v? That’s hard to believe, honestly. If that’s the case then that chip is a pretty rough sample and of low quality silicon. I’m still unsure of what your definition of “stable” is. Sounds to me that your definition of a stable setup would have to run P95 for a month straight while simultaneously running IBT AVX and whatever other ridiculous things you want to throw in to define stability. I’ve been overclocking Ryzen DRAM since first gen launch and CPU since 2700x launched. I know what is stable for everyday use. You are obviously running a government data center with the kind of “stability” you are hinting at. Btw if that chip isn’t stable with that clock and voltage you might want to trash it. To me, 10 loops of IBT AVX on high is about as far as you should go on stability testing. 48 hours with such and such stress test is just ludicrous and ignorant when you are only degrading the chip torturing it for that long. If you believe that you need that level of ridiculous stability then so be it but it’s foolish unless you are I fact running a data center for NASA or the CIA. Otherwise what is the point in it? Stability is defined per the users intentions with system. A gamer doesn’t need overly inflated stability and neither doesn’t 98% of anyone else. I’m not going to continue this any further since it’s obvious you are only going to keep feeding into a discussion that’s been had many times in this thread. Me and @Lord Zedd and several others had this very discussion. Scroll back a couple months or so and check it out if you want to have this conversation.


----------



## kazablanka

CJMitsuki said:


> So, you are saying that your chip is far from stable running 4.15ghz at over 1.5v? That’s hard to believe, honestly. If that’s the case then that chip is a pretty rough sample and of low quality silicon. I’m still unsure of what your definition of “stable” is. Sounds to me that your definition of a stable setup would have to run P95 for a month straight while simultaneously running IBT AVX and whatever other ridiculous things you want to throw in to define stability. I’ve been overclocking Ryzen DRAM since first gen launch and CPU since 2700x launched. I know what is stable for everyday use. You are obviously running a government data center with the kind of “stability” you are hinting at. Btw if that chip isn’t stable with that clock and voltage you might want to trash it. To me, 10 loops of IBT AVX on high is about as far as you should go on stability testing. 48 hours with such and such stress test is just ludicrous and ignorant when you are only degrading the chip torturing it for that long. If you believe that you need that level of ridiculous stability then so be it but it’s foolish unless you are I fact running a data center for NASA or the CIA. Otherwise what is the point in it? Stability is defined per the users intentions with system. A gamer doesn’t need overly inflated stability and neither doesn’t 98% of anyone else. I’m not going to continue this any further since it’s obvious you are only going to keep feeding into a discussion that’s been had many times in this thread. Me and @Lord Zedd and several others had this very discussion. Scroll back a couple months or so and check it out if you want to have this conversation.


Dude this chip is a R7 1700 not a 2700x ... Have you see alot of 1700 running stable at 4150mhz ,seriously now... There is stability and instability, stability is something that allows your to run everything not just games and browsing. Do some falding @ home and tell me if your chip is stable


----------



## CJMitsuki

kazablanka said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, you are saying that your chip is far from stable running 4.15ghz at over 1.5v? That’s hard to believe, honestly. If that’s the case then that chip is a pretty rough sample and of low quality silicon. I’m still unsure of what your definition of “stable” is. Sounds to me that your definition of a stable setup would have to run P95 for a month straight while simultaneously running IBT AVX and whatever other ridiculous things you want to throw in to define stability. I’ve been overclocking Ryzen DRAM since first gen launch and CPU since 2700x launched. I know what is stable for everyday use. You are obviously running a government data center with the kind of “stability” you are hinting at. Btw if that chip isn’t stable with that clock and voltage you might want to trash it. To me, 10 loops of IBT AVX on high is about as far as you should go on stability testing. 48 hours with such and such stress test is just ludicrous and ignorant when you are only degrading the chip torturing it for that long. If you believe that you need that level of ridiculous stability then so be it but it’s foolish unless you are I fact running a data center for NASA or the CIA. Otherwise what is the point in it? Stability is defined per the users intentions with system. A gamer doesn’t need overly inflated stability and neither doesn’t 98% of anyone else. I’m not going to continue this any further since it’s obvious you are only going to keep feeding into a discussion that’s been had many times in this thread. Me and @Lord Zedd and several others had this very discussion. Scroll back a couple months or so and check it out if you want to have this conversation.
> 
> 
> 
> Dude this chip is a R7 1700 not a 2700x ... Have you see alot of 1700 running stable at 4150mhz ,seriously now... There is stability and instability, stability is something that allows your to run everything not just games and browsing. Do some falding @ home and tell me if your chip is stable /forum/images/smilies/wink.gif
Click to expand...

I’ve had a 1700, a 1700x that I turned in for segfault big and currently have another unopened on my desk. Just haven’t gotten around to using it. I never put mine above 1.45v and never once had issues with it running 4.1ghz. Not saying they all can as I don’t have them all but I know from my experiences that it will hit that clock and not crash running anything IBT and OCCT included. 
It’s pretty clear that you are just wanting to be argumentative as you say “running something other than games or browsing” but you have said that CB15 isn’t viable as well as HWBOT x265. Pretty sure neither of those are a game or a browser. Now you are throwing in [email protected] like you are some kind of authority on stability when you only want to disagree with everything just so you can say I’m not running stable. Did what I say about you being wrong about the Prime Pro being better than the CH7 hit a nerve? It shouldn’t have bc you were wrong and no matter how much you carry this on it won’t change the fact that you are wrong. Look throughout this thread and see how many have had a similar experience to yours. I’d wager it is possibly only a couple. Your problem was either user error or defective hardware. To say that something is a bad product when you are one of a tiny group of people that have had such problems is just not giving a fair assessment to say the least. If I struck a nerve and you want to lash out and try to discredit me try to do it with a bit of class instead of being contradictory from one post to the next. It’s just grasping at straws at this point. Just go take your medication and relax, no reason to get all bothered. Everyone is wrong every once in awhile 😉 Some just admit it when they have the capabilities to actually see it and be critical of themselves. You have a nice day though 😊


----------



## nick name

I can't remember who posted and now I can't find where it was so could someone help me find the hidden power plan settings for core parking please?


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> I can't remember who posted and now I can't find where it was so could someone help me find the hidden power plan settings for core parking please?



Power Settings Explorer

Download this and run it...It unlocks everything and has it in a convenient UI to easily change any option and has descriptions for each. Make sure in the properties of the file the Unblock box is checked and run as administrator


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> Power Settings Explorer
> 
> Download this and run it...It unlocks everything and has it in a convenient UI to easily change any option and has descriptions for each. Make sure in the properties of the file the Unblock box is checked and run as administrator


Many thanks.


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> Many thanks.



np


----------



## nick name

Does anyone know if the latest 1001 BIOS Elmor gave us has any memory optimization changes? I seem to get a better tolerance for higher RAM speeds than before. They aren't stable, but I can boot them and the mobo no longer hangs or runs the series of POST codes it used to. It will actually try its memory training where prior it wouldn't and just hang until manual reset.


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> Does anyone know if the latest 1001 BIOS Elmor gave us has any memory optimization changes? I seem to get a better tolerance for higher RAM speeds than before. They aren't stable, but I can boot them and the mobo no longer hangs or runs the series of POST codes it used to. It will actually try its memory training where prior it wouldn't and just hang until manual reset.


As far as I know it only has the bug fixes he mentioned. The next Agesa should be ready this month.


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> As far as I know it only has the bug fixes he mentioned. The next Agesa should be ready this month.


Well those bug fixes fixed something because I can now boot 3822MHz which allowed me to finally hit 60000MB/s in Aida. It's absolutely not stable, but it was fun to get.

Before the system would hang or loop the same POST codes and not actually go through the memory training attempts. Now, if it can't boot it will make all its attempts and then return me to the BIOS.


----------



## zaubara

Hey guys,
I just received all my hardware (2700x, flare x 3200 14) and I was playing a bit with the performance enhancer lv3.
I watched der8auers vid, and i pretty much just hacked the numbers in - 103.4blck, offset up to +.1, reduced the ram speeds.
I can boot to windows. Whenever the cpu would hit the magical 4.5ghz mark however, the pc would freeze.

How high, in your opinion, is the success chance for everyone? Am I just unlucky with the chip? Anything I might've missed?
Thanks!


----------



## nick name

zaubara said:


> Hey guys,
> I just received all my hardware (2700x, flare x 3200 14) and I was playing a bit with the performance enhancer lv3.
> I watched der8auers vid, and i pretty much just hacked the numbers in - 103.4blck, offset up to +.1, reduced the ram speeds.
> I can boot to windows. Whenever the cpu would hit the magical 4.5ghz mark however, the pc would freeze.
> 
> How high, in your opinion, is the success chance for everyone? Am I just unlucky with the chip? Anything I might've missed?
> Thanks!


Well I can safely say I cannot reach those speeds. What are you using for cooling?


----------



## hurricane28

zaubara said:


> Hey guys,
> I just received all my hardware (2700x, flare x 3200 14) and I was playing a bit with the performance enhancer lv3.
> I watched der8auers vid, and i pretty much just hacked the numbers in - 103.4blck, offset up to +.1, reduced the ram speeds.
> I can boot to windows. Whenever the cpu would hit the magical 4.5ghz mark however, the pc would freeze.
> 
> How high, in your opinion, is the success chance for everyone? Am I just unlucky with the chip? Anything I might've missed?
> Thanks!


Yes, don't watch der8auers video's if you want 24/7 stability. He is an hardcore overclocker. 

Most chips can do 4.2/4.3 but that is about the max for Ryzen 2. RAM speed is about 3200 or 3466 MHz IF you have Samsung B-die RAM that is.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Yes, don't watch der8auers video's if you want 24/7 stability. He is an hardcore overclocker.
> 
> Most chips can do 4.2/4.3 but that is about the max for Ryzen 2. RAM speed is about 3200 or 3466 MHz IF you have Samsung B-die RAM that is.


I get 3636MHz 14-15-14-28 rock solid when using a BCLK of 101, but I generally just run 3600MHz with a normal BCLK. 

But yeah 4.25 all core is all I can get now, but I did get 4.3 benchable on my previous X470 Prime Pro board. Wasn't able to even run 4.275 for a benchmark once I got my CH7 and am waiting to hear back from Asus as to why that might be.


----------



## zaubara

nick name said:


> Well I can safely say I cannot reach those speeds. What are you using for cooling?


Right now, for testing purposes, the stock cooler on maximum overdrive.
Turns out, my NH-D15 was old enough to not include the AM4 bracket... it's on it's way, finally.
However it crashed at ~60°C, so I don't think temp was the major issue.



hurricane28 said:


> Yes, don't watch der8auers video's if you want 24/7 stability. He is an hardcore overclocker.
> 
> Most chips can do 4.2/4.3 but that is about the max for Ryzen 2. RAM speed is about 3200 or 3466 MHz IF you have Samsung B-die RAM that is.


Sure, but I would've hoped it would at least survive one round of cb15  4.2/.3 is also on all cores, I guess?
RAM (being b-die) work perfectly fine with Stilts fast 3200 preset - I think I can push those a bit further, I don't know if 3200 with tight timings or 3200+ at looser timings is better, yet.

4200 seemed to work for all cores at 1.4v set (possibly lower), keeping the bclk at 100 and using lvl 3 boosted 2 cores up to about 4300... so I guess it's not the worst.



nick name said:


> I get 3636MHz 14-15-14-28 rock solid when using a BCLK of 101, but I generally just run 3600MHz with a normal BCLK.
> 
> But yeah 4.25 all core is all I can get now, but I did get 4.3 benchable on my previous X470 Prime Pro board. Wasn't able to even run 4.275 for a benchmark once I got my CH7 and am waiting to hear back from Asus as to why that might be.


Sounds nice!
Well, apart from the board issue that is...
What made you use 3600 instead of 3200 14-13-13-28?



In a broader sense: is there a tried and tested method to know if you got a good overclocker vs a bad one, without having 5 other cpus in comparison?
And is there some comparison for all the Stilts RAM presets?

Thanks!


----------



## nick name

zaubara said:


> -snip-
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds nice!
> Well, apart from the board issue that is...
> What made you use 3600 instead of 3200 14-13-13-28?
> 
> 
> 
> In a broader sense: is there a tried and tested method to know if you got a good overclocker vs a bad one, without having 5 other cpus in comparison?
> And is there some comparison for all the Stilts RAM presets?
> 
> Thanks!



I know there are people that swear by 3200MHz with super tight timings, but I get a lot more bandwidth at higher speeds and also the latencies are lower. I haven't seen how tight I can get 3200Mhz yet. Maybe I will.


----------



## crakej

I can confirm that my 1700x can do 4.2GHz reliably with ram speeds up to 3200. I have never had it past 1.425v. Running now at 4.1GHz 1.387v

I dare say if I tried to run my cpu at any speed with 1.5v it just would not work. Not enough cooling for that in the real world.

There weren't any ram fixes in bios 1001, but other fixes could easily effect memory compatibility/reliability in some way. I'm certainly no less stable on this bios.


----------



## nick name

Has anyone been successful trying any of the high voltage DRAM presets on the board? The ones at 1.8V and 1.9V and super low timings?


----------



## chakku

Those voltages/presets are for LN2 overclocking AFAIK.


----------



## nick name

chakku said:


> Those voltages/presets are for LN2 overclocking AFAIK.


That's what I was thinking, but I didn't know if LN2 helps RAM overclocking if the pot only cools the CPU.


----------



## VPII

nick name said:


> That's what I was thinking, but I didn't know if LN2 helps RAM overclocking if the pot only cools the CPU.


Hi Nick, LN2 does help taken that the cpu is cooled down drastically assisting the IMC to be able to handle higher memory clocks. Well that is how it seems when I use LN2. Furthermore your memory actually gets really cold when running LN2 on the cpu for obvious reasons as the cold goes through the circuitry spreading all around and with the memory slots close the the cpu socket the cold will reach there as well. I have tried the Stilt DDR4 3600 12 12 12 1T 1.8Vdimm under LN2 and I was able to boot but I think I may have screwed up some other settings as stability went down the toilet.


----------



## bonomork

Im going to order the CH7 (w/o wi-fi). I have already 2 x G.Skill Trident Z RGB F4-3200C14D-16GTZRX and a 2700X.
Someone have already fitted Trident RGB on CH7 ? Any issue ? I would like at least to set the RAM @3200


----------



## VPII

bonomork said:


> Im going to order the CH7 (w/o wi-fi). I have already 2 x G.Skill Trident Z RGB F4-3200C14D-16GTZRX and a 2700X.
> Someone have already fitted Trident RGB on CH7 ? Any issue ? I would like at least to set the RAM @3200


3200 should not be a problem.... Mine sits at 3600 at present but 2T command rate


----------



## bonomork

VPII said:


> 3200 should not be a problem.... Mine sits at 3600 at present but 2T command rate


OK thank you


----------



## MNMadman

bonomork said:


> Im going to order the CH7 (w/o wi-fi). I have already 2 x G.Skill Trident Z RGB F4-3200C14D-16GTZRX and a 2700X.
> Someone have already fitted Trident RGB on CH7 ? Any issue ? I would like at least to set the RAM @3200


My GTZRX kit only does 3466 with 2T, but as VPII said there should be no problem getting 3200 to work.


----------



## bonomork

MNMadman said:


> My GTZRX kit only does 3466 with 2T, but as VPII said there should be no problem getting 3200 to work.


What RAM and SOC voltage ?


----------



## neikosr0x

VPII said:


> 3200 should not be a problem.... Mine sits at 3600 at present but 2T command rate


and then its me with the 3600 version c16 @ 3466 hahahaha **** me!


----------



## nick name

bonomork said:


> Im going to order the CH7 (w/o wi-fi). I have already 2 x G.Skill Trident Z RGB F4-3200C14D-16GTZRX and a 2700X.
> Someone have already fitted Trident RGB on CH7 ? Any issue ? I would like at least to set the RAM @3200


I have a 3600CL15 b-die kit that I run at its rated speed, but with tighter timings. For my current timing setup I have to run more voltage, but I think that 3200CL14 b-die kit should do well for you at 1.35V or just a hair more.


----------



## Copyright

Had a lot of problems with my Gigabyte Gaming 7 ... so I moved to this board only to find a whole new batch of problems. Not sure why but fan control doesn't seem to ramp up under load despite custom fan curves. When trying to use AI Suite III I am getting random shutdowns and have to kill power to get it back up. Seems to be related to NZXT CAM.. I kill the CAM program and then now I can use AI Suite III to calibrate.. if both are running.. calibration means shutdown. I moved to Argus.. wow what a great program.. fan control is great. But lately im getting these weird half way lock ups.. I notice that Argus seems to be frozen.. usually when im watching a video I get this issue. 

The next issue is why does it take 15 seconds just to Reach POST?... I have built 4 Ryzen setups.. two Asrock, one Asus and one Gigabyte. The Asrock just plain works! No issues at all. The fan control auto tune in bios is excellent. 


Does Asus even care? The Asus could be the best of them all but it's got some seriously strange issues... Are there any fixes ahead?


----------



## nick name

Copyright said:


> Had a lot of problems with my Gigabyte Gaming 7 ... so I moved to this board only to find a whole new batch of problems. Not sure why but fan control doesn't seem to ramp up under load despite custom fan curves. When trying to use AI Suite III I am getting random shutdowns and have to kill power to get it back up. Seems to be related to NZXT CAM.. I kill the CAM program and then now I can use AI Suite III to calibrate.. if both are running.. calibration means shutdown. I moved to Argus.. wow what a great program.. fan control is great. But lately im getting these weird half way lock ups.. I notice that Argus seems to be frozen.. usually when im watching a video I get this issue.
> 
> The next issue is why does it take 15 seconds just to Reach POST?... I have built 4 Ryzen setups.. two Asrock, one Asus and one Gigabyte. The Asrock just plain works! No issues at all. The fan control auto tune in bios is excellent.
> 
> 
> Does Asus even care? The Asus could be the best of them all but it's got some seriously strange issues... Are there any fixes ahead?


I can't speak to fan curves because I don't use them, but the oddly long POST delay isn't really an Asus issue -- just this board. The X470 Prime Pro I had before would POST super quick.


----------



## Copyright

nick name said:


> I can't speak to fan curves because I don't use them, but the oddly long POST delay isn't really an Asus issue -- just this board. The X470 Prime Pro I had before would POST super quick.


Asus makes the board.. I have built other X470 boards that POST fast.. the Asrock boots into windows by the time the Asus actually POST's. This is an ASUS issue as it is their board and bios.


----------



## nick name

Copyright said:


> Asus makes the board.. I have built other X470 boards that POST fast.. the Asrock boots into windows by the time the Asus actually POST's. This is an ASUS issue as it is their board and bios.


My meaning was that it wasn't ALL Asus boards. Of course it's an Asus issue in the sense they make the Crosshair VII, but not ALL their boards take a long time to POST.


----------



## MNMadman

bonomork said:


> What RAM and SOC voltage ?


RAM 1.4v and SOC 0.975v. I use The Stilt's 3466 preset in the BIOS. Couldn't get anything higher to be stable, but I'm happy with my 3200 kit doing 3466.


----------



## bonomork

MNMadman said:


> RAM 1.4v and SOC 0.975v. I use The Stilt's 3466 preset in the BIOS. Couldn't get anything higher to be stable, but I'm happy with my 3200 kit doing 3466.


Thank you


----------



## poliacido

did you guys had problems with the Stilt's profiles for the ram?
in my experience i tried the 3200 safe preset and the ram was not stable using memtest i think that profile pushed too much
then i tried the dram calculator from 1usmus and i set the safe settings but with cas15 instead of 14 and now seems stable, been running memtest for long and no error. I am keeping it at 1.4V and 1T

also mention my ram is a B-die gskill kit F4-3200C15D-16GTZSW 15-15-15-35

what do you think?
thanks


----------



## crakej

I'm at 3533MTs 1.42v CL14 for now, not tested 3600 on this bios yet.

Previously it's been recommended not to run the NZXT software along with any other monitoring s/w including AISuite, HWInfo, Aida64 etc. Most of these have now been fixed, but I don't know about NZXT software. I still try to avoid running any of these together, but does all seem ok lately - but I don't have NZXT so can't vouch for their position.

I run AISuite all the time, sometimes with HWInfo and/or Aida64. No problems currently.


----------



## hurricane28

Well i tried this new 1001 BIOS and i don't have any fan issues more but now i am having stability issues instead.. Its literally one step forward and 2 steps back with these BIOS's it seems. 

I was stable at 3466 MHz before but since i flashed the erratic BIOS 0804 i am not stable anymore at the same settings.. Settings are EXACTLY the same, i know this as i have saved an profile for every BIOS i flashed so far.


----------



## crakej

1001 has been very stable for me.

Can I also say that as far as slow boot up go, it can happen, but when your settings are right it will boot at normal speed.

I've got this case arriving on Weds, it really versatile and has awesome cooling capacity. I could have 6 (120s) on the sides, 6 on the top and my rad on the front. Even without all those fans, i'm going to have much better cooling and access to the board, including probe-it points. ALL my SATA drives will be on the lower level with the psu...


----------



## VicsPC

crakej said:


> 1001 has been very stable for me.
> 
> Can I also say that as far as slow boot up go, it can happen, but when your settings are right it will boot at normal speed.
> 
> I've got this case arriving on Weds, it really versatile and has awesome cooling capacity. I could have 6 (120s) on the sides, 6 on the top and my rad on the front. Even without all those fans, i'm going to have much better cooling and access to the board, including probe-it points. ALL my SATA drives will be on the lower level with the psu...


I have that same X5 case and even though its really cheaply made it works incredibly well. I have a rad as exhaust in the front and one as exhaust in the bottom. Having 3x140mms up top works incredibly well for ram and hotspot temps. It blows ambient temps over everything the way i have it set up its fantastic. Since im water cooled i only have the rear exhaust fans and my rads as exhaust but there isn't much heat coming off the mobo or the gpu, only the heat from the VRMs.

I have it in black though lol.


----------



## Carolina Roots

This may be a silly question, but I'm at a complete loss as to the answer. Where is the option to configure PBO? my boost is locked at 3.9ghz maximum regardless of what I do. The option is not available in the NBIO section of my bios. I'm on BIOS 1001 currently, but have never seen the option on any other BIOS that I've tested.


----------



## nick name

Carolina Roots said:


> This may be a silly question, but I'm at a complete loss as to the answer. Where is the option to configure PBO? my boost is locked at 3.9ghz maximum regardless of what I do. The option is not available in the NBIO section of my bios. I'm on BIOS 1001 currently, but have never seen the option on any other BIOS that I've tested.


Advanced > AMD CBS > NBIO > Precision Boost Overdrive Configuration


----------



## nick name

I wanted to see what performance was like with SMT disabled and have noticed a weird behavior. The CPU will enter its lower power states, however, the highest speed only goes as high as the all-core speed and not the 4.35GHz single-core speed that is normal. Also, when running a single core test in Cinebench all of the cores speeds go up to 4.1GHz as opposed to a single core -- the core that's being used. Has anyone else seen this?


----------



## Carolina Roots

nick name said:


> Carolina Roots said:
> 
> 
> 
> This may be a silly question, but I'm at a complete loss as to the answer. Where is the option to configure PBO? my boost is locked at 3.9ghz maximum regardless of what I do. The option is not available in the NBIO section of my bios. I'm on BIOS 1001 currently, but have never seen the option on any other BIOS that I've tested.
> 
> 
> 
> Advanced > AMD CBS > NBIO > Precision Boost Overdrive Configuration
Click to expand...

What I’m saying is that the PBO configuration option isn’t there.


----------



## MNMadman

nick name said:


> I wanted to see what performance was like with SMT disabled and have noticed a weird behavior. The CPU will enter its lower power states, however, the highest speed only goes as high as the all-core speed and not the 4.35GHz single-core speed that is normal. Also, when running a single core test in Cinebench all of the cores speeds go up to 4.1GHz as opposed to a single core -- the core that's being used. Has anyone else seen this?


Do you have Core Performance Boost set to Enabled or Auto? I've noticed that changing some settings will change the behavior of CPB Auto. Normally, Auto equals Enabled. But with some other settings changed, sometimes CPB Auto behaves like Disabled.

Try CPB Enabled and see if that makes it behave normally again.


----------



## nick name

MNMadman said:


> Do you have Core Performance Boost set to Enabled or Auto? I've noticed that changing some settings will change the behavior of CPB Auto. Normally, Auto equals Enabled. But with some other settings changed, sometimes CPB Auto behaves like Disabled.
> 
> Try CPB Enabled and see if that makes it behave normally again.


It was enabled. One core eventually showed a Max Speed of 43.5 but Cinebench runs still produced the same weird behavior. It was just something to mess with and I've turned SMT back on.


----------



## nick name

Carolina Roots said:


> What I’m saying is that the PBO configuration option isn’t there.


What did you expect to see and what are you seeing? 

What do you mean by PBO configuration option? If you want to manually enter values for things like PPT, TDC, and EDC you have to select Manual as opposed to Enabled or Auto.


----------



## Carolina Roots

nick name said:


> Carolina Roots said:
> 
> 
> 
> What I’m saying is that the PBO configuration option isn’t there.
> 
> 
> 
> What did you expect to see and what are you seeing?
> 
> What do you mean by PBO configuration option? If you want to manually enter values for things like PPT, TDC, and EDC you have to select Manual as opposed to Enabled or Auto.
Click to expand...

I guess I thought there would be an actual item in the bios which I could set to “auto/manual/enabled/disabled”. there is a determinism slider, but that is the closest thing that I can see to being what I’m looking for. There just isn’t an option line called PBO Configuration. Is there another way that I could go about getting PBO to work? My chip is a Ryzen 5 2600(no x) so I’m sure that has something to do with it at this point. Thanks for the help so far!


----------



## crakej

VicsPC said:


> I have that same X5 case and even though its really cheaply made it works incredibly well. I have a rad as exhaust in the front and one as exhaust in the bottom. Having 3x140mms up top works incredibly well for ram and hotspot temps. It blows ambient temps over everything the way i have it set up its fantastic. Since im water cooled i only have the rear exhaust fans and my rads as exhaust but there isn't much heat coming off the mobo or the gpu, only the heat from the VRMs.
> 
> I have it in black though lol.


This is good to know - it just makes more sense for the board to be laid flat like this - much easier to cool - hope to see some improvement from current setup.

I currently have rad exhaust from the top. Can you suck air in the bottom and exhaust through top or is it best to blow down onto motherboard?


----------



## Copyright

nick name said:


> My meaning was that it wasn't ALL Asus boards. Of course it's an Asus issue in the sense they make the Crosshair VII, but not ALL their boards take a long time to POST.


I never said all.. I said Asus needs to fix THIS boards long POST.


----------



## VicsPC

crakej said:


> This is good to know - it just makes more sense for the board to be laid flat like this - much easier to cool - hope to see some improvement from current setup.
> 
> I currently have rad exhaust from the top. Can you suck air in the bottom and exhaust through top or is it best to blow down onto motherboard?


You can from the bottom it's filtered but with all the cabling and the power supply for me it made more sense to use the top as intake. I tried different rad configurations and this is what the best setup for me. Fresh air right onto the mobo is best. You can set the front as exhaust as well I'm sure it would be fine. If you only have one rad i'd put it in the front as exhaust and have 1-4x intakes at the top, i found that to be the best for temps. It literally blows air right onto the gpu and vrm/ram this way.


----------



## Copyright

crakej said:


> 1001 has been very stable for me.
> 
> Can I also say that as far as slow boot up go, it can happen, but when your settings are right it will boot at normal speed.
> 
> I've got this case arriving on Weds, it really versatile and has awesome cooling capacity. I could have 6 (120s) on the sides, 6 on the top and my rad on the front. Even without all those fans, i'm going to have much better cooling and access to the board, including probe-it points. ALL my SATA drives will be on the lower level with the psu...


Boot is fast.. POST is slow.. what do you mean all settings are correct? it takes 15 seconds to just see the asus logo for me.. how long after hitting the power button do you see the Asus logo on the screen? I would love to see a video. I have talked to many who confirm its a long POST.


----------



## crakej

Copyright said:


> Boot is fast.. POST is slow.. what do you mean all settings are correct? it takes 15 seconds to just see the asus logo for me.. how long after hitting the power button do you see the Asus logo on the screen? I would love to see a video. I have talked to many who confirm its a long POST.


Actually, mine is 17-18 seconds. 15 for the beep. (Tested it at default settings too and was the same speed)

What I mean is that I have sometimes hit upon settings which give me a nice quick post. I have not been able to narrow it down to anything in particular at this point, but it happens when playing with memory settings. This has happened to me on previous PCs....

This is not a bad post time - there are some who are having 30 secs of post. That's really slow!


----------



## nick name

Copyright said:


> I never said all.. I said Asus needs to fix THIS boards long POST.


My mistake.


----------



## neikosr0x

Copyright said:


> Boot is fast.. POST is slow.. what do you mean all settings are correct? it takes 15 seconds to just see the asus logo for me.. how long after hitting the power button do you see the Asus logo on the screen? I would love to see a video. I have talked to many who confirm its a long POST.


for me its like 2 sec for the asus logo and 5 to 6 sec more for the windows logon.


----------



## nick name

neikosr0x said:


> for me its like 2 sec for the asus logo and 5 to 6 sec mores for the windows logon.


What drives do you have installed?


----------



## neikosr0x

nick name said:


> What drives do you have installed?


1 Samsung 970evo mvne m.2 as boot.
1 Samsung 850ssd
1 Sandisk SSD
2 7200rmp disk


----------



## chakku

I normally have a 20 second boot (according to Windows). POST takes the longest, once I get the ASUS logo/BIOS splash screen it is a few seconds to get to Windows, but POST is always 10-15 seconds.

Using a 970 Pro 512GB NVMe as boot.


----------



## nick name

neikosr0x said:


> 1 Samsung 970evo mvne m.2 as boot.
> 1 Samsung 850ssd
> 1 Sandisk SSD
> 2 7200rmp disk


Hmmm I have a 970 and an 850 and a HDD. I was hoping your config would give insight into what takes my system so long to POST, but no joy.


----------



## MNMadman

neikosr0x said:


> for me its like 2 sec for the asus logo and 5 to 6 sec more for the windows logon.


Must have Fast Boot enabled. Which means it's not doing a full POST, and it's not booting Windows fresh. But hey ... if boot speed is important to you and it doesn't cause problems, there's nothing wrong with doing it that way.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Its probably memory training contributing to the long posts or something to that effect. Watch the Q-Led and see if the light goes forward then cycles to a previous led then forward again. Usually memory pushed to its limits will do this. Maybe Asus need to slack up on how the bios trains the memory, it could be too strict on determining whether it needs training or not. No idea but I have seen the led cycle several times before contributing to long posts and I just adjusted resistances to work that behavior out such as Cad_Bus, Proc Odt, etc. It was rather frustrating though.


----------



## Copyright

crakej said:


> Actually, mine is 17-18 seconds. 15 for the beep. (Tested it at default settings too and was the same speed)
> 
> What I mean is that I have sometimes hit upon settings which give me a nice quick post. I have not been able to narrow it down to anything in particular at this point, but it happens when playing with memory settings. This has happened to me on previous PCs....
> 
> This is not a bad post time - there are some who are having 30 secs of post. That's really slow!


Ive been building PC's for over 20 years.. 15 seconds to post is pretty bad for a modern day PC.... Considering the Gigabyte X470 and Asrock X470 POST much faster. The Asrock is very quick and is the most stable board of the bunch. I can't even use any monitoring programs without my this board having issues.. NZXT CAM software has problems.. AI Suite III has issues and so does Argus monitor.


----------



## Copyright

neikosr0x said:


> for me its like 2 sec for the asus logo and 5 to 6 sec more for the windows logon.


Curious how you managed this.. seems like all are like me.. takes 15 seconds roughly to POST.. what memory and memory timings are you running? 5 to 6 seconds to see logo would be much more acceptable.. the Asrock board is about that quick.. if not quicker.


----------



## Copyright

MNMadman said:


> Must have Fast Boot enabled. Which means it's not doing a full POST, and it's not booting Windows fresh. But hey ... if boot speed is important to you and it doesn't cause problems, there's nothing wrong with doing it that way.


What do you mean not booting windows fresh? Fast boot usually means things like USB support etc don't get enabled during post. I have also read stability issues when using Fast boot so I left mine off. I rarely see fast boot help with posting.. in the past it's only sped up the POST process once the logo appears... so you don't sit on the logo for to long. There is also a 3 second hold in the bios on POST I noticed.


----------



## Copyright

CJMitsuki said:


> Its probably memory training contributing to the long posts or something to that effect. Watch the Q-Led and see if the light goes forward then cycles to a previous led then forward again. Usually memory pushed to its limits will do this. Maybe Asus need to slack up on how the bios trains the memory, it could be too strict on determining whether it needs training or not. No idea but I have seen the led cycle several times before contributing to long posts and I just adjusted resistances to work that behavior out such as Cad_Bus, Proc Odt, etc. It was rather frustrating though.


How in the heck did you get 4.45 stable? That is awesome. Is that all core speed or boost?


----------



## Copyright

Can someone recommend some 3200mhz RGB ram 32gb that works on this board?


----------



## CJMitsuki

Copyright said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Its probably memory training contributing to the long posts or something to that effect. Watch the Q-Led and see if the light goes forward then cycles to a previous led then forward again. Usually memory pushed to its limits will do this. Maybe Asus need to slack up on how the bios trains the memory, it could be too strict on determining whether it needs training or not. No idea but I have seen the led cycle several times before contributing to long posts and I just adjusted resistances to work that behavior out such as Cad_Bus, Proc Odt, etc. It was rather frustrating though.
> 
> 
> 
> How in the heck did you get 4.45 stable? That is awesome. Is that all core speed or boost?
Click to expand...

I have chilled air routed through my case so that I can run the chip at a higher voltage and still keep temps below 60c. 4.45ghz stable is up to 4 cores with XFR, the all core is 4.35. I can run it at 4.55ghz in heavy benchmarks but my voltages get a bit high even though temps never go above 75c. So, just a 280mm AIO and I made an adapter to route the cool air from my central A/C in my home through the rad and case to cool the coolant better and other components in the case. It helps overclock literally everything better. Especially memory, I need to update the timings on my sig though. I think my coolant stays around 18-19c and the air in the case is around the same. Plus I have quite a few very good fans and one of the best cases for airflow according to Gamers Nexus. 
It’s also a good chip.


----------



## MNMadman

Copyright said:


> What do you mean not booting windows fresh? Fast boot usually means things like USB support etc don't get enabled during post. I have also read stability issues when using Fast boot so I left mine off. I rarely see fast boot help with posting.. in the past it's only sped up the POST process once the logo appears... so you don't sit on the logo for to long. There is also a 3 second hold in the bios on POST I noticed.


From what I've seen, Fast Boot in the BIOS enables Fast Boot (or whatever the exact name is) in Windows too ... which is a kind of hibernation rather than a full fresh boot.


----------



## Copyright

MNMadman said:


> From what I've seen, Fast Boot in the BIOS enables Fast Boot (or whatever the exact name is) in Windows too ... which is a kind of hibernation rather than a full fresh boot.


Not familiar with that.. I am talking about cold boot not wake from sleep. If this is true that is news to me.


----------



## Copyright

CJMitsuki said:


> I have chilled air routed through my case so that I can run the chip at a higher voltage and still keep temps below 60c. 4.45ghz stable is up to 4 cores with XFR, the all core is 4.35. I can run it at 4.55ghz in heavy benchmarks but my voltages get a bit high even though temps never go above 75c. So, just a 280mm AIO and I made an adapter to route the cool air from my central A/C in my home through the rad and case to cool the coolant better and other components in the case. It helps overclock literally everything better. Especially memory, I need to update the timings on my sig though. I think my coolant stays around 18-19c and the air in the case is around the same. Plus I have quite a few very good fans and one of the best cases for airflow according to Gamers Nexus.
> It’s also a good chip.


LOL that is awesome.. very nice OC. Would you happen to know of a 32gb RGB 3200mhz RAM kit that works well on these boards? 4 sticks or two..


Saw these ...

This is on the QVL
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod...re=G.skill_RGB_3200mhz-_-20-232-650-_-Product


----------



## CJMitsuki

Copyright said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have chilled air routed through my case so that I can run the chip at a higher voltage and still keep temps below 60c. 4.45ghz stable is up to 4 cores with XFR, the all core is 4.35. I can run it at 4.55ghz in heavy benchmarks but my voltages get a bit high even though temps never go above 75c. So, just a 280mm AIO and I made an adapter to route the cool air from my central A/C in my home through the rad and case to cool the coolant better and other components in the case. It helps overclock literally everything better. Especially memory, I need to update the timings on my sig though. I think my coolant stays around 18-19c and the air in the case is around the same. Plus I have quite a few very good fans and one of the best cases for airflow according to Gamers Nexus.
> It’s also a good chip.
> 
> 
> 
> LOL that is awesome.. very nice OC. Would you happen to know of a 32gb RGB 3200mhz RAM kit that works well on these boards? 4 sticks or two..
Click to expand...

G.skill tridentZ works well on these boards. The 3200c14 or 3600c15 kits are the best ones from that line. I hear the CJR kits are good and I think those are 3600c16 but with 32gb 4x8 will probably be slightly better but with either it will be hard to hit 3333mhz or beyond with the IMC under that amount of stress. Next gen Ryzen should be much better I’m hoping. Gskill tridentz and FlareX are good and the CJR I think is the SniperX series. It’s the new die that ya been hitting some nice frequencies on single rank kits. 1usmus got his kit to 3733c14 which is impressive. Dual rank I’ve not seen go past 3333 and I’ve not seen any 4x8gb setups yet but technically they will be easier to stabilize since they are single rank. I think those kits aren’t as common though.

That set you linked should be as good as it gets. The reviews are mixed and someone said they got it to 3466 and I believed them until they said it was Aida64 stable so that’s a no on 3466. I have the 16gb kit of that particular bin and it’s great. 2 years and still running strong. Has been a very good kit.
Currently testing 3495mhz at 14-14-14-22-36 with very tight timings throughout but it’s been up to 3600 although dropping 2 straps and tightening timings to the max is much better performance.


----------



## nick name

Copyright said:


> LOL that is awesome.. very nice OC. Would you happen to know of a 32gb RGB 3200mhz RAM kit that works well on these boards? 4 sticks or two..
> 
> 
> Saw these ...
> 
> This is on the QVL
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod...re=G.skill_RGB_3200mhz-_-20-232-650-_-Product


Anything above 16GB gets difficult to run at speed. Either dual rank or fours dimms will be harder to get above 3200MHz.


----------



## Deyjandi

MNMadman said:


> From what I've seen, Fast Boot in the BIOS enables Fast Boot (or whatever the exact name is) in Windows too ... which is a kind of hibernation rather than a full fresh boot.


that statement is 100% incorrect


----------



## MNMadman

Deyjandi said:


> that statement is 100% incorrect


...and? You can't just make a statement like that. Explain what it really does.

The last time I used Fast Boot was years ago, as it caused problems for me. But the last time, it did indeed enable the fast boot option in Windows as well, which isn't an actual clean boot. That's why it's so fast.

It's one of the things I disable automatically in the BIOS now.


----------



## crakej

Fastboot in the bios changes *NOTHING* in windows! Bios setting can *ONLY* affect the BIOS, it cannot change windows settings.

Fastboot just speeds up post by missing out some initialization routines for hardware that you trust to work properly. Once your system runs reliably, you should enable this setting in the bios for fastest boot, but remember, the bios won't be testing everything in the way it does on a 'slow' boot, so it's the first thing to enable when things go wrong.

The setting for 'post delay' is to give you more time (if needed) to hit del and get into the bios. This delay ONLY happens if fastboot is disabled


----------



## crakej

Copyright said:


> Ive been building PC's for over 20 years.. 15 seconds to post is pretty bad for a modern day PC.... Considering the Gigabyte X470 and Asrock X470 POST much faster. The Asrock is very quick and is the most stable board of the bunch. I can't even use any monitoring programs without my this board having issues.. NZXT CAM software has problems.. AI Suite III has issues and so does Argus monitor.


As mentioned previously running apps that monitor the system together is not recommended, but largely has been fixed.

If you can't run ANY monitoring s/w then I can't help thinking you need to RMA

I'm not sure of the status of NZXT s/w, but I do know it was causing problems, and am not aware of it having being fixed. For me, AUSuite and HWInfo are reliable. 

There is also SIV which is in constant development and very reliable, definitely worth a go if you're having problems. http://rh-software.com/ Very useful when other s/w won't work


----------



## Copyright

crakej said:


> As mentioned previously running apps that monitor the system together is not recommended, but largely has been fixed.
> 
> If you can't run ANY monitoring s/w then I can't help thinking you need to RMA
> 
> I'm not sure of the status of NZXT s/w, but I do know it was causing problems, and am not aware of it having being fixed. For me, AUSuite and HWInfo are reliable.
> 
> There is also SIV which is in constant development and very reliable, definitely worth a go if you're having problems. http://rh-software.com/ Very useful when other s/w won't work


Considering its the exact same issue everyone else was having prior to the firmware update that is supposed to fix it I highly doubt its a defective board. Board was new enough it came with the latest bios already installed as well. I noticed using argus monitor I was getting some fan lockup issues .. I saw this in AI SUITE III also.. then noticed the latest firmware addresses this exact issue. Chances are if that fixes the fan lockup issues ill be fine but for some reason I just can't use AI SUITE III which is ok.. Argus is much better in my opinion.


----------



## Copyright

crakej said:


> Fastboot in the bios changes *NOTHING* in windows! Bios setting can *ONLY* affect the BIOS, it cannot change windows settings.
> 
> Fastboot just speeds up post by missing out some initialization routines for hardware that you trust to work properly. Once your system runs reliably, you should enable this setting in the bios for fastest boot, but remember, the bios won't be testing everything in the way it does on a 'slow' boot, so it's the first thing to enable when things go wrong.
> 
> The setting for 'post delay' is to give you more time (if needed) to hit del and get into the bios. This delay ONLY happens if fastboot is disabled


This is exactly what I figured.. Maybe some were confusing fast boot in windows and fastboot in bios. I have always known fastboot to just POST quicker and not look for things like USB Keyboard etc... I assume Asus has a way to get into bios if Fast Boot is enabled?


----------



## Copyright

nick name said:


> Anything above 16GB gets difficult to run at speed. Either dual rank or fours dimms will be harder to get above 3200MHz.


Currently using 4 sticks of Team Group Samsung B die @ 3200mhz 32gb total. It failed every test at first... then I went back and gave a bump in voltage to 1.37... it passes everything I throw at it.. I had thought about bumping it down to make sure I don't have issues.


----------



## crakej

Copyright said:


> Considering its the exact same issue everyone else was having prior to the firmware update that is supposed to fix it I highly doubt its a defective board. Board was new enough it came with the latest bios already installed as well. I noticed using argus monitor I was getting some fan lockup issues .. I saw this in AI SUITE III also.. then noticed the latest firmware addresses this exact issue. Chances are if that fixes the fan lockup issues ill be fine but for some reason I just can't use AI SUITE III which is ok.. Argus is much better in my opinion.


Not sure what your problem is then? It would be useful if you would put you system details in your sig, just click on Tools>Quick Links>Edit My Sig above.

Which bios are you using? 1001 s the current 'fixed' bios

Edit: you actually said *'I can't even use any monitoring programs without my this board having issues.. NZXT CAM software has problems.. AI Suite III has issues and so does Argus monitor.'* - we do not all share this problem!.... i sure don't...

Also meant to say, I have had quicker post times, but have not been able to keep those settings for stability.


----------



## hurricane28

I don't know what Assus is doing to our BIOS but the latest 1001 BIOS prevents me from stabilizing even 3400 MHz RAM.. I was always stable at 3466 MHz but now i can't even stabilize 3400 MHz.. 

A friend of mine who has an Gigabyte board which is 100 euro's cheaper can get 3400 MHz stable at even lower Timings..
@elmor, can you explain this?


----------



## CJMitsuki

hurricane28 said:


> I don't know what Assus is doing to our BIOS but the latest 1001 BIOS prevents me from stabilizing even 3400 MHz RAM.. I was always stable at 3466 MHz but now i can't even stabilize 3400 MHz..
> 
> A friend of mine who has an Gigabyte board which is 100 euro's cheaper can get 3400 MHz stable at even lower Timings..
> 
> @elmor, can you explain this?


Honestly I am more stable now than on 0804. I have 3533 stable with ridiculously tight timings now barring a 10 hour rock solid stability test. It’s 3 hours stablest the moment on HCI MemTest and it’s passed TM5 as well. Almost want to say this is the most stable my ram has ever been but I don’t want to jinx it.


----------



## hurricane28

CJMitsuki said:


> Honestly I am more stable now than on 0804. I have 3533 stable with ridiculously tight timings now barring a 10 hour rock solid stability test. It’s 3 hours stablest the moment on HCI MemTest and it’s passed TM5 as well. Almost want to say this is the most stable my ram has ever been but I don’t want to jinx it.


Good to hear that you are stable man, that doesn't really help me though. It might me be but i want to know what i am doing wrong than. I tried the same settings as before and i was stable and now i am not.. Go figure man. 

Would you mind sharing your BIOS screens so i can have a peek? Much obliged.


----------



## CJMitsuki

hurricane28 said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Honestly I am more stable now than on 0804. I have 3533 stable with ridiculously tight timings now barring a 10 hour rock solid stability test. It’s 3 hours stablest the moment on HCI MemTest and it’s passed TM5 as well. Almost want to say this is the most stable my ram has ever been but I don’t want to jinx it.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, I’ll post the txt file of my bios here as soon as I’m home for lunch in about 20 min.
> 
> Good to hear that you are stable man, that doesn't really help me though. It might me be but i want to know what i am doing wrong than. I tried the same settings as before and i was stable and now i am not.. Go figure man.
> 
> Would you mind sharing your BIOS screens so i can have a peek? Much obliged.
Click to expand...

Sure, as soon as I am home for lunch I will post the txt file of my settings. To be fair, I changed my timings right after flashing 1001 so I’m not sure if I was stable on my prior configuration as I found a setup that was much better right before flashing so I didn’t notice anything out of the ordinary


----------



## hurricane28

CJMitsuki said:


> Sure, as soon as I am home for lunch I will post the txt file of my settings. To be fair, I changed my timings right after flashing 1001 so I’m not sure if I was stable on my prior configuration as I found a setup that was much better right before flashing so I didn’t notice anything out of the ordinary



Much obliged man. Looking forward to it. But i do think i have an solution though. Its temps.. when ever it hits 40+c its spouting errors like no tomorrow.. put a fan on it and it runs much better.


----------



## CJMitsuki

hurricane28 said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sure, as soon as I am home for lunch I will post the txt file of my settings. To be fair, I changed my timings right after flashing 1001 so I’m not sure if I was stable on my prior configuration as I found a setup that was much better right before flashing so I didn’t notice anything out of the ordinary
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Much obliged man. Looking forward to it. But i do think i have an solution though. Its temps.. when ever it hits 40+c its spouting errors like no tomorrow.. put a fan on it and it runs much better.
Click to expand...

 Yeah, I took an old Gtx 660 apart and made a bracket from some metal salvaged from an old case and made my own ram cooler. After 10 hours of heavy ram testing it barely hits 34c.


Heres the txt file 

View attachment CjMitsuki_setting.txt


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Much obliged man. Looking forward to it. But i do think i have an solution though. Its temps.. when ever it hits 40+c its spouting errors like no tomorrow.. put a fan on it and it runs much better.


I've found that 40*C is about when my RAM will start throwing errors when its on the edge of stability. I have a 140mm Noctua fan sitting on my video card directly in front of my RAM to keep the temps down and the RAM sticks at the same temps.


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> Yeah, I took an old Gtx 660 apart and made a bracket from some metal salvaged from an old case and made my own ram cooler. After 10 hours of heavy ram testing it barely hits 34c.
> 
> 
> Heres the txt file
> 
> View attachment 223234


That.is.awesome. It ain't the prettiest, but I applaud the solution. I just have a fan sitting on top of my video card pointing at the RAM. My solution doesn't keep my RAM as cool as yours, however. It can still get up to 41*C during longer RAM tests.


----------



## hurricane28

CJMitsuki said:


> Yeah, I took an old Gtx 660 apart and made a bracket from some metal salvaged from an old case and made my own ram cooler. After 10 hours of heavy ram testing it barely hits 34c.
> 
> 
> Heres the txt file
> 
> View attachment 223234


Thnx man, much obliged. 

What ever works works man. I never had any temp issues with my RAM so i was kinda surprised i have this time.. 

I am stable now at 346 MHz:


----------



## CJMitsuki

hurricane28 said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, I took an old Gtx 660 apart and made a bracket from some metal salvaged from an old case and made my own ram cooler. After 10 hours of heavy ram testing it barely hits 34c.
> 
> 
> Heres the txt file
> 
> View attachment 223234
> 
> 
> 
> Thnx man, much obliged.
> 
> What ever works works man. I never had any temp issues with my RAM so i was kinda surprised i have this time..
> 
> I am stable now at 346 MHz:
Click to expand...

I don’t have temp problems with ram but the colder you can keep it the tighter you can get the timings and the higher you can get the frequency at those timings. 3466 with timings tightened perfectly can beat 3600 in performance since it’s very rare that someone can get 3600 to 14-14-14-22-36 along with all the other timings. It’s damn near impossible on Ryzen at present. I won’t even attempt to go back to 3600 until that is possible. It’s just not good enough. Bandwidth is never a good trade off for latency.


----------



## hurricane28

Agreed man. But speed and timings is not king in every situation. It depends on what your workload is and for 3D and professional work loads 3466 MHz Cl14 is the best of both worlds. 

3600 MHz indeed is not worth it as of now because of the high timings, i tested this with my 1600 CPU and i got better performance out of 3466 MHz Cl14 than 3600 MHz Cl16.


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> I don’t have temp problems with ram but the colder you can keep it the tighter you can get the timings and the higher you can get the frequency at those timings. 3466 with timings tightened perfectly can beat 3600 in performance since it’s very rare that someone can get 3600 to 14-14-14-22-36 along with all the other timings. It’s damn near impossible on Ryzen at present. I won’t even attempt to go back to 3600 until that is possible. It’s just not good enough. Bandwidth is never a good trade off for latency.


Yeah, I can't get my 3600MHz stable at 14-14-14 anything. With 14-15-14 I can get damn close though.

Edit:

I always get lower latency with higher RAM speeds though. Even with slightly looser timings than what I can set for 3466MHz -- 3600MHz has lower latency and much more bandwidth.


----------



## Copyright

crakej said:


> Not sure what your problem is then? It would be useful if you would put you system details in your sig, just click on Tools>Quick Links>Edit My Sig above.
> 
> Which bios are you using? 1001 s the current 'fixed' bios
> 
> Edit: you actually said *'I can't even use any monitoring programs without my this board having issues.. NZXT CAM software has problems.. AI Suite III has issues and so does Argus monitor.'* - we do not all share this problem!.... i sure don't...
> 
> Also meant to say, I have had quicker post times, but have not been able to keep those settings for stability.




I enabled NZXT CAM and all is good.. seems I just can't use it with AI SUITE III... If i do the pc will just power off randomly like a hard shutdown.. just a quick blink and off.. removing AI SUITE III is fine. I had issues where fans were locking up I saw reported by others. This messed with my monitoring programs. It would. make Argus do a weird kind of lockup. It may not be all as it seems to be a combination creating the issue. I don't believe it's a bad board and every combination of installed software is different. I have been doing tech work for over 20 years and have seen some strange things create issues. 

Are you running NZXT, CUE and AI SUITE III With custom fan curves without issue? They had to release a bios fix to correct this issue.. any chance at all it's not 100% fixed? I can replicate it every time.. run a fan calibration in AI SUITE with NZXT CAM up and running will cause power off at the end of the calibration everytime. When it does this I have to kill power at the PSU to get it to POST again and usually have to reapply my BIOS settings... Now my NZXT cam has the HUE+ and Kracken X62 so I imagine the combination would need to be the same to create the problem. I have not tried it again since the new 1001 bios.. From what I read we have another coming at the end of this month with more updates. I uninstalled AI SUITE III.. all issues went away. 

Although some of these posts are older this is the same issue I am having now.. Trying to reach out to some of these ppl to see if there is any confirmation it actually got fixed or if they gave up on AI SUITE III and certain monitoring apps.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/8g7ae0/psa_asus_crosshair_7_x470_random_shutdowns_paging/

There is a post on the ROG page for some reason I cannot open today but I found a few in that forum..

Read the first review on this board..
http://www.microcenter.com/product/506163/crosshair-vii-hero-am4-atx-amd-motherboard

Other than this issue the board is 100% stable passing everything I can throw at it.... is there a particular set of stress testing that works best for Ryzen 2? Maybe I am missing one.


Just started to think of my AI SUITE III version... went back and found I had used version VER30013.... version 30016 is out..Maybe this is the problem? Also wanted to thank you for the replies..Seems lately it's hard to get any. Glad I found this thread!


----------



## R0CK3T

hurricane28 said:


> I don't know what Assus is doing to our BIOS but the latest 1001 BIOS prevents me from stabilizing even 3400 MHz RAM.. I was always stable at 3466 MHz but now i can't even stabilize 3400 MHz..
> 
> A friend of mine who has an Gigabyte board which is 100 euro's cheaper can get 3400 MHz stable at even lower Timings..
> 
> @elmor, can you explain this?


For 3466 on 1001 try this settings: 

1.40v

tCK: 6
CL: 16
TAA: 16
TRCD: 16
TRP: 16
TRAS: 36
TRC: 52
TFAW: 41
TRRD_S: 4
TRRD_L: 9
TRFC1: 596
TRFC2: 443
TRFC4: 273
CR: 2

The rest set it to auto it's been working for me rock solid.


----------



## VPII

Sorry if I ask a silly question, but I seem to have missed where to get the 1001 bios. Can someone direct me please?


----------



## Elrick

VPII said:


> Sorry if I ask a silly question, but I seem to have missed where to get the 1001 bios. Can someone direct me please?



Suspect it's beta version only.


Still no update from 0804 off their website.


----------



## MNMadman

VPII said:


> Sorry if I ask a silly question, but I seem to have missed where to get the 1001 bios. Can someone direct me please?


First post of this thread has a link for the latest releases for C7H and C7H-WIFI. Elmor announces them in this thread when they become available.


----------



## madbrayniak

I just picked up this motherboard with 2700X and G.Skill Trident Z 3200 CL14 RAM. 

Putting this together next week.

Very excited!


----------



## hurricane28

R0CK3T said:


> For 3466 on 1001 try this settings:
> 
> 1.40v
> 
> tCK: 6
> CL: 16
> TAA: 16
> TRCD: 16
> TRP: 16
> TRAS: 36
> TRC: 52
> TFAW: 41
> TRRD_S: 4
> TRRD_L: 9
> TRFC1: 596
> TRFC2: 443
> TRFC4: 273
> CR: 2
> 
> The rest set it to auto it's been working for me rock solid.



Look at the top of this page. I already stated that i am stable again and it were the RAM temps. I placed an fan over them and all is well now. 

Will try for 3533 MHz today or even 3600 tight.


----------



## crakej

I'm also more reliable on bios 1001 

Have almost finished move to new (Core X5) case - it's all working, but needs tidying up. The whole rig runs cooler now and I havn't even set it up exactly how I want it yet....


----------



## hurricane28

Okay, than it might be me doing something wrong. 

I am still tweaking but it seems that i am the most stable at 4.2 GHz CPU and 3466 MHz RAM. ANY higher results in dramatically higher voltages or drastically loosen timings.


----------



## Deyjandi

Anyone tried the new AURA version? It doesn't even detect my motherboard..


----------



## hurricane28

Deyjandi said:


> Anyone tried the new AURA version? It doesn't even detect my motherboard..


Running fine here since released it.


----------



## Copyright

1001 seems more stable.. about to retest my ram which is 4x8 3200mhz stable in memtest and OCCT. For whatever reason AI Suite III opens much faster now since bios update. Let PC run overnight and I didn't get any random power off which is another good sign. The real test for me will be running fan calibration... Guess I will give it a shot..

Just had AI SUITE III show zero fan speeds for some reason like the fan readings locked up and so did CPU temp.. all went red... this happened before also.


----------



## lordzed83

I see Everyone is using FAN OVER RAM mod I'w started back on C6H hahaha.
If it goes for Memory speed I'w ran so much tests of video production gaming benchmarks ect. And average best setting on My system is 3466 cl14. Tested up to 3533/3600cl14 and where there are SOME gains in few benchmarks other ones and gaming scores are Lower !!!

Even Mining cryptos with cpu is slower !!!!

If You want to have a good laugh watch this  Found out that typical Joe got 64gb of memory in system nowadays


----------



## Onijin

Copyright said:


> 1001 seems more stable..


Agreed. My CPU and RAM overclocks seem a lot more stable, to the point where I can flip PB4 on and not have it pitch a fit every 5 seconds. My only ***** is that the machine refuses to wake from S3 now under any settings.


----------



## Deyjandi

hurricane28 said:


> Running fine here since released it.


i mean the beta version released today


----------



## Copyright

Onijin said:


> Agreed. My CPU and RAM overclocks seem a lot more stable, to the point where I can flip PB4 on and not have it pitch a fit every 5 seconds. My only ***** is that the machine refuses to wake from S3 now under any settings.


I need to test sleep.. it was working fine before.. Only issue I am having is AI Suite III so far and a weird issue using Argus. Could be a combination of things as I use CUE and CAM both which I am told is fixed.


----------



## Copyright

lordzed83 said:


> I see Everyone is using FAN OVER RAM mod I'w started back on C6H hahaha.
> If it goes for Memory speed I'w ran so much tests of video production gaming benchmarks ect. And average best setting on My system is 3466 cl14. Tested up to 3533/3600cl14 and where there are SOME gains in few benchmarks other ones and gaming scores are Lower !!!
> 
> Even Mining cryptos with cpu is slower !!!!
> 
> If You want to have a good laugh watch this  Found out that typical Joe got 64gb of memory in system nowadays
> https://youtu.be/qzshhrIj2EY



That video... wow... The real review sites like Gamers Nexus will show us the true results.


----------



## crakej

Copyright said:


> 1001 seems more stable.. about to retest my ram which is 4x8 3200mhz stable in memtest and OCCT. For whatever reason AI Suite III opens much faster now since bios update. Let PC run overnight and I didn't get any random power off which is another good sign. The real test for me will be running fan calibration... Guess I will give it a shot..
> 
> Just had AI SUITE III show zero fan speeds for some reason like the fan readings locked up and so did CPU temp.. all went red... this happened before also.


You're using the latest version?

Are you using any other monitoring s/w which may not have been updated yet?


----------



## Copyright

crakej said:


> You're using the latest version?
> 
> Are you using any other monitoring s/w which may not have been updated yet?


Everything appears to be the latest version.. I had all my normal apps open to see if the issue was still there.. I have not done the fan calibration yet which alwasy used to power it right off. 

I went to run the fan calibration and noticed my CPU temp was 00 and my fans speeds were all 000 and all red.. So I launched Argus to confirm and the fans were working fine and at their normal speeds. Honestly AI SUITE III is not a must although I really wish I could use Argus Monitor. It looks at everything including video card temps, HD temps and health etc.. also has a nice fan control feature. Something somewhere is not playing friendly.. and I am afraid its a combination of programs causing it which makes it harder to track. The issues are so random when they happen.

Is it me or did they just release a new Bios 0012? I saw that for the wifi version did not see one for non wifi.


----------



## MNMadman

Copyright said:


> Is it me or did they just release a new Bios 0012? I saw that for the wifi version did not see one for non wifi.


This was a test BIOS for the C7H-WIFI from before 1001 was released.


----------



## crakej

Hmmm - the temps in the WMI section of HWInfo is NOT showing the right temps - doesn't match T-die or cpu-diode?

Just going to get next beta see if that's any better....


----------



## crakej

So, while my machine isn't crashing - in fact no crashes for ages, I am having a problem with HWInfo WMI section freezing almost immediately. (Latest beta) - explains strange temps!

T-die working, temps are in fact fine.

It looks like AUSuite.exe is causing the WMI values in HWInfo to stick (we've been here before right?). ASUSFanService is fine and doesn't cause this.

This is only a readout error - the system reliability is not affected.

I also note that (especially when i've woken from sleep, code 30) fans are jittery - you can actually see the orange dot moving too high (and below!) the rpm (AISuite) that's been set. _Sometimes_ 'fixed' by changing some arbitrary setting on a fan and clicking 'apply'. Can you think of anything that might be causing this @elmor?

Edit: The fan actually drops to the speed the dot has gone down to even though it's below the min?


----------



## nick name

Is there an updated Q Code key? Every code I get isn't listed. Or sometimes it will sit and cycle through the same 5 or 6 codes at a half-second pace.


----------



## crakej

Done some more experimenting this morning....

WMI section in HWInfo64 is freezing when AISuite.exe is running. This does not affect anything though, system is running fine.

WMI section in SIV is working PERFECTLY while running AISuite.exe

ASUS Fan Service is NOT causing any problems... so far!


----------



## hurricane28

crakej said:


> So, while my machine isn't crashing - in fact no crashes for ages, I am having a problem with HWInfo WMI section freezing almost immediately. (Latest beta) - explains strange temps!
> 
> T-die working, temps are in fact fine.
> 
> It looks like AUSuite.exe is causing the WMI values in HWInfo to stick (we've been here before right?). ASUSFanService is fine and doesn't cause this.
> 
> This is only a readout error - the system reliability is not affected.
> 
> I also note that (especially when i've woken from sleep, code 30) fans are jittery - you can actually see the orange dot moving too high (and below!) the rpm (AISuite) that's been set. _Sometimes_ 'fixed' by changing some arbitrary setting on a fan and clicking 'apply'. Can you think of anything that might be causing this @elmor?
> 
> Edit: The fan actually drops to the speed the dot has gone down to even though it's below the min?


I think its "fan expert" which is no expert at all, nothing but trouble with Alsuite or Fan expert. Uninstall it and never use it again if you don't want problems.


----------



## crakej

hurricane28 said:


> I think its "fan expert" which is no expert at all, nothing but trouble with Alsuite or Fan expert. Uninstall it and never use it again if you don't want problems.


You are wrong. It's been almost completely reliable for me. No more unreliable than anything else. You're telling people not to use something that for many, works (almost!) perfectly. Your statement is unfounded and has no substance in fact at all!

Also, I was reporting test results - I did not make it up. And I spent time doing it. Have some respect when people take their time doing tests, trying to help others. I don't 'think' - I have made tests and told you the results. Just in case it wasn't clear enough:

AISuite runs *just fine*, nothing wrong, *correct* readings, all while running NOTHING else, no programs and *no other monitoring s/w*.

If I then run HWInfo (latest release) the WMI figures can get stuck fairly quickly. If and when it does happen, it *does not affect proper operation.*

This does *NOT happen* when just running AsusFanControlService.exe *only* when running AISuite.exe. It doesn't always happen - *I'm not certain yet*, but seems I can only get it to happen after sleep when you have code 30 instead of 24 when you first boot. When I have more time I will test more, but this happens consistently after sleep.

Also tested was using SIV with AISuite - *all works as expected*.

FanXpert is actually really good and has helped me to find the fan problems I mentioned a couple of pages back.


----------



## hurricane28

crakej said:


> You are wrong. It's been almost completely reliable for me. No more unreliable than anything else. You're telling people not to use something that for many, works (almost!) perfectly. Your statement is unfounded and has no substance in fact at all!
> 
> Also, I was reporting test results - I did not make it up. And I spent time doing it. Have some respect when people take their time doing tests, trying to help others. I don't 'think' - I have made tests and told you the results. Just in case it wasn't clear enough:
> 
> AISuite runs *just fine*, nothing wrong, *correct* readings, all while running NOTHING else, no programs and *no other monitoring s/w*.
> 
> If I then run HWInfo (latest release) the WMI figures can get stuck fairly quickly. If and when it does happen, it *does not affect proper operation.*
> 
> This does *NOT happen* when just running AsusFanControlService.exe *only* when running AISuite.exe. It doesn't always happen - *I'm not certain yet*, but seems I can only get it to happen after sleep when you have code 30 instead of 24 when you first boot. When I have more time I will test more, but this happens consistently after sleep.
> 
> Also tested was using SIV with AISuite - *all works as expected*.
> 
> FanXpert is actually really good and has helped me to find the fan problems I mentioned a couple of pages back.



Wauw, took a lot of sugar today or something? Jeez. 

I tried Alsuite for a couple of years now and its nothing but trouble for me ever since the 990FX Sabertooth motherboard.. So yeah, my statement does found and has substance as well man. I never had problems only after i installed Alsuite.. Go look over at the ROG forums man, full of people with problems with Alsuite.. 

Perhaps they fixed it by now but i have been waiting for a couple of years now but maybe they found that its the extremely erratic IT sensor that is causing this. If they fixed it i would be very happy and will use it again without an doubt but don't say that my statements have no ground because that is just plain wrong dude.


----------



## elmor

C7H WIFI 1101 (only wifi for now)

- AGESA 1.0.0.6

https://www.mediafire.com/file/23ii93bbsmxnn3s/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-1101.zip/file




crakej said:


> You are wrong. It's been almost completely reliable for me. No more unreliable than anything else. You're telling people not to use something that for many, works (almost!) perfectly. Your statement is unfounded and has no substance in fact at all!
> 
> Also, I was reporting test results - I did not make it up. And I spent time doing it. Have some respect when people take their time doing tests, trying to help others. I don't 'think' - I have made tests and told you the results. Just in case it wasn't clear enough:
> 
> AISuite runs *just fine*, nothing wrong, *correct* readings, all while running NOTHING else, no programs and *no other monitoring s/w*.
> 
> If I then run HWInfo (latest release) the WMI figures can get stuck fairly quickly. If and when it does happen, it *does not affect proper operation.*
> 
> This does *NOT happen* when just running AsusFanControlService.exe *only* when running AISuite.exe. It doesn't always happen - *I'm not certain yet*, but seems I can only get it to happen after sleep when you have code 30 instead of 24 when you first boot. When I have more time I will test more, but this happens consistently after sleep.
> 
> Also tested was using SIV with AISuite - *all works as expected*.
> 
> FanXpert is actually really good and has helped me to find the fan problems I mentioned a couple of pages back.



I'll try to look into this next week.


----------



## Syldon

crakej said:


> You are wrong. It's been almost completely reliable for me. No more unreliable than anything else. You're telling people not to use something that for many, works (almost!) perfectly. Your statement is unfounded and has no substance in fact at all!
> 
> Also, I was reporting test results - I did not make it up. And I spent time doing it. Have some respect when people take their time doing tests, trying to help others. I don't 'think' - I have made tests and told you the results. Just in case it wasn't clear enough:
> 
> AISuite runs *just fine*, nothing wrong, *correct* readings, all while running NOTHING else, no programs and *no other monitoring s/w*.
> 
> If I then run HWInfo (latest release) the WMI figures can get stuck fairly quickly. If and when it does happen, it *does not affect proper operation.*
> 
> This does *NOT happen* when just running AsusFanControlService.exe *only* when running AISuite.exe. It doesn't always happen - *I'm not certain yet*, but seems I can only get it to happen after sleep when you have code 30 instead of 24 when you first boot. When I have more time I will test more, but this happens consistently after sleep.
> 
> Also tested was using SIV with AISuite - *all works as expected*.
> 
> FanXpert is actually really good and has helped me to find the fan problems I mentioned a couple of pages back.


There has been many complaints about this software. And I totally agree if it is working then it is a very easy interface to get to grips with.

But, just because you are not seeing any issues doesnt mean they are not there. I personally have never used this software. Seeing the complaints about it was enough to dissuade me. 

Many have asked for fixes for fan issues, crashing and a myriad of other faults. Until Asus release a version with verified fault fixes then the best advice is to use the options in the bios. This reduces the problems associated with middlemen programmes like this and Windows.


----------



## Conenubi701

elmor said:


> C7H WIFI 1101 (only wifi for now)
> 
> - AGESA 1.0.0.6
> 
> https://www.mediafire.com/file/23ii93bbsmxnn3s/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-1101.zip/file




Testing it out shortly, thanks Elmor!


----------



## crakej

hurricane28 said:


> Wauw, took a lot of sugar today or something? Jeez.
> 
> I tried Alsuite for a couple of years now and its nothing but trouble for me ever since the 990FX Sabertooth motherboard.. So yeah, my statement does found and has substance as well man. I never had problems only after i installed Alsuite.. Go look over at the ROG forums man, full of people with problems with Alsuite..
> 
> Perhaps they fixed it by now but i have been waiting for a couple of years now but maybe they found that its the extremely erratic IT sensor that is causing this. If they fixed it i would be very happy and will use it again without an doubt but don't say that my statements have no ground because that is just plain wrong dude.


No, just hate it when people make completely false statements. If AISuite was as bad as you feel it is, it wouldn't be released....

So it doesn't work for _you_ - that does not mean AISuite does not work! For many it works just fine. It's had it fair share of problems in the past I know, but so has most monitoring s/w. Also, the most common 'faults' we have had on CH7 with AISuite is when it's been run in conjunction with other s/w that was incompatible. I don't see many with our board complaining. If it doesn't do what you want, then investigate and explain what it's doing/not doing for you, *with* test results to back it up. That's all I ask. Of course they have been working on it, improving it, and yes, it works much better than it used to!

Now, New Bios and new AGESA - this will be fun!

edit - oh no! WiFi only


----------



## crakej

elmor said:


> C7H WIFI 1101 (only wifi for now)
> 
> - AGESA 1.0.0.6
> 
> https://www.mediafire.com/file/23ii93bbsmxnn3s/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-1101.zip/file
> 
> I'll try to look into this next week.


Thanks @elmor Much appreciated. If you need any other tests, let me know.... now have decent access to my probit points so will be doing more investigating.


----------



## crakej

Syldon said:


> There has been many complaints about this software. And I totally agree if it is working then it is a very easy interface to get to grips with.
> 
> But, just because you are not seeing any issues doesn't mean they are not there. I personally have never used this software. Seeing the complaints about it was enough to dissuade me.
> 
> Many have asked for fixes for fan issues, crashing and a myriad of other faults. Until Asus release a version with verified fault fixes then the best advice is to use the options in the bios. This reduces the problems associated with middlemen programmes like this and Windows.


AISuite has been kept up to date with the new WMI interface actually and works well. Most complaints are coming from people who were not using the software correctly. If you look back at my posts I have never made it out to be the best thing since sliced bread - quite the contrary. No software is 100% reliable, it can't be (ex software engineer here) due to the massively complex systems it runs on.

I avoided AISuite for a while because of the forums, but glad I use it now. If you have a problem with it just report it - but you can't just make statements like 'it doesn't work - 'un-install it' - it's just not true! I've made proper tests before making my statements about it - just wish others would too!


----------



## chakku

elmor said:


> C7H WIFI 1101 (only wifi for now)
> 
> - AGESA 1.0.0.6
> 
> https://www.mediafire.com/file/23ii93bbsmxnn3s/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-1101.zip/file


Does this include the WMI fixes from the previous test BIOS?


----------



## nick name

elmor said:


> C7H WIFI 1101 (only wifi for now)
> 
> - AGESA 1.0.0.6
> 
> https://www.mediafire.com/file/23ii93bbsmxnn3s/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-1101.zip/file
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll try to look into this next week.


Sweeeeeeeet. It isn't even my birthday yet. Are there any changes from 1001 other than AGESA?


----------



## crakej

chakku said:


> Does this include the WMI fixes from the previous test BIOS?


yes


----------



## hurricane28

crakej said:


> No, just hate it when people make completely false statements. If AISuite was as bad as you feel it is, it wouldn't be released....
> 
> So it doesn't work for _you_ - that does not mean AISuite does not work! For many it works just fine. It's had it fair share of problems in the past I know, but so has most monitoring s/w. Also, the most common 'faults' we have had on CH7 with AISuite is when it's been run in conjunction with other s/w that was incompatible. I don't see many with our board complaining. If it doesn't do what you want, then investigate and explain what it's doing/not doing for you, *with* test results to back it up. That's all I ask. Of course they have been working on it, improving it, and yes, it works much better than it used to!
> 
> Now, New Bios and new AGESA - this will be fun!
> 
> edit - oh no! WiFi only


Man, you better hold that aggressive tone of yours as it doesn't contribute to anything and is based on an opinion not facts. 

I did a lot of research about the faulty IT sensor which is causing this erratic fan/ temp issue in my C6H time and i have had good conversations with Elmor and The Stilt about this which resulted in further investigation regarding the issues. I am not saying that i am the cause or started anything but i think for sure its been 1% due to my feed back "complaints" they investigated more in to this. 

What i said was my own experience among many others which is likely caused by the extremely erratic and unreliable IT8665E which is Asus now trying to fix and i really hope they can do it. 

I am flashing BIOS tomorrow if i can hold myself back lol.


----------



## hurricane28

elmor said:


> C7H WIFI 1101 (only wifi for now)
> 
> - AGESA 1.0.0.6
> 
> https://www.mediafire.com/file/23ii93bbsmxnn3s/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-1101.zip/file
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll try to look into this next week.



Thnx Elmor, much obliged! Even before my birthday lol. 

Can you tell us what we can expect from this new AGESA and what should be improved? thnx.


----------



## hurricane28

-deleted-


----------



## chakku

hurricane28 said:


> https://www.anandtech.com/show/11447/amd-announces-ryzen-agesa-1006-update


This is for SummitPi - notice the article is from 2017.


----------



## hurricane28

chakku said:


> This is for SummitPi - notice the article is from 2017.


lol yeah i saw that too late. Sorry for that.


----------



## chakku

crakej said:


> yes


I hope you're right.

I have noticed that POST on at least a reboot is a tad faster now? Watching the codes on the display flash during a boot makes it apparent that some codes/checks seem to be skipped or not shown now. Might just be me going crazy.


----------



## sr1030nx

hurricane28 said:


> https://www.anandtech.com/show/11447/amd-announces-ryzen-agesa-1006-update




That's a link from last year's previous AGESA.


----------



## crakej

hurricane28 said:


> Man, you better hold that aggressive tone of yours as it doesn't contribute to anything and is based on an opinion not facts.
> 
> I did a lot of research about the faulty IT sensor which is causing this erratic fan/ temp issue in my C6H time and i have had good conversations with Elmor and The Stilt about this which resulted in further investigation regarding the issues. I am not saying that i am the cause or started anything but i think for sure its been 1% due to my feed back "complaints" they investigated more in to this.
> 
> What i said was my own experience among many others which is likely caused by the extremely erratic and unreliable IT8665E which is Asus now trying to fix and i really hope they can do it.
> 
> I am flashing BIOS tomorrow if i can hold myself back lol.


Look, I don't know if you remember but we've had this > discussion before... I apologize (if) you feel I was being aggressive, but you were dismissive of my test results. As I said before it's a shame you feel like this as I've found information you've provided before to be extremely useful. I have no doubt that your feedback contributes much - I know this to be true, but it helps no one to just make sweeping statements with no testing and/or results.

Peace to you Hurricane28 - I'm a very peaceful, non-aggressive chap and it upsets me a bit to think I might have upset you by being aggressive. I hope this isn't really the case?  I better go have a smoke....


----------



## hurricane28

crakej said:


> Look, I don't know if you remember but we've had this > discussion before... I apologize (if) you feel I was being aggressive, but you were dismissive of my test results. As I said before it's a shame you feel like this as I've found information you've provided before to be extremely useful. I have no doubt that your feedback contributes much - I know this to be true, but it helps no one to just make sweeping statements with no testing and/or results.
> 
> Peace to you Hurricane28 - I'm a very peaceful, non-aggressive chap and it upsets me a bit to think I might have upset you by being aggressive. I hope this isn't really the case?  I better go have a smoke....



I hear ya man. No probs here or hard feelings. 

I don't smoke anymore, i actually quit for over 6 months now, haven't regret it ever since man.


----------



## crakej

hurricane28 said:


> I hear ya man. No probs here or hard feelings.
> 
> I don't smoke anymore, i actually quit for over 6 months now, haven't regret it ever since man.


Well done man! - I've actually quit as well - coming up for 4months. It's not easy!

It's good you've quit - I was one of the unlucky ones and have had lung cancer, and I can assure you it's not nice! I'm lucky enough to have been 'cured' - but even having had cancer, it's still very hard to actually quit. Evil tobacco! Of course in hindsight I knew I should have quit years ago, so well done and not waiting to get cancer!

Have you had a chance to test new bios?


----------



## nick name

I was hoping AGESA 1.0.0.6 would address this, but the behavior still persists. When I try to use odd numbered primary timings 13 13(or 14) 13 13 or 15 15(or 16) 15 15 it fails to post, but doesn't give just one Q code -- it cycles through: 14 03 56 dE Ad F3 in half-second increments. Has anyone seen this or cured it? The peculiar thing is I can post and boot even numbered timings at the same speeds that odd numbered timings will fail.


----------



## MNMadman

elmor said:


> C7H WIFI 1101 (only wifi for now)
> 
> - AGESA 1.0.0.6
> 
> https://www.mediafire.com/file/23ii93bbsmxnn3s/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-1101.zip/file


So glad I got the WiFi version. Great that we get to test stuff out first...



nick name said:


> I was hoping AGESA 1.0.0.6 would address this, but the behavior still persists. When I try to use odd number primary timings 13 13(or 14) 13 13 or 15 15(or 16) 15 15 it fails to post, but doesn't just give just one Q code -- it cycles through: 14 03 56 dE Ad F3 in half-second increments. Has anyone seen this or cured it? The odd thing is I can post and boot even timings at the same speeds that odd timings fail at.


I did have that happen one time when I was trying manual tuning of the timings. I "cured" it by resetting the BIOS and starting over. Not too helpful.

I'm currently running The Stilt's 3466 preset which uses 15-15-15-15 timings with no issue. This is with a G.Skill GTZRX 3200 2x8GB kit.


----------



## nick name

MNMadman said:


> So glad I got the WiFi version. Great that we get to test stuff out first...
> 
> 
> I did have that happen one time when I was trying manual tuning of the timings. I "cured" it by resetting the BIOS and starting over. Not too helpful.
> 
> I'm currently running The Stilt's 3466 preset which uses 15-15-15-15 timings with no issue. This is with a G.Skill GTZRX 3200 2x8GB kit.


Yeah, I am glad I got the WiFi version as well -- especially because Newegg had it like $60 off when I bought it which made it cheaper than the non-WiFi.

And I appreciate you mentioning your experience with the issue. I am running 3540 at 14-14-14-14 currently. I can't get 3600 at straight 14s. I was trying to run 3800MHz at 15-16-15-15 when I ran into the issue most recently. I can get it to POST and boot at 14-15-14-14, but not with 15-16-15-15. I tried 3400 or 3466 (I can't remember which) at 13-14-13-13, but ran into the issue. Again, though, it would POST and boot at 12-13-12-12. In both cases I was just trying to back the timing off a bit to check to see how much stability I could gain.


----------



## lordzed83

elmor said:


> C7H WIFI 1101 (only wifi for now)
> 
> - AGESA 1.0.0.6
> 
> https://www.mediafire.com/file/23ii93bbsmxnn3s/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-1101.zip/file
> 
> 
> Shiet was not expecting this till next week. Shame im on old school lan party. We dragged pcs from all over uk to Birmingham. Cant wait to gets sone tests going but till monday


----------



## R0CK3T

elmor said:


> C7H WIFI 1101 (only wifi for now)
> 
> - AGESA 1.0.0.6
> 
> https://www.mediafire.com/file/23ii93bbsmxnn3s/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-1101.zip/file
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll try to look into this next week.


I noticed a small bug, when XMP is enabled and I try to change the CL to 15 it stays on 16, it will go down to 14 but it wont stay on 15.


----------



## chakku

R0CK3T said:


> I noticed a small bug, when XMP is enabled and I try to change the CL to 15 it stays on 16, it will go down to 14 but it wont stay on 15.


Disable Geardown Mode.


----------



## Copyright

crakej said:


> You are wrong. It's been almost completely reliable for me. No more unreliable than anything else. You're telling people not to use something that for many, works (almost!) perfectly. Your statement is unfounded and has no substance in fact at all!
> 
> Also, I was reporting test results - I did not make it up. And I spent time doing it. Have some respect when people take their time doing tests, trying to help others. I don't 'think' - I have made tests and told you the results. Just in case it wasn't clear enough:
> 
> AISuite runs *just fine*, nothing wrong, *correct* readings, all while running NOTHING else, no programs and *no other monitoring s/w*.
> 
> If I then run HWInfo (latest release) the WMI figures can get stuck fairly quickly. If and when it does happen, it *does not affect proper operation.*
> 
> This does *NOT happen* when just running AsusFanControlService.exe *only* when running AISuite.exe. It doesn't always happen - *I'm not certain yet*, but seems I can only get it to happen after sleep when you have code 30 instead of 24 when you first boot. When I have more time I will test more, but this happens consistently after sleep.
> 
> Also tested was using SIV with AISuite - *all works as expected*.
> 
> FanXpert is actually really good and has helped me to find the fan problems I mentioned a couple of pages back.


My AI SUITE III only seems to have issues with NZXT CAM.. its no wonder you aren't experiencing what we are if you aren't using CAM which works fine with gigabyte and Asrock boards. My Ai SUITE sensors seem to get stuck and stop reading fan speeds and cpu temp.. strange thing is if I launch argus I can see everything just fine. If you were trying to run NZXT CAM and AI SUITE I imagine you would have issues as well. I have been talking to others still having these problems but what can you do. Been building PC's for over 20 years and this is a very annoying bug as anything I am using to try and control my fans seems to give me problems other than letting bios do it on it's own which I dislike. AI Suite was the main reason I come back to Asus.. After building two Asrock builds I must say those boards are extremely smooth running and very very fast to POST. The fan control in bios does a far better job at calibrating the fans. Is what it is.. I uninstalled AI SUITE and don't use Argus monitor and all issues are gone. For me had I known this it would have been a deal breaker.


----------



## Copyright

hurricane28 said:


> Man, you better hold that aggressive tone of yours as it doesn't contribute to anything and is based on an opinion not facts.
> 
> I did a lot of research about the faulty IT sensor which is causing this erratic fan/ temp issue in my C6H time and i have had good conversations with Elmor and The Stilt about this which resulted in further investigation regarding the issues. I am not saying that i am the cause or started anything but i think for sure its been 1% due to my feed back "complaints" they investigated more in to this.
> 
> What i said was my own experience among many others which is likely caused by the extremely erratic and unreliable IT8665E which is Asus now trying to fix and i really hope they can do it.
> 
> I am flashing BIOS tomorrow if i can hold myself back lol.


Sounds like you have had as much fun as I have with AI SUITE... after 10 years with asus this is my first AI Suite issue.. Works kinda ok if no other monitoring software liek NZXT CAM is in use.. but I get locked up readings of 0 on fans and cpu temp after awhile.. THought my software was out of date but it was actually updated.. the only thing out of date was just the EZ updater utility..


----------



## R0CK3T

chakku said:


> Disable Geardown Mode.


Damn!! you are good, I guess I'm the bug

Thanks!!!


----------



## MNMadman

elmor said:


> C7H WIFI 1101 (only wifi for now)
> 
> - AGESA 1.0.0.6
> 
> https://www.mediafire.com/file/23ii93bbsmxnn3s/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-1101.zip/file


Test Report:

Installed 1101 as I normally do...

1. Load optimized defaults, reboot.
2. Verify that it reset to defaults.
3. Use USB BIOS Flashback.
4. Load optimized defaults, reboot.
5. Manually put in all of my desired settings, one BIOS section at a time, rebooting between each (I don't save profiles).
6. Boot into Windows.

This update temporarily borked my GPU and WiFi when I first booted into Windows. Both drivers had to reset and reload (screen blanked several times, MSI afterburner was non-functional, IP and DNS settings were back to defaults). Made sure the settings for both were correct then rebooted again. Second boot worked perfectly and all functionality was restored.

Preliminary stability tests passed. Full tests will take a while to confirm.


----------



## nick name

MNMadman said:


> Test Report:
> 
> Installed 1101 as I normally do...
> 
> 1. Load optimized defaults, reboot.
> 2. Verify that it reset to defaults.
> 3. Use USB BIOS Flashback.
> 4. Load optimized defaults, reboot.
> 5. Manually put in all of my desired settings, one BIOS section at a time, rebooting between each (I don't save profiles).
> 6. Boot into Windows.
> 
> This update temporarily borked my GPU and WiFi when I first booted into Windows. Both drivers had to reset and reload (screen blanked several times, MSI afterburner was non-functional, IP and DNS settings were back to defaults). Made sure the settings for both were correct then rebooted again. Second boot worked perfectly and all functionality was restored.
> 
> Preliminary stability tests passed. Full tests will take a while to confirm.



I had several video quirks when I first booted with the new BIOS. I also had Microsoft Defender acting wonky and requiring a restart. After the first couple boots everything that was wrong is now fine.


----------



## chakku

I noticed that too actually, I disable WiFi in the BIOS but it seemed like my GPU driver had to reinstall itself as I noticed in Device Manager the dates for requested install of the drivers aligned with when I first booted into the system.

As for memory overclocking it's at least as stable as before, haven't begun experimenting with pushing my current overclock further. Not sure how much better we can get with dual rank memory anyway, I think 3466C14 is too far out of reach and anything between that and 3333C14 isn't worth it.


----------



## ciukacz

Copyright said:


> Just started to think of my AI SUITE III version... went back and found I had used version VER30013.... version 30016 is out..


latest AISuite is from around Jan-Feb (it shows DIP5 version 1.05.19) and of course it doesn't use new WMI interface.
caused lockups for me on C6H BIOS 6201 (first BIOS with WMI), haven't tested yet with 6301.
asked Raja 2 months ago for an updated version for those new BIOSes with WMI, no response...

edit: you really need to know your way around AISuite installer issues.
it leaves 4 services after uninstallation which probably won't get updated when you try to install over the old version.
you have to unblock the zip file (from properties in explorer) or the executables wont be able to elevate their permissions.


----------



## crakej

ciukacz said:


> latest AISuite is from around Jan-Feb (it shows DIP5 version 1.05.19) and of course it doesn't use new WMI interface.
> caused lockups for me on C6H BIOS 6201 (first BIOS with WMI), haven't tested yet with 6301.
> asked Raja 2 months ago for an updated version for those new BIOSes with WMI, no response...
> 
> edit: you really need to know your way around AISuite installer issues.
> it leaves 4 services after uninstallation which probably won't get updated when you try to install over the old version.
> you have to unblock the zip file (from properties in explorer) or the executables wont be able to elevate their permissions.


*Wrong!* Latest AUSuite on _most_ ASUS regional sites is V3.00.16, dropped on 20 June 2018, just after the WMI changes. I note this isn't on the .de version of the site. I only really look at .tw .uk and .us

Yes, like others here I know how to install ASUS software! It all gets updated fine so long as you unblock the file. Files are commonly blocked to prevent transmission if viruses. So long as you install correctly, everything will be removed when you uninstall. Failing that use something like iobit uninstaller which removes much more than windows program manager.

https://www.asus.com/uk/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO/HelpDesk_Download/ It's there for the CH6 too.


----------



## Krisztias

What do you guys think about watercooling the memory modules?


----------



## nick name

Krisztias said:


> What do you guys think about watercooling the memory modules?


Honestly, I've never seen numbers comparing air cooled to water cooled, but if you have the cash and it actually works then it's something to consider. I'd recommend getting the best memory you can before water cooling it. I wouldn't make the effort to wring out a mediocre kit.


----------



## Carolina Roots

Is the PBO configuration / utility only an X-type cpu feature? It is simply not on my bios anywhere. I also can’t enable it through the Ryzen Master utility.


----------



## crakej

Carolina Roots said:


> Is the PBO configuration / utility only an X-type cpu feature? It is simply not on my bios anywhere. I also can’t enable it through the Ryzen Master utility.


It's for Ryzen 2xxx CPUs only.


----------



## Carolina Roots

crakej said:


> Carolina Roots said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is the PBO configuration / utility only an X-type cpu feature? It is simply not on my bios anywhere. I also can’t enable it through the Ryzen Master utility.
> 
> 
> 
> It's for Ryzen 2xxx CPUs only.
Click to expand...

I have a Ryzen r5 2600 and it’s no where to be seen 😕


----------



## crakej

Carolina Roots said:


> I have a Ryzen r5 2600 and it’s no where to be seen 😕


It's in Advanced>AMD CBS>NBIO>Precision Boost Overdrive


----------



## Carolina Roots

crakej said:


> It's in Advanced>AMD CBS>NBIO>Precision Boost Overdrive


It's not though. I've watched videos of people showing exactly where it should be and it's exactly the same up until the end, where PBO isn't there.


----------



## hurricane28

Well i flashed this BIOS today and i must say that i am impressed so far by its stability to be honest. I never felt this stable before on the same settings as on the previous BIOS. 

I do want to point out some quirks though. 

1: Audio doesn't work after first reboot.

2: GPU drivers are not loading properly which results in weird flickering and low res. 

3: Realtek audio manager is uninstalled? After i flashed 1101 BIOS i no longer see realtek audio manager and i can't seem to install it back again.. Odd that an BIOS can do this, never seen before. 

4: LLC settings changed? I needed level 4 on the previous BIOS but now i tried level 3 and i am perfectly stable and it feels a tad snappier as well. 

Seen some other stuff too, post more later.


----------



## Carolina Roots

Accidental Double Post


----------



## crakej

Carolina Roots said:


> It's not though. I've watched videos of people showing exactly where it should be and it's exactly the same up until the end, where PBO isn't there.


What bios are you using?

That's where it should be!?!? Anyone else got any ideas?


----------



## Carolina Roots

crakej said:


> What bios are you using?
> 
> That's where it should be!?!? Anyone else got any ideas?


I've used literally every BIOS that has been released, including 1001. I'm just sitting on 0804 right now.


----------



## crakej

hurricane28 said:


> Well i flashed this BIOS today and i must say that i am impressed so far by its stability to be honest. I never felt this stable before on the same settings as on the previous BIOS.
> 
> I do want to point out some quirks though.
> 
> 1: Audio doesn't work after first reboot.
> 
> 2: GPU drivers are not loading properly which results in weird flickering and low res.
> 
> 3: Realtek audio manager is uninstalled? After i flashed 1101 BIOS i no longer see realtek audio manager and i can't seem to install it back again.. Odd that an BIOS can do this, never seen before.
> 
> 4: LLC settings changed? I needed level 4 on the previous BIOS but now i tried level 3 and i am perfectly stable and it feels a tad snappier as well.
> 
> Seen some other stuff too, post more later.


Sounds interesting! I was hoping we might be able to reduce LLC and/or drop voltage a bit.

Has new bios disabled your sound or something? They may have updated the UEFI driver in the bios... thanks for the heads up.

Now all I need is a non-wifi version! I know you can cross flash, but I think you lose your boards' serial no at the same time


----------



## crakej

Carolina Roots said:


> I've used literally every BIOS that has been released, including 1001. I'm just sitting on 0804 right now.


I don't have PBO  so don't really know, but I have a feeling your settings in the main section have to be set correctly or you won't see the menu

Can someone with PBO experience help out here please?


----------



## Copyright

crakej said:


> *Wrong!* Latest AUSuite on _most_ ASUS regional sites is V3.00.16, dropped on 20 June 2018, just after the WMI changes. I note this isn't on the .de version of the site. I only really look at .tw .uk and .us
> 
> Yes, like others here I know how to install ASUS software! It all gets updated fine so long as you unblock the file. Files are commonly blocked to prevent transmission if viruses. So long as you install correctly, everything will be removed when you uninstall. Failing that use something like iobit uninstaller which removes much more than windows program manager.
> 
> https://www.asus.com/uk/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO/HelpDesk_Download/ It's there for the CH6 too.


Agreed.. DO you know if 3.00.16 upgraded anything else other than ez update? The file on Asus site is not a stand alone isntall for AI SUITE III. I had to install 3.00.13 and then do the update but the update only talks about updating EZ update and nothing else. I still get the RED readings showing zero cpu temp and zero fan speed.. now im trying to remember at what point did I disable CAM software .. It may have been running when this happened..


----------



## Copyright

crakej said:


> I don't have PBO  so don't really know, but I have a feeling your settings in the main section have to be set correctly or you won't see the menu
> 
> Can someone with PBO experience help out here please?


On 1001 I see the PBO section and I don't recall enabling anything special but DOCP and adding a little extra RAM voltage. I did not turn on PBO yet. I can't remember exactly where it was but it was in there.


----------



## Copyright

crakej said:


> Sounds interesting! I was hoping we might be able to reduce LLC and/or drop voltage a bit.
> 
> Has new bios disabled your sound or something? They may have updated the UEFI driver in the bios... thanks for the heads up.
> 
> Now all I need is a non-wifi version! I know you can cross flash, but I think you lose your boards' serial no at the same time


Any reason they are holding back on the non WIFI version? I am right there with ya buddy ... no wifi.. lol


----------



## hurricane28

crakej said:


> Sounds interesting! I was hoping we might be able to reduce LLC and/or drop voltage a bit.
> 
> Has new bios disabled your sound or something? They may have updated the UEFI driver in the bios... thanks for the heads up.
> 
> Now all I need is a non-wifi version! I know you can cross flash, but I think you lose your boards' serial no at the same time




Idk what they screwed up man but my audio isn't right.. It doesn't sound right and i can't seem to install audio manager, jeez always something with Assus BIOS and software man.

Here are some pictures of the new features i discovered so far:


----------



## pschorr1123

Carolina Roots said:


> I've used literally every BIOS that has been released, including 1001. I'm just sitting on 0804 right now.


I just built a PC for my daughter using a x470 Taichi paired with the R5 2600 (non X) and the PBO settings are not visible in the bios. I have a X370 Taichi with the 2700X and know exactly where the setting is but it simply is invisible. There is extra space where it should be in the Advanced\CBS\NBIO page. The determiation option is present as well as the cTDP. I tried Googling PBO settings for non X or R5 2600 but haven't had much success. It does top out at the spec'ed 3.9 singe thread with no effort while my 2700X required enabling XFR2 and PBO to get the advertised 4.325. 

From what I understand the PBO will not achieve higher single core clock speed but will help the multi core boosts and when paired with a mild bclk OC then can come close to 4.5 ish single core. (2700X)

If anyone else using a non x 2000 series CPU can access the PBO options I'd like to see. For whats it's worth the AGESA is 1.0.0.2 if that means anything.


----------



## Deyjandi

hurricane28 said:


> Idk what they screwed up man but my audio isn't right.. It doesn't sound right and i can't seem to install audio manager, jeez always something with Assus BIOS and software man.
> 
> Here are some pictures of the new features i discovered so far:


AMI nvme native driver support isn't a new feature. It is present only in C7H but not in C6H afaik. Maybe it's a x470 feature. The SPD option looks interesting. No idea what it does though..


----------



## MNMadman

hurricane28 said:


> Idk what they screwed up man but my audio isn't right.. It doesn't sound right and i can't seem to install audio manager, jeez always something with Assus BIOS and software man.
> 
> Here are some pictures of the new features i discovered so far:


The XFR Enhancement was there before, just with a different name.

The AMI Native NVMe Driver Support was there before, maybe even back to 0804. I turn it off.

HD Audio Enable has been in that menu for a long time (back to 0804 at least). I leave it Auto there, as it's also in a different spot where I disable it -- it's one of the many redundant settings in the Advanced section. I have USB headphones so I haven't used on-board audio in years.

SPD Read Optimization is new. I have also set it to Disabled -- I want the whole SPD read whether it does any good or not.

-----

I wish they would add a BankGroupSwapAlt toggle. I want both BGS and BGSA disabled, damn it.

Also, has anybody else noticed that Ryzen Timing Checker is wrong now on the upper block of readings?

It doesn't read ProcODT (blank).
All three Setups are wrong.
All three Rtts are wrong.
All four DrvStrs are wrong.

I haven't checked RTC in a while, so I don't know if it's just wrong with 1101 or if it started before then.


----------



## crakej

All I know is that the WiFi board is the lead development board this time round - for the CH6 it was the non-wifi that came first..

Thanks for posting the pics Hurricane... I hate it when I have to wait like this! At least others will have had a chance to find any problems there might be for when the rest of us gets it...


----------



## nick name

MNMadman said:


> The XFR Enhancement was there before, just with a different name.
> 
> The AMI Native NVMe Driver Support was there before, maybe even back to 0804. I turn it off.
> 
> HD Audio Enable has been in that menu for a long time (back to 0804 at least). I leave it Auto there, as it's also in a different spot where I disable it -- it's one of the many redundant settings in the Advanced section. I have USB headphones so I haven't used on-board audio in years.
> 
> SPD Read Optimization is new. I have also set it to Disabled -- I want the whole SPD read whether it does any good or not.
> 
> -----
> 
> I wish they would add a BankGroupSwapAlt toggle. I want both BGS and BGSA disabled, damn it.
> 
> Also, has anybody else noticed that Ryzen Timing Checker is wrong now on the upper block of readings?
> 
> It doesn't read ProcODT (blank).
> All three Setups are wrong.
> All three Rtts are wrong.
> All four DrvStrs are wrong.
> 
> I haven't checked RTC in a while, so I don't know if it's just wrong with 1101 or if it started before then.



Yes, this new BIOS does break Ryzen Timing Checker for me too. It was working fine with 1001.


----------



## MNMadman

Running the 3466 Safe timings (but with 2T CR) from DRAM Calculator for Ryzen version 1.4.0.1, on the new 1101 test BIOS for the C7HWIFI board. Preliminary stress tests passed. Full stress testing in progress.


----------



## rv8000

crakej said:


> I don't have PBO  so don't really know, but I have a feeling your settings in the main section have to be set correctly or you won't see the menu
> 
> Can someone with PBO experience help out here please?


AFAIK, PBO isn't supported on non-x CPUS, I have the same issue on my CH6 with my 2600. The feature is also not supported in Ryzen Master for my 2600.


----------



## hurricane28

Okay fellas, never knew these settings were there but if you say so. 

Now i am having sound issues.. Can't seem to install Realtek audio manager anymore and i get weird windows sounds. Normally when something happens you get sort of a ring in Windows which sounds distorted now.. 

I went to the ROG forum and its even worse than this new ocn forum. It appears that they don't take security that seriously and you can't change nick name? When i change it it always comes back to half of my email adress when i login.. Weird man, first this BIOS now their forum is acting weird, whats next..


----------



## crakej

hurricane28 said:


> Okay fellas, never knew these settings were there but if you say so.
> 
> Now i am having sound issues.. Can't seem to install Realtek audio manager anymore and i get weird windows sounds. Normally when something happens you get sort of a ring in Windows which sounds distorted now..
> 
> I went to the ROG forum and its even worse than this new ocn forum. It appears that they don't take security that seriously and you can't change nick name? When i change it it always comes back to half of my email adress when i login.. Weird man, first this BIOS now their forum is acting weird, whats next..


Maybe you should re-flash.... it's as though it doesn't recognise it any more... what does device manager say for Sound?


----------



## hurricane28

crakej said:


> Maybe you should re-flash.... it's as though it doesn't recognise it any more... what does device manager say for Sound?


Idk man, perhaps. Weird issues lately man.. never had this on Gigabyte board and a friend of mine has an Gigabyte board and also zero problems and its 100 euro's less too.. That is what frustrates me the most. 

Can't get to support from Assus as their ROG forum is broken for me.. 

The driver is installed and i have sound but its not right.. like i said, everything works but the sound is just distorted sometimes and audio manager cannot be installed anymore which worked fine on other BIOS.. 

I reinstalled audio drivers from the Asus website but no luck, i installed the newest Realtek codec no luck.. This BIOS is broken and if i knew this is never installed it.. 

I want to warn people to NOT install this BIOS as it is broken!


----------



## MacG32

elmor said:


> C7H WIFI 1101 (only wifi for now)
> 
> - AGESA 1.0.0.6
> 
> https://www.mediafire.com/file/23ii93bbsmxnn3s/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-1101.zip/file



It seems I'm now able to run my RAM (G.Skill - Flare X 32GB (4x8GB) 3200MHz F4-3200C14D-16GFX x2) at it's advertised speed of 3200MHz and be 100% stable. I'm running Prime95 for 24 hours while normally using my computer to test for total stability. I'm 13 hours in and nice and stable. Attached are the exact settings I'm using.

Thank you and your crew for an outstanding BIOS and thank @1usmus for his DRAM Calculator for Ryzen™ 1.4.0.1. :thumb:


----------



## crakej

hurricane28 said:


> Idk man, perhaps. Weird issues lately man.. never had this on Gigabyte board and a friend of mine has an Gigabyte board and also zero problems and its 100 euro's less too.. That is what frustrates me the most.
> 
> Can't get to support from Assus as their ROG forum is broken for me..
> 
> The driver is installed and i have sound but its not right.. like i said, everything works but the sound is just distorted sometimes and audio manager cannot be installed anymore which worked fine on other BIOS..
> 
> I reinstalled audio drivers from the Asus website but no luck, i installed the newest Realtek codec no luck.. This BIOS is broken and if i knew this is never installed it..
> 
> I want to warn people to NOT install this BIOS as it is broken!


Bummer!

I'd give the re-slash a go first.... it might just be a corrupt install for some reason. Did it finish doing the flash after 1st re-boot?

Did you just plug your settings in from last bios?

Anyone else having trouble with 1101?


----------



## hurricane28

crakej said:


> Bummer!
> 
> I'd give the re-slash a go first.... it might just be a corrupt install for some reason. Did it finish doing the flash after 1st re-boot?
> 
> Did you just plug your settings in from last bios?
> 
> Anyone else having trouble with 1101?


Yeah, so frustrating dealing with this crap from Assus man.. never had any problems with Gigabyte.. i really don't have time nor the patience for this rubbish as its very frustrating for me...

Maybe man, i flash again as my system is totally unusable now.. I don't get audio in VLC mediaplayer as well.. 

No i just dialed the RAM setting from Mus1Mus calculator and that's it..


----------



## crakej

hurricane28 said:


> Yeah, so frustrating dealing with this crap from Assus man.. never had any problems with Gigabyte.. i really don't have time nor the patience for this rubbish as its very frustrating for me...
> 
> Maybe man, i flash again as my system is totally unusable now.. I don't get audio in VLC mediaplayer as well..
> 
> No i just dialed the RAM setting from Mus1Mus calculator and that's it..


Then I think it's your only option man. 

Don't do what I do though and spend so long doing it you can't work out whats going on! Sometimes I find a sleep has an ability to make me see things I couldn't the night before lol

It's a pain yes - i certainly hope reflashing works for you - I don't recall ever having an issue like this with audio, though on My Prime x370 Pro my audio died with 2 months of buying it - had to buy a sound card!


----------



## MNMadman

If you have a problem with 1101 the solution is simple -- revert to 1001 or whatever version you were using before. Try re-flashing 1101 again just in case, but then if that doesn't work, go back to a working version. Newer doesn't always mean better. Had that problem with my ASRock X399 Taichi board too -- newer BIOS versions screwed things up, so I went back to what worked.


----------



## crakej

MacG32 said:


> It seems I'm now able to run my RAM (G.Skill - Flare X 32GB (4x8GB) 3200MHz F4-3200C14D-16GFX x2) at it's advertised speed of 3200MHz and be 100% stable. I'm running Prime95 for 24 hours while normally using my computer to test for total stability. I'm 13 hours in and nice and stable. Attached are the exact settings I'm using.
> 
> Thank you and your crew for an outstanding BIOS and thank @1usmus for his DRAM Calculator for Ryzen™ 1.4.0.1. :thumb:


Encouraging result! I've read that 1.0.0.6 is meant to bring good improvement to ram - and that would be with all CPUs as we all share the same K17 IMC.

Is your sound working ok with 1101?


----------



## Praetorr

MNMadman said:


> If you have a problem with 1101 the solution is simple -- revert to 1001 or whatever version you were using before. Try re-flashing 1101 again just in case, but then if that doesn't work, go back to a working version. Newer doesn't always mean better. Had that problem with my ASRock X399 Taichi board too -- newer BIOS versions screwed things up, so I went back to what worked.


Yup. Plus, just to state the obvious: This is a BIOS posted for testing purposes. It's not claimed by Asus to be stable. If it was, they wouldn't need people to test it.


----------



## hurricane28

MNMadman said:


> If you have a problem with 1101 the solution is simple -- revert to 1001 or whatever version you were using before. Try re-flashing 1101 again just in case, but then if that doesn't work, go back to a working version. Newer doesn't always mean better. Had that problem with my ASRock X399 Taichi board too -- newer BIOS versions screwed things up, so I went back to what worked.


Its not that simple because 1101 screwed up my Windows 10 installation.. I have to reinstall i think now because of this damn BIOS.. 

I already flashed for the second time and no good result, still the same. 

I go back to previous BIOS and see if that works properly again. 

damn man, kinda weird that an BIOS can screw up audio drivers in Windows.. kinda scary too, if it can do this what else can it screw up..


----------



## hurricane28

Praetorr said:


> Yup. Plus, just to state the obvious: This is a BIOS posted for testing purposes. It's not claimed by Asus to be stable. If it was, they wouldn't need people to test it.


"This is a BIOS posted for testing purposes" where did you read that? And did you actually read somewhere that Assus did say that a BIOS Is stable..?


----------



## Praetorr

hurricane28 said:


> "This is a BIOS posted for testing purposes" where did you read that? And did you actually read somewhere that Assus did say that a BIOS Is stable..?


I suppose it's a matter of subjective opinion in this regard, but I don't consider a BIOS officially stated as "stable" until it's posted on the motherboard's official BIOS download page (e.g., https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WI-FI/HelpDesk_BIOS/).

Doesn't mean that a BIOS that was once posted for testing can't make its way to being posted as a stable build, of course.


----------



## Conenubi701

@elmor alright, I've had this version for a good 24 hours and I found a couple of issues.

1. My biggest issue is that I am getting constant hangups at the B4 Q-Code (USB HOTPLUG) after the initial post beep but before the UEFI tries to fully load up windows. I am pretty sure this has to do with my old Razer Arctosa connected to a KEYBOARD HUB that I use to split the keyboard signal between 2 PCs since I don't have issues when I unplug the keyboard, reset the PC, wait for the "No keyboard detected" warning, and then plug the USB back in. I have not tried the keyboard by itself but sometime this weekend I will (I have to move my set-ups since the hub is tucked away). 

2. Seems like GPU drivers were reset or something because I noticed my custom powerplay registry tables were deleted/disabled back to normal on my ASUS Strix 64. I started getting black screen hangups after loading into windows 10 with custom powerplay registry tables before I re-installed the drivers. Things are running fine now after a clean re-install of the drivers through DDU and the custom powerplay registry tables have saved and loaded up fine.


3. Minor Issue - I was getting Q-Code B1 issues but I think that was just due to over aggressive subtimings. Once I loosened tRFC, tRFC2, and TRFC4 a bit the B1 error went away.

PC info in case you need it:

2700x

32GB (4 x 8GB) 3200Mhz G.Skill Flare X RAM with tightened subtimings

SATA ports 1, 2, 3 are populated with SSDs

SATA ports 4,5 are populated with 1 TB HDDs in software (windows 10) RAID 0

NVME m.2 ssd drive in the bottom m.2 slot

El gato gamecapture pcie card in the bottom pcie slot


----------



## hurricane28

Praetorr said:


> I suppose it's a matter of subjective opinion in this regard, but I don't consider a BIOS officially stated as "stable" until it's posted on the motherboard's official BIOS download page (e.g., https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WI-FI/HelpDesk_BIOS/).
> 
> Doesn't mean that a BIOS that was once posted for testing can't make its way to being posted as a stable build, of course.


I hear ya and you are perhaps right. Although i did like it more if Elmor stated that this is an test BIOS instead of posting it like its an stable one. IF he said that it was only a test BIOS i would never flash it. 

Anyway, i am back to 1001 BIOS and luckily my audio is working again.


----------



## crakej

I always assume bios posted here is for testing..... for ex., 1001 is not on the official site anywhere.

I'm wondering if the problems reported with gpu driver resetting may be related to hurricanes sound problem, which I think sounds like a driver issue as well.

Bios update shouldn't really affect devices like this....


----------



## MacG32

crakej said:


> Encouraging result! I've read that 1.0.0.6 is meant to bring good improvement to ram - and that would be with all CPUs as we all share the same K17 IMC.
> 
> Is your sound working ok with 1101?



I'm glad I can finally get my RAM to run at it's advertised speed. :thumb:

I had a sound issue, but it was related to TeamViewer changing my audio settings. At first, I thought it was the Windows October Update and I reinstalled the latest Realtek HDA Drivers from Station-Drivers. Then I realized the settings changed randomly while in a TeamViewer session. I've had Discord change my audio settings once as well.

I just opened up the Device Manager and noticed that the Realtek Driver has been automatically replaced with an older Microsoft Driver. Seems I need to reinstall the latest Realtek Driver again. I'm not sure why or how it changed. The Realtek Control Panel has been removed from the Control Panel as well. Fun times...lol I still have 9+ hours of stress testing, before I can reinstall.

This might be a bug with DDU, the nVidia Driver, the Realtek Driver, Windows October Update, or the BIOS. I can't narrow it down right now and when I reinstall, if it's fixed, I probably won't investigate any further.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> I hear ya and you are perhaps right. Although i did like it more if Elmor stated that this is an test BIOS instead of posting it like its an stable one. IF he said that it was only a test BIOS i would never flash it.
> 
> Anyway, i am back to 1001 BIOS and luckily my audio is working again.


Don't forget that the 1001 BIOS isn't official yet either.


----------



## Bo55

Installed 1101 bios yesterday and first thing i noticed upon getting to the login screen was gpu drivers wernt loaded and had system hang on same screen which was present for 3 attempts at getting into windows. After manually shutting off and powering back on it went away i have no idea how and now everything seems normal, in fact my memory overclocking has been improved. With 0804 bios, i could not get 3466 1t at 14-14-14-14 timings stable at all, only if i used 15-14-14-14 however now i can. 3600 C15 1t has also improved for me, i can now tighten down my subs along with trfc without effecting stability. So besides the odd gpu display driver error, so far it seems good on my end. On a side note: I still get the cold boot issue though whether my settings are all at defaults or modified, i know its not the cpu or ram because i had my 2700x and trident z sticks in my x370 prime before changing to the CH vii wifi and it never did it then.


----------



## DavePDX

I want to thank @elmor for uploading the C7H WIFI 1101 BIOS. My observations with the 1101 BIOS so far:

1. I had a prior issue with the CPU fans and all case fans ramping up to 100% (with the default fan curves) over 2-3 minutes after booting up and that issue has gone away and the fans are all working properly now. I had a PM conversation with elmor about this as I thought that I was the only person having this issue and my thought was that I possibly had a HW problem. Setting all manual fan curves was the workaround that I found that corrected the issue for BIOS's 1001, 0804 and 0702. That issue seems to be resolved with the 1101 BIOS and the default fan curves work as they should.

2. As a few others experienced on the initial boot there was a lowered display resolution initially. As the computer was booting I figured that I would have to reinstall the nVidia drivers for my GTX 1080 but late in the initial boot process the proper video drivers loaded and all was good.

3. I had no issue with the audio drivers as the proper audio drivers were present and functioning properly.

4. I was able to test stable at 3266MHz (1usmus' 3266 Fast settings) on the 32GB (16GB X 2) of memory in the system. This was the prior stable settings so anything else that I can get later on when I have time will be gravy.

IMO, so far, so good with the v. 1101 BIOS.


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> Don't forget that the 1001 BIOS isn't official yet either.


I know, but there is an difference between "not official" and "broken official" This 1101 BIOS is clearly broken as many users report weird issues..

I mean, how can you release such an BIOS to the public with these issues like Audio not working and GPU drivers resetting..

I wish they waited a little longer and test themselves first instead of using us as Guinea pigs to do the testing for them.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> I know, but there is an difference between "not official" and "broken official" This 1101 BIOS is clearly broken as many users report weird issues..
> 
> I mean, how can you release such an BIOS to the public with these issues like Audio not working and GPU drivers resetting..
> 
> I wish they waited a little longer and test themselves first instead of using us as Guinea pigs to do the testing for them.


They want us to be help them test. It's why we get the BIOS early here from Elmor. I'm sorry you weren't clear on that, but it is by design. So you reporting your issues is helping, but your attitude doesn't. You gotta lighten up, man.


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> They want us to be help them test. It's why we get the BIOS early here from Elmor. I'm sorry you weren't clear on that, but it is by design. So you reporting your issues is helping, but your attitude doesn't. You gotta lighten up, man.


I hear what you are saying and to an extend i agree with you but releasing BIOS's like this also doesn't help. 

I mean, if the GPU drivers go nuts and i no longer have audio i go in wth mode because it has NOTHING to do with AMD AGESA or overclocking whatsoever, its just poor coding which is unnecessary imo.

I already said that LLC seems changed and its better with RAM overclocking.


----------



## zJordan

Hopefully the new BIOS allows me to push higher than 3200MHz tightened CL14 timings (CL14-14-14-14-28, with tight sub-timings). That being said, I can boot all the way up to 3466MHz CL14-14-14-15, perhaps even higher. I just can't get it stable. I can't get it to pass my Prime95 test. I use Prime95 with custom settings to test 13GB of memory with a Min FFT size of 448K, and a max FFT size of 4096K.


http://prntscr.com/l5rgum


I've passed 14 loops of MemTest86, and MANY MANY more with MemTest64 and none caught memory issues that were apparent in the first few minutes of a Prime95 workload. Honestly, give Prime95 a go for memory testing, at least before you commit to a LONG ASS MemTest86 loop. And what is crazier is only Prime95 caught my memory instability, revert memory changes allowed Prime95 to pass the first test effortlessly.


I don't think I'll trust memory tests in future, Prime95 all the way perhaps??


----------



## lordzed83

hurricane28 said:


> nick name said:
> 
> 
> 
> They want us to be help them test. It's why we get the BIOS early here from Elmor. I'm sorry you weren't clear on that, but it is by design. So you reporting your issues is helping, but your attitude doesn't. You gotta lighten up, man.
> 
> 
> 
> I hear what you are saying and to an extend i agree with you but releasing BIOS's like this also doesn't help.
> 
> I mean, if the GPU drivers go nuts and i no longer have audio i go in wth mode because it has NOTHING to do with AMD AGESA or overclocking whatsoever, its just poor coding which is unnecessary imo.
> 
> I already said that LLC seems changed and its better with RAM overclocking.
Click to expand...

I think most if us on crosshair motherboards got used to Yours constant complains. You had c6h and learned nothing from that expirience. Its like 1 out of 4 bioses that is less bugged than previous microcode one. Just face it there is no and pissiby wont ever be fully fixed bios on the croshair mothervoards haha.

I consider all bioses posted here as alpha state. As long as it does not brick my hardware im ok with flashing for 1 day to see whats the deal. its 30 minutes tops to flash back and load saved working profile.


----------



## ciukacz

crakej said:


> *Wrong!* Latest AUSuite on _most_ ASUS regional sites is V3.00.16, dropped on 20 June 2018, just after the WMI changes. I note this isn't on the .de version of the site. I only really look at .tw .uk and .us


it's just aisuite, dip5 is not included. latest dip5 is 1.05.19 from Feb and doesn't use wmi api.


----------



## chakku

In there end was it ever established if it's still worth using PE3 over PE2? I remember Elmor saying at least PE4 and possibly PE3 were going to be removed a long time ago but I'm not aware of what most people are using these days. I've been on PE3 with a tiny negative offset, would I be better off with PE2? Last I recall PE2 had a scalar of 10x while PE3 had 1x based on the info from https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?101617-Crosshair-VII-Hero-Essential-Info-Thread


----------



## nick name

chakku said:


> In there end was it ever established if it's still worth using PE3 over PE2? I remember Elmor saying at least PE4 and possibly PE3 were going to be removed a long time ago but I'm not aware of what most people are using these days. I've been on PE3 with a tiny negative offset, would I be better off with PE2? Last I recall PE2 had a scalar of 10x while PE3 had 1x based on the info from https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?101617-Crosshair-VII-Hero-Essential-Info-Thread


The biggest difference between PE Lvl 2 and Lvl 3 is that starting at Lvl 3 the CPU holds its speed and won't downclock while under load. PE Lvl 1 and Lvl 2 behave like manual PBO adjustments where the CPU will hold a speed until certain thresholds are hit and then downclock. The scalar 1 - 10 is supposed to control how long the CPU will try to hold the higher speed. Those "safety" measures are turned off in Lvl 3 and Lvl 4 and they do not downclock -- which can be dangerous. Lvl 3 and Lvl 4 are almost like setting a manual all-core overclock with fewer cores still being able to hit their own higher clock speeds. 

And if you're interested this can help you with that semi-overclock using PE Lvl 3 or Lvl 4 if you want to control your CPU speed beyond what it boots into Windows at: https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...tiplier-adjustments-through-ryzen-master.html


----------



## MacG32

@elmor There is some sort of an audio problem. The latest few driver's won't install the Realtek Control Panel. I uninstalled the Realtek Driver, cleaned the registry with CCleaner, restarted, and installed the latest driver from Station-Drivers. I'm not sure what the problem is. The driver is installed, but it won't install the control panel. Something's not right.

My memory passed 24 hours of Prime95 Torture Testing and is rock solid at 3200MHz, finally. :thumb:


----------



## clackersx

As others have said, 1101 does something which causes windows to detect numerous devices as new.

Easiest way for me to describe is it acts as if you have changed motherboard.

1101 caused my copy of windows to detect sound, display, networking, storage, drives etc as a new device.

If i went into device manager and enabled show hidden devices (so it shows "disconnected" devices) almost everything is listed twice, i assume everyone who has updated will see the same thing.



I had an Intel brand board a while back that did the same thing after an update but it did have a warning mentioning it in the changelog, can't remember the wording it used for explaining why, i think it might have been an update to a device table or location table or something like that which caused different addresses to be reported.



I'm just reinstalling windows, no biggie. I imagine that this will be "fixed" and I'll have to reinstall in a later bios.

edit: after reinstalling windows Realtek audio console and sound seems to work fine, using Realtek UAD 8480 driver (downloadable from Asus on the ROG STRIX x470-F support page). I ran AsusSetup as administrator, not the regular Setup if that makes a difference.


----------



## crakej

I had a feeling these problems might be connected... glad I'm not doing the testing this time lol but glad people are feeding back so they can get it right.

We know all bios here is beta - they're giving us an opportunity to try s/w early, in exchange for reporting errors, just like the insiders program in windows. Only release versions can be relied on really.

Our machines and the software running on them are incredibly complex. We here are enthusiasts and power users and must accept that we all have varying problems.... remember the cpu alone has billions and billions of components - add the rest of the pc and most of us have 100 billion components and more. Computers have error checking built in to help with failures because h/w is expected to fail. Most failures are not critical and/or are filtered out. We all have different ram, gpu etc etc that it is in fact a miracle that software runs as well as it does.

You can't foresee many problems that happen when, for ex, a single bit fails in a register that is very rarely used. At some point this may cause a big problem for you, that I just don't have a problem with, or it could affect someone in a way no one ever thought possible. If it were so easy to create things like this firmware and our motherboards with no errors, don't you think someone would have done that by now?? We wouldn't be here.....it would be very dull.

I think it's great that they released a beta way before they said they would be releasing - I thought we had at least 2 weeks to wait.


----------



## crakej

MacG32 said:


> @elmor There is some sort of an audio problem. The latest few driver's won't install the Realtek Control Panel. I uninstalled the Realtek Driver, cleaned the registry with CCleaner, restarted, and installed the latest driver from Station-Drivers. I'm not sure what the problem is. The driver is installed, but it won't install the control panel. Something's not right.
> 
> My memory passed 24 hours of Prime95 Torture Testing and is rock solid at 3200MHz, finally. :thumb:


I wonder if you'll get any higher? Certainly seems encouraging!


----------



## gupsterg

hurricane28 said:


> Here are some pictures of the new features i discovered so far:


It is as others have stated chap  .

I have added a note in the OP of ROG C7H thread that:-

Advanced > AMD CBS > NBIO Common Options > Precision Boost Override Configuration

Is now:-

Advanced > AMD CBS > NBIO Common Options > XFR Enhancement

Plus that when non X CPU is installed this feature is not available.



MNMadman said:


> Also, has anybody else noticed that Ryzen Timing Checker is wrong now on the upper block of readings?
> 
> It doesn't read ProcODT (blank).
> All three Setups are wrong.
> All three Rtts are wrong.
> All four DrvStrs are wrong.
> 
> I haven't checked RTC in a while, so I don't know if it's just wrong with 1101 or if it started before then.


RTC not reading information correctly in top section is due to newer AGESA on UEFI 1101, same issue I have seen on ZE.



MacG32 said:


> My memory passed 24 hours of Prime95 Torture Testing and is rock solid at 3200MHz, finally. :thumb:


I may soon be moving on my C7H. I reckon the C6H is much better for 4x 8GB. I found it way easier to gain 3400MHz C15 1T on it with that setup of RAM, below is some testing on C6H.

3x AIDA64



Spoiler














HCI Memtest v6.0



Spoiler












Rerun on same POST.









Rerun differing POST.











P95 v28.10b1 8K 4096K 26GB (CPU Stock)



Spoiler














P95 v28.10b1 8K 4096K 26GB (CPU OC)



Spoiler














Above setup still needs some tweaks, as I have caught 1 error in GSAT in 1hr runs on multiple POSTs  .

I may revisit the C7H again, but I just think the C6H is better due to having ASUS T-Topology. I also noted it allows smaller steps of VTTDDR as well.


----------



## kmellz

New bios was a nice one for me at least! While I had the same issues with hardware apparently being detected as new, and some problems with the realtek control panel gone (this **** is really irritating in general though with this board, sonic studio and realtek drivers, the equalizer only being available in sonic studio etc.. ugh) that was quickly solved by simply copying over rav64cpl.exe from extracted driver to the realtek folder... oh well. The equalizer is working fine now too without sonic studio, so now it seems I can simply upgrade drivers as usual again.

But the most interesting part was of course the promise of possibly better memory compability and oc.. which seems to have been fulfilled! Was previously running 3466Mhz "mostly" stable, now I'm running a sweet 3533Mhz with slightly tighter timings and lower voltages! Same main timings, but some lower subtimings. Haven't done a super extensive stress test, 1h in aida64 stress on the main components, gonna give some general games and programs a go now. 

But from how it was before when trying higher speeds and how fast it crashed, this is definetely looking promising.


----------



## Syldon

gupsterg said:


> I may soon be moving on my C7H. I reckon the C6H is much better for 4x 8GB. I found it way easier to gain 3400MHz C15 1T on it with that setup of RAM, below is some testing on C6H.



I ran 4X8 in the CH6 since release. Some of the earlier bios revisions allowed me to run at 3600 with stupid timings. Being new to manually setting up ram left a lot to be desired. But eitherway, I ran at 3466 with 800% runs of hcimemtest on 4x8. I couldn't get stable at 3333 on the Ch7. I eventually gave my son the old CH6 and 2 sticks of ram. 2X16 is better on the CH7 and 4X8 works best on the CH6.


----------



## CJMitsuki

hurricane28 said:


> nick name said:
> 
> 
> 
> They want us to be help them test. It's why we get the BIOS early here from Elmor. I'm sorry you weren't clear on that, but it is by design. So you reporting your issues is helping, but your attitude doesn't. You gotta lighten up, man.
> 
> 
> 
> I hear what you are saying and to an extend i agree with you but releasing BIOS's like this also doesn't help.
> 
> I mean, if the GPU drivers go nuts and i no longer have audio i go in wth mode because it has NOTHING to do with AMD AGESA or overclocking whatsoever, its just poor coding which is unnecessary imo.
> 
> I already said that LLC seems changed and its better with RAM overclocking.
Click to expand...

I usually try not to say much in the way of these types of comments but you are just plain wrong in every aspect. Releasing the bios in a forum thread for us to test is a courtesy as it allows us as consumers to be part of this important step in the development of the motherboard and the architecture we are using. Your negative comments are going to ruin that for everyone and that will hurt the forthcoming bios revisions and new Agesa releases in the future. We are critical feedback from active users and not some testers that are paid to test. We live with these boards and know them much better than those testers that possibly don’t even use the board personally aside from work. That will end up making it take longer to get these updates and with less feedback and testing, the less likely to catch some of the more rare bugs. 
Now when you complain about not knowing this was a beta when it’s literally in a thread about the crosshair 7 mobo and the site is not related to Asus at all is just one of two things...a mistake on your part for not using common sense before downloading and flashing or just a lack of common sense as a whole. Your complaints about a beta having bugs, and it was obvious to literally everyone but you that it was a beta bios, is counterproductive at the very least. You have no one to blame for not knowing but yourself. I believe you downloaded it excitedly without thinking, hoping it was a final release and got upset and hastily commented here about it still not knowing it was a beta, then upon not seeing the obvious you got embarrassed and are still trying to carry on this complaint as if it were actually a legitimate complaint. I can tell you that I’m no way is it legitimate and you’d be much better off just saying “My fault, I should’ve known it was a beta bios as it was not on the Asus official site but on Overclock.net CH7 forum. Sorry guys, I need to take my blood pressure meds and calm down.”
Exercise a bit of common sense and see the obvious. Don’t sit here and try to ruin Elmor’s nice gesture including us like this. He doesn’t have to do this and contributes to many overclocking communities on top of his work. 
You made a mistake by hastily downloading a file on a forum and flashed it to your bios. If you were worried about bugs then you should only be downloading from Asus official site in the first place. To carry on further and acting like you have some basis for an argument will only lead to you looking more ridiculous. @elmor Keep doing what you’re doing and take as much time as needed to fix things properly and we will test things out and give relevant feedback to help fix problems and improve performance. Thank you for going out of your way to include the overclock.net community in this critical process.


----------



## ubbernewb

how do i set my ram to 3200? when i try it freezes its this ram https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232221


----------



## nick name

ubbernewb said:


> how do i set my ram to 3200? when i try it freezes its this ram https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232221


What are you trying? Honestly, I would assume setting DOCP in BIOS would get it done for you, but you gotta let us know what isn't working so far.


----------



## nick name

Sooooo I'm thinking it isn't the new 1101 BIOS that is causing the driver issues after install, but the fact it's a new AGESA. I switched back to 1001 and I found the same behavior that we have seen when switching to 1101. That makes me think any AGESA switch is gonna cause the driver behavior we have seen after the first boot of 1101. 

Now with that said -- I switched back to 1001 because it seemed as if the new BIOS/AGESA caused some weird ping/latency issues when playing games online. In my case it was Rocket League and moreso CSGO. So I am gonna try 1001 for a bit to rule out some weird ISP issues. 

So to recap what I've seen is that simply switching between AGESA versions causes the driver issues people have seen thus far.


----------



## ubbernewb

nick name said:


> What are you trying? Honestly, I would assume setting DOCP in BIOS would get it done for you, but you gotta let us know what isn't working so far.


 docp how do i set that?


----------



## nick name

ubbernewb said:


> docp how do i set that?


It's in the BIOS. You should Goolge or use YouTube for screenshots. It's easier to see it.


----------



## nick name

nick name said:


> Sooooo I'm thinking it isn't the new 1101 BIOS that is causing the driver issues after install, but the fact it's a new AGESA. I switched back to 1001 and I found the same behavior that we have seen when switching to 1101. That makes me think any AGESA switch is gonna cause the driver behavior we have seen after the first boot of 1101.
> 
> Now with that said -- I switched back to 1001 because it seemed as if the new BIOS/AGESA caused some weird ping/latency issues when playing games online. In my case it was Rocket League and moreso CSGO. So I am gonna try 1001 for a bit to rule out some weird ISP issues.
> 
> So to recap what I've seen is that simply switching between AGESA versions causes the driver issues people have seen thus far.


Ok, so the weird ping issues persisted after reverting BIOS. It isn't the new AGESA/BIOS that were the issue.


----------



## ubbernewb

where is bios 1101? i have the corsshair vii hero i see bios 804 on their site


----------



## MNMadman

ubbernewb said:


> where is bios 1101? i have the corsshair vii hero i see bios 804 on their site


BIOS 1101 is a test version for the C7H-WiFi board only. It is not release-ready, so does not show up on the Asus site.

Unless you are willing to deal with all manner of potential bugs and problems, I suggest you stick with the BIOS versions that are available on the official site. If you do want to be an unofficial tester, there is a link to the newest BIOS versions in the first post of this thread. Just make sure you get the correct version that works for your board.


----------



## ubbernewb

i dodged a bullet like Neo from the Matrix earlier, my waterblock the hose twisted one sides fitting loose when i was installing it, and it leaked a little on my motherboard and wouldnt boot i tightened the fitting and the hose and took board out and used a plug in dust duster and after i wiped it as dry as i could i ran the air duster on it which makes pretty hot air after few minutes and blew it on the whole area and dried it out and replugged it all in and it seems fine


----------



## CJMitsuki

ubbernewb said:


> i dodged a bullet like Neo from the Matrix earlier, my waterblock the hose twisted one sides fitting loose when i was installing it, and it leaked a little on my motherboard and wouldnt boot i tightened the fitting and the hose and took board out and used a plug in dust duster and after i wiped it as dry as i could i ran the air duster on it which makes pretty hot air after few minutes and blew it on the whole area and dried it out and replugged it all in and it seems fine



If you dont plan to take the fittings off anytime soon you can use some threadlocker on them and it will keep that from happening. The red threadlocker is semi permanent and the blue can be taken back off with a bit of force but not excessive force. The red can be taken back off as well but takes much more force than the blue type. Also if the problem ever happens to be that a fitting is leaking at the treads you can get a very cheap roll of teflon tape and wrap the threads before installation of the fitting but cant be used in conjunction with threadlocker.


----------



## hurricane28

CJMitsuki said:


> I usually try not to say much in the way of these types of comments but you are just plain wrong in every aspect. Releasing the bios in a forum thread for us to test is a courtesy as it allows us as consumers to be part of this important step in the development of the motherboard and the architecture we are using. Your negative comments are going to ruin that for everyone and that will hurt the forthcoming bios revisions and new Agesa releases in the future. We are critical feedback from active users and not some testers that are paid to test. We live with these boards and know them much better than those testers that possibly don’t even use the board personally aside from work. That will end up making it take longer to get these updates and with less feedback and testing, the less likely to catch some of the more rare bugs.
> Now when you complain about not knowing this was a beta when it’s literally in a thread about the crosshair 7 mobo and the site is not related to Asus at all is just one of two things...a mistake on your part for not using common sense before downloading and flashing or just a lack of common sense as a whole. Your complaints about a beta having bugs, and it was obvious to literally everyone but you that it was a beta bios, is counterproductive at the very least. You have no one to blame for not knowing but yourself. I believe you downloaded it excitedly without thinking, hoping it was a final release and got upset and hastily commented here about it still not knowing it was a beta, then upon not seeing the obvious you got embarrassed and are still trying to carry on this complaint as if it were actually a legitimate complaint. I can tell you that I’m no way is it legitimate and you’d be much better off just saying “My fault, I should’ve known it was a beta bios as it was not on the Asus official site but on Overclock.net CH7 forum. Sorry guys, I need to take my blood pressure meds and calm down.”
> Exercise a bit of common sense and see the obvious. Don’t sit here and try to ruin Elmor’s nice gesture including us like this. He doesn’t have to do this and contributes to many overclocking communities on top of his work.
> You made a mistake by hastily downloading a file on a forum and flashed it to your bios. If you were worried about bugs then you should only be downloading from Asus official site in the first place. To carry on further and acting like you have some basis for an argument will only lead to you looking more ridiculous. @elmor Keep doing what you’re doing and take as much time as needed to fix things properly and we will test things out and give relevant feedback to help fix problems and improve performance. Thank you for going out of your way to include the overclock.net community in this critical process.


You better stayed quiet because this doesn't make sense at all and is as you self said: "counterproductive". 

This is quite some list of distain that mischaracterizes what i said so let me explain what i meant as you clearly have no idea but just want to troll. 

At first no, i didn't realize it was an beta BIOS to be honest because Elmor didn't say it was. That being said, most BIOS's Elmor releases here are close to finish and i rarely had so much problems with one than this 1101 BIOS. So no, i didn't expect this to go south pretty fast with this 1101 BIOS. The issues with Audio and GPU drivers have nothing to do with Beta BIOS testing, its just poor coding on Asus side, as simple as that. 

The weird part is that you seem to be okay with everything as its only an "beta BIOS" so if things go south pretty bad you simply say: "use common sense" and " you should know better" This is counterproductive and offers no positive feedback to either Asus or the community. I've had to re-flash audio drivers a couple of times and "repair" my Windows installation in order to get the audio working again. This has NOTHING to do with AGESA coding but Asus coding as AGESA AMD coding simply doesn't do anything with Audio nor GPU, but if someone can tell me they are plz correct me. But stil, they should have tested this before releasing it imo. This is not how you should release an BIOS imo. We deserve better in that aspect. I had no problem if the RAM or CPU Was less stable than i could say it was the agesa code and Asus could fix this but that was not the case. 

Anyway, i don't know if you know this but i have had the C6H motherboard since the beginning and gave feed back about it since the beginning too. This feed back lead to me getting and free C7H Wifi motherboard which i am very happy about as it almost fixes the problems i were having on the C6H board. That being said, that doesn't mean that i have to accept the problems Asus is causing. 

Anyway, i am not amused that you call me out for almost idiot for not understanding what i wrote earlier. This is uncalled for, especially your "common sense" story and i should take my "blood pressure meds" This is nothing to joke about and is an personal attack from your side which is also uncalled for. But fyi, i am an very fit 33 years old man, almost 34, that goes to the Gym everyday for at least 2 hours.. 
I would like you to apologize for that and or take it out of your post as it can be offensive to people with those problem. I would also like you to take personal attacks to yourself or send me pm about it but doing it in the way you are doing is just being an keyboard-commando which is also "counter productive" and just uncalled for.

That would be all, thank you.


----------



## hurricane28

gupsterg said:


> It is as others have stated chap  .
> 
> I have added a note in the OP of ROG C7H thread that:-
> 
> Advanced > AMD CBS > NBIO Common Options > Precision Boost Override Configuration
> 
> Is now:-
> 
> Advanced > AMD CBS > NBIO Common Options > XFR Enhancement
> 
> Plus that when non X CPU is installed this feature is not available.
> 
> 
> 
> RTC not reading information correctly in top section is due to newer AGESA on UEFI 1101, same issue I have seen on ZE.
> 
> 
> 
> I may soon be moving on my C7H. I reckon the C6H is much better for 4x 8GB. I found it way easier to gain 3400MHz C15 1T on it with that setup of RAM, below is some testing on C6H.
> 
> 3x AIDA64
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 224212
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HCI Memtest v6.0
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 224202
> 
> 
> Rerun on same POST.
> 
> View attachment 224204
> 
> 
> Rerun differing POST.
> 
> View attachment 224206
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P95 v28.10b1 8K 4096K 26GB (CPU Stock)
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 224208
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P95 v28.10b1 8K 4096K 26GB (CPU OC)
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 224210
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Above setup still needs some tweaks, as I have caught 1 error in GSAT in 1hr runs on multiple POSTs  .
> 
> I may revisit the C7H again, but I just think the C6H is better due to having ASUS T-Topology. I also noted it allows smaller steps of VTTDDR as well.


Okay, cool. I don't usually read on the ROG forum as its borked for me for quite some time now, i asked them what was wrong but no answer back as of yet.


----------



## elmor

The change seems to be that some devices are now reported to be under a controller with a different subsystem id. I'll try to find out why that is, if it's something we did or because of the new AGESA. I doubt it's a mistake and might have been done either to simplify things or fix some bug, chances are you'll have to live with this change. It shouldn't cause any issues in it self, I think the issues some of you are experiencing are simply due to a different driver being loaded after the devices are being installed once again. If this is the case, I'll ask that there's a warning added on the official page whenever this will be available there.


----------



## Deyjandi

hurricane28 said:


> You better stayed quiet because this doesn't make sense at all and is as you self said: "counterproductive".
> 
> This is quite some list of distain that mischaracterizes what i said so let me explain what i meant as you clearly have no idea but just want to troll.
> 
> At first no, i didn't realize it was an beta BIOS to be honest because Elmor didn't say it was. That being said, most BIOS's Elmor releases here are close to finish and i rarely had so much problems with one than this 1101 BIOS. So no, i didn't expect this to go south pretty fast with this 1101 BIOS. The issues with Audio and GPU drivers have nothing to do with Beta BIOS testing, its just poor coding on Asus side, as simple as that.
> 
> The weird part is that you seem to be okay with everything as its only an "beta BIOS" so if things go south pretty bad you simply say: "use common sense" and " you should know better" This is counterproductive and offers no positive feedback to either Asus or the community. I've had to re-flash audio drivers a couple of times and "repair" my Windows installation in order to get the audio working again. This has NOTHING to do with AGESA coding but Asus coding as AGESA AMD coding simply doesn't do anything with Audio nor GPU, but if someone can tell me they are plz correct me. But stil, they should have tested this before releasing it imo. This is not how you should release an BIOS imo. We deserve better in that aspect. I had no problem if the RAM or CPU Was less stable than i could say it was the agesa code and Asus could fix this but that was not the case.
> 
> Anyway, i don't know if you know this but i have had the C6H motherboard since the beginning and gave feed back about it since the beginning too. This feed back lead to me getting and free C7H Wifi motherboard which i am very happy about as it almost fixes the problems i were having on the C6H board. That being said, that doesn't mean that i have to accept the problems Asus is causing.
> 
> Anyway, i am not amused that you call me out for almost idiot for not understanding what i wrote earlier. This is uncalled for, especially your "common sense" story and i should take my "blood pressure meds" This is nothing to joke about and is an personal attack from your side which is also uncalled for. But fyi, i am an very fit 33 years old man, almost 34, that goes to the Gym everyday for at least 2 hours..
> I would like you to apologize for that and or take it out of your post as it can be offensive to people with those problem. I would also like you to take personal attacks to yourself or send me pm about it but doing it in the way you are doing is just being an keyboard-commando which is also "counter productive" and just uncalled for.
> 
> That would be all, thank you.


This had happened before in C6H back when amd changed the bios structure or something and btw u know that the GPU is connected straight to the CPU right? So theoretically an agesa update could make changes to hardware ids.
What's the big deal huh? Uninstalling the old device and reinstalling the drivers? If u get frustrated by such a simple procedure, you should keep your motherboard as it is, load the default settings then delete your oc.net account.


----------



## hurricane28

elmor said:


> The change seems to be that some devices are now reported to be under a controller with a different subsystem id. I'll try to find out why that is, if it's something we did or because of the new AGESA. I doubt it's a mistake and might have been done either to simplify things or fix some bug, chances are you'll have to live with this change. It shouldn't cause any issues in it self, I think the issues some of you are experiencing are simply due to a different driver being loaded after the devices are being installed once again. If this is the case, I'll ask that there's a warning added on the official page whenever this will be available there.


"due to a different driver being loaded after the devices are being installed once again" That is exactly what is happening but i was not able to flash new audio driver and it prevented me from installing audio manager. This is highly inconvenient as i use my headphone on the front io panel and can't now because i can't adjust the internal amp. It also totally broke my sound in Google chrome when i opened YouTube and i couldn't listen to music as the driver is completely unusable. 

I tried to flash the BIOS 1101 again but it didn't help. I tried 4 different Realtek drivers, also didn't help. I flashed back to 1001 BIOS and all is well again. 

The positive side is that system seems a lot more stable than 1001 BIOS and it allowed me to run tighter timings at the same frequency.


----------



## CJMitsuki

hurricane28 said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> I usually try not to say much in the way of these types of comments but you are just plain wrong in every aspect. Releasing the bios in a forum thread for us to test is a courtesy as it allows us as consumers to be part of this important step in the development of the motherboard and the architecture we are using. Your negative comments are going to ruin that for everyone and that will hurt the forthcoming bios revisions and new Agesa releases in the future. We are critical feedback from active users and not some testers that are paid to test. We live with these boards and know them much better than those testers that possibly don’t even use the board personally aside from work. That will end up making it take longer to get these updates and with less feedback and testing, the less likely to catch some of the more rare bugs.
> Now when you complain about not knowing this was a beta when it’s literally in a thread about the crosshair 7 mobo and the site is not related to Asus at all is just one of two things...a mistake on your part for not using common sense before downloading and flashing or just a lack of common sense as a whole. Your complaints about a beta having bugs, and it was obvious to literally everyone but you that it was a beta bios, is counterproductive at the very least. You have no one to blame for not knowing but yourself. I believe you downloaded it excitedly without thinking, hoping it was a final release and got upset and hastily commented here about it still not knowing it was a beta, then upon not seeing the obvious you got embarrassed and are still trying to carry on this complaint as if it were actually a legitimate complaint. I can tell you that I’m no way is it legitimate and you’d be much better off just saying “My fault, I should’ve known it was a beta bios as it was not on the Asus official site but on Overclock.net CH7 forum. Sorry guys, I need to take my blood pressure meds and calm down.”
> Exercise a bit of common sense and see the obvious. Don’t sit here and try to ruin Elmor’s nice gesture including us like this. He doesn’t have to do this and contributes to many overclocking communities on top of his work.
> You made a mistake by hastily downloading a file on a forum and flashed it to your bios. If you were worried about bugs then you should only be downloading from Asus official site in the first place. To carry on further and acting like you have some basis for an argument will only lead to you looking more ridiculous. @elmor Keep doing what you’re doing and take as much time as needed to fix things properly and we will test things out and give relevant feedback to help fix problems and improve performance. Thank you for going out of your way to include the overclock.net community in this critical process.
> 
> 
> 
> You better stayed quiet because this doesn't make sense at all and is as you self said: "counterproductive".
> 
> This is quite some list of distain that mischaracterizes what i said so let me explain what i meant as you clearly have no idea but just want to troll.
> 
> At first no, i didn't realize it was an beta BIOS to be honest because Elmor didn't say it was. That being said, most BIOS's Elmor releases here are close to finish and i rarely had so much problems with one than this 1101 BIOS. So no, i didn't expect this to go south pretty fast with this 1101 BIOS. The issues with Audio and GPU drivers have nothing to do with Beta BIOS testing, its just poor coding on Asus side, as simple as that.
> 
> The weird part is that you seem to be okay with everything as its only an "beta BIOS" so if things go south pretty bad you simply say: "use common sense" and " you should know better" This is counterproductive and offers no positive feedback to either Asus or the community. I've had to re-flash audio drivers a couple of times and "repair" my Windows installation in order to get the audio working again. This has NOTHING to do with AGESA coding but Asus coding as AGESA AMD coding simply doesn't do anything with Audio nor GPU, but if someone can tell me they are plz correct me. But stil, they should have tested this before releasing it imo. This is not how you should release an BIOS imo. We deserve better in that aspect. I had no problem if the RAM or CPU Was less stable than i could say it was the agesa code and Asus could fix this but that was not the case.
> 
> Anyway, i don't know if you know this but i have had the C6H motherboard since the beginning and gave feed back about it since the beginning too. This feed back lead to me getting and free C7H Wifi motherboard which i am very happy about as it almost fixes the problems i were having on the C6H board. That being said, that doesn't mean that i have to accept the problems Asus is causing.
> 
> Anyway, i am not amused that you call me out for almost idiot for not understanding what i wrote earlier. This is uncalled for, especially your "common sense" story and i should take my "blood pressure meds" This is nothing to joke about and is an personal attack from your side which is also uncalled for. But fyi, i am an very fit 33 years old man, almost 34, that goes to the Gym everyday for at least 2 hours..
> I would like you to apologize for that and or take it out of your post as it can be offensive to people with those problem. I would also like you to take personal attacks to yourself or send me pm about it but doing it in the way you are doing is just being an keyboard-commando which is also "counter productive" and just uncalled for.
> 
> That would be all, thank you.
Click to expand...

I wouldn’t hold your breath waiting for my apology bc it will never happen. As previously stated I usually don’t say much to address these types of comments but 9/10 comments on this thread from you are negative and it tiring when you seem to have the most problems out of anyone yet you are so quick to download a bios file from a forum and flash it to your machine. You downloaded a file that wasn’t in any capacity, implied or stated, to be official. That really didn’t have to be said though. I know if I see a bios posted to go to Asus’ site and see for my own eyes if it is up on their support page. If it’s not then it doesn’t take Sherlock Holmes to decipher that mystery. 

As for your CH6 thread awards, everyone knows that you have gotten that as I’ve personally seen you comment it on this thread or other threads at least a half dozen times. If there is by chance someone that doesn’t know you got that CH6 then I’m sure they will soon enough. Thing is, this isn’t the CH6 thread and you aren’t being helpful. I honestly can’t remember a time in the recent past that you were anything short of negative about every bios revision you’ve commented on or that bios revisions weren’t coming fast enough or there were too many bugs blah, blah, blah. The board could make you breakfast and you’d complain about your eggs Benedict being luke warm. Ok, I’m trolling a tiny amount now but you honestly need to step back and take a good look at the majority of your input here. I’m not the only one that has noticed it either.

If you’ll pull up all of my posts this is literally one of maybe 2 that I’ve ever really called someone out on. The rest are me helping others or asking legitimate questions. For me to say something means that you had to be doing something repetitive and annoying then I saw where you were acting like someone else was to blame for you downloading a test bios. Your complaining about letting us test these and give feedback is going to end up causing them to stop doing it. This is not something you see every mobo vendor doing and to be asked to give personal feedback leads to better products for us and they get the real issues that you aren’t just going to catch running the board through a battery of tests.

My responses to this are done. I would kindly ask that you stop the negativity and offer real feedback that isn’t in the form of a complaint. Have a good day.

There’s nothing that is so much of a problem that warrants complaints rather than constructive feedback. The reason I haven’t given feedback is because I am waiting for the non WiFi version as I never use WiFi on my desktop so I had no need for it. With that being said, you needed to be confronted or you’ll just keep on and on.


----------



## hurricane28

Deyjandi said:


> This had happened before in C6H back when amd changed the bios structure or something and btw u know that the GPU is connected straight to the CPU right? So theoretically an agesa update could make changes to hardware ids.
> What's the big deal huh? Uninstalling the old device and reinstalling the drivers? If u get frustrated by such a simple procedure, you should keep your motherboard as it is, load the default settings then delete your oc.net account.



Let me get this cleared up. I know how it works and i know agesa update can do certain things to the motherboard, but totally bork drivers? No, never heard from it before. 

Its not the procedure of reinstalling the audio drivers, but not being able to use audio at all, i tried several Realtek drivers but non of them worked or installed the audio manager i need. 

THAT was my main issue and has nothing to do with frustration about something simple as installing an driver.. 

I say these things because i know Asus can do better and they will. Elmor does an good job in updating us with the newest "test" BIOS so we can give feedback and tries to workout the issues. This resulted in much much better voltage and temp readings on the C7H compared to the C6H thread, but if people say nothing at all and "accept" the issues simply because its an beta BIOS doesn't change anything and is counterproductive. 

imo, an BIOS should make an system more or less stable, not bork Windows or devices.


----------



## gupsterg

gupsterg said:


> I may soon be moving on my C7H. I reckon the C6H is much better for 4x 8GB. I found it way easier to gain 3400MHz C15 1T on it with that setup of RAM, below is some testing on C6H.
> 
> 
> 
> Syldon said:
> 
> 
> 
> I ran 4X8 in the CH6 since release. Some of the earlier bios revisions allowed me to run at 3600 with stupid timings. Being new to manually setting up ram left a lot to be desired. But eitherway, I ran at 3466 with 800% runs of hcimemtest on 4x8. I couldn't get stable at 3333 on the Ch7. I eventually gave my son the old CH6 and 2 sticks of ram. 2X16 is better on the CH7 and 4X8 works best on the CH6.
Click to expand...

The C7H's darker Batman like theme is so cool, even the Q-Code display being black is nice touch. If I was honest it's only the cosmetic looks that attract me to it.

It sorta feels like we should have had ASUS T-Topology on the C7H. To me it's like a key attraction to keep the C6H.

Gonna probably be back soon on C7H, just to see if newer AGESA improves say 4 dimms aspect. But if the newer AGESA beta for C6H out soon, then I may just stay in that camp! (LOL)

Sorta debating if the C6E is the board to snap up now when see a promo. As that's pretty much C7H but X370 _and_ ASUS T-Topology  .

Way it's looking I'll end with a mini collection of boards! (LOOL)



hurricane28 said:


> Okay, cool. I don't usually read on the ROG forum as its borked for me for quite some time now, i asked them what was wrong but no answer back as of yet.


Ahh, OK  .


----------



## Dymblos

currently which are the best ram to get ryzen 2700x @4.2?
a 16GB kit is ok (2x8GB)
I read something that must be with samsung chip b-die with low "cas"

price range 200 to 300 usd

Maybe there is some ram with samsung chip and low cas under 200 that allow achieve 4.2Ghz without problem


----------



## Johan45

hurricane28 said:


> Let me get this cleared up. I know how it works and i know agesa update can do certain things to the motherboard, but totally bork drivers? No, never heard from it before.
> 
> Its not the procedure of reinstalling the audio drivers, but not being able to use audio at all, i tried several Realtek drivers but non of them worked or installed the audio manager i need.
> 
> THAT was my main issue and has nothing to do with frustration about something simple as installing an driver..
> 
> I say these things because i know Asus can do better and they will. Elmor does an good job in updating us with the newest "test" BIOS so we can give feedback and tries to workout the issues. This resulted in much much better voltage and temp readings on the C7H compared to the C6H thread, but if people say nothing at all and "accept" the issues simply because its an beta BIOS doesn't change anything and is counterproductive.
> 
> imo, an BIOS should make an system more or less stable, not bork Windows or devices.



You just haven't been around long enough. It can and does happen, seen it many times where a BIOS change can bork Windows even to the point it won't boot.


----------



## crakej

hurricane28 said:


> You better stayed quiet because this doesn't make sense at all and is as you self said: "counterproductive".
> 
> This is quite some list of distain that mischaracterizes what i said so let me explain what i meant as you clearly have no idea but just want to troll.
> 
> At first no, i didn't realize it was an beta BIOS to be honest because Elmor didn't say it was. That being said, most BIOS's Elmor releases here are close to finish and i rarely had so much problems with one than this 1101 BIOS. So no, i didn't expect this to go south pretty fast with this 1101 BIOS. The issues with Audio and GPU drivers have nothing to do with Beta BIOS testing, its just poor coding on Asus side, as simple as that.
> 
> The weird part is that you seem to be okay with everything as its only an "beta BIOS" so if things go south pretty bad you simply say: "use common sense" and " you should know better" This is counterproductive and offers no positive feedback to either Asus or the community. I've had to re-flash audio drivers a couple of times and "repair" my Windows installation in order to get the audio working again. This has NOTHING to do with AGESA coding but Asus coding as AGESA AMD coding simply doesn't do anything with Audio nor GPU, but if someone can tell me they are plz correct me. But stil, they should have tested this before releasing it imo. This is not how you should release an BIOS imo. We deserve better in that aspect. I had no problem if the RAM or CPU Was less stable than i could say it was the agesa code and Asus could fix this but that was not the case.
> 
> Anyway, i don't know if you know this but i have had the C6H motherboard since the beginning and gave feed back about it since the beginning too. This feed back lead to me getting and free C7H Wifi motherboard which i am very happy about as it almost fixes the problems i were having on the C6H board. That being said, that doesn't mean that i have to accept the problems Asus is causing.
> 
> Anyway, i am not amused that you call me out for almost idiot for not understanding what i wrote earlier. This is uncalled for, especially your "common sense" story and i should take my "blood pressure meds" This is nothing to joke about and is an personal attack from your side which is also uncalled for. But fyi, i am an very fit 33 years old man, almost 34, that goes to the Gym everyday for at least 2 hours..
> I would like you to apologize for that and or take it out of your post as it can be offensive to people with those problem. I would also like you to take personal attacks to yourself or send me pm about it but doing it in the way you are doing is just being an keyboard-commando which is also "counter productive" and just uncalled for.
> 
> That would be all, thank you.


I really don't understand why you're like this with people that try to help you. You also clearly don't understand some of the technology and how s/w interacts with it, or you wouldn't make these (untrue) statements.

'_This has NOTHING to do with AGESA coding but Asus coding as AGESA AMD coding.... _'

Yet another statement NOT based on fact! I'm sorry but you clearly don't understand how these things work. Prove us wrong and explain exactly which bit of ASUS coding is wrong? Why? How would you code it to fix it? Tell us exactly how ASUS has messed this up? Why not AMD? 

Please, don't take it too personally - your feedback can be really useful, but it's got to be factual - based on real tests. Slow down - if you don't enjoy being part of the leading edge, which entails things like having to deal with problems, then why not just buy a ready built pc? I don't think you want that really, which is fine, but please stop making statements like 'it doesn't work' or 'it's ASUS sloppy programming' or 'it's just not good enough' - how will this help anyone?

Peace man


----------



## crakej

Having worked in s/w before, I try not to make statements that could lead people like Elmor and the programmers astray. To help make sure I do this, I try to do the following, which is (loosely!) based on a proper software engineering testing/feedback structure

IF I find a problem, what I try to do, especially if I don't really understand the underlying tech or how it functions is this:

Write down what I did, what I expected to happen, and what happened if it was not as expected - just this can be enough to be useful feedback.

If I'm able to offer any other details like how many tests I did, exact h/w setup, settings or screenshots with my findings, then that's great too. Finally, if I do have any insight into what might be going wrong, then I try to explain that too.

I always avoid making statement like 'x doesn't work' unless I know that for a *fact*. If I have the *slightest* doubt, or know others haven't reported it or tested it, then I *do not* just write off stuff that others clearly find useful and/or it works for them.
@elmor surely it's not right to change the device IDs? This would explain drivers being reset or changed. People should still be able to run the full driver with the RealTek Audio manager? Looking fwd to learning more about this potential problem.


----------



## elmor

crakej said:


> Having worked in s/w before, I try not to make statements that could lead people like Elmor and the programmers astray. To help make sure I do this, I try to do the following, which is (loosely!) based on a proper software engineering testing/feedback structure
> 
> IF I find a problem, what I try to do, especially if I don't really understand the underlying tech or how it functions is this:
> 
> Write down what I did, what I expected to happen, and what happened if it was not as expected - just this can be enough to be useful feedback.
> 
> If I'm able to offer any other details like how many tests I did, exact h/w setup, settings or screenshots with my findings, then that's great too. Finally, if I do have any insight into what might be going wrong, then I try to explain that too.
> 
> I always avoid making statement like 'x doesn't work' unless I know that for a *fact*. If I have the *slightest* doubt, or know others haven't reported it or tested it, then I *do not* just write off stuff that others clearly find useful and/or it works for them.
> 
> @elmor surely it's not right to change the device IDs? This would explain drivers being reset or changed. People should still be able to run the full driver with the RealTek Audio manager? Looking fwd to learning more about this potential problem.



The device id of the actual device or controller is not changed, only the subystem id of the controller the device is attached to.

If you check the pictures of my last post, you can see that it's changed from Subsystem Vendor ID 1043 (ASUS) Subsystem Device ID 8747 to Subsystem Vendor ID 1022 (AMD) Subsystem Device ID 1453. It could be that we forgot to change the Subsystem Vendor/Device ID from the reference code.

https://pci-ids.ucw.cz/v2.2/pci.ids

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCI_configuration_space


----------



## crakej

Dymblos said:


> currently which are the best ram to get ryzen 2700x @4.2?
> a 16GB kit is ok (2x8GB)
> I read something that must be with samsung chip b-die with low "cas"
> 
> price range 200 to 300 usd
> 
> Maybe there is some ram with samsung chip and low cas under 200 that allow achieve 4.2Ghz without problem


2X8GB is best, though seems new bios coming soon will improve that. Some having success with 4x8GB now. Yes, Sammy b-die is best, single rank.

You won't get 4.2 mem speed on Ryzen.....yet. Most reliable is around +- 3600MTs currently


----------



## crakej

elmor said:


> The device id of the actual device or controller is not changed, only the subystem id of the controller the device is attached to.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCI_configuration_space


Interesting. Thanks.

So it shouldn't affect it really - though the driver may differentiate the hardware slightly differently which could still cause problems? I'm sure you'll let us know when they come back to you...


----------



## Terror-Byter

Just tried 1101 BIOS, and I can confirm that it has reset most if not all devices in windows 10. Like many have already experienced, the Audio drivers arent being detected and installed correctly. Will start messing around with ram speeds later today.


What I have run into, that I havent seen mentioned here, is that HWiNFO64 doesnt seem to be working with this Bios.
Am I the only one experiencing this or can others confirm?


----------



## kazablanka

elmor said:


> The device id of the actual device or controller is not changed, only the subystem id of the controller the device is attached to.
> 
> If you check the pictures of my last post, you can see that it's changed from Subsystem Vendor ID 1043 (ASUS) Subsystem Device ID 8747 to Subsystem Vendor ID 1022 (AMD) Subsystem Device ID 1453. It could be that we forgot to change the Subsystem Vendor/Device ID from the reference code.
> 
> https://pci-ids.ucw.cz/v2.2/pci.ids
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCI_configuration_space


May i ask you something? it is 7 months from launch and asus cant fix this board's bugs. Agesa get skipped.Why is this happening? I don't blame you personaly but what is going on with rog team guys?


----------



## hurricane28

kazablanka said:


> May i ask you something? it is 7 months from launch and asus cant fix this board's bugs. Agesa get skipped.Why is this happening? I don't blame you personaly but what is going on with rog team guys?


Here is perhaps your answer: 




If there isn't anything wrong, than why does everyone look so tense and give awkward answers to very relevant and good questions. Also listen to the sales pitch of the last person. "that's our job to ensure the best motherboard in the marked" hardware and specs are awesome indeed but the BIOS..? Its not terrible but it is not very stable for me. 

I will try the things Elmor said in the video and see if it helps.


----------



## MNMadman

Unfortunately, the new AGESA seems to have negatively affected RAM stability on my system. While preliminary stability tests passed fine, the longer tests failed. I'm using the exact same settings as I was with BIOS 1001.

When I get home from work, I'll be switching back to version 1001.


----------



## PopnOffatTheF

IS THAT WITH TEAMGROUP RAM? :O


----------



## Synoxia

Hey guys i have a 2700x and a CH7 mobo, good case airflow and a noctua d15. I'm trying to achieve the highest possible single core frequency (i need it) but also retaining a good multicore OC (zen 2 tops 4.265 ghz? so atleast 4.2ghz in multicore) for 24/7 use
Should i use performance enhancer lv 3 or 2? Voltages that this thing pumps out are scary and i can't realize if those are just voltage spikes or costant voltage... (i am ok with 1.50v spikes but 1.45+ costant voltage seems scary)


----------



## MacG32

kmellz said:


> New bios was a nice one for me at least! While I had the same issues with hardware apparently being detected as new, and some problems with the realtek control panel gone (this **** is really irritating in general though with this board, sonic studio and realtek drivers, the equalizer only being available in sonic studio etc.. ugh) that was quickly solved by simply copying over rav64cpl.exe from extracted driver to the realtek folder... oh well. The equalizer is working fine now too without sonic studio, so now it seems I can simply upgrade drivers as usual again.
> 
> But the most interesting part was of course the promise of possibly better memory compability and oc.. which seems to have been fulfilled! Was previously running 3466Mhz "mostly" stable, now I'm running a sweet 3533Mhz with slightly tighter timings and lower voltages! Same main timings, but some lower subtimings. Haven't done a super extensive stress test, 1h in aida64 stress on the main components, gonna give some general games and programs a go now.
> 
> But from how it was before when trying higher speeds and how fast it crashed, this is definetely looking promising.



Thank you for your insight, as I reinstalled the latest Realtek HDA Driver from Station-Drivers, copied over RAVCpl64.exe from the WIN64 folder of the install to the C:\Program Files\Realtek\Audio\HDA folder and the Realtek HD Audio Manager worked again. I appreciate it! :thumb:


----------



## nick name

Synoxia said:


> Hey guys i have a 2700x and a CH7 mobo, good case airflow and a noctua d15. I'm trying to achieve the highest possible single core frequency (i need it) but also retaining a good multicore OC (zen 2 tops 4.265 ghz? so atleast 4.2ghz in multicore) for 24/7 use
> Should i use performance enhancer lv 3 or 2? Voltages that this thing pumps out are scary and i can't realize if those are just voltage spikes or costant voltage... (i am ok with 1.50v spikes but 1.45+ costant voltage seems scary)


Level 3 and Level 4 ignore the safety settings in PBO which makes the CPU hold its clock speeds while under load whereas regular PBO, Level 1, and Level 2 will downclock while under load. So Level 3 and Level 4 will perform like a quasi all core overclock, but allow you to reach your higher single core speed. My technique for controlling voltages on multi core loads is to combine load line calibration with a negative offset. I am stable using LLC 4 and an offset of - .08, but it doesn't work well in conjunction with a high BCLK setting. My setup keeps voltages below 1.5V at high single core speeds (4.35GHz) and keeps voltages at below 1.4V for high multi core loads (4.15GHz ~ 4.25GHz). You might be able to tune your setup to work with a higher BCLK multiplier to give yourself higher speeds on single core runs.


----------



## gupsterg

kazablanka said:


> May i ask you something? it is 7 months from launch and asus cant fix this board's bugs. Agesa get skipped.Why is this happening? I don't blame you personaly but what is going on with rog team guys?


Personally in the period I've used the C7H I really can't say it's problematic board.

It may seem to x or even y things are not getting fixed, but they are.

If you think the grass is greener on the other side do read up on how other boards can be. Besides recently reading gripes on ASRock, Gigabyte I luv'd this one this best, MSI X370 Titanium owner or how about some extra juice to the CPU when no confirmation given on saving of settings.


----------



## nick name

kazablanka said:


> May i ask you something? it is 7 months from launch and asus cant fix this board's bugs. Agesa get skipped.Why is this happening? I don't blame you personaly but what is going on with rog team guys?


I believe @elmor said they skipped AGESA 1.0.0.4 for good reason, but I can't recall what that reason is. I do trust, however, that it was skipped for the benefit of us and honestly if it allowed us to get AGESA 1.0.0.6 sooner then I am happy they skipped 1.0.0.4.


----------



## Onijin

The new BIOS ironed a lot of problems out for me, but brought up a new one that I didn't notice before : On waking from S3 sleep, PB3/4 settings no longer work. Rather than boosting to 4.1/4.2ghz it'll peg itself at 3.9/4.0 and stay there until a restart. Went through UEFI a few times looking for relevant settings but couldn't find anything obvious. Any ideas?


----------



## Johan45

kazablanka said:


> May i ask you something? it is 7 months from launch and asus cant fix this board's bugs. Agesa get skipped.Why is this happening? I don't blame you personaly but what is going on with rog team guys?


Personally, I feel part of the issue is the constant AGESA updates from AMD. Since the launch of Ryzen in early 2017 there have been numerous AGESA updates typically every 2-3 months. This doesn't provide a nice and stable working environment for the BIOS teams. If they had a few months to concentrate on just optimizing a BIOS for a board that would be different but every couple months they have to analyze what changes AMD has made and recode their BIOS test it, tweak it and test some more. AMD is constantly changing the ground rules, ASUS et al, are just trying to keep up. 

I have said this before and will say it again, find a BIOS that works and stick with it. If you "want" to be beta testers then, by all means, go ahead and do that but stop crying foul when things go off the rails. All this wanting new AGESA to unlock some magical memory abilities is just wishful thinking. Things really aren't going to get that much better, the CPU is the limiting factor here and that's not going to change for a few months yet. We're not going to see any significant performance increase until then

I still use BIOS 702, no issues performance is good


----------



## gupsterg

At times I believe it is AMD.

At times it is ASUS/ODM.

For example, I was not really affected by Super IO chip crapping out fans on C6H, C7H and ZE. Many have had a rough ride for a fair while on the older boards. C7H owners have gained ASUS WMI so quick compared to C6H/ZE owners (ZE owners still have no public release yet  ).


----------



## kazablanka

Every bios version until now is buggy for me, everyone since boards release. Maybe different bugs from a bios to another but there are bugs. Iam not a beta tester i use official bios version. I have pay for this board a lot of money and i want my board to works perfect us every buyer. So i have to ask elmor as he represents asus rog in this thread ,what is going wrong with them. It's a shame for this decent board overall to have such silly bugs.
I have asus prime x470 pro too. This board's bios is the most stable bios i have ever had with an asus board. So the problem is not amd for me guys.


----------



## Johan45

kazablanka said:


> Every bios version until now is buggy for me, everyone since boards release. Maybe different bugs from a bios to another but there are bugs. Iam not a beta tester i use official bios version. I have pay for this board a lot of money and i want my board to works perfect us every buyer. So i have to ask elmor as he represents asus rog in this thread ,what is going wrong with them. It's a shame for this decent board overall to have such silly bugs.
> I have asus prime x470 pro too. This board's bios is the most stable bios i have ever had with an asus board. So the problem is not amd for me guys.


Maybe you should compile a list of BIOS releases and the associated "bugs" when they happen what you were doing etc.. that might go a long way in helping to get them resolved.


----------



## gupsterg

kazablanka said:


> Every bios version until now is buggy for me, everyone since boards release. Maybe different bugs from a bios to another but there are bugs. Iam not a beta tester i use official bios version.


The official bios thing really means not a lot IMO.

A lot of the releases on the C6H/ZE "we" gained few weeks prior to going "official" (courtesy of Elmor :thumb, once you downed "official" byte for byte it was identical. So each UEFI is pretty much beta or "official" with bugs  , some you or another may encounter soon or never.

I do believe from what I experienced from being a "pre-order" owner of C6H, that the ZE and C7H vastly had more developed UEFIs. So Johan's point that AGESA aren't gonna bring "magical" leaps is pretty much on $. So we have got very developed state on that side.

AGESAs probably only are bringing bug fixes we may not be aware of. ASUS/ODMs need to patch more consistently bugs on their side of things. Like I earlier said on the ZE which is probably the priciest AMD board it just had a "official" release that lacks ASUS WMI, so people still have Super IO crapping out fan header PWM. That is ASUS UEFI team dropping the ball, not AMD/AGESA.


----------



## Synoxia

nick name said:


> Level 3 and Level 4 ignore the safety settings in PBO which makes the CPU hold its clock speeds while under load whereas regular PBO, Level 1, and Level 2 will downclock while under load. So Level 3 and Level 4 will perform like a quasi all core overclock, but allow you to reach your higher single core speed. My technique for controlling voltages on multi core loads is to combine load line calibration with a negative offset. I am stable using LLC 4 and an offset of - .08, but it doesn't work well in conjunction with a high BCLK setting. My setup keeps voltages below 1.5V at high single core speeds (4.35GHz) and keeps voltages at below 1.4V for high multi core loads (4.15GHz ~ 4.25GHz). You might be able to tune your setup to work with a higher BCLK multiplier to give yourself higher speeds on single core runs.


I do not really care about multicore performance as i use this cpu for gaming, mostly in low core scenario.
In fact i have a single core game that maxes out r7 2700x at stock, i'd like to pump single core to max despite MT performance (but not lower than 1st gen possibly)
What would you suggest me in my scenario? Seems like PE lv 3 likes way more voltage than PE2, temps seem ok anyway but voltage worries me... is costant 1.5v ok on single thread?


----------



## kazablanka

gupsterg said:


> The official bios thing really means not a lot IMO.
> .


Yes but this is not my problem, as asus publish a new bios it has to be fully tested and bugless. If there are bugs asus has to correct them soon. Not waiting months...
I am a consumer not a bios tester...


----------



## nick name

Synoxia said:


> I do not really care about multicore performance as i use this cpu for gaming, mostly in low core scenario.
> In fact i have a single core game that maxes out r7 2700x at stock, i'd like to pump single core to max despite MT performance (but not lower than 1st gen possibly)
> What would you suggest me in my scenario? Seems like PE lv 3 likes way more voltage than PE2, temps seem ok anyway but voltage worries me... is costant 1.5v ok on single thread?
> 
> https://youtu.be/Notmixp0sDQ this is my current oc behaviour in single thread apps (PE 2 103 BCLK)
> 
> temps and voltages http://i67.tinypic.com/34gr9kw.png
> 
> Aren't this guy results too high on voltage? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XB4_rF72BJY&t=264s


Edit: I just realized what I had said was redundant.


----------



## MNMadman

kazablanka said:


> Yes but this is not my problem, as asus publish a new bios it has to be fully tested and bugless. If there are bugs asus has to correct them soon. Not waiting months...
> I am a consumer not a bios tester...


While this would be the ideal situation, it's not realistic. No manufacturer can test with all GPU models, or all RAM kits, or all SSDs, etc. It would be cost-prohibitive as well as a huge time sink.

There isn't a BIOS out there for any board from any manufacturer that doesn't have both known and as yet undiscovered bugs in it.

-----

I reverted to BIOS 1001 successfully. Drivers reset and reloaded themselves on first boot. Stability re-certification process has begun.


----------



## nick name

So Ryzen Timing Checker isn't working for me at all any more. It worked with some wonky readings earlier, but now I get this error when trying to use it: InitializeOls Failed

Edit:
It stopped working after reverting from BIOS 1101 to 1001. I have since changed back to 1101 and RTC still reports the same error.


----------



## ubbernewb

it shows all my drivers are in but i get no audio i have speakers plugged into green port in back i dont know whats going on i disabled my nvidia audio driver that came with my GPU and still nothing..EDIT nevermind drivers windows 10 installed didnt work had to get em off asus site


----------



## nick name

ubbernewb said:


> it shows all my drivers are in but i get no audio i have speakers plugged into green port in back i dont know whats going on i disabled my nvidia audio driver that came with my GPU and still nothing


Hey boss, can you give more details please? Are you using the 1101 BIOS? If you are there are some audio driver fixes in some of the most recent posts. Please review those for guidance.


----------



## ubbernewb

nick name said:


> Hey boss, can you give more details please? Are you using the 1101 BIOS? If you are there are some audio driver fixes in some of the most recent posts. Please review those for guidance.


i fixed it, it was the driver windows gave it didnt work as soon as i installed driver off asus site it worked...im on latest offical bios


----------



## gupsterg

kazablanka said:


> Yes but this is not my problem, as asus publish a new bios it has to be fully tested and bugless. If there are bugs asus has to correct them soon. Not waiting months...
> I am a consumer not a bios tester...


I can understand your frustration. The reality is as MNMadman has stated.

I don't have an issue with C7H with HW/SW/FW config I use, but regardless I favour the C6H for reasons stated before in post and another reason. It has been out so much longer, I would assume it would be more bug free.

I think I have finally ironed out my profile for 4.1GHz 3400MHz C15 1T on 4x8GB. I'm just gonna go for another round of seeing if I can tighten up some more timings. After that I will give the C7H another go, with knowledge what this CPU/RAM combo is capable of on C6H, if it matches or bests it, it stays, otherwise it goes; regardless how much I like it visually, etc.


----------



## neikosr0x

Hope to get the New bios for the Ch7 Hero as well, any time soon.


----------



## nick name

Welp RTC started working again. I can't tell you why though. And it still does the wonky reporting of some resistance values. Also, this timing setup was stable at 1001 and continues to be so on 1101.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Welp RTC started working again. I can't tell you why though. And it still does the wonky reporting of some resistance values. Also, this timing setup was stable at 1001 and continues to be so on 1101.


Thanks for sharing. Which Trident Zs have you got?


----------



## CJMitsuki

gupsterg said:


> After that I will give the C7H another go, with knowledge what this CPU/RAM combo is capable of on C6H, if it matches or bests it, it stays, otherwise it goes; regardless how much I like it visually, etc.


But visuals are 10% of the performance of a rig Gupsterg. Everyone knows that.


----------



## bonomork

I'm ordering CH7, but reading about these issues I'm really tempted to switch to another brand... kinda like from the frying pan to the fire ?


----------



## Copyright

bonomork said:


> I'm ordering CH7, but reading about these issues I'm really tempted to switch to another brand... kinda like from the frying pan to the fire ?


I have used the Gigabyte Aorus Gaming 7, The Asus CH7 and the Asrock Taichi. I did two builds with the Taichi.. they were the only two to not have issues. I'm not a rookie builder.. 20 years building custom rigs including custom loops and liquid cooling back in the 90's. I have built 100+ PC's for gamers..and workstations for Autocad and photoshop users. The Gigabyte gave me a lot of POST issues and finally the bios corrupted it self. I found a handful of guys with the exact same bios corruption issue. The Asrock board just plain works. It's simple.. It POST's very fast. The Asus however is a tweakers dream. Lot's to play with. The Asrock board wasn't as easy to get 4x8gb ram to 3200.. the Asus CH7 only took a small voltage bump and I was stable with 4x8 32gb. My issue with the Asus board is the long POST and issues with third party monitoring are still a problem with my board. Maybe my board has a problem... I can only speak on my own experience. As long as I don't use any third party monitoring apps and avoid using AI SUITE III all is great. Zero problems. Argus Monitor locks up the PC... using AI SUITE III and CAM together causes random power off issues. So far no bios update has fixed this for me and I have found others same issues. The Asrock Taichi is the only board I recommend to anyone... just my 2 cents..


----------



## CJMitsuki

Copyright said:


> bonomork said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm ordering CH7, but reading about these issues I'm really tempted to switch to another brand... kinda like from the frying pan to the fire ?
> 
> 
> 
> I have used the Gigabyte Aorus Gaming 7, The Asus CH7 and the Asrock Taichi. I did two builds with the Taichi.. they were the only two to not have issues. I'm not a rookie builder.. 20 years building custom rigs including custom loops and liquid cooling back in the 90's. I have built 100+ PC's for gamers..and workstations for Autocad and photoshop users. The Gigabyte gave me a lot of POST issues and finally the bios corrupted it self. I found a handful of guys with the exact same bios corruption issue. The Asrock board just plain works. It's simple.. It POST's very fast. The Asus however is a tweakers dream. Lot's to play with. The Asrock board wasn't as easy to get 4x8gb ram to 3200.. the Asus CH7 only took a small voltage bump and I was stable with 4x8 32gb. My issue with the Asus board is the long POST and issues with third party monitoring are still a problem with my board. Maybe my board has a problem... I can only speak on my own experience. As long as I don't use any third party monitoring apps and avoid using AI SUITE III all is great. Zero problems. Argus Monitor locks up the PC... using AI SUITE III and CAM together causes random power off issues. So far no bios update has fixed this for me and I have found others same issues. The Asrock Taichi is the only board I recommend to anyone... just my 2 cents..
Click to expand...

If I recall correctly, the author of HwInfo @Mumak said this was due to monitoring software needing a mutual exclusion programmed so they didn’t access the WMI at the same time. The same exact issue would happen to other software as well. IIRC CPUz and HwInfo were the first to address this issue. Not sure how many others did as well. Of course I could’ve heard wrong but I remember mention of this in this thread couple months back or so.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Thanks for sharing. Which Trident Zs have you got?


I am running F4-3600C15-16GTZ. I also have another profile for 3466MHz 14-14-14 (instead of 14-15-14) and tighter subs that is also stable.


----------



## Copyright

CJMitsuki said:


> If I recall correctly, the author of HwInfo @Mumak said this was due to monitoring software needing a mutual exclusion programmed so they didn’t access the WMI at the same time. The same exact issue would happen to other software as well. IIRC CPUz and HwInfo were the first to address this issue. Not sure how many others did as well. Of course I could’ve heard wrong but I remember mention of this in this thread couple months back or so.


Wish they would resolve this. Never had a problem with any other board like this. Also AI SUITE III would just randomly stop reading fan speed and CPU temp. CoreTemp runs 24/7 on my PC and zero issues with that application. I really wish Argus Monitor would work as well. Take away this problem and the long POST time it would be the best Board I have used for AMD builds.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Copyright said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I recall correctly, the author of HwInfo @Mumak said this was due to monitoring software needing a mutual exclusion programmed so they didn’t access the WMI at the same time. The same exact issue would happen to other software as well. IIRC CPUz and HwInfo were the first to address this issue. Not sure how many others did as well. Of course I could’ve heard wrong but I remember mention of this in this thread couple months back or so.
> 
> 
> 
> Wish they would resolve this. Never had a problem with any other board like this. Also AI SUITE III would just randomly stop reading fan speed and CPU temp. CoreTemp runs 24/7 on my PC and zero issues with that application. I really wish Argus Monitor would work as well. Take away this problem and the long POST time it would be the best Board I have used for AMD builds.
Click to expand...

If that is in fact the problem then that would be on the software developer’s side to fix if I’m not mistaken since they are the problem as they are both trying to access the WMI for the voltage, temp, etc. values at the same time causing the shutdowns. I had that problem when I was running HwInfo and Corsair Link at the same time and was resolved when HwInfo got a couple of updates. Not sure if CLink got one as well. It was a pain for sure but I don’t think it’s a motherboard problem. Just a conflict of programs trying to access critical processes simultaneously. The other mobos probably don’t get that problem bc maybe they have their monitoring values read some other way that isn’t as critical. Again, no idea on those details. If someone doesn’t make it known to the software developers they may never do anything about it.


----------



## Copyright

CJMitsuki said:


> If that is in fact the problem then that would be on the software developer’s side to fix if I’m not mistaken since they are the problem as they are both trying to access the WMI for the voltage, temp, etc. values at the same time causing the shutdowns. I had that problem when I was running HwInfo and Corsair Link at the same time and was resolved when HwInfo got a couple of updates. Not sure if CLink got one as well. It was a pain for sure but I don’t think it’s a motherboard problem. Just a conflict of programs trying to access critical processes simultaneously. The other mobos probably don’t get that problem bc maybe they have their monitoring values read some other way that isn’t as critical. Again, no idea on those details. If someone doesn’t make it known to the software developers they may never do anything about it.


If that is the case its a poor choice for Asus to do what they did. These other apps were fine with every other board I have used for many builds over many years. Even then.. their own AI SUITE III still has issues on my board and a few others I have talked to. If you aren't constantly watching AI SUITE III opened up you may miss the issue where it stops reading fan speed and CPU temp. My next board will be an Asrock.. Smoothest running Ryzen build i have done were a pair of Taichi builds I did recently. Their automatic fan tuning is actually superior to Asus. I felt no need to modify their settings... I always have to go back and tweak on Asus after running fan wizard.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Copyright said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> If that is in fact the problem then that would be on the software developer’s side to fix if I’m not mistaken since they are the problem as they are both trying to access the WMI for the voltage, temp, etc. values at the same time causing the shutdowns. I had that problem when I was running HwInfo and Corsair Link at the same time and was resolved when HwInfo got a couple of updates. Not sure if CLink got one as well. It was a pain for sure but I don’t think it’s a motherboard problem. Just a conflict of programs trying to access critical processes simultaneously. The other mobos probably don’t get that problem bc maybe they have their monitoring values read some other way that isn’t as critical. Again, no idea on those details. If someone doesn’t make it known to the software developers they may never do anything about it.
> 
> 
> 
> If that is the case its a poor choice for Asus to do what they did. These other apps were fine with every other board I have used for many builds over many years. Even then.. their own AI SUITE III still has issues on my board and a few others I have talked to. If you aren't constantly watching AI SUITE III opened up you may miss the issue where it stops reading fan speed and CPU temp. My next board will be an Asrock.. Smoothest running Ryzen build i have done were a pair of Taichi builds I did recently. Their automatic fan tuning is actually superior to Asus. I felt no need to modify their settings... I always have to go back and tweak on Asus after running fan wizard.
Click to expand...

I refuse to use AISuite or any other monitoring software that installs lots of services always running in the background. I keep my OS stripped and after boot I don’t want to be over 5-6% of 16gb memory usage. I will run SIV or HwInfo. Only reason I run CLink is to control fans and have them react to the coolant temps and to bump the pump speed up but I terminate CLink right after bootup with process lasso. I absolutely hate the ridiculous amount of background processes. I disable half of the windows services or more that are near useless. Even got rid of Cortana on my 10 install. 7 is much better but you can’t run some things with it. I also always disable Spectre protections, that’s a hit to performance leaving it enabled. As for the CH7, I don’t see any mobo coming close to having the capabilities that I like for overclocking. The VRMs are great, the voltages are pretty accurate, the amenities for overclocking just aren’t on any other board. It’s weak in the memory OC dept but not by much and it is unrivaled in the cpu OC dept. I honestly don’t have problems like others do with this board. I guess it’s because I don’t run that many monitoring programs. I set my fans in bios and I have another way to control several of the others and I just don’t like having software that accesses and makes changes to the bios while booted into windows. Sounds like a problem waiting to happen with the bios chip. The less I have running the less screwups can occur. When they drop in price I’m getting another for my 1700x that’s been unopened on my desk for months then this board will be used for a chiller setup or maybe DICE. I like the idea of making my own chiller from a discarded refrigerator or window a/c unit or possibly a deep freezer unit.
I imagine Asus used the WMI for more accurate readings possibly. Honestly all monitoring software should be on these things if they are specialty monitoring software. There’s no reason not to be as SIVs author Ray is and HwInfos Mumak is and CPUz’s is as well. Not sure what’s up with AISuite but I’d never use that anyway. It looks great but it’s too bulky and installs too much crap on the system. Monitoring software should be as unobtrusive as possible. A small driver and that’s about it. Installing multiple services and drivers along with auto updates and who knows what else is just not to my liking. I like it simple and to the point. I’ll boot to bios to change those settings, I don’t need software to access it and invite problems.


----------



## hurricane28

Software CAN solve the issue but its not caused by it. The cause is the extremely cheap and erratic iTE IT8665E which they know now and probably never use again since these problems date back from the 990FX era. My 990FX Sabertooth had the same erratic IT sensor and the same fan problems which they never fixed. I have talked about this with Elmor ant The Stilt in the C6H thread and via PM many many times and they spend a lot of time investigate this which has lead to C7H to monitor temps etc. correctly. IF they went with an Novuton chip instead of the erratic IT chip, they didn't have to solder another chip on the board for the readings. 

Read here what that guy said almost on the bottom of the page: http://www.ocdrift.com/review-asus-rog-crosshair-vi-extreme-x370-motherboard/2/

Now with the later BIOS's i have no fan issues anymore and the voltages and temp reading are very accurate in hardwareinfo64 to which i am very grateful for because when overclocking its convenient if you can see the correct voltages and temps for safety reasons alone. 

Other than that, i am very very happy with this board except for the stability. It seems that whenever my RAM hits 35 c or higher i get errors. One day its stable and when i run the program another day or hour i get errors.. I hope i can iron that out pretty soon.


----------



## crakej

I just keep to running one monitoring program at once - and I've had hardly any problems.

From AISuite to Aida, they're all pretty reliable on their own.

*For me* I've found AISuite and SIV to be the most reliable. I tend to use AISuite with HWInfo now they work together (though HWInfo sticks sometimes after sleep). For some reason *only* AISuite 3 will show me the right values for CPU, SoC and Dram voltages... Had problems with AISuite II in the past, but III has been mostly reliable.


----------



## crakej

Ive just seen that my new ADATA drive is not reading as fast as it should. it shows as having proper x4 connection. Fastest I can get is 2.7GB on CrystalMark and 2.5GB on Parkdale for seq reads. Reviews show this drive getting over 3.0GB seq read with CrystalMark. Anyone got any ideas? It an SX8200 480GB


----------



## MNMadman

crakej said:


> Reviews show this drive getting over 3.0GB seq read with CrystalMark. Anyone got any ideas? It an SX8200 480GB


Those reviews are likely with a clean drive (not used as a boot drive), or with a very clean Windows install. As you fill up an SSD, its performance will drop. The only exceptions are Intel's Optane drives.

Also, when was the last time you manually TRIMmed your drive? If you haven't for a while (or ever) you should do it. By default, it's done on a schedule, but the scheduled runs never successfully ran for me, so I turned them off. I TRIM my Samsung 960 Pro 2TB NVMe drive manually about once a week.

Edit: Intel does have a small advantage for drive performance. If the review system was Intel-based, that could account for some of the difference as well.


----------



## crakej

MNMadman said:


> Those reviews are likely with a clean drive (not used as a boot drive), or with a very clean Windows install. As you fill up an SSD, its performance will drop. The only exceptions are Intel's Optane drives.
> 
> Also, when was the last time you manually TRIMmed your drive? If you haven't for a while (or ever) you should do it. By default, it's done on a schedule, but the scheduled runs never successfully ran for me, so I turned them off. I TRIM my Samsung 960 Pro 2TB NVMe drive manually about once a week.
> 
> Edit: Intel does have a small advantage for drive performance. If the review system was Intel-based, that could account for some of the difference as well.


Good point about poss intel review system - but on checking, the tech powerup review is the Gigabyte AB350 Gaming

Like to keep drives trimmed regularly, and drive is new. it's not a huge difference, and definitely better than my SM961, just hoped to get past that 3GB barrier


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Good point about poss intel review system - but on checking, the tech powerup review is the Gigabyte AB350 Gaming
> 
> Like to keep drives trimmed regularly, and drive is new. it's not a huge difference, and definitely better than my SM961, just hoped to get past that 3GB barrier


Man chasing numbers will get ya. I do it all the time and it's so gratifying when you finally hit them. When the weather got to about 45*F on Monday I opened the window and put a fan in front of it pointed at my PC so I could finally break my previous benchmark scores. It was a glorious day filled with overclocking and benchmarking. The weird thing is I still can't get my ASUS Crosshair board to a stable overclock by setting my multiplier in BIOS and had to rely on PE Lvl 3, BCLK, and making adjustments to EDC in Ryzen Master. I was getting up to 4.33GHz benchmark stable with that method, but couldn't manually set 4.3GHz in BIOS and complete a Cinebench run. That 4.33GHz got me 2017 in Cinebench and broke my previous Superposition and Firestrike records.


----------



## prtuc2

Hi Guys,
I purchased the Asus Hero 7 last month, I am using the Ryzen 7 1700 and the G. Skill DDR4-2400 Fortis ram. Then I switch the PSU and upgrade the ram to G. SKill DDR4-3000 Trident Z 16-18-18-38 kit on the QVL. My system would sometimes randomly shut down and I would need to clear CMOS to boot up again. Everything in the BIOS is stock or DOCP standard, not sure if setting is not right or something wrong with the motherboard itself?


----------



## JayC72

MacG32 said:


> Thank you for your insight, as I reinstalled the latest Realtek HDA Driver from Station-Drivers, copied over RAVCpl64.exe from the WIN64 folder of the install to the C:\Program Files\Realtek\Audio\HDA folder and the Realtek HD Audio Manager worked again. I appreciate it! :thumb:


Latest realtek audio driver on Asus site is 6.0.1.8339.
What version have you downloaded? And do you have the link?
Thanks.


----------



## crakej

prtuc2 said:


> Hi Guys,
> I purchased the Asus Hero 7 last month, I am using the Ryzen 7 1700 and the G. Skill DDR4-2400 Fortis ram. Then I switch the PSU and upgrade the ram to G. SKill DDR4-3000 Trident Z 16-18-18-38 kit on the QVL. My system would sometimes randomly shut down and I would need to clear CMOS to boot up again. Everything in the BIOS is stock or DOCP standard, not sure if setting is not right or something wrong with the motherboard itself?


What bios are you using? .... and what settings are you using? ... What monitoring s/w are you running?

I'm on the 1700X and all is good


----------



## Syldon

prtuc2 said:


> Hi Guys,
> I purchased the Asus Hero 7 last month, I am using the Ryzen 7 1700 and the G. Skill DDR4-2400 Fortis ram. Then I switch the PSU and upgrade the ram to G. SKill DDR4-3000 Trident Z 16-18-18-38 kit on the QVL. My system would sometimes randomly shut down and I would need to clear CMOS to boot up again. Everything in the BIOS is stock or DOCP standard, not sure if setting is not right or something wrong with the motherboard itself?


The DOCP is terrible on ZEN systems. There is a dram calculator from 1smus that may help, or wait for the next bios release. The newest agesa 1.0.0.6 revision is near ready according to Elmor. 


There is a beta release of agesa 1.0.06, but it is causing many issues with hardware recognition. I would not recommend it.


----------



## MacG32

JayC72 said:


> Latest realtek audio driver on Asus site is 6.0.1.8339.
> What version have you downloaded? And do you have the link?
> Thanks.



04SEP18, 6.0.1.8531 - Realtek High Definition Audio (HDA) R2.8x (8531) WHQL
https://www.station-drivers.com/ind...tory&Itemid=352&func=fileinfo&id=3679&lang=en
It doesn't include the Sonic Suite, as it's only the audio driver. :thumb:


----------



## prtuc2

crakej said:


> What bios are you using? .... and what settings are you using? ... What monitoring s/w are you running?
> 
> I'm on the 1700X and all is good


I am on BIOS 0804, only thing I can in the BIOS is set AI tweaker to DOCP standard, then set cpu ratio to 30.0, disabled performance core boost, and set the cpu voltage to offset. Memory setting is left at stock. Using a NEC EA275UHD pairing with EVGA GTX 1070 FTW. I am not playing any games or cpu intensive programs, just browsing websites since it is unstable.


----------



## crakej

prtuc2 said:


> I am on BIOS 0804, only thing I can in the BIOS is set AI tweaker to DOCP standard, then set cpu ratio to 30.0, disabled performance core boost, and set the cpu voltage to offset. Memory setting is left at stock. Using a NEC EA275UHD pairing with EVGA GTX 1070 FTW. I am not playing any games or cpu intensive programs, just browsing websites since it is unstable.


I would recommend updating to bios 1001 which is a few pages back in this thread. I had trouble with using offset voltage and fixed OC on that bios - though nothing that would crash the machine. I can provide a link if you can't find it.

If your memory is on the QVL it should work with default DOCP setting, even if that isn't the most efficient setting.

May I ask why you're clocking the CPU so low? And you're not running any monitoring s/w?

Edit: here's the link - remember, it is a beta bios. http://download2266.mediafire.com/6q9pgt6lb1fg/o1o1h7qsr7k4hj3/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-1001.zip


----------



## Copyright

hurricane28 said:


> Software CAN solve the issue but its not caused by it. The cause is the extremely cheap and erratic iTE IT8665E which they know now and probably never use again since these problems date back from the 990FX era. My 990FX Sabertooth had the same erratic IT sensor and the same fan problems which they never fixed. I have talked about this with Elmor ant The Stilt in the C6H thread and via PM many many times and they spend a lot of time investigate this which has lead to C7H to monitor temps etc. correctly. IF they went with an Novuton chip instead of the erratic IT chip, they didn't have to solder another chip on the board for the readings.
> 
> Read here what that guy said almost on the bottom of the page: http://www.ocdrift.com/review-asus-rog-crosshair-vi-extreme-x370-motherboard/2/
> 
> Now with the later BIOS's i have no fan issues anymore and the voltages and temp reading are very accurate in hardwareinfo64 to which i am very grateful for because when overclocking its convenient if you can see the correct voltages and temps for safety reasons alone.
> 
> Other than that, i am very very happy with this board except for the stability. It seems that whenever my RAM hits 35 c or higher i get errors. One day its stable and when i run the program another day or hour i get errors.. I hope i can iron that out pretty soon.


This makes perfect sense to me.. Glad Asus is aware of the issue. Maybe some don't like to use the apps I use. They monitor health of many things including my drives and video card which I do like. It's not a problem with any other brand and I would not expect it from Asus who I considered one of the top brands out there. Anyone know if the z390 Asus boards use this same chip?


----------



## prtuc2

crakej said:


> I would recommend updating to bios 1001 which is a few pages back in this thread. I had trouble with using offset voltage and fixed OC on that bios - though nothing that would crash the machine. I can provide a link if you can't find it.
> 
> If your memory is on the QVL it should work with default DOCP setting, even if that isn't the most efficient setting.
> 
> May I ask why you're clocking the CPU so low? And you're not running any monitoring s/w?
> 
> Edit: here's the link - remember, it is a beta bios. http://download2266.mediafire.com/6q9pgt6lb1fg/o1o1h7qsr7k4hj3/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-1001.zip


I am running the stock cooler at the moment and don't like to run anything higher than stock without proper cooling. Waiting for the 5th generation Noctua cooler to be release and then I will play with the overclocking.


----------



## CJMitsuki

MNMadman said:


> Those reviews are likely with a clean drive (not used as a boot drive), or with a very clean Windows install. As you fill up an SSD, its performance will drop. The only exceptions are Intel's Optane drives.
> 
> Also, when was the last time you manually TRIMmed your drive? If you haven't for a while (or ever) you should do it. By default, it's done on a schedule, but the scheduled runs never successfully ran for me, so I turned them off. I TRIM my Samsung 960 Pro 2TB NVMe drive manually about once a week.
> 
> Edit: Intel does have a small advantage for drive performance. If the review system was Intel-based, that could account for some of the difference as well.


Everyone knows that when Intel has anything to do with the review it is without bias and you can 100% trust the results. They would never skew results to favor one product over another :yessir:

Seriously though, trimming the drive is a must but I go further and have Acronis backup with clean installs updated with software I use and ready to go. When I notice drive performance drop I just wipe the drive clean after backing up what is important and reload the clean install saved to the Acronis cloud and boom, performance restored. Its really handy since I run benchmarks a lot for HWBOT and i have stripped installs i bench from. I just run benches all night then I can wipe the NVME whenever I want performance at maximum 3600+ seq reads


----------



## gupsterg

gupsterg said:


> After that I will give the C7H another go, with knowledge what this CPU/RAM combo is capable of on C6H, if it matches or bests it, it stays, otherwise it goes; regardless how much I like it visually, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> But visuals are 10% of the performance of a rig Gupsterg. Everyone knows that.
Click to expand...

Damn I knew I was doing something wrong  . With this new advice I shall order RGB GPU Brace, I envisage gains from the realms of Principled Technologies :h34r-smi .


----------



## CJMitsuki

gupsterg said:


> Damn I knew I was doing something wrong  . With this new advice I shall order RGB GPU Brace, I envisage gains from the realms of Principled Technologies :h34r-smi .


:lachen: If you cant use your desktop to help land aircraft at night then you arent doing it right. So much RGB that it needs its own solar panel and if you use blue RGB the combined cooling of the blue lights will likely let you hit sub zero temps passively then you can chunk the liquid cooler and fans and add more blue RGB :lachen:


----------



## hurricane28

Copyright said:


> This makes perfect sense to me.. Glad Asus is aware of the issue. Maybe some don't like to use the apps I use. They monitor health of many things including my drives and video card which I do like. It's not a problem with any other brand and I would not expect it from Asus who I considered one of the top brands out there. Anyone know if the z390 Asus boards use this same chip?


I hope so too man. I hope they learned from this mistake and they avoid ITe chips like the plague from now on. 

All i know is that even the expensive ROG X399 zenith extreme has the same sensors and some people are affected by this issue as well. Some are pretty pissed and returned their boards like some did with the C6H and C7H board. So if Asus ROG doesn't step up their game, people will avoid them in the future.


----------



## Johan45

hurricane28 said:


> I hope so too man. I hope they learned from this mistake and they avoid ITe chips like the plague from now on.
> 
> All i know is that even the expensive ROG X399 zenith extreme has the same sensors and some people are affected by this issue as well. Some are pretty pissed and returned their boards like some did with the C6H and C7H board. So if Asus ROG doesn't step up their game, people will avoid them in the future.


Not likely, I'm sure they have agreements that need to be met. I still find it very coincidental that since the 990 days you and I have had the same motherboards. You have had issues on all of them where I haven't, I still think it has to be something you install perhaps or part of your set up. Maybe the incessant amount of monitoring you seem to do? I don't know just seems odd.


----------



## Espenn

hurricane28 said:


> Software CAN solve the issue but its not caused by it. The cause is the extremely cheap and erratic iTE IT8665E which they know now and probably never use again since these problems date back from the 990FX era. My 990FX Sabertooth had the same erratic IT sensor and the same fan problems which they never fixed. I have talked about this with Elmor ant The Stilt in the C6H thread and via PM many many times and they spend a lot of time investigate this which has lead to C7H to monitor temps etc. correctly. IF they went with an Novuton chip instead of the erratic IT chip, they didn't have to solder another chip on the board for the readings.
> 
> Read here what that guy said almost on the bottom of the page: http://www.ocdrift.com/review-asus-rog-crosshair-vi-extreme-x370-motherboard/2/
> 
> Now with the later BIOS's i have no fan issues anymore and the voltages and temp reading are very accurate in hardwareinfo64 to which i am very grateful for because when overclocking its convenient if you can see the correct voltages and temps for safety reasons alone.
> 
> Other than that, i am very very happy with this board except for the stability. It seems that whenever my RAM hits 35 c or higher i get errors. One day its stable and when i run the program another day or hour i get errors.. I hope i can iron that out pretty soon.


If you ever figure out the temperature thing, let me know. I have a very reliable 3466C14 going, but I also immediately error out when RAM temps get above 35C on this board. I see other users with other boards with DRAM temps running into the low 40s with no issues. I have an 80mm fan pointed at my DIMMs just to solve this problem.


----------



## nick name

Espenn said:


> If you ever figure out the temperature thing, let me know. I have a very reliable 3466C14 going, but I also immediately error out when RAM temps get above 35C on this board. I see other users with other boards with DRAM temps running into the low 40s with no issues. I have an 80mm fan pointed at my DIMMs just to solve this problem.


Have you adjusted your VRM phases?


----------



## MNMadman

Espenn said:


> If you ever figure out the temperature thing, let me know. I have a very reliable 3466C14 going, but I also immediately error out when RAM temps get above 35C on this board. I see other users with other boards with DRAM temps running into the low 40s with no issues. I have an 80mm fan pointed at my DIMMs just to solve this problem.


There isn't really anything to figure out. You just have more temperature-sensitive RAM sticks. Nothing wrong with that, they just need to be kept cooler.

I have the C7H-WIFI board and my RAM can and does hit the low 40s with no stability issues. It doesn't get that high very often, but when it does I don't have any issues. My RAM is G.Skill F4-3200C14D-16GTZRX running at 3466MHz using The Stilt's 3466 1.4v preset but with 2T CR.

Edit: I do manually set the switching frequency for the RAM VRMs to 50KHz above the lowest value. But I only recently started doing that, and I had no problems before I started doing that.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Espenn said:


> If you ever figure out the temperature thing, let me know. I have a very reliable 3466C14 going, but I also immediately error out when RAM temps get above 35C on this board. I see other users with other boards with DRAM temps running into the low 40s with no issues. I have an 80mm fan pointed at my DIMMs just to solve this problem.


Being able to run 40c with no problem can be many reasons, better IMC, subtimings more loose, better ram silicon, etc. Temperature affects stability and when you are on teh edge of stability and the temps increase it will become unstable, no different than a cpu. Electrons flow more efficiently as temperature decreases so its only natural that stability will decrease as electrical signals arent flowing as efficiently as they were when the ram was tested. Next time just test the ram at a higher ambient temp and youll be able to run stable at higher tmeps but you wont have tighter timings.


----------



## crakej

prtuc2 said:


> I am running the stock cooler at the moment and don't like to run anything higher than stock without proper cooling. Waiting for the 5th generation Noctua cooler to be release and then I will play with the overclocking.


your 1700 will run very reliably just leaving it at default on this board - your cooling is plenty sufficient for that. Setting your multiplier to 30 probably degrades your performance.

Did you update the bios? if so, try running with just DOCP set, nothing else. There were some problems with 0804, including using offset voltage with fixed multiplier - didn't downvolt properly.


----------



## hurricane28

Johan45 said:


> Not likely, I'm sure they have agreements that need to be met. I still find it very coincidental that since the 990 days you and I have had the same motherboards. You have had issues on all of them where I haven't, I still think it has to be something you install perhaps or part of your set up. Maybe the incessant amount of monitoring you seem to do? I don't know just seems odd.


I really hope so because more people saying that the ITe chips are extremely erratic and can cause a lot of problems. 

I think so too man. The problems started after i installed Alsuite 3 on my 990FX board but they started on my Crosshair boards without installing it at all. Even other people with similar problems didn't install Alsuite but still got problems. 

So, if people have issues with or without having Alsuite installed or with or without system monitoring, i can only conclude that this ITe chip is extremely buggy and erratic and can and will happen on any system when monitoring from it. It also causes high latency's. 

There is a reason why other manufactures don't buy ITe chips, and that's not because they are so great.. they are extremely cheap as well. You can get 10 of them for only 15 euro's.. Sounds like Asus ROG tries to cheap out on that but pays for it on the long run because now they had to solder an chip on the motherboard and are busy with this WMI implementation, which works as i no longer have fan issues anymore and temps and voltages never been more accurate, which is rather stupid because they knew the ITe was faulty because people told them on the ROG forum as well but they ignored them completely.


----------



## hurricane28

Espenn said:


> If you ever figure out the temperature thing, let me know. I have a very reliable 3466C14 going, but I also immediately error out when RAM temps get above 35C on this board. I see other users with other boards with DRAM temps running into the low 40s with no issues. I have an 80mm fan pointed at my DIMMs just to solve this problem.


Yes i have figured it out. 

I was using Mus1Mus calculator but it gave me wrong Dram voltages it turned out. I loaded The Stilt 3466 MHz CL14 profile and all is well now. Lower the voltage from 1.440 to 1.4 and temps are more than great again because of the lower temps obviously. Switching frequency can also help with stability, i keep it at 400 at all times but that works for me, your's can wildly differ.


----------



## CJMitsuki

hurricane28 said:


> I really hope so because more people saying that the ITe chips are extremely erratic and can cause a lot of problems.
> 
> I think so too man. The problems started after i installed Alsuite 3 on my 990FX board but they started on my Crosshair boards without installing it at all. Even other people with similar problems didn't install Alsuite but still got problems.
> 
> So, if people have issues with or without having Alsuite installed or with or without system monitoring, i can only conclude that this ITe chip is extremely buggy and erratic and can and will happen on any system when monitoring from it. It also causes high latency's.
> 
> There is a reason why other manufactures don't buy ITe chips, and that's not because they are so great.. they are extremely cheap as well. You can get 10 of them for only 15 euro's.. Sounds like Asus ROG tries to cheap out on that but pays for it on the long run because now they had to solder an chip on the motherboard and are busy with this WMI implementation, which works as i no longer have fan issues anymore and temps and voltages never been more accurate, which is rather stupid because they knew the ITe was faulty because people told them on the ROG forum as well but they ignored them completely.


This is what happens when upper management step in and make decisions to appease shareholders with higher profits rather than letting the engineers do their jobs. If they were going to save some making the board then they shouldve taken all of the RGB and plastic shrouds that impede airflow to the VRMs, PCH, etc and saved that money rather than on that chip, and they need to start cutting more fins into the heatsinks. Too much flashy crap on a board obviously meant for heavy overclocking. Pretty sure they couldve saved plenty and had an even better board with all of that taken off and the RGB connections gone. There would be no need for Aura software either on the bios menu so take that crap away as well. Another thing i cant stand is using one of their setup.exe files and it installs services that are not wanted or needed like the Asus Update service, NVidia and google are bad about this too. Google installs 3 service when you download Chrome. No option say no to them just load the system up with that trash and every one of them has their scheduled tasks that are written to registry. Such a pain everytime software is downloaded. Pretty sure the useless background tasks are using more resources than the actual software. Same with Windows, you can easily strip an install by 4gb+ as most of that crap is useless bloat and even after installation you can reduce bloat even further as most services are useless, defender and the anti malware are resource hogs and do nothing useful, the firewall is ok, and the sheer amount of telemetry sending data back is suffocating. Once all of that is removed the performance and responsiveness is nice. Glad I have scripts to do most of that as it would go insane doing it all manually.


----------



## poliacido

hi guys
i have a question, maybe it's silly but i am sure you can help me figure it out
currently i am 100% stable with P.E. at level3 and ram set at 3200 with all timings (tried also level4 but it can't run stable at all) and with a +0.05 offset...
now i am trying to play with the bclk but seems i am not stable even at 101mhz... also tried with +0.075v but i still crash after 1 or 2 minutes in IBT
is it possible my cpu can't even accept a so tiny bclk increase? or maybe even with only the perf.enh. lvl3 i maxed out the cpu limits (around 4.125 all cores on IBT) ?? 
maybe it is just silicon lottery i don't know

edit: maybe worth mention i am not using the last 2 sata ports but only the 1,2 and 3


----------



## CJMitsuki

poliacido said:


> hi guys
> i have a question, maybe it's silly but i am sure you can help me figure it out
> currently i am 100% stable with P.E. at level3 and ram set at 3200 with all timings (tried also level4 but it can't run stable at all) and with a +0.05 offset...
> now i am trying to play with the bclk but seems i am not stable even at 101mhz... also tried with +0.075v but i still crash after 1 or 2 minutes in IBT
> is it possible my cpu can't even accept a so tiny bclk increase? or maybe even with only the perf.enh. lvl3 i maxed out the cpu limits (around 4.125 all cores on IBT) ??
> maybe it is just silicon lottery i don't know
> 
> edit: maybe worth mention i am not using the last 2 sata ports but only the 1,2 and 3


What are your LLC settings, PBO settings, Async clock or Syncronous? Need more info...Just post a bios txt dump for us

With PE4 you should be able to run 101mhz clock with a much lower offset easily but IBT is going to cause some heat issues and also it ramps up and down through cycles so you could be getting a lot of voltage drop as you heat up if LLC settings arent set pretty high. I have nearly all of them maxed out. The VRMs dont really heat up that much of you have decent airflow. Need really stable voltage using IBT and nice stable memory or its not going to pass. Same with P95.

Also XFR/PBO is going to set you overclock according to how cool your system is at time you boot the system up. so that will change max OC up to a maximum of 43.5x multiplier plus the bclk OC. So, even PE3 is going to go by that, only different is how aggressive the voltages will be. You definitely dont need a +.075v offset with 101mhz bclk. .0375v should be more than enough. The problem is elsewhere.

Its also a good idea to run HwInfo with IBT so you can monitor vDroop and everything else. Running that program is dangerous if you arent monitoring and controlling everything.


----------



## Copyright

Johan45 said:


> Not likely, I'm sure they have agreements that need to be met. I still find it very coincidental that since the 990 days you and I have had the same motherboards. You have had issues on all of them where I haven't, I still think it has to be something you install perhaps or part of your set up. Maybe the incessant amount of monitoring you seem to do? I don't know just seems odd.


Dang.. guess ill have to do some research if I decide to pickup a z390 and 9900k. If Asus is still using this same chip I will just go to Asrock. I have used a dozen or so Asrock boards over the past couple years and they impress the hell out of me. Super fast Post and boot times. The Asus just tends to have a few more features like ESS DAC and the fan cooling normally is top tier.


----------



## Copyright

Anyone know at what point the service ASus Motherboard Fan Control Service (32bit) gets installed? I thought it was during AI Suite III but when I uninstalled AI SUITE III this stayed in place. Starting to wonder if this is what is locking up my PC when using argus monitor.. if so I may can prevent this task from running.


FYI.. apparently there is an AI SUITE III removal tool out there that may need to be used.. I killed the process and launched Argus Monitor.. if this fixes the problem I will be thrilled...


----------



## CJMitsuki

Copyright said:


> Anyone know at what point the service ASus Motherboard Fan Control Service (32bit) gets installed? I thought it was during AI Suite III but when I uninstalled AI SUITE III this stayed in place. Starting to wonder if this is what is locking up my PC when using argus monitor.. if so I may can prevent this task from running.


It does get installed with AiSuite but IIRC theres something you have to do besides a normal uninstall to clean everything that AiSuite leaves behind. I want to say it was on the ROG forums but maybe i can find it right quick.

Edit: heres the forum thread, and a link from Raja containing the exe needed to clean it. HERE


----------



## Copyright

crakej said:


> your 1700 will run very reliably just leaving it at default on this board - your cooling is plenty sufficient for that. Setting your multiplier to 30 probably degrades your performance.
> 
> Did you update the bios? if so, try running with just DOCP set, nothing else. There were some problems with 0804, including using offset voltage with fixed multiplier - didn't downvolt properly.


Have you ever installed AI SUITE III on your board? This may be the issue for me.. I installed it and apparently when you uninstall it there are services left behind that still run. If you have never installed AI SUITE III you don't have these services.


Testing now... I never made it more than a day without it acting up.. If I can go a day wtihout issue that was the problem.. which makes sense..


----------



## Copyright

Just found out today I should have mounted the M.2 in the bottom slot to avoid the PCIE lanes on the video card being reduced to x8....


----------



## poliacido

CJMitsuki said:


> What are your LLC settings, PBO settings, Async clock or Syncronous? Need more info...Just post a bios txt dump for us
> 
> With PE4 you should be able to run 101mhz clock with a much lower offset easily but IBT is going to cause some heat issues and also it ramps up and down through cycles so you could be getting a lot of voltage drop as you heat up if LLC settings arent set pretty high. I have nearly all of them maxed out. The VRMs dont really heat up that much of you have decent airflow. Need really stable voltage using IBT and nice stable memory or its not going to pass. Same with P95.
> 
> Also XFR/PBO is going to set you overclock according to how cool your system is at time you boot the system up. so that will change max OC up to a maximum of 43.5x multiplier plus the bclk OC. So, even PE3 is going to go by that, only different is how aggressive the voltages will be. You definitely dont need a +.075v offset with 101mhz bclk. .0375v should be more than enough. The problem is elsewhere.
> 
> Its also a good idea to run HwInfo with IBT so you can monitor vDroop and everything else. Running that program is dangerous if you arent monitoring and controlling everything.


it is a new build and actually i have everything on auto, i only set the ram, the perf.enhancer and the vcore on offset. Clock is sync
also excuse me i should have said that i ran HWinfo meanwhile testing of course  .... on load my vcore is around 1.36v and never seen how much droop i have because i am not so familiar with the offset voltage so i can only see the voltage bump from 0.85 (idle) to 1.36 in load
about this i saw a video from buildzoid and he tested and there was none to very little difference in vdroop using LLC5 or Auto
i am sorry i have no idea how to make a bios txt file  , i will look into it... but honestly i just changed what i said and nothing else... didn't touch anything in the PBO settings also

what do you suggest?? 
thanks for your help


----------



## CJMitsuki

poliacido said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> What are your LLC settings, PBO settings, Async clock or Syncronous? Need more info...Just post a bios txt dump for us
> 
> With PE4 you should be able to run 101mhz clock with a much lower offset easily but IBT is going to cause some heat issues and also it ramps up and down through cycles so you could be getting a lot of voltage drop as you heat up if LLC settings arent set pretty high. I have nearly all of them maxed out. The VRMs dont really heat up that much of you have decent airflow. Need really stable voltage using IBT and nice stable memory or its not going to pass. Same with P95.
> 
> Also XFR/PBO is going to set you overclock according to how cool your system is at time you boot the system up. so that will change max OC up to a maximum of 43.5x multiplier plus the bclk OC. So, even PE3 is going to go by that, only different is how aggressive the voltages will be. You definitely dont need a +.075v offset with 101mhz bclk. .0375v should be more than enough. The problem is elsewhere.
> 
> Its also a good idea to run HwInfo with IBT so you can monitor vDroop and everything else. Running that program is dangerous if you arent monitoring and controlling everything.
> 
> 
> 
> it is a new build and actually i have everything on auto, i only set the ram, the perf.enhancer and the vcore on offset. Clock is sync
> also excuse me i should have said that i ran HWinfo meanwhile testing of course /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif .... on load my vcore is around 1.36v and never seen how much droop i have because i am not so familiar with the offset voltage so i can only see the voltage bump from 0.85 (idle) to 1.36 in load
> about this i saw a video from buildzoid and he tested and there was none to very little difference in vdroop using LLC5 or Auto
> i am sorry i have no idea how to make a bios txt file /forum/images/smilies/tongue.gif , i will look into it... but honestly i just changed what i said and nothing else... didn't touch anything in the PBO settings also
> 
> what do you suggest??
> thanks for your help
Click to expand...

How did you set your ram exactly? DOCP? Well, about the voltages, I remember Buildzoid saying that but that’s only talking about the actual setting named LLC. You have many other settings in there that will change the LLC behaviors like transient response to the voltage fluctuation and also if it wants to maintain temperature balance or voltage balance. Personally I don’t trust auto for many settings as with bios revisions the algorithms that pick the settings for auto could change. Basically, if everything is on auto I’m gonna say that voltage is the problem on PE4. That setting changes things vastly and adding bclk to that enhances that further. Stick to 3 for the time being because 4 needs really good cooling. With 101mhz my system max is near 4.4ghz all core when my temps are really cool so you are likely getting a lot of heat. You may need to go into the PBO settings and check those out. I would scroll through older posts on this thread and you’ll get some good info on what you should do. If you don’t have good liquid cooling I wouldn’t do much on the way of PE4 at all though.


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> hi guys
> i have a question, maybe it's silly but i am sure you can help me figure it out
> currently i am 100% stable with P.E. at level3 and ram set at 3200 with all timings (tried also level4 but it can't run stable at all) and with a +0.05 offset...
> now i am trying to play with the bclk but seems i am not stable even at 101mhz... also tried with +0.075v but i still crash after 1 or 2 minutes in IBT
> is it possible my cpu can't even accept a so tiny bclk increase? or maybe even with only the perf.enh. lvl3 i maxed out the cpu limits (around 4.125 all cores on IBT) ??
> maybe it is just silicon lottery i don't know
> 
> edit: maybe worth mention i am not using the last 2 sata ports but only the 1,2 and 3


That's a lot of offset for that BCLK. 41.25 at BLCK 101 nets you 41.66 and you shouldn't need such a high offset to run that speed on all cores. Lately I have been using LLC 4 with a negative offset of -.08. That isn't with your BCLK though and I would recommend trying LLC 4 and an offset of -.050 to -.025 with your BCLK 101. 

With my setup of LLC 4 and offset of -.08 puts my voltage at 1.38V at 42.5 multiplier.

Edit:

I am adding a screen grab of what HWiNFO recorded during my Cinebench runs for multi and single core. And my BCLK is set to 100.2, but it booted at 100.3.


----------



## bMind

CJMitsuki said:


> Copyright said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone know at what point the service ASus Motherboard Fan Control Service (32bit) gets installed? I thought it was during AI Suite III but when I uninstalled AI SUITE III this stayed in place. Starting to wonder if this is what is locking up my PC when using argus monitor.. if so I may can prevent this task from running.
> 
> 
> 
> It does get installed with AiSuite but IIRC theres something you have to do besides a normal uninstall to clean everything that AiSuite leaves behind. I want to say it was on the ROG forums but maybe i can find it right quick.
> 
> Edit: heres the forum thread, and a link from Raja containing the exe needed to clean it. HERE
Click to expand...

It does get installed during AI Suite III install but the uninstall leaves services for whatever reason as was stated. As for the tool from ROG forums, I tried it on my VM because I tend to be suspicious to such tools. First, it just flashes console window, no log, no message, no nothing. Second..it does not work..all the services and registry entries remained as before. I cleaned manually both registry and service files.


----------



## CJMitsuki

bMind said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Copyright said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone know at what point the service ASus Motherboard Fan Control Service (32bit) gets installed? I thought it was during AI Suite III but when I uninstalled AI SUITE III this stayed in place. Starting to wonder if this is what is locking up my PC when using argus monitor.. if so I may can prevent this task from running.
> 
> 
> 
> It does get installed with AiSuite but IIRC theres something you have to do besides a normal uninstall to clean everything that AiSuite leaves behind. I want to say it was on the ROG forums but maybe i can find it right quick.
> 
> Edit: heres the forum thread, and a link from Raja containing the exe needed to clean it. HERE
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It does get installed during AI Suite III install but the uninstall leaves services for whatever reason as was stated. As for the tool from ROG forums, I tried it on my VM because I tend to be suspicious to such tools. First, it just flashes console window, no log, no message, no nothing. Second..it does not work..all the services and registry entries remained as before. I cleaned manually both registry and service files.
Click to expand...

Hmm, I would message Raja on those forums as he is an Asus employee so maybe there’s neither way to do it. I wasn’t gonna bother asking you if you ran as admin seeing as you are running on virtual machine so you probably already know that anyway.


----------



## Copyright

Well I think that was the issue... I watched a full 2 hour movie and no problems.. it always acted up before the end of a movie.. I may do a fresh install and just not use AI suite III at all. The Asus Fan control service was causing problems for sure.. woohoo!


----------



## CJMitsuki

Copyright said:


> Well I think that was the issue... I watched a full 2 hour movie and no problems.. it always acted up before the end of a movie.. I may do a fresh install and just not use AI suite III at all. The Asus Fan control service was causing problems for sure.. woohoo!


That’s one reason I keep it simple now with monitoring software. I do love the nice looking UI and features they have but I just don’t trust a program to reach into my bios from the OS and change settings much less leave tons of services and scheduled tasks even after an uninstall. There’s really no need for all of that as SIV does everything those programs do without all the extra background processes and other nonsense and HwInfo has a single tiny driver and also runs as a portable software. No installation needed. I’d love to have something with a really nice UI and had pretty much any reading you could want and was easy navigable but these bigger companies can’t do that without adding their bs to it. I’d even gladly pay for something like that which had a minimal footprint while program wasn’t running. HwInfo has some customization and there are some third party adding that are cool like the sidebar gadget where you can add several things to monitor to it and it’s in a nice small UI with tons of customization and isn’t a resource hog.


----------



## Copyright

CJMitsuki said:


> That’s one reason I keep it simple now with monitoring software. I do love the nice looking UI and features they have but I just don’t trust a program to reach into my bios from the OS and change settings much less leave tons of services and scheduled tasks even after an uninstall. There’s really no need for all of that as SIV does everything those programs do without all the extra background processes and other nonsense and HwInfo has a single tiny driver and also runs as a portable software. No installation needed. I’d love to have something with a really nice UI and had pretty much any reading you could want and was easy navigable but these bigger companies can’t do that without adding their bs to it. I’d even gladly pay for something like that which had a minimal footprint while program wasn’t running. HwInfo has some customization and there are some third party adding that are cool like the sidebar gadget where you can add several things to monitor to it and it’s in a nice small UI with tons of customization and isn’t a resource hog.


Thing is we should not have to worry about it. I have never had to before and never had an issue with other boards for monitoring. I also never had any performance hits. My cinebench score didn't even change so I don't know anything about this being tasking on the PC. I have used these apps for probably a decade across A LOT of PC's without issue. Right now Asus monitor is showing 12mb of memory used and 0% CPU usage. That is the great thing of having a PC this strong.. we don't have to worry about little apps like this. Don't get me wrong.. if I had 20 startup apps etc I could see that being an issue but the few I use I notice no performance hit at all other than a little slower to complete bootup. I think I am finally happy with this board.


----------



## zJordan

Guys, weird issue. Whenever I try to boot with ASMEDIA USB 3.1 Controller enabled I cannot boot. I get stuck on Q-Code 64 (aka, CPU DXE initial...), once I disable the controller I am able to boot flawlessly. However, when the controller is enabled I am still able to obtain a boot by pressing the reset switch.



My guess is busted controller? The USB port functioned when enabled, just extremely strange. This isn't something I am going to RMA for until I'm no longer using the board. I don't care for my USB Type-C port and 3.1 port, I'll just grab a seperate PCIe controller for those. 



This persists regardless of my overclock (-0.06250 undervolt, PBO Level 2, 3200MHz CL14-14-14-28 The Stilt's Timings)


EDIT: Worth noting that there was nothing plugged into either port controlled by the ASMEDIA controller.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Copyright said:


> Thing is we should not have to worry about it. I have never had to before and never had an issue with other boards for monitoring. I also never had any performance hits. My cinebench score didn't even change so I don't know anything about this being tasking on the PC. I have used these apps for probably a decade across A LOT of PC's without issue. Right now Asus monitor is showing 12mb of memory used and 0% CPU usage. That is the great thing of having a PC this strong.. we don't have to worry about little apps like this. Don't get me wrong.. if I had 20 startup apps etc I could see that being an issue but the few I use I notice no performance hit at all other than a little slower to complete bootup. I think I am finally happy with this board.


Its not that I notice it that is the problem. I dont get a choice as its installed as with any other monitoring software from bigger companies. They all have their telemetry that collects data other than what is needed. Id wager that nearly all applications that are current do this as data is money but even this isnt the problem for me but I use this for overclocking in a competitive nature and when I want to add a display driver or an application that monitors the vitals of the system every process makes an impact. I see it and not only that, some of these processes are ridiculous. Corsair Link, for example sends tons of data and uses cpu resources much more than youd think. Im forced to use it at least briefly because its the only way I can get the my pump on my AIO to go from 2100rpm to 2800rpm which makes quite a difference in cooling. That software has no business sending ridiculous amounts of data and using the cpu regularly. Just as AiSuite has no business auto installing an update service without asking and I would disable it in the registry only to have it RE-ENABLED. Now that is what I dont like, how it obviously has administrator rights and enables itself after the owner disables it via registry. Asus isnt the only company that does this but it is one of the absolute worst about programming their software to do things that i feel are unacceptable. Google is probably the second worst with Microsoft being the biggest. Microsoft is near incompetence level to boot as they havent released a major update that wasnt performing like a 6 year old coded it for as long as i can remember and the sheer amounts of telemetry I remove during a fresh install is complete lunacy. More than half of a windows install is useless to the vast majority of users and a good portion of that is sending information back to microsoft that it says you can stop besides some diagnostic data but I can guarantee with how it monitors everything, thats a lie. Theres no reason for anything extra such as telemetry aside from what its supposed to monitor and auto installing some crap that you cant truly disable is bs. It shouldnt re enable something I disabled via registry, ever. Especially an update service that is not wanted by me and installed without being asked if I want it. At the end of the day I wont ever feel a performance hit as it is a small service but all services arent using just a tiny bit of resources. Download Corsair Link and run it for a day and let the service run in the background and then at the end of the day see what it uses. Youll be surprised.


----------



## crakej

Copyright said:


> Have you ever installed AI SUITE III on your board? This may be the issue for me.. I installed it and apparently when you uninstall it there are services left behind that still run. If you have never installed AI SUITE III you don't have these services.
> 
> Testing now... I never made it more than a day without it acting up.. If I can go a day without issue that was the problem.. which makes sense..


Yes, I use it all the time relatively trouble free. 

I also use iobit uninstaller, which is great at removing things properly.

Edit: AISuite installs 2 services on my PC - and auto update thing is easy to disable - first thing I do after installation.


----------



## gupsterg

Copyright said:


> Dang.. guess ill have to do some research if I decide to pickup a z390 and 9900k. If Asus is still using this same chip I will just go to Asrock. I have used a dozen or so Asrock boards over the past couple years and they impress the hell out of me. Super fast Post and boot times. The Asus just tends to have a few more features like ESS DAC and the fan cooling normally is top tier.


Owned C6H since launch, within 1st month of ownership whatever Mumak liaising with Elmor, did to HWINFO fixed my fans PWM crap out.

Owned ZE since launch, I've had fan crap out ~3-4 times, of those times 50% of the time I was forcing it for testing to see how it occur on my rig.

Owned C7H since launch as well, again I really can't say I had issues on UEFI 0601 which was first one I used. It was only UEFI 0804 I could force fan crap out by using the borked ASUS WMI. From UEFI 0012 not an issue ASUS WMI.

All in all I have no regrets on any of the boards. Sometimes I've read C6H owners complain they think board is EOL, where I stand with it ASUS have not dropped it. On the contrary I feel I can drop the C7H as still the C6H is supported so well. ASRock dropped support for a X370 board within months of release at launch as they dropped the board from production.

ASRock UEFI is pants IMO, only a week or so I was discussing in private message with someone who has a X470 board from them, how if they wish to use custom pstate then the UEFI goes to AMD CBS mode, then all RAM timings they enter in hexadecimal.

Gigabyte I recall on flagship X370 board you entered RAM timings per channel if went manual timings. Several months after launch they also had boards bricking from UEFI updates. Yeah C6H had an issue like that at launch, but fixed extremely quick. In that by the time by slightly delayed pre-order board came their was UEFI that fixed issue.

If you do jump ship, I'd buy from somewhere that offers easy returns. I don't think I could cope with a non ASUS UEFI TBH.

Below is just minute sample of hours I clock up on boards I own.



Spoiler














To me there is only one company I have always considered ace, regardless of Intel/AMD and I'm sure using them  .


----------



## Twirlz

hurricane28 said:


> Software CAN solve the issue but its not caused by it. The cause is the extremely cheap and erratic iTE IT8665E which they know now and probably never use again since these problems date back from the 990FX era. My 990FX Sabertooth had the same erratic IT sensor and the same fan problems which they never fixed. I have talked about this with Elmor ant The Stilt in the C6H thread and via PM many many times and they spend a lot of time investigate this which has lead to C7H to monitor temps etc. correctly. IF they went with an Novuton chip instead of the erratic IT chip, they didn't have to solder another chip on the board for the readings.
> 
> Read here what that guy said almost on the bottom of the page: http://www.ocdrift.com/review-asus-rog-crosshair-vi-extreme-x370-motherboard/2/
> 
> Now with the later BIOS's i have no fan issues anymore and the voltages and temp reading are very accurate in hardwareinfo64 to which i am very grateful for because when overclocking its convenient if you can see the correct voltages and temps for safety reasons alone.
> 
> Other than that, i am very very happy with this board except for the stability. It seems that whenever my RAM hits 35 c or higher i get errors. One day its stable and when i run the program another day or hour i get errors.. I hope i can iron that out pretty soon.


Is this why I get awful stutters when monitoring applications are open? HWInfo (even if I disable Asus EC), AIDIA64, Hwmonitor, CPUz, MSI afterburner and others cause stutter/lag whenever they are open which can be noticeable even when typing. They seem to be reporting correctly but closing them resolves the stutter issue. I actually had a B350 Strix previously which had the same problem (and same IT8665E), but it seems much worse on this Crosshair and is unaffected by BIOs version in my case. The fan issue also got on my nerves but thankfully 1001 solved that.

It's a right pain as the computer feels really unpleasant to use when even just one of these applications is open.


----------



## hurricane28

Twirlz said:


> Is this why I get awful stutters when monitoring applications are open? HWInfo (even if I disable Asus EC), AIDIA64, Hwmonitor, CPUz, MSI afterburner and others cause stutter/lag whenever they are open which can be noticeable even when typing. They seem to be reporting correctly but closing them resolves the stutter issue. I actually had a B350 Strix previously which had the same problem (and same IT8665E), but it seems much worse on this Crosshair and is unaffected by BIOs version in my case. The fan issue also got on my nerves but thankfully 1001 solved that.
> 
> It's a right pain as the computer feels really unpleasant to use when even just one of these applications is open.


Idk man, maybe. I do recall that i had severe stutters in Metro last light and it resolved when i turned off monitoring and or the EC sensor. 

Only way for me to stop this issues IF it occurs again is to do an full system reset. This dictates that you need to power down your system, pull the power cord from the PSU but don't turn the switch off, than push reset button for a couple of seconds, pull the battery from the motherboard and hold the power button for 10 sec or more, this is what resets the EC registers, than let it sit like that for 10-15 minutes and put everything together again. 

This always worked for me when i was having these weird issues.


----------



## hurricane28

Okay i think this board is broken.

I can't find stability anymore with RAM speed.. one moment i am stable and another i am not, frecking frustrating and there is no way of overclocking like this. 

Yesterday i was stable at 3466 MHz regarding the Testmem5 and even this morning i run it and it was completely fine. Now when i run it it found 2 errors at the SAME EXACT settings as yesterday and i was stable the whole day.. I also noticed that above 35 c the ram becomes unstable or something and it begins to spit out errors.. previously i had no problems with this and i could run up to 40 c with no problems.

I'm like, wth man..!


----------



## Johan45

Try lowering the resistance?


----------



## JayC72

MacG32 said:


> 04SEP18, 6.0.1.8531 - Realtek High Definition Audio (HDA) R2.8x (8531) WHQL
> https://www.station-drivers.com/ind...tory&Itemid=352&func=fileinfo&id=3679&lang=en
> It doesn't include the Sonic Suite, as it's only the audio driver. :thumb:


Thanks MacG32.
Much appreciated.


----------



## hurricane28

Johan45 said:


> Try lowering the resistance?


Will try, do you know to what level is save?


----------



## Johan45

hurricane28 said:


> Will try, do you know to what level is save?


I usually use 48 or 53.3


----------



## zJordan

hurricane28 said:


> Will try, do you know to what level is save?


To quote AMD's technical marketing guy - "set it from 40 to 60, but no higher than 80.".


----------



## kazablanka

hurricane28 said:


> Okay i think this board is broken.
> 
> I can't find stability anymore with RAM speed.. one moment i am stable and another i am not, frecking frustrating and there is no way of overclocking like this.
> 
> Yesterday i was stable at 3466 MHz regarding the Testmem5 and even this morning i run it and it was completely fine. Now when i run it it found 2 errors at the SAME EXACT settings as yesterday and i was stable the whole day.. I also noticed that above 35 c the ram becomes unstable or something and it begins to spit out errors.. previously i had no problems with this and i could run up to 40 c with no problems.
> 
> I'm like, wth man..!


i think is you cpu overclock the problem not the ram... try more voltage to cpu or lowering your cpu overclock.


----------



## Flynn82

Also going for 3466 without GearDown enabled seems pretty ambitious to me.
I'd have to enable it and go with trcdrd 15 to get it stable.
Some tight settings can show problems only after multiple test runs. I had myself settings that would run with Karhu 10k% without errors and crash ingame or make only 500% when tested again.


----------



## gupsterg

Flynn82 said:


> Also going for 3466 without GearDown enabled seems pretty ambitious to me.
> I'd have to enable it and go with trcdrd 15 to get it stable.
> Some tight settings can show problems only after multiple test runs. I had myself settings that would run with Karhu 10k% without errors and crash ingame or make only 500% when tested again.


I reckon I got a bit of a turkey IMC, considering several here have 3533MHz+. I can get 3466MHz GDM Off 1T and tighten up without anything excessive on SOC/VDIMM (1.025/1.35).



Spoiler




































I got screenies of CB15, SuperPi, 3DM SD runs plus things like Y-Cruncher, RB, etc, but not done any gaming.


----------



## Copyright

Well ram is 3200mhz stable on all 4 sticks and I think it's time to start playing with XFR and to see how I can sqeeze more power out of this thing.. very confused as there are many different methods of overclocking with this board.. which works best? Just turning on XFR? or 103BCLK? Both? I see more using XFR vs PBO? Why is that?


----------



## poliacido

CJMitsuki said:


> How did you set your ram exactly? DOCP? Well, about the voltages, I remember Buildzoid saying that but that’s only talking about the actual setting named LLC. You have many other settings in there that will change the LLC behaviors like transient response to the voltage fluctuation and also if it wants to maintain temperature balance or voltage balance. Personally I don’t trust auto for many settings as with bios revisions the algorithms that pick the settings for auto could change. Basically, if everything is on auto I’m gonna say that voltage is the problem on PE4. That setting changes things vastly and adding bclk to that enhances that further. Stick to 3 for the time being because 4 needs really good cooling. With 101mhz my system max is near 4.4ghz all core when my temps are really cool so you are likely getting a lot of heat. You may need to go into the PBO settings and check those out. I would scroll through older posts on this thread and you’ll get some good info on what you should do. If you don’t have good liquid cooling I wouldn’t do much on the way of PE4 at all though.


No sir, no DOCP....i set the ram at the first time using the presets from the stilt, tried the 3200 CL14 safe (or how it is called) but i was not stable.... later i tried the ram calculator made by 1usmus with 3200 safe but with CL15 (instead if 14) and i can say i am stable 100% after testing quite a bit with memtest. Btw my ram is this kit F4-3200C15D-16GTZSW
May i ask you if you can send me a dump file of your bios settings so i can compare with mine and try your settings in the LLC and vrms configuration or something similar because i know i should not leave all on auto but some functions are still unknown to me and i am not totally sure how to change them or what they actually do... i come from an old Sandy bridge with a midrange asrock motherboard that didn't have all theese settings! 
For cooling i am using a 240mm AIO, it's not the best coling ever but i left the custom loop about 5 years ago...
It's awesome how you can get 4.4 at all cores, i guess it is with PE4 right? Also about PBO i thought i don't have to change anything here (and leave on auto) because i set the PE3 and maybe they override the settings each other or am i wrong? 
thanks



nick name said:


> That's a lot of offset for that BCLK. 41.25 at BLCK 101 nets you 41.66 and you shouldn't need such a high offset to run that speed on all cores. Lately I have been using LLC 4 with a negative offset of -.08. That isn't with your BCLK though and I would recommend trying LLC 4 and an offset of -.050 to -.025 with your BCLK 101.
> 
> With my setup of LLC 4 and offset of -.08 puts my voltage at 1.38V at 42.5 multiplier.
> 
> Edit:
> 
> I am adding a screen grab of what HWiNFO recorded during my Cinebench runs for multi and single core. And my BCLK is set to 100.2, but it booted at 100.3.


i don't know mate, i can't even get 101 stable with PE3 with +0.05 how can i get PE4 with blck and less voltage?? Maybe like Mitsuki said it's also a problem in the LLC/vrms settings
just to put it simple i tried the guide in the 1st page but seems not working well in my case.... well it works good with only PE3 but as soon i set anything beyond like 101 it become very unstable
thanks again

ps: sorry for my english i could make some mistakes


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> -snip-
> 
> 
> i don't know mate, i can't even get 101 stable with PE3 with +0.05 how can i get PE4 with blck and less voltage?? Maybe like Mitsuki said it's also a problem in the LLC/vrms settings
> just to put it simple i tried the guide in the 1st page but seems not working well in my case.... well it works good with only PE3 but as soon i set anything beyond like 101 it become very unstable
> thanks again
> 
> ps: sorry for my english i could make some mistakes


Well I think part of the problem would be too much voltage turning into too much heat. So it's why I recommended my setup. Give it a try and see how it works for you. And I didn't mention PE Level 4 -- I was recommending LLC Level 4 (load line calibration).


----------



## gupsterg

hurricane28 said:


> Will try, do you know to what level is save?
> 
> 
> 
> zJordan said:
> 
> 
> 
> To quote AMD's technical marketing guy - "set it from 40 to 60, but no higher than 80.".
Click to expand...

Going higher is not unsafe. We had this information from The Stilt and Team ASUS very early on on C6H OC thread. Simply put the advise is use ProcODT as you need for your setup.


----------



## crakej

Bios 1001 has been made official and put on ASUS web site.


----------



## hurricane28

You beat me to it man, was jut about to say that lol.


----------



## nikkyo

crakej said:


> Bios 1001 has been made official and put on ASUS web site.


I update to 1001 yesterday from 0804. And I don't recommend this Bios. For me is more unstable. I use pstates for OC, and now if I set disable for Core Performance Boost and change voltage in Pstate 0 the motherboard don't boot. The mobo stuck in white light and not boot de system. I need to use the default voltage and increase the voltage in offset for boot. Besides, I can only use one Pstates with Core Performance Boost disable if I set pstate 1 or 2 the mobo stuck again. I need to put only one pstate and the others in auto.

And I still with my voltage problem in windows. The voltages don't drop with pstates. But in previous Bios I have had the same problem.


----------



## crakej

Was kinda hoping we'd get the next beta to play with over the weekend.....


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Was kinda hoping we'd get the next beta to play with over the weekend.....


Same tbh :/


----------



## poliacido

nick name said:


> Well I think part of the problem would be too much voltage turning into too much heat. So it's why I recommended my setup. Give it a try and see how it works for you. And I didn't mention PE Level 4 -- I was recommending LLC Level 4 (load line calibration).


yes i am sorry, i read too fast and didn't understand i guess 
i will try your setting later today
thanks again


----------



## crakej

nikkyo said:


> I update to 1001 yesterday from 0804. And I don't recommend this Bios. For me is more unstable. I use pstates for OC, and now if I set disable for Core Performance Boost and change voltage in Pstate 0 the motherboard don't boot. The mobo stuck in white light and not boot de system. I need to use the default voltage and increase the voltage in offset for boot. Besides, I can only use one Pstates with Core Performance Boost disable if I set pstate 1 or 2 the mobo stuck again. I need to put only one pstate and the others in auto.
> 
> And I still with my voltage problem in windows. The voltages don't drop with pstates. But in previous Bios I have had the same problem.


I've not used p-states for some time as fixed OC with OC works well for me. Others here have this knowledge though - I do remember people discussing this earlier in this thread... Sorry I can't be more helpful.


----------



## MNMadman

nikkyo said:


> I update to 1001 yesterday from 0804. And I don't recommend this Bios. For me is more unstable. I use pstates for OC, and now if I set disable for Core Performance Boost and change voltage in Pstate 0 the motherboard don't boot. The mobo stuck in white light and not boot de system. I need to use the default voltage and increase the voltage in offset for boot. Besides, I can only use one Pstates with Core Performance Boost disable if I set pstate 1 or 2 the mobo stuck again. I need to put only one pstate and the others in auto.
> 
> And I still with my voltage problem in windows. The voltages don't drop with pstates. But in previous Bios I have had the same problem.


The voltage not dropping when using P-State overclocking is an AGESA change. Nothing can be done about it, except to revert to an earlier AGESA version. The newest AGESA (1.0.0.6) operates this way as well.

From what I can recall about P-State overclocking, you shouldn't change the voltage in the P-State itself anyway. Leave it at its default setting and change the voltage via offset. That was the advice from a year ago when I was still P-State overclocking.


----------



## Flynn82

Anyone knows if the official 1001 is the same version that some people had tried earlier and had problems with it?
I'm tempted to try it but if it's worse in regards to ram oc it would be just a waste of my time...


----------



## nick name

Flynn82 said:


> Anyone knows if the official 1001 is the same version that some people had tried earlier and had problems with it?
> I'm tempted to try it but if it's worse in regards to ram oc it would be just a waste of my time...


I saw no degradation with 1001. It may have been placebo, but it seemed to help me.


----------



## Flynn82

Thanks, maybe i'll give it a try and save my old profiles for going back if necessary.


----------



## Safetytrousers

poliacido said:


> yes i am sorry, i read too fast and didn't understand i guess
> i will try your setting later today
> thanks again


In my experience the only LLC that keeps the voltage setting you set is LLC 5. In all my testing I haven't seen any overshoot (although perhaps you need hardware to detect this).


----------



## CJMitsuki

Safetytrousers said:


> poliacido said:
> 
> 
> 
> yes i am sorry, i read too fast and didn't understand i guess /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> i will try your setting later today
> thanks again
> 
> 
> 
> In my experience the only LLC that keeps the voltage setting you set is LLC 5. In all my testing I haven't seen any overshoot (although perhaps you need hardware to detect this).
Click to expand...

You’ll never see the overshoot. It happens so quickly that software won’t detect it. You’d have to use sensitive equipment. The overshoot won’t hurt anything anyway so no need to worry about it. For the most part voltage by itself won’t hurt the components unless you introduce so much it arcs across the gaps in the integrated circuits but you’d have to put a lot of voltage through it to do that. It’s the resulting heat that is the main cause of real degradation. As long as you control the thermals then you are good to go. 

Also, fixed multiplier and PState I’ve found to be sub par overclocking methods. Better performance and higher frequencies are easier to attain with XFR overclocking using bclk if you want to go higher than 4.35ghz all core. The better your cooling the higher the system will set your XFR multiplier for the 1-6 core range and the all core range. Generally you’ll get 42.5 all core but if you have exceptional cooling then 43 or 43.5x multiplier is not uncommon. The 1-6 core boost will generally be 43.5x. Beyond those frequencies you’ll have to add bclk OC to get there and more positive offset voltage.


----------



## hurricane28

CJMitsuki said:


> You’ll never see the overshoot. It happens so quickly that software won’t detect it. You’d have to use sensitive equipment. The overshoot won’t hurt anything anyway so no need to worry about it. For the most part voltage by itself won’t hurt the components unless you introduce so much it arcs across the gaps in the integrated circuits but you’d have to put a lot of voltage through it to do that. It’s the resulting heat that is the main cause of real degradation. As long as you control the thermals then you are good to go.
> 
> Also, fixed multiplier and PState I’ve found to be sub par overclocking methods. Better performance and higher frequencies are easier to attain with XFR overclocking using bclk if you want to go higher than 4.35ghz all core. The better your cooling the higher the system will set your XFR multiplier for the 1-6 core range and the all core range. Generally you’ll get 42.5 all core but if you have exceptional cooling then 43 or 43.5x multiplier is not uncommon. The 1-6 core boost will generally be 43.5x. Beyond those frequencies you’ll have to add bclk OC to get there and more positive offset voltage.


Sorry but i have to correct you here. voltage overshoot if definitely kills your CPU which is why you don't want too high LLC level, it is correct that you can't measure it via software but with an oscilloscope you can see it. 

IF you need high llc levels your vcore is not set properly to begin with or the board has weak llc levels. On the C7H i need level 3 or 4.


----------



## CJMitsuki

hurricane28 said:


> Sorry but i have to correct you here. voltage overshoot if definitely kills your CPU which is why you don't want too high LLC level, it is correct that you can't measure it via software but with an oscilloscope you can see it.
> 
> IF you need high llc levels your vcore is not set properly to begin with or the board has weak llc levels. On the C7H i need level 3 or 4.



Ok, Ill go through this again. Voltage alone does not and never has been the cause of degradation in electronics. Voltage without any heat present only causes *Electromigration * It is the heat resulting from voltage that will degrade the components and heat will exponentially increase electromigration. There is no proof that voltage alone does anything that you will even see within the life of your cpu as electromigration due to voltage alone takes a very long time. There are studies on this very argument and while there are results supporting thermals causing real degradation there are none supporting voltage causing noticeable degradation outside of defective hardware. Now, if i pump 5v into the core then the circuit cant contain that and it would arc across gaps and short out melting things but thats common sense. High thermal cycles and high heat in general are the cause of degradation. Show me any credible proof that voltage alone is the cause and ill admit im wrong. Ill save you the time, there is none. Aside from that threshold where voltage will arc across circuits, the voltage does noting besides having the ions slowly deposit material over time to the point that gaps become so small that the voltage arcs to ground. Thermal cycles weaken all components at the atomic level through expansion and contraction of the molecules along with high heat just outright melting things that arent meant to be exposed to such heat.


----------



## hurricane28

CJMitsuki said:


> Ok, Ill go through this again. Voltage alone does not and never has been the cause of degradation in electronics. Voltage without any heat present only causes *Electromigration * It is the heat resulting from voltage that will degrade the components and heat will exponentially increase electromigration. There is no proof that voltage alone does anything that you will even see within the life of your cpu as electromigration due to voltage alone takes a very long time. There are studies on this very argument and while there are results supporting thermals causing real degradation there are none supporting voltage causing noticeable degradation outside of defective hardware. Now, if i pump 5v into the core then the circuit cant contain that and it would arc across gaps and short out melting things but thats common sense. High thermal cycles and high heat in general are the cause of degradation. Show me any credible proof that voltage alone is the cause and ill admit im wrong. Ill save you the time, there is none. Aside from that threshold where voltage will arc across circuits, the voltage does noting besides having the ions slowly deposit material over time to the point that gaps become so small that the voltage arcs to ground. Thermal cycles weaken all components at the atomic level through expansion and contraction of the molecules along with high heat just outright melting things that arent meant to be exposed to such heat.


Man, you have no idea what you are talking about.. You can't simply raise the voltage without getting higher amps or wattage.. If you increase the voltage you also increase the amps, why do you think watt comes from in the first place. Why do you also think there is an so called: "save voltage"? 

But don't believe me, take it from an actual engineer: 


























I would suggest you to follow Buildzoid if you want to learn something.


----------



## CJMitsuki

hurricane28 said:


> Man, you have no idea what you are talking about.. You can't simply raise the voltage without getting higher amps or wattage.. If you increase the voltage you also increase the amps, why do you think watt comes from in the first place. Why do you also think there is an so called: "save voltage"?
> 
> But don't believe me, take it from an actual engineer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMIh8dTdJwI
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XGhpKHWYAg
> 
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UqBk9gSGK64
> 
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8nFdFpuVBg
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDRHV3qtSWc
> 
> I would suggest you to follow Buildzoid if you want to learn something.



None of the videos even touch on anything i said and Buildzoid said not long ago that so called safe voltages arent a thing. They were intended to keep someone from overheating their cpu and destroying it. He also goes on to say he runs his memory at 1.6v daily as the voltage isnt a problem since it doesnt put out much heat on his rig. So tell me, where in any of that is it said that voltage without the presence of heat does real harm? Now, go research some real studies that have been going on for the past 100 years, literally and see what they say. Here's one about electromigration which is what voltage causes aside from heat "a properly designed IC device is more likely to fail from other (environmental) causes, such as cumulative damage from gamma-ray bombardment." 



https://www.ifte.de/books/em/em_chap2.pdf


https://ws680.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=907877


Now stop listening to YouTube engineers and go research what actual Scientists have studied and how research has changed the way cpu are manufactured and then research on the leading causes of IC failure. Literally every case of widespread degradation and failure due to voltage alone without the presence of heat were from defects. ie Western Digital and Commodore in the 80s.


I enjoy watching Buildzoid and respect his take on motherboards but he isnt an authority in this area.


----------



## hurricane28

I was revering to your statements that voltage overshoot doesn't harm which is plain wrong.. Buildzoid and D8erbauwer are engineers so is Elmor and Raja Asus. They all explained that its an bad idea to use extreme LLC and like i said before, IF you need such high LLC levels your vcore isn't set properly to begin with. 

I am no engineer so i have no idea how to explain this to you which is why i linked to someone who is an can. 

this is also an good link on how it all works, they did lots of testing about it so they know what they are talking about: https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?101617-Crosshair-VII-Hero-Essential-Info-Thread


----------



## CJMitsuki

hurricane28 said:


> I was revering to your statements that voltage overshoot doesn't harm which is plain wrong.. Buildzoid and D8erbauwer are engineers so is Elmor and Raja Asus. They all explained that its an bad idea to use extreme LLC and like i said before, IF you need such high LLC levels your vcore isn't set properly to begin with.
> 
> I am no engineer so i have no idea how to explain this to you which is why i linked to someone who is an can.
> 
> this is also an good link on how it all works, they did lots of testing about it so they know what they are talking about: https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?101617-Crosshair-VII-Hero-Essential-Info-Thread


I have watched pretty much every video you linked. I watch anything buildzoid puts out and remember what him and derbauer talked about in those and I do agree that if you have anything but the exact voltage that you set then the LLC is either too much or not enough. Now, at more extreme loads the LLC isnt always capable of keeping up but that’s nothing a normal user will ever see. I run mine at LLC 4 unless I’m running some heavy benching at high voltage then I go to 5 to make sure there is absolutely no drop. What I was saying is that the overshoot which happens once load is applied and the VRM start compensating the voltage to counteract the vDroop is not going to pop a capacitor or degrade the cpu in a way that anyone will ever experience in the life of the cpu. Maybe if you had such a horrible VRM and you were doing some high overclocks maybe the overshoot could do something g stupid but no one with a horrible board will be doing extreme overclocking and more than likely if the board has a VRM that bad it’s not even going to have LLC settings in the bios *cough* Biostar *cough*. Either way, I think at heavy overclocking benches that switching frequency is more important being that those benchmarks can go from no load to 260watts instantly at 4.5ghz and of the VRM isn’t reacting fast then the system will freeze every time.


----------



## gupsterg

nikkyo said:


> I update to 1001 yesterday from 0804. And I don't recommend this Bios. For me is more unstable. I use pstates for OC, and now if I set disable for Core Performance Boost and change voltage in Pstate 0 the motherboard don't boot. The mobo stuck in white light and not boot de system. I need to use the default voltage and increase the voltage in offset for boot. Besides, I can only use one Pstates with Core Performance Boost disable if I set pstate 1 or 2 the mobo stuck again. I need to put only one pstate and the others in auto.
> 
> And I still with my voltage problem in windows. The voltages don't drop with pstates. But in previous Bios I have had the same problem.


I would only set PState 0 frequency and VID within relevant menu. I would also set Global C-State Control as [Enabled].

Leave CPU Core Voltage on Extreme Tweaker on [Auto]. You can set Core Performance Boost to [Disabled] (I prefer to also).

Every UEFI upto 0804 above method has worked for me on 2700X. I'm hoping to be on my C7H later today, so will see if UEFI 1001 & 1101 work the same.


----------



## poliacido

CJMitsuki said:


> ..cut... Better performance and higher frequencies are easier to attain with XFR overclocking using bclk if you want to go higher than 4.35ghz all core. The better your cooling the higher the system will set your XFR multiplier for the 1-6 core range and the all core range. Generally you’ll get 42.5 all core but if you have exceptional cooling then 43 or 43.5x multiplier is not uncommon. The 1-6 core boost will generally be 43.5x. Beyond those frequencies you’ll have to add bclk OC to get there and more positive offset voltage.


what kind of cooling you have to achieve those freq.? as i told before i can't even get near. You said when it boots the xfr check which multiplier can use. Also do you use perf.enh. or just PBO in the CBS settings?


----------



## CJMitsuki

poliacido said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> ..cut... Better performance and higher frequencies are easier to attain with XFR overclocking using bclk if you want to go higher than 4.35ghz all core. The better your cooling the higher the system will set your XFR multiplier for the 1-6 core range and the all core range. Generally you’ll get 42.5 all core but if you have exceptional cooling then 43 or 43.5x multiplier is not uncommon. The 1-6 core boost will generally be 43.5x. Beyond those frequencies you’ll have to add bclk OC to get there and more positive offset voltage.
> 
> 
> 
> what kind of cooling you have to achieve those freq.? as i told before i can't even get near. You said when it boots the xfr check which multiplier can use. Also do you use perf.enh. or just PBO in the CBS settings?
Click to expand...

I’ll post my settings here in a moment. I use PE4, I have CPB enabled, PBO set to enabled and 10x scalar but I don’t think that does anything with PE and I have several other settings that will be different than stock and I’ll try to point those out in the txt file.


----------



## poliacido

CJMitsuki said:


> I’ll post my settings here in a moment. I use PE4, I have CPB enabled, PBO set to enabled and 10x scalar but I don’t think that does anything with PE and I have several other settings that will be different than stock and I’ll try to point those out in the txt file.


thanks a lot
i will try the settings asap to see if that helps my cpu


----------



## CJMitsuki

poliacido said:


> thanks a lot
> i will try the settings asap to see if that helps my cpu



Here are my settings. Just dont copy the cpu offset as you need to find that out yourself or the soc voltage vid or the dram voltage. Nor the memory timings or the vttddr voltage most everything else should be fine. If you are in doubt then dont copy it lol. btw, not responsible if you mess something up. You need decent cooling for PE4 so do at your own risk. Basically from that setup you just have to increase bclk and if it freezes then it needs voltage but with those settings you shouldnt need too much. also put LLC to 4 not 5...I was benching and forgot to change it back and i have it set to favor maintaining current balance and not thermal balance so it wont throttle so you may want to change that and in PState settings there is an option i enabled that reduces throttling so its up to you to use that or not.


----------



## poliacido

CJMitsuki said:


> Here are my settings. Just dont copy the cpu offset as you need to find that out yourself or the soc voltage vid or the dram voltage. Nor the memory timings or the vttddr voltage most everything else should be fine. If you are in doubt then dont copy it lol. btw, not responsible if you mess something up. You need decent cooling for PE4 so do at your own risk. Basically from that setup you just have to increase bclk and if it freezes then it needs voltage but with those settings you shouldnt need too much. also put LLC to 4 not 5...I was benching and forgot to change it back and i have it set to favor maintaining current balance and not thermal balance so it wont throttle so you may want to change that and in PState settings there is an option i enabled that reduces throttling so its up to you to use that or not.


thanks sir
i will look into it later tonight and of course i know i don't have to copy the voltages and the timigs


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> thanks sir
> i will look into it later tonight and of course i know i don't have to copy the voltages and the timigs


Give this a try too: https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...tiplier-adjustments-through-ryzen-master.html


----------



## poliacido

CJMitsuki said:


> Here are my settings. Just dont copy the cpu offset as you need to find that out yourself or the soc voltage vid or the dram voltage. Nor the memory timings or the vttddr voltage most everything else should be fine. If you are in doubt then dont copy it lol. btw, not responsible if you mess something up. You need decent cooling for PE4 so do at your own risk. Basically from that setup you just have to increase bclk and if it freezes then it needs voltage but with those settings you shouldnt need too much. also put LLC to 4 not 5...I was benching and forgot to change it back and i have it set to favor maintaining current balance and not thermal balance so it wont throttle so you may want to change that and in PState settings there is an option i enabled that reduces throttling so its up to you to use that or not.


ok i gave it a try and seems i get 41.3x always with your settings and PE3. I try to stay in the 1.38-1.4v at load so i set a +0.02 with LLC4.... it didn't change much from the previous settings when i had usually 41/41.3x
i tried also PE4 but it's not stabe, just crash after few seconds when using prime95 and with a voltage of 1.5v in load! So i lowered the offset to -0.07 to stay into the 1.4v range but still crashing...
one thing i can't understand: seems my cpu can't handle even 101 blck, no matter what i do it crashes.... even if at 100bclk PE3 i am stable... really it is weird and i can't understand why
is it possible this is the limit of my cpu?? I don't think it's a temp problem because i was around 75-80° after some minutes of prime95



nick name said:


> Give this a try too: https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...tiplier-adjustments-through-ryzen-master.html


thanks for your guide but i tried to adjust the EDC and maybe i did something wrong but after apply a higher EDC (from the 145 of PE3) the cpu works at stock speed...
this is what i get when booting with PE4: 42.2x ofc it's unstable 100% no matter what i do..


----------



## CJMitsuki

poliacido said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here are my settings. Just dont copy the cpu offset as you need to find that out yourself or the soc voltage vid or the dram voltage. Nor the memory timings or the vttddr voltage most everything else should be fine. If you are in doubt then dont copy it lol. btw, not responsible if you mess something up. You need decent cooling for PE4 so do at your own risk. Basically from that setup you just have to increase bclk and if it freezes then it needs voltage but with those settings you shouldnt need too much. also put LLC to 4 not 5...I was benching and forgot to change it back and i have it set to favor maintaining current balance and not thermal balance so it wont throttle so you may want to change that and in PState settings there is an option i enabled that reduces throttling so its up to you to use that or not.
> 
> 
> 
> ok i gave it a try and seems i get 41.3x always with your settings and PE3. I try to stay in the 1.38-1.4v at load so i set a +0.02 with LLC4.... it didn't change much from the previous settings when i had usually 41/41.3x
> i tried also PE4 but it's not stabe, just crash after few seconds when using prime95 and with a voltage of 1.5v in load! So i lowered the offset to -0.07 to stay into the 1.4v range but still crashing...
> one thing i can't understand: seems my cpu can't handle even 101 blck, no matter what i do it crashes.... even if at 100bclk PE3 i am stable... really it is weird and i can't understand why
> is it possible this is the limit of my cpu??
> 
> 
> 
> nick name said:
> 
> 
> 
> Give this a try too: https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...tiplier-adjustments-through-ryzen-master.html
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> thanks for your guide but i tried to adjust the EDC and maybe i did something wrong but after apply a higher EDC (from the 145 of PE3) the cpu works at stock speed...
> this is what i get when booting with PE4: 42.2x ofc it's unstable 100% no matter what i do.. /forum/images/smilies/frown.gif
Click to expand...

I don’t use Ryzen master but did you set PBO to “enabled” if so that sets the limits of the board as far as edc, tsp, and ppt. So, it crashes at PE4 with bclk at 100? Also, with XFR you are going to get high voltages running something like Prime95 since it puts a high load on your cpu and XFR is going to compensate with voltage and at PE4 the voltage is more aggressive. AMD says up to 1.45v is “safe” but I don’t listen to all that but maybe make 1.45v your maximum when max load is applied? You’ll rarely even get cpu loads that are like Prime95 anyway. Unless you render on this computer. If you are gaming I wouldn’t worry about Prime95. You are highly unlikely to ever put that cpu under full load ever.


----------



## poliacido

CJMitsuki said:


> I don’t use Ryzen master but did you set PBO to “enabled” if so that sets the limits of the board as far as edc, tsp, and ppt. So, it crashes at PE4 with bclk at 100? Also, with XFR you are going to get high voltages running something like Prime95 since it puts a high load on your cpu and XFR is going to compensate with voltage and at PE4 the voltage is more aggressive. AMD says up to 1.45v is “safe” but I don’t listen to all that but maybe make 1.45v your maximum when max load is applied? You’ll rarely even get cpu loads that are like Prime95 anyway. Unless you render on this computer. If you are gaming I wouldn’t worry about Prime95. You are highly unlikely to ever put that cpu under full load ever.


i don't use ryzen master neither, i tried it to check what the user Nick Name said
PB override is enabled, yes it crashes 100% with PE4 and bclk 100 not only with prime but also with cinebench... maybe it can finish the first run but at second try it's a crash for sure
i don't think is limited by the low voltage, as the 1st try with PE4 had 1.5v with LLC4 and still crashed
i am a little concerned that i lost the silicon lottery XD


----------



## CJMitsuki

poliacido said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don’t use Ryzen master but did you set PBO to “enabled” if so that sets the limits of the board as far as edc, tsp, and ppt. So, it crashes at PE4 with bclk at 100? Also, with XFR you are going to get high voltages running something like Prime95 since it puts a high load on your cpu and XFR is going to compensate with voltage and at PE4 the voltage is more aggressive. AMD says up to 1.45v is “safe” but I don’t listen to all that but maybe make 1.45v your maximum when max load is applied? You’ll rarely even get cpu loads that are like Prime95 anyway. Unless you render on this computer. If you are gaming I wouldn’t worry about Prime95. You are highly unlikely to ever put that cpu under full load ever.
> 
> 
> 
> i don't use ryzen master neither, i tried it to check what the user Nick Name said
> PB override is enabled, yes it crashes 100% with PE4 and bclk 100 not only with prime but also with cinebench... maybe it can finish the first run but at second try it's a crash for sure
> i don't think is limited by the low voltage, as the 1st try with PE4 had 1.5v with LLC4 and still crashed
> i am a little concerned that i lost the silicon lottery XD
Click to expand...

You might be right. I’m assuming the crashes are system locking up?


----------



## poliacido

CJMitsuki said:


> You might be right. I’m assuming the crashes are system locking up?


yes, i have to use the reset button
but really the 101bclk crash drives me mad.. really can't even stand this little increase!! From what i read they said only the 2 last sata ports can give crashes... i don't know i am just trowing some ideas

btw i just found this binning statistics on the silicon lottery website:


----------



## CJMitsuki

poliacido said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> You might be right. I’m assuming the crashes are system locking up?
> 
> 
> 
> yes, i have to use the reset button
> but really the 101bclk crash drives me mad.. really can't even stand this little increase!! From what i read they said only the 2 last sata ports can't be used... i don't know i am just trowing some ideas
> 
> btw i just found this binning statistics on the silicon lottery website:
Click to expand...

i would make sure my boot drives are either m.2 or in the first 2 sata ports. Silicon Lottery didn’t bin very many of them because they couldn’t make a profit on the first ones they bought. Also they used the multiplier to overclock the cpus and didn’t touch XFR at all.


----------



## poliacido

CJMitsuki said:


> i would make sure my boot drives are either m.2 or in the first 2 sata ports. Silicon Lottery didn’t bin very many of them because they couldn’t make a profit on the first ones they bought. Also they used the multiplier to overclock the cpus and didn’t touch XFR at all.


i have 3 devices in the ports 1,2 and 3: 1ssd, 1hdd and 1 dvdrom
maybe tomorrow i will try unplug the dvd and see how it behaves but i doubt that is the problem...


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> ok i gave it a try and seems i get 41.3x always with your settings and PE3. I try to stay in the 1.38-1.4v at load so i set a +0.02 with LLC4.... it didn't change much from the previous settings when i had usually 41/41.3x
> i tried also PE4 but it's not stabe, just crash after few seconds when using prime95 and with a voltage of 1.5v in load! So i lowered the offset to -0.07 to stay into the 1.4v range but still crashing...
> one thing i can't understand: seems my cpu can't handle even 101 blck, no matter what i do it crashes.... even if at 100bclk PE3 i am stable... really it is weird and i can't understand why
> is it possible this is the limit of my cpu?? I don't think it's a temp problem because i was around 75-80° after some minutes of prime95
> 
> 
> 
> thanks for your guide but i tried to adjust the EDC and maybe i did something wrong but after apply a higher EDC (from the 145 of PE3) the cpu works at stock speed...
> this is what i get when booting with PE4: 42.2x ofc it's unstable 100% no matter what i do..


I don't use PE Lvl 4 because it boots too high too often. I only use PE Lvl 3 and then increase EDC.


----------



## poliacido

nick name said:


> I don't use PE Lvl 4 because it boots too high too often. I only use PE Lvl 3 and then increase EDC.


that's what i did, the screenshot was to show the multiplier set by PE4 and anyway was not stable....


----------



## gupsterg

@nikkyo

Sorry did not get the chance to go back to C7H.
@MacG32

You can see below why  .


----------



## neikosr0x

poliacido said:


> yes, i have to use the reset button
> but really the 101bclk crash drives me mad.. really can't even stand this little increase!! From what i read they said only the 2 last sata ports can give crashes... i don't know i am just trowing some ideas
> 
> btw i just found this binning statistics on the silicon lottery website:


bro, just move your sata drives to the ports on the lower part of the mobo "just because im not sure what port numbers they are just now as im not at home", that solved the issue for me i wasnt able to get 100.2 before lol, now i can get it to 103.


----------



## poliacido

neikosr0x said:


> bro, just move your sata drives to the ports on the lower part of the mobo "just because im not sure what port numbers they are just now as im not at home", that solved the issue for me i wasnt able to get 100.2 before lol, now i can get it to 103.


yes i am using the lower ports, the top two are port 5 and 6 if i remember correct. How many sata ports are you using? And for what device?


----------



## MacG32

gupsterg said:


> @nikkyo
> 
> Sorry did not get the chance to go back to C7H.
> 
> @MacG32
> 
> You can see below why  .
> 
> View attachment 225934



I sure can and it looks great  .


----------



## neikosr0x

poliacido said:


> yes i am using the lower ports, the top two are port 5 and 6 if i remember correct. How many sata ports are you using? And for what device?


2700x
CH Hero 7
4 Satas
m.2 on the lower part of the mobo, but this one shouldn't interfere.


----------



## majestynl

poliacido said:


> yes i am using the lower ports, the top two are port 5 and 6 if i remember correct. How many sata ports are you using? And for what device?


yep, you need to use bottom 4:

_When testing reference clocking, make sure to use any of the four bottom SATA ports. The
X470 chipset has an issue with the two top SATA ports when adjusting PCI-E frequency. _

ENTHUSIAST HIGHLIGHTS.PDF




gupsterg said:


> I would only set PState 0 frequency and VID within relevant menu. I would also set Global C-State Control as [Enabled].
> 
> Leave CPU Core Voltage on Extreme Tweaker on [Auto]. You can set Core Performance Boost to [Disabled] (I prefer to also).
> 
> Every UEFI upto 0804 above method has worked for me on 2700X. I'm hoping to be on my C7H later today, so will see if UEFI 1001 & 1101 work the same.


Hey chap..hope u are well! 

Can you also share this info in your Crosshair VII Hero Essential Info thread:

https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-342.html#post27636476


----------



## gupsterg

MacG32 said:


> I sure can and it looks great  .


So far in testing of 4x8GB on my 2700X+C6H, it seems to me, TWR, TRFC and TRTP need significant loosening vs using 2x8GB. So far seems I don't lose significant performance though.

I have you tried manual timings on your setup? 



majestynl said:


> Hey chap..hope u are well!
> 
> Can you also share this info in your Crosshair VII Hero Essential Info thread:
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-342.html#post27636476


All good chap  , hope you are as well  .

I click link and just come back to top of this page, dunno if it's my browser playing up/forum or link issue. What was it you wished me to see/link?


----------



## Johan45

gupsterg said:


> So far in testing of 4x8GB on my 2700X+C6H, it seems to me, TWR, TRFC and TRTP need significant loosening vs using 2x8GB. So far seems I don't lose significant performance though.
> 
> I have you tried manual timings on your setup?
> 
> 
> 
> All good chap  , hope you are as well  .
> 
> I click link and just come back to top of this page, dunno if it's my browser playing up/forum or link issue. What was it you wished me to see/link?


Takes me to elmors post #3420


----------



## gupsterg

@Johan45 & @majestynl

Cheers added it as first Q&A on FAQ  .


----------



## poliacido

neikosr0x said:


> 2700x
> CH Hero 7
> 4 Satas
> m.2 on the lower part of the mobo, but this one shouldn't interfere.


so i should be fine... because i am using the lower ports.... but still can't run 101
what kind of problem you got when using the upper ports?? like no boot at all or just random crash when on stress test? because i crash only when in prime95 for example


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> so i should be fine... because i am using the lower ports.... but still can't run 101
> what kind of problem you got when using the upper ports?? like no boot at all or just random crash when on stress test? because i crash only when in prime95 for example


Prime95 is the hottest running program I use to test the CPU and pretty much anything above a 41 multiplier will fail for me. Intel Burn Test, for example, can pass with multipliers that Prime95 cannot.


----------



## poliacido

nick name said:


> Prime95 is the hottest running program I use to test the CPU and pretty much anything above a 41 multiplier will fail for me. Intel Burn Test, for example, can pass with multipliers that Prime95 cannot.


ok and even with cinebench i crash...


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> ok and even with cinebench i crash...


Is it a system lockup or a blue screen?


----------



## poliacido

nick name said:


> Is it a system lockup or a blue screen?


lockup, never had a bsod


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> lockup, never had a bsod


What is the ambient temperature in the room the PC is in? Is it warm in there?


----------



## Terror-Byter

So after a week of having tried bios 1101... I think Ive either killed the CPU or the Motherboard.


Tried to keep the same settings as bios 1001, which were stable. Ever since trying out 1101 immediately starting getting random lockups... no blue screens... no reboots... just a lockup where the image is still on screen, but keyboard and mouse dont respond, no lights flash, and the system is just 100% locked up. So day after day tried lowering speeds, voltages, going back to lower stable settings that I had tried in the past, and the lock ups persisted. Eventually just reset bios to defaults, with the combination of reset bios on the back + power cable and battery out for 30 mins, and the lockups then even started to happen in the bios itself.


At this point, I reflashed bios 1001... and since then the system doesnt post at all.
Removed all anything connected to the board that wasnt needed to get into the bios, ssds, m.2, usb cables and and tried a different GPU, and only 1 stick of ram. All that happens is the Q-Code keeps cycling through the various checks, then the last White LED blinks very briefly, and the cycles starts again.


Tried the safe mode flashback, by removing ram, and cpu, and only keeping the power cables connected.
Unpluged the mains, and removed the battery for 30 mins. Then plug in mains, and do the bios flash back procedure, and then repeat the steps twice.


Same thing... even went to far to try earlier bioses, 0804, 0702, 0601, and same thing.
Eventually reflashed bios 1101, and now the behaviour of the Q-Code is slightly different.


Put CPU and 1 stick of ram, and the Q-Code now procedes to do the CPU check Red LED only, and then goes on to the White LED and stays there with the Q-Code being 06.
06 According to the Manual is "Microcode Loading"


Has anyone had this issue with the CH7? Any ideas on how to resolve this? Or is it time to get a new board or CPU?
Im open to suggestions.


PS... No voltages were ever set too high, 

CPU voltage offset +0.0625v max, and lower,
RAM voltage 1.41v max, and lower,
SOC voltage 1.075v max, and lower,
VDDP voltage 0.855v max, and lower,
PLL voltage 1.84v max and lower,


----------



## MacG32

gupsterg said:


> So far in testing of 4x8GB on my 2700X+C6H, it seems to me, TWR, TRFC and TRTP need significant loosening vs using 2x8GB. So far seems I don't lose significant performance though.
> 
> I have you tried manual timings on your setup?



I used the DRAM Calculator for Ryzen v1.4.0.1 for my current timings. I haven't had time to play around with higher settings lately. I'm just glad that the new beta BIOS allows me to use my RAM at it advertised speed. It may be a few weeks or more before I can thoroughly test out anything else.


----------



## neikosr0x

poliacido said:


> so i should be fine... because i am using the lower ports.... but still can't run 101
> what kind of problem you got when using the upper ports?? like no boot at all or just random crash when on stress test? because i crash only when in prime95 for example


it would just get stuck on boot with some code"cant remember code number", at the asus screen. 

When i discovered the fault on the board, i just swapped ports, and cleared cmos from there it worked just fine.


----------



## neikosr0x

poliacido said:


> lockup, never had a bsod


so your problem is either voltage or temps.


----------



## Deyjandi

Asus pulled 1001 bios from the C7H site. I wonder if issues have been discovered


----------



## Johan45

Terror-Byter said:


> So after a week of having tried bios 1101... I think Ive either killed the CPU or the Motherboard.
> 
> 
> Tried to keep the same settings as bios 1001, which were stable. Ever since trying out 1101 immediately starting getting random lockups... no blue screens... no reboots... just a lockup where the image is still on screen, but keyboard and mouse dont respond, no lights flash, and the system is just 100% locked up. So day after day tried lowering speeds, voltages, going back to lower stable settings that I had tried in the past, and the lock ups persisted. Eventually just reset bios to defaults, with the combination of reset bios on the back + power cable and battery out for 30 mins, and the lockups then even started to happen in the bios itself.
> 
> 
> At this point, I reflashed bios 1001... and since then the system doesnt post at all.
> Removed all anything connected to the board that wasnt needed to get into the bios, ssds, m.2, usb cables and and tried a different GPU, and only 1 stick of ram. All that happens is the Q-Code keeps cycling through the various checks, then the last White LED blinks very briefly, and the cycles starts again.
> 
> 
> Tried the safe mode flashback, by removing ram, and cpu, and only keeping the power cables connected.
> Unpluged the mains, and removed the battery for 30 mins. Then plug in mains, and do the bios flash back procedure, and then repeat the steps twice.
> 
> 
> Same thing... even went to far to try earlier bioses, 0804, 0702, 0601, and same thing.
> Eventually reflashed bios 1101, and now the behaviour of the Q-Code is slightly different.
> 
> 
> Put CPU and 1 stick of ram, and the Q-Code now procedes to do the CPU check Red LED only, and then goes on to the White LED and stays there with the Q-Code being 06.
> 06 According to the Manual is "Microcode Loading"
> 
> 
> Has anyone had this issue with the CH7? Any ideas on how to resolve this? Or is it time to get a new board or CPU?
> Im open to suggestions.
> 
> 
> PS... No voltages were ever set too high,
> 
> CPU voltage offset +0.0625v max, and lower,
> RAM voltage 1.41v max, and lower,
> SOC voltage 1.075v max, and lower,
> VDDP voltage 0.855v max, and lower,
> PLL voltage 1.84v max and lower,


I would assume that the issues with 1101 had trashed your windows install, at a guess anyway that's why it was locking up.
Check your board for a sticker it will have info and tell you the initial BIOS that was loaded on the board. Try the flash-back to that BIOS version and see if it recovers. If not you've likely buggered your BIOS chip and will need to RMA the board.


----------



## hurricane28

Deyjandi said:


> Asus pulled 1001 bios from the C7H site. I wonder if issues have been discovered


No its not, i can still download it just fine from here.


----------



## spyshagg

I think i'm still on Bios 06xx something. 


Many many months ago I set PE to level4 with BCLK to 101 +60mv offset. And I just left it there. Never touched it again. 
All-core boost into the 4200mhz and 1-to-4 core boost into the high 4300mhz.


Only issue is the long time to boot up (it trains 4 or 5 times before actually posting), and losing 1 sata port when BCLK above 101.


Why should I consider updating the bios?


----------



## Deyjandi

hurricane28 said:


> No its not, i can still download it just fine from here.


true, maybe it was a caching issue or something


----------



## poliacido

nick name said:


> What is the ambient temperature in the room the PC is in? Is it warm in there?


mhhh no... i would say average house temperature.. about 20°C



neikosr0x said:


> so your problem is either voltage or temps.


tried with almost 1.48v and didn't work... and temps are not bad... 80°C at max when stress testing with prime


----------



## HeroofTime

Hello all,

I'm considering this motherboard for my brother who's into PC gaming. He knows next to nothing about overclocking, so overclocking is not relevant to him. He will greatly appreciate having WiFi capability and an onboard power button though. My only two choices appear to be the ASUS C7H and the MSI Gaming M7 AC. I'm sure the C7H is better overall, but my brother isn't into hardware and overclocking very much. I will be building his PC for him. One thing to note is that he'll be saving quite a bit of money going with MSI's offering, but I'd like to weigh all of my options before recommending something to my brother.

My main question is in regards to the Realtek RTL8822BE WiFi NIC that the C7H is equipped with. How's your guys' experience been with the WiFi on this motherboard? The MSI Gaming M7 AC comes with Intel's AC 8265 WiFi NIC, so I'm not concerned with the wireless performance of that motherboard one bit. Thanks for any insight.


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> All good chap  , hope you are as well  .
> 
> I click link and just come back to top of this page, dunno if it's my browser playing up/forum or link issue. What was it you wished me to see/link?


Great  yeap same here..




gupsterg said:


> @Johan45 & @majestynl
> 
> Cheers added it as first Q&A on FAQ  .


NP..saw you got the link worked out!




Terror-Byter said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> So after a week of having tried bios 1101... I think Ive either killed the CPU or the Motherboard.
> 
> 
> Tried to keep the same settings as bios 1001, which were stable. Ever since trying out 1101 immediately starting getting random lockups... no blue screens... no reboots... just a lockup where the image is still on screen, but keyboard and mouse dont respond, no lights flash, and the system is just 100% locked up. So day after day tried lowering speeds, voltages, going back to lower stable settings that I had tried in the past, and the lock ups persisted. Eventually just reset bios to defaults, with the combination of reset bios on the back + power cable and battery out for 30 mins, and the lockups then even started to happen in the bios itself.
> 
> 
> At this point, I reflashed bios 1001... and since then the system doesnt post at all.
> Removed all anything connected to the board that wasnt needed to get into the bios, ssds, m.2, usb cables and and tried a different GPU, and only 1 stick of ram. All that happens is the Q-Code keeps cycling through the various checks, then the last White LED blinks very briefly, and the cycles starts again.
> 
> 
> Tried the safe mode flashback, by removing ram, and cpu, and only keeping the power cables connected.
> Unpluged the mains, and removed the battery for 30 mins. Then plug in mains, and do the bios flash back procedure, and then repeat the steps twice.
> 
> 
> Same thing... even went to far to try earlier bioses, 0804, 0702, 0601, and same thing.
> Eventually reflashed bios 1101, and now the behaviour of the Q-Code is slightly different.
> 
> 
> Put CPU and 1 stick of ram, and the Q-Code now procedes to do the CPU check Red LED only, and then goes on to the White LED and stays there with the Q-Code being 06.
> 06 According to the Manual is "Microcode Loading"
> 
> 
> Has anyone had this issue with the CH7? Any ideas on how to resolve this? Or is it time to get a new board or CPU?
> Im open to suggestions.
> 
> 
> PS... No voltages were ever set too high,
> 
> CPU voltage offset +0.0625v max, and lower,
> RAM voltage 1.41v max, and lower,
> SOC voltage 1.075v max, and lower,
> VDDP voltage 0.855v max, and lower,
> PLL voltage 1.84v max and lower,



Looks like your bios chip is ruined 
You could try contacting Elmor over here or RMA it!




HeroofTime said:


> Hello all,
> 
> I'm considering this motherboard for my brother who's into PC gaming. He knows next to nothing about overclocking, so overclocking is not relevant to him. He will greatly appreciate having WiFi capability and an onboard power button though. My only two choices appear to be the ASUS C7H and the MSI Gaming M7 AC. I'm sure the C7H is better overall, but my brother isn't into hardware and overclocking very much. I will be building his PC for him. One thing to note is that he'll be saving quite a bit of money going with MSI's offering, but I'd like to weigh all of my options before recommending something to my brother.
> 
> My main question is in regards to the Realtek RTL8822BE WiFi NIC that the C7H is equipped with. How's your guys' experience been with the WiFi on this motherboard? The MSI Gaming M7 AC comes with Intel's AC 8265 WiFi NIC, so I'm not concerned with the wireless performance of that motherboard one bit. Thanks for any insight.


simply out of curiosity, why he needs a on-board power button if he doesn't OC. The button is mostly handy for open benches and/or extreme OC' ing 
Personally don't think its worth that extra money just for a WiFi option. There are plenty cheaper WiFi solutions (dongles/stands etc).
Dont get me wrong the CH7 is the best X470 in the market if you ask me. But spending that extra money for just regular gaming?!?! there are many other Asus/MSI boards to shop who are doing the job more then well (gaming)!


----------



## HeroofTime

@majestynl You're absolutely right to be honest. I'm recommending that he builds his PC on a bench case though. I did this years ago (just to try it out), and I will never go back to using a traditional case again. My CPU fans and GPU fans do not collect anywhere near the amount of dust a traditional case did. My PCs have sat in the same exact spot the past 15 years, and I know for a fact that a bench case keeps everything much cleaner. The fans do gather dust but very little. I cannot remember the last time I cleaned my CPU fans and they look good. My GPU I completely cleaned because I purchased it used off of eBay recently so that one's not relevant. There is only one concern when it comes to having a bench case, and that concern is making sure heat doesn't build up in certain areas. So, I use a probe thermometer designed for meats to have me covered. I just make sure certain chips on the motherboard and GPU don't get too hot during after my overclocking journey. 

That said, the bench case I'm recommending to my brother does come with a power and reset module that you can connect to the motherboard, but I strongly think it will make things look sloppy. I have the same bench case I'm recommending to him, and I've never bothered installing the sloppy looking power and reset module. I might reconsider this again for him though because I definitely agree with you. I would appreciate it if someone could give me some insight on the C7H's Realtek RTL8822BE WiFi NIC though. I'm just wondering if it's a poor performer, or if the NIC has any issues with it. Thanks!


----------



## MNMadman

HeroofTime said:


> Hello all,
> 
> I'm considering this motherboard for my brother who's into PC gaming. He knows next to nothing about overclocking, so overclocking is not relevant to him. He will greatly appreciate having WiFi capability and an onboard power button though. My only two choices appear to be the ASUS C7H and the MSI Gaming M7 AC. I'm sure the C7H is better overall, but my brother isn't into hardware and overclocking very much. I will be building his PC for him. One thing to note is that he'll be saving quite a bit of money going with MSI's offering, but I'd like to weigh all of my options before recommending something to my brother.
> 
> My main question is in regards to the Realtek RTL8822BE WiFi NIC that the C7H is equipped with. How's your guys' experience been with the WiFi on this motherboard? The MSI Gaming M7 AC comes with Intel's AC 8265 WiFi NIC, so I'm not concerned with the wireless performance of that motherboard one bit. Thanks for any insight.


Regarding the C7H WiFi, it's great. My 450/20 Comcast comes through full speed. Gaming is great on it as well. I just use the Realtek drivers (no Asus bloat software) and I get great ping times in my games. I'm about 20 feet away from the X-Fi router with one wall between.

Also, Windows 10 has the driver for the Realtek built-in, where the Intel driver wasn't (I had an MSI B450 board with Intel WiFi). You can't use the Intel WiFi during the Windows install by default. You might be able to add it in manually, but I don't remember how.

And I agree with majestynl -- both choices are top-tier boards that you don't necessarily need when you aren't overclocking. You could just as easily go with a B450 board with built-in WiFi to save money.


----------



## neikosr0x

poliacido said:


> mhhh no... i would say average house temperature.. about 20°C
> 
> 
> 
> tried with almost 1.48v and didn't work... and temps are not bad... 80°C at max when stress testing with prime


just try CPU volt offset + 0.0315 but be careful, check your voltage as soon as it boots. that, if you are using PE3 o PE4 + 101/102.

The Voltage should spike from 1.487 to anywhere near 1.550 on single core ops but it should be stable. use it as a test and keep lowering the offset while testing stability.

I have found, PE3 with Vcore at auto and after booting just increasing the EDC to 168 on Ryzen master, the best. Which helps to keep lower voltage ops when comparing it to PE4. When running Benchmarks on some games using PE4 vs PE3 with 102.4bkl i saw same averages on FPS even tho i was getting 4.456ghz on single core ops.


----------



## Conenubi701

@elmor

It seems that the 1101 BIOS is interfering with GPU drivers (among the myriad of other issues it causes). When I flashed to 1101 it reset a ton of devices and removed some others. So I tried a completely fresh install of windows and everything seemed ok until I updated W10 to the October 2018 update and then went and installed a GPU driver (18.10.1 from AMD). Once the GPU driver installed everything went bonkers on the system and it reset my devices (and completely removed the Bluetooth device off my PC, I wasn't able to turn it on since it was wiped off the PC). I'm going to roll back to 1001 and see if it's an AMD GPU driver issue or if it's the BIOS (most likely the BIOS since I didn't have this issue on 1001 and the 18.10.1 AMD GPU driver)




neikosr0x said:


> just try CPU volt offset + 0.0315 but be careful, check your voltage as soon as it boots. that, if you are using PE3 o PE4 + 101/102.
> 
> The Voltage should spike from 1.487 to anywhere near 1.550 on single core ops but it should be stable. use it as a test and keep lowering the offset while testing stability.
> 
> I have found, PE3 with Vcore at auto and after booting just increasing the EDC to 168 on Ryzen master, the best. Which helps to keep lower voltage ops when comparing it to PE4. When running Benchmarks on some games using PE4 vs PE3 with 102.4bkl i saw same averages on FPS even tho i was getting 4.456ghz on single core ops.


What BIOS are you on? also, mind posting your BIOS settings? I recently removed an SSD which allowed me to free up the last two SATA slots so that means I can start BCLK Oc'ing now.


----------



## JayC72

Conenubi701 said:


> @elmor
> 
> It seems that the 1101 BIOS is interfering with GPU drivers (among the myriad of other issues it causes).


This is the most likely reason they pulled bios 1101 from the official Asus page.
I don't see it there anymore.


----------



## Mandarb

Hey Crosshair VII Hero bros!

I have some issues with my PC, integrated audio (don't use that anymore, but if defective I'd want to have it fixes), can't get cameras and an elgato working again... wondering if any of you can offer advice: https://www.overclock.net/#/topics/1711472


----------



## HeroofTime

@MNMadman Awesome! Thank you for the information. It makes sense that it'd be best to install the drivers from Realtek to keep things working the way they were designed to. Stay away from bloatware no matter what!


----------



## hurricane28

Deyjandi said:


> true, maybe it was a caching issue or something


Nope, you were right after all. They pulled 1001 BIOS here too. 

Wonder what they found. 
@elmor, could you tell us why BIOS 1001 is being pulled from Asus website? Thnx.


----------



## nick name

HeroofTime said:


> @majestynl You're absolutely right to be honest. I'm recommending that he builds his PC on a bench case though. I did this years ago (just to try it out), and I will never go back to using a traditional case again. My CPU fans and GPU fans do not collect anywhere near the amount of dust a traditional case did. My PCs have sat in the same exact spot the past 15 years, and I know for a fact that a bench case keeps everything much cleaner. The fans do gather dust but very little. I cannot remember the last time I cleaned my CPU fans and they look good. My GPU I completely cleaned because I purchased it used off of eBay recently so that one's not relevant. There is only one concern when it comes to having a bench case, and that concern is making sure heat doesn't build up in certain areas. So, I use a probe thermometer designed for meats to have me covered. I just make sure certain chips on the motherboard and GPU don't get too hot during after my overclocking journey.
> 
> That said, the bench case I'm recommending to my brother does come with a power and reset module that you can connect to the motherboard, but I strongly think it will make things look sloppy. I have the same bench case I'm recommending to him, and I've never bothered installing the sloppy looking power and reset module. I might reconsider this again for him though because I definitely agree with you. I would appreciate it if someone could give me some insight on the C7H's Realtek RTL8822BE WiFi NIC though. I'm just wondering if it's a poor performer, or if the NIC has any issues with it. Thanks!


I like having an open air case also. I don't use the bench style, but the Thermaltake P3. Which I keep the plexi off off. You can get it with glass also. The case can be used standing or laying flat and can be configured with a vertical GPU installation. Also, has a support bracket for a reservoir/pump install. The Thermaltake P3 has 4 USB ports on the front along with power and reset button and also audio ports. 

Raijintek also makes an attractive open air case that is very similar in concept. I believes it's called the Paean.


----------



## nick name

Conenubi701 said:


> @elmor
> 
> It seems that the 1101 BIOS is interfering with GPU drivers (among the myriad of other issues it causes). When I flashed to 1101 it reset a ton of devices and removed some others. So I tried a completely fresh install of windows and everything seemed ok until I updated W10 to the October 2018 update and then went and installed a GPU driver (18.10.1 from AMD). Once the GPU driver installed everything went bonkers on the system and it reset my devices (and completely removed the Bluetooth device off my PC, I wasn't able to turn it on since it was wiped off the PC). I'm going to roll back to 1001 and see if it's an AMD GPU driver issue or if it's the BIOS (most likely the BIOS since I didn't have this issue on 1001 and the 18.10.1 AMD GPU driver)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What BIOS are you on? also, mind posting your BIOS settings? I recently removed an SSD which allowed me to free up the last two SATA slots so that means I can start BCLK Oc'ing now.



I think the driver issues are the result of changing from one AGESA to another. You'll find going from 1101 to a previous BIOS will yield the same result.


----------



## poliacido

neikosr0x said:


> just try CPU volt offset + 0.0315 but be careful, check your voltage as soon as it boots. that, if you are using PE3 o PE4 + 101/102.
> 
> The Voltage should spike from 1.487 to anywhere near 1.550 on single core ops but it should be stable. use it as a test and keep lowering the offset while testing stability.
> 
> I have found, PE3 with Vcore at auto and after booting just increasing the EDC to 168 on Ryzen master, the best. Which helps to keep lower voltage ops when comparing it to PE4. When running Benchmarks on some games using PE4 vs PE3 with 102.4bkl i saw same averages on FPS even tho i was getting 4.456ghz on single core ops.


i tried that setting. i got around 1.50v but still wasn't stable... even with 101 bclk...
i think my cpu is not one of the best ryzen for OC capabilities


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> i tried that setting. i got around 1.50v but still wasn't stable... even with 101 bclk...
> i think my cpu is not one of the best ryzen for OC capabilities


What RAM speed are you using? Perhaps that is what is causing the lock up?


----------



## poliacido

nick name said:


> What RAM speed are you using? Perhaps that is what is causing the lock up?


i have a 3200mhz kit and i set the timings with the calculator made by 1usmus
i don't think the ram are the problem beucase i tested quite a bit with memtest and i was 100% stable with the timings i have now...


----------



## hurricane28

Hi

I would like to know if there are more people here that use ROG forum. I ask this as the forum is very weird and simply doesn't function right because i can't change my nickname and it keeps changing it to my email adres for some reason.. I asked ROG on Facebook but i got no answer to help me than: "make a new account" This obviously is not going to help because i can't delete my account and when i want to login it use the Asus VIP Account for the ROG forum as well.. 

Thnx.


----------



## Johan45

hurricane28 said:


> Hi
> 
> I would like to know if there are more people here that use ROG forum. I ask this as the forum is very weird and simply doesn't function right because i can't change my nickname and it keeps changing it to my email adres for some reason.. I asked ROG on Facebook but i got no answer to help me than: "make a new account" This obviously is not going to help because i can't delete my account and when i want to login it use the Asus VIP Account for the ROG forum as well..
> 
> Thnx.


You should be able to PM a moderator and get them to change your nickname. The nick and e-mail are both tied to the account, you can update e-mail but the nickname is likely out of your control. On my homesite if someone tries to make another account they'll get flagged by IP and cookies, we only allow one account /person.


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> i have a 3200mhz kit and i set the timings with the calculator made by 1usmus
> i don't think the ram are the problem beucase i tested quite a bit with memtest and i was 100% stable with the timings i have now...


When you apply the 101 BCLK it will adjust your RAM speed a little also.


----------



## lordzed83

Guess Good I'm quite BZ at the time and had no time to Flash new Bioses.. Seems they are well junk


----------



## MNMadman

hurricane28 said:


> Nope, you were right after all. They pulled 1001 BIOS here too.
> 
> Wonder what they found.
> 
> @elmor, could you tell us why BIOS 1001 is being pulled from Asus website? Thnx.


I want to know what's wrong with it too, as it's working well for me. I can go back to 0804 if necessary, but then some of the sensors in HWiNFO only have number labels and not names.


----------



## hurricane28

Johan45 said:


> You should be able to PM a moderator and get them to change your nickname. The nick and e-mail are both tied to the account, you can update e-mail but the nickname is likely out of your control. On my homesite if someone tries to make another account they'll get flagged by IP and cookies, we only allow one account /person.


Thnx Johan,

I tried to contact an admin but they are hard to find. I don't usually use the ROG forum but it might give more information than on here. Its a weird forum too if you compare it to ocn imo. 

Thnx anyway.


----------



## hurricane28

MNMadman said:


> I want to know what's wrong with it too, as it's working well for me. I can go back to 0804 if necessary, but then some of the sensors in HWiNFO only have number labels and not names


More people would like to know man: https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?105772-ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-C7H-BIOS-1001-removed

As of yet no answer from Assus man.


----------



## poliacido

nick name said:


> When you apply the 101 BCLK it will adjust your RAM speed a little also.


yes mate... but really it is only 40mhz more... i will try with stock ram just to be sure lol...... but honestly i don't think thats the problem


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> yes mate... but really it is only 40mhz more... i will try with stock ram just to be sure lol...... but honestly i don't think thats the problem


I agree that it's probably not enough to lock the system up. Depending on my timings a 101 BCLK doesn't do a thing to my stability. Just trying to rule everything out we can.


----------



## nick name

Looking at the ROG forum I found the reason my latency in Aida is about 1ns higher now. Apparently, on 1001, another user reported that their latency in Aida were 1ns faster. Now, in 1101, my latency doesn't drop as much with increases in RAM speed when checking with Aida. It would get as low as 57 and now it stays around 59.6 and it was driving me nuts trying to figure out why the change.

So I guess it's useful for something.


----------



## poliacido

nick name said:


> I agree that it's probably not enough to lock the system up. Depending on my timings a 101 BCLK doesn't do a thing to my stability. Just trying to rule everything out we can.


yes, that's why tomorrow i will give it a try with [email protected] it's late here and i am almost sleeping now to try


----------



## nick name

I can't remember who it was, but they were reporting reaching higher clocks on their X470 Prime Pro and I also had the same experience. I reached out to ASUS to see if it was a problem with my Crosshair VII WiFi, but it turns out that ASUS engineers also say the Prime Pro reaches better CPU overclocks than the Crosshair VII WiFi does. They said that the Prime Pro is better for CPU overclocking than the Crosshair VII WiFi. With that said, however, I still find the Crosshair VII to be the superior motherboard because of all its other features and do not regret upgrading to it.


----------



## crakej

FFS - what is going on? We all thought we bought the best board for OCing - CPU AND ram!

It would be great if @elmor could put our minds to rest! And why does cpu need more juice on C7H?

My system is pretty reliable - not 100%, but pretty good.... but I'd still like to know if the bios I'm using shouldn't be used.

Hopefully this means a better, fixed bios is on the way for the W End...


----------



## hurricane28

crakej said:


> FFS - what is going on? We all thought we bought the best board for OCing - CPU AND ram!
> 
> It would be great if @elmor could put our minds to rest! And why does cpu need more juice on C7H?
> 
> My system is pretty reliable - not 100%, but pretty good.... but I'd still like to know if the bios I'm using shouldn't be used.
> 
> Hopefully this means a better, fixed bios is on the way for the W End...


You can wait a long time man, Elmor is never going to give us any answers.. He can place a new defective BIOS on this forum without mentioning its defective, and if we have questions we don't get any answers or very short that isn't really helping at all and he is saying that he is not here in an professional matter whatsoever and he can't say anything.. I mean, in what reality can you release an BIOS as an Assus employee but when we have questions you simply ignore the majority and if things get too difficult simply say that you are not posting this as an Assus rep and later discover that the 1001 BIOS is also being pulled from the Assus website for no apparent reason at all and not telling us anything why or what.. Not even on the ROG forums: https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?105772-ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-C7H-BIOS-1001-removed

This is NOT how we should be treated when we buy top notch products imo.. I don't like these types of games at all, not one bit..


----------



## Johan45

hurricane28 said:


> You can wait a long time man, Elmor is never going to give us any answers.. He can place a new defective BIOS on this forum without mentioning its defective, and if we have questions we don't get any answers or very short that isn't really helping at all and he is saying that he is not here in an professional matter whatsoever and he can't say anything.. I mean, in what reality can you release an BIOS as an Assus employee but when we have questions you simply ignore the majority and if things get too difficult simply say that you are not posting this as an Assus rep and later discover that the 1001 BIOS is also being pulled from the Assus website for no apparent reason at all and not telling us anything why or what.. Not even on the ROG forums: https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?105772-ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-C7H-BIOS-1001-removed
> 
> This is NOT how we should be treated when we buy top notch products imo.. I don't like these types of games at all, not one bit..


Honestly, I don't know why elmor wastes his time with this thread. Any input at all from him should be appreciated. Instead when things aren't exactly the way you want it you come in here and ***** and moan demanding that something is done. 
FFS, seriously this is how he gets treated. It's not like he runs ASUS you know. He can only give input to the teams responsible for various aspects of the HW. You tested the BIOS and found there were some issues. He reports back to the team. They think they fix it release it on their site and it's still not good. OK, they take it down. What more do you want? 
Maybe go and join another forum without this dedicated support from someone who has much more knowledge than most who are posting here. You guys have been given a hotline to the manufacturer and all you use it for is complaining and threatening to never buy their products again. 
If it were me in his shoes I'd just ditch the lot of you and go about my day. But he keeps coming back no matter how hard you ride him.
This thread is sounding just like the CHVI thread, there's a reason that you only see new posters or the same few. People get tired of reading through the kleenexes to get to some real and helpful content. The thread just deteriorates into a *****fest and no one enjoys it anymore.
I use a ton of HW from multiple manufacturers if you think this is only ASUS then get your head out of the sand and open your eyes.


----------



## crakej

Johan45 said:


> Honestly, I don't know why elmor wastes his time with this thread. Any input at all from him should be appreciated. Instead when things aren't exactly the way you want it you come in here and ***** and moan demanding that something is done.
> FFS, seriously this is how he gets treated. It's not like he runs ASUS you know. He can only give input to the teams responsible for various aspects of the HW. You tested the BIOS and found there were some issues. He reports back to the team. They think they fix it release it on their site and it's still not good. OK, they take it down. What more do you want?
> Maybe go and join another forum without this dedicated support from someone who has much more knowledge than most who are posting here. You guys have been given a hotline to the manufacturer and all you use it for is complaining and threatening to never buy their products again.
> If it were me in his shoes I'd just ditch the lot of you and go about my day. But he keeps coming back no matter how hard you ride him.
> This thread is sounding just like the CHVI thread, there's a reason that you only see new posters or the same few. People get tired of reading through the kleenexes to get to some real and helpful content. The thread just deteriorates into a *****fest and no one enjoys it anymore.
> I use a ton of HW from multiple manufacturers if you think this is only ASUS then get your head out of the sand and open your eyes.


Agree. Elmor is not the problem, he is the one and *only* connection we have. I'd like some answers, yes, but with respect - *as we have discussed before* - we are lucky to have this connection. Personally, I'm more than happy to wait for Elmor to reply - he doesn't even have to, but he does.

Rather less dramatically, I would like to know if bios I'm running is ok - they don't often withdraw them like that. As I mentioned earlier, my machine runs at almost 100% all the time - as an enthusiast I'm actually quite happy. 

I think withdrawing the bios just means they will release a better bios!

We are *very lucky* to have *beta* bios released here,please let's not ruin that for everyone.

I'd be interest to know if anyone here knows (for a fact!) why the cpu needs more juice on this board? I have to use more juice than I did on the X370 Pro, but I *don't* understand why people here say this board is better/worse etc etc - my finding is that this board can do exactly same and *better* OC than X370, just with that extra bit of juice - with the added excellent ram speeds I've been able to get reliable 3533/3600 I could never get before with exact same ram and cpu. 

My frustrations lie with those who are impatient, and make totally unfounded statements and demands. It achieves nothing.

I know I bought the right motherboard this time, even if I would like to see development moving ahead a bit quicker - it's still the best board.


----------



## crakej

*ROG Forum Problems*

When I had problems with ROG forums, this moderator sorted it quite quickly for me.... just drop him a msg on ROG forum.

[email protected]


----------



## hurricane28

Johan45 said:


> Honestly, I don't know why elmor wastes his time with this thread. Any input at all from him should be appreciated. Instead when things aren't exactly the way you want it you come in here and ***** and moan demanding that something is done.
> FFS, seriously this is how he gets treated. It's not like he runs ASUS you know. He can only give input to the teams responsible for various aspects of the HW. You tested the BIOS and found there were some issues. He reports back to the team. They think they fix it release it on their site and it's still not good. OK, they take it down. What more do you want?
> Maybe go and join another forum without this dedicated support from someone who has much more knowledge than most who are posting here. You guys have been given a hotline to the manufacturer and all you use it for is complaining and threatening to never buy their products again.
> If it were me in his shoes I'd just ditch the lot of you and go about my day. But he keeps coming back no matter how hard you ride him.
> This thread is sounding just like the CHVI thread, there's a reason that you only see new posters or the same few. People get tired of reading through the kleenexes to get to some real and helpful content. The thread just deteriorates into a *****fest and no one enjoys it anymore.
> I use a ton of HW from multiple manufacturers if you think this is only ASUS then get your head out of the sand and open your eyes.


Wauw, you don't get it do you.. plz re-read what i said and comment again. 

I don't know why you are defending Asus that much, do you have stock in them or something? I really don't care about other manufacturers as they have nothing to do with the problem at hand.. And yes i know its not only Asus. I simply don't like it when they play games like this, end of story. I really don't understand why you are so comfortable with this and its hard to understand what i said here. 

But i will humor you this time. 

I do like it when Elmor puts BIOS on this forum for us to test, never said anything different. What i don't like is when he puts an BIOS here without telling us what the problems might be if we flash it. I had have a hard time to get my audio back and my GPU drivers were also crashing.. If he knew this it would be nice of him to tell us so we could make the decision if we are going to flash it or not to take the risk. He mentioned before what the BIOS fixes or not and if its beta or close to finish BIOS. 

But the thing that angers me so is that Asus can do so much better and if their communication is just as good as their hardware they're golden. 

"They think they fix it release it on their site and it's still not good. OK, they take it down. What more do you want?" If its Gigabyte or MSI i could understand but this is Asus ROG man, top notch and "the best" according to ROG rep.. Yes the hardware is top notch and yes i really really like their board but their software..? Seriously, i never had so much problems with BIOS and or software than with ROG.. and if you look at the ROG forums more people experience the same as me. "the best" is an bold statement but can be justified with good service and support which we don't get.. even on ROG forum people get no answer as to why this 1001 BIOS is being pulled.. 

I am sorry if it offends you but i am simply not okay with mediocre communication when you buy "the best" motherboard, end of story.


----------



## hurricane28

crakej said:


> When had problems with ROG forums, this moderator sorted it quite quickly for me.... just drop him a msg on ROG forum.
> 
> [email protected]


Yes you are right, i dropped him am email and he solved it. I still find it weird that i have to ask an moderator in order to change my nickname, never seen this before on any forum. O well, its solved now. 

Thnx for the tip btw.


----------



## Johan45

hurricane28 said:


> Wauw, you don't get it do you.. plz re-read what i said and comment again.
> 
> I don't know why you are defending Asus that much, do you have stock in them or something? I really don't care about other manufacturers as they have nothing to do with the problem at hand.. And yes i know its not only Asus. I simply don't like it when they play games like this, end of story. I really don't understand why you are so comfortable with this and its hard to understand what i said here.
> 
> But i will humor you this time.
> 
> I do like it when Elmor puts BIOS on this forum for us to test, never said anything different. What i don't like is when he puts an BIOS here without telling us what the problems might be if we flash it. I had have a hard time to get my audio back and my GPU drivers were also crashing.. If he knew this it would be nice of him to tell us so we could make the decision if we are going to flash it or not to take the risk. He mentioned before what the BIOS fixes or not and if its beta or close to finish BIOS.
> 
> But the thing that angers me so is that Asus can do so much better and if their communication is just as good as their hardware they're golden.
> 
> "They think they fix it release it on their site and it's still not good. OK, they take it down. What more do you want?" If its Gigabyte or MSI i could understand but this is Asus ROG man, top notch and "the best" according to ROG rep.. Yes the hardware is top notch and yes i really really like their board but their software..? Seriously, i never had so much problems with BIOS and or software than with ROG.. and if you look at the ROG forums more people experience the same as me. "the best" is an bold statement but can be justified with good service and support which we don't get.. even on ROG forum people get no answer as to why this 1001 BIOS is being pulled..
> 
> I am sorry if it offends you but i am simply not okay with mediocre communication when you buy "the best" motherboard, end of story.


My point was, you flashed a beta BIOS, BETA being the key word. You tell me how anyone is going to know what issues may arise from a BIOS without testing it. Which is what YOU were doing. All the issues that arose afterward are YOUR FAULT! You flashed a test BIOS assuming the risk of doing so. You wanted to be a beta tester otherwise you wouldn't be flashing every BIOS version that gets posted here. Thia isn't elmors fault or ASUS fault that your sound doesn't work it's yours. 
Does someone need to put a special label on a BIOS that appears in a thread on a forum telling you it's a test/beta BIOS? Really, that's what you're upset about? Get real man. This whole thread is a test bed, what do you expect? 
You won't find these kinds of issues on other sites since they don't have their own personal liaison feeding them test BIOS fresh out of the lab.
By downloading and installing it you agreed to be a test subject like it or not. 
That's why I don't have these problems, I don't contribute to the data pool.


----------



## crakej

hurricane28 said:


> Wauw, you don't get it do you.. plz re-read what i said and comment again.
> 
> I don't know why you are defending Asus that much, do you have stock in them or something? I really don't care about other manufacturers as they have nothing to do with the problem at hand.. And yes i know its not only Asus. I simply don't like it when they play games like this, end of story. I really don't understand why you are so comfortable with this and its hard to understand what i said here.
> 
> But i will humor you this time.
> 
> I do like it when Elmor puts BIOS on this forum for us to test, never said anything different. What i don't like is when he puts an BIOS here without telling us what the problems might be if we flash it. I had have a hard time to get my audio back and my GPU drivers were also crashing.. If he knew this it would be nice of him to tell us so we could make the decision if we are going to flash it or not to take the risk. He mentioned before what the BIOS fixes or not and if its beta or close to finish BIOS.
> 
> But the thing that angers me so is that Asus can do so much better and if their communication is just as good as their hardware they're golden.
> 
> "They think they fix it release it on their site and it's still not good. OK, they take it down. What more do you want?" If its Gigabyte or MSI i could understand but this is Asus ROG man, top notch and "the best" according to ROG rep.. Yes the hardware is top notch and yes i really really like their board but their software..? Seriously, i never had so much problems with BIOS and or software than with ROG.. and if you look at the ROG forums more people experience the same as me. "the best" is an bold statement but can be justified with good service and support which we don't get.. even on ROG forum people get no answer as to why this 1001 BIOS is being pulled..
> 
> I am sorry if it offends you but i am simply not okay with mediocre communication when you buy "the best" motherboard, end of story.


Wow - see! - you can write much more effectively than your earlier rants! It makes a *huge* difference man! - I even read to the end (joking!) - but really, you made some good points, nothing fictional, and polite! It makes huge difference

For me, this is the best board I've ever bought - and I've had them all. There is always room for improvement, but I'd rather stick with my ASUS


----------



## majestynl

Wowww people Come on ! Nobody is pushing to test a Beta Bios! And if you say this board is worst then x board or a X brand cant have issues because of bla bla bla, Then sorry but i must commit you really have no experience!
Their are a lot of people who are more then happy to play with Beta bios versions so don't ruin this thread pls.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Wauw, you don't get it do you.. plz re-read what i said and comment again.
> 
> I don't know why you are defending Asus that much, do you have stock in them or something? I really don't care about other manufacturers as they have nothing to do with the problem at hand.. And yes i know its not only Asus. I simply don't like it when they play games like this, end of story. I really don't understand why you are so comfortable with this and its hard to understand what i said here.
> 
> But i will humor you this time.
> 
> I do like it when Elmor puts BIOS on this forum for us to test, never said anything different. What i don't like is when he puts an BIOS here without telling us what the problems might be if we flash it. I had have a hard time to get my audio back and my GPU drivers were also crashing.. If he knew this it would be nice of him to tell us so we could make the decision if we are going to flash it or not to take the risk. He mentioned before what the BIOS fixes or not and if its beta or close to finish BIOS.
> 
> But the thing that angers me so is that Asus can do so much better and if their communication is just as good as their hardware they're golden.
> 
> "They think they fix it release it on their site and it's still not good. OK, they take it down. What more do you want?" If its Gigabyte or MSI i could understand but this is Asus ROG man, top notch and "the best" according to ROG rep.. Yes the hardware is top notch and yes i really really like their board but their software..? Seriously, i never had so much problems with BIOS and or software than with ROG.. and if you look at the ROG forums more people experience the same as me. "the best" is an bold statement but can be justified with good service and support which we don't get.. even on ROG forum people get no answer as to why this 1001 BIOS is being pulled..
> 
> I am sorry if it offends you but i am simply not okay with mediocre communication when you buy "the best" motherboard, end of story.



Well I am hoping it's an instance of the BIOS being just flawed enough that it warranted being pulled, but so minor it isn't immediately necessary to address the community directly over why it was pulled. However, if there is a risk to damaging hardware or destroying data I hope they at least instruct us to flash a different BIOS. I am using 1101 and wonder if it shares the same problem 1001 was pulled for. 

And ASUS support has been very attentive when dealing with my issue. My only complaint was their recommendation to use LN2 to overclock as if it were easy to do. It was an out-of-touch recommendation -- in my opinion. Other than that ASUS has been great.


----------



## CJMitsuki

poliacido said:


> yes, that's why tomorrow i will give it a try with [email protected] it's late here and i am almost sleeping now to try


You are more than likely right about your cpu man, dont waste time trying anything else. You just had some bad lotto luck.




hurricane28 said:


> You can wait a long time man, Elmor is never going to give us any answers.. He can place a new defective BIOS on this forum without mentioning its defective, and if we have questions we don't get any answers or very short that isn't really helping at all and he is saying that he is not here in an professional matter whatsoever and he can't say anything.. I mean, in what reality can you release an BIOS as an Assus employee but when we have questions you simply ignore the majority and if things get too difficult simply say that you are not posting this as an Assus rep and later discover that the 1001 BIOS is also being pulled from the Assus website for no apparent reason at all and not telling us anything why or what.. Not even on the ROG forums: https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?105772-ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-C7H-BIOS-1001-removed
> 
> This is NOT how we should be treated when we buy top notch products imo.. I don't like these types of games at all, not one bit..





Johan45 said:


> Honestly, I don't know why elmor wastes his time with this thread. Any input at all from him should be appreciated. Instead when things aren't exactly the way you want it you come in here and ***** and moan demanding that something is done.
> FFS, seriously this is how he gets treated. It's not like he runs ASUS you know. He can only give input to the teams responsible for various aspects of the HW. You tested the BIOS and found there were some issues. He reports back to the team. They think they fix it release it on their site and it's still not good. OK, they take it down. What more do you want?
> Maybe go and join another forum without this dedicated support from someone who has much more knowledge than most who are posting here. You guys have been given a hotline to the manufacturer and all you use it for is complaining and threatening to never buy their products again.
> If it were me in his shoes I'd just ditch the lot of you and go about my day. But he keeps coming back no matter how hard you ride him.
> This thread is sounding just like the CHVI thread, there's a reason that you only see new posters or the same few. People get tired of reading through the kleenexes to get to some real and helpful content. The thread just deteriorates into a *****fest and no one enjoys it anymore.
> I use a ton of HW from multiple manufacturers if you think this is only ASUS then get your head out of the sand and open your eyes.





Johan45 said:


> My point was, you flashed a beta BIOS, BETA being the key word. You tell me how anyone is going to know what issues may arise from a BIOS without testing it. Which is what YOU were doing. All the issues that arose afterward are YOUR FAULT! You flashed a test BIOS assuming the risk of doing so. You wanted to be a beta tester otherwise you wouldn't be flashing every BIOS version that gets posted here. Thia isn't elmors fault or ASUS fault that your sound doesn't work it's yours.
> Does someone need to put a special label on a BIOS that appears in a thread on a forum telling you it's a test/beta BIOS? Really, that's what you're upset about? Get real man. This whole thread is a test bed, what do you expect?
> You won't find these kinds of issues on other sites since they don't have their own personal liaison feeding them test BIOS fresh out of the lab.
> By downloading and installing it you agreed to be a test subject like it or not.
> That's why I don't have these problems, I don't contribute to the data pool.





crakej said:


> Wow - see! - you can write much more effectively than your earlier rants! It makes a *huge* difference man! - I even read to the end (joking!) - but really, you made some good points, nothing fictional, and polite! It makes huge difference
> 
> For me, this is the best board I've ever bought - and I've had them all. There is always room for improvement, but I'd rather stick with my ASUS





majestynl said:


> Wowww people Come on ! Nobody is pushing to test a Beta Bios! And if you say this board is worst then x board or a X brand cant have issues because of bla bla bla, Then sorry but i must commit you really have no experience!
> Their are a lot of people who are more then happy to play with Beta bios versions so don't ruin this thread pls.



Ive already been through this with this guy and he doesnt get it. He thinks that a bios that is put on a forum should have some sort of warranty with it and he was literally the only person to not understand it was a test bios. Dont even respond to his posts anymore as 95% are negative and are only going to result in no posts from Elmor anymore. Just ignore his bs. We all knew that a bios on a forum thread wasnt official and him not knowing that is his fault for not exercising common sense.


----------



## Synoxia

Is performance enhancer level 3 suitable for 24/7 as long temperatures are in check (below 65c) ? I'm looking for the best single core speed. cooler is Noctua d15 case airflow is good, cpu is 2700x


----------



## JayC72

Johan45 said:


> My point was, you flashed a beta BIOS, BETA being the key word.


Don't forget this so called beta bios was released on the Asus download page, not tagged as "Beta".
So it's considered final. Just saying.

This last 1101 bios behaves more like an alpha version rather than beta. Beta would assume some internal testing had been done.
But clearly they are releasing an alpha version that had not been tested properly in house, and relied on their end users to test it, before releasing it to the public on their official website.

It ceased being a test bios as soon as it was uploaded to the Official download page. And yes, it has been pulled down for some reason. A reason that is still not released here to all their test mules.

Don't want to get in an argument, but bothsides have a point, if you stopped to listen to them.

I'm very grateful that we get the occasional post from Elmor, and the advanced preview of bios. But with the string of poorly coded bioses lately ... no thanks. I don't have a dedicated test system to try buggy bioses on. I only have this one system that is actually needed to be used daily.
And where is the return gratefulness from Asus for testing their bioses for them? F them. Stop testing their beta/alpha bioses for them and force them to do some internal testing of their own. Release decent bioses first, then I'll try them on my live system.


----------



## nick name

JayC72 said:


> Don't forget this so called beta bios was released on the Asus download page, not tagged as "Beta".
> So it's considered final. Just saying.
> 
> This last 1101 bios behaves more like an alpha version rather than beta. Beta would assume some internal testing had been done.
> But clearly they are releasing an alpha version that had not been tested properly in house, and relied on their end users to test it, before releasing it to the public on their official website.
> -snip-


Couple of points:

- Did you compare the BIOS 1001 posted here to the one posted on the ASUS site? If you haven't then don't assume they were exactly the same.

- And you can't claim they hadn't tested anything properly. You are making assumptions again and that is bordering on libelous. 

I don't disagree with anyone feeling they should be told why 1001 was pulled from the ASUS site, but all this other speculation is getting old and only serves to muddy the waters and bury posts from people with actual questions or information to share.


----------



## nick name

Synoxia said:


> Is performance enhancer level 3 suitable for 24/7 as long temperatures are in check (below 65c) ? I'm looking for the best single core speed. cooler is Noctua d15 case airflow is good, cpu is 2700x


I have been using it 24/7, but you have to remember it ignores the fit parameters. Soooo technically it's a form of overclock and if you aren't seeing alarming voltages or temperatures then I wouldn't worry too much.


----------



## JayC72

nick name said:


> Couple of points:
> 
> - Did you compare the BIOS 1001 posted here to the one posted on the ASUS site? If you haven't then don't assume they were exactly the same.


Umm ... have you tested it?

I have both right here, if you would like to convince yourself.
It's exactly the SAME. Right down to the byte count. 

I also have both 1101 bioses. The one that Elmor linked to at the mediafire download site, and the version that was on the official downloads. 

It doesn't even matter if they are NOT the exact same file. The bugs are the same, and they were reported on their very own forums. The bugs reported on the official forums are the same as the bugs reported here for 1101.

Do you honestly think Asus have been testing their bios releases "Properly" ? 
I don't need to assume anything. They have proven themselves by their very own actions of retracting, not one, but two, bios versions that were on their official download page ... with not explanations so far. 

Anyway, like I said. Both sides of the argument have valid points - if you stop to listen to it.
But some choose to put their blinkers on and only see one side.

Don't be fooled into thinking they are doing you a favour by releasing bioses early for you to play with.
You are being used. Some go into it knowingly. Me? I'm going to stop testing their bioses for them from now, and wait till they are good and ready ... after you have testing them.

If you didn't get them here, you can still get the bioses from the official site, so it's not like it's that special. Except, the files from the official site have already been trialled on you for issues. That's how I would release new software/firmware - Trial it on a small subset of the community before releasing it on mass.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Couple of points:
> 
> - Did you compare the BIOS 1001 posted here to the one posted on the ASUS site? If you haven't then don't assume they were exactly the same.
> 
> - And you can't claim they hadn't tested anything properly. You are making assumptions again and that is bordering on libelous.
> 
> I don't disagree with anyone feeling they should be told why 1001 was pulled from the ASUS site, but all this other speculation is getting old and only serves to muddy the waters and bury posts from people with actual questions or information to share.


Can I just squash what has become a bit of an urban myth about beta and version numbers....

Ver 1001 posted here is identical to ver 1001 posted anywhere else, otherwise how would we know what version it was???

Version numbers do NOT get changed! Ever.


----------



## JayC72

crakej said:


> Ver 1001 posted here is identical to ver 1001 posted anywhere else, otherwise how would we know what version it was???
> 
> Version numbers do NOT get changed! Ever.


Exactly. 
Spot on.


----------



## Johan45

JayC72 said:


> Do you honestly think Asus have been testing their bios releases "Properly" ?
> I don't need to assume anything. They have proven themselves by their very own actions of retracting, not one, but two, bios versions that were on their official download page ... with not explanations so far.


Looking from my perspective, testing is usually done on a clean system with new OS and minimal drivers. I can see how they missed subsystem ID's being changed since they installed Windows after the BIOS update so it didn't matter.



JayC72 said:


> Anyway, like I said. Both sides of the argument have valid points - if you stop to listen to it.
> But some choose to put their blinkers on and only see one side.


And NO, hurricane had no reason going off like a fountain, again. He took that BIOS from here knowing full well these are test BIOS. Being released on ASUS site afterward is totally irrelevant.


----------



## hurricane28

Johan45 said:


> Looking from my perspective, testing is usually done on a clean system with new OS and minimal drivers. I can see how they missed subsystem ID's being changed since they installed Windows after the BIOS update so it didn't matter.
> 
> 
> 
> And NO, hurricane had no reason going off like a fountain, again. He took that BIOS from here knowing full well these are test BIOS. Being released on ASUS site afterward is totally irrelevant.


You stil don't get it do you.. O well, i guess there is no point in discussing something with people who are so self-righteous and because of it don't see the fully picture but only want to argue and blame someone because they don't understand the true problem at hand which is also easier. 

If you are saying that i am right till a certain extend but i needed to say it in a different manner, than yes, you are right and perhaps i should have done it a different way but still, repeating yourself like: "He took that BIOS from here knowing full well these are test BIOS" doesn't make you right.


----------



## hurricane28

JayC72 said:


> Umm ... have you tested it?
> 
> I have both right here, if you would like to convince yourself.
> It's exactly the SAME. Right down to the byte count.
> 
> I also have both 1101 bioses. The one that Elmor linked to at the mediafire download site, and the version that was on the official downloads.
> 
> It doesn't even matter if they are NOT the exact same file. The bugs are the same, and they were reported on their very own forums. The bugs reported on the official forums are the same as the bugs reported here for 1101.
> 
> Do you honestly think Asus have been testing their bios releases "Properly" ?
> I don't need to assume anything. They have proven themselves by their very own actions of retracting, not one, but two, bios versions that were on their official download page ... with not explanations so far.
> 
> Anyway, like I said. Both sides of the argument have valid points - if you stop to listen to it.
> But some choose to put their blinkers on and only see one side.
> 
> Don't be fooled into thinking they are doing you a favour by releasing bioses early for you to play with.
> You are being used. Some go into it knowingly. Me? I'm going to stop testing their bioses for them from now, and wait till they are good and ready ... after you have testing them.
> 
> If you didn't get them here, you can still get the bioses from the official site, so it's not like it's that special. Except, the files from the official site have already been trialled on you for issues. That's how I would release new software/firmware - Trial it on a small subset of the community before releasing it on mass.


Fully agreed man, the thing is that i sometimes type or say what's exactly in my head and sometimes its not the best way but most people that know me i mean well.


----------



## Johan45

Pretty sure you're the one not getting it! It's your constant whining that people are tired of. Luckily for you elmor based his board disbursement on quantity not the quality of posts. Looking through your posting history, man, so much negativity and entitlement. These are just some of your complaints since flashing the BETA BIOS but I'll start off with my favourite quote where it all began and you've been going on about it for two weeks. 



hurricane28 said:


> Well i flashed this BIOS today and i must say that i am impressed so far by its stability to be honest. I never felt this stable before on the same settings as on the previous BIOS.
> 
> I do want to point out some quirks though.
> 
> 1: Audio doesn't work after first reboot.
> 
> 2: GPU drivers are not loading properly which results in weird flickering and low res.
> 
> 3: Realtek audio manager is uninstalled? After i flashed 1101 BIOS i no longer see realtek audio manager and i can't seem to install it back again.. Odd that an BIOS can do this, never seen before.
> 
> 4: LLC settings changed? I needed level 4 on the previous BIOS but now i tried level 3 and i am perfectly stable and it feels a tad snappier as well.
> 
> Seen some other stuff too, post more later.


https://www.overclock.net/forum/27684338-post3937.html
https://www.overclock.net/forum/27675134-post3836.html
https://www.overclock.net/forum/27672310-post3787.html
https://www.overclock.net/forum/27668244-post3735.html
https://www.overclock.net/forum/27666488-post3709.html
https://www.overclock.net/forum/27666330-post3699.html
https://www.overclock.net/forum/27666296-post3694.html
https://www.overclock.net/forum/27666094-post3681.html


----------



## mtrai

@Johan45 @hurricane28

Just WOW y'all. Chill out. 

If you have issues with using any beta bios whether posted here or on the official website due to issues you have THEN JUST DO NOT USE THEM. It is just that simple.


There is no need to have this back and forth argument in this thread or any other thread take it private conversations.

I get it some people have issues and others do not.

Personally I have not had issues unless unless I have modified my on bios and do some mod I should I do not. That rest solely on me no one else for my own mods. I have both the C6H wifi and the C7H wifi boards. 

Anyhow this thread is for help not bickering or arguing so LET IT DROP.


----------



## poliacido

a noob question: is there a way i can save my saved profiles so when i update the bios i don't have to set everything again? because when i updated to 1001 everything got wiped and if i remember correct in my old asrock p67 it was keeping the profiles when i updated the bios... i know it's a different brand from an old era.... XD


----------



## Johan45

You can export your settings but you won't be able to use them on a new/different BIOS. Just write things down, new BIOS quite often need some tweaking anyway.


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> a noob question: is there a way i can save my saved profiles so when i update the bios i don't have to set everything again? because when i updated to 1001 everything got wiped and if i remember correct in my old asrock p67 it was keeping the profiles when i updated the bios... i know it's a different brand from an old era.... XD


You can use a USB thumb drive, that is formatted with FAT32, to save profiles to.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Can I just squash what has become a bit of an urban myth about beta and version numbers....
> 
> Ver 1001 posted here is identical to ver 1001 posted anywhere else, otherwise how would we know what version it was???
> 
> Version numbers do NOT get changed! Ever.


I wasn't going to assume. Of course that makes sense; but, again, I wasn't going to assume.


----------



## crakej

Phew - had an appointment today - thought they were going to admit me to hospital.......which they are, but in a few week (eek, more surgery  )

I love playing with betas - sure would love one for the weekend now I have lots of time


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Phew - had an appointment today - thought they were going to admit me to hospital.......which they are, but in a few week (eek, more surgery  )
> 
> I love playing with betas - sure would love one for the weekend now I have lots of time


I hope all goes well.

And I enjoy messing with betas. I'm on my PC constantly and love putting it through its paces. Something to try -- something to test. Always re-evaluating.


----------



## hurricane28

crakej said:


> Phew - had an appointment today - thought they were going to admit me to hospital.......which they are, but in a few week (eek, more surgery  )
> 
> I love playing with betas - sure would love one for the weekend now I have lots of time


Nothing seriously i hope? 

Well, you can flash the 1101 BIOS, that will keep you busy lmao.


----------



## hurricane28

Johan45 said:


> Pretty sure you're the one not getting it! It's your constant whining that people are tired of. Luckily for you elmor based his board disbursement on quantity not the quality of posts. Looking through your posting history, man, so much negativity and entitlement. These are just some of your complaints since flashing the BETA BIOS but I'll start off with my favourite quote where it all began and you've been going on about it for two weeks.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27684338-post3937.html
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27675134-post3836.html
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27672310-post3787.html
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27668244-post3735.html
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27666488-post3709.html
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27666330-post3699.html
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27666296-post3694.html
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27666094-post3681.html


Who are you telling me i have no right..? You don't even contribute to the thread, not even to the forum man, so it is YOU that has no right to speak, Sir. I even emitted it that you don't even test the "BETA" BIOS's but do want to profit from the feedback people are giving.. and yet you are sitting on your high horse selective reading and attacking me for what i have said which have nothing to do with the problems at hand.

"Luckily for you elmor based his board disbursement on quantity not the quality of posts" now you speak for him as well? I had many conversations with Elmor and The Stilt and Mumak which i never show in public and especially not to you as its done in PM, so i know a little more than you in this regard. If you think i got this C7H Wifi board based on my post count about the C6H than i don't know what to tell you man, but you are very very wrong indeed, sir. End of story.


----------



## crakej

I've got back problems - if I don't have the surgery I'll have much worse problems, so it's a no-brainer really... hopefully I'll have less pain too.

don't need to do 1101 thanks - due to feedback from others


----------



## pony-tail

I have 2 Asus C6E boards one with a 1800x running win 10 and one with a 1600x running linux mint .
I am looking at upgrading to 2nd gen Ryzen .
it looks like I have 3 choices .
1/ sit pat and wait for 7nm Ryzen .
2/ bios update and 2700x on the Crosshair vi E
3/ Crosshair vii and 2700x .

My question is , is there any advantage , in using the newer board over using the vi and is that advantage significant ?



note these are not full on gaming rigs - I have a mini itx 8700k rig for that , but I do game on the one with Win 10 .


----------



## Johan45

hurricane28 said:


> Who are you telling me i have no right..? You don't even contribute to the thread, not even to the forum man, so it is YOU that has no right to speak, Sir. I even emitted it that you don't even test the "BETA" BIOS's but do want to profit from the feedback people are giving.. and yet you are sitting on your high horse selective reading and attacking me for what i have said which have nothing to do with the problems at hand.
> 
> "Luckily for you elmor based his board disbursement on quantity not the quality of posts" now you speak for him as well? I had many conversations with Elmor and The Stilt and Mumak which i never show in public and especially not to you as its done in PM, so i know a little more than you in this regard. If you think i got this C7H Wifi board based on my post count about the C6H than i don't know what to tell you man, but you are very very wrong indeed, sir. End of story.


Ever since I saw you posting in the FX thread the majority of your posting has been same crap we see here incessant complaints about how bad ASUS is but you have still had 4 boards in a row that I know of. There's no high horse and no I don't use this thread to my advantage there hasn't been much useful info over here since shortly after the CHVI launch. I never have updated to every BIOS that hits the web. I find something that works for me an WON"t change unless I need to. 
WHat really irritates me is that you take every opportunity to complain and it's just so tiring the same broken record over and over and over just a different day. Maybe it's just me but that's the reason I stop posting here. It just gets lost in the kleenexes.

In case your memory was a bit foggy I highlighted the important pat for you.
https://www.overclock.net/forum/27154177-post35098.html



> Since the initial X470 embargo is now up, we wanted to take the chance to give a little something back to the community and say thank you for your patience and help with beta testing. I have seven Crosshair VII Hero (Wi-Fi) boards here allocated for OCN users. *Measuring contribution is difficult, but we decided on sending them to the top seven posters in this thread.* A lot of your feedback has made it through and plenty of small little tweaks are added to Crosshair VII. You'll have to wait for the reviews for full details on the changes.
> 
> I'll be contacting the users listed below over PM for shipping arrangements.
> 
> 1. @gupsterg (1483 posts)
> 2. @Timur Born (934 posts)
> 3. @bluej511 (932 posts)
> 4. @hurricane28 (924 posts)
> 5. @lordzed83 (814 posts)
> 6. @majestynl (688 posts)
> 7. @Reikoji (646 posts)


----------



## crakej

New Chipset drivers: https://www.amd.com/en/support/chipsets/amd-socket-am4/x470


----------



## Synoxia

crakej said:


> New Chipset drivers: https://www.amd.com/en/support/chipsets/amd-socket-am4/x470


What changes?


----------



## nick name

Synoxia said:


> What changes?


AMD doesn't publish release notes for their chipset drivers.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Johan45 said:


> Ever since I saw you posting in the FX thread the majority of your posting has been same crap we see here incessant complaints about how bad ASUS is but you have still had 4 boards in a row that I know of. There's no high horse and no I don't use this thread to my advantage there hasn't been much useful info over here since shortly after the CHVI launch. I never have updated to every BIOS that hits the web. I find something that works for me an WON"t change unless I need to.
> WHat really irritates me is that you take every opportunity to complain and it's just so tiring the same broken record over and over and over just a different day. Maybe it's just me but that's the reason I stop posting here. It just gets lost in the kleenexes.
> 
> In case your memory was a bit foggy I highlighted the important pat for you.
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27154177-post35098.html





:jerry: :boxing3:


----------



## Synoxia

Does Sense mi Skew need to be disabled on 2700x? Which gives correct temp, auto, enabled or disabled


----------



## Dopamin3

Still no answer on why they pulled BIOS 1001?

They even removed the download link which was https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-1001.zip


----------



## nick name

Synoxia said:


> Does Sense mi Skew need to be disabled on 2700x? Which gives correct temp, auto, enabled or disabled


I think it depends on which software you use to monitor. HWiNFO has the skewed and unskewed temps. Tctl and Tdie respectively. Ryzen Master shows the temp sans skew and other programs I can't comment on.


----------



## Ramad

Dopamin3 said:


> Still no answer on why they pulled BIOS 1001?
> 
> They even removed the download link which was https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-1001.zip


ASUS is not allowed to publicly post a link to a BIOS containing AGESA 1.0.0.6 on their website yet, because AMD did not announce it yet. ASUS may be forgiven for posting it here as alpha/beta BIOS to get better testing results. No other motherboard manufacturer has publicly announced any BIOS with AGESA 1.0.0.6, so ASUS have to pull it back from their website, not because the BIOS is bad. 

The link for the "beta" BIOS is still there if anybody wants to try it.


----------



## crakej

Ramad said:


> ASUS is not allowed to publicly post a link to a BIOS containing AGESA 1.0.0.6 on their website yet, because AMD did not announce it yet. ASUS may be forgiven for posting it here as alpha/beta BIOS to get better testing results. No other motherboard manufacturer has publicly announced any BIOS with AGESA 1.0.0.6, so ASUS have to pull it back from their website, not because the BIOS is bad.
> 
> The link for the "beta" BIOS is still there if anybody wants to try it.


Totally makes sense! Thanks for that


----------



## westk

Synoxia said:


> What changes?


Viejos










Nuevos


----------



## Deyjandi

Ramad said:


> ASUS is not allowed to publicly post a link to a BIOS containing AGESA 1.0.0.6 on their website yet, because AMD did not announce it yet. ASUS may be forgiven for posting it here as alpha/beta BIOS to get better testing results. No other motherboard manufacturer has publicly announced any BIOS with AGESA 1.0.0.6, so ASUS have to pull it back from their website, not because the BIOS is bad.
> 
> The link for the "beta" BIOS is still there if anybody wants to try it.


except that bios 1001 contains AGESA 1.0.0.2c not 1.0.0.6


----------



## liakou

Synoxia said:


> What changes?


AMD PSP Driver changes:
Revision History
-----------------
AMDPSP v4.9.0.0 -

Major changes to this driver package include:
- Fix upgrade to RS5 compatibility issues.


AMD GPIO Driver changes:
### Known Issues:

* N\A

Revision History
-----------------
2.2.0.113 09/24/2018
* Updated the wakests flag for modernstandby support.


----------



## Conenubi701

Ramad said:


> ASUS is not allowed to publicly post a link to a BIOS containing AGESA 1.0.0.6 on their website yet, because AMD did not announce it yet. ASUS may be forgiven for posting it here as alpha/beta BIOS to get better testing results. No other motherboard manufacturer has publicly announced any BIOS with AGESA 1.0.0.6, so ASUS have to pull it back from their website, not because the BIOS is bad.
> 
> The link for the "beta" BIOS is still there if anybody wants to try it.


BIOS 1001 does not contain AGESA 1.0.0.6


----------



## crakej

Deyjandi said:


> except that bios 1001 contains AGESA 1.0.0.2c not 1.0.0.6


Well spotted!


----------



## gupsterg

MacG32 said:


> I used the DRAM Calculator for Ryzen v1.4.0.1 for my current timings. I haven't had time to play around with higher settings lately. I'm just glad that the new beta BIOS allows me to use my RAM at it advertised speed. It may be a few weeks or more before I can thoroughly test out anything else.


Ahh cool. I'm just interested in seeing what others with 4x8GB Samsung B die are getting on Pinnacle Ridge + C7H.

I now have a 2nd 2700X (1825 SUS), this one is clocking better than my 1st (1805 SUS) . But reacting similar for increased RAM density usage. I think Ryzen gen 1 (Summit Ridge) handles 4 dimms better, Ryzen gen 2 needs more work to get them higher from what I have seen. As now I have tried two gen 2 samples on C6H I think this more strongly than before.



HeroofTime said:


> My main question is in regards to the Realtek RTL8822BE WiFi NIC that the C7H is equipped with. How's your guys' experience been with the WiFi on this motherboard? The MSI Gaming M7 AC comes with Intel's AC 8265 WiFi NIC, so I'm not concerned with the wireless performance of that motherboard one bit. Thanks for any insight.


Had no issues, I've used mine on W7P x64 and Linux Mint v19. 



majestynl said:


> Great  yeap same here..
> 
> NP..saw you got the link worked out!


:thumb: .

I had read that post my Elmor before and thought must link it, but forgot  , :cheers: for bringing it up .



pony-tail said:


> I have 2 Asus C6E boards one with a 1800x running win 10 and one with a 1600x running linux mint .
> I am looking at upgrading to 2nd gen Ryzen .
> it looks like I have 3 choices .
> 1/ sit pat and wait for 7nm Ryzen .
> 2/ bios update and 2700x on the Crosshair vi E
> 3/ Crosshair vii and 2700x .
> 
> My question is , is there any advantage , in using the newer board over using the vi and is that advantage significant ?
> 
> 
> 
> note these are not full on gaming rigs - I have a mini itx 8700k rig for that , but I do game on the one with Win 10 .


The C6E has enhanced VRM than C6H. Having used the C7H I prefer my C6H, biggest reason it has ASUS T-Topology. I may soon sell both C6H and C7H, then buy C6E  .

The only thing C6H/C6E I have noted does not have is:-

i) StoreMi (no biggie IMO and you can gain this via SW out there).
ii) No official support for PBO in Ryzen Master (again no biggie IMO).
iii) No Scalar override option in PBO section of AMD CBS (which would be handy but again I can live without).

I'm hoping to use C6H/E even with CPUs after 2xxx  , as think it's a stonking board to keep.



Synoxia said:


> Does Sense mi Skew need to be disabled on 2700x? Which gives correct temp, auto, enabled or disabled


I would use disabled, regardless of "X" CPU or not and gen1 or not. As then tCTL is as AMD intended it to be plus if your PLL is not default value CPU temperature will not be skewed because of that.

Sense MI Skew, skews tCTL. Super IO chip on motherboard reads tCTL and also deducts offset and Super IO chips uses this for fan control.

Sense MI Skew used to default to enabled when left on [Auto] on C6H and was later changed to disabled, now seems has been changed back again due to a recent question on the ROG forum, link. I do not have C7H setup at present, If you wish to check if [Auto] defaults to enabled adjust PLL voltage and see if CPU temperature gets skewed.


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> New Chipset drivers: https://www.amd.com/en/support/chipsets/amd-socket-am4/x470


Thanks chap!



gupsterg said:


> :thumb: .
> 
> I had read that post my Elmor before and thought must link it, but forgot  , :cheers: for bringing it up .


Cheers!


----------



## Satanello

Hi guys. I have the opportunity to sell to a friend my current 7700k and I'd like to return to a Ryzen 2700x (I already had a 1700x with Asus CH6).
Surely I'll use the same ram, but I don't know if I could have problems with the CH7: Crucial Ballistix Elite 32Gb 3466 (8gbx4) BLE4C8G4D34AEEAK (Samsung B-die).
Can I hope to be able to use them without problems?

Thank you in advance.


----------



## MNMadman

Satanello said:


> Hi guys. I have the opportunity to sell to a friend my current 7700k and I'd like to return to a Ryzen 2700x (I already had a 1700x with Asus CH6).
> Surely I'll use the same ram, but I don't know if I could have problems with the CH7: Crucial Ballistix Elite 32Gb 3466 (8gbx4) BLE4C8G4D34AEEAK (Samsung B-die).
> Can I hope to be able to use them without problems?
> 
> Thank you in advance.


Will it work? Yes.

Will it work at advertised speed? You won't know until you try it. I'd put $5 on no.


----------



## hughjazz44

MNMadman said:


> Satanello said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi guys. I have the opportunity to sell to a friend my current 7700k and I'd like to return to a Ryzen 2700x (I already had a 1700x with Asus CH6).
> Surely I'll use the same ram, but I don't know if I could have problems with the CH7: Crucial Ballistix Elite 32Gb 3466 (8gbx4) BLE4C8G4D34AEEAK (Samsung B-die).
> Can I hope to be able to use them without problems?
> 
> Thank you in advance.
> 
> 
> 
> Will it work? Yes.
> 
> Will it work at advertised speed? You won't know until you try it. I'd put $5 on no.
Click to expand...

Crucial RAM doesn't use Samsung chips. Crucial is owned by Micron, thus it uses Micron chips.


----------



## Satanello

hughjazz44 said:


> Crucial RAM doesn't use Samsung chips. Crucial is owned by Micron, thus it uses Micron chips.


In these "top" series also Crucial use Samsung ICs 

http://www.relaxedtech.com/reviews/ballistix/elite-3466mhz-32gb-memory-kit/1

"Above is a screenshot from Thaiphoon Burner showing more details and as you can see, the memory IC used here is based on the Samsung B-die."

Tnx for your suggestions. I'll probably could reach 2933/3200 maximum frequency.

Inviato dal mio MI 8 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## CJMitsuki

Satanello said:


> In these "top" series also Crucial use Samsung ICs
> 
> http://www.relaxedtech.com/reviews/ballistix/elite-3466mhz-32gb-memory-kit/1
> 
> "Above is a screenshot from Thaiphoon Burner showing more details and as you can see, the memory IC used here is based on the Samsung B-die."
> 
> Tnx for your suggestions. I'll probably could reach 2933/3200 maximum frequency.
> 
> Inviato dal mio MI 8 utilizzando Tapatalk



B Die or not that will be a lower quality version of the dies used by 3200c14 and 3600c15 kits. With 4x8gb setup, even though it is the better 32gb setup in regards to frequency overclocking I would be surprised if you got 3200 @cas14 out of that die. If your 2700x has a great IMC then you may get more but I wouldnt expect any more than 3200 and 3266-3333 would be quite nice. The ultra high quality dies as mentioned above only get around 3400-3466 @cas14 max but the max freq isnt what you really should shoot for anyway. Dropping back a couple of straps and tightening timings should produce a better result although you will more than likely have to raise voltage and possibly get a fan or a memory cooler blowing on the sticks to maintain without errors at the best timings possible. Ideal temps from what ive seen are below 35c


----------



## Satanello

CJMitsuki said:


> B Die or not that will be a lower quality version of the dies used by 3200c14 and 3600c15 kits. With 4x8gb setup, even though it is the better 32gb setup in regards to frequency overclocking I would be surprised if you got 3200 @cas14 out of that die. If your 2700x has a great IMC then you may get more but I wouldnt expect any more than 3200 and 3266-3333 would be quite nice. The ultra high quality dies as mentioned above only get around 3400-3466 @cas14 max but the max freq isnt what you really should shoot for anyway. Dropping back a couple of straps and tightening timings should produce a better result although you will more than likely have to raise voltage and possibly get a fan or a memory cooler blowing on the sticks to maintain without errors at the best timings possible. Ideal temps from what ive seen are below 35c


Should be better if i decide to switch to an x399 mainboard (Rog Strix for example) and 1900x cpu With lower ram frequency but quad channel system ? 2700x and 1900x have the same price I should just spend some extra money on the mainboard. Mumble mumble....
I should open a new thread 'cause I'm going OT. 
Thanks again for your advice.


----------



## pony-tail

gupsterg said:


> Ahh cool. I'm just interested in seeing what others with 4x8GB Samsung B die are getting on Pinnacle Ridge + C7H.
> 
> I now have a 2nd 2700X (1825 SUS), this one is clocking better than my 1st (1805 SUS) . But reacting similar for increased RAM density usage. I think Ryzen gen 1 (Summit Ridge) handles 4 dimms better, Ryzen gen 2 needs more work to get them higher from what I have seen. As now I have tried two gen 2 samples on C6H I think this more strongly than before.
> 
> 
> 
> Had no issues, I've used mine on W7P x64 and Linux Mint v19.
> 
> 
> 
> :thumb: .
> 
> I had read that post my Elmor before and thought must link it, but forgot  , :cheers: for bringing it up .
> 
> 
> 
> The C6E has enhanced VRM than C6H. Having used the C7H I prefer my C6H, biggest reason it has ASUS T-Topology. I may soon sell both C6H and C7H, then buy C6E  .
> 
> The only thing C6H/C6E I have noted does not have is:-
> 
> i) StoreMi (no biggie IMO and you can gain this via SW out there).
> ii) No official support for PBO in Ryzen Master (again no biggie IMO).
> iii) No Scalar override option in PBO section of AMD CBS (which would be handy but again I can live without).
> 
> I'm hoping to use C6H/E even with CPUs after 2xxx  , as think it's a stonking board to keep.
> 
> 
> 
> I would use disabled, regardless of "X" CPU or not and gen1 or not. As then tCTL is as AMD intended it to be plus if your PLL is not default value CPU temperature will not be skewed because of that.
> 
> Sense MI Skew, skews tCTL. Super IO chip on motherboard reads tCTL and also deducts offset and Super IO chips uses this for fan control.
> 
> Sense MI Skew used to default to enabled when left on [Auto] on C6H and was later changed to disabled, now seems has been changed back again due to a recent question on the ROG forum, link. I do not have C7H setup at present, If you wish to check if [Auto] defaults to enabled adjust PLL voltage and see if CPU temperature gets skewed.



Thanks for the reply looks like I will be keeping my C6E


----------



## hughjazz44

Satanello said:


> hughjazz44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Crucial RAM doesn't use Samsung chips. Crucial is owned by Micron, thus it uses Micron chips.
> 
> 
> 
> In these "top" series also Crucial use Samsung ICs /forum/images/smilies/wink.gif
> 
> http://www.relaxedtech.com/reviews/ballistix/elite-3466mhz-32gb-memory-kit/1
> 
> "Above is a screenshot from Thaiphoon Burner showing more details and as you can see, the memory IC used here is based on the Samsung B-die."
> 
> Tnx for your suggestions. I'll probably could reach 2933/3200 maximum frequency.
> 
> Inviato dal mio MI 8 utilizzando Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I'm not buying it. I would first assume a software reading error before I'd believe that Micron is buying their competitors DRAM and packaging it on their PCBs.

Plus, it doesn't say "Samsung" anywhere on that screen cap. It does say B-die, but again, I'd assume a reading error. Unless Micron has something called B-die.

Edit: I did a little searching, and it seems I'm wrong. For whatever reason, Micron does indeed buy from Samsung from time to time. You learn something new everyday...


----------



## CJMitsuki

hughjazz44 said:


> I'm not buying it. I would first assume a software reading error before I'd believe that Micron is buying their competitors DRAM and packaging it on their PCBs.
> 
> Plus, it doesn't say "Samsung" anywhere on that screen cap. It does say B-die, but again, I'd assume a reading error. Unless Micron has something called B-die.
> 
> Edit: I did a little searching, and it seems I'm wrong. For whatever reason, Micron does indeed buy from Samsung from time to time. You learn something new everyday...



That doesnt mean that those are using Samsung chips as there is also a B die that Micron has as well. I saw on Crucials page where they hinted that these particular sticks used Micron but ill have to look further. I also didnt see them anywhere on B-Die Finder



Edit: Found this which is from a 2x8gb set so it seems that maybe he does have Samsung B Die


----------



## CJMitsuki

Just looked at B Die finder again and it does have the Ballistix Elite with Samsung B Die, However it only shows a 2x8gb kit. Did you buy 2 kits of 2x8gb to get the 4x8gb you have? Either that or the B Die finder is just not updated to show the 4x8gb setup.


----------



## MacG32

crakej said:


> New Chipset drivers: https://www.amd.com/en/support/chipsets/amd-socket-am4/x470



Thank you very much! 



gupsterg said:


> Ahh cool. I'm just interested in seeing what others with 4x8GB Samsung B die are getting on Pinnacle Ridge + C7H.
> 
> I now have a 2nd 2700X (1825 SUS), this one is clocking better than my 1st (1805 SUS) . But reacting similar for increased RAM density usage. I think Ryzen gen 1 (Summit Ridge) handles 4 dimms better, Ryzen gen 2 needs more work to get them higher from what I have seen. As now I have tried two gen 2 samples on C6H I think this more strongly than before.



Gen 1 Ryzen handled 4 sticks much easier for me as well. I noticed that with almost everyone. This 1.0.0.6 AGESA BIOS v1101 seems to have better RAM compatibility and the IMC problems seem to be worked out. I think AMD has fixed quite a bit of RAM compatibility and stability issues. I just hope we get a very good and well tested release BIOS very soon, as I've been highly disappointed with Gen 2 Ryzen and the C7H until this latest beta BIOS.


----------



## CJMitsuki

MacG32 said:


> Thank you very much!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gen 1 Ryzen handled 4 sticks much easier for me as well. I noticed that with almost everyone. This 1.0.0.6 AGESA BIOS v1101 seems to have better RAM compatibility and the IMC problems seem to be worked out. I think AMD has fixed quite a bit of RAM compatibility and stability issues. I just hope we get a very good and well tested release BIOS very soon, as I've been highly disappointed with Gen 2 Ryzen and the C7H until this latest beta BIOS.



You may have just gotten a sub par IMC. Ive not had any issues on Ryzen+ and idk about 4 dimms but in general Ryzen+ was miles ahead of first gen in memory compatibility and overclocking capabilities.


----------



## MacG32

CJMitsuki said:


> You may have just gotten a sub par IMC. Ive not had any issues on Ryzen+ and idk about 4 dimms but in general Ryzen+ was miles ahead of first gen in memory compatibility and overclocking capabilities.



I've tested 7 different 2700Xs and only 1 was partially stable with my 4 x 8 RAM. The other 6 would not start with the default memory settings and would downclock the RAM to 2400. With 2 x 8, I was able to overclock to 3466 with ease and very tight timings. The bad thing is I require more RAM, as I run many instances of various programs and/or have multiple programs running at once.

The only thing I've seen that's different between the 2 Gens is a little boost to clock speeds. I've had both. Everything else seems identical, when based on normal day to day operations and gaming. I'm anticipating the actual 7nm process to see speeds beyond 5GHz and memory compatibility up to 5000MHz. If these numbers are actually reached, then AMD will continue in the consumer market with strides forward. If not, I will be sadly heading back to Intel.

I was impressed with Gen 1 Ryzen, but Gen 2 has left a lot to be desired. I hope things look up in the future.


----------



## MNMadman

MacG32 said:


> Gen 1 Ryzen handled 4 sticks much easier for me as well. I noticed that with almost everyone. This 1.0.0.6 AGESA BIOS v1101 seems to have better RAM compatibility and the IMC problems seem to be worked out. I think AMD has fixed quite a bit of RAM compatibility and stability issues. I just hope we get a very good and well tested release BIOS very soon, as I've been highly disappointed with Gen 2 Ryzen and the C7H until this latest beta BIOS.


Not disappointed here at all. Got better RAM overclocking with C7H-WIFI than with C6H or MSI B450 Gaming Pro Carbon AC by a long shot. Have my 2x8GB 3200C14 kit doing The Stilt's 3466 preset (but with 2T CR). Neither of the others could make even 3200 stable. Tried four sticks in the C7H-WIFI just to see what I could get but had to reduce speed below 3000 to be stable.

Neither 1101 nor 1001 BIOSes are better than 0804 for me regarding overclocking. The only reason I'm using 1001 is because some of the board's sensors are properly identified in HWiNFO whereas in 0804 they are just identified with numbers. Used 1101 for a bit but it didn't have better clocks and I didn't like that it switched the hardware subsystem IDs so I went back to 1001.


----------



## CJMitsuki

MacG32 said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> You may have just gotten a sub par IMC. Ive not had any issues on Ryzen+ and idk about 4 dimms but in general Ryzen+ was miles ahead of first gen in memory compatibility and overclocking capabilities.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've tested 7 different 2700Xs and only 1 was partially stable with my 4 x 8 RAM. The other 6 would not start with the default memory settings and would downclock the RAM to 2400. With 2 x 8, I was able to overclock to 3466 with ease and very tight timings. The bad thing is I require more RAM, as I run many instances of various programs and/or have multiple programs running at once.
> 
> The only thing I've seen that's different between the 2 Gens is a little boost to clock speeds. I've had both. Everything else seems identical, when based on normal day to day operations and gaming. I'm anticipating the actual 7nm process to see speeds beyond 5GHz and memory compatibility up to 5000MHz. If these numbers are actually reached, then AMD will continue in the consumer market with strides forward. If not, I will be sadly heading back to Intel.
> 
> I was impressed with Gen 1 Ryzen, but Gen 2 has left a lot to be desired. I hope things look up in the future.
Click to expand...

You most definitely will not see 5ghz as they have already stated that it won’t be a huge gain in clock speed so I’d say base will be 3.9-4.0 and the very top end on ambient will be around 4.7-4.8 boost. Median clocks probably around 4.4-4.5 and I’d highly doubt 5ghz memory. Realistically I’d say 3800-3866 with maximum timings and probably 4000mhz without having to bump the cas latency to 15. Maybe with bios revisions you’ll see quite a bit higher but the real performance will be from the decrease in memory latency from the smaller die. IPC gains are estimated to be 10-15% so to put that in perspective, at 4.5ghz the 2700x gets 2100 in CB15. Now assume you have the same clock speed but a 15% IPC gain then that score would possibly be around 2400 and that’s with 3466mhz memory with maxed timings. Well, if you think about 8-10ns drop in memory latency and 3800mhz freq with same clocks as I have now. Then that score could be nearing 2500. That’s saying the clocks are at 4.5ghz, what about if the higher end of the spectrum are getting 4.8ghz on ambient for golden chips? Who knows? Thing is, at 5ghz the 9900k only does around 2200 and near 6ghz is only pushing 2600. I don’t see there being a performance gap between Intel and AMD after 7nm besides possibly single core. Which it won’t take long for the vast majority of games and apps to start using all cores then single core performance won’t matter anymore. Especially with resolutions evolving at the current pace.


----------



## Satanello

CJMitsuki said:


> Just looked at B Die finder again and it does have the Ballistix Elite with Samsung B Die, However it only shows a 2x8gb kit. Did you buy 2 kits of 2x8gb to get the 4x8gb you have? Either that or the B Die finder is just not updated to show the 4x8gb setup.


The memory kit I bought is 4x8 gb quad channel and for this reason I'm also considering the possibility to switch to Tr4 socket.

Inviato dal mio MI 8 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## crakej

I'm hoping that the 7nm chips will have a new IMC!

I'm on a 1700x and I'm very happy with performance on this board, especially the extra ram speed over my old X370....


----------



## gupsterg

Satanello said:


> Should be better if i decide to switch to an x399 mainboard (Rog Strix for example) and 1900x cpu With lower ram frequency but quad channel system ? 2700x and 1900x have the same price I should just spend some extra money on the mainboard. Mumble mumble....
> I should open a new thread 'cause I'm going OT.
> Thanks again for your advice.


Threadripper has 2 IMCs to make quad channel. So basically the speeds you get on using 4 dimms is same as 2 dimms on AM4.

AM4 CPU have 1 IMC so basically you won't see the same speeds with 4 dimms and especially on gen 2 / non ASUS T-Topology board I reckon 4 dimms requires some work; that some may not wish to put in.

Personally I can see the appeal of X399 over AM4. Recently seen some nice X399 mobos for a little more than high end AM4. Again 1900X can be had for 2700X prices. As TR uses 2 dies, at stock it sorta gives boost between Ryzen gen 1/2. In that 4 threads on 2 differing dies can be well above base clock and slightly above all cores precision boost.

Then the big factor of X399 is all those PCI-E lanes which AM4 does not have.

As stated before I can really see the allure of X399  .



pony-tail said:


> Thanks for the reply looks like I will be keeping my C6E


NP  , defo keep it man!

The VRM on the C6H is way more than ample for "us" overclockers, even on 2xxx CPU. I can't see it being an issue on next gen either TBH. The C6E has same mosfets as C7H, but 2 less phases for VCORE, as they are setup for SOC on it. The C6E has way more headers, accessories in box, etc. It is the "creme de la creme" :Rkingsmil .



MacG32 said:


> Gen 1 Ryzen handled 4 sticks much easier for me as well. I noticed that with almost everyone. This 1.0.0.6 AGESA BIOS v1101 seems to have better RAM compatibility and the IMC problems seem to be worked out. I think AMD has fixed quite a bit of RAM compatibility and stability issues. I just hope we get a very good and well tested release BIOS very soon, as I've been highly disappointed with Gen 2 Ryzen and the C7H until this latest beta BIOS.
> 
> 
> 
> MacG32 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've tested 7 different 2700Xs and only 1 was partially stable with my 4 x 8 RAM. The other 6 would not start with the default memory settings and would downclock the RAM to 2400. With 2 x 8, I was able to overclock to 3466 with ease and very tight timings. The bad thing is I require more RAM, as I run many instances of various programs and/or have multiple programs running at once.
> 
> The only thing I've seen that's different between the 2 Gens is a little boost to clock speeds. I've had both. Everything else seems identical, when based on normal day to day operations and gaming. I'm anticipating the actual 7nm process to see speeds beyond 5GHz and memory compatibility up to 5000MHz. If these numbers are actually reached, then AMD will continue in the consumer market with strides forward. If not, I will be sadly heading back to Intel.
> 
> I was impressed with Gen 1 Ryzen, but Gen 2 has left a lot to be desired. I hope things look up in the future.
Click to expand...

UEFI releases can contain IMC firmware updates so could well be the later AGESA has an update. Have you compared SMU FW, etc in HWINFO summary between the two UEFIs? I can't wait to see if latest AGESA improves 4x8GB on C6H...

I found on my last 1800X, same RAM kit (F4-3200C14Q-32GVK), same C6H. I determined a profile of 3400MHz C15 1T on 2x8GB. Then plugged in another 2, had to just bump SOC 1 or 2 steps, IIRC 1 step on ProcODT and bam had 3hrs PASS in HCI/P95. Both my gen 2 CPUs are not the same experience as that.

Gen 2 has been an incremental jump in ACB clocking for me at slightly lower/similar voltage as gen 1. Stock operation is much nicer than even the 1800X, so I can see the appeal of it for non OC peeps, more "plug n play" OC with PBO. PBO just need some more tweakable parameters and it would have be it IMO. Let's hope it develops on gen 2 or gen 3 really has those extra tweaks that I'd be after.

I can't see myself going back to Intel TBH, especially looking at their pricing for 8C/16T, besides how I'm enjoying keeping initial board for 2 gens+. I reckon even if gen 3 is not way better gen 2 will last be for fare while with all the cores/whatever frequency it is giving me.

So yes I am sorta disappointed, but not as well and overall happy with Ryzen/Threadripper.


----------



## Orb

oops wrong reply


----------



## Orb

Satanello said:


> Hi guys. I have the opportunity to sell to a friend my current 7700k and I'd like to return to a Ryzen 2700x (I already had a 1700x with Asus CH6).
> Surely I'll use the same ram, but I don't know if I could have problems with the CH7: Crucial Ballistix Elite 32Gb 3466 (8gbx4) BLE4C8G4D34AEEAK (Samsung B-die).
> Can I hope to be able to use them without problems?
> 
> Thank you in advance.


I using Crucial Ballistix Elite BLE8G4D34AEEAK.K8FB on my ASUS Strix X470-F Gaming.
So these could be a slighly different version.

The 3400 mhz is my current settings with 2x8gb (which is better then the stock settings)
The 3266 mhz, was with 4x8gb (But 2 sticks later died and waiting for new ones)

They run 100% stable with the settings below
Passed Prime blendd 2h, Mem test Pro 2400%, Ram test 2400%
Ram volt : 1.365
soc volt : 1.03125 LLC2

The ramm is weird though:
- cl 16-16-16-16 crashes instantly, cl 16-17-16-16 works fine, but trCDWR has to be 17 even at 3200 mhz)
- TRDRDSCL 4 (cant do lower)
- TWRWRSCL 4 (cant do lower)
- Ram stability best at 1.365 -1.370, after that they get less stable.
- TRFC can go as low as 250ns, which is nice because stock they are at 350ns


----------



## poliacido

in theese days i played around with PBO to see if my cpu can get the same freq. (or maybe more) than P.E.3 settings and something happened i can't understand:
basically as i told before with PE3 i get 41.3x stable all cores (but can't get more), now i tried with PE disabled and only with PBO enabled... i tried different scalars from 2X to 6X with a fixed 1.4v vcore
now with PBO the cpu multiplier seems not stable at all... it ramps up at 41.3x (same as PE3) and then goes down even to 34x and all in between.. up and down up and down ... it fluctuates A LOT
this seems even more with a higher scalar and less with a lower (2-3X).... i don't think the temps are the problem since i get the same or higher temps when using PE3
this doesn't happen with PE3: it just stays at 41.3x rock solid


----------



## CJMitsuki

poliacido said:


> in theese days i played around with PBO to see if my cpu can get the same freq. (or maybe more) than P.E.3 settings and something happened i can't understand:
> basically as i told before with PE3 i get 41.3x stable all cores (but can't get more), now i tried with PE disabled and only with PBO enabled... i tried different scalars from 2X to 6X with a fixed 1.4v vcore
> now with PBO the cpu multiplier seems not stable at all... it ramps up at 41.3x (same as PE3) and then goes down even to 34x and all in between.. up and down up and down ... it fluctuates A LOT
> this seems even more with a higher scalar and less with a lower (2-3X).... i don't think the temps are the problem since i get the same or higher temps when using PE3
> this doesn't happen with PE3: it just stays at 41.3x rock solid



That could also be related to the processor power settings in Windows as you can change how the cores react to loads (how fast the reaction, how fast and how many cores are parked/unparked and at which loads they do so, etc) there are a ridiculous amount of power settings hidden in Windows for the processor and can change the behavior dramatically. Its overwhelming at first but once you take time to read and understand what the settings do then its really nice. Example screens of some of the settings are below.


----------



## pschorr1123

CJMitsuki said:


> That doesnt mean that those are using Samsung chips as there is also a B die that Micron has as well. I saw on Crucials page where they hinted that these particular sticks used Micron but ill have to look further. I also didnt see them anywhere on B-Die Finder
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: Found this which is from a 2x8gb set so it seems that maybe he does have Samsung B Die


Just wanted to add my screen shot from my 16GB kit of Red Corsair Vengeance 3000 15,17,17,17,35 kit that I paid only $94 early March 2017 before the prices doubled. I replaced them with a Samsung b-die kit and gifted those. Micron ICs are not bad. Way better than hynix IMHO.


----------



## poliacido

CJMitsuki said:


> That could also be related to the processor power settings in Windows as you can change how the cores react to loads (how fast the reaction, how fast and how many cores are parked/unparked and at which loads they do so, etc) there are a ridiculous amount of power settings hidden in Windows for the processor and can change the behavior dramatically. Its overwhelming at first but once you take time to read and understand what the settings do then its really nice. Example screens of some of the settings are below.


thanks m8
i am using the windows balanced profile because i read a post from elmor and he said to use that. Now i remember he said it was for the PE settings and not for the PBO....
what profile are you using? or you made your own custom?


----------



## CJMitsuki

poliacido said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> That could also be related to the processor power settings in Windows as you can change how the cores react to loads (how fast the reaction, how fast and how many cores are parked/unparked and at which loads they do so, etc) there are a ridiculous amount of power settings hidden in Windows for the processor and can change the behavior dramatically. Its overwhelming at first but once you take time to read and understand what the settings do then its really nice. Example screens of some of the settings are below.
> 
> 
> 
> thanks m8
> i am using the windows balanced profile because i read a post from elmor and he said to use that. Now i remember he said it was for the PE settings and not for the PBO....
> what profile are you using? or you made your own custom?
Click to expand...

I use the High Performance setting but I’ve tweaked lots of settings so I guess you can say it’s custom. Before that I used High Performance and just set the minimum processor state to 40%. It’s much better than balanced for performance.


----------



## poliacido

CJMitsuki said:


> I use the High Performance setting but I’ve tweaked lots of settings so I guess you can say it’s custom. Before that I used High Performance and just set the minimum processor state to 40%. It’s much better than balanced for performance.


good i will give it a try later..... i have just downloaded AC odyssey and i can't wait to play it now ahahaha


----------



## neikosr0x

CJMitsuki said:


> I use the High Performance setting but I’ve tweaked lots of settings so I guess you can say it’s custom. Before that I used High Performance and just set the minimum processor state to 40%. It’s much better than balanced for performance.


40% why not 20% or 5% just curious.


----------



## CJMitsuki

neikosr0x said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> I use the High Performance setting but I’ve tweaked lots of settings so I guess you can say it’s custom. Before that I used High Performance and just set the minimum processor state to 40%. It’s much better than balanced for performance.
> 
> 
> 
> 40% why not 20% or 5% just curious.
Click to expand...

Well, it’s only going to drop according to PStates and I don’t use sleep or hibernate or any of that crap so mine will only drop to around 2.1ghz so I just use 40%. If you use deeper PStates then use 5% to allow for a lower downclock but in my specific case it won’t matter if I use 5% or 40%, the result is the same.


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> in theese days i played around with PBO to see if my cpu can get the same freq. (or maybe more) than P.E.3 settings and something happened i can't understand:
> basically as i told before with PE3 i get 41.3x stable all cores (but can't get more), now i tried with PE disabled and only with PBO enabled... i tried different scalars from 2X to 6X with a fixed 1.4v vcore
> now with PBO the cpu multiplier seems not stable at all... it ramps up at 41.3x (same as PE3) and then goes down even to 34x and all in between.. up and down up and down ... it fluctuates A LOT
> this seems even more with a higher scalar and less with a lower (2-3X).... i don't think the temps are the problem since i get the same or higher temps when using PE3
> this doesn't happen with PE3: it just stays at 41.3x rock solid


PE Levels 3 and 4 remove the safety parameters so the CPU will hold its speed and not downclock as a CPU simply using regular PBO. Level 1 and 2 are regular PBO and are simply pre-selected settings. The scalar is supposed to dictate how long the CPU will attempt to hold its speed before temps or power limits bring the speed down.


----------



## gupsterg

Scalar change relaxes voltage limiting for FIT. So based on various other aspects if the SMU determines an opportunity/headroom to allow more voltage to give x clock it will.


----------



## poliacido

nick name said:


> PE Levels 3 and 4 remove the safety parameters so the CPU will hold its speed and not downclock as a CPU simply using regular PBO. Level 1 and 2 are regular PBO and are simply pre-selected settings. The scalar is supposed to dictate how long the CPU will attempt to hold its speed before temps or power limits bring the speed down.


ok so there are other settings in the bios to remove the limitations? I mean is there a way to replicate PE3-4 with manual settings?
i tried the PBO because i saw a lot of ppl telling that PBO is the most viable way to OC the 2700x to achieve the max clocks...
i wonder other people with different motherboards what can do without PE? they have to OC with PBO and it works for them


----------



## gupsterg

PE3/4 have a tweak from The Stilt, link, "We" can't apply this to our own PBO setup AFAIK, a further tid bit on PE3/4 in this post.


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> PE3/4 have a tweak from The Stilt, link, "We" can't apply this to our own PBO setup AFAIK, a further tid bit on PE3/4 in this post.


If I remember correctly there are also some hidden cpu registry (was this the right word?) ( to the cpu directly) changes as well the same as the the selecting ie cinebench / realbench / aida things.

/edit I mean it is changing things in the cpu registry that we do not know how to do. I think, if I remember correctly, the MSR and MSI part of the CPU.


----------



## The Sandman

nick name said:


> PE Levels 3 and 4 remove the safety parameters so the CPU will hold its speed and not downclock as a CPU simply using regular PBO.


Maybe I'm not understanding something, my PE3 down clocks as normal but I'm on a C6H, is there a difference in chipset?


----------



## nick name

The Sandman said:


> Maybe I'm not understanding something, my PE3 down clocks as normal but I'm on a C6H, is there a difference in chipset?


I am assuming that it behaves differently being different boards and not the chipset itself. I think the CH7 was programmed to hold the clockspeed by ignoring the fit parameters whereas on the CH6 it was not.


----------



## gupsterg

mtrai said:


> If I remember correctly there are also some hidden cpu registry (was this the right word?) ( to the cpu directly) changes as well the same as the the selecting ie cinebench / realbench / aida things.
> 
> /edit I mean it is changing things in the cpu registry that we do not know how to do. I think, if I remember correctly, the MSR and MSI part of the CPU.


I believe so.



The Sandman said:


> Maybe I'm not understanding something, my PE3 down clocks as normal but I'm on a C6H, is there a difference in chipset?


Not a very good screenie, but it does down volt on C7H as well.









A lot of the SMU monitoring get knocked out and may also be the reason the VID request is shown as fixed.

The difference in X370 and X470 is minute IMO.



> The big change in the chipset will be in the power consumption. Currently the X370 chipset, built on a 55nm manufacturing process using ASMedia IP, runs at a 6.8W TDP (running at full load). For X470, we were told that this is the same process and IP, but the chip will now run at 4.8W peak and 1.9W in an idle mode. This is due to an improved power infrastructure within the chip, and AMD also claims that overall throughput is improved. The chipset firmware is also set to provide better memory OC support and stability.
> 
> The other factor in this is StoreMI, on the next page. This new feature technically does not require chipset support, however the free installer will check for the presence of an X470 chipset before providing a free license, otherwise the software will cost $20 and not have AMD branding.


Source link.

Really can't see improved RAM OC ability for same CPU used between both boards with same RAM used. As stated here and C6H thread the older flagships are better for 4 dimms from what I have experienced.


----------



## MNMadman

The Sandman said:


> Maybe I'm not understanding something, my PE3 down clocks as normal but I'm on a C6H, is there a difference in chipset?





nick name said:


> I am assuming that it behaves differently being different boards and not the chipset itself. I think the CH7 was programmed to hold the clockspeed by ignoring the fit parameters whereas on the CH6 it was not.


I think The Sandman is misunderstanding nick name's explanation.

The CPU will down-clock at idle no matter what level of PE you use. The difference with PE3/4 is that the top boost speed does not adjust to the load -- it will hold the same boost speed whether you are stressing with Prime95 or gaming. With PE1/2, the top boost speed constantly adjusts up and down depending on the specific load each moment. That's the way my C7H-WIFI behaves anyway.


----------



## CJMitsuki

MNMadman said:


> The Sandman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe I'm not understanding something, my PE3 down clocks as normal but I'm on a C6H, is there a difference in chipset?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nick name said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am assuming that it behaves differently being different boards and not the chipset itself. I think the CH7 was programmed to hold the clockspeed by ignoring the fit parameters whereas on the CH6 it was not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think The Sandman is misunderstanding nick name's explanation.
> 
> The CPU will down-clock at idle no matter what level of PE you use. The difference with PE3/4 is that the top boost speed does not adjust to the load -- it will hold the same boost speed whether you are stressing with Prime95 or gaming. With PE1/2, the top boost speed constantly adjusts up and down depending on the specific load each moment. That's the way my C7H-WIFI behaves anyway.
Click to expand...

It’s all dependent on thermal headroom no matter the PE level and I think that’s a trait of XFR/PBO as I’m completely on default doing a lot of underclock testing and mine still holds the max clock that the headroom is allowing with load applied. It’s acting just as PE 1-4 would act but on a different scale. I’m running PE at default and running a negative offset of .05v. I’ll be posting my results in testing from default PE all the way to 4 with baseclock OC added in once I get everything done. Right now I’m IBT AVX stable with 1.24v at 4.15ghz all core and 4.35ghz on 1-6 cores. I believe I can do it on 1.2v or bump the baseclock up a hair and get 4.4ghz on 1.3v. Although it will be voltage starved and not give full performance that it could achieve but I think is able to be stable on my cpu.


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> Really can't see improved RAM OC ability for same CPU used between both boards with same RAM used. As stated here and C6H thread the older flagships are better for 4 dimms from what I have experienced.


Agree! Cant see any difference on CH7 vs CH6 @ Memory OC ability. Have used at least 4 different sets. (2x8GB all Gskill bdie)


----------



## hurricane28

Same here, there is little to no gain going from C6H to C7H overclocking wise. This is to be expected as wel already hit the limit of what these chips can do. Hopefully Ryzen2 bring higher clocks and better IMC. 

3466 MHz is borderline stable on my system when doing stability tests but in everyday tasks i get no errors or weird things happening. 4.2 GHz is about the max my chip can do, beyond that it needs an ridiculous amount of voltage in order to be stable which isn't wort it. I think they want us to stop overclocking manually same as Nvidia.


----------



## crakej

For me was totally worth upgrading my board from Prime X370 Pro to CH7 - mem OCing is way better. Same 1700X and same memory. Will keep CH7 and get Zen2 next year....


----------



## CJMitsuki

majestynl said:


> gupsterg said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really can't see improved RAM OC ability for same CPU used between both boards with same RAM used. As stated here and C6H thread the older flagships are better for 4 dimms from what I have experienced.
> 
> 
> 
> Agree! Cant see any difference on CH7 vs CH6 @ Memory OC ability. Have used at least 4 different sets. (2x8GB all Gskill bdie)
Click to expand...

Well, the CH6 and 7 are 2 of the worst for memory OC out of the high end boards. The CH7 was made mainly for LN2 overclocking and most of the time they just slap some insane timings on the sticks and hammer it with voltage and leave it at that since they aren’t running the board very long and rock solid setups aren’t their focus. The processor OC capabilities are very nice though. I love that side of it. I can deal with only getting 3466-3533 with very tight timings. No one else is really getting more than that with timings worth using those freqs anyway


----------



## Sn0ops

Hello CH7 owners. My board is running fine so far. Just one thing, im wondering.

When entering the BIOS Menue and navigating with my mouse. The mouse feeling is very very swimmy / floaty and inconsistent. (Razer Deathadder Elite / Logitech G303) - problem happens with both

Is this normal? Is it faulty? Would be happy to hear some feedback.

On my previous boards from Asrock (Intel) / MSI (Intel) I didnt had this.

BIOS 804


----------



## crakej

CJMitsuki said:


> Well, the CH6 and 7 are 2 of the worst for memory OC out of the high end boards. The CH7 was made mainly for LN2 overclocking and most of the time they just slap some insane timings on the sticks and hammer it with voltage and leave it at that since they aren’t running the board very long and rock solid setups aren’t their focus. The processor OC capabilities are very nice though. I love that side of it. I can deal with only getting 3466-3533 with very tight timings. No one else is really getting more than that with timings worth using those freqs anyway


Interesting! What kind speeds are other high end boards getting then?


----------



## CJMitsuki

crakej said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, the CH6 and 7 are 2 of the worst for memory OC out of the high end boards. The CH7 was made mainly for LN2 overclocking and most of the time they just slap some insane timings on the sticks and hammer it with voltage and leave it at that since they aren’t running the board very long and rock solid setups aren’t their focus. The processor OC capabilities are very nice though. I love that side of it. I can deal with only getting 3466-3533 with very tight timings. No one else is really getting more than that with timings worth using those freqs anyway
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting! What kind speeds are other high end boards getting then?
Click to expand...

3733-3800


----------



## gupsterg

Dunno if the boards in this review are high end, but the reviewer I regard as the best person to be make the comparisons; Roger Tolppola aka "The Stilt".

https://www.io-tech.fi/artikkelit/testissa-amd-x470-emolevyt-asus-gigabyte-msi/


----------



## Johan45

Sn0ops said:


> Hello CH7 owners. My board is running fine so far. Just one thing, im wondering.
> 
> When entering the BIOS Menue and navigating with my mouse. The mouse feeling is very very swimmy / floaty and inconsistent. (Razer Deathadder Elite / Logitech G303) - problem happens with both
> 
> Is this normal? Is it faulty? Would be happy to hear some feedback.
> 
> On my previous boards from Asrock (Intel) / MSI (Intel) I didnt had this.
> 
> BIOS 804


It's pretty normal and a bit hard to use. I still use the KB to navigate BIOS like the good ole days, I find it a lot faster for making quick changes


----------



## Syldon

majestynl said:


> Agree! Cant see any difference on CH7 vs CH6 @ Memory OC ability. Have used at least 4 different sets. (2x8GB all Gskill bdie)



I changed to the CH7 and got better results. The temps are a tad lower on the CH7, and temps help memory OC. I checked the temps of the VRMs on both boards with a lasar thermometer. I got more or less the same results, but the positioning of the VRMs is better on the CH7. This helps the CPU marginally. There really wasnt a lot in it.


Overall though I got better results from 2 sticks on the CH7 over the CH6. I couldnt get 4 sticks to run at any speed worthwhile though. The 4X8 over 2X8 is the real big difference for the CH6/CH7.


----------



## zJordan

CJMitsuki said:


> 3733-3800



God damn, my C7H is unstable with anything above 3200MHz, though I can run 3200MHz with The Stilt's safe preset (14-14-14-28) with his sub-timings.


My RAM is B-Die, and its stock configuration is 3200MHz CL14-14-14-31 1.35v, so pretty high bin compared to even other B-Die kits, and it won't do 3333MHz or anything above.


This may be because I'm stubborn, I won't drop my timings from main timings from 14, but I would expect 3333MHz CL14-14-14-34 to be stable with loosened sub-timings, nope. Even 1.45v DRAM, 1.05v SoC, 400Hz MEM VRM switching frequency, and ProcODT 53.3ohms-70ohms won't stabilise it. 



Either way, 3200MHz with tight main & sub-timings is pretty solid. It's passed 12 hours of MemTest with no errors. The odd thing is I've ALWAYS been able to boot no matter how high I go. I was booting with the 3600MHz preset, it wasn't stable but I think with enough patience I could get 3466 running eventually with decent timings.


I think I'll wait for the non-WiFi board to get AGESA 1.0.0.6 before I take another stab at getting my board stable at 3466MHz, maybe my particular IMC and kit have just hit their silicon limits, 1.0.0.6 could help!


If anyone has any tips on helping me stabilise this thing, feel free to reply I'm never finished tweaking my build. But out of everything I've thought to try, nothing has stabilised 3333, 3400 or 3466. My only theory is my core voltage is just a bit low, I use Level 2 PBO with an undervolt of -0.055v. If anybody thinks this is worth a try I may put my CPU at stock voltage with no undervolt to see if my CPU voltage is my issue with stabilising > 3200MHz.


----------



## CJMitsuki

zJordan said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> 3733-3800
> 
> 
> 
> 
> God damn, my C7H is unstable with anything above 3200MHz, though I can run 3200MHz with The Stilt's safe preset (14-14-14-28) with his sub-timings.
> 
> 
> My RAM is B-Die, and its stock configuration is 3200MHz CL14-14-14-31 1.35v, so pretty high bin compared to even other B-Die kits, and it won't do 3333MHz or anything above.
> 
> 
> This may be because I'm stubborn, I won't drop my timings from main timings from 14, but I would expect 3333MHz CL14-14-14-34 to be stable with loosened sub-timings, nope. Even 1.45v DRAM, 1.05v SoC, 400Hz MEM VRM switching frequency, and ProcODT 53.3ohms-70ohms won't stabilise it.
> 
> 
> 
> Either way, 3200MHz with tight main & sub-timings is pretty solid. It's passed 12 hours of MemTest with no errors. The odd thing is I've ALWAYS been able to boot no matter how high I go. I was booting with the 3600MHz preset, it wasn't stable but I think with enough patience I could get 3466 running eventually with decent timings.
> 
> 
> I think I'll wait for the non-WiFi board to get AGESA 1.0.0.6 before I take another stab at getting my board stable at 3466MHz, maybe my particular IMC and kit have just hit their silicon limits, 1.0.0.6 could help!
> 
> 
> If anyone has any tips on helping me stabilise this thing, feel free to reply I'm never finished tweaking my build. But out of everything I've thought to try, nothing has stabilised 3333, 3400 or 3466. My only theory is my core voltage is just a bit low, I use Level 2 PBO with an undervolt of -0.055v. If anybody thinks this is worth a try I may put my CPU at stock voltage with no undervolt to see if my CPU voltage is my issue with stabilising > 3200MHz.
Click to expand...

My initial thought when you told me which kit that is, is that your IMC is to blame. I have that same kit and I can run 3600 and probably 3666 although I’m not going to waste my time when the performance will be trash which is why I have mine at 3500c14 and it will smoke 3600 like a Cuban cigar and I’d be willing to bet that it would take on 3733 at the timings that were used. Thing is, those high frequencies weren’t achieved on BDie. It was the Hynix CJR die used in the SniperX kits, specifically the 3466c16 kit IIRC. Those are said to clock very well and those freqs were at cas14 not 16 as the kit advertises. I can imagine the sub timings were quite loose, especially tRFC. My 3500 setup screams but I have to keep it under 35c, I have another setup at 3466 that is fine at 45c with performance slightly below 3500. Anyway, I highly doubt the motherboard would be the reason you aren’t getting that kit stable above 3200. Seems more likely the IMC is a bit weak or possible a bad kit of memory rather than the motherboard.


----------



## nick name

Sn0ops said:


> Hello CH7 owners. My board is running fine so far. Just one thing, im wondering.
> 
> When entering the BIOS Menue and navigating with my mouse. The mouse feeling is very very swimmy / floaty and inconsistent. (Razer Deathadder Elite / Logitech G303) - problem happens with both
> 
> Is this normal? Is it faulty? Would be happy to hear some feedback.
> 
> On my previous boards from Asrock (Intel) / MSI (Intel) I didnt had this.
> 
> BIOS 804


If you use the USB port next to the NIC port that goes away. I use a USB hub for all my devices and plug that directly into that one port and suffer no ill effects in BIOS. Using a different USB port, however, gives me that sluggish, floaty mouse feeling.


----------



## nick name

zJordan said:


> God damn, my C7H is unstable with anything above 3200MHz, though I can run 3200MHz with The Stilt's safe preset (14-14-14-28) with his sub-timings.
> 
> 
> My RAM is B-Die, and its stock configuration is 3200MHz CL14-14-14-31 1.35v, so pretty high bin compared to even other B-Die kits, and it won't do 3333MHz or anything above.
> 
> 
> This may be because I'm stubborn, I won't drop my timings from main timings from 14, but I would expect 3333MHz CL14-14-14-34 to be stable with loosened sub-timings, nope. Even 1.45v DRAM, 1.05v SoC, 400Hz MEM VRM switching frequency, and ProcODT 53.3ohms-70ohms won't stabilise it.
> 
> 
> 
> Either way, 3200MHz with tight main & sub-timings is pretty solid. It's passed 12 hours of MemTest with no errors. The odd thing is I've ALWAYS been able to boot no matter how high I go. I was booting with the 3600MHz preset, it wasn't stable but I think with enough patience I could get 3466 running eventually with decent timings.
> 
> 
> I think I'll wait for the non-WiFi board to get AGESA 1.0.0.6 before I take another stab at getting my board stable at 3466MHz, maybe my particular IMC and kit have just hit their silicon limits, 1.0.0.6 could help!
> 
> 
> If anyone has any tips on helping me stabilise this thing, feel free to reply I'm never finished tweaking my build. But out of everything I've thought to try, nothing has stabilised 3333, 3400 or 3466. My only theory is my core voltage is just a bit low, I use Level 2 PBO with an undervolt of -0.055v. If anybody thinks this is worth a try I may put my CPU at stock voltage with no undervolt to see if my CPU voltage is my issue with stabilising > 3200MHz.



It might be your IMC. I have a 3600CL15 Samsung b-die kit and can reach stable tight timings at 3466MHz and almost as tight at 3600MHz at DRAM 1.5V. This works using AGESA 1.0.0.2c and 1.0.0.6.


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> My initial thought when you told me which kit that is, is that your IMC is to blame. I have that same kit and I can run 3600 and probably 3666 although I’m not going to waste my time when the performance will be trash which is why I have mine at 3500c14 and it will smoke 3600 like a Cuban cigar and I’d be willing to bet that it would take on 3733 at the timings that were used. Thing is, those high frequencies weren’t achieved on BDie. It was the Hynix CJR die used in the SniperX kits, specifically the 3466c16 kit IIRC. Those are said to clock very well and those freqs were at cas14 not 16 as the kit advertises. I can imagine the sub timings were quite loose, especially tRFC. My 3500 setup screams but I have to keep it under 35c, I have another setup at 3466 that is fine at 45c with performance slightly below 3500. Anyway, I highly doubt the motherboard would be the reason you aren’t getting that kit stable above 3200. Seems more likely the IMC is a bit weak or possible a bad kit of memory rather than the motherboard.


I wonder if the Corsair Dominator Platinum Special Edition 3466 kit uses that Hynix CJR also. I found someone running it at 4000MHz stock timings with his Threadripper daily. That blew me away.


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> My initial thought when you told me which kit that is, is that your IMC is to blame. I have that same kit and I can run 3600 and probably 3666 although I’m not going to waste my time when the performance will be trash which is why I have mine at 3500c14 and it will smoke 3600 like a Cuban cigar and I’d be willing to bet that it would take on 3733 at the timings that were used. Thing is, those high frequencies weren’t achieved on BDie. It was the Hynix CJR die used in the SniperX kits, specifically the 3466c16 kit IIRC. Those are said to clock very well and those freqs were at cas14 not 16 as the kit advertises. I can imagine the sub timings were quite loose, especially tRFC. My 3500 setup screams but I have to keep it under 35c, I have another setup at 3466 that is fine at 45c with performance slightly below 3500. Anyway, I highly doubt the motherboard would be the reason you aren’t getting that kit stable above 3200. Seems more likely the IMC is a bit weak or possible a bad kit of memory rather than the motherboard.
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder if the Corsair Dominator Platinum Special Edition 3466 kit uses that Hynix CJR also. I found someone running it at 4000MHz stock timings with his Threadripper daily. That blew me away.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I’d like to see those timings. Anything more than cas 15 would likely not be worth it in most scenarios.


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> Yeah, I’d like to see those timings. Anything more than cas 15 would likely not be worth it in most scenarios.


I believe they were 16-19-19 at stock. However, the fact the he can run 4000MHz daily is what dropped my jaw. I reached out to him to ask what his timings were, but he never got back to me. Sad face.


----------



## crakej

CJMitsuki said:


> 3733-3800


Nice.... depending on timings....

I can boot at 3800, but very unstable and unable to do any testing. I'm hoping new agesa will bring some extra stability to get me back to at least a stable 3600. I'm on bios 1001 and not really tried any other mem OCing - might try 3600 again.

I've been experimenting getting my cpu back up to the 4.2GHz it did on my Prime Pro and seems ok. Mem is stable at 3533CL14 but cpu will drop a couple of threads 10 mins into P95. Raising CPU voltage doesn't seem to fix it, maybe it's SoC which I have at 1.0v. RamTest runs indefinitely, even if I'm running other stuff!

Now I have my new case I'm going to do some (more) voltage measurements from my ProbeIt points comparing with AISuite, HWInfo and what I've entered in the bios. If I have time I will also compare with SiV and Aida64. I'm going to do this with everything at default and with my OC settings.


----------



## CJMitsuki

crakej said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> 3733-3800
> 
> 
> 
> Nice.... depending on timings....
> 
> I can boot at 3800, but very unstable and unable to do any testing. I'm hoping new agesa will bring some extra stability to get me back to at least a stable 3600. I'm on bios 1001 and not really tried any other mem OCing - might try 3600 again.
> 
> I've been experimenting getting my cpu back up to the 4.2GHz it did on my Prime Pro and seems ok. Mem is stable at 3533CL14 but cpu will drop a couple of threads 10 mins into P95. Raising CPU voltage doesn't seem to fix it, maybe it's SoC which I have at 1.0v. RamTest runs indefinitely, even if I'm running other stuff!
> 
> Now I have my new case I'm going to do some (more) voltage measurements from my ProbeIt points comparing with AISuite, HWInfo and what I've entered in the bios. If I have time I will also compare with SiV and Aida64. I'm going to do this with everything at default and with my OC settings.
Click to expand...

What are your timings at 3533? Do me a favor and experiment drop to whatever you have to to get these timings or really close to work and test performance against the 3533 setup. 14-14-14-22-36-4-4-16-3-8-10-0-2-2-250-auto-auto-14-7-7-3-1-7-7-1-5-5-1 if you have to loosen anything try tertiaries first. I also have DrvStr values at 24ohm procodt at 53.3ohm, RTT at disabled-disabled-60ohm, geardiwn enabled at 1T and the last valued at 0-0-0. This is with using SoC Vid of 47 with SoC put to offset on the main page and then the offset at Auto. DRAM is at 1.475v. These are just my settings, do whatever you need to get those timings or close to them but don’t change primaries or tRFC if at all possible.


----------



## crakej

CJMitsuki said:


> What are your timings at 3533? Do me a favor and experiment drop to whatever you have to to get these timings or really close to work and test performance against the 3533 setup. 14-14-14-22-36-4-4-16-3-8-10-0-2-2-250-auto-auto-14-7-7-3-1-7-7-1-5-5-1 if you have to loosen anything try tertiaries first. I also have DrvStr values at 24ohm procodt at 53.3ohm, RTT at disabled-disabled-60ohm, geardiwn enabled at 1T and the last valued at 0-0-0. This is with using SoC Vid of 47 with SoC put to offset on the main page and then the offset at Auto. DRAM is at 1.475v. These are just my settings, do whatever you need to get those timings or close to them but don’t change primaries or tRFC if at all possible.


These are current settings - Some of yours are tighter than mine, so yes, I might have to have an experiument later! What does your SoC voltage come out at doing it like that? I can certainly try tightening tRFC more.... My Dram is at 1.42v


----------



## zJordan

CJMitsuki said:


> My initial thought when you told me which kit that is, is that your IMC is to blame. I have that same kit and I can run 3600 and probably 3666 although I’m not going to waste my time when the performance will be trash which is why I have mine at 3500c14 and it will smoke 3600 like a Cuban cigar and I’d be willing to bet that it would take on 3733 at the timings that were used. Thing is, those high frequencies weren’t achieved on BDie. It was the Hynix CJR die used in the SniperX kits, specifically the 3466c16 kit IIRC. Those are said to clock very well and those freqs were at cas14 not 16 as the kit advertises. I can imagine the sub timings were quite loose, especially tRFC. My 3500 setup screams but I have to keep it under 35c, I have another setup at 3466 that is fine at 45c with performance slightly below 3500. Anyway, I highly doubt the motherboard would be the reason you aren’t getting that kit stable above 3200. Seems more likely the IMC is a bit weak or possible a bad kit of memory rather than the motherboard.



I have this kit: https://www.overclockers.co.uk/team...3200mhz-dual-channel-kit-black-my-08l-tg.html


I'm also fairly convinced my IMC is to blame, this kit did 3400 or 3466 iirc on Z170 but I was nowhere near ambitious enough with timings as I am being on Ryzen - not that it wans't capable, I just didn't try - it was mostly an experiment, no point risking stability when I can just enable XMP on Z170 as gains were minimal at best. Regardless, not even CL15-15-15 3466MHz was stable on AM4.


I'm guessing I'd begin seeing stability at CL16, but at that point you begin throwing away frequency improvements at the expense of loose timings. I'd guess 3466MHz CL16-16-16-36 is probably competitive with 3200MHz CL14-14-14-31 (XMP/DOCP, no sub-timing tweaks), and maybe my 3200 CL14-14-14-28 The Stilt's preset could be better. Who knows, just guessing.


Either way, I shouldn't be disappointed. I'm running slightly above spec and maybe when Zen 2 drops I'll get a better IMC this time around.


----------



## CJMitsuki

crakej said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> What are your timings at 3533? Do me a favor and experiment drop to whatever you have to to get these timings or really close to work and test performance against the 3533 setup. 14-14-14-22-36-4-4-16-3-8-10-0-2-2-250-auto-auto-14-7-7-3-1-7-7-1-5-5-1 if you have to loosen anything try tertiaries first. I also have DrvStr values at 24ohm procodt at 53.3ohm, RTT at disabled-disabled-60ohm, geardiwn enabled at 1T and the last valued at 0-0-0. This is with using SoC Vid of 47 with SoC put to offset on the main page and then the offset at Auto. DRAM is at 1.475v. These are just my settings, do whatever you need to get those timings or close to them but don’t change primaries or tRFC if at all possible.
> 
> 
> 
> These are current settings - Some of yours are tighter than mine, so yes, I might have to have an experiument later! What does your SoC voltage come out at doing it like that? I can certainly try tightening tRFC more.... My Dram is at 1.42v
Click to expand...

I’ve found that those timings are fairly optimal through most of the current frequency range and can usually outperform frequencies 2-3 steps higher. I was running 1.425v with timings similar to yours but I had to go to 1.475 to get this setup running. Doing SoC that way with that hex value is a hair above 1.1v I did that to compensate for voltage drop. I think it’s around 1.07 once it goes to the IMC and that’s with the system at full load. Doing SoC voltage that way was more stable for me. I thought I remember reading that it applies that value during boot up instead of after. If so then that could stop memory training for some.


----------



## crakej

CJMitsuki said:


> I’ve found that those timings are fairly optimal through most of the current frequency range and can usually outperform frequencies 2-3 steps higher. I was running 1.425v with timings similar to yours but I had to go to 1.475 to get this setup running. Doing SoC that way with that hex value is a hair above 1.1v I did that to compensate for voltage drop. I think it’s around 1.07 once it goes to the IMC and that’s with the system at full load. Doing SoC voltage that way was more stable for me. I thought I remember reading that it applies that value during boot up instead of after. If so then that could stop memory training for some.


Ah! I remember that too.... I'll give this a try and report back later.... going to try keep my primary timings if I can.... might need to go to 14 14 14 to get other timings to work....


----------



## majestynl

CJMitsuki said:


> It’s all dependent on thermal headroom no matter the PE level and I think that’s a trait of XFR/PBO as I’m completely on default doing a lot of underclock testing and mine still holds the max clock that the headroom is allowing with load applied. It’s acting just as PE 1-4 would act but on a different scale. I’m running PE at default and running a negative offset of .05v. I’ll be posting my results in testing from default PE all the way to 4 with baseclock OC added in once I get everything done. Right now I’m IBT AVX stable with 1.24v at 4.15ghz all core and 4.35ghz on 1-6 cores. I believe I can do it on 1.2v or bump the baseclock up a hair and get 4.4ghz on 1.3v. Although it will be voltage starved and not give full performance that it could achieve but I think is able to be stable on my cpu.


 @gupsterg

*Did some interesting tests today with PE Mode and startup Temps * 

The max all core boost in PE modes are all initialized at startup i think. I could manipulate some lower temp with SenseMi Skew.

Below 2 screenshots:
- One with PE3 Mode and SenseMi skew on default (disabled): Max all core boost *4098Mhz!*
- One with PE3 Mode and SenseMi enabled with 272 as value: Max all core boost *4123Mhz!*

The temp difference is ~5c on load between SenseMi disabled vs Enabled and 272 as value! 

This totally explains the behavior i saw from my first 2700x at the begin.
Probably they played a few times with stock values for skewing with the first bios version we got! 

_Tested with: Ryzen 2700x and bios version 0702. PE3 Mode with -0.05v offset. Ambient temp 20c_


----------



## nick name

My SOC phase frequency ranges from 400-600, however, the BIOS information states it is 300-500. Is this the same for everyone?


----------



## gupsterg

@majestynl

Yes tinkering with Sense MI Skew would allow improved boosting  .

I currently don't hold the view that the limit to boost is set up at POST. I believe the SMU monitoring is ongoing to trim it back or enhance it based on factors as we already know.

Use ASUS Turbo V, link. You will know what is [Auto] values for a lot of the stuff, I started setting a lot of the voltages/settings in Tweakers Paradise manually as noticed CPU Aux 3.3V if left on [Auto] goes to 3.6V when we OC vs stock being 3.3V.

I'm currently not convinced to try PBO again TBH. My new CPU holds 4.1GHz at 1.268V VID in PState 0 (last was 1.318V), as I use LLC: [Auto] it's ~1.2V effective VCORE. PBO would defo be blasting it with more juice IMO  . I currently toying with idea of getting the EK monoblock TBH, to see how this chip is under water.



Spoiler






















I initially thought this CPU would be worse than old one, based on CPO test.

Note: Date is wrong in screenies below, as The Stilt's CPO Test expires if not roll back date on rig.

2700X Batch: 1805 SUS



Spoiler






























2700X Batch: 1825 SUS



Spoiler
































nick name said:


> My SOC phase frequency ranges from 400-600, however, the BIOS information states it is 300-500. Is this the same for everyone?


Yes, I believe it is bug.



Spoiler


----------



## CJMitsuki

majestynl said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> It’s all dependent on thermal headroom no matter the PE level and I think that’s a trait of XFR/PBO as I’m completely on default doing a lot of underclock testing and mine still holds the max clock that the headroom is allowing with load applied. It’s acting just as PE 1-4 would act but on a different scale. I’m running PE at default and running a negative offset of .05v. I’ll be posting my results in testing from default PE all the way to 4 with baseclock OC added in once I get everything done. Right now I’m IBT AVX stable with 1.24v at 4.15ghz all core and 4.35ghz on 1-6 cores. I believe I can do it on 1.2v or bump the baseclock up a hair and get 4.4ghz on 1.3v. Although it will be voltage starved and not give full performance that it could achieve but I think is able to be stable on my cpu.
> 
> 
> 
> @gupsterg
> 
> *Did some interesting tests today with PE Mode and startup Temps *
> 
> The max all core boost in PE modes are all initialized at startup i think. I could manipulate some lower temp with SenseMi Skew.
> 
> Below 2 screenshots:
> - One with PE3 Mode and SenseMi skew on default (disabled): Max all core boost *4098Mhz!*
> - One with PE3 Mode and SenseMi enabled with 272 as value: Max all core boost *4123Mhz!*
> 
> The temp difference is ~5c on load between SenseMi disabled vs Enabled and 272 as value!
> 
> This totally explains the behavior i saw from my first 2700x at the begin.
> Probably they played a few times with stock values for skewing with the first bios version we got! /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif
> 
> _Tested with: Ryzen 2700x and bios version 0702. PE3 Mode with -0.05v offset. Ambient temp 20c_
Click to expand...

While you were on vacation I did a lot of testing on XFR and how the clocks were determined. I’ll have to see if Sense Mi plays a role in that as I hadn’t tested that at all. Max clocks are determined at boot up according to thermal headroom, the colder you are running the higher the boost clocks will be and the all core clocks as well. Only thing is that the max clock is limited to a 43.5x multiplier and no matter how cool you run the max clock multiplier will not go higher. The only thing that changes at that point Is how high the all core boosts will go. Once you start getting the 43.5x multiplier you’ll pretty much always get 1-6 cores boosting to 4.35ghz not counting a base clock OC which is the only way to go beyond 4.35ghz on XFR. That’s something they should change honestly, once you set PE to level 3 or 4 then the max multiplier should go higher than 43.5x according to thermal headroom of course. I don’t mind using the base clock to go higher but in gpu benchmarks you are kind of limited to 104.8 base clock max as any more will negatively affect the gpu performance. That’s essentially caps the max XFR freq at 4558mhz and hitting 4.6ghz requires PState or manual OC which in my case at 4558mhz I was running around 1.55v during heavy loads at all core boosts on XFR. Once you go to 4.6ghz on PState or Manual OC the voltages get insane as 1.65v wouldn’t even run it and it would immediately freeze with any medium load applied. I wasn’t willing to go beyond that as that voltage was hitting 60c at idle on my setup so even if it wouldn’t have froze I would have to immediately stop the bench to avoid temps quickly becoming out of control. Now, I’m fairly certain with XFR I could run 4.6 at 1.6v flat and control the temps but 1.6v is my hard limit for my cooling right now. I’ll have to start into sub-zero if I want to go further. I’ll almost hate to replace this chip when Zen 2 launches since I’ve yet to see another one perform like it does. It takes anything I throw at it and I haven’t seen any form of degradation but 95% of the time my chip never sees 70c and I never run much more than 1.1v SoC on the IMC. it runs 4.4-4.45ghz daily and is 99% stable at 4.5ghz but not ideal for daily since temps often are sitting at 40-50c and once you start opening lots of different apps then temps are constantly up and down and it makes my fans ramp up then go back to being silent only to ramp up again and again.


----------



## majestynl

CJMitsuki said:


> While you were on vacation I did a lot of testing on XFR and how the clocks were determined.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I’ll have to see if Sense Mi plays a role in that as I hadn’t tested that at all. Max clocks are determined at boot up according to thermal headroom, the colder you are running the higher the boost clocks will be and the all core clocks as well. Only thing is that the max clock is limited to a 43.5x multiplier and no matter how cool you run the max clock multiplier will not go higher. The only thing that changes at that point Is how high the all core boosts will go. Once you start getting the 43.5x multiplier you’ll pretty much always get 1-6 cores boosting to 4.35ghz not counting a base clock OC which is the only way to go beyond 4.35ghz on XFR. That’s something they should change honestly, once you set PE to level 3 or 4 then the max multiplier should go higher than 43.5x according to thermal headroom of course. I don’t mind using the base clock to go higher but in gpu benchmarks you are kind of limited to 104.8 base clock max as any more will negatively affect the gpu performance. That’s essentially caps the max XFR freq at 4558mhz and hitting 4.6ghz requires PState or manual OC which in my case at 4558mhz I was running around 1.55v during heavy loads at all core boosts on XFR. Once you go to 4.6ghz on PState or Manual OC the voltages get insane as 1.65v wouldn’t even run it and it would immediately freeze with any medium load applied. I wasn’t willing to go beyond that as that voltage was hitting 60c at idle on my setup so even if it wouldn’t have froze I would have to immediately stop the bench to avoid temps quickly becoming out of control. Now, I’m fairly certain with XFR I could run 4.6 at 1.6v flat and control the temps but 1.6v is my hard limit for my cooling right now. I’ll have to start into sub-zero if I want to go further. I’ll almost hate to replace this chip when Zen 2 launches since I’ve yet to see another one perform like it does. It takes anything I throw at it and I haven’t seen any form of degradation but 95% of the time my chip never sees 70c and I never run much more than 1.1v SoC on the IMC. it runs 4.4-4.45ghz daily and is 99% stable at 4.5ghz but not ideal for daily since temps often are sitting at 40-50c and once you start opening lots of different apps then temps are constantly up and down and it makes my fans ramp up then go back to being silent only to ramp up again and again.


Yeap i know.. i did read those while i was nipping on my cocktail in the sun  Great shares m8!
But like you said, didnt saw you where playing with Sense Mi skew, so i gave it a try.. 

And you are totally right about less core boost clocks! But it does boost faster to those high clocks with low temps 




gupsterg said:


> @majestynl
> 
> Yes tinkering with Sense MI Skew would allow improved boosting  .
> 
> I currently don't hold the view that the limit to boost is set up at POST. I believe the SMU monitoring is ongoing to trim it back or enhance it based on factors as we already know.


Dunno mate, just made some new test with Turbo V to change Sense Mi skew on demand in OS:
Tried to get higher skew in OS results in no change in All core boost!, only temps got skewed. 
But booting up from bios with Higher skew value and then lowering in OS keeps the High mhz boost.
See attachted images below!



gupsterg said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Use ASUS Turbo V, link. You will know what is [Auto] values for a lot of the stuff, I started setting a lot of the voltages/settings in Tweakers Paradise manually as noticed CPU Aux 3.3V if left on [Auto] goes to 3.6V when we OC vs stock being 3.3V.
> 
> I'm currently not convinced to try PBO again TBH. My new CPU holds 4.1GHz at 1.268V VID in PState 0 (last was 1.318V), as I use LLC: [Auto] it's ~1.2V effective VCORE. PBO would defo be blasting it with more juice IMO  . I currently toying with idea of getting the EK monoblock TBH, to see how this chip is under water.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 227938
> 
> 
> View attachment 227940
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I initially thought this CPU would be worse than old one, based on CPO test.
> 
> Note: Date is wrong in screenies below, as The Stilt's CPO Test expires if not roll back date on rig.
> 
> 2700X Batch: 1805 SUS
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 227944
> 
> 
> View attachment 227946
> 
> 
> View attachment 227948
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2700X Batch: 1825 SUS
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 227950
> 
> 
> View attachment 227952
> 
> 
> View attachment 227954


Yep i know you are using Pstates  Great results there!! Normally i dont use PBO as daily. Im also running manual/pstates 4.2ghz @ 1.362v perfectly for months.
I just had an idea about temps effecting Boost in PBO and trying to manipulate.. so i thought lets try


----------



## nick name

majestynl said:


> @gupsterg
> 
> *Did some interesting tests today with PE Mode and startup Temps *
> 
> The max all core boost in PE modes are all initialized at startup i think. I could manipulate some lower temp with SenseMi Skew.
> 
> Below 2 screenshots:
> - One with PE3 Mode and SenseMi skew on default (disabled): Max all core boost *4098Mhz!*
> - One with PE3 Mode and SenseMi enabled with 272 as value: Max all core boost *4123Mhz!*
> 
> The temp difference is ~5c on load between SenseMi disabled vs Enabled and 272 as value!
> 
> This totally explains the behavior i saw from my first 2700x at the begin.
> Probably they played a few times with stock values for skewing with the first bios version we got!
> 
> _Tested with: Ryzen 2700x and bios version 0702. PE3 Mode with -0.05v offset. Ambient temp 20c_


I was also able to re-produce this behavior.


----------



## gupsterg

@majestynl

I did not mean adjusting in OS apply with tool  . I have never done any adjustments in OS with Turbo V  . It may well be some things are locked out. For example on Ryzen why ASUS MemTweakIt does not work for "on the fly" RAM timings changes is as timings can only be set at POST.

What I meant was let's say you have set skew as x, the limits for MHz under PBO would not be set at POST. The SMU would still kerb or enhance boost in OS if other limitations were not hit. I said this because of this in your post:-



> The max all core boost in PE modes are all initialized at startup i think.


Any how all good mate and enjoy  . The new CPU I think I got 4x8GB at 3200MHz at crazy low SOC, once finish fuller test will share in C6H thread.


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> @majestynl
> 
> I did not mean adjusting in OS apply with tool  . I have never done any adjustments in OS with Turbo V  . It may well be some things are locked out. For example on Ryzen why ASUS MemTweakIt does not work for "on the fly" RAM timings changes is as timings can only be set at POST.
> 
> What I meant was let's say you have set skew as x, the limits for MHz under PBO would not be set at POST. The SMU would still kerb or enhance boost in OS if other limitations were not hit. I said this because of this in your post:-
> 
> Any how all good mate and enjoy  . The new CPU I think I got 4x8GB at 3200MHz at crazy low SOC, once finish fuller test will share in C6H thread.


hehe never mind... you just brought me to an idea... playing with Turbo V and SensiMi on the fly 
The weird side is, it also uses way to low auto voltages. Still using the one he needs for 4098-4123mhz..
Will play more later..

Always interested to watch your results when u are ready m8! Good luck..cheers


----------



## gupsterg

@majestynl

Likewise it's all ways great to see your setups and discuss/test :thumb: .

Just like RTC, CPU-Z I've found Turbo V handy in screenies, to record set voltages.


----------



## crakej

CJMitsuki said:


> What are your timings at 3533? Do me a favor and experiment drop to whatever you have to to get these timings or really close to work and test performance against the 3533 setup. 14-14-14-22-36-4-4-16-3-8-10-0-2-2-250-auto-auto-14-7-7-3-1-7-7-1-5-5-1 if you have to loosen anything try tertiaries first. I also have DrvStr values at 24ohm procodt at 53.3ohm, RTT at disabled-disabled-60ohm, geardiwn enabled at 1T and the last valued at 0-0-0. This is with using SoC Vid of 47 with SoC put to offset on the main page and then the offset at Auto. DRAM is at 1.475v. These are just my settings, do whatever you need to get those timings or close to them but don’t change primaries or tRFC if at all possible.


So these are my settings now....Will do some testing tonight/tomorrow - doing ramtest now. Not sure it's any faster than before though, will let you know.


----------



## nick name

majestynl said:


> hehe never mind... you just brought me to an idea... playing with Turbo V and SensiMi on the fly
> The weird side is, it also uses way to low auto voltages. Still using the one he needs for 4098-4123mhz..
> Will play more later..
> 
> Always interested to watch your results when u are ready m8! Good luck..cheers


You can use Ryzen Master, on-the-fly, to adjust the multiplier up and down from where it boots at also. If it boots you at 40.8 you can get it up go 42~42.25 by changing EDC to 168.


----------



## crakej

CJMitsuki said:


> What are your timings at 3533? Do me a favor and experiment drop to whatever you have to to get these timings or really close to work and test performance against the 3533 setup. 14-14-14-22-36-4-4-16-3-8-10-0-2-2-250-auto-auto-14-7-7-3-1-7-7-1-5-5-1 if you have to loosen anything try tertiaries first. I also have DrvStr values at 24ohm procodt at 53.3ohm, RTT at disabled-disabled-60ohm, geardiwn enabled at 1T and the last valued at 0-0-0. This is with using SoC Vid of 47 with SoC put to offset on the main page and then the offset at Auto. DRAM is at 1.475v. These are just my settings, do whatever you need to get those timings or close to them but don’t change primaries or tRFC if at all possible.


So I've done some preliminary testing after modifying timings as you suggested. Kept my primary timings too.

P95 1/2 hour no dropped threads - I reckon it's the extra Soc which is now 1.085v (47 hex in AMD CBS, auto offset). MemTest >4000%

Very interesting! I still have my ram at 1.42v but it's much more reliable - doing more testing. Will see if it works with CPU at 4.2 instead of 4.1 as well.


----------



## nick name

I've always had SenseMi skew disabled so I don't know a lot about it. What confuses me is that enabling it and using the default 272 value causes lower temp readings. I assumed 272 being default would mean no skew, but it seems to be a reduction around 3*C. Is that what others get as well?


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I've always had SenseMi skew disabled so I don't know a lot about it. What confuses me is that enabling it and using the default 272 value causes lower temp readings. I assumed 272 being default would mean no skew, but it seems to be a reduction around 3*C. Is that what others get as well?


Will give it a go, but last time I'm sure Tctl and Tdie were still 10 degrees apart....


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> I've always had SenseMi skew disabled so I don't know a lot about it. What confuses me is that enabling it and using the default 272 value causes lower temp readings. I assumed 272 being default would mean no skew, but it seems to be a reduction around 3*C. Is that what others get as well?


I did some initial testing last night with multiple different skew values and there is some use for it from what I’ve seen. At 292 it seemed to be something like a 10c drop in temp readings with slightly higher boosts due to the system thinking it had thermal headroom, at 302 there was a 20-25c drop and 312 there was a 45-50c drop resulting in all core boost using the maximum multiplier no matter what as my temps were reading -22c. Only thing that is not to my liking is I would need another accurate way of measuring temps to use it for benching higher scores. I like the idea of being able to make it use max multiplier through a means other than software since software running results in lower scores. I’ll test further but it would seem you don’t want to go any further than 312 since there would be no benefit as the max multiplier can’t go furtherthan 43.5x. More testing tonight on that and PE behaviors.


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> I did some initial testing last night with multiple different skew values and there is some use for it from what I’ve seen. At 292 it seemed to be something like a 10c drop in temp readings with slightly higher boosts due to the system thinking it had thermal headroom, at 302 there was a 20-25c drop and 312 there was a 45-50c drop resulting in all core boost using the maximum multiplier no matter what as my temps were reading -22c. Only thing that is not to my liking is I would need another accurate way of measuring temps to use it for benching higher scores. I like the idea of being able to make it use max multiplier through a means other than software since software running results in lower scores. I’ll test further but it would seem you don’t want to go any further than 312 since there would be no benefit as the max multiplier can’t go furtherthan 43.5x. More testing tonight on that and PE behaviors.


Using 292 dropped it around 27*C for me.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Will give it a go, but last time I'm sure Tctl and Tdie were still 10 degrees apart....


It doesn't change the difference between Tctl and Tdie -- those still remain 10*C apart. It drops both of those, by around 3*C, when using the default value of 272 from where it is with SenseMi skew disabled.


----------



## crakej

Interesting.....

I'm going to have a little play with this....


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Interesting.....
> 
> I'm going to have a little play with this....


Yes, please. The more data points the better.


----------



## nick name

I'm also seeing lower reported temps when simply Enabling SenseMi skew and leaving the value on Auto. I wonder if that is why I see higher temps than a lot of other people . . . because I have had it disabled.


----------



## mtrai

Y'all be careful with this...If I remember correctly it is not actually affecting the temp but the only gives an offset. In other words it is just changing what is being reported not the actual temp.

I burned up a 2700X playing with this a while ago.

See my CPU-z valadation temp.

https://valid.x86.fr/y63csu
https://valid.x86.fr/3jusxe
https://valid.x86.fr/yn6ugz

Just be cautious as this adjusted something that even prevented thermal throttling and outright shutdown.

124 degrees Celsius.


----------



## MrPhilo

nick name said:


> Using 292 dropped it around 27*C for me.


I get roughly the same. My temp at idle today was around 27-29c and with SkewMI offset 292 I get -1c at times lol. So roughly around -25 to 30c I guess for 292.

I've noticed the voltage they request is also lower, is this skewed too? My CPU was just always at 4.35Ghz playing games and was requesting 1.44v, when normally it goes up to 1.5v


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> Y'all be careful with this...If I remember correctly it is not actually affecting the temp but the only gives an offset. In other words it is just changing what is being reported not the actual temp.
> 
> I burned up a 2700X playing with this a while ago.
> 
> See my CPU-z valadation temp.
> 
> https://valid.x86.fr/y63csu
> https://valid.x86.fr/3jusxe
> https://valid.x86.fr/yn6ugz
> 
> Just be cautious as this adjusted something that even prevented thermal throttling and outright shutdown.
> 
> 124 degrees Celsius.


Thank you, but I am aware it doesn't actually lower temps and just changes the reported temp. 

What were you doing that killed your 2700X? When I was messing with it I was only doing things I knew would result in temps that were safe like Cinebench so I could observe the difference with the SensMi skew applied.


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> Thank you, but I am aware it doesn't actually lower temps and just changes the reported temp.
> 
> What were you doing that killed your 2700X? When I was messing with it I was only doing things I knew would result in temps that were safe like Cinebench so I could observe the difference with the SensMi skew applied.


Just the normal things mainly cinebench and playing WOW...though I remember I was messing with that setting at this time.

It was not until saw the temps did I realize and what I think was going on...while the "reported" temp were fine the "actual" temps were not fine. It led to the CPU just not posting. IMO the thermal throttling or shutdown get max gets messed up with changing this. The Cpu can still report actual temps depending on what is reading it.


----------



## crakej

Doesn't it default to being on? If the difference is 3 degrees it should be safe right? Why else is SenseMi Skew even a thing?


----------



## majestynl

heheh i see gave you guys some toys to play with  Be careful tho! After skewing the temps i was able to control/monitor temps by the water temperature sensor! 
What i also quickly saw yesterday; if you are using offset or auto voltage, the voltage was not reflecting anymore. Be careful again!
It was just an test if i could manipulate PBO/XFR with this... seems it is not THAT smart


----------



## gupsterg

Mtrai is correct that it can affect protection. Timur Born sorta early on in C6H thread was experimenting trying to see throttle points, by switching off fans on AIO; as chip did not throttle, due to Sense MI skew, coolant may have boiled/pressure built up in AIO and piping burst.

When Sense MI skew is used it also has 2 methods of how it calc/report temp. Currently enjoying :drink: so not in right frame of mind to search/link Elmor's post on it.

And as stated before if Sense MI skew used and PLL is not default you get further skew...


----------



## nick name

majestynl said:


> heheh i see gave you guys some toys to play with  Be careful tho! After skewing the temps i was able to control/monitor temps by the water temperature sensor!
> What i also quickly saw yesterday; if you are using offset or auto voltage, the voltage was not reflecting anymore. Be careful again!
> It was just an test if i could manipulate PBO/XFR with this... seems it is not THAT smart


You can use Ryzen Master to change EDC values to change PBO/XFR.


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> majestynl said:
> 
> 
> 
> heheh i see gave you guys some toys to play with /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif Be careful tho! After skewing the temps i was able to control/monitor temps by the water temperature sensor!
> What i also quickly saw yesterday; if you are using offset or auto voltage, the voltage was not reflecting anymore. Be careful again!
> It was just an test if i could manipulate PBO/XFR with this... seems it is not THAT smart /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif
> 
> 
> 
> You can use Ryzen Master to change EDC values to change PBO/XFR.
Click to expand...

Yes, but when you are overclocking competitively you want to run as little as possible killing any and all services and processes that aren’t absolutely critical for the system to run. You an also just set edc in Bios or set PBO to “enable” and it sets all 3 parameters to their maximum settings for that particular motherboard.


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> Yes, but when you are overclocking competitively you want to run as little as possible killing any and all services and processes that aren’t absolutely critical for the system to run. You an also just set edc in Bios or set PBO to “enable” and it sets all 3 parameters to their maximum settings for that particular motherboard.


You don't need Ryzen Master running. Open it, change the value, and then close it. And changing the value in BIOS doesn't work when using a Performance Enhancer.


----------



## MrPhilo

majestynl said:


> heheh i see gave you guys some toys to play with  Be careful tho! After skewing the temps i was able to control/monitor temps by the water temperature sensor!
> What i also quickly saw yesterday; if you are using offset or auto voltage, the voltage was not reflecting anymore. Be careful again!
> It was just an test if i could manipulate PBO/XFR with this... seems it is not THAT smart


So the voltage reported by HWInfo isn't correct?


----------



## majestynl

nick name said:


> You can use Ryzen Master to change EDC values to change PBO/XFR.


I know all about EDC options but my intention was to manipulate XFR and PBO and understanding the underlying behavior! Just curious 



MrPhilo said:


> So the voltage reported by HWInfo isn't correct?


They are correct, but i mentioned the reflection. I was seeing low auto voltages for higher boost speeds. 
e.g. it was feeding the same voltage for 4.1mhz and 4.2mhz after i changed the skew value on the fly in OS


----------



## nick name

majestynl said:


> I know all about EDC options but my intention was to manipulate XFR and PBO and understanding the underlying behavior! Just curious
> 
> 
> 
> They are correct, but i mentioned the reflection. I was seeing low auto voltages for higher boost speeds.
> e.g. it was feeding the same voltage for 4.1mhz and 4.2mhz after i changed the skew value on the fly in OS



Did you know you could set any multiplier you'd like (42.5 and below) using EDC? I've used it to downclock my CPU to test RAM overnight before.


----------



## nick name

Booting with PE3 and only one active CCX resulted in a multiplier of 43.3 and another boot at 43.5.


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> heheh i see gave you guys some toys to play with  Be careful tho! After skewing the temps i was able to control/monitor temps by the water temperature sensor!
> What i also quickly saw yesterday; if you are using offset or auto voltage, the voltage was not reflecting anymore. Be careful again!
> It was just an test if i could manipulate PBO/XFR with this... seems it is not THAT smart


Well, you know me - lots of time on my hands - waiting for bios - just want to play with some other stuff while we wait.

I haven't noticed any real difference, but I didn't change then value for it either. Seems like one of those settings probably left alone... Will be doing my voltage testing today as well


----------



## MrPhilo

majestynl said:


> nick name said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can use Ryzen Master to change EDC values to change PBO/XFR.
> 
> 
> 
> I know all about EDC options but my intention was to manipulate XFR and PBO and understanding the underlying behavior! Just curious /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> 
> 
> MrPhilo said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the voltage reported by HWInfo isn't correct?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are correct, but i mentioned the reflection. I was seeing low auto voltages for higher boost speeds.
> e.g. it was feeding the same voltage for 4.1mhz and 4.2mhz after i changed the skew value on the fly in OS /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif
Click to expand...

Yeah, my CPU was boosting to 4.35Ghz at 1.44v when normally it hits 1.5V when it does that with no Skewmi, can we assume that the voltage is incorrect?


----------



## majestynl

nick name said:


> Did you know you could set any multiplier you'd like (42.5 and below) using EDC? I've used it to downclock my CPU to test RAM overnight before.


Didnt have the time to play with those a lot lately. Thid some test in begin when we knew about the values from Stilt. And im not using Ryzen Master 



crakej said:


> Well, you know me - lots of time on my hands - waiting for bios - just want to play with some other stuff while we wait.
> 
> I haven't noticed any real difference, but I didn't change then value for it either. Seems like one of those settings probably left alone... Will be doing my voltage testing today as well


Hehe yeap i know you  Have fun m8!

You need to toggle the option and at least enter a value ! Start with 272 



MrPhilo said:


> Yeah, my CPU was boosting to 4.35Ghz at 1.44v when normally it hits 1.5V when it does that with no Skewmi, can we assume that the voltage is incorrect?


Like i said before, its probably the voltage he needs for the lower all clock boost mhz! Again this was just a test to manipulate and as you can see its totally not smart as we think it was (XFR/PBO).


----------



## CJMitsuki

majestynl said:


> nick name said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can use Ryzen Master to change EDC values to change PBO/XFR.
> 
> 
> 
> I know all about EDC options but my intention was to manipulate XFR and PBO and understanding the underlying behavior! Just curious /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> 
> 
> MrPhilo said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the voltage reported by HWInfo isn't correct?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are correct, but i mentioned the reflection. I was seeing low auto voltages for higher boost speeds.
> e.g. it was feeding the same voltage for 4.1mhz and 4.2mhz after i changed the skew value on the fly in OS /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif
Click to expand...

I noticed more stability when I disabled sense mi skew and just started adjusting the T Offset numbers. It seems to do the same thing as far as skewing temps but I did get all core 4.35ghz IBT AVX stable at 1.27v which was kind of crazy to me. Going higher than the default 63 just -20c and lower temps and it bugged the WMI temp reading as it was too low to read correctly. I need a temp reading that is the actual temp so I can compare. It’s changing all of the ones I can see with HWinfo. When I can get a temp that’s actual and a voltage readout that is soldered to the board I will take it to 4.4ghz+ and see how stable it can be at low voltages. I’d love to see 4.4ghz on 1.35v and 4.5 on 1.4v but I’m dreaming at that point. With current setup the 4.4ghz on 1.35v seems very possible. Maybe see voltage boost to 1.4v but even so, that is a great result for that speed. The control of the voltages aren’t near as wild as Performance Enhancer either. They don’t swing wildly. The swing of voltage is like .05v so compared to PE4 it’s quite narrow and nice. Keeps temps very stable presumably.


----------



## majestynl

CJMitsuki said:


> I noticed more stability when I disabled sense mi skew and just started adjusting the T Offset numbers. It seems to do the same thing as far as skewing temps but I did get all core 4.35ghz IBT AVX stable at 1.27v which was kind of crazy to me. Going higher than the default 63 just -20c and lower temps and it bugged the WMI temp reading as it was too low to read correctly. I need a temp reading that is the actual temp so I can compare. It’s changing all of the ones I can see with HWinfo. When I can get a temp that’s actual and a voltage readout that is soldered to the board I will take it to 4.4ghz+ and see how stable it can be at low voltages. I’d love to see 4.4ghz on 1.35v and 4.5 on 1.4v but I’m dreaming at that point. With current setup the 4.4ghz on 1.35v seems very possible. Maybe see voltage boost to 1.4v but even so, that is a great result for that speed. The control of the voltages aren’t near as wild as Performance Enhancer either. They don’t swing wildly. The swing of voltage is like .05v so compared to PE4 it’s quite narrow and nice. Keeps temps very stable presumably.


Yeap, I was thinking to play with those when I have some time later. But you already did it 

As far as I know t offset does also t skewing. But be careful again. If I remember wel one user got skrewed his CPU earlier 

You could try to check voltages at probelt points ? And are you on water ? Cause you could also read water temps for keeping monitoring while playing.

As said will give do some more test later and share ..


----------



## CJMitsuki

majestynl said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> I noticed more stability when I disabled sense mi skew and just started adjusting the T Offset numbers. It seems to do the same thing as far as skewing temps but I did get all core 4.35ghz IBT AVX stable at 1.27v which was kind of crazy to me. Going higher than the default 63 just -20c and lower temps and it bugged the WMI temp reading as it was too low to read correctly. I need a temp reading that is the actual temp so I can compare. It’s changing all of the ones I can see with HWinfo. When I can get a temp that’s actual and a voltage readout that is soldered to the board I will take it to 4.4ghz+ and see how stable it can be at low voltages. I’d love to see 4.4ghz on 1.35v and 4.5 on 1.4v but I’m dreaming at that point. With current setup the 4.4ghz on 1.35v seems very possible. Maybe see voltage boost to 1.4v but even so, that is a great result for that speed. The control of the voltages aren’t near as wild as Performance Enhancer either. They don’t swing wildly. The swing of voltage is like .05v so compared to PE4 it’s quite narrow and nice. Keeps temps very stable presumably.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeap, I was thinking to play with those when I have some time later. But you already did it /forum/images/smilies/wink.gif
> 
> As far as I know t offset does also t skewing. But be careful again. If I remember wel one user got skrewed his CPU earlier /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif
> 
> You could try to check voltages at probelt points ? And are you on water ? Cause you could also read water temps for keeping monitoring while playing.
> 
> As said will give do some more test later and share ..
Click to expand...

Yeah, I’m going to solder a wire to the Probe-it point for voltage comparisons but I don’t think the sense mi skews voltages, I want to be sure though. Also, water temps aren’t going to give an accurate temp. My water temp rarely exceeds 24-25c and I know the cpu will idle at ambient but once a load is applied it maxes around 60-65c and water won’t get anywhere near those temps or else the loop will fail. I need a thermocouple in the cpu socket, there is a small hole in the motherboard on the backside of the socket meant for a thermocouple. It won’t give die temps but it’s better than nothing. Honestly AMD should’ve had a reading that is never skewed and the Sense Mi skewed temp should’ve been a totally separate reading.
I’m on water and liquid metal and cool air from my AC unit is routed through the rad at the front of the case and the side fed straight onto the gpu. The case is a Silverstone RL06 known for their great airflow. The front is wide open and I have a total of 9 Noctua NF-A14 ippc3000 fans. 4 on the front in push/pull for the rad. 2 blowing from the side onto the GPU 1 rear exhaust and 2 top exhaust. Beast of a fan too, they are industrial server fans. At 3000rpm they move a massive amount of air.


----------



## crakej

I'm going to spend some time checking things out at default.... especially those ProbeIt points.

Not much left of October......do we think we will get a new bios before it ends? 

1001 seems to OC better for me than earlier bios versions.... going to see if I can get my 3600MTs memory back as well me thinks...


----------



## nick name

majestynl said:


> Didnt have the time to play with those a lot lately. Thid some test in begin when we knew about the values from Stilt. And im not using Ryzen Master
> 
> 
> 
> -snip-


Yeah, I only use Ryzen Master to change the EDC value. It's the only reason I installed it. Have you seen this yet? 

https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...tiplier-adjustments-through-ryzen-master.html


----------



## elmor

https://www.overclock.net/forum/27694588-post38965.html

Sorry to leave you guys hanging like this. The subsystem id change in the latest beta bios has been fixed and will not be a problem in the next release, which should occur ~mid November.


----------



## mtrai

elmor said:


> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27694588-post38965.html
> 
> Sorry to leave you guys hanging like this. The subsystem id change in the latest beta bios has been fixed and will not be a problem in the next release, which should occur ~mid November.





elmor said:


> Hey guys, I've decided to discontinue my employment at Asus as of today. I realize that puts you guys in a worse position, but it's something I really felt was necessary. Primarily I want to focus more on product development and actual engineering instead of debugging endless issues. Hopefully I've been able to make your experience with our boards a little bit better. I'll still be around on the forums, just not dealing with product specific issues anymore. If you have any questions I'm always available through the PM function.
> 
> FYI: Last I heard PinnaclePi-1.0.0.6 BIOS releases are delayed and targeted for mid November.


Gonna miss having you around...I wish you well in your future endeavors!!


----------



## nick name

elmor said:


> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27694588-post38965.html
> 
> Sorry to leave you guys hanging like this. The subsystem id change in the latest beta bios has been fixed and will not be a problem in the next release, which should occur ~mid November.


I wish you the best of luck in your next endeavor. 

You didn't happen to snag the BIOS with that change to share with us perchance?


----------



## crakej

elmor said:


> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27694588-post38965.html
> 
> Sorry to leave you guys hanging like this. The subsystem id change in the latest beta bios has been fixed and will not be a problem in the next release, which should occur ~mid November.


You've been a great help thanks Ellmor and you sure can't hold back your career for us! Good luck for the future. Hopefully someone else from ASUS can keep us in the know


----------



## VicsPC

elmor said:


> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27694588-post38965.html
> 
> Sorry to leave you guys hanging like this. The subsystem id change in the latest beta bios has been fixed and will not be a problem in the next release, which should occur ~mid November.


Thanks for all the help on the C6 and C7, good luck with the future.


----------



## hurricane28

elmor said:


> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27694588-post38965.html
> 
> Sorry to leave you guys hanging like this. The subsystem id change in the latest beta bios has been fixed and will not be a problem in the next release, which should occur ~mid November.


Again here too, best wishes on your next new career. You have been a great help for us.


----------



## Deyjandi

elmor said:


> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27694588-post38965.html
> 
> Sorry to leave you guys hanging like this. The subsystem id change in the latest beta bios has been fixed and will not be a problem in the next release, which should occur ~mid November.


Thank you elmor for your support and help.


----------



## DavePDX

*Thanks for your help elmor!*



elmor said:


> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27694588-post38965.html
> 
> Sorry to leave you guys hanging like this. The subsystem id change in the latest beta bios has been fixed and will not be a problem in the next release, which should occur ~mid November.


Best of luck to you in your future endeavor. You were very helpful to me (as well as to others) and I really appreciate your efforts.


----------



## usoldier

elmor said:


> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27694588-post38965.html
> 
> Sorry to leave you guys hanging like this. The subsystem id change in the latest beta bios has been fixed and will not be a problem in the next release, which should occur ~mid November.


I wish you all the best mr Elmor and thanks for all the help you provided for all of us.


----------



## MacG32

elmor said:


> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27694588-post38965.html
> 
> Sorry to leave you guys hanging like this. The subsystem id change in the latest beta bios has been fixed and will not be a problem in the next release, which should occur ~mid November.



Thank you for everything you've done. Even though I wasn't around very long, your work has made a tremendous impact on all of us for quite some time. Keep up the good work in your future and I hope it turns out very well for you. Thank you again. :thumb:


----------



## lordzed83

elmor said:


> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27694588-post38965.html
> 
> Sorry to leave you guys hanging like this. The subsystem id change in the latest beta bios has been fixed and will not be a problem in the next release, which should occur ~mid November.


Thanks Elmor was a good fun ride. I'm sure You will get to do what is more exciting than looking for fixes of problems.
You sticking to Pc products ?? Or something totally new ??


----------



## elbubi

elmor said:


> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27694588-post38965.html
> 
> Sorry to leave you guys hanging like this. The subsystem id change in the latest beta bios has been fixed and will not be a problem in the next release, which should occur ~mid November.


Thanks for your kind support as of today, hoping the best for you on your next journey.

By chance, do you recall finding something about this issue on lattest bios developments?

Cheers!


----------



## bonomork

next week I'll receive a crosshair vii (no-wifi), which bios you suggest to flash, 0804 or 1001 (waiting for the next) ?


----------



## Rusakova

bonomork said:


> next week I'll receive a crosshair vii (no-wifi), which bios you suggest to flash, 0804 or 1001 (waiting for the next) ?


Since BIOS 1001 was pulled with no explanation and no one has been able to find out why.
I would suggest BIOS 0804. I'm currently on 1001 with no issues, but not knowing why 1001 was pulled is making
me considering doing a BIOS flashback to 0804. BIOS 0804 and 1001 is the same AGESA 1.0.0.2C so no difference there.
Doing a BIOS flashback on CH7 is easy.


----------



## crakej

Rusakova said:


> Since BIOS 1001 was pulled with no explanation and no one has been able to find out why.
> I would suggest BIOS 0804. I'm currently on 1001 with no issues, but not knowing why 1001 was pulled is making
> me considering doing a BIOS flashback to 0804. BIOS 0804 and 1001 is the same AGESA 1.0.0.2C so no difference there.
> Doing a BIOS flashback on CH7 is easy.


I'm on 1001 and it's been mostly ok. Had trouble adding two fans to the system last night and trying to see what that was, though may have been me as I was tired!

Will report back - but if I can't get it working properly I will go back to 0804


----------



## crakej

I've just sent an email to Raja at ASUS asking him if he can get someone to touch base with us, here or in ROG forums now Elmor has gone. I'll let you know if/when I get a reply.

I've asked him to look into what made them ditch the last 2 bios releases apart from what we know, and also if there will be someone else updating the ROG forums which have not seen much attention from ASUS recently in the Ryzen forums. Last, I asked if him or anyone else would be updating the page he (ironically) set up for X470 bios releases on ROG which has never been updated (since April) - *ASUS X470 ROG, ROG Strix, Prime, TUF - UEFI/SMU firmware updates.*

Meanwhile my fans seem to be under control again. 2 identical fans on different headers produce completely different power graphs (Riing 140s) in the bios and in AISuite


----------



## nick name

Something strange started happening last night while I was trying to beat some benchmark scores. When changing the BCLK to 102 the system boots at a 36.5 multiplier for min and max. This has not happened before and it persists now, the following day. Anyone else experience this?

Edit:

After a little testing it appears that any BCLK value above 101 produces the behavior.


----------



## nick name

ASUS sent me the latest Chrosshair VII 1001 BIOS. The file name, however, lacks WiFi so I am assuming it is for the non-wifi board. Is there a way to check it beyond its file name?


----------



## MacG32

BIOS
Version 1002
2018/11/02 8.24 MBytes
ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) BIOS 1002
Release BIOS 1002

https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WI-FI/HelpDesk_BIOS/

BIOS
Version 1002
2018/11/02 8.24 MBytes
ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO BIOS 1002
Release BIOS 1002

https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO/HelpDesk_BIOS/


----------



## nick name

MacG32 said:


> BIOS
> Version 1002
> 2018/11/02 8.24 MBytes
> ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) BIOS 1002
> Release BIOS 1002
> 
> https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WI-FI/HelpDesk_BIOS/
> 
> BIOS
> Version 1002
> 2018/11/02 8.24 MBytes
> ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO BIOS 1002
> Release BIOS 1002
> 
> https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO/HelpDesk_BIOS/



Not visible to me yet. You tease.


----------



## MacG32

nick name said:


> Not visible to me yet. You tease.



Wi-Fi
https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-1002.zip

Regular
https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...VII-HERO/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-1002.zip

They're there, but they were removed from the site for some reason. Use caution when using them. Who knows what condition they're in.

Edit: They're showing up on the site again. :thumb:


----------



## liakou

They are not removed, but somehow they don't appear at all times. Go to "Drivers & Tools" and cycle through the Windows versions there and 1002 appears...


----------



## nick name

MacG32 said:


> Wi-Fi
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-1002.zip
> 
> Regular
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...VII-HERO/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-1002.zip
> 
> They're there, but they were removed from the site for some reason. Use caution when using them. Who knows what condition they're in.
> 
> Edit: They're showing up on the site again. :thumb:


I wonder why an ASUS rep sent me a 1001 BIOS to test when 1002 exists. I'll have to ask that.


----------



## Rusakova

liakou said:


> They are not removed, but somehow they don't appear at all times. Go to "Drivers & Tools" and cycle through the Windows versions there and 1002 appears...


https://extraimage.net/images/2018/11/02/49c466ab4177d8e02b745ebaa35b6482.png

Did anyone check if AGESA 1.0.0.6 is in 1002 ?

Ok just checked. BIOS 1002 was under Windows 10 32 bit. Flashing now.
Release date is Nov 2nd 2018.

Edit :
Done flashing and tweaking. No issues so far.
No new AGESA as far as I can tell.
No release notes on ASUS page.
BIOS version date is 10/23/2018.
So 1002 is most likely a bug fixed version of 1001.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Not visible to me yet. You tease.


Select a different OS like Win 7 32bit....


----------



## crakej

Rusakova said:


> https://extraimage.net/images/2018/11/02/49c466ab4177d8e02b745ebaa35b6482.png
> 
> Did anyone check if AGESA 1.0.0.6 is in 1002 ?
> 
> Ok just checked. BIOS 1002 was under Windows 10 32 bit. Flashing now.
> Release date is Nov 2nd 2018.


No. It is NOT - still AGESA 1002


----------



## bonomork

crakej said:


> No. It is NOT - still AGESA 1002


I cannot understand why there isnt a changelog....


----------



## crakej

bonomork said:


> I cannot understand why there isnt a changelog....


That's something ASUS is not great at I'm afraid!


----------



## nick name

nick name said:


> Something strange started happening last night while I was trying to beat some benchmark scores. When changing the BCLK to 102 the system boots at a 36.5 multiplier for min and max. This has not happened before and it persists now, the following day. Anyone else experience this?
> 
> Edit:
> 
> After a little testing it appears that any BCLK value above 101 produces the behavior.


Sigh . . . I think this may be a result of updating the firmware on my 970 EVO.


----------



## MNMadman

nick name said:


> Something strange started happening last night while I was trying to beat some benchmark scores. When changing the BCLK to 102 the system boots at a 36.5 multiplier for min and max. This has not happened before and it persists now, the following day. Anyone else experience this?
> 
> Edit:
> 
> After a little testing it appears that any BCLK value above 101 produces the behavior.


On my board it will do that if you go above 100.6MHz BCLK and leave Core Performance Boost on Auto.

You need to set Core Performance Boost to Enabled and then it will boost normally. Note that it will still boot at lesser multipliers instead of the normal 37x.


----------



## nick name

MNMadman said:


> On my board it will do that if you go above 100.6MHz BCLK and leave Core Performance Boost on Auto.
> 
> You need to set Core Performance Boost to Enabled and then it will boost normally. Note that it will still boot at lesser multipliers instead of the normal 37x.


Jesus H. Christ. I don't recall ever changing the value from Enabled back to Auto so after hours of pulling my hair out you, sir, have saved the day. Many thanks.


----------



## crakej

So I made a mistake the other day that I've only noticed yesterday/today.

I decided to play with StoreMi. I recommend not running this unless you're committed. I only ever enabled a 2GB ram cache on my slow data drive, but decided not to go ahead. Uninstalled the software (late at night while tired) and don't really remember what it said on the screen.

Anyway, I've noticed when I did bios update that I couldn't access that hard drive from the bios. Turns out that I can only see the 2 drives on that hard disk if the StoreMi driver is loaded and running in windows. I cannot simply convert it back to a non-virtual disk/drives!

Has anyone any experience of this? Is there a way (and I understand there is meant to be) to convert the disk back? If I disable the driver, I can't see the drives!

Also, when loading HWInfo64, it gets stuck scanning hard drives for a minute or two before continuing to load. Very frustrating! Maybe I should just re-engage the cache and get on with it?  Has anyone else tried using StoreMi on this board?


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> So I made a mistake the other day that I've only noticed yesterday/today.
> 
> I decided to play with StoreMi. I recommend not running this unless you're committed. I only ever enabled a 2GB ram cache on my slow data drive, but decided not to go ahead. Uninstalled the software (late at night while tired) and don't really remember what it said on the screen.
> 
> Anyway, I've noticed when I did bios update that I couldn't access that hard drive from the bios. Turns out that I can only see the 2 drives on that hard disk if the StoreMi driver is loaded and running in windows. I cannot simply convert it back to a non-virtual disk/drives!
> 
> Has anyone any experience of this? Is there a way (and I understand there is meant to be) to convert the disk back? If I disable the driver, I can't see the drives!
> 
> Also, when loading HWInfo64, it gets stuck scanning hard drives for a minute or two before continuing to load. Very frustrating! Maybe I should just re-engage the cache and get on with it?  Has anyone else tried using StoreMi on this board?


There isn't any non-destructive method of removing StoreMi. You'll have to re-install and then backup the data on that drive because you will have to re-do everything on it after StoreMi is removed. And I mean everything.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> There isn't any non-destructive method of removing StoreMi. You'll have to re-install and then backup the data on that drive because you will have to re-do everything on it after StoreMi is removed. And I mean everything.


Fortunately I backup everything, but it's still irritating. I don't think this software is ready for public release. All I did was install it, selected the (slow!) hard disk I wanted to speed up, and stopped there. As I had no spare fast ssd my only option was to use a 2GB mem cache, which I did eventually enable once I realized this was probably the situation, but for my drive with lots of small files, it wasn't very effective. I didn't want to give it more time to do anything so uninstalled it - only it leaves the driver so you can see your disk. Crazy that I can't reverse it.

I'll use diskpart to clean the disk and start restoring it then I guess. 

Thanks for confirming the bad news for me! This software can work, but remember your SSD and disk will kind of merge and will only be available through the StoreMi virtual controller. Forever. (well, until they sort it out) - in fact in Windows the second SATA controller is gone (eek!) from Device Manager and replaced (in the Storage Controllers section) with the AMD Virtual AHCI controller.

That said, if you're happy to do it, the gains can be really very good - just don't go thinking you can casually play with it then uninstall it - you can't quite do that!


----------



## hahler2

Currently running bios 0704. Any reason to update to one of the newer bios's if I'm not having any trouble?


----------



## nick name

hahler2 said:


> Currently running bios 0704. Any reason to update to one of the newer bios's if I'm not having any trouble?


I don't know why but RAM does seem to be more stable in 1002. I reverted back to 804 to check to see if it was placebo and 804 wouldn't handle the RAM settings I have stable in the newer BIOS.


----------



## mtrai

And here I am on 1102 beta bios with AGESA 1.0.0.6 on the C7H WiFi and it has been running so smooth. I was even able to boot into Windows and do normal windows stuff browse and stuff at 3800 on the Ram at CL 14 14 14 14 28 42 260 once I got my 2700X back from RMA this morning. Was using those timing on my 1700x while waiting on 1102 at 3600 same timings. No the timings are not bench or stress stable yet but I will need some time.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> And here I am on 1102 beta bios with AGESA 1.0.0.6 on the C7H WiFi and it has been running so smooth. I was even able to boot into Windows and do normal windows stuff browse and stuff at 3800 on the Ram at CL 14 14 14 14 28 42 260 once I got my 2700X back from RMA this morning. Was using those timing on my 1700x while waiting on 1102 at 3600 same timings. No the timings are not bench or stress stable yet but I will need some time.


Where did you get 1102 from?


----------



## MacG32

nick name said:


> Where did you get 1102 from?



http://www.mediafire.com/folder/jkoxu4r003qu7/Release It's 1101 for the Wi-Fi board.


----------



## nick name

MacG32 said:


> http://www.mediafire.com/folder/jkoxu4r003qu7/Release It's 1101 for the Wi-Fi board.


Ahhh, I already have 1101. Elmor mentioned the corrected the subsystem id bug and was hoping someone had the revision with that fix in it. I asked ASUS for it so we'll see if I get it after the weekend.


----------



## MNMadman

Yeah, 1002 is running fine for me. Still don't like 1101 because it changed the subsystem IDs. Waiting for whatever 1101's successor is.


----------



## zJordan

Anyone figure out why 1001 was pulled? I'm on 1001 and see little reason to upgrade to 1002 when 1001 is completely stable for me. I'd rather wait for fixed 1101 on non-WiFi board.


----------



## xkronusx

Anyone else seeing really low values for 1.8VPLL Voltage?

I'm seeing 0.8V when it's set auto in uefi and 0.9 when set to 1.8.

Version 1002 on the Wifi model.


----------



## nick name

xkronusx said:


> Anyone else seeing really low values for 1.8VPLL Voltage?
> 
> I'm seeing 0.8V when it's set auto in uefi and 0.9 when set to 1.8.
> 
> Version 1002 on the Wifi model.


I am not. What are you reading those voltages with?


----------



## crakej

xkronusx said:


> Anyone else seeing really low values for 1.8VPLL Voltage?
> 
> I'm seeing 0.8V when it's set auto in uefi and 0.9 when set to 1.8.
> 
> Version 1002 on the Wifi model.


Mine's ok....


----------



## Whatisthisfor

I heard somewhere, there would be probs with Agesa 1.0.0.5? Has anyone mabye heard that too or even has better information about that matter?


----------



## nick name

Whatisthisfor said:


> I heard somewhere, there would be probs with Agesa 1.0.0.5? Has anyone mabye heard that too or even has better information about that matter?


Elmor said they intentionally skipped a revision before 1.0.0.6, but I can't remember which one it was. I can't remember exactly why either.


----------



## zJordan

nick name said:


> Elmor said they intentionally skipped a revision before 1.0.0.6, but I can't remember which one it was. I can't remember exactly why either.


I think they skipped all revisions from AGESA 1.0.0.2, 1.0.0.6 is the only revision they deem stable enough.


----------



## Alex K

I wonder if somebody who has successfull experience with precision boosts override overclock can post something like manual on the process and the values sinergy between each other.
Literally for me the goal is to make 3-4 cores seat on 4.35 when up to 4 cores (not threads) loaded, and when all cores load - 4.1 for me will be enough.


----------



## Deyjandi

what's wrong with asus support page?


----------



## Rusakova

Deyjandi said:


> what's wrong with asus support page?


I think they are rolling out a new design.


----------



## Rusakova

Whatisthisfor said:


> I heard somewhere, there would be probs with Agesa 1.0.0.5? Has anyone mabye heard that too or even has better information about that matter?


I believe it was AGESA 1.0.0.4 not .5, since 1.0.0.4 had some bugs which made Asus stop work on it.


----------



## Rusakova

Alex K said:


> I wonder if somebody who has successfull experience with precision boosts override overclock can post something like manual on the process and the values sinergy between each other.
> Literally for me the goal is to make 3-4 cores seat on 4.35 when up to 4 cores (not threads) loaded, and when all cores load - 4.1 for me will be enough.


I can't get it to work on BIOS 1002. I tried yesterday and multiplier would stay stuck on 41.5 with an FSB of 103.2 and vcore would stay at 1.365 voltage resulting in 4283 MHz on all cores.
Couldn't get it to adjust speed at all, just completely stuck, but surprisingly 100% stable.


----------



## Alex K

Rusakova said:


> I can't get it to work on BIOS 1002. I tried yesterday and multiplier would stay stuck on 41.5 with an FSB of 103.2 and vcore would stay at 1.365 voltage resulting in 4283 MHz on all cores.
> Couldn't get it to adjust the speed at all, just completely stuck, but surprisingly 100% stable.


That's why I'm asking some guys who succeeded to come out & share some info.
There is a lack of this info regarding PBO overclock around.


----------



## gupsterg

Deyjandi said:


> what's wrong with asus support page?


I seem to have issues with it when use Firefox, but none if use MS Edge. Selecting an OS in the drop down box does not initiate a page update, so see nothing, but does when use MS Edge.


----------



## Whatisthisfor

nick name said:


> Elmor said they intentionally skipped a revision before 1.0.0.6, but I can't remember which one it was. I can't remember exactly why either.


I see. Do you know, if there are already BIOS out there with Agesa 1.0.0.6 (beta or stable)?


----------



## mtrai

Whatisthisfor said:


> I see. Do you know, if there are already BIOS out there with Agesa 1.0.0.6 (beta or stable)?


Yes those of us with the C7H WIFI have beta bios 1101 with AGESA 1.0.0.6 and for me it is working like a charm like I have already stated.


----------



## Whatisthisfor

mtrai said:


> Yes those of us with the C7H WIFI have beta bios 1102 with AGESA 1.0.0.6 and for me it is working like a charm like I have already stated.


I have the gigabyte X470 board and therefore only sometimes read the Asus thread. We Gigabyters are still impatiently waiting for an Agesa 1.0.0.6 beta bios XD 

Do you experience any memory compatibility improvements compared with past BIOS with Agesa 1.0.0.4?


----------



## mtrai

Whatisthisfor said:


> I have the gigabyte X470 board and therefore only sometimes read the Asus thread. We Gigabyters are still impatiently waiting for an Agesa 1.0.0.6 beta bios XD
> 
> Do you experience any memory compatibility improvements compared with past BIOS with Agesa 1.0.0.4?


Us ASUS users never had any bios with 1.0.0.4 as ASUS felt it was too buggy and totally skipped it. 

On the beta 1101 with AGESA 1.0.0.6 I did try a few things...but at first was limited to using my 1700x as my 2700X had to go through RMA. And then we had Hurricane Michael hit...I live in Panama City Beach, Florida. So anyhow..I finally was able to ship off my 2700X and get it back from RMA. On my 1700X I had already been running 3533 14 14 14 28 42 260 stable. As a quick test after getting my 2700X put in, I tried some higher ram speeds. I was able to boot into windows and browse at 3800 with the same timings, though not stable even enough to bench. But heck it is a start. I have not yet had time to really work with finding my unstable timings at 3800 yet.

Keep in mind my this is my ram kit and yes it is Samsung B-die G.SKILL TridentZ RGB Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 4133MHz (PC4 33000) Desktop Memory Model F4-4133C19D-16GTZR 4133 stock timings are 19-19-19-39 Cas Latency 19 Voltage 1.35V, and I do have to give it more voltage on Ryzen but that is just how it is with Ryzen.


----------



## zulex

mtrai said:


> Yes those of us with the C7H WIFI have beta bios 1102 with AGESA 1.0.0.6 and for me it is working like a charm like I have already stated.


There have never been 1102 bios.


----------



## bonomork

mtrai said:


> Yes those of us with the C7H WIFI have beta bios 1102 with AGESA 1.0.0.6 and for me it is working like a charm like I have already stated.


Do you mean 1101 ?


----------



## mtrai

Fixed was just a typo.


----------



## ryan92084

elmor said:


> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27694588-post38965.html
> 
> Sorry to leave you guys hanging like this. The subsystem id change in the latest beta bios has been fixed and will not be a problem in the next release, which should occur ~mid November.


Best of luck to you in the future. I've never dealt with you directly but have read and appreciated a lot of what you've put out. Your back and forth with the end users was one of the reasons I jumped back into Asus after years of avoiding them. You will be missed.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Rusakova said:


> Alex K said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder if somebody who has successfull experience with precision boosts override overclock can post something like manual on the process and the values sinergy between each other.
> Literally for me the goal is to make 3-4 cores seat on 4.35 when up to 4 cores (not threads) loaded, and when all cores load - 4.1 for me will be enough.
> 
> 
> 
> I can't get it to work on BIOS 1002. I tried yesterday and multiplier would stay stuck on 41.5 with an FSB of 103.2 and vcore would stay at 1.365 voltage resulting in 4283 MHz on all cores.
> Couldn't get it to adjust speed at all, just completely stuck, but surprisingly 100% stable.
Click to expand...

I saw the same behavior all the way up to Performance Enhancer 3 so I went to PE4 and used a negative offset to counteract some of the extra voltage.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Alex K said:


> Rusakova said:
> 
> 
> 
> I can't get it to work on BIOS 1002. I tried yesterday and multiplier would stay stuck on 41.5 with an FSB of 103.2 and vcore would stay at 1.365 voltage resulting in 4283 MHz on all cores.
> Couldn't get it to adjust the speed at all, just completely stuck, but surprisingly 100% stable.
> 
> 
> 
> That's why I'm asking some guys who succeeded to come out & share some info.
> There is a lack of this info regarding PBO overclock around.
Click to expand...

Once the new Agesa comes out I’ll try to take some time and make a short guide on it. With my daughters softball season over until March I may have some time to write one up now.


----------



## Sarkoth

MNMadman said:


> ... Got better RAM overclocking with C7H-WIFI than with C6H or MSI B450 Gaming Pro Carbon AC by a long shot. Have my 2x8GB 3200C14 kit doing The Stilt's 3466 preset (but with 2T CR). Neither of the others could make even 3200 stable. Tried four sticks in the C7H-WIFI just to see what I could get but had to reduce speed below 3000 to be stable...



I'm running two kits of 2 x 16GB (64GB total) Corsair LPX @ 3200 CL 16 1T (RAM stock settings) with my CH7. Did take a little bit of tweaking and can't even tighten a single subtiming without getting unstable, but as is, this rig has been running rock solid. And I only put in a pesky R5 2600 until Zen 2 drops, so I am mighty impressed with either the Ryzen 2 IMC or I won the silicon lottery big time with my CPU. With only two bars I managed to get them to 3466 and 3533, although they wouldn't budge on the timings on their own either. One kit is Samsung B Die, one Hynix M, according to Typhoon Burner.


Personally couldn't be happier.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> I seem to have issues with it when use Firefox, but none if use MS Edge. Selecting an OS in the drop down box does not initiate a page update, so see nothing, but does when use MS Edge.


me too, but if you turn off new blocking tech in FF it loads just after starting FF. They're definitely doing something with design though - I keep an eye on the UK, US and Taiwan versions and it looks like they are trying out a dark theme...

Edit: seem ok now colour-wise, but still when you slect your OS it doesn't work unless you just loaded FF


----------



## xkronusx

nick name said:


> I am not. What are you reading those voltages with?





crakej said:


> Mine's ok....


In UEFI it was reading those voltages, I fresh booted this morning and it's reading 2.049V with auto settings. Not sure why it was reading low or set low must have been a restart bug or something.


----------



## nick name

gupsterg said:


> I seem to have issues with it when use Firefox, but none if use MS Edge. Selecting an OS in the drop down box does not initiate a page update, so see nothing, but does when use MS Edge.


I've seen quite a few posts where Chrome doesn't work with the ASUS download site. It's the only reason I use Edge -- the ASUS download site.


----------



## Johan45

crakej said:


> So I made a mistake the other day that I've only noticed yesterday/today.
> 
> I decided to play with StoreMi. I recommend not running this unless you're committed. I only ever enabled a 2GB ram cache on my slow data drive, but decided not to go ahead. Uninstalled the software (late at night while tired) and don't really remember what it said on the screen.
> 
> Anyway, I've noticed when I did bios update that I couldn't access that hard drive from the bios. Turns out that I can only see the 2 drives on that hard disk if the StoreMi driver is loaded and running in windows. I cannot simply convert it back to a non-virtual disk/drives!
> 
> Has anyone any experience of this? Is there a way (and I understand there is meant to be) to convert the disk back? If I disable the driver, I can't see the drives!
> 
> Also, when loading HWInfo64, it gets stuck scanning hard drives for a minute or two before continuing to load. Very frustrating! Maybe I should just re-engage the cache and get on with it?  Has anyone else tried using StoreMi on this board?


Unless the BIOS update did something behind the scenes you should have been able to use the StoreMi interface to break the virtual raid. It takes some time depending on the amount that has been written to the fast tier but it should work. I have played with it quite a bit. You didn't happen to shut the PC off before it was done? Be careful with it cause it can lock the drives so you can't install to them without doig a thorough cleaning with diskpart or secure erase


----------



## crakej

Johan45 said:


> Unless the BIOS update did something behind the scenes you should have been able to use the StoreMi interface to break the virtual raid. It takes some time depending on the amount that has been written to the fast tier but it should work. I have played with it quite a bit. You didn't happen to shut the PC off before it was done? Be careful with it cause it can lock the drives so you can't install to them without doig a thorough cleaning with diskpart or secure erase


I'd never used any fast tier and still couldn't get rid of it. Restored it last night so all is well  There was no operation to interrupt!


----------



## Whatisthisfor

mtrai said:


> Us ASUS users never had any bios with 1.0.0.4 as ASUS felt it was too buggy and totally skipped it.
> 
> On the beta 1101 with AGESA 1.0.0.6 I did try a few things...but at first was limited to using my 1700x as my 2700X had to go through RMA. And then we had Hurricane Michael hit...I live in Panama City Beach, Florida. So anyhow..I finally was able to ship off my 2700X and get it back from RMA. On my 1700X I had already been running 3533 14 14 14 28 42 260 stable. As a quick test after getting my 2700X put in, I tried some higher ram speeds. I was able to boot into windows and browse at 3800 with the same timings, though not stable even enough to bench. But heck it is a start. I have not yet had time to really work with finding my unstable timings at 3800 yet.
> 
> Keep in mind my this is my ram kit and yes it is Samsung B-die G.SKILL TridentZ RGB Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 4133MHz (PC4 33000) Desktop Memory Model F4-4133C19D-16GTZR 4133 stock timings are 19-19-19-39 Cas Latency 19 Voltage 1.35V, and I do have to give it more voltage on Ryzen but that is just how it is with Ryzen.


Great timings 3533 14 14 14 28 42 260 stable i must say. Hope Agesa 1.0.0.6 will hit Gigabyte boards too. I have the G.Skill Trident Z RGB DDR4 32GB Kit (4 x 8GB) 4133MHz CL17 but have had no luck yet to get it stable @ 3533 CL14, i have it running at CL16. Regarding these terrible hurricans i hope you and your people will be spared from them in the future.


----------



## Johan45

crakej said:


> I'd never used any fast tier and still couldn't get rid of it. Restored it last night so all is well  There was no operation to interrupt!


That's kind of its purpose to combine slow and fast drives. If you wanna play with RAM cache ASUS has a utility called RAM cacheII


----------



## CJMitsuki

Johan45 said:


> That's kind of its purpose to combine slow and fast drives. If you wanna play with RAM cache ASUS has a utility called RAM cacheII



That software from Asus is hot garbage as well as the Ram Disk. I personally havent seen a ton of benefit from Ram Cache then again Im using NVME and SSD


----------



## crakej

Johan45 said:


> That's kind of its purpose to combine slow and fast drives. If you wanna play with RAM cache ASUS has a utility called RAM cacheII


I know - but it also has the ability to use 2GB ram as cache, which is all I did. I have RamCache - I was just interested in how StoreMi works. It's a great solution for those with large HDs and small SSDs...

Edit: I don't need any of those kind of things.....just like seeing how it works.....


----------



## Alex K

CJMitsuki said:


> Once the new Agesa comes out I’ll try to take some time and make a short guide on it. With my daughters softball season over until March I may have some time to write one up now.


Would be nice. As this info mostly missing all across the google


----------



## Rusakova

Alex K said:


> Would be nice. As this info mostly missing all across the google


Usually you go into the BIOS under *Extreme Tweaker*:

Ai Overclock Tuner : *Manual*


eCLK mode : synchronous


BCLK frequency : 103 to 103.4 most people cannot run above 104.
I usually use 103.2

Performance enhancer : *Level 3(oc)*
CPU core ratio = 37.00 (for my CPU - 2700x but use whatever is your CPU's default base clock multiplier)
With FSB @ 103.4 and CPU ratio 37, memory clock will be 3308 MHz (usually 3200 MHZ) but 32 x 103.4 = 3308
If your ram can't handle that just lower the ram speed.

core performance boost *enabled*

CPU core voltage mode = *offset mode*


CPU offset mode *+*


CPU voltage offset = *0.0500*

The above settings should boost to ~ 4.45 on single core and ~ 4.25 on all cores.
But you would need some good cooling to do that ~ water
As I said earlier I cannot get this to work on BIOS 1002


----------



## Alex K

Rusakova said:


> Usually you go into the BIOS under *Extreme Tweaker*:
> 
> Ai Overclock Tuner : *Manual*
> 
> 
> eCLK mode : synchronous
> 
> 
> BCLK frequency : 103 to 103.4 most people cannot run above 104.
> I usually use 103.2
> 
> Performance enhancer : *Level 3(oc)*
> CPU core ratio = 37.00 (for my CPU - 2700x but use whatever is your CPU's default base clock multiplier)
> With FSB @ 103.4 and CPU ratio 37, memory clock will be 3308 MHz (usually 3200 MHZ) but 32 x 103.4 = 3308
> If your ram can't handle that just lower the ram speed.
> 
> core performance boost *enabled*
> 
> CPU core voltage mode = *offset mode*
> 
> 
> CPU offset mode *+*
> 
> 
> CPU voltage offset = *0.0500*
> 
> The above settings should boost to ~ 4.45 on single core and ~ 4.25 on all cores.
> But you would need some good cooling to do that ~ water
> As I said earlier I cannot get this to work on BIOS 1002


Thanks a lot for the help, will try.
But my end goal is to make 3-4 cores sit on 4.35+ under load when up to 8 threads and 4.1+ on all cores.

Can you tell how your settings work on 5-8 threads load?


----------



## CJMitsuki

Alex K said:


> Thanks a lot for the help, will try.
> But my end goal is to make 3-4 cores sit on 4.35+ under load when up to 8 threads and 4.1+ on all cores.
> 
> Can you tell how your settings work on 5-8 threads load?


You wont be able to use someone elses settings to determine what you will boost at. XFR/PBO boost is determined during bootup. The max multiplier is more than likely going to be 43.5x unless you are running hot but the all core multiplier and 1-6 core multipliers rely upon temperature headroom. That will vary anywhere from 41.5x to 43.5x all core and the 1-6 core boosts will be based on that too. So, while you can try his settings it will almost be a guarantee that your results will differ. XFR boosts can vary from boot to boot as well. If you are looking for a consistently accurate OC everytime them XFR will not give you that. If you have decent cooling just try PE at default, Core Performance Boost Enabled, 100 base clock, 37 on the multiplier, Cpu voltage Offset -.025v to -.0375v then go to PBO settings and change to Enabled and whatever you want Scalar to be. Then go to PState settings and go to the bottem setting called Relaxed EDC throttling and put it to Enabled and see what your boosts are. You dont need a base clock OC to achieve what you are looking for. Only thing the bclk OC is for is to get over 4.35ghz and nothing more. If XFR went over 43.5x multiplier there would be no need to even use it and thats why its used. So if you dont care about going over 4.35ghz there is no need to touch bclk, keep it at 100 and synchronous.


----------



## Johan45

CJMitsuki said:


> That software from Asus is hot garbage as well as the Ram Disk. I personally havent seen a ton of benefit from Ram Cache then again Im using NVME and SSD





crakej said:


> I know - but it also has the ability to use 2GB ram as cache, which is all I did. I have RamCache - I was just interested in how StoreMi works. It's a great solution for those with large HDs and small SSDs...
> 
> Edit: I don't need any of those kind of things.....just like seeing how it works.....


StoreMi is from AMD/Enmotus, I did a short write up on my experience with it. It really does work and yes for someone wanting to upgrade to an SSD/NVMe without reinstalling all their SW/Windows it works. It'll also work the other way with a large storage HDD for games it'll migrate files to your faster storage improving start times etc..


----------



## crakej

So i'm sticking with 1002 for now, seems fairly stable. Was playing around trying to get 3600MTs again (could do it on earlier builds) and discovered something that I have encountered before but did not want to mention in case I had imagined it.

Although not a cold boot - pressing reset button while machine already on - it booted REALLY fast.... I mean *really fast* - <5 sec (and fastboot is off). I'm trying to work out which setting it is that is making this behaviour, but not worked it out yet. I think it's to do with the cpu having enough juice at boot time but need to experiment more. At the moment i'm concentrating on getting 3600 100% stable, but if I can find settings that get me a nice fast boot time as well, that would be great.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Johan45 said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> That software from Asus is hot garbage as well as the Ram Disk. I personally havent seen a ton of benefit from Ram Cache then again Im using NVME and SSD
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> crakej said:
> 
> 
> 
> I know - but it also has the ability to use 2GB ram as cache, which is all I did. I have RamCache - I was just interested in how StoreMi works. It's a great solution for those with large HDs and small SSDs...
> 
> Edit: I don't need any of those kind of things.....just like seeing how it works..... /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> StoreMi is from AMD/Enmotus, I did a short write up on my experience with it. It really does work and yes for someone wanting to upgrade to an SSD/NVMe without reinstalling all their SW/Windows it works. It'll also work the other way with a large storage HDD for games it'll migrate files to your faster storage improving start times etc..
Click to expand...

I was referring to Ramcache and Ramdisk, not StoreMi. I have used StoreMi and it was nice other than the problem of uninstalling with reverting disks back was too volatile for me. I’m constantly backing up and reinstalling OS on my hard drives so I don’t really need it. I reinstall operating systems from Acronis at least 10 times or more a week so that I don’t have any unwanted processes disturbing performance and its constantly super clean. I just transfer pics and such to external drives.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> So i'm sticking with 1002 for now, seems fairly stable. Was playing around trying to get 3600MTs again (could do it on earlier builds) and discovered something that I have encountered before but did not want to mention in case I had imagined it.
> 
> Although not a cold boot - pressing reset button while machine already on - it booted REALLY fast.... I mean *really fast* - <5 sec (and fastboot is off). I'm trying to work out which setting it is that is making this behaviour, but not worked it out yet. I think it's to do with the cpu having enough juice at boot time but need to experiment more. At the moment i'm concentrating on getting 3600 100% stable, but if I can find settings that get me a nice fast boot time as well, that would be great.


Are you sitting in Windows when you hit the reset button? And does it matter if it's the one on the board or the one connected on the case?


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Are you sitting in Windows when you hit the reset button? And does it matter if it's the one on the board or the one connected on the case?


Sometimes yes, I'm impatient! Either button should be fine. If you reset from Windows it loads a bit slower next boot...


----------



## Alex K

CJMitsuki said:


> You wont be able to use someone elses settings to determine what you will boost at. XFR/PBO boost is determined during bootup. The max multiplier is more than likely going to be 43.5x unless you are running hot but the all core multiplier and 1-6 core multipliers rely upon temperature headroom. That will vary anywhere from 41.5x to 43.5x all core and the 1-6 core boosts will be based on that too. So, while you can try his settings it will almost be a guarantee that your results will differ. XFR boosts can vary from boot to boot as well. If you are looking for a consistently accurate OC everytime them XFR will not give you that. If you have decent cooling just try PE at default, Core Performance Boost Enabled, 100 base clock, 37 on the multiplier, Cpu voltage Offset -.025v to -.0375v then go to PBO settings and change to Enabled and whatever you want Scalar to be. Then go to PState settings and go to the bottem setting called Relaxed EDC throttling and put it to Enabled and see what your boosts are. You dont need a base clock OC to achieve what you are looking for. Only thing the bclk OC is for is to get over 4.35ghz and nothing more. If XFR went over 43.5x multiplier there would be no need to even use it and thats why its used. So if you dont care about going over 4.35ghz there is no need to touch bclk, keep it at 100 and synchronous.


yeah, you're right.
I'm not searching to go above 4.35.
Also, my cooling is Dark Rock Pro 3, so I would not be able to go all the way forward on it.
BUT, my CPU works with -0.081V totally stable, which is promising  Right now at stock PE settings it easy goes 3975 all cores.


----------



## nick name

Alex K said:


> yeah, you're right.
> I'm not searching to go above 4.35.
> Also, my cooling is Dark Rock Pro 3, so I would not be able to go all the way forward on it.
> BUT, my CPU works with -0.081V totally stable, which is promising  Right now at stock PE settings it easy goes 3975 all cores.



I use that offset with load line calibration. Something you can use with PE 3 or 4 is adjusting the EDC with Ryzen Master. Give this a look: https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...tiplier-adjustments-through-ryzen-master.html


----------



## mtrai

Just wanted to give an little info on our PE level 3 and 4 as there seems to be some confusion on what it is doing. While yes it does increase the duration of how long the boost can hold...the biggest change takes place in the CPU MSR registers. Whatever The_Stilt was able to do does change how the CPU on die caches work. Somehow it speeds the L1, L2, and L3 cache up in terms of reducing latency.

The first screen shot is with PE Level 3 and the second screenshot is PE Level 4 Notice all latency improve some by good margin. However the boost level is the same with either PE level.


----------



## MNMadman

mtrai said:


> Just wanted to give an little info on our PE level 3 and 4 as there seems to be some confusion on what it is doing. While yes it does increase the duration of how long the boost can hold...the biggest change takes place in the CPU MSR registers. Whatever The_Stilt was able to do does change how the CPU on die caches work. Somehow it speeds the L1, L2, and L3 cache up in terms of reducing latency.
> 
> The first screen shot is with PE Level 3 and the second screenshot is PE Level 4 Notice all latency improve some by good margin. However the boost level is the same with either PE level.


The boost level is the same with P3 and P4 on your system? It doesn't work that way on mine.

For me:
PE2 has an all-core boost that fluctuates slightly depending on what the load is (4150-4175 while gaming, around 4075-4100 while doing BOINC units).
PE3 gives an all-core boost that is slightly lower than the top boost for PE2 but keeps it constant at one speed no matter the load.
PE4 gives the highest all-core boost and it stays at that boost level while under load, no matter what application is running.


----------



## chakku

mtrai said:


> Just wanted to give an little info on our PE level 3 and 4 as there seems to be some confusion on what it is doing. While yes it does increase the duration of how long the boost can hold...the biggest change takes place in the CPU MSR registers. Whatever The_Stilt was able to do does change how the CPU on die caches work. Somehow it speeds the L1, L2, and L3 cache up in terms of reducing latency.
> 
> The first screen shot is with PE Level 3 and the second screenshot is PE Level 4 Notice all latency improve some by good margin. However the boost level is the same with either PE level.


The AIDA Cache & Memory Benchmark has some pretty volatile fluctuations between runs. Might be better to do an average or 5-6 runs each to get a better idea if there's any actual cache improvements exclusive of frequency/boost increase outside of margin of error.


----------



## mtrai

MNMadman said:


> The boost level is the same with P3 and P4 on your system? It doesn't work that way on mine.
> 
> For me:
> PE2 has an all-core boost that fluctuates slightly depending on what the load is (4150-4175 while gaming, around 4075-4100 while doing BOINC units).
> PE3 gives an all-core boost that is slightly lower than the top boost for PE2 but keeps it constant at one speed no matter the load.
> PE4 gives the highest all-core boost and it stays at that boost level while under load, no matter what application is running.


For me PE3 and 4 both have the same max boost, just PE 4 has better latency then PE 3. PE4 does have a higher all core boosts for me then PE 3.



chakku said:


> The AIDA Cache & Memory Benchmark has some pretty volatile fluctuations between runs. Might be better to do an average or 5-6 runs each to get a better idea if there's any actual cache improvements exclusive of frequency/boost increase outside of margin of error.


I have done many runs just not screen shotted them all. But it has been the same latencies with those 2 PE levels.


----------



## Synoxia

I can't get BCLK oc stable above 101, Bios version is 702, cpu is 2700x, ram is stable 2h GSAT, temp are ofcourse in check (Noctua d15, plenty of airflow) i am using 0.03 voltage offset with PE level 2.
Do i have the worst 2700x on the planet or what?
OC will get unstable randomly.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> Just wanted to give an little info on our PE level 3 and 4 as there seems to be some confusion on what it is doing. While yes it does increase the duration of how long the boost can hold...the biggest change takes place in the CPU MSR registers. Whatever The_Stilt was able to do does change how the CPU on die caches work. Somehow it speeds the L1, L2, and L3 cache up in terms of reducing latency.
> 
> The first screen shot is with PE Level 3 and the second screenshot is PE Level 4 Notice all latency improve some by good margin. However the boost level is the same with either PE level.


Aida64 latencies improve with CPU speed. I don't think it matters if it's PE 3 or PE4, but the actual CPU speed. Which in your case is increasing as you switch from PE 3 to PE 4. If you adjust your multiplier while your booted with PE 4 to match your PE 3 you will most likely find it's the same latencies. I've played with it quite a bit.


----------



## Rusakova

Synoxia said:


> I can't get BCLK oc stable above 101, Bios version is 702, cpu is 2700x, ram is stable 2h GSAT, temp are ofcourse in check (Noctua d15, plenty of airflow) i am using 0.03 voltage offset with PE level 2.
> Do i have the worst 2700x on the planet or what?
> OC will get unstable randomly.


Do you have any SATA drive plugged into port 5/6 ? Then you won't get above 101.
It's a weird thing with this board and the way SATA port 5/6 is connected.
Keep port 5/6 free and you can go to ~103.4 most people can't go above 104.


----------



## Synoxia

No... i have a samsung 850 ssd in sata port 1 and a 3tb HGST 7200 ultrastar in port 2 (the first from bottom to top, bios says port 1 and 2) . I tried 804 bios but nothing changes... i see many getting 103 stable what is wrong with my system?


----------



## gupsterg

nick name said:


> Aida64 latencies improve with CPU speed. I don't think it matters if it's PE 3 or PE4, but the actual CPU speed. Which in your case is increasing as you switch from PE 3 to PE 4. If you adjust your multiplier while your booted with PE 4 to match your PE 3 you will most likely find it's the same latencies. I've played with it quite a bit.


 @mtrai

Above is true.



> The core, L1 and L2 cache speed is permanently linked together as usual, however unlike with the previous designs the L3 cache now operates at core speed as well (i.e. full speed).


See heading The frequency relations of the CCX, here.


----------



## neikosr0x

Synoxia said:


> No... i have a samsung 850 ssd in sata port 1 and a 3tb HGST 7200 ultrastar in port 2 (the first from bottom to top, bios says port 1 and 2) . I tried 804 bios but nothing changes... i see many getting 103 stable what is wrong with my system?


yeap i have.

1 m.2
2ssd
2 normal disk 7200rpm

ch7 hero
2700x

and i can get 103.4 stable but i need to give it some more voltage of about eg: +0.250 or +0.0315


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> See heading The frequency relations of the CCX, here.


Great share gupsterg - very useful


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> @mtrai
> 
> See heading The frequency relations of the CCX, here.


Good stuff...it is hard to believe each day I still learn new or more in depth stuff with Ryzen CPUs.


----------



## crakej

I've managed to get back to 3600MTs - but 'only' at 4.1GHz with CPU getting up to 74 degrees (P95). It used to be 4.2GHz and about 71 degrees max. Tight settings - 14 13 13 13 22 36 and tRFC at 280 currently, which is the setting i'm currently working on - I think I can get it tighter.

Image is taken after running RamTest, P95 35min run and IBT AVX Very High. Turns out I had to reduce my SoC voltage a bit to really get it reliable...

For those that don't know me, I do usually do much more thorough tests once I'm dialled in - RamTest to 4000%, P95 for over an hour etc. - when my system needs to be proper 100% stable. Often I'm just happy with my system and have no problems without feeling the need for extensive testing, and I don't really do all night tests!


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> Great share gupsterg - very useful


NP  , the information The Stilt pumps out amazes me TBH and not just on Ryzen.



mtrai said:


> Good stuff...it is hard to believe each day I still learn new or more in depth stuff with Ryzen CPUs.


NP :thumb:.



crakej said:


> I've managed to get back to 3600MTs - but 'only' at 4.1GHz with CPU getting up to 74 degrees (P95). It used to be 4.2GHz and about 71 degrees max. Tight settings - 14 13 13 13 22 36 and tRFC at 280 currently, which is the setting i'm currently working on - I think I can get it tighter.
> 
> Image is taken after running RamTest, P95 35min run and IBT AVX Very High. Turns out I had to reduce my SoC voltage a bit to really get it reliable...
> 
> For those that don't know me, I do usually do much more thorough tests once I'm dialled in - RamTest to 4000%, P95 for over an hour etc. - when my system needs to be proper 100% stable. Often I'm just happy with my system and have no problems without feeling the need for extensive testing, and I don't really do all night tests!


That's damn nice result in my book. Perhaps temp difference due to room ambient variance between tests?


----------



## Synoxia

neikosr0x said:


> yeap i have.
> 
> 1 m.2
> 2ssd
> 2 normal disk 7200rpm
> 
> ch7 hero
> 2700x
> 
> and i can get 103.4 stable but i need to give it some more voltage of about eg: +0.250 or +0.0315


Check page 1-2 on the manual.. i've used sata ports 1-2 the ones on bottom... why i cant get more than 102?
If it can help im using ch7 wifi with Vega 64 gpu... i also have many devices plugged into usb ports too one of them is a DAC with 2 jbl305sr plugged in.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> NP  , the information The Stilt pumps out amazes me TBH and not just on Ryzen.
> 
> That's damn nice result in my book. Perhaps temp difference due to room ambient variance between tests?


Not sure - I do need to give the CPU more than I used to to achieve same OC. Don't seem to be able to do 4.2GHz AND have ram at 3600MTs on this bios, so am just going to get tFRC as low as possible.

Temps have been warmer here last few days - it's bound to have some effect I guess...


----------



## The Stilt

Ryzen Timing Checker 1.05

https://www.techpowerup.com/download/ryzen-timing-checker/

- Added an alternative code path required by PinnaclePI 1.0.0.6 AGESA.
- Added APOB NVC parsing support for Threadripper with Firmware TPM (fTPM) active.
- Disabled APOB NVC parsing for MCM4 Threadripper SKUs (2970WX & 2990WX) due to the piggyback structure of the CPU.

I'm pulling the plug after this version.
So no support for upcoming hardware, or even bug fixes.

Due to the fact that AMD is still unable (or unwilling) to provide a proper hardware access method to acquire the information RTC is displaying, maintaining the app has become a burden.
Since RTC has to rely on unofficial (and unorthodox) methods to acquire the displayed information, its functionality can be broken by even a single change AMD makes to the AGESA stack.
Trying to constantly reverse engineer the changes made by AMD, while maintaining the support for older software stack versions at the same time isn't very feasible at all.


----------



## nick name

The Stilt said:


> Ryzen Timing Checker 1.05
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/download/ryzen-timing-checker/
> 
> - Added an alternative code path required by PinnaclePI 1.0.0.6 AGESA.
> - Added APOB NVC parsing support for Threadripper with Firmware TPM (fTPM) active.
> - Disabled APOB NVC parsing for MCM4 Threadripper SKUs (2970WX & 2990WX) due to the piggyback structure of the CPU.
> 
> I'm pulling the plug after this version.
> So no support for upcoming hardware, or even bug fixes.
> 
> Due to the fact that AMD is still unable (or unwilling) to provide a proper hardware access method to acquire the information RTC is displaying, maintaining the app has become a burden.
> Since RTC has to rely on unofficial (and unorthodox) methods to acquire the displayed information, its functionality can be broken by even a single change AMD makes to the AGESA stack.
> Trying to constantly reverse engineer the changes made by AMD, while maintaining the support for older software stack versions at the same time isn't very feasible at all.



I can understand completely and I appreciate you creating this lastest release.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I've managed to get back to 3600MTs - but 'only' at 4.1GHz with CPU getting up to 74 degrees (P95). It used to be 4.2GHz and about 71 degrees max. Tight settings - 14 13 13 13 22 36 and tRFC at 280 currently, which is the setting i'm currently working on - I think I can get it tighter.
> 
> Image is taken after running RamTest, P95 35min run and IBT AVX Very High. Turns out I had to reduce my SoC voltage a bit to really get it reliable...
> 
> For those that don't know me, I do usually do much more thorough tests once I'm dialled in - RamTest to 4000%, P95 for over an hour etc. - when my system needs to be proper 100% stable. Often I'm just happy with my system and have no problems without feeling the need for extensive testing, and I don't really do all night tests!


Daaaaaamn. Alright let's see a RTC screen now too. I can't even get 14-14-14-14 stable at 3600.


----------



## hurricane28

The Stilt said:


> Ryzen Timing Checker 1.05
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/download/ryzen-timing-checker/
> 
> - Added an alternative code path required by PinnaclePI 1.0.0.6 AGESA.
> - Added APOB NVC parsing support for Threadripper with Firmware TPM (fTPM) active.
> - Disabled APOB NVC parsing for MCM4 Threadripper SKUs (2970WX & 2990WX) due to the piggyback structure of the CPU.
> 
> I'm pulling the plug after this version.
> So no support for upcoming hardware, or even bug fixes.
> 
> Due to the fact that AMD is still unable (or unwilling) to provide a proper hardware access method to acquire the information RTC is displaying, maintaining the app has become a burden.
> Since RTC has to rely on unofficial (and unorthodox) methods to acquire the displayed information, its functionality can be broken by even a single change AMD makes to the AGESA stack.
> Trying to constantly reverse engineer the changes made by AMD, while maintaining the support for older software stack versions at the same time isn't very feasible at all.


Thank you for your support and effort you put in this tool. Its a shame AMD goes this route, is it different for Intel or do they also provide no access to their hardware? 

Does it also differ from board to board or is it strictly AMD?


----------



## Synoxia

The Stilt said:


> Ryzen Timing Checker 1.05
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/download/ryzen-timing-checker/
> 
> - Added an alternative code path required by PinnaclePI 1.0.0.6 AGESA.
> - Added APOB NVC parsing support for Threadripper with Firmware TPM (fTPM) active.
> - Disabled APOB NVC parsing for MCM4 Threadripper SKUs (2970WX & 2990WX) due to the piggyback structure of the CPU.
> 
> I'm pulling the plug after this version.
> So no support for upcoming hardware, or even bug fixes.
> 
> Due to the fact that AMD is still unable (or unwilling) to provide a proper hardware access method to acquire the information RTC is displaying, maintaining the app has become a burden.
> Since RTC has to rely on unofficial (and unorthodox) methods to acquire the displayed information, its functionality can be broken by even a single change AMD makes to the AGESA stack.
> Trying to constantly reverse engineer the changes made by AMD, while maintaining the support for older software stack versions at the same time isn't very feasible at all.


Thanks for being the most useful guy to this community.
Might i dare to ask you if you have any clue why i can't OC bclk above 101 on my CH7 while others clearly can? This is driving me mad


----------



## The Stilt

hurricane28 said:


> Thank you for your support and effort you put in this tool. Its a shame AMD goes this route, is it different for Intel or do they also provide no access to their hardware?
> 
> Does it also differ from board to board or is it strictly AMD?


The issue exists mostly due to the security features.
It seems that the security was an afterthough, which was added only after everything else was completed.
The registers which could and normally would be used to read the parameters do exists, but they belong to a region which is "secured" by the platform security processor (PSP).
Securing a certain range means that it cannot be read or written. AMD could have easily allowed read only access to this region, but for some reason they decided not to.

Only the most basic timing and frequency information can be read on this platform. Everything else (such as ProcODT, etc) can be only read from a dynamic PSP NV copy, intended for debugging.
None of this is documented and because of that even the bioses cannot read them.

The worst memory related issue on this platform is that there is no way to tune the memory controller parameters.
They are hard coded into the memory controller firmware (PMU) and cannot be changed by anyone but AMD. This prevents the manufacturers from optimizing the parameters specifically for their designs.

For example on Z390 motherboards, on which I've worked on for the last couple weeks there are more than a hundred adjustable parameters. Intel provides the base line (MRC code) and the manufacturers can
then tune them further to better suit their designs. As an example, a specific dual rank B-die memory kit was giving me trouble on a Z390 motherboard. It was able to post at 3200MHz (which is very low for the platform) and higher
frequencies resulted in failed memory training and failures to post. About three hours later the very same kit was running at 4000MHz, with tighter timings than originally. Obviously the memory controllers on Intel and AMD CPUs have a very little in common, but
it is hard to say if the issues on Ryzen memory controllers are due to the memory controller IP itself being weak / bad or simply due to the fact that there are no adjustments available.


----------



## F0RCE963

The Stilt said:


> Ryzen Timing Checker 1.05
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/download/ryzen-timing-checker/
> 
> - Added an alternative code path required by PinnaclePI 1.0.0.6 AGESA.
> - Added APOB NVC parsing support for Threadripper with Firmware TPM (fTPM) active.
> - Disabled APOB NVC parsing for MCM4 Threadripper SKUs (2970WX & 2990WX) due to the piggyback structure of the CPU.
> 
> I'm pulling the plug after this version.
> So no support for upcoming hardware, or even bug fixes.
> 
> Due to the fact that AMD is still unable (or unwilling) to provide a proper hardware access method to acquire the information RTC is displaying, maintaining the app has become a burden.
> Since RTC has to rely on unofficial (and unorthodox) methods to acquire the displayed information, its functionality can be broken by even a single change AMD makes to the AGESA stack.
> Trying to constantly reverse engineer the changes made by AMD, while maintaining the support for older software stack versions at the same time isn't very feasible at all.


I know that you just said that this is the last version, but do you have any idea why I keep getting "InitializeOIs failed." error? It used to work but not anymore, not even the latest version.


----------



## The Stilt

F0RCE963 said:


> I know that you just said that this is the last version, but do you have any idea why I keep getting "InitializeOIs failed." error? It used to work but not anymore, not even the latest version.


It seems to be Windows related.
No know cures besides re-installing Windows, at least to me.


----------



## nick name

F0RCE963 said:


> I know that you just said that this is the last version, but do you have any idea why I keep getting "InitializeOIs failed." error? It used to work but not anymore, not even the latest version.


This eventually cured itself for me. I can't recall if it was related to the subsystem id bug in the 1101 BIOS, but I believe it fixed itself after reverting back to BIOS 1001 and a few attempts to run RTC.


----------



## nick name

The Stilt said:


> The issue exists mostly due to the security features.
> It seems that the security was an afterthough, which was added only after everything else was completed.
> The registers which could and normally would be used to read the parameters do exists, but they belong to a region which is "secured" by the platform security processor (PSP).
> Securing a certain range means that it cannot be read or written. AMD could have easily allowed read only access to this region, but for some reason they decided not to.
> 
> Only the most basic timing and frequency information can be read on this platform. Everything else (such as ProcODT, etc) can be only read from a dynamic PSP NV copy, intended for debugging.
> None of this is documented and because of that even the bioses cannot read them.
> 
> The worst memory related issue on this platform is that there is no way to tune the memory controller parameters.
> They are hard coded into the memory controller firmware (PMU) and cannot be changed by anyone but AMD. This prevents the manufacturers from optimizing the parameters specifically for their designs.
> 
> For example on Z390 motherboards, on which I've worked on for the last couple weeks there are more than a hundred adjustable parameters. Intel provides the base line (MRC code) and the manufacturers can
> then tune them further to better suit their designs. As an example, a specific dual rank B-die memory kit was giving me trouble on a Z390 motherboard. It was able to post at 3200MHz (which is very low for the platform) and higher
> frequencies resulted in failed memory training and failures to post. About three hours later the very same kit was running at 4000MHz, with tighter timings than originally. Obviously the memory controllers on Intel and AMD CPUs have a very little in common, but
> it is hard to say if the issues on Ryzen memory controllers are due to the memory controller IP itself being weak / bad or simply due to the fact that there are no adjustments available.




This is very frustrating to learn as a consumer and I can only imagine the level of frustration to someone that has the ability to fix an issue, but not the access.


----------



## crakej

The Stilt said:


> Ryzen Timing Checker 1.05
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/download/ryzen-timing-checker/
> 
> - Added an alternative code path required by PinnaclePI 1.0.0.6 AGESA.
> - Added APOB NVC parsing support for Threadripper with Firmware TPM (fTPM) active.
> - Disabled APOB NVC parsing for MCM4 Threadripper SKUs (2970WX & 2990WX) due to the piggyback structure of the CPU.
> 
> I'm pulling the plug after this version.
> So no support for upcoming hardware, or even bug fixes.
> 
> Due to the fact that AMD is still unable (or unwilling) to provide a proper hardware access method to acquire the information RTC is displaying, maintaining the app has become a burden.
> Since RTC has to rely on unofficial (and unorthodox) methods to acquire the displayed information, its functionality can be broken by even a single change AMD makes to the AGESA stack.
> Trying to constantly reverse engineer the changes made by AMD, while maintaining the support for older software stack versions at the same time isn't very feasible at all.


Thanks for this incredibly useful tool! What a shame AMD make this so difficult...


----------



## kmellz

Hopefully something they've changed for Zen 2!


----------



## BLUuuE

F0RCE963 said:


> I know that you just said that this is the last version, but do you have any idea why I keep getting "InitializeOIs failed." error? It used to work but not anymore, not even the latest version.


Try installing Open Hardware Monitor


----------



## Syldon

The Stilt said:


> Ryzen Timing Checker 1.05
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/download/ryzen-timing-checker/
> 
> - Added an alternative code path required by PinnaclePI 1.0.0.6 AGESA.
> - Added APOB NVC parsing support for Threadripper with Firmware TPM (fTPM) active.
> - Disabled APOB NVC parsing for MCM4 Threadripper SKUs (2970WX & 2990WX) due to the piggyback structure of the CPU.
> 
> I'm pulling the plug after this version.
> So no support for upcoming hardware, or even bug fixes.
> 
> Due to the fact that AMD is still unable (or unwilling) to provide a proper hardware access method to acquire the information RTC is displaying, maintaining the app has become a burden.
> Since RTC has to rely on unofficial (and unorthodox) methods to acquire the displayed information, its functionality can be broken by even a single change AMD makes to the AGESA stack.
> Trying to constantly reverse engineer the changes made by AMD, while maintaining the support for older software stack versions at the same time isn't very feasible at all.



Zen bioses breaking diagnostic software is becoming a feature. I think all appreciate the effort of people like yourself have put in to make OCing easier.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Synoxia said:


> No... i have a samsung 850 ssd in sata port 1 and a 3tb HGST 7200 ultrastar in port 2 (the first from bottom to top, bios says port 1 and 2) . I tried 804 bios but nothing changes... i see many getting 103 stable what is wrong with my system?


 increase PLL voltage a little


----------



## Alex K

CJMitsuki said:


> You wont be able to use someone elses settings to determine what you will boost at. XFR/PBO boost is determined during bootup. The max multiplier is more than likely going to be 43.5x unless you are running hot but the all core multiplier and 1-6 core multipliers rely upon temperature headroom. That will vary anywhere from 41.5x to 43.5x all core and the 1-6 core boosts will be based on that too. So, while you can try his settings it will almost be a guarantee that your results will differ. XFR boosts can vary from boot to boot as well. If you are looking for a consistently accurate OC everytime them XFR will not give you that. If you have decent cooling just try PE at default, Core Performance Boost Enabled, 100 base clock, 37 on the multiplier, Cpu voltage Offset -.025v to -.0375v then go to PBO settings and change to Enabled and whatever you want Scalar to be. Then go to PState settings and go to the bottem setting called Relaxed EDC throttling and put it to Enabled and see what your boosts are. You dont need a base clock OC to achieve what you are looking for. Only thing the bclk OC is for is to get over 4.35ghz and nothing more. If XFR went over 43.5x multiplier there would be no need to even use it and thats why its used. So if you dont care about going over 4.35ghz there is no need to touch bclk, keep it at 100 and synchronous.


Can you tell approximately how the behavior under load is changing depending on PBO scalar, that was always a mystery for me.
I understand that it gives more voltage & makes CPU run more on higher frequencies.
But how it translates in digits, is there any predictable, calculated behavior?


----------



## CJMitsuki

Alex K said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> You wont be able to use someone elses settings to determine what you will boost at. XFR/PBO boost is determined during bootup. The max multiplier is more than likely going to be 43.5x unless you are running hot but the all core multiplier and 1-6 core multipliers rely upon temperature headroom. That will vary anywhere from 41.5x to 43.5x all core and the 1-6 core boosts will be based on that too. So, while you can try his settings it will almost be a guarantee that your results will differ. XFR boosts can vary from boot to boot as well. If you are looking for a consistently accurate OC everytime them XFR will not give you that. If you have decent cooling just try PE at default, Core Performance Boost Enabled, 100 base clock, 37 on the multiplier, Cpu voltage Offset -.025v to -.0375v then go to PBO settings and change to Enabled and whatever you want Scalar to be. Then go to PState settings and go to the bottem setting called Relaxed EDC throttling and put it to Enabled and see what your boosts are. You dont need a base clock OC to achieve what you are looking for. Only thing the bclk OC is for is to get over 4.35ghz and nothing more. If XFR went over 43.5x multiplier there would be no need to even use it and thats why its used. So if you dont care about going over 4.35ghz there is no need to touch bclk, keep it at 100 and synchronous.
> 
> 
> 
> Can you tell approximately how the behavior under load is changing depending on PBO scalar, that was always a mystery for me.
> I understand that it gives more voltage & makes CPU run more on higher frequencies.
> But how it translates in digits, is there any predictable, calculated behavior?
Click to expand...

I can try to check that out and see. I didn’t notice any huge changes but then again I wasn’t lookin for any. Plus, I’m used to running all the way up to nearly 1.6v quite often so I probably wouldn’t have noticed it unless I looked for it. I’m recovering my OS from Acronis right now and I will check it out once I’m done.


----------



## Alex K

CJMitsuki said:


> I can try to check that out and see. I didn’t notice any huge changes but then again I wasn’t lookin for any. Plus, I’m used to running all the way up to nearly 1.6v quite often so I probably wouldn’t have noticed it unless I looked for it. I’m recovering my OS from Acronis right now and I will check it out once I’m done.


Thanks, mate.
BTW, have you noticed a strange behavior when making a 3-4 threads load?
When I launch LinPack with setting on 4 thread load, expected behavior: 4 threads loaded 100%, what I see in HWInfo 8 threads 40-50% load.

Also tried to make settings which you wrote before (PE3 + other), except setting scalar manually (left on auto). 
If more then 2 threads load (3-16), than all cores sit on 4.08 with 1.21-1.22V, TDie is near 76C.


----------



## hurricane28

The Stilt said:


> The issue exists mostly due to the security features.
> It seems that the security was an afterthough, which was added only after everything else was completed.
> The registers which could and normally would be used to read the parameters do exists, but they belong to a region which is "secured" by the platform security processor (PSP).
> Securing a certain range means that it cannot be read or written. AMD could have easily allowed read only access to this region, but for some reason they decided not to.
> 
> Only the most basic timing and frequency information can be read on this platform. Everything else (such as ProcODT, etc) can be only read from a dynamic PSP NV copy, intended for debugging.
> None of this is documented and because of that even the bioses cannot read them.
> 
> The worst memory related issue on this platform is that there is no way to tune the memory controller parameters.
> They are hard coded into the memory controller firmware (PMU) and cannot be changed by anyone but AMD. This prevents the manufacturers from optimizing the parameters specifically for their designs.
> 
> For example on Z390 motherboards, on which I've worked on for the last couple weeks there are more than a hundred adjustable parameters. Intel provides the base line (MRC code) and the manufacturers can
> then tune them further to better suit their designs. As an example, a specific dual rank B-die memory kit was giving me trouble on a Z390 motherboard. It was able to post at 3200MHz (which is very low for the platform) and higher
> frequencies resulted in failed memory training and failures to post. About three hours later the very same kit was running at 4000MHz, with tighter timings than originally. Obviously the memory controllers on Intel and AMD CPUs have a very little in common, but
> it is hard to say if the issues on Ryzen memory controllers are due to the memory controller IP itself being weak / bad or simply due to the fact that there are no adjustments available.


This is the best answer i've got since we discussed the IT sensor issues, much obliged Mr Stilt. 

Isn't there anyway to bring this under AMD's attention? I mean, if its that important perhaps you can email or contact AMD about it as you can explain this better than anyone else. 
The other option would be, and you would make a lot of people happy with it, is to work for Asus ROG, or is Taiwan too hot for you since you come from Finland? lol.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Alex K said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> I can try to check that out and see. I didn’t notice any huge changes but then again I wasn’t lookin for any. Plus, I’m used to running all the way up to nearly 1.6v quite often so I probably wouldn’t have noticed it unless I looked for it. I’m recovering my OS from Acronis right now and I will check it out once I’m done.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks, mate.
> BTW, have you noticed a strange behavior when making a 3-4 threads load?
> When I launch LinPack with setting on 4 thread load, expected behavior: 4 threads loaded 100%, what I see in HWInfo 8 threads 40-50% load.
> 
> Also tried to make settings which you wrote before (PE3 + other), except setting scalar manually (left on auto).
> If more then 2 threads load (3-16), than all cores sit on 4.08 with 1.21-1.22V, TDie is near 76C.
Click to expand...

No, I have never seen that behavior before. That’s strange, but what is more strange is that you are nearing 80c at 1.21v...You May want to check your cooler and see if it is seated properly and check the thermal paste. Is it a good thermal paste? At that voltage you shouldn’t get those temps.


----------



## gupsterg

Alex K said:


> Thanks, mate.
> BTW, have you noticed a strange behavior when making a 3-4 threads load?
> When I launch LinPack with setting on 4 thread load, expected behavior: 4 threads loaded 100%, what I see in HWInfo 8 threads 40-50% load.
> 
> Also tried to make settings which you wrote before (PE3 + other), except setting scalar manually (left on auto).
> If more then 2 threads load (3-16), than all cores sit on 4.08 with 1.21-1.22V, TDie is near 76C.


Not used that test, but on P95 if I lower thread count I need to set affinity via task manager to keep threads scheduled to use x cores.


----------



## Alex K

CJMitsuki said:


> No, I have never seen that behavior before. That’s strange, but what is more strange is that you are nearing 80c at 1.21v...You May want to check your cooler and see if it is seated properly and check the thermal paste. Is it a good thermal paste? At that voltage, you shouldn’t get those temps.


It's under all core LinPack with AVX only. Besides my Cooler (Dark Rock Pro 3) is not very powerful, yet very quiet. It is powerful only on paper. But in fact, it's limit is near 170-180W. And yes I'm using MX-2, so thermal paste is good I think.

Latest test attached (increased LLC to 4 and set the negative offset to -0.075V)
https://1drv.ms/u/s!Au2F56upYhudiaIG98MVC6cWNZ2miw


----------



## CJMitsuki

Alex K said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, I have never seen that behavior before. That’s strange, but what is more strange is that you are nearing 80c at 1.21v...You May want to check your cooler and see if it is seated properly and check the thermal paste. Is it a good thermal paste? At that voltage, you shouldn’t get those temps.
> 
> 
> 
> It's under all core LinPack with AVX only. Besides my Cooler (Dark Rock Pro 3) is not very powerful, yet very quiet. It is powerful only on paper. But in fact, it's limit is near 170-180W. And yes I'm using MX-2, so thermal paste is good I think.
> 
> Latest test attached (increased LLC to 4 and set the negative offset to -0.075V)
> https://1drv.ms/u/s!Au2F56upYhudiaIG98MVC6cWNZ2miw
Click to expand...

Eh, that thermal paste is borderline imo. It’s rated at 6 W/mK and Kryonaut is more than double that at 12.5 W/mK or if you wanted to go the Liquid Metal route then Conductonaut is 73 W/mK! I use Conductonaut and its quite good. I use it on my CPU and GPU


----------



## Alex K

CJMitsuki said:


> Eh, that thermal paste is borderline imo. It’s rated at 6 W/mK and Kryonaut is more than double that at 12.5 W/mK or if you wanted to go the Liquid Metal route then Conductonaut is 73 W/mK! I use Conductonaut and its quite good. I use it on my CPU and GPU


I bet that temperature comes from my weak cooler, not thermal paste. 
Right now, I'll not gonna change it, as it's a fresh build and I simply do not have time for it, besides I will see how it goes with Zen2 and maybe swap.
For now, I just want to make optimal adjustments to my CPU, probably will stick with OC2 mode + 5-6 scalar, hope this would work.


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> Eh, that thermal paste is borderline imo. It’s rated at 6 W/mK and Kryonaut is more than double that at 12.5 W/mK or if you wanted to go the Liquid Metal route then Conductonaut is 73 W/mK! I use Conductonaut and its quite good. I use it on my CPU and GPU


I've always wondered if using conductonaut on a CPU IHS leads to it "dripping" off and onto the motherboard. Does it stay in place?


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Eh, that thermal paste is borderline imo. It’s rated at 6 W/mK and Kryonaut is more than double that at 12.5 W/mK or if you wanted to go the Liquid Metal route then Conductonaut is 73 W/mK! I use Conductonaut and its quite good. I use it on my CPU and GPU
> 
> 
> 
> I've always wondered if using conductonaut on a CPU IHS leads to it "dripping" off and onto the motherboard. Does it stay in place?
Click to expand...

It has never dripped off onto my board but then again you shouldn’t be putting on enough to be able to drip off


----------



## specialedge

nick name said:


> I've always wondered if using conductonaut on a CPU IHS leads to it "dripping" off and onto the motherboard. Does it stay in place?


It is always emphasized to apply sparingly in order to minimize the chance that it occurs 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## gupsterg

Personally I think TIM used/purchased can be overated.

MX-2/4 in THG roundup has approx. ~0.01C difference, vs Kryonaut ~1.xC. Der8auer's testing MX-2/4 is ~0.5C difference and vs Kryonaut ~2.xC difference.

While back used Hydronaut as it was bundled with a block, glad I didn't pay for the stuff as thought it was pants to spread.

Considering the mild gains some of these TIMs give, "usability" and cost vs another TIM, I'd use the saving towards improved cooling.


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> It has never dripped off onto my board but then again you shouldn’t be putting on enough to be able to drip off


I assumed that too, but haven't had the balls to try it. I know that a thin layer is all that is required and that thin layer seems as if it would stay put.


----------



## nick name

gupsterg said:


> Personally I think TIM used/purchased can be overated.
> 
> MX-2/4 in THG roundup has approx. ~0.01C difference, vs Kryonaut ~1.xC. Der8auer's testing MX-2/4 is ~0.5C difference and vs Kryonaut ~2.xC difference.
> 
> While back used Hydronaut as it was bundled with a block, glad I didn't pay for the stuff as thought it was pants to spread.
> 
> Considering the mild gains some of these TIMs give, "usability" and cost vs another TIM, I'd use the saving towards improved cooling.



I purchased a small tube of Hydronaut, but gave up on its use when I couldn't get it to behave as I attempted to apply it. It wanted to stick to anything but the IHS and in my frustration I ended up haphazardly wasting it all. So I've been using Noctua's paste as it is exceptionally easy to handle.


----------



## CJMitsuki

gupsterg said:


> Personally I think TIM used/purchased can be overated.
> 
> MX-2/4 in THG roundup has approx. ~0.01C difference, vs Kryonaut ~1.xC. Der8auer's testing MX-2/4 is ~0.5C difference and vs Kryonaut ~2.xC difference.
> 
> While back used Hydronaut as it was bundled with a block, glad I didn't pay for the stuff as thought it was pants to spread.
> 
> Considering the mild gains some of these TIMs give, "usability" and cost vs another TIM, I'd use the saving towards improved cooling.


That’s not counting LM. I was getting 45c temps on my GPU and after LM it still dropped by 10c down to 35c. Also, it isn’t always about the thermals when comparing, it’s also about how it holds up over time.  Some TIM gets hard and cracks in a short amount of time and others get runny or can’t hold up well in cold. For anything above 8c nothing even comes close to LM, even when it isn’t direct die cooling. I usually see 10c+ drops in temps. The thermal conductivity is unreal. It’s almost as if your cooler is one with the IHS. So, I do agree with you that conventional TIM is a very minute gain in thermal headroom but LM being the exception. If anyone is wary about applying it the get some nail polish clear coat and apply a couple of coats to everything that it could possibly contact and you will be good to go. I was nervous the first time I did it and I have spilled some one the board but it comes up easily and as long as you take your time there is nothing to worry about. On my GPU I used some rubberized glue and applied a couple of layers around the die and it was good to go.


----------



## crakej

my experience of LM has been quite good. you need to be patient when applying it - it does take a while, though after a while you start learning how to do it (a bit) quicker. I think you can get LM pads now that only 'melt' when you switch on. Not sure how well these perform yet - need to look into it more. my temps were down 8 degrees on my cpu.


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> That’s not counting LM. I was getting 45c temps on my GPU and after LM it still dropped by 10c down to 35c. Also, it isn’t always about the thermals when comparing, it’s also about how it holds up over time. Some TIM gets hard and cracks in a short amount of time and others get runny or can’t hold up well in cold. For anything above 8c nothing even comes close to LM, even when it isn’t direct die cooling. I usually see 10c+ drops in temps. The thermal conductivity is unreal. It’s almost as if your cooler is one with the IHS. So, I do agree with you that conventional TIM is a very minute gain in thermal headroom but LM being the exception. If anyone is wary about applying it the get some nail polish clear coat and apply a couple of coats to everything that it could possibly contact and you will be good to go. I was nervous the first time I did it and I have spilled some one the board but it comes up easily and as long as you take your time there is nothing to worry about. On my GPU I used some rubberized glue and applied a couple of layers around the die and it was good to go.


Do you recall what your temperature drop was when switching from tradition TIM to LM on your CPU?


----------



## gupsterg

nick name said:


> I purchased a small tube of Hydronaut, but gave up on its use when I couldn't get it to behave as I attempted to apply it. It wanted to stick to anything but the IHS and in my frustration I ended up haphazardly wasting it all. So I've been using Noctua's paste as it is exceptionally easy to handle.


As I'd known/read how Hydronaut can be I wasn't surprised, but reading it to experiencing total different thing  . Several times I was like :sozo:, but I persevered  and didn't waste any.

I did heat the tube and give the GPU die a bit of a blast with hair dryer as to aid spreading. That was the only way I got something that resembled what I'm used, when spread AS5 by plastic card.

A few times I've thought I'd try MX-4, NT-H1 and Be Quiet DC1, as found real super cheap deals on them. Then I just stuck to what I've been using for what seems like an eon. 



CJMitsuki said:


> That’s not counting LM. I was getting 45c temps on my GPU and after LM it still dropped by 10c down to 35c. Also, it isn’t always about the thermals when comparing, it’s also about how it holds up over time. Some TIM gets hard and cracks in a short amount of time and others get runny or can’t hold up well in cold. For anything above 8c nothing even comes close to LM, even when it isn’t direct die cooling. I usually see 10c+ drops in temps. The thermal conductivity is unreal. It’s almost as if your cooler is one with the IHS. So, I do agree with you that conventional TIM is a very minute gain in thermal headroom but LM being the exception. If anyone is wary about applying it the get some nail polish clear coat and apply a couple of coats to everything that it could possibly contact and you will be good to go. I was nervous the first time I did it and I have spilled some one the board but it comes up easily and as long as you take your time there is nothing to worry about. On my GPU I used some rubberized glue and applied a couple of layers around the die and it was good to go.


In Der8auer's testing LM was a further drop of ~1C vs Kryonaut, THG shows ~2C. IMO, in regard to LM, vs more mainstream TIMs still not a wide enough gap account for aspects as stated before, to justify it.

Perhaps for people that don't pull apart their rig often LM is good value. I also get why delid users would use it also. For me and most it seems very much overated TBH. LM costs ~2.5-3x more than something mainstream. Mainstream pastes much easier to handle, etc.

My post is not meant to change your view  . I accept your view and respect your share, "just giving my 2c"  .


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> Do you recall what your temperature drop was when switching from tradition TIM to LM on your CPU?





crakej said:


> my experience of LM has been quite good. you need to be patient when applying it - it does take a while, though after a while you start learning how to do it (a bit) quicker. I think you can get LM pads now that only 'melt' when you switch on. Not sure how well these perform yet - need to look into it more. my temps were down 8 degrees on my cpu.



My results were similar, about 8c average


----------



## Alex K

@CJMitsuki have you checked the screen I posted earlier 
What do you think? Do you really think there is a problem there with something?


----------



## CJMitsuki

Alex K said:


> @*CJMitsuki* have you checked the screen I posted earlier
> What do you think? Do you really think there is a problem there with something?



As long as you are stable it seems fine, you were pulling 150w so on air those temps seem right. Thats not too bad for 1.23v, I expected the temps to be lower but I didnt expect 150w either. OCCT probably just runs hotter than i remember.


----------



## Johan45

I know I have said this before, TIM is just that not counting LM but for everything I do that's not extreme cold I use this because I'm cheap https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835103080 $30 for 200g approx 500 applications. If anything I might lose 3-5° and I think I'm being generous with that. Last night same TIM 360 AIO quick stability testing on a 9900k at 5.0 with 1.25V (these things are hot) 4266 mem. I don't think $30 for 6g paste would have made any difference to be honest and I've used all kinds. Now when getting serious I have Kryonaut and kingpin which isn't cheap but needs to hold up at -180°


----------



## VPII

I do find this thermal paste debate really interesting. I'm in South Africa so for the most part most options are limited and I do get my LN2 runs going every now and then and I've never had an issue with the TP I used. I know that TP can make a difference, but I seriously feel for everyday use some of the cheapest will give me maybe 2 or 3C more than what I'd get from what is stated as "THE BEST".

I am no pro and will never classify myself as one, but I like to fool around with the options I have and make it work.


----------



## crakej

What's this I've been seeing about ASUS stopping us from modding or using modded bios? I have wondered if my 1700x could per chance use XFR2 PBO ect if the settings were unlocked.... or maybe some other thing they don't want us kids meddling with


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> What's this I've been seeing about ASUS stopping us from modding or using modded bios? I have wondered if my 1700x could per chance use XFR2 PBO ect if the settings were unlocked.... or maybe some other thing they don't want us kids meddling with



Prior to the beta version 1001 we could modify user screen setups in AMIBCP. With 1001 and later versions recently it was removed. Manufacturers can request from AMI modified AMIBCP as well as just block the access on their part when they create the bios. It is part of how some things are hidden or unhidden. We can still edit flags in the hex files using another process which can expose some things or just outright change things even though they are not exposed.

The thing is I was not sure at the time when I realized this, was this a new ASUS thing, or was it a mandate from AMD, or just a newer version of AMIBCP. It turns out it was ASUS (though it is possible ASUS is now using a newer version we do not yet have). I personally believe though it was a decision of ASUS to prevent us from showing the things you were asking about. Recently MSI released AGESA PR-1.0.0.6 on a 350 beta bios a few days ago. Here is a screen shot showing what ASUS had hidden. We can only see the bios features tab on the ASUS bios...however MSI still shows all tabs including the Setup Configuration. Now you can see the difference The bios on the left of the screen shot is the 1101 C6H wifi beta the one on the right is the recently released MSI. I Have checked all the beta bios we have recently received on the C6H and C7H as well as few other 350 boards with recent beta bios and a couple or newly released on the ASUS site. All are the same and are locked down. AMIBCP allows the customization of the bios to not show those tabs if the manufacturer chooses to.

And to answer that question, well sort of not true XFR2 ...I have done it on my 1700x and C6H Wifi board. There is plenty of info in the ryzen bios modding thread.

/edit PS they already did not want us to use modified bios as we have to strip the .cap security signature from the bios and we had to find a work around to all this. Yes there is plenty they do not want us kids meddling with.


----------



## crakej

mtrai said:


> Prior to the beta version 1001 we could modify user screen setups in AMIBCP. With 1001 and later versions recently it was removed. Manufacturers can request from AMI modified AMIBCP as well as just block the access on their part when they create the bios. It is part of how some things are hidden or unhidden. We can still edit flags in the hex files using another process which can expose some things or just outright change things even though they are not exposed.
> 
> The thing is I was not sure at the time when I realized this, was this a new ASUS thing, or was it a mandate from AMD, or just a newer version of AMIBCP. It turns out it was ASUS (though it is possible ASUS is now using a newer version we do not yet have). I personally believe though it was a decision of ASUS to prevent us from showing the things you were asking about. Recently MSI released AGESA PR-1.0.0.6 on a 350 beta bios a few days ago. Here is a screen shot showing what ASUS had hidden. We can only see the bios features tab on the ASUS bios...however MSI still shows all tabs including the Setup Configuration. Now you can see the difference The bios on the left of the screen shot is the 1101 C6H wifi beta the one on the right is the recently released MSI. I Have checked all the beta bios we have recently received on the C6H and C7H as well as few other 350 boards with recent beta bios and a couple or newly released on the ASUS site. All are the same and are locked down. AMIBCP allows the customization of the bios to not show those tabs if the manufacturer chooses to.
> 
> And to answer that question, well sort of not true XFR2 ...I have done it on my 1700x and C6H Wifi board. There is plenty of info in the ryzen bios modding thread.
> 
> /edit PS they already did not want us to use modified bios as we have to strip the .cap security signature from the bios and we had to find a work around to all this. Yes there is plenty they do not want us kids meddling with.


This is a shame.... You managed to get XFR2 and PBO working on 1700X? I thought I had read in that tread that although they could expose the settings for it it had no effect..... I'll have another read while I wait for AGESA update!


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> This is a shame.... You managed to get XFR2 and PBO working on 1700X? I thought I had read in that tread that although they could expose the settings for it it had no effect..... I'll have another read while I wait for AGESA update!


The boosts on both 1700x/1800x vs the 2700x are pretty similar as both are related to thermals. XFR vs XFR2 and PBO vs PBO2 are nearly essentially the same. 2 is just a bit more refined. Then you also have to account for the differences in the microcode between 1000 to 2000 and the natural refinements.

The thermals is biggest part of how well XFR and PBO perform and you have power consumption as well. 

https://www.amd.com/en/technologies/sense-mi
https://www.anandtech.com/show/12625/amd-second-generation-ryzen-7-2700x-2700-ryzen-5-2600x-2600/5

The options are there and work for both...but the microcode also comes into play. 

So when I say yes sort of...it is not a just plug-n-play or just drop a modified bios in and you have to manually adjust a lot of bios parameters on the 1000 series where as the 2000 series will set those things. So that is why I say it is not true XFR2/ PBO 2 

I am probably not explaining what I mean well at all.


----------



## crakej

mtrai said:


> The boosts on both 1700x/1800x vs the 2700x are pretty similar as both are related to thermals. XFR vs XFR2 and PBO vs PBO2 are nearly essentially the same. 2 is just a bit more refined. Then you also have to account for the differences in the microcode between 1000 to 2000 and the natural refinements.
> 
> The thermals is biggest part of how well XFR and PBO perform and you have power consumption as well.
> 
> https://www.amd.com/en/technologies/sense-mi
> https://www.anandtech.com/show/12625/amd-second-generation-ryzen-7-2700x-2700-ryzen-5-2600x-2600/5
> 
> The options are there and work for both...but the microcode also comes into play.
> 
> So when I say yes sort of...it is not a just plug-n-play or just drop a modified bios in and you have to manually adjust a lot of bios parameters on the 1000 series where as the 2000 series will set those things. So that is why I say it is not true XFR2/ PBO 2
> 
> I am probably not explaining what I mean well at all.


Thank you! - Even without changing anything XFR worked much better on this board than it had on my X370 Prime Pro. I'm sure I read somewhere that the x470 chipset used some unused pins to supply Zen+ CPUs with that extra bit of juice, but I can't find any reference to that. Also, doesn't Zen+ have more sensors than 1xxx CPUs to really help fine tune the new OC modes?

My 1700X can do 4.2GHz depending on ram speed, which is pretty damn decent. I'm really excited about Zen 2 which will be going into this this board unless it really needs new (PCIE 4) chipset, but in the meantime, I'm still enjoying tweaking with my 1700x.


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> Also, doesn't Zen+ have more sensors than 1xxx CPUs to really help fine tune the new OC modes?


I don't believe so. Based on how new firmware can be ported to CPU via a UEFI/AGESA update I reckon PB/XFR2 could well be switched on for gen 1 if AMD were inclined to.

I wasn't too impressed with PB/XFR2 on 1st 2700X, but am really liking it on 2nd, hence I created a section in the ROG C7H OP to share some of what I've experienced.

Without OC/Performance bias tweaks. Just on my lapped ThermalRight Archon IB-E X2, AS5, room ambient of ~22C I just had this:-



Spoiler














Previously with same PBO setup but targetting ~3200MHz I had 182/1902 (above was same PBO setup but targetting ~3338MHz RAM).



Spoiler














All I'm using is PE: Default, PBO: Enabled, BCLK: 102.2, originally offset was +6.25mV, then testing in P95 v28.10b1 highlighted need for +12.5mV, P95 v29.4b8 pushed this to +18.75mV. At the end I've given VCORE/SOC a step bump after this testing, +25mV/1.012V. Lighter loads like RB, etc can show some nice clocks  . Hoping to have a monoblock next week to try on this same setup. I see myself not moving from C6H TBH  . Gonna tweak RAM some more and call it a day  .



Spoiler
































crakej said:


> I'm really excited about Zen 2 which will be going into this this board unless it really needs new (PCIE 4) chipset, but in the meantime, I'm still enjoying tweaking with my 1700x.


I reckon if it did have PCIE4 we'd see it use PCIE3 on boards from current/previous chipsets. An assumption based on another's in this article.



> Although not confirmed by AMD, we will state that most if not all systems will need a PCB re-spin to handle PCIe Gen4 signaling. So existing systems can get Rome with PCIe Gen3 but will require higher-quality PCB for PCIe Gen4.


----------



## nick name

So I've been taking advantage of the cooler weather again (really looking forward to next Tuesday and the 31*F forecasted low). So that coupled with my new Fractal Design S36 I've been pushing my CPU further than I've been able to before. My new Cinebench high score is now 2033 at 4.36GHz and I believe the temps on the CPU were getting up to 76*C, but I didn't have HWiNFO open during all of the runs. 

I used PE3, BCLK 103.4, and adjusted EDC in Ryzen Master to set a 42.3 multiplier. 


Hopefully the colder winter weather approaching will let me reach some @CJMitsuki levels of OC. I'll just need to sit at my PC bundled up as I pull cold air in from an open window.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> I don't believe so. Based on how new firmware can be ported to CPU via a UEFI/AGESA update I reckon PB/XFR2 could well be switched on for gen 1 if AMD were inclined to.
> 
> I wasn't too impressed with PB/XFR2 on 1st 2700X, but am really liking it on 2nd, hence I created a section in the ROG C7H OP to share some of what I've experienced.
> 
> Without OC/Performance bias tweaks. Just on my lapped ThermalRight Archon IB-E X2, AS5, room ambient of ~22C I just had this:-
> 
> 
> Previously with same PBO setup but targetting ~3200MHz I had 182/1902 (above was same PBO setup but targetting ~3338MHz RAM).
> 
> 
> All I'm using is PE: Default, PBO: Enabled, BCLK: 102.2, originally offset was +6.25mV, then testing in P95 v28.10b1 highlighted need for +12.5mV, P95 v29.4b8 pushed this to +18.75mV. At the end I've given VCORE/SOC a step bump after this testing, +25mV/1.012V. Lighter loads like RB, etc can show some nice clocks  . Hoping to have a monoblock next week to try on this same setup. I see myself not moving from C6H TBH  . Gonna tweak RAM some more and call it a day  .
> 
> I reckon if it did have PCIE4 we'd see it use PCIE3 on boards from current/previous chipsets. An assumption based on another's in this article.


I wondered if that might be the case. It's a shame - it's not like a 1700X could beat an 2700x even if you could enable XFR2/PO/PE modes. My 1700X is a good one, for sure though.

I can't wait to upgrade to Zen 2 - I also thought it would prob run PCIE ver 3 on X470/X370 boards. Haven't read anything about ver 4 specs yet - was wishful thinking 

You've got some nice results there gupsterg...... I am tempted by Threadripper - just really don't need it lol......not enough to pay extra for it! (come back to me in a year or 2 on that one!)

Life is crazy now - computers are becoming much more powerful at such pace (Thanks to AMD!)


----------



## neikosr0x

One question, so if elmor is off from ASUS. Who is taking care of this thread? Are we expecting some one to post an bios update here or do we have to be just checking the ASUS supp website every now and then.


----------



## nick name

neikosr0x said:


> One question, so if elmor is off from ASUS. Who is taking care of this thread? Are we expecting some one to post an bios update here or do we have to be just checking the ASUS supp website every now and then.


I guess that depends on if Elmor was tapped for the role or if he did it out of the kindness of his heart and then ASUS just went along. Hopefully, if it's the latter, ASUS will ask someone else to continue Elmor's work in the community.


----------



## crakej

neikosr0x said:


> One question, so if elmor is off from ASUS. Who is taking care of this thread? Are we expecting some one to post an bios update here or do we have to be just checking the ASUS supp website every now and then.


We were very lucky to have Elmor at our disposal! I hope this is something positive ASUS learn - I really don't get why manufacturers don't have a couple of staff lurking in the forums, helping people and interacting with users. Seem like a no-brainer, especially for fault detection and reporting.

Raja used to help out in the AM4 forums but we don't really see him any more - he seems more active in intel forums nowadays.

All is not lost though as we do still have some *really* helpful people in this community! Will we get beta bios? Time will tell, but various users have been able to get hold of these before...


----------



## mtrai

I swear...every day is a new adventure with my Ryzen CPUs

Today's issue of the day....now my 2700X is boosting all cores to the max XFR2 /PBO2 boost clock. 

I am not sure...as I have not changed anything since yesterday. Shut my PC down when I went to bed and just powered it up this morning. This one has me baffled. I do not use RyzenMaster...only bios settings.


----------



## VPII

crakej said:


> We were very lucky to have Elmor at our disposal! I hope this is something positive ASUS learn - I really don't get why manufacturers don't have a couple of staff lurking in the forums, helping people and interacting with users. Seem like a no-brainer, especially for fault detection and reporting.
> 
> Raja used to help out in the AM4 forums but we don't really see him any more - he seems more active in intel forums nowadays.
> 
> All is not lost though as we do still have some *really* helpful people in this community! Will we get beta bios? Time will tell, but various users have been able to get hold of these before...


You know..... I was waiting for this to come out. Knew about it for about a month or two as I heard it from a good friend of mine working in the industry. It would be sad if there is nobody else continuing to assist with what's new, what has changed and what to expect. Obviously I'll wish @elmor well in his new en devours and I trust that he'll be successful in all he does.


----------



## Synoxia

I am still unable to get more than 101 BCLK stable on my zen 2700x and can't figure out the reason why others can more than 103...


----------



## mtrai

Synoxia said:


> I am still unable to get more than 101 BCLK stable on my zen 2700x and can't figure out the reason why others can more than 103...


Stability for the bclk over 100 also depends on every component you have in the system on pcie busses. Some devices are very sensitive to any bclk changes. So while the CPU might be able to handle another device cannot...too many different variables for each persons PC. FOr me I have 1 m.2 drive that does not like any bclk over 101.8 it just vanishes. My gpus when I had the 580s in did not care about the bclk so I could do 103+....no issue...however my Vega 64 does not like any bclk over 101. If I go above 101 the system becomes unstable. Remember when you raise the Bclk you are not just overclocking the CPU and Ram but every other device as well.


----------



## MNMadman

Synoxia said:


> I am still unable to get more than 101 BCLK stable on my zen 2700x and can't figure out the reason why others can more than 103...


You could always try Asynchronous mode. It allows the CPU to have higher BCLK while the RAM and PCIe stay at a lower BCLK. It does add 15-20ns to latency though.


----------



## Synoxia

MNMadman said:


> You could always try Asynchronous mode. It allows the CPU to have higher BCLK while the RAM and PCIe stay at a lower BCLK. It does add 15-20ns to latency though.


Problem is PBO won't work properly then


----------



## MNMadman

Synoxia said:


> Problem is PBO won't work properly then


What do you mean, PBO doesn't work? The CPU will boost as normal with the settings you have selected for PBO. It did for me, when I tried it about a month ago or so.

You just need to set Core Performance Boost to Enabled. The Auto setting switches to disabled with higher BCLK speeds.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> I swear...every day is a new adventure with my Ryzen CPUs
> 
> Today's issue of the day....now my 2700X is boosting all cores to the max XFR2 /PBO2 boost clock.
> 
> I am not sure...as I have not changed anything since yesterday. Shut my PC down when I went to bed and just powered it up this morning. This one has me baffled. I do not use RyzenMaster...only bios settings.


Sometimes the Minimum Processor State will set itself to 100% so if what you're seeing is the max speed isn't 4.35GHz but the all core clock then that's what it sounds like has happened.


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> Sometimes the Minimum Processor State will set itself to 100% so if what you're seeing is the max speed isn't 4.35GHz but the all core clock then that's what it sounds like has happened.


Yeah that happens more then I want think about sometimes for no reason at all. It is downclocking like normal....that was the first thing I checked anyway and still at 40% for the Min state. I am seeing 4.35 on all core clock on the boost...it idles at 2199 and downvolts as well.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> It is downclocking like normal....that was the first thing I checked anyway and still at 40% for the Min state. I am seeing 4.35 on all core clock on the boost...it idles at 2199 and downvolts as well.


Wait, so can describe what your CPU is doing with the actual multiplier values? I am not sure I understand what you're saying.


----------



## mtrai

MNMadman said:


> You could always try Asynchronous mode. It allows the CPU to have higher BCLK while the RAM and PCIe stay at a lower BCLK. It does add 15-20ns to latency though.


Exactly the reason I do not use Async mode...but I guess it could benefit some people to use it. Extreme overclockers come to mind. But that added latency is a deal breaker for me.


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> Wait, so can describe what your CPU is doing with the actual multiplier values? I am not sure I understand what you're saying.


Yeah the PBO2 / XFR2 boost is boosting all cores to the max PBO2 / XFR2 instead of 1 or 2 and rarely 3 to 4...all cores on multithread hit 4.35 and it does not drop. I have had this happen before...usually rebooting would correct it...not tested again the last hour or so, but it has been persisting through reboots.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> Yeah the PBO2 / XFR2 boost is boosting all cores to the max PBO2 / XFR2 instead of 1 or 2 and rarely 3 to 4...all cores on multithread hit 4.35 and it does not drop. I have had this happen before...usually rebooting would correct it...not tested again the last hour or so, but it has been persisting through reboots.


That only happens to me when I use PE4 which is why I don't use it. Is that what you're using?


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> That only happens to me when I use PE4 which is why I don't use it. Is that what you're using?


 MOst of the time...but it does not normally do that for me.

/edit I just adjusted the voltage offset and it is fixed it. Now it is behaving like it should lol.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> MOst of the time...but it does not normally do that for me.


Well do this for me . . . reboot and then open Ryzen Master and under the Current Tab see if the value for EDC is 1. When it is 1 is when it does the crazy all core boost. And if it is 1 then you can correct that in Ryzen Master by changing it to 168 (which is the max and should change the multiplier to 42.5) using one of the Profile Tabs and then hitting apply. You can lower the multiplier by using different EDC values also.


----------



## CJMitsuki

mtrai said:


> Yeah the PBO2 / XFR2 boost is boosting all cores to the max PBO2 / XFR2 instead of 1 or 2 and rarely 3 to 4...all cores on multithread hit 4.35 and it does not drop. I have had this happen before...usually rebooting would correct it...not tested again the last hour or so, but it has been persisting through reboots.



Check the hidden power settings, some of those can cause that behavior under processor power management.


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> Well do this for me . . . reboot and then open Ryzen Master and under the Current Tab see if the value for EDC is 1. When it is 1 is when it does the crazy all core boost. And if it is 1 then you can correct that in Ryzen Master by changing it to 168 (which is the max and should change the multiplier to 42.5) using one of the Profile Tabs and then hitting apply. You can lower the multiplier by using different EDC values also.


Hmm I wished I had checked that before changing the offset voltage to see.


----------



## mtrai

CJMitsuki said:


> Check the hidden power settings, some of those can cause that behavior under processor power management.


Ekk I do not have them installed right now to show. But after changing my offset a hair made it start behaving normal again.


----------



## specialedge

mtrai said:


> MOst of the time...but it does not normally do that for me.
> 
> /edit I just adjusted the voltage offset and it is fixed it. Now it is behaving like it should lol.


I wish you would tell us what you "fixed" about it

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Synoxia

I am still not able to reach more than 101 bclk oc. I feel like an alien.


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> We were very lucky to have Elmor at our disposal! I hope this is something positive ASUS learn - I really don't get why manufacturers don't have a couple of staff lurking in the forums, helping people and interacting with users. Seem like a no-brainer, especially for fault detection and reporting.


Totally agree.

The support that was available on these forums reinforced my decision on which board to get.



Synoxia said:


> I am still not able to reach more than 101 bclk oc. I feel like an alien.


In your thread you highlight a component which matches mtrai observed behaviour, that is happening with you; I have made the txt bold and underlined.



mtrai said:


> Stability for the bclk over 100 also depends on every component you have in the system on pcie busses. Some devices are very sensitive to any bclk changes. So while the CPU might be able to handle another device cannot...too many different variables for each persons PC. FOr me I have 1 m.2 drive that does not like any bclk over 101.8 it just vanishes. *My gpus when I had the 580s in did not care about the bclk so I could do 103+....no issue...however my Vega 64 does not like any bclk over 101.* If I go above 101 the system becomes unstable. Remember when you raise the Bclk you are not just overclocking the CPU and Ram but every other device as well.


----------



## mtrai

specialedge said:


> I wish you would tell us what you "fixed" about it
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


As I said I just slightly adjusted my offset voltage and it went back to working like it was s'posed too.


----------



## Synoxia

gupsterg said:


> Totally agree.
> 
> The support that was available on these forums reinforced my decision on which board to get.
> 
> Same, i hope he comes back or we get someone else to support this thread
> 
> 
> 
> In your thread you highlight a component which matches mtrai observed behaviour, that is happening with you; I have made the txt bold and underlined.


Thanks gupsterg, i feel less like an alien now that i know that some guy had this issue. 
Do you think there's something i can try to overcome the issue without changing the GPU? I've tried settings PCI-E Gen 2 without results. Asynchronous BCLK will add latency... not gonna try that.
I've saw a guy on youtube able to get 103.8 with a Fury X if it can help.
Btw thanks for the contribute you give to this community, i've been lurking on your amd gpu threads for a while and istantly recognized you


----------



## mtrai

Synoxia said:


> Thanks gupsterg, i feel less like an alien now that i know that some guy had this issue.
> Do you think there's something i can try to overcome the issue without changing the GPU? I've tried settings PCI-E Gen 2 without results. Asynchronous BCLK will add latency... not gonna try that.
> I've saw a guy on youtube able to get 103.8 with a Fury X if it can help.
> Btw thanks for the contribute you give to this community, i've been lurking on your amd gpu threads for a while and istantly recognized you


There is no way to overcome this per device limitation with the bclk. It is what it is. To make matters worse the bclk tolerance to the pcie bus is further compounded to each individual device...what I mean...lets use my M.2 drive Samsung 850 256 gb that will not work if bclk is above 101.8 ...another person can own the same exact model it will work at 103 bclk. Each individual device will only tolerate so much pcie bus change, so we cannot say all of X devices will run at Y bclk. Each one has to be tested. The Bclk PCI buss speed tolerance is unique to each individual device.

The way I figured all this out...was I removed that m.2 drive and was able to hit 103+ without it in with my 580s. With it in it would not see the M.2 drive above 101.8 and would have strange issues in windows. Once I got my vega 64 I removed my 2 x 580s in crossfire. Left the same Bclk and would get constant BSOD with the GPU related issues. Once I lowered the blck those BSOD went away. 

If I remember correctly the the PCIe spec only allows for +/-.05% range to be in spec on the PCIe bus speeds. This is a very tiny spread.

I never bothered with testing all this with Async Mode....due to the much higher ram latency and system latency.

You only options are to remove the offending device to go above that devices pcie bus speed tolerance, replace the device with another that will work at the pcie bus speed, or not exceed the bclk pcie bus speed tolerance, or use Async Mode with the higher latency.

/edit added link to PCIe 3.0 specs, it is a big document.

http://composter.com.ua/documents/PCI_Express_Base_Specification_Revision_3.0.pdf

https://www.idt.com/document/apn/843-pci-express-reference-clock-requirements


----------



## neikosr0x

Synoxia said:


> Thanks gupsterg, i feel less like an alien now that i know that some guy had this issue.
> Do you think there's something i can try to overcome the issue without changing the GPU? I've tried settings PCI-E Gen 2 without results. Asynchronous BCLK will add latency... not gonna try that.
> I've saw a guy on youtube able to get 103.8 with a Fury X if it can help.
> Btw thanks for the contribute you give to this community, i've been lurking on your amd gpu threads for a while and istantly recognized you


try by taking off some hdd probably one of them is ******* up your system, also gpu... you could try async but u will get my ram latency


----------



## Synoxia

https://www.amazon.it/Hitachi-UltraStar-HUS724030ALE641-7200RPM-ENTERPRISE/dp/B0734K1PGT this is the one... but i need it as all my games are on it lol



mtrai said:


> There is no way to overcome this per device limitation with the bclk. It is what it is. To make matters worse the bclk tolerance to the pcie bus is further compounded to each individual device...what I mean...lets use my M.2 drive Samsung 850 256 gb that will not work if bclk is above 101.8 ...another person can own the same exact model it will work at 103 bclk. Each individual device will only tolerate so much pcie bus change, so we cannot say all of X devices will run at Y bclk. Each one has to be tested. The Bclk PCI buss speed tolerance is unique to each individual device.
> 
> The way I figured all this out...was I removed that m.2 drive and was able to hit 103+ without it in with my 580s. With it in it would not see the M.2 drive above 101.8 and would have strange issues in windows. Once I got my vega 64 I removed my 2 x 580s in crossfire. Left the same Bclk and would get constant BSOD with the GPU related issues. Once I lowered the blck those BSOD went away.
> 
> If I remember correctly the the PCIe spec only allows for +/-.05% range to be in spec on the PCIe bus speeds. This is a very tiny spread.
> 
> I never bothered with testing all this with Async Mode....due to the much higher ram latency and system latency.
> 
> You only options are to remove the offending device to go above that devices pcie bus speed tolerance, replace the device with another that will work at the pcie bus speed, or not exceed the bclk pcie bus speed tolerance, or use Async Mode with the higher latency.
> 
> /edit added link to PCIe 3.0 specs, it is a big document.
> 
> http://composter.com.ua/documents/PCI_Express_Base_Specification_Revision_3.0.pdf
> 
> https://www.idt.com/document/apn/843-pci-express-reference-clock-requirements


One thing i noticed is that most of the crashes don't even happen under load, but when playing a youtube video for some reason.
I guess i'll just not exceed bclk pci e bus speed until i find and change this device, or wait AMD to actually implement a way to tweak multiplers of precision boost without bclk. 
Something tells me that it's very likely that this won't come with this gen cpus but only on newer cpus just like PB&XFR2 aren't avalable on gen 1 ryzen 

One more question, is it better to use LV 3 LLC with higher voltage or level 4 with lower voltage? Currently my cpu with PE level 2 uses around 1.46 costantly with light thread apps and 1.48 up to 1.52 for single thread... temps are mostly around 50c, only sometimes they spikes to 60. Should i be worried?


----------



## crakej

Synoxia said:


> https://www.amazon.it/Hitachi-UltraStar-HUS724030ALE641-7200RPM-ENTERPRISE/dp/B0734K1PGT this is the one... but i need it as all my games are on it lol
> 
> 
> 
> One thing i noticed is that most of the crashes don't even happen under load, but when playing a youtube video for some reason.
> I guess i'll just not exceed bclk pci e bus speed until i find and change this device, or wait AMD to actually implement a way to tweak multiplers of precision boost without bclk.
> Something tells me that it's very likely that this won't come with this gen cpus but only on newer cpus just like PB&XFR2 aren't avalable on gen 1 ryzen
> 
> One more question, is it better to use LV 3 LLC with higher voltage or level 4 with lower voltage? Currently my cpu with PE level 2 uses around 1.46 costantly with light thread apps and 1.48 up to 1.52 for single thread... temps are mostly around 50c, only sometimes they spikes to 60. Should i be worried?


With thermals like that I think you have nothing to worry about! Is that around 60 degrees under load?


----------



## starrbuck

Did anyone else's T_SENSOR1 stop working after the latest BIOS update?

EDIT: It turns out this was a bad temp sensor. Not a BIOS problem!


----------



## nick name

Synoxia said:


> https://www.amazon.it/Hitachi-UltraStar-HUS724030ALE641-7200RPM-ENTERPRISE/dp/B0734K1PGT this is the one... but i need it as all my games are on it lol
> 
> 
> 
> One thing i noticed is that most of the crashes don't even happen under load, but when playing a youtube video for some reason.
> I guess i'll just not exceed bclk pci e bus speed until i find and change this device, or wait AMD to actually implement a way to tweak multiplers of precision boost without bclk.
> Something tells me that it's very likely that this won't come with this gen cpus but only on newer cpus just like PB&XFR2 aren't avalable on gen 1 ryzen
> 
> One more question, is it better to use LV 3 LLC with higher voltage or level 4 with lower voltage? Currently my cpu with PE level 2 uses around 1.46 costantly with light thread apps and 1.48 up to 1.52 for single thread... temps are mostly around 50c, only sometimes they spikes to 60. Should i be worried?


I saw something similar when attempting to make my BCLK overclock stable also. I ended up using LLC lvl 4 with a small negative offest. It helped make the single core workloads more stable. Workloads like you're seeing.


----------



## gupsterg

@MacG32

Any progress on your end with 4x8GB on C7H?


With CPU 1805 SUS I had below, PState 0 4.15GHz VID: 1.387 SOC: 1.05 VDIMM: 1.36 ProcODT: 48, rest as per screenie/default.



Spoiler




























Further testing had shown instability, for some reason I then bounced over to C6H, now back on C7H with 1825 SUS and UEFI 1101 with AGESA 1.0.0.6  .

Emulating some of my previous testing on other CPU did not help with this CPU. So currently here now.



Spoiler














Above I'm setting SPD Optimization: Disabled in UEFI, not made any difference to benches, doesn't seem as if it helped to stabilise profile as at the time I changed 2 settings to get above  . Lowered VTTDDR from 0.687 to 0.675 and Disabled SPDO.

On another side note, so far 1825 SUS for PBO behaves the same as when used on C6H.



Synoxia said:


> Thanks gupsterg, i feel less like an alien now that i know that some guy had this issue.
> Do you think there's something i can try to overcome the issue without changing the GPU? I've tried settings PCI-E Gen 2 without results. Asynchronous BCLK will add latency... not gonna try that.
> I've saw a guy on youtube able to get 103.8 with a Fury X if it can help.
> Btw thanks for the contribute you give to this community, i've been lurking on your amd gpu threads for a while and istantly recognized you


NP  , I'd stick with mtrai advice  .

I have only recently tinkered with BCLK on Pinnacle Ridge. On Summit Ridge and C6H, when using BCLK 109+ I'd lose my Intel AC7260 WiFi card. The Fury X and SATA SSD/HDD/ODD had no issues.


----------



## crakej

Found anything good about AGESA 1006 yet @gupsterg?


----------



## gupsterg

Not noticed so far TBH.

As stated before same CPU between C6H/C7H using same cooling, TIM, etc nabs same average MHz in P95, etc, benches the same for me.

If the new PBO menu is going to remain the same in future releases as beta 1101, then it's a step backwards. Allows no manual setup  .

UEFI 1101 MOBO/CPU/PBO pages



Spoiler






























So far only noted difference is the SPD Read toggle (default is Enabled).



Spoiler














So far I am setting RAM timings as have been in the past, ie not set values but which settings, as to see what others on [Auto] do. Again it seems tRDWR & tWRRD when left on [Auto] can train differently per channel, I'm sticking to [Auto] so far for those.



Spoiler


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Found anything good about AGESA 1006 yet @gupsterg?


Does @gupsterg have a newer version of 1101 or is it the same that Elmor gave us?


----------



## nick name

So I learned last night that I need to use LN2 mode to use an offset higher than .13125. Is that the same for everyone?


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Does @gupsterg have a newer version of 1101 or is it the same that Elmor gave us?


There is only one version 1101.

Edit: There is only ever one version of a version, otherwise it gets confusing!


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> There is only one version 1101.
> 
> Edit: There is only ever one version of a version, otherwise it gets confusing!


I am not sure what naming scheme ASUS uses soooooo yeah.


----------



## mtrai

@gupsterg @crakej Just a little update on my use with 1101 with AGESA 1.0.06 on my C7H Wifi 

Actually more of a shiny light. Been using 3733 Mhz on my ram all day...lots and lots of benchmarking. Also changed to Manual PBO XFR 2 settings and no Performance Enhancement levels. So far so good...will be running the longer mem tests later tonight or tomorrow. I have only had to make a few adjustments to my ram timings in the bios to get here. One thing of note...if you want higher cinebench scores you need to use PE levels IMO. But I am cool without that unless I need it just to show or a competition.

Here is where I am at currently. I am getting worried to hit 3800 stable I will have to loosen the timings to CL 16 and or change to 2T as well.

Also as I have already said offset voltage has changed some as well.


----------



## Syldon

nick name said:


> I am not sure what naming scheme ASUS uses soooooo yeah.



The releases for the CH6 were very haphazard. The releases for the CH7 have been fairly consistent in an incremental value. 
0207
0401
0509
0601
0702
0804
1001
1002

The revision numbers in between will be unstable revision that did not get past the alpha stages.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> @gupsterg @crakej Just a little update on my use with 1101 with AGESA 1.0.06 on my C7H Wifi
> 
> Actually more of a shiny light. Been using 3733 Mhz on my ram all day...lots and lots of benchmarking. Also changed to Manual PBO XFR 2 settings and no Performance Enhancement levels. So far so good...will be running the longer mem tests later tonight or tomorrow. I have only had to make a few adjustments to my ram timings in the bios to get here. One thing of note...if you want higher cinebench scores you need to use PE levels IMO. But I am cool without that unless I need it just to show or a competition.
> 
> Also RTC 1.0.5 does not read the correct ram speed on my bios with AGESA 1.0.0.6
> 
> Here is where I am at currently. I am getting worried to hit 3800 stable I will have to loosen the timings to CL 16 and or change to 2T as well.
> 
> Also as I have already said offset voltage has changed some as well.


Ayyy that's awesome. Which kit do you use?

And RTC shows the Ratio not the speed. So if you have adjusted the BCLK then you have to calculate the speed yourself.


----------



## nick name

Syldon said:


> The releases for the CH6 were very haphazard. The releases for the CH7 have been fairly consistent in an incremental value.
> 0207
> 0401
> 0509
> 0601
> 0702
> 0804
> 1001
> 1002
> 
> The revision numbers in between will be unstable revision that did not get past the alpha stages.


So then the BIOS version with the subsystem id bug fixed is probably at least 1102?


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> Ayyy that's awesome. Which kit do you use?
> 
> And RTC shows the Ratio not the speed. So if you have adjusted the BCLK then you have to calculate the speed yourself.


I forgot that ...

My Kit: G.SKILL TridentZ RGB Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 4133MHz (PC4 33000) Desktop Memory Model F4-4133C19D-16GTZR It is Samsung B-die


----------



## MacG32

gupsterg said:


> @MacG32
> 
> Any progress on your end with 4x8GB on C7H?
> 
> 
> With CPU 1805 SUS I had below, PState 0 4.15GHz VID: 1.387 SOC: 1.05 VDIMM: 1.36 ProcODT: 48, rest as per screenie/default.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 231100
> 
> View attachment 231104
> 
> View attachment 231102
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Further testing had shown instability, for some reason I then bounced over to C6H, now back on C7H with 1825 SUS and UEFI 1101 with AGESA 1.0.0.6  .
> 
> Emulating some of my previous testing on other CPU did not help with this CPU. So currently here now.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 231106
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Above I'm setting SPD Optimization: Disabled in UEFI, not made any difference to benches, doesn't seem as if it helped to stabilise profile as at the time I changed 2 settings to get above  . Lowered VTTDDR from 0.687 to 0.675 and Disabled SPDO.
> 
> On another side note, so far 1825 SUS for PBO behaves the same as when used on C6H.
> 
> 
> 
> NP  , I'd stick with mtrai advice  .
> 
> I have only recently tinkered with BCLK on Pinnacle Ridge. On Summit Ridge and C6H, when using BCLK 109+ I'd lose my Intel AC7260 WiFi card. The Fury X and SATA SSD/HDD/ODD had no issues.



Looks like you're having some luck moving forward with 1101. I still haven't had the time for further increases and testing. I did change my TIM from Prolimatech PK-1 to Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut and noticed a ~10 degree drop idling and a ~20 degree drop on a full load. I found this older testing from der8auer and decided to test it out. I'm happy with the results. https://overclocking.guide/thermal-...d-with-air-cooling-and-liquid-nitrogen-ln2/6/


----------



## nick name

MacG32 said:


> Looks like you're having some luck moving forward with 1101. I still haven't had the time for further increases and testing. I did change my TIM from Prolimatech PK-1 to Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut and noticed a ~10 degree drop idling and a ~20 degree drop on a full load. I found this older testing from der8auer and decided to test it out. I'm happy with the results. https://overclocking.guide/thermal-...d-with-air-cooling-and-liquid-nitrogen-ln2/6/


Jesus that's a massive drop. How bad is Prolimatech PK-1? I've never heard of it.


----------



## MacG32

nick name said:


> Jesus that's a massive drop. How bad is Prolimatech PK-1? I've never heard of it.



It's listed there in the testing I linked. It doesn't seem too bad, but it does go on pretty thick. I think that affected my results as well. A lot of reviewers seemed to have used it as their go to TIM, but I think that's changed in the past 3-5 years. I was looking around one evening at different TIM tests and finally came across the one I linked. Since der8auer is very reputable, I settled on his results for my testing.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I am not sure what naming scheme ASUS uses soooooo yeah.


Software release numbers are NEVER different for releases. You would never know hat you were running - what ever their naming convention. The fixed version Elmor referred to will never be released with the name 1101.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> So then the BIOS version with the subsystem id bug fixed is probably at least 1102?


exactly


----------



## crakej

mtrai said:


> @gupsterg @crakej Just a little update on my use with 1101 with AGESA 1.0.06 on my C7H Wifi
> 
> Actually more of a shiny light. Been using 3733 Mhz on my ram all day...lots and lots of benchmarking. Also changed to Manual PBO XFR 2 settings and no Performance Enhancement levels. So far so good...will be running the longer mem tests later tonight or tomorrow. I have only had to make a few adjustments to my ram timings in the bios to get here. One thing of note...if you want higher cinebench scores you need to use PE levels IMO. But I am cool without that unless I need it just to show or a competition.
> 
> Here is where I am at currently. I am getting worried to hit 3800 stable I will have to loosen the timings to CL 16 and or change to 2T as well.
> 
> Also as I have already said offset voltage has changed some as well.


Most excellent! ????

My machine was running with 3600MTs, 4.1GHz LLC5 (Lower voltage, higher temps) as experiment - 24 hours after and I couldn't boot to the desktop without blue screening. Not really sure what failed where, but the blue-screen makes me think cpu still not getting enough juice....


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> Most excellent! ????
> 
> My machine was running with 3600MTs, 4.1GHz LLC5 (Lower voltage, higher temps) as experiment - 24 hours after and I couldn't boot to the desktop without blue screening. Not really sure what failed where, but the blue-screen makes me think cpu still not getting enough juice....


I was facing reboot issues..it would fail...but it is stable once you boot. I think I have come close to the reboot issue which I think is resolved now. As you know this is slow go and my goal is 3800 but the voltage needed for ryzen is more then intel. I just do want to sacrifice cl14 to 16 with where I am. I do it slow.

The llc I am now using is 2. 

Once more many others have access to AGESA 1.0.0.6 will give us a bigger data points to work with.

Honestly I am starting to think I can hit 3800 at CL 14 and other tight timings on AGESA 1.0.0.6 since I got to 3733 with ease.


----------



## crakej

mtrai said:


> I was facing reboot issues..it would fail...but it is stable once you boot. I think I have come close to the reboot issue which I think is resolved now. As you know this is slow go and my goal is 3800 but the voltage needed for ryzen is more then intel. I just do want to sacrifice cl14 to 16 with where I am. I do it slow.
> 
> The llc I am now using is 2.
> 
> Once more many others have access to AGESA 1.0.0.6 will give us a bigger data points to work with.
> 
> Honestly I am starting to think I can hit 3800 at CL 14 and other tight timings on AGESA 1.0.0.6 since I got to 3733 with ease.


Sounds hopeful.

I think some of us could make it to 3800 in the future - can't see it getting further than that as it stands.
@AMD, Please, do NOT use the K17 IMC on zen 2!


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Sounds hopeful.
> 
> I think some of us could make it to 3800 in the future - can't see it getting further than that as it stands.
> 
> @AMD, Please, do NOT use the K17 IMC on zen 2!


I think it would be fine if @AMD opened things up to motherboard makers as Intel does. And thanks to @theStilt for pointing that out to those of us that didn't know that was an issue.


----------



## Syldon

nick name said:


> So then the BIOS version with the subsystem id bug fixed is probably at least 1102?



1102 was the wifi version, so I never used it.


----------



## Syldon

crakej said:


> Software release numbers are NEVER different for releases. You would never know hat you were running - what ever their naming convention. The fixed version Elmor referred to will never be released with the name 1101.


This is absolutely true for official releases. 

Beta revision sometimes they start over with new agesa releases. On the CH6 the beta revision were released on one number, then converted to an official release version number if it was deemed stable. There was one early of the beta releases that coinsided with an official release later on. I think it was 1701. I am not 100% because I never kept the original version. Some of the earlier CH6 releases could brick your board.


----------



## gupsterg

@nick name

It's 1101 as out in public domain. I used an image of W7 installed/activated on a UEFI from July. IIRC a few things got reinstalled I forgot to take notes. I don't use onboard sound, so may not encounter issue as others. I'll enable and see what happens.

@mtrai

Dammmn sweet! :thumb:

You'll find in a review of The Stilt's:-



> As a test processor, the Ryzen 7 2700X processor unit was previously tested stable under ideal conditions (1 DPC ITX motherboard, 2 memory slots) at DDR4-3666 memory speed and capable of driving light tests at DDR4-3800 speed.


You guys got some golden CPUs besides ability to tune :thumb:.

When you state you set PBO manually, you get manual in selection box of relevant menu in AMD CBS? I don't.
@MacG32

Ahh cool. If you do improve on 3200MHz with 4x8GB share experience :thumb:.


----------



## VnnAmed

"Version 1002
2018/11/028.24 MBytes
ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO BIOS 1002
Release BIOS 1002"

... Cool. Now, WHAT THE F*** DOES IT DO ASUS? Previous ones have descriptions like

"1. Improve system stability
2. Improve Secure Erase function on NVMe devices
3. Update LPPT firmware"

but this one is just 1002... I went a few pages back in this thread but couldn't find an answer. I'm scared to flash it since 0702 rendered my PC unusable for like a month (would crash in any kind of workload using 70-100% of the CPU) and only after flashing 0804 I have connected the dots. Thanks in advance.


----------



## crakej

VnnAmed said:


> "Version 1002
> 2018/11/028.24 MBytes
> ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO BIOS 1002
> Release BIOS 1002"
> 
> ... Cool. Now, WHAT THE F*** DOES IT DO ASUS? Previous ones have descriptions like
> 
> "1. Improve system stability
> 2. Improve Secure Erase function on NVMe devices
> 3. Update LPPT firmware"
> 
> but this one is just 1002... I went a few pages back in this thread but couldn't find an answer. I'm scared to flash it since 0702 rendered my PC unusable for like a month (would crash in any kind of workload using 70-100% of the CPU) and only after flashing 0804 I have connected the dots. Thanks in advance.


AMD for many reasons do not always provide a list of updates like this, something we just have to live with. I can say that I don't know anyone reporting any serious issues with 1002. If your machine is stable though, you don't have to update it.


----------



## VnnAmed

crakej said:


> AMD for many reasons do not always provide a list of updates like this, something we just have to live with. I can say that I don't know anyone reporting any serious issues with 1002. If your machine is stable though, you don't have to update it.


Well, but what if it could be more stable at higher clocks though?  Ehh, I'm flashing it.

One more thing though, what's the correct procedure of flashing a new BIOS? Load defaults, flash, load your settings?


----------



## crakej

VnnAmed said:


> Well, but what if it could be more stable at higher clocks though?  Ehh, I'm flashing it.
> 
> One more thing though, what's the correct procedure of flashing a new BIOS? Load defaults, flash, load your settings?


Just enter the bios and do it from there - no need for defaults etc. Then load your settings.


----------



## CJMitsuki

VnnAmed said:


> crakej said:
> 
> 
> 
> AMD for many reasons do not always provide a list of updates like this, something we just have to live with. I can say that I don't know anyone reporting any serious issues with 1002. If your machine is stable though, you don't have to update it. /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> 
> 
> Well, but what if it could be more stable at higher clocks though? /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif Ehh, I'm flashing it.
> 
> One more thing though, what's the correct procedure of flashing a new BIOS? Load defaults, flash, load your settings?
Click to expand...




crakej said:


> VnnAmed said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, but what if it could be more stable at higher clocks though? /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif Ehh, I'm flashing it.
> 
> One more thing though, what's the correct procedure of flashing a new BIOS? Load defaults, flash, load your settings?
> 
> 
> 
> Just enter the bios and do it from there - no need for defaults etc. Then load your settings.
Click to expand...

 @1usmus has a thread about the proper way to flash a bios. I use it every time and it never fails me and it has also cleared up some intermittent memory errors oddly enough. It completely erases the old bios from the chip and rewrites it instead of rewriting over old data. I’d say it is the best way to flash. It’s the thread where he keeps all of the bios mods.
https://www.overclock.net/#/topics/1640394?page=1


----------



## Keith Myers

crakej said:


> Sounds hopeful.
> 
> I think some of us could make it to 3800 in the future - can't see it getting further than that as it stands.
> 
> @AMD, Please, do NOT use the K17 IMC on zen 2!


I have hopes your wish comes true with that new I/O die in the Zen 2 package which is where the IMC is on Epyc. If we get something similar in the consumer Zen 2 package, we may get rid of the crappy Asmedia IMC controller silicon. We will have to wait and see I guess.


----------



## Synoxia

Idk if it's the right thread to ask but it's CH7 Related.
I am trying to get completely stutter and lag free computer, i've noticed HPET option is completely missing on asus boards but i've been reading that just disabling in bios is worse so i've tried enabling it: frametimes consistency went up but im worried about DPC latency... which results have you guys?
Also i am using AURA sync (gpu + mobo + fans) is that bad for DPC latency? I couldn't find a way to use aura sync from the bios but i couldn't find any option to do so.


----------



## Timur Born

Set the Windows power plan to "High Performance" before you measure. And also do *not* connect on your audio interface for measurement, else its own DPCs will be included in the results, which you do not want.

You obviously cannot disable the graphic-card, but a different driver can help. You can disable LAN/Wifi, though, which often helps to get DPC latencies in check.


----------



## crakej

Keith Myers said:


> I have hopes your wish comes true with that new I/O die in the Zen 2 package which is where the IMC is on Epyc. If we get something similar in the consumer Zen 2 package, we may get rid of the crappy Asmedia IMC controller silicon. We will have to wait and see I guess.


Good to see you Keith 

Do we know what IMC is on that yet?


----------



## Sn0ops

@Synoxia

This is my System with CH7 (no wifi) - 2700 X

Audio disabled
AS Media controller disabled
fastboot in Bios / Windows 1803 off
balanced power plan

some windows tweaks + CMD open as admin -> bcdedit /set useplatformclock false

everything is really fine - DPC is hanging between 7 up to 16 

- except im wondering about some random ntoskernel.exel DPC Spikes , maybe someone else does have clue how they come?

Thanks and regards


----------



## Timur Born

For audio single big spikes of other processes don't matter so much, because they happen on one core and every other core remains free to handle DPCs of the main audio driver thread.


----------



## Keith Myers

crakej said:


> Good to see you Keith
> 
> Do we know what IMC is on that yet?


No nothing divulged in any leaks so far as _exactly_ what is in the I/O die. Just that they are going with 14nm architecture because analog memory structure don't scale well at 7nm. They know the I/O die is going to become essentially the "Northbridge" of the Zen architecture. No mention of PCIe lanes in the I/O die so each cpu "chiplet" retains its own PCIe lanes. What this means is that each chiplet will have equal memory latency access to memory through the I/O die. Everything is tied together with Infinity Fabric.

I am just guessing that with needing to reengineer the memory interface, the engineers don't necessarily have to stick with the memory controller design that exists in the first generation dies.


----------



## glnn_23

Switched to the Crosshair VII from an Asus Strix itx. 
1st thing I did is remove the stupid plastic cover over the vrm block and have 2 x 120 fans over the vrms and mem. 

Certainly has a much busier bios than the itx.

Stability testing here all cores 4.4Ghz with P95 

Bclk. 101.2
PE Level 4
Vcore offset -0.03125
SOC. 1.085
1.8V PLL 1.77
LLC 4
Vdimm 1.42

Cooling is 3 x 360 p/p ek block dual D5 and fan blowing back of MB cpu. vrm, mem area.


----------



## Johan45

Keith Myers said:


> No nothing divulged in any leaks so far as _exactly_ what is in the I/O die. Just that they are going with 14nm architecture because analog memory structure don't scale well at 7nm. They know the I/O die is going to become essentially the "Northbridge" of the Zen architecture. No mention of PCIe lanes in the I/O die so each cpu "chiplet" retains its own PCIe lanes. What this means is that each chiplet will have equal memory latency access to memory through the I/O die. Everything is tied together with Infinity Fabric.
> 
> I am just guessing that with needing to reengineer the memory interface, the engineers don't necessarily have to stick with the memory controller design that exists in the first generation dies.


That's assuming that AMD goes with the I/O die at all in the AM4 setup. We only know it's in Epyc and likely TR but AM4 is still up in the air. Maybe if there's a plan for a 16 core on AM4 but that's just ludicrous IMO. Absolutely no need and then dual channel memory could be an issue driving that many cores.


----------



## nick name

glnn_23 said:


> Switched to the Crosshair VII from an Asus Strix itx.
> 1st thing I did is remove the stupid plastic cover over the vrm block and have 2 x 120 fans over the vrms and mem.
> 
> Certainly has a much busier bios than the itx.
> 
> Stability testing here all cores 4.4Ghz with P95
> 
> Bclk. 101.2
> PE Level 4
> Vcore offset -0.03125
> SOC. 1.085
> 1.8 PLL 1.77
> LLC 4
> Vdimm 1.42
> 
> Cooling is 3 x 360 p/p ek block dual D5 and fan blowing back of MB cpu. vrm, mem area.


Man, I am jealous of those temps. I only get low temps when I open a window and let in the cold air. And you definitely don't need a fan over the VRM, but overkill is always fun.


----------



## Keith Myers

Johan45 said:


> That's assuming that AMD goes with the I/O die at all in the AM4 setup. We only know it's in Epyc and likely TR but AM4 is still up in the air. Maybe if there's a plan for a 16 core on AM4 but that's just ludicrous IMO. Absolutely no need and then dual channel memory could be an issue driving that many cores.


From the AMD product roadmap charts, we know there is going to be Zen2 and Zen3 on AM4. How the internal die package is laid out is unknown. But we do know that the process will be 7nm and 7nm+ so it can't be too far outside possibility for AMD to reuse the "chiplet" design on AM4 socket. The chiplet goes hand in hand with an external I/O die in Epyc. Whether they do the same in AM4 or bring the I/O die back inside a monolithic cpu die is the question.


----------



## nick name

Synoxia said:


> Idk if it's the right thread to ask but it's CH7 Related.
> I am trying to get completely stutter and lag free computer, i've noticed HPET option is completely missing on asus boards but i've been reading that just disabling in bios is worse so i've tried enabling it: frametimes consistency went up but im worried about DPC latency... which results have you guys?
> Also i am using AURA sync (gpu + mobo + fans) is that bad for DPC latency? I couldn't find a way to use aura sync from the bios but i couldn't find any option to do so.


Did you have any monitoring software open when you ran that? My latencies only look like that when I have HWiNFO open. Also, yeah I just Device Manager to turn of HPET.


----------



## crakej

Personally I want the new AGESA as I'm hopeful I will get back my 3600MTs ram which I had previously. I'm an enthusiast with a LOT of time on my hands so for me new bios = new possibilities which I have the time to play around with. I'm also hopeful that some of us may get slightly better than 3600 with the new AGESA. For me this is the thing I do most of the time due to being off work sick long term.

I would recommend that users not hugely interested in the hardware and pushing it should *leave their bios as-is if their machine works well for them.*

For myself (and a few others!) it is this voyage of trying to find every ounce of power, every improvement... every improvement a new bios/AGESA ver may or may not provide, we are here trying to get that optimal performance, or try to utilize or prove unusual settings are possible. As Elmor has left, I sent msg to Raja on ROG forums to see what he had to say....

I've heard from Raja at last, he didn't say I couldn't share so this is what he said. I had asked if they would replace Elmor in this un-official support role - here's his reply.....

_*"From January, Silent Scone will go full time, so will be present on both sides of the forum. He’ll be the main ASUS contact from here on. My role here is constantly changing, I have two teams to look after and multiple tasks, so I’ve sampled a few more forum helpers and bought SS onboard to help out. Sorry for the issues.

-Raja"*_

I have asked what might happen re: bios release/beta releases until then, but still waiting for reply.


----------



## Syldon

Windows update has just reset the power plan on my system again. The CPU is set to minimum 100%, which will prevent any downvolting. 

Just a heads up.


----------



## mtrai

Hey all I just wanted to point out, for the adventurous you can should be able use the C7H WiFI bios on the C7H. I could use either the C6H or C6H WiFI bios on my C6H WIFI board with no issue. Never had an issue with doing that, so I would use which ever beta had updates earlier which was usually the C6H. When I would use the C6H on my WIFI version I just would not have the bios option in to disable the WIFI. So I would assume if you have use the C7H WIFI bios on a the non WIFI C7H you will have the option to disable the WIFI and Bluetooth but they will not do anything or I am guessing the options will display but perhaps they will not. The bios are are the same between them other then that extra option or lack of option.

Reply here or PM if you want to know how to flash this. It is pretty straight forward flash...the instructions are in another thread here, you only need to use the first step from the thread how to correctly flash bios. You need a USB set up with the instructions in that post EFI...command to flash is afuefix64 bios.cap /p /b /n /k /x /clrcfg 

Remember to make sure you have flashback bios on a USB stick in case of flashing issue. So no real danger here. It will not brick it. 

Anyhow I would recommend using this method to flash anyway to make sure it totally overwrites the bios since this is a big AGESA version change to 1.0.0.6

I guess I should of mentioned this earlier.


----------



## gupsterg

@MacG32

Well I had real PITA couple of days with 4x8GB using 2700X 1825 SUS. Initially I tried same settings as used with 1805 SUS, but the ProcODT that 1825 SUS favoured on C6H with C7H, this tanked in ~11% of HCI.



Spoiler














Where as same setup on 1805 SUS lasted ~490% then stopped by me. Then on another run after having done P95, etc it lasted til ~750% then few errors crept in. For reference below is 1805 SUS testing on older UEFI.



Spoiler




















View attachment HCI 4.15 1.387 1.05 1.36 0.687 48 24 24 24 24 room 22C FAIL 756% 900% 950%.jpg.txt




As I was using same motherboard and RAM kit now with 1825 SUS it bugged me why the same setup was failing so soon. On other CPU it had lasted so many more hours of HCI and several hours of P95 v28.10b1 / v29.4b8 (8K 4096K 28GB).

So I set about first changing ProcODT only.



Spoiler






































Out of all those ProcODT tests 43 had issues on warm POST, 48 was determined most optimal as last ~40% vs all other tests tanking at ~10%.

Next I had a play with CAD Bus drive strength, conclusion was reached that [Auto] (ie 24 20 24 24) was best or all set to 24, but using all 24 did not enhance stability vs [Auto], so I decided to stick with [Auto].

Next was SOC correct? my first gut instinct was to increase SOC as perhaps this CPU needed more as it was failing vastly sooner than 1805 SUS; 1825 SUS was now using exact same settings, only differing UEFI, even the dimm's serials where in exact same slots as testing for other CPU.

I opt to lower SOC. To my surprise I found I had to have SOC set as 1.025V or 1.031V (LLC: [Auto] was used), even a step lower or higher than those two values lead to failure in ~8% of HCI. Where as 1.025/1.031V could last well into ~400%/4hrs.



Spoiler












View attachment HCI 1.031 1.36 0.687 48 24 20 24 24 room 21C FAIL 1st 350% 2nd 3rd 750% of 775%.txt


























View attachment HCI 1.025 1.36 0.687 48 24 20 24 24 room 24C FAIL 1st 510 2nd 550 3rd 675 4 5th 780 6th 820.txt




Now you could say what if 1.025/1.031V test were flukes? perhaps training just occurred correctly at that time? So I rolled on to a warm POST test.



Spoiler














Full POST from shutdown test.



Spoiler














I'm now gonna check same POST rerun of HCI (just started it as I post this all). If that passes I'll see if other tweaks without changing timings allows me to make HCI pass >400% on reruns.

All in all my opinion is UEFI 1101 with AGESA 1.0.0.6 has not enhanced RAM MHz gains on 4x8GB, nor has it lowered them, seems similar struggle to gain >3200MHz on 4x8GB.

*** edit ***

Same POST rerun passed, see time/task manager in full post screenie above and compare below.



Spoiler












View attachment HCI 1.025 1.36 0.687 48 24 20 24 24 room 24C PASS WP 70% FP 80% SP 100%.txt


----------



## crakej

Thanks for reminding us about cross-flashing  I thought I'd seen it somewhere.

People should be aware that bios version 1101 was pulled due to problems including incorrect hardware IDs. It wont break your system, but you'll probably need different sound driver and GFX driver may want to re-load.

Was tempted to do this to experiment with the new AGESA, but would rather wait for the fixed version having seem problems some were having... so annoying knowing it's already fixed but not released! No worries....it will come when we least expect it


----------



## crakej

@gupsterg thanks for sharing your tests. 

I've always found SoC needs less than I think - dunno if it's just my cpu as know others use much higher...

Edit:you mean ver 1101 right?


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Personally I want the new AGESA as I'm hopeful I will get back my 3600MTs ram which I had previously. I'm an enthusiast with a LOT of time on my hands so for me new bios = new possibilities which I have the time to play around with. I'm also hopeful that some of us may get slightly better than 3600 with the new AGESA. For me this is the thing I do most of the time due to being off work sick long term.
> 
> I would recommend that users not hugely interested in the hardware and pushing it should *leave their bios as-is if their machine works well for them.*
> 
> For myself (and a few others!) it is this voyage of trying to find every ounce of power, every improvement... every improvement a new bios/AGESA ver may or may not provide, we are here trying to get that optimal performance, or try to utilize or prove unusual settings are possible. As Elmor has left, I sent msg to Raja on ROG forums to see what he had to say....
> 
> I've heard from Raja at last, he didn't say I couldn't share so this is what he said. I had asked if they would replace Elmor in this un-official support role - here's his reply.....
> 
> _*"From January, Silent Scone will go full time, so will be present on both sides of the forum. He’ll be the main ASUS contact from here on. My role here is constantly changing, I have two teams to look after and multiple tasks, so I’ve sampled a few more forum helpers and bought SS onboard to help out. Sorry for the issues.
> 
> -Raja"*_
> 
> I have asked what might happen re: bios release/beta releases until then, but still waiting for reply.


I wholeheartedly agree and thanks for finding out what's going on with an ASUS contact for us.


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> @gupsterg thanks for sharing your tests.
> 
> I've always found SoC needs less than I think - dunno if it's just my cpu as know others use much higher...
> 
> Edit:you mean ver 1101 right?


Yep I meant 1101 :doh: , always happy to share testing as much as like seeing others data  .

I just updated post with correction and also same POST HCI 100% PASS screenie and log for warm/full/same post testing.

I know this profile will have no issues in RealBench. It should also pass few hours each of Y-Cruncher/P95 (v28.10b1/v29.4b8 8K 4096K 28GB). I don't fancy reruns of HCI circa 4hrs plus tweaks, dunno if GSAT will be best test method. As that pauses and resumes testing/loading, which could cause glitching quicker. Sorta thinking perhaps I should buy RAM Test. Sorta in a hard place now with this profile.

For some this kinda testing may seem excessive, but I like to leave my rig running say things like [email protected]/bionic, etc for days on end. So really wanna nail high testing standard.

2x8GB I didn't find SOC had to be just right. Yes I gunned for lowest, for example 1805 SUS was like this:-



> 3200MHz set to 0.900V in UEFI (Tested using The Stilt Safe 3200MHz timings preset but TRC 44 & TRFC 256)
> 3333MHz set to 0.912V in UEFI (Tested using The Stilt Fast 3333MHz timings preset)
> 3400MHz set to 0.925V in UEFI (Tested using The Stilt Fast 3466MHz timings preset)
> 3466MHz set to 0.956V in UEFI (Tested using The Stilt Fast 3466MHz timings preset) Note: If CPU stock
> 3466MHz set to 0.968V in UEFI (Tested using The Stilt Fast 3466MHz timings preset) Note: CPU PState 0 OC 4.1GHz


If I went higher than needed I didn't see a stability issues as seen in previous posted testing for 4x8GB.

1805 SUS on 4x8GB used ~1.05V, I never at the time tested if lower/higher affected it (time constraint), as it does 1825 SUS. There is no doubt on this CPU with 4x8GB I need SOC at 1.025/1.031V, any lower/higher is exhibiting issues. Perhaps the setting which will improve HCI stability >400%/4hrs runs will change this aspect seen of SOC setting, dunno TBH at the moment.


----------



## HeroofTime

Hey all,

I'm building my brother's system and we ended up getting the C7H (got some discounted off the original price versus some cheaper boards that would've sufficed, so we said whatever and got it for him). It's only recognizing one stick of RAM, but both sticks are actually functional. I'm using the second and fourth slots away from the CPU. The second slot away from the CPU will not recognize either stick. Will a BIOS update fix that? I'm going to try it now, but I was wondering if BIOS v1002 is best currently for the C7H. I have the C6H and know that the latest isn't always the best (in terms of actual faults and issues that they can potentially cause). Thanks for the help guys. I do *not* want to take everything apart and ship this thing back. I'm going to have a mental breakdown if that happens (not really, but it's such a pain).


----------



## MacG32

gupsterg said:


> @MacG32
> 
> Well I had real PITA couple of days with 4x8GB using 2700X 1825 SUS. Initially I tried same settings as used with 1805 SUS, but the ProcODT that 1825 SUS favoured on C6H with C7H, this tanked in ~11% of HCI.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 231766
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where as same setup on 1805 SUS lasted ~490% then stopped by me. Then on another run after having done P95, etc it lasted til ~750% then few errors crept in. For reference below is 1805 SUS testing on older UEFI.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 231760
> 
> 
> View attachment 231762
> 
> 
> View attachment 231764
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As I was using same motherboard and RAM kit now with 1825 SUS it bugged me why the same setup was failing so soon. On other CPU it had lasted so many more hours of HCI and several hours of P95 v28.10b1 / v29.4b8 (8K 4096K 28GB).
> 
> So I set about first changing ProcODT only.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 231766
> 
> 
> View attachment 231768
> 
> 
> View attachment 231770
> 
> 
> View attachment 231772
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Out of all those ProcODT tests 43 had issues on warm POST, 48 was determined most optimal as last ~40% vs all other tests tanking at ~10%.
> 
> Next I had a play with CAD Bus drive strength, conclusion was reached that [Auto] (ie 24 20 24 24) was best or all set to 24, but using all 24 did not enhance stability vs [Auto], so I decided to stick with [Auto].
> 
> Next was SOC correct? my first gut instinct was to increase SOC as perhaps this CPU needed more as it was failing vastly sooner than 1805 SUS; 1825 SUS was now using exact same settings, only differing UEFI, even the dimm's serials where in exact same slots as testing for other CPU.
> 
> I opt to lower SOC. To my surprise I found I had to have SOC set as 1.025V or 1.031V (LLC: [Auto] was used), even a step lower or higher than those two values lead to failure in ~8% of HCI. Where as 1.025/1.031V could last well into ~400%/4hrs.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 231776
> 
> 
> View attachment 231778
> 
> 
> View attachment 231780
> 
> 
> View attachment 231782
> 
> 
> View attachment 231784
> 
> 
> View attachment 231786
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now you could say what if 1.025/1.031V test were flukes? perhaps training just occurred correctly at that time? So I rolled on to a warm POST test.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 231788
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Full POST from shutdown test.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 231790
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm now gonna check same POST rerun of HCI (just started it as I post this all). If that passes I'll see if other tweaks without changing timings allows me to make HCI pass >400% on reruns.
> 
> All in all my opinion is UEFI 1101 with AGESA 1.0.0.6 has not enhanced RAM MHz gains on 4x8GB, nor has it lowered them, seems similar struggle to gain >3200MHz on 4x8GB.
> 
> *** edit ***
> 
> Same POST rerun passed, see time/task manager in full post screenie above and compare below.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 231792
> 
> 
> View attachment 231794



I did notice a few things with my previous testing. The batch numbers don't mean much with Ryzen, as the same batch renders different results per processor. Each processor seems very unique. I also found that no matter how stable memory seems to be, when I ran Prime 95's Torture Test for 24 hours, it always caught the faults. I use my PC normally during the runs for added stress.

It looks like your warmed up memory stabled itself out enough for a passing run. That makes me wonder if an average temperature comes in to play for stability as well for some RAM. I bought and installed a RAM cooler with dual fans, just in case. When I tried running 3200MHz with 4 x 8GB on previous BIOS releases, it failed miserably. I have no idea if they added compatibility for my specific RAM or if the AGESA changes did anything, as ASUS and AMD never post detailed release notes.

Thank you very much for posting all of your testing, as it's all very valuable information that the community can benefit greatly from. I hope the next BIOS release stables out these variable results between boots and after running for some time. I've noticed quite a few people having varied results between boots. The VI seems to randomly suffer from this as well.


----------



## crakej

HeroofTime said:


> Hey all,
> 
> I'm building my brother's system and we ended up getting the C7H (got some discounted off the original price versus some cheaper boards that would've sufficed, so we said whatever and got it for him). It's only recognizing one stick of RAM, but both sticks are actually functional. I'm using the second and fourth slots away from the CPU. The second slot away from the CPU will not recognize either stick. Will a BIOS update fix that? I'm going to try it now, but I was wondering if BIOS v1002 is best currently for the C7H. I have the C6H and know that the latest isn't always the best (in terms of actual faults and issues that they can potentially cause). Thanks for the help guys. I do *not* want to take everything apart and ship this thing back. I'm going to have a mental breakdown if that happens (not really, but it's such a pain).


No one has reported anything awful with 1002 and I have found it reliable enough.


----------



## HeroofTime

@crakej Thank you for the info. I'll stick with v1002 then.

I updated the C7H's BIOS to v1002 and it didn't fix the issue. Do you guys think it's time to RMA it? This is going to be such a pain, and I'm going to hear it from my brother too which is going to be annoying (he'll know it's not my fault, but hearing more complaining is something I don't want to deal with).

The BIOS codes were cycling for a quick second until it hit F9. Right after F9, it went to AA and it stuck there. I know F9 means something's wrong with RAM, but I know nothing is wrong with the modules themselves because they work when putting them in the slot furthest from the CPU. The second slot from the CPU is the one causing this mess.


----------



## crakej

Not sure what to suggest. I have had problems with ram seating properly in an odd sockets - all you can try is re-seating until it works. If it won't work, try the other 2 slots - you may find they work ok. Then yes, I might think about RMA - unless anyone else has any ideas?


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> Thanks for reminding us about cross-flashing  I thought I'd seen it somewhere.
> 
> People should be aware that bios version 1101 was pulled due to problems including incorrect hardware IDs. It wont break your system, but you'll probably need different sound driver and GFX driver may want to re-load.
> 
> Was tempted to do this to experiment with the new AGESA, but would rather wait for the fixed version having seem problems some were having... so annoying knowing it's already fixed but not released! No worries....it will come when we least expect it


I did not have any issues with the hardware IDs...I think it was mainly for add on sound cards. As far GFX drivers...that has been a non issue for me and I change my GFX drivers very frequently. Anyhow drivers have not been an issue for me with the C7H WiFi beta bios 1101.


----------



## HeroofTime

@crakej I understand. The thing is, I've already re-seated the RAM multiple times trying to get it to work. I'm not sure what to do from here. I can RMA it and get it over with, but I really don't want to take everything apart again.


----------



## crakej

mtrai said:


> I did not have any issues with the hardware IDs...I think it was mainly for add on sound cards. As far GFX drivers...that has been a non issue for me and I change my GFX drivers very frequently. Anyhow drivers have not been an issue for me with the C7H WiFi beta bios 1101.


Pretty sure it was on board sound peeps were having problems with.... either way, you are tempting me! Stop, I protest!


----------



## crakej

HeroofTime said:


> @crakej I understand. The thing is, I've already re-seated the RAM multiple times trying to get it to work. I'm not sure what to do from here. I can RMA it and get it over with, but I really don't want to take everything apart again.


I hate that feeling hen you realize there's no way around it, you're going to have to take it to bits.....again!

If you can't get that ram working in either pair of slots you're going to have to return it, or RMA it.


----------



## nick name

HeroofTime said:


> @crakej I understand. The thing is, I've already re-seated the RAM multiple times trying to get it to work. I'm not sure what to do from here. I can RMA it and get it over with, but I really don't want to take everything apart again.


I would reach out to ASUS right away and start discussing your issue with them. It does sound like that slot is bad and it makes me wonder if that's why you got the discount. Sorry for your poor experience.


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> Pretty sure it was on board sound peeps were having problems with.... either way, you are tempting me! Stop, I protest!


Ha my onboard sound has been just fine. I thought that system ID mismatch though was with that other beta bios for the for the C6H that got pulled...not the C7H WiFi.


----------



## gupsterg

MacG32 said:


> I did notice a few things with my previous testing. The batch numbers don't mean much with Ryzen, as the same batch renders different results per processor. Each processor seems very unique. I also found that no matter how stable memory seems to be, when I ran Prime 95's Torture Test for 24 hours, it always caught the faults. I use my PC normally during the runs for added stress.
> 
> It looks like your warmed up memory stabled itself out enough for a passing run. That makes me wonder if an average temperature comes in to play for stability as well for some RAM. I bought and installed a RAM cooler with dual fans, just in case. When I tried running 3200MHz with 4 x 8GB on previous BIOS releases, it failed miserably. I have no idea if they added compatibility for my specific RAM or if the AGESA changes did anything, as ASUS and AMD never post detailed release notes.
> 
> Thank you very much for posting all of your testing, as it's all very valuable information that the community can benefit greatly from. I hope the next BIOS release stables out these variable results between boots and after running for some time. I've noticed quite a few people having varied results between boots. The VI seems to randomly suffer from this as well.


RAM/System was warm from prior testing before starting this shared test setup. So I can not say that was a factor. I did not uncover POST to POST variance.

Simply put stage 1 was basically setting ProcODT to optimal setup (48 ohms, which was same for both CPUs), stage 2 has been getting SOC correct, this did differ between the two CPUs, 1st 1.05/1.056 2nd 1.025/1.031. Same mobo/cooling/ram kit/ram timings/ram slots populated with same serial numbered dimms, only CPUs/UEFI differed.

I am still aiming to have way above 400% HCI stable before moving to other tests. I have done only 1 change since last test, currently passed 425% and counting, will share in a day or two where I get  .


----------



## majestynl

mtrai said:


> I forgot that ...
> 
> My Kit: G.SKILL TridentZ RGB Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 4133MHz (PC4 33000) Desktop Memory Model F4-4133C19D-16GTZR It is Samsung B-die


Bought these sticks: F4-4266C19D-16GTZR
Let's see how far I can push those : D
Will arrive next week..so will post test results soon !!


----------



## HeroofTime

@crakej @nick name I'm almost positive it's the motherboard. After taking everything apart, I inspected the rear side of the motherboard where the slots are soldered on the motherboard. There was at least one very questionable solder joint in correspondence to the faulty RAM slot. Everything's in the box going back to Newegg for replacement.


----------



## nick name

HeroofTime said:


> @crakej @nick name I'm almost positive it's the motherboard. After taking everything apart, I inspected the rear side of the motherboard where the slots are soldered on the motherboard. There was at least one very questionable solder joint in correspondence to the faulty RAM slot. Everything's in the box going back to Newegg for replacement.


Ahhh Newegg. I got my board from them on sale also.


----------



## Sn0ops

Somebody know exactly which four USB 3.1 ports are directly connected to the CPU? 
I cant see any hint in the user manual from my board.

talking of those:

AMD Ryzen™ 2nd Generation/ Ryzen™ with Radeon™ Vega Graphics/ Ryzen™ 1st Generation/7th Generation A-Series/Athlon X4 Processors : 
4 x USB 3.1 Gen 1 Schnittstellen (4 at back, blue)

Thanks for info guys.


----------



## mtrai

majestynl said:


> Bought these sticks: F4-4266C19D-16GTZR
> Let's see how far I can push those : D
> Will arrive next week..so will post test results soon !!


Assuming equal CPU IMC you should get at least the same. I had to stop pushing them for now due to another project that demands stability for the next month. Still running at 3736, but will not have time to fully test it.


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> Bought these sticks: F4-4266C19D-16GTZR
> Let's see how far I can push those : D
> Will arrive next week..so will post test results soon !!


Will be interesting to see - I have same running 3533 CL14 though have had 3600 before.


----------



## crakej

HeroofTime said:


> @crakej @nick name I'm almost positive it's the motherboard. After taking everything apart, I inspected the rear side of the motherboard where the slots are soldered on the motherboard. There was at least one very questionable solder joint in correspondence to the faulty RAM slot. Everything's in the box going back to Newegg for replacement.


Glad you found the problem - what a shame it's a quality issue. Have seen others report this as well.


----------



## gupsterg

Sn0ops said:


> Somebody know exactly which four USB 3.1 ports are directly connected to the CPU?
> I cant see any hint in the user manual from my board.


First post of this thread is a highlights PDF, see page 9.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

Yesterday all my troubles where so far away... now it doesn't clock or take any voltages down anymorte after changing the PSU...


So i watched into the ryzen power plan setting where it was set to 90% i'll changed it to 5%.
This fixed my issue with not clocking down cores anymore.


But one bug remains, when it clocks the cores down it doesn't take the VOLTAGES down ?
The funny thing is when i set everything in bios to default and then it works as it should...so should i remove the biosbattery or what?


using Bios 0509 ...yeah i know it's not up to date but ,it worked before i changed the PSU.
My head tells me it has something to do with the Mainboard...
Does this issue sound familiar to anyone here?


I only changed my Powersupply from Enermax Platimax 850w, to a Bequiet Straight Power 11 1000w. So did i miss something here?


There's another connector with the 24mainboardpin 


I dont Know what this connector is for.

Bequiet also recommends: Please make sure you balance the load across the 12 volt rails 12V3 und 12V4: ■ When using two PCIe cables, connect PCIe 1 and PCIe 3 ■ When you only need one PCIe cable, connect PCIe 2


----------



## majestynl

mtrai said:


> Assuming equal CPU IMC you should get at least the same. I had to stop pushing them for now due to another project that demands stability for the next month. Still running at 3736, but will not have time to fully test it.





crakej said:


> Will be interesting to see - I have same running 3533 CL14 though have had 3600 before.


Yeap, will share the test-results soon. Probably easy to smash my current 3533+CL14+TT profiles on it, but definitely curious if i can get more from these...


----------



## mtrai

majestynl said:


> Yeap, will share the test-results soon. Probably easy to smash my current 3533+CL14+TT profiles on it, but definitely curious if i can get more from these...


Ha I can't add...been running my 4133 kit at 3766 not 3733 for days now.


----------



## Syldon

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> Yesterday all my troubles where so far away... now it doesn't clock or take any voltages down anymorte after changing the PSU...
> 
> 
> So i watched into the ryzen power plan setting where it was set to 90% i'll changed it to 5%.
> This fixed my issue with not clocking down cores anymore.
> 
> 
> But one bug remains, when it clocks the cores down it doesn't take the VOLTAGES down ?
> The funny thing is when i set everything in bios to default and then it works as it should...so should i remove the biosbattery or what?
> 
> 
> using Bios 0509 ...yeah i know it's not up to date but ,it worked before i changed the PSU.
> My head tells me it has something to do with the Mainboard...
> Does this issue sound familiar to anyone here?



Total power used is shown in Watts. Watts = Amps X Volts. On earliler bios revisions, the amps value is showing as reduced as opposed to the volts value. The end result is the same it reduces the total power driven into the CPU. Look to your Amp values.


----------



## crakej

mtrai said:


> Ha I can't add...been running my 4133 kit at 3766 not 3733 for days now.


I'd be interested to see you timings please....
I was running 3600 (which i'd not been able to do in a while) but it just stopped working. I think some of the timings were just too tight. Want to tinker more

I've been able to boot up to 3800 leaving everything on default - not useable - but show potential. Getting this kit to 3200 on my X370 Prime Pro was a real headache, though I don't think I tried with geardown=on like I'm running them now.


----------



## crakej

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> Yesterday all my troubles where so far away... now it doesn't clock or take any voltages down anymorte after changing the PSU...
> 
> So i watched into the ryzen power plan setting where it was set to 90% i'll changed it to 5%.
> This fixed my issue with not clocking down cores anymore.
> 
> But one bug remains, when it clocks the cores down it doesn't take the VOLTAGES down ?
> The funny thing is when i set everything in bios to default and then it works as it should...so should i remove the biosbattery or what?
> 
> using Bios 0509 ...yeah i know it's not up to date but ,it worked before i changed the PSU.
> My head tells me it has something to do with the Mainboard...
> Does this issue sound familiar to anyone here?
> 
> I only changed my Powersupply from Enermax Platimax 850w, to a Bequiet Straight Power 11 1000w. So did i miss something here?
> 
> There's another connector with the 24mainboardpin
> 
> I dont Know what this connector is for.
> 
> Bequiet also recommends: Please make sure you balance the load across the 12 volt rails 12V3 und 12V4: ■ When using two PCIe cables, connect PCIe 1 and PCIe 3 ■ When you only need one PCIe cable, connect PCIe 2


First: update to bios 1002.

Second: yes, many have reported this and it's often just a reset of the bios or an update that's needed.

If you have a Ryzen 2xxx CPU, don't use Ryzen Balanced plan.

Hope that helps!


----------



## gupsterg

Just wanted your thoughts guys on something.

Below are some settings from Tweakers Paradise of ZE (ie sTR4):-

DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]

PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
PLL Tune R2 [Auto]

PLL Reference Voltage [Auto]
PLL Reference Voltage 2 [Auto]

Below is same menu but C6H/C7H (ie AM4):-

DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]

PLL Tune R1 [Auto]

PLL reference voltage [Auto]

So definitely PLL tune/ref voltage is accounting for the 2 dies on X399. So DRAM Tune has nothing to do with number of IMC/dies.

If we thought it was for DRAM channels then Xx70 does not have 4, only 2, so it's not that. I don't think it's based on # of dimm slots as X399 has 8 and Xx70 has 4.

I spent almost a day changing one of the 4 values or all four, I tried small changes and big changes and couldn't come to a conclusion if they aided or not stability on a profile. This was the second time I have done this, previously was when on 2 dimms, targetting 3533MHz on C7H.

Have any of you guys reached any findings on these settings? we only have one post by Elmor in the C6H thread which gives away little, other than it was supposed aid DRAM clocking but in their findings it did not.


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> I'd be interested to see you timings please....
> I was running 3600 (which i'd not been able to do in a while) but it just stopped working. I think some of the timings were just too tight. Want to tinker more
> 
> I've been able to boot up to 3800 leaving everything on default - not useable - but show potential. Getting this kit to 3200 on my X370 Prime Pro was a real headache, though I don't think I tried with geardown=on like I'm running them now.


I was also able to boot into windows at 3800 using my original timings I had rock solid at 3600. I could browse the web...but any type of bench or stress would BSOD. I will get you both sets of timings in a bit. JUst woke up and need coffee.

Bclk at 102

The first screenshot is at PE 1
The second screenshot is at PE 2





gupsterg said:


> Just wanted your thoughts guys on something.
> 
> So definitely PLL tune/ref voltage is accounting for the 2 dies on X399. So DRAM Tune has nothing to do with number of IMC/dies.
> 
> If we thought it was for DRAM channels then Xx70 does not have 4, only 2, so it's not that. I don't think it's based on # of dimm slots as X399 has 8 and Xx70 has 4.
> 
> I spent almost a day changing one of the 4 values or all four, I tried small changes and big changes and couldn't come to a conclusion if they aided or not stability on a profile. This was the second time I have done this, previously was when on 2 dimms, targetting 3533MHz on C7H.
> 
> Have any of you guys reached any findings on these settings? we only have one post by Elmor in the C6H thread which gives away little, other than it was supposed aid DRAM clocking but in their findings it did not.


I am pretty sure you have this correct, but I am saying this without actually looking at any Threadripper bios in details and extracting info from them. The reason I am saying this is that several bios not ASUS if I remember correctly even have per channel ram timings that could be set if unhidden. I will spend a little time this AM to try and confirm this for you from a TR bios.

/edit okay so I am comparing a bios from a TR and X470 boards. It would seem what you are saying is correct..but this is just supposition. Also there are is also a setting where you can also set on the 370 and 470 board. I can't remember if these are hidden by default but I believe they are from what I am vaguely remembering.

DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA 
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB

And true to form with what you are getting at on the TR this is:

DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA 
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHC
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHD

Also on the TR there are a number of dram settings which are are divided to AB and CD vs on the 370/470 with just one setting for each of these.

Such as:
VTTDDR AB Voltage
VTTDDR CD Voltage

VPP DRAM AB
VPP DRAM CD

All this bears out what you what your are thinking. Without a TR board I cannot test. And I am not sure what might be hidden or not.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Just wanted your thoughts guys on something.
> 
> Below are some settings from Tweakers Paradise of ZE (ie sTR4):-
> 
> DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
> 
> PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
> PLL Tune R2 [Auto]
> 
> PLL Reference Voltage [Auto]
> PLL Reference Voltage 2 [Auto]
> 
> Below is same menu but C6H/C7H (ie AM4):-
> 
> DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
> 
> PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
> 
> PLL reference voltage [Auto]
> 
> So definitely PLL tune/ref voltage is accounting for the 2 dies on X399. So DRAM Tune has nothing to do with number of IMC/dies.
> 
> If we thought it was for DRAM channels then Xx70 does not have 4, only 2, so it's not that. I don't think it's based on # of dimm slots as X399 has 8 and Xx70 has 4.
> 
> I spent almost a day changing one of the 4 values or all four, I tried small changes and big changes and couldn't come to a conclusion if they aided or not stability on a profile. This was the second time I have done this, previously was when on 2 dimms, targetting 3533MHz on C7H.
> 
> Have any of you guys reached any findings on these settings? we only have one post by Elmor in the C6H thread which gives away little, other than it was supposed aid DRAM clocking but in their findings it did not.


I must admit I've never played with these settings so have no understanding of what they are  - and never tried looking it up either. How do you think they may help?


----------



## crakej

mtrai said:


> Ha I can't add...been running my 4133 kit at 3766 not 3733 for days now.


You need to update your sig! I'm getting confused lol! 

I've so much time on my hands I'm thinking about cross flashing the 1101 bios as some are running it trouble free..... I can't help myself - I blame it on ADHD!


----------



## gupsterg

@mtrai

CTRL REF not hidden on C6H/C7H/ZE, I believe a bank setup/control. Hence Ryzen has 2 and Threadripper 4.

Seems VPP/VTT is per IMC, so as Ryzen CPU would have 1 it's single settings and Threadripper has 2, therefore 2 settings for each.

I went all the way down to 0 on all four expecting the C7H to not POST or have some kinda catastrophic issue in OS. Neither happened. Then I tried again other combos and just could not reach any conclusion.

@crakej

Dunno how the changes would help  , pretty much what you see as help string in UEFI is what we have to go on, so far. Any other info I have come across you wanna take with vast amount of salt   . You can see here is where Elmor gave info similar to help string, link.



Spoiler


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> You need to update your sig! I'm getting confused lol!
> 
> I've so much time on my hands I'm thinking about cross flashing the 1101 bios as some are running it trouble free..... I can't help myself - I blame it on ADHD!


I have updated my signature several times and well it keeps reverting back. Dunno why. Just do it...you will not regret it. And really just have a flashback USB on hand, I always do. Heck 2 days ago...I flashed my XFX 580 to a 590 just to show it could be done as proof of concept. Windows could not load the drivers but it flashed and would boot into windows but as a basic windows display device.


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> @mtrai
> 
> CTRL REF not hidden on C6H/C7H/ZE, I believe a bank setup/control. Hence Ryzen has 2 and Threadripper 4.
> 
> Seems VPP/VTT is per IMC, so as Ryzen CPU would have 1 it's single settings and Threadripper has 2, therefore 2 settings for each.
> 
> I went all the way down to 0 on all four expecting the C7H to not POST or have some kinda catastrophic issue in OS. Neither happened. Then I tried again other combos and just could not reach any conclusion.
> 
> @crakej
> 
> Dunno how the changes would help  , pretty much what you see as help string in UEFI is what we have to go on, so far. Any other info I have come across you wanna take with vast amount of salt   . You can see here is where Elmor gave info similar to help string, link.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 232140


Like I said I could not remember if any were hidden or not off the top of my head. Yeah those strings are sparse and the web is of no real help. I am with you...I am just not sure what they do as I am not sure what a lot of the bios options do.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> @mtrai
> 
> CTRL REF not hidden on C6H/C7H/ZE, I believe a bank setup/control. Hence Ryzen has 2 and Threadripper 4.
> 
> Seems VPP/VTT is per IMC, so as Ryzen CPU would have 1 it's single settings and Threadripper has 2, therefore 2 settings for each.
> 
> I went all the way down to 0 on all four expecting the C7H to not POST or have some kinda catastrophic issue in OS. Neither happened. Then I tried again other combos and just could not reach any conclusion.
> 
> @crakej
> 
> Dunno how the changes would help  , pretty much what you see as help string in UEFI is what we have to go on, so far. Any other info I have come across you wanna take with vast amount of salt   . You can see here is where Elmor gave info similar to help string, link.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 232140


Another very interesting share. Also, I haven't been looking at my VTT voltages to make sure they are V/2.
@mtrai I'm about to flash  Flashback at the ready!


----------



## gupsterg

mtrai said:


> Like I said I could not remember if any were hidden or not off the top of my head. Yeah those strings are sparse and the web is of no real help. I am with you...I am just not sure what they do as I am not sure what a lot of the bios options do.


Even if we haven't sussed it, it was nice to discuss and get an opinion that my thought process is not gone a wacko! LOL.

Thank you for time to read/think/comment :thumb. .



crakej said:


> Another very interesting share. Also, I haven't been looking at my VTT voltages to make sure they are V/2.


Rule is that, but you may find a setting, a step or two, above/below the rule, favours your setup.

One thing I have noted is out of C6H/C7H/ZE is the C6H had the most fine granularity VTT setting, ~6mV steps.

If someone from ASUS is reading please give this enhanced granularity to us tinkerers .


----------



## crakej

Oh dear.... Decided to cross flash the Wi-Fi uefi.... Now I can't boot.

Flashback is not working......flashes a couple of times then light stays on meaning so.ething went wrong.
When I try to boot, the qcodes just keep looping. No beep, nothing! Have tried small partition, fat fat32 as sS well. Really don't get why flashback is failing like this. Only thing I can think of is having flashed the Wi-Fi bios that the flashback task might want c7hwifi.cap as the file name instead of c7h.cap

Any ideas?


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> Oh dear.... Decided to cross flash the Wi-Fi uefi.... Now I can't boot.
> 
> Flashback is not working......flashes a couple of times then light stays on meaning so.ething went wrong.
> When I try to boot, the qcodes just keep looping. No beep, nothing! Have tried small partition, fat fat32 as sS well. Really don't get why flashback is failing like this. Only thing I can think of is having flashed the Wi-Fi bios that the flashback task might want c7hwifi.cap as the file name instead of c7h.cap
> 
> Any ideas?


Never flash different bios version by purpose  anyways..
Did you try both *.cap names ?
If i remember well there was something like USB BIOS FLASHBACK FIX or ASUS CrashFree BIOS method on other Mobo's. Dont know if Asus has it for the CH7. You can try to search. Otherwise contact ASUS


----------



## mtrai

@gupsterg @crakej

Woohoo not only able to boot into 3800...actually 3806 but was able to to AIDA bench ......drum roll please /edit it required me to raise both the soc and dram voltage but I am cool with that. All prior attempts ...not much effort could not even aida bench. This is looking good fellas. Ram is not really my best thing.


----------



## CJMitsuki

mtrai said:


> @*gupsterg* @*crakej*
> 
> Woohoo not only able to boot into 3800...actually 3806 but was able to to AIDA bench ......drum roll please /edit it required me to raise both the soc and dram voltage but I am cool with that. All prior attempts ...not much effort could not even aida bench. This is looking good fellas. Ram is not really my best thing.



let me get the link for the wifi bios, ill cross flash it and see if it works...Im also working on a setup for better single core. Running at 4.625ghz single boost but multicore is at 4.4 which isnt good for multicore benches. got a good bench on hwbot x265 at 13.4 fps or so might have been 13.7 but im going to try it out on SuperPi and others tonight. Oddly it isnt stable at all on Win 7 yet but win 10 it will run all night benching. Wish I could use win 10 for benching everything but gfx as I can strip it down and get almost as good scores as w7 on cpu benching bc its more stable and can handle higher clocks at less voltage.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> You need to update your sig! I'm getting confused lol!
> 
> I've so much time on my hands I'm thinking about cross flashing the 1101 bios as some are running it trouble free..... I can't help myself - I blame it on ADHD!


I had absolutely no problems on 1101 excluding the subsystem id bug. But because I was comparing BIOS against BIOS I stopped using 1101 because having to deal with the few driver issues that arose when switching was becoming a pain. So I am using 1002 until 1102 comes around and I can freely move between BIOS revisions without driver re-installs.


----------



## Rusakova

majestynl said:


> Never flash different bios version by purpose  anyways..
> Did you try both *.cap names ?
> If i remember well there was something like USB BIOS FLASHBACK FIX or ASUS CrashFree BIOS method on other Mobo's. Dont know if Asus has it for the CH7. You can try to search. Otherwise contact ASUS


The CH7 does have the USB Bios flashback slot and the BIOS flashback button on the back.


----------



## majestynl

mtrai said:


> @gupsterg @crakej
> 
> Woohoo not only able to boot into 3800...actually 3806 but was able to to AIDA bench ......drum roll please /edit it required me to raise both the soc and dram voltage but I am cool with that. All prior attempts ...not much effort could not even aida bench. This is looking good fellas. Ram is not really my best thing.


Hmm nice but dont want to ruin your happiness! can you do a quick HCI test?


----------



## mtrai

CJMitsuki said:


> let me get the link for the wifi bios, ill cross flash it and see if it works...Im also working on a setup for better single core. Running at 4.625ghz single boost but multicore is at 4.4 which isnt good for multicore benches. got a good bench on hwbot x265 at 13.4 fps or so might have been 13.7 but im going to try it out on SuperPi and others tonight. Oddly it isnt stable at all on Win 7 yet but win 10 it will run all night benching. Wish I could use win 10 for benching everything but gfx as I can strip it down and get almost as good scores as w7 on cpu benching bc its more stable and can handle higher clocks at less voltage.


Sorry it is somewhere in this thread...if you do not find it I will upload it my gdrive. Elmor posted it it is the 1101 for the C7H WiFI. Today is a drinking day now for me...once I hit benchmark stable at 3800 I am getting drunk. 

To me it was one thing just to boot into windows...totally another thing to actually produce a benchmark.


----------



## CJMitsuki

mtrai said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> let me get the link for the wifi bios, ill cross flash it and see if it works...Im also working on a setup for better single core. Running at 4.625ghz single boost but multicore is at 4.4 which isnt good for multicore benches. got a good bench on hwbot x265 at 13.4 fps or so might have been 13.7 but im going to try it out on SuperPi and others tonight. Oddly it isnt stable at all on Win 7 yet but win 10 it will run all night benching. Wish I could use win 10 for benching everything but gfx as I can strip it down and get almost as good scores as w7 on cpu benching bc its more stable and can handle higher clocks at less voltage.
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry it is somewhere in this thread...if you do not find it I will upload it my gdrive. Elmor posted it it is the 1101 for the C7H WiFI. Today is a drinking day now for me...once I hit benchmark stable at 3800 I am getting drunk.
> 
> To me it was one thing just to boot into windows...totally another thing to actually produce a benchmark.
Click to expand...

I just want to test with it and see if I can get 3666 with super tight timings. I was going to adjust my multi core with Ryzen master and I downloaded it and ran it on w7 but in diagnostic mode it tells me it only runs on w10 lol. What a joke. I don’t have the patience to find out which services it needs to run in diagnostic mode right now


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> @gupsterg @crakej
> 
> Woohoo not only able to boot into 3800...actually 3806 but was able to to AIDA bench ......drum roll please /edit it required me to raise both the soc and dram voltage but I am cool with that. All prior attempts ...not much effort could not even aida bench. This is looking good fellas. Ram is not really my best thing.


Ayyy I broke 60000 at 3800MHz also. I can't find my post with my screenshot though. I also couldn't get it stable enough for anything more than an Aida run.


----------



## gupsterg

@crakej

You should be able to recover board by using correct flash file and using flashback.
@mtrai

Damn nice chap! defo :drink: time  .


----------



## mtrai

Look y'all I have not have that much time to devote to my PC since Hurricane Michael hit...to me this has been the best bios. I have yet to see what could unlock.

Let me know how the wifi and bloothoth options are showing?


----------



## CJMitsuki

Using the 1101 wifi bios it flashed and booted using the Afuefix64 method perfectly on my non-wifi board. Once i entered the OS (w10x64) I did initially have a display problem and figured it was just the gfx driver problem that everyone was complaining about but when i went to download a new driver the screen flashed and the old driver loaded just fine and I never had a problem with the audio driver. I put in my settings for 3533mhz memory but not at the max tight timings but really close, usually i have to run decently cool to keep these without an intermittent error but it seemed to boot up and test without a single problem and the ram produced a bit better Aida64 results as well as booted faster and ran TM5 10 sec per cycle faster. Im going to test this a bit more and see how high memory can stay stable on tight timings. Initially this bios is quite nice, they did remove PBO but renamed it XFR enhancements or something and you can only enable or disable it so no scalar or edc adjustments or anything like that. Also saw something called SPD read optimization which from the looks of it dont really have a good use unless you are using the XMP or default SPD and care if the SPD is read anyway.


----------



## crakej

mtrai said:


> Look y'all I have not have that much time to devote to my PC since Hurricane Michael hit...to me this has been the best bios. I have yet to see what could unlock.
> 
> Let me know how the wifi and bloothoth options are showing?


Not working at all! Cannot flashback for some reason.

Left it off for a while but made it worse. When I turn on I only get the start button on the MB illuminating. Before mb aura lights would come on as well. Still can't get flashback working......meant to work whatever you flash to bios!?!?!


----------



## CJMitsuki

crakej said:


> mtrai said:
> 
> 
> 
> Look y'all I have not have that much time to devote to my PC since Hurricane Michael hit...to me this has been the best bios. I have yet to see what could unlock.
> 
> Let me know how the wifi and bloothoth options are showing?
> 
> 
> 
> Not working at all! Cannot flashback for some reason.
> 
> Left it off for a while but made it worse. When I turn on I only get the start button on the MB illuminating. Before mb aura lights would come on as well. Still can't get flashback working......meant to work whatever you flash to bios!?!?!
Click to expand...

Did you use the Afuefix64 method or just the asus flash?


----------



## crakej

CJMitsuki said:


> Did you use the Afuefix64 method or just the asus flash?


Afuefix64 - I've used this method a lot.....flashed a ok as normal....that's what I don't understand.

I have found out my usb keys are guid so made an MBR flashback key but still no joy! I'm using 1002 for flashback. Going to try with C7HWIFI.CAP next...


----------



## neikosr0x

CJMitsuki said:


> Did you use the Afuefix64 method or just the asus flash?


can you all share the method again please?


----------



## CJMitsuki

neikosr0x said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did you use the Afuefix64 method or just the asus flash?
> 
> 
> 
> can you all share the method again please?
Click to expand...

It’s explained with pics in Usmus’ bios mod thread on the first page.
It’s the best way to flash as it deletes all remnants of the previous bios before flashing instead of flashing over the old data.


----------



## crakej

Well, I've come to the conclusion that I've lost my 12v rails....

1st had sudden failures of previously good ram of of 3600MTs....reducing to lower powered 3533 profile fixed that.

Next I have strange bios bootloop preventing post from ever finishing. Then when I let it all cool down the only light shining through is the onboard start button.

Flashback failed.

Got meter out to measure and the probes broke! Both of them! This is when I realize nothing pure 12 or 5v is working - aurora, Blu-ray and ram fans NOT functioning.

There were no obvious signs it was on its way out. This could have been affecting my system in all sorts of ways! I'm not sure how long I've had this rm850, but looks like I need to replace it....prob had more than 5 years....a couple of those mining 24/7.


----------



## gupsterg

Ooo..... sorry to read that chap ....

Few days ago I saw Amazon Warehouse Deals had like new RM1000X for ~£100 delivered.

*** edit ***

They currently have promo of 20%, so ~£80, as their invoice never state's used I've tended to gain full manufacturer warranty from date of invoice.


----------



## mtrai

CJMitsuki said:


> Did you use the Afuefix64 method or just the asus flash?


You have to use Afuefix64 since you are switching bios between different motherboards.

Man that sucks on the PSU...but it would explain various issues you have been having.

EVGA is having some nice sales going on..not sure if they are in the EU. I picked up a Supernova 1000 G3 for 99.99 USD 10 + 2 year warranty. The sales prices seem to be the same on Newegg and Amazon as well for the EVGA PSU


----------



## CJMitsuki

crakej said:


> Well, I've come to the conclusion that I've lost my 12v rails....
> 
> 1st had sudden failures of previously good ram of of 3600MTs....reducing to lower powered 3533 profile fixed that.
> 
> Next I have strange bios bootloop preventing post from ever finishing. Then when I let it all cool down the only light shining through is the onboard start button.
> 
> Flashback failed.
> 
> Got meter out to measure and the probes broke! Both of them! This is when I realize nothing pure 12 or 5v is working - aurora, Blu-ray and ram fans NOT functioning.
> 
> There were no obvious signs it was on its way out. This could have been affecting my system in all sorts of ways! I'm not sure how long I've had this rm850, but looks like I need to replace it....prob had more than 5 years....a couple of those mining 24/7.


damn, that’s unlucky. Black Friday is this week and Cyber Monday is next Monday. Get a cheap one until then and you’ll get a really good deal on one


mtrai said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did you use the Afuefix64 method or just the asus flash?
> 
> 
> 
> You have to use Afuefix64 since you are switching bios between different motherboards.
> 
> Man that sucks on the PSU...but it would explain various issues you have been having.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I always use Afuefix64, I don’t like overwriting data. I even run Diskpart and clean my hard drives whenever I reinstall my OS.


----------



## mtrai

CJMitsuki said:


> damn, that’s unlucky. Black Friday is this week and Cyber Monday is next Monday. Get a cheap one until then and you’ll get a really good deal on one
> 
> Yeah, I always use Afuefix64, I don’t like overwriting data. I even run Diskpart and clean my hard drives whenever I reinstall my OS.


Heck I do it this way always now. I have one dedicated USB stick just for this. It just makes sense especially when changing such big things in the BIOS.


----------



## mtrai

@gupsterg

Do you think you can find out if Silent Scone will be a presence here as well as the Rog forums?

"From January, Silent Scone will go full time, so will be present on both sides of the forum. He’ll be the main ASUS contact from here on. My role here is constantly changing, I have two teams to look after and multiple tasks, so I’ve sampled a few more forum helpers and bought SS onboard to help out. Sorry for the issues.

-Raja"

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...o-UEFI-build-update-thread/page240#post745021


----------



## CJMitsuki

mtrai said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> damn, that’s unlucky. Black Friday is this week and Cyber Monday is next Monday. Get a cheap one until then and you’ll get a really good deal on one
> 
> Yeah, I always use Afuefix64, I don’t like overwriting data. I even run Diskpart and clean my hard drives whenever I reinstall my OS.
> 
> 
> 
> Heck I do it this way always now. I have one dedicated USB stick just for this. It just makes sense especially when changing such big things in the BIOS.
Click to expand...




mtrai said:


> Same, I just don’t trust Asus software at all. From the problems I’ve seen and the unneeded services it installs I just don’t use any of it or I try not to. I had one program that installed Asus Update and even if I disabled the service it would re enable itself. I had to go into the registry and stop it. That was what broke me from their software. @gupsterg
> 
> Do you think you can find out if Silent Scone will be a presence here as well as the Rog forums?
> 
> "From January, Silent Scone will go full time, so will be present on both sides of the forum. He’ll be the main ASUS contact from here on. My role here is constantly changing, I have two teams to look after and multiple tasks, so I’ve sampled a few more forum helpers and bought SS onboard to help out. Sorry for the issues.
> 
> -Raja"
> 
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...o-UEFI-build-update-thread/page240#post745021


Ive seen him in the Intel DDR4 thread but not really active on the AMD side from what I’ve seen but I don’t frequent the TR threads so he may go on those.


----------



## mtrai

CJMitsuki said:


> Ive seen him in the Intel DDR4 thread but not really active on the AMD side from what I’ve seen but I don’t frequent the TR threads so he may go on those.


Raja did say starting January.


----------



## crakej

Thanks for all your suggestions - I managed to get an RM 1000x for £119 delivered tomorrow.

I tried to get one where I live, but nowhere has 1000w in stock so came home and did amazon. Very frustrating how there aren't many really good shops for enthusiasts nowadays - I even checked into PC World who mainly sell fridges and TVs now. Some computer bits but NO power supplies 

Can't believe my laptop died as well! Think the SSD has given up even though I hardly use it.... so left with using my debian server temporarily which is running on my old ASUS M5A97 with a Phenom X 6.

So tomorrow my computer will all be less than 2 years old. Hopefully things will be a bit more stable now. Thinking about looking in old psu as it might just be a blown fuse - you never know....

I emailed Raja. I'm not sure if Silent Scone will be here as well - maybe. I copied the email exactly that I got from Raja. I did send another requesting a bit more detail, but no word so far.


----------



## gupsterg

@mtrai

No idea chap. Silent Scone is quite regularly present on ROG forum as he's admin there. I did comms with him on some site issues there, but not in regard to this new role. When next do chat to him I'll ask  .
@crakej

Crazy what's gone on your other system also giving up the ghost  .


----------



## mtrai

@gupsterg can you also ask another thing for me...you have a better relationship with Raja then I do. lol. Can you ask him why ASUS is now locking the new bios from being modified in AMIBCP? Or is that just an oversight. I really don't expect ASUS will answer. They locked the tabs out so we can longer do anything in AMIBCP.

The one on the right is the newer version which have the tab gone. Which AMI does allow. I have checked a number of bios not just the Crosshairs...all the betas or even one of the actual released one now do this.


----------



## CJMitsuki

mtrai said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ive seen him in the Intel DDR4 thread but not really active on the AMD side from what I’ve seen but I don’t frequent the TR threads so he may go on those.
> 
> 
> 
> Raja did say starting January.
Click to expand...

Yes, I saw that he will be full time in January. Just speaking on what I have seen him post on here at OCN. I’d say he’s still going to be much more active in the Intel threads than on the AMD side as he probably has more hands on time with an Intel system vs AMD. That’s just an assumption though but a likely one seeing as how he already spends his time there. I think Elmor was more personally connected to the OC community with how involved he was with HWBOT. I think troubleshooting problems all the time was turning something he loved into a less fulfilling “job”. I’ve always hated getting a job that incorporated something you were passionate about, only to make you lose the feel for it and start loathing something you once enjoyed.


----------



## Synoxia

Which one is better? Performance enhancer level 2 or 3? I've noticed PE level 2 gives me higher clocks under light thread loads but idk if that translates to better performance


----------



## nick name

Synoxia said:


> Which one is better? Performance enhancer level 2 or 3? I've noticed PE level 2 gives me higher clocks under light thread loads but idk if that translates to better performance


PE 2 is standard XFR/PBO so it will downclock. PE 3 removes the safety parameters so it doesn't downclock under load.


----------



## xfloggingkylex

Hey everyone,

Just built my first PC in a while replacing my 2700k with a 2700x, GTX 1080, CH7 and 16GB FlareX CL14 RAM. Running an EVGA CLC 280 in a Corsair Carbide Air 540 case.

Tinkered a little with PE 1-2 and PBO Enabled (seems to be more or less the same as PE2?) but doesn't give significant gains compared to the amount of extra heat and volts added. Currently running stock everything CPU wise and Stilts safe 3200 RAM timings, didn't have much luck with higher unfortunately.

Just wanted to say hi as I'll be reading this thread quite a bit going forward.


----------



## neikosr0x

Synoxia said:


> Which one is better? Performance enhancer level 2 or 3? I've noticed PE level 2 gives me higher clocks under light thread loads but idk if that translates to better performance


with PE3 u will get higher clocks at full load and also clocks will maintain the boost for longer meaning that with PE3 u will get 4.350 on single core loads basically all the time.


----------



## freddy85

neikosr0x said:


> with PE3 u will get higher clocks at full load and also clocks will maintain the boost for longer meaning that with PE3 u will get 4.350 on single core loads basically all the time.


If i enable PE3 the XFR gets disabled, it get locked on 4 ghz. if i disable PE then it fluctuate but never 4.3 at laod, only short random burst.

Have only enabled DOCP, no other settings.

edit. 2700x cpu


----------



## specialedge

freddy85 said:


> If i enable PE3 the XFR gets disabled, it get locked on 4 ghz. if i disable PE then it fluctuate but never 4.3 at laod, only short random burst.
> 
> Have only enabled DOCP, no other settings.
> 
> edit. 2700x cpu


Double check your windows power plan, it should be set to balanced, not ryzen balanced 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## freddy85

specialedge said:


> Double check your windows power plan, it should be set to balanced, not ryzen balanced
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


WOW, big thanks.. it worked, have struggled with this for sevral month. was sure my MB or CPU was a lemon.
Now its 4.3 singe core under load.. never before.

edit, 4.350 it is


----------



## nick name

freddy85 said:


> WOW, big thanks.. it worked, have struggled with this for sevral month. was sure my MB or CPU was a lemon.
> Now its 4.3 singe core under load.. never before.
> 
> edit, 4.350 it is


You can actually using any plan you like as long as you set Minimum Processor State to anything below 50%. I use the Ultimate Performance Plan and set Minimum Processor State to 20%.


----------



## crakej

Back at last! Still not sure exactly what happened as my DMM is also out of order 

My voltages do look a little batter - will no more when I test under load, but first, update to 1101


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

Syldon said:


> Total power used is shown in Watts. Watts = Amps X Volts. On earliler bios revisions, the amps value is showing as reduced as opposed to the volts value. The end result is the same it reduces the total power driven into the CPU. Look to your Amp values.



A big shoutout to you guys helping me out here!!!!!!!!!!!!! :specool: 



And sorry for my late response . 
BTW i got some updates .


We'll it turned out that this issue also existed on the Enermax Powersupply .



@ stock it works great but 1.519v ... yeah i know the comments from AMD onto this behave of the CPU. But i want it lower with 4ghz.















@ 4ghz and unfixed bios 0509.













crakej said:


> First: update to bios 1002.
> 
> Second: yes, many have reported this and it's often just a reset of the bios or an update that's needed .
> 
> If you have a Ryzen 2xxx CPU, don't use Ryzen Balanced plan .
> 
> Hope that helps!





Yes i'm having a 2700x CPU but it won't show ,but i already changed all of this in my rigprofile here... :thumbsdow


Can you please tell me why i shouldn't use the ryzen balanced plan ? 



Which one should i use if planing to UC+UV ?


What do you mean with a reset of the bios ?


One thing i tried was put out the motherboard battery for 90sec, then i did a CMOS reset but no change yet .


So how is the process of doing a bios flash on a X470 Asus Board .

Can i take one of these opinions without having issues ?

Things i've read so far about flashing bios or how it could be done :






> Using USB BIOS Flashback:
> Using USB BIOS Flashback, please rename to "C7H.CAP" after download;
> 
> Using EZFlash:
> Note 1 : This knowledge is only applicable to have EZFlash2 motherboard.
> Note 2 : Do NOT update the BIOS by yourself if it's not necessary. Update failure could lead your device not to boot/start up.
> 
> step 1. Enter the Advanced Mode
> step 2. Go to the "Tool menu"
> step 3. Select "ASUS EZ Flash Utility"
> step 4. Select BIOS file to perform the BIOS update process
> step 5. Reboot the system, and enter the BIOS again
> step 6. Press [F5] to Load Optimized Defaults
> step 7. Press [F10], save configuration and reset
> 
> In BIOS environment, the motherboard doesn’t support the USB whose format is NTFS. Please convert the USB format to FAT32.
> It is recommended to download the BIOS from ASUS support site directly.
> 
> 
> [Motherboard] Why isn't BIOS flashback working?
> If the light is flashing for 5 seconds and turns off, it means that the BIOS flashback is not operating properly. Please follow these steps below:
> 
> 1. We recommend you use a USB 2.0 storage device to save the latest BIOS version for better compatibility and stability.
> 2. Insert the USB storage device to the USB Flashback port.
> 3. Shut down your computer.
> 4. Press the BIOS Flashback button for 3 seconds until the Flashback LED blinks 3 times, indicating that the BIOS Flashback function is working
> 5. Wait until the light shuts off, indicating that the BIOS updating process is completed.
> 6. Do not unplug portable disk, power system, or press the CLR_CMOS button while BIOS update is ongoing, otherwise, update will be interrupted.
> 7. In case of interruption, please follow the above steps again.
> 8. If the light flashes for 5 seconds and turns into a solid light, this means that the BIOS Flashback is not operating properly.
> 
> This may be caused by improper installation of the USB storage device and wrong filename/file format. If this scenario happens, please restart the system to turn off the light.
> Updating the BIOS has risks. If the BIOS program is damaged during the update process and results in system failure to boot up, please contact local ASUS Product Support.





Thank you all !!!


----------



## chakku

CJMitsuki said:


> Ive seen him in the Intel DDR4 thread but not really active on the AMD side from what I’ve seen but I don’t frequent the TR threads so he may go on those.


Yeah he doesn't seem to really care at all about the AMD platforms.


----------



## crakej

Well, so far so good with new battery and bios 1101.

Running at 4.1GHz, 3533 cl14 13 13 22 36 cpu +0.05000v offset, no LLC - about 1.388v SoC is at 1.01v. I'm getting better performance and lower temps - my ambient is colder what with the snow and all - but this is def better. My testing is (very) preliminary so far but this is encouraging. Mem latency is 65. I've yet to add Pef bias. Also yet to try 3600+

Tired now! Will do more tomorrow


----------



## gupsterg

mtrai said:


> @gupsterg can you also ask another thing for me...you have a better relationship with Raja then I do. lol. Can you ask him why ASUS is now locking the new bios from being modified in AMIBCP? Or is that just an oversight. I really don't expect ASUS will answer. They locked the tabs out so we can longer do anything in AMIBCP.
> 
> The one on the right is the newer version which have the tab gone. Which AMI does allow. I have checked a number of bios not just the Crosshairs...all the betas or even one of the actual released one now do this.


When I do chat to him I'll add that on  , but I don't think I have any better relationship with him than any other forum member   .



Synoxia said:


> Which one is better? Performance enhancer level 2 or 3? I've noticed PE level 2 gives me higher clocks under light thread loads but idk if that translates to better performance


I yesterday went to UEFI 1002, as wanted to be able to adjust scalar (UEFI 1101 is not allowing manual PBO tweaks). I'd perhaps gun for your own setup.

@crakej

Nice to read your back online with rig  .

@MacG32

Further testing of 3333MHz C14 1T 4x8GB  .

First I'll link up the original testing posted here 4315. HCI had become slow to use. I was tempted to use GSAT, but I knew from my past experience with other CPU that I had seen passes of ~9hrs on 3400MHz C15 1T using 4x8GB and then had issues on other posts. So I decided to buy Kahru RAM Test, I am glad I did  .

In the previous testing very first conclusion reached was ProcODT 48 was optimal, retesting with RT also confirmed this. SOC also seemed correct, as further later testing did show I needed more  .

Next I decided to retune CAD Bus, to my surprise using 24 20 20 24 pushed the pass rate passed ~3000%.



Spoiler














You were right though that I was suffering somewhat POST to POST variance.



Spoiler














If you download those screenie/see filename in tab I had also started deviating from stock CLDO_VDDP in an attempt to improve stability. This was futile IMO, I thought it would be, but I did not wish to leave a stone unturned.

I also spent a day meddling with DRAM Tune, again no conclusion was reached if it did or did not help stability. I also spent some time with CAD Bus timings meddling, again futile exercise, again I knew this maybe the case from information in The Stilt's X470 mobo reviews. Again I did not wish to leave a stone unturned.

I slightly tightened tRC and changed tCKE at this point, as I still had fail at similar point I felt my issue was not timings related. The big break to solve POST to POST variance was tuning RTT values  . Again Kahru RAM Test shone in how quickly it discovered that profile was not correct.



Spoiler














There were 2 other tests which failed to post. Next was some quick fire testing to see if RTT 34 Off 60 was it.

Ordering in spoiler is setup POST, reboot run, full post from shutdown run, reboot run.



Spoiler






































Then I did another reboot run before turning in, ~10100% then an error.



Spoiler














I have now added some more juice to profile (SOC/VDIMM). I have reached so far ~4675%, will let you know I how it goes in a day or so  .

If you do downloads the attached screenies and compare filenames you'll also note I went from +25mV offset on core to +0mV.

Below is very 1st screenie in this post, side by side with 1st screenie from RTT tweak.



Spoiler














Just like in The Stilt's Ryzen Technical thread - PR info (link) the SMU of CPU on gen 2 monitors effective voltage. Positive changes of voltage offset and LLC increases seem to be ignored. I tried other setups as well.

The interesting thing is that negative offsets yields increases in frequency. This maybe due to various factors that affect algorithm.

As positive voltage increase was being circumvented by SMU I part way in testing changed to UEFI 1002. I then set a manual PBO of 1000/114/168 (ie what PBO: enabled defaults to) and also set scalar of 3x.

As soon as I conclude this profile I'll be adding this test data/conclusions to the C7H ROG thread and doing further testing on the voltage offset effect  .


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> @MacG32
> 
> Further testing of 3333MHz C14 1T 4x8GB  .
> 
> First I'll link up the original testing posted here 4315. HCI had become slow to use. I was tempted to use GSAT, but I knew from my past experience with other CPU that I had seen passes of ~9hrs on 3400MHz C15 1T using 4x8GB and then had issues on other posts. So I decided to buy Kahru RAM Test, I am glad I did  .
> 
> In the previous testing very first conclusion reached was ProcODT 48 was optimal, retesting with RT also confirmed this. SOC also seemed correct, as further later testing did show I needed more  .
> 
> Next I decided to retune CAD Bus, to my surprise using 24 20 20 24 pushed the pass rate passed ~3000%.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 233156
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You were right though that I was suffering somewhat POST to POST variance.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 233158
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you download those screenie/see filename in tab I had also started deviating from stock CLDO_VDDP in an attempt to improve stability. This was futile IMO, I thought it would be, but I did not wish to leave a stone unturned.
> 
> I also spent a day meddling with DRAM Tune, again no conclusion was reached if it did or did not help stability. I also spent some time with CAD Bus timings meddling, again futile exercise, again I knew this maybe the case from information in The Stilt's X470 mobo reviews. Again I did not wish to leave a stone unturned.
> 
> I slightly tightened tRC and changed tCKE at this point, as I still had fail at similar point I felt my issue was not timings related. The big break to solve POST to POST variance was tuning RTT values  . Again Kahru RAM Test shone in how quickly it discovered that profile was not correct.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 233160
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There were 2 other tests which failed to post. Next was some quick fire testing to see if RTT 34 Off 60 was it.
> 
> Ordering in spoiler is setup POST, reboot run, full post from shutdown run, reboot run.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 233162
> 
> 
> View attachment 233164
> 
> 
> View attachment 233166
> 
> 
> View attachment 233168
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then I did another reboot run before turning in, ~10100% then an error.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 233170
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have now added some more juice to profile (SOC/VDIMM). I have reached so far ~4675%, will let you know I how it goes in a day or so  .
> 
> If you do downloads the attached screenies and compare filenames you'll also note I went from +25mV offset on core to +0mV.
> 
> Below is very 1st screenie in this post, side by side with 1st screenie from RTT tweak.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 233172
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just like in The Stilt's Ryzen Technical thread - PR info (link) the SMU of CPU on gen 2 monitors effective voltage. Positive changes of voltage offset and LLC increases seem to be ignored. I tried other setups as well.
> 
> The interesting thing is that negative offsets yields increases in frequency. This maybe due to various factors that affect algorithm.
> 
> As positive voltage increase was being circumvented by SMU I part way in testing changed to UEFI 1002. I then set a manual PBO of 1000/114/168 (ie what PBO: enabled defaults to) and also set scalar of 3x.
> 
> As soon as I conclude this profile I'll be adding this test data/conclusions to the C7H ROG thread and doing further testing on the voltage offset effect  .


Cheers Chap! Thanks for detailed test reports! Always a pleasure to read! Good luck with further testing! 

Im currently playing around with a new set of : Trident Z F4-4266C19D-16GTZR

3466CL14+TT : Check
3533CL14+TT : Check
3600CL14+TT : Currently under stress-testing and tweaking. Im sure will get it done soon.

This is the first set of sticks that is accepting tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSCL @ 2 
Manually setting GD on disabled + setting 1T together still doesn't boot to windows. Changed at least 4/5 sets including 2/3 CPU's on this board but no luck.
Im suspecting the mobo itself.. 

anyways.. if i get the 3600 and Up profiles stable i will share full details here!

*Testrig: Ryzen 2700x @4.2 / 16GB 4266 Gskill's / Bios 1102


----------



## seth156

Hello



I’m in a bit of a fight with my system.

Last week I managed to get all the parts ready and upgrade from my x8350 bulldozer



asus crosshair 7 hero

2x8gb gskill 3200mhz cl14

Ryzen 2700x

sapphire x380-previous build

Ocz vector 250gb ssd-previous build 

1tb wd drive-previous build

Enermax 520w modular power supply-previous build

Using all the watercooling parts from may last system, 3x120mm radiator, eheim 1048pump and a d-tek block (dfi lan party times hehe)



I’m using the pc for autocad and v-ray renders(max modelling)



So all is well, windows 10 install goes really fast.

Tought I should play around with the settings a little, take advantage of my b-die kit and the asus mobo.

Had a very hard time finding stability.

No problem in memtest of prime but random blue screens in windows.

About 2 days ago things really started to go south, I got a restart and my rig would only see 8gb of ram.

Reseated the ram, the two sticks turned up.

Went back to safe defaults, tought I would try the latest bios.

Blue screen again in windows, on safe defaults.

Managed to update the bios, ran memtest while I was at work, 10 hours, no errors reported.

Closed the test, opened a chrome tab to log on to mail, crash again blue screen.

Now it’s stuck at code 06 - microcode loading.

Nothing I can do to pass that.

Temps were fine, max 65 under load, not using temp offset.



sorry if I f’up writing this, english is not my native language


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> Cheers Chap! Thanks for detailed test reports! Always a pleasure to read! Good luck with further testing!
> 
> Im currently playing around with a new set of : Trident Z F4-4266C19D-16GTZR
> 
> 3466CL14+TT : Check
> 3533CL14+TT : Check
> 3600CL14+TT : Currently under stress-testing and tweaking. Im sure will get it done soon.
> 
> This is the first set of sticks that is accepting tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSCL @ 2
> Manually setting GD on disabled + setting 1T together still doesn't boot to windows. Changed at least 4/5 sets including 2/3 CPU's on this board but no luck.
> Im suspecting the mobo itself..
> 
> anyways.. if i get the 3600 and Up profiles stable i will share full details here!
> 
> *Testrig: Ryzen 2700x @4.2 / 16GB 4266 Gskill's / Bios 1102


nice - here's my timings for 3533.... and my 3600 setting. I also think it's a motherboard problem that is making us have to turn on geardown. Even so i'm at 65ns with my 1700x so i'm quite pleased so far. Doing more work too and will share results. At 3600 I can actually turn geardown back off when using T2


----------



## crakej

seth156 said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Hello
> 
> I’m in a bit of a fight with my system.
> 
> Last week I managed to get all the parts ready and upgrade from my x8350 bulldozer
> 
> asus crosshair 7 hero
> 
> 2x8gb gskill 3200mhz cl14
> 
> Ryzen 2700x
> 
> sapphire x380-previous build
> 
> Ocz vector 250gb ssd-previous build
> 
> 1tb wd drive-previous build
> 
> Enermax 520w modular power supply-previous build
> 
> Using all the watercooling parts from may last system, 3x120mm radiator, eheim 1048pump and a d-tek block (dfi lan party times hehe)
> 
> 
> 
> I’m using the pc for autocad and v-ray renders(max modelling)
> 
> 
> 
> So all is well, windows 10 install goes really fast.
> 
> Tought I should play around with the settings a little, take advantage of my b-die kit and the asus mobo.
> 
> Had a very hard time finding stability.
> 
> No problem in memtest of prime but random blue screens in windows.
> 
> About 2 days ago things really started to go south, I got a restart and my rig would only see 8gb of ram.
> 
> Reseated the ram, the two sticks turned up.
> 
> Went back to safe defaults, tought I would try the latest bios.
> 
> Blue screen again in windows, on safe defaults.
> 
> Managed to update the bios, ran memtest while I was at work, 10 hours, no errors reported.
> 
> Closed the test, opened a chrome tab to log on to mail, crash again blue screen.
> 
> Now it’s stuck at code 06 - microcode loading.
> 
> Nothing I can do to pass that.
> 
> Temps were fine, max 65 under load, not using temp offset.
> 
> 
> 
> sorry if I f’up writing this, english is not my native language


Sounds like a cpu problem - not memory...... have you OCed the cpu? You may need some extra voltage somewhere to get it stable.


----------



## seth156

Yes, considered that.

That's why I tried the defaults in bios, that should be stable, right?

The last blue-screen was in windows, last night, after running prime and memtest at stock values.After that it's stuck at the post code from the picture.


----------



## gupsterg

@majestynl

Thanks and good luck with your testing  .

Hmmm, dunno about board being an issue in that you can't use GDMD + 1T, all CPUs/RAM I've had on C6H/C7H/ZE all took it TBH.
@seth156

0d and the Q-LED that is on = DRAM Fault. I'd try another RAM kit, perhaps it's having an intermittent issue.


----------



## seth156

gupsterg said:


> @majestynl
> 
> Thanks and good luck with your testing  .
> 
> Hmmm, dunno about board being an issue in that you can't use GDMD + 1T, all CPUs/RAM I've had on C6H/C7H/ZE all took it TBH.
> 
> @seth156
> 
> 0d and the Q-LED that is on = DRAM Fault. I'd try another RAM kit, perhaps it's having an intermittent issue.


Giz, I'm such an idiot.
Yes, code 0d, not 06.:thumb:

Thanks, I will try testing the sticks individually, after that with another kit.


----------



## crakej

seth156 said:


> Giz, I'm such an idiot.
> Yes, code 0d, not 06.:thumb:
> 
> Thanks, I will try testing the sticks individually, after that with another kit.


Don't forget to use the correct slots 2 and 4 or b and d - not the nearest ones


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> Hmmm, dunno about board being an issue in that you can't use GDMD + 1T, all CPUs/RAM I've had on C6H/C7H/ZE all took it TBH.


I've spoken with others with this particular kit they couldn't have geardown=off for any speed over 3200. Works on other boards and of course on intels. It didn't work on my x370 either. 

I am going to play a bit more with that now I have new power supply but the only way I've found to have geardown=off with speeds over 3200 was to change to T2. This also deserves a bit more testing. Last time I checked it out I was very surprised - there was little penalty and speeds were impressive, but I didn't get it quite stable. Feel a bit more optimistic now I know everything is working really well and I seem to have a solid platform


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> @majestynl
> 
> Thanks and good luck with your testing  .
> 
> Hmmm, dunno about board being an issue in that you can't use GDMD + 1T, all CPUs/RAM I've had on C6H/C7H/ZE all took it TBH.


YW, i also dunno m8  cause i have swapped to many parts and still cant get it working. Never tried low speeds. Only possible way is with 2T ! 




crakej said:


> I've spoken with others with this particular kit they couldn't have geardown=off for any speed over 3200. Works on other boards and of course on intels. It didn't work on my x370 either.
> 
> I am going to play a bit more with that now I have new power supply but the only way I've found to have geardown=off with speeds over 3200 was to change to T2. This also deserves a bit more testing. Last time I checked it out I was very surprised - there was little penalty and speeds were impressive, but I didn't get it quite stable. Feel a bit more optimistic now I know everything is working really well and I seem to have a solid platform


I have it all 3200CL14's and now also on the 4266CL19. As said to gupster, swapped so many parts never got it working. Suspecting the chipset. Cant say for sure. But never tried on lower speeds then 3200mhz.


----------



## specialedge

seth156 said:


> Hello
> 
> 
> 
> I’m in a bit of a fight with my system.
> 
> Last week I managed to get all the parts ready and upgrade from my x8350 bulldozer
> 
> 
> 
> asus crosshair 7 hero
> 
> 2x8gb gskill 3200mhz cl14
> 
> Ryzen 2700x
> 
> sapphire x380-previous build
> 
> Ocz vector 250gb ssd-previous build
> 
> 1tb wd drive-previous build
> 
> Enermax 520w modular power supply-previous build
> 
> Using all the watercooling parts from may last system, 3x120mm radiator, eheim 1048pump and a d-tek block (dfi lan party times hehe)
> 
> 
> 
> I’m using the pc for autocad and v-ray renders(max modelling)
> 
> 
> 
> So all is well, windows 10 install goes really fast.
> 
> Tought I should play around with the settings a little, take advantage of my b-die kit and the asus mobo.
> 
> Had a very hard time finding stability.
> 
> No problem in memtest of prime but random blue screens in windows.
> 
> About 2 days ago things really started to go south, I got a restart and my rig would only see 8gb of ram.
> 
> Reseated the ram, the two sticks turned up.
> 
> Went back to safe defaults, tought I would try the latest bios.
> 
> Blue screen again in windows, on safe defaults.
> 
> Managed to update the bios, ran memtest while I was at work, 10 hours, no errors reported.
> 
> Closed the test, opened a chrome tab to log on to mail, crash again blue screen.
> 
> Now it’s stuck at code 06 - microcode loading.
> 
> Nothing I can do to pass that.
> 
> Temps were fine, max 65 under load, not using temp offset.
> 
> 
> 
> sorry if I f’up writing this, english is not my native language


My only experience with 0d, and it may not apply to your situation, was when I was installing dual gpus in SLI. 0d is the code that currently posts for me when I have hard-reset or bios-cleared my system, where it prompts you to reset bios setting and Press F1 to continue. 

I thought my system was failing and showing a fault because I was not getting any display output. But I later discovered (after replacing the board and cpu) that my actual problem was because I had plugged my display into the second GPU rather than the first. 

So now when I boot, the 0d shows up but doesnt stop, as bios is proceeding as designed. So just make sure its not showing you "New CPU has been installed! Press F1 to continue." 

This is the type of situation I searched for weeks for a solution online, and nobody had a similar situation or was able to advise me lol. It was horrible. So just double check that first! 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## gupsterg

@crakej @majestynl

Cool guys, dunno really, seems strange the higher speed RAM is as such. I've only had kits of the 3200MHz C14 stuff, nearly bought some 3600MHz C15 a few days ago, but I resisted  .

All I know I've already stated. Yeah I didn't get 3533MHz with even going to 2T and or GDME, best for me has been ~3520MHz C15 1T GDMD using 1.35V.


----------



## nick name

gupsterg said:


> @crakej @majestynl
> 
> Cool guys, dunno really, seems strange the higher speed RAM is as such. I've only had kits of the 3200MHz C14 stuff, nearly bought some 3600MHz C15 a few days ago, but I resisted  .
> 
> All I know I've already stated. Yeah I didn't get 3533MHz with even going to 2T and or GDME, best for me has been ~3520MHz C15 1T GDMD using 1.35V.


Yeah, the 3600CL15 is what I have and can't get 3600 14-14-14-14 stable. If you're gonna upgrade go with a 4133 or faster kit. The prices I've seen for those are what I paid for my 3600CL15 6 months ago.


----------



## nick name

majestynl said:


> Cheers Chap! Thanks for detailed test reports! Always a pleasure to read! Good luck with further testing!
> 
> Im currently playing around with a new set of : Trident Z F4-4266C19D-16GTZR
> 
> 3466CL14+TT : Check
> 3533CL14+TT : Check
> 3600CL14+TT : Currently under stress-testing and tweaking. Im sure will get it done soon.
> 
> This is the first set of sticks that is accepting tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSCL @ 2
> Manually setting GD on disabled + setting 1T together still doesn't boot to windows. Changed at least 4/5 sets including 2/3 CPU's on this board but no luck.
> Im suspecting the mobo itself..
> 
> anyways.. if i get the 3600 and Up profiles stable i will share full details here!
> 
> *Testrig: Ryzen 2700x @4.2 / 16GB 4266 Gskill's / Bios 1102


You have BIOS 1102? Where did you get BIOS 1102? I would like to try 1102.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> nice - here's my timings for 3533.... and my 3600 setting. I also think it's a motherboard problem that is making us have to turn on geardown. Even so i'm at 65ns with my 1700x so i'm quite pleased so far. Doing more work too and will share results. At 3600 I can actually turn geardown back off when using T2


Damn I really want your RAM kit.


----------



## MacG32

gupsterg said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> When I do chat to him I'll add that on  , but I don't think I have any better relationship with him than any other forum member   .
> 
> 
> 
> I yesterday went to UEFI 1002, as wanted to be able to adjust scalar (UEFI 1101 is not allowing manual PBO tweaks). I'd perhaps gun for your own setup.
> 
> @crakej
> 
> Nice to read your back online with rig  .
> 
> @MacG32
> 
> Further testing of 3333MHz C14 1T 4x8GB  .
> 
> First I'll link up the original testing posted here 4315. HCI had become slow to use. I was tempted to use GSAT, but I knew from my past experience with other CPU that I had seen passes of ~9hrs on 3400MHz C15 1T using 4x8GB and then had issues on other posts. So I decided to buy Kahru RAM Test, I am glad I did  .
> 
> In the previous testing very first conclusion reached was ProcODT 48 was optimal, retesting with RT also confirmed this. SOC also seemed correct, as further later testing did show I needed more  .
> 
> Next I decided to retune CAD Bus, to my surprise using 24 20 20 24 pushed the pass rate passed ~3000%.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 233156
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You were right though that I was suffering somewhat POST to POST variance.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 233158
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you download those screenie/see filename in tab I had also started deviating from stock CLDO_VDDP in an attempt to improve stability. This was futile IMO, I thought it would be, but I did not wish to leave a stone unturned.
> 
> I also spent a day meddling with DRAM Tune, again no conclusion was reached if it did or did not help stability. I also spent some time with CAD Bus timings meddling, again futile exercise, again I knew this maybe the case from information in The Stilt's X470 mobo reviews. Again I did not wish to leave a stone unturned.
> 
> I slightly tightened tRC and changed tCKE at this point, as I still had fail at similar point I felt my issue was not timings related. The big break to solve POST to POST variance was tuning RTT values  . Again Kahru RAM Test shone in how quickly it discovered that profile was not correct.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 233160
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There were 2 other tests which failed to post. Next was some quick fire testing to see if RTT 34 Off 60 was it.
> 
> Ordering in spoiler is setup POST, reboot run, full post from shutdown run, reboot run.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 233162
> 
> 
> View attachment 233164
> 
> 
> View attachment 233166
> 
> 
> View attachment 233168
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then I did another reboot run before turning in, ~10100% then an error.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 233170
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have now added some more juice to profile (SOC/VDIMM). I have reached so far ~4675%, will let you know I how it goes in a day or so  .
> 
> If you do downloads the attached screenies and compare filenames you'll also note I went from +25mV offset on core to +0mV.
> 
> Below is very 1st screenie in this post, side by side with 1st screenie from RTT tweak.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 233172
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just like in The Stilt's Ryzen Technical thread - PR info (link) the SMU of CPU on gen 2 monitors effective voltage. Positive changes of voltage offset and LLC increases seem to be ignored. I tried other setups as well.
> 
> The interesting thing is that negative offsets yields increases in frequency. This maybe due to various factors that affect algorithm.
> 
> As positive voltage increase was being circumvented by SMU I part way in testing changed to UEFI 1002. I then set a manual PBO of 1000/114/168 (ie what PBO: enabled defaults to) and also set scalar of 3x.
> 
> As soon as I conclude this profile I'll be adding this test data/conclusions to the C7H ROG thread and doing further testing on the voltage offset effect  .



Thank you very much for your detailed testing and mentioning me. Please keep up the good work, as your testing explains a lot to the community and hopefully will help Asus as well. Varying post results should be a thing of the past in the near future. As for me, I'll be returning to the Intel side of the house this weekend. Take care and happy overclocking. :thumb:


----------



## Sn0ops

Im on BIOS 1002 since yesterday and have to say I really like it! System seems to be more snappy compared to 804.

I can also use the Stilt fast preset without any problems - 14,13,13,13,28 @1,4V

Sceen is attached.

CPU: RYZEN 2700X
RAM: 16 GB G.Skill Flare X (3200 MhZ - CL 14)
Motherboard: ASUS Crosshair Hero VII
GFX: Saphire RX Vega 56 + Nitro
PSU: Seasonic Prime - 750 Watt 
Cooler: Water Cooled by Artic Liquid Freezer 360
OS: WIN 10 - 64 bit - Pro N - 1803


----------



## gupsterg

seth156 said:


> Giz, I'm such an idiot.
> Yes, code 0d, not 06.:thumb:
> 
> Thanks, I will try testing the sticks individually, after that with another kit.


Sorry missed your reply yesterday. Look forward to update on issue.



nick name said:


> Yeah, the 3600CL15 is what I have and can't get 3600 14-14-14-14 stable. If you're gonna upgrade go with a 4133 or faster kit. The prices I've seen for those are what I paid for my 3600CL15 6 months ago.


3200MHz C14 = 8.75ns
3600MHz C15 = 8.33ns

4133MHz C19 = 9.19ns
4266MHz C19 = 8.91ns

To me 3333MHz C14 1T usually benches the same or betters 3466MHz C15 1T. So dunno I seem to believe that lower latency RAM like the 3600MHz C15 would probably be best.

Crakej and majestynl have an issue with 1T and need Gear Down Mode On, perhaps this is because of using the slightly higher latency RAM, dunno. How have you found the 3600MHz C15 kit for this aspect?

I just tried what is my best profile on C7H for benching/voltages/etc on 32GB with 1T Gear Down Mode On, profile collapsed within 40sec of Kahru RAM Test, where as with 1T GDM Off I have so many results of over 1000% to 10000%. I'm just now trying 2T GDM Off.

What makes some peoples setups work better with the differing setup of command rate and or gear down mode? is it components? silicon lottery? other settings? combo of each?

So confusing at times.



MacG32 said:


> Thank you very much for your detailed testing and mentioning me. Please keep up the good work, as your testing explains a lot to the community and hopefully will help Asus as well. Varying post results should be a thing of the past in the near future. As for me, I'll be returning to the Intel side of the house this weekend. Take care and happy overclocking. :thumb:


NP  . Sorry to read you have moved from platform, it seems at times rare to find people using/sharing experience on 32GB. I wish you the best with your new setup :cheers: .


----------



## majestynl

nick name said:


> You have BIOS 1102? Where did you get BIOS 1102? I would like to try 1102.


uuh Sorry i think i made a typo. Its probably 1101  Need to double check when im at home!




gupsterg said:


> @crakej @majestynl
> 
> Cool guys, dunno really, seems strange the higher speed RAM is as such. I've only had kits of the 3200MHz C14 stuff, nearly bought some 3600MHz C15 a few days ago, but I resisted  .
> 
> All I know I've already stated. Yeah I didn't get 3533MHz with even going to 2T and or GDME, best for me has been ~3520MHz C15 1T GDMD using 1.35V.


yeap i know! Currently busy with the 3600CL14 profile to get it stable! Takes some time again  I only have max 2 hours to test each day, kind of busy lately.
For 3533 it is happy with ~1.40v but going to 3600 its more around ~1.45v 
Bought mine 4266set for 295 euros! The 3200CL14's where 249,00!


----------



## seth156

gupsterg said:


> Sorry missed your reply yesterday. Look forward to update on issue.


Turns out one of my GSkill sticks is dead.

I used some paper tape and a marker to number the sticks, then tested them individually.
Both in primary slots - code 0d - no post
First one from the kit tested in primary slot - code 0d - no post
Second one tested in primary slot - posted with no problems

ok, seems we have a pattern here.

Tested the marked first one again in the primary slot - code 0d - no post

Decided to test the good stick with prime blend and memtest, no errors reported overnight.

I'm going to send the kit back to warranty, looking to replace it with a F4-4000C19D-16GTZKW kit, samsung Bdie, should be better binned.

Thanks for the replies.:thumb:


----------



## gupsterg

@majestynl

I saw recently on promo 3600MHz C15 for £175, they only had 2 kits in stock. 2 days I kept looking and thinking shall I buy or, not. I actually was online hitting refresh at the moment both sold (LOOL).

Cool, look forward to data share chap  .

@seth156

Ahh, sorry to read RAM faulty. Glad to read you now on the road to sorting your rig  . Chat soon and all the best  .


----------



## netman

sorry if i missed it - did noch regularly check this thread over the last few weeks but wasn't there supposed to be a new bios with pinnacle ridge agesa 1.0.0.6 for the beginning or at least the half of november - both is over but i cant seem to find e new bios four our ch7 anywhere ?


----------



## mtrai

majestynl said:


> uuh Sorry i think i made a typo. Its probably 1101  Need to double check when im at home!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yeap i know! Currently busy with the 3600CL14 profile to get it stable! Takes some time again  I only have max 2 hours to test each day, kind of busy lately.
> For 3533 it is happy with ~1.40v but going to 3600 its more around ~1.45v
> Bought mine 4266set for 295 euros! The 3200CL14's where 249,00!


I have made that typo several times with the WifI 1101 beta bios and typing 1102.

That goes with what I have observed, once you start getting above 3500/3600 the dram voltage requirements for each steps rises exponentially. If I remember correctly I could run 3200 cl 14 at about 1.39/1.4 3600 cl [email protected] 1.44 to 1.46 and for 3806 cl14, I needed at least 1.52- 1.56 voltage on the dram. Still not fully stable at 3800.

Seeing this pattern is telling me one thing, people will have to start cooling their ram with at least a fan blowing over it on Ryzen to get there. Lucky my ram is golden and that even at 1.5 ish voltage it still never gets above 40 degrees celsius under stress testing without a fan. Though I have read of others ram here which hits 40 and 50 degrees. WIth 50ish being the danger zone on ram and errors.
@seth156 I had that exact issue with one stick of my Trident Z 4133 set when bought them. RMA'ed them, G.skill is pretty fast and easy for RMA at least in the USA. Though I at least had a different set laying around.


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> @majestynl
> 
> I saw recently on promo 3600MHz C15 for £175, they only had 2 kits in stock. 2 days I kept looking and thinking shall I buy or, not. I actually was online hitting refresh at the moment both sold (LOOL).
> 
> Cool, look forward to data share chap  .


LOL, you missed that great deal chap! Maybe tomorrow with BF 




mtrai said:


> That goes with what I have observed, once you start getting above 3500/3600 the dram voltage requirements for each steps rises exponentially. If I remember correctly I could run 3200 cl 14 at about 1.39/1.4 3600 cl [email protected] 1.44 to 1.46 and for 3806 cl14, I needed at least 1.52- 1.56 voltage on the dram. Still not fully stable at 3800.
> 
> Seeing this pattern is telling me one thing, people will have to start cooling their ram with at least a fan blowing over it on Ryzen to get there. Lucky my ram is golden and that even at 1.5 ish voltage it still never gets above 40 degrees celsius under stress testing without a fan. Though I have read of others ram here which hits 40 and 50 degrees. WIth 50ish being the danger zone on ram and errors.


Exactly! Didn't try 3800 Yet. First stabilizing 3600CL14 
I know about the FANS. In fact i figure this last year and posted it often. For one of my sets an active cooling of the 3533CL14+TT profile was needed to cover +10000% or RAMTest. Sticks where getting 43-45c and errors came around 5000%. After putting a fan i managed to get them above 10K% Ramtest! 

The Fans are still on my setup so temps are probably not an issue for now. I just need more time to tweak the right settings. As a base i loaded my 3200CL14 stick profile, and it was no issue for 3466+3533 , all good.
Will share results soon when i got them stable!


----------



## mtrai

I also want to say for most people...unless you are looking for high benchmarks... I would suggest setting the goal post for you ram speed to [email protected] CL 14 vs pushing to 3800 and beyond. 3600+ will require so much time to get stable and will cause you much frustration.

Wait for those us who take the challenge to work it out and get some consistent timings and results to save yourself many headaches.

Also, even if you are trying to push that hard, I would suggest you have at least 2 and maybe 3 profiles in your bios. 1 slower ram that is 100% stable for daily use. 1 for known bench mark stable, and 1 for pushing the limits for testing. It will save you much grief obtaining these higher speeds.


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> I have it all 3200CL14's and now also on the 4266CL19. As said to gupster, swapped so many parts never got it working. Suspecting the chipset. Cant say for sure. But never tried on lower speeds then 3200mhz.


Interesting. I did test lower speeds and geardown=off worked for speeds <3200 on my 4266s


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> Interesting. I did test lower speeds and geardown=off worked for speeds <3200 on my 4266s


As soon as a touch GDM to disabled and select 1T together. BSOD before Loginscreen of Windows!
Will test with lower speeds soon!


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> As soon as a touch GDM to disabled and select 1T together. BSOD before Loginscreen of Windows!
> Will test with lower speeds soon!


when I could only use slower speeds, I never actually tested it with geardown=on as it worked well, up to 3200, then there was a major AGESA update and 3200 was not 100% reliable any more. Prob more like 98/99% which was really frustrating. Then got CH7 and ended up using geardown=on for speeds >= 3200 to get stability.


----------



## gupsterg

netman said:


> sorry if i missed it - did noch regularly check this thread over the last few weeks but wasn't there supposed to be a new bios with pinnacle ridge agesa 1.0.0.6 for the beginning or at least the half of november - both is over but i cant seem to find e new bios four our ch7 anywhere ?


No new one yet, UEFI 1101 has AGESA 1.0.0.6, but is from early October.



mtrai said:


> @seth156 I had that exact issue with one stick of my Trident Z 4133 set when bought them. RMA'ed them, G.skill is pretty fast and easy for RMA at least in the USA. Though I at least had a different set laying around.


My F4-3200C14D-16GTZ from Amazon UK was DOA on arrival, both sticks. I sent to Netherlands G.Skill as Amazon did not have the stock to swap out, ~ 2 weeks turnaround.



majestynl said:


> LOL, you missed that great deal chap! Maybe tomorrow with BF


LOL, I just can't believe how much of I chump I was watching the stock go :lachen: .



crakej said:


> Interesting. I did test lower speeds and geardown=off worked for speeds <3200 on my 4266s
> 
> 
> 
> majestynl said:
> 
> 
> 
> As soon as a touch GDM to disabled and select 1T together. BSOD before Loginscreen of Windows!
> Will test with lower speeds soon!
Click to expand...

Yeah real strange, this was recent test on ZE, RAM Test ~24000%, some info in top section of RTC is wrong.



Spoiler


----------



## seth156

Had to order the new kit, can't wait for a RMA process.
I use this rig for work 90% of the time.

Hope I get my money back from the vendor at least.


----------



## gupsterg

seth156 said:


> Had to order the new kit, can't wait for a RMA process.
> I use this rig for work 90% of the time.
> 
> Hope I get my money back from the vendor at least.


G.Skill is lifetime warranty, so if vendor don't play ball I'd roll with doing RMA and selling the sealed returned kit.


----------



## crakej

I'm getting there - not had decent results like this since May! I'm testing the different Performance Bias settings - this is using Aida/Geekbench. CB15 scored 1888.

I've test MemoryTest >1500%, P95 for 1 hour. Looking good - using slightly less power and getting much better temps. Ambient has gone down a few degrees which can, and does have quite a positive effect. Highest temp was 68c.

Saving and moving up to 3600


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

*undervolting and underclocking on the CH7*



So i updated the bios to 1002 and CMOSed it and also did a bios reset twice !


ISSUE persists !!! WHAT NOW?
Should i send it onto RMA?



Why is this s... not working like it should or did i missed something?


Before the CH7 board ,i had a X470 Prime and undervolting and underclocking worked like it should...


Looks like a spend 300euros for a faulty board...

*I'm really pissed atm.*


----------



## nick name

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> *undervolting and underclocking on the CH7*
> 
> 
> 
> So i updated the bios to 1002 and CMOSed it and also did a bios reset twice !
> 
> 
> ISSUE persists !!! WHAT NOW?
> Should i send it onto RMA?
> 
> 
> 
> Why is this s... not working like it should or did i missed something?
> 
> 
> Before the CH7 board ,i had a X470 Prime and undervolting and underclocking worked like it should...
> 
> 
> Looks like a spend 300euros for a faulty board...
> 
> *I'm really pissed atm.*


Have you checked that your Power Plan didn't change Minimum Processor State back to 100%? That used to happen to me all the time, but it has stopped recently. Give it a look if you haven't yet. Hopefully, your board isn't broken. And are you setting a manual voltage or are you using an offset? Please forgive me I don't know precisely what you're problem is. And is Core Performance Boost set to Enable?


----------



## crakej

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> *undervolting and underclocking on the CH7*
> 
> 
> 
> So i updated the bios to 1002 and CMOSed it and also did a bios reset twice !
> 
> 
> ISSUE persists !!! WHAT NOW?
> Should i send it onto RMA?
> 
> 
> 
> Why is this s... not working like it should or did i missed something?
> 
> 
> Before the CH7 board ,i had a X470 Prime and undervolting and underclocking worked like it should...
> 
> 
> Looks like a spend 300euros for a faulty board...
> 
> *I'm really pissed atm.*


I would put a call to support in first.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

nick name said:


> Have you checked that your Power Plan didn't change Minimum Processor State back to 100%? That used to happen to me all the time, but it has stopped recently. Give it a look if you haven't yet. Hopefully, your board isn't broken. And are you setting a manual voltage or are you using an offset? Please forgive me I don't know precisely what you're problem is.





All i want is: my 2700x running @ 4:0 Ghz and undervolt it too...


After setting the bios to it's defaults and not touching any other thing or setting, only changing the CPU Core Ratio to 40 NO DOWNVOLTING at all...:thumbsdow


No matter what i set or try... undervolting only works on auto and not touching the core ratio...

Yes i use offset, that's how it worked on the X470 Prime.


*My Bios Setup*



> [2018/11/22 18:18:14]
> Ai Overclock Tuner [Default]
> Performance Enhancer [Default]
> CPU Core Ratio [40.00]
> Performance Bias [None]
> Memory Frequency [DDR4-3000MHz]
> Core Performance Boost [Auto]
> SMT Mode [Auto]
> TPU [Keep Current Settings]
> CPU Core Voltage [Offset mode]
> CPU Offset Mode Sign [-]
> - CPU Core Voltage Offset [0.00625]
> CPU SOC Voltage [Offset mode]
> VDDSOC Offset Mode Sign [-]
> - VDDSOC Voltage Offset [0.05000]
> DRAM Voltage [1.35000]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [1.81000]
> 1.05V SB Voltage [1.05000]
> Target TDP [Auto]
> TRC_EOM [Auto]
> TRTP_EOM [Auto]
> TRRS_S_EOM [Auto]
> TRRS_L_EOM [Auto]
> TWTR_EOM [Auto]
> TWTR_L_EOM [Auto]
> TWCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWR_EOM [Auto]
> TFAW_EOM [Auto]
> TRCT_EOM [Auto]
> TREFI_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_DD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SC_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_DD_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SD_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SC_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWRRD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDWR_EOM [Auto]
> TWRRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> Mem Over Clock Fail Count [2]
> DRAM CAS# Latency [14]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [16]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [16]
> DRAM RAS# PRE Time [16]
> DRAM RAS# ACT Time [34]
> Trc [50]
> TrrdS [6]
> TrrdL [8]
> Tfaw [34]
> TwtrS [4]
> TwtrL [12]
> Twr [22]
> Trcpage [Auto]
> TrdrdScl [6]
> TwrwrScl [6]
> Trfc [360]
> Trfc2 [260]
> Trfc4 [160]
> Tcwl [14]
> Trtp [12]
> Trdwr [8]
> Twrrd [4]
> TwrwrSc [2]
> TwrwrSd [6]
> TwrwrDd [6]
> TrdrdSc [2]
> TrdrdSd [6]
> TrdrdDd [6]
> Tcke [8]
> ProcODT [68.6 ohm]
> Cmd2T [2T]
> Gear Down Mode [Disabled]
> Power Down Enable [Disabled]
> RttNom [RZQ/7]
> RttWr [RZQ/3]
> RttPark [RZQ/1]
> MemAddrCmdSetup [0]
> MemCsOdtSetup [0]
> MemCkeSetup [0]
> MemCadBusClkDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> VTTDDR Voltage [0.63750]
> VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
> VDDP Voltage [0.81000]
> 1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
> CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
> 2.5V SB Voltage [2.50000]
> DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
> PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
> PLL reference voltage [Auto]
> T Offset [Auto]
> Sense MI Skew [Auto]
> Sense MI Offset [Auto]
> Promontory presence [Auto]
> Clock Amplitude [Normal]
> CLDO VDDP voltage [700]
> CPU Load-line Calibration [Auto]
> CPU Current Capability [100%]
> CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Auto]
> VRM Spread Spectrum [Auto]
> CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
> CPU Power Phase Control [Standard]
> CPU Power Thermal Control [115]
> VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Auto]
> VDDSOC Current Capability [100%]
> VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Auto]
> VDDSOC Phase Control [Standard]
> DRAM Current Capability [100%]
> DRAM Power Phase Control [Optimized]
> DRAM Switching Frequency [Auto]
> DRAM VBoot Voltage [Auto]
> Security Device Support [Enable]
> Firmware TPM [Disable]
> Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
> PSS Support [Auto]
> SVM Mode [Disabled]
> PT XHCI GEN1 [Auto]
> PT XHCI GEN2 [Auto]
> PT USB Equalization4 [Auto]
> PT USB Redriver [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 0 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 1 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 2 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 3 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 4 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 5 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 6 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 7 [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 0 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 1 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 2 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 3 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 4 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 5 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 6 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 7 Enable [Auto]
> Onboard PCIE LAN PXE ROM [Enabled]
> AMD CRB EHCI Debug port switch [Disabled]
> Onboard LED [Enabled]
> Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
> Primary Video Device [PCIE / PCI Video]
> SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
> SATA Mode [AHCI]
> NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
> SMART Self Test [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> ErP Ready [Enable(S4+S5)]
> Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
> Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
> Power On By RTC [Disabled]
> HD Audio Controller [Disabled]
> M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
> PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
> PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
> M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
> M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
> SB Link Mode [Auto]
> Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
> USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
> When system is in working state [On]
> When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [Off]
> Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
> Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
> Network Stack [Disabled]
> Debug Port Table [Disabled]
> Debug Port Table 2 [Disabled]
> Device [M4-CT256M4SSD2]
> Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
> XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
> USB Mass Storage Driver Support [Enabled]
> JetFlashTranscend 16GB 1100 [Auto]
> U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
> U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
> U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> U31G1_5 [Enabled]
> U31G1_6 [Enabled]
> U31G1_7 [Enabled]
> U31G1_8 [Enabled]
> U31G1_9 [Enabled]
> U31G1_10 [Enabled]
> USB11 [Enabled]
> USB12 [Enabled]
> USB13 [Enabled]
> USB14 [Enabled]
> USB15 [Enabled]
> CPU Temperature [Monitor]
> MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
> VRM Temperature [Monitor]
> PCH Temperature [Monitor]
> T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
> CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
> AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
> W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
> W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
> HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
> CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
> 3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
> 5V Voltage [Monitor]
> 12V Voltage [Monitor]
> CPU Q-Fan Control [Auto]
> CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [200 RPM]
> CPU Fan Profile [Standard]
> AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 3 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [Auto]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> HAMP Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> HAMP Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> HAMP Fan Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
> OnChip SATA Channel [Auto]
> OnChip SATA Type [AHCI]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> IR Config [RX & TX0 Only]
> SdForce18 Enable [Disabled]
> SD Mode configuration [AMDA]
> Uart 0 Enable [Enabled]
> Uart 1 Enable [Enabled]
> I2C 0 Enable [Enabled]
> I2C 1 Enable [Enabled]
> I2C 2 Enable [Disabled]
> I2C 3 Enable [Disabled]
> GPIO Devices Support [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 0 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 1 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 2 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 3 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 4 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 5 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 6 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 7 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 0 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 1 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 2 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 3 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 4 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 5 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 6 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 7 [Auto]
> SATA Port 0 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 1 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 2 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 3 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 4 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 5 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 6 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 7 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Hot-Removable Support [Auto]
> SATA 6 AHCI Support [Auto]
> Int. Clk Differential Spread [Auto]
> SATA MAXGEN2 CAP OPTION [Auto]
> SATA CLK Mode Option [Auto]
> Aggressive Link PM Capability [Auto]
> Port Multiplier Capability [Auto]
> SATA Ports Auto Clock Control [Auto]
> SATA Partial State Capability [Auto]
> SATA FIS Based Switching [Auto]
> SATA Command Completion Coalescing Support [Auto]
> SATA Slumber State Capability [Auto]
> SATA MSI Capability Support [Auto]
> SATA Target Support 8 Devices [Auto]
> Generic Mode [Auto]
> SATA AHCI Enclosure [Auto]
> SATA SGPIO 0 [Auto]
> SATA SGPIO 1 [Disabled]
> SATA PHY PLL [Auto]
> AC/DC Change Message Delivery [Disabled]
> TimerTick Tracking [Auto]
> Clock Interrupt Tag [Auto]
> EHCI Traffic Handling [Disabled]
> Fusion Message C Multi-Core [Disabled]
> Fusion Message C State [Disabled]
> SPI Read Mode [Auto]
> SPI 100MHz Support [Auto]
> SPI Normal Speed [Auto]
> SPI Fast Read Speed [Auto]
> SPI Burst Write [Auto]
> I2C 0 D3 Support [Auto]
> I2C 1 D3 Support [Auto]
> I2C 2 D3 Support [Auto]
> I2C 3 D3 Support [Auto]
> I2C 4 D3 Support [Auto]
> I2C 5 D3 Support [Auto]
> UART 0 D3 Support [Auto]
> UART 1 D3 Support [Auto]
> UART 2 D3 Support [Auto]
> UART 3 D3 Support [Auto]
> SATA D3 Support [Auto]
> EHCI D3 Support [Auto]
> XHCI D3 Support [Auto]
> SD D3 Support [Auto]
> S0I3 [Auto]
> Chipset Power Saving Features [Enabled]
> SB Clock Spread Spectrum [Auto]
> SB Clock Spread Spectrum Option [-0.375%]
> HPET In SB [Auto]
> MsiDis in HPET [Auto]
> _OSC For PCI0 [Auto]
> USB Phy Power Down [Auto]
> PCIB_CLK_Stop Override [0]
> USB MSI Option [Auto]
> LPC MSI Option [Auto]
> PCIBridge MSI Option [Auto]
> AB MSI Option [Auto]
> SB C1E Support [Auto]
> SB Hardware Reduced Support [Auto]
> GPP Serial Debug Bus Enable [Auto]
> PSPP Policy [Auto]
> Memory Clock [Auto]
> Bank Interleaving [Enabled]
> Channel Interleaving [Enabled]
> Memory Clear [Disabled]
> Fast Boot [Disabled]
> Boot Logo Display [Auto]
> POST Delay Time [3 sec]
> Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
> Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
> Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
> Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
> Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
> Launch CSM [Enabled]
> Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
> Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
> Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
> Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
> OS Type [Other OS]
> Setup Animator [Disabled]
> Auto-launch ASUS Grid [Disabled]
> Load from Profile [1]
> Profile Name [666]
> Save to Profile [1]
> CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
> VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> BCLK Frequency [Auto]
> CPU Ratio [Auto]
> Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]


 I'm mad @ Asus not to the users here , you guys do a great job here on OCN :thumb:
I hope the picture below shows you my setting with the power plan[not ryzen power plan], also running latest HWinfo.
https://imgur.com/a/OZjBm7o


----------



## lordzed83

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> All i want is: my 2700x running @ 4:0 Ghz and undervolt it too...
> 
> 
> After setting the bios to it's defaults and not touching any other thing or setting, only changing the CPU Core Ratio to 40 NO DOWNVOLTING at all...:thumbsdow
> 
> 
> No matter what i set or try... undervolting only works on auto and not touching the core ratio...
> 
> Yes i use offset, that's how it worked on the X470 Prime.
> 
> 
> *My Bios Setup*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm mad @ Asus not to the users here , you guys do a great job here on OCN :thumb:
> I hope the picture below shows you my setting with the power plan[not ryzen power plan], also running latest HWinfo.


EEEE Tried to change P state to A0 ?? As long as i remember hard locking multi always resulted in no downvolting.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

lordzed83 said:


> EEEE Tried to change P state to A0 ?? As long as i remember hard locking multi always resulted in no downvolting.



Will try your suggestion after taking a shower .
But why did it work on my X470 Prime, i assembled another X470 for my brother and it is working with bios 4011 .
That's the case i'm interested to...cause shouldn't it work also on the CH7 this way ... is this board and bios built so differently from the Prime ?


A punching bag woul be good now ,to punch my aggressions into it


----------



## nick name

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> All i want is: my 2700x running @ 4:0 Ghz and undervolt it too...
> 
> 
> After setting the bios to it's defaults and not touching any other thing or setting, only changing the CPU Core Ratio to 40 NO DOWNVOLTING at all...:thumbsdow
> 
> 
> No matter what i set or try... undervolting only works on auto and not touching the core ratio...
> 
> Yes i use offset, that's how it worked on the X470 Prime.
> 
> 
> *My Bios Setup*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm mad @ Asus not to the users here , you guys do a great job here on OCN :thumb:
> I hope the picture below shows you my setting with the power plan[not ryzen power plan], also running latest HWinfo.


Well I know that any multiplier above 37 makes the CPU behave as it is overclocked. Which it is. And I think it is by design that it stays at the same multiplier and that it holds that voltage. 

Can I ask why you would set your CPU to 4.0GHz? That seems like you're handicapping yourself.


----------



## nick name

lordzed83 said:


> EEEE Tried to change P state to A0 ?? As long as i remember hard locking multi always resulted in no downvolting.


The way P state adjustments behave now is different than it was before. It won't behave as you expect it too. As it used to.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

*Found this on 4th Page *






Gettz8488 said:


> Not sure if anyone can help me out but I can’t seem to downvolt my cpu if I manually overclock it. I’ve tried just changing Pstate with auto voltage still doesn’t downvolt same story with offset voltage. And I’ve also tried 42 core ratio with offset no downvolting according to svi2
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro



*Ok here we go :*
I didn't tried the thing with the PStates yet, or should i rethink everything again ... or not ?
My last AMD build was with the Socket 939, after that i used Intel until Summer 2018 .
Didn't AMD had such a feature in the past called AMD Cool and Quiet .


*So now* i'm on auto and undervolting until it gets unstable if that's the way it works on this board , ok but to be true i don't think so .
But i will contact asus about this and also watch a few other forums until i get something ... that doesn't drive me into a wall .
My guess for now is: That we have a faulty bios implementation here compared to the X470 Prime .

So i'm now gonna demonstrate in BF V how my CPU and my temperatures behave, and thats a thing that worries me ... all cores @ 4,340mhz @ 1.51v
And why the heck has it worked for me and it works right now for my brother on a X470 Prime ?
By all means i also switched my PSU for this to get it fixed ...


Will post my pics later or tomorrow after working .


ANd thank you all for your comments so far, the weekend is coming, so it's test time


----------



## CJMitsuki

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> *Found this on 4th Page *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Ok here we go :*
> I didn't tried the thing with the PStates yet, or should i rethink everything again ... or not ?
> My last AMD build was with the Socket 939, after that i used Intel until Summer 2018 .
> Didn't AMD had such a feature in the past called AMD Cool and Quiet .
> 
> 
> *So now* i'm on auto and undervolting until it gets unstable if that's the way it works on this board , ok but to be true i don't think so .
> But i will contact asus about this and also watch a few other forums until i get something ... that doesn't drive me into a wall .
> My guess for now is: That we have a faulty bios implementation here compared to the X470 Prime .
> 
> So i'm now gonna demonstrate in BF V how my CPU and my temperatures behave, and thats a thing that worries me ... all cores @ 4,340mhz @ 1.51v
> And why the heck has it worked for me and it works right now for my brother on a X470 Prime ?
> By all means i also switched my PSU for this to get it fixed ...
> 
> 
> Will post my pics later or tomorrow after working .
> 
> 
> ANd thank you all for your comments so far, the weekend is coming, so it's test time


Have you tried PE3 with undervolting. For me it results in a 41.5x multiplier and if it doesnt give you the target clocks just bump the baseclock up a bit. PE3 gives better single core boosts at maximum compared to PE4 and PE4 gives better multicore boosts.


----------



## nick name

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> *Found this on 4th Page *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Ok here we go :*
> I didn't tried the thing with the PStates yet, or should i rethink everything again ... or not ?
> My last AMD build was with the Socket 939, after that i used Intel until Summer 2018 .
> Didn't AMD had such a feature in the past called AMD Cool and Quiet .
> 
> 
> *So now* i'm on auto and undervolting until it gets unstable if that's the way it works on this board , ok but to be true i don't think so .
> But i will contact asus about this and also watch a few other forums until i get something ... that doesn't drive me into a wall .
> My guess for now is: That we have a faulty bios implementation here compared to the X470 Prime .
> 
> So i'm now gonna demonstrate in BF V how my CPU and my temperatures behave, and thats a thing that worries me ... all cores @ 4,340mhz @ 1.51v
> And why the heck has it worked for me and it works right now for my brother on a X470 Prime ?
> By all means i also switched my PSU for this to get it fixed ...
> 
> 
> Will post my pics later or tomorrow after working .
> 
> 
> ANd thank you all for your comments so far, the weekend is coming, so it's test time


Well if it's the 1.51V @4.35GHz then I have a fix for that. If you use Load Line Calibration Level 4 with an negative offset of around .06 ~ .07 then you will see the highest voltage stay below 1.5V and still stay stable due to the LLC 4.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> All i want is: my 2700x running @ 4:0 Ghz and undervolt it too...
> 
> 
> After setting the bios to it's defaults and not touching any other thing or setting, only changing the CPU Core Ratio to 40 NO DOWNVOLTING at all...:thumbsdow
> 
> 
> No matter what i set or try... undervolting only works on auto and not touching the core ratio...
> 
> Yes i use offset, that's how it worked on the X470 Prime.
> 
> 
> *My Bios Setup*
> 
> I'm mad @ Asus not to the users here , you guys do a great job here on OCN :thumb:
> I hope the picture below shows you my setting with the power plan[not ryzen power plan], also running latest HWinfo.
> https://imgur.com/a/OZjBm7o


 I just noticed something very interesting about your bios dump. Will it help you? Not at all. Still interesting though. Back when 0702 released Asus removed many options that were kind of hidden from the regular menu. However, if you searched for those settings you could adjust them. They havent been available since 0601 but in your 1002 bios dump I clearly see those options listed again. Meaning you can possibly search for them and adjust them once again. It was like 20+ options that I wanted to test, even HPet option but that one you dont want to adjust at all or you will boot loop.


These are some of those options i believe 

AMD CRB EHCI Debug port switch [Disabled]
IR Config [RX & TX0 Only]
SdForce18 Enable [Disabled]
SD Mode configuration [AMDA]
Uart 0 Enable [Enabled]
Uart 1 Enable [Enabled]
I2C 0 Enable [Enabled]
I2C 1 Enable [Enabled]
I2C 2 Enable [Disabled]
I2C 3 Enable [Disabled]
GPIO Devices Support [Auto]
Int. Clk Differential Spread [Auto]
SATA MAXGEN2 CAP OPTION [Auto]
SATA CLK Mode Option [Auto]
Aggressive Link PM Capability [Auto]
Port Multiplier Capability [Auto]
SATA Ports Auto Clock Control [Auto]
SATA Partial State Capability [Auto]
SATA FIS Based Switching [Auto]
SATA Command Completion Coalescing Support [Auto]
SATA Slumber State Capability [Auto]
SATA MSI Capability Support [Auto]
SATA Target Support 8 Devices [Auto]
Generic Mode [Auto]
SATA AHCI Enclosure [Auto]
SATA SGPIO 0 [Auto]
SATA SGPIO 1 [Disabled]
SATA PHY PLL [Auto]
AC/DC Change Message Delivery [Disabled]
TimerTick Tracking [Auto]
Clock Interrupt Tag [Auto]
EHCI Traffic Handling [Disabled]
Fusion Message C Multi-Core [Disabled]
Fusion Message C State [Disabled]
SPI Read Mode [Auto]
SPI 100MHz Support [Auto]
SPI Normal Speed [Auto]
SPI Fast Read Speed [Auto]
SPI Burst Write [Auto]
I2C 0 D3 Support [Auto]
I2C 1 D3 Support [Auto]
I2C 2 D3 Support [Auto]
I2C 3 D3 Support [Auto]
I2C 4 D3 Support [Auto]
I2C 5 D3 Support [Auto]
UART 0 D3 Support [Auto]
UART 1 D3 Support [Auto]
UART 2 D3 Support [Auto]
UART 3 D3 Support [Auto]
SATA D3 Support [Auto]
EHCI D3 Support [Auto]
XHCI D3 Support [Auto]
SD D3 Support [Auto]
S0I3 [Auto]
Chipset Power Saving Features [Enabled]
SB Clock Spread Spectrum [Auto]
SB Clock Spread Spectrum Option [-0.375%]
HPET In SB [Auto]
MsiDis in HPET [Auto]
_OSC For PCI0 [Auto]
USB Phy Power Down [Auto]
PCIB_CLK_Stop Override [0]
USB MSI Option [Auto]
LPC MSI Option [Auto]
PCIBridge MSI Option [Auto]
AB MSI Option [Auto]
SB C1E Support [Auto]
SB Hardware Reduced Support [Auto]
GPP Serial Debug Bus Enable [Auto]
PSPP Policy [Auto]


Theres far too many options there for some not to be useful


----------



## mtrai

CJMitsuki said:


> I just noticed something very interesting about your bios dump. Will it help you? Not at all. Still interesting though. Back when 0702 released Asus removed many options that were kind of hidden from the regular menu. However, if you searched for those settings you could adjust them. They havent been available since 0601 but in your 1002 bios dump I clearly see those options listed again. Meaning you can possibly search for them and adjust them once again. It was like 20+ options that I wanted to test, even HPet option but that one you dont want to adjust at all or you will boot loop.
> 
> 
> These are some of those options i believe
> 
> AMD CRB EHCI Debug port switch [Disabled]
> IR Config [RX & TX0 Only]
> SdForce18 Enable [Disabled]
> 
> ...deleted the middle to shorten post.
> 
> SB Hardware Reduced Support [Auto]
> GPP Serial Debug Bus Enable [Auto]
> PSPP Policy [Auto]
> 
> 
> Theres far too many options there for some not to be useful


Actually some are useful, I used to be adjust them for my own personal modified bios via AMIBCP and then flash them, but sadly ASUS removed that options from us by limiting which tabs now show in AMIBCP. Also some are quite dangerous to touch and others are just for debugging if you have the correct hardware you can plug into the motherboard or "other correct AMI software". Also some are quite useless and do nothing, or have no place in a most modern PC set ups.

With that said, are there any particular settings you would like to know about?


----------



## HeroofTime

Sorry to post something irrelevant to the thread, but I've decided to return my brother's C7H that arrived DOA anyways as a result of poor treatment from ASUS recently. Read more about it in the following link.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/69-...d-asus-won-t-honor-warranty.html#post27727732


----------



## nick name

HeroofTime said:


> Sorry to post something irrelevant to the thread, but I've decided to return my brother's C7H that arrived DOA anyways as a result of poor treatment from ASUS recently. Read more about it in the following link.
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/69-...d-asus-won-t-honor-warranty.html#post27727732


Who are you ordering from? I wonder if there is a trend.


----------



## crakej

@Wuest3nFuchs It is down-clocking so in all likeliness it is downvolting, just you can't see it.


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> LOL, I just can't believe how much of I chump I was watching the stock go :lachen: .


Hehe. Next time better m8!



crakej said:


> when I could only use slower speeds, I never actually tested it with geardown=on as it worked well, up to 3200, then there was a major AGESA update and 3200 was not 100% reliable any more. Prob more like 98/99% which was really frustrating. Then got CH7 and ended up using geardown=on for speeds >= 3200 to get stability.


I see!! I really can't remember I have my speeds below 3200mhz. If I remember well I was one of the first with 3200mhz on the CH6. Since we discovered GDM mode. I never got it turned off. Even on many CPU and stick swaps.


----------



## majestynl

@Wuest3nFuchs and rest of board members:

Come on guys we all know this. Manual OC (set multiplier) will activate OC mode and No Downvolting. This is since begin, even on the CH6!!

Pstates is also no downvolting since few bios version back. All these modes activates OC mode and no downvolting. Only downclocking with the right min. CPU state in Power profiles in Windows.

Few pages back Elmor stated this again while we where discussing this over and over.

If you want downclocking use Default setting or PE modes with offset voltages! 

Personally I'm using manual OC with fixed voltage. No need downclocking cause the voltage is only important under load. Then it will generate heat!!!


----------



## nick name

majestynl said:


> @Wuest3nFuchs and rest of board members:
> 
> Come on guys we all know this. Manual OC (set multiplier) will activate OC mode and No Downvolting. This is since begin, even on the CH6!!
> 
> Pstates is also no downvolting since few bios version back. All these modes activates OC mode and no downvolting. Only downclocking with the right min. CPU state in Power profiles in Windows.
> 
> Few pages back Elmor stated this again while we where discussing this over and over.
> 
> If you want downclocking use Default setting or PE modes with offset voltages!
> 
> Personally I'm using manual OC with fixed voltage. No need downclocking cause the voltage is only important under load. Then it will generate heat!!!


I'm glad I didn't misremember this. I would have felt dumb.

And I wish more people would adopt my method of using PE 3 and adjusting EDC with Ryzen Master to set the multiplier. I can choose the multicore speed of my CPU -- anywhere from 3.1GHz to 4.25GHz. And you can couple that with BCLK for greater range but if you don't increase BCLK you can get away with LLC 4 and a negative voltage offset. All the while still reaching all power states so all speeds.


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> @Wuest3nFuchs and rest of board members:
> 
> Come on guys we all know this. Manual OC (set multiplier) will activate OC mode and No Downvolting. This is since begin, even on the CH6!!
> 
> Pstates is also no downvolting since few bios version back. All these modes activates OC mode and no downvolting. Only downclocking with the right min. CPU state in Power profiles in Windows.
> 
> Few pages back Elmor stated this again while we where discussing this over and over.
> 
> If you want downclocking use Default setting or PE modes with offset voltages!
> 
> Personally I'm using manual OC with fixed voltage. No need downclocking cause the voltage is only important under load. Then it will generate heat!!!


But downclocking AND downvolting work for me since 0804 with fixed OC and offset voltages.

CPU Core SVI2 TFN ranges from 0.956 - 1.406v


----------



## Syldon

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> All i want is: my 2700x running @ 4:0 Ghz and undervolt it too...
> 
> 
> After setting the bios to it's defaults and not touching any other thing or setting, only changing the CPU Core Ratio to 40 NO DOWNVOLTING at all...:thumbsdow
> 
> 
> No matter what i set or try... undervolting only works on auto and not touching the core ratio...
> 
> Yes i use offset, that's how it worked on the X470 Prime.
> 
> 
> *My Bios Setup*
> 
> I'm mad @ Asus not to the users here , you guys do a great job here on OCN :thumb:
> I hope the picture below shows you my setting with the power plan[not ryzen power plan], also running latest HWinfo.


Your system is working as intended. It isn't hitting exactly 4.0 because of the variance between the HPET (high precision event timer) and the RTC (real time clock). The downvolting is there also; it is just shown in an amp drop instead of a voltage differ (See Attached picture). Google for videos on Volts, Amps and Watts. 

There are some settings you could change to make your system run better than it is.


Ai overclock tuner to Manual (This will open more options)
Bclk frequency to 100 
Performance enhancer to level 1 (this will allow your system to boost on single core. This is better than an all core over clock. Your multicore should still sit above the 4.0 mark with less power usage).
CPU core ratio to 37
Cpu offset mode sign to + (Elmor recommended a +0.05v offset for the best usage)

*edited to add CPU core ratio value, I was running late for work and missed it*


----------



## gupsterg

majestynl said:


> @Wuest3nFuchs and rest of board members:
> 
> Come on guys we all know this. Manual OC (set multiplier) will activate OC mode and No Downvolting. This is since begin, even on the CH6!!
> 
> Pstates is also no downvolting since few bios version back. All these modes activates OC mode and no downvolting. Only downclocking with the right min. CPU state in Power profiles in Windows.
> 
> Few pages back Elmor stated this again while we where discussing this over and over.
> 
> If you want downclocking use Default setting or PE modes with offset voltages!
> 
> Personally I'm using manual OC with fixed voltage. No need downclocking cause the voltage is only important under load. Then it will generate heat!!!


As I understood it the CPU does a pseudo down volting/clocking when using Global C-State Control: [Enabled]. Read carefully 2nd/3rd paragraph in Elmor's post.

I can confirm with wall power meter and multimeter that if I set say PState 0 as 4.1GHz with VID 1.268V, on my current 2700X in AMD CBS, I will see lower power usage at idle with Global C-State Control: [Enabled] than it set as [Auto] or [Disabled].

Global C-State Control: [Enabled] in HWINFO will show VID requests of ~0.4V at idle, amps will be low, wall meter will show ~65W at idle.

Global C-State Control: [Auto] / [Disabled] in HWINFO will show static VID same as what I set in AMD CBS, amps will be low, wall meter will show ~90W at idle.

*** edit ***

Last night I was mucking around with 3533MHz on 4x8GB, as this kept failing a thought crossed my mind, I have yet to try 2700X 1825 SUS using 2x8GB.

TLDR It is very similar as 2700X 1805 SUS IMC. 1825 SUS has 2 advantages so far:-

i) on a PState 0 OC of 4.1GHz it needs VID: 1.268V LLC: Auto when tested for ~1hr in P95 v28.10b1 128K in place FFT vs 1.318V that 1805 SUS needed.

ii) it seems to boost better under PB/XFR2 in my crude compares.

Now on to the data/full read  .



Spoiler



~22:00 I had finished reflashing board with UEFI 1002 and removing 2 sticks of RAM to have 2x F4-3200C14-8GVK, slots A2/B2. I setup a base profile, ie defaults manual voltages, fan profiles, etc. Then I:-

i) loaded The Stilt 3466 timings.
ii) set 1T, gear down mode and power down enabled both as disabled.
iii) VDIMM/BOOT 1.35V, VTTDDR 0.675V, SOC 1.0V.

I had a fail in RT @ 30%.



Spoiler














Set ProcODT as 48, pass 250% on setup POST, then did 2x reboots and had 500%/750% PASS.



Spoiler




























I then did some meddling with 3533MHz, wasn't too shaby on results, as it was getting late I turned in. This morning I restored the 3466MHz The Stilt profile. I gained 1750% pass on restored profile POST, 2000% pass on reboot POST.



Spoiler





















All in all if I had been first timing using the 2700X/C7H/G.Skill RipJaw V 3200MHz C14 I'd be pretty blown away by the ease this happened.

It took ~15min to be on 3466MHz C15 1T IMO. These are nice low voltages and The Stilt's profile is nice IMO.


----------



## crakej

Downclocking AND downvolting work for me since 0804 with fixed OC and offset voltages (+ offset)

Edit - maybe it's the negative offset? I agree with others here though, it is working even if you can't see it. You're downclocking so downvolting must be happening.

Mine might be slightly different as I have Ryzen 1xxx CPU


----------



## mtrai

@CJMitsuki Oh I just had a thought and idea on those settings you mentioned. I will take a look at my thought on it and check to see if it is possible to make those settings available in search even though they do not appear. This idea just occurred to me, so it will take me a day or two to work with modifing the bios. Not even sure if this work, but it has some possibilities that it might. Worst case is I will have wasted some time for nothing...but then again it might pay off. 

And no they cannot be searched in the C7H WIFI beta bios either.


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> As I understood it the CPU does a pseudo down volting/clocking when using Global C-State Control: [Enabled]. Read carefully 2nd/3rd paragraph in Elmor's post.
> 
> I can confirm with wall power meter and multimeter that if I set say PState 0 as 4.1GHz with VID 1.268V, on my current 2700X in AMD CBS, I will see lower power usage at idle with Global C-State Control: [Enabled] than it set as [Auto] or [Disabled].
> 
> Global C-State Control: [Enabled] in HWINFO will show VID requests of ~0.4V at idle, amps will be low, wall meter will show ~65W at idle.
> 
> Global C-State Control: [Auto] / [Disabled] in HWINFO will show static VID same as what I set in AMD CBS, amps will be low, wall meter will show ~90W at idle.


Exactly  thats what im also seeing. Enabling C-State shows ~0.4v but never saw staying at that voltage like you see on PE Levels downclocking...
Never take a close look at power usage tho. Will check it out!



gupsterg said:


> *** edit ***
> 
> Last night I was mucking around with 3533MHz on 4x8GB, as this kept failing a thought crossed my mind, I have yet to try 2700X 1825 SUS using 2x8GB.
> 
> TLDR It is very similar as 2700X 1805 SUS IMC. 1825 SUS has 2 advantages so far:-
> 
> i) on a PState 0 OC of 4.1GHz it needs VID: 1.268V LLC: Auto when tested for ~1hr in P95 v28.10b1 128K in place FFT vs 1.318V that 1805 SUS needed.
> 
> ii) it seems to boost better under PB/XFR2 in my crude compares.
> 
> Now on to the data/full read  .
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> ~22:00 I had finished reflashing board with UEFI 1002 and removing 2 sticks of RAM to have 2x F4-3200C14-8GVK, slots A2/B2. I setup a base profile, ie defaults manual voltages, fan profiles, etc. Then I:-
> 
> i) loaded The Stilt 3466 timings.
> ii) set 1T, gear down mode and power down enabled both as disabled.
> iii) VDIMM/BOOT 1.35V, VTTDDR 0.675V, SOC 1.0V.
> 
> I had a fail in RT @ 30%.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 233608
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Set ProcODT as 48, pass 250% on setup POST, then did 2x reboots and had 500%/750% PASS.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 233610
> 
> View attachment 233612
> 
> View attachment 233614
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I then did some meddling with 3533MHz, wasn't too shaby on results, as it was getting late I turned in. This morning I restored the 3466MHz The Stilt profile. I gained 1750% pass on restored profile POST, 2000% pass on reboot POST.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 233616
> 
> View attachment 233618
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All in all if I had been first timing using the 2700X/C7H/G.Skill RipJaw V 3200MHz C14 I'd be pretty blown away by the ease this happened.
> 
> It took ~15min to be on 3466MHz C15 1T IMO. These are nice low voltages and The Stilt's profile is nice IMO.


Thanks for the share, will have a closer look when im at home!



crakej said:


> Downclocking AND downvolting work for me since 0804 with fixed OC and offset voltages (+ offset)
> 
> Edit - maybe it's the negative offset? I agree with others here though, it is working even if you can't see it. You're downclocking so downvolting must be happening.
> 
> Mine might be slightly different as I have Ryzen 1xxx CPU


Dunno, dont know if there is a difference in Ryzen 1 vs 2! I have a 2700x installed in the X470 system. I know it was downclocking en volting last year on my 1800x and CH6


----------



## lordzed83

nick name said:


> The way P state adjustments behave now is different than it was before. It won't behave as you expect it too. As it used to.


Prepare to be amazed. Cause I dont know how on Your's suystem it does not work or works different. I'm in Pstate oce since day one of ryzen. Even better I'm ojn Pstate overclock with bclk overclock downvolting downclocking and negative offset on 1002 bios as I type this LOL


----------



## By-Tor

I just made the jump back to AMD with a 1700x and Crosshair VII Hero MB. I installed windows and am getting a Q code of "24".

What does that mean?

TY


----------



## Praetorr

By-Tor said:


> I just made the jump back to AMD with a 1700x and Crosshair VII Hero MB. I installed windows and am getting a Q code of "24".
> 
> What does that mean?
> 
> TY


AFAIK 24 means everything is normal. 30 will be shown after resuming from sleep.


----------



## nick name

Praetorr said:


> AFAIK 24 means everything is normal. 30 will be shown after resuming from sleep.


Yeah, 24 is ok and means a new kernel. So a full reboot.


----------



## By-Tor

Wow I was worried I jacked something up... I just replaced a Asus Maximus VII Hero with this MB where normal was A0, so when I saw 24 I had to ask.

ty


----------



## Praetorr

By-Tor said:


> Wow I was worried I jacked something up... I just replaced a Asus Maximus VII Hero with this MB where normal was A0, so when I saw 24 I had to ask.
> 
> ty


You're very welcome! Enjoy the new board.


----------



## minal

After the latest update to kernel 4.19 (4.19.2-200.fc28.x86_64), it87 kernel module isn't loading. It's always fun googling a problem and rediscovering my own old posts 


https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-224.html#post27508838
https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-225.html#post27508948


Same failure with modprobe and "device or resource busy" error, and OpRegion conflict.


----------



## crakej

Interesting results. Was testing Perf Bias settings. The one outlined in red is the previous test using Aida/GeekBench setting, and the current one is CB11 (CB15 is out of the running as it's slower than both)

Aida/GeekBench setting yeilded slightly better latency over trans speed and CB11 yielded slightly better trans speed over latency - there's so little in it that I tend to use Aida/GB setting for the slightly better latency. Obviously if i was working on something that require bit data transfers, then I would choose the speed!

I've not been able to repeat these speeds and tests since May, so very happy. Just thought I'd let you know my findings before I move onto 3600 where I also had more success (reliability) back in May.

And check out that 1902 score in CB (on Aida/GB setting) - not bad for a 1700X is it? 

Edit: CB result under CB11 setting - *1908!*


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Interesting results. Was testing Perf Bias settings. The one outlined in red is the previous test using Aida/GeekBench setting, and the current one is CB11 (CB15 is out of the running as it's slower than both)
> 
> Aida/GeekBench setting yeilded slightly better latency over trans speed and CB11 yielded slightly better trans speed over latency - there's so little in it that I tend to use Aida/GB setting for the slightly better latency. Obviously if i was working on something that require bit data transfers, then I would choose the speed!
> 
> I've not been able to repeat these speeds and tests since May, so very happy. Just thought I'd let you know my findings before I move onto 3600 where I also had more success (reliability) back in May.
> 
> And check out that 1902 score in CB (on Aida/GB setting) - not bad for a 1700X is it?
> 
> Edit: CB result under CB11 setting - *1908!*


All of the Perf Bias settings provided too similar of results to rule outside the standard deviation for what I was using to measure them. I saw very similar differences when testing the same Perf Bias multiple times. I was unable to determine if one was better than another. The only thing I could conclude is that any of them are better than not using a Per Bias at all. And I would honestly say your measurements are too similar to rule one better than another because they are the same differences I saw in runs using the same Perf Bias. 

I do like where your heads at though. Much like me. Always searching. Always testing.


----------



## gupsterg

@crakej

Nice  .

Performance Bias tweaks cache timings. Gen 1 seems to gain more than gen 2 from it. For example benching CB15 with/without PB setting was ~50 points difference IIRC. Gen 2 gains less from when I last checked.

I got nice little profile today, SOC/VDIMM is sweet IMO, perhaps can lower SOC but no chance on VDIMM as C14 @ 3400MHz 1T GDMD needs that voltage. I find the C7H is ~0.05V above on DMM vs set in UEFI, so 1.365V = ~1.370V on DMM.



Spoiler



FP = Full post, WP = Warm post (ie reboot)

















































All of above benches without PB.



I believe this setup will improve my SuperPi run, will try that later. 

Dunno if you would find handy or not, I look at clock cycle, etc. I enter say what works in previous tests on left side and what frequency, then right side would be target setup.

View attachment My_RAM_calc.zip


I gotta say quite impressed with 3200MHz C14 kits, for example the 3400MHz CAS 14 = ~8.23ns, that betters the 3600MHz C15 kit I was eyeing up recently.

*** edit ***

Same setup but PB AIDA.



Spoiler






































And just like gen 1, using PB could affect normal system stability  .



Spoiler












Reboot occur whilst system left idle  .


----------



## Krisztias

lordzed83 said:


> Prepare to be amazed. Cause I dont know how on Your's suystem it does not work or works different. I'm in Pstate oce since day one of ryzen. Even better I'm ojn Pstate overclock with bclk overclock downvolting downclocking and negative offset on 1002 bios as I type this LOL


Not anymore.



elmor said:


> It's a change in the AGESA, now if you enter "OC Mode" (P0 ratio above default) it will lock the VID at the same as P0.





elmor said:


> I think this situation calls for further explanation.
> 
> On Ryzen CPUs, at least currently, there are 3 different P-states with different FID/DID (frequency) and VID (voltage). When the frequency is increased above the default base frequency (for example 3.7GHz on 2700X), the CPU will enter "OC Mode" which disables any power limits, CPB, XFR etc. In recent AGESA versions, "OC Mode" also prevents the CPU from requesting a lower VID than what P0 is set to. This means that the CPU will keep switching between the different P-states with different frequencies, but the voltage will be fixed at the P0 VID.
> 
> On top of this, there are also C-states. C-states are deeper power saving states which triggers functions like clock gating essentially turning off cores or other parts of the chip. If the chip enters a state where all cores are turned off, the CPU may also request the Vcore VRM output to turn off momentarily. This happens within milliseconds (maybe even microseconds, have not measured it) and is not noticeable to the user. What you will notice that the the reported CPU Core Voltage will read very low values around ~0.4V, which is an average value. If the CPU Core voltage is 0V for 1ms, then ramps up to 0.8V and stays there for 1ms, the average reading will most likely be around 0.4V.
> 
> It's still possible to use C-states while in "OC Mode", which means that you can still have some power savings and something that looks like "downvolting" while overclocked. To enable C-states, set AMD CBS\Zen Common Options\Global C-state Control = Enabled in BIOS. A side note on this is that when the CPU requests the Vcore VRM to turn off, it can reset any fixed override voltage that's been set. This means that you should not use Global C-state Control together with Vcore in Manual Mode.


----------



## Keith Myers

*Try options it87 ignore_resource_conflict=1 in an it87.conf file in /etc/modprobe.d*



minal said:


> After the latest update to kernel 4.19 (4.19.2-200.fc28.x86_64), it87 kernel module isn't loading. It's always fun googling a problem and rediscovering my own old posts
> 
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-224.html#post27508838
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-225.html#post27508948
> 
> 
> Same failure with modprobe and "device or resource busy" error, and OpRegion conflict.


I am on the last 0702 BIOS that allows the it87 kernel driver to load. The later BIOS' implement the WMI protocol interfaces and prevent the driver from loading. Ignore ACPI resources=lax or the direct parameter 
options it87 ignore_resource_conflict=1 don't have any effect with the WMI BIOS' which prevents the driver from loading because of conflict.

I too would like to know what the Mode 0 is all about.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> All of the Perf Bias settings provided too similar of results to rule outside the standard deviation for what I was using to measure them. I saw very similar differences when testing the same Perf Bias multiple times. I was unable to determine if one was better than another. The only thing I could conclude is that any of them are better than not using a Per Bias at all. And I would honestly say your measurements are too similar to rule one better than another because they are the same differences I saw in runs using the same Perf Bias.
> 
> I do like where your heads at though. Much like me. Always searching. Always testing.


I have, in fact, tested quite extensively.

These settings were designed originally by ASUS engineers to improve cache performance. As they could not guarantee 100% compatibility with all hardware combinations, rather than not use them, they grouped them into this 'Performance Bias' group of settings. This information came from Stilt or Elmor, I can't remember off hand. I can if need be find the original reference where they told me, but it was some time ago.

These settings will, for some, provide a modest improvement in performance, depending on for the most part on workload. Certainly (as @gupsterg mentioned) this seems to be of more benefit to 1xxx CPUs, but it's definitely worth checking out. My CB15 scores are repeatable, as are the latency and speed values - one definitely has advantage over the others in particular loads - ie latency over speeds of transfer.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I have, in fact, tested quite extensively.
> 
> These settings were designed originally by ASUS engineers to improve cache performance. As they could not guarantee 100% compatibility with all hardware combinations, rather than not use them, they grouped them into this 'Performance Bias' group of settings. This information came from Stilt or Elmor, I can't remember off hand. I can if need be find the original reference where they told me, but it was some time ago.
> 
> These settings will, for some, provide a modest improvement in performance, depending on for the most part on workload. Certainly (as @gupsterg mentioned) this seems to be of more benefit to 1xxx CPUs, but it's definitely worth checking out. My CB15 scores are repeatable, as are the latency and speed values - one definitely has advantage over the others in particular loads - ie latency over speeds of transfer.


I know what they do and I know they will improve performance -- I just couldn't get consistent enough results to prove one Perf Bias was better than another. I use the CB15 Perf Bias, but if you have a recommendation for better then I'd love to give your recommendation a go.


----------



## gupsterg

@nick name

As the gen 2 CPU have already tweaked cache from factory I believe it has less of an affect on their performance. Where as gen 1 gets a real healthy boost and if my memory serve me correctly setting to setting there is more of a recordable difference. So I would side with crakej with his setup. I added Performance Bias AIDA setting results to my previous post and it's sorta really nothing to scream and shout about on gen 2.



Krisztias said:


> Not anymore.


It does as lordzed83 states, you have missed the 2nd/3rd paragraphs of Elmor's quoted post, it is like a pseudo down volting but with real power benefits from what I saw on wall power meter.


----------



## nick name

gupsterg said:


> @nick name
> 
> As the gen 2 CPU have already tweaked cache from factory I believe it has less of an affect on their performance. Where as gen 1 gets a real healthy boost and if my memory serve me correctly setting to setting there is more of a recordable difference. So I would side with crakej with his setup. I added Performance Bias AIDA setting results to my previous post and it's sorta really nothing to scream and shout about on gen


Yeah, all I can verify is that any of the Perf Bias options are better than not using one. So they still help 2nd gen Ryzen -- it's just that the variance between runs in Aida, Geekbench 4 and Cinebench make it impossible for me to figure out which one of the three is actually the best.


----------



## minal

Keith Myers said:


> I am on the last 0702 BIOS that allows the it87 kernel driver to load. The later BIOS' implement the WMI protocol interfaces and prevent the driver from loading. Ignore ACPI resources=lax or the direct parameter
> options it87 ignore_resource_conflict=1 don't have any effect with the WMI BIOS' which prevents the driver from loading because of conflict.
> 
> I too would like to know what the Mode 0 is all about.


 I have remained on 0702 BIOS as well. I haven't been using acpi_enforce_resources=lax, and it's just upon updating to kernel 4.19 that it87 has failed to load. 

I just tried acpi_enforce_resources=lax and this allows it87 to load successfully. I also tried Mode0 as before and that made no difference. Unlike before, if I remove acpi_enforce_resources=lax, it87 again fails to load. I'm not tuning my system anymore so maybe I'll stay without it87 and not risk potential system instability. With it87 not being maintained anymore, it sure would be nice if future kernels incorporate its functionality.


----------



## Keith Myers

minal said:


> I have remained on 0702 BIOS as well. I haven't been using acpi_enforce_resources=lax, and it's just upon updating to kernel 4.19 that it87 has failed to load.
> 
> I just tried acpi_enforce_resources=lax and this allows it87 to load successfully. I also tried Mode0 as before and that made no difference. Unlike before, if I remove acpi_enforce_resources=lax, it87 again fails to load. I'm not tuning my system anymore so maybe I'll stay without it87 and not risk potential system instability. With it87 not being maintained anymore, it sure would be nice if future kernels incorporate its functionality.


The acpi_enforce_resources=lax is GLOBAL and the reason why there is always a warning attached to using it. OTOH, the options parameter in the it87.conf file ONLY applies to the it87 driver so is much safer.

I had no issue with the it87 driver with the options parameter with the 4.18 kernel shipped with the Ubuntu 18.10 distribution in my test partition. Thanks for the heads up on the 4.19 kernel. Have you figured out the issue yet or advised the developers of the kernel or maintainers of the driver?

Or are you going to just forego the driver since you are now on a stable machine?


----------



## Keith Myers

*Will use the it87 driver until it no longer works.*

I still like to see the two fan speeds that the motherboard exports. Also I really like to see my water temps as that tells me whether I need to open windows further or turn up the room fan speeds for better airflow.


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> -snip-



Hey, Keith I just looked at your signature. Where did you mount all those radiators for the hybrid GPUs? Or did they all reach to the front or top of the case for mounting there?


----------



## Keith Myers

nick name said:


> Hey, Keith I just looked at your signature. Where did you mount all those radiators for the hybrid GPUs? Or did they all reach to the front or top of the case for mounting there?


I assume you are speaking of the ASUS-Linux system? The case is the Thermaltake X9 and all the radiators are in the roof.


----------



## minal

Keith Myers said:


> The acpi_enforce_resources=lax is GLOBAL and the reason why there is always a warning attached to using it. OTOH, the options parameter in the it87.conf file ONLY applies to the it87 driver so is much safer.
> 
> I had no issue with the it87 driver with the options parameter with the 4.18 kernel shipped with the Ubuntu 18.10 distribution in my test partition. Thanks for the heads up on the 4.19 kernel. Have you figured out the issue yet or advised the developers of the kernel or maintainers of the driver?
> 
> Or are you going to just forego the driver since you are now on a stable machine?


I didn't know about it87.conf. You can place an option equivalent to acpi_enforce_resources=lax in there? 

I'm not sure what the problem is, so I don't know where to report it. And with the driver not being maintained anymore, I guess that developer gets a break. 

Yes, I'm thinking of forgoing the it87 module, since my system is stable. And since its no longer maintained I figure it's a matter of time before it stops working. Maybe that time has come. But if an config option can keep it going for a while it would be nice.



Keith Myers said:


> I still like to see the two fan speeds that the motherboard exports. Also I really like to see my water temps as that tells me whether I need to open windows further or turn up the room fan speeds for better airflow.


Yes, it's precisely the two fans speeds that I like monitoring too, along with Tdie which is reported fine without it87. Sometimes taking a peek at Vcore is fun too.


----------



## Keith Myers

minal said:


> I didn't know about it87.conf. You can place an option equivalent to acpi_enforce_resources=lax in there?
> 
> I'm not sure what the problem is, so I don't know where to report it. And with the driver not being maintained anymore, I guess that developer gets a break.
> 
> Yes, I'm thinking of forgoing the it87 module, since my system is stable. And since its no longer maintained I figure it's a matter of time before it stops working. Maybe that time has come. But if an config option can keep it going for a while it would be nice.
> 
> 
> Yes, it's precisely the two fans speeds that I like monitoring too, along with Tdie which is reported fine without it87. Sometimes taking a peek at Vcore is fun too.


Yes, make a it87.conf file with


Code:


options it87 ignore_resource_conflict=1

 in it. Place it in the /etc/modprobe.d directory. Edit the modules.conf file in the /etc/module-load.d directory and add


Code:


it87

 to the file if it isn't already there from the original it87 installation.

Guenter Roeck isn't developing the driver anymore but there are several people that have cloned the directory. One of them added a commit to the directory during the summer after Guenter said he was bailing on the driver. So there may be some development of sorts later possibly. Also he is regularly adding commits to the k10temp driver for the kernel packages. That is where your Tdie temp is coming from. So at least that driver is being maintained.

He bailed on the nct6775 driver too. I use it for the X99 system and see that I will be using it for the X399 build shortly. At least that SIO chip exports a considerable amount more sensors than the crappy ITE8665E chip. But more to blame for the lack of sensor outputs on the C7H is the way that ASUS implemented on that board. The it87 driver reports all the fans with the same chip on the Prime X370 board to show how badly ASUS screwed up on the C7H design. Will be nice to get all the fans and motherboard sensors reporting on the X399 system.


----------



## minal

Keith Myers said:


> Yes, make a it87.conf file with
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> options it87 ignore_resource_conflict=1
> 
> in it. Place it in the /etc/modprobe.d directory. Edit the modules.conf file in the /etc/module-load.d directory and add
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> it87
> 
> to the file if it isn't already there from the original it87 installation.
> 
> Guenter Roeck isn't developing the driver anymore but there are several people that have cloned the directory. One of them added a commit to the directory during the summer after Guenter said he was bailing on the driver. So there may be some development of sorts later possibly. Also he is regularly adding commits to the k10temp driver for the kernel packages. That is where your Tdie temp is coming from. So at least that driver is being maintained.
> 
> He bailed on the nct6775 driver too. I use it for the X99 system and see that I will be using it for the X399 build shortly. At least that SIO chip exports a considerable amount more sensors than the crappy ITE8665E chip. But more to blame for the lack of sensor outputs on the C7H is the way that ASUS implemented on that board. The it87 driver reports all the fans with the same chip on the Prime X370 board to show how badly ASUS screwed up on the C7H design. Will be nice to get all the fans and motherboard sensors reporting on the X399 system.


Things seem to be different in Fedora. I don't have a modules.conf. I found it87.conf already exists at: /usr/lib/modules-load.d/it87.conf and contains just "it87". I replaced the contents with "options it87 ignore_resource_conflict=1". it87 still fails to load. Is a reboot required?


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I know what they do and I know they will improve performance -- I just couldn't get consistent enough results to prove one Perf Bias was better than another. I use the CB15 Perf Bias, but if you have a recommendation for better then I'd love to give your recommendation a go.


I like where your head's at (not too patronising, is it?), but first thing I'd say is that (as stated previously, and below) I have a 1xxx cpu. I never made any claims for gen 2xxx which already has optimised cache (and I don't have one!). I do a lot of testing before I make any claims on this board.

So, those who have Ryzen 1xxx CPUs will be glad to know it's possible to increase throughput, and/or reduce latency, which _can_ result in a decent performance increase. Pease don't forget that the Perf Bias settings may introduce instability to your particular setup, but for many, they work reliably.

I don't have a Ryzen 2 CPU so cannot/have not tested, but other have (@gupsterg and others)


----------



## gupsterg

I think :grouphug: peeps. I don't think nick meant anything untoward by that. Text can be so cold...



> The biggest Zen-core related change compared to Summit Ridge is the L2 cache latency, which has been reduced from 17 CLKs to 12 CLKs. The rest of the changes featured in Pinnacle Ridge are related to manufacturing process, the scalable data fabric (SDF, "IF"), the memory controller and firmware / software configuration of various domains and components.
> 
> On average Pinnacle Ridge provides ~1.5% higher IPC than its predecessor. In certain latency sensitive workloads (such as WinRAR) the difference can be as high as 8% in favor of Pinnacle Ridge, confirming said changes to the caches and the slightly improved memory latency.


Cache/Memory latency is what PR had tweaks and as the performance bias tweaks those aspects the gains are less on PR in my experience.

Very early on I tried the CB15 PB on PR and it didn't get the gains SR did. For example on SR enabling PB CB15 was like effectively gaining ~100MHz+ CPU clock without actually doing so.

I'll have to look at past results, I have some in OP of the Ryzen Essential thread. IIRC it was like +50 points on SR, PR is ~25 points when I last checked. As PB on both gens was not stable in P95, etc, I only real ever used it for a bench sub and not 24/7 use TBH.

On another note, last night started on 3434MHz C14 1T GDMD. Seems like a doable profile, seems nice all round. PBOE enhanced clocks, BCLK further enhanced it, decent'ish RAM MHz with C14 1T. 

Simply put loaded The Stilt 3466MHz profile, dropped tCL, tRCD, tRP, tWR, tRFC, tRTP, 1T, GDMD, BCLK 101 and set SOC 1.031 VDIMM 1.385 VTTDDR 0.7. Passed a few reruns, longest is being shared.



Spoiler






























No PB etc on benches, last night was on ProcODT Auto (ie 53.3) as seen in CB15 screenie, seems as 48 is better. Continuing some more testing.

Wondering if others see ever so slightly improved clocks if this option is set to performance?



Spoiler














Run to run variance in CB15 seemed tighter to me, could well have just been fluke, dunno.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> I think :grouphug: peeps. I don't think nick meant anything untoward by that. Text can be so cold...


Agreed. Text is cold - Sorry - I wouldn't normally let something like that get to me, I'm sure nick name didn't mean anything by it.

I'm starting to get Ryzen 2 envy as i'm finding the the limits of SR, but I am very lucky with this chip which was an RMA after finding the SegFault problem.

I've been doing more work on my G.Skill 4266s running at 3600. I'm finding it really hard to stabilize on this bios. Have not been ale to get them stable for some time - I'm not sure why......yet. I had them stable @ 3600 TT for some time, now loose settings (CL14 15 14 14) won't work either.


----------



## gupsterg

I think you got a corker of a gen 1 CPU chap. At times I regret selling off my 1800X, like you was RMA from seg fault. It did 4.0GHz with ~1.38V VID LLC: Auto, why I miss it is I believe it was better at 4 dimm support than PR.

On the same ram kit I use now, but C6H, I determined 2x8GB setup of 3400MHz, plugged in 2 more dimms and all I did was bump SOC a notch or 2 and ProcODT one step and BOOM it worked.

I don't think I can gain the stability I did on 4 dimms with PR  . I reckon the IMC/FW is more geared towards 2 dimms, besides C7H lacking ASUS T-Topology.

On another note, I had been eyeing up a monoblock for C7H. Instead I had a coupon for EK from while back, in the black friday web sale nabbed a Supremacy EVO Acetal for £12 delivered (due to coupon)  . Now gotta source another pump/rad. I reckon the all black block will look so mean on C7H with the RipJaw V blacks.


----------



## crakej

When I replaced my power supply, I couldn't get it working with my CableMod 24 pin cable.

Instead I used the one that came with my RM1000. All the cables seem much better quality than the ones that came years ago with my RM850. They're all decent (but heavy) cables, which all have decent mesh shielding on them. I'm guessing this shielding is better than the fancy CableMod cables?

I wonder if I should use all the new cables from the RM1000? Or maybe just the 24 pin and EPS cables? The CableMod cables are obviously more flexible, take way less space and look nicer, but are they up to the job?

I want to make sure my CH7 has decent clean and reliable power - anyone know about cables?


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> I think you got a corker of a gen 1 CPU chap. At times I regret selling off my 1800X, like you was RMA from seg fault. It did 4.0GHz with ~1.38V VID LLC: Auto, why I miss it is I believe it was better at 4 dimm support than PR.
> 
> On the same ram kit I use now, but C6H, I determined 2x8GB setup of 3400MHz, plugged in 2 more dimms and all I did was bump SOC a notch or 2 and ProcODT one step and BOOM it worked.
> 
> I don't think I can gain the stability I did on 4 dimms with PR  . I reckon the IMC/FW is more geared towards 2 dimms, besides C7H lacking ASUS T-Topology.
> 
> On another note, I had been eyeing up a monoblock for C7H. Instead I had a coupon for EK from while back, in the black friday web sale nabbed a Supremacy EVO Acetal for £12 delivered (due to coupon)  . Now gotta source another pump/rad. I reckon the all black block will look so mean on C7H with the RipJaw V blacks.


I'm running 4.1GHz Auto LLC, 1.394v - best profile I've had yet.

I'm doubt I will ever gets speeds reliable of >3600 without lowering CPU speed to 4.0 or less.

I'm going to get lots of fans to pump nice cold air into my CoreX5 in an effort to get temps even lower than they are. 

Also, inside the case has this nice mesh to stop dust getting in, but I think I need to remove that from the top so the rad can exhaust through the top of the case much easier than it can already.

Edit: I look fwd to seeing what results you get with that block


----------



## gupsterg

I doubt the mesh aids anything. I believe that PSU comes with cables which have capacitors at connectors, you should be able to make them out. They improve ripple.

I once saw a review stating that PSU had them, but when I looked at Corsair site the photos differed for cables. Perhaps site is improved now or it was illustrative image.

Not ever used any cables which have not come with PSU. Last time I looked at the prices for cable sets I thought "WHAT!?", I could use that money for another piece of kit to try, etc.

Yeah will be 1st time placing a Ryzen CPU under water. Probably gonna buy the Magicool G2 Slim 360mm rad, ~£40. Have had 2 of those cooling TR+RXV64 and liked their price/performance/size, etc. Probably gonna use Arctic Cooling F12 PWM on the rad, again had those on the TR setup and worked really well. So cheap as well, last time snagged them ~£4 a fan. Probably be Barrow fittings, EK ZMT tubing that I already have, again black on black  . It's gonna be like whole batman'esque dark knight look  .


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Agreed. Text is cold - Sorry - I wouldn't normally let something like that get to me, I'm sure nick name didn't mean anything by it.
> 
> I'm starting to get Ryzen 2 envy as i'm finding the the limits of SR, but I am very lucky with this chip which was an RMA after finding the SegFault problem.
> 
> I've been doing more work on my G.Skill 4266s running at 3600. I'm finding it really hard to stabilize on this bios. Have not been ale to get them stable for some time - I'm not sure why......yet. I had them stable @ 3600 TT for some time, now loose settings (CL14 15 14 14) won't work either.


Sorry @crakej I meant no offense and I do like all the testing you do because its the same stuff I do. So when I said I like where your heads at it was meant with sincerity because I find myself running similar tests and trying different scenarios like you yourself. Sometimes I'll try something out because you made mention or in the case of the Perf Bias we both tested it out because it was there to try. 

And when I questioned your result it was because I only saw those two Aida screens and the difference between the two look precisely how my runs can vary when testing the same setup. If you had a sample that proved more useful than what I saw in my own testing then I apologize for questioning your interpretation of the results. My own proved infuriating in their variance.


----------



## Keith Myers

minal said:


> Things seem to be different in Fedora. I don't have a modules.conf. I found it87.conf already exists at: /usr/lib/modules-load.d/it87.conf and contains just "it87". I replaced the contents with "options it87 ignore_resource_conflict=1". it87 still fails to load. Is a reboot required?


Yes. I always had to reboot to load the kernel driver. You could also try loading the parameter directly via the modprobe call. First unload the module and then reload it with the parameter.


Code:


modprobe it87 ignore_resource_conflict=1


----------



## minal

Keith Myers said:


> Code:
> 
> 
> modprobe it87 ignore_resource_conflict=1


 This worked.

Also I should have read your instructions more carefully: placing an it87.conf with "options it87 ignore_resource_conflict=1" in /usr/lib/*modprobe.d*/ worked, while also having an it87.conf with just "it87" in /usr/lib/*modules-load.d*/ This wiki helped: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Kernel_module

This continues to work after a reboot, but even before rebooting I got the module to load by doing "sudo systemctl restart systemd-modules-load.service"

Now all is in order. 

Have you ever noticed it87's readings momentarily having unreasonable values (eg, 0 C or negative RPMs)? I've seen this on occasion in xsensor and evidenced as a blip on the plot and min values in Psensor. Would resource conflicts cause this? I've seen this with it87 before, without using "acpi_enforce_resources=lax" or "ignore_resource_conflict=1".


----------



## Keith Myers

minal said:


> This worked.
> 
> Also I should have read your instructions more carefully: placing an it87.conf with "options it87 ignore_resource_conflict=1" in /usr/lib/*modprobe.d*/ worked, while also having an it87.conf with just "it87" in /usr/lib/*modules-load.d*/ This wiki helped: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Kernel_module
> 
> This continues to work after a reboot, but even before rebooting I got the module to load by doing "sudo systemctl restart systemd-modules-load.service"
> 
> Now all is in order.
> 
> Have you ever noticed it87's readings momentarily having unreasonable values (eg, 0 C or negative RPMs)? I've seen this on occasion in xsensor and evidenced as a blip on the plot and min values in Psensor. Would resource conflicts cause this? I've seen this with it87 before, without using "acpi_enforce_resources=lax" or "ignore_resource_conflict=1".


Glad you got it working. I too have noticed the blips in sensor readouts temporarily. I only catch it rarely, maybe once a day. I think it has more to do with the SIO chip and ASUS implementation. I've never seen any evidence of actual resource conflicts in any logfiles. Only the warning notice that it may occur. Yes restarting the module load service works without rebooting.


----------



## minal

Keith Myers said:


> I think it has more to do with the SIO chip and ASUS implementation.


Oh, Asus...


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Sorry @crakej I meant no offense and I do like all the testing you do because its the same stuff I do. So when I said I like where your heads at it was meant with sincerity because I find myself running similar tests and trying different scenarios like you yourself. Sometimes I'll try something out because you made mention or in the case of the Perf Bias we both tested it out because it was there to try.
> 
> And when I questioned your result it was because I only saw those two Aida screens and the difference between the two look precisely how my runs can vary when testing the same setup. If you had a sample that proved more useful than what I saw in my own testing then I apologize for questioning your interpretation of the results. My own proved infuriating in their variance.


It's ok -was a knee jerk reaction


----------



## DoctorNick

Hello guys, if I may join in this thread. Having read earlier post i noticed that people are talking about not being able to use pstates overclocking after bios 0702. I have no issues. In fact i just got my system stable at 4,2ghz with custom pstates enabled - Ryzen 2700x.


----------



## nick name

DoctorNick said:


> Hello guys, if I may join in this thread. Having read earlier post i noticed that people are talking about not being able to use pstates overclocking after bios 0702. I have no issues. In fact i just got my system stable at 4,2ghz with custom pstates enabled - Ryzen 2700x.


Bahhhh. I wish you would have said "Hi everybody!" And then we could have all exclaimed "Hi, Doctor Nick!" But yeah, many folks are seeing the behavior Elmor said to expect, but I saw at least one user report the behavior stayed the same for him. 

In your setup do you still see 4.35GHz single core speeds? Or is it all 4.2GHz all the time?


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> It's ok -was a knee jerk reaction


I understand. And again -- my apologies.


----------



## DoctorNick

nick name said:


> Bahhhh. I wish you would have said "Hi everybody!" And then we could have all exclaimed "Hi, Doctor Nick!" But yeah, many folks are seeing the behavior Elmor said to expect, but I saw at least one user report the behavior stayed the same for him.
> 
> In your setup do you still see 4.35GHz single core speeds? Or is it all 4.2GHz all the time?


HELLO Nickname. 

To answer your question - no 

It's 4.2ghz under load all cores.. 2.2ghz idle @ 0,4v.. Can't seem to get all cores to 4.35ghz. If i disable 2 cores - I can get it to run 4.35 on all cores, but it takes alot of juice.


----------



## nick name

DoctorNick said:


> HELLO Nickname.
> 
> To answer your question - no
> 
> It's 4.2ghz under load all cores.. 2.2ghz idle @ 0,4v.. Can't seem to get all cores to 4.35ghz. If i disable 2 cores - I can get it to run 4.35 on all cores, but it takes alot of juice.


Have you played the Performance Enhancer Levels 3 and 4? If you're cooling on air you probably won't do well with Level 4, but see where level 3 lands you if you haven't yet.


----------



## Keith Myers

crakej said:


> I'm running 4.1GHz Auto LLC, 1.394v - best profile I've had yet.
> 
> I'm doubt I will ever gets speeds reliable of >3600 without lowering CPU speed to 4.0 or less.
> 
> I'm going to get lots of fans to pump nice cold air into my CoreX5 in an effort to get temps even lower than they are.
> 
> Also, inside the case has this nice mesh to stop dust getting in, but I think I need to remove that from the top so the rad can exhaust through the top of the case much easier than it can already.
> 
> Edit: I look fwd to seeing what results you get with that block


Yes do remove the magnetic filters in the case top lids to improve the radiator airflow due to restriction. Noticeable improvement on both my Core X9 and Core X5 cases.


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> Yeah will be 1st time placing a Ryzen CPU under water. Probably gonna buy the Magicool G2 Slim 360mm rad, ~£40. Have had 2 of those cooling TR+RXV64 and liked their price/performance/size, etc. Probably gonna use Arctic Cooling F12 PWM on the rad, again had those on the TR setup and worked really well. So cheap as well, last time snagged them ~£4 a fan. Probably be Barrow fittings, EK ZMT tubing that I already have, again black on black  . It's gonna be like whole batman'esque dark knight look  .


Well after you recommendation and reading reviews about magicool last year i bought one too. So Cheap and working more than good  I have many rads and these are doing there job at least same or better 
I can also recommend Artic Cooling F12, very cheap and top performance! The only issue is the color scheme  Never fitted well in my Theme 




DoctorNick said:


> Hello guys, if I may join in this thread. Having read earlier post i noticed that people are talking about not being able to use pstates overclocking after bios 0702. I have no issues. In fact i just got my system stable at 4,2ghz with custom pstates enabled - Ryzen 2700x.


Welcome Doctor! Its not that Pstates are unusable! You can read the conversation with me and Elmor here:

https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-342.html#post27635896


----------



## majestynl

Cant remember well but i thought some people here where running or trying to run 3600mhz CL14 here ?

I spent last week some few days getting 3600mhz stable with 14 15 14 14 42 + TT. Saturday i was very happy and reached multiple times ~4000% with Ramtest so i thought i was close after tweaking many settings!
Suddenly the day after i restarted the PC and entered working values in the Bios i never got them working again. Now it never passes 7%-50%  WOW so so frustrating! 
If i remember well i got same issue few months back with my 3533CL14+TT profile! Cant say for sure what i did after this but probably i re-flashed the bios and then got it stable later!

Testrig: Ryzen 2700x // CH7 // F4 4266CL19 (2x8GB) // Bios 1101


----------



## crakej

Keith Myers said:


> Yes do remove the magnetic filters in the case top lids to improve the radiator airflow due to restriction. Noticeable improvement on both my Core X9 and Core X5 cases.


I will get that out now then!! Thanks Keith 

My cooling seems really good at the moment so any extra cooling capacity is always good.


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> Cant remember well but i thought some people here where running or trying to run 3600mhz CL14 here ?
> 
> I spent last week some few days getting 3600mhz stable with 14 15 14 14 42 + TT. Saturday i was very happy and reached multiple times ~4000% with Ramtest so i thought i was close after tweaking many settings!
> Suddenly the day after i restarted the PC and entered working values in the Bios i never got them working again. Now it never passes 7%-50%  WOW so so frustrating!
> If i remember well i got same issue few months back with my 3533CL14+TT profile! Cant say for sure what i did after this but probably i re-flashed the bios and then got it stable later!
> 
> Testrig: Ryzen 2700x // CH7 // F4 4266CL19 (2x8GB) // Bios 1101


I did have it running - but having same probs as you now....


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> I did have it running - but having same probs as you now....


Yeap now i remember  Just as info to compare!, what settings have you used?

I'm thinking to re-flash bios or maybe going back to latest official bios version!


----------



## hurricane28

Stable as a rock here:


----------



## hurricane28

My best boot but not stable:

On Ryzen, 3466 MHz CL14 seems to be the sweet spot performance wise and what people can get out of their system momentarily.


----------



## crakej

Observation while trying to regain either of my 2 previous working profiles Fast (14 15 14 14), and Extreme (14 13 13 13) on my G.Skill 4266s...

I'll do a test, say increase a voltage, do a few tests, if it shows promise, i'll remember and/or go on to do another... and another - as you do.

If I hit a dead end or find the setting i'm working on is not having a positive effect, I'll go back to one of those profiles that had shown some promise, but they never produce the same results as they had previously..... just like entire profiles that no longer work.

Could something in Windows be doing this? :tiredsmil


----------



## nick name

The fastest I can get 14-14-14-14 stable is at 3500MHz with my kit. Sometimes a little faster speed, but not as a lasting result. Basically the same gremlins creep in and I have to go back to 3500MHz.


----------



## crakej

Nice OC @hurricane28 - for sure. 

I was running my 1700X at 4.2, but could go no further than 3466 on ram while I was at that speed. Now at 4.1 I can do 3533 really reliably, and have had working 3600 profiles that I just czan't get to work again. Both stoppedc workibng at same time which is why I suspect Windows - but could be anything.


----------



## hurricane28

crakej said:


> Nice OC @hurricane28 - for sure.
> 
> I was running my 1700X at 4.2, but could go no further than 3466 on ram while I was at that speed. Now at 4.1 I can do 3533 really reliably, and have had working 3600 profiles that I just czan't get to work again. Both stoppedc workibng at same time which is why I suspect Windows - but could be anything.


Thnx, it was trial and error to be honest on these boards man. Just too many settings to tinker with which can take weeks or months to get stable but if its stable its stable as a rock like mine now. 

I am very happy with it to be honest and i think its the max i can get from my system too, i tried 3600 MHz but i saw no gain whatsoever perhaps due to lack of stability so i set it back to my current 3466 MHz cl14 and its pretty fast and stable. 
I want to enjoy my system more instead of endlessly tweaking it, i don't have the patience for it anymore and i rather play games or other stuff with it.


----------



## ComansoRowlett

Any news on the new AGESA for this board? I'm currently stuck at 3466MHz CL14 on my set of G.skill 4600MHz CL19 sticks (b-die single rank of course). Obviously I don't expect any miracles with a new AGESA, my IMC seems to be more of my limitation here, but these sticks should be able to do 3700MHz CL14 pretty easily at 1.5v (XMP is rated for 1.5v 19-23-23-43-66 2304/4608). I see a bios called 1002 but as far as I'm aware it isn't the latest AGESA and is the same as 0804. I'd even take a beta bios at this point just to have a crack at some better settings. Last I heard there was a beta bios called 1101 with the new AGESA? Anyway my current settings are pretty tight, and I've tried changing almost every single setting relating to RAM stability to help stabilize thing. Closest I ever got to 3533 was 300% cleared on memtest, sadly if I change any of my voltages up or down I lose stability including DRAM which tells me my IMC is very much my limitation because B-die should pretty much scale upto 1.8v with voltage (FYI I didn't actually attempt to run this, but making a point).

Detailed settings are: 1.45v 14-14-14-24-38-1t TrrdS(and L): 4, Tfaw: 18, TwtrS: 4 twtrL (and TWR): 10, TrdrdScl (and Trdwrscl): 2, Trfc: 260, Trfc 2: 190, Trfc 4: 120, Tcwl: 14, Trtp: 8, Trdwr: 6, Twrrd: 3, TwrwrSc: 1, TwrwrSd (and Dd): 6, TrdrdSc: 1 TrdrdSd (and Dd): 4, Tcke: 1, ProcODT: 53.3, GDM: Disabled, Power Down Enable: Disabled (lol), Rttnom: RZQ/7, RttWr: Off, Rttpark: RZQ/4, Memcadclkdrv, etc: 24 Ohm, CLDO_VDDP: 866, VDDP: 0.855v, SOC: 1.1v. Literally changing anything gives me worse settings OR less stability, I've found my absolute limit.


----------



## crakej

ComansoRowlett said:


> Any news on the new AGESA for this board? I'm currently stuck at 3466MHz CL14 on my set of G.skill 4600MHz CL19 sticks (b-die single rank of course). Obviously I don't expect any miracles with a new AGESA, my IMC seems to be more of my limitation here, but these sticks should be able to do 3700MHz CL14 pretty easily at 1.5v (XMP is rated for 1.5v 19-23-23-43-66 2304/4608). I see a bios called 1002 but as far as I'm aware it isn't the latest AGESA and is the same as 0804. I'd even take a beta bios at this point just to have a crack at some better settings. Last I heard there was a beta bios called 1101 with the new AGESA? Anyway my current settings are pretty tight, and I've tried changing almost every single setting relating to RAM stability to help stabilize thing. Closest I ever got to 3533 was 300% cleared on memtest, sadly if I change any of my voltages up or down I lose stability including DRAM which tells me my IMC is very much my limitation because B-die should pretty much scale upto 1.8v with voltage (FYI I didn't actually attempt to run this, but making a point).
> 
> Detailed settings are: 1.45v 14-14-14-24-38-1t TrrdS(and L): 4, Tfaw: 18, TwtrS: 4 twtrL (and TWR): 10, TrdrdScl (and Trdwrscl): 2, Trfc: 260, Trfc 2: 190, Trfc 4: 120, Tcwl: 14, Trtp: 8, Trdwr: 6, Twrrd: 3, TwrwrSc: 1, TwrwrSd (and Dd): 6, TrdrdSc: 1 TrdrdSd (and Dd): 4, Tcke: 1, ProcODT: 53.3, GDM: Disabled, Power Down Enable: Disabled (lol), Rttnom: RZQ/7, RttWr: Off, Rttpark: RZQ/4, Memcadclkdrv, etc: 24 Ohm, CLDO_VDDP: 866, VDDP: 0.855v, SOC: 1.1v. Literally changing anything gives me worse settings OR less stability, I've found my absolute limit.


If you set geardown=on you will be able to go faster


----------



## ComansoRowlett

I've tried GDM on, it doesn't aid stability sadly and neither does 2t. Just gives me less performance.


----------



## ComansoRowlett

crakej said:


> If you set geardown=on you will be able to go faster


 I also see you have bios 1101, is that the beta bios that got pulled which was 1.0.0.6?


----------



## crakej

ComansoRowlett said:


> I also see you have bios 1101, is that the beta bios that got pulled which was 1.0.0.6?


yes, sorry - I meant to find the link for you - it's only for the *WIFI* version, but you can cross flash it with Afuefix.efi

I'll find it and update this post.

Edit: here it is. use at own risk obviously!

https://www.mediafire.com/file/23ii9...-1101.zip/file


----------



## ComansoRowlett

crakej said:


> yes, sorry - I meant to find the link for you - it's only for the *WIFI* version, but you can cross flash it with Afuefix.efi
> 
> I'll find it and update this post.
> 
> Edit: here it is. use at own risk obviously!
> 
> https://www.mediafire.com/file/23ii9...-1101.zip/file


It appears the link doesn't have the bios sadly, however if you are able to provide a link to it, did it provide you with any noticeable benefits over the older AGESA? Also I do have the non wifi version so I'd need to get familiar with this "Afuefix.eft" thing. I've never heard of it so if you can give me a few tips to get myself started up I'd appreciate it. Thanks


----------



## crakej

I've hosted the file here for a while. Please remember, *this bios was pulled from the official site, it IS beta and does have a couple of reported problems.* Use at your *own risk.* File is for WIFI model but can be flashed to non WIFI using Afuefix.efi

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1lgQbNxO3O0qoXeE1A9eH4T0y9oGFS9Px

There is a guide - I will find the link and post here shortly.

The guide is here https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...s-how-update-bios-correctly.html#post26403470 (Thanks to @1usmus)

Scroll down to *How to flash a official bios + mod bios (new instruction)* and follow instructions 1-7. When done, remove the usb drive and hit reset. Let it reboot fully - sometimes it will reboot again to install some other firmware.


----------



## ComansoRowlett

crakej said:


> I've hosted the file here for a while. Please remember, *this bios was pulled from the official site, it IS beta and does have a couple of reported problems.* Use at your own risk. File is for WIFI model but can be flashed to non WIFI using Afuefix.efi
> 
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1lgQbNxO3O0qoXeE1A9eH4T0y9oGFS9Px
> 
> There is a guide - I will find the link and post here shortly.


I'm aware of the risk, and thank you! As long as this bios is completely compatible via this method you're about to show then I have no problem trying it out


----------



## crakej

ComansoRowlett said:


> I'm aware of the risk, and thank you! As long as this bios is completely compatible via this method you're about to show then I have no problem trying it out


Instructions are there - I have to warn as it's a public forum and I don't want anyone to just update for the sake of it. It's not worth it unless you know what you're doing.

A few of us are running this with no problems. When Windows boots, you may find your GPU drivers re-install and/or your sound drivers, but after that all is fine - as far as I can see so far!


----------



## ComansoRowlett

crakej said:


> Instructions are there - I have to warn as it's a public forum and I don't want anyone to just update for the sake of it. It's not worth it unless you know what you're doing.
> 
> A few of us are running this with no problems. When Windows boots, you may find your GPU drivers re-install and/or your sound drivers, but after that all is fine - as far as I can see so far!


Luckily I do know what I'm doing for the most part, thank you for the heads up. I'll update you when I get round to it and if it installs correctly  I appreciate the help. Hopefully no one attempts this with no knowledge as I see you're trying to prevent, so probably a good thing you added that notice up top.


----------



## gupsterg

majestynl said:


> Well after you recommendation and reading reviews about magicool last year i bought one too. So Cheap and working more than good  I have many rads and these are doing there job at least same or better
> I can also recommend Artic Cooling F12, very cheap and top performance! The only issue is the color scheme  Never fitted well in my Theme


Yeah white blades are not ideal. Sound profile is nice on them even at max speed, not irritating.



crakej said:


> Could something in Windows be doing this? :tiredsmil


I wouldn't say that. If in doubt I always then replace it with fresh image.



nick name said:


> The fastest I can get 14-14-14-14 stable is at 3500MHz with my kit. Sometimes a little faster speed, but not as a lasting result. Basically the same gremlins creep in and I have to go back to 3500MHz.


~3466MHz seems max for my kits. I think perhaps the 2x 2700X I've had, have had weaker IMCs. Both seem to top out at ~3500MHz C15 1T, closest I get to 3533MHz is ~3520MHz  .

Yesterday I started profiling SOC needed for xyz MHz, again 2nd CPU seems same as first. I snagged several reruns RAM Test, upto 5000%, using 3200MHz The Stilt Safe preset, 1T GDMD, SOC 0.9V, VDIMM: 1.345V, VTTDDR: 0.675V. Currently running P95, then gonna see it it does 3333MHz at similar SOC as 1st CPU.



ComansoRowlett said:


> I've tried GDM on, it doesn't aid stability sadly and neither does 2t. Just gives me less performance.


Is the case for me also.


----------



## nick name

ComansoRowlett said:


> Any news on the new AGESA for this board? I'm currently stuck at 3466MHz CL14 on my set of G.skill 4600MHz CL19 sticks (b-die single rank of course). Obviously I don't expect any miracles with a new AGESA, my IMC seems to be more of my limitation here, but these sticks should be able to do 3700MHz CL14 pretty easily at 1.5v (XMP is rated for 1.5v 19-23-23-43-66 2304/4608). I see a bios called 1002 but as far as I'm aware it isn't the latest AGESA and is the same as 0804. I'd even take a beta bios at this point just to have a crack at some better settings. Last I heard there was a beta bios called 1101 with the new AGESA? Anyway my current settings are pretty tight, and I've tried changing almost every single setting relating to RAM stability to help stabilize thing. Closest I ever got to 3533 was 300% cleared on memtest, sadly if I change any of my voltages up or down I lose stability including DRAM which tells me my IMC is very much my limitation because B-die should pretty much scale upto 1.8v with voltage (FYI I didn't actually attempt to run this, but making a point).
> 
> Detailed settings are: 1.45v 14-14-14-24-38-1t TrrdS(and L): 4, Tfaw: 18, TwtrS: 4 twtrL (and TWR): 10, TrdrdScl (and Trdwrscl): 2, Trfc: 260, Trfc 2: 190, Trfc 4: 120, Tcwl: 14, Trtp: 8, Trdwr: 6, Twrrd: 3, TwrwrSc: 1, TwrwrSd (and Dd): 6, TrdrdSc: 1 TrdrdSd (and Dd): 4, Tcke: 1, ProcODT: 53.3, GDM: Disabled, Power Down Enable: Disabled (lol), Rttnom: RZQ/7, RttWr: Off, Rttpark: RZQ/4, Memcadclkdrv, etc: 24 Ohm, CLDO_VDDP: 866, VDDP: 0.855v, SOC: 1.1v. Literally changing anything gives me worse settings OR less stability, I've found my absolute limit.


The latest BIOS does seem more stable, memory wise, but I'm not sure if that's a placebo or not. Honestly, I'd say give it a try.


----------



## mtrai

ComansoRowlett said:


> I'm aware of the risk, and thank you! As long as this bios is completely compatible via this method you're about to show then I have no problem trying it out


Yeah it totally safe ...remember though, you will need to use this method to flash the bios to the non wifi bios when it ever drops. I Have been using this bios since day 1 when elmor posted it without any issues. I do have the C7H Wifi. I also have the C6H Wifi that I have running on the non wifi bios...cause I am lazy and do not feel like modding the WiFi bios.

Yes you will get a screen on the first boot after flashing 1101 wifi bios stating the bios is updating and do not power off or something like that. Also several devices will have to be redetected once you boot into windows due to changes in the bios. NOthing to worry about as this is noremal.

I suggest once you boot into windows..is let it run for few minutes...( I go with 10 mins) to let it settle down and get everything properly installed...and then do a shut down and restart. ( Recommend a total power down vs just a simple restart.)


----------



## ComansoRowlett

mtrai said:


> Yeah it totally safe ...remember though, you will need to use this method to flash the bios to the non wifi bios when it ever drops. I Have been using this bios since day 1 when elmor posted it without any issues. I do have the C7H Wifi. I also have the C6H Wifi that I have running on the non wifi bios...cause I am lazy and do not feel like modding the WiFi bios.
> 
> Yes you will get a screen on the first boot after flashing 1101 wifi bios stating the bios is updating and do not power off or something like that. Also several devices will have to be redetected once you boot into windows due to changes in the bios. NOthing to worry about as this is noremal.
> 
> I suggest once you boot into windows..is let it run for few minutes...( I go with 10 mins) to let it settle down and get everything properly installed...and then do a shut down and restart. ( Recommend a total power down vs just a simple restart.)


Thanks for the suggestion, however I successfully loaded this bios onto my system 4 hours ago or so and thankfully I did exactly what you suggested hehe, everything sorted it's self out eventually but I did a quick DDU of my GPU drivers just to make sure my 2080ti doesn't freak out on me. Now I do see some "improvent" straight away, I can't get 3533 stable just yet however going above 1.45v vDimm NOW gives me some noticeable differences. With 0804 I had issues using "odd" timings also even with GDM disabled, the post codes would just cycle so I'd have to hit the safe boot button to stop it derping out on me. Anyway, due to my "stability" window now changing, hopefully this means I can now tweak things to get this frequency stable


----------



## nick name

ComansoRowlett said:


> Thanks for the suggestion, however I successfully loaded this bios onto my system 4 hours ago or so and thankfully I did exactly what you suggested hehe, everything sorted it's self out eventually but I did a quick DDU of my GPU drivers just to make sure my 2080ti doesn't freak out on me. Now I do see some "improvent" straight away, I can't get 3533 stable just yet however going above 1.45v vDimm NOW gives me some noticeable differences. With 0804 I had issues using "odd" timings also even with GDM disabled, the post codes would just cycle so I'd have to hit the safe boot button to stop it derping out on me. Anyway, due to my "stability" window now changing, hopefully this means I can now tweak things to get this frequency stable


I've also see the post code cycling when using odd timings. I still saw the behavior with 1101 when testing fast speeds (3733+), but it did improve the behavior overall.


----------



## mtrai

ComansoRowlett said:


> Thanks for the suggestion, however I successfully loaded this bios onto my system 4 hours ago or so and thankfully I did exactly what you suggested hehe, everything sorted it's self out eventually but I did a quick DDU of my GPU drivers just to make sure my 2080ti doesn't freak out on me. Now I do see some "improvent" straight away, I can't get 3533 stable just yet however going above 1.45v vDimm NOW gives me some noticeable differences. With 0804 I had issues using "odd" timings also even with GDM disabled, the post codes would just cycle so I'd have to hit the safe boot button to stop it derping out on me. Anyway, due to my "stability" window now changing, hopefully this means I can now tweak things to get this frequency stable


This 1101 Wifi beta bios with the AGESA 1.0.0.6 has been the most stable bios I have had with Ryzen. It also allows me to push the ram clocks higher to 3800 and being able to at least boot into windows... I am not stable at 3800 so most days I am running it at 3600 14 14 14 14 260 and other tight timings. Yes Ryzen seems to me to require high ram voltage even at lesser speeds. The high voltage is fine as long as your ram does not hit 50+ degrees Celsius. Keep in mind...your Soc voltage need to be adjusted and really higher is not better on SoC voltage...I have found that somewhere between 1.05 and 1.1 is the best. At least for my CPU and Ram Kit.

I will not go back to any earlier bios this one has been the best. One other thing...it also seems with this one...that the way it calculates the CPU voltage is a bit different. You will have to find your new offset with this bios. **What I would previously use as my offset was putting my core at 1.6+ volts.** This is the first bios that really changes that.

PSA once again with at least for me...check your CPU voltage in windows...as it seems the offset changed in this one.


----------



## ComansoRowlett

mtrai said:


> This 1101 Wifi beta bios with the AGESA 1.0.0.6 has been the most stable bios I have had with Ryzen. It also allows me to push the ram clocks higher to 3800 and being able to at least boot into windows... I am not stable at 3800 so most days I am running it at 3600 14 14 14 14 260 and other tight timings. Yes Ryzen seems to me to require high ram voltage even at lesser speeds. The high voltage is fine as long as your ram does not hit 50+ degrees Celsius. Keep in mind...your Soc voltage need to be adjusted and really higher is not better on SoC voltage...I have found that somewhere between 1.05 and 1.1 is the best. At least for my CPU and Ram Kit.
> 
> I will not go back to any earlier bios this one has been the best. One other thing...it also seems with this one...that the way it calculates the CPU voltage is a bit different. You will have to find your new offset with this bios. **What I would previously use as my offset was putting my core at 1.6+ volts.** This is the first bios that really changes that.
> 
> PSA once again with at least for me...check your CPU voltage in windows...as it seems the offset changed in this one.


Thanks for the tips but don't worry I'm well advanced in what my IMC can handle, it has a very VERY tight window if I want to do 3533 (as it did previously for 3466). Like before I couldn't go 0.01mv over or under 1.45v vdimm without it becoming stupidly unstable. Aswell as all my other settings, moving them up or down. Like honestly I'm more than happy throwing 1.6v into these sticks even though there is no data on what happens to b-die/IMC at this voltage. My sticks even at 1.5v don't exceed 30C so I'm more than happy, wish I could keep them at 20C since B-die is most stable at 20C but it's almost impossible. My SOC sweet spot is also 1.1v. FYI my XMP for this kit is 1.5v 4600 CL19. Also thanks for new "offset" info, not sure how this will affect me since I always run LLC 5 since it literally gives straight what you ask for usually e.g. if you want 1.4v it will give you 1.4v with no drop under load, maybe like 3mv at most but very tiny drops.


----------



## crakej

My offset seems ok, though SoC is lower with this bios. 0.996v @ 3533MTs - used to be 1.00605. Not a huge difference, but it makes a difference. I've always found SoC to be very sensitive - one setting higher or lower could be the difference between the memory OC failing or being reliable. With my kit anyway.

I'm thinking this AGESA is different enough to warrant the time spent on tuning in my OC from (almost) scratch but not going to have time to do that until I get back from Iceland - hoping to see Northern Lights 

I thought I'd try turning off geardown last night @ 3533 - it booted until it started loading Windows with a few tiny lines of corruption on the screen too. Crashed. Didn't really expect it to work, but you never know with this platform! Didn't try giving it any extra ( or less!) voltage or anything, don't figure it's worth the time...

Good to hear others' experience of using this bios


----------



## ComansoRowlett

So I don't exactly know how this happened, but not only has my RAM OC capabilities increased slightly but so has my core OC (which usually you get less core OC with mem going higher since the core works harder now you've got more data passing through). I'm now doing 4.5GHz boost and 4.27GHz all core 1.425v where as before I was doing slightly below this. Single core in cinebench in R15 is now 190 while my all core is now 1970. All voltages read the same as in 0804 from SVI2 TFN so this is quite bizarre.


----------



## ComansoRowlett

I asked this before cross flashing 1101, this could be promising if we get a better bios provided. Don't hold your breathe though guys, but figured this was worth sharing


----------



## crakej

Nice one!

We never hold our breath where ASUS software/firmware release are concerned! :thumb:


----------



## majestynl

nick name said:


> I've also see the post code cycling when using odd timings. I still saw the behavior with 1101 when testing fast speeds (3733+), but it did improve the behavior overall.


Try playing with ProcODT. Helped me getting rid of that in the past!




mtrai said:


> This 1101 Wifi beta bios with the AGESA 1.0.0.6 has been the most stable bios I have had with Ryzen. It also allows me to push the ram clocks higher to 3800 and being able to at least boot into windows... I am not stable at 3800 so most days I am running it at 3600 14 14 14 14 260 and other tight timings. Yes Ryzen seems to me to require high ram voltage even at lesser speeds. The high voltage is fine as long as your ram does not hit 50+ degrees Celsius. Keep in mind...your Soc voltage need to be adjusted and really higher is not better on SoC voltage...I have found that somewhere between 1.05 and 1.1 is the best. At least for my CPU and Ram Kit.
> 
> I will not go back to any earlier bios this one has been the best. One other thing...it also seems with this one...that the way it calculates the CPU voltage is a bit different. You will have to find your new offset with this bios. **What I would previously use as my offset was putting my core at 1.6+ volts.** This is the first bios that really changes that.
> 
> PSA once again with at least for me...check your CPU voltage in windows...as it seems the offset changed in this one.


Spent few time on 1101! I can agree it feels like a upgrade from earlier bios version. I passed ~4000% Ram few times with 3600CL14+ Very tight timings. But like said before, suddenly it didnt work anymore. So need to start from scratch!  

Yesterday i loaded 1002 but its acting the same. So will go back to 1101 and try to manage 3600CL14 again! Cant confirm about Offset cause im using fixed voltages! Will have a look next time with PE modes + Offset!

Dont get me wrong but can you provide some more info about your Stable 3600Cl14+TT. Maybe some screenshots with Timings and archieved Memtest etc? Need it for comparison and testing!
Booting and benching with 3800 is also no issue here on the 1101!


----------



## mtrai

majestynl said:


> Try playing with ProcODT. Helped me getting rid of that in the past!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spent few time on 1101! I can agree it feels like a upgrade from earlier bios version. I passed ~4000% Ram few times with 3600CL14+ Very tight timings. But like said before, suddenly it didnt work anymore. So need to start from scratch!
> 
> Yesterday i loaded 1002 but its acting the same. So will go back to 1101 and try to manage 3600CL14 again! Cant confirm about Offset cause im using fixed voltages! Will have a look next time with PE modes + Offset!
> 
> Dont get me wrong but can you provide some more info about your Stable 3600Cl14+TT. Maybe some screenshots with Timings and archieved Memtest etc? Need it for comparison and testing!
> Booting and benching with 3800 is also no issue here on the 1101!


I will do a full text profile print out for you after I get my day going and post it here. Yeah I was only having issues with 3800 but I was using my tight timings that I have been using for 3200 and 3600 stable. It has been a while since I felt the need to test my memory at 3600 but it was for about 5000% That was several months or more ago.


----------



## By-Tor

Will populating both M.2 slots (top with NVMe and bottom with Sata III M.2) cause any performance problems for my single video card in the top PCI-e slot?

Thanks


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Nice one!
> 
> We never hold our breath where ASUS software/firmware release are concerned! :thumb:


You remember we supposed to get new bios this month well tahts 3 days left


----------



## Johan45

By-Tor said:


> Will populating both M.2 slots (top with NVMe and bottom with Sata III M.2) cause any performance problems for my single video card in the top PCI-e slot?
> 
> Thanks


Top GFX slot will drop to PCIe X8 but shouldn't be too noticeable performance wise


----------



## By-Tor

Johan45 said:


> Top GFX slot will drop to PCIe X8 but shouldn't be too noticeable performance wise


It will drop if both M.2 are used or just the top?


----------



## Johan45

By-Tor said:


> It will drop if both are used or just the top?


Top M.2 only supports PCIe based connection and will drop the first slot to X8
lower M.2 supports PCIe and SATA but doesn't interfere with the top slot bandwidth. Problem is you have nowhere for the SATA based drive if you put the NVMe in the bottom slot. as the top doesn't support SATA


----------



## By-Tor

Johan45 said:


> Top M.2 only supports PCIe based connection and will drop the first slot to X8
> lower M.2 supports PCIe and SATA but doesn't interfere with the top slot bandwidth. Problem is you have nowhere for the SATA based drive if you put the NVMe in the bottom slot. as the top doesn't support SATA


So if I used the NVMe drive in the bottom slot and not use the top M.2 slot it would not effect the performance of the video card. Would the NVMe drive run at advertised speeds in the bottom M.2 slot through the chipset?

Sorry for all the questions, would like to know these things before ordering parts....


----------



## Johan45

By-Tor said:


> So if I used the NVMe drive in the bottom slot and not use the top M.2 slot it would not effect the performance of the video card. Would the NVMe drive run at advertised speeds in the bottom M.2 slot through the chipset?
> 
> Sorry for all the questions, would like to know these things before ordering parts....


Yes it'll work fine in the bottom slot, back to my first statement though. The drop from X16 to X8 is not significant a couple percent at best


----------



## By-Tor

I can try it in the top slot and see how things run in games and if I don't like it I can move it to the bottom M.2 slot.

Johan45, Thank you so much for you time with this... It's appreciated!!!


----------



## zJordan

Yeah, where the hell is AGESA 1006 non-beta BIOS that elmor released? I thought elmor said in his parting statement that it was coming around mid November. Other ASUS boards have already received 1006.


----------



## Johan45

By-Tor said:


> I can try it in the top slot and see how things run in games and if I don't like it I can move it to the bottom M.2 slot.
> 
> Johan45, Thank you so much for you time with this... It's appreciated!!!


If you only plan on getting the one NVMe drive I would suggest using the bottom slot. The controllers on those drives tend to run hot so stuffing it under a GFX card won't do it any favours. You can also use the included heatsink from the top slot on the bottom if you like, I do.


----------



## By-Tor

Sounds good...


----------



## starrbuck

Johan45 said:


> If you only plan on getting the one NVMe drive I would suggest using the bottom slot. The controllers on those drives tend to run hot so stuffing it under a GFX card won't do it any favours. You can also use the included heatsink from the top slot on the bottom if you like, I do.


EK also makes an aftermarket heatsink I can personally recommend.


----------



## elbubi

New 1103 Beta BIOS => https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...-UEFI-Build-Update-Thread&p=747189#post747180


----------



## Syldon

elbubi said:


> New 1103 Beta BIOS => https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...-UEFI-Build-Update-Thread&p=747189#post747180



Thanks downloading it now.


----------



## ComansoRowlett

elbubi said:


> New 1103 Beta BIOS => https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...-UEFI-Build-Update-Thread&p=747189#post747180


I assume this is also AGESA 1.0.0.6? Although Asus have been known to test further AGESA by AMD when it hasn't officially been "handed" out yet previously so this could be interesting.

EDIT: It is AGESA 1.0.0.6, doesn't seem to be any difference compared to 1101 other than the graphics drivers, etc being sorted out when you first boot into windows upon bios install.


----------



## goncalossilva

AGESA 1.0.0.6 might actually be worse for dual-rank. Over on Asus' forum:



> Fwiw, I had memtest stable settings for my ram F4-3200C14D-32GTZR @ 3333;14-14-14-14-28 fail test 6 on pass 4.
> 
> My testing procedure is 5 pass on first boot. cold reboot 5x more passes, and then a warm reboot of at least 5 more passes. My hardware combo was stable with these timings ( Ryzen Dram calc 1.3.1 fast dual rank, 2 sticks) for BIOS revs 1002, 1001, and 0804. Tested each flash in the same way. So I am off to retest after loading 1002 back onto my board.


I have the same kit, but will be trying it anyway.


----------



## seth156

gupsterg said:


> Sorry missed your reply yesterday. Look forward to update on issue.


Okay, just to update on this.
Recieved the F4-4000C19D-16GTZKW on monday, plugged the sticks in, boot no problem.
Running memtest and prime blend stabe for 10-11hours now at 3466mhz - 1,39v, Ryzen calculator fast timings.
The CPU is at PBO 3, -0.0625VCore for these tests, boosting all cores ~4000-4050Mhz.

I experimented with PBO 4, it boosts on all cores to 4250Mhz, but the temperatures are not ok, gets to 85-86C in about 10-15 minutes and it needs +0.0500Vcore to get stable.

Gskill gave me a RMA number for the other kit, very helpfull and responsive.:thumb:


----------



## Silent Scone

ComansoRowlett said:


> I assume this is also AGESA 1.0.0.6? Although Asus have been known to test further AGESA by AMD when it hasn't officially been "handed" out yet previously so this could be interesting.
> 
> EDIT: It is AGESA 1.0.0.6, doesn't seem to be any difference compared to 1101 other than the graphics drivers, etc being sorted out when you first boot into windows upon bios install.


Yes, the only change is AGESA 1006.


----------



## nick name

The good thing is that my latency in Aida is back down to 57 from the 59 it was with 1002. Unless I changed something in BIOS that I forgot to set when I was on 1002. So maybe I'm wrong.

Edit:
The new AGESA does help with 14-14-14-14 at 3600MHz. It isn't stable, but it will actually make it through 1 cycle of TM5 whereas before it would throw errors right from the start.


----------



## gupsterg

I've done a lotta testing of the past few days. This was just to profile 2700X 1825 SUS for 2 dimms, same as 1805 SUS.

3200MHz set to 0.900V (Same as 1805 SUS)
3333MHz set to 0.912V (Same as 1805 SUS)
3400MHz set to 0.931V (1805 SUS was 0.925V, I had mistakenly tested 1825 at 0.931  may redo testing again)
3466MHz set to 0.943V whilst using PE: default PBO: Enabled (Better than 1805 SUS, it needed 0.956V (stock/no PBO)/0.968V (PState 0 OC 4.1GHz))

The 3466MHz was shocking IMO. All of above was VDIMM 1.345V in UEFI, on DMM bang on 1.35V. Originally SOC of 0.931 was used, it passed 1250% RT, then a warm post was done, 5000% passed. P95 v28.10b1 8K 4096K 13.5GB I had all threads collapse between 0 to 19mins. All profiles tested below 3466MHz whatever passed RT didn't need a SOC bump for P95 v28.10b1/v29.4b8/Y-Cruncher/RealBench.



Spoiler






























Any how here is ~27500% of RT at 3466MHz :clock: The Stilt :clock: 1T GDMD 1.345V 0.943V  .



Spoiler














Last night's testing of P95 prior to above RT run.



Spoiler






















As I've had another 2hr PASS in P95 I think it's time to try UEFI 1103 (Cheers Silent Scone :thumb: )  , hoping 4 dimms I nail something decent...



seth156 said:


> Okay, just to update on this.
> Recieved the F4-4000C19D-16GTZKW on monday, plugged the sticks in, boot no problem.
> Running memtest and prime blend stabe for 10-11hours now at 3466mhz - 1,39v, Ryzen calculator fast timings.
> The CPU is at PBO 3, -0.0625VCore for these tests, boosting all cores ~4000-4050Mhz.
> 
> I experimented with PBO 4, it boosts on all cores to 4250Mhz, but the temperatures are not ok, gets to 85-86C in about 10-15 minutes and it needs +0.0500Vcore to get stable.
> 
> Gskill gave me a RMA number for the other kit, very helpfull and responsive.:thumb:


Nice  .


----------



## majestynl

Wow Great  Loaded yesterday 1101 and started MemOC again and now i see the new beta bios.

Quickly compared both version, for now i only see below change


----------



## mtrai

@everyone... I hope everyone is realizing that with a new AGESA you will have to manually tune every setting again for any overclocking. I have found that a number of other settins voltage, proc odt and many other others needed slight tweaking from the previous AGESA before the C7H Wifi beta bios 1101 in order to be stable. I am not gonna bother reposting the screenshots of my memory timings on AGESA 1.0.0.6 right now. 

I am gonna flash the new beta bios later this morning once I wake up. I will also post my full bios settings as I promised yesterday.

Also please note the new bioss from ASUS cannot be easily modified due to ASUS now using a newer version of AMIBCP then what we have in the wild. All AMIBCP we have access to have been leaks.

@gupstergp thanks for that testing as always.


----------



## Syldon

mtrai said:


> @everyone... I hope everyone is realizing that with a new AGESA you will have to manually tune every setting again for any overclocking. I have found that a number of other settins voltage, proc odt and many other others needed slight tweaking from the previous AGESA before the C7H Wifi beta bios 1102 in order to be stable. I am not gonna bother reposting the screenshots of my memory timings on AGESA 1.0.0.6 right now.
> 
> I am gonna flash the new beta bios later this morning once I wake up. I will also post my full bios settings as I promised yesterday.
> 
> Also please note the new bioss from ASUS cannot be easily modified due to ASUS now using a newer version of AMIBCP then what we have in the wild. All AMIBCP we have access to have been leaks.
> 
> @gupstergp thanks for that testing as always.


I loaded the same settings as last revision (1002). The only difference I am seeing is in the dram voltage. To run at 1.35v I had to set at 1.37v on ver 1002. A DMM reading verified this, and the system would fail to boot if left below the 1.35v actual. On this version the bios and a DMM is showing 1.35v. HWinfo and SIV are showing 1.33v.


I will try some higher memory speeds later this weekend.


----------



## gupsterg

@mtrai

NP  , likewise always fascinating to see your escapades  .

@Syldon

1103 working with 1101 settings.



Spoiler






















View attachment 1103_Base_Profile_16_setting.txt


For the shown 3466MHz setup I only change in my Base Profile for 16GB (2x8GB):-

i) Memory Frequency 3466MHz
ii) Load The Stilt 3466MHz timings
iii) Set VBOOT/VDIMM 1.345V, manual SOC 0.943V

Doubt will have issues in P95, but going ahead with testing  .

@Silent Scone

Pre AEGSA 1.0.0.6 UEFIs we had more settings to tinker in UEFI for PBO:-



Spoiler














UEFI 1101/1103 is now like this:-



Spoiler














Any chance of finding out if this AMD AGESA taking away features or ASUS yet to expand on it, cheers  .


----------



## bvbdragon

does anyone know which 4x usb 3.1 row at the backpanel belongs to the chipset and cpu?


----------



## zJordan

bvbdragon said:


> does anyone know which 4x usb 3.1 row at the backpanel belongs to the chipset and cpu?


 Top 4 USB ports are CPU, bottom 4 USB ports are chipset.


USB 3.1 (Type-A & Type-C) is ASMedia USB 3.1 controller - I disable this as my PC won't boot with it enabled (yes, I need to RMA).


----------



## ComansoRowlett

After a lot of testing and fiddling, I'm still stuck a 3466, I thought I had 3533MHz stable at one point but I still get an error spat out eventually. So unfortunately it looks like I'm at my IMC's hard limit.


----------



## lightsout

Grain of salt and all that, but the newegg reviews on this board are horrendous, have you guys noticed a high amount of RMA's?


----------



## ComansoRowlett

lightsout said:


> Grain of salt and all that, but the newegg reviews on this board are horrendous, have you guys noticed a high amount of RMA's?


I haven't been "active" here long but I have had long looks through the past few months or so and seen nothing too worrying about this board and RMA rates. Apparently the Crosshair VI (X370) had high RMA rates at the start due to bios bugs, but that was way early 2017. Bugs of that nature seem to have been quashed. This board (Crosshair X470 VII so you may of been confused with VI, so just ensuring you're looking at the right board) is one of the best boards I've owned quite frankly, and wouldn't want to change anything other than removing 2 DIMM slots to aid RAM overclocking hehe, but thats nit picking.


----------



## minal

lightsout said:


> Grain of salt and all that, but the newegg reviews on this board are horrendous, have you guys noticed a high amount of RMA's?


Yup, I think that's earned. I had to RMA due to flaky BIOS freezing up, possibly also causing memory issues. My replacement has had no problems. Seems that for some, this board is perfect, while for others it's a total nightmare. That's especially frustrating given the premium positioning and pricing of this line/model. My suggestion is if you have any issues, RMA without hesitation asap.


----------



## lightsout

ComansoRowlett said:


> I haven't been "active" here long but I have had long looks through the past few months or so and seen nothing too worrying about this board and RMA rates. Apparently the Crosshair VI (X370) had high RMA rates at the start due to bios bugs, but that was way early 2017. Bugs of that nature seem to have been quashed. This board (Crosshair X470 VII so you may of been confused with VI, so just ensuring you're looking at the right board) is one of the best boards I've owned quite frankly, and wouldn't want to change anything other than removing 2 DIMM slots to aid RAM overclocking hehe, but thats nit picking.


It was this board, but looking at the reviews again its the first page that has a lot of bad ones, there is actually only 5, 1 egg reviews so maybe its not as bad as it seems.


----------



## nick name

lightsout said:


> Grain of salt and all that, but the newegg reviews on this board are horrendous, have you guys noticed a high amount of RMA's?


I think I've read about two instances, but I'm not inclined to believe there is a trend.


----------



## lordzed83

Flashed 1103 works ok with 1809 windows even to i noticed this build is slower than previous.... 
Looks like less volts needed for same oc and everythibg seems to be working in general.


----------



## akoikaw

what does b7 code mean? I can't get in the bios(version1002). Tried resetting cpu, checking ram each slot. no bueno 
edit: usb bios flashback doesn't seem to work either


----------



## ComansoRowlett

akoikaw said:


> what does b7 code mean? I can't get in the bios(version1002). Tried resetting cpu, checking ram each slot. no bueno
> edit: usb bios flashback doesn't seem to work either


Does the "safe boot" button work at all? You may want to attempt the new AGESA bios, as far as I know B7 is related to memory. You could perhaps try just one stick in A2 rather than A2/B2 and see if that boots also. You could also try resetting the CMOS either by removing the battery or pressing the button on the back of the motherboard next to bios flashback.


----------



## akoikaw

ComansoRowlett said:


> Does the "safe boot" button work at all? You may want to attempt the new AGESA bios, as far as I know B7 is related to memory. You could perhaps try just one stick in A2 rather than A2/B2 and see if that boots also. You could also try resetting the CMOS either by removing the battery or pressing the button on the back of the motherboard next to bios flashback.


Thanks for the help.
I did try safeboot button, same thing. I also tried all the dimm slot it doesn't work either.
I'll just return this and my ram and get a replacement. I don't have enough knowledge to fix this


----------



## gupsterg

lightsout said:


> Grain of salt and all that, but the newegg reviews on this board are horrendous, have you guys noticed a high amount of RMA's?


Not IMO.

Had launch boards of C6H/C7H/ZE and not RMA'd a single one. I clock up plenty of hours of usage on them, tinker a lot.


----------



## Syldon

Has anyone noticed the VDDP sensor output that is now showing in HWinfo @0.4v. I checked my previous screenies. I cannot see it anywhere. 
On the CH6 VDDP was recommended at 0.9v. I have tried to change the values of the VDDP and the CLDO_VDDP. There was no change to the HWinfo output value.
Is this a misnamed sensor and does anyone know why Asus have enabled it?





gupsterg said:


> For the shown 3466MHz setup I only change in my Base Profile for 16GB (2x8GB):-
> 
> i) Memory Frequency 3466MHz
> ii) Load The Stilt 3466MHz timings
> iii) Set VBOOT/VDIMM 1.345V, manual SOC 0.943V


I dropped my SOC from .98v to .943v Working fine with a hcimemtest for 1 hour. I tried to drop this previously on earlier revisions, and it just caused errors. Thanks for this one. Everyone likes to lower their power usage.




lightsout said:


> Grain of salt and all that, but the newegg reviews on this board are horrendous, have you guys noticed a high amount of RMA's?


Is it a high amount of RMAs or just people being vocal. 

Amazon.uk has 8 reviews with 2 bad. From the 2 bad reviews one bought the wrong product and the other may have a router issue.
Scan just states 5 stars.
OC.uk has no reviews.
Kustom doesn't sell it
Ebuyer has one bad review
"+ Probably the best AM4 motherboard you can get.
Bad Points − Compatibility issues with an Asus 1080ti turbo graphics card"

I know there was some issues with the early bios revision release. I havent noticed anything major about the CH7 on any other forums.


----------



## gupsterg

@Syldon

Nice to read you've seen an improvement with later UEFI/AGESA  .

VDDP as shown in HWINFO is mislabelled on C7H, it is not exposed for monitoring from when I asked early on this thread, IIRC there is a post by Mumak within this thread. Gen 2 CPU still has as defaults VDDP: ~900mV, CLDO_VDDP: 950mV.

Some more testing  .

So I had seen decent passes on 3466MHz The Stilt using PE: Default, PBO: Enabled, Determinism Slider: Performance. So I dropped RAM divider to 3400MHz, increased BCLK to 101MHz. Below is setup POST, warm POST and then another warm POST.



Spoiler






























Gaining the RAM Test ~24000% pass was nice, not only is RAM setup OK but CPU is not having issues with increased BCLK/core MHz, etc.

Now I stated before that CPU 1805 SUS for 3466MHz used differing SOC for differing CPU setup, 0.956V (stock/no PBO)/0.968V (PState 0 OC 4.1GHz). 1825 SUS required a bump from 0.943V to 0.950V to make P95 v28.10b1 stabilise. 



Spoiler






















In nutshell somewhat similar as previous CPU, increased CPU MHz coupled with high loading on CPU/RAM may need SOC voltage bump. P95 v29.4b8 uses differing instruction set, tends to be slightly low loading than v28.10b1, hence slightly higher clocks will be seen. Below is not apples to apples, as run is not same length (yet), only shown to show that on another POST and differing load the bump of SOC is holding profile stable.



Spoiler














Unless I run into an issue won't be sharing more data on this profile. Once testing complete moving to BCLK 102MHz testing, so will further enhance single/multicore and hopefully be closer to 3466MHz.


----------



## Silent Scone

gupsterg said:


> @mtrai
> 
> NP  , likewise always fascinating to see your escapades  .
> 
> @Syldon
> 
> 1103 working with 1101 settings.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 234856
> 
> 
> View attachment 234858
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 234860
> 
> 
> For the shown 3466MHz setup I only change in my Base Profile for 16GB (2x8GB):-
> 
> i) Memory Frequency 3466MHz
> ii) Load The Stilt 3466MHz timings
> iii) Set VBOOT/VDIMM 1.345V, manual SOC 0.943V
> 
> Doubt will have issues in P95, but going ahead with testing  .
> 
> @Silent Scone
> 
> Pre AEGSA 1.0.0.6 UEFIs we had more settings to tinker in UEFI for PBO:-
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 234862
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UEFI 1101/1103 is now like this:-
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 234864
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any chance of finding out if this AMD AGESA taking away features or ASUS yet to expand on it, cheers  .


Possibly a mixture of the two in order to condense the Precision stuff. I'll see if I can find out.


----------



## nick name

My VDDP voltage is showing .632V in HWiNFO.

When you're looking at the PBO options in 1103 have you previously selected a Performance Enhancer level?

And for some reason my Aida memory latency is now back up into the 59's as opposed the 57's it was reaching after I flashed the BIOS. I can't figure that one out.


----------



## ComansoRowlett

Has anyone noticed with bios 1103 that PBO varies per boot, and sometimes takes longer to post with it enabled? Sometimes my low end voltage will be 1.425v, sometimes it will be 1.419v or 1.438v and it will change each boot. My all core clock speed for some reason during this boot is 4.28GHz when usually it's 4.265Ghz which I know isn't stable on my system, so it's concerning with it fluctuating so much. Anyway, if anyone else can confirm having this issue also it'd be appreciated, thanks! 

FYI my settings are: 0.075v offset, BCLK 103.4 with level 3 (OC)


----------



## goncalossilva

ComansoRowlett said:


> Has anyone noticed with bios 1103 that PBO varies per boot, and sometimes takes longer to post with it enabled? Sometimes my low end voltage will be 1.425v, sometimes it will be 1.419v or 1.438v and it will change each boot. My all core clock speed for some reason during this boot is 4.28GHz when usually it's 4.265Ghz which I know isn't stable on my system, so it's concerning with it fluctuating so much. Anyway, if anyone else can confirm having this issue also it'd be appreciated, thanks!
> 
> FYI my settings are: 0.075v offset, BCLK 103.4 with level 3 (OC)


I've noticed this on every BIOS I've used with my 2700X  Bumping vcore/soc a tick or two helps stabilizing it in my case, but it can still oscillate.


----------



## nick name

ComansoRowlett said:


> Has anyone noticed with bios 1103 that PBO varies per boot, and sometimes takes longer to post with it enabled? Sometimes my low end voltage will be 1.425v, sometimes it will be 1.419v or 1.438v and it will change each boot. My all core clock speed for some reason during this boot is 4.28GHz when usually it's 4.265Ghz which I know isn't stable on my system, so it's concerning with it fluctuating so much. Anyway, if anyone else can confirm having this issue also it'd be appreciated, thanks!
> 
> FYI my settings are: 0.075v offset, BCLK 103.4 with level 3 (OC)


It depends on the temp of your CPU during POST/boot. If it's cooler it will boot with a higher multiplier. It's why I don't use Lvl 4. That boots at some crazy multipliers sometimes. If you get booted with a multiplier you can't use then you can change the multiplier with Ryzen Master. I use a 102 BCLK most of the time so after boot I use Ryzen Master to increase my multiplier. And if I'm benchmarking I will use it to increase it even higher. 

This post will give you some details.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...tiplier-adjustments-through-ryzen-master.html


----------



## ComansoRowlett

goncalossilva said:


> I've noticed this on every BIOS I've used with my 2700X  Bumping vcore/soc a tick or two helps stabilizing it in my case, but it can still oscillate.





nick name said:


> It depends on the temp of your CPU during POST/boot. If it's cooler it will boot with a higher multiplier. It's why I don't use Lvl 4. That boots at some crazy multipliers sometimes. If you get booted with a multiplier you can't use then you can change the multiplier with Ryzen Master. I use a 102 BCLK most of the time so after boot I use Ryzen Master to increase my multiplier. And if I'm benchmarking I will use it to increase it even higher.
> 
> This post will give you some details.
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...tiplier-adjustments-through-ryzen-master.html


Huh, I've never had it with any other bios weirdly. Anyway, thanks for the input  I'll definitely have a fiddle around, I think the reason I may not of noticed before is because it's suddenly got to winter and is much colder, since I have my window open my PC is gonna be loving it.


----------



## nick name

ComansoRowlett said:


> Huh, I've never had it with any other bios weirdly. Anyway, thanks for the input  I'll definitely have a fiddle around, I think the reason I may not of noticed before is because it's suddenly got to winter and is much colder, since I have my window open my PC is gonna be loving it.


I have been using the colder weather to beat all my benchmark scores from the summer. And using Ryzen Master to set my multiplier is actually more stable than trying to set the multiplier in BIOS. I got up to 2059 in Cinebench at 4.4Ghz by combining BCLK with PE3 and raising the multiplier with Ryzen Master.


----------



## ComansoRowlett

nick name said:


> I have been using the colder weather to beat all my benchmark scores from the summer. And using Ryzen Master to set my multiplier is actually more stable than trying to set the multiplier in BIOS. I got up to 2059 in Cinebench at 4.4Ghz by combining BCLK with PE3 and raising the multiplier with Ryzen Master.


Haha same here!  Helps my gpu boost stay higher much longer (around the 2.1GHz range), but nice CB score/clockspeed :O I understand it was probably a "bench run", but how much voltage did 4.4GHz take for you to get?


----------



## nick name

ComansoRowlett said:


> Haha same here!  Helps my gpu boost stay higher much longer (around the 2.1GHz range), but nice CB score/clockspeed :O I understand it was probably a "bench run", but how much voltage did 4.4GHz take for you to get?


Hmmm, I can't really remember. I use an offset with my method, but it was around +.137V. I do remember that I had to put the mobo in LN2 mode to get it to boot/behave with the voltage offset I needed. It's the first time I attempted to use that much voltage and haven't had cold enough weather to try it again. I was wearing shorts and a tee today here in Texas.

Edit:
I wanna say it ended up around a high 1.5V to low 1.6V.

Edit 2:
Unfortunately, that screen doesn't show during the actual run. I didn't open HWiNFO and CPUZ until after the run was completed. So the voltage it shows wasn't what it actually ran at.


----------



## crakej

bios 1103 Fixed: Device SubId's that caused some trouble. Your drivers will revert to normal, including sound.


----------



## kazablanka

nick name said:


> Hmmm, I can't really remember. I use an offset with my method, but it was around +.137V. I do remember that I had to put the mobo in LN2 mode to get it to boot/behave with the voltage offset I needed. It's the first time I attempted to use that much voltage and haven't had cold enough weather to try it again. I was wearing shorts and a tee today here in Texas.
> 
> Edit:
> I wanna say it ended up around a high 1.5V to low 1.6V.
> 
> Edit 2:
> Unfortunately, that screen doesn't show during the actual run. I didn't open HWiNFO and CPUZ until after the run was completed. So the voltage it shows wasn't what it actually ran at.


How the new agesa is going with memory overclock?


----------



## Syldon

kazablanka said:


> How the new agesa is going with memory overclock?


It is a better revision imho. I have lowered the dram back to 1.35v, SOC is down by .05v to 9.43v(havent tested this any further yet), CPU is down to offset+0.25v from 0.5v with no loss obvious. I have managed to boot and run testing at 3600 which failed hcimemtest @ 50%. This wasn't a very
hardy attempt. I am short on time for next few weeks. I am not seeing any glitches so far.

I would say go for it, if you are unsure.


----------



## crakej

Ditto

I think this build is just the corrected 1101 - seems good so far. AGESA 1006 is an improvement so far, but more thorough testing ahead


----------



## MrPhilo

1103 let's me run at 3533 on my 3466 timings now even if my temps are 43c on ram. Couldn't do this at all on previous. Only other thing I've changed was 1.425v to 1.44v. I left my PC running all night and no error. So happy 🙂 think it's the max I can go on this CPU imc though


----------



## gupsterg

Silent Scone said:


> Possibly a mixture of the two in order to condense the Precision stuff. I'll see if I can find out.


Cheers appreciate it  .

What is still so shameful is SOC frequency in manual mode still has bugged out range  ; this has been going on for months.



crakej said:


> Ditto
> 
> I think this build is just the corrected 1101 - seems good so far. AGESA 1006 is an improvement so far, but more thorough testing ahead


I agree this seems like sorted 1101.

For me jury is out if I prefer AGESA 1.0.0.6 UEFIs or 1.0.0.2C, I've gone back to 32GB and really can't say it's any better for supporting it. As the older AGESA allows manual tweaks of PPT, TDC, EDC and Scalar value I'm leaning towards going back TBH.


----------



## Singularity48

Hey all, I've been lurking this thread for a few days since I heard the new AGESA was coming out, I'd like to cc ya'll to this post I made in the DDR4 thread https://www.overclock.net/forum/10-...memory-stability-thread-206.html#post27739694
I'm wondering about C7H-specific stable results for you guys as far as bdie goes, and where I could improve.

Also it seems like 1.0.0.6 has the same or worse dual rank compatibility compared to 1.0.0.2? What a time for me to pick up a 2x16 kit lol.


----------



## The Stilt

1103 bios or AGESA 1.0.0.6 in general seems to include new PMU FW versions for all Ryzen CPUs (Summit, Raven / Pinnacle) so this time around any changes in the memory behavior might actually be based on facts, instead of placebo.

It is great if there are gains to be had from improving the memory controller firmwares, however at the same time it would be quite sad: If the behavior can be improved, why has it taken so long to do so? AFAIK the previous firmware versions date from Raven's release, i.e. are already 10 months old...


----------



## nick name

Has anyone else made further attempts to get 3600 stable at 14-14-14-14? I can get further in testing before errors, but can't complete testing error free yet. 

And I still haven't pinned down what caused my Aida latency to increase 2ns from when I first flashed 1103. I know it's minuscule, but 57ns latencies was something I could repeatedly achieve and now I can't get lower than 59ns again.


----------



## crakej

The Stilt said:


> 1103 bios or AGESA 1.0.0.6 in general seems to include new PMU FW versions for all Ryzen CPUs (Summit, Raven / Pinnacle) so this time around any changes in the memory behavior might actually be based on facts, instead of placebo.
> 
> It is great if there are gains to be had from improving the memory controller firmwares, however at the same time it would be quite sad: If the behavior can be improved, why has it taken so long to do so? AFAIK the previous firmware versions date from Raven's release, i.e. are already 10 months old...


Interesting bit of information - I had not noticed that! My testing is very very basic so far - i'm going to spend a few hours doing my OC from (almost) scratch to see if it's real improvement though. Currently i'm running 3533 CL14 13 13 13 with tight timings, but SoC voltage is slightly lower than previously needed, but I've not tested enough yet. I did a little experimenting at 3600 (which I did have stable on 0804) but previous settings do not work.

Someone else (maybe more) reported their OC on 1101 had just stopped working without any obvious reason. Same for me, I had tested my 3600 fairly extensively and had been running it for a couple of weeks when it just.... well, it just broke - I cannot explain it any other way. I considered that maybe it was a problem with Windows, but it's doesn't appear to be the culprit. It's really stumped me for now.

I'm going to start with OC of 3200, with geardown=off and go from there....

Yes, frustrating if they could have done this all along - I do have a nagging feeling they  might not have put as much work into the PMU firmware as they should - we'll see. Still, any improvements are welcome.


----------



## crakej

Hmmmm.... first 3533 OC attempt with bios 1103

I put in my previous day to day settings for 4.1GHz 3533MTs CL14 - same settings I was booting and running before the update - but they do *NOT* work. The CPU side of things works fine - lovely stable 4.1, but ram - doesn't want to know, I haven't booted once with my last ram settings - even with no CPU OC. 

I will report back if and when I learn more.....


----------



## hurricane28

Is it save to flash this "stable" BIOS without it crapping out drivers like the previous one did?


----------



## crakej

hurricane28 said:


> Is it save to flash this "stable" BIOS without it crapping out drivers like the previous one did?


I can *only* speak for myself, but yes, that problem is resolved. ROG Supreme FX has returned.

Not had enough time to properly check out the memory OC side of things, but the settings I had working yesterday didn't boot at all. I did NOT test extensively and will star from scratch tomorrow. I may re-check those settings before I crash out tonight, just to stop me from wondering about that 

Edit: I really do think it would be MUCH better for the beta bios *to be tested out in the enthusiast community long enough for us to give reliable, tested feedback.*


----------



## crakej

So, I gave my previously working settings from bios 1101 - 4.1GHz 3533 - another shot with bios 1103... I loaded defaults and completely booted before trying this.

Again, it failed to boot (mem training, I I set it to do up to 3 retries) at all - tried changing a couple of things but no difference. I don't know if this is a problem, or just some setting that is working differently on AGESA 1006, but it's something that (at least for me) requires a bit more investigation. Maybe it's particular to 1xxx CPUs. Might try re-flashing, but I did flash it using afuefix.efi which does clear all settings that may linger from previous bios.

As previously mentioned, 4.1GHz CPU only OC is fine.

Very much looking fwd to seeing what results others get with this bios so far.


----------



## Jspinks020

elmor said:


> Crosshair VII
> 
> Crosshair VII is here, and plenty of feedback from OCN has made it into the product. It's not revolutionary, but there are a lot of small little tweaks that in the end makes a big difference.
> 
> 
> Key highlights:
> 
> - CPU/SOC VRM reconfigured to 10+2 and upgraded to IR3555 Power Stages. Additionally the SOC phases are placed between the CPU phases for lower temperatures.
> 
> - Supports Asynchronous eCLK mode, which allows you to overclock the CPU reference clock independently from Fabric/DRAM and PCI-E.
> 
> - Performance Enhancer option can increase or disable XFR power and current limits allowing you to boost higher and longer. Together with reference clock adjustments this means you can get up to ~4.5 GHz in single threaded loads and 4.2-4.3 GHz in multi threaded. @The Stilt is the original author of this function.
> 
> - Much improved voltage monitoring both in software and at ProbeIt points with differential sensing for CPU Core Voltage, CPU SOC Voltage, DRAM Voltage and EPS12V.
> 
> - Stealth mode which easily disables Aura and on-board LEDs completely, including the power button and Q-Code display.
> 
> 
> For further details, check the attached PDF brief. Or ask in the thread
> 
> 
> BIOS
> 
> Latest releases available here: http://www.mediafire.com/folder/jkoxu4r003qu7/Release
> 
> *C7H/WIFI BIOS 0601*
> 
> - First release on OCN
> 
> http://www.mediafire.com/file/lyc7if2402j4203/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-0601.zip sha256 d0d54fe84bf4cacc6cce5abbb071f83166ab4a4ada3d97749632cde1aa50b1e6
> http://www.mediafire.com/file/dhf3sqmbg4sh3pj/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0601.zip sha256 28bbc18cf2ec9166feb3776eaffee1d4c17f02e59d11f542bb6568071e1011fb



See you went all out on the Mobo's again your build. I thought about it but just went with a pretty entry level MSI x470, hoping to at least hit 4.2ghz with the 2600x and should I think anyways...just nothing Fancy. Good Reliable backup and Redundant build.


----------



## ComansoRowlett

crakej said:


> So, I gave my previously working settings from bios 1101 - 4.1GHz 3533 - another shot with bios 1103... I loaded defaults and completely booted before trying this.
> 
> Again, it failed to boot (mem training, I I set it to do up to 3 retries) at all - tried changing a couple of things but no difference. I don't know if this is a problem, or just some setting that is working differently on AGESA 1006, but it's something that (at least for me) requires a bit more investigation. Maybe it's particular to 1xxx CPUs. Might try re-flashing, but I did flash it using afuefix.efi which does clear all settings that may linger from previous bios.
> 
> As previously mentioned, 4.1GHz CPU only OC is fine.
> 
> Very much looking fwd to seeing what results others get with this bios so far.


Nope I have exactly the same issue memory side, I was very close to getting 3533MHz stable on my 2700X on bios 1002 infact, going to 1103 before I even had a thorough chance to test 1101 and I can't even get close no matter what I change. It won't even post 3533MHz at this stage, where as previously I could at least boot into 3666MHz (not stable ofc). I have tried ProcODT at 40 all the way to 80 each yield same results as well as the other various terminations to 20, 24 and then 20, 20, 40, 60 and no dice. SOC voltage at 0.93 actually gave me the closest to stability I actually got into windows and passed HCI up until 50%, while the rest didn't even post all together. I had memory retry to 7 even, so I was a bit more patient for nothing basically.


----------



## Jspinks020

ComansoRowlett said:


> Nope I have exactly the same issue memory side, I was very close to getting 3533MHz stable on my 2700X on bios 1002 infact, going to 1103 before I even had a thorough chance to test 1101 and I can't even get close no matter what I change. It won't even post 3533MHz at this stage, where as previously I could at least boot into 3666MHz (not stable ofc). I have tried ProcODT at 40 all the way to 80 each yield same results as well as the other various terminations to 20, 24 and then 20, 20, 40, 60 and no dice. SOC voltage at 0.93 actually gave me the closest to stability I actually got into windows and passed HCI up until 50%, while the rest didn't even post all together. I had memory retry to 7 even, so I was a bit more patient for nothing basically.


Well you have the Tuning and Power delivery with ROG there. Surprised not at 4.2ghz. And memory Experimentation, hell I don't know some kits can oc really well. Me I don't care I thought 3200mhz was still Nice. Shot in the dark to see if XMP is gonna work or not, it probably does though. And I salute them..I thought Ryzen was pretty Worthy. I'll have a mildly operated one and see what I can play with and find lol


----------



## ComansoRowlett

Jspinks020 said:


> Well you have the Tuning and Power delivery with ROG there. Surprised not at 4.2ghz. And memory Experimentation, hell I don't know some kits can oc really well. Me I don't care I thought 3200mhz was still Nice. Shot in the dark to see if XMP is gonna work or not, it probably does though. And I salute them..I thought Ryzen was pretty Worthy. I'll have a mildly operated one and see what I can play with and find lol


My processor speed is 4.265GHz all core, single core is 4.5GHz. You probably got mixed up with the guy with the first gen chip who has 4.1GHz (which is very good). My kit is samsung b-die, single rank 2x8GB which is pretty much the best you can get for the IMC so being locked at 3466 CL14 is kinda sad, when the kit it's self can do 3700 CL14 on a CPU with a capable IMC. Zen 2 looks to be promising for that side though so, we'll see. I'll aim low and hope I can actually do 3700MHz CL14, high end I'll try for around CL15/Cl16 4000MHz 1T but it's all gonna depend on the new IMC on those chips, anyway I'm going off on a tangent now haha. FYI if you didn't see the signature the kit I'm using right now is rated for 4600MHz CL19 (2T) so hence why it's a little sad to see such low memory speeds in comparison to what it could be doing.


----------



## hurricane28

crakej said:


> I can *only* speak for myself, but yes, that problem is resolved. ROG Supreme FX has returned.
> 
> Not had enough time to properly check out the memory OC side of things, but the settings I had working yesterday didn't boot at all. I did NOT test extensively and will star from scratch tomorrow. I may re-check those settings before I crash out tonight, just to stop me from wondering about that
> 
> Edit: I really do think it would be MUCH better for the beta bios *to be tested out in the enthusiast community long enough for us to give reliable, tested feedback.*


Thnx dude, the only issue i had was with the drivers other than that the agesa 6 is pretty good as far as i could tell. 

I thought this was going to be an quiet Sunday but it turns out that i have a lot of things to do now with this new BIOS lol.


----------



## Jspinks020

ComansoRowlett said:


> My processor speed is 4.265GHz all core, single core is 4.5GHz. You probably got mixed up with the guy with the first gen chip who has 4.1GHz (which is very good). My kit is samsung b-die, single rank 2x8GB which is pretty much the best you can get for the IMC so being locked at 3466 CL14 is kinda sad, when the kit it's self can do 3700 CL14 on a CPU with a capable IMC. Zen 2 looks to be promising for that side though so, we'll see. I'll aim low and hope I can actually do 3700MHz CL14, high end I'll try for around CL15/Cl16 4000MHz 1T but it's all gonna depend on the new IMC on those chips, anyway I'm going off on a tangent now haha. FYI if you didn't see the signature the kit I'm using right now is rated for 4600MHz CL19 (2T) so hence why it's a little sad to see such low memory speeds in comparison to what it could be doing.


Yeah seems like they wanted B-Die on everything and probably much more of the testing, But that Microcenter stuff was a decent Hynix kit on sale, Think I did get it up to 3400-3600mhz. Just ok, nothing to write home about. Someone said it was Working with Ryzen so good to know. cool stuff. Save Team Blue for a Rainy day been wanting to play with Ryzen for some time..2nd Gen seems quite Nice. Only thing I didn't order the 2600x with the Spire cooler...kinda wish I did now I think about it but o well, going under water.


----------



## crakej

ComansoRowlett said:


> Nope I have exactly the same issue memory side, I was very close to getting 3533MHz stable on my 2700X on bios 1002 infact, going to 1103 before I even had a thorough chance to test 1101 and I can't even get close no matter what I change. It won't even post 3533MHz at this stage, where as previously I could at least boot into 3666MHz (not stable ofc). I have tried ProcODT at 40 all the way to 80 each yield same results as well as the other various terminations to 20, 24 and then 20, 20, 40, 60 and no dice. SOC voltage at 0.93 actually gave me the closest to stability I actually got into windows and passed HCI up until 50%, while the rest didn't even post all together. I had memory retry to 7 even, so I was a bit more patient for nothing basically.


Interesting - we have similar kits - I'm just about to star from scratch see if I can find whats changed, or if 3533 upwards are not working, something @Silent_Scone should be aware that we're checking out.

Again - why didn't ASUS leave this with enthusiasts for more than a couple of days before general release? I'm going to start by re-flashing, but I'm not holding my breath, Stilt mentioned the new firmwares including the IMC so you're my hunch (like others) is that we need to re-tune. Otherwise some of us are having problems between v1101`and 1103. Maybe this re-flash will help....here I go! :rambo:


----------



## gupsterg

@majestynl

Check these out  .

Got fittings/rad/block on route  . Picking up Thermaltake Core P5 tomorrow. Have already DDC/RES/Tubing/coolant. Gonna order up those AC P12 PWMs, besides black blades has improved RPM range  . 



The Stilt said:


> 1103 bios or AGESA 1.0.0.6 in general seems to include new PMU FW versions for all Ryzen CPUs (Summit, Raven / Pinnacle) so this time around any changes in the memory behavior might actually be based on facts, instead of placebo.
> 
> It is great if there are gains to be had from improving the memory controller firmwares, however at the same time it would be quite sad: If the behavior can be improved, why has it taken so long to do so? AFAIK the previous firmware versions date from Raven's release, i.e. are already 10 months old...


For me UEFI 1103 is as much of a pain for 32GB (4x8GB) >3266MHz as UEFI 1101 (AGESA 1.0.0.6) and prior UEFIs using AGESA 1.0.0.2. No UEFI gets me >3500MHz on 16GB (2x8GB).

TBH AGESA 1.0.0.6 has changed very little for me.

You may have seen a previous post where I highlighted I can set manual PPT/TDC/EDC/Scalar value on AGESA 1.0.0.6 UEFIs, is this AMD locking out?


----------



## crakej

I was just testing auto settings after re-flashing....

Previous to 1103 (i'm very bad and didn't check this on 1101 like this, but will) I could leave everything on auto and up my ram speed on every try until I got higher than 3600 booting to windows (though very unstable)

I can not find ANY settings yet that will let me boot or post any speed above about 3233MTs. Also, with my sticks, bios used to use the default speed settings - 19 19 19 19, but this was trying to (well, at 3200 it was fine) post using CL16 22 22 22 instead of the CL19 the sticks used to default to. So currently for me there are huge changes in this bios. I am going back to 1101 to check the diff - might have to go back to bios 1002.


----------



## gupsterg

I did the same as I do on all UEFIs.

Setup a base profile.

View attachment 1103_Base_Profile_16_setting.txt


I loaded The Stilt 3200MHz safe timings, tested 3200MHz with SOC/VDIMM manually set, as it passed testing no need to change [Auto] ProcODT/RTT/etc.

Then I loaded The Stilt 3333MHz safe timings, tested 3333MHz with SOC/VDIMM manually set, as it passed testing no need to change [Auto] ProcODT/RTT/etc.

Then I loaded The Stilt 3466MHz safe timings, tested 3400MHz with SOC/VDIMM manually set, as it passed testing no need to change [Auto] ProcODT/RTT/etc. Then tested 3466MHz with SOC/VDIMM manually set, this some UEFIs I have used ProcODT 48 others [Auto] (53.3) has been fine.

All cap out ~3500MHz using BCLK tweak whilst on 3466MHz divider/The Stilt timings. If I increase divider to 3533MHz and drop BCLK to be nearer ~3500MHz and work upwards again I never reach more than ~3520MHz. Meddled with too many settings to try and get 3533MHz stable on 2 CPUs now and none have.

This is recent 32GB testing on 1103.

3200MHz I can use SOC 0.9V VDIMM 1.345V and can use The Stilt 3200MHz Safe timings for 2x8GB. 3266MHz needs SOC 0.918V, same VDIMM, but I slackened tRAS, tWR and tRFC (not found time to see which is really cause of issue). Did several reruns and below is longest.



Spoiler















At 3333MHz all UEFIs need more tweaks to get anything on stability front.









Again had to tweak CAD Bus to improve stability and change ProcODT.



Spoiler






















Now on 3rd rerun, before use P95, etc on profile.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> I did the same as I do on all UEFIs.
> 
> Setup a base profile.
> 
> View attachment 235630
> 
> 
> I loaded The Stilt 3200MHz safe timings, tested 3200MHz with SOC/VDIMM manually set, as it passed testing no need to change [Auto] ProcODT/RTT/etc.
> 
> Then I loaded The Stilt 3333MHz safe timings, tested 3333MHz with SOC/VDIMM manually set, as it passed testing no need to change [Auto] ProcODT/RTT/etc.
> 
> Then I loaded The Stilt 3466MHz safe timings, tested 3400MHz with SOC/VDIMM manually set, as it passed testing no need to change [Auto] ProcODT/RTT/etc. Then tested 3466MHz with SOC/VDIMM manually set, this some UEFIs I have used ProcODT 48 others [Auto] (53.3) has been fine.
> 
> All cap out ~3500MHz using BCLK tweak whilst on 3466MHz divider/The Stilt timings. If I increase divider to 3533MHz and drop BCLK to be nearer ~3500MHz and work upwards again I never reach more than ~3520MHz. Meddled with too many settings to try and get 3533MHz stable on 2 CPUs now and none have.
> 
> This is recent 32GB testing on 1103.
> 
> 3200MHz I can use SOC 0.9V VDIMM 1.345V and can use The Stilt 3200MHz Safe timings for 2x8GB. 3266MHz needs SOC 0.918V, same VDIMM, but I slackened tRAS, tWR and tRFC (not found time to see which is really cause of issue). Did several reruns and below is longest.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 235642
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At 3333MHz all UEFIs need more tweaks to get anything on stability front.
> 
> View attachment 235636
> 
> 
> Again had to tweak CAD Bus to improve stability and change ProcODT.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 235638
> 
> 
> View attachment 235640
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now on 3rd rerun, before use P95, etc on profile.


Interesting - it's what I have to do as well. Tho nothing =>3200 will work on my sticks without geardown=on (even on 1103)

I've loaded up 1002 and not having much luck with that so wondering if I've pushed these sticks too far. Still have loads of experiments to do, but stopping for sun lunch


----------



## gupsterg

Only things that have changed in my base profile a few weeks back vs earlier testing is:-

i) I used to use PE: Default and PBO: [Auto], as I'd got so many results without issues with PBO: Enabled (ie PPT 1000W 114A TDC 168A EDC), now that is part of my base profile.

ii) Still not sure if Determinism Slider set to Performance from [Auto] is or isn't doing anything to improve clocks. Again elected this to be part of base profile little while back.

As I'm not seeing much difference in RAM clocking on new AGESA vs older no euphoria has occurred.

Only current euphoria is to see if I gain something from WC'ing CPU. Also be stunning to have setup in an open case IMO.


----------



## hurricane28

This BIOS looks promising. 

Same settings as on previous BIOS and stable as a rock, it even finished Tm5 faster:


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> I've done a lotta testing of the past few days.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> This was just to profile 2700X 1825 SUS for 2 dimms, same as 1805 SUS.
> 
> 3200MHz set to 0.900V (Same as 1805 SUS)
> 3333MHz set to 0.912V (Same as 1805 SUS)
> 3400MHz set to 0.931V (1805 SUS was 0.925V, I had mistakenly tested 1825 at 0.931  may redo testing again)
> 3466MHz set to 0.943V whilst using PE: default PBO: Enabled (Better than 1805 SUS, it needed 0.956V (stock/no PBO)/0.968V (PState 0 OC 4.1GHz))
> 
> The 3466MHz was shocking IMO. All of above was VDIMM 1.345V in UEFI, on DMM bang on 1.35V. Originally SOC of 0.931 was used, it passed 1250% RT, then a warm post was done, 5000% passed. P95 v28.10b1 8K 4096K 13.5GB I had all threads collapse between 0 to 19mins. All profiles tested below 3466MHz whatever passed RT didn't need a SOC bump for P95 v28.10b1/v29.4b8/Y-Cruncher/RealBench.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 234824
> 
> 
> View attachment 234826
> 
> 
> View attachment 234828
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any how here is ~27500% of RT at 3466MHz :clock: The Stilt :clock: 1T GDMD 1.345V 0.943V  .
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 234834
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Last night's testing of P95 prior to above RT run.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 234830
> 
> 
> View attachment 234832
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As I've had another 2hr PASS in P95 I think it's time to try UEFI 1103 (Cheers Silent Scone :thumb: )  , hoping 4 dimms I nail something decent...
> 
> 
> 
> Nice  .



Thanks for the share chap!



gupsterg said:


> @mtrai
> 
> NP  , likewise always fascinating to see your escapades  .



LOL 



lordzed83 said:


> Flashed 1103 works ok with 1809 windows even to i noticed this build is slower than previous....
> Looks like less volts needed for same oc and everythibg seems to be working in general.


Can't confirm the less volts needed for Dram or SOC! Didn't test with lower vcore on cpu!



lightsout said:


> It was this board, but looking at the reviews again its the first page that has a lot of bad ones, there is actually only 5, 1 egg reviews so maybe its not as bad as it seems.


NO RMA here, dunno personally i think people are doing RMA to fast. I own that much HW, and the last time i did a RMA was with a PSU. And most RMA's i did where also PSU's!
Anyway..




gupsterg said:


> @majestynl
> 
> Check these out  .
> 
> Got fittings/rad/block on route  . Picking up Thermaltake Core P5 tomorrow. Have already DDC/RES/Tubing/coolant. Gonna order up those AC P12 PWMs, besides black blades has improved RPM range  .


Wow Thanks ! Waited that long for these  Eventually gave it up and got the be quiet silent wings 3! Personally not a big fan of Noctua 
Anyways..will definitely try the new P12! They are soooo cheap 



nick name said:


> Has anyone else made further attempts to get 3600 stable at 14-14-14-14? I can get further in testing before errors, but can't complete testing error free yet.
> 
> And I still haven't pinned down what caused my Aida latency to increase 2ns from when I first flashed 1103. I know it's minuscule, but 57ns latencies was something I could repeatedly achieve and now I can't get lower than 59ns again.


Dunno what to think of this new bios/agesa version. In the very begin it was looking promosing but i cant get my 3533CL14's Profile working anymore! Getting errors on long tests!

At the begin i got multiple 3000%+ Ramtest with 3600CL14+TT but now i cant get pass 500% anymore..

anyway.. still testing and tweaking over here. Currently my only Stable profile is the 3466CL14+TT on new Bios. Below screenshot of the 5th run!


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> [/spoiler]
> 
> Dunno what to think of this new bios/agesa version. In the very begin it was looking promosing but i cant get my 3533CL14's Profile working anymore! Getting errors on long tests!
> 
> At the begin i got multiple 3000%+ Ramtest with 3600CL14+TT but now i cant get pass 500% anymore..
> 
> anyway.. still testing and tweaking over here. Currently my only Stable profile is the 3466CL14+TT on new Bios. Below screenshot of the 5th run!


Same here, only I can't even post! Going to start with separate CPU and RAM OC as I can't see the wood for the trees just yet


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> Same here, only I can't even post! Going to start with separate CPU and RAM OC as I can't see the wood for the trees just yet


hmm thats sad  Did you try different values for ProcODT and CAD Bus? ProcODT has really impact on successfully booting/training! 
Probably you know but just to confirm: don't forget the Dram Booting voltage!

I can easily boot/bench with 3600/3800+! But those errors in Ramtest


----------



## gupsterg

@majestynl

NP on data share  , also like seeing yours as well  .

Mine are coming in ~£6.50 a piece. I ordered black/black, momentarily was thinking I'd get the transparent black blades, but thought nah look odd with solid black frame. Looking forward to trying these for sure  .

I reckon build should look clean and dark. Barrow fittings black, EK ZMT black, EK Supremacy Evo Acetal, res is EK DDC, so black again  .


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> hmm thats sad  Did you try different values for ProcODT and CAD Bus? ProcODT has really impact on successfully booting/training!
> Probably you know but just to confirm: don't forget the Dram Booting voltage!
> 
> I can easily boot/bench with 3600/3800+! But those errors in Ramtest


I'll try that - meanwhile I went back to 1002 and loaded old profile....it doesn't work! When training fails i get beeps instantly and it fails on code F9 - Recovery Capsule Not Found... What's that about???

And why can I still not get old settings working? I wonder if the firmware update to the IMC is not reversible? There is not a huge amount of information on the internals of the AMD SMU.

Do you use DOCP? I have not used it in ages and w3as really surprised when 1103 tried to boot 3200 CL16 22 22 22 and not the proper XMP timings of 19 19 19 19 - only using DOCP stopped that. I also noticed an odd behaviour in Aida64 - the SPD information was not able to be displayed - no error, nothing. Will update see if that fixes it.

I have also just tried on 1002 to load one of the Stils profiles that used to work, but it doesn't work.

Machine works great at defaults - passes everything. Getting to the point where I may have to try reseating the ram or testing single sticks.....something's not right here....not when I OC the memory.


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> I'll try that - meanwhile I went back to 1002 and loaded old profile....it doesn't work! When training fails i get beeps instantly and it fails on code F9 - Recovery Capsule Not Found... What's that about???
> 
> And why can I still not get old settings working? I wonder if the firmware update to the IMC is not reversible? There is not a huge amount of information on the internals of the AMD SMU.
> 
> Do you use DOCP? I have not used it in ages and w3as really surprised when 1103 tried to boot 3200 CL16 22 22 22 and not the proper XMP timings of 19 19 19 19 - only using DOCP stopped that. I also noticed an odd behaviour in Aida64 - the SPD information was not able to be displayed - no error, nothing. Will update see if that fixes it.
> 
> I have also just tried on 1002 to load one of the Stils profiles that used to work, but it doesn't work.
> 
> Machine works great at defaults - passes everything. Getting to the point where I may have to try reseating the ram or testing single sticks.....something's not right here....not when I OC the memory.


When i first loaded 1101 i saw the " Bios is updating" message after flashing! Thats when SMU gets updated! 
Later i re-flashed 1002 and tried older working profiles from 3533CL14+TT with no luck either!!

Then i flashed 1103 without any "Bios is updating message" because it was already loaded from my 1101 bios flash. 
As far as i know the SMU stays the same. So re-flashing a older bios has no change! AFAIK we need a tool to go back!

Coming back to your question: No i dont use DOCP, i never use those presets! Always manual tuning!
Personally i think we need to find that small tweak what is needed for these new SMU/Firmware update! And i can say its not the usual values we are using! 
My notes while tweaking and finding stable setting for 3600/3533 is massive for current bios! ...Takes so much time..


----------



## Ramad

@crakej

Try flashing BIOS 0601 then flashing the BIOS you want to use. See if that help you get the results you want.


----------



## crakej

Ramad said:


> @crakej
> 
> Try flashing BIOS 0601 then flashing the BIOS you want to use. See if that help you get the results you want.


willing to try almost anything! would that put the 'old' smu firmware back then?


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> willing to try almost anything! would that put the 'old' smu firmware back then?


maybe if that one includes an older SMU Update! You could try


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> When i first loaded 1101 i saw the " Bios is updating" message after flashing! Thats when SMU gets updated!
> Later i re-flashed 1002 and tried older working profiles from 3533CL14+TT with no luck either!!
> 
> Then i flashed 1103 without any "Bios is updating message" because it was already loaded from my 1101 bios flash.
> As far as i know the SMU stays the same. So re-flashing a older bios has no change! AFAIK we need a tool to go back!
> 
> Coming back to your question: No i dont use DOCP, i never use those presets! Always manual tuning!
> Personally i think we need to find that small tweak what is needed for these new SMU/Firmware update! And i can say its not the usual values we are using!
> My notes while tweaking and finding stable setting for 3600/3533 is massive for current bios! ...Takes so much time..


I just can't believe it's so different. And why the change between 1101 and 1103? I have not managed to post once today with anything over 3200 (on 1103)


----------



## Ramad

crakej said:


> willing to try almost anything! would that put the 'old' smu firmware back then?


It will if no restrictions are build in the new BIOS. I don't think there are any restrictions.



crakej said:


> I just can't believe it's so different. And why the change between 1101 and 1103? I have not managed to post once today with anything over 3200 (on 1103)


2 tools can help you post at desired speed if the memory controller is capable. Just remember setting RAM voltage to 1.4V.

1. RTT settings: Those can vary a lot depending on changes made in the BIOS/AGESA. I have an X370 K7 that boots only at Disabled-RZQ/3-Disabled with AGESA 1.0.0.0 and RZQ/4-Disabled-Disabled with AGESA 1.0.0.1 and above. Those are not constant and can vary. Finding the right settings takes time, but you will be happy with the result. 

2. PROCODT: As the RAM speed goes higher, this needs to be increased also. I found out that lower is better, but it also depends on CPU quality.


----------



## gupsterg

majestynl said:


> When i first loaded 1101 i saw the " Bios is updating" message after flashing! Thats when SMU gets updated!


CPU related FW you get no message from board.

When LED EC gets updated via UEFI update you will get the message "Please do not shutdown, blah blah blah" and in the text there will be clearly stated LED Firmware is being updated.

The other message you get is when Super IO chip FW is updated. It will be the same message as LED Firmware but will not have the text LED Firmware update. It has nothing to state Super IO chip FW is updating, you will see it occurred when compare motherboard page in UEFI.

You may note each time a new UEFI is flashed, system will POST and you see the enter UEFI message to set it up. Once you exit with or without saving the board will POST again, you will see ROG logo and instead of OS loading board will reset again, then next POST you will get OS boot. I believe this is when CPU FW is checked and or updated.

Each UEFI contains Super IO chip/LED/CPU, etc firmware, if we flash over to one where no changes occurred we will not get the message "Please do not turn off blah, blah, blah". Regardless the observation of a POST not going to OS, but then on next POST will go to OS will always occur. So I believe the CPU related FW is always checked/updated as needed at that point.

Below is compare of mobo pages, as between UEFI 0012/1002/1101/1103 there is no Super IO/LED FW changes you'd have been on something older than 0012 when went to 1101 to see the messages on screen.



Spoiler














I also have CPU FW pages.


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> I just can't believe it's so different. And why the change between 1101 and 1103? I have not managed to post once today with anything over 3200 (on 1103)


I can understand its frustrating! Dunno, im on a 2700x! I have a block installed so cant easily switch to my first gen ryzen on this board/system!

If i was you i would do the following:
- Change you ProcODT to a higher value, set SOC 1.15v just to be sure its not effected and try to boot!
- If it doesn't work, you could go back with your timings. Lets say only main timings 14 14 14 34 and if success then slowly ad the sub-timings in groups to see which brings the issue!

Or just reflash the older bios ramad is talking about and see if its reallt the SMU!

report back pls! Thanks


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> CPU related FW you get no message from board.
> 
> When LED EC gets updated via UEFI update you will get the message "Please do not shutdown, blah blah blah" and in the text there will be clearly stated LED Firmware is being updated.
> 
> The other message you get is when Super IO chip FW is updated. It will be the same message as LED Firmware but will not have the text LED Firmware update. It has nothing to state Super IO chip FW is updating, you will see it occurred when compare motherboard page in UEFI.
> 
> You may note each time a new UEFI is flashed, system will POST and you see the enter UEFI message to set it up. Once you exit with or without saving the board will POST again, you will see ROG logo and instead of OS loading board will reset again, then next POST you will get OS boot. I believe this is when CPU FW is checked and or updated.
> 
> Each UEFI contains Super IO chip/LED/CPU, etc firmware, if we flash over to one where no changes occurred we will not get the message "Please do not turn off blah, blah, blah". Regardless the observation of a POST not going to OS, but then on next POST will go to OS will always occur. So I believe the CPU related FW is always checked/updated as needed at that point.
> 
> Below is compare of mobo pages, as between UEFI 0012/1002/1101/1103 there is no Super IO/LED FW changes you'd have been on something older than 0012 when went to 1101 to see the messages on screen.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 235704
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I also have CPU FW pages.


Yeap always you with most detailed info! Haha thanks.. i can certainly say your HDD's are most filled with Screenies  LOL Great!


----------



## gupsterg

majestynl said:


> Yeap always you with most detailed info! Haha thanks.. i can certainly say your HDD's are most filled with Screenies  LOL Great!


LOL :thumb: .

Here is CPU pages.

As The Stilt said, until AGESA 1.0.0.6 UEFI (ie 1101/1103) no updates to CPU.



Spoiler














Why does UEFI 0012/1001/1002/1101/1103 have a Super IO EC update?

The reason is as part of ASUS WMI we gained improved voltage monitoring in SW, these are the reading in HWINFO we see with (VRM).

The ZE also gains this on ASUS WMI, C6H/C6E do not.

I believe this is down to how Super IO EC updates caused bricking on C6H. C6E was released later, but through an owner I have confirmed that like the C6H, on UEFI with ASUS WMI they gained no Super IO EC firmware updates, thus none of the new (VRM) monitoring in HWINFO.


----------



## crakej

Thanks for the shares guys. I'm trying to remain patient but sometimes gets a little frustrating. :thinking:


----------



## gupsterg

Dunno what has flipped with "system" for you. But as stated to majestynl each UEFI flash will result in using EC/CPU FW as intended for it. Hope you get your rig back as you'd like  .


----------



## Rusakova

majestynl said:


> When i first loaded 1101 i saw the " Bios is updating" message after flashing! Thats when SMU gets updated!
> Later i re-flashed 1002 and tried older working profiles from 3533CL14+TT with no luck either!!
> 
> Then i flashed 1103 without any "Bios is updating message" because it was already loaded from my 1101 bios flash.
> As far as i know the SMU stays the same. So re-flashing a older bios has no change! AFAIK we need a tool to go back!
> 
> Coming back to your question: No i dont use DOCP, i never use those presets! Always manual tuning!
> Personally i think we need to find that small tweak what is needed for these new SMU/Firmware update! And i can say its not the usual values we are using!
> My notes while tweaking and finding stable setting for 3600/3533 is massive for current bios! ...Takes so much time..


I didn't get any "Bios is updating message" going from 1002 to 1103.
I did get it on previous BIOS updates when AGESA was updated but nothing on this one.
But my Flare-X now runs at 3600 MHz.


----------



## mtrai

Sorry all been very busy the last few days to report all my findings and my settings for AGESA 1.0.0.6. I am still on the elmor beta bios 1101. We recently adopted a rescue dog who had not been fixed yet, due to our current situation where I live, and amazingly bad luck she went into heat on Friday so my hands have been very full not letting her get loose and also getting our lab rescue and her used to each other. I will get at least my current bios setting posted for people to see. Yes I have ram stable at 3600 but nothing new with that...mostly stable at 3733 and windows boot, browser stable at 3800.

Here are my 3600 setting from the bios profile. I also use the same timing up to 3800 but as I said not stable. Just not had time to spend on it right now.

One thing I am seeing is people are not using enough dram voltage for these high speeds and tight timings. Keep in mind...you also have to keep in mind your ram temps as it will also hurt stability. for 3600 I can get away with 1.48 bio droops to 1.46 however 3733 and 3800 both need more then 1.5 volts on the dram. And the other thing is the soc voltage...I have been seeing I am more stable 1.05 to 1.1 after vdroop nothing more...higher then 1.15 causes me stability issues.



Spoiler



[2018/12/02 14:57:09]
Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
eCLK Mode [Synchronous mode]
BCLK Frequency [102.0000]
BCLK_Divider [Auto]
Performance Enhancer [Level 1]
CPU Core Ratio [37.00]
Performance Bias [CB11.5]
Memory Frequency [DDR4-3603MHz]
Core Performance Boost [Enabled]
SMT Mode [Auto]
TPU [Keep Current Settings]
TRC_EOM [Auto]
TRTP_EOM [Auto]
TRRS_S_EOM [Auto]
TRRS_L_EOM [Auto]
TWTR_EOM [Auto]
TWTR_L_EOM [Auto]
TWCL_EOM [Auto]
TWR_EOM [Auto]
TFAW_EOM [Auto]
TRCT_EOM [Auto]
TREFI_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_DD_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SD_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SC_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SCL_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_DD_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SD_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SC_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SCL_EOM [Auto]
TWRRD_EOM [Auto]
TRDWR_EOM [Auto]
TWRRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
Mem Over Clock Fail Count [3]
DRAM CAS# Latency [14]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [14]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [14]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [14]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [28]
Trc [42]
TrrdS [4]
TrrdL [6]
Tfaw [24]
TwtrS [4]
TwtrL [12]
Twr [10]
Trcpage [Auto]
TrdrdScl [2]
TwrwrScl [2]
Trfc [260]
Trfc2 [Auto]
Trfc4 [Auto]
Tcwl [14]
Trtp [8]
Trdwr [7]
Twrrd [3]
TwrwrSc [1]
TwrwrSd [7]
TwrwrDd [7]
TrdrdSc [1]
TrdrdSd [5]
TrdrdDd [5]
Tcke [1]
ProcODT [53.3 ohm]
Cmd2T [Auto]
Gear Down Mode [Auto]
Power Down Enable [Disabled]
RttNom [RZQ/7]
RttWr [Dynamic ODT Off]
RttPark [RZQ/5]
MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
MemCkeSetup [Auto]
MemCadBusClkDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 3]
CPU Current Capability [Auto]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
CPU Voltage Frequency [300]
CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
CPU Power Phase Control [Power Phase Response]
Manual Adjustment [Ultra Fast]
CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Auto]
VDDSOC Current Capability [Auto]
VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed VDDSOC Switching Frequency(KHz) [400]
VDDSOC Phase Control [Power Phase Response]
Manual Adjustment [Ultra Fast]
DRAM Current Capability [100%]
DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [300]
DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.48000]
VTTDDR Voltage [0.75000]
VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
VDDP Voltage [Auto]
1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
PLL reference voltage [Auto]
T Offset [Auto]
Sense MI Skew [Auto]
Sense MI Offset [Auto]
Promontory presence [Auto]
Clock Amplitude [Auto]
CLDO VDDP voltage [Auto]
CPU Core Voltage [Offset mode]
CPU Offset Mode Sign [+]
- CPU Core Voltage Offset [0.02500]
CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
- VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.10000]
DRAM Voltage [1.48000]
1.8V PLL Voltage [1.80000]
1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
Firmware TPM [Disable]
Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
PSS Support [Auto]
SVM Mode [Disabled]
Onboard LED [Enabled]
Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
SATA Mode [AHCI]
NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
SMART Self Test [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
SB Link Mode [Auto]
Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
When system is in working state [On]
When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [On]
Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
Wi-Fi Controller [Enabled]
Bluetooth Controller [Enabled]
ErP Ready [Disabled]
Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
Power On By RTC [Disabled]
Network Stack [Disabled]
Device [Samsung SSD 850 EVO 250GB]
Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
USB Mass Storage Driver Support [Enabled]
U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
U31G1_5 [Enabled]
U31G1_6 [Enabled]
U31G1_7 [Enabled]
U31G1_8 [Enabled]
U31G1_9 [Enabled]
U31G1_10 [Enabled]
USB11 [Enabled]
USB12 [Enabled]
USB13 [Enabled]
USB14 [Enabled]
USB15 [Enabled]
CPU Temperature [Monitor]
MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
PCH Temperature [Monitor]
T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
5V Voltage [Monitor]
12V Voltage [Monitor]
CPU Q-Fan Control [Auto]
CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [200 RPM]
CPU Fan Profile [Standard]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 3 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [Auto]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Source [CPU]
HAMP Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
HAMP Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
HAMP Fan Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
PSPP Policy [Auto]
Fast Boot [Disabled]
AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
Boot Logo Display [Enabled]
POST Delay Time [3 sec]
Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
Launch CSM [Enabled]
Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
OS Type [Other OS]
Setup Animator [Disabled]
ASUS Grid Install Service [Enabled]
Load from Profile [1]
Profile Name [3600]
Save to Profile [3]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
BCLK Frequency [Auto]
CPU Ratio [Auto]
DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A2]
Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
RedirectForReturnDis [Auto]
L2 TLB Associativity [Auto]
Platform First Error Handling [Auto]
Enable IBS [Auto]
Global C-state Control [Auto]
Power Supply Idle Control [Auto]
Opcache Control [Auto]
Custom Pstate0 [Auto]
Custom Pstate1 [Auto]
Custom Pstate2 [Auto]
Custom Pstate3 [Auto]
Custom Pstate4 [Auto]
Custom Pstate5 [Auto]
Custom Pstate6 [Auto]
Custom Pstate7 [Auto]
Relaxed EDC throttling [Auto]
Downcore control [Auto]
SMTEN [Auto]
SEV-ES ASID Space Limit [1]
Streaming Stores Control [Auto]
ACPI _CST C1 Declaration [Auto]
L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
DRAM scrub time [Auto]
Redirect scrubber control [Auto]
Disable DF sync flood propagation [Auto]
Freeze DF module queues on error [Auto]
GMI encryption control [Auto]
xGMI encryption control [Auto]
CC6 memory region encryption [Auto]
Location of private memory regions [Auto]
System probe filter [Auto]
Memory interleaving [Channel]
Memory interleaving size [512 Bytes]
Channel interleaving hash [Auto]
Memory Clear [Disabled]
ACPI SLIT Distance Control [Auto]
Power Down Enable [Auto]
Cmd2T [Auto]
Gear Down Mode [Auto]
CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
Data Poisoning [Auto]
DRAM ECC Symbol Size [Auto]
DRAM ECC Enable [Auto]
TSME [Auto]
Data Scramble [Auto]
Chipselect Interleaving [Auto]
BankGroupSwap [Disabled]
Address Hash Bank [Auto]
Address Hash CS [Auto]
SPD Read Optimization [Enabled]
MBIST Enable [Disabled]
MBIST Aggressors [Auto]
MBIST Per Bit Slave Die Reporting [Auto]
IOMMU [Auto]
Determinism Slider [Auto]
cTDP Control [Auto]
PSI [Auto]
ACS Enable [Auto]
PCIe ARI Support [Auto]
CLDO_VDDP Control [Auto]
HD Audio Enable [Auto]
Force PCIe gen speed [Auto]
Processor temperature Control [Auto]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
SOC OVERCLOCK VID [0]
Mode0 [Auto]



Bonus a little album of my rescue dogs. https://imgur.com/a/9eVHOdv


----------



## hurricane28

crakej said:


> Thanks for the shares guys. I'm trying to remain patient but sometimes gets a little frustrating. :thinking:


I hear ya on that one lol. 

What i do is leave the rig for a moment and do something else to calm down and try again later, it always works for me.


----------



## crakej

With a little encouragement and information shared, I'm back up to 3466 CL14, Proc ODT 60 and a few other timings relaxed... thanks guys.

Just failed IBT V Hard, but it's early days. I hope the changes they've made are worth it.

My machine was running 3600 reliably not that long ago, would be nice if it would again..... At least I can see light at the end of the tunnel now 

My set up has always been very sensitive to voltage - it has to be spot on, not one up or down.

Too sleepy to do any more tonight :asleepysm
@mtrai what beautiful dogs!


----------



## ComansoRowlett

crakej said:


> With a little encouragement and information shared, I'm back up to 3466 CL14, Proc ODT 60 and a few other timings relaxed... thanks guys.
> 
> Just failed IBT V Hard, but it's early days. I hope the changes they've made are worth it.
> 
> My machine was running 3600 reliably not that long ago, would be nice if it would again..... At least I can see light at the end of the tunnel now
> 
> My set up has always been very sensitive to voltage - it has to be spot on, not one up or down.
> 
> Too sleepy to do any more tonight :asleepysm
> 
> @mtrai what beautiful dogs!


I feel your pain there, my system is almost exactly the same. Took me forever to get 3466MHz stable back on 0804, had to do the same on 1103 actually. If I move my SOC from 1.1v it becomes unstable (for 3466MHz, not sure for higher/lower), same with memory voltage even, 1.45v is my sweet spot, seems our IMC's are very picky.


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> With a little encouragement and information shared, I'm back up to 3466 CL14, Proc ODT 60 and a few other timings relaxed... thanks guys.
> 
> Just failed IBT V Hard, but it's early days. I hope the changes they've made are worth it.
> 
> My machine was running 3600 reliably not that long ago, would be nice if it would again..... At least I can see light at the end of the tunnel now
> 
> My set up has always been very sensitive to voltage - it has to be spot on, not one up or down.
> 
> Too sleepy to do any more tonight :asleepysm
> 
> @mtrai what beautiful dogs!


I had to change a few settings on 3600 when I went to AGESA 1.0.0.6 I think it was my procodt and the come up with new cad settings...I had to change the from 20 20 20 20 to something else. I just had to play with one setting at a time and see if it was better or worse. I have not had to touch any of those settings for months.

And thanks for looking at my furbabies but they are the reason I have not had much time to post pc stuff with the new one going into heat and keeping her from getting pregnant until she can get spayed.


----------



## lordzed83

I almost got my 3600 14 15 15 14 working almost. Had one error at 1.44 on ram crashed at 1.45 hmmm


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> LOL :thumb: .
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Here is CPU pages.
> 
> As The Stilt said, until AGESA 1.0.0.6 UEFI (ie 1101/1103) no updates to CPU.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 235710
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why does UEFI 0012/1001/1002/1101/1103 have a Super IO EC update?
> 
> The reason is as part of ASUS WMI we gained improved voltage monitoring in SW, these are the reading in HWINFO we see with (VRM).
> 
> The ZE also gains this on ASUS WMI, C6H/C6E do not.
> 
> I believe this is down to how Super IO EC updates caused bricking on C6H. C6E was released later, but through an owner I have confirmed that like the C6H, on UEFI with ASUS WMI they gained no Super IO EC firmware updates, thus none of the new (VRM) monitoring in HWINFO.


Makes sense chap! Saw the new VRM Monitoring values in HwInfo! Nice



Rusakova said:


> I didn't get any "Bios is updating message" going from 1002 to 1103.
> I did get it on previous BIOS updates when AGESA was updated but nothing on this one.
> But my Flare-X now runs at 3600 MHz.


Dunno, but my flash order was: 0702>1101>1002>1103



mtrai said:


> Sorry all been very busy the last few days
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> to report all my findings and my settings for AGESA 1.0.0.6. I am still on the elmor beta bios 1101. We recently adopted a rescue dog who had not been fixed yet, due to our current situation where I live, and amazingly bad luck she went into heat on Friday so my hands have been very full not letting her get loose and also getting our lab rescue and her used to each other. I will get at least my current bios setting posted for people to see. Yes I have ram stable at 3600 but nothing new with that...mostly stable at 3733 and windows boot, browser stable at 3800.
> 
> Here are my 3600 setting from the bios profile. I also use the same timing up to 3800 but as I said not stable. Just not had time to spend on it right now.
> 
> One thing I am seeing is people are not using enough dram voltage for these high speeds and tight timings. Keep in mind...you also have to keep in mind your ram temps as it will also hurt stability. for 3600 I can get away with 1.48 bio droops to 1.46 however 3733 and 3800 both need more then 1.5 volts on the dram. And the other thing is the soc voltage...I have been seeing I am more stable 1.05 to 1.1 after vdroop nothing more...higher then 1.15 causes me stability issues.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> [2018/12/02 14:57:09]
> Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
> eCLK Mode [Synchronous mode]
> BCLK Frequency [102.0000]
> BCLK_Divider [Auto]
> Performance Enhancer [Level 1]
> CPU Core Ratio [37.00]
> Performance Bias [CB11.5]
> Memory Frequency [DDR4-3603MHz]
> Core Performance Boost [Enabled]
> SMT Mode [Auto]
> TPU [Keep Current Settings]
> TRC_EOM [Auto]
> TRTP_EOM [Auto]
> TRRS_S_EOM [Auto]
> TRRS_L_EOM [Auto]
> TWTR_EOM [Auto]
> TWTR_L_EOM [Auto]
> TWCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWR_EOM [Auto]
> TFAW_EOM [Auto]
> TRCT_EOM [Auto]
> TREFI_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_DD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SC_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_DD_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SD_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SC_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWRRD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDWR_EOM [Auto]
> TWRRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> Mem Over Clock Fail Count [3]
> DRAM CAS# Latency [14]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [14]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [14]
> DRAM RAS# PRE Time [14]
> DRAM RAS# ACT Time [28]
> Trc [42]
> TrrdS [4]
> TrrdL [6]
> Tfaw [24]
> TwtrS [4]
> TwtrL [12]
> Twr [10]
> Trcpage [Auto]
> TrdrdScl [2]
> TwrwrScl [2]
> Trfc [260]
> Trfc2 [Auto]
> Trfc4 [Auto]
> Tcwl [14]
> Trtp [8]
> Trdwr [7]
> Twrrd [3]
> TwrwrSc [1]
> TwrwrSd [7]
> TwrwrDd [7]
> TrdrdSc [1]
> TrdrdSd [5]
> TrdrdDd [5]
> Tcke [1]
> ProcODT [53.3 ohm]
> Cmd2T [Auto]
> Gear Down Mode [Auto]
> Power Down Enable [Disabled]
> RttNom [RZQ/7]
> RttWr [Dynamic ODT Off]
> RttPark [RZQ/5]
> MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
> MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
> MemCkeSetup [Auto]
> MemCadBusClkDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 3]
> CPU Current Capability [Auto]
> CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
> CPU Voltage Frequency [300]
> CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
> CPU Power Phase Control [Power Phase Response]
> Manual Adjustment [Ultra Fast]
> CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
> VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Auto]
> VDDSOC Current Capability [Auto]
> VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Manual]
> Fixed VDDSOC Switching Frequency(KHz) [400]
> VDDSOC Phase Control [Power Phase Response]
> Manual Adjustment [Ultra Fast]
> DRAM Current Capability [100%]
> DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
> DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
> Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [300]
> DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.48000]
> VTTDDR Voltage [0.75000]
> VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
> VDDP Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
> CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
> 2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
> PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
> PLL reference voltage [Auto]
> T Offset [Auto]
> Sense MI Skew [Auto]
> Sense MI Offset [Auto]
> Promontory presence [Auto]
> Clock Amplitude [Auto]
> CLDO VDDP voltage [Auto]
> CPU Core Voltage [Offset mode]
> CPU Offset Mode Sign [+]
> - CPU Core Voltage Offset [0.02500]
> CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
> - VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.10000]
> DRAM Voltage [1.48000]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [1.80000]
> 1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
> Firmware TPM [Disable]
> Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
> PSS Support [Auto]
> SVM Mode [Disabled]
> Onboard LED [Enabled]
> Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
> SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
> SATA Mode [AHCI]
> NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
> SMART Self Test [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
> M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
> PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
> PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
> M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
> M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
> SB Link Mode [Auto]
> Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
> USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
> When system is in working state [On]
> When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [On]
> Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
> Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
> Wi-Fi Controller [Enabled]
> Bluetooth Controller [Enabled]
> ErP Ready [Disabled]
> Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
> Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
> Power On By RTC [Disabled]
> Network Stack [Disabled]
> Device [Samsung SSD 850 EVO 250GB]
> Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
> XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
> USB Mass Storage Driver Support [Enabled]
> U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
> U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
> U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> U31G1_5 [Enabled]
> U31G1_6 [Enabled]
> U31G1_7 [Enabled]
> U31G1_8 [Enabled]
> U31G1_9 [Enabled]
> U31G1_10 [Enabled]
> USB11 [Enabled]
> USB12 [Enabled]
> USB13 [Enabled]
> USB14 [Enabled]
> USB15 [Enabled]
> CPU Temperature [Monitor]
> MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
> PCH Temperature [Monitor]
> T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
> HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
> CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
> AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
> W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
> W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
> 3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
> 5V Voltage [Monitor]
> 12V Voltage [Monitor]
> CPU Q-Fan Control [Auto]
> CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [200 RPM]
> CPU Fan Profile [Standard]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 3 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [Auto]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> HAMP Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> HAMP Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> HAMP Fan Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
> AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> PSPP Policy [Auto]
> Fast Boot [Disabled]
> AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
> Boot Logo Display [Enabled]
> POST Delay Time [3 sec]
> Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
> Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
> Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
> Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
> Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
> Launch CSM [Enabled]
> Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
> Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
> Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
> Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
> OS Type [Other OS]
> Setup Animator [Disabled]
> ASUS Grid Install Service [Enabled]
> Load from Profile [1]
> Profile Name [3600]
> Save to Profile [3]
> CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
> VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> BCLK Frequency [Auto]
> CPU Ratio [Auto]
> DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A2]
> Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
> RedirectForReturnDis [Auto]
> L2 TLB Associativity [Auto]
> Platform First Error Handling [Auto]
> Enable IBS [Auto]
> Global C-state Control [Auto]
> Power Supply Idle Control [Auto]
> Opcache Control [Auto]
> Custom Pstate0 [Auto]
> Custom Pstate1 [Auto]
> Custom Pstate2 [Auto]
> Custom Pstate3 [Auto]
> Custom Pstate4 [Auto]
> Custom Pstate5 [Auto]
> Custom Pstate6 [Auto]
> Custom Pstate7 [Auto]
> Relaxed EDC throttling [Auto]
> Downcore control [Auto]
> SMTEN [Auto]
> SEV-ES ASID Space Limit [1]
> Streaming Stores Control [Auto]
> ACPI _CST C1 Declaration [Auto]
> L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
> L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
> DRAM scrub time [Auto]
> Redirect scrubber control [Auto]
> Disable DF sync flood propagation [Auto]
> Freeze DF module queues on error [Auto]
> GMI encryption control [Auto]
> xGMI encryption control [Auto]
> CC6 memory region encryption [Auto]
> Location of private memory regions [Auto]
> System probe filter [Auto]
> Memory interleaving [Channel]
> Memory interleaving size [512 Bytes]
> Channel interleaving hash [Auto]
> Memory Clear [Disabled]
> ACPI SLIT Distance Control [Auto]
> Power Down Enable [Auto]
> Cmd2T [Auto]
> Gear Down Mode [Auto]
> CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
> CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
> Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
> Data Poisoning [Auto]
> DRAM ECC Symbol Size [Auto]
> DRAM ECC Enable [Auto]
> TSME [Auto]
> Data Scramble [Auto]
> Chipselect Interleaving [Auto]
> BankGroupSwap [Disabled]
> Address Hash Bank [Auto]
> Address Hash CS [Auto]
> SPD Read Optimization [Enabled]
> MBIST Enable [Disabled]
> MBIST Aggressors [Auto]
> MBIST Per Bit Slave Die Reporting [Auto]
> IOMMU [Auto]
> Determinism Slider [Auto]
> cTDP Control [Auto]
> PSI [Auto]
> ACS Enable [Auto]
> PCIe ARI Support [Auto]
> CLDO_VDDP Control [Auto]
> HD Audio Enable [Auto]
> Force PCIe gen speed [Auto]
> Processor temperature Control [Auto]
> Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
> SOC OVERCLOCK VID [0]
> Mode0 [Auto]
> 
> 
> 
> Bonus a little album of my rescue dogs. https://imgur.com/a/9eVHOdv


Is it stable or not? Can you share some Ramtest/HCI screens?

btw: Great dogs! Thanks for the share!



crakej said:


> With a little encouragement and information shared, I'm back up to 3466 CL14, Proc ODT 60 and a few other timings relaxed... thanks guys.
> 
> Just failed IBT V Hard, but it's early days. I hope the changes they've made are worth it.
> 
> My machine was running 3600 reliably not that long ago, would be nice if it would again..... At least I can see light at the end of the tunnel now
> 
> My set up has always been very sensitive to voltage - it has to be spot on, not one up or down.
> 
> Too sleepy to do any more tonight :asleepysm
> 
> @mtrai what beautiful dogs!


Your welcome  Try to give your CPU a bit more vcore for IBT to check if thats not the bottleneck!

Same here, my voltages where always sensitive too. And on all my Ramsticks i need 1.15v or Auto on soc to pass long memtest on high ram speeds!


----------



## crakej

I think I'm over the shock now - i'm a couple of days behind - I was in Iceland when this bios was released but catching up now. There definitely isn't a placebo here - it's quite different including the bios/IMC choosing quite different timings for auto from previous AGESA versions.

I use IBT to check to CPU voltage is sufficient, if nothing else it's a good rough guide.

So....off I go to tune things up a bit more


----------



## Monoroch

Crosshair VII Hero (1103 bios)
2700x
4x Samsung M378A1K43BB2-CRC (4x8Gb) (3333mhz 18-18-18-37, not 100% sure in stable, but enough for 1pass memtest86)
DRAM voltage 1.4 (manual)
Everything other - auto

On PE lvl4, all works ok, until linpack streestest. After few minutes system just freeze. Not bsod or reboot. Everytime freeze. (100% not overheat or ram failure. At least exactly same, with stock ram freq 2400mhz)
On PE lvl3, stress tests works ok. But it has much lower EDC (145 instead 168, from rysen master info). And as result ~4.1Ghz all core load. (vs 4.3Ghz on PE lvl4)

I'm quite newbie about overclock deeper than just change multiplier. So, i'm pretty sure, i just missing one or two small things, thats allow me stabilize system.
p.s. Noctua NH-D15 SE-AM4. And PC in ~0 С° ambient temperature. (so i have some freedom for OC, until summer)
Any advice?


----------



## nick name

Monoroch said:


> Crosshair VII Hero (1103 bios)
> 2700x
> 4x Samsung M378A1K43BB2-CRC (4x8Gb) (3333mhz 18-18-18-37, not 100% sure in stable, but enough for 1pass memtest86)
> DRAM voltage 1.4 (manual)
> Everything other - auto
> 
> On PE lvl4, all works ok, until linpack streestest. After few minutes system just freeze. Not bsod or reboot. Everytime freeze. (100% not overheat or ram failure. At least exactly same, with stock ram freq 2400mhz)
> On PE lvl3, stress tests works ok. But it has much lower EDC (145 instead 168, from rysen master info). And as result ~4.1Ghz all core load. (vs 4.3Ghz on PE lvl4)
> 
> I'm quite newbie about overclock deeper than just change multiplier. So, i'm pretty sure, i just missing one or two small things, thats allow me stabilize system.
> p.s. Noctua NH-D15 SE-AM4. And PC in ~0 С° ambient temperature. (so i have some freedom for OC, until summer)
> Any advice?


Sounds like it didn't have enough power at 4.3GHz. So you can add an offset in BIOS. It would also help to use LLC4. Load line calibration level 4. 

You can also change the multiplier on PE 3 or PE 4 using Ryzen Master if you want. 

https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...tiplier-adjustments-through-ryzen-master.html


----------



## crakej

I'm still struggling...

Anything beyond 3466 (which isn't reliable) I can not post. OC requires Hard cold reset to work.I have noticed that the machine tends to (after I power-on)... reboot once without making a sound - I assume early mem training failing?

Next power on fails with code F9 and 1 long, 2 short beeps - in fact this always happens on the second reboot. The AMI code is failed parity, but that doesn't make sense, at first I thought it was the usual 3 beeps I hear on my X370, but this is different. Does it beep like this for anyone else?

Last attempt it gives a code F9 and one beep.

This is like I have a completely different computer for me! till workin at it though...


----------



## ComansoRowlett

crakej said:


> I'm still struggling...
> 
> Anything beyond 3466 (which isn't reliable) I can not post. OC requires Hard cold reset to work.I have noticed that the machine tends to (after I power-on)... reboot once without making a sound - I assume early mem training failing?
> 
> Next power on fails with code F9 and 1 long, 2 short beeps - in fact this always happens on the second reboot. The AMI code is failed parity, but that doesn't make sense, at first I thought it was the usual 3 beeps I hear on my X370, but this is different. Does it beep like this for anyone else?
> 
> Last attempt it gives a code F9 and one beep.
> 
> This is like I have a completely different computer for me! till workin at it though...


I don't have a motherboard speaker so I can't tell you from experience with the sounds sadly, but I haven't experienced this sort of behavior either (in terms of error codes, and not booting on 2nd boot, etc). Anything over 3466 just won't work for me, it will just train endlessly, I've never actually gotten an error code when trying to go for frequency before infact, only when lowering the timings below 14 or setting "odd" timings.


----------



## nick name

ComansoRowlett said:


> I don't have a motherboard speaker so I can't tell you from experience with the sounds sadly, but I haven't experienced this sort of behavior either (in terms of error codes, and not booting on 2nd boot, etc). Anything over 3466 just won't work for me, it will just train endlessly, I've never actually gotten an error code when trying to go for frequency before infact, only when lowering the timings below 14 or setting "odd" timings.


Forgive the question, but did you use the correct RAM slots?


----------



## ComansoRowlett

nick name said:


> Forgive the question, but did you use the correct RAM slots?


A2/B2 of course. Anyway, point being I was saying I hadn't experienced what he was since he was asking if others had.


----------



## crakej

Does anyone get the usual 3 equal beeps that used to be associated with memory training....?

(still not got over 3466  )


----------



## nick name

Can anyone explain why the higher the temperature the more power the CPU requires/uses? As it might pertain to Ryzen or as it pertains for any CPU? It's a new curiosity after observing the behavior.


----------



## gupsterg

nick name said:


> Can anyone explain why the higher the temperature the more power the CPU requires/uses? As it might pertain to Ryzen or as it pertains for any CPU? It's a new curiosity after observing the behavior.


Electrical characteristics change of silicon with temperature. Resistance, conductivity and leakage; some of the PDFs I've tried to digest are mind blowing on the complexities. The leakage leads to more current being used, resulting in more power, heat and so on. Pertains to all semiconductors.


----------



## Johan45

crakej said:


> I'm still struggling...
> 
> Anything beyond 3466 (which isn't reliable) I can not post. OC requires Hard cold reset to work.I have noticed that the machine tends to (after I power-on)... reboot once without making a sound - I assume early mem training failing?
> 
> Next power on fails with code F9 and 1 long, 2 short beeps - in fact this always happens on the second reboot. The AMI code is failed parity, but that doesn't make sense, at first I thought it was the usual 3 beeps I hear on my X370, but this is different. Does it beep like this for anyone else?
> 
> Last attempt it gives a code F9 and one beep.
> 
> This is like I have a completely different computer for me! till workin at it though...


I would try reflashing the BIOS only this time use the Flashback port


----------



## crakej

Spent last few hours working on computer. Found I was over-volting the cpu -don't ask me how I managed to get myself in that situation, but I did. Results are promising now - 4.1ghz ram @ 3466CL14 13 13 13 26. tCKE is 6, which seems to be crucial (used to be on1) but not tested that theory yet, just nice to get back to something recognisable.

Here's a run a just did with IBT AVX - highest result i''ve ever had at this ram speed (or possibly any speed!). Need 3533 previously, and even then, wasn't quite getting these results. Much more testing to do, but I will do a couple more preliminary tests @ 3533 and 3600 now I'm seeing what's going on a bit better!

Surprised how low SoC has come - can prob come a little lower - yet to test.


----------



## nick name

gupsterg said:


> Electrical characteristics change of silicon with temperature. Resistance, conductivity and leakage; some of the PDFs I've tried to digest are mind blowing on the complexities. The leakage leads to more current being used, resulting in more power, heat and so on. Pertains to all semiconductors.


Thanks @gupsterg.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Spent last few hours working on computer. Found I was over-volting the cpu -don't ask me how I managed to get myself in that situation, but I did. Results are promising now - 4.1ghz ram @ 3466CL14 13 13 13 26. tCKE is 6, which seems to be crucial (used to be on1) but not tested that theory yet, just nice to get back to something recognisable.
> 
> Here's a run a just did with IBT AVX - highest result i''ve ever had at this ram speed (or possibly any speed!). Need 3533 previously, and even then, wasn't quite getting these results. Much more testing to do, but I will do a couple more preliminary tests @ 3533 and 3600 now I'm seeing what's going on a bit better!
> 
> Surprised how low SoC has come - can prob come a little lower - yet to test.


Wow that's impressive. I can't even boot with your timings. And those IBT results are equally impressive.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Wow that's impressive. I can't even boot with your timings. And those IBT results are equally impressive.


I don't seem able to post or boot with almost anyone else's timings either - started like someone else suggested - used the Stilt's 3466 1.4v profile and changed the speed to 3400 - that got me going.... but has taken hours to get here....


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> I don't seem able to post or boot with almost anyone else's timings either - started like someone else suggested - used the Stilt's 3466 1.4v profile and changed the speed to 3400 - that got me going.... but has taken hours to get here....


It's up to ram kit design. I cant boot wiith Stilt's 3466 cause i cant boot with tCWL15 not a clue why second teamgroup kit same situation 14 works 16 works. Can use Stilt's timings with it changed to 14 no rpoblem. Took me weeks to find out that Slower timing wont work LOL


----------



## neikosr0x

lordzed83 said:


> It's up to ram kit design. I cant boot wiith Stilt's 3466 cause i cant boot with tCWL15 not a clue why second teamgroup kit same situation 14 works 16 works. Can use Stilt's timings with it changed to 14 no rpoblem. Took me weeks to find out that Slower timing wont work LOL


well now on 1103 my kit will hit 3566 no problem at cl16-15-15-15 rock solid, before i couldn't get it stable at all... also noticed that if i set CL15 the bios wont take it and just run it at cl16 but when setting it at cl14 works just well.


----------



## Erik9519

I realize this is the Crosshair VII thread but, I've just updated to the AGESA 1.0.0.6 for the X470-f Gaming strix and noticed that per core overclocking in Ryzen Master is still broken wonder if that's the case too for the Crosshair. 
If I set a different clock for any one core that core will get the desired clock while all the others get locked to 3.4GHz... (2700x)
Are there any other overclocking tools to do per-core overclocking which works?
Per-core ratio is nowhere to be found in the bios itself. 
I realize the gains from this kind of overclock can be minimal but AMD tells us which cores are the best so might as well make use of that information.


----------



## By-Tor

Is it normal for my MB to take a bit from when I push the play button to when it posts? Only talking about 10-12 seconds, but much long than the Asus Maximus VII Hero it replaced.

It seems like it goes through a long process before it posts.

Is there something I need to do to speed this process up?

ty


----------



## ComansoRowlett

By-Tor said:


> Is it normal for my MB to take a bit from when I push the play button to when it posts? Only talking about 10-12 seconds, but much long than the Asus Maximus VII Hero it replaced.
> 
> It seems like it goes through a long process before it posts.
> 
> Is there something I need to do to speed this process up?
> 
> ty


This appears to just be the nature of this board, likely to do with memory training thus why it takes longer. In the boot up setting you could lower the "post screen" to 1 or 0 to make it go faster, if you have a BCLK overclock it tends to take a little longer also I've found.


----------



## By-Tor

ComansoRowlett said:


> This appears to just be the nature of this board, likely to do with memory training thus why it takes longer. In the boot up setting you could lower the "post screen" to 1 or 0 to make it go faster, if you have a BCLK overclock it tends to take a little longer also I've found.


Roger. Thank you


----------



## Bo55

By-Tor said:


> Is it normal for my MB to take a bit from when I push the play button to when it posts? Only talking about 10-12 seconds, but much long than the Asus Maximus VII Hero it replaced.
> 
> It seems like it goes through a long process before it posts.
> 
> Is there something I need to do to speed this process up?
> 
> ty


My 2700x machine takes over 1 minute from power on to get to password screen using a 960 evo, i first get cold boot issue so it will turn on and off 3 times, after that i get memory training (EVERY TIME) and only after that will it post. No issues with my SR B-die memory either. My old 4770k rig with z-87c motherboard took only 11 seconds.. I mostly blame the motherboard in which was the first and now LAST "high end" board i will ever purchase.


----------



## gupsterg

nick name said:


> Thanks @gupsterg.


NP  .



crakej said:


> I don't seem able to post or boot with almost anyone else's timings either - started like someone else suggested - used the Stilt's 3466 1.4v profile and changed the speed to 3400 - that got me going.... but has taken hours to get here....


Nice to read your heading back up on RAM  . Damn nice timings  . 



lordzed83 said:


> It's up to ram kit design. I cant boot wiith Stilt's 3466 cause i cant boot with tCWL15 not a clue why second teamgroup kit same situation 14 works 16 works. Can use Stilt's timings with it changed to 14 no rpoblem. Took me weeks to find out that Slower timing wont work LOL


Odd tCWL does not work. Been like that for over 1yr+, dunno if it works at lower RAM MHz but for sure the speeds we usually target it does not apply.



neikosr0x said:


> well now on 1103 my kit will hit 3566 no problem at cl16-15-15-15 rock solid, before i couldn't get it stable at all... also noticed that if i set CL15 the bios wont take it and just run it at cl16 but when setting it at cl14 works just well.


Perhaps you have Gear Down Mode on [Auto] or [Enabled], it needs to be set to [Disabled] to allow odd CL, or else gets rounded up to nearest even number.



Erik9519 said:


> I realize this is the Crosshair VII thread but, I've just updated to the AGESA 1.0.0.6 for the X470-f Gaming strix and noticed that per core overclocking in Ryzen Master is still broken wonder if that's the case too for the Crosshair.
> If I set a different clock for any one core that core will get the desired clock while all the others get locked to 3.4GHz... (2700x)
> Are there any other overclocking tools to do per-core overclocking which works?
> Per-core ratio is nowhere to be found in the bios itself.
> I realize the gains from this kind of overclock can be minimal but AMD tells us which cores are the best so might as well make use of that information.


Per core overclocking!? did not know that was even possible on Ryzen. Never seen options in the UEFI and I'm pretty sure even Ryzen Master does not support per core overclocking.


----------



## Erik9519

gupsterg said:


> Per core overclocking!? did not know that was even possible on Ryzen. Never seen options in the UEFI and I'm pretty sure even Ryzen Master does not support per core overclocking.


Yes, I can do this in Ryzen Master


Spoiler














 however when I press apply and check the clocks (while running Cinebench) in HWinfo64 I see that only core 3 and core 7 run at at 4250 while all the others run at 3400 instead for some reason...


----------



## lordzed83

So whos hyped for 3600x cpus then?? Looks like we get 12 core drop in to C7H with 5ghz boost sounds like what id like hehe


----------



## Elrick

lordzed83 said:


> So whos hyped for 3600x cpus then?? Looks like we get 12 core drop in to C7H with 5ghz boost sounds like what id like hehe


Actually hoping for the C8H when it presents itself.

When you get the 3600X better fit the blighter into it's future comfort zone, being the x570 hardware.


----------



## neikosr0x

lordzed83 said:


> So whos hyped for 3600x cpus then?? Looks like we get 12 core drop in to C7H with 5ghz boost sounds like what id like hehe


if we get a 12c cpu with 4.6 or 4.8 boost, i'm pretty sure the ch7 would be able to handle it. The VRM on this board is very very solid with high current capacity.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Almost have 3600 stable...Only need to find what is causing an intermittent error. Performance is nice but only if I can keep these timings or better. Ill work on it more tonight and hopefully have it sorted.


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> Almost have 3600 stable...Only need to find what is causing an intermittent error. Performance is nice but only if I can keep these timings or better. Ill work on it more tonight and hopefully have it sorted.
> 
> View attachment 236156


Drop txt file ill have a look what You playing with. After 10 hours or more I'w given up on 3600. Not Always 1 error pops out :/


----------



## CJMitsuki

lordzed83 said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Almost have 3600 stable...Only need to find what is causing an intermittent error. Performance is nice but only if I can keep these timings or better. Ill work on it more tonight and hopefully have it sorted.
> 
> View attachment 236156
> 
> 
> 
> Drop txt file ill have a look what You playing with. After 10 hours or more I'w given up on 3600. Not Always 1 error pops out :/
Click to expand...

It will be quite awhile before I am home again. I have most of the board settings memorized if you need to know some specifics. Bc it will probably be about 10 hours before I leave work. I also need to do more testing at warmer temps. I’ve had the dimms at 35c but a lot of the testing has been much lower as it’s winter now and I made a shelf so that the comp can rest on the sill and reconfigured the fans on the side to pull in air from the outside and exhaust out the top of the case through some duct back outside. Temps were running about 6-8c with the dimms sitting at 10c most of the night. Nearly had 4.6ghz all core running below 1.6v. I hate that I can’t push past 104.8mhz bclk without destroying the benching run on a 3D workload or even one that is sensitive to disk speed since it affects the speed of my NVME. I go from 3600 seq read to 2000. Just dropping to PCIe 2.0. There needs to be a better way to push past 4.56ghz without a bclk increase. If the clocks wouldn’t lock at all core if you touched the ratio then that would be nice. Put the ration at 40x and push bclk from there. I could probably get 4.65ghz with 3600 on the dram bc it seems to stabilize the cpu clocks at lower voltage with higher dram freqs. But that could also have been all due to the cool temps.


----------



## westk

I have done 3600 but on each reboot is different their behavior.. 120% of RAM checked with HCI without errors, but I shutdown the PC and the nextday, 5% and I have errors. I dont get it.


----------



## HolyFist

CJMitsuki said:


> Almost have 3600 stable...Only need to find what is causing an intermittent error. Performance is nice but only if I can keep these timings or better. Ill work on it more tonight and hopefully have it sorted.
> 
> View attachment 236156


I've tested this as i have the same RAM as him: https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-463.html#post27741616

It's not stable, before 1%, 1% something, 2% i get RAM errors in Memtest (7 instances open).

I've tried your settings (with tiny tweak) and it was insta stable to 150-200%+ with 1.46V

I'm using 1.05 SOC and +0.0116 offset increase on CPU but this one still testing, with 0.025 is how i achieved these results along PE1 and multipler of 37.

However i don't know why i'm getting 61.2 latency.

GSkill F4-4133C19D-16GTZR is the RAM btw.

EDIT: CPU is not Overclocked, however i left it at 37 when testing previous link which made the 37x104 become quite hot, also if i disable offset increase the system randomly freezes.


----------



## Monoroch

Any way to limit max cpu ratio with PBO?
I add voltage, it try to get faster freq. I limit edc, ratio become to needed, but voltage lower than i want.


----------



## CJMitsuki

HolyFist said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Almost have 3600 stable...Only need to find what is causing an intermittent error. Performance is nice but only if I can keep these timings or better. Ill work on it more tonight and hopefully have it sorted.
> 
> View attachment 236156
> 
> 
> 
> I've tested this as i have the same RAM as him: https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-463.html#post27741616
> 
> It's not stable, before 1%, 1% something, 2% i get RAM errors in Memtest (7 instances open).
> 
> I've tried your settings (with tiny tweak) and it was insta stable to 150-200%+ with 1.46V
> 
> I'm using 1.05 SOC and +0.0116 offset increase on CPU but this one still testing, with 0.025 is how i achieved these results along PE1 and multipler of 37.
> 
> However i don't know why i'm getting 61.2 latency.
> 
> GSkill F4-4133C19D-16GTZR is the RAM btw.
> 
> EDIT: CPU is not Overclocked, however i left it at 37 when testing previous link which made the 37x104 become quite hot, also if i disable offset increase the system randomly freezes.
Click to expand...

You are at that latency likely due to the differences in Cad_Bus resistances and silicon differences. It’s logical we will have different outcomes even if the settings and components were exactly the same since no two cpu or Dram IC is the same within the silicon. It’s also likely due, in part, to me running at 4.5ghz and you were running at 4.15ghz. It doesn’t really affect the memory latency much, maybe -/+ .5ns but it does affect cache latency dramatically as you can see. My settings were PE4 with +.0875v offset with 104mhz baseclock, 1.48v on the ram, and I don’t apply SoC voltage like others usually do. I have it on “offset” but I put the offset value to “auto” then I go to NBIO options in the AMD CBS menu and adjust “SoC OC VID” and I’m fairly certain it’s set to 50 which sets a SoC voltage of something like 1.05v but I think it applies it at time of boot instead of afterwards, giving the system that initial stability it needs. I have been doing it like that for awhile now and it’s the best way to adjust SoC voltage. I also set nearly all voltages manually so there will be no variation due to “auto” settings as auto likes to differ from boot to boot, especially concerning voltages. My dram control reference voltage has been bumped to .6v on both “A” and “B” R Tune 1-4 is set to 63 but sometimes I will use 40 as an alternate value that has worked for me in the past, 838 on CLDO VDDP, IIRC. VDDP is .791v, VPP MEM is 2.55v, the others in “Tweakers Paradise” are manually set to their default value so auto cannot decide to change them. Streaming Stores, Opcache, HW Prefetchers, are all enabled. Determinism is on Performance, LLC is on 4, 140% current, Switching frequency is 400, Phases are set to extreme as well as the thermal balancing with 136 as the value set for the CPU. SoC is LLC 3, 140%, 400 Switching Freq, optimized phases. Dram settings are 130%, extreme, 300 Switching frequency, and boot voltage matches dram voltage. PLL is 1.9v and SB voltage is set to 1.1v. Also I’m planning to run through and figure out which PCIe and data ports I’m not using as well as USB and disabling all of that in Bios as that will aid in stability of the system as well as boot times and such. If there’s settings I missed and you wanna know just ask. Otherwise it’ll be around 9-10pm eastern US time before I can post a bios dump txt file.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Monoroch said:


> Any way to limit max cpu ratio with PBO?
> I add voltage, it try to get faster freq. I limit edc, ratio become to needed, but voltage lower than i want.


It can not exceed 43.5x so if you are running bclk then just do the math and you can keep it from exceeding 43.5 x your base clock as that is the limit of boost, hence the need to use bclk to go higher than 4.35ghz but you cannot control what the clocks do aside from that. You can only keep their boost ceiling at a certain level, whether it boosts to that reliably depends on your cooling and voltage offset.


----------



## CJMitsuki

westk said:


> I have done 3600 but on each reboot is different their behavior.. 120% of RAM checked with HCI without errors, but I shutdown the PC and the nextday, 5% and I have errors. I dont get it.


I believe this is due to having certain settings on “auto” especially voltages since they will vary boot to boot. I suppose other settings on auto could affect this too unless there is a hard rule as to what value it defaults to and some settings are like that but I would imagine some are determined dynamically during the system booting up and they will likely have variances in the values that are determined for them to be set at. This is why I manually set as much as I can, it lowers the chances of that behavior from what I’ve seen.


----------



## Syldon

lordzed83 said:


> So whos hyped for 3600x cpus then?? Looks like we get 12 core drop in to C7H with 5ghz boost sounds like what id like hehe



Super stoked here. I will pass on the February releases. I would rather wait for the 3850x variant when it is released.


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> Almost have 3600 stable...Only need to find what is causing an intermittent error. Performance is nice but only if I can keep these timings or better. Ill work on it more tonight and hopefully have it sorted.
> 
> View attachment 236156


1103 seemed more promising than it's feeling now. The tight 3600 timings I had overnight stable before are throwing a couple errors even after they've been backed off.


----------



## nick name

Monoroch said:


> Any way to limit max cpu ratio with PBO?
> I add voltage, it try to get faster freq. I limit edc, ratio become to needed, but voltage lower than i want.


So what is your goal?


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Almost have 3600 stable...Only need to find what is causing an intermittent error. Performance is nice but only if I can keep these timings or better. Ill work on it more tonight and hopefully have it sorted.
> 
> View attachment 236156
> 
> 
> 
> 1103 seemed more promising than it's feeling now. The tight 3600 timings I had overnight stable before are throwing a couple errors even after they've been backed off.
Click to expand...

Start weeding out any settings that are on Auto and set them to the preferred value so that there can be no changes. Even if that isn’t the problem it will be one thing to make the system more stable and consistent.


----------



## Monoroch

CJMitsuki said:


> It can not exceed 43.5x so if you are running bclk then just do the math and you can keep it from exceeding 43.5 x your base clock as that is the limit of boost, hence the need to use bclk to go higher than 4.35ghz but you cannot control what the clocks do aside from that. You can only keep their boost ceiling at a certain level, whether it boosts to that reliably depends on your cooling and voltage offset.


Sad. Lower bclk = zero pbo pros. As 1core freq=all core freq.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Monoroch said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> It can not exceed 43.5x so if you are running bclk then just do the math and you can keep it from exceeding 43.5 x your base clock as that is the limit of boost, hence the need to use bclk to go higher than 4.35ghz but you cannot control what the clocks do aside from that. You can only keep their boost ceiling at a certain level, whether it boosts to that reliably depends on your cooling and voltage offset.
> 
> 
> 
> Sad. Lower bclk = zero pbo pros. As 1core freq=all core freq.
Click to expand...

Use Performance Enhancer settings. Try Pe1 then try out PE2 and see if they fit you better. Make sure CPB is enabled


----------



## Monoroch

CJMitsuki said:


> Use Performance Enhancer settings. Try Pe1 then try out PE2 and see if they fit you better. Make sure CPB is enabled


I'm trying. My original post - Link
Still can't receive stability under stresstests, even with a bit lower freq.


----------



## HolyFist

CJMitsuki said:


> You are at that latency likely due to the differences in Cad_Bus resistances and silicon differences. It’s logical we will have different outcomes even if the settings and components were exactly the same since no two cpu or Dram IC is the same within the silicon. It’s also likely due, in part, to me running at 4.5ghz and you were running at 4.15ghz. It doesn’t really affect the memory latency much, maybe -/+ .5ns but it does affect cache latency dramatically as you can see. My settings were PE4 with +.0875v offset with 104mhz baseclock, 1.48v on the ram, and I don’t apply SoC voltage like others usually do. I have it on “offset” but I put the offset value to “auto” then I go to NBIO options in the AMD CBS menu and adjust “SoC OC VID” and I’m fairly certain it’s set to 50 which sets a SoC voltage of something like 1.05v but I think it applies it at time of boot instead of afterwards, giving the system that initial stability it needs. I have been doing it like that for awhile now and it’s the best way to adjust SoC voltage. I also set nearly all voltages manually so there will be no variation due to “auto” settings as auto likes to differ from boot to boot, especially concerning voltages. My dram control reference voltage has been bumped to .6v on both “A” and “B” R Tune 1-4 is set to 63 but sometimes I will use 40 as an alternate value that has worked for me in the past, 838 on CLDO VDDP, IIRC. VDDP is .791v, VPP MEM is 2.55v, the others in “Tweakers Paradise” are manually set to their default value so auto cannot decide to change them. Streaming Stores, Opcache, HW Prefetchers, are all enabled. Determinism is on Performance, LLC is on 4, 140% current, Switching frequency is 400, Phases are set to extreme as well as the thermal balancing with 136 as the value set for the CPU. SoC is LLC 3, 140%, 400 Switching Freq, optimized phases. Dram settings are 130%, extreme, 300 Switching frequency, and boot voltage matches dram voltage. PLL is 1.9v and SB voltage is set to 1.1v. Also I’m planning to run through and figure out which PCIe and data ports I’m not using as well as USB and disabling all of that in Bios as that will aid in stability of the system as well as boot times and such. If there’s settings I missed and you wanna know just ask. Otherwise it’ll be around 9-10pm eastern US time before I can post a bios dump txt file.


Thanks for the detailed input, i have some cores boosting to 4470, but when playing games i notice that RivaTuner overlay (using HWiNFO plugin) reports up to 4100MHz mostly and averaging 4000, however it only shows one value not per core (average of all since i dont want 16 lines of text on screen), those i check in HWiNFO, with that said, at 100 - 3466 RAM instead of 104 - 3605, it shows up to 4200MHz, both with Balanced Plan, other Plans core even less, i assume this is where PE comes in, however at offset of 0.025 and PE1 only my 2700X was hitting 78ºC max (real temp) with the X62 as i took that screenshot.

I can't begin to imagine how much high the temp would be if i used PE4.

Also according to Ryzen DRAM Calc my RAM quality is 90%, however for some reason i can never post with the values that software gives me (Fast preset).

I guess there's nothing i can do to lower latency? Ragardless it's the first time i'm able to use settings posted by someone else and even with different RAM, thank you very much!


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> Spent last few hours working on computer. Found I was over-volting the cpu -don't ask me how I managed to get myself in that situation, but I did. Results are promising now - 4.1ghz ram @ 3466CL14 13 13 13 26. tCKE is 6, which seems to be crucial (used to be on1) but not tested that theory yet, just nice to get back to something recognisable.
> 
> Here's a run a just did with IBT AVX - highest result i''ve ever had at this ram speed (or possibly any speed!). Need 3533 previously, and even then, wasn't quite getting these results. Much more testing to do, but I will do a couple more preliminary tests @ 3533 and 3600 now I'm seeing what's going on a bit better!
> 
> Surprised how low SoC has come - can prob come a little lower - yet to test.


Nice! Im always using tCKE as 6! 3533 and 3600 are still not fully stable over here. Going to try lowering main-timings @ 15 later!
But as comparison i did a IBT AVX with same timings. See attachment below



Bo55 said:


> My 2700x machine takes over 1 minute from power on to get to password screen using a 960 evo, i first get cold boot issue so it will turn on and off 3 times, after that i get memory training (EVERY TIME) and only after that will it post. No issues with my SR B-die memory either. My old 4770k rig with z-87c motherboard took only 11 seconds.. I mostly blame the motherboard in which was the first and now LAST "high end" board i will ever purchase.


1 Minute is too long but as you are saying it does a 3x cycle thats effecting the time a lot. Some of your settings (RAM) are not fully boot stable. Try different ProcODT or set RamBoot voltage same as RamVoltage!
These boards are not the fastest with startup probably because of the long boot-checkups! But if your 3x cycle is fixed its doable!



CJMitsuki said:


> Almost have 3600 stable...Only need to find what is causing an intermittent error. Performance is nice but only if I can keep these timings or better. Ill work on it more tonight and hopefully have it sorted.
> 
> View attachment 236156





westk said:


> I have done 3600 but on each reboot is different their behavior.. 120% of RAM checked with HCI without errors, but I shutdown the PC and the nextday, 5% and I have errors. I dont get it.


Hehe good luck. Thats the whole issue  ! Lost few days on it. Still not fully stable here!



nick name said:


> 1103 seemed more promising than it's feeling now. The tight 3600 timings I had overnight stable before are throwing a couple errors even after they've been backed off.


Same here.. i have multiple long Ramtest runs around with success @ 3000%+. Before i go over to +10k% + i always do a multiple quick tests to see if its reliable. But suddenly the next day it was not able to go over 500% anymore.


@crakej : Screenshot for comparision with a 2700x @ 4.2 and same RAM speeds and timings! Almost same as my own 3466 profile!


----------



## lordzed83

Syldon said:


> Super stoked here. I will pass on the February releases. I would rather wait for the 3850x variant when it is released.


Guess ya getting Crosshair VIII then ?? so far looks like we need new MB for 16 cores chips so i dtick to 12 cores if possible. I dont need more cores anyway.... I need Mhz !!!!!


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> It will be quite awhile before I am home again. I have most of the board settings memorized if you need to know some specifics. Bc it will probably be about 10 hours before I leave work. I also need to do more testing at warmer temps. I’ve had the dimms at 35c but a lot of the testing has been much lower as it’s winter now and I made a shelf so that the comp can rest on the sill and reconfigured the fans on the side to pull in air from the outside and exhaust out the top of the case through some duct back outside. Temps were running about 6-8c with the dimms sitting at 10c most of the night. Nearly had 4.6ghz all core running below 1.6v. I hate that I can’t push past 104.8mhz bclk without destroying the benching run on a 3D workload or even one that is sensitive to disk speed since it affects the speed of my NVME. I go from 3600 seq read to 2000. Just dropping to PCIe 2.0. There needs to be a better way to push past 4.56ghz without a bclk increase. If the clocks wouldn’t lock at all core if you touched the ratio then that would be nice. Put the ration at 40x and push bclk from there. I could probably get 4.65ghz with 3600 on the dram bc it seems to stabilize the cpu clocks at lower voltage with higher dram freqs. But that could also have been all due to the cool temps.


Well only You here got temperature hax I gotta work with 1.425vcore max as that hits 75c after some stress tests so cant get away with more than that. even with playing around 3600 does not seem faster than 3535 i got atm. Tooo many limiting problems main is temperature of cpu second memory kit :/


----------



## CJMitsuki

lordzed83 said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> It will be quite awhile before I am home again. I have most of the board settings memorized if you need to know some specifics. Bc it will probably be about 10 hours before I leave work. I also need to do more testing at warmer temps. I’ve had the dimms at 35c but a lot of the testing has been much lower as it’s winter now and I made a shelf so that the comp can rest on the sill and reconfigured the fans on the side to pull in air from the outside and exhaust out the top of the case through some duct back outside. Temps were running about 6-8c with the dimms sitting at 10c most of the night. Nearly had 4.6ghz all core running below 1.6v. I hate that I can’t push past 104.8mhz bclk without destroying the benching run on a 3D workload or even one that is sensitive to disk speed since it affects the speed of my NVME. I go from 3600 seq read to 2000. Just dropping to PCIe 2.0. There needs to be a better way to push past 4.56ghz without a bclk increase. If the clocks wouldn’t lock at all core if you touched the ratio then that would be nice. Put the ration at 40x and push bclk from there. I could probably get 4.65ghz with 3600 on the dram bc it seems to stabilize the cpu clocks at lower voltage with higher dram freqs. But that could also have been all due to the cool temps.
> 
> 
> 
> Well only You here got temperature hax I gotta work with 1.425vcore max as that hits 75c after some stress tests so cant get away with more than that. even with playing around 3600 does not seem faster than 3535 i got atm. Tooo many limiting problems main is temperature of cpu second memory kit :/
Click to expand...

From the looks of it the weather is cool enough where you are to do just what I did. I parked mine on a window sill in my room and let it pull the cold air into the case through the side and made an adapter so that the front could pull the air as well even though it wasn’t facing the window. Looks like you’re getting down to 1-2c in the next day or so.


----------



## smokin_mitch

Hi I'm a new member just joined this forum today to hopefully get a question answered about my 2700x/C7H, I'm running PE4 and it seems to run quite well for me but whenever I put my pc to sleep then wake it up I lose PE4 it seems to go back to stock settings and requires a reboot to get my PE4 clocks back? I run PE4 with a -0.05v offset and it holds 4.25ghz and remains around 70c when running cinebench i'm cooling it with an ek mlc phoenix 360mm in push/pull 

so basically is there something i'm missing in bios to make PE4 work when waking my pc from sleep ?


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> Nice! Im always using tCKE as 6! 3533 and 3600 are still not fully stable over here. Going to try lowering main-timings @ 15 later!
> But as comparison i did a IBT AVX with same timings. See attachment below
> 
> @crakej : Screenshot for comparision with a 2700x @ 4.2 and same RAM speeds and timings! Almost same as my own 3466 profile!


Looking good! I've found that I can lower my tCKE to 1 now my voltages are better.

I've got 3533 stable. Going to see ifI can get my SoC down a bit more, and also going to give 3600 another proper go....


----------



## HolyFist

I messed up my Overclock while testing and now i don't know how to fix it since it was a mix of settings from two different posts, the only thing i touched after was voltages, nothing in RAM timings window.

Bellow in the screen with blue background was the stable one with over 1h, outside is current one that i get errors before 20min, sometimes 5.

I noticed that the VSoC voltages are different along VDDP which seems rather low and i can't seem to get them like before.

I've tried 1.05 and it's pretty low, if i set to 1.1 it gets close but still above, i'm pretty sure i was using 1.1 but neither 1.05 or 1.1 is stable now (altho 1.05 seems to last around 20 minutes and 1.1 i get errors before 10%)

I've cleared CMOS and try again with timings and voltages, but the voltages are still wrong.

Anyone knows what did i mess up? Thanks!


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> From the looks of it the weather is cool enough where you are to do just what I did. I parked mine on a window sill in my room and let it pull the cold air into the case through the side and made an adapter so that the front could pull the air as well even though it wasn’t facing the window. Looks like you’re getting down to 1-2c in the next day or so.


Nottingham man 6c last night 11 in day. Thats British Winter for ya  maybe will see snow for 1 day Maybe.


----------



## CJMitsuki

lordzed83 said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> From the looks of it the weather is cool enough where you are to do just what I did. I parked mine on a window sill in my room and let it pull the cold air into the case through the side and made an adapter so that the front could pull the air as well even though it wasn’t facing the window. Looks like you’re getting down to 1-2c in the next day or so.
> 
> 
> 
> Nottingham man 6c last night 11 in day. Thats British Winter for ya /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif maybe will see snow for 1 day Maybe.
Click to expand...

Same type weather here. Southeastern US is usually hot and humid with short winters. Anything below 50f is cold to me.


----------



## CJMitsuki

smokin_mitch said:


> Hi I'm a new member just joined this forum today to hopefully get a question answered about my 2700x/C7H, I'm running PE4 and it seems to run quite well for me but whenever I put my pc to sleep then wake it up I lose PE4 it seems to go back to stock settings and requires a reboot to get my PE4 clocks back? I run PE4 with a -0.05v offset and it holds 4.25ghz and remains around 70c when running cinebench i'm cooling it with an ek mlc phoenix 360mm in push/pull
> 
> so basically is there something i'm missing in bios to make PE4 work when waking my pc from sleep ?


Hmm, no clue on this one. I don’t sleep so neither does my PC 😂


----------



## ComansoRowlett

lordzed83 said:


> Nottingham man 6c last night 11 in day. Thats British Winter for ya  maybe will see snow for 1 day Maybe.


Haha I feel your pain. Last year I got snow once and it settled to an inch that built up, then melted with in 5 minutes as soon as it stopped snowing lol! It's currently around 12C where I am now, wish it'd get colder in England.


----------



## HolyFist

Ignore previous post, i fixed it, it's done like the first pic, PE1, 37 Multipler, 104 BCLK, 1.1 SoC and 1.46 RAM, CPU offset +0.025

Both were done on High Performance power Plan (which helped me find out why the values were different).

EDIT: This was also done on main Windows account with a lot of stuff running in background and also MemTest usually takes 30 minutes to get to 100% coverage.

Either way here's the text file with settings:



Spoiler



[2018/12/06 00:10:35]
Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
eCLK Mode [Synchronous mode]
BCLK Frequency [104.0000]
BCLK_Divider [Auto]
Performance Enhancer [Level 1]
CPU Core Ratio [37.00]
Performance Bias [Auto]
Memory Frequency [DDR4-3605MHz]
Core Performance Boost [Enabled]
SMT Mode [Auto]
TPU [Keep Current Settings]
TRC_EOM [Auto]
TRTP_EOM [Auto]
TRRS_S_EOM [Auto]
TRRS_L_EOM [Auto]
TWTR_EOM [Auto]
TWTR_L_EOM [Auto]
TWCL_EOM [Auto]
TWR_EOM [Auto]
TFAW_EOM [Auto]
TRCT_EOM [Auto]
TREFI_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_DD_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SD_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SC_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SCL_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_DD_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SD_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SC_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SCL_EOM [Auto]
TWRRD_EOM [Auto]
TRDWR_EOM [Auto]
TWRRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto]
DRAM CAS# Latency [14]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [15]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [14]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [14]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [24]
Trc [38]
TrrdS [4]
TrrdL [4]
Tfaw [16]
TwtrS [3]
TwtrL [8]
Twr [10]
Trcpage [Auto]
TrdrdScl [2]
TwrwrScl [2]
Trfc [280]
Trfc2 [Auto]
Trfc4 [Auto]
Tcwl [12]
Trtp [6]
Trdwr [9]
Twrrd [3]
TwrwrSc [1]
TwrwrSd [7]
TwrwrDd [7]
TrdrdSc [1]
TrdrdSd [5]
TrdrdDd [5]
Tcke [1]
ProcODT [60 ohm]
Cmd2T [1T]
Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
Power Down Enable [Disabled]
RttNom [RZQ/7]
RttWr [Dynamic ODT Off]
RttPark [RZQ/5]
MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
MemCkeSetup [Auto]
MemCadBusClkDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
CPU Load-line Calibration [Auto]
CPU Current Capability [Auto]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Auto]
VRM Spread Spectrum [Auto]
CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
CPU Power Phase Control [Auto]
CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Auto]
VDDSOC Current Capability [Auto]
VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed VDDSOC Switching Frequency(KHz) [400]
VDDSOC Phase Control [Power Phase Response]
Manual Adjustment [Ultra Fast]
DRAM Current Capability [100%]
DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [300]
DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.46000]
VTTDDR Voltage [0.72500]
VPP_MEM Voltage [2.50000]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
VDDP Voltage [0.85500]
1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
PLL reference voltage [Auto]
T Offset [Auto]
Sense MI Skew [Auto]
Sense MI Offset [Auto]
Promontory presence [Auto]
Clock Amplitude [Auto]
CLDO VDDP voltage [700]
CPU Core Voltage [Offset mode]
CPU Offset Mode Sign [+]
- CPU Core Voltage Offset [0.01875]
CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
- VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.10000]
DRAM Voltage [1.46000]
1.8V PLL Voltage [1.80000]
1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
Firmware TPM [Disable]
Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
PSS Support [Auto]
SVM Mode [Disabled]
Onboard LED [Disabled]
Q-Code LED Function [Disabled after POST]
SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
SATA Mode [AHCI]
NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
SMART Self Test [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
SB Link Mode [Auto]
Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
When system is in working state [On]
When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [Off]
Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
Wi-Fi Controller [Disabled]
Bluetooth Controller [Disabled]
ErP Ready [Disabled]
Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
Power On By RTC [Disabled]
Network Stack [Disabled]
Device [OCZ-VERTEX3]
Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
USB Mass Storage Driver Support [Enabled]
SKYMEDI USB Drive [Auto]
U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
U31G1_5 [Enabled]
U31G1_6 [Enabled]
U31G1_7 [Enabled]
U31G1_8 [Enabled]
U31G1_9 [Enabled]
U31G1_10 [Enabled]
USB11 [Enabled]
USB12 [Enabled]
USB13 [Enabled]
USB14 [Enabled]
USB15 [Enabled]
CPU Temperature [Monitor]
MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
PCH Temperature [Monitor]
T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
5V Voltage [Monitor]
12V Voltage [Monitor]
CPU Q-Fan Control [Auto]
CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [200 RPM]
CPU Fan Profile [Standard]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 3 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [Auto]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Source [CPU]
HAMP Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
HAMP Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
HAMP Fan Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
PSPP Policy [Auto]
Fast Boot [Enabled]
Next Boot after AC Power Loss [Normal Boot]
AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
Boot Logo Display [Enabled]
POST Delay Time [3 sec]
Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
Launch CSM [Enabled]
Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
OS Type [Other OS]
Setup Animator [Disabled]
ASUS Grid Install Service [Enabled]
Load from Profile [1]
Profile Name [3600Stable100%]
Save to Profile [1]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
BCLK Frequency [Auto]
CPU Ratio [Auto]
DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A2]
Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
RedirectForReturnDis [Auto]
L2 TLB Associativity [Auto]
Platform First Error Handling [Auto]
Enable IBS [Auto]
Global C-state Control [Auto]
Power Supply Idle Control [Auto]
Opcache Control [Auto]
Custom Pstate0 [Auto]
Custom Pstate1 [Auto]
Custom Pstate2 [Auto]
Custom Pstate3 [Auto]
Custom Pstate4 [Auto]
Custom Pstate5 [Auto]
Custom Pstate6 [Auto]
Custom Pstate7 [Auto]
Relaxed EDC throttling [Auto]
Downcore control [Auto]
SMTEN [Auto]
SEV-ES ASID Space Limit [1]
Streaming Stores Control [Auto]
ACPI _CST C1 Declaration [Auto]
L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
DRAM scrub time [Auto]
Redirect scrubber control [Auto]
Disable DF sync flood propagation [Auto]
Freeze DF module queues on error [Auto]
GMI encryption control [Auto]
xGMI encryption control [Auto]
CC6 memory region encryption [Auto]
Location of private memory regions [Auto]
System probe filter [Auto]
Memory interleaving [Channel]
Memory interleaving size [512 Bytes]
Channel interleaving hash [Auto]
Memory Clear [Auto]
ACPI SLIT Distance Control [Auto]
Power Down Enable [Auto]
Cmd2T [Auto]
Gear Down Mode [Auto]
CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
Data Poisoning [Auto]
DRAM ECC Symbol Size [Auto]
DRAM ECC Enable [Auto]
TSME [Auto]
Data Scramble [Auto]
Chipselect Interleaving [Auto]
BankGroupSwap [Disabled]
Address Hash Bank [Auto]
Address Hash CS [Auto]
SPD Read Optimization [Enabled]
MBIST Enable [Disabled]
MBIST Aggressors [Auto]
MBIST Per Bit Slave Die Reporting [Auto]
IOMMU [Auto]
Determinism Slider [Auto]
cTDP Control [Auto]
PSI [Auto]
ACS Enable [Auto]
PCIe ARI Support [Auto]
CLDO_VDDP Control [Auto]
HD Audio Enable [Auto]
Force PCIe gen speed [Auto]
Processor temperature Control [Auto]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
SOC OVERCLOCK VID [0]
Mode0 [Auto]


----------



## ryouiki

Sadly my 4790k decided it couldn't wait a few more months for Zen2 and fell over dead, so I ended up with CH7 + 2700x as a holdover.

Flashed board to 1103, seems to have no issues with 32 GB (4x8 GSkill FlareX 3200CL14) by just enabling DCOP. Haven't had much time to look at much else at this point. Is it normal for voltages on this board to be so high on Auto? VCore will spike to 1.5V+, SOC seems to be set somewhere around 1.1-1.2V.

Unfortunately as a Intel convert not super familiar with this platform, and having a hard time processing all the information in this thread. PE Level 2 + Negative VCore Offset + Lower SOC voltage as first steps?


----------



## nick name

ryouiki said:


> Sadly my 4790k decided it couldn't wait a few more months for Zen2 and fell over dead, so I ended up with CH7 + 2700x as a holdover.
> 
> Flashed board to 1103, seems to have no issues with 32 GB (4x8 GSkill FlareX 3200CL14) by just enabling DCOP. Haven't had much time to look at much else at this point. Is it normal for voltages on this board to be so high on Auto? VCore will spike to 1.5V+, SOC seems to be set somewhere around 1.1-1.2V.
> 
> Unfortunately as a Intel convert not super familiar with this platform, and having a hard time processing all the information in this thread. PE Level 2 + Negative VCore Offset + Lower SOC voltage as first steps?


Set SOC to 1.1V at most and then you can work your way down from there.

And if you use PE 3 then the CPU won't downclock while under load. Also enable Core Performance Boost.

And if you use load line calibration level 4 you can use a negative offset of around .0687~.075V. That will get those voltages lower. But yeah those voltages are normal. 

Aslo you can use any Windows power plan you'd like, but just make certain that minimum processor state is set to anything below 50%.


----------



## Praetorr

smokin_mitch said:


> Hi I'm a new member just joined this forum today to hopefully get a question answered about my 2700x/C7H, I'm running PE4 and it seems to run quite well for me but whenever I put my pc to sleep then wake it up I lose PE4 it seems to go back to stock settings and requires a reboot to get my PE4 clocks back? I run PE4 with a -0.05v offset and it holds 4.25ghz and remains around 70c when running cinebench i'm cooling it with an ek mlc phoenix 360mm in push/pull
> 
> so basically is there something i'm missing in bios to make PE4 work when waking my pc from sleep ?


I had this same concern (only using PE3), which I researched in-depth several months ago. I think I posted a link directly to the post earlier in this thread, but basically an Asus rep confirmed that because PE3/PE4 are basically "hacks" they simply will not work after resuming from sleep. There's nothing you can do, other than just not use sleep mode or live with the limitation, sadly.


----------



## crakej

Almost got 3600 reliable! Voltages are lower than previous AGESA. Ram CPU and SoC. On 'old' voltages it just doesn't post! Please bear in mind that most of my (our?) readings in HWInfo are a little lower than set in bios. Will try remember to get screenies of bios settings in future...

Edit: I should add, that according to Aida, perf is only very marginally better than 3533, but in some tests, like IBT, performance is slightly worse than 3533 (forgot to take screenie of Aida - duh!).


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Almost got 3600 reliable! Voltages are lower than previous AGESA. Ram CPU and SoC. On 'old' voltages it just doesn't post! Please bear in mind that most of my (our?) readings in HWInfo are a little lower than set in bios. Will try remember to get screenies of bios settings in future...
> 
> Edit: I should add, that according to Aida, perf is only very marginally better than 3533, but in some tests, like IBT, performance is slightly worse than 3533 (forgot to take screenie of Aida - duh!).


Ye noticed same thing 3533 with sae timings as 3600 is well slower...


----------



## CJMitsuki

crakej said:


> Almost got 3600 reliable! Voltages are lower than previous AGESA. Ram CPU and SoC. On 'old' voltages it just doesn't post! Please bear in mind that most of my (our?) readings in HWInfo are a little lower than set in bios. Will try remember to get screenies of bios settings in future...
> 
> Edit: I should add, that according to Aida, perf is only very marginally better than 3533, but in some tests, like IBT, performance is slightly worse than 3533 (forgot to take screenie of Aida - duh!).


I think the marginally better part could be due to your tertiaries being so tight. Relax the tWRWR timings and tighten a bit on the later primaries such as tWtrlS and L. I didn’t get a chance to do anything last night since I ended up working 14 hours and got to my desk and into the bios and fell asleep with my hands still on the keyboard. Woke this morning still in bios lol. But am about to take an early day and do some testing.


----------



## crakej

;27747984 said:


> I think the marginally better part could be due to your tertiaries being so tight. Relax the scl timings and tighten a bit on the later primaries such as tWtrlS and L. I didn’t get a chance to do anything last night since I ended up working 14 hours and got to my desk and into the bios and fell asleep with my hands still on the keyboard. Woke this morning still in bios lol. But am about to take an early day and do some testing.


Ha! I woke at about 3am with bios screen on as well... :asleepysm

I'm finding 3600 hard to nail - I can get it pretty stable (2000% RamTest, IBT V Hard), but raising any voltages makes it LESS stable.

So now we know the voltages are lower - where do we go? Timings. I'm trying to stabilize my TT, but think I have to expect they are just too tight for this speed. I'm also going to try your suggestions, then using T2 - I've had interesting results with that before - it might even let our speeds go higher. This will take a while, but I might cheat and do the T2 test first.....and or 3733  3600 boredom is creeping in - I need to do something a little different for a bit - might learn something interesting, then i'll come back to this and make it stable!

My little plan to deviate briefly has ended - well - none for the wiser.... I could not get IBT V Hard to complete with T2, Geardown on and off. I'm guessing T2 may need different voltages and/or other timings to work.

Back to testing 3600 using my notes and some ideas from CJMitsuki. Gone down to CL14 15 14 14 28 T1 which is testing now on RamTest just past 2500%


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> I think the marginally better part could be due to your tertiaries being so tight. Relax the tWRWR timings and tighten a bit on the later primaries such as tWtrlS and L. I didn’t get a chance to do anything last night since I ended up working 14 hours and got to my desk and into the bios and fell asleep with my hands still on the keyboard. Woke this morning still in bios lol. But am about to take an early day and do some testing.


Have You see any ACTUAL gain going from 3533 to 3600 tho ??


----------



## CJMitsuki

lordzed83 said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think the marginally better part could be due to your tertiaries being so tight. Relax the tWRWR timings and tighten a bit on the later primaries such as tWtrlS and L. I didn’t get a chance to do anything last night since I ended up working 14 hours and got to my desk and into the bios and fell asleep with my hands still on the keyboard. Woke this morning still in bios lol. But am about to take an early day and do some testing.
> 
> 
> 
> Have You see any ACTUAL gain going from 3533 to 3600 tho ??
Click to expand...

Ive seen gain in the form of higher cpu freqs at lower voltages so it seems like the higher the stable frequency on dram the more support you have for higher cpu overclocks. You know, since we are using an IMC now and when the next gen comes out we will have to learn Ryzen dram all over again since it will essentially be using a north bridge instead of an integrated controller. I’m expecting latencies to be30-40ns at 4000mhz+


----------



## crakej

So far for me, 3600 only has advantage on certain loads - currently experimenting to see what's what, but where there is an improvement, it's there, but small. Current test is better than any previous! Very hopeful I've nailed 3600! Have to go out so will leave RamTest running see what I get.

These lower voltages really had me stumped! Couldn't believe it was real! Got me thinking, I think about 3 months after 1xxx was released, a new AGESA came out which for me, increased the voltage required by my exact same system. The values I'm using now are not far off what they were when series one launched (again, FOR ME!). Am I alone in this thought?


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> So far for me, 3600 only has advantage on certain loads - currently experimenting to see what's what, but where there is an improvement, it's there, but small. Current test is better than any previous! Very hopeful I've nailed 3600! Have to go out so will leave RamTest running see what I get.
> 
> These lower voltages really had me stumped! Couldn't believe it was real! Got me thinking, I think about 3 months after 1xxx was released, a new AGESA came out which for me, increased the voltage required by my exact same system. The values I'm using now are not far off what they were when series one launched (again, FOR ME!). Am I alone in this thought?


Nope your not alone in your thinking. AGESA 1.0.0.6 is a game changer IMO. On the previous one I had to use 1.5+ dram voltage to be stable. With 1.0.0.6 I am under 1.5 actually 1.46 at 3600 stable. As I showed it is possible to boot ram at 3800 on the 2700X I just had other things in real life to spend much time with it.


----------



## ryouiki

nick name said:


> Set SOC to 1.1V at most and then you can work your way down from there.
> 
> And if you use PE 3 then the CPU won't downclock while under load. Also enable Core Performance Boost.
> 
> And if you use load line calibration level 4 you can use a negative offset of around .0687~.075V. That will get those voltages lower. But yeah those voltages are normal.
> 
> Aslo you can use any Windows power plan you'd like, but just make certain that minimum processor state is set to anything below 50%.


Thanks for this. Right now I'm not really looking to push things too hard, maybe just get memory timings cleaned up while staying @3200. Just need a stable system to keep me going until Zen2 refresh is actually on the market.

Right now things appear to be stable with PE Level 2, -0.10V VCore Offset, 1.0V SOC. I attempted to tighten up the timings based on the calculator... this required a slight uptick in memory voltage (1.355-1.360) to POST properly, but has passed 12+ hours of memory testing. Not sure how well I did here.


----------



## lordzed83

ComansoRowlett said:


> Haha I feel your pain. Last year I got snow once and it settled to an inch that built up, then melted with in 5 minutes as soon as it stopped snowing lol! It's currently around 12C where I am now, wish it'd get colder in England.


**** colder. Try runnign to work every day when its around 0. Not to mention I crashed my classic car on icy road at start of january...


----------



## skymeows

hey guys, im pretty new to overclocking my stuff but im pretty happy with my results!
Im running; PE2 with - 0.106 offset as vcore and 1.42 on the dram voltage


//: sorry for the stupid question but what does geardown mode? leaving it on results in me having random errors while off im stable


----------



## crakej

Ok, I'm 99% stable!

I've come home to find RamTest failed at 9899%. I'm normally happy with 4000%+. I will test p95 tomorrow which I like to finish an hour, but i'm petty sure it can do that. Very happy! More tests including 3733/3800 tomorrow.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Ok, I'm 99% stable!
> 
> I've come home to find RamTest failed at 9899%. I'm normally happy with 4000%+. I will test p95 tomorrow which I like to finish an hour, but i'm petty sure it can do that. Very happy! More tests including 3733/3800 tomorrow.


Ayyyy bravo. Still very jealous of your timings.


----------



## Singularity48

Something I hadn't considered which probably shows how new I am to overclocking in general, the SoC voltage above like 1.05v has pretty strong effects on full package heat and causes my XFR to clock about 100mhz lower in stress tests. Backed off from my 3200 12-13-13-22-36 because of that. Seems like it takes way more power to lower timings than to bump frequency, which makes sense. My kit wouldn't stabilize at those timings without 1.5 vdimm and around 1.04 SoC, but i've got it running real easy at 3333 14-14-14-28-42 rfc 242, 1.375 vdimm 1.0 SoC. gonna see if I can get 3400/3466 with those timings without going crazy on voltage.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Ok, I'm 99% stable!
> 
> I've come home to find RamTest failed at 9899%. I'm normally happy with 4000%+. I will test p95 tomorrow which I like to finish an hour, but i'm petty sure it can do that. Very happy! More tests including 3733/3800 tomorrow.


Im happy with 1000 hehe. What timings and volts Uou ended up with?? I went from 1.1 soc to 1.05 and gained stability


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> Im happy with 1000 hehe. What timings and volts Uou ended up with?? I went from 1.1 soc to 1.05 and gained stability


I had to lower my SoC to 1.00625 from 1.04v, I'm using LLC5 for my testing as it holds the voltage steady. This also allows me to see the even with LLC5, i'm not going to spike my voltages high enough (at current settings!) to do any damage. Sweet. CPU offset is currently +0.01250 (used to be MUCH higher!) which is about 1.362v for my 4.1GHz

Edit: meant to say that by loosening the timings a bit my performance has in fact improved a bit. Will do further tests later.

A (VERY) brief test of 3666/3733 was fruitless, but still getting the hang of the new AGESA....


----------



## CJMitsuki

I got tired of 3600mhz, its so close yet so far away. So, I went and found a better setup. Better than PE1,2, or 3 and matches 4 in overall performance but this setup is more geared toward single core speeds. Found a couple of options in the Bios that helped a bit too. Address Hash CS-Disabled, Address Hash Bank- Enabled, and Chipselect Interleaving- Disabled helped stability and gave a small bandwidth boost. The Cache latencies on this setup are insane. Performance Enhancer left at default which will let it use regular PBO/XFR then just adjust the bclk. It uses a lot less voltage than PE4 and only spikes when the single core is going. At 104.8mhz bclk the all core is only 4375mhz with single core at 4557mhz. They must have changed PBO behaviors or something because it never ran like this or affected the cache like this. The only thing 3600 has on it is Write bandwidth and latency by a small margin.


----------



## CJMitsuki

crakej said:


> I had to lower my SoC to 1.00625 from 1.04v, I'm using LLC5 for my testing as it holds the voltage steady. This also allows me to see the even with LLC5, i'm not going to spike my voltages high enough (at current settings!) to do any damage. Sweet. CPU offset is currently +0.01250 (used to be MUCH higher!) which is about 1.362v for my 4.1GHz



Lets see some benchmark numbers


----------



## Yviena

Hmm weird the 2 right bottom fan headers works but doesn't show rpm, while all other fan headers display rpm so I know it's not the fan/cable.


----------



## crakej

3600 CL14 15 14 14 28 42 270 Ram 1.42v CPU 4.1GHz Offset + 0.01250v SoC 1.00625v - Preliminary bench tests - CB11 Perf Bias.

Very impressive!!! However too much freezing going on to use this Bias setting. Testing continues.


----------



## crakej

crakej said:


> 3600 CL14 15 14 14 28 42 270 Ram 1.42v CPU 4.1GHz Offset + 0.01250v SoC 1.00625v - Preliminary bench tests - CB11, Aida and CB15 Perf Bias.
> 
> CB11 best performance so far!!! Although a little freezing happened during IBT test, seem most snappy Bias setting on the desktop. I don't often game and have other varied loads including VMs


Edit: Preliminary tests complete. Testing continued in day to day use though.....


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Edit: Preliminary tests complete. Testing continued in day to day use though.....


drop txt file interested how You got power optionsset up /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif just got back from work and ill play around also /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif


----------



## lordzed83

Update droped soc to 1.0125 llc4 and ddr4 to 1.425 passed ibt and memtest. Unexpected. Happy to keave it at this but let me reboot with 3600 hehe


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> I got tired of 3600mhz, its so close yet so far away. So, I went and found a better setup. Better than PE1,2, or 3 and matches 4 in overall performance but this setup is more geared toward single core speeds. Found a couple of options in the Bios that helped a bit too. Address Hash CS-Disabled, Address Hash Bank- Enabled, and Chipselect Interleaving- Disabled helped stability and gave a small bandwidth boost. The Cache latencies on this setup are insane. Performance Enhancer left at default which will let it use regular PBO/XFR then just adjust the bclk. It uses a lot less voltage than PE4 and only spikes when the single core is going. At 104.8mhz bclk the all core is only 4375mhz with single core at 4557mhz. They must have changed PBO behaviors or something because it never ran like this or affected the cache like this. The only thing 3600 has on it is Write bandwidth and latency by a small margin.


I did some testing with Aida latencies and BCLK a while ago and found that increased CPU speed and higher BCLK bring latencies down exactly the same as you're experiencing.


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> I got tired of 3600mhz, its so close yet so far away. So, I went and found a better setup. Better than PE1,2, or 3 and matches 4 in overall performance but this setup is more geared toward single core speeds. Found a couple of options in the Bios that helped a bit too. Address Hash CS-Disabled, Address Hash Bank- Enabled, and Chipselect Interleaving- Disabled helped stability and gave a small bandwidth boost. The Cache latencies on this setup are insane. Performance Enhancer left at default which will let it use regular PBO/XFR then just adjust the bclk. It uses a lot less voltage than PE4 and only spikes when the single core is going. At 104.8mhz bclk the all core is only 4375mhz with single core at 4557mhz. They must have changed PBO behaviors or something because it never ran like this or affected the cache like this. The only thing 3600 has on it is Write bandwidth and latency by a small margin.
> 
> 
> 
> I did some testing with Aida latencies and BCLK a while ago and found that increased CPU speed and higher BCLK bring latencies down exactly the same as you're experiencing.
Click to expand...

It’s not as much as you think. It barely affects the memory latency but the cache latencies are directly related to the cpu so of course they drop with higher clocks but even with PE4 at 104.8mhz which at 43.5x is 4557mhz all core it would only drop the L3 cache to 8.7ns and has always, and still is like that. This was no different on PBO the last time I tested it which was around 0804 bios revision. Now the L3 cache consistently hits 8.3ns that’s 4.6% drop in what I thought was already quite low latency for L3 at 8.7ns. At 4.35ghz, depending on setup, is anywhere from 8.8ns-9ns with the latter being the case most of the time. I’m just curious as to what is so different from PE and PBO besides the obvious behaviors? And what did they change bc they for sure changed something besides the memory compatibility as shown by them removing Scalar settings so they had to have touched PBO functionality for it to behave so dramatically. I really wish the all core boost would hit 4.45ghz instead of 4.375ghz. It would be a perfect ratio of single core to multicore but I won’t complain too much bc it runs so cool and is very stable. I’m running up to 6 cores at 4.57ghz with LLC 1 and all LLC settings on the lowest it can go.


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> Update droped soc to 1.0125 llc4 and ddr4 to 1.425 passed ibt and memtest. Unexpected. Happy to keave it at this but let me reboot with 3600 hehe


 There ya go - lower voltages rule!

Here's my settings anyway...



Spoiler



[2018/12/07 18:24:11]
Ai Overclock Tuner [Default]
CPU Core Ratio [41.00]
Performance Bias [CB11.5]
Memory Frequency [DDR4-3600MHz]
Core Performance Boost [Disabled]
SMT Mode [Auto]
EPU Power Saving Mode [Disabled]
TPU [Keep Current Settings]
TRC_EOM [Auto]
TRTP_EOM [Auto]
TRRS_S_EOM [Auto]
TRRS_L_EOM [Auto]
TWTR_EOM [Auto]
TWTR_L_EOM [Auto]
TWCL_EOM [Auto]
TWR_EOM [Auto]
TFAW_EOM [Auto]
TRCT_EOM [Auto]
TREFI_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_DD_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SD_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SC_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SCL_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_DD_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SD_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SC_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SCL_EOM [Auto]
TWRRD_EOM [Auto]
TRDWR_EOM [Auto]
TWRRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto]
DRAM CAS# Latency [14]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [15]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [14]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [14]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [28]
Trc [42]
TrrdS [4]
TrrdL [4]
Tfaw [16]
TwtrS [4]
TwtrL [8]
Twr [12]
Trcpage [Auto]
TrdrdScl [2]
TwrwrScl [2]
Trfc [270]
Trfc2 [Auto]
Trfc4 [Auto]
Tcwl [12]
Trtp [8]
Trdwr [Auto]
Twrrd [2]
TwrwrSc [1]
TwrwrSd [4]
TwrwrDd [4]
TrdrdSc [1]
TrdrdSd [4]
TrdrdDd [4]
Tcke [1]
ProcODT [60 ohm]
Cmd2T [1T]
Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
Power Down Enable [Disabled]
RttNom [Rtt_Nom Disable]
RttWr [Dynamic ODT Off]
RttPark [Auto]
MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
MemCkeSetup [Auto]
MemCadBusClkDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [Auto]
CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 5]
CPU Current Capability [130%]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
CPU Voltage Frequency [500]
CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
CPU Power Phase Control [Power Phase Response]
Manual Adjustment [Regular]
CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 2]
VDDSOC Current Capability [130%]
VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Auto]
VDDSOC Phase Control [Optimized]
DRAM Current Capability [130%]
DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [400]
DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.42000]
VTTDDR Voltage [Auto]
VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
VDDP Voltage [Auto]
1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
PLL reference voltage [Auto]
T Offset [Auto]
Sense MI Skew [Auto]
Sense MI Offset [Auto]
Promontory presence [Auto]
Clock Amplitude [Auto]
CLDO VDDP voltage [Auto]
CPU Core Voltage [Offset mode]
CPU Offset Mode Sign [+]
- CPU Core Voltage Offset [0.01250]
CPU SOC Voltage [Offset mode]
VDDSOC Offset Mode Sign [-]
- VDDSOC Voltage Offset [0.09375]
DRAM Voltage [1.42000]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
Firmware TPM [Disable]
Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
PSS Support [Auto]
SVM Mode [Disabled]
Onboard LED [Enabled]
Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
SATA Mode [AHCI]
NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
SMART Self Test [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
PCIEX8/X4_2 Mode [Auto]
PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
SB Link Mode [Auto]
Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
When system is in working state [On]
When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [On]
Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
ErP Ready [Disabled]
Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
Power On By RTC [Disabled]
Network Stack [Disabled]
Device [N\A]
Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
USB Mass Storage Driver Support [Enabled]
Lexar USB Flash Drive 1100 [Auto]
U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
U31G1_5 [Enabled]
U31G1_6 [Enabled]
U31G1_7 [Enabled]
U31G1_8 [Enabled]
U31G1_9 [Enabled]
U31G1_10 [Enabled]
USB11 [Enabled]
USB12 [Enabled]
USB13 [Enabled]
USB14 [Enabled]
USB15 [Enabled]
CPU Temperature [Monitor]
MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
PCH Temperature [Monitor]
T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
5V Voltage [Monitor]
12V Voltage [Monitor]
CPU Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [200 RPM]
CPU Fan Profile [Manual]
CPU Upper Temperature [70]
CPU Fan Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
CPU Middle Temperature [25]
CPU Fan Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [46]
CPU Lower Temperature [20]
CPU Fan Min. Duty Cycle (%) [46]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Manual]
Chassis Fan 1 Upper Temperature [70]
Chassis Fan 1 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Chassis Fan 1 Middle Temperature [45]
Chassis Fan 1 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
Chassis Fan 1 Lower Temperature [40]
Chassis Fan 1 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
Allow Fan Stop [Disabled]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 3 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Manual]
Chassis Fan 3 Upper Temperature [70]
Chassis Fan 3 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Chassis Fan 3 Middle Temperature [45]
Chassis Fan 3 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
Chassis Fan 3 Lower Temperature [40]
Chassis Fan 3 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [34]
Allow Fan Stop [Disabled]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Source [CPU]
HAMP Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
HAMP Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
HAMP Fan Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
PSPP Policy [Auto]
Fast Boot [Enabled]
Next Boot after AC Power Loss [Normal Boot]
AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
Boot Logo Display [Enabled]
POST Delay Time [3 sec]
Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
Launch CSM [Enabled]
Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
OS Type [Other OS]
Setup Animator [Disabled]
ASUS Grid Install Service [Enabled]
Load from Profile [5]
Profile Name [4.1ghz3600]
Save to Profile [5]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
BCLK Frequency [Auto]
CPU Ratio [Auto]
DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A2]
Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
RedirectForReturnDis [Auto]
L2 TLB Associativity [Auto]
Platform First Error Handling [Disabled]
Enable IBS [Auto]
Global C-state Control [Auto]
Power Supply Idle Control [Auto]
Opcache Control [Auto]
Custom Pstate0 [Auto]
Custom Pstate1 [Auto]
Custom Pstate2 [Auto]
Custom Pstate3 [Auto]
Custom Pstate4 [Auto]
Custom Pstate5 [Auto]
Custom Pstate6 [Auto]
Custom Pstate7 [Auto]
Relaxed EDC throttling [Auto]
Downcore control [Auto]
SMTEN [Auto]
SEV-ES ASID Space Limit [1]
Streaming Stores Control [Auto]
ACPI _CST C1 Declaration [Auto]
L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
DRAM scrub time [Auto]
Redirect scrubber control [Auto]
Disable DF sync flood propagation [Auto]
Freeze DF module queues on error [Auto]
GMI encryption control [Auto]
xGMI encryption control [Auto]
CC6 memory region encryption [Auto]
Location of private memory regions [Auto]
System probe filter [Auto]
Memory interleaving [Auto]
Memory interleaving size [Auto]
Channel interleaving hash [Auto]
Memory Clear [Auto]
ACPI SLIT Distance Control [Auto]
Power Down Enable [Auto]
Cmd2T [Auto]
Gear Down Mode [Auto]
CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
Data Poisoning [Auto]
DRAM ECC Symbol Size [Auto]
DRAM ECC Enable [Auto]
TSME [Auto]
Data Scramble [Auto]
Chipselect Interleaving [Auto]
BankGroupSwap [Auto]
Address Hash Bank [Auto]
Address Hash CS [Auto]
SPD Read Optimization [Enabled]
MBIST Enable [Disabled]
MBIST Aggressors [Auto]
MBIST Per Bit Slave Die Reporting [Auto]
IOMMU [Auto]
NBIO Internal Poison Consumption [Auto]
NBIO RAS Control [Auto]
Determinism Slider [Auto]
PSI [Auto]
ACS Enable [Auto]
PCIe ARI Support [Auto]
CLDO_VDDP Control [Auto]
HD Audio Enable [Auto]
Force PCIe gen speed [Auto]
Processor temperature Control [Auto]
SOC OVERCLOCK VID [0]
Mode0 [Auto]


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> There ya go - lower voltages rule!
> 
> Here's my settings anyway...
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> [2018/12/07 18:24:11]
> Ai Overclock Tuner [Default]
> CPU Core Ratio [41.00]
> Performance Bias [CB11.5]
> Memory Frequency [DDR4-3600MHz]
> Core Performance Boost [Disabled]
> SMT Mode [Auto]
> EPU Power Saving Mode [Disabled]
> TPU [Keep Current Settings]
> TRC_EOM [Auto]
> TRTP_EOM [Auto]
> TRRS_S_EOM [Auto]
> TRRS_L_EOM [Auto]
> TWTR_EOM [Auto]
> TWTR_L_EOM [Auto]
> TWCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWR_EOM [Auto]
> TFAW_EOM [Auto]
> TRCT_EOM [Auto]
> TREFI_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_DD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SC_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_DD_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SD_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SC_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWRRD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDWR_EOM [Auto]
> TWRRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto]
> DRAM CAS# Latency [14]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [15]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [14]
> DRAM RAS# PRE Time [14]
> DRAM RAS# ACT Time [28]
> Trc [42]
> TrrdS [4]
> TrrdL [4]
> Tfaw [16]
> TwtrS [4]
> TwtrL [8]
> Twr [12]
> Trcpage [Auto]
> TrdrdScl [2]
> TwrwrScl [2]
> Trfc [270]
> Trfc2 [Auto]
> Trfc4 [Auto]
> Tcwl [12]
> Trtp [8]
> Trdwr [Auto]
> Twrrd [2]
> TwrwrSc [1]
> TwrwrSd [4]
> TwrwrDd [4]
> TrdrdSc [1]
> TrdrdSd [4]
> TrdrdDd [4]
> Tcke [1]
> ProcODT [60 ohm]
> Cmd2T [1T]
> Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
> Power Down Enable [Disabled]
> RttNom [Rtt_Nom Disable]
> RttWr [Dynamic ODT Off]
> RttPark [Auto]
> MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
> MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
> MemCkeSetup [Auto]
> MemCadBusClkDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [Auto]
> CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 5]
> CPU Current Capability [130%]
> CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
> CPU Voltage Frequency [500]
> CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
> CPU Power Phase Control [Power Phase Response]
> Manual Adjustment [Regular]
> CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
> VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 2]
> VDDSOC Current Capability [130%]
> VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Auto]
> VDDSOC Phase Control [Optimized]
> DRAM Current Capability [130%]
> DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
> DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
> Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [400]
> DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.42000]
> VTTDDR Voltage [Auto]
> VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
> VDDP Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
> CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
> 2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
> PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
> PLL reference voltage [Auto]
> T Offset [Auto]
> Sense MI Skew [Auto]
> Sense MI Offset [Auto]
> Promontory presence [Auto]
> Clock Amplitude [Auto]
> CLDO VDDP voltage [Auto]
> CPU Core Voltage [Offset mode]
> CPU Offset Mode Sign [+]
> - CPU Core Voltage Offset [0.01250]
> CPU SOC Voltage [Offset mode]
> VDDSOC Offset Mode Sign [-]
> - VDDSOC Voltage Offset [0.09375]
> DRAM Voltage [1.42000]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> 1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
> Firmware TPM [Disable]
> Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
> PSS Support [Auto]
> SVM Mode [Disabled]
> Onboard LED [Enabled]
> Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
> SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
> SATA Mode [AHCI]
> NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
> SMART Self Test [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
> M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
> PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
> PCIEX8/X4_2 Mode [Auto]
> PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
> M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
> M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
> SB Link Mode [Auto]
> Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
> USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
> When system is in working state [On]
> When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [On]
> Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
> Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
> ErP Ready [Disabled]
> Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
> Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
> Power On By RTC [Disabled]
> Network Stack [Disabled]
> Device [N\A]
> Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
> XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
> USB Mass Storage Driver Support [Enabled]
> Lexar USB Flash Drive 1100 [Auto]
> U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
> U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
> U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> U31G1_5 [Enabled]
> U31G1_6 [Enabled]
> U31G1_7 [Enabled]
> U31G1_8 [Enabled]
> U31G1_9 [Enabled]
> U31G1_10 [Enabled]
> USB11 [Enabled]
> USB12 [Enabled]
> USB13 [Enabled]
> USB14 [Enabled]
> USB15 [Enabled]
> CPU Temperature [Monitor]
> MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
> PCH Temperature [Monitor]
> T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
> HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
> CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
> AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
> W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
> W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
> 3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
> 5V Voltage [Monitor]
> 12V Voltage [Monitor]
> CPU Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [200 RPM]
> CPU Fan Profile [Manual]
> CPU Upper Temperature [70]
> CPU Fan Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
> CPU Middle Temperature [25]
> CPU Fan Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [46]
> CPU Lower Temperature [20]
> CPU Fan Min. Duty Cycle (%) [46]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Manual]
> Chassis Fan 1 Upper Temperature [70]
> Chassis Fan 1 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
> Chassis Fan 1 Middle Temperature [45]
> Chassis Fan 1 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
> Chassis Fan 1 Lower Temperature [40]
> Chassis Fan 1 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
> Allow Fan Stop [Disabled]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 3 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Manual]
> Chassis Fan 3 Upper Temperature [70]
> Chassis Fan 3 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
> Chassis Fan 3 Middle Temperature [45]
> Chassis Fan 3 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
> Chassis Fan 3 Lower Temperature [40]
> Chassis Fan 3 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [34]
> Allow Fan Stop [Disabled]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> HAMP Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> HAMP Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> HAMP Fan Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
> AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> PSPP Policy [Auto]
> Fast Boot [Enabled]
> Next Boot after AC Power Loss [Normal Boot]
> AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
> Boot Logo Display [Enabled]
> POST Delay Time [3 sec]
> Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
> Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
> Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
> Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
> Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
> Launch CSM [Enabled]
> Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
> Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
> Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
> Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
> OS Type [Other OS]
> Setup Animator [Disabled]
> ASUS Grid Install Service [Enabled]
> Load from Profile [5]
> Profile Name [4.1ghz3600]
> Save to Profile [5]
> CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
> VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> BCLK Frequency [Auto]
> CPU Ratio [Auto]
> DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A2]
> Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
> RedirectForReturnDis [Auto]
> L2 TLB Associativity [Auto]
> Platform First Error Handling [Disabled]
> Enable IBS [Auto]
> Global C-state Control [Auto]
> Power Supply Idle Control [Auto]
> Opcache Control [Auto]
> Custom Pstate0 [Auto]
> Custom Pstate1 [Auto]
> Custom Pstate2 [Auto]
> Custom Pstate3 [Auto]
> Custom Pstate4 [Auto]
> Custom Pstate5 [Auto]
> Custom Pstate6 [Auto]
> Custom Pstate7 [Auto]
> Relaxed EDC throttling [Auto]
> Downcore control [Auto]
> SMTEN [Auto]
> SEV-ES ASID Space Limit [1]
> Streaming Stores Control [Auto]
> ACPI _CST C1 Declaration [Auto]
> L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
> L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
> DRAM scrub time [Auto]
> Redirect scrubber control [Auto]
> Disable DF sync flood propagation [Auto]
> Freeze DF module queues on error [Auto]
> GMI encryption control [Auto]
> xGMI encryption control [Auto]
> CC6 memory region encryption [Auto]
> Location of private memory regions [Auto]
> System probe filter [Auto]
> Memory interleaving [Auto]
> Memory interleaving size [Auto]
> Channel interleaving hash [Auto]
> Memory Clear [Auto]
> ACPI SLIT Distance Control [Auto]
> Power Down Enable [Auto]
> Cmd2T [Auto]
> Gear Down Mode [Auto]
> CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
> CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
> Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
> Data Poisoning [Auto]
> DRAM ECC Symbol Size [Auto]
> DRAM ECC Enable [Auto]
> TSME [Auto]
> Data Scramble [Auto]
> Chipselect Interleaving [Auto]
> BankGroupSwap [Auto]
> Address Hash Bank [Auto]
> Address Hash CS [Auto]
> SPD Read Optimization [Enabled]
> MBIST Enable [Disabled]
> MBIST Aggressors [Auto]
> MBIST Per Bit Slave Die Reporting [Auto]
> IOMMU [Auto]
> NBIO Internal Poison Consumption [Auto]
> NBIO RAS Control [Auto]
> Determinism Slider [Auto]
> PSI [Auto]
> ACS Enable [Auto]
> PCIe ARI Support [Auto]
> CLDO_VDDP Control [Auto]
> HD Audio Enable [Auto]
> Force PCIe gen speed [Auto]
> Processor temperature Control [Auto]
> SOC OVERCLOCK VID [0]
> Mode0 [Auto]


Thanks I see Gear Down Mode [Enabled] tho  Maybe would need it to get 3600 working heh


----------



## Synoxia

EDIT DOUBLE ENTRY BUG EXCUSE ME DELETE THIS


----------



## Synoxia

CJMitsuki said:


> It’s not as much as you think. It barely affects the memory latency but the cache latencies are directly related to the cpu so of course they drop with higher clocks but even with PE4 at 104.8mhz which at 43.5x is 4557mhz all core it would only drop the L3 cache to 8.7ns and has always, and still is like that. This was no different on PBO the last time I tested it which was around 0804 bios revision. Now the L3 cache consistently hits 8.3ns that’s 4.6% drop in what I thought was already quite low latency for L3 at 8.7ns. At 4.35ghz, depending on setup, is anywhere from 8.8ns-9ns with the latter being the case most of the time. I’m just curious as to what is so different from PE and PBO besides the obvious behaviors? And what did they change bc they for sure changed something besides the memory compatibility as shown by them removing Scalar settings so they had to have touched PBO functionality for it to behave so dramatically. I really wish the all core boost would hit 4.45ghz instead of 4.375ghz. It would be a perfect ratio of single core to multicore but I won’t complain too much bc it runs so cool and is very stable. I’m running up to 6 cores at 4.57ghz with LLC 1 and all LLC settings on the lowest it can go.


4.57 Ghz????? Is this a 2700x? You've got a diamond chip cooled under chilled water or what lol.
Currently i am running 102.4 bclk sticking to High performance power plan because 4.45ghz in single core give me crashes, other than that DPC is lower on high perf plan and less microstutters in games. 
Basically i run 4.35ghz all the time unless im really heavy loading all cores, llc 4 + PE level 2


----------



## lordzed83

Synoxia said:


> 4.57 Ghz????? Is this a 2700x? You've got a diamond chip cooled under chilled water or what lol.
> Currently i am running 102.4 bclk sticking to High performance power plan because 4.45ghz in single core give me crashes, other than that DPC is lower on high perf plan and less microstutters in games.
> Basically i run 4.35ghz all the time unless im really heavy loading all cores, llc 4 + PE level 2


ye hes using hacks check hes temperatures.... Everyone knows that AMD's cpud love to be sub 70c


----------



## Singularity48

Tested my dual rank kit some more last night, tried for 3466 14-14-14-28-42 272 1.41v DRAM 1.0v SoC which booted fine but was getting errors really fast in memtest, more than likely I needed more dram voltage, but 3400 with the exact same settings is about 1100% memtest stable which is cool. I ran a quick and dirty test at 3400 with 1.4v vdimm instead of 1.41 and it threw one error out of 10 tests @150%, so that little bump in voltage seems to have helped. Might try 3466/3500 at 1.43-45v or so next and see if that's possible.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Synoxia said:


> 4.57 Ghz????? Is this a 2700x? You've got a diamond chip cooled under chilled water or what lol.
> Currently i am running 102.4 bclk sticking to High performance power plan because 4.45ghz in single core give me crashes, other than that DPC is lower on high perf plan and less microstutters in games.
> Basically i run 4.35ghz all the time unless im really heavy loading all cores, llc 4 + PE level 2





lordzed83 said:


> ye hes using hacks check hes temperatures.... Everyone knows that AMD's cpud love to be sub 70c



Not chilled water, well I guess you could say it is. I built a shelf up at the window sill above my desk and the computer is pulling in (11c currently) outside air from the side and front fans cooling the H115i pro AIO and all components in the case. It will get down to 3c tonight but the air usually is about 5c warmer than the outside air once it hits the temp sensor at the fan intake. I have also sealed up my case with weather stripping and sealed all unused intake areas as not to get warm air from my house mixing with the intake air and I just have it exit the top of the case into my room. I remain warm while my comp doesnt lol


----------



## kazablanka

crakej said:


> 3600 CL14 15 14 14 28 42 270 Ram 1.42v CPU 4.1GHz Offset + 0.01250v SoC 1.00625v - Preliminary bench tests - CB11 Perf Bias.
> 
> Very impressive!!! However too much freezing going on to use this Bias setting. Testing continues.


very nice dude well done


----------



## crakej

kazablanka said:


> very nice dude well done


Thank you! Still testing.... OC is holding after power off, though there have been a couple of reboots where memtest only got to about 500%, but that was with other stuff running - I just wanted to see how robust the OC is. I have managed to boot to desktop @ 3666MTs a few times, but looks like 3600 is the fastest I can go at with CL14. We will see 

I may relax my CPU to 4GHz, which may give me a little more Ram OC ability, we'll see, but will certainly bring down power requirements - and temps would be better too.


----------



## Jspinks020

doing great but yeah it is a heat warmer. I think 4.3ghz is about tops. But you have more to play around with in there in the bios. Probably don't matter a whole lot really. Super Impressed.


----------



## HolyFist

Update on the 3605MHz with 1103.

Previous settings still needed tweaking, especially for CPU, no longer have high temps and freezes due to CPU.

Boosts to almost 4.5GHz, screenshot shows 4470MHz on two cores on Balanced Power Plan.

Bellow is proof, on Latency windows, first two is Balanced Power Plan.

And screenshot when playing a game, System uptime so far is 5H20min.

Yesterday was around 10h, before that was when i did the stability test with new tweaks.

Previously temps would go for 80ºC when doing MemTest and 61+ when playing games, i thought it could be new BIOS, but it wasn't.

Edit: Temps are on Kraken x62 on very silent setting for Fans.


----------



## Singularity48

Question for people who've messed with BCLK, it seems there's a certain bclk (last one I tried was 101.8, knew for a fact 102 didn't work) that once passed over will just completely disable my m.2 sata MX500 drive. My nvme 970 evo and SATA HDD are just fine at that same value (970 is my boot drive and i can get into windows with no problem). My 970 is in the slot that shares pcie lanes with the GPU, the MX500 is in the bottom m.2 pcie/SATA slot. I'm wondering if this is a behavior of my drive or if the C7H disables that port above a certain bclk.


----------



## chakku

Singularity48 said:


> Tested my dual rank kit some more last night, tried for 3466 14-14-14-28-42 272 1.41v DRAM 1.0v SoC which booted fine but was getting errors really fast in memtest, more than likely I needed more dram voltage, but 3400 with the exact same settings is about 1100% memtest stable which is cool. I ran a quick and dirty test at 3400 with 1.4v vdimm instead of 1.41 and it threw one error out of 10 tests @150%, so that little bump in voltage seems to have helped. Might try 3466/3500 at 1.43-45v or so next and see if that's possible.


Can you elaborate on what all your BIOS settings are for getting 3400 stable? I get errors with the same settings as far as RTC goes, you mention 1.41V on the memory but your HWiNFO in the screenshot suggests it's at 1.385V?


----------



## Singularity48

chakku said:


> Can you elaborate on what all your BIOS settings are for getting 3400 stable? I get errors with the same settings as far as RTC goes, you mention 1.41V on the memory but your HWiNFO in the screenshot suggests it's at 1.385V?


Honestly I'm not sure why hwinfo is showing that voltage on DRAM, I have both boot voltage and DRAM voltage at 1.41v in bios; soc at 1.0.
Here's all the relevant BIOS settings I don't have on auto (on bios 0804 btw):

(extreme tweakers tab)
DOCP Standard
PE2 (PBO on, 1000 on all values, 10x scalar)
core voltage -100mv offset

(tweakers paradise)
vddp voltage .855

(digi+ power)
DRAM current capability 100%
DRAM power phase control extreme
DRAM vboot voltage 1.41v

every other value is in the attached shot (recommended value used) except I have procODT at 68.6ohm and DRAM voltage at 1.41.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Singularity48 said:


> Question for people who've messed with BCLK, it seems there's a certain bclk (last one I tried was 101.8, knew for a fact 102 didn't work) that once passed over will just completely disable my m.2 sata MX500 drive. My nvme 970 evo and SATA HDD are just fine at that same value (970 is my boot drive and i can get into windows with no problem). My 970 is in the slot that shares pcie lanes with the GPU, the MX500 is in the bottom m.2 pcie/SATA slot. I'm wondering if this is a behavior of my drive or if the C7H disables that port above a certain bclk.



That is 100% the behavior of the m.2 Sata SSD. I had the same problem when I bought an 850 EVO m.2 SSD, my 960 pro works amazingly in it even at 106 bclk as well as my 850evo SSD that are connected with a sata3 connection. It just seems like there is a problem with M.2 SATA connections and base clock. It will quickly corrupt any and all data on the drive as well.


----------



## Singularity48

Ahh I figured. Thanks for the confirmation. I guess I'll leave bclk alone until I feel like grabbing a standard SSD.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Singularity48 said:


> Ahh I figured. Thanks for the confirmation. I guess I'll leave bclk alone until I feel like grabbing a standard SSD.


 SSDs are getting stupid cheap now...If you want a really good SSD comparable to Samsung EVO for half the price look for "WD Black" which is western digitals higher performance SSD and has been getting really good reviews as well as speed. Im looking to get a 1tb soon unless the Samsung EVO 1tb drops in price before then. *1TB WD Black *cant beat comparable performance for 100$ cheaper than the 970 evo. Im holding out since they will be realeasing the newer technology for SSDs soon and the prices will plummet for the older stuff. If you only need 500gb id go for the 960 pro though. Cheaper than 970 evo and the WD Black 500gb and faster than both with a longer warranty


----------



## chakku

Singularity48 said:


> Honestly I'm not sure why hwinfo is showing that voltage on DRAM, I have both boot voltage and DRAM voltage at 1.41v in bios; soc at 1.0.
> Here's all the relevant BIOS settings I don't have on auto (on bios 0804 btw):
> 
> (extreme tweakers tab)
> DOCP Standard
> PE2 (PBO on, 1000 on all values, 10x scalar)
> core voltage -100mv offset
> 
> (tweakers paradise)
> vddp voltage .855
> 
> (digi+ power)
> DRAM current capability 100%
> DRAM power phase control extreme
> DRAM vboot voltage 1.41v
> 
> every other value is in the attached shot (recommended value used) except I have procODT at 68.6ohm and DRAM voltage at 1.41.


Damn, you either have a very good IMC or 0804 is much better than 1101 for this. I'd bet on the chip though, I can't get a -100mv offset without crashing while trying to boot into windows.


----------



## Jspinks020

Nice, also got a nice one. Running a little hotter than Id like but will work. Maybe the 360 would help a little or something....


----------



## CJMitsuki

Finished my memory tweaking and got my final setup at 3562mhz stable and the performance is beyond what I expected. If I had to say then Id say it runs equivalent to [email protected] at the same timings. Once im done testing a few more things ill have an AMD CBS optimization for taking everything off of Auto and enabling the correct setting which in my case resulted in some bandwidth gains and responsiveness to the system as a whole. Nothing major but any gain is good and the most important part is there is no way the bios can change itself from boot to boot if there are no settings left to chance on Auto.






Spoiler


----------



## Singularity48

chakku said:


> Damn, you either have a very good IMC or 0804 is much better than 1101 for this. I'd bet on the chip though, I can't get a -100mv offset without crashing while trying to boot into windows.


It might be my chip, though I've tried lowering the offset farther and it refuses to even attempt a boot lower than -100mv, but it's been rocksteady there for like 2.5 months through all of my ram testing. I haven't tried any of the newer BIOS yet because I was hoping with the new AGESA there'd be dual rank improvements reported.


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> Finished my memory tweaking and got my final setup at 3562mhz stable and the performance is beyond what I expected. If I had to say then Id say it runs equivalent to [email protected] at the same timings. Once im done testing a few more things ill have an AMD CBS optimization for taking everything off of Auto and enabling the correct setting which in my case resulted in some bandwidth gains and responsiveness to the system as a whole. Nothing major but any gain is good and the most important part is there is no way the bios can change itself from boot to boot if there are no settings left to chance on Auto.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 237164
> 
> View attachment 237166
> 
> View attachment 237168
> 
> View attachment 237170


Damn nice. And Those low temps 17c on ddr on that voltage


----------



## gupsterg

For members with 32GB setups  .

UEFI 1103, 2700X PE: Default (Some test runs with PBO: Enabled, not PE1-4, etc used), F4-3200C14Q-32GVK.

For a fare length of time I have been using same RAM/CPU between C6H/C7H. I have seen results of upto 3400MHz lasting 9hrs in RAM stability programs, but some what consistency of stability has been thwarting me POST to POST.

Here is some testing run over the course of 2-3 days. The files are ordered by date, most recent setup at top is passing stability testing for a 6th+ warm POST  .



Spoiler














As you can see from varying % tested it was not the length of testing which was really the issue. An orange box highlights a test run of 12000%+, it was more so to do with on my 6th consecutive warm POST I'd lose stability.

From previous and shown tests ProcODT 48 always came out as best with combined HW, regardless of UEFI used and or which SN# of dimm in which slot. CAD Bus 24 20 20 24 always again seemed solid for me. RTT was odd, several setups seemed sound, none IMO got rid of the POST to POST issue I was seeing. In the end the final setup seems as if is going to use the default RTT settings.

If I changed ProcODT from 48 and or deviated from CAD Bus/RTT settings that aided stability I had issues very quickly, see the red boxed files. At the blue lined point I moved around the dimms within slots. Again really can't say it helped me IMO. The break seems to have come from matching VDDP and CLDO_VDDP. Usually I use default values manually set, VDDP: 0.900V, CLDO_VDDP: 950mV.

Below is the ~13000%.



Spoiler














That test was not on a warm/setup POST, but a POST from having pressed reset, as reboot from OS once ending prior test the board had hung at 7A. If you ref the list of screenies setup 1.043 1.365 0.687 48 24 20 20 24 VDDP 885 CLDO 885 lasted for 5 POSTs, then the test above, one more warm POST and then rig did Q-Code: F9 on next warm POST.

Using VDDP 0.915V & CLDO_VDDP 915mV seems to have sorted this destabilisation after 6th consecutive warm POST.



Spoiler














Rig is now on it's 8th warm POST test run  . Some of you may have noted the the filenames changed at a point not to have PBOEP in them, those test are without PBO: Enabled. I shall be re-enabling in next set of tests. I think I'll also ref some past tests, to see what lowered SOC/VDIMM/timings I have used for 32GB @ 3333MHz in the past and see if they last for 6+ consecutive warm POST runs with VDDP & CLDO_VDDP tweak.

@crakej

Nice :thumb: .


----------



## Singularity48

Forget everything I said about 3400 being stable. Whew boy did it start destabilizing hard. I can't even get it to go more than like 20 seconds in memtest without throwing an error and it crashes everything, sometimes programs other times full system. I changed absolutely nothing, seems it was stable for that one post and went to **** quick on subsequent restarts. Computers are a mystery to me. lol back to 3200 I go for now


----------



## FlanK3r

Guys, is it possible to have issue with SX8200 NVMe SSD (in M2 bottom slot -second, but directly linked to CPU) and two cards Vega 56? My friend cant install WIndows on PC, always he got error on start of Win10 installation process (attach.)


----------



## neikosr0x

CJMitsuki said:


> Finished my memory tweaking and got my final setup at 3562mhz stable and the performance is beyond what I expected. If I had to say then Id say it runs equivalent to [email protected] at the same timings. Once im done testing a few more things ill have an AMD CBS optimization for taking everything off of Auto and enabling the correct setting which in my case resulted in some bandwidth gains and responsiveness to the system as a whole. Nothing major but any gain is good and the most important part is there is no way the bios can change itself from boot to boot if there are no settings left to chance on Auto.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 237164
> 
> View attachment 237166
> 
> View attachment 237168
> 
> View attachment 237170


my ram runs stable but im getting only 495xmbs on Memory copy at 16-15-15-15 t1 any guess? 3566mhz (Write and read are around 5500mbps


----------



## CJMitsuki

neikosr0x said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Finished my memory tweaking and got my final setup at 3562mhz stable and the performance is beyond what I expected. If I had to say then Id say it runs equivalent to [email protected] at the same timings. Once im done testing a few more things ill have an AMD CBS optimization for taking everything off of Auto and enabling the correct setting which in my case resulted in some bandwidth gains and responsiveness to the system as a whole. Nothing major but any gain is good and the most important part is there is no way the bios can change itself from boot to boot if there are no settings left to chance on Auto.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 237164
> 
> View attachment 237166
> 
> View attachment 237168
> 
> View attachment 237170
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> my ram runs stable but im getting only 495xmbs on Memory copy at 16-15-15-15 t1 any guess? 3566mhz (Write and read are around 5500mbps
Click to expand...

I’d have to have more information than what you are giving me. Like frequency, full timings, model of ram etc. it’s better to just post RTC, and CPUZ screenshots of the timings and model number of ram


----------



## Johan45

FlanK3r said:


> Guys, is it possible to have issue with SX8200 NVMe SSD (in M2 bottom slot -second, but directly linked to CPU) and two cards Vega 56? My friend cant install WIndows on PC, always he got error on start of Win10 installation process (attach.)


I'm using the same drive in the bottom slot with 1 Vega64 and no issues. The drive shouldn't be interfering with the PCIe at all in the bottom slot. Do you know the drive works or is it new?


----------



## FlanK3r

The drive was local Adata media sample, but propably could be good (used in one review).


----------



## CJMitsuki

Johan45 said:


> FlanK3r said:
> 
> 
> 
> Guys, is it possible to have issue with SX8200 NVMe SSD (in M2 bottom slot -second, but directly linked to CPU) and two cards Vega 56? My friend cant install WIndows on PC, always he got error on start of Win10 installation process (attach.)
> 
> 
> 
> I'm using the same drive in the bottom slot with 1 Vega64 and no issues. The drive shouldn't be interfering with the PCIe at all in the bottom slot. Do you know the drive works or is it new?
Click to expand...

The only problems I’ve seen are with M.2 Sata SSD drives and bclk overclocking. None of that affected the NVME or regular Sata drives. Sounds like it’s a problem with the M.2 slot. Is he able to install with no problems if he transfers the Drive to the M.2_2 slot(top)? If he still has the same problem when he uses it in the M.2_2 slot then it’s a problem with the drive, if he doesn’t have the same problem when he moves the M.2 NVME then it’s a problem with the motherboard.


----------



## FlanK3r

One fix what helped, he installed clean OS at another PC (without drivers) and put it back t the M2_1 and Ryzen works...Lol.


----------



## Sn0ops

Hello Guys - I need an advice from someone who is more familiar with ramtimings / voltage setting for Ram.

-> My problem tooks me long time to investigate where the rootcause is. The Problem was I had missing soundsteps / sometimes bit fps drops / Soundcrackling.
Especially missing footsteps in cs go / BF 5 drove me crazy.

I had the whole time: RAM : 3200 MhZ Geardown off / command rate 1T ( 14 / 13 / 13 /13 / 28 / 42 @ 1,4v) I switched back to Geardown ON / Commandrate 1T

-> FPS Drops gone (180 up to 200 fps in BF5), missing sounds gone , footsteeps not missing - ultra smooth gameplay

But frameparcing is slower / inputlag is defenetly bit higher.

So, how can I stabilize commandrate 1T with geardown off, without that faulty sound and fps drops ???

Thanks for your help !!!



Current Settings:

BIOS 1002 (I tested 1103) -Problem still persist with Agesa 1006. 
Im waiting for next Bios with 1006. As 1002 seems to be more responsive / snappy. Lower DPC etc.

I using Performance Enhancer Lvl 2 - Offset Voltage mode: -0.07500 / Syncronus Mode / BCLK = 100 mhz
All Cores are on 4,25 GHZ ingame constantly. Single core boost going to 4566 mhz - having a good chip i guess 

Ram: 3200 MhZ / Timings: 14 / 13 / 13 /13 / 28 / 42 @ 1,4v - 1T Geardown (on)


Asmedia Controller = off 
XHCI Handoff = off
fastboot = off
Soundcard = off

_____________________________

My System Specs:

CPU: RYZEN 2700X
RAM: 16 GB G.Skill Flare X (3200 MhZ)
Motherboard: ASUS Crosshair Hero VII
GFX: Saphire RX Vega 56 + Nitro
PSU: Seasonic Prime - 750 Watt 
Cooler: Water Cooled by Artic Liquid Freezer 360
OS: WIN 10 - 64 bit - Pro N - 1809
SSD: MX500 Crucial


----------



## Ramad

Sn0ops said:


> Hello Guys - I need an advice from someone who is more familiar with ramtimings / voltage setting for Ram.
> 
> -> My problem tooks me long time to investigate where the rootcause is. The Problem was I had missing soundsteps / sometimes bit fps drops / Soundcrackling.
> Especially missing footsteps in cs go / BF 5 drove me crazy.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I had the whole time: RAM : 3200 MhZ Geardown off / command rate 1T ( 14 / 13 / 13 /13 / 28 / 42 @ 1,4v) I switched back to Geardown ON / Commandrate 1T
> 
> -> FPS Drops gone (180 up to 200 fps in BF5), missing sounds gone , footsteeps not missing - ultra smooth gameplay
> 
> But frameparcing is slower / inputlag is defenetly bit higher.
> 
> So, how can I stabilize commandrate 1T with geardown off, without that faulty sound and fps drops ???
> 
> Thanks for your help !!!
> 
> 
> 
> Current Settings:
> 
> BIOS 1002 (I tested 1103) -Problem still persist with Agesa 1006.
> Im waiting for next Bios with 1006. As 1002 seems to be more responsive / snappy. Lower DPC etc.
> 
> I using Performance Enhancer Lvl 2 - Offset Voltage mode: -0.07500 / Syncronus Mode / BCLK = 100 mhz
> All Cores are on 4,25 GHZ ingame constantly. Single core boost going to 4566 mhz - having a good chip i guess
> 
> Ram: 3200 MhZ / Timings: 14 / 13 / 13 /13 / 28 / 42 @ 1,4v - 1T Geardown (on)
> 
> 
> Asmedia Controller = off
> XHCI Handoff = off
> fastboot = off


Please try the following timings and find out if it fixes the issue you are having:



Spoiler



DRAM CAS# Latency [14]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [14]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [14]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [14]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [32]
Trc [46]
TrrdS [4]
TrrdL [7]
Tfaw [26]
TwtrS [3]
TwtrL [9]
Twr [16]
Trcpage [Auto]
TrdrdScl [2]
TwrwrScl [2]
Trfc [560]
Trfc2 [416]
Trfc4 [256]
Tcwl [14]
Trtp [8]
Trdwr [8]
Twrrd [4]
TwrwrSc [1]
TwrwrSd [6]
TwrwrDd [6]
TrdrdSc [1]
TrdrdSd [4]
TrdrdDd [4]
Tcke [8]


----------



## Sn0ops

Ramad said:


> Please try the following timings and find out if it fixes the issue you are having:
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> DRAM CAS# Latency [14]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [14]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [14]
> DRAM RAS# PRE Time [14]
> DRAM RAS# ACT Time [32]
> Trc [46]
> TrrdS [4]
> TrrdL [7]
> Tfaw [26]
> TwtrS [3]
> TwtrL [9]
> Twr [16]
> Trcpage [Auto]
> TrdrdScl [2]
> TwrwrScl [2]
> Trfc [560]
> Trfc2 [416]
> Trfc4 [256]
> Tcwl [14]
> Trtp [8]
> Trdwr [8]
> Twrrd [4]
> TwrwrSc [1]
> TwrwrSd [6]
> TwrwrDd [6]
> TrdrdSc [1]
> TrdrdSd [4]
> TrdrdDd [4]
> Tcke [8]



Hello Ramad,

Thanks for the fast reply! I will test them tomorrow and give you feedback here 

Just one question for the timings you offered me.
I will still use 1,4V , Geardown off, 1T with them - okay?

Thanks in advance.


----------



## Ramad

Sn0ops said:


> Hello Ramad,
> 
> Thanks for the fast reply! I will test them tomorrow and give you feedback here
> 
> Just one question for the timings you offered me.
> I will still use 1,4V , Geardown off, 1T with them - okay?
> 
> Thanks in advance.


Geardown off + 1T can cause instability with some RAM, others can't boot with these settings. Try with Geardown off and on +1T if your RAM can run stable with both settings and find out which set gives better results. You are welcome and good luck.


----------



## numlock66

Sn0ops said:


> Hello Guys - I need an advice from someone who is more familiar with ramtimings / voltage setting for Ram.
> 
> -> My problem tooks me long time to investigate where the rootcause is. The Problem was I had missing soundsteps / sometimes bit fps drops / Soundcrackling.
> Especially missing footsteps in cs go / BF 5 drove me crazy.
> 
> I had the whole time: RAM : 3200 MhZ Geardown off / command rate 1T ( 14 / 13 / 13 /13 / 28 / 42 @ 1,4v) I switched back to Geardown ON / Commandrate 1T
> 
> -> FPS Drops gone (180 up to 200 fps in BF5), missing sounds gone , footsteeps not missing - ultra smooth gameplay
> 
> But frameparcing is slower / inputlag is defenetly bit higher.
> 
> So, how can I stabilize commandrate 1T with geardown off, without that faulty sound and fps drops ???
> 
> Thanks for your help !!!
> 
> 
> 
> Current Settings:
> 
> BIOS 1002 (I tested 1103) -Problem still persist with Agesa 1006.
> Im waiting for next Bios with 1006. As 1002 seems to be more responsive / snappy. Lower DPC etc.
> 
> I using Performance Enhancer Lvl 2 - Offset Voltage mode: -0.07500 / Syncronus Mode / BCLK = 100 mhz
> All Cores are on 4,25 GHZ ingame constantly. Single core boost going to 4566 mhz - having a good chip i guess
> 
> Ram: 3200 MhZ / Timings: 14 / 13 / 13 /13 / 28 / 42 @ 1,4v - 1T Geardown (on)
> 
> 
> Asmedia Controller = off
> XHCI Handoff = off
> fastboot = off
> 
> _____________________________
> 
> My System Specs:
> 
> CPU: RYZEN 2700X
> RAM: 16 GB G.Skill Flare X (3200 MhZ)
> Motherboard: ASUS Crosshair Hero VII
> GFX: Saphire RX Vega 56 + Nitro
> PSU: Seasonic Prime - 750 Watt
> Cooler: Water Cooled by Artic Liquid Freezer 360
> OS: WIN 10 - 64 bit - Pro N - 1809
> SSD: MX500 Crucial


Why don't you try 3466 or 3533mhz cas14 Ryzen Dram Calc?


----------



## freddy85

How is it possible to get so high single core clocks without overclocking BCLK?
i get max 4.35 on pe3, any setting im missing?


----------



## Singularity48

freddy85 said:


> How is it possible to get so high single core clocks without overclocking BCLK?
> i get max 4.35 on pe3, any setting im missing?


It's not possible to go higher using PBO without BCLK.


----------



## specialedge

Using pbo3/4 in addition to bclk increases can you share with me your voltage/digi+ settings? I am having much trouble with system hanging about 70sec after OS load, presumably due to insufficient vcore

C7h/2700x @ pbo3/4
Bclk 104
Offset +0.025v OR - 0.05v
LLC 4

Can this be due to a bad chip?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## CJMitsuki

Sn0ops said:


> Hello Ramad,
> 
> Thanks for the fast reply! I will test them tomorrow and give you feedback here
> 
> Just one question for the timings you offered me.
> I will still use 1,4V , Geardown off, 1T with them - okay?
> 
> Thanks in advance.



Why are you so adamant on using GD off and 1t? GD enabled vs disabled has negligible performance impact but for the vast majority it increases stability massively. Just go with GD enabled and either step frequency up on the ram or tighten timings to match the performance or surpass the current setup.


Also you state that you hit 4.5ghz+ with baseclock at 100. Are you sure about that? Ryzen 2700x does not got beyond 43.5x multiplier when using XFR/PBO so its not possible to hit that speed without baseclock increases. The speed you are talking about requires 105mhz baseclock to achieve which would drop your gpu performance as you would be using PCIe 2.0





specialedge said:


> Using pbo3/4 in addition to bclk increases can you share with me your voltage/digi+ settings? I am having much trouble with system hanging about 70sec after OS load, presumably due to insufficient vcore
> 
> C7h/2700x @ pbo3/4
> Bclk 104
> Offset +0.025v OR - 0.05v
> LLC 4
> 
> Can this be due to a bad chip?
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk



Set Performance Enhancer to default and make sure XFR enhancement is enabled in the NBIO settings as well as CPB and then try your base clock OC and see if that helps. I recently started playing with it and the stability is great with lower voltages. It is more geared toward Single core performance vs PE4 but is definitely better than PE3 since PE3 is also geared toward single core performance more than PE4 but PE3 takes much more voltage than the setup I described. I can run 4.5ghz with LLC1 and +.05v and the voltage is much less and more stable than PE3. At 104.8mhz the all core runs at 4.375ghz and 1-6 cores most of the time are running at 4.557ghz with all core voltage around 1.42v and the 1-6 core 4.55ghz bounces arounnd with short spikes to 1.55v as with any XFR controlled setup.



freddy85 said:


> How is it possible to get so high single core clocks without overclocking BCLK?
> i get max 4.35 on pe3, any setting im missing?


Max boost is 43.5x multiplier no matter what you do on XFR/PBO, so 4.35ghz is maximum that can be achieved without help from the BCLK increase. The system still runs at the stated maximum 43.5x limit but the baseclock is what is needed to break that frequency limit. I wish that werent the case since it kind of limits you to 104.8mhz unless you want to lose SSD and GPU performance from droping to PCIe 2.0 and PState and manual all core OC is underwhelming in the way of performance.


----------



## Sn0ops

numlock66 said:


> Why don't you try 3466 or 3533mhz cas14 Ryzen Dram Calc?


I will soon!



freddy85 said:


> How is it possible to get so high single core clocks without overclocking BCLK?
> i get max 4.35 on pe3, any setting im missing?


In Windows: as CMD : bcdedit /set useplatformclock false


Seriously - i dont know why my CPU hits that high clocks..See my Screens attached, this was when playing battlefield 5 today CPU Hitted 4449 mhz. 
Yesterday I played and HWMonitor reported up to 4566 MHZ.

FYI - I have nice 360 Watercooling.

In Tweakin Menue im using: (BIOS 1002)



Im Using Overclock mode : Manual
Syncronus Mode
Performance Enhancer = Level 2
BCLK = 100 MHZ
Voltage mode= Offset
minus
-0.0750

+ My Ramsettings - mentioned in the post before

Everything else is on Auto. 

+

Asmedia Controller = off 
XHCI Handoff = off
fastboot = off
Onboards Sound = off

If you need further infos please feel free to ask.



CJMitsuki said:


> Why are you so adamant on using GD off and 1t? GD enabled vs disabled has negligible performance impact but for the vast majority it increases stability massively. Just go with GD enabled and either step frequency up on the ram or tighten timings to match the performance or surpass the current setup.?


Games felt more snappy. Inputlag was less - but so far there was this glitching sound and framespikes. So at the moment staying with GDN on - 1T (Im playing competetive and very sensitive to this).


----------



## CJMitsuki

Sn0ops said:


> numlock66 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why don't you try 3466 or 3533mhz cas14 Ryzen Dram Calc?
> 
> 
> 
> I will soon!
> 
> 
> 
> freddy85 said:
> 
> 
> 
> How is it possible to get so high single core clocks without overclocking BCLK?
> i get max 4.35 on pe3, any setting im missing?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In Tweakin Menue im using:
> 
> in Windows: as CMD : bcdedit /set useplatformclock false
> 
> Seriously - i dont know why...See my Screens attached, this was when playing battlefield 5 today CPU Hitted 4449 mhz.
> Yesterday I played and HWMonitor reported up to 4566 MHZ.
> 
> 
> Im Using Overclock mode : Manual
> Syncronus Mode
> Performance Enhancer = Level 2
> BCLK = 100 MHZ
> Voltage mode= Offset
> minus
> -0.0750
> 
> + My Ramsettings.
> 
> Everything else is on Auto.
> 
> +
> 
> Asmedia Controller = off
> XHCI Handoff = off
> fastboot = off
> Onboards Sound = off
> 
> 
> 
> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you so adamant on using GD off and 1t? GD enabled vs disabled has negligible performance impact but for the vast majority it increases stability massively. Just go with GD enabled and either step frequency up on the ram or tighten timings to match the performance or surpass the current setup.
> 
> 
> Also you state that you hit 4.5ghz+ with baseclock at 100. Are you sure about that? Ryzen 2700x does not got beyond 43.5x multiplier when using XFR/PBO so its not possible to hit that speed without baseclock increases. The speed you are talking about requires 105mhz baseclock to achieve which would drop your gpu performance as you would be using PCIe 2.0
> 
> 
> Please see my screens.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you have HwInfo64? It will show all of that info and more. I don’t know if HWmonitor is accurate as I don’t really see others using it. Also it could be due to turning hpet off. HWInfo has an option for baseclock polling as without Hpet it can become skewed.
Click to expand...


----------



## Singularity48

HWMonitor is wildly inaccurate infact. A thread with that exact question comes up almost daily on reddit. HWinfo64 is much much more accurate.


----------



## freddy85

Thanks for sharing setting, did not work for me though. Got slightly lower clock speed. Hitting 4.450 while gaming bf 5 is amazing I only get 4.1.


----------



## nick name

HWMonitor is reporting the wrong speeds. 3DMark also does that. Use HWiNFO.


----------



## zJordan

HWMonitor said I also achieved 4.5GHz single core (Obviously this isn't possible without BCLK/LN2). Use HWInfo or CPU-Z.


----------



## Synoxia

CJMitsuki said:


> Not chilled water, well I guess you could say it is. I built a shelf up at the window sill above my desk and the computer is pulling in (11c currently) outside air from the side and front fans cooling the H115i pro AIO and all components in the case. It will get down to 3c tonight but the air usually is about 5c warmer than the outside air once it hits the temp sensor at the fan intake. I have also sealed up my case with weather stripping and sealed all unused intake areas as not to get warm air from my house mixing with the intake air and I just have it exit the top of the case into my room. I remain warm while my comp doesnt lol


Little necro but just i've just read this. Clever AF lol you should post pics of this into Air cooling forum


----------



## Sn0ops

Ramad said:


> Geardown off + 1T can cause instability with some RAM, others can't boot with these settings. Try with Geardown off and on +1T if your RAM can run stable with both settings and find out which set gives better results. You are welcome and good luck.


tested your timing - they also work with 1T , GND off without sound glitches.
Thanks for that!!


----------



## Sn0ops

zJordan said:


> HWMonitor said I also achieved 4.5GHz single core (Obviously this isn't possible without BCLK/LN2). Use HWInfo or CPU-Z.


@ all - im sorry HWmonitor really show wrong values for CPU Clock. Sorry for confusion!
I tested with HWInfo64 now. And now it is 4,35 GHZ as it should be.


----------



## crakej

I have to say, so far, for me, this bios is great!

I'm using less voltage and ram oc has improved with 3600 now reliable (though it was a few bioses ago!).

I experimented yesterday with T2 and turning geardown to off. For me and many others, we have to turn geardown=on for speeds of =>3200. This isn't a problem - it hardly affects performance, and if it enables you to get >=3200, then it's worth enabling!

So I decided to try T2 with geardown=off first, to see what would happen (this is at 3600MTs btw!) - I literally just tuned on T2 and turned off geardown and re-booted. Transfer rate was VERY slightly less than T1, geardown=on (560GB verses 550GB) and latency was the same!

It's always worth playing with these settings - though saying that, I tried to stabilize 3666MTs, T2, geardown=off (limited tests) but changing almost anything seemed to stop it passing POST. I'm still wondering if I could get geardown off at lower speeds - if only I could discover that setting that allows me to do that!

Currently, i can't see getting much past 3666 without loosening timings - that's going to take some work......but I love it 

Quite busy over next few days, but will post any results I come up with....


----------



## VPII

CJMitsuki said:


> The only problems I’ve seen are with M.2 Sata SSD drives and bclk overclocking. None of that affected the NVME or regular Sata drives. Sounds like it’s a problem with the M.2 slot. Is he able to install with no problems if he transfers the Drive to the M.2_2 slot(top)? If he still has the same problem when he uses it in the M.2_2 slot then it’s a problem with the drive, if he doesn’t have the same problem when he moves the M.2 NVME then it’s a problem with the motherboard.


I have a similar problem with my MX300 NVME drive when I go over BCLK 101. Funny thing is even if I use Async it still won't pick up the drive. Nothing wrong with the drive or port in normal use or BCLK lower than 101.


----------



## Singularity48

VPII said:


> I have a similar problem with my MX300 NVME drive when I go over BCLK 101. Funny thing is even if I use Async it still won't pick up the drive. Nothing wrong with the drive or port in normal use or BCLK lower than 101.


The MX300 is not NVMe, it's SATA, so it makes sense that it wouldn't work.


----------



## Kildar

You guys are lucky u got a update.

Us c6h people are still waiting for asus to get off their lazy asses!


----------



## VPII

Singularity48 said:


> The MX300 is not NVMe, it's SATA, so it makes sense that it wouldn't work.


My mistake, was thinking about my other SSD.... the one I am referring to is my Corsair Force MP300 480gb ssd and it is nvme


----------



## CJMitsuki

VPII said:


> I have a similar problem with my MX300 NVME drive when I go over BCLK 101. Funny thing is even if I use Async it still won't pick up the drive. Nothing wrong with the drive or port in normal use or BCLK lower than 101.


I didn’t see a change in behavior besides 15ns+ increase in latency with Async. It didn’t split the clocks as I still dropped to PCIe 2.0 on the gfx card. Literally no change in benchmark besides within margin of error from 105.4 bclk Synchronous and Then 105.4 CPU and the other 104.8mhz Asyncronous.


Kildar said:


> You guys are lucky u got a update.
> 
> Us c6h people are still waiting for asus to get off their lazy asses!


It’s not a massive increase over what 1.0.0.2 brought so don’t be too upset about it. Don’t get me wrong, any increase in memory compatibility is welcome and I’m very happy with it but it’s nothing to write home about. At least for the high end b die memory, that is. As far as cpu regular XFR/PBO w/o Performance Enhancer seems to have been touched on and it actually feels great over PE 3 and 4 for daily use and heavier single core performance loads. If I could get the multi core multiplier to clock maybe .5x or .75x higher to go along with the single core then that would be amazing. If I’m having to limit myself with 104.8mhz base clock then I can only do Single core up to 4 cores heavily at 4557mhz. It will occasionally bump 2 more cores at that speed for 6 core but only for a sec but 1-2 cores are always at that speed in normal use at 1.5v with spikes at 1.6v and heavier use 1 core to 4 core runs @ 1.55v. Heavy all core is at 4375mhz but runs at a much lighter 1.425v. I suspect the voltages for 1-6 cores are too aggressive as There isn’t much wattage being used and it’s very stable so the voltage algorithm could do with being dialed back. Better yet, they need to give us the ability to relax the aggressiveness of the voltage algorithms for XFR/PBO as well as the Clock Multiplier bias in respect to Temperatures. That would essentially make it perfect as you could leave it alone for “no touch” OC or you could further tweak it to your specific silicon to be more or less aggressive. I don’t necessarily like having presets that I can’t tune a little. That’s the problem with PE and XFR/PBO in general. More of a problem with PE than the latter. I love XFR/PBO but they obviously have the ability to tune the way it “thinks” when it determines voltages and clock multipliers and boosts, they should give us that ability on high end boards at least.


----------



## CJMitsuki

VPII said:


> Singularity48 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The MX300 is not NVMe, it's SATA, so it makes sense that it wouldn't work.
> 
> 
> 
> My mistake, was thinking about my other SSD.... the one I am referring to is my Corsair Force MP300 480gb ssd and it is nvme
Click to expand...

That would be the first one I’ve seen act that way being NVME, I always stick to either Samsung or WD Black NVME drives. If you go back a gen on the EVOs you can get a good deal on the 960 pros. They run great. I’ve never had a problem with the regular EVOs or the NVMEs from Samsung, only the M.2 Sata SSD. I’m thinking of getting a second 960 pro and a PCIe adapter since I don’t want to have my gfx card sharing lanes with the M.2_2 slot and running them in RAID 0 for benching.


----------



## Jackalito

Hey guys!

I've been rocking a Crosshair VI Hero with a Ryzen 7 1700X ever since it was first released, and even though it was kind of a bumpy road over the first months, it's been running rather smoothly for me over the past year and a half or so. However, during the Black Friday sales I managed to get my hands on a Crosshair VII Hero and a Ryzen 7 2700X. Hopefully I'll be getting the last thing I need this week so that I can build the new beast before the weekend.



I've been reading this thread for a while now but still I've got some doubts. What is the easiest or most effective way to get the best out of my new chip? On my current system I've been using PStates OC in order for the CPU to underclock/undervolt when it's not stressed. Is there any similar OC thing on the new platform?

Also, my RAM may be somehow problematic as it is Dual Rank, although Sammy B-die, F4-3200C14D-32GTZ. It's been running great at 3200, though with somehow loose timings on my current rig. Any insightful info I should keep in mind to get the best out of it? Does anyone around here have the same memory kit with this mobo? Should I give the Ryzen Calc a go to get some foundations and go from there?


Thanks in advance, guys!
Cheers!


----------



## neojack

@Jackalito
dual rank ram on ryzen is a beast to tame
congrats for running this kit @3200 on a 1700x

you may check this thread (it's about first gen mainly, but still usefull):
https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...el-rank-2-x-f4-3200c14d-32gtz-kit-64gb-2.html


----------



## Singularity48

Jackalito said:


> F4-3200C14D-32GTZ


I have the RGB version of that kit in my build, it runs perfectly at rated speeds and has no problem with tightened subtimings on c14. I had it running at the timings in the screenshot for several weeks before I started trying for higher frequency.


----------



## Ramad

Sn0ops said:


> tested your timing - they also work with 1T , GND off without sound glitches.
> Thanks for that!!


Happy to help. Enjoy the game.


----------



## Synoxia

Hey guys i am trying again to get higher BCLK oc. Do you know what the voltage in tweaker paradise do? Some of them have in description "It can help with BCLK overclock" but i don't know how far i can push these...


----------



## JbstormburstADV

Hello guys. I've been off of Intel for about half a year now and I'm still finding nailing down optimized BIOS settings for my hardware is near impossible, since my prior extent of OC experience was pretty much "run XMP" and go. If anyone would like to assist with coming up with settings, that would be great. My (relevant) hardware is as follows;

Ryzen 2700X
Crosshair VII Hero Wi-Fi
NZXT Kraken X62
G-Skill F4-3600C16D-16GTZR
Sapphire NITRO RX 580
EVGA Supernove PS 1000
Phanteks Enthoo Luxe TG

Current BIOS is at 1103, and so far the only setting I've changed is Setup Animator [On].


----------



## gupsterg

Kildar said:


> You guys are lucky u got a update.
> 
> Us c6h people are still waiting for asus to get off their lazy asses!


There is little to no difference with AGESA 1.0.0.6 for me.

All UEFIs 2x8GB 3466MHz C15 1T is max I get, using VDIMM 1.35V. 4x8GB 3333MHz C14 1T, needs a lot of work regardless of UEFI used and or voltages. I recently tried tightening the ram timings on 4x8GB whilst on AGESA 1.0.0.6, it seems to destabilise, retesting AGESA 1.0.0.2 UEFI now. 

Seen posters go on and on, here and other places, how AGESA 1.0.0.6 may boost PB/XFR2; it does not for me. All tests I have run like for like are the same averaged frequencies, etc.

IMO AGESA 1.0.0.6 is a step backwards, as Precision Boost Overdrive menu in UEFI no longer allows manually set PPT/TDC/EDC/Scalar value.

*** edit ***

LOL I gained +10MHz average CPU core clock under PB/XFR2 on AGESA 1.0.0.6  .



Spoiler


----------



## neikosr0x

JbstormburstADV said:


> Hello guys. I've been off of Intel for about half a year now and I'm still finding nailing down optimized BIOS settings for my hardware is near impossible, since my prior extent of OC experience was pretty much "run XMP" and go. If anyone would like to assist with coming up with settings, that would be great. My (relevant) hardware is as follows;
> 
> Ryzen 2700X
> Crosshair VII Hero Wi-Fi
> NZXT Kraken X62
> G-Skill F4-3600C16D-16GTZR
> Sapphire NITRO RX 580
> EVGA Supernove PS 1000
> Phanteks Enthoo Luxe TG
> 
> Current BIOS is at 1103, and so far the only setting I've changed is Setup Animator [On].


Got the same Ram kit, anything u are looking for exactly?


----------



## innaig86

Hi people!

I just build my new pc, but I think there's something wrong with my cpu temps with default settings.
MB: CH7 WIFI with BIOS 1103
CPU: Ryzen 7 2700x
RAM: 16GB, 2 x F4-3200C14-8GFX, samsung b-die
Cooler: AIO Corsair H100i v1
Room temp: 20°

If I just set my ram to [email protected] and leave everything @ default (in particular Core Performance Boost on Auto), my temps under load are very high and voltages almost touch 1.47v-1.5v on the cpu


Spoiler














Idle temps bounce from 30 to 40.

With Core Performance Boost disabled, max cpu voltage under load is 1.1v


Spoiler















I've setup the ram following DRAM Calculator for Ryzer 1.4.0.1, following REC. settings


Spoiler















I didn't touch anything but RAM related stuff.
Are these temps/voltages normal or safe? If not safe, should I screw CPB and manually oc the cpu? Or maybe leave CPB on and work on voltages offset?
I'm very new on this stuff, I'm coming from a i7-2600k where the only thing I touched in the bios was the XMP profile for the ram, so... tell me EVERYTHING I should do 

Thanks in advance.

edit: I forgot -> Balanced on Windows Power Management. The normal one, not the AMD Ryzen Balanced profile.


----------



## innaig86

Update: I enabled "Performance Enhancer"@lev3.
Core VID now is blocked on 1.319v (HWinfo64), either in [email protected] or [email protected]
Average CPU Temps under load: Tctl 93° (max 103.8°), Tdie 83° (max 93.8°).


----------



## zJordan

innaig86 said:


> Hi people!
> 
> I just build my new pc, but I think there's something wrong with my cpu temps with default settings.
> MB: CH7 WIFI with BIOS 1103
> CPU: Ryzen 7 2700x
> RAM: 16GB, 2 x F4-3200C14-8GFX, samsung b-die
> Cooler: AIO Corsair H100i v1
> Room temp: 20°
> 
> If I just set my ram to [email protected] and leave everything @ default (in particular Core Performance Boost on Auto), my temps under load are very high and voltages almost touch 1.47v-1.5v on the cpu
> 
> Idle temps bounce from 30 to 40.
> 
> With Core Performance Boost disabled, max cpu voltage under load is 1.1v
> 
> I didn't touch anything but RAM related stuff.
> Are these temps/voltages normal or safe? If not safe, should I screw CPB and manually oc the cpu? Or maybe leave CPB on and work on voltages offset?
> I'm very new on this stuff, I'm coming from a i7-2600k where the only thing I touched in the bios was the XMP profile for the ram, so... tell me EVERYTHING I should do
> 
> Thanks in advance.
> 
> edit: I forgot -> Balanced on Windows Power Management. The normal one, not the AMD Ryzen Balanced profile.


 You are running at 3.7GHz - the base clock of this CPU. If you disable Core Performance Boost you effectively disable XB2/PB2 so you cannot boost any higher than the base clock. Also, 3.7GHz on 2700x is incredibly easy to achieve. I was able to use 1v and HWINFO claims only ~60-90watts are being drawn. You double your power draw just by using PE2.


High voltages are normal, it isn't 1.4/1.5v across all cores - just one - four. AMD says this is safe, when you utilise all 16 threads you'll notice your clocks drop down to ~4GHz and you'll have a much higher voltage (1.32v~)


I would just enable Core Performance Boost, set Performance Enhancer or whatever it is called to Level 1 (Level 2 isn't worth the extra heat imo) and you'll boost to 4.35GHz on a few cores during single threaded workloads or 4GHz 100% utilisation. Just don't leave it disabled because otherwise you could have just got a 2700 and overclock to 3.7GHz with slightly more voltage.


For what it's worth, my 2700x with a Cryorig H5 also runs quite hot. Up to 70c during x264 workloads (all 16 threads), and up to 85c during Linpack or P95 (aka, anything that touches AVX). It's just important to understand that this is an 8-core processor on a not-so-great node (GoFlo 14/12nm), it is acceptable power draw for me. When I first got to grips with my 2700x I was the same way, I was use to quad cores and the fact my 6600k at 4.6GHz would still draw less power than my 2700x does at stock.


----------



## innaig86

zJordan said:


> You are running at 3.7GHz - the base clock of this CPU. If you disable Core Performance Boost you effectively disable XB2/PB2 so you cannot boost any higher than the base clock. Also, 3.7GHz on 2700x is incredibly easy to achieve. I was able to use 1v and HWINFO claims only ~60-90watts are being drawn. You double your power draw just by using PE2.
> 
> 
> High voltages are normal, it isn't 1.4/1.5v across all cores - just one - four. AMD says this is safe, when you utilise all 16 threads you'll notice your clocks drop down to ~4GHz and you'll have a much higher voltage (1.32v~)
> 
> 
> I would just enable Core Performance Boost, set Performance Enhancer or whatever it is called to Level 1 (Level 2 isn't worth the extra heat imo) and you'll boost to 4.35GHz on a few cores during single threaded workloads or 4GHz 100% utilisation. Just don't leave it disabled because otherwise you could have just got a 2700 and overclock to 3.7GHz with slightly more voltage.
> 
> 
> For what it's worth, my 2700x with a Cryorig H5 also runs quite hot. Up to 70c during x264 workloads (all 16 threads), and up to 85c during Linpack or P95 (aka, anything that touches AVX). It's just important to understand that this is an 8-core processor on a not-so-great node (GoFlo 14/12nm), it is acceptable power draw for me. When I first got to grips with my 2700x I was the same way, I was use to quad cores and the fact my 6600k at 4.6GHz would still draw less power than my 2700x does at stock.


Thank you for your answer, I set Perf. [email protected] as your advice.
So people reporting max temp with AIO at 65° are simply not testing the cpu properly (no AVX), right?

I'm quite shocked btw, I can't imagine this cpu with the stock Wraith Prism cooler o_o


----------



## JbstormburstADV

neikosr0x said:


> Got the same Ram kit, anything u are looking for exactly?


Oh, you are a god-send. Any chance you can get your UEFI settings into a text file? I want something to compare to, and hopefully if I enable them as directed, I can finally get my system stable.


----------



## crakej

innaig86 said:


> Thank you for your answer, I set Perf. [email protected] as your advice.
> So people reporting max temp with AIO at 65° are simply not testing the cpu properly (no AVX), right?
> 
> I'm quite shocked btw, I can't imagine this cpu with the stock Wraith Prism cooler o_o


Your temps are a little high. You may need to re-apply thermal paste - maybe you have too much? 

Max temps ideally you'd want to be <75 degrees (Tdie) max. Also check that your pump is going at correct RPM. Did you run fan optimization in the bios? If not, try that first.


----------



## Singularity48

innaig86 said:


> Thank you for your answer, I set Perf. [email protected] as your advice.


Try this: Set Performance Enhancer to level 2, and go into the Core Voltage on the main Extreme Tweaker tab, choose offset, pick the - sign, then put in .05 and hit enter, then save and reset. PBO works really well with a negative voltage offset, by default it pushes way higher voltages than are needed to hit the same clocks, which increases heat which will cause you to downclock. An undervolt keeps the temps down farther so PBO sees that it has more thermal headroom to boost higher.

A -.05v/-50mV undervolt should be achievable for most 2700Xs, mine will go as far as -.1v/-100mV. See if -.05v works for you first and if it does you can try to go for -.1v. If that doesn't work then your optimal undervolt is somewhere between those values.

With an H150i PRO aio and the settings in my sig I maintain (all core) ~4.1ghz on heavy load/stress tests, ~4.25ghz in lighter loads, and the 4.35ghz max single core that's the hard cap without a BCLK oc. Temps in Prime95 sffts level out at about 70-75c. Your results will be lower clockwise and higher tempwise than mine just because we have different cooling solutions and other factors, but there's basically no reason not to use as much of a negative voltage offset as is stable unless you're going for a manual OC or you're playing with BCLK.


----------



## innaig86

crakej said:


> Your temps are a little high. You may need to re-apply thermal paste - maybe you have too much?
> 
> Max temps ideally you'd want to be <75 degrees (Tdie) max. Also check that your pump is going at correct RPM. Did you run fan optimization in the bios? If not, try that first.


The pump is connected to the AIO pump of the motherboard and it's running full speed. CPU fans (2x Noctua NF-F12 PWM replacing the corsair stock fans) the same, under load.
Maybe it's the thermal paste. The cpu seemed bigger than my old i7-2600k and I put a little more paste than usual.



Singularity48 said:


> Try this: Set Performance Enhancer to level 2, and go into the Core Voltage on the main Extreme Tweaker tab, choose offset, pick the - sign, then put in .05 and hit enter, then save and reset. PBO works really well with a negative voltage offset, by default it pushes way higher voltages than are needed to hit the same clocks, which increases heat which will cause you to downclock. An undervolt keeps the temps down farther so PBO sees that it has more thermal headroom to boost higher.
> 
> A -.05v/-50mV undervolt should be achievable for most 2700Xs, mine will go as far as -.1v/-100mV. See if -.05v works for you first and if it does you can try to go for -.1v. If that doesn't work then your optimal undervolt is somewhere between those values.
> 
> With an H150i PRO aio and the settings in my sig I maintain (all core) ~4.1ghz on heavy load/stress tests, ~4.25ghz in lighter loads, and the 4.35ghz max single core that's the hard cap without a BCLK oc. Temps in Prime95 sffts level out at about 70-75c. Your results will be lower clockwise and higher tempwise than mine just because we have different cooling solutions and other factors, but there's basically no reason not to use as much of a negative voltage offset as is stable unless you're going for a manual OC or you're playing with BCLK.


I've done some test, combining PE level and negative offset voltage on CPU, running AIDA64 for 10min:
- PE lev2, -0.05v -> 3992MHz, Temp average 86°, peak 98°


Spoiler















- PE lev2, -0.1v -> 4GHz average, with little differences on cores under load, Temp average 84°, peak 91.8°


Spoiler















- PE lev3, no undervolt -> 4.141MHz, Temp average 82-83°, peak 93.1°


Spoiler















- PE lev3, -0.05v -> 4.116MHz, temp average 76-77°, peak 86°


Spoiler















So the last one is the way to go, for me? Almost best clock, best temperatures.

I still have to test for full stability though.

edit: uhm, why TinyPic doesn't work as image hosting?


----------



## majestynl

*Finally broke RAM OC @ 3600mhz CL14 with TT*

After long time with tweaking and testing i managed to get 3600mhz CL14+TT Fully stable on latest bios version 1103!
The keypoint was finally an precision adjustment of the VTDDR and Ram voltage value. Leaving VTRDDR at default/auto (50%) is not enough on all Ram-voltages and needs even a better adjustment on higher Ram speeds like 3533mhz and UP. 

So read your Ram-voltages in Hwinfo then adjust it to match as closely to 2x the VTTDR you entered in bios! 
In my case entering 1.475v in bios results in 1.462v in Hwinfo! That's why i needed to set the voltage to 1.48v in bios so it was 1.472 in Hwinfo.

*CPU:* Ryzen 2700x @ 4.2Ghz manual OC
*Ram:* Gskill F4-4266C19D-16GTZR
*RamOC:* 3600mhz CL14+TT (see screenshots for detailed info)
*Ram Settings:* 1.48v in bios // Soc 1.15v // RttPark 60ohm // CadBus 20ohm // VTDDR 0.7375v // DramDigiPower AsusOptimized!
*Ram Cooling:* Active with Gskill Fans

*Stress testing:* Multiple Ramtest runs. Start RAMtest till i get approx 4K then stop and start again to get 4k again. Restart system en run the long test. I managed to get around 10k+ then i manually stopped the test! Then Run multiple RealBench tests from 15min (8GB) each! And at the end i played some games and some general PC use etc.

_What im going to do next is: Trying to lower timings and maybe some voltages if possible.Will share results if i manage to get it better/faster!_


----------



## tobs8

Hello, everyone. I'm new to the forum. I'm trying to overclock my ram (32Gb Gskill Trident z Rgb : 4 x F4-3200C16-8GTZR Hynix AFR, cpu ryzen 2600x, motherboard ch7) and I managed to find stability at 3300mhz cl 16-18-18-18-40-58,vSoc offset + 0.0375,vram 1.375,Vcore offset +0.025. No error in memtest or testmem5. 
With the previous bios I could get to 3333mhz cl 16-17-17-17-32-49 with the same voltages, so with the new bios 1103 I had a slight worsening. Considering that it is very difficult to overclock 4 dimm of Hynix AFR ram, do you think i can get better results?


----------



## HolyFist

@majestynl very nice, congrats, how do i install TurboV Core software tho? Also i guess i still need to reboot after applying changes?

I got mine stable at Boost to 4.5GHz (the max VCore voltage happens even at stock and boosts to 4.35 on it's own and it's because of the low temps), but i would like to try and get my latency lower, as i get between 61 up to 61.7 at 3605Mhz.

Bellow screenshot that i just took now while playing a game showing *multiple cores at 4497MHz*

and Official statement about 1.5V spikes: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/8ojte9/amd_responds_to_2700x_spikes_above_15v_vcore/


----------



## westk

Which´s the RAM tester are you using? Last image


----------



## Singularity48

innaig86 said:


> So the last one is the way to go, for me? Almost best clock, best temperatures.
> 
> I still have to test for full stability though.


I wouldn't use PE3 with your cooling solution, it's an ASUS added OC that's out of AMD spec, pushes crazy voltages and you're very likely to system crash on Prime95 within minutes for not much added benefit. I'd stick with the PE2 and -.1v or lower if you can get away with it. Your temps still seem high though, might try to repaste/reseat your AIO and see if that helps.


----------



## innaig86

Singularity48 said:


> I wouldn't use PE3 with your cooling solution, it's an ASUS added OC that's out of AMD spec, pushes crazy voltages and you're very likely to system crash on Prime95 within minutes for not much added benefit. I'd stick with the PE2 and -.1v or lower if you can get away with it. Your temps still seem high though, might try to repaste/reseat your AIO and see if that helps.


Yep, AIDA64 seems to not stress test so well, I tried with prime/intelburn and it crashes at pe3 with auto-voltages.
For now, I switched back to PE1, -0.1v with a good tradeoff of temperatures and clocks, but I need to check the thermal paste.


----------



## Singularity48

innaig86 said:


> Yep, AIDA64 seems to not stress test so well, I tried with prime/intelburn and it crashes at pe3 with auto-voltages.
> For now, I switched back to PE1, -0.1v with a good tradeoff of temperatures and clocks, but I need to check the thermal paste.


Yeah I'd check the thermal paste and seating and try PE2 again, my chip/cooling solution can handle it easily but yours might be different. Either way PE1 with -.1v is still good, a lot of chips can't undervolt that low. Also, this might be anecdotal but I've NEVER had a CPU related crash due to a negative offset. In my experience, if I'm able to boot with an offset (and default PE up to PE2), it'll be stable. My CPU refuses to boot anywhere lower than exactly -.1v, but it's been running steady with PE2 and that offset for about 3 months.


----------



## majestynl

innaig86 said:


> edit: uhm, why TinyPic doesn't work as image hosting?


you can easily attach files while writing you post, you dont need to link to TinyPic!




HolyFist said:


> @majestynl very nice, congrats, how do i install TurboV Core software tho? Also i guess i still need to reboot after applying changes?


TY  You can get it from elmors CH6 Oc pack: http://www.mediafire.com/file/bt551y72d718sek/C6HOCAK0302.zip 

No you dont need to reboot, thats exactly the purpose of the SW  But don't forget after restart your bios will possibly override the settings. I'm using it for read out my set voltages and if i want quick adjustments for testing etc. so i don't need to enter the bios!




westk said:


> Which´s the RAM tester are you using? Last image


RamTest from https://www.karhusoftware.com/ramtest/


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> *Finally broke RAM OC @ 3600mhz CL14 with TT*
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> After long time with tweaking and testing i managed to get 3600mhz CL14+TT Fully stable on latest bios version 1103!
> The keypoint was finally an precision adjustment of the VTDDR and Ram voltage value. Leaving VTRDDR at default/auto (50%) is not enough on all Ram-voltages and needs even a better adjustment on higher Ram speeds like 3533mhz and UP.
> 
> So read your Ram-voltages in Hwinfo then adjust it to match as closely to 2x the VTTDR you entered in bios!
> In my case entering 1.475v in bios results in 1.462v in Hwinfo! That's why i needed to set the voltage to 1.48v in bios so it was 1.472 in Hwinfo.
> 
> *CPU:* Ryzen 2700x @ 4.2Ghz manual OC
> *Ram:* Gskill F4-4266C19D-16GTZR
> *RamOC:* 3600mhz CL14+TT (see screenshots for detailed info)
> *Ram Settings:* 1.48v in bios // Soc 1.15v // RttPark 60ohm // CadBus 20ohm // VTDDR 0.7375v // DramDigiPower AsusOptimized!
> *Ram Cooling:* Active with Gskill Fans
> 
> *Stress testing:* Multiple Ramtest runs. Start RAMtest till i get approx 4K then stop and start again to get 4k again. Restart system en run the long test. I managed to get around 10k+ then i manually stopped the test! Then Run multiple RealBench tests from 15min (8GB) each! And at the end i played some games and some general PC use etc.
> 
> _What im going to do next is: Trying to lower timings and maybe some voltages if possible.Will share results if i manage to get it better/faster!_


Nice results! I'll experiment with this, may allow me to use my tight timings too.


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> Nice results! I'll experiment with this, may allow me to use my tight timings too.


Thanks. Good luck with testing. Install TurboV so you can easily check voltages between bios and hwinfo. Match your voltage as close as possible to 2x VTDDR. 

In my case:
VTDDR 0.7125 needs Ramvoltage @ 1.435v
VTDDR 0.7250 needs Ramvoltage @ 1.455v
VTDDR 0.7375 needs Ramvoltage @ 1.48v

If I don't use Above matching voltages I get quick errors!

Today I played more and I saw differences at voltages above 1.4. Maybe this clarifies why it's not a big deal on my 3466 and lower profiles. Cause I'm using 1.4v for my 3466 profile and this results in almost accurate voltage in hwinfo. But going up in voltages above 1.4v shows differences. And for higher speeds we need more voltage...

Curious if this happens also with your tests...


----------



## westk

majestynl said:


> you can easily attach files while writing you post, you dont need to link to TinyPic!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TY  You can get it from elmors CH6 Oc pack: http://www.mediafire.com/file/bt551y72d718sek/C6HOCAK0302.zip
> 
> No you dont need to reboot, thats exactly the purpose of the SW  But don't forget after restart your bios will possibly override the settings. I'm using it for read out my set voltages and if i want quick adjustments for testing etc. so i don't need to enter the bios!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RamTest from https://www.karhusoftware.com/ramtest/


Oh is paid and I dont have a buck =(


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Your temps are a little high. You may need to re-apply thermal paste - maybe you have too much?
> 
> Max temps ideally you'd want to be <75 degrees (Tdie) max. Also check that your pump is going at correct RPM. Did you run fan optimization in the bios? If not, try that first.


so all working nice with 3600 ACE !!!


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> Thanks. Good luck with testing. Install TurboV so you can easily check voltages between bios and hwinfo. Match your voltage as close as possible to 2x VTDDR.
> 
> In my case:
> VTDDR 0.7125 needs Ramvoltage @ 1.435v
> VTDDR 0.7250 needs Ramvoltage @ 1.455v
> VTDDR 0.7375 needs Ramvoltage @ 1.48v
> 
> If I don't use Above matching voltages I get quick errors!
> 
> Today I played more and I saw differences at voltages above 1.4. Maybe this clarifies why it's not a big deal on my 3466 and lower profiles. Cause I'm using 1.4v for my 3466 profile and this results in almost accurate voltage in hwinfo. But going up in voltages above 1.4v shows differences. And for higher speeds we need more voltage...
> 
> Curious if this happens also with your tests...


Done a few more experiments this afternoon. These are my voltages for 3600 CL14 15 14 14 28. I used to be able to run 3600 CL14 13 13 13 26 but can't quite get it...still doing some tests but performance is not a lot more (if anything) with those timings really.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Done a few more experiments this afternoon. These are my voltages for 3600 CL14 15 14 14 28. I used to be able to run 3600 CL14 13 13 13 26 but can't quite get it...still doing some tests but performance is not a lot more (if anything) with those timings really.


I can't get anywhere close to the numbers you see in IBT. Time @ 75.942s and Speed @ 101.4946 testing at Very High. You're getting almost double the performance that I get.


----------



## kazablanka

nick name said:


> I can't get anywhere close to the numbers you see in IBT. Time @ 75.942s and Speed @ 101.4946 testing at Very High. You're getting almost double the performance that I get.


you use the official ibt , he is not


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I can't get anywhere close to the numbers you see in IBT. Time @ 75.942s and Speed @ 101.4946 testing at Very High. You're getting almost double the performance that I get.


Sorry - those are the IBT AVX results 

I get 86GFlops in 88 seconds on original ver


----------



## nick name

kazablanka said:


> you use the official ibt , he is not





crakej said:


> Sorry - those are the IBT AVX results
> 
> I get 86GFlops in 88 seconds on original ver


Ohhhhhhhh. I looked at the screenshot to check to see if I was using the same version and it appeared the same.


Edit:

Can you point me to the IBT AVX version please?


----------



## marsel

Hey

Does anyone has a link for the matching version of TurboV Core, cant find a working version for my ch7.

Thanks


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Ohhhhhhhh. I looked at the screenshot to check to see if I was using the same version and it appeared the same.
> 
> 
> Edit:
> 
> Can you point me to the IBT AVX version please?


I have it here - it's hard to find! https://drive.google.com/open?id=1cIoEO7SZ5zLHByTCyp4heFadhg_QH2OC


----------



## crakej

marsel said:


> Hey
> 
> Does anyone has a link for the matching version of TurboV Core, cant find a working version for my ch7.
> 
> Thanks


Will try find for you - I think I downloaded it from the ROG site. If you have AISuite installed, then just click on TPU to get the same information.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I have it here - it's hard to find! https://drive.google.com/open?id=1cIoEO7SZ5zLHByTCyp4heFadhg_QH2OC


Many thanks!


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> Done a few more experiments this afternoon. These are my voltages for 3600 CL14 15 14 14 28. I used to be able to run 3600 CL14 13 13 13 26 but can't quite get it...still doing some tests but performance is not a lot more (if anything) with those timings really.


hmm if you ask me..i would up your ram voltage cause 2x 0.7125v = 1.425v. But seeing from your HwInfo it gets 1.406v! 
If im right you need to push 1.435v to get close to 1.425v.




marsel said:


> Hey
> 
> Does anyone has a link for the matching version of TurboV Core, cant find a working version for my ch7.
> 
> Thanks


im using version 1.02.02

https://filehost.net/4b6d700b24ebd487


----------



## marsel

majestynl said:


> im using version 1.02.02
> 
> https://filehost.net/4b6d700b24ebd487


thank you!


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> hmm if you ask me..i would up your ram voltage cause 2x 0.7125v = 1.425v. But seeing from your HwInfo it gets 1.406v!
> If im right you need to push 1.435v to get close to 1.425v.


Well, currently I'm rock solid stable and can easily pass 4000% RamTest. My voltage is set as 1.425 in the bios, showing 1.406 in HWInfo - doesn't seem much point putting it up if it's working...

Even then, more testing required here, and will still use this as I try to push higher speeds.


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> Well, currently I'm rock solid stable and can easily pass 4000% RamTest. My voltage is set as 1.425 in the bios, showing 1.406 in HWInfo - doesn't seem much point putting it up if it's working...
> 
> Even then, more testing required here, and will still use this as I try to push higher speeds.


Nice! yeap if its working then no need for adjusting 

So your ram needs only 1.4v for 3600mhz? Can you share full screenshot with RTC / TurboV and Hwinfo open so i can compare some tests over here. Thanks in advance!


----------



## westk

I keep testing my 3600 CL14 and I got its rare behavior =)

The most of the OS start is stable but I wanted to know what voltage or setting was different went go bad.

The only voltage that is different is the VDDP.

0.076 - Bad Start
0.098 - Rock solid

Where do you set this voltage in BIOS? I have set the VDDP but is 855 for example. Not 0.10v.


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> Nice! yeap if its working then no need for adjusting
> 
> So your ram needs only 1.4v for 3600mhz? Can you share full screenshot with RTC / TurboV and Hwinfo open so i can compare some tests over here. Thanks in advance!


Here you go - yes, ram is set at 1.420v in bios, cpu is only +0.01250 offset and SoC still low at -0.9375 (-0.08750 in bios i think?).

Have tried experimenting with 3666 but can't quite stabilize it, putting cpu up made it worse, 1 notch more of SoC and 1.44v for ram got best results, anything else made it worse.


----------



## drkCrix

Greetings everyone,

I am currently shopping for a new board to replace my Taichi x370 (I find the lack of bios updates disturbing) and I am looking at either the Strix x470 or the Crosshair x470

The extra power phases aside, anything I should know regarding the two? Going for gaming and productivity over crushing benchmarks.

Any help is greatly appreciated.

Thanks,

Chris


----------



## Praetorr

drkCrix said:


> Greetings everyone,
> 
> I am currently shopping for a new board to replace my Taichi x370 (I find the lack of bios updates disturbing) and I am looking at either the Strix x470 or the Crosshair x470
> 
> The extra power phases aside, anything I should know regarding the two? Going for gaming and productivity over crushing benchmarks.
> 
> Any help is greatly appreciated.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Chris


I can't comment on the nuances between those boards, but if it's any help I can comment broadly about the BIOS support.

I've had AM4 boards from Gigabyte (X370 K7), MSI (ITX Gaming AC), and Asus (X470 CH7 Wi-Fi). While the grass always looks greener on the other side, so far I'd say Asus without question has the best BIOS support. 

Gigabyte is an absolute mess... They released blatantly broken BIOS after blatantly broken BIOS. They are, in my view, utterly shameless. 

MSI seems fine, but their BIOS layout is pure insanity. It makes no sense whatsoever. I've also heard offset voltage still doesn't work properly on many of their boards.

Asus so far has been solid. I've had the easiest time OCing RAM, and the BIOS layout and feature-set are incredible. 


So, that's a long winded way of saying that I think you're making a reasonable decision to go Asus.


----------



## Singularity48

I started messing with the DRAM voltages today because I'm having the same discrepancy between what I set in BIOS and what shows up in HWinfo. I'd set 1.48v in BIOS and it shows exactly 1.45v in HWinfo and seemed to have a weirdly scaling offset between the value you set and what shows up in OS. I downloaded TurboV and it shows the values I set in BIOS, but which one is accurate? I need to know in order to accurately set my VTTDDR voltage.


----------



## bonomork

I've just completed my last build switching from a 5820k to a 2700X with G.SKILL Trident Z F4-3200C14D-16GTZRX.

Quick setting as follows (bios 1103):

PE level 2
.1V undervolt on Vcore

Balanced profile 5%-100%

Please let me know if i'm doing well and where I've to improve.


----------



## gupsterg

@majestynl @crakej

Nice results guys  .



Singularity48 said:


> I started messing with the DRAM voltages today because I'm having the same discrepancy between what I set in BIOS and what shows up in HWinfo. I'd set 1.48v in BIOS and it shows exactly 1.45v in HWinfo and seemed to have a weirdly scaling offset between the value you set and what shows up in OS. I downloaded TurboV and it shows the values I set in BIOS, but which one is accurate? I need to know in order to accurately set my VTTDDR voltage.


Firstly update HWINFO, opt to use the (VRM) readings. Usually the average read for me is similar to DMM applied to ProbeIt for x voltage.

Secondly HWINFO defaults to polling interval of 2000ms, you wanna lower this value to gain faster polling. Which will somewhat improve "accuracy", again I'd ref the average for certain voltages.

Thirdly be aware of granularity. The read backs do not have like a 1mV granularity. The SVI2 readings have 6.25mV, so a reading can only use that step, the other readings that your most likely to reference are ~10mV (reference PDF in OP, page 7).

Lastly try to gain a DMM, even a reasonably priced one will be handy. I find on my board there is a difference of +0.05V for set DRAM voltage vs actual read via DMM and as stated before the average read in HWINFO tends to match DMM. So if I set 1.345V for VDIMM I have actual 1.35V. As on SOC I do not change load line calibration from [Auto], usually actual tends to be 2-3 steps lower than set, also depends on CPU/SOC loading. For example manually set 0.900V will be ~0.880-0.900V, again due to how load line effect is, not due to deficiency in CPU/motherboard/etc.

VTTDDR should be set to ~1/2 of VDIMM. You may find due aspects highlighted, a step higher or lower to the calc based on set VDIMM may work well. Some times a a further nudge either way may be favoured by your "setup". It's a shame the C7H lacks the granularity that C6H had for setting VTTDDR, but it's not that much of a biggie. Calc some of the setups for VTTDDR based on VDIMM and you'll see what I mean.


----------



## VPII

bonomork said:


> I've just completed my last build switching from a 5820k to a 2700X with G.SKILL Trident Z F4-3200C14D-16GTZRX.
> 
> Quick setting as follows (bios 1103):
> 
> PE level 2
> .1V undervolt on Vcore
> 
> Balanced profile 5%-100%
> 
> Please let me know if i'm doing well and where I've to improve.


Most of the chaps here will give you better advice so I'll keep it limited. If you expect more from your memory you need higher CPU clocks. I tend to prefer manual clocking so I'm set at 4.267ghz using 1.325vcore for everyday us. To put it into perspective look at my memory throughput at these clocks. Yup nowhere near what some of these esteemed members can do but it should show you what can be done with some memory speed and timings. Even what you see n the screen shot is not the best. I've ran my memory at 3600 using the 3600 preset in the bios, but guys here does way better using different timings and 1T command rate unlike my 2T. But that is the unfortunate thing that happens when you in a country where things happens slowly.


----------



## bonomork

VPII said:


> Most of the chaps here will give you better advice so I'll keep it limited. If you expect more from your memory you need higher CPU clocks. I tend to prefer manual clocking so I'm set at 4.267ghz using 1.325vcore for everyday us. To put it into perspective look at my memory throughput at these clocks. Yup nowhere near what some of these esteemed members can do but it should show you what can be done with some memory speed and timings. Even what you see n the screen shot is not the best. I've ran my memory at 3600 using the 3600 preset in the bios, but guys here does way better using different timings and 1T command rate unlike my 2T. But that is the unfortunate thing that happens when you in a country where things happens slowly.


My screenshot is related to minor changes in the bios settings. I've just enabled PE lvl 2, added a negative offset to the Vcore (.1) and a standard DDR4 D.O.C.P.
Since I'm back to AMD team with my main rig I would like to improve the above settings following the suggestions by the skilled people on this platform.


----------



## nick name

bonomork said:


> My screenshot is related to minor changes in the bios settings. I've just enabled PE lvl 2, added a negative offset to the Vcore (.1) and a standard DDR4 D.O.C.P.
> Since I'm back to AMD team with my main rig I would like to improve the above settings following the suggestions by the skilled people on this platform.


I imagine you could use PE Lvl 3 with the cooler you have. I prefer that. And if you're gonna keep BCLK at 100 then you can set a negative VCORE offset to reduce voltages. Depending on your workload you can find stability between negative .04 ~ .08.


----------



## Singularity48

gupsterg said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Firstly update HWINFO, opt to use the (VRM) readings. Usually the average read for me is similar to DMM applied to ProbeIt for x voltage.
> 
> Secondly HWINFO defaults to polling interval of 2000ms, you wanna lower this value to gain faster polling. Which will somewhat improve "accuracy", again I'd ref the average for certain voltages.
> 
> Thirdly be aware of granularity. The read backs do not have like a 1mV granularity. The SVI2 readings have 6.25mV, so a reading can only use that step, the other readings that your most likely to reference are ~10mV (reference PDF in OP, page 7).
> 
> Lastly try to gain a DMM, even a reasonably priced one will be handy. I find on my board there is a difference of +0.05V for set DRAM voltage vs actual read via DMM and as stated before the average read in HWINFO tends to match DMM. So if I set 1.345V for VDIMM I have actual 1.35V. As on SOC I do not change load line calibration from [Auto], usually actual tends to be 2-3 steps lower than set, also depends on CPU/SOC loading. For example manually set 0.900V will be ~0.880-0.900V, again due to how load line effect is, not due to deficiency in CPU/motherboard/etc.
> 
> VTTDDR should be set to ~1/2 of VDIMM. You may find due aspects highlighted, a step higher or lower to the calc based on set VDIMM may work well. Some times a a further nudge either way may be favoured by your "setup". It's a shame the C7H lacks the granularity that C6H had for setting VTTDDR, but it's not that much of a biggie. Calc some of the setups for VTTDDR based on VDIMM and you'll see what I mean.


So if I'm understanding correctly, I should use HWinfo's average DRAM voltage reading and set a VTTDDR of close to half that value +/- one step? 

I understand the whole granularity thing, I noticed it while testing more last night. If I set a DRAM value in BIOS, for example 1.455v, HWinfo will show either 1.417v or 1.428v in a repeating cycle, which averages out to 1.425v which makes me think it's just a straight up ~.03v difference between BIOS DRAM voltage values and real readings on my board. Maybe it's because i'm still on BIOS 0804? Not sure if that behavior would be different between BIOS versions, but a difference of .03v seems like a lot when I'm trying to set a working VTTDDR voltage, and as far as I can tell there's no way in HWinfo to monitor your VTTDDR voltage to make sure that isn't also off by .03v.


----------



## Singularity48

well I reinstalled windows today and updated the BIOS to 1103. we'll see how this goes. RIP manual PBO

edit: seems I was right about the newer BIOS changing the voltage monitoring behavior, HWinfo shows my DRAM Voltage (VRM) now and it's within .01v of my BIOS setting. I might test my dual rank kit @ 3333cl14 fast in a few days because I'm pretty sure 3400 is gonna be impossible with my IMC. still hitting similar CPU clocks without the manual PBO values which is nice.


----------



## gupsterg

For my hardware yes average read of VDIMM (VRM) matches actual read of VDIMM using digital multimeter on ProbeIt point. I see no change in actual read under load or idle, it is pretty much static; at most I see a very mild up or down of 0.001V.

UEFI 0804 / 0702 had broken ASUS WMI, so HWINFO will not show the enhanced accuracy readings from VRM controller, but will show the readings from Super IO Chip, which are less accurate. So that is why on UEFI 0012 onwards you'll see what you are seeing on UEFI 1103. If you want same enhanced monitoring, but manual PBO in UEFI use UEFI 1002.

Personally I would not set VTTDDR based on what HWINFO reads VDIMM back as. This is not due to the program being bad, but down to how to granularity is, besides other aspects I highlighted in previous post and the particular voltage you wish to tweak based on it.

VDIMM is steps of 0.05V, so lets say you set 1.355V and you were actually getting real voltage of that. VTTDDR would need to be circa 0.6775V. You can not set that, you can only use 0.675V or 0.687V. So I think you are overcomplicating the matter. Even the C6H would not have allowed as accurate a match up, it would have allowed circa 0.675V 0.680V 0.687V.

Just find out from testing if your setup likes closely matched VTTDDR, or step above or below, or a few steps above or below.

Majestynl in his share has basically used HWINFO as guidance and then used reaction to testing to x setup to stabilise profile. His average read back is 1.49V, VDIMM set is 1.48V (more than likely will differ if read using digital multimeter), VTTDDR is 0.7375V, 0.7375V x 2 = 1.475V, see how he is not following the rule to the letter? but found what works best for his setup through testing and using what he has access to as guidance.


----------



## bonomork

nick name said:


> I imagine you could use PE Lvl 3 with the cooler you have. I prefer that. And if you're gonna keep BCLK at 100 then you can set a negative VCORE offset to reduce voltages. Depending on your workload you can find stability between negative .04 ~ .08.


Still on PE lvl 2, I've increased memory frequency to 3333 MHz with the previous timing. It seems stable, better memory latency now 65.5 ns (AIDA)


----------



## Syldon

bonomork said:


> I've just completed my last build switching from a 5820k to a 2700X with G.SKILL Trident Z F4-3200C14D-16GTZRX.
> 
> Quick setting as follows (bios 1103):
> 
> PE level 2
> .1V undervolt on Vcore
> 
> Balanced profile 5%-100%
> 
> Please let me know if i'm doing well and where I've to improve.



This is a very common type of post that comes around here. Where you are atm is a baseline setting that will work for a high percentage of people. That is to say there is a lot of flexibility in the settings you have. This makes allowances differences of the quality of components between set ups. 

If you want a quick route look at !smus's dram calculator. 

If you want a more in depth view of how make adjustments, you will need to get the tools to allow you to see the results of what you are changing and also allow you to post back those settings here.

Apps to look into are HWinfo or SIV, HCImemtest, prime 95 and IBT. Also think about getting a multimeter and a lasar thermometer, both are relatively cheap.


----------



## bonomork

Syldon said:


> This is a very common type of post that comes around here. Where you are atm is a baseline setting that will work for a high percentage of people. That is to say there is a lot of flexibility in the settings you have. This makes allowances differences of the quality of components between set ups.
> 
> If you want a quick route look at !smus's dram calculator.
> 
> If you want a more in depth view of how make adjustments, you will need to get the tools to allow you to see the results of what you are changing and also allow you to post back those settings here.
> 
> Apps to look into are HWinfo or SIV, HCImemtest, prime 95 and IBT. Also think about getting a multimeter and a lasar thermometer, both are relatively cheap.


Thank you for your suggestions. I'm not new to OC i.e. Intel CPU, but with Ryzen it sounds different and I'm looking for some good guide.


----------



## zJordan

bonomork said:


> Thank you for your suggestions. I'm not new to OC i.e. Intel CPU, but with Ryzen it sounds different and I'm looking for some good guide.


 I guess just know that you have very little overclocking headroom on the 2700x. XF2 and PB2 push it to the limits depending on setting used.


You should focus on stabilising memory as far as it will go. I've seen people push your kit to ~3466MHz with good timings. My B-Die kit despite having tighter timings (XMP anyway) than yours won't go past 3200MHz (but I have tight timings that I hate to loosen) - to try higher frequency memory use the DRAM calculator someone posted earlier on this page. It doesn't work 100%, but it should give you stable timings at 3200MHz at least - these will be tighter than XMP, and more numerous.


I wouldn't bother with base clock overclocking (anything other than Auto will disable XF2 and PB2), leave it at stock and use PBO Lvl 2 or 3/4 with BCLK overclocks to get an extra ~100MHz on all boosts, also consider offset negative voltage to undervolt. (e.g. 4.35GHz cores will operate at around 4.45GHz, etc.).


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Sorry - those are the IBT AVX results
> 
> I get 86GFlops in 88 seconds on original ver


If it goes for ibt its great to see small performance gains uits easly repetative benchmark. I go by time to complete loop of 10 for my memory tweeks


----------



## Singularity48

gupsterg said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> For my hardware yes average read of VDIMM (VRM) matches actual read of VDIMM using digital multimeter on ProbeIt point. I see no change in actual read under load or idle, it is pretty much static; at most I see a very mild up or down of 0.001V.
> 
> UEFI 0804 / 0702 had broken ASUS WMI, so HWINFO will not show the enhanced accuracy readings from VRM controller, but will show the readings from Super IO Chip, which are less accurate. So that is why on UEFI 0012 onwards you'll see what you are seeing on UEFI 1103. If you want same enhanced monitoring, but manual PBO in UEFI use UEFI 1002.
> 
> Personally I would not set VTTDDR based on what HWINFO reads VDIMM back as. This is not due to the program being bad, but down to how to granularity is, besides other aspects I highlighted in previous post and the particular voltage you wish to tweak based on it.
> 
> VDIMM is steps of 0.05V, so lets say you set 1.355V and you were actually getting real voltage of that. VTTDDR would need to be circa 0.6775V. You can not set that, you can only use 0.675V or 0.687V. So I think you are overcomplicating the matter. Even the C6H would not have allowed as accurate a match up, it would have allowed circa 0.675V 0.680V 0.687V.
> 
> Just find out from testing if your setup likes closely matched VTTDDR, or step above or below, or a few steps above or below.
> 
> Majestynl in his share has basically used HWINFO as guidance and then used reaction to testing to x setup to stabilise profile. His average read back is 1.49V, VDIMM set is 1.48V (more than likely will differ if read using digital multimeter), VTTDDR is 0.7375V, 0.7375V x 2 = 1.475V, see how he is not following the rule to the letter? but found what works best for his setup through testing and using what he has access to as guidance.


You're right about overthinking it, I tend to be cautious and try to be as precise as possible, but now that I know it was a problem with the monitoring I'm more willing to mess around with it. Like I said I'll do some testing at 3333/3400c14 on the new BIOS and see if I can make headway over 3200c14 I had on 0804.


----------



## Margatroid

Does anyone know if the VII has fan issues with the 1103 bios (or if it has in other recent bios updates)? I'm trying to decide whether to buy a VI or a VII, and I'm thinking maybe the VII is the better choice if I can avoid some of the problems the VI still has.


----------



## 1usmus

*1103 MOD*

* unlocked PBO, Managed overclocking Control and OC Mode (in AMD CBS)

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1CfKYa9haqn9oD89b2rurvyeRbBLk82n6


----------



## crakej

1usmus said:


> *1103 MOD*
> 
> * unlocked PBO, Managed overclocking Control and OC Mode (in AMD CBS)
> 
> https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1CfKYa9haqn9oD89b2rurvyeRbBLk82n6


Thanks @1usmus! Much appreciated.


----------



## CJMitsuki

1usmus said:


> *1103 MOD*
> 
> * unlocked PBO, Managed overclocking Control and OC Mode (in AMD CBS)
> 
> https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1CfKYa9haqn9oD89b2rurvyeRbBLk82n6


Will flash momentarily and test

On an unrelated note...This happened


----------



## crakej

@1usmus will any of these settings benefit Ryzen 1xxx CPUs?


----------



## VPII

CJMitsuki said:


> Will flash momentarily and test
> 
> On an unrelated note...This happened
> View attachment 239956


Hi CJMitsuki, can you possibly explain to me what the benefit is with this modded bios. Sorry, I'm learning everyday. I'd also like to understand how you are able to run your 2700X at 4.45ghz. Look I can easily do 4.4 with my vcore set to 1.5 but obviously not stable for extreme stresses. My everyday use is 4.26ghz using 1.325vcore and it works without fail. I'd just like to understand how you able to get the clocks you get from a 2700X. Obviously going into summer here now will limit my clocking..... my poor 2080ti is really feeling it with the heat around here..... but so would the cpu as well.


----------



## zulex

1usmus said:


> *1103 MOD*
> 
> * unlocked PBO, Managed overclocking Control and OC Mode (in AMD CBS)
> 
> https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1CfKYa9haqn9oD89b2rurvyeRbBLk82n6


Does this work for wifi version?


----------



## kmellz

Anyone else have problems with getting random "network not available" ? First thought it was my router dying, or possibly the fiber box. But, recently started testing to see if other devices lost net also, but only my computer.. after googling it seems there's quite a few cases of intel integrated network cards having these issues :/ Thought it would be sweet sweet quality with an intel one.. 
Mixing around a bit with things like receieve/transmit buffers have helped a little bit, but it still happenes frequently. Extremely irritating when gaming!


----------



## Margatroid

Hey guys, I'm doing a C7H build and the last thing I have to decide is the RAM. I'm considering getting G Skill Flare X because it seems incredibly easy to overclock on, but it's $30-$40 more than some other comparable kits that aren't optimized for AMD with the hardcoded sub-timings the Flare X has. Is this extra expense worthwhile? I've read that The Stilt's timings are actually selectable in the C7H BIOS, so would that make the built-in timings on the Flare X RAM redundant, or are they still useful for their plug-and-play functionality? I'm new to overclocking RAM on AMD so I feel like making things easier might be worthwhile for me.

Then again, I wonder if I'd be better off saving my money and just getting one of the other K4A8G085WB kits from this list if I'm going to get basically the same result with the C7H's timings: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/62vp2g/clearing_up_any_samsung_bdie_confusion_eg_on/

Would love to hear any of your opinions on this. Thanks!


----------



## gupsterg

Well had a new CPU come yesterday. 1835 PGS, seems lower leakage as needs higher VCORE for frequency plus info from CPO Test seems to support this AFAIK.



Spoiler




View attachment 1805 SUS 1825 SUS 1835 PGS Full.jpg


Notes: Some will note, some test data is on C6H. I have tested 1825 SUS for CPO_Test on both and found no large variation in result. Each UEFI on differing board was AGESA 1.0.0.2C, so same CPU FW, etc. Even default limiters are same for each board. PE Default PBO Auto was used, default Balanced OS power plan. The date is rolled back in screenies for 1825 & 1835 as test will not run as deemed expired.



PB/XFR2 boost under P95 v28.10b1 was slightly better than 1805 SUS, but lower than 1825 SUS. CB15 even in same conditions shows 1825 SUS has slight edge in single and multi core. IMC for 32GB in quick testing seems the worst out of all 3 CPUs.

I have another C7H WIFI coming today, will be interesting to see how the CPUs behave on differing board. It will be a first for me to try another board of same model. So far only had 1x each of C6H, C7H and ZE, be interesting to see if changes occur for favoured settings on CPUs/RAM used on current C7H vs new board.



Singularity48 said:


> You're right about overthinking it, I tend to be cautious and try to be as precise as possible, but now that I know it was a problem with the monitoring I'm more willing to mess around with it. Like I said I'll do some testing at 3333/3400c14 on the new BIOS and see if I can make headway over 3200c14 I had on 0804.


:specool: .



Margatroid said:


> Does anyone know if the VII has fan issues with the 1103 bios (or if it has in other recent bios updates)? I'm trying to decide whether to buy a VI or a VII, and I'm thinking maybe the VII is the better choice if I can avoid some of the problems the VI still has.


Regardless of which board you get Super IO chip is same, has same issues.

Each board has received ASUS WMI support. If an application uses that method of access to Super IO chip all is well, if not you still could have an issue.

For me on C6H, C7H and ZE even with without ASUS WMI I had very little fan control issues. With ASUS WMI and keeping to apps that support feature I've had no issues. 



1usmus said:


> *1103 MOD*
> 
> * unlocked PBO, Managed overclocking Control and OC Mode (in AMD CBS)
> 
> https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1CfKYa9haqn9oD89b2rurvyeRbBLk82n6


Nice, thank you :thumb: .



VPII said:


> Hi CJMitsuki, can you possibly explain to me what the benefit is with this modded bios. Sorry, I'm learning everyday. I'd also like to understand how you are able to run your 2700X at 4.45ghz. Look I can easily do 4.4 with my vcore set to 1.5 but obviously not stable for extreme stresses. My everyday use is 4.26ghz using 1.325vcore and it works without fail. I'd just like to understand how you able to get the clocks you get from a 2700X. Obviously going into summer here now will limit my clocking..... my poor 2080ti is really feeling it with the heat around here..... but so would the cpu as well.


Firstly he cools his CPU uses cold air from AC IIRC. Secondly uses a BCLK tweak to bump single/multi core.

The modded UEFI should bring back manual setup of PBO limiters. So rather than using Ryzen Master, you can use UEFI.



zulex said:


> Does this work for wifi version?


Only if force flashed. Will be trying it soon, at present busy with other things to try another UEFI.


----------



## VPII

gupsterg said:


> Firstly he cools his CPU uses cold air from AC IIRC. Secondly uses a BCLK tweak to bump single/multi core.
> 
> The modded UEFI should bring back manual setup of PBO limiters. So rather than using Ryzen Master, you can use UEFI.


Thanks for the heads up gupsterq, see I mostly bench not really worried about everyday use as what I use for everyday works fine for me. Unfortunately in the bench world AMD is still lacking, or shall I say the support for AMD is lacking. When I look at the 9900K for instance.... it is way ahead when running 3dmark Fire Strike or Time Spy. But when compared clock for clock with AMD when running Cinebench R15 the AMD Ryzen is about 100+ points better at the same clock speed. Go to Hwbot and filter for Ryzen 2700X and see the highest is 2630 at 5.7Ghz... the first 9900K to past that result was running 5.9Ghz. Yes it was about 30+ points better but even at 5.84ghz is still could not beat that AMD Ryzen.


----------



## DDSZ

Finally finished my build. Some dremel action was needed on the noctua's L9i/L9a AM4 cooler mounting kit so I could fit it on my old Scythe Ninja 3 
Everything is fine so far!
But I'm not sure if I should do Pstate OC, or just stick to normal OC. Recommendations?


----------



## Margatroid

gupsterg said:


> Regardless of which board you get Super IO chip is same, has same issues.
> 
> Each board has received ASUS WMI support. If an application uses that method of access to Super IO chip all is well, if not you still could have an issue.
> 
> For me on C6H, C7H and ZE even with without ASUS WMI I had very little fan control issues. With ASUS WMI and keeping to apps that support feature I've had no issues.


Thanks for the reply! I think I'm going to go with the VII since they may support it longer.

Do you have any opinions about the value of using the built-in timings in Flare X RAM on a C7H? I posted at the bottom of the last page and I think people probably won't see it...


----------



## MrPhilo

*3600CL14 1103*

Love the bios 1103, previous bios before 1xxx series, I could only get 3466Mhz with decent timings and I think 1001 let me tighten it more. I just thought I had a bad IMC tbh.

Now I can run 3600CL14 with pretty good timings! I don't have no fan or anything against my RAM, it's just going by the case temperature, so I was really surprised tbh.

But my system loves high VOLTAGES lol.

*SoC at 1.15V (LLC5)* - If I used 1.1v or 1.05v, my system does not seem to be as smooth and I get ram error anyways with anything lower than 1.15v (which is the voltage as auto).
*RAM is at 1.5v* with drops to 1.487 as per HWinfo which might be right or wrong, but I tried running at 1.46v, 1.465v etc until 1.5v and I stopped getting errors.

But happy with my results 

Will there be any trouble running my RAM at 1.5v in the long run? I've read it's fine but just curious.


----------



## nick name

Does anyone leave virtualization turned on in BIOS? It seems to keep my CPU from reaching lower p-states and HWiNFO doesn't display CPU multiplier when I have it on. 

On a kinda related note -- has anyone played with the new Windows Sandbox?


----------



## DirtyHarry14028

@1usmus 
Is it possible to provide it for the wifi version?


----------



## westk

nick name said:


> Does anyone leave virtualization turned on in BIOS? It seems to keep my CPU from reaching lower p-states and HWiNFO doesn't display CPU multiplier when I have it on.
> 
> On a kinda related note -- has anyone played with the new Windows Sandbox?


When I turn it on and I use it (memu), I have unexpected reboots


----------



## gupsterg

@crakej

1835 PGS like 1805 SUS is showing signs of doing 3533MHz C15 1T at reasonably low voltages. 1805 SUS did stop doing 3533MHz for me full stop after a few days, so will see where this goes. 1825 SUS pretty much never showed any real stability at 3533MHz, best was ~3520MHz.



Spoiler














I may perhaps even shave some of the voltages.



Spoiler














It's sorta feels strange to see how PB/XFR2 differs ever so slightly between the chips and also PBO. Pretty much 1805 SUS scaled the least, 1825 SUS the most and 1835 PGS lies somewhere between each. For ACB OC the 1835 PGS has close similarities to 1805 SUS, both need ~1.312-1.318V VID for PState 0 as 4.1GHz. Both did also 4.15GHz using ~1.350-1.356V, further testing on 1805 SUS had shown at this clock it did need more juice, still have to do the same on 1835 PGS.



Spoiler
















VPII said:


> Thanks for the heads up gupsterq, see I mostly bench not really worried about everyday use as what I use for everyday works fine for me. Unfortunately in the bench world AMD is still lacking, or shall I say the support for AMD is lacking. When I look at the 9900K for instance.... it is way ahead when running 3dmark Fire Strike or Time Spy. But when compared clock for clock with AMD when running Cinebench R15 the AMD Ryzen is about 100+ points better at the same clock speed. Go to Hwbot and filter for Ryzen 2700X and see the highest is 2630 at 5.7Ghz... the first 9900K to past that result was running 5.9Ghz. Yes it was about 30+ points better but even at 5.84ghz is still could not beat that AMD Ryzen.


NP  .

Yeah dunno what it is about the 3DM benches, I too and several others note this. Last time I checked, IIRC, in the combined test I never see CPU peg to 100% like on Intel rig. IIRC my i5 4690K bests the Ryzen 7 for that test with same GPU.



DDSZ said:


> Finally finished my build. Some dremel action was needed on the noctua's L9i/L9a AM4 cooler mounting kit so I could fit it on my old Scythe Ninja 3
> Everything is fine so far!
> But I'm not sure if I should do Pstate OC, or just stick to normal OC. Recommendations?


Nice to see you around chap :thumb: . Hope you're enjoying new rig  .

With the 2700 perhaps PState OC be better. I have not had one yet and from a review I read while back, it does not hold higher frequency under PB/XFR2 as X CPU. Perhaps by tweaking the configurable TDP it will allow gains under PB/XFR2. Dunno really just stating what I may try if had one.



Margatroid said:


> Thanks for the reply! I think I'm going to go with the VII since they may support it longer.
> 
> Do you have any opinions about the value of using the built-in timings in Flare X RAM on a C7H? I posted at the bottom of the last page and I think people probably won't see it...


NP  .

The built in The Stilt timings I value greatly. They are my go to setups to find bearings when change CPUs, RAM, etc and nice to compare how differing CPU/B die used, profile for them.



nick name said:


> Does anyone leave virtualization turned on in BIOS? It seems to keep my CPU from reaching lower p-states and HWiNFO doesn't display CPU multiplier when I have it on.
> 
> On a kinda related note -- has anyone played with the new Windows Sandbox?


When I used it on C6H with gen 1 had no issues, yet to try with gen 2 on C7H. Will give it a go soon and report if have an issue  .


----------



## HolyFist

MrPhilo said:


> Love the bios 1103, previous bios before 1xxx series, I could only get 3466Mhz with decent timings and I think 1001 let me tighten it more. I just thought I had a bad IMC tbh.
> 
> Now I can run 3600CL14 with pretty good timings! I don't have no fan or anything against my RAM, it's just going by the case temperature, so I was really surprised tbh.
> 
> But my system loves high VOLTAGES lol.
> 
> *SoC at 1.15V (LLC5)* - If I used 1.1v or 1.05v, my system does not seem to be as smooth and I get ram error anyways with anything lower than 1.15v (which is the voltage as auto).
> *RAM is at 1.5v* with drops to 1.487 as per HWinfo which might be right or wrong, but I tried running at 1.46v, 1.465v etc until 1.5v and I stopped getting errors.
> 
> But happy with my results
> 
> Will there be any trouble running my RAM at 1.5v in the long run? I've read it's fine but just curious.


Those voltages are way too high, you should be able to get 3466CL14 even with advanced timings untouched and almost everything on Auto and all temperatures will be much lower, same for power usage and the performance different isn't that much anyway, i get only 3 more FPS average at 3440x1440 in AC Odyssey with 3605MHz and 2700X Boosting up to 4.5GHz (normally around 4.1/4.2 when playing).

Also your image only seems to be testing a bit less than 5GB of RAM, that's hardly even close to being accurate, you need to test most of RAM like 12GB, normally leaving at least around 1GB free for system.

Also i don't like LLC on Ryzen, any increase in usage can cause temperatures to quickly rise and then fall, resulting in average higher temps which on its own is bad because the higher the temperatures the less MHz the CPU will do.


----------



## MrPhilo

HolyFist said:


> Those voltages are way too high, you should be able to get 3466CL14 even with advanced timings untouched and almost everything on Auto and all temperatures will be much lower, same for power usage and the performance different isn't that much anyway, i get only 3 more FPS average at 3440x1440 in AC Odyssey with 3605MHz and 2700X Boosting up to 4.5GHz (normally around 4.1/4.2 when playing).
> 
> Also your image only seems to be testing a bit less than 5GB of RAM, that's hardly even close to being accurate, you need to test most of RAM like 12GB, normally leaving at least around 1GB free for system.
> 
> Also i don't like LLC on Ryzen, any increase in usage can cause temperatures to quickly rise and then fall, resulting in average higher temps which on its own is bad because the higher the temperatures the less MHz the CPU will do.


Yeah, I dropped my SoC down to 1.1v and it worked fine. I did 5gb so I can also use my computer.

I left it on all night when I went to sleep with 1.5gb left so all good, no errors.

I have gone down to 3533 though at 1.45v, the performance was hardly any different as u mentioned, but still its nice to know that I can run it at 3600cl14.


----------



## Jackalito

Singularity48 said:


> I have the RGB version of that kit in my build, it runs perfectly at rated speeds and has no problem with tightened subtimings on c14. I had it running at the timings in the screenshot for several weeks before I started trying for higher frequency.



I'm struggling to set my RAM at 3200 with looser timings than yours. I know I'm not pushing voltage that hard, aside from the fact that my new 2700X may not have a superb IMC. But, could you please provide the rest of your settings?

Right now as it is my RAM (2x16GB) GSkill F43200C14D-32GTZ Sammy B-die is only stable at 3066MHz with the following settings:











I would appreciate anyone who could give me some advice as how to proceed to try and achieve 3200 stable based on experience with Dual Rank memory.

Thanks a bunch, guys! I always learn so much just by reading your posts and experiences with the platform :thumb:


----------



## gupsterg

3533MHz so far is sound on this new CPU. With some under volting gained ever so slightly better PB/XFR2 clocks same as higher leakage/lower effective voltage CPU.

Prior to UV RT ACB ~4.130GHz.



Spoiler














-50mV yields ~4.15GHz.



Spoiler



Initial test.









Warm POST 1.









Warm POST 2.











Perhaps this CPU will hold 3533MHz, as had some results on 3600MHz C15 1T which other past CPUs have not done.



Spoiler






















Looks like I won't be trying the new C7H, but keeping to using my launch board.

*** edit ***

AIDA64 results, basically The Stilt 3466MHz timings on 3533MHz is what I've been testing PBOE, determinism slider Performance, AIDA64 was without the UV on CPU.



Spoiler


----------



## CJMitsuki

VPII said:


> Hi CJMitsuki, can you possibly explain to me what the benefit is with this modded bios. Sorry, I'm learning everyday. I'd also like to understand how you are able to run your 2700X at 4.45ghz. Look I can easily do 4.4 with my vcore set to 1.5 but obviously not stable for extreme stresses. My everyday use is 4.26ghz using 1.325vcore and it works without fail. I'd just like to understand how you able to get the clocks you get from a 2700X. Obviously going into summer here now will limit my clocking..... my poor 2080ti is really feeling it with the heat around here..... but so would the cpu as well.





VPII said:


> Thanks for the heads up gupsterq, see I mostly bench not really worried about everyday use as what I use for everyday works fine for me. Unfortunately in the bench world AMD is still lacking, or shall I say the support for AMD is lacking. When I look at the 9900K for instance.... it is way ahead when running 3dmark Fire Strike or Time Spy. But when compared clock for clock with AMD when running Cinebench R15 the AMD Ryzen is about 100+ points better at the same clock speed. Go to Hwbot and filter for Ryzen 2700X and see the highest is 2630 at 5.7Ghz... the first 9900K to past that result was running 5.9Ghz. Yes it was about 30+ points better but even at 5.84ghz is still could not beat that AMD Ryzen.


Sorry for not responding sooner as I have been ridiculously busy lately. The A/C cooled air portion is kinda correct as I was using that not long ago but now I have my PC on a shelf I built at window level and I have it sealed up crudely to pull in outside winter air to cool it but I can run 4.45ghz without that cooling tbh. I do have to crank the fan speed up to max to be IBT AVX stable though but benching, gaming, and mostly everything else is 100% stable all day long at 1.4 to 1.425v. Apparently its a decent chip, I got 2102cb on cb15 not long ago using baseclock tuning. I think that took like 1.59v @ 4558mhz all core to get but Im not positive. The screens should be on Hwbot.

The reason for the benchmarks differing between the two platforms is because the 3dmark benches heavily favor frequency and low latency and rendering benching heavily favor core count which is AMDs strength as it has more experience with cpus with higher core counts. Im thinking the race will be really tight after Zen 2 comes out with higher freqs and lower latency being their weakness and thats the main focus for Zen 2.


----------



## VPII

CJMitsuki said:


> Sorry for not responding sooner as I have been ridiculously busy lately. The A/C cooled air portion is kinda correct as I was using that not long ago but now I have my PC on a shelf I built at window level and I have it sealed up crudely to pull in outside winter air to cool it but I can run 4.45ghz without that cooling tbh. I do have to crank the fan speed up to max to be IBT AVX stable though but benching, gaming, and mostly everything else is 100% stable all day long at 1.4 to 1.425v. Apparently its a decent chip, I got 2102cb on cb15 not long ago using baseclock tuning. I think that took like 1.59v @ 4558mhz all core to get but Im not positive. The screens should be on Hwbot.
> 
> The reason for the benchmarks differing between the two platforms is because the 3dmark benches heavily favor frequency and low latency and rendering benching heavily favor core count which is AMDs strength as it has more experience with cpus with higher core counts. Im thinking the race will be really tight after Zen 2 comes out with higher freqs and lower latency being their weakness and thats the main focus for Zen 2.
> View attachment 240702
> View attachment 240706


Thank you for the explanation. Yes, from what my friend, been living in Taiwan for a couple years, said to me, when Zen2 comes a chip like the 9900K will not even be an equation anymore. I trust him as he has been working closely with most board and chip partners. He also said when Zen 2 comes you want to also get the Crosshair VIII Hero to truly benefit from the updated boost clocks. I really cannot wait.


----------



## gupsterg

Gained slight tweaks further on The Stilt's 3466MHz timings @ 3533MHz and managed to keep voltages close to original determinations.

tRC 54 > 50
tFAW 36 > 32
tWR 12 > 10
tRFC 333 (~188ns) > 309 (~174ns)
tRTP 8 > 5



Spoiler














The error in above screenie was triggered just as I opened 2nd CPU-Z window to have SPD tab. Had this occur in the past and usually a bump in a voltage solves this.

AIDA64 for the mentioned tweaks showed little to no gains.



Spoiler




























I was able to use even -100mV last night.



Spoiler














The testing from -25mV to -100mV revealed a few things.

i) Too far a drop created intermittent POST issues on re POST after changing UEFI settings.

ii) Too far a drop began to curb gains in averaged core clocks.

iii) Idle VID did not drop 1:1 based on offset. Setting a -50mV offset created in the region of -25mV drop, this 2:1 ratio seemed to occur in all the test screenies.


----------



## crakej

Just a quick note - will give more info when I have time!

I had a blue screen of death in windows today, and now my 3600 profile does not work. Kaput! ....And my 3533 profile as well. This has happened before, I assumed it was degradation until I got 3600 working again with bios 1103. Have no time to look into it properly yet. Have reflashed cleared everything.....but nothing working as it was before.

Also, those not getting 3200MTs on your ram OC, try enabling geardown and change to T1, that should get you further!


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> Gained slight tweaks further on The Stilt's 3466MHz timings @ 3533MHz and managed to keep voltages close to original determinations.
> 
> tRC 54 > 50
> tFAW 36 > 32
> tWR 12 > 10
> tRFC 333 (~188ns) > 309 (~174ns)
> tRTP 8 > 5
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 240742
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The error in above screenie was triggered just as I opened 2nd CPU-Z window to have SPD tab. Had this occur in the past and usually a bump in a voltage solves this.


Nice! I will experiment with these timings - thanks for sharing.


----------



## gupsterg

@crakej

Dunno about your issue.

This new CPU is defo seeming to hold 3533MHz C15 1T  . Rig not been off for coming upto over a day. So after last night's ~6hr run of RAM Test with 1 error I did some more reruns without any changes.



Spoiler



All tests are back to back warm POSTs































As RAM Test was sound and knew last night's run had an issue near end when I opened 2x CPU-Z I tried RB/P95.



Spoiler














P95 v29.4b8 8K 4096K 13GB exposed issue with profile in ~30min.



Spoiler














Using SOC 1.025V enhanced stability to gain 2hrs PASS.



Spoiler














Currently profile stand as in this txt.

View attachment 1103_1835_PBOUV_3533_setting.txt


----------



## Jackalito

Jackalito said:


> I'm struggling to set my RAM at 3200 with looser timings than yours. I know I'm not pushing voltage that hard, aside from the fact that my new 2700X may not have a superb IMC. But, could you please provide the rest of your settings?
> 
> Right now as it is my RAM (2x16GB) GSkill F4-3200C14D-32GTZ Sammy B-die is only stable at 3066MHz with the following settings:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would appreciate anyone who could give me some advice as how to proceed to try and achieve 3200 stable based on experience with Dual Rank memory.
> 
> Thanks a bunch, guys! I always learn so much just by reading your posts and experiences with the platform :thumb:



I quote myself to add the rest of the, I think, relevant settings:
Ai Overclock Tuner: Default
Performance Enhancer: Auto
CPU Core Ratio: Auto
Performance Bias: None
Memory Frequency: 3066MHz
Core Performance Boost: Disabled
SMT Mode: Auto
TPU: Keep current settings


Note: I'm not overclocking the CPU yet as I'm waiting to replace the fan for a Noctua NH-D15 SE-AM4.



ProcODT: 60 ohm
Cmd2T: 2T
Gear Down Mode: Disabled
Power Down Mode: Disabled


RttNom: RZQ/7
RttWr: RZQ/3
RttPark: RZQ/1


MemAddrCmdSetup: Auto
MemCsOdtSetup: Auto
MemCkeSetup: Auto


MemCadBusClkDrvStren: Auto
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren: Auto
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren: Auto
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren: Auto


VTTDDR Voltage: 0.67500
VPP_MEM Voltage: 2.50000
VDDP Voltage: 0.85500
CLDO VDDP voltage: 700


CPU Core Voltage: Auto
CPU SOC Voltage: 0.98750
DRAM Voltage: 1.35000
1.8V PLL Voltage: 1.80000
1.05 SB Voltage: Auto


No LLC whatsoever



Fast Boot: Disabled
CSM: Disabled



I'll post my question in the RAM OC and Ryzen Calculator threads as well.


Thanks in advance! :thumb:


----------



## gupsterg

@Jackalito

Not used dual rank on AM4/sTR4. I have used 4x8GB though. To gain anything at or above 3200MHz on 2700X+C7H I needed to tune ProcODT and CAD Bus. CAD Bus for most of my profiles I needed 24 20 20 24, it's some what timing consuming to sus what you may need.


----------



## Ramad

Jackalito said:


> I quote myself to add the rest of the, I think, relevant settings:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Ai Overclock Tuner: Default
> Performance Enhancer: Auto
> CPU Core Ratio: Auto
> Performance Bias: None
> Memory Frequency: 3066MHz
> Core Performance Boost: Disabled
> SMT Mode: Auto
> TPU: Keep current settings
> 
> 
> Note: I'm not overclocking the CPU yet as I'm waiting to replace the fan for a Noctua NH-D15 SE-AM4.
> 
> 
> 
> ProcODT: 60 ohm
> Cmd2T: 2T
> Gear Down Mode: Disabled
> Power Down Mode: Disabled
> 
> 
> RttNom: RZQ/7
> RttWr: RZQ/3
> RttPark: RZQ/1
> 
> 
> MemAddrCmdSetup: Auto
> MemCsOdtSetup: Auto
> MemCkeSetup: Auto
> 
> 
> MemCadBusClkDrvStren: Auto
> MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren: Auto
> MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren: Auto
> MemCadBusCkeDrvStren: Auto
> 
> 
> VTTDDR Voltage: 0.67500
> VPP_MEM Voltage: 2.50000
> VDDP Voltage: 0.85500
> CLDO VDDP voltage: 700
> 
> 
> CPU Core Voltage: Auto
> CPU SOC Voltage: 0.98750
> DRAM Voltage: 1.35000
> 1.8V PLL Voltage: 1.80000
> 1.05 SB Voltage: Auto
> 
> 
> No LLC whatsoever
> 
> 
> 
> Fast Boot: Disabled
> CSM: Disabled
> 
> 
> 
> I'll post my question in the RAM OC and Ryzen Calculator threads as well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance! :thumb:


Can your system boot with:

RttNom: RZQ/5
RttWr: Disabled
RttPark: Disabled

DRAM Voltage: 1.36000

MemAddrCmdSetup: 1
MemCsOdtSetup: 1
MemCkeSetup: 1

CLDO_VDDP: 952 (mV)

ProcODT: 53.3 Ohm (or 48 Ohm if it can)

If it can then that is a good start. If it can't then you can try the settings that I wrote but try raising _RttNom_ from _RttNom: RZQ/7_ in your settings to _RttNom: RZQ/5_ (low is good but too low will make RAM unstable). The CLDO_VDDP value that you are using is too low to make the RAM stable.


----------



## gupsterg

@Jackalito

This thread may also be handy to view as several dual rank users were sharing experience, etc.

RTT tuning can also be time consuming, some setups of these settings resulted in no POST. Even when you do encounter no POST still crack on trying settings either side of the no POST parameters, if you get what I mean.


----------



## Singularity48

Tested BCLK tonight and think I found where I want to stay, 102.6mhz and +.01v offset @ 4.46ghz single core. Temps aren't bad either. I tried higher BCLKs (103.4 and 103.8) and they worked fine but I had to put more voltage in than I wanted for 4.5ghz, that v/f curve is a real ***** lol


----------



## kmellz

kmellz said:


> Anyone else have problems with getting random "network not available" ? First thought it was my router dying, or possibly the fiber box. But, recently started testing to see if other devices lost net also, but only my computer.. after googling it seems there's quite a few cases of intel integrated network cards having these issues :/ Thought it would be sweet sweet quality with an intel one..
> Mixing around a bit with things like receieve/transmit buffers have helped a little bit, but it still happenes frequently. Extremely irritating when gaming!


Well, didn't find any solutions to this, tried everything around.. guess it might work with a new router possibly, but this is ridiculous. Ended up plugging in the wireless antenna atm so that it's connected to both at the same time, and falls back to wireless when the other one dies. Still some loss, but not a complete network loss at least!


----------



## Jackalito

gupsterg said:


> @*Jackalito*
> 
> Not used dual rank on AM4/sTR4. I have used 4x8GB though. To gain anything at or above 3200MHz on 2700X+C7H I needed to tune ProcODT and CAD Bus. CAD Bus for most of my profiles I needed 24 20 20 24, it's some what timing consuming to sus what you may need.





Ramad said:


> Can your system boot with:
> 
> RttNom: RZQ/5
> RttWr: Disabled
> RttPark: Disabled
> 
> DRAM Voltage: 1.36000
> 
> MemAddrCmdSetup: 1
> MemCsOdtSetup: 1
> MemCkeSetup: 1
> 
> CLDO_VDDP: 952 (mV)
> 
> ProcODT: 53.3 Ohm (or 48 Ohm if it can)
> 
> If it can then that is a good start. If it can't then you can try the settings that I wrote but try raising _RttNom_ from _RttNom: RZQ/7_ in your settings to _RttNom: RZQ/5_ (low is good but too low will make RAM unstable). The CLDO_VDDP value that you are using is too low to make the RAM stable.





gupsterg said:


> @*Jackalito*
> 
> This thread may also be handy to view as several dual rank users were sharing experience, etc.
> 
> RTT tuning can also be time consuming, some setups of these settings resulted in no POST. Even when you do encounter no POST still crack on trying settings either side of the no POST parameters, if you get what I mean.



Thank you guys for the suggestions and resources. I'll start doing some tests soon and report back


----------



## HolyFist

crakej said:


> Just a quick note - will give more info when I have time!
> 
> I had a blue screen of death in windows today, and now my 3600 profile does not work. Kaput! ....And my 3533 profile as well. This has happened before, I assumed it was degradation until I got 3600 working again with bios 1103. Have no time to look into it properly yet. Have reflashed cleared everything.....but nothing working as it was before.


I've noticed this too, including spending over 12h on AC Odyssey which is very sensible to overclock, i even managed to stabilize it again with lower voltage on both RAM and SoC, my 3466MHz always works, there's gotta be something we're missing that's causing instability when exposed at these speeds for long periods of time, degradation comes to mind but i doubt that's why, more like something becomes unstable/too sensible over time when running like that for long periods of time, i just don't know what.

I had Unstable 1.45v, changed to 1.46v and stable then not stable, then 1.47 and 1.48 equally stable but not anymore, i lowered back to 1.46v and SoC 1.05 and stable again on MemTest, then became unstable again.

I think the issue is either related to SoC/CPU voltages or some specific setting at bottom of RAM timings like ProcODT, RTT park etc


----------



## Myllox

Hi all.

As many others, 3600 is haunting me 

Today re-flashed 1103 on C7H and started over. The only reason i keep trying at 3600 is that im so freaking close to stable operation.

I had one run with Karhu which failed at 10000% and one failed at 5000% both at SOC 1.0475 .. so right now im trying 1.075, but to be honest .. i've been hunting 3600 for some time now, it feels like im missing out on something simple. 

Currently @ 1.46vDIMM, SOC 1.04375v (http://prntscr.com/lz6a0e)

anyone got any ideas on what to try? i've seen a few posts about testing alternate Rtt setting, not sure on how to move forward

btw, its 3600 that is haunting me .. i can run 14-15-15-14 or 16-16-16-16 .. both give the same results 

Edit: SOC 1.075v failed at 1500% so going back to 1.04375v .. set cha vref to 0.55x (just passed 1400%)


----------



## nick name

HolyFist said:


> I've noticed this too, including spending over 12h on AC Odyssey which is very sensible to overclock, i even managed to stabilize it again with lower voltage on both RAM and SoC, my 3466MHz always works, there's gotta be something we're missing that's causing instability when exposed at these speeds for long periods of time, degradation comes to mind but i doubt that's why, more like something becomes unstable/too sensible over time when running like that for long periods of time, i just don't know what.
> 
> I had Unstable 1.45v, changed to 1.46v and stable then not stable, then 1.47 and 1.48 equally stable but not anymore, i lowered back to 1.46v and SoC 1.05 and stable again on MemTest, then became unstable again.
> 
> I think the issue is either related to SoC/CPU voltages or some specific setting at bottom of RAM timings like ProcODT, RTT park etc



I've had timings that proved stable through all tests, but for whatever reason lock up during gaming. I'm not sure if it's Nvidia's drivers being sensitive to tight RAM timings or if it isn't enough DRAM voltage.


----------



## HolyFist

Myllox said:


> btw, its 3600 that is haunting me .. i can run 14-15-15-14 or 16-16-16-16 .. both give the same results


I know you're not going to like since this will increase latency but, it's how i stopped my 3466MHz long ago to have these exact same problems, however i spent almost all day around it back then and gave up.

tRFC i changed to auto and never had issues again, i also set other timings to Auto except the basic ones like 14-15-14 etc

Like i said in previous post i think the issue is somwhere on this page, likely at the bottom even tho i know tRFC on Auto stopped my issues, even on 1103 it's perfectly fine at 3466MHz however i notice that the FPS in games goes up and down randomly a lot more vs 3605MHz.

I could try the same trick that i did with 3466MHz but i'm too bored for that plus is Christmas, merry Christmas all


----------



## Myllox

HolyFist said:


> I know you're not going to like since this will increase latency but, it's how i stopped my 3466MHz long ago to have these exact same problems, however i spent almost all day around it back then and gave up.
> 
> tRFC i changed to auto and never had issues again, i also set other timings to Auto except the basic ones like 14-15-14 etc
> 
> Like i said in previous post i think the issue is somwhere on this page, likely at the bottom even tho i know tRFC on Auto stopped my issues, even on 1103 it's perfectly fine at 3466MHz however i notice that the FPS in games goes up and down randomly a lot more vs 3605MHz.
> 
> I could try the same trick that i did with 3466MHz but i'm too bored for that plus is Christmas, merry Christmas all


Well first of all, merry xmas  

secondly, look at this beautiful screenshot ^^ .. im going to consider +10hrs with Karhu stable :thumb:
Its time to hunt secondary now 

oh, and btw, im not hunting fps .. its more like i just need to get it to work lol .. im the kinda guy who builds a computer and dont use it .. i'd rather build another one


----------



## HolyFist

Myllox said:


> Well first of all, merry xmas
> 
> secondly, look at this beautiful screenshot ^^ .. im going to consider +10hrs with Karhu stable :thumb:
> Its time to hunt secondary now
> 
> oh, and btw, im not hunting fps .. its more like i just need to get it to work lol .. im the kinda guy who builds a computer and dont use it .. i'd rather build another one


Seems like i was right tho, you disabled rttnom and changed rttpark 

Also your tRFC seems to be on Auto since that's what i also have when mine is on Auto (tho at 3466MHz)

Regardless, congratulations!


----------



## Myllox

HolyFist said:


> Seems like i was right tho, you disabled rttnom and changed rttpark
> 
> Also your tRFC seems to be on Auto since that's what i also have when mine is on Auto (tho at 3466MHz)
> 
> Regardless, congratulations!


I posted in the DRAM Calculator thread, to continue my hunt


----------



## majestynl

*FIRST OFF ALL MERRY X-MAS to everyone *





gupsterg said:


> 3533MHz so far is sound on this new CPU.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> With some under volting gained ever so slightly better PB/XFR2 clocks same as higher leakage/lower effective voltage CPU.
> 
> Prior to UV RT ACB ~4.130GHz.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 240638
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -50mV yields ~4.15GHz.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Initial test.
> 
> View attachment 240632
> 
> 
> Warm POST 1.
> 
> View attachment 240634
> 
> 
> Warm POST 2.
> 
> View attachment 240636
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps this CPU will hold 3533MHz, as had some results on 3600MHz C15 1T which other past CPUs have not done.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 240642
> 
> 
> View attachment 240640
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like I won't be trying the new C7H, but keeping to using my launch board.
> 
> *** edit ***
> 
> AIDA64 results, basically The Stilt 3466MHz timings on 3533MHz is what I've been testing PBOE, determinism slider Performance, AIDA64 was without the UV on CPU.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 240648
> 
> 
> View attachment 240650
> 
> 
> View attachment 240652


Nice chap! Just saw your results  and have fun with your new HW !



crakej said:


> Just a quick note - will give more info when I have time!
> 
> I had a blue screen of death in windows today, and now my 3600 profile does not work. Kaput! ....And my 3533 profile as well. This has happened before, I assumed it was degradation until I got 3600 working again with bios 1103. Have no time to look into it properly yet. Have reflashed cleared everything.....but nothing working as it was before.
> 
> Also, those not getting 3200MTs on your ram OC, try enabling geardown and change to T1, that should get you further!


Welcome to the Unstable world of Ram above 3466+ hehehe. Its something weird what can cause instability after a reboot/crash etc. Im suspecting something with training. Trying to find the issue/solution but its soooo time consuming.
E.g. : a x profile who is +10K Ramtest stable could acting weird on next boot not passing 7% Ramtest... Sometimes i can help it with a clearcmos and load working profile again who will pass 10k again, but the next boot it could fail instantly 



Myllox said:


> Well first of all, merry xmas
> 
> secondly, look at this beautiful screenshot ^^ .. im going to consider +10hrs with Karhu stable :thumb:
> Its time to hunt secondary now
> 
> oh, and btw, im not hunting fps .. its more like i just need to get it to work lol .. im the kinda guy who builds a computer and dont use it .. i'd rather build another one


Great! Did you manage to re-run the test after a cold/warm boot. Most issues start after re-runs. Like told before, i could have a +10k Ramtest stable profile who suddenly cant pass 7% after the next boot


----------



## Myllox

majestynl said:


> *FIRST OFF ALL MERRY X-MAS to everyone *
> Great! Did you manage to re-run the test after a cold/warm boot. Most issues start after re-runs. Like told before, i could have a +10k Ramtest stable profile who suddenly cant pass 7% after the next boot


No problems to run several Ramtest loops, but did encounter cold boot issues (which i found to be too low vcore voltage). Running PE3 on C7H with too much negative offset  .. counter productive to undervolt cpu when overclocking ram lol.


----------



## DoctorNick

HolyFist said:


> I know you're not going to like since this will increase latency but, it's how i stopped my 3466MHz long ago to have these exact same problems, however i spent almost all day around it back then and gave up.
> 
> tRFC i changed to auto and never had issues again, i also set other timings to Auto except the basic ones like 14-15-14 etc
> 
> Like i said in previous post i think the issue is somwhere on this page, likely at the bottom even tho i know tRFC on Auto stopped my issues, even on 1103 it's perfectly fine at 3466MHz however i notice that the FPS in games goes up and down randomly a lot more vs 3605MHz.
> 
> I could try the same trick that i did with 3466MHz but i'm too bored for that plus is Christmas, merry Christmas all


On a another topic.. Couldn't help but looking at your sig and seeing 4.5ghz boost. How did you manage that and is that with single or with all cores?


----------



## nick name

DoctorNick said:


> On a another topic.. Couldn't help but looking at your sig and seeing 4.5ghz boost. How did you manage that and is that with single or with all cores?


He is using a BCLK of 104 and I am almost certain that is single core.


----------



## DoctorNick

nick name said:


> He is using a BCLK of 104 and I am almost certain that is single core.


Ah I see. Thank you. Makes sense, yes must be single core


----------



## HolyFist

DoctorNick said:


> On a another topic.. Couldn't help but looking at your sig and seeing 4.5ghz boost. How did you manage that and is that with single or with all cores?


Nope, not single core, i even had once where it went past 4.5GHz

I'm currently running at Stock and 3466MHz because power usage is so low due to low voltage it's not worth it, games feel smoother cause minimum FPS is higher than currently, but since i'm not playing AC Odyssey a long time or any games atm that much anymore i saved BIOS and loaded the Stock at 3466MHz, i play Final Fantasy XIV but currently bored, new patch should come early January so maybe i'll start using it again, still gotta save on electricity bill and save for new GPU since the GTX1080 is pretty bad for 3440x1440 

I attach two pics showing 2700X at 4.5GHz one of which shows system uptime too 

Edit: game shows 17FPS because it has a "background mode" that limits FPS and disables audio when window loses focus


----------



## CJMitsuki

DoctorNick said:


> nick name said:
> 
> 
> 
> He is using a BCLK of 104 and I am almost certain that is single core.
> 
> 
> 
> Ah I see. Thank you. Makes sense, yes must be single core /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
Click to expand...

It’s not necessarily single core. If your cooling is good enough then PBO will make more cores boost to the max frequency up to the 43.5x multiplier.


----------



## Sn0ops

My Ram is set to 3400 mhz @1,4V / Soc 1.025V / 14 /14 /14 /14 / 28 (+ all Settings from Dram Calculator) / Geardown off, Powerdown off

BIOS 1103.

____________________________________

My first question is - if it is still okay to play with ryzen balanced powerplan (90% Minimumstate) for Zen+ (I mean safe to use?) , because gameplay feels much better with that power plan in my opionion (BF5, AC Odyssey) -> I got higher FPS and better gamefeeling.

Bios Settings with theseerformance Enhancer: Auto / BCLK: 100 / Core Voltage: Auto

_____________________________________

Second question - How is a about : High Performance Plan with Biossettings: Multiplier 41X, CPU Core Voltage: Manual Mode @ 1,4V / LLC CPU: Level 3 / Core Performance Boost = disabled / Performance Enhancer: Auto / BCLK: 100

-> Especially this Plan works slightly more better - but also here the questions is it safe to use 1,4V consistently for Ryzen - all cores always on 4,1 GHZ?
Under load-> 1,394V

Thanks for help guys 


CPU: RYZEN 2700X
RAM: 16 GB G.Skill Flare X (3200 MhZ - CL 14)
Motherboard: ASUS Crosshair Hero VII
GFX: Saphire RX Vega 56 + Nitro
PSU: Seasonic Prime - 750 Watt 
Cooler: Water Cooled by Artic Liquid Freezer 360
OS: WIN 10 - 64 bit - Pro N - 1809


----------



## Singularity48

I hadn't gone back to PE4+PBO since I got my h150i, not sure why, maybe the voltage spooked me at the time. I think I have it stable at a -.03v offset; at least a whole bunch of CineB runs, game and regular use stable. It's likely I need a little bit more voltage for real stability, haven't tried p95 or IBT yet. Temps in CB aren't bad either, ~68c with my fans running at every day speed, 65c at max speed which is way too loud lol. Is 4.223ghz all core the cap for PE4 without bclk? Seems like it.


----------



## HolyFist

Sn0ops said:


> My Ram is set to 3400 mhz @1,4V / Soc 1.025V / 14 /14 /14 /14 / 28 (+ all Settings from Dram Calculator) / Geardown off, Powerdown off
> 
> BIOS 1103.
> 
> ____________________________________
> 
> My first question is - if it is still okay to play with ryzen balanced powerplan (90% Minimumstate) for Zen+ (I mean safe to use?) , because gameplay feels much better with that power plan in my opionion (BF5, AC Odyssey) -> I got higher FPS and better gamefeeling.
> 
> Bios Settings with theseerformance Enhancer: Auto / BCLK: 100 / Core Voltage: Auto
> 
> _____________________________________
> 
> Second question - How is a about : High Performance Plan with Biossettings: Multiplier 41X, CPU Core Voltage: Manual Mode @ 1,4V / LLC CPU: Level 3 / Core Performance Boost = disabled / Performance Enhancer: Auto / BCLK: 100
> 
> -> Especially this Plan works slightly more better - but also here the questions is it safe to use 1,4V consistently for Ryzen - all cores always on 4,1 GHZ?
> Under load-> 1,394V
> 
> Thanks for help guys


Ryzen Power Plan is still good, people believe balanced is better because it reaches higher clocks, while this is true the former is not, the performance is worse because what happens is that on Balanced Plan the CPU runs much cooler due to being mostly few cores running at actual high MHz, normally when not under load my 2700X runs at around 1999-2099MHz, this alone makes the CPU drop in voltages/temperatures, since it prevents the CPU from running at higher clocks for extended periods of time, look at it like the Power Plan limits how low the clocks can go for the CPU, High Performance is also better, you can do benchmarks even for Latency on RAM and Latency will be lower also on High performance plan.

Balanced Power Plan "Min Processor Rate": 5%
Ryzen Power Plan "Min Processor Rate": 90%
High Power Plan "Min Processor Rate": 100%

So what happens is, on High Perf plan the CPU will be at max Clocks all the time regardless of load (disabling core parking and having fixed multiplier and CStates off), from own experience this is far better for games, there will be less and very few sudden FPS drops compared to Balanced (also minimum FPS in benchmarks will get a boost in FPS), similar to boosting to 4.5GHz or having a fixed OC of 4.3GHz at all times, the 4.3GHz will be by a good margin better since it's always and on all cores at 4.3GHz, the boost is rare to reach 4.5GHz and normally 4.1-4.3GHz even on High yet keeps varying on all cores so speeds will be different per core based on temperatures and that's why sometimes games stutter due to hiccups in clock changes tho is not common (however most stutter on Windows 10 is caused by Standby memory and there's already a few ways to eliminate the issue).



Singularity48 said:


> I hadn't gone back to PE4+PBO since I got my h150i, not sure why, maybe the voltage spooked me at the time. I think I have it stable at a -.03v offset; at least a whole bunch of CineB runs, game and regular use stable. It's likely I need a little bit more voltage for real stability, haven't tried p95 or IBT yet. Temps in CB aren't bad either, ~68c with my fans running at every day speed, 65c at max speed which is way too loud lol. Is 4.223ghz all core the cap for PE4 without bclk? Seems like it.


You can make CPU run at max speed by using High Performance Power Plan, if you have a multipler of 42.5 for example for 4250MHz and you use High Perf Plan there's no need for any PE.

If you go into HWiNFO and switch between power plans, example Balanced and look at clocks, then switch to High you'll see the clocks always at max on High Perf Plan. 

I forgot to mention that need to disable CStates and core parking for that.


----------



## crakej

HolyFist said:


> I've noticed this too, including spending over 12h on AC Odyssey which is very sensible to overclock, i even managed to stabilize it again with lower voltage on both RAM and SoC, my 3466MHz always works, there's gotta be something we're missing that's causing instability when exposed at these speeds for long periods of time, degradation comes to mind but i doubt that's why, more like something becomes unstable/too sensible over time when running like that for long periods of time, i just don't know what.
> 
> I had Unstable 1.45v, changed to 1.46v and stable then not stable, then 1.47 and 1.48 equally stable but not anymore, i lowered back to 1.46v and SoC 1.05 and stable again on MemTest, then became unstable again.
> 
> I think the issue is either related to SoC/CPU voltages or some specific setting at bottom of RAM timings like ProcODT, RTT park etc


I'm glad it's not just me!

I have to agree that it's something we're just not getting right....

We will sus it out! :boxing3:


----------



## Myllox

Anyone have any info on whats updated/improved with the new chipset drivers?

Found 18.40.02 on https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO/HelpDesk_Download/ 

On amd.com they still list 18.10.1810 released back in october

at work atm, will update myself when i get back from the office


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> *FIRST OFF ALL MERRY X-MAS to everyone *
> 
> Welcome to the Unstable world of Ram above 3466+ hehehe. Its something weird what can cause instability after a reboot/crash etc. Im suspecting something with training. Trying to find the issue/solution but its soooo time consuming.
> E.g. : a x profile who is +10K Ramtest stable could acting weird on next boot not passing 7% Ramtest... Sometimes i can help it with a clearcmos and load working profile again who will pass 10k again, but the next boot it could fail instantly
> 
> Great! Did you manage to re-run the test after a cold/warm boot. Most issues start after re-runs. Like told before, i could have a +10k Ramtest stable profile who suddenly cant pass 7% after the next boot


Also - HAPPY CHRISTMAS TO ALL! :band:

I'd been running day to day fine. Cold boot, fine. Sleep, fine. Everything was running really very well!

I do get the impression there maybe setting/s we have yet to reveal as giving added stability. It's difficult because we don't really know what's limiting things. Of course the other thing is that we cannot expect out kits to just keep going at CL14 all the way to 4000 and beyond - I do think I've found a barrier at 3466/3533 that this kit will do reliably at CL14.

I'm also going to experiment more with geardown and T2 at >=3600. My limited experiments showed that things can run pretty well using these settings, but it appears that just turning on T2 and/or geardown on/off is not that enough (for me, anyway). Trying to tweak it just didn't work - I think other settings need to be set differently (compared to using T1), including voltages.

I just don't get why these profiles stop working, even after re-flashing and clearing everything with the /CLRCFG flag. Is the mem learning technology in the CPU and out of reach of clearing he bios?


----------



## crakej

Myllox said:


> Anyone have any info on whats updated/improved with the new chipset drivers?
> 
> Found 18.40.02 on https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO/HelpDesk_Download/
> 
> On amd.com they still list 18.10.1810 released back in october
> 
> at work atm, will update myself when i get back from the office


Nothing new - appears to be the 18.10 version from AMDs site. Only thing it suggested updating was my display driver which I do from the display driver!


----------



## HolyFist

crakej said:


> I'm glad it's not just me!
> 
> I have to agree that it's something we're just not getting right....
> 
> We will sus it out! :boxing3:


Sadly it is likely to be tRFC (since i have it on Auto at 3466MHz), RIP latency :\


----------



## HolyFist

Okay so i decided to do a quick test with tRFC on Auto and straight 100%+ memtest

However this happened as well with tRFC 280 and then changing voltages helped, then didn't, then helped again, as i mentioned before, so

This is something i learned back then with the Ryzen 1700 and trying to get 3466MHz, tRFC was so damn sensitive i had to leave on Auto to even be able to use 3466MHz stable (i can tweak on this board and with the 2700X) on the Crosshair VI

However i didn't want it to be the reason why because it's a big factor in latency, or FPS/benchmark scores if you translate it.

At 3605MHz due to 104 BCLK i need more tRFC normally than at standard 3600 and 100 BCLK, anyway at 3605MHz Auto tRFC is 606, so quite a big jump vs the 280.

Latency increased by 3ns (i started HWINFO close to end of Memtest hit 100% because i forgot to start it, so the values are not as accurate)

This is with reduced voltages, 1.05 SoC and 1.46 RAM

I don't know if there's something else that can help stabilize low tRFC but voltages surely are not, at least SoC and RAM (or even CPU offset).

Anyway here's a screen of what happen with tRFC on Auto (it went up to 150% on 2GB windows before i stop in previous tries and tRFC 280 but then it became unstable)


----------



## Martin778

So, uhm, looks like I'm back in town. Needed a 4k PC and a Ryzen based rig seemed a no brainer for this resolution. Got the same HW as before - 2700X, C7H-WiFi and 2x8 gigs of FlareX 3200 C14. Don't even have to update my sig except for some details, LOL! Besides that I'm looking for an RTX2080Ti (still kinda undecided, 2x1080Ti / 2080 SLI again or 2080Ti).

I wonder if anything changed in terms of RAM, is the 3466MHz still the maximum stable preset? Any plans for Crosshair VII Extreme?


----------



## nick name

HolyFist said:


> Ryzen Power Plan is still good, people believe balanced is better because it reaches higher clocks, while this is true the former is not, the performance is worse because what happens is that on Balanced Plan the CPU runs much cooler due to being mostly few cores running at actual high MHz, normally when not under load my 2700X runs at around 1999-2099MHz, this alone makes the CPU drop in voltages/temperatures, since it prevents the CPU from running at higher clocks for extended periods of time, look at it like the Power Plan limits how low the clocks can go for the CPU, High Performance is also better, you can do benchmarks even for Latency on RAM and Latency will be lower also on High performance plan.
> 
> Balanced Power Plan "Min Processor Rate": 5%
> Ryzen Power Plan "Min Processor Rate": 90%
> High Power Plan "Min Processor Rate": 100%
> 
> So what happens is, on High Perf plan the CPU will be at max Clocks all the time regardless of load (disabling core parking and having fixed multiplier and CStates off), from own experience this is far better for games, there will be less and very few sudden FPS drops compared to Balanced (also minimum FPS in benchmarks will get a boost in FPS), similar to boosting to 4.5GHz or having a fixed OC of 4.3GHz at all times, the 4.3GHz will be by a good margin better since it's always and on all cores at 4.3GHz, the boost is rare to reach 4.5GHz and normally 4.1-4.3GHz even on High yet keeps varying on all cores so speeds will be different per core based on temperatures and that's why sometimes games stutter due to hiccups in clock changes tho is not common (however most stutter on Windows 10 is caused by Standby memory and there's already a few ways to eliminate the issue).
> 
> 
> 
> You can make CPU run at max speed by using High Performance Power Plan, if you have a multipler of 42.5 for example for 4250MHz and you use High Perf Plan there's no need for any PE.
> 
> If you go into HWiNFO and switch between power plans, example Balanced and look at clocks, then switch to High you'll see the clocks always at max on High Perf Plan.
> 
> I forgot to mention that need to disable CStates and core parking for that.


Yes, if you're using a set multiplier then using High Performance is fine. However, if you want your CPU to be able to reach all its speeds then you need to have Minimum Processor State set to anything below 50%. You do this so the CPU can go through all its p-states and accordingly reach all its speeds. ie 4.35GHz on single core workloads. And you can use any power plan you'd like as long as you have minimum processor state set below 50%. I use Ultimate Performance and 20% with PE 3. If you have Minimum Processor State above 50% then the CPU won't go through all its p-states and will be stuck at a lower speed on fewer and single core workloads.



Singularity48 said:


> I hadn't gone back to PE4+PBO since I got my h150i, not sure why, maybe the voltage spooked me at the time. I think I have it stable at a -.03v offset; at least a whole bunch of CineB runs, game and regular use stable. It's likely I need a little bit more voltage for real stability, haven't tried p95 or IBT yet. Temps in CB aren't bad either, ~68c with my fans running at every day speed, 65c at max speed which is way too loud lol. Is 4.223ghz all core the cap for PE4 without bclk? Seems like it.


PE 4 usually comes in at 42.5, but if you're using a negative offset it usually causes PE 3 and PE 4 to boot at lower multipliers. I've had PE 4 boot as high as 43.5 and that's the reason I don't use it.


----------



## HolyFist

Martin778 said:


> I wonder if anything changed in terms of RAM, is the 3466MHz still the maximum stable preset?


Nope, 3600 or more, the issue with more than 3600 is that it needs CL15 (3700+) instead of CL14 so latency increases and that means not worth it imo since at least games don't seem to benefit from it.

3466MHz at CL13 is a beast, i was able to boot but got blue screen soon after into Windows, didn't bother again since it needs 1.48v+



Martin778 said:


> Any plans for Crosshair VII Extreme?


Not that i'm aware of, and at this point with new CPUs in Q1 2019 i doubt they will, likely they will make new chipset boards and an Extreme version of it.



nick name said:


> Yes, if you're using a set multiplier then using High Performance is fine. However, if you want your CPU to be able to reach all its speeds then you need to have Minimum Processor State set to anything below 50%. You do this so the CPU can go through all its p-states and accordingly reach all its speeds. ie 4.35GHz on single core workloads. And you can use any power plan you'd like as long as you have minimum processor state set below 50%. I use Ultimate Performance and 20% with PE 3. If you have Minimum Processor State above 50% then the CPU won't go through all its p-states and will be stuck at a lower speed on fewer and single core workloads.
> 
> 
> 
> PE 4 usually comes in at 42.5, but if you're using a negative offset it usually causes PE 3 and PE 4 to boot at lower multipliers. I've had PE 4 boot as high as 43.5 and that's the reason I don't use it.


Maybe if you use PE balanced is fine, but like i said High Perf increases amounts of cores that run at high clocks, i prefer all 8 cores at 4.1GHz (limit by High perf) than one at 4.3Ghz for 2 seconds and 3 others at 4.1-4.2.

I did the tests, High Perf has better performance everything, game benchmarks, CB, Latency also lower.

Look here for comparison of Power Plans and Latency i did: https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-473.html#post27751150


----------



## HolyFist

So.. *my 2700X just hit 4656MHz* out of nowhere 

Edit: I had my power plan on Power Saving since yesterday since i haven't been playing games, might have been because of that after i change to balanced since it was very low temps when i changed, i also noticed 159MHz Bus... this has to be a glitch lol.


----------



## VicsPC

HolyFist said:


> So.. *my 2700X just hit 4656MHz* out of nowhere
> 
> Edit: I had my power plan on Power Saving since yesterday since i haven't been playing games, might have been because of that after i change to balanced since it was very low temps when i changed, i also noticed 159MHz Bus... this has to be a glitch lol.


Yup its a glitch, i stopped using hwinfo was getting way too many inconsistencies while running it with ab so i use ab exclusively and have no issues showing clocks and temps, no longer getting an HBM of 220°C.


----------



## nick name

HolyFist said:


> Nope, 3600 or more, the issue with more than 3600 is that it needs CL15 (3700+) instead of CL14 so latency increases and that means not worth it imo since at least games don't seem to benefit from it.
> 
> 3466MHz at CL13 is a beast, i was able to boot but got blue screen soon after into Windows, didn't bother again since it needs 1.48v+
> 
> 
> Not that i'm aware of, and at this point with new CPUs in Q1 2019 i doubt they will, likely they will make new chipset boards and an Extreme version of it.
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe if you use PE balanced is fine, but like i said High Perf increases amounts of cores that run at high clocks, i prefer all 8 cores at 4.1GHz (limit by High perf) than one at 4.3Ghz for 2 seconds and 3 others at 4.1-4.2.
> 
> I did the tests, High Perf has better performance everything, game benchmarks, CB, Latency also lower.
> 
> Look here for comparison of Power Plans and Latency i did: https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-473.html#post27751150


PE 3 will get you 4.1+GHz on all cores and still allow for higher single core speeds. 

And, yes, latency decreases as CPU speed increases. BCLK also helps. 

But again -- I use the Ultimate Performance plan and what matters is that Minimum Processor State is set below 50% if you want your CPU to reach all its p-states.


----------



## Singularity48

That 3600c15 kit is on sale for $210 for the week, I picked it up and it'll be here later today. Supposedly the highest binned b-die on the market, pretty excited to test it. Anyone who has it, OC experiences? 3600 15-15-15-15-35 @ 1.35v stock is kinda insane already. Hoping the rumors I've heard about Zen2's IMC are true and it supports 3600+ better, this kit should be able to do 4000+ with really good timings.


----------



## nick name

Singularity48 said:


> That 3600c15 kit is on sale for $210 for the week, I picked it up and it'll be here later today. Supposedly the highest binned b-die on the market, pretty excited to test it. Anyone who has it, OC experiences? 3600 15-15-15-15-35 @ 1.35v stock is kinda insane already. Hoping the rumors I've heard about Zen2's IMC are true and it supports 3600+ better, this kit should be able to do 4000+ with really good timings.


That's the kit that I have, but I can't get XMP to run stable at 1.35V. It needs about 1.37V for its CL15 profile. 

What I am currently running is pictured below. It's at 1.5V and SOC at 1.0V. I was running it with SOC 1.1V, but BIOS 1103 has proven to be stable at 1.0V. I ran an 8.5 hour test last night with no errors. You might even be able to get it stable at a lower DRAM voltage. The secondary timings can be tightened a little bit further, but I was too lazy to tune it any further.


----------



## Singularity48

nick name said:


> What I am currently running is pictured below. It's at 1.5V and SOC at 1.0V. I was running it with SOC 1.1V, but BIOS 1103 has proven to be stable at 1.0V. I ran an 8.5 hour test last night with no errors. You might even be able to get it stable at a lower DRAM voltage. The secondary timings can be tightened a little bit further, but I was too lazy to tune it any further.


Damn those are some tight timings. That tFAW is sick. 292 tRFC too aggggh I can't wait to mess with this kit lol. You tried anything like 3200-3466 max tightened timings?



> I can't get XMP to run stable at 1.35V. It needs about 1.37V for its CL15 profile.


I've seen that kind of thing on a lot of reviews at really high freqs/good timings, isn't that technically a defective kit? Or would it have to do with another factor besides the modules themselves? Either way that's good to know in case the DOCP profile doesn't work immediately.


----------



## nick name

Singularity48 said:


> Damn those are some tight timings. That tFAW is sick. 292 tRFC too aggggh I can't wait to mess with this kit lol. You tried anything like 3200-3466 max tightened timings?
> 
> 
> 
> I've seen that kind of thing on a lot of reviews at really high freqs/good timings, isn't that technically a defective kit? Or would it have to do with another factor besides the modules themselves? Either way that's good to know in case the DOCP profile doesn't work immediately.


You know I never considered whether it was defective not running at 1.35V. I guess I could reach out to G.SKILL and ask. I assumed it was because Ryzen.

On another note -- SOC at 1.0V isn't stable anymore . . . because of course it's not. It is weird how fickle this IMC is.

Edit:

Welp it's back to SOC at 1.1V. I guess it could be stable lower, but I'm tired of messing with it. I've tried up to 1.04V and now it just makes me sad.


----------



## HolyFist

I've changed BCLK to 100 from 104, straight stable again in memtest, and also disabled multipler 37 for CPU.

Temperatures are rather high compared to 3605 BCLK 104 (which is 3466MHz at 104)

tRFC was at 346 which is what Calculator gave me, tho that utility is always off for some reason, like it says to disable GearDown in like every preset but my PC doesn't even post without it enabled.


----------



## Singularity48

nick name said:


> You know I never considered whether it was defective not running at 1.35V. I guess I could reach out to G.SKILL and ask. I assumed it was because Ryzen.


Honestly since the kit's not on QVL they're likely to tell you to eat ****, but it might be worth a try. It'd be one thing if you just couldn't run the profile due to IMC, but only being stable at a higher voltage than advertised seems like a defective (at least, as far as not running as advertised) kit to me.


----------



## nick name

Singularity48 said:


> Honestly since the kit's not on QVL they're likely to tell you to eat ****, but it might be worth a try. It'd be one thing if you just couldn't run the profile due to IMC, but only being stable at a higher voltage than advertised seems like a defective (at least, as far as not running as advertised) kit to me.


Yeah your view makes sense and I never really thought about it that way. 

Another thought is that it runs the primary timings DOCP sets, but the board sets the secondary timings so those might be tighter than what G.SKILL tested at.


----------



## Singularity48

nick name said:


> Another thought is that it runs the primary timings DOCP sets, but the board sets the secondary timings so those might be tighter than what G.SKILL tested at.


Ah yeah that might be it too. I'll see how DOCP goes when my kit comes in and report back.


----------



## nick name

nick name said:


> You know I never considered whether it was defective not running at 1.35V. I guess I could reach out to G.SKILL and ask. I assumed it was because Ryzen.
> 
> On another note -- SOC at 1.0V isn't stable anymore . . . because of course it's not. It is weird how fickle this IMC is.
> 
> Edit:
> 
> Welp it's back to SOC at 1.1V. I guess it could be stable lower, but I'm tired of messing with it. I've tried up to 1.04V and now it just makes me sad.


 @Singularity48 Ok I am an idiot. I was testing to see if I could pull off 14-14-14-14 with lower SOC (something I hadn't tried before and still won't run stable) and forgot to change it back to 14-15-14-14.  So after I noticed that in HWiNFO I went back into BIOS and changed it and changed SOC back to 1.0V and it is, in fact, stable. 

I also got DRAM voltage lowered to 1.485V, but that's only passed a couple tests and still need to run it over night.


----------



## gupsterg

Belated XMAS greetings members, best wishes in advance of new year upon us!  .

@majestynl

1835 SUS is defo holding 3533MHz C15 1T sound.



Spoiler














From ebay 2nd hand case & ddc pump/res £80, bought new rad/fittings £70 and 3x AC P120 ~£20, had EK ZMT tubing left over from another build.

I had bought a new PWM DDC pump, but returned it after saw the 2nd hand one could be modded to have PWM.



Spoiler














*Going WC gained ~10-12C drop in CPU temp vs ThermalRight Archon SB-E X2 (lapped base) with 2x TY143. I found CPU gained no extra MHz under stock settings or PE: [Default] PBO: [Enabled] with improved temps.*

I had found in previous testing CPU was more sensitive to P95 v29.4b8, so went for 4hrs run without PBOE, 8K 4096K 12GB.



Spoiler














Then did rerun of 7.5hrs and 8hrs.



Spoiler





















Next 7hrs P95 v28.10b1 8K 4096K 12GB.



Spoiler














Fan/pump profile was adjusted with each of these runs. Due to loop size/make up higher pump speed didn't really improve temps, so tuned it down. Ref'ing some results not shared can probably lower fan speed further without losing cooling performance. The Arctic Cooling P12 PWM work really well and extremely quiet, they will go down to crazy low ~400 RPM. IIRC upto and including 1000 RPM inaudible, between 1000 - 1200 gotta really listen out to hear them in a quiet room. 1200+ is where a very minor air noise can be heard, again room needs to be quiet or else can be easily not heard.

Just to round off testing prior to BCLK bump did 10000% RT.



Spoiler














BCLK 102 3533MHz using The Stilt 3466MHz, 1T Gear Down Mode Off, PE Default, PBO Enabled.

RT 3000%



Spoiler














Warm POST RT 3600%



Spoiler














Warm POST 2 P95 v29.4b8 8K 4096K 12GB 7.5hrs



Spoiler














Warm POST 3 P95 v28.10b1 8K 4096K 12GB 10hrs



Spoiler














Some benchmarks (No OS tweaks or Performance Bias).



Spoiler






































































View attachment 1103_WC_B102_PB_3533_setting.txt




HolyFist said:


> Nope, not single core, i even had once where it went past 4.5GHz
> 
> I'm currently running at Stock and 3466MHz because power usage is so low due to low voltage it's not worth it, games feel smoother cause minimum FPS is higher than currently, but since i'm not playing AC Odyssey a long time or any games atm that much anymore i saved BIOS and loaded the Stock at 3466MHz, i play Final Fantasy XIV but currently bored, new patch should come early January so maybe i'll start using it again, still gotta save on electricity bill and save for new GPU since the GTX1080 is pretty bad for 3440x1440
> 
> I attach two pics showing 2700X at 4.5GHz one of which shows system uptime too
> 
> Edit: game shows 17FPS because it has a "background mode" that limits FPS and disables audio when window loses focus


Sorry for me the screenshots do not prove 4.5GHz ACB.

All it shows is at some point loading cycled across cores, as others were not fully loaded and frequency hit higher clocks. Please show a multi core load, sustained usage all threads count.



HolyFist said:


> So.. *my 2700X just hit 4656MHz* out of nowhere
> 
> Edit: I had my power plan on Power Saving since yesterday since i haven't been playing games, might have been because of that after i change to balanced since it was very low temps when i changed, i also noticed 159MHz Bus... this has to be a glitch lol.


Yes you had BCLK read back incorrectly.

Ryzen has no dedicated HW for accurate BCLK read back.

HWINFO when set correctly will not exhibit this issue. Ref OP here.


----------



## pschorr1123

Quick question for any users here with an Optane 900p or 905p sata style drive with the bundled U.2 to M.2 adapter cable. Will it fit in the top M.2 slot or does the GPU not give it enough clearance? Also will Windows recognize and install to this device or is this a way over priced data drive on the AM4 platform?

Thanks in advance


----------



## crakej

HolyFist said:


> Sadly it is likely to be tRFC (since i have it on Auto at 3466MHz), RIP latency :\


Sadly is just aint that easy 

The few experiments I've done so far just won't get 3533 or 3600 working again, including tRFC, extra/less voltage and looser timings, still need more experiments to try get to bottom of this....


----------



## gupsterg

RB 1hr run.



Spoiler














Rerun RB 1hr on another warm POST (4th).


Spoiler














RT 6000% on same warm POST.



Spoiler














3600MHz C15 1T best RT run so far is ~1970% in RT.



Spoiler


----------



## nick name

@gupsterg Lol I have a Thermaltake Core P3 and I balance a 140mm Noctua fan on the top of the case also. The best part about using the Noctua is the magnet in the fan hub holds the fan better than other fans I have used in the same position. I also have a 120mm fan sitting on my graphics card in front of the RAM sticks, however, with your CPU block and its tubing position you may not be able to do the same. 

I must say that the P5 makes the P3 look pretty small in comparison.


----------



## Singularity48

@nick name I tested my kit all day, XMP super didn't work, so many errors. Probably the board auto settings after all. Didn't bother trying to see if it'd work with more voltage, I tried DRAM calc fast and that didn't work. Then I tried your settings and had way more success, but i'm still getting errors. Could you post your full BIOS settings? I'd appreciate it.

Going to bed soon, gonna run a test at 2133/auto everything ram related tonight and make sure it's not a problem with the sticks.


----------



## nick name

Singularity48 said:


> @nick name I tested my kit all day, XMP super didn't work, so many errors. Probably the board auto settings after all. Didn't bother trying to see if it'd work with more voltage, I tried DRAM calc fast and that didn't work. Then I tried your settings and had way more success, but i'm still getting errors. Could you post your full BIOS settings? I'd appreciate it.
> 
> Going to bed soon, gonna run a test at 2133/auto everything ram related tonight and make sure it's not a problem with the sticks.


Sure thing.



Spoiler



Ai Overclock Tuner [D.O.C.P. Standard]
D.O.C.P. [D.O.C.P DDR4-3603 15-15-15-35-1.35V]
eCLK Mode [Synchronous mode]
BCLK Frequency [100.2000]
BCLK_Divider [Auto]
Performance Enhancer [Level 3 (OC)]
CPU Core Ratio [37.00]
Performance Bias [Aida/Geekbench]
Memory Frequency [DDR4-3607MHz]
Core Performance Boost [Enabled]
SMT Mode [Enabled]
TPU [Keep Current Settings]
TRC_EOM [Auto]
TRTP_EOM [Auto]
TRRS_S_EOM [Auto]
TRRS_L_EOM [Auto]
TWTR_EOM [Auto]
TWTR_L_EOM [Auto]
TWCL_EOM [Auto]
TWR_EOM [Auto]
TFAW_EOM [Auto]
TRCT_EOM [Auto]
TREFI_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_DD_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SD_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SC_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SCL_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_DD_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SD_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SC_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SCL_EOM [Auto]
TWRRD_EOM [Auto]
TRDWR_EOM [Auto]
TWRRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto]
DRAM CAS# Latency [14]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [15]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [14]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [14]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [28]
Trc [42]
TrrdS [4]
TrrdL [4]
Tfaw [18]
TwtrS [4]
TwtrL [10]
Twr [10]
Trcpage [Auto]
TrdrdScl [4]
TwrwrScl [4]
Trfc [292]
Trfc2 [Auto]
Trfc4 [Auto]
Tcwl [14]
Trtp [8]
Trdwr [7]
Twrrd [3]
TwrwrSc [1]
TwrwrSd [6]
TwrwrDd [6]
TrdrdSc [1]
TrdrdSd [4]
TrdrdDd [4]
Tcke [1]
ProcODT [60 ohm]
Cmd2T [1T]
Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
Power Down Enable [Disabled]
RttNom [Rtt_Nom Disable]
RttWr [Dynamic ODT Off]
RttPark [Auto]
MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
MemCkeSetup [Auto]
MemCadBusClkDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 4]
CPU Current Capability [130%]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
CPU Voltage Frequency [500]
CPU Power Duty Control [Extreme]
CPU Power Phase Control [Power Phase Response]
Manual Adjustment [Ultra Fast]
CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 4]
VDDSOC Current Capability [120%]
VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed VDDSOC Switching Frequency(KHz) [600]
VDDSOC Phase Control [Power Phase Response]
Manual Adjustment [Ultra Fast]
DRAM Current Capability [110%]
DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.50000]
VTTDDR Voltage [Auto]
VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
VDDP Voltage [Auto]
1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
PLL reference voltage [Auto]
T Offset [Auto]
Sense MI Skew [Disabled]
Sense MI Offset [Auto]
Promontory presence [Auto]
Clock Amplitude [Auto]
CLDO VDDP voltage [Auto]
CPU Core Voltage [Offset mode]
CPU Offset Mode Sign [-]
- CPU Core Voltage Offset [0.06250]
CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
- VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.00000]
DRAM Voltage [1.48500]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
Firmware TPM [Disable]
Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
PSS Support [Auto]
SVM Mode [Disabled]
Onboard LED [Enabled]
Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
SATA Mode [AHCI]
NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
SMART Self Test [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
HD Audio Controller [Disabled]
M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
SB Link Mode [Auto]
Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
When system is in working state [Off]
When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [Off]
Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
Wi-Fi Controller [Disabled]
Bluetooth Controller [Enabled]
ErP Ready [Disabled]
Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
Power On By RTC [Disabled]
Network Stack [Disabled]
Device [Samsung SSD 850 EVO 1TB]
Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
USB Mass Storage Driver Support [Enabled]
SanDisk [Auto]
U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
U31G1_5 [Enabled]
U31G1_6 [Enabled]
U31G1_7 [Enabled]
U31G1_8 [Enabled]
U31G1_9 [Enabled]
U31G1_10 [Enabled]
USB11 [Enabled]
USB12 [Enabled]
USB13 [Enabled]
USB14 [Enabled]
USB15 [Enabled]
CPU Temperature [Monitor]
MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
PCH Temperature [Monitor]
T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
5V Voltage [Monitor]
12V Voltage [Monitor]
CPU Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
PSPP Policy [Auto]
Fast Boot [Disabled]
AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
Boot Logo Display [Enabled]
POST Delay Time [3 sec]
Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
Launch CSM [Enabled]
Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
OS Type [Other OS]
Setup Animator [Disabled]
ASUS Grid Install Service [Enabled]
Load from Profile [1]
Profile Name [SIMPLE]
Save to Profile [1]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
BCLK Frequency [Auto]
CPU Ratio [Auto]
DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A2]
Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
RedirectForReturnDis [Auto]
L2 TLB Associativity [Auto]
Platform First Error Handling [Auto]
Enable IBS [Auto]
Global C-state Control [Auto]
Power Supply Idle Control [Auto]
Opcache Control [Auto]
Custom Pstate0 [Auto]
Custom Pstate1 [Auto]
Custom Pstate2 [Auto]
Custom Pstate3 [Auto]
Custom Pstate4 [Auto]
Custom Pstate5 [Auto]
Custom Pstate6 [Auto]
Custom Pstate7 [Auto]
Relaxed EDC throttling [Enabled]
Downcore control [Auto]
SMTEN [Auto]
SEV-ES ASID Space Limit [1]
Streaming Stores Control [Auto]
ACPI _CST C1 Declaration [Auto]
L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
DRAM scrub time [Auto]
Redirect scrubber control [Auto]
Disable DF sync flood propagation [Auto]
Freeze DF module queues on error [Auto]
GMI encryption control [Auto]
xGMI encryption control [Auto]
CC6 memory region encryption [Auto]
Location of private memory regions [Auto]
System probe filter [Auto]
Memory interleaving [Auto]
Memory interleaving size [Auto]
Channel interleaving hash [Auto]
Memory Clear [Auto]
ACPI SLIT Distance Control [Auto]
Power Down Enable [Auto]
Cmd2T [Auto]
Gear Down Mode [Auto]
CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
Data Poisoning [Auto]
DRAM ECC Symbol Size [Auto]
DRAM ECC Enable [Auto]
TSME [Auto]
Data Scramble [Auto]
Chipselect Interleaving [Auto]
BankGroupSwap [Disabled]
Address Hash Bank [Auto]
Address Hash CS [Auto]
SPD Read Optimization [Enabled]
MBIST Enable [Disabled]
MBIST Aggressors [Auto]
MBIST Per Bit Slave Die Reporting [Auto]
IOMMU [Auto]
Determinism Slider [Performance]
cTDP Control [Auto]
PSI [Auto]
ACS Enable [Auto]
PCIe ARI Support [Auto]
CLDO_VDDP Control [Auto]
HD Audio Enable [Auto]
Force PCIe gen speed [Auto]
Processor temperature Control [Auto]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
SOC OVERCLOCK VID [0]
Mode0 [Auto]


----------



## Singularity48

nick name said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Sure thing.
> 
> Ai Overclock Tuner [D.O.C.P. Standard]
> D.O.C.P. [D.O.C.P DDR4-3603 15-15-15-35-1.35V]
> eCLK Mode [Synchronous mode]
> BCLK Frequency [100.2000]
> BCLK_Divider [Auto]
> Performance Enhancer [Level 3 (OC)]
> CPU Core Ratio [37.00]
> Performance Bias [Aida/Geekbench]
> Memory Frequency [DDR4-3607MHz]
> Core Performance Boost [Enabled]
> SMT Mode [Enabled]
> TPU [Keep Current Settings]
> TRC_EOM [Auto]
> TRTP_EOM [Auto]
> TRRS_S_EOM [Auto]
> TRRS_L_EOM [Auto]
> TWTR_EOM [Auto]
> TWTR_L_EOM [Auto]
> TWCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWR_EOM [Auto]
> TFAW_EOM [Auto]
> TRCT_EOM [Auto]
> TREFI_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_DD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SC_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_DD_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SD_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SC_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWRRD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDWR_EOM [Auto]
> TWRRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto]
> DRAM CAS# Latency [14]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [15]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [14]
> DRAM RAS# PRE Time [14]
> DRAM RAS# ACT Time [28]
> Trc [42]
> TrrdS [4]
> TrrdL [4]
> Tfaw [18]
> TwtrS [4]
> TwtrL [10]
> Twr [10]
> Trcpage [Auto]
> TrdrdScl [4]
> TwrwrScl [4]
> Trfc [292]
> Trfc2 [Auto]
> Trfc4 [Auto]
> Tcwl [14]
> Trtp [8]
> Trdwr [7]
> Twrrd [3]
> TwrwrSc [1]
> TwrwrSd [6]
> TwrwrDd [6]
> TrdrdSc [1]
> TrdrdSd [4]
> TrdrdDd [4]
> Tcke [1]
> ProcODT [60 ohm]
> Cmd2T [1T]
> Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
> Power Down Enable [Disabled]
> RttNom [Rtt_Nom Disable]
> RttWr [Dynamic ODT Off]
> RttPark [Auto]
> MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
> MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
> MemCkeSetup [Auto]
> MemCadBusClkDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 4]
> CPU Current Capability [130%]
> CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
> CPU Voltage Frequency [500]
> CPU Power Duty Control [Extreme]
> CPU Power Phase Control [Power Phase Response]
> Manual Adjustment [Ultra Fast]
> CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
> VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 4]
> VDDSOC Current Capability [120%]
> VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Manual]
> Fixed VDDSOC Switching Frequency(KHz) [600]
> VDDSOC Phase Control [Power Phase Response]
> Manual Adjustment [Ultra Fast]
> DRAM Current Capability [110%]
> DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
> DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
> Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
> DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.50000]
> VTTDDR Voltage [Auto]
> VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
> VDDP Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
> CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
> 2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
> PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
> PLL reference voltage [Auto]
> T Offset [Auto]
> Sense MI Skew [Disabled]
> Sense MI Offset [Auto]
> Promontory presence [Auto]
> Clock Amplitude [Auto]
> CLDO VDDP voltage [Auto]
> CPU Core Voltage [Offset mode]
> CPU Offset Mode Sign [-]
> - CPU Core Voltage Offset [0.06250]
> CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
> - VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.00000]
> DRAM Voltage [1.48500]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> 1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
> Firmware TPM [Disable]
> Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
> PSS Support [Auto]
> SVM Mode [Disabled]
> Onboard LED [Enabled]
> Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
> SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
> SATA Mode [AHCI]
> NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
> SMART Self Test [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> HD Audio Controller [Disabled]
> M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
> PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
> PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
> M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
> M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
> SB Link Mode [Auto]
> Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
> USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
> When system is in working state [Off]
> When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [Off]
> Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
> Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
> Wi-Fi Controller [Disabled]
> Bluetooth Controller [Enabled]
> ErP Ready [Disabled]
> Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
> Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
> Power On By RTC [Disabled]
> Network Stack [Disabled]
> Device [Samsung SSD 850 EVO 1TB]
> Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
> XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
> USB Mass Storage Driver Support [Enabled]
> SanDisk [Auto]
> U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
> U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
> U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> U31G1_5 [Enabled]
> U31G1_6 [Enabled]
> U31G1_7 [Enabled]
> U31G1_8 [Enabled]
> U31G1_9 [Enabled]
> U31G1_10 [Enabled]
> USB11 [Enabled]
> USB12 [Enabled]
> USB13 [Enabled]
> USB14 [Enabled]
> USB15 [Enabled]
> CPU Temperature [Monitor]
> MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
> PCH Temperature [Monitor]
> T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
> HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
> CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
> AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
> W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
> W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
> 3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
> 5V Voltage [Monitor]
> 12V Voltage [Monitor]
> CPU Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> PSPP Policy [Auto]
> Fast Boot [Disabled]
> AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
> Boot Logo Display [Enabled]
> POST Delay Time [3 sec]
> Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
> Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
> Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
> Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
> Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
> Launch CSM [Enabled]
> Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
> Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
> Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
> Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
> OS Type [Other OS]
> Setup Animator [Disabled]
> ASUS Grid Install Service [Enabled]
> Load from Profile [1]
> Profile Name [SIMPLE]
> Save to Profile [1]
> CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
> VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> BCLK Frequency [Auto]
> CPU Ratio [Auto]
> DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A2]
> Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
> RedirectForReturnDis [Auto]
> L2 TLB Associativity [Auto]
> Platform First Error Handling [Auto]
> Enable IBS [Auto]
> Global C-state Control [Auto]
> Power Supply Idle Control [Auto]
> Opcache Control [Auto]
> Custom Pstate0 [Auto]
> Custom Pstate1 [Auto]
> Custom Pstate2 [Auto]
> Custom Pstate3 [Auto]
> Custom Pstate4 [Auto]
> Custom Pstate5 [Auto]
> Custom Pstate6 [Auto]
> Custom Pstate7 [Auto]
> Relaxed EDC throttling [Enabled]
> Downcore control [Auto]
> SMTEN [Auto]
> SEV-ES ASID Space Limit [1]
> Streaming Stores Control [Auto]
> ACPI _CST C1 Declaration [Auto]
> L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
> L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
> DRAM scrub time [Auto]
> Redirect scrubber control [Auto]
> Disable DF sync flood propagation [Auto]
> Freeze DF module queues on error [Auto]
> GMI encryption control [Auto]
> xGMI encryption control [Auto]
> CC6 memory region encryption [Auto]
> Location of private memory regions [Auto]
> System probe filter [Auto]
> Memory interleaving [Auto]
> Memory interleaving size [Auto]
> Channel interleaving hash [Auto]
> Memory Clear [Auto]
> ACPI SLIT Distance Control [Auto]
> Power Down Enable [Auto]
> Cmd2T [Auto]
> Gear Down Mode [Auto]
> CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
> CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
> Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
> Data Poisoning [Auto]
> DRAM ECC Symbol Size [Auto]
> DRAM ECC Enable [Auto]
> TSME [Auto]
> Data Scramble [Auto]
> Chipselect Interleaving [Auto]
> BankGroupSwap [Disabled]
> Address Hash Bank [Auto]
> Address Hash CS [Auto]
> SPD Read Optimization [Enabled]
> MBIST Enable [Disabled]
> MBIST Aggressors [Auto]
> MBIST Per Bit Slave Die Reporting [Auto]
> IOMMU [Auto]
> Determinism Slider [Performance]
> cTDP Control [Auto]
> PSI [Auto]
> ACS Enable [Auto]
> PCIe ARI Support [Auto]
> CLDO_VDDP Control [Auto]
> HD Audio Enable [Auto]
> Force PCIe gen speed [Auto]
> Processor temperature Control [Auto]
> Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
> SOC OVERCLOCK VID [0]
> Mode0 [Auto]


Awesome, thanks so much dude. VTTDDR at auto is really surprising though. Mine was at .75v for 1.5v DRAM and threw errors, then I bumped the SOC up a little bit which may or may not have helped but it threw less errors. Then I changed VTT to .7625v and that was way worse, almost immediate error. I had to set mine a step below 1/2 my BIOS DRAM (.7375v instead of .75v) which completed several memtests to 250% before a cold boot test threw one error. The funny thing is .7375v is almost exactly 1/2 of what HWinfo reports as my non-VRM DRAM Voltage (1.472v HWinfo, with 1.5v set in BIOS)


----------



## nick name

Singularity48 said:


> Awesome, thanks so much dude. VTTDDR at auto is really surprising though. Mine was at .75v for 1.5v DRAM and threw errors, then I bumped the SOC up a little bit which may or may not have helped but it threw less errors. Then I changed VTT to .7625v and that was way worse, almost immediate error. I had to set mine a step below 1/2 my BIOS DRAM (.7375v instead of .75v) which completed several memtests to 250% before a cold boot test threw one error. The funny thing is .7375v is almost exactly 1/2 of what HWinfo reports as my non-VRM DRAM Voltage (1.472v HWinfo, with 1.5v set in BIOS)


I've had VTTDDR manually set before, but it doesn't seem to impact my stability (nor hurt it). 

What is your SOC set to?


----------



## Singularity48

nick name said:


> What is your SOC set to?


In BIOS I had it set to 1.01v at first, then 1.03 and 1.04. all the digi+ power stuff was on Auto except the DRAM boot voltage. I can't actually hold 1.0v SOC without setting 1.03125v+ in BIOS.


----------



## nick name

Singularity48 said:


> In BIOS I had it set to 1.01v at first, then 1.03 and 1.04. all the digi+ power stuff was on Auto except the DRAM boot voltage. I can't actually hold 1.0v SOC without setting 1.03125v+ in BIOS.


Yeah, you're gonna wanna use LLC 4 for SOC. Actually I use LLC 4 for everything. And I would suggest the lazy method of starting at 1.1V for SOC and then moving down.


----------



## Singularity48

nick name said:


> Yeah, you're gonna wanna use LLC 4 for SOC. Actually I use LLC 4 for everything. And I would suggest the lazy method of starting at 1.1V for SOC and then moving down.


Will do. I see you have all the other digi+ settings set too, any suggestions for those? Not sure how much they all affect RAM OC stability.

Also, does running a negative vcore offset have an effect on RAM OC at all? I see you have PE3 and -.06v which gives me hope for my PE4 and -.03v.


----------



## nick name

Singularity48 said:


> Will do. I see you have all the other digi+ settings set too, any suggestions for those? Not sure how much they all affect RAM OC stability.
> 
> Also, does running a negative vcore offset have an effect on RAM OC at all? I see you have PE3 and -.06v which gives me hope for my PE4 and -.03v.


I haven't seen VCORE impact RAM. And I don't use PE 4 due to it sometimes booting at multipliers that are too high ie 43 and 43.5. I use PE 3 and then raise the multiplier after boot with Ryzen Master. 

Yeah, I set all the digi+ settings. I don't like any droop.


----------



## VPII

I've picked up something interesting the past couple of days while playing Shadow of Tomb Raider. I kept getting these crashes, sometimes BSOD and sometimes just a crash to desktop. I changed my CPU to run at 100% stock to see if that might be the cause, but it still happened. My RTX 2080 TI I've also change to run at stock but still the same issue. Now the memory I ran before with the STILT 3200 Safe was a set of Galax HOF DDR4 4000, but I sold it now as the memory meant nothing for me with my current setup. So I put back my GSkill F4-3200C14D-16GTZR and set it to run at DOCP. At first it was running the STILT 3200 Safe setting but I wanted to make sure it was not the memory and set it to run with the DOCP except that I set geardown to be disabled but see that this was the only thing I did not change I decided to drop the memory speed to see if that helped. So I left timings to be DOCP for the 3200 set and changed the speed to 3000mhz. This helped as I was able to finish the game without an issue. Interestingly I even tried to run BFV at the 3200 mem speed and it also crashed, now with the 3000 mem speed all seems to be fine.

Now this memory always worked at 3200 even 3600 for Stilt's setting but now it does now. Can it be that the latest AGESA might have caused this. I'd like to flash back to an old bios to test and see.


----------



## nick name

VPII said:


> I've picked up something interesting the past couple of days while playing Shadow of Tomb Raider. I kept getting these crashes, sometimes BSOD and sometimes just a crash to desktop. I changed my CPU to run at 100% stock to see if that might be the cause, but it still happened. My RTX 2080 TI I've also change to run at stock but still the same issue. Now the memory I ran before with the STILT 3200 Safe was a set of Galax HOF DDR4 4000, but I sold it now as the memory meant nothing for me with my current setup. So I put back my GSkill F4-3200C14D-16GTZR and set it to run at DOCP. At first it was running the STILT 3200 Safe setting but I wanted to make sure it was not the memory and set it to run with the DOCP except that I set geardown to be disabled but see that this was the only thing I did not change I decided to drop the memory speed to see if that helped. So I left timings to be DOCP for the 3200 set and changed the speed to 3000mhz. This helped as I was able to finish the game without an issue. Interestingly I even tried to run BFV at the 3200 mem speed and it also crashed, now with the 3000 mem speed all seems to be fine.
> 
> Now this memory always worked at 3200 even 3600 for Stilt's setting but now it does now. Can it be that the latest AGESA might have caused this. I'd like to flash back to an old bios to test and see.


I'm sorry but your wall of text wasn't something that made sense. Could you edit and format it differently please.


----------



## VPII

nick name said:


> I'm sorry but your wall of text wasn't something that made sense. Could you edit and format it differently please.


Sorry for me messed up message. Let me put it point for point. All of the below I picked up with errors I got while playing Shadow of Tomb Raider (Not used until last week)

1. First set of Ram used: GSkill F4-3200C14D-16GTZR - Always ran with Stilt 3200 safe preset, but was also able to run 3600 Stilt Preset

2. Untill last week I used the following RAM: Galax DDR4 4000 ran at 3200 with Stilt Safe Preset

3. Galax Memory sold as did not really help me much

4. From last week I started running the GSkill F4-3200C14D-16GTZR - but found not stable even if I use DOCP

5. Dropped memory speed to 3000 with DOCP timings and seem to be stable

6. BIOS for above was 1103

This morning I did the following:

1. I flashed with 1002 which would be older AGESA and memory stable with DOCP but definitely slower than with 1103 bios.

2. Flashed back again to 1103 and now memory does not even want to run at 3000 keeps giving F9 at startup. 

3. Flashed back to 1002 and same issue with RAM now. 

4. Now back at 1103 and will test again.

When I posted the above message I was running 3000mhz memory speed, actually got into Windows. However, the moment strain was put on the memory running AIDA I got a BSOD. I changed the memory speed to 2800 and it worked even ran AIDA but the moment I restarted it gave me the F9 error. Right now I am running 2666 memory speed. My plan however is to get another set of memory GSkill Flare 3200 CL14, but right now I'm stuck with 2666 memory speed which does not make sense to me as this memory worked 3200 speed all along and was even stable 3600 with the Stilt preset.


----------



## VPII

Okay now even 2666 gave me the F9 error on startup. I seriously don't understand why. I have another board, my LN2 board which I'll test after it is dry out of the dishwasher to get rid of the vaseline it is coated in. If it works without an issue on that board then the problem is with the board, not the memory or cpu.


----------



## gupsterg

nick name said:


> @gupsterg Lol I have a Thermaltake Core P3 and I balance a 140mm Noctua fan on the top of the case also. The best part about using the Noctua is the magnet in the fan hub holds the fan better than other fans I have used in the same position. I also have a 120mm fan sitting on my graphics card in front of the RAM sticks, however, with your CPU block and its tubing position you may not be able to do the same.
> 
> I must say that the P5 makes the P3 look pretty small in comparison.


Initially I was gonna go P3, then the P5 caught my eye. As if I do go WC'd GPU as well, I could go upto a 480mm rad. Been keeping out for another GPU. Probably gonna try to nab a Fiji, seen some listings of R9 Nano's with WB go for ~£150 or less, which seem like a steal to me.

Well impressed with how good the C7H VRM is, really can't say I noted any vast increase in temp by going open air. The fan mainly blows on the RAM and is running very low revs. Currently use blu tack to keep it in place . The open air setup with the fan on RAM, I see max ~36C on RAM, this is ~max 4C lower than when C7H/RAM was in case. Case had 2x 140mm as intake, 2x 140mm on HSF and 120mm exhaust, all in line, creating tunnel of airflow from front to back of case.



VPII said:


> Okay now even 2666 gave me the F9 error on startup. I seriously don't understand why. I have another board, my LN2 board which I'll test after it is dry out of the dishwasher to get rid of the vaseline it is coated in. If it works without an issue on that board then the problem is with the board, not the memory or cpu.


Q-Code: F9 is usually memory training issue rather than memory fault being detected, which is usually 0d with also DRAM Q-LED staying lit. So besides board/RAM perhaps CPU IMC is having issues, dunno though.

Using 2x8GB B die UEFI 1103 or 1002 clocks the same for me on RAM. This is based on 2 CPUs I have done same tests.

What I have noted is the recently acquired CPU (1835 PGS), clocks lower with PE: [Default] PBO: [Enabled] on UEFI 1002 vs 1103. It also uses lower VCORE on 1002. Done multiple POSTs and it never reaches the same CPU clocks as 1103.

CPU 2700X 1825 SUS nabs same clocks on UEFI 1002 & 1103 with PE: [Default] PBO: [Enabled].

IMO the CPU/SMU FW differences between AGESA 1.0.0.2C and 1.0.0.6 may affect some CPU for clocks with PBO: Enabled.


----------



## VPII

gupsterg said:


> Initially I was gonna go P3, then the P5 caught my eye. As if I do go WC'd GPU as well, I could go upto a 480mm rad. Been keeping out for another GPU. Probably gonna try to nab a Fiji, seen some listings of R9 Nano's with WB go for ~£150 or less, which seem like a steal to me.
> 
> 
> 
> Well impressed with how good the C7H VRM is, really can't say I noted any vast increase in temp by going open air. The fan mainly blows on the RAM and is running very low revs. Currently use blu tack to keep it in place . The open air setup with the fan on RAM, I see max ~36C on RAM, this is ~max 4C lower than when C7H/RAM was in case. Case had 2x 140mm as intake, 2x 140mm on HSF and 120mm exhaust, all in line, creating tunnel of airflow from front to back of case.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Q-Code: F9 is usually memory training issue rather than memory fault being detected, which is usually 0d with also DRAM Q-LED staying lit. So besides board/RAM perhaps CPU IMC is having issues, dunno though.
> 
> 
> 
> Using 2x8GB B die UEFI 1103 or 1002 clocks the same for me on RAM. This is based on 2 CPUs I have done same tests.
> 
> 
> 
> What I have noted is the recently acquired CPU (1835 PGS), clocks lower with PE: [Default] PBO: [Enabled] on UEFI 1002 vs 1103. It also uses lower VCORE on 1002. Done multiple POSTs and it never reaches the same CPU clocks as 1103.
> 
> 
> 
> CPU 2700X 1825 SUS nabs same clocks on UEFI 1002 & 1103 with PE: [Default] PBO: [Enabled].
> 
> 
> 
> IMO the CPU/SMU FW differences between AGESA 1.0.0.2C and 1.0.0.6 may affect some CPU for clocks with PBO: Enabled.


Thanks for the reply gupster.... I actually got the d0 now and system wont even start. Busy cleaning my ln2 board to try and see if it works.

What does the d0 mean?

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## VPII

No worries Gupster.... I saw anothrr post of your regarding qpost d0.... seems the memory died. Pitty I cannot claim warranty. Took spreaders off for insulation during ln2. Will tey put it back but I doubt it will look the same.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## crakej

VPII said:


> Sorry for me messed up message. Let me put it point for point. All of the below I picked up with errors I got while playing Shadow of Tomb Raider (Not used until last week)
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 1. First set of Ram used: GSkill F4-3200C14D-16GTZR - Always ran with Stilt 3200 safe preset, but was also able to run 3600 Stilt Preset
> 
> 2. Untill last week I used the following RAM: Galax DDR4 4000 ran at 3200 with Stilt Safe Preset
> 
> 3. Galax Memory sold as did not really help me much
> 
> 4. From last week I started running the GSkill F4-3200C14D-16GTZR - but found not stable even if I use DOCP
> 
> 5. Dropped memory speed to 3000 with DOCP timings and seem to be stable
> 
> 6. BIOS for above was 1103
> 
> 
> This morning I did the following:
> 
> 1. I flashed with 1002 which would be older AGESA and memory stable with DOCP but definitely slower than with 1103 bios.
> 
> 2. Flashed back again to 1103 and now memory does not even want to run at 3000 keeps giving F9 at startup.
> 
> 3. Flashed back to 1002 and same issue with RAM now.
> 
> 4. Now back at 1103 and will test again.
> 
> When I posted the above message I was running 3000mhz memory speed, actually got into Windows. However, the moment strain was put on the memory running AIDA I got a BSOD. I changed the memory speed to 2800 and it worked even ran AIDA but the moment I restarted it gave me the F9 error. Right now I am running 2666 memory speed. My plan however is to get another set of memory GSkill Flare 3200 CL14, but right now I'm stuck with 2666 memory speed which does not make sense to me as this memory worked 3200 speed all along and was even stable 3600 with the Stilt preset.


Someone may correct me, but simply re-flashing to 1002 is not enough - there was a firmware update to the IMC in 1103 as well as AGESA update, and in order to re-flash the older version, you would need to flash the last version with an IMC update to force the downgrade of that firmware, which is rarely updated. 

I think you have to go back to 0703 or 0804 for that. You will know as these updates happen in 2 parts, when you reboot it will say 'updating.... do not turn off' and reboot again. I'm also not sure but you may have to use afugan.efi. Information is in this thread - i'll update when I find it.

So, read this page on going back to older IMC firmware https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-462.html#post27741412 where @Ramad recommends using Bios 0601 Everything you need is on that page


----------



## VPII

crakej said:


> Someone may correct me, but simply re-flashing to 1002 is not enough - there was a firmware update to the IMC in 1103 as well as AGESA update, and in order to re-flash the older version, you would need to flash the last version with an IMC update to force the downgrade of that firmware, which is rarely updated.
> 
> 
> 
> I think you have to go back to 0703 or 0804 for that. You will know as these updates happen in 2 parts, when you reboot it will say 'updating.... do not turn off' and reboot again. I'm also not sure but you may have to use afugan.efi. Information is in this thread - i'll update when I find it.


Hi crakej you are right. Tried those bios updates all the way back and with the 0d qpost it is memory failure. Happens on both my mobo's.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## crakej

VPII said:


> Hi crakej you are right. Tried those bios updates all the way back and with the 0d qpost it is memory failure. Happens on both my mobo's.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


Updated my post with the info you need, but don't forget, when you update to 1103, it's a major update which required most of us to completely re-tune at least some of our main settings/timings/voltages. Be Patient, if that's the problem you're having, then you'll just need to read up from beginning of December where some of us discuss and find solutions.

Hope this helps.


----------



## VPII

crakej said:


> Updated my post with the info you need, but don't forget, when you update to 1103, it's a major update which required most of us to completely re-tune at least some of our main settings/timings/voltages. Be Patient, if that's the problem you're having, then you'll just need to read up from beginning of December where some of us discuss and find solutions.
> 
> 
> 
> Hope this helps.


Hi crakej.... thanks but no start now. Stuck at d0 which is memory failing so I already ordered a set of gskill flare 3200 cl14 which is apparently compatible with x470 chipset.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## gupsterg

Well got to the bottom of why UEFI 1002 does not sustain same CPU clocks as UEFI 1103 with CPU 2700X 1835 PGS when using PE: [Default] PBO: [Enabled].

I believe UEFI 1103 has a preset Scalar VID change when PBO is enabled that UEFI 1002 does not. If I manually start changing Scalar VID then I do gain back clocks on 1002.

First up CPU 2700X 1825 SUS. In CPO_Test this has greatest mV difference between worst/best core, ~+115mV, worst core 1.43V, best core ~1.32V (higher leakage CPU IMO). Left screenie is PBO 3x, centre PBO 10x and right is 1103 PBO.



Spoiler














Next up CPU 2700X 1835 SUS. In CPO_Test this has tightest mV difference between Best/Worst core, ~-1mV, worst/best core ~1.44V. So in UEFI 1103 PBO results in on average ~4.21GHz using ~1.407V when loaded with RT.



Spoiler














Same setup on UEFI 1002 is on average ~4.18GHz using ~1.37V



Spoiler














Next playing with Scalar VID gains me back clocks as UEFI 1103.



Spoiler



HWINFO polling interval 500ms, always for RT runs I zero HWINFO and then start RT, as it get timers as close to each and as relevant data as I can, compare averages of CPU temp/frequency/VCORE SVI2, etc.

*
10x*








*
9x*








*
8x*








*
7x*








*
6x*








*
5x*








*
4x*








*
3x*








*
2x*











To me out of the 3 CPUs I have, I believe 1835 PGS is best.


Responds to Scalar VID changes best out of all 3 CPUs.
Has tightest worst to best core difference between all 3 CPUs.
Gains best RAM clock out of all 3 CPUs.



VPII said:


> No worries Gupster.... I saw anothrr post of your regarding qpost d0.... seems the memory died. Pitty I cannot claim warranty. Took spreaders off for insulation during ln2. Will tey put it back but I doubt it will look the same.


From that post and your other replies to Crakej I'd deem RAM is indeed at fault.



crakej said:


> Someone may correct me, but simply re-flashing to 1002 is not enough - there was a firmware update to the IMC in 1103 as well as AGESA update, and in order to re-flash the older version, you would need to flash the last version with an IMC update to force the downgrade of that firmware, which is rarely updated.
> 
> I think you have to go back to 0703 or 0804 for that. You will know as these updates happen in 2 parts, when you reboot it will say 'updating.... do not turn off' and reboot again. I'm also not sure but you may have to use afugan.efi. Information is in this thread - i'll update when I find it.
> 
> So, read this page on going back to older IMC firmware https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-462.html#post27741412 where @Ramad recommends using Bios 0601 Everything you need is on that page


Each UEFI contains what it should have with it.

You do not need to flash x and they y to gain back z.

If it was that way ASUS/other motherboard makers would stipulate flashing a UEFI consecutively of release/version, etc. As it would be deemed having incremental changes which add to the last UEFI, which is not the case.

I tried the manual update method and compared vs Flashback and it is no different IMO.


----------



## Myllox

gupsterg said:


> RB 1hr run.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 242190
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rerun RB 1hr on another warm POST (4th).
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 242192
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RT 6000% on same warm POST.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 242194
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3600MHz C15 1T best RT run so far is ~1970% in RT.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 242196


Go ->
tRTP =12
tRDRDSCL =3
tWRWRSCL = 3

i bet you reach min 5000% 

impressive on 1.35v


----------



## Myllox

added an extra fan 
surprised to see a 120mm fit below my X62 Kraken in my NZXT H440 .. actually the extra air in helps 2c on the RAM


----------



## crakej

VPII said:


> Hi crakej.... thanks but no start now. Stuck at d0 which is memory failing so I already ordered a set of gskill flare 3200 cl14 which is apparently compatible with x470 chipset.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


oh dear, d0 is not good - cpu initializtion error 
0d is memory related - also not good!


----------



## Singularity48

@nick name I think I finally got it. Tried so much different **** today, too many to list. Got it down to a consistent 1 error per test every single time no matter the conditions after setting all the Digi+ options. Of course the last thing I would think to try is what seems to have ended up working, I dropped my DRAM/boot voltage from 1.5 to 1.49v. Thank god I remembered from the DRAM calc flowchart that for UHQ sticks like these you should try dropping the voltage instead of raising it. 4 100% passes straight, from normal restart and cold boot, and another 300% pass that finished a bit ago. Here's hoping it's overnight stable.


----------



## gupsterg

Myllox said:


> Go ->
> tRTP =12
> tRDRDSCL =3
> tWRWRSCL = 3
> 
> i bet you reach min 5000%
> 
> impressive on 1.35v


Thanks I will try those tweaks at some point  . At present really gunning to keep 1T SCL 2 on each  .

3570MHz on UEFI 1002 is showing promise.

First just bumped BCLK and failed ~14% in RT.



Spoiler














Next bumped SOC/VDIMM and failed ~758%.



Spoiler














Next went for CAD Bus bump on all values.


Spoiler














Then did 2x warm POSTs just to see if all is OK on that aspect, got 1750%.



Spoiler














Tried CB15/AIDA64.



Spoiler



















*
Note:* No OS/Performance Bias tweaks applied.



Now on a P95 v29.4b8 8K 4096K 12GB run.



Spoiler














Will share if I do or do not gain 3570MHz with further testing.


----------



## VPII

crakej said:


> oh dear, d0 is not good - cpu initializtion error
> 
> 0d is memory related - also not good!


Sorry it is 0d Im getting. So memory it is.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## nick name

@Singularity48 I've lowered my DRAM voltage to 1.485V and its been stable so far. I haven't run it overnight, but it's passed several other tests and has been great during gaming and other everyday tasks. 

Also, did you and @VPII both use the RAM slots the manual instructs to use?


----------



## Ramad

VPII said:


> Sorry it is 0d Im getting. So memory it is.


I have only seen this error with display problems. You can do a quick test by holding the "Delete" key when 0d is displayed and see if the Q-led changes the code to something else. If it does then it's related to display error somewhere between the graphics card and the monitor. You may need to re-seat the CPU to get better connection in those cheap FoxConn CPU sockets.


----------



## VPII

Okay, I'm currently running one stick of memory. Was still an issue getting it to run but I left everything on auto so the system set and run the memory as can. Right now it seems to work.

I've tried both sticks in mo other mobo and it would immediately give F9 then hand on 0d when switched on. This was the same issue I had with my everyday board. Interestingly when I finally got my system to switch on it went straight to the post screen telling me not to switch off as the bios need to finalise updating. Well all's good now. When I get the new memory on Friday I'll test it with DOCP as I know the memory should work and is compatible and if I still experience these issues I'll take the cpu and board with memory to the shop to check whether the cpu imc may be faulty. It is one of the toughest things to kill in a cpu so I really doubt that it is the case.


----------



## Singularity48

Happy new year everybody!

That said, RIP. Still, one error overnight isn't that bad, I'm pretty close to ironing it out. Next thing to test would be 1-1.05v SOC and/or 1.48-1.485v DRAM.


----------



## VPII

Small update.... the one stick of ram I have is running 3200 docp and currently up to 700% Kahru mem test so at least it seem the imc is okay.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## nick name

Singularity48 said:


> Happy new year everybody!
> 
> That said, RIP. Still, one error overnight isn't that bad, I'm pretty close to ironing it out. Next thing to test would be 1-1.05v SOC and/or 1.48-1.485v DRAM.


I will bet you a dollar (American dollar not the crappy Canadian or Australian) that disabling Geardown Mode is gonna fix it before going higher on SOC will. And if you aren't at 1.48~5V already then that might be it too. I never found any benefit to SOC higher than 1.1V if you're using LLC 4. The only reason to go higher would be to account for droop.

HAPPY NEW YEAR!

Edit:

To clarify -- I believe Geardown Mode is what allows for lower SOC voltages so I am not saying to disable it to find stability, but that going higher in SOC is most likely not beneficial. Also, it might be the higher temps on your RAM where you begin to find instability. I've found that the tighter the timings the more sensitive the RAM is to temps and going above 40*C is where it starts with me. I have placed a 120mm fan on my video card that sits in front of my RAM sticks and that works very well at cooling them.


----------



## nick name

VPII said:


> Small update.... the one stick of ram I have is running 3200 docp and currently up to 700% Kahru mem test so at least it seem the imc is okay.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


That is a good sign. 

Are you sure you were using the correct RAM slots?


----------



## VPII

nick name said:


> That is a good sign.
> 
> 
> 
> Are you sure you were using the correct RAM slots?


Yup nick, I was and sm at present. At over 2000% now. Would have been higher but when screen switches off it cannot find the rtx 2080 ti input and I needed to reset and start fresh.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## VPII

nick name said:


> That is a good sign.
> 
> Are you sure you were using the correct RAM slots?


All good... I stopped it at 6700% as it is roughly 99.8% coverage. I noticed that with DOCP it sets Geardown as enabled. I'll try it disabled to see if it still passes.


----------



## Myllox

gupsterg said:


> Thanks I will try those tweaks at some point  . At present really gunning to keep 1T SCL 2 on each  .
> 
> 3570MHz on UEFI 1002 is showing promise.
> 
> First just bumped BCLK and failed ~14% in RT.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 242674
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Next bumped SOC/VDIMM and failed ~758%.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 242676
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Next went for CAD Bus bump on all values.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 242678
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then did 2x warm POSTs just to see if all is OK on that aspect, got 1750%.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 242680
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tried CB15/AIDA64.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 242682
> 
> 
> View attachment 242684
> 
> *
> Note:* No OS/Performance Bias tweaks applied.
> 
> 
> 
> Now on a P95 v29.4b8 8K 4096K 12GB run.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 242686
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will share if I do or do not gain 3570MHz with further testing.


Just curious, is there a reason to why you are running Bios 1002 and therefore the older AGESA 1.0.0.2? 
Version 1103 should be far better with dram and stability (AGESA 1.0.0.6)


----------



## Singularity48

nick name said:


> I will bet you a dollar (American dollar not the crappy Canadian or Australian) that disabling Geardown Mode is gonna fix it before going higher on SOC will. And if you aren't at 1.48~5V already then that might be it too. I never found any benefit to SOC higher than 1.1V if you're using LLC 4. The only reason to go higher would be to account for droop.
> 
> HAPPY NEW YEAR!
> 
> Edit:
> 
> To clarify -- I believe Geardown Mode is what allows for lower SOC voltages so I am not saying to disable it to find stability, but that going higher in SOC is most likely not beneficial. Also, it might be the higher temps on your RAM where you begin to find instability. I've found that the tighter the timings the more sensitive the RAM is to temps and going above 40*C is where it starts with me. I have placed a 120mm fan on my video card that sits in front of my RAM sticks and that works very well at cooling them.


Yeah I've got SOC at 1.1v and DRAM voltage at 1.49v in BIOS right now. Dropping from 1.5v dram to 1.49v dramatically reduced how many errors I was getting, from 1 before 100% to 1 overnight. the screenshot I posted of the overnight is from those settings. I'm thinking drop SOC to 1.0v and see if that's better/worse/the same and then reduce DRAM to 1.48v or so.

My DRAM temps maxed out at 42c last night on the dimm farthest from my front 140mm fan, I guess I could try to jury-rig a fan pointing at the DIMMs. I looked into memory coolers like the Corsair and G.skill ones but it doesn't seem like they're worth buying at all.


----------



## nick name

Singularity48 said:


> Yeah I've got SOC at 1.1v and DRAM voltage at 1.49v in BIOS right now. Dropping from 1.5v dram to 1.49v dramatically reduced how many errors I was getting, from 1 before 100% to 1 overnight. the screenshot I posted of the overnight is from those settings. I'm thinking drop SOC to 1.0v and see if that's better/worse/the same and then reduce DRAM to 1.48v or so.
> 
> My DRAM temps maxed out at 42c last night on the dimm farthest from my front 140mm fan, I guess I could try to jury-rig a fan pointing at the DIMMs. I looked into memory coolers like the Corsair and G.skill ones but it doesn't seem like they're worth buying at all.


If you can place a fan on top of your GPU and in front of the RAM then that's probably a better solution than RAM coolers.


----------



## VPII

nick name said:


> That is a good sign.
> 
> 
> 
> Are you sure you were using the correct RAM slots?


In reply to my previous message... geardown disabled seems to work just fine. I am so happy as this means nothing wrong with mobo or cpu so new ram would do the trick. Unless it is a dusl channel issue.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## Singularity48

nick name said:


> If you can place a fan on top of your GPU and in front of the RAM then that's probably a better solution than RAM coolers.


Yeah, I'm gonna do that next time I feel like opening my computer. I've got like 5 120mm fans lying around doing nothing. I think I can actually use my AIO tubing to stabilize the fan on top of the GPU.


----------



## VPII

VPII said:


> Yup nick, I was and sm at present. At over 2000% now. Would have been higher but when screen switches off it cannot find the rtx 2080 ti input and I needed to reset and start fresh.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


Okay now for the wierd stuff.... both sticks 3000 cl16 running memtest at present. Had to leave when it was already past 400%.... if this works Ill reseat the cpu and try 3200 again. But this is pretty wierd.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## Singularity48

Well that was new and spooky, I was messing with getting 3466c13 working on this kit and I got into windows most of the time but crazy amounts of memtest errors, nothing seemed like it was gonna fix it. Then I got an error on boot, fTPM corrupted or something to that effect, press Y to reset which I did. Everything seems to be normal again and i'm back at 3600c14. Anyone gotten that before? I was adjusting the DRAM/boot voltage when I was greeted with that message.

Side note, is cl13 even possible to get stable? I've seen conflicting reports about odd cas timings not working on Ryzen, or maybe that was only with Geardown on.


----------



## majestynl

* HAPPY NEW YEAR *


----------



## VPII

Both sticks completed mem test up to 6500%. Then I decided to take cpu out clean socket and cpu pins with acetone. Unfortunately no more both sticks work at any speed. Single stick still good docp with geardown disabled.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## Myllox

Singularity48 said:


> Well that was new and spooky, I was messing with getting 3466c13 working on this kit and I got into windows most of the time but crazy amounts of memtest errors, nothing seemed like it was gonna fix it. Then I got an error on boot, fTPM corrupted or something to that effect, press Y to reset which I did. Everything seems to be normal again and i'm back at 3600c14. Anyone gotten that before? I was adjusting the DRAM/boot voltage when I was greeted with that message.
> 
> Side note, is cl13 even possible to get stable? I've seen conflicting reports about odd cas timings not working on Ryzen, or maybe that was only with Geardown on.


Yup, you need gear down off to be able to do any uneven CL values

btw, must have been scary .. never seen that myself


----------



## nick name

@Singularity48 Yeah the AIO tubing coming from the pump can either help or hinder positioning a fan on the GPU to direct at your RAM. AIOs with the tubing exiting the side of the pump allow for the most clearance, but some pumps with the tubing exiting the top can still be made to allow for that fan position. It isn't the most elegant looking solution, but it is certainly effective. 

And odd timings at higher speeds will require Geardown Mode disabled or the board will simply change the odd timing to the next higher even timing. What you will likely find, however, is that high speeds and odd CL will not POST and the POST code will simply be an endless cycling of around 6 codes at a 1 second interval. Also an example of my experience: 3800CL15 will do that to me, but 3800CL14 or CL16 will boot (won't be stable though). 

I finally remembered to test my timings with the lower 1.485V voltage overnight and it produced no errors and the temp maxed out at 35.8*C.


----------



## nirurin

1usmus said:


> *1103 MOD*
> 
> * unlocked PBO, Managed overclocking Control and OC Mode (in AMD CBS)
> 
> https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1CfKYa9haqn9oD89b2rurvyeRbBLk82n6



I was recommended this bios rom after finding out that the new Crosshair VII bios no longer has the scalar options. Gave the rom a try, and it seems that the scalar options aren't in this either? The only additional settings it has over stock are the 'Managed Overclocking Control' and 'OC Mode' settings, which have no explanation about what they actually do? Is there any documentation for this rom somewhere, or are these settings some kind of standard terminology that I just don't know? 

Seems to have options of OC1, OC2, OC3... but they don't seem to do anything?


----------



## crakej

Well, the only mem OC >3200 that posted for me today was the stilt 3600 1.4v OC profile in memory settings which runs at T2.

Everything else is causing code 9F almost instantly (recovery capsule not found) just like my previously working settings. Going to try re-seating my memory tomorrow amongst other things....


----------



## VPII

So I explained the issue I found with my memory and had some great input from some members as to what I should do.

So yesterday I decided to test both memory sticks in the same slot, one after the other. Well it seems with luck I'v always chosen the correct stick or working stick when I tested single channel. When I changed the stick to the other I immediately would get the F9 . 9F and it would change to 0d and hang. So just to be sure I decided to see whether I could test the working stick in the B2 slot instead of the A2 to make sure that it does read and pick up the memory. Well it did but would give an error when running mem test at around 659% which I think might be to do with the fact that the manual state that when using one stick it needs to go into A2 not B2. So right now it is clear that one of the memory dimms has failed. I'll confirm again when I get the new memory on Friday.


----------



## nick name

VPII said:


> So I explained the issue I found with my memory and had some great input from some members as to what I should do.
> 
> So yesterday I decided to test both memory sticks in the same slot, one after the other. Well it seems with luck I'v always chosen the correct stick or working stick when I tested single channel. When I changed the stick to the other I immediately would get the F9 . 9F and it would change to 0d and hang. So just to be sure I decided to see whether I could test the working stick in the B2 slot instead of the A2 to make sure that it does read and pick up the memory. Well it did but would give an error when running mem test at around 659% which I think might be to do with the fact that the manual state that when using one stick it needs to go into A2 not B2. So right now it is clear that one of the memory dimms has failed. I'll confirm again when I get the new memory on Friday.


Glad to hear you're getting it sorted.


----------



## gupsterg

Myllox said:


> Just curious, is there a reason to why you are running Bios 1002 and therefore the older AGESA 1.0.0.2?
> Version 1103 should be far better with dram and stability (AGESA 1.0.0.6)


A newer AGESA/CPU FW may not necessarily favour a users HW combo/settings, that is one reason to compare what occurs on each UEFI.

As shown in a post a CPU I have gains more CPU MHz under PE: [Default] PBO: [Enabled], on another there is no difference. So for me it was very interesting to see this. I can gain back the CPU MHz on UEFI 1002 to same level as UEFI 1103, if adjust Scalar VID, which I can't access on UEFI 1103 and not change PPT/TDC/EDC in UEFI if I wish to.

So far UEFI 1002/1103 (AGESA 1.0.0.2C/1.0.0.6) for RAM MHz/stability attained on 2x8GB is no different than each other. Each for me gains 3533MHz using The Stilt's 3466MHz timings on 1T Gear Down Mode: [Disabled] at same SOC, VDIMM, ProcODT, CAD Bus, RTT, etc. Both so far do not gain me 3600MHz using same timings/CR/GDMD. Both will allow same BCLK OC, coupled with PBO: [Enabled] and same RAM MHz.


----------



## kmellz

Per my earlier posts on network instability, seems it's very likely the cable that was the problem! Had a spare one around and trying it now, seems to be 100% stable atm. Kinda weird but yeah.

On another note, anyone seen any rumours/news when we might get bios updates for the upcoming zen 2? Ordering a 3700X directly when it's available


----------



## nick name

kmellz said:


> Per my earlier posts on network instability, seems it's very likely the cable that was the problem! Had a spare one around and trying it now, seems to be 100% stable atm. Kinda weird but yeah.
> 
> On another note, anyone seen any rumours/news when we might get bios updates for the upcoming zen 2? Ordering a 3700X directly when it's available


Well with CES coming in a few days I imagine we will be getting information if the existing rumors are to be believed. 

And glad you got your networking issue sorted.


----------



## nick name

Is this thread slow because of the Holidays or have a bunch of folks started to use new platforms?


----------



## The Sandman

nick name said:


> Is this thread slow because of the Holidays or have a bunch of folks started to use new platforms?



It must be the lull before the storm.
Everyone is just busy pounding on their ole Gen1 and Gen+'s one last time now Gen2 release is quickly approaching 
Or maybe the latest AGESA is just that good and there's nothing to complain about, it's been tough in the C6H thread up till it's release lol.

Joking aside, I've been wondering the same thing (and thought it might just be me) as it's not only this thread, most all I visit regularly for some reason.


----------



## nick name

Well here is something I've never, absolutely ever done before. I just passed TM5 1usmus profile @ 3700MHz. I've been kinda stable @ 3666MHz before and then lost it, but never close to passing anything @ 3700MHz. So this is fun. Remember that when looking at the speed in Ryzen Timing Checker that it doesn't show the speed, but the mem clock ratio which then also has to be multiplied against BCLK. And my BCLK is at 101 for this test.


----------



## VPII

nick name said:


> Well here is something I've never, absolutely ever done before. I just passed TM5 1usmus profile @ 3700MHz. I've been kinda stable @ 3666MHz before and then lost it, but never close to passing anything @ 3700MHz. So this is fun. Remember that when looking at the speed in Ryzen Timing Checker that it doesn't show the speed, but the mem clock ratio which then also has to be multiplied against BCLK. And my BCLK is at 101 for this test.


Great stuff nick name.... well I tested the one stick I have but thus far only 3600 cl15 but T2 which is still better than 3200 cl14 T1. COuld you possibly direct me to where I can get the Testmem 5 application which is english. A little difficult understanding the Vietnamese version.


----------



## nick name

Here is an abundance of screenshots of Aida benchmarks. The variances between runs I witnessed is astounding, but I'm sure most folks already knew that. Also, some of the best results were witnessed, but not recorded.


----------



## Singularity48

I'm still lurking the thread, did some more testing tonight.

1.0v SOC threw an error relatively quickly, but 1.025v seems to be working fine. Maybe I could get it down to 1.0125v but I'm not stressing .01v lol. Once I got that working I lowered the DRAM voltages, tried 1.45 and 1.46v and neither would boot, but 1.47v booted just fine and got 100% in memtest. Gonna see how it goes overnight.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Well here is something I've never, absolutely ever done before. I just passed TM5 1usmus profile @ 3700MHz. I've been kinda stable @ 3666MHz before and then lost it, but never close to passing anything @ 3700MHz. So this is fun. Remember that when looking at the speed in Ryzen Timing Checker that it doesn't show the speed, but the mem clock ratio which then also has to be multiplied against BCLK. And my BCLK is at 101 for this test.


Nice result!

When you say you had 3666 stable then lost it, what happened?


----------



## HolyFist

nick name said:


> Well here is something I've never, absolutely ever done before. I just passed TM5 1usmus profile @ 3700MHz. I've been kinda stable @ 3666MHz before and then lost it, but never close to passing anything @ 3700MHz. So this is fun. Remember that when looking at the speed in Ryzen Timing Checker that it doesn't show the speed, but the mem clock ratio which then also has to be multiplied against BCLK. And my BCLK is at 101 for this test.


I was going to ask how you have that RAM temps with that speed, then i looked at values and you opened HWINFO after tests were done. CPU-Z window doesn't even match the multiplier of HWINFO 

My sticks always at 40-46 when under load.


----------



## CJMitsuki

HolyFist said:


> nick name said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well here is something I've never, absolutely ever done before. I just passed TM5 1usmus profile @ 3700MHz. I've been kinda stable @ 3666MHz before and then lost it, but never close to passing anything @ 3700MHz. So this is fun. Remember that when looking at the speed in Ryzen Timing Checker that it doesn't show the speed, but the mem clock ratio which then also has to be multiplied against BCLK. And my BCLK is at 101 for this test.
> 
> 
> 
> I was going to ask how you have that RAM temps with that speed, then i looked at values and you opened HWINFO after tests were done. CPU-Z window doesn't even match the multiplier of HWINFO /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> My sticks always at 40-46 when under load.
Click to expand...

Temps above 35c start reducing stability by a great deal. You should get a fan like an 80mm or something and secure it so it’s blowing directly on the sticks all the time and pretty close to the sticks with a decent fan speed. That will help out tons.


----------



## Ramad

RAM is manufactured to withstand temperature up to 95C (this is made clear in every RAM die data sheet). If the user already having instability at 35C then there is something wrong with the timings used. Chocking the RAM by reducing tRFC to super low timings is a way of asking for instability when the RAM dies starts to heat up. I would rather trade stability for very low tight timings that may or may not translate to 1 frame in a game.


----------



## crakej

Ramad said:


> RAM is manufactured to withstand temperature up to 95C (this is made clear in every RAM die data sheet). If the user already having instability at 35C then there is something wrong with the timings used. Chocking the RAM by reducing tRFC to super low timings is a way of asking for instability when the RAM dies starts to heat up. I would rather trade stability for very low tight timings that may or may not translate to 1 frame in a game.


I've always thought ram should be able to run fine at 50+ degrees.... so cooling the ram is just allowing OCs that probably aren't really doing your ram any good. Thank you for reminding us of this!


----------



## CJMitsuki

Ramad said:


> RAM is manufactured to withstand temperature up to 95C (this is made clear in every RAM die data sheet). If the user already having instability at 35C then there is something wrong with the timings used. Chocking the RAM by reducing tRFC to super low timings is a way of asking for instability when the RAM dies starts to heat up. I would rather trade stability for very low tight timings that may or may not translate to 1 frame in a game.


Where in that post did it mention anything about 35c being the max temps it could withstand. I remember stating the fact that stability will be greatly reduced about 35c. Also, why is everything about FPS? Of course you aren’t going to gain FPS. The faster the Ram the faster the cpu can process information. Besides, fps isn’t even the most important factor when it comes to a good smooth gaming experience as that would be frametimes which see a great deal of benefit from higher Ram frequencies in any game that uses the cpu. That’s all game to an extent and the more a game relies on the CPU the more these frametimes will be improved. I’ve literally been overclocking memory on Ryzen an average 4 or more hours daily since Ryzen 1 launched. I’ve paid a great deal of attention to it. Many, including @1usmus how important those temps are to a good DRAM overclock. If you think having the ram at 80c will yield anything but terrible efficiency then you are mistaken as anything that uses conductors and electrical signals loses efficiency the warmer it gets. How important are these delicate signals in DRAM? Well, the slightest interference is likely to cause errors. So, you run your ram as hot as you want within JEDEC standards since they have all the right information but I’m going to keep mine nice and cool just like many know to do to get best performance out of your ram. Btw, the only time something is wrong with timings is when errors occur. Just to reiterate, if you run your ram above 35c stability will be greatly reduced and the higher the temps climb the more stability will drop as with pretty much any part of your machine. Cpu loses stability the hotter it gets, VRMs become less efficient the hotter they get, etc. When we stop using electrical signals in computing is probably when this will cease to be true. Until then, pretty much any component in the system that relies on electrical signals with behave this way.


----------



## CJMitsuki

crakej said:


> Ramad said:
> 
> 
> 
> RAM is manufactured to withstand temperature up to 95C (this is made clear in every RAM die data sheet). If the user already having instability at 35C then there is something wrong with the timings used. Chocking the RAM by reducing tRFC to super low timings is a way of asking for instability when the RAM dies starts to heat up. I would rather trade stability for very low tight timings that may or may not translate to 1 frame in a game.
> 
> 
> 
> I've always thought ram should be able to run fine at 50+ degrees.... so cooling the ram is just allowing OCs that probably aren't really doing your ram any good. Thank you for reminding us of this!
Click to expand...

It can run fine at that temp just like a cpu can run fine up to TJMaxx, that doesn’t mean you should run it at that temp. It will yield horrible efficiency. Otherwise why is there an uplift in performance on a cpu as you reduce temps? Electrical signals and voltages travel with less resistance. Meaning you can use less voltage and the signals are less likely degrade.


----------



## ComansoRowlett

Well yeah RAM can run fine at high temps, but I know certain IC's run best at certain temperatures e.g. B-die runs absolute best at around 20C and you lose scaling going below or above (especially below, into sub-ambient especially) so CJMitsuki is correct, the higher the temps the worse the sticks will clock, etc. You won't notice much loss until you start getting to the higher end again as CJ says 35C+ is when you'll notice slight scale loss but it really is IC/silicon dependent, you're much more likely to see some moderate scaling loss above the 50C+ range.


----------



## crakej

CJMitsuki said:


> It can run fine at that temp just like a cpu can run fine up to TJMaxx, that doesn’t mean you should run it at that temp. It will yield horrible efficiency. Otherwise why is there an uplift in performance on a cpu as you reduce temps? Electrical signals and voltages travel with less resistance. Meaning you can use less voltage and the signals are less likely degrade.


This is true, but I never experienced this problem until now. It's not like running cpu at TJMaxx though as max temp quoted for DDR4 is usually something like 85 degrees max but I was starting to see problems at 40 degrees+ - while running really tight timings at speeds we've not previously been able to achieve. My ram is specced to 4266MTs (yes, I know I can't expect that on Zen....yet) so was not expecting those temps to be too high considering i'm not running my ram anywhere near it's specced speed, but with much tighter timings than specced which does = more temp.


----------



## CJMitsuki

crakej said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> It can run fine at that temp just like a cpu can run fine up to TJMaxx, that doesn’t mean you should run it at that temp. It will yield horrible efficiency. Otherwise why is there an uplift in performance on a cpu as you reduce temps? Electrical signals and voltages travel with less resistance. Meaning you can use less voltage and the signals are less likely degrade.
> 
> 
> 
> This is true, but I never experienced this problem until now. It's not like running cpu at TJMaxx though as max temp quoted for DDR4 is usually something like 85 degrees max but I was starting to see problems at 40 degrees+ - while running really tight timings at speeds we've not previously been able to achieve. My ram is specced to 4266MTs (yes, I know I can't expect that on Zen....yet) so was not expecting those temps to be too high considering i'm not running my ram anywhere near it's specced speed, but with much tighter timings than specced which = more temp.
Click to expand...

It will happen anytime you are pushing the absolute maximum edge of stability. One parameter sways toward inefficiency then it will fall like a house of cards. Overclocks on the edge are fragile and only really meant for benching. I can stabilize 3600c12 but it needs a lot of voltage and cold temps. I bench with it then swap back.


----------



## crakej

CJMitsuki said:


> It will happen anytime you are pushing the absolute maximum edge of stability. One parameter sways toward inefficiency then it will fall like a house of cards. Overclocks on the edge are fragile and only really meant for benching. I can stabilize 3600c12 but it needs a lot of voltage and cold temps. I bench with it then swap back.


Wow - CL12 @ 3600? My machine would never boot! Impressive even if you can't use it 24/7!


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Nice result!
> 
> When you say you had 3666 stable then lost it, what happened?


I'm not really sure what happened (it was several BIOS versions ago), but now with Geardown mode enabled I am overnight stable at 3666 again. Before I always had Geardown mode disabled, but I think I am gonna keep it on for the extra stability. I've also been able to run lower SOC voltages with it enabled so that's nice too. 

I was gonna test 3700 overnight, but its looser timings got worse results in Geekbench 4 when compared to 3666. I am gonna try to see how tight I can get 3700 or perhaps try 3740 with a 100 BCLK.


----------



## nick name

HolyFist said:


> I was going to ask how you have that RAM temps with that speed, then i looked at values and you opened HWINFO after tests were done. CPU-Z window doesn't even match the multiplier of HWINFO
> 
> My sticks always at 40-46 when under load.


CPU-Z is showing the multiplier live and it usually shows the fastest core I believe. I actually had HWiNFO open during the test so the max RAM temp it shows was from during the test. And I cool my RAM by placing a 120mm fan on top of my GPU pointed at my RAM sticks. Keeps them much cooler than without. Oh and my case is also an open air case.


----------



## nick name

Ayyy 3740 (3733) passed TM5.


----------



## Ramad

CJMitsuki said:


> Where in that post did it mention anything about 35c being the max temps it could withstand. I remember stating the fact that stability will be greatly reduced about 35c.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Also, why is everything about FPS? Of course you aren’t going to gain FPS. The faster the Ram the faster the cpu can process information. Besides, fps isn’t even the most important factor when it comes to a good smooth gaming experience as that would be frametimes which see a great deal of benefit from higher Ram frequencies in any game that uses the cpu. That’s all game to an extent and the more a game relies on the CPU the more these frametimes will be improved. I’ve literally been overclocking memory on Ryzen an average 4 or more hours daily since Ryzen 1 launched. I’ve paid a great deal of attention to it. Many, including @1usmus how important those temps are to a good DRAM overclock. If you think having the ram at 80c will yield anything but terrible efficiency then you are mistaken as anything that uses conductors and electrical signals loses efficiency the warmer it gets. How important are these delicate signals in DRAM? Well, the slightest interference is likely to cause errors. So, you run your ram as hot as you want within JEDEC standards since they have all the right information but I’m going to keep mine nice and cool just like many know to do to get best performance out of your ram. Btw, the only time something is wrong with timings is when errors occur. Just to reiterate, if you run your ram above 35c stability will be greatly reduced and the higher the temps climb the more stability will drop as with pretty much any part of your machine. Cpu loses stability the hotter it gets, VRMs become less efficient the hotter they get, etc.
> 
> 
> When we stop using electrical signals in computing is probably when this will cease to be true. Until then, pretty much any component in the system that relies on electrical signals with behave this way.


First of all, you may want to hit "Enter" a few time in a post to make it readable before the reader gets headache when reading such a packed sets of sentences, this is not sarcasm nor it's a joke. I'm serious, with respect.

I'm not a novice PC user and I know the impact of generated heat on the components inside a PC. _"stability will be greatly reduced about 35c"_ is not a fact, that is statement which is opposite the *fact* that RAM operating temperature is up to 95C. 

If RAM stability starts declining already when reaching 36% of operating temperature (35C) then it' because voltage is low so RAM cells are not charged as they should or timing are too tight that commands can't meet used deadlines (delays), because heat gets dies to expand, which means that the lanes are getting longer (atoms are getting further away from each other for electrons to make the jumps from an atom to the next, means higher resistance) for electrons (signals) to reach from A to B before the deadlines (delays) expires. If the right delays are used then heat will not be an issue, and when a fan is used then it's a way of masking the fact that the RAM is not stable at used timings.

Why frames? Well, I did build my PC to play games, brows the net,, see youtube videos...etc. I did not buy it to test RAM and CPU everyday, so my opinion is: it is a waste of time if tuning and re-tuning does not result a better experience in my day to day PC usage. 

What I meant with this post is: _"stability will be greatly reduced about 35c"_ is your opinion which I respect, but this is not a fact.


----------



## Syldon

Ramad said:


> What I meant with this post is: _"stability will be greatly reduced about 35c"_ is your opinion which I respect, but this is not a fact.



A lot of people here bought memory coolers precisely because of correlation between hitting 40 degrees centigrade and stability. Keeping memory below the 40c made an impact on stability as reported by many here, which in turn led to more posting 3466 as opposed to 3333. Some went even higher and posted 3533s.

Dram is designed to higher temps than 40c, but the CH7 has issues with temps beyond a certain point, which turn affect stability with +speed. 

When I posted about the effect of a memory fan, Lordz posted that this had already been mentioned by 1smus on the CH6 post.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Ramad said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Where in that post did it mention anything about 35c being the max temps it could withstand. I remember stating the fact that stability will be greatly reduced about 35c.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Also, why is everything about FPS? Of course you aren’t going to gain FPS. The faster the Ram the faster the cpu can process information. Besides, fps isn’t even the most important factor when it comes to a good smooth gaming experience as that would be frametimes which see a great deal of benefit from higher Ram frequencies in any game that uses the cpu. That’s all game to an extent and the more a game relies on the CPU the more these frametimes will be improved. I’ve literally been overclocking memory on Ryzen an average 4 or more hours daily since Ryzen 1 launched. I’ve paid a great deal of attention to it. Many, including @1usmus how important those temps are to a good DRAM overclock. If you think having the ram at 80c will yield anything but terrible efficiency then you are mistaken as anything that uses conductors and electrical signals loses efficiency the warmer it gets. How important are these delicate signals in DRAM? Well, the slightest interference is likely to cause errors. So, you run your ram as hot as you want within JEDEC standards since they have all the right information but I’m going to keep mine nice and cool just like many know to do to get best performance out of your ram. Btw, the only time something is wrong with timings is when errors occur. Just to reiterate, if you run your ram above 35c stability will be greatly reduced and the higher the temps climb the more stability will drop as with pretty much any part of your machine. Cpu loses stability the hotter it gets, VRMs become less efficient the hotter they get, etc.
> 
> 
> When we stop using electrical signals in computing is probably when this will cease to be true. Until then, pretty much any component in the system that relies on electrical signals with behave this way.
> 
> 
> 
> First of all, you may want to hit "Enter" a few time in a post to make it readable before the reader gets headache when reading such a packed sets of sentences, this is not sarcasm nor it's a joke. I'm serious, with respect.
> 
> I'm not a novice PC user and I know the impact of generated heat on the components inside a PC. _"stability will be greatly reduced about 35c"_ is not a fact, that is statement which is opposite the *fact* that RAM operating temperature is up to 95C.
> 
> If RAM stability starts declining already when reaching 36% of operating temperature (35C) then it' because voltage is low so RAM cells are not charged as they should or timing are too tight that commands can't meet used deadlines (delays), because heat gets dies to expand, which means that the lanes are getting longer (atoms are getting further away from each other for electrons to make the jumps from an atom to the next, means higher resistance) for electrons (signals) to reach from A to B before the deadlines (delays) expires. If the right delays are used then heat will not be an issue, and when a fan is used then it's a way of masking the fact that the RAM is not stable at used timings.
> 
> Why frames? Well, I did build my PC to play games, brows the net,, see youtube videos...etc. I did not buy it to test RAM and CPU everyday, so my opinion is: it is a waste of time if tuning and re-tuning does not result a better experience in my day to day PC usage.
> 
> What I meant with this post is: _"stability will be greatly reduced about 35c"_ is your opinion which I respect, but this is not a fact.
Click to expand...

Considering I’m not using a keyboard sitting at my desk at home I don’t really care to hit enter a few times to appease the grammar gestapo that love to look down and cast insult upon the commoners. So with all due respect, I can read it and you are welcome to skip over it if you get headaches. I’m not entitled to have my post read by anyone. 
If you would’ve read into what I said about FPS I was saying that FPS isn’t what makes gameplay more smooth. A good frametime is much more important to maintain rather than a high frame rate. Memory frequency doesn’t really contribute to the FPS but frametimes are a different story as higher memory frequencies can solve microstutter problems as well as it’s what makes everything “buttery smooth”. You can be running at 144hz all day but if your frametimes are trash then so are those frames. I’d rather run 40fps at great frametimes than at 144 with trash frametimes. This comes increasingly true as games leverage more of the cpu.
Regarding my statement on stability, after I have tested hundreds of hours on this platform nearly everday for the past 2 years opinion gave way to fact. Not only is it behavior that I observe but many others. Show me instances where you have users running their dimms stable at 80c with decent timings. Also, when did taking a fan to get a higher overclock become wrong on Overclock.net? Are you sure you’re in the right forum? Read through the Ryzen DRAM thread and you’ll see various instances backing up what you have considered my opinion. What you are saying is something no one disputed which is that the ICs can run up to 95c. Well, of course they can, but does this mean they should be ran at those temps? Of course not. To reach those temps you would not only have to have horrible airflow in the case but you’d have to be running them at 1.7v+. Even when I’m running mine at 1.7v I have never went over 50c. Provide me with evidence of a decently performing Ryzen memory OC fully stable at those temps on the dimms or just because Samsung said that the dies won’t be damaged at those temps being misconstrued as what normal operating temps are. I’d be impressed if you could find any instances of a Ryzen memory overclock at that temp or anywhere near it running stable with good timings and comparing it to the same dimms at ambient.


----------



## CJMitsuki

crakej said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> It will happen anytime you are pushing the absolute maximum edge of stability. One parameter sways toward inefficiency then it will fall like a house of cards. Overclocks on the edge are fragile and only really meant for benching. I can stabilize 3600c12 but it needs a lot of voltage and cold temps. I bench with it then swap back.
> 
> 
> 
> Wow - CL12 @ 3600? My machine would never boot! Impressive even if you can't use it 24/7!
Click to expand...

You could boot, just hit it with 1.7v and dial in [email protected] and it will boot. Lol


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> You could boot, just hit it with 1.7v and dial in [email protected] and it will boot. Lol


I've actually tried it and couldn't get it to work. However, I haven't tried when I have a window open and the room cold. Might have to give it a go next time I get some cold weather.


----------



## Singularity48

Well, 1.025v SOC and 1.47v DRAM/Boot threw 2 errors overnight, one at 700% and the next at 2100%, DIMM temps maxed at 38c (screenshot is overnight run). 1.1v SOC and 1.49v DRAM overnight test I did before threw one error, but the test also didn't last as long so who knows. I'll try 1.025v SOC and 1.48v DRAM tonight and see if that fixes anything.


----------



## Ramad

Syldon said:


> A lot of people here bought memory coolers precisely because of correlation between hitting 40 degrees centigrade and stability. Keeping memory below the 40c made an impact on stability as reported by many here, which in turn led to more posting 3466 as opposed to 3333. Some went even higher and posted 3533s.
> 
> Dram is designed to higher temps than 40c, but the CH7 has issues with temps beyond a certain point, which turn affect stability with +speed.
> 
> When I posted about the effect of a memory fan, Lordz posted that this had already been mentioned by 1smus on the CH6 post.


I'm not saying that you must not use a fan, by all means please do, but saying that memory loses stability greatly at 35C is not correct. 



CJMitsuki said:


> Considering I’m not using a keyboard sitting at my desk at home I don’t really care to hit enter a few times to appease the grammar gestapo that love to look down and cast insult upon the commoners. So with all due respect, I can read it and you are welcome to skip over it if you get headaches. I’m not entitled to have my post read by anyone.
> If you would’ve read into what I said about FPS I was saying that FPS isn’t what makes gameplay more smooth. A good frametime is much more important to maintain rather than a high frame rate. Memory frequency doesn’t really contribute to the FPS but frametimes are a different story as higher memory frequencies can solve microstutter problems as well as it’s what makes everything “buttery smooth”. You can be running at 144hz all day but if your frametimes are trash then so are those frames. I’d rather run 40fps at great frametimes than at 144 with trash frametimes. This comes increasingly true as games leverage more of the cpu.
> Regarding my statement on stability, after I have tested hundreds of hours on this platform nearly everday for the past 2 years opinion gave way to fact. Not only is it behavior that I observe but many others. Show me instances where you have users running their dimms stable at 80c with decent timings. Also, when did taking a fan to get a higher overclock become wrong on Overclock.net? Are you sure you’re in the right forum? Read through the Ryzen DRAM thread and you’ll see various instances backing up what you have considered my opinion. What you are saying is something no one disputed which is that the ICs can run up to 95c. Well, of course they can, but does this mean they should be ran at those temps? Of course not. To reach those temps you would not only have to have horrible airflow in the case but you’d have to be running them at 1.7v+. Even when I’m running mine at 1.7v I have never went over 50c. Provide me with evidence of a decently performing Ryzen memory OC fully stable at those temps on the dimms or just because Samsung said that the dies won’t be damaged at those temps being misconstrued as what normal operating temps are. I’d be impressed if you could find any instances of a Ryzen memory overclock at that temp or anywhere near it running stable with good timings and comparing it to the same dimms at ambient.


I did not catch much of your post before getting dizzy. My final word is that I trust RAM manufacturers when they write in every data sheet that *"Operating Temperature: 0<T<95"*. So if my RAM is not stable in this interval then I will loosen the timings or increase the RAM voltage or both. Good luck.


----------



## wingman99

Ramad said:


> I'm not saying that you must not use a fan, by all means please do, but saying that memory loses stability greatly at 35C is not correct.
> 
> 
> 
> I did not catch much of your post before getting dizzy. My final word is that I trust RAM manufacturers when they write in every data sheet that *"Operating Temperature: 0<T<95"*. So if my RAM is not stable in this interval then I will loosen the timings or increase the RAM voltage or both. Good luck.


I agree memory temperatures are not a stability problem when used with factory heat sinks.


----------



## Syldon

Ramad said:


> I'm not saying that you must not use a fan, by all means please do, but saying that memory loses stability greatly at 35C is not correct.



https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-161.html#post27464590


https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-164.html#post27465178


https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-166.html#post27465774


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Chill guys. 

This conversation is getting overly heated over nothing, please keep it civil. No need for name calling or anything of that sort. Feel free to disagree, but lets all do it politely. 

Thanks,
E


----------



## gupsterg

2700X 1835 PGS
C7HWIFI UEFI 1103

PE: Default PBO: Enabled

The Stilt 3466MHz Timings @ 3533MHz, system setup as in photo. The Ripjaw V when screenie taken room ambient ~17C, Trident Z ~16C. Trident Z fail to even POST with same settings as Ripjaw V.



Spoiler












The 120mm fan blowing on RAM, is an Arctic Cooling F12 PWM, this does not spin up much at all.

*2 dimms from F4-3200C14Q-32GVK*









*2 dimms from F4-3200C14Q-32GTZSW*











The Ripjaw V also seem to do 3600MHz C15 1T (below is best result so far manually stopped), so far not even had a POST to OS with Trident Z on same MHz/Timings.



Spoiler


----------



## HolyFist

CJMitsuki said:


> Temps above 35c start reducing stability by a great deal. You should get a fan like an 80mm or something and secure it so it’s blowing directly on the sticks all the time and pretty close to the sticks with a decent fan speed. That will help out tons.


I have a 140 fan above it blowing towards them but the fan is kinda weak, is the one that comes with the NZXT H440, it covers like half the CPU pump (not that it matters) and the RAM, and i get up to 46ºC when i do Memtest at least 100%, this happens with VSOC at 1.05 and 1.1 is the same as at 3466MHz, right now it hit 37.8ºC on FFXIV which hardly taxes (uptime of 4h+)

I've tried to actually look for a fan cooling fan/kit thing but seems hard to find on EU there's the Corsair ones but they dont seem to be compatible with my sticks.


----------



## VPII

I need some advice.... I got a new set of G-Skill 3200 FlareX basically F4-3200C14D-16GFX.

This is the first set I was able to load the Stilt 3466 preset with the CL14 timings. It booted up without an issue but I saw on here that people run Testmem 5 to test the memory. Now I got an error pretty quickly and I'd like to find a means to get 3466 stable. I tested the 3333 preset and it passed Testmem 5 without a hiccup but I'd like to try and see if I could get more out of this memory. Any advice would be highly appreciated.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I'm not really sure what happened (it was several BIOS versions ago), but now with Geardown mode enabled I am overnight stable at 3666 again. Before I always had Geardown mode disabled, but I think I am gonna keep it on for the extra stability. I've also been able to run lower SOC voltages with it enabled so that's nice too.
> 
> I was gonna test 3700 overnight, but its looser timings got worse results in Geekbench 4 when compared to 3666. I am gonna try to see how tight I can get 3700 or perhaps try 3740 with a 100 BCLK.


I have to enable geardown as well. Thanks for sharing the screenie!


----------



## VPII

VPII said:


> I need some advice.... I got a new set of G-Skill 3200 FlareX basically F4-3200C14D-16GFX.
> 
> This is the first set I was able to load the Stilt 3466 preset with the CL14 timings. It booted up without an issue but I saw on here that people run Testmem 5 to test the memory. Now I got an error pretty quickly and I'd like to find a means to get 3466 stable. I tested the 3333 preset and it passed Testmem 5 without a hiccup but I'd like to try and see if I could get more out of this memory. Any advice would be highly appreciated.


Okay I found that 3466 is stable as per testmem 5 if my cpu is running stock standard so I need more vcore at 4.256ghz than 1.325 I set.


----------



## crakej

New Bios available from ASUS site:

ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO BIOS 1201
Improve system performance.
Add CPU PCIe Lanes Unlocked item in BIOS when plugging in AMD Athlon 2XX series processors.

Will check it out when i'm home soon.


----------



## westk

Only WIFI?


----------



## HolyFist

*Crosshair VII Hero WIFI BIOS 1201:* https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-1201.zip

*Crosshair VII Hero BIOS 1201:* https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...VII-HERO/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-1201.zip

Doesn't show up yet on support page, btw.

Edit: Seems to show up on page for Windows 10 32-bit and Windows 7 page, Windows 10 64-bit seems to be missing.


----------



## crakej

westk said:


> Only WIFI?


File is still propagating - non WiFi is here:-

https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO/HelpDesk_Download/

Select Windows 10

So far I have had big problems with this update, but it could have been a corrupt download, I will find out shortly. Was stopping me from booting saying 'new CPU detected or fTPM corrupt' Reset? Y/N?

It's possible the file got corrupted on it's way to my usb stick so am checking now.

Edit: File was CORRUPT - *all working properly now.*


----------



## nick name

HolyFist said:


> I have a 140 fan above it blowing towards them but the fan is kinda weak, is the one that comes with the NZXT H440, it covers like half the CPU pump (not that it matters) and the RAM, and i get up to 46ºC when i do Memtest at least 100%, this happens with VSOC at 1.05 and 1.1 is the same as at 3466MHz, right now it hit 37.8ºC on FFXIV which hardly taxes (uptime of 4h+)
> 
> I've tried to actually look for a fan cooling fan/kit thing but seems hard to find on EU there's the Corsair ones but they dont seem to be compatible with my sticks.


I've looked at lots of options for purpose built fan coolers, but found that for the price versus performance a fan sitting on my GPU serves best. Especially when considering that smaller fans make a more annoying noise when running fast and they don't really move that much air. You can spend $15 on a good fan that moves a lot of air and stays reasonably quiet versus the higher prices of an entire kit.

Also, I think it was @CJMitsuki that crafted his own kit with GPU fans. Perhaps he can share his design as it looks pretty solid.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> File is still propagating - non WiFi is here:-
> 
> https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO/HelpDesk_Download/
> 
> Select Windows 10
> 
> So far I have had big problems with this update, but it could have been a corrupt download, I will find out shortly. Was stopping me from booting saying 'new CPU detected or fTPM corrupt' Reset? Y/N?
> 
> It's possible the file got corrupted on it's way to my usb stick so am checking now.


Oh noes. Please let us know what you find. I am always eager to try out a new BIOS. I am bummed that we don't have someone to share the beta BIOS with us anymore.


----------



## westk

I always load new default values with a new BIOS. Is a good practice. Also you have to delete old secure boot keys and create new ones.


----------



## crakej

OK guys -* the update is OK* - I must have had corrupt file as all is working as expected.

Loading profiles from prev bios works, but 1st time I tried one of them I got code F9 and repeating 1 long, 2 short beeps until I power-cycled the mains - then my OC didn't work...... as expected


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Oh noes. Please let us know what you find. I am always eager to try out a new BIOS. I am bummed that we don't have someone to share the beta BIOS with us anymore.


I love trying out betas as well - maybe we should ask Silent Scone....

Good to have this to try out over the weekend - can I get my speeds back up to 3533+? Not with my old profiles, that's for sure.

I *ALWAYS* allow bios to boot properly with default settings after update


----------



## nick name

I am running 1201 now and it still seems that when either saving a BIOS profile to USB or loading the profile it isn't ever completely done. There are always a setting or two that either failed to save correctly or are not loading properly.


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> HolyFist said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have a 140 fan above it blowing towards them but the fan is kinda weak, is the one that comes with the NZXT H440, it covers like half the CPU pump (not that it matters) and the RAM, and i get up to 46ºC when i do Memtest at least 100%, this happens with VSOC at 1.05 and 1.1 is the same as at 3466MHz, right now it hit 37.8ºC on FFXIV which hardly taxes (uptime of 4h+)
> 
> I've tried to actually look for a fan cooling fan/kit thing but seems hard to find on EU there's the Corsair ones but they dont seem to be compatible with my sticks.
> 
> 
> 
> I've looked at lots of options for purpose built fan coolers, but found that for the price versus performance a fan sitting on my GPU serves best. Especially when considering that smaller fans make a more annoying noise when running fast and they don't really move that much air. You can spend $15 on a good fan that moves a lot of air and stays reasonably quiet versus the higher prices of an entire kit.
> 
> Also, I think it was @CJMitsuki that crafted his own kit with GPU fans. Perhaps he can share his design as it looks pretty solid.
Click to expand...

I just took the two fans off of an old gtx660 and those along with pretty much any gpu fans mount to the fins of the cooler with three small screws in a triangular pattern so I removed the fans along with the wiring not cutting any wires and I took some aviation snips for cutting thin sheet metal and cut an old hard drive cage I removed from my Corsair h500r case or whatever model it is and fashioned a bracket that the fans could mount to using the same holes in that triangular pattern. I test fitted them and marked the screw holes for drilling with a small drill bit and also traced around and cut off any excess metal that would keep air from hitting the dimms. Then I made two smaller brackets that would be secured to the fan bracket and these were bent in a “U” shape except the there were no round parts of the “U”. Now this would make 4 legs point downward to the dimms. I tridentZ heatsinks they have places that you can essentially wedge a thin piece of metal in and they will hold secure providing you put a thin layer of electrical tape on the legs to make them just fat enough and rubbery so they wedge nicely into those slots holding everything in place. I have my case sealed to it’s air source and I’m not home yet but I will take the cooler out and show you how I made it. It’s fairly simple in design. If you want to really get simple and cheap, just use zip ties and mount a fan directly to the heatsinks. Being that even with a fan on it you seem to get near 50c raises questions though. How is your cases airflow set up because if two fans airstreams are crossing it will cause dead spots and turbulence in the case which will cause hot spots in various areas. I sealed the rear of my cases completely and pull in air from the front and side and it exits the top. This forces the air coming in the side to hit the gpu and go up instead of out the back and the air flows through the fins better. Also the fans on the front which are also attached to the radiator have to exit through the top making a ton of air pass directly over the ram and the two small fans push the air straight down in between the ram where the biggest dead spot is. Also I’m using the RL06 which is one of the best cases for airlfow per Gamers Nexus and is less than 100$ and I have 10 noctuas in it as well as a 200mm noctua on my window pushing outside air into the case and the top of the case is sealed and routed to flow right back out of the same window.


----------



## Hale59

*Asus Crosshair VII WiFi problems during OC*

Hello People

Happy New Year

I got into some problems during OC. Before anything else, here are my specs:
- Mobo: Asus Crosshair VII WiFi
- CPU: Ryzen 5 2600X with Corsair H105
- Drive: Samsung MZ-V7E250BW 970 EVO 250GB NVMe M.2 2280 PCI-Express 3.0 x4 Solid State Drive
- GPU: GTX 1080Ti with wateblock and EK-Predator 240
- Ram: G,Skill F4-3200C14D-16GFX (DDR4-3200 8GBx2
- PSU: Corsair AX 860i. 
- W10 Pro 64
- No chassis. Open Air.

Addittional info: Yesterday or the day before I installed: AMD Chipset Driver V18.40.02 for Windows Win10 64bit. I mention this because sometime my monitor flickered a few a couple of times but I thought it was my GPU.
Additional info (Bios, etc) can be obtained on the attached photos A, B and C.
Yesterday I did a bit of OC. It was late and I stopped it and went to read more info regarding my hardware.
As I was surfing, the screen started flickering like mad, and I rebooted the system because I wanted to set to default factory settings. Bios was flickering all over and I couldn't do bugger all. Rebooted again but keyboard and mouse was not recognized (mouse plugged into keyboard). Switched off and crawled into bed.

This morning it was doing the same. Switched off, uninstalled all components, including battery. After 15, installed everything again and the problem persisted.
Onboard yellow/green led light on. I thought my M.2 is corrupted.
Removed it and installed a clean 850 Pro in order to install bootable W1 on a USB. Rebooted, screen detects the new SSD and USB, but keyboard and mouse don't show up.
Mouse plugged directly into a mobo usb slot and it was detected. Tried to slot it usb keyboard into other mobos usb slots, but no avail. onboard Boot led light on all the time. See photos attached D, E and F.

The M.2 is not detected. Onboard led BOOT light is on.
Firstly I thought the M.2 is corrupted. Which can be true.
Or the Mobo became faulty. Because keyboard isn't detected.

All the hardware is under warranty.
RMA the M.2? But it can be faulty Mobo.
I am inclined to RMA the mobo.
I don't think it has nothing to do with CPU.

Can someone looks into this and give some hints please. I am not technical at all.


----------



## crakej

Note to self:

When a well tested OC fails suddenly, remember it is just as likely, if not more, that the problem is mechanical in nature and can be fixed simply by (for example) *re-seating the ram!*

I've been meaning to check, but with 3200 still working at a good speed I just didn't consider that the dimm might not be quite in properly.

I can now resume testing 3600+ but will have no idea if it's different to 1103

I spent ages checking my CPU OC on 1103 earlier - still can't believe how much less power i'm needing to maintain OC. Will report back later after seeing how far this ram OC will now go! For me 3533 is only taking 1.395v on the dram so hopefully I can go a bit further


----------



## westk

Putting them in another bank(S)


----------



## gupsterg

Removed 2x F4-3200C14-8GTZSW, fitted 2x F4-3200C14-8GVK.

Used Flashback to apply UEFI 1201.

Setup "Base Profile", setup "PBOE 3533S", no issues on either. Running RT on warm POST currently, below is 1st POST on profile; tested to 2500%, same settings as UEFI 1002, 1103.



Spoiler














On the skin no essential firmware changes.



Spoiler














Comparing settings txts no real changes either.



Spoiler




View attachment 1103_WC_PBO_3533S_setting.txt


View attachment 1201_PBOE_3533S_setting.txt




Keen eyed may note I using CAD Bus 24 24 24 24 vs 20 20 20 20 in a lot of my shares for same HW combo. A lot of repeat/rinse testing had shown it was more ideal than initial all 20 20 20 20 tested (applies to all UEFIs now).


----------



## crakej

westk said:


> Putting them in another bank(S)


Nope, didn't even need to do that (doesn't work for me anyway) - literally just popped them up and snapped them back in - OC fully restored! Going to stop for tonight and have a :drink: and get some rest.

Very frustrating really as I've wasted so many days! Oh well, nothin I can do about that.

Will get back to 3666 tomorrow, but initial testing shows I probably need to increase SoC at this point - not needed to change it for ages! 0.994v SVI TFN currently, which is just over 1.0 in the bios.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Nope, didn't even need to do that (doesn't work for me anyway) - literally just popped them up and snapped them back in - OC fully restored! Going to stop for tonight and have a :drink: and get some rest.
> 
> Very frustrating really as I've wasted so many days! Oh well, nothin I can do about that.
> 
> Will get back to 3666 tomorrow, but initial testing shows I probably need to increase SoC at this point - not needed to change it for ages! 0.994v SVI TFN currently, which is just over 1.0 in the bios.


With Geardown enabled I can use 1.0V for SOC at 3600 and am using 1.025V SOC for my stable 3666 setting. And at 3740 I am using 1.05V.


----------



## Syldon

Something weird going on with GDM. I cant run with it disabled on 3466. Something that I have done for a very long time. I am trying some of the higher strap to see if there is a gain on this revision, but so far it is looking not very promising for me.


----------



## crakej

Syldon said:


> Something weird going on with GDM. I cant run with it disabled on 3466. Something that I have done for a very long time. I am trying some of the higher strap to see if there is a gain on this revision, but so far it is looking not very promising for me.


Lots of us have to use GDM=ON or we casn't run these speeds - I need it with everything above 3200


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> With Geardown enabled I can use 1.0V for SOC at 3600 and am using 1.025V SOC for my stable 3666 setting. And at 3740 I am using 1.05V.


Hmmm.....might give it a quick go before vodka goes to my head... drinking up the xmas leftovers 

Edit: Thanks nick name - up and running at 3666 SoC 1.025v ram is 1.450v - seems stable but will have to wait to test! not any faster than 3600 so far.


----------



## The Sandman

gupsterg said:


> Removed 2x F4-3200C14-8GTZSW, fitted 2x F4-3200C14-8GVK.
> 
> Used Flashback to apply UEFI 1201.
> 
> Setup "Base Profile", setup "PBOE 3533S", no issues on either. Running RT on warm POST currently, below is 1st POST on profile; tested to 2500%, same settings as UEFI 1002, 1103.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 243606
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On the skin no essential firmware changes.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 243608
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Comparing settings txts no real changes either.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 243610
> 
> 
> View attachment 243612
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Keen eyed may note I using CAD Bus 24 24 24 24 vs 20 20 20 20 in a lot of my shares for same HW combo. A lot of repeat/rinse testing had shown it was more ideal than initial all 20 20 20 20 tested (applies to all UEFIs now).



Always interesting! Thanks man.
Curious what AIDA looks like at for you at 3533.


----------



## nick name

In an interesting development. I hadn't been familiar with POST code F9 until recent mentions here, but it appears that I now have some personal experience with it. It may be purely coincidental, but after updating my BIOS to the latest 1201 I have run into POST code F9 twice. My run-ins have been when pushing RAM timings, however, it wasn't ever observed when on BIOS 1103 so the correlation seems relevant. The code I saw when RAM failed to POST was 05 so perhaps it isn't a problem with the newest BIOS and instead an increased usefulness of POST codes with this newest BIOS.


----------



## VPII

crakej said:


> Lots of us have to use GDM=ON or we casn't run these speeds - I need it with everything above 3200


Hi crakej, so with my old TridentZ memory failing, well one of the sticks I picked up a new set of FlareX which actually has the AMD compatible sticker on it... ha ha ha. Well now everything seems to work. I tested the memory with the 3466 Stilt preset. It boots up with the CL14 preset but it is not stable when I test it with Testmem 5. When I tried it with the Stilt 3466 - CL15 it worked and passed Testmem 5 without an issue if the cpu is running stock but this is with GD disabled. Any overclock will result in an error in the 3rd or 4th cycle. I have not tried the memory with the Stilt 3600 preset but will do so going forward as it is faster even at 2T with GD disabled.


----------



## VPII

I can really do with some advice.... I noticed that my memory latency cache as well as memory has increased going with the new "AMD compatible" memory. It is clear when running Cinebench 15R when my result with the cpu at 4.256ghz is about 100+ lower than before. I'm not sure what I need to work on to improve latencies. Even when I run the memory 3466 CL15 it is lower by a lot. System is running well, but it is frustrating when I've seen so much better before. 

Memory was:

G-Skill TridentZ - F4-3200C14D-16GTZR

Memory now:

G-Skill FlareX - F4-3200C14D-16GFX

At 3600 memory speed Stilt preset 2T GD disabled I would get below 60 for memory latency with previous set, now 64 the lowest. L1 about 0.9 now 1 or 1.1, L2 was 2.9 now 3 to 3.1 and L3 was 8.8 now 9.4 to 9.8 all at the same cpu speed.


----------



## The Sandman

VPII said:


> I can really do with some advice.... I noticed that my memory latency cache as well as memory has increased going with the new "AMD compatible" memory. It is clear when running Cinebench 15R when my result with the cpu at 4.256ghz is about 100+ lower than before. I'm not sure what I need to work on to improve latencies. Even when I run the memory 3466 CL15 it is lower by a lot. System is running well, but it is frustrating when I've seen so much better before.
> 
> Memory was:
> 
> G-Skill TridentZ - F4-3200C14D-16GTZR
> 
> Memory now:
> 
> G-Skill FlareX - F4-3200C14D-16GFX
> 
> At 3600 memory speed Stilt preset 2T GD disabled I would get below 60 for memory latency with previous set, now 64 the lowest. L1 about 0.9 now 1 or 1.1, L2 was 2.9 now 3 to 3.1 and L3 was 8.8 now 9.4 to 9.8 all at the same cpu speed.


May be of no help but my Flare-x run very stable on a C6H at 3466 C14.


----------



## VPII

The Sandman said:


> May be of no help but my Flare-x run very stable on a C6H at 3466 C14.


Thanks I'll try set the timings as such and see how it goes.


----------



## Singularity48

With the F4-3600C15D-16GTZ kit, anyone have timing suggestions for 3466/3533? 3600 is a hassle and the timings aren't as tight as I'd like, I'm looking to get my latency down as much as possible.


----------



## VPII

The Sandman said:


> May be of no help but my Flare-x run very stable on a C6H at 3466 C14.


After many struggles I found a means to set bios as per your post except for some timings lower. First run CB15 yealded 1835 pretty poor with cpu at 4.26ghz. Second run I basically set priority for application to realtime and the result was 5 shy of what I got before and the result 1975. At least it seems my way of running the app is what resulted in the poor results. Just funny as usually on first run without setting priority it would be 19XX somewhere.


----------



## gupsterg

Room ambient was ~13C at start, near end ~14C.

2700X 1835 PGS
C7H WIFI UEFI 1201
F4-3200C14D-16GVK

3533MHz 1T GDMD using The Stilt 3466MHz timings.

Post purpose, scaling of PB/XF2 with lower temps. PE: Default PBO: Enabled

I have see average ACB ~4.18GHz before when CPU loaded with RT and room temp low. Today was best so far ~4.22GHz and lowers to usual 4.16GHz as time goes on. IMO PB/XFR2 is tuned to leverage best out of CPU for normal room ambient temps and we see slight gains as temps lower.



Spoiler








































































HolyFist said:


> I've tried to actually look for a fan cooling fan/kit thing but seems hard to find on EU there's the Corsair ones but they dont seem to be compatible with my sticks.


This has good availability in EU and should be compatible.



The Sandman said:


> Always interesting! Thanks man.
> Curious what AIDA looks like at for you at 3533.


Likewise :thumb: , as requested AIDA64 and some others, no OS/performance bias tweaks.



Spoiler














































































Always seem to get on COPY large swing, dunno why.


----------



## neikosr0x

Singularity48 said:


> With the F4-3600C15D-16GTZ kit, anyone have timing suggestions for 3466/3533? 3600 is a hassle and the timings aren't as tight as I'd like, I'm looking to get my latency down as much as possible.


if you can, share your RAM timing and settings.
i own the C16 version... i can get 3466 cl16 100% stable, testing 3533cl16 just now. with cl17 3600 i can boot but is not stable.


----------



## MrPhilo

For me the new bios 1201 is less stable for me, my 3600cl14 I get errors within under 100% on 14 x 850 on memtest

Even with 3533 I get errors.

Gone back to 1103 and im just over 150% on memtest, no problem so far.


----------



## gupsterg

UEFI 1201 has bested previous versions for 3600MHz 1T GDMD using The Stilt's 3466MHz timings.



Spoiler














Testing POST to POST training variance, etc currently.


----------



## nick name

Singularity48 said:


> With the F4-3600C15D-16GTZ kit, anyone have timing suggestions for 3466/3533? 3600 is a hassle and the timings aren't as tight as I'd like, I'm looking to get my latency down as much as possible.


These timings have been stable for me in the past. I didn't use these settings regularly though. I was probably running DRAM voltage at 1.5V. You'll also notice that geardown mode is disabled so SOC might be lower if you disable geardown mode.


----------



## nick name

I've been trying to tighten timings for 3666 and when testing overnight my system froze, however, it didn't throw any errors before it did. So I'm assuming it's a result of insufficient DRAM voltage, but I'm not sure if I wanna go higher than it's currently at with those timings. 

These are the timings I was testing:


----------



## nick name

VPII said:


> I can really do with some advice.... I noticed that my memory latency cache as well as memory has increased going with the new "AMD compatible" memory. It is clear when running Cinebench 15R when my result with the cpu at 4.256ghz is about 100+ lower than before. I'm not sure what I need to work on to improve latencies. Even when I run the memory 3466 CL15 it is lower by a lot. System is running well, but it is frustrating when I've seen so much better before.
> 
> Memory was:
> 
> G-Skill TridentZ - F4-3200C14D-16GTZR
> 
> Memory now:
> 
> G-Skill FlareX - F4-3200C14D-16GFX
> 
> At 3600 memory speed Stilt preset 2T GD disabled I would get below 60 for memory latency with previous set, now 64 the lowest. L1 about 0.9 now 1 or 1.1, L2 was 2.9 now 3 to 3.1 and L3 was 8.8 now 9.4 to 9.8 all at the same cpu speed.



Cache latencies will decrease with faster CPU speeds and bandwidth will increase. I would double check that your CPU speed is the same as it was during previous tests. 

What settings do you run for your CPU? And have you set a Performance Bias in BIOS?


----------



## Bo55

Decided to sell my rig, 2700x and crosshair vii wifi due to having inconsistant performance day to day, cpu temps raised up out of no where recently at stock clocks using my h110i by 10degrees in gaming (65-75,76) which i cant explain. In a high ventilated case (corsair 750d airflow edition) Memory sticks top out at nearly 50 degrees at only 1.4v and 1.06v soc and climbing during gaming. Whenever i turn my pc on, it has to always train memory which for me is frustrating. I gave buying a "top end" board a chance to see how much better/less hassle it would be but it only made memory overclocking better up to 3466, which im pretty sure the x470 Prime Pro can do, beyond that i was losing performance and getting instability even when using 16gb trident z SR B-die memory and getting cold boot every time i powered up my machine taking over a minute to get into windows. Possibly all just bad luck but after spending $452 aud on this board i should expect it to run flawlessly which it wasnt so i will be waiting for ryzen 3000 and x570 if that turns out good.

All the best
Cheers


----------



## gupsterg

"Errr Houston...."



Spoiler


----------



## Bo55

gupsterg said:


> "Errr Houston...."
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 243856
> 
> 
> View attachment 243858
> 
> 
> View attachment 243860
> 
> 
> View attachment 243862


Good to see you can load a preset. Cl15 3600 is actually slower for ST performance than cl14 3400, i know because i ran both setups. MT tasks though help a little when increasing frequency which can be seen running cinebench r15 for example. The real issue are the problems caused by the overpriced board itself. Lesson learnt, stick to mid range boards.


----------



## nick name

Bo55 said:


> Good to see you can load a preset. Cl15 3600 is actually slower for ST performance than cl14 3400, i know because i ran both setups. MT tasks though help a little when increasing frequency which can be seen running cinebench r15 for example. The real issue are the problems caused by the overpriced board itself. Lesson learnt, stick to mid range boards.


I think you may have just been massively unlucky. Hopefully a little luck will be on your side with your next system and you get a golden chip.


----------



## Bo55

nick name said:


> I think you may have just been massively unlucky. Hopefully a little luck will be on your side with your next system and you get a golden chip.


Yep. Haha thanks mate i'll report back if i do ☺

Cheers


----------



## gupsterg

Bo55 said:


> Good to see you can load a preset. Cl15 3600 is actually slower for ST performance than cl14 3400, i know because i ran both setups. MT tasks though help a little when increasing frequency which can be seen running cinebench r15 for example. The real issue are the problems caused by the overpriced board itself. Lesson learnt, stick to mid range boards.


:thumbsdow.

Post was not aimed at you, if it was I would have qouted you. I can see you have been great help to others, so sorry to rain on your parade. Yeah I can load preset and enjoy.

3400MHz C14 with ~0.1ns gain vs 3600MHz C15 must be vast gains for ST.

I hope you gain what you're after. All the best to you.


----------



## crakej

Bo55 said:


> Good to see you can load a preset. Cl15 3600 is actually slower for ST performance than cl14 3400, i know because i ran both setups. MT tasks though help a little when increasing frequency which can be seen running cinebench r15 for example. The real issue are the problems caused by the overpriced board itself. Lesson learnt, stick to mid range boards.


3600 CL14 is better though when it work for you.

I came from a mid priced board to this board and I'm very happy that I did the upgrade.


----------



## nick name

Ok now I am seeing POST failures with code F9 when RAM speed and timings shouldn't be problematic.


----------



## VPII

nick name said:


> Cache latencies will decrease with faster CPU speeds and bandwidth will increase. I would double check that your CPU speed is the same as it was during previous tests.
> 
> What settings do you run for your CPU? And have you set a Performance Bias in BIOS?


Performance bias I usually leave it on Auto?


----------



## nick name

VPII said:


> Performance bias I usually leave it on Auto?


You'll get better performance if you select one of the options. Any option really, but I think the Aida/Geekbench one might be the best. It optimizes the CPU cache I believe.


----------



## VPII

nick name said:


> You'll get better performance if you select one of the options. Any option really, but I think the Aida/Geekbench one might be the best. It optimizes the CPU cache I believe.


Shot, thanks nick name


----------



## Singularity48

nick name said:


> These timings have been stable for me in the past. I didn't use these settings regularly though. I was probably running DRAM voltage at 1.5V. You'll also notice that geardown mode is disabled so SOC might be lower if you disable geardown mode.


Nice, thanks again. It was stable even with tFAW lower than 16? RFC 222 is super low too, that's pretty sick. I'll try these tonight. 

Also, how do you go about manually tightening timings? I really have no idea how to do it myself, I've been getting by with calc presets or using other people's results like yours.


----------



## nick name

Singularity48 said:


> Nice, thanks again. It was stable even with tFAW lower than 16? RFC 222 is super low too, that's pretty sick. I'll try these tonight.
> 
> Also, how do you go about manually tightening timings? I really have no idea how to do it myself, I've been getting by with calc presets or using other people's results like yours.


Honestly, I can't really recall, but I don't screenshot timings to save unless they pass a few tests at least. I should also say that some of the timings can be too tight and cause issues in games.


----------



## Syldon

Gave up on revision 1201 Couldn't get it stable. Found I was getting crashes when I went back to 1103 also. Apparently my VPN software had prevented an ethernet driver update, which had disabled some of the protocols. Just a bad coincidence to get when you want to check out something new.


Reflashed to 1201. Old settings working as well as ever. Only left HCImemtest running for 2 hours. Pretty pointless doing a full 8 hours test with settings that I know have worked very well in the past.


----------



## gupsterg

For my HW combo UEFI 1201 has so far been most stable for 3600MHz 1T GDMD using The Stilt 3466MHz timings. Best so far I've managed is back to back testing in RT, on 1x full cold POST, 4x warm POSTs and then RT fails on 5th warm POST.



Spoiler






















































AIDA64 still has swing on COPY.



Spoiler






























Gonna continue on trying to get this "preset" done as it should be "load and play"   .


----------



## Baio73

Hi there… for me the new 1201 worsed something.
I used to load the last BIOS preset ([email protected]), but after rebooting I got RAM beeps.
Can someone suggest me some settings for G.Skill F4-3600C16D-16GTZR?
I can't decide which combination is better, lower speed/lower timings or higher speed/higher timings.
I'm currently keeping them @2T, I remember 1T was definetly better but I'm quite new to Ryzen.

Thanks in advance for your help! 

Baio


----------



## VPII

gupsterg said:


> For my HW combo UEFI 1201 has so far been most stable for 3600MHz 1T GDMD using The Stilt 3466MHz timings. Best so far I've managed is back to back testing in RT, on 1x full cold POST, 4x warm POSTs and then RT fails on 5th warm POST.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 244006
> 
> 
> View attachment 244008
> 
> 
> View attachment 244010
> 
> 
> View attachment 244012
> 
> 
> View attachment 244014
> 
> 
> View attachment 244016
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AIDA64 still has swing on COPY.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 244018
> 
> 
> View attachment 244020
> 
> 
> View attachment 244022
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gonna continue on trying to get this "preset" done as it should be "load and play"   .


Hi gupsterq I'd like some advice..... I tried your approach booting into windows 3600 with the Stilt 3466 CL15 preset. It worked but my latencies seem higher than it should. My memory is sitting at 63.1, L1 at 1.0, L2 at 3.1 and L3 at 9.6.... this is higher than it should be. I tried so many ways to get the timings similar to other setups but my latency just does not want to go down as it should. Your help will be greatly appreciated. The memory I use is the G-Skill Flare F4-3200C14D-16GFX


----------



## gupsterg

VPII said:


> Hi gupsterq I'd like some advice..... I tried your approach booting into windows 3600 with the Stilt 3466 CL15 preset. It worked but my latencies seem higher than it should. My memory is sitting at 63.1, L1 at 1.0, L2 at 3.1 and L3 at 9.6.... this is higher than it should be. I tried so many ways to get the timings similar to other setups but my latency just does not want to go down as it should. Your help will be greatly appreciated. The memory I use is the G-Skill Flare F4-3200C14D-16GFX


Hi chap  .

I had read your posts, advice Nick gave is pretty much what I'd give.

AIDA64 cache benchmark is affected by CPU speed, as cache runs at same frequency as whatever CPU is. RAM bandwidth/latency for me have been RAM frequency/timings related and ever so slightly I may see a gain with CPU MHz. If AIDA64 (or another benchmark) is under performing for given "profile", I'd reapply an image of OS to my rig, as it could be something has silently corrupted whilst I meddled, etc.

Performance bias tweaks cache timings, so you may see gains with that. [Auto] defaults to [None] from what I have seen.

The Flare X uses same PCB/IC as other G.Skill RAM of same speed/bin. Even SPD data is same except lacks XMP profile from a post Voodoo Jungle (author of Thaiphoon Burner) made when that kit launched. So no different than Ripjaw V/Trident Z, so I wouldn't expect that as cause of issue for you have at present. I have noted newer G.Skill kits do tend to have kit P/N in SPD rather than dimm P/N.

Perhaps attach a UEFI settings txt to post, maybe "we" will see something, but I doubt it and reckon it's perhaps OS/SW related or as Nick said before CPU not reaching same speeds. What happens if you do a manual CPU MHz OC, do benches perform as they should?


----------



## neikosr0x

Baio73 said:


> Hi there… for me the new 1201 worsed something.
> I used to load the last BIOS preset ([email protected]), but after rebooting I got RAM beeps.
> Can someone suggest me some settings for G.Skill F4-3600C16D-16GTZR?
> I can't decide which combination is better, lower speed/lower timings or higher speed/higher timings.
> I'm currently keeping them @2T, I remember 1T was definetly better but I'm quite new to Ryzen.
> 
> Thanks in advance for your help!
> 
> Baio


Could you share your settings i own the same ram kit i couldn't made them run stable on 3600mhz but now 3533 is working just fine no problems


----------



## gupsterg

Seems like POST to POST training variance is gone on 3600MHz 1T GDMD using The Stilt 3466MHz timings.

1x full cold POST, 6x warm POSTs, clear/restore profile tested as well (so 2nd FCP). Room ambient initially 16C, as day progressed sits at 18C.

1x CP, 5x WP below spoiler.



Spoiler






















































6th WP did RB 1hr, then RT 3600% on same POST.



Spoiler






















Profile cleared/restored, P95 v29.4b8 8K 4096K 12GB 1hr tested.



Spoiler














View attachment 1201_PBOE_3600S_setting.txt


----------



## crakej

I've been trying to stabilize 3666 (and 3733 to a lesser extent) today.

I can only get it stable using timings that mean it's SLOWER than my 3533 profile! Had to have tFAW at 30 and tRDRDSCL and tWRWRSCL are at 4T. Dram voltage for 3666 is 1.45v. Couldn't get 3733 anywhere near stable. Lots more experimenting yet to be done!


----------



## lester007

My settings are more stable and doesn't spit random error on this bios 1201 unlike the 1103. I also upgraded my cpu 2700 to 2700x because that cpu has crappy memory oc capabilities.


----------



## hurricane28

Hey guys!

How is this new 1201 BIOS? Any gains or some new options?


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Hey guys!
> 
> How is this new 1201 BIOS? Any gains or some new options?


I have only noticed one change and it's been a failure to POST and the resulting POST code being F9. At first it seemed to be due to bad RAM timings, but it persists with stable RAM timings now also.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I have only noticed one change and it's been a failure to POST and the resulting POST code being F9. At first it seemed to be due to bad RAM timings, but it persists with stable RAM timings now also.


I've had that since 1103, but now on 1201 I get F9 1long, 2 short beeps, repeating until I press reset. Normally 1 long, 2 short beeps is a failure of ram in the video card, so not sure whats going on here, but training just reboot silently now.

Memory training failure used to be 3 short beeps didn't it?

I do now have my 3600 profile tuned back in - Impressive results for my 1700X!  Sweet. Just waiting on RamTest to make sure it's still totally reliable.


----------



## VPII

gupsterg said:


> Hi chap  .
> 
> I had read your posts, advice Nick gave is pretty much what I'd give.
> 
> AIDA64 cache benchmark is affected by CPU speed, as cache runs at same frequency as whatever CPU is. RAM bandwidth/latency for me have been RAM frequency/timings related and ever so slightly I may see a gain with CPU MHz. If AIDA64 (or another benchmark) is under performing for given "profile", I'd reapply an image of OS to my rig, as it could be something has silently corrupted whilst I meddled, etc.
> 
> Performance bias tweaks cache timings, so you may see gains with that. [Auto] defaults to [None] from what I have seen.
> 
> The Flare X uses same PCB/IC as other G.Skill RAM of same speed/bin. Even SPD data is same except lacks XMP profile from a post Voodoo Jungle (author of Thaiphoon Burner) made when that kit launched. So no different than Ripjaw V/Trident Z, so I wouldn't expect that as cause of issue for you have at present. I have noted newer G.Skill kits do tend to have kit P/N in SPD rather than dimm P/N.
> 
> Perhaps attach a UEFI settings txt to post, maybe "we" will see something, but I doubt it and reckon it's perhaps OS/SW related or as Nick said before CPU not reaching same speeds. What happens if you do a manual CPU MHz OC, do benches perform as they should?


Hi gupsterq, my cpu has always been running the same speed, either 4267mhz or 4369mhz depending on whether I run benchmarks or for everyday use. In you post you stated reapply an image of your OS to your rig. What do you mean by this....sorry it is silly questions, but I'd rather make sure I understand.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I've had that since 1103, but now on 1201 I get F9 1long, 2 short beeps, repeating until I press reset. Normally 1 long, 2 short beeps is a failure of ram in the video card, so not sure whats going on here, but training just reboot silently now.
> 
> Memory training failure used to be 3 short beeps didn't it?
> 
> I do now have my 3600 profile tuned back in - Impressive results for my 1700X!  Sweet. Just waiting on RamTest to make sure it's still totally reliable.


I don't use a system speaker so I am completely unfamiliar with the beeps and boops of the Crosshair.


----------



## Elrick

VPII said:


> The memory I use is the G-Skill Flare F4-3200C14D-16GFX


Have the same memory here but when I upgraded the bios to the latest 1201 version, the memory all went into AUTO mode.

Downside to that was the constant beeping when it was restarted, as soon as I went back into the Bios section I noticed straight away in Dram Voltage, that it was locked in at 1.2v (AUTO).

Corrected it immediately, manual adjustment to 1.35v for my two 8GB sticks and it was rock solid.

Weird that Auto now means the lowest voltage setting.


----------



## nick name

I must say that BIOS 1201 is absolutely not as stable as 1103. I won't say 1201 isn't stable for stock settings, but it has caused new problems that I haven't seen before while overclocking. The problem may be hardware as it seems to persist after reverting back to 1103, however, it began when testing on 1201.

I suggest to wait to use 1201 until others report if the BIOS is the problem when overclocking. 

Edit:

The biggest issue I saw in 1201 was random reboots while in BIOS while trying to make changes to settings -- which I have never seen before. It happened multiple times until I was finally successful in loading optimized defaults (which may not have done anything) and then immediately flashing back to 1103. I had another instance immediately after flashing back to 1103, but I re-flashed 1103 again and the issue went away.


----------



## gupsterg

VPII said:


> Hi gupsterq, my cpu has always been running the same speed, either 4267mhz or 4369mhz depending on whether I run benchmarks or for everyday use. In you post you stated reapply an image of your OS to your rig. What do you mean by this....sorry it is silly questions, but I'd rather make sure I understand.


I image my OS to another drive, ie backup, I use Macrium Reflect. So if I deem that OS may have corrupted I'll just do a restore. Saves me time rather than do reinstall.

I have "staged" backups. For example:-

i) fresh install of OS.
ii) (i) + latest drivers at the time.
iii) (ii) + latest utils/benchmarks, etc I'd use.

Usually I revert to image stage (iii).



nick name said:


> I must say that BIOS 1201 is absolutely not as stable as 1103. I won't say 1201 isn't stable for stock settings, but it has caused new problems that I haven't seen before while overclocking. The problem may be hardware as it seems to persist after reverting back to 1103, however, it began when testing on 1201.
> 
> I suggest to wait to use 1201 until others report if the BIOS is the problem when overclocking.
> 
> Edit:
> 
> The biggest issue I saw in 1201 was random reboots while in BIOS while trying to make changes to settings -- which I have never seen before. It happened multiple times until I was finally successful in loading optimized defaults (which may not have done anything) and then immediately flashing back to 1103. I had another instance immediately after flashing back to 1103, but I re-flashed 1103 again and the issue went away.


Random reboots in UEFI I only had on few POSTs on initial install of board months ago when I got the board. I still use the same launch board, I returned the latest board I recently got.

I posted that occurrence here, issue just went away. I was left scratching my head as nothing had changed to alleviate the issue. As I knew how meticulously I check cables, etc are seated I even did not reseated things like that.

The only things I have noted as issues on UEFI 1201 are:-

i) SOC manual VRM frequency range is still borked.
ii) User can suffer infinite loop of memory training fail, ie Q-Code: F9 occurs and then board will get stuck in loop rather than reset to recovery and repost. This occurred occasionally for me when deducing 3600MHz settings and targeting 3666MHz. Pressing "Safe Boot" button on board get's me out of the loop.


----------



## crakej

1203 is ok for me so far. Slight differences as I mentioned before, but working at least as good as 1103.

What settings are you using in the power section @gupsterg? I just set all on Extreme - never changed the frequencies for the VRM and am wondering what benefit it can bring?


----------



## gupsterg

@crakej

Post 5051 has current setup txt  .

Only 2 settings I really change on External Digi+ Power Control are:-

i) VRM Spread Spectrum [Disabled]

ii) DRAM VBoot Voltage matched to DRAM Voltage on Extreme Tweaker page.

When you select the section for VRM frequency change, it has a concise and helpful blurb there. So far lowering/increasing frequency has not helped me.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> @crakej
> 
> Post 5051 has current setup txt  .
> 
> Only 2 settings I really change on External Digi+ Power Control are:-
> 
> i) VRM Spread Spectrum [Disabled]
> 
> ii) DRAM VBoot Voltage matched to DRAM Voltage on Extreme Tweaker page.
> 
> When you select the section for VRM frequency change, it has a concise and helpful blurb there. So far lowering/increasing frequency has not helped me.


Hmmmm.... I might try turning off extreme then, see what happens - just always done it since launch of Zen, can't even remember which guide recommended it!


----------



## gupsterg

IIRC DRAM Phase control is Extreme by default.

Extreme keeps all phases active. So say for CPU has 10, SOC has 2, DRAM has 2. You can set each as you want. When a phase is added/dropped it can cause electrical effects which may destabilise a setup, especially when at the edge of OC. Having the full phases on also allows better coping for jumps in power, etc, flip side is components may get hotter as always on. When ever I've checked with a IR gun the DRAM mosfets are pretty cool, circa 20-27C.

VRM frequency increases aid response to loading, but can introduce noise. For example in the context of DRAM OC we're after least noise to have best signalling integrity. In a nutshell with ProcODT/CAD Bus/RTT we are aiming to clean up issues on signalling as we push harder.

Just even voltage has a noise aspect AFAIK. So at the edge of stability too much voltage creates as much as an issue as too little.

I guess due to variance of these aspects (besides silicon lottery) we see peoples different setups needing tweaks.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> IIRC DRAM Phase control is Extreme by default.
> 
> Extreme keeps all phases active. So say for CPU has 10, SOC has 2, DRAM has 2. You can set each as you want. When a phase is added/dropped it can cause electrical effects which may destabilise a setup, especially when at the edge of OC. Having the full phases on also allows better coping for jumps in power, etc, flip side is components may get hotter as always on. When ever I've checked with a IR gun the DRAM mosfets are pretty cool, circa 20-27C.
> 
> VRM frequency increases aid response to loading, but can introduce noise. For example in the context of DRAM OC we're after least noise to have best signalling integrity. In a nutshell with ProcODT/CAD Bus/RTT we are aiming to clean up issues on signalling as we push harder.
> 
> Just even voltage has a noise aspect AFAIK. So at the edge of stability too much voltage creates as much as an issue as too little.
> 
> I guess due to variance of these aspects (besides silicon lottery) we see peoples different setups needing tweaks.


Thanks gupsterg! Very interesting post - I understand that much better now! I'm actually getting my best run on RamTest since changing to 'standard' for CPU and SoC


----------



## ClintLeo

nick name said:


> I must say that BIOS 1201 is absolutely not as stable as 1103. I won't say 1201 isn't stable for stock settings, but it has caused new problems that I haven't seen before while overclocking. The problem may be hardware as it seems to persist after reverting back to 1103, however, it began when testing on 1201.
> 
> I suggest to wait to use 1201 until others report if the BIOS is the problem when overclocking.
> 
> Edit:
> 
> The biggest issue I saw in 1201 was random reboots while in BIOS while trying to make changes to settings -- which I have never seen before. It happened multiple times until I was finally successful in loading optimized defaults (which may not have done anything) and then immediately flashing back to 1103. I had another instance immediately after flashing back to 1103, but I re-flashed 1103 again and the issue went away.



Hi

I had the same thing with 1201.
I flashed 1201 put my settings that i use all the time and it wasn't stable,wish I knew why.
I had to flash 1103 twice and I'm now back to where i was before.


----------



## westk

Well with this BIOS I had to put 1.2 vSOC to make stable 3600CL14


----------



## nick name

westk said:


> Well with this BIOS I had to put 1.2 vSOC to make stable 3600CL14


I've never seen anyone actually get more stability with SOC that high. What are your timings?


----------



## westk




----------



## nick name

westk said:


>


Eek. With geardown mode enabled I can run SOC at 1.0V and with GDM disabled I only need 1.1V.


----------



## westk

Yea its weird, with the previous BIOS I could do this with 1.15


----------



## crakej

I do tighter timings with 1v (actual 0.994v)! I've never tried running anything with SoC that high.

My SoC voltage is very sensitive as well - just one click either way will ruin stability. Of course memory binned at 3200 running 3600 might just need that extra voltage...


----------



## gupsterg

Post 5051 contained what I'd finalised as 3600MHz C15 1T on UEFI 1201. Now as the evening drew in on 06/01/19 I started testing if I could lower SOC, I could. I did not attempt lowering VDIMM as older UEFIs had needed more for same setup.

SOC 1.05V was tested for 1x CP = 1000%, then I did 5x WP tests, 1550%, 1750%, 2000%, 2800%, 3333%, 6th WP I had fail at 4346%.



Spoiler














Then I tried 1.056V, fail at 9356%.



Spoiler














Now today was higher room ambient, ~20C vs 16/18C range of 05th to 6th Jan. This lead to profile having issues even at SOC 1.068V, as tested before in RT/RB/P95. Prior to increasing voltages I tried a number of tweaks, all tests failed. Then I tried UEFI 1103, even worse stability for my HW/settings. Back to 1201 and bump on SOC/VDIMM has regained stability. I also did one other tweak, which I currently believe is not cause for regaining stability. I will know tomorrow on some more testing.



Spoiler














































I'm now on 5th WP RT run and using PC for this post as well  . Tomorrow will be testing with further room ambient increase, ~22C.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> Post 5051 contained what I'd finalised as 3600MHz C15 1T on UEFI 1201. Now as the evening drew in on 06/01/19 I started testing if I could lower SOC, I could. I did not attempt lowering VDIMM as older UEFIs had needed more for same setup.
> 
> SOC 1.05V was tested for 1x CP = 1000%, then I did 5x WP tests, 1550%, 1750%, 2000%, 2800%, 3333%, 6th WP I had fail at 4346%.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 244592
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then I tried 1.056V, fail at 9356%.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 244594
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now today was higher room ambient, ~20C vs 16/18C range of 05th to 6th Jan. This lead to profile having issues even at SOC 1.068V, as tested before in RT/RB/P95. Prior to increasing voltages I tried a number of tweaks, all tests failed. Then I tried UEFI 1103, even worse stability for my HW/settings. Back to 1201 and bump on SOC/VDIMM has regained stability. I also did one other tweak, which I currently believe is not cause for regaining stability. I will know tomorrow on some more testing.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 244596
> 
> 
> View attachment 244598
> 
> 
> View attachment 244600
> 
> 
> View attachment 244602
> 
> 
> View attachment 244604
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm now on 5th WP RT run and using PC for this post as well  . Tomorrow will be testing with further room ambient increase, ~22C.


For me, looks like I had to increase ram volts compared to 1103 - 1.42 up to 1.43v

I'm just double checking now, but changing that power setting from Extreme to Standard for CPU and SoC seems to have gained me almost perfect stability - i've gone past 10k% on RamTest

Interestingly - most of you prob know that I use AISuite relatively trouble-free. I have also used ROG Turbo Core to test different voltage settings without re-booting, but it kept crashing. As I hav AISuite running, decided to check out the TPU settings as they are basically the Turbo Core settings......and more. I also have access to the DIGI Power section like the bios.

It doesn't change the bios settings, so you have to write down what works best, and remember to change any settings that helped.

Edit: Looks like it was a fluke getting that 10k% - can't get past 99% now...


----------



## gupsterg

Best I have had as single run is 24000% on 3600MHz 1T GDMD using The Stilt 3466MHz.



Spoiler














What I have been unable to resolve is how board will still go Q-Code: F9 on an infinity loop after say x warm POSTs. If I pull the board out of loop by say using RETRY button, I still do not get instant fail.



Spoiler














Currently flashed UEFI 1103, trying the 24k% RT settings of UEFI 1201 on it, so far OK.



Spoiler














Gonna be doing some multiple warm POST tests soon and then length run.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

*HELP !!!*



Syldon said:


> Your system is working as intended. It isn't hitting exactly 4.0 because of the variance between the HPET (high precision event timer) and the RTC (real time clock). The downvolting is there also; it is just shown in an amp drop instead of a voltage differ (See Attached picture). Google for videos on Volts, Amps and Watts.
> 
> There are some settings you could change to make your system run better than it is.
> 
> 
> Ai overclock tuner to Manual (This will open more options)
> Bclk frequency to 100
> Performance enhancer to level 1 (this will allow your system to boost on single core. This is better than an all core over clock. Your multicore should still sit above the 4.0 mark with less power usage).
> CPU core ratio to 37
> Cpu offset mode sign to + (Elmor recommended a +0.05v offset for the best usage)
> 
> *edited to add CPU core ratio value, I was running late for work and missed it*





Thanks man !


Hello again !

HELP!!!
It's a very long time since i posted about my problem, but things have come worse with updating the bios and my system acts strange ,specially the bios !
It was something relateed to Underclocking undervolting which i misunderstood> too long on the blue side .
And to be true and i dont know where to begin.Since then i havent come further but updating my bios gave me more issues then it solved.

Full story :
Things happened in the last week, and before all of this sh.t i had a X470 Prime and i just migrated the os over the new board. Win 1803
So this issues below began after setting up the system freshly and updating the bios to 1103.
Issues on windows: 1803+1809

1. I wanted to fix sound crackling with this board, but didnt used onboard.
Currently i think my decision to try fix my sound crackling issue has made it worser. 
It worked for the fresh installed 1809 without my Xfi installed and i used onboard sound.
But mainly i use my headset which has it's own SP. (soundprocessor)
ANd also there i have this sound crackling after bios initialized the USB...WTD

After installing all drivers and so on also did a few restarts and updated windows itself,after that i played a round BF V, it was soooo smooth .
No slow texture loading or any other graphical issues,then i was going to bed.

2. Now the next day i woke up and boom...blackscreen and fans turn 100% , all fans !
The funny fact is i have videos of hwinfo where i had more options on the GPU TAB, and this changed from boot to boot. i mean WTD ! Also the task manager from windows shows sometimes a gpu sometimes not.
i hope i can upload it since the ocn-website has changed ,sometimes it works and sometimes not .

3. In win 10 i have the problem sometimes if i shutdown the pc via the OS but it wont shut down i mean power off, it runs until i press the start button, to make it off.
I dont think this is normal !This is randomly !!!

4. Why the hell do all my cores boost to 4.35GHZ ,shouldnt it only boost one core to the max? 

5. Before this new installation i wasn't able to use Ryzen Master, now it works.

6. Slow texture loading in all games i have tested, GTA V ,BF V, BF 1, Division ,Insurgency sandstorm.

7. Tested another 8*2 GB kit but single ranked, same behave, same issues.


8. Sometimes there was no GPU in task manager , i show this on part two of the video.


Bios issues:
Trying to set 2T under various settings is impossible, not on auto not ,on 2t ,it always shows 1T !

2T is needed when using Dual ranked ram, if im not misinformed !!!

Sometimes it completely hangs during post showing me the rog logo 

Sometimes i get into bios and no mouse nor keyboard is working...

Laggy unresponsive bios> randomly 

Sometimes setting wont apply or didn't have apllied after restart.

The DRAM voltage shows only 1.33v but it has been set to 1.35

The SB voltage shows 1.084-1.087 so i also have the pain that this is a first batch board which showing SB voltage falsely, which is not acceptable to me for a 300euro Board !


Sound crackling


Actually fixed:

Fixed that blackscreen and all fans to 100% with a reinstall of Win 1809 .
This fix had to do with TDR issues. Added TdrDelay 10 in regedit .

Hardware : 2700x , ballistix elite 2*8gb Dual ranked 3000mhz , R9 Fury Nitro , [email protected] 1201 , Bequiet Straight Power 1000W
Software+drivers : 1809 , Adrenalin 18.9.3 and 18.11.2

And guys this is really make me pulling my hair out, it drives me so crazy that i wanted to push it all out of the window.
Today if my brother has time he lends me his 1080ti, but i think it's a board issue i have...or ram...or CPU...frustration

HELP!!!
And tell me if you guys need more input on this like bios setting or so...


*Videos:*
*part one : strange vrm voltage is displayed on hwinfo
*
*



*​ 

*part two : no gpu in task manager , isnt it strange ?
*
*



*​ 

*UPDATE:*

*As i read above i'm not he only one were the bios has made nearly stable machines instable, interesting but :thumbsdow .*
The german guys on hwluxx told me ,never change a running system,even bios! 

So should i try to go back to 0509 where all nearly worked perfectly no stutters no lags no slow texture load?
Is a bios flashback even possible , i mean in terms of agesa updates ...



*Sound crackling *

Anyone here got the sound crackling fixed, i laso have it with onboard sound ,so my Xfi wasn't the problem here !
It happens when the bios boots and then again on windows and after a shutdown too.


----------



## toxick

3533MHz


----------



## crakej

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> Thanks man !
> 
> 
> Hello again !
> 
> HELP!!!
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> It's a very long time since i posted about my problem, but things have come worse with updating the bios and my system acts strange ,specially the bios !
> It was something relateed to Underclocking undervolting which i misunderstood> too long on the blue side .
> And to be true and i dont know where to begin.Since then i havent come further but updating my bios gave me more issues then it solved.
> 
> Full story :
> Things happened in the last 3 weeeks, and before this board i had a X470 Prime and i just migrated the os over the new board. Win 1803
> So this issues below began after setting up the system freshly.
> Issues on windows: 1803+1809
> 
> 1. I wanted to fix sound crackling with this board, but didnt used onboard.
> Currently i think my decision to try fix my sound crackling issue has made it worser.
> It worked for the fresh installed 1809 without my Xfi installed and i used onboard sound.
> But mainly i use my headset which has it's own SP. (soundprocessor)
> After installing all drivers and so on also did a few restarts and updated windows itself,after that i played a round BF V, it was soooo smooth .
> No slow texture loading or any other graphical issues,then i was going to bed.
> 
> 2. Now the next day i woke up and boom...blackscreen and fans turn 100% , all fans !
> The funny fact is i have fotos of hwinfo where i had more options on the GPU TAB, and this changed from boot to boot. i mean *** !
> i hope i can upload it since the ocn-website has changed ,sometimes it works and sometimes not .
> 
> 3. In win 10 i have the problem sometimes if i shutdown the pc via the OS but it wont shut down i mean power off, it runs until i press the start button, to make it off.
> I dont think this is normal !This is randomly !!!
> 
> 4. Why the hell do all my cores boost to 4.35GHZ ,shouldnt it only boost one core to the max?
> 
> 5. Before this new installation i wasn't able to use Ryzen Master, now it works.
> 
> 6. Slow texture loading in all games i have tested, GTA V ,BF V, BF 1, Division ,Insurgency sandstorm.
> 
> 7. Tested another 8*2 GB kit but single ranked, same behave, same issues.
> 
> 
> 8. Sometimes there was no GPU in task manager , i show this on part two of the video.
> 
> 
> Bios issues:
> Trying to set 2T under various settings is impossible, not on auto not ,on 2t ,it always shows 1T !
> 
> 2T is needed when using Dual ranked ram, if im not misinformed !!!
> 
> Sometimes it completely hangs during post showing me the rog logo
> 
> Sometimes i get into bios and no mouse nor keyboard is working...
> 
> Laggy unresponsive bios> randomly
> 
> Sometimes setting wont apply or didn't have apllied after restart.
> 
> 
> The DRAM voltage shows only 1.33v but it has been set to 1.35
> 
> 
> The SB voltage shows 1.084-1.087 so i also have the pain that this is a first batch board which showing SB voltage falsely, which is not acceptable to me for a 300euro Board !
> 
> 
> Actually fixed:
> 
> Fixed that blackscreen and all fans to 100% with a reinstall of Win 1809 .
> This fix had to do with TDR issues. Added TdrDelay 10 in regedit .
> 
> Hardware : 2700x , ballistix elite 2*8gb Dual ranked 3000mhz , R9 Fury Nitro , [email protected] 1201 , Bequiet Straight Power 1000W
> Software+drivers : 1809 , Adrenalin 18.9.3 and 18.11.2
> 
> And guys this is really make me pulling my hair out, it drives me so crazy that i wanted to push it all out of the window.
> Today if my brother has time he lends me his 1080ti, but i think it's a board issue i have...or ram...or CPU...frustration
> 
> HELP!!!
> And tell me if you guys need more input on this like bios setting or so...
> 
> 
> *Videos:*
> *part one : strange vrm voltage is displayed on hwinfo
> *
> *https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxsGjUER4jU*​
> 
> *part two : no gpu in task manager , isnt it strange ?
> *
> *https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNtfzKMcEFI*​
> 
> 
> *UPDATE:*
> 
> *As i read above i'm not he only one were the bios has made nearly stable machines instable, interesting but :thumbsdow .*
> The german guys on hwluxx told me ,never change a running system,even bios!
> 
> So should i try to go back to 0509 where all nearly worked perfectly no stutters no lags no slow texture load?
> Is a bios flashback even possible , i mean in terms of agesa updates ...


Wow - not too many questions!

IF you are having problems in the bios with jerky movements on the mouse, I would try another gfx card, then if thats the same, I would suspect the board. Anyone else got an idea?

I think all of us share the same thing with voltages not showing what we expect - all lower than our settings. Personally I would leave SB 1.05 and 1.8 PLL on auto

I've tried skimming through your video to find the unusual VRM temp but couldn't see it - in fact you have the ASUS WMI section disabled - enable it and don't run any other monitoring s/w while you're using it as it will rule out anything else interacting with it.

You seem to be rushing to get things done but you need to slow down, do ONE thing at a time or you will never find any potential problems. You can use ASUS ROG TurboCore which will show you your proper bios settings and allow you to adjust them on the fly. This is also available in AISuite under TPU.


----------



## crakej

I've just had to re-seat my memory AGAIN

My OC stopped working (again) - re-seated memory and all is fine again.....why does it keep doing this?


----------



## westk

westk said:


> Yea its weird, with the previous BIOS I could do this with 1.15





crakej said:


> I do tighter timings with 1v (actual 0.994v)! I've never tried running anything with SoC that high.
> 
> My SoC voltage is very sensitive as well - just one click either way will ruin stability. Of course memory binned at 3200 running 3600 might just need that extra voltage...


Here we go again, RAM instability in the next cold boot. I dont get it.

Could be this low voltage?


----------



## gupsterg

@crakej

Post 5077 contained 24K% RT PASS of 3600MHz C15 1T on UEFI 1201, as stated there I have occasional Q-Code: F9 on warm POST, board would then be stuck in that. If I got it out of loop I still did not encounter instability in OS.

I then tried exact same settings on UEFI 1103. I did 14k% PASS in RT, again on concurrent warm POST I would encounter Q-Code: F9. Only difference board would not get stuck in loop and profile would be reset and I'd have to reload.



Spoiler






























I have now opted for Extreme phase control on CPU/SOC/DRAM, so no phases switch off and hopefully lessen interference from phases dropping in/out of use. I have gone manual VRM switching frequency for each, 300/400/300 (yeah SOC one is bugged I believe, 400 = 300 IMO). I also shaved VDIMM by 0.05V from previous tests. Now I have had 12 full/warm posts without issue on UEFI 1103, gonna now stick to this setup and test for length.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> @crakej
> 
> Post 5077 contained 24K% RT PASS of 3600MHz C15 1T on UEFI 1201, as stated there I have occasional Q-Code: F9 on warm POST, board would then be stuck in that. If I got it out of loop I still did not encounter instability in OS.
> 
> I then tried exact same settings on UEFI 1103. I did 14k% PASS in RT, again on concurrent warm POST I would encounter Q-Code: F9. Only difference board would not get stuck in loop and profile would be reset and I'd have to reload.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 244844
> 
> 
> View attachment 244846
> 
> 
> View attachment 244848
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have now opted for Extreme phase control on CPU/SOC/DRAM, so no phases switch off and hopefully lessen interference from phases dropping in/out of use. I have gone manual VRM switching frequency for each, 300/400/300 (yeah SOC one is bugged I believe, 400 = 300 IMO). I also shaved VDIMM by 0.05V from previous tests. Now I have had 12 full/warm posts without issue on UEFI 1103, gonna now stick to this setup and test for length.


I'm back on extreme as well. |I look fwd to your results - my main problem is keeping the sticks properly seated ATM. I have been keeping a close eye on your results - v similar to what I'm getting. This new F9 thing is weird though for sure - never happened to me before on bios versions before 1103 where it first started showing, though not repeating like on 1203.

Edit: F9=Recovery Capsule Not Found - what a strange error - I've NEVER had it before bios 1103


----------



## gupsterg

Q-Code: F9 is memory training failure, you'll see a post in the C6H thread/HWBOT by Elmor stated how the q-code display displays status code for post as well as errors and the manual was never correct for C6H and I doubt it is for C7H in this regard.

You'll also note Q-LED for DRAM will be on when Q-Code: F9 occurs.

I've had Q-Code: F9 on every UEFI, regardless of mobo, when I push RAM OC, may that be timings and or MHz.

I have no doubt now that ProcODT 48, RTT 34 Off 60, CAD Bus 24 24 24 24 is right for targeted RAM setup in my case. I also believe around the 1.075V for SOC and 1.385V for VDIMM is right. I just gotta find settings for other elements I can change to gain that POST to POST stability.

I don't have any seating issues for RAM, etc.


----------



## Alex K

Sorry, a bit off offtop:

Guys choosing between these three 240mm AIO for my 2700x:
https://www.amazon.com/Be-Quiet-Silent-Loop-240mm/dp/B01M063PGD
https://www.amazon.com/Fractal-Design-FD-WCU-CELSIUS-S24-BK-Cooler/dp/B0719DHG5Y
https://www.amazon.com/Enermax-LIQMAX-Performance-Liquid-ELC-LMR240-BS/dp/B00QWZIN92

Reasonable suggestions required, especially somebody with usage experience.

P.S. Please do not suggest 280mm, my Mechify C can't fit it on top with Crosshair VII


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

Alex K said:


> Sorry, a bit off offtop:
> 
> Guys choosing between these three 240mm AIO for my 2700x:
> https://www.amazon.com/Be-Quiet-Silent-Loop-240mm/dp/B01M063PGD
> https://www.amazon.com/Fractal-Design-FD-WCU-CELSIUS-S24-BK-Cooler/dp/B0719DHG5Y
> https://www.amazon.com/Enermax-LIQMAX-Performance-Liquid-ELC-LMR240-BS/dp/B00QWZIN92
> 
> Reasonable suggestions required, especially somebody with usage experience.
> 
> P.S. Please do not suggest 280mm, my Mechify C can't fit it on top with Crosshair VII



Hello i use the Bequiet 240mm Silent Loop it's a great deal for a 2700x CPU .
It's reuseable ,refillable ,you can also expand it ! The components/parts are from Alphacool ! :thumb:





crakej said:


> Wow - not too many questions!
> 
> IF you are having problems in the bios with jerky movements on the mouse, I would try another gfx card, then if thats the same, I would suspect the board. Anyone else got an idea?
> 
> I think all of us share the same thing with voltages not showing what we expect - all lower than our settings. Personally I would leave SB 1.05 and 1.8 PLL on auto
> 
> I've tried skimming through your video to find the unusual VRM temp but couldn't see it - in fact you have the ASUS WMI section disabled - enable it and don't run any other monitoring s/w while you're using it as it will rule out anything else interacting with it.
> 
> You seem to be rushing to get things done but you need to slow down, do ONE thing at a time or you will never find any potential problems. You can use ASUS ROG TurboCore which will show you your proper bios settings and allow you to adjust them on the fly. This is also available in AISuite under TPU.



Hi man !


Thank you for your comment !

No in the video you see that there were such sdtrange GPU tabs in hwinfo that i've never seen ,and that was the first and last time i saw them.So my fury was displaying strange things.
Alsdo i will try what you recommend me above,but before that i have a 1080ti here which i will test my setup now.


*BTW is it possible to flash back to a older version of the bios from 1201 to 0509 in my case? I'm sceptical because of the agesa updates it has already on it...
*


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> Q-Code: F9 is memory training failure, you'll see a post in the C6H thread/HWBOT by Elmor stated how the q-code display displays status code for post as well as errors and the manual was never correct for C6H and I doubt it is for C7H in this regard.
> 
> You'll also note Q-LED for DRAM will be on when Q-Code: F9 occurs.
> 
> I've had Q-Code: F9 on every UEFI, regardless of mobo, when I push RAM OC, may that be timings and or MHz.
> 
> I have no doubt now that ProcODT 48, RTT 34 Off 60, CAD Bus 24 24 24 24 is right for targeted RAM setup in my case. I also believe around the 1.075V for SOC and 1.385V for VDIMM is right. I just gotta find settings for other elements I can change to gain that POST to POST stability.
> 
> I don't have any seating issues for RAM, etc.


Very useful! It's quite poor that their tech support dept is not feeding this back to their production team or whoever is responsible for collating reported problems! Perhaps we should draw Silent Scone's attention to this? Does anyone know his username on here?

I really don't remember seeing F9 before, but before when memory failed i had 3 beeps (didn't we?) so i never looked. I assumed that the re-boots with no beeps were the training errors now as I've not had that before. I have been paying more attention to codes lately, so might not be right.


----------



## nick name

When I would get a POST code after failure to POST it was usually 05, but then on BIOS 1201 it was F9.


----------



## kmellz

Alex K said:


> Sorry, a bit off offtop:
> 
> Guys choosing between these three 240mm AIO for my 2700x:
> https://www.amazon.com/Be-Quiet-Silent-Loop-240mm/dp/B01M063PGD
> https://www.amazon.com/Fractal-Design-FD-WCU-CELSIUS-S24-BK-Cooler/dp/B0719DHG5Y
> https://www.amazon.com/Enermax-LIQMAX-Performance-Liquid-ELC-LMR240-BS/dp/B00QWZIN92
> 
> Reasonable suggestions required, especially somebody with usage experience.
> 
> P.S. Please do not suggest 280mm, my Mechify C can't fit it on top with Crosshair VII


Go https://www.amazon.com/ARCTIC-Liqui...901&sr=8-2&keywords=arctic+liquid+freezer+240

Extremely happy with mine! If you want more performance slap some better fans on it.

Just be aware of the extra thickness of the radiator!


----------



## Syldon

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks man !
> 
> 
> Hello again !
> 
> HELP!!!
> It's a very long time since i posted about my problem, but things have come worse with updating the bios and my system acts strange ,specially the bios !
> It was something relateed to Underclocking undervolting which i misunderstood> too long on the blue side .
> And to be true and i dont know where to begin.Since then i havent come further but updating my bios gave me more issues then it solved.
> 
> Full story :
> Things happened in the last week, and before all of this sh.t i had a X470 Prime and i just migrated the os over the new board. Win 1803
> So this issues below began after setting up the system freshly and updating the bios to 1103.
> Issues on windows: 1803+1809
> 
> 1. I wanted to fix sound crackling with this board, but didnt used onboard.
> Currently i think my decision to try fix my sound crackling issue has made it worser.
> It worked for the fresh installed 1809 without my Xfi installed and i used onboard sound.
> But mainly i use my headset which has it's own SP. (soundprocessor)
> ANd also there i have this sound crackling after bios initialized the USB...WTD
> 
> After installing all drivers and so on also did a few restarts and updated windows itself,after that i played a round BF V, it was soooo smooth .
> No slow texture loading or any other graphical issues,then i was going to bed.
> 
> 2. Now the next day i woke up and boom...blackscreen and fans turn 100% , all fans !
> The funny fact is i have videos of hwinfo where i had more options on the GPU TAB, and this changed from boot to boot. i mean WTD ! Also the task manager from windows shows sometimes a gpu sometimes not.
> i hope i can upload it since the ocn-website has changed ,sometimes it works and sometimes not .
> 
> 3. In win 10 i have the problem sometimes if i shutdown the pc via the OS but it wont shut down i mean power off, it runs until i press the start button, to make it off.
> I dont think this is normal !This is randomly !!!
> 
> 4. Why the hell do all my cores boost to 4.35GHZ ,shouldnt it only boost one core to the max?
> 
> 5. Before this new installation i wasn't able to use Ryzen Master, now it works.
> 
> 6. Slow texture loading in all games i have tested, GTA V ,BF V, BF 1, Division ,Insurgency sandstorm.
> 
> 7. Tested another 8*2 GB kit but single ranked, same behave, same issues.
> 
> 
> 8. Sometimes there was no GPU in task manager , i show this on part two of the video.
> 
> 
> Bios issues:
> Trying to set 2T under various settings is impossible, not on auto not ,on 2t ,it always shows 1T !
> 
> 2T is needed when using Dual ranked ram, if im not misinformed !!!
> 
> Sometimes it completely hangs during post showing me the rog logo
> 
> Sometimes i get into bios and no mouse nor keyboard is working...
> 
> Laggy unresponsive bios> randomly
> 
> Sometimes setting wont apply or didn't have apllied after restart.
> 
> The DRAM voltage shows only 1.33v but it has been set to 1.35
> 
> The SB voltage shows 1.084-1.087 so i also have the pain that this is a first batch board which showing SB voltage falsely, which is not acceptable to me for a 300euro Board !
> 
> 
> Sound crackling
> 
> 
> Actually fixed:
> 
> Fixed that blackscreen and all fans to 100% with a reinstall of Win 1809 .
> This fix had to do with TDR issues. Added TdrDelay 10 in regedit .
> 
> Hardware : 2700x , ballistix elite 2*8gb Dual ranked 3000mhz , R9 Fury Nitro , [email protected] 1201 , Bequiet Straight Power 1000W
> Software+drivers : 1809 , Adrenalin 18.9.3 and 18.11.2
> 
> And guys this is really make me pulling my hair out, it drives me so crazy that i wanted to push it all out of the window.
> Today if my brother has time he lends me his 1080ti, but i think it's a board issue i have...or ram...or CPU...frustration
> 
> HELP!!!
> And tell me if you guys need more input on this like bios setting or so...
> 
> 
> *Videos:*
> *part one : strange vrm voltage is displayed on hwinfo
> *
> *https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxsGjUER4jU*​
> 
> *part two : no gpu in task manager , isnt it strange ?
> *
> *https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNtfzKMcEFI*​
> 
> *UPDATE:*
> 
> *As i read above i'm not he only one were the bios has made nearly stable machines instable, interesting but :thumbsdow .*
> The german guys on hwluxx told me ,never change a running system,even bios!
> 
> So should i try to go back to 0509 where all nearly worked perfectly no stutters no lags no slow texture load?
> Is a bios flashback even possible , i mean in terms of agesa updates ...
> 
> 
> 
> *Sound crackling *
> 
> Anyone here got the sound crackling fixed, i laso have it with onboard sound ,so my Xfi wasn't the problem here !
> It happens when the bios boots and then again on windows and after a shutdown too.


I watched the video. It is painful because of the glare; it is much better to do screenshots (print screen keyboard shortcut then paste into a bitmap). You hwinfo can be laid out in tabs, Then simply drag items to the different screens.


Your CPU looks under volted. HWinfo shows 1.2v being used, and CPU is only reading 3.7 Ghz. Memory is running at base 2133mhz, which is what the system runs at when it cannot use your settings.

For anyone to be able to help you out you would need:
A list of hardware.
A txt dump of your bios settings.
Any results you have from stability programme testing.


I really don't think your issue is with your graphics card. It looks more like corruption due to the bad memory set up. But no one can say without good information to work from.


----------



## gupsterg

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> *BTW is it possible to flash back to a older version of the bios from 1201 to 0509 in my case? I'm sceptical because of the agesa updates it has already on it...
> *


Use flashback method. AFAIK C7H has only had AGESA 1.0.0.2 / AGESA 1.0.0.2C / AGESA 1.0.0.6.

I would go for UEFI 1002 if wanting older AGESA, as that has correct ASUS WMI implementation plus AGESA 1.0.0.2C.

After experiencing both 1103/1201 for a lot of testing, I'd say there are no gains or loss in stability vs each, but as UEFI 1201 is prone to getting stuck in memory training error loop (Q-Code: F9 Q-LED: DRAM) I'd opt for UEFI 1103 unless you have fully honed profile for use on UEFI 1201. 



crakej said:


> Very useful! It's quite poor that their tech support dept is not feeding this back to their production team or whoever is responsible for collating reported problems! Perhaps we should draw Silent Scone's attention to this? Does anyone know his username on here?
> 
> I really don't remember seeing F9 before, but before when memory failed i had 3 beeps (didn't we?) so i never looked. I assumed that the re-boots with no beeps were the training errors now as I've not had that before. I have been paying more attention to codes lately, so might not be right.


I agree it is poor, especially when the Q-Codes in manual people will be using to diagnose issues. I also believe how Elmor explained the Q-Code display works should be placed in manual. In my sig is Ryzen Memory Thread link, SS is OP so you'll see his user name, etc.

Mutiple beep moment would be Q-Code: F9 Q-LED: DRAM and that next post where we hear single beep, then profile reset, would also be same.


----------



## crakej

Think I may have stability - RamTest is at nearly 9k% after not only putting ram up to 1.43v, but also going up a step on the cpu offset voltage to +0.01875v - first ime i've needed to raise cpu power in some time.

Will do warm boot test/s and also some perf tests to see how well i'm doing. I may be able to go up to 3666


----------



## gupsterg

I'm not going for length anymore. As you know same settings used on UEFI 1201/1103 yield 24K%/14K% PASS in RT where I manually stop. My aim is to nail the occasional Q-Code: F9 Q-LED: DRAM at POST.

I spent yesterday trying various things to get rid of it whilst on UEFI 1103, using 3600MHz 1T GDMD with The Stilt's 3466MHz timings.

Things tried were:-

i) Lowering VDIMM, I went from 1.385V down to 1.365V, at that point I had no more Q-Code: F9 Q-LED: DRAM on upto 1x full cold POST + 12 consecutive warm POSTs, but stability in OS was compromised in OS.

ii) Tried Power Phase Control [Power Phase Response] Manual Adjustment [Ultra Fast] on CPU/SOC. This improved nothing for context of testing.

iii) Tried CPU/SOC/DRAM on Power Phase Control: Extreme with lowest VRM frequency. Idea was as all phases be on, no interference from then dropping in/out, lowest VRM frequency for least noise effect. This improved nothing for context of testing.

iv) Most painstaking testing was doing 1mV drops of CLDO_VDDP. I opted to start at 1000mV and worked down to 988mV, I also tried 949mV and 700mV. This improved nothing for context of testing.

v) I then did some off the cuff tests, examples like adding CPU VCORE offset, RAM timings loosening, etc. Again saw no improved results for context of testing.

At this point I called it a night. As CPU had shown such lengthy/repeat passes in RT it was bewildering I couldn't resolve the occasional POST issue.

Today I believe I maybe on to a solution.

First up I tried an unorthodox approach.

At launch of Ryzen gen 1, I had issues with 3200MHz having same occasional POST issues. I used sleep/resume to circumvent issue. Later UEFIs resolved the issue. I tried the same on this profile and OS stability was compromised. This lead me to believe I must review my settings.

I decided to go for ProcODT 53 rather than 48, due to higher ProcODT I felt I should down aspect of RTT. I had been using 34 Off 60 and set it now 34 Off 48, CAD Bus I kept same (all 24). I then passed 1xFP, 9xWP, with RT stability and no sign of Q-Code: F9 Q-LED: DRAM. On the 10th WP RT failed 7%, I did another WP (ie 11th) again fail 7%, I then did shutdown and repost, RT fail 57%. I then shutdown and removed power from PSU, to force fullest POST possible and bam I was back with stability. I'm now on 1xFP, 5th WP with RT stability and no sign of Q-Code: F9 Q-LED: DRAM.

If this new profile for the rerun lasts again upto 9x WP then TBH I could leave it there, as I'd never do that many in a normal day/usage. Or I could see if I can tune it out.


----------



## ComansoRowlett

https://www.youtube.com/c/AMD/live For those interested AMD is going live in an about 1 hours time for their CES coverage. Potential for Zen 2 stuff to be paper launched if you weren't aware. Kind of off topic, but at the same time - I'm hoping to put a Zen 2 in this board if it's compatible.


----------



## gupsterg

@crakej

New profile only bulked as stated before, have not been able to make it crack for POST to POST variance in context of my issue stated before.

Here is screenies ZIP with settings txt, I'd order files by time, room started off ~17C and was later ~18C.

Now rolled down a divider and upped BCLK.



Spoiler














Once BCLK tweak tested fully, will aim to see if I can improve on timings. Next phase apply a negative CPU VCORE offset and see if can tune down SOC and or VDIMM. Not going for any more BCLK and RAM MHz, hope to snag a small PCB GPU like a Nano, apply water block, so can see more of C7H and calling it a day with rig  .



ComansoRowlett said:


> https://www.youtube.com/c/AMD/live For those interested AMD is going live in an about 1 hours time for their CES coverage. Potential for Zen 2 stuff to be paper launched if you weren't aware. Kind of off topic, but at the same time - I'm hoping to put a Zen 2 in this board if it's compatible.





> What this means for PCIe 4.0 is actually fairly simple. We expect there to be a new line of motherboards presumably something like X570 that will be PCIe 4.0 compatible, for any new PCIe 4.0 graphics cards that will be coming to market. One of the differences with PCIe 4.0 is that it can only handle PCB traces up to 7 inches before needing a redriver/retimer, so these extra ICs are needed for ports lower down the board. But, the first PCIe slot on most motherboards is in that limit, so it would appear that a lot of current 300 and 400 series motherboards, assuming the traces adhere to signal integrity specifications, could have their first PCIe slot rated at PCIe 4.0 with new firmware.


Source link.

If above happens that gives me goosebumps. Prior to Ryzen, I only had Intel from Q6600 release, I did not use or recommend AMD CPU to friends family. I used to miss not being able to reuse a great mobo. As long ASUS churn out the FW, the C6H/C7H seems sound for longevity IMO.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

Syldon said:


> I watched the video. It is painful because of the glare; it is much better to do screenshots (print screen keyboard shortcut then paste into a bitmap). You hwinfo can be laid out in tabs, Then simply drag items to the different screens.
> 
> 
> Your CPU looks under volted. HWinfo shows 1.2v being used, and CPU is only reading 3.7 Ghz. Memory is running at base 2133mhz, which is what the system runs at when it cannot use your settings.
> 
> For anyone to be able to help you out you would need:
> A list of hardware.
> A txt dump of your bios settings.
> Any results you have from stability programme testing.
> 
> 
> I really don't think your issue is with your graphics card. It looks more like corruption due to the bad memory set up. But no one can say without good information to work from.


Thank you for leaving a comment, Syldon.

Back on the days i started with this rig i made a 9000% Karhu Test which it passed !
https://imgur.com/p3FHzkc

I'm working to get that txt to my stick , so it's on the way .

I also updated my rig infos. i hope the site gets it otherwise i wrtie it in my signature.








gupsterg said:


> Use flashback method. AFAIK C7H has only had AGESA 1.0.0.2 / AGESA 1.0.0.2C / AGESA 1.0.0.6.
> 
> I would go for UEFI 1002 if wanting older AGESA, as that has correct ASUS WMI implementation plus AGESA 1.0.0.2C.
> 
> After experiencing both 1103/1201 for a lot of testing, I'd say there are no gains or loss in stability vs each, but as UEFI 1201 is prone to getting stuck in memory training error loop (Q-Code: F9 Q-LED: DRAM) I'd opt for UEFI 1103 unless you have fully honed profile for use on UEFI 1201.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree it is poor, especially when the Q-Codes in manual people will be using to diagnose issues. I also believe how Elmor explained the Q-Code display works should be placed in manual. In my sig is Ryzen Memory Thread link, SS is OP so you'll see his user name, etc.
> 
> Mutiple beep moment would be Q-Code: F9 Q-LED: DRAM and that next post where we hear single beep, then profile reset, would also be same.


Hey gupsterg !
Thank you for leaving a comment.
I really tried it. I did exactly what is written in the manual ,it didn't worked...so i tried the normal method via bios and now i'm back to 0509 where i had not the problems i mentioned above.
But i really wonder why Bios Flashback didn't worked ... i putted the stick into the correct usb port , renamed the file to C7H.CAP ,shutdown computer pressed the flashback button,no lights nothing ... 

Will try 1002 on the coming weekend .


----------



## gupsterg

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> Hey gupsterg !
> Thank you for leaving a comment.
> I really tried it. I did exactly what is written in the manual ,it didn't worked...so i tried the normal method via bios and now i'm back to 0509 where i had not the problems i mentioned above.
> But i really wonder why Bios Flashback didn't worked ... i putted the stick into the correct usb port , renamed the file to C7H.CAP ,shutdown computer pressed the flashback button,no lights nothing ...
> 
> Will try 1002 on the coming weekend .


That is strange the flashback button did not light up. If say the embedded controller on motherboard that operates flashback did not find the UEFI file on USB, the button will stay lit blue. Do make sure USB stick is FAT32, place UEFI flash file in root, IIRC don't use a large capacity USB, IIRC when I used a 32GB one it did not work for me.

On UEFI prior to fully fixed ASUS WMI you are pretty much gonna get random shutdowns as in your second video in previous post.

I would opt for UEFI 1002, clean OS, do not install any programs for monitoring/etc. See if this stays stable, then I'd opt for latest HWINFO, CPU-Z, AIDA64 and or SIV, as monitoring tools.

I have not used W10 on C7H so far. I dual boot with W7 Pro x64 and Linux Mint v19, you can run Linux even on USB still, to rule out if it is W10 perhaps use rig with Linux.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

gupsterg said:


> That is strange the flashback button did not light up. If say the embedded controller on motherboard that operates flashback did not find the UEFI file on USB, the button will stay lit blue. Do make sure USB stick is FAT32, place UEFI flash file in root, IIRC don't use a large capacity USB, IIRC when I used a 32GB one it did not work for me.
> 
> 
> Will try flashback with another stick i only have 2*16gb and one 128gbstick here.
> And there was no blue or any other ledlight, and the stick was formatted to fat32.
> 
> 
> On UEFI prior to fully fixed ASUS WMI you are pretty much gonna get random shutdowns as in your second video in previous post.
> Sry i didn't mentioned that this* ISSUE on the video was with bios 1201* .
> 
> 
> 
> I would opt for UEFI 1002, clean OS, do not install any programs for monitoring/etc. See if this stays stable, then I'd opt for latest HWINFO, CPU-Z, AIDA64 and or SIV, as monitoring tools.
> 
> I have not used W10 on C7H so far. I dual boot with W7 Pro x64 and Linux Mint v19, you can run Linux even on USB still, to rule out if it is W10 perhaps use rig with Linux.



naah better not i'm not familair with linux,maybe i'll try Win 7 x64 later .


After yesterday palying around witth my bro's 1080ti, i can tell it's not the gpu.
i also reseated the ram today and 0509 is running good @ stock bios setup atm and since 0900 CET.


Slow texture loading is obsolete, i mean it really could be the bad ram setup i've done . 


offtopic:

BTW nice AMD anounced vega 2 as radeon VII, maybe i'll pair it with the Hero VII ... maybe ....


----------



## gupsterg

@crakej

Yeah BLCK tweak all sound so far. Will be going for other tests tomorrow plus multi post test.



Spoiler
















Wuest3nFuchs said:


> naah better not i'm not familair with linux,maybe i'll try Win 7 x64 later .
> 
> 
> After yesterday palying around witth my bro's 1080ti, i can tell it's not the gpu.
> i also reseated the ram today and 0509 is running good @ stock bios setup atm and since 0900 CET.
> 
> 
> Slow texture loading is obsolete, i mean it really could be the bad ram setup i've done .
> 
> 
> offtopic:
> 
> BTW nice AMD anounced vega 2 as radeon VII, maybe i'll pair it with the Hero VII ... maybe ....


ASUS WMI fix is two fold. 

i) UEFI must have correct implementation.

ii) SW used that may access Super IO chip must use it.

If video was on 1201 as you state, then I suspect OS/SW issue cause random black screen. I'd go clean OS, least amount of utils and see what happens.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

*Update : *



Bios Flashback did work now , but after that i had no Intel Lan Port anymore, a 2nd restart fixed it.
https://imgur.com/a/U4BFJOs


Before that restart i had that serious bug where it wont shut off and displays 24 on the qcode,thats nearly on every 2nd time i want to shut off or restart the System.
This code is beeing displayed everytime after bios boot.
And yes your absolutely right we need a updaeted Q-Code List.


*Current setup extracted txt:*




Spoiler



[2019/01/09 23:10:03]
Ai Overclock Tuner [Default]
Performance Enhancer [Level 1]
CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
Performance Bias [Auto]
Memory Frequency [Auto]
Core Performance Boost [Disabled]
SMT Mode [Auto]
TPU [Keep Current Settings]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
CPU SOC Voltage [Auto]
DRAM Voltage [Auto]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
Target TDP [Auto]
TRC_EOM [Auto]
TRTP_EOM [Auto]
TRRS_S_EOM [Auto]
TRRS_L_EOM [Auto]
TWTR_EOM [Auto]
TWTR_L_EOM [Auto]
TWCL_EOM [Auto]
TWR_EOM [Auto]
TFAW_EOM [Auto]
TRCT_EOM [Auto]
TREFI_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_DD_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SD_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SC_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SCL_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_DD_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SD_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SC_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SCL_EOM [Auto]
TWRRD_EOM [Auto]
TRDWR_EOM [Auto]
TWRRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
Mem Over Clock Fail Count [3]
DRAM CAS# Latency [Auto]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [Auto]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [Auto]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [Auto]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [Auto]
Trc [Auto]
TrrdS [Auto]
TrrdL [Auto]
Tfaw [Auto]
TwtrS [Auto]
TwtrL [Auto]
Twr [Auto]
Trcpage [Auto]
TrdrdScl [Auto]
TwrwrScl [Auto]
Trfc [Auto]
Trfc2 [Auto]
Trfc4 [Auto]
Tcwl [Auto]
Trtp [Auto]
Trdwr [Auto]
Twrrd [Auto]
TwrwrSc [Auto]
TwrwrSd [Auto]
TwrwrDd [Auto]
TrdrdSc [Auto]
TrdrdSd [Auto]
TrdrdDd [Auto]
Tcke [Auto]
ProcODT [Auto]
Cmd2T [Auto]
Gear Down Mode [Auto]
Power Down Enable [Auto]
RttNom [Auto]
RttWr [Auto]
RttPark [Auto]
MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
MemCkeSetup [Auto]
MemCadBusClkDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [Auto]
VTTDDR Voltage [Auto]
VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
VDDP Voltage [Auto]
1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
PLL reference voltage [Auto]
T Offset [Auto]
Sense MI Skew [Auto]
Sense MI Offset [Auto]
Promontory presence [Auto]
Clock Amplitude [Auto]
CLDO VDDP voltage [Auto]
CPU Load-line Calibration [Auto]
CPU Current Capability [Auto]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Auto]
VRM Spread Spectrum [Auto]
CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
CPU Power Phase Control [Auto]
CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Auto]
VDDSOC Current Capability [Auto]
VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Auto]
VDDSOC Phase Control [Auto]
DRAM Current Capability [100%]
DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
DRAM Switching Frequency [Auto]
DRAM VBoot Voltage [Auto]
Security Device Support [Enable]
Firmware TPM [Disable]
Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
PSS Support [Auto]
SVM Mode [Disabled]
PT XHCI GEN1 [Auto]
PT XHCI GEN2 [Auto]
PT USB Equalization4 [Auto]
PT USB Redriver [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 0 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 1 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 2 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 3 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 4 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 5 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 6 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 7 [Auto]
PT SATA PORT 0 Enable [Auto]
PT SATA PORT 1 Enable [Auto]
PT SATA PORT 2 Enable [Auto]
PT SATA PORT 3 Enable [Auto]
PT SATA PORT 4 Enable [Auto]
PT SATA PORT 5 Enable [Auto]
PT SATA PORT 6 Enable [Auto]
PT SATA PORT 7 Enable [Auto]
Onboard PCIE LAN PXE ROM [Enabled]
AMD CRB EHCI Debug port switch [Disabled]
Onboard LED [Enabled]
Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
Primary Video Device [PCIE / PCI Video]
SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
SATA Mode [AHCI]
NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
SMART Self Test [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
ErP Ready [Disabled]
Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
Power On By RTC [Disabled]
HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
SB Link Mode [Auto]
Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
When system is in working state [On]
When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [Off]
Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
Network Stack [Disabled]
Debug Port Table [Disabled]
Debug Port Table 2 [Disabled]
Device [CT250MX500SSD1]
Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
USB Mass Storage Driver Support [Enabled]
JetFlashTranscend 16GB 1.00 [Auto]
U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
U31G1_5 [Enabled]
U31G1_6 [Enabled]
U31G1_7 [Enabled]
U31G1_8 [Enabled]
U31G1_9 [Enabled]
U31G1_10 [Enabled]
USB11 [Enabled]
USB12 [Enabled]
USB13 [Enabled]
USB14 [Enabled]
USB15 [Enabled]
CPU Temperature [Monitor]
MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
VRM Temperature [Monitor]
PCH Temperature [Monitor]
T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
5V Voltage [Monitor]
12V Voltage [Monitor]
CPU Q-Fan Control [Auto]
CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [200 RPM]
CPU Fan Profile [Standard]
AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 3 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [Auto]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Source [CPU]
HAMP Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
HAMP Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
HAMP Fan Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
OnChip SATA Channel [Auto]
OnChip SATA Type [AHCI]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
IR Config [RX & TX0 Only]
SdForce18 Enable [Disabled]
SD Mode configuration [AMDA]
Uart 0 Enable [Enabled]
Uart 1 Enable [Enabled]
I2C 0 Enable [Enabled]
I2C 1 Enable [Enabled]
I2C 2 Enable [Disabled]
I2C 3 Enable [Disabled]
GPIO Devices Support [Auto]
ESATA Port On Port 0 [Auto]
ESATA Port On Port 1 [Auto]
ESATA Port On Port 2 [Auto]
ESATA Port On Port 3 [Auto]
ESATA Port On Port 4 [Auto]
ESATA Port On Port 5 [Auto]
ESATA Port On Port 6 [Auto]
ESATA Port On Port 7 [Auto]
SATA Power On Port 0 [Auto]
SATA Power On Port 1 [Auto]
SATA Power On Port 2 [Auto]
SATA Power On Port 3 [Auto]
SATA Power On Port 4 [Auto]
SATA Power On Port 5 [Auto]
SATA Power On Port 6 [Auto]
SATA Power On Port 7 [Auto]
SATA Port 0 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 1 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 2 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 3 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 4 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 5 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 6 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 7 MODE [Auto]
SATA Hot-Removable Support [Auto]
SATA 6 AHCI Support [Auto]
Int. Clk Differential Spread [Auto]
SATA MAXGEN2 CAP OPTION [Auto]
SATA CLK Mode Option [Auto]
Aggressive Link PM Capability [Auto]
Port Multiplier Capability [Auto]
SATA Ports Auto Clock Control [Auto]
SATA Partial State Capability [Auto]
SATA FIS Based Switching [Auto]
SATA Command Completion Coalescing Support [Auto]
SATA Slumber State Capability [Auto]
SATA MSI Capability Support [Auto]
SATA Target Support 8 Devices [Auto]
Generic Mode [Auto]
SATA AHCI Enclosure [Auto]
SATA SGPIO 0 [Auto]
SATA SGPIO 1 [Disabled]
SATA PHY PLL [Auto]
AC/DC Change Message Delivery [Disabled]
TimerTick Tracking [Auto]
Clock Interrupt Tag [Auto]
EHCI Traffic Handling [Disabled]
Fusion Message C Multi-Core [Disabled]
Fusion Message C State [Disabled]
SPI Read Mode [Auto]
SPI 100MHz Support [Auto]
SPI Normal Speed [Auto]
SPI Fast Read Speed [Auto]
SPI Burst Write [Auto]
I2C 0 D3 Support [Auto]
I2C 1 D3 Support [Auto]
I2C 2 D3 Support [Auto]
I2C 3 D3 Support [Auto]
I2C 4 D3 Support [Auto]
I2C 5 D3 Support [Auto]
UART 0 D3 Support [Auto]
UART 1 D3 Support [Auto]
UART 2 D3 Support [Auto]
UART 3 D3 Support [Auto]
SATA D3 Support [Auto]
EHCI D3 Support [Auto]
XHCI D3 Support [Auto]
SD D3 Support [Auto]
S0I3 [Auto]
Chipset Power Saving Features [Enabled]
SB Clock Spread Spectrum [Auto]
SB Clock Spread Spectrum Option [-0.375%]
HPET In SB [Auto]
MsiDis in HPET [Auto]
_OSC For PCI0 [Auto]
USB Phy Power Down [Auto]
PCIB_CLK_Stop Override [0]
USB MSI Option [Auto]
LPC MSI Option [Auto]
PCIBridge MSI Option [Auto]
AB MSI Option [Auto]
SB C1E Support [Auto]
SB Hardware Reduced Support [Auto]
GPP Serial Debug Bus Enable [Auto]
PSPP Policy [Auto]
Memory Clock [Auto]
Bank Interleaving [Enabled]
Channel Interleaving [Enabled]
Memory Clear [Disabled]
Fast Boot [Disabled]
Boot Logo Display [Auto]
POST Delay Time [3 sec]
Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
Launch CSM [Enabled]
Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
OS Type [Other OS]
Setup Animator [Disabled]
Auto-launch ASUS Grid [Disabled]
Load from Profile [1]
Profile Name [1]
Save to Profile [1]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
BCLK Frequency [Auto]
CPU Ratio [Auto]
Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]



https://imgur.com/a/J1RQ9Pp


*TODO List: *

Tomorrow clean install of win 10 1809,test test test


----------



## gupsterg

@Wuest3nFuchs

Do not use Performance Enhancer set to Level 1, use Default.

Set Core Performance Boost to Enabled.

Then you have stock CPU.

Sense MI Skew set to Disabled, this way you know tCTL/tDIE is as AMD AGESA dictate (ie no skew).

Then install OS. Install no monitoring/OS OC SW IMO.

I have never had board not shut off when I request it, not even on C6H/ZE. If issue persists I'd consider RMA mobo.


----------



## Baio73

neikosr0x said:


> Could you share your settings i own the same ram kit i couldn't made them run stable on 3600mhz but now 3533 is working just fine no problems


Sorry for late reply, very busy days… :-(

Nothing special, just set everything to Auto and the speed manually:



Hope it'll be usefull for you!

Baio

PS. still waiting for someone suggesting me some setting for this kit (G.Skill TridentZ F4-3600C16D-16GTZR).
Otherwise, is there any guide to folow? There's a mess of settings with those RAMs...


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

gupsterg said:


> @*Wuest3nFuchs*
> 
> Do not use Performance Enhancer set to Level 1, use Default.
> 
> Set Core Performance Boost to Enabled.
> 
> Then you have stock CPU.
> 
> Sense MI Skew set to Disabled, this way you know tCTL/tDIE is as AMD AGESA dictate (ie no skew).
> 
> Then install OS. Install no monitoring/OS OC SW IMO.
> 
> I have never had board not shut off when I request it, not even on C6H/ZE. If issue persists I'd consider RMA mobo.





Thank you very much gupsterg !!!




Spoiler



[2018/09/18 12:36:31]
Ai Overclock Tuner [Default]
Performance Enhancer [Default]
CPU Core Ratio [40.00]
Performance Bias [None]
Memory Frequency [DDR4-3000MHz]
Core Performance Boost [Auto]
SMT Mode [Auto]
TPU [Keep Current Settings]
CPU Core Voltage [Offset mode]
CPU Offset Mode Sign [-]
- CPU Core Voltage Offset [0.00625]
CPU SOC Voltage [Offset mode]
VDDSOC Offset Mode Sign [-]
- VDDSOC Voltage Offset [0.06250]
DRAM Voltage [1.35000]
1.8V PLL Voltage [1.81000]
1.05V SB Voltage [1.05000]
Target TDP [Auto]
TRC_EOM [Auto]
TRTP_EOM [Auto]
TRRS_S_EOM [Auto]
TRRS_L_EOM [Auto]
TWTR_EOM [Auto]
TWTR_L_EOM [Auto]
TWCL_EOM [Auto]
TWR_EOM [Auto]
TFAW_EOM [Auto]
TRCT_EOM [Auto]
TREFI_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_DD_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SD_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SC_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SCL_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_DD_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SD_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SC_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SCL_EOM [Auto]
TWRRD_EOM [Auto]
TRDWR_EOM [Auto]
TWRRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
Mem Over Clock Fail Count [2]
DRAM CAS# Latency [16]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [16]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [16]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [16]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [38]
Trc [70]
TrrdS [6]
TrrdL [8]
Tfaw [38]
TwtrS [4]
TwtrL [12]
Twr [22]
Trcpage [Auto]
TrdrdScl [6]
TwrwrScl [6]
Trfc [360]
Trfc2 [260]
Trfc4 [160]
Tcwl [14]
Trtp [12]
Trdwr [8]
Twrrd [4]
TwrwrSc [2]
TwrwrSd [6]
TwrwrDd [6]
TrdrdSc [2]
TrdrdSd [6]
TrdrdDd [6]
Tcke [8]
ProcODT [68.6 ohm]
Cmd2T [2T]
Gear Down Mode [Disabled]
Power Down Enable [Disabled]
RttNom [RZQ/7]
RttWr [RZQ/3]
RttPark [RZQ/1]
MemAddrCmdSetup [0]
MemCsOdtSetup [0]
MemCkeSetup [0]
MemCadBusClkDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
VTTDDR Voltage [0.63750]
VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
VDDP Voltage [0.81000]
1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
2.5V SB Voltage [2.50000]
DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
PLL reference voltage [Auto]
T Offset [Auto]
Sense MI Skew [Auto]
Sense MI Offset [Auto]
Promontory presence [Auto]
Clock Amplitude [Normal]
CLDO VDDP voltage [700]
CPU Load-line Calibration [Auto]
CPU Current Capability [100%]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Auto]
Active Frequency Mode [Enabled]
CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
CPU Power Phase Control [Standard]
CPU Power Thermal Control [115]
VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Auto]
VDDSOC Current Capability [100%]
VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Auto]
VDDSOC Phase Control [Standard]
DRAM Current Capability [100%]
DRAM Power Phase Control [Optimized]
DRAM Switching Frequency [Auto]
DRAM VBoot Voltage [Auto]
Security Device Support [Enable]
Firmware TPM [Disable]
Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
PSS Support [Auto]
SVM Mode [Enabled]
PT XHCI GEN1 [Auto]
PT XHCI GEN2 [Auto]
PT USB Equalization4 [Auto]
PT USB Redriver [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 0 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 1 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 2 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 3 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 4 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 5 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 6 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 7 [Auto]
PT SATA PORT 0 Enable [Auto]
PT SATA PORT 1 Enable [Auto]
PT SATA PORT 2 Enable [Auto]
PT SATA PORT 3 Enable [Auto]
PT SATA PORT 4 Enable [Auto]
PT SATA PORT 5 Enable [Auto]
PT SATA PORT 6 Enable [Auto]
PT SATA PORT 7 Enable [Auto]
Onboard PCIE LAN PXE ROM [Enabled]
AMD CRB EHCI Debug port switch [Disabled]
Onboard LED [Enabled]
Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
Primary Video Device [PCIE / PCI Video]
SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
SATA Mode [AHCI]
NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
SMART Self Test [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
ErP Ready [Disabled]
Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
Power On By RTC [Disabled]
HD Audio Controller [Disabled]
M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Disabled(X4/X4 mode)]
PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
SB Link Mode [Auto]
Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
When system is in working state [On]
When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [Off]
Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
Network Stack [Disabled]
Debug Port Table [Disabled]
Debug Port Table 2 [Disabled]
Device [Samsung SSD 840 EVO 500GB]
Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
USB Mass Storage Driver Support [Enabled]
JetFlashTranscend 16GB 1.00 [Auto]
U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
U31G1_5 [Enabled]
U31G1_6 [Enabled]
U31G1_7 [Enabled]
U31G1_8 [Enabled]
U31G1_9 [Enabled]
U31G1_10 [Enabled]
USB11 [Enabled]
USB12 [Enabled]
USB13 [Enabled]
USB14 [Enabled]
USB15 [Enabled]
CPU Temperature [Monitor]
MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
VRM Temperature [Monitor]
PCH Temperature [Monitor]
T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
5V Voltage [Monitor]
12V Voltage [Monitor]
CPU Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [2.6 sec]
CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [Ignore]
CPU Fan Profile [Manual]
CPU Upper Temperature [70]
CPU Fan Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
CPU Middle Temperature [50]
CPU Fan Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [70]
CPU Lower Temperature [30]
CPU Fan Min. Duty Cycle (%) [45]
AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [PWM Mode]
Water Pump Upper Temperature [60]
Water Pump Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Water Pump Middle Temperature [35]
Water Pump Middle. Duty Cycle(%) [100]
Water Pump Lower Temperature [25]
Water Pump Min. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Turbo]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [400 RPM]
Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Turbo]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 3 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Turbo]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Source [CPU]
HAMP Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
HAMP Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
HAMP Fan Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
OnChip SATA Channel [Auto]
OnChip SATA Type [AHCI]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
IR Config [RX & TX0 Only]
SdForce18 Enable [Disabled]
SD Mode configuration [AMDA]
Uart 0 Enable [Enabled]
Uart 1 Enable [Enabled]
I2C 0 Enable [Enabled]
I2C 1 Enable [Enabled]
I2C 2 Enable [Disabled]
I2C 3 Enable [Disabled]
GPIO Devices Support [Auto]
ESATA Port On Port 0 [Auto]
ESATA Port On Port 1 [Auto]
ESATA Port On Port 2 [Auto]
ESATA Port On Port 3 [Auto]
ESATA Port On Port 4 [Auto]
ESATA Port On Port 5 [Auto]
ESATA Port On Port 6 [Auto]
ESATA Port On Port 7 [Auto]
SATA Power On Port 0 [Auto]
SATA Power On Port 1 [Auto]
SATA Power On Port 2 [Auto]
SATA Power On Port 3 [Auto]
SATA Power On Port 4 [Auto]
SATA Power On Port 5 [Auto]
SATA Power On Port 6 [Auto]
SATA Power On Port 7 [Auto]
SATA Port 0 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 1 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 2 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 3 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 4 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 5 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 6 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 7 MODE [Auto]
SATA Hot-Removable Support [Auto]
SATA 6 AHCI Support [Auto]
Int. Clk Differential Spread [Auto]
SATA MAXGEN2 CAP OPTION [Auto]
SATA CLK Mode Option [Auto]
Aggressive Link PM Capability [Auto]
Port Multiplier Capability [Auto]
SATA Ports Auto Clock Control [Auto]
SATA Partial State Capability [Auto]
SATA FIS Based Switching [Auto]
SATA Command Completion Coalescing Support [Auto]
SATA Slumber State Capability [Auto]
SATA MSI Capability Support [Auto]
SATA Target Support 8 Devices [Auto]
Generic Mode [Auto]
SATA AHCI Enclosure [Auto]
SATA SGPIO 0 [Auto]
SATA SGPIO 1 [Disabled]
SATA PHY PLL [Auto]
AC/DC Change Message Delivery [Disabled]
TimerTick Tracking [Auto]
Clock Interrupt Tag [Auto]
EHCI Traffic Handling [Disabled]
Fusion Message C Multi-Core [Disabled]
Fusion Message C State [Disabled]
SPI Read Mode [Auto]
SPI 100MHz Support [Auto]
SPI Normal Speed [Auto]
SPI Fast Read Speed [Auto]
SPI Burst Write [Auto]
I2C 0 D3 Support [Auto]
I2C 1 D3 Support [Auto]
I2C 2 D3 Support [Auto]
I2C 3 D3 Support [Auto]
I2C 4 D3 Support [Auto]
I2C 5 D3 Support [Auto]
UART 0 D3 Support [Auto]
UART 1 D3 Support [Auto]
UART 2 D3 Support [Auto]
UART 3 D3 Support [Auto]
SATA D3 Support [Auto]
EHCI D3 Support [Auto]
XHCI D3 Support [Auto]
SD D3 Support [Auto]
S0I3 [Auto]
Chipset Power Saving Features [Enabled]
SB Clock Spread Spectrum [Auto]
SB Clock Spread Spectrum Option [-0.375%]
HPET In SB [Auto]
MsiDis in HPET [Auto]
_OSC For PCI0 [Auto]
USB Phy Power Down [Auto]
PCIB_CLK_Stop Override [0]
USB MSI Option [Auto]
LPC MSI Option [Auto]
PCIBridge MSI Option [Auto]
AB MSI Option [Auto]
SB C1E Support [Auto]
SB Hardware Reduced Support [Auto]
GPP Serial Debug Bus Enable [Auto]
PSPP Policy [Auto]
Memory Clock [Auto]
Bank Interleaving [Enabled]
Channel Interleaving [Enabled]
Memory Clear [Disabled]
Fast Boot [Disabled]
Boot Logo Display [Auto]
POST Delay Time [1 sec]
Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
Launch CSM [Enabled]
Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
OS Type [Other OS]
Setup Animator [Disabled]
Auto-launch ASUS Grid [Disabled]
Load from Profile [3]
Profile Name [stabiltests]
Save to Profile [3]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
BCLK Frequency [Auto]
CPU Ratio [Auto]
Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]




*This was my setup with bios 0509 before i had all that issues. *


Before the 1.st biosflash the shutdown or restart bug never happened before.


I try your settings now and reinstall OS as you told ! :thumb:



*EDIT:*
What should i do after OS is installed ?
I think installing the drivers first, maybe updating win 10 or...

Install BF V and play it ?


*Todo List:
*


Spoiler



*Plan A
*
Bios 0509 > check

fresh iso of 1809 install via rufus > check

gupsterg bios suggestions > check
prepare 840 and 860 evo for OS installations > check

next step install OS
install drivers
install and play BF V ?


*Plan B if something strange happens*

Do exactly the same from above but with bios* 1002*


----------



## crakej

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> *Update : *
> 
> 
> 
> Bios Flashback did work now , but after that i had no Intel Lan Port anymore, a 2nd restart fixed it.
> https://imgur.com/a/U4BFJOs
> 
> 
> Before that restart i had that serious bug where it wont shut off and displays 24 on the qcode,thats nearly on every 2nd time i want to shut off or restart the System.
> This code is beeing displayed everytime after bios boot.
> And yes your absolutely right we need a updaeted Q-Code List.
> 
> 
> *Current setup extracted txt:*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> [2019/01/09 23:10:03]
> Ai Overclock Tuner [Default]
> Performance Enhancer [Level 1]
> CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
> Performance Bias [Auto]
> Memory Frequency [Auto]
> Core Performance Boost [Disabled]
> SMT Mode [Auto]
> TPU [Keep Current Settings]
> CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
> CPU SOC Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> 1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
> Target TDP [Auto]
> TRC_EOM [Auto]
> TRTP_EOM [Auto]
> TRRS_S_EOM [Auto]
> TRRS_L_EOM [Auto]
> TWTR_EOM [Auto]
> TWTR_L_EOM [Auto]
> TWCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWR_EOM [Auto]
> TFAW_EOM [Auto]
> TRCT_EOM [Auto]
> TREFI_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_DD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SC_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_DD_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SD_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SC_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWRRD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDWR_EOM [Auto]
> TWRRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> Mem Over Clock Fail Count [3]
> DRAM CAS# Latency [Auto]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [Auto]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [Auto]
> DRAM RAS# PRE Time [Auto]
> DRAM RAS# ACT Time [Auto]
> Trc [Auto]
> TrrdS [Auto]
> TrrdL [Auto]
> Tfaw [Auto]
> TwtrS [Auto]
> TwtrL [Auto]
> Twr [Auto]
> Trcpage [Auto]
> TrdrdScl [Auto]
> TwrwrScl [Auto]
> Trfc [Auto]
> Trfc2 [Auto]
> Trfc4 [Auto]
> Tcwl [Auto]
> Trtp [Auto]
> Trdwr [Auto]
> Twrrd [Auto]
> TwrwrSc [Auto]
> TwrwrSd [Auto]
> TwrwrDd [Auto]
> TrdrdSc [Auto]
> TrdrdSd [Auto]
> TrdrdDd [Auto]
> Tcke [Auto]
> ProcODT [Auto]
> Cmd2T [Auto]
> Gear Down Mode [Auto]
> Power Down Enable [Auto]
> RttNom [Auto]
> RttWr [Auto]
> RttPark [Auto]
> MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
> MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
> MemCkeSetup [Auto]
> MemCadBusClkDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [Auto]
> VTTDDR Voltage [Auto]
> VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
> VDDP Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
> CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
> 2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
> PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
> PLL reference voltage [Auto]
> T Offset [Auto]
> Sense MI Skew [Auto]
> Sense MI Offset [Auto]
> Promontory presence [Auto]
> Clock Amplitude [Auto]
> CLDO VDDP voltage [Auto]
> CPU Load-line Calibration [Auto]
> CPU Current Capability [Auto]
> CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Auto]
> VRM Spread Spectrum [Auto]
> CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
> CPU Power Phase Control [Auto]
> CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
> VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Auto]
> VDDSOC Current Capability [Auto]
> VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Auto]
> VDDSOC Phase Control [Auto]
> DRAM Current Capability [100%]
> DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
> DRAM Switching Frequency [Auto]
> DRAM VBoot Voltage [Auto]
> Security Device Support [Enable]
> Firmware TPM [Disable]
> Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
> PSS Support [Auto]
> SVM Mode [Disabled]
> PT XHCI GEN1 [Auto]
> PT XHCI GEN2 [Auto]
> PT USB Equalization4 [Auto]
> PT USB Redriver [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 0 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 1 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 2 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 3 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 4 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 5 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 6 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 7 [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 0 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 1 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 2 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 3 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 4 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 5 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 6 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 7 Enable [Auto]
> Onboard PCIE LAN PXE ROM [Enabled]
> AMD CRB EHCI Debug port switch [Disabled]
> Onboard LED [Enabled]
> Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
> Primary Video Device [PCIE / PCI Video]
> SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
> SATA Mode [AHCI]
> NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
> SMART Self Test [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> ErP Ready [Disabled]
> Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
> Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
> Power On By RTC [Disabled]
> HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
> M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
> PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
> PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
> M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
> M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
> SB Link Mode [Auto]
> Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
> USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
> When system is in working state [On]
> When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [Off]
> Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
> Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
> Network Stack [Disabled]
> Debug Port Table [Disabled]
> Debug Port Table 2 [Disabled]
> Device [CT250MX500SSD1]
> Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
> XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
> USB Mass Storage Driver Support [Enabled]
> JetFlashTranscend 16GB 1.00 [Auto]
> U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
> U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
> U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> U31G1_5 [Enabled]
> U31G1_6 [Enabled]
> U31G1_7 [Enabled]
> U31G1_8 [Enabled]
> U31G1_9 [Enabled]
> U31G1_10 [Enabled]
> USB11 [Enabled]
> USB12 [Enabled]
> USB13 [Enabled]
> USB14 [Enabled]
> USB15 [Enabled]
> CPU Temperature [Monitor]
> MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
> VRM Temperature [Monitor]
> PCH Temperature [Monitor]
> T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
> CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
> AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
> W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
> W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
> HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
> CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
> 3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
> 5V Voltage [Monitor]
> 12V Voltage [Monitor]
> CPU Q-Fan Control [Auto]
> CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [200 RPM]
> CPU Fan Profile [Standard]
> AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 3 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [Auto]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> HAMP Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> HAMP Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> HAMP Fan Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
> OnChip SATA Channel [Auto]
> OnChip SATA Type [AHCI]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> IR Config [RX & TX0 Only]
> SdForce18 Enable [Disabled]
> SD Mode configuration [AMDA]
> Uart 0 Enable [Enabled]
> Uart 1 Enable [Enabled]
> I2C 0 Enable [Enabled]
> I2C 1 Enable [Enabled]
> I2C 2 Enable [Disabled]
> I2C 3 Enable [Disabled]
> GPIO Devices Support [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 0 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 1 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 2 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 3 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 4 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 5 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 6 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 7 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 0 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 1 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 2 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 3 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 4 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 5 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 6 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 7 [Auto]
> SATA Port 0 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 1 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 2 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 3 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 4 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 5 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 6 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 7 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Hot-Removable Support [Auto]
> SATA 6 AHCI Support [Auto]
> Int. Clk Differential Spread [Auto]
> SATA MAXGEN2 CAP OPTION [Auto]
> SATA CLK Mode Option [Auto]
> Aggressive Link PM Capability [Auto]
> Port Multiplier Capability [Auto]
> SATA Ports Auto Clock Control [Auto]
> SATA Partial State Capability [Auto]
> SATA FIS Based Switching [Auto]
> SATA Command Completion Coalescing Support [Auto]
> SATA Slumber State Capability [Auto]
> SATA MSI Capability Support [Auto]
> SATA Target Support 8 Devices [Auto]
> Generic Mode [Auto]
> SATA AHCI Enclosure [Auto]
> SATA SGPIO 0 [Auto]
> SATA SGPIO 1 [Disabled]
> SATA PHY PLL [Auto]
> AC/DC Change Message Delivery [Disabled]
> TimerTick Tracking [Auto]
> Clock Interrupt Tag [Auto]
> EHCI Traffic Handling [Disabled]
> Fusion Message C Multi-Core [Disabled]
> Fusion Message C State [Disabled]
> SPI Read Mode [Auto]
> SPI 100MHz Support [Auto]
> SPI Normal Speed [Auto]
> SPI Fast Read Speed [Auto]
> SPI Burst Write [Auto]
> I2C 0 D3 Support [Auto]
> I2C 1 D3 Support [Auto]
> I2C 2 D3 Support [Auto]
> I2C 3 D3 Support [Auto]
> I2C 4 D3 Support [Auto]
> I2C 5 D3 Support [Auto]
> UART 0 D3 Support [Auto]
> UART 1 D3 Support [Auto]
> UART 2 D3 Support [Auto]
> UART 3 D3 Support [Auto]
> SATA D3 Support [Auto]
> EHCI D3 Support [Auto]
> XHCI D3 Support [Auto]
> SD D3 Support [Auto]
> S0I3 [Auto]
> Chipset Power Saving Features [Enabled]
> SB Clock Spread Spectrum [Auto]
> SB Clock Spread Spectrum Option [-0.375%]
> HPET In SB [Auto]
> MsiDis in HPET [Auto]
> _OSC For PCI0 [Auto]
> USB Phy Power Down [Auto]
> PCIB_CLK_Stop Override [0]
> USB MSI Option [Auto]
> LPC MSI Option [Auto]
> PCIBridge MSI Option [Auto]
> AB MSI Option [Auto]
> SB C1E Support [Auto]
> SB Hardware Reduced Support [Auto]
> GPP Serial Debug Bus Enable [Auto]
> PSPP Policy [Auto]
> Memory Clock [Auto]
> Bank Interleaving [Enabled]
> Channel Interleaving [Enabled]
> Memory Clear [Disabled]
> Fast Boot [Disabled]
> Boot Logo Display [Auto]
> POST Delay Time [3 sec]
> Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
> Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
> Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
> Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
> Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
> Launch CSM [Enabled]
> Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
> Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
> Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
> Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
> OS Type [Other OS]
> Setup Animator [Disabled]
> Auto-launch ASUS Grid [Disabled]
> Load from Profile [1]
> Profile Name [1]
> Save to Profile [1]
> CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
> VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> BCLK Frequency [Auto]
> CPU Ratio [Auto]
> Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
> 
> 
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/J1RQ9Pp
> 
> 
> *TODO List: *
> 
> Tomorrow clean install of win 10 1809,test test test


qcode 24 is normal - you always get this when UEFI hands over to the OS.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> @crakej
> 
> New profile only bulked as stated before, have not been able to make it crack for POST to POST variance in context of my issue stated before.
> 
> Here is screenies ZIP with settings txt, I'd order files by time, room started off ~17C and was later ~18C.
> 
> Now rolled down a divider and upped BCLK.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 245198
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Once BCLK tweak tested fully, will aim to see if I can improve on timings. Next phase apply a negative CPU VCORE offset and see if can tune down SOC and or VDIMM. Not going for any more BCLK and RAM MHz, hope to snag a small PCB GPU like a Nano, apply water block, so can see more of C7H and calling it a day with rig  .
> 
> Source link.
> 
> If above happens that gives me goosebumps. Prior to Ryzen, I only had Intel from Q6600 release, I did not use or recommend AMD CPU to friends family. I used to miss not being able to reuse a great mobo. As long ASUS churn out the FW, the C6H/C7H seems sound for longevity IMO.



Thanks for sharing. Very helpful.

I'm still not 100% - often getting past 5k% RT even 10k when I can wait, but between boots it changes. Seems to be most reliable from cold boot. I'm going to remove my ram and make sure connectors are clean (as I have to keep re-seating it) - my only other alternative is to use T2, which isn't the ed of the world, but I just wish I could use T1 GD disabled as specced.
Thanks for sharing. Very helpful.

I'm still not 100% - often getting past 5k% RT even 10k when I can wait, but between boots it changes. Seems to be most reliable from cold boot. I'm going to remove my ram and make sure connectors are clean (as I have to keep re-seating it) - my only other alternative is to use T2, which isn't the ed of the world, but I just wish I could use T1 GD disabled as specced.


----------



## Syldon

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> *Update : *
> 
> 
> 
> Bios Flashback did work now , but after that i had no Intel Lan Port anymore, a 2nd restart fixed it.
> https://imgur.com/a/U4BFJOs
> 
> 
> Before that restart i had that serious bug where it wont shut off and displays 24 on the qcode,thats nearly on every 2nd time i want to shut off or restart the System.
> This code is beeing displayed everytime after bios boot.
> And yes your absolutely right we need a updaeted Q-Code List.
> 
> 
> *Current setup extracted txt:*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> [2019/01/09 23:10:03]
> Ai Overclock Tuner [Default]
> Performance Enhancer [Level 1]
> CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
> Performance Bias [Auto]
> Memory Frequency [Auto]
> Core Performance Boost [Disabled]
> SMT Mode [Auto]
> TPU [Keep Current Settings]
> CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
> CPU SOC Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> 1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
> Target TDP [Auto]
> TRC_EOM [Auto]
> TRTP_EOM [Auto]
> TRRS_S_EOM [Auto]
> TRRS_L_EOM [Auto]
> TWTR_EOM [Auto]
> TWTR_L_EOM [Auto]
> TWCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWR_EOM [Auto]
> TFAW_EOM [Auto]
> TRCT_EOM [Auto]
> TREFI_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_DD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SC_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_DD_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SD_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SC_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWRRD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDWR_EOM [Auto]
> TWRRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> Mem Over Clock Fail Count [3]
> DRAM CAS# Latency [Auto]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [Auto]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [Auto]
> DRAM RAS# PRE Time [Auto]
> DRAM RAS# ACT Time [Auto]
> Trc [Auto]
> TrrdS [Auto]
> TrrdL [Auto]
> Tfaw [Auto]
> TwtrS [Auto]
> TwtrL [Auto]
> Twr [Auto]
> Trcpage [Auto]
> TrdrdScl [Auto]
> TwrwrScl [Auto]
> Trfc [Auto]
> Trfc2 [Auto]
> Trfc4 [Auto]
> Tcwl [Auto]
> Trtp [Auto]
> Trdwr [Auto]
> Twrrd [Auto]
> TwrwrSc [Auto]
> TwrwrSd [Auto]
> TwrwrDd [Auto]
> TrdrdSc [Auto]
> TrdrdSd [Auto]
> TrdrdDd [Auto]
> Tcke [Auto]
> ProcODT [Auto]
> Cmd2T [Auto]
> Gear Down Mode [Auto]
> Power Down Enable [Auto]
> RttNom [Auto]
> RttWr [Auto]
> RttPark [Auto]
> MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
> MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
> MemCkeSetup [Auto]
> MemCadBusClkDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [Auto]
> VTTDDR Voltage [Auto]
> VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
> VDDP Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
> CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
> 2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
> PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
> PLL reference voltage [Auto]
> T Offset [Auto]
> Sense MI Skew [Auto]
> Sense MI Offset [Auto]
> Promontory presence [Auto]
> Clock Amplitude [Auto]
> CLDO VDDP voltage [Auto]
> CPU Load-line Calibration [Auto]
> CPU Current Capability [Auto]
> CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Auto]
> VRM Spread Spectrum [Auto]
> CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
> CPU Power Phase Control [Auto]
> CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
> VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Auto]
> VDDSOC Current Capability [Auto]
> VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Auto]
> VDDSOC Phase Control [Auto]
> DRAM Current Capability [100%]
> DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
> DRAM Switching Frequency [Auto]
> DRAM VBoot Voltage [Auto]
> Security Device Support [Enable]
> Firmware TPM [Disable]
> Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
> PSS Support [Auto]
> SVM Mode [Disabled]
> PT XHCI GEN1 [Auto]
> PT XHCI GEN2 [Auto]
> PT USB Equalization4 [Auto]
> PT USB Redriver [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 0 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 1 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 2 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 3 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 4 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 5 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 6 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 7 [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 0 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 1 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 2 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 3 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 4 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 5 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 6 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 7 Enable [Auto]
> Onboard PCIE LAN PXE ROM [Enabled]
> AMD CRB EHCI Debug port switch [Disabled]
> Onboard LED [Enabled]
> Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
> Primary Video Device [PCIE / PCI Video]
> SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
> SATA Mode [AHCI]
> NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
> SMART Self Test [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> ErP Ready [Disabled]
> Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
> Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
> Power On By RTC [Disabled]
> HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
> M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
> PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
> PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
> M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
> M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
> SB Link Mode [Auto]
> Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
> USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
> When system is in working state [On]
> When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [Off]
> Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
> Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
> Network Stack [Disabled]
> Debug Port Table [Disabled]
> Debug Port Table 2 [Disabled]
> Device [CT250MX500SSD1]
> Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
> XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
> USB Mass Storage Driver Support [Enabled]
> JetFlashTranscend 16GB 1.00 [Auto]
> U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
> U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
> U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> U31G1_5 [Enabled]
> U31G1_6 [Enabled]
> U31G1_7 [Enabled]
> U31G1_8 [Enabled]
> U31G1_9 [Enabled]
> U31G1_10 [Enabled]
> USB11 [Enabled]
> USB12 [Enabled]
> USB13 [Enabled]
> USB14 [Enabled]
> USB15 [Enabled]
> CPU Temperature [Monitor]
> MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
> VRM Temperature [Monitor]
> PCH Temperature [Monitor]
> T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
> CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
> AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
> W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
> W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
> HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
> CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
> 3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
> 5V Voltage [Monitor]
> 12V Voltage [Monitor]
> CPU Q-Fan Control [Auto]
> CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [200 RPM]
> CPU Fan Profile [Standard]
> AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 3 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [Auto]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> HAMP Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> HAMP Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> HAMP Fan Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
> OnChip SATA Channel [Auto]
> OnChip SATA Type [AHCI]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> IR Config [RX & TX0 Only]
> SdForce18 Enable [Disabled]
> SD Mode configuration [AMDA]
> Uart 0 Enable [Enabled]
> Uart 1 Enable [Enabled]
> I2C 0 Enable [Enabled]
> I2C 1 Enable [Enabled]
> I2C 2 Enable [Disabled]
> I2C 3 Enable [Disabled]
> GPIO Devices Support [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 0 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 1 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 2 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 3 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 4 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 5 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 6 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 7 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 0 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 1 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 2 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 3 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 4 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 5 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 6 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 7 [Auto]
> SATA Port 0 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 1 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 2 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 3 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 4 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 5 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 6 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 7 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Hot-Removable Support [Auto]
> SATA 6 AHCI Support [Auto]
> Int. Clk Differential Spread [Auto]
> SATA MAXGEN2 CAP OPTION [Auto]
> SATA CLK Mode Option [Auto]
> Aggressive Link PM Capability [Auto]
> Port Multiplier Capability [Auto]
> SATA Ports Auto Clock Control [Auto]
> SATA Partial State Capability [Auto]
> SATA FIS Based Switching [Auto]
> SATA Command Completion Coalescing Support [Auto]
> SATA Slumber State Capability [Auto]
> SATA MSI Capability Support [Auto]
> SATA Target Support 8 Devices [Auto]
> Generic Mode [Auto]
> SATA AHCI Enclosure [Auto]
> SATA SGPIO 0 [Auto]
> SATA SGPIO 1 [Disabled]
> SATA PHY PLL [Auto]
> AC/DC Change Message Delivery [Disabled]
> TimerTick Tracking [Auto]
> Clock Interrupt Tag [Auto]
> EHCI Traffic Handling [Disabled]
> Fusion Message C Multi-Core [Disabled]
> Fusion Message C State [Disabled]
> SPI Read Mode [Auto]
> SPI 100MHz Support [Auto]
> SPI Normal Speed [Auto]
> SPI Fast Read Speed [Auto]
> SPI Burst Write [Auto]
> I2C 0 D3 Support [Auto]
> I2C 1 D3 Support [Auto]
> I2C 2 D3 Support [Auto]
> I2C 3 D3 Support [Auto]
> I2C 4 D3 Support [Auto]
> I2C 5 D3 Support [Auto]
> UART 0 D3 Support [Auto]
> UART 1 D3 Support [Auto]
> UART 2 D3 Support [Auto]
> UART 3 D3 Support [Auto]
> SATA D3 Support [Auto]
> EHCI D3 Support [Auto]
> XHCI D3 Support [Auto]
> SD D3 Support [Auto]
> S0I3 [Auto]
> Chipset Power Saving Features [Enabled]
> SB Clock Spread Spectrum [Auto]
> SB Clock Spread Spectrum Option [-0.375%]
> HPET In SB [Auto]
> MsiDis in HPET [Auto]
> _OSC For PCI0 [Auto]
> USB Phy Power Down [Auto]
> PCIB_CLK_Stop Override [0]
> USB MSI Option [Auto]
> LPC MSI Option [Auto]
> PCIBridge MSI Option [Auto]
> AB MSI Option [Auto]
> SB C1E Support [Auto]
> SB Hardware Reduced Support [Auto]
> GPP Serial Debug Bus Enable [Auto]
> PSPP Policy [Auto]
> Memory Clock [Auto]
> Bank Interleaving [Enabled]
> Channel Interleaving [Enabled]
> Memory Clear [Disabled]
> Fast Boot [Disabled]
> Boot Logo Display [Auto]
> POST Delay Time [3 sec]
> Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
> Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
> Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
> Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
> Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
> Launch CSM [Enabled]
> Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
> Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
> Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
> Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
> OS Type [Other OS]
> Setup Animator [Disabled]
> Auto-launch ASUS Grid [Disabled]
> Load from Profile [1]
> Profile Name [1]
> Save to Profile [1]
> CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
> VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> BCLK Frequency [Auto]
> CPU Ratio [Auto]
> Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
> 
> 
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/J1RQ9Pp
> 
> 
> *TODO List: *
> 
> Tomorrow clean install of win 10 1809,test test test



From the tools menu, you can see some of the acceptable timings for the memory you have installed. You should be able to achieve your 3000 memory speed with the timings you have there. Here is mine. These are not the timings I use now, but it is a good starting point for stability.


----------



## gupsterg

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> Thank you very much gupsterg !!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> [2018/09/18 12:36:31]
> Ai Overclock Tuner [Default]
> Performance Enhancer [Default]
> CPU Core Ratio [40.00]
> Performance Bias [None]
> Memory Frequency [DDR4-3000MHz]
> Core Performance Boost [Auto]
> SMT Mode [Auto]
> TPU [Keep Current Settings]
> CPU Core Voltage [Offset mode]
> CPU Offset Mode Sign [-]
> - CPU Core Voltage Offset [0.00625]
> CPU SOC Voltage [Offset mode]
> VDDSOC Offset Mode Sign [-]
> - VDDSOC Voltage Offset [0.06250]
> DRAM Voltage [1.35000]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [1.81000]
> 1.05V SB Voltage [1.05000]
> Target TDP [Auto]
> TRC_EOM [Auto]
> TRTP_EOM [Auto]
> TRRS_S_EOM [Auto]
> TRRS_L_EOM [Auto]
> TWTR_EOM [Auto]
> TWTR_L_EOM [Auto]
> TWCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWR_EOM [Auto]
> TFAW_EOM [Auto]
> TRCT_EOM [Auto]
> TREFI_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_DD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SC_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_DD_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SD_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SC_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWRRD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDWR_EOM [Auto]
> TWRRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> Mem Over Clock Fail Count [2]
> DRAM CAS# Latency [16]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [16]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [16]
> DRAM RAS# PRE Time [16]
> DRAM RAS# ACT Time [38]
> Trc [70]
> TrrdS [6]
> TrrdL [8]
> Tfaw [38]
> TwtrS [4]
> TwtrL [12]
> Twr [22]
> Trcpage [Auto]
> TrdrdScl [6]
> TwrwrScl [6]
> Trfc [360]
> Trfc2 [260]
> Trfc4 [160]
> Tcwl [14]
> Trtp [12]
> Trdwr [8]
> Twrrd [4]
> TwrwrSc [2]
> TwrwrSd [6]
> TwrwrDd [6]
> TrdrdSc [2]
> TrdrdSd [6]
> TrdrdDd [6]
> Tcke [8]
> ProcODT [68.6 ohm]
> Cmd2T [2T]
> Gear Down Mode [Disabled]
> Power Down Enable [Disabled]
> RttNom [RZQ/7]
> RttWr [RZQ/3]
> RttPark [RZQ/1]
> MemAddrCmdSetup [0]
> MemCsOdtSetup [0]
> MemCkeSetup [0]
> MemCadBusClkDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> VTTDDR Voltage [0.63750]
> VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
> VDDP Voltage [0.81000]
> 1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
> CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
> 2.5V SB Voltage [2.50000]
> DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
> PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
> PLL reference voltage [Auto]
> T Offset [Auto]
> Sense MI Skew [Auto]
> Sense MI Offset [Auto]
> Promontory presence [Auto]
> Clock Amplitude [Normal]
> CLDO VDDP voltage [700]
> CPU Load-line Calibration [Auto]
> CPU Current Capability [100%]
> CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Auto]
> Active Frequency Mode [Enabled]
> CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
> CPU Power Phase Control [Standard]
> CPU Power Thermal Control [115]
> VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Auto]
> VDDSOC Current Capability [100%]
> VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Auto]
> VDDSOC Phase Control [Standard]
> DRAM Current Capability [100%]
> DRAM Power Phase Control [Optimized]
> DRAM Switching Frequency [Auto]
> DRAM VBoot Voltage [Auto]
> Security Device Support [Enable]
> Firmware TPM [Disable]
> Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
> PSS Support [Auto]
> SVM Mode [Enabled]
> PT XHCI GEN1 [Auto]
> PT XHCI GEN2 [Auto]
> PT USB Equalization4 [Auto]
> PT USB Redriver [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 0 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 1 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 2 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 3 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 4 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 5 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 6 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 7 [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 0 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 1 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 2 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 3 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 4 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 5 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 6 Enable [Auto]
> PT SATA PORT 7 Enable [Auto]
> Onboard PCIE LAN PXE ROM [Enabled]
> AMD CRB EHCI Debug port switch [Disabled]
> Onboard LED [Enabled]
> Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
> Primary Video Device [PCIE / PCI Video]
> SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
> SATA Mode [AHCI]
> NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
> SMART Self Test [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> ErP Ready [Disabled]
> Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
> Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
> Power On By RTC [Disabled]
> HD Audio Controller [Disabled]
> M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Disabled(X4/X4 mode)]
> PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
> PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
> M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
> SB Link Mode [Auto]
> Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
> USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
> When system is in working state [On]
> When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [Off]
> Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
> Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
> Network Stack [Disabled]
> Debug Port Table [Disabled]
> Debug Port Table 2 [Disabled]
> Device [Samsung SSD 840 EVO 500GB]
> Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
> XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
> USB Mass Storage Driver Support [Enabled]
> JetFlashTranscend 16GB 1.00 [Auto]
> U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
> U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
> U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> U31G1_5 [Enabled]
> U31G1_6 [Enabled]
> U31G1_7 [Enabled]
> U31G1_8 [Enabled]
> U31G1_9 [Enabled]
> U31G1_10 [Enabled]
> USB11 [Enabled]
> USB12 [Enabled]
> USB13 [Enabled]
> USB14 [Enabled]
> USB15 [Enabled]
> CPU Temperature [Monitor]
> MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
> VRM Temperature [Monitor]
> PCH Temperature [Monitor]
> T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
> CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
> AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
> W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
> W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
> HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
> CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
> 3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
> 5V Voltage [Monitor]
> 12V Voltage [Monitor]
> CPU Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [2.6 sec]
> CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [Ignore]
> CPU Fan Profile [Manual]
> CPU Upper Temperature [70]
> CPU Fan Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
> CPU Middle Temperature [50]
> CPU Fan Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [70]
> CPU Lower Temperature [30]
> CPU Fan Min. Duty Cycle (%) [45]
> AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [PWM Mode]
> Water Pump Upper Temperature [60]
> Water Pump Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
> Water Pump Middle Temperature [35]
> Water Pump Middle. Duty Cycle(%) [100]
> Water Pump Lower Temperature [25]
> Water Pump Min. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Turbo]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [400 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Turbo]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 3 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Turbo]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> HAMP Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> HAMP Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> HAMP Fan Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
> OnChip SATA Channel [Auto]
> OnChip SATA Type [AHCI]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> IR Config [RX & TX0 Only]
> SdForce18 Enable [Disabled]
> SD Mode configuration [AMDA]
> Uart 0 Enable [Enabled]
> Uart 1 Enable [Enabled]
> I2C 0 Enable [Enabled]
> I2C 1 Enable [Enabled]
> I2C 2 Enable [Disabled]
> I2C 3 Enable [Disabled]
> GPIO Devices Support [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 0 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 1 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 2 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 3 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 4 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 5 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 6 [Auto]
> ESATA Port On Port 7 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 0 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 1 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 2 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 3 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 4 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 5 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 6 [Auto]
> SATA Power On Port 7 [Auto]
> SATA Port 0 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 1 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 2 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 3 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 4 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 5 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 6 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 7 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Hot-Removable Support [Auto]
> SATA 6 AHCI Support [Auto]
> Int. Clk Differential Spread [Auto]
> SATA MAXGEN2 CAP OPTION [Auto]
> SATA CLK Mode Option [Auto]
> Aggressive Link PM Capability [Auto]
> Port Multiplier Capability [Auto]
> SATA Ports Auto Clock Control [Auto]
> SATA Partial State Capability [Auto]
> SATA FIS Based Switching [Auto]
> SATA Command Completion Coalescing Support [Auto]
> SATA Slumber State Capability [Auto]
> SATA MSI Capability Support [Auto]
> SATA Target Support 8 Devices [Auto]
> Generic Mode [Auto]
> SATA AHCI Enclosure [Auto]
> SATA SGPIO 0 [Auto]
> SATA SGPIO 1 [Disabled]
> SATA PHY PLL [Auto]
> AC/DC Change Message Delivery [Disabled]
> TimerTick Tracking [Auto]
> Clock Interrupt Tag [Auto]
> EHCI Traffic Handling [Disabled]
> Fusion Message C Multi-Core [Disabled]
> Fusion Message C State [Disabled]
> SPI Read Mode [Auto]
> SPI 100MHz Support [Auto]
> SPI Normal Speed [Auto]
> SPI Fast Read Speed [Auto]
> SPI Burst Write [Auto]
> I2C 0 D3 Support [Auto]
> I2C 1 D3 Support [Auto]
> I2C 2 D3 Support [Auto]
> I2C 3 D3 Support [Auto]
> I2C 4 D3 Support [Auto]
> I2C 5 D3 Support [Auto]
> UART 0 D3 Support [Auto]
> UART 1 D3 Support [Auto]
> UART 2 D3 Support [Auto]
> UART 3 D3 Support [Auto]
> SATA D3 Support [Auto]
> EHCI D3 Support [Auto]
> XHCI D3 Support [Auto]
> SD D3 Support [Auto]
> S0I3 [Auto]
> Chipset Power Saving Features [Enabled]
> SB Clock Spread Spectrum [Auto]
> SB Clock Spread Spectrum Option [-0.375%]
> HPET In SB [Auto]
> MsiDis in HPET [Auto]
> _OSC For PCI0 [Auto]
> USB Phy Power Down [Auto]
> PCIB_CLK_Stop Override [0]
> USB MSI Option [Auto]
> LPC MSI Option [Auto]
> PCIBridge MSI Option [Auto]
> AB MSI Option [Auto]
> SB C1E Support [Auto]
> SB Hardware Reduced Support [Auto]
> GPP Serial Debug Bus Enable [Auto]
> PSPP Policy [Auto]
> Memory Clock [Auto]
> Bank Interleaving [Enabled]
> Channel Interleaving [Enabled]
> Memory Clear [Disabled]
> Fast Boot [Disabled]
> Boot Logo Display [Auto]
> POST Delay Time [1 sec]
> Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
> Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
> Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
> Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
> Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
> Launch CSM [Enabled]
> Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
> Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
> Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
> Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
> OS Type [Other OS]
> Setup Animator [Disabled]
> Auto-launch ASUS Grid [Disabled]
> Load from Profile [3]
> Profile Name [stabiltests]
> Save to Profile [3]
> CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
> VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> BCLK Frequency [Auto]
> CPU Ratio [Auto]
> Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *This was my setup with bios 0509 before i had all that issues. *
> 
> 
> Before the 1.st biosflash the shutdown or restart bug never happened before.
> 
> 
> I try your settings now and reinstall OS as you told ! :thumb:
> 
> 
> 
> *EDIT:*
> What should i do after OS is installed ?
> I think installing the drivers first, maybe updating win 10 or...
> 
> Install BF V and play it ?
> 
> 
> *Todo List:
> *
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> *Plan A
> *
> Bios 0509 > check
> 
> fresh iso of 1809 install via rufus > check
> 
> gupsterg bios suggestions > check
> prepare 840 and 860 evo for OS installations > check
> 
> next step install OS
> install drivers
> install and play BF V ?
> 
> 
> *Plan B if something strange happens*
> 
> Do exactly the same from above but with bios* 1002*


The settings txt you have provided for what you used to use on 0509 before issues seems fine to me.

One thing I would say is if you change PLL from 1.8V, then make sure you set Sense MI Skew as Disabled. In the past testing has shown if Sense MI Skew is Enabled or Auto defaults to Enabled, changes in PLL will skew CPU temperature. Increasing PLL from 1.8V skews CPU temperature artificially higher, lowering PLL from 1.8V skews CPU temperature artificially lower.

This would be my suggestions.

i) Check all cables, GPU, RAM, etc seated correctly.

ii) Flash using Flashback UEFI 1002 or 1103. Load UEFI defaults (Press F5), set Performance Enhancer to Default, set Sense Mi Skew to Disabled. On Advanced page I'd set things like Onboard devices, etc as you'd want. On Monitor page set fan headers as you need. Disable ASUS Grid, save this as Base Profile.

iii) Install OS of preference, create backup image of OS after install. Install AMD Chipset driver and other hardware drivers you need, again make backup image.

As stated before do not install any OS OC SW, do not bother with monitoring tools, do not install any RGB SW or SW that controls fans etc for AIO and or other HW.

You're target is to see if system behaves at defaults using basic OS/SW you need to use. So do install games, applications you would use for you normal usage (ie Office, Video Editing SW, etc). If using W10, then I would for sure disable Fast Startup within OS.

After games and apps are loaded on rig then make another backup. If all is well then start added monitoring tools, etc. OC last, once you have staged backups and know rig is behaving as it should.



crakej said:


> I'm still not 100% - often getting past 5k% RT even 10k when I can wait, but between boots it changes. Seems to be most reliable from cold boot. I'm going to remove my ram and make sure connectors are clean (as I have to keep re-seating it) - my only other alternative is to use T2, which isn't the ed of the world, but I just wish I could use T1 GD disabled as specced.
> Thanks for sharing. Very helpful.


IIRC the RAM we're all using from G.Skill is binned 2T.

No problem on shares  .


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

gupsterg said:


> The settings txt you have provided for what you used to use on 0509 before issues seems fine to me.
> 
> One thing I would say is if you change PLL from 1.8V, then make sure you set Sense MI Skew as Disabled. In the past testing has shown if Sense MI Skew is Enabled or Auto defaults to Enabled, changes in PLL will skew CPU temperature. Increasing PLL from 1.8V skews CPU temperature artificially higher, lowering PLL from 1.8V skews CPU temperature artificially lower.
> 
> This would be my suggestions.
> 
> i) Check all cables, GPU, RAM, etc seated correctly.
> 
> ii) Flash using Flashback UEFI 1002 or 1103. Load UEFI defaults (Press F5), set Performance Enhancer to Default, set Sense Mi Skew to Disabled. On Advanced page I'd set things like Onboard devices, etc as you'd want. On Monitor page set fan headers as you need. Disable ASUS Grid, save this as Base Profile.
> 
> iii) Install OS of preference, create backup image of OS after install. Install AMD Chipset driver and other hardware drivers you need, again make backup image.
> 
> As stated before do not install any OS OC SW, do not bother with monitoring tools, do not install any RGB SW or SW that controls fans etc for AIO and or other HW.
> 
> You're target is to see if system behaves at defaults using basic OS/SW you need to use. So do install games, applications you would use for you normal usage (ie Office, Video Editing SW, etc). If using W10, then I would for sure disable Fast Startup within OS.
> 
> After games and apps are loaded on rig then make another backup. If all is well then start added monitoring tools, etc. OC last, once you have staged backups and know rig is behaving as it should.



i really aprecciate your help gupsterg. ANd thank you so mcuh for this nice guide !



ATM i did the following with my main system , as i have 2 ssd's which i can use for testing purposes like THIS !


Now Win 10 1809 is installed and patched and shutdown meanwhile i plugged it off and tested my main SSD.
Next step drivers.



The problem with the restarts and not shut off or down is intermitent.



Spoiler



Restart via Windows *failed > reset button *
Shutdown via Windows *PASSED*
Restart via Windows *PASSED*
Restart via Windows *failed > reset button*
Shutdown via Windows *PASSED*
Shutdown via Windows *PASSED*
Shutdown via Windows *PASSED*
Shutdown via Windows *PASSED*
Restart via Windows* failed > reset button Q Code 40 ... i have no fastboot option active ob BIOS so ****
Restart via Windows* PASSED*
Shutdown via Windows* failed > reset button*
Restart via Windows* PASSED*
Restart via Windows* PASSED*
Restart via Windows* PASSED*
Shutdown via Windows *PASSED*
Restart via Windows* failed > reset button Q Code 40*



Should i really test further with the test system SSD or should i consider RMA ,cause of the boards behave ? ?


Edit:
Also i have disabled fastboot now in Win 10...on my main system SSD...maybe thats what keeps it from restarting shutdown ?


Those options were really hard to find, but i found a solution.

https://www.tenforums.com/tutorials/4189-turn-off-fast-startup-windows-10-a.html


----------



## gupsterg

@Wuest3nFuchs

No problem  .

Q-Code: 24 is board posted to OS say with fresh kernel.

Q-Code: 30 is board posted to OS with resumed kernel from sleep.

Q-Code: 40 is board posted to OS with resumed kernel from MS Fast Startup.

I am inclined to believe the intermittent not shutting down from OS is due to some issue with W10 OS. Windows 10 has an habit of re-enabling Fast Startup mode, especially after big updates. Please double check it is set to off, as you have Q-Code: 40 denoting it is active.

I'm just gonna go to my other rig and attached screenshot of exact screen option for you to see and attach to this post, so check in a moment.

*** edit ***



Spoiler



Click orange boxed text.









Click red boxed text, then you can uncheck Fast Startup.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

*Thanks MAN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*









So here we go.


I completely shutoff fast boot option on windows and on bios.
But 3 tests one of them failed restarting again ... what the hell





Shutdown via Windows *PASSED*
Restart via Windows *PASSED*
Restart via Windows *failed **Q code 24> reset button *

I'm doing that thing until i see a 40 so up to 10times,back in 10 minutes or so.
Getting hungry, this drives me nuts*.*

Nice Vega Logo gupsterg !!!


----------



## gupsterg

@Wuest3nFuchs

Yeah like simple wallpaper  .

Check your event log around time board did not shutdown, perhaps that will give clue what happened.

Currently what do you have connected to board? ie fans (and to which headers), add on cards, USB devices, USB headers used, etc.

Perhaps if you can keep system simple and see what happens.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

Since this it wont shutdown anymore ! no more !ok it did it one time but look below



Spoiler



Shutdown via Windows *failed > reset button*
Shutdown via Windows *failed > reset button*
Restart via Windows *PASSED*
Restart via Windows *PASSED*
Shutdown via Windows *failed > reset button*
Shutdown via Windows *PASSED*
Restart via Windows *PASSED*
Shutdown via Windows* failed > reset button*






My brain says give up ,my heart says send it to rma...why cant i have more luck... 

*Things also done :*
re seated RAM
re seated GPU
checked all power+sata cables

*So there were only two things left Mainboard and CPU...*








gupsterg said:


> @*Wuest3nFuchs*
> 
> Yeah like simple wallpaper  .
> 
> Check your event log around time board did not shutdown, perhaps that will give clue what happened.
> 
> Currently what do you have connected to board? ie fans (and to which headers), add on cards, USB devices, USB headers used, etc.
> 
> Perhaps if you can keep system simple and see what happens.



nothing special in my eyes ,really.
All logs converted to english !


https://www.file-upload.net/en/download-13464227/Fulllog.evtx.html
https://www.file-upload.net/en/download-13464226/Kernelevents.evtx.html


I only have one Fan connected to the CPU ,cause my Case has it's own integrated fan controller .



I dont use RGB software .


Connected to the USB are Xbone Controller , Keyboard and Mouse, Headset.


----------



## gupsterg

@Wuest3nFuchs

Nothing within event log to go off of  .

You have simple system, fresh UEFI at defaults, as you have issues still I can only suggest RMA .

Only other suggestion is place Linux Mint on USB stick see how it behave. I'm using v19 Cinnamon, download page, guide to create USB stick.

If you follow guide, the created USB will boot to Linux OS on it, no need to install. You can check if multiple boot to Linux OS and shutdown work ok.


----------



## Ramad

@Wuest3nFuchs


Please try changing RAM voltage to 1.35V and CPU 1.8V PLL to 1.92V. See if that solves the issue, those are completely safe voltages by the way.


----------



## westk

Be careful with the USB XBOX dongles.. one friend of mine has weirds issues playing BFV. He has to detach it always before start the game.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

Thank you for your hard work and help ,really ! ! ! ! !



I write Asus about RMA and also the seller where i bought it.
I also linked them this pages related to my issues.



One thing i could try is windows 7 and linux mint is maybe an option to watch if it behaves the same , but not today i need a break. 



Thanks gupsterg !




Ramad said:


> @Wuest3nFuchs
> 
> 
> Please try changing RAM voltage to 1.35V and CPU 1.8V PLL to 1.92V. See if that solves the issue, those are completely safe voltages by the way.



WIll try it tomorrow. Thanks !




westk said:


> Be careful with the USB XBOX dongles.. one friend of mine has weirds issues playing BFV. He has to detach it always before start the game.



ATM only Keyboard Mouse and Headset were connected, i dont play wirelessly  . But thanks maybe that could help out a friend which uses a dongle with xbone contr.


----------



## chakku

Will be curious to see if we get a BIOS update to enable gen 4 on the first slot when 3000 series comes out.


----------



## nick name

chakku said:


> Will be curious to see if we get a BIOS update to enable gen 4 on the first slot when 3000 series comes out.


I hope if they it comes with the option to switch it on or off. The PCIe riser cable I use to mount my GPU vertically is far too long for gen 4 to work.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

Installed Linux Mint Cinnamon 19.1 on ssd. Dunno if i test until 2400 cet too tired today .But lets see what it bringe up here. I also got that bug with the 1080ti from my bro. 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## chakku

nick name said:


> I hope if they it comes with the option to switch it on or off. The PCIe riser cable I use to mount my GPU vertically is far too long for gen 4 to work.


If they enabled it I'm sure you could force Gen 3 in the BIOS just like you can force 2 and 1 on the slots currently.


----------



## nick name

chakku said:


> If they enabled it I'm sure you could force Gen 3 in the BIOS just like you can force 2 and 1 on the slots currently.


I'm dumb and forgot you can do that. In my defense I never use it though so it is something easy to forget is there.


----------



## pschorr1123

Wondering if any of you guys can offer some advice.

I've been rocking a 2700x on the Taichi X370 with the same bios since the 2700x launched. I ran 101 bclk -.00625 offset on vcore @ lowest llc. PBO manual @1000, 114,168 Ram= Samsung B-die 3600 cl 16kit. 3333 14,15,14,14,28 so on @ 1.43 ddr SOC 1.10 (Taichi Default) LLC Medium LVL 3

Been running stable without any issues since I got the 2700X. I originally had the RAM at 3200 Stilts Fast settings until I later got 3333 Stable a month or 2 later. 3466 would occasionally have memory training issues which would require going back into bios and loading profile but profiles don't properly save all settings so that got old real quick. (yeah Asrock Bios Team Sucks) But I digress. Real issue is I have been running great with no issues until about a month ago when I started getting random BSODs pertaining to memory.

First thing I did was set the bclk back to 100. Still getting random blue screens so I rolled back to 3200 Stilts fast. Passes Memtest HCL overnight no problems. More BSODs so replaced the drive with a 970evo and did a fresh install of Win 10 and once again BSOD Memory_Management. So I figure maybe update GPU driver. Since I have Vega 64 Liquid I update to 19.1.1 and it broke Windows. As soon as I hit the desktop it freezes. IT did give me 1 BSOD before freezing once which was thread_stuck_in_Device_Driver. This same crap happened before when I tried going to the Anniversary driver back in December. I had to restore from an image backup. I always use DDU to wipe out the old driver and do a clean install. Restoring the image gets me back up and running from the AMD GPU driver install breaking my system.

So I'm running out of ideas. I just installed Afterburner the day prior to this last BSOD and have used it for a long time without issue. I'm on 18.10.1 right now which I updated to after SOTR came out. Is it possible that I'm the only guy with B-die that can't run stable @ 3200? How can it be rock solid and then just take a dump with no bios flashes or changes? Is it possible Afterburner no longer plays well with Vega?

I am going to run Mem Test HCL over nite and post my results in the AM. I posted one pass that is pretty recent. I replaced the NVME as the RD400 I had wouldn't allow me to restart the PC which became very annoying especially when troubleshooting the PC.

I'm asking here because I feel this is a platform issue and not just a Taichi problem. Also because there are a lot more active people in here where as the Taichi forum is pretty dead. Any advice you guys can give to help me troubleshoot the issue would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## nick name

pschorr1123 said:


> Wondering if any of you guys can offer some advice.
> 
> I've been rocking a 2700x on the Taichi X370 with the same bios since the 2700x launched. I ran 101 bclk -.00625 offset on vcore @ lowest llc. PBO manual @1000, 114,168 Ram= Samsung B-die 3600 cl 16kit. 3333 14,15,14,14,28 so on @ 1.43 ddr SOC 1.10 (Taichi Default) LLC Medium LVL 3
> 
> Been running stable without any issues since I got the 2700X. I originally had the RAM at 3200 Stilts Fast settings until I later got 3333 Stable a month or 2 later. 3466 would occasionally have memory training issues which would require going back into bios and loading profile but profiles don't properly save all settings so that got old real quick. (yeah Asrock Bios Team Sucks) But I digress. Real issue is I have been running great with no issues until about a month ago when I started getting random BSODs pertaining to memory.
> 
> First thing I did was set the bclk back to 100. Still getting random blue screens so I rolled back to 3200 Stilts fast. Passes Memtest HCL overnight no problems. More BSODs so replaced the drive with a 970evo and did a fresh install of Win 10 and once again BSOD Memory_Management. So I figure maybe update GPU driver. Since I have Vega 64 Liquid I update to 19.1.1 and it broke Windows. As soon as I hit the desktop it freezes. IT did give me 1 BSOD before freezing once which was thread_stuck_in_Device_Driver. This same crap happened before when I tried going to the Anniversary driver back in December. I had to restore from an image backup. I always use DDU to wipe out the old driver and do a clean install. Restoring the image gets me back up and running from the AMD GPU driver install breaking my system.
> 
> So I'm running out of ideas. I just installed Afterburner the day prior to this last BSOD and have used it for a long time without issue. I'm on 18.10.1 right now which I updated to after SOTR came out. Is it possible that I'm the only guy with B-die that can't run stable @ 3200? How can it be rock solid and then just take a dump with no bios flashes or changes? Is it possible Afterburner no longer plays well with Vega?
> 
> I am going to run Mem Test HCL over nite and post my results in the AM. I posted one pass that is pretty recent. I replaced the NVME as the RD400 I had wouldn't allow me to restart the PC which became very annoying especially when troubleshooting the PC.
> 
> I'm asking here because I feel this is a platform issue and not just a Taichi problem. Also because there are a lot more active people in here where as the Taichi forum is pretty dead. Any advice you guys can give to help me troubleshoot the issue would be greatly appreciated.



Is it possible you might find some stability by cleaning the pins on the GPU? Or just re-seating it? 

Also, another Crosshair user has needed to re-seat his RAM multiple times now for whatever reason. It's an odd problem to have, but he seems to have it. 

What DRAM voltage are you running? Have you tested slightly higher voltage? I've passed several RAM tests (even overnight), but still found instability in games which was cured by more DRAM voltage.


----------



## Syldon

pschorr1123 said:


> Wondering if any of you guys can offer some advice.
> 
> I've been rocking a 2700x on the Taichi X370 with the same bios since the 2700x launched. I ran 101 bclk -.00625 offset on vcore @ lowest llc. PBO manual @1000, 114,168 Ram= Samsung B-die 3600 cl 16kit. 3333 14,15,14,14,28 so on @ 1.43 ddr SOC 1.10 (Taichi Default) LLC Medium LVL 3
> 
> Been running stable without any issues since I got the 2700X. I originally had the RAM at 3200 Stilts Fast settings until I later got 3333 Stable a month or 2 later. 3466 would occasionally have memory training issues which would require going back into bios and loading profile but profiles don't properly save all settings so that got old real quick. (yeah Asrock Bios Team Sucks) But I digress. Real issue is I have been running great with no issues until about a month ago when I started getting random BSODs pertaining to memory.
> 
> First thing I did was set the bclk back to 100. Still getting random blue screens so I rolled back to 3200 Stilts fast. Passes Memtest HCL overnight no problems. More BSODs so replaced the drive with a 970evo and did a fresh install of Win 10 and once again BSOD Memory_Management. So I figure maybe update GPU driver. Since I have Vega 64 Liquid I update to 19.1.1 and it broke Windows. As soon as I hit the desktop it freezes. IT did give me 1 BSOD before freezing once which was thread_stuck_in_Device_Driver. This same crap happened before when I tried going to the Anniversary driver back in December. I had to restore from an image backup. I always use DDU to wipe out the old driver and do a clean install. Restoring the image gets me back up and running from the AMD GPU driver install breaking my system.
> 
> So I'm running out of ideas. I just installed Afterburner the day prior to this last BSOD and have used it for a long time without issue. I'm on 18.10.1 right now which I updated to after SOTR came out. Is it possible that I'm the only guy with B-die that can't run stable @ 3200? How can it be rock solid and then just take a dump with no bios flashes or changes? Is it possible Afterburner no longer plays well with Vega?
> 
> I am going to run Mem Test HCL over nite and post my results in the AM. I posted one pass that is pretty recent. I replaced the NVME as the RD400 I had wouldn't allow me to restart the PC which became very annoying especially when troubleshooting the PC.
> 
> I'm asking here because I feel this is a platform issue and not just a Taichi problem. Also because there are a lot more active people in here where as the Taichi forum is pretty dead. Any advice you guys can give to help me troubleshoot the issue would be greatly appreciated.


Those timings are near identical to mine for a 3533 test run I am looking at. It is looking very favourable. The differences I have is tWTRL-9. I have different driver strength andf procODT, but those are customed to match each memory set.

Aside form increasing the voltage, which has been suggested above, try VDDP voltage. The CH6 was set to 9v, haven't seen anything for the CH7 yet.

Good luck


----------



## gupsterg

I had done a lot of testing where room ambient was 14-18C, so last night rig basked in warmer climates , room ambient 24C.



Spoiler
















Wuest3nFuchs said:


> Installed Linux Mint Cinnamon 19.1 on ssd. Dunno if i test until 2400 cet too tired today .But lets see what it bringe up here. I also got that bug with the 1080ti from my bro.


OK, look forward to knowing what happens.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

Mint is great. 
Could i also do a live install on a usb or should i stay with the normal installation ,for only test the shutdown restart bug?
also did a few restarts and shutdown via mint, no issue so far. 

yesterday in my Main sys ssd played a few rounds bfv and it was good no texture issues ,while RAM was only @ 2133mhz. so the Performance is here. 

Actually trying to get my pwmanager etc on usb and all the stuff i need to setup win 7 and another try with 10.




Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

1.start of my system today got qcode 0d. 
break .that started well...
make a big can of Matè tea ,you all know why . 
2nd boot worked

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


*Sry for double posting but i cant edit via tapatalk ..*.


Before i start with win 7 i have to search my old key...if i need it.
Also on my agenda is :


Use winsetupfromusb to install windows iso ...worked in the past.
840evo secure erase via bios.
Install win 7and drivers and no monitoring tools !
Reinstall my Xfi since audio and deactivate onboard sound.
crackling has to do with usb initialization on startup and on shutdown ,thats what ive seen/heard myself.


----------



## Alex K

Baio73 said:


> Sorry for late reply, very busy days… :-(
> 
> Nothing special, just set everything to Auto and the speed manually:
> 
> 
> 
> Hope it'll be usefull for you!
> 
> Baio
> 
> PS. still waiting for someone suggesting me some setting for this kit (G.Skill TridentZ F4-3600C16D-16GTZR).
> Otherwise, is there any guide to folow? There's a mess of settings with those RAMs...


Hi, I'm not considering myself as a person with perfect knowledge of RAM overclocking, but this was considered a very bad kit for Ryzen, even though its B-DIE.
I have a similar kit based on 2 x F4-3600C16-8GTZ sticks.
For now, the best stable result is [email protected]/1.35VRAM.0.925SOC with increased TRFC value, as this kit can't handle values of TRFC provided by DRAM calculator.
I tried pushing from 1.35 up to 1.5V on RAM but couldn't get stable even 3466 which is frustrated.


----------



## numlock66

gupsterg said:


> I had done a lot of testing where room ambient was 14-18C, so last night rig basked in warmer climates , room ambient 24C.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 245564
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OK, look forward to knowing what happens.


Do you have an AIDA Cache? Any attempt of cas 14 worked?


----------



## pschorr1123

nick name said:


> Is it possible you might find some stability by cleaning the pins on the GPU? Or just re-seating it?
> 
> Also, another Crosshair user has needed to re-seat his RAM multiple times now for whatever reason. It's an odd problem to have, but he seems to have it.
> 
> What DRAM voltage are you running? Have you tested slightly higher voltage? I've passed several RAM tests (even overnight), but still found instability in games which was cured by more DRAM voltage.


Thanks I will pull the RAM out and re-seat. I did pull one out a while back in order to redo my thermal paste maybe a piece of dust got in or something. The dram voltage was @1.38 I have now kicked it to 1.39. When 3333 was stable while gaming daily it needed 1.425. I also removed the negative vcore offset. The case has really good airflow with a Tower CPU cooler to help move air around up there. I'm aware that Ryzen will throw errors out left and right when the Dimms get above 52c.

Do any of you guys think Afterburner could be the culprit to my GPU driver upgrade woes? I have read other users having problems with afterburner. Before I upgraded my 2nd display to 4k from 1080p I had a hard time finding newer drivers that wouldn't reset the HDMI overscan / scaling garbage every single time I would exit a game. Very annoying, lol! 

I figured I would move back up to 3333 and 101 bclk if/ when I can get 3200 nailed back down again like I said in the original post I gamed on it several hours a day and didn't have any issues until around the time I updated my GPU driver for SOTR back in October and have been chasing things down since. 

Thanks again for the advice going to shutdown and re-seat now.


----------



## pschorr1123

Syldon said:


> Those timings are near identical to mine for a 3533 test run I am looking at. It is looking very favourable. The differences I have is tWTRL-9. I have different driver strength andf procODT, but those are customed to match each memory set.
> 
> Aside form increasing the voltage, which has been suggested above, try VDDP voltage. The CH6 was set to 9v, haven't seen anything for the CH7 yet.
> 
> Good luck


Forgive my Noob question but I have never messed with VDDP until now. I posted a screenshot of the default setting in my bios. it @ .92v which seems kind of high. Shouldn't it be a little over half of the SOC voltage? Mine is set @1.10 by default with Memory Straps higher than 3000. Anyway what should I bump it up too?

I figured I would ask a pro before messing with it. 

Thanks

btw, I left Afterburner uninstalled and tried to install the latest Radeon 19.1.1 again and have had no issues for now......fingers crossed, lol


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

@gupsterg 

Im not able to install win 7 from a USB 3.0 stick ,does this Board have 2 usb Portion the back the first ones should do it ? nur no progress atm. im stuck. i was able to so that with a usb3.0 Stick in my old board in a usb2.0 port, so i don't get it.so if i believe the manual it shpuld work. 

Planned to make a Dual boot win 7 + 10 in the evo 840 for testing purposes .









Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk

update: win 10 1803 iso installed via winsetupfromusb seems working fine right now.
No updates ,no drivers installed so far 3xshutdown+restarts passed!!!

Now i think windows bootmanager is somehoq corrupted or was, let's see what happens after chipset driver installation .


----------



## Baio73

Alex K said:


> Hi, I'm not considering myself as a person with perfect knowledge of RAM overclocking, but this was considered a very bad kit for Ryzen, even though its B-DIE.
> I have a similar kit based on 2 x F4-3600C16-8GTZ sticks.
> For now, the best stable result is [email protected]/1.35VRAM.0.925SOC with increased TRFC value, as this kit can't handle values of TRFC provided by DRAM calculator.
> I tried pushing from 1.35 up to 1.5V on RAM but couldn't get stable even 3466 which is frustrated.


Thanks for your replay… you gave me some bad news…
I'm not asking to thiss kit some strange thing, I'd like just them to work @ stock speeds and timinings… As I wrote before I can't state if it's better having lower timings/lower speed or higher timings/higher speed.
What sound really strange to me it's they are not working even if everything is set to Auto. :-(

Baio


----------



## zJordan

Alex K said:


> Hi, I'm not considering myself as a person with perfect knowledge of RAM overclocking, but this was considered a very bad kit for Ryzen, even though its B-DIE.
> I have a similar kit based on 2 x F4-3600C16-8GTZ sticks.
> For now, the best stable result is [email protected]/1.35VRAM.0.925SOC with increased TRFC value, as this kit can't handle values of TRFC provided by DRAM calculator.
> I tried pushing from 1.35 up to 1.5V on RAM but couldn't get stable even 3466 which is frustrated.


 I have Team Group 3200MHz CL14-14-14-31 - I can't remember the exact model but like you I can't really stabilise anything above 3200MHz. I mean I can boot up to 3600MHz, pass Cinebench, etc but the moment I do any form of memory test it will fail in the first 100% coverage.


My 3200MHz result is better than stock (14-14-14-28) with 1.4v DRAM, 1v SoC. I suppose I could stabilise 3466MHz, I just can't be bothered to loosen primary timings. I did loosen sub-timings. I've tried increasing voltages for various things (up to 1.5v DRAM, 1.15v SoC and nothing really improves, even tried reducing voltages).


I've accepted 3200MHz with good timings is the best I can get, regardless of BIOS. Could be ****ty IMC, could be ****ty RAM (but this worked well on Skylake-platforms).


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

chipset driver>restart>3xshutdown passed
3xrestart passed !!!
same with Intel Lan driver and amd 18.11.2. but for today i leave it as it is. 
Doing my next steps after waking up tomorrow. But atm it works. 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## gupsterg

Room ambient ~24C, P95 v29.4b8 8K 4096K 12GB 8hrs run on PE: Default, PBO: Enabled, 3600MHz 1T GDMD using The Stilt 3466MHz timings.



Spoiler














@Wuest3nFuchs

You can create install USB with persistent storage, IIRC limited to 4GB for storage aspect, then Mint will recall what you do and not be fresh OS each time. TBH using it as is fine to see if you have same issues as when on W10.

Post 3 of this thread has info on how to create W7 ISO with Chipset, etc drivers for install on AM4.

So all is well on fresh W10 1803? did you use same install ISO as before or fresh ISO?



numlock66 said:


> Do you have an AIDA Cache? Any attempt of cas 14 worked?


Nope not tried C14, if you see in previous posts of mine just on last few pages of thread I was resolving an intermittent POST issue when on this RAM setup. Those posts contain AIDA64 runs, some have also CB15 & CPU-Z.

I have dropped a RAM divider and upped BCLK for some testing. As previous sets of testing was low room ambient I turned up the heat to see if RT/P95, etc is stable at ~24C rather than ~14-18C.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

@ gupsterg 

I installed my last windows via rufus maybe and the same iso and NOT on stock bios, maybe this also helped. 

Will post my findings tomorrow and hopefully i don't need to RMA.

And if i run into issues i have the option to use win7 ,thanks to you gupsterg. 

Thanks Man !

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk

Edit: the 1803 iso i used is from my New external backup hdd. 
Before i used 1809 which was reported to have new issues with the patchday from tuesday this week.


----------



## gupsterg

RB 2hrs, room ambient ~24C at start, as I was feeling the heat (  ) I trimmed it down to ~21C near the end.



Spoiler






















@Wuest3nFuchs

Glad you've worked through it chap  and hope now rig behaves and you enjoy it :thumb: .


----------



## CJMitsuki

*Universal way to accurately determine Ram Performance*

What have we been using to determine a given setup's actual performance? I have been testing quite a bit lately with tm5 more as a benchmark and secondarily as a stability test. It seems as though it follows Geekbench 3 memory performance numbers very closely with how I have been measuring performance with tm5. I have yet to find a fault with using it to determine real world performance as it translates to any memory sensitive task ive found. Geekbench 3 is one of the "go to" benchmarks for memory performance so thats why I have been comparing tm5 to it and watching the performance numbers. These numbers are not affected by the cpu frequency either so it can be easily determined from anyones setup how their fast their setup is. 

What I did was for example, took my total stable time from TM5 which for [email protected] was 36m 10sec for 10 cycles which is the minimum needed for 16gb. I then broke that down into total seconds which is 2170sec and divided that by the amount of ram used by tm5 for the test (which is important as a smaller amount takes a shorter time per cycle and more ram=longer cycles) In my case this number I used was 912 as it is the amount per thread used for each cycle. This ended up giving me the equation a/b=c where, a=total seconds for test and b=mb per thread used. This resulted in 2170/912=2.38 with 2.38 being what I used as a benchmark score. Now I took that formula and started comparing what I knew were different performance, such as, [email protected] which was just me taking the bclk down from 104.6mhz to 103.2mhz. This resulted in 3min38sec per tm5 cycle as opposed to 3min36sec cycles of 3577mhz setup which is expected as it is slightly higher frequency. I then had to conform using Geekbench 3 and it reflected everything as memory score for 3577mhz was 7807 and 7756 for 3555mhz. 

So, I think that this is a reliable way to determine realistic performance of a given stable setup and luckily TM5 tests stability as well so it can be used not only to test the memory stability but overall performance to determine if a given setup is better than another. This is my initial thoughts from my tests which I will continue and I will post screenshots later backing up everything I have said. Aida64 cant determine performance of ram, it can only show capabilities of a setup and it is not very consistent. It is good for a quick analysis of a given setups potential but due to timing conflicts and memory errors those numbers may or may not be true. With the method I used it is consistent and also shows memory stability within the same test. The only drawback at this point is that TM5 likes to allocate more memory to the test dynamically and I'm not sure if you can lock a set amount of ram to it and have it stay at that given amount. If the OS releases some free ram then at the end of the TM5 cycle it will use it, providing there is enough to use to distribute among the threads evenly. I'm trying to find a way to lock this down or talk to @1usmus about the details of the config file values so it can be changed or possibly a softwareupdate giving the ability to lock the memory amount used since the benchmark number wouldn't be accurate if that number changed during the test. I always use msconfig to go into windows diagnostic mode with only Power service and Windows Management Instrumentation service checked and then wait for the system to settle before running the test and not doing much in the way of tasks while the test is running.

Let me know what anyone thinks so I can determine if this is 100% reliable to use as a viable ram performance benchmark. From all i have seen, it is viable but I may miss something. Its better to find something reliable and universal so setups can be compared accurately against another so the most optimal setups can be used and also helping to understand how certain timings affect performance and to what scale they affect performance.

Edit: Aida64 telling me my ram is off the scale :lachen: (100% a glitch)


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> What have we been using to determine a given setup's actual performance? I have been testing quite a bit lately with tm5 more as a benchmark and secondarily as a stability test. It seems as though it follows Geekbench 3 memory performance numbers very closely with how I have been measuring performance with tm5. I have yet to find a fault with using it to determine real world performance as it translates to any memory sensitive task ive found. Geekbench 3 is one of the "go to" benchmarks for memory performance so thats why I have been comparing tm5 to it and watching the performance numbers. These numbers are not affected by the cpu frequency either so it can be easily determined from anyones setup how their fast their setup is.
> 
> What I did was for example, took my total stable time from TM5 which for [email protected] was 36m 10sec for 10 cycles which is the minimum needed for 16gb. I then broke that down into total seconds which is 2170sec and divided that by the amount of ram used by tm5 for the test (which is important as a smaller amount takes a shorter time per cycle and more ram=longer cycles) In my case this number I used was 912 as it is the amount per thread used for each cycle. This ended up giving me the equation a/b=c where, a=total seconds for test and b=mb per thread used. This resulted in 2170/912=2.38 with 2.38 being what I used as a benchmark score. Now I took that formula and started comparing what I knew were different performance, such as, [email protected] which was just me taking the bclk down from 104.6mhz to 103.2mhz. This resulted in 3min38sec per tm5 cycle as opposed to 3min36sec cycles of 3577mhz setup which is expected as it is slightly higher frequency. I then had to conform using Geekbench 3 and it reflected everything as memory score for 3577mhz was 7807 and 7756 for 3555mhz.
> 
> So, I think that this is a reliable way to determine realistic performance of a given stable setup and luckily TM5 tests stability as well so it can be used not only to test the memory stability but overall performance to determine if a given setup is better than another. This is my initial thoughts from my tests which I will continue and I will post screenshots later backing up everything I have said. Aida64 cant determine performance of ram, it can only show capabilities of a setup and it is not very consistent. It is good for a quick analysis of a given setups potential but due to timing conflicts and memory errors those numbers may or may not be true. With the method I used it is consistent and also shows memory stability within the same test. The only drawback at this point is that TM5 likes to allocate more memory to the test dynamically and I'm not sure if you can lock a set amount of ram to it and have it stay at that given amount. If the OS releases some free ram then at the end of the TM5 cycle it will use it, providing there is enough to use to distribute among the threads evenly. I'm trying to find a way to lock this down or talk to @1usmus about the details of the config file values so it can be changed or possibly a softwareupdate giving the ability to lock the memory amount used since the benchmark number wouldn't be accurate if that number changed during the test. I always use msconfig to go into windows diagnostic mode with only Power service and Windows Management Instrumentation service checked and then wait for the system to settle before running the test and not doing much in the way of tasks while the test is running.
> 
> Let me know what anyone thinks so I can determine if this is 100% reliable to use as a viable ram performance benchmark. From all i have seen, it is viable but I may miss something. Its better to find something reliable and universal so setups can be compared accurately against another so the most optimal setups can be used and also helping to understand how certain timings affect performance and to what scale they affect performance.
> 
> Edit: Aida64 telling me my ram is off the scale :lachen: (100% a glitch)
> View attachment 245684


It took me forever to get to the point where you said those Aida scores were a glitch. I was so confused. 

And I use Geekbench 4 to test my RAM timings because Geekbench 3 isn't as complete when using the trial/free version. What I like about Geekbench 4 is how it shows the memory bandwidth and latency, but also all the other tests that you can compare against previous results (if you save the URL from each run). It seems to be the quickest, thorough way to evaluate performance with many smaller tests compiled into one run.


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> It took me forever to get to the point where you said those Aida scores were a glitch. I was so confused.
> 
> And I use Geekbench 4 to test my RAM timings because Geekbench 3 isn't as complete when using the trial/free version. What I like about Geekbench 4 is how it shows the memory bandwidth and latency, but also all the other tests that you can compare against previous results (if you save the URL from each run). It seems to be the quickest, thorough way to evaluate performance with many smaller tests compiled into one run.


From what ive heard there are some discrepancies in the GB4 multicore test which is the reason HWBOT doesnt include them in the points system. GB3 has a workaround to be able to use the 64bit portion of the test. Just go into the GB3 folder and swap the names of the 32bit test and 64bit test file and then run the 32bit test from the GB3 benchmark, voila you are using the 64bit version.


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> From what ive heard there are some discrepancies in the GB4 multicore test which is the reason HWBOT doesnt include them in the points system. GB3 has a workaround to be able to use the 64bit portion of the test. Just go into the GB3 folder and swap the names of the 32bit test and 64bit test file and then run the 32bit test from the GB3 benchmark, voila you are using the 64bit version.
> View attachment 245690


And that, good sir, is why I love ya. Many thanks.


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> And that, good sir, is why I love ya. Many thanks.


NP. 

The reason why I am suggesting the TM5 as a benchmark for ram performance solution is to save time since it seems to follow Geekbench 3 performance scaling pretty closely and would be able to not only tell you a comparative value for performance that can be used to accurately (In my opinion) differentiate the performance of 2 setups which can be rather hard to do when the setups are very similar. It can show you whether trading off a little bandwidth for a latency improvement was worth it, etc. All while you test stability of the memory which will likely be done anyway. You can even do the same for a quick peek at performance by only running 1 cycle then dividing that by 10% of the mem per thread value or multiplying the cycle time by 10 and using the formula I used above. If I knew how to make a program that could automatically do this then I would or even better would be for the TM5 developer to just incorporate a benchmark score into the software for when the test completes. Sounds like it wouldn't be that hard to implement a mathematical formula output and display it. HCI memtest bootable version is the only other test with a benchmark score implemented but it only really shows you how the memory affected the cpu overclock and doesn't give ram performance directly so you couldn't compare that score to another persons score unless they had the same exact cpu overclock setup and thats unlikely with XFR/PBO behavior unless it was a straight multiplier overclock and thats a terrible way to overclock Ryzen.


----------



## Martin778

Are the performance enhancer options just hard coded settings or do they check certain CPU's capabilities like the needed Vcore etc and adapt itself to it?
I'm surprised to see Lvl.4 OC showing lower VID than Lvl.3.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Martin778 said:


> Are the performance enhancer options just hard coded settings or do they check certain CPU's capabilities like the needed Vcore etc and adapt itself to it?
> I'm surprised to see Lvl.4 OC showing lower VID than Lvl.3.


I wouldnt even pay attn to VID. The Performance Enhancer sets a multiplier based on temperatures when the system boots or posts but I would say that there are hard coded algorithms for each multiplier. If it paid attention to what the cpu needed then there would be no need for applying offsets when increasing bclk as it would just apply more voltage itself. PE3 is more geared for single thread performance so if the system sets a 43.5x multiplier for 1-4 cores then the all core is likely to be 42x on PE3 while on PE4 all cores can be 43.5x but most of the time its likely all core will be 43x max. The voltages that are used dont care what the VID is as its not a voltage but what a core, thread, cpu etc is requesting. PE 3 and 4 override those requests to use more voltage as the multipliers are much more aggressive than normal. So VID isnt a value a pay much attention to and the voltages that the board tells you arent 100% accurate. The VRM reading is higher than actual voltage as it is read from the voltage regulator before being sent to wherever it is going and there will be voltage drop from the VRM to the destination. The further it has to go the farther it will drop. The only truly accurate readings are ones you take yourself as close to the destination as possible. CPU Socket, DIMM, SoC is likely read from the socket as well if you are brave enough to poke around on the back of the cpu socket with system powered that is. ProbeIt points are better readings than the IO chip but they arent totally accurate either, although they are probably pretty accurate for DRAM bc they are pretty close. But anyway, if youll watch voltages with PE3 and PE4 youll notice 4 is much more aggressive than 3...quite a bit, in fact.


----------



## Martin778

Mine seems to be doing a different thing, just locking 4.14 or 4.24 firm across all cores. It doesn't drop or rise when using the Ryzen Balanced profile.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Martin778 said:


> Mine seems to be doing a different thing, just locking 4.14 or 4.24 firm across all cores. It doesn't drop or rise when using the Ryzen Balanced profile.


So, you are using performance enhancer and the cores are locked at a certain frequency and not fluctuating during normal usage? Under load then they will all lock to the all core frequency determined but during normal usage they should be up and down constantly within the restraints of the multiplier of course.

Edit: They should be changing kinda like mine does in the screenshot and it should be changing all the time depending on power management settings. I dont use balanced, I use a custom profile as Microsoft hides about 40 power options that are mostly related to the cpu cores and how they behave essentially gimping the processor even when using the High Performance profile. Look up a program called "Power Settings Explorer"


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> NP.
> 
> The reason why I am suggesting the TM5 as a benchmark for ram performance solution is to save time since it seems to follow Geekbench 3 performance scaling pretty closely and would be able to not only tell you a comparative value for performance that can be used to accurately (In my opinion) differentiate the performance of 2 setups which can be rather hard to do when the setups are very similar. It can show you whether trading off a little bandwidth for a latency improvement was worth it, etc. All while you test stability of the memory which will likely be done anyway. You can even do the same for a quick peek at performance by only running 1 cycle then dividing that by 10% of the mem per thread value or multiplying the cycle time by 10 and using the formula I used above. If I knew how to make a program that could automatically do this then I would or even better would be for the TM5 developer to just incorporate a benchmark score into the software for when the test completes. Sounds like it wouldn't be that hard to implement a mathematical formula output and display it. HCI memtest bootable version is the only other test with a benchmark score implemented but it only really shows you how the memory affected the cpu overclock and doesn't give ram performance directly so you couldn't compare that score to another persons score unless they had the same exact cpu overclock setup and thats unlikely with XFR/PBO behavior unless it was a straight multiplier overclock and thats a terrible way to overclock Ryzen.


I don't see enough consistency in TM5 to use it as a benchmark. I think part of it has to with each pass seems to free up more RAM each time so each pass takes a little bit longer, however, it doesn't always test the exact same amount of RAM during each pass over the running of several different tests.


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> I don't see enough consistency in TM5 to use it as a benchmark. I think part of it has to with each pass seems to free up more RAM each time so each pass takes a little bit longer, however, it doesn't always test the exact same amount of RAM during each pass over the running of several different tests.


The amount of ram it uses doesnt matter since the benchmark number derived from the formula isnt based off of total time. Im pretty sure I figured out how to stop it from using more ram as it is freed up though as that is a problem. Its not that the program is inconsistent, its just that the configuration options are a mystery for now. You can however set how much ram it will ignore so its reserved for the OS. You can set that number higher and TM5 wont be prone to use more memory. The initial amount of memory it uses isnt important, only that it stays using that amount the entire test.

Try increasing the value highlighted below to 512 or even 1024 if you have an excess of memory that gets freed up. This will cause TM5 to ignore that amount of memory and should keep it from allocating more for the test.
Edit: Changing it to 512 seems to have fixed the allocation of more ram. The test needs at least 32mb for every thread in excess of that number set in the config. So, if set to 512 then there would have to be 1024mb excess free ram before it would try to allocate more. If that was the case then the value could be changed to 768 but i doubt that will be needed.


----------



## VPII

CJMitsuki said:


> The amount of ram it uses doesnt matter since the benchmark number derived from the formula isnt based off of total time. Im pretty sure I figured out how to stop it from using more ram as it is freed up though as that is a problem. Its not that the program is inconsistent, its just that the configuration options are a mystery for now. You can however set how much ram it will ignore so its reserved for the OS. You can set that number higher and TM5 wont be prone to use more memory. The initial amount of memory it uses isnt important, only that it stays using that amount the entire test.
> 
> Try increasing the value highlighted below to 512 or even 1024 if you have an excess of memory that gets freed up. This will cause TM5 to ignore that amount of memory and should keep it from allocating more for the test.
> Edit: Changing it to 512 seems to have fixed the allocation of more ram. The test needs at least 32mb for every thread in excess of that number set in the config. So, if set to 512 then there would have to be 1024mb excess free ram before it would try to allocate more. If that was the case then the value could be changed to 768 but i doubt that will be needed.
> View attachment 245726


Sorry for possibly a silly question, but what is TM5 exactly


----------



## CJMitsuki

VPII said:


> Sorry for possibly a silly question, but what is TM5 exactly


It is a relatively new memory stability testing software referenced by 1usmus *Here* You have to download the .cfg file and inser it into the "bin" folder and run the Tm5 exe as admin and choose the "exit and load config" then point it to the .cfg file and start the software again as admin then it is setup.

Edit: Here are screenshots of the location where the .cfg file should go and the values that should be changed in the .cfg file. Cycles should be chaged to 10 for 16gb and for dual rank 32gb leave it on 5 cycles. Changing the OS reserved size just keeps the software from dynamically allocating more ram for testing throughout the test. Its an artificial fix until I can get info on the configuration options.


----------



## Syldon

pschorr1123 said:


> Forgive my Noob question but I have never messed with VDDP until now. I posted a screenshot of the default setting in my bios. it @ .92v which seems kind of high. Shouldn't it be a little over half of the SOC voltage? Mine is set @1.10 by default with Memory Straps higher than 3000. Anyway what should I bump it up too?
> 
> I figured I would ask a pro before messing with it.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> btw, I left Afterburner uninstalled and tried to install the latest Radeon 19.1.1 again and have had no issues for now......fingers crossed, lol


I hope the problem is just software related.

SOC voltage is for power to things outside of the CPU. PCI bus, information to memory etc. I am sure someone will correct me as to the exact definition. I am going from posts from Elmor (ex AMD rep). 

The VDDP is the power going to the pins on the CPU, I don't think there is any relation to the SOC voltage. The default is 0.9v. It may not be the cause of your issue. It was just that you were asking for possible causes. I know from previous that variation of the VDDP can cause crashes for some. 0.92v is not really a problem, that is close to spec of expected reading differ.

As a btw, HWinfo wrongly lists a VDDP reading. It is a mislabelled reading, and not the VDDP.
*edit* I should add this is a glitch in the board not the software.

There is also another VDDP listed. The CLD0_VDDP. This is not the same as VDDP. CLD0_VDDP is the power leading into the memory.


----------



## gupsterg

12hrs P95 v28.10b1 8K 4096K 12GB. room ambient 24C.



Spoiler
















Syldon said:


> I hope the problem is just software related.
> 
> SOC voltage is for power to things outside of the CPU. PCI bus, information to memory etc. I am sure someone will correct me as to the exact definition. I am going from posts from Elmor (ex AMD rep).
> 
> The VDDP is the power going to the pins on the CPU, I don't think there is any relation to the SOC voltage. The default is 0.9v. It may not be the cause of your issue. It was just that you were asking for possible causes. I know from previous that variation of the VDDP can cause crashes for some. 0.92v is not really a problem, that is close to spec of expected reading differ.
> 
> As a btw, HWinfo wrongly lists a VDDP reading. It is a mislabelled reading, and not the VDDP.
> *edit* I should add this is a glitch in the board not the software.
> 
> There is also another VDDP listed. The CLD0_VDDP. This is not the same as VDDP. CLD0_VDDP is the power leading into the memory.


SOC = IMC

VDDP = PCI-E Phy

CLDO_VDDP = DDR Phy



Martin778 said:


> Are the performance enhancer options just hard coded settings or do they check certain CPU's capabilities like the needed Vcore etc and adapt itself to it?
> I'm surprised to see Lvl.4 OC showing lower VID than Lvl.3.


Performance Enhancer is ASUS term for Precision Boost Overdrive, which in AGESA 1.0.0.6 UEFI is termed as XFR Enhancement.

PE menu contains presets for PBO limiters, you can find links to info by Elmor/The Stilt in OP here.

PE: Default PBO/XFRE: Enabled uses PPT: 1000W, TDC: 114A, EDC: 168A. Scalar VID I believe is relaxed on AGESA 1.0.0.6 UEFI as well. I have a CPU which on older AGESA at same settings boost less vs newer, only way older AGESA set to same settings boosts same is if I up Scalar VID which I have no access to on newer AGESA. 

Regardless if you use say PE 1-4 or PE: Default and PBO/XFRE: Enabled, POST to POST the CPU may end up boosting slightly differently. This is the SMU/Algorithm doing it's "business".

Under the conditions of this context yes the SMU is dictating VCORE based on VID requests. When CPU is default (ie PE: Default PBO/XFRE: Auto) it will not be as aggressive. As the differing presets open up limiters (PPT/TDC/EDC/Scalar VID) depending upon silicon characteristics you could see aggressive VCORE.

I have had 3x 2700x, each slightly different.

1805 SUS had tight best core to worst core VCORE usage, compared to other 2 CPUs scaled less at default and PE: [Default] PBO/XFRE: [Enabled]. Due to all cores using similar VCORE I reckon it needed more effective cooling.

1825 SUS had big variation best core to worst core VCORE usage, we're talking ~200mV difference, this scaled the best at default and PE: [Default] PBO/XFRE: [Enabled]. Due to this bigger disparity in core to core voltage it seemed easier to cool.

1835 PGS has the tightest best core to worst core VCORE usage, was coming out like 1mV difference, this scaled between the other 2 CPUs at default and PE: [Default] PBO/XFRE: [Enabled]. Due to all cores using similar VCORE I reckon it needed more effective cooling.

Now the other highlight between 1825 SUS and 1835 PGS was how the later CPU reacted to AGESA 1.0.0.6. It improved clocks under newer SMU FW vs AGESA 1.0.0.2C and earlier. 1825 SUS so no gains or loss on CPU MHz average regardless of FW.

So differing CPUs may differ on same FW, as and when AMD tweak FW, same CPU may behave differently for CPU MHz under PB/XFR2 + PBO OC.



Martin778 said:


> Mine seems to be doing a different thing, just locking 4.14 or 4.24 firm across all cores. It doesn't drop or rise when using the Ryzen Balanced profile.


Default setup of Ryzen Balanced profile has a little to high min CPU % IIRC. Try OS Balanced or tweaking Ryzen Balanced profile.


----------



## CJMitsuki

pschorr1123 said:


> Syldon said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those timings are near identical to mine for a 3533 test run I am looking at. It is looking very favourable. The differences I have is tWTRL-9. I have different driver strength andf procODT, but those are customed to match each memory set.
> 
> Aside form increasing the voltage, which has been suggested above, try VDDP voltage. The CH6 was set to 9v, haven't seen anything for the CH7 yet.
> 
> Good luck
> 
> 
> 
> Forgive my Noob question but I have never messed with VDDP until now. I posted a screenshot of the default setting in my bios. it @ .92v which seems kind of high. Shouldn't it be a little over half of the SOC voltage? Mine is set @1.10 by default with Memory Straps higher than 3000. Anyway what should I bump it up too?
> 
> I figured I would ask a pro before messing with it.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> btw, I left Afterburner uninstalled and tried to install the latest Radeon 19.1.1 again and have had no issues for now......fingers crossed, lol
Click to expand...

VDDP is not the voltage that is half of Dram voltage. You are thinking of VTTDDR and that is half of Dram voltage give or take a small amount. VDDP, while I have seen it at that high a value I found .795 to be my best value. CLD0_VDDP is valuable sometimes. Usually when you can reach really tight timings and then when you step your frequency up to the next step you can’t boot at all or nothing will make it stable when it should be easily made stable. Sometimes this can be a “memory hole” having something to do with Dram voltage frequency IIRC and this voltage can move that “hole” in the frequency steps. It should just be played around with until able to boot then a bit more to make the frequency accessible. This is not common but I have actually experienced it before and found 838 to be best for me at higher freqs (above 3533). You have to imagine this noise as frequency waves so if you move the wave forward to access a frequency affected then the other wave in the noise’s frequency move as well possibly causing holes at a lower frequency. Ideally you want to sit in the center of the “wave” and not the “trough” of this interference for best stability. Again this isn’t common as not everyone is likely to encounter this interference at a large scale as to where the hole would be big enough to cause a problem.

Edit: @1usmus explains it better *HERE*


----------



## CJMitsuki

gupsterg said:


> Default setup of Ryzen Balanced profile has a little to high min CPU % IIRC. Try OS Balanced or tweaking Ryzen Balanced profile.


Anyone interested in configuring their cpu power management characteristics and how and when it changes P and C States and highly configure the way core parking works should check this *forum thread* out and the utility the OP created. It creates a more user friendly interface to configure the hidden power options that windows has. Usually this would be done by editing the registry but this has simplified that so anyone can access them and configure the system to their liking. I would not bother with the garbage profiles incorporated into Windows. They keep all of the better options hidden from you and taking performance away as well as management of how and when the cpu goes into idle and how fast it responds to a load. The options that are given to us is a joke to be quite honest compared to what is hidden by default.


----------



## pschorr1123

Syldon said:


> I hope the problem is just software related.
> 
> SOC voltage is for power to things outside of the CPU. PCI bus, information to memory etc. I am sure someone will correct me as to the exact definition. I am going from posts from Elmor (ex AMD rep).
> 
> The VDDP is the power going to the pins on the CPU, I don't think there is any relation to the SOC voltage. The default is 0.9v. It may not be the cause of your issue. It was just that you were asking for possible causes. I know from previous that variation of the VDDP can cause crashes for some. 0.92v is not really a problem, that is close to spec of expected reading differ.
> 
> As a btw, HWinfo wrongly lists a VDDP reading. It is a mislabelled reading, and not the VDDP.
> *edit* I should add this is a glitch in the board not the software.
> 
> There is also another VDDP listed. The CLD0_VDDP. This is not the same as VDDP. CLD0_VDDP is the power leading into the memory.


Thanks for the info guys. If I would have asked over in the Taichi forum all I would have got in return is the sound of crickets, lol.

So it looks like the Taichi does not have a cldo_vddp option exposed.


----------



## gupsterg

pschorr1123 said:


> Thanks for the info guys. If I would have asked over in the Taichi forum all I would have got in return is the sound of crickets, lol.
> 
> So it looks like the Taichi does not have a cldo_vddp option exposed.


IIRC ASRock operate in two ways for OC, "their" way and "AMD". If you choose the AMD way then you gain access to AMD CBS menu, then you may find CLDO_VDDP in there.

I mean not to sound rude, but if we keep post after post discussing a non C7H board this thread will get diluted with that and other board owners may join in. I would open a thread of your own within AMD Motherboard section, appropriately titled for you to gain insight and stand as a thread that may also help an owner in your situation. I always see posts/threads not on a basis of now, but also for me and others to ref later.


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> 12hrs P95 v28.10b1 8K 4096K 12GB. room ambient 24C.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 245852
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SOC = IMC
> 
> VDDP = PCI-E Phy
> 
> CLDO_VDDP = DDR Phy
> 
> 
> 
> Performance Enhancer is ASUS term for Precision Boost Overdrive, which in AGESA 1.0.0.6 UEFI is termed as XFR Enhancement.
> 
> PE menu contains presets for PBO limiters, you can find links to info by Elmor/The Stilt in OP here.
> 
> PE: Default PBO/XFRE: Enabled uses PPT: 1000W, TDC: 114A, EDC: 168A. Scalar VID I believe is relaxed on AGESA 1.0.0.6 UEFI as well. I have a CPU which on older AGESA at same settings boost less vs newer, only way older AGESA set to same settings boosts same is if I up Scalar VID which I have no access to on newer AGESA.
> 
> Regardless if you use say PE 1-4 or PE: Default and PBO/XFRE: Enabled, POST to POST the CPU may end up boosting slightly differently. This is the SMU/Algorithm doing it's "business".
> 
> Under the conditions of this context yes the SMU is dictating VCORE based on VID requests. When CPU is default (ie PE: Default PBO/XFRE: Auto) it will not be as aggressive. As the differing presets open up limiters (PPT/TDC/EDC/Scalar VID) depending upon silicon characteristics you could see aggressive VCORE.
> 
> I have had 3x 2700x, each slightly different.
> 
> 1805 SUS had tight best core to worst core VCORE usage, compared to other 2 CPUs scaled less at default and PE: [Default] PBO/XFRE: [Enabled]. Due to all cores using similar VCORE I reckon it needed more effective cooling.
> 
> 1825 SUS had big variation best core to worst core VCORE usage, we're talking ~200mV difference, this scaled the best at default and PE: [Default] PBO/XFRE: [Enabled]. Due to this bigger disparity in core to core voltage it seemed easier to cool.
> 
> 1835 PGS has the tightest best core to worst core VCORE usage, was coming out like 1mV difference, this scaled between the other 2 CPUs at default and PE: [Default] PBO/XFRE: [Enabled]. Due to all cores using similar VCORE I reckon it needed more effective cooling.
> 
> Now the other highlight between 1825 SUS and 1835 PGS was how the later CPU reacted to AGESA 1.0.0.6. It improved clocks under newer SMU FW vs AGESA 1.0.0.2C and earlier. 1825 SUS so no gains or loss on CPU MHz average regardless of FW.
> 
> So differing CPUs may differ on same FW, as and when AMD tweak FW, same CPU may behave differently for CPU MHz under PB/XFR2 + PBO OC.
> 
> 
> 
> Default setup of Ryzen Balanced profile has a little to high min CPU % IIRC. Try OS Balanced or tweaking Ryzen Balanced profile.


Hey Gup, great results m8! Wasnt available bc of other work to do. Just ready reading most of the post. Thanks for all your shares again! So you managed 3600!!! 

@nick name / @CJMitsuki / @Syldon and many others i haven't mentioned, thanks for all the share this new year. Needed some time to catch up again!

Im going to give the new bios a try right now!


----------



## gupsterg

@majestynl

Welcome back chap :cheers: .

Yeah CPU I got before Xmas nailed it. I did also buy a new mobo, but after seeing how the new CPU was I returned mobo.

So just like C6H/ZE I have kept my original launch board and see gains from CPU IMC mainly and some aid from UEFI.

Just be aware UEFI 1201 for me would go into loop of Q-Code: F9 Q-LED: DRAM (ie memory training fail) when testing certain profiles. You may recall we had a UEFI like that on C6H.


----------



## Singularity48

Is it normal that my 2700x starts downclocking at 63c? I was messing with BCLK some a few days ago, 102.6 with default PE and PBO, my chip would clock up to 4.2ghz all core in CB but once the temps hit 63c (tdie) in hwinfo it downclocked some cores to 4.18 and eventually all cores settle there. I'm personally comfortable with my cpu running at 75c under max so I'd rather it throttle there.


----------



## nick name

Singularity48 said:


> Is it normal that my 2700x starts downclocking at 63c? I was messing with BCLK some a few days ago, 102.6 with default PE and PBO, my chip would clock up to 4.2ghz all core in CB but once the temps hit 63c (tdie) in hwinfo it downclocked some cores to 4.18 and eventually all cores settle there. I'm personally comfortable with my cpu running at 75c under max so I'd rather it throttle there.


Yes that is exactly how PBO behaves. You need to use Performance Enhancer Level 3 or 4 if you don't want it to down clock.


----------



## Singularity48

nick name said:


> You need to use Performance Enhancer Level 3 or 4 if you don't want it to down clock.


bleh, i figured i would. the boot inconsistencies on pe3/4 are annoying and trying to dial in a voltage for the bclk on PE3 is hard. but if it's my only option then I guess that's what I'll do.


----------



## nick name

Singularity48 said:


> bleh, i figured i would. the boot inconsistencies on pe3/4 are annoying and trying to dial in a voltage for the bclk on PE3 is hard. but if it's my only option then I guess that's what I'll do.


I can help with that. Temps will still play a role, but my process will give some granular control.

Edit:

Actually you may not have to do much if you're using a higher BCLK.


----------



## Singularity48

nick name said:


> I can help with that. Temps will still play a role, but my process will give some granular control.


I'm all ears


----------



## nick name

Singularity48 said:


> I'm all ears


First thing is to try using PE 3 with your BCLK number. I imagine it will boot you anywhere between 41-41.75 so it might be higher than you want. So from there you can reduce or increase the multiplier by manipulating EDC with Ryzen Master. 

And I imagine the VCORE offset you're using will translate pretty closely, but you'll have to figure it out through attempts.


----------



## nick name

And I can't remember if I pointed you to this, but it should tell you how to adjust your EDC to change your multiplier:

https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...tiplier-adjustments-through-ryzen-master.html


----------



## Singularity48

nick name said:


> And I can't remember if I pointed you to this, but it should tell you how to adjust your EDC to change your multiplier:
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...tiplier-adjustments-through-ryzen-master.html


I saw this a couple months ago but didn't really read it, great idea you had there! I'll be trying this tonight. I'd really like to get BCLK working because every other OC type leaves something to be desired. I know my chip is capable of 4.25 all core at around 1.39v, so if I can get that working with BCLK I might try for 4.3 with the BCLK boost.


----------



## nick name

Singularity48 said:


> I saw this a couple months ago but didn't really read it, great idea you had there! I'll be trying this tonight. I'd really like to get BCLK working because every other OC type leaves something to be desired. I know my chip is capable of 4.25 all core at around 1.39v, so if I can get that working with BCLK I might try for 4.3 with the BCLK boost.


Well The Stilt told me that he would also adjust EDC to change the multiplier when using PE 3 or 4 and told ASUS it should be implemented in BIOS that way, but ASUS failed to do so. 

And if you're using BCLK 102.6 and you boot at multiplier 41.5 then you'll land at 4.26GHz so you won't have to use EDC to adjust the multiplier.


----------



## Singularity48

nick name said:


> And if you're using BCLK 102.6 and you boot at multiplier 41.5 then you'll land at 4.26GHz so you won't have to use EDC to adjust the multiplier.


Do you have any idea how using positive Auto offset works with this method? Does it adjust the voltage needed to fit your new EDC value (say going from 41.5 to 42 multiplier)?


----------



## nick name

Singularity48 said:


> Do you have any idea how using positive Auto offset works with this method? Does it adjust the voltage needed to fit your new EDC value (say going from 41.5 to 42 multiplier)?


I've used positive offset with higher BCLK, but I can't remember what I needed. I've found that it isn't so much for multi-core workloads, but for the single-core speeds. What VCORE do you use now?


----------



## Singularity48

nick name said:


> I've used positive offset with higher BCLK, but I can't remember what I needed. I've found that it isn't so much for multi-core workloads, but for the single-core speeds. What VCORE do you use now?


Funnily enough using offsets is what prompted my original question, because with default PBO+BCLK it would push voltages that were not needed/too high for the all core target (1.425v @ 4.25ghz) so it would start thermal throttling, but that same offset was needed for the high single core freqs (4.46ghz). I'm basically looking for a way to get more performance out of the voltage that is already going to be pushed for all core, which seems to be your method lol. I was using a +.025 when I was testing 102.6, I didn't have a problem with it other than the thermal throttling.


----------



## VPII

@nick name I'd like to ask you a question. I've never bothered with this whole EDC, TDC and PPT. I overclock manually so no precision boost and all that for me. I usually run my cpu all core 4.267ghz with a 1.325vcore. When I open Ryzen Master it states that the values for these mentioned are:

EDC - 140
TDC - 95
PPT - 141

These values from what I understand is the normal values. Is there a way to change them?


----------



## nick name

Singularity48 said:


> Funnily enough using offsets is what prompted my original question, because with default PBO+BCLK it would push voltages that were not needed/too high for the all core target (1.425v @ 4.25ghz) so it would start thermal throttling, but that same offset was needed for the high single core freqs (4.46ghz). I'm basically looking for a way to get more performance out of the voltage that is already going to be pushed for all core, which seems to be your method lol. I was using a +.025 when I was testing 102.6, I didn't have a problem with it other than the thermal throttling.


With a BCLK of 100.2 I usually use an offset of negative ~.04V. I can't remember the exact amount hence the ~. Furthermore I can use an offset of negative .075V for lighter workloads, but for AVX workloads I need negative ~.04V. And when I use those offsets I am at 4.25GHz at 1.406V or less. Things like Cinebench, games, and daily loads work fine with a negative offset of .075V and put 4.25GHz at around 1.387V.

I'd imagine that the offset you mentioned would be fine with PE 3 and the BCLK you already use because the multi core workload will be satisfied, but your single core speed would be what might need more juice (probably not if you've already been using it). But most importantly, for your use case, is that PE 3 with your BCLK would put you AND keep you at or close to the all core speed you want without any down clocking.


----------



## nick name

VPII said:


> @nick name I'd like to ask you a question. I've never bothered with this whole EDC, TDC and PPT. I overclock manually so no precision boost and all that for me. I usually run my cpu all core 4.267ghz with a 1.325vcore. When I open Ryzen Master it states that the values for these mentioned are:
> 
> EDC - 140
> TDC - 95
> PPT - 141
> 
> These values from what I understand is the normal values. Is there a way to change them?


Use Ryzen Master and then switch to Profile 1 or Profile 2. From there you will select Precision Boost Overdrive which sits between Auto and Manual. There you can adjust PPT to 1000, TDC to 114, and then change EDC to whatever you need. EDC is what manipulates the multiplier on Performance Enhancer Level 3 or 4. It works best with PE 3 because PE 4 will load you in at max EDC which is max multiplier and the reason I don't use PE 4 is that it sometimes boots with an erroneous EDC value which jumps the multiplier up to 43 or 43.5. With amazing cooling that might be fine, but it isn't a behavior you can predict so I use PE 3 and then maximize EDC to max out the multiplier when I know I have the cooling for it or that I know my work load will be stable. Stabilizing 42.5 for the harshest work loads isn't always an option.

PS

Use PE 3 and it will auto set those PPT and TDC values though you will have to set them once in Ryzen Master and then from there all you need to worry about is the EDC value to manipulate your multiplier. I actually use that method to overclock my CPU with BCLK instead of BIOS multiplier. I've used my method to get up to around 4.435GHz and reach Cinebench scores of 2059. At the same time my single score speeds were higher because I didn't set the multiplier in BIOS.


----------



## VPII

nick name said:


> Use Ryzen Master and then switch to Profile 1 or Profile 2. From there you will select Precision Boost Overdrive which sits between Auto and Manual. There you can adjust PPT to 1000, TDC to 114, and then change EDC to whatever you need. EDC is what manipulates the multiplier on Performance Enhancer Level 3 or 4. It works best with PE 3 because PE 4 will load you in at max EDC which is max multiplier and the reason I don't use PE 4 is that it sometimes boots with an erroneous EDC value which jumps the multiplier up to 43 or 43.5. With amazing cooling that might be fine, but it isn't a behavior you can predict so I use PE 3 and then maximize EDC to max out the multiplier when I know I have the cooling for it or that I know my work load will be stable. Stabilizing 42.5 for the harshest work loads isn't always an option.
> 
> PS
> 
> Use PE 3 and it will auto set those PPT and TDC values though you will have to set them once in Ryzen Master and then from there all you need to worry about is the EDC value to manipulate your multiplier. I actually use that method to overclock my CPU with BCLK instead of BIOS multiplier. I've used my method to get up to around 4.435GHz and reach Cinebench scores of 2059. At the same time my single score speeds were higher because I didn't set the multiplier in BIOS.


Thanks I will give it a try.....


----------



## VPII

nick name said:


> Use Ryzen Master and then switch to Profile 1 or Profile 2. From there you will select Precision Boost Overdrive which sits between Auto and Manual. There you can adjust PPT to 1000, TDC to 114, and then change EDC to whatever you need. EDC is what manipulates the multiplier on Performance Enhancer Level 3 or 4. It works best with PE 3 because PE 4 will load you in at max EDC which is max multiplier and the reason I don't use PE 4 is that it sometimes boots with an erroneous EDC value which jumps the multiplier up to 43 or 43.5. With amazing cooling that might be fine, but it isn't a behavior you can predict so I use PE 3 and then maximize EDC to max out the multiplier when I know I have the cooling for it or that I know my work load will be stable. Stabilizing 42.5 for the harshest work loads isn't always an option.
> 
> PS
> 
> Use PE 3 and it will auto set those PPT and TDC values though you will have to set them once in Ryzen Master and then from there all you need to worry about is the EDC value to manipulate your multiplier. I actually use that method to overclock my CPU with BCLK instead of BIOS multiplier. I've used my method to get up to around 4.435GHz and reach Cinebench scores of 2059. At the same time my single score speeds were higher because I didn't set the multiplier in BIOS.


Hi Nick

I seem to be sitting with something similar to what another member posted. PE3 would put my all core speed at 4.125, basically the 41.25 multi. But all the cores would stay at that point with no up or down fluctuation. Not sure if there is a setting I missed.


----------



## VPII

Okay I sort of found it..... Changed some things in bios regarding precision boost and then went into Ryzen Master to create another profile. All core jumped up to 4.257, but it is still not dropping again or raising on single core.


----------



## Alex K

Baio73 said:


> Thanks for your replay… you gave me some bad news…
> I'm not asking to this kit some strange thing, I'd like just them to work @ stock speeds and timings… As I wrote before I can't state if it's better having lower timings/lower speed or higher timings/higher speed.
> What sound really strange to me it's they are not working even if everything is set to Auto. :-(
> 
> Baio


XMP Speed for our kits is [email protected], I don't know how your kit will perform (but you report in ns, looks the same as mine, so I assume that your kit has the same quality of chips).
In our case to reach this speed will require a crazy amount of DRAM voltage. Usually, you've got instability when your memory is something near 52C on Ryzen platform. Mine sticks reach 46-47C with about 1.41V applied, so not too much headroom. Also, for example, [email protected] will crush 3600 with auto timings in real-world applications.

You can try to use Ryzen DRAM calculator by @1usmus, which will calculate most of the values for you.
You will need to enter them in bios & done. But my kit was not able to run stable anything except [email protected]
Only yesterday I finished customizing [email protected] timings provided by the calculator to be stable on my system.
This is the difference between what calculator provided & what became stable:


Spoiler














Also, it took a ridiculous amount of time to archive stable result (By stable I mean 14 cycles of TM5 with @1usmus config, 100% coverage in MemTestIt & Running couple hours streaming of Hunt Showdown which makes Ryzen all core load 70-100% & uses about 12-13Gb of RAM ).


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> @majestynl
> 
> Welcome back chap :cheers: .
> 
> Yeah CPU I got before Xmas nailed it. I did also buy a new mobo, but after seeing how the new CPU was I returned mobo.
> 
> So just like C6H/ZE I have kept my original launch board and see gains from CPU IMC mainly and some aid from UEFI.
> 
> Just be aware UEFI 1201 for me would go into loop of Q-Code: F9 Q-LED: DRAM (ie memory training fail) when testing certain profiles. You may recall we had a UEFI like that on C6H.


Cheers! 

Great, so you kept the best ones 

Like you suggested, i can confirm the Q-Code F9 Behavior. Happened a few times. My working profiles for 3466 and 3533 are also working flawless on the new bios. (Screenshot from 3533 attached). Not yet tried the 3600 profile.

After i switched Mem strap from 3533 to 3600 with no upping other voltages or settings i got below message. When i pres "Y" it keeps looping to same message. When i press "N" it goes back to bios. So eventually i upped to dram-voltage and the message was gone .. strange!

*Attached Files:*
- fTPM NV corrupted message
- 3533 Memtest pass 11k


----------



## gupsterg

@majestynl

If profile is out I can also have the message you had. I have also had something along the lines of recovery motherboard UEFI, blah blah, usually reset gets rig back or SAFE BOOT button.

Any how still on 1103 here. Dropped to RAM divider 3466MHz, upped BCLK to 103.8. Had good PASS in RT, used normally, did some benches, rerun RT on a full cold POST, testing profile further.



Spoiler




















Note: No OS/Performance bias used for benches



















































I kept the CPU with best IMC, tightest best core/worst core VCORE gap (~1mV), seems lower leakage CPU as uses higher VCORE. This was not best CPU MHz clocker, but that one had ~200mV best core/worst core VCORE gap. Under PBO OC difference was max 50MHz, which I wasn't gonna worry about when this nabbed 3600MHz and other only 3466MHz.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

Hi all! 
@gupsterg

yesterday i don't did anything with my Main ssd or test ssd. 
Today i tried the test ssd and played over an hour, no hangs, no lags, no slow texture load.

For the last 3hrs i was playing also in my main ssd. tested BF V and sandstorm. 

I think it works now as it should. 

Should i try flashing 1201 again via flashback ?
What would you do next ?

Trying my last working bios template tomorrow .

btw nice thread in the rog Forum, excellent job gupsterg. 

THX

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## gupsterg

@Wuest3nFuchs

Nice  .

Which UEFI are you on currently?


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

@gupsterg 

Currently on 0509 .

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## Baio73

Alex K said:


> XMP Speed for our kits is [email protected], I don't know how your kit will perform (but you report in ns, looks the same as mine, so I assume that your kit has the same quality of chips).
> In our case to reach this speed will require a crazy amount of DRAM voltage. Usually, you've got instability when your memory is something near 52C on Ryzen platform. Mine sticks reach 46-47C with about 1.41V applied, so not too much headroom. Also, for example, [email protected] will crush 3600 with auto timings in real-world applications.
> 
> You can try to use Ryzen DRAM calculator by @1usmus, which will calculate most of the values for you.
> You will need to enter them in bios & done. But my kit was not able to run stable anything except [email protected]
> Only yesterday I finished customizing [email protected] timings provided by the calculator to be stable on my system.
> This is the difference between what calculator provided & what became stable:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 246170
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, it took a ridiculous amount of time to archive stable result (By stable I mean 14 cycles of TM5 with @1usmus config, 100% coverage in MemTestIt & Running couple hours streaming of Hunt Showdown which makes Ryzen all core load 70-100% & uses about 12-13Gb of RAM ).


Thanks for your replay.
My system sets VDIMM @1.4v, with this voltage (+0.50v above what declared by G.Skill for XMP profile) I can run maximum 3400MHz. At this speed I have not tried to lower timigs due to lack of time. I've set every timing to Auto and the mobo sets 16-24-24-57-81-2T... not so good in my humble opinion. 
As soon as I can I'm gonna try your settings, 'cause I've no idea of how Ryzen DRAM Calculator works.

Baio


----------



## gupsterg

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> @gupsterg
> 
> Currently on 0509 .
> 
> Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


I'd try 1002, that was last AGESA 1.0.0.2C UEFI, has ASUS WMI implementation, 0804/0702 it is broken.

Once you have flashed it and system POST it should show messages where it updates embedded controllers on motherboard.



Spoiler


----------



## nick name

VPII said:


> Okay I sort of found it..... Changed some things in bios regarding precision boost and then went into Ryzen Master to create another profile. All core jumped up to 4.257, but it is still not dropping again or raising on single core.


Few things that immediately come to mind:

- You can't set a manual voltage for VCORE and must use an offset. If you set a manual voltage for VCORE the CPU will behave as if its overclocked aka only maintain one speed.
- Minimal Processor State in your Windows power plan must be set below 50% on whichever power plan you choose to use. That allows the CPU to reach all its p-states so it can down clock and which allows it to run higher single/fewer core speeds. 
- Enable Core Performance Boost in BIOS.


----------



## CJMitsuki

VPII said:


> Okay I sort of found it..... Changed some things in bios regarding precision boost and then went into Ryzen Master to create another profile. All core jumped up to 4.257, but it is still not dropping again or raising on single core.


Post a txt bios dump and post it so i can see your setup


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

gupsterg said:


> I'd try 1002, that was last AGESA 1.0.0.2C UEFI, has ASUS WMI implementation, 0804/0702 it is broken.
> 
> Once you have flashed it and system POST it should show messages where it updates embedded controllers on motherboard.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 246248


Well the first and second attempt to flash the bios to 1002 failed, due to the usb stick. 
Grabbed another one, then it worked flawlessly. 
Maybe the usb-stick is corrupted. 
Until now no shutdown or restart issue occured. 
One thing i've noticed again that the slow texture load is there again, but not as heavy as before .

All currently tested in my main system ssd.
The one i've fresh installed (think it was friday) has not been tested after bios update so far . I hope it's a driver issue. 

Good night and i'll report back on monday or tuesday. 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## ComansoRowlett

Baio73 said:


> Thanks for your replay.
> My system sets VDIMM @1.4v, with this voltage (+0.50v above what declared by G.Skill for XMP profile) I can run maximum 3400MHz. At this speed I have not tried to lower timigs due to lack of time. I've set every timing to Auto and the mobo sets 16-24-24-57-81-2T... not so good in my humble opinion.
> As soon as I can I'm gonna try your settings, 'cause I've no idea of how Ryzen DRAM Calculator works.
> 
> Baio


Gskill have XMP profiles upto 1.5v, my kit for instance is rated for 4600MHz CL19 with a 1.5v XMP. Besides these are only resellers, you want to look at what JEDEC/Memory IC makers specify and they both specify 1.5v is the maximum you can have. However here are examples from Gskill https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-4600c19d-16gtzkkc-[discontinued] and https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-4600c18d-16gtzr one featuring 1.5v and the other 1.45v. So yeah feel free to push upto those voltages if it aids stability, should be more than fine even if it's just a bare stick with no heatsink. Of course pushing voltage on every IC doesn't necessarily help, but if you have Samsung B-die I know for a fact most scale upto 1.8v (not recommended for daily) so 1.5v should be childs play and some even further, max I've seen someone push is 2.1v on Samsung B-die for benching purposes only.


----------



## nick name

ComansoRowlett said:


> Gskill have XMP profiles upto 1.5v, my kit for instance is rated for 4600MHz CL19 with a 1.5v XMP. Besides these are only resellers, you want to look at what JEDEC/Memory IC makers specify and they both specify 1.5v is the maximum you can have. However here are examples from Gskill https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-4600c19d-16gtzkkc-[discontinued] and https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-4600c18d-16gtzr one featuring 1.5v and the other 1.45v. So yeah feel free to push upto those voltages if it aids stability, should be more than fine even if it's just a bare stick with no heatsink. Of course pushing voltage on every IC doesn't necessarily help, but if you have Samsung B-die I know for a fact most scale upto 1.8v (not recommended for daily) so 1.5v should be childs play and some even further, max I've seen someone push is 2.1v on Samsung B-die for benching purposes only.


I actually run my b-die kit at 1.5V daily.


----------



## gupsterg

Update on profile initially tested with RT in post 5181.

This lost 1 thread in P95 v29.4b8 8K 4096K 12GB ~1hr 10min.



Spoiler












View attachment P95 v29.4b8 RAM B103.8 PBOEP 1.075 1.385 0.687 34 Off 48 room 20C 1 thread FAIL.txt




I upped SOC to 1.087V and ~3hrs in lost 1 thread again.



Spoiler












View attachment P95 v29.4b8 RAM B103.8 PBOEP 1.087 1.385 0.687 34 Off 48 room 20C 1 thread FAIL 3hrs.txt




Next I reverted to SOC 1.075V, but upped VBOOT/VDIMM to 1.39V and VTTDDR 0.7V, 4hrs (still going as I type, reached 4.33hrs).



Spoiler


----------



## ComansoRowlett

nick name said:


> I actually run my b-die kit at 1.5V daily.


Same here


----------



## Alex K

ComansoRowlett said:


> Gskill have XMP profiles upto 1.5v, my kit for instance is rated for 4600MHz CL19 with a 1.5v XMP. Besides these are only resellers, you want to look at what JEDEC/Memory IC makers specify and they both specify 1.5v is the maximum you can have. However here are examples from Gskill https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-4600c19d-16gtzkkc-[discontinued] and https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-4600c18d-16gtzr one featuring 1.5v and the other 1.45v. So yeah feel free to push upto those voltages if it aids stability, should be more than fine even if it's just a bare stick with no heatsink. Of course pushing voltage on every IC doesn't necessarily help, but if you have Samsung B-die I know for a fact most scale upto 1.8v (not recommended for daily) so 1.5v should be childs play and some even further, max I've seen someone push is 2.1v on Samsung B-die for benching purposes only.


Sticks in our kits are very bad, you can check my upper response to see how I increased TRFC to make RAM stable, also my kit is already near 48C on 1.41V, so we do not have too much headroom.
His kit might be a bit better though, but our reports from Typhoon Burner are almost the same regarding delays in NS,


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

@gupsterg 

...had my first working day, so holidays were over for me right now.

Sucessfully tested the test ssd setup.

The overdriventool has only been used to put the fan spinning up to 1300rpm. 
She likes it cool. (Fury)

Maybe i'll make a gaming based installment of Win 10 1803, and a productive one. 

Actually i think it could be a combination of a corrupt stick,followed by some issues on the OS Level, and those may based on the software i have installed on the main system ssd. 
BUT thats a thing i've to check out. 
If it isn't that i'll tell ya.

So thank you very much for your help, i hope i can move on now, get my stable to that point where it was before my issues started. 

Cheers mate









Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## nick name

Alex K said:


> Sticks in our kits are very bad, you can check my upper response to see how I increased TRFC to make RAM stable, also my kit is already near 48C on 1.41V, so we do not have too much headroom.
> His kit might be a bit better though, but our reports from Typhoon Burner are almost the same regarding delays in NS,


I place a 120mm fan on the GPU in front of the RAM to cool the RAM.


----------



## nick name

ComansoRowlett said:


> Same here


What speed and timings do you run daily?


----------



## Nucky

So I managed to damage one of my sticks from my kit of F4-3200C14D-32GTZSK . I guess I was too aggressive when I was pulling the heat spreader off. Was running that kit at 3200 12-13-13-22 . I have a kit of F4-3600C15D-16GTZ coming in today. I want to run it at least 3466 but preferably faster. Anyone have a suggestion of where I should start? Just use the timing calculator and go from there? Thanks for any help.


----------



## nick name

Nucky said:


> So I managed to damage one of my sticks from my kit of F4-3200C14D-32GTZSK . I guess I was too aggressive when I was pulling the heat spreader off. Was running that kit at 3200 12-13-13-22 . I have a kit of F4-3600C15D-16GTZ coming in today. I want to run it at least 3466 but preferably faster. Anyone have a suggestion of where I should start? Just use the timing calculator and go from there? Thanks for any help.


For a DRAM Calculator starting point? The 3600 FAST will most likely work with little effort. I say little because I need a little more DRAM voltage. However, I run either a faster speed or tighter timings for 3600 so I usually run 1.5V daily. 

Right now I'm running 3666 because I gave up on 3740 with a tRFC lower than 400.

PS
Do you still have the heatspreader off the old kit? If they don't work anymore I'd love the plastic trim pieces from your kit to replace my red trim pieces. I had to get red because it was the only color the kit came in when I bought them.


----------



## Nucky

I just got the kit in. DOCP did not want to boot. So I moved to 3466 with the stilt's fast timings. Going to try for 3600 fast now. I do have the trimp pieces as I have been limping along on 1 16gb stick for the last few days. My 3600c15 kit also has the red trim, if I end up not watercooling them I plan to swap in the black trim pieces. But If I do end up not needing them I'll let you know.


----------



## nick name

Nucky said:


> I just got the kit in. DOCP did not want to boot. So I moved to 3466 with the stilt's fast timings. Going to try for 3600 fast now. I do have the trimp pieces as I have been limping along on 1 16gb stick for the last few days. My 3600c15 kit also has the red trim, if I end up not watercooling them I plan to swap in the black trim pieces. But If I do end up not needing them I'll let you know.


Oh yeah I had to bump DRAM voltage to 1.37V to use DOCP. 

If you run Geardown mode enabled then 3600 works at SOC 1.0V, but with Geardown mode disabled I needed SOC 1.1V.


----------



## Nucky

The 3600 fast preset from the calculator worked for me at 1.45v and SOC 1.03125 . By worked I mean I could boot, run cinebench, aida64, and type this message. Attached is the aida64 run. Ran memtest and didn't make it to 10% before errors but they happened as the dimms hit 40c. 

Currently running PE4 with a -0.9375 offset. I've had bad luck with any bclk over 101, my 960 starts not being detected. 

Knowing that the new chips won't be out for several more months I want to start tweaking my setup again. I felt like I was stuck with the dual rank dimms and this single rank kit has renewed my interest in pushing for more. I'll take all the tips I can get.


----------



## nick name

Nucky said:


> The 3600 fast preset from the calculator worked for me at 1.45v and SOC 1.03125 . By worked I mean I could boot, run cinebench, aida64, and type this message. Attached is the aida64 run. Ran memtest and didn't make it to 10% before errors but they happened as the dimms hit 40c.
> 
> Currently running PE4 with a -0.9375 offset. I've had bad luck with any bclk over 101, my 960 starts not being detected.
> 
> Knowing that the new chips won't be out for several more months I want to start tweaking my setup again. I felt like I was stuck with the dual rank dimms and this single rank kit has renewed my interest in pushing for more. I'll take all the tips I can get.


In the Calculator the timings are listed in the order: 14-14-15-14. However, if you look at the labels you'll see that in BIOS they are ordered differently and they should be input in the order: 14-15-14-14. That will completely bork your setup if you enter that 15 into the wrong spot. I didn't notice that for more time than I care to admit, but once I did it changed the game.

Edit:

The 970 doesn't seem to care about BCLK as high as 104 I think. I can't remember exactly how high I've gone, but it was never an issue for the 970. Which m.2 slot do you use?

And that is a huge offset for VCORE. Thight might be part of the problem?

I use PE 3 and then bump up EDC with Ryzen Master which manipulates the multiplier.


----------



## MrPhilo

Nucky said:


> The 3600 fast preset from the calculator worked for me at 1.45v and SOC 1.03125 . By worked I mean I could boot, run cinebench, aida64, and type this message. Attached is the aida64 run. Ran memtest and didn't make it to 10% before errors but they happened as the dimms hit 40c.
> 
> Currently running PE4 with a -0.9375 offset. I've had bad luck with any bclk over 101, my 960 starts not being detected.
> 
> Knowing that the new chips won't be out for several more months I want to start tweaking my setup again. I felt like I was stuck with the dual rank dimms and this single rank kit has renewed my interest in pushing for more. I'll take all the tips I can get.


You could try my timing for 3533. Recently tried the bios 1201 and aiming to lower my voltage as much as possible compared to before.

Before on 1103

4.25Ghz at 1.4v
3600CL14 at 1.49v
SoC at 1.137v

Now on 1201

4.25Ghz at 1.375v
3533CL14 at 1.415v
SoC at 1.025v

I've spent all weekend stablising it and so far so good.


----------



## Nucky

nick name said:


> In the Calculator the timings are listed in the order: 14-14-15-14. However, if you look at the labels you'll see that in BIOS they are ordered differently and they should be input in the order: 14-15-14-14. That will completely bork your setup if you enter that 15 into the wrong spot. I didn't notice that for more time than I care to admit, but once I did it changed the game.
> 
> Edit:
> 
> The 970 doesn't seem to care about BCLK as high as 104 I think. I can't remember exactly how high I've gone, but it was never an issue for the 970. Which m.2 slot do you use?
> 
> And that is a huge offset for VCORE. Thight might be part of the problem?
> 
> I use PE 3 and then bump up EDC with Ryzen Master which manipulates the multiplier.


I've never noticed the mixup in the order for the timings so I've probably been doing it wrong this whole time.
I have tried with the offset on and off. Anything over 101 and I get the issue. I use the bottom nvme slot. 

Since I got in at 3600 and everything seems good I'm already tearing the heatspreaders off of this kit.


----------



## nick name

Nucky said:


> I've never noticed the mixup in the order for the timings so I've probably been doing it wrong this whole time.
> I have tried with the offset on and off. Anything over 101 and I get the issue. I use the bottom nvme slot.
> 
> Since I got in at 3600 and everything seems good I'm already tearing the heatspreaders off of this kit.


Yeah, it took me a long while before I noticed it. 

I guess if you're like me you'll probably end up selling that 960 and getting a 970. Using a BCLK above 101 can be very helpful when overclocking. Especially in the manner I overclock. 

Are the trim pieces of the old kit black? And do you still need them?


----------



## Nucky

I am considering moving to a 970. I would like to try and run a 103bclk and push for 4.4+ single core. 

The trim pieces are black. Where the 3600 kit is new I am going to at least hold on to all my parts until my return window is over.


----------



## nick name

Nucky said:


> I am considering moving to a 970. I would like to try and run a 103bclk and push for 4.4+ single core.
> 
> The trim pieces are black. Where the 3600 kit is new I am going to at least hold on to all my parts until my return window is over.


I would recommend the 970. Running 4.4 single core is very doable with good cooling and then if you can get some extremely good cooling 4.4 all core is even better. I have to use the colder weather to achieve that, but it's let me hit some fun benchmark scores. 

Roger that. I wish G.SKILL would sell those plastic trim pieces. I've run my kit without the trim pieces, but I didn't like the way it looked moreso than I hate the red.


----------



## nick name

I am gonna test whether POST code F9 is a result of too little SOC voltage. I'm gonna try booting with too little RAM voltage to see if I get the F9 POST code and repeat the process with too little SOC voltage. What has given me the idea is while testing 3700MHz with tight-ish timings my first try failed to POST and gave me the F9 code, but worked with some more SOC voltage. And I am currently running Karhu at 2GB with 8 threads and I'm at 7000% and no errors. 

Side note: does anyone run Karhu with a smaller RAM allotment and fewer threads and then game as it runs? As a test? I wanna try to find a way to identify those RAM settings that pass overnight tests, but prove unstable while gaming.


----------



## Martin778

Is 77*C Tdie on a Dark rock Pro 4 + 2700X to be expected when running 4.25GHz 1.4V (PE4 OC) and in X264v2?


----------



## nick name

Martin778 said:


> Is 77*C Tdie on a Dark rock Pro 4 + 2700X to be expected when running 4.25GHz 1.4V (PE4 OC) and in X264v2?


I couldn't say as I don't run that workload type. Can you run something much more common like Cinebench so your polling group is much larger?


----------



## nick name

So I've been testing 3703MHz all day and it's been very very promising. Of course I have to test overnight, but I think today's results warrant it.

Edit:

Welp it looks the settings I was running yesterday became unstable today. The only difference between yesterday and today being increased ambient temperature.


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> So I've been testing 3703MHz all day and it's been very very promising. Of course I have to test overnight, but I think today's results warrant it.


Nice, whats it pulling in a memory benchmark though?


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> I couldn't say as I don't run that workload type. Can you run something much more common like Cinebench so your polling group is much larger?


x264 is heavier than Cinebench so Id say thats probably expected with that cooler and PE4 bc the voltages are pretty aggressive.


----------



## ComansoRowlett

nick name said:


> What speed and timings do you run daily?


3466MHz CL13-13-13-24-38-1t GM disabled.


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> Nice, whats it pulling in a memory benchmark though?


https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/11664992
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/11665017
http://browser.geekbench.com/geekbench3/8730103


----------



## nick name

ComansoRowlett said:


> 3466MHz CL13-13-13-24-38-1t GM disabled.


Oooh I wonder if my kit can run that. Will you post your RTC screenshot so I can try out your settings?


----------



## minal

*Linux ASUS WMI sensor driver*

@Keith Myers and all linux users:

This looks like a neat project to get ASUS WMI sensors readouts in linux https://github.com/electrified/asus-wmi-sensors

Requires BIOS 1002 on the C7HWIFI. I finally have a reason to update! What's the most stable recent BIOS now?

It'll be great to report results here and also provide feedback to the author!


----------



## ComansoRowlett

nick name said:


> Oooh I wonder if my kit can run that. Will you post your RTC screenshot so I can try out your settings?


I can tell you the bios settings even once I am home, currently away. RTC seems to have issues on windows 1809 for me, gives me an error about initialization which sucks. Can just copy & paste the bios profile settings when I'm back for you to try out  My IMC kinda sucks so I decided to see if I could lower the timings instead of increase MHz, wouldn't budge even 1mhz past otherwise it's touch and go, seems very temperature dependent.


----------



## nick name

ComansoRowlett said:


> I can tell you the bios settings even once I am home, currently away. RTC seems to have issues on windows 1809 for me, gives me an error about initialization which sucks. Can just copy & paste the bios profile settings when I'm back for you to try out  My IMC kinda sucks so I decided to see if I could lower the timings instead of increase MHz, wouldn't budge even 1mhz past otherwise it's touch and go, seems very temperature dependent.


I had that problem with RTC a while back with the new AGESA. I had to uninstall and reinstall a few times, but couldn't tell you exactly how I got it to just start working again. 

Also, have you updated your RTC? The Stilt made a new one for the new AGESA, but stated it would be the last update.

And I appreciate you sharing.


----------



## CJMitsuki

ComansoRowlett said:


> I can tell you the bios settings even once I am home, currently away. RTC seems to have issues on windows 1809 for me, gives me an error about initialization which sucks. Can just copy & paste the bios profile settings when I'm back for you to try out  My IMC kinda sucks so I decided to see if I could lower the timings instead of increase MHz, wouldn't budge even 1mhz past otherwise it's touch and go, seems very temperature dependent.


If its the same initialization error Im thinking of then I found it had to do with another program that had implemented another version of the WinRing driver and there were conflicts or RTC was trying to use that particular driver. I want to say TurboVcore caused this but It may have been another tool similar.


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> If its the same initialization error Im thinking of then I found it had to do with another program that had implemented another version of the WinRing driver and there were conflicts or RTC was trying to use that particular driver. I want to say TurboVcore caused this but It may have been another tool similar.


My instance of the issue didn't involve any of those listed programs. If that helps at all.


----------



## BLUuuE

ComansoRowlett said:


> I can tell you the bios settings even once I am home, currently away. RTC seems to have issues on windows 1809 for me, gives me an error about initialization which sucks. Can just copy & paste the bios profile settings when I'm back for you to try out  My IMC kinda sucks so I decided to see if I could lower the timings instead of increase MHz, wouldn't budge even 1mhz past otherwise it's touch and go, seems very temperature dependent.


Try installing Open Hardware Monitor


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> So I've been testing 3703MHz all day and it's been very very promising. Of course I have to test overnight, but I think today's results warrant it.
> 
> Edit:
> 
> Welp it looks the settings I was running yesterday became unstable today. The only difference between yesterday and today being increased ambient temperature.


What voltage did you use for the ram here?


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> What voltage did you use for the ram here?


I think I was running 1.56V for 3703MHz. I've stopped testing it after it seemed to be much too sensitive to temps. Unless there was some other variable I am not accounting for.


----------



## gupsterg

Continuing on from post 5192, at 5hrs 47min test failed.



Spoiler














I tried a few different things after that, but adding a VCORE offset seems to have got me past 5hrs+ barrier. I believe the offset is aiding training at POST to stabilise this OC. As when I increase VCORE offset, load voltage for me never changes, only idle. 



Spoiler
















Wuest3nFuchs said:


> @gupsterg
> 
> ...had my first working day, so holidays were over for me right now.
> 
> Sucessfully tested the test ssd setup.
> 
> The overdriventool has only been used to put the fan spinning up to 1300rpm.
> She likes it cool. (Fury)
> 
> Maybe i'll make a gaming based installment of Win 10 1803, and a productive one.
> 
> Actually i think it could be a combination of a corrupt stick,followed by some issues on the OS Level, and those may based on the software i have installed on the main system ssd.
> BUT thats a thing i've to check out.
> If it isn't that i'll tell ya.
> 
> So thank you very much for your help, i hope i can move on now, get my stable to that point where it was before my issues started.
> 
> Cheers mate
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


NP  , hope all is still well.



minal said:


> @Keith Myers and all linux users:
> 
> This looks like a neat project to get ASUS WMI sensors readouts in linux https://github.com/electrified/asus-wmi-sensors
> 
> Requires BIOS 1002 on the C7HWIFI. I finally have a reason to update! What's the most stable recent BIOS now?
> 
> It'll be great to report results here and also provide feedback to the author!


Thanks for posting, will be trying it ASAP.

1002 if want AGESA 1.0.0.2C, 1103 if you want AGESA 1.0.0.6.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

@gupsterg

Hi, how are you?

First off all i checked the typhoonburner and it told me that my dram controller supports up to 1466mhz =2933. I didn't made a karhu stresstest yet, but i plan to in the next days.
Also tryin mint with gsat. 

To be true ,today i had 4 failed shutdowns in a row on my main ssd .

On the fresh installed OS SSD i hadn't this issue. 
So i dunno where this come from. 
I also can see no issue on ob the event history .

Last weekend i ordered a 3 usb3.0 usb stick with different sizes and even 2x usb2.0. So i hopefully can eliminate a faulty OS installation. 

I hold thumbs up for your stability and benchmark results! 
btw what is this RT you always Talk about ?

cheers mate 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## gupsterg

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> @gupsterg
> 
> Hi, how are you?
> 
> First off all i checked the typhoonburner and it told me that my dram controller supports up to 1466mhz =2933. I didn't made a karhu stresstest yet, but i plan to in the next days.
> Also tryin mint with gsat.
> 
> To be true ,today i had 4 failed shutdowns in a row on my main ssd .
> 
> On the fresh installed OS SSD i hadn't this issue.
> So i dunno where this come from.
> I also can see no issue on ob the event history .
> 
> Last weekend i ordered a 3 usb3.0 usb stick with different sizes and even 2x usb2.0. So i hopefully can eliminate a faulty OS installation.
> 
> I hold thumbs up for your stability and benchmark results!
> btw what is this RT you always Talk about ?
> 
> cheers mate
> 
> Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


Hi, all good here  .

Officially Ryzen 2xxx supports 2933MHz on 2 dimms of single rank/sided RAM, but you can OC  . I also do run GSAT on Mint as as well. You may find CPU-X handy on Linux, I used it in my screenies on that OS, it's like CPU-Z; Keith recommended it.

As you have no issue on fresh installed OS can only assume something is up with OS on main SSD. Dunno what to suggest to know what is wrong with that install.

Yes this chip has been great  . I plan to upgrade radiator, as I reckon the PBO OC with BCLK 103.8MHz has pushed it. RT is abbreviation for Karhu RAM Test.

All the best and hope to read of you gaining back OC :thumb: .


----------



## Keith Myers

*Thank you . . . . thank you*



minal said:


> @Keith Myers and all linux users:
> 
> This looks like a neat project to get ASUS WMI sensors readouts in linux https://github.com/electrified/asus-wmi-sensors
> 
> Requires BIOS 1002 on the C7HWIFI. I finally have a reason to update! What's the most stable recent BIOS now?
> 
> It'll be great to report results here and also provide feedback to the author!


Thank you very much minal for the post. I was not aware of this new kernel mode sensor driver. I have stuck with BIOS 0702 on my C7H boards because the later version aren't compatible with the latest kernels.

I will be giving this new driver a test after updating to the 1002 BIOS for the C7H. It will be great to get all of the WMI sensors available in Linux.:thumb:

[Edit] Tried to compile but hit errors. Logged a issue on the repository. Will wait for an reply about how to fix the errors.

[Edit 2] The developer said the driver only will compile on kernels > 4.17 because of changes in HWMON. Said he will be fixing it shortly to work on lesser kernels.


----------



## Keith Myers

Is it possible to return to BIOS 0702 after updating to BIOS 1002 and determining that 1002 isn't compatible with Linux.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

hey keith! i used bios flashback from 0509 to 1201 and back to 0509. So yes it's possible. Hope that answer helps you.

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## Martin778

Hm, I have PE3 on, DOCP standard, memory set to 3333MHz Stilt Fast @ 1.4V, everything else on auto but I still very rarely see that 4.3GHz PBO frequency, pretty much only very brief jumps in Ryzen Master or HWInfo64. 
When gaming or even running Cinebench R15 single core, all 8 lock to 4.15GHz and stay there.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Martin778 said:


> Hm, I have PE3 on, DOCP standard, memory set to 3333MHz Stilt Fast @ 1.4V, everything else on auto but I still very rarely see that 4.3GHz PBO frequency, pretty much only very brief jumps in Ryzen Master or HWInfo64.
> When gaming or even running Cinebench R15 single core, all 8 lock to 4.15GHz and stay there.


Thats because PE doesn’t rely on memory speed to determine its multiplier. Temps are what it uses. Aside from that PE3 won’t hit 43.5 all core unless you bclk OC to around 104mhz then to stay at 3333 you have to step memory down 2 steps. 1 step for each 2 MHz on the base clock to keep it at the same freq. PE3 is more for single core clocks and PE4 is for the higher all core clocks.


----------



## Martin778

What's weird is that when running, say 3dmark Port Royal, the 1st test shows the CPU mostly at 2.2GHz and only sometimes jumping to 4.1-4.35.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Martin778 said:


> What's weird is that when running, say 3dmark Port Royal, the 1st test shows the CPU mostly at 2.2GHz and only sometimes jumping to 4.1-4.35.


That’s bc it’s barely using the CPU and the GPU is taking most of the workload unless on the physics test.


----------



## nick name

Martin778 said:


> Hm, I have PE3 on, DOCP standard, memory set to 3333MHz Stilt Fast @ 1.4V, everything else on auto but I still very rarely see that 4.3GHz PBO frequency, pretty much only very brief jumps in Ryzen Master or HWInfo64.
> When gaming or even running Cinebench R15 single core, all 8 lock to 4.15GHz and stay there.


You can use Ryzen Master to adjust the multiplier when using PE 3 or 4. If you're booting at 41.5 with PE 3 then you can get it up to 42.5 and maybe higher. 

https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...tiplier-adjustments-through-ryzen-master.html


----------



## Martin778

Ryzen Master shows that it's hitting EDC limit of 140A under Cinebench R15 and resulting in ~4094MHz all core freq, when I increase it to 168A (max I can set in RM) it boosts to 4240MHz but results in 74*C Tdie under R15.


----------



## nick name

Martin778 said:


> Ryzen Master shows that it's hitting EDC limit of 140A under Cinebench R15 and resulting in ~4094MHz all core freq, when I increase it to 168A (max I can set in RM) it boosts to 4240MHz but results in 74*C Tdie under R15.


What cooler do you use?

And have you set a VCORE offset in BIOS?


----------



## Keith Myers

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> hey keith! i used bios flashback from 0509 to 1201 and back to 0509. So yes it's possible. Hope that answer helps you.
> 
> Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


Thanks I was worried because I think the WMI BIOS' make changes to the SMU firmware code and you normally can't revert back through those changes unless you use the AFUDOS app.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

Keith Myers said:


> Thanks I was worried because I think the WMI BIOS' make changes to the SMU firmware code and you normally can't revert back through those changes unless you use the AFUDOS app.


I cant tell you that exactly .
But i noticed the Firmware numbers changed in bios ,on windows 10 i have hwinfo running .
It showed me the asus ec and ite Controller before i've flashed the board the first time. 
After the bios update it showed me the wmi style in hwinfo.

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## Keith Myers

*asuswmisensors driver*

As I posted in my other message, the driver currently only works on kernels greater than 4.17 because of changes to HWMON. I put it onto my test development Ubuntu 18.10 partition with kernel 4.18.13 and it works beautifully. The developer said he should make changes so it works on earlier kernels shortly. This is the sensors output:


----------



## minal

Keith Myers said:


> Is it possible to return to BIOS 0702 after updating to BIOS 1002 and determining that 1002 isn't compatible with Linux.





Keith Myers said:


> As I posted in my other message, the driver currently only works on kernels greater than 4.17 because of changes to HWMON. I put it onto my test development Ubuntu 18.10 partition with kernel 4.18.13 and it works beautifully. The developer said he should make changes so it works on earlier kernels shortly. This is the sensors output:


BIOS 1002 incompatible with linux?? In what way? What about 1103?
I seriously can't wait to get all those sensor readouts! Beautiful.


----------



## Keith Myers

minal said:


> BIOS 1002 incompatible with linux?? In what way? What about 1103?
> I seriously can't wait to get all those sensor readouts! Beautiful.


OK, not enough detail. With the BIOS 0804 which was the first WMI implementation, I found the it87 driver would refuse to load and generated a kernel error because it stomped on an ACPI protected address. That is why I have stuck to 0702 BIOS so far.The WMI export to the kernel really confused it. I never tried any newer version than that one. Maybe the later versions didn't cause the problem with the Linux kernels I am using.

So the new asuswmisensor driver works beautifully in Ubuntu 18.10. Dropped back to my daily driver Ubuntu 18.04 and modprobed the it87 driver back in which I had removed expecting issues with the BIOS 1002 I had flashed. It is still working and other than the normal ACPI warning message about SystemIO range conflicts with the driver address, no issues. So I would say you can safely use the 1002 BIOS now with the it87 driver while waiting for the newer WMI driver. Just use the [options it87 ignore_resource_conflict=1] option in a it87.conf file in /etc/modprobe.d directory in the meantime.


----------



## minal

Keith Myers said:


> OK, not enough detail. With the BIOS 0804 which was the first WMI implementation, I found the it87 driver would refuse to load and generated a kernel error because it stomped on an ACPI protected address. That is why I have stuck to 0702 BIOS so far.The WMI export to the kernel really confused it. I never tried any newer version than that one. Maybe the later versions didn't cause the problem with the Linux kernels I am using.
> 
> So the new asuswmisensor driver works beautifully in Ubuntu 18.10. Dropped back to my daily driver Ubuntu 18.04 and modprobed the it87 driver back in which I had removed expecting issues with the BIOS 1002 I had flashed. It is still working and other than the normal ACPI warning message about SystemIO range conflicts with the driver address, no issues. So I would say you can safely use the 1002 driver now with the it87 driver while waiting for the newer WMI driver. Just use the [options it87 ignore_resource_conflict=1] option in a it87.conf file in /etc/modprobe.d directory in the meantime.


Oh, ok, thanks for the clarification. So it's compatibility with the it87 driver that possibly had issues due to BIOS changes.

I'm actually on kernel 4.19, so maybe the trouble you ran into on Ubuntu 18.04 is a non-issue on Fedora. 

Any reason not to try BIOS 1103 with AGESA 1.0.0.6?


----------



## Keith Myers

*New version available for asus-wmi-sensors driver*



minal said:


> Oh, ok, thanks for the clarification. So it's compatibility with the it87 driver that possibly had issues due to BIOS changes.
> 
> I'm actually on kernel 4.19, so maybe the trouble you ran into on Ubuntu 18.04 is a non-issue on Fedora.
> 
> Any reason not to try BIOS 1103 with AGESA 1.0.0.6?


No it shouldn't be an issue at all with kernel 4.19. Git or clone the repository and sudo make dkms. Done deal. You do have to have lm-sensors already installed of course. Very simple installation.

Other than he said it hadn't been tested on anything newer than 1002 which was mandatory, I would say go for it. Flash 1103 with AGESA 1.0.0.6 and let us know if it works. The developer would like to know also.

[Edit]

A new version is available that builds and installs on older kernels is available now.
https://github.com/electrified/asus-wmi-sensors


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

@gupsterg 

Which bios is recommended for NOT frying the embbeded controller on C7H.

I also did 2x1hr gsat, sucessfully @2933...
...I hope it passed succesfully as i'm not familiar with gsat nor Linux .

















Will post my 2933 template later. 
Btw i have DUAL RANKED RAM (3000) crucial ballistix elite in my Main rig .
Officially Amd supports DUAL RANKED @2666 (sounds devilish),from what i've ready so far. 
They chips are samsung E die .










I also ordered a asus 1070ti cerberus which is on sale right now . My fury causes these graphical texture issues i have while gaming and they were not persistent .Sometimes it runs good and sometimes i have Messer up textures even in my fresh installed OS SSD. 
As i know you also gar a few furys, what dir you saw this Kind of values.
Same driver used in both ssd' s 18.11.2 .
But i get different results on hwinfo64 .










As my first issues with the system started on a fresh installed system over Night.

So where my fury showed me those results, i've never seen before .
Atm i don't have these values spotted since the issues started on 4.1.2019 .










Normally it should look like this or?










Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## Keith Myers

I found that the older it87 driver works fine with BIOS 1002. You still would need to make an it87.conf file for the /etc/modprobe.d directory with the contents of options it87 ignore_resource_conflict=1

You won't "fry" anything. You will just not load the driver or will have errors without the options it87 ignore_resource_conflict=1 contents in an it87.conf file.

However I would just forego the older it87 driver for now as the developer as just made a new release of the asus-wmi-sensors driver that works on earlier kernels

https://github.com/electrified/asus-wmi-sensors


----------



## Keith Myers

@minal. Go get the new asus-wmi-sensors driver. It has been updated to install to older kernels without the need for hwmon_max definition. Currently running it on my Ubuntu 18.04 distro with kernel 4.15.0-43. All the WMI sensors are reporting.


----------



## minal

Keith Myers said:


> @*minal* . Go get the new asus-wmi-sensors driver. It has been updated to install to older kernels without the need for hwmon_max definition. Currently running it on my Ubuntu 18.04 distro with kernel 4.15.0-43. All the WMI sensors are reporting.


Thanks for reporting! I haven't updated the BIOS yet because I don't want to reboot just now. I'll try the asus-wmi-sensors driver as soon as I do, and since I'm on kernel 4.19 there should be no problem with the hwmon_max definition. I'm thinking I'll try BIOS 1103 with AGESA 1.0.0.6 for no other reason than validating it.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

I've found out that the bios option :

Adress Hash Bank when on auto it is enabled .
So i tried to disable it and got BankGroupSwapalt deactivated, proofed via rtc .

So to me it seems Adress Hash Bank is BankGroupSwapalt .

Also on windows when i run hwinfo i get 1dpc-mr, thinking of issue when also runing rtc .

cheers 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk

Passed another 1hr30min of gsat, so far so good.

Now testing with 1usmus tm5 cfg on win 10.

Passed, now trying the docp bios option and do tests .









docp setting passed


----------



## minal

Success! asus-wmi-sensors is working nicely on BIOS 1103 and kernel 4.19.15. It's so great having the fan RPM, temperature, and voltage readings from linux. 

I installed the driver with "sudo make dkms" and then had it start at boot by creating the file /usr/lib/modules-load.d/asus-wmi-sensors.conf containing the module's name "asus-wmi-sensors". (Noted here for my future reference  )

=====

Btw, on BIOS 1103 compared to 0702, I'm noticing 30-50MHz more on the CPU, depending on load. The CPU seems to hit 4.35GHz more easily and frequently on single/few cores, and stay around 4.15GHz on all cores on typical full loads vs maybe 4.10GHz before. 4.06GHz on all cores with p95. Similar ambient and peak temperatures between the comparisons.

On both BIOSes, the settings are PBO+CPB enabled, no/default PE, -50mV offset on Vcore, and RAM at DOCP 3200MHz with 1.35V DRAM Voltage.


----------



## crakej

I've been playing around with the Stilt's 3600 1.4v T2 profile today. It ended when I was unable to control my fans properly, even from the bios. Also, the profile stopped working at all until I put 60-ohm in manually for 
Proc ODT - and then when it booted, I would have these same problems, using the bios OR AISuite!

When I tried to optimize them in the bios ch1 and ch3 would just get stuck on full power. I notice that even after loading default values for the bios, when I tried re-optimizing the fans strange things were still happening.

For one all my PWM fans are identified as DC, and won't work properly unless they are left like that!?!?!? These problems repeat if I try loading the T2 profile again.

I may go back to 1103 which seemed more reliable to me. Also didn't have that F9 constantly repeating problem. Is @Silent Scone aware of the problems we have with 1201? Are there any betas or releases coming up with fixes?


----------



## minal

crakej said:


> When I tried to optimize them in the bios ch1 and ch3 would just get stuck on full power. I notice that even after loading default values for the bios, when I tried re-optimizing the fans strange things were still happening.
> 
> For one all my PWM fans are identified as DC, and won't work properly unless they are left like that!?!?!? These problems repeat if I try loading the T2 profile again.
> 
> I may go back to 1103 which seemed more reliable to me.


 Fan control is weird for me too on 1103, and even 0702. eg. fan calibration results in pwm values > 100% for my Noctua A12x25 fan. Luckily I can edit the fan curve chart (so frustrating) to bring it to the values I want, but if I enter values directly in the text fields (I think in Monitoring section of the BIOS), it refuses them as invalid values...

So, I can get the fans to behave as I want, but there are definitely weird issues with input and fan calibration, and that seems to be the case across many BIOS versions.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> -snip-
> 
> I may go back to 1103 which seemed more reliable to me. Also didn't have that F9 constantly repeating problem. Is @Silent Scone aware of the problems we have with 1201? Are there any betas or releases coming up with fixes?



My theory is that F9 is from too little SOC voltage. Care to help me test that theory by only increasing SOC when you see it next?


----------



## nick name

Can someone tell me what PLL voltage does and why LN2 mode bumps it up to 2.1V?


----------



## crakej

minal said:


> Fan control is weird for me too on 1103, and even 0702. eg. fan calibration results in pwm values > 100% for my Noctua A12x25 fan. Luckily I can edit the fan curve chart (so frustrating) to bring it to the values I want, but if I enter values directly in the text fields (I think in Monitoring section of the BIOS), it refuses them as invalid values...
> 
> So, I can get the fans to behave as I want, but there are definitely weird issues with input and fan calibration, and that seems to be the case across many BIOS versions.


Glad it's not just me! I sometimes get good results but recently has just been strange - had 2 fans in the HAMP and it could never detect them. Even 2 identical fans didn't work on 1 connector. I've never had these problems with the CPU fan though - always seems to calibrate well.


----------



## crakej

How are you getting on with the G.Skill F4-4266s @majestynl ? Have you experimented more with them? What settings have you settled for? Just interested if your experience is same as mine.....


----------



## Keith Myers

Look for a further asus-wmi-sensors update as an issue has been logged describing the double reporting of CPU Voltage and SoC voltage because of the polling from both the WMI interface and the EC (embedded controller) interface. Suggested change is to add a suffix to the sensor value denoting its source like SIV or HwInfo does. 

There are slight differences in values from both sources because of the bit resolution differences in D-A conversion.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> My theory is that F9 is from too little SOC voltage. Care to help me test that theory by only increasing SOC when you see it next?


I don't think so - if I have it higher than it is ram becomes unstable.

Not sure about PLL, but I've always left mine on auto which comes out as 1.984v (actual I think is 2v) when OCing


----------



## minal

Keith Myers said:


> Look for a further asus-wmi-sensors update as an issue has been logged describing the double reporting of CPU Voltage and SoC voltage because of the polling from both the WMI interface and the EC (embedded controller) interface. Suggested change is to add a suffix to the sensor value denoting its source like SIV or HwInfo does.
> 
> There are slight differences in values from both sources because of the bit resolution differences in D-A conversion.


Which source is considered more accurate?


----------



## Keith Myers

*I can't remember . . . . .*



minal said:


> Which source is considered more accurate?


I can't remember. Somewhere in the forum is the answer as to bit resolution. One is 20mV or 12mV per bit and the other something different ? ? ? I can't remember. I do know that whatever sensor that the k10temp driver is using reports higher precision than the WMI sensor ?? for the Tdie temp compared to the CPU temp sensor output from the asus-wmi-sensor. There is a note somewhere on the k10temp github page or the it87 driver page that explains which has higher resolution. I use the k10temp Tdie sensor for the cpu temp on my hosts.


----------



## minal

Keith Myers said:


> I do know that whatever sensor that the k10temp driver is using reports higher precision than the WMI sensor ?? for the Tdie temp compared to the CPU temp sensor output from the asus-wmi-sensor.


I noticed this too. The k10temp readings have precision to the tenths decimal place, while asus-wmi-sensor's output is integer only. 

Not sure, but the time resolution also seems better with k10temp. At least when plotted with psensor, difference in precision is quite noticeable with k10temp's reading curve being less blocky and showing larger peaks and dips.


----------



## elmor

Keith Myers said:


> I can't remember. Somewhere in the forum is the answer as to bit resolution. One is 20mV or 12mV per bit and the other something different ? ? ? I can't remember. I do know that whatever sensor that the k10temp driver is using reports higher precision than the WMI sensor ?? for the Tdie temp compared to the CPU temp sensor output from the asus-wmi-sensor. There is a note somewhere on the k10temp github page or the it87 driver page that explains which has higher resolution. I use the k10temp Tdie sensor for the cpu temp on my hosts.





minal said:


> I noticed this too. The k10temp readings have precision to the tenths decimal place, while asus-wmi-sensor's output is integer only.
> 
> Not sure, but the time resolution also seems better with k10temp. At least when plotted with psensor, difference in precision is quite noticeable with k10temp's reading curve being less blocky and showing larger peaks and dips.



The reading from the EC is more accurate, the values are directly from the VRM controllers. The SIO reading has lower resolution and some SIO chips have rather large errors/offsets. I assume k10temp reads the CPU Tctl value directly from the CPU, while the WMI interface is reporting the the SIO recorded value using an external bus to the CPU which is also weighted using the CPU Socket thermistor.


----------



## crakej

elmor said:


> The reading from the EC is more accurate, the values are directly from the VRM controllers. The SIO reading has lower resolution and some SIO chips have rather large errors/offsets. I assume k10temp reads the CPU Tctl value directly from the CPU, while the WMI interface is reporting the the SIO recorded value using an external bus to the CPU which is also weighted using the CPU Socket thermistor.


Ah-ha! So that's why all those voltages aren't quite right! Thanks @elmor

Hope your new job is going well


----------



## minal

elmor said:


> The reading from the EC is more accurate, the values are directly from the VRM controllers. The SIO reading has lower resolution and some SIO chips have rather large errors/offsets. I assume k10temp reads the CPU Tctl value directly from the CPU, while the WMI interface is reporting the the SIO recorded value using an external bus to the CPU which is also weighted using the CPU Socket thermistor.


 Thanks for this information! 

Aside from reading values with the WMI, is it possible to set values? eg. the ability to set fan speeds from within the OS would help to find optimal fan curves, identify the loudest fan, etc.


----------



## Ceadderman

Feedback please;

Is this set of RAM on the QVL? Any issues with running it? Non RGB suggestions please if they aren't good.

*G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model F4-3600C19D-32GVRB*

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## elmor

minal said:


> Thanks for this information!
> 
> Aside from reading values with the WMI, is it possible to set values? eg. the ability to set fan speeds from within the OS would help to find optimal fan curves, identify the loudest fan, etc.



It's possible to create such a function, but it doesn't exist as of now.


----------



## Keith Myers

*the it87 driver allowed fan control*



minal said:


> Thanks for this information!
> 
> Aside from reading values with the WMI, is it possible to set values? eg. the ability to set fan speeds from within the OS would help to find optimal fan curves, identify the loudest fan, etc.


The older it87 driver allowed fan control if you set pwmN=enable in HWMON interfaces.


----------



## CJMitsuki

crakej said:


> I don't think so - if I have it higher than it is ram becomes unstable.
> 
> Not sure about PLL, but I've always left mine on auto which comes out as 1.984v (actual I think is 2v) when OCing


You can lower CPU temps by quite a bit by setting a manual PLL voltage to reflect true 1.8v. I have to set mine to 1.76v to get it to be 1.8v on the multimeter. I dont remember how much temps dropped but it was pretty dramatic for me to notice as I wasnt even looking for a change in temps. Stability wasnt affected, even when bclk OCing.


----------



## SoulRipper

Hello guys,

I am trying to get my rig perfectly stable, and most specifically my RAM:

CPU: Ryzen 2700X
MB: C7H (BIOS v1201)
RAM: 32GB Corsair CMK32GX4M2B3200C16 @ 3200 Mhz
PSU: Corsair AX860

Sometimes I pass 20000% with Karhu, but on next boot it fails at 150%...

I feel I'm very close, but I don't understand why sometimes it's rock stable and sometimes not.

I've tried increasing SOC (to 1.2V) & RAM (to 1.45V) with no success. Timings are XMP ones. I get much more errors with Gear Down Mode disabled. Already tried 2T.

Any idea?

Thanks in advance.


----------



## nick name

SoulRipper said:


> Hello guys,
> 
> I am trying to get my rig perfectly stable, and most specifically my RAM:
> 
> CPU: Ryzen 2700X
> MB: C7H (BIOS v1201)
> RAM: 32GB Corsair CMK32GX4M2B3200C16 @ 3200 Mhz
> PSU: Corsair AX860
> 
> Sometimes I pass 20000% with Karhu, but on next boot it fails at 150%...
> 
> I feel I'm very close, but I don't understand why sometimes it's rock stable and sometimes not.
> 
> I've tried increasing SOC (to 1.2V) & RAM (to 1.45V) with no success. Timings are XMP ones. I get much more errors with Gear Down Mode disabled. Already tried 2T.
> 
> Any idea?
> 
> Thanks in advance.


I've never seen anyone with RTTPARK as high as you are showing. Is that a value you set manually? Or was that on Auto?


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> You can lower CPU temps by quite a bit by setting a manual PLL voltage to reflect true 1.8v. I have to set mine to 1.76v to get it to be 1.8v on the multimeter. I dont remember how much temps dropped but it was pretty dramatic for me to notice as I wasnt even looking for a change in temps. Stability wasnt affected, even when bclk OCing.


Does PLL really impact temps that much? I've read it does in Google search results, but didn't pay those any mind. I feel dumb after I forgot I had my board in LN2 mode for the past month and a half and PLL was at 2.1V that entire time before I noticed. I made a couple changes at the same time I switched off LN2 mode so I couldn't check to see how returning PLL back to normal impacted temps.


----------



## SoulRipper

nick name said:


> I've never seen anyone with RTTPARK as high as you are showing. Is that a value you set manually? Or was that on Auto?


Hi nick name, thanks for the reply. That was on Auto. Do you think I should lower it?


----------



## nick name

SoulRipper said:


> Hi nick name, thanks for the reply. That was on Auto. Do you think I should lower it?


Well my concern comes from an AMD video about RAM overclocking and they mentioned high resistances being bad so it's why I made mention. Looking at the 1usmus DRAM Calculator it shows 240 Ohms as well though so I guess it's what is called for. Disregard my concern.


----------



## minal

elmor said:


> It's possible to create such a function, but it doesn't exist as of now.


Does this need to be implemented by Asus in BIOS or can the linux driver implement it?


Keith Myers said:


> The older it87 driver allowed fan control if you set pwmN=enable in HWMON interfaces.


So we can have full sensor readouts, or we can have some readouts and fan control for 2 fans.. nice! lol But thanks, I did not know it87 has fan control.


----------



## Nucky

So I upgraded from the 960 evo to a 970 and I am still having issues with any bclk over 101. The machine posts fine but never goes past the "Press blah blah" and windows never loads. Is there a bios setting I am missing or am I just super unlucky?


----------



## nick name

Nucky said:


> So I upgraded from the 960 evo to a 970 and I am still having issues with any bclk over 101. The machine posts fine but never goes past the "Press blah blah" and windows never loads. Is there a bios setting I am missing or am I just super unlucky?


Does it work fine with standard BCLK?


----------



## Keith Myers

minal said:


> Does this need to be implemented by Asus in BIOS or can the linux driver implement it?
> 
> So we can have full sensor readouts, or we can have some readouts and fan control for 2 fans.. nice! lol But thanks, I did not know it87 has fan control.


Yes with the limited sensors on the C7H, it does seem meaningless. It was a different story on the X370 Pro or C6H. But I find I get all the fan control I need from the BIOS settings.


----------



## Nucky

nick name said:


> Does it work fine with standard BCLK?


Yeah, 100 and 101 work fine. Anything over 101 and that is what happens.


----------



## elmor

minal said:


> Does this need to be implemented by Asus in BIOS or can the linux driver implement it?
> 
> So we can have full sensor readouts, or we can have some readouts and fan control for 2 fans.. nice! lol But thanks, I did not know it87 has fan control.


Needs to be added by BIOS. Also keep in mind that the it87 driver will not use a "safe" method of accessing the SIO and may cause errors in readouts/fan control etc.


----------



## minal

elmor said:


> Needs to be added by BIOS. Also keep in mind that the it87 driver will not use a "safe" method of accessing the SIO and may cause errors in readouts/fan control etc.


Awesome, thanks. Any idea if this is on Asus' roadmap for BIOS development?


----------



## Rusakova

Nucky said:


> So I upgraded from the 960 evo to a 970 and I am still having issues with any bclk over 101. The machine posts fine but never goes past the "Press blah blah" and windows never loads. Is there a bios setting I am missing or am I just super unlucky?


Isn't the SATA bug still in effect on this board, with bclk > 101 ?
(You must not have anything connected to SATA SLOT 6 to go above 101)


----------



## Nucky

Rusakova said:


> Nucky said:
> 
> 
> 
> So I upgraded from the 960 evo to a 970 and I am still having issues with any bclk over 101. The machine posts fine but never goes past the "Press blah blah" and windows never loads. Is there a bios setting I am missing or am I just super unlucky?
> 
> 
> 
> Isn't the SATA bug still in effect on this board, with bclk > 101 ?
> (You must not have anything connected to SATA SLOT 6 to go above 101)
Click to expand...

That was it. Thank you so much! I had no idea about the sata6 bug. I also never checked the manual and assumed the top slot was sata1/2 like every other Asus board I've had. Swapped the drives around and now 103 bclk is booting no issue.


----------



## nick name

Nucky said:


> That was it. Thank you so much! I had no idea about the sata6 bug. I also never checked the manual and assumed the top slot was sata1/2 like every other Asus board I've had. Swapped the drives around and now 103 bclk is booting no issue.


Sorry Nucky -- I can't seem to reply to any messages. Have you had any overclocking success now that you can use higher BCLK?


----------



## Nucky

I've been able to boot at 103 no problem. Can't seem to dial in stability for CB runs though. Highest I've got stable for CB has been 102.4 which is giving me 4.35 all core and 4.45 single core. Is there any way to fix the bclk dropping down ? Mine constantly fluctuates from 102.4 to 102.x . Always did the same at 100 bclk. I have always ran a pretty aggressive undervolt at 100/101. So not sure what you guys are running for positive offsets with 103.


----------



## nick name

Nucky said:


> I've been able to boot at 103 no problem. Can't seem to dial in stability for CB runs though. Highest I've got stable for CB has been 102.4 which is giving me 4.35 all core and 4.45 single core. Is there any way to fix the bclk dropping down ? Mine constantly fluctuates from 102.4 to 102.x . Always did the same at 100 bclk. I have always ran a pretty aggressive undervolt at 100/101. So not sure what you guys are running for positive offsets with 103.


Yeah the BCLK always fluctuates. And I can't really remember what offset I was using for BCLK that high, but I'm sure @CJMitsuki can help since he does it much more often.


----------



## Ceadderman

Ceadderman said:


> Feedback please;
> 
> Is this set of RAM on the QVL? Any issues with running it? Non RGB suggestions please if they aren't good.
> 
> *G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model F4-3600C19D-32GVRB*
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


 :jealoussm 

Dang I know this is OCN,and OC is a lifechoice, but Hades.Will this RAM kit work? Does anyone have experience with it? I would like to know since I am gonna be dropping the US Mint's worth of wages on putting this system together, hopefully, if I can get some answers.

Gonna run 1800x until Zen 2. Maybe a bit longer but I would like to run the 1800x since I was an early adopter who didn't have the capital or the patience to pay for price gouged RAM and didn't know if I was going with CVIHero or if I would skip it. I skipped it.

Well now I know. So any assistance would be appreciated. Thanks. :thumb:

I swear the "like" system needs to be brought back. At least that was an incentive for... :doh:

OH! I don't want RGB because it would be wasted. I am gonna swap out the stock sinks for a couple EK Monarch sinks. So if no buenos, please rec along this line. 

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## nick name

Ceadderman said:


> :jealoussm
> 
> Dang I know this is OCN,and OC is a lifechoice, but Hades.Will this RAM kit work? Does anyone have experience with it? I would like to know since I am gonna be dropping the US Mint's worth of wages on putting this system together, hopefully, if I can get some answers.
> 
> Gonna run 1800x until Zen 2. Maybe a bit longer but I would like to run the 1800x since I was an early adopter who didn't have the capital or the patience to pay for price gouged RAM and didn't know if I was going with CVIHero or if I would skip it. I skipped it.
> 
> Well now I know. So any assistance would be appreciated. Thanks. :thumb:
> 
> I swear the "like" system needs to be brought back. At least that was an incentive for... :doh:
> 
> OH! I don't want RGB because it would be wasted. I am gonna swap out the stock sinks for a couple EK Monarch sinks. So if no buenos, please rec along this line.
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


I can't imagine why it wouldn't work, but it's always more a question of the speed. I'd say 3600 is absolutely doable, but I don't know with dual-rank stinks. You probably wouldn't want to run 3600 with CL 19 anyway so if you're goal is lower speed and tighter timings then that may be a more realistic expectation (around 3400CL14). You might have better luck with a kit that is closer to 3200CL14 than a 3600CL19 in that regard, however.


----------



## Keith Myers

*Never had an issue with the it87 driver*



elmor said:


> Needs to be added by BIOS. Also keep in mind that the it87 driver will not use a "safe" method of accessing the SIO and may cause errors in readouts/fan control etc.


Yes, the driver may cause issues. I never tried to control fans and the readouts were always fine. I did use the ignore_resource_conflicts=1 parameter. But as always YMMV so you are warned.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Nucky said:


> I've been able to boot at 103 no problem. Can't seem to dial in stability for CB runs though. Highest I've got stable for CB has been 102.4 which is giving me 4.35 all core and 4.45 single core. Is there any way to fix the bclk dropping down ? Mine constantly fluctuates from 102.4 to 102.x . Always did the same at 100 bclk. I have always ran a pretty aggressive undervolt at 100/101. So not sure what you guys are running for positive offsets with 103.





nick name said:


> Yeah the BCLK always fluctuates. And I can't really remember what offset I was using for BCLK that high, but I'm sure @CJMitsuki can help since he does it much more often.


Youll just have to keep increasing the positive offset until it runs stable. The voltage needed will be determined by your hardware and everyone will have a different experience. If I were to guess @ PE4 103 then id say like +.075v but thats a guess. CB15 is a heavier benchmark with a short duration so more voltage than normally used for 103mhz bclk will be needed to keep it from crashing. Ill run a few tests and see what my minimum voltage needed is on PE3 and 4. With your clocks it looks like you are probably running PE3 though.

Also, I never saw my bclk fluctuate at all, it stays locked and the multiplier fluctuates.


----------



## Nucky

CJMitsuki said:


> Nucky said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've been able to boot at 103 no problem. Can't seem to dial in stability for CB runs though. Highest I've got stable for CB has been 102.4 which is giving me 4.35 all core and 4.45 single core. Is there any way to fix the bclk dropping down ? Mine constantly fluctuates from 102.4 to 102.x . Always did the same at 100 bclk. I have always ran a pretty aggressive undervolt at 100/101. So not sure what you guys are running for positive offsets with 103.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nick name said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah the BCLK always fluctuates. And I can't really remember what offset I was using for BCLK that high, but I'm sure @CJMitsuki can help since he does it much more often.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Youll just have to keep increasing the positive offset until it runs stable. The voltage needed will be determined by your hardware and everyone will have a different experience. If I were to guess @ PE4 103 then id say like +.075v but thats a guess. CB15 is a heavier benchmark with a short duration so more voltage than normally used for 103mhz bclk will be needed to keep it from crashing. Ill run a few tests and see what my minimum voltage needed is on PE3 and 4. With your clocks it looks like you are probably running PE3 though.
> 
> Also, I never saw my bclk fluctuate at all, it stays locked and the multiplier fluctuates.
Click to expand...

Okay. I never tried as high as +.075. I tried up to +.068. I am running PE4. At 103 and the positive offset all core was 4.4 and single was 4.475. I've moved back to 102.4 trying to get it as low as possible as I'll probably use it as my daily setup.


----------



## Syldon

Spotted this video in reddit/r/intel. Food for thought I will have a try next time I have some time free.


----------



## nick name

Nucky said:


> Okay. I never tried as high as +.075. I tried up to +.068. I am running PE4. At 103 and the positive offset all core was 4.4 and single was 4.475. I've moved back to 102.4 trying to get it as low as possible as I'll probably use it as my daily setup.


When I was benching at 4.42GHz it was done with cold weather. My RAM was down to 9*C. To get stability to bench I had to run a high +offset. So high that I had to enable LN2 mode on the board.


----------



## Nucky

I opened a window in my office and got some low temps. Ended up using a +.08 offset to get some cincebench runs to go through. I wasn't able to make it through a timespy cpu run before I gave up.


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> When I was benching at 4.42GHz it was done with cold weather. My RAM was down to 9*C. To get stability to bench I had to run a high +offset. So high that I had to enable LN2 mode on the board.





Nucky said:


> I opened a window in my office and got some low temps. Ended up using a +.08 offset to get some cincebench runs to go through. I wasn't able to make it through a timespy cpu run before I gave up.


Never had to enable LN2 mode on PE4 but it does require much more voltage than PE3. Pretty sure I was using 1.55v-1.59v for 104.8mhz on PE4 so 103 will be something like +.11v or maybe a bit higher bc PE3 took around +.075v Which was around 1.49-1.5v and a bit less during CB15 run and scored 2020cb, on PE4 id say it will score around 2075 depending on memory configuration.


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> Never had to enable LN2 mode on PE4 but it does require much more voltage than PE3. Pretty sure I was using 1.55v-1.59v for 104.8mhz on PE4 so 103 will be something like +.11v or maybe a bit higher bc PE3 took around +.075v Which was around 1.49-1.5v and a bit less during CB15 run and scored 2020cb, on PE4 id say it will score around 2075 depending on memory configuration.


Yeah, I needed to go just a tiny bit higher than the board would allow without LN2 mode. I was using PE3.


----------



## Ceadderman

nick name said:


> I can't imagine why it wouldn't work, but it's always more a question of the speed. I'd say 3600 is absolutely doable, but I don't know with dual-rank stinks. You probably wouldn't want to run 3600 with CL 19 anyway so if you're goal is lower speed and tighter timings then that may be a more realistic expectation (around 3400CL14). You might have better luck with a kit that is closer to 3200CL14 than a 3600CL19 in that regard, however.


With timings that loose, there should be some flexibility since the whole system is to be watercooled with one 360 PE and two 360 SE radiators. Buying block and PE and some fittings in the beginning of February. :thumb:

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## CJMitsuki

Ceadderman said:


> With timings that loose, there should be some flexibility since the whole system is to be watercooled with one 360 PE and two 360 SE radiators. Buying block and PE and some fittings in the beginning of February. :thumb:
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


Honestly, without even knowing the type of dies I know I wouldnt get that kit. With timings that garbage it has to speak for the quality of dies used making the sticks. Even [email protected] CL14 would be faster than [email protected] CL19. I feel like you would struggle just to overclock that kit but that is just going off of my intuition and not any facts or input from known use cases but Ive seen people struggle with 3200c16 kits badly so 3600c19 is far worse binned timings. Personally I think you would regret getting that kit unless you didnt mind running at 3000mhz or lower. There are only two dies that I would trust right now for Ryzen and that is High Quality Samsung B Dies and Hynix CJR dies. I know that kit isnt running HQ Bdie and I dont think G.SKill uses Hynix CJR in anything but the SniperX kits at the moment but I could be wrong.

Edit: 240$ for 32gb is super cheap so I wouldnt expect much but if that is your budget and you absolutely need 32gb then go for it. If you only need 16gb then the same amount of cash will get you a 3200c14 kit that will be about the best Ryzen kit you can find for current gen or even first gen and Id imagine it will still be amazing for Ryzen 2.


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> Honestly, without even knowing the type of dies I know I wouldnt get that kit. With timings that garbage it has to speak for the quality of dies used making the sticks. Even [email protected] CL14 would be faster than [email protected] CL19. I feel like you would struggle just to overclock that kit but that is just going off of my intuition and not any facts or input from known use cases but Ive seen people struggle with 3200c16 kits badly so 3600c19 is far worse binned timings. Personally I think you would regret getting that kit unless you didnt mind running at 3000mhz or lower. There are only two dies that I would trust right now for Ryzen and that is High Quality Samsung B Dies and Hynix CJR dies. I know that kit isnt running HQ Bdie and I dont think G.SKill uses Hynix CJR in anything but the SniperX kits at the moment but I could be wrong.
> 
> Edit: 240$ for 32gb is super cheap so I wouldnt expect much but if that is your budget and you absolutely need 32gb then go for it. If you only need 16gb then the same amount of cash will get you a 3200c14 kit that will be about the best Ryzen kit you can find for current gen or even first gen and Id imagine it will still be amazing for Ryzen 2.


Heck, I've seen 3600CL15 get as low or lower than $240 recently.


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Honestly, without even knowing the type of dies I know I wouldnt get that kit. With timings that garbage it has to speak for the quality of dies used making the sticks. Even [email protected] CL14 would be faster than [email protected] CL19. I feel like you would struggle just to overclock that kit but that is just going off of my intuition and not any facts or input from known use cases but Ive seen people struggle with 3200c16 kits badly so 3600c19 is far worse binned timings. Personally I think you would regret getting that kit unless you didnt mind running at 3000mhz or lower. There are only two dies that I would trust right now for Ryzen and that is High Quality Samsung B Dies and Hynix CJR dies. I know that kit isnt running HQ Bdie and I dont think G.SKill uses Hynix CJR in anything but the SniperX kits at the moment but I could be wrong.
> 
> Edit: 240$ for 32gb is super cheap so I wouldnt expect much but if that is your budget and you absolutely need 32gb then go for it. If you only need 16gb then the same amount of cash will get you a 3200c14 kit that will be about the best Ryzen kit you can find for current gen or even first gen and Id imagine it will still be amazing for Ryzen 2.
> 
> 
> 
> Heck, I've seen 3600CL15 get as low or lower than $240 recently.
Click to expand...

Exactly, DDR4 price are predicted to drop by 20% this year but I wouldn’t hold my breath on that since Zen 2 will drive demand back up around mid year. Just an excuse for those companies to explain another “shortage of memory” and artificially drive prices back up. Although they do have eyes on them at the moment so we will see.


----------



## Ceadderman

CJMitsuki said:


> Honestly, without even knowing the type of dies I know I wouldnt get that kit. With timings that garbage it has to speak for the quality of dies used making the sticks. Even [email protected] CL14 would be faster than [email protected] CL19. I feel like you would struggle just to overclock that kit but that is just going off of my intuition and not any facts or input from known use cases but Ive seen people struggle with 3200c16 kits badly so 3600c19 is far worse binned timings. Personally I think you would regret getting that kit unless you didnt mind running at 3000mhz or lower. There are only two dies that I would trust right now for Ryzen and that is High Quality Samsung B Dies and Hynix CJR dies. I know that kit isnt running HQ Bdie and I dont think G.SKill uses Hynix CJR in anything but the SniperX kits at the moment but I could be wrong.
> 
> Edit: 240$ for 32gb is super cheap so I wouldnt expect much but if that is your budget and you absolutely need 32gb then go for it. If you only need 16gb then the same amount of cash will get you a 3200c14 kit that will be about the best Ryzen kit you can find for current gen or even first gen and Id imagine it will still be amazing for Ryzen 2.


So where does one find out which sticks have Samsung b dies?

I always look at specs but I have never seen any mention of this in the rundowns. 

I normally like to run double the memory over my last system when building my new system so I know that I won't have to worry about it. My last system has 16gb. The one before that 8gb and my old XP system 4gb.

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## CJMitsuki

Ceadderman said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Honestly, without even knowing the type of dies I know I wouldnt get that kit. With timings that garbage it has to speak for the quality of dies used making the sticks. Even [email protected] CL14 would be faster than [email protected] CL19. I feel like you would struggle just to overclock that kit but that is just going off of my intuition and not any facts or input from known use cases but Ive seen people struggle with 3200c16 kits badly so 3600c19 is far worse binned timings. Personally I think you would regret getting that kit unless you didnt mind running at 3000mhz or lower. There are only two dies that I would trust right now for Ryzen and that is High Quality Samsung B Dies and Hynix CJR dies. I know that kit isnt running HQ Bdie and I dont think G.SKill uses Hynix CJR in anything but the SniperX kits at the moment but I could be wrong.
> 
> Edit: 240$ for 32gb is super cheap so I wouldnt expect much but if that is your budget and you absolutely need 32gb then go for it. If you only need 16gb then the same amount of cash will get you a 3200c14 kit that will be about the best Ryzen kit you can find for current gen or even first gen and Id imagine it will still be amazing for Ryzen 2.
> 
> 
> 
> So where does one find out which sticks have Samsung b dies?
> 
> I always look at specs but I have never seen any mention of this in the rundowns.
> 
> I normally like to run double the memory over my last system when building my new system so I know that I won't have to worry about it. My last system has 16gb. The one before that 8gb and my old XP system 4gb.
> 
> ~Ceadder /forum/images/smilies/smil3dbd4e4c2e742.gif
Click to expand...

What type of tasks do you use your pc for ? Let me know and I’ll point you toward the kits you’ll want as all B Die are not created equal and some b Die is trash. Good b die should last through your next couple builds and is pretty resilient as I’ve abused mine and it stills runs just like it did over 2 years ago.


----------



## Ceadderman

CJMitsuki said:


> What type of tasks do you use your pc for ? Let me know and I’ll point you toward the kits you’ll want as all B Die are not created equal and some b Die is trash. Good b die should last through your next couple builds and is pretty resilient as I’ve abused mine and it stills runs just like it did over 2 years ago.


I will be doing something of everything. OCing ,Gaming, Rendering etc.

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## Keith Myers

Ceadderman said:


> So where does one find out which sticks have Samsung b dies?
> 
> I always look at specs but I have never seen any mention of this in the rundowns.
> 
> I normally like to run double the memory over my last system when building my new system so I know that I won't have to worry about it. My last system has 16gb. The one before that 8gb and my old XP system 4gb.
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


This link was always good for a starting place.https://benzhaomin.github.io/bdiefinder/


----------



## Ceadderman

Keith Myers said:


> This link was always good for a starting place.https://benzhaomin.github.io/bdiefinder/


Good find.

Sadly every listing is LED or RGB. So I guess for my needs the GSkill RAM is the best I can get atm.

The problem lies in the need for non RGB sticks. They are too tall as bare sticks to swap Monarch sinks to. Non RGB are the correct height for the swap. So I will go with those and possibly change them out with a pair of Bdie if I can find those in non RGB. 

Thanks fellas for your input. :cheers:

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## nick name

Ceadderman said:


> Good find.
> 
> Sadly every listing is LED or RGB. So I guess for my needs the GSkill RAM is the best I can get atm.
> 
> The problem lies in the need for non RGB sticks. They are too tall as bare sticks to swap Monarch sinks to. Non RGB are the correct height for the swap. So I will go with those and possibly change them out with a pair of Bdie if I can find those in non RGB.
> 
> Thanks fellas for your input. :cheers:
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


A good quick and dirty b-die rule is matching timings. And the rule holds true up to 3600. If all the timings match then it's a strong possibility it's b-die and then you can check if that kit is in the data base. So 14-14-14, 15-15-15, 16-16-16.


----------



## Ceadderman

nick name said:


> A good quick and dirty b-die rule is matching timings. And the rule holds true up to 3600. If all the timings match then it's a strong possibility it's b-die and then you can check if that kit is in the data base. So 14-14-14, 15-15-15, 16-16-16.


19-20-20 with a latency of 40. So no, they likely are not Bdie chips. 

A quick pouring over the link showed nothing but 16gb kits. 2x8gb. Not what I want. Ahhhh well. :blushsmil 

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## crakej

So I'm not having any luck on bios 1201 - can't get 3600 stable as I could previously - even with loose timings.

It's only RamTest that fails - IBT, P95 pass, but when I run RamTest I'll get 5000%+ on one run and 320% on the next. I'm finding that my tight timings are passing easier than the ones i've backed off on as well.

Going back to 1002, maybe further, to see how things used to work...


----------



## hurricane28

crakej said:


> So I'm not having any luck on bios 1201 - can't get 3600 stable as I could previously - even with loose timings.
> 
> It's only RamTest that fails - IBT, P95 pass, but when I run RamTest I'll get 5000%+ on one run and 320% on the next. I'm finding that my tight timings are passing easier than the ones i've backed off on as well.
> 
> Going back to 1002, maybe further, to see how things used to work...



Did you try TM5 too? If its only Ramtest that fails that doesn't mean that you are unstable in any other stuff you do on your PC. 

TM5 is very reliable for me and i haven't had any crash or other weird behavior when i pass it. I leave CPU at stock and only RAM speed is at 3466 MHz Cl14 and its stable as a rock for weeks now. No matter what stress program i use or whenever, it passes with flying colors. No need for manual OC on the CPU side and as for RAM speed, 3466 CL 14 is king in every scenario. I tested this and it turned out that 3600 MHz was slower than 3466 MHz due to looser timings.


----------



## crakej

hurricane28 said:


> Did you try TM5 too? If its only Ramtest that fails that doesn't mean that you are unstable in any other stuff you do on your PC.
> 
> TM5 is very reliable for me and i haven't had any crash or other weird behavior when i pass it. I leave CPU at stock and only RAM speed is at 3466 MHz Cl14 and its stable as a rock for weeks now. No matter what stress program i use or whenever, it passes with flying colors. No need for manual OC on the CPU side and as for RAM speed, 3466 CL 14 is king in every scenario. I tested this and it turned out that 3600 MHz was slower than 3466 MHz due to looser timings.


Yes, that fails even quicker. I've always found RamTest ok.

I was running for weeks solidly at 3600. I've also had problems where I've had to reseat my memory so going to also remove it and clean everything, but trying previous bios to see which worked best for me...


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Yes, that fails even quicker. I've always found RamTest ok.
> 
> I was running for weeks solidly at 3600. I've also had problems where I've had to reseat my memory so going to also remove it and clean everything, but trying previous bios to see which worked best for me...


There is a user with my RAM kit in the 1usmus DRAM Calculator thread running 3600 14-14-14-22-36 and very tight subs. The kicker is he is doing it at 1.44V. I guess my kit not running XMP at 1.35V was a sign it was a weaker kit.


----------



## nick name

Has anyone seen the prompt "New CPU installed TPM neeeds to be reset hit yes or no". The prompt is actually much longer and isn't the standard New CPU enter setup. I've found it for the first time ever today while overclocking RAM. I mention it because it's the first time after a bajillion BSOD during other overclocking attemtps.


----------



## ComansoRowlett

nick name said:


> Has anyone seen the prompt "New CPU installed TPM neeeds to be reset hit yes or no". The prompt is actually much longer and isn't the standard New CPU enter setup. I've found it for the first time ever today while overclocking RAM. I mention it because it's the first time after a bajillion BSOD during other overclocking attemtps.


Never had that happen before no, unstable RAM as I'm sure you know can even make BIOS's act funky or completely corrupt them so it may just be that it had a glitch due to instability.


----------



## nick name

ComansoRowlett said:


> Never had that happen before no, unstable RAM as I'm sure you know can even make BIOS's act funky or completely corrupt them so it may just be that it had a glitch due to instability.


It was after BSOD before Windows ever booted and I don't use Bitlocker so that coupled with it being the first time I saw it I figured I'd give it a mention here.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Ceadderman said:


> Good find.
> 
> Sadly every listing is LED or RGB. So I guess for my needs the GSkill RAM is the best I can get atm.
> 
> The problem lies in the need for non RGB sticks. They are too tall as bare sticks to swap Monarch sinks to. Non RGB are the correct height for the swap. So I will go with those and possibly change them out with a pair of Bdie if I can find those in non RGB.
> 
> Thanks fellas for your input. :cheers:
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


All those may be RGB but the code at the end of the model numbers determine if it is RGB or not on G.Skill. You can get any combination of RGB or non RGB in TridentZ kits.

Example: *G. Skill FlareX 3200c14* THis kit comes in TridentZ RGB, non RGB and FlareX but are the same High Quality Samsung BDies under the heat spreaders. The model numbers all start with f4-3200c14d-16___ the only difference is the last part of the model number indicating the particular line of ram, in this FlareX case the last 3 letters are GFX. 3200 denotes the frequency c14 denotes the cas latency, the "d" denotes dual channel, 16 denotes the total GB in the kit and after that is the part that doesnt matter for performance which is the particular G.Skill line of RAM


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Has anyone seen the prompt "New CPU installed TPM neeeds to be reset hit yes or no". The prompt is actually much longer and isn't the standard New CPU enter setup. I've found it for the first time ever today while overclocking RAM. I mention it because it's the first time after a bajillion BSOD during other overclocking attemtps.


Yes - I have - this is new and has never happened to me before 1201.....along with the F9 error beeping and repeating. Was hoping @Silent Scone might be able to enlighten us on this new 'problem'


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Yes - I have - this is new and has never happened to me before 1201.....along with the F9 error beeping and repeating. Was hoping @Silent Scone might be able to enlighten us on this new 'problem'


Ahhh thanks @crakej. I wasn't sure if it was my first time or if it was something new with the 1201 BIOS.


----------



## CJMitsuki

crakej said:


> nick name said:
> 
> 
> 
> Has anyone seen the prompt "New CPU installed TPM neeeds to be reset hit yes or no". The prompt is actually much longer and isn't the standard New CPU enter setup. I've found it for the first time ever today while overclocking RAM. I mention it because it's the first time after a bajillion BSOD during other overclocking attemtps.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes - I have - this is new and has never happened to me before 1201.....along with the F9 error beeping and repeating. Was hoping @Silent Scone might be able to enlighten us on this new 'problem'
Click to expand...

I doubt you’ll see much in the way of answers. From the looks of it, the last time you mentioned him asking about answers back on the 21st he was hot and heavy on the 10nm Intel threads for several days after your mention. According to his activity on this forum you are unlikely to see him on much of anything related to AMD. Last time was 2 months ago on this thread saying he would look into something and see what he could find out about a problem. 
Aside from all of that, have either of you having that TPM error reflashed the bios? If you were doing a lot of heavy memory OC and the bios happened to write something and the memory it used had errors then it’s likely there was some corruption in the bios. I always reflash after doing heavy memory OC that resulted in BSODs. Takes nearly no time to use the Afuefix64 utility to wipe the chip and flash it fresh.


----------



## crakej

CJMitsuki said:


> I doubt you’ll see much in the way of answers. From the looks of it, the last time you mentioned him asking about answers back on the 21st he was hot and heavy on the 10nm Intel threads for several days after your mention. According to his activity on this forum you are unlikely to see him on much of anything related to AMD. Last time was 2 months ago on this thread saying he would look into something and see what he could find out about a problem.
> Aside from all of that, have either of you having that TPM error reflashed the bios? If you were doing a lot of heavy memory OC and the bios happened to write something and the memory it used had errors then it’s likely there was some corruption in the bios. I always reflash after doing heavy memory OC that resulted in BSODs. Takes nearly no time to use the Afuefix64 utility to wipe the chip and flash it fresh.


I thought I'd give him another go... Doing well if he's being paid for it right? Will try on ROG forum but Raj seems more likely to reply. No point feeding back problems if no one is listening.

As for the TPM problem - this happened on first boot after using Afuefix64 (with /CLRCFG flag) - no OCing had happened. It's happened more than once to me like that - first time I thought it was because i'd flashed the WiFi file, but there's not reason that would affect TPM and when I got the right file, the same thing happened.

I'm on bios 0604 ATM - seems more stable than 1002 with same settings. On 1201, my cpu voltage does't seem to help with ram OC any more - older settings I always had to increase cpu v when increasing ram speed, but 1201 does not tolerate any higher than +0.01250 offset - it causes memory errors. Testing this theory on 0604 now, using exact same settings from 1201 except cpu v which I will try at higher settings. This could also be something to do with LLC which I'm going to test tomorrow.

Edit: meant to say, I've not had any BSODS before the TPM thing happened


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> I doubt you’ll see much in the way of answers. From the looks of it, the last time you mentioned him asking about answers back on the 21st he was hot and heavy on the 10nm Intel threads for several days after your mention. According to his activity on this forum you are unlikely to see him on much of anything related to AMD. Last time was 2 months ago on this thread saying he would look into something and see what he could find out about a problem.
> Aside from all of that, have either of you having that TPM error reflashed the bios? If you were doing a lot of heavy memory OC and the bios happened to write something and the memory it used had errors then it’s likely there was some corruption in the bios. I always reflash after doing heavy memory OC that resulted in BSODs. Takes nearly no time to use the Afuefix64 utility to wipe the chip and flash it fresh.


I didn't actually do anything in response to it other than hit no the first time it appeared and then hit yes the second time appeared. Haven't had any problems since. Hopefully, re-flashing isn't gonna be necessary.


----------



## nick name

Hey guys -- what's the best utility for adjusting voltages within Windows? Hopefully something that can adjust DRAM and SOC voltages. Am I wrong in remembering that something exists?


----------



## skymeows

im getting crazy mem errors when having trcd below 15, kinda weird that i could go c13 3500 @1,45v as long having trcd at 15 or higher.. just me or did i miss something? 
on 1201, pe3 with + ,075 offset and 103 blck


----------



## The Sandman

nick name said:


> Hey guys -- what's the best utility for adjusting voltages within Windows? Hopefully something that can adjust DRAM and SOC voltages. Am I wrong in remembering that something exists?


Asus TurboV Core


----------



## nick name

skymeows said:


> im getting crazy mem errors when having trcd below 15, kinda weird that i could go c13 3500 @1,45v as long having trcd at 15 or higher.. just me or did i miss something?
> on 1201, pe3 with + ,075 offset and 103 blck


Which trcd is it? trcdwr or trcdrd?


----------



## skymeows

nick name said:


> Which trcd is it? trcdwr or trcdrd?


oh im sorry, trcdrd


----------



## nick name

The Sandman said:


> Asus TurboV Core


LOL. I was just coming back to edit my post saying I found it. Thank you for the effort though.


----------



## crakej

I can confirm that my 3600 timings are much more stable on bios 0601 with extra juice for the cpu - this just didn't work for me on 1201. I will find out as I work my way though the different bios versions.

ASUS TurboCore is the same as the TPU section of AISuite except AISuite has a couple more settings.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I can confirm that my 3600 timings are much more stable on bios 0601 with extra juice for the cpu - this just didn't work for me on 1201. I will find out as I work my way though the different bios versions.
> 
> ASUS TurboCore is the same as the TPU section of AISuite except AISuite has a couple more settings.


Hey @crakej have you messed with VDDP to stabilize RAM before? I just started doing so in my attempt to stabilize 3600 with 14-14-14-14 timings and it's proving very impactful. I am now 8 cycles into TM5 with no errors which I've never gotten as far before without adjusting VDDP. Moreso reducing VDDP.

Edit:
It worked!

Edit Part Deux:
After a reboot, to input the voltages changed with ASUS Turbo V in Windows into BIOS, I got an error while testing.


----------



## i_max2k2

Hi guys, 

I have been away from this for a little while, I'm running a 2700x with this motherboard, and I was wondering with the most recent bios, if there was a guide for overclocking the processor. I believe I'm on 0601 bios, is the new 12xx version better to upgrade to? 

Thanks


----------



## Keith Myers

CJMitsuki said:


> All those may be RGB but the code at the end of the model numbers determine if it is RGB or not on G.Skill. You can get any combination of RGB or non RGB in TridentZ kits.
> 
> Example: *G. Skill FlareX 3200c14* THis kit comes in TridentZ RGB, non RGB and FlareX but are the same High Quality Samsung BDies under the heat spreaders. The model numbers all start with f4-3200c14d-16___ the only difference is the last part of the model number indicating the particular line of ram, in this FlareX case the last 3 letters are GFX. 3200 denotes the frequency c14 denotes the cas latency, the "d" denotes dual channel, 16 denotes the total GB in the kit and after that is the part that doesnt matter for performance which is the particular G.Skill line of RAM


If you avoid any appearance of "R" in the last part of the part number in the G.Skill Trident Z line, you can avoid RGB kits. The last letters descriptor tells you the color scheme of the heat spreader. So -GTZ is just the basic original grey with red highlights spreader. -GTZKW is the black-white heat spreader.


----------



## nick name

i_max2k2 said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> I have been away from this for a little while, I'm running a 2700x with this motherboard, and I was wondering with the most recent bios, if there was a guide for overclocking the processor. I believe I'm on 0601 bios, is the new 12xx version better to upgrade to?
> 
> Thanks


I believe it's a better BIOS, but if you want things like the PBO scalar you're not gonna wanna use 1201. Actually (someone might need to correct me) those PBO options may have disappeared in 1103. 

If you're just talking CPU multiplier for overclocking then the feature set is the same.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Hey @crakej have you messed with VDDP to stabilize RAM before? I just started doing so in my attempt to stabilize 3600 with 14-14-14-14 timings and it's proving very impactful. I am now 8 cycles into TM5 with no errors which I've never gotten as far before without adjusting VDDP. Moreso reducing VDDP.
> 
> Edit:
> It worked!
> 
> Edit Part Deux:
> After a reboot, to input the voltages changed with ASUS Turbo V in Windows into BIOS, I got an error while testing.


No, but it's doing good for me here too! I'm doing some reading on it now. Curious as to wht the VDDP Voltage readout is on AISuite that shows about 0.500v not the 0.900 of the VDDP setting. Will report back what I find....


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> No, but it's doing good for me here too! I'm doing some reading on it now. Curious as to wht the VDDP Voltage readout is on AISuite that shows about 0.500v not the 0.900 of the VDDP setting. Will report back what I find....


Yeah, HWiNFO shows VDDP a lot lower also.

Edit:

Something I've recently become curious about is the CPU 3.3V AUX. It's showing as 3.6V in TurboV


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Yeah, HWiNFO shows VDDP a lot lower also.
> 
> Edit:
> 
> Something I've recently become curious about is the CPU 3.3V AUX. It's showing as 3.6V in TurboV


Some of these voltages seem to ruse as you increase the ram speed.

Not finding any decent info on VDDP yet - anyone here know much more about it?

Going to reboot now and see if OC sticks.

Edit: Ah ha! if I'm not mistaken, the 'other' VDDP is CLDO_VDDP, which is usually around 0.900v 

VDDP is around 0.500 default.

Edit Part 2: I was wrong about CLDO_VDDP - it's the one in tweakers paradise - but still can't find the other one! Testing mem after reboot now

Edit part 3: Having rebooted and put the settings into the bios from AISuite/TurboCore - mem test failed.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Some of these voltages seem to ruse as you increase the ram speed.
> 
> Not finding any decent info on VDDP yet - anyone here know much more about it?
> 
> Going to reboot now and see if OC sticks.
> 
> Edit: Ah ha! if I'm not mistaken, the 'other' VDDP is CLDO_VDDP, which is usually around 0.900v
> 
> VDDP is around 0.500 default.
> 
> Edit Part 2: I was wrong about CLDO_VDDP - it's the one in tweakers paradise - but still can't find the other one! Testing mem after reboot now
> 
> Edit part 3: Having rebooted and put the settings into the bios from AISuite/TurboCore - mem test failed.


VDDP showed 900 in TurboV for me. Before I adjusted it that is.

VDDP is in Tweakers paradise toward the top and CLDO VDDP is at the bottom. 

And I had the same reboot problem. Waa waaaaaaaaa.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> VDDP showed 900 in TurboV for me. Before I adjusted it that is.
> 
> VDDP is in Tweakers paradise toward the top and CLDO VDDP is at the bottom.
> 
> And I had the same reboot problem. Waa waaaaaaaaa.


Same for me on AISuite

It still improved things a bit, but not the stability I had before - going to try lowering it another notch....


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Same for me on AISuite
> 
> It still improved things a bit, but not the stability I had before - going to try lowering it another notch....


I've also reduced PLL a little bit too.


----------



## Syldon

crakej said:


> Some of these voltages seem to ruse as you increase the ram speed.
> 
> Not finding any decent info on VDDP yet - anyone here know much more about it?
> 
> Going to reboot now and see if OC sticks.
> 
> Edit: Ah ha! if I'm not mistaken, the 'other' VDDP is CLDO_VDDP, which is usually around 0.900v
> 
> VDDP is around 0.500 default.
> 
> Edit Part 2: I was wrong about CLDO_VDDP - it's the one in tweakers paradise - but still can't find the other one! Testing mem after reboot now
> 
> Edit part 3: Having rebooted and put the settings into the bios from AISuite/TurboCore - mem test failed.



VDDP default voltage is 0.9v not 0.5v. The VDDP readout in HWinfo is a misnamed sensor, and not actually valid.


----------



## crakej

Syldon said:


> VDDP default voltage is 0.9v not 0.5v. The VDDP readout in HWinfo is a misnamed sensor, and not actually valid.


There are 2 distinct VDDP voltages in AISuite - one is 0.9v and one is about 0.5v. I'm sure I remember reading in the early days of Ryzen that there were 2 VDDPs. I think the other is something to do with the south bridge. Have asked on ROG as well to see if anyone knows what it is. The links on the Ryzen Essential Info page seem to have broken which is where I'm sure I first read asbout it. See pic below.

For me, HWInfo also shows this other voltage as Vin5.

On another note, lowering my VDDP a bit more to 0.855 (instead of 0.885v) has stabilised my system at 3600. Even after reboot.

Edit: gupsterg has recommended we ignore Vin5.


----------



## crakej

Sigh....

It is stable -it isn't -then it is - then it isn't. Then I put all my setting back to where it was failing - and it's stable. For now.

VDDP seems like it's a placebo setting - you change it, it's stable, then it isn't, you change it, even change it back still results are not conclusive - not for me, any way. So i'm not convinced it's much help to me.

I also notice on 0601 LLC works a bit differently - the voltage range for SoC is slightly bigger than on 1201 where it's a bit tighter for the same LLC level (2)

I need a break!


----------



## crakej

So, on bios 0601 - this is what I learned so far....

1.8vPLL is indeed scaled up as you increase your ram OC. At default it shows as 1.76v (remember, most voltages are reported a bit below what they are, why I will never understand...) and at 3600 it's more like 1.9v (set as 2v automatically in bios).

Same is true for CPU 3.3v AUX - at default it's set at 3.3 and (for me anyway) displays correctly as 3.3v. At 3600 bios automatically sets 3.6v as seen in AISuite TPU and TurboCore.

I have to assume the bios does this because it's needed. Surely we should leave PLL where bios puts it rather than lowering it which is under-volting, isn't it?

Moving up to bios 0804 next...

Edit: another difference is that on mem training fail, you get three short beeps>code F9>reboot. On 1201 we get 1 long beep, 2 short>code F9>repeating. Not sure if this is significan't though.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> So, on bios 0601 - this is what I learned so far....
> 
> 1.8vPLL is indeed scaled up as you increase your ram OC. At default it shows as 1.76v (remember, most voltages are reported a bit below what they are, why I will never understand...) and at 3600 it's more like 1.9v (set as 2v automatically in bios).
> 
> Same is true for CPU 3.3v AUX - at default it's set at 3.3 and (for me anyway) displays correctly as 3.3v. At 3600 bios automatically sets 3.6v as seen in AISuite TPU and TurboCore.
> 
> I have to assume the bios does this because it's needed. Surely we should leave PLL where bios puts it rather than lowering it which is under-volting, isn't it?
> 
> Moving up to bios 0804 next...


I can confirm that CPU 3.3V AUX does the same thing on 1201.


----------



## Syldon

crakej said:


> There are 2 distinct VDDP voltages in AISuite - one is 0.9v and one is about 0.5v. I'm sure I remember reading in the early days of Ryzen that there were 2 VDDPs. I think the other is something to do with the south bridge. Have asked on ROG as well to see if anyone knows what it is. The links on the Ryzen Essential Info page seem to have broken which is where I'm sure I first read asbout it. See pic below.
> 
> For me, HWInfo also shows this other voltage as Vin5.
> 
> On another note, lowering my VDDP a bit more to 0.855 (instead of 0.885v) has stabilised my system at 3600. Even after reboot.
> 
> Edit: gupsterg has recommended we ignore Vin5.


CLD0_VDDP is the Voltage for the DDR4 PHY on the SoC.

VDDP is the external voltage level sent to the CPU VDDP pins

https://community.amd.com/community/gaming/blog/2017/05/25/community-update-4-lets-talk-dram

I don't use ASuite so cant comment, but the label of VDDP in HWinfo is not the VDDP or the CLD0_vddp setting named in the bios screen. 

Altering the VDDP has been known to aid stability in the past. Particularly of systems that pass stability tests and then fail when under normal loads. This is something from the early days of Ryzen.


----------



## nick name

So I've been a bit bored with the standard memory testing methods. I usually run TM5 and then test with other tools after it passes TM5, but waiting 40 minutes for 10 passes gets old. Since I can't really use my PC with TM5 I am mixing a bunch of things together to play with while testing. I don't know how effective it is so feel free to call me an idiot. 

I have 2 4K YouTube videos playing in split-screen. A 4K Netflix movie in windowed mode. A 4K movie playing in Movies & TV in windowed mode. A 4K movie playing in VLC in windowed mode. Karhu testing 2000MB w/3 threads. Prime95 custom testing 2000MB w/3 threads. IBT and IBT AVX both with their own 2000MB w/3 threads. Two MemTest instances running 1000MB w/1 thread each. And making Cinebench runs and typing this. (I just froze because my negative CPU offset was too high LOL but no memory errors) Again feel free to call me an idiot.

The most fun was seeing all 5 different 4K videos playing without issue (until my CPU offset proved too aggressive).


----------



## crakej

Syldon said:


> CLD0_VDDP is the Voltage for the DDR4 PHY on the SoC.
> 
> VDDP is the external voltage level sent to the CPU VDDP pins
> 
> https://community.amd.com/community/gaming/blog/2017/05/25/community-update-4-lets-talk-dram
> 
> I don't use ASuite so cant comment, but the label of VDDP in HWinfo is not the VDDP or the CLD0_vddp setting named in the bios screen.
> 
> Altering the VDDP has been known to aid stability in the past. Particularly of systems that pass stability tests and then fail when under normal loads. This is something from the early days of Ryzen.


I'm only talking about VDDP - not CLDO_VDDP which I understand.

I posted an image showing the 'other' VDDP in AISuite, which does display *exactly* what HWInfo displays as *VIN5* (not CLDO_VDDP & HWInfo doesn't have a VDDP voltage), including when the voltage goes up and down. It's obviously not CLDO or VDDP as the voltage is reported as around 0.500v, not 0.950v or 0.900v

So while it clearly isn't any of those things, it's not random and does seem to be a valid reading - of something - that's all I'm saying.

I'm just reporting everything as I go through the various bios versions and tests. Everything I've posted is actual results - and I did say that 'for me' VDDP didn't have any repeatable effect on my OC - I know it does for some. 

I'm on 0804 now and so far seems less stable than 0601. More testing tomorrow.


----------



## Nucky

For anyone running windows 7 on this board, how did you get network drivers? That seems to be my last hurdle.


----------



## Syldon

crakej said:


> I'm only talking about VDDP - not CLDO_VDDP which I understand.
> 
> I posted an image showing the 'other' VDDP in AISuite, which does display *exactly* what HWInfo displays as *VIN5* (not CLDO_VDDP & HWInfo doesn't have a VDDP voltage), including when the voltage goes up and down. It's obviously not CLDO or VDDP as the voltage is reported as around 0.500v, not 0.950v or 0.900v
> 
> So while it clearly isn't any of those things, it's not random and does seem to be a valid reading - of something - that's all I'm saying.
> 
> I'm just reporting everything as I go through the various bios versions and tests. Everything I've posted is actual results - and I did say that 'for me' VDDP didn't have any repeatable effect on my OC - I know it does for some.
> 
> I'm on 0804 now and so far seems less stable than 0601. More testing tomorrow.


I don't have a Vin5 reading. I have a VDDP reading. I would guess this is because I have carried it over from an old layout, and my VDDP is your vin5 reading.

Murmak has already answered what Vin5 is on his [url="https://www.hwinfo.com/forum/Thread-What-is-VIN5]HWinfo forum[/url]. 




Murmak said:


> VINx are generic voltage input names. Such names are used for boards, where it's not possible to determine their meaning and in most cases such inputs are not used on the board and thus can provide invalid values.




My apologies for coming across a bit cold. Nightshifts this week.
On the up though 23 months to retiring, not that I am counting.

GL with the testing


----------



## crakej

Syldon said:


> I don't have a Vin5 reading. I have a VDDP reading. I would guess this is because I have carried it over from an old layout, and my VDDP is your vin5 reading.
> 
> Murmak has already answered what Vin5 is on his [url="https://www.hwinfo.com/forum/Thread-What-is-VIN5]HWinfo forum[/url].


You don't have a VDDP reading because you're on a different bios - in my case, on bios 0601 and 0804, Vin5 IS showing something else - so is AISuite


He made a general statemented about VINx labels - but, on early bios versions anyway, it's showing something coherent which changes according to load


----------



## Syldon

crakej said:


> You don't have a VDDP reading because you're on a different bios - in my case, on bios 0601 and 0804, Vin5 IS showing something else - so is AISuite
> 
> 
> He made a general statemented about VINx labels - but, on early bios versions anyway, it's showing something coherent which changes according to load


I get it is named differently due to revision. But both are showing .5v. It is a fair bet they are both the same sensor output.


----------



## crakej

Syldon said:


> I get it is named differently due to revision. But both are showing .5v. It is a fair bet they are both the same sensor output.


I thought we'd established that? All I'm saying is that I'm sure in this case the reading probably is something as it's fairly stable and reacts predictably (like when applying full load), just mis-labelled.


----------



## crakej

So, this is a nice bit of ASUS love.... politely enquired to Raj why S Scone seems not interested in the AMD community, as he'd previously said he would be, with this reply:

_'Please contact asus support if you have issues to report. '_


----------



## CJMitsuki

crakej said:


> So, this is a nice bit of ASUS love.... politely enquired to Raj why S Scone seems not interested in the AMD community, as he'd previously said he would be, with this reply:
> 
> _'Please contact asus support if you have issues to report. '_


Sounds about right. I knew as soon as he came in here spouting that nonsense about assigning him to take over in place of Elmor to interact here. You only had to look at his interaction with the forum in general to know that he is uninterested in the AMD side. Not to mention the last interaction was 2 months ago and ended with him saying he would look into a problem that was mentioned then not even a second thought. Thats fine, while I do like the OC capabilities of this board I dislike the long post and Ive heard several sources state there will be multiple very high end OC boards aside from asus. If that happens to be the case I will be looking to try another one besides a ROG board. Preferably with only 2 Dimm slots.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Nucky said:


> For anyone running windows 7 on this board, how did you get network drivers? That seems to be my last hurdle.


You need to download the Intel Proset driver utility. It contains many Intel network drivers and will install the one you need.


----------



## nick name

Yeah, it is a bummer that the person who replaced @elmor to be our contact here isn't really interested. Who knows -- maybe that means ASUS is hard at work on X570 or preparing a BIOS for X470 and Ryzen 2. Fingers crossed.


----------



## Nucky

CJMitsuki said:


> You need to download the Intel Proset driver utility. It contains many Intel network drivers and will install the one you need.


Thanks, I managed to find it last night and got some decent runs in. With the bclk, 3600c15 kit, and the windows 7 install setup for benching the 2700x finally feels like an all around upgrade from my 1680v2. I'm ready to play with zen2 now.


----------



## crakej

It's a shame ASUS didn't see the value in replacing Elmor - I had a feeling this would happen too.....

On bios 0804 I managed to get my 3600 profile almost stable by adding lots of CPUv and raising SoC 1 notch to compensate for the slightly lower voltage range LLC2 provides on versions > 0804.

Updated to 1002 (AGESA 1006). New: Mem training fail now causes one long, 2 short beeps (used to be 3 short beeps) with code F9 before powering off-on.

VIN5 displays as 'VDDP' under the new WMI sensor interface, but still not showing actual VDDP, but still the same 0.5v approx.

Seem to have properly stabilised my 3600 profile with minimal (+0.01250 offset) extra VCore, that extra bit of SoC and ram at 1.43v. Seem to remember it all went wrong (well, when my 3600 OC stopped working) from 1103 onwards, but also maybe I've learned something from going back. A few more tests to do to make sure I am stable. Will go up to 1103 tomorrow.


----------



## nick name

I've had to back off a couple things to get my 3600 14-14-14-14 stable at 1.45V. I tested overnight and ended up with about 24 errors in 10 hours so hopefully the changes I've made will prove overnight stable. It's proving stable during partial testing and every day use, but that was more or less the case yesterday as well. 

Today I'm doing a variation of what I did yesterday with the multiple tests. I ran 4 different RAM tests simultaneously (gave each test 2 cores and 2GB) for an hour while continuing to use my PC to browse the web and none of them returned any errors. I also ran TM5 with the other 4 for a few passes when I wasn't using the PC. 

Fingers crossed that these timings prove to be truly stable.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I've had to back off a couple things to get my 3600 14-14-14-14 stable at 1.45V. I tested overnight and ended up with about 24 errors in 10 hours so hopefully the changes I've made will prove overnight stable. It's proving stable during partial testing and every day use, but that was more or less the case yesterday as well.
> 
> Today I'm doing a variation of what I did yesterday with the multiple tests. I ran 4 different RAM tests simultaneously (gave each test 2 cores and 2GB) for an hour while continuing to use my PC to browse the web and none of them returned any errors. I also ran TM5 with the other 4 for a few passes when I wasn't using the PC.
> 
> Fingers crossed that these timings prove to be truly stable.


V similar to mine....


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> V similar to mine....


You do a lot of things I never try. I read on here in another thread (don't know the person's level of expertise though) that tCL and tCWL should be the same and that tWRRD should be half of tRDWR. I've also never set tRTP lower than tRDWR. And I've never seen tWRWRSD/tWRWRDD the same value as tRDRDSD/tRDRDDD. 

So can you shed some light on why you've used the values that you have? I don't know what any of them actually do and just go more off of patterning my timings off of what I saw in the DRAM Calculator. Oh, and that little bit I read on here in another thread. 

On a separate note: I have tried tRDRDSCL/tWRWRSCL at 2, but it seemed to cause issues in games.


----------



## Ceadderman

Is anyone using a bluetooth xbone controller with this board? Need to know cause I have one in my cart and need to know if I should get the USB dongle or if it connects without one.

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## nick name

Ceadderman said:


> Is anyone using a bluetooth xbone controller with this board? Need to know cause I have one in my cart and need to know if I should get the USB dongle or if it connects without one.
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


I use the bluetooth for my PS4 controller.


----------



## cheddle

Ceadderman said:


> Is anyone using a bluetooth xbone controller with this board? Need to know cause I have one in my cart and need to know if I should get the USB dongle or if it connects without one.
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


Hi Ceadder, cheddle here...

I can confirm that the xbone bluetooth controller works with this board


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> You do a lot of things I never try. I read on here in another thread (don't know the person's level of expertise though) that tCL and tCWL should be the same and that tWRRD should be half of tRDWR. I've also never set tRTP lower than tRDWR. And I've never seen tWRWRSD/tWRWRDD the same value as tRDRDSD/tRDRDDD.
> 
> So can you shed some light on why you've used the values that you have? I don't know what any of them actually do and just go more off of patterning my timings off of what I saw in the DRAM Calculator. Oh, and that little bit I read on here in another thread.
> 
> On a separate note: I have tried tRDRDSCL/tWRWRSCL at 2, but it seemed to cause issues in games.


I started with Stilt settings - then started using the calculator to give me ideas on what I could do. I've done a LOT of testing!

tCL and tCWL are normally the same, but really tight timings you can often drop 2 from tCL for tCWL - it brings small but noticeable performance increase.

I always have tRDWR on Auto - it's a habit I got from the Stilt. Often when you leave the bios to fill in the timings it would choose a different timing for bank A and B - one can be 8 and the other 9. Of course if you set this yourself, both banks will get set as to the same value. tWRRD I have again taken from the calculator, and then tested to see how low I can get it.

As for tWRWRSD/tWRWRDD the same value as tRDRDSD/tRDRDDD. They're usually at 5 5 4 4 respectively - i've actually done that by mistake - and it's working! I've not found these settings to gain much, if any performance compared to having them at 7 7 5 5 respectively.

tRDRDSCL/tWRWRSCL these affect performance a fair bit, so the lower you can get them the better. At the speeds we're at I started with them at 3 or 4 I think just to make sure and then tried reducing them to 2 when I'd done everything else.

Not very scientific - just what I've learned really from Stilt, people on here and loads of testing. Hope it can help.

I have found something that breaks my stability - allowing the computer to sleep. It will crash a while after waiting. I think something's not getting restored properly...


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I started with Stilt settings - then started using the calculator to give me ideas on what I could do. I've done a LOT of testing!
> 
> tCL and tCWL are normally the same, but really tight timings you can often drop 2 from tCL for tCWL - it brings small but noticeable performance increase.
> 
> I always have tRDWR on Auto - it's a habit I got from the Stilt. Often when you leave the bios to fill in the timings it would choose a different timing for bank A and B - one can be 8 and the other 9. Of course if you set this yourself, both banks will get set as to the same value. tWRRD I have again taken from the calculator, and then tested to see how low I can get it.
> 
> As for tWRWRSD/tWRWRDD the same value as tRDRDSD/tRDRDDD. They're usually at 5 5 4 4 respectively - i've actually done that by mistake - and it's working! I've not found these settings to gain much, if any performance compared to having them at 7 7 5 5 respectively.
> 
> tRDRDSCL/tWRWRSCL these affect performance a fair bit, so the lower you can get them the better. At the speeds we're at I started with them at 3 or 4 I think just to make sure and then tried reducing them to 2 when I'd done everything else.
> 
> Not very scientific - just what I've learned really from Stilt, people on here and loads of testing. Hope it can help.
> 
> I have found something that breaks my stability - allowing the computer to sleep. It will crash a while after waiting. I think something's not getting restored properly...


I've tried lowering tCWL lower than tCL, but it doesn't seem to want to work for me. And I think it's odd I can't get it to work because the 2133 timings the board sets has tCL at 15 and tCWL at 11. Yet I can't get 14 and 12 to work. I guess it's the speed. 

I do see that the board sets tRDWR differently for each channel, but when I leave it on Auto it's always higher than I want so it annoys me. I wish I could manually set it per channel myself. 

And I've yet to find a legit stable 3600 14-14-14-14 setup with tight-ish subs so I think I am gonna give up on that. Just gonna go back to my 14-15-14-14 timings with tight subs.

Edit:
So I guess tRDWR and tWRRD are similar, if not related, because both will have different values for each channel when left on Auto. But it appears that rule I read about tWRRD being half of tRDWR isn't observed by the motherboard when using Auto as it sets tRDWR to 9 (which is why I don't use Auto here) and tWRRD to 1. Strangely, when I set tRDWR to 6 and leave tWRRD to Auto -- the board sets tWRRD to 2 and 3. Even more odd is that at 2133MHz BIOS displays that the board is setting tWRRD to 0.


----------



## nick name

Has anyone found that they can't use a 2T command rate with Geardown mode enabled? I can set 2T, but if I have Geardown enabled it switches to 1T after boot.


----------



## Ceadderman

nick name said:


> I use the bluetooth for my PS4 controller.


Thank you fellas, I wasn't wanting to purchase the USB stick if I didn't have to and knowing this bit of info saved me $25. I already have enough in my newegg cart. :cheers:

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## VPII

Just want to see whether this is good. Look I did not run much stress tests mainly benching and gaming, but I am sitting at 4.275 to 4.286Ghz using only 1.3375vcore. It seems pretty stable as everything I run works and I have not had any crashes or blue screens. The vcore seems fairly low I's say for the speed the CPU is running but it seems to work without an issue.


----------



## nick name

VPII said:


> Just want to see whether this is good. Look I did not run much stress tests mainly benching and gaming, but I am sitting at 4.275 to 4.286Ghz using only 1.3375vcore. It seems pretty stable as everything I run works and I have not had any crashes or blue screens. The vcore seems fairly low I's say for the speed the CPU is running but it seems to work without an issue.


I mean you'd have to run some stress tests to know for certain, but if you have run your normal workloads and it is fine then just keep it as is until it proves it needs more voltage. Myself, I use around 1.38V at 4.25GHz and the offset I use to reach that is stable for many many things, but it is too much negative offset for absolutely everything to run without freezing.


----------



## VPII

nick name said:


> I mean you'd have to run some stress tests to know for certain, but if you have run your normal workloads and it is fine then just keep it as is until it proves it needs more voltage. Myself, I use around 1.38V at 4.25GHz and the offset I use to reach that is stable for many many things, but it is too much negative offset for absolutely everything to run without freezing.


Thanks nick name, this appear to be stable no issues. Now even at same vcore 4.29ghz. I'm happy as is but will continue to test with normal use. Reason for not stress testing is that it would more than likely fail due to memory running 3466 CL14.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I've tried lowering tCWL lower than tCL, but it doesn't seem to want to work for me. And I think it's odd I can't get it to work because the 2133 timings the board sets has tCL at 15 and tCWL at 11. Yet I can't get 14 and 12 to work. I guess it's the speed.
> 
> I do see that the board sets tRDWR differently for each channel, but when I leave it on Auto it's always higher than I want so it annoys me. I wish I could manually set it per channel myself.
> 
> And I've yet to find a legit stable 3600 14-14-14-14 setup with tight-ish subs so I think I am gonna give up on that. Just gonna go back to my 14-15-14-14 timings with tight subs.
> 
> Edit:
> So I guess tRDWR and tWRRD are similar, if not related, because both will have different values for each channel when left on Auto. But it appears that rule I read about tWRRD being half of tRDWR isn't observed by the motherboard when using Auto as it sets tRDWR to 9 (which is why I don't use Auto here) and tWRRD to 1. Strangely, when I set tRDWR to 6 and leave tWRRD to Auto -- the board sets tWRRD to 2 and 3. Even more odd is that at 2133MHz BIOS displays that the board is setting tWRRD to 0.


It doesn't always work - I may yet have to change that as RamTest failed last night at about 2500%. I think I will change bios for a more recent one though so if anything I've learned carries through to 1201.

tRDWR I leave on auto a) because the Stilt did, b) makes sense c) Even if the timing it chooses isn't what you want, it is likely to be right. I've tried a bit of changing it but stability is negatively impacted. It may be as we get higher speeds that we do need to set it. On my 3666 experiments it did select a better timing than 3600 - but those experiments are limited at the moment.

tRDWR and tWRRD I experimented with different values. I never tried tWRRD set to 1 - might try it later - I work on one setting at a time lowering it until failure, then work up from there. I have not done it that precisely on the latest bios - I may need to. Thanks for sharing your information.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Has anyone found that they can't use a 2T command rate with Geardown mode enabled? I can set 2T, but if I have Geardown enabled it switches to 1T after boot.


I've been able to do it, but found it difficult to tune in my OC with T2. I think if that happens you should set T2, save and re-boot, then power off, or try changing GD first - re-boot - then doing T2.

That's what I'd try.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I've been able to do it, but found it difficult to tune in my OC with T2. I think if that happens you should set T2, save and re-boot, then power off, or try changing GD first - re-boot - then doing T2.
> 
> That's what I'd try.


I didn't power off during any of my testing. It was simply noticing that having 2T selected would result in 1T after boot with GDM enabled. Then going back and disabling GDM and seeing 2T upon rebooting. 

Side note:
@crakej Turns out that earlier I was referencing you to yourself from an older post. LOL.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I didn't power off during any of my testing. It was simply noticing that having 2T selected would result in 1T after boot with GDM enabled. Then going back and disabling GDM and seeing 2T upon rebooting.
> 
> Side note:
> @crakej Turns out that earlier I was referencing you to yourself from an older post. LOL.


Lol...

I just changed tWRWRSD and tWRWRDD to 5 from 4 and RamTest is almost 3500% while i'm watching TV in FireFox and browsing. I have no idea why I put them at 4 - I know that doesn't work for me!

Edit: RamTest failed at 8270% - might have to put them a bit higher still

Edit 2: Yep, put them both to 6 - now passed RamTest 25000% I wonder what will happen when I reinstall 1201!


----------



## crakej

Decided to skip back to 1201

Exact same stable settings and RamTest fails at 3000% 

I will go back to 1103 tomorrow see what that's like, but only after having a little go at re-stabilizing this profile on 1201.


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> I didn't power off during any of my testing. It was simply noticing that having 2T selected would result in 1T after boot with GDM enabled. Then going back and disabling GDM and seeing 2T upon rebooting.
> 
> Side note:
> @crakej Turns out that earlier I was referencing you to yourself from an older post. LOL.


GDM overrides the Command Rate and essentially makes it 1.5T. Even if you set it to 2T, it does not matter.


----------



## crakej

So to clear RamTest with my 3600 profile, I had to increase VCore to offset +0.01875 from +0.01250. Everything else the same.

A bit more testing to make sure CPU OC is still all good. CPU LLC is 5, (1.369v) currently, but have plenty of scope to lower that (and increase VCore) if I want to. I think I could probably get back up to 4.2GHz on the cpu with that headroom, but only if I don't want to go faster on my memory, which I am going to try after confirming this OC. These are my current settings on 1201:

Edit: Rebooted to repeat tests, and now can't run IBT at all! Same settings! Clearing bios to retry.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> So to clear RamTest with my 3600 profile, I had to increase VCore to offset +0.01875 from +0.01250. Everything else the same.
> 
> A bit more testing to make sure CPU OC is still all good. CPU LLC is 5, (1.369v) currently, but have plenty of scope to lower that (and increase VCore) if I want to. I think I could probably get back up to 4.2GHz on the cpu with that headroom, but only if I don't want to go faster on my memory, which I am going to try after confirming this OC. These are my current settings on 1201:
> 
> Edit: Rebooted to repeat tests, and now can't run IBT at all! Same settings! Clearing bios to retry.


I gotta admit that I am happy I don't have to worry about my CPU when playing with my RAM. I hope you get it sorted.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I gotta admit that I am happy I don't have to worry about my CPU when playing with my RAM. I hope you get it sorted.


Ram OC is just unstable on 1201 - even with extra VCore compared to bios 1002 it fails. Doing a few more experiments, but if things stay like this I will have to back down to 3533 or downgrade to 1002 ni order to have my 3600 running ast decent temps.

I'm also thinking it might be time to update my cooling system. Anyone care to recommend an upgrade to my MasterLiquid 240? Shall I just go to the 280 Pro or something else?


----------



## CJMitsuki

crakej said:


> Ram OC is just unstable on 1201 - even with extra VCore compared to bios 1002 it fails. Doing a few more experiments, but if things stay like this I will have to back down to 3533 or downgrade to 1002 ni order to have my 3600 running ast decent temps.
> 
> I'm also thinking it might be time to update my cooling system. Anyone care to recommend an upgrade to my MasterLiquid 240? Shall I just go to the 280 Pro or something else?


1201 feels quite good to me but one thing Im trying to understand, why the obsession with 3600? Youre likely to get better performance with 3533 using tighter timings or running a base clock OC and using something like 3550 like I do. Ive had 3600 stable multiple times but the performance is not as good due to the timings. Sure, it looks better on Aida64 but Im sure we all know that Aida64 numbers are only numbers and lack any evidence of performance. This is another thing that I try to understand as I see so many overclocking ram, How do we know this OC "A" is better than OC "B"? There has to be a clear performance metric to compare different overclocking setups or essentially an overclock could be working against you and providing less performance. A consistent memory sensitive test has to be ran to get a clear picture so you aren't spitting into the wind so to speak.


----------



## numlock66

crakej said:


> Ram OC is just unstable on 1201 - even with extra VCore compared to bios 1002 it fails. Doing a few more experiments, but if things stay like this I will have to back down to 3533 or downgrade to 1002 ni order to have my 3600 running ast decent temps.
> 
> I'm also thinking it might be time to update my cooling system. Anyone care to recommend an upgrade to my MasterLiquid 240? Shall I just go to the 280 Pro or something else?


https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/coolermaster-masterliquid-ml360r-rgb,5736.html


----------



## crakej

CJMitsuki said:


> 1201 feels quite good to me but one thing Im trying to understand, why the obsession with 3600? Youre likely to get better performance with 3533 using tighter timings or running a base clock OC and using something like 3550 like I do. Ive had 3600 stable multiple times but the performance is not as good due to the timings. Sure, it looks better on Aida64 but Im sure we all know that Aida64 numbers are only numbers and lack any evidence of performance. This is another thing that I try to understand as I see so many overclocking ram, How do we know this OC "A" is better than OC "B"? There has to be a clear performance metric to compare different overclocking setups or essentially an overclock could be working against you and providing less performance. A consistent memory sensitive test has to be ran to get a clear picture so you aren't spitting into the wind so to speak.


I do it for a hobby really. Love the challenge. 

I do a LOT of tests! I'm focusing on 3600 currently as I've had it running stable, and better than my 3533 profile in all tests. Not much, but enough to be noticeable.

After many tests today on 1103, I cannot get my profile to run reliably as it does on 1002 - I've loosened up all my secondary timings, changed voltages up and down, but nothing works. It's intriguing and annoying! - I thrive on trying to find out what's changed (AMD tell us nothing for a multitude of reasons) - if I can.

Since I started with My X370 Prime Pro I've gradually got better and better at doing things, and been able to extract excellent performance. But, give a dog a bone (or in this case, 4200MTs ram) and he's going to do his darnedest to get every bit of juice out of it I can! I should point out I have ADHD, and can do this for HOURS! I do lose hope sometimes and give it a break - often coming back too it able to solve my current problem.

At one point, I had 3600MTs stable with 1.420v, now (if I'm on 1002 bios) it needs 1.30v. Any setting either side of those voltages would cause failure (for me and my set up) - it's got to be spot on, so takes some time working in combination with other voltages, power settings.

I may now have found the limit for my hardware, but it will take a bit more testing to be sure of that. I think on 1002 I can probably tune in 3666, but not on newer bioses. It may be that LLC is working differently on the latest bios, or it may be I need to change the termination blocks which I've not previously needed to do. Really am stumped why previous timings and voltages no longer work.

Something else I've noticed - for my setup anyway - is that there are some tweaks from the ram calculator which really helped out - as well as a couple that didn't. L1 and L2 Stream HW Prefetcher>Enabled worked well and Opcache>enabled too, but enabling mem interleaving at the suggested values actually SLOWED down certain tasks. These are settings that may bring benefit at other settings for my kit, but I do those tests last.

You're dead right about OCing being able to make things worse... One thing I found was that if your memory OC is not quite right your machine will take some time to boot. When I zero in on good settings, it's often the thing I notice first - the machine booting at a decent, normal speed, as it should. Another thing to know is that sometimes loosening (not tightening as you may think) a timing, can increase performance. This is because bad OCs can slow down your hardware as it's not running optimally.

I do try to repeat test at least 3 times - when I have a stable OC I will repeat them again. This way you can average the performance increase/decrease. Not perfect, but works for me.

I have lots of time on my hands lol!! :typer: :thinking: Keeps me occupied while off work and waiting for surgery, but i've always loved this kind of thing right from the BBC micro days!


----------



## crakej

numlock66 said:


> https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/coolermaster-masterliquid-ml360r-rgb,5736.html


Thanks - not really needing RGB, but the cooler looks good enough to outweigh that! Thanks for the recommendation, it is 1st on my list 

Anyone else got suggestions for upgrade to my MasterLiquid 240? Plenty of space in my CoreX5 case for almost any size cooler. Can't really afford more than 150GBP currently....


----------



## VicsPC

crakej said:


> Thanks - not really needing RGB, but the cooler looks good enough to outweigh that! Thanks for the recommendation, it is 1st on my list
> 
> Anyone else got suggestions for upgrade to my MasterLiquid 240? Plenty of space in my CoreX5 case for almost any size cooler. Can't really afford more than 150GBP currently....


I've got the same case with a 360 on the bottom and a 240 at the front, i use the top as intake fans so that ambient air blows right over the ram and gpu (to cool wtv isn't cooled by water), and it's been lovely, no issues at all.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Thanks - not really needing RGB, but the cooler looks good enough to outweigh that! Thanks for the recommendation, it is 1st on my list
> 
> Anyone else got suggestions for upgrade to my MasterLiquid 240? Plenty of space in my CoreX5 case for almost any size cooler. Can't really afford more than 150GBP currently....


That MasterLiquid was one I looked at because it wasn't the standard Asetek pump and cold plate. I think it and the new Corsair Platinum line uses the same pump and that new Corsair AIO got some strong reviews. 

I ended up going with a Fractal Design S36 Celsius because it was dirt cheap and doesn't use any kind of software.


----------



## mtrai

TIL and thought I would share here and in the memory thread. AIDA should somehow make this bit more know somehow. But if you right click the start benchmark a hidden menu pops up. Credit to https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocki...y_psa_in_aida64_right_click_the_bench_button/

However I then tried right clicking in the results area and got an additional menu that allows you to change the bench mark order and weather it displays in MB/s or GB/s and there are 3 additional tests. I am not sure what all this really means for testing just yet...but there are changes from one test to another especially in latency.


----------



## crakej

VicsPC said:


> I've got the same case with a 360 on the bottom and a 240 at the front, i use the top as intake fans so that ambient air blows right over the ram and gpu (to cool wtv isn't cooled by water), and it's been lovely, no issues at all.


Do you have it blowing out or in? Sounds like quite a good way to do it. Currently my 240 is blowing out the top, back front and side blowing in. The way you have it means I could have fans blowing down from the top onto everything
@nick name added Fractal s36 to my list - I like that there's no RGB! - and the price is great! Does the plate mount easily on our boards or does a plate need fitting?


----------



## crakej

mtrai said:


> TIL and thought I would share here and in the memory thread. AIDA should somehow make this bit more know somehow. But if you right click the start benchmark a hidden menu pops up. Credit to https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocki...y_psa_in_aida64_right_click_the_bench_button/
> 
> However I then tried right clicking in the results area and got an additional menu that allows you to change the bench mark order and weather it displays in MB/s or GB/s and there are 3 additional tests. I am not sure what all this really means for testing just yet...but there are changes from one test to another especially in latency.


Thanks for the hint! You can also right click the save button to choose PNG or XML


----------



## VicsPC

crakej said:


> Do you have it blowing out or in? Sounds like quite a good way to do it. Currently my 240 is blowing out the top, back front and side blowing in. The way you have it means I could have fans blowing down from the top onto everything
> 
> @nick name added Fractal s36 to my list - I like that there's no RGB! - and the price is great! Does the plate mount easily on our boards or does a plate need fitting?


I have the top 3 blowing in (3x140mm fans) then have a rad pushing out at the bottom in push/pull and one at the front pushing out in push/pull. My water delta is around 9-10°C and in a room that has no airflow im happy with that, it's cooler in the summer with the AC on. Keeps the ram and gpu cool even though its watercooled.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Do you have it blowing out or in? Sounds like quite a good way to do it. Currently my 240 is blowing out the top, back front and side blowing in. The way you have it means I could have fans blowing down from the top onto everything
> 
> @nick name added Fractal s36 to my list - I like that there's no RGB! - and the price is great! Does the plate mount easily on our boards or does a plate need fitting?


I replaced a 4th gen Asetek cooler with Fractal Design 5th gen Asetek cooler so my memory from the first installation is dated, but I believe it was super easy. I don't remember struggling with it at all.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> TIL and thought I would share here and in the memory thread. AIDA should somehow make this bit more know somehow. But if you right click the start benchmark a hidden menu pops up. Credit to https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocki...y_psa_in_aida64_right_click_the_bench_button/
> 
> However I then tried right clicking in the results area and got an additional menu that allows you to change the bench mark order and weather it displays in MB/s or GB/s and there are 3 additional tests. I am not sure what all this really means for testing just yet...but there are changes from one test to another especially in latency.


You, sir. You are the best.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I replaced a 4th gen Asetek cooler with Fractal Design 5th gen Asetek cooler so my memory from the first installation is dated, but I believe it was super easy. I don't remember struggling with it at all.


Excellent - Fractal moves to the top of the list then..... Love the way you've set it up. I do look at it thinking I need a bank of fans blowing down on the board and RAM. Makes perfect sense when we have all that room! Cooling is paramount on this board!


----------



## crakej

I'm just about to go back to bios 1002 to test my previously stable OC

I predict it may well not work, even though it survived reboots and power cycles, I have a feeling things out of my control will conspire against me!

But - it was really good OC, so you never know! Fingers crossed! 

Edit:Should have known! Can't g et it stable back on 1002. Very strange really, I mean last time I tested on this bios the OC survived reboots, sleep and proper (unplug it) power cycles....... gosd I want to know what going on! Going back to my previously stable 3533 profile to see how that is, but not too hopeful as it has really tight timings....


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Excellent - Fractal moves to the top of the list then..... Love the way you've set it up. I do look at it thinking I need a bank of fans blowing down on the board and RAM. Makes perfect sense when we have all that room! Cooling is paramount on this board!


I haven't tried the cooler with its stock 2000 RPM fans. The specs of the fans seem pretty good, but they're white and not my thing. On a Thermaltake Core P3 they stick out like a sore thumb. When I got the cooler I immediately started with the fans you see in my signature which I moved over from my previous Thermaltake Water 3.0 360 AIO. Found 'em brand new and dirt cheap on eBay from a seller that was pulling them off new Corsair coolers. My guess is those coolers were going to a mining operation. Now I'm using 3000 RPM Noctuas @ 1500 RPM. Honestly, I'm not sure it was the wisest choice to spend money on the Noctuas when considering the performance I already had, but they do look cooler.


----------



## CJMitsuki

crakej said:


> I do it for a hobby really. Love the challenge.
> 
> I do a LOT of tests! I'm focusing on 3600 currently as I've had it running stable, and better than my 3533 profile in all tests. Not much, but enough to be noticeable.
> 
> After many tests today on 1103, I cannot get my profile to run reliably as it does on 1002 - I've loosened up all my secondary timings, changed voltages up and down, but nothing works. It's intriguing and annoying! - I thrive on trying to find out what's changed (AMD tell us nothing for a multitude of reasons) - if I can.
> 
> Since I started with My X370 Prime Pro I've gradually got better and better at doing things, and been able to extract excellent performance. But, give a dog a bone (or in this case, 4200MTs ram) and he's going to do his darnedest to get every bit of juice out of it I can! I should point out I have ADHD, and can do this for HOURS! I do lose hope sometimes and give it a break - often coming back too it able to solve my current problem.
> 
> At one point, I had 3600MTs stable with 1.420v, now (if I'm on 1002 bios) it needs 1.30v. Any setting either side of those voltages would cause failure (for me and my set up) - it's got to be spot on, so takes some time working in combination with other voltages, power settings.
> 
> I may now have found the limit for my hardware, but it will take a bit more testing to be sure of that. I think on 1002 I can probably tune in 3666, but not on newer bioses. It may be that LLC is working differently on the latest bios, or it may be I need to change the termination blocks which I've not previously needed to do. Really am stumped why previous timings and voltages no longer work.
> 
> Something else I've noticed - for my setup anyway - is that there are some tweaks from the ram calculator which really helped out - as well as a couple that didn't. L1 and L2 Stream HW Prefetcher>Enabled worked well and Opcache>enabled too, but enabling mem interleaving at the suggested values actually SLOWED down certain tasks. These are settings that may bring benefit at other settings for my kit, but I do those tests last.
> 
> You're dead right about OCing being able to make things worse... One thing I found was that if your memory OC is not quite right your machine will take some time to boot. When I zero in on good settings, it's often the thing I notice first - the machine booting at a decent, normal speed, as it should. Another thing to know is that sometimes loosening (not tightening as you may think) a timing, can increase performance. This is because bad OCs can slow down your hardware as it's not running optimally.
> 
> I do try to repeat test at least 3 times - when I have a stable OC I will repeat them again. This way you can average the performance increase/decrease. Not perfect, but works for me.
> 
> I have lots of time on my hands lol!! :typer: :thinking: Keeps me occupied while off work and waiting for surgery, but i've always loved this kind of thing right from the BBC micro days!


You should try out *Geekbench 3* Ive found that the memory scores are very consistent and even when you run a higher freq but is unstable, even slightly, will produce a worse score than a lower frequency that is stable. Ive been able to get up to 8200 memory score but that takes quite a bit of tweaking, 8000 is still quite good though. Run the 64bit test and if you dont want to buy the benchmark there is a way to still run the 64bit test by swapping the names of the files corresponding to each test in the Geekbench folder then just simply running the 32bit test and it will output 64bit results. IMO this is probably the best performance mark for memory.


----------



## crakej

Will check out Geekbench.....thanks....

Just loaded my 3533 Extreme profile, added the tweaks I've learned to it, and got the best result I ever had on Cinebench R15! Remember, I'm on Ryzen1 here! More than 55 points more than when I last ran at 4.2GHz 3533

Can't get it stable though


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Will check out Geekbench.....thanks....
> 
> Just loaded my 3533 Extreme profile, added the tweaks I've leaned to it, and got the best result I ever had on Cinebench R15! Remember, I'm on Ryzen1 here! More than 55 points more than when I last ran at 4.2GHz 3533
> 
> Can't get it stable though


I keep forgetting you're using a 1700X. Great score.


----------



## majestynl

Just got this delivered...will start installing it tomorrow..


----------



## nick name

majestynl said:


> Just got this delivered...will start installing it tomorrow..


I didn't think anyone would be getting one of those. Are you using it for gaming or productivity?


----------



## majestynl

nick name said:


> majestynl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just got this delivered...will start installing it tomorrow..
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't think anyone would be getting one of those. Are you using it for gaming or productivity?
Click to expand...

Just For fun 😄


----------



## Khelben

Hello all! This will be a lengthy post filled with newbie questions so i want to apologise in advance for polluting your thread and thank anyone that bothers going through it and maybe provide me with some answers.

I've just put together a new 2700x/C7H build.Some additional information about the case/cooling as i think they are vital to give you a full picture and answer my main worry/question. Case is a Fractal Meshify C with 2 NF-A14PWM for intake and one NF-S12A for exhaust.Cpu cooler the NH-D15 with one of the NF-A15 fans it comes with and an NF-F12PWM in the front (instead of the second A15,as ram clearance cooler height and case size didn't allow for it).The tim used is TG Kryonaut.I also want to stress here that the system is an a *virgin* state : I have just done a basic install of W10 ,haven't downloaded any drivers/updates(save for the gpu) and the only programs i have installed are HWInfo64,CPU-Z,Asus Realbench,HWMonitor and Chrome. The mobo is running on its stock bios( 0804) and i haven't touched a single thing in the UEFI.

Now onto my first question/worry. I am afraid i may have applied the TIM badly/insufficiently.Truth is the first time i went through with it,i botched it.I tried applying the Kryonaut the way der8auer shows on his  youtube guide but i ended up having paste leak over the sides.To make matters worse when i took of the cooler to clean and reapply i managed to get some TIM on the cpu pins.Anxiety,baths in isopropyl alcohol and a nerve-racking slow clean with a toothbrush is what followed.So on my second attempt and whilst sticking to the same method ( the paste felt too hard/rigid to be applied in a peapod fashion) i was more conservative and left a good 1-2mm of uncovered space all around the edges of the IHS,hoping that pressure from the cooler would help spread any excess past from the middle and cover the entirety of it.Here's a screenshot of a 15min Asus Realbench stresstest and the temps i got on HWInfo64.Room temp is around 18-20*C.



Spoiler















Are these temps ok or do they just point to a bad TIM application/airbubles etc?Also my understanding from what i've read the Tdie value is the actual temp or is this wrong?

Ok,prologue is over! ( i warned you this will be lengthy, don't bite  ). I want to OC /meddle with my UEFI and i have zero experience.I've read guides,watched youtube videos and browsed the relevant threads here well in advance of me buying the parts but quite frankly most of the posts fly straight over my head. I know there are quite a few guides out there ( here included) that just revolve around setting an OC preset on the mobo and let the AMD algos do their magic or run something like AI Suite but the following screenshot and my pc habits make worry this is not a viable road for me.I tend to build a PC and forget where the power button is( my nehalem pc has probably been cold booted no more than 10 times since 2008).So i want something that is stable 24/7 and is being used constantly.The following voltages don't give me that peace of mind and from my understanding unless i manually OC i won't avoid them ( or is maybe a simple vcore -offset just enough?).Pic is also taken during the 15mins realbench.



Spoiler















From what i've read 1.5 is the no-go over zone given by AMD and given my pc habits i would like to stay as close to 1.4 as possible.Is there maybe a guide somewhere in these 500 pages that i've missed or could anyone point me towards to where i should start looking/reading about the whole process?Ideally i would love to get to 4.2Ghz whilst being as close to 1.4V as possible and get my ram as close to 3600 as possible.Also am i correct to assume that i should first be done with my CPU oc and the meddle with the RAM or is my headcanon wrong here too? Btw i am running 2x F4-3600c15 8gb kits from Gskill.

Lastly, i know people suggest you run the system on stock for quite a few days (game,run stress tests w/e) before you OC but these voltages i am seeing quite honestly scare me off and i would like to be done with it before i put the system under heavy load ( be it games or Vivaldi/Premiere).

I understand that this whole thread and the nature of questions as wells as my evident lack of knowledge scream : please hold my hand.Now don't get me wrong,i would be grateful if someone did just that  but that's not what i am asking.An answer to if my temps are normal and if i should reapply my TIM and a nod towards a guide on how to manually OC (again it's the damn voltages that have me worried which by the by reach 1.5 even now i m typing this and not running realbench) would be more than enough.

Thanks to anyone that managed to go through this painful display of ignorance and again sorry for messing up your thread.


----------



## Keith Myers

*Data crunchers are envious now*



majestynl said:


> Just got this delivered...will start installing it tomorrow..


All the data crunchers are instantly envious of you. 1/4 FP64 performance on a consumer card. Matches up against the RTX 2080 at the same price.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Khelben said:


> Hello all! This will be a lengthy post filled with newbie questions so i want to apologise in advance for polluting your thread and thank anyone that bothers going through it and maybe provide me with some answers.
> 
> I've just put together a new 2700x/C7H build.Some additional information about the case/cooling as i think they are vital to give you a full picture and answer my main worry/question. Case is a Fractal Meshify C with 2 NF-A14PWM for intake and one NF-S12A for exhaust.Cpu cooler the NH-D15 with one of the NF-A15 fans it comes with and an NF-F12PWM in the front (instead of the second A15,as ram clearance cooler height and case size didn't allow for it).The tim used is TG Kryonaut.I also want to stress here that the system is an a *virgin* state : I have just done a basic install of W10 ,haven't downloaded any drivers/updates(save for the gpu) and the only programs i have installed are HWInfo64,CPU-Z,Asus Realbench,HWMonitor and Chrome. The mobo is running on its stock bios( 0804) and i haven't touched a single thing in the UEFI.
> 
> Now onto my first question/worry. I am afraid i may have applied the TIM badly/insufficiently.Truth is the first time i went through with it,i botched it.I tried applying the Kryonaut the way der8auer


First, calm down. Second, everything looks fine. Temps are fine, viltage spiking in that fashion is normal. Mine spikes to 1.6v all the time and Ive ran it at 1.65v with no degradation as voltage isnt the worry as much as the temps are. Not saying to run yours at anything like I do but just saying that youre fine. The voltage spikes you see are normal for PBO they are only short bursts as the clocks are constantly changing. If I were you Id just change to Performance Enhancer 3 and set a -.05v Core voltage offset and let PBO do its thing. You wont want to go any more than that with your cooler. You are likely to get 4.1ghz all core with 4.35ghz on 1-4 cores. If you want more then just bump up te BCLK a few notches and watch the OC go up. As you increase BcLK youll have to back the negative offset on the core down to hive it a bit more voltage headroom to work with. You wont really control the voltage with PBO, it will do that itself but the offsets give it limits sort of. The 2700x is a pretty tough cpu, Ive had mine doing some crazy numbers and it never hurt it a bit. So just relax and play with it but PBO makes it easy to do a general OC.

Sorry for typos, im on my iphobe and cant be bothered to fix them.


----------



## majestynl

Keith Myers said:


> majestynl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just got this delivered...will start installing it tomorrow..
> 
> 
> 
> All the data crunchers are instantly envious of you. 1/4 FP64 performance on a consumer card. Matches up against the RTX 2080 at the same price.
Click to expand...

Lol, let's see what i can do with it. Curious about pptables etc. The only thing I'm not happy with is the waiting for a custom block 😞


----------



## neikosr0x

Khelben said:


> Hello all! This will be a lengthy post filled with newbie questions so i want to apologise in advance for polluting your thread and thank anyone that bothers going through it and maybe provide me with some answers.
> 
> I've just put together a new 2700x/C7H build.Some additional information about the case/cooling as i think they are vital to give you a full picture and answer my main worry/question. Case is a Fractal Meshify C with 2 NF-A14PWM for intake and one NF-S12A for exhaust.Cpu cooler the NH-D15 with one of the NF-A15 fans it comes with and an NF-F12PWM in the front (instead of the second A15,as ram clearance cooler height and case size didn't allow for it).The tim used is TG Kryonaut.I also want to stress here that the system is an a *virgin* state : I have just done a basic install of W10 ,haven't downloaded any drivers/updates(save for the gpu) and the only programs i have installed are HWInfo64,CPU-Z,Asus Realbench,HWMonitor and Chrome. The mobo is running on its stock bios( 0804) and i haven't touched a single thing in the UEFI.


Temps are fine, i get 63c/65c on all cores load for 20min test thats using PE4, voltages go around 1.4v to 1.42v and in single core loads also using PE4 i get temps around 55c with and average voltage of 1.495 it spikes to 1.55. During gaming i get 1.4v(sometimes even lower) averages for long gaming sessions with temps going as high as 65c. Room temps would be around 10c to 15c.


----------



## Keith Myers

*drivers and tools not ready for the VII yet*



majestynl said:


> Lol, let's see what i can do with it. Curious about pptables etc. The only thing I'm not happy with is the waiting for a custom block 😞


You might want to look at two YT videos on the card regarding overclocking the VII. der8auer and GamersNexus both attempted to overclock and it was not pretty. Any attempt to use the standard tools to overclock ended with the card running at reduced clocks and whacky readings.

Seems the drivers and the tools are not prepared for this new card quite yet. Best results were to simply use the provided self-overclock function in the driver and not mess with anything else. If you can keep the card cool, and it would appear your custom block for the card will do that, you could be seeing clocks around 2 Ghz.


----------



## majestynl

Keith Myers said:


> You might want to look at two YT videos on the card regarding overclocking the VII. der8auer and GamersNexus both attempted to overclock and it was not pretty. Any attempt to use the standard tools to overclock ended with the card running at reduced clocks and whacky readings.
> 
> Seems the drivers and the tools are not prepared for this new card quite yet. Best results were to simply use the provided self-overclock function in the driver and not mess with anything else. If you can keep the card cool, and it would appear your custom block for the card will do that, you could be seeing clocks around 2 Ghz.


yeap watched almost all videos. Im already waiting since CES for this 

didn't try manual OC yet because all the freaking reviews. But Memory OC from 1000mhz to 1200mhz is definitely working here! Auto OC gives a small boost...not really fun 
will play with few things over here..


----------



## Ceadderman

majestynl said:


> yeap watched almost all videos. Im already waiting since CES for this
> 
> didn't try manual OC yet because all the freaking reviews. But Memory OC from 1000mhz to 1200mhz is definitely working here! Auto OC gives a small boost...not really fun
> will play with few things over here..


I must say that I am quite jelly atm. Though not because I can't get one but because I would have to pull 4 things out of my Newegg cart to fit it with the new CVIIHero and RAM(16gb), if I were to do that, no SSD(1tb) no monitor(Samsung 43") no Camera... $1500 goes a long way, but not that far when you have a few other things of need. Ah well there is always next Gen. 

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## majestynl

Ceadderman said:


> I must say that I am quite jelly atm. Though not because I can't get one but because I would have to pull 4 things out of my Newegg cart to fit it with the new CVIIHero and RAM(16gb), if I were to do that, no SSD(1tb) no monitor(Samsung 43") no Camera... $1500 goes a long way, but not that far when you have a few other things of need. Ah well there is always next Gen.
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


hehe yeap thats a lot of things you need pull out from your cart  

Currently doing manual OC, and i must say for Timespy it isn't a issue yet. Will try some games later. For now i have a nice bump in perf.

- 1950mhz @ 1072mv and HBM @ 1185mhz
- Timespy link (2nd): https://www.3dmark.com/spy/6162233
- Attached wattmann screenie after timespy run

and for those who want: a Radeon VII wallpaper i created!!


----------



## crakej

I know it's hard to say, but how much extra cooling will I get by upgrading to a 360 cooler from my lowly ML240?

I've done a LOT of experimenting today with increasing tCKE to 6. This allowed my to lower cpu voltage from offset +0.01250 to -0.02500. It also brought stability at 3600 tantalizingly close! one run I can run something cpu demanding like IBT AVX on Very Hard and pass, but fail RamTest or TM5. Then I got mem tests to pass, but IBT failed half way through. Whatever I do I don't seem to b able to quite balance things to get stable. |It's a shame as I have all that extra headroom in VCore and prob could have got cpu to 4.2GHz which would make my latency and data transfer rates excellent!

Anyone one know what might be stopping me from getting IBT to pass when mem tests pass?

I'm driving to the Peak District tomorrow for a couple of days off, so as much as I hate to stop, I need to sleep now!

Have written to support to let them know about the loop some of us get when mem training fails. Also asked if there are any new bios yet. Hopefully will come back with fresh head and have a eureka moment :drink:


----------



## Ceadderman

majestynl said:


> hehe yeap thats a lot of things you need pull out from your cart
> 
> Currently doing manual OC, and i must say for Timespy it isn't a issue yet. Will try some games later. For now i have a nice bump in perf.
> 
> - 1950mhz @ 1072mv and HBM @ 1185mhz
> - Timespy link (2nd): https://www.3dmark.com/spy/6162233
> - Attached wattmann screenie after timespy run
> 
> and for those who want: a Radeon VII wallpaper i created!!


I went back to Newegg and checked, all sold out. :blushsmil

I might actually have adjusted my cart to fit it. Or held off my PPCs cart with the cooling gear till later down the road. My coupon doesn't expire that soon anyway. Ahhhh well maybe when I make everything final, they may be back in stock. Not gonna hold my breath however as word has it there are only 5k Radeon VII cards available. 

Nice score on Timespy and great RAM clocks. I adjusted my RAM purchase for 3200 14 sticks. Really wanted 3600 sticks but those were 19 latency and all I could find. I will finesse my cart when I finally get my funds to drop on the counter. 

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## Keith Myers

> I know it's hard to say, but how much extra cooling will I get by upgrading to a 360 cooler from my lowly ML240?


Too many variables. Case airflow. Room ambient temps. Thickness of 360mm radiator. Fan speed. WAG and probably 5° C. I saw the biggest difference in moving from a standard 27mm thick 360mm radiator to a 56mm thick 360mm radiator. Much more dissipation surface area plus less fin density allows slower fan speeds and less need for high static pressure fans. Less noise.


----------



## Ceadderman

Keith Myers said:


> Too many variables. Case airflow. Room ambient temps. Thickness of 360mm radiator. Fan speed. WAG and probably 5° C. I saw the biggest difference in moving from a standard 27mm thick 360mm radiator to a 56mm thick 360mm radiator. Much more dissipation surface area plus less fin density allows slower fan speeds and less need for high static pressure fans. Less noise.


I figure he'd see roughly °5 or better going from an AIO to a full 360 loop. 1 component + OC= 2x120mm of cooling surface + 120mm of headroom. Of course it depends on whether the move is to another AIO or with a 360 or a custom loop. 

My old HWL 360 Stealth II kept my chipsets @ ~°55 and my 1100T @ ~°45 24/7. Crosshair IV Formula platform.

I'm moving up in the world with CVIIHero WiFi, 1800x, current RX 480 8gb(under water) and 16gb GSkill RAM. Gonna drop a monoblock on it and tie everything up with acrylic tubing. Going to go with EK Rads. Two SE and one PE 360s. Nine EK 500-2200rpm Vardars to push the air through them should do the trick.

Which is complete overkill for this setup, but it's my extreme HAF932 build that I really want to finish before I move into a new OL-11 Dynamic. Always wanted a Lian-Li and this is the year for it. Pretty sure I will need a third SE however as I don't see the PE filling the vertical space in that case with 25mm of clearance to allow for top and bottom Radiators. :kookoo: :blushsmil 

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## CJMitsuki

Ceadderman said:


> Keith Myers said:
> 
> 
> 
> Too many variables. Case airflow. Room ambient temps. Thickness of 360mm radiator. Fan speed. WAG and probably 5° C. I saw the biggest difference in moving from a standard 27mm thick 360mm radiator to a 56mm thick 360mm radiator. Much more dissipation surface area plus less fin density allows slower fan speeds and less need for high static pressure fans. Less noise.
> 
> 
> 
> I figure he'd see roughly °5 or better going from an AIO to a full 360 loop. 1 component + OC= 2x120mm of cooling surface + 120mm of headroom.
> 
> My old HWL 360 Stealth II kept my chipsets @ ~°55 and my 1100T @ ~°45 24/7. Crosshair IV Formula platform.
> 
> I'm moving up in the world with CVIIHero WiFi, 1800x, current RX 480 8gb(under water) and 16gb GSkill RAM. Gonna drop a monoblock on it and tie everything up with acrylic tubing. Going to go with EK Rads. Two SE and one PE 360s.
> 
> Which is complete overkill for this setup, but it's my extreme HAF932 build that I really want to finish before I move into a new OL-11 Dynamic. Always wanted a Lian-Li and this is the year for it. Pretty sure I will need a third SE however as I don't see the PE filling the vertical space in that case with 25mm of clearance to allow for top and bottom Radiators. /forum/images/smilies/kookoo.gif /forum/images/smilies/blushsmiley.gif
> 
> ~Ceadder /forum/images/smilies/smil3dbd4e4c2e742.gif
Click to expand...

If you want to drop temps for as little investment as possible then drop some LM on the IHS and see how it does. Probably will drop thermals better than a liquid cooler upgrade will...or do both.


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> If you want to drop temps for as little investment as possible then drop some LM on the IHS and see how it does. Probably will drop thermals better than a liquid cooler upgrade will...or do both.


Won't LM eat into the copper cold plate on an AIO? Won't a nickel plated plate be needed?


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you want to drop temps for as little investment as possible then drop some LM on the IHS and see how it does. Probably will drop thermals better than a liquid cooler upgrade will...or do both.
> 
> 
> 
> Won't LM eat into the copper cold plate on an AIO? Won't a nickel plated plate be needed?
Click to expand...

No, Copper and Nickel are fine. Its Aluminum that will get destroyed by the Gallium. Ive had LM on mine for almost a year, ever since the 2700x released.


----------



## Keith Myers

CJMitsuki said:


> If you want to drop temps for as little investment as possible then drop some LM on the IHS and see how it does. Probably will drop thermals better than a liquid cooler upgrade will...or do both.


Interesting idea and EASY! I've never messed with LM before. Guess I need to experiment a little and learn a bit more on the topic.


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> No, Copper and Nickel are fine. Its Aluminum that will get destroyed by the Gallium. Ive had LM on mine for almost a year, ever since the 2700x released.


I thought that too, but recently saw someone post a horror story about their copper cold plate. They could have just been overreacting to the staining, however. I believe you can also expect some slight pitting, but folks say that is of negligible concern.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Keith Myers said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you want to drop temps for as little investment as possible then drop some LM on the IHS and see how it does. Probably will drop thermals better than a liquid cooler upgrade will...or do both.
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting idea and EASY! I've never messed with LM before. Guess I need to experiment a little and learn a bit more on the topic.
Click to expand...

The first time you do it, can be intimidating but proper preparation is all you need. On my GPUs I use hot glue on the SMDs that surround the die so the LM will never have a chance to touch the but clear nail polish works well too, or super glue. Although super glue will peel if the surface is smooth. I use the Gorilla Glue brand glue sticks and that stuff is really tough for hot glue. I dont put anything around the CPU IHS but its probably a good idea to use some nail polish. After all is applied I have a huge magnifying lens on an articulating arm attached to my desk that has a ring light on it and I use that to scan the board for any LM that may have strayed from the intended area but Im always careful so its never been a problem. Also, a syringe of the conductonaut is enough to do many applications as you only use a minute amount of the LM and spread it super thin. On my 2700x I noticed 10-15c drop in temps in IBT and about 10c drop on my GPU in Superposition benchmark on the extreme run that really works the gpu hard. The higher your temps are, the more beneficial the LM becomes and it is not ideal for temps below 8c as it starts to solidify and separate from the application surface. Although, I have ran it at -4c and it wasnt a problem but it will climb back to the melting point before dropping back to low temps so I assume it will cycle through being solid and liquid quickly. Im sure for most this isnt an issue though. All in all, for temps above 8c I wouldnt use anything else, nothing else comes close as the thermal conductivity is around 75 W/m•K and thermal pastes top out around 12 W/m•K.


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, Copper and Nickel are fine. Its Aluminum that will get destroyed by the Gallium. Ive had LM on mine for almost a year, ever since the 2700x released.
> 
> 
> 
> I thought that too, but recently saw someone post a horror story about their copper cold plate. They could have just been overreacting to the staining, however. I believe you can also expect some slight pitting, but folks say that is of negligible concern.
Click to expand...

It will stain but it wont pit. What it seems to do is form a very thin alloy with the copper but its easily taken off with a copper scouring pad. After a year on my H115i there has been no pitting or wear whatsoever. Gamers Nexus has done multiple studies on LM and has even conducted a year long experiment where the LM wasnt touched for a year on their bench test rig so it was also heavily used and there was no visible wear or degradation in performance.


----------



## Ceadderman

CJMitsuki said:


> The first time you do it, can be intimidating but proper preparation is all you need. On my GPUs I use hot glue on the SMDs that surround the die so the LM will never have a chance to touch the but clear nail polish works well too, or super glue. Although super glue will peel if the surface is smooth. I use the Gorilla Glue brand glue sticks and that stuff is really tough for hot glue. I dont put anything around the CPU IHS but its probably a good idea to use some nail polish. After all is applied I have a huge magnifying lens on an articulating arm attached to my desk that has a ring light on it and I use that to scan the board for any LM that may have strayed from the intended area but Im always careful so its never been a problem. Also, a syringe of the conductonaut is enough to do many applications as you only use a minute amount of the LM and spread it super thin. On my 2700x I noticed 10-15c drop in temps in IBT and about 10c drop on my GPU in Superposition benchmark on the extreme run that really works the gpu hard. The higher your temps are, the more beneficial the LM becomes and it is not ideal for temps below 8c as it starts to solidify and separate from the application surface. Although, I have ran it at -4c and it wasnt a problem but it will climb back to the melting point before dropping back to low temps so I assume it will cycle through being solid and liquid quickly. Im sure for most this isnt an issue though. All in all, for temps above 8c I wouldnt use anything else, nothing else comes close as the thermal conductivity is around 75 W/m•K and thermal pastes top out around 12 W/m•K.


I assume you use a chiller, yes? °8c is pretty cool. 

I don't yet have the intestinal fortitude to use LM or Conductonaut in between the IHS and Block in any of my loops. I will Lapp a CPU brand new out of the box though. Did it with my 955BE. I hadn't even benched it. Just dropped it right on the paper and offs came the Nickel. I have since learned to temper my patience. So far as I know that chip is still working.  lol

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## CJMitsuki

Ceadderman said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> The first time you do it, can be intimidating but proper preparation is all you need. On my GPUs I use hot glue on the SMDs that surround the die so the LM will never have a chance to touch the but clear nail polish works well too, or super glue. Although super glue will peel if the surface is smooth. I use the Gorilla Glue brand glue sticks and that stuff is really tough for hot glue. I dont put anything around the CPU IHS but its probably a good idea to use some nail polish. After all is applied I have a huge magnifying lens on an articulating arm attached to my desk that has a ring light on it and I use that to scan the board for any LM that may have strayed from the intended area but Im always careful so its never been a problem. Also, a syringe of the conductonaut is enough to do many applications as you only use a minute amount of the LM and spread it super thin. On my 2700x I noticed 10-15c drop in temps in IBT and about 10c drop on my GPU in Superposition benchmark on the extreme run that really works the gpu hard. The higher your temps are, the more beneficial the LM becomes and it is not ideal for temps below 8c as it starts to solidify and separate from the application surface. Although, I have ran it at -4c and it wasnt a problem but it will climb back to the melting point before dropping back to low temps so I assume it will cycle through being solid and liquid quickly. Im sure for most this isnt an issue though. All in all, for temps above 8c I wouldnt use anything else, nothing else comes close as the thermal conductivity is around 75 W/m•K and thermal pastes top out around 12 W/m•K.
> 
> 
> 
> I assume you use a chiller, yes? °8c is pretty cool.
> 
> I don't yet have the intestinal fortitude to use LM or Conductonaut in between the IHS and Block in any of my loops. I will Lapp a CPU brand new out of the box though. Did it with my 955BE. I hadn't even benched it. Just dropped it right on the paper and offs came the Nickel. I have since learned to temper my patience. So far as I know that chip is still working. /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif lol
> 
> ~Ceadder /forum/images/smilies/smil3dbd4e4c2e742.gif
Click to expand...

No, I dont use a chiller but rather I have a shelf right at the window above my desk that I built and my case sits right up at the window and I made a mount for some intake fans that I can mount to the window frame and the case intakes cold winter air through the side and front and exhausts it out the top of the case and routed out the window and everything is sealed so my room can be warm but the air inside the case is the same temp as the outside air. Once it warms up this spring I will go back to the duct that I attach to the A/C vent near my desk and it draws cold air from that and exhausts it into the room. I dont seal it at that point besides where cracks in the case naturally are. I do seal those so the case pressure doesnt have parasitic loss feom all of the gaps where the case is assembled. I also use some thin weather stripping to seal the tempered glass panel. The A/C doesnt keep it as cold as the winter air but it can drop to 10c sometimes if Im running me A/C down around 45-50f. Of the case is sealed and you knsulate the exterior of the case there is no chance of condensation in my winter setup. The spring/summer setup doesnt have a problem either as the room will be the same temp as the case.


----------



## gupsterg

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> @gupsterg
> 
> Which bios is recommended for NOT frying the embbeded controller on C7H.
> 
> I also did 2x1hr gsat, sucessfully @2933...
> ...I hope it passed succesfully as i'm not familiar with gsat nor Linux .
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will post my 2933 template later.
> Btw i have DUAL RANKED RAM (3000) crucial ballistix elite in my Main rig .
> Officially Amd supports DUAL RANKED @2666 (sounds devilish),from what i've ready so far.
> They chips are samsung E die .
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I also ordered a asus 1070ti cerberus which is on sale right now . My fury causes these graphical texture issues i have while gaming and they were not persistent .Sometimes it runs good and sometimes i have Messer up textures even in my fresh installed OS SSD.
> As i know you also gar a few furys, what dir you saw this Kind of values.
> Same driver used in both ssd' s 18.11.2 .
> But i get different results on hwinfo64 .
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As my first issues with the system started on a fresh installed system over Night.
> 
> So where my fury showed me those results, i've never seen before .
> Atm i don't have these values spotted since the issues started on 4.1.2019 .
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Normally it should look like this or?
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


Sorry for delayed response, took a holiday from OCN  .

I do not know of UEFI that fries EC. ASUS WMI is broken in UEFI prior to 1002, so I'd say use that or an AGESA 1.0.0.6 UEFI (1103/1201).

1st image of HWINFO where you have outlined GPU usage values that is something that recently (well few months back IIRC) was exposed in HWINFO. IIRC W10 Task Manager was first showing these new metrics and then HWINFO did also.

2nd image of HWINFO where you have outlined GPU VRM controller data, IIRC nearer the end of my time with Fiji I recall it was showing at times and not. IIRC when I spoke to Martin about it, it was AMD driver side causing this. 



crakej said:


> I don't think so - if I have it higher than it is ram becomes unstable.
> 
> Not sure about PLL, but I've always left mine on auto which comes out as 1.984v (actual I think is 2v) when OCing
> 
> 
> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can lower CPU temps by quite a bit by setting a manual PLL voltage to reflect true 1.8v. I have to set mine to 1.76v to get it to be 1.8v on the multimeter. I dont remember how much temps dropped but it was pretty dramatic for me to notice as I wasnt even looking for a change in temps. Stability wasnt affected, even when bclk OCing.
Click to expand...

Crakej if Sense Mi Skew is [Enabled] or [Auto] defaults to enabled, then a non default PLL voltage will skew tCTL/tDIE artificially.



nick name said:


> Has anyone seen the prompt "New CPU installed TPM neeeds to be reset hit yes or no". The prompt is actually much longer and isn't the standard New CPU enter setup. I've found it for the first time ever today while overclocking RAM. I mention it because it's the first time after a bajillion BSOD during other overclocking attemtps.


Yes. OC profile unsound for me when this occurred. Also had some long winded message about recovery UEFI please do not turn off, blah blah blah, IIRC was also asking or stating it was gonna use/need a file to recover UEFI. I just hit reset and board was fine, changed OC profile and all good.


----------



## Keith Myers

CJMitsuki said:


> The first time you do it, can be intimidating but proper preparation is all you need. On my GPUs I use hot glue on the SMDs that surround the die so the LM will never have a chance to touch the but clear nail polish works well too, or super glue. Although super glue will peel if the surface is smooth. I use the Gorilla Glue brand glue sticks and that stuff is really tough for hot glue. I dont put anything around the CPU IHS but its probably a good idea to use some nail polish. After all is applied I have a huge magnifying lens on an articulating arm attached to my desk that has a ring light on it and I use that to scan the board for any LM that may have strayed from the intended area but Im always careful so its never been a problem. Also, a syringe of the conductonaut is enough to do many applications as you only use a minute amount of the LM and spread it super thin. On my 2700x I noticed 10-15c drop in temps in IBT and about 10c drop on my GPU in Superposition benchmark on the extreme run that really works the gpu hard. The higher your temps are, the more beneficial the LM becomes and it is not ideal for temps below 8c as it starts to solidify and separate from the application surface. Although, I have ran it at -4c and it wasnt a problem but it will climb back to the melting point before dropping back to low temps so I assume it will cycle through being solid and liquid quickly. Im sure for most this isnt an issue though. All in all, for temps above 8c I wouldnt use anything else, nothing else comes close as the thermal conductivity is around 75 W/m•K and thermal pastes top out around 12 W/m•K.


Does it work over large areas? I would want to try it on a TR 2920X IHS and XSPC Raystorm Neo block. I have cold air coming through the rad and I still am sitting at 68° C. die temp at full load. Like I can't transfer the heat out of the dies as fast as I could. I think I should be colder based on the wattage dissipation capabilities of the XSPC RX360 radiator.


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> Does it work over large areas? I would want to try it on a TR 2920X IHS and XSPC Raystorm Neo block. I have cold air coming through the rad and I still am sitting at 68° C. die temp at full load. Like I can't transfer the heat out of the dies as fast as I could. I think I should be colder based on the wattage dissipation capabilities of the XSPC RX360 radiator.


I can't imagine it wouldn't work over large areas. Is it possible a better pump might help also? 

I think I am gonna give it a go on my 2700X. I don't mind if my cold plate gets "stained" by the gallium.


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> Keith Myers said:
> 
> 
> 
> Does it work over large areas? I would want to try it on a TR 2920X IHS and XSPC Raystorm Neo block. I have cold air coming through the rad and I still am sitting at 68° C. die temp at full load. Like I can't transfer the heat out of the dies as fast as I could. I think I should be colder based on the wattage dissipation capabilities of the XSPC RX360 radiator.
> 
> 
> 
> I can't imagine it wouldn't work over large areas. Is it possible a better pump might help also?
> 
> I think I am gonna give it a go on my 2700X. I don't mind if my cold plate gets "stained" by the gallium.
Click to expand...

Yes, its able to work over any area. You may want to apply it a bit thicker than normal on a TR IHS bc im not sure of how concave or convex those become during the soldering process. Youd think that since it is such a larger area compared to the other processors that there would be a bit of a difference. I always apply my LM thicker just to ensure good contact. Just remember to apply a bit to the coldplate as well so that it breaks the surface tension and there isnt bubbles.


----------



## Keith Myers

nick name said:


> I can't imagine it wouldn't work over large areas. Is it possible a better pump might help also?
> 
> I think I am gonna give it a go on my 2700X. I don't mind if my cold plate gets "stained" by the gallium.


I don't think that the XSPC Photon X4 170 pump/reservoir is the problem. It is based on the standard D5 pump but with a fixed speed of what #4 speed is on the D5. Flow rate of 600lph.

[Edit] What I never did before installing the 2920X was check for convexity of the IHS. I know the block is absolutely flat in the short dimension and only out about 1/4mm in the long dimension.
Might be smart to lap the IHS before going the LM route.


----------



## gupsterg

Keith Myers said:


> I don't think that the XSPC Photon X4 170 pump/reservoir is the problem. It is based on the standard D5 pump but with a fixed speed of what #4 speed is on the D5. Flow rate of 600lph.


DDC PWM I use on 2700X I give it range of 20-22% PWM, CPU block & 360mm slim rad, any increase in flow gains me nothing.

EK D5 PWM I use on TR1950X/VEGA64 I have lessened range to half I used to use, CPU/GPU blocks & 2x 360mm slim rads, I saw no increase in temps with lowered flow rate.


----------



## crakej

Well, I'm back from Peak District which was a really nice break from everything including OCing!

Thanks for the advice Re: upgrading to a 360 AIO from 240. It seems it would be worth while for me. I am thinking I may go for the Fractal Design S36.

Those that use the S36 - do you connect fans to the MS or to the built in controller?

I already use LM - it was well worth learning how to apply it and I wil continue to use it. I note there are now LM 'pads' which you just stick to the plate and melts when used - anyone given those a try?
@gupsterg I have SenseMi Skew Disabled. When running mem at 3600 PLL is 2.0v and CPU 3.3v is set at 3.6v without me touching them.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Well, I'm back from Peak District which was a really nice break from everything including OCing!
> 
> Thanks for the advice Re: upgrading to a 360 AIO from 240. It seems it would be worth while for me. I am thinking I may go for the Fractal Design S36.
> 
> Those that use the S36 - do you connect fans to the MS or to the built in controller?
> 
> I already use LM - it was well worth learning how to apply it and I wil continue to use it. I note there are now LM 'pads' which you just stick to the plate and melts when used - anyone given those a try?
> 
> @gupsterg I have SenseMi Skew Disabled. When running mem at 3600 PLL is 2.0v and CPU 3.3v is set at 3.6v without me touching them.


I don't use the headers on the radiator. I imagine it's pretty convenient to do so though. The only thing I can think of is that the PWM signal would then control both the pump and fan speeds so if you want to run either independently you probably won't want to do that. I run the pump at full speed always and I can't hear it. The fans, though, I have hooked up to a Noctua controller.


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> @gupsterg I have SenseMi Skew Disabled. When running mem at 3600 PLL is 2.0v and CPU 3.3v is set at 3.6v without me touching them.


CPU Aux goes from 3.3V to 3.6V when left on [Auto] and we OC. This seems to be based off an "auto rule". I have that occur on TR+ZE, Ryzen+C6H/C7H. I just choose to set it as 3.3V manually when became aware of it occurrence.

PLL I have always set as 1.8V, IIRC Elmor did state in this thread before, this increase can occur due to "auto rule".


----------



## Keith Myers

I'm going to have to experiment. If disabling SenseMi Skew and manually setting to 1.8V for PLL, I wonder what the Tdie/Tctrl is going to read. On manual OC with I assume an "autorule" in play, I have PLL 1.8V at 2.03V at 4.025Ghz.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Keith Myers said:


> I'm going to have to experiment. If disabling SenseMi Skew and manually setting to 1.8V for PLL, I wonder what the Tdie/Tctrl is going to read. On manual OC with I assume an "autorule" in play, I have PLL 1.8V at 2.03V at 4.025Ghz.


From my testing PLL increased whether manual or by auto never gave a benefit. Even running at 107mhz bclk. I did however show a drop in cpu temps by manually locking PLL to the 1.8v reading by the Asus WMI sensor which happened to be 1.76v in bios. I confirmed an actual drop by using a Klein IR5 handheld infrared thermometer on the back of the cpu socket. Very nice little IR gun for very cheap. Im sure it isnt accurate to a very high degree but its accurate enough to measure surface temps of various hardware such as the CPU socket.

Edit: Checked around and it is accurate within +/- 2F so accurate enough for the price imo.

*Klein IR5 Amazon*


----------



## minal

CJMitsuki said:


> From my testing PLL increased whether manual or by auto never gave a benefit. Even running at 107mhz bclk. I did however show a drop in cpu temps by manually locking PLL to the 1.8v reading by the Asus WMI sensor which happened to be 1.76v in bios. I confirmed an actual drop by using a Klein IR5 handheld infrared thermometer on the back of the cpu socket. Very nice little IR gun for very cheap. Im sure it isnt accurate to a very high degree but its accurate enough to measure surface temps of various hardware such as the CPU socket.
> 
> Edit: Checked around and it is accurate within +/- 2F so accurate enough for the price imo.
> 
> *Klein IR5 Amazon*


 Out of curiosity, I checked PLL readings by BIOS and the Asus WMI sensor readout:

Auto or manually setting 1.8V: 1.83V reading
Manual 1.77V: 1.809V reading
Manual 1.76V: 1.79V reading

The input field does not accept increments smaller than 0.01V.

Are the settings or readings more reliable?


----------



## CJMitsuki

minal said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> From my testing PLL increased whether manual or by auto never gave a benefit. Even running at 107mhz bclk. I did however show a drop in cpu temps by manually locking PLL to the 1.8v reading by the Asus WMI sensor which happened to be 1.76v in bios. I confirmed an actual drop by using a Klein IR5 handheld infrared thermometer on the back of the cpu socket. Very nice little IR gun for very cheap. Im sure it isnt accurate to a very high degree but its accurate enough to measure surface temps of various hardware such as the CPU socket.
> 
> Edit: Checked around and it is accurate within +/- 2F so accurate enough for the price imo.
> 
> *Klein IR5 Amazon*
> 
> 
> 
> Out of curiosity, I checked PLL readings by BIOS and the Asus WMI sensor readout:
> 
> Auto or manually setting 1.8V: 1.83V reading
> Manual 1.77V: 1.809V reading
> Manual 1.76V: 1.79V reading
> 
> The input field does not accept increments smaller than 0.01V.
> 
> Are the settings or readings more reliable?
Click to expand...

Not sure which is closer to actual coltaged applied. I assume that would have to be checked at the back of the cpu socket. Im tempted to solder some wires to the socket to check vCore, SoC, and PLL voltages to see which is kost accurate. I only trust the probeit points for the DRAM voltage as ot is right next to the Dimms. There should be a Probe it point at rhe destination of the voltages they are checking and nowhere else. It doesnt matter how much voltage you send to a component, its what the voltae is once it arrives and that voltage can drop quite a bit from point A to point B. Thats why we have VRMs so the voltage gets regulated and adjusted through Load Line Calibration. Thats why you wouldnt want the VRMs on the other side of the board from the CPU. It bumps the voltage back up after voltage drop and regulates ot so the cpu runs more stable or hopefully more stable. If the VRMs were across the board it wouldnt do any good since the viltage would drop once again by the time the voltage reached its destination. So for vCore, SoC, and PLL I wouldnt trust any readings besides from the socket itself to be accurate. Probeits are seemingly quite far from the CPU for me to trust 100%. I may try to solder those wires this weekend if I get ballsy. Been thinking about it for awhile now.


----------



## minal

CJMitsuki said:


> Not sure which is closer to actual coltaged applied. I assume that would have to be checked at the back of the cpu socket. Im tempted to solder some wires to the socket to check vCore, SoC, and PLL voltages to see which is kost accurate. I only trust the probeit points for the DRAM voltage as ot is right next to the Dimms. There should be a Probe it point at rhe destination of the voltages they are checking and nowhere else. It doesnt matter how much voltage you send to a component, its what the voltae is once it arrives and that voltage can drop quite a bit from point A to point B. Thats why we have VRMs so the voltage gets regulated and adjusted through Load Line Calibration. Thats why you wouldnt want the VRMs on the other side of the board from the CPU. It bumps the voltage back up after voltage drop and regulates ot so the cpu runs more stable or hopefully more stable. If the VRMs were across the board it wouldnt do any good since the viltage would drop once again by the time the voltage reached its destination. So for vCore, SoC, and PLL I wouldnt trust any readings besides from the socket itself to be accurate. Probeits are seemingly quite far from the CPU for me to trust 100%. I may try to solder those wires this weekend if I get ballsy. Been thinking about it for awhile now.


If you go ahead with the fancier measurements, I'm sure you'll have an audience here.. Just make sure curiosity doesn't kill your board! Then again, I changed the PLL voltage out of curiosity (currently on manual 1.76V, reading 1.79V), even though I had no need.


----------



## CJMitsuki

minal said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure which is closer to actual coltaged applied. I assume that would have to be checked at the back of the cpu socket. Im tempted to solder some wires to the socket to check vCore, SoC, and PLL voltages to see which is kost accurate. I only trust the probeit points for the DRAM voltage as ot is right next to the Dimms. There should be a Probe it point at rhe destination of the voltages they are checking and nowhere else. It doesnt matter how much voltage you send to a component, its what the voltae is once it arrives and that voltage can drop quite a bit from point A to point B. Thats why we have VRMs so the voltage gets regulated and adjusted through Load Line Calibration. Thats why you wouldnt want the VRMs on the other side of the board from the CPU. It bumps the voltage back up after voltage drop and regulates ot so the cpu runs more stable or hopefully more stable. If the VRMs were across the board it wouldnt do any good since the viltage would drop once again by the time the voltage reached its destination. So for vCore, SoC, and PLL I wouldnt trust any readings besides from the socket itself to be accurate. Probeits are seemingly quite far from the CPU for me to trust 100%. I may try to solder those wires this weekend if I get ballsy. Been thinking about it for awhile now.
> 
> 
> 
> If you go ahead with the fancier measurements, I'm sure you'll have an audience here.. Just make sure curiosity doesn't kill your board! Then again, I changed the PLL voltage out of curiosity (currently on manual 1.76V, reading 1.79V), even though I had no need.
Click to expand...

Im getting better at micro soldering. Just repaired 6 traces on a dead board that was dropped and it cut the traces. So Im fairly confident I can attach wires to the small SMDs without killing the board and cpu. Also, if I happen to destroy them then disregard my confidence lol. I wouldnt attempt it if I didnt have an unopened 1700x still sitting on a shelf from a segfault RMA a year ago. The original was a week 3 cpu from when Ryzen first launched but was a poor overclocker. Well, mediocre. 4.15ghz at best iirc.


----------



## crakej

minal said:


> Out of curiosity, I checked PLL readings by BIOS and the Asus WMI sensor readout:
> 
> Auto or manually setting 1.8V: 1.83V reading
> Manual 1.77V: 1.809V reading
> Manual 1.76V: 1.79V reading
> 
> The input field does not accept increments smaller than 0.01V.
> 
> Are the settings or readings more reliable?


Interesting, my PLL always reads from WMI LOWER than I set it - if I set 1.8v (or auto) I get about 1.76v or 2.0v reads as 1.984v. My DMM is broken ATM so can't do Probit point...


----------



## Ceadderman

crakej said:


> Interesting, my PLL always reads from WMI LOWER than I set it - if I set 1.8v (or auto) I get about 1.76v or 2.0v reads as 1.984v. My DMM is broken ATM so can't do Probit point...


V readings always fluctuate +/- dependent of the power needs of the chip. I wouldn't stress about that as 1.76v is within spec for your 1.8v setting. Same for your 2.0v setting. 

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## crakej

Ceadderman said:


> V readings always fluctuate +/- dependent of the power needs of the chip. I wouldn't stress about that as 1.76v is within spec for your 1.8v setting. Same for your 2.0v setting.
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


Indeed - I'm not too worried, but mine is consistently lower than than it should be when others are the opposite. On some setting this is crucial - I didn't know what I was doing until I realized bios readings of voltages were almost all under what they are set at.


----------



## crakej

Spent many hours experimenting with RAM OCs on bios 1201.

I've been looking at 3533 and 3600, both which I had working previously. None of them work reliably any more, even if I slacken off the timings - it will be reliable, then after a reboot, memtests will fail immediately. Next boot it might work again...

I've also learned that increasing tCKE can (for me) let me reduce CPU volts a LOT. on my 3600 profile changing tCKE from 1 to 6 allowed me to lower my CPU volts from +0.01250 to - (yes, negative offset) -0.02500v. I have CPU LLC at 5 while testing so I know what works and what leeway I have - when I have good timings, if I have enough leeway I can reduce LLC and increase voltage accordingly.

Incredibly, while playing with my 3533 profile, I managed to score 1950 on CB15. 50 points higher than ANY profile I'd ever tested before! This was mainly due to enabling the opCache and both PreFethchers in the bios Perf Bias set to CB11. Latency was 63.5. CPU was running at 4.2GHz. I could not make the damn thing stable though.

It's my Birthday today so I might have to get myself a present of a new AIO - either FD s36 or EVGA CLC 280 which has amazing cooling properties which would definitely be an improvement on my Coolermaster ML240. Installing 3 Artic F12s as extra intakes on the side of my Core X5 today an try neaten things up so air flows better. I might stick my Vengeance stick in to experiment with. They are Hynix MFRs, dual rail, so interested to see their performance. They are 3200CL16s - i'll sell them if they aren't as good as my G.Skills.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> -snip-
> 
> It's my Birthday today so I might have to get myself a present of a new AIO - either FD s36 or EVGA CLC 280 which has amazing cooling properties which would definitely be an improvement on my Coolermaster ML240. Installing 3 Artic F12s as extra intakes on the side of my Core X5 today an try neaten things up so air flows better. I might stick my Vengeance stick in to experiment with. They are Hynix MFRs, dual rail, so interested to see their performance. They are 3200CL16s - i'll sell them if they aren't as good as my G.Skills.


I ended up going with the FD S36 after looking at the EVGA CLC 280 for a while. Gamers Nexus was the reason I looked at the 280 so hard, but after looking at other sites and the price of the 280 going up as well as the 120mm fan size for a 360 cooler being a size I already had on hand I jumped on the S36.

It proved more capable than my previous Thermaltake 360 AIO that was a previous gen Asetek cooler. And I used the exact same fans on each cooler (old and new) so the comparison should be considered fair.


----------



## Keith Myers

Well I just turned MISenseSkew to disabled on my C7H's. Offset was left at Auto. Set the PLL voltage to 1.80V on two machines and after reboot the readback voltage was 1.809V. The other machine had a readback voltage of 1.76V when the set voltage was at 1.80V so I bumped it to 1.83V to get a readback of 1.809V. The temps did not change one bit on any machine. Machines are still stable at their default overclocks for core and memory. So didn't accomplish anything nor did it impact the performance or stability in any way apparently.

Question. I did not find MISenseSkew in any menu in the BIOS. I found it via the F9 Search function. I am on BIOS 1002. So it it normally hidden in these BIOS' now? I remember on the X370 Prime Pro that it was visible in the menus.


----------



## Keith Myers

For a stock 360 AIO I think the Fractal Design S36 is the one to go to. No fluff with RGB and standard fans but apparently with a decent Asetek pump in the build. If I could have fit the S36 in my case which was not possible with the fan locations already being occupied by the gpu AIO 120mm radiators, I would have gone with that. I went with the EVGA CLC 280 which has the 5th Gen 690LC Asetek pump and controller. It was cheaper and available at the time when my first choice of the Corsair H110i was not available. I hated the stock fans that come with it and immediately removed them and put my standard Corsair ML140 fans on it. Was fortunate to find a new Linux developer on Github that has put together a program for controlling the Asetek 3rd, 4th and 5th Gen Asetek pump controllers used in NZXT and now EVGA AIO coolers for setting pump and fan speeds and controlling the RGB lighting. Seems to be cooling the 2700X quite well.


----------



## minal

Keith Myers said:


> Well I just turned MISenseSkew to disabled on my C7H's. Offset was left at Auto. Set the PLL voltage to 1.80V on two machines and after reboot the readback voltage was 1.809V. The other machine had a readback voltage of 1.76V when the set voltage was at 1.80V so I bumped it to 1.83V to get a readback of 1.809V. The temps did not change one bit on any machine. Machines are still stable at their default overclocks for core and memory. So didn't accomplish anything nor did it impact the performance or stability in any way apparently.
> 
> Question. I did not find MISenseSkew in any menu in the BIOS. I found it via the F9 Search function. I am on BIOS 1002. So it it normally hidden in these BIOS' now? I remember on the X370 Prime Pro that it was visible in the menus.


I recently disabled Sense MI Skew too based on @gupsterg's guide (section "Some of what I do with OC'ing"). I noticed no difference either in temps or stability (24 hrs of y-cruncher). I believe the Sense MI Skew setting is in Tweaker's Paradise.


----------



## crakej

I think it will be the S36 then. It's a few quid less than the CLC280 and I already have a couple of EK FFS-5s i can use with it push pull maybe if I get another....

While tidying up my machine I found that one of the wires to one of my CPU fans was broken! The fan had been working, but probably at reduced speed. Fixing it has helped things a bit, but I need just a few more degrees to be able to run reliably at 4.2GHz

My poor CPU takes more voltage on the CH7 than the Prime X370 Pro used to, to achieve 4.2. 1.4v versus 1.388 (with no RAM OC.)


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I think it will be the S36 then. It's a few quid less than the CLC280 and I already have a couple of EK FFS-5s i can use with it push pull maybe if I get another....
> 
> While tidying up my machine I found that one of the wires to one of my CPU fans was broken! The fan had been working, but probably at reduced speed. Fixing it has helped things a bit, but I need just a few more degrees to be able to run reliably at 4.2GHz
> 
> My poor CPU takes more voltage on the CH7 than the Prime X370 Pro used to, to achieve 4.2. 1.4v versus 1.388 (with no RAM OC.)


You can do a quasi-push/pull with the stock fans and two other 120mm fans. You just don't have a fan in the middle on one side. 

I found that the CH7 also doesn't overclock as well as the Prime X470 does alos. ASUS confirmed.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> You can do a quasi-push/pull with the stock fans and two other 120mm fans. You just don't have a fan in the middle on one side.
> 
> I found that the CH7 also doesn't overclock as well as the Prime X470 does alos. ASUS confirmed.


True - could use just the 2 until I can afford the other one - if ever I need it.... Think I'm going to order the S36 then and some new LM

Also, as none of my mates took the hint re: my birthday present, I'm going to order that too I think! 

Nice New DMM/Oscilloscope from banggood:https://www.banggood.com/Upgraded-M...KvOsJI-3M_kv_6Cb2nlAUQL9mzEo&cur_warehouse=CN

:drum: :letsparty


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> True - could use just the 2 until I can afford the other one - if ever I need it.... Think I'm going to order the S36 then and some new LM
> 
> Also, as none of my mates took the hint re: my birthday present, I'm going to order that too I think!
> 
> Nice New DMM/Oscilloscope from banggood:https://www.banggood.com/Upgraded-M...KvOsJI-3M_kv_6Cb2nlAUQL9mzEo&cur_warehouse=CN
> 
> :drum: :letsparty


Oh, man. I've never seen a hand held oscilloscope. Looks just like a multimeter. Happy birthday!

And if I wasn't feeling lazy then I'd try my AIO without a fan in the middle and record the results. I've done that before, but I didn't pay any attention to what temps were as a result. I did note that the fans on the front flowed a little faster. Or at least I'm assuming so because they reached higher RPMs. It seems some air flows/leaks into that vacant space in the back as opposed to being pulled straight through the radiator and the second fan and then being exhausted by the second fan. I'm not sure if that causes any pooling of air in that back middle area because the front middle fan is pushing against that extra air that splashes out from the top and bottom front fans. If it does, however, I can't imagine it's of any negative consequence.


----------



## Keith Myers

That's a great price for a scopemeter. But they have been around for a long time. Fluke had the first ScopeMeter 190 back in the 90's. Cost a fortune - over $2K. I have a couple of TPI 440 ScopeMeters for ten years probably. Cost around $340. They are absolutely fantastic for industrial electronics troubleshooting. Being able to see waveforms is really helpful.


----------



## crakej

Very happy with the meter. It's reduced from 70 quid but of course delivery brings the price back up. I managed to get it from the UK for a few quid more including next day delivery, and UK warranty - it's called LM2001 Digital Oscilloscope Multimeter and I got it from Amazon:https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B07KW5BRHB/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o00__o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

S36 is on it's way from scan along with some liquid metal pads.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Very happy with the meter. It's reduced from 70 quid but of course delivery brings the price back up. I managed to get it from the UK for a few quid more including next day delivery, and UK warranty - it's called LM2001 Digital Oscilloscope Multimeter and I got it from Amazon:https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B07KW5BRHB/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o00__o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
> 
> S36 is on it's way from scan along with some liquid metal pads.


Oh, man keep me informed on the LM pads. I'm curious as to how precisely you can apply it. My worry is that it would be more than needed after it's brought up to temp and it liquefies. I haven't pulled the trigger on LM yet and those pads have me intrigued. 

Since you'll be running two different sets of fans on the S36 I would encourage getting something like the Noctua fan controller that has a knob/dial. I'm currently running 3xNoctuas (3000 RPM) with 3xCorsair SP120L (2700 RPM). I can plug both sets into the Noctua controller without any obvious issue in their function, but I can't say precisely what their speeds are in that setup. Also, the Noctuas at one speed move more air then the Corsairs at the same speed so the Corsairs were probably restricting the Noctuas if they were running at similar RPMs on the Noctua controller. 

So what I've done is plugged the Noctua's into the motherboard and set them at a static speed and have the Corsairs running off the Noctua controller. Doing so allowed me to audibly tune the speed of the Corsairs to acoustically sync with the Noctuas. I listened for the wobble in the sound to disappear as I dialed in the Corsair speed by starting at high RPMs and then reducing. And it appears it was as I assumed -- the Corsairs needed to run faster than the Noctuas to match up their air flow. Granted, it's tuned by ear so I'm not entirely certain how accurate it is, but I also monitored the fan speed of the Noctuas and watched for the slight increase of their speed as an indicator they weren't being hindered by the Corsairs. Of course I could just run the Corsairs obviously faster than needed, but with my day-to-day setup I like to keep the fans quieter than their balls out performance would be.

What's kinda funny is that I set the AIO fans to the level of sound the single Noctua 140mm 1500RPM fan produces. That's the fan I have sitting in front of my RAM sticks on top of my GPU. That 140mm Noctua is kinda loud.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Oh, man keep me informed on the LM pads. I'm curious as to how precisely you can apply it. My worry is that it would be more than needed after it's brought up to temp and it liquefies. I haven't pulled the trigger on LM yet and those pads have me intrigued.
> 
> Since you'll be running two different sets of fans on the S36 I would encourage getting something like the Noctua fan controller that has a knob/dial. I'm currently running 3xNoctuas (3000 RPM) with 3xCorsair SP120L (2700 RPM). I can plug both sets into the Noctua controller without any obvious issue in their function, but I can't say precisely what their speeds are in that setup. Also, the Noctuas at one speed move more air then the Corsairs at the same speed so the Corsairs were probably restricting the Noctuas if they were running at similar RPMs on the Noctua controller.
> 
> So what I've done is plugged the Noctua's into the motherboard and set them at a static speed and have the Corsairs running off the Noctua controller. Doing so allowed me to audibly tune the speed of the Corsairs to acoustically sync with the Noctuas. I listened for the wobble in the sound to disappear as I dialed in the Corsair speed by starting at high RPMs and then reducing. And it appears it was as I assumed -- the Corsairs needed to run faster than the Noctuas to match up their air flow. Granted, it's tuned by ear so I'm not entirely certain how accurate it is, but I also monitored the fan speed of the Noctuas and watched for the slight increase of their speed as an indicator they weren't being hindered by the Corsairs. Of course I could just run the Corsairs obviously faster than needed, but with my day-to-day setup I like to keep the fans quieter than their balls out performance would be.
> 
> What's kinda funny is that I set the AIO fans to the level of sound the single Noctua 140mm 1500RPM fan produces. That's the fan I have sitting in front of my RAM sticks on top of my GPU. That 140mm Noctua is kinda loud.


Yes, I'm hoping the pads will be as easy to use as they say they are!

I'm going to have to get some kind of fan controller. How long are the power leadas on the fans that come with the S36? I saw a review that said they're really short. I'd prefer my motherboard to control the fans, might get the ASUS extension card. I really don't want to run any new software as I've learned to use FanXpert (as annoying as it can be!) so going to stick with it.

My rad exausts out the top - I might put the FFS-5 on top pulling air out through the rad. I'm thinking i'll use the 2 at the 'hot' end of the rad rather than risk air circulating in a gap if I put them either end of the rad, my only real concern is that they run up to 3000rpm - will I need to limit them to 2000rpm like the Fractal Design fans? (or the same effective airflow?). Maybe I can run them higher as they're just sucking air through the rad??

I've had radiators mounted drawing air in from outside, but that's never worked for me as well as exhausting therefore using air from inside the case. I've got lots of air entering my case from the side, front and back (Riing 140s), the Riing fans have very different profiles from each other - one only has the range of 500 to 1100rpm - it should go up to 1500 like the other one!

I'll report back when it's all fitted


----------



## DoctorNick

nick name said:


> Oh, man keep me informed on the LM pads. I'm curious as to how precisely you can apply it. My worry is that it would be more than needed after it's brought up to temp and it liquefies. I haven't pulled the trigger on LM yet and those pads have me intrigued.
> 
> Since you'll be running two different sets of fans on the S36 I would encourage getting something like the Noctua fan controller that has a knob/dial. I'm currently running 3xNoctuas (3000 RPM) with 3xCorsair SP120L (2700 RPM). I can plug both sets into the Noctua controller without any obvious issue in their function, but I can't say precisely what their speeds are in that setup. Also, the Noctuas at one speed move more air then the Corsairs at the same speed so the Corsairs were probably restricting the Noctuas if they were running at similar RPMs on the Noctua controller.
> 
> So what I've done is plugged the Noctua's into the motherboard and set them at a static speed and have the Corsairs running off the Noctua controller. Doing so allowed me to audibly tune the speed of the Corsairs to acoustically sync with the Noctuas. I listened for the wobble in the sound to disappear as I dialed in the Corsair speed by starting at high RPMs and then reducing. And it appears it was as I assumed -- the Corsairs needed to run faster than the Noctuas to match up their air flow. Granted, it's tuned by ear so I'm not entirely certain how accurate it is, but I also monitored the fan speed of the Noctuas and watched for the slight increase of their speed as an indicator they weren't being hindered by the Corsairs. Of course I could just run the Corsairs obviously faster than needed, but with my day-to-day setup I like to keep the fans quieter than their balls out performance would be.
> 
> What's kinda funny is that I set the AIO fans to the level of sound the single Noctua 140mm 1500RPM fan produces. That's the fan I have sitting in front of my RAM sticks on top of my GPU. That 140mm Noctua is kinda loud.


Hello fellow ocn'er. I have experience both LM and LM pads, and I must say the LM pads are nowhere near in performance to conductonaut or similar. Right now I'm using LM on both GPU and CPU with great results - 6-8 C difference compared to kryonaut. 

Use one small drop on the cooler and just spread it. You may even be able to use the same drop on the CPU also as it spreads "forever"...


----------



## crakej

DoctorNick said:


> Hello fellow ocn'er. I have experience both LM and LM pads, and I must say the LM pads are nowhere near in performance to conductonaut or similar. Right now I'm using LM on both GPU and CPU with great results - 6-8 C difference compared to kryonaut.
> 
> Use one small drop on the cooler and just spread it. You may even be able to use the same drop on the CPU also as it spreads "forever"...


Thanks for that post - I usually use LM, but thought the pads might be more convenient - Still - be useful to have for emergencies..

I see it's dissipation is 10w - which is still about (more than) double of so called 'high performance' pastes which are normally <5w, but I do like to know I have the maximum cooling going on so will spread the metal


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Yes, I'm hoping the pads will be as easy to use as they say they are!
> 
> I'm going to have to get some kind of fan controller. How long are the power leadas on the fans that come with the S36? I saw a review that said they're really short. I'd prefer my motherboard to control the fans, might get the ASUS extension card. I really don't want to run any new software as I've learned to use FanXpert (as annoying as it can be!) so going to stick with it.
> 
> My rad exausts out the top - I might put the FFS-5 on top pulling air out through the rad. I'm thinking i'll use the 2 at the 'hot' end of the rad rather than risk air circulating in a gap if I put them either end of the rad, my only real concern is that they run up to 3000rpm - will I need to limit them to 2000rpm like the Fractal Design fans? (or the same effective airflow?). Maybe I can run them higher as they're just sucking air through the rad??
> 
> I've had radiators mounted drawing air in from outside, but that's never worked for me as well as exhausting therefore using air from inside the case. I've got lots of air entering my case from the side, front and back (Riing 140s), the Riing fans have very different profiles from each other - one only has the range of 500 to 1100rpm - it should go up to 1500 like the other one!
> 
> I'll report back when it's all fitted


The cables on the stock S36 fans are pretty darn short. Just long enough to reach the headers at the top of the radiator so I'd recommend geting a 3-1 PWM cable. All of the headers I've used on the board were capable of powering 3 fans. And the H_AMP header is at least powerful enough for 6 fans.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> The cables on the stock S36 fans are pretty darn short. Just long enough to reach the headers at the top of the radiator so I'd recommend geting a 3-1 PWM cable. All of the headers I've used on the board were capable of powering 3 fans. And the H_AMP header is at least powerful enough for 6 fans.


Funny....you buy yourself something new and think - that's all I need - then realize you need to spend a fair few quid more to do things properly lol..... thanks for confirming that!

Got a 1 to 3 (for CPU fans) and a 1 to 5 splitter (for other intake fans) coming from amazon. The 2 Vardars will be on their own connector as they are rated at 5.5w each and our fan headers only do up to 12w. If I do get another Vardar (to make up to 3 pulling fans) I will have to use the HAMP fan header for sure. I will get a hub or ASUS fan extension to go on the EXT header when I've saved up enough for my extra case fans. 

Looking fwd to this upgrade....


----------



## nick name

CPU Fan has disappeared from HWiNFO. I didn't hide it -- it just vanished. It also isn't at the bottom of the list of sensors either and it can't be found in the hidden item list either. Anyone have an idea?


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> CPU Fan has disappeared from HWiNFO. I didn't hide it -- it just vanished. It also isn't at the bottom of the list of sensors either and it can't be found in the hidden item list either. Anyone have an idea?


Can you check in something else like SiV to see if it's there?

Check in bios to make sure it's running....


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Can you check in something else like SiV to see if it's there?
> 
> Check in bios to make sure it's running....


I'll need to learn what SiV is.

And the fan speed is read in BIOS just fine so I don't think it's hardware. 

If I do a re-install of HWiNFO will my customizations be lost?

Edit:

I got it fixed by using Restore Original Order. Happy to see that it didn't really change any of my customizations, but returned the missing CPU Fan reading.


----------



## Keith Myers

SIV or System Information Viewer http://rh-software.com is a contemporary to HwInfo64. Both developers work together on figuring out new hardware. But SIV is much more comprehensive of what it can show about your system. Much more, and sometimes that is its most common negative complaint. It can tell you more about your system than you knew possible. It exposes everything in its menus. TMI or information overload is cited a lot. But if you want to have the final arbiter of what information is exposed and how hardware is detected, I believe SIV is the absolute best.


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> SIV or System Information Viewer http://rh-software.com is a contemporary to HwInfo64. Both developers work together on figuring out new hardware. But SIV is much more comprehensive of what it can show about your system. Much more, and sometimes that is its most common negative complaint. It can tell you more about your system than you knew possible. It exposes everything in its menus. TMI or information overload is cited a lot. But if you want to have the final arbiter of what information is exposed and how hardware is detected, I believe SIV is the absolute best.


Ah, yes. I attempted to explore it once.


----------



## mito1172

Keith Myers said:


> SIV or System Information Viewer http://rh-software.com is a contemporary to HwInfo64. Both developers work together on figuring out new hardware. But SIV is much more comprehensive of what it can show about your system. Much more, and sometimes that is its most common negative complaint. It can tell you more about your system than you knew possible. It exposes everything in its menus. TMI or information overload is cited a lot. But if you want to have the final arbiter of what information is exposed and how hardware is detected, I believe SIV is the absolute best.


SIV very nice thank you


----------



## crakej

Got all my bits today EXCEPT my LM. I thought I had some here but can't find it. Might just set up with the stuff they put on the coldplate and sort it out when the LM arrives.

Have found that if I do push/pull (exhausting out the top) on my S36 and want to mount int the top of my Core X5 - but there will be a gap between all my fans and the mount. What should I do? Does a gap matter?


----------



## hurricane28

crakej said:


> Got all my bits today EXCEPT my LM. I thought I had some here but can't find it. Might just set up with the stuff they put on the coldplate and sort it out when the LM arrives.
> 
> Have found that if I do push/pull (exhausting out the top) on my S36 and want to mount int the top of my Core X5 - but there will be a gap between all my fans and the mount. What should I do? Does a gap matter?


Of course, you want to have the tightest seal you can get for optimal performance. Try to use regular screws instead of thumbscrews.


----------



## hurricane28

Some people that know me a little here know that i don't like dust in my case. Now i found an solution which is kinda need. 

I bought me one of these: https://www.itdusters.com/product/xpower-a-5-1000-watt-electric-air-duster-vacuum/

Its really amazing and it blows warm air and it can suck too! I can clean anything i want and it has more than adequate power to blow dust from any surface.


----------



## crakej

hurricane28 said:


> Of course, you want to have the tightest seal you can get for optimal performance. Try to use regular screws instead of thumbscrews.


If i'm going to have push/pull, then this is the only way I can do it - the thumbscrews have the holes I need to put the screws into hold the cooler in place in the top of my case...


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> If i'm going to have push/pull, then this is the only way I can do it - the thumbscrews have the holes I need to put the screws into hold the cooler in place in the top of my case...


I have to do push/pull by installing the fans to the radiator at the same time I am installing the radiator to the case. It's a pain, but it sounds like you'll have to do the same if you don't have a removable panel to attach your radiator to. 

So what I do is use long enough screws that will go through the case then the fans and into the radiator. You'll want the fans absent on the opposite side of the radiator while doing this unless you have massive hands.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I have to do push/pull by installing the fans to the radiator at the same time I am installing the radiator to the case. It's a pain, but it sounds like you'll have to do the same if you don't have a removable panel to attach your radiator to.
> 
> So what I do is use long enough screws that will go through the case then the fans and into the radiator. You'll want the fans absent on the opposite side of the radiator while doing this unless you have massive hands.


Thank you! :applaud: :band:

I don't know why I couldn't see that solution! The Core X5 has rails that the cooler or fans attach to so it will be easy!

Will prob wait until my LM arrives - hopefully tomorrow, but if not i'll just connect everything up and make sure it's all working, do the LM next week....


----------



## CJMitsuki

crakej said:


> Thank you! :applaud: :band:
> 
> I don't know why I couldn't see that solution! The Core X5 has rails that the cooler or fans attach to so it will be easy!
> 
> Will prob wait until my LM arrives - hopefully tomorrow, but if not i'll just connect everything up and make sure it's all working, do the LM next week....


Why not install the rad on the front of the case so that its takes in cold air instead of the warm air when its mounted on the top as exhaust?


----------



## crakej

CJMitsuki said:


> Why not install the rad on the front of the case so that its takes in cold air instead of the warm air when its mounted on the top as exhaust?


I've always had better results this way. I've tried on the top back front, pushing pulling, blowing sucking.... I also have my blueray drive in the way at the front. I've got 2 x 140mm (front and back) and 3 120mm (side) intake fans and will be adding at least another 3 to the base. My GPU is mostly shrouded with hot air being blown out the back of the card, but some does leak into the case.

I might not even do push pull - I might nd up using the Vardars as decent intake fans either blowing down onto MB, or perhaps on the bottom at the front pulling cold air in. Decisions decisions!


----------



## Keith Myers

crakej said:


> I've always had better results this way. I've tried on the top back front, pushing pulling, blowing sucking.... I also have my blueray drive in the way at the front. I've got 2 x 140mm (front and back) and 3 120mm (side) intake fans and will be adding at least another 3 to the base. My GPU is mostly shrouded with hot air being blown out the back of the card, but some does leak into the case.
> 
> I might not even do push pull - I might nd up using the Vardars as decent intake fans either blowing down onto MB, or perhaps on the bottom at the front pulling cold air in. Decisions decisions!


The standard 30mm fan screws are long enough to go through the X5 mounting plate, fans, and still have enough thread to mount to the radiator.

The endless configuration options in the Core X5 and X9 cases are why it is a pleasure to build in them.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I've always had better results this way. I've tried on the top back front, pushing pulling, blowing sucking.... I also have my blueray drive in the way at the front. I've got 2 x 140mm (front and back) and 3 120mm (side) intake fans and will be adding at least another 3 to the base. My GPU is mostly shrouded with hot air being blown out the back of the card, but some does leak into the case.
> 
> I might not even do push pull - I might nd up using the Vardars as decent intake fans either blowing down onto MB, or perhaps on the bottom at the front pulling cold air in. Decisions decisions!


Yeah, I did something crazy yesterday -- I took the feet off my Core P3 and laid it flat. I put the case's back panel on again so it runs the slightest bit warmer in this configuration, but it looks kinda cool. Oh, and I put the plexi back on it so I can put stuff on "top" of the PC now too.


----------



## crakej

Keith Myers said:


> The standard 30mm fan screws are long enough to go through the X5 mounting plate, fans, and still have enough thread to mount to the radiator.
> 
> The endless configuration options in the Core X5 and X9 cases are why it is a pleasure to build in them.


Thanks for confirming this Keith. I'm considering having rad on one side and fans blowing down onto motherboard on the RAM side of things but i'm concerned the rad might take up too much heat from the gpu below it. I'll sleep on it!


----------



## VicsPC

Keith Myers said:


> The standard 30mm fan screws are long enough to go through the X5 mounting plate, fans, and still have enough thread to mount to the radiator.
> 
> The endless configuration options in the Core X5 and X9 cases are why it is a pleasure to build in them.





crakej said:


> Thanks for confirming this Keith. I'm considering having rad on one side and fans blowing down onto motherboard on the RAM side of things but i'm concerned the rad might take up too much heat from the gpu below it. I'll sleep on it!


Yea it's a pleasure to build in em but i found the steel to be incredibly poor quality. Bunch of threads in the steel in my case are already destroyed to the point where the screws just go in and spin haha. Here's a tip that works great, get some small washers and use em when mounting stuff, works out a lot better.


----------



## gupsterg

minal said:


> Out of curiosity, I checked PLL readings by BIOS and the Asus WMI sensor readout:
> 
> Auto or manually setting 1.8V: 1.83V reading
> Manual 1.77V: 1.809V reading
> Manual 1.76V: 1.79V reading
> 
> The input field does not accept increments smaller than 0.01V.
> 
> Are the settings or readings more reliable?


My results.



Spoiler



UEFI set manually to 1.8V









UEFI set manually to 1.77V









UEFI set manually to 1.76V









UEFI set manually to 1.81V











Lowering PLL did kill off 3600MHz RAM, as soon as gone to 1.8V/1.81V all AOK, usually gains in PLL have got me nothing.


----------



## minal

gupsterg said:


> My results.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 255186
> 
> 
> View attachment 255188
> 
> 
> View attachment 255190
> 
> 
> View attachment 255192
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lowering PLL did kill off 3600MHz RAM, as soon as gone to 1.8V/1.81V all AOK, usually gains in PLL have got me nothing.


Thanks for those results. When you mention the UEFI voltage, is that the setting or the reading?


----------



## gupsterg

NP  , UEFI voltage = as set in UEFI manually. Updated that post, so text above image states what PLL was set to  .


----------



## minal

Perfect. Did you also happen to note what the readings were in UEFI?
Your settings in UEFI seem to match pretty well with the HWinfo and DMM readings.


----------



## gupsterg

Sorry I did not note the monitoring data in UEFI.

HWINFO I use with 300ms polling interval, default is 2000ms. My view is the granularity is poor for PLL 1.8V rail for monitoring.

HWINFO within each screenshot was reset and as quick as mouse would move RAM Test was initiated, so the test data is under load. You'll note in the 1.77V test, at idle the text states HWINFO showed 1.766V/1.788V, the multimeter showed only swing of 0.003V.


----------



## Keith Myers

They did not chase out the threads after painting the case parts. So if you try to force a screw into paint clogged holes, you risk cross threading and damaging the threads. Fix is to chase any never used yet hole with a 6-32NC tap. I found I had to chase out the bottom panel threads when I needed to move the power supply brace for fitting a bigger power supply. Thumb screws wouldn't start till I did.

I don't know about the relative quality of the steel used in the case. Seemed very similar to any case I have ever used. I would dread picking the case up with higher quality and I assume much heavier gage steel, the case is a gut buster as it is when fully loaded with gpus and custom water cooling.


----------



## crakej

Spent most of the day doing my cooler upgrade..... is has NOT gone well!...

The pics are of my cpu, which has some legs which seem to have lost their gold! What happened was that when I cam to remove the old cooler, the coldplate was STUCK to the CPU! I mean really stuck. I use LM, and have never had this before, I guess it's the longest i've ever had it in use. Anyway, tried twisting and pulling as others suggested, but hadn't realized that when I tried to remove cooler CPU had come out of slot but was still held in by the lever that locks the CPU in.

Got it out and pins were bent! Having straightened pins I eventually got the CPU to go back in and decided to check it by powering up for a couple of secs to see if post was happening.....it was.

Removed CPU to clean and thought, i'll just check it again to make sure - now I have an instant Code 8, no post, no beeps. Long story short is that I can't tell if this is the MB or the CPU. I include pix of my CPU - I've circled pins that look like they've lost their gold coating, and wondered if this is enough to stop the CPU working? Maybe a leg is broken enough to screw up some essential signal? None are visibly broken though (can anyone see any pins missing?)

Will have to get my Prime x370 Pro out to test the CPU. Whichever way it goes it's going to cost me dear. Was going to get Ryzen 3xxx to put in my C7H, but might have to buy another cpu to keep me going until that happens! Really can't afford this.....what a treat I got myself for my birthday!

So, grrrrrrr. And grrrrrr some more! Still unable to work - got another operation coming next month - so really gonna stretch my c card!


----------



## Ceadderman

There was an issue for early adoption of CVIIHero where iCue software was crashing into UEFI software. Is this still an issue? I will be submitting an order for this board and a K55 and M65 included in my cart and I would like to know so as to adjust my cart if necessary. Thanks.

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## hurricane28

crakej said:


> Spent most of the day doing my cooler upgrade..... is has NOT gone well!...
> 
> The pics are of my cpu, which has some legs which seem to have lost their gold! What happened was that when I cam to remove the old cooler, the coldplate was STUCK to the CPU! I mean really stuck. I use LM, and have never had this before, I guess it's the longest i've ever had it in use. Anyway, tried twisting and pulling as others suggested, but hadn't realized that when I tried to remove cooler CPU had come out of slot but was still held in by the lever that locks the CPU in.
> 
> Got it out and pins were bent! Having straightened pins I eventually got the CPU to go back in and decided to check it by powering up for a couple of secs to see if post was happening.....it was.
> 
> Removed CPU to clean and thought, i'll just check it again to make sure - now I have an instant Code 8, no post, no beeps. Long story short is that I can't tell if this is the MB or the CPU. I include pix of my CPU - I've circled pins that look like they've lost their gold coating, and wondered if this is enough to stop the CPU working? Maybe a leg is broken enough to screw up some essential signal? None are visibly broken though (can anyone see any pins missing?)
> 
> Will have to get my Prime x370 Pro out to test the CPU. Whichever way it goes it's going to cost me dear. Was going to get Ryzen 3xxx to put in my C7H, but might have to buy another cpu to keep me going until that happens! Really can't afford this.....what a treat I got myself for my birthday!
> 
> So, grrrrrrr. And grrrrrr some more! Still unable to work - got another operation coming next month - so really gonna stretch my c card! /forum/images/smilies/frown.gif
> 
> Sorry to hear about your misfortune man. It looks like several pins are dates and indeed lost their gold? Hard to see but if they are damaged I am afraid to say that your CPU is dead.. 😞
> 
> I had similar thing a while back in my 8350 days. I was planning to refresh the Tim but I pulled the CPU right out the socket without much force.. I was lucky and didn't damage anything but I noticed that I used too much Tim which caused more suction than necessary which is the reason why I pulled the CPU out of the socked. Later I used less and it's been good ever since.
> 
> Good luck man.


----------



## crakej

It seems the CPU getting stuck to the coldplate is fairly common with Liquid Metal. It wasn't suction holding it down - the LM had gone off completely - it' was disconcertingly stuck!

If I had known about this I would have carefully levered the block from my CPU!

Anyway, I'm not convinced it's the CPU - even if I did lose some gold - check out this pic! When I was putting the new stand-offs for the new cooler on, I used a pair of narrow nosed pliers to help me turn them in as a couple of them didnt' screw in easily. Near the tip of my DMM probe you will see a tiny inline fuse/capacitor - which is NOT attached to anything! The area I circled green is thew only area I see where it might go - but I need confirmation of this.

Can anyone help? I may be able to solder it back in place if I can find out where it's from!

Going to have to reinstall the X370...after I test the CPU


----------



## nick name

Actually it goes here:


----------



## Ceadderman

crakej said:


> It seems the CPU getting stuck to the coldplate is fairly common with Liquid Metal. It wasn't suction holding it down - the LM had gone off completely - it' was disconcertingly stuck!
> 
> If I had known about this I would have carefully levered the block from my CPU!
> 
> Anyway, I'm not convinced it's the CPU - even if I did lose some gold - check out this pic! When I was putting the new stand-offs for the new cooler on, I used a pair of narrow nosed pliers to help me turn them in as a couple of them didnt' screw in easily. Near the tip of my DMM probe you will see a tiny inline fuse/capacitor - which is NOT attached to anything! The area I circled green is thew only area I see where it might go - but I need confirmation of this.
> 
> Can anyone help? I may be able to solder it back in place if I can find out where it's from!
> 
> Going to have to reinstall the X370...after I test the CPU


Look to the left of the tip of your probe in your pic. It has a spot just above one diode(?) where there are two uncovered trace ends. That's the likeliest spot from what I can see. 

If you increase the size of your pic the two pads are screaming at you... "HERE WE ARE!!!"

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## dkarDaGobert

it looks like the right Asmedia IC on top of the PCI-E is destroyed.


----------



## crakej

Thanks for the help guys - I will continue with this in the morning....


----------



## minal

gupsterg said:


> Sorry I did not note the monitoring data in UEFI.
> 
> HWINFO I use with 300ms polling interval, default is 2000ms. My view is the granularity is poor for PLL 1.8V rail for monitoring.
> 
> HWINFO within each screenshot was reset and as quick as mouse would move RAM Test was initiated, so the test data is under load. You'll note in the 1.77V test, at idle the text states HWINFO showed 1.766V/1.788V, the multimeter showed only swing of 0.003V.


Ok, I noted PLL at idle in UEFI:
(UEFI setting [V], UEFI reading [V], DMM reading [V])
(1.80, 1.831, 1.815)
(1.79, 1.831, 1.802)
(1.78, 1.809, 1.793)
(1.77, 1.809, 1.783)
(1.76, 1.787, 1.773)

Also DRAM:
(1.35, 1.35, 1.351)

And SB:
(1.05, 1.097, 1.115)

And SOC:
(0.90, 0.890, 0.891)

Is the DMM reading supposed to change for VCORE? It was pretty static at 1.37 V while I measured. The UEFI readings varied a bit between ~1.2xx V to ~1.4xx V.

Not sure what to make of the discrepancies between the settings and different readings, at least for PLL and SB. Also not sure of the significance, since my system is working fine. Curiosity just got the better of me.


----------



## VPII

crakej said:


> Thanks for the help guys - I will continue with this in the morning....


I @crakej I had the similar 08 qcode once, but found out it was my own doing. The 08 code will show when the EPS 12V is not connected to the motherboard from the psu.


----------



## gupsterg

​@crakej

OMG, don't think I'd use LM based on this melding action  .

Sorry to read of issues with board/CPU pins  .

The lever/socket really does not provide much in they way of locking CPU in, unlike LGA. It's more of just a grasp so CPU does not fall out, if you get what I mean.

Ref the orange arrow/line I marked on your photo with my board photo in below spoiler.



Spoiler





















@minal

When in UEFI rig is not at idle. UEFI is like mini OS, that is why you may see CPU boosting and VCORE not same as idle in OS. I'll check my VCORE in UEFI, etc. I'll get you a power meter read when my rig sits in UEFI, it is not the same value as in OS from what I recall.

In regard to UEFI setting [V], UEFI reading [V], DMM reading [V] for:-

i) PLL seems as I would see similar.

ii) DRAM that is nice vs my board, my board tends to over volt by ~ +0.05V from set in UEFI vs DMM.

iii) SB you have early batch of board, so experience the same as me, check PSA pretty much near top of OP in ROG C7H thread.

iv) SOC seems as I would see similar.


----------



## elbubi

Hi @elmor / @Silent Scone

This issue is still happening under newest version 1201. Could anybody on BIOS team please, please, PLEASE, take a deeper look at it?

Regards and thanks in advance.




elbubi said:


> Hi @elmor!
> 
> 
> First of all, thanks for your dedication and support. Happy to see agesa 1.0.0.6 is nearly coming, hope it helps improving memory timmings a bit.
> 
> I'm overall satisfied with my CH7 Wi-Fi performance, altough faster boot times would be nice tbh.
> 
> The only "bug" I found is that Intel Ethernet port stops responding to WOL magic packets after aprox. 24hs of computer being shutdown in power-off state (S5). In S3 it works just fine no matter how long it has been sleeping, but in S5 it works for some period (sometimes a day, sometimes less/more), but then it stops responding and only physical power-on is possible.
> 
> I have another machine on my LAN with asus board and intel nic (olders one though), with exactly same os and settings, and it doesn't behave this way.
> 
> Having use Wake on Lan/Wan for more than 10 years, I'm aware of all the "tricks" to make it work under power-off state (green lan, power saving options, windows fast boot, arp/mac fix binding entry on router's side, open ports, ddns, etc.), so I'm 99.9% confident is not an end user issue.
> 
> I've tried 5 different driver versions so I kind of ruled that out too, only remaining thing to think of is a BIOS issue.
> 
> I post it here cause I really don't know how to reach Asus engineers to have them look at this in order to have it solved.
> 
> 
> Kindest regards and thanks in advance!


----------



## crakej

Thanks for all the help guys....going to attempt to solder it back on now.

Re: voltages: using my new DMM all voltages measure at probit point LESS than I enter them in the bios except Ram and VDDCPU which read correctly.

Do I have one of the early boards i've read about somewhere? It's consistent so I can deal with it, but it would be nice for bios and WMI to readout correct values like my old X30 did quite nicely.

Speaking of my old X370 - I tried powering the board last night but it didn't power up!


----------



## crakej

elbubi said:


> Hi @elmor / @Silent Scone
> 
> This issue is still happening under newest version 1201. Could anybody on BIOS team please, please, PLEASE, take a deeper look at it?
> 
> Regards and thanks in advance.


Elmor is not with ASUS any more, though he does still give advice where he can. @Silent Scone is MIA - you could try raja on the ROG forums.... Hopefully someone can help you. Failing that, the only thing you can do is a bug report for support.

Sorry I can't help more!


----------



## gupsterg

Khelben said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From what i've read 1.5 is the no-go over zone given by AMD and given my pc habits i would like to stay as close to 1.4 as possible.


Firstly sorry for delayed response to PM, I have chosen to reply here.

As stated to you by others in thread, which you also stated in PM, this is normal behaviour for Ryzen, this is correct.

I believe you need clarification on the monitoring data you are viewing.

The max column in HWINFO is showing max reached at any given time during the monitoring session.

Your CPU was not sustaining a ~4.3GHz all cores OC, so it was not getting sustained 1.5V to all cores. What's shown in your screenshot is max boost occurring on any single core, then also the max VID request. The max clock / VID could have occurred at any differing time during the monitoring session, the data is not linked, it is just max for any value at any time during monitoring session. Be aware monitoring data even when using lowered polling interval can not show what is going on as quick as it's occurring. You may find lowering the polling interval in HWINFO from 2000ms to 300ms gives you better idea on what is going on.

Now look at the current section. Core 5 reached ~4.3GHz, VID request was ~1.481V. VID readback is a request not effective voltage (VCORE), we only see one VCORE in monitoring data, I believe individual cores effective VCORE is not exposed.

Statuscore was a nice app to select/load, single/multiple cores, sadly on W10 as the legacy driver install is not allowed it does not work. You could use P95 to load single/multiple cores and see the monitoring data to gain better insight. I'll aim to post some tests ASAP  .


----------



## elmor

crakej said:


> It seems the CPU getting stuck to the coldplate is fairly common with Liquid Metal. It wasn't suction holding it down - the LM had gone off completely - it' was disconcertingly stuck!
> 
> If I had known about this I would have carefully levered the block from my CPU!
> 
> Anyway, I'm not convinced it's the CPU - even if I did lose some gold - check out this pic! When I was putting the new stand-offs for the new cooler on, I used a pair of narrow nosed pliers to help me turn them in as a couple of them didnt' screw in easily. Near the tip of my DMM probe you will see a tiny inline fuse/capacitor - which is NOT attached to anything! The area I circled green is thew only area I see where it might go - but I need confirmation of this.
> 
> Can anyone help? I may be able to solder it back in place if I can find out where it's from!
> 
> Going to have to reinstall the X370...after I test the CPU





crakej said:


> Spent most of the day doing my cooler upgrade..... is has NOT gone well!...
> 
> The pics are of my cpu, which has some legs which seem to have lost their gold! What happened was that when I cam to remove the old cooler, the coldplate was STUCK to the CPU! I mean really stuck. I use LM, and have never had this before, I guess it's the longest i've ever had it in use. Anyway, tried twisting and pulling as others suggested, but hadn't realized that when I tried to remove cooler CPU had come out of slot but was still held in by the lever that locks the CPU in.
> 
> Got it out and pins were bent! Having straightened pins I eventually got the CPU to go back in and decided to check it by powering up for a couple of secs to see if post was happening.....it was.
> 
> Removed CPU to clean and thought, i'll just check it again to make sure - now I have an instant Code 8, no post, no beeps. Long story short is that I can't tell if this is the MB or the CPU. I include pix of my CPU - I've circled pins that look like they've lost their gold coating, and wondered if this is enough to stop the CPU working? Maybe a leg is broken enough to screw up some essential signal? None are visibly broken though (can anyone see any pins missing?)
> 
> Will have to get my Prime x370 Pro out to test the CPU. Whichever way it goes it's going to cost me dear. Was going to get Ryzen 3xxx to put in my C7H, but might have to buy another cpu to keep me going until that happens! Really can't afford this.....what a treat I got myself for my birthday!
> 
> So, grrrrrrr. And grrrrrr some more! Still unable to work - got another operation coming next month - so really gonna stretch my c card!





nick name said:


> Actually it goes here:


There's could be quite a bit of physical damage to that board, not sure if it's repairable without sending it to a professional. Even then there would be no guarantees.

Marked in yellow below

1. It's difficult to tell if these are some kind of fibers or a scratch + crack of the chip package. Possibly also a bit of a ripped trace or some component at the bottom right?
2. Exposed copper/trace or a fragment of some kind?
3. Bent pin, shouldn't cause any issue
4. Missing 10uF/16V decoupling capacitor (should work without it)


----------



## nick name

elmor said:


> There's could be quite a bit of physical damage to that board, not sure if it's repairable without sending it to a professional. Even then there would be no guarantees.
> 
> Marked in yellow below
> 
> 1. It's difficult to tell if these are some kind of fibers or a scratch + crack of the chip package. Possibly also a bit of a ripped trace or some component at the bottom right?
> 2. Exposed copper/trace or a fragment of some kind?
> 3. Bent pin, shouldn't cause any issue
> 4. Missing 10uF/16V decoupling capacitor (should work without it)


#1 kinda looks like fibers to me and hopefully, if he can't repair #4, it'll keep on trucking without it. 
@crakej

Did you figure out why your X370 won't power on? Or was it due to your CPU being damaged? Fingers crossed it isn't your CPU. That would suck.


----------



## elbubi

crakej said:


> Elmor is not with ASUS any more, though he does still give advice where he can. @Silent Scone is MIA - you could try raja on the ROG forums.... Hopefully someone can help you. Failing that, the only thing you can do is a bug report for support.
> 
> Sorry I can't help more!


Thanks for the hint. Followed your adviced and posted on ROG Forums (https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?109156-Ch7-wifi-wake-on-lan-issue).

Good Luck with your cpu/mobo!


----------



## crakej

elmor said:


> There's could be quite a bit of physical damage to that board, not sure if it's repairable without sending it to a professional. Even then there would be no guarantees.
> 
> Marked in yellow below
> 
> 1. It's difficult to tell if these are some kind of fibers or a scratch + crack of the chip package. Possibly also a bit of a ripped trace or some component at the bottom right?
> 2. Exposed copper/trace or a fragment of some kind?
> 3. Bent pin, shouldn't cause any issue
> 4. Missing 10uF/16V decoupling capacitor (should work without it)


Hey @elmor! Good to hear from you man!

1 Is a fiber - yay!
2 Yes, that looks exposed - any recommendation? hadn't seen that.
3 Had seen it - almost forgot while worrying about the rest!
4 I found a guy who soldered it back on for me! Blinding! - However, what looked like an even smaller diode (or resistor perhaps) right next to it suffered at my shaky hand - when the guy fixed it he said the component was missing. When I tried soldering I messed up and hadn't realized it had gone - hoping i'll be ok without it. It would lie right under the bottom yellow line of box 4, passing by the side of the capacitor that was missing.

Thanks for putting me straight!

I'm guessing that my Code 8 was caused by the 12v rail going down - closely followed by the 5 volt rail, so my X370 should be ok if all else fails.


My problems did not end there however. My (new!) power supply is also *dead* and I've had to order another as they don't use reusable fuses any more (bloody outrageous if you ask me!) so could not be repaired,.... unless anyone know anything I don't?

When PSU arrives I can test both boards and the poor CPU.....assuming one of my boards will power up.

I'm really stressed - I'm such an idiot putting a pair of pliers anywhere near my PCB - I would never do that when working on anyone else's computer. Never. I'm still unable to work (got another operation on my back coming up on the 7th) and havn't even finished paying for this build


----------



## minal

gupsterg said:


> @*minal*
> 
> When in UEFI rig is not at idle. UEFI is like mini OS, that is why you may see CPU boosting and VCORE not same as idle in OS. I'll check my VCORE in UEFI, etc. I'll get you a power meter read when my rig sits in UEFI, it is not the same value as in OS from what I recall.
> 
> In regard to UEFI setting [V], UEFI reading [V], DMM reading [V] for:-
> 
> i) PLL seems as I would see similar.
> 
> ii) DRAM that is nice vs my board, my board tends to over volt by ~ +0.05V from set in UEFI vs DMM.
> 
> iii) SB you have early batch of board, so experience the same as me, check PSA pretty much near top of OP in ROG C7H thread.
> 
> iv) SOC seems as I would see similar.


 Ah, I should have at least glanced at my UPS's power readings while in UEFI... Next time. But yes, I understand that "idle" in UEFI isn't the same as idle in OS, where VCORE can drop to ~0.7V or even half that according to asus_wmi_sensors. What confused me is that the VCORE reading was not varying on the DMM even though the UEFI reading changed a bit. Is that expected?

As for SB, thanks for the reminder about the PSA. I had read that long ago but forgot about it. Good to know that discrepancies seem to be due to reading/probing points. 

Curiosity is satisfied... at least for now.


----------



## gupsterg

@crakej

Blimey, IIRC you only got a new PSU while back.
@minal

OS at idle I see ~70W on wall plug meter for total rig exc.monitor. Whilst sat in UEFI I see ~150W  , which is bonkers IMO. Something like RAM Test running on rig is ~175W.

I sat for ~2mins watching the monitoring data for CPU VCORE in UEFI, I see range of 1.466V-1.492V, mostly ~1.474V. DMM on the other hand is reasonably steady ~1.472V, I see a very mild swing range of 1.469V - 1.474V.

My rig was using UEFI 1002 at the time, set as PE: Default, PBO: Enabled, Scalar: 7x, 3600MHz 1T GDMD using The Stilt 3466MHz timings, SOC: 1.075V VDIMM: 1.385V.

Rig HW is, 2700X, C7H, 2x F4-3200C14-8GVK, HD 5850, SATA SSD 500GB, DDC PWM, 3x P12 PWM.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> @crakej
> 
> Blimey, IIRC you only got a new PSU while back.


I know! I really have to learn to treat my PC the same way I treat other peoples' PCs! I am p*ssed with how they've made the PSUs totally UN-serviceable - at least you used to be able to replace the fuses fairly easily.

Hopefully things will look up today - going to test both boards and get my new cooler install finished. If CH7 is working I will use it of course, but always going to worry knowing a resistor is missing!


----------



## ComansoRowlett

@crakej Sorry to hear what has happened, I always check in here to see how you guys are getting on with mem OC. Namely you, since you seem to experiment a lot! Helps me work out if I can do anything for mine too, although I haven't bothered to actually do any mem OC since November now and just left it with the settings I managed. Either way, hope you can get back up and running, I need your research! Haha.


----------



## nick name

I need a little help. My PC is starting to fail to POST and it is with my day-to-day settings. Nothing stands out to link the behavior to other than trying out 3600MHz at 14-14-14-14 again and then reverting back to 3540MHz at 14-14-14-14. 

The POST codes I am seeing are E6, 58, 06, and 03. All of those are with the white LED. Anyone have any ideas? The manual shows most of the codes as reserved.


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> I know! I really have to learn to treat my PC the same way I treat other peoples' PCs! I am p*ssed with how they've made the PSUs totally UN-serviceable - at least you used to be able to replace the fuses fairly easily.
> 
> Hopefully things will look up today - going to test both boards and get my new cooler install finished. If CH7 is working I will use it of course, but always going to worry knowing a resistor is missing!


Sorry to hear you have issues  you really have bad luck there!




nick name said:


> I need a little help. My PC is starting to fail to POST and it is with my day-to-day settings. Nothing stands out to link the behavior to other than trying out 3600MHz at 14-14-14-14 again and then reverting back to 3540MHz at 14-14-14-14.
> 
> The POST codes I am seeing are E6, 58, 06, and 03. All of those are with the white LED. Anyone have any ideas? The manual shows most of the codes as reserved.


Just save your settings/profile to a USB then re-flash bios again. See if you can start with defaults. Then with a quick simple mem oc. If no issues you can try to load profile from your USB again.!


----------



## nick name

majestynl said:


> -snip-
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just save your settings/profile to a USB then re-flash bios again. See if you can start with defaults. Then with a quick simple mem oc. If no issues you can try to load profile from your USB again.!


TBH -- I was a little concerned with trying a re-flash because I was still failing to POST after using the clear CMOS button and my concern was a failure during the re-flash causing things to get worse. However, I have since summoned some courage and re-flashed . . . successfully. So hopefully it's been resolved.


----------



## nick name

dkarDaGobert said:


> delete
> wrong subboard


Damn it. Now I'm curious.


----------



## majestynl

nick name said:


> TBH -- I was a little concerned with trying a re-flash because I was still failing to POST after using the clear CMOS button and my concern was a failure during the re-flash causing things to get worse. However, I have since summoned some courage and re-flashed . . . successfully. So hopefully it's been resolved.


im glad it fixed your issue!


----------



## minal

gupsterg said:


> @*minal*
> 
> OS at idle I see ~70W on wall plug meter for total rig exc.monitor. Whilst sat in UEFI I see ~150W  , which is bonkers IMO. Something like RAM Test running on rig is ~175W.
> 
> I sat for ~2mins watching the monitoring data for CPU VCORE in UEFI, I see range of 1.466V-1.492V, mostly ~1.474V. DMM on the other hand is reasonably steady ~1.472V, I see a very mild swing range of 1.469V - 1.474V.
> 
> My rig was using UEFI 1002 at the time, set as PE: Default, PBO: Enabled, Scalar: 7x, 3600MHz 1T GDMD using The Stilt 3466MHz timings, SOC: 1.075V VDIMM: 1.385V.
> 
> Rig HW is, 2700X, C7H, 2x F4-3200C14-8GVK, HD 5850, SATA SSD 500GB, DDC PWM, 3x P12 PWM.


It is pretty stunning how much power/voltage is used in UEFI when it would seem like it should be close to zero load. Maybe it's the lack of power saving. After all, in OS the VCORE can drop to less than half of what it is in UEFI. Thanks for taking the time to make these observations!


----------



## Keith Myers

Sorry to hear of your misfortune crakej. I managed to scrub off a pepper flake sized SMD resistor near the back of the cpu socket on a X370 Prime Pro board while I was trying to remove the mastic from double sided foam tape that I use to mount a 40mm socket fan on my AMD boards. I actually found the resistor among the scrubbings in the trash after an hour with a magnifying glass. But I totally failed to solder it back onto the trace. I didn't have a SMD workstation kit. The resistor was needed to enable the onboard LAN chip apparently. Everything else works but now have to use a WiFi PCIe card for connectivity.


----------



## nick name

@crakej Any progress?


----------



## CeeKnocker

Hi guys, I'm a new owner of a 2700x + C7Hw... currently battling the "random, hard shutdown with nothing in the event viewer" issue that I've seen documented a few times early on in this thread. 

It happens at idle/load/full load with impunity, as a few people have documented. I have just removed a corsair H115i and thus removed corsair link, however it's still happening. 

I'm currently on page 69 (dudes!) of the thread, gathering as much info on this as I can, but could anyone can save me a few hundred pages and let me know if there has been a definitive fix for this so far?

Currently running the latest BIOS, and I've tried cycling through the different power plans as per Kyle @ OCP, and obviously removing corsair link.

I'll try removing all trace of any monitoring/RGB software that may be hiding.

I'm thinking also maybe a new fresh Windows install might help, any further tips/advice before I do so?

Thanks as always! 

EDIT - also checked for shorts, re-seated all cabling, no OC except DOCP enabled running at 3200/auto (standard profile for my Trident Z 3200C14)

And - to clarify this is the hard shutdown, meaning I need to kill the power to my PSU (Dark Power Pro 11 1000w) and drain the residual power before I can switch on again. Never blue screened, never crashes, just hard off.


----------



## crakej

So I had to buy a CPU to test my board as local computer shop that had offered to test my 1700x took all day to tell me my CPU is FAKE! I had explained you can't read Txt on CPU as liquid metal had coated the surface which was also keyed. They obviously know nothing of LM..

Edit:When I picked up the CPU this morning I asked the guy (who had refused to put it in one of his motherboards) what he thought I was doing? Planting a virus on his motherboard? I've used this place for 15+ years. Never have I experienced such incompetence. I told them i only needed to know if it posts. So I've had to buy a new CPU to test things myself.

I Have a new Ryzen 3 2200g. Sadly it confirms my CH7 is dead. This is costing so much. Only way I can pay is c card as not working.

So, do I minimize expense and get a 60 pound m board then upgrade to Ch8 when it comes? Then get new CPU in a few months... Or...

Replace the CH7 now and keep it until I get new CPU?

Of course it may well be that my 1700x is fine, but won't know this until I get new board.

What do you guys think?

I'm glad I've been of help to some here. It would be a shame if I have to get another board. Part of what sways me is just that... I get lots of help too and peeps on this forum are pretty supportive of each other.

Of coarse, if @[email protected] wants someone to test their CH8 I would humbly accept the challenge!

Back down here on earth meanwhile.... I'll let you knows what happens, but I can't be without computer For yet another day! 

Thanks for everyone's help!


----------



## ComansoRowlett

crakej said:


> So I had to buy a CPU to test my board as local computer shop that had offered to test my 1700x took all day to tell me my CPU is FAKE! I had explained you can't read Txt on CPU as liquid metal had coated the surface which was also keyed. They obviously know nothing of LM..
> 
> Edit:When I picked up the CPU this morning I asked the guy (who had refused to put it in one of his motherboards) what he thought I was doing? Planting a virus on his motherboard? I've used this place for 15+ years. Never have I experienced such incompetence. I told them i only needed to know if it posts. So I've had to buy a new CPU to test things myself.
> 
> I Have a new Ryzen 3 2200g. Sadly it confirms my CH7 is dead. This is costing so much. Only way I can pay is c card as not working.
> 
> So, do I minimize expense and get a 60 pound m board then upgrade to Ch8 when it comes? Then get new CPU in a few months... Or...
> 
> Replace the CH7 now and keep it until I get new CPU?
> 
> Of course it may well be that my 1700x is fine, but won't know this until I get new board.
> 
> What do you guys think?
> 
> I'm glad I've been of help to some here. It would be a shame if I have to get another board. Part of what sways me is just that... I get lots of help too and peeps on this forum are pretty supportive of each other.
> 
> Of coarse, if @[email protected] wants someone to test their CH8 I would humbly accept the challenge!
> 
> Back down here on earth meanwhile.... I'll let you knows what happens, but I can't be without computer For yet another day!
> 
> Thanks for everyone's help!


Damn that really sucks! And well, depending what new board you get depends on how patient can you be. Like it's roughly gonna be 4-5 months until we see Zen 2 emerge so you may well be best off with a Crosshair VII. It should be more than competent I should think to handle at least a 12 core if it happens to come to market. I know with the cheaper boards (namely Asus) you are usually locked to like 3000MHz memory due to the boards memory layout of the board, could not exceed this on an X370 pro or a B350 plus I think it was (I previously owned the X370, and the other board was for a friend) and I was using the same kit I am now which can happily do 3600 CL14 at least. Anyway thats my thoughts, hopefully it doesn't set you back too much! And well if it happens your 1700 doesn't work (hope it does for your sake) you can go nuts with the 2200G


----------



## crakej

ComansoRowlett said:


> Damn that really sucks! And well, depending what new board you get depends on how patient can you be. Like it's roughly gonna be 4-5 months until we see Zen 2 emerge so you may well be best off with a Crosshair VII. It should be more than competent I should think to handle at least a 12 core if it happens to come to market. I know with the cheaper boards (namely Asus) you are usually locked to like 3000MHz memory due to the boards memory layout of the board, could not exceed this on an X370 pro or a B350 plus I think it was (I previously owned the X370, and the other board was for a friend) and I was using the same kit I am now which can happily do 3600 CL14 at least. Anyway thats my thoughts, hopefully it doesn't set you back too much! And well if it happens your 1700 doesn't work (hope it does for your sake) you can go nuts with the 2200G


I think you may be right - I won't be happy if I can't OC my RAM like I could. It would be interesting to play with the 4 core 2200g as I've not played with Ryzen 2xxx CPUs yet - will be interesting to see how well the mem copes with the 7nm versus 12nm K17 memory controller.

I'm just feeling sick that I have to pay £250. Again


----------



## crakej

New Ch7 coming tomorrow.

 

Edit: I did more teesting with new cpu in place. When I switch on it stops at code 8. I measured the voltages at the probit points. PLL was 0.1v, vcore ans SoC were 0v.

I have no idea how this happened other than that tiny missing component - I may give it to the guy that did the repair to see if he can get it going.

This is such a mess - I wonder if I plugged a cable from my RM1000 into my EVGA when testing. What I do know is that when I was testing the board iinitially, there wasn;t an error 8.

Let this be a lesson to anyone - don't rush, use the CORRECT tools, and don't take any risks that you you wouldn't take on others hardware!


----------



## nick name

@crakej I'm sorry to hear that. Maybe this new CH7 is gonna be a better overclocker? That would be fun. Perhaps Buildzoid could have fun with your broken CH7 on his YouTube channel?

Separately, I ran into the problem I thought I cured with a BIOS re-flash. PC is failing to POST and displaying the white LED and one of the codes: E6, 58, 06, 0d, 03. This time it persisted after another BIOS re-flash.

Edit:

I'd run a search, but I can't remember enough details -- what is the program to cleanly flash a BIOS? I believe it removes the old and flashes a new?


----------



## nick name

CeeKnocker said:


> Hi guys, I'm a new owner of a 2700x + C7Hw... currently battling the "random, hard shutdown with nothing in the event viewer" issue that I've seen documented a few times early on in this thread.
> 
> It happens at idle/load/full load with impunity, as a few people have documented. I have just removed a corsair H115i and thus removed corsair link, however it's still happening.
> 
> I'm currently on page 69 (dudes!) of the thread, gathering as much info on this as I can, but could anyone can save me a few hundred pages and let me know if there has been a definitive fix for this so far?
> 
> Currently running the latest BIOS, and I've tried cycling through the different power plans as per Kyle @ OCP, and obviously removing corsair link.
> 
> I'll try removing all trace of any monitoring/RGB software that may be hiding.
> 
> I'm thinking also maybe a new fresh Windows install might help, any further tips/advice before I do so?
> 
> Thanks as always!
> 
> EDIT - also checked for shorts, re-seated all cabling, no OC except DOCP enabled running at 3200/auto (standard profile for my Trident Z 3200C14)
> 
> And - to clarify this is the hard shutdown, meaning I need to kill the power to my PSU (Dark Power Pro 11 1000w) and drain the residual power before I can switch on again. Never blue screened, never crashes, just hard off.



Are you using any form of ASUS AI Suite?


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> @crakej I'm sorry to hear that. Maybe this new CH7 is gonna be a better overclocker? That would be fun. Perhaps Buildzoid could have fun with your broken CH7 on his YouTube channel?
> 
> Separately, I ran into the problem I thought I cured with a BIOS re-flash. PC is failing to POST and displaying the white LED and one of the codes: E6, 58, 06, 0d, 03. This time it persisted after another BIOS re-flash.
> 
> Edit:
> 
> I'd run a search, but I can't remember enough details -- what is the program to cleanly flash a BIOS? I believe it removes the old and flashes a new?


Afuefix.exe just on way out but you'll find it here if you searh. Find the thread about how to flash modded bios.


----------



## Ceadderman

Just picked up this board and Monoblock yesterday. 

Along with(thanks to b-die finder)...

G.SKILL TridentZ Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3200 (PC4 25600) Intel Z370 Platform Desktop Memory Model F4-3200C14D-16GTZSK. 

A little pricey given the RAM pricing projections but I simply couldn't wait. I need my system build to start soon. Only thing left to get is my case. Unfortunately I couldn't get that for the price I intended to get it at so that could wait. Especially when I got a real nice price on Streacoms open bench table recently reviewed by Blue Devil and Tech Jesus. I got that in black and it should be here soon. 

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## hurricane28

crakej said:


> So I had to buy a CPU to test my board as local computer shop that had offered to test my 1700x took all day to tell me my CPU is FAKE! I had explained you can't read Txt on CPU as liquid metal had coated the surface which was also keyed. They obviously know nothing of LM..
> 
> Edit:When I picked up the CPU this morning I asked the guy (who had refused to put it in one of his motherboards) what he thought I was doing? Planting a virus on his motherboard? I've used this place for 15+ years. Never have I experienced such incompetence. I told them i only needed to know if it posts. So I've had to buy a new CPU to test things myself.
> 
> I Have a new Ryzen 3 2200g. Sadly it confirms my CH7 is dead. This is costing so much. Only way I can pay is c card as not working.
> 
> So, do I minimize expense and get a 60 pound m board then upgrade to Ch8 when it comes? Then get new CPU in a few months... Or...
> 
> Replace the CH7 now and keep it until I get new CPU?
> 
> Of course it may well be that my 1700x is fine, but won't know this until I get new board.
> 
> What do you guys think?
> 
> I'm glad I've been of help to some here. It would be a shame if I have to get another board. Part of what sways me is just that... I get lots of help too and peeps on this forum are pretty supportive of each other.
> 
> Of coarse, if @[email protected] wants someone to test their CH8 I would humbly accept the challenge!
> 
> Back down here on earth meanwhile.... I'll let you knows what happens, but I can't be without computer For yet another day!
> 
> Thanks for everyone's help!


Sorry to hear about your problems man.. I wish i could help. 

The thing what i would do is to get second hand C7H for as cheap as i can find and than upgrade to newer motherboard when it releases.


----------



## CeeKnocker

nick name said:


> Are you using any form of ASUS AI Suite?


No, I opted out of all the ASUS software, and started again from scratch last night. BIOS flash, basic (DOCP 3200/14) ram clocks, fresh win10 install with just chipset drivers, GPU, audio and lan/wifi, then origin/steam and started rolling in my games overnight. 
This morning, it was still up! Sitting pretty, something it hasn't wanted to do with the cocktail of monitoring/RGB/fan controlling software I had on there before... I'm really hoping this is a good sign 

Installed coretemp to show me what the CPU was doing, looked like a couple of cores are happy to spin up to 4.3 on demand using the windows balanced power plan, that is more than enough for me for now - to have a system that won't randomly shut itself off. Once stability is confirmed, I'll have a proper play.

Also before even connecting up to the big bad internets, I had run the debloat/remove telemetry script from here:
https://github.com/Sycnex/Windows10Debloater

Well worth a look, especially the GUI based one. Some peoples powershell skills are truly AWESOME!

Anyway I'll report back if the issue returns... still enjoying all the tips and advice in this thread, up to page 156


----------



## VicsPC

So my PC just froze, rebooted it and was greeted with a code 58 on the debug. Tried reseating ram and reseating CPU same code. Put in my 1700x and system booted no problem. I think my 2700x might have given up ghost .


----------



## crakej

Rebuilding my PC at last! Here's what I can report:

My RM1000 power supply seems to be fine, so will put it back in and sell the new EVGA 850w (minus the nice Velcro cable ties!)

My 1700x appears to be fine as well! No screen connected yet so not 100% certain yet. Yes, I will use LM again, now I know how it can stick. I know better how to get the coldplate off it now without damaging the CPU pins.

Of course, now I have a Ryzen+ part here I kinda want to do some tests with it in the memory dept (my cpu is definitely faster than the 2200g!) - interested to see how the K17 runs at 7nm with my set-up. I should probably just sell it!

I'm interested to see how the power readings are on this boards as well as most peoples bios/wmi readings are above what's set in bios whereas mine (mostly) reported lower.

Will update later


----------



## Ceadderman

Instead of running AISuite has anyone tried running Speedfan 4.52?

Works with Windows 10 and scans your board for all relavent headers including sensor headers...

http://www.almico.com/speedfan.php

I am considering running it since I know full well how buggy AISuite is. I liked it when I was running my CIVFormula system 24/7 but I never tried Speedfan. :thinking:

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## crakej

Ceadderman said:


> Instead of running AISuite has anyone tried running Speedfan 4.52?
> 
> Works with Windows 10 and scans your board for all relavent headers including sensor headers...
> 
> http://www.almico.com/speedfan.php
> 
> I am considering running it since I know full well how buggy AISuite is. I liked it when I was running my CIVFormula system 24/7 but I never tried Speedfan. :thinking:
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


I've always used AISuite - no problems here unless i've run something else, like HWInfo or Aida64 a the same time. HWInfo is ok now except if AISuite is open, in which case all the WMI values freeze (In HWInfo) after a while.


----------



## nick name

CeeKnocker said:


> -snip-
> 
> Installed coretemp to show me what the CPU was doing, looked like a couple of cores are happy to spin up to 4.3 on demand using the windows balanced power plan, that is more than enough for me for now - to have a system that won't randomly shut itself off. Once stability is confirmed, I'll have a proper play.
> 
> Also before even connecting up to the big bad internets, I had run the debloat/remove telemetry script from here:
> https://github.com/Sycnex/Windows10Debloater
> 
> -snip-


I think everyone in here would recommend HWiNFO above everything else. You should try it. I'm not familiar with what coretemp is so I can't say which is better though. 

And I use Spybot's Anti-Beacon for my Win 10 telemetry blocking. Do you know how your choice compares? 



VicsPC said:


> So my PC just froze, rebooted it and was greeted with a code 58 on the debug. Tried reseating ram and reseating CPU same code. Put in my 1700x and system booted no problem. I think my 2700x might have given up ghost .


I've mentioned earlier about my new POST failures and code 58 is one of the ones I've seen. Also, codes E6, 06, 0d, and 03. All with the white debug LED. I believe it's somewhat memory related as using the safe-boot button on the motherboard seems to get past it, but the clear CMOS button had some POST failures after its use. 



crakej said:


> Rebuilding my PC at last! Here's what I can report:
> 
> -snip-
> 
> Of course, now I have a Ryzen+ part here I kinda want to do some tests with it in the memory dept (my cpu is definitely faster than the 2200g!) - interested to see how the K17 runs at 7nm with my set-up. I should probably just sell it!
> 
> -snip-


Glad to hear there is some good news. 

Aren't the 2200G and 2400G based off of 1st gen Ryzen or is that just the laptop APUs?


----------



## crakej

Got my machine back together at last! No OCing yet, but here's what I noticed with new board (and it is pretty new, comes with bios 1103)

Got NVMEs in both slots, but only one is working - does using 2 use some of the lanes from the graphics card?

Voltages: All are higher than they used to read on my old board, so I guess the same as everyone elses now then? Thats going to be confusing when I start OCing! Do I remember reading that some early boards reported voltages low??

I've decided to make sure the 1700x is running properly before I decide exactly what to do with the 2200g, which i'll probably sell or maybe keep for a spare.

I'm running nice and cool - as cool as 22c idle.

More updates when i've done some testing and OCing.


----------



## VicsPC

nick name said:


> I think everyone in here would recommend HWiNFO above everything else. You should try it. I'm not familiar with what coretemp is so I can't say which is better though.
> 
> And I use Spybot's Anti-Beacon for my Win 10 telemetry blocking. Do you know how your choice compares?
> 
> 
> 
> I've mentioned earlier about my new POST failures and code 58 is one of the ones I've seen. Also, codes E6, 06, 0d, and 03. All with the white debug LED. I believe it's somewhat memory related as using the safe-boot button on the motherboard seems to get past it, but the clear CMOS button had some POST failures after its use.
> 
> 
> 
> Glad to hear there is some good news.
> 
> Aren't the 2200G and 2400G based off of 1st gen Ryzen or is that just the laptop APUs?


Yea but why would my 1700x work and 2700x not work lol. I haven't even updated the BIOS or anything, tried clearing CMOS a couple times and didn't solve anyhting but the 1700x worked. My pc hard froze then i restarted it and instant Code 58. Not sure how else to fix it, i put in my 1700x. Going to try to RMA the 2700x only thing i can think of.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Glad to hear there is some good news.
> 
> Aren't the 2200G and 2400G based off of 1st gen Ryzen or is that just the laptop APUs?


Me too!

Yes, forgot 2200 is Ryzen 1 - I was thinking of 2500 because it has Vega GFX, but 2200g did only come out last year... def selling it! Nice and pristine, it will be on eBay tomorrow 

As for boot failures, white light signifies something is wrong with VGA/GFX, though 58 is to do with CPU cache I think, so that would be strange to have together.

Edit: Code 58 is 'Possibly CPU self test failed, or CPU cache error'.


----------



## VicsPC

crakej said:


> Me too!
> 
> Yes, forgot 2200 is Ryzen 1 - I was thinking of 2500 because it has Vega GFX, but 2200g did only come out last year... def selling it! Nice and pristine, it will be on eBay tomorrow
> 
> As for boot failures, white light signifies something is wrong with VGA/GFX, though 58 is to do with CPU cache I think, so that would be strange to have together.
> 
> Edit: Code 58 is 'Possibly CPU self test failed, or CPU cache error'.


Yea i had 58 and white light. Tried reseating CPU and ram and no gone, put in my 1700x booted no problem. Ill try to boot with a single ram stick tomorrow with my 2700x and see if it solves anything. The fact that i had a hard crash and then the code 58 I don't know. Memory errors would at least give a blue screen so Im unsure what it is. As of right now the 1700x has been running a good 6hrs and played some games and a couple restarts with no issue so idk. I doubt my 2700x is dead but what else could it be?


----------



## crakej

VicsPC said:


> Yea i had 58 and white light. Tried reseating CPU and ram and no gone, put in my 1700x booted no problem. Ill try to boot with a single ram stick tomorrow with my 2700x and see if it solves anything. The fact that i had a hard crash and then the code 58 I don't know. Memory errors would at least give a blue screen so Im unsure what it is. As of right now the 1700x has been running a good 6hrs and played some games and a couple restarts with no issue so idk. I doubt my 2700x is dead but what else could it be?


Have you got another display card you could try? As unlikely as it is, the white light would usually indicate the VGA subsystem so might as well`rule it out. I have a feeling there may be a problem with the 2700x though seeing as 1700x boots ok. Is it doing this with default bios settings?


----------



## VicsPC

crakej said:


> Have you got another display card you could try? As unlikely as it is, the white light would usually indicate the VGA subsystem so might as well`rule it out. I have a feeling there may be a problem with the 2700x though seeing as 1700x boots ok. Is it doing this with default bios settings?


I'm water cooled so would make it a complete PITA to try it, it's what i thought as well as my vega 64 didn't have its usage lights on while booting so i thought it was that, but putting the 1700x and having it boot right away and working in games without issues is what makes me think something is up with the 2700x. Even booted up this morning just fine without issues.

Default BIOS settings made no difference, first thing i tried was clearing CMOS a couple times and rebooting still got 58. I'm at a loss but usually replacing a part with a known working one and it solving the issue usually decides the culprit. Unless someone else thinks it might be something else i think its RMA time.

So put the 2700x in my crosshair vi, plugged the 24pin and 8pin and push the start button on the mobo nothing happens, i had this problem testing out my vii when i first go it would not boot without the case power button being plugged in was weird. Did the same to my vi with the box and mobo next to my case and even plugged in my sata drive and just doesnt turn on. CPU ready light changed from red to green but nothing, really wish i could test it on my vi to see if its faulty.


----------



## CeeKnocker

@nick name


Sure, I am a fan of HWiNFO too, just wanted something super basic to show me core speeds, coretemp is perfect for that 

There's loads of software that'll help stop win10 being so pervasive, what I like particularly about this is you can literally see the code... so you know EXACTLY what's happening... without experience with your software I can't really give you a comparison, apologies.
I can say that the guy who wrote the scripts I used is at full on powershell master lvl!


----------



## crakej

VicsPC said:


> I'm water cooled so would make it a complete PITA to try it, it's what i thought as well as my vega 64 didn't have its usage lights on while booting so i thought it was that, but putting the 1700x and having it boot right away and working in games without issues is what makes me think something is up with the 2700x. Even booted up this morning just fine without issues.
> 
> Default BIOS settings made no difference, first thing i tried was clearing CMOS a couple times and rebooting still got 58. I'm at a loss but usually replacing a part with a known working one and it solving the issue usually decides the culprit. Unless someone else thinks it might be something else i think its RMA time.
> 
> So put the 2700x in my crosshair vi, plugged the 24pin and 8pin and push the start button on the mobo nothing happens, i had this problem testing out my vii when i first go it would not boot without the case power button being plugged in was weird. Did the same to my vi with the box and mobo next to my case and even plugged in my sata drive and just doesnt turn on. CPU ready light changed from red to green but nothing, really wish i could test it on my vi to see if its faulty.


Apologies if I made you repeat yourself - been trying to keep up on my phone and tablet which isn't ideal!

My board failed with code 08 (not 8x) and the red light stuck for CPU problem, but it turned out to b the motherboard. Very frustrating for you but I think you at least need to get the 2700x tested in another board, it is the most likely culprit sadly 

Anyone notice when you add the 4 pin EATX 12v power supply a red light comes on near the VRM? I decided to unplug it until I know what it is.....especially after this week!


----------



## VicsPC

crakej said:


> Apologies if I made you repeat yourself - been trying to keep up on my phone and tablet which isn't ideal!
> 
> My board failed with code 08 (not 8x) and the red light stuck for CPU problem, but it turned out to b the motherboard. Very frustrating for you but I think you at least need to get the 2700x tested in another board, it is the most likely culprit sadly
> 
> Anyone notice when you add the 4 pin EATX 12v power supply a red light comes on near the VRM? I decided to unplug it until I know what it is.....especially after this week!


Haha funny you mention that, on the vi im using (my old one) i unplugged the 8pin and a little LED came on. I'm having luck testing it, turns out the psu 24pin doesnt seem to go in quite nicely so the board wasn't booting. I'm going to use flasback on my vi with the newest BIOS then try the 2700x again, right now a couple times it was giving me a code 90 (gave me a code 58 once as well) and the white LED is staying lit. This is with my r9 390 so I'm doubting a vga/gpu issue now. Going to update the BIOS on the VI and try again see what happens.


----------



## crakej

Yep, you can deffo rule out VGA. It will b e interesting to see how far you get.

I'm having trouble with my ADATA SX8200NP - Sequential write speed is only 500MBs - it should be over 1K. It's been like this since I started using it.

I now have my Samsung SM961 in the M.2_2 slot running in Sata mode. Drive is half the size of my ADATA yet it writes at 1455MBs in Sata mode!??? Both drives read at 2.4GBs - the ADATA with NVME1.3 should be faster then any Sata drive.... it seems most people don't have this problem...... I didn't realize using the second M.2 would take lanes from the Display Card but it does - running at X8. Might have to get a PCIE NVME card to avoid this.


----------



## VicsPC

crakej said:


> Yep, you can deffo rule out VGA. It will b e interesting to see how far you get.
> 
> I'm having trouble with my ADATA SX8200NP - Sequential write speed is only 500MBs - it should be over 1K. It's been like this since I started using it.
> 
> I now have my Samsung SM961 in the M.2_2 slot running in Sata mode. Drive is half the size of my ADATA yet it writes at 1455MBs in Sata mode!??? Both drives read at 2.4GBs - the ADATA with NVME1.3 should be faster then any Sata drive.... it seems most people don't have this problem...... I didn't realize using the second M.2 would take lanes from the Display Card but it does - running at X8. Might have to get a PCIE NVME card to avoid this.


Doesn't get very far, put my NH-U14s on (without a fan but still enough to cool it no issues), and just gives me code 90 over and over on the vi, even using safeboot i get a code 90. Looked it up and has to do with boot device but from what i hear the codes in the c6h manual weren't very accurate as per elmor. Still gives me the white light and I'm pretty sure even without an ssd/hdd it would still boot to BIOS (thats how i made sure my crosshair vii worked and updated the BIOS before i got my 2700x, put my 1700x in it without any drives attached). I called in my retailer and giving me an RMA, he said both codes he looked up were CPU related so we shall see.


----------



## crakej

I've just been doing an OC test on the new board - I loaded my 3600 profile, 4.1GHz and windowsd won't boot! Blue screen of death.

I've checked with my DMM and the voltages being reported in AISuite/HWInfo are higher than I set so this could have thrown my profile out in any manner of ways. I tried just the RAM OC on it's own but couldn't get it to work - tried ProcODt @ 56 and 60ohm....then I thought, why not try tuning off geardown mode which i've always needed for any speed over 3200. I would get to the end of post and it would freeze with corruption on the screen...

Not any more! Although windows still wouldn't boot, it did try - this i the first time I've ever been able to get past post running at 3600 - and repetitively - ever.

So, why the bluescreens? I'm thinking maybe CPU damage. about 3 or 4 pins on it have lost their gold which is a bit worrying. Tonight and tomorrow going to try working way up from 3200 and see where I get, but I better hang on to that 2200g for now.

I've done a bit of load testing - very brief - but enough to see how much better my cooling is - even at default settings. I can have Thunderbird and Firefox open (lots of tabs!) watching live TV Temp was as low as 27c. IBT V hard got the CPU to about low to mid 40's.

Hope you get your CPU sorted @VicsPC - does sound like it might need replacing. Hopefully I won't need to replace mine.


----------



## VicsPC

crakej said:


> I've just been doing an OC test on the new board - I loaded my 3600 profile, 4.1GHz and windowsd won't boot! Blue screen of death.
> 
> I've checked with my DMM and the voltages being reported in AISuite/HWInfo are higher than I set so this could have thrown my profile out in any manner of ways. I tried just the RAM OC on it's own but couldn't get it to work - tried ProcODt @ 56 and 60ohm....then I thought, why not try tuning off geardown mode which i've always needed for any speed over 3200. I would get to the end of post and it would freeze with corruption on the screen...
> 
> Not any more! Although windows still wouldn't boot, it did try - this i the first time I've ever been able to get past post running at 3600 - and repetitively - ever.
> 
> So, why the bluescreens? I'm thinking maybe CPU damage. about 3 or 4 pins on it have lost their gold which is a bit worrying. Tonight and tomorrow going to try working way up from 3200 and see where I get, but I better hang on to that 2200g for now.
> 
> I've done a bit of load testing - very brief - but enough to see how much better my cooling is - even at default settings. I can have Thunderbird and Firefox open (lots of tabs!) watching live TV Temp was as low as 27c. IBT V hard got the CPU to about low to mid 40's.
> 
> Hope you get your CPU sorted @VicsPC - does sound like it might need replacing. Hopefully I won't need to replace mine.


Yup already got my RMA email so will be gone shortly. Shame my psu 24pin doesn't work too well.


----------



## nick name

VicsPC said:


> Yup already got my RMA email so will be gone shortly. Shame my psu 24pin doesn't work too well.


Were you able to get your 2700X to boot on the CH7 again? And did you see any other codes beyond 58 on the CH7? I've seen 58, but it wasn't the only code. I haven't had any problems the last couple of days, but I've thought I cured my problem before and it presented again.


----------



## VicsPC

nick name said:


> Were you able to get your 2700X to boot on the CH7 again? And did you see any other codes beyond 58 on the CH7? I've seen 58, but it wasn't the only code. I haven't had any problems the last couple of days, but I've thought I cured my problem before and it presented again.


On my c7 i only saw 58 over and over there was nothing else. PC froze, i hard shutdown and started it back up and just got 58. I doubt the BIOS corrupted itself or the ram suddenly became faulty so it was almost a dead giveaway. On my c6 it gave me code 90 which according to the manual is a boot code. Dropped the 1700x in and it booted right up on default settings and on my saved profile.

I removed it twice and put it back in, reseated the ram and kept getting code 58. I didn't reflash the BIOS because the 1700x dropped in and worked.


----------



## nick name

VicsPC said:


> On my c7 i only saw 58 over and over there was nothing else. PC froze, i hard shutdown and started it back up and just got 58. I doubt the BIOS corrupted itself or the ram suddenly became faulty so it was almost a dead giveaway. On my c6 it gave me code 90 which according to the manual is a boot code. Dropped the 1700x in and it booted right up on default settings and on my saved profile.
> 
> I removed it twice and put it back in, reseated the ram and kept getting code 58. I didn't reflash the BIOS because the 1700x dropped in and worked.


Bummer. Hopefully, the myriad of codes I've seen means my problem isn't similar to yours.


----------



## VicsPC

nick name said:


> Bummer. Hopefully, the myriad of codes I've seen means my problem isn't similar to yours.


Nah you would know right away, the fact that it hard froze before giving me the issue was sign enough.


----------



## crakej

I can't get my G.Skill mem to OC - not even at 3200 - can boot, but getting constant bluescreens when windows is loading.

Was starting to think maybe my CPU is damaged, so put my 2 x8GB Vengeance 3200CL16 Micron sticks in and they run fine at 3200 using DOCP, so I'm guessing it's just some difference with this motherboard that i'm unaware of just now, that's stopping the G.Skill running with existing profiles.

None of the built in profiles works either (up to 3600) so I guess I'm going to have to start from scratch.....


----------



## Silent Scone

elbubi said:


> Thanks for the hint. Followed your adviced and posted on ROG Forums (https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?109156-Ch7-wifi-wake-on-lan-issue).
> 
> Good Luck with your cpu/mobo!


Replied to your post, sounds like it's possibly instability. Will try to be more active shortly over the next few months. Always file a bug report with support for your region, though. (Also wasn't aware the mention system was working).


----------



## crakej

It's good to hear from you @Silent Scone 


Does anyone know why I might be getting so many bluescreens when booting Windows with my G.Skill Ram OCed on my new board. I've never had this previously when OCing Ram.... Windows starts loading, then just when login screen should appear, it crashes with some memory error and/or a Win Code 021a when it tried to do a windows repair.

I managed to get 3200 to boot at last (unstable) at 16 22 22 22 53 75, but not had a chance to try lowering things to see whats going on, but to go from being able to run 3533 CL14 13 13 13 26 42 just last week on my old board, to this on the new one, really has me stumped :confuseds 3600 was running at CL14 15 14 14 28 42 at last week too...

I'm wondering if the termination might be different on this board.....


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> It's good to hear from you @Silent Scone
> 
> 
> Does anyone know why I might be getting so many bluescreens when booting Windows with my G.Skill Ram OCed on my new board. I've never had this previously when OCing Ram.... Windows starts loading, then just when login screen should appear, it crashes with some memory error and/or a Win Code 021a when it tried to do a windows repair.
> 
> I managed to get 3200 to boot at last (unstable) at 16 22 22 22 53 75, but not had a chance to try lowering things to see whats going on, but to go from being able to run 3533 CL14 13 13 13 26 42 just last week on my old board, to this on the new one, really has me stumped :confuseds 3600 was running at CL14 15 14 14 28 42 at last week too...
> 
> I'm wondering if the termination might be different on this board.....


So I guess we should ask the silly question. Did you use the correct RAM slots? 

Also, are you manually setting the termination settings or leaving them auto? 

And did you go and set all your Digi+ settings?


----------



## nick name

Silent Scone said:


> Replied to your post, sounds like it's possibly instability. Will try to be more active shortly over the next few months. Always file a bug report with support for your region, though. (Also wasn't aware the mention system was working).


I won't fault you on that. This forum's notification system is not what I'm used to either. 
@crakej asked first, but if ASUS is looking for any board testers for the next Crosshair then I'd like to also volunteer.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> So I guess we should ask the silly question. Did you use the correct RAM slots?
> 
> Also, are you manually setting the termination settings or leaving them auto?
> 
> And did you go and set all your Digi+ settings?


Correct ram slots - yes
Leaving termination on auto - always been the best setting for me...
DIGI Section - yes

I expected things to be a little different, but this is crazy! Testing them one at a time now....

Edit: I'm a bit worried my G.Skill memory isn't quite right - I just tried setting ProcODT from 48 to 80ohms - it made NO DIFFERENCE? Now I'll have to get my ram tested somehow - this is the only DDR4 machine I'm running. My Corsair Vengeance Hynix works just fine, so can't be the CPU.

Can only get memtest, RamTest and TestMem5 to pass on the G.Skills at 2133


----------



## Silent Scone

crakej said:


> Correct ram slots - yes
> Leaving termination on auto - always been the best setting for me...
> DIGI Section - yes
> 
> I expected things to be a little different, but this is crazy! Testing them one at a time now....


Sounds like I'm coming in halfway through here. What are the conditions that have changed since you were stable? (New board / memory etc)


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Correct ram slots - yes
> Leaving termination on auto - always been the best setting for me...
> DIGI Section - yes
> 
> I expected things to be a little different, but this is crazy! Testing them one at a time now....


Are you running tCWL lower than tCL again? I've never had much luck with that, but my board wasn't much older than your original board.


----------



## crakej

Silent Scone said:


> Sounds like I'm coming in halfway through here. What are the conditions that have changed since you were stable? (New board / memory etc)


Had to replace my CH7 - damaged it. There shouldn't be any way the ram could have been damaged AFAIK, but previous experience tells me anything can happen, especially when you take your eye off the ball..... (and I did)

Put machine together, load an OC profile I was running last week, and it won't work. I've tried loosening timings right back to safe settings but I just can't get anything over 2133 to stick any more - these were running at 3600 last week.

My pair of Vengeance Hynix MFRs work well at their default settings - 3200 CL16 18 18 18 and pass all memory tests

There was also minor CPU damage because LM had glued my CPU to my coldplate - without realizing I managed to pull the cpu out. I do wonder if there could have been residual power in the board that caused damage as 2 or 3 of the cpu pins appear to have 'lost' their gold - I assume the pins are plated and that some plate was scrapped off as the CPU came out? It is possible that the discolouration could be electrical in nature, I did clean it best I could before I put it back in.

Thinking about it, part of the problem was that the AM4 socket doesn't exactly grip the CPU tight or I wouldn't have had this problem, so maybe not enough to strip the pins.....

The CPU is in my new board and working well - OCed to 4.1GHz easily, and works with the Hynix MFR at 3200 reliably, so it can't be the CPU, can it??


[email protected] I think I am going to have to give it a break for today! 

I'm all ears!


----------



## Keith Myers

My first thought was the pins looked burnt from too much current going through them and they overheated. I did not think that the gold plating could have been stripped from the pins in that fashion unless it was poorly applied in the first place. But then all the pins would have had the plating pulled off.

My second thought was that your LM got into the socket and attacked those pins.


----------



## crakej

Keith Myers said:


> My first thought was the pins looked burnt from too much current going through them and they overheated. I did not think that the gold plating could have been stripped from the pins in that fashion unless it was poorly applied in the first place. But then all the pins would have had the plating pulled off.
> 
> My second thought was that your LM got into the socket and attacked those pins.


Thanks Keith, I think I may just have to get it out and clean the pins more then, if I don't, I'll always wonder if that was it.

For the moment, the Vengeance ram is working reliably at 3200 - might be able to get it stable at 3466 - we'll see. Maybe this ram is less suspect-able to the coated pins for some reason...


----------



## Pietro

Which bios version requires the lowest voltage for CPU overclock and is best for samsung b-die OC? On which pbo works, because on 1201 I had to downlclock cpu from 4175MHz to 4150MHz and ram 3566 to 3466MHz comparing to 1101 beta. It is the least reliable board I ever had in my life, on older versions sometimes it was stable for hours in cpu/ram stress tests on other it had cold boot reseting few times before starting and crashing in stress tests after few minutes. Are there any new beta versions?


----------



## Ceadderman

crakej said:


> Had to replace my CH7 - damaged it. There shouldn't be any way the ram could have been damaged AFAIK, but previous experience tells me anything can happen, especially when you take your eye off the ball..... (and I did)
> 
> Put machine together, load an OC profile I was running last week, and it won't work. I've tried loosening timings right back to safe settings but I just can't get anything over 2133 to stick any more - these were running at 3600 last week.
> 
> My pair of Vengeance Hynix MFRs work well at their default settings - 3200 CL16 18 18 18 and pass all memory tests
> 
> There was also minor CPU damage because LM had glued my CPU to my coldplate - without realizing I managed to pull the cpu out. I do wonder if there could have been residual power in the board that caused damage as 2 or 3 of the cpu pins appear to have 'lost' their gold - I assume the pins are plated and that some plate was scrapped off as the CPU came out? It is possible that the discolouration could be electrical in nature, I did clean it best I could before I put it back in.
> 
> Thinking about it, part of the problem was that the AM4 socket doesn't exactly grip the CPU tight or I wouldn't have had this problem, so maybe not enough to strip the pins.....
> 
> The CPU is in my new board and working well - OCed to 4.1GHz easily, and works with the Hynix MFR at 3200 reliably, so it can't be the CPU, can it??
> 
> 
> [email protected] I think I am going to have to give it a break for today!
> 
> I'm all ears!


Dude, the socket is not the culprit for the bent pins. That socket's latch tolerances are the same as 3+, 3 right on down tube history of AMD latch sockets. Either you didn't doublecheck the seating of your CPU or you applied too much force to the cooler. I am thinking the latter here. I suspect that if you dismantled the socket you would find gold shavings under the pin locker plate. Thereby causing all kinds of havoc with your system.

I mean how many shavings are grounding the CPU from inside the socket? Prolly more than any of us want to know.

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## Ramad

@crakej


The 4 pins on the CPU looks like they had bad contact with the socket pins. This explains the miscolored pins caused by heat. After having to re-seat the CPU a few times on the CH6 at the beginning, I figured out that pushing the CPU slightly in the same direction it is moved when locking the CPU by lowering the lever will help get better contact between the pins, this has been the case on both the CH6 and the K7. 

Foxconn's sockets are cheaper and not as good (they are bad actually) as LOTES (which are pretty good) and motherboard manufacturers will use the cheaper product until they figure out that they are bad. Only MSI and BIOSTAR used LOTES on X370 based motherboards and only MSI uses LOTES on the X470 motherboards. 

With that said, try using another CPU and see if it runs stable, if not then I'm afraid that the CPU socket pins are damaged/burned out. This may help you get the picture: https://www.anandtech.com/show/2859


----------



## Ceadderman

Ramad said:


> @crakej
> 
> 
> The 4 pins on the CPU looks like they had bad contact with the socket pins. This explains the miscolored pins caused by heat. After having to re-seat the CPU a few times on the CH6 at the beginning, I figured out that pushing the CPU slightly in the same direction it is moved when locking the CPU by lowering the lever will help get better contact between the pins, this has been the case on both the CH6 and the K7.
> 
> Foxconn's sockets are cheaper and not as good (they are bad actually) as LOTES (which are pretty good) and motherboard manufacturers will use the cheaper product until they figure out that they are bad. Only MSI and BIOSTAR used LOTES on X370 based motherboards and only MSI uses LOTES on the X470 motherboards.
> 
> With that said, try using another CPU and see if it runs stable, if not then I'm afraid that the CPU socket pins are damaged/burned out. This may help you get the picture: https://www.anandtech.com/show/2859


Bruh, you linked an Intel specific article. Two VERY different beasts Intel and AMD. Nothing to do at all with CVIIHero. Thanks anyway. 

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## crakej

Ceadderman said:


> Dude, the socket is not the culprit for the bent pins. That socket's latch tolerances are the same as 3+, 3 right on down tube history of AMD latch sockets. Either you didn't doublecheck the seating of your CPU or you applied too much force to the cooler. I am thinking the latter here. I suspect that if you dismantled the socket you would find gold shavings under the pin locker plate. Thereby causing all kinds of havoc with your system.
> 
> I mean how many shavings are grounding the CPU from inside the socket? Prolly more than any of us want to know.
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


I'm not blaming the socket - I pulled the CPU out of the socket, there's no doubt about that - but I did not apply too much force. It came up at one corner which is when the pins got bent as they were still in the socket on the opp corner 

It happened because the LM had literally stuck my CPU to the coldplate like nothing else does - I was expecting the CPU to stay in the socket. After searching, this is quite common amongst LM users who did not know how this stuff sticks like it does. I've reviewed the pics of the CPU and it does look like electrical discolouration as Keith suggests - even the bottom of the pins is discoloured, and they were not in the area where the bent pins were - in fact they're dotted around the CPU - 3 of them.


----------



## crakej

Ramad said:


> @crakej
> 
> 
> The 4 pins on the CPU looks like they had bad contact with the socket pins. This explains the miscolored pins caused by heat. After having to re-seat the CPU a few times on the CH6 at the beginning, I figured out that pushing the CPU slightly in the same direction it is moved when locking the CPU by lowering the lever will help get better contact between the pins, this has been the case on both the CH6 and the K7.
> 
> Foxconn's sockets are cheaper and not as good (they are bad actually) as LOTES (which are pretty good) and motherboard manufacturers will use the cheaper product until they figure out that they are bad. Only MSI and BIOSTAR used LOTES on X370 based motherboards and only MSI uses LOTES on the X470 motherboards.
> 
> With that said, try using another CPU and see if it runs stable, if not then I'm afraid that the CPU socket pins are damaged/burned out. This may help you get the picture: https://www.anandtech.com/show/2859


Interesting you mention this as I've found and do exactly the same.

Funny thing is CPU seems to be running fine - with my other RAM at 3200 just fine. Maybe the damage is limiting my ram speed, but I pass everything at 3200 with my Vengeance Ram. Going to try the G.Skills again tomorrow, and I do have another CPU I can test with, so looks like I'll have to do that.... I just checked the old board and there is no other (obvious) damage.

Interesting article - I've always felt that you have to hold the CPU down when you put it in and that it can come out real easy... and it is the foxconn part. I haven't done many thousands of hours hardcore OCing, though! I wondered if there might have been power in the board when the cpu came out, possibly causing some arcing.... or maybe the connection just wasn't good enough. I did previously run at 4.2GHz 3600MTs - and I remember one day it just didn't want to do it again. I've tested CPU up to 4.2GHz with 2133MTs memory just fine yesterday.

What I really need here is a memory test - not conventional that just tests memory, but something that checks the actual efficiency of the interface.


----------



## crakej

Ceadderman said:


> Bruh, you linked an Intel specific article. Two VERY different beasts Intel and AMD. Nothing to do at all with CVIIHero. Thanks anyway.
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


Actually, the article was very interesting! Much of it is applicable.


----------



## nick name

Did anyone else know that with Samsung b-die you can drop tRCDWR to as low as 8 and maintain stability? I just learned that from a Buildzoid video.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Did anyone else know that with Samsung b-die you can drop tRCDWR to as low as 8 and maintain stability? I just learned that from a Buildzoid video.


I noticed this too - did it bring you much gains?


----------



## Keith Myers

I pulled an AMD FX processor out of the socket when I tried to pull the cooler off while the socket latch was still enabled. This was before I learned to twist the cpu cooler slightly to break the TIM adhesion of the IHS to the cooler. I pulled straight up and yanked the cpu clear out of the socket with the cpu still stuck to the cooler. Fortunately I didn't bend or break any pins. But I did not also scrape any gold plating off any of the pins either nor leave any behind in the socket. Pried the cpu off the cooler and put it back into the socket with a new application of TIM. The TIM that stuck was a year old application of AS5 and all the silicone oils had evaporated out leaving nothing but the aluminum matrix behind. Last time I used AS5 and moved to MX-4. Still always twist the cpu cooler first now before removing it.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I noticed this too - did it bring you much gains?


I haven't compared it by running with and without as of yet, but from what I've seen with Geekbench and Aida it does seem better. But I also changed some of the subs so that could be it also. I can't say I've seen any ill effects other than needing more DRAM voltage and a little more SOC.

Edit:

To be more specific -- it seems to have added to bandwidth in Aida benchmarks.


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> I pulled an AMD FX processor out of the socket when I tried to pull the cooler off while the socket latch was still enabled. This was before I learned to twist the cpu cooler slightly to break the TIM adhesion of the IHS to the cooler. I pulled straight up and yanked the cpu clear out of the socket with the cpu still stuck to the cooler. Fortunately I didn't bend or break any pins. But I did not also scrape any gold plating off any of the pins either nor leave any behind in the socket. Pried the cpu off the cooler and put it back into the socket with a new application of TIM. The TIM that stuck was a year old application of AS5 and all the silicone oils had evaporated out leaving nothing but the aluminum matrix behind. Last time I used AS5 and moved to MX-4. Still always twist the cpu cooler first now before removing it.


I tend to use a heavier application of paste so I get the stuck cooler to CPU, but I can't twist much due to the mount preventing it. I've had to wiggle and rock.


----------



## nick name

This is off topic, but I just learned that Canada has some racist ass people. Who would have thought that playing CS:GO would have introduced me to terrible, terrible people.


----------



## speed_demon

CS has traditionally had foul mouthed and bad-attitude people since the beginning of 1.6 days. It's just something you have to learn to process and forget; or better yet find a server like OCN's old one that was aggressive in banning those types of player.


----------



## nick name

nick name said:


> Did anyone else know that with Samsung b-die you can drop tRCDWR to as low as 8 and maintain stability? I just learned that from a Buildzoid video.


According to 1usmus -- setting tRCDWR to 8, while accepted by the BIOS, doesn't actually result in the value being run at 8 as the memory controller will change the value. 

I tried testing with 8 and 14 and it seems to produce the same test results in Geekbench and Aida. When I changed the value to 12 it resulted in better performance in Aida, but then failed TM5 so I am assuming 12 is a value that isn't so low the memory controller overrides it.


----------



## crakej

So, I tried my G.Skill memory again today and it's still not working @ 3200 

Tomorrow, I will take CPU out again and clean the discoloured pins with alcohol. Failing that, the only other way to test the G.Skills will be to put the 2200G into my system and see if it works with that. Hopefully I won't have to do that as wanted to sell that on as new...


----------



## Ceadderman

nick name said:


> According to 1usmus -- setting tRCDWR to 8, while accepted by the BIOS, doesn't actually result in the value being run at 8 as the memory controller will change the value.
> 
> I tried testing with 8 and 14 and it seems to produce the same test results in Geekbench and Aida. When I changed the value to 12 it resulted in better performance in Aida, but then failed TM5 so I am assuming 12 is a value that isn't so low the memory controller overrides it.


GN gives buildzoid credibility so maybe there is weight to what the guy says. I dunno.

I do know that dude went very in depth in his x470 board review and his top five list. Didn't say much of anything to get my hackles peaked. Minor calculation issues do not say "do not listen to this guy" but he was extremely thorough and I respect that.

I have a b-die kit so I will be testing buildzoid's credibility where the settings are concerned. But every piece of hardware has its own sweet spot from one component to another. Even the same set of sticks as mine may not improve performance over another pair of the same sticks. 

But nobody has to listen to my take on this as I knew that you had to work to get RAM to their OC speed but I didn't know that 3600 series were slower than 3200 with tighter timings until I read the b-die information and of course buildzoid. Also several members here pointed the way. 

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## diypartsjoy

I wish I had a VII Hero. Imagine all the things you could do.


----------



## w00dstock

So i know this is a oc thread but i have this very peculiar problem.

On post my systems keeps posting error code B4 which is for usb devices.Now i have done a bios reset , flashback and cmos clean up but none work.
Now i have isolated the problem to the fact that if any usb device is plugged in mobo or case it will not post.
Internal headers are not the culprit.Now my solution is to unplug usb stuff and let post and boot to windows and replug it back.But im tired of this and now i want a real solution.
I bought this mobo like last week, if anyone can shed some light on this issue, i would be very grateful to you.

P.S No there is no board damage and pretty much all usb ports work fine, no issues at all. Its just the bloody post thing.

P.P.S Specs are 2700x , CH7 7 (non wifi), gskill ram 32gb s-bdie, corsair h100i , rmx1000 and 2070 rtx


----------



## Ceadderman

w00dstock said:


> So i know this is a oc thread but i have this very peculiar problem.
> 
> On post my systems keeps posting error code B4 which is for usb devices.Now i have done a bios reset , flashback and cmos clean up but none work.
> Now i have isolated the problem to the fact that if any usb device is plugged in mobo or case it will not post.
> Internal headers are not the culprit.Now my solution is to unplug usb stuff and let post and boot to windows and replug it back.But im tired of this and now i want a real solution.
> I bought this mobo like last week, if anyone can shed some light on this issue, i would be very grateful to you.
> 
> P.S No there is no board damage and pretty much all usb ports work fine, no issues at all. Its just the bloody post thing.
> 
> P.P.S Specs are 2700x , CH7 7 (non wifi), gskill ram 32gb s-bdie, corsair h100i , rmx1000 and 2070 rtx


Try... Sorry after rereading I have nothing. :blushsmil

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## nick name

w00dstock said:


> So i know this is a oc thread but i have this very peculiar problem.
> 
> On post my systems keeps posting error code B4 which is for usb devices.Now i have done a bios reset , flashback and cmos clean up but none work.
> Now i have isolated the problem to the fact that if any usb device is plugged in mobo or case it will not post.
> Internal headers are not the culprit.Now my solution is to unplug usb stuff and let post and boot to windows and replug it back.But im tired of this and now i want a real solution.
> I bought this mobo like last week, if anyone can shed some light on this issue, i would be very grateful to you.
> 
> P.S No there is no board damage and pretty much all usb ports work fine, no issues at all. Its just the bloody post thing.
> 
> P.P.S Specs are 2700x , CH7 7 (non wifi), gskill ram 32gb s-bdie, corsair h100i , rmx1000 and 2070 rtx



Which USB port are you using? Do you have any external drives plugged in? Are you using a USB hub of any sort?


----------



## nick name

diypartsjoy said:


> I wish I had a VII Hero. Imagine all the things you could do.


They are nice. I went from the X470 Prime Pro to the CH7.


----------



## nick name

Ceadderman said:


> GN gives buildzoid credibility so maybe there is weight to what the guy says. I dunno.
> 
> I do know that dude went very in depth in his x470 board review and his top five list. Didn't say much of anything to get my hackles peaked. Minor calculation issues do not say "do not listen to this guy" but he was extremely thorough and I respect that.
> 
> I have a b-die kit so I will be testing buildzoid's credibility where the settings are concerned. But every piece of hardware has its own sweet spot from one component to another. Even the same set of sticks as mine may not improve performance over another pair of the same sticks.
> 
> But nobody has to listen to my take on this as I knew that you had to work to get RAM to their OC speed but I didn't know that 3600 series were slower than 3200 with tighter timings until I read the b-die information and of course buildzoid. Also several members here pointed the way.
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:



I guess the adage applies: Trust, but verify.


----------



## minal

w00dstock said:


> So i know this is a oc thread but i have this very peculiar problem.
> 
> On post my systems keeps posting error code B4 which is for usb devices.Now i have done a bios reset , flashback and cmos clean up but none work.
> Now i have isolated the problem to the fact that if any usb device is plugged in mobo or case it will not post.
> Internal headers are not the culprit.Now my solution is to unplug usb stuff and let post and boot to windows and replug it back.But im tired of this and now i want a real solution.
> I bought this mobo like last week, if anyone can shed some light on this issue, i would be very grateful to you.
> 
> P.S No there is no board damage and pretty much all usb ports work fine, no issues at all. Its just the bloody post thing.
> 
> P.P.S Specs are 2700x , CH7 7 (non wifi), gskill ram 32gb s-bdie, corsair h100i , rmx1000 and 2070 rtx


Could it have something to do with XHCI/EHCI/Legacy USB settings in UEFI? I don't know much about it, so hopefully others here can help confirm if that could be a cause.


----------



## crakej

So I removed my 1700x today to have another look at the pins.

The gold has been oxidized on a couple of them. When cleaned they are shiny silver colour. While not ideal, it should (and does with the Vengeance memory) work. I'm beggining to think the ram is damaged in some way.

Of course the only way to check the G.Skills is to pop in that brand new 2200G and see how they work with that. Can't help feeling it's something to do with the memory...


----------



## crakej

w00dstock said:


> So i know this is a oc thread but i have this very peculiar problem.
> 
> On post my systems keeps posting error code B4 which is for usb devices.Now i have done a bios reset , flashback and cmos clean up but none work.
> Now i have isolated the problem to the fact that if any usb device is plugged in mobo or case it will not post.
> Internal headers are not the culprit.Now my solution is to unplug usb stuff and let post and boot to windows and replug it back.But im tired of this and now i want a real solution.
> I bought this mobo like last week, if anyone can shed some light on this issue, i would be very grateful to you.
> 
> P.S No there is no board damage and pretty much all usb ports work fine, no issues at all. Its just the bloody post thing.
> 
> P.P.S Specs are 2700x , CH7 7 (non wifi), gskill ram 32gb s-bdie, corsair h100i , rmx1000 and 2070 rtx


I have a prob with my front USB 3.0 ports - when I plug a USB drive into one of them, my mouse becomes sluggish and unresponsive until I remove it. It does boot ok though.


----------



## Ceadderman

nick name said:


> I guess the adage applies: Trust, but verify.


Exactly. One cannot stress this enough. In the buildzoid Crosshair VII review, he does make calculation errors and admits to them in the same review. Some he corrects at the point of error and some he simply makes the mistake and corrects himself during the exiting process. I can excuse that sort of thing so long as the reviewer is not soapboxing. 

CVIIHero is my first Ryzen board. Early adopted 1800x, but before I could pull the trigger on VI they all sold out. Just in time for the issues with Ryzen to present themselves. Short time later VII was unveiled by ASUS(iirc) so it worked in my favor. I have always got the top shelf ASUS hardware whenever possible. My previous ATAXboard is CIVFormula. I have had 5 different chips on it starting with 955BE. I still own it and it is 100% watercooled. CPU, chipset block RAM and custom blocked Sapphire 6870 using a Swiftech 6950/6870 heatsink milled out to allow clean installation of EK Thermosphere CPU blocks. You cannot OC the card but you can undervolt mod it. I only blocked the two I own to keep my system quiet. Current CPU on it is 1100T. Excellent chip and worth OClocking,not as much headroom as 1050 but still a worthwhile gaming chip. Not RReworthy but doable. 

Now? Well I am ready to give the CIVFormula to my 3 year old and move slightly up in standard. I will camp on 1180x until Zen 3 launches. 

Cannot wait to get back and start messing with Ryzen build. :wheee:

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## crakej

So, going to pop the 2200G in today.

Turns out this CPU is interesting - it is almost Zen+ - except it's on GF 14nm+ process. It features PB2 and slightly different design meaning it supports faster memory than Zen1 parts.

It will be interesting to see how well this works - as well as seeing if my G.Skill memory is working.


----------



## w00dstock

w00dstock said:


> So i know this is a oc thread but i have this very peculiar problem.
> 
> On post my systems keeps posting error code B4 which is for usb devices.Now i have done a bios reset , flashback and cmos clean up but none work.
> Now i have isolated the problem to the fact that if any usb device is plugged in mobo or case it will not post.
> Internal headers are not the culprit.Now my solution is to unplug usb stuff and let post and boot to windows and replug it back.But im tired of this and now i want a real solution.
> I bought this mobo like last week, if anyone can shed some light on this issue, i would be very grateful to you.
> 
> P.S No there is no board damage and pretty much all usb ports work fine, no issues at all. Its just the bloody post thing.
> 
> P.P.S Specs are 2700x , CH7 7 (non wifi), gskill ram 32gb s-bdie, corsair h100i , rmx1000 and 2070 rtx


Okay solution time.So after bashing my head, i did the most basic thing reflashed bios once to gain access to bios, then i applied my setting.After which i changed the csm setting under boot and disabled it completely.No more b4 code issue


----------



## crakej

w00dstock said:


> Okay solution time.So after bashing my head, i did the most basic thing reflashed bios once to gain access to bios, then i applied my setting.After which i changed the csm setting under boot and disabled it completely.No more b4 code issue


Interesting - I might try turning off CSM as well - I don't need it.


----------



## crakej

I might now be very active on here over next few days as going into hospital tomorrow morning for back surgery. Hopefully I'll be home in a couple of days, maybe more.

I might play around with the 2200G later once I've got everything ready for when I get back, just thought i'd let you know why I might not be able to answer you as will only have tab and phone with me.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I might now be very active on here over next few days as going into hospital tomorrow morning for back surgery. Hopefully I'll be home in a couple of days, maybe more.
> 
> I might play around with the 2200G later once I've got everything ready for when I get back, just thought i'd let you know why I might not be able to answer you as will only have tab and phone with me.


Good luck and get well soon!


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> I might now be very active on here over next few days as going into hospital tomorrow morning for back surgery. Hopefully I'll be home in a couple of days, maybe more.
> 
> I might play around with the 2200G later once I've got everything ready for when I get back, just thought i'd let you know why I might not be able to answer you as will only have tab and phone with me.


Hoping for a speedy recovery.


----------



## Keith Myers

Same with me on all my C7H boards. Plug a USB stick into the front USB ports where the combo mouse/keyboard micro receiver resides and I kill the mouse and keyboard from responding.


----------



## nick name

I have a 6 port USB hub plugged into the USB port next to the LAN port. It's the one USB port where the mouse doesn't get laggy while in BIOS so it's my preferred port. And the only thing I use for in the front case USB port is a USB stick I store my BIOS and BIOS profiles on. That one just stays plugged in.


----------



## crakej

Keith Myers said:


> Same with me on all my C7H boards. Plug a USB stick into the front USB ports where the combo mouse/keyboard micro receiver resides and I kill the mouse and keyboard from responding.


You too eh Keith? I thought I was the only one with this poblem. I've tried all the different drivers for the ports, but nothing seems to make a difference....


----------



## The Sandman

w00dstock said:


> Okay solution time.So after bashing my head, i did the most basic thing reflashed bios once to gain access to bios, then i applied my setting.After which i changed the csm setting under boot and disabled it completely.No more b4 code issue


Thanks for sharing!
+Rep


----------



## VicsPC

So for anyone interested, my CPU was found to be faulty and I will be getting a new one. Have no idea what happened to it and which i could send it to AMD to find out but oh well. It's crazy how slow the 1700x at it's stock 3.5ghz feels compared to the 2700x though.


----------



## VPII

I'd like to ask a question regarding 3d benchmarks. Now my overclock is constant or manual. 4.285mhz at 1.365v. Stable through any bench. Id did a good Timespy run a couple weeks ago.

https://www.3dmark.com/spy/5965452

Unfortunetaly I cannot do the same again. Mostly it falls below 15k and if lucky jyst over 15k.

What is the best power management and other settings to use when running 3d benchmarks with ryzen?

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## nick name

VPII said:


> I'd like to ask a question regarding 3d benchmarks. Now my overclock is constant or manual. 4.285mhz at 1.365v. Stable through any bench. Id did a good Timespy run a couple weeks ago.
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/spy/5965452
> 
> Unfortunetaly I cannot do the same again. Mostly it falls below 15k and if lucky jyst over 15k.
> 
> What is the best power management and other settings to use when running 3d benchmarks with ryzen?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


The thing that immediately comes to mind is temps.


----------



## VPII

nick name said:


> The thing that immediately comes to mind is temps.


Temps are okay.... cpu max at 69 to 70c during physics test and gpu highest is 40 to 41c as it has a Nzxt Kraken G12 with Corsair H110 cw fitted. So I doubt temps is an issue.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## Ceadderman

VPII said:


> Temps are okay.... cpu max at 69 to 70c during physics test and gpu highest is 40 to 41c as it has a Nzxt Kraken G12 with Corsair H110 cw fitted. So I doubt temps is an issue.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


Kraken is a solid AIO. However, I think your temps are the issue as you may be expecting too much from your AIO. Your system is expelling heat and your ambient temp increases because of it. So try later after opening a window to allow that temp to decrease to its normal state. A custom loop would likely allow a couple more runs at it but I wouldn't expect much more from that either as the same rule applies for Custom as it ddoes custom. The main differences being the cold plate of the custom allows for better cooling over the AIO. 

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## VPII

Ceadderman said:


> Kraken is a solid AIO. However, I think your temps are the issue as you may be expecting too much from your AIO. Your system is expelling heat and your ambient temp increases because of it. So try later after opening a window to allow that temp to decrease to its normal state. A custom loop would likely allow a couple more runs at it but I wouldn't expect much more from that either as the same rule applies for Custom as it ddoes custom. The main differences being the cold plate of the custom allows for better cooling over the AIO.
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


Thank Ceaderman, we've had abnormally cooler days for the end of summer here in Cape Town, South Africa which is why I tested the runs. At present CPU max 69 when running Time Spy Physics. Yesterday I even dropped half of the rad for the Corsair H110 into an ice bucket resulting in max 36c on the gpu during bench. This in itself should mean that the gpu should not downclock by much during the run. I actually saw the clocks can stay as is untill 40c. But TDP limit might also be an issue even though I am using the 380watt bios on the GPU. 

Sorry for bringing this in here as it is basically a combination of gpu, cpu and mobo. At present I'm running tests with performance bias to see the impact. First run with CB11 performance bias gave me 15132 https://www.3dmark.com/spy/6517372 with gpu temps maxing out at 41C so not too bad.


----------



## Keith Myers

I never bothered trying other drivers but I did learn to plug USB sticks into the back I/O panel ports. At least my cases are fairly easy to access the back, just have to rotate and pull the case forward a bit on the desktop.


----------



## R0CK3T

VPII said:


> I'd like to ask a question regarding 3d benchmarks. Now my overclock is constant or manual. 4.285mhz at 1.365v. Stable through any bench. Id did a good Timespy run a couple weeks ago.
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/spy/5965452
> 
> Unfortunetaly I cannot do the same again. Mostly it falls below 15k and if lucky jyst over 15k.
> 
> What is the best power management and other settings to use when running 3d benchmarks with ryzen?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


the problem you are experiencing is a windows 10 update KB4482887 it's a security patch, after this patch my 3DMark scores went down just like yours. I ended up uninstalling the patch and going back to a previous graphics driver.


----------



## orClocker

Do you guys mind if ask if all the ACPI WMI issues have been worked out? Seems like 1201 has other issues, but how about the sensors?

I bumped my bios to 1103 and of course i observed SensorIO crash out.

I upgraded aida to latest (from the beta version with wmi support) and am monitoring now, but im not hopeful. The Sensor interface seemed more stable on 0804...


----------



## majestynl

R0CK3T said:


> the problem you are experiencing is a windows 10 update KB4482887 it's a security patch, after this patch my 3DMark scores went down just like yours. I ended up uninstalling the patch and going back to a previous graphics driver.


yeap, many people reported lower performance while gaming with this update. MS knows the issue! I disabled the update to be sure!


----------



## nick name

orClocker said:


> Do you guys mind if ask if all the ACPI WMI issues have been worked out? Seems like 1201 has other issues, but how about the sensors?
> 
> I bumped my bios to 1103 and of course i observed SensorIO crash out.
> 
> I upgraded aida to latest (from the beta version with wmi support) and am monitoring now, but im not hopeful. The Sensor interface seemed more stable on 0804...


Do you not use HWiNFO? I only recommend HWiNFO.


----------



## orClocker

nick name said:


> Do you not use HWiNFO? I only recommend HWiNFO.


Okay, that doesnt really answer my question, but thanks for the recommendation?


----------



## nick name

orClocker said:


> Okay, that doesnt really answer my question, but thanks for the recommendation?


Sorry, yeah that wasn't very helpful. I'm not completely up-to-speed with all sensors updates, but the conversations always seem to lead to HWiNFO being what works best.


----------



## crakej

Hey guys.....hopefully I'll be out if hospital later today....cant wait to get home to my CH7.

With WMI just pick one monitoring program to use at a time...its when you run something else which may or may not access WMI correctly, that causes problems.

Others may sneer, but I use AISuite most of the time. If I also run hwinfo, the WMI section of hwinfo will eventually stop updating. Point to note is that once you open AISuite, closing it does not seem to really close it - I believe monitoring continues in the background.

My favourites:

Aisuite, HWInfo, Aida, SiV.


----------



## CeeKnocker

https://www.computerbase.de/2019-03/amd-ryzen-cpu-ddr4-ram/

Interesting ram comparison featuring our beloved


----------



## crakej

So, X470 Pro has new Bios with new AGESA (though feedback not great ATM)


Posted by @Reous :-
https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...-asus-prime-x470-pro-issues-successes-35.html
*BIOS 4406

https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/m...-ASUS-4406.zip
Changelog:
Update AGESA to Combo-AM4 0.0.7.0 for the upcoming processors and improve some CPU compatibility
ASUS strongly recommends that you update AMD chipset driver 18.50.16 or later before updating BIOS *


So updates are starting to support new CPUs - interesting AGESA version 'Combo....' don't remember seeing that before. New Chipset driver also incoming.

Interesting times are coming!

Edit: @1usmus recommend not updating to AGESA 0070 and 0072 https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...w-update-bios-correctly-113.html#post27885788


----------



## Ceadderman

CeeKnocker said:


> https://www.computerbase.de/2019-03/amd-ryzen-cpu-ddr4-ram/
> 
> Interesting ram comparison featuring our beloved


Still have to park my OS on a drive. But I put my system together using a 5770 to stand in for my blocked RX480. I will add some liquid to the RX480 and cap it for a short run, but the 5770 actually works well for UEFI and shows up on my 43" Samsung NU6900 monitor. Don't know why I didn't go with a larger screen than 23" back in the day cause dang the UEFI looks yummy on the 43". 

Crosshair VII Hero
R7 1800x
16gb GSkill TridentZ 3200 cl14 (currently 2133mhz)
XFX Radeon HD 5770(stand in) with DVI/HDMI adapter
4Tb WD Black 7200
120gb Samsung 750 EVO
128 Adata m.2

Soon to be added:

500gb Samsung 860 EVO
1Tb Samsung 860 EVO 
XFX RX 480 8GB.

I am waiting for my PPCs order to arrive. Monoblock, Radiators etc. So this system is put together for Air with a 212 EVO standing in for the Monoblock keeping the 1800x a chilly 38° with ectotherm between them. I have plenty of that on hand and am getting a decent amount of it with my order. Gonna parallel everything together, CPU, GPU and RAM. 

Check out "Black Snow" in Rigbuilder for current specs. 

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## nick name

Hey @crakej -- how did everything go? Are you well? 

Also, look what I can do.


----------



## gupsterg

nick name said:


> TBH -- I was a little concerned with trying a re-flash because I was still failing to POST after using the clear CMOS button and my concern was a failure during the re-flash causing things to get worse. However, I have since summoned some courage and re-flashed . . . successfully. So hopefully it's been resolved.


As board has Flashback feature I would use that. Even if you suffered power outage whilst flash process occurred just rerun Flashback and board will recover. 



minal said:


> It is pretty stunning how much power/voltage is used in UEFI when it would seem like it should be close to zero load. Maybe it's the lack of power saving. After all, in OS the VCORE can drop to less than half of what it is in UEFI. Thanks for taking the time to make these observations!


No problem. Yeah crazy. I think it could be a shortcoming of development on SMU FW, allowing CPU to behave this way under these specific conditions.



Ceadderman said:


> Instead of running AISuite has anyone tried running Speedfan 4.52?
> 
> Works with Windows 10 and scans your board for all relavent headers including sensor headers...
> 
> http://www.almico.com/speedfan.php
> 
> I am considering running it since I know full well how buggy AISuite is. I liked it when I was running my CIVFormula system 24/7 but I never tried Speedfan. :thinking:
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


I don't think the app uses ASUS WMI...



orClocker said:


> Do you guys mind if ask if all the ACPI WMI issues have been worked out? Seems like 1201 has other issues, but how about the sensors?
> 
> I bumped my bios to 1103 and of course i observed SensorIO crash out.
> 
> I upgraded aida to latest (from the beta version with wmi support) and am monitoring now, but im not hopeful. The Sensor interface seemed more stable on 0804...


From UEFI 1002 ASUS WMI is correct AFAIK, prior UEFIs (0804/0702) broken.

Perhaps you had an app open which was not using ASUS WMI. I have used AIDA64, CPU-Z and HWINFO concurrently for several hours and encountered no issues.

AFAIK some of even ASUS apps don't use ASUS WMI, as I have encounters users that have had erratic issues/shutdowns which resolved after the apps were removed.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Hey @crakej -- how did everything go? Are you well?
> 
> Also, look what I can do.


It went well, but recovery is very painful - will check in with doctors see if they can do anything.

My G.Skills still refuse to work over 3200 terrible timings. When I can actually install my 2200g I'll be able to see if it's CPU or memory that's the problem, but I think I will have to RMA  

My Vengeance run at 16 18 18 18 but being dual rank, perform fairly well - not tried too much to OC them yet.

I've saved these settings! Well done mate!


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> It went well, but recovery is very painful - will check in with doctors see if they can do anything.
> 
> My G.Skills still refuse to work over 3200 terrible timings. When I can actually install my 2200g I'll be able to see if it's CPU or memory that's the problem, but I think I will have to RMA
> 
> My Vengeance run at 16 18 18 18 but being dual rank, perform fairly well - not tried too much to OC them yet.
> 
> I've saved these settings! Well done mate!


Some of those subs might be too tight for gaming. I've experienced some issues though the settings are stable. 

I hope recovery goes more smoothly for you.

Thots and players.


----------



## crakej

Thanks Nick Name - appreciated.

As I discussed previously - new bios is here https://www.asus.com/uk/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO/HelpDesk_Download/

AGESA 0070 - I'm weary of this. And 0072 is already out and also not getting good reviews. Mostly that latency and some ram OCs suffer. Users of X470 Prime Pro also resulted in lower clock speeds on 2xxx CPUs

ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO BIOS 2008
Update AGESA 0070 for the upcoming processors and improve CPU compatibility.
ASUS strongly recommends installing AMD chipset driver 18.50.16 or later before updating BIOS.

Edit: Note that last bit 'ASUS strongly recommends installing AMD chipset driver 18.50.16 or later before updating BIOS.' - this chipset driver is not available yet!

Edit 2: I have done some more research, and it seems that those that have had the updated AGESA, get a new chipset driver from ASUS, which is not available from AMD for some reason. It should appear in the Drivers and tools menu, but I don't see it - yet - for our board. Some blaming loss in PBO OC to this driver, some to AGESA. Some clarity from @Silent Scone would be handy here. Interested to see others test results here.

Edit 3!: Someone has given me a coy of the ASUS chipset update package. I will share if others want it. It's from the download page for the X470 Prime Pro.


----------



## nick name

I'm assuming that since AMD never planned to publicize AGESA updates they haven't given any informative release notes?

Has anyone reported anything good about the latest AGESA?

And are people reporting the voltages they're seeing now with their lower clock speeds? Perhaps AMD isn't happy with what they are seeing in longevity? That would upsetting to learn.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I'm assuming that since AMD never planned to publicize AGESA updates they haven't given any informative release notes?
> 
> Has anyone reported anything good about the latest AGESA?
> 
> And are people reporting the voltages they're seeing now with their lower clock speeds? Perhaps AMD isn't happy with what they are seeing in longevity? That would upsetting to learn.


Have a look on the Prime Pro forum https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...470-pro-issues-successes-38.html#post27891530

but also on the Modded Bios Thread by @1usmus for more information


----------



## Chronicles

https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WI-FI/HelpDesk_BIOS/


*Version 2008
2019/03/14* 10.23 MBytes
ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) BIOS 2008
Update AGESA 0070 for the upcoming processors and improve CPU compatibility.
ASUS strongly recommends installing AMD chipset driver 18.50.16 or later before updating BIOS.


----------



## Mannekino

So ASUS publishes a new BIOS, strongly recommends updating to a new chipset driver also, but then they don't list the new chipset driver under the downloads page?

What's going on here?

Latest chipset driver on AMD website for X470: 18.10.1810

Latest chipset driver on ASUS website for ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO: 18.40.02


----------



## Chronicles

I noticed that too, in the Asus Q-Installer thing that it automatically loads into windows it shows current is 18.50.16.01 and lets you install with that.


----------



## Nick Moiré

Chronicles said:


> I noticed that too, in the Asus Q-Installer thing that it automatically loads into windows it shows current is 18.50.16.01 and lets you install with that.


Q-Installer that too annoy, I'm stuck at 99% for an hour then I disabled it from bios. everything just fine


----------



## Ceadderman

Running BIOS 1002... With AMD latest chipset 18.50.16 updated through Q update just fine for me with my BNIB board. 

1002 was already on it. 

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## Mannekino

Ceadderman said:


> Running BIOS 1002... With AMD latest chipset 18.50.16 updated through Q update just fine for me with my BNIB board.
> 
> 1002 was already on it.
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


What is this Q update you guys are talking about, I can't find it on the ASUS site.


----------



## Ceadderman

Mannekino said:


> What is this Q update you guys are talking about, I can't find it on the ASUS site.


I think it comes in the AISuite tools update. Not really sure cause 15 minutes into the process and a restart it opened with a rather helpful list of the necessary drivers for my build. 

I didn't build with my RX 480 to start due to it being ready for water. Instead I dropped my Radeon HD 5770 on the board strictly for Display purposes. Works pretty well for the task and will see what gaming I can do with it. I was considering sending it in for warranty because the system it was on wouldn't POST. Guess I killed two birds with one stone. Something else wrong with the other system and my new system is coming along just fine on Air. 1st core of 1800x touches 4.0 w/o clocking it. Today my PPCs order lands at the doorstep. So as soon as I can get my case I will put it all under water, including the GSkill TridentZ 3200 kit. 

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## crakej

Here's the file guys. It was shared with me by others who have it.

It's only available in some territories even for the boards that should have had it ages ago. Use this and new bios with your own caution please!

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1J5uXbEck0eCh_0Eu9kwPsmtVn3ssZSHP/view?usp=sharing


----------



## Ceadderman

Here is a screenshot from Black Snow.

Patience as I am still learning Windows 10s' screwy functionality... or rather lack of functionality. 3rd day on the new OS. :doh:


----------



## crakej

I managed to get my 2200g in today.

Although it has the K17.1 Memory Controller - and a few Vega cores - it has little really to surprise me! I haven't even enabled Vega! I suppose it might be interesting to see if they can speed GFX up with my RX580, but not really that bothered.

What I found out though is that my G.Skill memory isn't working right and going to have to go back  I've always had problems with it really so will be good to get them replaced. This also means my 1700x, while bruised from it's ordeal is working just fine, which I will put back in tomorrow - I mean - going from 16 to 4 cores is underwhelming! Windows definitely benefits from having those cores - watching tv CPU was at 38% compared to about 8%. That said Windows seems to run really well - no discernable slow down, and the chip runs really cool, so this chip is probably really good for those on a tight budget.

Another things to note, as I'm in pain, and knew it would be temporary, I used an LM patch - my plate still had a little LM residue so just plonked it on and switched on. It idled along in the bios at around 29c - even without the cpu reaching the supposed 80c needed to cure the patch. Even under load I couldn't get this thing much over 50c! I'm really interested to see what I've got when I remove the cooler - will the patch still be there - in-tact? Or melded into the cold plate? My 1700x is still nicely coated in LM so will be nice and easy getting it back in.

Anyone ever done an RMA with Alza?


----------



## crakej

Ceadderman said:


> I think it comes in the AISuite tools update. Not really sure cause 15 minutes into the process and a restart it opened with a rather helpful list of the necessary drivers for my build.
> ~Ceadder :drink:


I can confirm that ASUS Easy Update does offer the file also.


----------



## Onijin

Tried installing the new BIOS last night. Everything went well until it failed to post and the Q-code LED flashed DE AD. Right about then is when I shat a brick and went reaching for my flashback thumbdrive. Thankfully 1201 took just fine and I'm back up and running. Anyone else have any weird issues with 2008?


----------



## JayC72

For those looking for the 18.50.16 chipset and can't find it...

It's on the Asus web site. Just need to click on "Show All"


----------



## DAM20

2008 bios gave me worst performance, is it normal?


----------



## crakej

DAM20 said:


> 2008 bios gave me worst performance, is it normal?


If you look back a couple of pages I warn against installing as many having problems with the new AGESA. See https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...w-update-bios-correctly-113.html#post27885788 for example.

Some people seem to be ok though, just needing a tweak on their memory.

This is completely new AGESA, I also wouldn't be loading in your old profiles as there are different settings which might mean your profiles don't load correctly for this bios. Only way to be sure is to enter things manually.


----------



## 1usmus

DAM20 said:


> 2008 bios gave me worst performance, is it normal?


https://www.overclock.net/forum/27885782-post4109.html

reduced efficiency of multi-core utilization affects on FPS


----------



## DAM20

crakej said:


> If you look back a couple of pages I warn against installing as many having problems with the new AGESA. See https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...w-update-bios-correctly-113.html#post27885788 for example.
> 
> Some people seem to be ok though, just needing a tweak on their memory.
> 
> This is completely new AGESA, I also wouldn't loading in your old profiles as there are different settings which might mean your profiles don't load correctly for this bios. Only way to be sure is to enter things manually.


Oh got it, I'll check the setting manually, also I can't flash back any older bios now, a bit strange


----------



## crakej

DAM20 said:


> Oh got it, I'll check the setting manually, also I can't flash back any older bios now, a bit strange


You can use afuefix64.exe - discussed in that thread - which will let you do it.


----------



## crakej

1usmus said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27885782-post4109.html
> 
> reduced efficiency of multi-core utilization affects on FPS


Thanks @1usmus - anyone any closer to working out why we have this performance problem?


----------



## DAM20

crakej said:


> You can use afuefix64.exe - discussed in that thread - which will let you do it.


Where can i find it?


----------



## nick name

This latest AGESA is in anticipation of next gen Ryzen, correct?


----------



## crakej

DAM20 said:


> Where can i find it?


At the start of the thread I linked to!

https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...yzen-bios-mods-how-update-bios-correctly.html

*Obviously you do NOT need to run AFUGAN as well as you're not installing a modded bios*


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> This latest AGESA is in anticipation of next gen Ryzen, correct?


Looks like it!


----------



## Mannekino

I've been experiencing PC crashes for the past 2-3 weeks or so, and they are increasing in frequency. Today it happened twice so far and I'm getting a bit worried.

I updated the BIOS of my motherboard back in januari to version 1201.

I can't find anything useful in the logs of Windows 10. How should proceed and troubleshoot this issues. It's getting quite annoying. Should I try and update to the latest BIOS?

Should I run a memory test first or maybe try a reinstall of Windows 10?


----------



## DAM20

crakej said:


> Looks like it!


Thanks man!


----------



## Ceadderman

Mannekino said:


> I've been experiencing PC crashes for the past 2-3 weeks or so, and they are increasing in frequency. Today it happened twice so far and I'm getting a bit worried.
> 
> I updated the BIOS of my motherboard back in januari to version 1201.
> 
> I can't find anything useful in the logs of Windows 10. How should proceed and troubleshoot this issues. It's getting quite annoying. Should I try and update to the latest BIOS?
> 
> Should I run a memory test first or maybe try a reinstall of Windows 10?


Try backflashing to 1002. It most probably is not your OS.I looked at BIOS updates and decided to stay with 1002 because its working and because right under 1201 it says "optimized for APU...", so not having an APU on hand. It's possible that it could work with all R chips but also possible your issues are caused by the UEFI looking for an APU and not finding one in the socket. :thinking:

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## nick name

Ceadderman said:


> Try backflashing to 1002. It most probably is not your OS.I looked at BIOS updates and decided to stay with 1002 because its working and because right under 1201 it says "optimized for APU...", so not having an APU on hand. It's possible that it could work with all R chips but also possible your issues are caused by the UEFI looking for an APU and not finding one in the socket. :thinking:
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


I doubt this is the problem.


----------



## nick name

Mannekino said:


> I've been experiencing PC crashes for the past 2-3 weeks or so, and they are increasing in frequency. Today it happened twice so far and I'm getting a bit worried.
> 
> I updated the BIOS of my motherboard back in januari to version 1201.
> 
> I can't find anything useful in the logs of Windows 10. How should proceed and troubleshoot this issues. It's getting quite annoying. Should I try and update to the latest BIOS?
> 
> Should I run a memory test first or maybe try a reinstall of Windows 10?


You're not giving enough information for someone to help you troubleshoot.


----------



## Ceadderman

nick name said:


> I doubt this is the problem.


Maybe/Maybe not. What's it gonna hurt to backflash? Wc2w, confirms that its not the issue. 

I had an "AE" post code issue over a stupid HDMI cable replacement. Went from a shielded HDMI to a thicker unshielded cable. Checked every component to make sure they were seated properly. Still "AE". Replaced HDMI and board POSTed. Ya simply never know w/o trying every unlikely situation. I was quite surprised a simple and highly unlikely thing like an HDMI could cause the Legacy issue result. :mellowsmi

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## crakej

Mannekino said:


> I've been experiencing PC crashes for the past 2-3 weeks or so, and they are increasing in frequency. Today it happened twice so far and I'm getting a bit worried.
> 
> I updated the BIOS of my motherboard back in januari to version 1201.
> 
> I can't find anything useful in the logs of Windows 10. How should proceed and troubleshoot this issues. It's getting quite annoying. Should I try and update to the latest BIOS?
> 
> Should I run a memory test first or maybe try a reinstall of Windows 10?


I'd be inclined to do memory test first.


----------



## Mannekino

nick name said:


> You're not giving enough information for someone to help you troubleshoot.


Understandable, my specs are in my signature. What more information should I provide? That's the problem for me also, if I go into the Windows log files after rebooting my PC again there is nothing useful to be found.

This is what happens.

1. I have two monitors my primary monitor goes completely black
2. My second monitor goes to a yellowish color all over the screen
3. The audio that I was playing gets all distorted, like a robot dying 
4. After a while there is no more audio and I hear my two case fans ramp up
5. I have to turn off the PC by holding down the power button
6. When I turn on the PC again it doesn't POST and I hear the fans at high speed
7. I have to turn it off and on again and then I get a message that the system failed to POST last time, I go inside the BIOS and check my settings and continue

My BIOS settings are pretty much standard, I only have the D.O.C.P. profile enabled of my memory, I'm not doing any manual overclocking.


----------



## Nighthog

Mannekino said:


> Understandable, my specs are in my signature. What more information should I provide? That's the problem for me also, if I go into the Windows log files after rebooting my PC again there is nothing useful to be found.
> 
> This is what happens.
> 
> 1. I have two monitors my primary monitor goes completely black
> 2. My second monitor goes to a yellowish color all over the screen
> 3. The audio that I was playing gets all distorted, like a robot dying
> 4. After a while there is no more audio and I hear my two case fans ramp up
> 5. I have to turn off the PC by holding down the power button
> 6. When I turn on the PC again it doesn't POST and I hear the fans at high speed
> 7. I have to turn it off and on again and then I get a message that the system failed to POST last time, I go inside the BIOS and check my settings and continue
> 
> My BIOS settings are pretty much standard, I only have the D.O.C.P. profile enabled of my memory, I'm not doing any manual overclocking.


Did you do some memory error testing with TestMem5 or similiar? or just not setting D.O.C.P for a start to eliminate RAM OC instability?


----------



## 1usmus

*It is time to tell you about the features that will appear in Ryzen 3000* 




Spoiler



*Valhalla Common Options:*
* Performance
* Core Watchdog:
1) Core Watchdog Timer Enable
2) Core Watchdog Timer Interval
3) Core Watchdog Timer Severity

Soc Miscellaneous Control:
* ABL Console Out Control

BIXBY Common Options

Local APIC Mode:
1) xAPIC
2) x2APIC
3) Auto

MCA error thresh enable
1) False
2) True

MCA error thresh count

SMU and PSP Debug Mode
1) Disabled
2) Enabled
3) Auto

Xtrig7 Workaround
1) Auto
2) No Workaround
3) Bronze Workaround
4) Silver Workaround

PPIN Opt-in
1) Disabled
2) Enabled
3)Auto

CCD/Core/Thread Enablement
* CCD Control:
1) Auto
2) 2 CCDs
3) 3 CCDs
4) 4 CCDs
5) 6 CCDs

or

* CCD Control:
1) Auto
2) 2 CCDs
3) 3 CCDs
4) 4 CCDs

or

* CCD Control:
1) Auto
2) 1 CCDs

Core control:
1) Auto
2) TWO (1 + 1)
3) FOUR (2 + 2)
4) SIX (3 + 3)

Link:
CAKE CRC perf bounds Control
CAKE CRC perf bounds
4-link xGMI max speed
3-link xGMI max speed

System probe filter

PSP error injection support

NUMA nodes per socket:
1) NPS0
2) NPS1
3) NPS2
4) NPS4
5) Auto

1TB remap:
1) Do not remap
2) Attempt
3) Auto

DRAM map inversion:
1) Disabled
2) Enabled
3) Auto

ACPI
*ACPI SRAT L3 Cache As NUMA Domain
* ACPI SLIT Distance Control
* ACPI SLIT remote relative distance
* ACPI SLIT virtual distance
* ACPI SLIT same socket distance
* ACPI SLIT remote socket distance
* ACPI SLIT local SLink distance
* ACPI SLIT remote SLink distance
* ACPI SLIT local inter-SLink distance
* ACPI SLIT remote inter-SLink distance

Common RAS
* DRAM Post Package Repair
* RCD Parity
* DRAM Address Command Parity Retry
* Max Parity Error Replay
* Write CRC Enable
* DRAM Write CRC Enable and Retry Limit
* Max Write CRC Error Replay
* Disable Memory Error Injection

ECC Configuration
* DRAM UECC Retry

Security
* Chipselect Interleaving:
1) Disabled
2) Auto
Address Hash CS
Address Hash Rm

Memory MBIST
* MBIST Test Mode:
1) Interface Mode
2) Data Eye Mode
3) Both
4) Auto
* MBIST Per Bit Slave Die Reporting
1) Disabled
2) Enabled
3) Auto
* Pattern Select
1) PRBS
2) SSO
3) Both
* Pattern Length
* Aggressor Channel
* Aggressor Static Lane Control
* Aggressor Static Lane Select Upper 32 bits
* Aggressor Static Lane Select Lower 32 Bits
* Aggressor Static Lane Select ECC
* Aggressor Static Lane Value
* Target Static Lane Control
* Target Static Lane Select Upper 32 bit
* Target Static Lane Select Lower 32 Bits
* Static Lane Select ECC
* Target Static Lane Value
* Data Eye Type:
1) 1D Voltage Sweep
2) 1D Timing Sweep
3) 2D Full Data Eye
4) Worst Case Margin Only
* Worst Case Margin Granularity
* Read Voltage Sweep Step Size
* Read Timing Sweep Step Size
* Write Voltage Sweep Step Size
* Write Timing Sweep Step Size

XFR Enhancement:
1) FCLK Frequency
2) MEMCLK Frequency
3) UCLK DIV1 MODE:
a) Auto
b) UCLK==MEMCLK
c) UCLK==MEMCLK/2
+ precision boost override

SMU Common Options
* CLDO_VDDP Control
* EfficiencyModeEn
* Package Power Limit Control
* DF Cstates
* Fixed SOC Pstate
* CPPC

NTB Common Options
* Link Speed : Gen 4



*Translation into simple language. We have:*

1) New memory controller with partial error correction for nonECC memory
2) Desktop processor with two (2 CCD) chiplets on board, 32 threads maximum
3) New MBIST (Memory built-in self-test)
4) Core watchdog - is a fail/safe function used to reset a system in case the microprocessor gets lost due to address or data errors
5) XFR - at the moment I do not see anything special about it, the algorithm and limits have been updated. Scalar Controll come back with new processors.
6) Updated core control has a symmetric configuration of the active cores . In 2CCD configurations, each chiplet has its own RAM channel in order to minimize latency to memory access. 1 channel on 8 cores will be a bottleneck if you use the system in the default state. 
7) *PCI GEN 4 for CH7*

UPD: point number 6 is questionable, perhaps there will be a special long-range interface for connecting a chiplet with IO

This is not all information which I will gladden you in the near future


----------



## hurricane28

1usmus said:


> *It is time to tell you about the features that will appear in Ryzen 3000*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> *Valhalla Common Options:*
> * Performance
> * Core Watchdog:
> 1) Core Watchdog Timer Enable
> 2) Core Watchdog Timer Interval
> 3) Core Watchdog Timer Severity
> 
> Soc Miscellaneous Control:
> * ABL Console Out Control
> 
> BIXBY Common Options
> 
> Local APIC Mode:
> 1) xAPIC
> 2) x2APIC
> 3) Auto
> 
> MCA error thresh enable
> 1) False
> 2) True
> 
> MCA error thresh count
> 
> SMU and PSP Debug Mode
> 1) Disabled
> 2) Enabled
> 3) Auto
> 
> Xtrig7 Workaround
> 1) Auto
> 2) No Workaround
> 3) Bronze Workaround
> 4) Silver Workaround
> 
> PPIN Opt-in
> 1) Disabled
> 2) Enabled
> 3)Auto
> 
> CCD/Core/Thread Enablement
> * CCD Control:
> 1) Auto
> 2) 2 CCDs
> 3) 3 CCDs
> 4) 4 CCDs
> 5) 6 CCDs
> 
> or
> 
> * CCD Control:
> 1) Auto
> 2) 2 CCDs
> 3) 3 CCDs
> 4) 4 CCDs
> 
> or
> 
> * CCD Control:
> 1) Auto
> 2) 1 CCDs
> 
> Core control:
> 1) Auto
> 2) TWO (1 + 1)
> 3) FOUR (2 + 2)
> 4) SIX (3 + 3)
> 
> Link:
> CAKE CRC perf bounds Control
> CAKE CRC perf bounds
> 4-link xGMI max speed
> 3-link xGMI max speed
> 
> System probe filter
> 
> PSP error injection support
> 
> NUMA nodes per socket:
> 1) NPS0
> 2) NPS1
> 3) NPS2
> 4) NPS4
> 5) Auto
> 
> 1TB remap:
> 1) Do not remap
> 2) Attempt
> 3) Auto
> 
> DRAM map inversion:
> 1) Disabled
> 2) Enabled
> 3) Auto
> 
> ACPI
> *ACPI SRAT L3 Cache As NUMA Domain
> * ACPI SLIT Distance Control
> * ACPI SLIT remote relative distance
> * ACPI SLIT virtual distance
> * ACPI SLIT same socket distance
> * ACPI SLIT remote socket distance
> * ACPI SLIT local SLink distance
> * ACPI SLIT remote SLink distance
> * ACPI SLIT local inter-SLink distance
> * ACPI SLIT remote inter-SLink distance
> 
> Common RAS
> * DRAM Post Package Repair
> * RCD Parity
> * DRAM Address Command Parity Retry
> * Max Parity Error Replay
> * Write CRC Enable
> * DRAM Write CRC Enable and Retry Limit
> * Max Write CRC Error Replay
> * Disable Memory Error Injection
> 
> ECC Configuration
> * DRAM UECC Retry
> 
> Security
> * Chipselect Interleaving:
> 1) Disabled
> 2) Auto
> Address Hash CS
> Address Hash Rm
> 
> Memory MBIST
> * MBIST Test Mode:
> 1) Interface Mode
> 2) Data Eye Mode
> 3) Both
> 4) Auto
> * MBIST Per Bit Slave Die Reporting
> 1) Disabled
> 2) Enabled
> 3) Auto
> * Pattern Select
> 1) PRBS
> 2) SSO
> 3) Both
> * Pattern Length
> * Aggressor Channel
> * Aggressor Static Lane Control
> * Aggressor Static Lane Select Upper 32 bits
> * Aggressor Static Lane Select Lower 32 Bits
> * Aggressor Static Lane Select ECC
> * Aggressor Static Lane Value
> * Target Static Lane Control
> * Target Static Lane Select Upper 32 bit
> * Target Static Lane Select Lower 32 Bits
> * Static Lane Select ECC
> * Target Static Lane Value
> * Data Eye Type:
> 1) 1D Voltage Sweep
> 2) 1D Timing Sweep
> 3) 2D Full Data Eye
> 4) Worst Case Margin Only
> * Worst Case Margin Granularity
> * Read Voltage Sweep Step Size
> * Read Timing Sweep Step Size
> * Write Voltage Sweep Step Size
> * Write Timing Sweep Step Size
> 
> XFR Enhancement:
> 1) FCLK Frequency
> 2) MEMCLK Frequency
> 3) UCLK DIV1 MODE:
> a) Auto
> b) UCLK==MEMCLK
> c) UCLK==MEMCLK/2
> + precision boost override
> 
> SMU Common Options
> * CLDO_VDDP Control
> * EfficiencyModeEn
> * Package Power Limit Control
> * DF Cstates
> * Fixed SOC Pstate
> * CPPC
> 
> NTB Common Options
> * Link Speed : Gen 4
> 
> 
> 
> *Translation into simple language. We have:*
> 
> 1) New memory controller with partial error correction for nonECC memory
> 2) Desktop processor with two 2CCD chiplets on board, 32 threads maximum
> 3) New MBIST (Memory built-in self-test)
> 4) Core watchdog - is a fail/safe function used to reset a system in case the microprocessor gets lost due to address or data errors
> 5) XFR - at the moment I do not see anything special about it, the algorithm and limits have been updated. Scalar Controll come back with new processors.
> 6) Updated core control has a symmetric configuration of the active cores . Perhaps each chiplet has its own RAM channel in order to minimize latency to memory access. 1 channel on 8 cores will be a bottleneck if you use the system in the default state
> 
> This is not all information which I will gladden you in the near future


Thank you for the info man, although i am not upgrading CPU but GPU this year its still good to know. 

I am thinking on getting an 1660 TI or an 2070.


----------



## 1usmus

hurricane28 said:


> Thank you for the info man, although i am not upgrading CPU but GPU this year its still good to know.
> 
> I am thinking on getting an 1660 TI or an 2070.



After 3 months there will be an announcement of Navi. Wait she is a monster


----------



## crakej

1usmus said:


> After 3 months there will be an announcement of Navi. Wait she is a monster


Thanks for the information! V Exciting!


----------



## DAM20

On 1201 and 18.50.06 driver, still having a bit of performance drop...


----------



## Mannekino

Nighthog said:


> Did you do some memory error testing with TestMem5 or similiar? or just not setting D.O.C.P for a start to eliminate RAM OC instability?


Not yet, I'm going to run Memtest86+ this night when I'm sleeping and report back the results tomorrow. Haven't had any crashes today.


----------



## nick name

1usmus said:


> *It is time to tell you about the features that will appear in Ryzen 3000*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> *Valhalla Common Options:*
> * Performance
> * Core Watchdog:
> 1) Core Watchdog Timer Enable
> 2) Core Watchdog Timer Interval
> 3) Core Watchdog Timer Severity
> 
> Soc Miscellaneous Control:
> * ABL Console Out Control
> 
> BIXBY Common Options
> 
> Local APIC Mode:
> 1) xAPIC
> 2) x2APIC
> 3) Auto
> 
> MCA error thresh enable
> 1) False
> 2) True
> 
> MCA error thresh count
> 
> SMU and PSP Debug Mode
> 1) Disabled
> 2) Enabled
> 3) Auto
> 
> Xtrig7 Workaround
> 1) Auto
> 2) No Workaround
> 3) Bronze Workaround
> 4) Silver Workaround
> 
> PPIN Opt-in
> 1) Disabled
> 2) Enabled
> 3)Auto
> 
> CCD/Core/Thread Enablement
> * CCD Control:
> 1) Auto
> 2) 2 CCDs
> 3) 3 CCDs
> 4) 4 CCDs
> 5) 6 CCDs
> 
> or
> 
> * CCD Control:
> 1) Auto
> 2) 2 CCDs
> 3) 3 CCDs
> 4) 4 CCDs
> 
> or
> 
> * CCD Control:
> 1) Auto
> 2) 1 CCDs
> 
> Core control:
> 1) Auto
> 2) TWO (1 + 1)
> 3) FOUR (2 + 2)
> 4) SIX (3 + 3)
> 
> Link:
> CAKE CRC perf bounds Control
> CAKE CRC perf bounds
> 4-link xGMI max speed
> 3-link xGMI max speed
> 
> System probe filter
> 
> PSP error injection support
> 
> NUMA nodes per socket:
> 1) NPS0
> 2) NPS1
> 3) NPS2
> 4) NPS4
> 5) Auto
> 
> 1TB remap:
> 1) Do not remap
> 2) Attempt
> 3) Auto
> 
> DRAM map inversion:
> 1) Disabled
> 2) Enabled
> 3) Auto
> 
> ACPI
> *ACPI SRAT L3 Cache As NUMA Domain
> * ACPI SLIT Distance Control
> * ACPI SLIT remote relative distance
> * ACPI SLIT virtual distance
> * ACPI SLIT same socket distance
> * ACPI SLIT remote socket distance
> * ACPI SLIT local SLink distance
> * ACPI SLIT remote SLink distance
> * ACPI SLIT local inter-SLink distance
> * ACPI SLIT remote inter-SLink distance
> 
> Common RAS
> * DRAM Post Package Repair
> * RCD Parity
> * DRAM Address Command Parity Retry
> * Max Parity Error Replay
> * Write CRC Enable
> * DRAM Write CRC Enable and Retry Limit
> * Max Write CRC Error Replay
> * Disable Memory Error Injection
> 
> ECC Configuration
> * DRAM UECC Retry
> 
> Security
> * Chipselect Interleaving:
> 1) Disabled
> 2) Auto
> Address Hash CS
> Address Hash Rm
> 
> Memory MBIST
> * MBIST Test Mode:
> 1) Interface Mode
> 2) Data Eye Mode
> 3) Both
> 4) Auto
> * MBIST Per Bit Slave Die Reporting
> 1) Disabled
> 2) Enabled
> 3) Auto
> * Pattern Select
> 1) PRBS
> 2) SSO
> 3) Both
> * Pattern Length
> * Aggressor Channel
> * Aggressor Static Lane Control
> * Aggressor Static Lane Select Upper 32 bits
> * Aggressor Static Lane Select Lower 32 Bits
> * Aggressor Static Lane Select ECC
> * Aggressor Static Lane Value
> * Target Static Lane Control
> * Target Static Lane Select Upper 32 bit
> * Target Static Lane Select Lower 32 Bits
> * Static Lane Select ECC
> * Target Static Lane Value
> * Data Eye Type:
> 1) 1D Voltage Sweep
> 2) 1D Timing Sweep
> 3) 2D Full Data Eye
> 4) Worst Case Margin Only
> * Worst Case Margin Granularity
> * Read Voltage Sweep Step Size
> * Read Timing Sweep Step Size
> * Write Voltage Sweep Step Size
> * Write Timing Sweep Step Size
> 
> XFR Enhancement:
> 1) FCLK Frequency
> 2) MEMCLK Frequency
> 3) UCLK DIV1 MODE:
> a) Auto
> b) UCLK==MEMCLK
> c) UCLK==MEMCLK/2
> + precision boost override
> 
> SMU Common Options
> * CLDO_VDDP Control
> * EfficiencyModeEn
> * Package Power Limit Control
> * DF Cstates
> * Fixed SOC Pstate
> * CPPC
> 
> NTB Common Options
> * Link Speed : Gen 4
> 
> 
> 
> *Translation into simple language. We have:*
> 
> 1) New memory controller with partial error correction for nonECC memory
> 2) Desktop processor with two (2 CCD) chiplets on board, 32 threads maximum
> 3) New MBIST (Memory built-in self-test)
> 4) Core watchdog - is a fail/safe function used to reset a system in case the microprocessor gets lost due to address or data errors
> 5) XFR - at the moment I do not see anything special about it, the algorithm and limits have been updated. Scalar Controll come back with new processors.
> 6) Updated core control has a symmetric configuration of the active cores . In 2CCD configurations, each chiplet has its own RAM channel in order to minimize latency to memory access. 1 channel on 8 cores will be a bottleneck if you use the system in the default state.
> 7) *PCI GEN 4 for CH7*
> 
> This is not all information which I will gladden you in the near future


Ayyyy thanks for that 1usmus.


----------



## nick name

Mannekino said:


> Not yet, I'm going to run Memtest86+ this night when I'm sleeping and report back the results tomorrow. Haven't had any crashes today.


Thanks for the extra info. 

I've had the robot audio in the past, but it was on an old intel system and I can't remember what was the cause or even if I solved it. Sorry, I can't be more helpful.


----------



## Ceadderman

@1usmus Thank you so much for this update. Will Ryzen 3000 work on this board?

I finally got my early adopted 1800x up and running after waiting so long for RAM pricing to stabilize. I figured the board could wait. No RAM kinda made it a simple decision. I will upgrade to Navi and R 3000 in the next cycle since I had put off 1800x long enough and wish to get some use out of it in the meantime. So for now it's just a compatibility issue for me. 

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## hurricane28

1usmus said:


> After 3 months there will be an announcement of Navi. Wait she is a monster


I don't buy AMD GPU's  Nvidia fanboy lol.


----------



## 1usmus

Ceadderman said:


> @1usmus Thank you so much for this update. Will Ryzen 3000 work on this board?
> 
> I finally got my early adopted 1800x up and running after waiting so long for RAM pricing to stabilize. I figured the board could wait. No RAM kinda made it a simple decision. I will upgrade to Navi and R 3000 in the next cycle since I had put off 1800x long enough and wish to get some use out of it in the meantime. So for now it's just a compatibility issue for me.
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


Everything will be perfect, support is already there.



hurricane28 said:


> I don't buy AMD GPU's  Nvidia fanboy lol.


----------



## LightningManGTS

@1usmus is the independent clock control stuff live in the current bios? I plan on updating after I get out of work this evening and I figured I pick your brain while I'm minding time ????


----------



## Mannekino

Mannekino said:


> I've been experiencing PC crashes for the past 2-3 weeks or so, and they are increasing in frequency. Today it happened twice so far and I'm getting a bit worried.
> 
> I updated the BIOS of my motherboard back in januari to version 1201.
> 
> I can't find anything useful in the logs of Windows 10. How should proceed and troubleshoot this issues. It's getting quite annoying. Should I try and update to the latest BIOS?
> 
> Should I run a memory test first or maybe try a reinstall of Windows 10?





Mannekino said:


> Understandable, my specs are in my signature. What more information should I provide? That's the problem for me also, if I go into the Windows log files after rebooting my PC again there is nothing useful to be found.
> 
> This is what happens.
> 
> 1. I have two monitors my primary monitor goes completely black
> 2. My second monitor goes to a yellowish color all over the screen
> 3. The audio that I was playing gets all distorted, like a robot dying
> 4. After a while there is no more audio and I hear my two case fans ramp up
> 5. I have to turn off the PC by holding down the power button
> 6. When I turn on the PC again it doesn't POST and I hear the fans at high speed
> 7. I have to turn it off and on again and then I get a message that the system failed to POST last time, I go inside the BIOS and check my settings and continue
> 
> My BIOS settings are pretty much standard, I only have the D.O.C.P. profile enabled of my memory, I'm not doing any manual overclocking.


Quoted my original question and more explanation of what happens. I ran Memtest86+ last night for about 10 hours and no errors. How can I further troubleshoot this?


----------



## VicsPC

Mannekino said:


> Quoted my original question and more explanation of what happens. I ran Memtest86+ last night for about 10 hours and no errors. How can I further troubleshoot this?


Hopefully its not video card related, at this point i would reinstall windows (yes its a pain) and reinstall chipset drivers and video drivers with ur ehternet/wifi off. I have hard crashes sometimes when the power goes out and the pc reboots itself fine but will freeze at windows loading, then once it boots it will freeze in games, resetting cmos a few times fixes that for me, and it happens every time power goes out as well. Assuming the board is very finnicky with that.


----------



## Mannekino

VicsPC said:


> Hopefully its not video card related, at this point i would reinstall windows (yes its a pain) and reinstall chipset drivers and video drivers with ur ehternet/wifi off. I have hard crashes sometimes when the power goes out and the pc reboots itself fine but will freeze at windows loading, then once it boots it will freeze in games, resetting cmos a few times fixes that for me, and it happens every time power goes out as well. Assuming the board is very finnicky with that.


Should I wait with reinstalling Windows until AMD has released the new chipset driver on their own website? Apparently there is a new version of the chipset driver because ASUS stated that it strongly recommends installing version 18.50.06 with their latest BIOS.

I can't download this new version yet on the AMD site and it's not listed either on the ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (non-WIFI) version downloads page. It is listed on the ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO WIFI downloads page however.

Did ASUS make a mistake and forget to list the new chipset drivers on the downloads page of the non-WIFI model?


----------



## martinhal

I got my board over the weekend. Before I update the Bios , on what bios PBO best on ?


----------



## Ceadderman

1usmus said:


> Everything will be perfect, support is already there.


:wheee:

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## nick name

Mannekino said:


> Should I wait with reinstalling Windows until AMD has released the new chipset driver on their own website? Apparently there is a new version of the chipset driver because ASUS stated that it strongly recommends installing version 18.50.06 with their latest BIOS.
> 
> I can't download this new version yet on the AMD site and it's not listed either on the ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (non-WIFI) version downloads page. It is listed on the ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO WIFI downloads page however.
> 
> Did ASUS make a mistake and forget to list the new chipset drivers on the downloads page of the non-WIFI model?


If it's just the chipset drivers you need you can snag them from the wifi page. Heck, you can grab the X470 chipset drivers from any X470 motherboard page.


----------



## Alex K

Hi! Need a quick tip with memory for 2700х, does anybody has experience with this kit, especially with 4x8Gb install, can the timings be better: G.Skill Sniper X 2x8GB DDR4 PS4-25600 F4-3200C16D-16GSXFB
Of suggest something except Flare X, which can do 3200 with decent timings, Flare X is too much wait.


----------



## 1usmus

LightningManGTS said:


> @1usmus is the independent clock control stuff live in the current bios? I plan on updating after I get out of work this evening and I figured I pick your brain while I'm minding time ????


Are you interested in FCLK? if so, this is the same eCLK mode created for greater granularity when overclocking the processor


----------



## nick name

martinhal said:


> I got my board over the weekend. Before I update the Bios , on what bios PBO best on ?


1201 seems to do well, but I don't use plain PBO.


----------



## AmaKatsu

Alex K said:


> Hi! Need a quick tip with memory for 2700х, does anybody has experience with this kit, especially with 4x8Gb install, can the timings be better: G.Skill Sniper X 2x8GB DDR4 PS4-25600 F4-3200C16D-16GSXFB
> 
> Of suggest something except Flare X, which can do 3200 with decent timings, Flare X is too much wait.



8GBx4 is more headache, you may need to play with Rtt and ProcODT

I used 2 kits of HX432C16PB3K2/16 (not quad kit)

by individual, each kit can run 3800 without touching Rtt, DrvStr and ProcODT. but when they're on 8GBx4 everything like messed up.

Most stable for 1.40v is 3466 16-22-22-42 for me











Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Alex K

Thanks for the answer, currently looking on something similar to Flare X to get something like 3200-3400 CL14 (literally don't see any reason to run ram higher 3200 if it can run with decent timings)


----------



## Sptz

Hi everyone, 

I know this is for a different mobo but since the Bios is pretty similar I'd like to ask a couple of questions if I may? 
I own a R5 2600x, running on an Asus B450i and ram @3466mhz tight timings and - 0.06v cpu offset. (fully 24/7 stable) 

Just by switching to PE level 2 just gained me +100 score on cinebench. Woa, zero difference in temps really (running a dark rock 4 on it).

Would it be worth going for PE level 3? Would probably have to reduce the -0.06v offset I'm running right now though right? As it probably requires more voltage? 

Regarding XFR Enhancement / PBO:

[XFR Enhancement](https://i.imgur.com/IeT0voE.jpg)

It's on Auto, which would mean it's ON? Is it worth to turn it on? 

And regarding CPU Power Phase Control. Is it worth going for ASUS Optimised (or anything else in this section that I could tweak) instead of Auto? Would it help if I turn on PBO? 

[Digi+ Power Control](https://i.imgur.com/5ZYeS30.jpg)

Basically, I know what PBO is supposed to do but is it worth it? It's just annoying that Asus don't include these in their manual so no idea what Auto really means here.


----------



## Alex K

Also, can somebody tell me, if there is chance that this kit will work on ryzen 2700x with it's built in XMP:
https://www.amazon.com/G-SKILL-TridentZ-32GB-3200Mhz-F4-3200C16D-32GTZR/dp/B07DMNZY56


----------



## 1usmus

*AMD Ryzen Memory Tweaking & Overclocking Guide* by me

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_Memory_Tweaking_Overclocking_Guide/


----------



## mahN4

Sptz said:


> Hi everyone,
> 
> I know this is for a different mobo but since the Bios is pretty similar I'd like to ask a couple of questions if I may?
> I own a R5 2600x, running on an Asus B450i and ram @3466mhz tight timings and - 0.06v cpu offset. (fully 24/7 stable)
> 
> Just by switching to PE level 2 just gained me +100 score on cinebench. Woa, zero difference in temps really (running a dark rock 4 on it).
> 
> Would it be worth going for PE level 3? Would probably have to reduce the -0.06v offset I'm running right now though right? As it probably requires more voltage?
> 
> Regarding XFR Enhancement / PBO:
> 
> [XFR Enhancement](https://i.imgur.com/IeT0voE.jpg)
> 
> It's on Auto, which would mean it's ON? Is it worth to turn it on?
> 
> And regarding CPU Power Phase Control. Is it worth going for ASUS Optimised (or anything else in this section that I could tweak) instead of Auto? Would it help if I turn on PBO?
> 
> [Digi+ Power Control](https://i.imgur.com/5ZYeS30.jpg)
> 
> Basically, I know what PBO is supposed to do but is it worth it? It's just annoying that Asus don't include these in their manual so no idea what Auto really means here.





Care to share your results? Currently my highest score on a 2600x with 3400mhz fast settings and X370 Strix is 1446cb and single 176cb, but my board does not have the PE lvl's :/


----------



## Sptz

mahN4 said:


> Sptz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi everyone,
> 
> I know this is for a different mobo but since the Bios is pretty similar I'd like to ask a couple of questions if I may?
> I own a R5 2600x, running on an Asus B450i and ram @3466mhz tight timings and - 0.06v cpu offset. (fully 24/7 stable)
> 
> Just by switching to PE level 2 just gained me +100 score on cinebench. Woa, zero difference in temps really (running a dark rock 4 on it).
> 
> Would it be worth going for PE level 3? Would probably have to reduce the -0.06v offset I'm running right now though right? As it probably requires more voltage?
> 
> Regarding XFR Enhancement / PBO:
> 
> [XFR Enhancement](https://i.imgur.com/IeT0voE.jpg)
> 
> It's on Auto, which would mean it's ON? Is it worth to turn it on?
> 
> And regarding CPU Power Phase Control. Is it worth going for ASUS Optimised (or anything else in this section that I could tweak) instead of Auto? Would it help if I turn on PBO?
> 
> [Digi+ Power Control](https://i.imgur.com/5ZYeS30.jpg)
> 
> Basically, I know what PBO is supposed to do but is it worth it? It's just annoying that Asus don't include these in their manual so no idea what Auto really means here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care to share your results? Currently my highest score on a 2600x with 3400mhz fast settings and X370 Strix is 1446cb and single 176cb, but my board does not have the PE lvl's :/
Click to expand...

I only ran cinebench R20. First was 3003 or something similar, with PE level 2 it went to 3110


----------



## crakej

1usmus said:


> *AMD Ryzen Memory Tweaking & Overclocking Guide* by me
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_Memory_Tweaking_Overclocking_Guide/


Nice! Well done @1usmus - thanks for sharing your knowledge with us!


----------



## nick name

Alex K said:


> Also, can somebody tell me, if there is chance that this kit will work on ryzen 2700x with it's built in XMP:
> https://www.amazon.com/G-SKILL-TridentZ-32GB-3200Mhz-F4-3200C16D-32GTZR/dp/B07DMNZY56


I think there is a solid chance. It's not excessively fast or the tightest timings.


----------



## nick name

Sptz said:


> Hi everyone,
> 
> I know this is for a different mobo but since the Bios is pretty similar I'd like to ask a couple of questions if I may?
> I own a R5 2600x, running on an Asus B450i and ram @3466mhz tight timings and - 0.06v cpu offset. (fully 24/7 stable)
> 
> Just by switching to PE level 2 just gained me +100 score on cinebench. Woa, zero difference in temps really (running a dark rock 4 on it).
> 
> Would it be worth going for PE level 3? Would probably have to reduce the -0.06v offset I'm running right now though right? As it probably requires more voltage?
> 
> Regarding XFR Enhancement / PBO:
> 
> [XFR Enhancement](https://i.imgur.com/IeT0voE.jpg)
> 
> It's on Auto, which would mean it's ON? Is it worth to turn it on?
> 
> And regarding CPU Power Phase Control. Is it worth going for ASUS Optimised (or anything else in this section that I could tweak) instead of Auto? Would it help if I turn on PBO?
> 
> [Digi+ Power Control](https://i.imgur.com/5ZYeS30.jpg)
> 
> Basically, I know what PBO is supposed to do but is it worth it? It's just annoying that Asus don't include these in their manual so no idea what Auto really means here.



Honestly, you'll just have to try it.


----------



## Ceadderman

I got this memory for my board.

*G.SKILL TridentZ Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3200 (PC4 25600) Intel Z370 Platform Desktop Memory Model F4-3200C14D-16GTZSK*

I realize that it's geared more toward Intel but it was the only CAS 14 Latency RAM I could find w/o RGB. I purchased a pair of Monarch heatsinks to swap to my RAM and no RGB gives me the best chance of swapping into them.

I tried to get 3200 with Auto voltage and it failed. Pretty sure I could get 3200 minimum with some work involved but since they show up at 2133 w/o issue I haven't been in a hurry to increase the speed. POST failed once, I reverted to 2133 and it POSTed. So for now I am concentrating on getting my OS and other drives populated with my OS and gaming Library. This will take a while as I am just finishing up GTA V, which has been dl'ing off and on for 4 days. 

Anyway, anyone else running the above set? 

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## nick name

Ceadderman said:


> I got this memory for my board.
> 
> *G.SKILL TridentZ Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3200 (PC4 25600) Intel Z370 Platform Desktop Memory Model F4-3200C14D-16GTZSK*
> 
> I realize that it's geared more toward Intel but it was the only CAS 14 Latency RAM I could find w/o RGB. I purchase a pair of Monarch heatsinks to swap to my RAM and no RGB gives me the best chance of swapping into them.
> 
> I tried to get 3200 with Auto voltage and it failed. Pretty sure I could get 3200 minimum with some work involved but since they show up at 2133 w/o issue I haven't been in a hurry to increase the speed. POST failed once, I reverted to 2133 and it POSTed. So for now I am concentrating on getting my OS and other drives populated with my OS and gaming Library. This will take a while as I am just finishing up GTA V, which has been dl'ing off and on for 4 days.
> 
> Anyway, anyone else running the above set?
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


Yeah, my RAM doesn't run DOCP at 1.35V either. It takes about 1.37V. And if you're installing software and what not then running it at 2133MHz is a good idea if you haven't stabilized any other setting yet.


----------



## minal

1usmus said:


> *AMD Ryzen Memory Tweaking & Overclocking Guide* by me
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_Memory_Tweaking_Overclocking_Guide/


 Thanks, Yuri, for this incredibly detailed and practical article. I'm surprised there aren't more comments about it. Aside from the quality of the work on the article, the DRAM Calculator for Ryzen, etc, the consistency of the efforts over time deserves appreciation!

The article tempts me to try the suggestions just for curiosity, even though I'm using DR RAM (2 X 16GB 3200 b-die), linux only (most testing software is Windows only), and not a gamer (testing performance impact of RAM OC on compute applications would be great!).

A thought on OC stability: the tips and tricks page mentions Windows could be the source of problems, aside from OC stability. Additionally, couldn't instability during the OCing process introduce errors/corruption to the OS? So would it not be better to test OC in a live CD/USB environment and not risk corrupting an OS installation that is meant to be permanent?


----------



## Terror-Byter

*Mystery...*

He peeps. Was wondering if someone was either able to explain this behavior.


Basic info...
Crosshair VII Wifi, Bios 1201

2700X, PE/3, +0.05v, Offset, PBO on

100 Bclk, DDR 3400, 4x8 GB


Mystery is this... every day I see the max CPU frequency shoot up to impossible speeds.
Anywhere from 4700mhz all the way up to 6000mhz, most times at around 5000mhz.
This is reported in all monitoring apps, HWInfo, CpuZ, MWMonitor, you name it.


Cooler is a H115i, fans set on minimum, so this is no where near anything remotely extreme.
How and why are these speeds being reported. Software issue? Sensor Issue?


Is anyone else having this issue? Or anyone able to explain this?


----------



## nick name

Terror-Byter said:


> He peeps. Was wondering if someone was either able to explain this behavior.
> 
> 
> Basic info...
> Crosshair VII Wifi, Bios 1201
> 
> 2700X, PE/3, +0.05v, Offset, PBO on
> 
> 100 Bclk, DDR 3400, 4x8 GB
> 
> 
> Mystery is this... every day I see the max CPU frequency shoot up to impossible speeds.
> Anywhere from 4700mhz all the way up to 6000mhz, most times at around 5000mhz.
> This is reported in all monitoring apps, HWInfo, CpuZ, MWMonitor, you name it.
> 
> 
> Cooler is a H115i, fans set on minimum, so this is no where near anything remotely extreme.
> How and why are these speeds being reported. Software issue? Sensor Issue?
> 
> 
> Is anyone else having this issue? Or anyone able to explain this?



HWmonitor does this, but I've never seen HWiNFO do it. However, if they are open at the same time then maybe HWiNFO will show false readings too. Again, though, I have never seen HWiNFO do it myself or reported by anyone else.


----------



## Terror-Byter

nick name said:


> HWmonitor does this, but I've never seen HWiNFO do it. However, if they are open at the same time then maybe HWiNFO will show false readings too. Again, though, I have never seen HWiNFO do it myself or reported by anyone else.



Hmm... yes I do usually have HMMotinor open at the same time, ill try running all apps seperatly from eachother and report back, but I have even seen it on CPU-Z, caught my eye a couple of times, and like schrodinger's cat, when you arent looking at CPU-Z is when it happens, and when you do look at it, it doesnt happen. You have to have it open and be looking roughly 22.2 pixels away


----------



## Sn0ops

*NBIO Options HDaudio / System responsivness / input lag*

Hello 

I got questions concerning the following:

I have setup the following in my Bios:

CMS = Off (standard = on)
Bootmode = Windows Uefi Only
XHCI Hand off = disabled (standard = enabled,is required for Windows 7)
USB Legacy = auto
HD Onboard Sound / Controller= disabled
Fastboot = off
+ Ramsettings.

NEW: HD AUDIO Enable = diabled 

-> As far as I know, these should be the best settings for Windows 10 latest offic. Version 1809. Please correct me if im Wrong.



With these settings also with latest Bios 2008 + latest Chipset Gaming is very nice. No Problems!


As im very sensitive to input lag / responsiveness of my PC, due to competitive Gaming - I still felt there was something off with my System.

-> I checked the Bios again (also valid for older Versions).

Under Advanced Settings -> AMD CBS -> NBIO Options -> HD AUDIO Enable (was set to auto) -> I disabled it it! And it was like a gamechanger... !!!

Could somebody explain what this options exactly does? I could not find any information about it. In my case it creates defnetly a lot of inputlag / desync - escpecially in CS GO, but also other games have been effected.

Tracking my Wintimetester after change it to disabled also shows more constant Ratio of 0,99999 or 1,0000.
Before often drops to 0,98 etc.


Thanks for your help & im still open minded for further Bios Tweaking hints! 
These settings which mentions about are working like a charm.
______________________________________

My System Specs:

CPU: RYZEN 2700X
RAM: 16 GB G.Skill Flare X (3200 MhZ - CL 14)
Motherboard: ASUS Crosshair Hero VII
GFX: Saphire RX Vega 56 + Nitro
PSU: Seasonic Prime - 750 Watt 
Cooler: Water Cooled by Artic Liquid Freezer 360
OS: WIN 10 - 64 bit - Pro N - 1809
M2: Samsung 970 EVO Plus


----------



## nick name

Sn0ops said:


> Hello
> 
> -snip-



When I use WinTimerTester my Query Performance Frequency is 3.6MHz and not 10MHz. What's this tool used to measure?


----------



## Sn0ops

nick name said:


> When I use WinTimerTester my Query Performance Frequency is 3.6MHz and not 10MHz. What's this tool used to measure?


Your listed Frequency is due to your Windows Version. Windows 1809 has a new QPC of 10 Mhz.

You are using Windows 10 Version 1803 or below. (check by typ "winver") in search function.


----------



## Conenubi701

Does disabling HD Audio disable your front panel or rear I/o audio ports?



Sn0ops said:


> Hello
> 
> I got questions concerning the following:
> 
> I have setup the following in my Bios:
> 
> CMS = Off (standard = on)
> Bootmode = Windows Uefi Only
> XHCI Hand off = disabled (standard = enabled,is required for Windows 7)
> USB Legacy = auto
> HD Onboard Sound / Controller= disabled
> Fastboot = off
> + Ramsettings.
> 
> NEW: HD AUDIO Enable = diabled
> 
> -> As far as I know, these should be the best settings for Windows 10 latest offic. Version 1809. Please correct me if im Wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> With these settings also with latest Bios 2008 + latest Chipset Gaming is very nice. No Problems!
> 
> 
> As im very sensitive to input lag / responsiveness of my PC, due to competitive Gaming - I still felt there was something off with my System.
> 
> -> I checked the Bios again (also valid for older Versions).
> 
> Under Advanced Settings -> AMD CBS -> NBIO Options -> HD AUDIO Enable (was set to auto) -> I disabled it it! And it was like a gamechanger... !!!
> 
> Could somebody explain what this options exactly does? I could not find any information about it. In my case it creates defnetly a lot of inputlag / desync - escpecially in CS GO, but also other games have been effected.
> 
> Tracking my Wintimetester after change it to disabled also shows more constant Ratio of 0,99999 or 1,0000.
> Before often drops to 0,98 etc.
> 
> 
> Thanks for your help & im still open minded for further Bios Tweaking hints!
> These settings which mentions about are working like a charm.
> ______________________________________
> 
> My System Specs:
> 
> CPU: RYZEN 2700X
> RAM: 16 GB G.Skill Flare X (3200 MhZ - CL 14)
> Motherboard: ASUS Crosshair Hero VII
> GFX: Saphire RX Vega 56 + Nitro
> PSU: Seasonic Prime - 750 Watt
> Cooler: Water Cooled by Artic Liquid Freezer 360
> OS: WIN 10 - 64 bit - Pro N - 1809
> M2: Samsung 970 EVO Plus


----------



## nick name

Sn0ops said:


> Your listed Frequency is due to your Windows Version. Windows 1809 has a new QPC of 10 Mhz.
> 
> You are using Windows 10 Version 1803 or below. (check by typ "winver") in search function.


I Googled, but never saw that answer -- so thank you.


----------



## Terror-Byter

*Latency*

While on this topic... one thing Ive run into is horrible latency issues, where my sound would for a split second stutter. 



After having tried disabling multiple systems, and reading up on tons of latency related issues, what solved it for me was a combination of a few things . Firstly, the AMD sata drivers, especially the virtualized driver that gets installed by storeMi, produces a ton of latency and audio issues. Once I unintsalled the AMD Virtualized sata driver, or StoreMi version, the problems diminshed, but were still there, just less frequent.


The next thing I did, was enable Raid mode in the bios and installed the AMD raid drivers, but just used the drives as they are without creating an AMD raid. This too diminished the latency issues, and only happened once every hour or so. I didnt stop there, I kept reading, and googling. Using all kinds of latency monitoring apps, and trying out various ideas posted on a bunch of forums... until very recently I came across this https://www.tenforums.com/tutorials/72971-add-ahci-link-power-management-power-options-windows.html


This seemed to have been the final nail on the coffin for Latency issues, and with the steps I mentioned before and following that guide my latency now looks like this... and I do use the onboard sound card... havent disabled anything onboard now.


And OH, one final note, something I ran into while chancing from AHCI to Raid in the bios, was an infinite windows loading screen. The way I got around this was to hit the reset button every time windows would forever load, eventually getting to the recovery screen, then boot into safemode, did nothing, and reboot. Probem solved for me.



Hope that helps some of you


----------



## Terror-Byter

*Impossible MegaHURTS*



nick name said:


> HWmonitor does this, but I've never seen HWiNFO do it. However, if they are open at the same time then maybe HWiNFO will show false readings too. Again, though, I have never seen HWiNFO do it myself or reported by anyone else.



So I tried using different apps to monitor cpu frequency seperatly from eachother, tried each app after a reboot, couldnt CPU-Z in the act, but HWinfo reported 4712 and 4997 after a reboot, unfortunatelt while I was taking a screen shot the pc locked up, since Im still trying to find a stable PE/3 OC on this system. However, a few runs of 3Dmark, also show this bizzare increase in cpu frequency.


4,466 MHz https://www.3dmark.com/spy/6652865
4,581 MHz https://www.3dmark.com/spy/6652757
4,668 MHz https://www.3dmark.com/spy/6652488
4,672 MHz https://www.3dmark.com/fs/18784776
4,972 MHz https://www.3dmark.com/spy/6650444
4,957 MHz https://www.3dmark.com/fs/16721661


I cant for the life of me figure out whats going on... there is no way in hell this chip is doing that


Finnaly got a ss of hwinfo with a a higher boost speed of even what Derbaur and Elmo got on LN2  (No its not a real OC, its just some weird stuff happening on my system Im trying to figure out)


----------



## nick name

Terror-Byter said:


> So I tried using different apps to monitor cpu frequency seperatly from eachother, tried each app after a reboot, couldnt CPU-Z in the act, but HWinfo reported 4712 and 4997 after a reboot, unfortunatelt while I was taking a screen shot the pc locked up, since Im still trying to find a stable PE/3 OC on this system. However, a few runs of 3Dmark, also show this bizzare increase in cpu frequency.
> 
> 
> 4,466 MHz https://www.3dmark.com/spy/6652865
> 4,581 MHz https://www.3dmark.com/spy/6652757
> 4,668 MHz https://www.3dmark.com/spy/6652488
> 4,672 MHz https://www.3dmark.com/fs/18784776
> 4,972 MHz https://www.3dmark.com/spy/6650444
> 4,957 MHz https://www.3dmark.com/fs/16721661
> 
> 
> I cant for the life of me figure out whats going on... there is no way in hell this chip is doing that
> 
> 
> Finnaly got a ss of hwinfo with a a higher boost speed of even what Derbaur and Elmo got on LN2  (No its not a real OC, its just some weird stuff happening on my system Im trying to figure out)


I've seen 3dmark give bad readings, but I've never seen HWiNFO give bad readings. What else are you running? There has to be something interfering that might be running in the background. What do you have installed?


----------



## w00dstock

so i need little basic help, the ch7 has 2 eatx power slots on the top left corner with one is 4 pin connector (Eatx12V_1) and other is 2 pin connector (eatx12V_2) but i dont have the pin for the latter so what should i do ?
psu is rmx1000, this is was my first build so little confusing or should i just plug in half leave the rest as it is ?


----------



## d3nso

The second eps power connector is not necsesary but this should be also statet in the manual.


----------



## w00dstock

d3nso said:


> The second atx power connector is not necsesary but this should be also stated in the manual.


so if i am to plug in the second eps cable is it safe to just leave the other 4 pin hanging, since one cable has 2 x 4 pins which can be detached from each other.


----------



## d3nso

Yes 4+4 eps connector is able to deliver up to 235W, so more than you will ever need even with basic overclocking.


----------



## crakej

w00dstock said:


> so if i am to plug in the second eps cable is it safe to just leave the other 4 pin hanging, since one cable has 2 x 4 pins which can be detached from each other.


Yes, You must use the 8 pin (4+4) connector - the 4 pin connector is optional, and should not be used on it's own. I have both connected.


----------



## Flexarius

PCI GEN 4 for CH7 ?

Great!


----------



## Ceadderman

Only need the 8 pin connection populated with 4+4. The single 4pin stays unpopulated unless you plan to put this board under LN2. It's for Extreme power use only.

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## LicSqualo

Terror-Byter said:


> While on this topic... one thing Ive run into is horrible latency issues, where my sound would for a split second stutter.
> 
> 
> 
> After having tried disabling multiple systems, and reading up on tons of latency related issues, what solved it for me was a combination of a few things . Firstly, the AMD sata drivers, especially the virtualized driver that gets installed by storeMi, produces a ton of latency and audio issues. Once I unintsalled the AMD Virtualized sata driver, or StoreMi version, the problems diminshed, but were still there, just less frequent.
> 
> 
> The next thing I did, was enable Raid mode in the bios and installed the AMD raid drivers, but just used the drives as they are without creating an AMD raid. This too diminished the latency issues, and only happened once every hour or so. I didnt stop there, I kept reading, and googling. Using all kinds of latency monitoring apps, and trying out various ideas posted on a bunch of forums... until very recently I came across this https://www.tenforums.com/tutorials/72971-add-ahci-link-power-management-power-options-windows.html
> 
> 
> This seemed to have been the final nail on the coffin for Latency issues, and with the steps I mentioned before and following that guide my latency now looks like this... and I do use the onboard sound card... havent disabled anything onboard now.
> 
> 
> And OH, one final note, something I ran into while chancing from AHCI to Raid in the bios, was an infinite windows loading screen. The way I got around this was to hit the reset button every time windows would forever load, eventually getting to the recovery screen, then boot into safemode, did nothing, and reboot. Probem solved for me.
> 
> 
> 
> Hope that helps some of you


Have you updated your windows? Which release you have? Mine, as example, is 1809 (RS5) build 17763.
I remember months ago something happened about the bios WMI and windows timer so Hwinfo and all the same software (or the same windows) had to update accordingly to read correctly the CPU speed.

DPCLatency is know to have bad reading in windows 10. Best is LatencyMon (here: https://www.resplendence.com/latencymon).

Regarding to switch from AHCI to RAID was really a bad idea. Luckily you solved, but there is a correct way to switch, if you need-it, and google-it and/or wiki can help you.


----------



## Terror-Byter

LicSqualo said:


> Have you updated your windows? Which release you have? Mine, as example, is 1809 (RS5) build 17763.
> I remember months ago something happened about the bios WMI and windows timer so Hwinfo and all the same software (or the same windows) had to update accordingly to read correctly the CPU speed.
> 
> DPCLatency is know to have bad reading in windows 10. Best is LatencyMon (here: https://www.resplendence.com/latencymon).
> 
> Regarding to switch from AHCI to RAID was really a bad idea. Luckily you solved, but there is a correct way to switch, if you need-it, and google-it and/or wiki can help you.



Yes I did use latencymon to narrow down what was causing the latency issue, for me it tunred out to be storport.sys the windows storage manager driver, but it was only a symptom. I then knew it had something to do with storage. Things I tried to narrow it down further was uninstalling the Samsung NVME driver and downloading the latest and re-installing that, which had no effect. What did have an effect is when I completely disabled the sata controllers in the bios. But since I had drives on those ports which I need to use, I had to re-enable them, which then took me down the path of trying various versions of the sata drivers. Both from AMD, StoreMi, and the windows default ones. The AMD and StoreMi drivers turned out to be the worse ones causing audio stutters every 10-15 minutes or so, no matter which version of the driver I used. The default windows sata driver only caused alot less audio stutters, only every hour or so, but were still present, and thats when I thought I trying to different way of accessing the drives on those ports using a completely different kind of driver ie. the RAID driver. This then only caused Audio stutters once or twice per day. And only after I added the AHCI power managment option and configured it via that link in my previos post did the audio stutters completely go away. I then tried out the AHCI driver again (Not RAID) and the stutters were back. So I just defaulted to using the RAID drivers. And with the current configuration, my system is now very snappy, really good responsiveness on mouse and keyboard, especially in gaming, and no stutters at all. And no high latency reported by latencymon due to storeport.sys.


Windows is the latest version too... Windows 10 Pro 1809, 17763.379


It might also be worth noting that I have 4 drives on my sata ports... 2x 1tb ssds, and 2x 8tb WD Reds, both setup as a Storagespace mirror arrays. I cant say for sure, but this might very well be a contributing factor. There is a reason for going the Storagespace mirror route though. The reason for mirror, is a no brainer, but the reason for using Storeagespaces instead of other mirror raid options are for compatability. If my AMD system dies, I can just pull those drives out, and slap them into my X79 board, and all the data is there. If I had set up an AMD Mirror array, those drives would not have been accesable on my Intel board. I also considered getting a cheap LSI Raid controller off ebay, but I couldnt find a good PCI-e x4 card for that. They all seem to be PCI-e X8 cards, which means having to sacrifce 8 lanes just for that card, leaving only 8 lanes left for the Titan X Pascal.


This has been a 7 month battle with this AMD Ryzen platform for me. Only now, finnaly my system is running smoothly and snappy, leaving me more time to focus on whats truely important... DRAM OVERCLOCKING


----------



## Terror-Byter

nick name said:


> I've seen 3dmark give bad readings, but I've never seen HWiNFO give bad readings. What else are you running? There has to be something interfering that might be running in the background. What do you have installed?



I had considered there might have been something in the background, old driver or something interfiering with the readings, so at one point I took out the nvme, and fresh installed Windows 10 on a sata ssd I have spare. Clean install, and installed nothing else, not even drivers. I ran monitoring apps off a usb stick, and found the same wierd cpu speed peaks. Then installed all AMD and hardware official but basic drivers, as in no bloaty software, and still the same thing. My only conclusion now is that it must be a faulty sensor, either within the cpu, or the motherboard. It doesnt really cause any noticible issues, or add any extra performace as the numbers seem to suggest, I still get more or less the same benchmark performance numbers everyone else gets, and no crashes when it happens... and now while Im actually writing this... im wondering... could this be the cause or related to the latency issues I had... hmm... food for thought. Other than getting another chip and board... cant think of what else to try to narrow down the crazy cpu speeds occasionally reported.


----------



## nick name

Anyone else see that the next Crosshair series will include the Hero and the Formula?

Edit:

And the Impact? What is the Impact?


----------



## numlock66

nick name said:


> Anyone else see that the next Crosshair series will include the Hero and the Formula?


https://wccftech.com/asus-x570-motherboards-next-gen-amd-ryzen-3000-cpus-leak-out/


----------



## nick name

numlock66 said:


> https://wccftech.com/asus-x570-motherboards-next-gen-amd-ryzen-3000-cpus-leak-out/


https://videocardz.com/newz/upcoming-asus-x570-motherboards


----------



## crakej

Very interesting! Of course it's rumoured that CH7 will get PCIE 4 with CPU upgrade - which would be very cool as not long had to replace my motherboard so can't justify buying a new one.  I'll get SO frustrated knowing my CPU is being held back by not updating my motherboard!

Very happy now I have my lovely 16 threads back after my 24 hour experiment with the 2200G - great cpu if you're on a budget, but I couldn't wait to get my 1700x back in!

Alza have picked up my G.Skill memory for RMA - hopefully that goes nice and smoothly and they just replace it. I hate hanging around for RMAs! Also, my Hynix Vengeance LPX doesn't seem to OC too well, but going to try working way up to 3466..... this dual rank memory seems to OC quite differently. It does run more efficiently, but harder (so far) to OC.


----------



## Ceadderman

crakej said:


> Very interesting! Of course it's rumoured that CH7 will get PCIE 4 with CPU upgrade - which would be very cool as not long had to replace my motherboard so can't justify buying a new one.  I'll get SO frustrated knowing my CPU is being held back by not updating my motherboard!
> 
> Very happy now I have my lovely 16 threads back after my 24 hour experiment with the 2200G - great cpu if you're on a budget, but I couldn't wait to get my 1700x back in!
> 
> Alza have picked up my G.Skill memory for RMA - hopefully that goes nice and smoothly and they just replace it. I hate hanging around for RMAs! Also, my Hynix Vengeance LPX doesn't seem to OC too well, but going to try working way up to 3466..... this dual rank memory seems to OC quite differently. It does run more efficiently, but harder (so far) to OC.


Meh. 4.0 would be nice, but I have gotten along just fine w/o it. I doubt there is a switch prebuilt into this board that would enable it by simply replacing the CPU.

I do plan to upgrade later but am wondering if R9 will work on this board or if it's the EPYC socket only. Cause that would be an awesome jump in performance over R7 1800x performance. I would pay the listed msrp of $560 for that. Paid $500 for my early adopted chip when purchased from Newegg. 

Hopefully R9 does work. Not that my system is specifically a workstation system. Mine is a do everything as necessary system. But hot damn I want that chip, I have a little kid so photos and videos go hand in hand with being a parent. Cannot wait to know if R9 is compatible with this board. :wheee:

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## crakej

Ceadderman said:


> Meh. 4.0 would be nice, but I have gotten along just fine w/o it. I doubt there is a switch prebuilt into this board that would enable it by simply replacing the CPU.
> 
> I do plan to upgrade later but am wondering if R9 will work on this board or if it's the EPYC socket only. Cause that would be an awesome jump in performance over R7 1800x performance. I would pay the listed msrp of $560 for that. Paid $500 for my early adopted chip when purchased from Newegg.
> 
> Hopefully R9 does work. Not that my system is specifically. Mine is a do everything as necessary system. But hot damn I want that chip, I have a little kid so photos and videos go hand in hand with being a parent. Cannot wait to know if R9 is compatible with this board. :wheee:
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


Rumour has it that PCIE 4 uses the same bus, and that because the tracks on the CH7 are under a certain length, PCIE 4 may work out of the box, but it's not confirmed yet. Obviously this would only work on the CPU connected bus, not the chipset. If it works on the M.2 slot, we could have double speed M.2 which would be quite nice 

I'm sure our boards can support the 16 core part - we're hardly drawing anything compared to what it could do! I'm up for the 3700x 12 core myself.


----------



## Ceadderman

crakej said:


> Rumour has it that PCIE 4 uses the same bus, and that because the tracks on the CH7 are under a certain length, PCIE 4 may work out of the box, but it's not confirmed yet. Obviously this would only work on the CPU connected bus, not the chipset. If it works on the M.2 slot, we could have double speed M.2 which would be quite nice
> 
> I'm sure our boards can support the 16 core part - we're hardly drawing anything compared to what it could do! I'm up for the 3700x 12 core myself.


Yeah I could stand 8thread increase over current setup if that's what I am locked to. Rather have the R9 however. Get a load of that 5.1ghz boost clock.  :wheee: 

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## crakej

Anyone know what these other CH8 boards are? How are they better than the Hero?

Formula? Impact??


----------



## Conenubi701

crakej said:


> Anyone know what these other CH8 boards are? How are they better than the Hero?
> 
> Formula? Impact??


Formula has always been the best of the best. Highest rated components. Considering ASUS went to cheaper VRMs on their high end boards AFTER the Crosshair VII released my bet would be on the CH8 Formula being at least on par with the CH7

Impact is their ITX lineup.

I really wish we had a CH8 Gene since those are their M-ATX boards but ATX is fine with me


----------



## Ceadderman

Conenubi701 said:


> Formula has always been the best of the best. Highest rated components. Considering ASUS went to cheaper VRMs on their high end boards AFTER the Crosshair VII released my bet would be on the CH8 Formula being at least on par with the CH7
> 
> Impact is their ITX lineup.
> 
> I really wish we had a CH8 Gene since those are their M-ATX boards but ATX is fine with me


Not sure Formula is even necessary as Hero is pretty much that segment in the RoG lineup. But we don't have an Extreme board in this lineup and haven't had one since CIVFormula. I have had both CIVFormula and CIVFExtreme. 

There was no Extreme for CVFormula. Probably cause it would kill FX chips in the blink of an eye. FX was notoriously hot IME. Had to RMA a Client chip because it couldn't stay below TDP threshold when Folding. A bnib chip should be able to do that right out of the box. 

No Extreme for Crosshair VI either. 

I think that should be the focus for Crosshair VIII Formula. Although I have absolutely no idea why the Strix boards even exist? Other than being the best boards in the AMD 50 series nomenclature. Which has only been around for a few iterations iirc. B250 was initial release for R(*) 1*** CPU series. 

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## ComansoRowlett

Honestly from Asus I want a proper overclocking board, with 2 dimms slots for better memory overclocking, obviously the X570 new features and a VRM capable of handling a maxed out 16 core and all the other good stuff we see on the Intel side. I'm hoping since a Formula is coming this will be what we'll be getting, then the CH8 will just be the successor to the CH7.


----------



## Ceadderman

ComansoRowlett said:


> Honestly from Asus I want a proper overclocking board, with 2 dimms slots for better memory overclocking, obviously the X570 new features and a VRM capable of handling a maxed out 16 core and all the other good stuff we see on the Intel side. I'm hoping since a Formula is coming this will be what we'll be getting, then the CH8 will just be the successor to the CH7.


Aleady have it. Well mostly. CPU is where you are limited to two DIMM slots. It's not an issue with any AIB partner specifically limiting their own platforms. 

This is an AMD issue that goes back to Phenom or even before then.

I myself would like to see many of those issues rectified, but it's not ASUS we need to implore to make these fixes. 

The one nice thing about Ryzen, is we can populate all 4 DIMM Slots reasonably well. Even if we cannot OC with them filled. At least that's what I have heard. I only have two sticks ATM, so I cannot test with 4 slots populated. 

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## ComansoRowlett

Ceadderman said:


> Aleady have it. Well mostly. CPU is where you are limited to two DIMM slots. It's not an issue with any AIB partner specifically limiting their own platforms.
> 
> This is an AMD issue that goes back to Phenom or even before then.
> 
> I myself would like to see many of those issues rectified, but it's not ASUS we need to implore to make these fixes.
> 
> The one nice thing about Ryzen, is we can populate all 4 DIMM Slots reasonably well. Even if we cannot OC with them filled. At least that's what I have heard. I only have two sticks ATM, so I cannot test with 4 slots populated.
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


I'm talking like something like the EVGA Z390 dark, or the Z390 Apex, where you physically only have 1 dimm slot per channel thus allowing for less strain on the IMC so you can push the memory further since the other 2 slots aren't physically there. I want a full on balls the walls OC/XOC motherboard, where they're trying to drag every last MHz/timing possible. But for people who want 4 dimms populated for the platform they could for example go for a CH8 (or don't necessarily desire every last mhz or can afford it) where as say the Formula might be the board which does what I'm talking about.


----------



## nick name

Ceadderman said:


> Not sure Formula is even necessary as Hero is pretty much that segment in the RoG lineup. But we don't have an Extreme board in this lineup and haven't had one since CIVFormula. I have had both CIVFormula and CIVFExtreme.
> 
> There was no Extreme for CVFormula. Probably cause it would kill FX chips in the blink of an eye. FX was notoriously hot IME. Had to RMA a Client chip because it couldn't stay below TDP threshold when Folding. A bnib chip should be able to do that right out of the box.
> 
> No Extreme for Crosshair VI either.
> 
> I think that should be the focus for Crosshair VIII Formula. Although I have absolutely no idea why the Strix boards even exist? Other than being the best boards in the AMD 50 series nomenclature. Which has only been around for a few iterations iirc. B250 was initial release for R(*) 1*** CPU series.
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


Wasn't there a Crosshair VI Extreme? At least there is on their website. 

And the image that was leaked of the Crosshair VIII Formula showed lots of armor(?) on the front and back of the board. Similar to what they do with their other Formula Intel boards. 

And the Strix boards have more BIOS features with solid, but not the best, hardware.


----------



## crakej

Thanks Guys - of course I will have to stick with my CH7, but I'm sure Ryzen 3xxx will run just fine on our boards...

Just can't wait to see what other features the X570 chipset will bring


----------



## Ceadderman

nick name said:


> Wasn't there a Crosshair VI Extreme? At least there is on their website.
> 
> And the image that was leaked of the Crosshair VIII Formula showed lots of armor(?) on the front and back of the board. Similar to what they do with their other Formula Intel boards.
> 
> And the Strix boards have more BIOS features with solid, but not the best, hardware.


Now that you mention it, yeah I do believe they did. Although I never saw one in the wild. If I remember correctly it was EATX. And I do remember an EATX offering. Primarily since I needed ATX over that form factor. :blinksmil lol 

CIVFormula never got the armor option. But I do know that their Intel boards got it after z99 was introduced. But if this is ASUS's lone selling feature over CHVIIHero, I will happily camp on this board.

We'll have to wait and see. Never know what feature ASUS will pull out of their backside. I still have the cable connect cable that allows you to overclock from a laptop instead of on the desktop. Purely a kitschy feature but it could still be used if I wanted to. 

Then there was that stand alone 5.25 device they came out with? Forgot the name of it because I never got the CHVFormula board. Chose to skip it cause CHIVFormula had the same features with a BIOS update allowing for FX chip. Mine is locked to 1100t cause I was not impressed with FX chips both a client and my brother got 8125s' and client temps simply couldn't handle [email protected] test. Hit TDP in 5 minutes flat. RMA'ed that sucker immediately. Imagine if I dropped it into IBT hot water. Woulda killed it dead. So I waited and let my younger have all the glory with that one.  lol 

I kinda jumped aboard R7 1800x but the market was checked with issues. So I waited them out and my $500 chip served time as a paperweight. :doh:

So we shall see what happens with 3*** series. 

Gonna hold off it for a minute, but I will likely upgrade to R9 3850x and stay on this board. Seems to be the sweet spot for platforms atm. 

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## poliacido

i am pretty sure our CH7 will handle ryzen 3xxx pretty well regarding power delivery
the big question is: what new usefull features (for OC) will X570 have? and i am not talking about PCIE4.... honestly i couldn't care less


----------



## Keith Myers

I'm curious what the "real" achievable core clocks will be under compute loads.


----------



## westk

The 2008 BIOS has fixed the PBO issue?


----------



## Jackalito

westk said:


> The 2008 BIOS has fixed the PBO issue?


I've got the same doubt. Can anyone please enlighten us? Thanks


----------



## crakej

poliacido said:


> i am pretty sure our CH7 will handle ryzen 3xxx pretty well regarding power delivery
> the big question is: what new usefull features (for OC) will X570 have? and i am not talking about PCIE4.... honestly i couldn't care less


I'm very interested in the new chipset. It's a shame they chose to release new chipset every year. Still, you can't have everything! I'll be gutted if X470 holds me back.

We'll find out soon


----------



## Ceadderman

crakej said:


> I'm very interested in the new chipset. It's a shame they chose to release new chipset every year. Still, you can't have everything! I'll be gutted if X470 holds me back.
> 
> We'll find out soon


I won't be. I would give my Bro(@ a discount) my current x470 board and grab a x570. 

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## westk

Jackalito said:


> I've got the same doubt. Can anyone please enlighten us? Thanks


Is not fixed in the 2008 version.


----------



## Jackalito

westk said:


> Is not fixed in the 2008 version.


Thank you for confirming this. Doesn't PBO work or is the feature missing altogether? 
Thanks again.


----------



## AmaKatsu

Keith Myers said:


> I'm curious what the "real" achievable core clocks will be under compute loads.



I think gaming and some functions video editing benefits from this, many game not use much core. They aiming for GHz. Like a 2700x with 30% load on Tom Clancy: Division 2 boost to 4.35GHz while Video Editing like Premier Pro loves GHz too. When use Razor Tool you'll see Pr not utilize all core but some core with boost


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Keith Myers

AmaKatsu said:


> I think gaming and some functions video editing benefits from this, many game not use much core. They aiming for GHz. Like a 2700x with 30% load on Tom Clancy: Division 2 boost to 4.35GHz while Video Editing like Premier Pro loves GHz too. When use Razor Tool you'll see Pr not utilize all core but some core with boost
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


As a citizen science data cruncher, all I care about is maximum all core boost under 100% loading. Floating point GFLOPS/sec is KING>


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> As a citizen science data cruncher, all I care about is maximum all core boost under 100% loading. Floating point GFLOPS/sec is KING>


Have you checked out my post:

https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...tiplier-adjustments-through-ryzen-master.html


----------



## Keith Myers

nick name said:


> Have you checked out my post:
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...tiplier-adjustments-through-ryzen-master.html


I only run Linux so Ryzen Master not available to me.


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> I only run Linux so Ryzen Master not available to me.


Do you use SenseMi Skew to synthetically lower temps to reach higher speeds?


----------



## Ceadderman

Anyone using Kaspersky AV pack software included with this board from ASUS???

Being a khanucklehead, I downloaded the software but had not yet installed it as I am in the process of building up my drives and where I want them as well as where I am storing Games, OS, Storage etc.

Today I tried downloading and installing Daemon Tools Lite. Yeah right. Stupid AV program blocked the file as MalWare and took hostage of my machine until I let it remove the files. I haven't even installed it yet. I ended up going to Kaspersky's site and opening an account with them. But at this point me being an AVG guy(That system will let you do whatever you need to do) I am not liking Kaspersky's system. Maybe I will change my mind but this issue is a GINORMOUS negative sfaiac. 

Anyone have any feedback on this?

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## Keith Myers

nick name said:


> Do you use SenseMi Skew to synthetically lower temps to reach higher speeds?


No. I took a look at that and played with disabling the parameter, but I observed no changes in the cpu temps. I haven't tried to alter the setting to artificially lower the temp so that the cpu can clock higher. The cpus run in the mid-70's under AIO water cooling so not much overhead available anyway. I accept I run my systems very differently from the majority of users here so don't expect to get the same kind of results that are published in the forums. As long as the systems are 24/7 stable and can push the work back to the mothership, I am happy. The 3 or 4 gpus do the heavy lifting on the hosts anyway. I only crunch cpu tasks for Seti. The cpus just have to shovel work to the gpus. The cpu tasks are just a little bit of extra love for Seti.


----------



## crakej

Ceadderman said:


> Anyone using Kaspersky AV pack software included with this board from ASUS???
> 
> Being a khanucklehead, I downloaded the software but had not yet installed it as I am in the process of building up my drives and where I want them as well as where I am storing Games, OS, Storage etc.
> 
> Today I tried downloading and installing Daemon Tools Lite. Yeah right. Stupid AV program blocked the file as MalWare and took hostage of my machine until I let it remove the files. I haven't even installed it yet. I ended up going to Kaspersky's site and opening an account with them. But at this point me being an AVG guy(That system will let you do whatever you need to do) I am not liking Kaspersky's system. Maybe I will change my mind but this issue is a GINORMOUS negative sfaiac.
> 
> Anyone have any feedback on this?
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


I haven't used Kaspersky in years just for this reason. I just use Defender and occasionally run things like RogueKiller64, HouseCall and others that catch things Defender misses.

As for Daemon Tools - I'm interested in using this to backup my system drive so may install it myself.... be interested to see how well it works.


----------



## crakej

Another bios is incoming with AGESA 0072 and PBO fixes - I keep an eye on the Prime X470 thread - interesting to see they tend to get bios updates before us. It would be nice if @Silent Scone could get it for us to test. Surely if a Prime Pro user gets sent beta bioses, we should be able to get them too? It seems to make a difference which country you're in (I think!) because whenever I've tried to get UK support to send me a beta, they refuse saying that is never possible, though others can seem to get them. I tried contacting support in another area and am told I must go through the UK.

Still, good to know it's coming for those of you affected by the PBO problems in 2008


----------



## Duvar

I am waiting too. Bios 2008 is....
Look the difference between the AGESA Versions: https://www.computerbase.de/forum/threads/amd-ryzen-ram-oc-community.1829356/page-366#post-22469318


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> Another bios is incoming with AGESA 0072 and PBO fixes - I keep an eye on the Prime X470 thread - interesting to see they tend to get bios updates before us. It would be nice if @Silent Scone could get it for us to test. Surely if a Prime Pro user gets sent beta bioses, we should be able to get them too? It seems to make a difference which country you're in (I think!) because whenever I've tried to get UK support to send me a beta, they refuse saying that is never possible, though others can seem to get them. I tried contacting support in another area and am told I must go through the UK.
> 
> Still, good to know it's coming for those of you affected by the PBO problems in 2008



It would be nice if he would even acknowledge AMD even exist. https://www.overclock.net/forum/search.php?searchid=8051734


----------



## Ceadderman

crakej said:


> I haven't used Kaspersky in years just for this reason. I just use Defender and occasionally run things like RogueKiller64, HouseCall and others that catch things Defender misses.
> 
> As for Daemon Tools - I'm interested in using this to backup my system drive so may install it myself.... be interested to see how well it works.


I rather like having a stand alone A/V. But I will admit I am a simple novice with Kaspersky after so many years of using AVG Free, AVG Internet Security and 3 system one year coverage with AVG and using MalWare Bytes. Started using AVG back around 2000, so it's pretty intuitive(or rather *was* intuitive) for my daily driver systems. Back when I got my CIVFormula system, it too came with Kaspersky but I stuck to AVG and never used it.

Built Black Snow and didn't have AVG, yet still can access it if necessary. Just thought I would give Kaspersky a try if ASUS thinks well enough of it to continue supplying it with their ROG products this far after CIVFormula. AVG is solid but their console ended up klunky after Windows 10 was released. At least ASUS isn't flogging the McAffee or Norton crapola A/V dead horse. Those two A/V packs spiders throughout your system so deep that it's Hades getting rid of them should you decide to remove them and go with a competitor. I learned that lesson with a used LapTop I picked up years ago. Even a system reset could not remove Norton. :mellowsmi

Well anywho, I eventually figured Kaspersky out as a switch needed to be turned off to allow the download and installation process to work to get DTools Lite to work. Now I simply have to figure out that tool to take an OS Snapshot and park it on my 120gb drive should I need to replace the Adata 128gb drive or refresh my OS. 

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## crakej

Ceadderman said:


> I rather like having a stand alone A/V. But I will admit I am a simple novice with Kaspersky after so many years of using AVG Free, AVG Internet Security and 3 system one year coverage with AVG and using MalWare Bytes. Started using AVG back around 2000, so it's pretty intuitive(or rather *was* intuitive) for my daily driver systems. Back when I got my CIVFormula system, it too came with Kaspersky but I stuck to AVG and never used it.
> 
> Built Black Snow and didn't have AVG, yet still can access it if necessary. Just thought I would give Kaspersky a try if ASUS thinks well enough of it to continue supplying it with their ROG products this far after CIVFormula. AVG is solid but their console ended up klunky after Windows 10 was released. At least ASUS isn't flogging the McAffee or Norton crapola A/V dead horse. Those two A/V packs spiders throughout your system so deep that it's Hades getting rid of them should you decide to remove them and go with a competitor. I learned that lesson with a used LapTop I picked up years ago. Even a system reset could not remove Norton. :mellowsmi
> 
> Well anywho, I eventually figured Kaspersky out as a switch needed to be turned off to allow the download and installation process to work to get DTools Lite to work. Now I simply have to figure out that tool to take an OS Snapshot and park it on my 120gb drive should I need to replace the Adata 128gb drive or refresh my OS.
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


I also used to use AVG all the time but don't like it any more either..... glad you got it sorted anyway....


----------



## Keith Myers

When I was running Windows, I ran Kaspersky for several years with no issues. I liked the product. Unobtrusive but did the job. Easy to configure which directories to keep hands off.


----------



## BUFUMAN

Ceadderman said:


> I rather like having a stand alone A/V. But I will admit I am a simple novice with Kaspersky after so many years of using AVG Free, AVG Internet Security and 3 system one year coverage with AVG and using MalWare Bytes. Started using AVG back around 2000, so it's pretty intuitive(or rather *was* intuitive) for my daily driver systems. Back when I got my CIVFormula system, it too came with Kaspersky but I stuck to AVG and never used it.
> 
> 
> 
> Built Black Snow and didn't have AVG, yet still can access it if necessary. Just thought I would give Kaspersky a try if ASUS thinks well enough of it to continue supplying it with their ROG products this far after CIVFormula. AVG is solid but their console ended up klunky after Windows 10 was released. At least ASUS isn't flogging the McAffee or Norton crapola A/V dead horse. Those two A/V packs spiders throughout your system so deep that it's Hades getting rid of them should you decide to remove them and go with a competitor. I learned that lesson with a used LapTop I picked up years ago. Even a system reset could not remove Norton. :mellowsmi
> 
> 
> 
> Well anywho, I eventually figured Kaspersky out as a switch needed to be turned off to allow the download and installation process to work to get DTools Lite to work. Now I simply have to figure out that tool to take an OS Snapshot and park it on my 120gb drive should I need to replace the Adata 128gb drive or refresh my OS.
> 
> 
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


Sorry but bull**** pur. Norton IS is working flawless since 2006.

You are talking history ****, i am sure you used Norton systemworks @win95 an remember your faluts. It was **** back then.

Btw it's the best Internet security for novice users.

https://www.av-test.org/de/antivirus/privat-windows/windows-10/februar-2019/

Gesendet von meinem LYA-L29 mit Tapatalk


----------



## Ceadderman

BUFUMAN said:


> Sorry but bull**** pur. Norton IS is working flawless since 2006.
> 
> You are talking history ****, i am sure you used Norton systemworks @win95 an remember your faluts. It was **** back then.
> 
> Btw it's the best Internet security for novice users.
> 
> https://www.av-test.org/de/antivirus/privat-windows/windows-10/februar-2019/
> 
> Gesendet von meinem LYA-L29 mit Tapatalk


I wasn't taking issue with how well they work. I have issues with an embedded A/V product that will never let the user to fully remove it, should they decide they don't like it. Don't get yer knickers in a twist over this. Many Enthusiast builders have the same opinions as I do on the issue. Enjoy it if you like it. I simply don't like it for the reasons stated. No more no less. :cheers:

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## 1usmus

Duvar said:


> I am waiting too. Bios 2008 is....
> Look the difference between the AGESA Versions: https://www.computerbase.de/forum/threads/amd-ryzen-ram-oc-community.1829356/page-366#post-22469318


I wrote about this almost 3 weeks ago :thumbsdow

For example in the game AC: odyssey I observe a decrease in the average and minal FPS


----------



## Jackalito

New UEFI BIOS Update:

Version 2103 2019/04/01 ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO BIOS 2103
"1. Update AM4 ComboPI 0.0.7.2
2. Improved Memory Stability"​


https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO/HelpDesk_Download/


----------



## Duvar

Jackalito said:


> New UEFI BIOS Update:
> 
> Version 2103 2019/04/01 ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO BIOS 2103
> "1. Update AM4 ComboPI 0.0.7.2
> 2. Improved Memory Stability"​
> 
> 
> https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO/HelpDesk_Download/


Hmm dont see new Bios there...


----------



## crakej

Duvar said:


> Hmm dont see new Bios there...


Try her https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO/HelpDesk_Download/

Still propagating...


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> Try her https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO/HelpDesk_Download/
> 
> Still propagating...


Select Windows 7 64 bit and it is there both this one and the wifi one.


----------



## Duvar

mtrai said:


> Select Windows 7 64 bit and it is there both this one and the wifi one.


Worked for you? Couldnt install on Win 10 64Bit.


----------



## mtrai

Duvar said:


> Worked for you? Couldnt install on Win 10 64Bit.


The Bios is neutral to your OS but right now I am poking around the new bios to see any changes.


----------



## Duvar

mtrai said:


> The Bios is neutral to your OS but right now I am poking around the new bios to see any changes.


Yes i thought that too, but i couldnt install it. I will give it a another try...
Dont have to rename it ro something like that i guess?


----------



## minal

Interesting that v2103 is the first time a new release is smaller in size (8.05 MB) than a previous one. Especially coming after v2008 which was a huge jump (10.23 MB vs 8.44 MB before). v2103 is smaller than all but the first two releases. As for what that could mean... let's just hope "Improved Memory Stability" isn't an April Fool's joke.


----------



## Duvar

minal said:


> Interesting that v2103 is the first time a new release is smaller in size (8.05 MB) than a previous one. Especially coming after v2008 which was a huge jump (10.23 MB vs 8.44 MB before). v2103 is smaller than all but the first two releases. As for what that could mean... let's just hope "Improved Memory Stability" isn't an April Fool's joke.


Says that it is not a proper Bios, when i try to install...


----------



## crakej

Duvar said:


> Yes i thought that too, but i couldnt install it. I will give it a another try...
> Dont have to rename it ro something like that i guess?


No. It should work - if not, try downloading again.


----------



## Duvar

crakej said:


> No. It should work - if not, try downloading again.


Already downloaded three times, always says, that it is not a proper Bios.
I think i need to format the f....ing usb stick, but always worked with this stick... hmmm.


----------



## crakej

Duvar said:


> Already downloaded three times, always says, that it is not a proper Bios.


you are unzipping it right?


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> The Bios is neutral to your OS but right now I am poking around the new bios to see any changes.


I'm gonna need that report on my desk ASAP. Now get out and tell my busty secretary to get in here for some dictation.


----------



## nick name

Where the heck is @CJMitsuki?


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> I'm gonna need that report on my desk ASAP. Now get out and tell my busty secretary to get in here for some dictation.


I am seeing very little changes in options...one caught my eye. Take a further look at it.


----------



## mtrai

Duvar said:


> Already downloaded three times, always says, that it is not a proper Bios.
> I think i need to format the f....ing usb stick, but always worked with this stick... hmmm.


I downloaded the Win 7 64 bit listing for it. Unzipped it, put it on my usb and booted into the bios and used ezflash from within the bios. Worked just fine. Though later today gonna see if I will bother modding the bios.


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> Where the heck is @CJMitsuki?


Didn't he recently have some major back surgery and said he would be gone for a few weeks? I believe he posted since the surgery saying he came through it fine...but it hurts him real bad right now to sit at his PC. Maybe it was not him but another user...now I am not sure.


----------



## Jackalito

Guys, is PBO finally working again with 2103? :thinking:


----------



## mtrai

Everything is working for me as it should...non modded bios yet. 

One thing of note with the 0.0.7.2 early testing is showing I need less voltage on my CPU for the same boost clocks. Only had it booted for a few minutes so no real testing...but I have never been able to boost to my previous clocks with a .05 negative offset.


----------



## clackersx

Anyone have any idea why Asus still uses old versions of RAIDXpert2 in the bios?

2008 and 2103 still have 9.2.0.70.

9.2.0.87 was released in October 2018 or something like that.

I can modify the bios myself and update it, just wondering why they still have the old version.


----------



## Jackalito

mtrai said:


> Everything is working for me as it should...non modded bios yet.
> 
> One thing of note with the 0.0.7.2 early testing is showing I need less voltage on my CPU for the same boost clocks. Only had it booted for a few minutes so no real testing...but I have never been able to boost to my previous clocks with a .05 negative offset.



Thanks, I'll give it a try this week and report back any findings or issues I may encounter.




clackersx said:


> Anyone have any idea why Asus still uses old versions of RAIDXpert2 in the bios?
> 
> 2008 and 2103 still have 9.2.0.70.
> 
> 9.2.0.87 was released in October 2018 or something like that.
> 
> I can modify the bios myself and update it, just wondering why they still have the old version.



I guess you could ask ASUS through their support page, but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for a meaningful reply from them, tbh.


----------



## Duvar

Like i guessed my usb stick was the culprit, after formating the stick, everything works fine now, thx guys and i wish you all good luck and high and stable overclocks


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> I am seeing very little changes in options...one caught my eye. Take a further look at it.


I found a bunch of CSM options that weren't there before. The first thing I hate, though, is there are some voltage fields you can no longer key in and have to use + or - to adjust them.

Edit:

I can now type into those fields. I guess it was some weird first setup bug that didn't allow me to type into the fields.


----------



## nick name

I am hoping that the ASUS page's reference to RAM stability isn't a reference to their previous 2008 BIOS, but to RAM stability in general.


----------



## nick name

Ok, I just started an instance of TM5 and noticed that Performance Enhancer Level 3 is using a much higher multiplier now. Previous BIOS versions were 41 or 41.3 with my current ambient temps and now on BIOS 2013 it set itself to 42.5. I am gonna go double check that I didn't select PE 4 on accident, but I am pretty certain I didn't.


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> I found a bunch of CSM options that weren't there before. The first thing I hate, though, is there are some voltage fields you can no longer key in and have to use + or - to adjust them.


A lot of those were already present but hidden. Most people that mod bios did not bother with unhiding those. I did.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> A lot of those were already present but hidden. Most people that mod bios did not bother with unhiding those. I did.


I wonder if they are gonna hide them again after they get everything else sorted out.


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> I wonder if they are gonna hide them again after they get everything else sorted out.


From what I had been seeing is they have left a few more options hidden in each of the last successive bios. I am going through my wifi bios right now...and setting things up to see what might be hidden. I have not even gotten to the module editing yet.


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> Where the heck is @CJMitsuki?





mtrai said:


> Didn't he recently have some major back surgery and said he would be gone for a few weeks? I believe he posted since the surgery saying he came through it fine...but it hurts him real bad right now to sit at his PC. Maybe it was not him but another user...now I am not sure.


No idea where that guy is, he didnt have back surgery though. I know him personally and he confirmed this 

Just been working a lot. Anything new as far as bios and memory compatibility. Oh yeah, btw I shoved 1.79v through my 2700x and destroyed the PCIe lanes Im assuming as the chip powers and computer will boot but no visual to any PCIe slot. Good news is that AMD will accept the RMA :kookoo:

Using my previously unopened 1700x and without playing with it I got it to 4ghz all core boost @ 1.4v running at 17c idle and normal working temps around 40c


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> No idea where that guy is, he didnt have back surgery though. I know him personally and he confirmed this
> 
> Just been working a lot. Anything new as far as bios and memory compatibility. Oh yeah, btw I shoved 1.79v through my 2700x and destroyed the PCIe lanes Im assuming as the chip powers and computer will boot but no visual to any PCIe slot. Good news is that AMD will accept the RMA :kookoo:
> 
> Using my previously unopened 1700x and without playing with it I got it to 4ghz all core boost @ 1.4v running at 17c idle and normal working temps around 40c


Jesus, that's a lot of voltage.


----------



## mtrai

CJMitsuki said:


> No idea where that guy is, he didnt have back surgery though. I know him personally and he confirmed this
> 
> Anything new as far as bios and memory compatibility.


Well I just discovered search works everything at least with my current modded bios. I can now search HPET, spread sprectrim, MSI etc...and make changes to the setting even though they do not appear. 

Could someone check if this is also true in an untouched 2103 bios?


----------



## crakej

mtrai said:


> Didn't he recently have some major back surgery and said he would be gone for a few weeks? I believe he posted since the surgery saying he came through it fine...but it hurts him real bad right now to sit at his PC. Maybe it was not him but another user...now I am not sure.



No, that was me - much better now, able to do much more now 

I have 1700x so can't see PBO/PE. Don't see any other settings new for me BGS and BGSA are there but dunno if they work. Spread Spectrum has always been there in the Power menu.


----------



## crakej

CJMitsuki said:


> Just been working a lot. Anything new as far as bios and memory compatibility. Oh yeah, btw I shoved 1.79v through my 2700x and destroyed the PCIe lanes Im assuming as the chip powers and computer will boot but no visual to any PCIe slot. Good news is that AMD will accept the RMA :kookoo:
> 
> Using my previously unopened 1700x and without playing with it I got it to 4ghz all core boost @ 1.4v running at 17c idle and normal working temps around 40c


Not had a chance to test mem yet (hynix m dies atm  ) but will today.

Your 1700x seems good - you can get that voltage lower still with LLC (I've always used 5) and/or by lowering tCKE to =>6. I run 4.1GHz offset -0.02500v, LLC5, 24/7.


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> No, that was me - much better now, able to do much more now
> 
> I have 1700x so can't see PBO/PE. Don't see any other settings new for me BGS and BGSA are there but dunno if they work. Spread Spectrum has always been there in the Power menu.


Glad you are feeling better. Sorry could not remember exactly who. I remember a while ago a few bios version, search was not working anymore. I hardly ever mess with it since I mod each bios to my own liking so no need to use search. I accidentally hit f9 last night. But I seem to remember HPET for example would not come up even in bios where other things would.


----------



## CJMitsuki

crakej said:


> Not had a chance to test mem yet (hynix m dies atm  ) but will today.
> 
> Your 1700x seems good - you can get that voltage lower still with LLC (I've always used 5) and/or by lowering tCKE to =>6. I run 4.1GHz offset -0.02500v, LLC5, 24/7.


I havent done anythong in bios to the cpu...just slapped some settings on it, no LLC, configured memory and tested and all seemed fine. spent like 20 min on it. Ill try for something better soon. Ill likely go for higher clocks rather than lower voltage, efficiency just isnt my style


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> Jesus, that's a lot of voltage.


It actually was fine with that voltage but It was really late and I fell asleep during a benchmark run and yeah...It was on all night with that voltage so mustve burnt the transistors or something...I could probably revive it using the oven method but if AMD wants to give me a 2700x then ill take it


----------



## poliacido

nick name said:


> Ok, I just started an instance of TM5 and noticed that Performance Enhancer Level 3 is using a much higher multiplier now. Previous BIOS versions were 41 or 41.3 with my current ambient temps and now on BIOS 2013 it set itself to 42.5. I am gonna go double check that I didn't select PE 4 on accident, but I am pretty certain I didn't.


so the new bios is more unstable with PE3? i am also using PE3 with an old bios (1001) and i get same 41.3 but my cpu can't handle 42.5 all cores with a reasonable voltage


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> so the new bios is more unstable with PE3? i am also using PE3 with an old bios (1001) and i get same 41.3 but my cpu can't handle 42.5 all cores with a reasonable voltage


It isn't unstable for me, but you can reduce the multiplier with Ryzen Master if it is unstable for you.


----------



## poliacido

nick name said:


> It isn't unstable for me, but you can reduce the multiplier with Ryzen Master if it is unstable for you.


ok maybe i will give it a try
but guys which bios do you think is still the best till now? am i wrong or the new releases put in new bugs?


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> ok maybe i will give it a try
> but guys which bios do you think is still the best till now? am i wrong or the new releases put in new bugs?


I haven't found anything buggy, but the one thing I didn't do is benchmark the RAM to see if the performance with 2103 is less like it was on 2008. And I'm coming off of 1201 which I was plenty pleased with so if you simply wanna move up to that then I'd definitely recommend it.


----------



## Rusakova

nick name said:


> I haven't found anything buggy, but the one thing I didn't do is benchmark the RAM to see if the performance with 2103 is less like it was on 2008. And I'm coming off of 1201 which I was plenty pleased with so if you simply wanna move up to that then I'd definitely recommend it.


Ram performance is the same for me on 2103 as it was on 1201.
But 2103 does boost higher. With default settings and only PBO enabled it boost to 42 ~ 42.5 on all cores, which it didn't do before.
So I'm actually considering running with no PE at all.


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> I haven't found anything buggy, but the one thing I didn't do is benchmark the RAM to see if the performance with 2103 is less like it was on 2008. And I'm coming off of 1201 which I was plenty pleased with so if you simply wanna move up to that then I'd definitely recommend it.


I will recommend it for several reasons I am seeing. Please keep in mind, I have not been able to do as extensive testing right now as I normally do since we going through the process of arranging in home hospice care for my mother-in-law that we take care of.

Cpu core needs less voltage. So please do not just plug in your old values.

Ram timings are more forgiving. I mean the timings do not have to be as precise...but that will help for really high ram clocking. Once the family is gone back home from setting up the hospice I am gonna be shooting for 4000 Mhz ram stable which I now think is very obtainable.

There are more options available...via search. You can hit f9 and pull up spread spectrum and disable it if you want. You pull up HPET and disable, and now actually boot into windows with no issue. You can pull up any actual setting via search that is there even if it is hidden. (note this may take a modified bios since I did not check this before I modified my bios.) The options do not show in the bios screen but show up in search.

Also note I have not pushed my ram yet due to the issues I mentioned but at 3600 with no issue, no fuss or no muss at cl 14.

I have a lot on my plate right now that does not allow me to mess around with stuff.




























Ram Aida run today for another thread but might be helpful.


----------



## Sn0ops

@mtrai - Is this CH VII?

Im also on Bios 2103 - working a like a charm - but when hitting F9 and using search function ->"HPET" - HPET is not shown.
How does this come?, what is diffrent between your and my board?

Thanks


----------



## nick name

Sn0ops said:


> @mtrai - Is this CH VII?
> 
> Im also on Bios 2103 - working a like a charm - but when hitting F9 and using search function ->"HPET" - HPET is not shown.
> How does this come?, what is diffrent between your and my board?
> 
> Thanks


He modded the BIOS so that may be why he can search and you can't. I'll hop into BIOS and try to search and report back.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> I will recommend it for several reasons I am seeing. Please keep in mind, I have not been able to do as extensive testing right now as I normally do since we going through the process of arranging in home hospice care for my mother-in-law that we take care of.
> 
> Cpu core needs less voltage. So please do not just plug in your old values.
> 
> Ram timings are more forgiving. I mean the timings do not have to be as precise...but that will help for really high ram clocking. Once the family is gone back home from setting up the hospice I am gonna be shooting for 4000 Mhz ram stable which I now think is very obtainable.
> 
> There are more options available...via search. You can hit f9 and pull up spread spectrum and disable it if you want. You pull up HPET and disable, and now actually boot into windows with no issue. You can pull up any actual setting via search that is there even if it is hidden. (note this may take a modified bios since I did not check this before I modified my bios.) The options do not show in the bios screen but show up in search.
> 
> Also note I have not pushed my ram yet due to the issues I mentioned but at 3600 with no issue, no fuss or no muss at cl 14.
> 
> I have a lot on my plate right now that does not allow me to mess around with stuff.
> 
> 
> 
> Ram Aida run today for another thread but might be helpful.


Unfortunately, I haven't found the same in regards to higher RAM speeds. Even at 3600 14-14-14-14 I can't stabilize. Still have to use 14-15-14-14. 3666 and 3733 still can't be made stable on my 3600CL15 kit.

I, also, cannot run search to find those hidden options.


----------



## mtrai

That is what I needed to find out...is this searching in the untouched bios or was it my modded bios? 

C7H Wifi 2103 mod b. Letter is only for my use to keep track of things I have change. As I confessed I have not bother to search for things in many bios once it was pretty much removed. I only happen to fat finger the f9 key and search came up so I thought well let me see. So it appears it is my mod. If someone was test it out I will be happy to make it available.


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> I haven't found anything buggy, but the one thing I didn't do is benchmark the RAM to see if the performance with 2103 is less like it was on 2008. And I'm coming off of 1201 which I was plenty pleased with so if you simply wanna move up to that then I'd definitely recommend it.





Rusakova said:


> Ram performance is the same for me on 2103 as it was on 1201.
> But 2103 does boost higher. With default settings and only PBO enabled it boost to 42 ~ 42.5 on all cores, which it didn't do before.
> So I'm actually considering running with no PE at all.





Sn0ops said:


> @mtrai - Is this CH VII?
> 
> Im also on Bios 2103 - working a like a charm - but when hitting F9 and using search function ->"HPET" - HPET is not shown.
> How does this come?, what is diffrent between your and my board?
> 
> Thanks


I have the C7H Wifi but I have modded my own bios as I always do. So the modding is what appears to unlock them in search even though they do not appear in the regular bios options. I will need to do a bit of testing on this to verify. So if anyone has the C7H Wifi board I will like to check my previous mod to see if it allows search as well. As my mod b shows extra stuff aka 2 fields for the value we already work with it.


----------



## Duvar

mtrai said:


> I have the C7H Wifi but I have modded my own bios as I always do. So the modding is what appears to unlock them in search even though they do not appear in the regular bios options. I will need to do a bit of testing on this to verify. So if anyone has the C7H Wifi board I will like to check my previous mod to see if it allows search as well. As my mod b shows extra stuff aka 2 fields for the value we already work with it.


RAM Performance is the same for me with this new Bios, but i can confirm that lower CPU Voltages are now possible and stable.Try to reduce your CPU voltage a lil bit (20-30mV) and test it for stability.


----------



## red-ray

*BIOS 2103 03/19/2019 has the Matisse µCode + AGESA*



crakej said:


> Thanks Guys - of course I will have to stick with my CH7, but I'm sure Ryzen 3xxx will run just fine on our boards...
> 
> Just can't wait to see what other features the X570 chipset will bring


Have you noticed that the latest ASUS Crosshair VII Hero (Wi-Fi) BIOS 2103 03/19/2019 has the Matisse CPU µCode + Combo-AM4 AGESA so you should be OK, but I suspect the AGESA will get updated in the near future.

I am not sure what will happen with the Matisse GPP Bridges as regards PCIe 4 as it's possible the board hardware might not be "up to it" as I have only seen what you get with a Matisse in an X570 chipset board.

How stable is BIOS 2103 03/19/2019? Since updating my ASUS Crosshair VII Hero (Wi-Fi) + AMD Ryzen 7 2700X @ stock keeps rebooting for no obvious reason. I am running Windows 10 x64 Enterprise V10.00 Build 18362 19H1.


----------



## neikosr0x

Well, as ram support the 2103Bios is the best so far for me. I am able to run the kit a 3466 cl14 so far no errors, i was also monitoring the CPU vcore with the PBO option enable plus PE3 just to check and the CPU is using a bit less voltage than before. I will try to reduce it further to see how it goes.


----------



## VPII

I'd like to ask a favour. I've always been a manual overclock person, hence my system is running 24/7 at 42.75 x 100.2 giving me about 4.28ghz at 1.331vcore. It is stable with all benchmarks I am running. I do not do full stress test to check stability seen that I have not had an issue running the cpu as such. I'd like to understand how you guys go about using the no overclock except for BCLK and run your system with only the motherboard clocking the processor higher. I understand performance enhancer and it is mostly PE 3 that people use as PE 4 is not really stable seen that I'm getting 4.3ghz when running PE 4. I can clock my chip all the way up to 4.36 to 4.375hgz on my AIO cooling for short bench runs. 4.3Ghz requires around 1.4 to 1.425vcore with 4.375 more like 1.45 to 1.4625vcore. I know the chip I have is not that bad seen that I can run it all day at just under 4.3ghz using only 1.331vcore. In all honesty I can actually run it at the same 4.28ghz using only 1.3125vcore and it will run all things except for Cinebench R20.

So what should I set when wanting that let the board clock my cpu instead of myself?

I'm attaching a pic of my cache and memory performance at the stated speed.


----------



## Baio73

*Samsung 860 PRO nVme or 970 EVO nVme?*

Sorry for the strange request, but I don'r really know where else to ask...
I've read somewhere there are some troubles with Samsung 860 Pro nVme SDD's… anyone kwnos if the newer 970 EVO has the same issues?
I'am asking because I have a 860 PRO nVme and every BIOS release I flash, I stil have cold boot problems, particularly when repowering the system from a power loss (meaning when all the house remains without power at all).

Thanks.

Baio


----------



## Jaju123

Can anyone confirm that 2103 doesn't have a latency regression like 2101 had?


----------



## Duvar

Baio73 said:


> Sorry for the strange request, but I don'r really know where else to ask...
> I've read somewhere there are some troubles with Samsung 860 Pro nVme SDD's… anyone kwnos if the newer 970 EVO has the same issues?
> I'am asking because I have a 860 PRO nVme and every BIOS release I flash, I stil have cold boot problems, particularly when repowering the system from a power loss (meaning when all the house remains without power at all).
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Baio


Cold boots are normal when repowering from power loss (2-3 times). Has something to do with the caps or so i heard (to recharge them).
I have a 970 evo 1TB and no problems at all.

Edit: Yes there is a latency regression.


----------



## wisepds

*AI SUITE*

I have a question... Ai Suite (Xpert fan in particular) software works fine?. On last bios and last windows 10 update that software power off my pc when touch fans speed. Only unplugging the power cable works again.

are you Ai Suite software working properly with your systems?


----------



## hurricane28

wisepds said:


> I have a question... Ai Suite (Xpert fan in particular) software works fine?. On last bios and last windows 10 update that software power off my pc when touch fans speed. Only unplugging the power cable works again.
> 
> are you Ai Suite software working properly with your systems?


Obviously its not working properly lol. 

I had similar problems before fans stopt spinning or erratically spin up and down for no reason etc. etc. uninstalled the program and never installed it again nor want to install it again.


----------



## crakej

wisepds said:


> I have a question... Ai Suite (Xpert fan in particular) software works fine?. On last bios and last windows 10 update that software power off my pc when touch fans speed. Only unplugging the power cable works again.
> 
> are you Ai Suite software working properly with your systems?


Working ok here...... will do more testing though.


----------



## nick name

VPII said:


> I'd like to ask a favour. I've always been a manual overclock person, hence my system is running 24/7 at 42.75 x 100.2 giving me about 4.28ghz at 1.331vcore. It is stable with all benchmarks I am running. I do not do full stress test to check stability seen that I have not had an issue running the cpu as such. I'd like to understand how you guys go about using the no overclock except for BCLK and run your system with only the motherboard clocking the processor higher. I understand performance enhancer and it is mostly PE 3 that people use as PE 4 is not really stable seen that I'm getting 4.3ghz when running PE 4. I can clock my chip all the way up to 4.36 to 4.375hgz on my AIO cooling for short bench runs. 4.3Ghz requires around 1.4 to 1.425vcore with 4.375 more like 1.45 to 1.4625vcore. I know the chip I have is not that bad seen that I can run it all day at just under 4.3ghz using only 1.331vcore. In all honesty I can actually run it at the same 4.28ghz using only 1.3125vcore and it will run all things except for Cinebench R20.
> 
> So what should I set when wanting that let the board clock my cpu instead of myself?
> 
> I'm attaching a pic of my cache and memory performance at the stated speed.


I think your question is letting the board set the VCORE itself? You could use an offset. Since you're not running higher single core speeds then a negative offset might be what works. 

I run a negative offset of about .075V with PE3 and I manipulate my PE3 multiplier with Ryzen Master. With the newest BIOS, though, the multiplier is a bit higher than with 1201. 1201 used to boot at around 41 ~ 41.25 with the negative offset and my ambient temps and now on 2103 it boots at 42.25 ~ 42.5. I'm assuming it's because of the lower voltages needed that others are reporting.


----------



## VPII

nick name said:


> I think your question is letting the board set the VCORE itself? You could use an offset. Since you're not running higher single core speeds then a negative offset might be what works.
> 
> I run a negative offset of about .075V with PE3 and I manipulate my PE3 multiplier with Ryzen Master. With the newest BIOS, though, the multiplier is a bit higher than with 1201. 1201 used to boot at around 41 ~ 41.25 with the negative offset and my ambient temps and now on 2103 it boots at 42.25 ~ 42.5. I'm assuming it's because of the lower voltages needed that others are reporting.


Thanks nick name, I'll give it a shot during the weekend. I'm juts going to add some off topic info for another discussion.

At present I'm more focused on getting the most out of my Palit RTX 2080 Ti Gaming Pro with a Kraken G12 and Corsair H110 as coolings and results look good. Just a pitty that the true performance on Ryzen is not translated into most of the 3D Benchmarks. Sorry but I am the guy than would dump 20 liters of LN2 on my CPU to make it run 5.6Ghz to see what I can get..... most for CPU but I like to throw some 3D benches in there as well. Buying computer hardware in South Africa is not easy as the pricing is next to ridiculous. Fortunately there was Black Friday and I got a nice RTX 2080 Ti for a not to bad price. See I always compare it with USA pricing and if within 10 to 20% I'll do it. Fortunately I get the opportunity to visit the USA every now and then and then I'll look and get some hardware if needed.

Right now, I am eagerly waiting on Zen 2. From what I gathered 12 core is the true possibility, nothing yet confirmed on 16 core, but I'll wait. Will be my next purchase which I've been saving for the past year or so.


----------



## nick name

VPII said:


> Thanks nick name, I'll give it a shot during the weekend. I'm juts going to add some off topic info for another discussion.
> 
> At present I'm more focused on getting the most out of my Palit RTX 2080 Ti Gaming Pro with a Kraken G12 and Corsair H110 as coolings and results look good. Just a pitty that the true performance on Ryzen is not translated into most of the 3D Benchmarks. Sorry but I am the guy than would dump 20 liters of LN2 on my CPU to make it run 5.6Ghz to see what I can get..... most for CPU but I like to throw some 3D benches in there as well. Buying computer hardware in South Africa is not easy as the pricing is next to ridiculous. Fortunately there was Black Friday and I got a nice RTX 2080 Ti for a not to bad price. See I always compare it with USA pricing and if within 10 to 20% I'll do it. Fortunately I get the opportunity to visit the USA every now and then and then I'll look and get some hardware if needed.
> 
> Right now, I am eagerly waiting on Zen 2. From what I gathered 12 core is the true possibility, nothing yet confirmed on 16 core, but I'll wait. Will be my next purchase which I've been saving for the past year or so.


I understand. I might still hold the highest Firestrike score for a 2700X/1070 ti combo and I tried hard to get it. 

Something I am playing with now is a larger negative offset. I couldn't boot with more than -.10625 so I am trying -.10625 right now and it will run R20 with a 42.3 multiplier at 1.35V. 

And I now believe that PE 3 is kinda broken in that it isn't setting the multiplier based of off EDC as it was before. EDC was set to 145 with PE 3 previously, but now when you used Ryzen Master to key in 145 into EDC the multiplier drops to where it was on BIOS 1201. So it appears that PE 3 is behaving as PE 4 does. At least how PE 4 was behaving for me by setting the multiplier higher than expected.


----------



## VPII

nick name said:


> I understand. I might still hold the highest Firestrike score for a 2700X/1070 ti combo and I tried hard to get it.
> 
> 
> 
> Something I am playing with now is a larger negative offset. I couldn't boot with more than -.10625 so I am trying -.10625 right now and it will run R20 with a 42.3 multiplier at 1.35V.
> 
> 
> 
> And I now believe that PE 3 is kinda broken in that it isn't setting the multiplier based of off EDC as it was before. EDC was set to 145 with PE 3 previously, but now when you used Ryzen Master to key in 145 into EDC the multiplier drops to where it was on BIOS 1201. So it appears that PE 3 is behaving as PE 4 does. At least how PE 4 was behaving for me by setting the multiplier higher than expected.


I know with my Time Spy Runs and Frie Strike Ultra I've got the highest results.

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/18885725

https://www.3dmark.com/spy/6774714

https://www.3dmark.com/spy/6774856

Took a while with a win 20 update but now I seen to have gotten the hang of things. Partly due to 1000 watt XOC bios flash on the Gpu.



Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## nick name

VPII said:


> I know with my Time Spy Runs and Frie Strike Ultra I've got the highest results.
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/fs/18885725
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/spy/6774714
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/spy/6774856
> 
> Took a while with a win 20 update but now I seen to have gotten the hang of things. Partly due to 1000 watt XOC bios flash on the Gpu.
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


If I ever get a 2080 ti just know I'll be gunning for the top spots.


----------



## Ceadderman

Baio73 said:


> Sorry for the strange request, but I don'r really know where else to ask...
> I've read somewhere there are some troubles with Samsung 860 Pro nVme SDD's… anyone knows if the newer 970 EVO has the same issues?
> I'am asking because I have a 860 PRO nVme and every BIOS release I flash, I stil have cold boot problems, particularly when repowering the system from a power loss (meaning when all the house remains without power at all).
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Baio


I would go with the 970 EVO. Some users like Samsung Pro Devices. But if you can afford the slight cost increase going with the latest device, then that's where I would put my $$$. I doubt you would notice much of a difference in the performance of the two.

I am not running NVME atm since I blew my computer wad on all the components for Black Snow, so I parked my OS on an unused Adata m.2. But as soon as I have a little money set aside for the upgrade I plan to pick up an NVME 970 EVO. Even if it's just for my OS drive. Seems as though my OS wants to park everything to my 128gb drive, so the next one will be 500gb minimum. I will simply stay on top of DL locations in the meantime. :mellowsmi

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## nick name

Ceadderman said:


> I would go with the 970 EVO. Some users like Samsung Pro Devices. But if you can afford the slight cost increase going with the latest device, then that's where I would put my $$$. I doubt you would notice much of a difference in the performance of the two.
> 
> I am not running NVME atm since I blew my computer wad on all the components for Black Snow, so I parked my OS on an unused Adata m.2. But as soon as I have a little money set aside for the upgrade I plan to pick up an NVME 970 EVO. Even if it's just for my OS drive. Seems as though my OS wants to park everything to my 128gb drive, so the next one will be 500gb minimum. I will simply stay on top of DL locations in the meantime. :mellowsmi
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


If you or anyone else is NVMe shopping then this might be an interesting watch:


----------



## Ceadderman

nick name said:


> If you or anyone else is NVMe shopping then this might be an interesting watch:
> 
> https://youtu.be/ER5LuSqg1AE


Seen it.

Since it's simply an OS drive there won't be much in the way of writes to file on the disk other than what gets unpacked in Windows 10. So honestly, Writes per minute is completely subjective to usage. :thumb:

Also, I rather like my EVOs. The only one seeing the most writes is my 1TB disk and that thing has taken on over 3/4 of my Steam/UbiSoft/R* Social Club files w/o much in the way of slowing down. My games all load reliabally quick and updates are pretty seamless. 

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## nick name

Ceadderman said:


> Seen it.
> 
> Since it's simply an OS drive there won't be much in the way of writes to file on the disk other than what gets unpacked in Windows 10. So honestly, Writes per minute is completely subjective to usage. :thumb:
> 
> Also, I rather like my EVOs. The only one seeing the most writes is my 1TB disk and that thing has taken on over 3/4 of my Steam/UbiSoft/R* Social Club files w/o much in the way of slowing down. My games all load reliabally quick and updates are pretty seamless.
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


I agree. I also enjoy my EVOs.


----------



## Baio73

Ceadderman said:


> I would go with the 970 EVO. Some users like Samsung Pro Devices. But if you can afford the slight cost increase going with the latest device, then that's where I would put my $$$. I doubt you would notice much of a difference in the performance of the two.
> 
> I am not running NVME atm since I blew my computer wad on all the components for Black Snow, so I parked my OS on an unused Adata m.2. But as soon as I have a little money set aside for the upgrade I plan to pick up an NVME 970 EVO. Even if it's just for my OS drive. Seems as though my OS wants to park everything to my 128gb drive, so the next one will be 500gb minimum. I will simply stay on top of DL locations in the meantime. :mellowsmi
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


Thanks for your replay.
I have a 960PRO nVme at the moment and I'm absolutely happy with it.
I was asking to see if the cold boot problem I have since I bought the CH7 was somehow connected with the SSD (I've read someone solving it moving to a 970EVO, but maybe it's just one lucky man).
I think I'm gonna save my money… meaning I'm gonna spend it in some other absolutely unnecessary piece of hardware. 

Baio


----------



## crakej

I just 'upgraded' to an SX8200NP 480GB, 3GBs, 1.7GBs write from my SM961 256GB which is now in my M.2_2 slot, but faster than my old drive. New drive I only get 560MBs write speed so don't know what's going on there - others seem to get the right performance.....maybe it's because I have 'only' 66GB free on the drive......?

Can confirm my 1700X is running fine at 4.1GHz with slightly less voltage, so happy about that, have yet to properly OC my Vengeance 3200CL16 Hynix MFR much past a fast 3200 profile, but I will try!


----------



## 1usmus

*Guys, if you find problems in the new microcode, do not be afraid to write about it. In an emergency, you can even in private messages. I have a direct connection with AMD and problems will be solved much faster.*


----------



## nick name

The Stilt said:


> The issue exists mostly due to the security features.
> It seems that the security was an afterthough, which was added only after everything else was completed.
> The registers which could and normally would be used to read the parameters do exists, but they belong to a region which is "secured" by the platform security processor (PSP).
> Securing a certain range means that it cannot be read or written. AMD could have easily allowed read only access to this region, but for some reason they decided not to.
> 
> Only the most basic timing and frequency information can be read on this platform. Everything else (such as ProcODT, etc) can be only read from a dynamic PSP NV copy, intended for debugging.
> None of this is documented and because of that even the bioses cannot read them.
> 
> The worst memory related issue on this platform is that there is no way to tune the memory controller parameters.
> They are hard coded into the memory controller firmware (PMU) and cannot be changed by anyone but AMD. This prevents the manufacturers from optimizing the parameters specifically for their designs.
> 
> For example on Z390 motherboards, on which I've worked on for the last couple weeks there are more than a hundred adjustable parameters. Intel provides the base line (MRC code) and the manufacturers can
> then tune them further to better suit their designs. As an example, a specific dual rank B-die memory kit was giving me trouble on a Z390 motherboard. It was able to post at 3200MHz (which is very low for the platform) and higher
> frequencies resulted in failed memory training and failures to post. About three hours later the very same kit was running at 4000MHz, with tighter timings than originally. Obviously the memory controllers on Intel and AMD CPUs have a very little in common, but
> it is hard to say if the issues on Ryzen memory controllers are due to the memory controller IP itself being weak / bad or simply due to the fact that there are no adjustments available.


 @1usmus can you ask someone about this? And whether it is the same with Zen 2?


----------



## Filters83

nick name said:


> @1usmus can you ask someone about this? And whether it is the same with Zen 2?


I believe its more a motherboard problem at this point as 1usmus explained in his post and i can confirm moving from a strix x370 f gaming to the x470 f gaming solved my oc problem whit the memory, i was having trouble getting stable a 3200mhz cl14 kit at more than 3333mhz now on the same kit same cpu only different motherboard im stable first try 3466 no problem after 2 days of testing etc not a single error, then ofc momory controller have part in all this ! 
Or maby its possible to have some error correction of the signal ? Like adsl signal have error correction maby we can have something like for the memory to cpu signal ?


----------



## nick name

Filters83 said:


> I believe its more a motherboard problem at this point as 1usmus explained in his post and i can confirm moving from a strix x370 f gaming to the x470 f gaming solved my oc problem whit the memory, i was having trouble getting stable a 3200mhz cl14 kit at more than 3333mhz now on the same kit same cpu only different motherboard im stable first try 3466 no problem after 2 days of testing etc not a single error, then ofc momory controller have part in all this !
> Or maby its possible to have some error correction of the signal ? Like adsl signal have error correction maby we can have something like for the memory to cpu signal ?


This will sound rude, but that isn't my intent -- did you read the quoted text by The Stilt?


----------



## 1usmus

No need to quarrel, dear Stilt is absolutely right. Indeed, quite a few settings are blocked.
AMD can unlock them, but the question is whether maternal manufacturers will want add(create) this menu. After all, these settings will be of interest only to enthusiasts of the upper segment. I ask this question, do not worry.


----------



## hurricane28

1usmus said:


> *Guys, if you find problems in the new microcode, do not be afraid to write about it. In an emergency, you can even in private messages. I have a direct connection with AMD and problems will be solved much faster.*


Good to hear man. IS there any benefit from updating to the latest BIOS for me? I am rock solid stable now but if there are benefits than i would do it. 

Also, are you in contact with Asus as well? I mean, you need both party's for BIOS right?


----------



## neikosr0x

1usmus said:


> *Guys, if you find problems in the new microcode, do not be afraid to write about it. In an emergency, you can even in private messages. I have a direct connection with AMD and problems will be solved much faster.*


There is an error i have experienced, If you enable PBO + PE3 sometimes the PC wont boot at usual PBO speeds, So instead of booting at x41.50, 42.50 it would just boot at 37x 39.50x. And that never happened to me before, i can replicate the issue if i restart the PC a few times in short periods of time (1-15min).

Another thing i noticed is that if you leave PBO on Auto and then enable PE4 you wont get EDC over to 168 Value. When checking on Ryzen Master you will see that the EDC value will be stuck at 142 if i recall correctly and you wont be able to push it higher than that.


----------



## 1usmus

hurricane28 said:


> Good to hear man. IS there any benefit from updating to the latest BIOS for me? I am rock solid stable now but if there are benefits than i would do it.
> 
> Also, are you in contact with Asus as well? I mean, you need both party's for BIOS right?


The new microcode can really improve overclocking, but nobody canceled the problems with the SDF.
After Elmor left the asus, our communication is minimal, unfortunately.


----------



## 1usmus

neikosr0x said:


> There is an error i have experienced, If you enable PBO + PE3 sometimes the PC wont boot at usual PBO speeds, So instead of booting at x41.50, 42.50 it would just boot at 37x 39.50x. And that never happened to me before, i can replicate the issue if i restart the PC a few times in short periods of time (1-15min).
> 
> Another thing i noticed is that if you leave PBO on Auto and then enable PE4 you wont get EDC over to 168 Value. When checking on Ryzen Master you will see that the EDC value will be stuck at 142 if i recall correctly and you wont be able to push it higher than that.


PE is a creation of ASUS, AMD has nothing to do with them. I noticed something like this earlier and this is related to the CPU temperature at system startup (The boost algorithm uses some of the values ​​that the sensors receive during system startup). Try to turn on sense mi skew 267, then 272.
Will there be a problem after these changes?


----------



## Filters83

nick name said:


> This will sound rude, but that isn't my intent -- did you read the quoted text by The Stilt?


yes i did and was late  im just curious anyway as many of us im not an expert and can base teory only on my experience, also i didnt know that memory controller can have settings aswell


----------



## nick name

neikosr0x said:


> There is an error i have experienced, If you enable PBO + PE3 sometimes the PC wont boot at usual PBO speeds, So instead of booting at x41.50, 42.50 it would just boot at 37x 39.50x. And that never happened to me before, i can replicate the issue if i restart the PC a few times in short periods of time (1-15min).
> 
> Another thing i noticed is that if you leave PBO on Auto and then enable PE4 you wont get EDC over to 168 Value. When checking on Ryzen Master you will see that the EDC value will be stuck at 142 if i recall correctly and you wont be able to push it higher than that.


Did you remember to Enable Core Performance Boost?


----------



## chakku

Has a consensus been made on 2103/AGESA 0.0.7.2? I understand 2008/0.0.7.0 was a no-go coming from 1201?


----------



## nick name

chakku said:


> Has a consensus been made on 2103/AGESA 0.0.7.2? I understand 2008/0.0.7.0 was a no-go coming from 1201?


I still haven't tested RAM with anything beyond AIDA, but haven't seen any added latency with AIDA so I'm happy with 2103. I'm running an offset of -.100V on VCORE which is a good bit more than was stable on 1201.


----------



## AmaKatsu

With 4 dimm Hynix CJR 3466 CL16, I can say that 2103 are far better than 1201.

v1201 can passed 
-Karhu 12000%
-HCI memtest 2000%
-Memtest5 20 cycles

but after restart and retest, sometimes it instantly fail on test. (all DRAM timing were manual)

for the same setting applied on v2103, there's no issue like v1201. Now stable is true stable.










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 1usmus

AmaKatsu said:


> With 4 dimm Hynix CJR 3466 CL16, I can say that 2103 are far better than 1201.
> 
> v1201 can passed
> -Karhu 12000%
> -HCI memtest 2000%
> -Memtest5 20 cycles
> 
> but after restart and retest, sometimes it instantly fail on test. (all DRAM timing were manual)
> 
> for the same setting applied on v2103, there's no issue like v1201. Now stable is true stable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I have a similar set ... I don't understand why you have such high timings
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_Memory_Tweaking_Overclocking_Guide/9.html


----------



## toxick

Up until two days ago I used BIOS 1201. I changed the video card to Radeon VII(update vBIOS to 106) and because I got black screens I also updated motherboard BIOS to 2103. Now the things are even worst. I want go back to BIOS 1201, but i can't, with EZ Flash 3 Utility I could roll back only to BIOS 2008. Flashback doesn't work....... 
I also received the error code AA.


----------



## AmaKatsu

1usmus said:


> I have a similar set ... I don't understand why you have such high timings
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_Memory_Tweaking_Overclocking_Guide/9.html



I really appreciated your oc guide and I always use your Ryzen Calculator as reference but when I go 4 dimm, the Ryzen Calculator seem doesn't work like 2 dimm worked.

even 16-20-22 or 16-18-18 can cause non noot or needed clearCMOS sometimes, So 16-22-22 seem to be worked.

I think CJR also has various grade? maybe

ps. by individual those kit of 8x2 can get through 3600 CL16 both, 
and highest boot with 3800 no problems.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## neikosr0x

1usmus said:


> PE is a creation of ASUS, AMD has nothing to do with them. I noticed something like this earlier and this is related to the CPU temperature at system startup (The boost algorithm uses some of the values ​​that the sensors receive during system startup). Try to turn on sense mi skew 267, then 272.
> Will there be a problem after these changes?


Yea i know that about PE/Asus thing, but just pointing it out because it never happened to be before on other Bios. It is first time i see this behavior on my setup. I have never messed up with Sense mi skew i will try that i bit latter and see how it goes.



nick name said:


> Did you remember to Enable Core Performance Boost?


yea bro, i manually set it to Enable. Like i said, for me it seems that there is a weird behavior leaving PBO on auto and then just setting PE3 or PE4 on. I'm on a 2700x btw.


----------



## VPII

I found something interesting after flashing to the 2103 bios just now. My computer on the next start up from switching off (not removing power from PSU) failed to start. Upon getting to the bios screen it stated that there was a power issue or something of that sort. Anyways I restarted and all good. I did another Aida mem and cache test and it appears to be a tab bit faster, not much but in the numbers you can see it. First screen grab with old bios second with new, but you'll see it in the screenshot. Interestingly look at the read and write differences, it appears as though the 2008 bios is quicker.


----------



## hurricane28

1usmus said:


> The new microcode can really improve overclocking, but nobody canceled the problems with the SDF.
> After Elmor left the asus, our communication is minimal, unfortunately.


Thnx for the info, Assus always has been a poor company warranty wise.. Thank's to Elmor things were getting better and now he left i think he left a big hole in Assus ROG man.. 

I can't stand companies like that man.. Really hate that attitude..


----------



## VPII

hurricane28 said:


> Thnx for the info, Assus always has been a poor company warranty wise.. Thank's to Elmor things were getting better and now he left i think he left a big hole in Assus ROG man..
> 
> I can't stand companies like that man.. Really hate that attitude..


Gebruik die hardware soos jy dit moet gebruik....

Sorry I saw Netherlands and I thought maybe I can throw in something similar.

Use the hardware as it is supposed to be used then you should not have to deal with Asus. Says that man that killed many an Asus mobo over the past..... I wont share the years then it would make me sound very old.


----------



## poliacido

guys what is 1usmus talking about when he referes to SDF problems still not fixed with the latest bios?
also @nickname you said with the latest bios you are stable at 42.5 and a -100 offset?? what offset did you set before? you were also like me at 41.25x if i remember.....


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> guys what is 1usmus talking about when he referes to SDF problems still not fixed with the latest bios?
> also @nickname you said with the latest bios you are stable at 42.5 and a -100 offset?? what offset did you set before? you were also like me at 41.25x if i remember.....


I am running VCORE at -.100V now and that makes it through everything I've tried so far. It isn't much though: @42.5 Cinebench R15 and R20, Intel Burn Test AVX version, Geekbench 3 and 4, all gaming sessions and daily tasks. Before I had to run it around -.05V ~ -.068V. Previously what I assumed to need a lower offset were the higher frequency tasks and not so much the all core tasks. But, again, I haven't really stressed it so it may prove to be too large an offset at -.100V.


----------



## hurricane28

VPII said:


> Gebruik die hardware soos jy dit moet gebruik....
> 
> Sorry I saw Netherlands and I thought maybe I can throw in something similar.
> 
> Use the hardware as it is supposed to be used then you should not have to deal with Asus. Says that man that killed many an Asus mobo over the past..... I wont share the years then it would make me sound very old.



lol i hear ya but that is not what i meant.


----------



## crakej

Managed to get my Hynix m-dies (Corsair CMK16GX4M2B3200C16) up to 3400 CL16 but it wasn't quite stable - got a bluescreen, but couldn't get this on bios 2008.

Got 3333 running nice and stable, and not that far behind the perf of the b-dies at 3600! (1874 on CB15) I guess this is because they're 2 rank dimms.

Pretty sure I'll be able to get 3400 stable - will be interesting to see how far I can go - couldn't get 3466 to boot at all on 2008 so going to check that out tomorrow as well. Might have to go to CL18 to get it.


----------



## westk

I don't get it. I have test my OC with AIDA and Memtest and it´s all right but with TM5 I have errors. I can play games and everything is OK too.


----------



## hurricane28

westk said:


> I don't get it. I have test my OC with AIDA and Memtest and it´s all right but with TM5 I have errors. I can play games and everything is OK too.


What is not to get here? You are not stable.

Test with TM5 for RAM and CPU with IBT AVX, Prime95 or OCCT with AVX enabled. This way you are ensured of stability.


----------



## AmaKatsu

Did you see any difference value in RTC ?, except for vsoc (actually 1.00625 in bios)

of course no, I change nothing. Only VTTDDR that changed from Auto to 0.675 (even though DRAM 1.40v)

That make error at 8400% going pass though 12000% with no issue 

With reminds, bios 1201 can lowest timing as 16-22-22 otherwise cause no boot or clearCMOS while bios 2103 allow me lower timing to 16-18-19 and some sub that never allows before.

 https://valid.x86.fr/mxtav3


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## nick name

AmaKatsu said:


> Did you see any difference value in RTC ?, except for vsoc (actually 1.00625 in bios)
> 
> of course no, I change nothing. Only VTTDDR that changed from Auto to 0.675 (even though DRAM 1.40v)
> 
> That make error at 8400% going pass though 12000% with no issue
> 
> With reminds, bios 1201 can lowest timing as 16-22-22 otherwise cause no boot or clearCMOS while bios 2103 allow me lower timing to 16-18-19 and some sub that never allows before.
> 
> https://valid.x86.fr/mxtav3
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


So for which run did you lower VTTDDR? Was it the run with the higher SOC that had an error?


----------



## AmaKatsu

nick name said:


> So for which run did you lower VTTDDR? Was it the run with the higher SOC that had an error?



for those two pictures if I screenshot while idle they will be both 1.0063 and 1.0000 under load. So it the same value for vsoc

the point is VTTDDR

VTTDDR : Auto, cause error at 8400%

VTTDDR : 0.675, can run 12000%

I also try 0.7 but It error in 3 minutes.

---------

There's many soc I have try before got final value.

1.05 seem too high, error in 1 hrs
1.02 get better, error in 4 hr
0.98 or 1.10 not going to good, error in 30 mins

So, 1.00625 be the good one (at least)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## nick name

AmaKatsu said:


> for those two pictures if I screenshot while idle they will be both 1.0063 and 1.0000 under load. So it the same value for vsoc
> 
> the point is VTTDDR
> 
> VTTDDR : Auto, cause error at 8400%
> 
> VTTDDR : 0.675, can run 12000%
> 
> I also try 0.7 but It error in 3 minutes.
> 
> ---------
> 
> There's many soc I have try before got final value.
> 
> 1.05 seem too high, error in 1 hrs
> 1.02 get better, error in 4 hr
> 0.98 or 1.10 not going to good, error in 30 mins
> 
> So, 1.00625 be the good one (at least)
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


It sounds like you're not running LLC for SOC. Is that correct?

And I have heard that lower VTTDDR can yield stability for some so if it works for you then you can't argue with results.


----------



## AmaKatsu

nope, 

soc llc : 3 (always)

soc power limit : 120%

dram phase : extreme

cpu llc : 3, phase ultra fast

------

most setting with manual, except for Tweak Paradise section

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## nick name

AmaKatsu said:


> nope,
> 
> soc llc : 3 (always)
> 
> soc power limit : 120%
> 
> dram phase : extreme
> 
> cpu llc : 3, phase ultra fast
> 
> ------
> 
> most setting with manual, except for Tweak Paradise section
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I prefer LLC 4.


----------



## AmaKatsu

nick name said:


> I prefer LLC 4.



worth to try but I may come back in 2-3 days, for 32GB test that too long. 

take 7 hrs to coverage 12000%

for one-shot done without error it's ok but it's not always like that 

I think 
1) SoC LLC 4 + VTTDDR auto
2) SoC LLC 4 + VTTDDR (some value)
may not take that long, 20 hrs may good


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## hahler2

I’m having trouble with PE on bios 2008. I have PE set to level 3. Voltage running at an offset of -.075. LLC set to level 3. These are the same settings I’ve been running for quite some time and it used to boost up to 4.3 or higher in some games. Now, no matter what program I’m running, it won’t run higher than 4.0. Games, cinebench, Aida64, nothing. Is there a bug with this bios and I need to update to 2103 or is there something else going on?


----------



## crakej

hahler2 said:


> I’m having trouble with PE on bios 2008. I have PE set to level 3. Voltage running at an offset of -.075. LLC set to level 3. These are the same settings I’ve been running for quite some time and it used to boost up to 4.3 or higher in some games. Now, no matter what program I’m running, it won’t run higher than 4.0. Games, cinebench, Aida64, nothing. Is there a bug with this bios and I need to update to 2103 or is there something else going on?


Yes - update to 2103 and it should go back to normal - in fact, you may need less VCore on this bios.


----------



## 1usmus

*I have 2 news for you. One is good, the second is bad.*

Good news. I managed to get to the PMU (memory controller settings and memory training). Now not only moding AGESA but also PMU is possible. Due to the fact that the procedure is not fast, mods will be limited. But in any case, I will share the leadership with you.


Bad news. The memory controller firmware for Zen 2 is identical to Zen + / Zen. That is, in the new processors, the memory controller will be old.


----------



## VicsPC

1usmus said:


> *I have 2 news for you. One is good, the second is bad.*
> 
> Good news. I managed to get to the PMU (memory controller settings and memory training). Now not only moding AGESA but also PMU is possible. Due to the fact that the procedure is not fast, mods will be limited. But in any case, I will share the leadership with you.
> 
> 
> Bad news. The memory controller firmware for Zen 2 is identical to Zen + / Zen. That is, in the new processors, the memory controller will be old.


Not sure that's really a bad thing, seems to be fine on my 2700x, and hynix memory which everyone said was s*it. Even on my second 2700x (first one died after 6months), my Hynix memory at factory settings isn't a problem. On my 1700x and c6 i went from 16-18 to 14-15 in my timings and was totally stable. I think they made a massive leap in changing em. Most people are pushing em to the limit it's why i think they're not doing too good.


----------



## neikosr0x

hahler2 said:


> I’m having trouble with PE on bios 2008. I have PE set to level 3. Voltage running at an offset of -.075. LLC set to level 3. These are the same settings I’ve been running for quite some time and it used to boost up to 4.3 or higher in some games. Now, no matter what program I’m running, it won’t run higher than 4.0. Games, cinebench, Aida64, nothing. Is there a bug with this bios and I need to update to 2103 or is there something else going on?


One advice, skip 2008 and go for 2103. Works so much better.


----------



## lordzed83

hurricane28 said:


> Thnx for the info, Assus always has been a poor company warranty wise.. Thank's to Elmor things were getting better and now he left i think he left a big hole in Assus ROG man..
> 
> I can't stand companies like that man.. Really hate that attitude..


I can cause they dont give a **** about MINORITY of people moaning when they can slap premium 25% on products just for ROG label on it. Amazed You are still using Aus products after all the whining and moaning You did about them lol. It's like You are Prime example why they do it.... CRY AND BUY


----------



## lordzed83

1usmus said:


> *Guys, if you find problems in the new microcode, do not be afraid to write about it. In an emergency, you can even in private messages. I have a direct connection with AMD and problems will be solved much faster.*


Great stuff!!! You do so much for AMD comunityand take **** from noone LOVE IT. Quick question would You say there are any descent gains in this new bios. Im still on 1103 3533cl14 full stable thats why I'w not been messing around with my system and actually gaming. I'w p[ut 300 hours in Monster hunter world now division 2 got 150 hours in alrd hahahaah.

Ill be buying 3700x or whatever they will have on sale when Zen 2 lands so not sure if its worth to play around for no gain haha


----------



## crakej

1usmus said:


> *I have 2 news for you. One is good, the second is bad.*
> 
> Good news. I managed to get to the PMU (memory controller settings and memory training). Now not only moding AGESA but also PMU is possible. Due to the fact that the procedure is not fast, mods will be limited. But in any case, I will share the leadership with you.
> 
> 
> Bad news. The memory controller firmware for Zen 2 is identical to Zen + / Zen. That is, in the new processors, the memory controller will be old.


Thanks for update.

Surely even though mem controller is same firmware doesn't mean they havn't done anything to the controller to improve it. Ryzen 1000 had K17 and Ryzen+ has K17.1, so maybe we'll get a K17.2?


----------



## nick name

1usmus said:


> *I have 2 news for you. One is good, the second is bad.*
> 
> Good news. I managed to get to the PMU (memory controller settings and memory training). Now not only moding AGESA but also PMU is possible. Due to the fact that the procedure is not fast, mods will be limited. But in any case, I will share the leadership with you.
> 
> 
> Bad news. The memory controller firmware for Zen 2 is identical to Zen + / Zen. That is, in the new processors, the memory controller will be old.


I read/saw something about the new memory controller being able to run up to 5GHz -- is that true? And I guess the firmware being the same doesn't bum me out if the new hardware can run faster without being hampered by older firmware. Or am I looking at this wrong?


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I read/saw something about the new memory controller being able to run up to 5GHz -- is that true? And I guess the firmware being the same doesn't bum me out if the new hardware can run faster without being hampered by older firmware. Or am I looking at this wrong?


Memory controller will now be on IO die which is 14nm, we can only hope they've refined the controller itself, seeing as the firmware is the same.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Memory controller will now be on IO die which is 14nm, we can only hope they've refined the controller itself, seeing as the firmware is the same.


Have you seen any numbers confirming what I've heard? Lemme try to remember where I got it from and I'll link it.

Edit:

I can't find it, but I think it was probably in an AdoredTV YouTube video.


----------



## starrbuck

BIOS 2103 is much worse for me as far as memory overclocking. I was running stable at 3466 and 14-15-14-14. After upgrading to 2103, the same settings do not work. I had trouble getting the memory going at stock speeds (3200) and the latency seems to be higher.


----------



## 1usmus

crakej said:


> Thanks for update.
> 
> Surely even though mem controller is same firmware doesn't mean they havn't done anything to the controller to improve it. Ryzen 1000 had K17 and Ryzen+ has K17.1, so maybe we'll get a K17.2?


The difference between the Zen and Zen + controllers is 2.2%. I think this is more like a statistical error than a result. But there is a probability of a hardware improvement, there is also a new memclk / 2 mode and IF settings.I do not exclude that the quality of memory controllers will increase due to the fact that we will have several pieces of silicon
In the near future there will be a lot of speculation, therefore I mentally prepare you for the announcement of new processors  :drum:



nick name said:


> I read/saw something about the new memory controller being able to run up to 5GHz -- is that true? And I guess the firmware being the same doesn't bum me out if the new hardware can run faster without being hampered by older firmware. Or am I looking at this wrong?


theoretically it's true, but this is a 1/2 memclk mode, IF will suffer greatly in it



lordzed83 said:


> Great stuff!!! You do so much for AMD comunityand take **** from noone LOVE IT. Quick question would You say there are any descent gains in this new bios. Im still on 1103 3533cl14 full stable thats why I'w not been messing around with my system and actually gaming. I'w p[ut 300 hours in Monster hunter world now division 2 got 150 hours in alrd hahahaah.
> 
> Ill be buying 3700x or whatever they will have on sale when Zen 2 lands so not sure if its worth to play around for no gain haha


Nice to hear what you remember about me 
I like overclocking on a new bios unequivocally, there are a lot of changes in it, I advise you to try 



starrbuck said:


> BIOS 2103 is much worse for me as far as memory overclocking. I was running stable at 3466 and 14-15-14-14. After upgrading to 2103, the same settings do not work. I had trouble getting the memory going at stock speeds (3200) and the latency seems to be higher.


Do you have a picture of RTC settings from the past BIOS?


----------



## hurricane28

lordzed83 said:


> I can cause they dont give a **** about MINORITY of people moaning when they can slap premium 25% on products just for ROG label on it. Amazed You are still using Aus products after all the whining and moaning You did about them lol. It's like You are Prime example why they do it.... CRY AND BUY


Agreed, they don't give a crap about us.. 

I did not just whine and moan, i provided feedback and researched why this C6H was faulty, discussed it with Elmor and other people and they fixed it because more people were having the same problem.. Its not only Asus though, most of the manufacturers don't geve a rats ass about us only about money which is gotten this big in the first place.. 

I didn't buy Asus product after i purchased my C6H so what are you talking about?


----------



## wonderiuy

1usmus said:


> Bad news. The memory controller firmware for Zen 2 is identical to Zen + / Zen. That is, in the new processors, the memory controller will be old.


I would like to look at this bad news as a good one: they will still work on our memory controller, even if they think to work on the new one, sharing then the improvement


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Have you seen any numbers confirming what I've heard? Lemme try to remember where I got it from and I'll link it.
> 
> Edit:
> 
> I can't find it, but I think it was probably in an AdoredTV YouTube video.


I've not seen that - but I have read that the memory controller is K17.3, so it is updated - afraid it was late and I can't find the reference. Whatever it was also mentioned a new one for ThreadRipper (K17.6 or K17.9 I think)

Remember, controller runs at half ram speed, so we need it to go at 2GHz+. But it's refined 14nm process (I/O die) and refined IMC, so it will be better 

Edit: I read about it in an article about lastest Aida64 beta supporting new CPUs and chipsets. I think the info is in the release notes about the new K17.x IMCs the new chips have...


----------



## crakej

Has anyone read about the new tech which 'converts' sequential, single core programs to use multiple cores, on the fly, hugely increasing IPC!

One company has been bought up by Intel and another version of the tech is around for ARM and x86 CPUs. One thing I read or listened to implied that we would see this tech on ARM and/or AMD CPUs 'sooner than we think'. This tech will come to AMD in one form or another as an intuitive way to get non-parallel, sequential code that runs on only one core, to make use of idle cores. I think one of the companies is describing it as having 'threadlets'

Here's a link to an article about the system Intel bought.... https://www.itworld.com/article/2838623/cpu-startup-firm-offers-chip-level-virtual-machines.html

I will try find the other information I found late last night and post it here, but it's really exciting. Multicore CPUs could suddenly get an uplift in single core IPC by using those idle cores that programmers still are not using! Uplift could be as much as *50-100% - yep - DOUBLING IPC!*

Wouldn't that be a nice surprise at Ryzen 3000 (or probably 4000) launch! If AMD get this tech integrated for Ryzen 3000 this would be HUGE!


----------



## poliacido

am i wrong or they released a new bios 2202 today? did i miss something?
also i don't know why it shows again 2103 released again today

EDIT: i can't find it on asus.com, but i can on my country asus website


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> am i wrong or they released a new bios 2202 today? did i miss something?
> also i don't know why it shows again 2103 released again today
> 
> EDIT: i can't find it on asus.com, but i can on my country asus website


Here is the download link:
https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-2202.zip

Edit: That's for WiFi 

Here is non-wifi:
https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...VII-HERO/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-2202.zip


----------



## poliacido

nick name said:


> Here is the download link:
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-2202.zip


yes now i can see it too on asus.com
maybe they released it there a little later
i wonder what is "enhanced security" about


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> yes now i can see it too on asus.com
> maybe they released it there a little later
> i wonder what is "enhanced security" about


It's actually not published on their site for me yet. It's just easy to type the newest BIOS into the download link for the existing BIOS as long as you know the new version number.


----------



## poliacido

nick name said:


> It's actually not published on their site for me yet. It's just easy to type the newest BIOS into the download link for the existing BIOS as long as you know the new version number.


Do you mean you can't see it if you go through the support page? 
Also something weird is going on because there are 2 bios (same 2103) but with different release date and different sizes: one is 8mb and the newest is 10.3mb...


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> Do you mean you can't see it if you go through the support page?
> Also something weird is going on because there are 2 bios (same 2103) but with different release date and different sizes: one is 8mb and the newest is 10.3mb...


Yeah, I had to type in the new BIOS version into download URL I got from the existing BIOS. I can't actually see the version listed yet. It also doesn't show multiples of 2103 for me either. 

I am running 2202 now and haven't really seen anything different to note yet.


----------



## poliacido

nick name said:


> Yeah, I had to type in the new BIOS version into download URL I got from the existing BIOS. I can't actually see the version listed yet. It also doesn't show multiples of 2103 for me either.
> 
> I am running 2202 now and haven't really seen anything different to note yet.


Already updated? lol you were fast.... 
Probably there are some minor improvements about "security" but not regarding performances. Keep testing and share your thoughts


----------



## mtrai

I can see it at least for the wifi


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> Already updated? lol you were fast....
> Probably there are some minor improvements about "security" but not regarding performances. Keep testing and share your thoughts


Yeah, I can see all the updates now and it does simply state "Enhanced Security". I can also see the different versions of 2103 now also.



mtrai said:


> I can see it at least for the wifi


Also visible for me now too.


----------



## Pawel1683

Hi did someone install this chipset from asus website 
Version 18.50.16.01 
2019/04/10
im stuck in 87%
and I need this when i have Radeon software 19.4.1 version ?


----------



## poliacido

nick name said:


> Yeah, I can see all the updates now and it does simply state "Enhanced Security". I can also see the different versions of 2103 now also.
> 
> 
> 
> Also visible for me now too.


maybe something related to new Spectre patches in the microcode? i don't know i am just throwing ideas around


----------



## mtrai

poliacido said:


> maybe something related to new Spectre patches in the microcode? i don't know i am just throwing ideas around


STIBP Status Single Thread Indirect Branch Predictors (STIBP) is a method to migate indirect branch target injection attacks on AMD products. 

This has been in the last few previous bios...I do not remember it from older ones but not checked back through them. It has been hidden and disabled in all the few recent bios I checked today. Though today's bios is showing it disabled. I have yet to flash this bios as I am still modding it to my liking.


----------



## nick name

Pawel1683 said:


> Hi did someone install this chipset from asus website
> Version 18.50.16.01
> 2019/04/10
> im stuck in 87%
> and I need this when i have Radeon software 19.4.1 version ?


I installed it without it without issue.


----------



## crakej

Pawel1683 said:


> Hi did someone install this chipset from asus website
> Version 18.50.16.01
> 2019/04/10
> im stuck in 87%
> and I need this when i have Radeon software 19.4.1 version ?


You need to install the new chipset driver before updating to any 2xxx version of the bios - 2008, 2103 and 2202


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> You need to install the new chipset driver before updating to any 2xxx version of the bios - 2008, 2103 and 2202


I was actually on an older chipset driver while on 2103 and all seemed fine. I only upgraded drivers because it was available on the ASUS site so I figured -- why not.


----------



## nick name

I can't seem to get the latest LAN driver to run, however. I think it may be because the last driver I installed came from Intel and is probably newer.


----------



## wingman99

nick name said:


> I can't seem to get the latest LAN driver to run, however. I think it may be because the last driver I installed came from Intel and is probably newer.


I had a problem with LAN internet and it was the KB4493509 windows 10 update. I uninstalled the update and now my LAN internet works fine.


----------



## crakej

I had most up to date intel driver already as well.

There is a new audio driver, AISuite, Aura and ROG CPUz too which I've installed ok...


----------



## wingman99

crakej said:


> I had most up to date intel driver already as well.
> 
> There is a new audio driver, AISuite, Aura and ROG CPUz too which I've installed ok...


Are you having a problem with the Ethernet Intel i219-v?


----------



## crakej

wingman99 said:


> Are you having a problem with the Ethernet Intel i219-v?


Hmmmmmm......seems I don't have the latest Lan! Installing now. Will report back.


----------



## wingman99

crakej said:


> Hmmmmmm......seems I don't have the latest Lan! Installing now. Will report back.


Do you have windows 10 and the KB4493509 windows 10 update installed?


----------



## Ceadderman

I feel so inadequate in my current BIOS compared to you guys. I am running 1002. Felt no need to change it as it's been 100% stable. 

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## Terror-Byter

**

Whats this about? Very confusing...
Bios Version 2103 released today 2019/04/11 10.29 MBytes
Bios Version 2202 also released today 2019/04/11 10.3 MBytes

But then also...

the other Bios Version 2103 released over a week ago 2019/04/01 8.05 MBytes

So which is the new new bios? 2103 or 2202??? Huh!?!?


----------



## Ceadderman

Hey guys, no offense but could you put your systems in Rig Builder and then update your signature in User CP? You can show up to 3 systems in your sig and would clean things up considerably. Thank you. :cheers:

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## crakej

wingman99 said:


> Do you have windows 10 and the KB4493509 windows 10 update installed?


I don't have that update - but I'm up to date.

So when I ran the installer I chose to install Drivers/Software and it told me intel something or the other (sorry! it's 5.30am here) was a higher version and would need to be removed before installation of this version.

I do tend to go to intel for updates of the Lan - always prefer to get driver from the IC manufacturer rather than motherboard manufacturer...

I have Ver 12.15.184.1 dated 11 Jan 2019


----------



## wingman99

crakej said:


> I don't have that update - but I'm up to date.
> 
> So when I ran the installer I chose to install Drivers/Software and it told me intel something or the other (sorry! it's 5.30am here) was a higher version and would need to be removed before installation of this version.
> 
> I do tend to go to intel for updates of the Lan - always prefer to get driver from the IC manufacturer rather than motherboard manufacturer...
> 
> I have Ver 12.15.184.1 dated 11 Jan 2019


What is your most recent windows 10 update? I had a problem with the Intel network and KB4493509 update. I have ver 12.15.22.6


----------



## Reous

crakej said:


> You need to install the new chipset driver before updating to any 2xxx version of the bios - 2008, 2103 and 2202



It is only necessary if you use the internal graphic of a Raven Ridge APU. In worst case you wouldn't get a video signal in Windows.


----------



## Rusakova

Terror-Byter said:


> Whats this about? Very confusing...
> Bios Version 2103 released today 2019/04/11 10.29 MBytes
> Bios Version 2202 also released today 2019/04/11 10.3 MBytes
> 
> But then also...
> 
> the other Bios Version 2103 released over a week ago 2019/04/01 8.05 MBytes
> 
> So which is the new new bios? 2103 or 2202??? Huh!?!?


When you download and unzip the BIOS doesn't it expand to 16,386 KB regardless of what Asus writes ? (10.29 / 8.05 MBytes)
But it sure does look weird with two versions of the 2103 BIOS with different dates.


----------



## crakej

wingman99 said:


> What is your most recent windows 10 update? I had a problem with the Intel network and KB4493509 update. I have ver 12.15.22.6


I'm on March 12, 2019—KB4489899 (OS Build 17763.379) are you on an insider version?


----------



## slim[er]

*Win10 latest update*

Windows 10 version 1803, isn't an insider build right? That's what I'm using and my latest update was 4/9 KB4493509.


----------



## crakej

slim[er] said:


> Windows 10 version 1803, isn't an insider build right? That's what I'm using and my latest update was 4/9 KB4493509.


It's not an insider build, but it's old - you should be on 1809


----------



## wingman99

crakej said:


> I'm on March 12, 2019—KB4489899 (OS Build 17763.379) are you on an insider version?


My PC received KB4493509 on patch Tuesday ‎4/‎9/‎2019 (OS Build 17763.379) No I'm not on the insider version. I wonder if they stopped the windows 10 KB4493509 update?


----------



## crakej

wingman99 said:


> My PC received KB4493509 on patch Tuesday ‎4/‎9/‎2019 (OS Build 17763.379) No I'm not on the insider version. I wonder if they stopped the windows 10 KB4493509 update?


Interesting - what was in the update? Mine says it's up to date.


----------



## wingman99

crakej said:


> Interesting - what was in the update? Mine says it's up to date.


kb4493509 update link: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4493509/windows-10-update-kb4493509 

What was the last checked for your updates?


----------



## crakej

wingman99 said:


> kb4493509 update link: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4493509/windows-10-update-kb4493509
> 
> What was the last checked for your updates?


Your link is broken - dunno what's going on there...

My last update was https://support.microsoft.com/en-gb/help/4489899/windows-10-update-kb4489899 update to 1809

Literally just checked and no updates waiting.

Hmmm - my link not working either.......what's goin on?


----------



## wingman99

crakej said:


> Your link is broken - dunno what's going on there...
> 
> My last update was https://support.microsoft.com/en-gb/help/4489899/windows-10-update-kb4489899 update to 1809
> 
> Literally just checked and no updates waiting.
> 
> Hmmm - my link not working either.......what's goin on?


Thanks for checking on that. With your help I should not have received April 9, 2019—KB4493509 (OS Build 17763.437), because I have (OS Build 17763.379).
Does that make sense?


----------



## crakej

wingman99 said:


> Thanks for checking on that. With your help I should not have received April 9, 2019—KB4493509 (OS Build 17763.437), because I have (OS Build 17763.379).
> Does that make sense?


Yes! Phew!


----------



## starrbuck

1usmus said:


> Do you have a picture of RTC settings from the past BIOS?


Yes, and thanks for your reply. I was actually able to figure out it was some more obscure setting keeping me from booting. I haven't determined exactly which one just yet but I will do a comparison this weekend to try to figure it out. I am back to the same OC speeds on CPU and memory that I had before.


----------



## poliacido

did you install the latest Aura? I just installed it and i can't open it anymore.. it tells me it was blocked for protection reasons....***


----------



## nick name

Welp I'm still on 1803.


----------



## poliacido

I just see a new bios 2203, same features of 2202 
and they removed the 2202

at the moment i can see it on asus italy website but not on asus.com


----------



## Keith Myers

Ceadderman said:


> I feel so inadequate in my current BIOS compared to you guys. I am running 1002. Felt no need to change it as it's been 100% stable.
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


I'm right with you. I updated to 1002 to get the WMI BIOS so I can use the asus-wmi-sensors driver and I will stay put. 100% stable and my memory runs fine at 3466 CL14 for my compute load.


----------



## nick name

hahler2 said:


> I’m having trouble with PE on bios 2008. I have PE set to level 3. Voltage running at an offset of -.075. LLC set to level 3. These are the same settings I’ve been running for quite some time and it used to boost up to 4.3 or higher in some games. Now, no matter what program I’m running, it won’t run higher than 4.0. Games, cinebench, Aida64, nothing. Is there a bug with this bios and I need to update to 2103 or is there something else going on?


Did you get this sorted?

If you haven't then check your Windows power plan. Installing the newest chipset drivers the system will also install the Ryzen Balanced power plan and run that power plan. It has Minimum Processor State set at 90% and for me it set Maximum Processor State to 99% and that last bit can cause the behavior you describe.


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> I'm right with you. I updated to 1002 to get the WMI BIOS so I can use the asus-wmi-sensors driver and I will stay put. 100% stable and my memory runs fine at 3466 CL14 for my compute load.


You know the only benefit I've found with these newer BIOS 2103, 2202, 2203 is the ability to run the CPU with less voltage. The timing is nice with Texas summer coming. I'm running an offset of negative .100V which I wasn't able to run prior with PE Level 3.


----------



## minal

nick name said:


> You know the only benefit I've found with these newer BIOS 2103, 2202, 2203 is the ability to run the CPU with less voltage. The timing is nice with Texas summer coming. I'm running an offset of negative .100V which I wasn't able to run prior with PE Level 3.


That's quite an appealing benefit for those who want silence and therefore low temps. I'll have to update eventually. And yes, quite timely with summer coming.


----------



## Ceadderman

Keith Myers said:


> I'm right with you. I updated to 1002 to get the WMI BIOS so I can use the asus-wmi-sensors driver and I will stay put. 100% stable and my memory runs fine at 3466 CL14 for my compute load.


I never updated. My board came already rocking 1002. 

Which to me was quite odd. I fully expected that my new board would come with day 0 BIOS and I would have to hunt and peck to find a workable option in the Driver Support List. My Crosshair IV Formula was that way when I got it. 

On another note, I know ASUS boards allow you to enter UEFI via desktop. But for the life of me I cannot seem to get it there. Was there a change with this board? My Bro has a 1700x on a ASUS x350 Gaming board and he can access his, but there isn't much he can do in it other than the basics. Anyone have an idea on accessing UEFI on Hero other than with a restart to Delete map? :mellowsmi

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## nick name

Ceadderman said:


> I never updated. My board came already rocking 1002.
> 
> Which to me was quite odd. I fully expected that my new board would come with day 0 BIOS and I would have to hunt and peck to find a workable option in the Driver Support List. My Crosshair IV Formula was that way when I got it.
> 
> On another note, I know ASUS boards allow you to enter UEFI via desktop. But for the life of me I cannot seem to get it there. Was there a change with this board? My Bro has a 1700x on a ASUS x350 Gaming board and he can access his, but there isn't much he can do in it other than the basics. Anyone have an idea on accessing UEFI on Hero other than with a restart to Delete map? :mellowsmi
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


I'm not familiar with that at all. What are you looking to access? I ask because you can get to some voltages using TurboV Core.


----------



## nick name

minal said:


> That's quite an appealing benefit for those who want silence and therefore low temps. I'll have to update eventually. And yes, quite timely with summer coming.


Within BIOS I can set VCORE to -.100V (edit: it seems I can boot with -.10625 now on 2203 but upon testing was too much to run IBT AVX) but nothing more will boot. However, using TurboV Core within Windows let me increase the offset to -.11250V which makes it through about 5 or 6 back to back Cinbench R20 runs with a CPU multiplier of 42.5 on PE 3. Higher offsets eventually crashed. 

Sorry -- this next bit is almost a flow of consciousness bordering on rambling. 

Speaking of PE 3 -- I use Ryzen Master to move the multiplier by adjusting EDC and it appears that BIOS 2203 will allow for governing of EDC from within the BIOS where previous BIOS versions would not if used in conjunction with PE 3 or PE 4. 

I stumbled upon this after finding that with 2203 the value for EDC would not go above 145 (which is what PE 3 is set to use) in Ryzen Master. Previous BIOS versions before 2202 would behave correctly in that PE 3 would boot into Windows with EDC at 145 and the corresponding multiplier would be set (also taking into account temps at POST), but it wouldn't cap it. With 2202 (I never used 2008) it didn't appear that EDC was actually being used to set the multiplier for PE 3 as it was coming in as if EDC was set for 168. So to troubleshoot that I changed EDC to 145 and as expected it brought the multiplier down to where I expected it and setting it to 168 moved the multiplier as expected as well. 

Now with 2203 there seems to be some return to normal behavior, but with a twist. So with 2203 and using PE 3 the multiplier will set as expected for an EDC value of 145 and caps EDC to 145. Prior to BIOS 2203 you could still increase EDC to its max of 168 to increase the multiplier and now you can't. 

What this behavior has caused me to learn is that you can finally set the values for TDC PPT and EDC without them being ignored when using PE 3 or PE 4. All previous BIOS revisions you could not. It was a problem I discussed with The Stilt and he shared that his design intended for control over the multiplier to exist within BIOS even when using PE 3 and PE 4. ASUS just didn't implement it that way which forced me to rely on Ryzen Master to control the multiplier for PE 3 and PE 4 by adjusting EDC. 

Now with BIOS 2203 the control exists within BIOS to set the multiplier for PE 3 or PE 4 by adjusting EDC. So if you enjoy how PE 3 will lock the multiplier while under load, but couldn't use it because of the multiplier being too high -- you can now control it under the PBO settings by manually setting the value for EDC to something lower than 145. 

Also TDC isn't limited to 114 anymore and can be set as high as 10000, but there doesn't seem to be any benefit from the change. Oh and EDC isn't limited to 168 anymore either. With no benefit observed from exceeding the previous limit of 168. (Edit: You can see higher multipliers with a higher EDC value (above 168) set in BIOS. Setting it around 220 seems to be the effective limit. Going higher does not result in a change in the multiplier in Windows.)

Worth noting is that while it now allows you to adjust EDC in BIOS without being ignored when using PE 3 or 4 it will also cap EDC to what is set in BIOS while in Windows. So if you want to increase EDC with Ryzen Master from within Windows you won't be able to adjust it past what is set in BIOS.

Amendment:

I have just found that setting EDC to 134 in BIOS translated into a cap of 140 when using Ryzen Master in Windows. I haven't explored beyond this so I don't know if 140 is the floor or if there is a certain value that will be added to what is set in BIOS when using a value below 145. 145 is what PE 3 would normally use.

Addendum to amendment:

Ok I've now found that although Ryzen Master will display a max value for EDC to be 140 (above the 134 I set in BIOS) it will not actually change that value above the 134 value set in BIOS. So it does appear that what is set in BIOS is the cap. Even though Ryzen Master may show a higher value for the max.

Revelation:

Ok so apparently 168 isn't the functional cap for EDC anymore. If you input 200 then it will bump the mutiplier from 42.5 to 42.75. I had tried 180 and it did nothing so it appears that higher EDC values will increase the multiplier, but it doesn't scale the same way it did before as adjusting down from a max of 168.

Edit to revelation:

I should have tried a little past 180 because 184 will increase the multiplier to 42.75 -- it didn't need to be 200. I have also realized that 168 (the previous max for EDC) was setting the multiplier to 42.25 and increasing EDC to 172 bumped the multiplier to 42.5. That increase falls inline with previously observed scaling. The jump from 172 to 184 to increase the multiplier to 42.75 does not though.

Exacerbated resignment:

Ugghhhh there is more to it than I thought in regards to the high side of EDC and its control over the multiplier. This is gonna take much more to figure out the max and how high I can increase the multiplier beyond the behavior when the previous max EDC was 168. The higher I go the more I'm learning. Though I can say that none of this seems worth it in terms of voltages. The higher EDC seems to draw more voltage than previously needed when using BCLK to increase speed. Edit to this: Wait i think the max has been found. It doesn't seem useful though.


----------



## Ceadderman

Can someone do me a favor and post a clear snapshot of the actual areas of interest I need to pay attention to in the UEFI for RAM clocking using Ryzen Calculator??? 

I used Thaiphoon software to get the correct info from my RAM and filled in that info into the Calculator, but I'll be danged if nothing I see in settings is anywhere close other than timings, speed and voltage. Everything else is simply bamfoozling trying to apply the information. I'm no dummy, but that's probably why I get about a third of the way through before I simply discard and exit from UEFI. :stun:

If you could put the snap through MSpaint it would certainly help clear things up a bit. :thinking:

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## poliacido

Ceadderman said:


> Can someone do me a favor and post a clear snapshot of the actual areas of interest I need to pay attention to in the UEFI for RAM clocking using Ryzen Calculator???
> 
> I used Thaiphoon software to get the correct info from my RAM and filled in that info into the Calculator, but I'll be danged if nothing I see in settings is anywhere close other than timings, speed and voltage. Everything else is simply bamfoozling trying to apply the information. I'm no dummy, but that's probably why I get about a third of the way through before I simply discard and exit from UEFI. :stun:
> 
> If you could put the snap through MSpaint it would certainly help clear things up a bit. :thinking:
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


do you mean this?? or where to find the settings in the advanced tab of the ryzen calculator (procODT .. gear down etc...)


----------



## Pawel1683

I have one question about AMD chipset driver 
I need install this when i have Radeon VII and install radeon software adrenalin 2019
and when im not OC i need this or can forgot about chipset bios etc ?


----------



## nick name

Ceadderman said:


> Can someone do me a favor and post a clear snapshot of the actual areas of interest I need to pay attention to in the UEFI for RAM clocking using Ryzen Calculator???
> 
> I used Thaiphoon software to get the correct info from my RAM and filled in that info into the Calculator, but I'll be danged if nothing I see in settings is anywhere close other than timings, speed and voltage. Everything else is simply bamfoozling trying to apply the information. I'm no dummy, but that's probably why I get about a third of the way through before I simply discard and exit from UEFI. :stun:
> 
> If you could put the snap through MSpaint it would certainly help clear things up a bit. :thinking:
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


Can you mark up a screenshot of the Calulator indicating what you can't find in BIOS? Or what you are unfamiliar with?

One thing I struggled with without realizing my mistake is:


----------



## nick name

I've just started getting this USB error after upgrading to latest chipset drivers, Windows 1809, and BIOS 2203. It never occurred before, but it might be hardware as well. It happens when I am trying to turn off my PS4 controller. Anyone else experience something similar?

Edit:

I think it's the cable I was using going bad. I plugged it into a hub without the controller and it caused the hub to act wonky.

Edit 2:

Can confirm . . . cable went bad.


----------



## starrbuck

starrbuck said:


> Yes, and thanks for your reply. I was actually able to figure out it was some more obscure setting keeping me from booting. I haven't determined exactly which one just yet but I will do a comparison this weekend to try to figure it out. I am back to the same OC speeds on CPU and memory that I had before.


Upon checking the settings txt files, the only significant difference I can find is Sense MI Skew which I had set to Disabled but it's on Auto now. Could this keep it from booting?


----------



## wingman99

crakej said:


> Yes! Phew!


I checked with Microsoft help forum and Independent Advisor said "Yes, your system should have that update, it will bring your system up to 17763.437" So it is amazing you don't have KB4493509 update. Do you think they stopped the update for folks?


----------



## nick name

starrbuck said:


> Upon checking the settings txt files, the only significant difference I can find is Sense MI Skew which I had set to Disabled but it's on Auto now. Could this keep it from booting?


I always disable SenseMi skew. I don't think that is it.


----------



## Ceadderman

nick name said:


> Can you mark up a screenshot of the Calulator indicating what you can't find in BIOS? Or what you are unfamiliar with?
> 
> One thing I struggled with without realizing my mistake is:


Yeah, see this is where my confusion stems from.

I know there are 3 Frequencies but then there are 4 in the outcome after keying the specs into the profile logger. That, and there is some confusion as to RP, RAS & FAW settings. There are four mid level (0-100 rankings). My RP is 30. RAS 44. and FAW 32.

My problem is not specifically that I don't know what I am looking at but with the terminological differences between Calculator and ASUS OC settings. 

So if anyone can take some snaps and show me where to put one for one (Calc to ASUS OC) that I need to input to that would be a great help. I have mid level expertise but when there are 4(at minimum) points of entry showing ranks of 30 or better (but not 100 or higher) I kind of talk myself out of it because I would rather err on the side of caution rather than bork my only two sticks of DDR4. Had I another set that I could pull off the shelf I could most certainly run the numbers without issue. But I've only the two and really don't feel like dealing with warranty support and being down for more than a few days. :mellowsmi

So seeing your 2nd snap, My first three number are 1)# 2)# and 4)#. "#" = value. Correct? :thinking:

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## nick name

Ceadderman said:


> Yeah, see this is where my confusion stems from.
> 
> I know there are 3 Frequencies but then there are 4 in the outcome after keying the specs into the profile logger. That, and there is some confusion as to RP, RAS & FAW settings. There are four mid level (0-100 rankings). My RP is 30. RAS 44. and FAW 32.
> 
> My problem is not specifically that I don't know what I am looking at but with the terminological differences between Calculator and ASUS OC settings.
> 
> So if anyone can take some snaps and show me where to put one for one (Calc to ASUS OC) that I need to input to that would be a great help. I have mid level expertise but when there are 4(at minimum) points of entry showing ranks of 30 or better (but not 100 or higher) I kind of talk myself out of it because I would rather err on the side of caution rather than bork my only two sticks of DDR4. Had I another set that I could pull off the shelf I could most certainly run the numbers without issue. But I've only the two and really don't feel like dealing with warranty support and being down for more than a few days. :mellowsmi
> 
> So seeing your 2nd snap, My first three number are 1)# 2)# and 4)#. "#" = value. Correct? :thinking:
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


Do you have Ryzen Timing Checker? 

And add a t in front of those fields. tRP, tRAS, tFAW

And please mark up a screenshot of the calculator indicating where your confusion lies.


----------



## Ceadderman

nick name said:


> Do you have Ryzen Timing Checker?
> 
> And add a t in front of those fields. tRP, tRAS, tFAW
> 
> And please mark up a screenshot of the calculator indicating where your confusion lies.


This is not Ryzen Timing Checker. It's DRAM Calculator for Ryzen™ 1.4.1 (overclocking DRAM on AM4) thread by @1usmus

Alot of these inputs are not the same as the Extreme Tweaker options, which are pretty confusing to begin with. It's been nearly a decade since I have overclocked RAM and that was DDR3. So I'm a tad rusty in this area. 

The three underlined are the confusing options. The ones in the Rectangle(yeah I know more like squished loaf of bread :blushsmil ) you pretty much solved for me with the 2nd screenshot. My first three inputs are 14. So top two are 14 and 4th one is 14. Unless I should change them all from 15 to 14 from the top option. :thinking:

but yeah I left out "t" from tRAS, tRC and tFAW which probably confused you. I tend to drop redundant letters when writing them down. So it carried over to relating them. Which I shouldn't do if I wish to ask for advice. :doh:

Extreme Tweaker settings has more than 3 options for double digit entries and one of mine are set @50? Which kinda confuses me. Since all my values of that range are well under 50. :mellowsmi

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## AmaKatsu

So, you're used the Ryzen Calculator and didn't know where to match those values in Extreme Tweak (bios) right ?










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## poliacido

Just updated to 2203 but i can't get same results with PE3 anymore
seems i can also stay with a little lower offset on the core but now PE3 sets me at 40.8x all cores and before was 41.25x, still i have to test to see if it's stable
Also i don't know what is happening but sometimes i noticed it boots and has a lot higher voltage on the core (1.48)....and stays like that until i reboot
In ryzen master the EDC is set to 145, i don't remember what it was before... i will try to increase it in the bios and see if it changes


----------



## neikosr0x

poliacido said:


> Just updated to 2203 but i can't get same results with PE3 anymore
> seems i can also stay with a little lower offset on the core but now PE3 sets me at 40.8x all cores and before was 41.25x, still i have to test to see if it's stable
> Also i don't know what is happening but sometimes i noticed it boots and has a lot higher voltage on the core (1.48)....and stays like that until i reboot
> In ryzen master the EDC is set to 145, i don't remember what it was before... i will try to increase it in the bios and see if it changes


it is normal happens to me as well. I'm running my 2700x with PBO set to enable also i need to keep testing. You can try it like that, and you will get PE4 type of performance with way less CPU volt. i can also run it with an offset of -0.25 and it runs like nothing.


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> Just updated to 2203 but i can't get same results with PE3 anymore
> seems i can also stay with a little lower offset on the core but now PE3 sets me at 40.8x all cores and before was 41.25x, still i have to test to see if it's stable
> Also i don't know what is happening but sometimes i noticed it boots and has a lot higher voltage on the core (1.48)....and stays like that until i reboot
> In ryzen master the EDC is set to 145, i don't remember what it was before... i will try to increase it in the bios and see if it changes


Go back a page and find my recent looooong post. 

Also, if voltage is sitting high longer than a minute after boot then I would check your Windows power plan. The newest chipset drivers also included the Ryzen Balanced power plan and then sets that as your power plan. The problem with it is that it sets Minimum Processor state to 90% and we need it to be a value below 50% for the CPU to reach all its p-states. It also set the Maximum Processor State to 99% on my machine, but not sure if it's doing that to everyone.


----------



## nick name

Ceadderman said:


> This is not Ryzen Timing Checker. It's DRAM Calculator for Ryzen™ 1.4.1 (overclocking DRAM on AM4) thread by @1usmus
> 
> -snip-
> 
> Extreme Tweaker settings has more than 3 options for double digit entries and one of mine are set @50? Which kinda confuses me. Since all my values of that range are well under 50. :mellowsmi
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


Are the 3 options you're talking about the SAFE, FAST, and EXTREME options? Because those are just progressively tighter timings that it offers to try. The EXTREME options generally don't work for me so I would use the FAST or SAFE options.

And I mentioned RTC because I wasn't sure of what you were uncertain about and thought it may serve as a key of sorts.


----------



## poliacido

neikosr0x said:


> it is normal happens to me as well. I'm running my 2700x with PBO set to enable also i need to keep testing. You can try it like that, and you will get PE4 type of performance with way less CPU volt. i can also run it with an offset of -0.25 and it runs like nothing.


can you tell me what did you set in the PBO settings? I've never tried overclocking with only PBO.... Or you also set PE3+pbo?
Also what multiplier (all cores) do you get?



nick name said:


> Go back a page and find my recent looooong post.
> 
> Also, if voltage is sitting high longer than a minute after boot then I would check your Windows power plan. The newest chipset drivers also included the Ryzen Balanced power plan and then sets that as your power plan. The problem with it is that it sets Minimum Processor state to 90% and we need it to be a value below 50% for the CPU to reach all its p-states. It also set the Maximum Processor State to 99% on my machine, but not sure if it's doing that to everyone.


I read that post, also with the new edit you did
regarding the power plan i saw the chipset set that weird ryzen power plan, i noticed it before upgrading to 2203 and i set back to windows balanced to get p states...
About the high voltage it stays high till the pstates engages but as soon as i crunch some workload (like cinebench) the voltage rise again a lot.... Don't know why but sometimes it boots with a 0.1 higher VID that's why has this high voltage
Maybe a good Clear CMOS can fix it?
Anyway it doesn't explain me why with the new bios i can't get back to 41.25 as before with PE3, you said in your case it boosts even higher than before but instead i get a lower multiplier. Just like you i get a higher voltage... that's why i run with -0.025 now.... before it was a +0.025


----------



## The Sandman

poliacido said:


> can you tell me what did you set in the PBO settings? I've never tried overclocking with only PBO.... Or you also set PE3+pbo?
> Also what multiplier (all cores) do you get?
> 
> I read that post, also with the new edit you did
> regarding the power plan i saw the chipset set that weird ryzen power plan, i noticed it before upgrading to 2203 and i set back to windows balanced to get p states...
> About the high voltage it stays high till the pstates engages but as soon as i crunch some workload (like cinebench) the voltage rise again a lot.... Don't know why but sometimes it boots with a 0.1 higher VID that's why has this high voltage
> Maybe a good Clear CMOS can fix it?
> Anyway it doesn't explain me why with the new bios i can't get back to 41.25 as before with PE3, you said in your case it boosts even higher than before but instead i get a lower multiplier. Just like you i get a higher voltage... that's why i run with -0.025 now.... before it was a +0.025



I'm curious as to your cooling solution. Remember with PE3 your multiplier etc is set during POST and is dependent on system ambient.
On my C6H with 0.0.7.2 Bios mine still boots with x42 as it always has but there is a slight tendency to drop to 41.8 (maybe 1 out of 8 boot attempts).
My cooling solution includes three rads and a monoblock. High performance power plan with 20% minimal cpu for me.


@*nick name* I finally got around to trying out PE3 + PBO EDC to 155 (4350 all core) on latest C6H Bios with working PBO again.
First time in and mistakenly left Vcore/LLC on "auto" as usual with my previous PE3 OC hahaha, I about crapped my pants when I started IBT AVX on a custom run lol.
It was late and I did not have the time to play much but wow. It seems I may have a new area to play with till CHVIII-F/3700x comes around.
Are you simply using a Offset Vcore? I'll be checking through that thread of yours as time allows as it appears there still a bunch to learn with PBO. Great find! +Rep!!!


----------



## poliacido

The Sandman said:


> I'm curious as to your cooling solution. Remember with PE3 your multiplier etc is set during POST and is dependent on system ambient.
> On my C6H with 0.0.7.2 Bios mine still boots with x42 as it always has but there is a slight tendency to drop to 41.8 (maybe 1 out of 8 boot attempts).
> My cooling solution includes three rads and a monoblock. High performance power plan with 20% minimal cpu for me.
> 
> 
> @*nick name* I finally got around to trying out PE3 + PBO EDC to 155 (4350 all core) on latest C6H Bios with working PBO again.
> First time in and mistakenly left Vcore/LLC on "auto" as usual with my previous PE3 OC hahaha, I about crapped my pants when I started IBT AVX on a custom run lol.
> It was late and I did not have the time to play much but wow. It seems I may have a new area to play with till CHVIII-F/3700x comes around.
> Are you simply using a Offset Vcore? I'll be checking through that thread of yours as time allows as it appears there still a bunch to learn with PBO. Great find! +Rep!!!


I have an AIO with a 240 rad. I know it checks during the post for the temps but till this morning with the previous bios has always set higher multipliers.... i have around 20° C ambient temperature
this is what i get with PE3 and a little - offset (don't look at ram timings i still have to set them)


----------



## nick name

The Sandman said:


> I'm curious as to your cooling solution. Remember with PE3 your multiplier etc is set during POST and is dependent on system ambient.
> On my C6H with 0.0.7.2 Bios mine still boots with x42 as it always has but there is a slight tendency to drop to 41.8 (maybe 1 out of 8 boot attempts).
> My cooling solution includes three rads and a monoblock. High performance power plan with 20% minimal cpu for me.
> 
> 
> @*nick name* I finally got around to trying out PE3 + PBO EDC to 155 (4350 all core) on latest C6H Bios with working PBO again.
> First time in and mistakenly left Vcore/LLC on "auto" as usual with my previous PE3 OC hahaha, I about crapped my pants when I started IBT AVX on a custom run lol.
> It was late and I did not have the time to play much but wow. It seems I may have a new area to play with till CHVIII-F/3700x comes around.
> Are you simply using a Offset Vcore? I'll be checking through that thread of yours as time allows as it appears there still a bunch to learn with PBO. Great find! +Rep!!!


I've found that VCORE offset of -.100V has proven stable through Prime, IBT AVX, Cinebench R20, Gaming, etc. Anything more will crash on something. And variance of .25 on multiplier doesn't surprise me. If you wanna adjust it after boot then Ryzen Master will get it done by adjusting EDC. 



poliacido said:


> I have an AIO with a 240 rad. I know it checks during the post for the temps but till this morning with the previous bios has always set higher multipliers.... i have around 20° C ambient temperature
> this is what i get with PE3 and a little - offset (don't look at ram timings i still have to set them)


What I would recommend is going into BIOS and with PE 3 go into the PBO settings and set to Manual and enter in PPT TDC and EDC. The difference now is that it will no longer override those numbers with the PE 3 numbers, but will also cap EDC once booted to what is set in BIOS. So if you want a higher multiplier and don't need the flexibility of changing it in Windows then set EDC to something like 152 and see where it boots your multiplier. Adjust in around increments of 4 up and down to find where want. If you want to adjust within Windows then you will have to set a higher EDC like 168 and then adjust with Ryzen Master after boot. 

And I am using PE 3 with -.100V offset and LLC set to 4. You will likely find you can increase yours quite a bit now too unless you're combining it with an increased BCLK.


----------



## Keith Myers

nick name said:


> You know the only benefit I've found with these newer BIOS 2103, 2202, 2203 is the ability to run the CPU with less voltage. The timing is nice with Texas summer coming. I'm running an offset of negative .100V which I wasn't able to run prior with PE Level 3.


Can you tell me what voltage does the cpu end up with all cores loaded with the latest BIOS'

I end up at 1.33V for all cores under load on the 1002 BIOS @ 4.025GHz.


----------



## poliacido

nick name said:


> I've found that VCORE offset of -.100V has proven stable through Prime, IBT AVX, Cinebench R20, Gaming, etc. Anything more will crash on something. And variance of .25 on multiplier doesn't surprise me. If you wanna adjust it after boot then Ryzen Master will get it done by adjusting EDC.
> 
> 
> 
> What I would recommend is going into BIOS and with PE 3 go into the PBO settings and set to Manual and enter in PPT TDC and EDC. The difference now is that it will no longer override those numbers with the PE 3 numbers, but will also cap EDC once booted to what is set in BIOS. So if you want a higher multiplier and don't need the flexibility of changing it in Windows then set EDC to something like 152 and see where it boots your multiplier. Adjust in around increments of 4 up and down to find where want. If you want to adjust within Windows then you will have to set a higher EDC like 168 and then adjust with Ryzen Master after boot.
> 
> And I am using PE 3 with -.100V offset and LLC set to 4. You will likely find you can increase yours quite a bit now too unless you're combining it with an increased BCLK.


Yes, seems that worked for me... increased in the Bios the EDC to 152 and booted back to 41.3x like previous
here is a screenshot during a prime95 session, i will try to increase it like you said in small steps but not so sure if my cpu can keep up, it is not exactly a "golden sample" silicon. What vcore do you get under load? I am also running on LLC4 but with a -0.025 offset
So they lowered the EDC value in one of the latest bios? Just FYI i was running on 1001 bios...


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> Yes, seems that worked for me... increased in the Bios the EDC to 152 and booted back to 41.3x like previous
> here is a screenshot during a prime95 session, i will try to increase it like you said in small steps but not so sure if my cpu can keep up, it is not exactly a "golden sample" silicon. What vcore do you get under load? I am also running on LLC4 but with a -0.025 offset
> So they lowered the EDC value in one of the latest bios? Just FYI i was running on 1001 bios...


I don't think they lowered the EDC value, but something changed because you can now increase EDC up to 1000 if you chose. It doesn't do much though. 

Previously the BIOS would override user input values for EDC if you used PE 3 or PE 4. PE 3 was designed to run with EDC at 145 and PE 4 set EDC to 168. Now it seems it still uses those values, but sometimes get wonky? Previously PE 4 would sometimes boot with EDC at 0 (I don't think that was the actual value -- just what Ryzen Master displayed) and the multiplier would set itself at 43.5. It's why I never used PE 4 -- due to that little bug. It should have been using 168 for EDC which would have set a multiplier around 42.5 ~ 43.

Now the quirk is that EDC is set by which Performance Enhancer you select and it caps it to that when you try to adjust it in Ryzen Master. I'm not entirely certain what's going on. 

As far as voltages go -- it seems that my ambient temp is lower than yours as it only took EDC at 148 to get me up to a multiplier of 41.3. I mention that because the CPU will use more voltage when it's warmer. Screenshot is while running Cinebench R15. 

Honestly, try a moonshot and set your VCORE to -.100V offset. If it doesn't work then you'll find out pretty quickly and you can just back it off from there. Again, that's if you don't also boost the BCLK.


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> Can you tell me what voltage does the cpu end up with all cores loaded with the latest BIOS'
> 
> I end up at 1.33V for all cores under load on the 1002 BIOS @ 4.025GHz.


Using PE 3 with EDC set to 136 setting multiplier to 40.25 (HWiNFO displays as 40.3) running Cinebench R15. VCORE offset of -.100V.


----------



## poliacido

nick name said:


> I don't think they lowered the EDC value, but something changed because you can now increase EDC up to 1000 if you chose. It doesn't do much though.
> 
> Previously the BIOS would override user input values for EDC if you used PE 3 or PE 4. PE 3 was designed to run with EDC at 145 and PE 4 set EDC to 168. Now it seems it still uses those values, but sometimes get wonky? Previously PE 4 would sometimes boot with EDC at 0 (I don't think that was the actual value -- just what Ryzen Master displayed) and the multiplier would set itself at 43.5. It's why I never used PE 4 -- due to that little bug. It should have been using 168 for EDC which would have set a multiplier around 42.5 ~ 43.
> 
> Now the quirk is that EDC is set by which Performance Enhancer you select and it caps it to that when you try to adjust it in Ryzen Master. I'm not entirely certain what's going on.
> 
> As far as voltages go -- it seems that my ambient temp is lower than yours as it only took EDC at 148 to get me up to a multiplier of 41.3. I mention that because the CPU will use more voltage when it's warmer. Screenshot is while running Cinebench R15.
> 
> Honestly, try a moonshot and set your VCORE to -.100V offset. If it doesn't work then you'll find out pretty quickly and you can just back it off from there. Again, that's if you don't also boost the BCLK.


No way i can run 41x at your voltage... at least that was impossible with previous bios i had (1001) my cpu needed 1.38/1.4 , also playing with BCLK was a no-no (instant crash) even with 101
I was trying now with EDC 156 (41.5x) and with my pleasure seems stable but wasn't with 1001..... and at 156 edc it gets 1.4v under load 
i will try to lower the offset but really i don't think it will stay stable


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> No way i can run 41x at your voltage... at least that was impossible with previous bios i had (1001) my cpu needed 1.38/1.4 , also playing with BCLK was a no-no (instant crash) even with 101
> I was trying now with EDC 156 (41.5x) and with my pleasure seems stable but wasn't with 1001..... and at 156 edc it gets 1.4v under load
> i will try to lower the offset but really i don't think it will stay stable


That is high. I can get 42.5 at 1.387V more or less depending on the ambient temps. Higher temps lead to more voltage. 

I'm telling ya. Just try a large offset. Too high and it won't boot. If it does boot then run a quick Prime95 and adjust if needed. Won't hurt anything if it doesn't work.

Also, what is your SOC voltage? At your RAM speed and timings I can't imagine you need more than 1.106V as displayed in HWiNFO. I'm running 3600CL14 with 1.0V on SOC. 

What are your ambient temps in Italy?


----------



## poliacido

nick name said:


> That is high. I can get 42.5 at 1.387V more or less depending on the ambient temps. Higher temps lead to more voltage.
> 
> I'm telling ya. Just try a large offset. Too high and it won't boot. If it does boot then run a quick Prime95 and adjust if needed. Won't hurt anything if it doesn't work.
> 
> What are your ambient temps in Italy?


Here is around 20°C, inside home i mean
Regarding voltage i know i am at the limit with 1.4v but my cpu as i said before seems not the luckiest... silicon lottery speaking...
Just to give you something to compare with previous bios (1001): setting PE3 and a +0.025 offset i got 41.25x at 1.38-1.4V, but i couldn't even lower a bit like 1.35v that was a crash 1000%.

edit: with a Clear CMOS seems also i got rid of that weird bug where it sets a lot higher voltage around 1.5v

Do you use ryzen master to change voltage directly in windows?


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> Here is around 20°C, inside home i mean
> Regarding voltage i know i am at the limit with 1.4v but my cpu as i said before seems not the luckiest... silicon lottery speaking...
> Just to give you something to compare with previous bios (1001): setting PE3 and a +0.025 offset i got 41.25x at 1.38-1.4V, but i couldn't even lower a bit like 1.35v that was a crash 1000%.
> 
> edit: with a Clear CMOS seems also i got rid of that weird bug where it sets a lot higher voltage around 1.5v
> 
> Do you use ryzen master to change voltage directly in windows?


I don't use Ryzen Master, but you can use TurboV Core to adjust the offset. I used it to test offsets greater than what would POST when set in BIOS. My PC ran with an offset as large as -.150V though it was most certainly not stable. I gradually reduced it to end up at -.10625V which seemed stable and I could also POST at when set in BIOS, but it eventually proved unstable. So back to -.1000V and so far so good.


----------



## nick name

It turns out that an offset of -.1000V is too much to run Cinebench R20 at 4.3GHz. 

With the ability to increase EDC to far above 168 you can now eek out just a little more using Ryzen Master. So while I wouldn't run the multiplier at 43 as a daily driver it is kinda fun being able to reach it even with warmer temps now. Using Ryzen Master alone without increasing BCLK I mean.


----------



## Ceadderman

nick name said:


> Are the 3 options you're talking about the SAFE, FAST, and EXTREME options? Because those are just progressively tighter timings that it offers to try. The EXTREME options generally don't work for me so I would use the FAST or SAFE options.
> 
> And I mentioned RTC because I wasn't sure of what you were uncertain about and thought it may serve as a key of sorts.


Nope. I ran the Calculator for Safe since I mostly do gaming on this system atm and that was the rec'd option of the 3 available.

My issue is the Extreme Tweaker options. But I figured that out with the most recent screen cap posted below your latest response. ASUS capitalized the Options where I was looking for lower case options. Now there is no confusion. Gonna hop out now and input my settings. 

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## poliacido

nick name said:


> I don't use Ryzen Master, but you can use TurboV Core to adjust the offset. I used it to test offsets greater than what would POST when set in BIOS. My PC ran with an offset as large as -.150V though it was most certainly not stable. I gradually reduced it to end up at -.10625V which seemed stable and I could also POST at when set in BIOS, but it eventually proved unstable. So back to -.1000V and so far so good.


Wow you keep the ram at almost 1.5v... what is your ram kit rated for?
Anyway today i came home too late to do some test, tomorrow i will dig further into the voltage and also yesterday i got some troubles with my ram kit... i seem unable to run the fast presets of the calculator, i wasn't unable either with the old bios too but i tried anyway


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> Wow you keep the ram at almost 1.5v... what is your ram kit rated for?
> Anyway today i came home too late to do some test, tomorrow i will dig further into the voltage and also yesterday i got some troubles with my ram kit... i seem unable to run the fast presets of the calculator, i wasn't unable either with the old bios too but i tried anyway


Yeah, I'm not worried about the voltage being too high I just wish I could get more performance at such high voltage. The DRAM Calculator suggests around 1.46V for slightly looser timings than I run so my kit isn't far from average, but when I hear about what some other kits can do at lower voltages it makes me curious as to what something like a 4000CL17 kit can do with my IMC.


----------



## poliacido

nick name said:


> Yeah, I'm not worried about the voltage being too high I just wish I could get more performance at such high voltage. The DRAM Calculator suggests around 1.46V for slightly looser timings than I run so my kit isn't far from average, but when I hear about what some other kits can do at lower voltages it makes me curious as to what something like a 4000CL17 kit can do with my IMC.


Average? that seems very good compared to mine:
i have this https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3200c15d-16gtz
but it won't pass the mem test with the fast preset (3200mhz) , tried even with 1.35v
I don't know maybe i am setting something wrong in the calculator but i don't think i am so dumb


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> Average? that seems very good compared to mine:
> i have this https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3200c15d-16gtz
> but it won't pass the mem test with the fast preset (3200mhz) , tried even with 1.35v
> I don't know maybe i am setting something wrong in the calculator but i don't think i am so dumb


You're gonna need to push more voltage than 1.35V.


----------



## poliacido

nick name said:


> You're gonna need to push more voltage than 1.35V.


My bad, i did a mistake: i was using 1.4v..... 1.35 is what i have set now, but really the calculator with fast preset recommends to use max 1.375
But i never tried going over 1.4 and it was not stable either with 1.4... maybe have to push even more the voltage


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> My bad, i did a mistake: i was using 1.4v..... 1.35 is what i have set now, but really the calculator with fast preset recommends to use max 1.375
> But i never tried going over 1.4 and it was not stable either with 1.4... maybe have to push even more the voltage


Unfortunately that probably won't fix it.


----------



## Ceadderman

nick name said:


> You're gonna need to push more voltage than 1.35V.


Looks like I will have to input a higher voltage. I went no more than the extreme 1.36 and my system couldn't make it through POST no matter what I changed. I didn't mess with the ohm settings past 20ohms though. :thinking:

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## neikosr0x

Ceadderman said:


> Looks like I will have to input a higher voltage. I went no more than the extreme 1.36 and my system couldn't make it through POST no matter what I changed. I didn't mess with the ohm settings past 20ohms though. :thinking:
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


Check your SOC volt, months ago the bios was setting my soc volt to some around 1.1+, then i started using 1.030 and i solved many ram issues. that helped me to gain stability and better latency


----------



## nick name

Ceadderman said:


> Looks like I will have to input a higher voltage. I went no more than the extreme 1.36 and my system couldn't make it through POST no matter what I changed. I didn't mess with the ohm settings past 20ohms though. :thinking:
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


I usually have to run a little more than the calculator suggests. And on the CAD_BUS my system always uses 24 ohms when set to automatic so I use 24 ohms when I set it. For procODT I can't boot with anything, but 53.3 or 60 ohms.


----------



## nick name

I've been playing with RAM lately and have been running lots of Geekbench 3 and it has revealed that my offset of -.1000V is too much. It seems to be when GB 3 is running the single core benches which has always been what's governed how large an offset I could use. So I've backed it off to -.09375V and have run many back to back GB 3 runs without any more shut downs.

Edit:

I am talking about VCORE. I think I've settled on -.075V to pass everything that punishes single core speeds. It's still better than before. When testing on previous BIOS versions I ended up around -.043V to pass absolutely everything I threw at it.


----------



## poliacido

Do you think Vsoc too high can lead to mem instability? Mine also is set to 1.1 and like @neikosr0x said he has better stability with a lower Vsoc


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> Do you think Vsoc too high can lead to mem instability? Mine also is set to 1.1 and like @neikosr0x said he has better stability with a lower Vsoc


You know I'm not sure? I've never tested the theory. I'd imagine it could.


----------



## poliacido

nick name said:


> You know I'm not sure? I've never tested the theory. I'd imagine it could.


i think i've read 1usmus speaking about this on the guide he put on techpowerup
Anyway i lowered the Vsoc to 1v and increased a bit the Vram (1.4) and now i get few errors on memtest...

edit: here it is: * Do not use too high voltages for SOC and DRAM. The calculator will tell you in which framework you should look for a stable result. Always start debugging the system with these voltages.


----------



## neikosr0x

poliacido said:


> Do you think Vsoc too high can lead to mem instability? Mine also is set to 1.1 and like @neikosr0x said he has better stability with a lower Vsoc


on the preview bios, i started fixing my mem timings and all of that. and i was running into some ram issue until i went and played with my vsoc manually lowering the voltage. I did it after i saw something about it here in this same thread.


----------



## poliacido

neikosr0x said:


> on the preview bios, i started fixing my mem timings and all of that. and i was running into some ram issue until i went and played with my vsoc manually lowering the voltage. I did it after i saw something about it here in this same thread.


I think i lost the silicon lottery even on the ram.... i can't even run the "safe" profile on 1.4v
This kit is rated to 3200cl15 and probably it can't work with cl14


----------



## The Sandman

poliacido said:


> i think i've read 1usmus speaking about this on the guide he put on techpowerup
> Anyway i lowered the Vsoc to 1v and increased a bit the Vram (1.4) and now i get few errors on memtest...
> 
> edit: here it is: * Do not use too high voltages for SOC and DRAM. The calculator will tell you in which framework you should look for a stable result. Always start debugging the system with these voltages.


Over volting can/will act the same as under volting and can cause instability. This is exactly why it's always best to start low, let it fail, and note the time till failure. While making small increases keep a close eye on the time till failure to see if you're actually moving in the right direction. On my Flare-X I started out at .950v VSoc for 3200MHz.
I too haven't had very good luck with low Dram voltage. 3200MHz iirc was 1.4v to 1.41v and current 3466MHz C14 is 1.43v Dram voltage with 1.069v SOC.

Take the time (if you haven't already) and go through the DIGI settings found in the RDC (Power Supply System). LLC, Current Capability, Switching Freqs etc.

When working on 3466MHz I had to adjust/play with CLDO_VDDP and VDDP plus the DIGI settings as it becomes more of a balancing act  There's usually 3 variables to choose from, if the first chose doesn't improve matters try a different set.


----------



## crakej

poliacido said:


> Do you think Vsoc too high can lead to mem instability? Mine also is set to 1.1 and like @neikosr0x said he has better stability with a lower Vsoc


Yes - many have found they can use much lower VSoC - I'm using 0.96v with my CPU at 4.1GHz and ram at 3333 (Hynix m-die). With my other (b-die) kit was the same up to 3533 I was still on 0.96v - any more would cause instability. I think it depends on your IMC as I have it the same with 2 very different memory kits.

It's certainly worth playing with as can help reduce temps as well.


----------



## Ceadderman

nick name said:


> I've been playing with RAM lately and have been running lots of Geekbench 3 and it has revealed that my offset of -.1000V is too much. It seems to be when GB 3 is running the single core benches which has always been what's governed how large an offset I could use. So I've backed it off to -.09375V and have run many back to back GB 3 runs without any more shut downs.


I may not have been paying attention but I just realized you set a negative value in your SOC. I didn't put a negative value in mine. Just double checked and I have no negative values anywhere in RAM Calculator. :mellowsmi

Shoot I would be happy with an unstable overclock. My settings won't even get past POST. :doh: I have one more thing to try but am pretty sure that increased DRAM voltage will not give it the magic bullet it needs to help it past POST. :headscrat

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## nick name

Ceadderman said:


> I may not have been paying attention but I just realized you set a negative value in your SOC. I didn't put a negative value in mine. Just double checked and I have no negative values anywhere in RAM Calculator. :mellowsmi
> 
> Shoot I would be happy with an unstable overclock. My settings won't even get past POST. :doh: I have one more thing to try but am pretty sure that increased DRAM voltage will not give it the magic bullet it needs to help it past POST. :headscrat
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


No, I don't set an offset for SOC. I always use Manual and set a value depending on my RAM speed and timings.


----------



## Baio73

poliacido said:


> My bad, i did a mistake: i was using 1.4v..... 1.35 is what i have set now, but really the calculator with fast preset recommends to use max 1.375
> But i never tried going over 1.4 and it was not stable either with 1.4... maybe have to push even more the voltage


Ciao!
I've got a kit of G.Skill F4-3600C16D-16GTZR and got to make them work @3400 with the latest BIOS and manually setting VRAM @ 1.41.
Previous BIOS release and [email protected] I couldn't go over 3200.
Hope it may help you.

Baio


----------



## Syldon

nick name said:


> I've been playing with RAM lately and have been running lots of Geekbench 3 and it has revealed that my offset of -.1000V is too much. It seems to be when GB 3 is running the single core benches which has always been what's governed how large an offset I could use. So I've backed it off to -.09375V and have run many back to back GB 3 runs without any more shut downs.
> 
> Edit:
> 
> I am talking about VCORE. I think I've settled on -.075V to pass everything that punishes single core speeds. It's still better than before. When testing on previous BIOS versions I ended up around -.043V to pass absolutely everything I threw at it.


I found -0.75v was my limit before drop off.
I use IBT to check for CPU consistency over GB. IBT gives output in Gflops and a final result time. The downside is residual heat. Booting with the CPU hot from the previous run can change how the PBO sets up. I try to leave things cool for an hour before I try a second attempt.



poliacido said:


> Do you think Vsoc too high can lead to mem instability? Mine also is set to 1.1 and like @neikosr0x said he has better stability with a lower Vsoc


The higher the voltage that you use, the higher the signal distortion output. Resistance in the circuits can lead to signal distorting nearby circuits. Similar to people with pacemakers having to be careful around strong magnets.

Not all circuits are made equally. Each setup will have its individual optimum points. You can govern this to an extent in ProcODT and the bus settings. which are situated at the end of the dram timings menu.


----------



## nick name

Syldon said:


> I found -0.75v was my limit before drop off.
> I use IBT to check for CPU consistency over GB. IBT gives output in Gflops and a final result time. The downside is residual heat. Booting with the CPU hot from the previous run can change how the PBO sets up. I try to leave things cool for an hour before I try a second attempt.
> 
> -snip-


Geekbench 3 wasn't in my test suite of programs before, but I've found it useful recently. Before it was always difficult to try to suss out which voltage offset was enough for single/fewer core workloads. Unfortunately it took me a little too long to realize it wasn't my RAM settings that were the problem, but my CPU offset so I nixed several RAM setups that I am now re-testing. Once I realized when the test was failing it dawned on me that it was during the single core tests and those have always been what really govern the offset I use.


----------



## Syldon

nick name said:


> Geekbench 3 wasn't in my test suite of programs before, but I've found it useful recently. Before it was always difficult to try to suss out which voltage offset was enough for single/fewer core workloads. Unfortunately it took me a little too long to realize it wasn't my RAM settings that were the problem, but my CPU offset so I nixed several RAM setups that I am now re-testing. Once I realized when the test was failing it dawned on me that it was during the single core tests and those have always been what really govern the offset I use.


Yeah I try to separate each test also. IBT for CPU test, and then HCImemtest for a memory only test. I have karhu ramtest also, which is great for a quick test. It is down to where your comfort zone is though.

I am liking the newer revision though. A bit buggy on first few boot ups. It kept on trying to set SOC at .82v for some strange reason. Cpu voltages are the lowest I have ever seen them on a 2700x. 

This may be a bit skewed though. I just upgraded to an open case. The temp differences are huge. On PE3 I was hitting 75c on all cores with IBT running at full. Now I am running PE4 with 65c being the max. PE4 has changed on this revision also. Before It gave a higher CPU frequency on all cores. Now it allows more cores to boost at the same time. Prior to this revision I only ever saw one core boost.

When I get some more time this weekend I try with bus clocks to see where temps lie at higher frequencies.


----------



## VPII

Okay, on a different note.... I am ecstatic, in part because I got me gpu to react as need be, but I'm really impressed with my cpu score on this bench. CPU at 4.35ghz manual oc, so vcore around 1.46 but temps all good, but this is the best cpu score I got in Time Spy since trying it with Ryzen. Not yet with Dice or LN2, but still pretty good I'd say.

https://www.3dmark.com/spy/6936630

Sorry but I am a manual overclocker, I really don't care about single core performance, it is all about all cores or nothing.


----------



## poliacido

The Sandman said:


> Over volting can/will act the same as under volting and can cause instability. This is exactly why it's always best to start low, let it fail, and note the time till failure. While making small increases keep a close eye on the time till failure to see if you're actually moving in the right direction. On my Flare-X I started out at .950v VSoc for 3200MHz.
> I too haven't had very good luck with low Dram voltage. 3200MHz iirc was 1.4v to 1.41v and current 3466MHz C14 is 1.43v Dram voltage with 1.069v SOC.
> 
> Take the time (if you haven't already) and go through the DIGI settings found in the RDC (Power Supply System). LLC, Current Capability, Switching Freqs etc.
> 
> When working on 3466MHz I had to adjust/play with CLDO_VDDP and VDDP plus the DIGI settings as it becomes more of a balancing act  There's usually 3 variables to choose from, if the first chose doesn't improve matters try a different set.





crakej said:


> Yes - many have found they can use much lower VSoC - I'm using 0.96v with my CPU at 4.1GHz and ram at 3333 (Hynix m-die). With my other (b-die) kit was the same up to 3533 I was still on 0.96v - any more would cause instability. I think it depends on your IMC as I have it the same with 2 very different memory kits.
> 
> It's certainly worth playing with as can help reduce temps as well.


Yes guys that is what i am trying to do now but seems 1v for me (Vsoc) is too low... i noticed sometimes i can't even boot with the post code reporting errors about ram configuration
For now i will leave stock timings and maybe this weekend, if i have the time to test.. because it takes a lot, i will try to go step by step also using the nice guide by 1usmus on techpowerup




Baio73 said:


> Ciao!
> I've got a kit of G.Skill F4-3600C16D-16GTZR and got to make them work @3400 with the latest BIOS and manually setting VRAM @ 1.41.
> Previous BIOS release and [email protected] I couldn't go over 3200.
> Hope it may help you.
> 
> Baio


Hey Baio! I think i know you also on hwupgrade.it forums, maybe you are the same person  ... but anyway: you said you kit is rated for 3600 from the factory and you can run it 3400 at 1.41v?? Is there something wrong? I think you can RMA it


----------



## VPII

On a totally different note. Im not playing around with PBO or any standard settings on this board. For me it is all about clocking the processor to where I can and run a benchmark. Well I was pleasantly surprised yesterday when I ran Time Spy and got a 10.5 physics score and 17.2 gpu score.

https://www.3dmark.com/spy/6936630

I may be doind some dry ice over the weekend to break the 16k overall score. I shpuld be able to run 4.8 to 4.9ghz maybe more.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## crakej

Ì'm still struggling with my Hynix m-dies.

Can get 3400 to boot but cannot stabilize it. Need to really work through things as I'm just not used to these timings......I want my b-dies back! (Still waiting for them to test them and replace)

Then I thought, if I can't get mem above 3333, then with my CPU running at LLC5 offset - 0.3125v 4.1GHz, I decided to push my CPU back up to 4.2GHz (which it can do easily). I couldn't get it to work - not with any voltage below 1.42v. I used to be able to run this CPU at 4.2GHz LLC5 1.388v max, so not sure what's going on - unless I've been impatient and bumped a setting up/down 2 instead of 1....

Only way to check for sure is to go back to defaults and test the CPU OC on it's own. I wonder if having dual rail memory makes some difference? Will report back of course.

Last - has anyone else noticed that when booting OCed system, before the logo screen comes up it looks like a C64 with a border and cursor, the border looking like a program is loading - bit like a spectrum as well I guess! Will try get a pic for you.


----------



## neikosr0x

crakej said:


> Ì'm still struggling with my Hynix m-dies.
> 
> Can get 3400 to boot but cannot stabilize it. Need to really work through things as I'm just not used to these timings......I want my b-dies back! (Still waiting for them to test them and replace)
> 
> Then I thought, if I can't get mem above 3333, then with my CPU running at LLC5 offset - 0.3125v 4.1GHz, I decided to push my CPU back up to 4.2GHz (which it can do easily). I couldn't get it to work - not with any voltage below 1.42v. I used to be able to run this CPU at 4.2GHz LLC5 1.388v max, so not sure what's going on - unless I've been impatient and bumped a setting up/down 2 instead of 1....
> 
> Only way to check for sure is to go back to defaults and test the CPU OC on it's own. I wonder if having dual rail memory makes some difference? Will report back of course.
> 
> Last - has anyone else noticed that when booting OCed system, before the logo screen comes up it looks like a C64 with a border and cursor, the border looking like a program is loading - bit like a spectrum as well I guess! Will try get a pic for you.


Yeap, it is doing it since last 2 bios updates. (the logo thing)


----------



## nick name

neikosr0x said:


> Yeap, it is doing it since last 2 bios updates. (the logo thing)


Yeah, I get like a command line cursor before the splash screen. Which is nice because it gives my keyboard time to to initiate before I need to mash the DEL key.


----------



## Ceadderman

nick name said:


> Yeah, I get like a command line cursor before the splash screen. Which is nice because it gives my keyboard time to to initiate before I need to mash the DEL key.


Query: I recently saw this on @1usmus's Ryzen Calculator thread...

https://www.overclock.net/forum/27937684-post4314.html

It says a file needs deletion prior to running v1.4.1 of the Calculator(if I am reading this correctly) and since I've tried every option the Ryzen Calculator posted for Safe mode it's down to possible removal of the offending file or update the BIOS. 

What do you think?

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## nick name

Ceadderman said:


> Query: I recently saw this on @1usmus's Ryzen Calculator thread...
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27937684-post4314.html
> 
> It says a file needs deletion prior to running v1.4.1 of the Calculator(if I am reading this correctly) and since I've tried every option the Ryzen Calculator posted for Safe mode it's down to possible removal of the offending file or update the BIOS.
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


No that isn't about the Calculator. It's about his latest revisions to his TM5 profile.


----------



## Ceadderman

nick name said:


> No that isn't about the Calculator. It's about his latest revisions to his TM5 profile.


So I guess it's time to update the BIOS. Cause I cannot get through the POST procedure no matter what settings I apply. 

I will check AMD Ryzen screenshot though. Maybe I am simply missing something because I haven't used it. Just the RAM Calculator and Thaiphoon burner.

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## neikosr0x

Ceadderman said:


> So I guess it's time to update the BIOS. Cause I cannot get through the POST procedure no matter what settings I apply.
> 
> I will check AMD Ryzen screenshot though. Maybe I am simply missing something because I haven't used it. Just the RAM Calculator and Thaiphoon burner.
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


btw just in case, if nothing happens just try using the other 2 ram slots on the mobo. instead of A_1 A_2 try B_1 B_2


----------



## Ceadderman

neikosr0x said:


> btw just in case, if nothing happens just try using the other 2 ram slots on the mobo. instead of A_1 A_2 try B_1 B_2


Not sure that should make a difference. :thinking:

Anyone else having success using B1 and B2 slots? :mellowsmi

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## neikosr0x

Ceadderman said:


> Not sure that should make a difference. :thinking:
> 
> Anyone else having success using B1 and B2 slots? :mellowsmi
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


Life is strange, looooooong time ago had a similar issue on a Intel board, swapping will only take 3 min.


----------



## Ramad

@*Ceadderman*

Please consult your motherboard's manual on which memory slots to use for best performance and least issues. You may get better help if you print out BIOS setting configuration to a text file from the BIOS.


----------



## hurricane28

Ceadderman said:


> Not sure that should make a difference. :thinking:
> 
> Anyone else having success using B1 and B2 slots? :mellowsmi
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


I hear people who are using the slots closest to the CPU get higher and more stable over clocks and others have better performance in the outer slots.Best thing is to try and see for yourself.


----------



## nick name

Using different slots isn't recommended. I've tried recently and it wouldn't POST with stable settings. It won't take long if you want to try for yourself, but I don't think you'll find a different experience.


----------



## Ceadderman

Ramad said:


> @*Ceadderman*
> 
> Please consult your motherboard's manual on which memory slots to use for best performance and least issues. You may get better help if you print out BIOS setting configuration to a text file from the BIOS.


Always do. I have been building systems for nearly 30 years, back to the 386 platform days. I never toss the manual aside before reading through the manual RTFM prevails around my house. Even if it tells me the same things that all the other manuals do. 



hurricane28 said:


> I hear people who are using the slots closest to the CPU get higher and more stable over clocks and others have better performance in the outer slots.Best thing is to try and see for yourself.


AMD systems generally do work better with A1 and A2 populated slots than B1 and B2. Hence my open question for owners of the Crosshair VII Hero boards here. Just concerned about a suggestion regarding moving RAM to B Channel slots. My ears pricked at the suggestion. 



nick name said:


> Using different slots isn't recommended. I've tried recently and it wouldn't POST with stable settings. It won't take long if you want to try for yourself, but I don't think you'll find a different experience.


Yeah I didn't figure it was worth trying without getting some clarification on the issue. So likely I will need to update the BIOS to v2103 which lists better RAM stability. Because I don't think that my results are so out of order that my system cannot get past POST cycle. I even backed off the 14CL settings back to 15CL which is what is currently set at 15 and running 2133mhz on my base settings. Should have still gone through POST @ 3200 with those settings. Even if it weren't stable. 

Is it possible that EPU settings are affecting my RAM settings? Because I have noticed that no matter what I try, the system force feeds EPU settings down my throat instead of allowing me to disable EPU settings. I think this may be an OS issue more than AI Suite 3 issue. Cause every time I go back to check my system settings, I am right back to EPU status. I have an EVGA 850G3 power supply. Should be more than enough headroom running the CPU with a display card(Radeon 5770 HD) and 4 SSD and 1 HDD. I have nothing else hogging power or demanding a lower power cycle to be used. If I am currently using more than 400w I will eat my hat with no A1 sauce. :mellowsmi

It's quite probable that 1002 isn't as stable as I thought it was. It's also possible that my display setting of 150% is making the system unstable as a result of being on 1002. I don't know if the latter part makes a difference, but I will back it down to 100% and give it another go tonight and see if it will make it past POST. I kinda wish the lanes on the board were wider to get more consistent power across the platform, but can't really do that with an RGB board as those RGB lanes take up real estate on the board. But ahhh well, if that doesn't afffect you guys, it sure as Hades shouldn't affect my experience. 

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## VPII

Oh my word..... did I have a challenge after my Dry ice session on Thursday night. Firstly I have two "was working" Asus Crosshair VII hero motherboards and a "was working Ryzen 2700X". My reason for stating was working is firstly:

My usual motherboard I was using before the Dry Ice would fail with a 3F qpost code. Searching board up nothing but it would also hang with the yellow memory light still lit on the board. Now I tried with my still working old memory dimm but result was the same. Interestingly when I have no ram installed it would still give me the 3F instead of 55 qpost.

Well the motherboard has been through the dish washing machine, well both of them so I decided lets pop them in the oven at about 30 to 40c. Well it seemed to have worked as I am posting this from my computer, however, I did end up getting the overcurrent usb and system would switch off, unless I enable LN2 mode with the jumper. I did get the system to also hand at 02 qpost code with the VGA and boot light lit. I'll keep monitoring it now to see if still issues. 

My dry ice session was cut short also due to some issues which may have been related to insulation.... I did rush it a bit, but I got two nice time spy runs.

https://www.3dmark.com/spy/6946378

https://www.3dmark.com/spy/6946325


Okay so after restarting the whole system shut down. No lights on so I think we have a short. Back in the oven 35c or there sbout. Will let it rest till tomorrow and try again. Obviously posting now from my phone.

And I'm back up again.... cleaned cpu pins with acetone and put the mobo in the oven again for some warmth. Seems to be all good now. Except that my cpu temp is read incorrectly at 58c but when looking at Hw64info it shows 35 to 40c TCDIE. Also in bios and in Hw64info it shows my 12volt line from psu is ready between 7 and 8v but checking with a multi even during load it is 12.1v. Unfortunately my Time Spy scores has gone for a pile of garbage. CPU score good for speed but Graphics pretty poor.


----------



## crakej

As far as I know, there's another AGESA coming through - Pi Combo 1.0.0.0, which should help to iron out the problems found with 0070 and 0072

My machine is stable currently, though can't get my 4.2GHz OC working with Ram OC

Going to do more experimenting later with CPU only OC. I think there may be some differences with my dual rank ram affecting my CPU OC that my b-dies did not....


----------



## 1usmus

crakej said:


> As far as I know, there's another AGESA coming through - Pi Combo 1.0.0.0, which should help to iron out the problems found with 0070 and 0072
> 
> My machine is stable currently, though can't get my 4.2GHz OC working with Ram OC
> 
> Going to do more experimenting later with CPU only OC. I think there may be some differences with my dual rank ram affecting my CPU OC that my b-dies did not....


try changing frequencies for VRM


----------



## nick name

1usmus said:


> try changing frequencies for VRM


Yeah, I've found that Optimized on DRAM and SOC with their lowest frequencies allow for better RAM overclocks.


----------



## Baio73

poliacido said:


> […]
> 
> Hey Baio! I think i know you also on hwupgrade.it forums, maybe you are the same person  ... but anyway: you said you kit is rated for 3600 from the factory and you can run it 3400 at 1.41v?? Is there something wrong? I think you can RMA it


It's me, of course! 
Nothing wrong and the RAM works fine… and the demostration is that I could not make them run @3400MHz with old BIOS, instead they are ok with 2103.
Maybe with the latest BIOS they can work fine also @3600, onestly I didn't try for lack of time. The latest time I made some tries with memory speed the system corrupted and I needed toi reinstall Windows from scratch.
I'm not sure if these RAM are on Asus QVL for CH7HWIFI, but reading around the net makes me think there is some trouble between Ryzen and RAM.

Baio

EDIT: just given a try… loaded DOCP profile for 3600 and worked fine. After I discovered there's a latest BIOS release (2203) and flashed it… now I can't set RAM @3400... flashed back to 2103, nothing changes… now I'm on 2133. I keep saying there's some trouble between Ryzen and RAM.

EDIT 2: found an old thread on G.Skill forum saying to try to raise RAM speed step by step. So I set SOC voltage to 1.1v and DRAM voltage to 1.45v (as before) and started raising from 2133 to 3600 and now they work fine. =8-|
NEVER had a strangest piece of hardware in my life.


----------



## VPII

I need some help.... After finally getting my system up and running again I seem to have a drop in various benchmarks I'm running.

Firstly Cinebench 15R I'd usually get around 1992 or just about 2000 with my cpu manually overclocked to 4282mhz. However, at precent I barely get 1850.

Time Spy physics I'd get around 10200 or so but now it is sitting around 9200 to 9300.

I know it may be something I'm missing but this is a big drop and I'm not sure why. Any ideas would be helpful.

FOUND THE REASON....... Anti virus messing things up. Thanks


----------



## DoctorNick

Be advised BIOS 2103 (ZIP)/ first uploaded as RAR is broken, 2203 is OK - Asus has been notified.


----------



## Ceadderman

Well that was indeed weird.

I walked away from my running system to do Easter stuffs with my son. When I got back to my system it was off.

Couldn't restart it without turning the PSU off. Once back up, I went directly into the UEFI and it was in EZ Tuner. I never used F7 to change from Advanced. So I changed it back to Advanced and exited UEFI.

Opened HWinfo64 and looked around. System is running all cores and threads @ 3.7ghz... :thinking:

So opened up CPUZ to confirm. Yeppers... 3.7ghz :jealoussmi

I have no idea how performance was boosted. There was NOBODY in the house to fiddle with the system. It simply just did it itself. I did have to restart after Exiting UEFI and got a black screen. The OS was stalled. But other than that, there were no hinky instances that I witnessed. I haven't installed any driver updates since the last round.

So now I get to go back into UEFI and adjust the CPU clock speed. 

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## nick name

I keep getting POST code F9 after restarting within BIOS. You know -- when you hit F10 to save and exit. With stable settings. It's starting to get irritating.


----------



## Conenubi701

New Chipset drivers directly from AMD https://www.amd.com/en/support/chipsets/amd-socket-am4/X470

Seems like the ones from ASUS are a bit newer than the ones from AMD


----------



## ryouiki

nick name said:


> I keep getting POST code F9 after restarting within BIOS. You know -- when you hit F10 to save and exit. With stable settings. It's starting to get irritating.


Seeing something similar randomly... sometimes will boot, sometimes will not, usually stops with F9 code. Additionally after 2203 system started failing after being up for a few hours... it will just essentially hard lock/lose display/display Qcode 08.

For now I pretty much had default all my settings for things to be stable... I am not sure what changed but it is going to take some time to figure out what it is unhappy about since it was completely stable prior to this BIOS.


----------



## AmaKatsu

nick name said:


> I keep getting POST code F9 after restarting within BIOS. You know -- when you hit F10 to save and exit. With stable settings. It's starting to get irritating.



yup, same here. both 2103 and 2203 cause F9 for me sometimes


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I keep getting POST code F9 after restarting within BIOS. You know -- when you hit F10 to save and exit. With stable settings. It's starting to get irritating.


And then it works when you press reset? This bios is picky about booting!


----------



## crakej

Managed to get a replacement NVME from Amazon - surprisingly easy - they sent the drive out to me so I could transfer my system to it then return the faulty drive (was writing at only 500MBs instead of 1.7GBs).

I completely forgot to set the VRM frequencies in the Power section of the bios, I will try this see if it helps me get my 4.2GHz, but previously didn't need to do this. Going to re-test with no ram OC as well which I haven't done as the weather has been so great!


----------



## nick name

ryouiki said:


> Seeing something similar randomly... sometimes will boot, sometimes will not, usually stops with F9 code. Additionally after 2203 system started failing after being up for a few hours... it will just essentially hard lock/lose display/display Qcode 08.
> 
> For now I pretty much had default all my settings for things to be stable... I am not sure what changed but it is going to take some time to figure out what it is unhappy about since it was completely stable prior to this BIOS.


For me it's only from within BIOS. It starts up with no issues from a cold boot. 



crakej said:


> And then it works when you press reset? This bios is picky about booting!


Sometimes I have to hit reset several times. And occasionally power cycle it.


----------



## crakej

Just getting Windows update KB4493509 - first one i've had from ver 449xxxx - hopefully no problems with it!


----------



## kmellz

Newest bioses indeed seems to have a lot of changes, started having crashes with previously stable settings and had to redo the whole RAM oc, currently running slightly slower and just waiting it out for zen2  On the upside I discovered that I needed a decent amount less CPU voltage than I previously thought for the same cpu oc.

Had tried lowerng it a bit with the reports from others on that, but didn't work. But that was before redoing ram oc also.


----------



## wingman99

crakej said:


> Just getting Windows update KB4493509 - first one i've had from ver 449xxxx - hopefully no problems with it!


Was it a automatic update and did you have any problems with KB4493509 update also what motherboard Ethernet controller do you have?


----------



## Baio73

Found this topic on Corsair's User Forum about AIO's correct powering:

http://forum.corsair.com/v3/showthread.php?t=168801

Does anyone know what's the right setting in the BIOS for CH7 mobos?
I couldn't find a "voltage control" entry to set.…

Baio


----------



## crakej

wingman99 said:


> Was it a automatic update and did you have any problems with KB4493509 update also what motherboard Ethernet controller do you have?


All good. Intel 1211 Gigabit Ethernet


----------



## kmellz

Baio73 said:


> Found this topic on Corsair's User Forum about AIO's correct powering:
> 
> http://forum.corsair.com/v3/showthread.php?t=168801
> 
> Does anyone know what's the right setting in the BIOS for CH7 mobos?
> I couldn't find a "voltage control" entry to set.…
> 
> Baio


When you go into the fan controls, you can set it to DC/PWM control, DC is what they mean by that = constant voltage.


----------



## crakej

Baio73 said:


> Found this topic on Corsair's User Forum about AIO's correct powering:
> 
> http://forum.corsair.com/v3/showthread.php?t=168801
> 
> Does anyone know what's the right setting in the BIOS for CH7 mobos?
> I couldn't find a "voltage control" entry to set.…
> 
> Baio


This doesn't make sense to me - where would you plug in the CPU fan? Plug it into the pump header and just make sure that it's set on max. If you go to Easy Fan Tuning on the basic bios setup page you can set the pump settings there along with the CPU fans.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> This doesn't make sense to me - where would you plug in the CPU fan? Plug it into the pump header and just make sure that it's set on max. If you go to Easy Fan Tuning on the basic bios setup page you can set the pump settings there along with the CPU fans.


I believe the pump header and AIO header are always set to max.


----------



## VPII

nick name said:


> I believe the pump header and AIO header are always set to max.


Yes that is absolutely correct. Always set to max. I checked with the AIO I got fitted to my GPU which I plugged into the fan header just at the bottom of the PCI E slot and that one is also dedicated for an AIO pump and it runs 100% all the time.


----------



## Baio73

VPII said:


> Yes that is absolutely correct. Always set to max. I checked with the AIO I got fitted to my GPU which I plugged into the fan header just at the bottom of the PCI E slot and that one is also dedicated for an AIO pump and it runs 100% all the time.


Yes, correct.
I didn't plug there the fan cable as I discovered the AIO header later reading the manual.
Don't know why I thought it was on the other side of the mobo and gave it up.

Thanks guys.

Baio


----------



## crakej

Baio73 said:


> Yes, correct.
> I didn't plug there the fan cable as I discovered the AIO header later reading the manual.
> Don't know why I thought it was on the other side of the mobo and gave it up.
> 
> Thanks guys.
> 
> Baio


Yes, AIO Pump is what I meant to say lol - glad you found it!


----------



## crakej

Trying to tune my dual rank memory and just noticed that BGS/BGSA are NOT working on this bios.

I've set explicitly BGS=Enabled BGSA=Disabled yet it still boots with BGSA enabled. I see in the CH6 thread that @Ramad has had better luck with e-dies - any chance of your settings? I think they might help. These are my current settings - the underlined values are set on auto - I've never seen these values and have no idea how you would set it in the bios - the ram calculator suggests a value of 0 or 1 - I've always left them on auto.


----------



## Ramad

crakej said:


> Trying to tune my dual rank memory and just noticed that BGS/BGSA are NOT working on this bios.
> 
> I've set explicitly BGS=Enabled BGSA=Disabled yet it still boots with BGSA enabled. I see in the CH6 thread that @*Ramad* has had better luck with e-dies - any chance of your settings? I think they might help. These are my current settings - the underlined values are set on auto - I've never seen these values and have no idea how you would set it in the bios - the ram calculator suggests a value of 0 or 1 - I've always left them on auto.



Do you want all BIOS settings or just RAM related settings? My CAD settings may surprise you. 

Memory signals delays has been tuned by AMD (I think) because the old 0/1 does not run stable. 

I did advice setting those values to 1 in a thread that I can't remember because Gigabyte did tune (or by a mistake) MemAddrCmdSetup = b (means 11) which is not the correct value on earlier AGESA when using 20/24 Ohm on related setting, that was a way to lock the values to help users boot using XMP.


----------



## crakej

Ramad said:


> Do you want all BIOS settings or just RAM related settings? My CAD settings may surprise you.
> 
> Memory signals delays has been tuned by AMD (I think) because the old 0/1 does not run stable.
> 
> I did advice setting those values to 1 in a thread that I can't remember because Gigabyte did tune (or by a mistake) MemAddrCmdSetup = b (means 11) which is not the correct value on earlier AGESA when using 20/24 Ohm on related setting, that was a way to lock the values to help users boot using XMP.


Just the ram settings..... well, be interesting to see your cad settings as well.

Thanks Ramad


----------



## Ramad

crakej said:


> Just the ram settings..... well, be interesting to see your cad settings as well.
> 
> Thanks Ramad



Here you go:




Spoiler



DRAM CAS# Latency [14]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [17]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [17]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [17]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [34]
Trc [54]
TrrdS [4]
TrrdL [7]
Tfaw [26]
TwtrS [3]
TwtrL [9]
Twr [16]
Trcpage [Auto]
TrdrdScl [2]
TwrwrScl [2]
Trfc [416]
Trfc2 [256]
Trfc4 [176]
Tcwl [12]
Trtp [8]
Trdwr [12]
Twrrd [6]
TwrwrSc [1]
TwrwrSd [6]
TwrwrDd [6]
TrdrdSc [1]
TrdrdSd [6]
TrdrdDd [6]
Tcke [6]

ProcODT [48 ohm]
Cmd2T [2T]
Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
Power Down Enable [Disabled]
RttNom [RZQ/4]
RttWr [Dynamic ODT Off]
RttPark [Rtt_PARK Disable]
MemAddrCmdSetup [57]
MemCsOdtSetup [57]
MemCkeSetup [57]
MemCadBusClkDrvStren [60.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [60.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [60.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [60.0 Ohm]

CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 1]
CPU Current Capability [100%]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
CPU Voltage Frequency [500]
CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
CPU Power Phase Control [Standard]
CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 1]
VDDSOC Current Capability [100%]
VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed VDDSOC Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
VDDSOC Phase Control [Standard]
DRAM Current Capability [100%]
DRAM Power Phase Control [Optimized]
DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.36000]
VTTDDR Voltage [0.67980]
VPP_MEM Voltage [2.50000]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [0.50000]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [0.50000]
VDDP Voltage [1.00500]
VDDP Standby Voltage [1.00500]
1.8V Standby Voltage [1.80000]
CPU 3.3v AUX [3.40000]
2.5V SB Voltage [2.50000]
DRAM R1 Tune [0]
DRAM R2 Tune [0]
DRAM R3 Tune [0]
DRAM R4 Tune [0]
PCIE Tune R1 [Disabled]
PCIE Tune R2 [Disabled]
PCIE Tune R3 [0]
PLL Tune R1 [Disabled]
PLL reference voltage [0]
T Offset [0]
Sense MI Skew [Disabled]
Sense MI Offset [0]
Promontory presence [Enabled]
Clock Amplitude [Normal]
CLDO VDDP voltage [1000]

CPU Core Voltage [Manual mode]
- CPU Core Voltage Override [1.37500]
CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
- VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.05000]
DRAM Voltage [1.36000]
1.8V PLL Voltage [2.00000]
1.05V SB Voltage [1.05000]




Those CAD settings may not work for you, but they are what I use and the system is stable. I also use 1KB memory page size alocated pr. SOCKET. If your RAM is based on 8Gbit dies then use 512Byte.


----------



## crakej

Ramad said:


> Here you go:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> DRAM CAS# Latency [14]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [17]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [17]
> DRAM RAS# PRE Time [17]
> DRAM RAS# ACT Time [34]
> Trc [54]
> TrrdS [4]
> TrrdL [7]
> Tfaw [26]
> TwtrS [3]
> TwtrL [9]
> Twr [16]
> Trcpage [Auto]
> TrdrdScl [2]
> TwrwrScl [2]
> Trfc [416]
> Trfc2 [256]
> Trfc4 [176]
> Tcwl [12]
> Trtp [8]
> Trdwr [12]
> Twrrd [6]
> TwrwrSc [1]
> TwrwrSd [6]
> TwrwrDd [6]
> TrdrdSc [1]
> TrdrdSd [6]
> TrdrdDd [6]
> Tcke [6]
> 
> ProcODT [48 ohm]
> Cmd2T [2T]
> Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
> Power Down Enable [Disabled]
> RttNom [RZQ/4]
> RttWr [Dynamic ODT Off]
> RttPark [Rtt_PARK Disable]
> MemAddrCmdSetup [57]
> MemCsOdtSetup [57]
> MemCkeSetup [57]
> MemCadBusClkDrvStren [60.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [60.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [60.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [60.0 Ohm]
> 
> CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 1]
> CPU Current Capability [100%]
> CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
> CPU Voltage Frequency [500]
> CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
> CPU Power Phase Control [Standard]
> CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
> VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 1]
> VDDSOC Current Capability [100%]
> VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Manual]
> Fixed VDDSOC Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
> VDDSOC Phase Control [Standard]
> DRAM Current Capability [100%]
> DRAM Power Phase Control [Optimized]
> DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
> Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
> DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.36000]
> VTTDDR Voltage [0.67980]
> VPP_MEM Voltage [2.50000]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [0.50000]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [0.50000]
> VDDP Voltage [1.00500]
> VDDP Standby Voltage [1.00500]
> 1.8V Standby Voltage [1.80000]
> CPU 3.3v AUX [3.40000]
> 2.5V SB Voltage [2.50000]
> DRAM R1 Tune [0]
> DRAM R2 Tune [0]
> DRAM R3 Tune [0]
> DRAM R4 Tune [0]
> PCIE Tune R1 [Disabled]
> PCIE Tune R2 [Disabled]
> PCIE Tune R3 [0]
> PLL Tune R1 [Disabled]
> PLL reference voltage [0]
> T Offset [0]
> Sense MI Skew [Disabled]
> Sense MI Offset [0]
> Promontory presence [Enabled]
> Clock Amplitude [Normal]
> CLDO VDDP voltage [1000]
> 
> CPU Core Voltage [Manual mode]
> - CPU Core Voltage Override [1.37500]
> CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
> - VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.05000]
> DRAM Voltage [1.36000]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [2.00000]
> 1.05V SB Voltage [1.05000]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Those CAD settings may not work for you, but they are what I use and the system is stable. I also use 1KB memory page size allocated pr. SOCKET. If your RAM is based on 8Gbit dies then use 512Byte.


Thanks - I will play more tomorrow. I've been using 512 per channel (I have 8Gb dies) - might experiment more with this as well - just always assumed I need to use channel interleaving....


----------



## Baio73

Hi again,
I'm looking for an answer to THE question about RAM and Ryzen… lower timings or higher speeds?
I've read around and understood that the best is higher speeds AND lower timings (nooo, really?), but where is the turning point?
Some says 3400 and 14CL, do you agree?

I'm asking because I'm gonna get rid of my actual G.Skill kit (F4-3600C16D-16GTZR)… I can't make them stable even @stock values and don't know why everytime some BIOS setting fails, I have to set every single speed step from 2133 to 3600 to put them back to their frequency. And that's very frustrating, as I takes me 20 minutes of reboots everytime.

So I decided to switch to Corsair, but noticed that Asus QVL for our mobo is quite desert in 3200 or higher sections.
What Corsair RGB model do you suggest to look for?

Thanks!

Baio


----------



## Ramad

crakej said:


> Thanks - I will play more tomorrow. I've been using 512 per channel (I have 8Gb dies) - might experiment more with this as well - just always assumed I need to use channel interleaving....



8Gb dies means your RAM sticks are single rank if your RAM is 2 x 8GB, so your system may not benefit from enabled Bank Group Swap and my RTT settings may not work on your system.


----------



## crakej

Ramad said:


> 8Gb dies means your RAM sticks are single rank if your RAM is 2 x 8GB, so your system may not benefit from enabled Bank Group Swap and my RTT settings may not work on your system.


Duh - thank you! I don't know why I assumed they were dual rail.... now for even more playing! Still m-dies though


----------



## Syldon

Baio73 said:


> Hi again,
> I'm looking for an answer to THE question about RAM and Ryzen… lower timings or higher speeds?
> I've read around and understood that the best is higher speeds AND lower timings (nooo, really?), but where is the turning point?
> Some says 3400 and 14CL, do you agree?
> 
> I'm asking because I'm gonna get rid of my actual G.Skill kit (F4-3600C16D-16GTZR)… I can't make them stable even @stock values and don't know why everytime some BIOS setting fails, I have to set every single speed step from 2133 to 3600 to put them back to their frequency. And that's very frustrating, as I takes me 20 minutes of reboots everytime.
> 
> So I decided to switch to Corsair, but noticed that Asus QVL for our mobo is quite desert in 3200 or higher sections.
> What Corsair RGB model do you suggest to look for?
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Baio


What speed are you getting right now ? AMD will only guarantee 3200 as a maximum. So if 3200 is your limit then I would stay with what you have. Switching to corsair will be unlikely to improve your situation.

*edit*

Here is a b die finder that will assist you if you wish to continue with buying another set of Dimms.


----------



## crakej

Baio73 said:


> Hi again,
> I'm looking for an answer to THE question about RAM and Ryzen… lower timings or higher speeds?
> I've read around and understood that the best is higher speeds AND lower timings (nooo, really?), but where is the turning point?
> Some says 3400 and 14CL, do you agree?
> 
> I'm asking because I'm gonna get rid of my actual G.Skill kit (F4-3600C16D-16GTZR)… I can't make them stable even @stock values and don't know why everytime some BIOS setting fails, I have to set every single speed step from 2133 to 3600 to put them back to their frequency. And that's very frustrating, as I takes me 20 minutes of reboots everytime.
> 
> So I decided to switch to Corsair, but noticed that Asus QVL for our mobo is quite desert in 3200 or higher sections.
> What Corsair RGB model do you suggest to look for?
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Baio


Here's my last working profile for my 4266C19s... SoC was 0.968v Ram was 1.395v My cpu was using 1.388v LLC 5 and my SoC LLC2, extreme power profiles.

Might give you something to work with..... What happens with calculator timings?

Edit: had probs uploading correct image for you! this is correct now. If memory serve me right, I was able to get ram voltage slightly lower - try 1.375/1.385. I know mine were quite sensitive to getting the right voltage.


----------



## Baio73

Syldon said:


> What speed are you getting right now ? AMD will only guarantee 3200 as a maximum. So if 3200 is your limit then I would stay with what you have. Switching to corsair will be unlikely to improve your situation.
> 
> *edit*
> 
> Here is a b die finder that will assist you if you wish to continue with buying another set of Dimms.


Thanks for your replay.
It’s hard to say which is the limit at the moment, I’ve run stable @3600 for some days (common use, not benchmarking) then got RAM beeps in a reboot after changing non-RAM related BIOS values.
DOCP values don’t work, to get 3600 I need to reset BIOS to def, then set SOC @1.1v, VRAM @1.4v, reboot and then I must raise the speed from 2133 to 3600 STEP BY STEP REBOOTING AFTER EVERY CHANGE.
This usually works... not the last time I tried (failed in the last step 3600). Every other RAM-related BIOS setting left to Auto.
I hope there is a way to make them work correctly, but I’m afraid it’d take a very long time (thai I don’t have, unfortunately).
I pointed to Corsair because I already use iCue.

Baio


----------



## Baio73

crakej said:


> Here's my last working profile for my 4266C19s... SoC was 0.968v Ram was 1.395v My cpu was using 1.388v LLC 5 and my SoC LLC2, extreme power profiles.
> 
> Might give you something to work with..... What happens with calculator timings?
> 
> Edit: had probs uploading correct image for you! this is correct now. If memory serve me right, I was able to get ram voltage slightly lower - try 1.375/1.385. I know mine were quite sensitive to getting the right voltage.


Thanks to you too.
Unfortunately, as I said, I’m not gonna have much time to spend on fine tuning in the immediate future... 
I could not use the calculator because when I try to import Thyphoon’s profile, calculator finds an error... is there anche guide for it?
I see you pumped your RAM to very high speeds, is that something you do for fun or is there any other reason to prefer higher speeds instead of lower timings?
I thought 3400 CL14 was the best solution...

Baio


----------



## nick name

Baio73 said:


> Thanks to you too.
> Unfortunately, as I said, I’m not gonna have much time to spend on fine tuning in the immediate future...
> I could not use the calculator because when I try to import Thyphoon’s profile, calculator finds an error... is there anche guide for it?
> I see you pumped your RAM to very high speeds, is that something you do for fun or is there any other reason to prefer higher speeds instead of lower timings?
> I thought 3400 CL14 was the best solution...
> 
> Baio


I hate to ask, but did you make certain you were using the correct RAM slots as instructed by the manual?


----------



## crakej

Baio73 said:


> Thanks to you too.
> Unfortunately, as I said, I’m not gonna have much time to spend on fine tuning in the immediate future...
> I could not use the calculator because when I try to import Thyphoon’s profile, calculator finds an error... is there anche guide for it?
> I see you pumped your RAM to very high speeds, is that something you do for fun or is there any other reason to prefer higher speeds instead of lower timings?
> I thought 3400 CL14 was the best solution...
> 
> Baio


Using Thyphoon, click on READ to read your ram data in, then click on File>Export as HTML

Then you should be able to import into ram calculator.

I'm an overclocker! So yes, a lot of it is for 'fun', but also it's about getting the best from the hardware I've got. I do have the time to do it! What settings are best is dependant on what timings you've got. I had good timings at 3600 so yes, it was faster, but only very marginally. Personally, I found the best balance to be at 3533 where you could really tighten timings for impressive results. Currently, most Ryzen users should be able to get up to 3600 with the right memory....

I have very mixed use - occasional gaming, and using virtual machines if I'm doing any programming projects. This is somewhere where Ryzen REALLY shines! So nice being able to run a few quad core machines at once


----------



## Ceadderman

Finally got my 3200mhz, but it's under D.O.C.P. 

It POSTED but it's showing up as 4th slot XMP-3200 in CPUZ and 2+4 are unpopulated slots. 

Not too concerned since I am letting the setting train the board for 3200mhz.

I will likely attempt changing the physical settings over the weekend to see if I cannot get 3200 to POST without D.O.C.P. presettings. Kind of confused however since I ran Cinebench R20 and the scoring hasn't changed going from 2133 to 3200. I honestly don't know what to make of it, other than the actual speed is 2133. :thinking:

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## nick name

Ceadderman said:


> Finally got my 3200mhz, but it's under D.O.C.P.
> 
> It POSTED but it's showing up as 4th slot XMP-3200 in CPUZ and 2+4 are unpopulated slots.
> 
> Not too concerned since I am letting the setting train the board for 3200mhz.
> 
> I will likely attempt changing the physical settings over the weekend to see if I cannot get 3200 to POST without D.O.C.P. presettings. Kind of confused however since I ran Cinebench R20 and the scoring hasn't changed going from 2133 to 3200. I honestly don't know what to make of it, other than the actual speed is 2133. :thinking:
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


If you're numbering from the CPU to away then slots 2 and 4 are the slots that should be populated. The first slot closest to the CPU should not be populated.


----------



## Ceadderman

nick name said:


> If you're numbering from the CPU to away then slots 2 and 4 are the slots that should be populated. The first slot closest to the CPU should not be populated.


I do RTFM, but apparently my old eyes aren't much help sometimes. 

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## nick name

Ceadderman said:


> I do RTFM, but apparently my old eyes aren't much help sometimes.
> 
> ~Ceadder "drink:


Wait, so does that mean you used the correct slots or no?


----------



## Ceadderman

nick name said:


> Wait, so does that mean you used the correct slots or no?


Apparently not. Thought I had my sticks in the correct slots but I moved them over to their proper slots. Probably why my RAM Clock failed, being that they were in the incorrect locations. :doh:

Fixed it, so I will make another attempt later. 

Gave +Rep for the correction. :thumb:

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## nick name

Ceadderman said:


> Apparently not. Thought I had my sticks in the correct slots but I moved them over to their proper slots. Probably why my RAM Clock failed, being that they were in the incorrect locations. :doh:
> 
> Fixed it, so I will make another attempt later.
> 
> Gave +Rep for the correction. :thumb:
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


Lol. Thank you and I'm happy to hear it was a simple correction.


----------



## Baio73

nick name said:


> I hate to ask, but did you make certain you were using the correct RAM slots as instructed by the manual?


Never mind, it's a right question!
I installed them in A2-B2 slot as suggested in the manual.
Due to the AIO and the case A1 slot is covered by the AIO's USB connector and thus not avaliable.

Baio


----------



## Baio73

crakej said:


> Using Thyphoon, click on READ to read your ram data in, then click on File>Export as HTML
> 
> Then you should be able to import into ram calculator.


That's what I did, then in the calculator I click on "import XMP"... but no value is loaded and when I click on one of the "calculate" button it says "enter the values!".
Also quitting iCue (as Thyphoon suggests) helps.




> I'm an overclocker! So yes, a lot of it is for 'fun', but also it's about getting the best from the hardware I've got. I do have the time to do it! What settings are best is dependant on what timings you've got. I had good timings at 3600 so yes, it was faster, but only very marginally. Personally, I found the best balance to be at 3533 where you could really tighten timings for impressive results. Currently, most Ryzen users should be able to get up to 3600 with the right memory....
> 
> I have very mixed use - occasional gaming, and using virtual machines if I'm doing any programming projects. This is somewhere where Ryzen REALLY shines! So nice being able to run a few quad core machines at once


Got it.
So, as I thought, 3600 is a good choice to start with assuming you have enough time to look for tight timings.
And that is way I got this kit… but I can't make it work even @stock.

Baio


----------



## crakej

Baio73 said:


> That's what I did, then in the calculator I click on "import XMP"... but no value is loaded and when I click on one of the "calculate" button it says "enter the values!".
> Also quitting iCue (as Thyphoon suggests) helps.
> 
> Got it.
> So, as I thought, 3600 is a good choice to start with assuming you have enough time to look for tight timings.
> And that is way I got this kit… but I can't make it work even @stock.
> 
> Baio


Did you follow these steps exactly? (I know I didn't put these all before - I just assumed you knew)

1. Load Typhoon
2. Click on Read
3. Click on Report
4. Click on Show Delays In NS (scroll down)
5 Click File>Export As HTML
6. Save


----------



## LethalSpoon

Baio73 said:


> Got it.
> So, as I thought, 3600 is a good choice to start with assuming you have enough time to look for tight timings.
> And that is way I got this kit… but I can't make it work even @stock.
> 
> Baio


I have the same kit, and is good enough to run 3400 cl14 without issue at 1,4v. Did you try the Stilt profiles? Safe 3200 and 3333 are good starting points.


----------



## crakej

LethalSpoon said:


> I have the same kit, and is good enough to run 3400 cl14 without issue at 1,4v. Did you try the Stilt profiles? Safe 3200 and 3333 are good starting points.


That's a great idea - those sticks should definitely run one of those 1.4v profiles. Do you have some optimized timings voltages he could try as you have same kit?


----------



## LethalSpoon

crakej said:


> That's a great idea - those sticks should definitely run one of those 1.4v profiles. Do you have some optimized timings voltages he could try as you have same kit?


He can try first to run the safe 3333 Stilt profile and lower the voltage to 1,35-1,37v. With the latest BIOS latency should be around 62-63ns, wich is a nice improvement over 3600 cl16.


----------



## crakej

Looking good!

I can't wait to get my G.Skills back from RMA!


----------



## Baio73

crakej said:


> Did you follow these steps exactly? (I know I didn't put these all before - I just assumed you knew)
> 
> 1. Load Typhoon
> 2. Click on Read
> 3. Click on Report
> 4. Click on Show Delays In NS (scroll down)
> 5 Click File>Export As HTML
> 6. Save


Ok, I missed some steps… at point 5) Export as COMPLETE HTML Report is needed.

Then I import the file in calculator? That's all?

Baio


----------



## Baio73

LethalSpoon said:


> I have the same kit, and is good enough to run 3400 cl14 without issue at 1,4v. Did you try the Stilt profiles? Safe 3200 and 3333 are good starting points.


Can you make it work @3600 stock CL? How many volts?

Tried to load Stilt's Safe 3333 profile but the speed was stuck @2133, so I re-entered the BIOS and set manually… BEEPS.
So I reset alla BIOS values to def, load the Stilt's again AND immediately (without rebooting) set 3333 manually and seem to be stable.
Now, what's the next step?

Baio


----------



## LethalSpoon

Baio73 said:


> Can you make it work @3600 stock CL? How many volts?
> 
> Tried to load Stilt's Safe 3333 profile but the speed was stuck @2133, so I re-entered the BIOS and set manually… BEEPS.
> So I reset alla BIOS values to def, load the Stilt's again AND immediately (without rebooting) set 3333 manually and seem to be stable.
> Now, what's the next step?
> 
> Baio


If you are happy with the performance now you can try to decrease voltage to 1,37v or even 1,35v and see if they are stable (karhu, tm5, HCI, ...), to have a nice balanced profile for 24/7 use. Or if you want bigger numbers try to push them to 3400 cl14.

*Stock DOCP settings doesnt work even at 1,45v, no worth trying pushing more volts.


----------



## crakej

Baio73 said:


> Ok, I missed some steps… at point 5) Export as COMPLETE HTML Report is needed.
> 
> Then I import the file in calculator? That's all?
> 
> Baio


Yes. Step 5 I think I just use export as HTML, not COMPLETE, but just try see what works for you.


----------



## Ceadderman

Last night I got into Boosting my RAM to 3200mhz. 

Only used ThaiPhoon Burner and DRAM Calculator for Ryzen 1.4.1 and nothing else.

It went much easier than expected after moving the sticks to their correct slots.

I just input everything from the Red demarked boxes unless it says "(Alt)". Those are for use after first attempt fails. Thankfully mine did not. 

I haven't run any Timing specific benches but I put the system through quite a few Cinebench R20 Runs. I figure if the initial settings weren't up to reasonable snuff, then the system would've crashed out. It's stable enough for the moment. I was really happy that my settings got me through POST, since the last time the system wouldn't do that and reverted to the 2133 settings.

Downloaded Ryzen Master last night too and thankfully 1800x appears in that so after I run some timing benches and deal with any negative result(if there are any) I will be fiddling with the CPU clock using RyMaster and getting the best possible CPU clock I can. I really should hold off on that as I don't have the best cooling solution I own. But the spring chill is keeping ambients pretty low. So at least through RyMaster I can fiddle with the settings and keep a decent clock on the CPU above 3.6ghz. 

Hope this helps those that are confused about their RAM settings. :cheers:

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## lordzed83

New chipset drivers 
https://www.guru3d.com/news-story/d...-for-ryzen-and-threadripper-motherboards.html
@1usmus started playing around with this 2003 bios its good got some voltages down. Do everyone got UNDERLINE displayed before post sequence starts tho ?? Or its reflash job ??


----------



## LethalSpoon

lordzed83 said:


> Do everyone got UNDERLINE displayed before post sequence starts tho ?? Or its reflash job ??


Yep, nothing to worry about.


----------



## Syldon

lordzed83 said:


> @1usmus started playing around with this 2003 bios its good got some voltages down.


I take it you mean 2203?



lordzed83 said:


> Do everyone got UNDERLINE displayed before post sequence starts tho ?? Or its reflash job ??


What is this UNDERLINE


----------



## Syldon

lordzed83 said:


> New chipset drivers
> https://www.guru3d.com/news-story/d...-for-ryzen-and-threadripper-motherboards.html


News on new drivers is alweays appreciated. However, do these drivers supersede the Asus drivers released on the driver download page. The Asus driver indicates a higher version Version 18.50.16.01.

Ignore this I found the answer in the subtext underneath the Asus driver listing. AMD Chipset Driver V5.12.0.38 for the Asus one.


----------



## kmellz

AMDs driver seems to have some updated components if you go into custom install, since not all the ones (I think?) are there that normally are.


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> New chipset drivers
> https://www.guru3d.com/news-story/d...-for-ryzen-and-threadripper-motherboards.html
> 
> @1usmus started playing around with this 2003 bios its good got some voltages down. Do everyone got UNDERLINE displayed before post sequence starts tho ?? Or its reflash job ??


Yeah - we're all getting the C-64 boot up screen!


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Yeah - we're all getting the C-64 boot up screen!


AAA sop not only me cool. How ya getting on with first gen ?? I managed to get 3600cl14 stable with geardown on. Deffo preffer 3533cl14 with real T1 tad faster in division 2


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> AAA sop not only me cool. How ya getting on with first gen ?? I managed to get 3600cl14 stable with geardown on. Deffo preffer 3533cl14 with real T1 tad faster in division 2


I was doing ok until I had to RMA my 4266s. Was running 3600CL14, then managed to get a wicked 3533 profile working which scored me 1953 in CB15 with CPU at 4.2GHz instead of 4.1! However, my ram failed - or maybe degraded - and had to RMA. Just got credit note last night and wondering what to replace them with - maybe to Patriot Viper Steel Series 16GB 4400Mhz CL19, but only just got credit note. So long as they're b-die or anything else decent for Ryzen.

My CPU has been through a lot - but it's still going strong. Most recent bios (2xxx) slightly reduced the voltage I needed for 4.1GHz, but can't seem to get 4.2 any more - maybe thats because of my temp memory sticks (LPX)


----------



## hurricane28

Hey guys, 

Do any of you ran Cinebench 2.0? If so, what are your stock boost clocks at? I am only getting around 4 GHz..every thing else boosts up to 4.250 as it should.


----------



## lordzed83

just had a go at CB 20
https://i.ibb.co/ngpCJPK/cb20.jpg


----------



## hurricane28

Cool, but you manually overclock don't you?


----------



## Ceadderman

lordzed83 said:


> just had a go at CB 20
> https://i.ibb.co/ngpCJPK/cb20.jpg


Nice scores. I'm posting in the high 3s' but @ 3200mhz with no overclock on the CPU atm. Won't be dialing that in to anything close to 4.0ghz so long as my board is on the test bench. Your scores are highly respectable compared to mine. :thumb:

I posted my results on the last page. 

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## minal

I just upgraded from BIOS 1103 to 2203 on the C7HWIFI+2700X+Fedora29. First impressions are that 2203 is more liberal with Vcore. 1103 with -50mV offset on Vcore performs at similar clock speeds, temperatures, and voltages compared to 2203 with -75mV. At least that's my quick assessment. Still can't boot with -100mV.


----------



## nick name

minal said:


> I just upgraded from BIOS 1103 to 2203 on the C7HWIFI+2700X+Fedora29. First impressions are that 2203 is more liberal with Vcore. 1103 with -50mV offset on Vcore performs at similar clock speeds, temperatures, and voltages compared to 2203 with -75mV. At least that's my quick assessment. Still can't boot with -100mV.


Really? I can boot at a hair past -.1000V.


----------



## Ceadderman

minal said:


> I just upgraded from BIOS 1103 to 2203 on the C7HWIFI+2700X+*Fedora29*. First impressions are that 2203 is more liberal with Vcore. 1103 with -50mV offset on Vcore performs at similar clock speeds, temperatures, and voltages compared to 2203 with -75mV. At least that's my quick assessment. Still can't boot with -100mV.


Linux distro? :mellowsmi

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## minal

nick name said:


> Really? I can boot at a hair past -.1000V.





Ceadderman said:


> Linux distro? :mellowsmi
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


 Yes and yes.

I'm not sure yet if the -75mV Vcore offset is actually stable as I've just done a few minutes of stress testing and a few cycles of shutting down and restarting. If I run into problems I'll set it back to -50mV which ran without issue for months on 1103.


----------



## crakej

Got a credit note for my G.Skill 4266s that I RMAed.

Should I just replace with the same?


----------



## nick name

minal said:


> Yes and yes.
> 
> I'm not sure yet if the -75mV Vcore offset is actually stable as I've just done a few minutes of stress testing and a few cycles of shutting down and restarting. If I run into problems I'll set it back to -50mV which ran without issue for months on 1103.


For a bit -.1000V seemed stable for many different workloads, but the most demanding single core workloads needed more power. So I ended up at -.06875V.


----------



## minal

nick name said:


> For a bit -.1000V seemed stable for many different workloads, but the most demanding single core workloads needed more power. So I ended up at -.06875V.


So not even -0.0750 V was stable for all loads for you? In general I prefer to err on the side of stability.


----------



## nick name

minal said:


> So not even -0.0750 V was stable for all loads for you? In general I prefer to err on the side of stability.


That is correct. The workloads that required the most power are in the Geekbench 3 suite of benchmarks, but in the rare chance that I do encounter one outside of it then I should be ok. Honestly, with my use case I could probably use -.1000V and not see a restart (which I actually did for a while), but I'd always have the thought lingering in the back of my mind that it wasn't truly stable.


----------



## minal

nick name said:


> That is correct. The workloads that required the most power are in the Geekbench 3 suite of benchmarks, but in the rare chance that I do encounter one outside of it then I should be ok. Honestly, with my use case I could probably use -.1000V and not see a restart (which I actually did for a while), but I'd always have the thought lingering in the back of my mind that it wasn't truly stable.


 Do you mean the free/"tryout" versions of Geekbench 3 and 4? It takes only around a minute to complete a series of tests and doesn't stress the system as much as prime95 or especially y-cruncher. Those really heat things up, especially the latter with spikes when switching between tests.

So far, -75mV is holding for me. I even upgraded my OS... that was a bit of unnecessary risk. The thought was definitely lingering on my mind...

I should also clarify that when I said my system doesn't boot with -100mV, I meant it doesn't POST.


----------



## lordzed83

hurricane28 said:


> Cool, but you manually overclock don't you?


OFC thats where fun is at haha


----------



## hurricane28

lordzed83 said:


> OFC thats where fun is at haha



I only clock my memory, CPU is no need as it doesn't overclock higher than max boost lol.


----------



## lordzed83

hurricane28 said:


> I only clock my memory, CPU is no need as it doesn't overclock higher than max boost lol.


No chance to get 4300 all core boost with 3533cl14 no matter what voltages i throw at it. Not stable enough for me


----------



## VPII

lordzed83 said:


> No chance to get 4300 all core boost with 3533cl14 no matter what voltages i throw at it. Not stable enough for me


Oh dear.... I listen to these not stable enough unless it passes so and so. Well I set and start and run whatever I usually run and if all works well I am happy. I mean why stress a cpu just to confirm that it would run the end of the world when it is not yet on the cards. My overclock not yet tested with whatever you deem acceptable but it will work with whatever normal everyday things I throw at it so Im happy.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## darkdavid08

Writing this from my phone so excuse any poor formatting.

Been having random freezes/black screens (qcode 8 Dram led lit) for the last several weeks after updating to the 2000 and higher bios versions and new AMD chipset drivers mid-late March. It progressively got worse until it freezes as soon as a minute after boot on desktop.

I've tried flashing back my BIOS to every version back to 1002 and no dice, same symptoms. Clearing CMOS and going stock each time, even safe mode does it.

The ram in my system is a f4-3200c14q-16gtzr set, CPU - 2700x, Storage - m.2/satassd/hdd, PSU - ax1500i, Cooler - H150i pro, GPU - GTX 1070ti, and Motherboard is of course Asus C7H nonwifi.

I just ran memtest86 today on my RAM and it passed all tests with 0 errors. I'm seriously at wits end and don't know how to proceed from here without RMAing my motherboard. Everything has worked fine on PE3 everything Auto (stilts fast 3200) settings for almost a year up till the last few bios and AMD chipset updates. This makes me hesitant to RMA the motherboard as i don't think it's the issue.

Also, the freezing occurs regardless of OC or stock settings, and happens in safe mode. 

If anyone can point me in the right direction as to where to go from here troubleshooting-wise, I'd be forever grateful.

Edit: also use Corsair iCue and Msi Afterburner along with having Asus AURA installed.

Edit2: Just got a Kmode Exception BSOD in safe mode


----------



## Ceadderman

darkdavid08 said:


> Writing this from my phone so excuse any poor formatting.
> 
> Been having random freezes/black screens (qcode 8 Dram led lit) for the last several weeks after updating to the 2000 and higher bios versions and new AMD chipset drivers mid-late March. It progressively got worse until it freezes as soon as a minute after boot on desktop.
> 
> I've tried flashing back my BIOS to every version back to 1002 and no dice, same symptoms. Clearing CMOS and going stock each time, even safe mode does it.
> 
> The ram in my system is a f4-3200c14q-16gtzr set, CPU - 2700x, Storage - m.2/satassd/hdd, PSU - ax1500i, Cooler - H150i pro, GPU - GTX 1070ti, and Motherboard is of course Asus C7H nonwifi.
> 
> I just ran memtest86 today on my RAM and it passed all tests with 0 errors. I'm seriously at wits end and don't know how to proceed from here without RMAing my motherboard. Everything has worked fine on PE3 everything Auto (stilts fast 3200) settings for almost a year up till the last few bios and AMD chipset updates. This makes me hesitant to RMA the motherboard as i don't think it's the issue.
> 
> Also, the freezing occurs regardless of OC or stock settings, and happens in safe mode.
> 
> If anyone can point me in the right direction as to where to go from here troubleshooting-wise, I'd be forever grateful.
> 
> Edit: also use Corsair iCue and Msi Afterburner along with having Asus AURA installed.
> 
> Edit2: Just got a Kmode Exception BSOD in safe mode


First things first. Turn off iCue. And try running without it. CVIIHero has had instability issues as a result of AuraSync and iCue no playing well with others. I have a K55 and a M65 and both use iCue. But I tend to turn it off to keep from having issues with my CVIIHero WiFi. 

The board is not the likely candidate here. 

It could ALSO be your OS got borked and if iCue isn't the culprit, then I would look to a fresh OS. That's one reason why I put my OS on the m.2 and used Macrium to close the OS drive to my 120gb 750 EVO. So no matter what I have an OS to boot on with. I let it sit tethered to my 500gb EVO drive but not plugged in except for maintenance time. 

Those are the things that pop out at me from reading of your issues. :thinking:

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## crakej

I'm going to order these today - Patriot Viper Steel Series 16GB KIT DDR4 4400Mhz CL19 - for 145gbp on ebay. They were 179 on Alza (just reduced from 236)

I almost got another 2 Corsair LPX 3200C16s for 92gbp instead so I would have 32GB, but I don't really need 32 yet...but vey tempting for 92 quid!

All the b-dies kits i looked at, including the g.skill 4266s, use T2 timing above 4000MTs, so the kit above must be binned at l;east as well as this one, if not better. People have achieved good OCs with the Patriots and I'll save nearly 100gpb to put toward my Ryzen 3xxx


----------



## CJMitsuki

darkdavid08 said:


> Writing this from my phone so excuse any poor formatting.
> 
> Been having random freezes/black screens (qcode 8 Dram led lit) for the last several weeks after updating to the 2000 and higher bios versions and new AMD chipset drivers mid-late March. It progressively got worse until it freezes as soon as a minute after boot on desktop.
> 
> I've tried flashing back my BIOS to every version back to 1002 and no dice, same symptoms. Clearing CMOS and going stock each time, even safe mode does it.
> 
> The ram in my system is a f4-3200c14q-16gtzr set, CPU - 2700x, Storage - m.2/satassd/hdd, PSU - ax1500i, Cooler - H150i pro, GPU - GTX 1070ti, and Motherboard is of course Asus C7H nonwifi.
> 
> I just ran memtest86 today on my RAM and it passed all tests with 0 errors. I'm seriously at wits end and don't know how to proceed from here without RMAing my motherboard. Everything has worked fine on PE3 everything Auto (stilts fast 3200) settings for almost a year up till the last few bios and AMD chipset updates. This makes me hesitant to RMA the motherboard as i don't think it's the issue.
> 
> Also, the freezing occurs regardless of OC or stock settings, and happens in safe mode.
> 
> If anyone can point me in the right direction as to where to go from here troubleshooting-wise, I'd be forever grateful.
> 
> Edit: also use Corsair iCue and Msi Afterburner along with having Asus AURA installed.
> 
> Edit2: Just got a Kmode Exception BSOD in safe mode





Id highly doubt icue or any other software was the culprit, although they possibly could be causing some form of issues but not the ones you are describing. Id wager that they are memory related. Have you ran a memory tester for an extended period (several hours at the very least but 8 hours is nice) and not memtest86...HCI, Ramtest, or TM5? Post the RTC screenshot so I can look at the timings. If it isnt the ram then it could be the DIMM slots or even some contaminants in the slot. DIMM slots would be what Id check last though. If you have overclocked your memory at any point since youve had the OS installed there could have been corruptions in the OS files while there were errors. More than likely id say there are either current errors due to unstable memory though. Thats what my initial thought is as its the problem that would cause all of the things you mention.


----------



## Jackalito

Even though this piece of news is a couple of days old, I don't think I've seen anyone commenting on this one around here. So, ASUS will be updating their X370, X470, B350 and B450 motherboards to fully support Ryzen 3000 series with new, still not released, UEFI updates.


In the case of our *Crosshair VII Hero*, we should be looking forward to *version 2302*.


Here's a link with the whole thing and all the mobos that will officially recieve support from ASUS:
https://www.guru3d.com/news-story/a...motherboards-for-next-gen-amd-ryzen-cpus.html


Apologies if this was already mentioned, as I didn't see it.


----------



## LethalSpoon

darkdavid08 said:


> Writing this from my phone so excuse any poor formatting.
> 
> Been having random freezes/black screens (qcode 8 Dram led lit) for the last several weeks after updating to the 2000 and higher bios versions and new AMD chipset drivers mid-late March. It progressively got worse until it freezes as soon as a minute after boot on desktop.
> 
> I've tried flashing back my BIOS to every version back to 1002 and no dice, same symptoms. Clearing CMOS and going stock each time, even safe mode does it.
> 
> The ram in my system is a f4-3200c14q-16gtzr set, CPU - 2700x, Storage - m.2/satassd/hdd, PSU - ax1500i, Cooler - H150i pro, GPU - GTX 1070ti, and Motherboard is of course Asus C7H nonwifi.
> 
> I just ran memtest86 today on my RAM and it passed all tests with 0 errors. I'm seriously at wits end and don't know how to proceed from here without RMAing my motherboard. Everything has worked fine on PE3 everything Auto (stilts fast 3200) settings for almost a year up till the last few bios and AMD chipset updates. This makes me hesitant to RMA the motherboard as i don't think it's the issue.
> 
> Also, the freezing occurs regardless of OC or stock settings, and happens in safe mode.
> 
> If anyone can point me in the right direction as to where to go from here troubleshooting-wise, I'd be forever grateful.
> 
> Edit: also use Corsair iCue and Msi Afterburner along with having Asus AURA installed.
> 
> Edit2: Just got a Kmode Exception BSOD in safe mode


Did you try both RAM modules separately to see if system works fine with one of them?

*I dont think is software related, but you should format the system drive and do a fresh Windows install to discard it completely.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> I'm going to order these today - Patriot Viper Steel Series 16GB KIT DDR4 4400Mhz CL19 - for 145gbp on ebay. They were 179 on Alza (just reduced from 236)
> 
> I almost got another 2 Corsair LPX 3200C16s for 92gbp instead so I would have 32GB, but I don't really need 32 yet...but vey tempting for 92 quid!
> 
> All the b-dies kits i looked at, including the g.skill 4266s, use T2 timing above 4000MTs, so the kit above must be binned at l;east as well as this one, if not better. People have achieved good OCs with the Patriots and I'll save nearly 100gpb to put toward my Ryzen 3xxx


I had Patriot vipers sadly dual rank but still on my 1700x they ware running at 3000cl14 of first 2 months of ryzen.


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> I had Patriot vipers sadly dual rank but still on my 1700x they ware running at 3000cl14 of first 2 months of ryzen.


These are nice 1R b-dies....can't wait to try them out - and they're over 100gbp cheaper than my g.skill 4266s. Got them for 140gbp including next day delivery. Sweet


----------



## 1usmus

I’m finally ready to announce the release date of the new version *DRAM Calculator for Ryzen™ 1.5.0* - *7th may* 








*May 7* is the birthday of the new product, the benchmark of the memory subsystem. His name - *MEMbench*. This test package is absolutely free and has no limitations. More information I will publish on news portals on the day of publication


----------



## Baio73

CJMitsuki said:


> Id highly doubt icue or any other software was the culprit, although they possibly could be causing some form of issues but not the ones you are describing. Id wager that they are memory related. Have you ran a memory tester for an extended period (several hours at the very least but 8 hours is nice) and not memtest86...HCI, Ramtest, or TM5? Post the RTC screenshot so I can look at the timings. If it isnt the ram then it could be the DIMM slots or even some contaminants in the slot. DIMM slots would be what Id check last though. If you have overclocked your memory at any point since youve had the OS installed there could have been corruptions in the OS files while there were errors. More than likely id say there are either current errors due to unstable memory though. Thats what my initial thought is as its the problem that would cause all of the things you mention.


Why "not memtest86"?

Baio


----------



## crakej

1usmus said:


> I’m finally ready to announce the release date of the new version *DRAM Calculator for Ryzen™ 1.5.0* - *7th may*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *May 7* is the birthday of the new product, the benchmark of the memory subsystem. His name - *MEMbench*. This test package is absolutely free and has no limitations. More information I will publish on news portals on the day of publication


Thanks @1usmus - looking good!

Your help with these apps is much appreciated!


----------



## darkdavid08

Ok just to update everyone, I tried each stick separately to no avail. I tried clean installing Windows off a usb drive and the qcode 8 DRAM led black screens make it impossible to finish or even get an RTC screenshot. At this point I'm suspecting the Ram or the Mobo, I have a feeling Asus AURA might have corrupted the SPD on my sticks from what I've been reading, since I have cpuz and hwinfo and the sticks seems to pass long memory tests (only tried overnight windows memtest and memtest86 off USB though so far).


----------



## Ceadderman

darkdavid08 said:


> Ok just to update everyone, I tried each stick separately to no avail. I tried clean installing Windows off a usb drive and the qcode 8 DRAM led black screens make it impossible to finish or even get an RTC screenshot. At this point I'm suspecting the Ram or the Mobo, I have a feeling Asus AURA might have corrupted the SPD on my sticks from what I've been reading, since I have cpuz and hwinfo and the sticks seems to pass long memory tests (only tried overnight windows memtest and memtest86 off USB though so far).


So am I correct assuming that you're running RGB sticks? I am not so I haven't run into those issues. :thinking:

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## darkdavid08

Yes this Gskill set is RGB enabled


----------



## Ceadderman

darkdavid08 said:


> Yes this Gskill set is RGB enabled


Gotcha!

Sadly that will always be a potential issue with RGB products. Drivers clash all the time. But RGB is relatively new-ish so a Motherboard with RGB and RAM with RGB is a volatility issue waiting to happen. I have Corsair RGB products and once I set my lighting color of choice I leave the software off. :thumb:

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## Baio73

darkdavid08 said:


> Yes this Gskill set is RGB enabled


Try to ask in G.Skill forum, Official Support is quite slow but the answer will come.
Maybe there's something you can do without RMA your kit.

Baio


----------



## darkdavid08

Bad news, Bought a new 4gb stick at the local computer store, still getting qcoding 8 Dram led flashing. I can't even get past a UEFI usb drive fresh install of Windows 10, I don't know what to do at this point besides remounting my H150i pro bracket or RMAing my motherboard after that. I feel like I've tried everything and I don't understand how it worked perfectly up till the beginning of April w/ no hardware changes, over clocked and running fast Still presets. Totally confused at this point as to how my motherboard could have gotten to the point that it's doing this.


----------



## Baio73

darkdavid08 said:


> Bad news, Bought a new 4gb stick at the local computer store, still getting qcoding 8 Dram led flashing. I can't even get past a UEFI usb drive fresh install of Windows 10, I don't know what to do at this point besides remounting my H150i pro bracket or RMAing my motherboard after that. I feel like I've tried everything and I don't understand how it worked perfectly up till the beginning of April w/ no hardware changes, over clocked and running fast Still presets. Totally confused at this point as to how my motherboard could have gotten to the point that it's doing this.


You had a very bad luck… but things are made this way, the work perfectly untill they break.
At this point I think you can't do nothing but RMA the mobo.
If you have the possibility, try the RAM in another mobo, just to ensure you don't have to do another RMA.

Baio


----------



## Ceadderman

darkdavid08 said:


> Bad news, Bought a new 4gb stick at the local computer store, still getting qcoding 8 Dram led flashing. I can't even get past a UEFI usb drive fresh install of Windows 10, I don't know what to do at this point besides remounting my H150i pro bracket or RMAing my motherboard after that. I feel like I've tried everything and I don't understand how it worked perfectly up till the beginning of April w/ no hardware changes, over clocked and running fast Still presets. Totally confused at this point as to how my motherboard could have gotten to the point that it's doing this.


Bad chipset driver maybe? :mellowsmi

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## darkdavid08

Honestly I was thinking that because the Second to last Chipset driver (RS5) seemed to line up with when my issues started, but I formatted my m.2 the other night and had all my important settings backed up to a separate external to prep for a clean install, and it's still happening during clean W10 install booting off a USB drive. 

If it is infact the chipset drivers, surely after a format the issue would have gone away by now right? The drive is empty now.


----------



## Baio73

darkdavid08 said:


> Honestly I was thinking that because the Second to last Chipset driver (RS5) seemed to line up with when my issues started, but I formatted my m.2 the other night and had all my important settings backed up to a separate external to prep for a clean install, and it's still happening during clean W10 install booting off a USB drive.
> 
> If it is infact the chipset drivers, surely after a format the issue would have gone away by now right? The drive is empty now.


How can the chipset drivers affect the boot? OS is not loaded yet.

Baio


----------



## crakej

darkdavid08 said:


> Bad news, Bought a new 4gb stick at the local computer store, still getting qcoding 8 Dram led flashing. I can't even get past a UEFI usb drive fresh install of Windows 10, I don't know what to do at this point besides remounting my H150i pro bracket or RMAing my motherboard after that. I feel like I've tried everything and I don't understand how it worked perfectly up till the beginning of April w/ no hardware changes, over clocked and running fast Still presets. Totally confused at this point as to how my motherboard could have gotten to the point that it's doing this.


Has anything else happened? Maybe your CPU needs re-seating?

You tried the one new stick, latest bios, cleared cmos? Still can't boot?

Edit: why do you need to remount the bracket?


----------



## VicsPC

darkdavid08 said:


> Honestly I was thinking that because the Second to last Chipset driver (RS5) seemed to line up with when my issues started, but I formatted my m.2 the other night and had all my important settings backed up to a separate external to prep for a clean install, and it's still happening during clean W10 install booting off a USB drive.
> 
> If it is infact the chipset drivers, surely after a format the issue would have gone away by now right? The drive is empty now.


Yea it would, I'd take everything apart and reseat. Clean the ram stick contacts with some alcohol and check the pins and stuff on ur board. When my 2700x s*it itself i was getting q code 42 or something but the DRAM led was lit so i wouldn't rely solely on the qcodes and LED debug. For me when i was getting the 8 code, i had spilled some water into one of my ram slots, i let it all dry out so it wasnt an issue but one of my ram stick contacts ended up with slight corrosion, enough to make it not boot.


----------



## Elrick

VicsPC said:


> For me when i was getting the 8 code, i had spilled some water into one of my ram slots, i let it all dry out so it wasnt an issue but one of my ram stick contacts ended up with slight corrosion, enough to make it not boot.


If anyone spills water or any liquid into their Ram Slots (by accident - not looking for an RMA) you have to spray 'heaps' of Isopropyl Alcohol into that ram slot (when it's all turned off and the memory sticks removed).

Have done it myself some years ago and actually saved my motherboard and ram, a few hours later when I returned everything together and powered it on, everything was like it was before.

No errors shown whilst booting or running further memory software testing, for 24 hours.


----------



## crakej

Just got my new memory! Patriot Viper Steel 4400 CL19

Just loaded the Stilts' 3600 1.4v profile and I'm off - GearDown=disabled CL16, booted first time! These are truly going to be fun to OC!


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Just got my new memory! Patriot Viper Steel 4400 CL19
> 
> Just loaded the Stilts' 3600 1.4v profile and I'm off - GearDown=disabled CL16, booted first time! These are truly going to be fun to OC!


Ooooooh I'm excited.


----------



## stinger2k

@darkdavid08

Code 8 you can give that a try to unmount the cpu -> CLRCMOS -> mount newly the cpu and start.... with only 1 DDR4 Stick in A2...
Should boot up... and as a second chance eventually your MB has a BIOS Recovery function which doesn´t require CPU & RAM installed...?

Code 8 is more CPU related issue, like VCore, cooler sitting(to strengthend screws etc...)


----------



## darkdavid08

stinger2k said:


> @darkdavid08
> 
> Code 8 you can give that a try to unmount the cpu -> CLRCMOS -> mount newly the cpu and start.... with only 1 DDR4 Stick in A2...
> Should boot up... and as a second chance eventually your MB has a BIOS Recovery function which doesn´t require CPU & RAM installed...?
> 
> Code 8 is more CPU related issue, like VCore, cooler sitting(to strengthend screws etc...)


Just reseated everything, even the CPU and cooler, cleaned out my DIMMs and ramsticks with ISO, reseated all my PSU connectors and double checked. The board looked pristine, no signs of water or any kind of damage on the board and almost no dust.

Still getting freezing when I try to install windows. Already tried every DIMM separately and with NEW store bought RAM, issue persists, I sure love ASUS products /s.

Edit: just got a CLOCK_WATCHDOG_TIMEOUT at the language selection of W10 install, booting off an external.


----------



## Ramad

darkdavid08 said:


> Just reseated everything, even the CPU and cooler, cleaned out my DIMMs and ramsticks with ISO, reseated all my PSU connectors and double checked. The board looked pristine, no signs of water or any kind of damage on the board and almost no dust.
> 
> Still getting freezing when I try to install windows. Already tried every DIMM separately and with NEW store bought RAM, issue persists, I sure love ASUS products /s.
> 
> Edit: just got a CLOCK_WATCHDOG_TIMEOUT at the language selection of W10 install, booting off an external.


Can you post BIOS settings including used voltages?


----------



## darkdavid08

Ramad said:


> darkdavid08 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just reseated everything, even the CPU and cooler, cleaned out my DIMMs and ramsticks with ISO, reseated all my PSU connectors and double checked. The board looked pristine, no signs of water or any kind of damage on the board and almost no dust.
> 
> Still getting freezing when I try to install windows. Already tried every DIMM separately and with NEW store bought RAM, issue persists, I sure love ASUS products /s.
> 
> Edit: just got a CLOCK_WATCHDOG_TIMEOUT at the language selection of W10 install, booting off an external.
> 
> 
> 
> Can you post BIOS settings including used voltages?
Click to expand...

All stock, should I post what my voltage readouts are at? I just replaced the PSU w a 1500w titanium to rule out my old psu

PS: unplugged all other drives, took out CMOS battery for 30s, and retried every DIMM again one at a time with same and different ram sticks, getting freezes and restarts everytime with ram Qled lit.


----------



## crakej

darkdavid08 said:


> All stock, should I post what my voltage readouts are at? I just replaced the PSU w a 1500w titanium to rule out my old psu
> 
> PS: unplugged all other drives, took out CMOS battery for 30s, and retried every DIMM again one at a time with same and different ram sticks, getting freezes and restarts everytime with ram Qled lit.


OK - just trying to think of everything - you mentioned flashing bios - what method do you use to do this and have you up and downgraded the bios?


----------



## Ramad

darkdavid08 said:


> All stock, should I post what my voltage readouts are at? I just replaced the PSU w a 1500w titanium to rule out my old psu
> 
> PS: unplugged all other drives, took out CMOS battery for 30s, and retried every DIMM again one at a time with same and different ram sticks, getting freezes and restarts everytime with ram Qled lit.


Set SOC voltage to 1.15V, CPU voltage to 1.35V, DRAM voltage to 1.4V and CLDO_VDDP to 980mV. Set all voltages manually. Set RAM to 2133MT/s too and see if your system is unstable with those basic settings.


----------



## darkdavid08

Ramad said:


> darkdavid08 said:
> 
> 
> 
> All stock, should I post what my voltage readouts are at? I just replaced the PSU w a 1500w titanium to rule out my old psu
> 
> PS: unplugged all other drives, took out CMOS battery for 30s, and retried every DIMM again one at a time with same and different ram sticks, getting freezes and restarts everytime with ram Qled lit.
> 
> 
> 
> Set SOC voltage to 1.15V, CPU voltage to 1.35V, DRAM voltage to 1.4V and CLDO_VDDP to 980mV. Set all voltages manually. Set RAM to 2133MT/s too and see if your system is unstable with those basic settings.
Click to expand...

After setting all the voltages manually you specified (additionally 1.1v and 1.8v on last two), I was able to install windows with UEFI and secure boot and the issue hasn't happened yet. Really odd as to why the auto settings (with auto + vcore offset) worked so long and kept a rock solid stable oc. 

Additionally, I started the RMA process but the label has a day or two before it comes in. Should I still RMA the board?

PS: I'll keep you guys posted if the issue happens again, for now I'm going to get all the right drivers loaded on this clean install and see if I can get my old PE3 oc stable with manual settings.
Also Attached is a screenshot of RTC


----------



## nick name

darkdavid08 said:


> After setting all the voltages manually you specified (additionally 1.1v and 1.8v on last two), I was able to install windows with UEFI and secure boot and the issue hasn't happened yet. Really odd as to why the auto settings (with auto + vcore offset) worked so long and kept a rock solid stable oc.
> 
> Additionally, I started the RMA process but the label has a day or two before it comes in. Should I still RMA the board?
> 
> PS: I'll keep you guys posted if the issue happens again, for now I'm going to get all the right drivers loaded on this clean install and see if I can get my old PE3 oc stable with manual settings.
> Also Attached is a screenshot of RTC


Whoa. 1.8V shouldn't be set on SOC, DRAM, or CPU. Was that a typo?


----------



## VPII

nick name said:


> Whoa. 1.8V shouldn't be set on SOC, DRAM, or CPU. Was that a typo?


I think he probably meant SOC 1.1 and SB 1.8


----------



## Ramad

darkdavid08 said:


> After setting all the voltages manually you specified (additionally 1.1v and 1.8v on last two), I was able to install windows with UEFI and secure boot and the issue hasn't happened yet. Really odd as to why the auto settings (with auto + vcore offset) worked so long and kept a rock solid stable oc.
> 
> Additionally, I started the RMA process but the label has a day or two before it comes in. Should I still RMA the board?
> 
> PS: I'll keep you guys posted if the issue happens again, for now I'm going to get all the right drivers loaded on this clean install and see if I can get my old PE3 oc stable with manual settings.
> Also Attached is a screenshot of RTC



Try the following settings with RAM at 3200MT/s (no XMP/DOCP) before deciding if you have to RMA the motherboard: 



Code:


DRAM CAS# Latency [14]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [14]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [14]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [14]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [30]
Trc [46]
TrrdS [4]
TrrdL [7]
Tfaw [26]
TwtrS [3]
TwtrL [9]
Twr [16]
Trcpage [Auto]
TrdrdScl [2]
TwrwrScl [2]
Trfc [560]
Trfc2 [416]
Trfc4 [256]
Tcwl [14]
Trtp [8]
Trdwr [12]
Twrrd [6]
TwrwrSc [1]
TwrwrSd [6]
TwrwrDd [6]
TrdrdSc [1]
TrdrdSd [6]
TrdrdDd [6]
Tcke [6]

ProcODT [48 ohm or 53.3 ohm] (lower is better for stability based on my testings. Your CPU may work with even lower values)
Cmd2T [2T]
Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
Power Down Enable [Disabled]
RttNom [Disabled]
RttWr [Dynamic ODT Off]
RttPark [RZQ/5]
MemAddrCmdSetup [11]
MemCsOdtSetup [11]
MemCkeSetup [11]
MemCadBusClkDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]

Keep voltages at manual values that you are using now (including CLDO_VDDP at 980mV) when testing the settings above, and let us know if this works on your system.


----------



## darkdavid08

Ramad said:


> Try the following settings with RAM at 3200MT/s (no XMP/DOCP) before deciding if you have to RMA the motherboard:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> DRAM CAS# Latency [14]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [14]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [14]
> DRAM RAS# PRE Time [14]
> DRAM RAS# ACT Time [30]
> Trc [46]
> TrrdS [4]
> TrrdL [7]
> Tfaw [26]
> TwtrS [3]
> TwtrL [9]
> Twr [16]
> Trcpage [Auto]
> TrdrdScl [2]
> TwrwrScl [2]
> Trfc [560]
> Trfc2 [416]
> Trfc4 [256]
> Tcwl [14]
> Trtp [8]
> Trdwr [12]
> Twrrd [6]
> TwrwrSc [1]
> TwrwrSd [6]
> TwrwrDd [6]
> TrdrdSc [1]
> TrdrdSd [6]
> TrdrdDd [6]
> Tcke [6]
> 
> ProcODT [48 ohm or 53.3 ohm] (lower is better for stability based on my testings. Your CPU may work with even lower values)
> Cmd2T [2T]
> Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
> Power Down Enable [Disabled]
> RttNom [Disabled]
> RttWr [Dynamic ODT Off]
> RttPark [RZQ/5]
> MemAddrCmdSetup [11]
> MemCsOdtSetup [11]
> MemCkeSetup [11]
> MemCadBusClkDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> 
> Keep voltages at manual values that you are using now (including CLDO_VDDP at 980mV) when testing the settings above, and let us know if this works on your system.



I'll try your settings out and report back. Realizing now that I downloaded Ryzen Timing Calc that theres a bunch of power settings in the bios I could have been using for stability, however the fact that I get instability on stock/default settings worries me, would that be good enough reason to RMA or should I keep chasing stable BIOS settings/tweaks? Thanks again for the support! You guys are the best.


----------



## HolyFist

It's been some time since i touched the BIOS, i'm on 1103 atm.

i think i read something at the time that 1201 was better for RAM but didn't pay any attention since.

Are there any benefits updating from 1103?


----------



## Ceadderman

HolyFist said:


> It's been some time since i touched the BIOS, i'm on 1103 atm.
> 
> i think i read something at the time that 1201 was better for RAM but didn't pay any attention since.
> 
> Are there any benefits updating from 1103?


Am running BIOS 1002 and running a stable 3200mhz on my RAM. Nothing wrong with the board or the BIOS.

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## Keith Myers

I'm still on 1002 myself as it has the WMI BIOS for sensors readout. Since I am not into benchmarking or testing endlessly, rather actually using my computers for work, I am staying pat since I have stable computers running all cores north of 4Ghz with the memory running at 3466Mhz with CL14 Fast timings. What's not to like?


----------



## crakej

My new Patriot Viper Steel memory is excellent! I've tuned in 3600MTsCL14 nicely - it's interesting to note that with almost the same settings, my G.Skill 4266s could perform (very, very) slightly better. I think this is because the G.Skills could cope with tCWL being 2 lower than tCL, but these don't like that at all. However, these have been much easier to tune in.

I'm going to see if I can get higher today, as well as trying out 3533 which I reckon I'll be able to get i at CL13 (geardown=off). It's very tempting to get another kit of these for 32GB, but need to save the money I saved for my new CPU really. Here's where I am so far: I get 54GBs mem transfers at 63.5ns.


----------



## bonomork

HolyFist said:


> It's been some time since i touched the BIOS, i'm on 1103 atm.
> 
> i think i read something at the time that 1201 was better for RAM but didn't pay any attention since.
> 
> Are there any benefits updating from 1103?


1103 here, RAM Gskill [email protected] 2700X PE2 -100mV rock solid. Update the BIOS only if you are having issues.


----------



## crakej

Does anyone use AMD drivers for SATA? Is it worth the bother?

Edit: played around with new ram a bit today - was just trying to stabilize 3800MTs CL16, but other than getting better transfer rates, latency is not quite there. Not had much time at 3800 to really see if it can be tightened up in any way but desktop was running fine. Still have GearDown=*disabled* and tCKE at 1, so there's plenty of tuning opportunities - putting tCKE = to 6 would let me lower my CPU voltage quite a bit, and GearDown=on may just give me that extra bit of leeway that I need.

Something of note... I noticed that it's not possible to enter timings of <4 for RRDS and RRDL - something the calculator suggested I do - setting them to 3 and 2 respectively, the bios just sets them straight back to 4. Were you aware of this limit of 4 @1usmus?


----------



## Syldon

Finally got mine to run at 3533.



Spoiler



Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
eCLK Mode [Synchronous mode]
BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
BCLK_Divider [Auto]
Performance Enhancer [Level 4 (OC)]
CPU Core Ratio [37.00]
Performance Bias [Auto]
Memory Frequency [DDR4-3533MHz]
Core Performance Boost [Enabled]
SMT Mode [Enabled]
TPU [Keep Current Settings]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Enabled]
TRC_EOM [Auto]
TRTP_EOM [Auto]
TRRS_S_EOM [Auto]
TRRS_L_EOM [Auto]
TWTR_EOM [Auto]
TWTR_L_EOM [Auto]
TWCL_EOM [Auto]
TWR_EOM [Auto]
TFAW_EOM [Auto]
TRCT_EOM [Auto]
TREFI_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_DD_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SD_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SC_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SCL_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_DD_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SD_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SC_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SCL_EOM [Auto]
TWRRD_EOM [Auto]
TRDWR_EOM [Auto]
TWRRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto]
DRAM CAS# Latency [14]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [14]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [15]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [14]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [28]
Trc [42]
TrrdS [4]
TrrdL [5]
Tfaw [20]
TwtrS [4]
TwtrL [12]
Twr [10]
Trcpage [Auto]
TrdrdScl [3]
TwrwrScl [3]
Trfc [282]
Trfc2 [Auto]
Trfc4 [Auto]
Tcwl [14]
Trtp [8]
Trdwr [6]
Twrrd [3]
TwrwrSc [Auto]
TwrwrSd [Auto]
TwrwrDd [Auto]
TrdrdSc [Auto]
TrdrdSd [Auto]
TrdrdDd [Auto]
Tcke [1]
ProcODT [53.3 ohm]
Cmd2T [1T]
Gear Down Mode [Disabled]
Power Down Enable [Disabled]
RttNom [RZQ/7]
RttWr [Dynamic ODT Off]
RttPark [RZQ/4]
MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
MemCkeSetup [Auto]
MemCadBusClkDrvStren [30.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [20.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [20.0 Ohm]
CPU Load-line Calibration [Auto]
CPU Current Capability [Auto]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Auto]
VRM Spread Spectrum [Auto]
CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
CPU Power Phase Control [Auto]
CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Auto]
VDDSOC Current Capability [Auto]
VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Auto]
VDDSOC Phase Control [Auto]
DRAM Current Capability [100%]
DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
DRAM Switching Frequency [Auto]
DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.38000]
VTTDDR Voltage [Auto]
VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
VDDP Voltage [0.88500]
1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
PLL reference voltage [Auto]
T Offset [Auto]
Sense MI Skew [Disabled]
Sense MI Offset [Auto]
Promontory presence [Auto]
Clock Amplitude [Auto]
CLDO VDDP voltage [Auto]
CPU Core Voltage [Offset mode]
CPU Offset Mode Sign [-]
- CPU Core Voltage Offset [0.06250]
CPU SOC Voltage [Offset mode]
VDDSOC Offset Mode Sign [-]
- VDDSOC Voltage Offset [0.07500]
DRAM Voltage [1.38000]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
Firmware TPM [Disable]
Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
PSS Support [Auto]
SVM Mode [Enabled]
Onboard LED [Enabled]
Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
SATA Mode [AHCI]
NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
SMART Self Test [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
HD Audio Controller [Disabled]
M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
SB Link Mode [Auto]
Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
When system is in working state [On]
When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [Off]
Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
ErP Ready [Disabled]
Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
Power On By RTC [Disabled]
Network Stack [Disabled]
Device [Samsung SSD 850 EVO 1TB]
Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
USB Mass Storage Driver Support [Enabled]
U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
U31G1_5 [Enabled]
U31G1_6 [Enabled]
U31G1_7 [Enabled]
U31G1_8 [Enabled]
U31G1_9 [Enabled]
U31G1_10 [Enabled]
USB11 [Enabled]
USB12 [Enabled]
USB13 [Enabled]
USB14 [Enabled]
USB15 [Enabled]
CPU Temperature [Monitor]
MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
PCH Temperature [Monitor]
T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
5V Voltage [Monitor]
12V Voltage [Monitor]
CPU Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [200 RPM]
CPU Fan Profile [Manual]
CPU Upper Temperature [68]
CPU Fan Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
CPU Middle Temperature [56]
CPU Fan Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [54]
CPU Lower Temperature [40]
CPU Fan Min. Duty Cycle (%) [20]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Manual]
Chassis Fan 1 Upper Temperature [65]
Chassis Fan 1 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Chassis Fan 1 Middle Temperature [55]
Chassis Fan 1 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [70]
Chassis Fan 1 Lower Temperature [20]
Chassis Fan 1 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
Allow Fan Stop [Disabled]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Manual]
Chassis Fan 2 Upper Temperature [68]
Chassis Fan 2 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Chassis Fan 2 Middle Temperature [62]
Chassis Fan 2 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [55]
Chassis Fan 2 Lower Temperature [41]
Chassis Fan 2 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [45]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 3 Smoothing Up/Down Time [15.9 sec]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Manual]
Chassis Fan 3 Upper Temperature [60]
Chassis Fan 3 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Chassis Fan 3 Middle Temperature [55]
Chassis Fan 3 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [75]
Chassis Fan 3 Lower Temperature [40]
Chassis Fan 3 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
Allow Fan Stop [Enabled]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [Auto]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Source [CPU]
HAMP Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
HAMP Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
HAMP Fan Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
PSPP Policy [Auto]
Fast Boot [Enabled]
Next Boot after AC Power Loss [Normal Boot]
AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
Boot Logo Display [Disabled]
POST Report [1 sec]
Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
Launch CSM [Enabled]
Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
OS Type [Other OS]
Setup Animator [Disabled]
ASUS Grid Install Service [Enabled]
Load from Profile [1]
Profile Name [3533]
Save to Profile [2]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
BCLK Frequency [Auto]
CPU Ratio [Auto]
DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A2]
Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
RedirectForReturnDis [Auto]
L2 TLB Associativity [Auto]
Platform First Error Handling [Auto]
Core Performance Boost [Auto]
Enable IBS [Disabled]
Global C-state Control [Auto]
Power Supply Idle Control [Auto]
Opcache Control [Auto]
Custom Pstate0 [Auto]
Custom Pstate1 [Auto]
Custom Pstate2 [Auto]
Custom Pstate3 [Auto]
Custom Pstate4 [Auto]
Custom Pstate5 [Auto]
Custom Pstate6 [Auto]
Custom Pstate7 [Auto]
Relaxed EDC throttling [Auto]
Downcore control [Auto]
SMTEN [Auto]
SEV-ES ASID Space Limit [1]
Streaming Stores Control [Auto]
ACPI _CST C1 Declaration [Auto]
L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
SMU and PSP Production Mode [Auto]
DRAM scrub time [Auto]
Redirect scrubber control [Auto]
Disable DF sync flood propagation [Auto]
Freeze DF module queues on error [Auto]
GMI encryption control [Auto]
xGMI encryption control [Auto]
CC6 memory region encryption [Auto]
Location of private memory regions [Auto]
System probe filter [Auto]
Memory interleaving [Auto]
Memory interleaving size [Auto]
Channel interleaving hash [Auto]
Memory Clear [Enabled]
ACPI SLIT Distance Control [Auto]
Overclock [Auto]
Power Down Enable [Auto]
Cmd2T [Auto]
Gear Down Mode [Auto]
CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
Data Poisoning [Auto]
DRAM ECC Symbol Size [Auto]
DRAM ECC Enable [Auto]
TSME [Auto]
Data Scramble [Auto]
Chipselect Interleaving [Auto]
BankGroupSwap [Disabled]
BankGroupSwapAlt [Disabled]
Address Hash Bank [Auto]
Address Hash CS [Auto]
SPD Read Optimization [Enabled]
MBIST Enable [Disabled]
IOMMU [Auto]
Determinism Slider [Auto]
cTDP Control [Auto]
Fan Control [Auto]
PSI [Auto]
ACS Enable [Auto]
Enable AER Cap [Auto]
PCIe ARI Support [Auto]
CLDO_VDDP Control [Auto]
HD Audio Enable [Disabled]
Block PCIe Loopback [Auto]
Force PCIe gen speed [Auto]
Processor temperature Control [Auto]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
SOC OVERCLOCK VID [0]
Mode0 [Auto]
SATA Controller [Auto]
Sata RAS Support [Auto]
Sata Disabled AHCI Prefetch Function [Auto]
Aggresive SATA Device Sleep Port 0 [Disabled]
Aggresive SATA Device Sleep Port 1 [Disabled]
XHCI controller enable [Auto]
XHCI Controller1 enable (Die1) [Auto]
XHCI2 enable (MCM1/Die0) [Auto]
XHCI3 enable (MCM1/Die1) [Auto]
SD Configuration Mode [Disabled]
Ac Loss Control [Always Off]
I2C 0 Enable [Auto]
I2C 1 Enable [Auto]
I2C 2 Enable [Auto]
I2C 3 Enable [Auto]
I2C 4 Enable [Auto]
I2C 5 Enable [Auto]
Uart 0 Enable [Auto]
Uart 1 Enable [Auto]
Uart 2 Enable (no HW FC) [Auto]
Uart 3 Enable (no HW FC) [Auto]
ESPI Enable [Auto]
AMD XGBE Controller 0 [Auto]
AMD XGBE Controller 1 [Auto]
AMD XGBE Controller 2 [Auto]
AMD XGBE Controller 3 [Auto]
AMD XGBE Controller 4 [Auto]
AMD XGBE Controller 5 [Auto]
AMD XGBE Controller 6 [Auto]
AMD XGBE Controller 7 [Auto]
eMMC/SD Configure [Auto]
Driver Type [Auto]
D3 Cold Support [Auto]
eMMC Boot [Auto]



1smus' tool for dram setting does not work with my memory, but he has hcimemtest built into it with a much cleaner interface.


----------



## Ceadderman

@Syldon 

Get rid of "="bios txt" " in your spoiler. Then "Spoiler" will work. :thumb:

Ninja'ed me. :ninja:

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## Syldon

Ceadderman said:


> @Syldon
> 
> Get rid of "="bios txt" " in your spoiler. Then "Spoiler" will work. :thumb:
> 
> Ninja'ed me. :ninja:
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


There is no preview in quick reply.


----------



## MrPhilo

I need some help. I got some Trident Z 3600CL16 that was made in 2017 for a really good price and sold my old 4266 stick.

At 3466 14-14-14-14 etc tight timing with geardown mode enabled it is stable on memtest and ram test on windows along with gaming, no problem. But this is the weird part, it would fail the ram training like 90% of the time at boot. Like I'm baffled, I have tried upping dram boot voltage, changing prod and CAS bus but it will fail most of the time. I've spent the past day trying to see if it'll work and it does randomly but I have given up and settled at 3333 with a bit tighter timing.

But I'm back now and this is another the weird part, at 3466 15-14-14-14 with geardown off it'll boot, not to mention it has found no errors for 3 hours on 10 X 1400 memtest.

It will boot on 3533 15-14-14-14-14, 3600 15-14-14-14 and even 3666 15-14-14-14. All get errors but I just find it weird it will boot and not fail training lol but fail on 3466 14-14-14-14. Any help would be appreciated ...

Bios is 2203


----------



## Ceadderman

MrPhilo said:


> I need some help. I got some Trident Z 3600CL16 that was made in 2017 for a really good price and sold my old 4266 stick.
> 
> At 3466 14-14-14-14 etc tight timing with geardown mode enabled it is stable on memtest and ram test on windows along with gaming, no problem. But this is the weird part, it would fail the ram training like 90% of the time at boot. Like I'm baffled, I have tried upping dram boot voltage, changing prod and CAS bus but it will fail most of the time. I've spent the past day trying to see if it'll work and it does randomly but I have given up and settled at 3333 with a bit tighter timing.
> 
> But I'm back now and this is another the weird part, at 3466 15-14-14-14 with geardown off it'll boot, not to mention it has found no errors for 3 hours on 10 X 1400 memtest.
> 
> It will boot on 3533 15-14-14-14-14, 3600 15-14-14-14 and even 3666 15-14-14-14. All get errors but I just find it weird it will boot and not fail training lol but fail on 3466 14-14-14-14. Any help would be appreciated ...
> 
> Bios is 2203


Try it without D.O.C.P. RAM training and see what happens. Took less than a Day for my RAM clock to take during RAM training. Next day I was up to 3200 w/o issue. Although I did have to increase the voltage +.01v.

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## MrYoke

My Ram kit is some G.Skill F4-3466C16D-32GTZ and after months of testing, I can't get these things to be stable above 2933MHz. Is it because of heat? If so, what temperatures would you usually aim for? I'm actually debating on getting a Ram cooler fan.


----------



## Syldon

MrYoke said:


> My Ram kit is some G.Skill F4-3466C16D-32GTZ and after months of testing, I can't get these things to be stable above 2933MHz. Is it because of heat? If so, what temperatures would you usually aim for? I'm actually debating on getting a Ram cooler fan.


What temperatures are the modules showing? 

@2933mhz it is very unlikely that heat is an issue, unless there is another outside source. 40c was the point where some were getting ram instability at higher frequencies. You are not running those type of frequencies.

Most likely it is because you are using 2X16 with a double rank memory module. You are stretching the compatibility window by using more than 2X8, and also using non b die memory.


----------



## nick name

Syldon said:


> What temperatures are the modules showing?
> 
> @2933mhz it is very unlikely that heat is an issue, unless there is another outside source. 40c was the point where some were getting ram instability at higher frequencies. You are not running those type of frequencies.
> 
> Most likely it is because you are using 2X16 with a double rank memory module. You are stretching the compatibility window by using more than 2X8, and also using non b die memory.


Even worse if it's a 4x8GB kit.


----------



## minal

nick name said:


> For a bit -.1000V seemed stable for many different workloads, but the most demanding single core workloads needed more power. So I ended up at -.06875V.


I've ended up at -68.75 mV VCORE offset too, stable for almost a week now. With -75 mV over a few days, the system twice suddenly blanked out: screen lost signal, peripherals lost connectivity, but fans were still spinning. No error messages in journalctl system log.


----------



## AmaKatsu

MrYoke said:


> My Ram kit is some G.Skill F4-3466C16D-32GTZ and after months of testing, I can't get these things to be stable above 2933MHz. Is it because of heat? If so, what temperatures would you usually aim for? I'm actually debating on getting a Ram cooler fan.


I don't think 2933 will get heat issue even if you use any burn test software.

It will be good if you can share your Thaiphoon Burner and Bios setting


----------



## crakej

MrYoke said:


> My Ram kit is some G.Skill F4-3466C16D-32GTZ and after months of testing, I can't get these things to be stable above 2933MHz. Is it because of heat? If so, what temperatures would you usually aim for? I'm actually debating on getting a Ram cooler fan.


Have you tried the 1.4v presets in the bios??


----------



## Jackalito

After multiple issues failing to stabalize my OC settings with the latest two UEFI updates, 2103 and 2203, getting random black screen crashes every once in a while, sometimes accompanied by Qcode 8, I've given up and got back to BIOS 1103. Everything working fully stable again without these issues. I really hope they're resolved by the time they release the next 2302 update.


I just don't have the time right now to try and troubleshoot this, especially taking into account I've found more people online reporting the same exact problems, so I know it's not just my setup.


----------



## MrYoke

Syldon said:


> What temperatures are the modules showing?
> 
> @2933mhz it is very unlikely that heat is an issue, unless there is another outside source. 40c was the point where some were getting ram instability at higher frequencies. You are not running those type of frequencies.
> 
> Most likely it is because you are using 2X16 with a double rank memory module. You are stretching the compatibility window by using more than 2X8, and also using non b die memory.


I would guess it's just because it's the double rank modules. I am just breaking down the root issue on why it won't stay stable @ 3200MHz or a little higher, but I always hear that this board isn't a good Memory overclocker in regards to dual rank memory. Also this kit is B-Die, well according to what Thaiphoon Burner says.



AmaKatsu said:


> I don't think 2933 will get heat issue even if you use any burn test software.
> 
> It will be good if you can share your Thaiphoon Burner and Bios setting


I'll upload them now.


----------



## Ramad

@MrYoke

Are you trying to run your RAM at 3200MT/s using the timings you have posted? tRDWR is too low so it can't be done, you may try 8CK or 10CK for that along with increasing tFAW to 20CK-23CK and tWR to 16CK if tRTP is 8CK.

Many think that too low timings is good, but this is not the case.


----------



## MrYoke

Ramad said:


> @MrYoke
> 
> Are you trying to run your RAM at 3200MT/s using the timings you have posted? tRDWR is too low so it can't be done, you may try 8CK or 10CK for that along with increasing tFAW to 20CK-23CK and tWR to 16CK if tRTP is 8CK.
> 
> Many think that too low timings is good, but this is not the case.


I'll try this, thanks! These timings are not the original timings I used to try to hit 3200MHz and were originally higher, but not as high as you are recommending. Do you know any good sources on what each of these sub-timings do and maybe good posts/references that seem resourceful?

Edit: Oh, and your recommended BIOS version?


----------



## Ceadderman

MrYoke said:


> I'll try this, thanks! These timings are not the original timings I used to try to hit 3200MHz and were originally higher, but not as high as you are recommending. Do you know any good sources on what each of these sub-timings do and maybe good posts/references that seem resourceful?
> 
> Edit: Oh, and your recommended BIOS version?


I do not believe the BIOS matters much. My board came with 1002 pre-installed and I have yet to download a replacement.

I have G.SKILL TridentZ Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin SDRAM DDR4 3200 F4-3200C14D-16GTZSK and they work fine @3200MHz. 

I did have one blank screen issue, but that could've been my GPU throwing a bad OC or low 1.34v setting. So I upped the voltage to 1.35 and haven't had any boot issues since. I've been running 14-14-14-14 timings since I upped the speed of the RAM which has been about a month now iirc.

I think that it may be that your expectations are too high regarding 4 sticks of RAM and it's causing your issue. I would try a lower speed, because AMD boards are not generally impressive with 4 sticks of RAM when it comes to overclocking them. So if you're trying for 3200mhz, I would suggest 3000mhz instead. If that is 24/7 stable then, you could make another attempt at 3200mhz, but I wouldn't count my chicks that you will get that. 

One way to confirm this is to pull two and make an attempt at 3200mhz. You will likely see success using Ryen Calculator 1.5 to give you your input variables. If successful, then I think you've found your issue and how best to avoid it. 

There is a YouTube video explaining RAM slots and how they work. We are running a board that is a Daisy Chain logic system. So we have to populate our slots accordingly to get the best results from them. :mellowsmi

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## AmaKatsu

I just read from somewhere not sure about in this thread or not but I have similar problems with PE even if I use PE level 1

Power Plan Option
Minimum Processor 20% can run Prime95 only 16mins, got 1 thread not running

Minimum Processor 50% can run Prime95 2:30hrs, got 1 thread not running

Minimum Processor 65% Prime95 can run 6hrs+

My Prime95 set to 800K, 16 thread, 25000MB of RAM

and ram already test with TM5 config v3 10cycles and LinX 0.70 8GB 15times


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## crakej

Ramad said:


> @MrYoke
> 
> Are you trying to run your RAM at 3200MT/s using the timings you have posted? tRDWR is too low so it can't be done, you may try 8CK or 10CK for that along with increasing tFAW to 20CK-23CK and tWR to 16CK if tRTP is 8CK.
> 
> Many think that too low timings is good, but this is not the case.


I often find that rounding a timing *up* can work wonders, and can in fact improve performance sometimes because too low a setting might cause unseen errors which impact performance. My old G.Skills I fear may have been degraded by really harsh timings, but luckily I got a refund when I RMAed them. I have to say I'm actually quite glad I had to RMA them as I got better memory for half the price with the new Patriots which OC *MUCH* easier the the 4266s did.

This is the first kit I've had that runs without geardown mode. Because of this I could do some tests I couldn't do before. Running at 3600CL14 I tried running the memory with geardown on and off, and can definitely say it hardly makes any difference at all - on this kit anyway - less than 1ns.

I will post some of my timings soon, but have 3600 stable, and have profiles working up to 3800CL16 which boot and can run stuff, but there's loads of memory errors - I haven't spent any real time trying to stabilize it yet though. I'm going to see how far I can get on CL14 before I go for the higher dividers. The returns really start to diminish after you have to go to CL16, we'll see how far I can get soon, but reckon I'd have to get to near 3900MTs CL16 to get any improvement in latency (compared to lower speeds with CL14 timings). Of course the transfer rate does rise as mem speed gets higher, so if your loads use lots of large mem transfers then you will see some improvement from those extra GB per sec. For all round performance, it still looks like 3533 CL13/14 is the sweet spot.

Don't forget I'm on a 1700X CPU!

Many experiments to do! Will keep you posted. If anyone is looking for cheap, excellent memory, get these Patriot Viper Steel 4400s! I got mine for 125GBP!

Edit: forgot to say - on bios versions 2xxx I have also had black screen/Code 8 failures which were the result of a bad ram OC


----------



## 1usmus

AGESA Combo-AM4 1.0.0.1 will be available for download soon


----------



## AmaKatsu

1usmus said:


> AGESA Combo-AM4 1.0.0.1 will be available for download soon



Oh yeah thanks, another worth to try 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> I often find that rounding a timing *up* can work wonders, and can in fact improve performance sometimes because too low a setting might cause unseen errors which impact performance. My old G.Skills I fear may have been degraded by really harsh timings, but luckily I got a refund when I RMAed them. I have to say I'm actually quite glad I had to RMA them as I got better memory for half the price with the new Patriots which OC *MUCH* easier the the 4266s did.
> 
> This is the first kit I've had that runs without geardown mode. Because of this I could do some tests I couldn't do before. Running at 3600CL14 I tried running the memory with geardown on and off, and can definitely say it hardly makes any difference at all - on this kit anyway - less than 1ns.


True Dat, rounding up tight timings can work wonders...though on this I will just say...while some of us want that tight timings for high benchmarks...reality is I run 2 different profiles. One for benchmarks to ekk out every last bit of performance. The other one is for gaming stability with some trade offs for that gaming stable system.

Haha I glad people are figuring this out. There is no practically difference with it on or off other then harder to make the ram stable. This is true across the board the higher the ram clocks. You will see more of a difference with it on or off at lower ram speeds.


----------



## 1usmus

I think it's time to start

The maximum value of the frequency of RAM Zen 2 generation is 5000 MHz mode UCLK == MEMCLK / 2.


----------



## crakej

1usmus said:


> I think it's time to start
> 
> The maximum value of the frequency of RAM Zen 2 generation is 5000 MHz mode UCLK == MEMCLK / 2.


Thanks 1usmus - Interesting news! Will there not be a performance penalty for this though? Especially with 12 or more cores......


----------



## nick name

Does anyone run the RAM 1.4V 3466MHz preset in BIOS?


----------



## Keith Myers

nick name said:


> Does anyone run the RAM 1.4V 3466MHz preset in BIOS?


That's all I have run.


----------



## Baio73

nick name said:


> Does anyone run the RAM 1.4V 3466MHz preset in BIOS?


Not here… I get RAM beeps…

Baio


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> That's all I have run.


I just realized there are two profiles for 3466MHz at 1.4V. Do you run the Stilt's or the other one at the top of the list with tighter timings?


----------



## Keith Myers

nick name said:


> I just realized there are two profiles for 3466MHz at 1.4V. Do you run the Stilt's or the other one at the top of the list with tighter timings?


I run the one at the top with the tighter timings. I have also run the Stilts profile at one time or another. Since the tighter version works just as well, I go with it.


----------



## mtrai

Hey y'all I just wanted to post some new findings I stumbled across this past weekend. I made a huge boo boo with my win 10 install and needed to do a clean install. So since I knew Win 10 1903 ISO can be had, I decided to install it clean since I already had to do this. Anyhow...as most are aware AMD CPU incur the AMD Penalty. This is highlighted best in Firestrike.

Well after installing Win 10 1903, drivers, etc and 3dmark..and setting my timings on my Vega 64< I was in for a shock with the Physics and Combined scores. It is looking like AMD CPU are now on parity or rather scoreing much more what they really should. I never saw this uplift reported anywhere as I kept up with changes to the insider edition changes.


----------



## crakej

Done some experimenting today...

I have 3600CL14 stable, and today worked on 3533 which I got working with my extreme settings, exact same timings as my G.Skill 4266s, but not getting the same performance. I've not had the G.Skills since bios 2xxx versions came out, maybe it just difference with current AGESA? Will do a bit more tweaking on it as used to run cpu at 4.2GHz which it doesn't seem to want to do.

I'm going to load an older bios tomorrow so I can compare, but have been trying faster speeds in the meantime, and have been able to boot up at 3866MTsCL6 and run bench tests. Although mem transfers are up to 58GBs, and latency is 67ns, performance is slower (?) than my 3600 profile, and way slower than my 3533 profile used to score in CB15. I've only managed a score of 1904 with 3600MTs. I used to get 1949 with 3533MTs! 

Almost forgot - both the 3466 profiles in the bios work for me.


----------



## lordzed83

New chipset drivers
https://www.guru3d.com/files-get/amd-chipset-drivers-download,1.html


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> New chipset drivers
> https://www.guru3d.com/files-get/amd-chipset-drivers-download,1.html


Looks like it's the ones we got 'early' - no new drivers for me...


----------



## CJMitsuki

crakej said:


> Done some experimenting today...
> 
> I have 3600CL14 stable, and today worked on 3533 which I got working with my extreme settings, exact same timings as my G.Skill 4266s, but not getting the same performance. I've not had the G.Skills since bios 2xxx versions came out, maybe it just difference with current AGESA? Will do a bit more tweaking on it as used to run cpu at 4.2GHz which it doesn't seem to want to do.
> 
> I'm going to load an older bios tomorrow so I can compare, but have been trying faster speeds in the meantime, and have been able to boot up at 3866MTsCL6 and run bench tests. Although mem transfers are up to 58GBs, and latency is 67ns, performance is slower (?) than my 3600 profile, and way slower than my 3533 profile used to score in CB15. I've only managed a score of 1904 with 3600MTs. I used to get 1949 with 3533MTs!
> 
> Almost forgot - both the 3466 profiles in the bios work for me.





Perfect example of why high frequencies mean nothing without good subtimings


----------



## crakej

CJMitsuki said:


> Perfect example of why high frequencies mean nothing without good subtimings


Yes, though under certain loads high transfer rates might be what you need. It also shows that not all b-die is like other b-die memory - for example, these Patriots haven't needed geardown mode at all so far - even at 3866. Also, these seem to need BGA and BGSA disabled for best performance. The old 4266s needed geardown on and BGSA for best performance.

This also shows that 3533 is not the sweet spot for all fast memory sticks. I have a feeling, the sweet spot on the Patriots will be 3666 - possibly 3733.

I still have lots of experimenting to do on this new kit!


----------



## crakej

So today I've loaded bios 1201 with AGESA 1006

None of the OC profiles I created on bios 2203 will run! The closest was my 3600 profile which crashes after entering my password.

Older profiles, created for my G.Skills, on older bioses (< ver 2xxx) do work! Even my 3533CL14 extreme profile at 14 13 13 26 with 4.2GHz CPU. It's not stable, but almost as it was before.

This shows that the new bioses are quite different, with performance decreases and slightly slower latency. I'm trying to work out which settings are working differently, but it's no easy task.

The 3533 profile is amazing (on this ver of the bios) scoring up to 1950 on CB15 - 50 points more than ANY other profile I've worked on, inducing 3866CL16 - but that's only CB15, which I think I might have maxed out for 1st gen CPUs as everything higher than 3533 seems to score around 1900.

Another conclusion I can draw is that my new Patriots CAN perform as fast as my old G.Skills could - and no need for geardown - it doesn't seem to make much difference. Sweet 

I'll report back again after more testing. Going to go back to latest bios tonight/tomorrow for more testing and to see if I can make OC as efficient on 2203 as it is on 1201.


----------



## nick name

Something I've observed is that latency with Aida can change between boots. Everything the same and latency changes.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Something I've observed is that latency with Aida can change between boots. Everything the same and latency changes.


This is true - you have to do a few runs to be sure.

On another note - is the Crosshair VIII coming? https://www.instagram.com/p/BxcTOgagM-m/?utm_source=ig_share_sheet&igshid=7j3s5cypa7tz


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> This is true - you have to do a few runs to be sure.
> 
> On another note - is the Crosshair VIII coming? https://www.instagram.com/p/BxcTOgagM-m/?utm_source=ig_share_sheet&igshid=7j3s5cypa7tz


Didn't you already see the leaks? We posted them in here. There are gonna be several flavors of the Crosshair VIII. 

https://wccftech.com/asus-x570-motherboards-next-gen-amd-ryzen-3000-cpus-leak-out/


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Didn't you already see the leaks? We posted them in here. There are gonna be several flavors of the Crosshair VIII.
> 
> https://wccftech.com/asus-x570-motherboards-next-gen-amd-ryzen-3000-cpus-leak-out/


I did! But now we have a date!

Having had to buy a 2nd C7H I'm going to have to stick with it for now


----------



## Ceadderman

nick name said:


> Didn't you already see the leaks? We posted them in here. There are gonna be several flavors of the Crosshair VIII.
> 
> https://wccftech.com/asus-x570-motherboards-next-gen-amd-ryzen-3000-cpus-leak-out/


I only have 2 questions regarding x570 CVIIIHero.

First, will my MonoBlock swap over? I have the EK CVIHero MonoBlock and it will work with CVIIHero. Going by the pictures it "looks" like it will be compatible. But who's to say. There could be something slightly out of pattern for the previous gens. I guess I will have to wait.

Second, will R9 3850x fit that board? Or x470 CVIIHero? That would play a major role in how I address a possible upgrade path. Especially if the MonoBlock will not transfer over or if it does and the R9 3850x will not be backward compatible with x470 boards. :mellowsmi

+Rep for the find. :thumb:

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## crakej

Ceadderman said:


> I only have 2 questions regarding x570 CVIIIHero.
> 
> First, will my MonoBlock swap over? I have the EK CVIHero MonoBlock and it will work with CVIIHero. Going by the pictures it "looks" like it will be compatible. But who's to say. There could be something slightly out of pattern for the previous gens. I guess I will have to wait.
> 
> Second, will R9 3850x fit that board? Or x470 CVIIHero? That would play a major role in how I address a possible upgrade path. Especially if the MonoBlock will not transfer over or if it does and the R9 3850x will not be backward compatible with x470 boards. :mellowsmi
> 
> +Rep for the find. :thumb:
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


I see no reason you shouldn't be able to use your monoblock, but wait to see final design before you pull the trigger.

Yes, the R9 3850X will work well in the C7H and C8H, though there might be extra functionality on the 570 boards. There is plenty of power supply.


----------



## nick name

Ceadderman said:


> I only have 2 questions regarding x570 CVIIIHero.
> 
> First, will my MonoBlock swap over? I have the EK CVIHero MonoBlock and it will work with CVIIHero. Going by the pictures it "looks" like it will be compatible. But who's to say. There could be something slightly out of pattern for the previous gens. I guess I will have to wait.
> 
> Second, will R9 3850x fit that board? Or x470 CVIIHero? That would play a major role in how I address a possible upgrade path. Especially if the MonoBlock will not transfer over or if it does and the R9 3850x will not be backward compatible with x470 boards. :mellowsmi
> 
> +Rep for the find. :thumb:
> 
> ~Ceadder :drink:


I'm assuming the highest tier Crosshair VIII will have some better power delivery for the Ryzen 9 beasts. Since several manufacturers seem to be adding another tier to their X570 line-ups beyond what they did for X470 I'm assuming there is something that warrants it in Ryzen's next product stack. That being a power hungry Ryzen 9 of some kind.


----------



## ComansoRowlett

Slightly off topic since this is a Crosshair VII thread, buttttttttttttt I thought I'd share my thoughts on something. I don't know how many have seen the Biostar X570 board with supposedly 4000MHz maximum memory support, however if this is the case I think the most important detail to take from this is it was with 4x dimms. Since AMD is trying to persuade manufacturers to go with daisy chain on most X570 boards to help with standardizing some things with the memory controller, I'd make the assumption that this board is daisy chain and that 2x8GB single rank b-die (4 slots, 1 dimm per channel) should be able to exceed 4000MHz assuming the board is setup correctly and of course the memory controller can do it, but yeah as I was saying if it can do 4000MHz max with 4 dimms then 2 dimms should be higher in my mind. Potentially exciting things are heading our way, and if we see a top of the line board with 2 dimm slots (1 dimm per channel) then that could potentially open the way for something stupid high, but I will take this with a grain of salt otherwise I'll hype myself too much. 

Let me know what you guys think


----------



## crakej

ComansoRowlett said:


> Slightly off topic since this is a Crosshair VII thread, buttttttttttttt I thought I'd share my thoughts on something. I don't know how many have seen the Biostar X570 board with supposedly 4000MHz maximum memory support, however if this is the case I think the most important detail to take from this is it was with 4x dimms. Since AMD is trying to persuade manufacturers to go with daisy chain on most X570 boards to help with standardizing some things with the memory controller, I'd make the assumption that this board is daisy chain and that 2x8GB single rank b-die (4 slots, 1 dimm per channel) should be able to exceed 4000MHz assuming the board is setup correctly and of course the memory controller can do it, but yeah as I was saying if it can do 4000MHz max with 4 dimms then 2 dimms should be higher in my mind. Potentially exciting things are heading our way, and if we see a top of the line board with 2 dimm slots (1 dimm per channel) then that could potentially open the way for something stupid high, but I will take this with a grain of salt otherwise I'll hype myself too much.
> 
> Let me know what you guys think


Ha.....I'm pretty excited too 

Also @1usmus has let us know that X570/Ryzen 3000 will be able to do up to 5000MTs! This would be a crazy improvement!


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Ha.....I'm pretty excited too
> 
> Also @1usmus has let us know that X570/Ryzen 3000 will be able to do up to 5000MTs! This would be a crazy improvement!


I'd need someone like @1usmus to clarify, but I believe there is a certain point where the memory would run faster than the infinity fabric could handle so the infinity fabric would run at half or at least a reduced memory speed. I imagine that means there will be an actual speed sweet spot where the infinity fabric would run at its fastest but potentially slower than the memory's top speed.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Ha.....I'm pretty excited too
> 
> Also @1usmus has let us know that X570/Ryzen 3000 will be able to do up to 5000MTs! This would be a crazy improvement!


depends on Latency tbh.... Zen 1/2 had 200% of intel's mamory Latency one of reason why its not as good for High fps gaming !!!!


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I'd need someone like @1usmus to clarify, but I believe there is a certain point where the memory would run faster than the infinity fabric could handle so the infinity fabric would run at half or at least a reduced memory speed. I imagine that means there will be an actual speed sweet spot where the infinity fabric would run at its fastest but potentially slower than the memory's top speed.


You're right - he says...

*'The maximum value of the frequency of RAM Zen 2 generation is 5000 MHz mode UCLK == MEMCLK / 2'*

I'm not sure how much more performance you can get when you're reducing clocks like that though...


----------



## AmaKatsu

yesterday I have test something, "Power Supply Idle Control". Normally it set to Auto but I changed to "Typical" and test with prime95.

I have test 3 values : 8k, 1344k and 1792k. (30mins each)

the 1792k got failed within a minute  and the others passed.

even disable PBO and set ram to default (2133) it still error on 1792k test.

I'm so confused why Power Supply Idle Control involves that much.

After I change back to Auto, everything just working fine.

All tests passed 
TM5 config v3 : 10 cycle
LinX_0.7 8GB : 15 times
prime95 : 800k, 25000MB
prime95 : 1344k, FFT, 30mins
prime95 : 1792k, FFT, 30mins
prime95 : 8-4096k, FFT, 6hrs

bios 2103



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## crakej

CH6 got their bios update earlier today - AGESA 0072a

Hopefully ours will follow shortly


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> CH6 got their bios update earlier today - AGESA 0072a
> 
> Hopefully ours will follow shortly


Ours normally drop on a Friday or late Thursday soooooo I hope you're right.


----------



## Baio73

Here it is... 2304
https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WI-FI/HelpDesk_BIOS/

ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) BIOS 2304

1. Update AM4 ComboPI 0.0.7.2A for next-gen processors and to improve CPU compatibility

2. Fixed an issue with Precision Boost values

3. Improved memory compatibility 

4. Enhance system security

ASUS strongly recommends installing AMD chipset driver 18.50.16 or later before updating to this BIOS version.

Baio


----------



## nick name

Baio73 said:


> Here it is... 2304
> https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WI-FI/HelpDesk_BIOS/
> 
> ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) BIOS 2304
> 
> 1. Update AM4 ComboPI 0.0.7.2A for next-gen processors and to improve CPU compatibility
> 
> 2. Fixed an issue with Precision Boost values
> 
> 3. Improved memory compatibility
> 
> 4. Enhance system security
> 
> ASUS strongly recommends installing AMD chipset driver 18.50.16 or later before updating to this BIOS version.
> 
> Baio


Lol . . . I just checked 20 minutes ago and it wasn't there. 

And I hope that PBO fix doesn't change the behavior as it is with 2203. I kinda like how it is now. 

Something with nothing to do with the new BIOS -- I can't boot RAM speeds past 3600MHz. I used to be able to run 3666MHz and faster, but now I can't even POST with them. I think I may have created a memory hole after using 3600 with a tCWL value lower than tCL.

Edit:

I can't find that 2304 by changing the download link. Can you copy the link and post it?

Edit 2:

Using the new Edge browser I can get 2304 to download by changing the link.
https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-2304.zip

For non-wifi: https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...VII-HERO/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-2304.zip


----------



## Baio73

nick name said:


> […]
> Edit:
> 
> I can't find that 2304 by changing the download link. Can you copy the link and post it?
> 
> Edit 2:
> 
> Using the new Edge browser I can get 2304 to download by changing the link.
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-2304.zip
> 
> For non-wifi: https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...VII-HERO/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-2304.zip


I've used Edge too.

FINALLY!!!
I can get my RAM to work @3600 CAS16!! 
Even if they are set to 2T by Stil's profile.

Baio


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Ours normally drop on a Friday or late Thursday soooooo I hope you're right.


Hopefully we'll get a later AGESA version - like 1001, or even 1002 (which is already out on a Gigabyte X470 board) and they'll be an improvement on the 007x versions we've had so far.

OCing is very different on these AGESA versions and some are reporting higher inter-CCX times of 75ns as well. It would be a shame to sacrifice current performance for the the sake of the new CPUs

In the meantime, I'm going to see how far I get on CL14 - I might be able to squeeze 3666 out of it. I can already boot 3866 CL16, but needs much work, and will need to get higher than that to beat any CL14 timings. 

Edit: didn't see the updates! Overclocker.net keeps not updating!


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Hopefully we'll get a later AGESA version - like 1001, or even 1002 (which is already out on a Gigabyte X470 board) and they'll be an improvement on the 007x versions we've had so far.
> 
> -snip-


Unfortunately, we did not.


----------



## Baio73

nick name said:


> Unfortunately, we did not.


Confirm:



Baio


----------



## crakej

Phooey! and Gigabyte are on 1002!

Still - off to flash and check out!


----------



## nick name

I'm having tremendous difficulty getting 3666MHz to POST now. I'm not entirely sure why, but I'm fearing degradation. The one time I was successful getting it to boot it immediately threw errors in TM5. And that was with timings previously shown to be 99% stable. Not sure if the abundance of errors is related to my inability to get 3666MHz to POST or the latest BIOS.

Edit:

Re-seated the RAM sticks and it appears to have cured my problem. It was either RAM creep or me blowing out the slots.


----------



## crakej

SiSoft Sandra show inter-ccx latency is slightly up for me - was averaging 73ns and now it's 75ns - consistently.

Also a bit down on my Aida results - Latency up to 67ns, had been 63ns, but everything else is about right. More experimenting to do to see if settings can be tuned any more!!

Edit: Yep - everything I'm running is very slightly slower for me  Time to try some tuning!


----------



## Rusakova

Why is the 2304 BIOS file twice as large as all the other BIOS files released for this board ?


----------



## nick name

Rusakova said:


> Why is the 2304 BIOS file twice as large as all the other BIOS files released for this board ?


I didn't even notice. 32MB unpacked is twice as large as the others. That does seem a mighty significant increase in size.


----------



## Rusakova

nick name said:


> I didn't even notice. 32MB unpacked is twice as large as the others. That does seem a mighty significant increase in size.


I was getting paranoid. Downloaded it from 3 different places and with different browsers. Same result.


----------



## nick name

Can anyone else check to see if 2304 uses more power on the CPU? I'm running the same offset as I was with 2203 but the reported voltage in HWiNFO is a bit more. It might be due to higher temps however I can't tell.

Edit:
It does appear to be due to higher ambient and CPU temps.


----------



## HolyFist

Seems like i still shouldn't update BIOS from 1103.

Oh well, guess i'll have to sell this board and the 2700X, i bought my 4133MHz kit as future proof, maybe this time with the X570 and Ryzen 3000 i'll be able to go there or close.

I just hope the leaks of 5.1GHz 16 Core are true, while it might seem a high boost clock for 16 Cores this is 7nm and that doesn't mean the CPU can actually boost that much frequently anyway.

My 2700X atm is set to auto (cause uses too much power otherwise) so boost is the standard 4.3GHz but most of the time averages 4.0GHz when playing games (and boost to 4.5GHz averages 4.2-4.3GHz).

The 2700X is good, but i want better since i play Online games where CPU matters a lot (especially core frequency).

Assassin's Creed Odyssey is a lot smoother at 4.5GHz Boost and 3605MHz RAM but the power usage is a lot higher :/


----------



## mtrai

Rusakova said:


> I was getting paranoid. Downloaded it from 3 different places and with different browsers. Same result.


This is normal. They had to add a lot more information with the new upcoming Ryzen 3000 to the bios to make it backwards compatible. I am only just starting to look at the bios structure. Most work I will do will take place tomorrow. Not seeing any real new options to unlock. We kind of expected this and predicted this. This is one of the reason not all manufacturers can make the newest bios available for all all their boards...as they do not all have a bios rom chip that support the massive increase of of the bios space need. For us with the C7H whatever version we have a bios rom chip large enough.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Can anyone else check to see if 2304 uses more power on the CPU? I'm running the same offset as I was with 2203 but the reported voltage in HWiNFO is a bit more. It might be due to higher temps however I can't tell.


My 1700X is running at the same voltage as the last few 2xxx bioses. I was able to lower my CPU power slightly when I updated to 2008 bios.

Will do more experimenting to see if I get get my settings any better on this bios (V2304) and report back. I did test bios 1201 the other day, and OCing was different enough that I had to tweak for some times to get things working, but it was slightly 'better' than 2xxx bios versions.


----------



## crakej

Has anyone else noticed in Windows that their CPU speed is 'wondering' more than it should?


I have CPB off, CPU at 4.1GHz offset voltage. Task manager reports my 'base clock' as 4.10GHz, but current speed is wondering around between 4.01 and 4.09GHz, with power set to 100% Min and Max for testing.

Why is it not steady? I also notice some benchmarks report my CPU speed as 4.09GHz and my 'boost' speed as 4.05GHz???

Other than those peculiarities and the slight loss of performance, I've not noticed anything else about the current bios so far, just wondered if anyone else experience this?


----------



## crakej

My my OC from 2203 does *NOT* work on 2304 

It fail on IBT Standard, with my QCode jumping to Code 8 before the test finishes. This did not happen before! It's going to take some time to figure out what's changed.....


----------



## Rusakova

crakej said:


> My my OC from 2203 does *NOT* work on 2304
> 
> It fail on IBT Standard, with my QCode jumping to Code 8 before the test finishes. This did not happen before! It's going to take some time to figure out what's changed.....


After the latest Windows update, my 1800X / Prime X370 PRO (server rig) with Hynix memory,
suddenly cannot run 3200 MHz memory anymore. Had to lower it to 3000 MHz.
It boots fine but suddenly isn't stable anymore.
I haven't had time to tweak it yet. But I'm wondering if the windows update is
doing something it shouldn't since that's all I have done to the 1800X rig.
Maybe it's connected to the MDS patch.
My 2700X is fine no issues there on ROG CH7 Hero.


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> My my OC from 2203 does *NOT* work on 2304
> 
> It fail on IBT Standard, with my QCode jumping to Code 8 before the test finishes. This did not happen before! It's going to take some time to figure out what's changed.....





Rusakova said:


> After the latest Windows update, my 1800X / Prime X370 PRO (server rig) with Hynix memory,
> suddenly cannot run 3200 MHz memory anymore. Had to lower it to 3000 MHz.
> It boots fine but suddenly isn't stable anymore.
> I haven't had time to tweak it yet. But I'm wondering if the windows update is
> doing something it shouldn't since that's all I have done to the 1800X rig.
> Maybe it's connected to the MDS patch.
> My 2700X is fine no issues there on ROG CH7 Hero.


If your on windows 10 1903 be aware there a lot more changes then was ever disclosed or discussed by people on the insider edition. It is hard to explain but the huge uplifts we are getting on AMD cpus cannot be explained nor was it publicly disclosed. 

The best I can show is look at my physics and combined firestrike test prior to me installing 1903 and the previous version of windows. The first one is with Win 10 version 1903

https://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/19304391/fs/19293120

So some major changes happened that no one caught. I have yet to update to the newest bios that came out yesterday.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> If your on windows 10 1903 be aware there a lot more changes then was ever disclosed or discussed by people on the insider edition. It is hard to explain but the huge uplifts we are getting on AMD cpus cannot be explained nor was it publicly disclosed.
> 
> The best I can show is look at my physics and combined firestrike test prior to me installing 1903 and the previous version of windows. The first one is with Win 10 version 1903
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/19304391/fs/19293120
> 
> So some major changes happened that no one caught. I have yet to update to the newest bios that came out yesterday.


My highest Fire Strike physics score is 23334.


----------



## LethalSpoon

Baio73 said:


> I've used Edge too.
> 
> FINALLY!!!
> I can get my RAM to work @3600 CAS16!!
> Even if they are set to 2T by Stil's profile.
> 
> Baio


DOCP works? :h34r-smi


----------



## Ceadderman

HolyFist said:


> Seems like i still shouldn't update BIOS from 1103.
> 
> Oh well, guess i'll have to sell this board and the 2700X, i bought my 4133MHz kit as future proof, maybe this time with the X570 and Ryzen 3000 i'll be able to go there or close.
> 
> I just hope the leaks of 5.1GHz 16 Core are true, while it might seem a high boost clock for 16 Cores this is 7nm and that doesn't mean the CPU can actually boost that much frequently anyway.
> 
> My 2700X atm is set to auto (cause uses too much power otherwise) so boost is the standard 4.3GHz but most of the time averages 4.0GHz when playing games (and boost to 4.5GHz averages 4.2-4.3GHz).
> 
> The 2700X is good, but i want better since i play Online games where CPU matters a lot (especially core frequency).
> 
> Assassin's Creed Odyssey is a lot smoother at 4.5GHz Boost and 3605MHz RAM but the power usage is a lot higher :/


I think you're expecting way too much from your CPU. 

Let's see if I can esplain this so you better understand what to look for from a Gaming focus.

Quad cores with HT technology are better for Gaming tasks. There isn't much demand on the CPU when gaming. Sure there are more and more games paging the CPU for tasks, but none of them are paging more than 3 tasks through a CPU. If you only want a Gaming setup, then I would suggest an R5 CPU or even an i7 Quad core. 

Octo cores with HT technology are better for Rendering tasks. Photoshop and Video as well as CAD are best served with CPUs with more than a core count of 4. It makes editing a much easier task when you've got a CPU like the R7 and now the R9 once that releases.

Now if your system is to be a multi use system like mine is, then I would recommend an R7 or i7 CPU. I won't be more specific other than platform because your need is based on your budget first and your needs second. 

But if you're looking at it the way you did in your recent post then I think selling your board and CPU and downclocking your purchase would serve you better than looking at rumored clock speeds and basing your choice off that. Clock speeds aren't the end all be all reason for making a CPU purchase.

That's essentially like being a Web surfer only and thinking you need a GTX 2080 ti for a web browser based system. Sure you CAN do that, but then you overspent your actual needs when an APU system would do the same job for A LOT less. :mellowsmi

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## Baio73

LethalSpoon said:


> DOCP works? :h34r-smi


Didn't try but never worked with previous versions.

Baio


----------



## crakej

Not sure about this bios - managed to stabilize my OC by increasing SoC a tiny bit - either that or increase CPU voltage.

Not sure if I'm imagining it, but temps seem higher too. Increasing voltages more is not ideal. I think I'm going to go back to the last bios, just to confirm how things were working before.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Not sure about this bios - managed to stabilize my OC by increasing SoC a tiny bit - either that or increase CPU voltage.
> 
> Not sure if I'm imagining it, but temps seem higher too. Increasing voltages more is not ideal. I think I'm going to go back to the last bios, just to confirm how things were working before.


Im looking at changes and not sure If its worth the bother this new bios. More security = slower system thats why latencies went up. I used to be in 59-60ns memory 

theritory before the Security fixes started coming out now 61-62ns and lost performance since I had my 2700x in general with all the windows fixes ect around 60-70 CinebenchR15 points. And 10-15 seconds to complete ibt maximum high run... While GAINING on memory and cpu speed !!!!


----------



## Rusakova

lordzed83 said:


> Im looking at changes and not sure If its worth the bother this new bios. More security = slower system thats why latencies went up. I used to be in 59-60ns memory
> 
> theritory before the Security fixes started coming out now 61-62ns and lost performance since I had my 2700x in general with all the windows fixes ect around 60-70 CinebenchR15 points. And 10-15 seconds to complete ibt maximum high run... While GAINING on memory and cpu speed !!!!


I'm not worried. Just look at the way MS tackled the AES performance hit (when Meltdown came out). It's now back where it was, performance wise.
I'm sure some of the performance drop will be clawed back over time. In any case I prefer security over minuscule performance hits.


----------



## lordzed83

Rusakova said:


> I'm not worried. Just look at the way MS tackled the AES performance hit (when Meltdown came out). It's now back where it was, performance wise.
> I'm sure some of the performance drop will be clawed back over time. In any case I prefer security over minuscule performance hits.


Well they can have all my porn collection i give em my hdd drives if they want **** all there 2 take im very public open with everything so nothign to hide from noone.
After spending hundreds of hours I'w never regained performance I had on this system before all those holes and fixes. It's plain **** that updates only cut performance down not seen Any gain since start of Zen+ on my system just less and less performance even stability is not as great as it was year ago.


----------



## crakej

So, after a bit of testing, I found that my OC required just 0.01v more on SoC, whichever 2xxx ver of the bios I use.

I think in my previous testing, I must have forgotten to do tests after a proper cold boot. Previous to ver 2xxx things wee different though - 1201 seems best bios for me currently, so I may just go back to that until we get AGESA 1001 or 1002. We'll see - I think we might just have to get used to the fact we have these changes.

I have seem people mention that the latest preview version of Windows they are on has made a significant difference to performance for Ryzen - I look fwd to this!


----------



## neikosr0x

lordzed83 said:


> Well they can have all my porn collection i give em my hdd drives if they want **** all there 2 take im very public open with everything so nothign to hide from noone.
> After spending hundreds of hours I'w never regained performance I had on this system before all those holes and fixes. It's plain **** that updates only cut performance down not seen Any gain since start of Zen+ on my system just less and less performance even stability is not as great as it was year ago.


For me it was kind of the same with benchmarks but stability and ram compatibility has been better than before, i can reach better ram oc and better timings, on the CPU side i did noticed some hit, but im sure it was windows ******* updates.


----------



## MrYoke

The max I still get with my 2x16 3466Mhz c16 kit is 2933Mhz c14. Damn. Should I just sell my kit and get 2x16 3200MHz c14 kits instead, or is it hard to reach those clocks and timings on dual rank kits with the Hero VII regardless of what you have?


----------



## Rusakova

MrYoke said:


> The max I still get with my 2x16 3466Mhz c16 kit is 2933Mhz c14. Damn. Should I just sell my kit and get 2x16 3200MHz c14 kits instead, or is it hard to reach those clocks and timings on dual rank kits with the Hero VII regardless of what you have?


I never got my GSkill Trident Z F4-3200C14D-32GTZ (Samsung B-die - 2x16 GB) to run 3200 MHz. Sure they could boot and bench @ 3200/3333MHz, but they were never 100% stable.
Like your 16 GB dual ranks, they were stuck at 2933 MHz.


----------



## crakej

Rusakova said:


> I never got my GSkill Trident Z F4-3200C14D-32GTZ (Samsung B-die - 2x16 GB) to run 3200 MHz. Sure they could boot and bench @ 3200/3333MHz, but they were never 100% stable.
> Like your 16 GB dual ranks, they were stuck at 2933 MHz.


Do you have geardown=enabled?


----------



## minal

Rusakova said:


> I never got my GSkill Trident Z F4-3200C14D-32GTZ (Samsung B-die - 2x16 GB) to run 3200 MHz. Sure they could boot and bench @ 3200/3333MHz, but they were never 100% stable.
> Like your 16 GB dual ranks, they were stuck at 2933 MHz.


Odd, I have the same RAM and it works 100% stable with just setting DOCP.


----------



## nick name

MrYoke said:


> The max I still get with my 2x16 3466Mhz c16 kit is 2933Mhz c14. Damn. Should I just sell my kit and get 2x16 3200MHz c14 kits instead, or is it hard to reach those clocks and timings on dual rank kits with the Hero VII regardless of what you have?


Any chance you're using the incorrect RAM slots?


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> Any chance you're using the incorrect RAM slots?


No such thing mate, some actually benefit from using the B slots. 

I think there is something not right in the settings, the CPU has a bad imc or the RAM kit is not that great.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Rusakova said:


> I never got my GSkill Trident Z F4-3200C14D-32GTZ (Samsung B-die - 2x16 GB) to run 3200 MHz. Sure they could boot and bench @ 3200/3333MHz, but they were never 100% stable.
> Like your 16 GB dual ranks, they were stuck at 2933 MHz.


Id almost bet that it has to do with your timings and voltage. I ran into another with the same problem and literally had their kit stable with the first setup I gave them...Mind you, this was on a Threadripper as well. Post timings and voltages and ill look at it. BDie is easy to get stable unless there is a hardware issue. Usually its due to not using enough voltage since BDie loves voltage and can handle it much better than other dies.


----------



## ryouiki

Maybe coincidental, maybe not:

BIOS 2304 seems to play with my memory (4x8gb @ 3200) much better than previous releases, boot from cold start is much faster and I've yet to see F9 issues I had with 2203. The only lingering issue I seem to have is the system will randomly not resume from sleep, but this has been going on since 1103.


----------



## poliacido

Gigabyte enables PCI-e 4.0 on the existing X470 and B450 boards, did you see that?
https://wccftech.com/gigabyte-bios-update-pcie-4-am4-motherboards-amd-ryzen-3000-cpus/

maybe asus will do the same for us


----------



## Jackalito

Rusakova said:


> I never got my GSkill Trident Z F4-3200C14D-32GTZ (Samsung B-die - 2x16 GB) to run 3200 MHz. Sure they could boot and bench @ 3200/3333MHz, but they were never 100% stable.
> Like your 16 GB dual ranks, they were stuck at 2933 MHz.


Others and myself got your same kit perfectly stable at 3200 CL14, so post your config so that we can take a look at it and try to steer you in the right direction


----------



## lordzed83

Well updated to 2304 lost 3 seconds on IBT and 40 points on CB20 yay....


----------



## Rusakova

I'm currently using a 2 x 8 GB flare-X kit @ 3466 MHz. But I still have the 2 x 16 GB G Skill modules.
But I don't have time to play with them until the weekend.
Last time I tried was with BIOS 2103 and I used Ryzen Ram calculator as a starting point and even went as high as 1.45v
But it's not stable. It's never been above 2933 MHz :-(
I will try one more time come Friday / Saturday and post timings then.
Help will be much appreciated.


----------



## Ceadderman

Said this a while back, but I have 2x8gb TridentZ 3200s. In B slot config I couldn't get 3200. In A slot config I got 3200 and they're running stable @ 1.35v.

If you're running in 1st and 3rd slots and having issues, try running 2nd and 4th slots. Those are the initial slots that are called for and they without a doubt work. :thumb:

~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> No such thing mate, some actually benefit from using the B slots.
> 
> -snip-


I'm going to have to strongly disagree.


----------



## ComansoRowlett

nick name said:


> I'm going to have to strongly disagree.


I'm with you on that.


----------



## crakej

A2 B2 *ARE* the best slots for dual channel memory. On rare occasion, certain sticks may work in the other slots, but it really is very rare and not ideal. You will always get better OC on A2/B2 slots as they're nearer to the CPU 

I'm back on latest bios, stable 3600CL14 T1. Moving up to 3666 for my next tests.

Also, off topic I know, but I just had my 4 year cancer check-up and I'm still cancer free! :drum:


----------



## Baio73

crakej said:


> A2 B2 *ARE* the best slots for dual channel memory. On rare occasion, certain sticks may work in the other slots, but it really is very rare and not ideal. You will always get better OC on A2/B2 slots as they're nearer to the CPU
> 
> I'm back on latest bios, stable 3600CL14 T1. Moving up to 3666 for my next tests.
> 
> Also, off topic I know, but I just had my 4 year cancer check-up and I'm still cancer free! :drum:


That's great news!

Baio


----------



## Jackalito

crakej said:


> A2 B2 *ARE* the best slots for dual channel memory. On rare occasion, certain sticks may work in the other slots, but it really is very rare and not ideal. You will always get better OC on A2/B2 slots as they're nearer to the CPU
> 
> I'm back on latest bios, stable 3600CL14 T1. Moving up to 3666 for my next tests.
> 
> Also, off topic I know, but I just had my 4 year cancer check-up and I'm still cancer free! :drum:


Really glad to read about that, especially the latter! :specool:


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> A2 B2 *ARE*-snip-
> 
> Also, off topic I know, but I just had my 4 year cancer check-up and I'm still cancer free! :drum:


Keep up the good work, friend. May you die of very old age after a long and happy life.


----------



## netman

any news on AGESA Combo-AM4 1.0.0.1 for our ch7 ? thats also the agesa version amd recommends for all the x470 Boards 

gigabyte already even offers AGESA Combo-AM4 1.0.0.2 for their Gaming 7 Board...


----------



## crakej

netman said:


> any news on AGESA Combo-AM4 1.0.0.1 for our ch7 ? thats also the agesa version amd recommends for all the x470 Boards
> 
> gigabyte already even offers AGESA Combo-AM4 1.0.0.2 for their Gaming 7 Board...


It's coming!

Just because Gigabyte have it doesn't mean ASUS aren't working on it. In my experience, ASUS prefer to spend extra time testing new AGESA and it's integration with their UEFI.


----------



## LethalSpoon

crakej said:


> A2 B2 *ARE* the best slots for dual channel memory. On rare occasion, certain sticks may work in the other slots, but it really is very rare and not ideal. You will always get better OC on A2/B2 slots as they're nearer to the CPU
> 
> I'm back on latest bios, stable 3600CL14 T1. Moving up to 3666 for my next tests.
> 
> Also, off topic I know, but I just had my 4 year cancer check-up and *I'm still cancer free!* :drum:


Best news! Time to celebrate it pushing some RAM :devil:


----------



## HolyFist

What's up with the Chipset drivers, on ASUS BIOS page they recommend 18.50.16 and Official AMD says 19.10

So which one do we use?


----------



## Elrick

HolyFist said:


> What's up with the Chipset drivers, on ASUS BIOS page they recommend 18.50.16 and Official AMD says 19.10
> 
> So which one do we use?


ALWAYS go for the very latest release from AMD. They're the ones that actually develop the software drivers, Asus doesn't do anything but supply OLD downloads.

Would rather get the latest version, every time it's available.


----------



## crakej

Elrick said:


> ALWAYS go for the very latest release from AMD. They're the ones that actually develop the software drivers, Asus doesn't do anything but supply OLD downloads.
> 
> Would rather get the latest version, every time it's available.


Actually - I think they are the same - ASUS (for whatever reason) released them before AMD with the 1st AGESA Combo bios. I tried installing the 'new' AMD ones, but everything showed as up to date. Whichever you choose, it's recommended you install it before updating to bios ver 2xxx.


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> I'm going to have to strongly disagree.



That's alright. You are in titled to have your own opinion. 

I tested this a long time ago and saw nothing special and could run the same speeds in B slots as in A slots. Some people reported better overclocking when the B slots populated. 

Now i am not saying that its an good idea, just saying that some people had good experience with it.


----------



## hurricane28

crakej said:


> A2 B2 *ARE* the best slots for dual channel memory. On rare occasion, certain sticks may work in the other slots, but it really is very rare and not ideal. You will always get better OC on A2/B2 slots as they're nearer to the CPU
> 
> I'm back on latest bios, stable 3600CL14 T1. Moving up to 3666 for my next tests.
> 
> Also, off topic I know, but I just had my 4 year cancer check-up and I'm still cancer free! :drum:


Nice man, good job. Let us know how and if that works. 

That's some good news man, congrats. Hope you will be free for ever form that terrible decease man.


----------



## Jackalito

Quick question guys, has any of you experienced BSODs after enabling virtualization support for the CPU on the UEFI BIOS?


It happened to me yesterday when I was trying the new Windows Sandbox feature of Windows 10 1903. And then I remembered having the exact same issue back in the day when I had the CH VI and a Ryzen 1700X. Could it be that I need more voltage applied for the CPU or SOC than with virtualization disabled? 


Hope anyone has any hints as I never figured it out in the past.
Cheers!


----------



## AmaKatsu

Jackalito said:


> Quick question guys, has any of you experienced BSODs after enabling virtualization support for the CPU on the UEFI BIOS?
> 
> 
> It happened to me yesterday when I was trying the new Windows Sandbox feature of Windows 10 1903. And then I remembered having the exact same issue back in the day when I had the CH VI and a Ryzen 1700X. Could it be that I need more voltage applied for the CPU or SOC than with virtualization disabled?
> 
> 
> Hope anyone has any hints as I never figured it out in the past.
> Cheers!


I think that normal, you may need to understand about Hypervisor

Hypervisor Type 1 and Type 2 can not run simultaneous

such as when you enable Hyper-V and run Nox it highly possible to get bsod

while Hyper-V required to run Docker / Windows Sanbox (maybe)


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> That's alright. You are in titled to have your own opinion.
> 
> I tested this a long time ago and saw nothing special and could run the same speeds in B slots as in A slots. Some people reported better overclocking when the B slots populated.
> 
> Now i am not saying that its an good idea, just saying that some people had good experience with it.


I've never seen anyone report any anecdotal evidence supporting the use of the incorrect RAM slots being of benefit when overclocking their RAM. I have, however, seen anecdotal evidence to the contrary. And then there is the fact that the manual instructs which pair of slots to use. 

The only reason I am challenging you on this is because if folks believe the slots are truly interchangeable then they may be reluctant to question their installation when attempting to remedy any RAM problems they may have.


----------



## nick name

Jackalito said:


> Quick question guys, has any of you experienced BSODs after enabling virtualization support for the CPU on the UEFI BIOS?
> 
> 
> It happened to me yesterday when I was trying the new Windows Sandbox feature of Windows 10 1903. And then I remembered having the exact same issue back in the day when I had the CH VI and a Ryzen 1700X. Could it be that I need more voltage applied for the CPU or SOC than with virtualization disabled?
> 
> 
> Hope anyone has any hints as I never figured it out in the past.
> Cheers!


I can't say I've used virtualization extensively, but I can say that the CPU definitely behaved a lot differently (in regards to voltages, down clocking, etc.) than without virtualization. So perhaps you'll need to adjust any CPU voltage settings.


----------



## Jackalito

AmaKatsu said:


> I think that normal, you may need to understand about Hypervisor
> 
> Hypervisor Type 1 and Type 2 can not run simultaneous
> 
> such as when you enable Hyper-V and run Nox it highly possible to get bsod
> 
> while Hyper-V required to run Docker / Windows Sanbox (maybe)



As far as I know I need Hyper-V in order to use Windows Sandbox.




nick name said:


> I can't say I've used virtualization extensively, but I can say that the CPU definitely behaved a lot differently (in regards to voltages, down clocking, etc.) than without virtualization. So perhaps you'll need to adjust any CPU voltage settings.


Thanks, I guess it makes sense. So, should I try upping the CPU voltage slightly? Any other voltage you can think of that could have an effect on this?

Cheers guys!


----------



## nick name

Jackalito said:


> As far as I know I need Hyper-V in order to use Windows Sandbox.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks, I guess it makes sense. So, should I try upping the CPU voltage slightly? Any other voltage you can think of that could have an effect on this?
> 
> Cheers guys!


I don't have any ideas off-hand, but I've wanted to play with the new Windows sandbox also so I might give it a whirl and report back.


----------



## Hale59

Ready, unless ROG CROSSHAIR VIII FORMULA provides.


----------



## Jackalito

nick name said:


> I don't have any ideas off-hand, but I've wanted to play with the new Windows sandbox also so I might give it a whirl and report back.


Thanks, nick. I just did another quick test and Sandbox doesn't seem to launch without Hyper-V, which according to what I've gathered so far is the main culprit of CPU Virtualization related BSODs.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> A2 B2 *ARE* the best slots for dual channel memory. On rare occasion, certain sticks may work in the other slots, but it really is very rare and not ideal. You will always get better OC on A2/B2 slots as they're nearer to the CPU
> 
> I'm back on latest bios, stable 3600CL14 T1. Moving up to 3666 for my next tests.
> 
> Also, off topic I know, but I just had my 4 year cancer check-up and I'm still cancer free! :drum:


Grats on Cancer free check. 
My ******* spine is getting so bad I wish i had cancer to just finish me off. I dont feel like waking up anymore its just pain from first step of a day. Every day feels like battle with mobility problems. Generally feeling **** months now every doctors appoitment takes weeks just to have it re aranged cause whatever reason. Since november I'm just about to see physiotherapis on 18 of June if i wont snap in half by then. Joys of being born with ****ed spine :/


On 2304 not bad bios at all got ymy overclock and memory set up at max stable option but takes less volts than before. So under IBT i lost 6c of maximum temperature.


----------



## nick name

Has anyone here ever played around with Primocache?


----------



## Robi_uk

Anyone can recommend a good air cooler on this board for the 2700x that will not catch the ram or hit a gtx 1080ti on the first gpu slot? Currently have a AIO coolermaster seidon but the fan noise when temp spikes is starting to get a bit annoying!


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> Grats on Cancer free check.
> My ******* spine is getting so bad I wish i had cancer to just finish me off. I dont feel like waking up anymore its just pain from first step of a day. Every day feels like battle with mobility problems. Generally feeling **** months now every doctors appoitment takes weeks just to have it re aranged cause whatever reason. Since november I'm just about to see physiotherapis on 18 of June if i wont snap in half by then. Joys of being born with ****ed spine :/


I know how it feels man - I also have bad spine - had an op on that in March. Back pain is just terrible!


So far I've not found anything of real interest with this bios - it's still stable - but we still have that Commodore 64-like boot up screen!


----------



## nick name

Robi_uk said:


> Anyone can recommend a good air cooler on this board for the 2700x that will not catch the ram or hit a gtx 1080ti on the first gpu slot? Currently have a AIO coolermaster seidon but the fan noise when temp spikes is starting to get a bit annoying!


Have you adjusted the fans at all? What are you using to control them? Also what size is the AIO?


----------



## Robi_uk

nick name said:


> Have you adjusted the fans at all? What are you using to control them? Also what size is the AIO?


I played around with the different fan profiles in the bios and tried setting custom ones as well, but due to the sharp spikes I either need to set it at a constant high speed rate to begin with to stop it from jumping so much or use a sharp incline. Saying that I have not really looked at it again since the beginning so not sure if later bios revisions have improved the fan control? AM currently on bios 2103.
my AIO is a 240 (two times 120 fans on a push setup at the top of the case) https://www.amazon.co.uk/Cooler-Master-Radiator-Silencio-RL-S24V-24PK-R1/dp/B01HMZLE8M


----------



## kmellz

Robi_uk said:


> I played around with the different fan profiles in the bios and tried setting custom ones as well, but due to the sharp spikes I either need to set it at a constant high speed rate to begin with to stop it from jumping so much or use a sharp incline. Saying that I have not really looked at it again since the beginning so not sure if later bios revisions have improved the fan control? AM currently on bios 2103.
> my AIO is a 240 (two times 120 fans on a push setup at the top of the case) https://www.amazon.co.uk/Cooler-Master-Radiator-Silencio-RL-S24V-24PK-R1/dp/B01HMZLE8M


Had to mess around quite a bit with that until I got it decent, I have it set to not scale upwards until around 55C something, until then the fans spin at the highest rpm that is still quiet. It mostly stays around 30C or lower, but random intense spikes can send it up quite a bit which gives the irritating spin ups.
Try using some temperature logging program and use your computer normally (without any super intense tasks) to see where the temps are mostly, and set the curves accordingly.


----------



## nick name

Robi_uk said:


> I played around with the different fan profiles in the bios and tried setting custom ones as well, but due to the sharp spikes I either need to set it at a constant high speed rate to begin with to stop it from jumping so much or use a sharp incline. Saying that I have not really looked at it again since the beginning so not sure if later bios revisions have improved the fan control? AM currently on bios 2103.
> my AIO is a 240 (two times 120 fans on a push setup at the top of the case) https://www.amazon.co.uk/Cooler-Master-Radiator-Silencio-RL-S24V-24PK-R1/dp/B01HMZLE8M


I have 3xNoctua 3000RPM fans attached to the HAMP header and 3xCorsair 2700RPM fans on a external Noctua controller. I have the Noctuas running at 1800RPM constantly and the Corsairs at 2300RPM fixed. However, since the Noctuas are running off the mobo they will speed up to max when the CPU gets up to 75*C, but that never happens unless I am running IBT, Prime95, Cinbebench R20, or something similar at high CPU speeds. So my recommendation is to set the fastest speed you can tolerate and hope you don't hit the 75*C mark forcing your fans to max and/or *buy a controller like the Noctua NA-FC1 which is around $20. 
*
With the controller you simply attach it to a header on the mobo and set that header to max (or any other speed) and then you can physically dial-in the percentage of the speed set with the mobo that you want. 

Honestly, it's my biggest gripe about the motherboard . . . there isn't a way to prevent the fan from reaching its max speed once you hit 75*C.


----------



## ClintLeo

Hi

I'm hoping someone can help.
I was running windows 7,then after updating to bios 2304 I couldn't boot into 7.
After trying different things I worked out that CSM isn't working properly with this bios and unfortunatly 7 needs CSM enabled.
With CSM on auto my PC gets stuck at the orbs,on enbled my PC gets stuck between POST and the orbs(so just a black screen) and on disabled it can't find a boot device.
At the moment I've installed 8,1 because you can disable CSM for 8,1.

Is there anything I can do to get CSM working so I can put 7 back on?


----------



## westk

Jackalito said:


> Quick question guys, has any of you experienced BSODs after enabling virtualization support for the CPU on the UEFI BIOS?
> 
> 
> It happened to me yesterday when I was trying the new Windows Sandbox feature of Windows 10 1903. And then I remembered having the exact same issue back in the day when I had the CH VI and a Ryzen 1700X. Could it be that I need more voltage applied for the CPU or SOC than with virtualization disabled?
> 
> 
> Hope anyone has any hints as I never figured it out in the past.
> Cheers!


I have always this behavior. I dont know why.


----------



## nick name

ClintLeo said:


> Hi
> 
> I'm hoping someone can help.
> I was running windows 7,then after updating to bios 2304 I couldn't boot into 7.
> After trying different things I worked out that CSM isn't working properly with this bios and unfortunatly 7 needs CSM enabled.
> With CSM on auto my PC gets stuck at the orbs,on enbled my PC gets stuck between POST and the orbs(so just a black screen) and on disabled it can't find a boot device.
> At the moment I've installed 8,1 because you can disable CSM for 8,1.
> 
> Is there anything I can do to get CSM working so I can put 7 back on?


Are you running secure boot?


----------



## ClintLeo

nick name said:


> Are you running secure boot?



HI

Thanx for the reply.
My bios was set to Windows uefi and all the keys were disabled.
I'm going back into the bios to check my settings and try with a win7 install stick.


----------



## nick name

ClintLeo said:


> HI
> 
> Thanx for the reply.
> My bios was set to Windows uefi and all the keys were disabled.
> I'm going back into the bios to check my settings and try with a win7 install stick.


Try the "OS Other" or whatever it's called.

And under CSM are you using UEFI and Legacy? Or just UEFI?


----------



## ClintLeo

nick name said:


> Try the "OS Other" or whatever it's called.
> 
> And under CSM are you using UEFI and Legacy? Or just UEFI?


I went into the bios and tried every CSM setting and the OtherOS setting nothing worked,either it would go to a black screen or say no bootable device.


----------



## Ceadderman

Robi_uk said:


> Anyone can recommend a good air cooler on this board for the 2700x that will not catch the ram or hit a gtx 1080ti on the first gpu slot? Currently have a AIO coolermaster seidon but the fan noise when temp spikes is starting to get a bit annoying!


Cheap cooler $30 or less: Cooler Master 212 EVO

Better cooler $60 or more Noctua D15

These are the ones I would recommend. 

My 212 EVO doesn't even come close to invading the GPU space. If you want four sticks of RAM however, you can only run one fan as the other side will encroach into the first slot.

The Noctua cooler would be my alternate choice since they come with their solid performance fans. 

Other people would say that an EVO isn't all it's cracked up to be and it's recommended too much, but it and the BeQuiet! Dark Rock slim are on par with each other and they are separated by tenths of a degree or so at Stock and you pay more for the fans on the BeQuiet! unit. I think that one goes for $30 more than the 212.

https://youtu.be/AQYxHJzQw2c[/ame]
~Ceadder :drink:


----------



## crakej

ClintLeo said:


> Hi
> 
> I'm hoping someone can help.
> I was running windows 7,then after updating to bios 2304 I couldn't boot into 7.
> After trying different things I worked out that CSM isn't working properly with this bios and unfortunatly 7 needs CSM enabled.
> With CSM on auto my PC gets stuck at the orbs,on enbled my PC gets stuck between POST and the orbs(so just a black screen) and on disabled it can't find a boot device.
> At the moment I've installed 8,1 because you can disable CSM for 8,1.
> 
> Is there anything I can do to get CSM working so I can put 7 back on?


Did you update the chipset driver first?


----------



## gupsterg

ClintLeo said:


> Hi
> 
> I'm hoping someone can help.
> I was running windows 7,then after updating to bios 2304 I couldn't boot into 7.
> After trying different things I worked out that CSM isn't working properly with this bios and unfortunatly 7 needs CSM enabled.
> With CSM on auto my PC gets stuck at the orbs,on enbled my PC gets stuck between POST and the orbs(so just a black screen) and on disabled it can't find a boot device.
> At the moment I've installed 8,1 because you can disable CSM for 8,1.
> 
> Is there anything I can do to get CSM working so I can put 7 back on?


Leave CSM on UEFI default [Enabled] or [Auto]. You need to select the boot device and save & exit.



Spoiler




View attachment 190524074939.BMP




I installed updated chipset driver later in OS, v19.10.0429 from AMD site.


----------



## ClintLeo

crakej said:


> Did you update the chipset driver first?


Hi,yeah I had the latest AMD chipset installed.

To gupsterg

I tried that as well,On Auto\enabled it saw my 960 pro and tried to boot but wouldn't go further than the Windows orb screen,even left it for ten minutes while I
finished watching a episode of Big Bang theory on the TV,just in case it would go past.

Thank you for the reply's.
I've finally downgraded the bios to 22xx,I couldn't get flashback to work,till this morning.
Re-installed 7,unfortunately I needed my PC for the next day so installed 8,1 in rush.

This weekend I'm going to try the latest bios again and see if it was just a fluke and now that flashback is working properly again(which I think was my fault I couldn't get it to work)


----------



## bMind

Feels like a good place to ask, if not..sorry in advance and let me know where I should ask my questions 

I would like to get into OC a bit with my Crosshair VII and Ryzen 2700X..I'm on air (Dark Rock 4 Pro) and rocking G.Skill Trident Z RGB (F4-3200C14D-32GTZR) with few beQuiet Silent Wings 3. I've been following this thread since before I've got the system, but the amount of posts and sometimes (high) level of the conversation is a bit intimidating to get my answers on my own. Is there a place I should start, something I should read so I'm not just a dumbass clicking things


----------



## gupsterg

ClintLeo said:


> Hi,yeah I had the latest AMD chipset installed.
> 
> To gupsterg
> 
> I tried that as well,On Auto\enabled it saw my 960 pro and tried to boot but wouldn't go further than the Windows orb screen,even left it for ten minutes while I
> finished watching a episode of Big Bang theory on the TV,just in case it would go past.
> 
> Thank you for the reply's.
> I've finally downgraded the bios to 22xx,I couldn't get flashback to work,till this morning.
> Re-installed 7,unfortunately I needed my PC for the next day so installed 8,1 in rush.
> 
> This weekend I'm going to try the latest bios again and see if it was just a fluke and now that flashback is working properly again(which I think was my fault I couldn't get it to work)


I should have stated in my previous post more clearly what happens on my system with UEFI 2304.

Below screenshot is with only a Crucial MX500 SATA SSD connected to system. If Windows Boot Manager is given 1st priority I will not have Window 7 Pro x64 load. I must give priority to highlighted entry for storage device.



Spoiler














On other UEFIs I do not have to do this. I have not checked what entry is selected automatically on other UEFIs. I did not need to reinstalled Windows 7 to use on UEFI 2304, only make the change as highlighted in UEFI Boot page.


----------



## nick name

bMind said:


> Feels like a good place to ask, if not..sorry in advance and let me know where I should ask my questions
> 
> I would like to get into OC a bit with my Crosshair VII and Ryzen 2700X..I'm on air (Dark Rock 4 Pro) and rocking G.Skill Trident Z RGB (F4-3200C14D-32GTZR) with few beQuiet Silent Wings 3. I've been following this thread since before I've got the system, but the amount of posts and sometimes (high) level of the conversation is a bit intimidating to get my answers on my own. Is there a place I should start, something I should read so I'm not just a dumbass clicking things


You probably won't get much more out of your RAM beyond some tighter timings, but overclocking the CPU is pretty straightforward. I don't imagine you'll get much much from it though. Are you a Performance Enhance level? Level 3 and Level 4 are overclocks of PBO and I believe them to be the best solution when overclocking. Others will disagree with me.


----------



## ClintLeo

gupsterg said:


> I should have stated in my previous post more clearly what happens on my system with UEFI 2304.
> 
> Below screenshot is with only a Crucial MX500 SATA SSD connected to system. If Windows Boot Manager is given 1st priority I will not have Window 7 Pro x64 load. I must give priority to highlighted entry for storage device.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 271150
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On other UEFIs I do not have to do this. I have not checked what entry is selected automatically on other UEFIs. I did not need to reinstalled Windows 7 to use on UEFI 2304, only make the change as highlighted in UEFI Boot page.


Thank you
Tomorrow I'm going to re flash 2304 and then I will try that.
Just want everything back to normal before I try again.


----------



## neikosr0x

nick name said:


> You probably won't get much more out of your RAM beyond some tighter timings, but overclocking the CPU is pretty straightforward. I don't imagine you'll get much much from it though. Are you a Performance Enhance level? Level 3 and Level 4 are overclocks of PBO and I believe them to be the best solution when overclocking. Others will disagree with me.


For me, using PBO on Ryzen is better than Doing normal OC, as my CPU clocks at my desired clock on all cores per say 4.25ghz and also clocks at 4.35 for single core task basically 99% of the time. It also consumes way less power than having the CPU clocked at 4.2 all the time and it is not always pushing that much voltage.


----------



## Rusakova

So I just installed my GSkill Trident Z F4-3200C14D-32GTZ (2 x 16 GB) and tried with D.O.C.P


Spoiler

















Spoiler















Didn't last long.

TurboV reports
VTTDDR : 0.6750
DRAM Ref : 0.5
VDDP : 0.9
When using DOCP

I'm gonna key in the numbers manually and up the voltage + use Ryzen mem calc.


----------



## Rusakova

So I tried running with the options in Ryzen Dram Calculator



Spoiler















and it wouldn't boot.

So I just keyed in 14-14-14-14-34 with 1.365v and the rest on auto. It boots just fine @ 3200 MHz.
Ramtest is at 38% so far.
But I need to work on the timings. Will post Ryzen timing checker with 14-14-14-14-34 + auto.

Everything on AUTO except the marked values and it still fails Ramtest very fast.


Spoiler















EDIT
Upping the DRAM voltage to 1.375v made them ... so far ... error free in Memtest.
EDIT 2
Running 3200 MHz with 14-14-14-14-34-48 1.375v + VSOC LLC3 + DRAM Current Capability 120% + VSOC 1.0125v
passed 3 Memtest5 1usmus_V2 cycles.
EDIT 3
and it failed Memtest5
EDIT4
If I run without any PE's (performance enhancers) it can pass multiple Memtest5 cycles.
If I lower tRFC to 312 it fails Memtest.


----------



## nick name

Rusakova said:


> So I tried running with the options in Ryzen Dram Calculator
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and it wouldn't boot.
> 
> So I just keyed in 14-14-14-14-34 with 1.365v and the rest on auto. It boots just fine @ 3200 MHz.
> Ramtest is at 38% so far.
> But I need to work on the timings. Will post Ryzen timing checker with 14-14-14-14-34 + auto.
> 
> Everything on AUTO except the marked values and it still fails Ramtest very fast.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT
> Upping the DRAM voltage to 1.375v made them ... so far ... error free in Memtest.
> EDIT 2
> Running 3200 MHz with 14-14-14-14-34-48 1.375v + VSOC LLC3 + DRAM Current Capability 120% + VSOC 1.0125v
> passed 3 Memtest5 1usmus_V2 cycles.
> EDIT 3
> and it failed Memtest5
> EDIT4
> If I run without any PE's (performance enhancers) it can pass multiple Memtest5 cycles.
> If I lower tRFC to 312 it fails Memtest.


I'm assuming those are b-dies so you can go higher on the RAM voltage without issue. What you also may need to try is 14-15-14-14. The 15 being tRCD (which is called something different in BIOS so just know it's the second value).

Edit:
I know it's only 3200MHz, but I'm assuming the kit being 32GB is the problem. My 3600MHz 16GB kit can't be run at 14-14-14-14, but at 14-15-14-14 it can be run with very tight sub timings. Perhaps you're in the same boat.


----------



## nick name

I know we've discussed SenseMI Skew in the past, but did we ever discover why; when set to Enabled and without adjustment, it reports significantly lower temps? With it on -- idle temps are about 3*C lower than when it's off. And under load (Cinebench R15) it seems to be lower by about 5*C - 7*C.


----------



## Rusakova

nick name said:


> I'm assuming those are b-dies so you can go higher on the RAM voltage without issue. What you also may need to try is 14-15-14-14. The 15 being tRCD (which is called something different in BIOS so just know it's the second value).
> 
> Edit:
> I know it's only 3200MHz, but I'm assuming the kit being 32GB is the problem. My 3600MHz 16GB kit can't be run at 14-14-14-14, but at 14-15-14-14 it can be run with very tight sub timings. Perhaps you're in the same boat.


Thank you, it worked changing the tRCD to 15.

Yes, they are B-dies. Changed timings to 14-15-14-14 and they can pass memtest5 with tRFC 312 
If I run the Flare-X kit with 14-13-13-14 timings @ 3200 MHz they score > 50 000 MB/s in Read/Write and around 50 000 MB/s in copy.
The 2 x 16 GB dual rank kit scores > 46 000 MB/s in read/write but it performs better in almost every benchmark I run.
I'm going to try 15-15-15-15 @ 3466 MHz with 1.4v


----------



## nick name

Rusakova said:


> Thank you, it worked changing the tRCD to 15.
> 
> Yes, they are B-dies. Changed timings to 14-15-14-14 and they can pass memtest5 with tRFC 312
> If I run the Flare-X kit with 14-13-13-14 timings @ 3200 MHz they score > 50 000 MB/s in Read/Write and around 50 000 MB/s in copy.
> The 2 x 16 GB dual rank kit scores > 46 000 MB/s in read/write but it performs better in almost every benchmark I run.
> I'm going to try 15-15-15-15 @ 3466 MHz with 1.4v


I'd go back and look at all the timings again if tRCD at 15 gets tRFC to run at 312. Hopefully, you can get your Read/Write closer to what your FlareX kit was doing.


----------



## ClintLeo

gupsterg said:


> I should have stated in my previous post more clearly what happens on my system with UEFI 2304.
> 
> Below screenshot is with only a Crucial MX500 SATA SSD connected to system. If Windows Boot Manager is given 1st priority I will not have Window 7 Pro x64 load. I must give priority to highlighted entry for storage device.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 271150
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On other UEFIs I do not have to do this. I have not checked what entry is selected automatically on other UEFIs. I did not need to reinstalled Windows 7 to use on UEFI 2304, only make the change as highlighted in UEFI Boot page.


I just tested it.
Trying to manually set it and trying all the settings under CSM it wont boot to the windows orb screen,just past the post screen the hard drive activity light even stops flashing.
I think that part of the reason is I'm booting off a M.2 NVME PCI-E drive.


----------



## darkdavid08

Just got my RMA back for the board as was suggested in this thread and another on the ASUS forums. Brand New board and I'm still getting the qcode 8 blackscreens a few minutes after boot, cannot even install windows. 

If anyone that has been following my posts the last few pages/weeks and could give me some advice on where to go from here I'd be esctatic. Also Tried without my m.2 and with new RAM, still happens.


----------



## VicsPC

darkdavid08 said:


> Just got my RMA back for the board as was suggested in this thread and another on the ASUS forums. Brand New board and I'm still getting the qcode 8 blackscreens a few minutes after boot, cannot even install windows.
> 
> If anyone that has been following my posts the last few pages/weeks and could give me some advice on where to go from here I'd be esctatic. Also Tried without my m.2 and with new RAM, still happens.


At this point, the only thing left is the cpu. Maybe it has some issues. I know that my 2700x died after like 8months or something and was giving me a white LED on boot (which is for RAM problems lol) and i was getting a code 42, tried it in my C6 and same issue white LED with a dif q code. I dont think those q codes and LEDs are very reliable to be honest, best bet is to test. Id try your cpu in another board, highly unlikely you have 2 faulty boards.


----------



## gupsterg

ClintLeo said:


> I just tested it.
> Trying to manually set it and trying all the settings under CSM it wont boot to the windows orb screen,just past the post screen the hard drive activity light even stops flashing.
> I think that part of the reason is I'm booting off a M.2 NVME PCI-E drive.


Ahh OK, sorry to read what worked for me has not for you.

I can't help but think something is off with UEFI 2304. As I can flashback older UEFI and boom I don't have to do this tweak. I sometimes have to also reapply tweak for W7 to load on UEFI 2304  .

I have a NVME coming this week Tuesday AFAIK, will let you know how it goes and relay what happens to Silent Scone aswell.


----------



## ClintLeo

gupsterg said:


> Ahh OK, sorry to read what worked for me has not for you.
> 
> I can't help but think something is off with UEFI 2304. As I can flashback older UEFI and boom I don't have to do this tweak. I sometimes have to also reapply tweak for W7 to load on UEFI 2304  .
> 
> I have a NVME coming this week Tuesday AFAIK, will let you know how it goes and relay what happens to Silent Scone aswell.


Thanx
I also think it's a problem with the UEFI,I'm hoping that is all it is and it's not there to force people to update their OS's.


----------



## nick name

darkdavid08 said:


> Just got my RMA back for the board as was suggested in this thread and another on the ASUS forums. Brand New board and I'm still getting the qcode 8 blackscreens a few minutes after boot, cannot even install windows.
> 
> If anyone that has been following my posts the last few pages/weeks and could give me some advice on where to go from here I'd be esctatic. Also Tried without my m.2 and with new RAM, still happens.


I only recall seeing code 8 after a crash due to insufficient power. Have you ruled out your power supply and/or cables? Are you using the 8 pin cable at the top of the board? I'm assuming you're running voltages at default settings?


----------



## darkdavid08

nick name said:


> I only recall seeing code 8 after a crash due to insufficient power. Have you ruled out your power supply and/or cables? Are you using the 8 pin cable at the top of the board? I'm assuming you're running voltages at default settings?


That was the first thing I replaced/tried. Went from a cs650m to a new ax1500i titanium (found a crazy deal), so I doubt it's my power supply or cables.


----------



## nick name

darkdavid08 said:


> That was the first thing I replaced/tried. Went from a cs650m to a new ax1500i titanium (found a crazy deal), so I doubt it's my power supply or cables.


Are you using that 8 pin at the top of the board?


----------



## darkdavid08

nick name said:


> Are you using that 8 pin at the top of the board?


Yes 8pin only, there's room to connect another 4pin but I assume that's for LN2 ect


----------



## Ramad

darkdavid08 said:


> Just got my RMA back for the board as was suggested in this thread and another on the ASUS forums. Brand New board and I'm still getting the qcode 8 blackscreens a few minutes after boot, cannot even install windows.
> 
> If anyone that has been following my posts the last few pages/weeks and could give me some advice on where to go from here I'd be esctatic. Also Tried without my m.2 and with new RAM, still happens.


I thought you did manage to solve the issue and could install Windows:https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-610.html#post27955678
You are trying to make the motherboard boot using low/stock voltages which may not be ideal for your setup. Set SOC to 1.1V and DRAM voltage to 1.4V. Also, rising CLDO_VDDP voltage to 1000mV could help you boot. 

I did provide timings for you to test last time, you can try them too.


----------



## nick name

Apparently, ASUS is going to have 30 mobo designs for the upcoming Zen 2 series.


----------



## Baio73

darkdavid08 said:


> Yes 8pin only, there's room to connect another 4pin but I assume that's for LN2 ect


Are you using any extension for your PSU cables?

Baio


----------



## darkdavid08

Ramad said:


> I thought you did manage to solve the issue and could install Windows:https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-610.html#post27955678
> You are trying to make the motherboard boot using low/stock voltages which may not be ideal for your setup. Set SOC to 1.1V and DRAM voltage to 1.4V. Also, rising CLDO_VDDP voltage to 1000mV could help you boot.
> 
> I did provide timings for you to test last time, you can try them too.



I did end up trying those before I sent my motherboard out for RMA, thanks again for that. I was able to install windows but the issue persisted. General consensus here and on ASUS forums was that something was wrong with the motherboard if I was having issues with auto settings and your tweaks. Luckily, I managed to get my hands on a brand new 2700x so I'll be able to report back tomorrow if it is indeed my setup or a bad cpu.

Thanks again for all the help and support along the way


----------



## chakku

So who reckons the C7H will be able to handle some above-ambient, decent overclocking of the 3900X? If it's just PCI-E 4.0 through the chipset I'd rather not get a new motherboard for it.


----------



## Jaju123

Any ideas if this mobo will somehow support PCIe 4.0 if I drop a ryzen 3000 processor into it?

That would be very nice, lol


----------



## bMind

nick name said:


> You probably won't get much more out of your RAM beyond some tighter timings, but overclocking the CPU is pretty straightforward. I don't imagine you'll get much much from it though. Are you a Performance Enhance level? Level 3 and Level 4 are overclocks of PBO and I believe them to be the best solution when overclocking. Others will disagree with me.


I'm not expecting wonders in terms of memory, it runs both sticks on the advertised speeds and timings (used DOCP 3200MHz that sets everything). As for PE I'm not using it..but the reason is I don't know if it's 'set it forget it' type of a thing or I need to learn a bit more and tweak settings etc.



neikosr0x said:


> For me, using PBO on Ryzen is better than Doing normal OC, as my CPU clocks at my desired clock on all cores per say 4.25ghz and also clocks at 4.35 for single core task basically 99% of the time. It also consumes way less power than having the CPU clocked at 4.2 all the time and it is not always pushing that much voltage.


As I wrote above, I'm not sure if PE is something you just set it and bios does all the magic later  if it is I might try it, PE3 for now?

Thanks for taking time to answer someone not so experienced with all this..


----------



## CJMitsuki

darkdavid08 said:


> I did end up trying those before I sent my motherboard out for RMA, thanks again for that. I was able to install windows but the issue persisted. General consensus here and on ASUS forums was that something was wrong with the motherboard if I was having issues with auto settings and your tweaks. Luckily, I managed to get my hands on a brand new 2700x so I'll be able to report back tomorrow if it is indeed my setup or a bad cpu.
> 
> Thanks again for all the help and support along the way


Post a .txt file of your bios dump so we can see the settings and also the model ram, model hdd, nvme, ssd you are using. The qcode is just a general cpu error and can literally be anything from a corrupted windows installation to a bad DRAM setup. Post this info and tag me in it and Im sure we will find the solution fairly quick. Its either a bios setting, timings, or system file corruption (probably a sata driver or something like that got corrupted due to memory errors of some sort). Its happened to me before, you can boot up a usb with your particular windows build installation and get a command prompt through recovery and run system file checker and DISM to check for corrupted files on the installation. Sometimes it can fix them and sometimes it cannot and you have to fresh install, which may not be a bad idea anyway. Hopefully you have your data backed up with Acronis or somthing similar if you have important data.

Edit: If you cannot get into the bios then download one of the earlier bios files from another comp and extract the .CAP (Renaming this file to something short will make it much easier later like C7H2203.cap or similar) file into the BOOT folder of this *FILE* after extracting it then use *Rufus* utility to put it on the USB stick. Next just put the USB stick in and make sure its the only drive attached, as in disconnect the hard drives. It should boot into a shell environment similar to Linux terminal. The attached USB should be fs1 or similar since it is the only drive installed so type "*cd fs1:*" and hit enter, then type "*dir*" and hit enter. If you dont see the directory of the USB such as the EFI folder then it is under another drive such as *fs2:* or *fs3:* etc. After you have the right drive targeted then type "*cd EFI/BOOT*". That should target the folder where you saved the .cap file earlier. Next type in "*Afuefix64 biosfile.cap /P /B /N /K /X /CLRCFG*" and hit enter, replacing biosfile.cap with what you renamed the bios file to, of course. 

This will completely wipe the bios chip instead of overwriting the old data and its the method I prefer to use when flashing rather than the proprietary ASUS method which ASUS have a bad track record when it comes to their software so I only use it if I absolutely must. This shell environment is from American Megatrends and is likely what the motherboard manufacturers use to initially install files onto the bios chip. Ive not once had anything go wrong using this method and I actually will clear the chip and rewrite the bios every once in awhile even if not updating because it can increase general system stability. Its similar to using secure erase on your ssd before you install an operating system rather than installing another OS by simple format and install. This will return the storage in the chip to either 1s or 0s similar to doing a "clean all" to a disk using diskpart from the command prompt in Windows. There is less chance that old lingering data will remain afterwards.


----------



## Reikoji

WTB Crosshair VIII Extreme


----------



## VicsPC

chakku said:


> So who reckons the C7H will be able to handle some above-ambient, decent overclocking of the 3900X? If it's just PCI-E 4.0 through the chipset I'd rather not get a new motherboard for it.


Agreed, I'd love it for it to just be drop in and good to go even without any overclocking (i know AMD doesnt leave much headroom on their CPUs and GPUs for OCing). Would be fantastic if it worked fine. I know between x370 and x470 there wasn't much difference if any when using 1st or 2nd gen Ryzen.


----------



## CJMitsuki

bMind said:


> I'm not expecting wonders in terms of memory, it runs both sticks on the advertised speeds and timings (used DOCP 3200MHz that sets everything). As for PE I'm not using it..but the reason is I don't know if it's 'set it forget it' type of a thing or I need to learn a bit more and tweak settings etc.
> 
> 
> As I wrote above, I'm not sure if PE is something you just set it and bios does all the magic later  if it is I might try it, PE3 for now?
> 
> Thanks for taking time to answer someone not so experienced with all this..


Yes, you can set PE3 and it should work fine. The main difference in PE3 and PE4 is how the clocks behave during different levels of load that is applied. PE4 will boost every core to its max with little load applied while PE3 will have a better balance as far as the 1 core, 4 core, 6 core, and all core overclocks applied. You can also tweak this a bit further with Ryzen Master as @nick name knows. Just basically max out the PPT and TDP values then bump the EDC value up a little and use HwInfo64 to see how the clocks behave during normal use and with a heavy load applied and if you want the 4 core, 6 core, or all core to boost higher and be more sensitive to load then just increase the EDC value until the PBO behaves just how you want it to behave. It essentially gives you some level of control over a "automated" overclock. After you find the settings you like just save a profile in Ryzen Master and you can apply that profile when you log on and then exit Ryzen Master since you dont need it after you set the profile upon logging in. Also, make sure you arent using the "balanced" windows power profile. Just enable the High Performance profile then adjust the "minimum processor performance" to like 5% and that will allow it to idle when the computer isnt being used for a heavy task. There are further power tweaks you can do by unlocking all the hidden power settings that give even more fine control over how the cores behave and other things as well, like the responsiveness of the the cpu and disks and how idle behaves, etc.


----------



## CJMitsuki

VicsPC said:


> Agreed, I'd love it for it to just be drop in and good to go even without any overclocking (i know AMD doesnt leave much headroom on their CPUs and GPUs for OCing). Would be fantastic if it worked fine. I know between x370 and x470 there wasn't much difference if any when using 1st or 2nd gen Ryzen.


The VRM is the only thing that would become a factor in the ability to handle the 3900x and I doubt you have to worry about that with this motherboard. The VRMs are very excessive for the current Ryzen+, I had my 2700x over 275 watts and the VRMs barely even got warm so Im betting the 3900x will be perfectly fine. Now, Asus claims to have changed something in the hardware on the x570 boards that will allow much higher memory clocks so thats something to consider along with the obvious newer features that will accompany the new chipset that supposely is rated at around 11 watts for the PCH. Im sure there will be benefits to getting the newer boards. Im personally waiting for a 2 DIMM slot ATX board. If EVGA do something similar to the EVGA Dark they released for Intel then ill drop this C7H like brick and switch. Ive already heard they will be doing just that. If its anything like the Dark then it will crush everything Asus has.


----------



## neikosr0x

CJMitsuki said:


> The VRM is the only thing that would become a factor in the ability to handle the 3900x and I doubt you have to worry about that with this motherboard. The VRMs are very excessive for the current Ryzen+, I had my 2700x over 275 watts and the VRMs barely even got warm so Im betting the 3900x will be perfectly fine. Now, Asus claims to have changed something in the hardware on the x570 boards that will allow much higher memory clocks so thats something to consider along with the obvious newer features that will accompany the new chipset that supposely is rated at around 11 watts for the PCH. Im sure there will be benefits to getting the newer boards. Im personally waiting for a 2 DIMM slot ATX board. If EVGA do something similar to the EVGA Dark they released for Intel then ill drop this C7H like brick and switch. Ive already heard they will be doing just that. If its anything like the Dark then it will crush everything Asus has.


forget about evga doing amd boards, they are very exclusive for nvidia and intel... we need amd to get more marketshare and then we will see.
Even though ASUS line is the best you can get for AM4. The problems we are getting on the bios side is mostly because Ryzen was a very new thing... and it is ageing well.


----------



## VicsPC

CJMitsuki said:


> The VRM is the only thing that would become a factor in the ability to handle the 3900x and I doubt you have to worry about that with this motherboard. The VRMs are very excessive for the current Ryzen+, I had my 2700x over 275 watts and the VRMs barely even got warm so Im betting the 3900x will be perfectly fine. Now, Asus claims to have changed something in the hardware on the x570 boards that will allow much higher memory clocks so thats something to consider along with the obvious newer features that will accompany the new chipset that supposely is rated at around 11 watts for the PCH. Im sure there will be benefits to getting the newer boards. Im personally waiting for a 2 DIMM slot ATX board. If EVGA do something similar to the EVGA Dark they released for Intel then ill drop this C7H like brick and switch. Ive already heard they will be doing just that. If its anything like the Dark then it will crush everything Asus has.


I would but means id have to spend on the mobo and new faster ram, 3200mhz seems fine to be honest, ends up getting diminishing returns above that for my application. Just dropping in a 3800x would work wonders with the new ipc gains.


----------



## Mandarb

I suppose the R9 3900X will be no problem for the Crosshair VII Hero. What I'm more interested about is whether this rumoured 16 core part is going to see the light of day, and if so, will the Crosshair VII Hero be able to handle it. If not, I might actually buy the R9 3900X day one, I don't think I want to change my motherboard again (my Crosshair VI Hero was faulty and since exchanging it took a month I bought a C7H and sold the C6H that was returned to me).


----------



## gupsterg

The C7H has 5 true phases doubled to 10 for VCORE. Uses IR3555M, AFAIK capable of 60A each phase. The Zenith Extreme had 8 true phases and used same IR3555M. In my mind the HW is more than ample on C7H.


----------



## bMind

CJMitsuki said:


> Yes, you can set PE3 and it should work fine. The main difference in PE3 and PE4 is how the clocks behave during different levels of load that is applied. PE4 will boost every core to its max with little load applied while PE3 will have a better balance as far as the 1 core, 4 core, 6 core, and all core overclocks applied. You can also tweak this a bit further with Ryzen Master as @nick name knows. Just basically max out the PPT and TDP values then bump the EDC value up a little and use HwInfo64 to see how the clocks behave during normal use and with a heavy load applied and if you want the 4 core, 6 core, or all core to boost higher and be more sensitive to load then just increase the EDC value until the PBO behaves just how you want it to behave. It essentially gives you some level of control over a "automated" overclock. After you find the settings you like just save a profile in Ryzen Master and you can apply that profile when you log on and then exit Ryzen Master since you dont need it after you set the profile upon logging in. Also, make sure you arent using the "balanced" windows power profile. Just enable the High Performance profile then adjust the "minimum processor performance" to like 5% and that will allow it to idle when the computer isnt being used for a heavy task. There are further power tweaks you can do by unlocking all the hidden power settings that give even more fine control over how the cores behave and other things as well, like the responsiveness of the the cpu and disks and how idle behaves, etc.


Thanks! I know that it's stupid question, but..PE3 is not something that will make the system unstable or something? I just set it in bios and then observe? And then continue with tweaks you mentioned?


----------



## nick name

bMind said:


> Thanks! I know that it's stupid question, but..PE3 is not something that will make the system unstable or something? I just set it in bios and then observe? And then continue with tweaks you mentioned?


https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...tiplier-adjustments-through-ryzen-master.html


----------



## CJMitsuki

bMind said:


> Thanks! I know that it's stupid question, but..PE3 is not something that will make the system unstable or something? I just set it in bios and then observe? And then continue with tweaks you mentioned?


Probably have to bump the vCORE offset up a couple ticks. Nothing major. Dont use manual vCORE though, just use a + Offset and and bump it up a tick then run a stress test like Prime95 or Intel Burn. PE3 leans more toward single core performance so youd have to raise EDC a decent amount before it starts pushing high wattage. Just have HwInfo64 open and take note of the CPU+Soc watts and tDIE temps and just keep the temps in line with what you want. 70-75c during a stress test is average so around that temp or less is what you are aiming for. If it goes up to 80c then just stop the stress test and back the vCORE down a tick or lower EDC a point or two. If you pay attention to how the voltage and EDC value affect wattage and temps you can dial the overclock to a perfect spot for max performance while maintaing the temps you want. If the stress test fails then you know that you either have to add vCORE or if temps are where you want them then back the EDC down a hair and test again. EDC is going to push the cores to have higher clocks and the vCORE is going to keep those higher clocks stable. Its like a scale, on one side you have the vCORE and the other side you have the EDC. You dont want too much vCORE for the EDC you are running as that will be wasted energy and you dont want to have too little vCORE or the overclock will be unstable. Gotta find the balance of vCORE and EDC while using the temps and stress test as a guide to let you know what to increase or decrease. The better cooling system you have will of course determine how high your overclock will be. 

Its not unusual to get 4.5ghz with exceptional cooling if you use baseclock OC in tandem with the method mentioned. If you have an ambient of 30c+ in the house I wouldnt even waste my time though but if you have a 280mm AIO and the house is around 21c then you should see a nice bit of headroom. Most people think Ryzen is almost maxed right out of the box but for Ryzen+ this isnt true. Most of those will be limited by their motherboard vendor just not having a good bios or just listening to reddit and youtube rather than doing their own testing. Most "major" tech news outlets are pitiful when it comes to trying to OC Ryzen so they just tell everyone not to bother overclocking as its at its limit. To an extent this is true but only true for PState and Manual overclocking, they are severely limited on overclocking. PBO manipulation and baseclock OC can achieve much more than the aforementioned methods though.


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> Probably have to bump the vCORE offset up a couple ticks. Nothing major. Dont use manual vCORE though, just use a + Offset and and bump it up a tick then run a stress test like Prime95 or Intel Burn. -snip-.


I can use a sizable negative offset with PE3 and no BCLK increase. Well I use a small BCLK increase of .2, but you know what I mean. If you're not running intensive single-core loads or AVX loads at 4.3GHz then you can get away with close to -.1000V. If you want any workload to run then around -.06250V will probably work. 

So I run -.1000V and when I need to I adjust it down I do so with TurboV Core in Windows. And I really only ever adjust it for benchmarking since my day-to-day and gaming workloads all run at -.1000V no problem.


----------



## chakku

CJMitsuki said:


> The VRM is the only thing that would become a factor in the ability to handle the 3900x and I doubt you have to worry about that with this motherboard. The VRMs are very excessive for the current Ryzen+, I had my 2700x over 275 watts and the VRMs barely even got warm so Im betting the 3900x will be perfectly fine. Now, Asus claims to have changed something in the hardware on the x570 boards that will allow much higher memory clocks so thats something to consider along with the obvious newer features that will accompany the new chipset that supposely is rated at around 11 watts for the PCH. Im sure there will be benefits to getting the newer boards. Im personally waiting for a 2 DIMM slot ATX board. If EVGA do something similar to the EVGA Dark they released for Intel then ill drop this C7H like brick and switch. Ive already heard they will be doing just that. If its anything like the Dark then it will crush everything Asus has.


I thought EVGA were not going to do AMD boards?


----------



## chakku

crakej said:


> Good to see you Keith
> 
> Do we know what IMC is on that yet?


IIRC someone in the DRAM Calc thread mentioned it was the same as previous. May have been @1usmus but I'm not 100% sure right now.


----------



## darkdavid08

darkdavid08 said:


> I did end up trying those before I sent my motherboard out for RMA, thanks again for that. I was able to install windows but the issue persisted. General consensus here and on ASUS forums was that something was wrong with the motherboard if I was having issues with auto settings and your tweaks. Luckily, I managed to get my hands on a brand new 2700x so I'll be able to report back tomorrow if it is indeed my setup or a bad cpu.
> 
> Thanks again for all the help and support along the way


It was the CPU definitevly. After replacing it all my issues went away. Seems like the past 2-3 (2xxx series) bios updates and subsequent AMD chipset updates damaged my CPU. My guess is PBO, XFR, and overdrive. 

I had everything on default with an auto offset on Vcore, was running PE level 3 until these issues started. Maybe the new bios updates gave my CPU too much voltage when it was boosting my clocks? In any case happy to be back up and running.


----------



## nick name

darkdavid08 said:


> It was the CPU definitevly. After replacing it all my issues went away. Seems like the past 2-3 (2xxx series) bios updates and subsequent AMD chipset updates damaged my CPU. My guess is PBO, XFR, and overdrive.
> 
> I had everything on default with an auto offset on Vcore, was running PE level 3 until these issues started. Maybe the new bios updates gave my CPU too much voltage when it was boosting my clocks? In any case happy to be back up and running.


Well if you're just running PE 3 then you can run a negative offset. Try to tame the beast with at least -.0500V though you can probably go a smidgen higher with the offset. 

Also, if you don't wanna run PE 3 with a multiplier closer to 43 then you can lower EDC in BIOS and/or with Ryzen Master. If you set it in BIOS then that value becomes the max value that Ryzen Master will be able to set it to. So if you always lower the multiplier than use BIOS.


----------



## Baio73

Testing new RAM…
Has anyone experienced Corsair CMW16GX4M2C3600C18?
At the moment I can't boot over 3200 with incredibily high timings…

Baio


----------



## bMind

nick name said:


> https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...tiplier-adjustments-through-ryzen-master.html


I will definitely check that link out, thanks!



CJMitsuki said:


> Probably have to bump the vCORE offset up a couple ticks. Nothing major. Dont use manual vCORE though, just use a + Offset and and bump it up a tick then run a stress test like Prime95 or Intel Burn. PE3 leans more toward single core performance so youd have to raise EDC a decent amount before it starts pushing high wattage. Just have HwInfo64 open and take note of the CPU+Soc watts and tDIE temps and just keep the temps in line with what you want. 70-75c during a stress test is average so around that temp or less is what you are aiming for. If it goes up to 80c then just stop the stress test and back the vCORE down a tick or lower EDC a point or two. If you pay attention to how the voltage and EDC value affect wattage and temps you can dial the overclock to a perfect spot for max performance while maintaing the temps you want. If the stress test fails then you know that you either have to add vCORE or if temps are where you want them then back the EDC down a hair and test again. EDC is going to push the cores to have higher clocks and the vCORE is going to keep those higher clocks stable. Its like a scale, on one side you have the vCORE and the other side you have the EDC. You dont want too much vCORE for the EDC you are running as that will be wasted energy and you dont want to have too little vCORE or the overclock will be unstable. Gotta find the balance of vCORE and EDC while using the temps and stress test as a guide to let you know what to increase or decrease. The better cooling system you have will of course determine how high your overclock will be.
> 
> Its not unusual to get 4.5ghz with exceptional cooling if you use baseclock OC in tandem with the method mentioned. If you have an ambient of 30c+ in the house I wouldnt even waste my time though but if you have a 280mm AIO and the house is around 21c then you should see a nice bit of headroom. Most people think Ryzen is almost maxed right out of the box but for Ryzen+ this isnt true. Most of those will be limited by their motherboard vendor just not having a good bios or just listening to reddit and youtube rather than doing their own testing. Most "major" tech news outlets are pitiful when it comes to trying to OC Ryzen so they just tell everyone not to bother overclocking as its at its limit. To an extent this is true but only true for PState and Manual overclocking, they are severely limited on overclocking. PBO manipulation and baseclock OC can achieve much more than the aforementioned methods though.


Thank you for taking time and effort to answer, this is such a nice writeup! I need to process all that information!  But I will definitely try to test this tomorrow or on Thursday


----------



## nick name

Baio73 said:


> Testing new RAM…
> Has anyone experienced Corsair CMW16GX4M2C3600C18?
> At the moment I can't boot over 3200 with incredibily high timings…
> 
> Baio


Are you using the correct RAM slots?


----------



## crakej

Baio73 said:


> Testing new RAM…
> Has anyone experienced Corsair CMW16GX4M2C3600C18?
> At the moment I can't boot over 3200 with incredibily high timings…
> 
> Baio


Enable GearDown


----------



## Baio73

nick name said:


> Are you using the correct RAM slots?


Yes, the same slot as for former G.Skill.



crakej said:


> Enable GearDown


That helped, now I'm running @3400MHz, but timings still high (24-23-23).
Should I load Stilt's setup now?

Baio


----------



## gupsterg

gupsterg said:


> Ahh OK, sorry to read what worked for me has not for you.
> 
> I can't help but think something is off with UEFI 2304. As I can flashback older UEFI and boom I don't have to do this tweak. I sometimes have to also reapply tweak for W7 to load on UEFI 2304  .
> 
> I have a NVME coming this week Tuesday AFAIK, will let you know how it goes and relay what happens to Silent Scone aswell.
> 
> 
> 
> ClintLeo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thanx
> I also think it's a problem with the UEFI,I'm hoping that is all it is and it's not there to force people to update their OS's.
Click to expand...

Installed Intel 660P 1TB NVME in lower M.2 slot. NVME firmware as out of box did no update yet, even though there is one out for it. I did fresh install of W7 Pro x64 all went sound on UEFI 2304, CSM is [Enabled] as per UEFI defaults. If encouter any issues when install Linux on it as well will let you know.


----------



## ClintLeo

gupsterg said:


> Installed Intel 660P 1TB NVME in lower M.2 slot. NVME firmware as out of box did no update yet, even though there is one out for it. I did fresh install of W7 Pro x64 all went sound on UEFI 2304, CSM is [Enabled] as per UEFI defaults. If encouter any issues when install Linux on it as well will let you know.


Thanx,now I'm at a loss.
I tried to use a usb stick with a Win7 install with the usb3 and nvme drivers and the same issue.
If I get home early from work tomorrow I will try something again.


----------



## crakej

Baio73 said:


> Yes, the same slot as for former G.Skill.
> 
> 
> 
> That helped, now I'm running @3400MHz, but timings still high (24-23-23).
> Should I load Stilt's setup now?
> 
> Baio


You could try, but I think you should try some timings from the ram calculator. You shouldn't need to bother with interleaving or setting cadbus to anything other than auto for now - just make sure you enable geardown when you load Stilts timings or use the calculator if it's not on already 

Glad you're gettin somewhere!


----------



## gupsterg

ClintLeo said:


> Thanx,now I'm at a loss.
> I tried to use a usb stick with a Win7 install with the usb3 and nvme drivers and the same issue.
> If I get home early from work tomorrow I will try something again.


No problem.

I use a USB which has Linux Mint/W7/W10 on it. I add all OS isos using WinSetupFromUSB Tool. The W7 iso currently on USB is as I placed guide in this thread. Today I gave installer driver when it asked off another USB. Tomorrow will update the iso with NVME driver and reinstall.

I'll dump UEFI setting txt of my settings and upload tomorrow.


----------



## ClintLeo

gupsterg said:


> No problem.
> 
> I use a USB which has Linux Mint/W7/W10 on it. I add all OS isos using WinSetupFromUSB Tool. The W7 iso currently on USB is as I placed guide in this thread. Today I gave installer driver when it asked off another USB. Tomorrow will update the iso with NVME driver and reinstall.
> 
> I'll dump UEFI setting txt of my settings and upload tomorrow.


I've been using Gigabytes utility to create an bootable Win 7 usb stick,It installs the usb3 drivers and the nvme drivers.


----------



## bMind

Ok, so as a test I enabled PBO (btw..it's in two places? Tweakers Paradise and in Advanced > CBS > XFR?) and PE3 and VCORE boosted to 1.5-ish and I lost ability to downclock?  With stress testing my temps skyrocketed to 88?  I've researched a bit and tried negative offset, but with no luck, well it worked but was a bit unstable, I need to dig more.


----------



## MrYoke

I came to accept my kit won't go above 2933MHz. So, may I get some advice to optimize my timings and other options?

Here is my timing checker:


----------



## Rusakova

MrYoke said:


> I came to accept my kit won't go above 2933MHz. So, may I get some advice to optimize my timings and other options?
> 
> Here is my timing checker:


Change tRCDRD to 15 and try 3200 MHz again with DRAM voltage at 1.38v
You may have to tweak your LLC for CPU and VSOC to get it 100% stable.
It may also be needed to adjust some of the other CPU power features.


----------



## nick name

Rusakova said:


> Change tRCDRD to 15 and try 3200 MHz again with DRAM voltage at 1.38v
> You may have to tweak your LLC for CPU and VSOC to get it 100% stable.
> It may also be needed to adjust some of the other CPU power features.


It's the second value in BIOS.


----------



## nick name

bMind said:


> Ok, so as a test I enabled PBO (btw..it's in two places? Tweakers Paradise and in Advanced > CBS > XFR?) and PE3 and VCORE boosted to 1.5-ish and I lost ability to downclock?  With stress testing my temps skyrocketed to 88?  I've researched a bit and tried negative offset, but with no luck, well it worked but was a bit unstable, I need to dig more.


You need to have Minimum Processor State below 50% in your Windows power plan. That may fix your down clocking problem. 

Also, share as many values as you can when attempting to get help with troubleshooting. ie your voltage offset. 

And don't forget your LLC settings.


----------



## chakku

G SKILL 4000MT/s kits running on C7H + 2700X - thinking this must be Hynix CJR or something? They were displaying it on the C8H as well and I initially thought it was an X570 thing, apparently not.



Spoiler


----------



## nick name

chakku said:


> G SKILL 4000MT/s kits running on C7H + 2700X - thinking this must be Hynix CJR or something? They were displaying it on the C8H as well and I initially thought it was an X570 thing, apparently not.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


I didn't realize it was a CH7 either. And I know G.SKILL has a 4000CL17 kit that is 17-17-17 so I'm assuming it is b-die so that kit pictured with those timings being Hynix CJR makes sense.


----------



## chakku

nick name said:


> I didn't realize it was a CH7 either. And I know G.SKILL has a 4000CL17 kit that is 17-17-17 so I'm assuming it is b-die so that kit pictured with those timings being Hynix CJR makes sense.


Either that or those were simply the timings they required to get 4000 stable with Ryzen's IMC.


----------



## nick name

I'm thinking my upgrade path is gonna start with the next ASUS Crosshair board before anything else. I wanna see what the new board can do with a 2700X and my 3600CL15 RAM. From there pick a new CPU and then maybe new RAM. It's seems like the most fun way to approach all the new techs coming in July. The idea that ASUS has more available to them to improve RAM performance intrigues me more than anything else right now and I'm excited.


----------



## CJMitsuki

gupsterg said:


> No problem.
> 
> I use a USB which has Linux Mint/W7/W10 on it. I add all OS isos using WinSetupFromUSB Tool. The W7 iso currently on USB is as I placed guide in this thread. Today I gave installer driver when it asked off another USB. Tomorrow will update the iso with NVME driver and reinstall.
> 
> I'll dump UEFI setting txt of my settings and upload tomorrow.


You should check out Pop_os! its a derivative of ubuntu and honestly its quite good. I can get rather good performance as system76 has a performance profile command and Ive got a decent Hardware monitor configured. It can monitor more but I stripped it down in the .conf file. Nvidia overclocking is nice and easy as well. Its probably the best distro Ive used and I doubt ill use anything else as I can run any windows apps I need and it outperforms W7 and W10. This 1700x is getting about the same performance in most benchmarks @ 4ghz as my 2700x was getting at 4.3ghz in W7 Pro completely stripped down.


----------



## Syldon

chakku said:


> G SKILL 4000MT/s kits running on C7H + 2700X - thinking this must be Hynix CJR or something? They were displaying it on the C8H as well and I initially thought it was an X570 thing, apparently not.


 I use this one.


----------



## gupsterg

gupsterg said:


> No problem.
> 
> I use a USB which has Linux Mint/W7/W10 on it. I add all OS isos using WinSetupFromUSB Tool. The W7 iso currently on USB is as I placed guide in this thread. Today I gave installer driver when it asked off another USB. Tomorrow will update the iso with NVME driver and reinstall.
> 
> I'll dump UEFI setting txt of my settings and upload tomorrow.





ClintLeo said:


> I've been using Gigabytes utility to create an bootable Win 7 usb stick,It installs the usb3 drivers and the nvme drivers.


I've done a lot of re-POSTs on rig whilst using UEFI 2304 + NVME + W7, so far not experienced issue as I had with say a SATA SDD. I'll try later a flashback to an older UEFI and then to 2304, see if it throws rig.

I've not used the Gigabyte util but have seen others mention it in various threads. Perhaps use nLite and see what happens.

In the past if I have experienced W7 freezing on "orbs", this was on M7R, C6H, ZE and C7H. This occurred if say I had CSM setup incorrect in UEFI and was say forcing a install by picking UEFI partition off install media. So IMO W7 with a UEFI system can be temperamental. I have always had sure fire success if make sure CSM is [Auto] or [Enabled], use MBR partition setup on storage device and go for install off media without launching using UEFI. This last bit what I mean is when I say check boot menu in UEFI or boot menu pressing F8 at POST I pick the entry without UEFI in front.

Below is my current settings:-

View attachment 2304_PBOE43200GSNVME_setting.txt


HW is:-

2700X
F4-3200C14Q-32GVK
Sapphire HD 5850 Toxic
Intel 660P 1TB in lower M.2



CJMitsuki said:


> You should check out Pop_os! its a derivative of ubuntu and honestly its quite good. I can get rather good performance as system76 has a performance profile command and Ive got a decent Hardware monitor configured. It can monitor more but I stripped it down in the .conf file. Nvidia overclocking is nice and easy as well. Its probably the best distro Ive used and I doubt ill use anything else as I can run any windows apps I need and it outperforms W7 and W10. This 1700x is getting about the same performance in most benchmarks @ 4ghz as my 2700x was getting at 4.3ghz in W7 Pro completely stripped down.


+rep, thanks for info  . As I have the space on the newly installed 1TB NVME I'll give it a whirl  . Currently just taken with trying to get 3333MHz C14 1T stable.



Spoiler






















































I had nice ~5hrs of back to back stability, I did setup POST run of 1750%, 2x warm POST 2800% + 4200% and BOOM! on next full POST I have fail at 19%!



Spoiler














I wish we had access to the IMC training menu on AM4.

Recently I transferred 1950X + F4-3200C14Q-32GTZSW from Zenith Extreme to Zenith Extreme Alpha.



Spoiler














So hoping latest AM4 AGESA delivers this menu to us!


----------



## bMind

nick name said:


> You need to have Minimum Processor State below 50% in your Windows power plan. That may fix your down clocking problem.
> 
> Also, share as many values as you can when attempting to get help with troubleshooting. ie your voltage offset.
> 
> And don't forget your LLC settings.


I had Windows Balanced plan enabled and Minimum Processor State set to 5%. I just enabled PBO in XFR settings (and this other place in Tweakers paradise) and set PE3, I didn't modify enything else. As I said, just a test to see if it will work. It did in terms of clock speeds (and boy of boy the temps ) but since it did not downvolt I reverted back and got back to work, because I did not have much time to play around with it and I didn't want to mess up something by rushing and doing panick-button-mashing 

As for offset, I enabled negative value of -0.1000. I know that's a lot but I've seen posts on reddit claiming that can be possible (by doing some tinkering with bios settings). But didn't come to that since my downvolting was not working.


----------



## nick name

bMind said:


> I had Windows Balanced plan enabled and Minimum Processor State set to 5%. I just enabled PBO in XFR settings (and this other place in Tweakers paradise) and set PE3, I didn't modify enything else. As I said, just a test to see if it will work. It did in terms of clock speeds (and boy of boy the temps ) but since it did not downvolt I reverted back and got back to work, because I did not have much time to play around with it and I didn't want to mess up something by rushing and doing panick-button-mashing
> 
> As for offset, I enabled negative value of -0.1000. I know that's a lot but I've seen posts on reddit claiming that can be possible (by doing some tinkering with bios settings). But didn't come to that since my downvolting was not working.


Did you also enable Core Performance Boost? How long is the PC running while you're testing and monitoring the CPU voltages?

And I run -.1000V, but I know it won't run some AVX loads and other demanding high frequency single-core loads.


----------



## ClintLeo

gupsterg said:


> I've done a lot of re-POSTs on rig whilst using UEFI 2304 + NVME + W7, so far not experienced issue as I had with say a SATA SDD. I'll try later a flashback to an older UEFI and then to 2304, see if it throws rig.
> 
> I've not used the Gigabyte util but have seen others mention it in various threads. Perhaps use nLite and see what happens.
> 
> In the past if I have experienced W7 freezing on "orbs", this was on M7R, C6H, ZE and C7H. This occurred if say I had CSM setup incorrect in UEFI and was say forcing a install by picking UEFI partition off install media. So IMO W7 with a UEFI system can be temperamental. I have always had sure fire success if make sure CSM is [Auto] or [Enabled], use MBR partition setup on storage device and go for install off media without launching using UEFI. This last bit what I mean is when I say check boot menu in UEFI or boot menu pressing F8 at POST I pick the entry without UEFI in front.
> 
> Below is my current settings:-
> 
> View attachment 272134


Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
OS Type [Other OS]

I've tested using those settings.
My settings are normally,
Boot Device Control [UEFI only]
Boot from Network Devices [Ignore]
Boot from Storage Devices [UEFI First]
Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [UEFI First]
OS Type [Windows UEFI Mode]


----------



## bMind

nick name said:


> Did you also enable Core Performance Boost? How long is the PC running while you're testing and monitoring the CPU voltages?
> 
> And I run -.1000V, but I know it won't run some AVX loads and other demanding high frequency single-core loads.


I think I did enable it? Or maybe it was auto..hm..will see tomorrow. As for how long I was running, few hours? But the temps were too high, so I went back to previous settings.


----------



## nick name

bMind said:


> I think I did enable it? Or maybe it was auto..hm..will see tomorrow. As for how long I was running, few hours? But the temps were too high, so I went back to previous settings.


Do you have virtualization enabled?


----------



## bMind

nick name said:


> Do you have virtualization enabled?


Yes, need it for dev purposes.


----------



## mtrai

Some bad news...Robert Hallock AMD at Computrex that there will NOT BE PCIe 4.0 support on any X470 and X370 boards and they will be updating the bios to remove this as option for these boards. He announced this in a presentation.

link deleted

Link to original article.
https://www.sweclockers.com/nyhet/2...stod-for-aldre-moderkort-i-400-och-300-serien


----------



## crakej

mtrai said:


> Some bad news...Robert Hallock AMD at Computrex that there will NOT BE PCIe 4.0 support on any X470 and X370 boards and they will be updating the bios to remove this as option for these boards. He announced this in a presentation.
> 
> https://old.reddit.com/r/Amd/comment...rt_on_300_and/
> 
> Link to original article.
> https://www.sweclockers.com/nyhet/27...och-300-serien


Nooooo! I'm sure we can bake it back in! Maybe it's because of the power requirement?

Both links not working!


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> Nooooo! I'm sure we can bake it back in! Maybe it's because of the power requirement?
> 
> Both links not working!


2nd link back up.
https://www.sweclockers.com/nyhet/2...stod-for-aldre-moderkort-i-400-och-300-serien

They both got taken down...but I still had the page open will post the text.



> AMD cuts PCI Express 4.0 support for older 400 and 300 series motherboards
> Motherboard today 20:21
> The one who planned to upgrade to the Ryzen 3000 series and keep his motherboard will be without support for PCI Express 4.0, as AMD decided to lock the function only to new X570 models.
> 
> In conjunction with the opening of this year's Computex trade show in Taiwan, AMD announced additional details on the Ryzen 3000 series , based on the Zen 2 architecture and offering up to 12 cores for consumer base AM4. Alongside promises of high performance, the processors will also be the first to support PCI Express 4.0.
> 
> Normally, new interfaces require new motherboards, but when SweClockers met AMD at CES 2019 at the beginning of the year, it was unclear if this would really be the case with PCI Express 4.0. This is when the interface is integrated into the processor itself, which in turn is connected directly to the motherboard's PCI Express connections.
> 
> A few months later, the first data showed that manufacturers would add support for PCI Express 4.0 to older models with the X470 and B450 control circuits, and some even as far back as the X370 and B350. This provided that the older motherboards were paired with a processor in the Ryzen 3000 series.
> 
> This aroused hopes among many enthusiasts who already have such a motherboard and thus could access the new function by replacing the processor itself. When SweClockers sits down and talks to AMD's Robert Hallock, however, it does not appear to be the case.
> 
> During the call on the new platform for the Ryzen 3000 series, where socket AM4 is made and the control circuit X570 is introduced, Hallock is clearly in support of PCI Express 4.0 support on older motherboards. He starts by telling about all the news published by both partner manufacturers and the media, and concludes that AMD will remove that opportunity through software (BIOS / UEFI).
> 
> Combinations for PCI Express 4.0 support with base AM4
> X570
> 
> X470 / B450
> 
> X370 / B350
> 
> Ryzen 3000 series "Matisse"
> 
> Yes
> 
> Yes No
> 
> Yes No
> 
> Ryzen 2000 series "Pinnacle Ridge"
> 
> No
> 
> No
> 
> No
> 
> Ryzen 1000 Series "Summit Ridge"
> 
> No
> 
> No
> 
> No
> 
> Hallock develops with the decision based on AMD can not guarantee adequate support and functionality on older motherboards. When PCI Express 4.0 involves a doubling of the bandwidth, completely different requirements are imposed on the conductor paths than what older motherboards have been designed for.
> 
> He also admits that there may well be well-designed motherboards with X470, B450, X370 and B350 where the conductor paths are sufficient for the signal strength required. In cases where PCI Express 4.0 does not work properly, it is unclear whether the consumer's debt should be imposed on the motherboard or processor manufacturer (AMD), but also who is responsible.
> 
> 
> The decision to delete PCI Express 4.0 support with older motherboards is simply that AMD wants to take it safe before the uncertain, according to Hallock. Another part that is likely to play is the sale of motherboards, where it is in the manufacturers' interest to sell new ones and in AMD's to sell their new control circuit X570 to the manufacturers.
> 
> The big news with PCI Express 4.0 is that the standard doubles the bandwidth compared to PCI Express 3.0, a transition that is well-suited to future graphics cards and will soon enable faster SSDs.


Pictures of it:


----------



## HolyFist

Since we spend every page pretty much talking about memory overclock, this might please you (doubt even with Zen 2 on this board we can achieve these results however):


----------



## nick name

bMind said:


> Yes, need it for dev purposes.


There's your culprit. The CPU behaves differently with virtualization on. In particular the CPU doesn't seem to downclock/downvolt the same as without virtualization.


----------



## nick name

HolyFist said:


> Since we spend every page pretty much talking about memory overclock, this might please you (doubt even with Zen 2 on this board we can achieve these results however):


Oh god. I need to change my pants now.


----------



## mtrai

HolyFist said:


> Since we spend every page pretty much talking about memory overclock, this might please you (doubt even with Zen 2 on this board we can achieve these results however):


I already claimed it was a fake. The_Stilt also is claiming it is a fake. Too many issues. We both claimed it was fake for different reasons.



> The Stilt is calling this a fake on a Finnish forum. Translation:
> 
> "The AIDA64 shown in the image does not contain the CP-B0 identifier (string) and Matisse's current stepping is MTS-B0."
> 
> https://bbs.io-tech.fi/threads/amd-...yzen3-zen3-ryzen4.132311/page-30#post-5123419


My basis for my reasons were different but still valid. There are some issues with the read write and copy speeds. As well as the L1 latency. As this would mean a 50+% improvement. The l2 cache read writ and copy speeds are alarming. The l3 speeds if this sort of true can be explained by the large 32 MB l3 cache maybe but even those seem too slow.

https://old.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/buwwbh/zen_2_appears_to_have_fixed_the_memory_latency/

Also for comparison me on my 2700X clocked in at 3830. Also some else posted 4000 Mhz on their 2700x in another thread somewhere here.


----------



## Ramad

HolyFist said:


> Since we spend every page pretty much talking about memory overclock, this might please you (doubt even with Zen 2 on this board we can achieve these results however):


This is fake. Simple explanation: my R5 1600 beats L2 and L3 bandwidth on this picture. And remember that Zen 2 12 core has 32MB L3 cache.

Use your CPU to compare, this is an easy one.


----------



## chakku

Yeah looks fake to me as well. Numbers look pulled from an Intel processor as they are in the ballpark of something you would expect from a 9900K running 4000MT/s memory as per below: (Note the write speed on L1 is half the speed of the 'leak' but there's also a '?' in that value which leads me to believe it was manually typed in). Plus as others have mentioned the L2/L3 are really slow compared to current Ryzen, which are also aspects of Intel's cache.


----------



## Gigabytes

Not sure I believe this talk about AMD not allowing the enabling of PCIe 4.0 on X470/X370 boards that would support it. While that is something Intel would definitely do, it is not the way the AMD I know would act. Time will tell I guess.


----------



## Syldon

bMind said:


> Yes, need it for dev purposes.





nick name said:


> There's your culprit. The CPU behaves differently with virtualization on. In particular the CPU doesn't seem to downclock/downvolt the same as without virtualization.


I dont have any issues with Virtualisation enabled. I am not using PBO. I have been running with down clocking and volting working perfectly on a few revisions now. 

All my settings here.


----------



## dev1ance

Gigabytes said:


> Not sure I believe this talk about AMD not allowing the enabling of PCIe 4.0 on X470/X370 boards that would support it. While that is something Intel would definitely do, it is not the way the AMD I know would act. Time will tell I guess.


Seems weird considering Gigabyte implemented BIOs to enable it as well. Would they waste time doing it if it didn't work? Confused.


----------



## gupsterg

nick name said:


> Do you have virtualization enabled?
> 
> 
> 
> bMind said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, need it for dev purposes.
> 
> 
> 
> nick name said:
> 
> 
> 
> There's your culprit. The CPU behaves differently with virtualization on. In particular the CPU doesn't seem to downclock/downvolt the same as without virtualization.
> 
> 
> 
> Syldon said:
> 
> 
> 
> I dont have any issues with Virtualisation enabled. I am not using PBO. I have been running with down clocking and volting working perfectly on a few revisions now.
> 
> All my settings here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

I've had SVM enabled, with Precision Boost Overide set to Enabled. I experience down volting/clocking in W7/Linux Mint. Besides SW monitoring show down volting wall power meter and digital multimeter on probeit points confirms power/voltage.


----------



## Gypsycurse

Hello all, 

I was wondering if anyone might be able to get the bottom of an issue I'm experiencing. 
My system will run perfectly day in, day out, but every so often has a problem cold booting. 

The PC will turn on, and turn off, restart immediately, and then start booting. 
It shows the normal for 2203 bios weird commodore cursor, then show the press f2 or delete post screen, 
at this point it will drop back to an American Megatrends logo, no text, no options, just stuck. 

It began happening after a bios update, which went through normally.

The system is 2700x with no overclock. The memory is Gskill Samsung b die set at 3400 (3200 rated cl14), 
however when the issue first started happening the memory was not overclocked at all.

Initially, I took it into the shop I bought it in and they said the system needed a new penny battery for the bios ($60 service charge), however since then its happened again. 
The problem is it doesn't always happen, and I suspect that it booted to the F1 recovery screen as it does with me after some disconnecting and waiting.

Any suggestions on where to look? 

John


----------



## bMind

nick name said:


> There's your culprit. The CPU behaves differently with virtualization on. In particular the CPU doesn't seem to downclock/downvolt the same as without virtualization.


It's more to PBO, because it works fine (downvolt) when I have it disabled, or rather..when I have PE3 enabled.



Syldon said:


> I dont have any issues with Virtualisation enabled. I am not using PBO. I have been running with down clocking and volting working perfectly on a few revisions now.
> 
> All my settings here.


Thanks! Without PBO enabled down volting works for me as well. It's just I can't make it to behave the same when on PBO.



gupsterg said:


> I've had SVM enabled, with Precision Boost Overide set to Enabled. I experience down volting/clocking in W7/Linux Mint. Besides SW monitoring show down volting wall power meter and digital multimeter on probeit points confirms power/voltage.


Damn, I need to be doing something wrong. Mine is rock solid at one value. With PE3 that is, because on default it does downvolt.


----------



## gupsterg

bMind said:


> Damn, I need to be doing something wrong. Mine is rock solid at one value. With PE3 that is, because on default it does downvolt.


Post a screenie of HWINFO. IIRC you may not see certain stuff operate as it would if you use PE3/4. Ref links in section ASUS Performance Enhancer in OP of this thread.


----------



## MrYoke

Rusakova said:


> Change tRCDRD to 15 and try 3200 MHz again with DRAM voltage at 1.38v
> You may have to tweak your LLC for CPU and VSOC to get it 100% stable.
> It may also be needed to adjust some of the other CPU power features.


I did as you said and so far it has been working out great! I still need to test for stability but so far so good.


----------



## netman

i wonder why we still got no new 1.0.0.1 Bios for all Asus Motherboards as most of the other Motherboard Manufaturers (Asrock, Biostar, Gigabyte, Msi) have updatet nearly all of their 450 and 470 Boards to the new Agesa (and they seem to work quite well). Asus is quite slow this time - any infos why that is ?


----------



## kmellz

They've always been slow, supposedly to make it work better but, there's still been quite a few problems even after they were released late :/


----------



## BeetleatWar1977

i know there is a 4803 for the Prime out there https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/13339177 .... but nothing official as of yet.....


----------



## mtrai

Gigabytes said:


> Not sure I believe this talk about AMD not allowing the enabling of PCIe 4.0 on X470/X370 boards that would support it. While that is something Intel would definitely do, it is not the way the AMD I know would act. Time will tell I guess.





dev1ance said:


> Seems weird considering Gigabyte implemented BIOs to enable it as well. Would they waste time doing it if it didn't work? Confused.


The issue that arose is two fold. The motherboard manufactures already had to redesign the PCB thickness to accomadate the thickness of the traces that would carry the signal for PCIe4 on the 570 boards. Secondly 470 and 370 boards mostly cannot carry the pcie4 signal with the existing traces. What the AMD guy said was while they are sure some 470 boards would work fine most would not due to the traces needed for the signal with



> Hallock develops with the decision based on AMD can not guarantee adequate support and functionality on older motherboards. When PCI Express 4.0 involves a doubling of the bandwidth, completely different requirements are imposed on the conductor paths than what older motherboards have been designed for.
> 
> He also admits that there may well be well-designed motherboards with X470, B450, X370 and B350 where the conductor paths are sufficient for the signal strength required.
> 
> The decision to delete PCI Express 4.0 support with older motherboards is simply that AMD wants to take it safe before the uncertain, according to Hallock.


Now the good news is this will done in the UEFI/BIOs so it may be possible for some of that mod bios to either unlock it or add it back. Only time will tell what will be possible for us.


----------



## bMind

gupsterg said:


> Post a screenie of HWINFO. IIRC you may not see certain stuff operate as it would if you use PE3/4. Ref links in section ASUS Performance Enhancer in OP of this thread.


I will try to get some done on Sunday, I'll be away from my computer first half of the weekend. Thanks!

And I'll try to read links you've suggested!


----------



## crakej

There are hardly any PCIE 4 devices yet. I would like the option of having it though!

I've read elsewhere that AMD aren't removing it from the bios - they're just leaving it to the board vendors to decide if they'll support it or not, which makes sense as some board designs will physicaslly just not support it due to hardware limitations.

I'm still working on my 3866 profile, trying to find 100% stability. If I have to loosen timings then it won't be worth it as performance will drop below my 3600/3733 profiles. Will keep ya posted....

Edit: Re: PCIe 4 https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/bve4kk/prex570_boards_will_not_support_pcie_gen_4/


----------



## nick name

When the ASUS board stack leaked one of the Crosshair VIII variants was the Impact. Has anyone seen anything about it or was it just bad info? Was hoping for a Crosshair board with only two RAM slots for better overclocking.

Edit:
I'm an idiot. I've been seeing it this whole time and just wasn't paying attention to the name. I should have googled before posting. My bad, guys.


----------



## Gigabytes

mtrai said:


> The issue that arose is two fold. The motherboard manufactures already had to redesign the PCB thickness to accomadate the thickness of the traces that would carry the signal for PCIe4 on the 570 boards. Secondly 470 and 370 boards mostly cannot carry the pcie4 signal with the existing traces. What the AMD guy said was while they are sure some 470 boards would work fine most would not due to the traces needed for the signal with


I don't think thickness of the trace has anything to do with it, the length is what matters. Some boards would be able to support it hence why Gigabyte has enabled it. All Asus needs to do with the CH7 is get one of the NVMe drives on gen 4, Gen 4 drives are just around the corner.


----------



## Keith Myers

chakku said:


> IIRC someone in the DRAM Calc thread mentioned it was the same as previous. May have been @1usmus but I'm not 100% sure right now.


Actually, the IMC is AMD's own design based on the ASMEDIA IP. They are building it themselves without ASMEDIA.


----------



## mito1172

gupsterg said:


> The C7H has 5 true phases doubled to 10 for VCORE. Uses IR3555M, AFAIK capable of 60A each phase. The Zenith Extreme had 8 true phases and used same IR3555M. In my mind the HW is more than ample on C7H.


is it enough for the C6H 3900x?


----------



## ComansoRowlett

mito1172 said:


> is it enough for the C6H 3900x?


I reckon you could get away with it but it'll be a bit sketchy if you want to max out a 3900X. It can definitely do it stock, but when it comes to overclocking you could be looking quite bad in terms of VRM temps. Either way, I reckon it'll be a bad idea if you'll be looking to get some decent memory overclocks aswell. The C6H and extreme both use t-topology memory layouts which the Zen 2 IMC will not prefer. Simply put most X570 boards are daisy chain because the Zen 2 controller is being optimised for that layout, and performance deg from a X370 t-topology to a X570 daisy chain could be as much as 1000mt/s lost worst case which of course is very bad. You'll perhaps be better off getting a C7H if you upgrade because that board is significantly cheaper than any of the X570 boards, has a VRM which is very capable of handling a 16 core and uses daisy chain so won't hamper your memory overclocks too much at all (aswell as no chipset fan).


----------



## mito1172

ComansoRowlett said:


> I reckon you could get away with it but it'll be a bit sketchy if you want to max out a 3900X. It can definitely do it stock, but when it comes to overclocking you could be looking quite bad in terms of VRM temps. Either way, I reckon it'll be a bad idea if you'll be looking to get some decent memory overclocks aswell. The C6H and extreme both use t-topology memory layouts which the Zen 2 IMC will not prefer. Simply put most X570 boards are daisy chain because the Zen 2 controller is being optimised for that layout, and performance deg from a X370 t-topology to a X570 daisy chain could be as much as 1000mt/s lost worst case which of course is very bad. You'll perhaps be better off getting a C7H if you upgrade because that board is significantly cheaper than any of the X570 boards, has a VRM which is very capable of handling a 16 core and uses daisy chain so won't hamper your memory overclocks too much at all (aswell as no chipset fan).


thanks. CPU stock speed is enough for me and only RAM 3200 MHz enough


----------



## chakku

Keith Myers said:


> Actually, the IMC is AMD's own design based on the ASMEDIA IP. They are building it themselves without ASMEDIA.


I found where I read about the IMC https://www.overclock.net/forum/27926826-post40306.html

Where did you hear your side? I know AMD have now designed the chipset as opposed to ASMedia but I didn't hear anything about the IMC.


----------



## Keith Myers

chakku said:


> I found where I read about the IMC https://www.overclock.net/forum/27926826-post40306.html
> 
> Where did you hear your side? I know AMD have now designed the chipset as opposed to ASMedia but I didn't hear anything about the IMC.


OK, maybe I have it reversed. I thought I had read somewhere . . . . . online YT channels, that it was the reverse, that they had stayed with the PCH silicon manufactured by ASMEDIA but then taken the ASMEDIA IMC IP or design framework and licensed it, but then tweaked it to their own needs in the silicon in the cpu.

Probably will get answered somewhat definitively whenever AnandTech's Ian Cutress does a "deep dive" into the architecture at launch.


----------



## gupsterg

gupsterg said:


> The C7H has 5 true phases doubled to 10 for VCORE. Uses IR3555M, AFAIK capable of 60A each phase. The Zenith Extreme had 8 true phases and used same IR3555M. In my mind the HW is more than ample on C7H.
> 
> 
> mito1172 said:
> 
> 
> 
> is it enough for the C6H 3900x?
Click to expand...

C6H has 4 VCORE phases doubled to 8. Uses:-



> Texas Instruments CSD87350Q5D NexFET power block. These power blocks integrate the high-side and low-side MOSFET into a single package, are rated at 25A continuous output at 90% efficiency and can operate upwards of 40A.


I reckon you could get away with it but it'll be a bit sketchy if you want to max out a 3900X. It can definitely do it stock, but when it comes to overclocking you could be looking quite bad in terms of VRM temps. Either way, I reckon it'll be a bad idea if you'll be looking to get some decent memory overclocks aswell. The C6H and extreme both use t-topology memory layouts which the Zen 2 IMC will not prefer. Simply put most X570 boards are daisy chain because the Zen 2 controller is being optimised for that layout, and performance deg from a X370 t-topology to a X570 daisy chain could be as much as 1000mt/s lost worst case which of course is very bad. You'll perhaps be better off getting a C7H if you upgrade because that board is significantly cheaper than any of the X570 boards, has a VRM which is very capable of handling a 16 core and uses daisy chain so won't hamper your memory overclocks too much at all (aswell as no chipset fan).



mito1172 said:


> thanks. CPU stock speed is enough for me and only RAM 3200 MHz enough


[/QUOTE]

I saw a post on [URL="https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/bw7wdw/asus_crosshair_vi_hero_and_upcoming_3000series/"]reddit yesterday, within it contained information that @The Stilt stated IMC FW is not differing between Zen1 & Zen2. I did search web and didn't find this post, will be asking for source link.

If this is true and based on speculation that Infinity Fabric can be set to not be linked 1:1 to RAM clock this could be the reason to improved RAM clocks on Zen2. On that basis I reckon X370/X470 could well do the RAM MHz that X570 would do.

My own experience with C6H vs C7H for RAM MHz was they were very close. I used 2x8GB single rank/sided RAM, 2 CPUs that I had access to at the time reached same RAM MHz on each. Where the difference was 4x8GB.

The C7H wouldn't even POST on 3466MHz with 4x8GB, I could get decent stability at 3400MHz on the C6H, but still on differing POSTs could encounter instability quickly. I reckon I may have snagged 3333MHz if I hadn't started testing something else. The C7H at 3333MHz has decent stability for length and at times flakes out quick, 3200MHz seems the best I'd get with 4x8GB.

I believe the T-Topology is a plus on C6H. I believe I would have liked it on the C7H. I'm hoping the "Optimem III" on C8H is new iteration of T-Topology.


----------



## ComansoRowlett

gupsterg said:


> C6H has 4 VCORE phases doubled to 8. Uses:-
> 
> 
> 
> reddit yesterday, within it contained information that @The Stilt stated IMC FW is not differing between Zen1 & Zen2. I did search web and didn't find this post, will be asking for source link.
> 
> If this is true and based on speculation that Infinity Fabric can be set to not be linked 1:1 to RAM clock this could be the reason to improved RAM clocks on Zen2. On that basis I reckon X370/X470 could well do the RAM MHz that X570 would do.
> 
> My own experience with C6H vs C7H for RAM MHz was they were very close. I used 2x8GB single rank/sided RAM, 2 CPUs that I had access to at the time reached same RAM MHz on each. Where the difference was 4x8GB.
> 
> The C7H wouldn't even POST on 3466MHz with 4x8GB, I could get decent stability at 3400MHz on the C6H, but still on differing POSTs could encounter instability quickly. I reckon I may have snagged 3333MHz if I hadn't started testing something else. The C7H at 3333MHz has decent stability for length and at times flakes out quick, 3200MHz seems the best I'd get with 4x8GB.
> 
> I believe the T-Topology is a plus on C6H. I believe I would have liked it on the C7H. I'm hoping the "Optimem III" on C8H is new iteration of T-Topology.


I doubt the C8H is using any form of T-Topology. AMD have optimized the Zen 2 memory controller for daisy chain motherboards, so that is why pretty much all X570 boards will be using daisy chain thus hindering t-topology since they've pretty much thrown a lot of thought out for that layout. Actually it could be a very interesting platform, we could even get 4 dimms working better on a daisy chain layout vs t-topology with the Zen 2 chips since the controller will be that biased for that layout, I wish AMD would let motherboard vendors have more free will when tweaking the parameters like Intel, then we could have certain boards which work better with a certain amount of sticks depending on use case.


----------



## hurricane28

Hi everyone, 

Are there some people who flashed 2304 on their board and if so, how does it perform? Or are there any issues?


Thnx.


----------



## HolyFist

The ASUS Prime X470 Pro got BIOS update with AGESA 1.0.0.1

I wonder how much longer for us.


----------



## kmellz

For anyone wanting to stay as up to date as possible, here's a handy automated tool to update bios modules: https://www.win-raid.com/t154f16-Tool-Guide-News-quot-UEFI-BIOS-Updater-quot-UBU.html
Pay attention to the renaming part further down, as our ASUS bioses needs it to be able to flash.
Done it to mine, working great!


----------



## gupsterg

ComansoRowlett said:


> I doubt the C8H is using any form of T-Topology. AMD have optimized the Zen 2 memory controller for daisy chain motherboards, so that is why pretty much all X570 boards will be using daisy chain thus hindering t-topology since they've pretty much thrown a lot of thought out for that layout. Actually it could be a very interesting platform, we could even get 4 dimms working better on a daisy chain layout vs t-topology with the Zen 2 chips since the controller will be that biased for that layout, I wish AMD would let motherboard vendors have more free will when tweaking the parameters like Intel, then we could have certain boards which work better with a certain amount of sticks depending on use case.


Dunno.

When I read about Optimem II it was not clear if it does include T-Topology or it would be an extra inclusion on some boards with Optimem II also.



> Memory frequencies continue to climb, and our Z390 motherboards have evolved to keep pace. They feature Optimem II, which reimagines memory traces from the ground up—literally. Optimem II adds a dedicated ground plane and surrounding ground trace with via stitching to reduce interference for the traces connecting the CPU and memory slots. It also routes traces through different PCB layers to cut down on crosstalk. These changes combine with our T-Topology trace layout to enable DDR4 speeds in excess of 4266MHz with all slots populated, even if you’re using RGB-infused RAM.


Source link.

AFAIK 1000 series / 2000 series CPU AGESA, AMD reference is daisy chain also but some boards still had T-Topology. Zenith Extreme and Alpha also had it, dunno what AMD reference is supposed to be for TR4. I do hope T-Topology is there as would like to use 4 dimms on AM4.


----------



## nick name

gupsterg said:


> Dunno.
> 
> When I read about Optimem II it was not clear if it does include T-Topology or it would be an extra inclusion on some boards with Optimem II also.
> 
> 
> 
> Source link.
> 
> AFAIK 1000 series / 2000 series CPU AGESA, AMD reference is daisy chain also but some boards still had T-Topology. Zenith Extreme and Alpha also had it, dunno what AMD reference is supposed to be for TR4. I do hope T-Topology is there as would like to use 4 dimms on AM4.


In one of the many computex videos someone mentioned ASUS had figured out some things in regards to RAM on their new X570 boards. I'm not sure if it's beyond what other board vendors are doing, but it gave the impression of being very promising.


----------



## gupsterg

nick name said:


> In one of the many computex videos someone mentioned ASUS had figured out some things in regards to RAM on their new X570 boards. I'm not sure if it's beyond what other board vendors are doing, but it gave the impression of being very promising.


Ahh cool, I didn't seen the videos, been a bit busy with things. I did see the photos of live G.Skill systems running some nice speeds, IIRC also posted in this thread by a member.

I scanned a Finnish forum that The Stilt can be on and did not find any info on his thoughts on IMC of Zen2. I did see a post where he still states Samsung B die is the way to go. I do reckon they must have decoupled Infinity Fabric from RAM MHz, IIRC 1usmus has also stated this, dunno if he's seen in a UEFI or what source he has.

TBH only thing that would make me move from C7H is if it doesn't gain a UEFI containing options relating to Zen2, which I doubt it won't. One reason I did sell on the C6H was at the time the UEFI stopped having PBO menu on 2000 series. Dunno if it came back as don't read that thread any more. If the C7H achieves RAM MHz a grade or so close to X570, I reckon I will still stick with it, even if slap a 3000 series in it.


----------



## nick name

gupsterg said:


> Ahh cool, I didn't seen the videos, been a bit busy with things. I did see the photos of live G.Skill systems running some nice speeds, IIRC also posted in this thread by a member.
> 
> I scanned a Finnish forum that The Stilt can be on and did not find any info on his thoughts on IMC of Zen2. I did see a post where he still states Samsung B die is the way to go. I do reckon they must have decoupled Infinity Fabric from RAM MHz, IIRC 1usmus has also stated this, dunno if he's seen in a UEFI or what source he has.
> 
> TBH only thing that would make me move from C7H is if it doesn't gain a UEFI containing options relating to Zen2, which I doubt it won't. One reason I did sell on the C6H was at the time the UEFI stopped having PBO menu on 2000 series. Dunno if it came back as don't read that thread any more. If the C7H achieves RAM MHz a grade or so close to X570, I reckon I will still stick with it, even if slap a 3000 series in it.


I'm assuming that the upgraded PCB will make the new Crosshair VIII physically superior in terms of traces and signal integrity so I am eager to get it with my current CPU and RAM and see what gains can be had. Then from there see which CPU I should upgrade to.


----------



## gupsterg

nick name said:


> I'm assuming that the upgraded PCB will make the new Crosshair VIII physically superior in terms of traces and signal integrity so I am eager to get it with my current CPU and RAM and see what gains can be had. Then from there see which CPU I should upgrade to.


Will be looking out for your shares for sure  .


----------



## crakej

Of course I did it the other way when Ryzen 2000 came out, I upgraded my board to CH7 from Prime X370 Pro, keeping my 1700X, and it made a HUGE difference!

A bit cheesed not having PBO/XFR2 - but hey...whats a man to do??! I'll be getting CPU first this time round as I hd to replace my CH7 in Feb.

I believe the PBO did come back on those boards that 'lost it'.


----------



## narukun

Would be fine to buy this mobo for a 3800X or 3900X and of course, for overclock? Im not interested on pci-e 4.0, I don't know if I miss anything else


----------



## nick name

narukun said:


> Would be fine to buy this mobo for a 3800X or 3900X and of course, for overclock? Im not interested on pci-e 4.0, I don't know if I miss anything else


The assumed RAM clocking proficiency of X570 over X470.

Edit:

And RAM proficiency absolutely matters. Some recent testing in the post below.


----------



## nick name

Some recent testing I did for someone over at Linus Tech Tips forum:

Here are the results of my runs. All are done with the CPU at 4.0GHz with the only thing changed being the RAM speed and timings. The speed and primary timings for 3000MHz and 2400MHz are set manually with the secondary timings to Auto. The 3600MHz is all manually tuned. 



Cinebench R15

3600 14-15-14-30: 1858, 1862, 1854

3000 16-18-18-38: 1821, 1827, 1822

2400 17-17-17-37: 1785, 1788, 1795



CS:GO

3600 14-15-14-30: 396.56 FPS Average 

3000 16-18-18-38: 330.47 FPS Average

2400 17-17-17-37: 323.83 FPS Average



GTA V Benchmark Runs Screenshot

One thing worth noting is that the secondary timings for 2400MHz were a bit better than they were for 3000MHz. It's why the gap in CS:GO between those two wasn't as great as the gap from 3600MHz to 3000MHz.


----------



## chakku

nick name said:


> The assumed RAM clocking proficiency of X570 over X470.
> 
> Edit:
> 
> And RAM proficiency absolutely matters. Some recent testing in the post below.


There's nothing that necessarily suggests X570 will be better though. The 4000MT/s kit was shown on both X470 and X570 with a 2700X. 

Best to just wait for reviews, either way you either have X470 and are waiting to find out or are waiting for Ryzen 3000 to upgrade in which case you should have enough information on release to know whether to go for X570 or save some money with X470 at that point.


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> Of course I did it the other way when Ryzen 2000 came out, I upgraded my board to CH7 from Prime X370 Pro, keeping my 1700X, and it made a HUGE difference!
> 
> A bit cheesed not having PBO/XFR2 - but hey...whats a man to do??! I'll be getting CPU first this time round as I hd to replace my CH7 in Feb.
> 
> I believe the PBO did come back on those boards that 'lost it'.


Nice to know it came back, I may snag a bargain C6H/C6E on ebay or something to have a revisit then  .

Yeah if I had a 1000 series I'd probably be going for the CPU upgrade first. I have not bothered with manual OC or even PE level changes. I find PBO: On and or with some mild BCLK OC is more than ample for my needs. I just really wanna snag 4 dimms at 3333MHz+ using say C14 1T. Hope new AGESA brings differing and favourable IMC FW, etc. 



narukun said:


> Would be fine to buy this mobo for a 3800X or 3900X and of course, for overclock? Im not interested on pci-e 4.0, I don't know if I miss anything else


IMO should take it with ease. I would see what pricing is of X570, compare results of 3000 series on X470 vs X570 then decide. I reckon you may snag a used C7H at such a price that TBH if X570 edges out on performance it may still make the "better bang for buck" option. Which could mean you could spend the saved money on a better GPU or other HW that makes more of a difference to your usage experience.



nick name said:


> Some recent testing I did for someone over at Linus Tech Tips forum:
> 
> Here are the results of my runs. All are done with the CPU at 4.0GHz with the only thing changed being the RAM speed and timings. The speed and primary timings for 3000MHz and 2400MHz are set manually with the secondary timings to Auto. The 3600MHz is all manually tuned.
> 
> 
> 
> Cinebench R15
> 
> 3600 14-15-14-30: 1858, 1862, 1854
> 
> 3000 16-18-18-38: 1821, 1827, 1822
> 
> 2400 17-17-17-37: 1785, 1788, 1795
> 
> 
> 
> CS:GO
> 
> 3600 14-15-14-30: 396.56 FPS Average
> 
> 3000 16-18-18-38: 330.47 FPS Average
> 
> 2400 17-17-17-37: 323.83 FPS Average
> 
> 
> 
> GTA V Benchmark Runs Screenshot
> 
> One thing worth noting is that the secondary timings for 2400MHz were a bit better than they were for 3000MHz. It's why the gap in CS:GO between those two wasn't as great as the gap from 3600MHz to 3000MHz.


3600 14-15-14-30 = 7.77ns - 8.33ns - 7.77ns - 16.66ns

3000 16-18-18-38 = 10.66ns - 12ns - 12ns - 25.33ns

2400 17-17-17-37 = 14.16ns - 14.16ns - 14.16ns - 30.83ns

By leaving secondary timings Auto for 2400/3000 it became a void compare for me, besides the primaries being what they are.

I may rerun some of those tests I did on 1000 series with the 2700X, link. Final table below from that post.



Spoiler


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Some recent testing I did for someone over at Linus Tech Tips forum:
> 
> Here are the results of my runs. All are done with the CPU at 4.0GHz with the only thing changed being the RAM speed and timings. The speed and primary timings for 3000MHz and 2400MHz are set manually with the secondary timings to Auto. The 3600MHz is all manually tuned.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Cinebench R15
> 
> 3600 14-15-14-30: 1858, 1862, 1854
> 
> 3000 16-18-18-38: 1821, 1827, 1822
> 
> 2400 17-17-17-37: 1785, 1788, 1795
> 
> 
> 
> CS:GO
> 
> 3600 14-15-14-30: 396.56 FPS Average
> 
> 3000 16-18-18-38: 330.47 FPS Average
> 
> 2400 17-17-17-37: 323.83 FPS Average
> 
> 
> 
> GTA V Benchmark Runs Screenshot
> 
> 
> One thing worth noting is that the secondary timings for 2400MHz were a bit better than they were for 3000MHz. It's why the gap in CS:GO between those two wasn't as great as the gap from 3600MHz to 3000MHz.


Great numbers! Thanks for sharing.


----------



## hurricane28

Soo, what about the new 2304 BIOS of this board, does it bring anything new or complications i should know before i flash?


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> Nice to know it came back, I may snag a bargain C6H/C6E on ebay or something to have a revisit then  .
> 
> Yeah if I had a 1000 series I'd probably be going for the CPU upgrade first. I have not bothered with manual OC or even PE level changes. I find PBO: On and or with some mild BCLK OC is more than ample for my needs. I just really wanna snag 4 dimms at 3333MHz+ using say C14 1T. Hope new AGESA brings differing and favourable IMC FW, etc.


I'll try and confirm that PBO came back for you, think I know where the quote is! Edit: looking at CH6 thread people are talking about PBO settings, so it's definitely back 

Not having PBO (I have 1700X) means I don't know as much as others about it, but from what I've seen it's VERY efficient. I'm lucky, my 1700X can do 4.2GHz depending on memory speed - I reduce it to 4.1GHz on ram speeds >3533 as voltage is too high, though I have found reducing tCKE to 6 from 1 can allow you to reduce CPU voltage, which is allowing me to test speeds of 3733 right up to 3866.

I think I saw something on Reddit saying that our IMCs (1xxx and 2xxx CPUs) will get no further updates, but that's not backed up officially from what I've seen. Let hope though! I have seen favourable rumours of 4 dimms running much better, but don't know if that's something to do with X570 boards or/and AGESA updates.


----------



## crakej

hurricane28 said:


> Soo, what about the new 2304 BIOS of this board, does it bring anything new or complications i should know before i flash?


Seems ok. Better than previous couple of versions I reckon (2008 and 2203)

I think we'll have another bios soon - prob towards end of week, with AGESA 1001. Prime X470 Pro got it yesterday.


----------



## netman

i hope Combo Agesa 1001 arrives soon for our CH7 as most other manufaturers already have it rolled out for most of ther B450/X470 and some also already for their 3XX Boards. I would like to do a round of Ram Testing again with the new Agesa - as its rumored it also works a lot better with ryzen+ cpus - so i can't wait to give it a try ...


----------



## crakej

netman said:


> i hope Combo Agesa 1001 arrives soon for our CH7 as most other manufaturers already have it rolled out for most of ther B450/X470 and some also already for their 3XX Boards. I would like to do a round of Ram Testing again with the new Agesa - as its rumored it also works a lot better with ryzen+ cpus - so i can't wait to give it a try ...


I think we usually get get our update toward the end of the week the Prime Pro gets it.. Certain models of CH6 have had their bios updates taken down but there's no info on that yet. I check fairly regularly!


----------



## hurricane28

crakej said:


> Seems ok. Better than previous couple of versions I reckon (2008 and 2203)
> 
> I think we'll have another bios soon - prob towards end of week, with AGESA 1001. Prime X470 Pro got it yesterday.


Cool man, thnx for the heads up. 

I was thinking too that there is a new BIOS on its way which is why i asked about this one first. 

I guess i have to wait until end of the week begin next week and flash that one instead. I ams till on 2203 and it seems okay.


----------



## HolyFist

2 New ASUS motherboards now have 1.0.0.1 making it three

Shouldn't be that far for the VII.


----------



## nick name

HolyFist said:


> 2 New ASUS motherboards now have 1.0.0.1 making it three
> 
> Shouldn't be that far for the VII.


I'm holding my breath, but I'm a smoker. So I'm gonna need it sooner rather than later.


----------



## CJMitsuki

I will be getting the new VIII Impact as it will be the best for memory OC and seems to be the only one ive seen that only has 2 DIMM slots. This of course depends on the price. Im not going to feed into an insane price for a board that small with less features than the others. Im just debating on CPU now, not sure if I want 8 core or 12 core. I think im going to wait on initial testing of the OC behaviors before I decide.


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> I will be getting the new VIII Impact as it will be the best for memory OC and seems to be the only one ive seen that only has 2 DIMM slots. This of course depends on the price. Im not going to feed into an insane price for a board that small with less features than the others. Im just debating on CPU now, not sure if I want 8 core or 12 core. I think im going to wait on initial testing of the OC behaviors before I decide.


I want that board if the VRMs are as capable as the CH7.

Also, if it has the same robust BIOS as the CH8 Hero.


----------



## gupsterg

UEFI I reckon will be the same. From what Buildzoid states in his video (in spoiler below), how the latest board's VRM has been "teamed" and the info here, would be 4 phases VCORE, using 8 TDA21472, 70A each.



Spoiler













crakej said:


> I'll try and confirm that PBO came back for you, think I know where the quote is! Edit: looking at CH6 thread people are talking about PBO settings, so it's definitely back
> 
> Not having PBO (I have 1700X) means I don't know as much as others about it, but from what I've seen it's VERY efficient. I'm lucky, my 1700X can do 4.2GHz depending on memory speed - I reduce it to 4.1GHz on ram speeds >3533 as voltage is too high, though I have found reducing tCKE to 6 from 1 can allow you to reduce CPU voltage, which is allowing me to test speeds of 3733 right up to 3866.
> 
> I think I saw something on Reddit saying that our IMCs (1xxx and 2xxx CPUs) will get no further updates, but that's not backed up officially from what I've seen. Let hope though! I have seen favourable rumours of 4 dimms running much better, but don't know if that's something to do with X570 boards or/and AGESA updates.


Nice  .

PBO works well IMO. You got super nice 1000 series :thumb: .

IIRC when AGESA 1.0.0.6 hit The Stilt stated in this thread all CPUs gain update, perhaps we'll still keep seeing them. Ah well if they allow on 1000/2000 series say Infinity Fabric decoupling and IMC training menu, I'd be happy with that  .


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> Nice  .
> 
> PBO works well IMO. You got super nice 1000 series :thumb: .
> 
> IIRC when AGESA 1.0.0.6 hit The Stilt stated in this thread all CPUs gain update, perhaps we'll still keep seeing them. Ah well if they allow on 1000/2000 series say Infinity Fabric decoupling and IMC training menu, I'd be happy with that  .


That's good news! I'm more inclined to believe him than Reddit!

It would be great if they allow IF decoupling on older CPUs - no reason it can't be done really... tho we didn't get asychronous mode - guess it depends where the hardware for these things is situated - if it's on-chip, then you gotta have that chip...


----------



## VPII

If I may ask, I know that it states on the download for the bios support new processors, but does this mean that the 2304 BIOS will support the Ryzen 9 3900X? As I'd like to get the cpu but I'll be without an older one when I get it so just want to make sure I'll be sorted.


----------



## crakej

VPII said:


> If I may ask, I know that it states on the download for the bios support new processors, but does this mean that the 2304 BIOS will support the Ryzen 9 3900X? As I'd like to get the cpu but I'll be without an older one when I get it so just want to make sure I'll be sorted.


All good to go!

Another update is coming which is much more reliable for ram a well as more work being done to support Matisse


----------



## VPII

crakej said:


> All good to go!
> 
> 
> 
> Another update is coming which is much more reliable for ram a well as more work being done to support Matisse


Thanks boet "brother in Afrikaans" much appreciated.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> That's good news! I'm more inclined to believe him than Reddit!
> 
> It would be great if they allow IF decoupling on older CPUs - no reason it can't be done really... tho we didn't get asychronous mode - guess it depends where the hardware for these things is situated - if it's on-chip, then you gotta have that chip...


Async has latency penalty, I've only used it once to try it in all the time I've had 2700X. Yeah I would have that as IMC FW can be updated could have been given to 1000 series. Perhaps there is some silcon difference, dunno. We can only hope we get IF decoupling  .



VPII said:


> If I may ask, I know that it states on the download for the bios support new processors, but does this mean that the 2304 BIOS will support the Ryzen 9 3900X? As I'd like to get the cpu but I'll be without an older one when I get it so just want to make sure I'll be sorted.


Just as added info to Crakej's info, the mobo has Flashback feature. You can flash any UEFI to it with just power supply connected to it. You need no CPU/RAM/GPU/etc, just power to it and flash file on USB, inserted in correct port on rear IO.


----------



## VicsPC

gupsterg said:


> Async has latency penalty, I've only used it once to try it in all the time I've had 2700X. Yeah I would have that as IMC FW can be updated could have been given to 1000 series. Perhaps there is some silcon difference, dunno. We can only hope we get IF decoupling  .
> 
> 
> 
> Just as added info to Crakej's info, the mobo has Flashback feature. You can flash any UEFI to it with just power supply connected to it. You need no CPU/RAM/GPU/etc, just power to it and flash file on USB, inserted in correct port on rear IO.


And if flashback doesn't work, try different USB sticks. I have 2 sandisk USB sticks, one is 2.0 the other 3.0. Tried on both the C6 and C7 and my 2.0 one doesn't work with flashback, just keeps blinking blue. My 3.0 sandisk ultra has worked on both without issues. So if it doesn't work don't be discouraged, try a different stick.


----------



## nick name

I guess we have to wait at least another week for a new BIOS.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I guess we have to wait at least another week for a new BIOS.


Lol.....I know! Can't believe they made us wait another week! I guess they're busy removing all that PCIE 4 code - no that i care as I have no ver 4 devices.

I've been looking at my Sapphire R9 280x Toxic sitting on the shelf. I was going to sell it but figured I may as well keep it for a spare. I bought it years ago, and it's actually a PCIE 3.0 card, though I only ever ran it on ver 2.0. I wonder how much a difference it would make running it on ver 3.0? It also had a nice 384 bit memory interface.

Back to the bios - I notice some boards have had it withdrawn, so maybe there's some problems with it. I wish they'd let us beta test like they used to!


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Lol.....I know! Can't believe they made us wait another week! I guess they're busy removing all that PCIE 4 code - no that i care as I have no ver 4 devices.
> 
> I've been looking at my Sapphire R9 280x Toxic sitting on the shelf. I was going to sell it but figured I may as well keep it for a spare. I bought it years ago, and it's actually a PCIE 3.0 card, though I only ever ran it on ver 2.0. I wonder how much a difference it would make running it on ver 3.0? It also had a nice 384 bit memory interface.
> 
> Back to the bios - I notice some boards have had it withdrawn, so maybe there's some problems with it. I wish they'd let us beta test like they used to!


Speaking of . . . did you see that Elmor LN2 build? That thing was sweeeeeet.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Speaking of . . . did you see that Elmor LN2 build? That thing was sweeeeeet.


No, didn't see! Do you have a link?


----------



## Keith Myers

gupsterg said:


> Async has latency penalty, I've only used it once to try it in all the time I've had 2700X. Yeah I would have that as IMC FW can be updated could have been given to 1000 series. Perhaps there is some silcon difference, dunno. We can only hope we get IF decoupling  .
> 
> 
> 
> Just as added info to Crakej's info, the mobo has Flashback feature. You can flash any UEFI to it with just power supply connected to it. You need no CPU/RAM/GPU/etc, just power to it and flash file on USB, inserted in correct port on rear IO.


Is that even with major changes in the BIOS AGESA levels?? I'm referring to going backwards in AGESA levels. I think that still requires AFUDOS. Correct?


----------



## narukun

Hey guys i just got the CH7 today, any recommendations before updating to the latest BIOS? its stock right now like 1200 version


----------



## gupsterg

Keith Myers said:


> Is that even with major changes in the BIOS AGESA levels?? I'm referring to going backwards in AGESA levels. I think that still requires AFUDOS. Correct?


I don't use AFUDOS at all TBH, I tried it once or twice only, flashback is my preferred method.

Times wise AFUDOS seems same as Flashback. I noted no difference in UEFI after which method I used. If a profile was unstable on a UEFI flashed via Flashback it was also via a flash on AFUDOS.

I have gone back and forth on UEFIs so many times I'm surprised I have not had bios chip fail due to so many flashes. Regradless of differing AGESAs, differing embedded controller FW (ie ASUS EC, LED EC, Keybot, etc), Flashback has worked as it should and board has had what it should for flash file used.

"Flashback" is a self-contained SPI programmer built onto the motherboard. If you had power failure whilst using flashback, you can rerun flashback and board would work. As stated before no HW needs to be in board other than USB with flash file in correct port and power supply connected.


----------



## hurricane28

Hi guys, 

I just installed My new RTX ROG strixx 2060 advanced and i wanted to install Asus aura but it keeps crashing on me.. More people with this issue?
I tried 2 different versions of the software but both crash before it even starts.


----------



## untouchable247

hurricane28 said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> I just installed My new RTX ROG strixx 2060 advanced and i wanted to install Asus aura but it keeps crashing on me.. More people with this issue?
> I tried 2 different versions of the software but both crash before it even starts.


Used a very old version (april 2018) to set everything up, then got rid off the crapware. Newer versions wouldn't work for me.


----------



## CJMitsuki

gupsterg said:


> I don't use AFUDOS at all TBH, I tried it once or twice only, flashback is my preferred method.
> 
> Times wise AFUDOS seems same as Flashback. I noted no difference in UEFI after which method I used. If a profile was unstable on a UEFI flashed via Flashback it was also via a flash on AFUDOS.
> 
> I have gone back and forth on UEFIs so many times I'm surprised I have not had bios chip fail due to so many flashes. Regradless of differing AGESAs, differing embedded controller FW (ie ASUS EC, LED EC, Keybot, etc), Flashback has worked as it should and board has had what it should for flash file used.
> 
> "Flashback" is a self-contained SPI programmer built onto the motherboard. If you had power failure whilst using flashback, you can rerun flashback and board would work. As stated before no HW needs to be in board other than USB with flash file in correct port and power supply connected.


The difference is in the methods used is in the control you have over the process. If youll notice whenever you overwrite data on a hdd, ssd, etc. over time you lose performance from data being overwritten and as time passes the drive will become more susceptible to data corruption and drive errors. To counteract that the drive should be fully cleaned of data and all the binary reset. For a normal drive this can easily be done by opening terminal/cmd and typing diskpart then using the commands to select the correct drive then using the clean all command which will take some time to complete but will reset all the binary back to all 0's or all 1's throughout the entire disk. Well, when you use flashback the bios chip data isnt cleaned, only overwritten. By using the American Megatrends utility you have the option to completely clean the chip before the new data is written which often does lead to an increase in stability from personal experiences. ive even gotten rid of a memory stability issue just by doing this. i have seen vendor bios flash implementations fail (Not on c7h) on multiple occasions but have yet to have AFUEFI fail throughout countless flashes.


----------



## crakej

Keith Myers said:


> Is that even with major changes in the BIOS AGESA levels?? I'm referring to going backwards in AGESA levels. I think that still requires AFUDOS. Correct?


I've used afuefix64.exe on occasion when I wanted to go back in AGESA levels, but rarely.


----------



## gupsterg

CJMitsuki said:


> The difference is in the methods used is in the control you have over the process. If youll notice whenever you overwrite data on a hdd, ssd, etc. over time you lose performance from data being overwritten and as time passes the drive will become more susceptible to data corruption and drive errors. To counteract that the drive should be fully cleaned of data and all the binary reset. For a normal drive this can easily be done by opening terminal/cmd and typing diskpart then using the commands to select the correct drive then using the clean all command which will take some time to complete but will reset all the binary back to all 0's or all 1's throughout the entire disk. Well, when you use flashback the bios chip data isnt cleaned, only overwritten. By using the American Megatrends utility you have the option to completely clean the chip before the new data is written which often does lead to an increase in stability from personal experiences. ive even gotten rid of a memory stability issue just by doing this. i have seen vendor bios flash implementations fail (Not on c7h) on multiple occasions but have yet to have AFUEFI fail throughout countless flashes.


I would be very surprised when you use Flashback if a erase is not done prior to write.

If I use incorrect filename for flash file, note the number of flashes of LED before it becomes steady on and compare to when I use correct filename I see it flash longer before it quickens flashing to denote flashing being done.

For me I value boards with hardware flash facility, I have noted other competing boards now have this feature. It is more beneficial than dual BIOS IMO. Besides being able to flash UEFI without other HW, recover board from failed flash due to power loss, I have managed to save the boards in my possession from say beta UEFI quirks I have encountered.

Any how whatever process use/value is all good  .


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> No, didn't see! Do you have a link?


----------



## AngryLobster

Has anyone experienced really really bad DPC latency with this board? Specifically with Nvidia drivers.

I RMA'd my board and got a replacement that suffers from audio crackling/pops so I ran latencymon which showed the graphics driver as the culprit. This is a new Win 10 install using the same hardware as on the previous board (2080 Ti/2700x) which didn't have this issue.

Is this just a bad board or something I can resolve?


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> https://youtu.be/Cw2zn_H1WOA


I want that cube!


----------



## gooshpitz

AngryLobster said:


> Has anyone experienced really really bad DPC latency with this board? Specifically with Nvidia drivers.
> 
> I RMA'd my board and got a replacement that suffers from audio crackling/pops so I ran latencymon which showed the graphics driver as the culprit. This is a new Win 10 install using the same hardware as on the previous board (2080 Ti/2700x) which didn't have this issue.
> 
> Is this just a bad board or something I can resolve?


Check in device manager if the audio and sata controllers are in msi mode. That's what solved it for me.


----------



## HolyFist

AngryLobster said:


> Has anyone experienced really really bad DPC latency with this board? Specifically with Nvidia drivers.
> 
> I RMA'd my board and got a replacement that suffers from audio crackling/pops so I ran latencymon which showed the graphics driver as the culprit. This is a new Win 10 install using the same hardware as on the previous board (2080 Ti/2700x) which didn't have this issue.
> 
> Is this just a bad board or something I can resolve?


No it seems just to be ASUS, it happened with my 1700 and the Crosshair VI and how happens with the 2700X and the Crosshair VII.

This is how i fixed it (disabled SATA driver), never had problems since (DPC Latency is still far from perfect even on fresh Windows 10 install, also tried nvidia drivers from early 2018 and all have the same problem).










However my AMD ASUS experience wasn't very good so i'm gonna change to something else next time i buy a motherboard, i remember 1usmus mention here that he got quite better results with MSi and also complained a bit about ASUS lol.


----------



## crakej

My latency is great with my 1700X 

This is while watching live video.

Edit: I know this isn't the best tool, but it does still give you a good guide of what's going on. LatencyMon (which I also use) backs up these results and gives you detail of what processes are causing more latency..


----------



## HolyFist

That tool is useless no offense, LatencyMon is what people should use.

I disabled all overclock, installed Windows on different SSD, same problem.

My Windows is from Media Creation Tool download into USB drive.

I have a lot of Hard Page Faults even on fresh install.

Also if i use anything that uses ASUS Sensors the DPC latency spikes (like HWiNFO or AIDA64), i know that HWiNFO has a warning regarding ASUS WMI.

The AHCI driver is from 2006, and the AMD SATA Driver is from 2017 but this is the one that causes stuttering even when just listening to music, there's nothing newer even.

Also you are using AMD GPU, the other user also mention using nvidia, which is also what i have.

Might be nvidia related with some batch of GPUs (i got MSI Sea Hawk X GTX1080 soon after release).

I know that is not the first time this is brought here tho, and same on Crosshair VI thread.

ASUS has been fine until i went ASUS + AMD.


----------



## crakej

Spoiler






HolyFist said:


> That tool is useless no offense, LatencyMon is what people should use.
> 
> I disabled all overclock, installed Windows on different SSD, same problem.
> 
> My Windows is from Media Creation Tool download into USB drive.
> 
> I have a lot of Hard Page Faults even on fresh install.
> 
> Also if i use anything that uses ASUS Sensors the DPC latency spikes (like HWiNFO or AIDA64), i know that HWiNFO has a warning regarding ASUS WMI.
> 
> The AHCI driver is from 2006, and the AMD SATA Driver is from 2017 but this is the one that causes stuttering even when just listening to music, there's nothing newer even.
> 
> Also you are using AMD GPU, the other user also mention using nvidia, which is also what i have.
> 
> Might be nvidia related with some batch of GPUs (i got MSI Sea Hawk X GTX1080 soon after release).
> 
> I know that is not the first time this is brought here tho, and same on Crosshair VI thread.
> 
> ASUS has been fine until i went ASUS + AMD.






It's not completely useless actually - it gives a good quick guide. I also use LatencyMon which backs up DPClat.exe's results.

I just tested with Aida and HWInfo, but I would expect software like these to use up latency anyway, which they do. I know we have different GPUs - I thought the comparison would be useful. Hope you find a solution.

Enjoy your Sunday


----------



## HolyFist

DPCLat doesn't provide any insight of what can be causing the issues, hence why i find it useless. And if people are having issues they will eventually have to go LatencyMon anyway 

The issue isn't that bad (after disabling AMD SATA driver), there's only a handful games that i notice it being a problem, Black Desert Online being one, but i rarely play it so is fine.

Have a nice Sunday too!


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I want that cube!


If you could source LN2 for cheap that would be an awesome rig to play with. 

I wonder if there is a cheaper gas that perhaps would not cool as well, but offset the cost enough to make it feasible for a daily driver.


----------



## nick name

Damn it. I know the CPU leaks are sexy, but I just wanna know about the CH8.


----------



## CCoR

gooshpitz said:


> Check in device manager if the audio and sata controllers are in msi mode. That's what solved it for me.


are you saying that they shouldn't be in MSI mode or that they should?


----------



## ryouiki

AngryLobster said:


> Has anyone experienced really really bad DPC latency with this board? Specifically with Nvidia drivers.


What are people considering bad DPC latency?

I ran LatencyMon on this board and not really seeing anything I would consider "bad":



Code:


Highest measured interrupt to process latency (µs):   198.0
Average measured interrupt to process latency (µs):   4.517918

Highest measured interrupt to DPC latency (µs):       194.90
Average measured interrupt to DPC latency (µs):       1.531787

Highest ISR routine execution time (µs):              226.620
Driver with highest ISR routine execution time:       dxgkrnl.sys - DirectX Graphics Kernel, Microsoft Corporation

Highest DPC routine execution time (µs):              573.190
Driver with highest DPC routine execution time:       ntoskrnl.exe - NT Kernel & System, Microsoft Corporation

The only time I see poor performance on this board is if I'm running HWiNFO64 and leave ASUS WMI monitoring enabled.


----------



## gooshpitz

CCoR said:


> are you saying that they shouldn't be in MSI mode or that they should?


Should be in MSI mode. Honestly i set all devices i can in MSI mode (gpu,audio, sata, ethernet etc).


----------



## VPII

gooshpitz said:


> Should be in MSI mode. Honestly i set all devices i can in MSI mode (gpu,audio, sata, ethernet etc).


Sorry for my ignorance but what is msi mode?

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## Rusakova

VPII said:


> Sorry for my ignorance but what is msi mode?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


https://forums.guru3d.com/threads/windows-line-based-vs-message-signaled-based-interrupts.378044/

Where you can also find a tool to change the interrupt mode for your devices in your system.


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> I think I saw something on Reddit saying that our IMCs (1xxx and 2xxx CPUs) will get no further updates, but that's not backed up officially from what I've seen. Let hope though! I have seen favourable rumours of 4 dimms running much better, but don't know if that's something to do with X570 boards or/and AGESA updates.


Was bored of waiting for new UEFI from ASUS. I've just used UBU v1.74.03 to have newer microcode on 2700X with UEFI 2304.

Orig left, mod right.









1. Grab UBU here.

2. Grab latest DB for MCE here.

3. Extract UBU to folder, replace the MCE DB, follow steps 3 to 5 from 1usmus post here.

Once UBU updates file and if you use menus to exit it will save/rename file for flashback usage.

Rig has posted, taken settings, voltages, etc all good when checked with DMM, now testing setup, may have to have a dabble with PMU mod.


----------



## HolyFist

Rusakova said:


> https://forums.guru3d.com/threads/windows-line-based-vs-message-signaled-based-interrupts.378044/
> 
> Where you can also find a tool to change the interrupt mode for your devices in your system.


Thanks ive tried the tool and SATA AHCI was only one in High priority (others undefined), i switch GTX1080 and Audio device (Realtek) to MSI mode but they still show as positive number, is this normal or need to restart to fix?

Also whats the priority for? Should i not touch these? Thanks


----------



## nick name

HolyFist said:


> Thanks ive tried the tool and SATA AHCI was only one in High priority (others undefined), i switch GTX1080 and Audio device (Realtek) to MSI mode but they still show as positive number, is this normal or need to restart to fix?
> 
> Also whats the priority for? Should i not touch these? Thanks


You need to restart to change.


----------



## nick name

gupsterg said:


> Was bored of waiting for new UEFI from ASUS. I've just used UBU v1.74.03 to have newer microcode on 2700X with UEFI 2304.
> 
> Orig left, mod right.
> 
> View attachment 273804
> 
> 
> 1. Grab UBU here.
> 
> 2. Grab latest DB for MCE here.
> 
> 3. Extract UBU to folder, replace the MCE DB, follow steps 3 to 5 from 1usmus post here.
> 
> Once UBU updates file and if you use menus to exit it will save/rename file for flashback usage.
> 
> Rig has posted, taken settings, voltages, etc all good when checked with DMM, now testing setup, may have to have a dabble with PMU mod.


Any noticeable changes?


----------



## gupsterg

nick name said:


> Any noticeable changes?


So far things seem as before.









Benches same, fails the same if I use same settings as bench.

But a retweak of some settings seems as if I may gain stability, but still too early to say if nailed it.

I have had decent runs on 4x8GB @ 3333MHz before, aka 5hrs+ of testing all good, then something flips and profile fails.

This CPU several times I thought I'd sell, but can't, as it's the only Ryzen I've had that I've had some decent runs @ 3666MHz C15 1T on 2x8GB with what I think is nice SOC/VDIMM.

Will continue testing and share what goes on  .

*** edit ***

Moving on to tightening some timings as had these passes, each screen is differing POST, as usual issue for me is POST to POST training issue, last screenie has AIDA64 showing microcode version.



Spoiler


----------



## HolyFist

I noticed that LatencyMon shows overall lower DPC, but there's like a weird thing going on in games where when i move the camera it feels weird, as if you are playing on a 144FPS monitor and it feels like its 60FPS dunno how to explain better, its like this drag a bit, kind of a ghosting effect. I disabled MSI (like it is by default) for the GTX1080, ill test to see if its gone tomorrow when i have time.


----------



## AngryLobster

I am seeing 10000+ DPC latency from Nv driver via latencymon. I just switched the GPU driver and audio to MSI mode to see if it solves the issue. Will report back if it does.

What I don't understand is why this became an issue on this specific board. The RMA'd one did not require any of this and never exhibited pops through my external DAC/AMP.


----------



## ComansoRowlett

https://www.gamersnexus.net/news-pc/3481-amd-navi-rx-5700-xt-specs-overclocking-architecture Big thing that catches my eye, 16 core and 5100MHz memory on ambient.


----------



## AngryLobster

Man I'm so sick of dealing with this DPC latency issue. At this point I am 99% sure it's the board itself. I've tried everything and have only a KB/Mouse connected. Picture below was from just idling at desktop for 30min.

I'm really not interested in doing another RMA and having to take my entire build apart + wait 3 weeks turn around.

Can anyone suggest a comparable motherboard? Maybe the Gaming 7.


----------



## nick name

I was hoping the memory threshold tied to Infinity Fabric would have been closer to 4000+ , but I guess this isn't terrible.


----------



## chakku

The GN article notes trace layout and a new controller design are the reason for them being able to hit 5100MT/s with Ryzen 3000. I wonder if this is related to the topology and if the C7H, being daisychain like most if not all X570 boards, will also be capable of much better memory overclocking. Would love to get a bit closer to 3733 on my kit, I'm not sure what it's -really- capable of because of Zen+ limiting it. Anyone know how dual rank 2x16GB B-die kits fare on Intel systems at the moment?

I know they're highly binned but the fact that 4000C19 and 3733C17 kits in 2x16/dual rank configs exist make me hopeful that there's a chance of getting a bit more than 3200C14 out of these sticks.


----------



## Elrick

Just thought I would let those interested in knowing that 32GB Corsair memory works with this Motherboard.

Currently running this https://www.newegg.com/global/au-en...-sdram/p/N82E16820236498?Item=N82E16820236498

At full 3200Mhz speed using only 1.35v.

No overclocking of this memory considering it's Hynix C sticks but am glad at finally getting two 16GB sticks working reliably with the currently released bios supplied by Asus.

_Just despise their RGB nonsense here, really irritates me when I open the case and see it blaring away whilst it's powered on._


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> So far things seem as before.
> 
> View attachment 273814
> 
> 
> Benches same, fails the same if I use same settings as bench.
> 
> But a retweak of some settings seems as if I may gain stability, but still too early to say if nailed it.
> 
> I have had decent runs on 4x8GB @ 3333MHz before, aka 5hrs+ of testing all good, then something flips and profile fails.
> 
> This CPU several times I thought I'd sell, but can't, as it's the only Ryzen I've had that I've had some decent runs @ 3666MHz C15 1T on 2x8GB with what I think is nice SOC/VDIMM.
> 
> Will continue testing and share what goes on  .
> 
> *** edit ***
> 
> Moving on to tightening some timings as had these passes, each screen is differing POST, as usual issue for me is POST to POST training issue, last screenie has AIDA64 showing microcode version.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 273820
> 
> 
> View attachment 273822
> 
> 
> View attachment 273824
> 
> 
> View attachment 273826
> 
> 
> View attachment 273828


Is the microcode the AGESA update? And the PMU the memory controller? Thanks for posting - looking fwd to your results!


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> Is the microcode the AGESA update? And the PMU the memory controller? Thanks for posting - looking fwd to your results!


I believe I'm using AGESA 1.0.0.1, why the string is not updated in screenshots is I believe it is picked from a place in UEFI where manually the AGESA version needs updating. I have seen this in the past when a UEFI gained a AGESA update but the string was not matching the AGESA in use.

The CPU Microcode has been updated, PMU not, that would need the manual edits. Not had time as been busy with other things. When I have time, gotta compare ASUS 2304 SMU FW version number vs 2304 with mod. I'm inclined to believe something has changed, as my idle VID is lower than previous data I have, again must double check.

So far 4x8GB 3333MHz C14 1T looks promising with this modded UEFI. I gained some improvement on tRAS, tRC & tRFC over the previously shared screenies. I have passed several RAM test sessions of upto 1500% (~1hr) on differing POSTs of board. Still need more time to fully know if it is sorted.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> I believe I'm using AGESA 1.0.0.1, why the string is not updated in screenshots is I believe it is picked from a place in UEFI where manually the AGESA version needs updating. I have seen this in the past when a UEFI gained a AGESA update but the string was not matching the AGESA in use.
> 
> The CPU Microcode has been updated, PMU not, that would need the manual edits. Not had time as been busy with other things. When I have time, gotta compare ASUS 2304 SMU FW version number vs 2304 with mod. I'm inclined to believe something has changed, as my idle VID is lower than previous data I have, again must double check.
> 
> So far 4x8GB 3333MHz C14 1T looks promising with this modded UEFI. I gained some improvement on tRAS, tRC & tRFC over the previously shared screenies. I have passed several RAM test sessions of upto 1500% (~1hr) on differing POSTs of board. Still need more time to fully know if it is sorted.


Very interesting! Thanks for the information.

I'm still trying to work out what I think of 0072/0072a - I have a couple of profiles that ran really well under 1xxx bios versions, yet can't quite get stable under 2xxx versions. Also had some interesting things going on enabling GearDown - machine re-boots, I hit del to enter bios, and I just get blank screen. Bios IS running as I can hit F10>Enter and it re-boots. Of course I can't adjust anything with blank screen! This does not happen on all profiles though.

It's strange - I get the voltages spot on, but I just can't get the timings, or other settings to work. I'll be doing more testing today, may even go back to ver 1xxx to confirm my findings. Will report here of course.


----------



## Ramad

crakej said:


> Very interesting! Thanks for the information.
> 
> I'm still trying to work out what I think of 0072/0072a - I have a couple of profiles that ran really well under 1xxx bios versions, yet can't quite get stable under 2xxx versions. Also had some interesting things going on enabling GearDown - machine re-boots, I hit del to enter bios, and I just get blank screen. Bios IS running as I can hit F10>Enter and it re-boots. Of course I can't adjust anything with blank screen! This does not happen on all profiles though.
> 
> It's strange - I get the voltages spot on, but I just can't get the timings, or other settings to work. I'll be doing more testing today, may even go back to ver 1xxx to confirm my findings. Will report here of course.



Do you get black screen if you enable Gear Down and set CMD to 2T?


----------



## crakej

Ramad said:


> Do you get black screen if you enable Gear Down and set CMD to 2T?


I only tried that once to be fair, but had the same results so went back to T1 - this was trying to stabilize 3733CL16. I can boot to desktop and run things, but memtests fail


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> Very interesting! Thanks for the information.
> 
> I'm still trying to work out what I think of 0072/0072a - I have a couple of profiles that ran really well under 1xxx bios versions, yet can't quite get stable under 2xxx versions. Also had some interesting things going on enabling GearDown - machine re-boots, I hit del to enter bios, and I just get blank screen. Bios IS running as I can hit F10>Enter and it re-boots. Of course I can't adjust anything with blank screen! This does not happen on all profiles though.
> 
> It's strange - I get the voltages spot on, but I just can't get the timings, or other settings to work. I'll be doing more testing today, may even go back to ver 1xxx to confirm my findings. Will report here of course.


I don't use GearDown regardless of 2x8GB or 4x8GB so 0 experience on that front. Max MHz using 2x8GB is 3666MHz using The Stilt 3466MHz timings with 1T plus Power / Gear Down Off, I have had 3400MHz on 4x8GB, but just like 3333MHz can be I pass a lot of lengthy testing and then BAM! profile is dead  .

Dunno if it's my HW or settings I use Gear Down mode and or 2T set on it's own kills things for me  .

Room ambient ~22C, below is warm POST, full POST from shutdown, warm POST, 3x warm POST then retest.



Spoiler






































Now I'm in the zone of this is not shabby. Still gonna keep doing some reruns, then perhaps some P95, etc.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> I don't use GearDown regardless of 2x8GB or 4x8GB so 0 experience on that front. Max MHz using 2x8GB is 3666MHz using The Stilt 3466MHz timings with 1T plus Power / Gear Down Off, I have had 3400MHz on 4x8GB, but just like 3333MHz can be I pass a lot of lengthy testing and then BAM! profile is dead  .
> 
> Dunno if it's my HW or settings I use Gear Down mode and or 2T set on it's own kills things for me  .
> 
> Room ambient ~22C, below is warm POST, full POST from shutdown, warm POST, 3x warm POST then retest.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 273928
> 
> 
> View attachment 273930
> 
> 
> View attachment 273932
> 
> 
> View attachment 273934
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now I'm in the zone of this is not shabby. Still gonna keep doing some reruns, then perhaps some P95, etc.


My old G.Skills needed GearDown to get 3200 or more - don't think these Patriots need it at all.

What are your thoughts on interleaving? I've never seen any benefit before, but haven't tried it in ages.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> I want that cube!


Where will you get 100 liters of ln2/day to run it tho


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> Where will you get 100 liters of ln2/day to run it tho


Lol....I know, but imagine having that bubbling away in your office 'this is our totally awesome PC'


----------



## Krisztias

nick name said:


> I was hoping the memory threshold tied to Infinity Fabric would have been closer to 4000+ , but I guess this isn't terrible.


Disappointing latency's... I hoped/thougt that we will have latency's in the 50's with Matisse, not in the mid 60's with 3733MHz...


----------



## ComansoRowlett

Krisztias said:


> Disappointing latency's... I hoped/thougt that we will have latency's in the 50's with Matisse, not in the mid 60's with 3733MHz...


To be fair there is plenty of chance to lower tighten the timings from what they have listed, lots of tweaking to be done I'm sure! Plus there is also the new balancing act of the 2:1 FCLK, the CL they used wasn't exactly ideal in the slide shown. The kit I have is able to do roughly 4400MHz CL14 at the very least so it's certainly going to get interesting experimenting with this.


----------



## nick name

Krisztias said:


> Disappointing latency's... I hoped/thougt that we will have latency's in the 50's with Matisse, not in the mid 60's with 3733MHz...


With the higher CAS latency and what I'm assuming to be motherboard set sub-timings I'm not too worried about those numbers.


----------



## Krisztias

ComansoRowlett said:


> To be fair there is plenty of chance to lower tighten the timings from what they have listed, lots of tweaking to be done I'm sure! Plus there is also the new balancing act of the 2:1 FCLK, the CL they used wasn't exactly ideal in the slide shown. The kit I have is able to do roughly 4400MHz CL14 at the very least so it's certainly going to get interesting experimenting with this.





nick name said:


> With the higher CAS latency and what I'm assuming to be motherboard set sub-timings I'm not too worried about those numbers.


I hope you guys are right


----------



## narukun

AngryLobster said:


> Man I'm so sick of dealing with this DPC latency issue. At this point I am 99% sure it's the board itself. I've tried everything and have only a KB/Mouse connected. Picture below was from just idling at desktop for 30min.
> 
> I'm really not interested in doing another RMA and having to take my entire build apart + wait 3 weeks turn around.
> 
> Can anyone suggest a comparable motherboard? Maybe the Gaming 7.


Im having terrible latency here too, using latencymon 20k+ on ntoskrnl.exe and 2k+ nvlddmkm.sys, using windows 1903


----------



## AngryLobster

narukun said:


> Im having terrible latency here too, using latencymon 20k+ on ntoskrnl.exe and 2k+ nvlddmkm.sys, using windows 1903


I have basically tried 50 different things. None of it has worked and am confident it's the board itself.

I just bought a Gaming 7 Wifi to swap my CPU/GPU/SSD to and will report back if it solves the issue. 

I wouldn't care but I use a external DAC/AMP and the crackling/pops make my entire sound setup worthless (TH900 + JBL530's).


----------



## nick name

AngryLobster said:


> I have basically tried 50 different things. None of it has worked and am confident it's the board itself.
> 
> I just bought a Gaming 7 Wifi to swap my CPU/GPU/SSD to and will report back if it solves the issue.
> 
> I wouldn't care but I use a external DAC/AMP and the crackling/pops make my entire sound setup worthless (TH900 + JBL530's).


I understand your frustration. Hope you get it sorted.


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> My old G.Skills needed GearDown to get 3200 or more - don't think these Patriots need it at all.
> 
> What are your thoughts on interleaving? I've never seen any benefit before, but haven't tried it in ages.


I did not get this, sorry. Do you mean the automatic interleaving from using 4x8GB?

I compared Prime X470 Pro UEFI 4804 aka AEGSA ComboAM4 1.0.0.1 with UEFI 2304 for PMU code as per 1usmus guide for mod.

I'm finding second/fourth search lengths are 45BC not 45CC and I'm finding PMU sections did not get updated, ie they are identical.









@mtrai

What are your findings chap?



Krisztias said:


> Disappointing latency's... I hoped/thougt that we will have latency's in the 50's with Matisse, not in the mid 60's with 3733MHz...
> 
> 
> 
> ComansoRowlett said:
> 
> 
> 
> To be fair there is plenty of chance to lower tighten the timings from what they have listed, lots of tweaking to be done I'm sure! Plus there is also the new balancing act of the 2:1 FCLK, the CL they used wasn't exactly ideal in the slide shown. The kit I have is able to do roughly 4400MHz CL14 at the very least so it's certainly going to get interesting experimenting with this.
> 
> 
> 
> nick name said:
> 
> 
> 
> With the higher CAS latency and what I'm assuming to be motherboard set sub-timings I'm not too worried about those numbers.
> 
> 
> 
> Krisztias said:
> 
> 
> 
> I hope you guys are right
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

 @Krisztias in this thread we've seen tad below 60ns with decent stability on 2000 series. After seeing the AMD slides gives me confidence we are looking at >3533MHz with ease on 3000 series and should be able to improve on latency shown.

Yesterday on TPU there was ASUS X570 price leak story, members were discussing PCB layers in comments. Seems as if only the highest tier or odd lower one may get 8 and norm is 6, which the C7H is as well. Perhaps we will get sound RAM OC when coupled with 3000 series on C7H as well.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> I did not get this, sorry. Do you mean the automatic interleaving from using 4x8GB?
> 
> I compared Prime X470 Pro UEFI 4804 aka AEGSA ComboAM4 1.0.0.1 with UEFI 2304 for PMU code as per 1usmus guide for mod.
> 
> I'm finding second/fourth search lengths are 45BC not 45CC and I'm finding PMU sections did not get updated, ie they are identical.
> 
> US X570 price leak story, members were discussing PCB layers in comments. Seems as if only the highest tier or odd lower one may get 8 and norm is 6, which the C7H is as well. Perhaps we will get sound RAM OC when coupled with 3000 series on C7H as well.


Lol - Sorry - I know sometimes I'm not clear - I meant the bios settings in Advanced>CBS. Setting interleaving to channel, die, none etc.... and can any of these settings, including Interleave Hashing, make any difference to stability....

I also think we'll get better ram OCing with Mattisse on CH7.

Edit: so no PMU update for us!  Maybe we'll get one on AGESA 1002? I see some boards have this version already...


----------



## gupsterg

Ahh right.

Advanced > AMD CBS > DF Common Options > Memory Interleaving

Options are Auto / Socket / Die / Channel / None

You'll see in the note it states option changes only have affect if memory population is meeting requirement of option.

When I last checked with 2x8GB single rank/sided I could not see any performance benefit. Not tried with 4x8GB yet and don't have dual rank kit. I also think I won't see a difference regardless of RAM used due to CPU/#RAM channels.

On Threadripper it's exact same menu and settings. [Auto] or [DIE] for Distributed (UMA) and [Channel] for Local (NUMA). When I used 2x8GB on ZE any change to the options made no difference, only when I went 4x8GB did it make a difference, as then RAM was not unified and if I understand it correctly each die could use the RAM closest to it, not span the IF. Below is AIDA64 run on TR, left is NUMA, right is UMA.



Spoiler
















> Memory interleaving is a technique that CPUs use to increase the memory bandwidth available for an application. Without interleaving, consecutive memory blocks, often cache lines, are read from the same memory bank. So software that reads consecutive memory will need to wait for a memory transfer to complete before starting the next memory access. With memory interleaving enabled, consecutive memory blocks are in different banks and so can all contribute to the overall memory bandwidth a program can achieve


Above quote from here.

I doubt if this option change has stability effects TBH. As above shows it's more of a technique to improve organisation/usage of RAM resource.

*** edit ***

As PMU didn't seem to differ between Prime X470 AGESA 1.0.0.1 UEFI I changed version ID in my modded UEFI.



Spoiler


----------



## mtrai

@gupsterg



> What are you finding


Well the big take away with the new 32 MB bios is not matter what I could not flash it if I modified it in anyway. Most modules are the exact same there are just more of them...as well as a huge amount of padding.

As to the interleveling. I have had mixed results just using 2 sticks. It is really meant for 4 sticks of ram. Like I said though mixed results.

Only tried it on my C7H Wifi new bios.


----------



## gupsterg

@mtrai

If I take C7H 2203 and search for AGESA string 0.0.7.2 I see one instance, 2304 has 2; it's like it's 2 UEFIs in one file :headscrat.

So have you compared an AGESA 1.0.0.1 UEFI PMU to C7H 2304 and noted they are identical?

So far only done 2 real mods on 2304. First was update it using UBU v1.74.0.3, this flashed via flashback without issue. Second I took that flash file changed AGESA version string and it would not flash. I then took official 2304, edited AGESA version string, updated it via UBU and then it flashed via flashback.

Strangely when I compared the second modded UEFI and third I could find no difference in compare done by HxD. I will be double checking this if I muddle the files up from each method for comparison :headscrat.


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> @mtrai
> 
> If I take C7H 2203 and search for AGESA string 0.0.7.2 I see one instance, 2304 has 2; it's like it's 2 UEFIs in one file :headscrat.
> 
> So have you compared an AGESA 1.0.0.1 UEFI PMU to C7H 2304 and noted they are identical?
> 
> So far only done 2 real mods on 2304. First was update it using UBU v1.74.0.3, this flashed via flashback without issue. Second I took that flash file changed AGESA version string and it would not flash. I then took official 2304, edited AGESA version string, updated it via UBU and then it flashed via flashback.
> 
> Strangely when I compared the second modded UEFI and third I could find no difference in compare done by HxD. I will be double checking this if I muddle the files up from each method for comparison :headscrat.


I did not think to use flashback. LOL


----------



## gupsterg

mtrai said:


> I did not think to use flashback. LOL


Ahh, ok.



crakej said:


> Edit: so no PMU update for us!  Maybe we'll get one on AGESA 1002? I see some boards have this version already...


Compared a Gigabyte UEFI PMU from AGESA Combo-AM4 1.0.0.2, this has same PMU FW as ASUS Prime X470 Pro AGESA Combo-AM4 1.0.0.1 UEFI, which again is same as C7H UEFI 2304 Combo-AM4 0.0.7.2a. I haven't found a version string for PMU, dunno if one is disclosed in UEFI.

1usmus shared 2 zips in his post, out of it come say folders named as:-

AGESA 1.0.0.0a - 1.0.0.2c PMU

AGESA 1.0.0.4c - 0.0.7.2 PMU

If I've understood it correctly/based off my compares, the folder name is denoting AGESA version range for PMU FW with in it.

Basically we had same PMU FW between PinnaclePI-AM4 1.0.0.01 to 1.0.0.2c, then new one in PinnaclePI-AM4 1.0.0.4c, which is being used with up to even Combo-AM4 1.0.0.2.

The Stilt's post regarding PMU FW change was when we gained PinnaclePI-AM4 1.0.0.6, which again fits in with compares/1usmus folder naming, as C7H did not get the in between AGESA.

Will get same data to together on CPU/SMU FW if I can...


----------



## nick name

gupsterg said:


> -snip-
> 
> The Stilt's post regarding PMU FW change was when we gained PinnaclePI-AM4 1.0.0.6, which again fits in with compares/1usmus folder naming, as C7H did not get the in between AGESA.
> 
> Will get same data to together on CPU/SMU FW if I can...


If ASUS is being selective on which AGESA to use as they did before then I trust that they aren't updating just to update, but updating when it is useful.


----------



## gupsterg

@nick name

I got no issue with how ASUS been doing what they have with AGESA TBH. Surprising thing is the SOC VRM frequency range is still bork'd, I can still enter 600kHz. I did ping Raja about it months ago and he did say he'd pass on info, but couldn't guarantee when it would get resolved. There is another UEFI quirk someone uncovered ages ago, again did ping him, must check to see if it still exists.



Spoiler














@crakej

CPU microcode is same between AGESA Combo-AM4 1.0.0.1 & 1.0.0.2 as well.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> @nick name
> 
> I got no issue with how ASUS been doing what they have with AGESA TBH. Surprising thing is the SOC VRM frequency range is still bork'd, I can still enter 600kHz. I did ping Raja about it months ago and he did say he'd pass on info, but couldn't guarantee when it would get resolved. There is another UEFI quirk someone uncovered ages ago, again did ping him, must check to see if it still exists.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 274114
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @crakej
> 
> CPU microcode is same between AGESA Combo-AM4 1.0.0.1 & 1.0.0.2 as well.


Thanks for all the results Gupsterg - much appreciate!


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> Thanks for all the results Gupsterg - much appreciate!


NP  , surprising how often the AGESA version is changing, but not say PMU FW. We also end up with say other portions updating.



Spoiler














Gotta start running more of these UEFIs through UBU  .


----------



## Ramad

@crakej

The system may benefit from channel memory interleaving when using 4 sticks of RAM, that is 2 DIMMs pr. channel, so spreading data over 2 DIMMs is logical for the memory controller. This is not the case when using 2 DIMMs, spreading data over 1 DIMM does not make sense for the memory controller. Try using socket memory interleaving at 512 bytes if you have an 8Gbit based memory sticks, that will interleave data over occupied sockets, which are 2 sticks or more.


----------



## ryouiki

AngryLobster said:


> I have basically tried 50 different things. None of it has worked and am confident it's the board itself.
> 
> I just bought a Gaming 7 Wifi to swap my CPU/GPU/SSD to and will report back if it solves the issue.
> 
> I wouldn't care but I use a external DAC/AMP and the crackling/pops make my entire sound setup worthless (TH900 + JBL530's).


Very odd. Just out of curiosity have you disabled power management on your Nvidia card? I've not had issues either way with my external DAC (Schiit) but the power management on the the Nvidia cards can cause some issues here... I rarely run this system without EVGA utility running since I have custom frequency/voltage/fan curves that are being applied, so the card is not really downclocking.


----------



## nick name

I wish I would have thought to post this yesterday (because it doesn't seem to be live today), but there is New Zealand seller (https://www.computerlounge.co.nz) that listed the ASUS Crosshair VIII boards with prices. And on their site the new boards were priced barely higher than the previous CH7 boards. Like $10 more or around $275 after conversions to USD. The person that found it confirmed with the seller that those were actual prices and not placeholders. I can't remember what the Formula was priced at, but it wasn't crazy high like I was expecting. Unfortunately, they didn't have the Impact listed and unfortunately they don't have any I can find now. I'm super pumped if this translates to the US market not seeing a huge price jump from CH7 to CH8 like media outlets are expecting with X470 to X570. This doesn't include tariffs into the equation. 

I really want to try the new Crosshair with my 2700X and 3600CL15 RAM to see how the board factors into RAM performance. Everything looks so promising.

Edit:
Quick search in Google to find if anyone else saw this yesterday and I can't find someone who was smart enough to screen grab any of it. I did find that TechPowerUp is stating the CH8 is gonna run about $100 more than the CH7 so the prices I saw may have been place holders and the person that confirmed the prices may have been wrong.


----------



## gupsterg

@mtrai

Giga have AGESA Combo-AM4 1.0.0.3 out, PMU FW is same as AGESA PinnaclePI-AM4 1.0.0.4c - Combo-AM4 1.0.0.2 :headscrat . CPU microcode is updated again, D now for 2700X.



Spoiler














I added also PMU from say AGESA PinnaclePI-AM4 1.0.0.0a - 1.0.0.2c to UEFI 2304, flashes via flashback, board will not POST, will stick at Q-Code: 0d Q-LED: DRAM.

If I edit UEFI version number ie 2304 the file is not manually flashable or using flashback. If I edit date of UEFI again not flashable.

I can edit CPU mCode, add PMU file, edit AGESA version string, files is flashable both methods.


----------



## AngryLobster

nick name said:


> I wish I would have thought to post this yesterday (because it doesn't seem to be live today), but there is New Zealand seller (https://www.computerlounge.co.nz) that listed the ASUS Crosshair VIII boards with prices. And on their site the new boards were priced barely higher than the previous CH7 boards. Like $10 more or around $275 after conversions to USD. The person that found it confirmed with the seller that those were actual prices and not placeholders. I can't remember what the Formula was priced at, but it wasn't crazy high like I was expecting. Unfortunately, they didn't have the Impact listed and unfortunately they don't have any I can find now. I'm super pumped if this translates to the US market not seeing a huge price jump from CH7 to CH8 like media outlets are expecting with X470 to X570. This doesn't include tariffs into the equation.
> 
> I really want to try the new Crosshair with my 2700X and 3600CL15 RAM to see how the board factors into RAM performance. Everything looks so promising.
> 
> Edit:
> Quick search in Google to find if anyone else saw this yesterday and I can't find someone who was smart enough to screen grab any of it. I did find that TechPowerUp is stating the CH8 is gonna run about $100 more than the CH7 so the prices I saw may have been place holders and the person that confirmed the prices may have been wrong.


Given the Gigabyte Gaming 7 successor is $349 (https://www.anandtech.com/show/1453...d-with-wifi-6-25g-lan-triple-pcie-40-m2-slots), ASUS CH8 will definitely be $399 minimum.


----------



## AngryLobster

ryouiki said:


> Very odd. Just out of curiosity have you disabled power management on your Nvidia card? I've not had issues either way with my external DAC (Schiit) but the power management on the the Nvidia cards can cause some issues here... I rarely run this system without EVGA utility running since I have custom frequency/voltage/fan curves that are being applied, so the card is not really downclocking.


Yeah even on maximum performance latency is reduced but I still get audible stutter/pops. I also disabled all power saving in AMD CBS setting through the bios + unplugged everything but my mouse/KB, disabled Network/Bluetooth, you name it.

My Gigabyte board just arrived so I'm gonna do the swap now to see if the CH7 is the culprit.


----------



## IF6WAS9

narukun said:


> Im having terrible latency here too, using latencymon 20k+ on ntoskrnl.exe and 2k+ nvlddmkm.sys, using windows 1903





ryouiki said:


> Very odd. Just out of curiosity have you disabled power management on your Nvidia card? I've not had issues either way with my external DAC (Schiit) but the power management on the the Nvidia cards can cause some issues here... I rarely run this system without EVGA utility running since I have custom frequency/voltage/fan curves that are being applied, so the card is not really downclocking.


Have either of you having latency issues tried reverting back to an earlier Intel network driver? If not, you should try one from late 2018 (23.5.0.0. from 10/15/18 works for me).

I too use an external USB DAC and I recently had some serious latency issues that went away after reverting to an older network driver. 

I had only updated a few things prior to the latency issue so I was able to uninstall or revert each thing to earlier versions until hitting upon the network driver as the culprit. I've tried the last 3 Intel drivers and they all cause the latency issue for me.


----------



## crakej

Ramad said:


> @crakej
> 
> The system may benefit from channel memory interleaving when using 4 sticks of RAM, that is 2 DIMMs pr. channel, so spreading data over 2 DIMMs is logical for the memory controller. This is not the case when using 2 DIMMs, spreading data over 1 DIMM does not make sense for the memory controller. Try using socket memory interleaving at 512 bytes if you have an 8Gbit based memory sticks, that will interleave data over occupied sockets, which are 2 sticks or more.


Thanks Ramad - I might give it a go on these sticks see how it works out.


----------



## Rusakova

IF6WAS9 said:


> Have either of you having latency issues tried reverting back to an earlier Intel network driver? If not, you should try one from late 2018 (23.5.0.0. from 10/15/18 works for me).
> 
> I too use an external USB DAC and I recently had some serious latency issues that went away after reverting to an older network driver.
> 
> I had only updated a few things prior to the latency issue so I was able to uninstall or revert each thing to earlier versions until hitting upon the network driver as the culprit. I've tried the last 3 Intel drivers and they all cause the latency issue for me.


Usually the NIC driver is using MSI interrupts as a default, did you check before and after reverting ?


----------



## narukun

IF6WAS9 said:


> Have either of you having latency issues tried reverting back to an earlier Intel network driver? If not, you should try one from late 2018 (23.5.0.0. from 10/15/18 works for me).
> 
> I too use an external USB DAC and I recently had some serious latency issues that went away after reverting to an older network driver.
> 
> I had only updated a few things prior to the latency issue so I was able to uninstall or revert each thing to earlier versions until hitting upon the network driver as the culprit. I've tried the last 3 Intel drivers and they all cause the latency issue for me.


I really appreciate your help!, but I couldnt find that driver about that date, only Version: 23.5 (Previously Released) Date: 06/12/2018

Do you know where can I find that one?


----------



## Praetorr

narukun said:


> I really appreciate your help!, but I couldnt find that driver about that date, only Version: 23.5 (Previously Released) Date: 06/12/2018
> 
> Do you know where can I find that one?


https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/28484/Ethernet-Intel-Network-Adapter-Driver-for-Windows-10


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> @mtrai
> 
> Giga have AGESA Combo-AM4 1.0.0.3 out, PMU FW is same as AGESA PinnaclePI-AM4 1.0.0.4c - Combo-AM4 1.0.0.2 :headscrat . CPU microcode is updated again, D now for 2700X.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 274314
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I added also PMU from say AGESA PinnaclePI-AM4 1.0.0.0a - 1.0.0.2c to UEFI 2304, flashes via flashback, board will not POST, will stick at Q-Code: 0d Q-LED: DRAM.
> 
> If I edit UEFI version number ie 2304 the file is not manually flashable or using flashback. If I edit date of UEFI again not flashable.
> 
> I can edit CPU mCode, add PMU file, edit AGESA version string, files is flashable both methods.


Gonna look at all this today I hope. Been busy this week. Do you mind sending me your bios that worked. Would save me some time.


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> Thanks Ramad - I might give it a go on these sticks see how it works out.


Just gonna add I have seen some improvements with even 2 sticks but you have to play with the size settings. Some ram chips prefer different sizes to get slightly better latency. However this setting is really neccessary to set if using 4 sticks. Also set the Memory Clear option to disable so most of the time it retain the CBS memory settings. One other setting that needs to be address bank group swap and bank group swap alt, for 2 sticks this needs to be disable for 4 sticks it needs to be set to enable. See if all this helps.


----------



## crakej

mtrai said:


> Just gonna add I have seen some improvements with even 2 sticks but you have to play with the size settings. Some ram chips prefer different sizes to get slightly better latency. However this setting is really neccessary to set if using 4 sticks. Also set the Memory Clear option to disable so most of the time it retain the CBS memory settings. One other setting that needs to be address bank group swap and bank group swap alt, for 2 sticks this needs to be disable for 4 sticks it needs to be set to enable. See if all this helps.


My current sticks (2) seem to prefer BGS and BGSA to be disabled.


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> My current sticks (2) seem to prefer BGS and BGSA to be disabled.


2 sticks should be disabled 4 sticks should be enabled.


----------



## AngryLobster

Just an update, moving all the same hardware over to the Aorus Gaming 7 has solved the pops/crackles and what wasn't apparent to me, stutter in games.

I didn't even format and he issues were gone immediately so definitely something up with the CH7. 

The sad part is the Gigabyte's bios is absolute garbage and IMO Asus functioned like a Rolls Royce in comparison (especially in terms of fan control).


----------



## crakej

mtrai said:


> 2 sticks should be disabled 4 sticks should be enabled.


I just did experiment with bios 1201 - loaded 3600 profile saved from bios 2304.

Bios versions <2000 didn't let you control BGSA - only BGA, that and probably a few other things, make profiles from 2304 unusable on Bios with AGESA =<1006. I'm still going to do a few more experiments on 1201 - when I get the time to enter the timings manually. Trying to update my programming skills so I can try put together a couple of Windows apps I've been thinking about - it's taking up my spare time!


----------



## HolyFist

AngryLobster said:


> Just an update, moving all the same hardware over to the Aorus Gaming 7 has solved the pops/crackles and what wasn't apparent to me, stutter in games.
> 
> I didn't even format and he issues were gone immediately so definitely something up with the CH7.
> 
> The sad part is the Gigabyte's bios is absolute garbage and IMO Asus functioned like a Rolls Royce in comparison (especially in terms of fan control).


Yeah i knew it had to be ASUS, the C7H Wifi has the problem, the C6H also had this problem.

Gigabyte BIOS was revamped but i think is only for new boards (not sure).

I'm seriously disappointed in ASUS, i mean when i look at BIOS: https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/ultimative-am4-uefi-bios-ubersicht-14-06-19-a-1228903.html

ASUS is only one that literally just doesn't have more than 3 boards on 1.0.0.1 (and its been at least a week since)

I also still didn't forget the mess it was with Fans randomly going full speed out of nowhere either and took them over a year to get it fixed.

Either way all these new boards are very expensive, the only upgrade i see for me is the 3950X, then the Gigabyte X570 Aorus Extreme is very appealing but also very expensive.

Guess i'll just buy the CPU at one point depending on how it performs in games.


----------



## neikosr0x

Have you guys experienced the same behavior after Windows 1903 Update? Where after the update, The CPU doesn't go to the lower stepping (power limit) even when setting the Windows profile to "balanced" with the minimum set to 5%. After the update, my CPU doesn't really stays at low power and starts to draw 1.5+ almost constantly. any minor request by a program will make the CPU to kick in at almost full frequency while pushing the voltage over 1.5volt And yes i'm using PE4 But before the update i was getting a 1.530max volt for just a second and the back to 1.450volt max with 1.475 averages on Gaming. way less if i was only browsing and stuff like that. I did went back to 1803 and everything went back to normal. although something tells me that something might be wrong there. I did noticed that while on the 1903 Update if went on killing all programs running in the background the CPU would end up stepping back to the lower voltage and cpu frequency.


----------



## nick name

neikosr0x said:


> Have you guys experienced the same behavior after Windows 1903 Update? Where after the update, The CPU doesn't go to the lower stepping (power limit) even when setting the Windows profile to "balanced" with the minimum set to 5%. After the update, my CPU doesn't really stays at low power and starts to draw 1.5+ almost constantly. any minor request by a program will make the CPU to kick in at almost full frequency while pushing the voltage over 1.5volt And yes i'm using PE4 But before the update i was getting a 1.530max volt for just a second and the back to 1.450volt max with 1.475 averages on Gaming. way less if i was only browsing and stuff like that. I did went back to 1803 and everything went back to normal. although something tells me that something might be wrong there. I did noticed that while on the 1903 Update if went on killing all programs running in the background the CPU would end up stepping back to the lower voltage and cpu frequency.


Are you on the latest chipset drivers?


----------



## Jackalito

neikosr0x said:


> Have you guys experienced the same behavior after Windows 1903 Update? Where after the update, The CPU doesn't go to the lower stepping (power limit) even when setting the Windows profile to "balanced" with the minimum set to 5%. After the update, my CPU doesn't really stays at low power and starts to draw 1.5+ almost constantly. any minor request by a program will make the CPU to kick in at almost full frequency while pushing the voltage over 1.5volt And yes i'm using PE4 But before the update i was getting a 1.530max volt for just a second and the back to 1.450volt max with 1.475 averages on Gaming. way less if i was only browsing and stuff like that. I did went back to 1803 and everything went back to normal. although something tells me that something might be wrong there. I did noticed that while on the 1903 Update if went on killing all programs running in the background the CPU would end up stepping back to the lower voltage and cpu frequency.


You're not alone in this boat. I saw the same behavior when I installed 1903 (fresh install - no update). The only workaround I've found so far is to create a power plan where I limit the max CPU speed to 50%, so that when I'm just browsing the web, the system is not pulling up absurd voltages and clocks. 

I'm using the latest chipset drivers and my installation is up to date as well.


----------



## nick name

Jackalito said:


> You're not alone in this boat. I saw the same behavior when I installed 1903 (fresh install - no update). The only workaround I've found so far is to create a power plan where I limit the max CPU speed to 50%, so that when I'm just browsing the web, the system is not pulling up absurd voltages and clocks.
> 
> I'm using the latest chipset drivers and my installation is up to date as well.


I've been hearing about new optimizations within Windows with 1903, but they all say that you need a new chipset driver which they speak about as if it hasn't been released yet. However, I do wonder if it's the latest one that motherboard manufacturers are telling users to update with the new AGESA roll outs. 

I'm still on on 1809 so I haven't seen the behavior myself.


----------



## gupsterg

mtrai said:


> Gonna look at all this today I hope. Been busy this week. Do you mind sending me your bios that worked. Would save me some time.


This one is 2304 with mCode D.



crakej said:


> My current sticks (2) seem to prefer BGS and BGSA to be disabled.


Shouldn't make a difference in stability IMO. Again it's a technique for organising RAM access from what I gathered.

The Stilt recomended BGS: Off BGSA: On if running 1 dimm per channel of single sided/rank RAM, any other setup BGS: On BGSA: Off.


----------



## nick name

neikosr0x said:


> Have you guys experienced the same behavior after Windows 1903 Update? Where after the update, The CPU doesn't go to the lower stepping (power limit) even when setting the Windows profile to "balanced" with the minimum set to 5%. After the update, my CPU doesn't really stays at low power and starts to draw 1.5+ almost constantly. any minor request by a program will make the CPU to kick in at almost full frequency while pushing the voltage over 1.5volt And yes i'm using PE4 But before the update i was getting a 1.530max volt for just a second and the back to 1.450volt max with 1.475 averages on Gaming. way less if i was only browsing and stuff like that. I did went back to 1803 and everything went back to normal. although something tells me that something might be wrong there. I did noticed that while on the 1903 Update if went on killing all programs running in the background the CPU would end up stepping back to the lower voltage and cpu frequency.


I've updated to 1903 and I think I'm seeing the same thing. If the reporting on the 1903 optimizations are accurate and the latest chipset drivers are the ones we need for it to work then it seems like what we are seeing is the optimization to speed responses. Namely the slide pictured.


----------



## gupsterg

Plan on using 1903 on 2700X+C7H this weekend, TR1950X+ZEA seems normal to me...









Install was fresh ISO not update...


----------



## kundica

nick name said:


> I've been hearing about new optimizations within Windows with 1903, but they all say that you need a new chipset driver which they speak about as if it hasn't been released yet. However, I do wonder if it's the latest one that motherboard manufacturers are telling users to update with the new AGESA roll outs.
> 
> I'm still on on 1809 so I haven't seen the behavior myself.





nick name said:


> I've updated to 1903 and I think I'm seeing the same thing. If the reporting on the 1903 optimizations are accurate and the latest chipset drivers are the ones we need for it to work then it seems like what we are seeing is the optimization to speed responses. Namely the slide pictured.


You don't need a new chipset driver except for Ryzen 3xxx series. Should've been obvious from HWUB's testing even though they came to a different conclusion. https://twitter.com/Thracks/status/1139578937531666434


----------



## nick name

kundica said:


> You don't need a new chipset driver except for Ryzen 3xxx series. Should've been obvious from HWUB's testing even thought they came to a different conclusion. https://twitter.com/Thracks/status/1139578937531666434


Lol, I'm an idiot. The thing I thought it was states clearly it's for 3rd gen Ryzen. 

Maybe I am only seeing what I want then, but I think I am seeing more frequent voltage spikes. I should have paid more attention before I upgraded though. My assessment is the furthest from scientific.


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> This one is 2304 with mCode D.
> 
> 
> 
> Shouldn't make a difference in stability IMO. Again it's a technique for organising RAM access from what I gathered.
> 
> The Stilt recomended BGS: Off BGSA: On if running 1 dimm per channel of single sided/rank RAM, any other setup BGS: On BGSA: Off.


Thank for the bios. Will check it out in a bit.

Exactly what you said....and people need to know they need to check is they have single sided or double sided ram. I forgot about that detail.


----------



## gupsterg

@mtrai

NP. I can't say I found mCode injection has destabilised UEFI in minor tests done so far, so look forward to knowing how you find it.









If you have, can you share SiSoft Sandra > Processor MultiCore Efficiency benchmark results?


----------



## mtrai

@gupsterg will do testing and all over the weekend.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Lol, I'm an idiot. The thing I thought it was states clearly it's for 3rd gen Ryzen.
> 
> Maybe I am only seeing what I want then, but I think I am seeing more frequent voltage spikes. I should have paid more attention before I upgraded though. My assessment is the furthest from scientific.


There is some performance increase with this version of Windows - it's widely reported on youtube that the May update has brought some better games benchmarks.... So just the left half of the image 

I'm only just installing it myself - it still hadn't come up in Windows update!


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> There is some performance increase with this version of Windows - it's widely reported on youtube that the May update has brought some better games benchmarks.... So just the left half of the image
> 
> I'm only just installing it myself - it still hadn't come up in Windows update!


Yeah, I had to force it with Update Assistant.


----------



## nick name

Has everyone seen the Geekbench 4 scores run on a Gigabyte X570 with 4400MHz RAM and 4266Mhz RAM? The CPU is a Ryzen 3600.


----------



## neikosr0x

nick name said:


> neikosr0x said:
> 
> 
> 
> Have you guys experienced the same behavior after Windows 1903 Update? Where after the update, The CPU doesn't go to the lower stepping (power limit) even when setting the Windows profile to "balanced" with the minimum set to 5%. After the update, my CPU doesn't really stays at low power and starts to draw 1.5+ almost constantly. any minor request by a program will make the CPU to kick in at almost full frequency while pushing the voltage over 1.5volt And yes i'm using PE4 But before the update i was getting a 1.530max volt for just a second and the back to 1.450volt max with 1.475 averages on Gaming. way less if i was only browsing and stuff like that. I did went back to 1803 and everything went back to normal. although something tells me that something might be wrong there. I did noticed that while on the 1903 Update if went on killing all programs running in the background the CPU would end up stepping back to the lower voltage and cpu frequency.
> 
> 
> 
> Are you on the latest chipset drivers?
Click to expand...

Yes i tried with the both the ones on the asus website and the ones on AMD website both had the same behaviour. It seems that when you have few process running on the background like Chrome, Corsair iCue, Logitech hub and Steam. Those things alone are enough to make the cpu to kick in lots of volt without idling. And like i said, going back to 1803 solved it so it might be something here. It is a similar behaviour as activating Ryzen Balanced profile on Windows.


----------



## nick name

neikosr0x said:


> Yes i tried with the both the ones on the asus website and the ones on AMD website both had the same behaviour. It seems that when you have few process running on the background like Chrome, Corsair iCue, Logitech hub and Steam. Those things alone are enough to make the cpu to kick in lots of volt without idling. And like i said, going back to 1803 solved it so it might be something here. It is a similar behaviour as activating Ryzen Balanced profile on Windows.


Ummmm, wut?


----------



## QuadJunky

nick name said:


> Ummmm, wut?


Some how all of his s's turned into s here you go though.....



neikosr0x said:


> Yes i tried with the both the ones on the asus website and the ones on AMD website both had the same behaviour. It seems that when you have few process running on the background like Chrome, Corsair iCue, Logitech hub and steam. Those things alone are enough to make the cpu to kick in lots of volt without idling. And like i said, going back to 1803 solved it so it might be something here. It is a similar behaviour as activating Ryzen Balanced profile on Windows.


----------



## neikosr0x

nick name said:


> Ummmm, wut?


hahahaha yea! ***? i think that the mobile website is broken hahahahahahahah


----------



## 1usmus

gupsterg said:


> @mtrai
> 
> NP. I can't say I found mCode injection has destabilised UEFI in minor tests done so far, so look forward to knowing how you find it.
> 
> View attachment 274540
> 
> 
> If you have, can you share SiSoft Sandra > Processor MultiCore Efficiency benchmark results?


unfortunately, the injection of the new microcode is only a half of the solution ... with each update of the microcode, there is an update of other modules / drivers. Therefore, it is impossible to call the bios full-fledged after an independent update. At the moment I do not have data where other important pieces of code are located ...


----------



## mtrai

1usmus said:


> unfortunately, the injection of the new microcode is only a half of the solution ... with each update of the microcode, there is an update of other modules / drivers. Therefore, it is impossible to call the bios full-fledged after an independent update. At the moment I do not have data where other important pieces of code are located ...


Quick question for you. On the last 2304 bios when you edit it with amibcp to show options in the bios, when it saves it is now 4 KB smaller. I assume that is due to the bios being double the size. However when trying to flash it, it errors no matter which method is use. Any insight? I am going to try to use the flashback method today with a modded bios. It does not work size mismatch. 

The reason I do this is this allows you to use the search in the bios for things we cannot show such HPET and Spread Spectum and allows you to change the settings.


----------



## mtrai

1usmus said:


> unfortunately, the injection of the new microcode is only a half of the solution ... with each update of the microcode, there is an update of other modules / drivers. Therefore, it is impossible to call the bios full-fledged after an independent update. At the moment I do not have data where other important pieces of code are located ...


I have tried to explain exactly that. It is not as easy as just swapping a module as others are tied to each other.

Quick question for you. On the last 2304 bios when you edit it with amibcp to show options in the bios, when it saves it is now 4 KB smaller. I assume that is due to the bios being double the size. However when trying to flash it, it errors no matter which method is use. Any insight? I am going to try to use the flashback method today with a modded bios. It does not work size mismatch. 

The reason I do this is this allows you to use the search in the bios for things we cannot show such HPET and Spread Spectum and allows you to change the settings.


----------



## AngryLobster

Another update on my DPC latency saga. I thought this board was the issue causing my 2000-3000+ latency (audio pops/crackles) via Nvidia driver but upon switching to the Gigabyte Gaming 7 (terrible mobo) it's still there just slightly quieter.

I switched back to the CH7 because the Gigabyte board is absolutely atrocious in comparison.

I am completely lost at this point. I've changed motherboard, ram and have disabled everything nonessential with only a mouse connected.

Can a PSU cause this? It's either the PSU or my 2080 Ti at this point.


----------



## narukun

AngryLobster said:


> Another update on my DPC latency saga. I thought this board was the issue causing my 2000-3000+ latency (audio pops/crackles) via Nvidia driver but upon switching to the Gigabyte Gaming 7 (terrible mobo) it's still there just slightly quieter.
> 
> I switched back to the CH7 because the Gigabyte board is absolutely atrocious in comparison.
> 
> I am completely lost at this point. I've changed motherboard, ram and have disabled everything nonessential with only a mouse connected.
> 
> Can a PSU cause this? It's either the PSU or my 2080 Ti at this point.


I changed my rams from crucial to g skill samsung b-die, changed my mobo from B450-F Strix to CH7 and my latency is the same on latencymon, though the games are smoother. I feel like is my GPU or PSU too, I'll probably change the PSU later for a cheap EVGA just for testing.


----------



## AngryLobster

I'm gonna go out to Frys and buy a PSU tonight. I'm ready to pull my hair out at this point.

EDIT: Borrowed a friends PSU which did not fix the issue. At this point it's gotta be either trash Nvidia driver or my 2080 Ti itself which has run flawlessly since launch.

I give up.


----------



## Rusakova

AngryLobster said:


> I'm gonna go out to Frys and buy a PSU tonight. I'm ready to pull my hair out at this point.
> 
> EDIT: Borrowed a friends PSU which did not fix the issue. At this point it's gotta be either trash Nvidia driver or my 2080 Ti itself which has run flawlessly since launch.
> 
> I give up.


Are you using the AMD SATA drivers ?
- if yes try reverting to standard SATA AHCI controller and see if it helps.









Have you tried Installing the Nvidia graphics driver without the Nvidia Audio HD drivers ?


----------



## AngryLobster

Yeah I uninstalled the AMD Sata drivers a long time ago and am using the default Microsoft ones you have pictured.

I have only the Nvidia driver installed, no Physx, no audio. I have every audio component disabled all together. HPET off, everything in MSI mode, C states off, Performance mode for both CPU/GPU, you name it.

I just swapped to a GTX 1060 that I borrowed and the issue is still there so definitely not my 2080 Ti. This means the only component that I have not swapped are the SSD and CPU.

Gonna swap SSD on Monday and pray.


----------



## nick name

AngryLobster said:


> Yeah I uninstalled the AMD Sata drivers a long time ago and am using the default Microsoft ones you have pictured.
> 
> I have only the Nvidia driver installed, no Physx, no audio. I have every audio component disabled all together. HPET off, everything in MSI mode, C states off, Performance mode for both CPU/GPU, you name it.
> 
> I just swapped to a GTX 1060 that I borrowed and the issue is still there so definitely not my 2080 Ti. This means the only component that I have not swapped are the SSD and CPU.
> 
> Gonna swap SSD on Monday and pray.


Did you try just changing the SATA port you're using?


----------



## Aretak

AngryLobster said:


> Yeah I uninstalled the AMD Sata drivers a long time ago and am using the default Microsoft ones you have pictured.
> 
> I have only the Nvidia driver installed, no Physx, no audio. I have every audio component disabled all together. HPET off, everything in MSI mode, C states off, Performance mode for both CPU/GPU, you name it.
> 
> I just swapped to a GTX 1060 that I borrowed and the issue is still there so definitely not my 2080 Ti. This means the only component that I have not swapped are the SSD and CPU.
> 
> Gonna swap SSD on Monday and pray.


I was actually having the very same problem recently with audio distortions. I initially thought the problem was down to my CPU or RAM overclock, but I eventually narrowed the cause down to the cheap 120GB SSD that I was using as a boot drive. I replaced it with a 240GB Samsung NVMe drive (an SM961 that I found cheap) and it solved the problem entirely. So you might have some luck with changing out your SSD.


----------



## ryouiki

AngryLobster said:


> Yeah I uninstalled the AMD Sata drivers a long time ago and am using the default Microsoft ones you have pictured.
> 
> I have only the Nvidia driver installed, no Physx, no audio. I have every audio component disabled all together. HPET off, everything in MSI mode, C states off, Performance mode for both CPU/GPU, you name it.
> 
> I just swapped to a GTX 1060 that I borrowed and the issue is still there so definitely not my 2080 Ti. This means the only component that I have not swapped are the SSD and CPU.
> 
> Gonna swap SSD on Monday and pray.


Sorry to hear you are still having issues... just out of curiosity did you recently upgrade to Windows 10 1903? There have been a number of complaints regarding the latest Windows release and latency, Microsoft is apparently looking into the issue.

Also, somewhere earlier in the thread there was mention of issues with Intel LAN drivers... for anyone seeing high latency there, go to Device Manager -> Intel 211 -> Advanced and set Interrupt Modulation to either Low or disable it entirely and see if that helps resolve the issue.


----------



## gupsterg

1usmus said:


> unfortunately, the injection of the new microcode is only a half of the solution ... with each update of the microcode, there is an update of other modules / drivers. Therefore, it is impossible to call the bios full-fledged after an independent update. At the moment I do not have data where other important pieces of code are located ...


Cheers for the insight  .

mCode for 2700X

UEFI 0601 8008206
UEFI 0702 8008206
UEFI 0804 8008206
UEFI 1002 8008206

UEFI 1101 800820B
UEFI 1103 800820B
UEFI 1201 800820B

UEFI 2008 800820B
UEFI 2103 800820B
UEFI 2203 800820B
UEFI 2304 800820B

mCode B has been used with AGESA PinnaclePI-AM4 1.0.0.6 as well is AM4 ComboPI 0.0.7.0 to AM4 ComboPI 0.0.7.2a.

So far I have found PMU FW there are only 2 versions.

First found between AGESA PinnaclePI-AM4 1.0.0.0a to 1.0.0.2c, second found between AGESA PinnaclePI-AM4 1.0.0.4c to Combo-AM4 1.0.0.3.

I did compare your method of PMU injection with The Stilt's for his custom C6H UEFIs (must check his ZE UEFI), seems the same method.

SMU FW

43.18.0 was in UEFI 0601 AGESA PinnaclePI-AM4 1.0.0.2
43.20.0 was in UEFI 1002 AGESA PinnaclePI-AM4 1.0.0.2c
43.20.0 was in UEFI 1103 AGESA PinnaclePI-AM4 1.0.0.6
43.21.0 was in UEFI 2008 AGESA Combo-AM4 0.0.7.0
43.21.0 was in UEFI 2304 AGESA Combo-AM4 0.0.7.2a

SMU FW version string I could see in UEFI in quick search I did.

I do believe modules can be updated as needed. From ASUS support page:-



> Version 0601 2018/05/11 8.09 MBytes
> 
> ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) BIOS 0601
> 1. Update SMU Firmware to version 43.18.0
> 2. Update RAID driver to version 9.2.0.41.
> 3. Update Asus Grid notification behavior


Also it seems some vendors do not update all option roms. Left is C7H UEFI 2304 AGESA 0.0.7.2, middle is Prime X470 Pro UEFI 4804 AGESA 1.0.0.1, right is GigaByte X470 AGESA 1.0.0.2.









Seems UBU can update these as well.


----------



## 1usmus

gupsterg said:


> Cheers for the insight  .
> 
> mCode for 2700X
> 
> UEFI 0601 8008206
> UEFI 0702 8008206
> UEFI 0804 8008206
> UEFI 1002 8008206
> 
> UEFI 1101 800820B
> UEFI 1103 800820B
> UEFI 1201 800820B
> 
> UEFI 2008 800820B
> UEFI 2103 800820B
> UEFI 2203 800820B
> UEFI 2304 800820B
> 
> mCode B has been used with AGESA PinnaclePI-AM4 1.0.0.6 as well is AM4 ComboPI 0.0.7.0 to AM4 ComboPI 0.0.7.2a.
> 
> So far I have found PMU FW there are only 2 versions.
> 
> First found between AGESA PinnaclePI-AM4 1.0.0.0a to 1.0.0.2c, second found between AGESA PinnaclePI-AM4 1.0.0.4c to Combo-AM4 1.0.0.3.
> 
> I did compare your method of PMU injection with The Stilt's for his custom C6H UEFIs (must check his ZE UEFI), seems the same method.
> 
> SMU FW
> 
> 43.18.0 was in UEFI 0601 AGESA PinnaclePI-AM4 1.0.0.2
> 43.20.0 was in UEFI 1002 AGESA PinnaclePI-AM4 1.0.0.2c
> 43.20.0 was in UEFI 1103 AGESA PinnaclePI-AM4 1.0.0.6
> 43.21.0 was in UEFI 2008 AGESA Combo-AM4 0.0.7.0
> 43.21.0 was in UEFI 2304 AGESA Combo-AM4 0.0.7.2a
> 
> SMU FW version string I could see in UEFI in quick search I did.
> 
> I do believe modules can be updated as needed. From ASUS support page:-
> 
> 
> 
> Also it seems some vendors do not update all option roms. Left is C7H UEFI 2304 AGESA 0.0.7.2, middle is Prime X470 Pro UEFI 4804 AGESA 1.0.0.1, right is GigaByte X470 AGESA 1.0.0.2.
> 
> View attachment 274696
> 
> 
> Seems UBU can update these as well.
> 
> View attachment 274698


true, the methods are identical and all important parts of the code are contained in the padding section


----------



## gupsterg

1usmus said:


> true, the methods are identical and all important parts of the code are contained in the padding section


 :thumb: .

Not full list but was to see some things.



Spoiler



UEFI 0207 AGESA PinnaclePi-AM4 1.0.0.0a
mCode 8008202
SMU 43.10.0
EC1: MBEC-X470-0108
EC2: RGE2-X470-0103
LED EC1: AUMA0-E6K5-0105
LED EC2: AULA1-S072-0203

UEFI 0401 AGESA PinnaclePi-AM4 1.0.0.0a
mCode 8008202
SMU 43.10.0
EC1: MBEC-X470-0108
EC2: RGE2-X470-0103
LED EC1: AUMA0-E6K5-0105
LED EC2: AULA1-S072-0203

UEFI 0509 AGESA PinnaclePi-AM4 1.0.0.2a
mCode 8008206
SMU 43.16.0
EC1: MBEC-X470-0111
EC2: RGE2-X470-0103
LED EC1: AUMA0-E6K5-0105
LED EC2: AULA1-S072-0203

UEFI 0601 AGESA PinnaclePi-AM4 1.0.0.2a
mCode 8008206
SMU 43.18.0
EC1: MBEC-X470-0111
EC2: RGE2-X470-0103
LED EC1: AUMA0-E6K5-0105
LED EC2: AULA1-S072-0203

UEFI 0702 AGESA PinnaclePi-AM4 1.0.0.2c
mCode 8008206
SMU 43.20.0
EC1: MBEC-X470-0113
EC2: RGE2-X470-0103
LED EC1: AUMA0-E6K5-0105
LED EC2: AULA1-S072-0203

UEFI 0804 AGESA PinnaclePi-AM4 1.0.0.2c
mCode 8008206
SMU 43.20.0
EC1: MBEC-X470-0113
EC2: RGE2-X470-0103
LED EC1: AUMA0-E6K5-0105
LED EC2: AULA1-S072-0203

UEFI 1002 AGESA PinnaclePi-AM4 1.0.0.2c
mCode 8008206
SMU 43.20.0
EC1: MBEC-X470-0115
EC2: RGE2-X470-0103
LED EC1: AUMA0-E6K5-0105
LED EC2: AULA1-S072-0203

UEFI 1103 AGESA PinnaclePi-AM4 1.0.0.6
mCode 800820B
SMU 43.20.0
EC1: MBEC-X470-0115
EC2: RGE2-X470-0103
LED EC1: AUMA0-E6K5-0105
LED EC2: AULA1-S072-0203

UEFI 2304 AGESA Combo-AM4 0.0.7.2a
mCode 800820B
SMU 43.21.0
EC1: MBEC-X470-0115
EC2: RGE2-X470-0103
LED EC1: AUMA0-E6K5-0105
LED EC2: AULA1-S072-0203



Notes:

i) From UEFI 0702 ASUS WMI, but has issues, also 0804, from 1002 fixed. Q-Code: 70 denotes ASUS EC flash occurring.

ii) PMU FW (aka IMC) 2 files, first found between AGESA PinnaclePI-AM4 1.0.0.0a to 1.0.0.2c, second found between AGESA PinnaclePI-AM4 1.0.0.4c to Combo-AM4 1.0.0.3.

iii) SMU FW can be shared between AGESA, for example PinnaclePi-AM4 1.0.0.2c/1.0.0.6 both used SMU 43.20.0.

iv) Applying PMU v1 to UEFI 2304 (aka PMU v2 UEFI) resulted in board Q-Code: 0d Q-LED: DRAM on POST.

Successful mods so far to UEFI 2304:-

i) mCode update, tested 800820C and 800820D.

ii) Disk controller EFI/OROM update.



Spoiler





















iii) AGESA version string change

Failed mods so far:-

i) PMU FW swap.

iii) UEFI version string change.

sTR4 has this menu to adjust IMC training:-









Have you seen any mobo on AM4 with this menu or been able to mod access to it?


----------



## Reous

I only have seen the "PMU Training" settings in Agesa ComboAM4 1001 or higher and only in the Zen2 files. Is this screen from you? Are these settings working with Zen+?


----------



## gupsterg

Reous said:


> I only have seen the "PMU Training" settings in Agesa ComboAM4 1001 or higher and only in the Zen2 files. Is this screen from you? Are these settings working with Zen+?


Thank you :thumb: .

Screenshot is from my Zenith Extreme Alpha UEFI 0405 with Threadripper 1950X.

Threadripper has had this option on generation 1xxx since launch, even Zenith Extreme had option.

It must be possible to mod this to AM4 1xxx/2xxx in my opinion.


----------



## kmellz

Yeah updated (all) the modules and microcode a while ago with UBU (main thread has a good guide/info https://www.win-raid.com/t154f16-Tool-Guide-News-quot-UEFI-BIOS-Updater-quot-UBU.html ) on 2304, everything working fine. Didn't try modding anything more though, just updating since many vendors seems to never update these parts of the bios sadly.


----------



## gupsterg

kmellz said:


> Yeah updated (all) the modules and microcode a while ago with UBU (main thread has a good guide/info https://www.win-raid.com/t154f16-Tool-Guide-News-quot-UEFI-BIOS-Updater-quot-UBU.html ) on 2304, everything working fine. Didn't try modding anything more though, just updating since many vendors seems to never update these parts of the bios sadly.


Thank you :thumb: .

I have also done network update using UBU with success  .


----------



## Reous

gupsterg said:


> It must be possible to mod this to AM4 1xxx/2xxx in my opinion.



Yeah, i'm sure it is possible in some way but i don't know how. My last try ended up with an bricked bios.


----------



## gupsterg

Reous said:


> Yeah, i'm sure it is possible in some way but i don't know how. My last try ended up with an bricked bios.


I have BCP v5.02.0031, I don't see AMD CBS so must follow your guide to enable?



Spoiler














*** edit ***

Right got the PMU menu from ZEA FW. Aiming to mod this into C7H UEFI. Doesn't look like simple copy and paste, must edit some hex to make "form" relevant to C7H CBS.


----------



## 1usmus

gupsterg said:


> I have BCP v5.02.0031, I don't see AMD CBS so must follow your guide to enable?
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 274714
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *** edit ***
> 
> Right got the PMU menu from ZEA FW. Aiming to mod this into C7H UEFI. Doesn't look like simple copy and paste, must edit some hex to make "form" relevant to C7H CBS.


share please BCP v5.02.0031


----------



## Reous

gupsterg said:


> I have BCP v5.02.0031, I don't see AMD CBS so must follow your guide to enable?
> 
> Right got the PMU menu from ZEA FW. Aiming to mod this into C7H UEFI. Doesn't look like simple copy and paste, must edit some hex to make "form" relevant to C7H CBS.



Yeah not that easy. There are separate CBS files for Zen+ APU, CPU and Zen2 CPU. Tell me if you have some luck.


----------



## mtrai

@1usmus sorry I would of shared it much earlier I thought you had it already. Here you go. AMIBCP 5.02.0031 Sorry removed it as it not allowed. Sent PM


----------



## mtrai

@gupsterg on Asus most things in CBS menu have to be changed via 1usmus and others guides. And most will never show...however there is a way to access them in the bios even though you do not have a menu. You have to change all the things under show to user in both master list of settings and then under each setting. Then you can search and change those settings. 

However I am having major issues with the 2304 bios. Anytime I make any changes it just will not install no matter the method. Unlike the previous bios which would be 2kb smaller, this one become 4 kb smaller. I am at a loss on installing it. Without being able to flash it I cannot search the settings I unhide.


----------



## gupsterg

Reous said:


> Yeah not that easy. There are separate CBS files for Zen+ APU, CPU and Zen2 CPU. Tell me if you have some luck.


This UEFI has PMU menu but is not showing. I will check if options work which show. If you have time please check were I am going wrong.

Do you think I need to update CbsBase? for example in a X570 UEFI each base has it's own setup.



mtrai said:


> @gupsterg on Asus most things in CBS menu have to be changed via 1usmus and others guides. And most will never show...however there is a way to access them in the bios even though you do not have a menu. You have to change all the things under show to user in both master list of settings and then under each setting. Then you can search and change those settings.
> 
> However I am having major issues with the 2304 bios. Anytime I make any changes it just will not install no matter the method. Unlike the previous bios which would be 2kb smaller, this one become 4 kb smaller. I am at a loss on installing it. Without being able to flash it I cannot search the settings I unhide.


I believe it is 4kb lighter as it is 2 UEFIs in one. I will rerun testing how I got correct file size and share ASAP, I do believe UEFITool correct size on save.


*** edit ***

I have the menu  …









@mtrai

I rerun process here is ZIP organise via time. The C7HWIFI.CAP had:-

1. PMU Training Menu in AMD CBS > UMC Common Options > DDR4 Common Options > Phy Configuration

2. mCode 800820D and all current updates to disk/video/network

3. AGESA Version string changed to reflect mods (0.0.7.2+DVNP)

*** edit ***

Whole of AMD CBS is not functional  , settings appear, can change and save, but do not apply  . Looks like copying in the CBS menu from ZEA is not answer....


----------



## Reous

At least you got the menu 


I think you have to change some code in the cbs file(s) to accept the Zen+ CPU. Now you can see the settings but they only working with Zen2. Maybe you can find something.


----------



## gupsterg

Reous said:


> At least you got the menu


 .

If I edit CbsSetupDxe using HxD to say have menu I end up with corrupt file.

Below is stock 2304 DDR4 Common Options



Spoiler






Code:


0xC4A8 	Form: DDR4 Common Options, FormId: 0x7035 {01 86 35 70 DC 00}
0xC4AE 		Subtitle: Statement.Prompt: DDR4 Common Options, Flags: 0x0 {02 87 DC 00 00 00 00}
0xC4B5 		End {29 02}
0xC4B7 		Subtitle: Statement.Prompt: , Flags: 0x0 {02 87 02 00 00 00 00}
0xC4BE 		End {29 02}
0xC4C0 		Ref: DRAM Timing Configuration, VarStoreInfo (VarOffset/VarName): 0xFFFF, VarStore: 0x0, QuestionId: 0x46, FormId: 0x7039 {0F 0F E0 00 E0 00 46 00 00 00 FF FF 00 39 70}
0xC4CF 		Ref: DRAM Controller Configuration, VarStoreInfo (VarOffset/VarName): 0xFFFF, VarStore: 0x0, QuestionId: 0x47, FormId: 0x703A {0F 0F E1 00 E1 00 47 00 00 00 FF FF 00 3A 70}
0xC4DE 		Ref: CAD Bus Configuration, VarStoreInfo (VarOffset/VarName): 0xFFFF, VarStore: 0x0, QuestionId: 0x48, FormId: 0x703B {0F 0F E2 00 E2 00 48 00 00 00 FF FF 00 3B 70}
0xC4ED 		Ref: Data Bus Configuration, VarStoreInfo (VarOffset/VarName): 0xFFFF, VarStore: 0x0, QuestionId: 0x49, FormId: 0x703C {0F 0F E3 00 E3 00 49 00 00 00 FF FF 00 3C 70}
0xC4FC 		Ref: Common RAS, VarStoreInfo (VarOffset/VarName): 0xFFFF, VarStore: 0x0, QuestionId: 0x4A, FormId: 0x703D {0F 0F E4 00 E4 00 4A 00 00 00 FF FF 00 3D 70}
0xC50B 		Ref: Security, VarStoreInfo (VarOffset/VarName): 0xFFFF, VarStore: 0x0, QuestionId: 0x4B, FormId: 0x703E {0F 0F E5 00 E5 00 4B 00 00 00 FF FF 00 3E 70}
0xC51A 	End Form {29 02}





I inject in:-



Code:


0F 0F E6 00 E6 00 4C 00 00 00 FF FF 00 3F 70

This should create an extra entry.

Then I inject in PMU Menu hex .



Spoiler






Code:


0xEF6B 	Form: Phy Configuration, FormId: 0x703E {01 86 3E 70 EB 00}
0xEF71 		Subtitle: Statement.Prompt: Phy Configuration, Flags: 0x0 {02 87 EB 00 00 00 00}
0xEF78 		End {29 02}
0xEF7A 		Subtitle: Statement.Prompt: , Flags: 0x0 {02 87 02 00 00 00 00}
0xEF81 		End {29 02}
0xEF83 		Ref: PMU Training, VarStoreInfo (VarOffset/VarName): 0xFFFF, VarStore: 0x0, QuestionId: 0x8A, FormId: 0x7044 {0F 0F F8 01 F8 01 8A 00 00 00 FF FF 00 44 70}
0xEF92 	End Form {29 02}
0xEF94 	Form: PMU Training, FormId: 0x7044 {01 86 44 70 F8 01}
0xEF9A 		Subtitle: Statement.Prompt: PMU Training, Flags: 0x0 {02 87 F8 01 00 00 00}
0xEFA1 		End {29 02}
0xEFA3 		Subtitle: Statement.Prompt: , Flags: 0x0 {02 87 02 00 00 00 00}
0xEFAA 		End {29 02}
0xEFAC 		One Of: DFE Read Training, VarStoreInfo (VarOffset/VarName): 0xCF, VarStore: 0x5000, QuestionId: 0x8B, Size: 1, Min: 0x0, Max 0xFF, Step: 0x0 {05 91 F9 01 FA 01 8B 00 00 50 CF 00 10 10 00 FF 00}
0xEFBD 			One Of Option: Disable, Value (8 bit): 0x0 {09 07 9D 00 00 00 00}
0xEFC4 			One Of Option: Enable, Value (8 bit): 0x1 {09 07 A8 00 00 00 01}
0xEFCB 			One Of Option: Auto, Value (8 bit): 0xFF (default) {09 07 19 00 10 00 FF}
0xEFD2 		End One Of {29 02}
0xEFD4 		One Of: FFE Write Training, VarStoreInfo (VarOffset/VarName): 0xD0, VarStore: 0x5000, QuestionId: 0x8C, Size: 1, Min: 0x0, Max 0xFF, Step: 0x0 {05 91 FB 01 FC 01 8C 00 00 50 D0 00 10 10 00 FF 00}
0xEFE5 			One Of Option: Disable, Value (8 bit): 0x0 {09 07 9D 00 00 00 00}
0xEFEC 			One Of Option: Enable, Value (8 bit): 0x1 {09 07 A8 00 00 00 01}
0xEFF3 			One Of Option: Auto, Value (8 bit): 0xFF (default) {09 07 19 00 10 00 FF}
0xEFFA 		End One Of {29 02}
0xEFFC 		One Of: PMU Pattern Bits Control, VarStoreInfo (VarOffset/VarName): 0xD1, VarStore: 0x5000, QuestionId: 0x8D, Size: 1, Min: 0x1, Max 0xFF, Step: 0x0 {05 91 FD 01 FE 01 8D 00 00 50 D1 00 10 10 01 FF 00}
0xF00D 			One Of Option: Auto, Value (8 bit): 0xFF (default) {09 07 19 00 10 00 FF}
0xF014 			One Of Option: Manual, Value (8 bit): 0x1 {09 07 62 01 00 00 01}
0xF01B 		End One Of {29 02}
0xF01D 		Suppress If {0A 82}
0xF01F 			QuestionId: 0x8D equals value 0x1 {12 86 8D 00 01 00}
0xF025 				Not {17 02}
0xF027 			End {29 02}
0xF029 			Numeric: PMU Pattern Bits, VarStoreInfo (VarOffset/VarName): 0xD2, VarStore: 0x5000, QuestionId: 0x8E, Size: 1, Min: 0x0, Max 0xA, Step: 0x0 {07 91 FF 01 00 02 8E 00 00 50 D2 00 10 20 00 0A 00}
0xF03A 				Default: DefaultId: 0x0, Value (8 bit): 0x0 {5B 06 00 00 00 00}
0xF040 			End {29 02}
0xF042 		End If {29 02}
0xF044 	End Form {29 02}





I change:-

01 86 3E 70 EB 00 to 01 86 3D 70 E4 00

02 87 E4 00 00 00 00 to 02 87 E4 00 00 00 00

This should make menu entry 4, I then bump relevant hex of Common RAS / Security entries to make them lower down (ie E5 / E6 plus FormId).

I inject in same order as ZEA CbsSetupDxe so then when I copy in the text labels located lower down they'd be in same order.

I then change size due to added code, right at top of file. I do believe I need to make more edits to make the injections relevant (not found the hex yet) and or am using wrong tools/process, as then IFR will not parse this modded sct.



Spoiler














So the mod will fail IMO.

As just adding CbsSetupDxe from ZEA to 2304 had changed menus I thought if I replace CbsBaseDxe menu may become functional. Board does not complete post, ends up in Q-Code cycle....

CbsSetupDxe is just a menu front end.

It must hook into another module, for example CbsBaseDxe.

This is bigger task than I envisaged, without the experience and or SW tools not gonna work :mellowsmi ...


----------



## crakej

When will ASUS deliver any of the available AGESA bioses to us? Like AGESA 1001 1002 1003?

We still don't even have 1001. I'm quite surprised though I do see CH6 and others have had some bother with 1001 bioses. Of course none of us knows what's really going on!


----------



## Reous

@*gupsterg* 
Maybe this deserves a new own thread? How to teaching Bios modding by myself? 


@crakej
A member from HWLuxx asked the support and they said they will pull out new bios around Zen2 launch with Agesa ComboAM4 1002.


----------



## gupsterg

Reous said:


> @*gupsterg*
> Maybe this deserves a new own thread? How to teaching Bios modding by myself?


As I had thought editing existing data is easy.

Adding/removing requires other SW tools/experience I don't have. I found the information on Win-RAID Forum, link.



> It can be modified as shown, easily, for what is already there, but even removing a line via hex that is shown in text does far more than that and I think it will break the entire file, it's compiled in an assembler so adding or removing a line will break everything after that and probably before as well.
> Modifying an already present value is easy.


I have PM'd a person he states he did write tool to do this, link. Will see if I get a response.


----------



## crakej

Reous said:


> @*gupsterg*
> Maybe this deserves a new own thread? How to teaching Bios modding by myself?
> 
> 
> @crakej
> A member from HWLuxx asked the support and they said they will pull out new bios around Zen2 launch with Agesa ComboAM4 1002.


Why does this not surprise me!? They have the source for 1003 and we get 0072 - yet we're on the current top tier X470 board  I've found 2304 to be not quite stable, no mater what I do. If this is the case, I might go back to AGESA 1006 until the update comes - was easier to stabilise - for me, anyway 

Thanks Reous - let's hope they're wrong and we get it this week. What a shame we can't make use of the new Windows Scheduler for Ryzen until we get the bios.


----------



## iNeri

crakej said:


> Why does this not surprise me!? They have the source for 1003 and we get 0072 - yet we're on the current top tier X470 board  I've found 2304 to be not quite stable, no mater what I do. If this is the case, I might go back to AGESA 1006 until the update comes - was easier to stabilise - for me, anyway
> 
> Thanks Reous - let's hope they're wrong and we get it this week. What a shame we can't make use of the new Windows Scheduler for Ryzen until we get the bios.


You can use the new Scheduler rigth now. I can confirm it, The witcher 3 dont use 4 threads if the game dont use it. Before all the 16 threads are always on.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Why does this not surprise me!? They have the source for 1003 and we get 0072 - yet we're on the current top tier X470 board  I've found 2304 to be not quite stable, no mater what I do. If this is the case, I might go back to AGESA 1006 until the update comes - was easier to stabilise - for me, anyway
> 
> Thanks Reous - let's hope they're wrong and we get it this week. What a shame we can't make use of the new Windows Scheduler for Ryzen until we get the bios.


AMD confirmed that the Windows 1903 topology awareness works now and what needs the new chipset drivers will be for the 3rd gen Ryzen.


----------



## Gothmog

Updated from stable 1201 to 2304 this morning when i had free time just to paly around. Its utterly ****. The problem is now i cant go back to 1201. Tried 3-4 times. What the heck. ***


----------



## chakku

There's a new chipset driver out now (1.6.13.0400), though I haven't checked to see which components have been updated. Additionally the supported list doesn't include Ryzen 3000 processors so I doubt the clock ramping behavior is included in this (which is exclusive to 3000). As others have said, scheduler changes are already live and don't need a chipset driver update.

https://www.amd.com/en/support/chipsets/amd-socket-am4/x470


----------



## narukun

AngryLobster said:


> Another update on my DPC latency saga. I thought this board was the issue causing my 2000-3000+ latency (audio pops/crackles) via Nvidia driver but upon switching to the Gigabyte Gaming 7 (terrible mobo) it's still there just slightly quieter.
> 
> I switched back to the CH7 because the Gigabyte board is absolutely atrocious in comparison.
> 
> I am completely lost at this point. I've changed motherboard, ram and have disabled everything nonessential with only a mouse connected.
> 
> Can a PSU cause this? It's either the PSU or my 2080 Ti at this point.


Any updates my friend? there is a new AMD chipset driver too


----------



## AngryLobster

narukun said:


> Any updates my friend? there is a new AMD chipset driver too


New chipset driver didn't do anything but my new NVME SSD is arriving tomorrow. I tested my 2080 Ti in a 9900K system and it's fine without any latency issues. Once I get the new SSD in with a fresh install of Windows 10 I'll report back.

Tried:

-2 motherboards
-3 sets of ram
-2 PSU's
-2 GPU's

Same SSD/CPU so it's one of the 2.


----------



## crakej

@1usmus has mentioned that....

'to avoid conflicts with the new windows scheduler (1903) you will have to use AGESA Combo-AM4 1.0.0.1 or newer'

in other threads....

I have to say, 1903 has reduced my latency considerably, though odd spikes of 1000+ns which didn't used to happen.

@Gothmog - sorry to hear you're having problems. You can go back to 1201 if you use Afuefix64.exe (not Afugan which is for modded bioses)


----------



## chakku

AngryLobster said:


> New chipset driver didn't do anything but my new NVME SSD is arriving tomorrow. I tested my 2080 Ti in a 9900K system and it's fine without any latency issues. Once I get the new SSD in with a fresh install of Windows 10 I'll report back.
> 
> Tried:
> 
> -2 motherboards
> -3 sets of ram
> -2 PSU's
> -2 GPU's
> 
> Same SSD/CPU so it's one of the 2.


What GPUs have you tested? NVIDIA drivers are notoriously bad for DPC issues and when I tried to force my 1080 Ti to run in MSI mode it caused other issues, sometimes BSODs and sometimes failure to boot when restarting the system.


----------



## Rusakova

crakej said:


> @1usmus has mentioned that....
> 
> 'to avoid conflicts with the new windows scheduler (1903) you will have to use AGESA Combo-AM4 1.0.0.1 or newer'
> 
> in other threads....
> 
> I have to say, 1903 has reduced my latency considerably, though odd spikes of 1000+ns which didn't used to happen.
> 
> @Gothmod - sorry to hear you're having problems. You can go back to 1201 if you use Afuefix64.exe (not Afugan which is for modded bioses)


Can't he just use BIOS flashback ?


----------



## crakej

Rusakova said:


> Can't he just use BIOS flashback ?


He can sure try it, but not sure if it will allow you to go back AGESA levels - anyone else remember?

It won't hurt to try.


----------



## chakku

crakej said:


> He can sure try it, but not sure if it will allow you to go back AGESA levels - anyone else remember?
> 
> It won't hurt to try.


IIRC it was PMU firmware that you couldn't go back on, not AGESA?


----------



## crakej

chakku said:


> IIRC it was PMU firmware that you couldn't go back on, not AGESA?


Can't remember - try flashback - if it doesn't work, use Afueifix64


----------



## gupsterg

Gothmog said:


> Updated from stable 1201 to 2304 this morning when i had free time just to paly around. Its utterly ****. The problem is now i cant go back to 1201. Tried 3-4 times. What the heck. ***
> 
> 
> 
> Rusakova said:
> 
> 
> 
> Can't he just use BIOS flashback ?
> 
> 
> crakej said:
> 
> 
> 
> He can sure try it, but not sure if it will allow you to go back AGESA levels - anyone else remember?
> 
> It won't hurt to try.
> 
> 
> 
> chakku said:
> 
> 
> 
> IIRC it was PMU firmware that you couldn't go back on, not AGESA?
> 
> 
> 
> crakej said:
> 
> 
> 
> Can't remember - try flashback - if it doesn't work, use Afueifix64
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Post 3 of this thread, section How to use Flashback (ie updating motherboard UEFI), I have added text:-

*Note:* Flashback will allow you to flash any UEFI you would like featuring support for your board, regardless what version it is, AGESA version, etc, etc.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> *Note:* Flashback will allow you to flash any UEFI you would like featuring support for your board, regardless what version it is, AGESA version, etc, etc.


Thanks for confirming @gupsterg


----------



## gupsterg

NP  , TBH even the modded UEFI I have been making I've used flashback to flash them.

A day or so ago I went from say modded UEFI 2304 all the way back to first release UEFI.









Everything I am supposed have with whatever UEFI I do get.


----------



## Gothmog

Thank you all. Tried flashback and it worked , I'm back on 1201 !


----------



## mtrai

@gupsterg that is where I am stuck with this new size bios. It just will not flash.


----------



## kmellz

Completely new installer for the drivers now, also took quite a bit longer to install, even compared to a brand new fresh install on the older one. Hopefully for the better!


----------



## poliacido

kmellz said:


> Completely new installer for the drivers now, also took quite a bit longer to install, even compared to a brand new fresh install on the older one. Hopefully for the better!


yes i just installed it too
but i noticed it doesn't contain anymore the ryzen balanced plan, or maybe i didn't see it


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> yes i just installed it too
> but i noticed it doesn't contain anymore the ryzen balanced plan, or maybe i didn't see it


Mine also didn't offer me that stupid power plan.


----------



## poliacido

nick name said:


> Mine also didn't offer me that stupid power plan.


ok, so i read on guru3d something about it
they said with win 1903 the ryzen power plan is not needed anymore, it will install though if you are on an older win version
probably is because the new scheduler


----------



## ComansoRowlett

poliacido said:


> ok, so i read on guru3d something about it
> they said with win 1903 the ryzen power plan is not needed anymore, it will install though if you are on an older win version
> probably is because the new scheduler


Strange, I'm on the latest version of 1903 and got the chipset driver yesterday but I got the Ryzen power plan regardless


----------



## poliacido

ComansoRowlett said:


> Strange, I'm on the latest version of 1903 and got the chipset driver yesterday but I got the Ryzen power plan regardless


yes i have it too in the menu
probably it is kept from the previous driver installation, maybe with a fresh win10 1903 install and with the latest drivers it does not install the power plan... i am not willing to try it though ahahah


----------



## gupsterg

mtrai said:


> @gupsterg that is where I am stuck with this new size bios. It just will not flash.


I think we are using differing methods.









I am not doing above.

For example when I added the CbsSetupDxe from ZEA to C7H UEFI I do this:-

i) Open ZEA UEFI in UEFITool, search for GUID F639D37E-, click the found message so browser window takes me there, expand the GUID, select PE32 and extract as is.

ii) Open another UEFITool, open C7H UEFI, search for GUID A5E369C8-, click the found message so browser window takes me there, expand the GUID, select PE32 and replace as is with the ZEA CbsSetupDxe.

The file will be correct size, will flash using flashback.

When I was modding CbsSetupDxe I was again extracting it only and placing it back after edits, again UEFI size was correct.

UBU updates also keeps same file size, so file will flash using flashback.

*** edit ***

You may recall I was trying to change UEFI version string.

If I changed via HxD file would not flash. If I changed via BCP secure capsule signature lost. The way to do it is using UEFITool, extract as is GUID AB56DC60-, edit in HxD, replace as is. File can be flashed using flashback, etc.









C7H WiFi 2304.1 download link.

i) UEFI/AGESA version mod

ii) CPU mCode & others elements updated via UBU


----------



## chakku

poliacido said:


> ok, so i read on guru3d something about it
> they said with win 1903 the ryzen power plan is not needed anymore, it will install though if you are on an older win version
> probably is because the new scheduler


Ryzen power plan hasn't been needed since second gen launched.


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> I think we are using differing methods.
> 
> I am not doing above.
> 
> For example when I added the CbsSetupDxe from ZEA to C7H UEFI I do this:-
> 
> i) Open ZEA UEFI in UEFITool, search for GUID F639D37E-, click the found message so browser window takes me there, expand the GUID, select PE32 and extract as is.
> 
> ii) Open another UEFITool, open C7H UEFI, search for GUID A5E369C8-, click the found message so browser window takes me there, expand the GUID, select PE32 and replace as is with the ZEA CbsSetupDxe.
> 
> The file will be correct size, will flash using flashback.
> 
> When I was modding CbsSetupDxe I was again extracting it only and placing it back after edits, again UEFI size was correct.
> 
> UBU updates also keeps same file size, so file will flash using flashback.
> 
> *** edit ***
> 
> You may recall I was trying to change UEFI version string.
> 
> If I changed via HxD file would not flash. If I changed via BCP secure capsule signature lost. The way to do it is using UEFITool, extract as is GUID AB56DC60-, edit in HxD, replace as is. File can be flashed using flashback, etc.
> 
> C7H WiFi 2304.1 download link.
> 
> i) UEFI/AGESA version mod
> 
> ii) CPU mCode & others elements updated via UBU


I mean if I only even just use AMIBCP to open up settings just for search it will not flash this has always worked before. I mean just changing settings to user, saving and then flashing which as always worked before does not any longer.


----------



## narukun

Hey guys just a random question, can I use windows while is memtest86 running? I noticed that if I don't use my pc I don't get any errors, but if I'm using windows while the test is running then I get some errors


----------



## nick name

narukun said:


> Hey guys just a random question, can I use windows while is memtest86 running? I noticed that if I don't use my pc I don't get any errors, but if I'm using windows while the test is running then I get some errors


I'd trust the errors you get when using Windows. Any errors really. So if you can force errors then the overclock isn't stable.


----------



## gupsterg

mtrai said:


> I mean if I only even just use AMIBCP to open up settings just for search it will not flash this has always worked before. I mean just changing settings to user, saving and then flashing which as always worked before does not any longer.


I don't know why, sorry. I am looking forward to next release of UEFI from ASUS, not because of say AGESA, etc, but to see the size of flash file.

Last night when I did the UEFI version string mod I found the GUID twice, again as if 2 UEFIs in one file.

Being able to use BCP is nice due to GUI, what if you try to do the same but manually, don't know if possible, just an idea.



narukun said:


> Hey guys just a random question, can I use windows while is memtest86 running? I noticed that if I don't use my pc I don't get any errors, but if I'm using windows while the test is running then I get some errors
> 
> 
> 
> nick name said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'd trust the errors you get when using Windows. Any errors really. So if you can force errors then the overclock isn't stable.
Click to expand...

Perhaps the program has an issue. I once uncovered an issue in Y-Cruncher which I used to determine stability on a profile. So perhaps verify using another application.


----------



## 621670

Is anyone else having garbage RAM overclocking on the latest official ASUS bios? Upgraded to a G.Skill 2x16GB 3000-CL14 kit with B-die chips and I can't even get 3200 CL14 working without erroring like crazy.


----------



## narukun

It's ok to use CPU VRM Switching Frequency to 500khz 24/7 on this motherboard? I can get a good voltage while OCing when I use it


----------



## iNeri

narukun said:


> It's ok to use CPU VRM Switching Frequency to 500khz 24/7 on this motherboard? I can get a good voltage while OCing when I use it


Yes, even 600 khz no problem whit that heatsink. Check your VRM temps. If are ok for you then no problem.


----------



## narukun

iNeri said:


> Yes, even 600 khz no problem whit that heatsink. Check your VRM temps. If are ok for you then no problem.


Nice!, thank you for the info, I checked them with hwinfo while doing cinebench on a hot day, they're like 50~54°C


----------



## gupsterg

iNeri said:


> Yes, even 600 khz no problem whit that heatsink. Check your VRM temps. If are ok for you then no problem.


Range is 300kHz to 500kHz, see The Stilts table here, the labels have been wrong for a while on one of the settings ...


----------



## chakku

User32 said:


> Is anyone else having garbage RAM overclocking on the latest official ASUS bios? Upgraded to a G.Skill 2x16GB 3000-CL14 kit with B-die chips and I can't even get 3200 CL14 working without erroring like crazy.


I've been stuck at 3200C14 on my 2x16GB B-Die kit as well. 3333/3400 will always eventually give me an error, though I've run them before daily without any issues, the fact that errors pop up frequently in stability testing don't make me comfortable using them.

Fingers crossed we can get closer to 3733 with Ryzen 3000 on this board, I'm curious to know if the 4000 kit G.Skill showed off running on a 2700X/C7H had a different BIOS or if the processor just had a really good IMC.


----------



## Rusakova

chakku said:


> I've been stuck at 3200C14 on my 2x16GB B-Die kit as well. 3333/3400 will always eventually give me an error, though I've run them before daily without any issues, the fact that errors pop up frequently in stability testing don't make me comfortable using them.
> 
> Fingers crossed we can get closer to 3733 with Ryzen 3000 on this board, I'm curious to know if the 4000 kit G.Skill showed off running on a 2700X/C7H had a different BIOS or if the processor just had a really good IMC.


It's annoying since my 2 x 8 GB B-die runs 3533 MHz (C14) , but 2 x 16 GB B-Die is struggling to reach 3200 MHz.
I'm not expecting the 2 x 8 GB kit to go higher on Ryzen 3xxx, but I'm hoping the 2 x 16 GB kit will do at least 3466 MHz.


----------



## chakku

Rusakova said:


> It's annoying since my 2 x 8 GB B-die runs 3533 MHz (C14) , but 2 x 16 GB B-Die is struggling to reach 3200 MHz.
> I'm not expecting the 2 x 8 GB kit to go higher on Ryzen 3xxx, but I'm hoping the 2 x 16 GB kit will do at least 3466 MHz.


It's the price we have to pay for having 32GB of memory I guess.. Was considering picking up a 16GB kit on the side to run way faster speeds since prices are much lower now.


----------



## nick name

chakku said:


> -snip-
> Fingers crossed we can get closer to 3733 with Ryzen 3000 on this board, I'm curious to know if the 4000 kit G.Skill showed off running on a 2700X/C7H had a different BIOS or if the processor just had a really good IMC.


I'm curious if it was simply bootable or if there was any actual stability at that speed.


----------



## nick name

chakku said:


> It's the price we have to pay for having 32GB of memory I guess.. Was considering picking up a 16GB kit on the side to run way faster speeds since prices are much lower now.


It might be worth it for competitive benchmarking. My kit at 3600 14-15-14-14 performs better than when it's at 3200 12-13-12-12.


----------



## chakku

nick name said:


> I'm curious if it was simply bootable or if there was any actual stability at that speed.


I'm sure it has to pass some rigid form of testing to become an overclocking profile on a retail product. The screenshots from G.Skill teasing/testing new potential kits/SKUs (like here) suggests they use HCI Memtest with the Dang Wang loader but I have no idea what their benchmark/passing score is.


----------



## chakku

nick name said:


> It might be worth it for competitive benchmarking. My kit at 3600 14-15-14-14 performs better than when it's at 3200 12-13-12-12.


Yeah I can see Newegg have B-Die Flare X kits for $120, I don't think it's even been a year since I picked up this dual rank B-Die kit for almost 5x that price..


----------



## iNeri

chakku said:


> Yeah I can see Newegg have B-Die Flare X kits for $120, I don't think it's even been a year since I picked up this dual rank B-Die kit for almost 5x that price..


Where? i see them at $140 

https://www.newegg.com/global/mx-es...-sdram/p/N82E16820232530?Item=N82E16820232530


----------



## chakku

iNeri said:


> Where? i see them at $140
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/global/mx-es...-sdram/p/N82E16820232530?Item=N82E16820232530


Says $125 for me, they were $120 yesterday though.


----------



## nick name

chakku said:


> I'm sure it has to pass some rigid form of testing to become an overclocking profile on a retail product. The screenshots from G.Skill teasing/testing new potential kits/SKUs (like here) suggests they use HCI Memtest with the Dang Wang loader but I have no idea what their benchmark/passing score is.


I didn't think those were actual products, but system builds with overclocks.


----------



## chakku

nick name said:


> I didn't think those were actual products, but system builds with overclocks.


Not sure what you're saying here, the page I linked was a a press release for a new product and included the following line: "The following screenshot shows rigorous test of the new memory kit, validated with the Intel® Core™ i5-6600K processor and the ASUS Z170-DELUXE motherboard."

Who knows if 400% is just their target for 64GB or all kits and if it's still the same as it was back then.


----------



## nick name

chakku said:


> Not sure what you're saying here, the page I linked was a a press release for a new product and included the following line: "The following screenshot shows rigorous test of the new memory kit, validated with the Intel® Core™ i5-6600K processor and the ASUS Z170-DELUXE motherboard."
> 
> Who knows if 400% is just their target for 64GB or all kits and if it's still the same as it was back then.


The system they had on display at their Computex booth. This one. I thought we were talking about this one.


----------



## chakku

nick name said:


> The system they had on display at their Computex booth. This one. I thought we were talking about this one.


Ah no, I was just using that 3600 kit as an example of how they've tested an XMP profile on a retail product, which I assume was being advertised at Computex. Are G.Skill known for presenting memory overclocks only and not releasing a new product for it? The timings seem a bit too loose for an overclocker's effort.


----------



## crakej

So Prime X470 Pro has new bios with AGESA 1002, while we're still on 0072a


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> So Prime X470 Pro has new bios with AGESA 1002, while we're still on 0072a


Is that the 4804 BIOS? I saw ASUS ran a handful of older boards with a Ryzen 3600 through Geekbench 4 yesterday. The Prime Pro was one of them. Also, a couple A320 boards.


----------



## nick name

chakku said:


> Ah no, I was just using that 3600 kit as an example of how they've tested an XMP profile on a retail product, which I assume was being advertised at Computex. Are G.Skill known for presenting memory overclocks only and not releasing a new product for it? The timings seem a bit too loose for an overclocker's effort.


I didn't see any explanation of the builds by anyone that made videos of them at Computex. They were all simply presented. I assumed they were all overclocks since the SKU for the RAM wasn't given with all the other parts in the systems.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Is that the 4804 BIOS? I saw ASUS ran a handful of older boards with a Ryzen 3600 through Geekbench 4 yesterday. The Prime Pro was one of them. Also, a couple A320 boards.


Ver 5007 for Prime Pro.

Interesting info re:Geekbench - I guess CH7 wan't one of them?


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Ver 5007 for Prime Pro.
> 
> Interesting info re:Geekbench - I guess CH7 wan't one of them?


Not yet. The other board they did was a B450.


----------



## poliacido

i am noticing with the new scheduler in the 1903 patch a weird case in games
I mean before i had 3-4 cores boosting higher at max frequency, if the game was not using more than 2/4 cores.....But now all cores stay at the max "all cores" frequency.
I tried only few games for now and maybe they like to use more than 4 cores i don't know.... i tried with BF5 , Jurassic world evolution and Rage 2
Did you see the same behaviour?


----------



## Rusakova

poliacido said:


> i am noticing with the new scheduler in the 1903 patch a weird case in games
> I mean before i had 3-4 cores boosting higher at max frequency, if the game was not using more than 2/4 cores.....But now all cores stay at the max "all cores" frequency.
> I tried only few games for now and maybe they like to use more than 4 cores i don't know.... i tried with BF5 , Jurassic world evolution and Rage 2
> Did you see the same behaviour?


I didn't try it before updating to 1903 (I only benchmarked 15 apps or so - no difference in performance - but after adjusting my PBO / negative voltage offset,
I logged CPU usage in Apex Legends (using HWInfo), and all cores goes ~ 4300 MHz but it's not really maxing any of them so CPU temp was around 62 deg C.


----------



## neikosr0x

poliacido said:


> i am noticing with the new scheduler in the 1903 patch a weird case in games
> I mean before i had 3-4 cores boosting higher at max frequency, if the game was not using more than 2/4 cores.....But now all cores stay at the max "all cores" frequency.
> I tried only few games for now and maybe they like to use more than 4 cores i don't know.... i tried with BF5 , Jurassic world evolution and Rage 2
> Did you see the same behaviour?


In my case, the cores didn't even clocked to the max 4.35ghz the max they clocked was 4.30ghz. And while idling the cores were always jumping around pulling a lot of voltage. So i went back to 1803 and all was good.


----------



## Rusakova

neikosr0x said:


> In my case, the cores didn't even clocked to the max 4.35ghz the max they clocked was 4.30ghz. And while idling the cores were always jumping around pulling a lot of voltage. So i went back to 1803 and all was good.


Yes, it always pulls a lot of voltage when idling, not really important.
The voltage being used when under heavy load is however and it's usually a lot lower.


----------



## poliacido

Rusakova said:


> I didn't try it before updating to 1903 (I only benchmarked 15 apps or so - no difference in performance - but after adjusting my PBO / negative voltage offset,
> I logged CPU usage in Apex Legends (using HWInfo), and all cores goes ~ 4300 MHz but it's not really maxing any of them so CPU temp was around 62 deg C.


My cpu can't get anywhere near to 4300 all cores, i can hit 4350 with 2 cores but anyway..... same as me the cores are not maxed, they're all around 20/50% usage 



neikosr0x said:


> In my case, the cores didn't even clocked to the max 4.35ghz the max they clocked was 4.30ghz. And while idling the cores were always jumping around pulling a lot of voltage. So i went back to 1803 and all was good.


I don't see any difference when at idle, same as before.

EDIT: added a screenshot of BF4 with only 1 core at 100% but still all cores going at the same speed, seems the PBO is not boosting the cores


----------



## Fabio Bertelli

Someone here upgrated from Crosshair VI (X370)?
There big improvements?

I'm asking because would like to build one system with ryzen 2700 and use around @3,8~4 ghz. 
X370 can be found for around $110 (used) and x470 around $200 (used) or $255 (new). Worth the difference?


----------



## poliacido

Fabio Bertelli said:


> Someone here upgrated from Crosshair VI (X370)?
> There big improvements?
> 
> I'm asking because would like to build one system with ryzen 2700 and use around @3,8~4 ghz.
> X370 can be found for around $110 (used) and x470 around $200 (used) or $255 (new). Worth the difference?


IMHO go for the used x370, if you don't plan to upgrade to ryzen 3xxx series.


----------



## neikosr0x

poliacido said:


> My cpu can't get anywhere near to 4300 all cores, i can hit 4350 with 2 cores but anyway..... same as me the cores are not maxed, they're all around 20/50% usage
> 
> 
> 
> I don't see any difference when at idle, same as before.
> 
> EDIT: added a screenshot of BF4 with only 1 core at 100% but still all cores going at the same speed, seems the PBO is not boosting the cores


That is normal. Mine goes all the way to max all core boost which is 4.225 on PE4. Again on PE4 on the new update does pulls lots of voltage even when idling because the cores are spiking all the time. but on windows 1803 if i'm idling the cpu clocks back to 2.200ghz and at around 0.800v even if im browsing the usually stays at those clocks with occasional boots.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

gupsterg said:


> Sorry for delayed response, took a holiday from OCN  .
> 
> I do not know of UEFI that fries EC. ASUS WMI is broken in UEFI prior to 1002, so I'd say use that or an AGESA 1.0.0.6 UEFI (1103/1201).
> 
> 1st image of HWINFO where you have outlined GPU usage values that is something that recently (well few months back IIRC) was exposed in HWINFO. IIRC W10 Task Manager was first showing these new metrics and then HWINFO did also.
> 
> 2nd image of HWINFO where you have outlined GPU VRM controller data, IIRC nearer the end of my time with Fiji I recall it was showing at times and not. IIRC when I spoke to Martin about it, it was AMD driver side causing this.


We'll thanks for clearing that up,i thought i run at least only into issues here on my end.
On monday i'll receive a kit of GSkill F4-3200C14D-16GFX ,and hopefully Samsung B Dies.
And sry for the very late response i've overlooked it since the whole new OCN website [still have some issues] is sometimes still a pain for me to navigate and such things were better with the old version :doh:

*One example : Editing the rig and add or change something doesn't work !*

Found a fix here https://www.overclock.net/forum/17793-resolved-issues/1727610-bugged-rig.html


----------



## poliacido

neikosr0x said:


> That is normal. Mine goes all the way to max all core boost which is 4.225 on PE4. Again on PE4 on the new update does pulls lots of voltage even when idling because the cores are spiking all the time. but on windows 1803 if i'm idling the cpu clocks back to 2.200ghz and at around 0.800v even if im browsing the usually stays at those clocks with occasional boots.


ok, i've never been stable with PE4, i was not lucky with the silicon lottery


----------



## hurricane28

Can someone help me plz? 

I have a problem with my boost clocks and can't figure out what the problem is. 

https://www.3dmark.com/compare/spy/...FHmxICxOjpwC9PM2m-pNYuYZcKZxqo06NYxbD4yxLbo98

After i updated to my ROG 2060 i get 1K lower CPU score no matter what i set, i keep getting around 6K while on the MSI 970 i had over 7K.. 

Can someone explain to me what is going on here? It was on the same Windows, same BIOS etc. Only new GPU. I used DDU to completely uninstall the driver and installed the new one. 

I tried auto clocks, performance enhancer level 2 etc. etc. nothing works. Rebooted a couple of times, uninstalled last installed programs etc. etc. still missing 1 K performance.


----------



## Fabio Bertelli

poliacido said:


> IMHO go for the used x370, if you don't plan to upgrade to ryzen 3xxx series.


Yes, I was thinking and the x370 have really good specs for the price. 
Thank you for your opinion!


----------



## lordzed83

3600x Review on x470 gigabyte board 











rest in link
https://elchapuzasinformatico.com/2019/06/amd-ryzen-5-3600-x470-review/#temperatura-y-consumo


----------



## Rusakova

lordzed83 said:


> 3600x Review on x470 gigabyte board
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rest in link
> https://elchapuzasinformatico.com/2019/06/amd-ryzen-5-3600-x470-review/#temperatura-y-consumo


It's "just" a 3600 not the X version, but it still does very well.
With a boost clock of 4.2 GHz against a 9900k.
No overclocking in the review is disappointing.


----------



## lordzed83

Well bioses are **** they cant overclock thats why no tests.


----------



## iNeri

lordzed83 said:


> Well bioses are **** they cant overclock thats why no tests.


They said that even on x570 board the bios are screw up as well. :/ At two weeks from launch is this posible?

Thats why ASUS dont release bios based on those agesa, it dont have any sense. Why they bother if AMD dont care :v


----------



## ComansoRowlett

iNeri said:


> They said that even on x570 board the bios are screw up as well. :/ At two weeks from launch is this posible?
> 
> Thats why ASUS dont release bios based on those agesa, it dont have any sense. Why they bother if AMD dont care :v


I should think it's very much intentional to prevent people like them spreading out all the info before preorders, etc have even begun. I should think the media/tech channels such as Gamers Nexus, LTT,etc will receive software/bios's via the manufacturers/AMD directly just before July 7th when the NDA is removed so they can drop the video on the dot of NDA expiration.


----------



## crakej

Many ASUS boards already have 1001 and more recently 1002. Other boards have 1003.

I'm curious as to why CH7, top of the stack, does not have either. It would be nice if @Silent Scone could offer us some information.

Edit: Just read that ASUS A320 boards have new bios with 1002.


----------



## kmellz

Bit surprised about the bioses for this board yeah, especially since the wifi I have was supposed to be the main dev board..right. Doesn't quite feel like it!


----------



## nick name

Well someone had a BIOS they could overclock on, but I'm assuming it was a manufacturer or someone close to it. There were some Geekbench 4 runs of a Ryzen 3600 at 4.4GHz the other day. It put up some very strong numbers though it was running Linux.


----------



## nick name

kmellz said:


> Bit surprised about the bioses for this board yeah, especially since the wifi I have was supposed to be the main dev board..right. Doesn't quite feel like it!


I wouldn't be surprised if ROG boards need more time to develop due to things like the Performance Enhancers 3 and 4. My guess is they aren't just developing for Ryzen 2000 CPUs and are having to test everything with Ryzen 3000 now also. So their PBO enhancements probably require a good amount of testing.


----------



## lordzed83

AngryLobster said:


> Man I'm so sick of dealing with this DPC latency issue. At this point I am 99% sure it's the board itself. I've tried everything and have only a KB/Mouse connected. Picture below was from just idling at desktop for 30min.
> 
> I'm really not interested in doing another RMA and having to take my entire build apart + wait 3 weeks turn around.
> 
> Can anyone suggest a comparable motherboard? Maybe the Gaming 7.





nick name said:


> Well someone had a BIOS they could overclock on, but I'm assuming it was a manufacturer or someone close to it. There were some Geekbench 4 runs of a Ryzen 3600 at 4.4GHz the other day. It put up some very strong numbers though it was running Linux.


Geekbench is new ashes of singularity for AMD just its on CPU side. Amd found benchmark taht always scores great on CPUs and started showcasing it everywhere.... Like AoS and Vega hahaah


----------



## nick name

lordzed83 said:


> Geekbench is new ashes of singularity for AMD just its on CPU side. Amd found benchmark taht always scores great on CPUs and started showcasing it everywhere.... Like AoS and Vega hahaah


The scores I am talking about haven't been published any where I've seen. I actually don't recall seeing AMD talk about Geekbench much either.


----------



## Reikoji

nick name said:


> The scores I am talking about haven't been published any where I've seen. I actually don't recall seeing AMD talk about Geekbench much either.


Because they don't talk about geekbench. Its really more suited for mobile. AMD would do Cinebench.

The leaked geekbench results for various Ryzen 3000 processors have been all over the place. Not really reliable.


----------



## narukun

The gaming performance in FarCry 5 is really good, the cheapest Ryzen 5 and no overclock, thats totally good news.


----------



## nick name

Reikoji said:


> -snip-
> The leaked geekbench results for various Ryzen 3000 processors have been all over the place. Not really reliable.


What do you mean? The scores are all pretty much in line with eachother.


----------



## chakku

crakej said:


> Many ASUS boards already have 1001 and more recently 1002. Other boards have 1003.
> 
> I'm curious as to why CH7, top of the stack, does not have either. It would be nice if @Silent Scone could offer us some information.
> 
> Edit: Just read that ASUS A320 boards have new bios with 1002.


 @Silent Scone still doesn't give a **** about the AMD side. TBH Elmor was half the reason I got the C6H/C7H and moving forward when I upgrade my motherboard I'll probably move on to another vendor, seems like MSI have much better memory overclocking currently anyway, it's just the BIOS side that needs work but they appear to get updates more often.


----------



## crakej

chakku said:


> @Silent Scone still doesn't give a **** about the AMD side. TBH Elmor was half the reason I got the C6H/C7H and moving forward when I upgrade my motherboard I'll probably move on to another vendor, seems like MSI have much better memory overclocking currently anyway, it's just the BIOS side that needs work but they appear to get updates more often.


So it would seem


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> Many ASUS boards already have 1001 and more recently 1002. Other boards have 1003.
> 
> I'm curious as to why CH7, top of the stack, does not have either. It would be nice if @Silent Scone could offer us some information.
> 
> Edit: Just read that ASUS A320 boards have new bios with 1002.





crakej said:


> So it would seem


Actually he does not...no seeming like it. He does not even post in the AMD official rog forums. Because of him this is the my last ASUS hardware.


----------



## Reikoji

nick name said:


> What do you mean? The scores are all pretty much in line with eachother.


They is one out there where the single core score of a 3800x is pathetic compared to a 9900k, and then one where a 3600 single core score is right with a 9900k. Geekbench is just a stupid bench because its too memory dependent, and it doesn't produce consistent results. I see the leaks as just a mind game.


----------



## neikosr0x

Reikoji said:


> They is one out there where the single core score of a 3800x is pathetic compared to a 9900k, and then one where a 3600 single core score is right with a 9900k. Geekbench is just a stupid bench because its too memory dependent, and it doesn't produce consistent results. I see the leaks as just a mind game.


I'm sure that you wont be dissapointed, AMD can't play with buyers trust... they have achieved so much vs a super company like Intel that it would be stupid move to play with our trust. So, i am pretty sure we are all going to be amazed and surprised once we get the benchmarks. They didn't show the CPU running with PBO 2.0, They got rid of XFR to introduce their new PBO 2.0 which gives over 200mhz+ over the advertised speeds, just by adding a normal AIO cooler? really? We are less than 2 weeks to see all of the benchmarks. We are going to be very very surprised. They can manage to hit 4.7ghz on a 8core AK 3950x ([email protected] each X8c) CCX which means that is very likely to get those 8 cores cpu to boost up there. My understanding is that they just wanted to keep the TDP close 105 as possible.


----------



## nick name

Reikoji said:


> They is one out there where the single core score of a 3800x is pathetic compared to a 9900k, and then one where a 3600 single core score is right with a 9900k. Geekbench is just a stupid bench because its too memory dependent, and it doesn't produce consistent results. I see the leaks as just a mind game.


Not to be rude, but I don't think you know how to evaluate Geekbench 4 scores.


----------



## crakej

Anyone experienced anything like this? Neither SFC or DSIM seem to be able to fix it.


----------



## Ramad

crakej said:


> Anyone experienced anything like this? Neither SFC or DSIM seem to be able to fix it.



Reinstall Windows, not from scratch but by running setup from within Windows using a USB install drive. Windows is corrupted by now so you cannot recover it.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Anyone experienced anything like this? Neither SFC or DSIM seem to be able to fix it.


What does DSIM say?


----------



## crakej

Ramad said:


> Reinstall Windows, not from scratch but by running setup from within Windows using a USB install drive. Windows is corrupted by now so you cannot recover it.


This happened after installing the latest cumulative update to 1903. Removed the update and it's running better, but still there is corruption  You know what it's like, when you just don't wanna install windows again!

Will running setup that way save my programs @Ramad? It's So long since I've had this kind of problem.

DSIM/SFC Output:



Code:


C:\WINDOWS\system32>DISM.exe /Online /Cleanup-Image /RestoreHealth /Source:g:\sources /LimitAccess

Deployment Image Servicing and Management tool
Version: 10.0.18362.1

Image Version: 10.0.18362.30

[==========================100.0%==========================] The restore operation completed successfully.
The operation completed successfully.

C:\WINDOWS\system32>sfc /scannow

Beginning system scan.  This process will take some time.

Beginning verification phase of system scan.
Verification 100% complete.

Windows Resource Protection found corrupt files but was unable to fix some of them.
For online repairs, details are included in the CBS log file located at
windir\Logs\CBS\CBS.log. For example C:\Windows\Logs\CBS\CBS.log. For offline
repairs, details are included in the log file provided by the /OFFLOGFILE flag.


----------



## Ramad

crakej said:


> This happened after installing the latest cumulative update to 1903. Removed the update and it's running better, but still there is corruption  You know what it's like, when you just don't wanna install windows again!
> 
> Will running setup that way save my programs @*Ramad* ? It's So long since I've had this kind of problem.
> 
> DSIM/SFC Output:
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> C:\WINDOWS\system32>DISM.exe /Online /Cleanup-Image /RestoreHealth /Source:g:\sources /LimitAccess
> 
> Deployment Image Servicing and Management tool
> Version: 10.0.18362.1
> 
> Image Version: 10.0.18362.30
> 
> [==========================100.0%==========================] The restore operation completed successfully.
> The operation completed successfully.
> 
> C:\WINDOWS\system32>sfc /scannow
> 
> Beginning system scan.  This process will take some time.
> 
> Beginning verification phase of system scan.
> Verification 100% complete.
> 
> Windows Resource Protection found corrupt files but was unable to fix some of them.
> For online repairs, details are included in the CBS log file located at
> windir\Logs\CBS\CBS.log. For example C:\Windows\Logs\CBS\CBS.log. For offline
> repairs, details are included in the log file provided by the /OFFLOGFILE flag.



Yes, it will check installed Windows and see if any program is effected by the "upgrade" and let you know, nothing changes usually except Windows itself. Old Windows directory will be renamed to "Old Windows". It does not take long and will reuse all drivers that are existing and all programs will be there. Please use the same Windows version.


I have done this in case of Windows corruption since Windows 8 days and it works fine if SFC and DISM fails. I would check RAM/SOC voltages, one of them or both could be low or you are running higher RAM frequency than IMC can handle if this is the case then try loosing tRDWR/tWRRD timings, 10/4 or 10/5 are OK. IMC needs breathing room when running at higher frequency.


----------



## crakej

Ramad said:


> Yes, it will check installed Windows and see if any program is effected by the "upgrade" and let you know, nothing changes usually except Windows itself. Old Windows directory will be renamed to "Old Windows". It does not take long and will reuse all drivers that are existing and all programs will be there. Please use the same Windows version.
> 
> 
> I have done this in case of Windows corruption since Windows 8 days and it works fine if SFC and DISM fails. I would check RAM/SOC voltages, one of them or both could be low or you are running higher RAM frequency than IMC can handle if this is the case then try loosing tRDWR/tWRRD timings, 10/4 or 10/5 are OK. IMC needs breathing room when running at higher frequency.


Cool....I will give it a go.... Not running any particularly amazing timings currently.... something definitely happened when this update happened.....


----------



## lordzed83

Check this **** out guys.... My mate came back home and hes pc is on ****ign FIRE... One of HDD's failed and set whole pc in flames got back from work just in time before carpet got on fire... And yes that is 2000 pound LG OLED that he gotten last xmas.....

















Thats how 3500 pound bbq looks like  Guess hes upgrading to Zen2 also now.... It was 4770k + 1080ti

@crakej i upgraded ran tests ect not seen any changes maybe minimal change in cb20 score thats it.


----------



## AngryLobster

Thank god I don't use mechanical storage anymore. I can't imagine a HDD catching fire though, maybe it was the PSU or PSU cables leading to the HDD.

Anyway, for those of you curious about my DPC latency issue, it's been almost a week of use with a new NVME SSD and the issue is completely gone. The prior Samsung 850 1TB only has 34TB of writes which is 50% of it's "rated" write endurance but I guess something is wrong with it.

So glad it's not the motherboard as this is IMO by far the best AM4 motherboard now that I've tried them all.


----------



## narukun

AngryLobster said:


> Thank god I don't use mechanical storage anymore. I can't imagine a HDD catching fire though, maybe it was the PSU or PSU cables leading to the HDD.
> 
> Anyway, for those of you curious about my DPC latency issue, it's been almost a week of use with a new NVME SSD and the issue is completely gone. The prior Samsung 850 1TB only has 34TB of writes which is 50% of it's "rated" write endurance but I guess something is wrong with it.
> 
> So glad it's not the motherboard as this is IMO by far the best AM4 motherboard now that I've tried them all.


I'm about to buy a new NVME, since I have stutters too, which one did you get?


----------



## AngryLobster

narukun said:


> I'm about to buy a new NVME, since I have stutters too, which one did you get?


Not sure where you're located but I bought the Inland Premium 1TB for $97. It's a generic Phison E12 which is a lot better than the other stuff that's comparably priced.


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> Check this **** out guys.... My mate came back home and hes pc is on ****ign FIRE... One of HDD's failed and set whole pc in flames got back from work just in time before carpet got on fire... And yes that is 2000 pound LG OLED that he gotten last xmas.....
> 
> Thats how 3500 pound bbq looks like  Guess hes upgrading to Zen2 also now.... It was 4770k + 1080ti
> 
> @crakej i upgraded ran tests ect not seen any changes maybe minimal change in cb20 score thats it.


You need AGESA 1001+ for the inter-ccx improvements...


----------



## hurricane28

chakku said:


> @Silent Scone still doesn't give a **** about the AMD side. TBH Elmor was half the reason I got the C6H/C7H and moving forward when I upgrade my motherboard I'll probably move on to another vendor, seems like MSI have much better memory overclocking currently anyway, it's just the BIOS side that needs work but they appear to get updates more often.


Wauw, this is really telling guys, second rep that is planning to leave Assus... Silent is rep on the ROG forums as well.. 

I wonder why other people still defending Assus even now. This CH7 is also my last Asus board, something like MSI sounds very sweet or even Gigabyte seems good nowadays.


----------



## hurricane28

lordzed83 said:


> Check this **** out guys.... My mate came back home and hes pc is on ****ign FIRE... One of HDD's failed and set whole pc in flames got back from work just in time before carpet got on fire... And yes that is 2000 pound LG OLED that he gotten last xmas.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thats how 3500 pound bbq looks like  Guess hes upgrading to Zen2 also now.... It was 4770k + 1080ti
> 
> @crakej i upgraded ran tests ect not seen any changes maybe minimal change in cb20 score thats it.


Wauw.. That is very sad to see  Hope he has good insurance.


----------



## Robi_uk

Your friends PC seems to be a watercooled system, is it possible for a leakage to be the cause of the fire?
I was thinking of switching my AIO cooler to a BeQuite for noise reasons but if it is leakage that can cause fires like this I will defo switch sooner rather then later!

Can you get PC insurance? and would it even be covered if you were to OC your system!?


----------



## crakej

I've been doing some tests on bios 1201 recently and something I noticed is really bugging me.

When I shutdown windows, it takes ages! Longer than boot up! It just sits there on the blank screen saying shutting down with the spinning wheel - for a good 15 to 20 seconds. On bios 1201 it just shuts down.

Anyone else noticed this?

Edit: My in place Windows upgrade FAILED - it got to the bit saying my machine would reboot shortly, and 15 mins later get a textbox saying 'Upgrade failed'. I'm going to have to try and manually repair the corrupt files - main one seems to be the catalog database which holds all the files needed to do the repair.


----------



## Jackalito

crakej said:


> I've been doing some tests on bios 1201 recently and something I noticed is really bugging me.
> 
> When I shutdown windows, it takes ages! Longer than boot up! It just sits there on the blank screen saying shutting down with the spinning wheel - for a good 15 to 20 seconds. On bios 1201 it just shuts down.
> 
> Anyone else noticed this?
> 
> Edit: My in place Windows upgrade FAILED - it got to the bit saying my machine would reboot shortly, and 15 mins later get a textbox saying 'Upgrade failed'. I'm going to have to try and manually repair the corrupt files - main one seems to be the catalog database which holds all the files needed to do the repair.


I've been suffering from the same long delays every time I want to restart or shutdown Windows, and I thought it was an issue with 1903. Oh well, maybe it's a minor thing between 1903 and the current BIOS for our board. 

I just wish ASUS would update with a more recent AGESA version


----------



## lordzed83

hurricane28 said:


> Wauw.. That is very sad to see  Hope he has good insurance.


Nope that is 3500 quid crisped to nothing...


----------



## lordzed83

Robi_uk said:


> Your friends PC seems to be a watercooled system, is it possible for a leakage to be the cause of the fire?
> I was thinking of switching my AIO cooler to a BeQuite for noise reasons but if it is leakage that can cause fires like this I will defo switch sooner rather then later!
> 
> Can you get PC insurance? and would it even be covered if you were to OC your system!?


Not from leak its HDD 100% confirmed also guy from OCUK had this happen:
Dad had a hard drive melt last week , Sara power cable completely melted itself onto the drive . Crazy how this starts , luckily he killed the power after smelling the funk. He's on a quality if not maybe aging seasonic platform


When watercooling fails and I'w seen dozens over years.... And You use proper fluid that is not electrical conductive you can have water on motherboard and gpu and pc will still run just starts crashing artefacts worst case will trigger PSU protection. That's why You should change coolant in water cooling loop every one year.... As it gets conductive over time due to running over metal's.

My system is insured for 3000 pounds.... In case of storm frying the pc for example or being stolen.


----------



## Robi_uk

Wow thanks for clarifying that, I didnt realise HDD could be the cause of fires.

Is there anyway to minimise the risk of HDDs catching fire, i.e. should we be replacing the HDDs after a certain number of years? Switch to SSDs altogether?

With regards to to your insurance do they cover accidental fire/damage? I would have thought they would have a clause in it such as if you OC your system which results in the fire they will not pay out?


----------



## lordzed83

https://ranker.sisoftware.co.uk/sho...d5e2daeedce8dff98bb686a0c5a09dad8bf8c5fd&l=en

i9900K:

Multi-Media Integer 1095.56Mpix/s
Multi-Media Long-int 467.95Mpix/s
Multi-Media Quad-int 7.58Mpix/s
Multi-Media Single-float 1065.02Mpix/s
Multi-Media Double-float 632.94Mpix/s
Multi-Media Quad-float 25.51Mpix/s

Ryzen 2700X:

Multi-Media Integer 570.09Mpix/s
Multi-Media Long-int 193.88Mpix/s
Multi-Media Quad-int 5.87Mpix/s
Multi-Media Single-float 609.39Mpix/s
Multi-Media Double-float 344.77Mpix/s
Multi-Media Quad-float 15.84Mpix/s


Ryzen 3900X:

Multi-Media Integer 1480.27Mpix/s
Multi-Media Long-int 562.00Mpix/s
Multi-Media Quad-int 9.70Mpix/s
Multi-Media Single-float 1515.27Mpix/s
Multi-Media Double-float 922.04Mpix/s
Multi-Media Quad-float 35.83Mpix/s


Ryzen 3900X:
Processor Arithmetic: 416.43GOPS
Processor Multi-Media: 1274.07Mpix/s 
Processor Cryptography (High Security): 21.47GB/s


i9900k:
Processor Arithmetic: 303.56GOPS
Processor Multi-Media: 792.38Mpix/s
Processor Cryptography (High Security): 14.67GB/s



They will pay out thats why i have PC insured MAINLY dont care about rest of this ****hole i live in can go in flames. PC is what is insured as extra and mainly.


----------



## nick name

lordzed83 said:


> https://ranker.sisoftware.co.uk/sho...d5e2daeedce8dff98bb686a0c5a09dad8bf8c5fd&l=en
> 
> i9900K:
> 
> Multi-Media Integer 1095.56Mpix/s
> Multi-Media Long-int 467.95Mpix/s
> Multi-Media Quad-int 7.58Mpix/s
> Multi-Media Single-float 1065.02Mpix/s
> Multi-Media Double-float 632.94Mpix/s
> Multi-Media Quad-float 25.51Mpix/s
> 
> Ryzen 2700X:
> 
> Multi-Media Integer 570.09Mpix/s
> Multi-Media Long-int 193.88Mpix/s
> Multi-Media Quad-int 5.87Mpix/s
> Multi-Media Single-float 609.39Mpix/s
> Multi-Media Double-float 344.77Mpix/s
> Multi-Media Quad-float 15.84Mpix/s
> 
> 
> Ryzen 3900X:
> 
> Multi-Media Integer 1480.27Mpix/s
> Multi-Media Long-int 562.00Mpix/s
> Multi-Media Quad-int 9.70Mpix/s
> Multi-Media Single-float 1515.27Mpix/s
> Multi-Media Double-float 922.04Mpix/s
> Multi-Media Quad-float 35.83Mpix/s
> 
> 
> Ryzen 3900X:
> Processor Arithmetic: 416.43GOPS
> Processor Multi-Media: 1274.07Mpix/s
> Processor Cryptography (High Security): 21.47GB/s
> 
> 
> i9900k:
> Processor Arithmetic: 303.56GOPS
> Processor Multi-Media: 792.38Mpix/s
> Processor Cryptography (High Security): 14.67GB/s
> 
> 
> 
> -snip-


Well hello there.


----------



## VPII

lordzed83 said:


> https://ranker.sisoftware.co.uk/sho...d5e2daeedce8dff98bb686a0c5a09dad8bf8c5fd&l=en
> 
> 
> 
> i9900K:
> 
> 
> 
> Multi-Media Integer 1095.56Mpix/s
> 
> Multi-Media Long-int 467.95Mpix/s
> 
> Multi-Media Quad-int 7.58Mpix/s
> 
> Multi-Media Single-float 1065.02Mpix/s
> 
> Multi-Media Double-float 632.94Mpix/s
> 
> Multi-Media Quad-float 25.51Mpix/s
> 
> 
> 
> Ryzen 2700X:
> 
> 
> 
> Multi-Media Integer 570.09Mpix/s
> 
> Multi-Media Long-int 193.88Mpix/s
> 
> Multi-Media Quad-int 5.87Mpix/s
> 
> Multi-Media Single-float 609.39Mpix/s
> 
> Multi-Media Double-float 344.77Mpix/s
> 
> Multi-Media Quad-float 15.84Mpix/s
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ryzen 3900X:
> 
> 
> 
> Multi-Media Integer 1480.27Mpix/s
> 
> Multi-Media Long-int 562.00Mpix/s
> 
> Multi-Media Quad-int 9.70Mpix/s
> 
> Multi-Media Single-float 1515.27Mpix/s
> 
> Multi-Media Double-float 922.04Mpix/s
> 
> Multi-Media Quad-float 35.83Mpix/s
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ryzen 3900X:
> 
> Processor Arithmetic: 416.43GOPS
> 
> Processor Multi-Media: 1274.07Mpix/s
> 
> Processor Cryptography (High Security): 21.47GB/s
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i9900k:
> 
> Processor Arithmetic: 303.56GOPS
> 
> Processor Multi-Media: 792.38Mpix/s
> 
> Processor Cryptography (High Security): 14.67GB/s
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They will pay out thats why i have PC insured MAINLY dont care about rest of this ****hole i live in can go in flames. PC is what is insured as extra and mainly.


Interestingly I explained my insurance the value of my pc and ask them to add it. So I got a qoute but stating it is a laptop so I phoned back and said it is a house pc and they said don't worry it is included in my house goods insurance. Well hell yes no extra payment.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## Rusakova

Jackalito said:


> I've been suffering from the same long delays every time I want to restart or shutdown Windows, and I thought it was an issue with 1903. Oh well, maybe it's a minor thing between 1903 and the current BIOS for our board.
> 
> I just wish ASUS would update with a more recent AGESA version


I have been going nuts over this. Not that I restart or shutdown often, but still.
I was actually considering a clean install of 1903, to see if that would solve anything.
If BIOS 1201 solves that then flashback here I come.
I'm just afraid when I get my 3900X, the problem will be back (have to update BIOS),
unless a new BIOS comes out with a fix.

*EDIT*
Maybe it's related to some of the security updates in the BIOS and it will always be like
this going forward.


----------



## nick name

That's odd. I don't have any problems shutting down quickly. Steam will sometimes hold it up, but that's it.


----------



## Jackalito

Rusakova said:


> I have been going nuts over this. Not that I restart or shutdown often, but still.
> I was actually considering a clean install of 1903, to see if that would solve anything.
> If BIOS 1201 solves that then flashback here I come.
> I'm just afraid when I get my 3900X, the problem will be back (have to update BIOS),
> unless a new BIOS comes out with a fix.
> 
> *EDIT*
> Maybe it's related to some of the security updates in the BIOS and it will always be like
> this going forward.


Well, I did fresh install Windows 10 1903 and that didn't fix it, so I'm glad to hear you didn't go that way. 

Maybe a CU + BIOS will solve it for us.


----------



## Rusakova

nick name said:


> That's odd. I don't have any problems shutting down quickly. Steam will sometimes hold it up, but that's it.


What chipset drivers are you using ?

*EDIT*
Just tried two other chipser drivers, same result.
So it's not related to that.


----------



## Keith Myers

This news article was posted several places in the last couple of days about Windows 10 taking an extra 60 seconds to shut down because of a flaw in the USB drivers.
https://lifehacker.com/how-to-fix-the-windows-10-shutdown-delay-bug-1835840316


----------



## crakej

Keith Myers said:


> This news article was posted several places in the last couple of days about Windows 10 taking an extra 60 seconds to shut down because of a flaw in the USB drivers.
> https://lifehacker.com/how-to-fix-the-windows-10-shutdown-delay-bug-1835840316


Thanks Keith! Thought I was losing it....

Looks like I have major corruption anyway with things saying stuff like I don't have Administrators permission to do this or that. In - place upgrade failed  Can't even run any troublshooters....

Re-install for me...


----------



## Rusakova

Keith Myers said:


> This news article was posted several places in the last couple of days about Windows 10 taking an extra 60 seconds to shut down because of a flaw in the USB drivers.
> https://lifehacker.com/how-to-fix-the-windows-10-shutdown-delay-bug-1835840316


This doesn't really help me, since I don't have any USB type C devices plugged in.
But thank you for the suggestion.


----------



## Keith Myers

crakej said:


> Thanks Keith! Thought I was losing it....
> 
> Looks like I have major corruption anyway with things saying stuff like I don't have Administrators permission to do this or that. In - place upgrade failed  Can't even run any troublshooters....
> 
> Re-install for me...


My thinking is that you have a corrupted file system where data blocks of one file is being pointed to or referenced by the the block location of another file.

If sfc /scannow or dism can't fix it after running chkdsk, then a reinstall of Windows from scratch is the only solution. I would run a data integrity check first on the target drive to move any iffy blocks to offline and refill with some of the over provisioned spare blocks.


----------



## crakej

Keith Myers said:


> My thinking is that you have a corrupted file system where data blocks of one file is being pointed to or referenced by the the block location of another file.
> 
> If sfc /scannow or dism can't fix it after running chkdsk, then a reinstall of Windows from scratch is the only solution. I would run a data integrity check first on the target drive to move any iffy blocks to offline and refill with some of the over provisioned spare blocks.


I'm SO silly! I forgot about going back to a restore point - I set one just after installing 1903 - and then it worked with the in place install!

Thanks for your help @Ramad and @Kieth Myers


----------



## Keith Myers

crakej said:


> I'm SO silly! I forgot about going back to a restore point - I set one just after installing 1903 - and then it worked with the in place install!
> 
> Thanks for your help @Ramad and @Kieth Myers


Well, you got lucky. I didn't have that kind of luck. When my Windows 10 installation broke, I couldn't use a single one of my restore points to roll back to a previous known good snapshot. Neither sfc/ scannow nor DISM could fix me.

So I said ef it and blew away my last Windows installation and converted the last machine to Linux. Never looking back. Glad you could recover eventually.


----------



## crakej

Keith Myers said:


> Well, you got lucky. I didn't have that kind of luck. When my Windows 10 installation broke, I couldn't use a single one of my restore points to roll back to a previous known good snapshot. Neither sfc/ scannow nor DISM could fix me.
> 
> So I said ef it and blew away my last Windows installation and converted the last machine to Linux. Never looking back. Glad you could recover eventually.


Yes - I'm lucky I set that point when I did....really thought I'd be reinstalling


----------



## narukun

I have a stupid question, is the R9 3900X a 2 "glued-together" cpus? like two 6 cores cpus inside or just straight 12 cores? same for the 3950X


----------



## ComansoRowlett

narukun said:


> I have a stupid question, is the R9 3900X a 2 "glued-together" cpus? like two 6 cores cpus inside or just straight 12 cores? same for the 3950X


In theory yes, but Robert Hallock said the latency between the 2 CCD's is 1-2 milliseconds so they practically see each as the same chip anyway. But as far as I'm aware each 8 core chiplets have 2x4 cores each and 2 CCX's. So 3900X and 3950X will have the same amount of CCD's just will have an extra CCX inside a CCD enabled.


----------



## netman

still no new Agesa for on of the top notch (price and featurewise) X470 Boards - its really annoying - 2 B-Dies Kits waiting here and nothing to test with...


----------



## crakej

netman said:


> still no new Agesa for on of the top notch (price and featurewise) X470 Boards - its really annoying - 2 B-Dies Kits waiting here and nothing to test with...


You'll still get good speed from your b-die before the update....


----------



## netman

i already tweaked out my kits with the existing agesa  so as i said nothing more to test without the new Agesa which seems very more promising regarding Ram Speeds and Latencys if you compare it with other manufacturers that already offer the new agesa for their X470 Boards


----------



## Baio73

netman said:


> i already tweaked out my kits with the existing agesa  so as i said nothing more to test without the new Agesa which seems very more promising regarding Ram Speeds and Latencys if you compare it with other manufacturers that already offer the new agesa for their X470 Boards


Among your kits do you have a 2x8 Corsair CMW16GX4M2C3600C18?
I'm struggling to set them above 3400MHz... no way.

Baio


----------



## nick name

I'm pretty eager for the new BIOS as well, but didn't someone say ASUS is timing its release with the new Ryzen CPUs? So the Friday before that would be the 5th of July.


----------



## netman

no sorry i have 2 Gskill kits a F4-3200C14D-16GTZ that runs at 3533 14-15-14-14-30 and a F4-4266C19D-16GTZSW that i got stable @ 3400-15-15-14-15-32 with my 2700X - so i am really looking forward to test again with the new Agesa and of course the new Matisse Cpus - would be nice to get 3733 or even more. 

By stable i mean 2 Karhu Runs with 10000% and no mistakes.


----------



## nick name

On a separate note: one of the recent Geekbench 4 scores for a 3900X were done with the new Crosshair VIII Hero WiFi. It was done with 2133MHz RAM so the score wasn't spectacular, but I think it's the first time I've seen it in the wild.


----------



## Rusakova

nick name said:


> I'm pretty eager for the new BIOS as well, but didn't someone say ASUS is timing its release with the new Ryzen CPUs? So the Friday before that would be the 5th of July.


Since the chipset driver for Ryzen 3xxx 1 ms CPU speed switch, will be released on the 7th.
Asus might just do the same with a new BIOS. The 5th looks like a good date.


----------



## netman

For me thats hard to accept - as i bought one of the most expensive X470 Boards also to get the best Support and Service available - and that is absolutely not given if all the other boards get the new Agesa Versions long time before the CH7 - a really bad Experience - i only hope it therefore at least works like a charme when the new Agesa is finally out for our ch7 - no more excuses then!


----------



## Rusakova

netman said:


> For me thats hard to accept - as i bought one of the most expensive X470 Boards also to get the best Support and Service available - and that is absolutely not given if all the other boards get the new Agesa Versions long time before the CH7 - a really bad Experience - i only hope it therefore at least works like a charme when the new Agesa is finally out for our ch7 - no more excuses then!


Maybe they were told by AMD to hold it back until the 7th, who knows.
I do agree that some info from Asus would be nice.
On the current 2304 BIOS, I'm running my B-die @ 3533 MHz no issues.
I'm also running my 2700X with a - voltage offset and even if a new AGESA
comes out, I doubt I can squeeze any more performance out of my system.


----------



## nick name

netman said:


> For me thats hard to accept - as i bought one of the most expensive X470 Boards also to get the best Support and Service available - and that is absolutely not given if all the other boards get the new Agesa Versions long time before the CH7 - a really bad Experience - i only hope it therefore at least works like a charme when the new Agesa is finally out for our ch7 - no more excuses then!


Honestly, I don't think it's unreasonable. I haven't heard of any ROG boards with the very latest AGESA and it seems like it's just the boards with fewer features that have been updated. There is some custom work ASUS has to do with their Performance Enhancers 3 and 4 and probably some other things too. So if they are going to be running the new Ryzen CPUs I can't imagine they are going to move as fast as they would if they only needed to test things on the current Ryzen CPUs. 

If I were them -- I would take this time to make things as perfect as possible for those getting the new CPUs at launch. And as such I wouldn't release the BIOS until launch or shortly before so I could test test test in the mean time.


----------



## crakej

But 2304 already supports Matisse - there is nothing to hide........ loads of other boards have 1001 1002 1003 even, so nothing to hide there either.

....unless there is a surprise for us on premium boards?


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> But 2304 already supports Matisse - there is nothing to hide........ loads of other boards have 1001 1002 1003 even, so nothing to hide there either.
> 
> ....unless there is a surprise for us on premium boards?


While this is true there aren't any consumers with the new CPUs so no reason to iron out all the bugs if nobody is going to find them. Getting closer to release and being the BIOS version they know will be used by consumers with the new CPUs they may be paying closer attention to the smaller details. There were some PBO values they corrected with the last 2304 BIOS so perhaps that's a reason we got 2304. But really we should remember that AGESA updates aren't always used by ASUS and there were about four months between the ones we did get. 

Again, though, I will point out that ASUS ROG boards are the only ones I know of that have a PBO overclock feature so they have to tailor for that. All the other boards (as far as I am aware) use XFR/PBO as AMD created it. 

Fingers crossed on a surprise though. That would be delightful.


----------



## neikosr0x

nick name said:


> While this is true there aren't any consumers with the new CPUs so no reason to iron out all the bugs if nobody is going to find them. Getting closer to release and being the BIOS version they know will be used by consumers with the new CPUs they may be paying closer attention to the smaller details. There were some PBO values they corrected with the last 2304 BIOS so perhaps that's a reason we got 2304. But really we should remember that AGESA updates aren't always used by ASUS and there were about four months between the ones we did get.
> 
> Again, though, I will point out that ASUS ROG boards are the only ones I know of that have a PBO overclock feature so they have to tailor for that. All the other boards (as far as I am aware) use XFR/PBO as AMD created it.
> 
> Fingers crossed on a surprise though. That would be delightful.


I can't really complain about ASUS Bios updates, they might not be the fastest all the time. But they certainly have they best Bios/features in my opinion. PBO PE3/PE4 are something i appreciate a lot. As it makes our boards to claim those clock 200mhz+ higher than any other PBO lvl from AMD standards. I don't know this boards doesn't really have much flaws.


----------



## Jackalito

I really hope we get a new BIOS update by Friday.


----------



## netman

i won't bet anymore


----------



## wonderiuy

What if the surprise is "bios development is discontinued"? Ahahahaha seems so such far


----------



## crakej

AMD seem to be releasing a few videos with more information about Ryzen 3000, including this not so interesting one about GameCache (cache to you and me) 




.....and this more interesting one on PB Overdrive on Ryzen 3000 




Still not clear if x370/x470 will have this capability - Robert starts by explaining how the VRMs work (well, what they're there for) on the X570.


----------



## Keith Myers

crakej said:


> AMD seem to be releasing a few videos with more information about Ryzen 3000, including this not so interesting one about GameCache (cache to you and me) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwsLSrcoCgE
> 
> .....and this more interesting one on PB Overdrive on Ryzen 3000 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prAaADB9Kck
> 
> Still not clear if x370/x470 will have this capability - Robert starts by explaining how the VRMs work (well, what they're there for) on the X570.


Good video simplifying PBO. I believe the distinction at the end mentioned Performance Boost Overdrive with Automatic Overclocking.
That feature will be specific to X570 and Ryzen 3000 cpus. Normal X370/X470 Zen+ cpus still have the regular PBO.


----------



## crakej

Keith Myers said:


> Good video simplifying PBO. I believe the distinction at the end mentioned Performance Boost Overdrive with Automatic Overclocking.
> That feature will be specific to X570 and Ryzen 3000 cpus. Normal X370/X470 Zen+ cpus still have the regular PBO.


I thought so.... it's a shame it works like this - all the hoo haa about using the same socket for years - but a different chipset every year! Almost no point having the same socket!

Well, obviously there is a point. Most users can't upgraded board and CPU year on year, I just hate not being able to have it all lol


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> Good video simplifying PBO. I believe the distinction at the end mentioned Performance Boost Overdrive with Automatic Overclocking.
> That feature will be specific to X570 and Ryzen 3000 cpus. Normal X370/X470 Zen+ cpus still have the regular PBO.


While the X570 bit was a little disappointing the idea that you can stack another 200MHz on top was nice. I'm curious about how it adds it though. Will it on top of the fastest single core loads or will it apply it to all loads? Regardless, it makes me hopeful that there is some manual overclocking headroom for those that simply wanting a static clock speed.


----------



## Keith Myers

nick name said:


> While the X570 bit was a little disappointing the idea that you can stack another 200MHz on top was nice. I'm curious about how it adds it though. Will it on top of the fastest single core loads or will it apply it to all loads? Regardless, it makes me hopeful that there is some manual overclocking headroom for those that simply wanting a static clock speed.


That is the question I want answered too. What about all core static clock speeds with the PBO +Automatic Overclocking.

I guess that will likely get answered, at least I hope so, in the upcoming product reviews once embargo lifts. If the reviewers don't answer that question I will be unhappy and promptly post my displeasure in the comments. I know my usage is atypical compared to the majority of users but I still need to know whether I will see any improvements in actual all-core, high utilization computing. This is definitely a wait and see situation awaiting some product maturity before contemplating an upgrade.


----------



## kundica

I don't think it'll be specific to x570. There's already bios available for x470(Strix maybe) that has the feature in the PBO menu. I saw a screenshot on Reddit today but don't remember which thread.

Sent from my LG V30 using Tapatalk


----------



## chakku

It's available on all motherboards that receive updates to support Ryzen 3000.


----------



## narukun

The Asus Prime b350-plus and the B350-F gaming already got new bios today and we are still waiting... 

Version 5007
2019/07/01 10.16 MBytes
PRIME B350-PLUS BIOS 5007
Update new AGESA to improve compatibility;
Recommend updating the BIOS via EZ Flash.

https://www.asus.com/ch-de/Motherboards/PRIME-B350-PLUS/HelpDesk_BIOS/

Version 5008
2019/07/01 9.97 MBytes
ROG STRIX B350-F GAMING BIOS 5008
Update new AGESA to improve compatibility;
Recommend updating the BIOS via EZ Flash. 

https://www.asus.com/uk/Motherboards/ROG-STRIX-B350-F-GAMING/HelpDesk_BIOS/


----------



## Baio73

Trying to set up my RAM (Corsair CMW16GX4M2C3600C18) following the attached indications… can't set the speed above 3200.
A couple of times I reached 3466, but in this moment I'm writing @3200.
Never had such a strange combination of mobo/RAM… the SAME EXACTLY BIOS values sometimes work and sometimes not… 

SOC Voltage is set to 1.19 (BIOS reading is 1.175, as suggested by Calculator… don't know why the time I took the picture the valus is not displayed).

In Calculator I find 2 values (BGS and BGS alt) I can't locate in the BIOS.
On the other hand in the BIOS I find TRCPAGE (0 if set to Auto), TRFC 2 (suppose corresponds to tRFC alt of Calculator), TRFC 4 (132 if set to Auto), MEMADDRCMDSETP, MEMCSODTSETUP and MEMCKESTUP.

Any suggestion?
I'm looking for another RAM change… 

Baio


----------



## Onijin

In UEFI hit F9 to search and look for "BankGroupSwap" without quotes.


----------



## lordzed83




----------



## neikosr0x

crakej said:


> I thought so.... it's a shame it works like this - all the hoo haa about using the same socket for years - but a different chipset every year! Almost no point having the same socket!
> 
> Well, obviously there is a point. Most users can't upgraded board and CPU year on year, I just hate not being able to have it all lol


it is just fine, at least... according to AMD x470 will make use of the new PBO 2.0 feature. I just wonder how much our current x470 CH7 can handle. Hopefully it can give full headroom for the 3900x.


----------



## VicsPC

neikosr0x said:


> it is just fine, at least... according to AMD x470 will make use of the new PBO 2.0 feature. I just wonder how much our current x470 CH7 can handle. Hopefully it can give full headroom for the 3900x.


Found this yesterday, lots of people might find it useful. Looks like our board can handle quite a lot, so could the Crosshair VI. 

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/commen...os_share_flow_optimization&utm_term=control_2

Here's the spreadsheet. 
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...VxdCR9daIVNyMatydkpFA/htmlview?sle=true#gid=0


----------



## Baio73

Onijin said:


> In UEFI hit F9 to search and look for "BankGroupSwap" without quotes.


Found them, thanks.
But slight improvement… I could reach 3466 once, then got beeps @3500.
Then I could not set 3400 again…
I'm getting even more puzzled…

Baio


----------



## crakej

Baio73 said:


> Found them, thanks.
> But slight improvement… I could reach 3466 once, then got beeps @3500.
> Then I could not set 3400 again…
> I'm getting even more puzzled…
> 
> Baio


Do you have GearDown enabled? If not, give it a try.


----------



## HolyFist

After updating to Windows 10 v1903 the DPC Latency issues are back, it reset some drivers, i've installed newest ones again but doesn't seem to matter.

Fresh Install in different SSD, same issue, all BIOS back to defaults same problem, no overclock same problem.

I've put all devices in MSI mode and doesn't help either.

It happened with C6H too and 1700 on it, sometimes the system sound glitches and system stutters along with it (not games the whole thing even just browsing in Firefox/Chrome).

I have RAM sticks in B2 and A2 as per board manual, did the same on C6H, i guess this is fine?

Anyone has a clue why this is happening or where to look to solve this?


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> That is the question I want answered too. What about all core static clock speeds with the PBO +Automatic Overclocking.
> 
> I guess that will likely get answered, at least I hope so, in the upcoming product reviews once embargo lifts. If the reviewers don't answer that question I will be unhappy and promptly post my displeasure in the comments. I know my usage is atypical compared to the majority of users but I still need to know whether I will see any improvements in actual all-core, high utilization computing. This is definitely a wait and see situation awaiting some product maturity before contemplating an upgrade.


Have you been looking at any of the Geekbench 4 scores for the new Ryzen 3000 CPUs? The 3700X is popping up now and much more 3900X now too. However, a few days ago the 3600 had a few overlocked runs at 4.4GHz running Linux and those scores were damn impressive.


----------



## lordzed83

HolyFist said:


> After updating to Windows 10 v1903 the DPC Latency issues are back, it reset some drivers, i've installed newest ones again but doesn't seem to matter.
> 
> Fresh Install in different SSD, same issue, all BIOS back to defaults same problem, no overclock same problem.
> 
> I've put all devices in MSI mode and doesn't help either.
> 
> It happened with C6H too and 1700 on it, sometimes the system sound glitches and system stutters along with it (not games the whole thing even just browsing in Firefox/Chrome).
> 
> I have RAM sticks in B2 and A2 as per board manual, did the same on C6H, i guess this is fine?
> 
> Anyone has a clue why this is happening or where to look to solve this?


New chipset drivers ??


----------



## lordzed83

Zeed said: ↑
So does C7H but microcode is month old or so....

Anyhow 8pack been playing around
Both of these boards working. I tried them both...


Thats C6H and C7H FYI


----------



## HolyFist

New Chipset Drivers dont help


----------



## Keith Myers

nick name said:


> Have you been looking at any of the Geekbench 4 scores for the new Ryzen 3000 CPUs? The 3700X is popping up now and much more 3900X now too. However, a few days ago the 3600 had a few overlocked runs at 4.4GHz running Linux and those scores were damn impressive.


Yes, I have seen the leaked scores, but not the 3900X one yet. I'll have to go find that one. That cpu is one of my target purchases. I really want to see how that cpu matches up against my TR 2920X host in a core for core comparison. I want to convert at least one 2700X host to the 3900X. I likely will just drop 3700X cpus into the remaining 2700X hosts. I run Geekbench4 myself for profiling all my systems after making a change. But the benchmark only runs for a couple of minutes and really doesn't tell you how well the cores will hold their overclocks over a constant load of an hour. Prime95 is better for that or my normal validation of just running my normal BOINC workload. You can't get to a thermal soak in only a couple of minutes.


----------



## Rusakova

HolyFist said:


> New Chipset Drivers dont help


Have you tried enabling / disabling High Precision Event Timer (HPET) ?
Mileage may vary. Some have micro stutters or slow downs with it enabled
others see the opposite effect.


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> Yes, I have seen the leaked scores, but not the 3900X one yet. I'll have to go find that one. That cpu is one of my target purchases. I really want to see how that cpu matches up against my TR 2920X host in a core for core comparison. I want to convert at least one 2700X host to the 3900X. I likely will just drop 3700X cpus into the remaining 2700X hosts. I run Geekbench4 myself for profiling all my systems after making a change. But the benchmark only runs for a couple of minutes and really doesn't tell you how well the cores will hold their overclocks over a constant load of an hour. Prime95 is better for that or my normal validation of just running my normal BOINC workload. You can't get to a thermal soak in only a couple of minutes.


Here you go, friend:

http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/search?q=x570
http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/search?utf8=✓&q=ryzen+3600
http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/search?utf8=✓&q=3700x
http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/search?utf8=✓&q=3900x

Edit:
A little trick to see the core speeds during the test is to add .gb4 to the end of the URL of the score you're looking at.


----------



## Keith Myers

nick name said:


> Here you go, friend:
> 
> http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/search?q=x570
> http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/search?utf8=✓&q=ryzen+3600
> http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/search?utf8=✓&q=3700x
> http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/search?utf8=✓&q=3900x
> 
> Edit:
> A little trick to see the core speeds during the test is to add .gb4 to the end of the URL of the score you're looking at.


Very cool. Thanks for that tips and tricks. Didn't know about that one. I see the top scoring 3900X running mostly 4.4Ghz all cores during the test. My 2920X runs 4296Mhz all cores with little deviation. There are a lot more deviations and variability in the 3900X scores. I see 4 cores drop out down to 3300Mhz for some reason. Looks like the 3900X might have that 200Mhz Auto Overclocking function running since that is the general core clock difference over my 2920X.
3900X

"platform": {
"os": "Windows",
"architecture": "x86_64",
"bits": 64
},
"processor_frequency": {
"minimum": 3363,
"maximum": 4492,
"median": 4449,
"mean": 4405,
 "stddev": 191.85056806267835,

Keith's 2920X

"platform": {
"os": "Linux",
"architecture": "x86_64",
"bits": 64
},
"processor_frequency": {
"minimum": 4229,
"maximum": 4298,
"median": 4296,
"mean": 4293,
"stddev": 9.5797547975170012,


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> Very cool. Thanks for that tips and tricks. Didn't know about that one. I see the top scoring 3900X running mostly 4.4Ghz all cores during the test. My 2920X runs 4296Mhz all cores with little deviation. There are a lot more deviations and variability in the 3900X scores. I see 4 cores drop out down to 3300Mhz for some reason. Looks like the 3900X might have that 200Mhz Auto Overclocking function running since that is the general core clock difference over my 2920X.
> 3900X
> 
> "platform": {
> "os": "Windows",
> "architecture": "x86_64",
> "bits": 64
> },
> "processor_frequency": {
> "minimum": 3363,
> "maximum": 4492,
> "median": 4449,
> "mean": 4405,
> "stddev": 191.85056806267835,
> 
> Keith's 2920X
> 
> "platform": {
> "os": "Linux",
> "architecture": "x86_64",
> "bits": 64
> },
> "processor_frequency": {
> "minimum": 4229,
> "maximum": 4298,
> "median": 4296,
> "mean": 4293,
> "stddev": 9.5797547975170012,


Glad to help. I got the tip from someone here and he said he got it from Reddit so people helping people makes the world go round. 

Did you see the overclocked 3600 Linux scores? A good 600 points more on single core scores than your top scores.


----------



## Baio73

crakej said:


> Do you have GearDown enabled? If not, give it a try.


Yes, enabled as indicated by Calculator.

Baio


----------



## Keith Myers

nick name said:


> Glad to help. I got the tip from someone here and he said he got it from Reddit so people helping people makes the world go round.
> 
> Did you see the overclocked 3600 Linux scores? A good 600 points more on single core scores than your top scores.


No, I just looked. Mostly all of them around 4250Mhz. I am primarily interested in the floating point math scores since that is my normal workload. The increase in the FP register from 128 bits to 256 bits wide is the improvement I am most excited about along with the doubling of the L2 and L3 caches. The math performance of Zen 2 should be much improved over Ryzen +. It the IMC of the new cpu is improved, I might be able to get more memory clocks over my standard 3466. That improves the transactional speed also in calculations. Just biding my time till review embargoes lift and sales go live.


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> No, I just looked. Mostly all of them around 4250Mhz. I am primarily interested in the floating point math scores since that is my normal workload. The increase in the FP register from 128 bits to 256 bits wide is the improvement I am most excited about along with the doubling of the L2 and L3 caches. The math performance of Zen 2 should be much improved over Ryzen +. It the IMC of the new cpu is improved, I might be able to get more memory clocks over my standard 3466. That improves the transactional speed also in calculations. Just biding my time till review embargoes lift and sales go live.


Bearded Hardware got a 3700X to review which he plans to do live on Sunday. I just started following him so I don't know if AMD sent him previous CPUs to review, but I'm hoping that AMD's expectation is for him to display that the 3700X is a strong overclocking CPU. Fingers crossed that these new 3000 CPUs will overclock up to and past their boost speeds.


----------



## lordzed83

Well Guys got more info from 8pack about Overclocking of Zen2


Oh its always the first thing i do ^^^^ 

I don’t understand, i never did expect a lot of overclocking head room, CPU’s these days seem to be pushed near the limits with only 1 or 2 of the cores boosting high, if Ryzen 2000 is anything to go by you’re lucky to get the maximum single core boost on all cores by overclocking, is that what you’re talking about?

Yes. You’re lucky to get the maximum single core boost on all cores by overclocking


----------



## lordzed83

nick name said:


> Bearded Hardware got a 3700X to review which he plans to do live on Sunday. I just started following him so I don't know if AMD sent him previous CPUs to review, but I'm hoping that AMD's expectation is for him to display that the 3700X is a strong overclocking CPU. Fingers crossed that these new 3000 CPUs will overclock up to and past their boost speeds.


They wiont CONFIRMED sadly..... I got 2 people saying same thing They dont overclock above boost. If You are lucky you will get boost all core on my type of cooling. Think overclocking like Zen+


----------



## Keith Myers

lordzed83 said:


> Well Guys got more info from 8pack about Overclocking of Zen2
> 
> 
> Oh its always the first thing i do ^^^^
> 
> I don’t understand, i never did expect a lot of overclocking head room, CPU’s these days seem to be pushed near the limits with only 1 or 2 of the cores boosting high, if Ryzen 2000 is anything to go by you’re lucky to get the maximum single core boost on all cores by overclocking, is that what you’re talking about?
> 
> Yes. You’re lucky to get the maximum single core boost on all cores by overclocking


Yes, my goal is always to achieve the highest sustained boost on all cores for 24/7 workloads. If it clocks all core like Zen + but at a couple of 100Mhz higher than the previous gen, that's fine by me. I know how to achieve high all-core clocks.


----------



## lordzed83

Keith Myers said:


> Yes, my goal is always to achieve the highest sustained boost on all cores for 24/7 workloads. If it clocks all core like Zen + but at a couple of 100Mhz higher than the previous gen, that's fine by me. I know how to achieve high all-core clocks.


I dont have my hopes up too much... 12x4.4 should cut it for me


----------



## chakku

lordzed83 said:


> They wiont CONFIRMED sadly..... I got 2 people saying same thing They dont overclock above boost. If You are lucky you will get boost all core on my type of cooling. Think overclocking like Zen+


The days of having a big overclocking boost like Sandy Bridge are over, mostly because of all these new boost algorithms that essentially do automatic overclocking for you. I doubt we will ever see something like that again, where the boost was 3.7GHz on a 2500K but you could easily get 4.2GHz+ all core without changing voltage and push all the way to even 5GHz with a good chip and cooling.


----------



## Keith Myers

lordzed83 said:


> I dont have my hopes up too much... 12x4.4 should cut it for me


That would be fine for me also. I am hoping the improved math functions elicit better crunch times more than the marginally improved core clocks.


----------



## VPII

Well Ive been contemplating getting a X570 board with the Ryzen 9 3900X Im planning to buy, but I've decided now that Ill first run the new cpu in my CH7 board untill I have a better picture of the X570 options.

The vrm power delivery from the CH7 should be more than enough. My board is stripped bare when I do LN2 runs and vrm temps not an issue only when they get too cold.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## crakej

This has happened twice, so i thought i better report it. It's ONLY ever happened on 2304.

While testing some slightly tighter timings on 3600, I started IBT and quickly noticed my fans were NOT spinning up! The temps were only reading 40c, so they were just not going to work!

Simple reboot solved problem. I have no idea what may have caused it.

It's happened twice now, so keep your eyes open just in case!


----------



## crakej

Prime X370 Pro got new bios this morning - not seen feedback yet.

Edit: It's AGESA 1002


----------



## westk

Baio73 said:


> Trying to set up my RAM (Corsair CMW16GX4M2C3600C18) following the attached indications… can't set the speed above 3200.
> A couple of times I reached 3466, but in this moment I'm writing @3200.
> Never had such a strange combination of mobo/RAM… the SAME EXACTLY BIOS values sometimes work and sometimes not…
> 
> SOC Voltage is set to 1.19 (BIOS reading is 1.175, as suggested by Calculator… don't know why the time I took the picture the valus is not displayed).
> 
> In Calculator I find 2 values (BGS and BGS alt) I can't locate in the BIOS.
> On the other hand in the BIOS I find TRCPAGE (0 if set to Auto), TRFC 2 (suppose corresponds to tRFC alt of Calculator), TRFC 4 (132 if set to Auto), MEMADDRCMDSETP, MEMCSODTSETUP and MEMCKESTUP.
> 
> Any suggestion?
> I'm looking for another RAM change…
> 
> Baio


There´s an update newer. I´d try that first.


----------



## westk

HolyFist said:


> After updating to Windows 10 v1903 the DPC Latency issues are back, it reset some drivers, i've installed newest ones again but doesn't seem to matter.
> 
> Fresh Install in different SSD, same issue, all BIOS back to defaults same problem, no overclock same problem.
> 
> I've put all devices in MSI mode and doesn't help either.
> 
> It happened with C6H too and 1700 on it, sometimes the system sound glitches and system stutters along with it (not games the whole thing even just browsing in Firefox/Chrome).
> 
> I have RAM sticks in B2 and A2 as per board manual, did the same on C6H, i guess this is fine?
> 
> Anyone has a clue why this is happening or where to look to solve this?


Did you test another PSU? That sound that you described sounds like the guilty


----------



## Baio73

westk said:


> There´s an update newer. I´d try that first.


Oh, I missed it… thanks! I'm gonna try it.

But I was thinking… my RAM is rated 3600 CAS 18 @stock speed… Calculator gives me [email protected] isn't it overlock?
I mean, I know that with Ryzen everything above 2933 is an overclock, but if I set the RAM as Calculator says, I'd overclock them twice! Once the CPU (the memory controller is inside it) ad once the RAM.
I'm gonna try with new Calculator values but [email protected]

Baio

EDIT: tried the values given by the latest release of Calculator, no improvement even if some majior timings are higher.
Also tried the new values along with CAS 18, could step up to 3400, above RAM beeps.
I'm gonna run out of ideas...


----------



## nick name

Baio73 said:


> Oh, I missed it… thanks! I'm gonna try it.
> 
> But I was thinking… my RAM is rated 3600 CAS 18 @stock speed… Calculator gives me [email protected] isn't it overlock?
> I mean, I know that with Ryzen everything above 2933 is an overclock, but if I set the RAM as Calculator says, I'd overclock them twice! Once the CPU (the memory controller is inside it) ad once the RAM.
> I'm gonna try with new Calculator values but [email protected]
> 
> Baio
> 
> EDIT: tried the values given by the latest release of Calculator, no improvement even if some majior timings are higher.
> Also tried the new values along with CAS 18, could step up to 3400, above RAM beeps.
> I'm gonna run out of ideas...


Did we ever ask you if you used the RAM slots A2 and B2?


----------



## MrYoke

Is there any word of a new bios coming out before Zen 2's release? I didn't update my bios yet since it works fine for my 2700X and it seems like the most recent bios still needs a lot of work.


----------



## crakej

MrYoke said:


> Is there any word of a new bios coming out before Zen 2's release? I didn't update my bios yet since it works fine for my 2700X and it seems like the most recent bios still needs a lot of work.


Nope, there's never any 'word' on bios releases. 

Pretty sure we'll have a new bios by week end though.


----------



## Baio73

nick name said:


> Did we ever ask you if you used the RAM slots A2 and B2?


Yes, slots are correct.

I've found a 4133MHz kit from Corsair at a good price, but I've several doubts… if I can't set even @3600 I'd gain just a couple of lower timing in the best scenario.

Baio


----------



## neikosr0x

Baio73 said:


> Yes, slots are correct.
> 
> I've found a 4133MHz kit from Corsair at a good price, but I've several doubts… if I can't set even @3600 I'd gain just a couple of lower timing in the best scenario.
> 
> Baio


I have the same RAM kit as yours, if i'm not mistaken. I could share my BIOS settings with you to see if it works. I also own the same CPU and i'm running my kit no problem a 3466 CL14. And do work at 3600 CL16/CL17 but not soooo stable yet.


----------



## elbubi

elbubi said:


> Hi @elmor!
> First of all, thanks for your dedication and support. Happy to see agesa 1.0.0.6 is nearly coming, hope it helps improving memory timmings a bit.
> 
> I'm overall satisfied with my CH7 Wi-Fi performance, altough faster boot times would be nice tbh.
> 
> The only "bug" I found is that Intel Ethernet port stops responding to WOL magic packets after aprox. 24hs of computer being shutdown in power-off state (S5). In S3 it works just fine no matter how long it has been sleeping, but in S5 it works for some period (sometimes a day, sometimes less/more), but then it stops responding and only physical power-on is possible.
> 
> I have another machine on my LAN with asus board and intel nic (olders one though), with exactly same os and settings, and it doesn't behave this way.
> 
> Having use Wake on Lan/Wan for more than 10 years, I'm aware of all the "tricks" to make it work under power-off state (green lan, power saving options, windows fast boot, arp/mac fix binding entry on router's side, open ports, ddns, etc.), so I'm 99.9% confident is not an end user issue.
> 
> I've tried 5 different driver versions so I kind of ruled that out too, only remaining thing to think of is a BIOS issue.
> 
> I post it here cause I really don't know how to reach Asus engineers to have them look at this in order to have it solved.
> 
> Kindest regards and thanks in advance!


Updating this thread with last findings:

Been able to narrow this issue down further with +100 tests (You don't imagine how much this issue complicates my daily life)

Resume from S5 after +1 day does NOT work ONLY when S3 state has been inmediatly active prior to S5 and no restart has been performed in between.

EXAMPLE 1 - WOL NOT WORKING (AFTER +1 days of beint spent off):

1) POWER ON
2) SLEEP (S3)
3) RESUME FROM SLEEP
4) POWER OFF (S5)
5) WOL NOT WORKING


EXAMPLE 2 - WOL WORKING

1) POWER ON
2) POWER OFF
3) WOL WORKING 100%


EXAMPLE 3 - WOL WORKING

1) POWER ON
2) SLEEP (S3)
3) RESUME FROM S3
4) RESTART
4) POWER OFF (S5)
5) WOL WORKING 100%

Don't know what else to do, I guess it's a BIOS bug that will likely never be solved.

Cheers!


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Nope, there's never any 'word' on bios releases.
> 
> Pretty sure we'll have a new bios by week end though.


From tests that 8pack did x470 and x570 are on pain performance BUT x570x pulls ahead cause of newer microcode...


----------



## gupsterg

Yeah, link, as he got a beta UEFI after relaying to ASUS issues, link, hopefully next release is a sound UEFI.

Even though I can't see myself going out and buying a C8H, nice to read his viewpoint on it, link.

Another thing I noted when checking ASUS X570 product pages, it looks like all boards have gone over to Nuvoton Super IO Chip, so the issues created by ITE IT8665E shouldn't occur with these new boards.


----------



## neikosr0x

gupsterg said:


> Yeah, link, as he got a beta UEFI after relaying to ASUS issues, link, hopefully next release is a sound UEFI.
> 
> Even though I can't see myself going out and buying a C8H, nice to read his viewpoint on it, link.
> 
> Another thing I noted when checking ASUS X570 product pages, it looks like all boards have gone over to Nuvoton Super IO Chip, so the issues created by ITE IT8665E shouldn't occur with these new boards.


https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/c7qj5e/am4_vcore_vrm_ratings_to_help_you_decide_on_a/

And we got this.


----------



## Baio73

neikosr0x said:


> I have the same RAM kit as yours, if i'm not mistaken. I could share my BIOS settings with you to see if it works. I also own the same CPU and i'm running my kit no problem a 3466 CL14. And do work at 3600 CL16/CL17 but not soooo stable yet.


Many thanks man!
Why are you running 3466CAS14? Do you have better perfomances vs. 3600CAS17?

Baio


----------



## neikosr0x

Baio73 said:


> Many thanks man!
> Why are you running 3466CAS14? Do you have better perfomances vs. 3600CAS17?
> 
> Baio


Yea in my case, 3466 14CL gets me lower latency and not much of a difference in bandwidth i will be posting my config as i get home today, about 6 hours from now.


----------



## lordzed83

OC take the single core boost - 200mhz you have 24-7 stable clock on 240-360aio cooler. All chips I tried can do this... 3600c16 mems...

Use an old chipset board it's like losing 100mhz on current Bios I tried compared to latest x570. 

more detailzzzz


----------



## nick name

It's been a bit since I last ran it so it may have been before BIOS 2304 and the latest chipset drivers -- my Ryzen Timing Checker no longer runs. No errors. No nothing.

Edit:
NVM it appears that Windows Security is going back to blocking it again. It's flagging it with Win32/Fuery.B!cl


----------



## crakej

A page appeared briefly on Amazon uk with CH8 Formula - *674.89GPB*!!!


----------



## crakej

CH6 got new bios with AGESA Combo 1002


----------



## gupsterg

Version 2406 2019/07/05 14.68 MBytes

ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO BIOS 2406
1. Improve system stability.
2. Before running the USB BIOS Flashback tool, please rename the BIOS file (C7H.CAP) using BIOSRenamer.

Version 2406 2019/07/05 14.68 MBytes

ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) BIOS 2406
1. Improve system stability.
2. Before running the USB BIOS Flashback tool, please rename the BIOS file (C7HWIFI.CAP) using BIOSRenamer.

*** edit ***

My mouse does not work in UEFI 2406....


----------



## westk

What AGESA come with?


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> Version 2406 2019/07/05 14.68 MBytes
> 
> ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO BIOS 2406
> 1. Improve system stability.
> 2. Before running the USB BIOS Flashback tool, please rename the BIOS file (C7H.CAP) using BIOSRenamer.
> 
> Version 2406 2019/07/05 14.68 MBytes
> 
> ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) BIOS 2406
> 1. Improve system stability.
> 2. Before running the USB BIOS Flashback tool, please rename the BIOS file (C7HWIFI.CAP) using BIOSRenamer.
> 
> *** edit ***
> 
> My mouse does not work in UEFI 2406....


My mouse doesn't work in bios either. AGESA is 1002

Will run tests this afternoon.


----------



## westk

Thanks, testing when come back to home


----------



## lordzed83

Zen2 Review 

https://imgur.com/a/YkoOCgM


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> My mouse doesn't work in bios either. AGESA is 1002
> 
> Will run tests this afternoon.


Yep AGESA ComboPi-AM4 1.0.0.2

mCode C, perhaps AGESA ComboPi-AM4 1.0.0.3 release will have D.

Inter core latency is back to PinnaclePi-AM4 and earlier AGESA.



Spoiler






























My usual "go to"profile seems to be OK, aka PE: Default, PBO: Enabled, 3533MHz using The Stilt 3466MHz preset.

*** edit ***

No PMU Training menu  ....


----------



## lordzed83

gupsterg said:


> Yep AGESA ComboPi-AM4 1.0.0.2
> 
> mCode C, perhaps AGESA ComboPi-AM4 1.0.0.3 release will have D.
> 
> Inter core latency is back to PinnaclePi-AM4 and earlier AGESA.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 277938
> 
> 
> View attachment 277940
> 
> 
> View attachment 277942
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My usual "go to"profile seems to be OK, aka PE: Default, PBO: Enabled, 3533MHz using The Stilt 3466MHz preset.
> 
> *** edit ***
> 
> No PMU Training menu  ....


Well Ill be home n 1 hour 10 minutes from work so tests will start in 1.20


----------



## crakej

My wireless mouse doesn't work properly in Windows (very jerky) - hardly ever updates. Rear USB3 ports. Had to use front port.

Tested all ports in bios, even though it detects 1 mouse, it will not work in the bios. VERY frustrating. I hope this is fixed rapidly! @Silent Scone @[email protected] It makes using UEFI very slow!

Awful C64/Spectrum boot up screen still greeting me.

Just testing last stable OC at 3600, but will try from scratch to see if there are any improvements.

To say i'm a bit disappointed so far is an understatement. Top notch board (until Sunday...) and no mouse working in the bios. Testing ASUS? This is why you should share betas with the enthusiast community - we find these things very quickly.

Ryzen 1700x here so nothing extra in bios for me  Only new thing I saw is *ACPI Slit distance* whatever that might be!

Any extras for 2xxx CPUs?


----------



## Reous

@*crakej* 
Compared to other boards the updates from today missing something more.

SB Clock Spread Spectrum (Zen2 only?)
Target FCLK Speed Value (Zen2 only)
Max CPU Boost Clock Override 0MHz - 200MHz
Platform Thermal Throttle Limit

Might be more settings. Doesn't really look like a final bios for me :thinking:


----------



## crakej

Reous said:


> @*crakej*
> Compared to other boards the updates from today missing something more.
> 
> SB Clock Spread Spectrum (Zen2 only?)
> Target FCLK Speed Value (Zen2 only)
> Max CPU Boost Clock Override 0MHz - 200MHz
> Platform Thermal Throttle Limit
> 
> Might be more settings. Doesn't really look like a final bios for me :thinking:


Thanks Reous. These settings are available on other boards?

Seems the CH6 has the same problem of the mouse not working. This is a huge oversight! Going to have a proper look around bios now...


----------



## gupsterg

lordzed83 said:


> Well Ill be home n 1 hour 10 minutes from work so tests will start in 1.20


I was just hoping I'd see PMU Training menu, other than that I really had no hopes this was gonna be some dramatic release for us 1xxx/2xxx owners...

3600MHz using The Stilt 3466MHz timings working as usual...



Spoiler
















crakej said:


> My wireless mouse doesn't work properly in Windows (very jerky) - hardly ever updates. Rear USB3 ports. Had to use front port.
> 
> Tested all ports in bios, even though it detects 1 mouse, it will not work in the bios. VERY frustrating. I hope this is fixed rapidly! @Silent Scone @[email protected] It makes using UEFI very slow!
> 
> Awful C64/Spectrum boot up screen still greeting me.
> 
> Just testing last stable OC at 3600, but will try from scratch to see if there are any improvements.
> 
> To say i'm a bit disappointed so far is an understatement. Top notch board (until Sunday...) and no mouse working in the bios. Testing ASUS? This is why you should share betas with the enthusiast community - we find these things very quickly.
> 
> Ryzen 1700x here so nothing extra in bios for me  Only new thing I saw is *ACPI Slit distance* whatever that might be!
> 
> Any extras for 2xxx CPUs?


I've got my Logitech wireless doggle in rear IO USB next to the Flashback port (as usual). Never had mouse not work in UEFI before, even on C6H/ZE/ZEA....

No new menus for 2xxx CPUs either  ....

I plan to go for a 3700X, defo know it has PMU Training menu plus all the other stuff  ....


----------



## crakej

Still got painfully slow shutdown here as well.


----------



## gupsterg

Still on W7 here, all working as it should. I had been planning on using W10 1903 with W7/LM v19, it started moaning I didn't have GPT partition table. I couldn't be bothered to sort drive out...


----------



## kmellz

Latest ch7 wifi bios fully updated with UEFI BIOS Updater
https://mega.nz/#!RXIF3AqA!kP7qBGnI0iwA-chp9ZpVfq-riDqoT0rtd-vOGuonIDM


----------



## nick name

gupsterg said:


> Still on W7 here, all working as it should. I had been planning on using W10 1903 with W7/LM v19, it started moaning I didn't have GPT partition table. I couldn't be bothered to sort drive out...


Windows will easily and quickly convert MBR to GPT. In fact the command is basically that. 

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/deployment/mbr-to-gpt


----------



## nick name

Also no mouse here. USB port I use is rear port next to NIC port. 

Though navigating with the arrow keys isn't as annoying as it used to be.


----------



## gupsterg

nick name said:


> Windows will easily and quickly convert MBR to GPT. In fact the command is basically that.
> 
> https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/deployment/mbr-to-gpt


Cheers, was aware of that, just couldn't be bothered TBH...



nick name said:


> Also no mouse here. USB port I use is rear port next to NIC port.
> 
> Though navigating with the arrow keys isn't as annoying as it used to be.


I always use keyboard, but when save settings usually opt to move mouse to OK. That was where I noticed mouse not working. Only other time I use mouse is when taking screenie in UEFI, I like to move it away.

Glaring issues like this with the UEFI always make me think what else could be wrong.

For me I like UEFI 1002 best. It has all the options I need. Next best is 1103, only thing it lacks is PBO menu has no manual tweaking options. Every UEFI on the 2xxx range so far has something up the swan.

I was surprised we still got a 32MB flash.... god knows what ASUS are filling it up with...


----------



## Rusakova

Since I have a pair of wireless headphones installing 2406 might not be a good idea.
Oh well, I'm going to do it anyway just to see what happens.


----------



## lordzed83

@gupsterg @crakej no problems here Mouse works in bios. Noticed that BCLK overclocking is unstable with this bios tried my 102 and 104 profiles 3533 and 3600 NO GO. Bclk 100 works fine


----------



## nick name

gupsterg said:


> Cheers, was aware of that, just couldn't be bothered TBH...
> -snip-


When I recently ran it it was on spinning rust and took no time at all.


----------



## nick name

I'm not sure if there is anything in the new AGESA that will improve memory support on the current IMC, but in my first test things are looking pretty promising. I've never gotten past about 10 minutes running 3666MHz with even looser timings than I am trying now yet I'm an 1hr 10min into testing with Karhu and no errors. I might be stopping this run and trying 14-15-14-14 next. My subs though are pretty much what I run my daily 3600MHz with except with slightly higher tRFC. Heck, I might just try to get 3733MHz stable. Test is still running as I type this.

Edit:
Welp got me an error at around the 1hr 20min mark. I might try to cure that with some voltage. Fingers crossed.


----------



## Keith Myers

gupsterg said:


> Yeah, link, as he got a beta UEFI after relaying to ASUS issues, link, hopefully next release is a sound UEFI.
> 
> Even though I can't see myself going out and buying a C8H, nice to read his viewpoint on it, link.
> 
> Another thing I noted when checking ASUS X570 product pages, it looks like all boards have gone over to Nuvoton Super IO Chip, so the issues created by ITE IT8665E shouldn't occur with these new boards.


I don't care anymore about the use of the very dodgy ITE8665E SIO chip on the ASUS motherboards now that I have access to the asus-wmi-sensor driver. My question about the new boards with the Nuvoton SIO chip is will the BIOS for the X570 boards be a WMI BIOS also like the older updated X470 boards. If they are, then no issues. But if the Nuvoton SIO chip has to be directly polled, it provides very limited information with the Linux driver compared to the asus-wmi-sensor driver. I have to use the default NCT6775 driver for the Nuvoton chipset on my Asrock X399 board and it is very limited.

[Edit] Just got a reply for my question to the developer. He states as long as ASUS does not radically change anything in the WMI interface, the driver "should just work"
Said he might have to add some BIOS strings depending on what they did with version numbers. I am relieved since it was such a struggle and long battle with the old it87 driver until the asus-wmi-sensor finally arrived.


----------



## Hale59

Chipset driver version

https://twitter.com/Thracks/status/1147222355443404800


----------



## mtrai

I have not yet install bios 2406 but still looking through the bios in bcp. I just noticed that the CPU Line Load Calibration now has levels 1 through 8, also there are two VDDSOC Line Load Calibrations options one has levels 1 through 5 and other has levels 1 through 8.


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> @gupsterg @crakej no problems here Mouse works in bios. Noticed that BCLK overclocking is unstable with this bios tried my 102 and 104 profiles 3533 and 3600 NO GO. Bclk 100 works fine


What kind of mouse do you have?

I've not found anything different in Ram OC so far.

I also wonder what else can be wrong if they can't even get the bios mouse driver right! Best bios for me and 1700x so far has still been 1002.


----------



## gupsterg

mtrai said:


> I have not yet install bios 2406 but still looking through the bios in bcp. I just noticed that the CPU Line Load Calibration now has levels 1 through 8, also there are two VDDSOC Line Load Calibrations options one has levels 1 through 5 and other has levels 1 through 8.


2700X only seeing the usual 5, not looked at UEFI in BCP, etc...

What do you make of this 32MB thing going on, on last 2 releases?



nick name said:


> When I recently ran it it was on spinning rust and took no time at all.


Ok, will look into it, cheers.



Keith Myers said:


> I don't care anymore about the use of the very dodgy ITE8665E SIO chip on the ASUS motherboards now that I have access to the asus-wmi-sensor driver. My question about the new boards with the Nuvoton SIO chip is will the BIOS for the X570 boards be a WMI BIOS also like the older updated X470 boards. If they are, then no issues. But if the Nuvoton SIO chip has to be directly polled, it provides very limited information with the Linux driver compared to the asus-wmi-sensor driver. I have to use the default NCT6775 driver for the Nuvoton chipset on my Asrock X399 board and it is very limited.


Ok.


----------



## crakej

My inter-core latency is WAY better! (Best pair)

Worst pair has gone from 50ns to 53ns


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> 2700X only seeing the usual 5, not looked at UEFI in BCP, etc...
> 
> What do you make of this 32MB thing going on, on last 2 releases?
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, will look into it, cheers.
> 
> 
> 
> Ok.


The 32 meg size is easy to explain. It is actually 2 bios, so double the size. This is for compatibility with previous CPUs and APUs. Some other boards and other manufactuerers cannot do this due to the size of the bios chip on the motherboard. Asus used 256 sized bios chips on most of the Ryzen boards. Others that are smaller had to remove namely APU cpu support to accommodate the Ryzen 3000 code.

Also note there are a few extra duplicate USB setting sections which may be the root cause of the USB issues during boot up and in the bios menu. These duplicates were not in any previous bios.


----------



## Nucky

Everything appears to be working on 2304 for me. I haven't messed with memory settings for a long while now, anything stand out here that I should tweak?


----------



## crakej

I seem to be able to tighten secondary timings slightly more than i've been able to on any 2xxx bios. More experimenting required though!


----------



## chakku

Am I tripping balls or something? I could have sworn I saw 2406 on the C7H WIFI support page and now it's back to 2304?


----------



## lordzed83

@crakey I got Made in Switzeland Mionix mouse i gotten years ago limited SK Gaming edition. It's best mouse I'w had ****s over Razer and logitech. If I remember Paid 99 pounds on promo for it You can feel the build quality still looks like new all years of wow. Only thing I brok was Scroll switch from spaming Execute on my warrior in WoW for years... Replaced it with new one from cheap organ donor mouse and got 3 more left if it goes again


----------



## ComansoRowlett

chakku said:


> Am I tripping balls or something? I could have sworn I saw 2406 on the C7H WIFI support page and now it's back to 2304?


It's still there under windows 10 32bit on the wifi version only. 

https://mega.nz/#!aWgiTYhZ!B2iTZJRsu4qXpNYiTqz-drcVArNrQjFP6RD3IDeNNp8 downloaded it just incase anyone wants it but I can't stress enough its for WIFI only and it doesn't even specificy the AGESA.


----------



## ComansoRowlett

ComansoRowlett said:


> It's still there under windows 10 32bit on the wifi version only.
> 
> https://mega.nz/#!aWgiTYhZ!B2iTZJRsu4qXpNYiTqz-drcVArNrQjFP6RD3IDeNNp8 downloaded it just incase anyone wants it but I can't stress enough its for WIFI only and it doesn't even specificy the AGESA.


Update: As it stands the 2406 for the NON wifi is also under windows 10 32 bit. If anyone downloads it can you let me know what AGESA it is please! Thank you 

EDIT: nevermind just read back and saw people were having issues and that it was AGESA 1.0.0.2.


----------



## Dr. Vodka

So you guys are also having issues with the mouse not working in the BIOS? We over at the C6H thread are experiencing the same issue with our corresponding release, 7106. Looks like these were rushed...

Seeing we share the mouse bug, by any chance, did your fan control also get borked or weird with 2406? My case fans seem to be stuck at 100%... 7003 (last 0.0.7.2a BIOS) was working just fine on both the mouse in BIOS and fan control.

I'll go back to 7003 for the time being... 







chakku said:


> Am I tripping balls or something? I could have sworn I saw 2406 on the C7H WIFI support page and now it's back to 2304?


Reading a few pages back on this thread, it seems this release is bugged for both the C7H and the C6H. It wouldn't suprise me if they found out and pulled it.

As far as the C6H is concerned, I never saw 7106 listed on the download page today, just got it from the link someone posted on the C6H thread.


----------



## crakej

Dr. Vodka said:


> So you guys are also having issues with the mouse not working in the BIOS? We over at the C6H thread are experiencing the same issue with our corresponding release, 7106. Looks like these were rushed...
> 
> Seeing we share the mouse bug, by any chance, did your fan control also get borked or weird with 2406? My case fans seem to be stuck at 100%... 7003 (last 0.0.7.2a BIOS) was working just fine on both the mouse in BIOS and fan control.
> 
> I'll go back to 7003 for the time being...
> 
> Reading a few pages back on this thread, it seems this release is bugged for both the C7H and the C6H. It wouldn't suprise me if they found out and pulled it.
> 
> As far as the C6H is concerned, I never saw 7106 listed on the download page today, just got it from the link someone posted on the C6H thread.


Most recent ver still showing for me on uk and us sites.

Yes, these seem rushed, same mouse bug, but my fans are ok.


----------



## nick name

Dr. Vodka said:


> So you guys are also having issues with the mouse not working in the BIOS? We over at the C6H thread are experiencing the same issue with our corresponding release, 7106. Looks like these were rushed...
> 
> Seeing we share the mouse bug, by any chance, did your fan control also get borked or weird with 2406? My case fans seem to be stuck at 100%... 7003 (last 0.0.7.2a BIOS) was working just fine on both the mouse in BIOS and fan control.
> 
> I'll go back to 7003 for the time being...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Reading a few pages back on this thread, it seems this release is bugged for both the C7H and the C6H. It wouldn't suprise me if they found out and pulled it.
> 
> As far as the C6H is concerned, I never saw 7106 listed on the download page today, just got it from the link someone posted on the C6H thread.



I haven't seen any problems with my fans. It's one of the first things I setup and everything seems to be working perfectly.


----------



## nick name

Nucky said:


> Everything appears to be working on 2304 for me. I haven't messed with memory settings for a long while now, anything stand out here that I should tweak?


Which kit are you using? Mine is the 3600CL15 Samsung b-die kit. For this daily setup I run DRAM voltage at 1.485V.


----------



## gupsterg

@Dr. Vodka

Yeah 3 of us having mouse issues. I don't have any fan control issues. I'm running 4x fans via a 4 in 1 cable and water pump of HAMP, profile is PWM manual setup with T_Sensor as source.

@mtrai

You may recall you had stated you'd had issues editing 2xxx UEFIs. I stated I haven't yet used AMIBCP on them and just done other mods using UBU/UEFITool/HxD. You then stated you found work around where you ran file through UBU and then edits done via AMIBCP meant file was still flashable.

I found an oddity today with AMIBCP.

I opened UEFI 2406 (untouched) in it, made changes, clicked the SAVE icon.



Spoiler














It saved changes, *but* did not display message "Saving secure capsule as unsigned". When closing AMIBCP it asked do I want to save changes, as I had checked in explorer that file timestamp had updated I declined, the file flashed using flashback.



Spoiler














Mem P-State has appeared, I can't locate the other options I changed to user (ref the AMIBCP image above), not even in "Search", any info you can share?


----------



## kmellz

Also had the non working mouse issue :/ Using a normal one not a wireless.. quality bios yet again


----------



## lordzed83

weird how i got no mouse problems


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> @Dr. Vodka
> 
> Yeah 3 of us having mouse issues. I don't have any fan control issues. I'm running 4x fans via a 4 in 1 cable and water pump of HAMP, profile is PWM manual setup with T_Sensor as source.
> 
> @mtrai
> 
> You may recall you had stated you'd had issues editing 2xxx UEFIs. I stated I haven't yet used AMIBCP on them and just done other mods using UBU/UEFITool/HxD. You then stated you found work around where you ran file through UBU and then edits done via AMIBCP meant file was still flashable.
> 
> I found an oddity today with AMIBCP.
> 
> I opened UEFI 2406 (untouched) in it, made changes, clicked the SAVE icon.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 278042
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It saved changes, *but* did not display message "Saving secure capsule as unsigned". When closing AMIBCP it asked do I want to save changes, as I had checked in explorer that file timestamp had updated I declined, the file flashed using flashback.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 278044
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mem P-State has appeared, I can't locate the other options I changed to user (ref the AMIBCP image above), not even in "Search", any info you can share?


That is correct now.... .cap is no longer signed. This happened starting in the prior bios when it doubled in size. 

What I do to make sure things show...is change it in the main section then in its own section. So in this case set it to user in this section and then in the tweakers paradise. Also some things even if you change it to user will not show unless you actually edit the bios module, though if you set both the main and subsection to user you should be able to use f9 and search it and make changes without actually editing the bios modules. 

I was drinking yesterday so did not even bother to work on editing and modding this bios yet. As it is easy to make a mistake but it is very time consuming since I open up every possible option. Just making the changes in BCP takes about 4 to 5 hours then I have to edit a number of modules.

/edit one last thought or thing...is some things will not ever show in any menu but and this is the important finding...you can search it such as HPET and Spread spectrum and actually change the setting.

/edit 2 when I do work on the bios this weekend and make sure it is working I will post my modded bios as usual. As i said it takes me about 8 to 12 hours to fully mod the bios. So give me some time.

/edit 3 in the pic I am showing...change every setting there to user and then in each section set ever thing to user. This allows it to show if it not hidden but also allows you to search it. Also note there is about 800 fan control settings that you can unhide and gain more fan control. This works without actually editing the modules.

/edit 4 I may have been mistaken with the previous bios from being over cautious since I was not getting that message on saving it. But in the end I got it working. There were a number of red flags for me. So I was being very cautious. As flashing it the way I am used to just did not work.


----------



## crakej

Seems only certain (wireless?) mice are affected.

In Windows, mouse still doesn't work in rear USB2 ports, but still (even worse) jerky in rear USB3 ports, except the one below RJ45 Network connector. Works in front USB3 as well. Turned off Legacy USB in bios to see if it would help but no difference.

I've been experimenting with timings and voltages at 3733MTs - very nearly stable at CL16. A lot less unrecoverable F9 errors while playing with settings. Also trying to get 3600MTs working well enough for it to be worthwhile. Also trying to get voltages down on ram with mixed results. Much more to do, but doing a bit in my garden for a while to see if I get any inspiration 

I can't believe ASUS didn't get a fix out before close of business yesterday. They managed to get a 3rd bios out for the Prime X570 Pro yesterday - looks rushed as well - they went from ver 0604 to 0804 to ver *7010*! 

Edit: I take it back, my mouse will not work in any rear ports for any amount of time...


----------



## Reous

crakej said:


> I can't believe ASUS didn't get a fix out before close of business yesterday. They managed to get a 3rd bios out for the Prime X570 Pro yesterday - looks rushed as well - they went from ver 0604 to 0804 to ver *7010*!



Asus Beta Bios mostly have a high number. Official one will be low again. But looks like every manufacture have their problems with X570 because they releasing a lot of new versions.


----------



## crakej

Reous said:


> Asus Beta Bios mostly have a high number. Official one will be low again. But looks like every manufacture have their problems with X570 because they releasing a lot of new versions.


You would have thought they would be better prepared. Rushing out revisions that have so obviously been rushed themselves is a recipe for disaster. Especially with existing X470 boards. ASUS used to be a bit more careful than this. I'd love to know how many tested this bios 

Is the UEFI (ASUS) responsible for the EFI mouse driver, or is it (I'm guessing not) contained within AGESA?


----------



## xeizo

Mouse works fine on my Prime Pro with the same AGESA(1.0.0.2), but not on my CH7. Asus is being sloppy.


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> You would have thought they would be better prepared. Rushing out revisions that have so obviously been rushed themselves is a recipe for disaster. Especially with existing X470 boards. ASUS used to be a bit more careful than this. I'd love to know how many tested this bios
> 
> Is the UEFI (ASUS) responsible for the EFI mouse driver, or is it (I'm guessing not) contained within AGESA?


The new ASUS bios now has several duplicate USB hidden USB menus. These extra menus were not in any previous bios. So my guess is these are causing the issues. It has also been reported other USB devices not working with this new bios until you get into windows since the bios hands off control to windows. So I would say this is an ASUS issue with these duplicate USB menus.


----------



## larrydavid

This is not encouraging https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/commen...t_d/et3380p?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x

This guy in Romania bought an R5 3600 early and can't get above 2133 memory speed on his Crosshair VII Hero. He was previously running 3466 C14 with his 2700X IIRC.


----------



## gupsterg

@mtrai

UEFI 2406 seems to have the sections/data which would get removed when on UEFI 2304 I'd save it in AMIBCP and get message "Saving secure capsule as unsigned". Not sure what is going on...

+rep for the tip on changing "up the tree" to user.



Spoiler














Now the options do come up in search.



Spoiler














While back I tested editing VDDSOC FSW, link. I even modded and tried 250kHz-1000kHz range, worked in the way of flashing/saving, etc. As no oscope can not confirm changes take, have you any info that the VRM controller can support this?


----------



## iNeri

larrydavid said:


> This is not encouraging https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/commen...t_d/et3380p?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x
> 
> This guy in Romania bought an R5 3600 early and can't get above 2133 memory speed on his Crosshair VII Hero. He was previously running 3466 C14 with his 2700X IIRC.


Bad news, that is the bios that asus realease on CH6 too.


----------



## VPII

larrydavid said:


> This is not encouraging https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/commen...t_d/et3380p?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x
> 
> 
> 
> This guy in Romania bought an R5 3600 early and can't get above 2133 memory speed on his Crosshair VII Hero. He was previously running 3466 C14 with his 2700X IIRC.


Well I am certain the Ryzen 9 3900x in my CH7 will do way better. I seriously dont trust others to show what can and cannot be done.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## gupsterg

Gigabyte seem to have AGESA 1.0.0.3AB on some of their product download pages. Seems like a lot of quick version updates been flying out. Also seems as if AMD/board vendors haven't really put in the effort to have everything right....


----------



## larrydavid

VPII said:


> Well I am certain the Ryzen 9 3900x in my CH7 will do way better. I seriously dont trust others to show what can and cannot be done.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


I guess we'll find out tomorrow.


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> @mtrai
> 
> UEFI 2406 seems to have the sections/data which would get removed when on UEFI 2304 I'd save it in AMIBCP and get message "Saving secure capsule as unsigned". Not sure what is going on...
> 
> +rep for the tip on changing "up the tree" to user.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 278102
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now the options do come up in search.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 278104
> 
> 
> 
> 
> While back I tested editing VDDSOC FSW, link. I even modded and tried 250kHz-1000kHz range, worked in the way of flashing/saving, etc. As no oscope can not confirm changes take, have you any info that the VRM controller can support this?


That is how you have to do it. Glad you understood what I said. Even though with editing the modules we cannot make them show...there is still a way even if it takes a few steps in the bios using search. It is another drinking day for us...so modding is out. I will have to take a deep dive into what you are asking on the VDDSOC. I would really hate to give wrong info since I am already drinking.


----------



## xeizo

MSI and Asrock also have 1.0.0.3 for certain boards, but the word is AGESA is seriously bugged this time and according to the guy who wrote Ryzen Dram Calculator: things will not be looking good until AGESA 1.0.0.6, which is due late July(shipping to board manufacturers) according to what he has heard(from AMD?).

I expect this launch to be rough. Still don't want a X570 with a buzzing fan.

The question is, is X570 as bugged as X470? It is the same AGESA AFAIK.


----------



## 1usmus

I have to break some rules and reassure you. Artificial restriction is present due to NDA. To fully use Zen 2 you need 1.0.0.3AB


----------



## ToguroSR

Thanks for the clarification 1usmus. I was really worried with Asus ....i am the guy that got the 3600 early and was wondering why all the problems.


----------



## 1usmus

ToguroSR said:


> Thanks for the clarification 1usmus. I was really worried with Asus ....i am the guy that got the 3600 early and was wondering why all the problems.


everything will be fine, do not panic 

*One more thing.*

New bios, I advise you to install using flashback.
Then turn off the system. And only then can you do what you want.


----------



## ToguroSR

1usmus said:


> everything will be fine, do not panic
> 
> *One more thing.*
> 
> New bios, I advise you to install using flashback.
> Then turn off the system. And only then can you do what you want.



Sounds about right. I try to always use bios flashback ..just to be safe . Thanks again for the info....and even if not final bios and drivers it still is nice and better than my 2700x


----------



## xeizo

1usmus said:


> everything will be fine, do not panic
> 
> *One more thing.*
> 
> New bios, I advise you to install using flashback.
> Then turn off the system. And only then can you do what you want.


Thanks 1usmus, some slight sandbagging from AMD I guess 

Let's hope Asus treats us with a proper bios ASAP!

edit. Oh, and there will be a new chipset driver released tomorrow from what I have heard, maybe that one does some magic as well.


----------



## Jackalito

gupsterg said:


> Gigabyte seem to have AGESA 1.0.0.3AB on some of their product download pages. Seems like a lot of quick version updates been flying out. Also seems as if AMD/board vendors haven't really put in the effort to have everything right....


As per usual - we should be used to it by now


----------



## nick name

I'm not seeing anything wonky except the disappearing mouse cursor in BIOS. Well maybe that you can set PBO manual values to a bajillion. I think it was around 64000+ if you just key in a bunch of numbers to find its max.


----------



## 1usmus

xeizo said:


> Thanks 1usmus, some slight sandbagging from AMD I guess
> 
> Let's hope Asus treats us with a proper bios ASAP!
> 
> edit. Oh, and there will be a new chipset driver released tomorrow from what I have heard, maybe that one does some magic as well.


and there will be a new Ryzen Master, all the timings and all the settings now have a very close resemblance to the main menu of the calculator. You can also easily share profiles with friends


----------



## xeizo

1usmus said:


> and there will be a new Ryzen Master, all the timings and all the settings now have a very close resemblance to the main menu of the calculator. You can also easily share profiles with friends


Ah, exciting! Will be hard to sleep tonight ...


----------



## gupsterg

mtrai said:


> That is how you have to do it. Glad you understood what I said. Even though with editing the modules we cannot make them show...there is still a way even if it takes a few steps in the bios using search. It is another drinking day for us...so modding is out. I will have to take a deep dive into what you are asking on the VDDSOC. I would really hate to give wrong info since I am already drinking.


Enjoy your drinking chap. Not looking for you to dive into UEFI, I did the mod before and even using it today.



Spoiler














Wanted to know if you knew VRM controller on mobo can do 1000kHz, we know the IR3555 can.



Jackalito said:


> As per usual - we should be used to it by now


LOL, too true  ...


----------



## narukun

Should I wait before updating my bios? since there is a new one coming out, I'm about to buy the R9 3900X


----------



## 1usmus

narukun said:


> Should I wait before updating my bios? since there is a new one coming out, I'm about to buy the R9 3900X


Tomorrow should be published update
You can also update the BIOS without a processor (flashback)


----------



## crakej

1usmus said:


> I have to break some rules and reassure you. Artificial restriction is present due to NDA. To fully use Zen 2 you need 1.0.0.3AB


There's an NDA on the bios mouse driver? lol :lmaosmile And those of us not upgrading need working bios too!


----------



## 1usmus

crakej said:


> Inc;
> 
> 
> There's an NDA on the bios mouse driver? lol :lmaosmile And those of us not upgrading need working bios too!


LOL
error in the code should always be, otherwise bored users and programmers
in principle, I see no problems in the new bios, all latency and speeds are fixed


----------



## thescreensavers

1usmus said:


> everything will be fine, do not panic
> 
> *One more thing.*
> 
> New bios, I advise you to install using flashback.
> Then turn off the system. And only then can you do what you want.



So for other boards that do not have "flashback" feature is there anything we have to worry about?


----------



## crakej

There is a new chipset driver on ASUS site as well, don't know if anyone else saw it with new bios release.... I didn't have everything it has so something is more up to date than AMDs current version.

https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...3.1343740076.1561946820-2139053490.1558405525


----------



## Jackalito

crakej said:


> There is a new chipset driver on ASUS site as well, don't know if anyone else saw it with new bios release.... I didn't have everything it has so something is more up to date than AMDs current version.
> 
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...3.1343740076.1561946820-2139053490.1558405525


Thanks for the heads up, mate! 
Cheers


----------



## crakej

1usmus said:


> LOL
> error in the code should always be, otherwise bored users and programmers
> in principle, I see no problems in the new bios, all latency and speeds are fixed


Lol, I'm not knocking it..... more mocking it for something so silly - but does make you wonder what else someone might have forgotten!

My inter-core latency improved amazingly. Couldn't believe results! For Ryzen 1st gen the improvement - 49ns - down from 79ns - is prob one of biggest performance boosts I've had in a while that worked for my 1700X


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> There is a new chipset driver on ASUS site as well, don't know if anyone else saw it with new bios release.... I didn't have everything it has so something is more up to date than AMDs current version.
> 
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...3.1343740076.1561946820-2139053490.1558405525


Yeah, I couldn't tell if it was doing a less than or greater than or just doing a not equal to. I did instal the ones it said weren't installed but it gave no indication of if it was newer or older.

Edit:
Can confirm the newer AMD Ryzen Power Plan in this update is still garbage for the 2700X. And I don't know if it was just me but it had Maximum Processor State set to 99% and my CPU wouldn't go faster than idle speeds.


----------



## 15kspec

EDIT: removed


----------



## crakej

Arrrg! getting so frustrated - woke up the other day and can't move my fingers properly on my right hand, so I got it in a splint.....typing is annoyingly slow....otherwise wouldn't mind about the mouse business!

Amazing how much you don't realize just what you use your fingers for.......not just bios settings....

Radial nerve palsy apparently - could last weeks!


----------



## xeizo

crakej said:


> My inter-core latency improved amazingly. Couldn't believe results! For Ryzen 1st gen the improvement - 49ns - down from 79ns - is prob one of biggest performance boosts I've had in a while that worked for my 1700X


Exactly how do you measure that? A benchmark program, which one?


----------



## crakej

xeizo said:


> Exactly how do you measure that? A benchmark program, which one?


SiSoft Sandra - https://www.sisoftware.co.uk/download-lite/

It has a benchmark specifically for this.


----------



## xeizo

crakej said:


> SiSoft Sandra - https://www.sisoftware.co.uk/download-lite/
> 
> It has a benchmark specifically for this.


Thanks!


----------



## ComansoRowlett

1usmus said:


> everything will be fine, do not panic
> 
> *One more thing.*
> 
> New bios, I advise you to install using flashback.
> Then turn off the system. And only then can you do what you want.


Thank you 1usmus, you're a god send I swear.


----------



## ryouiki

Installed 2406 (via flashback), no mouse issues for me, previous stable memory configuration seems to be fine (4x8gb @ 3200CL14 + Fast Timings).


----------



## chakku

Was going to install it with flashback but if we're getting a new one with 1.0.0.3AB anyway I'd rather not spend the time inputting all my timings and settings again just to have to do it again when that drops.

I really hope someone tests the 3700/3800X vs 3900X in RPCS3 as that will basically be the deciding factor for me, how the 2 chiplet compares to 1.


----------



## ComansoRowlett

chakku said:


> Was going to install it with flashback but if we're getting a new one with 1.0.0.3AB anyway I'd rather not spend the time inputting all my timings and settings again just to have to do it again when that drops.
> 
> I really hope someone tests the 3700/3800X vs 3900X in RPCS3 as that will basically be the deciding factor for me, how the 2 chiplet compares to 1.


Yeah I'm with you. I'm still on 2103, didn't see a point to flash until I'm sure on the bios revision.


----------



## PPBottle

1usmus said:


> everything will be fine, do not panic
> 
> *One more thing.*
> 
> New bios, I advise you to install using flashback.
> Then turn off the system. And only then can you do what you want.


THis also applies to the people with mobos that support BIOS flashback? Or the ones without the feature are just boned?


----------



## kundica

PPBottle said:


> THis also applies to the people with mobos that support BIOS flashback? Or the ones without the feature are just boned?


You do realize this thread only concerns one mobo right?

Sent from my LG V30 using Tapatalk


----------



## Baio73

Just flashed BIOS 2406 (using pcoff-flashback), underscore is still there, mouse does not work (Logitech G903+Powerplay connected to monitor's hub).
Not so good... 

Baio


----------



## gupsterg

C8F/C8H download sections came alive, AGESA ComboPi-AM4 1.0.0.3AB. TBH dunno why we had the 1.0.0.2 release if that was just around the corner, I'd much prefer a slower release rate but more tested/refined. 
@Baio73

If by underscore you mean just prior to ROG logo screen you see a _ that seems normal for the 2xxx UEFI. Something changed with 2xxx more so than the older UEFIs, as Q-Codes changed as well.


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> There is a new chipset driver on ASUS site as well, don't know if anyone else saw it with new bios release.... I didn't have everything it has so something is more up to date than AMDs current version.
> 
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...3.1343740076.1561946820-2139053490.1558405525


This is older driver than what AMD site has as current. You can tell from version number on ASUS site. Previous numbering was:-

Revision Number 18.10.1810 Release Date 10/26/2018

Revision Number 19.10.0429 Release Date 05/10/2019

Then we had total revision numbering scheme change recently:-

Revision Number 1.6.13.0400 Release Date 6/17/2019

Next release which has the faster clock change capability for 3xxx series is gonna be out today or so. 1.07.07 link to Robert Hallock stating this.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> This is older driver than what AMD site has as current. You can tell from version number on ASUS site. Previous numbering was:-
> 
> Revision Number 18.10.1810 Release Date 10/26/2018
> 
> Revision Number 19.10.0429 Release Date 05/10/2019
> 
> Then we had total revision numbering scheme change recently:-
> 
> Revision Number 1.6.13.0400 Release Date 6/17/2019
> 
> Next release which has the faster clock change capability for 3xxx series is gonna be out today or so. 1.07.07 link to Robert Hallock stating this.


Some of it was newer - I didn't have 3 of the drivers  Ver 19.10.16 in Win 10 Section, release 5 July 19


----------



## Baio73

gupsterg said:


> @Baio73
> 
> If by underscore you mean just prior to ROG logo screen you see a _ that seems normal for the 2xxx UEFI. Something changed with 2xxx more so than the older UEFIs, as Q-Codes changed as well.


Yes, I meant exactly that… but reading the latest posts I understood they fixed it… maybe I've read too fast.

Baio


----------



## kmellz

Newest chipset drivers are out https://www.amd.com/en/support do a forced refresh if you can't see them


----------



## netman

gupsterg said:


> C8F/C8H download sections came alive, AGESA ComboPi-AM4 1.0.0.3AB. TBH dunno why we had the 1.0.0.2 release if that was just around the corner, I'd much prefer a slower release rate but more tested/refined.


could asus even get slower - we waited weeks for the 2406 update for the ch7 - where lots of other boards already got this update - and now thanks to amd to fully unleash the new matisse cpus on X470 (Ramspeed) we need the new 1.0.0.3 Combo Agesa and if Asus needs this long again we will wait another month (and some new bugs) till we can get better ram Speed with the new matisse cpus on ch7 - to me that ist extremely dissapointing... Just preordered a 3800X tough.


----------



## crakej

kmellz said:


> Newest chipset drivers are out https://www.amd.com/en/support do a forced refresh if you can't see them


Interesting - I only needed the PCIE driver from that package, the ASUS package had most of that....


----------



## kmellz

Also noticed this now while at the amd page "AMD Ryzen™ Power Plans (required for UEFI CPPC2 in Windows® 10 May 2019 Update)"
Does that mean we have to actually use the ryzen power plan for the improved frequency scaling to work? 
Feels weird since they weren't including the AMD power plan for a few releases now.
Can of course edit the power plan, was just an interesting thing


----------



## xeizo

Strange, I installed the new Ryzen Master 2.0 but I get the old GUI, what? The old one removed.


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> Strange, I installed the new Ryzen Master 2.0 but I get the old GUI, what? The old one removed.


Is it out? Ryzen Master didn't see an available update. Guess I will just Google it.


----------



## larrydavid

kmellz said:


> Also noticed this now while at the amd page "AMD Ryzen™ Power Plans (required for UEFI CPPC2 in Windows® 10 May 2019 Update)"
> Does that mean we have to actually use the ryzen power plan for the improved frequency scaling to work?
> Feels weird since they weren't including the AMD power plan for a few releases now.
> Can of course edit the power plan, was just an interesting thing


Good question. They really haven't clarified that point. The Ryzen power plan wasn't supposed to be used for the Ryzen 2000 series, just the 1000 series, so it'd be odd if we have to go back to using that specific power plan.


----------



## xeizo

In Geekbench Windows Balanced has slightly better single core, Ryzen Balanced has slightly better multicore. Frequencies on individual cores jumps around a lot more with Windows Balanced, it's probably slightly more energy efficient.


----------



## Rusakova

netman said:


> could asus even get slower - we waited weeks for the 2406 update for the ch7 - where lots of other boards already got this update - and now thanks to amd to fully unleash the new matisse cpus on X470 (Ramspeed) we need the new 1.0.0.3 Combo Agesa and if Asus needs this long again we will wait another month (and some new bugs) till we can get better ram Speed with the new matisse cpus on ch7 - to me that ist extremely dissapointing... Just preordered a 3800X tough.


I don't think they can get any slower to be honest. It's extremely annoying.
I just hope we get a new BIOS before my 3900X arrives.


----------



## Hale59

AMD uProf 3.0, a tool suite that allows engineers to optimize performance for a variety of apps running on AMD processors:

https://developer.amd.com/amd-uprof/?sf215410082=1


----------



## lordzed83

1usmus said:


> Tomorrow should be published update
> You can also update the BIOS without a processor (flashback)


Wassup was about to ask about nee Zen2 calculator. So new bios for us with new microcode should be up like never than 2406 ??
I got 3900x ordered so happy times


----------



## poliacido

nick name said:


> Is it out? Ryzen Master didn't see an available update. Guess I will just Google it.


did you find it? i can't find it either

EDIT: nevermind.... i just downloaded from the AMD site and checked the version and it is 2.0.0.1189, but seems the new GUI and functions are only for 3rd gen ryzen


----------



## crakej

Why is it that ebay and amazon in the UK have ZERO Ryzen 3000 CPUs for sale unless they're in a system or part of a bundle?

I'm gonna hold off as long as I can until some testing is done on our board..... I think! The perf gain from 1xxx to 3xxx is phenomenal!


----------



## narukun

0 stock here in amazon or newegg mexico


----------



## Velheibgnar

I just installed newest bios and chipset driver and I forgot what was my "AI overclock tunner" setting.
Probably was default, but I changed it to Auto just to see and... It's awesome like this (all core 4.0x):









Need to OC ram again and I'm confused, "Auto" profile won't bother ram overclocking? Can this stay on Auto or I should go back to Defaul for AI oc tuner?


----------



## ComansoRowlett

Well guys it's been a good ride but unfortunately I've seen the light of MSI and bought myself an X570 ACE (memory OC will be very VERY close to the godlike). 3900X + ACE combo is gonna be amazing, there was just too many question marks for me to stay on the C7H. The support seems to be getting worse and worse and now X570 is here I don't see why it'd get any better.


----------



## iNeri

narukun said:


> 0 stock here in amazon or newegg mexico


Check out on PCMIG 6250 pesos for 3700x wich is Pretty good. Its like msrp tax included [emoji14] if youre in CDMX. 

Digital LIFE have it at 6500 pesos + shipping.

Ddtech have it too at 6600 pesos + shipping. 

Enviado desde mi ONEPLUS A6000 mediante Tapatalk


----------



## Fabio Bertelli

ComansoRowlett said:


> Well guys it's been a good ride but unfortunately I've seen the light of MSI and bought myself an X570 ACE (memory OC will be very VERY close to the godlike). 3900X + ACE combo is gonna be amazing, there was just too many question marks for me to stay on the C7H. The support seems to be getting worse and worse and now X570 is here I don't see why it'd get any better.


wow really great choice! :cheers:
if you want sell your ch7, let me know


----------



## ComansoRowlett

Fabio Bertelli said:


> wow really great choice! :cheers:
> if you want sell your ch7, let me know


I'd be willing to sell the C7H to you if you're in the UK (or Europe)  I am in the UK so if you're in the US wouldn't make sense for either of us to do that due to shipping cost.


----------



## Keith Myers

I can't even FIND a listing for any Ryzen 3000 processor on either Amazon or Newegg.com in the U.S. How are you guys finding them.? Do you have to know the secret code/handshake or something?


----------



## ComansoRowlett

Keith Myers said:


> I can't even FIND a listing for any Ryzen 3000 processor on either Amazon or Newegg.com in the U.S. How are you guys finding them.?  Do you have to know the secret code/handshake or something?


Problem is you had to be there right on the dot when the sites went live with the processors or they went out of stock everywhere. Newegg went early and the 3900X's sold out within 5 minutes.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/AMD-Ryzen-...+7+3700X&qid=1562562760&s=gateway&sr=8-6&th=1 here is the UK listing, if you get the link to each one and put ".com" instead of ".co.uk" they'll show up. But most will be unavailable since stock is gone.


----------



## hurricane28

Keith Myers said:


> I can't even FIND a listing for any Ryzen 3000 processor on either Amazon or Newegg.com in the U.S. How are you guys finding them.? Do you have to know the secret code/handshake or something?


Its Trump man, he's everywhere lmao. 

Sorry i had to make the reference there.


----------



## hurricane28

ComansoRowlett said:


> Well guys it's been a good ride but unfortunately I've seen the light of MSI and bought myself an X570 ACE (memory OC will be very VERY close to the godlike). 3900X + ACE combo is gonna be amazing, there was just too many question marks for me to stay on the C7H. The support seems to be getting worse and worse and now X570 is here I don't see why it'd get any better.


Good choice man, Gigabyte and MSI have stepped up and are on par if not better compared to ROG boards. Overclocking is also on par if not better on lower tier boards with Ryzen 2000. 

Good luck with your board. If i had the choice i would also switch to Gigabyte or MSI.


----------



## Keith Myers

ComansoRowlett said:


> Problem is you had to be there right on the dot when the sites went live with the processors or they went out of stock everywhere. Newegg went early and the 3900X's sold out within 5 minutes.
> 
> https://www.amazon.co.uk/AMD-Ryzen-...+7+3700X&qid=1562562760&s=gateway&sr=8-6&th=1 here is the UK listing, if you get the link to each one and put ".com" instead of ".co.uk" they'll show up. But most will be unavailable since stock is gone.


I wouldn't be surprised that stock is already gone. What I can't fathom is that no matter what search terms I use, I only hit old Ryzen Zen or Zen+ products. I expected to at least land on the page for the product and have it tell me it was out of stock. But not even that shows up.


----------



## gupsterg

Nice video by der8auer on 3000 series delid/overclocking....



Spoiler














gupsterg said:


> This is older driver than what AMD site has as current. You can tell from version number on ASUS site. Previous numbering was:-
> 
> Revision Number 18.10.1810 Release Date 10/26/2018
> 
> Revision Number 19.10.0429 Release Date 05/10/2019
> 
> Then we had total revision numbering scheme change recently:-
> 
> Revision Number 1.6.13.0400 Release Date 6/17/2019
> 
> Next release which has the faster clock change capability for 3xxx series is gonna be out today or so. 1.07.07 link to Robert Hallock stating this.
> 
> 
> 
> crakej said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some of it was newer - I didn't have 3 of the drivers  Ver 19.10.16 in Win 10 Section, release 5 July 19
Click to expand...

My post was meant to highlight that ASUS were too slow to allow this "new" chipset driver as already AMD site had newer one...



Baio73 said:


> Yes, I meant exactly that… but reading the latest posts I understood they fixed it… maybe I've read too fast.
> 
> Baio


NP.



netman said:


> could asus even get slower - we waited weeks for the 2406 update for the ch7 - where lots of other boards already got this update - and now thanks to amd to fully unleash the new matisse cpus on X470 (Ramspeed) we need the new 1.0.0.3 Combo Agesa and if Asus needs this long again we will wait another month (and some new bugs) till we can get better ram Speed with the new matisse cpus on ch7 - to me that ist extremely dissapointing... Just preordered a 3800X tough.


I agree gap was larger this time. But I had been looking at UEFI releases from others with updated AGESA and TBH things like the PMU FW (aka IMC) hadn't been updated.

Even AGESA ComboPi-AM4 1.0.0.3AB has same PMU FW as used in AGESA PinnaclePI-AM4 1.0.0.4c.

View attachment PMU_Files.zip


Gotta be 3xxx series either has a differing section of UEFI for IMC FW, besides having other physical differences allowing it to improve vs 1xxx/2xxx on RAM front.

The other thing is this.

We had Inter Core Latency hit with AGESA CombiPi-0.0.7.0 between 0.0.7.2A. Updating the microcode didn't seem to solve it in tests I did. As the IMC FW hasn't changed on newer AGESA UEFI there must be another module which had issue.



kmellz said:


> Also noticed this now while at the amd page "AMD Ryzen™ Power Plans (required for UEFI CPPC2 in Windows® 10 May 2019 Update)"
> Does that mean we have to actually use the ryzen power plan for the improved frequency scaling to work?
> Feels weird since they weren't including the AMD power plan for a few releases now.
> Can of course edit the power plan, was just an interesting thing


AFAIK UEFI CPPC2 is only feature of 3xxx series CPU, so if your on 1xxx/2xxx you won't need to worry.


----------



## neikosr0x

hurricane28 said:


> Good choice man, Gigabyte and MSI have stepped up and are on par if not better compared to ROG boards. Overclocking is also on par if not better on lower tier boards with Ryzen 2000.
> 
> Good luck with your board. If i had the choice i would also switch to Gigabyte or MSI.


I am very skeptic about Gigabyte motherboards after i bough the x370 Gaming 5, It lacked most overclocking features that any other decent board would have. And the quality on the VRM were zh*t zh*t zh*t, You couldn't stress the board at all otherwise it would freeze and not only was mine but also a friend of mine had the same issues at stock clocks while rendering. Now, MSI is a different story they do seem to be getting better and better, although i'm not sure about how gigabyte 3rd motherboards would work i am scare of having the same experience. With this CH7 board everything runs almost perfect, yes BIOS releases are probably a bit slower than other brands but the board's features are top notch not to mention the built quality.


----------



## ComansoRowlett

Keith Myers said:


> I wouldn't be surprised that stock is already gone. What I can't fathom is that no matter what search terms I use, I only hit old Ryzen Zen or Zen+ products. I expected to at least land on the page for the product and have it tell me it was out of stock. But not even that shows up.


True. They were definitely live at launch so no idea why they've pulled them, perhaps they aren't expecting new stock for a while.


----------



## ComansoRowlett

hurricane28 said:


> Good choice man, Gigabyte and MSI have stepped up and are on par if not better compared to ROG boards. Overclocking is also on par if not better on lower tier boards with Ryzen 2000.
> 
> Good luck with your board. If i had the choice i would also switch to Gigabyte or MSI.


Yeah I must admit MSI are killing it right now, in the past I'd never of considered them. Asus seem to be going the opposite way at the moment but I hope they come back with something, especially since I actually like their bios implementation. If a company comes out with a 2 dimm full-sized ATX board that I'd definitely jump on it.


----------



## Ramad

Wrong thread.


----------



## lordzed83

@crakej and rest Stock came in to OCUK today !!!!
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/amd-...hz-socket-am4-processor-retail-cp-3b5-am.html

Get em if You want before they are gone


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> @crakej and rest Stock came in to OCUK today !!!!
> https://www.overclockers.co.uk/amd-...hz-socket-am4-processor-retail-cp-3b5-am.html
> 
> Get em if You want before they are gone


Oh man.....don't do this to me! I'm trying to not rush into things lol.......


On another note, did we notice that we now have code d3 instead of AA when we boot into windows??


----------



## crakej

Does anyone think it's worth waiting to see if we get 'better' silicon a few months down the road? Just can't help thinking about SEGFault issues....

Otherwise I think I just can't help myself!


----------



## CJMitsuki

crakej said:


> Does anyone think it's worth waiting to see if we get 'better' silicon a few months down the road? Just can't help thinking about SEGFault issues....
> 
> Otherwise I think I just can't help myself!


I don’t think a segfault bug affects you unless you do heavy compiling. I had a segfault bugged 1700x but it ran fine. I just traded it in to see if I could get a better chip but it’s about the same. 
On another note, I was going to get the 3900x but the overclocking seemed like it might be boring for that sku so I ordered the 3700x that morning they released on Newegg. Should be here Tuesday at the latest. All these content creators are kind of funny. They couldn’t OC Ryzen first gen or Ryzen+ that well either. They just don’t know how to OC Ryzen. You can’t let the system Auto OC and you damn sure don’t want to OC by the multiplier. Baseclock OC and tweaking the EDC value is really the best way to “tune” the boost behavior to get max performance. Also, those Geekbench scores that have been put up show that none can overclock memory very well. My 1700x gets better memory scores. I’m GB3 they should be over 8000 in multithreaded memory. I can’t believe AMD told them that 3600 @cl16 was preferred over 3200 @cl14 when I’m pretty positive 3733 @cl14 will be easily attained with minimum effort. I don’t think you want to go over 3733mhz unless you’re at least staying at a cas latency of 14-15. There’s something that changes in the memory controller above that frequency that will probably affect the performance negatively, not sure yet.


----------



## Johan45

gupsterg said:


> AFAIK UEFI CPPC2 is only feature of 3xxx series CPU, so if your on 1xxx/2xxx you won't need to worry.



You are correct CPPC2 only works with the 3000 CPUs 

Foranyone who wants to know if it runs on a CHVII here's a couple of shots. I also had Win7 up and running on X470 but the new X570 chipset has some changes and I honestly haven't had the time to chase down the needed drivers for slipstreaming. I've also included a quick run with 4000 MHz cl17 RAM but as you'll see the even Cas number is still a thing. You'll also notice how the NB is only running 1000 MHz which is how AMD managed to increase the RAM speed compatibility notice the slight performance drop in GB4


----------



## gupsterg

@Johan45

Sweet shares (+rep), was gonna roll to OC to see what you'd been upto  .

Per chance you know if non X R5 3600 has full menu PBO menu for tweaking?



crakej said:


> Oh man.....don't do this to me! I'm trying to not rush into things lol.......
> 
> 
> On another note, did we notice that we now have code d3 instead of AA when we boot into windows??


AA here on official 2406 when in W7/LMv19.1



crakej said:


> Does anyone think it's worth waiting to see if we get 'better' silicon a few months down the road? Just can't help thinking about SEGFault issues....
> 
> Otherwise I think I just can't help myself!


IIRC this was only a thing with early 1xxx, I can't recall 2xxx having this issue and doubt 3xxx has it, but could be wrong  .


----------



## VPII

Johan45 said:


> You are correct CPPC2 only works with the 3000 CPUs
> 
> 
> 
> Foranyone who wants to know if it runs on a CHVII here's a couple of shots. I also had Win7 up and running on X470 but the new X570 chipset has some changes and I honestly haven't had the time to chase down the needed drivers for slipstreaming. I've also included a quick run with 4000 MHz cl17 RAM but as you'll see the even Cas number is still a thing. You'll also notice how the NB is only running 1000 MHz which is how AMD managed to increase the RAM speed compatibility notice the slight performance drop in GB4


Your best bet is to run 3600 or 3733 with the IF speed sitting at half that speed. The performance gains is noticable. A friend of mine having played around with a 3600 and a couple x570 boards found that the GB snd Asus boards were the most difficult to get the IF speed right where as with the Asrock board he was able to get 1900mhz IF speed with memory at 3800.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## crakej

Thanks for shares and replies.....

I wonder why I'm getting code d3 then - usually appears while bios is updating. I'm going to re- flash to be sure...


----------



## gupsterg

Well I ordered a R5 3600, in stock on OCuk, as a forum there it's FOC next day delivery. Mainly down to how I really don't use the rig and in the main and it's a tinkering rig to pass time with. Looking at below slide and AMD presentation video the R5 3600 also has PBO.



Spoiler
















Spoiler
















Spoiler



https://youtu.be/bAketc8BCzw?t=45


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> I don’t think a segfault bug affects you unless you do heavy compiling. I had a segfault bugged 1700x but it ran fine. I just traded it in to see if I could get a better chip but it’s about the same.
> On another note, I was going to get the 3900x but the overclocking seemed like it might be boring for that sku so I ordered the 3700x that morning they released on Newegg. Should be here Tuesday at the latest. All these content creators are kind of funny. They couldn’t OC Ryzen first gen or Ryzen+ that well either. They just don’t know how to OC Ryzen. You can’t let the system Auto OC and you damn sure don’t want to OC by the multiplier. Baseclock OC and tweaking the EDC value is really the best way to “tune” the boost behavior to get max performance. Also, those Geekbench scores that have been put up show that none can overclock memory very well. My 1700x gets better memory scores. I’m GB3 they should be over 8000 in multithreaded memory. I can’t believe AMD told them that 3600 @cl16 was preferred over 3200 @cl14 when I’m pretty positive 3733 @cl14 will be easily attained with minimum effort. I don’t think you want to go over 3733mhz unless you’re at least staying at a cas latency of 14-15. There’s something that changes in the memory controller above that frequency that will probably affect the performance negatively, not sure yet.


From what 8pack tested 3733 is not stable on all cpus hes tested due to infinity fabric.


----------



## gupsterg

lordzed83 said:


> From what 8pack tested 3733 is not stable on all cpus hes tested due to infinity fabric.


A lot of the reviews I've read today (as was out for most of the day yesterday) seem to say exactly what 8 Pack was leaking on OCuk before launch.

- No OC room on core, pretty much CPUs are maxed out of the box.
- 3600MHz with 1:1 IF is it.

IIRC Der8auer in his video I posted few posts back tested 10 CPUs...


----------



## lordzed83

gupsterg said:


> A lot of the reviews I've read today (as was out for most of the day yesterday) seem to say exactly what 8 Pack was leaking on OCuk before launch.
> 
> - No OC room on core, pretty much CPUs are maxed out of the box.
> - 3600MHz with 1:1 IF is it.
> 
> IIRC Der8auer in his video I posted few posts back tested 10 CPUs...


Yup Even more screwed to max than Zen+ was. I went over few reviews myself same thing. Hopy my 3600cl14 will work with my kit


----------



## gupsterg

lordzed83 said:


> Yup Even more screwed to max than Zen+ was. I went over few reviews myself same thing. Hopy my 3600cl14 will work with my kit


Johan45 is Shawn Jennings at Overclockers, his review on R9 3900 & R7 3700X highlights decent RAM compatibility. He's got decent experience to qualify as valid experience  .



> AMD has solved the compatibility issue as well. I tried several different RAM kits from 3200 MHz up to 4266 MHz and all of them just worked once XMP was set in the BIOS. No more guessing and wondering which RAM might work or which RAM IC to have… a breath of fresh air.


----------



## narukun

I hate ASUS is still behind with the bios update :/





iNeri said:


> Check out on PCMIG 6250 pesos for 3700x wich is Pretty good. Its like msrp tax included [emoji14] if youre in CDMX.
> 
> Digital LIFE have it at 6500 pesos + shipping.
> 
> Ddtech have it too at 6600 pesos + shipping.
> 
> Enviado desde mi ONEPLUS A6000 mediante Tapatalk


Is DDTech safe? i've never heard of them before, imma buy the 3900X for $9500 pesos


----------



## crakej

So, worked out that I'm getting code D3 when I run (new) Ryzen Master - which works just as it did before for me....


----------



## masterkaj

Well maybe it's good we didn't get an updated bios right away because it seems like all x570 launch motherboards were using a bugged bios. This caused the max boosts to only reach ~4.3 instead of 4.5-6 and the boost response time was ~500ms instead of ~10ms.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cacwf9/psa_ryzen_3000_gaming_performance_is_being_gimped/

Anandtech is also re-running their benchmarks with the updated bios (MSI was one of the first to fix it):
https://twitter.com/andreif7/status/1148170909322293248

I do hope ASUS does come out with a new bios that resolves that bug before my new 3900x arrives though.


----------



## kundica

masterkaj said:


> Well maybe it's good we didn't get an updated bios right away because it seems like all x570 launch motherboards were using a bugged bios. This caused the max boosts to only reach ~4.3 instead of 4.5-6 and the boost response time was ~500ms instead of ~10ms.


Not all. It seems it was those who used a bios that didn't have an AMD approved AGESA for launch testing. Many reviewers used a newer bios with different AGESA that was provided after the fact from mobo manufacturers. At least that's what I've deduced from all the available information.


----------



## Johan45

gupsterg said:


> @Johan45
> 
> Sweet shares (+rep), was gonna roll to OC to see what you'd been upto  .
> 
> Per chance you know if non X R5 3600 has full menu PBO menu for tweaking?


Just super busy, had two CPUs and two Vid cards to review in about 10 days. 
I would assume it has the same functionality as other CPUs just has more of a limited boost speed.



VPII said:


> Your best bet is to run 3600 or 3733 with the IF speed sitting at half that speed. The performance gains is noticable. A friend of mine having played around with a 3600 and a couple x570 boards found that the GB snd Asus boards were the most difficult to get the IF speed right where as with the Asrock board he was able to get 1900mhz IF speed with memory at 3800.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


I know these things, I've spent a couple of weeks with a CHVIII and an MSI Godlike.
I think you're confusing terms a bit it's not the IF that drops to half speed when going over 3600 it's the memory controller. The IF actually locks at 1800 MHz which is adjustable BTW.
As an example when left on auto and using 4400 MHz DDR at XMP
DRAM true speed is 2200 MHz
Infinity Fabric is locked to 1800 MHz (but adjustable)
Memory controller is reduced to half the memory speed which would be 1100 MHz. This can be locked in a 1:1 ratio with RAM but tends to become unstable around 1900 MHz


----------



## nick name

Johan45 said:


> Just super busy, had two CPUs and two Vid cards to review in about 10 days.
> I would assume it has the same functionality as other CPUs just has more of a limited boost speed.
> 
> 
> 
> I know these things, I've spent a couple of weeks with a CHVIII and an MSI Godlike.
> I think you're confusing terms a bit it's not the IF that drops to half speed when going over 3600 it's the memory controller. The IF actually locks at 1800 MHz which is adjustable BTW.
> As an example when left on auto and using 4400 MHz DDR at XMP
> DRAM true speed is 2200 MHz
> Infinity Fabric is locked to 1800 MHz (but adjustable)
> Memory controller is reduced to half the memory speed which would be 1100 MHz. This can be locked in a 1:1 ratio with RAM but tends to become unstable around 1900 MHz


Ahhh this answered all my questions.


----------



## Johan45

lordzed83 said:


> Yup Even more screwed to max than Zen+ was. I went over few reviews myself same thing. Hopy my 3600cl14 will work with my kit


You shouldn't have any issues with 3600 MHz RAm just watch the CHVII BIOS isn't quite right yet and desouples the RAM from the controller prematurely at 3600 when it should be after 3600.
I'll poke around with it more and see what can be done. I'm just trying to catch up with everything at home now that the reviews are done


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> So, worked out that I'm getting code D3 when I run (new) Ryzen Master - which works just as it did before for me....


+rep for solving/sharing  , I guess I will run in to this when try RM with R5 3600  .



Johan45 said:


> Just super busy, had two CPUs and two Vid cards to review in about 10 days.
> I would assume it has the same functionality as other CPUs just has more of a limited boost speed.


Ahhh ok. Well I ordered one as seems to me as if doesn't lack any of the options and opens up nicely, link 1 & 2, latter clearly has PBO + 200MHz.

In the main I just wanna really see my 3200MHz C14 sticks clocking their nuts off on 3xxx. My current 2700X I've had 3666MHz C15 1T ~3000% pass in RAM Test. It still has sometimes training issues. I believe if AMD opened up the PMU Training menu for AM4 1xxx/2xxx as they have on TR 1xxx/2xxx I could nail full stability. One reason I wanted 3xxx ASAP was I'd been itching to try the PMU menu. Have you played with it?

Slighly off topic you seen the detailed spreadsheet on mobos someone did, link.




Johan45 said:


> I know these things, I've spent a couple of weeks with a CHVIII and an MSI Godlike.
> I think you're confusing terms a bit it's not the IF that drops to half speed when going over 3600 it's the memory controller. The IF actually locks at 1800 MHz which is adjustable BTW.
> As an example when left on auto and using 4400 MHz DDR at XMP
> DRAM true speed is 2200 MHz
> Infinity Fabric is locked to 1800 MHz (but adjustable)
> Memory controller is reduced to half the memory speed which would be 1100 MHz. This can be locked in a 1:1 ratio with RAM but tends to become unstable around 1900 MHz


8 Pack/AMD Robert Hallock said same. What I'm wondering is how they (AMD) managed 3733MHz with 1:1 IF, do you think perhaps a "in house" UEFI used with option which has not been released publicly, besides golden CPU? 



Spoiler






> Normal ratio: 1:1:1 for IFRAM:UMC.
> 
> When you go 1MHz past DDR4-3600, it gets automatically set to 2:1 DRAM:UMC, and IF gets set to 1800MHz. You can set the IF to anything you want, and you can go back to a 1:1 DRAM:UMC ratio if you want.


Source Robert Hallock


----------



## kmellz

Ordered a 3800X, should be here in about a week! Hopefully a shiny new nice bios by then and other fixes ^^


----------



## nick name

gupsterg said:


> -snip-
> 
> In the main I just wanna really see my 3200MHz C14 sticks clocking their nuts off on 3xxx. My current 2700X I've had 3666MHz C15 1T ~3000% pass in RAM Test. It still has sometimes training issues. I believe if AMD opened up the PMU Training menu for AM4 1xxx/2xxx as they have on TR 1xxx/2xxx I could nail full stability. One reason I wanted 3xxx ASAP was I'd been itching to try the PMU menu. Have you played with it?
> 
> -snip-


Have you tried the after POST timings?


----------



## harderthanfire

Anyone else able to select PCIE Gen 4 on their CH7 after installing a Ryzen 3000 series cpu?


----------



## poliacido

harderthanfire said:


> Anyone else able to select PCIE Gen 4 on their CH7 after installing a Ryzen 3000 series cpu?


is that possible? Not that i know of


----------



## xeizo

poliacido said:


> is that possible?


AFAIK so was it communicated from AMD a few weeks ago it should be a X570 exclusive, even if better X470 boards would be able to do it at least on PCIE slot 1. Technically, but not if it's locked down.


----------



## poliacido

xeizo said:


> AFAIK so was it communicated from AMD a few weeks ago it should be a X570 exclusive, even if better X470 boards would be able to do it at least on PCIE slot 1. Technically, but not if it's locked down.


yes i heard that too and Gigabyte also released a bios with that option and they quickly removed with the newer version... not sure if it was a mistake or just AMD wants to keep it for the X570 just for marketing reasons


----------



## harderthanfire

Here are a couple of photos of the bios showing it - one to show it is a CH7 the other showing the gen4 options.

Looks like you can set it for most of the PCIE slots, I don't have any gen4 devices to actually check though.


----------



## xeizo

harderthanfire said:


> Here are a couple of photos of the bios showing it - one to show it is a CH7 the other showing the gen4 options.
> 
> Looks like you can set it for most of the PCIE slots, I don't have any gen4 devices to actually check though.



Interesting! How is your memory working? Any frequencies above 2133MHz? Og, I see in the picture it's 3200MHz, not as borked as rumoured then


----------



## crakej

xeizo said:


> Interesting! How is your memory working? Any frequencies above 2133MHz? Og, I see in the picture it's 3200MHz, not as borked as rumoured then


Of course! 1st pic shows its running 3200MTs


----------



## HolyFist

I'm confused about something, the new BIOS released yesterday doesn't support the 3900X?

Also in this video it shows 4400MHz with the X470 and the 3900X however as expected not optimal due to timings but nice anyway


----------



## harderthanfire

I couldn't actually get over 3133mhz on this same ram on my 2700x without membench throwing errors all over the place so overall pretty happy about the ram situation given this ram is only rated for 3000mhz C15.


Some info around boosting/overclocking/undervolting on my 3900X:


Max single core boost I have seen is 4566mhz and all core boost it seems to manage 4150 or 4075 depending on workload type.


I'm now running a VCORE offset of -0.1V and singe core is boosting to 4514, all core boost in CB15/CB20 is 4044, when it was 4075 without the undervolt. Temps are 10C cooler at max load 74C instead of 84C. Idle temps are also slightly lower ofc. So overall I think it is worth it to undervolt using negative offset like on the 2700X.



My OC settings in Ryzen master are super lazy:


----------



## Hale59

Aware this is an ASUS thread, but MSI says the storage space of the BIOS chip of the older (MSI) motherboards is not enough to fully absorb the list of new CPUs and the X470 and B450 boards were designed for 105 W TDP. Overclocking is therefore only recommended for high-end boards. They are realing a Lite BIOS to ensure compatibility with the new Ryzen processors.

What is the situation with the VII? If the 2700X has a 105 W TDP, it will be fine for the new CPUs?


----------



## harderthanfire

Hale59 said:


> Aware this is an ASUS thread, but MSI says the storage space of the BIOS chip of the older (MSI) motherboards is not enough to fully absorb the list of new CPUs and the X470 and B450 boards were designed for 105 W TDP. Overclocking is therefore only recommended for high-end boards. They are realing a Lite BIOS to ensure compatibility with the new Ryzen processors.
> 
> What is the situation with the VII? If the 2700X has a 105 W TDP, it will be fine for the new CPUs?





The VRM on the VII is way overkill for anything except LN2 overclocking even for the 12/16 core CPUs and I don't think ASUS have the storage space issues that MSI do in regards to the BIOS chip. So really not seeing a downside of the VII yet other than ASUS' slow BIOS updates.


----------



## crakej

Hale59 said:


> Aware this is an ASUS thread, but MSI says the storage space of the BIOS chip of the older (MSI) motherboards is not enough to fully absorb the list of new CPUs and the X470 and B450 boards were designed for 105 W TDP. Overclocking is therefore only recommended for high-end boards. They are realing a Lite BIOS to ensure compatibility with the new Ryzen processors.
> 
> What is the situation with the VII? If the 2700X has a 105 W TDP, it will be fine for the new CPUs?


It's more than enough for all the new CPUs.

I decided to go for the 3900x after all that. Ordered direct from AMD who say it's 'in stock' - I should hope so!

I'll sleep better tonight now decision is made


----------



## nick name

harderthanfire said:


> I couldn't actually get over 3133mhz on this same ram on my 2700x without membench throwing errors all over the place so overall pretty happy about the ram situation given this ram is only rated for 3000mhz C15.
> 
> 
> Some info around boosting/overclocking/undervolting on my 3900X:
> 
> 
> Max single core boost I have seen is 4566mhz and all core boost it seems to manage 4150 or 4075 depending on workload type.
> 
> 
> I'm now running a VCORE offset of -0.1V and singe core is boosting to 4514, all core boost in CB15/CB20 is 4044, when it was 4075 without the undervolt. Temps are 10C cooler at max load 74C instead of 84C. Idle temps are also slightly lower ofc. So overall I think it is worth it to undervolt using negative offset like on the 2700X.
> 
> 
> 
> My OC settings in Ryzen master are super lazy:



Are the Performance Enhancers Levels 3 and 4 still there? If so -- have you tried them?


----------



## gilljoy

Decided to order one of these myself, mainy because I don't need pcie-4 and I want a fanless motherboard.

The latest bios is 05/july 2019 is that the one with ryzen 3700x support.


----------



## harderthanfire

nick name said:


> Are the Performance Enhancers Levels 3 and 4 still there? If so -- have you tried them?



Not sure - Stuff has been moved and renamed and loads of extra stuff too. I'll reboot in a few minutes and take a look.


----------



## Hale59

harderthanfire said:


> The VRM on the VII is way overkill for anything except LN2 overclocking even for the 12/16 core CPUs and I don't think ASUS have the storage space issues that MSI do in regards to the BIOS chip. So really not seeing a downside of the VII yet other than ASUS' slow BIOS updates.





crakej said:


> It's more than enough for all the new CPUs.
> 
> I decided to go for the 3900x after all that. Ordered direct from AMD who say it's 'in stock' - I should hope so!
> 
> I'll sleep better tonight now decision is made


That's good news. Thank you guys.


----------



## crakej

gilljoy said:


> Decided to order one of these myself, mainy because I don't need pcie-4 and I want a fanless motherboard.
> 
> The latest bios is 05/july 2019 is that the one with ryzen 3700x support.


All bios versions 2xxx (AGESA Combi-Pi 0072) and newer support the new CPUs, but there is a newer one on the way...


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> All bios versions 2xxx (AGESA Combi-Pi 0072) and newer support the new CPUs, but there is a newer one on the way...


Hey, Jerk! What's with this ellipsis crap you cheeky bastard?!? What do you know?!?


----------



## gilljoy

crakej said:


> All bios versions 2xxx (AGESA Combi-Pi 0072) and newer support the new CPUs, but there is a newer one on the way...


Brilliant thanks, I'll grab the latest one and use the flashback usb to get me up and running until the new one arrives


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Hey, Jerk! What's with this ellipsis crap you cheeky bastard?!? What do you know?!?


Uh??????

What have I done?!


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Uh??????
> 
> What have I done?!


Don't you play coy with me. What do you know about a new BIOS? Who's your source? What are you keeping from us?

Or was that ellipsis nothing more than an ellipsis?


----------



## xeizo

1usmus said in this very thread there will be new bioses, no one said when ....


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Don't you play coy with me. What do you know about a new BIOS? Who's your source? What are you keeping from us?
> 
> Or was that ellipsis nothing more than an ellipsis?


I know nothing other than that AGESA 1003AB is coming to us next! When? Who knows, but soon I hope!

Edit: You know I wouldn't keep anything from you anyway!


----------



## narukun

I bought the Ryzen 9 3900X so I'm hoping to get the bios soon, if not, I still can return this board since I bought it not so long ago, I'll buy MSI next if I have to do that..


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I know nothing other than that AGESA 1003AB is coming to us next! When? Who knows, but soon I hope!
> 
> Edit: You know I wouldn't keep anything from you anyway!


Ahhh, I was hoping you found someone at ASUS that was going to start sharing with us like Elmor did.


----------



## harderthanfire

Given what is already working fine, what are we actually expecting the AB version to do? Fix the bug at high memory speeds where the IF clock goes nuts?


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Ahhh, I was hoping you found someone at ASUS that was going to start sharing with us like Elmor did.


Wow.....that would be nice eh......

Not even a peep from Raja (or anyone from ASUS for that matter!) over this launch.

Seems 'Silent' Scone is that indeed. Silent.


----------



## harderthanfire

nick name said:


> Are the Performance Enhancers Levels 3 and 4 still there? If so -- have you tried them?



I can confirm these are now gone totally, as are the Samsung B-Die Memory OC profiles....


----------



## xeizo

harderthanfire said:


> Given what is already working fine, what are we actually expecting the AB version to do? Fix the bug at high memory speeds where the IF clock goes nuts?


More than one had problems getting the RAM over 2133MHz, and boost is currently bugged in all bioses including X570. Also some who can OC RAM reports dividers are kicking in already @ 3600MHz which they shall not.

There are bugs, apart from mouse not working. So there will be less buggy bioses, but who knows when. If everything is working for someone, fine for that someone


----------



## xeizo

harderthanfire said:


> I can confirm these are now gone totally, as are the Samsung B-Die Memory OC profiles....


Does the new PBO Override show up and function, +0-200MHz? Not that it matters, as there is like +25MHz headroom anyways ... but, things may improve with new bioses.


----------



## crakej

harderthanfire said:


> I can confirm these are now gone totally, as are the Samsung B-Die Memory OC profiles....


Maybe PE3 and 4 still appear for Ryzen 2xxx CPUs?


----------



## crakej

Just re-flashed 2406 with flashback and mouse still not working in bios (someone on Discord says it fixed his mouse problem), and running Ryzen Master still causes code D3 to appear. Seems new version doesn't do anything new for Ryzen 1xxx CPUs except cause this error code!


----------



## harderthanfire

crakej said:


> Maybe PE3 and 4 still appear for Ryzen 2xxx CPUs?



It does yeah




xeizo said:


> Does the new PBO Override show up and function, +0-200MHz? Not that it matters, as there is like +25MHz headroom anyways ... but, things may improve with new bioses.



That does show up yeah but it is easier to set it in Ryzen Master IMO.


Not sure what the reported boost problems are as mine seems to boost just fine. I am using that new/re-used Ryzen powerplan though (with min cpu set to 5% as it defaults to 90%....).


The only weird thing I have seen is sometimes 8-10 of the cores boost high even though only one core is actually under any load higher than 5%.


Also the reported CPU Core voltage seems to be much higher when a single or few core boost and a lot lower when all cores are red lining, though obviously overall power draw is lower with the single core boost.


----------



## kundica

xeizo said:


> More than one had problems getting the RAM over 2133MHz, and boost is currently bugged in all bioses including X570. Also some who can OC RAM reports dividers are kicking in already @ 3600MHz which they shall not.
> 
> There are bugs, apart from mouse not working. So there will be less buggy bioses, but who knows when. If everything is working for someone, fine for that someone


If you read this thread from Elmor you'll see that the C7H is currently defaulting to 1.2v on DRAM boot with bios 2406. That's probably what's giving people issues. Luckily for the C7H, it can be changed.
https://www.overclock.net/forum/13-amd-general/1728878-ryzen-3000-memory-fabric-x370-x470-x570.html


----------



## harderthanfire

kundica said:


> If you read this thread from Elmor you'll see that the C7H is currently defaulting to 1.2v on DRAM boot with bios 2406. That's probably what's giving people issues. Luckily for the C7H, it can be changed.
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/13-amd-general/1728878-ryzen-3000-memory-fabric-x370-x470-x570.html



That explains why I don't have any issues then - I set mine to 1.35v manually when I first booted into bios.


----------



## xeizo

harderthanfire said:


> That explains why I don't have any issues then - I set mine to 1.35v manually when I first booted into bios.


Me too, I set mine at 1.44V, with Ryzen 2000.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Maybe PE3 and 4 still appear for Ryzen 2xxx CPUs?


Yeah, I still have it. I was just hoping for the same on Ryzen 3000X CPUs as I found them to be the best way to overlcock and really utilize the CPU to its max.


----------



## nick name

On a separate note: @crakej are your running a lower tCWL than tCL? I seem to be able to run tCL 14 with a tCWL 11 when tRDWR is 10+, but have to use tCWL 12 with tRDWR at 8. The latter also requires much more SOC voltage at 1.05V versus the former tCWL and tRDWR 10+ at 1.0V SOC. And I say 10+ for tRDWR because I leave it at Auto and the board sets one channel at 10 and the other at 9 or 11


----------



## gupsterg

kundica said:


> If you read this thread from Elmor you'll see that the C7H is currently defaulting to 1.2v on DRAM boot with bios 2406. That's probably what's giving people issues. Luckily for the C7H, it can be changed.
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/13-amd-general/1728878-ryzen-3000-memory-fabric-x370-x470-x570.html


Thanks for posting this, +rep :thumb: . So much content everywhere hard to keep up , but diamond content from :clock: Elmor :clock:.

Nice to see C7H performing close to C8F. Non WiFi C8H is ~£400 @ OCuk and C8F ~£600, I know I'll be keeping to C7H. Been also keeping an eye on Amazon Warehouse deals, seen some C6H open box for £115, if on prime day there're still around and they run 20% off promo of something gonna grab one to compare with C7H when using 3xxx CPU for some tinkering fun.



nick name said:


> Yeah, I still have it. I was just hoping for the same on Ryzen 3000X CPUs as I found them to be the best way to overlcock and really utilize the CPU to its max.


Have you seen info stating it's not there?



Spoiler



Eagerly awaiting tomorrow .


----------



## nick name

gupsterg said:


> Thanks for posting this, +rep :thumb: . So much content everywhere hard to keep up , but diamond content from :clock: Elmor :clock:.
> 
> Nice to see C7H performing close to C8F. Non WiFi C8H is ~£400 @ OCuk and C8F ~£600, I know I'll be keeping to C7H. Been also keeping an eye on Amazon Warehouse deals, seen some C6H open box for £115, if on prime day there're still around and they run 20% off promo of something gonna grab one to compare with C7H when using 3xxx CPU for some tinkering fun.
> 
> 
> 
> Have you seen info stating it's not there?
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Eagerly awaiting tomorrow .
> 
> View attachment 278612


Yeah, someone with a Ryzen 3000 CPU said it wasn't there anymore.


----------



## hurricane28

neikosr0x said:


> I am very skeptic about Gigabyte motherboards after i bough the x370 Gaming 5, It lacked most overclocking features that any other decent board would have. And the quality on the VRM were zh*t zh*t zh*t, You couldn't stress the board at all otherwise it would freeze and not only was mine but also a friend of mine had the same issues at stock clocks while rendering. Now, MSI is a different story they do seem to be getting better and better, although i'm not sure about how gigabyte 3rd motherboards would work i am scare of having the same experience. With this CH7 board everything runs almost perfect, yes BIOS releases are probably a bit slower than other brands but the board's features are top notch not to mention the built quality.


I hear ya but how many settings do you actually need? I mean, more than half of the settings don't even work, make things worse or we don't even know what it does on the Crosshair boards. This leads to instabilities across the platform without knowing what is causing this. They also have some settings twice in the BIOS regarding RAM settings etc. Why? 

I haven't own any Gigabyte board since the 990FX era but a friend of mine does and he is raving about it and its really stable, right from the bat actually. It took Assus over 2 years in order to stabilize it and its still not working properly.. My boost clock is not stable and most of the time its stuck at 4.150 GHz.. Same setting son the Gigabyte board gave him 4.250 GHz. 

Don't get me wrong, the Crosshair boards are good boards and top notch only not for me anymore and i am tired of being an guinea pig for Assus without them even responding back, their ROG website isn't even working 9 out of 10 times.. because this BS Elmor mainly left Assus and now silent scone doesn't want to get involved with Assus either...


----------



## Nucky

I can confirm the performance enhancer options are not there for zen2 chips on the ch7. There are pe1-2-3 levels on the current bios on the ch8. I just put a 3900x in my machine today and built a ch8 3900x machine for my co-worker. Currently I can't get my 3900x to boost higher than 4.25 all core and 4.3+ single in a game. It will sometimes boost to 4.6 when idling. I am running 3733 15-15-15-35 right now though.


----------



## kundica

Nucky said:


> I can confirm the performance enhancer options are not there for zen2 chips on the ch7. There are pe1-2-3 levels on the current bios on the ch8. I just put a 3900x in my machine today and built a ch8 3900x machine for my co-worker. Currently I can't get my 3900x to boost higher than 4.25 all core and 4.3+ single in a game. It will sometimes boost to 4.6 when idling. I am running 3733 15-15-15-35 right now though.


Which memory kit did you use(I'm interested in the rated speed/timings) and are you running 1:1?


----------



## Nucky

I'm running a 3600c15 trident z kit. I am 1:1. My secondary timings aren't tightened yet. Memory errors are hard locking with a c5 code and I have to reset cmos once I hit that point.


----------



## Hale59

For those interested to see CH8 UEFI:

http://www.theoverclocker.com/rog-crosshair-viii-hero-wi-fi-review/5/


----------



## dev1ance

So is PCI-e 4.0 enabled for those with the new chips?

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/caq5h5/x470_crosshair_vii_seems_to_have_pcie_gen_4/

It might explain this:

https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews..._7_3700x_ryzen_9_3900x_x470_vs_x570_review/11


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> On a separate note: @crakej are your running a lower tCWL than tCL? I seem to be able to run tCL 14 with a tCWL 11 when tRDWR is 10+, but have to use tCWL 12 with tRDWR at 8. The latter also requires much more SOC voltage at 1.05V versus the former tCWL and tRDWR 10+ at 1.0V SOC. And I say 10+ for tRDWR because I leave it at Auto and the board sets one channel at 10 and the other at 9 or 11


Yes, you know I use this 'trick'. I still set tRDWR to auto in almost all cases. Your findings agree exactly the same as mine. I usually have tCWL=tCL-2 (or -3 sometimes). I'm running 3600MTS CL14, SoC 1.05v 

Can't wait for new toy to play with....


----------



## nick name

@crakej Honestly I was hoping someone reached out to you and started talking about what to expect in hopes that ASUS was going to find a few folks to send the new board to. It kind of breaks my heart thinking that they aren't going to do the same thing they've done in the past because there isn't anyone keeping an eye on the community anymore. There are a ton of good people in this community that would share a wealth of knowledge if they could get their hands on a new board, but the initiative doesn't seem to be there anymore. And by that I mean the initiative to foster the community and engage them to aid in development and learning.

Edit:
I don't mean to say ASUS doesn't care though. I absolutely believe they care. The problems anyone is seeing appears to be the same problems all board vendors have so please don't add on to my thoughts with assumptions that ASUS has abandoned this community.


----------



## kundica

Nucky said:


> I'm running a 3600c15 trident z kit. I am 1:1. My secondary timings aren't tightened yet. Memory errors are hard locking with a c5 code and I have to reset cmos once I hit that point.


Thanks for the info. I have come Trident Z 4000c17 I've been holding onto. I'm interested to see how tight I can dial it in at 3600.


----------



## gupsterg

nick name said:


> Yeah, someone with a Ryzen 3000 CPU said it wasn't there anymore.


Ahh, OK. Seems from The Stilt's shares in his thread it non issue due to how 3xxx series is anyway. Crazy that a 3900X died for HUB with OC, I hadn't seen that review.



Nucky said:


> I can confirm the performance enhancer options are not there for zen2 chips on the ch7. There are pe1-2-3 levels on the current bios on the ch8. I just put a 3900x in my machine today and built a ch8 3900x machine for my co-worker. Currently I can't get my 3900x to boost higher than 4.25 all core and 4.3+ single in a game. It will sometimes boost to 4.6 when idling. I am running 3733 15-15-15-35 right now though.


You seem to have/be doing better with your 3900X than The Stilt, link.



Nucky said:


> I'm running a 3600c15 trident z kit. I am 1:1. My secondary timings aren't tightened yet. Memory errors are hard locking with a c5 code and I have to reset cmos once I hit that point.


Still nice result considering how the UEFIs are still unpolished as Elmor said, link.



Hale59 said:


> For those interested to see CH8 UEFI:
> 
> http://www.theoverclocker.com/rog-crosshair-viii-hero-wi-fi-review/5/


Cheers for link  .



dev1ance said:


> So is PCI-e 4.0 enabled for those with the new chips?
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/caq5h5/x470_crosshair_vii_seems_to_have_pcie_gen_4/
> 
> It might explain this:
> 
> https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews..._7_3700x_ryzen_9_3900x_x470_vs_x570_review/11


I reckon it will get removed just as other board vendors did, but it if it stays and works reliably that'll be sweet!


----------



## VPII

Just to understand, why do you need to use bios flash back to flash the new bios? I've never used it but understand how it works but just want to be sure why?

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## crakej

VPII said:


> Just to understand, why do you need to use bios flash back to flash the new bios? I've never used it but understand how it works but just want to be sure why?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


I'm not sure it matters too much - I did it both from EZFlash in the bios and flashback with no difference. I did notice when I did it via EZFlash it took much longer than usual, presumably because of the bigger bios size....

Maybe it's just more reliable than people flashing with mental OCs running, as it doesn't rely on the pc to do it.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> I reckon it will get removed just as other board vendors did, but it if it stays and works reliably that'll be sweet!


I think so too, but I'm sure it won't take too long for some enterprising person to come along and put those modules back in the bios. Although I'm not too bothered about pcie 4, it would be nice to have it if it works. I've done some reading on the matter and it seems there's nothing stopping you from running 4.0 on 3.0 hardware, so long as it doesn't go over a certain distance from the cpu. I confirmed this from tech docs about pcie 3 and 4.

There's lots new to learn! I'm sure in a few months people will have found ways of OCing we can't even imagine now. I can already, with my 1700x, nearly run stable 3733 memory, so I'm quite optimistic!

Just waiting for AMD to dispatch my 3900x - got confirmation of order this morning.

About the XBOX game deal we get - it give 3 months access to XBOX PC library, and Gears 5 when released - so if my3 months have finished before the game is released, I don't get to play it?

I'm also considering this: the XBOX beta app allows you to sign up for 1 month access for $1GBP - so might be worth doing that before using your codes.


----------



## lordzed83

@crakej haahah You could not hold off could You  Waiting for mine to get shipped also. @hurricane28 well I got Gigabyte x570 for my mate's new pc on the way/order so Ill say how it is. Had bad XP with Gigabyte motherboard's VRM section going in smoke on Z77 motherboard 2 week old no OC lol.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Well, after looking around quite a bit Im convinced that the majority of the people that reviewed memory scaling and just benchmarking the new cpus dont really know how to OC memory on Ryzen nor do they realize how important cas latency is. You have well known sites putting 3200 cl14 vs. 3600 cl17 vs. 4000 cl20 and saying that bc there really isnt a gain from the 3600mhz and 4000mhz setup vs the 3200mhz setup that theres no decent memory scaling. Those setups shouldnt be compared and then used to make a determination on memory scaling on the Ryzen architecture. Now running 3200 cl14 vs 3600 cl14 vs 4000 cl17/18 might be something to write an article about. In my eyes, TechPowerup's article on memory scaling is nothing short of misleading due to sheer ignorance on how to compare memory setups. First gen and Ryzen+ have been running up to 3600 cl14 for a long time now reliably so why are so many running 3600 cl16/17 and trying to make it out likes its going to be some memory sweet spot? I can literally take and run 3466 cl14 with AUTO subtimings and it would be worlds better than 3600 cl16/17 or even 4000 cl20 in most scenarios.


----------



## cheddle

I just installed the 2406 bios and the latest ryzen master and I notice that my max EDC has been reduced from 168amps down to 145amps?? what gives?

I remain undecided between the 3800x and 3900x - on one hand the 3800x might hold some stronger clocks in games, where as the 3900x is 4 extra cores for a 'slight' increase in price...


----------



## crakej

@lordzed83 Nope, just couldn't hold off while everyone else was ordering 
@CJMitsuki I couldn't agree more. I'm surprised that they haven't learned this yet, but then they're constantly just reviewing new stuff all the time, so they don't experiment like many of us do. Even still! Also, they've being using the 'wrong' bios releases to do their testing. I'm seeing some new reviews coming up on youtube using correct bios but not had time to watch yet.


----------



## majestynl

The Lil baby has arrived


----------



## CJMitsuki

crakej said:


> @CJMitsuki I couldn't agree more. I'm surprised that they haven't learned this yet, but then they're constantly just reviewing new stuff all the time, so they don't experiment like many of us do. Even still! Also, they've being using the 'wrong' bios releases to do their testing. I'm seeing some new reviews coming up on youtube using correct bios but not had time to watch yet.



I dont trust 99% of Ryzen reviews I watch. From multiplier or default PBO overclocking to determine OC potential to running XMP to determine mem performance and other ridiculous crap I just cant trust any of it anymore. The only review Ill pay attn to is my own and from these forum posts. Ill still watch them but I take anything and everything they say with a dump truck full of grains of salt. "3600 cl16 will be the new sweet spot" Its almost satire at this point. Even AMD have their head in their rectum on some of the memory capabilities of Ryzen. I mean why send 3600 cl16 kits to "reviewers" when all they all did was run the kits on XMP timings and gimp the performance. Send them the damn 4000 cl17 and tell them to run it at 3600 cl14 and call it a day (unless 4000 cl17 works easily?) I have yet to even see any of them even doing anything other than half ass the settings and run XMP likes its an Intel CPU. So we dont have any worthwhile latency numbers or actual OC potential to go on. I remember all of them saying the same crap about the 2700x and running it the same way yet its was really easy to get 4.35ghz on all cores by tuning the EDC parameter and then going much further by bclk tuning. 
I dont remember ever seeing any of that brought up in any review or even well after the 2700x had been out for awhile. Its just lazy reviews in my eyes and you can basically toss everything they all said in the trash until the real reviewers (ie normal users in forums that actually test hardware) rather than someone slapping a cpu in a mobo and recording it for views...


----------



## Johan45

CJMitsuki said:


> Well, after looking around quite a bit Im convinced that the majority of the people that reviewed memory scaling and just benchmarking the new cpus dont really know how to OC memory on Ryzen nor do they realize how important cas latency is. You have well known sites putting 3200 cl14 vs. 3600 cl17 vs. 4000 cl20 and saying that bc there really isnt a gain from the 3600mhz and 4000mhz setup vs the 3200mhz setup that theres no decent memory scaling. Those setups shouldnt be compared and then used to make a determination on memory scaling on the Ryzen architecture. Now running 3200 cl14 vs 3600 cl14 vs 4000 cl17/18 might be something to write an article about. In my eyes, TechPowerup's article on memory scaling is nothing short of misleading due to sheer ignorance on how to compare memory setups. First gen and Ryzen+ have been running up to 3600 cl14 for a long time now reliably so why are so many running 3600 cl16/17 and trying to make it out likes its going to be some memory sweet spot? I can literally take and run 3466 cl14 with AUTO subtimings and it would be worlds better than 3600 cl16/17 or even 4000 cl20 in most scenarios.


I can't speak for all who do reviews but first AMD never leaves much time for reviewers, add to that last minutes BIOS changes which require new testing for accurate data. 
Second, when comparing across platforms it's only fair to keep as much posssible the same so every system I tested (2700X,8700K,9900K,3700X and 3900X) had a fresh copy of the Win10 May 2019, new BIOS, new chipset etc.. on the same bench with the same PSU and the same 2x8 kit of FlareX 3200 Cl14. As for Overclocking, If I had a team then maybe I could explore all avenues but I concentrate on the main parts which was PBO and manual OC. 
You have to remember that forum dwellers aren't the masses and 90% of the users will set XMP and go, some don't even do that.
EDIT: I almost forgot, I had to review the 5700 and the 5700XT in that same 10 days.
EDIT<EDIT: One more thing BCLK adjustment is nil on X570 blows the sata out of the water. Haven't tested with PCIe devices yet but system won't boot even at 101


----------



## Nucky

From the limited amount I've been able to play with my chip right now it appears PBO is not working at all. It will update the parameters in ryzen master e.g. +200mhz in PBO settings has ryzen master showing 4850 as the max boost clock. But the overall clocks don't change. I am seeing boosts of 4.292-4.317 MT consistently. For ST in an actual workload the highest I've seen sustained is about 4.45 and I get better cb15 ST scores with everything on auto then i do with PBO settings maxed. Sorry for rambling, if anyone wants me to test anything later today just ask and I'll do what I can.


----------



## Jaju123

Nucky said:


> From the limited amount I've been able to play with my chip right now it appears PBO is not working at all. It will update the parameters in ryzen master e.g. +200mhz in PBO settings has ryzen master showing 4850 as the max boost clock. But the overall clocks don't change. I am seeing boosts of 4.292-4.317 MT consistently. For ST in an actual workload the highest I've seen sustained is about 4.45 and I get better cb15 ST scores with everything on auto then i do with PBO settings maxed. Sorry for rambling, if anyone wants me to test anything later today just ask and I'll do what I can.


I dont know what memory you have, but i want to know if 3600mhz cl14 is readily achievable with optimised subtimings in line with the DRAM calculator fast preset, and whether this has an impact on gaming performance?


----------



## CJMitsuki

Johan45 said:


> I can't speak for all who do reviews but first AMD never leaves much time for reviewers, add to that last minutes BIOS changes which require new testing for accurate data.
> Second, when comparing across platforms it's only fair to keep as much posssible the same so every system I tested (2700X,8700K,9900K,3700X and 3900X) had a fresh copy of the Win10 May 2019, new BIOS, new chipset etc.. on the same bench with the same PSU and the same 2x8 kit of FlareX 3200 Cl14. As for Overclocking, If I had a team then maybe I could explore all avenues but I concentrate on the main parts which was PBO and manual OC.
> You have to remember that forum dwellers aren't the masses and 90% of the users will set XMP and go, some don't even do that.
> EDIT: I almost forgot, I had to review the 5700 and the 5700XT in that same 10 days.
> EDIT<EDIT: One more thing BCLK adjustment is nil on X570 blows the sata out of the water. Haven't tested with PCIe devices yet but system won't boot even at 101


I agree on keeping all of the setups running the same memory setup when comparing to other SKUs but Im talking about determining overall performance. Such as running the 9900k at 5.2ghz then comparing that to a Ryzen 2 on default PBO and 3600 cl16 XMP. If youre going to run the 9900k out of spec bc it scales well with CPU freq then why not tighten memory timings for the Ryzen as it potentially scales well with decent subtimings. Previous gens did so Im assuming 2nd gen will as well. If they were just comparing 2 CPUs and running them both at stock then by all means keep everything stock for a fair comparison. This still doesnt explain TechPowerup's ignorance in their "Memory Scaling" write up for Ryzen 2nd gen. I almost had to make sure it wasnt April Fools Day when I saw them comparing 3200 @ 14-14-14-34-1T to 4000 @ 20-19-19-39-1T and 3600 @ 17-19-19-39-2T. You can go ahead and say the latter 2 setups are running pure dumpster timings. How that write up could ever be called a legit memory scaling comparison for Ryzen 2nd gen or ANY architecture for that matter is beyond me but maybe Im not smart enough to understand how memory scaling comparison methodology works in the mainstream.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Jaju123 said:


> I dont know what memory you have, but i want to know if 3600mhz cl14 is readily achievable with optimised subtimings in line with the DRAM calculator fast preset, and whether this has an impact on gaming performance?


With high quality B die on 2nd gen it should be easily achievable but even if you had to drop to 3533 @ cl14 youd never see the difference in gaming between the 2 so either 3533 or 3600 @ cl14 with tightened subtimings will be nice and yes you will notice a difference in gaming. More due to the latency performance increase than with the fps but youll see more fps as well but dont expect 50 more fps. Maybe 10+ fps if youre lucky.


----------



## lordzed83

@CJMitsuki ye thats why I asked @elmor if hes got some time to go 3600cl16 vs 3600cl14. All memory tests I'w seen on reviews are Useless and most of Reviews are useless in general cause late bioses ect.


----------



## Nucky

Jaju123 said:


> I dont know what memory you have, but i want to know if 3600mhz cl14 is readily achievable with optimised subtimings in line with the DRAM calculator fast preset, and whether this has an impact on gaming performance?


I have a 3600c15 Trident Z kit under water. I was previously running it at 3600 14-15-14-28 on my 2700x. Currently running it at 3733c15 with loose subtimings due to the c5 bug on the current bios. 3600c14 tight should be easily achievable once we get 1.0.0.3ab and definitely doable on the current bios. For me, if my board runs into a memory issue on boot it gets stuck with q code c5 and the only way to clear it is to reset cmos.


----------



## Johan45

lordzed83 said:


> @CJMitsuki ye thats why I asked @elmor if hes got some time to go 3600cl16 vs 3600cl14. All memory tests I'w seen on reviews are Useless and most of Reviews are useless in general cause late bioses ect.



I'm testing that as we speak.
@CJMitsuki
When I review it's stock vs stock or head to head at the same speed for IPC comparison. I just didn't like being painted with the same brush. I try to be fair and as comprehensive as time allows


----------



## nick name

If you wanna go and watch Bearded Hardware's live stream from yesterday he was playing with speed and primary timings. He did get a little into setting tRFC and tFAW toward the end too. He was booting 3800MHz at 12-11-11-11-21 and tRFC at 180. Then running Aida and a little Cinebench at the end. He didn't test stability, but from what I saw -- if it booted then it ran without crashing. This was on a 3700X OC'd to 4.3GHz. He couldn't get 4.4GHz stable. I think he is gonna use LN2 today.

Oh and he was using a G.SKILL TridentZ Royal 4000CL17 kit as he is sponsored by G.SKILL.


----------



## gupsterg

@Johan45

+rep and thanks for shares :thumb: .



CJMitsuki said:


> Well, after looking around quite a bit Im convinced that the majority of the people that reviewed memory scaling and just benchmarking the new cpus dont really know how to OC memory on Ryzen nor do they realize how important cas latency is. You have well known sites putting 3200 cl14 vs. 3600 cl17 vs. 4000 cl20 and saying that bc there really isnt a gain from the 3600mhz and 4000mhz setup vs the 3200mhz setup that theres no decent memory scaling. Those setups shouldnt be compared and then used to make a determination on memory scaling on the Ryzen architecture. Now running 3200 cl14 vs 3600 cl14 vs 4000 cl17/18 might be something to write an article about. In my eyes, TechPowerup's article on memory scaling is nothing short of misleading due to sheer ignorance on how to compare memory setups. First gen and Ryzen+ have been running up to 3600 cl14 for a long time now reliably so why are so many running 3600 cl16/17 and trying to make it out likes its going to be some memory sweet spot?  I can literally take and run 3466 cl14 with AUTO subtimings and it would be worlds better than 3600 cl16/17 or even 4000 cl20 in most scenarios.


It seem from The Stilt's post that even though we should go low latency it isn't the same level of gains as 1xxx/2xxx, link.



majestynl said:


> The Lil baby has arrived


Nice :thumb: , my Amazon 3700X is showing as ~15th July+ ETA to be in my hands  , but OCuk delivered  ...


Spoiler


----------



## Johan45

I've done some testing for comparisons.
First at 3600 MHz you need to set the FClck to 1800 or it will boot decoupled and NB will read 900. Plug and play settings from Ryzen 2xxx don't seem to boot so needs attention to subtimings and RTC checker doesn't work for this CPU.
If you get error C5 just power down and reboot usually goes fine. I think it has to do with changng the fabric link.
Currently working on 1900/3800 which may be possible not sure about stability. Be back with more later working on sub-timings and fighting a lot of no-posts


----------



## lordzed83

@Johan45 wont 3800 put You in 2:1 IF ??? Also noticed You ran 3600cl14 at T2 and 3800cl16 at T1 hehe


----------



## crakej

oh god.......I really hope AMD dispatch my CPU today! How will I sleep tonight?!?!??

I'm going to load up my fastest reliable OC profile later and bench everything before new CPU arrives. Perf jump from 1700x is going to be amazing!


----------



## Johan45

lordzed83 said:


> @Johan45 wont 3800 put You in 2:1 IF ??? Also noticed You ran 3600cl14 at T2 and 3800cl16 at T1 hehe


You can force 1:1 by setting the FClck. 3600 was just a quick test I already knew it was easy to set. 3800 is my objective. I'll post more details when done


----------



## upgraditus

1usmus said:


> I have to break some rules and reassure you. Artificial restriction is present due to NDA. To fully use Zen 2 you need 1.0.0.3AB


Firstly, thank you for all your hard work and wealth of knowledge you provide. Secondarily, sorry if you have answered this somewhere, but since nda is gone now can you please divulge; what is this restriction we face? I'm hoping it relates to memory since that is where I'm currently struggling with 3700X + Prime X470-Pro on 1.0.0.2, but would like to know either way.


----------



## lordzed83

@Johan45 oooo thats great not seen anyone mentioning that  @1usmus waiting for Your's calculator magic. You have any interesting Findings so far ??


----------



## gupsterg

I confirm on R5 3600 retail I have full PBO settings access in UEFI based on what current UEFI 2406 AGESA ComboPi-AM4 1.0.0.2 allows  . For anyone interested I have posted experience so far on ROG forum and will continue updates there on how things go.


----------



## Martelele

Hello.Have somebody tried running 3900X on v2304 of bios? I'm scared to flash bios to v2406 because of the issues I've read about and knowing that my current bios is stable,just want to skip that version.Can I safely try to run the 3900X on v2304 which I'm currently on? Now I'm running Ryzen 3 1200 (just a placeholder) + Gskill 3200 CL14 and everything is pretty stable.Cheers


----------



## elmor

Gen4 works on 2406: https://www.overclock.net/forum/28033224-post33.html


----------



## Nucky

Martelele said:


> Hello.Have somebody tried running 3900X on v2304 of bios? I'm scared to flash bios to v2406 because of the issues I've read about and knowing that my current bios is stable,just want to skip that version.Can I safely try to run the 3900X on v2304 which I'm currently on? Now I'm running Ryzen 3 1200 (just a placeholder) + Gskill 3200 CL14 and everything is pretty stable.Cheers


I ran mine for a very brief period on v2304. Performance wasn't terrible at stock, but almost no monitoring software worked correctly. 
@gupsterg are your PBO settings actually working? No matter what I changed with mine my clocks did not adjust even though Ryzen Master would reflect the new max clocks.


----------



## Johan45

OK, tested 3800 Cl16 for 30 minutes in AIDA64 stability. Might not be 100% but I'm sure it's do-able. SOC at 1.15 and VDDG at 1.05 these are best kept ~ 100 mv apart since VDDG is fed from SOC
RAN a few benchmarks in Win10 instead of Win7 you can see the boost to the GB4 score, ST dropped though, the changes in Win10 I do believe help MT workloads.


----------



## Johan45

gupsterg said:


> I confirm on R5 3600 retail I have full PBO settings access in UEFI based on what current UEFI 2406 AGESA ComboPi-AM4 1.0.0.2 allows  . For anyone interested I have posted experience so far on ROG forum and will continue updates there on how things go.


 Don't be surprised when you see the half write speeds in ADIA64!



Martelele said:


> Hello.Have somebody tried running 3900X on v2304 of bios? I'm scared to flash bios to v2406 because of the issues I've read about and knowing that my current bios is stable,just want to skip that version.Can I safely try to run the 3900X on v2304 which I'm currently on? Now I'm running Ryzen 3 1200 (just a placeholder) + Gskill 3200 CL14 and everything is pretty stable.Cheers


Don't use 2304, it doesn't work right. You can see in the pics I just posted 2604 works fine. The only thing I have heard is that the new AGESA helps the boosting.


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> Nice :thumb: , my Amazon 3700X is showing as ~15th July+ ETA to be in my hands  , but OCuk delivered  ...
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 278716


including the Haribo as usual  Good luck with it chap!

Im playing around with Mem OC like Johan! Will report if i got something to show 
ps: those write speeds are really ugly


----------



## crakej

elmor said:


> Gen4 works on 2406: https://www.overclock.net/forum/28033224-post33.html


Very interesting - thanks @elmor. Do you think we'll be able to fix it when they undoubtedly remove this? Reading I've done says this should work fine within certain limits - I read it in pcie 4.0 tech docs.


----------



## chakku

elmor said:


> Gen4 works on 2406: https://www.overclock.net/forum/28033224-post33.html


First slot only I assume? Would imagine the M.2 slot direct from the CPU is a bit far away as it's at the bottom of the board so only option for a Gen4 SSD would be using that one, but not sure what the implication is if you use the second slot for your GPU then, would the second slot be 3.0 x8 while the top is 4.0 x8?

EDIT: Remembered the layout wrong, top slot is from the CPU. I could actually be tempted to pick up a 4.0 SSD if it does indeed work but I'll wait to see if ASUS don't change their mind in a future BIOS update.


----------



## pez

I have to admit I was skeptical that this board was going to get any meaningful 4th gen support. Going to do my own reading and research, but I think I might be able to justify not having to uproot my entire rig to eek out some more performance.


----------



## majestynl

Interesting... 3800mhz CL14 
Ram @ 1.5v / FCLK 1900 / SOC and VDDG and most others still on auto. No Stress-test done!





elmor said:


> Gen4 works on 2406: https://www.overclock.net/forum/28033224-post33.html


Thanks for the info! Will try it


----------



## lordzed83

majestynl said:


> Interesting... 3800mhz CL14
> Ram @ 1.5v / FCLK 1900 / SOC and VDDG and most others still on auto. No Stress-test done!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for the info! Will try it


63ns veeerrryy nice


----------



## chakku

Was there still going to be an AGESA 1.0.0.3AB BIOS coming for the C7H as was hinted before or is 2406 the defacto Ryzen 3000 BIOS for the near future?


----------



## Johan45

chakku said:


> Was there still going to be an AGESA 1.0.0.3AB BIOS coming for the C7H as was hinted before or is 2406 the defacto Ryzen 3000 BIOS for the near future?


I'm sure whenever ASUS gets around to it, it'll be updated


----------



## xeizo

I suppose there will be several new bioses for the CH7, X470 is still in production as an alternative to X570, it's not dead. And AMD did promise backwards compatibility, that means reasonably free of bugs.

Seems nothing wrong with performance on 2406 though, mostly great numbers so far.

Personally I first ordered a 3800X on Sunday morning, but as no delivery date showed up I cancelled, and ordered a 3700X from a local shop that promised to have a large batch incoming. The batch never arrived to the shop. So, I had to realise I must wait whatever I do. The only Ryzen 3000 I've seen in the wild here is 3600, which seems plentiful, but I'm not going from 8-core to 6-core. 

Since I have to wait anyway, I ordered and paid for a 3900X, seems the most logical match for my rig. And I don't have to be shocked over the low write speeds 

Now waiting.


----------



## gupsterg

Johan45 said:


> Don't be surprised when you see the half write speeds in ADIA64!


Roger that :thumb: , seen from reviews reason, etc  , but none the less thanks chap for heads up  .

Please accept my humble apologies for losing contact with you in PM, offline life things took my time and the online time I did have didn't allow me to communicate with all I may wish to.



majestynl said:


> including the Haribo as usual  Good luck with it chap!


I'm supposed to mb on a diet  ...



majestynl said:


> Interesting... 3800mhz CL14
> Ram @ 1.5v / FCLK 1900 / SOC and VDDG and most others still on auto. No Stress-test done!


WOW, regardless of stress test really shows board/RAM was not issue, but previous gen IMC, etc. So many times said that to others.



xeizo said:


> I suppose there will be several new bioses for the CH7, X470 is still in production as an alternative to X570, it's not dead. And AMD did promise backwards compatibility, that means reasonably free of bugs.
> 
> Seems nothing wrong with performance on 2406 though, mostly great numbers so far.
> 
> Personally I first ordered a 3800X on Sunday morning, but as no delivery date showed up I cancelled, and ordered a 3700X from a local shop that promised to have a large batch incoming. The batch never arrived to the shop. So, I had to realise I must wait whatever I do. The only Ryzen 3000 I've seen in the wild here is 3600, which seems plentiful, but I'm not going from 8-core to 6-core.
> 
> Since I have to wait anyway, I ordered and paid for a 3900X, seems the most logical match for my rig. And I don't have to be shocked over the low write speeds
> 
> Now waiting.


I'll be honest I went Ryzen 8C/16T with 1xxx/2xxx as it seemed so affordable and I wanted it, rather than need. Having spent the little time I have with R5 3600 I am grinning ear to ear.


----------



## Johan45

gupsterg said:


> Roger that :thumb: , seen from reviews reason, etc  , but none the less thanks chap for heads up  .
> 
> Please accept my humble apologies for losing contact with you in PM, offline life things took my time and the online time I did have didn't allow me to communicate with all I may wish to.


No need Gups, we all have lives. I was on a break too like the calm before the storm. I didn't have one thing on my bench in the two months prior to this launch.


----------



## lordzed83

@gupsterg i know We keep telling people that motherboards are most about VRM and Bios support nowadays and rest up to CPU but they think that spending 800 quid on new motherboard will give them better overclocking... Those days are looong time gone when IMC was separate chip on motherboard ect.


----------



## Bart

Hey, has anyone else noticed that if you've been keeping your board up to date, that PBO behavior is changing? Or is it just me? My 2700X *used* to boost to 4,374mhz all core when benching, stable, at PBO L3. Lately, it only boosts to 4,175mhz all core on L3, yet somehow gets better scores in 3dmark (which is an awful metric, I know). Anyone else see behavior like that?


----------



## FJSAMA

3dmarks increase is due to Windows / Chipset drivers Update. (you did update right?)
My ryzen 2600x pbo is also nerfed in lastest bios ( used to be 4.25 and now it 4.15. Still does 4.25 under gaming / lighter loads)


----------



## Bart

FJSAMA: your post is all garbled, apparently mobile posting is broken, FYI. I did update the BIOS for kicks, and the chipset drivers. I already had a newer RAID driver than what's on Asus site, so I left all that alone. Windows is up to date too.


----------



## nick name

Bart said:


> Hey, has anyone else noticed that if you've been keeping your board up to date, that PBO behavior is changing? Or is it just me? My 2700X *used* to boost to 4,374mhz all core when benching, stable, at PBO L3. Lately, it only boosts to 4,175mhz all core on L3, yet somehow gets better scores in 3dmark (which is an awful metric, I know). Anyone else see behavior like that?


I imagine you have to go into your PBO manual settings and raise EDC.


----------



## Hale59

AMD Ryzen Master - Good News

The new version of AMD Ryzen Master can show you core behavior that other tools can't or don't! Examples include: cc6 sleeping cores, sub-2200MHz idle cores, sub-1V idle voltages, fastest CPU physical core, your motherboard's VRM capacity, and more.

If you make changes in Ryzen Master, it will tell the BIOS what to do. If you make changes in BIOS, it will be seen in Ryzen Master.

Just for 3rd gen, but they are working on it for 1st and 2nd also.

https://twitter.com/Thracks/status/1148810420884561920


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> 63ns veeerrryy nice


Yep looks promising 



gupsterg said:


> I'm supposed to mb on a diet  ...


LOL , then stop ordering hardware 



gupsterg said:


> WOW, regardless of stress test really shows board/RAM was not issue, but previous gen IMC, etc. So many times said that to others.


Yeah def. The IMC. It was also no reliable at speeds higher then 3466. Anyways, let's see where we can go with the 3 series..



Bart said:


> Hey, has anyone else noticed that if you've been keeping your board up to date, that PBO behavior is changing? Or is it just me? My 2700X *used* to boost to 4,374mhz all core when benching, stable, at PBO L3. Lately, it only boosts to 4,175mhz all core on L3, yet somehow gets better scores in 3dmark (which is an awful metric, I know). Anyone else see behavior like that?


Are you sure all core boosting that high. Sorry but never saw that. And def not on Level3. Maybe you are confusing all core vs single core boosts ?! Cause otherwise your ST boost must be around 4600-4700.


----------



## chakku

3700X ordered, turns out the 3900X really doesn't do well in RPCS3 because of the 3 core CCXs. Maybe with Zen 3 I'll consider a 16 core.

Can't wait to start playing around with memory! Fingers crossed 3600 on this kit is trivial.


----------



## xeizo

chakku said:


> 3700X ordered, turns out the 3900X really doesn't do well in RPCS3 because of the 3 core CCXs. Maybe with Zen 3 I'll consider a 16 core.
> 
> Can't wait to start playing around with memory! Fingers crossed 3600 on this kit is trivial.


Looks like a good choice, I have never used RPCS3 and likely never will, but if it's important you seem to have made the right decision.

I run a lot of productivity stuff, DAW with plugs and video editing, moar cores the better for me. Nevertheless, 3700X is a lot more price/perfomance than 3900X!

Best price/performance is no doubt 3600 as it is not far behind in general performance, but way cheaper.


----------



## neikosr0x

have anyone tried 32gb 4x8gb config yet on new Ryzen? would you think that 3600mhz could be achievable?


----------



## neikosr0x

chakku said:


> 3700X ordered, turns out the 3900X really doesn't do well in RPCS3 because of the 3 core CCXs. Maybe with Zen 3 I'll consider a 16 core.
> 
> Can't wait to start playing around with memory! Fingers crossed 3600 on this kit is trivial.


I believe you can disable 1ccx in case you want to use RPCS3.


----------



## lordzed83

chakku said:


> 3700X ordered, turns out the 3900X really doesn't do well in RPCS3 because of the 3 core CCXs. Maybe with Zen 3 I'll consider a 16 core.
> 
> Can't wait to start playing around with memory! Fingers crossed 3600 on this kit is trivial.


And thats where ProcessLasso comes in to play and You can lock applications to use only selected cores/ccxs


----------



## chakku

neikosr0x said:


> I believe you can disable 1ccx in case you want to use RPCS3.





lordzed83 said:


> And thats where ProcessLasso comes in to play and You can lock applications to use only selected cores/ccxs


The issue is there only being 3 cores/6 threads on a CCX. The way RPCS3 works it needs 8 threads (6 SPU + 2 PPU threads) with low latency communications which is why the emulator itself will move all processes to one CCX, but 6 threads is not enough in many cases. Better explanation here: https://www.reddit.com/r/rpcs3/comments/cbd3x2/psa_ryzen_users_that_are_not_using_an_8_or_16core/

Was waiting for some tests to see if the lower latency on Zen 2 would make it a non-issue but 65-75ns between cores on different CCXs is too high still.

3950X should work well for this and be best of all worlds but I really don't need a 16 core at this point in time.


----------



## lordzed83

@crakej my toys are here whole new build for mate and 3900x for myself


----------



## xeizo

lordzed83 said:


> @crakej my toys are here whole new build for mate and 3900x for myself


Happy building!


----------



## Johan45

neikosr0x said:


> have anyone tried 32gb 4x8gb config yet on new Ryzen? would you think that 3600mhz could be achievable?


I had already switched platforms over to the MSI X570 Godlike but from my experience so far the memory capabilities, for the most part, lie in the new IMC. There's no reason IMO that this wouldn't work in a CHVII. I put 2x8 3600 and 2x8 4000 Royals in the MSI board hit XMP for 3600. It booted straight away and I ran GB which isn't a stability test but it's quite memory sensitive and the results look good.


----------



## hurricane28

lordzed83 said:


> @crakej haahah You could not hold off could You  Waiting for mine to get shipped also.
> @hurricane28 well I got Gigabyte x570 for my mate's new pc on the way/order so Ill say how it is. Had bad XP with Gigabyte motherboard's VRM section going in smoke on Z77 motherboard 2 week old no OC lol.


Cool, let me know how it works. A friend of mine owned both Ch7 and Gigabyte x470 top notch board and the Gigabyte is more stable, higher RAM oc and easier to use. I'm keen on knowing what you think of it. Let me know dude.

My boost clocks are still not good.. it doesn't boost to 4.250 GHz like it should in games but to 4.175 or something.. no matter what i do, the boost is broken on this board for me.. I am on latest BIOS btw and i even used performance enhancer but it does nothing at all.


----------



## nick name

Does anyone use the DRAM Training Control After Training? It doesn't seem to work on 2406.

Edit:
Same thing on 2304. Am I doing something wrong? Are they supposed to be hex values?


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Does anyone use the DRAM Training Control After Training? It doesn't seem to work on 2406.
> 
> Edit:
> Same thing on 2304. Am I doing something wrong? Are they supposed to be hex values?


I've never known what it's for.....


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I've never known what it's for.....


Well it's the only spot where tREFI is listed so I was hoping to learn to use it. @CJMitsuki did you ever get it figured out?


----------



## Jaju123

My 3700x arrives tomorrow. Would be great if asus could release a real BIOS for this board! Does RAM overclocking work properly on the latest BIOS with 3000 series? I've heard mixed reports.


----------



## gupsterg

nick name said:


> Does anyone use the DRAM Training Control After Training? It doesn't seem to work on 2406.
> 
> Edit:
> Same thing on 2304. Am I doing something wrong? Are they supposed to be hex values?


Menu has never functioned since 1xxx/C6H days, as only at POST Ryzen timings can be set AFAIK.


----------



## Bart

majestynl said:


> Are you sure all core boosting that high. Sorry but never saw that. And def not on Level3. Maybe you are confusing all core vs single core boosts ?! Cause otherwise your ST boost must be around 4600-4700.


Unless HWinfo is lying, I'm sure. It tops out all 8 cores, it's just that now instead of 4.35Ghz, it's boosting to 4.166ghz. The newer BIOS changes to PBO are definitely at play here. More experimentation is needed. System is underwater (EK monoblock), FYI.

EDIT: I should clarify something, I'm going by HWinfo64s max boost clock during benching. So I mean at some point, every core had hit 4,374mhz. It might not mean all of em were pegged at exactly the same time, but I'm assuming Cinebench (the new one) or 3dmark's CPU test would peg all 8 cores.


----------



## nick name

gupsterg said:


> Menu has never functioned since 1xxx/C6H days, as only at POST Ryzen timings can be set AFAIK.


Well poop.


----------



## Nucky

My all core boost with everything on auto and with a -0.050 offset is around 4.292-4.316 in a gaming load like PUBG. CB15 seems to be boosting around the 4.175 -4.250 range and sometimes dropping down to around 4.115 . With that offset, temps in gaming for me are around 44-50c. Custom loop with 3x360mm rads. I can't seem to manipulate those clocks at all though. edit: this is with a 3900x.


----------



## majestynl

Bart said:


> Unless HWinfo is lying, I'm sure. It tops out all 8 cores, it's just that now instead of 4.35Ghz, it's boosting to 4.166ghz. The newer BIOS changes to PBO are definitely at play here. More experimentation is needed. System is underwater (EK monoblock), FYI.


Hmm strange, as said before. If your ACB was doing 4.35Ghz then your Single core Boost must be around ~4.7Ghz. Must be the best 2700x Chip in the world  i would never swap that one. 
And yes, PBO has gone lot of changes, therefor PBO2 for Matisse! 

edit on your edit: thats what i told you. That not your all core boost.  For that all core need running at max clocks at same time. Dont look at the Max clocks tab, just check the first tab with clocks. They must running together a certain mhz at the same time.



Nucky said:


> My all core boost with everything on auto and with a -0.050 offset is around 4.292-4.316 in a gaming load like PUBG. CB15 seems to be boosting around the 4.175 -4.250 range and sometimes dropping down to around 4.115 . With that offset, temps in gaming for me are around 44-50c. Custom loop with 3x360mm rads. I can't seem to manipulate those clocks at all though. edit: this is with a 3900x.


The 4.292-4.316 is not your all core boost, games mostly dont use all cores full at the same time . Test it with CB or any other stress-test app. 4.175 is more or less the ACB for you


----------



## Bart

majestynl said:


> Hmm strange, as said before. If you ACB was doing 4.35Ghz then your Single core Boost must be around ~4.7Ghz. Must be the best 2700x Chip in the world  i would never swap that one.
> And yes, PBO has gone lot of changes, therefor PBO2 for Matisse!


I need to do some reading on PBO! There's no way I have a golden chip, and this EK monoblock isn't magic. I had PBO set to level 4 at one point, and it was reporting my CPU hitting ridiculous temps I've never seen, not to mention over 1.5v to the CPU, but I was also messing with LLC at the same time. I hope someone does a nicely detailed "deep dive" on PBO so I can learn before I fry something.


----------



## neikosr0x

emmm, any solution for the bios not recognizing the keyboard when posting? i can't get into the bios  "Bios 2406"


----------



## Hale59

Explain this


----------



## majestynl

Bart said:


> I need to do some reading on PBO! There's no way I have a golden chip, and this EK monoblock isn't magic. I had PBO set to level 4 at one point, and it was reporting my CPU hitting ridiculous temps I've never seen, not to mention over 1.5v to the CPU, but I was also messing with LLC at the same time. I hope someone does a nicely detailed "deep dive" on PBO so I can learn before I fry something.


Lots of info around PBO 
I'm thinking your are a bit of confused around PBO. Level 4 you are talking about is asus performance enhancer (PE). Currently not available for the 3x series.


----------



## Bart

majestynl said:


> Lots of info around PBO
> I'm thinking your are a bit of confused around PBO. Level 4 you are talking about is asus performance enhancer (PE). Currently not available for the 3x series.


I'm probably misusing the terminology. I'm talking about X470, and whatever thingy I'm setting to "level 3 (OC)" or "level 4 (OC)". So whatever that thing is.  For benching on the CH7 Hero with 2700X and 4x8GB memory, here's what I'm doing:

1) set the memory to DOCP, 3200CL14, 
2) loading the Stilt's "fast timing" memory profile, but then resetting the command rate to 2t (because 4x8GB, 1T is sketchy)
3) set that thingy that says Level 3 (OC)

That's it, everything else on auto. I've done NO tweaking at all on this stuff, because this boost seems to work *really* well. I'm not sure I even see in the point in manual OCing anymore. Must be getting old! 

EDIT: Performance Enhancer it is! You'd think I'd learn to read in my old age, apologies for the mix up! I just did some quick testing with PE level 4, and while toasty, does appear to boost where I thought it USED to at level 3:


----------



## crakej

Jaju123 said:


> My 3700x arrives tomorrow. Would be great if asus could release a real BIOS for this board! Does RAM overclocking work properly on the latest BIOS with 3000 series? I've heard mixed reports.


Working fine.


----------



## neikosr0x

omg, this bios is so far from finished hahaha. If I mess with the PBO options in bios the pc wont boot and I had to plug an old crappy keyboard to be able to get into the bios. but neither my corsair mouse or keyboard works in bios...


----------



## nick name

Bart said:


> I'm probably misusing the terminology. I'm talking about X470, and whatever thingy I'm setting to "level 3 (OC)" or "level 4 (OC)". So whatever that thing is.  For benching on the CH7 Hero with 2700X and 4x8GB memory, here's what I'm doing:
> 
> 1) set the memory to DOCP, 3200CL14,
> 2) loading the Stilt's "fast timing" memory profile, but then resetting the command rate to 2t (because 4x8GB, 1T is sketchy)
> 3) set that thingy that says Level 3 (OC)
> 
> That's it, everything else on auto. I've done NO tweaking at all on this stuff, because this boost seems to work *really* well. I'm not sure I even see in the point in manual OCing anymore. Must be getting old!
> 
> EDIT: Performance Enhancer it is! You'd think I'd learn to read in my old age, apologies for the mix up! I just did some quick testing with PE level 4, and while toasty, does appear to boost where I thought it USED to at level 3:



You might find this helpful. I got a little rambley with the updates that came with the newer AGESAs.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...tiplier-adjustments-through-ryzen-master.html


----------



## Bart

I just became convinced that PBO might be dangerous on X470 for older CPUs, LOL! I just did some quick tinkering in the BIOS, and this is kinda scary. In an effort to understand the difference between PE and PBO, I decided to set PE back to auto, and then via the new menu in the later CH7 BIOSes, I set PBO from Auto to Enabled. I then rebooted and fired up Cinebench R20. It scored badly, 4107, but more importantly is boosting the voltage WELL OVER 1.5V, in addition to hammering all the cores to near 4.35ghz:


And all I did was set performance enhancer back to "auto" and set PBO to "enabled". Am I being paranoid, or is that as scary as I think it is? Maybe AMD wants me to burn out my 2700x so I can upgrade.


----------



## harderthanfire

Hale59 said:


> Explain this



People have already benchmarked PCIE Gen4 on this board and proved it works correctly (matching speeds on X570 boards), it also shows as an option in bios so whatever the source of that image is has incorrect information.


----------



## Hale59

harderthanfire said:


> People have already benchmarked PCIE Gen4 on this board and proved it works correctly (matching speeds on X570 boards), it also shows as an option in bios so whatever the source of that image is has incorrect information.


Yes, aware of that.
My point about that image was seeing a better PCIE-4 support on the lower boards.


----------



## Jaju123

neikosr0x said:


> emmm, any solution for the bios not recognizing the keyboard when posting? i can't get into the bios  "Bios 2406"


I cant get into the bios either. Does anyone have a solution? Not that amusing that this passed QC tbh.

EDIT: I managed to get into the BIOS through using windows troubleshooting, but neither mouse nor keyboard works in it so I cant change anything anyway xD


----------



## neikosr0x

Jaju123 said:


> I cant get into the bios either. Does anyone have a solution? Not that amusing that this passed QC tbh.
> 
> EDIT: I managed to get into the BIOS through using windows troubleshooting, but neither mouse nor keyboard works in it so I cant change anything anyway xD


that looks worst than my issue, mine doesn't work only during boot/bios.


----------



## nick name

Bart said:


> I just became convinced that PBO might be dangerous on X470 for older CPUs, LOL! I just did some quick tinkering in the BIOS, and this is kinda scary. In an effort to understand the difference between PE and PBO, I decided to set PE back to auto, and then via the new menu in the later CH7 BIOSes, I set PBO from Auto to Enabled. I then rebooted and fired up Cinebench R20. It scored badly, 4107, but more importantly is boosting the voltage WELL OVER 1.5V, in addition to hammering all the cores to near 4.35ghz:
> 
> 
> And all I did was set performance enhancer back to "auto" and set PBO to "enabled". Am I being paranoid, or is that as scary as I think it is? Maybe AMD wants me to burn out my 2700x so I can upgrade.


For regular PBO or PE Levels 1 - 3 you can use a pretty sizable negative VCORE offset. At least -.0500V and at most -.1000V offset.


----------



## nick name

Jaju123 said:


> I cant get into the bios either. Does anyone have a solution? Not that amusing that this passed QC tbh.
> 
> EDIT: I managed to get into the BIOS through using windows troubleshooting, but neither mouse nor keyboard works in it so I cant change anything anyway xD


Have you tried other ports?

Also, you can unplug any and all drives to force the PC to boot into BIOS. In case you run into that situation again.


----------



## Jaju123

nick name said:


> Have you tried other ports?
> 
> Also, you can unplug any and all drives to force the PC to boot into BIOS. In case you run into that situation again.


I tried all the ports and to unplug all other USBs, but it didn't work in the BIOS or to get into the BIOS. Now my memory is at 2133 mhz... lol

Seems like these guys are having the same issue:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/c9o8yx/asus_crosshair_vii_hero_bios_2406_issues/


----------



## harderthanfire

For those looking to undervolt the 3900X I'm seeing much lower temps and higher boost with -0.1v compared to -0.05v. The -0.05v for me boosts much lower than -0.1v as well as being hotter!


----------



## nick name

harderthanfire said:


> For those looking to undervolt the 3900X I'm seeing much lower temps and higher boost with -0.1v compared to -0.05v. The -0.05v for me boosts much lower than -0.1v as well as being hotter!


Does that run AVX loads? Cinebench R20?


----------



## neikosr0x

harderthanfire said:


> For those looking to undervolt the 3900X I'm seeing much lower temps and higher boost with -0.1v compared to -0.05v. The -0.05v for me boosts much lower than -0.1v as well as being hotter!


i will try it in a few minutes im trying to get my ram working with lower latency lol 68ns atm 3600mhz cl16 i want to get something around 64ns xD


----------



## crakej

Jaju123 said:


> I tried all the ports and to unplug all other USBs, but it didn't work in the BIOS or to get into the BIOS. Now my memory is at 2133 mhz... lol
> 
> Seems like these guys are having the same issue:
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/c9o8yx/asus_crosshair_vii_hero_bios_2406_issues/


The mouse, and to a much lesser extent the keyboard problems are well known and reported. Other ASUS boards too.

Hopefully we will get updated soon!


----------



## Bart

nick name said:


> For regular PBO or PE Levels 1 - 3 you can use a pretty sizable negative VCORE offset. At least -.0500V and at most -.1000V offset.


+REP, thanks for the tip! I think these new BIOSes are very immature. We shouldn't have to use offsets, but in this case a -0.075V offset knocked the temps back down under 1.5V, more like 1.45V-1.46V now, sometimes lower. It didn't like -0.1V, so I dialed it back to -0.075, and it at least survives an R20 run. Further tinkering is required, and will probably be rendered useless once they get the BIOS / PBO stuff right.


----------



## majestynl

neikosr0x said:


> emmm, any solution for the bios not recognizing the keyboard when posting? i can't get into the bios  "Bios 2406"


Their is a bug in the bios probably. Use a PS/2 Keyboard/mouse at that moment..




Bart said:


> I'm probably misusing the terminology.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I'm talking about X470, and whatever thingy I'm setting to "level 3 (OC)" or "level 4 (OC)". So whatever that thing is.  For benching on the CH7 Hero with 2700X and 4x8GB memory, here's what I'm doing:
> 
> 1) set the memory to DOCP, 3200CL14,
> 2) loading the Stilt's "fast timing" memory profile, but then resetting the command rate to 2t (because 4x8GB, 1T is sketchy)
> 3) set that thingy that says Level 3 (OC)
> 
> That's it, everything else on auto. I've done NO tweaking at all on this stuff, because this boost seems to work *really* well. I'm not sure I even see in the point in manual OCing anymore. Must be getting old!
> 
> EDIT: Performance Enhancer it is! You'd think I'd learn to read in my old age, apologies for the mix up! I just did some quick testing with PE level 4, and while toasty, does appear to boost where I thought it USED to at level 3:





Spoiler



No problem  They try to make it plug and play yes. But their are still some things to play with !




Bart said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I just became convinced that PBO might be dangerous on X470 for older CPUs, LOL! I just did some quick tinkering in the BIOS, and this is kinda scary. In an effort to understand the difference between PE and PBO, I decided to set PE back to auto, and then via the new menu in the later CH7 BIOSes, I set PBO from Auto to Enabled. I then rebooted and fired up Cinebench R20.
> 
> 
> It scored badly, 4107, but more importantly is boosting the voltage WELL OVER 1.5V, in addition to hammering all the cores to near 4.35ghz:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And all I did was set performance enhancer back to "auto" and set PBO to "enabled". Am I being paranoid, or is that as scary as I think it is? Maybe AMD wants me to burn out my 2700x so I can upgrade.


I think you are getting paranoid. Let me try to clear it up. 4.35Ghz is not your all core boost as said before. Run CB while looking at Hwinfo. And check the "black marked rectangle" in screenshot below. While you are running CB Multicore test you will see all cores @ certain mhz. Thats the number you are searching for. The one you are looking are the peaks that a single core has reached ever  (4.35ghz in your screenshot)

1.5v is just for a small amount of time. Its totally not an issue. A core is boosting to a certain high voltage before it gets in sleep. And Hwinfo is not fast enough to measure it correctly! 



harderthanfire said:


> For those looking to undervolt the 3900X I'm seeing much lower temps and higher boost with -0.1v compared to -0.05v. The -0.05v for me boosts much lower than -0.1v as well as being hotter!


Will try with a 3700x and report back!


----------



## gupsterg

Does PBO overdrive work on R5 3600 with UEFI 2406 AEGSA 1.0.0.2, YES!


----------



## Bart

majestynl said:


> I think you are getting paranoid. Let me try to clear it up. 4.35Ghz is not your all core boost as said before. Run CB while looking at Hwinfo. And check the "black marked rectangle" in screenshot below. While you are running CB Multicore test you will see all cores @ certain mhz. Thats the number you are searching for. The one you are looking are the peaks that a single core has reached ever  (4.35ghz in your screenshot)
> 
> 1.5v is just for a small amount of time. Its totally not an issue. A core is boosting to a certain high voltage before it gets in sleep. And Hwinfo is not fast enough to measure it correctly!


Cool, now that I've run R20 while watching HWinfo64, I get it. According to that, I'm topping out at 4116+, but at obscene voltage. I think I'll disable PDO, go back to PE, and note the differences, especially in voltages. I'm learning a lot today! The big lesson I'm learning here is: wait for BIOS updates before getting paranoid. A lot is changing right now on X470 for obvious reasons.


----------



## harderthanfire

nick name said:


> Does that run AVX loads? Cinebench R20?



Cinebench R20 is fine, in fact my highest score is with the -0.1V offset. R15 score drops slightly though.


As for AVX loads AIDA 64 ray trace and photoworx benchmarks run fine too.


I am running "safe" ram timings/speed compared to most here of 3200mhz 16 but I only have medium quality B die not high 


I am running PBO with +200mhz and max on the limits though in this bios the PPT limit does not seem to set or report correctly.


----------



## gupsterg

Matisse Hypeship are coming to dock…



Spoiler


----------



## xeizo

Bart said:


> +REP, thanks for the tip! I think these new BIOSes are very immature. We shouldn't have to use offsets, but in this case a -0.075V offset knocked the temps back down under 1.5V, more like 1.45V-1.46V now, sometimes lower. It didn't like -0.1V, so I dialed it back to -0.075, and it at least survives an R20 run. Further tinkering is required, and will probably be rendered useless once they get the BIOS / PBO stuff right.


I've been running -0.0875V all the time, it started when still using the Prism. It kept it from ramping up and swooshing. Now I use a DRP4 but I kept the setting as it is cooler with not much performance regression. Around -0.1V and Windows will freeze.


----------



## nick name

Bart said:


> +REP, thanks for the tip! I think these new BIOSes are very immature. We shouldn't have to use offsets, but in this case a -0.075V offset knocked the temps back down under 1.5V, more like 1.45V-1.46V now, sometimes lower. It didn't like -0.1V, so I dialed it back to -0.075, and it at least survives an R20 run. Further tinkering is required, and will probably be rendered useless once they get the BIOS / PBO stuff right.


Well we've always used offsets and these latest BIOS versions have allowed us to use less voltage in many instances too so that's a plus. Before these comboPI AGESAs I couldn't use as high an offset as I do now.


----------



## nick name

harderthanfire said:


> Cinebench R20 is fine, in fact my highest score is with the -0.1V offset. R15 score drops slightly though.
> 
> 
> As for AVX loads AIDA 64 ray trace and photoworx benchmarks run fine too.
> 
> 
> I am running "safe" ram timings/speed compared to most here of 3200mhz 16 but I only have medium quality B die not high
> 
> 
> I am running PBO with +200mhz and max on the limits though in this bios the PPT limit does not seem to set or report correctly.


Well that is delightful to hear.


----------



## Bart

nick name said:


> Well we've always used offsets and these latest BIOS versions have allowed us to use less voltage in many instances too so that's a plus. Before these comboPI AGESAs I couldn't use as high an offset as I do now.


Oh don't get me wrong, having all these options is great. But it seems to me that if the PBO mechanism constantly asks for much higher voltage than required, it needs to be tuned a bit, that's all. I'm quite happy disabling it, and just running PE on level 3. It looks like I get close to the same performance at way less voltage and heat.


----------



## cheddle

im using a 3700x on bios 2406, im having loads of issues with POST code C5 on saving BIOS and on boot - the only way to resolve is to clear CMOS. is it recommended to go back to 2304 for now? I cant seem to set memory timings or set PBO +mhz and a whole range of other settings without getting a C5 code... 

I set some PBO settings in NBIO and ended up with a 'checksum fail' on post - never seen that one before...

This BIOS is TERRIBLE :-/


----------



## xeizo

cheddle said:


> im using a 3700x on bios 2406, im having loads of issues with POST code C5 on saving BIOS and on boot - the only way to resolve is to clear CMOS. is it recommended to go back to 2304 for now? I cant seem to set memory timings or set PBO +mhz and a whole range of other settings without getting a C5 code...
> 
> I set some PBO settings in NBIO and ended up with a 'checksum fail' on post - never seen that one before...
> 
> This BIOS is TERRIBLE :-/


A lot of users hitting the same wall, BOOT DRAM VOLTAGE is bugged and defaults to 1.2V, just change it to 1.35V and reboot will work fine.


----------



## neikosr0x

majestynl said:


> Their is a bug in the bios probably. Use a PS/2 Keyboard/mouse at that moment..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No problem  They try to make it plug and play yes. But their are still some things to play with !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are getting paranoid. Let me try to clear it up. 4.35Ghz is not your all core boost as said before. Run CB while looking at Hwinfo. And check the "black marked rectangle" in screenshot below. While you are running CB Multicore test you will see all cores @ certain mhz. Thats the number you are searching for. The one you are looking are the peaks that a single core has reached ever  (4.35ghz in your screenshot)
> 
> 1.5v is just for a small amount of time. Its totally not an issue. A core is boosting to a certain high voltage before it gets in sleep. And Hwinfo is not fast enough to measure it correctly!
> 
> 
> 
> Will try with a 3700x and report back!


In my case with the 3900x, if I go with undervolt -0.500v the CPU won't boost as high. But one thing it bugs me is that the CPU is constantly pushing a lot of volt always over 1.2v even at idling again pushing clocks around 4.2+. Now, there are new power plans with the latest chipset driver of which you can use one called Ryzen Power server plan but that one would just set the cpu to sleep like literally sleep hahaha, and it loses a lot of performance... But this thing only happens on Windows 1903, not 1803.


----------



## harderthanfire

neikosr0x said:


> In my case with the 3900x, if I go with undervolt -0.500v the CPU won't boost as high. But one thing it bugs me is that the CPU is constantly pushing a lot of volt always over 1.2v even at idling again pushing clocks around 4.2+. Now, there are new power plans with the latest chipset driver of which you can use one called Ryzen Power server plan but that one would just set the cpu to sleep like literally sleep hahaha, and it loses a lot of performance... But this thing only happens on Windows 1903, not 1803.



Sounds like it is due to this: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cbls9g/the_final_word_on_idle_voltages_for_3rd_gen_ryzen/


Undervolting by -0.5V is a lot, most people run between -0.05V and -0.1V. For me I got the best boost with -0.1V on my 3900X.


Also make sure you LLC/DIGI+ settings other than the undervolt are all set to auto - I had manual ones set from my 2700X and they caused problems in the VCORE not dropping when idle.


----------



## oreonutz

Here we go again! Had a lot of fun in these forums back at Gen Ryzen 1000 and 2000 Launch. Both of those times I had bought the new Crosshair Board with my new Chip, this time I am keeping the Crosshair VII Hero and dropping the 3900x in it (It gets delivered in about an hour) and Dropping my 2700x in my Crosshair VI Hero, at least for now. I have skimmed through the forum here, and glad to see a bunch of you guys doing the same. I just have a quick question.

With the 2700x in the C7H, I had my best results with Level 4 PE and a -.05v Offset on Voltage, and then tuning my Bdie Freq up to 3600 and getting my Timings as Low as humanly Possible. This allowed me to hit a 4.25 All Core, with Single Cores boosting to 4.4, and 4 Cores Boosting to 4.35. I also was able to use a Bclk of 100.4 to get just a little bit more out of it.

Is this the same method with the 3000 Series that works? I stopped upgrading my UEFI about 10/23/2018 with the 1002 UEFI because thats where I had the best PBO Performance and Memory Stability (Was able to keep my Memory OC even with 4 Dimms Filled), so I have not seen any of their newer UEFI Implementations, and just wondering if PE Still works the same? I know I also will have an F-Clock to play with as well, just wondering if the theory is the same for PBO OCing everything else.

Appreciate everyone's help! Happy OCing!!!


----------



## neikosr0x

harderthanfire said:


> Sounds like it is due to this: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cbls9g/the_final_word_on_idle_voltages_for_3rd_gen_ryzen/
> 
> 
> Undervolting by -0.5V is a lot, most people run between -0.05V and -0.1V. For me I got the best boost with -0.1V on my 3900X.
> 
> 
> Also make sure you LLC/DIGI+ settings other than the undervolt are all set to auto - I had manual ones set from my 2700X and they caused problems in the VCORE not dropping when idle.


my bad, I meant to say 0.0500 lol. Are you using BPO? or all stock?


----------



## oreonutz

Bart said:


> Cool, now that I've run R20 while watching HWinfo64, I get it. According to that, I'm topping out at 4116+, but at obscene voltage. I think I'll disable PDO, go back to PE, and note the differences, especially in voltages. I'm learning a lot today! The big lesson I'm learning here is: wait for BIOS updates before getting paranoid. A lot is changing right now on X470 for obvious reasons.


FYI. Performance Enhancer (PE) Is PBO Overclocking, Once you set the PE Above Level 2, it automatically turns PBO On and Sets the Limits. You can go into the CBS settings yourself and turn them off all you want, and your settings will just be ignored (Unless ASUS has changed this behavior in newer UEFI's). So Its still a good idea to use Offsets with Voltage when using PE. The good thing about using PE (Level 3 or 4) is it tells the chip to completely ignore the power calculation part of the equation for boosting, allowing you to sustain a higher PBO All Core OC, then with it off. I am hoping in the new UEFI's they allow you to do that without using PE, giving you a finer level of control, but I will know soon enough. (3900x arrives shortly)


----------



## neikosr0x

cheddle said:


> im using a 3700x on bios 2406, im having loads of issues with POST code C5 on saving BIOS and on boot - the only way to resolve is to clear CMOS. is it recommended to go back to 2304 for now? I cant seem to set memory timings or set PBO +mhz and a whole range of other settings without getting a C5 code...
> 
> I set some PBO settings in NBIO and ended up with a 'checksum fail' on post - never seen that one before...
> 
> This BIOS is TERRIBLE :-/


Had a similar issue, just set the desire max frequency for your ram. Then apply just the basic and safe timings eg: 16-16-16-16 leave everything auto, and then just change a few more settings till you get a decent latency. That's what I did but latency is not as good as I would like too. at the moment I'm at 3600mhz 14-15-15-15 30-48 358-256-168. 1.45volt remember to pair the infinity fabric clock to the same speed as the ram. i'm getting 67.8ns atm


----------



## lordzed83

Not had good play yet cause puttign second pc together but thats what i got atm. 3600 14/15/15/35


----------



## nick name

lordzed83 said:


> Not had good play yet cause puttign second pc together but thats what i got atm. 3600 14/15/15/35


Nooooooo! Not that 14-15 crap again. I thought the new IMC would handle 14-14-14-14 no problem. Tell me you have a weak RAM kit or that you were just being cautious. TELL ME!


----------



## kundica

I replaced my 2700x with a 3900x this afternoon and been doing some testing, mostly on memory. Tweaked my 4000CL17 kit to 3733 16-15-15-32 at 1.375v. Dealing with the even CAS is annoying. Memory got super hot but I don't have any direct air on it at the moment(I didn't reset HWinfo before testing the mem so some of the other temps are from benching my CPU and GPU). My system is custom a loop so I'll probably add a few fans at the bottom intake to blow some cool air past the RAM.

Boost clocks on my system seem alright. If I run the CPU at Auto voltage it'll boost on some cores to 4.65 but I prefer to run an offset right now due to heat. I've tested between .1, .05, and .025 negative offsets so far. .05 seems like a good compromise for now with decent boost on single core and mitigating temps.


----------



## harderthanfire

neikosr0x said:


> my bad, I meant to say 0.0500 lol. Are you using BPO? or all stock?



I'm using PBO +200mhz and all the limits raised.


----------



## bonomork

*F4-3200C14-8GTZRX*

I need some suggestion to get my Geil memory stable @ 3400C14

Currently my rig is stable @3333CL14 (XMP 3200) and frequency 3333MHz

I've tried 3400MHz but system freeze even if I can bench.

What I can do ? I would like to mantain CAS 14.


----------



## CCoR

Bart said:


> Unless HWinfo is lying, I'm sure. It tops out all 8 cores, it's just that now instead of 4.35Ghz, it's boosting to 4.166ghz. The newer BIOS changes to PBO are definitely at play here. More experimentation is needed. System is underwater (EK monoblock), FYI.
> 
> EDIT: I should clarify something, I'm going by HWinfo64s max boost clock during benching. So I mean at some point, every core had hit 4,374mhz. It might not mean all of em were pegged at exactly the same time, but I'm assuming Cinebench (the new one) or 3dmark's CPU test would peg all 8 cores.


2700x here and after latest string of bios updates, my all core boosting 4.35 is no longer attainable. Its now between 4.17-.23


----------



## gupsterg

kundica said:


> I replaced my 2700x with a 3900x this afternoon and been doing some testing, mostly on memory. Tweaked my 4000CL17 kit to 3733 16-15-15-32 at 1.375v. Dealing with the even CAS is annoying.


Nice  , Disable Gear Down Mode to use odd CAS.


----------



## xeizo

bonomork said:


> I need some suggestion to get my Geil memory stable @ 3400C14
> 
> Currently my rig is stable @3333CL14 (XMP 3200) and frequency 3333MHz
> 
> I've tried 3400MHz but system freeze even if I can bench.
> 
> What I can do ? I would like to mantain CAS 14.


I don't know, I have dual rank 0.938 C15 modules(2x16GB) so c14 isn't even an option for me at those frequencies, but this is benchmark stable at 3400MHz. The modules reach 45C after 5 min memory torture test at 1.42V VDIMM. Maybe you could use as a base to work yourself down, as you have better clocking sticks than mine. I'm happy I reach any frequencies at all with dual rank sticks, and which are tuned for Intel systems. Those used to not even boot on early Ryzen systems. And I seem to have a quite bad IMC as I need lots of VDIMM.


----------



## neikosr0x

lordzed83 said:


> Not had good play yet cause puttign second pc together but thats what i got atm. 3600 14/15/15/35


What memory are you using, maybe we could share timing to help each other finding lower timings.


----------



## neikosr0x

nick name said:


> Nooooooo! Not that 14-15 crap again. I thought the new IMC would handle 14-14-14-14 no problem. Tell me you have a weak RAM kit or that you were just being cautious. TELL ME!


Believe me, it is far better than before for me 14-14-14-14 gave me errors, but it booted with no problems also I left everything auto so that might be the problem, I didn't want to spend crazy time on it so I went to play it safe and tried 14-15-15-15/30-48 and it is working perfectly fine. today I might spend some more time to get, I will also try to clock it a bit higher. This is my kit G.Skill F4-3600C16-8GTZR


----------



## Jaju123

I got another mouse to work in the BIOS, lol, but no keyboard, so I cant change voltages etc. I think. Does anyone know if you can change voltages with only a mouse? xD

My 3700x comes later today and would ideally like to see how it works with my 3600 cl15 kit...


----------



## lordzed83

nick name said:


> Nooooooo! Not that 14-15 crap again. I thought the new IMC would handle 14-14-14-14 no problem. Tell me you have a weak RAM kit or that you were just being cautious. TELL ME!


Depends if You consider 3733cl17 memory kit a Crap one.
@neikosr0x thats what I set up this morning passed 400% memtest my memory usually faills with errors around 170% when its not right
Soc 1.1 VDDG 1.05


----------



## neikosr0x

lordzed83 said:


> Depends if You consider 3733cl17 memory kit a Crap one.
> 
> @neikosr0x thats what I set up this morning passed 400% memtest my memory usually faills with errors around 170% when its not right
> Soc 1.1 VDDG 1.05


For some reason, if I try booting the RAM higher than 3600 "3800 per say" it boots but the boards still boots at 3600 lol... any ideas?


----------



## cheddle

harderthanfire said:


> I'm using PBO +200mhz and all the limits raised.


I havnt had much luck getting that set... did you do so via the BIOS AMD CBS menus? I cant seem to get PPT higher than stock and find I get stuck with C5 if I try to set a +mhz PBO :-/


----------



## cheddle

My efforts so far with Hynix CJR dual-rank 2x16gb sticks... my AIO had a leak so im on the Wraith Spire. CPU is stock speed.

1.166v SOC 
1.050v VDDG
1.439v DRAM

The 3700x certainly does take a hit in terms of memory bandwidth... 

I am yet to try 3733mhz, will try when I have some more time. 

timings are all manual but not super duper tight.


----------



## kundica

gupsterg said:


> Nice  , Disable Gear Down Mode to use odd CAS.


I tried when I was working on the timings yesterday but it didn't do anything.


----------



## neikosr0x

Well managed to, boot at 3800 so far I found stability at 3800 cl16-16-16-16 /36-58 1.48-volt HWinfo reports 4.61-volt. 65.6ns


----------



## majestynl

kundica said:


> I replaced my 2700x with a 3900x this afternoon and been doing some testing,
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> mostly on memory. Tweaked my 4000CL17 kit to 3733 16-15-15-32 at 1.375v. Dealing with the even CAS is annoying. Memory got super hot but I don't have any direct air on it at the moment(I didn't reset HWinfo before testing the mem so some of the other temps are from benching my CPU and GPU). My system is custom a loop so I'll probably add a few fans at the bottom intake to blow some cool air past the RAM.
> 
> Boost clocks on my system seem alright. If I run the CPU at Auto voltage it'll boost on some cores to 4.65 but I prefer to run an offset right now due to heat. I've tested between .1, .05, and .025 negative offsets so far. .05 seems like a good compromise for now with decent boost on single core and mitigating temps.


Nice Aida results ! Blowing air past the ram helped me a lot on the older system. Did push the limits there...anyways.. Have fun playing around 



Jaju123 said:


> I got another mouse to work in the BIOS, lol, but no keyboard, so I cant change voltages etc. I think. Does anyone know if you can change voltages with only a mouse? xD
> 
> My 3700x comes later today and would ideally like to see how it works with my 3600 cl15 kit...


Personally never had that issue. You have tried all USB combinations on the back right? Cant say which one is from the CPU directly. But you can try that one!
Anyways.. you can also play with voltages in the OS (e.g.TurboV Core) till your new CPU arrives 




lordzed83 said:


> Spoiler


Nice!



neikosr0x said:


> For some reason, if I try booting the RAM higher than 3600 "3800 per say" it boots but the boards still boots at 3600 lol... any ideas?


Thats strange, if i cant boot with a certain setting i got stuck on a weird Qcode  btw: Are you using MemRetry (On top op Timings page) ? I always set that to 5!


----------



## Gettz8488

I’m heavily leaning on getting this board over the X570 do to the chipset fan. I have a question regarding ez flash I currently don’t have a ryzen processor and plan on going 3900X can I ez flash the newest bios without a cpu? Question 2. What are the major issues you guys are seeing right now with this board and the ryzen 3000 series?


----------



## majestynl

Gettz8488 said:


> I’m heavily leaning on getting this board over the X570 do to the chipset fan. I have a question regarding ez flash I currently don’t have a ryzen processor and plan on going 3900X can I ez flash the newest bios without a cpu? Question 2. What are the major issues you guys are seeing right now with this board and the ryzen 3000 series?


Understand your point about choosing a x470 vs the x570!
EZ Flash can only by used when booted..in bios! So you need to use the USB Flashback port on the back I/O side!
Currently al bios versions are not mature with new Agesa/Features. Same for x570. Personally i didn't found real big issues so far. Some users have issues with Mouse/Keyboard in Bios. And some having booting issues while trying to play with settings in bios. Running fine and definitely higher memory speeds with new Ryzen.


----------



## neikosr0x

So far this is what i got.


----------



## lordzed83

neikosr0x said:


> So far this is what i got.


Well with my mem kits I need gear down enabled at 3800cl16 or i get errors heh


----------



## nick name

neikosr0x said:


> So far this is what i got.


Any chance of getting that tFAW down?


----------



## neikosr0x

nick name said:


> Any chance of getting that tFAW down?


Just tried that from 40 to 30, and failed within the first 4 mins of mem test . The improvements are as shown.


----------



## nick name

neikosr0x said:


> Just tried that from 40 to 30, and failed within the first 4 mins of mem test . The improvements are as shown.


What speed can you run with a 16 tFAW?


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> @mtrai
> 
> UEFI 2406 seems to have the sections/data which would get removed when on UEFI 2304 I'd save it in AMIBCP and get message "Saving secure capsule as unsigned". Not sure what is going on...
> 
> +rep for the tip on changing "up the tree" to user.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 278102
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now the options do come up in search.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 278104
> 
> 
> 
> 
> While back I tested editing VDDSOC FSW, link. I even modded and tried 250kHz-1000kHz range, worked in the way of flashing/saving, etc. As no oscope can not confirm changes take, have you any info that the VRM controller can support this?


God can't believe I am having to ask this can you post the modded bios. I am going through *ell with mine at the moment.


----------



## oreonutz

Gettz8488 said:


> I’m heavily leaning on getting this board over the X570 do to the chipset fan. I have a question regarding ez flash I currently don’t have a ryzen processor and plan on going 3900X can I ez flash the newest bios without a cpu? Question 2. What are the major issues you guys are seeing right now with this board and the ryzen 3000 series?


About to drop my 3900x in my Crosshair 7 Hero (x470) now, just finished up with the Benchmarks for comparison. 

As @majestynl Mentioned, the Feature you are looking for on any ASUS Board you want to flash a new UEFI too without a CPU installed is Called "USB Flashback". This board, the Crosshair 7 Hero, does have that feature. So to answer your question simply, yes you can easily flash to a Ryzen 3000 Supported UEFI without a CPU Installed.

Some things to keep in mind. Although I am pretty sure it does work these days, out of habit from the older days, its always best to format the Flash Drive you are using to store the UEFI on as Fat32. Put the New UEFI on the Root of the Drive. MAKE SURE to unzip the downloaded UEFI, and rename the file to "C7H.cap". Also take note of which USB Port is Labeled "USB Flashback" on the IO Shield, and make sure to plug the Flash Drive containing the new UEFI into that port.

After this, the power supply just needs to be plugged into the wall with its power supply switch turned on, but the computer itself off, hold the USB Flashback Button down for 3 Seconds then let go, The Button you just pressed will now start flashing, approximately 3 to 5 minutes later it will finish flashing, your UEFI is now flashed, you can turn on the PC with the Ryzen 3000 CPU Installed. Hope this helps.


----------



## chakku

I'm surprised people don't just use flashback for every BIOS update. As soon as you put the file on your flash drive, rename the CAP file correctly and shutdown your PC you just plug it in the right port, press the flashback button and wait until the activity LED stops flashing/is off. It's very set & forget.


----------



## westk

What are the benefits over EZ flash?


----------



## lordzed83

westk said:


> What are the benefits over EZ flash?


It totally wipes everything. Think of it as service mode flash


----------



## oreonutz

chakku said:


> I'm surprised people don't just use flashback for every BIOS update. As soon as you put the file on your flash drive, rename the CAP file correctly and shutdown your PC you just plug it in the right port, press the flashback button and wait until the activity LED stops flashing/is off. It's very set & forget.


100 Percent agree. I actually leave a Flash Drive in that port permanently. So its there to save New UEFI's to in the event I need to flash. It is the cleanest way ASUS Offers to flash the UEFI too. The only way to get a cleaner Flash is to hook up an EPROM Reader/Writer to the chip directly and Delete the Flash then Write the New UEFI yourself, but that can be a hassle (Programming the Serial Number and UUID, not to mention getting a good connection to the EPROM if the Chip isn't removable), so I definitely go with USB Flashback almost 100% of the time!


----------



## oreonutz

westk said:


> What are the benefits over EZ flash?


As @lordzed83 Mentioned, It performs a Low Level wipe on the old UEFI, flashing in the new one, so you end up with the freshest UEFI Possible from the Provided methods. Sometimes (A lot of the times with these early UEFI's) when using EZ Flash you end up with corrupt parts of the UEFI that end up creating weird behaviors. Like for instance, early on in the life of this Board some of us experienced problems with our Fan Controllers acting erratically (they would go from the PWM Adjusting the Fans Correctly, to just no longer working until a full reboot), and it ended up being UEFI Corruption related. We would use USB Flashback after completely draining the caps from the board (and removing the CMOS Battery), and it would end up fixing the issue. So its just all around a cleaner and more effective way to flash your board.


----------



## westk

Thanks guys, everyday learning


----------



## Rusakova

westk said:


> What are the benefits over EZ flash?


You can also flash older BIOS revisions using Flashback.


----------



## chakku

oreonutz said:


> 100 Percent agree. I actually leave a Flash Drive in that port permanently. So its there to save New UEFI's to in the event I need to flash. It is the cleanest way ASUS Offers to flash the UEFI too. The only way to get a cleaner Flash is to hook up an EPROM Reader/Writer to the chip directly and Delete the Flash then Write the New UEFI yourself, but that can be a hassle (Programming the Serial Number and UUID, not to mention getting a good connection to the EPROM if the Chip isn't removable), so I definitely go with USB Flashback almost 100% of the time!


That's a good idea actually, I don't know why I don't leave mine in as well - I don't use that USB port for anything else.


----------



## narukun

oreonutz said:


> As @lordzed83 Mentioned, It performs a Low Level wipe on the old UEFI, flashing in the new one, so you end up with the freshest UEFI Possible from the Provided methods. Sometimes (A lot of the times with these early UEFI's) when using EZ Flash you end up with corrupt parts of the UEFI that end up creating weird behaviors. Like for instance, early on in the life of this Board some of us experienced problems with our Fan Controllers acting erratically (they would go from the PWM Adjusting the Fans Correctly, to just no longer working until a full reboot), and it ended up being UEFI Corruption related. We would use USB Flashback after completely draining the caps from the board (and removing the CMOS Battery), and it would end up fixing the issue. So its just all around a cleaner and more effective way to flash your board.


Do you need to drain the caps and remove the CMOS battery before using bios flashback?


----------



## mtrai

Anyone else have the FCLK option in their bios on bios 2406 (C7H WIFI)?


----------



## gupsterg

mtrai said:


> God can't believe I am having to ask this can you post the modded bios. I am going through *ell with mine at the moment.


Sent via PM, based on what Elmor & The Stilt stated it's not wise to tweak the FSW in UEFI.

Elmor confirmed by using a oscope that the 400kHz-600kHz range is indeed working for VDDSOC, so the help string is wrong for min/max.



mtrai said:


> Anyone else have the FCLK option in their bios on bios 2406 (C7H WIFI)?


Yes when using Matisse, not when had Pinnacle Ridge on that UEFI.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> Anyone else have the FCLK option in their bios on bios 2406 (C7H WIFI)?


I don't. Have you tried doing anything with it yet? Be funny if it did something on the 2700X.


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> I don't. Have you tried doing anything with it yet? Be funny if it did something on the 2700X.


I am not even sure how to begin testing, as I just got around to installing 2604 today with my first mod pass. So I am guessing it showing due to my mod. I was not expecting it to show.


----------



## gupsterg

kundica said:


> I tried when I was working on the timings yesterday but it didn't do anything.


Odd. Is working for me as intended on R5 3600.



mtrai said:


> Anyone else have the FCLK option in their bios on bios 2406 (C7H WIFI)?
> 
> 
> 
> nick name said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't. Have you tried doing anything with it yet? Be funny if it did something on the 2700X.
Click to expand...

If it is then CPU-Z Memory tab NB Frequency will change.

For example:-



Spoiler














On Matisse NB Frequency in CPU-Z is FCLK (ie IF).

*** edit ***

Johan45 has explained what occurred in CPU-Z and I misinterpreted  .

NB Frequency in CPU-Z reflects UCLK, once I forced FCLK 1:1 with MEMCLK the UCLK was matching.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> I am not even sure how to begin testing, as I just got around to installing 2604 today with my first mod pass. So I am guessing it showing due to my mod. I was not expecting it to show.


I'd try dropping it a little and checking in CPU-Z as mentioned above.


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> Odd. Is working for me as intended on R5 3600.
> 
> 
> 
> If it is then CPU-Z Memory tab NB Frequency will change.
> 
> On Matisse NB Frequency in CPU-Z is FCLK (ie IF).


Just tested it with a number of changes and restarts...even though it can be made to show...it does not work on the 2000 series. Oh well.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> Just tested it with a number of changes and restarts...even though it can be made to show...it does not work on the 2000 series. Oh well.


Damn, that would have been fun.


----------



## majestynl

mtrai said:


> Just tested it with a number of changes and restarts...even though it can be made to show...it does not work on the 2000 series. Oh well.


Good morning


----------



## kundica

gupsterg said:


> Odd. Is working for me as intended on R5 3600.


You're right, I was misconfiguring it. Been a while since I messed around with this stuff. Running more tests now.

Sent from my LG V30 using Tapatalk


----------



## lordzed83

Sadny not AVX stable for AVX i need drop to like 4250. but for my uses 4350 should work from what iw tested. 

New memory kit tomorrow so hopefull i can tweek there and not run this kit on 1.46 I'm hoping for same speed but no geardown or tighter timings and more like 1.4 volts


----------



## crakej

mtrai said:


> I am not even sure how to begin testing, as I just got around to installing 2604 today with my first mod pass. So I am guessing it showing due to my mod. I was not expecting it to show.


You mean 2406 right? Or do you have a secret bios?? lol


----------



## Gettz8488

How are idle temps looking for you guys? My cpu just shipped won’t be here until next week but I see people are idling at 50C is this normal or is it monitoring temps causing it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## MrYoke

So when use userbenchmark, I noticed @ 32mb that there is a bit of a hill there. Is this considered normal?

https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/18290829


----------



## crakej

MrYoke said:


> So when use userbenchmark, I noticed @ 32mb that there is a bit of a hill there. Is this considered normal?
> 
> https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/18290829


Yep - I have 16GB, have the same 'hill' as you starting just after 8GB... https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/16682359


----------



## MrYoke

crakej said:


> Yep - I have 16GB, have the same 'hill' as you starting just after 8GB... https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/16682359


Well, not really the hill but the "bump" where it then curves down after 32mb.


----------



## LePr3

nick name said:


> Does anyone use the DRAM Training Control After Training? It doesn't seem to work on 2406.
> 
> Edit:
> Same thing on 2304. Am I doing something wrong? Are they supposed to be hex values?


 I do. They're supposed to be hex values. Most work, some don't. For whatever reason, these timings (tCL, tRCWR/RD, tRP, tRAS, tRC, and tWR, ProcODT, MemFreq) don't take hold, but the rest do. I'd take a a few printscreens, but I'm not sure how to do so from within the BIOS. I leave the most of the actual DRAM menu on Auto now with those exceptions above as it fills correctly from the training menu. [EDIT=Figured it out]


Spoiler



























Also, for those who keep experiencing multiple motherboard resets after a cold boot (supposedly memory training) enabling everything within 
the MBIST test menu and selecting Data Eye prevents that. 1st bootup always works, and I've found it prevents POST-to-POST memory errors - when it's stable one POST, but unstable on another. Enabling that fixed that annoyance for me.


Spoiler


----------



## nick name

LePr3 said:


> I do. They're supposed to be hex values. Most work, some don't. For whatever reason, these timings (tCL, tRCWR/RD, tRP, tRAS, tRC, and tWR, ProcODT, MemFreq) don't take hold, but the rest do. I'd take a a few printscreens, but I'm not sure how to do so from within the BIOS. I leave the most of the actual DRAM menu on Auto now with those exceptions above as it fills correctly from the training menu. [EDIT=Figured it out]
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, for those who keep experiencing multiple motherboard resets after a cold boot (supposedly memory training) enabling everything within
> the MBIST test menu and selecting Data Eye prevents that. 1st bootup always works, and I've found it prevents POST-to-POST memory errors - when it's stable one POST, but unstable on another. Enabling that fixed that annoyance for me.
> 
> 
> Spoiler



Ok, setting everything in MBIST did NOT actually set things for me. And what are the hex values for After Training?

Edit:
Added the NOT


----------



## oreonutz

narukun said:


> Do you need to drain the caps and remove the CMOS battery before using bios flashback?


Sorry just now checked the forum again and saw your question. No that is not a requirement at all. That is just recommended when trying to clear out corruption from the UEFI, 99 percent of the time though you are just trying a different UEFI, not trying to fix corruption, and in those cases draining the caps or removing the CMOS battery is not necessary.


----------



## harderthanfire

Gettz8488 said:


> How are idle temps looking for you guys? My cpu just shipped won’t be here until next week but I see people are idling at 50C is this normal or is it monitoring temps causing it?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro



I was idling at around 50C but tweaked my watercooling setup and now idling at around 40C, tops out after a 30 min Aida64 stress test at 77C based on a case ambient of 34C. That's with watercooling with pump on max, low noise fans on 90% on a 240mm rad.


Have to be super careful when monitoring idle temps as you can cause it to start boosting the cores, Ryzen master doesn't seem to trigger the boost as much so I am using that for idle temps. Load temps are not as hard to measure.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

https://www.computerbase.de/2019-07/asus-mainboard-x470-b450-pcie-4.0/

PCI-E 4.0 for x470 boards from asus !!!!!

https://pics.computerbase.de/8/8/5/1/2/2-1080.204a3097.jpg

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## LePr3

nick name said:


> Ok, setting everything in MBIST did actually set things for me. And what are the hex values for After Training?


Just the usual hex values which will correspond to real numbers. Ignore the 'h' on the end for dropdown lists.
e.g '0Eh' in a dropdown box refers to 14. Just remove the h.

Hexs start from 0 count up to 9 like normal numbers, before becoming letters. They go up to 'F' before resetting back to zero. Think of A,B,C,D,E,F as 10,11,12,13,14,15 'normal' numbers. Then they roll over and start again. e.g after F --> 10, 11, 12, 13 etc.
'10' = 16.

It's easier to visualize on this this hex sheet. Just match the number you're after 'DEC' to the corresponding 'HEX' value. https://ascii.cl/conversion.htm


----------



## Jaju123

Gettz8488 said:


> How are idle temps looking for you guys? My cpu just shipped won’t be here until next week but I see people are idling at 50C is this normal or is it monitoring temps causing it?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


My 3700x boosts if I even move the mouse. If I dont do anything then it settles around 35C, otherwise it goes up to 50C. With corsair h150i pro.


----------



## VPII

Taken that stock of the Ryzen 9 3900x in South Africa is not available with no eta available, I decided to update my order and use some of the funds for a Ryzen 5 3600 just to get my system working in proper order. Ill test tonight as Ill pick up the processor in an hour or so and report back.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## crakej

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> https://www.computerbase.de/2019-07/asus-mainboard-x470-b450-pcie-4.0/
> 
> PCI-E 4.0 for x470 boards from asus !!!!!
> 
> https://pics.computerbase.de/8/8/5/1/2/2-1080.204a3097.jpg
> 
> Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


Can't see why CH7 wouldn't be able to support PCIE 4 GPU.... it's closer to cpu than the M.2 slot.

Thanks for sharing.


----------



## crakej

LePr3 said:


> I do. They're supposed to be hex values. Most work, some don't. For whatever reason, these timings (tCL, tRCWR/RD, tRP, tRAS, tRC, and tWR, ProcODT, MemFreq) don't take hold, but the rest do. I'd take a a few printscreens, but I'm not sure how to do so from within the BIOS. I leave the most of the actual DRAM menu on Auto now with those exceptions above as it fills correctly from the training menu. [EDIT=Figured it out]
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, for those who keep experiencing multiple motherboard resets after a cold boot (supposedly memory training) enabling everything within
> the MBIST test menu and selecting Data Eye prevents that. 1st bootup always works, and I've found it prevents POST-to-POST memory errors - when it's stable one POST, but unstable on another. Enabling that fixed that annoyance for me.
> 
> 
> Spoiler


But what do these setting actually do?


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

crakej said:


> Can't see why CH7 wouldn't be able to support PCIE 4 GPU.... it's closer to cpu than the M.2 slot.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for sharing.


edit:12:30
i got it wrong! no pcie4.0 for CH7 which is sad. so i also got a x470 TUF and that thing gets it? *** is wrong with asus ?

https://pics.computerbase.de/8/8/5/1/2/1-1080.4df422bd.jpg

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## neikosr0x

Jaju123 said:


> My 3700x boosts if I even move the mouse. If I dont do anything then it settles around 35C, otherwise it goes up to 50C. With corsair h150i pro.


check if enabling PBO + OC 200+ solves it. When i started using the 3900x i went straight to do that and i was getting lower temps with it enabled than with stock settings on. Now i came back to stock settings and my temps are higher.


----------



## Jaju123

neikosr0x said:


> check if enabling PBO + OC 200+ solves it. When i started using the 3900x i went straight to do that and i was getting lower temps with it enabled than with stock settings on. Now i came back to stock settings and my temps are higher.


I can try - in the advanced tab, then AMD overclocking settings you mean?


----------



## gupsterg

Just a heads up to fellow tinkers.

Do not enable ABL Console Out Control.



Spoiler














I got attracted to it due to the PMU entry there, enabling it made my board stick at POST with black screen. Even doing "SAFEBOOT", "RETRY" or "CMOS_CLR" did not get normal POSTing back. I had to reflash UEFI via flashback to recover functionality.


----------



## Jaju123

Btw to those with keyboard problems on the latest bios, I fixed it on my corsair keyboard by enabling some kind of compatability mode by holding down F1 key and the "windows lock" key on the top right of the keyboard together for 3 seconds. Upon release the scroll lock light will be flashing and it'll work to get into the BIOS. That's on my Corsair Strafe RGB Silent keyboard.


----------



## neikosr0x

Jaju123 said:


> I can try - in the advanced tab, then AMD overclocking settings you mean?


Yes or through the Ryzen master app, both would work.


----------



## Hale59

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> edit:12:30
> i got it wrong! no pcie4.0 for CH7 which is sad. so i also got a x470 TUF and that thing gets it? *** is wrong with asus ?
> 
> https://pics.computerbase.de/8/8/5/1/2/1-1080.4df422bd.jpg
> 
> Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


That's what I tried to show earlier
https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-697.html#post28035378


----------



## gupsterg

gupsterg said:


> If it is then CPU-Z Memory tab NB Frequency will change.
> 
> For example:-
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 279376
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Matisse NB Frequency in CPU-Z is FCLK (ie IF).
> 
> *** edit ***
> 
> Johan45 has explained what occurred in CPU-Z and I misinterpreted  .
> 
> NB Frequency in CPU-Z reflects UCLK, once I forced FCLK 1:1 with MEMCLK the UCLK was matching.
> 
> 
> 
> mtrai said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just tested it with a number of changes and restarts...even though it can be made to show...it does not work on the 2000 series. Oh well.
Click to expand...

I updated my post, Johan45 has pointed it out my mistake via PM, sorry guys  .

I was gonna PM @Mumak, but may as well ask here. I was wondering Martin if on Matisse you are able to show more of these clock domains? ie FCLK, UCLK 



gupsterg said:


> Odd. Is working for me as intended on R5 3600.
> 
> 
> kundica said:
> 
> 
> 
> You're right, I was misconfiguring it. Been a while since I messed around with this stuff. Running more tests now.
Click to expand...

Cool, just as headsup that another forum member pointed out to me from my data shares.

CLDO_VDDP when left on [Auto] and I set 3666MHz MEMCLK & FCLK is going to ~1.1V when it should be ~0.9V AFAIK.

You guys may recall DRAM update post on AMD Community and The Stilt stated same in C6H OC thread:-



> Voltage for the DDR4 PHY on the SoC. Somewhat counterintuitively, lowering VDDP can often be more beneficial for stability than raising CLDO_VDDP. Advanced overclockers should also know that altering CLDO_VDDP can move or resolve memory holes. Small changes to VDDP can have a big effect, and VDDP cannot not be set to a value greater than VDIMM-0.1V (not to exceed 1.05V). A cold reboot is required if you alter this voltage.


Hopefully The Stilt will give guidance here where I have asked.


----------



## Gettz8488

harderthanfire said:


> I was idling at around 50C but tweaked my watercooling setup and now idling at around 40C, tops out after a 30 min Aida64 stress test at 77C based on a case ambient of 34C. That's with watercooling with pump on max, low noise fans on 90% on a 240mm rad.
> 
> 
> Have to be super careful when monitoring idle temps as you can cause it to start boosting the cores, Ryzen master doesn't seem to trigger the boost as much so I am using that for idle temps. Load temps are not as hard to measure.




Thanks for the reply those idle temps are gonna drive me nuts when I build my system lol. And I don’t have a custom loop I use nh d15. Knowing myself I’ll probably try to under volt or use an all core manual OC what all core have you guys been seeing with the 3900?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## lordzed83

new toys are in


----------



## majestynl

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> edit:12:30
> i got it wrong! no pcie4.0 for CH7 which is sad. so i also got a x470 TUF and that thing gets it? *** is wrong with asus ?
> 
> https://pics.computerbase.de/8/8/5/1/2/1-1080.4df422bd.jpg
> 
> Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


HUH....
Check elmor's post :

https://www.overclock.net/forum/28033224-post34.html



neikosr0x said:


> check if enabling PBO + OC 200+ solves it. When i started using the 3900x i went straight to do that and i was getting lower temps with it enabled than with stock settings on. Now i came back to stock settings and my temps are higher.


Dunno if we can fix that. AMD stated even sensor polling from HwInfo can fluctuate/boost the clocks shortly.




gupsterg said:


> Just a heads up to fellow tinkers.
> 
> Do not enable ABL Console Out Control.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 279478
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I got attracted to it due to the PMU entry there, enabling it made my board stick at POST with black screen. Even doing "SAFEBOOT", "RETRY" or "CMOS_CLR" did not get normal POSTing back. I had to reflash UEFI via flashback to recover functionality.


Thanks for the warning... 



gupsterg said:


> Hopefully The Stilt will give guidance here where I have asked.


Will follow that post. CLDO_VDDP is always been very sensitive 



lordzed83 said:


> new toys are in
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Good luck hope you get good results with low CL! 
Currently i have the Gskills F4-4133C19D installed. Will play with my CL14's 3200 soon. Looks like those are better binned then the 4133's!


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> You mean 2406 right? Or do you have a secret bios?? lol


Yeah 2406 but yes slighty modded


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

majestynl said:


> HUH....
> 
> Check elmor's post :
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/28033224-post34.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dunno if we can fix that. AMD stated even sensor polling from HwInfo can fluctuate/boost the clocks shortly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for the warning...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will follow that post. CLDO_VDDP is always been very sensitive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good luck hope you get good results with low CL!
> 
> Currently i have the Gskills F4-4133C19D installed. Will play with my CL14's 3200 soon. Looks like those are better binned then the 4133's!


i cant See the Post from elmor on this thread you posted for me ,btw thread is from 2004 ...

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## gilljoy

Anyone had this issue?

Sitting at idle, the voltage is sitting at 1.46 constantly on the cpu & at idle I'm sitting at 4.3Ghz. Temps are sitting at 50C and the cooler is going at 2000rpm.

Running the Ryzen balanced performance plan as recommended but it doesn't ever seem to clock down

Latest chipset driver installed and windows updated,.


----------



## Johan45

lordzed83 said:


> Sadny not AVX stable for AVX i need drop to like 4250. but for my uses 4350 should work from what iw tested.
> 
> New memory kit tomorrow so hopefull i can tweek there and not run this kit on 1.46 I'm hoping for same speed but no geardown or tighter timings and more like 1.4 volts


I just want to add here that pushing the IF/Mem controller past 1800 can cause performance drops in multi-thread operations. The IF has error correction and if a bit unstable your scores will drop.
This is the same benchmark, same core speed but 3200 CL14 FlareX at XMP. Notice the difference in scores it hit 7699. I'm also testing RAM/IF speed Vs core speed and voltage needed. I did my first round of OC with 3600 and this one at 3200 mem appears to need less voltage. I haven't found my OC limit yet just wanted to interject that high RAM speed may not hel performance when running 1:1


----------



## Mumak

gupsterg said:


> I updated my post, Johan45 has pointed it out my mistake via PM, sorry guys  .
> 
> I was gonna PM @Mumak, but may as well ask here. I was wondering Martin if on Matisse you are able to show more of these clock domains? ie FCLK, UCLK


I'm not sure if CPU-Z is really able to read FCLK and the value you see really represents it.
HWiNFO is (was) able to read FCLK on Matisse for quite some time, but you most likely won't see this info.
The problem here is that the method used to measure FCLK can be locked by AMD. And as you would guess it, they do lock it on most CPUs. I have seen some earlier parts where it wasn't locked and worked, but all recent ones I've see are locked.
I have asked whether there's any particular reason not to allow FCLK measuring (other that trying to hide something), but obviously haven't got a response. We have also requested AMD to unlock this method, but they didn't do so yet.


----------



## gupsterg

@Johan45

+rep for shares  .

Last night did some 3733MHz 1:1 MEMCLK & FCLK testing 400% was best I got in RT. I'm just amazed I can run 3600MHz C15 @ 1.355V on Matisse, needed ~1.385V on PR with same mobo/RAM. Even if say the higher RAM/IF on lengthy test proves to be issue and say see performance loss from error correction as you point out, I think if I got say 3600MHz C14 1T with tight subs I'll be grinning ear to ear.



Mumak said:


> I'm not sure if CPU-Z is really able to read FCLK and the value you see really represents it.
> HWiNFO is (was) able to read FCLK on Matisse for quite some time, but you most likely won't see this info.
> The problem here is that the method used to measure FCLK can be locked by AMD. And as you would guess it, they do lock it on most CPUs. I have seen some earlier parts where it wasn't locked and worked, but all recent ones I've see are locked.
> I have asked whether there's any particular reason not to allow FCLK measuring (other that trying to hide something), but obviously haven't got a response. We have also requested AMD to unlock this method, but they didn't do so yet.


+rep for info and swift reply  , let's hope AMD sort unlock, as it's just nice to stick to one tool showing all.

My bad, as Johan45 pointed out it in PM to me, CPU-Z NB Frequency is seeming like UCLK from tests and info he has.


----------



## Jaju123

gilljoy said:


> Anyone had this issue?
> 
> Sitting at idle, the voltage is sitting at 1.46 constantly on the cpu & at idle I'm sitting at 4.3Ghz. Temps are sitting at 50C and the cooler is going at 2000rpm.
> 
> Running the Ryzen balanced performance plan as recommended but it doesn't ever seem to clock down
> 
> Latest chipset driver installed and windows updated,.


Check using only Ryzen Master, as the other programme's polling causes ryzen to boost


----------



## Jaju123

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> edit:12:30
> i got it wrong! no pcie4.0 for CH7 which is sad. so i also got a x470 TUF and that thing gets it? *** is wrong with asus ?
> 
> https://pics.computerbase.de/8/8/5/1/2/1-1080.4df422bd.jpg
> 
> Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


My 3700x and C7H disagree with that random chinese article

https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=279518&thumb=1


----------



## gilljoy

Jaju123 said:


> Check using only Ryzen Master, as the other programme's polling causes ryzen to boost


Exact same thing happens in master.


----------



## Mumak

gupsterg said:


> @Johan45
> 
> +rep for shares  .
> 
> Last night did some 3733MHz 1:1 MEMCLK & FCLK testing 400% was best I got in RT. I'm just amazed I can run 3600MHz C15 @ 1.355V on Matisse, needed ~1.385V on PR with same mobo/RAM. Even if say the higher RAM/IF on lengthy test proves to be issue and say see performance loss from error correction as you point out, I think if I got say 3600MHz C14 1T with tight subs I'll be grinning ear to ear.
> 
> 
> 
> +rep for info and swift reply  , let's hope AMD sort unlock, as it's just nice to stick to one tool showing all.
> 
> My bad, as Johan45 pointed out it in PM to me, CPU-Z NB Frequency is seeming like UCLK from tests and info he has.


Yup, I too think that CPU-Z doesn't show the true FCLK.
I would ask Franck directly, but he appears to be on vacation now.. And I'll be from tomorrow for a week as well; don't want to see a PC during that time 
So today I released Beta build 3855 which has the latest and best according to today's knowledge.
We're pushing AMD to solve things like FCLK readout and the recent idle-gate issue. Hoping there will be some progress after my return.


----------



## majestynl

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> i cant See the Post from elmor on this thread you posted for me ,btw thread is from 2004 ...
> 
> Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


The link is working fine and from few days ago  Maybe something to do with Mobile view/Tapatalk. 



gilljoy said:


> Anyone had this issue?
> 
> Sitting at idle, the voltage is sitting at 1.46 constantly on the cpu & at idle I'm sitting at 4.3Ghz. Temps are sitting at 50C and the cooler is going at 2000rpm.
> 
> Running the Ryzen balanced performance plan as recommended but it doesn't ever seem to clock down
> 
> Latest chipset driver installed and windows updated,.


Not me.. did you try with Bios defaults for same behavior?



Johan45 said:


> I just want to add here that pushing the IF/Mem controller past 1800 can cause performance drops in multi-thread operations. The IF has error correction and if a bit unstable your scores will drop.
> This is the same benchmark, same core speed but 3200 CL14 FlareX at XMP. Notice the difference in scores it hit 7699. I'm also testing RAM/IF speed Vs core speed and voltage needed. I did my first round of OC with 3600 and this one at 3200 mem appears to need less voltage. I haven't found my OC limit yet just wanted to interject that high RAM speed may not hel performance when running 1:1


Can confirm this! Have done multiple tests with 3200 CL14 vs 3800mhz on Ram! 
+Rep


----------



## crakej

Jaju123 said:


> My 3700x and C7H disagree with that random chinese article
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=279518&thumb=1


Indeed it's baked into our current bios - It will work, but probably just top x16 in x8 mode (same speed as 3.0 x16) and x4 to the top M.2. That post showed that CH7 def supported M.2, but not GPU, but GPU slot is nearer to CPU so will probably work. Proper testing will be done soon, early tests suggests it works well......on M.2 at least.


----------



## Johan45

Mumak said:


> Yup, I too think that CPU-Z doesn't show the true FCLK.
> I would ask Franck directly, but he appears to be on vacation now.. And I'll be from tomorrow for a week as well; don't want to see a PC during that time
> So today I released Beta build 3855 which has the latest and best according to today's knowledge.
> We're pushing AMD to solve things like FCLK readout and the recent idle-gate issue. Hoping there will be some progress after my return.


I'm 99% sure it's reporting the memory controller speed, at least from my testing. According to AMD when over 3600 MHz RAM speed the mem controller speed drops to half and the IF is supposed to be locked at 1800 MHz. Without forcing a 1:1 operstion when booting into windows with 3800 MHz RAm the NB section will show 950 MHz which reflects the drop in speed of the controller. IMO


Did some testing of 3600 VS 3200 MHz RAM and OC voltage requirements. Running at 3600 required 1.325 V set in BIOS and 3200 required 1.275 V set in BIOS to pass the same test with very similar scores. To me, for max OC and best temps on the HCC CPUs 3200 MHz is still likely the sweet spot.


----------



## lordzed83

Johan45 said:


> I just want to add here that pushing the IF/Mem controller past 1800 can cause performance drops in multi-thread operations. The IF has error correction and if a bit unstable your scores will drop.
> This is the same benchmark, same core speed but 3200 CL14 FlareX at XMP. Notice the difference in scores it hit 7699. I'm also testing RAM/IF speed Vs core speed and voltage needed. I did my first round of OC with 3600 and this one at 3200 mem appears to need less voltage. I haven't found my OC limit yet just wanted to interject that high RAM speed may not hel performance when running 1:1


Thats why I gotten new kit as my kit cant do 3600cl14 that I want. I'm ok with running my memory 24/7 @ 1.46 volt done that last 14 months anyway 
Any reason You are running T1 not T2 ??


----------



## Gettz8488

@majestynl what isle temps are you seeing? And what cooking do you have?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Johan45

lordzed83 said:


> Thats why I gotten new kit as my kit cant do 3600cl14 that I want. I'm ok with running my memory 24/7 @ 1.46 volt done that last 14 months anyway
> Any reason You are running T1 not T2 ??


That's just how the board set-up the XMP. 1T doesn't always seem to be the default anylonger at least not on this MSI. Might have something to do with the distance to the controller? Not really sure but for testing I just like to keep things the same and how 90% of users would set their systems. Many don't even enable the XMP believe it or not


----------



## gupsterg

Mumak said:


> Yup, I too think that CPU-Z doesn't show the true FCLK.
> I would ask Franck directly, but he appears to be on vacation now.. And I'll be from tomorrow for a week as well; don't want to see a PC during that time
> So today I released Beta build 3855 which has the latest and best according to today's knowledge.
> We're pushing AMD to solve things like FCLK readout and the recent idle-gate issue. Hoping there will be some progress after my return.


OK, thanks again as always :thumb: , enjoy your break :thumb: .



Johan45 said:


> I'm 99% sure it's reporting the memory controller speed, at least from my testing. According to AMD when over 3600 MHz RAM speed the mem controller speed drops to half and the IF is supposed to be locked at 1800 MHz. Without forcing a 1:1 operstion when booting into windows with 3800 MHz RAm the NB section will show 950 MHz which reflects the drop in speed of the controller. IMO
> 
> 
> Did some testing of 3600 VS 3200 MHz RAM and OC voltage requirements. Running at 3600 required 1.325 V set in BIOS and 3200 required 1.275 V set in BIOS to pass the same test with very similar scores. To me, for max OC and best temps on the HCC CPUs 3200 MHz is still likely the sweet spot.


+rep, I plan on profiling and stability testing upto 3733MHz 1:1 RAM:IF, if get there then bench and use best setup taking into account performance/voltages, etc.


----------



## majestynl

Gettz8488 said:


> @majestynl what isle temps are you seeing? And what cooking do you have?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


*PBO + 200mhz / 10x scaler / all maxed out*
IDLE Temps: 36c-42c
Max load: 74c
When applying an voltage ofset -0.075v : Max load 64c

*Manual OC @ 4.3Ghz*
Voltage: ~1.3-1.325v
IDLE Temps: haven't paid attention
Max load: 60c

Ambient: 22c
CPU: 3700x


----------



## Johan45

One addition to this post https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-709.html#post28039138
Comparing needed voltage for 4.3 GHz Vs RAM speed. I wanted to see what effect 1800 MHz IF and 2:1 controller speed would have on required voltage. I kept increasing RAM speed at CL 17-17-17 from 4000 MHz > 4400 MHz where the performance was relatively the same as the last two examples. Interestingly the voltage requirement fell right in the middle at 1.3 V to run CB R20 at 4.3 GHz


----------



## mtrai

/EDIT WARNING THIS IS A BETA BIOS FLASH AT YOUR OWN RISK. ONE USER HAS REPORTED THE SB VOLTAGE IS WHACKED. ANOTHER REPORTED IT FIXED ITSELF ONCE YOU BOOTED INTO WINDOWS AND THEN BACK INTO THE BIOS, and for me I did not even have the issue I have even reflashed it several times now to repro. This does not mean this bios is ready for anyone to use.

Beta Bios for just C7H WIFI was just posted on the Rog Forums by one of the super moderators.

NO CHANGELOG NO INFO ON WHAT CHANGED.

WIFI ONLY 

WTH I am gonna just install as I also have the mouse issue. If it seems to work well will start on modding it.


https://www.dropbox.com/s/k2beo11w1kw7kus/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0068.rar?dl=0

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?112003-Latest-C7H-BIOS

I am looking at it right now in BCP.


----------



## nick name

LePr3 said:


> Just the usual hex values which will correspond to real numbers. Ignore the 'h' on the end for dropdown lists.
> e.g '0Eh' in a dropdown box refers to 14. Just remove the h.
> 
> Hexs start from 0 count up to 9 like normal numbers, before becoming letters. They go up to 'F' before resetting back to zero. Think of A,B,C,D,E,F as 10,11,12,13,14,15 'normal' numbers. Then they roll over and start again. e.g after F --> 10, 11, 12, 13 etc.
> '10' = 16.
> 
> It's easier to visualize on this this hex sheet. Just match the number you're after 'DEC' to the corresponding 'HEX' value. https://ascii.cl/conversion.htm


Sorry I forgot a word in my earlier post. The MBIST page does not set any of the values for me. Can you tell me if you do anything in the main timings page in conjunction with the MBIST page?

And thank you for the help with the hex values. I will try it out. I am trying to control tREFI so I need to find out how to set a value like 13000.

Edit:
The after POST Timing Control doesn't accept the hex value for 13000.

Also, on that Advanced RAM timing page -- those values still won't actually apply when I set them.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> Beta Bios for just C7H WIFI was just posted on the Rog Forums by one of the super moderators.
> 
> NO CHANGELOG NO INFO ON WHAT CHANGED.
> 
> WIFI ONLY
> 
> WTH I am gonna just install as I also have the mouse issue. If it seems to work well will start on modding it.
> 
> 
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/k2beo11w1kw7kus/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0068.rar?dl=0
> 
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?112003-Latest-C7H-BIOS
> 
> I am looking at it right now in BCP.


Sweet. Thank you.


----------



## mtrai

C7H WIFI beta bios info so far. I will add to the list as I find. There were a few new options in the bios that were exposed by default will have to investigate.



It is still AGESA Combo-AM4 1.0.0.2

My mouse is not working in the bios.

Post and boot-up was faster. (Post is very fast)

No issue with using the the stilts fast 3333 preset and setting my ram starting at 3568 as this is my new jumping off start with new bios and work up from there.

/edit I was wrong on the commodore splash screen...it was the first 2 boots was so fast did not see it display but it is still there.


----------



## gupsterg

*Do not flash this UEFI guys!*

First post, entered UEFI and greeted with ~1.3V to chipset! Digital multimeter also report same!

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?112003-Latest-C7H-BIOS&p=776486&posted=1#post776486


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> C7H WIFI beta bios info so far. I will add to the list as I find. There were a few new options in the bios that were exposed by default will have to investigate.
> 
> 
> 
> It is still AGESA Combo-AM4 1.0.0.2
> 
> My mouse is not working in the bios.
> 
> Post and boot-up was faster. (Post is very fast)
> 
> No issue with using the the stilts fast 3333 preset and setting my ram starting at 3568 as this is my new jumping off start with new bios and work up from there.
> 
> /edit I was wrong on the commodore splash screen...it was the first 2 boots was so fast did not see it display but it is still there.


With my 2700X it presents me with that 200MHz+ option under PBO settings. 

My mouse is also still wonky.

I'm assuming any changes were aimed at new Ryzen 3000 CPUs and anyone with a Ryzen 2000 won't really a benefit from this beta BIOS.


----------



## nick name

gupsterg said:


> *Do not flash this UEFI guys!*
> 
> First post, entered UEFI and greeted with ~1.3V to chipset! Digital multimeter also report same!
> 
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?112003-Latest-C7H-BIOS&p=776486&posted=1#post776486


Oof. I didn't even notice that.

Edit:
It seems to correct itself once it gets into Windows? At least according to HWiNFO.


----------



## majestynl

Johan45 said:


> One addition to this post https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-709.html#post28039138
> Comparing needed voltage for 4.3 GHz Vs RAM speed. I wanted to see what effect 1800 MHz IF and 2:1 controller speed would have on required voltage. I kept increasing RAM speed at CL 17-17-17 from 4000 MHz > 4400 MHz where the performance was relatively the same as the last two examples. Interestingly the voltage requirement fell right in the middle at 1.3 V to run CB R20 at 4.3 GHz


Johan, just at of curiosity what voltage are you pushing for 4000 and 4400mhz on ram ?


----------



## gupsterg

nick name said:


> Oof. I didn't even notice that.
> 
> Edit:
> It seems to correct itself once it gets into Windows? At least according to HWiNFO.


I've gone back 2406, deleted 0068, not worth the risk of losing board IMO...


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> *Do not flash this UEFI guys!*
> 
> First post, entered UEFI and greeted with ~1.3V to chipset! Digital multimeter also report same!
> 
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?112003-Latest-C7H-BIOS&p=776486&posted=1#post776486


Good catch gup!!
Maybe users need to ad * bold* marked disclaimers when posting unofficial beta bios versions over here. I can see less exp. users will just flash without knowing the risks.. !


----------



## gupsterg

majestynl said:


> Good catch gup!!
> Maybe users need to ad * bold* marked disclaimers when posting unofficial beta bios versions over here. I can see less exp. users will just flash without knowing the risks.. !


That's Shamino aka Peter Tan, renowned overclocker and Crosshair Hero is his puppy AFAIK.


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> That's Shamino aka Peter Tan, renowned overclocker and Crosshair Hero is his puppy AFAIK.


? Still unofficial, but with less exp users I'm mentioning the ones flashing the bios to their system. Not the bios baker 



nick name said:


> Oof. I didn't even notice that.
> 
> Edit:
> It seems to correct itself once it gets into Windows? At least according to HWiNFO.


Happens a lot with voltages on Asus boards in Bios


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> *Do not flash this UEFI guys!*
> 
> First post, entered UEFI and greeted with ~1.3V to chipset! Digital multimeter also report same!
> 
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?112003-Latest-C7H-BIOS&p=776486&posted=1#post776486





nick name said:


> Oof. I didn't even notice that.
> 
> Edit:
> It seems to correct itself once it gets into Windows? At least according to HWiNFO.


That is odd mine booted at 1.076 on the SB


----------



## gupsterg

Only my take. Everything is beta...

We saw time and time again UEFI that were released in the C6H thread turn "Official"...

So "Official" sorta counts for nothing with me...

Everything is thought bug free until we find the bug ... then that "Official" was really beta for those that think "Official" is more bug free...

I just would have expected a bit more QA to be releasing even a "unofficial/beta" publicly on forum...

Let's take say UEFI 2406, in CPU-Z we see UEFI date as 21/06/2019, we were able to download it what 05/07/19, ~2wks and no one noted mouse issue, sorta shocking....



mtrai said:


> That is odd mine booted at 1.076 on the SB


Usually I see ~1.09V as my board is early batch and over reads by ~50mV in SW & Probeit point, but ~1.3V is alot when stock is 1.05V and I had that manually set prior to UEFI flash. Even the flash was done using Flashback and I did CMOS_CLR before flashback.


----------



## Gettz8488

majestynl said:


> *PBO + 200mhz / 10x scaler / all maxed out*
> 
> IDLE Temps: 36c-42c
> 
> Max load: 74c
> 
> When applying an voltage ofset -0.075v : Max load 64c
> 
> 
> 
> *Manual OC @ 4.3Ghz*
> 
> Voltage: ~1.3-1.325v
> 
> IDLE Temps: haven't paid attention
> 
> Max load: 60c
> 
> 
> 
> Ambient: 22c
> 
> CPU: 3700x




Out of curiosity what type of cooling are you using?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> Only my take. Everything is beta...
> 
> We saw time and time again UEFI that were released in the C6H thread turn "Official"...
> 
> So "Official" sorta counts for nothing with me...
> 
> Everything is thought bug free until we find the bug ... then that "Official" wasn't really beta for those that think "Official" is more bug free...
> 
> I just would have expected a bit more QA to be releasing even a "unofficial/beta" publicly on forum...
> 
> Let's take say UEFI 2406, in CPU-Z we see UEFI date as 21/06/2019, we were able to download it what 05/07/19, ~2wks and no one noted mouse issue, sorta shocking....


Can't disagree you on that part !!! Build date in bios is also different. Anyways.. sometimes you need a lot of users to find the bugs. Personally I don't have the mouse bug.


----------



## majestynl

Gettz8488 said:


> Out of curiosity what type of cooling are you using?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


On that particular system. I have a EK CL with a 360 and 240 rad. Currently only running the CPU in the loop. Need to find time to mount the block on the VII


----------



## gupsterg

majestynl said:


> Can't disagree you on that part !!! Build date in bios is also different. Anyways.. sometimes you need a lot of users to find the bugs. Personally I don't have the mouse bug.


Yeah about 3-4 of here got it on various setups. Not a biggie as I use keyboard, but makes me think what other quirk is there lurking...

Back on 2406...









Seeing the usual as I have since owning the board...


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> Only my take. Everything is beta...
> 
> We saw time and time again UEFI that were released in the C6H thread turn "Official"...
> 
> So "Official" sorta counts for nothing with me...
> 
> Everything is thought bug free until we find the bug ... then that "Official" was really beta for those that think "Official" is more bug free...
> 
> I just would have expected a bit more QA to be releasing even a "unofficial/beta" publicly on forum...
> 
> Let's take say UEFI 2406, in CPU-Z we see UEFI date as 21/06/2019, we were able to download it what 05/07/19, ~2wks and no one noted mouse issue, sorta shocking....
> 
> 
> 
> Usually I see ~1.09V as my board is early batch and over reads by ~50mV in SW & Probeit point, but ~1.3V is alot when stock is 1.05V and I had that manually set prior to UEFI flash. Even the flash was done using Flashback and I did CMOS_CLR before flashback.





gupsterg said:


> Only my take. Everything is beta...
> 
> We saw time and time again UEFI that were released in the C6H thread turn "Official"...
> 
> So "Official" sorta counts for nothing with me...
> 
> Everything is thought bug free until we find the bug ... then that "Official" was really beta for those that think "Official" is more bug free...
> 
> I just would have expected a bit more QA to be releasing even a "unofficial/beta" publicly on forum...
> 
> Let's take say UEFI 2406, in CPU-Z we see UEFI date as 21/06/2019, we were able to download it what 05/07/19, ~2wks and no one noted mouse issue, sorta shocking....
> 
> I hear you...I just did another reflash of this bios via flashback to try and verify...mine still defaulted to what I expected to see of 1.076 on the SB. Dunno. Something for people to look out for. Gonna edit my post.
> 
> /edit back in about 10 or 15 minutes as I just finished modding it bcp and want to see what is all now showing.


----------



## Johan45

majestynl said:


> Johan, just at of curiosity what voltage are you pushing for 4000 and 4400mhz on ram ?


For the 4000+ I was using G.Skill Royal 4000 CL 17 so at 4000 it was 1.35V and 4400 I was up to 1.5V DRAM


----------



## lordzed83

majestynl said:


> *PBO + 200mhz / 10x scaler / all maxed out*
> IDLE Temps: 36c-42c
> Max load: 74c
> When applying an voltage ofset -0.075v : Max load 64c
> 
> *Manual OC @ 4.3Ghz*
> Voltage: ~1.3-1.325v
> IDLE Temps: haven't paid attention
> Max load: 60c
> 
> Ambient: 22c
> CPU: 3700x


is this AVX stable ??


----------



## gupsterg

mtrai said:


> I hear you...I just did another reflash of this bios via flashback to try and verify...mine still defaulted to what I expected to see of 1.076 on the SB. Dunno. Something for people to look out for. Gonna edit my post.
> 
> /edit back in about 10 or 15 minutes as I just finished modding it bcp and want to see what is all now showing.


Cheers for info, dunno if I will try 0068 again  .

On another note IIRC Crakej had moved his mouse to another USB port and got it working in UEFI. I tried every rear IO USB port and then USB 3.0/2.0 connected to case from mobo header and no go for my Logitech K400 keyboard mousepad combo. Only keyboard works on UEFI 2406 in UEFI.


----------



## untouchable247

help, tl;dr!

how to get mouse working in bios 2406 or how can i set custom fan curves with keyboard? thanks!


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

Jaju123 said:


> My 3700x and C7H disagree with that random chinese article
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=279518&thumb=1


THIS IS ABSOLUTELY AMAZING ! Thanks !



majestynl said:


> The link is working fine and from few days ago  Maybe something to do with Mobile view/Tapatalk.


Right ,on tapatalk couldnt see his post ! Thanks man !!!


----------



## neikosr0x

gupsterg said:


> Only my take. Everything is beta...
> 
> We saw time and time again UEFI that were released in the C6H thread turn "Official"...
> 
> So "Official" sorta counts for nothing with me...
> 
> Everything is thought bug free until we find the bug ... then that "Official" was really beta for those that think "Official" is more bug free...
> 
> I just would have expected a bit more QA to be releasing even a "unofficial/beta" publicly on forum...
> 
> Let's take say UEFI 2406, in CPU-Z we see UEFI date as 21/06/2019, we were able to download it what 05/07/19, ~2wks and no one noted mouse issue, sorta shocking....
> 
> 
> 
> Usually I see ~1.09V as my board is early batch and over reads by ~50mV in SW & Probeit point, but ~1.3V is alot when stock is 1.05V and I had that manually set prior to UEFI flash. Even the flash was done using Flashback and I did CMOS_CLR before flashback.


lol, I just noted that my SB also boots at 1.09v is this normal?


----------



## lordzed83

untouchable247 said:


> help, tl;dr!
> 
> how to get mouse working in bios 2406 or how can i set custom fan curves with keyboard? thanks!


Buy different mouse mine works fine in bios.

Just use auto tune and change temperatures from there thats what I do.


----------



## nick name

untouchable247 said:


> help, tl;dr!
> 
> how to get mouse working in bios 2406 or how can i set custom fan curves with keyboard? thanks!


If you go under Monitor then you can set fan settings in another menu there. Temps and power percentages can be keyed in.

Edit:
Screens added.


----------



## mtrai

@gupsterg There are some major changes in how PBO and XFX works on the 2700 some for the good and some for the bad on this beta 0068 bios. It seems like mashup of what works for the 3000 series and what is s'posed to be on the 2000 series, some weird combo of the two...a hybrid IMO.


----------



## untouchable247

lordzed83 said:


> Buy different mouse mine works fine in bios.
> 
> Just use auto tune and change temperatures from there thats what I do.


Very helpful haha. So "no mouse in bios" doesn't hit everyone? I'm lucky again, nice. Auto just isn't for me, sorry.




nick name said:


> If you go under Monitor then you can set fan settings in another menu there. Temps and power percentages can be keyed in.


Thanks, that's what I was looking for.


----------



## neikosr0x

untouchable247 said:


> Very helpful haha. So "no mouse in bios" doesn't hit everyone? I'm lucky again, nice. Auto just isn't for me, sorry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks, that's what I was looking for.


i have no mouse or keyboard thanks god my cheap logitech keyboard did work


----------



## majestynl

Johan45 said:


> For the 4000+ I was using G.Skill Royal 4000 CL 17 so at 4000 it was 1.35V and 4400 I was up to 1.5V DRAM


Hmm nice.. mine needs way more (4133), going to swap the 3200cl14. Let's see what those can do.



lordzed83 said:


> is this AVX stable ??


Honestly have not used AVX yet.. only AIDA for 1hr now.. so maybe AVX will need a bit more , but can't confirm yet. Just playing around for now. No real stability tests. 




Wuest3nFuchs said:


> Right ,on tapatalk couldnt see his post ! Thanks man !!!


Np m8!


----------



## gupsterg

neikosr0x said:


> lol, I just noted that my SB also boots at 1.09v is this normal?


Yes that is ok. Some boards are over showing from actual, ~+50mV Elmor stated it wayback in this thread, again when I stated my board was showing ~1.09V.

As a few here and on ROG did not have issue I reran testing of UEFI 0068.

I redownload file on a laptop, like I usually do, as this system can not be OC'd, etc, etc. Used FLASHBACK, like I always do.

I had same ~1.35V, I saw upto ~1.375V on multimeter.

You can see all the things I did across about 4-5 POSTs of system in this post on ROG.



mtrai said:


> @gupsterg There are some major changes in how PBO and XFX works on the 2700 some for the good and some for the bad on this beta 0068 bios. It seems like mashup of what works for the 3000 series and what is s'posed to be on the 2000 series, some weird combo of the two...a hybrid IMO.


Cool.

One reason I went 3xxx is PBO menu has more options, PMU Training is there, MBIST has so many options. A lot is there which 1xxx/2xxx may not support AFAIK...


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> Yes that is ok. Some boards are over showing from actual, ~+50mV Elmor stated it wayback in this thread, again when I stated my board was showing ~1.09V.
> 
> As a few here and on ROG did not have issue I reran testing of UEFI 0068.
> 
> I redownload file on a laptop, like I usually do, as this system can not be OC'd, etc, etc. Used FLASHBACK, like I always do.
> 
> I had same ~1.35V, I saw upto ~1.375V on multimeter.
> 
> You can see all the things I did across about 4-5 POSTs of system in this post on ROG.
> 
> 
> 
> Cool.
> 
> One reason I went 3xxx is PBO menu has more options, PMU Training is there, MBIST has so many options. A lot is there which 1xxx/2xxx may not support AFAIK...


Just a thought...could this be an issue with yours and others 3000 series and I still using my 2700x on the 0068 bios? (holding out for the 3950X) I just reran everything over and over with many reboots, power off, pulling the power etc and it was always at 1.076 as expected for my board.


----------



## Synoxia

Hi guys. I am still using 2700x. 2406 breaks mouse functionality so i think i am going to a previous bios. I've also heard newer bios "degrade" PBO performance. Which bios you suggest? 1103?


----------



## gupsterg

mtrai said:


> Just a thought...could this be an issue with yours and others 3000 series and I still using my 2700x on the 0068 bios? (holding out for the 3950X) I just reran everything over and over with many reboots, power off, pulling the power etc and it was always at 1.076 as expected for my board.


Dunno.

UEFI 2406 non issue. Flashed it via flashback. Restored saved profiles I have from USB:-

i) Base Profile (ie CPU/RAM stock, voltages stock but manually set, fan profiles, etc)

ii) Base with 3533MHz 1:1 RAM:IF

iii) Base with 3600MHz 1:1 RAM:IF

iv) Base with 3666MHz 1:1 RAM:IF

Each time I restored profile from USB I entered UEFI, checked things, then saved it again in ASUS Profile.

From 1st POST to all those everything as it should be except mousepad on Logitech K400 not working.

Re-running RT on 3666MHz profile.


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> Dunno.
> 
> UEFI 2406 non issue. Flashed it via flashback. Restored saved profiles I have from USB:-
> 
> i) Base Profile (ie CPU/RAM stock, voltages stock but manually set, fan profiles, etc)
> 
> ii) Base with 3533MHz 1:1 RAM:IF
> 
> iii) Base with 3600MHz 1:1 RAM:IF
> 
> iv) Base with 3666MHz 1:1 RAM:IF
> 
> Each time I restored profile from USB I entered UEFI, checked things, then saved it again in ASUS Profile.
> 
> From 1st POST to all those everything as it should be except mousepad on Logitech K400 not working.
> 
> Re-running RT on 3666MHz profile.
> 
> View attachment 279610


I mean a feature of the ASUS bios engineering...aka a bug. In any even it should be reported to them as if they listen. Look it was even @Silentscone who provided the beta bios


----------



## Synoxia

@1usmus what bios are you using on your 2700x? I've been reading that basically now PE3 is the way to go, i've been noticing slower clock speeds on my 2700x and more voltage required to be stable with PBO on latest bioses compared to PE3...


----------



## gupsterg

mtrai said:


> I mean a feature of the ASUS bios engineering...aka a bug. In any even it should be reported to them as if they listen. Look it was even @Silentscone who provided the beta bios


No it was Shamino, Peter Tan, link. You will find in the C6H thread when finalheaven said to Elmor I will name my rig after you as board is so great, elmor said something like I didn't do much it is Shamino's board, I will try to find post...



Spoiler




















Link to post.


----------



## glnn_23

Have a 3900x running in the CH7 and trying to get memory going ok here.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> On another note IIRC Crakej had moved his mouse to another USB port and got it working in UEFI. I tried every rear IO USB port and then USB 3.0/2.0 connected to case from mobo header and no go for my Logitech K400 keyboard mousepad combo. Only keyboard works on UEFI 2406 in UEFI.


Nope - never got mouse working in bios. Tested ALL ports - nothing. It does work for some though.

In Windows, it only works on my front USB3 port - ln other ports it becomes jerky and unusable.


----------



## glnn_23

Pushed a little further here Aida64 3800c14.


----------



## Gettz8488

glnn_23 said:


> Have a 3900x running in the CH7 and trying to get memory going ok here.




What type of cooling are you using? And are you running an all core OC? Your temps are super chilly


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## neikosr0x

I think there is a BUG in this BIOS, 2406. I had my FANs running at pwn config. So i went to compress some heavy files on 7zip and all my fans started to go "0" RPM for a few sec and went on at low RPM till i closed 7zip.


----------



## glnn_23

Gettz8488 said:


> What type of cooking are you using? And are you running an all core OC? Your temps are super chilly
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Cooling is custom water, 3 x 360 in p/p, 2 x d5, fans over vrm and mem, fan back of cpu.
All core oc.


----------



## Gettz8488

glnn_23 said:


> Cooling is custom water, 3 x 360 in p/p, 2 x d5, fans over vrm and mem, fan back of cpu.
> 
> All core oc.




4.1ghz at 1.2Vcore? By looking at your screenshot that’s really goodz


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## crakej

neikosr0x said:


> I think there is a BUG in this BIOS, 2406. I had my FANs running at pwn config. So i went to compress some heavy files on 7zip and all my fans started to go "0" RPM for a few sec and went on at low RPM till i closed 7zip.


I've had fans not coming on as well! It's happened twice, couldn't nail down a cause though. Started IBT and suddenly realized it was far too quiet. Rebooted and it was fine.

I'm still waiting for my CPU  but i did get a dispatch note tonight......delivery will be no later than TUESDAY! Tuesday - it may as well be a month! I need it!


----------



## mtrai

No all these different things are not bugs, y'all just have it wrong...they are ASUS FEATURES. Each bios has it own unique features.


----------



## crakej

mtrai said:


> No all these different things are not bugs, y'all just have it wrong...they are ASUS FEATURES. Each bios has it own unique features.


Lol.... I knew I should have read the manual!


----------



## dlbsyst

nick name said:


> If you go under Monitor then you can set fan settings in another menu there. Temps and power percentages can be keyed in.
> 
> Edit:
> Screens added.


Thank you so much for the useful bit of info nick name. I had no idea I could set my fans speed and curve there. I have the Crosshair VI but it has the same setting in BIOS as you guys VII.


----------



## nick name

dlbsyst said:


> Thank you so much for the useful bit of info nick name. I had no idea I could set my fans speed and curve there. I have the Crosshair VI but it has the same setting in BIOS as you guys VII.


 My pleasure.


----------



## nick name

The only cooling related issue I've had is that my AIO pump would disappear in BIOS and Windows. This began before 2406 though. And is cured by a reboot. Oh, and the pump would still be running -- just not reporting. So I guess nothing like you guys are running into. Disregard.


----------



## lester007

My 3900x is coming today, what should I do first I am still bios 1201 should I go straight to latest bios?


----------



## lordzed83

finished building new rig for my mate so got zen hardcore and zen light stress testing overnight hahhaah


----------



## LePr3

crakej said:


> But what do these setting actually do?


 They seem to be another way to train your memory. Whether they make any meaningful difference or not, I've no idea. Anecdotally, I'm now stable at 3508Mhz w/o Geardown mode, which was something that was out of reach for me before 2406 (1201 before). Whether it's due to the new BIOS AGESA, or the POST Timing Control settings, I can't say. I'm just happy to have that stable now.




nick name said:


> Sorry I forgot a word in my earlier post. The MBIST page does not set any of the values for me. Can you tell me if you do anything in the main timings page in conjunction with the MBIST page?
> ...
> Also, on that Advanced RAM timing page -- those values still won't actually apply when I set them.


 Ah, I should've clarified. The MBIST test isn't needed for the POST Timing Control settings to take hold. Enabling the MBIST test is to stop multiple multiple memory training resets from cold boot - when the motherboard resets like 3 times.
About the the settings not applying, if you remember,


LePr3 said:


> ...For whatever reason, these timings (*tCL, tRCWR/RD, tRP, tRAS, tRC, and tWR, ProcODT, MemFreq*) don't take hold, but the rest do.


 You'll still need to enter those values in the normal DRAM menu, so pretty much most of the primary timings. If you look back at my screenshots, you'll see I'll still have those values keyed in the normal DRAM menu. I also haven't seen any spot where we can input tREFI, so I'm not sure where you're trying to place that. All of the settings in the training menu corresponds to stuff we already on the DRAM menu, so it's hard to gauge it's usefulness.

Even so, based on your screen shot, everywhere where you've put 14h, should be 0Eh for the value of 14.

tRCWR = 15 = 0Fh
tRAS = 30 = 1Eh
tRC, if you're after 44, then it should be 2C.

Examples for the menu settings actually work:
tFAW, if you're after 16, should be 10.
tRFC = 252 = FC
tCWL = 14 = 0Eh
tWTRL = 12 = 0Ch

If it has a 'h' next to it, or if the help text at the bottom has it listed as a possible value, it needs to be in hex, otherwise you can enter the value normally.

Any settings in the normal DRAM menu takes precedence over these values, so I'm assuming they must be used in initial training? Either way, it doesn't hurt to try it.




mtrai said:


> @*gupsterg* There are some major changes in how PBO and XFX works on the 2700 some for the good and some for the bad on this beta 0068 bios. It seems like mashup of what works for the 3000 series and what is s'posed to be on the 2000 series, some weird combo of the two...a hybrid IMO.



I can vouch for the PBO changes, as I use normal PBO2 due to it being load dynamic over PBO-3 and 4. PBO3 locks to a static all core frequency when 8 threads are placed on it, where as PBO2 will change based on the load. I've never been able to run PBO4. For me, PBO2 used to only be able to run 4.2Ghz in all core heavy workloads and 4.3Ghz in all core light workloads on BIOS 1201. The changes they've made in 2406 has allowed me to get 4.25Ghz all core heavy and 4.35 all core light. Single threads in both is 4.4Ghz. I'm still trying to find where the new edge is for stability slowly bumping up the freq through LLC changes.


----------



## mtrai

?????


----------



## LePr3

I'll post some examples in a few hours.


----------



## nick name

LePr3 said:


> They seem to be another way to train your memory. Whether they make any meaningful difference or not, I've no idea. Anecdotally, I'm now stable at 3508Mhz w/o Geardown mode, which was something that was out of reach for me before 2406 (1201 before). Whether it's due to the new BIOS AGESA, or the POST Timing Control settings, I can't say. I'm just happy to have that stable now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, I should've clarified. The MBIST test isn't needed for the POST Timing Control settings to take hold. Enabling the MBIST test is to stop multiple multiple memory training resets from cold boot - when the motherboard resets like 3 times.
> About the the settings not applying, if you remember, You'll still need to enter those values in the normal DRAM menu, so pretty much most of the primary timings. If you look back at my screenshots, you'll see I'll still have those values keyed in the normal DRAM menu. I also haven't seen any spot where we can input tREFI, so I'm not sure where you're trying to place that. All of the settings in the training menu corresponds to stuff we already on the DRAM menu, so it's hard to gauge it's usefulness.
> 
> Even so, based on your screen shot, everywhere where you've put 14h, should be 0Eh for the value of 14.
> 
> tRCWR = 15 = 0Fh
> tRAS = 30 = 1Eh
> tRC, if you're after 44, then it should be 2C.
> 
> Examples for the menu settings actually work:
> tFAW, if you're after 16, should be 10.
> tRFC = 252 = FC
> tCWL = 14 = 0Eh
> tWTRL = 12 = 0Ch
> 
> If it has a 'h' next to it, or if the help text at the bottom has it listed as a possible value, it needs to be in hex, otherwise you can enter the value normally.
> 
> Any settings in the normal DRAM menu takes precedence over these values, so I'm assuming they must be used in initial training? Either way, it doesn't hurt to try it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can vouch for the PBO changes, as I use normal PBO2 due to it being load dynamic over PBO-3 and 4. PBO3 locks to a static all core frequency when 8 threads are placed on it, where as PBO2 will change based on the load. I've never been able to run PBO4. For me, PBO2 used to only be able to run 4.2Ghz in all core heavy workloads and 4.3Ghz in all core light workloads on BIOS 1201. The changes they've made in 2406 has allowed me to get 4.25Ghz all core heavy and 4.35 all core light. Single threads in both is 4.4Ghz. I'm still trying to find where the new edge is for stability slowly bumping up the freq through LLC changes.



Sorry, I read the bits that didn't work and then forgot about 'em. That's on me. 

And thank you for taking the extra time to explain. I was thinking we were on the same page when I was also talking about the DRAM Timing Control After Training page which can be navigated to from the main DRAM timing page. It's an option below the presets. That's where there is an option for tREFI that I can't get to work. However, I think @gupsterg said that it wouldn't because you couldn't change values after POST. But that's why I was confused about where to use hex values and why I was using the wrong values on the Advanced AMD CBS timings page. 

So now that I have some more clarity I am gonna go back and try to use the timings page under AMD CBS and see if I can get past the memory training when combined with Data Eye. From what it says in the BIOS Data Eye just checks voltage against timing so the memory training stopping makes sense. Unless I'm thinking about it wrong.

Edit:
Got it to work! Except tREFI.


----------



## oreonutz

Finally have had time to drop my 3900x into my Crosshair 7 Hero. So Far All I have done is got my 4x8GB Flare X Memory Kit up to 3200Mhz using Manual Timings, CL14. Left the Clocks on Auto. It is definitely boosting a single Core to 4.6Ghz out of the box which is good to see, but it appears when under a full load it drops to about 4.1Ghz. Its also using a lot of CPUv on auto to do it, when lightly loaded I am seeing my CPUv as high as 1.48, and when under a full CB Load its as high as 1.45. Haven't started messing with Offsets yet. 

Just wanted to check with you fine enthusiasts and compare CB Scores. Want to see if what I am seeing is about average for out of the box. 

CB15:


Spoiler















CB20:


Spoiler


----------



## nick name

oreonutz said:


> Finally have had time to drop my 3900x into my Crosshair 7 Hero. So Far All I have done is got my 4x8GB Flare X Memory Kit up to 3200Mhz using Manual Timings, CL14. Left the Clocks on Auto. It is definitely boosting a single Core to 4.6Ghz out of the box which is good to see, but it appears when under a full load it drops to about 4.1Ghz. Its also using a lot of CPUv on auto to do it, when lightly loaded I am seeing my CPUv as high as 1.48, and when under a full CB Load its as high as 1.45. Haven't started messing with Offsets yet.
> 
> Just wanted to check with you fine enthusiasts and compare CB Scores. Want to see if what I am seeing is about average for out of the box.
> 
> CB15:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CB20:
> 
> 
> Spoiler


The spoilers are empty.

And someone else was using a VCORE negative offset of .1000V with AVX loads.


----------



## chakku

Booted into Windows at 3600 to do some preliminary testing with my 2x16GB kit. Have a missed a setting somewhere or something? My Read/Copy speeds are horrible, much worse than 3200 XMP settings.


----------



## dev1ance

chakku said:


> Booted into Windows at 3600 to do some preliminary testing with my 2x16GB kit. Have a missed a setting somewhere or something? My Read/Copy speeds are horrible, much worse than 3200 XMP settings.


I had a similar glitch on C6E after I restored a profile. Had to do a BIOs settings reset to 'optimized settings' and manually input everything again.


----------



## chakku

Really hoping there's a new BIOS soon that works properly, admittedly dropping this new CPU in while being extremely hungover wasn't the best idea but it sure does give me PTSD flashbacks from the early 1800X/C6H days where I have to cross my fingers every time I reboot that something doesn't hang or need a CMOS clear. Have already had a few instances of no boot with a code of 15 or C5.

Clearing settings and putting them back in did get me my read/write/latency to where it should be, but it looks like I have a long path ahead of me getting this kit anywhere near stable because TM5 spits out errors like there's no tomorrow.


----------



## neikosr0x

crakej said:


> I've had fans not coming on as well! It's happened twice, couldn't nail down a cause though. Started IBT and suddenly realized it was far too quiet. Rebooted and it was fine.
> 
> I'm still waiting for my CPU  but i did get a dispatch note tonight......delivery will be no later than TUESDAY! Tuesday - it may as well be a month! I need it!


Ohhh my maaan! I feel you! For now, I just kicked the fans to work at DC to see if it helps while we get a stable BIOS.


----------



## dev1ance

neikosr0x said:


> Ohhh my maaan! I feel you! For now, I just kicked the fans to work at DC to see if it helps while we get a stable BIOS.


Happened to my WPump header on C6E as well! Thought my pump was going or something. I've had it turn off on me twice now and had to immediately press the reset button to get it running again (reached >100 degrees the first time and throttled all the way to 500MHz) so I decided to just use a direct molex connector.


----------



## neikosr0x

dev1ance said:


> Happened to my WPump header on C6E as well! Thought my pump was going or something. I've had it turn off on me twice now and had to immediately press the reset button to get it running again (reached >100 degrees the first time and throttled all the way to 500MHz) so I decided to just use a direct molex connector.


So it is not only me. It is the stupid BIOS being broken, my god ASUS where are your good engineering team?, My WPump is set to work at a certain speed all the time thanks god in my case it was only my fans.


----------



## chakku

neikosr0x said:


> So it is not only me. It is the stupid BIOS being broken, my god ASUS where are your good engineering team?, My WPump is set to work at a certain speed all the time thanks god in my case it was only my fans.


I've had my CPU fans not turning on as well. It's a mess.


----------



## dev1ance

neikosr0x said:


> So it is not only me. It is the stupid BIOS being broken, my god ASUS where are your good engineering team?, My WPump is set to work at a certain speed all the time thanks god in my case it was only my fans.


I think the glitch just cuts off power entirely to the header.


----------



## gupsterg

gupsterg said:


> On another note IIRC Crakej had moved his mouse to another USB port and got it working in UEFI. I tried every rear IO USB port and then USB 3.0/2.0 connected to case from mobo header and no go for my Logitech K400 keyboard mousepad combo. Only keyboard works on UEFI 2406 in UEFI.
> 
> 
> 
> crakej said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nope - never got mouse working in bios. Tested ALL ports - nothing. It does work for some though.
> 
> In Windows, it only works on my front USB3 port - ln other ports it becomes jerky and unusable.
Click to expand...

Ahh my bad  .



mtrai said:


> No all these different things are not bugs, y'all just have it wrong...they are ASUS FEATURES. Each bios has it own unique features.
> 
> 
> 
> crakej said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lol.... I knew I should have read the manual!
Click to expand...

I threw away the manual  ...



lester007 said:


> My 3900x is coming today, what should I do first I am still bios 1201 should I go straight to latest bios?


Use flashback to apply 2406 from ASUS support page.



nick name said:


> @gupsterg said that it wouldn't because you couldn't change values after POST. But that's why I was confused about where to use hex values and why I was using the wrong values on the Advanced AMD CBS timings page.


I'm lost.

All I know is DRAM Timings Control on Extreme Tweaker page & DRAM timings within AMD CBS works. Last time I checked the control on Extreme Tweaker over rules the one in AMD CBS. DRAM Timings Control After Training within DRAM Timings Control on Extreme Tweaker page did not work. If it is now, all good  , something more to tinker with  . So look forward to shares on how it goes for you guys  .



chakku said:


> Booted into Windows at 3600 to do some preliminary testing with my 2x16GB kit. Have a missed a setting somewhere or something? My Read/Copy speeds are horrible, much worse than 3200 XMP settings.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Your best bet is to download and view settings in Ryzen Master.

Check Memory Control section has Coupled Mode: On, Memory Clock & Fabric Clock are matched.


Spoiler


----------



## harderthanfire

I got the 1.3V SB bug with the beta bios too but once set manually to 1.05 seems fine. Getting faster boot times as well with it so going to stick with it for now.


I want to briefly mention the PBO scaler value and what it does to my 3900X: For the same PBO and negative voltage offset settings I get an all core boost of 4.194mhz vs 4.096mhz for a 10x scaler vs 1x scaler. My full burn AVX load temps do go up from 77C to 81C as a result though.


I think such a large increase is worth it for me so going to run with PBO of +200mhz, 10x scaler, max limits and a -0.1v VCORE offset until we get a new bios that changes how things work or something.


Now I just need to get some decent RAM so I can start to match you guys in benchmarks, my RAM that maxes out at 3200mhz 16CAS ain't cutting it.


Also does anyone else think it is mental that this chip can put 11 out of 12 cores to sleep and then clock down the remaining one to 169mhz when idle!


----------



## gupsterg

harderthanfire said:


> I got the 1.3V SB bug with the beta bios too but once set manually to 1.05 seems fine. Getting faster boot times as well with it so going to stick with it for now.
> 
> 
> I want to briefly mention the PBO scaler value and what it does to my 3900X: For the same PBO and negative voltage offset settings I get an all core boost of 4.194mhz vs 4.096mhz for a 10x scaler vs 1x scaler. My full burn AVX load temps do go up from 77C to 81C as a result though.
> 
> 
> I think such a large increase is worth it for me so going to run with PBO of +200mhz, 10x scaler, max limits and a -0.1v VCORE offset until we get a new bios that changes how things work or something.
> 
> 
> Now I just need to get some decent RAM so I can start to match you guys in benchmarks, my RAM that maxes out at 3200mhz 16CAS ain't cutting it.


Thanks for share  .

I had thought about manually setting it 1.05V, but let's say I use "SAFEBOOT" to get out of a situation which OC has caused board not to POST, I or you will be back at ~1.3V+ chipset voltage.


----------



## oreonutz

oreonutz said:


> Finally have had time to drop my 3900x into my Crosshair 7 Hero. So Far All I have done is got my 4x8GB Flare X Memory Kit up to 3200Mhz using Manual Timings, CL14. Left the Clocks on Auto. It is definitely boosting a single Core to 4.6Ghz out of the box which is good to see, but it appears when under a full load it drops to about 4.1Ghz. Its also using a lot of CPUv on auto to do it, when lightly loaded I am seeing my CPUv as high as 1.48, and when under a full CB Load its as high as 1.45. Haven't started messing with Offsets yet.
> 
> Just wanted to check with you fine enthusiasts and compare CB Scores. Want to see if what I am seeing is about average for out of the box.
> 
> CB15:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CB20:
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Apparently These spoilers showed empty, even though I can see them on my side, so weird. Anyways, here they are just uploaded as an attachment.


----------



## ComansoRowlett

This is my 3900X at 4.5GHz 1.325 (1.306v after droop), memory is at 3733 CL14 too. I'd say I got a golden chip on the core side.


----------



## cheddle

harderthanfire said:


> I got the 1.3V SB bug with the beta bios too but once set manually to 1.05 seems fine. Getting faster boot times as well with it so going to stick with it for now.
> 
> 
> I want to briefly mention the PBO scaler value and what it does to my 3900X: For the same PBO and negative voltage offset settings I get an all core boost of 4.194mhz vs 4.096mhz for a 10x scaler vs 1x scaler. My full burn AVX load temps do go up from 77C to 81C as a result though.
> 
> 
> I think such a large increase is worth it for me so going to run with PBO of +200mhz, 10x scaler, max limits and a -0.1v VCORE offset until we get a new bios that changes how things work or something.
> 
> 
> Now I just need to get some decent RAM so I can start to match you guys in benchmarks, my RAM that maxes out at 3200mhz 16CAS ain't cutting it.
> 
> 
> Also does anyone else think it is mental that this chip can put 11 out of 12 cores to sleep and then clock down the remaining one to 169mhz when idle!


nice! on my 3700x I dont think the +200mhz setting changes anything at all...


----------



## cheddle

ComansoRowlett said:


> This is my 3900X at 4.5GHz 1.325 (1.306v after droop), memory is at 3733 CL14 too. I'd say I got a golden chip on the core side.


wow thats nice! my 3700x scrapes through a 4.375ghz at 1.375v (around 1.35v after droop) - It will be interesting to see what the 3950x spits out


----------



## ComansoRowlett

cheddle said:


> wow thats nice! my 3700x scrapes through a 4.375ghz at 1.375v (around 1.35v after droop) - It will be interesting to see what the 3950x spits out


Yeah I reckon as things mature we might see chips do what my chip is capable of more often. 3950X's may even do this easily by then since they're supposedly gonna be nicely binned CCD's.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

I really don't wanna pin the devil on the Wall but AMD warned Asus about PCI-E 4.0 .

Update 12.07.2019 14:52 clock
Speaking to the manufacturer, ComputerBase learned that the list that appeared in Asia was the result of Asus' internal status quo status quo. However, the function essentially depends on the support of the program library provided by AMD (AGESA). Asus therefore refers to the statements of AMD: Officially, only the X570 chipset supports PCIe 4.0 with Ryzen 3000. Against this background, it remains possible that a new BIOS with adapted AGESA code from AMD makes the option for PCIe 4.0 disappear again even with Asus .

https://www.computerbase.de/2019-07/asus-mainboard-x470-b450-pcie-4.0/



Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## harderthanfire

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> I really don't wanna pin the devil on the Wall but AMD warned Asus about PCI-E 4.0 .
> 
> Update 12.07.2019 14:52 clock
> Speaking to the manufacturer, ComputerBase learned that the list that appeared in Asia was the result of Asus' internal status quo status quo. However, the function essentially depends on the support of the program library provided by AMD (AGESA). Asus therefore refers to the statements of AMD: Officially, only the X570 chipset supports PCIe 4.0 with Ryzen 3000. Against this background, it remains possible that a new BIOS with adapted AGESA code from AMD makes the option for PCIe 4.0 disappear again even with Asus .
> 
> https://www.computerbase.de/2019-07/asus-mainboard-x470-b450-pcie-4.0/
> 
> 
> 
> Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk



Might explain why Asus is not shipping the newest AGESA yet.


----------



## mtrai

@LePr3 I am doing the same...having to re find the edge of stability. Loving how fast this bios boots and shuts down and restarts.


----------



## mtrai

To all those that are having various fan issues would y'all like a modded bios that opens up about 800 additional fan settings ( at least it seems like that many when I am unhiding them)....not sure if it would help. I do not have this issue as I use an external fan controller for all my fans and molex for my waterpump...with just a dummy connector on my CPU.

Let me know if y'all want to try it out, if no one wants it I will not spend the time today to mod it again, it would be on the beta 0068 as a bonus you can search and modify things like Spread Sprectrum and Hpet as well many other things. The fan settings I would unhide are under the standard fan menu.


----------



## mtrai

Last Comment for now....which bios should you be using at this time if on the 3000 series I would recommend 2406 due to the SB voltage issue however once you set the SB voltage the issue goes away so you need to do that straight away if you want to use beta 0068, I would use this one at your own risk and monitor your SB voltage on each boot up.

If you are on the 2000 series I would use the beta 0068 bios due to the many enhancements the 2000 series gets, too many to list but includes very fast boot up, shut down, and restart. Enhanced PBO/ XFR


----------



## gupsterg

mtrai said:


> Last Comment for now....which bios should you be using at this time if on the 3000 series I would recommend 2406 due to the SB voltage issue however once you set the SB voltage the issue goes away so you need to do that straight away if you want to use beta 0068, I would use this one at your own risk and monitor your SB voltage on each boot up.


I've never sat and watched SB voltage with digital multimeter at POST before. But what does happen on say VDIMM/SOC is the momentarily board POST at default then your settings are applied. I don't know if the people like me and harderthanfire which see ~1.35V as chipset will still be getting momentary burst of ~1.35V at POST before manual settings take over.

Also as stated before if you had to CLEAR_CMOS or use SAFEBOOT and you are a user who needs to manually set chipset voltage on UEFI 0068 then you will be back at ~1.35V, if you do those things to get out of a situation.

Totally can not recommend UEFI 0068...


----------



## crakej

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> I really don't wanna pin the devil on the Wall but AMD warned Asus about PCI-E 4.0 .
> 
> Update 12.07.2019 14:52 clock
> Speaking to the manufacturer, ComputerBase learned that the list that appeared in Asia was the result of Asus' internal status quo status quo. However, the function essentially depends on the support of the program library provided by AMD (AGESA). Asus therefore refers to the statements of AMD: Officially, only the X570 chipset supports PCIe 4.0 with Ryzen 3000. Against this background, it remains possible that a new BIOS with adapted AGESA code from AMD makes the option for PCIe 4.0 disappear again even with Asus .
> 
> https://www.computerbase.de/2019-07/asus-mainboard-x470-b450-pcie-4.0/
> 
> Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


Yep, we know - but it is working for now. I imagine it wont be too hard for someone to mod future bios to include the needed drivers.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

crakej said:


> Yep, we know - but it is working for now. I imagine it wont be too hard for someone to mod future bios to include the needed drivers.


if that's the case i'm fine with it.

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## crakej

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> if that's the case i'm fine with it.
> 
> Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


I believe AMD is largely leaving it up to the vendors. If you read up the tech docs, it speaks about how this is very feasible - I guess AMD and the vendors just want us buying new boards, and not having to answer too many tech support questions on the matter as it just won't work on some boards - it depends on a few factors and would be a tech support nightmare.

Personally, I think now we already have it, it would be crazy to take it away as we've already proved it works on the CH7 (M.2 does definitely). I think ASUS should be concentrating on other matters in the bios before taking away pcie 4 for the sake of it.

Does anyone have an RX5700? Aren't they pcie 4?


----------



## gupsterg

Just wanted to share.

When board is off, ie shutdown from OS, PSU has power from wall plug I measure ~1.060V on my DMM on SB Probeit point, all other points have no voltage.

When POST process occurs it goes to ~1.090V initially, then bumps to ~1.120V, then approximately as OS loads ~1.105V, at OS idle same.

Dunno what the bugged UEFI does. Chipset stays active, what it's "standby" voltage feed is on bugged UEFI I dunno and I'm not gonna flash and check.

Board was checked with [Auto] and manual 1.05V chipset voltages.

As I have early board, there is over read on SB in SW monitoring/Probeit points the voltage stated above are ~50mV out from actual, link to elmor's post on this issue.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

crakej said:


> I believe AMD is largely leaving it up to the vendors. If you read up the tech docs, it speaks about how this is very feasible - I guess AMD and the vendors just want us buying new boards, and not having to answer too many tech support questions on the matter as it just won't work on some boards - it depends on a few factors and would be a tech support nightmare.
> 
> 
> 
> Personally, I think now we already have it, it would be crazy to take it away as we've already proved it works on the CH7 (M.2 does definitely). I think ASUS should be concentrating on other matters in the bios before taking away pcie 4 for the sake of it.
> 
> 
> 
> Does anyone have an RX5700? Aren't they pcie 4?




thank you very much! that explains a lot...
And as far as i know 5700 and 5700xt supports pci-e 4.0 !



Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## Gigabytes

crakej said:


> I believe AMD is largely leaving it up to the vendors. If you read up the tech docs, it speaks about how this is very feasible - I guess AMD and the vendors just want us buying new boards, and not having to answer too many tech support questions on the matter as it just won't work on some boards - it depends on a few factors and would be a tech support nightmare.
> 
> Personally, I think now we already have it, it would be crazy to take it away as we've already proved it works on the CH7 (M.2 does definitely). I think ASUS should be concentrating on other matters in the bios before taking away pcie 4 for the sake of it.
> 
> Does anyone have an RX5700? Aren't they pcie 4?


The RX5700 Gen4 can't even max out a Gen3 pcie slot, no GPU can. Maybe in the future when the speeds of GPU double Gen4 will be needed. Point of Gen4 at this time is? Gen4 NVMe perform exactly the same on X470 and X570 Crosshair also.


----------



## crakej

Gigabytes said:


> The RX5700 Gen4 can't even max out a Gen3 pcie slot, no GPU can. Maybe in the future when the speeds of GPU double Gen4 will be needed. Point of Gen4 at this time is? Gen4 NVMe perform exactly the same on X470 and X570 Crosshair also.


I thought this was the case - still, would be nice to know if it does work for the future.... I would only be using it for NVMe - Can't afford GPU upgrade for a while!


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> Just wanted to share.
> 
> When board is off, ie shutdown from OS, PSU has power from wall plug I measure ~1.060V on my DMM on SB Probeit point, all other points have no voltage.
> 
> When POST process occurs it goes to ~1.090V initially, then bumps to ~1.120V, then approximately as OS loads ~1.105V, at OS idle same.
> 
> Dunno what the bugged UEFI does. Chipset stays active, what it's "standby" voltage feed is on bugged UEFI I dunno and I'm not gonna flash and check.
> 
> Board was checked with [Auto] and manual 1.05V chipset voltages.
> 
> As I have early board, there is over read on SB in SW monitoring/Probeit points the voltage stated above are ~50mV out from actual, link to elmor's post on this issue.


I had one of the early boards, but that one is assigned to the tip after a broke it! This board the voltages are reported a bit high, but on probit they are what you have set in bios, though only tested this once ages ago, so might check again.

I've asked Shamino over on ROG to see if he can clarify anything and just to make sure he's aware of some of the probs we're having. You never know, he might answer!


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> I had one of the early boards, but that one is assigned to the tip after a broke it! This board the voltages are reported a bit high, but on probit they are what you have set in bios, though only tested this once ages ago, so might check again.
> 
> I've asked Shamino over on ROG to see if he can clarify anything and just to make sure he's aware of some of the probs we're having. You never know, he might answer!


Ahh, good call  . I just hope next UEFI is more polished.

Odd thing is same UEFI (2406) when using R7 2700X I had the memory presets section on R5 3600 not there  .

Next there are 2 sets of LLC controls for CPU/SOC on R5 3600.



Spoiler






















ProODT has more settings on Matisse.



Spoiler






















Besides more in MBIST and having PMU Training menu. Also has DF-CStates option.



Spoiler














Also there is SOC Overclock mode, which disables C-States for IF, etc IIRC the help string.

Plethora of new options...


----------



## lordzed83

ComansoRowlett said:


> This is my 3900X at 4.5GHz 1.325 (1.306v after droop), memory is at 3733 CL14 too. I'd say I got a golden chip on the core side.


Poat some more details man... Full memory timing list plz also is it actually stable?? What you tested stability on?? Will it pass ycruncher?

Also finished playing around with my mates new pc.
Iw set him my old ddrs 3200 on tight timings. Needs to be rock solid stable before gets it cause not driving 60 miles each way to fix it if something is wrong


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> Ahh, good call  . I just hope next UEFI is more polished.
> 
> Odd thing is same UEFI (2406) when using R7 2700X I had the memory presets section on R5 3600 not there  .
> 
> Next there are 2 sets of LLC controls for CPU/SOC on R5 3600.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 279872
> 
> 
> View attachment 279874
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ProODT has more settings on Matisse.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 279876
> 
> 
> View attachment 279878
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Besides more in MBIST and having PMU Training menu. Also has DF-CStates option.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 279880
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also there is SOC Overclock mode, which disables C-States for IF, etc IIRC the help string.
> 
> Plethora of new options...


Very interesting!

I'm dying here waiting for my CPU! ...all these new things to try out! What's with the 2-stage LLC? Never seen that before.... and Proc ODT - we've never need those values before!!


----------



## oreonutz

ComansoRowlett said:


> This is my 3900X at 4.5GHz 1.325 (1.306v after droop), memory is at 3733 CL14 too. I'd say I got a golden chip on the core side.


NICE!!!!!!! Golden Chip Indeed. Mine Kept Crashing when Manual OCing to just 4.3Ghz with 1.4v. Had to increase to 1.41 to keep it stable and stopped pushing because even on a custom water loop the temps were getting to high. 4.5Ghz at 1.325v, man, I am jealous!


----------



## oreonutz

gupsterg said:


> Ahh, good call  . I just hope next UEFI is more polished.
> 
> Odd thing is same UEFI (2406) when using R7 2700X I had the memory presets section on R5 3600 not there  .
> 
> Next there are 2 sets of LLC controls for CPU/SOC on R5 3600.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 279872
> 
> 
> View attachment 279874


I noticed the 2 Stages of LLC Settings on my 2406 UEFI as well. When you set the First one it automatically sets the second one Three levels below, which is weird, I can't figure out which one its actually using. I normally run LLC Level 2, So I set the first one to Level 2, and then it sets the second one to Level 5, and because of the amount of Vdroop I am getting, I assume I am closer to level 5. I don't know if I should just leave LLC on Automatic, or how this set of LLC is supposed to work.

Also, when the 3900x is in my Board, I also don't have the Memory Presets in UEFI either, They are there on my 2700x. 

I was able to increase my kit of 32GB (4x8GB Flare X Kit) to 3400Mhz CL14-Trcd14-Trp14-Tras34-Trc54-Trfc256, and it booted without issue at the same 1.36v, with also the same SOCv of 1.14 and its stable as a Rock, just ran through my stability testing and its great. This same Kit on my 2700x Needed 1.45v to get to 3400 with the same timing, and still would throw errors and cause stability issues, so this is awesome!


----------



## hurricane28

ComansoRowlett said:


> This is my 3900X at 4.5GHz 1.325 (1.306v after droop), memory is at 3733 CL14 too. I'd say I got a golden chip on the core side.


Can you run it again with Hwinfo64 running and showing screenshot of both plz? Would like to see the settings.


----------



## crakej

ComansoRowlett said:


> This is my 3900X at 4.5GHz 1.325 (1.306v after droop), memory is at 3733 CL14 too. I'd say I got a golden chip on the core side.


I'd love more detail too! What settings for CPU and RAM?

Very nice!


----------



## lordzed83

Well ill share what i learned.
1 gigabyte bios is still years behind asus 
2 gpu software og gigabyte even worse than bioa hahahh

Anyhow 1.1 soc is nor enough for 3733 i waa looking in ddr voltage up to 1.45 no effect. Went on lower ddr volts and poped soc to 1.15 and paased 1000%. Also im using standard power aerrings. Llc4 cpu llc3 soc 400khz on everything. 


Have anyone tested what effect does the Infinity fabric voltage got on its performnce/stability?? 

Think its next thing ill try once im happy with my ddrs. Got the standard 1.05 atm.


----------



## Bart

Yeah I'm not liking my GB bios either. I'm trying to give it a fair chance, but as a long time Asus guy it feels gross, LOL! Plus it seems like the performance enhancement stuff is broke, at least with my 3900x on the latest beta bios (f5g I think?). Works fantastic on my CH7, but on this GB board, simply enabling PBO instantly makes everything worse. I can't make a core go anywhere near 4.6ghz in either scenario. I'm thinking once they start stocking Asus boards around here, I might be eating a restocking fee and switching back.


----------



## Gettz8488

Bart said:


> Yeah I'm not liking my GB bios either. I'm trying to give it a fair chance, but as a long time Asus guy it feels gross, LOL! Plus it seems like the performance enhancement stuff is broke, at least with my 3900x on the latest beta bios (f5g I think?). Works fantastic on my CH7, but on this GB board, simply enabling PBO instantly makes everything worse. I can't make a core go anywhere near 4.6ghz in either scenario. I'm thinking once they start stocking Asus boards around here, I might be eating a restocking fee and switching back.




What do your idle temps look like? I haven’t received my 3900X yet but I plan on downvolting in exchange for some performance in order to keep those idle temps down kind of a pet peeve of mine.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Gettz8488

Have a question for some of you if you disable PBO on your Mobo does this disable XFR? Meaning my cpu won’t have high single core clocks?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## neikosr0x

lordzed83 said:


> Well ill share what i learned.
> 1 gigabyte bios is still years behind asus
> 2 gpu software og gigabyte even worse than bioa hahahh
> 
> Anyhow 1.1 soc is nor enough for 3733 i waa looking in ddr voltage up to 1.45 no effect. Went on lower ddr volts and poped soc to 1.15 and paased 1000%. Also im using standard power aerrings. Llc4 cpu llc3 soc 400khz on everything.
> 
> 
> Have anyone tested what effect does the Infinity fabric voltage got on its performnce/stability??
> 
> Think its next thing ill try once im happy with my ddrs. Got the standard 1.05 atm.


Forgot to mention man, i step down my ram a bit because it was getting too hot for my likes and needing too much voltage so went to 3733 at 1.45v c16 30/50 tfaw16. So far stable and not so hot... soc 1.090volt. but im running my cpu stock with no pbo and and -0.1000 offset while we get a better bios. temps are very low and still getting 4.566ghz st and 4.166mt~ sometimes 4.2ghz.


----------



## crakej

Do we know what the max temps and voltages are recommended on 3xxx CPUs?

How are things looking with secondary timings? Similar to previous gen/s?


----------



## nick name

neikosr0x said:


> Forgot to mention man, i step down my ram a bit because it was getting too hot for my likes and needing too much voltage so went to 3733 at 1.45v c16 30/50 tfaw16. So far stable and not so hot... soc 1.090volt. but im running my cpu stock with no pbo and and -0.1000 offset while we get a better bios. temps are very low and still getting 4.566ghz st and 4.166mt~ sometimes 4.2ghz.


What temps are you seeing? I wouldn't worry about damaging them per se, but you can run into stability problems if you're overclocked to the edge.


----------



## nick name

Gettz8488 said:


> Have a question for some of you if you disable PBO on your Mobo does this disable XFR? Meaning my cpu won’t have high single core clocks?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


I believe you only lose XFR if you manually overclock. PBO is on top of XFR. 

Of course someone correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## neikosr0x

nick name said:


> What temps are you seeing? I wouldn't worry about damaging them per se, but you can run into stability problems if you're overclocked to the edge.


yes that was the case, i mean game and stuff like that wouldn't give any issues, but stress test the temps were getting around 48c and this CASE has a bad exhaust so the hot air was fakng up the whole system hahahaha.


----------



## nick name

neikosr0x said:


> yes that was the case, i mean game and stuff like that wouldn't give any issues, but stress test the temps were getting around 48c and this CASE has a bad exhaust so the hot air was fakng up the whole system hahahaha.


Have you considered pointing a fan directly at your RAM. I place a fan on top of my GPU right in front of my RAM and that works extremely well. That is if you don't have bad GPU sag.


----------



## Bart

Gettz8488 said:


> What do your idle temps look like? I haven’t received my 3900X yet but I plan on downvolting in exchange for some performance in order to keep those idle temps down kind of a pet peeve of mine.


I had the system up briefly for testing, OS install, etc, temps were fine, idling in the low 30s if I remember correctly (Barrow water block). Once I get it built into my main rig, I'll be able to pound the snot out of it.


----------



## chakku

Honestly have no idea how I booted into 3600 before.. Now if I try input the timings and voltages and creep up to 3600 at ~200mhz steps I get the boot lockup at 3466 or above. Even 3400/3466 is if I get lucky, I can use the reboot/retry buttons and sometimes make it through to these but anything more is a hard lock and CMOS clear.


----------



## Syldon

crakej said:


> Do we know what the max temps and voltages are recommended on 3xxx CPUs?
> 
> How are things looking with secondary timings? Similar to previous gen/s?


Debauer did some stuff with voltages and temps. Try here


----------



## neikosr0x

nick name said:


> Have you considered pointing a fan directly at your RAM. I place a fan on top of my GPU right in front of my RAM and that works extremely well. That is if you don't have bad GPU sag.


Yesterday I was looking to get a g.skill turbulencem or a corsair dominator mount to do the trick. Probably next month ill get either.


----------



## nick name

neikosr0x said:


> Yesterday I was looking to get a g.skill turbulencem or a corsair dominator mount to do the trick. Probably next month ill get either.


Bah, just be cheap like me and sit a fan on your GPU.


----------



## lordzed83

neikosr0x said:


> lordzed83 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well ill share what i learned.
> 1 gigabyte bios is still years behind asus
> 2 gpu software og gigabyte even worse than bioa hahahh
> 
> Anyhow 1.1 soc is nor enough for 3733 i waa looking in ddr voltage up to 1.45 no effect. Went on lower ddr volts and poped soc to 1.15 and paased 1000%. Also im using standard power aerrings. Llc4 cpu llc3 soc 400khz on everything.
> 
> 
> Have anyone tested what effect does the Infinity fabric voltage got on its performnce/stability??
> 
> Think its next thing ill try once im happy with my ddrs. Got the standard 1.05 atm.
> 
> 
> 
> Forgot to mention man, i step down my ram a bit because it was getting too hot for my likes and needing too much voltage so went to 3733 at 1.45v c16 30/50 tfaw16. So far stable and not so hot... soc 1.090volt. but im running my cpu stock with no pbo and and -0.1000 offset while we get a better bios. temps are very low and still getting 4.566ghz st and 4.166mt~ sometimes 4.2ghz.
Click to expand...



Aaaaa i tesyed and 3733c1its not faster than 3600 errors licking in i bet 
Thats my mater build sore


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Do we know what the max temps and voltages are recommended on 3xxx CPUs?
> 
> How are things looking with secondary timings? Similar to previous gen/s?



Iw heatd that 1.4 is new 1.45


----------



## crakej

Syldon said:


> Debauer did some stuff with voltages and temps. Try here


Thank you... so almost the same as before..

I hope you guys don't get bored when I finally get my 3900x next week and I ask all this stuff you've done already! (I'll try not to!)

Most of you know I have lots of time, so when i do eventually have my CPU, I'm happy to run tests any of you might need/want done so we can compare and work stuff out.

So excited! It's just incredible - AMD are single handedly increasing the amount of computing power on the planet exponentially. Very exciting times.


----------



## crakej

Can someone that does bios modding have a look and see if they can see what modules provide pcie functionality?

Can we save that to re-use later?


----------



## lordzed83

@crakej today I noticed taht Zen2 reacts to rtemperature more like Intel than old amd. While frying my mate s new righ with stress tests overclocking itp. Cpu was sitting at 90c (checked 3 softwares) And was stable bo crasz ec. For me 24/7 setup is up to 80c. Atm im stress testing around 71


aaa another thing my 3900x had terrible not flat IHS no my liquid metal timm was touching maybe 60% added extra to cut it and temops went down 3c


----------



## cheddle

chakku said:


> Honestly have no idea how I booted into 3600 before.. Now if I try input the timings and voltages and creep up to 3600 at ~200mhz steps I get the boot lockup at 3466 or above. Even 3400/3466 is if I get lucky, I can use the reboot/retry buttons and sometimes make it through to these but anything more is a hard lock and CMOS clear.



Its probably DRAM boot voltage - this defaults to 1.2v - set it manually to a around your actual DRAM volts and you should be fine  the 200mhz~ steps thing isnt a real fix as it just dodges the low DRAM post voltage. I can go from 2133 to 3733 in a single leap!


----------



## VPII

Taken the issue with stock of the Ryzen 3000 processors in South Africa I decided to use part of my payment for the Ryzen 9 3900 for a Ryzen 5 3600. Well I am seriously surprised as this chip is killing some of the results I got with my 2700X. Not quite there in Time Spy, but in Fire Strike is basically on par.

Fire Strike comparison 
https://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/19843419/fs/19643643

A Time Spy run
https://www.3dmark.com/spy/7766875

And to round it off, interestingly the 2nd best with a 6 core in the world at 4.3ghz but the winner at 6.8ghz...... seriously this is a run at 2.5ghz slower but it is right up there.

https://www.3dmark.com/pcm7/1177818

on Hwbot just to show

https://hwbot.org/submission/4193562_vpii_pcmark_7_ryzen_5_3600_10001_marks

If I do not get the Ryzen 9 3900X in the coming week, I'll get some Dry Ice to run this chip. I am actually shocked at how low the temps are on this chip at 1.425vcore.

I've noticed CB20 actually heats op the processor more than most benchmarks so here's a run I did only to see the max temps. Was not my best run though


----------



## chakku

cheddle said:


> Its probably DRAM boot voltage - this defaults to 1.2v - set it manually to a around your actual DRAM volts and you should be fine  the 200mhz~ steps thing isnt a real fix as it just dodges the low DRAM post voltage. I can go from 2133 to 3733 in a single leap!


I have DRAM Vboot voltage (In External Digi+ Power Control) set to equal what my DRAM voltage is, doesn't seem to make a difference, ie 1.4V in this case or even 1.45V to try get the 3600 to boot. Was using this even before the 1.2V bug on my 2700X.


----------



## subzero_

*Modded ASUS Crosshair VII Hero (Wi-Fi) Bios v. 2406?*

Sorry for making a post for this, this is my first one, new to the site. I wanted to unhide some settings (all of them would be fine) but according to @mtrai post it takes hours. I was wondering if someone or mtrai could link me the modded bios file?


----------



## chakku

chakku said:


> I have DRAM Vboot voltage (In External Digi+ Power Control) set to equal what my DRAM voltage is, doesn't seem to make a difference, ie 1.4V in this case or even 1.45V to try get the 3600 to boot. Was using this even before the 1.2V bug on my 2700X.


May have been a timing that was too tight that it just wouldn't boot at actually. Managed to crawl my way back up to 3600.. Started off with only primary timings input as per calc (profile V2) and slowly tightened timings while making sure i still booted in. One interesting thing I spotted the auto timings doing was setting tRDWR to 8 on one channel and 7 on the other. I have yet to set these both to 7 but I wonder if this was one of the causes, one of the sticks prefering a looser timing?

EDIT: Just changed the timing to 7 and bang, C5 error and boot lockup. Seem to have found the culprit!

EDIT2: I think I understand the '7/8' setting in the V1 profile for 3600C14 now..

Time to try get 3733 stable.. I hope. Speeds are looking good so far


Spoiler


----------



## VPII

Im sitting with a slight problem. The setup hss been running pretty well except for the odd power on agsin failures. Now it wont start up, just 08 qpost but literally for a fraction of a second and switch off again, not it is cycling on off on off on off with mo startup.

Got it sorted now.... unplug mobo and took out battery for about 10 minutes and working now.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## oreonutz

What the hell. I was just watching a youtube video, and I happened to look down at my 2nd screen to see HWinfo reporting my Temperature at 110c! I quickly checked Pump speed and it was at 0! Damnit, what the hell Asus! Now i need to find a molex connector because apparently I cant rely on Asus Fan Controller to keep power to the pump???


----------



## chakku

Argh just hit an error at 1018%..


----------



## oreonutz

oreonutz said:


> What the hell. I was just watching a youtube video, and I happened to look down at my 2nd screen to see HWinfo reporting my Temperature at 110c! I quickly checked Pump speed and it was at 0! Damnit, what the hell Asus! Now i need to find a molex connector because apparently I cant rely on Asus Fan Controller to keep power to the pump???


So I have to test a scenario. My Water Pump is powered through a SATA Power Connector, but I connected the PWM Tach Cable from the Pump to the WPump+ Sensor on my C7H. Before putting in the 3900x and Flashing to the 2406 UEFI I have NEVER had a problem running it this way. I like it because I can control my Pump Speed Based on CPU Temperature to have it Ramp Up Pump speed Accordingly, I just use a slow Reaction time so its not constantly jumping.

Anyways, it would appear that The Board Just STOPPED sending PWM Signals altogether, because when I noticed my CPU Temp at 110c, I quickly Checked Pump Speed and it was at 0, The Fans said they were at their normal 1200RPM, but when I checked them, they were all Stopped completely. 

So I need to test to see if this EK-SPC Pump will allow itself to drop all the way to 0RPM if The Motherboard tells it to. It would appear thats what happened.

And at the time I was doing nothing but watching a Youtube Video, so not sure what would cause the Fan Controller to just cut out Completely. At the Launch of this board back for the 2000 Series, I had a stupid problem where the PWM Controller would get stuck, so the fans wouldn't just stop, but they would just stay at whatever speed they happened to be at when the Controller stopped adjusting, but I never had a problem where they just stopped all Fans and Pumps altogether.

Is anyone else noticing this problem on this UEFI??? Thinking about trying the Beta UEFI, but afraid to blowout my chipset... (That would be my luck)


----------



## dev1ance

oreonutz said:


> What the hell. I was just watching a youtube video, and I happened to look down at my 2nd screen to see HWinfo reporting my Temperature at 110c! I quickly checked Pump speed and it was at 0! Damnit, what the hell Asus! Now i need to find a molex connector because apparently I cant rely on Asus Fan Controller to keep power to the pump???





oreonutz said:


> So I have to test a scenario. My Water Pump is powered through a SATA Power Connector, but I connected the PWM Tach Cable from the Pump to the WPump+ Sensor on my C7H. Before putting in the 3900x and Flashing to the 2406 UEFI I have NEVER had a problem running it this way. I like it because I can control my Pump Speed Based on CPU Temperature to have it Ramp Up Pump speed Accordingly, I just use a slow Reaction time so its not constantly jumping.
> 
> Anyways, it would appear that The Board Just STOPPED sending PWM Signals altogether, because when I noticed my CPU Temp at 110c, I quickly Checked Pump Speed and it was at 0, The Fans said they were at their normal 1200RPM, but when I checked them, they were all Stopped completely.
> 
> So I need to test to see if this EK-SPC Pump will allow itself to drop all the way to 0RPM if The Motherboard tells it to. It would appear thats what happened.
> 
> And at the time I was doing nothing but watching a Youtube Video, so not sure what would cause the Fan Controller to just cut out Completely. At the Launch of this board back for the 2000 Series, I had a stupid problem where the PWM Controller would get stuck, so the fans wouldn't just stop, but they would just stay at whatever speed they happened to be at when the Controller stopped adjusting, but I never had a problem where they just stopped all Fans and Pumps altogether.
> 
> Is anyone else noticing this problem on this UEFI??? Thinking about trying the Beta UEFI, but afraid to blowout my chipset... (That would be my luck)




Here's a bypass if you have no molex connector: connect your pump to CHA and run CHA on a manual curve with 100% for all temperatures (or just a constant speed rather than ramping up and down). REMEMBER to set the minimum fan spin to 600RPM. In this case, it happened to me a third time but the pump continued to run at full speed while fans were all down to around 800-1000RPM.

My AIO pump did the exact same thing. It shouldn't have dropped to 0 but it did the first few times while connected to WPump. Decided to use molex but I hate the thought of no monitoring in case that fails too lol. Hence why I connected to CHA. It happened again to me but the setting of minimum 600RPM kept the pump running for some reason at full speed while the rest of my fans ran at their minimums. Set minimum RPM limit for all your fans and they'll still spin.

Are you also using the 'manual' option? I wonder if that's the cause.

I would also set HWInfo alert up (checkmark "Run a Program" and search "shutdown.exe") so it would shutdown if pump (or CHA if you connect to that) <1000RPM with "-s and t -03" (shutdown within 3 seconds) in arguments.

To note, I have a C6E. So it's something to do with BIOs and not the board.


----------



## neikosr0x

dev1ance said:


> Here's a bypass if you have no molex connector: connect your pump to CHA and run CHA on a manual curve with 100% for all temperatures (or just a constant speed rather than ramping up and down). REMEMBER to set the minimum fan spin to 600RPM. In this case, it happened to me a third time but the pump continued to run at full speed while fans were all down to around 800-1000RPM.
> 
> My AIO pump did the exact same thing. It shouldn't have dropped to 0 but it did the first few times while connected to WPump. Decided to use molex but I hate the thought of no monitoring in case that fails too lol. Hence why I connected to CHA. It happened again to me but the setting of minimum 600RPM kept the pump running for some reason at full speed while the rest of my fans ran at their minimums. Set minimum RPM limit for all your fans and they'll still spin.
> 
> Are you also using the 'manual' option? I wonder if that's the cause.
> 
> I would also set HWInfo alert up (checkmark "Run a Program" and search "shutdown.exe") so it would shutdown if pump (or CHA if you connect to that) <1000RPM with "-s and t -03" (shutdown within 3 seconds) in arguments.
> 
> To note, I have a C6E. So it's something to do with BIOs and not the board.


We are all in the same boat here, happened to be as well... honestly, i wonder how asus couldn't spot this many issues before releasing this BIOS.


----------



## oreonutz

dev1ance said:


> Here's a bypass if you have no molex connector: connect your pump to CHA and run CHA on a manual curve with 100% for all temperatures (or just a constant speed rather than ramping up and down). REMEMBER to set the minimum fan spin to 600RPM. In this case, it happened to me a third time but the pump continued to run at full speed while fans were all down to around 800-1000RPM.
> 
> My AIO pump did the exact same thing. It shouldn't have dropped to 0 but it did the first few times while connected to WPump. Decided to use molex but I hate the thought of no monitoring in case that fails too lol. Hence why I connected to CHA. It happened again to me but the setting of minimum 600RPM kept the pump running for some reason at full speed while the rest of my fans ran at their minimums. Set minimum RPM limit for all your fans and they'll still spin.
> 
> Are you also using the 'manual' option? I wonder if that's the cause.
> 
> I would also set HWInfo alert up (checkmark "Run a Program" and search "shutdown.exe") so it would shutdown if pump (or CHA if you connect to that) <1000RPM with "-s and t -03" (shutdown within 3 seconds) in arguments.
> 
> To note, I have a C6E. So it's something to do with BIOs and not the board.


This is GREAT ADVICE! Thank You! I feel like a dumb ass, but I am drawing a Blank for CHA. Do you mean any of the CHA1-3 Headers? 

So a few things. I decided having monitoring on the pump just wasn't worth the risk of this happening again, since I work from this PC and might not look down at HWinfo for hours at a time when I am really engaged in a project, and I just can't have that happen again, So I went and found me a PWM to Molex Adapter. Also I was stupid, after opening up my Rig, I realized my Pump is not Connected via SATA Power, that was my old pump I was thinking of, this one Gets all its power straight from the PWM Connector, so my PWM to Molex adapter at least solved that issue for now, even with no fans spinning in this system, as long as the Pump is working and I am not running a benchmark or something, I won't have to worry about burning up the CPU.

That said, I love what you are saying about setting the Minimum fan levels, right now they are all set to 200RPM Min, I run ALL Corsair ML120 or 140 Fans, and I think 200RPM may be below their starting threshold, so that may be why they all kicked off. So I am about to reboot and kick in the 600RPM Min.

I am using a Manual WPump Fan Setting in the UEFI. But something weird I just noticed. Even after performing a Factory Default, the Settings for WPUMP/AIO disappeared in the UEFI. On the Monitoring screen it displays the RPM of the Pump (Before I disconnected it) but when you go down to change the values, the only setting there is the setting to change it from Auto/PWM/DC. It was set to PWM, Manual, and then I had a custom Speed set for High, Medium, and Low, but all those settings are just gone now. That's when I just decided it was time to find the PWM to Molex adapter.

So I am going to take your advice and set all my fans to have a minimum, and next time I notice this happen I will report back to let you know if this worked for me (I also may open her back up and throw her on a CHA Header and set the Min as you suggested, but I have to Plan out which set of Fans I am going to move off of one of the CHA Headers first. I also have the ASUS Fan Extension Card, maybe I will finally hook that up and see if the Fans Connected to that suffer from the same issue). Anyways, Thank You @dev1ance for the great advice!


----------



## oreonutz

So I doubt if anyone cares, but I was excited about this, so thought maybe someone would find it interesting.

Yesterday when trying to Manually OC, I needed 1.45v to get 4.3Ghz to run stable through a CB20 Run. I run a 4x8GB Kit of Flare X 3200 CL14, and to get that to Boot at 3400CL14 I needed to bump up the SOCv to 1.1625 (or so I thought).

Today I decided to get my rig to boot at the Lowest SOCv possible, and I was able to get her to boot and pass MemTest at 1000% with just 1.125 SOCv, and then I started working up my Manual OC starting with 1.3vCORE at 4.1Ghz, working up just 25Mhz at a time, and before you know it I was up to 4.3Ghz. I haven't tried going up from here yet, as I haven't done a full Hour Blender AVX Render Yet, which is the hardest Load my Workflow requires, so I am not sure if it will pass that yet, but it did 10 Consecutive run of CB20 No Problem! 

So It seems, as with Zen+, there is a balance between SOCv and vCore that (probably like Zen+) will likely vary from chip to chip. Too Much SOCv and you will need more vCore to make the Same Core Clock Stable. I ran into this issue with my 2700x and too much SOCv as well, its always my first instinct when something doesn't pass validation on memory to bump up the voltage, but with Zen SOC sometimes its smart to try to bump down first. Anyways, Thought this was interesting, hopefully someone else will find this useful as well. Got my Highest CB20 Score yet too, up 300 Points!


----------



## LePr3

nick name said:


> Sorry, I read the bits that didn't work and then forgot about 'em. That's on me.
> 
> And thank you for taking the extra time to explain. I was thinking we were on the same page when I was also talking about the DRAM Timing Control After Training page which can be navigated to from the main DRAM timing page. It's an option below the presets. That's where there is an option for tREFI that I can't get to work. However, I think @gupsterg said that it wouldn't because you couldn't change values after POST. But that's why I was confused about where to use hex values and why I was using the wrong values on the Advanced AMD CBS timings page.
> 
> So now that I have some more clarity I am gonna go back and try to use the timings page under AMD CBS and see if I can get past the memory training when combined with Data Eye. From what it says in the BIOS Data Eye just checks voltage against timing so the memory training stopping makes sense. Unless I'm thinking about it wrong.
> 
> Edit:
> Got it to work! Except tREFI.


I'm late, but I see which menu you were talking about now! I tried a few changes and none of them held - exactly like you said. At least the CBS menu kinda works. We still have no idea if it's any different to setting it through the usual DRAM menu, but whynot.



mtrai said:


> ?????


I'm not sure if that was directed at me, but here's a few screenshots showing what I mean by PBO2 being load dynamic vs PBO3-4. This is post is _long_ though so ignore if not.


Spoiler



First a cinebench run. I've done a quick change to try and keep all core 'heavy' load frequencies the same across both.
First PBO2 which hovers around 4.173Ghz to 4.2Ghz.


Spoiler














Then PBO3 which I've set to lock itself at 4.173Ghz all core. PBO3 voltage is no way long term stable at all, but the point here is to demonstrate the differences between the two.


Spoiler















You'll notice PBO2 is very generous with the voltage - 1.4 is very much on the limit - which is seemlingly dangerous, and it fluctuates wildly. This is not default because I've 'told' it to do this. In contrast, PBO3's voltage kinda flatlines under load after vdroop. For PBO1-2, this is fine, as the CPU will actively throttle the current/voltage based off the EDC/TDC limit before it becomes dangerous. The voltages being supplied are always vividly changing due to the CPU constantly making readjustments based off herustics. What we can't see is it throttling.

The following is how you can nudge it so it goes slightly further.

Under normal circumstances, PBO2 would scale back to 1.38 volts at X10 scaler as a best case all core heavy workloads. This happens because everyone hits the temperature limit before the EDC limit. This can be influenced, and it's done by setting SenseMi Skew to enabled, adjusting the SenseMI offset and changing CPU voltage to offset. Default is 272, which will end up reporting around a 20 degree lower temperature. Enabling SenseMI requires a cold boot restart for the changes to take effect. The reported temps for tDie become influenced by SenseMI offset and PLL voltage (make sure this is 1.8V else your temps reported temps will become too high).
Enabling these tricks the temperature headroom for PBO2 and allows us to play with what voltages we can put through it before it decides to throttle back. PBO3-4 is temperature and power limit agnostic, so this setting has no relevance there.

Now here's an example of a 'light' load showing the dynamics of regular XFR.
PBO2


Spoiler














 PBO3


Spoiler














 
Despite being an all core load, PBO2 has decided that because there's less current, it'll happily boost all the cores higher while supplying them with a higher voltage - if TDC/EDC allow. The issue I have with PBO3-4 is that despite being allowed to go over PBO2's X10 scalers maximum power limits (1.38-1.48 volts), it locks frequency 'statically' based on how many cores are under load. For PBO3, the maximum single core boost is three threads before it'll decide to go to it's all core multiplier. PBO4 will almost always try to hit 43x multiplier all core (it's probably adjustable but I've never looked into it.)
In PBO3, this raises a dilemma: because it locks the cores statically, your all core overclock must be able to take your worst case load. This means you're limiting your frequency for lighter loads that utilize many threads.

Now for some characteristics I've noticed on PBO1-2: PBO does not care what LLC or voltage you set. Well, actually, that's a lie. It does, but not in the usual sense of overclocking. They're more 'influencers' due to the CPU controlling most the settings.

These have all been documented, but here's where I must make a note. People have been advocating for undervolting their CPUs while using normal XFR/PBO, but _that's going about it the wrong way._ You '_want_' XFR/PBO to give as much voltage as it can before EDC/TDC throttling to maintain stability and have the maximum boost in low current workloads.
Applying a negative voltage offset shifts the operating all core load frequency upwards, which seems good, but doing this hurts your light load voltages (single or all core). If you check your actual working voltages under heavy load, it's most likely still the same. Below is an undervolt of -0.05. You'll notice the idle voltages have dropped when told to go full power.

PBO2 - Undervolt -0.05 Idle


Spoiler
















PBO2 Default 1.45ish volts Idle


Spoiler
















Now let's place some load on it.




Spoiler














 
You'll also notice that the multiplier has gone up and we've gained around 75Mhz in cinebench. You'll also notice that the all core voltage is still the same. This is because PBO goes off the scaler setting and picks based off EDC/PDC, temps etc. This is not vDroop! Changing LLC will leave the cores at 1.4volts regardless and simply scale the frequency up and down. Hilariously, this results in 4.35-4.375Ghz all core light load. This seems all well and good. But let's check the single core.

Locked single thread to thread #15 - PBO2 Default Voltage


Spoiler














Locked single thread to core #15 - PBO2 -0.05 Undervolt


Spoiler














Oh dear. Because of our undervolt our single core is now only being supplied 1.425 volts. This is what causes lockups, and prevents single core from boosting higher in BCLK workloads.

You have to apply a negative offset high enough for it to clock under 1.38volts with vdroop for it to actually reduce your 'heavy' load working voltages. (This may have changed in 2406, but practically we'd never want to do this - it makes light loads unstable, adjust the PBO scaler instead). By default, PBO2 is around 1.45 default on idle, which is why you'll hear common undervolts of around .075 - .1.

Because of this, I'd earnestly recommend not to undervolt. Applying a negative offset hurts your single core voltage. Under normal circumstances, instead of freezing the CPU will quietly throttle the single core back. Instead, adjust your voltages through the PBO scaler and move the all core load frequency up and down through the use of LLC + Mode0 in the bios (Mode0 adds/removes 25Mhz.) Select CPU Voltage to 'Offset', select 'minus' and keep it on Auto.


Under these new changes, it's possible to regain a single core that's similiar to PBO3 + BLCK overclocking while still having a higher 3-16 thread light load.

Now, I have a poor CPU specimen and a moderate cooler. It'll barely do 4.2Ghz @ 1.4volts. This means that if I were to use PBO3, I'd have to limit my all core frequency to 4.2Ghz and see how far I can get with single core. Many games and applications load at least 4 threads so the following happens: Windows constantly moves threads around, and PBO3 allows single core clocks with only 3 threads loaded or less, you ultimately end up with the all core frequency all the time. With PBO2, you get granularity, no. of threads irrelevant. PBO3 imo is only useful if you can push 4.275Ghz all core, and/or you have the need to push beyond the voltage limits PBO2 provides (most likely BLCK overclocking single core).
You can achieve similar effects to PBO3 with PBO2 by adjusting the SenseMI offset + PLL voltages extremely, but the idea is that we want the CPU to scale back under heavy loads, and boost higher on lighter ones. Adjusting these too far results in a CPU with a max multiplier that's unresponsive to load changes. The goal is to try and match what your max all core 'heavy' load frequency is at, with the all core voltage you decide on, scaling the frequency using LLC. You can move back down to 1.30-1.38volts all core by using a lower PBO scaler if you're uncomfortable with 1.4 and doing SenseMi temperature skewing is still beneficial - it 'relaxs' the temperature throttling, allowing higher for frequencies.

TLDR; Enabling SenseMI and offset 272 allows us to go beyond the 1.38-1.48 voltage limit. Under the defaults for SenseMI, At 10X PBO scaling, new voltage limits are around 1.4-1.5. These are adjustable through PBO scaling choices, and SenseMI offset.

For PBO2, I personally don't mind the high voltages, because I know the CPU will scale back if a high current load gets put into it. The voltage isn't static and in Linux, you can watch the cores frequency change in 0.1sec updates, having a deviations of up to 25-50MhzMhz at times under load. Watching PBO3-4 results in the frequency being locked.


I've been running PBO2 and telling it to push between 1.4-1.5 since release haven't noticed any degradation. I think it's because of the EDC throttling mechanism stopping it from actually delivering the advertised amount of volts. I'd be more worried if I were using PBO3-4, because the power limits are released and EDC never throttles. Those two run really hot for me despite using lower voltages for them.

For anyone running Ryzen 3000, I've no idea if doing this method carries over. I've had a hunch that this doing this 'should' work in terms of making them boost higher, as they're still using normal XFR/PBO. Whether it's safe or not, or how much quicker your chip will degrade, I can't say. For me, the latest BIOS has improved PBO/XFR in that I no longer lock up when trying for 4.2Ghz+ all core heavy load. My old limit was anywhere in between 4.2Ghz-4.4Ghz. I'm still testing, but 4.25Ghz-4.4Ghz seems stable so far.


----------



## chakku

Admittedly only recently bought Karhu Ramtest, is the % threshold different for 32GB of RAM like it was for HCI Memtest? Is 2400% acceptable for daily, non-critical use?


----------



## ComansoRowlett

hurricane28 said:


> Can you run it again with Hwinfo64 running and showing screenshot of both plz? Would like to see the settings.


Here you are. I actually had to up the vcore slightly since I lowered some timings on the memory (makes the core work harder so makes sense). I've probably given it too much now, I just placed the droop from LLC2 to 1 to get a flat line. I could of probably dropped it a few clicks lower voltage alongside that (e.g. 1.312v or something).

Something to note though the voltage wall is extremely heavy. With 1.187v I can run upto 4.4 just fine. 4.45 required 1.262v (although I didn't attempt lower) and then 4.5GHz required 1.325 (or maybe slightly less) with P95 prolonged testing.


----------



## gupsterg

ComansoRowlett said:


> This is my 3900X at 4.5GHz 1.325 (1.306v after droop), memory is at 3733 CL14 too. I'd say I got a golden chip on the core side.


Wow nice :thumb: . Thing makes mince meat of the 16C/32T Threadripper , considering it's 12C/24T.



crakej said:


> Very interesting!
> 
> I'm dying here waiting for my CPU! ...all these new things to try out! What's with the 2-stage LLC? Never seen that before.... and Proc ODT - we've never need those values before!!


Dunno about the 2 stage LLC. I hope your CPU is soon with you. Seems as if what ProcODT values we used with say Zen/Zen+ may not be the case with Zen2.

For example 3666MHz using ProcODT 48 on 2700X I never would have got to OS let alone run RealBench for 3.5hrs before it popped an error.



oreonutz said:


> I noticed the 2 Stages of LLC Settings on my 2406 UEFI as well. When you set the First one it automatically sets the second one Three levels below, which is weird, I can't figure out which one ts actually using. I normally run LLC Level 2, So I set the first one to Level 2, and then it sets the second one to Level 5, and because of the amount of Vdroop I am getting, I assume I am closer to level 5. I don't know if I should just leave LLC on Automatic, or how this set of LLC is supposed to work.
> 
> Also, when the 3900x is in my Board, I also don't have the Memory Presets in UEFI either, They are there on my 2700x.
> 
> I was able to increase my kit of 32GB (4x8GB Flare X Kit) to 3400Mhz CL14-Trcd14-Trp14-Tras34-Trc54-Trfc256, and it booted without issue at the same 1.36v, with also the same SOCv of 1.14 and its stable as a Rock, just ran through my stability testing and its great. This same Kit on my 2700x Needed 1.45v to get to 3400 with the same timing, and still would throw errors and cause stability issues, so this is awesome!


I've always stuck with LLC [Auto] on Zen/Zen+ and probably will on Zen2, then be as AMD spec.



crakej said:


> Do we know what the max temps and voltages are recommended on 3xxx CPUs?
> 
> How are things looking with secondary timings? Similar to previous gen/s?


Recently when I asked The Stilt for guidance on P95 usage he stated TjMax 95, but be below 85C and seem as if due to process/density we may wanna not fire heavy duty loads, link.



crakej said:


> Can someone that does bios modding have a look and see if they can see what modules provide pcie functionality?
> 
> Can we save that to re-use later?


Besides module what is a total mare from what I experienced is getting the menu text/options to be there. So it's not just about the modules, etc. Then the text/menu option has to link to "variable", again another mare....



chakku said:


> Admittedly only recently bought Karhu Ramtest, is the % threshold different for 32GB of RAM like it was for HCI Memtest? Is 2400% acceptable for daily, non-critical use?


From what I've noted to reach the same % on 32GB when using RAM Test as say a run on 16GB takes twice as long, caveat same CPU setup for each.

So I believe % requirement would be same for each setup, you would just be spending double the time as have double the RAM to test.


----------



## chakku

gupsterg said:


> From what I've noted to reach the same % on 32GB when using RAM Test as say a run on 16GB takes twice as long, caveat same CPU setup for each.
> 
> So I believe % requirement would be same for each setup, you would just be spending double the time as have double the RAM to test.


Thanks, reason I ask is the 24/7 Memory Stability thread OP comments on HCI

"HCI consider 1000% to be the 'golden standard' however for larger densities this can be time consuming. A minimal coverage of two laps (200%) is required to be added to the table for HCI for density over 16GB. 16GB or less requires a minimum of 4 laps (400%)"

Not sure how Karhu numbers compare to HCI but I guess amount of RAM makes no difference for %.


----------



## neikosr0x

I just found this, looks like not all CPU should handle 3800mhz RAM at 1:1. Does anyone have problems trying to run memory at that speed "3633+"


----------



## gupsterg

chakku said:


> Thanks, reason I ask is the 24/7 Memory Stability thread OP comments on HCI
> 
> "HCI consider 1000% to be the 'golden standard' however for larger densities this can be time consuming. A minimal coverage of two laps (200%) is required to be added to the table for HCI for density over 16GB. 16GB or less requires a minimum of 4 laps (400%)"
> 
> Not sure how Karhu numbers compare to HCI but I guess amount of RAM makes no difference for %.


NP  .

When OP had that in we were on v5.0 HCI or earlier IIRC. Then v6.0 changed:-



> 6.0: optimized for computers with >4GB ram. Particularly significant for Deluxe users. If you are testing 8GB or more you need this version. If testing less than 4GB, 5.x may actually be slightly faster. *Based on extensive empirical research we have updated the percent coverage metric*; testing to 100% will catch all errors except for intermittent failures; to detect intermittent problems test to 400%.


If my memory serve me correctly 1000% on v6.0 was longer run time than 1000% on v5.0 or earlier, I have both IIRC and may check when time allows. So you couldn't even compare the two, even if it's technically same program in use and HW+settings, etc.


----------



## nick name

chakku said:


> Admittedly only recently bought Karhu Ramtest, is the % threshold different for 32GB of RAM like it was for HCI Memtest? Is 2400% acceptable for daily, non-critical use?


From the Karhu FAQ:



Code:


Q: How long should I test?
A: Error detection rates by test duration*:

Duration ≤ 1 min: 47,44 %
Duration ≤ 5 min: 74,41 %
Duration ≤ 10 min: 83,66 %
Duration ≤ 30 min: 95,67 %
Duration ≤ 60 min: 98,43 %
* RAM Test 1.1.0.0, stop on error

Q: How much coverage is enough?
A: Error detection rates by test coverage*:

Coverage ≤ 100 %: 64,57 %
Coverage ≤ 200 %: 75,79 %
Coverage ≤ 400 %: 82,68 %
Coverage ≤ 800 %: 91,34 %
Coverage ≤ 1600 %: 96,06 %
Coverage ≤ 3200 %: 98,03 %
Coverage ≤ 6400 %: 99,41 %
* RAM Test 1.1.0.0, stop on error, normalized to 16384 MB test region size


----------



## mtrai

subzero_ said:


> Sorry for making a post for this, this is my first one, new to the site. I wanted to unhide some settings (all of them would be fine) but according to @mtrai post it takes hours. I was wondering if someone or mtrai could link me the modded bios file?


Which settings?


----------



## AvengedRobix

The problem with mouse in BIOS with 2406 Is only with rizen 3000?

Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A6013 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## subzero_

@mtrai Mostly HPET but was interested in Spread Spectrum too. I read that disabling anything you don't need decreases latency (input lag), I'm big into CS:GO and I'm rank A right now on ESEA. So yeah I'd be good with all of the settings being unhidden, I'd read up on the individual settings before I disabled it though so I didn't mess anything up.


----------



## lordzed83




----------



## nick name

AvengedRobix said:


> The problem with mouse in BIOS with 2406 Is only with rizen 3000?
> 
> Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A6013 utilizzando Tapatalk


No, first and second gen Ryzen also.


----------



## mtrai

subzero_ said:


> @mtrai Mostly HPET but was interested in Spread Spectrum too. I read that disabling anything you don't need decreases latency (input lag), I'm big into CS:GO and I'm rank A right now on ESEA. So yeah I'd be good with all of the settings being unhidden, I'd read up on the individual settings before I disabled it though so I didn't mess anything up.


I did not mod 2406 much but I did do the new beta bios 0068 let me know if you want it? Keep in mind you have to use search to find HPET and Spread Spectrum.


----------



## subzero_

mtrai said:


> I did not mod 2406 much but I did do the new beta bios 0068 let me know if you want it? Keep in mind you have to use search to find HPET and Spread Spectrum.


Yeah bro I'll take it, and noted ty


----------



## xeizo

mtrai said:


> I did not mod 2406 much but I did do the new beta bios 0068 let me know if you want it? Keep in mind you have to use search to find HPET and Spread Spectrum.


Dp you have a mod for installing and running it on the non WiFi CH7?


----------



## nick name

lordzed83 said:


>


Your AIO pump is showing 0 RPM?

Also, kind of impressed BCLK is sitting at 100 and not 99.8.


----------



## xeizo

lordzed83 said:


>


I don't know if you've noticed it, but your pic is very small ....


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> Your AIO pump is showing 0 RPM?
> 
> Also, kind of impressed BCLK is sitting at 100 and not 99.8.


I looks like when running PE at auto it automatically stays at 100, at least so do my board.


----------



## mtrai

subzero_ said:


> Yeah bro I'll take it, and noted ty


Here you go this is the modded 0068 C7H WIFI the new bios are to large to upload here now. Remember to flash via flashback.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=15ok6PFLMP4KXgXUBD7bz4OOj7LTYyPUU


----------



## mtrai

xeizo said:


> Dp you have a mod for installing and running it on the non WiFi CH7?


Sorry no...just do not have the time to mod various bios.


----------



## xeizo

mtrai said:


> Sorry no...just do not have the time to mod various bios.


No problem, just wondering if you had already done it. Let's hope Asus posts a better one for regular download sooner than later!


----------



## chakku

nick name said:


> From the Karhu FAQ:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> Q: How long should I test?
> A: Error detection rates by test duration*:
> 
> Duration ≤ 1 min: 47,44 %
> Duration ≤ 5 min: 74,41 %
> Duration ≤ 10 min: 83,66 %
> Duration ≤ 30 min: 95,67 %
> Duration ≤ 60 min: 98,43 %
> * RAM Test 1.1.0.0, stop on error
> 
> Q: How much coverage is enough?
> A: Error detection rates by test coverage*:
> 
> Coverage ≤ 100 %: 64,57 %
> Coverage ≤ 200 %: 75,79 %
> Coverage ≤ 400 %: 82,68 %
> Coverage ≤ 800 %: 91,34 %
> Coverage ≤ 1600 %: 96,06 %
> Coverage ≤ 3200 %: 98,03 %
> Coverage ≤ 6400 %: 99,41 %
> * RAM Test 1.1.0.0, stop on error, normalized to 16384 MB test region size


My only confusion here is that obviously the coverage is based on 16GB memory which I assume the test duration is as well. >60min testing will get me above 2000% but based on these numbers >60min would already be well into 3200%+ on 16GB kits.

Might just see if I can get away with it as it is, don't really want to loosen up any more timings otherwise what's the point of having slow 3733 vs maybe a little faster 3600 :/


----------



## subzero_

mtrai said:


> Here you go this is the modded 0068 C7H WIFI the new bios are to large to upload here now. Remember to flash via flashback.
> 
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=15ok6PFLMP4KXgXUBD7bz4OOj7LTYyPUU


Thank you my man you are a legend


----------



## gupsterg

nick name said:


> From the Karhu FAQ:
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> Q: How long should I test?
> A: Error detection rates by test duration*:
> 
> Duration ≤ 1 min: 47,44 %
> Duration ≤ 5 min: 74,41 %
> Duration ≤ 10 min: 83,66 %
> Duration ≤ 30 min: 95,67 %
> Duration ≤ 60 min: 98,43 %
> * RAM Test 1.1.0.0, stop on error
> 
> Q: How much coverage is enough?
> A: Error detection rates by test coverage*:
> 
> Coverage ≤ 100 %: 64,57 %
> Coverage ≤ 200 %: 75,79 %
> Coverage ≤ 400 %: 82,68 %
> Coverage ≤ 800 %: 91,34 %
> Coverage ≤ 1600 %: 96,06 %
> Coverage ≤ 3200 %: 98,03 %
> Coverage ≤ 6400 %: 99,41 %
> * RAM Test 1.1.0.0, stop on error, normalized to 16384 MB test region size
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> chakku said:
> 
> 
> 
> My only confusion here is that obviously the coverage is based on 16GB memory which I assume the test duration is as well. >60min testing will get me above 2000% but based on these numbers >60min would already be well into 3200%+ on 16GB kits.
> 
> Might just see if I can get away with it as it is, don't really want to loosen up any more timings otherwise what's the point of having slow 3733 vs maybe a little faster 3600 :/
Click to expand...

If you have double the RAM it will take double the time to test. So if you want the like error detection on 32GB you will need to do the same coverage % IMO.


----------



## lordzed83

nick name said:


> Your AIO pump is showing 0 RPM?
> 
> Also, kind of impressed BCLK is sitting at 100 and not 99.8.


I got Memory fan hooked up in to aio pump header 

Also i got most of y bios settings on manual thats why its 100mhz. Things that are on auto are auto cause tested manual and Tighter timings yeld less performance than Auto. Will test more tomorrow

thats my settings after another 6 hours of tweeking


----------



## CJMitsuki

got 3800 initially stable...need to tigten timings now


----------



## xeizo

Thanks to both of you for sharing *all* settings, really useful! 

Great results!


----------



## KADEZ.

I have an ryzen 5 3600 on my c6H (x370) with bios 7003 (2nd most recent; 7103 is not updating via web, already says my bios is up to date when I try to update to 7103). 

I can only get to 2133mhz on my memory, even with manually OC ram to any frequency, rebooting always resets my memory back to 2133. 

How come when I try the asus EZ flash in bios to update to 7103 (c6h) it says my bios is already up-to-date?


----------



## VPII

Well 3800 memory for me is a no go at present. Ill test agsin with higher timings, but I believe the issue may be the 1900 fclk. I got started up at 3666 mem speed but did not test too much yet.

I am totally shocked at how good this Ryzen 5 3600 is. Getting it to work in the c7h board was pretty easy the moment I did a flash back to latest bios.

Unfortunately my windows 7 setup don't have any mouse or keyboard anymore which is strange taken that it was the setup I used with the 2700x.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## CJMitsuki

Tightened my timings, small improvement but I did not expect to gain much more. What I found is probably a bug but setting tRDWR t6o anyting, and also manually setting 1900mz FCLK will result in a C5 code on boot up. I know for a fact I ave headroom on my memory to go another step or 2 in frequency but it wont allow it without doing MCLK/2 crap. The way I got around it is setting MCLK to 3733mhz and setting FCLK to 1867mhz then set BCLK to 101.8mhz and it will let you run 3800mhz MCLK and 1900mhz FCLK. I cant take my BCLK up any higher or else I wont boot. Also, once you adjust your BCLK your boost will lock to default lowest frequency but if you go into Ryzern Master and enable PBO it will be fine again. Im getting almost 4.5ghz on 4 cores now @ 1.4v. All Core is 4375-4400mhz @ 1.35v.


----------



## cheddle

CJMitsuki said:


> Tightened my timings, small improvement but I did not expect to gain much more. What I found is probably a bug but setting tRDWR t6o anyting, and also manually setting 1900mz FCLK will result in a C5 code on boot up. I know for a fact I ave headroom on my memory to go another step or 2 in frequency but it wont allow it without doing MCLK/2 crap. The way I got around it is setting MCLK to 3733mhz and setting FCLK to 1867mhz then set BCLK to 101.8mhz and it will let you run 3800mhz MCLK and 1900mhz FCLK. I cant take my BCLK up any higher or else I wont boot. Also, once you adjust your BCLK your boost will lock to default lowest frequency but if you go into Ryzern Master and enable PBO it will be fine again. Im getting almost 4.5ghz on 4 cores now @ 1.4v. All Core is 4375-4400mhz @ 1.35v.


nice working finding out the BCLK behaviour. What IC's are on your sticks? 

Im playing with dual-rank Hynix CJR. 70ns is about where they start to get tricky.


----------



## CJMitsuki

cheddle said:


> nice working finding out the BCLK behaviour. What IC's are on your sticks?
> 
> Im playing with dual-rank Hynix CJR. 70ns is about where they start to get tricky.



They are the 3200 cl14 Samsung B dies on a TridentZ set specifically F4-3200c14d-16gtzr model, a 2x8gb kit


----------



## chakku

CJMitsuki said:


> Tightened my timings, small improvement but I did not expect to gain much more. What I found is probably a bug but setting tRDWR t6o anyting, and also manually setting 1900mz FCLK will result in a C5 code on boot up. I know for a fact I ave headroom on my memory to go another step or 2 in frequency but it wont allow it without doing MCLK/2 crap. The way I got around it is setting MCLK to 3733mhz and setting FCLK to 1867mhz then set BCLK to 101.8mhz and it will let you run 3800mhz MCLK and 1900mhz FCLK. I cant take my BCLK up any higher or else I wont boot. Also, once you adjust your BCLK your boost will lock to default lowest frequency but if you go into Ryzern Master and enable PBO it will be fine again. Im getting almost 4.5ghz on 4 cores now @ 1.4v. All Core is 4375-4400mhz @ 1.35v.


What are you PBO settings like to get the near 4.5GHz boost? Seems like BIOS PBO settings barely give me 4375 on a single core at any time, haven't seen 4.4GHz let alone higher.


----------



## CJMitsuki

chakku said:


> What are you PBO settings like to get the near 4.5GHz boost? Seems like BIOS PBO settings barely give me 4375 on a single core at any time, haven't seen 4.4GHz let alone higher.


Its the bclk that causes the boost to go higher as it changes the clocks.


----------



## chakku

CJMitsuki said:


> Its the bclk that causes the boost to go higher as it changes the clocks.


Ah yeah that would make sense, although your 4478MHz boost divided by 101.8 BCLK still works out to around 44x multi which I still can't seem to get to.


----------



## chakku

Woohoo looks like I found my stable 3733C16 timings/settings. 1.48V which is pushing it but hopefully with some more testing I can bring that down. At 7000% on Karhu and will leave it overnight but happy enough with this result as it is.


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> Its the bclk that causes the boost to go higher as it changes the clocks.


Nice scores man. It's em volts i tell ya. Have not played with new mem sticks above 1.4 volt  3633 as above on that voltage is great. Woprking on profile for overclockers uk 4133 8 pack mem kit sop they can coppy and go. Great thing is it does not have booting problem as needs lessvolts


----------



## christosjr1

My c7h is bugging with the 2406 bios a lot. Half the time it resets my xmp ram from 3333 to 2133 and 8/10 when I shutdown windows it does not shut completely leaving all fans working. Back to previous bios for me


----------



## christosjr1

My c7h is bugging with the 2406 bios a lot. Half the time it resets my xmp ram from 3333 to 2133 and 8/10 when I shutdown windows it does not shut completely leaving all fans working. Back to previous bios for me


----------



## CJMitsuki

3733 stable before tightening timings...


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> 3733 stable before tightening timings...


BTW Have You tested actual performance on 3600 vs 3733 vs 3800 ?? Cause 3600 turns out better than 3800 in my case with same timings. The error correction drawback is real :/ thats why im messing around with 3633 .

AAAA and do You still use Haxed cooling solution aka Air con


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> 3733 stable before tightening timings...


BTW Have You tested actual performance on 3600 vs 3733 vs 3800 ?? Cause 3600 turns out better than 3800 in my case with same timings. The error correction drawback is real :/ thats why im messing around with 3633 . Memory errors and stability is miles ahead of Zen1 but im looking for actuall cb point from tighting timings. And seen diminishing returns on going TOO TIGHT !!! lost performance not gained !!!

AAAA and do You still use Haxed cooling solution aka Air con


----------



## neikosr0x

CJMitsuki said:


> 3733 stable before tightening timings...


could you share timings and voltages please? also what latency you get?


----------



## neikosr0x

lordzed83 said:


> BTW Have You tested actual performance on 3600 vs 3733 vs 3800 ?? Cause 3600 turns out better than 3800 in my case with same timings. The error correction drawback is real :/ thats why im messing around with 3633 . Memory errors and stability is miles ahead of Zen1 but im looking for actuall cb point from tighting timings. And seen diminishing returns on going TOO TIGHT !!! lost performance not gained !!!
> 
> AAAA and do You still use Haxed cooling solution aka Air con


I was getting better performance at 3800 at least shown in AIDA64 any other way to check that out?


----------



## CJMitsuki

lordzed83 said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> 3733 stable before tightening timings...
> 
> 
> 
> BTW Have You tested actual performance on 3600 vs 3733 vs 3800 ?? Cause 3600 turns out better than 3800 in my case with same timings. The error correction drawback is real 😕 thats why im messing around with 3633 . Memory errors and stability is miles ahead of Zen1 but im looking for actuall cb point from tighting timings. And seen diminishing returns on going TOO TIGHT !!! lost performance not gained !!!
> 
> AAAA and do You still use Haxed cooling solution aka Air con /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif
Click to expand...

I havent tested different setups yet but ive noticed a few things. I think its going to come down to if you can get low timings. Single core dropped a bit on 3800 until i tightened the last bit up then it edged ahead of what I seen on 3733 but im about to fibish tightening 3733. I doubt 3600 will be better bc at 3733 im able to pretty much tighten to the maximum. Maybe 3666 at 14-13-13-22-36 or something could edge out the others. I could push to 3866 or 3933 but it seems the bios wont allow it at 1:1:1. It gives an error “C5” and i have to clear CMOS or it wont boot at all. Same thing if I try to adjust tRDWR at all, I get an automatic C5 error and have to clear cmos. Im hoping a bios update fixes it. I know i can get 3866 easy and more than likely 3933 at cl14, 4000 would be doubtful. I only use the AC when I bench on hwbot.org if I need it. Im undervolting this processor quite a bit so It barely hits 60c under load.


----------



## CJMitsuki

neikosr0x said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> 3733 stable before tightening timings...
> 
> 
> 
> could you share timings and voltages please? also what latency you get?
Click to expand...




neikosr0x said:


> lordzed83 said:
> 
> 
> 
> BTW Have You tested actual performance on 3600 vs 3733 vs 3800 ?? Cause 3600 turns out better than 3800 in my case with same timings. The error correction drawback is real 😕 thats why im messing around with 3633 . Memory errors and stability is miles ahead of Zen1 but im looking for actuall cb point from tighting timings. And seen diminishing returns on going TOO TIGHT !!! lost performance not gained !!!
> 
> AAAA and do You still use Haxed cooling solution aka Air con /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif
> 
> 
> 
> I was getting better performance at 3800 at least shown in AIDA64 any other way to check that out?
Click to expand...

I shared timings in an above post from Ryzen Master. As far as testing performance of memory you dont ever go by Aida64 to judge that. Its more of a reference tool to kinda give an idea of what gains a change has made. You can guve a set up wildly unstable timings and it will show gains in Aida64 so it is misleading. Also, the latency numbers you see is Aida is not the effective latency. SiSoft Sandra or Passmark Performance Test can show effective latencies. In Aida Ive gotten it down to 63ns but the effective latency was 28ns. In comparison the 2700x best effective latency I saw was around 45-46 so even though this architecture may show similar latencies to Zen+ in aida64, in actuality Zen2 is a 20ns gain in latency performance over Zen+. Best Intel chips have effective latencies of 13ns for another comparison.


----------



## lordzed83

CJMitsuki said:


> I shared timings in an above post from Ryzen Master. As far as testing performance of memory you dont ever go by Aida64 to judge that. Its more of a reference tool to kinda give an idea of what gains a change has made. You can guve a set up wildly unstable timings and it will show gains in Aida64 so it is misleading. Also, the latency numbers you see is Aida is not the effective latency. SiSoft Sandra or Passmark Performance Test can show effective latencies. In Aida Ive gotten it down to 63ns but the effective latency was 28ns. In comparison the 2700x best effective latency I saw was around 45-46 so even though this architecture may show similar latencies to Zen+ in aida64, in actuality Zen2 is a 20ns gain in latency performance over Zen+. Best Intel chips have effective latencies of 13ns for another comparison.


Iw settled for 4350 all core 1.5 hour aida and realbench stable. Maxes out around 80c after that.

Ibt sadly got some bug cant runnit on zen2 and it was my nr1 performance test :/ now im looking at 3 rins of cb20. Maybe could try cpuid bench cause gives quite allot of points to see difference just need 2 xheck gow repeteable it is.


I know i cant boot at 3733 with ky 14 15 14 28 settings no matter what i tried to change. Would need to go and teat out performance on the 14 15 15 32nypu are using.


----------



## crakej

CJMitsuki said:


> I havent tested different setups yet but ive noticed a few things. I think its going to come down to if you can get low timings. Single core dropped a bit on 3800 until i tightened the last bit up then it edged ahead of what I seen on 3733 but im about to fibish tightening 3733. I doubt 3600 will be better bc at 3733 im able to pretty much tighten to the maximum. Maybe 3666 at 14-13-13-22-36 or something could edge out the others. I could push to 3866 or 3933 but it seems the bios wont allow it at 1:1:1. It gives an error “C5” and i have to clear CMOS or it wont boot at all. Same thing if I try to adjust tRDWR at all, I get an automatic C5 error and have to clear cmos. Im hoping a bios update fixes it. I know i can get 3866 easy and more than likely 3933 at cl14, 4000 would be doubtful. I only use the AC when I bench on hwbot.org if I need it. Im undervolting this processor quite a bit so It barely hits 60c under load.


What happens with tRDWR on Auto?

I'm still waiting for my CPU! - should be here tomorrow..


----------



## Axaion

Can anyone, or everyone with this board please do a DPC Latency test with LatencyMon?

Considering this board, or the x470 Taichi/ultimate.. But as far as i know..

The asus has worse DPC Latency and Daisy-Chain RAM
But the ASRock is T-topology RAM

Seems really hard to find any dpc test anywhere now-adays, wheres r0ach when you need him?

Also.. can you disable HPET in the bios?


----------



## narukun

The DPC latency is terrible right now, like 2~6k ntoskrnl.exe, but it seems is because of windows 1903

https://forums.geforce.com/default/...e-large-latency-spikes-/post/6114668/#6114668

And you can only disable HPET with modded bios sadly


----------



## nick name

Axaion said:


> Can anyone, or everyone with this board please do a DPC Latency test with LatencyMon?
> 
> Considering this board, or the x470 Taichi/ultimate.. But as far as i know..
> 
> The asus has worse DPC Latency and Daisy-Chain RAM
> But the ASRock is T-topology RAM
> 
> Seems really hard to find any dpc test anywhere now-adays, wheres r0ach when you need him?
> 
> Also.. can you disable HPET in the bios?


I believe this board is t-topology. 

I haven't run LatencyMon in a while. I think since before Windows 1903 and definitely before the latest BIOS updates. I also never had problems with my mic before Windows 1903 so I'm thinking the higher results I'm seeing now are from Windows 1903. It's pretty bad.


----------



## nick name

CJMitsuki said:


> I havent tested different setups yet but ive noticed a few things. I think its going to come down to if you can get low timings. Single core dropped a bit on 3800 until i tightened the last bit up then it edged ahead of what I seen on 3733 but im about to fibish tightening 3733. I doubt 3600 will be better bc at 3733 im able to pretty much tighten to the maximum. Maybe 3666 at 14-13-13-22-36 or something could edge out the others. I could push to 3866 or 3933 but it seems the bios wont allow it at 1:1:1. It gives an error “C5” and i have to clear CMOS or it wont boot at all. Same thing if I try to adjust tRDWR at all, I get an automatic C5 error and have to clear cmos. Im hoping a bios update fixes it. I know i can get 3866 easy and more than likely 3933 at cl14, 4000 would be doubtful. I only use the AC when I bench on hwbot.org if I need it. Im undervolting this processor quite a bit so It barely hits 60c under load.


Is this because of the halved 16-bit write lane?


----------



## Axaion

narukun said:


> The DPC latency is terrible right now, like 2~6k ntoskrnl.exe, but it seems is because of windows 1903
> 
> https://forums.geforce.com/default/...e-large-latency-spikes-/post/6114668/#6114668
> 
> And you can only disable HPET with modded bios sadly


Well damn, never had any good experiences with modded BIOS'es, but at least id be willing to use it, if theyre available.

Guessing no one is running 1809 to test, heh


nick name said:


> I believe this board is t-topology.
> 
> I haven't run LatencyMon in a while. I think since before Windows 1903 and definitely before the latest BIOS updates. I also never had problems with my mic before Windows 1903 so I'm thinking the higher results I'm seeing now are from Windows 1903. It's pretty bad.


the spreadsheet and any info i could find says the Asus is Daisy-chain


----------



## VPII

I need to understand something, I'm putting 1.4125vcore through my Ryzen 5 3600 and the highest bench temps I've seen was 63c. Running Aida64 stress test it will climb up to 78c. My problem is that vcore reported by CPUz, Coretemp and Ryzen Master is 1.1vcore. I cannot run Hwinfo64 it won't open keeps hanging while starting up.


----------



## neikosr0x

CJMitsuki said:


> I shared timings in an above post from Ryzen Master. As far as testing performance of memory you dont ever go by Aida64 to judge that. Its more of a reference tool to kinda give an idea of what gains a change has made. You can guve a set up wildly unstable timings and it will show gains in Aida64 so it is misleading. Also, the latency numbers you see is Aida is not the effective latency. SiSoft Sandra or Passmark Performance Test can show effective latencies. In Aida Ive gotten it down to 63ns but the effective latency was 28ns. In comparison the 2700x best effective latency I saw was around 45-46 so even though this architecture may show similar latencies to Zen+ in aida64, in actuality Zen2 is a 20ns gain in latency performance over Zen+. Best Intel chips have effective latencies of 13ns for another comparison.


that some nice info thanks. Today i might try to test every with Sisoft and report back, will try 3600cl14 a 3733cl14 if i can or cl16 like i'm running it atm


----------



## larrydavid

narukun said:


> The DPC latency is terrible right now, like 2~6k ntoskrnl.exe, but it seems is because of windows 1903
> 
> https://forums.geforce.com/default/...e-large-latency-spikes-/post/6114668/#6114668
> 
> And you can only disable HPET with modded bios sadly


You can disable HPET in Windows as well with some CLI commands, or flat-out disable the HPET device in device manager as well.


----------



## nick name

VPII said:


> I need to understand something, I'm putting 1.4125vcore through my Ryzen 5 3600 and the highest bench temps I've seen was 63c. Running Aida64 stress test it will climb up to 78c. My problem is that vcore reported by CPUz, Coretemp and Ryzen Master is 1.1vcore. I cannot run Hwinfo64 it won't open keeps hanging while starting up.



Have you tried going into HWiNFO Settings > Safety > Disable Drive Scan?

Or S.M.A.R.T. Support?


----------



## VPII

nick name said:


> Have you tried going into HWiNFO Settings > Safety > Disable Drive Scan?
> 
> 
> 
> Or S.M.A.R.T. Support?


Hi nick, sorry my complete illiterate question, how do I do that.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## Martelele

VPII said:


> I need to understand something, I'm putting 1.4125vcore through my Ryzen 5 3600 and the highest bench temps I've seen was 63c. Running Aida64 stress test it will climb up to 78c. My problem is that vcore reported by CPUz, Coretemp and Ryzen Master is 1.1vcore. I cannot run Hwinfo64 it won't open keeps hanging while starting up.



I'm experiencing the exact same thing when I try to overclock my 3600X manually,so I believe that's the bios issue.When I set OC to auto and voltage to offset everything is fine,so I think we just have to wait for the new bios release.


----------



## VPII

nick name said:


> Have you tried going into HWiNFO Settings > Safety > Disable Drive Scan?
> 
> Or S.M.A.R.T. Support?


Hi Nick, I tried editing the INI file but no luck. I'm so irritated by this. Sorry.


----------



## Axaion

CJMitsuki said:


> 3733 stable before tightening timings...


Mate, can you please do a LatencyMon test?

pretty please?


----------



## nick name

VPII said:


> Hi Nick, I tried editing the INI file but no luck. I'm so irritated by this. Sorry.


Here ya go.

Settings > Safety > Disable Drive Scan

Edit:
I don't know how to order images. The first one is at the bottom.


----------



## lordzed83

Axaion said:


> Mate, can you please do a LatencyMon test?
> 
> pretty please?


This **** ??


----------



## VPII

nick name said:


> Here ya go.
> 
> Settings > Safety > Disable Drive Scan
> 
> Edit:
> I don't know how to order images. The first one is at the bottom.


Hi nick, thanks a bunch, got it going. Interestingly the cpu vcore sits at the same level including temps, but cpu core voltage reads 1.419 but drops to 1.375 under load and I'm sorry I do not want to play with LLC.


----------



## chakku

CJMitsuki said:


> 3733 stable before tightening timings...


Those timings are looking pretty good already, definitely much better than what I can seem to get. After finally getting a stable setup (below) I'm ready to start tweaking my 3733 timings, but currently have it testing 1.45V as opposed to 1.48V to get the DIMM temps down a little hopefully.










On the topic of 3600 v 3733 v 3800 and beyond it would be good to see some Infinity Fabric speed tests, IIRC above 3200 timings mattered more on 1000/2000 series because IF didn't scale beyond 1600MHz anyway.


----------



## crakej

Running HWInfo isn't recommended at the moment, and as ever, AMD say NOT to run more than 1 monitoring program at once. HWInfo keeps the cpu awake, stopping cores from sleeping and keeping voltages high.

Edit:ment to say, make sure you update chipset drivers from the AMD site - ver 1.07.07.0725 - it does have some more recent files than the latest ASUS ones do.


----------



## neikosr0x

crakej said:


> Running HWInfo isn't recommended at the moment, and as ever, AMD say NOT to run more than 1 monitoring program at once. HWInfo keeps the cpu awake, stopping cores from sleeping and keeping voltages high.


well after i disable MSI afterburner from starting up on boot and killing corsair Icue HWInfo is working OKEY, i have it at 2000ms refresh and i can see the CPU going idle with everything closed but chrome.


----------



## harderthanfire

crakej said:


> Running HWInfo isn't recommended at the moment, and as ever, AMD say NOT to run more than 1 monitoring program at once. HWInfo keeps the cpu awake, stopping cores from sleeping and keeping voltages high.



Yeah it does do exactly this. Problem is I've not found a single reliable program that can monitor temps that doesn't.


Ryzen master causes the CPU to boost when it updates the screen due to all the bars and things, even with animations turned off. CPU-Z is good for the VCORE but nothing else.


Might just stick in a T-probe with an external display as this is getting pretty silly just to monitor temps.


----------



## crakej

harderthanfire said:


> Yeah it does do exactly this. Problem is I've not found a single reliable program that can monitor temps that doesn't.
> 
> 
> Ryzen master causes the CPU to boost when it updates the screen due to all the bars and things, even with animations turned off. CPU-Z is good for the VCORE but nothing else.
> 
> 
> Might just stick in a T-probe with an external display as this is getting pretty silly just to monitor temps.


If you do what @neikosr0x has done and increase the polling time to 2000ms, it will help.


----------



## neikosr0x

crakej said:


> If you do what @neikosr0x has done and increase the polling time to 2000ms, it will help.


here, I took them with a single monitor app at a time. 

PD: "Steam would pull the CPU a lot."


----------



## harderthanfire

crakej said:


> If you do what @*neikosr0x* has done and increase the polling time to 2000ms, it will help.



I had tried that but turns out even CPU-Z and Ryzen Master had the same issue. It was some dodgy DIGI+ settings making it so the cores would hardly ever go to sleep, set them back to AUTO and all is good now - even with HWINFO.


----------



## crakej

harderthanfire said:


> I had tried that but turns out even CPU-Z and Ryzen Master had the same issue. It was some dodgy DIGI+ settings making it so the cores would hardly ever go to sleep, set them back to AUTO and all is good now - even with HWINFO.


Do you know which setting that was?


----------



## toxick

An hour ago i got the 3900X.


----------



## ComansoRowlett

toxick said:


> An hour ago i got the 3900X.


Might want to dial your memory down to the point your UMC is = to your memory clock. E.g. 3600-3733 and lower the timings. You'll get much better performance.


----------



## toxick

ComansoRowlett said:


> Might want to dial your memory down to the point your UMC is = to your memory clock. E.g. 3600-3733 and lower the timings. You'll get much better performance.


I was so excited to see that memory clock works at 4000.


----------



## ComansoRowlett

toxick said:


> I was so excited to see that memory clock works at 4000.


Yeah you and me both. I was actually looking forward to ripping some 4800+ memory on these chips but even then 4800 CL18 couldn't bring the latency as low as what I can get with 3733 CL14 so I just stuck with that. It takes a lot to overcome the penalty, however if you are after pure bandwidth/write speed going faster on the memory may be good for you. However if I was you I'd aim to start at 3600 and see how tight you can get your timings.

https://prnt.sc/offh5h here is someone else doing it I know.


----------



## Axaion

lordzed83 said:


> This **** ??


Yep, excatly that, can you let it run for 5+ minutes? 

Im sure theres others searching the web for the same information lol

In any case, thanks for just that one!


----------



## majestynl

Axaion said:


> Well damn, never had any good experiences with modded BIOS'es, but at least id be willing to use it, if theyre available.
> 
> Guessing no one is running 1809 to test, heh
> 
> 
> the spreadsheet and any info i could find says the Asus is Daisy-chain


Yep its a Daisy Chain for sure!


----------



## chakku

Axaion said:


> Yep, excatly that, can you let it run for 5+ minutes?
> 
> Im sure theres others searching the web for the same information lol
> 
> In any case, thanks for just that one!


I definitely noticed some audio dropouts and DPC latency issues before, though I suspected it was an unstable mem OC, the suspects according to LatMon were the usual DX kernel/NVIDIA ****. Need to investigate further when I'm done tweaking memory and CPU OC.

Probably helps to note that I have a Samsung NVME drive for boot and NV graphics which are both subject to these WHEA errors. Have HPET disabled and as many unnecessary drivers as I can disabled as well, though still running Samsung NVME drivers.


----------



## harderthanfire

crakej said:


> Do you know which setting that was?



I think it was current limit set to 140%. Hell it could have been the actual reboot to change it that sorted it for all I know.


I have also noticed that if you change the max CPU power state in windows power profiles to 99% instead of 100% it gets pinned at idle voltage and won't boost - so don't do that.


----------



## nick name

majestynl said:


> Yep its a Daisy Chain for sure!


Wait, I thought our CH7 boards were t topology?


----------



## YpsiNine

nick name said:


> Wait, I thought our CH7 boards were t topology?


C6H is t-topology. C7H is daisy chain.


----------



## hurricane28

ComansoRowlett said:


> Here you are. I actually had to up the vcore slightly since I lowered some timings on the memory (makes the core work harder so makes sense). I've probably given it too much now, I just placed the droop from LLC2 to 1 to get a flat line. I could of probably dropped it a few clicks lower voltage alongside that (e.g. 1.312v or something).
> 
> Something to note though the voltage wall is extremely heavy. With 1.187v I can run upto 4.4 just fine. 4.45 required 1.262v (although I didn't attempt lower) and then 4.5GHz required 1.325 (or maybe slightly less) with P95 prolonged testing.


Thank you, seems you are very lucky with your chip man. Amazing CPU indeed.

Have fun with it.


----------



## majestynl

CJMitsuki said:


> 3733 stable before tightening timings...


I assume you are actively cooling your ram because of low ram temps !!??

I found long time ago when actively cooling ram I could push r oc even more. Also shared many times on ch6 and ch7 thread.

Yesterday I pushed the ram on CL14 @3800 with fans blowing on them 3k% + (stopped Ramtest). Without fan I got errors around 500% and sticks where like 42c. With fans I can keep them like 36c with pushing 1.5v juice.

*So if people get stuck on errors on high OC the ram, try blowing a fan and see if it helps you too *




nick name said:


> Wait, I thought our CH7 boards were t topology?


Nope, the ch6 was T-topology


----------



## CJMitsuki

3733 cl14 updated timings. Very close to final timings but I cant finish, i have to leave for work. Ive barely slept due to all this memory tweaking and testing...


----------



## chakku

CJMitsuki said:


> 3733 cl14 updated timings. Very close to final timings but I cant finish, i have to leave for work. Ive barely slept due to all this memory tweaking and testing...


Already jelly of your timings, CAS14 at 3733 is an instant C5 boot for me with all other timings confirmed stable (up to 20k% in ramtest).


----------



## CJMitsuki

chakku said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> 3733 cl14 updated timings. Very close to final timings but I cant finish, i have to leave for work. Ive barely slept due to all this memory tweaking and testing...
> 
> 
> 
> Already jelly of your timings, CAS14 at 3733 is an instant C5 boot for me with all other timings confirmed stable (up to 20k% in ramtest).
Click to expand...

Fairly certain the C5 error behaviors are not intended and are due to some bios bugs


----------



## chakku

CJMitsuki said:


> Fairly certain the C5 error behaviors are not intended and are due to some bios bugs


From what I understand it is failed memory overclock/training that causes it to happen. The unintended behavior is not being able to reboot/reset without clearing CMOS once you get the error. As per elmor's 'Ryzen 3000 Memory / Fabric' thread:



> C6H 7106 + C7H 2406: After failing memory overclocking you get stuck at C5 POST code which never seems to recover. The only way to get back is to clear CMOS.


I think 3733C14 just may be a bit too tight for dual rank but if someone else manages it and we get some better BIOSes I'm keen to test further. May be possible with 3666 multi + BCLK OC as you have, however I'd prefer to keep my BCLK at 100 for PCI-E devices.


----------



## Gigabytes

Cannot ever remember seeing copy speeds above read and write speeds.


----------



## nick name

Gigabytes said:


> Cannot ever remember seeing copy speeds above read and write speeds.


Yeah, I'm curious to know what allows for that. Is it the larger cache? Or is it a product of a reduced write and reduced read? Because on a 2700X the speed you're running would result in higher reads and I know why the writes are reduced so I'm thinking the copy is running free as it would on a 2700X and it's only higher because of the reduced write and read.

My 3606MHz RAM produces 57K Read 56K Write and 54K Copy with a 57.7ns latency.

Edit:
3666MHz wouldn't produce a 58K Copy with a 2700X so maybe it is the cache?


----------



## Gigabytes

Not really sure, there is another 3900X posted in this thread and its copy speed looks in line with what i would expect to see. What kit you running?


Just dicking around, not tightened at all and haven't really pushed the fclk


----------



## CJMitsuki

chakku said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fairly certain the C5 error behaviors are not intended and are due to some bios bugs
> 
> 
> 
> From what I understand it is failed memory overclock/training that causes it to happen. The unintended behavior is not being able to reboot/reset without clearing CMOS once you get the error. As per elmor's 'Ryzen 3000 Memory / Fabric' thread:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> C6H 7106 + C7H 2406: After failing memory overclocking you get stuck at C5 POST code which never seems to recover. The only way to get back is to clear CMOS.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think 3733C14 just may be a bit too tight for dual rank but if someone else manages it and we get some better BIOSes I'm keen to test further. May be possible with 3666 multi + BCLK OC as you have, however I'd prefer to keep my BCLK at 100 for PCI-E devices.
Click to expand...

I get that error by changing tRDWR from Auto to the exact timing that it is running while on Auto. So that is not failed memory OC. I also run 3800 through a BCLK very stable but if I dont use BCLK and just adjust to 3800 regularly then I get that code. Its 100% a bug if not intended, which I have no idea why it would be intended. A failed mem oc could cause it but in the cases ive seen it is not.


----------



## chakku

CJMitsuki said:


> I get that error by changing tRDWR from Auto to the exact timing that it is running while on Auto. So that is not failed memory OC.


I have the exact same thing. Noted it in a previous post, but it seems like one DIMM for me is running at a higher timing than the other. If I set it to the lower of the two I get the C5 error so I've left it on Auto as well.


----------



## chakku

DPC Latency - I'm suspecting NVIDIA drivers as usual?

EDIT: Updated LatMon and don't appear to be getting the spikes anymore, still getting highest DPC (0.6ms or so) from nviddmkm.sys


----------



## nick name

chakku said:


> DPC Latency - I'm suspecting NVIDIA drivers as usual?
> 
> EDIT: Updated LatMon and don't appear to be getting the spikes anymore.


Oof. Not me. Still very much seeing large spikes.


----------



## chakku

nick name said:


> Oof. Not me. Still very much seeing large spikes.


I'm seeing spikes still but they don't appear to be as bad as before. They were 2000us before and once I updated they've dropped to 550 or so, however still seems like NV drivers are to blame. Still definitely worse than I want but it's an improvement if it was just old LatMon causing it.

See attached pics for before and after. Before was run for about 5min (spikes would happen within 30sec) and after has been run for about 15min.

Funnily enough now I have pagefaults being reported, not sure if previous ver of LatMon was just missing these.


----------



## harderthanfire

chakku said:


> I'm seeing spikes still but they don't appear to be as bad as before. They were 2000us before and once I updated they've dropped to 550 or so, however still seems like NV drivers are to blame. Still definitely worse than I want but it's an improvement if it was just old LatMon causing it.
> 
> See attached pics for before and after. Before was run for about 5min (spikes would happen within 30sec) and after has been run for about 15min.
> 
> Funnily enough now I have pagefaults being reported, not sure if previous ver of LatMon was just missing these.



I'm seeing something similar, however if I use resource monitor to look for page faults it does not show any when LatMon is showing some so I'm not sure I trust LatMon here.


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> What happens with tRDWR on Auto?
> 
> I'm still waiting for my CPU! - should be here tomorrow..
> 
> 
> 
> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> I get that error by changing tRDWR from Auto to the exact timing that it is running while on Auto. So that is not failed memory OC. I also run 3800 through a BCLK very stable but if I dont use BCLK and just adjust to 3800 regularly then I get that code. Its 100% a bug if not intended, which I have no idea why it would be intended. A failed mem oc could cause it but in the cases ive seen it is not.
> 
> 
> 
> chakku said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have the exact same thing. Noted it in a previous post, but it seems like one DIMM for me is running at a higher timing than the other. If I set it to the lower of the two I get the C5 error so I've left it on Auto as well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

1xxx, 2xxx, 3xxx and TR 1xxx exhibit behaviour as below on [Auto] for tRDWR, as The Stilt's timings leave it [Auto] I have always done this on CPUs stated, I just meddle with other timings.



Spoiler















Perhaps some setups can take tRDWR "tuned" settings, perhaps can't, dunno...


----------



## cheddle

CJMitsuki said:


> 3733 cl14 updated timings. Very close to final timings but I cant finish, i have to leave for work. Ive barely slept due to all this memory tweaking and testing...


Is your VDDG higher than your SOC voltage there? I was lead to belive that VDDG should be SOC-100mv (i.e if soc is 1.15v then VDDG should be 1.05v)


----------



## chakku

gupsterg said:


> 1xxx, 2xxx, 3xxx and TR 1xxx exhibit behaviour as below on [Auto] for tRDWR, as The Stilt's timings leave it [Auto] I have always done this on CPUs stated, I just meddle with other timings.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps some setups can take tRDWR "tuned" settings, perhaps can't, dunno...


In hindsight that could have been why I had issues with getting some timings stable on my 2700X since I would always plug figures into there but never really had any trouble booting in.


----------



## CJMitsuki

chakku said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> I get that error by changing tRDWR from Auto to the exact timing that it is running while on Auto. So that is not failed memory OC.
> 
> 
> 
> I have the exact same thing. Noted it in a previous post, but it seems like one DIMM for me is running at a higher timing than the other. If I set it to the lower of the two I get the C5 error so I've left it on Auto as well.
Click to expand...




gupsterg said:


> crakej said:
> 
> 
> 
> What happens with tRDWR on Auto?
> 
> I'm still waiting for my CPU! - should be here tomorrow..
> 
> 
> 
> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> I get that error by changing tRDWR from Auto to the exact timing that it is running while on Auto. So that is not failed memory OC. I also run 3800 through a BCLK very stable but if I dont use BCLK and just adjust to 3800 regularly then I get that code. Its 100% a bug if not intended, which I have no idea why it would be intended. A failed mem oc could cause it but in the cases ive seen it is not.
> 
> 
> 
> chakku said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have the exact same thing. Noted it in a previous post, but it seems like one DIMM for me is running at a higher timing than the other. If I set it to the lower of the two I get the C5 error so I've left it on Auto as well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 1xxx, 2xxx, 3xxx and TR 1xxx exhibit behaviour as below on [Auto] for tRDWR, as The Stilt's timings leave it [Auto] I have always done this on CPUs stated, I just meddle with other timings.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps some setups can take tRDWR "tuned" settings, perhaps can't, dunno...
Click to expand...




cheddle said:


> CJMitsuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> 3733 cl14 updated timings. Very close to final timings but I cant finish, i have to leave for work. Ive barely slept due to all this memory tweaking and testing...
> 
> 
> 
> Is your VDDG higher than your SOC voltage there? I was lead to belive that VDDG should be SOC-100mv (i.e if soc is 1.15v then VDDG should be 1.05v)
Click to expand...

Yeah, my A Dimm is running 10 and B is 9. Gupsterg, Ive always adjusted tRDWR on the last 3 cpus Ive had and as a matter of fact I was changing it on this same bios on my 1700x before my 3700x and Ive never had a problem until now. The real problem is that this mysterious C5 error is popping up during a lot of situations now. Certain setting in bios will do it, adjusting tRDWR will do it, trying to run 3800mhz 1:1:1 normally will do it (oddly enough I can drop to 3733 and add a 101.8 bclk and tighten the hell out of the timings and it runs perfectly) I can go to 102 bclk before I get that C5 error. Ive even seen a forum thread the other day about an intel user on an Asus board (Maximus mobo i believe) getting the same C5 code. Bottom line to me is that these are not memory errors but some other bios problem, maybe in the coding of the bios and how it interacts with Ryzen 2nd gen? I do know it isn't memory errors causing it though. If they fix it I guarantee Ill hit 3933cl14 1:1:1 but for now ill just play with tge setups I have.


----------



## ComansoRowlett

hurricane28 said:


> Thank you, seems you are very lucky with your chip man. Amazing CPU indeed.
> 
> Have fun with it.


Thank you  Yeah I'm enjoying it, was supposed to be dumping it in September for a 3950X but this chip is just so good I don't know how I could do that now. Guess we'll see how the 3950X's clock before I can comment


----------



## neikosr0x

CJMitsuki said:


> Yeah, my A Dimm is running 10 and B is 9. Gupsterg, Ive always adjusted tRDWR on the last 3 cpus Ive had and as a matter of fact I was changing it on this same bios on my 1700x before my 3700x and Ive never had a problem until now. The real problem is that this mysterious C5 error is popping up during a lot of situations now. Certain setting in bios will do it, adjusting tRDWR will do it, trying to run 3800mhz 1:1:1 normally will do it (oddly enough I can drop to 3733 and add a 101.8 bclk and tighten the hell out of the timings and it runs perfectly) I can go to 102 bclk before I get that C5 error. Ive even seen a forum thread the other day about an intel user on an Asus board (Maximus mobo i believe) getting the same C5 code. Bottom line to me is that these are not memory errors but some other bios problem, maybe in the coding of the bios and how it interacts with Ryzen 2nd gen? I do know it isn't memory errors causing it though. If they fix it I guarantee Ill hit 3933cl14 1:1:1 but for now ill just play with tge setups I have.


i also have that disparity since ever, but if i change it it will freeze in this bios.


----------



## majestynl

CJMitsuki said:


> Fairly certain the C5 error behaviors are not intended and are due to some bios bugs





chakku said:


> From what I understand it is failed memory overclock/training that causes it to happen. The unintended behavior is not being able to reboot/reset without clearing CMOS once you get the error. As per elmor's 'Ryzen 3000 Memory / Fabric' thread:
> 
> I think 3733C14 just may be a bit too tight for dual rank but if someone else manages it and we get some better BIOSes I'm keen to test further. May be possible with 3666 multi + BCLK OC as you have, however I'd prefer to keep my BCLK at 100 for PCI-E devices.





CJMitsuki said:


> I get that error by changing tRDWR from Auto to the exact timing that it is running while on Auto. So that is not failed memory OC. I also run 3800 through a BCLK very stable but if I dont use BCLK and just adjust to 3800 regularly then I get that code. Its 100% a bug if not intended, which I have no idea why it would be intended. A failed mem oc could cause it but in the cases ive seen it is not.


I agree it has something to do with Memory training/Booting. On previous bios versions we had different Qcodes that came up while training was failed. 
But i also agree it has some bugs and throwing this error to fast. Sometimes you just reset and just load same settings but this time from a profile and it just boot properly!



cheddle said:


> Is your VDDG higher than your SOC voltage there? I was lead to belive that VDDG should be SOC-100mv (i.e if soc is 1.15v then VDDG should be 1.05v)


That got my attention too  If i remember well the stilt said it needs to be slightly lower then your soc!



ComansoRowlett said:


> Thank you  Yeah I'm enjoying it, was supposed to be dumping it in September for a 3950X but this chip is just so good I don't know how I could do that now. Guess we'll see how the 3950X's clock before I can comment


You have a Diamond chip instead of gold m8! I would keep this one. Dont expect to much from clocks (3950x) In 2 years we managed to go 200-300mhz up with Ryzen. So few months wont change a lot


----------



## HardwareNumb3rs

Any news about a new bios release? even beta... This one with Zen2 it terrible.


----------



## crakej

I thought it would never get here! At last!

On tRDWR - I've almost always left if at Auto, though there have been some times when experimenting that I've needed to set it precisely. Will do some tests at stock before I jump in - so much information it's difficult to know where to start!


----------



## VPII

crakej said:


> I thought it would never get here! At last!
> 
> 
> 
> On tRDWR - I've almost always left if at Auto, though there have been some times when experimenting that I've needed to set it precisely. Will do some tests at stock before I jump in - so much information it's difficult to know where to start!


Oh man @crakej I so wish stock here in South Africa would arrive. I did get myself a Ryzen 5 3600 to play with and it is so much fun. Setting my memory to run 3600 cl 14 was no problem but on my 2700x it was an issue.

Great, cannot wait to see what you do with that chip.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> I thought it would never get here! At last!
> 
> On tRDWR - I've almost always left if at Auto, though there have been some times when experimenting that I've needed to set it precisely. Will do some tests at stock before I jump in - so much information it's difficult to know where to start!


Have fun playing around m8!


----------



## gupsterg

cheddle said:


> Is your VDDG higher than your SOC voltage there? I was lead to belive that VDDG should be SOC-100mv (i.e if soc is 1.15v then VDDG should be 1.05v)


You need to have bare min ~40mV headroom of SOC over VDDG. My setup defaulted to ~1.025V SOC and VDDG 0.950, so perhaps ~75mV is OK as well, perhaps ~100mV too much.

Doing some testing today which may or may not show what I do or do not need as gap.



Spoiler
















chakku said:


> In hindsight that could have been why I had issues with getting some timings stable on my 2700X since I would always plug figures into there but never really had any trouble booting in.


The screenies on right have other timings dropped, but by only dropping even CL from 14 to 15 yielded the tRDWR to change on [Auto].



Spoiler
















Spoiler














On TR the 2 outlined are [Auto] as The Stilt guided that on quad channel, same again, as CL dropped, tRDWR did as well.

Perhaps out rule of UEFI, rather than convention of timings, dunno....



CJMitsuki said:


> Yeah, my A Dimm is running 10 and B is 9. Gupsterg, Ive always adjusted tRDWR on the last 3 cpus Ive had and as a matter of fact I was changing it on this same bios on my 1700x before my 3700x and Ive never had a problem until now. The real problem is that this mysterious C5 error is popping up during a lot of situations now. Certain setting in bios will do it, adjusting tRDWR will do it, trying to run 3800mhz 1:1:1 normally will do it (oddly enough I can drop to 3733 and add a 101.8 bclk and tighten the hell out of the timings and it runs perfectly) I can go to 102 bclk before I get that C5 error. Ive even seen a forum thread the other day about an intel user on an Asus board (Maximus mobo i believe) getting the same C5 code. Bottom line to me is that these are not memory errors but some other bios problem, maybe in the coding of the bios and how it interacts with Ryzen 2nd gen? I do know it isn't memory errors causing it though. If they fix it I guarantee Ill hit 3933cl14 1:1:1 but for now ill just play with tge setups I have.


Don't know what C5 is.

Defo quirks in UEFI 2406 in relation to Matisse IMO.

UEFI 0068 I'm on day two of usage. I believe Matisse trains better on it. Yes it has double post on setting changes, but observing voltages like SOC on these POSTs it behaves closer to Pinnacle Ridge. ROG forum has my current thoughts on it in this post.



crakej said:


> I thought it would never get here! At last!


Enjoy! chap :thumb: ....


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> I thought it would never get here! At last!
> 
> On tRDWR - I've almost always left if at Auto, though there have been some times when experimenting that I've needed to set it precisely. Will do some tests at stock before I jump in - so much information it's difficult to know where to start!


Cool cant wait to see what ya get


----------



## Martelele

I have a question about about VDDP,CLDO VDDG and CLDO VDDP voltages as I can't find a proper information about those voltages (especially CLDO VDDG,no idea what it is).I have SOC Voltage set to 1.15 and HWInfo is reporting that VDDP Voltage is set to 0.523V which i think is holding me back from overclocking my Samsung B-Die further (currently 3600 MHZ CL16).Can someone help me understand those voltages as I'm new to the ryzen platform? Thanks in advance


----------



## majestynl

Martelele said:


> I have a question about about VDDP,CLDO VDDG and CLDO VDDP voltages as I can't find a proper information about those voltages (especially CLDO VDDG,no idea what it is).I have SOC Voltage set to 1.15 and HWInfo is reporting that VDDP Voltage is set to 0.523V which i think is holding me back from overclocking my Samsung B-Die further (currently 3600 MHZ CL16).Can someone help me understand those voltages as I'm new to the ryzen platform? Thanks in advance


VDDG is the fabric voltage!

Check out The Stilts info about CLDO VDDG: https://www.overclock.net/forum/28031966-post36.html


----------



## gupsterg

Same as 1xxx, 2xxx, TR 1xxx, I see tRDWR drop when on [Auto] with CL drop.



Spoiler














When I dropped CL whilst on 3666MHz C15 voltages, it resulted in C5 Q-Code and about when I should see the DRAM Q-LED, which is not functioning on Matisse with UEFI 2406 or UEFI 0068. I know it did function on UEFI 2406 with 2700X, so DRAM Q-LED not working seems quirk of UEFI for Matisse.

Then I changed VDIMM from 1.385V to 1.425V and VTTDDR 0.7125V, again Q-CODE: C5, again around when I should see DRAM Q-LED. I used "SAFEMODE" by holding down power button on board to get POST. Then I changed VDIMM from 1.425V to 1.45V and VTTDDR 0.725V, did get to OS, RT FAIL ~161%.

Can not for sure say Q-CODE: C5 is DRAM, but seems about right.



Martelele said:


> I have a question about about VDDP,CLDO VDDG and CLDO VDDP voltages as I can't find a proper information about those voltages (especially CLDO VDDG,no idea what it is).I have SOC Voltage set to 1.15 and HWInfo is reporting that VDDP Voltage is set to 0.523V which i think is holding me back from overclocking my Samsung B-Die further (currently 3600 MHZ CL16).Can someone help me understand those voltages as I'm new to the ryzen platform? Thanks in advance


The C7H does not show valid VDDP in HWINFO, use ASUS Turbo V Core to see it. I have used v1.02.02, link, there is also v1.05.03_beta, link (not used that yet).

VDDP AFAIK is Phy PCI-E, default is 1.05V on Matisse.

CLDO_VDDP is Phy DDR4, default is 0.900V on Matisse.

CLDO_VDDG is voltage to IF, default is 0.950V on Matisse.

Below are screenies from within AMD menu, VDDP there is same as CLDO_VDDP setting as in Tweakers Paradise.


Spoiler


----------



## Martelele

gupsterg said:


> The C7H does not show valid VDDP in HWINFO, use ASUS Turbo V Core to see it. I have used v1.02.02, link, there is also v1.05.03_beta, link (not used that yet).
> 
> VDDP AFAIK is Phy PCI-E, default is 1.05V on Matisse.
> 
> CLDO_VDDP is Phy DDR4, default is 0.900V on Matisse.
> 
> CLDO_VDDG is voltage to IF, default is 0.950V on Matisse.



Thank you very much,you're a champ! Can you tell me max safe numbers for those voltages and should I really care about them when stabilizng my memory with SOC on 1.15V and DRAM 1.45?Cheers


----------



## Jackalito

crakej said:


> I thought it would never get here! At last!
> 
> On tRDWR - I've almost always left if at Auto, though there have been some times when experimenting that I've needed to set it precisely. Will do some tests at stock before I jump in - so much information it's difficult to know where to start!


So happy for you, pal! 
Enjoy your new beast! :specool:


----------



## crakej

R 9 3900X - First impressions and questions!

First boot took ages, but when I did enter the bios I found the cpu temp at 46c and rising. Clocks were being reported as 4.6GHz. I can't optimize the fans in the bios as without a mouse you can't get to the button.

I set fans to right settings for pwm/DC, saved and rebooted into Windows 10. Temps are high! - always 40c +. I'm using AISuite which still hasn't been updated for matisse ((you have to ask why, might check 570 downloads to see if it's there) but I still seem to be getting good temp readings and it is clocking down properly while using it.

IBT AVX (just wanted to see what it would do) won't even run. It stops almost immediately saying linpack stopped, may be missing files...

Got fans how I like them (never go below 800) and with nothing else running temps hover around the 40s, load Firefox and temps go from the 40s into the low 50s.

Then I ran CB R15 - score 3156. I ran it consecutively until my temps were maxing out at 76c. Performance was not affected.

Then I ran Aida64 to stress the CPU properly - you can see the results - at least 1 core`boosted to 4542GHz - not bad right? Again temp went up to 76c, but everything looked fairly normal.

How strange having this temp range from 40c yet never goes over about 76c - and is still running fine. At idle, I lost patience waiting for temp to go below 40c, but voltages did go way down, and wattage down to 0.8w. So why is the temp not dropping? I think some of it is that it doesn't stay on those low voltages for long....

I'm using Carbonaught for the first time instead of LM. I have problems with my hands so if this works for me it will save me hours of painstaking work to get the LM just right.

First question is: I know others have similar temps - is it normal and has anyone managed to reduce them, without reducing performance? Any other advice welcome!


----------



## gupsterg

Martelele said:


> Thank you very much,you're a champ! Can you tell me max safe numbers for those voltages and should I really care about them when stabilizng my memory with SOC on 1.15V and DRAM 1.45?Cheers


NP  .

VDDP I don't think will aid you.

CLDO_VDDP again I think will not aid you.

In regard to SOC & CLDO_VDDP only info I have seen this.

Just as info, on 2xxx I had seen at x point regardless of SOC voltage I saw no gains, for example 3666MHz on my last 2700X needed SOC ~1.106, higher voltage had issues more than less, I could lower a bit and still see some better stability than the higher than 1.106V. The Stilt on 2xxx said some CPUs regressed on MHz attained with greater than 1.05V (effective voltage not set point). What Matisse does dunno, he has not said and all of us are testing and seeing...



crakej said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> R 9 3900X - First impressions and questions!
> 
> First boot took ages, but when I did enter the bios I found the cpu temp at 46c and rising. Clocks were being reported as 4.6GHz. I can't optimize the fans in the bios as without a mouse you can't get to the button.
> 
> I set fans to right settings for pwm/DC, saved and rebooted into Windows 10. Temps are high! - always 40c +. I'm using AISuite which still hasn't been updated for matisse ((you have to ask why, might check 570 downloads to see if it's there) but I still seem to be getting good temp readings and it is clocking down properly while using it.
> 
> IBT AVX (just wanted to see what it would do) won't even run. It stops almost immediately saying linpack stopped, may be missing files...
> 
> Got fans how I like them (never go below 800) and with nothing else running temps hover around the 40s, load Firefox and temps go from the 40s into the low 50s.
> 
> Then I ran CB R15 - score 3156. I ran it consecutively until my temps were maxing out at 76c. Performance was not affected.
> 
> Then I ran Aida64 to stress the CPU properly - you can see the results - at least 1 core`boosted to 4542GHz - not bad right? Again temp went up to 76c, but everything looked fairly normal.
> 
> How strange having this temp range from 40c yet never goes over about 76c - and is still running fine. At idle, I lost patience waiting for temp to go below 40c, but voltages did go way down, and wattage down to 0.8w. So why is the temp not dropping? I think some of it is that it doesn't stay on those low voltages for long....
> 
> I'm using Carbonaught for the first time instead of LM. I have problems with my hands so if this works for me it will save me hours of painstaking work to get the LM just right.
> 
> First question is: I know others have similar temps - is it normal and has anyone managed to reduce them, without reducing performance? Any other advice welcome!


Dunno about CB context for 3900X, been swotting on other stuff to recall reviews, but stock 1950X is ~2900. So yeah nice 3xxx 12C/24T vs TR1xxx 16C/32T.

Issue with 3xxx is due to process, increased density, heat is just BOOM there. On P95 whilst on R5 3600 I've seen quite ridiculous temps vs say 2700X.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> Dunno about CB context for 3900X, been swotting on other stuff to recall reviews, but stock 1950X is ~2900. So yeah nice 3xxx 12C/24T vs TR1xxx 16C/32T.
> 
> Issue with 3xxx is due to process, increased density, heat is just BOOM there. On P95 whilst on R5 3600 I've seen quite ridiculous temps vs say 2700X.


Thanks gupsterg.

Great .... I think lol. So waving from 40c to 50c is perfectly normal now! 

I think I feel better! I really thought temps would go to 80c+ as I was starting 10c hotter than I would with my 1700x.

I just tried DOCP settings for my ram (4400) but got code C5 - had to hit to clr cmos button. Can't say I expected it to boot at 4400 (or even less) without setting some other stuff up....

Can I just say this.... Our boards are NOT ready for this CPU - software tools, even the 'updated' AISuite I found on CH8 page, are not ready either. I'm just going through and making sure everything is up to date.

Lastly, the first time a ran R Master, it failed saying it did 'not support this cpu'! I had to remove and re-install twice before it worked. It would seem the installer installs the version appropriate for your current cpu, so having done what I thought was an update, wasn't an update at all.


----------



## lordzed83

@crakej same here IBT does not run i think its the bug that makes Destiny 2 not run on Zen2. Thats why I have had to move to aida and realbench stress test.

I'm on coolaboratory liquid ultra. IHS on my 3900x is fuucking wayyy not flat... I redid it. added extra metal got temps down by 3c


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> Thanks gupsterg.
> 
> Great .... I think lol. So waving from 40c to 50c is perfectly normal now!
> 
> I think I feel better! I really thought temps would go to 80c+ as I was starting 10c hotter than I would with my 1700x.
> 
> I just tried DOCP settings for my ram (4400) but got code C5 - had to hit to clr cmos button. Can't say I expected it to boot at 4400 (or even less) without setting some other stuff up....
> 
> Can I just say this.... Our boards are NOT ready for this CPU - software tools, even the 'updated' AISuite I found on CH8 page, are not ready either. I'm just going through and making sure everything is up to date.
> 
> Lastly, the first time a ran R Master, it failed saying it did 'not support this cpu'! I had to remove and re-install twice before it worked. It would seem the installer installs the version appropriate for your current cpu, so having done what I thought was an update, wasn't an update at all.



NP  .

Mine is fresh install with pretty much nothing other than real necessary bits, currently no games or real apps, just what you see in my data shares really. W10 Pro x64 fully updated, only driver I did manually is AMD Chipset driver v1.07.07, rest is whatever Bill Gates deemed fit  . AMD Ryzen plan is as it was deemed by them, I only changed screen off time and disabled sleep and OS has Fast Startup disabled. CPU will idle nicely ~30C, slightish hit of load like say opening a menu, something can cause rises to ~42C instantly. So as before we see highest value with no averaging.

On PBO+150MHz, on 6x scalar to keep >~4.3GHz ACB, usually averages ~50C max ~60C in Kahru RAM Test.

Averages ~67C max ~73C in RealBench, average/max ~74C P95 v29.8b3 with AVX/AVX2/FMA3/FMA4 disabled using 160K in place FFT.



Spoiler


----------



## lordzed83

@crakej thats my 1st application one of best iw ever done !!!

Also I'w tested n my mates rig iw been building how HIGH temperature affects stability. Cpu survived bit over 1 hour at 92-94c tclk whatever was 108c . And works fine. That 240mm aio was too hot to touch


----------



## lordzed83

gupsterg said:


> NP  .
> 
> Mine is fresh install with pretty much nothing other than real necessary bits, currently no games or real apps, just what you see in my data shares really. W10 Pro x64 fully updated, only driver I did manually is AMD Chipset driver v1.07.07, rest is whatever Bill Gates deemed fit  . AMD Ryzen plan is as it was deemed by them, I only changed screen off time and disabled sleep and OS has Fast Startup disabled. CPU will idle nicely ~30C, slightish hit of load like say opening a menu, something can cause rises to ~42C instantly. So as before we see highest value with no averaging.
> 
> On PBO+150MHz, on 6x scalar to keep >~4.3GHz ACB, usually averages ~50C max ~60C in Kahru RAM Test.
> 
> Averages ~67C max ~73C in RealBench, average/max ~74C P95 v29.8b3 with AVX/AVX2/FMA3/FMA4 disabled using 160K in place FFT.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 280800
> 
> 
> View attachment 280802


I'm lazy not formated or anything slamed cpu in did standard windows ccleaner ect its stable . If it aint broke dont fix it hehe.


----------



## gupsterg

lordzed83 said:


> @crakej thats my 1st application one of best iw ever done !!!
> 
> Also I'w tested n my mates rig iw been building how HIGH temperature affects stability. Cpu survived bit over 1 hour at 92-94c tclk whatever was 108c . And works fine. That 240mm aio was too hot to touch


TjMax is 95C, probably would've been throttling  .... 



lordzed83 said:


> I'm lazy not formated or anything slamed cpu in did standard windows ccleaner ect its stable . If it aint broke dont fix it hehe.


All good chap, whatever works well for you  .


----------



## crakej

As other have found RM is good for temps. AISuite, although it reports voltage and wattage well, it adds to the temp. With RM my temps are between34c and 42c (spikes) while idling.

Also have high voltage at idle - about 1.48v. I understand this is ok (for now?)

Going to try out some ram OCing later...

Does anyone know what the Legacy Compatibility Mode is?

Edit: when I tried DOCP and got the C5 code, it did not attempt any training, just went straight to C5


----------



## neikosr0x

crakej said:


> As other have found RM is good for temps. AISuite, although it reports voltage and wattage well, it adds to the temp. With RM my temps are between34c and 42c (spikes) while idling.
> 
> Also have high voltage at idle - about 1.48v. I understand this is ok (for now?)
> 
> Going to try out some ram OCing later...
> 
> Does anyone know what the Legacy Compatibility Mode is?
> 
> Edit: when I tried DOCP and got the C5 code, it did not attempt any training, just went straight to C5


yea, when it fails it goes straight to C5, just set you mem speed some primary timings volt and leave every auto and go from there.


----------



## lordzed83

gupsterg said:


> TjMax is 95C, probably would've been throttling  ....
> 
> 
> 
> All good chap, whatever works well for you  .


naaaa i turned off everything manual locked voltage at 1.5 with llc at max no vdrop and 4.2 all core and ran it waiting for thermal shotdown


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> As other have found RM is good for temps. AISuite, although it reports voltage and wattage well, it adds to the temp. With RM my temps are between34c and 42c (spikes) while idling.
> 
> Also have high voltage at idle - about 1.48v. I understand this is ok (for now?)
> 
> Going to try out some ram OCing later...
> 
> Does anyone know what the Legacy Compatibility Mode is?
> 
> Edit: when I tried DOCP and got the C5 code, it did not attempt any training, just went straight to C5


Legacy mode may switch off a CCD, I wouldn't try it. I saw a thread on Reddit yesterday or so (I can't find it now), where someone via UEFI (don't know which board), cut back CPU and IIRC couldn't get back to full setup. They tried CMOSCLR, reflash of UEFI, etc. Last I read was waiting for a new UEFI to release which may get full chip back...


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> Legacy mode may switch off a CCD, I wouldn't try it. I saw a thread on Reddit yesterday or so (I can't find it now), where someone via UEFI (don't know which board), cut back CPU and IIRC couldn't get back to full setup. They tried CMOSCLR, reflash of UEFI, etc. Last I read was waiting for a new UEFI to release which may get full chip back...


This is good to know! They really need to be disabling that until/if it works properly!


----------



## majestynl

*3800mhz on RAM @ 1900 1:1:1*
- Only Base timings CL14, will tighten later
- CPU 3700x @ stock PBO
- RAM Trident-Z 3200CL14 (2x8GB)
- RAM @ 1.5v / SOC 1.1v / CLDO VDDG 1v
- Most settings can be seen in RT screenshot
- Few Extra tweaks: SOC LLC2 and Dram Freq 400

*Stability test done with Actively cooling the ram. Stopped test @3200%. This is second run immediately after the First one stopped at 2K!


----------



## crakej

I do wish the mouse worked in the bios as I have real trouble with my right hand ATM. I can get through bios much quicker with mouse and left hand on keyboard. Not getting on with RM either - it's all in a different order......well confusing!

Just experimenting with 3600MTs, fabric @ 1800. Just seeing how far I can reduce ram and SoC from 1.07 Soc and VDDG at 1.03. RM always shows 1.1 for SoC though.


----------



## AvengedRobix

My 3900X was here.. First attempt to good daily (Vcore 1.31 LLC3 drop 1.24 during cb15)


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> This is good to know! They really need to be disabling that until/if it works properly!


NP  .



majestynl;28046088[SPOILER said:


> ]*3800mhz on RAM @ 1900 1:1:1*
> - Only Base timings CL14, will tighten later
> - CPU 3700x @ stock PBO
> - RAM Trident-Z 3200CL14 (2x8GB)
> - RAM @ 1.5v / SOC 1.1v / CLDO VDDG 1v
> - Most settings can be seen in RT screenshot
> - Few Extra tweaks: SOC LLC2 and Dram Freq 400
> 
> *Stability test done with Actively cooling the ram. Stopped test @3200%. This is second run immediately after the First one stopped at 2K!


Nice +rep for share :thumb: .



crakej said:


> I do wish the mouse worked in the bios as I have real trouble with my right hand ATM. I can get through bios much quicker with mouse and left hand on keyboard. Not getting on with RM either - it's all in a different order......well confusing!
> 
> Just experimenting with 3600MTs, fabric @ 1800. Just seeing how far I can reduce ram and SoC from 1.07 Soc and VDDG at 1.03. RM always shows 1.1 for SoC though.[/SPOILER]


RM will show correctly if you change SOC in AMD menu in UEFI, be aware if you use Extreme Tweaker SOC adjustment on UEFI 2406 at POST initially ~1.1V is given, then what you want. With the AMD menu all through POST on UEFI 2406 it is as you set.


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> Nice +rep for share :thumb: .



And below with same Memory Profile but now with manual OC @ 4.3Ghz. Latency will go down even more in Aida 


NP m8! Will share more after i tighten the sub-timings. And i will also do some comparison with lower speed but with cl12 if its possible


----------



## glnn_23

Testing 4 x 8Gb at 3666Mhz .


----------



## larrydavid

majestynl said:


> *3800mhz on RAM @ 1900 1:1:1*
> - Only Base timings CL14, will tighten later
> - CPU 3700x @ stock PBO
> - RAM Trident-Z 3200CL14 (2x8GB)
> - RAM @ 1.5v / SOC 1.1v / CLDO VDDG 1v
> - Most settings can be seen in RT screenshot
> - Few Extra tweaks: SOC LLC2 and Dram Freq 400
> 
> *Stability test done with Actively cooling the ram. Stopped test @3200%. This is second run immediately after the First one stopped at 2K!



Have you found raising the SOC and CLDO VDDG is needed with the higher mem clocks and tightr timings?


----------



## lordzed83

AvengedRobix said:


> My 3900X was here.. First attempt to good daily (Vcore 1.31 LLC3 drop 1.24 during cb15)


**** man this is stable ?? can this pass like 15 minutes realbench stress test ?? @majestynl
Like everyone showing here memory overclocks ect. Noone showing if its actuall use stable


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> @majestynl
> Like everyone showing here memory overclocks ect. Noone showing if its actuall use stable


Honestly I was working on this profile since few days, I know it's as good as stable. Passed multiple times Ramtest few K. One of them showed in screenshot in earlier post!

I just installed the Full Adobe CC for my wife so she can do her daily work tomorrow on this machine with big files and exports. If she passes the day without a blue screen I know it's stable for 99,9% daily use 

On Ryzen 1x and 2x series sometimes I got Ramtest stability 8-10k on a profile for high ram but then the next dat it got failed at 500%. I see on 3x series it's different. I can run multiple time same percentages. Anyways.. more test will follow. And I will let you also know about tomorrow. 

By the way. Today I also did a lot of test with PBO and offset voltages. Some interesting things I will share tomorrow. Need to have some sleep now ...


----------



## majestynl

larrydavid said:


> Have you found raising the SOC and CLDO VDDG is needed with the higher mem clocks and tightr timings?


Not really. I just started with 1.1 on SOC and didn't needed to ad more. But for CLDO VDDG I found lowering gave me better results!

SOC voltage on al my older Ryzen SKu's needed to be accurate set. Will test tomorrow if I can lower it on the 3700x. Or maybe it's same as the others SKu's and need exactly a specific value.


----------



## lordzed83

majestynl said:


> Honestly I was working on this profile since few days, I know it's as good as stable. Passed multiple times Ramtest few K. One of them showed in screenshot in earlier post!
> 
> I just installed the Full Adobe CC for my wife so she can do her daily work tomorrow on this machine with big files and exports. If she passes the day without a blue screen I know it's stable for 99,9% daily use
> 
> On Ryzen 1x and 2x series sometimes I got Ramtest stability 8-10k on a profile for high ram but then the next dat it got failed at 500%. I see on 3x series it's different. I can run multiple time same percentages. Anyways.. more test will follow. And I will let you also know about tomorrow.
> 
> By the way. Today I also did a lot of test with PBO and offset voltages. Some interesting things I will share tomorrow. Need to have some sleep now ...


I'm not taking about ram stability bu actuall whole system can it do 10-15 minutes loop of cb20 ??


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> I'm not taking about ram stability bu actuall whole system can it do 10-15 minutes loop of cb20 ??


Be more clear next time dude.. 

Never heard about those test, is that your new lordzed stability method a la 2019??? Lol

I was showing a memory OC in my post so dunno why CB runs will show stability on the system. With non stable ram I can endless run CB... Anyways if that makes you happy I can show you. Hehe you know me for a long time here. I don't show bull****. As you could see from my post info. I was running the CPU @ stock. So that will be tooo easy dude...

But next time.. you need to present your new Lordzed stability method on each OC you show us ..alright


----------



## lordzed83

majestynl said:


> Be more clear next time dude..
> 
> Never heard about those test, is that your new lordzed stability method a la 2019??? Lol
> 
> I was showing a memory OC in my post so dunno why CB runs will show stability on the system. With non stable ram I can endless run CB... Anyways if that makes you happy I can show you. Hehe you know me for a long time here. I don't show bull****. As you could see from my post info. I was running the CPU @ stock. So that will be tooo easy dude...
> 
> But next time.. you need to present your new Lordzed stability method on each OC you show us ..alright


Well since IBT is bugged same as desity 2 i just change running time of CB20 to 600s and it loops for 10 minutes. Even Aida/realbench dont put out as much heat  I know You dont but Im interested how it affects system stability. Bit more tricky when You are locked on 4350 hehehe reminds me of my 1700x @3950 could do more but not with tight memory to have it rendering stable.

I just found that this 10 minute cb20 blows up stability fastest on my system thats why I use it that way  Ycruncher is really brutal more brutal than ibt very highx10 


I jsst got too much time every change I do i test on ramtest hci then move to aida for at lest 15 minutes to consider moving to next change.


----------



## Baio73

Maybe I've become too old for modern Pcs, but this is the strangest piece of hardware I've ever had in my life.
Don't know if it's the CPU or the mobo… maybe the combination of the 2 things.

I can't understand why, if I can run the system 100% stable for a week with certain BIOS values, suddendly I can't lo longer do!
Yesterday I powered up the pc, Windows found an "unkown USB device not working properly", I rebooted (by the OS, not forced with reset button), and the pc got stuck on "underscore" screen and "99" on the debug screen. Forced the BIOS reset via the back button, entered the BIOS (no mouse, uff…), selected the exact same values as before (see attachment), and can't set the RAM higher than 3266 instead of 3466 I used for a whole week. RAM beeps all the way.

It does not depend on RAM, it's my third kit (2 different G.Skill before these Corsair)… I've passed through 6-7 BIOS upgrades and none of them solved the problem… maybe they worsed it! I mean, not to manage to have RAM working at their target values, but TO WORK AT THE VALUES THEY DID 5 DAMNED MINUTES BEFORE!

Maybe I'm too dumb to use DRAM Calculator… is there a guide I can use? It's my last chance not to go defenitely crazy.

One thing I know for sure… all this is very frustrating. ((((((


Baio


----------



## Mandarb

I have the C7H because my C6H turned out to be defective. BIOS was first pretty unstable and no chance to get to 3200MHz. With time BIOS got better and I could run it at 3200MHz. I could dial in the numbers, have it tested with Ryzen memory tester up to 3000% coverage. Rockstable.

But a week later it would refuse to boot at the settings. Had to reset and reflash BIOS to get it back up. Stable again for a bit. Changed the CPU from a 1800X to 2700X, stable again for a bit. With time I could only boot at lower and lower frequencies, RAM always perfectly stable, no errors when bootet. Turned out it was the motherboard.


----------



## Baio73

Mandarb said:


> I have the C7H because my C6H turned out to be defective. BIOS was first pretty unstable and no chance to get to 3200MHz. With time BIOS got better and I could run it at 3200MHz. I could dial in the numbers, have it tested with Ryzen memory tester up to 3000% coverage. Rockstable.
> 
> But a week later it would refuse to boot at the settings. Had to reset and reflash BIOS to get it back up. Stable again for a bit. Changed the CPU from a 1800X to 2700X, stable again for a bit. With time I could only boot at lower and lower frequencies, RAM always perfectly stable, no errors when bootet. Turned out it was the motherboard.


Did you go into an RMA?
I can imagine it is not an easy to demostrate defect…

Baio


----------



## lester007

Testing @3466Mhz 14-15-14-22-36-4-4-16-3-8-10-0-3-3-250-auto-auto-14-8-7-3-1-7-7-1-5-5-1
dram volt 1.45
I get errors putting tRCD to 14. 
Seems fairly stable I hope. I tried 3600 and 3733 hit single core boost less in my observation I don't know why.
PBO +200Mhz
offset vcore -0.075v


----------



## harderthanfire

Just got the pump randomly getting set to 0 RPM bug - not too happy about this as I was not at my PC so it hit overheat protection. 



Added an alert to restart if it goes less than 1 RPM now but still worried about it, might look at getting a molex adapter as that is scary stuff.


----------



## crakej

harderthanfire said:


> Just got the pump randomly getting set to 0 RPM bug - not too happy about this as I was not at my PC so it hit overheat protection.
> 
> 
> 
> Added an alert to restart if it goes less than 1 RPM now but still worried about it, might look at getting a molex adapter as that is scary stuff.


CPU will cut out before it's damaged.


----------



## AvengedRobix

Just for bench =) don't search super stability


----------



## crakej

I've found I need GearDown on for 3600+ - just as with my 1700x. Are others finding they need it where they did before?

Just testing 1.0 SoC, VDDG 0.950, no CPU changes, 3600 14 15 14 14 28 42 T1. Have not tightened tertiary timings yet.


Edit:
Is this right? VTTDDR is not being set automatically? - though doesn't seem to have affected me yet (still 0.6v). Test above (TM5) just passed....going to continue lowering until I find the lowest values.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> I've found I need GearDown on for 3600+ - just as with my 1700x. Are others finding they need it where they did before?
> 
> Just testing 1.0 SoC, VDDG 0.950, no CPU changes, 3600 14 15 14 14 28 42 T1. Have not tightened tertiary timings yet.
> 
> 
> Edit:
> Is this right? VTTDDR is not being set automatically? - though doesn't seem to have affected me yet (still 0.6v). Test above (TM5) just passed....going to continue lowering until I find the lowest values.


Same here need geardown on 3600+ VTTDDR afaik does not read correctly


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> Same here need geardown on 3600+ VTTDDR afaik does not read correctly


Cool. Thanks for that 

Because I had 1700x I know nothing about CPU like EDC PTT and the auto OC. I have much to learn, so not OCing CPU yet.

One thing I need to know though - does setting manual voltage for SoC change anything? I'm not seeing anything other than ACB at about 4.2GHz while using P95, TM5 or RamTest - unless it's a light load.

These are current settings.


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> Well since IBT is bugged same as desity 2 i just change running time of CB20 to 600s and it loops for 10 minutes. Even Aida/realbench dont put out as much heat  I know You dont but Im interested how it affects system stability. Bit more tricky when You are locked on 4350 hehehe reminds me of my 1700x @3950 could do more but not with tight memory to have it rendering stable.
> 
> I just found that this 10 minute cb20 blows up stability fastest on my system thats why I use it that way  Ycruncher is really brutal more brutal than ibt very highx10
> 
> 
> I jsst got too much time every change I do i test on ramtest hci then move to aida for at lest 15 minutes to consider moving to next change.


Well i run mostly AIDA and RB for stressing system. Then using Realworld with Heavy applications and Games!
Will do the lordzed method later tonight ..just for you  



lester007 said:


> Testing @3466Mhz 14-15-14-22-36-4-4-16-3-8-10-0-3-3-250-auto-auto-14-8-7-3-1-7-7-1-5-5-1
> dram volt 1.45
> I get errors putting tRCD to 14.
> Seems fairly stable I hope. I tried 3600 and 3733 hit single core boost less in my observation I don't know why.
> PBO +200Mhz
> offset vcore -0.075v


Probably you under-volted to much. And what i also saw yesterday in my tests. When maxing out PBO i got less often Singlecore boost to high Mhz. My all core boost where higher but single got worst. Maybe you can test that out. First try without offset, en then compare without PBO maxed out!

_Later tonight i will share al my test results done with PBO and offset voltages! Interesting !_



harderthanfire said:


> Just got the pump randomly getting set to 0 RPM bug - not too happy about this as I was not at my PC so it hit overheat protection.
> 
> Added an alert to restart if it goes less than 1 RPM now but still worried about it, might look at getting a molex adapter as that is scary stuff.


Dont know why people PWM their Pump. As far as i know its not recommend for a pump going up and down to much. I ran all my pumps full power always with zero issues. I just control the fans in PWM!

And btw: as @crakej saying , your system has fail-safe features!


----------



## Digitalwolf

crakej said:


> I've found I need GearDown on for 3600+ - just as with my 1700x. Are others finding they need it where they did before?


To be honest I never really pushed memory on my Ryzen 1xxx/2xxx chips. I had sold off most everything for this round. Then I saw some articles about x570 prices and I bought a CH7 refurb from B&H because it had a pretty nice discount. I also went with a 3600x for now and may or may not change out the cpu later.

Anyway... personally I haven't really changed much of anything in bios. I have an old G. Skill 3600 kit that was one of the few my ryzen cpu's would work with (I don't have any of the newer Ryzen memory kits). So this is a F4-3600C15D-16GVR kit that I got from Newegg I would say years ago. So to be honest I hit the boards version of xmp to see what would happen and that's all I did. So no gear down or at least I haven't personally touched that setting. I've had the system up for a week now testing and normal use with no issues. Well there is one thing I changed... I read Elmor's thread about memory boot voltage and I set my memory boot voltage to 1.35.

The only real observations I have is that out of the box the base clock is pretty much always showing as 99.8 for me. So my peak core speed is 439x.x as opposed to 4400. This of course does drop my memory speed slightly as well, so it's something like 1796.6 x 2 instead of 1800 aka 3600. I did try to increase base but you can't set 100.1 that I could see only 100.2. When I did that I was locked into I want to say a 38x multi and the cpu did not clock up or down. So I changed that setting back and decided to wait until I get more free time. I think I saw a post that mentioned how to get the cpu to still clock up/down in the situation I just described... I just don't have time right now to mess with it.

I need to start figuring out some of the bios because, with default settings the vcore peaks at 1.45. At the low end core speeds drop to something around 1,846.5 and the core voltage to 0.925. Then the core voltage will cycle up and under load it's anywhere from 1.4'ish to 1.45. I personally don't think the cpu needs anywhere near that much voltage out of the box. However, there are a lot of settings I need to understand and currently I have a lot of things going on that I need to wrap up before I can really get into the bios.


----------



## lordzed83

@majestynl shame cb10 does not have option of 10 runs completion time. Would be fantastic tool for longer benchmark :/


I got new promising setting but not had time to test out. Only had time for 450% pass on ramtest scores very nice for CL16 63.7- 63.8ns

3800cl16/16/16/32/52 1.45v
RRDS 7
RRDL 10
TFAW 35
WTRS 4
WTRL 14
WTRL 14
RDRD SCL 3
WRWR SCL 3
RFC 367
CWL 16
RTP 10
RDWR 8
WRRD 4
WRWR SC 1
WRWR SD 8
WRWR DD 8
RDRD 1
RDRD 5
RDRD 5
CKE 1


----------



## majestynl

Digitalwolf said:


> To be honest I never really pushed memory on my Ryzen 1xxx/2xxx chips. I had sold off most everything for this round. Then I saw some articles about x570 prices and I bought a CH7 refurb from B&H because it had a pretty nice discount. I also went with a 3600x for now and may or may not change out the cpu later.


Yeap, im also happy didn't bought the X570. The CH7 does the job perfectly if you ask me!



Digitalwolf said:


> Anyway... personally I haven't really changed much of anything in bios. I have an old G. Skill 3600 kit that was one of the few my ryzen cpu's would work with (I don't have any of the newer Ryzen memory kits). So this is a F4-3600C15D-16GVR kit that I got from Newegg I would say years ago. So to be honest I hit the boards version of xmp to see what would happen and that's all I did. So no gear down or at least I haven't personally touched that setting. I've had the system up for a week now testing and normal use with no issues. Well there is one thing I changed... I read Elmor's thread about memory boot voltage and I set my memory boot voltage to 1.35.


I have several kit laying around. And i can say my oldest Gskill 3200 CL14 is the best from all. It outperforms also my most expensive 4133mhz kit 



Digitalwolf said:


> The only real observations I have is that out of the box the base clock is pretty much always showing as 99.8 for me. So my peak core speed is 439x.x as opposed to 4400. This of course does drop my memory speed slightly as well, so it's something like 1796.6 x 2 instead of 1800 aka 3600. I did try to increase base but you can't set 100.1 that I could see only 100.2. When I did that I was locked into I want to say a 38x multi and the cpu did not clock up or down. So I changed that setting back and decided to wait until I get more free time. I think I saw a post that mentioned how to get the cpu to still clock up/down in the situation I just described... I just don't have time right now to mess with it.


You can set it manual to 100 or whatever you wish. You just need to enable PBO again. Easy way is to do it in Ryzen Master App!



Digitalwolf said:


> I need to start figuring out some of the bios because, with default settings the vcore peaks at 1.45. At the low end core speeds drop to something around 1,846.5 and the core voltage to 0.925. Then the core voltage will cycle up and under load it's anywhere from 1.4'ish to 1.45. I personally don't think the cpu needs anywhere near that much voltage out of the box. However, there are a lot of settings I need to understand and currently I have a lot of things going on that I need to wrap up before I can really get into the bios.


You can give a - offset but check your stability and also your performance. As said earlier. Yesterday i did test with PBO and voltage offsets. I got the best perf. results with over-volting then under-volting like some of the users are saying. So best way is to do your own test for youy specific silicon!


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> @majestynl shame cb10 does not have option of 10 runs completion time. Would be fantastic tool for longer benchmark :/
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I got new promising setting but not had time to test out. Only had time for 450% pass on ramtest scores very nice for CL16 63.7- 63.8ns
> 
> 3800cl16/16/16/32/52 1.45v
> RRDS 7
> RRDL 10
> TFAW 35
> WTRS 4
> WTRL 14
> WTRL 14
> RDRD SCL 3
> WRWR SCL 3
> RFC 367
> CWL 16
> RTP 10
> RDWR 8
> WRRD 4
> WRWR SC 1
> WRWR SD 8
> WRWR DD 8
> RDRD 1
> RDRD 5
> RDRD 5
> CKE 1


CB10 ??? You mean R15 ?


----------



## gupsterg

AvengedRobix said:


> My 3900X was here.. First attempt to good daily (Vcore 1.31 LLC3 drop 1.24 during cb15)


Nice, any chance of sharing background?  , I likey  .



majestynl said:


> And below with same Memory Profile but now with manual OC @ 4.3Ghz. Latency will go down even more in Aida
> 
> 
> NP m8! Will share more after i tighten the sub-timings. And i will also do some comparison with lower speed but with cl12 if its possible


Sweet  .



glnn_23 said:


> Testing 4 x 8Gb at 3666Mhz .


Wow nice, any settings share cheers?



lordzed83 said:


> **** man this is stable ?? can this pass like 15 minutes realbench stress test ??
> @majestynl
> Like everyone showing here memory overclocks ect. Noone showing if its actuall use stable


My R5 3600 setup find Kahru RAM Test is better test than RB. For example a profile that fails ~3K in RAM Test, say ~1hr runtime, fails ~3.5hrs in RealBench....



lester007 said:


> Testing @3466Mhz 14-15-14-22-36-4-4-16-3-8-10-0-3-3-250-auto-auto-14-8-7-3-1-7-7-1-5-5-1
> dram volt 1.45
> I get errors putting tRCD to 14.
> Seems fairly stable I hope. I tried 3600 and 3733 hit single core boost less in my observation I don't know why.
> PBO +200Mhz
> offset vcore -0.075v


Experienced 1xxx, 2xx, 3xxx, TR 1xxx, on C6H, C7H, ZE, ZEA with:-

i) F4-3200C14D-16GTZ
ii) F4-3600C15D-16GTZ
iii) F4-3200C14Q-32GVK
iv) F4-3200C14Q-32GTZSW
v) F4-4000C18Q-32GTZ
vi) Viper Steel 4000MHz (PVS416G400C9K)

None of them have taken 14-14-14-14 at >3333MHz, dunno if it's the settings I use or what.

In regard to PBO my experience been like this, after +150MHz CPU does more frequency bounce for say Kahru RAM Test run, at +150MHz there is slight bounce between say ~4.275GHz-~4.35GHz, lower than +150MHz I get solid ACB. Best gains in say CB R15/R20, etc again is +150MHz, higher yields no gains and can cause regression for me. So do test what is best PBO+xxxMHz.



crakej said:


> I've found I need GearDown on for 3600+ - just as with my 1700x. Are others finding they need it where they did before?
> 
> Just testing 1.0 SoC, VDDG 0.950, no CPU changes, 3600 14 15 14 14 28 42 T1. Have not tightened tertiary timings yet.
> 
> 
> Edit:
> Is this right? VTTDDR is not being set automatically? - though doesn't seem to have affected me yet (still 0.6v). Test above (TM5) just passed....going to continue lowering until I find the lowest values.


Upto 3666MHz for say ~3K RAM Test, ~3.5hrs RB, non issues with Gear Down Mode: Off. >3666MHz I believe FCLK being 1:1 causes me issue, as I have had RAM Test fair PASS on 3733MHz with GDMD, but FCLK not 1:1 with RAM.

What APP you using to see it?


----------



## crakej

Only thing that shows VTTDDR is AISuite - 0.6v


----------



## gupsterg

Peeps with 2 CCD CPUs may wanna grab this tool which allows each CCX to clock at x, link in der8auer's YT video description. From what der8auer states, RM also allows this feature.



Spoiler













harderthanfire said:


> Just got the pump randomly getting set to 0 RPM bug - not too happy about this as I was not at my PC so it hit overheat protection.
> 
> Added an alert to restart if it goes less than 1 RPM now but still worried about it, might look at getting a molex adapter as that is scary stuff.


I have used C7H extensively and test with multiple monitoring SW open for length on a "run". I have had PWM go down twice so far, once yesterday and once today.

The cause for me is Ryzen Master.

See WMV here, on the plus side seems a R5 3600 can run PBO+150MHz for low loads passively  ...

Another result for today which has been nice is PBO+150MHz with 3600MHz using :clock: The Stilt :clock: 3466MHz timings on 1T, GDMD, PDMD I can snag at stock SOC (1.025V) / VDIMM (1.35V) and VDDG only need bump to ~0.962V on UEFI 0068  ...

R5 3600 is defo been fun  ...



crakej said:


> Only thing that shows VTTDDR is AISuite - 0.6v


Use ASUS TurboV core, v1.02.02 I have used a lot within screenies for data capture of settings, there is also v1.05.03 Beta, not tried that yet.


----------



## harderthanfire

majestynl said:


> Dont know why people PWM their Pump. As far as i know its not recommend for a pump going up and down to much. I ran all my pumps full power always with zero issues. I just control the fans in PWM!
> 
> And btw: as @*crakej* saying , your system has fail-safe features!



TBH it only runs at either 80% or 100% I have nothing set in between so it is pretty pointless. It is just to cut down on the slight whine of the pump as the system is silent otherwise.


----------



## crakej

I am still getting code d3 (missing protocol) - every time I run Ryzen Master!?

What is going on?


----------



## lordzed83

majestynl said:


> CB10 ??? You mean R15 ?


Phone missclick at work so  I ofc got Cb Trilogy to play 11.5 15 and 20 

TBH i have not tried 3633 with no geardown on my timings profile. Possiby would need more volts. Could it be that 2 ciplets behave different on memory side if it goes for stability ect. Need testing


----------



## kmellz

Finally got my 3800x  Everything seemed to go fine at the start, but then the bios just started crapping out.. yeesh. Had to put more and more things back to auto settings, but even then it started shutting down with fans spinning at max, also same behavior when doing a power down/reboot, like it crashed. 
Tried doing a bios flashback with the new beta bios.. didn't work! No clue why. Flashed it normally in bios though, seems to be more stable.
Running full auto atm though except for memory at 3200 and fclk at 1600. Will try some more tomorrow when I get my new Dark Pro 8PACK RAM!
Anyways, bios is in major need of fixing, sad it went this far from the awesome community presence with lots of info and betas at the start.
Was a major reason why I bought this board 

Also, anyone know what we should be running Sense MI Skew at this time around? Disabled again?


----------



## nick name

I've been playing with faster RAM on my 2700X and it frustrates me that some sessions will run with minimal errors making me think some tweaking will get it stable and then upon the next boot with the changes made it throws a million errors immediately. I wish I could figure out what causes that. It's almost as if there is a core that gets assigned to something at POST and sometimes it's a strong core and other times it's a crap core.


----------



## AvengedRobix

for anyone


----------



## crakej

I have SoC down to 0.970v, VDDG 0.920v 3600MTs, TM5 pass and nearly half hour P95 - didn't go further as want to find min working voltage and go from there. RM still says 1.1v for SoC
@gupsterg I will have a look - thanks for sharing!


----------



## gupsterg

majestynl said:


> Dont know why people PWM their Pump. As far as i know its not recommend for a pump going up and down to much. I ran all my pumps full power always with zero issues. I just control the fans in PWM!
> 
> 
> 
> harderthanfire said:
> 
> 
> 
> TBH it only runs at either 80% or 100% I have nothing set in between so it is pretty pointless. It is just to cut down on the slight whine of the pump as the system is silent otherwise.
Click to expand...

Ahh, never read PWM pump shouldn't be going up down. TBH I bought a PWM D5 for sTR4 rig and PWM DDC for AM4 as wanted it to somewhat change with cooling need. For example the DDC I use set to ~20% and goes to max ~28%, only way to get silence from it plus some extra cooling effect when needed.



crakej said:


> I am still getting code d3 (missing protocol) - every time I run Ryzen Master!?
> 
> What is going on?


Seems normal to me. Occurs on 2700X+C7H and R5 3600+C7H.

Do keep in mind that:-

a) Somewhat Q-Code behaviour changed with 2xxx UEFI even on 2700X and now we're on Matisse.
b) Donkeys ago Elmor said some of what is in the manual is not correct for Q-Codes and be aware the Q-Code display not only is for faults but status as well. So perhaps the d3 is to show RM hook in to UEFI, etc...



AvengedRobix said:


> for anyone


+rep and thanks :thumb: .



crakej said:


> I have SoC down to 0.970v, VDDG 0.920v 3600MTs, TM5 pass and nearly half hour P95 - didn't go further as want to find min working voltage and go from there. RM still says 1.1v for SoC
> 
> @gupsterg I will have a look - thanks for sharing!


Wow nice  .


----------



## netman

Gigabyte Gaming 7 got its Update for Agesa 1.0.0.3 AB 5 Days Ago, Asrock 370 and 470 Taichi got their Agesa 1.0.0.3 Update today - i wonder how long again we have to wait vor the ch7 and ch6 - its just annoying ...


----------



## nick name

netman said:


> Gigabyte Gaming 7 got its Update for Agesa 1.0.0.3 AB 5 Days Ago, Asrock 370 and 470 Taichi got their Agesa 1.0.0.3 Update today - i wonder how long again we have to wait vor the ch7 and ch6 - its just annoying ...


Well we get our BIOS releases on Fridays soooo maybe then?


----------



## gupsterg

netman said:


> Gigabyte Gaming 7 got its Update for Agesa 1.0.0.3 AB 5 Days Ago, Asrock 370 and 470 Taichi got their Agesa 1.0.0.3 Update today - i wonder how long again we have to wait vor the ch7 and ch6 - its just annoying ...


Shamino states it has bug, dunno if we will see it or get next version. Gigabyte rep on reddit stated AGESA ComboPi-AM4 1.0.0.3 ABA they got day or so ago and working on that. IIRC that has say Destiny 2 fix.


----------



## crakej

It's the ABA version they pulled - and really close to release.

We should be grateful we didn't get a bugged bios release.


----------



## neikosr0x

Not sure if you guys have seen it yet or posted it. But here it is 



 it is a video of der8auer where he shows and shares an OC TOOL for Ryzen 3000. You can overclock the chip per CCX using less voltage and getting very good OC check it out if you haven't


----------



## toxick

Finally stable!


----------



## AvengedRobix

toxick said:


> Finally stable!


can you post all you're timings and satting for ram?


----------



## kundica

toxick said:


> Finally stable!


I have the same kit as you but get slightly better results running at 3733 with modified timings. What sort of results did you get at 3733? Also, I'm currently running 1.375v but I haven't attempted to lower it yet.

I tested it to 2700% but started tweaking other things so I haven't gone back to do a longer test.


----------



## toxick

AvengedRobix said:


> can you post all you're timings and satting for ram?


Still in work!


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> I have SoC down to 0.970v, VDDG 0.920v 3600MTs, TM5 pass and nearly half hour P95 - didn't go further as want to find min working voltage and go from there. RM still says 1.1v for SoC
> 
> @gupsterg I will have a look - thanks for sharing!


Well i tried cutting soc to 1.05 vddg 1.00 error at 20% so decided to xheck if sticks need more food poped extra 30 again error. Moved soc to 1.1 vddg to 1.05 and so far so good. Thats on 3733. I tried that 3800 but get errors maybe i ahould try soc 1.15 vddg 1.1 hmm ill see after i finish this 3733 test and report hehe


----------



## toxick

3DMark Time Spy

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/37747748?


----------



## AvengedRobix

toxick said:


> Still in work!


Thanks.. i try


----------



## crakej

How low is too low for SoC and VDDG?

I just passed TM5 and 3 hours P95 0.96875v SoC, 0.918v VDDG @ 3600


----------



## toxick

After an hour of using I obtained maximum boost speed of 4.575GHz.


----------



## majestynl

*PBO Test offset voltages vs Performance and clocks*
If somebody is interested i did some test with offset voltages and PBO behavior and made some graphs for better view

CPU: 3700x
RAM: 3800mhz CL14 1:1:1
_All test done with no Perf bias or whatever. Just applied the voltages, boot OS and start test + monitoring!_

What i found out on my specific chip:
- Dont get fooled: Under-volting shows higher clocks but performance is not getting better. With -0.075 i got worst performance but highest clocks!
- Maxing out PBO with +200mhz and 10x scaler etc. asked for more voltage to show his wings!
- CPU-Z single-core bench same on all tests (stock PBO) // but slightly higher on PBO+200mhz with more voltages (not included in graphs)
- If you want best performance and you are maxing out PBO, probably you also need some extra juice


----------



## lordzed83

majestynl said:


> *PBO Test offset voltages vs Performance and clocks*
> If somebody is interested i did some test with offset voltages and PBO behavior and made some graphs for better view
> 
> CPU: 3700x
> RAM: 3800mhz CL14 1:1:1
> _All test done with no Perf bias or whatever. Just applied the voltages, boot OS and start test + monitoring!_
> 
> What i found out on my specific chip:
> - Dont get fooled: Under-volting shows higher clocks but performance is not getting better. With -0.075 i got worst performance but highest clocks!
> - Maxing out PBO with +200mhz and 10x scaler etc. asked for more voltage to show his wings!
> - CPU-Z single-core bench same on all tests (stock PBO) // but slightly higher on PBO+200mhz with more voltages (
> not included in graphs)
> - If you want best performance and you are maxing out PBO, probably you also need some extra juice


nice test seen few of those reports by now. I remember when tweeking my 2700x was very similar situation kinda. cpu was stable at 1.416 but with 1.425 i was gainign performance but going for more like 1.435 gave nothing more.

I just love toying around with ryzen bit here bit theer some gains some looses hehe


----------



## lordzed83

netman said:


> Gigabyte Gaming 7 got its Update for Agesa 1.0.0.3 AB 5 Days Ago, Asrock 370 and 470 Taichi got their Agesa 1.0.0.3 Update today - i wonder how long again we have to wait vor the ch7 and ch6 - its just annoying ...


Gigabyte aklso had bios upgrasw that bricked motherboard of one chap at OCUK  Ill rather wait than have a brick lol


----------



## chakku

gupsterg said:


> Shamino states it has bug, dunno if we will see it or get next version. Gigabyte rep on reddit stated AGESA ComboPi-AM4 1.0.0.3 ABA they got day or so ago and working on that. IIRC that has say Destiny 2 fix.


Honestly as long as we're getting frequent updates on the situation like we were from Elmor I'd be happy enough. Problem is that until Shamino made that thread on the ROG forum we had nothing but radio silence ever since Elmor left.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> How low is too low for SoC and VDDG?
> 
> I just passed TM5 and 3 hours P95 0.96875v SoC, 0.918v VDDG @ 3600


I dont think too low exists as long as you are not loosing pertformance and its stable. Low = better cause less temps 
And how are You finding temps with normal thermal compound on 3900x ??


Well my CB11.5 collection updated


----------



## xg4m3

Is it worth keeping this board? I got it 3 days ago and seeing all the problems people have with it, I'm thinking of returning it and getting some X570 board.
I didn't know Asus is so bad when it comes to updates :/


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> I dont think too low exists as long as you are not loosing pertformance and its stable. Low = better cause less temps
> And how are You finding temps with normal thermal compound on 3900x ??


I'm using one of those new carbon pads - and it's working really well!


----------



## lester007

majestynl said:


> Probably you under-volted to much. And what i also saw yesterday in my tests. When maxing out PBO i got less often Singlecore boost to high Mhz. My all core boost where higher but single got worst. Maybe you can test that out. First try without offset, en then compare without PBO maxed out!
> 
> _Later tonight i will share al my test results done with PBO and offset voltages! Interesting !_


It could be, will do more testing with the offset! Thanks 



gupsterg said:


> Experienced 1xxx, 2xx, 3xxx, TR 1xxx, on C6H, C7H, ZE, ZEA with:-
> 
> i) F4-3200C14D-16GTZ
> ii) F4-3600C15D-16GTZ
> iii) F4-3200C14Q-32GVK
> iv) F4-3200C14Q-32GTZSW
> v) F4-4000C18Q-32GTZ
> vi) Viper Steel 4000MHz (PVS416G400C9K)
> 
> None of them have taken 14-14-14-14 at >3333MHz, dunno if it's the settings I use or what.
> 
> In regard to PBO my experience been like this, after +150MHz CPU does more frequency bounce for say Kahru RAM Test run, at +150MHz there is slight bounce between say ~4.275GHz-~4.35GHz, lower than +150MHz I get solid ACB. Best gains in say CB R15/R20, etc again is +150MHz, higher yields no gains and can cause regression for me. So do test what is best PBO+xxxMHz.


Very interesting find! I had only 1 sample it won't do for me as well, my all core boost when playing games about 4.3GHz, stress test around 4.1-4.15GHz.


----------



## Mandarb

Installee my 3900x and did some testing and tweaking. I can currently only get 3000MHz out of my dual ranked 3200 CL14 2x16GB Trident Z

What temps are you seeing with prime95 small ffts and a Noctua NH-D15S? I get up to 84°C with stock settings.


----------



## chakku

Mandarb said:


> I can currently only get 3000MHz out of my dual ranked 3200 CL14 2x16GB Trident Z


Try leave everything on Auto except change DDR speed to 3733, fabric clock to 1867, DRAM voltage to 1.45V and DRAM boot voltage to 1.45V. I have 3600CL14 and 3733CL16 stable at this voltage, if you can boot in with everything set to Auto then you can start tweaking and testing from there. I suspect boot DRAM voltage is holding back your OC to 3000MHz right now. Also helps to change DRAM current capability to 120% and switching freq to 450MHz.



Spoiler



3600CL14









3733CL16


----------



## VPII

My Ryzen 5 3600 has never really ran at stock settings so yesterday I wanted to just test and see routing back to default settings except for Memory. When I started up and ran single and multicore tests it basically just stuck at 3600 mhz clock speed and won't increase or decrease. I went back into bios to enable PBO and core performance boost but still the same stuck at 3600mhz. I did manage to drop my overclock vcore from 1.4125 to 1.3687 just by setting vcore LLC to 5. I picked up when not setting it there is a 0.0375 vcore drop

This overclock is running the processor at 4.309ghz.


----------



## crakej

@gupsterg have you tried your Viper Steels with matisse yet? Mine are 4400s - only up to 3600 so far here, vdim is 1.420v - but very low SoC 0.968v


----------



## Mandarb

@chakku: thanks, didn't realise dram boot auto was reverted to use 1.2V.

Also, anybody else got the issue that their board doesn't shut down properly? I see an error code 8 displayed, chassis fans 2 and 3 keep running, everything eöse off. I have to kill the power to get it out of this state.


----------



## neikosr0x

Mandarb said:


> @chakku: thanks, didn't realise dram boot auto was reverted to use 1.2V.
> 
> Also, anybody else got the issue that their board doesn't shut down properly? I see an error code 8 displayed, chassis fans 2 and 3 keep running, everything eöse off. I have to kill the power to get it out of this state.


for me sometimes it doesn't even turn off. so I have to hard power off the pc.


----------



## MrPhilo

Anyone tried separate CCX OC? Some were able to get 4.5Ghz on one CCX, 4.45Ghz on another and 4.3Ghz on the weaker one at 1.35v. Be interesting if anyone can test this.


----------



## Nucky

I tested the ccx overclocking last night. Was able to get 4.5,4.475,4.325,4.325 @1.35v llc5 . With 3600 14-14-14-28 and IF 1800. For CB r20 I had to drop down to 4.45,4.45,4.3,4.3. Didn't have much time to test further but it is looking promising so far.


----------



## lordzed83

Nucky said:


> I tested the ccx overclocking last night. Was able to get 4.5,4.475,4.325,4.325 @1.35v llc5 . With 3600 14-14-14-28 and IF 1800. For CB r20 I had to drop down to 4.5,4.5,4.3,4.3. Didn't have much time to test further but it is looking promising so far.


Thats cool MAybe Ill play with this. Since I'm happy with my 3733cl14 i can see what cores are good hehe


----------



## kmellz

Got my new RAM now (T-FORCE DARK PRO 8PACK 3866mhz) and man that feeling compared to previous gen Ryzen, when setting it to 3733mhz, and it just boots up without a hitch. Gonna try out timings and also see if my fclk can handle 1900mhz without performance drops, then I might aim for 3800mhz with lowest timings!


----------



## lordzed83

kmellz said:


> Got my new RAM now (T-FORCE DARK PRO 8PACK 3866mhz) and man that feeling compared to previous gen Ryzen, when setting it to 3733mhz, and it just boots up without a hitch. Gonna try out timings and also see if my fclk can handle 1900mhz without performance drops, then I might aim for 3800mhz with lowest timings!


And we are in the 8pack club  i decided to settle for 3733 .... FOR NOW hehe passes 2x1 hour ramtest yesterday with 1.425 volts at cl14 so happy with that


----------



## xg4m3

2501 Bios has just been released, but for now only for 32bit W10.


----------



## MrPhilo

lordzed83 said:


> kmellz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Got my new RAM now (T-FORCE DARK PRO 8PACK 3866mhz) and man that feeling compared to previous gen Ryzen, when setting it to 3733mhz, and it just boots up without a hitch. Gonna try out timings and also see if my fclk can handle 1900mhz without performance drops, then I might aim for 3800mhz with lowest timings!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And we are in the 8pack club /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif i decided to settle for 3733 .... FOR NOW hehe passes 2x1 hour ramtest yesterday with 1.425 volts at cl14 so happy with that /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
Click to expand...

3733cl14 at 1.425v.. that's amazing is the 8 pack a better b die than your typical 3200cl14 or 3600cl16


----------



## kundica

xg4m3 said:


> 2501 Bios has just been released, but for now only for 32bit W10.


Win ver makes no difference on the bios rom. It's probably just 32-bit that gets populated on the server host first. Flashing momentarily.

Edit: Flashed. It's still AGESA 1.0.0.2 =(


----------



## xg4m3

Yeah, seems like it just fixes some minor stuff and mouse in Bios.


----------



## crakej

They had to pull AGESA 1003, so I guess this is just to fix those minor problems we found including mouse (thank god!)

Installing.

Version 2501 2019/07/1814.66 MBytes

ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO BIOS 2501
Fix an issue where the mouse will sometimes freeze in the UEFI.
Update multi-language string.
Fix an issue with the Safe Boot button.
"Before running the USB BIOS Flashback tool, please rename the BIOS file (C7H.CAP)


----------



## AvengedRobix

kundica said:


> Win ver makes no difference on the bios rom. It's probably just 32-bit that gets populated on the server host first. Flashing momentarily.
> 
> Edit: Flashed. It's still AGESA 1.0.0.2 =(


Serious? .2???? ***


----------



## lordzed83

xg4m3 said:


> 2501 Bios has just been released, but for now only for 32bit W10.


Thanks for update 
link
wifi
https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...900.516647097.1563405481-805206871.1562745256
normal
https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...176.516647097.1563405481-805206871.1562745256


flashing


----------



## kmellz

lordzed83 said:


> And we are in the 8pack club  i decided to settle for 3733 .... FOR NOW hehe passes 2x1 hour ramtest yesterday with 1.425 volts at cl14 so happy with that


Mind posting your memory settings? Looked through your post history, but the one where you published a picture with settings, the picture wasn't working now :/


----------



## Rhadamanthis

Still problem in aura......problem fakeboot with m2 device? not agesa 1003? cpu z show 1.0.0.2


----------



## Baio73

Just flashed.. mouse back, yppie-yah! :-/

Baio


----------



## chakku

If 2501 is a minor fix are profiles from 2406 still working on it?


----------



## nick name

Baio73 said:


> Just flashed.. mouse back, yppie-yah! :-/
> 
> Baio


I still can't find it. Damn time-zones.

Edit:
NVM I found it under Win 7 32-bit.+

Edit 2:
Welp it looks like I know why I couldn't use my usual switch BIOS versions within the URL trick. The URL has Crosshair VIII in it.

https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/SocketAM4/*ROG_CROSSHAIR_VIII_HERO_WI-FI*/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-2501.zip


----------



## crakej

For those who have not read the past 4 pages, ASUS pulled upcoming bios with AGESA 1003ABA because they found a major bug while doing final release checks.

They saved us lots of problems and provided this (2501) to fix a couple of annoying minor bugs while they move on to trying to sort out the next bit of buggy code from AMD


----------



## Baio73

crakej said:


> For those who have not read the past 4 pages, ASUS pulled upcoming bios with AGESA 1003ABA because they found a major bug while doing final release checks.
> 
> They saved us lots of problems and provided this (2501) to fix a couple of annoying minor bugs while they move on to trying to sort out the next bit of buggy code from AMD


This should be a good news… but one year has passed, more than 200€ spent and problems are still there… that is becoming very upsetting for me.
I must be happy my mouse works again in the BIOS?
MMMMMHHHH....

Baio


----------



## nick name

Baio73 said:


> This should be a good news… but one year has passed, more than 200€ spent and problems are still there… that is becoming very upsetting for me.
> I must be happy my mouse works again in the BIOS?
> MMMMMHHHH....
> 
> Baio


What problems? If you would have stayed on a previous BIOS that wasn't put out for Ryzen 3000 compatibility then you shouldn't have any problems. You have to reset the clock when considering these new BIOS versions meant to bring compatibility for the new CPUs. It's almost as if the board were being launched again. And ASUS can't do anything about AMD putting out AGESA versions with bugs.


----------



## neikosr0x

Well just tried last BIOS on my board with the same settings and it seems that the scheduler is working a bit better and I got better scores in cinebench... lol with the exact same settings it was just marginal but never managed to get this cores even with -0.1000volt on the cpu lol.


----------



## lordzed83

kmellz said:


> Mind posting your memory settings? Looked through your post history, but the one where you published a picture with settings, the picture wasn't working now :/


soz took a while was flashing bios and changing clutc h fluid lol


----------



## lordzed83

Baio73 said:


> This should be a good news… but one year has passed, more than 200€ spent and problems are still there… that is becoming very upsetting for me.
> I must be happy my mouse works again in the BIOS?
> MMMMMHHHH....
> 
> Baio


what does Asus got to do wuith AMD sending bugged software over ??? Software drivers bugs been AMD's thing on Zen from day 1 !!!!


----------



## kmellz

lordzed83 said:


> soz took a while was flashing bios and changing clutc h fluid lol


Thx! Also, are those trfc2/4 timings actually correct?? Saw previous posters also having really high timings there.. might actually have been exactly the same. Is it just ryzen master showing incorrect valuse on those two?

Man idk about this RAM though.. Spent a good few hours now trying to get it working at decent timings and "low" (3600-3800mhz somewhere was my plan, which for this super-binned kit should be a walk in the park) speeds, but anything under 17-17-17-17 just seems super unstable. And then I just discovered it actually seems to want LESS voltage to be stable, 1.35 atm and testing.. not quite what b-dies want usually. Started out at 1.4 or so and went up.
Depending on how this looks I might have to try my old corsair lpx 4000mhz kit, cause this doesn't really feel worth the money unless the sub-timings can go super tight compared to the lpx. Currently just auto pretty much 99% except main timings.

Anyone else have some strange experiences with their new setup compared to how it should be? Or am I the only one with bad luck D:


----------



## lordzed83

kmellz said:


> Thx! Also, are those trfc2/4 timings actually correct?? Saw previous posters also having really high timings there.. might actually have been exactly the same. Is it just ryzen master showing incorrect valuse on those two?
> 
> Man idk about this RAM though.. Spent a good few hours now trying to get it working at decent timings and "low" (3600-3800mhz somewhere was my plan, which for this super-binned kit should be a walk in the park) speeds, but anything under 17-17-17-17 just seems super unstable. And then I just discovered it actually seems to want LESS voltage to be stable, 1.35 atm and testing.. not quite what b-dies want usually. Started out at 1.4 or so and went up.
> Depending on how this looks I might have to try my old corsair lpx 4000mhz kit, cause this doesn't really feel worth the money unless the sub-timings can go super tight compared to the lpx. Currently just auto pretty much 99% except main timings.
> 
> Anyone else have some strange experiences with their new setup compared to how it should be? Or am I the only one with bad luck D:


Remember i do have fan giving blow job to mem kits hehehehe. Its the temperarure im sure.

Tbh i had pass on 1.4 wirh my kit but just a dirty 500% ramtest but since i got fan and been uainf 1.425 for my daily on old kit over year rhen why not 


Aaaa and tRafc hmm not sure about rest but i only set main one and rest is calculated off it I Think lime on previous zens.
Anyone can Confirm??


Aaa one more thing geardown iw got on auto.


----------



## kmellz

lordzed83 said:


> Remember i do have fan giving blow job to mem kits hehehehe. Its the temperarure im sure.
> 
> Tbh i had pass on 1.4 wirh my kit but just a dirty 500% ramtest but since i got fan and been uainf 1.425 for my daily on old kit over year rhen why not


Temp shouldn't be a problem at all, since I do a cpu + mem test to see general stability it also maxes the fans, meaning it's a windtunnel in there  Should be more than enough, especially since when it crashes it crashes super fast, RAM hasn't even had time to get warm at that point :/


----------



## crakej

How has memory voltage scaled for you on Matisse? What did you need for 3600 and what do you need for 3800?

What else did you have to do to attain 3800?


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> How has memory voltage scaled for you on Matisse? What did you need for 3600 and what do you need for 3800?
> 
> What else did you have to do to attain 3800?


I'w given up on 3800 as i do heavy load testing 

It passed 15 minues of this 
https://bpcprdstorageacc.blob.core....5ac3ff187bb4f5d180dc054afa58459fec9810be.jpeg

This is my cooling in action maxed 86 with 220w load  I was checking if my 4300 is stable before moving on to testing my core specific clocks

thats max what I can have on AVX loads


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> I'w given up on 3800 as i do heavy load testing
> 
> It passed 15 minues of this
> https://bpcprdstorageacc.blob.core....5ac3ff187bb4f5d180dc054afa58459fec9810be.jpeg
> 
> This is my cooling in action maxed 86 with 220w load  I was checking if my 4300 is stable before moving on to testing my core specific clocks


Nice 

What speed are you running now and how much voltage does ram need?


----------



## chakku

chakku said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 3733CL16


Passed this with 18000% at 1.4V now, may try for 1.35V tonight but also feel I need to tighten up tRAS/tRC. tRFC is surprisingly low for this setup at 288 but I may even try to lower that too. Unfortunately SCL timings give errors at anything below 4 and I know these have a decent performance impact.

Anyone else playing around with 2x16GB 3733?


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Nice
> 
> What speed are you running now and how much voltage does ram need?


See above thats what I can do on AVX load that I will never use hahaaha but since IBT AVX is not working i had to move to Ycruncher :] 
played around with tRFC and TFAW and managed to get SoC to 1.1 vddg still on 1.05 ddr still 1.425 but I think I can get something down.

This Ryzen master Stress test barely got my cpu to 74c even tho iw changed to max 300s run time and turned memory test on. so it's Useless 
For light load i got CB20 run time se ton 600s thats like 20 runs on loop or something


----------



## lordzed83

chakku said:


> Passed this with 18000% at 1.4V now, may try for 1.35V tonight but also feel I need to tighten up tRAS/tRC. tRFC is surprisingly low for this setup at 288 but I may even try to lower that too. Unfortunately SCL timings give errors at anything below 4 and I know these have a decent performance impact.
> 
> Anyone else playing around with 2x16GB 3733?


20k% hehehe ACE  I'm on trfc 298 nit tried 288 should work maybe


----------



## chakku

lordzed83 said:


> 20k% hehehe ACE  I'm on trfc 298 nit tried 288 should work maybe


DRAM Calc said 298 for me but I misread and set 289.. and it passed hahaha so I dropped it to 288 to make it an even number. Will see tonight if I can get it a tiny bit lower


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> See above thats what I can do on AVX load that I will never use hahaaha but since IBT AVX is not working i had to move to Ycruncher :]
> played around with tRFC and TFAW and managed to get SoC to 1.1 vddg still on 1.05 ddr still 1.425 but I think I can get something down.
> 
> This Ryzen master Stress test barely got my cpu to 74c even tho iw changed to max 300s run time and turned memory test on. so it's Useless
> For light load i got CB20 run time se ton 600s thats like 20 runs on loop or something


Sorry - I wasn't very clear - I meant ram speeds and voltages...

My XMP settings for 4133 have voltage at 1.4v, but i'm already past that at 1.42v for 3600MTs, guess it must be to do with binning.....

Maybe using T2 would be beneficial to me....


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> what does Asus got to do wuith AMD sending bugged software over ??? Software drivers bugs been AMD's thing on Zen from day 1 !!!!





nick name said:


> What problems? If you would have stayed on a previous BIOS that wasn't put out for Ryzen 3000 compatibility then you shouldn't have any problems. You have to reset the clock when considering these new BIOS versions meant to bring compatibility for the new CPUs. It's almost as if the board were being launched again. And ASUS can't do anything about AMD putting out AGESA versions with bugs.





crakej said:


> For those who have not read the past 4 pages, ASUS pulled upcoming bios with AGESA 1003ABA because they found a major bug while doing final release checks.
> 
> They saved us lots of problems and provided this (2501) to fix a couple of annoying minor bugs while they move on to trying to sort out the next bit of buggy code from AMD




Their will be never a bug free Agesa or Bios release. It's SW ! 
If the Gigabyte rep didn't find the bug Asus had released the bios. Sometimes bugs are really difficult to find and most of the time even doesn't show on all configurations.

We also can't only blaim AMD always. Bios makers and AMD are both a team to deliver us good bios versions as possible. If we get good bios to flash we mostly only credit the MB manufacturer. But maybe they got a good Agesa from AMD. Anyways you all probably get my point here .


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> Sorry - I wasn't very clear - I meant ram speeds and voltages...
> 
> My XMP settings for 4133 have voltage at 1.4v, but i'm already past that at 1.42v for 3600MTs, guess it must be to do with binning.....
> 
> Maybe using T2 would be beneficial to me....


Sometimes lower CL also need more voltage. You mean DOCP right ? Are you using lower cl for your 3600 compared to the 4133 from preset.? Sometimes those presets just show a certain voltage but I think mostly tested on intel systems. Never saw somebody running 4000+ on previous Ryzen systems. Only now on 3x CPUs. So probably those profiles are not set for Ryzen.

1.4v for 4000 sounds way too low if you ask me. Maybe on high CL??


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Sorry - I wasn't very clear - I meant ram speeds and voltages...
> 
> My XMP settings for 4133 have voltage at 1.4v, but i'm already past that at 1.42v for 3600MTs, guess it must be to do with binning.....
> 
> Maybe using T2 would be beneficial to me....


aaaa i'w got 4133 1.4 8pack edition Thats the High bin teamgroup does better than the normal team group 4133. Also depends on timings I think im running the 14/15/15/15

What Soc and VDDG You are on atm ?? I had situation where without bumping Soc/vdddg i tried from 1.375 to 1.48 Errrors. Droppped back to 1.425 bumped them and that works I'w dropped by another 25mv both and leave test overnight see what happens . Ofc Mining on gpu menetime so thats liek memory and stability testing in one


----------



## lordzed83

majestynl said:


> Sometimes lower CL also need more voltage. You mean DOCP right ? Are you using lower cl for your 3600 compared to the 4133 from preset.? Sometimes those presets just show a certain voltage but I think mostly tested on intel systems. Never saw somebody running 4000+ on previous Ryzen systems. Only now on 3x CPUs. So probably those profiles are not set for Ryzen.
> 
> 1.4v for 4000 sounds way too low if you ask me. Maybe on high CL??


Let me check if I can boot up with xmp brb


----------



## lordzed83

majestynl said:


> Sometimes lower CL also need more voltage. You mean DOCP right ? Are you using lower cl for your 3600 compared to the 4133 from preset.? Sometimes those presets just show a certain voltage but I think mostly tested on intel systems. Never saw somebody running 4000+ on previous Ryzen systems. Only now on 3x CPUs. So probably those profiles are not set for Ryzen.
> 
> 1.4v for 4000 sounds way too low if you ask me. Maybe on high CL??


I'w did quick xmp check. Thats what this kit is on [email protected] volt
Right shotdown cmos clear load my test profile start mining start memtest see whats up tomorrow


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> Sometimes lower CL also need more voltage. You mean DOCP right ? Are you using lower cl for your 3600 compared to the 4133 from preset.? Sometimes those presets just show a certain voltage but I think mostly tested on intel systems. Never saw somebody running 4000+ on previous Ryzen systems. Only now on 3x CPUs. So probably those profiles are not set for Ryzen.
> 
> 1.4v for 4000 sounds way too low if you ask me. Maybe on high CL??


DOCP/XMP yes.

Mine are rated at 4133MTs CL19 1.4v and 4400 CL19 1.45v. Yes, I'm trying to keep CL14 as I've seen people with 3200CL14 kits doing, guess I just need more power.

I've tested with SoC 1.1v VDDG 1v. - was hoping I might need less voltage than I did with 1700x, and it is less, but only by 0.01v

Will need to experiment more with T2 and CL15/16 as well.


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> aaaa i'w got 4133 1.4 8pack edition Thats the High bin teamgroup does better than the normal team group 4133. Also depends on timings I think im running the 14/15/15/15
> 
> What Soc and VDDG You are on atm ?? I had situation where without bumping Soc/vdddg i tried from 1.375 to 1.48 Errrors. Droppped back to 1.425 bumped them and that works I'w dropped by another 25mv both and leave test overnight see what happens . Ofc Mining on gpu menetime so thats liek memory and stability testing in one


For 3600MTs CL14 I use 0.970v SoC and 0.920v VDDG - Passed TM5 and 3 hours P95. I will try with them at 1.1v and 1v when testing higher speeds.


----------



## crakej

So that's interesting - I just got it to boot using XMP at 4266MTs REALLY EASILY. It's terrible timings (CL20 19 19 19 42) of course and doesn't perform any better than my 3600 profile.

Also, I got the voltages wrong, it's doing this at a cool 1.35v 

I guess this means if I want to OC with CL14, i'm going to need that 1.43 and more.

Can't believe it actually booted! Going to try 4400 now. For 4266 it set the IF at 1600.. 

Thanks for your help guys - this give me much more to work with as I can see vaguely what setting I need. 

Edit: 4400 failed, but happy I have loads more to try out tomorrow.


----------



## nick name

Man, I feel so left out with my 2700X. Here are my 3800MHz Aida scores on an absolutely not stable config.


----------



## glnn_23

A little stress testing RB 2.56 1hr. 3900x.

In Bios LLC 3 , Vcore 1.25v . Under load 1.22v - 1.23v most of the time.

CCX Clocks set in Ryzen Master


----------



## Baio73

nick name said:


> What problems? If you would have stayed on a previous BIOS that wasn't put out for Ryzen 3000 compatibility then you shouldn't have any problems. You have to reset the clock when considering these new BIOS versions meant to bring compatibility for the new CPUs. It's almost as if the board were being launched again. And ASUS can't do anything about AMD putting out AGESA versions with bugs.


I can't get the RAM in sign higher than 3266... sometimes managed to get 3400 for a while (meaning system is 100% stable for a week or more, than suddendly I must reset the BIOS and the same exact values don't work anymore).
Changed 3 different kit of RAM and passed through 12 BIOS updates.

Baio


----------



## Baio73

lordzed83 said:


> what does Asus got to do wuith AMD sending bugged software over ??? Software drivers bugs been AMD's thing on Zen from day 1 !!!!


As I wrote before, this board had 12 different BIOS releases and problems are still there (and someone comes directly from the manufacturer, as the mouse issue).
Ok, AGESA from AMD is bugged, but I think Asus should react a little more quickly after 1 year and more.
And I'm talking about a 2700x, not a new 3xxx.

Baio


----------



## VPII

Can anybody explain to me how I get a Ryzen 5 3600 running stock to boost single core to 4.2ghz, not sure what the multicore boost is but it basically just stay at 3.6ghz nothing higher.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## chakku

Can anyone confirm if 2406 profiles are compatible with 2501?


----------



## crakej

chakku said:


> Can anyone confirm if 2406 profiles are compatible with 2501?


Seem to be, yes.


----------



## crakej

My rig just vanished from my sig AND the rig builder!


----------



## lordzed83

chakku said:


> Can anyone confirm if 2406 profiles are compatible with 2501?


Works here no problem I see this bios as fixed up previous one


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> I'w did quick xmp check. Thats what this kit is on [email protected] volt
> Right shotdown cmos clear load my test profile start mining start memtest see whats up tomorrow


yeap with high CL  and probably also not 1:1 ? and 2T ?




crakej said:


> DOCP/XMP yes.
> 
> Mine are rated at 4133MTs CL19 1.4v and 4400 CL19 1.45v. Yes, I'm trying to keep CL14 as I've seen people with 3200CL14 kits doing, guess I just need more power.
> 
> I've tested with SoC 1.1v VDDG 1v. - was hoping I might need less voltage than I did with 1700x, and it is less, but only by 0.01v
> 
> Will need to experiment more with T2 and CL15/16 as well.


Yeap i also have one of those kits (4133)! But my 3200CL14 kits are doing way better. Same here, need les voltage on SOC. But thats related to the CPU. Sounds logic for me!



VPII said:


> Can anybody explain to me how I get a Ryzen 5 3600 running stock to boost single core to 4.2ghz, not sure what the multicore boost is but it basically just stay at 3.6ghz nothing higher.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk



We need more info. Maybe a screenshot from Hwinfo while IDLE en LOADed! And a bios settings dump .txt ?



crakej said:


> Seem to be, yes.





lordzed83 said:


> Works here no problem I see this bios as fixed up previous one


Great!


----------



## Martelele

Do someone know if it's possible to modify fan speed settings in v2406 bios to not go full speed after exceeding 75C?


----------



## majestynl

Martelele said:


> Do someone know if it's possible to modify fan speed settings in v2406 bios to not go full speed after exceeding 75C?


Called "Q-Fan" in bios! 
Bios >>Monitor page >> Scroll Down >> Q-Fan


----------



## kmellz

Tried some more stuff today, so far it seems that it's the latencies 100%. Main ones at 18 atm, rest auto, seems to be 100% stable.. bit disappointed :/ At least my FCLK seems to be stable at 1900mhz, RAM at 3800mhz. So I'll try the other way then, max 1:1 speed at these latencies and tweak sub-timings, instead of 100-200mhz lower with super low timings.

Also, goddamn the heat scaling after 1.3V! After seeing people around here running way lower volts, and higher mhz than me, I pulled down my 1.35 to 1.3, 4300mhz. Shaved a good 5-10C off! Will try higher + lower volts later etc, focusing on the memory right now though.

Edit: Well that was a hard nope after 1900mhz fclk! xD Won't even boot.


----------



## Martelele

majestynl said:


> Called "Q-Fan" in bios!
> Bios >>Monitor page >> Scroll Down >> Q-Fan


I found it long time ago,but I actually can't lower the fans speed from 100% after exceeding 75C.Is there some covered setting to unlock it?


----------



## mtrai

Hear y'all go for the C7H WIFI only modded bios 2501 with a lot options open as well as you can search and set Spread Sprectrum and HPET.

It is ready for flashback. Also note if you used the beta 0068 bios you can import your bios settings. This also fixes the USB mouse and keyboards issues.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1CCUXsMIX9vOyCfGKRpAgGuDpC2jr6T35


----------



## Synoxia

mtrai said:


> Hear y'all go for the C7H WIFI only modded bios 2501 with a lot options open as well as you can search and set Spread Sprectrum and HPET.
> 
> It is ready for flashback. Also note if you used the beta 0068 bios you can import your bios settings. This also fixes the USB mouse and keyboards issues.
> 
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1CCUXsMIX9vOyCfGKRpAgGuDpC2jr6T35


Thank you mtrai for this. Do you recommend this bios on a old 2700x? I've heard that newer AMD bios nerf ryzen 2000 precision boost... should i downgrade to 1103 or something?
Trying to shove off some gaming perf, i can't afford 3700x right now


----------



## nick name

Martelele said:


> I found it long time ago,but I actually can't lower the fans speed from 100% after exceeding 75C.Is there some covered setting to unlock it?


I've never found a way and it was the bane of my existence when using 3000RPM Noctua fans until I got a separate Noctua controller.


----------



## majestynl

Martelele said:


> I found it long time ago,but I actually can't lower the fans speed from 100% after exceeding 75C.Is there some covered setting to unlock it?



If i remember well, you cant enter a lower value if you already have set a value that is higher or equal. It will auto-correct you. So start from bottom. Set all PWM % first to 10% , then change one by one starting from bottom. Let me know if that works for you.




nick name said:


> I've never found a way and it was the bane of my existence when using 3000RPM Noctua fans until I got a separate Noctua controller.


Really? Cant remember i had an issue there. I could be wrong and never set it below 100% .... 
Will double check again when im at home!


----------



## harderthanfire

mtrai said:


> Hear y'all go for the C7H WIFI only modded bios 2501 with a lot options open as well as you can search and set Spread Sprectrum and HPET.
> 
> It is ready for flashback. Also note if you used the beta 0068 bios you can import your bios settings. This also fixes the USB mouse and keyboards issues.
> 
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1CCUXsMIX9vOyCfGKRpAgGuDpC2jr6T35



Thanks a lot mate.


----------



## oreonutz

majestynl said:


> If i remember well, you cant enter a lower value if you already have set a value that is higher or equal. It will auto-correct you. So start from bottom. Set all PWM % first to 10% , then change one by one starting from bottom. Let me know if that works for you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Cant remember i had an issue there. I could be wrong and never set it below 100% ....
> Will double check again when im at home!


Yeah Unfortunately it is a thing with both the Crosshair VII and VI Hero. They allow you to set the parameters for 3 Temperatures, but even if you set the highest temperature to only use say 50% Fan speed, it will adhere to that until the CPU Temperature hits 76 Degrees exactly. As soon as that happens, NO MATTER WHAT you have set, it pumps your fans up to 100% Speed and its annoying. The Only way I found around it either use my own Fan Controller, which I don't like as much, or put my own Sensor in the board to Monitor the CPU Temperature, calibrate it to be as close to the actual Tdie temp as possible, then use the SenseMI Skew Setting to make the Temperature report lower then it actually is by 10 Degrees. I never allow my temps to get above 85c anyway, so this always worked well for me, but is obviously dangerous if you don't have a way to monitor your temps otherwise.

If someone could find a way to break that 100% Fan Speed at 76 Degrees C, I would love to know how too!


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> Hear y'all go for the C7H WIFI only modded bios 2501 with a lot options open as well as you can search and set Spread Sprectrum and HPET.
> 
> It is ready for flashback. Also note if you used the beta 0068 bios you can import your bios settings. This also fixes the USB mouse and keyboards issues.
> 
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1CCUXsMIX9vOyCfGKRpAgGuDpC2jr6T35


I have a quick question. I have never tried to do this yet, because I don't feel like bricking my board in case I am wrong, and I assume people much smarter then me would have figured this out if this wasnt the case, but its still bothering me. 

I keep comparing UEFI versions between the Crosshair VII Hero and Crosshair VII Hero Wifi, and with every single release where the UEFI Version's are the same, the Files Look IDENTICAL, except for the Wifi added in the name. Obviously they are literally the exact same boards, the only difference is the Wifi Card is populated in the VII Hero Wifi, and the slot is empty in the Non Wifi. Other than that they are literally Identical.

Has anyone ever tried Flashing a Wifi UEFI onto a non Wifi or Vice Versa? Is there a reason it wouldn't work other than possibly Identity Setting in the UEFI that could be changed through modding? Sorry if this is a stupid question...


----------



## mtrai

Synoxia said:


> Thank you mtrai for this. Do you recommend this bios on a old 2700x? I've heard that newer AMD bios nerf ryzen 2000 precision boost... should i downgrade to 1103 or something?
> Trying to shove off some gaming perf, i can't afford 3700x right now


Actually I highly recomend this even on the 2700x. I am still using my 2700x and the 1.0.0.2 brings some massive PBO changes and and multiple cores can now run at the top previous single core clocks.



oreonutz said:


> I have a quick question. I have never tried to do this yet, because I don't feel like bricking my board in case I am wrong, and I assume people much smarter then me would have figured this out if this wasnt the case, but its still bothering me.
> 
> I keep comparing UEFI versions between the Crosshair VII Hero and Crosshair VII Hero Wifi, and with every single release where the UEFI Version's are the same, the Files Look IDENTICAL, except for the Wifi added in the name. Obviously they are literally the exact same boards, the only difference is the Wifi Card is populated in the VII Hero Wifi, and the slot is empty in the Non Wifi. Other than that they are literally Identical.
> 
> Has anyone ever tried Flashing a Wifi UEFI onto a non Wifi or Vice Versa? Is there a reason it wouldn't work other than possibly Identity Setting in the UEFI that could be changed through modding? Sorry if this is a stupid question...


Yes you can but you have to use a efi prompt and 2 different flash programs. See this thread for how to create the needed USB stick and the files needed. https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...yzen-bios-mods-how-update-bios-correctly.html

I used to do this back on my C6H WiFI when elmor used to release C6H bios so I could go ahead and use them. Only thing that is actually different is Wifi and Bluetooth toggle options.

Since we have flashback it is a non issue. I even once made a hybrid bios using an ASROCK menu module I replaced into my C6H Wifi bios.



oreonutz said:


> Yeah Unfortunately it is a thing with both the Crosshair VII and VI Hero. They allow you to set the parameters for 3 Temperatures, but even if you set the highest temperature to only use say 50% Fan speed, it will adhere to that until the CPU Temperature hits 76 Degrees exactly. As soon as that happens, NO MATTER WHAT you have set, it pumps your fans up to 100% Speed and its annoying. The Only way I found around it either use my own Fan Controller, which I don't like as much, or put my own Sensor in the board to Monitor the CPU Temperature, calibrate it to be as close to the actual Tdie temp as possible, then use the SenseMI Skew Setting to make the Temperature report lower then it actually is by 10 Degrees. I never allow my temps to get above 85c anyway, so this always worked well for me, but is obviously dangerous if you don't have a way to monitor your temps otherwise.
> 
> If someone could find a way to break that 100% Fan Speed at 76 Degrees C, I would love to know how too!


Yes there is actually is a method but you would require a modified bios. I do not tend to open up all the actual fan controls the bios actually has. If you would like I will do it for you and you test and report back...there are a lot of fan control options I do not even know what they do.


----------



## Axaion

Man i wish both the regular and wifi c7h had hpet and spread spectrum disable possible by default

Ofc i got the regular, and now theres custom for wifi lmao


----------



## nick name

Axaion said:


> Man i wish both the regular and wifi c7h had hpet and spread spectrum disable possible by default
> 
> Ofc i got the regular, and now theres custom for wifi lmao


What's the deal with spread spectrum? Are we talking about the VRMs?


----------



## Axaion

nick name said:


> What's the deal with spread spectrum? Are we talking about the VRMs?


Just me being odd and wanting exactly 100blck for example


----------



## lordzed83

kmellz said:


> Temp shouldn't be a problem at all, since I do a cpu + mem test to see general stability it also maxes the fans, meaning it's a windtunnel in there  Should be more than enough, especially since when it crashes it crashes super fast, RAM hasn't even had time to get warm at that point :/


Any luck with them timings ?? 
@majestynl
Well timings as shown ofc 2:1 but got T1 locked in with geardown i bet cause auto.

In other news woke up 3.40am for a piss so im like ill check hows memtests going ramtest was onlike 3400% so decided to pop HCI on that passed 3 hours or somethign cause woke up at like 7am turned it off and left just Nicehash mining


----------



## mtrai

I just re modified the C7H WiFI 2501 bios to allow extended fan controls this also contains other hidden options and allows you to search Spread spectrum, hpet and a whole lot of other options that can only be accessed via search.

Y'all let me know if you gain more fan control. There are a lot of options I just do not know what they do under fans. Also there should 2 additional menus in the q-fan control.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1q_LUDXgQRfALTBqkScaO0BIR5BQzTJKH


----------



## Rhadamanthis

mtrai said:


> I just re modified the C7H WiFI 2501 bios to allow extended fan controls this also contains other hidden options and allows you to search Spread spectrum, hpet and a whole lot of other options that can only be accessed via search.
> 
> Y'all let me know if you gain more fan control. There are a lot of options I just do not know what they do under fans. Also there should 2 additional menus in the q-fan control.
> 
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1q_LUDXgQRfALTBqkScaO0BIR5BQzTJKH


you can mod 2501 not wi-fi?


----------



## mtrai

Rhadamanthis said:


> you can mod 2501 not wi-fi?



It is just time consuming...if enough request it I will do it for the non wifi board.


----------



## Xuso

mtrai said:


> I just re modified the C7H WiFI 2501 bios to allow extended fan controls this also contains other hidden options and allows you to search Spread spectrum, hpet and a whole lot of other options that can only be accessed via search.
> 
> Y'all let me know if you gain more fan control. There are a lot of options I just do not know what they do under fans. Also there should 2 additional menus in the q-fan control.
> 
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1q_LUDXgQRfALTBqkScaO0BIR5BQzTJKH


Hello, I would be happy if the fan smoothing up down time function works, since it is broken for always and Asus does not fix it.


----------



## Xuso

mtrai said:


> I just re modified the C7H WiFI 2501 bios to allow extended fan controls this also contains other hidden options and allows you to search Spread spectrum, hpet and a whole lot of other options that can only be accessed via search.
> 
> Y'all let me know if you gain more fan control. There are a lot of options I just do not know what they do under fans. Also there should 2 additional menus in the q-fan control.
> 
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1q_LUDXgQRfALTBqkScaO0BIR5BQzTJKH



Hello, I would be happy if the fan smoothing up down time function works, since it is broken for always and Asus does not fix it.


----------



## VPII

mtrai said:


> It is just time consuming...if enough request it I will do it for the non wifi board.


Hi @mtrai so this 2501 bios is for wifi only? I almost flashed it onto my non wifi board.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## mtrai

VPII said:


> Hi @mtrai so this 2501 bios is for wifi only? I almost flashed it onto my non wifi board.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


THe one I modded is only for the wifi board.


----------



## mtrai

Xuso said:


> Hello, I would be happy if the fan smoothing up down time function works, since it is broken for always and Asus does not fix it.


Give my re moddified bios a try and see...there are a lot of fan smoothing controls I unhid.


----------



## Axaion

mtrai said:


> It is just time consuming...if enough request it I will do it for the non wifi board.


well i for one would love a non-wifi mod, once the bios has been matured a bit, no need to have you do bios mods every week


----------



## Rhadamanthis

mtrai said:


> It is just time consuming...if enough request it I will do it for the non wifi board.


Thanks


----------



## VPII

mtrai said:


> THe one I modded is only for the wifi board.


Okay shot, thanks a lot for the help. I don't really have issues with the current bios for this non wifi board running a R5 3600. I tried running stock but clocks stuck at 3600mhz but Im not a stock person so right noe ccx0 is at 4.334ghz and ccx1 at 4.389ghz running cb15. Not cd20 though as cb20 means ccx0 4.334ghz and ccx1 4.359ghz

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## mtrai

Alright y'all by popular request, give me a few hours to mod the 2501 for the non wifi board.


----------



## VPII

mtrai said:


> Alright y'all by popular request, give me a few hours to mod the 2501 for the non wifi board.


Yo man, I wish I csn put in words how great you gesture is. Thanks boet, brother in Afrikaans

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## mtrai

Here it is the modded bios for the non wifi 2501. Remember to access some bios options you have to use search (F9) in the bios. For example Spready Spectrum and HPET must be searched. There are a ton more options that can only be searched. I also unhid every possible bios menu option as well. So look for new menus.

One last note...for those wanting more fan control check out all the options I just opened up. TBH there are some fan options I just do not know what they do but they are unlocked for you play with.

Download link for the C7H 2501 modded bios. THIS IS THE NON WIFI version. You will need to rename the file to C7H.cap and use flashback to flash it.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1YRsWwD1cB3LDU-_Dy6GmdhY9VczxHkiY


----------



## kmellz

lordzed83 said:


> Any luck with them timings ??
> 
> @majestynl
> Well timings as shown ofc 2:1 but got T1 locked in with geardown i bet cause auto.
> 
> In other news woke up 3.40am for a piss so im like ill check hows memtests going ramtest was onlike 3400% so decided to pop HCI on that passed 3 hours or somethign cause woke up at like 7am turned it off and left just Nicehash mining


This is what I ended up with right now, kinda happy after all! Still wish the RAM could go some lower timings but oh well.. pretty sure it could continue scaling mhz wise quite a while also, but not going 1:1 on fclk is just horrible, even if you lock it at 1900mhz xD
Ended up with a nice cpu too, 4.4ghz all core at 1.28v~
Will revisit all this stuff after a few bioses, right now I just want to use the computer ^^


----------



## nick name

@mtrai Is your modded BIOS simply exposed fan controls? Or should I search around for other things too?


----------



## webwilli

mtrai said:


> Here it is the modded bios for the non wifi 2501. Remember to access some bios options you have to use search (F9) in the bios. For example Spready Spectrum and HPET must be searched. There are a ton more options that can only be searched. I also unhid every possible bios menu option as well. So look for new menus.
> 
> One last note...for those wanting more fan control check out all the options I just opened up. TBH there are some fan options I just do not know what they do but they are unlocked for you play with.
> 
> Download link for the C6H 2501 modded bios. THIS IS THE NON WIFI version. You will need to rename the file to C7H.cap and use flashback to flash it.
> 
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1YRsWwD1cB3LDU-_Dy6GmdhY9VczxHkiY


Thank you


----------



## Gigabytes

kmellz said:


> This is what I ended up with right now, kinda happy after all! Still wish the RAM could go some lower timings but oh well.. pretty sure it could continue scaling mhz wise quite a while also, but not going 1:1 on fclk is just horrible, even if you lock it at 1900mhz xD
> Ended up with a nice cpu too, 4.4ghz all core at 1.28v~
> Will revisit all this stuff after a few bioses, right now I just want to use the computer ^^


Whats up with your memory write speeds?


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> @mtrai Is your modded BIOS simply exposed fan controls? Or should I search around for other things too?


There is all kind of goodies...in actual menus..and then other stuff that is only available via F9 search in the bios such as HPET and Spread Spectrum. I figured out a few bios ago how to expose these menu in search even though we cannot show the menu. And then all the fan stuff.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> There is all kind of goodies...in actual menus..and then other stuff that is only available via F9 search in the bios such as HPET and Spread Spectrum. I figured out a few bios ago how to expose these menu in search even though we cannot show the menu. And then all the fan stuff.


This one kind of made me laugh. Don't know what it does, but that last option gave me a chuckle.


----------



## Axaion

mtrai said:


> There is all kind of goodies...in actual menus..and then other stuff that is only available via F9 search in the bios such as HPET and Spread Spectrum. I figured out a few bios ago how to expose these menu in search even though we cannot show the menu. And then all the fan stuff.


Asus should throw money at you.


----------



## kmellz

Gigabytes said:


> Whats up with your memory write speeds?


It's because of how the chiplet setup works apparently, only cpus with 2+ have full write speeds as far as I understand it


----------



## nick name

Axaion said:


> Asus should throw money at you.


But not coins. That would be kind of a dick move.


----------



## nick name

kmellz said:


> It's because of how the chiplet setup works apparently, only cpus with 2+ have full write speeds as far as I understand it


It's because it's reduced to 16 bit lanes as opposed to the 32 bit on the others. So those with two chiplets have the 2 16 bit lanes.


----------



## dreckschmeck

okay guys, I got my 3900x ! 
This thing is a beast loves memory. Previosly I couldn't do more than 3200mhz at CL14 with my 2700x.
But now it's rocking 3733mhz 1:1 and with 4x8 GB mind you  1900 flck and 3800CL14 is an instant C5 for you though!

But there seems to be some BIOS bugs around. For instance I can't set the PPT and EDC limits to a higher value. Once it's set the core clock goes down to 360 mhz on ALL cores.
Windows still works but damn sloow 
Anyone can confirm that and has a workaround perhaps?

Does PBO work for you guys? never saw a core go up to more than 4.3ghz somethin


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> This one kind of made me laugh. Don't know what it does, but that last option gave me a chuckle.



That is the only reason I expose that setting...but once upon a time it was used to tell the system what kind of cooling so it can set some other settings.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> That is the only reason I expose that setting...but once upon a time it was used to tell the system what kind of cooling so it can set some other settings.


I'm just tickled by the "I'm not" option. Like "I'm not cooling my PC so fingers crossed". I imagine they could have replaced it with "meh".


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> I'm just tickled by the "I'm not" option. Like "I'm not cooling my PC so fingers crossed". I imagine they could have replaced it with "meh".


That is exactly how I read it and filled in the blanks my first time too.


----------



## AvengedRobix

how to install this modded bios?


----------



## Baio73

dreckschmeck said:


> okay guys, I got my 3900x !
> This thing is a beast loves memory. Previosly I couldn't do more than 3200mhz at CL14 with my 2700x.
> But now it's rocking 3733mhz 1:1 and with 4x8 GB mind you  1900 flck and 3800CL14 is an instant C5 for you though!
> 
> But there seems to be some BIOS bugs around. For instance I can't set the PPT and EDC limits to a higher value. Once it's set the core clock goes down to 360 mhz on ALL cores.
> Windows still works but damn sloow
> Anyone can confirm that and has a workaround perhaps?
> 
> Does PBO work for you guys? never saw a core go up to more than 4.3ghz somethin


What RAM kit are you using?

Baio


----------



## VPII

mtrai said:


> Here it is the modded bios for the non wifi 2501. Remember to access some bios options you have to use search (F9) in the bios. For example Spready Spectrum and HPET must be searched. There are a ton more options that can only be searched. I also unhid every possible bios menu option as well. So look for new menus.
> 
> One last note...for those wanting more fan control check out all the options I just opened up. TBH there are some fan options I just do not know what they do but they are unlocked for you play with.
> 
> Download link for the C6H 2501 modded bios. THIS IS THE NON WIFI version. You will need to rename the file to C7H.cap and use flashback to flash it.
> 
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1YRsWwD1cB3LDU-_Dy6GmdhY9VczxHkiY


Thank you @mtrai , I really do appreciate your help.


----------



## nick name

Just for giggles I flashed 1201 and keyed in all the values I'd been running lately and it wouldn't even POST. So I guess that means ASUS has been making some strong progress.


----------



## CJMitsuki

3800 cl 14 tight timings stable 

Ramtest


Spoiler














Aida


Spoiler














Geekbench 3


Spoiler














Geekbench 4


Spoiler














Maxxmem


Spoiler


----------



## VPII

majestynl said:


> yeap with high CL  and probably also not 1:1 ? and 2T ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeap i also have one of those kits (4133)! But my 3200CL14 kits are doing way better. Same here, need les voltage on SOC. But thats related to the CPU. Sounds logic for me!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We need more info. Maybe a screenshot from Hwinfo while IDLE en LOADed! And a bios settings dump .txt ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Great!


Okay, firstly, not sure how to do the BIOS dump .txt, but in all honesty if all is at F5 default, except for memory it would not really make a difference. After flashing the bios with 2501, I seem to have gotten some happiness. Attached is at default, so boost all core at 42 x which is maybe not all that bad. Temps good as it is an open bench setup. You'll see from my best results my manual clocks a fair bit higher as in 4.334 CCX0 and 4.359 CCX1


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> Here it is the modded bios for the non wifi 2501. Remember to access some bios options you have to use search (F9) in the bios. For example Spready Spectrum and HPET must be searched. There are a ton more options that can only be searched. I also unhid every possible bios menu option as well. So look for new menus.
> 
> One last note...for those wanting more fan control check out all the options I just opened up. TBH there are some fan options I just do not know what they do but they are unlocked for you play with.
> 
> Download link for the C6H 2501 modded bios. THIS IS THE NON WIFI version. You will need to rename the file to C7H.cap and use flashback to flash it.
> 
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1YRsWwD1cB3LDU-_Dy6GmdhY9VczxHkiY


Dude, @mtrai You are a legend! Thank You! Sorry I haven't got back sooner, been working like crazy.

Just downloaded your modded UEFI and going to flash it and report back about the New Fan control settings, see if the "I'm Not" Option means, "I'm not gonna boost your fans to 100% because you asked Nicely". Here's hoping! LOL!

Thank you for answering my question about using a Wifi Version on a non wifi board as well.

So I actually already provide a service fixing Bricked boards due to bad CMOS Flashes. So I have the tools, hardware and software to connect directly to a CMOS, Either while in the Board still or if the chip is removable I can just take it out and put it in my Reader, Backup the bad CMOS, Clear it, then Apply the fresh CMOS. And of course to do that, you have to use a tool to Put in the Mac Address and the UUID. Is that similar to what is neccesary in this case? I know you provided a link, I am going to check that out soon, just curious if the process is similar. Thank you Again!!!! I will report back soon!

Oh @mtrai, I have one more quick question for you. You have a modded UEFI earlier that opened up more options on a BETA UEFI for the WIFI Version, I believe it was 0068 or something similar, and people were reporting having much faster Boot times, and other people had a bug where way too much voltage was going to the chipset. For some reason with the newest version (I haven't tried your modded version of it yet) my PC is taking about Twice as long to boot. It seems to post much faster, but then hangs while loading windows for about 2 Minutes, which is weird. Do you think there would be some benefits to running the Modded Beta UEFI over this new UEFI, or in your opinion is the New UEFI better? Just wondering. Anyways, will shut up now! Thanks again!


----------



## CCoR

Just updated bios to the unofficial bios

So far I'm super impressed, thanks!


----------



## smokin_mitch

I think I hit the silicon lottery with my 3800x, manual oc 4.5ghz all cores 1.325v


----------



## crakej

Why is my bus stuck at 99.8? Is it because I'm not using a modded bios? Do I need to turn off S Spectrum to get it to 100mhz?

Running 3600CL14 currently, 1.42v vdimm. Can do 3733CL14 as well, 1.47v vdimm, don't seem to be able to do 3800 without super lose timings.

Experimenting with T2 - limited success. Seems to need same timings and voltages as T1, though I haven't played with other voltages (only SoC and VDDG) yet.

What is the max safe value for SoC? Is it still 1.2v? When I had these both on Auto, RM just shows 1.1v SoC (whatever value I put) and VDDG higher than that - SoC is not displaying properly.


----------



## smokin_mitch

If you set Ai Overlock Tuner in Bios to AUTO instead of Default its sets bus clock at 100.6mhz then in hwinfo it'll always read 100.0Mhz


----------



## AvengedRobix

CJMitsuki said:


> 3800 cl 14 tight timings stable
> 
> Ramtest
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 281916
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aida
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 281918
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Geekbench 3
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 281920
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Geekbench 4
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 281922
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maxxmem
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 281924


can you post tge settings on Bios? i've try but error C5


----------



## AvengedRobix

mtrai said:


> That is the only reason I expose that setting...but once upon a time it was used to tell the system what kind of cooling so it can set some other settings.


how to flash the custom bios?


----------



## crakej

AvengedRobix said:


> how to flash the custom bios?


He did give instructions. Rename C7H.cap and use bios flashback


----------



## crakej

smokin_mitch said:


> If you set Ai Overlock Tuner in Bios to AUTO instead of Default its sets bus clock at 100.6mhz then in hwinfo it'll always read 100.0Mhz


Thank you! So I guess you could just set the bus clock at 100.6 yourself (wasn't sure if this would be sensible)....... I thought the auto selection would do that sill bios 'overclock'...


----------



## CJMitsuki

AvengedRobix said:


> can you post tge settings on Bios? i've try but error C5


All my timings are in the screenshots but sure i can upload my bios but it may not work for you the way I have mine set.


Spoiler




View attachment 3800mhzA_setting.txt






crakej said:


> Thank you! So I guess you could just set the bus clock at 100.6 yourself (wasn't sure if this would be sensible)....... I thought the auto selection would do that sill bios 'overclock'...


When I set mine to 100mhz it reflects the same in HwInfo64


----------



## thegr8anand

Memory overclockers here, if i buy Adata Spectrix D41 8gb 4133mhz 19-19-19-39 @ 1.4v (AX4U413338G19-SR41) can i get good timings if i underclock it at 3733mhz as its the sweetspot for ryzen 3000.


I have decided on C7H with 3700x and have to buy ram. But unable to find ddr4 3600 c16/17 or 3200 c14/15 at reasonable prices. I can get that 4133 for reasonable price so asking.


----------



## lordzed83

CCoR said:


> Just updated bios to the unofficial bios
> 
> So far I'm super impressed, thanks!


Thats nice set You got there


----------



## thegr8anand

thegr8anand said:


> Memory overclockers here, if i buy Adata Spectrix D41 8gb 4133mhz 19-19-19-39 @ 1.4v (AX4U413338G19-SR41) can i get good timings if i underclock it at 3733mhz as its the sweetspot for ryzen 3000.
> 
> 
> I have decided on C7H with 3700x and have to buy ram. But unable to find ddr4 3600 c16/17 or 3200 c14/15 at reasonable prices. I can get that 4133 for reasonable price so asking.



Please help guys. I don't want to buy this 4133mhz and find out i was wrong about underclocking and ram won't work at all.


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> @majestynl
> Well timings as shown ofc 2:1 but got T1 locked in with geardown i bet cause auto.
> 
> In other news woke up 3.40am for a piss so im like ill check hows memtests going ramtest was onlike 3400% so decided to pop HCI on that passed 3 hours or somethign cause woke up at like 7am turned it off and left just Nicehash mining


Got ya.. do you have AiDA test from that to check speeds and latency




VPII said:


> Okay, firstly, not sure how to do the BIOS dump .txt, but in all honesty if all is at F5 default, except for memory it would not really make a difference. After flashing the bios with 2501, I seem to have gotten some happiness. Attached is at default, so boost all core at 42 x which is maybe not all that bad. Temps good as it is an open bench setup. You'll see from my best results my manual clocks a fair bit higher as in 4.334 CCX0 and 4.359 CCX1


If I remember well. On the profiles page, then save bios setting to a file .txt

Okay strange. Have you:
- Installed newest AMD chipset drivers
- Installed latest windows updates ?
- Tetsting on AMD Ryzen Balanced power plan. came with chipset drivers?
- Tried with bios defaults

You could also check this video I saw yesterday:









smokin_mitch said:


> I think I hit the silicon lottery with my 3800x, manual oc 4.5ghz all cores 1.325v


Impressive. Saw also yesterday some other guy having great results with the 3800x. Im considering to get one too.





crakej said:


> Thank you! So I guess you could just set the bus clock at 100.6 yourself (wasn't sure if this would be sensible)....... I thought the auto selection would do that sill bios 'overclock'...


On the 3x series you also need to manually enable PBO .e.g. in RM otherwise the clocks get stucked.


----------



## crakej

CJMitsuki said:


> When I set mine to 100mhz it reflects the same in HwInfo64


Don't know why it won't work like that for me then. Putting that setting to auto worked though.


----------



## gupsterg

chakku said:


> Honestly as long as we're getting frequent updates on the situation like we were from Elmor I'd be happy enough. Problem is that until Shamino made that thread on the ROG forum we had nothing but radio silence ever since Elmor left.


+1.



lester007 said:


> Very interesting find! I had only 1 sample it won't do for me as well, my all core boost when playing games about 4.3GHz, stress test around 4.1-4.15GHz.


NP.



crakej said:


> @gupsterg have you tried your Viper Steels with matisse yet? Mine are 4400s - only up to 3600 so far here, vdim is 1.420v - but very low SoC 0.968v


In comparison to the G.Skill kits they paled , then also the heat spreaders just one day fell of all by themselves , Luckily did not short anything  . I then returned them and got a refund.



chakku said:


> If 2501 is a minor fix are profiles from 2406 still working on it?


While back the UEFI was sorted to allow profiles from differing UEFIs to function with another. IIRC around the UEFI v2xxx this has been this way. 



kmellz said:


> Thx! Also, are those trfc2/4 timings actually correct?? Saw previous posters also having really high timings there.. might actually have been exactly the same. Is it just ryzen master showing incorrect valuse on those two?


tRFC2/4 wasn't used on Ryzen 1xxx. 2xxx and I believe is the same case with 3xxx, as there are other similarities.



chakku said:


> Passed this with 18000% at 1.4V now, may try for 1.35V tonight but also feel I need to tighten up tRAS/tRC. tRFC is surprisingly low for this setup at 288 but I may even try to lower that too. Unfortunately SCL timings give errors at anything below 4 and I know these have a decent performance impact.
> 
> Anyone else playing around with 2x16GB 3733?


WOW nice :thumb: .



glnn_23 said:


> A little stress testing RB 2.56 1hr. 3900x.
> 
> In Bios LLC 3 , Vcore 1.25v . Under load 1.22v - 1.23v most of the time.
> 
> CCX Clocks set in Ryzen Master


Just as headsup a profile that can fail say under 1hr in Kahru RAM test for me, passes ~3.5hrs of RealBench.



Axaion said:


> Just me being odd and wanting exactly 100blck for example


Ryzen has no HW for accurate BCLK read back.

For SW to display the value other methods are in use, this has been the case since 1xxx, til even now.

Set BCLK manually in UEFI.

Set HWINFO not to periodically poll BCLK.

You will have static BCLK 100MHz in HWINFO and several other apps. Those that keep showing a variance are just showing the inaccuracy of no HW being present to report BCLK correctly. Just be aware that what you set BCLK as it what you really are at.



crakej said:


> Why is my bus stuck at 99.8? Is it because I'm not using a modded bios? Do I need to turn off S Spectrum to get it to 100mhz?
> 
> Running 3600CL14 currently, 1.42v vdimm. Can do 3733CL14 as well, 1.47v vdimm, don't seem to be able to do 3800 without super lose timings.
> 
> Experimenting with T2 - limited success. Seems to need same timings and voltages as T1, though I haven't played with other voltages (only SoC and VDDG) yet.
> 
> What is the max safe value for SoC? Is it still 1.2v? When I had these both on Auto, RM just shows 1.1v SoC (whatever value I put) and VDDG higher than that - SoC is not displaying properly.


UEFI 2406/2501 when you use adjust SOC voltage on Extreme Tweaker it will shows as 1.1V in RM, if you use AMD menu in UEFI then RM shows as it is set.

Be also aware when the post process occurs, if you adjust SOC voltage on Extreme Tweaker, SOC shoots to ~1.1V then back to what you set. When you use AMD menu this does not occur.

UEFI 0068 is different. ASUS seem to have quashed the bug and you can use the SOC voltage change on Extreme Tweaker and no ~1.1V shootup.



thegr8anand said:


> Memory overclockers here, if i buy Adata Spectrix D41 8gb 4133mhz 19-19-19-39 @ 1.4v (AX4U413338G19-SR41) can i get good timings if i underclock it at 3733mhz as its the sweetspot for ryzen 3000.
> 
> 
> I have decided on C7H with 3700x and have to buy ram. But unable to find ddr4 3600 c16/17 or 3200 c14/15 at reasonable prices. I can get that 4133 for reasonable price so asking.


Those will be Samsung B die, single rank/sided. They should work well.



majestynl said:


> On the 3x series you also need to manually enable PBO .e.g. in RM otherwise the clocks get stucked.


Didn't on R5 3600, dunno if other chips need this...


----------



## crakej

I'm making some progress..... 3733 CL14 IF 1866, mem 1866. 3800CL14 is proving tough. Tried using geardown off and T2, but doesn't boot - code 91, the C5.

Safeboot still isn't working, it just reboots exactly the same so you still have to use the clr cmos button.


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> Didn't on R5 3600, dunno if other chips need this...


Good to know..thanks..
Well on my 3700x and few others it's the case. Also saw a 3900x.


----------



## Kitilan

crakej said:


> I'm making some progress..... 3733 CL14 IF 1866, mem 1866. 3800CL14 is proving tough. Tried using geardown off and T2, but doesn't boot - code 91, the C5.
> 
> 
> 
> Safeboot still isn't working, it just reboots exactly the same so you still have to use the clr cmos button.


try to put bclk 101.8

Отправлено с моего SM-G930F через Tapatalk


----------



## mtrai

oreonutz said:


> Dude, @mtrai You are a legend! Thank You! Sorry I haven't got back sooner, been working like crazy.
> 
> Just downloaded your modded UEFI and going to flash it and report back about the New Fan control settings, see if the "I'm Not" Option means, "I'm not gonna boost your fans to 100% because you asked Nicely". Here's hoping! LOL!
> 
> Thank you for answering my question about using a Wifi Version on a non wifi board as well.
> 
> So I actually already provide a service fixing Bricked boards due to bad CMOS Flashes. So I have the tools, hardware and software to connect directly to a CMOS, Either while in the Board still or if the chip is removable I can just take it out and put it in my Reader, Backup the bad CMOS, Clear it, then Apply the fresh CMOS. And of course to do that, you have to use a tool to Put in the Mac Address and the UUID. Is that similar to what is neccesary in this case? I know you provided a link, I am going to check that out soon, just curious if the process is similar. Thank you Again!!!! I will report back soon!
> 
> Oh @mtrai, I have one more quick question for you. You have a modded UEFI earlier that opened up more options on a BETA UEFI for the WIFI Version, I believe it was 0068 or something similar, and people were reporting having much faster Boot times, and other people had a bug where way too much voltage was going to the chipset. For some reason with the newest version (I haven't tried your modded version of it yet) my PC is taking about Twice as long to boot. It seems to post much faster, but then hangs while loading windows for about 2 Minutes, which is weird. Do you think there would be some benefits to running the Modded Beta UEFI over this new UEFI, or in your opinion is the New UEFI better? Just wondering. Anyways, will shut up now! Thanks again!


That sounds like an issue with windows loading. The 2501 fixed both the usb mouse/ keyboard issues and the voltage issue. Otherwise it is pretty much the same as 0068. So I would use 2501 modded. One nice thing that has occured wrecently with ASUS bios is no need to actually hex edit things anymore to make the important things that hidden now can be shown via search. It just requires the latest AMIBCP, which I had to wait about 4 months for it to appear in the wild on the internet. I was told I would just have to wait for latest AMIBCP to leak by our favorite former asus employee and amd enthusiast. 

Boot times and shutdown times are greatly improved with beta bios 0068 and it carried over to 2501

I did create a mod of 2501 for the non wifi c7h yesterday as well.

Non Wifi C7H modded 2501 https://drive.google.com/open?id=1YRsWwD1cB3LDU-_Dy6GmdhY9VczxHkiY

C7hWIFI Modded 2501 https://drive.google.com/open?id=1q_LUDXgQRfALTBqkScaO0BIR5BQzTJKH

You must name the bios to correct format for flashback on your board. You also must use flashback to flash. C7H.cap for the non wifi. and C7HWIFI.cap for the C7HWIFI.


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> I'm making some progress..... 3733 CL14 IF 1866, mem 1866. 3800CL14 is proving tough. Tried using geardown off and T2, but doesn't boot - code 91, the C5.
> 
> Safeboot still isn't working, it just reboots exactly the same so you still have to use the clr cmos button.


Nice  .

Hold down power button on board/case until mobo turns off, on next turn on you will be in "SAFEMODE", settings will be recalled but not used for that POST.



majestynl said:


> Good to know..thanks..
> Well on my 3700x and few others it's the case. Also saw a 3900x.


Ahh ok  .


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> Nice  .
> 
> Hold down power button on board/case until mobo turns off, on next turn on you will be in "SAFEMODE", settings will be recalled but not used for that POST.
> 
> Ahh ok  .


Nope - I've always used that method to get Safeboot to work, but it doesn't work at all, not there or the safeboot button. I've never had to use the clr cmos button at the back before.

I'm still wondering why I have this code d3 error when running RM - a few others have had it but there's very little information


----------



## VPII

I found a really tough but quick test to see whether you have cpu stability. It won't be affected too much by the memory but it is seriously one of the toughest tests on the processor. Trust me when I say this will quickly tell you whether your processor is stable. I had to increase voltage on my Ryzen 5 3600 to the point where I rather dropped the speed as the temps were getting too high, as into the 80C region. The test is the FP32 Ray trace and if it pass the FP64 Ray trace in Aida64.


----------



## smokin_mitch

I'm getting an E1 post code when waking up from sleep and I have to hit the reset button on my pc, is this due to that fact I'm manually overlocking?


----------



## majestynl

*2nd CL14 Ramkit : Testing 3800mhz/1900mhz 1:1:1*

Same behavior as my other CL14 Kit. When running high memory OC sticks needs cooling. Attached screenshot from Ramtest passed at 13K%!

*1st Ramkit F4-3200C14D-16GTZR*

Without cooling: 500-600% error
Temps: ~42c when error occurs
With cooling: Passed multiple times 3k / 6k / 10K Ramtest
Screenshots: can be found in below links

*2nd Ramkit F4-3200C14D-16GTZRX (Ryzen)*

Without cooling: 1000-1100% error
Temps: ~42c when error occurs
With cooling: Passed multiple times 3k / 13K Ramtest
Screenshot: attached to this post

_More testing: AIDA System Test passed x hours / Many other bench en test sw's used with success!
Realworld testing: After 07-16-2019 i used the pc till today with high usage e.g. Adobe CC Sw's / Games etc. without any issues. Rams where still cooled while doing this!_

*1st test can be found here:*
https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-736.html#post28046088

- Only Base timings CL14, will tighten later
- CPU 3700x @ stock offset -0.025v
- RAM Trident-Z 3200CL14 (2x8GB)
- RAM @ 1.5v / SOC 1.1v / CLDO VDDG 1v


----------



## crakej

What the deal with ProcODT on these CPUs?

I couldn't go above 60 or below 53 before - I'm testing 32ohms and it seems fine. Doesn't seem to make much difference performance wise.

I thought higher ODT could help with higher clocks?


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> *2nd CL14 Ramkit : Testing 3800mhz/1900mhz 1:1:1*
> 
> Same behavior as my other CL14 Kit. When running high memory OC sticks needs cooling. Attached screenshot from Ramtest passed at 13K%!
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> *1st Ramkit F4-3200C14D-16GTZR*
> 
> Without cooling: 500-600% error
> Temps: ~42c when error occurs
> With cooling: Passed multiple times 3k / 6k / 10K Ramtest
> Screenshots: can be found in below links
> 
> *2nd Ramkit F4-3200C14D-16GTZRX (Ryzen)*
> 
> Without cooling: 1000-1100% error
> Temps: ~42c when error occurs
> With cooling: Passed multiple times 3k / 13K Ramtest
> Screenshot: attached to this post
> 
> _More testing: AIDA System Test passed x hours / Many other bench en test sw's used with success!
> Realworld testing: After 07-16-2019 i used the pc till today with high usage e.g. Adobe CC Sw's / Games etc. without any issues. Rams where still cooled while doing this!_
> 
> *1st test can be found here:*
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-736.html#post28046088
> 
> 
> - Only Base timings CL14, will tighten later
> - CPU 3700x @ stock offset -0.025v
> - RAM Trident-Z 3200CL14 (2x8GB)
> - RAM @ 1.5v / SOC 1.1v / CLDO VDDG 1v


Impressive results! I might have to get another set of Tridents. I'm up to 3733 1:1:1 - going to try 3800 again now.


----------



## crakej

An observation I've made while testing memory/benching...

My so called 'fastest' cores seem to be the LEAST used! When they are used, they're usually NOT the fastest cores. All I have done is set PBO to on. CPB stays off right? On the slower CCD, usually all the cores will attain the same speed of about 4.2 or 4.3GHz. CPU voltage is on auto. SoC is 1.081 (or 1081mv entered in the AMD menu), VDDG is 1.031v. ACB is anywhere between 4.12 and 4.25 usually, sometimes a bit more.


----------



## lordzed83

@crakej try this 1.46 volts on ddr llc4 500khz 1.1soc 1.06vddg 
as you see 6 hours while mining passed  It's tad faster than my 3733 profile and should not be as hard on ram kits as its cl16 setup.


----------



## nick name

@crakej doesn't like LLC.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> @crakej doesn't like LLC.


I don't mind it - used to run the 1700x with LLC 5 and LLC 4 for SoC

I did just try a few runs with LLC 3 but not with much luck.


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @crakej try this 1.46 volts on ddr llc4 500khz 1.1soc 1.06vddg
> as you see 6 hours while mining passed  It's tad faster than my 3733 profile and should not be as hard on ram kits as its cl16 setup.


I'll give it a go later. was trying 1.5 on ram - cpu is still on auto. Tried cl 14 and 16. I figure at this point maybe the CPU wants more juice....?

3733 is running ram at 1.455v.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I don't mind it - used to run the 1700x with LLC 5 and LLC 4 for SoC
> 
> I did just try a few runs with LLC 3 but not with much luck.


Hmmm, maybe it was someone else that doesn't like LLC.


----------



## Keith Myers

*good math performance from the 3900X*



kmellz said:


> Tried some more stuff today, so far it seems that it's the latencies 100%. Main ones at 18 atm, rest auto, seems to be 100% stable.. bit disappointed :/ At least my FCLK seems to be stable at 1900mhz, RAM at 3800mhz. So I'll try the other way then, max 1:1 speed at these latencies and tweak sub-timings, instead of 100-200mhz lower with super low timings.
> 
> Also, goddamn the heat scaling after 1.3V! After seeing people around here running way lower volts, and higher mhz than me, I pulled down my 1.35 to 1.3, 4300mhz. Shaved a good 5-10C off! Will try higher + lower volts later etc, focusing on the memory right now though.
> 
> Edit: Well that was a hard nope after 1900mhz fclk! xD Won't even boot.


I was hoping to find someone's posts about what kind of voltages they were using for 4300Mhz. I had no clue. So just started with my manual OC with a 41x multiplier and it set Vcore for 1.09V. Which I thought was unbelievably low. So started increasing it slowly while running P95 and SAT until I didn't get errors. Took all day yesterday. Ended up at 4300Mhz @ 1.29V which under 15 core load and LLC3 drops down to 1.25V. Been running at that load since I got the machine back crunching. 12 cpu tasks and 3 gpu tasks. I changed over to the AVX apps too since they were 3 minutes faster than the SSE41 apps. The temps are 78-80°C. loaded. The math performance is a big improvement over the 2700X. I wonder if I can drop the voltage further to improve the temps or do I lose stability? Could not use any the RAM Calculator settings, it always locked up the machine. Saw a note today that 53 ohms is way too high for Zen 2. Maybe that was the issue. So running mostly on XMP Auto with a few timings from the calculator punched in to get back to my normal 3466CL14 timings. I could not find any stability at 3533 or 3600 so gave up for the moment to get the machine back crunching. Lost a days worth of production for the cpu upgrade. Managed to lose the pump on the 1080 Hybrid card too to make matters worse. Had to put a 1070 back in till I get the 1080 RMA'd. Eventually my production will recover once I get the 1080 back and the pending work validates. Do like the math performance on the cpu. Shaving about 5-10 minutes per task off the cpu tasks compared to the 4025Mhz 2700X times.


----------



## lordzed83

nick name said:


> @crakej doesn't like LLC.


I run 1,341v llc5 cpu llc4 soc 1.1 atm temps are better than on auto lol


----------



## lordzed83

Keith Myers said:


> I was hoping to find someone's posts about what kind of voltages they were using for 4300Mhz. I had no clue. So just started with my manual OC with a 41x multiplier and it set Vcore for 1.09V. Which I thought was unbelievably low. So started increasing it slowly while running P95 and SAT until I didn't get errors. Took all day yesterday. Ended up at 4300Mhz @ 1.29V which under 15 core load and LLC3 drops down to 1.25V. Been running at that load since I got the machine back crunching. 12 cpu tasks and 3 gpu tasks. I changed over to the AVX apps too since they were 3 minutes faster than the SSE41 apps. The temps are 78-80°C. loaded. The math performance is a big improvement over the 2700X. I wonder if I can drop the voltage further to improve the temps or do I lose stability? Could not use any the RAM Calculator settings, it always locked up the machine. Saw a note today that 53 ohms is way too high for Zen 2. Maybe that was the issue. So running mostly on XMP Auto with a few timings from the calculator punched in to get back to my normal 3466CL14 timings. I could not find any stability at 3533 or 3600 so gave up for the moment to get the machine back crunching. Lost a days worth of production for the cpu upgrade. Managed to lose the pump on the 1080 Hybrid card too to make matters worse. Had to put a 1070 back in till I get the 1080 RMA'd. Eventually my production will recover once I get the 1080 back and the pending work validates. Do like the math performance on the cpu. Shaving about 5-10 minutes per task off the cpu tasks compared to the 4025Mhz 2700X times.


Depends on load for 4325 Ycruncher stable I NEED 1.34 after vdrop


----------



## Keith Myers

lordzed83 said:


> Depends on load for 4325 Ycruncher stable I NEED 1.34 after vdrop


I was using Prime95 small FFT's (12K/24K min/max) with AVX code Option 12 with 2000MB RAM for each worker for my all core loading to figure out voltages and clocks. Don't have any Windows utilities as I run Linux. I have downloaded the Ycruncher which I need to investigate as an alternative to P95 as it seems to get good results for heavy loading from you. I don't run fully committed on BOINC for cpus as the run_times don't end up matching the cpu_times by a few minutes at most when overcommitted. Highest production is when run_times match cpu_times. I normally run 68-70% of available cores. You crunch more tasks in a day that way.


----------



## kmellz

Keith Myers said:


> I was hoping to find someone's posts about what kind of voltages they were using for 4300Mhz. I had no clue. So just started with my manual OC with a 41x multiplier and it set Vcore for 1.09V. Which I thought was unbelievably low. So started increasing it slowly while running P95 and SAT until I didn't get errors. Took all day yesterday. Ended up at 4300Mhz @ 1.29V which under 15 core load and LLC3 drops down to 1.25V. Been running at that load since I got the machine back crunching. 12 cpu tasks and 3 gpu tasks. I changed over to the AVX apps too since they were 3 minutes faster than the SSE41 apps. The temps are 78-80°C. loaded. The math performance is a big improvement over the 2700X. I wonder if I can drop the voltage further to improve the temps or do I lose stability? Could not use any the RAM Calculator settings, it always locked up the machine. Saw a note today that 53 ohms is way too high for Zen 2. Maybe that was the issue. So running mostly on XMP Auto with a few timings from the calculator punched in to get back to my normal 3466CL14 timings. I could not find any stability at 3533 or 3600 so gave up for the moment to get the machine back crunching. Lost a days worth of production for the cpu upgrade. Managed to lose the pump on the 1080 Hybrid card too to make matters worse. Had to put a 1070 back in till I get the 1080 RMA'd. Eventually my production will recover once I get the 1080 back and the pending work validates. Do like the math performance on the cpu. Shaving about 5-10 minutes per task off the cpu tasks compared to the 4025Mhz 2700X times.


I'm currently stable at 4.4ghz now @ 1.3v, could probably lower it one step or so, but I've just left cpu/ram where they're at right now so I can use the computer ^^ Will go for tweaking it all again, especially the ram, when a new polished bios comes out with new AGESA.


----------



## harderthanfire

Ordered some new RAM, went conservative 3600 C16 - Hoping to run at 3766 C16


Must remember not to leave ram timings to auto, set them to auto on my current set whilst doing a manual CPU overclock and it has set it to C24 ffs


----------



## dreckschmeck

Baio73 said:


> What RAM kit are you using?
> 
> Baio


I'm using 2x Gskill F4-3600C15D-16GTZ so 32 GB total


----------



## crakej

Hows it going with modded bioses?

What are the advantages of it?


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Hows it going with modded bioses?
> 
> What are the advantages of it?


You can disable spread spectrum with it if you wanna see if that cures your 99.8Mhz BCLK.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> You can disable spread spectrum with it if you wanna see if that cures your 99.8Mhz BCLK.


Cured that - all you have to do is use <auto> instead of DOCP or Automatic in extreme tweaker. It then sets the clock at 100.6 or whatever is needed to get it to 100mhz


----------



## poliacido

what agesa has the latest bios 2501? i am still on 2203
is it worth upgrading or just wait for newer agesa versions?


----------



## xeizo

poliacido said:


> what agesa has the latest bios 2501? i am still on 2203
> is it worth upgrading or just wait for newer agesa versions?


If you still have a 2700X thou shall not upgrade, the latest bios on AGESA PinnaclePi is the best for 2700X. Got my highest CB20 score back then, and a lot less bugs.

If you are planning to insert a Ryzen 3000 very soon, it can be worth upgrading just to get a primer on all the bugs and their workarounds ....


----------



## harderthanfire

Old vs New memory - pretty decent improvement! 

Not really tweaked it yet, just got that overclock on it with regular DOCP timings. Any advice on timings etc or how far to push the OC on memory/IF clock would be appreciated.


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> what agesa has the latest bios 2501? i am still on 2203
> is it worth upgrading or just wait for newer agesa versions?


Since you're not on 1201 and running off a ComboPi AGESA then you should keep up-to-date with the latest AGESA.


----------



## poliacido

xeizo said:


> If you still have a 2700X thou shall not upgrade, the latest bios on AGESA PinnaclePi is the best for 2700X. Got my highest CB20 score back then, and a lot less bugs.
> 
> If you are planning to insert a Ryzen 3000 very soon, it can be worth upgrading just to get a primer on all the bugs and their workarounds ....


no i will not upgrade for now



nick name said:


> Since you're not on 1201 and running off a ComboPi AGESA then you should keep up-to-date with the latest AGESA.


thanks, i will upgrade then tomorrow... are you still on your 2700x or did you upgrade?


----------



## DaKaN

Impressed with the memory controller. 4x8GB 3200mhz g.skill
Gonna try to push timings some more and stability test
CCX0:4450 CCX1:4450 CCX2:4350 CCX3:4350 1.36v(drops down to 1.27 during heavy load)

Edit: added geekbench score and link.
ST:6051 MT:53845
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/13989915


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> no i will not upgrade for now
> 
> 
> 
> thanks, i will upgrade then tomorrow... are you still on your 2700x or did you upgrade?


Sigh . . . I'm still with the 2700X. And something funny I did recently is try out the old 1201 BIOS with my current setup (without the same VCORE offset though) and I couldn't even POST. So my takeaway from that is there is a benefit in using the latest BIOS.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> Sigh . . . I'm still with the 2700X. And something funny I did recently is try out the old 1201 BIOS with my current setup (without the same VCORE offset though) and I couldn't even POST. So my takeaway from that is there is a benefit in using the latest BIOS.


I've heard talk about memory support getting better for each bios revision, mainly in the AGESA-version from AMD, could be some truth to it.


----------



## AvengedRobix

DaKaN said:


> Impressed with the memory controller. 4x8GB 3200mhz g.skill
> Gonna try to push timings some more and stability test
> CCX0:4450 CCX1:4450 CCX2:4350 CCX3:4350 1.36v(drops down to 1.27 during heavy load)
> 
> Edit: added geekbench score and link.
> ST:6051 MT:53845
> https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/13989915


Can we have a bios setting of you're timing?


----------



## DaKaN

AvengedRobix said:


> Can we have a bios setting of you're timing?


sure. here's a screen of RM
Most timings were left on Auto. I only adjusted the main ones for cl16


----------



## poliacido

nick name said:


> Sigh . . . I'm still with the 2700X. And something funny I did recently is try out the old 1201 BIOS with my current setup (without the same VCORE offset though) and I couldn't even POST. So my takeaway from that is there is a benefit in using the latest BIOS.


Your 2700x is not bad at all, why would you change it for the 3000 series?? i mean unless you need more cores i didn't see a huge gap in gaming performance. In my opinion is not worth the upgrade for now at the actual prices, better save those money for a higher end gpu.
I am actually trying to save some € and build a custom loop again like i had with the old core2quad.... we'll see ....


----------



## AvengedRobix

DaKaN said:


> sure. here's a screen of RM
> 
> Most timings were left on Auto. I only adjusted the main ones for cl16


Tnx guy.. tomorrow i try

Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A6013 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## Synoxia

@mtrai thank you. I am keeping this bios then.
Any bios options suggestion aimed at gaming? Bankgroupswap is disabled. PBO is on -0.075 offset, Ram run at 3533 c14-14-14-28 stable,
I've disabled every spread spectrum i've found. Is hpet OFF bios + windows (useplatformclock /false) worth?
Do you think relaxed EDC throttling enabled might help? 
To everyone: what do these do, any good?

EDIT: actually guck randomguys benchmark on youtube, they know nothing. ASUS know nothing. 
HPET off from bios + windows10 useplatform /false completely fixed anvil engine (Ac origins/odyssey) microstuttering.
Guck you Asus from hiding this option from bios.


----------



## kertsz

The last bios (Version 2406 and 2501) paralyze my ventilators connected to the motherboard, I have to use version 2304 to correct it


----------



## Hale59

AMD Ryzen 3000 – Part IV – DDR4 Scaling https://lab501.ro/procesoare-chipseturi/amd-ryzen-3000-part-iv-ddr4-scaling-english-version


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> There is all kind of goodies...in actual menus..and then other stuff that is only available via F9 search in the bios such as HPET and Spread Spectrum. I figured out a few bios ago how to expose these menu in search even though we cannot show the menu. And then all the fan stuff.


Good Morning!

I am not sure why, but I can not get the 2501 Non-WIFI Modded UEFI to Flash. I am very familiar with Flashback, and it appears to try to flash, but ultimately errors out and I end up with the Vanilla 2501. Curiously I went to use the EZ Flash function to see if it would Read your UEFI File as Genuine, and it Said it was not a UEFI File, however when I told it to read Your Wifi Mod, it recognized that as 2501 right away. I did not flash it because it was the Wifi version and I am still not 100 Percent versed on how to Flash the Wifi Version properly.

I was wondering if anyone else has had success with the 2501 Non-Wifi Mod yet, or if its just me.

Sorry I hadn't tested earlier, its been a busy week for me, I finally just now had the time.

I still really appreciate the time and effort you have put into this @mtrai, I don't know the first thing about Modding UEFI's, but I am a quick study and know my way around code (sometimes) if there is anything I can do to help. Thank You!


----------



## majestynl

kertsz said:


> The last bios (Version 2406 and 2501) paralyze my ventilators connected to the motherboard, I have to use version 2304 to correct it


I have a PWM-Splitter connected to CPU Fan header (Push)! And a PWM-Splitter connected to CPU-OPT Fan header (Pull)!
When i start the PC i do see the Push Fans are not spinning for few seconds then they do spin but very low, and after 1-2s they are spinning right!

I tried to switch the fans from CPU to CPU-OPT. But the ones that where not spinning right at the start just got moved . So it looks like the PWM signal is to weak for 3 fans at the start!


----------



## AvengedRobix

DaKaN said:


> sure. here's a screen of RM
> Most timings were left on Auto. I only adjusted the main ones for cl16


nothing... even C5 error... Voltage of ram and SOC?


----------



## oreonutz

AvengedRobix said:


> nothing... even C5 error... Voltage of ram and SOC?


His Screen shot shows SOCv at 1.1v, but it doesn't show his VRam Voltage.

If I were you, I would go into the DIGI+ Power Controls and set your DRAM VBoot Voltage to like 1.45v then save and reboot, and then try to enter in the Overclocked Ram Settings he put. I don't know what the Ram you are using is Rated for, but assuming it 3200MHZ CL14 Ram, I would try at least 1.48v for both the DRAM Voltage and the Boot DRAM VBoot Voltage and see if it posts. If it does Test Stability, and then see if you can bring down/up the voltage from there.

But in my experience the C5 Boot Error relates to not having the VBoot Dram Voltage High enough in the DIGI+ Settings to Post with the RAM OC Settings.


----------



## majestynl

oreonutz said:


> His Screen shot shows SOCv at 1.1v, but it doesn't show his VRam Voltage.
> 
> If I were you, I would go into the DIGI+ Power Controls and set your DRAM VBoot Voltage to like 1.45v then save and reboot, and then try to enter in the Overclocked Ram Settings he put. I don't know what the Ram you are using is Rated for, but assuming it 3200MHZ CL14 Ram, I would try at least 1.48v for both the DRAM Voltage and the Boot DRAM VBoot Voltage and see if it posts. If it does Test Stability, and then see if you can bring down/up the voltage from there.
> 
> But in my experience the C5 Boot Error relates to not having the VBoot Dram Voltage High enough in the DIGI+ Settings to Post with the RAM OC Settings.


Can agree...Most of the time i got the C5 when boot-voltage was not correct! But i also have it with all different RAM tunes. Sometimes i can by-pass it by entering the values one by one. And sometimes i can by saving my edits on a profile. Then just load defaults and immediately after that loading profile and booting again!


----------



## AvengedRobix

oreonutz said:


> AvengedRobix said:
> 
> 
> 
> nothing... even C5 error... Voltage of ram and SOC?
> 
> 
> 
> His Screen shot shows SOCv at 1.1v, but it doesn't show his VRam Voltage.
> 
> If I were you, I would go into the DIGI+ Power Controls and set your DRAM VBoot Voltage to like 1.45v then save and reboot, and then try to enter in the Overclocked Ram Settings he put. I don't know what the Ram you are using is Rated for, but assuming it 3200MHZ CL14 Ram, I would try at least 1.48v for both the DRAM Voltage and the Boot DRAM VBoot Voltage and see if it posts. If it does Test Stability, and then see if you can bring down/up the voltage from there.
> 
> But in my experience the C5 Boot Error relates to not having the VBoot Dram Voltage High enough in the DIGI+ Settings to Post with the RAM OC Settings.
Click to expand...

I've try vboot 1,45 and 1,50 but nothing.. this evening retry...


----------



## DaKaN

AvengedRobix said:


> nothing... even C5 error... Voltage of ram and SOC?


dram at 1.47 and soc 1.1. whatever setting I use on soc, it wont change. stuck on max 1.1
i'm using g.skill F4 3200cl14GTZR.


----------



## majestynl

DaKaN said:


> dram at 1.47 and soc 1.1. whatever setting I use on soc, it wont change. stuck on max 1.1
> i'm using g.skill F4 3200cl14GTZR.


Can you check the soc voltage in TurboV or HwInfo?
TurboV download links in this post provided by gupsterg (bottom): https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-739.html#post28047398


----------



## AvengedRobix

DaKaN said:


> AvengedRobix said:
> 
> 
> 
> nothing... even C5 error... Voltage of ram and SOC?
> 
> 
> 
> dram at 1.47 and soc 1.1. whatever setting I use on soc, it wont change. stuck on max 1.1
> i'm using g.skill F4 3200cl14GTZR.
Click to expand...

Tnx.. this evening retry..


----------



## DaKaN

AvengedRobix said:


> Tnx.. this evening retry..


I sometimes do get C5 when booting. To get past that click the reset button on the MB a couple times. 
Seems to be some memory training issues. Hopefully that will be fixed in a new bios.


----------



## lordzed83

majestynl said:


> Can agree...Most of the time i got the C5 when boot-voltage was not correct! But i also have it with all different RAM tunes. Sometimes i can by-pass it by entering the values one by one. And sometimes i can by saving my edits on a profile. Then just load defaults and immediately after that loading profile and booting again!


In my case usually its the wrong timings. On this New bios not as many problems on my end. Can power down pc turn psu off and it boots.

Damn it gotten hot today not benching after work not with ambient up by 7c 


From silicone lottery
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cg0f0z/addressing_some_concernsquestions_before_we/


----------



## MrPhilo

Anyone know what is the MSIDIS HPET in the bios setting does? Just seen it while disabling HPET.

Is the HPET setting showing up with anyone with 3000 series? Just installed it now and it's not showing up. Have tried flashing it again and still the same, nothing in f9 search


----------



## thegr8anand

My C7H and 3900x are incoming in 4-5 days and had to sort out the ram.



https://www.newegg.com/team-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820331241?Item=N82E16820331241


Have ordered these 3200 CL14 as couldn't find Trident 3600C15. Timings @ 3200 are slightly better than G.Skill TridentZ (14-14-14-31 vs 14-14-14-34). Hope can OC well at 3600/3733.


----------



## lordzed83

thegr8anand said:


> My C7H and 3900x are incoming in 4-5 days and had to sort out the ram.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/team-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820331241?Item=N82E16820331241
> 
> 
> Have ordered these 3200 CL14 as couldn't find Trident 3600C15. Timings @ 3200 are slightly better than G.Skill TridentZ (14-14-14-31 vs 14-14-14-34). Hope can OC well at 3600/3733.


Ye I was looking if 3600cl15 are about but they are EOL product afaik


----------



## nick name

lordzed83 said:


> Ye I was looking if 3600cl15 are about but they are EOL product afaik


Yeah, I think you're gonna have to find the equivalent bin in higher speeds. So a little more expensive too. However, the 4000CL17 is pretty much gone the way of the 3600CL15.


----------



## AvengedRobix

DaKaN said:


> I sometimes do get C5 when booting. To get past that click the reset button on the MB a couple times.
> Seems to be some memory training issues. Hopefully that will be fixed in a new bios.


Ok... f**k C5.. set 1 parameter and F10.. another 1 F10... is too long but work =) Tnx mister!


----------



## xeizo

I couldn't stand this being idle from tinkering with the memory. I cancelled the 3900X and ordered a 3700X, which will arrive on Wednesday. Fun times ahead, I only have 3600c17 RAM which is about the worst B-Die, and it's 2x16GB dual rank. It will be interesting to see how far it can be tortured, if at all. On my 2700X, which is a very average chip, 3400c16 is the limit for being total stable


----------



## gkolarov

Hi,

did any of you have a shutdown issue after upgrading to the latest BIOS 2501 ? The screen turns off, the water pump runs at highest speed (no motherboard control over it), but the computer does not shuts down. It's like the mobo turns off without turning the power supply. If I manually remove the power cable it turns off, but if I return it in fer seconds the system powers on (like a reboot). If I wait more time before returning the power cable it stays turned off. 

Thank you!


----------



## Bart

gkolarov said:


> Hi,
> 
> did any of you have a shutdown issue after upgrading to the latest BIOS 2501 ? The screen turns off, the water pump runs at highest speed (no motherboard control over it), but the computer does not shuts down. It's like the mobo turns off without turning the power supply. If I manually remove the power cable it turns off, but if I return it in fer seconds the system powers on (like a reboot). If I wait more time before returning the power cable it stays turned off.
> 
> Thank you!


I had that same thing happen to me, even before 2501, but it got fixed at some point. Updated to 2501 and it's back. The system WILL shut down eventually (within 5 minutes, at least mine does).


----------



## gkolarov

Hahaha, seems my happy times with that motherboard are over  Will try few tricks , maybe something will work it out  Cheers !


----------



## VPII

I'm sitting with the problem of living in a wonderful 3rd world country so no clear indicstion of when the Ryzen 9 3900x will be available, the processor I paid for on the 7th of this month.

But to hold me over I got a Ryzen 5 3600. Now Im pretty impressed with this chip coming from a Ryzen 7 2700x. Firstly I can run this chip all core 4333mhz at 1.38 to 1.4vcore. Yup 1.4 sounds alot but temps does not even reach 65c while benching.

At first stock seemed to be an issue with cpu clocks stuck at 3600mhz. I found changing bclk causes this. Now I have this cpu at stock running 4.225 to 4.25ghz all core and 4.4ghz single core. with pbo x 10. And all good.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## Bart

lordzed83 said:


> Ye I was looking if 3600cl15 are about but they are EOL product afaik


Hey Zed, you can still find G.Skill 3600CL15 kits on Newegg sometimes, but they go out of stock in a hurry. But they can be had if you're quick on the trigger and have Newegg notifications on. I couldn't find any on Amazon.


----------



## oreonutz

thegr8anand said:


> My C7H and 3900x are incoming in 4-5 days and had to sort out the ram.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/team-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820331241?Item=N82E16820331241
> 
> 
> Have ordered these 3200 CL14 as couldn't find Trident 3600C15. Timings @ 3200 are slightly better than G.Skill TridentZ (14-14-14-31 vs 14-14-14-34). Hope can OC well at 3600/3733.


I Sincerely hope you have better luck then I. I ended up putting them in my Intel System because they don't OC well, I have 2 Kits of them. The GSkill Flare X Kit seems to be a better Bin SKU as I have now 4 Kits of them, and each can easily do 3600 CL 15 On this New Platform. (I thought the same thing because of the lower Timings, but at least in my case it ended up not helping at all)


----------



## MrPhilo

Has anyone tried running the Infinity fabric higher than half the ram speed? For example 3600cl14 but infinity at 2000? Thought it be interesting to see.


----------



## Mandarb

Bart said:


> I had that same thing happen to me, even before 2501, but it got fixed at some point. Updated to 2501 and it's back. The system WILL shut down eventually (within 5 minutes, at least mine does).





gkolarov said:


> Hi,
> 
> did any of you have a shutdown issue after upgrading to the latest BIOS 2501 ? The screen turns off, the water pump runs at highest speed (no motherboard control over it), but the computer does not shuts down. It's like the mobo turns off without turning the power supply. If I manually remove the power cable it turns off, but if I return it in fer seconds the system powers on (like a reboot). If I wait more time before returning the power cable it stays turned off.
> 
> Thank you!


Mentioned that earlier in the thread, had it happen too. On 2406 and 2501 with my 3900X. Case fans keep spinning, rest is turned off.

Also, do you guys get crazy temperature spikes too? Even when running benches or prime, temperature is a constant up and down, as is voltage -> CPU gets cooler, more voltage gets applied, CPU spikes up, voltage is dialled back, CPU temp goes down, voltage gets applied, CPU spikes up, rinse repeat.

See the picture of my temperature here: https://imgur.com/gallery/jUMaZxf (in case you're wondering why I'm using Argus Monitor: the Fan controller on my Vega64 decided to die and I'm using the H_AMP header on the motherboard. The only way to control a motherboard fan header by GPU temperature was Argus Monitor)


----------



## nick name

MrPhilo said:


> Has anyone tried running the Infinity fabric higher than half the ram speed? For example 3600cl14 but infinity at 2000? Thought it be interesting to see.



Doesn't deviating from 1:1:1 in any direction cause a degradation in performance?


----------



## Bart

Mandarb said:


> Also, do you guys get crazy temperature spikes too? Even when running benches or prime, temperature is a constant up and down, as is voltage -> CPU gets cooler, more voltage gets applied, CPU spikes up, voltage is dialled back, CPU temp goes down, voltage gets applied, CPU spikes up, rinse repeat.


I get those spikes too, not sure if I'm seeing the same pattern though. I can see every core spike to nearly 1.5V, all 12 cores at 4.35ghz, just by starting HWinfo64. I don't even need to benchmark, LOL! But I'm questioning if that's a valid reading or not.


----------



## MrPhilo

nick name said:


> MrPhilo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Has anyone tried running the Infinity fabric higher than half the ram speed? For example 3600cl14 but infinity at 2000? Thought it be interesting to see.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn't deviating from 1:1:1 in any direction cause a degradation in performance?
Click to expand...

No idea, they never mention any detriment or negative side. 

Since infinity fabric can now run it by itself without being tied to RAM. I can't see why it would be negative.

I plan to get the Trident Neo 3600 CL14-15-15 1.4v, seems to be a really good binned version. Anyone else getting this? Be interesting to see how much better it is than my 3600cl16.


----------



## nick name

MrPhilo said:


> No idea, they never mention any detriment or negative side.
> 
> Since infinity fabric can now run it by itself without being tied to RAM. I can't see why it would be negative.
> 
> I plan to get the Trident Neo 3600 CL14-15-15 1.4v, seems to be a really good binned version. Anyone else getting this? Be interesting to see how much better it is than my 3600cl16.


I am almost certain I read it recently in one of the other relevant threads The Stilt or elmor started. However, I think someone else posted it so it may not be reliable so I probably shouldn't even have mentioned it.


----------



## nick name

So this is fun:


----------



## chakku

MrPhilo said:


> No idea, they never mention any detriment or negative side.
> 
> Since infinity fabric can now run it by itself without being tied to RAM. I can't see why it would be negative.
> 
> I plan to get the Trident Neo 3600 CL14-15-15 1.4v, seems to be a really good binned version. Anyone else getting this? Be interesting to see how much better it is than my 3600cl16.


They do mention a detriment. Desyncing FCLK and UCLK will result in higher latency and UCLK is dependant on RAM, hence 'Coupled mode' in Ryzen Master.


----------



## Mandarb

Bart said:


> I get those spikes too, not sure if I'm seeing the same pattern though. I can see every core spike to nearly 1.5V, all 12 cores at 4.35ghz, just by starting HWinfo64. I don't even need to benchmark, LOL! But I'm questioning if that's a valid reading or not.


And what completely throws me off: I can set CPU voltage to 1.3V in BIOS, but when I check HWinfo64 CPU VID voltage is still at 1.4-1.5V when running light loads/right out of idle. When I then run a heavy load such as prime95 both SVI 12 and CPU VID goes down to say 1.2V, which seems believable. But at the same time how is the CPU getting 1.5V to the cores when it's set to only deliver 1.3V.


----------



## Bart

Mandarb said:


> And what completely throws me off: I can set CPU voltage to 1.3V in BIOS, but when I check HWinfo64 CPU VID voltage is still at 1.4-1.5V when running light loads/right out of idle. When I then run a heavy load such as prime95 both SVI 12 and CPU VID goes down to say 1.2V, which seems believable. But at the same time how is the CPU getting 1.5V to the cores when it's set to only deliver 1.3V.


Yep, that's why I think it's nothing to worry about. HWinfo needs updating too.


----------



## MrPhilo

chakku said:


> They do mention a detriment. Desyncing FCLK and UCLK will result in higher latency and UCLK is dependant on RAM, hence 'Coupled mode' in Ryzen Master.


In the bios setting you can set FCLK=UCLK or UCLK/2. Won't that not solve it, setting it to match your manual FCLK?


----------



## oreonutz

Mandarb said:


> Also, do you guys get crazy temperature spikes too? Even when running benches or prime, temperature is a constant up and down, as is voltage -> CPU gets cooler, more voltage gets applied, CPU spikes up, voltage is dialled back, CPU temp goes down, voltage gets applied, CPU spikes up, rinse repeat.





Bart said:


> I get those spikes too, not sure if I'm seeing the same pattern though. I can see every core spike to nearly 1.5V, all 12 cores at 4.35ghz, just by starting HWinfo64. I don't even need to benchmark, LOL! But I'm questioning if that's a valid reading or not.


So, I just wanted to add that I also am not comfortable with those spikes on my new Fancy Processor, but with Zen+ AMD Assured us multiple times that seeing Spikes up to 1.5v was a normal and expected behavior, and I ran my 2700x on a daily basis with constant spikes up to 1.5v while under lightly threaded loads up until I switched it out with my 3900x and never saw any degradation or any issues, So I tend to believe them, even though seeing it makes me uncomfortable. (Also for the record I bought my 2700x on Launch day, and had my PBO Dialed in by week 2, had it dialed in to hit 4.25Ghz all Core under Heavy Multi Threaded Loads, and it boosted to 4.4Ghz for Single Core and 2 Core Loads, in those lightly threaded scenarios it was common to see voltages hit 1.4825v, and would sometimes spike to just below 1.5v, and when I reached out to AMD Personally they assured me this was fine, and it ran fine like this up until the 7/12/2019 when I recieved my 3900x and swapped it out).

This time around I would continue to run my 3900x that way, but when Under Heavy Load on all Cores, which is something that is part of my every day workflow, both Stock and PBO makes my all core drop down to 4.05Ghz, which compared to my All Core overclock of 4.3Ghz is not acceptable to me. So I was able to drop my Voltage to a Manual Voltage of 1.3v and set my All core to 4.3Ghz, and then Use a Script that I set to launch with the start of my PC to Apply a 4.5Ghz OC to my 1st CCX, a 4.45 to the Second, 4.35 to the Third, and left the 4th at 4.3Ghz, and that works perfectly without any boosting voltages and gives me the best of both worlds as far as a good balance between my Single Core and Multi Score Performance. (I have to set my LLC to Level 4 in the UEFI though, otherwise I see stability issues when performing a multihour Blender Render.)

So until PBO Gets an update to work better (at least on my chip) under Heavy All Core Loads, I feel this may be the better way to go.

With that being said, I did want to point you to what AMD Robert said himself about the Vcore boosting up to 1.5v being normal and expected behavior, as thats how they designed the chips to behave, in case you haven't seen this already. Link: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cbls9g/the_final_word_on_idle_voltages_for_3rd_gen_ryzen/

Apparently there are still aspects of the boosting behavior they are still trying to get technical answers for, but Robert assures everyone that it is perfectly normal for Ryzen to boost to 1.5v while idle and under light loads, just as it was with Zen+ and we shouldn't worry about degradation with our chips. Still makes me uneasy, but hope this helps...


----------



## oreonutz

Mandarb said:


> And what completely throws me off: I can set CPU voltage to 1.3V in BIOS, but when I check HWinfo64 CPU VID voltage is still at 1.4-1.5V when running light loads/right out of idle. When I then run a heavy load such as prime95 both SVI 12 and CPU VID goes down to say 1.2V, which seems believable. But at the same time how is the CPU getting 1.5V to the cores when it's set to only deliver 1.3V.


I also see the same exact reporting in HWinfo with my Vcore set manually to 1.3v in the UEFI. However, my interpretation of this is that the CPU VID that HWinfo is reporting is the Voltage that the CPU is requesting/expecting from the VRM at a given load. By hooking your multi-meter up to the probeit points on the board, or by just checking the SVI2 TFN CPU Vcore Sensor or Asus WMI Vcore sensor in HWinfo, you can see that this Voltage Change is not actually happening, and that (depending on your LLC Settings) a Steady 1.3v is in fact being delivered to the CPU under light and heavy load scenarios. (In your case the fact that the SVI 12 Sensor shows your Vcore Value to be 1.2v when under heavy load is probably because you have your LLC still set to auto, or close to level 1, So what you are seeing is Vdroop in Action, and its just a coincidence that this also happens to be the CPU VID Value as well). 

If you put your CPU back to Auto for both the Ratio and the Vcore in the UEFI, and then hit your CPU with different load scenarios and watch the CPU VID Voltages, you will see that those 1.4v-1.5v is the normal behavior for light loads, and 1.2v to 1.25v (at least in the case of my 3900x) is the normal CPU VID Value when under Heavy Multi Core Load Scenarios. The Difference being that in this case the VRM is actually delivering those Voltages to the CPU, where as when we Manually set the vCore and CPU Ratio, those CPU VID Values are being overridden, its just that HWinfo continues to show what the CPU Would be requesting.

I have no idea if my assumption on this is 100 Percent correct, for that we would need someone smarter than I to weigh in, but given the tests I have ran myself, this is what I currently believe to be the case.


----------



## VPII

Please explain to me this. I have my Ryzen 5 3600 running perfectly well with PBO X 10 going all core between 4.15 and 4.25ghz and single core 4.4 ghz. Obviously with the BCLK not read as a true 100% the end result on clocks is a little lower. Now when I manual overclock I compensate for it by increasing the BCLK to 100.2 to 100.8 mhz. This increase in BCLK result in PBO or even normal boost not functioning with clocks stuck at 3.6ghz. Any help will be greatly appreciated.


----------



## Xenozx

Hi all, i have the crosshair VII wifi x470 and i had a 2700x before i just upgraded to the 3900x. I am using the same memory sticks as before, and on my 2700x I could get them to easily clock up to 3400mhz at 14 14 14 28. They are samsung B die, team dark brand. Now with the 3900x they can not clock over 2900mhz without the computer not posting, and a C5 stuck on the LCD screen. I did a fresh cmos clear, and even tried only loading the DOCP profile and still wont load even that. best i have been able to manage is 2860 @ 14 14 14 28. I have to set it manually. Any idea why my memory wont clock like it used to only thing that has changed was the CPU and the bios version. I am on the latest 2501, but had the same issue on the bios previous.

also, I thought there was a way to set your BCLK to say 103, and still have XFR and PBO work, did asus patch this trick, so that it doesnt work any more? I tried setting it to 103.0 and when i boot into windows my CPU is stuck at an all core of like 38xxmhz where when its at 100.0 BCLK it will bounce up to around 4.4ghz and worst case an all core 4.05ghz. does that sound good?


----------



## oreonutz

Xenozx said:


> Hi all, i have the crosshair VII wifi x470 and i had a 2700x before i just upgraded to the 3900x. I am using the same memory sticks as before, and on my 2700x I could get them to easily clock up to 3400mhz at 14 14 14 28. They are samsung B die, team dark brand. Now with the 3900x they can not clock over 2900mhz without the computer not posting, and a C5 stuck on the LCD screen. I did a fresh cmos clear, and even tried only loading the DOCP profile and still wont load even that. best i have been able to manage is 2860 @ 14 14 14 28. I have to set it manually. Any idea why my memory wont clock like it used to only thing that has changed was the CPU and the bios version. I am on the latest 2501, but had the same issue on the bios previous.
> 
> also, I thought there was a way to set your BCLK to say 103, and still have XFR and PBO work, did asus patch this trick, so that it doesnt work any more? I tried setting it to 103.0 and when i boot into windows my CPU is stuck at an all core of like 38xxmhz where when its at 100.0 BCLK it will bounce up to around 4.4ghz and worst case an all core 4.05ghz. does that sound good?


I think you are running into the VBoot issue. Go into Your UEFI BEFORE setting any memory settings, go to the Digi+ Power Settings, the very bottom of that menu is a settings called DRAM VBoot Voltage. Set that to 1.4v (I Would not set it any lower) Then Save and Reboot, go back into the UEFI and then Manually set your RAM Speed, RAM Voltage, and Timings. So in your case, manually choose 3400Mhz for the Ram Speed, go down and Choose 1.4v for the Ram Voltage, and then go into the timings page and set 14, 14, 14, 14, 28, 48, then go down to SOCv and Set it to Manual and Set that to 1.05v. Then Save and Reboot. Assuming it posts, go into the UEFI again, in the Tools menu create a Profile for yourself, save and reboot. Now you can work on slowly dropping down your Ram Voltage and SOCv as necessary, I would work on one at a time going down 0.05 or so at a time until you reach instability and then bring it back up 0.05v, then work on the next Voltage. Make sure to leave the DRAM VBoot at 1.4v though, as it seems that much is needed to avoid the C5 Error when Booting anything over 2933Mhz. Try this out, let us know if it helps! Good Luck!

Also, not sure about BCLK and PBO as I haven't been able to get PBO To Function as It did on the 2700x, so I have stopped playing with it and started using Per CCX Overclocking instead. Someone else might be able to help you with that though.


----------



## oreonutz

VPII said:


> Please explain to me this. I have my Ryzen 5 3600 running perfectly well with PBO X 10 going all core between 4.15 and 4.25ghz and single core 4.4 ghz. Obviously with the BCLK not read as a true 100% the end result on clocks is a little lower. Now when I manual overclock I compensate for it by increasing the BCLK to 100.2 to 100.8 mhz. This increase in BCLK result in PBO or even normal boost not functioning with clocks stuck at 3.6ghz. Any help will be greatly appreciated.


I haven't played with BCLK while using PBO yet, so hopefully someone else can tune in and better help you, but what it sounds like is if you manually adjust BCLK it locks the CPU into OC Mode, which makes PBO not function, there for locking you at stock unless you also use the Multiplier to manually overclock. Obviously this was different on the 2000 Series platform, but maybe ASUS or AMD Changed this behavior with this generation. Your Probably better off disabling Spread Spectrum with @mtrai Modded UEFI, which has the same effect of locking the BCLK at 100, either that or setting the AI Overclocker to Auto instead of Default which for me at least seems to automatically bring the BLCK to 100.6 in UEFI, which reports as 100Mhz BCLK once booted. Wish I could be more helpful.


----------



## xeizo

oreonutz said:


> Also for the record I bought my 2700x on Launch day, and had my PBO Dialed in by week 2, had it dialed in to hit 4.25Ghz all Core under Heavy Multi Threaded Loads, and it boosted to 4.4Ghz for Single Core and 2 Core Loads,.


You're kinda spoiled, you got a Golden Chip 2700X, not many out there doing 4.25GHz all core stable


----------



## VPII

oreonutz said:


> I haven't played with BCLK while using PBO yet, so hopefully someone else can tune in and better help you, but what it sounds like is if you manually adjust BCLK it locks the CPU into OC Mode, which makes PBO not function, there for locking you at stock unless you also use the Multiplier to manually overclock. Obviously this was different on the 2000 Series platform, but maybe ASUS or AMD Changed this behavior with this generation. Your Probably better off disabling Spread Spectrum with @mtrai Modded UEFI, which has the same effect of locking the BCLK at 100, either that or setting the AI Overclocker to Auto instead of Default which for me at least seems to automatically bring the BLCK to 100.6 in UEFI, which reports as 100Mhz BCLK once booted. Wish I could be more helpful.


Thank you @oreonutz much appreciate your input. Trust me Im still happy with what this Ryzen 5 3600 can do, hopefully next week Ill get my 3900x as per the shop.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## matzemoerk

You have to set PBO to enabled in BIOS and again in Windows using Ryzen Master to get PBO working when setting BCKL other than 100. I have my 3700x running with a 103 BCKL.


----------



## VPII

matzemoerk said:


> You have to set PBO to enabled in BIOS and again in Windows using Ryzen Master to get PBO working when setting BCKL other than 100. I have my 3700x running with a 103 BCKL.


Thanks, it is just so irritating using Ryzen Master when everything is set in the bios. I really don't like overclocking software.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## lordzed83

VPII said:


> Thanks, it is just so irritating using Ryzen Master when everything is set in the bios. I really don't like overclocking software.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


Like I mentioned in Stilts stopic.. I wish they would add /ccx overclocking from bios level not ryzen master heh


----------



## neikosr0x

xeizo said:


> You're kinda spoiled, you got a Golden Chip 2700X, not many out there doing 4.25GHz all core stable


On my old 2700x i was also going 4.2ghz and 4.275ghz all core boost with PE4 enable with PE3 I was getting 4.150ghz all core. I thought that was kind of normal really.


----------



## xeizo

neikosr0x said:


> On my old 2700x i was also going 4.2ghz and 4.275ghz all core boost with PE4 enable with PE3 I was getting 4.150ghz all core. I thought that was kind of normal really.


LoL, no it's not, somewhere between 4000-4100MHz is "normal" all core full load for a 2700X


----------



## oreonutz

xeizo said:


> You're kinda spoiled, you got a Golden Chip 2700X, not many out there doing 4.25GHz all core stable


Yeah I got Lucky 3 Times, I have 2 Chips that will do it, and then One I bought and built for a client would do it. I have built with 7 other and all of them could get to at least 4150, but couldn't get them all up to that 4.2Ghz stable.


----------



## oreonutz

neikosr0x said:


> On my old 2700x i was also going 4.2ghz and 4.275ghz all core boost with PE4 enable with PE3 I was getting 4.150ghz all core. I thought that was kind of normal really.


Unfortunately Level 4 wouldn't run stable on every chip, and then even when using Level 4 some chips would STILL only boost to 4.15 at most, and when using BCLK to try to tune it up it would be Blue Screen City. But My Launch Chip was/still is a Beast, I have it relegated to a Destiny 2 PC Right now, lol.


----------



## oreonutz

lordzed83 said:


> Like I mentioned in Stilts stopic.. I wish they would add /ccx overclocking from bios level not ryzen master heh


100 Percent Agree! Right now I have devised a script using ASUS tool to impliment my OC upon Boot up, but obviously would prefer a UEFI level tool so I can keep my OC no matter which OS I decide to boot to.


----------



## neikosr0x

oreonutz said:


> Unfortunately Level 4 wouldn't run stable on every chip, and then even when using Level 4 some chips would STILL only boost to 4.15 at most, and when using BCLK to try to tune it up it would be Blue Screen City. But My Launch Chip was/still is a Beast, I have it relegated to a Destiny 2 PC Right now, lol.


lol I always thought it was kind of normal for PE4, mine was basically running PE4 from day one even with -0.0125 offsite. So I was lucky then.


----------



## VPII

Finally, I am picking up my Ryzen 9 3900x later today. So excited, finally first one in South Africa

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## oreonutz

VPII said:


> Finally, I am picking up my Ryzen 9 3900x later today. So excited, finally first one in South Africa
> 
> Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


Hell Yeah Man! Let us know how it goes!


----------



## mtrai

oreonutz said:


> Good Morning!
> 
> I am not sure why, but I can not get the 2501 Non-WIFI Modded UEFI to Flash. I am very familiar with Flashback, and it appears to try to flash, but ultimately errors out and I end up with the Vanilla 2501. Curiously I went to use the EZ Flash function to see if it would Read your UEFI File as Genuine, and it Said it was not a UEFI File, however when I told it to read Your Wifi Mod, it recognized that as 2501 right away. I did not flash it because it was the Wifi version and I am still not 100 Percent versed on how to Flash the Wifi Version properly.
> 
> I was wondering if anyone else has had success with the 2501 Non-Wifi Mod yet, or if its just me.
> 
> Sorry I hadn't tested earlier, its been a busy week for me, I finally just now had the time.
> 
> I still really appreciate the time and effort you have put into this @mtrai, I don't know the first thing about Modding UEFI's, but I am a quick study and know my way around code (sometimes) if there is anything I can do to help. Thank You!


I cannot test the non wifi but it should all be good since this mod is only done using the latestest AMIBCP and does not require any hex editing since search makes some things un hidden. Even though we can not show them in an actual menu. I only have one USB stick that will actually work with flashback, all my other ones just will error out when I try to use them.


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> I cannot test the non wifi but it should all be good since this mod is only done using the latestest AMIBCP and does not require any hex editing since search makes some things un hidden. Even though we can not show them in an actual menu. I only have one USB stick that will actually work with flashback, all my other ones just will error out when I try to use them.


I will try to learn how to mod it, I appreciate your help. I have a flash drive that works with flashback, its the same one I use for all my flashes, something is definitely not working, but I will see if I can figure it out. Any tips for what to look for are of course always welcome!


----------



## Xenozx

mtrai said:


> Good Morning!
> 
> I am not sure why, but I can not get the 2501 Non-WIFI Modded UEFI to Flash. I am very familiar with Flashback, and it appears to try to flash, but ultimately errors out and I end up with the Vanilla 2501. Curiously I went to use the EZ Flash function to see if it would Read your UEFI File as Genuine, and it Said it was not a UEFI File, however when I told it to read Your Wifi Mod, it recognized that as 2501 right away. I did not flash it because it was the Wifi version and I am still not 100 Percent versed on how to Flash the Wifi Version properly.
> 
> I was wondering if anyone else has had success with the 2501 Non-Wifi Mod yet, or if its just me.
> 
> Sorry I hadn't tested earlier, its been a busy week for me, I finally just now had the time.
> 
> I still really appreciate the time and effort you have put into this @mtrai , I don't know the first thing about Modding UEFI's, but I am a quick study and know my way around code (sometimes) if there is anything I can do to help. Thank You!
> I cannot test the non wifi but it should all be good since this mod is only done using the latestest AMIBCP and does not require any hex editing since search makes some things un hidden. Even though we can not show them in an actual menu. I only have one USB stick that will actually work with flashback, all my other ones just will error out when I try to use them.


dunno if it helps, but i tried updating my wifi crosshair vii to 2501 from the bios using the internet, and it would download the file, and say the same thing not a UEFI bios. I booted into windows, downloaded the file manually saved it to my C:/ drive, and then went back into the bios, and ran it that way, and it flashed fine, so maybe the online version that is accessible through the bios is currupt? i tried 3 times, same error all 3 times.


----------



## VPII

oreonutz said:


> Hell Yeah Man! Let us know how it goes!


Thanks man, Ill sure do. Hope st least about 4.3ghz manual a. But first stock all core. But first stock then pbo.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## oreonutz

Xenozx said:


> dunno if it helps, but i tried updating my wifi crosshair vii to 2501 from the bios using the internet, and it would download the file, and say the same thing not a UEFI bios. I booted into windows, downloaded the file manually saved it to my C:/ drive, and then went back into the bios, and ran it that way, and it flashed fine, so maybe the online version that is accessible through the bios is currupt? i tried 3 times, same error all 3 times.


That is interesting. Well I downloaded the file from @mtrai google share direct to my flash drive that I leave permanently in the Flashback Port, its the same drive I use to flash every time, and I flash quite a bit, this is the only time I have had an issue. But I thought maybe I downloaded the Wifi version on accident, so I went to his link and downloaded it again, this time to both my flash drive and my Raid array, and tried 2 more times to flash it, both times when booting up I ended back in just vanilla 2501, which is of course what I was already running. I think I am going to try to mod the Wifi Version myself since that definitely appears to be read as genuine, I just have to go through the steps of getting it to work with the non-wifi board, so heres to figuring that out.

2501 Vanilla flashed for me no problems just downloading it directly from ASUS website and using flashback to the same flash drive.

I appreciate the tip though @Xenozx.

@mtrai dropped me a link of how to get a wifi version to work with the non wifi board before, so I am going to hunt that down and see if I can do this successfully today.


----------



## kmellz

For the FCLK questions, not running 1:1 in any way just seems to be bad, tested scaling mhz on ram while locking fclk to 1900mhz, still a big (~10ns+ for me) latency increase, would have been nice otherwise!


----------



## thegr8anand

I bought C7H for 3900x and both will be coming by weekend. To support i need to use flashback to new bios correct?


----------



## harderthanfire

oreonutz said:


> 100 Percent Agree! Right now I have devised a script using ASUS tool to impliment my OC upon Boot up, but obviously would prefer a UEFI level tool so I can keep my OC no matter which OS I decide to boot to.



Care to share please? The whole launch ryzen master press 2 buttons then close is getting old for me too xD


----------



## Hale59

thegr8anand said:


> I bought C7H for 3900x and both will be coming by weekend. To support i need to use flashback to new bios correct?


https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?101617-Crosshair-VII-Hero-Essential-Info-Thread


----------



## MrPhilo

kmellz said:


> For the FCLK questions, not running 1:1 in any way just seems to be bad, tested scaling mhz on ram while locking fclk to 1900mhz, still a big (~10ns+ for me) latency increase, would have been nice otherwise!


Did you also change UCLK to = FCLK?

EDIT: Also anyone able to get there CPU to downclock when they have a set frequency and voltage? Before enabling C states did the trick but now it's just stuck at 4.4ghz my power plan is ryzen balance and with the minimum is 5%.


----------



## thegr8anand

oreonutz said:


> I Sincerely hope you have better luck then I. I ended up putting them in my Intel System because they don't OC well, I have 2 Kits of them. The GSkill Flare X Kit seems to be a better Bin SKU as I have now 4 Kits of them, and each can easily do 3600 CL 15 On this New Platform. (I thought the same thing because of the lower Timings, but at least in my case it ended up not helping at all)



Wow thats my hopes dashed already and they costed me so much!!




Hale59 said:


> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?101617-Crosshair-VII-Hero-Essential-Info-Thread



Thanks!


----------



## crakej

MrPhilo said:


> Did you also change UCLK to = FCLK?
> 
> EDIT: Also anyone able to get there CPU to downclock when they have a set frequency and voltage? Before enabling C states did the trick but now it's just stuck at 4.4ghz my power plan is ryzen balance and with the minimum is 5%.


What does it show in Ryzen Master?


----------



## chakku

MrPhilo said:


> In the bios setting you can set FCLK=UCLK or UCLK/2. Won't that not solve it, setting it to match your manual FCLK?


You can't change UCLK. It's always either memory speed (DDR/2) or half if not synced with FCLK (DDR/4).


----------



## MrPhilo

crakej said:


> What does it show in Ryzen Master?


Bit lost or blind lol, which part on Ryzen Master you want me to look at 



chakku said:


> You can't change UCLK. It's always either memory speed (DDR/2) or half if not synced with FCLK (DDR/4).


If you search UCLK on F9 Search there will be an option that lets you define the speed. Either Auto, UCLK=FCLK or UCLK=FCLK/2.


----------



## crakej

MrPhilo said:


> Bit lost or blind lol, which part on Ryzen Master you want me to look at
> 
> 
> 
> If you search UCLK on F9 Search there will be an option that lets you define the speed. Either Auto, UCLK=FCLK or UCLK=FCLK/2.


can you see the cores downclocking or sleeping?


----------



## MrPhilo

crakej said:


> can you see the cores downclocking or sleeping?


Oh thought you meant if I could see cstates enabled but couldn't see that. I can see cores sleeping and downclocking. I guess hwinfo can't see it yet.. thanks!


----------



## chakku

MrPhilo said:


> If you search UCLK on F9 Search there will be an option that lets you define the speed. Either Auto, UCLK=FCLK or UCLK=FCLK/2.


Hmm, wasn't aware of the option being there. Would be happy to see some test results from yourself on it but I was of the impression that UCLK was tied to memory clock.


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> Like I mentioned in Stilts stopic.. I wish they would add /ccx overclocking from bios level not ryzen master heh


Agree! 



MrPhilo said:


> Did you also change UCLK to = FCLK?
> 
> EDIT: Also anyone able to get there CPU to downclock when they have a set frequency and voltage? Before enabling C states did the trick but now it's just stuck at 4.4ghz my power plan is ryzen balance and with the minimum is 5%.


So you are talking about Manual OC and downclocking and volting!? Previously we did it with P-states. Didnt find any time to test this. I even dont know if its enabled or will work.
But when i manual OC, i see sleeping cores and different clocks compared to 3rd party monitoring tools. So maybe its already downclocking and volting? 
Those other monitoring tools are that great currently. Not fast enough to keep the 3x series


----------



## MrPhilo

chakku said:


> Hmm, wasn't aware of the option being there. Would be happy to see some test results from yourself on it but I was of the impression that UCLK was tied to memory clock.


Well I'm a bit lazy doing test atm since its working fine at 3800CL16 and 1900 on both UCLK and FCLK.

But there is a way to tell if your UCLK is running the same speed as the FCLK you set, you can use CPU-Z as the northbridge its reporting is UCLK as per Stilt



The Stilt said:


> Wanted to clear a common misconception people seem to have: The "Northbridge Frequency" displayed by CPU-Z is NOT the FCLK (fabric) frequency. Instead it is the frequency of the memory controller itself (UCLK). Normally both FCLK and UCLK operate at the same speed (MEMCLK). When FCLK and MEMCLK are desynchronised, UCLK will be set to 1/2 mode. Regardless if you lower or raise it below / above the MEMCLK. For example, if MEMCLK = 3200MHz and FCLK is anything else than 1600MHz, the UCLK frequency will be MEMCLK / 2 (i.e. 800MHz).
> 
> No third party software (for the time being) can monitor FCLK frequency.





majestynl said:


> So you are talking about Manual OC and downclocking and volting!? Previously we did it with P-states. Didnt find any time to test this. I even dont know if its enabled or will work.
> But when i manual OC, i see sleeping cores and different clocks compared to 3rd party monitoring tools. So maybe its already downclocking and volting?
> Those other monitoring tools are that great currently. Not fast enough to keep the 3x series


Yeah it's downclocking fine in Ryzen Master , just weird how on auto mode HWINfo monitor it fine but when manual OC it can't.


----------



## chakku

MrPhilo said:


> But there is a way to tell if your UCLK is running the same speed as the FCLK you set, you can use CPU-Z as the northbridge its reporting is UCLK as per Stilt


The Stilt's comments align with my understanding which is that UCLK will be forced to 2:1 with MCLK if FCLK!=MCLK which is why having that UCLK setting in the BIOS confuses me.


----------



## crakej

MrPhilo said:


> Oh thought you meant if I could see cstates enabled but couldn't see that. I can see cores sleeping and downclocking. I guess hwinfo can't see it yet.. thanks!


NP - according to AMD HWIfo and the others can not report as accurately as RM does currently. If it's down-volting in RM, it's down-volting.


----------



## VPII

Okay, so I finally got my Ryzen 9 3900X. Installed it and no issues, except for the C5 due to Vmem Boot voltage too low when I set the memory speed to 3600. It took me a while to figure out the best CCX speed per core and it is still not done as I believe there is more in some of the CCX's but I settled for one step down on each for now. Vcore set to 1.35v with LLC5 and 8.... Highest temp I've seen was 78C not visible in one of these runs. This is clearly not the best chip, but we'll see when I fine tune the CCX clocking. And yes, I do not use Ryzen Master I use the other CCX clocking tool that apparently increase vcore which is not true.... I measured with a multimeter on the probelt and vcore to the point as per what is set in bios.


----------



## Xenozx

oreonutz said:


> I think you are running into the VBoot issue. Go into Your UEFI BEFORE setting any memory settings, go to the Digi+ Power Settings, the very bottom of that menu is a settings called DRAM VBoot Voltage. Set that to 1.4v (I Would not set it any lower) Then Save and Reboot, go back into the UEFI and then Manually set your RAM Speed, RAM Voltage, and Timings. So in your case, manually choose 3400Mhz for the Ram Speed, go down and Choose 1.4v for the Ram Voltage, and then go into the timings page and set 14, 14, 14, 14, 28, 48, then go down to SOCv and Set it to Manual and Set that to 1.05v. Then Save and Reboot. Assuming it posts, go into the UEFI again, in the Tools menu create a Profile for yourself, save and reboot. Now you can work on slowly dropping down your Ram Voltage and SOCv as necessary, I would work on one at a time going down 0.05 or so at a time until you reach instability and then bring it back up 0.05v, then work on the next Voltage. Make sure to leave the DRAM VBoot at 1.4v though, as it seems that much is needed to avoid the C5 Error when Booting anything over 2933Mhz. Try this out, let us know if it helps! Good Luck!
> 
> Also, not sure about BCLK and PBO as I haven't been able to get PBO To Function as It did on the 2700x, so I have stopped playing with it and started using Per CCX Overclocking instead. Someone else might be able to help you with that though.


this worked for me thanks! I was able to get it to go up to 3600mhz but settled on 3533 @ 16-16-16-32. I only noticed one issue, and that is when i run cinebench or the cpu-z bench, my #'s actually seem worse? i get 7900 multi and about 500 single in cpu-z bench, and Cinebench r15 i get 200 single core. When i look at hwinfo it seems even when only running single core i never see the mhz go over 4225mhz. I thought it would boost up to around 4600mhz single core? also when I run all core test, all cores seem to drop down to 4050mhz. does that seem right? how can i tell if xfr and pbo are working properly?


----------



## oreonutz

harderthanfire said:


> Care to share please? The whole launch ryzen master press 2 buttons then close is getting old for me too xD


So sorry, been working all day, just got back home to get on the forums! Give me about an hour or 2 to settle in and I will post up what I have for you.


----------



## gupsterg

@crakej

You are not alone to see VTTDDR when left on [Auto] does not become 1/2 of VDIMM. I noticed this today when I set it as [Auto], this is a bug for sure, this was on UEFI 2501. I'm pretty sure UEFI 2406 would also exhibit this behaviour as they are so similar...



kmellz said:


> For the FCLK questions, not running 1:1 in any way just seems to be bad, tested scaling mhz on ram while locking fclk to 1900mhz, still a big (~10ns+ for me) latency increase, would have been nice otherwise!


2CCD CPUs behave differently, ie 3900X. Elmor's thread OP has info. Looking at benches of my own vs 2 CCD they seem to have a slight edge even when using same setup.


----------



## oreonutz

thegr8anand said:


> Wow thats my hopes dashed already and they costed me so much!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks!


I am hoping to god in your case you got lucky. There are other people who have claimed to have great experience with those kits, which is the reason I bought them to begin with, I have 2 Pairs, and had the same experience with both, In fact I have had 3 Kits in total, but the second kit I purchased came with 1 DOA Stick, so I tested the one Working stick before sending it back and had the same results. Don't get me wrong, they ALL Ran at their XMP Profile, they just took 1.7v to get to run 3600 CL15 Stable (one stick took 1.8v and still couldn't do it and thats where I finally decided to stop pushing the IMC more). But I also have only been RAM Ocing for 4 years and still consider myself to have a lot to learn, so it is entirely possible that I either just didn't know what the hell I was doing, or just had down right bad luck with the silicon lottery. That said, these Flare X Sticks from G Skill that are 3200 CL14, I would swear by, they are easy as hell and don't require much voltage at all to push up to 3600 CL15.

Again, I do not mean to rain on your parade, I sincerely hope that you write back and talk about how far you were able to push them (This was both 1st and 2nd Gen Ryzen I was trying to push them on and my IMC on both chips was just average, so you may have way better luck, I have not put my TeamGroup kit back into my fancy new 3900x system to test).


----------



## oreonutz

Xenozx said:


> this worked for me thanks! I was able to get it to go up to 3600mhz but settled on 3533 @ 16-16-16-32. I only noticed one issue, and that is when i run cinebench or the cpu-z bench, my #'s actually seem worse? i get 7900 multi and about 500 single in cpu-z bench, and Cinebench r15 i get 200 single core. When i look at hwinfo it seems even when only running single core i never see the mhz go over 4225mhz. I thought it would boost up to around 4600mhz single core? also when I run all core test, all cores seem to drop down to 4050mhz. does that seem right? how can i tell if xfr and pbo are working properly?


I am glad the VBoot trick worked for you! Always glad to help!

Regarding PBO, it Pissed me off. I had the same exact problem, the second I set my RAM Past 2400Mhz it does the same damn thing to me. Everyone says you have to use the new Version of Ryzen Master to get PBO Working properly, so you might have better luck with that then I, but even with that when Under a CB R20 Load the most I have seen is 4.15Ghz all core, and my Single Core Boost is no where near the 4.6Ghz I see it hitting when I leave everything (including the Ram) Stock. After messing with it for damn near 24 hours straight, I decided I was going to go to the Per CCX Overclocking route and that has turned out to be the winning method for me. I will be doing a small write up on the best way I have found to boot up with the Per Core CCX Overclocking, just working out the remaining bugs with my script (I am not the best Script writer and I am sure a lot of you could do this way better than I.)


----------



## majestynl

Got this 3800x arrived today! Lets have fun


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> Got this 3800x arrived today! Lets have fun


Look fwd to seeing your results!

Do enjoy!


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> @crakej
> 
> You are not alone to see VTTDDR when left on [Auto] does not become 1/2 of VDIMM. I noticed this today when I set it as [Auto], this is a bug for sure, this was on UEFI 2501. I'm pretty sure UEFI 2406 would also exhibit this behaviour as they are so similar...


Have you checked with DMM to see if it's being set correctly? I've been really lazy - haven't got my DMM out yet to investigate my 'real' voltages - might have a look later.

Don't suppose I could convince you to check out your Viper Steels on your set-up, would be interesting to see if you can still run IF at 1900 with them, then we'd know if ram can affect the speed of the IF or if it's just the io die.... then I'd know if I should sell mine!


----------



## gupsterg

majestynl said:


> Got this 3800x arrived today! Lets have fun
> 
> 
> crakej said:
> 
> 
> 
> Look fwd to seeing your results!
> 
> Do enjoy!
Click to expand...

+1, week 25 silicon (~June 17, 2019-June 23, 2019).



crakej said:


> Have you checked with DMM to see if it's being set correctly? I've been really lazy - haven't got my DMM out yet to investigate my 'real' voltages - might have a look later.
> 
> Don't suppose I could convince you to check out your Viper Steels on your set-up, would be interesting to see if you can still run IF at 1900 with them, then we'd know if ram can affect the speed of the IF or if it's just the io die.... then I'd know if I should sell mine!


Didn't check with DMM, but setting is working, as profile failed on [Auto] (ie 0.6V), only back to normal with manually set 0.7V.

As said in previous post when you asked my experience with Viper Steels, I said my system didn't favour them, was on 2700X at the time.

They were the 4000MHz C19 2x8GB kit, they would not run 3533MHz/3600MHz using The Stilt's 3466MHz timings, 1T, GDMD, 1.355V/1.385V. When I tried manually tinkering they seemed not as easy going as the G.Skill B die kit's I've got/had.

I returned them and got full refund inc shipping, as one day, within a week or so of getting them, the heat spreaders just fell off, luckily did not short anything.



Spoiler


----------



## Victor Göhlin

Hi new to this forum.

Yesterday I assembled my new computer with C7H, R7 3800X and G.Skill Trident Z 2x8GB 3600MHz CL15 and I have problems to boot my computer. Every time I start the computer i get stuck at Q-code C5 after passing postcode 15 within 2-3 sec of posting, the computer stays on with all fans spinning as they should at an even RPM and all RGB on the MB is working as it should out of the box. According to the MB manual postcode 15-18 is "Pre-memory System Agent initialization is started" and Q-code C5 have no known reason but seem to occur for users with an unstable overclock on memory, to low memory voltage or to tight memory timings, my problem is that I can't even get into bios to apply any memory setting so I assume my memory currently must run at [email protected] I also have a problem with not getting any image when I boot either through my old gtx 1080ti or gtx 780ti which both work fine in my old i7 2600k build, so I can't even see if Ï get any options to enter bios before my computer get stuck at C5 within the 2-3sec after turning it on. 

I have tried both bios 2501 and 2406 several times through bios flashback, clear CMOS, asus safe boot, run with 1 memory stick, remove MB battery and so on still get stuck at C5 after postcode 15.

I have assembled about 12-15 computers the last 8 years and never had any issues like these before.

I will try to lend my sisters computer with Asus Strix B350-F, R5 1600 and Corsair Vengeance 2x8GB 3200MHz CL16 and test her memory sticks in my computer and mine in hers to see if there is any problems with my sticks.

Have anyone in here had similar problems and/or does anyone here have some solution that might help me?


----------



## Gigabytes

Victor Göhlin said:


> Hi new to this forum.
> 
> Yesterday I assembled my new computer with C7H, R7 3800X and G.Skill Trident Z 2x8GB 3600MHz CL15 and I have problems to boot my computer. Every time I start the computer i get stuck at Q-code C5 after passing postcode 15 within 2-3 sec of posting, the computer stays on with all fans spinning as they should at an even RPM and all RGB on the MB is working as it should out of the box. According to the MB manual postcode 15-18 is "Pre-memory System Agent initialization is started" and Q-code C5 have no known reason but seem to occur for users with an unstable overclock on memory, to low memory voltage or to tight memory timings, my problem is that I can't even get into bios to apply any memory setting so I assume my memory currently must run at [email protected] I also have a problem with not getting any image when I boot either through my old gtx 1080ti or gtx 780ti which both work fine in my old i7 2600k build, so I can't even see if Ï get any options to enter bios before my computer get stuck at C5 within the 2-3sec after turning it on.
> 
> I have tried both bios 2501 and 2406 several times through bios flashback, clear CMOS, asus safe boot, run with 1 memory stick, remove MB battery and so on still get stuck at C5 after postcode 15.
> 
> I have assembled about 12-15 computers the last 8 years and never had any issues like these before.
> 
> I will try to lend my sisters computer with Asus Strix B350-F, R5 1600 and Corsair Vengeance 2x8GB 3200MHz CL16 and test her memory sticks in my computer and mine in hers to see if there is any problems with my sticks.
> 
> Have anyone in here had similar problems and/or does anyone here have some solution that might help me?


Make sure you set the RAM boot voltage.


----------



## oreonutz

harderthanfire said:


> Care to share please? The whole launch ryzen master press 2 buttons then close is getting old for me too xD


OK. So I finally have a version of my Auto PerCCX Overclock Autostart script that I am comfortable sharing. Please don't rip me apart too much as I only dabble in scripting here in there to get things done, and still have a lot to learn. I just spent the last hour trying to figure out how to get this damn script to launch in the background so the CMD Windows don't pop up, and for whatever reason when the damn Task Scheduler Launches the script that way, no matter how I do it, it doesn't set the clocks. So for now this is the best way I have found to do it.

First Disclaimers and Warnings.

This uses a PerCCX Overclock tool that ASUS Uses, and I believe our very own @shamino1978 made. According to The Stilt, this Tool is not meant to be used by novice users, and if you don't set your voltage manually in the UEFI there is a chance you could damage your chip if you set the wrong VID with this tool. So as a safety precaution, I would definitely set your own VCore in the UEFI before using this tool. When you set your own VCore via the manual method (NOT OFFSET) in the UEFI it does not matter what the VID is set to because it is ignored. However, as a safety precaution my Script is set to use a VID of 1.3v, I would leave that part of the script alone just in case you end up having to boot your board from factory default and forget to set your vcore manually, as 1.3v is not enough to hurt anything. Even so, please understand you are using this tool and my script entirely at your own risk, please make sure you understand what you are doing, before using this script.

OK now that we got that out of the way, I am providing a zip file via my google drive share. Once downloaded you need to unzip its contents which will create a folder called "perccx0723", the way this script is designed that folder needs to be at the root of your c drive with the files directly inside of it.

Inside this folder you will find all the files that originally came with the tool plus "autostart.bat", "autoccx.vbs" and "Per CCX Overclock.xml". Once the folder is on your C Drive, you can go to Computer Management/Task Scheduler/Task Scheduler Library and select the "Action" Menu followed by "Import Task". Then browse to "C:\perccx0723\" and select the "Per CCX Overclock.xml" file. This will import the task that I have set up to automatically start with your PC as your User, this is the one way that I could get this script to properly launch upon the start of the PC. It has a 15 Second delay. You can of course edit any of the tasks parameters, but I found the way I have configured it to work every single boot. (Where as without the 15s delay for instance, it only worked sometimes, and without being configured as starting with your user logged in, it wouldn't launch at all, so I believe I have it configured already to work the best.)

If you rather set up the Task Scheduler yourself, what you need to know is that the "Autoccx.vbs" is the script that sets your Per CCX Overclock, and so that is the file that needs to be launched with the PC. The autostart.bat is just a simple bat file that tells it to open the script in a command window.

Now for the most important part. How you set your Per CCX Overclock is by opening that "AutoCCX.vbs" file in notepad and editing your clocks for each ccx in that file. I did my best to make it as readable as possible, you should be able to find the Clocks listed in Mhz, and edit them to your liking. It goes in order from CCX0 through CCX 3. All you need to do is edit in your desired Clocks for each ccx and then save the file, then make sure that file launches automatically and it will set your Per CCX Overclock. You can simply double click the file after editing it and watch your clocks in HWinfo to verify that its working as intended. I also included a file titled "reset to 4250 Allcore.vbs" which will set all your clocks to 4.25Ghz, so you can sanity check that your edited script is working.

Again, I want to reiterate that this tool is NOT INTENDED to set your Voltages, only your Clocks per CCX, so PLEASE Make sure you set your VCore Manually in the UEFI before using this tool.

Sorry for being so verbose, I just want to make sure anyone who uses this completely understands what this is.

Other than that, Happy Per CCX Overclocking, once you have this script set right, you no longer have to open up Ryzen Master Every single time you restart, the script will do that work for you! ENJOY!!!

https://drive.google.com/file/d/16aZuX3SNGsR96sCjZeL7s7AyAiHzjpwQ/view?usp=sharing


----------



## oreonutz

Victor Göhlin said:


> Hi new to this forum.
> 
> Yesterday I assembled my new computer with C7H, R7 3800X and G.Skill Trident Z 2x8GB 3600MHz CL15 and I have problems to boot my computer. Every time I start the computer i get stuck at Q-code C5 after passing postcode 15 within 2-3 sec of posting, the computer stays on with all fans spinning as they should at an even RPM and all RGB on the MB is working as it should out of the box. According to the MB manual postcode 15-18 is "Pre-memory System Agent initialization is started" and Q-code C5 have no known reason but seem to occur for users with an unstable overclock on memory, to low memory voltage or to tight memory timings, my problem is that I can't even get into bios to apply any memory setting so I assume my memory currently must run at [email protected] I also have a problem with not getting any image when I boot either through my old gtx 1080ti or gtx 780ti which both work fine in my old i7 2600k build, so I can't even see if Ï get any options to enter bios before my computer get stuck at C5 within the 2-3sec after turning it on.
> 
> I have tried both bios 2501 and 2406 several times through bios flashback, clear CMOS, asus safe boot, run with 1 memory stick, remove MB battery and so on still get stuck at C5 after postcode 15.
> 
> I have assembled about 12-15 computers the last 8 years and never had any issues like these before.
> 
> I will try to lend my sisters computer with Asus Strix B350-F, R5 1600 and Corsair Vengeance 2x8GB 3200MHz CL16 and test her memory sticks in my computer and mine in hers to see if there is any problems with my sticks.
> 
> Have anyone in here had similar problems and/or does anyone here have some solution that might help me?


Please refer to this post from just a few days ago, it will explain in detail what you need to do to get you up and running, just subsitute the timings and Memory Clock Speeds Mentioned for your own specific kits, and otherwise follow this post exactly, and you will be one happy enthusiast! Happy Overclocking!

https://www.overclock.net/forum/28055984-post7616.html


----------



## Victor Göhlin

Gigabytes said:


> Make sure you set the RAM boot voltage.


Yes I would if I would be able to get into Bios which I can't, I get stuck at C5 instantly and receive no video signal even though i now tried 3 graphics cards gtx 1080ti, gtx 780ti and R9 270X.



oreonutz said:


> Please refer to this post from just a few days ago, it will explain in detail what you need to do to get you up and running, just subsitute the timings and Memory Clock Speeds Mentioned for your own specific kits, and otherwise follow this post exactly, and you will be one happy enthusiast! Happy Overclocking!
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/28055984-post7616.html


As I said I get stuck at C5 instantly and can't even enter bios to apply any memory settings, I am a bit lost on how i should proceed


----------



## Gigabytes

Victor Göhlin said:


> Yes I would if I would be able to get into Bios which I can't, I get stuck at C5 instantly and receive no video signal even though i now tried 3 graphics cards gtx 1080ti, gtx 780ti and R9 270X.
> 
> 
> 
> As I said I get stuck at C5 instantly and can't even enter bios to apply any memory settings, I am a bit lost on how i should proceed


Did you backflash the latest BIOS? If it's a new board it may not have the newer BIOS. In fact, backflash the BIOS again either way.


----------



## oreonutz

Victor Göhlin said:


> Yes I would if I would be able to get into Bios which I can't, I get stuck at C5 instantly and receive no video signal even though i now tried 3 graphics cards gtx 1080ti, gtx 780ti and R9 270X.


Your video card is most likely fine, you need to clear CMOS. If you clear CMOS and are still having problems then do the following. Hit the Clear Cmos Button with the board Powered Off. Wait 5 Seconds. Pull the Power completely from the power supply (or just turn off the power supply switch) Remove the CMOS Battery from the Board. Now with the CMOS Battery Out, and the board completely without Power, hold down the power button on your case for at least 30 seconds. I Like to hold it down for 30 seconds twice in a row. This discharges the caps on your board, draining all the standby voltage out of both your power supply and board.

After about 2 to 3 Minutes, turn the power back on your power supply. You can leave the CMOS battery out for now, as we need to make sure the problem is fixed. Hit that CMOS Reset button one more time, and then turn on your system and see If it posts this time, if it does, do not set any settings in the UEFI EXCEPT FOR your DRAM VBOOT Voltage. You will find that under Your DIGI+ Power Settings, its the very last setting. Set it to AT LEAST 1.4v. Save and reboot. Go back into the UEFI Settings, and now set up your Ram. And if you made it this far make sure to put the CMOS Battery back in your board so your UEFI Settings stick.

If for some reason your board still does not post after this, switch out your ram, as the C5 halt is Ram Related, and it may just be that your IMC Has a problem with your Ram Kit. (However before switching out your ram I would try this trick first, its helped more then a few with this issue already). Good luck, let us know if this helped!


----------



## oreonutz

Gigabytes said:


> Did you backflash the latest BIOS? If it's a new board it may not have the newer BIOS. In fact, backflash the BIOS again.


Yeah I thought that too, but then I went and read his original post, he definitely tried flashing both 2501 and 2406 and neither worked for him, so this is either a corrupt UEFI Issue, which draining the power from his board and doing a CMOS reset will help, Or His IMC just doesn't like his Ram.


----------



## gupsterg

Victor Göhlin said:


> As I said I get stuck at C5 instantly and can't even enter bios to apply any memory settings, I am a bit lost on how i should proceed


i) Turn power off to PSU, use CLEAR CMOS.

ii) Turn power on to PSU, power on board, set everything in UEFI as you'd want except RAM profile.

iii) Set VBoot: 1.35V last setting within External Digi+ Power Control menu on Extreme Tweaker page.

iv) Set DRAM Voltage on Extreme Tweaker page as 1.35V.

v) Set VTTDDR: 0.675V within Tweakers Paradise menu on Extreme Tweaker page.

vi) Save & exit.

Now once system load up again and setup RAM profile. You should be able to get at least 3533MHz IMO. With a G.Skill 3200C14 kit I only need VDIMM 1.355V for 3600MHz C15.

Keep VTTDDR 1/2 of DRAM voltage.

Match VBoot & DRAM Voltage when you change them.


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> Look fwd to seeing your results!
> 
> Do enjoy!


Thanks. Will share asap 



gupsterg said:


> +1, week 25 silicon (~June 17, 2019-June 23, 2019).



yeap..as my 3700x ! Hope the IMC is at least the same!


----------



## gupsterg

majestynl said:


> yeap..as my 3700x ! Hope the IMC is at least the same!


I'm wishing to see 1933MHz+ silicon in one of our hands  . May the silicon gods smile on your new CPU  .


----------



## Xenozx

oreonutz said:


> OK. So I finally have a version of my Auto PerCCX Overclock Autostart script that I am comfortable sharing. Please don't rip me apart too much as I only dabble in scripting here in there to get things done, and still have a lot to learn. I just spent the last hour trying to figure out how to get this damn script to launch in the background so the CMD Windows don't pop up, and for whatever reason when the damn Task Scheduler Launches the script that way, no matter how I do it, it doesn't set the clocks. So for now this is the best way I have found to do it.
> 
> First Disclaimers and Warnings.
> 
> This uses a PerCCX Overclock tool that ASUS Uses, and I believe our very own @shamino1978 made. According to The Stilt, this Tool is not meant to be used by novice users, and if you don't set your voltage manually in the UEFI there is a chance you could damage your chip if you set the wrong VID with this tool. So as a safety precaution, I would definitely set your own VCore in the UEFI before using this tool. When you set your own VCore via the manual method (NOT OFFSET) in the UEFI it does not matter what the VID is set to because it is ignored. However, as a safety precaution my Script is set to use a VID of 1.3v, I would leave that part of the script alone just in case you end up having to boot your board from factory default and forget to set your vcore manually, as 1.3v is not enough to hurt anything. Even so, please understand you are using this tool and my script entirely at your own risk, please make sure you understand what you are doing, before using this script.
> 
> OK now that we got that out of the way, I am providing a zip file via my google drive share. Once downloaded you need to unzip its contents which will create a folder called "perccx0723", the way this script is designed that folder needs to be at the root of your c drive with the files directly inside of it.
> 
> Inside this folder you will find all the files that originally came with the tool plus "autostart.bat", "autoccx.vbs" and "Per CCX Overclock.xml". Once the folder is on your C Drive, you can go to Computer Management/Task Scheduler/Task Scheduler Library and select the "Action" Menu followed by "Import Task". Then browse to "C:\perccx0723\" and select the "Per CCX Overclock.xml" file. This will import the task that I have set up to automatically start with your PC as your User, this is the one way that I could get this script to properly launch upon the start of the PC. It has a 15 Second delay. You can of course edit any of the tasks parameters, but I found the way I have configured it to work every single boot. (Where as without the 15s delay for instance, it only worked sometimes, and without being configured as starting with your user logged in, it wouldn't launch at all, so I believe I have it configured already to work the best.)
> 
> If you rather set up the Task Scheduler yourself, what you need to know is that the "Autoccx.vbs" is the script that sets your Per CCX Overclock, and so that is the file that needs to be launched with the PC. The autostart.bat is just a simple bat file that tells it to open the script in a command window.
> 
> Now for the most important part. How you set your Per CCX Overclock is by opening that "AutoCCX.vbs" file in notepad and editing your clocks for each ccx in that file. I did my best to make it as readable as possible, you should be able to find the Clocks listed in Mhz, and edit them to your liking. It goes in order from CCX0 through CCX 3. All you need to do is edit in your desired Clocks for each ccx and then save the file, then make sure that file launches automatically and it will set your Per CCX Overclock. You can simply double click the file after editing it and watch your clocks in HWinfo to verify that its working as intended. I also included a file titled "reset to 4250 Allcore.vbs" which will set all your clocks to 4.25Ghz, so you can sanity check that your edited script is working.
> 
> Again, I want to reiterate that this tool is NOT INTENDED to set your Voltages, only your Clocks per CCX, so PLEASE Make sure you set your VCore Manually in the UEFI before using this tool.
> 
> Sorry for being so verbose, I just want to make sure anyone who uses this completely understands what this is.
> 
> Other than that, Happy Per CCX Overclocking, once you have this script set right, you no longer have to open up Ryzen Master Every single time you restart, the script will do that work for you! ENJOY!!!
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/16aZuX3SNGsR96sCjZeL7s7AyAiHzjpwQ/view?usp=sharing


awesome! so just a question with this. is this mainly for setting an all core overclock? I take it XFR and PBO are disabled when you use this correct?

Last question, can I set my best core to say 4600 and would the system be smart enough to use that core for say games and stuff, and only utilize the other cores that maybe I set to 4250 when multi tasking?


----------



## MrPhilo

VPII said:


> Okay, so I finally got my Ryzen 9 3900X. Installed it and no issues, except for the C5 due to Vmem Boot voltage too low when I set the memory speed to 3600. It took me a while to figure out the best CCX speed per core and it is still not done as I believe there is more in some of the CCX's but I settled for one step down on each for now. Vcore set to 1.35v with LLC5 and 8.... Highest temp I've seen was 78C not visible in one of these runs. This is clearly not the best chip, but we'll see when I fine tune the CCX clocking. And yes, I do not use Ryzen Master I use the other CCX clocking tool that apparently increase vcore which is not true.... I measured with a multimeter on the probelt and vcore to the point as per what is set in bios.


No idea if anyone mentioned this yet, on your CPU-Z your UCLK is half the speed (NB Frequency). Should be running at 1800 not 900. Your losing a few performance, just fyi in case you haven't spotted it yet


----------



## lordzed83

gupsterg said:


> @crakej
> 
> You are not alone to see VTTDDR when left on [Auto] does not become 1/2 of VDIMM. I noticed this today when I set it as [Auto], this is a bug for sure, this was on UEFI 2501. I'm pretty sure UEFI 2406 would also exhibit this behaviour as they are so similar...
> 
> 
> 
> 2CCD CPUs behave differently, ie 3900X. Elmor's thread OP has info. Looking at benches of my own vs 2 CCD they seem to have a slight edge even when using same setup.


Hmmm I see that on HWINFO also BUT in my case profile not failed Interesting maybe I should try to se tit manual and see what happens  TBH I was thinking It's a readout error till You mentioned it does seem to work when You are changing to auto and profile is unstable ect. More FUN tests to run for me after work 

Sitting at work thinking now. It's possible that me elaving VTTDDR on auto was reason I could not get 3800cl14 pass with no errors no matter what volts as it always shown like 430mv or so there !!!


----------



## lordzed83

oreonutz said:


> OK. So I finally have a version of my Auto PerCCX Overclock Autostart script that I am comfortable sharing. Please don't rip me apart too much as I only dabble in scripting here in there to get things done, and still have a lot to learn. I just spent the last hour trying to figure out how to get this damn script to launch in the background so the CMD Windows don't pop up, and for whatever reason when the damn Task Scheduler Launches the script that way, no matter how I do it, it doesn't set the clocks. So for now this is the best way I have found to do it.
> 
> First Disclaimers and Warnings.
> 
> This uses a PerCCX Overclock tool that ASUS Uses, and I believe our very own @shamino1978 made. According to The Stilt, this Tool is not meant to be used by novice users, and if you don't set your voltage manually in the UEFI there is a chance you could damage your chip if you set the wrong VID with this tool. So as a safety precaution, I would definitely set your own VCore in the UEFI before using this tool. When you set your own VCore via the manual method (NOT OFFSET) in the UEFI it does not matter what the VID is set to because it is ignored. However, as a safety precaution my Script is set to use a VID of 1.3v, I would leave that part of the script alone just in case you end up having to boot your board from factory default and forget to set your vcore manually, as 1.3v is not enough to hurt anything. Even so, please understand you are using this tool and my script entirely at your own risk, please make sure you understand what you are doing, before using this script.
> 
> OK now that we got that out of the way, I am providing a zip file via my google drive share. Once downloaded you need to unzip its contents which will create a folder called "perccx0723", the way this script is designed that folder needs to be at the root of your c drive with the files directly inside of it.
> 
> Inside this folder you will find all the files that originally came with the tool plus "autostart.bat", "autoccx.vbs" and "Per CCX Overclock.xml". Once the folder is on your C Drive, you can go to Computer Management/Task Scheduler/Task Scheduler Library and select the "Action" Menu followed by "Import Task". Then browse to "C:\perccx0723\" and select the "Per CCX Overclock.xml" file. This will import the task that I have set up to automatically start with your PC as your User, this is the one way that I could get this script to properly launch upon the start of the PC. It has a 15 Second delay. You can of course edit any of the tasks parameters, but I found the way I have configured it to work every single boot. (Where as without the 15s delay for instance, it only worked sometimes, and without being configured as starting with your user logged in, it wouldn't launch at all, so I believe I have it configured already to work the best.)
> 
> If you rather set up the Task Scheduler yourself, what you need to know is that the "Autoccx.vbs" is the script that sets your Per CCX Overclock, and so that is the file that needs to be launched with the PC. The autostart.bat is just a simple bat file that tells it to open the script in a command window.
> 
> Now for the most important part. How you set your Per CCX Overclock is by opening that "AutoCCX.vbs" file in notepad and editing your clocks for each ccx in that file. I did my best to make it as readable as possible, you should be able to find the Clocks listed in Mhz, and edit them to your liking. It goes in order from CCX0 through CCX 3. All you need to do is edit in your desired Clocks for each ccx and then save the file, then make sure that file launches automatically and it will set your Per CCX Overclock. You can simply double click the file after editing it and watch your clocks in HWinfo to verify that its working as intended. I also included a file titled "reset to 4250 Allcore.vbs" which will set all your clocks to 4.25Ghz, so you can sanity check that your edited script is working.
> 
> Again, I want to reiterate that this tool is NOT INTENDED to set your Voltages, only your Clocks per CCX, so PLEASE Make sure you set your VCore Manually in the UEFI before using this tool.
> 
> Sorry for being so verbose, I just want to make sure anyone who uses this completely understands what this is.
> 
> Other than that, Happy Per CCX Overclocking, once you have this script set right, you no longer have to open up Ryzen Master Every single time you restart, the script will do that work for you! ENJOY!!!
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/16aZuX3SNGsR96sCjZeL7s7AyAiHzjpwQ/view?usp=sharing


This is great 100% what I wanted/needed !!! +rep


----------



## lordzed83

Xenozx said:


> awesome! so just a question with this. is this mainly for setting an all core overclock? I take it XFR and PBO are disabled when you use this correct?
> 
> Last question, can I set my best core to say 4600 and would the system be smart enough to use that core for say games and stuff, and only utilize the other cores that maybe I set to 4250 when multi tasking?


No ATM You cant use /core oc. Well You can but other core in CCX goes in limp mode and runs at 3500mhz max


----------



## lordzed83

gupsterg said:


> i) Turn power off to PSU, use CLEAR CMOS.
> 
> ii) Turn power on to PSU, power on board, set everything in UEFI as you'd want except RAM profile.
> 
> iii) Set VBoot: 1.35V last setting within External Digi+ Power Control menu on Extreme Tweaker page.
> 
> iv) Set DRAM Voltage on Extreme Tweaker page as 1.35V.
> 
> v) Set VTTDDR: 0.675V within Tweakers Paradise menu on Extreme Tweaker page.
> 
> vi) Save & exit.
> 
> Now once system load up again and setup RAM profile. You should be able to get at least 3533MHz IMO. With a G.Skill 3200C14 kit I only need VDIMM 1.355V for 3600MHz C15.
> 
> Keep VTTDDR 1/2 of DRAM voltage.
> 
> Match VBoot & DRAM Voltage when you change them.


Nice wrightup. What I do on top. When PSU is OFF i press power button and wait for all the LED's on motherboard DIE like 1-2 seconds get capacitors emptied before i press cmos clear. Not sure if its better but not worse


----------



## lordzed83

majestynl said:


> Thanks. Will share asap
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yeap..as my 3700x ! Hope the IMC is at least the same!


More toys Man we got loads of playing around ahead. Not to mention we are still on 1.0.0.2 Hope Friday we could have 1.0.0.3 of some sorts if not no problem TBH I'm quite happy with this 2501 atm. 
@gupsterg remember states of bioses we ware testing at start of C6H ??  Thats not working thats not reading correctly this bios does not boost at all


----------



## kmellz

MrPhilo said:


> Bit lost or blind lol, which part on Ryzen Master you want me to look at
> 
> 
> 
> If you search UCLK on F9 Search there will be an option that lets you define the speed. Either Auto, UCLK=FCLK or UCLK=FCLK/2.


Per your first quote on me and the following discussion, sadly it doesn't work :/ Also what the option says is uclk=memclk / memclk/2, for me even when changing it to the first one, it still goes to /2! Oh well. Had a bit of hope there ^^ Didn't even know the option was there, maybe it'll work as intended(?) in a future bios


----------



## crakej

Just did a few tests with VTTDDR. So far I couldn't find any difference when setting it or not (0.6v)

It was only few short tests as I've got to go out soon, but will do more later.

Don't know if it's the high ambient temp (28c instead of 21c) but my stable 3733 profile is not as stable as it was!  I might have changed something last night when I was tired, but again, don't have time to check until later.

Edit: I did get my meter out, but forgot VTTDDR isn't on the probit points.


----------



## Victor Göhlin

oreonutz said:


> Your video card is most likely fine, you need to clear CMOS. If you clear CMOS and are still having problems then do the following. Hit the Clear Cmos Button with the board Powered Off. Wait 5 Seconds. Pull the Power completely from the power supply (or just turn off the power supply switch) Remove the CMOS Battery from the Board. Now with the CMOS Battery Out, and the board completely without Power, hold down the power button on your case for at least 30 seconds. I Like to hold it down for 30 seconds twice in a row. This discharges the caps on your board, draining all the standby voltage out of both your power supply and board.
> 
> After about 2 to 3 Minutes, turn the power back on your power supply. You can leave the CMOS battery out for now, as we need to make sure the problem is fixed. Hit that CMOS Reset button one more time, and then turn on your system and see If it posts this time, if it does, do not set any settings in the UEFI EXCEPT FOR your DRAM VBOOT Voltage. You will find that under Your DIGI+ Power Settings, its the very last setting. Set it to AT LEAST 1.4v. Save and reboot. Go back into the UEFI Settings, and now set up your Ram. And if you made it this far make sure to put the CMOS Battery back in your board so your UEFI Settings stick.
> 
> If for some reason your board still does not post after this, switch out your ram, as the C5 halt is Ram Related, and it may just be that your IMC Has a problem with your Ram Kit. (However before switching out your ram I would try this trick first, its helped more then a few with this issue already). Good luck, let us know if this helped!





gupsterg said:


> i) Turn power off to PSU, use CLEAR CMOS.
> 
> ii) Turn power on to PSU, power on board, set everything in UEFI as you'd want except RAM profile.
> 
> iii) Set VBoot: 1.35V last setting within External Digi+ Power Control menu on Extreme Tweaker page.
> 
> iv) Set DRAM Voltage on Extreme Tweaker page as 1.35V.
> 
> v) Set VTTDDR: 0.675V within Tweakers Paradise menu on Extreme Tweaker page.
> 
> vi) Save & exit.
> 
> Now once system load up again and setup RAM profile. You should be able to get at least 3533MHz IMO. With a G.Skill 3200C14 kit I only need VDIMM 1.355V for 3600MHz C15.
> 
> Keep VTTDDR 1/2 of DRAM voltage.
> 
> Match VBoot & DRAM Voltage when you change them.


I followed the steps @oreonutz wrote and even left the computer without power for about 1 hour without the Cmos battery. Still no success, instantly C5 and don't even get time to go into bios. Tomorrow i will remove my twin tower heatsink and install the included wraith prism and try to troubleshoot my pc with the ram from my sister computer and try mine in hers to see if the problem is about the RAM or CPU/motherboard.

Trying to link a video i captured while trying to boot the computer for the 2nd time without cmos battery:


----------



## harderthanfire

oreonutz said:


> OK. So I finally have a version of my Auto PerCCX Overclock Autostart script that I am comfortable sharing. Please don't rip me apart too much as I only dabble in scripting here in there to get things done, and still have a lot to learn. I just spent the last hour trying to figure out how to get this damn script to launch in the background so the CMD Windows don't pop up, and for whatever reason when the damn Task Scheduler Launches the script that way, no matter how I do it, it doesn't set the clocks. So for now this is the best way I have found to do it.
> 
> First Disclaimers and Warnings.
> 
> This uses a PerCCX Overclock tool that ASUS Uses, and I believe our very own @*shamino1978* made. According to The Stilt, this Tool is not meant to be used by novice users, and if you don't set your voltage manually in the UEFI there is a chance you could damage your chip if you set the wrong VID with this tool. So as a safety precaution, I would definitely set your own VCore in the UEFI before using this tool. When you set your own VCore via the manual method (NOT OFFSET) in the UEFI it does not matter what the VID is set to because it is ignored. However, as a safety precaution my Script is set to use a VID of 1.3v, I would leave that part of the script alone just in case you end up having to boot your board from factory default and forget to set your vcore manually, as 1.3v is not enough to hurt anything. Even so, please understand you are using this tool and my script entirely at your own risk, please make sure you understand what you are doing, before using this script.
> 
> OK now that we got that out of the way, I am providing a zip file via my google drive share. Once downloaded you need to unzip its contents which will create a folder called "perccx0723", the way this script is designed that folder needs to be at the root of your c drive with the files directly inside of it.
> 
> Inside this folder you will find all the files that originally came with the tool plus "autostart.bat", "autoccx.vbs" and "Per CCX Overclock.xml". Once the folder is on your C Drive, you can go to Computer Management/Task Scheduler/Task Scheduler Library and select the "Action" Menu followed by "Import Task". Then browse to "C:\perccx0723\" and select the "Per CCX Overclock.xml" file. This will import the task that I have set up to automatically start with your PC as your User, this is the one way that I could get this script to properly launch upon the start of the PC. It has a 15 Second delay. You can of course edit any of the tasks parameters, but I found the way I have configured it to work every single boot. (Where as without the 15s delay for instance, it only worked sometimes, and without being configured as starting with your user logged in, it wouldn't launch at all, so I believe I have it configured already to work the best.)
> 
> If you rather set up the Task Scheduler yourself, what you need to know is that the "Autoccx.vbs" is the script that sets your Per CCX Overclock, and so that is the file that needs to be launched with the PC. The autostart.bat is just a simple bat file that tells it to open the script in a command window.
> 
> Now for the most important part. How you set your Per CCX Overclock is by opening that "AutoCCX.vbs" file in notepad and editing your clocks for each ccx in that file. I did my best to make it as readable as possible, you should be able to find the Clocks listed in Mhz, and edit them to your liking. It goes in order from CCX0 through CCX 3. All you need to do is edit in your desired Clocks for each ccx and then save the file, then make sure that file launches automatically and it will set your Per CCX Overclock. You can simply double click the file after editing it and watch your clocks in HWinfo to verify that its working as intended. I also included a file titled "reset to 4250 Allcore.vbs" which will set all your clocks to 4.25Ghz, so you can sanity check that your edited script is working.
> 
> Again, I want to reiterate that this tool is NOT INTENDED to set your Voltages, only your Clocks per CCX, so PLEASE Make sure you set your VCore Manually in the UEFI before using this tool.
> 
> Sorry for being so verbose, I just want to make sure anyone who uses this completely understands what this is.
> 
> Other than that, Happy Per CCX Overclocking, once you have this script set right, you no longer have to open up Ryzen Master Every single time you restart, the script will do that work for you! ENJOY!!!
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/16aZuX3SNGsR96sCjZeL7s7AyAiHzjpwQ/view?usp=sharing



Thanks a lot mate +rep


----------



## VPII

Hi guys, I am saying good bey. Yup, no more Asus. Seriously not what I want but what I need. My system has been superb running my new Ryzen 9 3900x until tonight. Started up all good, wanted to check the actual core speed multi and single st stock.... bam qpost 22, reset qpost c5. When with cmos clear I get into bios and change I get the same 22 then c5. I tried everything, no go..... I've left system unplugged and power button to clear caps but no go.

So I sm sorry, I hope to someday meet you all and have a drink or so.

Cheers.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## gkolarov

gkolarov said:


> Hi,
> 
> did any of you have a shutdown issue after upgrading to the latest BIOS 2501 ? The screen turns off, the water pump runs at highest speed (no motherboard control over it), but the computer does not shuts down. It's like the mobo turns off without turning the power supply. If I manually remove the power cable it turns off, but if I return it in fer seconds the system powers on (like a reboot). If I wait more time before returning the power cable it stays turned off.
> 
> Thank you!


It somehow fixed itself. I just load factory defaults in the bios -> test ->success => back to bios to load my profile -> test = success ! Time to drink and celebrate


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> I'm wishing to see 1933MHz+ silicon in one of our hands  . May the silicon gods smile on your new CPU  .





crakej said:


> Look fwd to seeing your results!
> 
> Do enjoy!





lordzed83 said:


> More toys Man we got loads of playing around ahead. Not to mention we are still on 1.0.0.2 Hope Friday we could have 1.0.0.3 of some sorts if not no problem TBH I'm quite happy with this 2501 atm.


Just installed the new 3800x! Load my OC profile and booted in to Windows. No issues so far. CPU @ Stock but RAM on 3800/1900 + TT! Clocks are nice to see 
Need to verify if the ram oc is still stable as before on the 3700x!

Edit: Screenshot... Loaded Manual OC profile but upped to 4.4Ghz and ran some tests. Looks promising. Haven't lowered voltage yet. Started high!


----------



## Xenozx

Victor Göhlin said:


> I followed the steps @oreonutz wrote and even left the computer without power for about 1 hour without the Cmos battery. Still no success, instantly C5 and don't even get time to go into bios. Tomorrow i will remove my twin tower heatsink and install the included wraith prism and try to troubleshoot my pc with the ram from my sister computer and try mine in hers to see if the problem is about the RAM or CPU/motherboard.
> 
> Trying to link a video i captured while trying to boot the computer for the 2nd time without cmos battery: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnHnuJAUDcE&feature=youtu.be


i couldnt see in the vid, but if you have 2 sticks of ram, make sure you have them in slot 1 and 3, not 0 and 2. This actually made a huge difference for me.


----------



## lordzed83

majestynl said:


> Just installed the new 3800x! Load my OC profile and booted in to Windows. No issues so far. CPU @ Stock but RAM on 3800/1900 + TT! Clocks are nice to see
> Need to verify if the ram oc is still stable as before on the 3700x!
> 
> Edit: Screenshot... Loaded Manual OC profile but upped to 4.4Ghz and ran some tests. Looks promising. Haven't lowered voltage yet. Started high!


looks like 3800 does have BETTER binned chiplets what You think ?? how is it compared to 3700x ??


----------



## kmellz

lordzed83 said:


> looks like 3800 does have BETTER binned chiplets what You think ?? how is it compared to 3700x ??


Definitely better binned, but of course some are still unluckly D: There's a thread on reddit from siliconlottery where they confirm the same, usually around 100mhz better than 3700x


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> looks like 3800 does have BETTER binned chiplets what You think ?? how is it compared to 3700x ??


I almost can say that for SURE! That's why i was tempted to buy the 3800x in first place. But they weren't available at launch-day/week!

Difference i saw till now:
- It boost higher than advertised on all cores @ stock
- It needs less voltage on all core boost situations! 
- It needs less voltage for Manual OC (clocks vs clocks)
- Less vdroop

More than happy. Will keep this one as my main! Will start my stability tests soon. After that i can check if i can go higher on FCLK


----------



## Victor Göhlin

Xenozx said:


> i couldnt see in the vid, but if you have 2 sticks of ram, make sure you have them in slot 1 and 3, not 0 and 2. This actually made a huge difference for me.


I have a kit of 2 sticks 8GB each which should be high binned samsung B-die specified to 3600MHz CL15 1,35V, i put them i slot 2 and 4 which was recommended by the manual as primary slots. 

As I wrote in my previous post, I will test a kit of Corsair Vengeance LP 16GB (2x8GB) CL16 with samsung B-die from my sisters computer tomorrow in my motherboard and try to run my sticks in her motherboard. I just have to go to the store and buy some cleaning alcohol for the thermal paste so I can assemble the stock cooler for easier access to the hardware during troubleshooting.

If i don't get any success i might take a 1,5h ride to a physical store of which i bought my RAM and CPU online from for troubleshooting support (499Sek ~45 Euros) so they can test my CPU and RAM in another motherboard and an older cpu in my motherboard with another kit of memory, then if none of my components are defective I will have to wait for Asus to get their ***** together and fix their RAM post issues in their latest bios for ryzen 3000 (I know Asus shouldn't take all the blame cuz of AMDs rushed launch with bugged Agesa but Asus unfortunately seems to have a bit more problems with their bioses for ryzen 3000 compared to the competition).


----------



## lordzed83

majestynl said:


> I almost can say that for SURE! That's why i was tempted to buy the 3800x in first place. But they weren't available at launch-day/week!
> 
> Difference i saw till now:
> - It boost higher than advertised on all cores @ stock
> - It needs less voltage on all core boost situations!
> - It needs less voltage for Manual OC (clocks vs clocks)
> - Less vdroop
> 
> More than happy. Will keep this one as my main! Will start my stability tests soon. After that i can check if i can go higher on FCLK


Great to hear. With the heatwave we got that Ycruncher Pi benchmark turned in to my nemesis if ya seen in opther topic. Had to drop 25mhz to maintain pass gadwwwww damn it I cant do more cause radiator does not even get warm after whole day of mining so since ambient went so much up cant do nuffing. At lest tested what does VDDG got to do with stability till i hit thermal protection hehehe. So I know it works and system will reboot with cpu temperature warning if **** hits the fan like my water pump dying.


----------



## lordzed83

Victor Göhlin said:


> I have 2 sticks 8GB each which should be high binned samsung B-die specified to 3600MHz CL15 1,35V, i put them i slot 2 and 4 which was recommended by the manual as primary slots.
> 
> As I wrote in my previous post, I will test a kit of Corsair Vengeance LP 16GB (2x8GB) CL16 with samsung B-die from my sisters computer tomorrow in my motherboard and try to run my sticks in her motherboard. I just have to go to the store and buy some cleaning alcohol for the thermal paste so I can assemble the stock cooler for easier access to the hardware during troubleshooting.
> 
> If i don't get any success i might take a 1,5h ride to a physical store of which i bought my RAM and CPU online from for troubleshooting support (499Sek ~45 Euros) so they can test my CPU and RAM in another motherboard and an older cpu in my motherboard with another kit of memory, then if none of my components are defective I will have to wait for Asus to get their ***** together and fix their RAM post issues in their latest bios for ryzen 3000 (I know Asus shouldn't take all the blame cuz of AMDs rushed launch with bugged Agesa but Asus unfortunately seems to have a bit more problems with their bioses for ryzen 3000 compared to the competition).


Well You do have 2 different memory sticks not pair of 2 so would not expect that it will EVER be fixed to work flawless on rated speeds. How You ended up with 2 different ones ?? Cause for 45 euros test you could like sell em on and buy 1 normal 2 stick kit.

for cleaning off thermal compound I use nail vanish its 'bit' stronger than alcohol


----------



## Victor Göhlin

lordzed83 said:


> Well You do have 2 different memory sticks not pair of 2 so would not expect that it will EVER be fixed to work flawless on rated speeds. How You ended up with 2 different ones ?? Cause for 45 euros test you could like sell em on and buy 1 normal 2 stick kit.
> 
> for cleaning off thermal compound I use nail vanish its 'bit' stronger than alcohol


Of course they're a kit 16GB total on 2x8GB sticks, https://www.gskill.com/product/165/...-ZDDR4-3600MHz-CL15-15-15-35-1.35V16GB-(2x8GB)


----------



## xeizo

Got my 3700X, everything worked from start, my 2x16GB dual rank sticks did 3600c16 1T at first try. 52.5MB/s bandwith and 69ns latency. The cpu hits 4.4 as it should, using Ryzen high performance it sits still at 4300MHz. Heavy load goes down to 4150-4175Mhz. Highest temp 77C during CB20. I use Ryzen balanced now and it's nice and quiet.

Looking around at different peoples benchmarks it's ridicilous exact 100MHz behind 3800X in all benchmarks, and performs exactly 100MHz less in performance. AMD looks to be really good at binning.

This will be an excellent cpu for my secondary rig when 3950X arrives, and will get me up to speed on to how these things behave


----------



## lordzed83

Victor Göhlin said:


> Of course they're a kit 16GB total on 2x8GB sticks, https://www.gskill.com/product/165/...-ZDDR4-3600MHz-CL15-15-15-35-1.35V16GB-(2x8GB)


aaaa That is Fantastic kit wanted one but they are EOL I think. If i remember thiose ware TOP b Die bin mem kits. But There is NO chance xmp will work. Does it boot up at all like with no settings ?? Tried A1 B1 slots in motherboard instead of A2 and B2 ??


----------



## oreonutz

Xenozx said:


> awesome! so just a question with this. is this mainly for setting an all core overclock? I take it XFR and PBO are disabled when you use this correct?
> 
> Last question, can I set my best core to say 4600 and would the system be smart enough to use that core for say games and stuff, and only utilize the other cores that maybe I set to 4250 when multi tasking?


Kind of. This is for setting a Per CCX Manual Overclock. So all it does is adjust the Overclock per CCX. So with the Script I provided without editing it first, if you ran it, it would set your First CCX to 4400Mhz, your Second CCX to 4400 Mhz, your 3rd CCX to 4350Mhz, and Your 4th CCX to 4250Mhz. This assumes you have a 3900x, if you have a lower SKU it would only set your first 2 CCX to 4400Mhz which is effectively just an all core overclock, but you can edit it to change the values, allowing you to have your First CCX at 4500Mhz and your second CCX at 4300Mhz as an example. This allows you to leave your VCore at a set value, In my case I set my Vcore manually to 1.3v, and then I found the highest I Could Clock each CCX before Losing Stability. So say you were locked at an all core overclock of 4300Mhz like I was at 1.3v. You actually may find that one of your CCX's was holding your all Core back, in my case it was my Last CCX that even had trouble holding a 4.3Ghz OC. So I dropped my Worst CCX to 4.25Ghz, Then I found I could Clock my First 2 CCX's to 4.4Ghz, and My 3rd CCX to 4.35 Ghz, and then run running my Blender AVX Workload for One Hour, I was able to remain stable the entire time. So Effectively I pushed my Performance even higher under the same Vcore. This also has the added benefit of having a higher Single Core OC for the CCX you can run at a Higher Clock, but it does depend on Windows Scheduler applying that load to the Higher Clocked CCX which isn't always the case unfortunately. But hopefully Windows will eventually adjust their Scheduler to apply the load based on these characteristics in the future.

You can not use this tool to set your Best Single Core to a certain Frequency, You have to apply the Same Frequency to the entire CCX. The way Zen2 was designed, the only way to Clock an Individual core higher in the same CCX would require the other Cores in that CCX to be at least 1Ghz Lower, so for that reason it is not feasible to only Clock One Core in a CCX to Given Frequency, instead you have to clock them all to a higher Frequency. I am still trying to wrap my head around this, there are people who understand it better, and therefore can explain it better than I. I am still confused because I can see an Individual Core Being Clocked Higher on a Single Core in a CCX while the Other Cores are only Clocked a little bit lower when under auto, but for right now with current tools, doing this manually doesn't seem to be possible.

Hope that answers your question, sorry I know its been about 12 hours, I had to get to work today, so I just now got back to the forums.


----------



## oreonutz

lordzed83 said:


> This is great 100% what I wanted/needed !!! +rep


You are very welcome! 

Before I devised this I reached out to @shamino1978 for help, because my previous script was much more buggy. And After I released this script early this morning, Shamino got back to me with a method of doing this built in to the tool. It achieves the same exact goal as my method, but is more efficient as it doesn't require my VBScript, and instead has a settings.xml file that applies your per CCX OC, automatically when opening the tool. I have not tested it yet, but I am assuming it gets same job done with less hassle. So after I test it, if @shamino1978 agrees, I will post that here as well.


----------



## oreonutz

Victor Göhlin said:


> I followed the steps @oreonutz wrote and even left the computer without power for about 1 hour without the Cmos battery. Still no success, instantly C5 and don't even get time to go into bios. Tomorrow i will remove my twin tower heatsink and install the included wraith prism and try to troubleshoot my pc with the ram from my sister computer and try mine in hers to see if the problem is about the RAM or CPU/motherboard.
> 
> Trying to link a video i captured while trying to boot the computer for the 2nd time without cmos battery: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnHnuJAUDcE&feature=youtu.be


I am sorry this didn't work for you, it does appear that either you have bad CPU, Bad CPU Mount, or the more likely scenario, your CPU Simply does not like your RAM. I would DEFINITELY Try using a different Kit, and if you don't have a different Kit immediately available to you, at least try each stick that you do have individually to see if that makes a difference. Also try reseating the RAM, as that surprisingly has been a problem more times then I would care to admit when trouble shooting no posts in the past with clients. Good Luck!


----------



## Victor Göhlin

lordzed83 said:


> aaaa That is Fantastic kit wanted one but they are EOL I think. If i remember thiose ware TOP b Die bin mem kits. But There is NO chance xmp will work. Does it boot up at all like with no settings ?? Tried A1 B1 slots in motherboard instead of A2 and B2 ??





oreonutz said:


> I am sorry this didn't work for you, it does appear that either you have bad CPU, Bad CPU Mount, or the more likely scenario, your CPU Simply does not like your RAM. I would DEFINITELY Try using a different Kit, and if you don't have a different Kit immediately available to you, at least try each stick that you do have individually to see if that makes a difference. Also try reseating the RAM, as that surprisingly has been a problem more times then I would care to admit when trouble shooting no posts in the past with clients. Good Luck!


The system havn't booted past postcode 15 followed my instant C5 anytime at all since first assembly, as I said before I will do some troubleshooting with the help of my sisters R5 1600, B350 and 16GB (2x8GB) computer later during the day to see if I can narrow the problem down to any specific component from my new build either MOBO, RAM or CPU


----------



## oreonutz

Victor Göhlin said:


> The system havn't booted past postcode 15 followed my instant C5 anytime at all since first assembly, as i said before i will do some troubleshooting with the help of my sisters R5 1600, B350 and 16GB (2x8GB) computer later during the day to see if I can narrow the problem down to any specific component from my new build either MOBO, RAM or CPU


Good Luck My Friend, I am sorry we weren't able to be more helpful to you. I have a feeling it will end up having something to do with your ram as that C5 Post Error Code usually has something to do with RAM, but hopefully it ends up being something easy to fix for you. Let us know how your troubleshooting works out tonight. Before tearing down your entire RIG I would focus on switching out your RAM as that does seem to be the most likely culprit. But you know what your doing. Good Luck!


----------



## harderthanfire

The PWM bug is really kicking my ass at the moment. Hoping next bios fixes that as my pump stopping all the time is just nuts. I have set it to 100% DC in bios so hoping that makes it not get impacted going forwards.


----------



## oreonutz

harderthanfire said:


> The PWM bug is really kicking my ass at the moment. Hoping next bios fixes that as my pump stopping all the time is just nuts. I have set it to 100% DC in bios so hoping that makes it not get impacted going forwards.


Someone earlier in this thread gave me a great tip, which was to set the Minimun Fan Speed on the Header that you plug your fan into. He also said if you plug your pump into one of your CHA Headers and set that 600RPM Low Speed Limit that it actually will default to full pump speed when the bug happens.

I also have that bug, And I set the 600RPM Limit on all my headers and now no matter what all my fans stay spinning at 600RPM even that that bug randomly kicks in.

But I didn't want to risk having my pump stop again, so I decided to plug it into a Molex connector instead, just to make sure it stayed on no matter what until Asus fixes this issue.


----------



## MacClipper

Relief is here... 



https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?112279


GL


----------



## gupsterg

majestynl said:


> I almost can say that for SURE! That's why i was tempted to buy the 3800x in first place. But they weren't available at launch-day/week!
> 
> Difference i saw till now:
> - It boost higher than advertised on all cores @ stock
> - It needs less voltage on all core boost situations!
> - It needs less voltage for Manual OC (clocks vs clocks)
> - Less vdroop
> 
> More than happy. Will keep this one as my main! Will start my stability tests soon. After that i can check if i can go higher on FCLK


Nice :thumb: .

Seem Silicon can vary a lot, few days ago I noted a thread on Reddit where a R5 3600 showed screenie of CPU hitting 1.5V at stock for 4.2GHz, mine is ~1.3V, even with PBO+200MHz and relaxed FIT it's ~1.44V.

Have you tried 1933MHz?



harderthanfire said:


> The PWM bug is really kicking my ass at the moment. Hoping next bios fixes that as my pump stopping all the time is just nuts. I have set it to 100% DC in bios so hoping that makes it not get impacted going forwards.


Previously only had it twice when ran Ryzen Master for say >3mins or so with other monitoring tools open. But also experienced it on an overnight run of HCI. As I had no log running, can't say when it occurred, only HWINFO was ever opened on that run prior to my making the screen capture video. WMV in this ZIP, rig had been in use since 21st midday with no real downtime, as that was when I targetted 3800MHz and went about testing it.



Spoiler


----------



## thegr8anand

Just in time as my C7H arrives. Hopefully fixes the issues been mentioned.


----------



## crakej

MacClipper said:


> Relief is here...
> 
> 
> 
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?112279
> 
> 
> GL


Testing now.


----------



## hurricane28

harderthanfire said:


> The PWM bug is really kicking my ass at the moment. Hoping next bios fixes that as my pump stopping all the time is just nuts. I have set it to 100% DC in bios so hoping that makes it not get impacted going forwards.


Sorry to hear man, i had the same problem on the Ch6 but never on the Ch7 as it has been "fixed". 

What id did to "solve" it is to turn down the system, pull the BIOS battery so that the pwm registers that went corrupt are empty, than hold the power button for like 5-10 seconds to be sure that the power is completely drained form the board and restart everything. That is what i did and the problem never occurred again.

In order to prevent this issue from happening again its best not to use more than one software to monitor the system. If you use hwinfo64 don't use anything else besides it. also, disable these programs from startup and start them manually. This way its less likely that things go wrong. I hope this helps. 

Good luck.


----------



## crakej

Quick update. I'm guessing they've injected 1003AB into the code that was going to be ABA - bios has Overdrive menu where it should be on Extreme tweaker. Seems more 'finished'

Boots up much quicker. Going to experiment with OCing now, but it's really hot so not going to be testing for hours.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Quick update. I'm guessing they've injected 1003AB into the code that was going to be ABA - bios has Overdrive menu where it should be on Extreme tweaker. Seems more 'finished'
> 
> Boots up much quicker. Going to experiment with OCing now, but it's really hot so not going to be testing for hours.


Damn im about to leave for work wont be able to flash and test for 8 houers. I woke up its 27c in my room ATM just 10am. Benching today ?? no point lol Well i can drop 50mhz and play like last night


----------



## crakej

VTTDDR is now being set/reporting properly.

VDDR SoC is showing as 1.1v - will need to check with meter to see if it spikes at boot time.

Have loaded my 3733 profile and seems to work, though might start again and see if this bios is OCing the same as 2501.


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> Damn im about to leave for work wont be able to flash and test for 8 houers. I woke up its 27c in my room ATM just 10am. Benching today ?? no point lol Well i can drop 50mhz and play like last night


Gutted for you man! I hate it when that happens!


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> Great to hear. With the heatwave we got that Ycruncher Pi benchmark turned in to my nemesis if ya seen in opther topic. Had to drop 25mhz to maintain pass gadwwwww damn it I cant do more cause radiator does not even get warm after whole day of mining so since ambient went so much up cant do nuffing. At lest tested what does VDDG got to do with stability till i hit thermal protection hehehe. So I know it works and system will reboot with cpu temperature warning if **** hits the fan like my water pump dying.


Yeap, was suprised it was that good!

LOL...yeah it was like 40c here in the Netherlands. I do have a AC so didn't effects my tests compared to earlier tests! 



harderthanfire said:


> The PWM bug is really kicking my ass at the moment. Hoping next bios fixes that as my pump stopping all the time is just nuts. I have set it to 100% DC in bios so hoping that makes it not get impacted going forwards.





oreonutz said:


> Someone earlier in this thread gave me a great tip, which was to set the Minimun Fan Speed on the Header that you plug your fan into. He also said if you plug your pump into one of your CHA Headers and set that 600RPM Low Speed Limit that it actually will default to full pump speed when the bug happens.
> 
> I also have that bug, And I set the 600RPM Limit on all my headers and now no matter what all my fans stay spinning at 600RPM even that that bug randomly kicks in.
> 
> But I didn't want to risk having my pump stop again, so I decided to plug it into a Molex connector instead, just to make sure it stayed on no matter what until Asus fixes this issue.


I didnt have any RPM bug before on my 3700x. After i installed the 3800x on same machine i got the RPM issue yesterday while i was benching 
Strange it never happened before but now in few hours i installed the new cpu i got all my fans at ZERO rpm. Dunno if its related but maybe it was just coincidence.

Anyways. I can assure you, setting 600RPM etc doesnt help. Cause mine where set correctly. I always have them on 600RPM!




gupsterg said:


> Nice :thumb: .
> 
> Seem Silicon can vary a lot, few days ago I noted a thread on Reddit where a R5 3600 showed screenie of CPU hitting 1.5V at stock for 4.2GHz, mine is ~1.3V, even with PBO+200MHz and relaxed FIT it's ~1.44V.
> 
> Have you tried 1933MHz?


Thanks! yeah that's true. It can vary a lot! No didnt try yet. Will do that today hopefully. Will let you know! I ran same Memory profiles. And this one also passed my profiles without any issue. So im still on 3800/1900 CL14


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Gutted for you man! I hate it when that happens!


was expecting this bios to land tomorrow as they usually do... Friday


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> was expecting this bios to land tomorrow as they usually do... Friday
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Lol! :laughings

Couldn't agree more!


----------



## Jaju123

crakej said:


> Quick update. I'm guessing they've injected 1003AB into the code that was going to be ABA - bios has Overdrive menu where it should be on Extreme tweaker. Seems more 'finished'
> 
> Boots up much quicker. Going to experiment with OCing now, but it's really hot so not going to be testing for hours.



Is this a beta BIOS or official/stable?


----------



## Connor Vickers

Hey guys!

In need of a little advice. I upgraded from a 6700k Z170-A to a 3700x/CH7 and since making the jump my GPU (STRIX 2080) is now very loud on boot. The middle fan hits 100% speed during POST. This never happened on the old motherboard.


Has anyone managed to fix this behavior? 
Alternatively, does anyone know if I can plug that fan on the gpu into a fan header extension cable and attach it to my internal fan controller. (Should fix it and I can base the RPM on the GPU's thermal sensor temp.

It's nitpicking but its also revealed that the Strix's fan bearings have gone so I'm trying to avoid an RMA 

Cheers!


----------



## lordzed83

Jaju123 said:


> Is this a beta BIOS or official/stable?


All bioes atm are beta on all motherboards


----------



## lordzed83

Connor Vickers said:


> Hey guys!
> 
> In need of a little advice. I upgraded from a 6700k Z170-A to a 3700x/CH7 and since making the jump my GPU (STRIX 2080) is now very loud on boot. The middle fan hits 100% speed during POST. This never happened on the old motherboard.
> 
> 
> Has anyone managed to fix this behavior?
> Alternatively, does anyone know if I can plug that fan on the gpu into a fan header extension cable and attach it to my internal fan controller. (Should fix it and I can base the RPM on the GPU's thermal sensor temp.
> 
> It's nitpicking but its also revealed that the Strix's fan bearings have gone so I'm trying to avoid an RMA
> 
> Cheers!


Watercool it = no fan = no problem 

I dont think there would be a solution to this. Hooking up to motherboard would work as workaround. but then card wont control fan speed


----------



## crakej

I've had 3 crashes on new bios using profile from previous version. I've now let the bios fill in the secondary and tertiary timings which is does differently to 2501.

I'm going to have to re-build this profile from scratch see just how different things are.


----------



## xeizo

Boost doesn't work properly with 2602, as reported from other vendors with 1.0.0.3AB. My cpu can't get a single MHz above 4275Mz. On 2501 it happily boosted to 4400MHz on almost all cores. Also Vcore is stuck at 1.48-1.5V using the Ryzen power plans, didn't happen with 2501, using Windows balanced vcore moves as it should.

Memory works the same, and it booted at first try with the same settings, but there is a performance regression.


----------



## neikosr0x

Just installed the 2602 and it looks like neither CPUZ and HWiNFO64 are showing the correct values.


----------



## xeizo

neikosr0x said:


> Just installed the 2602 and it looks like neither CPUZ and HWiNFO64 are showing the correct values.


I guess HWINFO64 do show the correct values, because they are worse, and performance IS worse in benchmarks.


----------



## crakej

xeizo said:


> I guess HWINFO64 do show the correct values, because they are worse, and performance IS worse in benchmarks.


I'm finding this bios very unstable with my previous settings.

I think you're going to have to re-tune your timings. One example is tWRRD - 2501 was setting this to 1. 2602 does not, it looks like it's back to what we thought it would be - 2 to 4 depending on frequency.


----------



## xeizo

On the flip side so does Ryzen Master work, it didn't with 2501 for me. And one interesting thing is PBO is not activated according to Ryzen Master, it's only in Auto mode, even though I activated PBO in bios. Have to re-check in the bios.


----------



## majestynl

Connor Vickers said:


> Hey guys!
> 
> In need of a little advice. I upgraded from a 6700k Z170-A to a 3700x/CH7 and since making the jump my GPU (STRIX 2080) is now very loud on boot. The middle fan hits 100% speed during POST. This never happened on the old motherboard.
> 
> 
> Has anyone managed to fix this behavior?
> Alternatively, does anyone know if I can plug that fan on the gpu into a fan header extension cable and attach it to my internal fan controller. (Should fix it and I can base the RPM on the GPU's thermal sensor temp.
> 
> It's nitpicking but its also revealed that the Strix's fan bearings have gone so I'm trying to avoid an RMA
> 
> Cheers!





lordzed83 said:


> Watercool it = no fan = no problem
> 
> .. but then card wont control fan speed


He want to handle the fan speed by GPU Thermal sensor. That's exactly what the cards also is doing.. So no issue if you ask me! Its a workaround so it will do the job!





crakej said:


> I've had 3 crashes on new bios using profile from previous version. I've now let the bios fill in the secondary and tertiary timings which is does differently to 2501.
> 
> I'm going to have to re-build this profile from scratch see just how different things are.


I hope its corrupted profiles readings. I will wait for flashing


----------



## crakej

I have a flickering code d3 when I run RM. Didn't do that before! Stops flickering when I exit.

Hopefully the profile is not compatible as menus have changed. It's still not stable with the bios setting tertiary timings, but it is better.

Memory training does work, but I've not had to use safeboot yet so not sure if that's working yet.

Boost isn't going higher than 4275. RM is showing SoC as 1.1 and VDDG as 1.148v! CLDO_VDDP is 1.0979 so that needs sorting out like 2501.

ProcODT now defaults to 40Ohms, used to be 60Ohms

Every time I re-boot, it does memory training again. Will update if I find cause.

PE modes are there, but I have no idea how to use them.

With limited testing, I still can't attain 3800MTs/1900MHz 

Safebot works well - just hold power button in until system is off, then turn straight back on for safe mode. No removing batteries or anything else required!

Cold/hard resets cause mem training to happen again - sometimes.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> I've had 3 crashes on new bios using profile from previous version. I've now let the bios fill in the secondary and tertiary timings which is does differently to 2501.
> 
> I'm going to have to re-build this profile from scratch see just how different things are.


Ill see how my timings work or they dont. I worked my profile out different way so allot of timings are AUTO ones as Manual tight ware not giving GAINS


----------



## xeizo

Back on 2501, performance is better.


----------



## lordzed83

xeizo said:


> Back on 2501, performance is better.


You should say Performance is better with OLD settings. As always its start from almost 0 when new bios comes out.
Hows memory latency ?? 3d mark score ?? CB20 score Geekbench score ??


----------



## MrPhilo

xeizo said:


> On the flip side so does Ryzen Master work, it didn't with 2501 for me. And one interesting thing is PBO is not activated according to Ryzen Master, it's only in Auto mode, even though I activated PBO in bios. Have to re-check in the bios.


Did you have Ryzen Master driver wasn't installed correctly error? When you try to open previously.

I had that, I had to delete the old registry in the Ryzen Master folder on Regedit and it fixed it. It's on /AMDHelp subreddit


----------



## xeizo

lordzed83 said:


> You should say Performance is better with OLD settings. As always its start from almost 0 when new bios comes out.
> Hows memory latency ?? 3d mark score ?? CB20 score Geekbench score ??


I did not try everything, but I tried a lot, and no benchmark was on par with 2501 no matter which setting. Least difference was actually memory, which performed about the same.
I'm at 68.5ns now for my dual rank C17 memory @3600c16 1T, which I feel is ok since it's not OC dream memory.

On both bioses Windows Balanced is to be preferred, at least with this heatwave, as temperatures are lower using it.

I started using 3700X yesterday with 2501 and scores where ok, with 2602 every score had regressed and I couldn't compensate for it using, stock, auto, PBO or whatever. Back on 2501 is back as before.


----------



## xeizo

MrPhilo said:


> Did you have Ryzen Master driver wasn't installed correctly error? When you try to open previously.
> 
> I had that, I had to delete the old registry in the Ryzen Master folder on Regedit and it fixed it. It's on /AMDHelp subreddit


Thanks, will try that as Ryzen Master died anyway, even before I was back on 2501. On 2501 it has always been a no go.

edit. Yes, it worked!


----------



## lordzed83

xeizo said:


> I did not try everything, but I tried a lot, and no benchmark was on par with 2501 no matter which setting. Least difference was actually memory, which performed about the same.
> I'm at 68.5ns now for my dual rank C17 memory @3600c16 1T, which I feel is ok since it's not OC dream memory.
> 
> On both bioses Windows Balanced is to be preferred, at least with this heatwave, as temperatures are lower using it.
> 
> I started using 3700X yesterday with 2501 and scores where ok, with 2602 every score had regressed and I couldn't compensate for it using, stock, auto, PBO or whatever. Back on 2501 is back as before.


well this could be due to heat  Ill drop my clock by 50mhz run 3 benchmarks or so get scores down before upgrade. That on Full Manual setting.


----------



## lordzed83

Got home its 31c in here heatwave stress test PASS 

















I let her cool down a bit before 3 bench runs at 4250 and new bios flash time


----------



## crakej

It's too hot to do too much testing today.

So far I have to agree performance and reliability were a bit better for me on 2501, but there are lots of new settings still to investigate....


----------



## lordzed83

xeizo said:


> I did not try everything, but I tried a lot, and no benchmark was on par with 2501 no matter which setting. Least difference was actually memory, which performed about the same.
> I'm at 68.5ns now for my dual rank C17 memory @3600c16 1T, which I feel is ok since it's not OC dream memory.
> 
> On both bioses Windows Balanced is to be preferred, at least with this heatwave, as temperatures are lower using it.
> 
> I started using 3700X yesterday with 2501 and scores where ok, with 2602 every score had regressed and I couldn't compensate for it using, stock, auto, PBO or whatever. Back on 2501 is back as before.


You are Right had a look and everything scoress les and runs worse  @crakej this bios emmm how ya say it emmm Sucks ?? ill run memtest to check if its ok but in general 1 hour play with it reboots weird trains memory weird..


----------



## Bart

LOL at that pic Zed, ahahaha! It's just like that here in Canada's capital too, only add about 12C more for the humidity. Thank the god I don't believe in for cool basement and swimming pools!


----------



## mtrai

I am back on the 2501 as well. No issues booting but nothing I did would regain the lost performance on the CPU. Max it would all core boost to was 4116 on 2602 but on 2501 my cpu boost up to 4363 on all cores and sometimes 4392 on 3 to 5 cores. I was not seeing any real new options and in fact less in the CBS menu, only 5 or 6 options now.

However you can use use saved bios .cmo profile between bios now. I used my save profile from 2502 and also tested the previous bios .cmo.


----------



## kmellz

New bios seems to be working fine here, doesn't seem to be any performance loss. At least not noticeable. Only weird thing so far is rebooting, it starts to reboot, but then shuts off instead and boots up..
Other than that I tested some more ram stuff since new bios and agesa etc, no changes from what I can tell in ability to get better timings/mhz. But figured out something that probably worked on previous bios too, just hadn't been bothered changing the main timings one by one, just went all, or cas+/- three others+/- separately. Turns out I can run 16-18-16-16 with previous tweaked subtimings! Always something


----------



## lordzed83

https://videocardz.com/newz/something-gigabyte-msi-and-amd-do-not-want-you-to-see

GIGA**** and M**** my vrm peaked at 64 when i was pulling those 200w yesterday with 28c ambient.
This made my day hahaahahahaha


----------



## lordzed83

kmellz said:


> New bios seems to be working fine here, doesn't seem to be any performance loss. At least not noticeable. Only weird thing so far is rebooting, it starts to reboot, but then shuts off instead and boots up..
> Other than that I tested some more ram stuff since new bios and agesa etc, no changes from what I can tell in ability to get better timings/mhz. But figured out something that probably worked on previous bios too, just hadn't been bothered changing the main timings one by one, just went all, or cas+/- three others+/- separately. Turns out I can run 16-18-16-16 with previous tweaked subtimings! Always something


There is but small one around 50-60 points in CB20 and 80 in geekbench single.


----------



## mtrai

kmellz said:


> New bios seems to be working fine here, doesn't seem to be any performance loss. At least not noticeable. Only weird thing so far is rebooting, it starts to reboot, but then shuts off instead and boots up..
> Other than that I tested some more ram stuff since new bios and agesa etc, no changes from what I can tell in ability to get better timings/mhz. But figured out something that probably worked on previous bios too, just hadn't been bothered changing the main timings one by one, just went all, or cas+/- three others+/- separately. Turns out I can run 16-18-16-16 with previous tweaked subtimings! Always something


What were you running your CPU clocks at before and after? This info would very helpful. Essentially PBO and XFR are no longer working correctly with 6102. So if you were only using certain things you would not see any improvements or down grades. Also you did not mention what your ram is clocked to or what CPU you have. These are all very important to look at the entire situation. Especially those of us that push everything to the absolute limits. IF you are not pushing that hard it might not be noticeable. Nothing against you.

As I said my 2700X runs at 4316 on all cores under load and will boost to 4393 on anywhere from 3 to 5 cores on 2501. Also I run my ram daily at 3568 with main timings of 14 14 14 14 28 32 280. On bios 2602 all core boost to only 4116 and that 200 Mhz makes a huge difference in performance. Also the max single core was also showing 4116 which is a different issue.

I even went through the trouble of modding the bios to see if it that would help. Nope. Also the CBS menu only has about 4 or 6 options versus what it used to have.


----------



## kmellz

lordzed83 said:


> There is but small one around 50-60 points in CB20 and 80 in geekbench single.


Checked it again now, does indeed seem to be a small one, 40 points less



mtrai said:


> What were you running your CPU clocks at before and after? This info would very helpful. Essentially PBO and XFR are no longer working correctly with 6102. So if you were only using certain things you would not see any improvements or down grades. Also you did not mention what your ram is clocked to or what CPU you have. These are all very important to look at the entire situation. Especially those of us that push everything to the absolute limits. IF you are not pushing that hard it might not be noticeable. Nothing against you.
> 
> As I said my 2700X runs at 4316 on all cores under load and will boost to 4393 on anywhere from 3 to 5 cores on 2501. Also I run my ram daily at 3568 with main timings of 14 14 14 14 28 32 280. On bios 2602 all core boost to only 4116 and that 200 Mhz makes a huge difference in performance. Also the max single core was also showing 4116 which is a different issue.
> 
> I even went through the trouble of modding the bios to see if it that would help. Nope. Also the CBS menu only has about 4 or 6 options versus what it used to have.


Not sure if you've hidden it or something, but you can see my specs in my sig, it's a manual 4.4ghz oc. As per previous quote answer, was indeed a small ~1% drop in score it seems. Only difference now from before is I'm actually running better memory timings, so guess that might be why my drop is a bit lower.


----------



## mtrai

kmellz said:


> Checked it again now, does indeed seem to be a small one, 40 points less
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure if you've hidden it or something, but you can see my specs in my sig, it's a manual 4.4ghz oc. As per previous quote answer, was indeed a small ~1% drop in score it seems. Only difference now from before is I'm actually running better memory timings, so guess that might be why my drop is a bit lower.


Okay just gonna suggest trying this...dropping the ram speed to 3600 but using something 14 14 14 14 28 32 280


----------



## lester007

Im just curious if anyone is running 4x16gb kit? Bdie etc.
What kind of frequency you guys getting?
I might buy, currently running a 2x8gb b die


----------



## xeizo

lester007 said:


> Im just curious if anyone is running 4x16gb kit? Bdie etc.
> What kind of frequency you guys getting?
> I might buy, currently running a 2x8gb b die


Not yet, but I'm running 2x16 dual rank which would be the same for the IMC as 4x16 single rank, I suppose the newest sticks will be available as single rank due to higher density chips. Anyway, 3600 16-16-16-36-56-1T was a breeze. Worked at first try and is membench stable. I haven't even tried higher yet, as I'm already on the so called "sweet spot" for Zen2. I have no high hopes for c14, since dual rank and C17 sticks but I'm happy as is. Will try tighter timings later, it's time consuming rebooting a zillion times


----------



## lester007

xeizo said:


> Not yet, but I'm running 2x16 dual rank which would be the same for the IMC as 4x16 single rank, I suppose the newest sticks will be available as single rank due to higher density chips. Anyway, 3600 16-16-16-36-56-1T was a breeze. Worked at first try and is membench stable. I haven't even tried higher yet, as I'm already on the so called "sweet spot" for Zen2. I have no high hopes for c14, since dual rank and C17 sticks but I'm happy as is. Will try tighter timings later, it's time consuming rebooting a zillion times


thanks for your input, I bought a 4x8 kit 3600CL16, hopefully coming tomorrow. I'm thinking to return it and get 4x16gb 3200CL14 instead.
Right now im playing with 3800MHz cl16 seems stable so far.
and also I'll tweak the dram volt later Lol


----------



## Axaion

lordzed83 said:


> https://videocardz.com/newz/something-gigabyte-msi-and-amd-do-not-want-you-to-see
> 
> GIGA**** and M**** my vrm peaked at 64 when i was pulling those 200w yesterday with 28c ambient.
> This made my day hahaahahahaha


Its going to make your day less when you see buildzoid ramble about it though, asus seems to have let their marketing department run wild


----------



## christosjr1

So the big question for me is this: which is the best bios for my 2700x and cjr 2x16?


----------



## hurricane28

Axaion said:


> Its going to make your day less when you see buildzoid ramble about it though, asus seems to have let their marketing department run wild


Ye, its nothing new actually, they do it for quite some time now but not as extreme like this. It makes them look even worse as Assus has the most problems out of all the motherboards line up. 

hardware wise its very very good, except for the IT sensor of course.


----------



## hurricane28

christosjr1 said:


> So the big question for me is this: which is the best bios for my 2700x and cjr 2x16?


It depends, but on my system 2406 runs fine. Its trial and error basically, just try some of the latest BIOS and test for yourself.


----------



## lordzed83

Axaion said:


> Its going to make your day less when you see buildzoid ramble about it though, asus seems to have let their marketing department run wild


Awww cool link ill have a look. Amd pissed off cayse its 3950x init


----------



## Victor Göhlin

oreonutz said:


> Good Luck My Friend, I am sorry we weren't able to be more helpful to you. I have a feeling it will end up having something to do with your ram as that C5 Post Error Code usually has something to do with RAM, but hopefully it ends up being something easy to fix for you. Let us know how your troubleshooting works out tonight. Before tearing down your entire RIG I would focus on switching out your RAM as that does seem to be the most likely culprit. But you know what your doing. Good Luck!



I'm done with my troubleshooting it all ended up being a dead stick of RAM, once i removed the stick who was blocked by my twin tower heatsink the computer could boot without problem. The faulty stick didn't work in any slot on either mine or my sisters motherboard and the other stick in the kit worked perfectly fine in both computers.

My sisters Corsair Vengeance LP 2x8GB kit worked perfectly fine in my computer with both sticks installed. Even managed to boot with them and pass a memtest at 3733 @1.4V with stock XMP CL16 over their stock 3200MHz CL16 (B-die).

I have started a RMA with my online retailer but it probably takes 20-30 days before they get a new shipment of this kit so i will go to my local store and grab a cheap 16GB 3200MHz kit to use until i get a replacement for my faulty kit.


----------



## thegr8anand

I just received my C7H. I don't know what bios its on but its April 19 make. Can i straight flash this bios 2602 with bios flashback or go one by one? For 3900x.​


----------



## crakej

thegr8anand said:


> I just received my C7H. I don't know what bios its on but its April 19 make. Can i straight flash this bios 2602 with bios flashback or go one by one? For 3900x.​


2601 is a beta bios.

You can upgrade to whichever one you want straight away. I'd go for 2501 if you want it to just work. If you're OCing you might like 2602 but there are a few bugs, and some report loss of performance.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> 2601 is a beta bios.
> 
> You can upgrade to whichever one you want straight away. I'd go for 2501 if you want it to just work. If you're OCing you might like 2602 but there are a few bugs, and some report loss of performance.


There's a 2601 and a 2602?


----------



## nick name

Has anyone seen any freezes in Windows or in BIOS with a 2700X (or other Ryzen 2000) on BIOS 2602?


----------



## lordzed83

nick name said:


> Has anyone seen any freezes in Windows or in BIOS with a 2700X (or other Ryzen 2000) on BIOS 2602?


~

Ill be honest. I dont think Zen1 and Zen+ owners Should use new bioses. There is nothing to Gain loose if anything. 
If I was You id Flash Version 2203 and dont bother with New beta/alpha bioses for next 6 months. Thats if You are not in it for Fun of testing and tweeking. Microcode for Zen+ was basically DONE .


----------



## nick name

lordzed83 said:


> ~
> 
> Ill be honest. I dont think Zen1 and Zen+ owners Should use new bioses. There is nothing to Gain loose if anything.
> If I was You id Flash Version 2203 and dont bother with New beta/alpha bioses for next 6 months. Thats if You are not in it for Fun of testing and tweeking. Microcode for Zen+ was basically DONE .


There were some advancements. I went back to 1201 for fun and I couldn't even POST with the settings I run now. And it was with keyed in values and not a profile.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> There's a 2601 and a 2602?


Lol - no, just 2602.......typo!


----------



## AvengedRobix

christosjr1 said:


> So the big question for me is this: which is the best bios for my 2700x and cjr 2x16?


24xx


----------



## VPII

Okay, Gigabyte is poor to say the least so Im back using my c7h. I do however sit with a problem.

Firstly all went well sfter installing the 3900X, memory at 3600 with if 1800 no issue. 

I wanted to test actual boost at stock so I dropped my manual oc for stock and then qpost 22 hang after reset qpost c5. Found thst defsult memory worked okay but slow.

After many walk arounds I got dcop for my ddr4 3200 to work. All good, but at present I get random win 10 error shut downs except for when using default memory.

Now I have the option to test with either 3900x or 3600 which Ill do tomorrow. But any idea of what to do would be great. Thanks.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## hifi12

Hi,

I recently purchased a 3900x+CH7 combo and I got very bad temps (45-60 idle 95º in aida64 and prime95 at stock settings)

I've seen on Reddit and other forums that it may be due to buggy bios. Ryzen master says core voltage vary a bit around 1.4V (it varies more in CPU-Z) and PPT stays at 7% when I run prime95 (where temp go straight up to 95º). I got slightly better temps with a -0.1 offset.

I tried bios 2406 and 2501.

What I don't understand is that you all guys seems to be fine with this motherboard, so I wonder if the problem really is the bios. I tried 2 different cooler. The stock one and the grand macho rt with the same luck. I tried to reapply thermal paste 3 times.

Do you have any idea what I could do to improve the situation?
I'm thinking of sending back everything, which will be sad because of the lack of 3900x stock. But I can't offer to wait an hypothetical improvement while my RMA windows is closing.

Thanks for your help


----------



## xeizo

Memory looks good on bios 2501, dual rank and all


----------



## harderthanfire

hifi12 said:


> Hi,
> 
> I recently purchased a 3900x+CH7 combo and I got very bad temps (45-60 idle 95º in aida64 and prime95 at stock settings)
> 
> I've seen on Reddit and other forums that it may be due to buggy bios. Ryzen master says core voltage vary a bit around 1.4V (it varies more in CPU-Z) and PPT stays at 7% when I run prime95 (where temp go straight up to 95º). I got slightly better temps with a -0.1 offset.
> 
> I tried bios 2406 and 2501.
> 
> What I don't understand is that you all guys seems to be fine with this motherboard, so I wonder if the problem really is the bios. I tried 2 different cooler. The stock one and the grand macho rt with the same luck. I tried to reapply thermal paste 3 times.
> 
> Do you have any idea what I could do to improve the situation?
> I'm thinking of sending back everything, which will be sad because of the lack of 3900x stock. But I can't offer to wait an hypothetical improvement while my RMA windows is closing.
> 
> Thanks for your help



I get similar temps to those on stock settings and I'm running water cooling.


Undervolting or manually overclocking per CCX are what keep my temps in control.


Also make sure you are using the Ryzen Balanced power plan in windows and that in the advanced settings of the plan the lower limit for cpu is set to 0%, mine defaulted to 90% for some reason.


----------



## lordzed83

nick name said:


> There were some advancements. I went back to 1201 for fun and I couldn't even POST with the settings I run now. And it was with keyed in values and not a profile.


Ye but why 1201 not the 2203??


----------



## lordzed83

hifi12 said:


> Hi,
> 
> I recently purchased a 3900x+CH7 combo and I got very bad temps (45-60 idle 95º in aida64 and prime95 at stock settings)
> 
> I've seen on Reddit and other forums that it may be due to buggy bios. Ryzen master says core voltage vary a bit around 1.4V (it varies more in CPU-Z) and PPT stays at 7% when I run prime95 (where temp go straight up to 95º). I got slightly better temps with a -0.1 offset.
> 
> I tried bios 2406 and 2501.
> 
> What I don't understand is that you all guys seems to be fine with this motherboard, so I wonder if the problem really is the bios. I tried 2 different cooler. The stock one and the grand macho rt with the same luck. I tried to reapply thermal paste 3 times.
> 
> Do you have any idea what I could do to improve the situation?
> I'm thinking of sending back everything, which will be sad because of the lack of 3900x stock. But I can't offer to wait an hypothetical improvement while my RMA windows is closing.
> 
> Thanks for your help


Mate sorry to break it to you. This is NORMAL with 3900x . install hwinfo start prime and have a look at tdie i bet its 105 ot so and have a look in actual voltage after v drop.

People are like its 1.4!!! Reality after v dropits more like 1.320. Generally i noticed that there is brick wall with bew cpu design. Cant get heat out to ihs fast enough. I get 15c difference of cpu temp and tdie temp. Thie heats up faster in cache heavy workloads.


Tltr. You could put3 coolers at once in thus 3900x and it wont be cooler. But if its stable does it matter?? Im using liquid metal even this does not help much.


----------



## thegr8anand

Can you delid 3900x for Liquid Metal?


----------



## harderthanfire

Off to OCUK to get a new case and some conductonaut tomorrow so hopefully get some better temps. I doubt it though, the 3900X is a beast.


As for delidding, no point as the IHS is soldered so pretty good conductivity anyway.


----------



## thegr8anand

So conductonaut for your cpu cooler?


----------



## nick name

lordzed83 said:


> Ye but why 1201 not the 2203??


Because after 1201 is when the new ComboPi AGESA arrived.


----------



## harderthanfire

thegr8anand said:


> So conductonaut for your cpu cooler?



Yeah - hoping it makes a little difference


----------



## lester007

xeizo said:


> Memory looks good on bios 2501, dual rank and all


awesome!, i'm liking my 3800MHz oc on my ram so far
hopefully i get decent oc on my new 4x8gb tridentz royal, just came in today and it's beautiful kit


----------



## lordzed83

harderthanfire said:


> Yeah - hoping it makes a little difference


Dont think so but worth a benchmark. Of ya do it run hmm dunno geekbench before and after and cb20 before and after. If it got any performance impact besides thermals. I think all here would be interested to see if it helps. Im on liquid ultra cause conductonaut was out of stock and been using itsince came out


----------



## Axaion

xeizo said:


> Memory looks good on bios 2501, dual rank and all


this really makes me want to fiddle around with my flareX kit..


----------



## VPII

VPII said:


> Okay, Gigabyte is poor to say the least so Im back using my c7h. I do however sit with a problem.
> 
> Firstly all went well sfter installing the 3900X, memory at 3600 with if 1800 no issue.
> 
> I wanted to test actual boost at stock so I dropped my manual oc for stock and then qpost 22 hang after reset qpost c5. Found thst defsult memory worked okay but slow.
> 
> After many walk arounds I got dcop for my ddr4 3200 to work. All good, but at present I get random win 10 error shut downs except for when using default memory.
> 
> Now I have the option to test with either 3900x or 3600 which Ill do tomorrow. But any idea of what to do would be great. Thanks.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


Okay, just to drop some info on my issue. It appears that my bios was buggered. Did a flash back and all good even at 3533mhz memory now. Testing mdmory to check stability. If all good Ill save the profile and see if I can get 3600 mem and 1800 if going again. Must be voltages as 3533 gave c5 error untill I changed soc v to 1.025 and vddg to 0.975 from auto.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## 1usmus

* July 29, I will introduce to the world new DRAM Calculator for Ryzen 1.6.0 *

You will receive full support for Zen 2, X570, updated presets, new features, training tips for x399, and of course the new version of MEMbench (Custom and Random latency tests).
Stay in touch


----------



## untouchable247

Defninitely my last ASUS motherboard, too many issues, always something wrong with bios/compatability. Ram compatabilty improved with ryzen 3000? Maybe but not on my CH VII, 2700x could run my flare x 3200 cl14 ram at 3466 cl14 for some time after months and months of issues and broken bios versions. 3700x with bios 2501 can't even post with xmp profile. Ram boot voltage is the problem? No, set it to 1.45, works one time, next boot attempt C5 again. Clear cmos. Again and again and again.

1003AB bios is better? No, not really, ram training is back, had this issue for a long time with 2700x and now it's back with the 3700x. No matter what my ram timings or voltage are, it's stuck at training for first boot. Have to turn off psu, restart and get lucky to boot. Not to mention ridiculous high cpu temps with this bios.


That's what I paid for? Sorry ASUS, never again. Borken pieces of trash firmware.


----------



## enthilzar

Well I changed my C6H -> C7H.
RAM sticks used:
2x8GB G.Skill Trident Z 3600CL16 + 2x8GB G.Skill Trident Z 4133CL17
CPU: AMD 3900x

Now the "fun" part:
Using my old 2700x and the RAM works in C6H.
Using 3900x and 4 RAM sticks works in C6H (3600CL14).
Using 2700x with an pre Ryzen3000 BIOS works in C7H with the RAM sticks.
BUT: Using the 3900x (also 2700x) with C7H Post Ryzen3000 BIOS (tried all BIOS Version, also the 2602 Beta) is only working with 1 single RAM stick. If I try to use 2 or more: C5 error.

Tried to:
- Set vdimm boot, vddp, vsoc vdimm voltage
- different BIOS versions (flashback method)
- lower frequency (1333Mhz)
- reflashed and resetted BIOS multiple times
- using different slots

I suppose I am stucked with 1 DIMM for now 😞
(Idea of going back to C6H would take another 1hour+ for switching hardware)


----------



## neikosr0x

1usmus said:


> * July 29, I will introduce to the world new DRAM Calculator for Ryzen 1.6.0 *
> 
> You will receive full support for Zen 2, X570, updated presets, new features, training tips for x399, and of course the new version of MEMbench (Custom and Random latency tests).
> Stay in touch


OMG bro! thank you so much!


----------



## crakej

enthilzar said:


> Well I changed my C6H -> C7H.
> RAM sticks used:
> 2x8GB G.Skill Trident Z 3600CL16 + 2x8GB G.Skill Trident Z 4133CL17
> CPU: AMD 3900x
> 
> Now the "fun" part:
> Using my old 2700x and the RAM works in C6H.
> Using 3900x and 4 RAM sticks works in C6H (3600CL14).
> Using 2700x with an pre Ryzen3000 BIOS works in C7H with the RAM sticks.
> BUT: Using the 3900x (also 2700x) with C7H Post Ryzen3000 BIOS (tried all BIOS Version, also the 2602 Beta) is only working with 1 single RAM stick. If I try to use 2 or more: C5 error.
> 
> Tried to:
> - Set vdimm boot, vddp, vsoc vdimm voltage
> - different BIOS versions (flashback method)
> - lower frequency (1333Mhz)
> - reflashed and resetted BIOS multiple times
> - using different slots
> 
> I suppose I am stucked with 1 DIMM for now 😞
> (Idea of going back to C6H would take another 1hour+ for switching hardware)


Using both kits together isn't likely to work. It worked on the CH6 because you're lucky, and it uses different topology for the slots.

Pick which kit you're going to use and put them in the proper slots. Enter the primary timings manually. Enter the voltages (SoC needs to be set (in millivolts, so 1.068 is 1068) in the AMD OC menu in the Advanced tab in bios)

Try booting.

Bios 2602 is beta, and has problems, but memory training works well (even if it does do it every time I boot!). 2501 is more stable, but training is not good so stick to the primary timings on your memory.

Failing that, just boot at default settings. Better bios is coming.

Hope this helps!


----------



## enthilzar

crakej said:


> Using both kits together isn't likely to work. It worked on the CH6 because you're lucky, and it uses different topology for the slots.
> 
> Pick which kit you're going to use and put them in the proper slots. Enter the primary timings manually. Enter the voltages (SoC needs to be set (in millivolts, so 1.068 is 1068) in the AMD OC menu in the Advanced tab in bios)
> 
> Try booting.
> 
> Bios 2602 is beta, and has problems, but memory training works well (even if it does do it every time I boot!). 2501 is more stable, but training is not good so stick to the primary timings on your memory.
> 
> Failing that, just boot at default settings. Better bios is coming.
> 
> Hope this helps!



Normally it doesn't matter if you use t-topology or daisy chain. The sticks should work on both boards.
In fact I used them on a prime x370-pro (t-top; 3200CL14;1700x), prime x470-pro (daisy chain 3333CL14,2700x), C6H (t-top, 3480CL14,2700x/3600CL14,3900x) and on the C7H (daisy chain, t-top, 3333CL14,2700x).
So if they work or not should not be really a question if it is a daisy chain or t-top board. You just get different max freq.


But as you said, I already tested the stick one by one (to be honest every stick in every combination, even mixed; in the proper slots; well in every slot combination).


Didn't try to set soc in this menu (just in the normal ai tweaker vsoc 1.1v), thanks fo this hint  Will try it.



I already tried 24xx, 25xx and 26xx (beta) bios, all showed the same bug.


----------



## crakej

enthilzar said:


> Normally it doesn't matter if you use t-topology or daisy chain. The sticks should work on both boards.
> In fact I used them on a prime x370-pro (t-top; 3200CL14;1700x), prime x470-pro (daisy chain 3333CL14,2700x), C6H (t-top, 3480CL14,2700x/3600CL14,3900x) and on the C7H (daisy chain, t-top, 3333CL14,2700x).
> So if they work or not should not be really a question if it is a daisy chain or t-top board. You just get different max freq.
> 
> But as you said, I already tested the stick one by one (to be honest every stick in every combination, even mixed; in the proper slots; well in every slot combination).
> 
> Didn't try to set soc in this menu (just in the normal ai tweaker vsoc 1.1v), thanks fo this hint  Will try it.
> 
> I already tried 24xx, 25xx and 26xx (beta) bios, all showed the same bug.


You probably don't need as much as 1.1v for 2 sticks, not sure about 4. You have been very lucky with mixing the kits - it often does not work at all. With Matisse, I would just try with 2 for now.

Did you try just entering the primaries? like 14 16 14 14 28 - rest on auto. Or select DOCP, go into timings and put everything to auto under the primaries. Make sure VDDG is about 0.040 less than SoC - you might be able to lower it later. I'd start with SoC at about 1.081v (1081mv)


----------



## enthilzar

crakej said:


> You probably don't need as much as 1.1v for 2 sticks, not sure about 4. You have been very lucky with mixing the kits - it often does not work at all. With Matisse, I would just try with 2 for now.
> 
> Did you try just entering the primaries? like 14 16 14 14 28 - rest on auto. Or select DOCP, go into timings and put everything to auto under the primaries. Make sure VDDG is about 0.040 less than SoC - you might be able to lower it later. I'd start with SoC at about 1.081v (1081mv)



I tried 1 stick (working), 2 sticks (not working) and 4 sticks (not working).


I also tried to enter primary timings (timings I know working on this board before, but without high freq.)
Will try to set SoC + vddg when returning home (bbq  ).


----------



## lordzed83

Ok I know I got tooo much time so came up with trying to test out impact of Performance Bias on Zen2. Dont Judge my PAINT skill I'm an artist lol.
Maybe someone more inteligent can get more conclusions from cache tests on Aida. Auto and CB 11.5 are 'slowest' in my brains of calculation aidavision so went with geek vs cb15 tests. Every score is avereage of 3 runs.

So If anyone want to waste some time, this took me 4 hours so of reboots. Looks like ill be using CB15 same as on 2700x
Would be interesting if someone tried them 2 on theirs system in some bencharks to confirm .


----------



## lordzed83

@1usmus epic testing now hat u got on screenshot


----------



## kmellz

With performance bias on cb15, and some ever so slightly tweaked memory timings, I'm back at about the same score as before the drop with 2602 bios ^^ /in cb 20


----------



## crakej

I'm getting back near to stability on 2602. Using more voltage for ram than I'd hoped at 3733. ProcODT was on auto at 40ohms but I put that up to 43.3ohms.

Tried changing RTTPark to RZQ/3, in 3 places in the bios. None of them worked - it stayed at RZQ/5

Ram is now at 1.47v, about to test 1.475 as not quite stable.

Anyone tried PE modes yet on Matisse?


----------



## harderthanfire

Urgh messed up and ordered my parts for delivery instead of pickup - got to wait till Monday now 


Looking forward to the updated RAM calculator! I'm terrible at adjusting the timings manually, got no patience for it.


----------



## gupsterg

lester007 said:


> awesome!, i'm liking my 3800MHz oc on my ram so far
> hopefully i get decent oc on my new 4x8gb tridentz royal, just came in today and it's beautiful kit


Data ZIP (organise files by time) which has 3666MHz/3733MHz 4x8GB tested upto ~1000% in Kahru RAM Test, then some preliminary testing of 3800MHz.

UEFI 2406/2501 on C7H defaults ProcODT as 60, where as UEFI 0068 is 40, like the C8H/F. ProcODT 60 was fine for 3666MHz, but 3733MHz would get stuck at POST in Q-CODE: C5 (instantly), once I set manually 40 I gained POST. 3800MHz would do the same, until I set 34.6.

ZIP below has settings txt, screenies of menu which may not be in txt, plus it shows 6 timings which I think best to leave on [Auto] as I believe MC may prefer these as is.

View attachment R532GPBO1503800.zip


Currently system been rebooted and rerunning further testing of PBO+150MHz 3800MHz 4x8GB.



Spoiler














Currently using SOC: 1.081 VDDG: 1.018 vs 1.068 & 1.013 when on 2x8GB same MEMCLK.

Some AIDA64 compares below.



Spoiler
















enthilzar said:


> Well I changed my C6H -> C7H.
> RAM sticks used:
> 2x8GB G.Skill Trident Z 3600CL16 + 2x8GB G.Skill Trident Z 4133CL17
> CPU: AMD 3900x
> 
> Now the "fun" part:
> Using my old 2700x and the RAM works in C6H.
> Using 3900x and 4 RAM sticks works in C6H (3600CL14).
> Using 2700x with an pre Ryzen3000 BIOS works in C7H with the RAM sticks.
> BUT: Using the 3900x (also 2700x) with C7H Post Ryzen3000 BIOS (tried all BIOS Version, also the 2602 Beta) is only working with 1 single RAM stick. If I try to use 2 or more: C5 error.
> 
> Tried to:
> - Set vdimm boot, vddp, vsoc vdimm voltage
> - different BIOS versions (flashback method)
> - lower frequency (1333Mhz)
> - reflashed and resetted BIOS multiple times
> - using different slots
> 
> I suppose I am stucked with 1 DIMM for now 😞
> (Idea of going back to C6H would take another 1hour+ for switching hardware)


Lower ProODT, Matisse seems to work differently to 1xxx/2xxx.


----------



## Jaju123

My 3600 CL15 memory is super weird. If I put voltage close to 1.5v it boots up at higher frequencies, but produces more errors (maybe heat?). If I put it at like 1.35-1.39V, it is less likely to boot at all at these higher speeds (like 3600+), but it wont produce any errors. Has anyone else experienced something like this?


----------



## Alpi

Jaju123 said:


> My 3600 CL15 memory is super weird. If I put voltage close to 1.5v it boots up at higher frequencies, but produces more errors (maybe heat?). If I put it at like 1.35-1.39V, it is less likely to boot at all at these higher speeds (like 3600+), but it wont produce any errors. Has anyone else experienced something like this?


Voltage is Your friend !  Those number aren't so high. Even with Hynix ic's You can see scaleing for even a bit higher values. Boot up voltage can be tricky sometimes. A good value can obsolete post issues sometimes but yes, Ryzen usually don't like "too much" voltages not on vdimm or even vsoc. 1,5 vdimm is pretty high to those clocks anyway I guess but as I said, don't know Your mem sticks.


----------



## lester007

gupsterg said:


> Data ZIP (organise files by time) which has 3666MHz/3733MHz 4x8GB tested upto ~1000% in Kahru RAM Test, then some preliminary testing of 3800MHz.
> 
> UEFI 2406/2501 on C7H defaults ProcODT as 60, where as UEFI 0068 is 40, like the C8H/F. ProcODT 60 was fine for 3666MHz, but 3733MHz would get stuck at POST in Q-CODE: C5 (instantly), once I set manually 40 I gained POST. 3800MHz would do the same, until I set 34.6.
> 
> ZIP below has settings txt, screenies of menu which may not be in txt, plus it shows 6 timings which I think best to leave on [Auto] as I believe MC may prefer these as is.
> 
> View attachment 283958
> 
> 
> Currently system been rebooted and rerunning further testing of PBO+150MHz 3800MHz 4x8GB.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 283960
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Currently using SOC: 1.081 VDDG: 1.018 vs 1.068 & 1.013 when on 2x8GB same MEMCLK.
> 
> Some AIDA64 compares below.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 283962
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lower ProODT, Matisse seems to work differently to 1xxx/2xxx.


ProODT 40 works for me at 3800MHz anything besides that I can't post.
I am using same settings too when I was using my 2x8 3200cl14 kit. 
Testing 32gb+ for error takes longer 

Great work @gupsterg cheers!


----------



## crakej

I still can't attain 3800:1900 - even lowering my ProcODT all the way to 30ohms  I even went up to 1.55v on the memory.

I don't get C5 error any more though - get 07 instead. Have had it close to booting before, so not sure what's changed in that respect in 2602.

I've tuned my 3733 as best I can - this is the nearly complete profile here, still got 1 error in RamTest. Not bad I guess.

I've had LOADS of times when booting into bios that I'm greeted with a blank screen. Bios is running - I can still press escape and load OS, or F5>F10 to reset to default and reboot. Have to keep re-starting until it works!


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> I still can't attain 3800:1900 - even lowering my ProcODT all the way to 30ohms  I even went up to 1.55v on the memory.
> 
> I don't get C5 error any more though - get 07 instead. Have had it close to booting before, so not sure what's changed in that respect in 2602.
> 
> I've tuned my 3733 as best I can - this is the nearly complete profile here, still got 1 error in RamTest. Not bad I guess.
> 
> I've had LOADS of times when booting into bios that I'm greeted with a blank screen. Bios is running - I can still press escape and load OS, or F5>F10 to reset to default and reboot. Have to keep re-starting until it works!


**** man looks ike You got worse 3900x than me then there is andy_mk3 from OCUK hes got 4.45 all core cb20 pass on hes and stable 4.4 sub 1.35 voltrs

Dropped Ya MY 4325 3800/1900 txt file. Thats the 100bclk version. If this does not boot try 101.8bclk and 1 tick down on mem and IF and cpu till ya get lets say 4251.

Just thinking now them Patriot ddrs are single or dual rank ?? Ones i had on B die with 1700x ware dual rank


----------



## lester007

crakej said:


> I still can't attain 3800:1900 - even lowering my ProcODT all the way to 30ohms  I even went up to 1.55v on the memory.
> 
> I don't get C5 error any more though - get 07 instead. Have had it close to booting before, so not sure what's changed in that respect in 2602.
> 
> I've tuned my 3733 as best I can - this is the nearly complete profile here, still got 1 error in RamTest. Not bad I guess.
> 
> I've had LOADS of times when booting into bios that I'm greeted with a blank screen. Bios is running - I can still press escape and load OS, or F5>F10 to reset to default and reboot. Have to keep re-starting until it works!


I guess you all tried the settings but i have used ProcODT 53 when i have the 2x8kit though I am still at 2501 bios just works fine for me.
it could be your subtimings, maybe tFAW, for me i set tRDWR to 8, ymmv just my opinion 

Not sure where I could get the 2602? I don't see in asus support page, did I miss something?


----------



## crakej

lester007 said:


> I guess you all tried the settings but i have used ProcODT 53 when i have the 2x8kit though I am still at 2501 bios just works fine for me.
> it could be your subtimings, maybe tFAW, for me i set tRDWR to 8, ymmv just my opinion
> 
> Not sure where I could get the 2602? I don't see in asus support page, did I miss something?


https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?112279-X370-X470-AGESA-1003AB-Bioses

These are beta releases. Use at your own risk! They ARE buggy.


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> **** man looks ike You got worse 3900x than me then there is andy_mk3 from OCUK hes got 4.45 all core cb20 pass on hes and stable 4.4 sub 1.35 voltrs
> 
> Dropped Ya MY 4325 3800/1900 txt file. Thats the 100bclk version. If this does not boot try 101.8bclk and 1 tick down on mem and IF and cpu till ya get lets say 4251.
> 
> Just thinking now them Patriot ddrs are single or dual rank ?? Ones i had on B die with 1700x ware dual rank


They're single rail.

My cpu will boost to 4.5 or rarely 4.6 on default settings on bios 2501. But wouldn't do 1900 IF whatever I tried. Still, performance for 3733 is pretty good. Haven't actually played too much with PBO settings except for enabling it and setting my TDC higher which had zero effect.

Edit: you know what I have not done? I have not given my cpu any extra juice. Was this just to attain the memory OC? Maybe I should try same CPU OC....


----------



## Nucky

Jaju123 said:


> My 3600 CL15 memory is super weird. If I put voltage close to 1.5v it boots up at higher frequencies, but produces more errors (maybe heat?). If I put it at like 1.35-1.39V, it is less likely to boot at all at these higher speeds (like 3600+), but it wont produce any errors. Has anyone else experienced something like this?


I just got my second 3600c15 kit in today. Currently testing 3733c16 (stole timings from gupstergs latest post) at 1.42v. When I was running 2x8 at 3600c14 I was using 1.45v on the previous bios. Currently at 500%+ with no errors.


----------



## Syldon

thegr8anand said:


> Can you delid 3900x for Liquid Metal?


Debuaur delidded the 3900. There is only a minute amount of gain and it is not worth the effort/risk.

I think he also had to skim the IHS after he delidded it to get the temps back down to where they were before delidding. The gain was 1-2c in temps if I remember correctly.


----------



## Syldon

enthilzar said:


> Normally it doesn't matter if you use t-topology or daisy chain. The sticks should work on both boards.


With a 2700x a CH6 is by far more compatible for 4 sticks. This was covered a lot in early CH7 posts. Elmor even posted about this pre CH7 launch in the CH6 thread. Gupsterg has posts explaining about the topology differences. 

I cant comment on Ryzen 3 yet. Waiting for a 3950, and still in two minds about upgrading from a 2700x yet.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> They're single rail.
> 
> My cpu will boost to 4.5 or rarely 4.6 on default settings on bios 2501. But wouldn't do 1900 IF whatever I tried. Still, performance for 3733 is pretty good. Haven't actually played too much with PBO settings except for enabling it and setting my TDC higher which had zero effect.
> 
> Edit: you know what I have not done? I have not given my cpu any extra juice. Was this just to attain the memory OC? Maybe I should try same CPU OC....


o ye man use my power section setting. On auto in power section i cant even pass cb20 
I assure You for 3800mem 1.1 in my case or more under load is needed


----------



## lordzed83

Syldon said:


> Debuaur delidded the 3900. There is only a minute amount of gain and it is not worth the effort/risk.
> 
> I think he also had to skim the IHS after he delidded it to get the temps back down to where they were before delidding. The gain was 1-2c in temps if I remember correctly.


Well I would need 2 ask him ghow delit affects tDIE. My copu stays 78c on stress but Tdie aka die itself is 10-20c hotter cant get heat to ihz\/water block fast enough. My 2700x was Cooler with more wats going out cause of that. I was benching IBT AVX at 230w stable cpu maxed out around 82. With 3900x 210-214w cpu stays 81-82 BUT tdie goes to 102-108c on cache heavy loads like that ycruncher. And Nicehash that mines using cpu cache hehe


----------



## Nucky

Nucky said:


> I just got my second 3600c15 kit in today. Currently testing 3733c16 (stole timings from gupstergs latest post) at 1.42v. When I was running 2x8 at 3600c14 I was using 1.45v on the previous bios. Currently at 500%+ with no errors.


Made it to 1150% karhu before I stopped the test. [email protected] . Fresh 2501, pretty much everything auto outside of a few memory settings.


----------



## Syldon

lordzed83 said:


> Well I would need 2 ask him ghow delit affects tDIE. My copu stays 78c on stress but Tdie aka die itself is 10-20c hotter cant get heat to ihz\/water block fast enough. My 2700x was Cooler with more wats going out cause of that. I was benching IBT AVX at 230w stable cpu maxed out around 82. With 3900x 210-214w cpu stays 81-82 BUT tdie goes to 102-108c on cache heavy loads like that ycruncher. And Nicehash that mines using cpu cache hehe


I think this is the 



 I watched.


----------



## lordzed83

Syldon said:


> I think this is the video I watched.


Seen it and its CPU temoperature not tDie i just msg him on facebook to ask if he could clear it up

have a look wham im on about. My cpu temp (same as ryzen master reports) And Tdie temp


----------



## AvengedRobix

Can i disable M2 without remove him? For insert a ssd to bench


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> Seen it and its CPU temoperature not tDie i just msg him on facebook to ask if he could clear it up
> 
> have a look wham im on about. My cpu temp (same as ryzen master reports) And Tdie temp


RM shows 1867 as the IF and mem speed, but Aida shows 3800MTs?


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> RM shows 1867 as the IF and mem speed, but Aida shows 3800MTs?


cause i run 101.8 bclk well 102 atm i foumnd its More stable than running 100 bclk @3800 mem. @CJMitsuki noticed that HE CANT BOOT with 100bclk at 3800 but boots no problem with 101.8 like I got. 
You tyried botingh up with my settings ??


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> cause i run 101.8 bclk well 102 atm i foumnd its More stable than running 100 bclk @3800 mem. @CJMitsuki noticed that HE CANT BOOT with 100bclk at 3800 but boots no problem with 101.8 like I got.
> You tyried botingh up with my settings ??


Right, I got ya!

Going to go for it in the morning.... too tired for it just no...


----------



## oreonutz

Victor Göhlin said:


> I'm done with my troubleshooting it all ended up being a dead stick of RAM, once i removed the stick who was blocked by my twin tower heatsink the computer could boot without problem. The faulty stick didn't work in any slot on either mine or my sisters motherboard and the other stick in the kit worked perfectly fine in both computers.
> 
> My sisters Corsair Vengeance LP 2x8GB kit worked perfectly fine in my computer with both sticks installed. Even managed to boot with them and pass a memtest at 3733 @1.4V with stock XMP CL16 over their stock 3200MHz CL16 (B-die).
> 
> I have started a RMA with my online retailer but it probably takes 20-30 days before they get a new shipment of this kit so i will go to my local store and grab a cheap 16GB 3200MHz kit to use until i get a replacement for my faulty kit.


Glad to hear you got it sorted. Sounds like we are starting to learn these processors decently well, we suspected Ram as the culprit, and turns out it was. I hope your online retailer is able to get you a replacement a little quicker then 20 to 30 days, but glad you are able to slot in a kit in the mean time. Happy OCing!


----------



## oreonutz

hifi12 said:


> Hi,
> 
> I recently purchased a 3900x+CH7 combo and I got very bad temps (45-60 idle 95º in aida64 and prime95 at stock settings)
> 
> I've seen on Reddit and other forums that it may be due to buggy bios. Ryzen master says core voltage vary a bit around 1.4V (it varies more in CPU-Z) and PPT stays at 7% when I run prime95 (where temp go straight up to 95º). I got slightly better temps with a -0.1 offset.
> 
> I tried bios 2406 and 2501.
> 
> What I don't understand is that you all guys seems to be fine with this motherboard, so I wonder if the problem really is the bios. I tried 2 different cooler. The stock one and the grand macho rt with the same luck. I tried to reapply thermal paste 3 times.
> 
> Do you have any idea what I could do to improve the situation?
> I'm thinking of sending back everything, which will be sad because of the lack of 3900x stock. But I can't offer to wait an hypothetical improvement while my RMA windows is closing.
> 
> Thanks for your help


Sorry @hifi12 But like @harderthanfire and @lordzed83 said, thats just how hot these Processors run, ESPECIALLY While at stock speeds. When I am running at Stock, hitting my CPU with a AIDA64 Load for even just 10 Mins see's Temps spike up to 89c, and on Prime 95 Small FFTs I see temps up to 96c, and I am running an EKWB with a 360mm RAD Thats 40mm Thick. The 3900x just runs HOT! 

The way I deal with it is just by Manually setting Voltage down to 1.275, and then Per CCX Overclocking to get the most out of each CCX, that sees my best CCX at 4.4Ghz and My Worst at 4.25Ghz, but all at 1.275v which gives me still amazing performance, and then I see my Peak Temps only hit 85c during a Prime 95 Load which is MUCH more reasonable.

Let us know what you end up finding that works for you.


----------



## glnn_23

Switched to 2602 bios and all good so far Realbench and GSAT.
Running 4 x 8Gb 3733c16


----------



## gupsterg

lester007 said:


> ProODT 40 works for me at 3800MHz anything besides that I can't post.
> I am using same settings too when I was using my 2x8 3200cl14 kit.
> Testing 32gb+ for error takes longer
> 
> Great work @gupsterg cheers!


Ahh ok.

NP on shares.

Last night I flashed UEFI 0068, this has better training process IMO. I also bumped SOC/VDDG as I wanted to give profile some additional "guard band".

So far some nice runs, data ZIP. Copy in AIDA64 is up by 3000MB/s, minor loss on read, write same, minute loss on latency, below top is 1DPC, bottom is 2DPC.



Spoiler
















crakej said:


> I still can't attain 3800:1900 - even lowering my ProcODT all the way to 30ohms  I even went up to 1.55v on the memory.
> 
> I don't get C5 error any more though - get 07 instead. Have had it close to booting before, so not sure what's changed in that respect in 2602.
> 
> I've tuned my 3733 as best I can - this is the nearly complete profile here, still got 1 error in RamTest. Not bad I guess.
> 
> I've had LOADS of times when booting into bios that I'm greeted with a blank screen. Bios is running - I can still press escape and load OS, or F5>F10 to reset to default and reboot. Have to keep re-starting until it works!


2602 was pants IMO. I used a profile which works on 2406/0068/2501 and when used on 2602 I went to reboot from OS and system just shutdown. I then didn't waste my time with 2602 and went to another UEFI.



Syldon said:


> With a 2700x a CH6 is by far more compatible for 4 sticks. This was covered a lot in early CH7 posts. Elmor even posted about this pre CH7 launch in the CH6 thread. Gupsterg has posts explaining about the topology differences.
> 
> I cant comment on Ryzen 3 yet. Waiting for a 3950, and still in two minds about upgrading from a 2700x yet.


Yeah 1xxx/2xxx with say 4 dimms seemed to favour T-Topology of C6H vs daisy chain of C7H. Don't have C6H any more, but damn 3xxx is clocking as nice on 2DPC as 1DPC. 



glnn_23 said:


> Switched to 2602 bios and all good so far Realbench and GSAT.
> Running 4 x 8Gb 3733c16


Nice  , +rep for share of settings and data  .


----------



## usoldier

Hey guys how the status of this Mobo atm , was looking to save money buying one of these for a 3900x build, my CH6 died yesterday 2 days after warranty ended XD


----------



## enthilzar

Okay I give up on using 2 sticks on my C7H at the moment.

- settings custom timings (which are tested for years now): 1stick C5 -> vdimm boot 1,4v -> OK; 2 sticks: C5
- changing vsoc: 1 stick ok, 2 sticks C5
- changing procODT: 1 stick okay, 2 sticks C5
- changing vddg: 1 stick okay, 2 sticks C5
- changing timings: 1 stick okay, 2 sticks C5
- changing cldo vddp: 1 stick okay, 2 sticks C5
- changing bios (and retesting all): 1 stick okay, 2 sticks C5

going back to pre Ryzen 3000 bios and 2700x: Even 4 sticks working -.-

Will wait 1 week for a new beta or final Bios.
If they do not release any, I'll go back to C6H.


Edit: Btw guys using EK supremacy EVO. Try to rotate the waterblock 90degrees (did a temperature drop of 10degrees (celsius) for me.


----------



## VPII

Okay, I've been playing around with this C7H mobo for the past couple of days running a Ryzen 9 3900X. It's been great in the beginning running memory at DDR4 3600 CL14 without an issue untill about two days ago. I've reflash backed the bios 3 or 4 times already as it appeared to be corrupted taken that even cmos clear won't reset to default. At present, the best I'm able to get, running Karhu memstest stable is DDR4 3333, but a little higher taken my bclk sitting at 100.8mhz. I've had 3400 memory speed work, but only briefly, now it is a no go. Memory voltage at 1.45. The stable 3600 memory speed was at CL14, now I mean stable as in bench stable, not stress test stable.

So right now, I'm stuck at 3333 memory speed. It is okay, but a little disappointing taken that 3600 worked before. At least 3333 is super stable now, even at 1.35 vdimm.


----------



## harderthanfire

enthilzar said:


> Okay I give up on using 2 sticks on my C7H at the moment.
> 
> - settings custom timings (which are tested for years now): 1stick C5 -> vdimm boot 1,4v -> OK; 2 sticks: C5
> - changing vsoc: 1 stick ok, 2 sticks C5
> - changing procODT: 1 stick okay, 2 sticks C5
> - changing vddg: 1 stick okay, 2 sticks C5
> - changing timings: 1 stick okay, 2 sticks C5
> - changing cldo vddp: 1 stick okay, 2 sticks C5
> - changing bios (and retesting all): 1 stick okay, 2 sticks C5
> 
> going back to pre Ryzen 3000 bios and 2700x: Even 4 sticks working -.-
> 
> Will wait 1 week for a new beta or final Bios.
> If they do not release any, I'll go back to C6H.
> 
> 
> Edit: Btw guys using EK supremacy EVO. Try to rotate the waterblock 90degrees (did a temperature drop of 10degrees (celsius) for me.



That might be why mine is a tad warmer than I'd expect. Been thinking the block isn't making the best contact with where the chiplets are or something.


----------



## lordzed83

enthilzar said:


> Okay I give up on using 2 sticks on my C7H at the moment.
> 
> - settings custom timings (which are tested for years now): 1stick C5 -> vdimm boot 1,4v -> OK; 2 sticks: C5
> - changing vsoc: 1 stick ok, 2 sticks C5
> - changing procODT: 1 stick okay, 2 sticks C5
> - changing vddg: 1 stick okay, 2 sticks C5
> - changing timings: 1 stick okay, 2 sticks C5
> - changing cldo vddp: 1 stick okay, 2 sticks C5
> - changing bios (and retesting all): 1 stick okay, 2 sticks C5
> 
> going back to pre Ryzen 3000 bios and 2700x: Even 4 sticks working -.-
> 
> Will wait 1 week for a new beta or final Bios.
> If they do not release any, I'll go back to C6H.
> 
> 
> Edit: Btw guys using EK supremacy EVO. Try to rotate the waterblock 90degrees (did a temperature drop of 10degrees (celsius) for me.


Interesting Could You drop us photo of block orientation ?? I added extra Liquid metal that did help.
@gupsterg i see You abnd me got same opinion on that 2602 bios in short feels trash. Even mouse in Bios isstuttering on my pc  Boots bad trains memory weird and it scores lower. I'w not found a single thing worth wasting time with it.


----------



## glnn_23

Just playing around with Aida64 here trying raise fclk a little.
Opened HWiNFO after run.


----------



## enthilzar

lordzed83 said:


> Interesting Could You drop us photo of block orientation ?? I added extra Liquid metal that did help.


I'm out for a few hours, but I'll make a pic later today 🙂


----------



## crakej

usoldier said:


> Hey guys how the status of this Mobo atm , was looking to save money buying one of these for a 3900x build, my CH6 died yesterday 2 days after warranty ended XD


You should still contact warranty - they often give a bit of leeway of a few days - worked with Dell for me when my laptop died 2 days out of warranty - they replaced it.


----------



## crakej

enthilzar said:


> Edit: Btw guys using EK supremacy EVO. Try to rotate the waterblock 90degrees (did a temperature drop of 10degrees (celsius) for me.


Sorry it's still not working for you!

Very interesting about turning your block - might investigate if mine could benefit from being turned.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Sorry it's still not working for you!
> 
> Very interesting about turning your block - might investigate if mine could benefit from being turned.


Actually got me thinking cause You could have outlet over I/O cip inlet over chiplets like iw draw here.
Cant rotate mny block tho need 2 wait for new 8pack ones 










Atm im on Red orientatnio Yellow should help with tdie shooting up like crazy on cache heavy loads while ihs is 15c cooler ect.


----------



## Baio73

Decided to give another chance to Asus' mobo and plannig to get a 3xxx to see if I can finally get RAMs to work at their target speed.
According to you what's the best choice between 3700x and 3800x?
I see the first has a quite lower TDP.
Thanks guys.

Baio


----------



## enthilzar

crakej said:


> Sorry it's still not working for you!
> 
> Very interesting about turning your block - might investigate if mine could benefit from being turned.


Hey no problem 
That's why I have 2 mainboards.
As I have a few min left I did the promised photos and switched back to my C6H. Of cause it is all working again 
Will check back to C7H after we get some Bios versions which are not crap.

(Btw sorry, second pic is on the C7H but it doesn't really matter)


----------



## nick name

Has anyone seen any weird voltage swings on DRAM? Not sure if it's a reporting bug with HWiNFO or not. BIOS 2602.


----------



## Syldon

lordzed83 said:


> Seen it and its CPU temoperature not tDie i just msg him on facebook to ask if he could clear it up
> 
> have a look wham im on about. My cpu temp (same as ryzen master reports) And Tdie temp


Did not know there was a difference between the two with the new Ryzen CPUs. I checked again on the 2700 and the CPU temp matches the Tdie. Do you know why there is a difference between the two on yours and not mine? 

I would guess at sensor location. One being in the Control chip and the other being in CPU chiplet.


----------



## lordzed83

Syldon said:


> Did not know there was a difference between the two with the new Ryzen CPUs. I checked again on the 2700 and the CPU temp matches the Tdie. Do you know why there is a difference between the two on yours and not mine?
> 
> I would guess at sensor location. One being in the Control chip and the other being in CPU chiplet.


Cause on Zen and Zen+ its all one Chip not 2/3 chips under IHS


----------



## lordzed83

enthilzar said:


> Hey no problem
> That's why I have 2 mainboards.
> As I have a few min left I did the promised photos and switched back to my C6H. Of cause it is all working again
> Will check back to C7H after we get some Bios versions which are not crap.
> 
> (Btw sorry, second pic is on the C7H but it doesn't really matter)


OOO I got same block how have You turned it ariound in mounting plate ?? those 4 screws on bottom ??

Assume I need 2 drain the loop and strip block apart ye ?


----------



## crakej

HWInfo show my CPU boosting to 4.475 - RM does not show that.

Which is right?


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> HWInfo show my CPU boosting to 4.475 - RM does not show that.
> 
> Which is right?


With that bugged 2602 bios ?? Who knows 
Deopends what You got set HW info cpu speed reading as. RM in general is better for that sort of thing tho


----------



## enthilzar

lordzed83 said:


> OOO I got same block how have You turned it ariound in mounting plate ?? those 4 screws on bottom ??
> 
> Assume I need 2 drain the loop and strip block apart ye ?


I just fixed the block to a pipe and stripped the block apart and rotated the inside parts.
(Only the block, I left the acryl part alone. Ah and do not forget a towel )
No real need to drain the hole loop or loosen the tubes if you take care.


----------



## crakej

Going back to 2501

Great seeing what's coming, but 2602 is very much beta indeed. Very happy Shamino shared it with us to try out, have left as much feedback as possible on ROG forum.


----------



## lordzed83

enthilzar said:


> I just fixed the block to a pipe and stripped the block apart and rotated the inside parts.
> (Only the block, I left the acryl part alone. Ah and do not forget a towel )
> No real need to drain the hole loop or loosen the tubes if you take care.


I dont **** about DONE cleaned block while at it


























And most important whats the effect ??









- 7c on cpu difference of cpu to tdie from 19c to 10c. So cut down basically 16c of Tdie. I know there is 7w more on max draw on before But thats from running VDDG of 1060mv to keep cpu stable due to temperature i'm now on 950mv. as sugested by @1usmus


----------



## nick name

lordzed83 said:


> -snip-


Did you make note of ambient temps? I only ask because a lot of the minimums on the before temps were higher than the minimums on the after temps.


----------



## lordzed83

nick name said:


> Did you make note of ambient temps? I only ask because a lot of the minimums on the before temps were higher than the minimums on the after temps.


Ye im back to my nioemal 21cin the room. And I could not get Minimums lower than 30c before now im back to temps from my 1700/2700 aka few c above ambient  also as you see there was some **** stuck in waterblock that deffo have not helpped since it was not drained for 15 months so far. When im doing draining every 2 years or so i strip waterblocks appart and clean out but Coppu gets more **** than gpu one. 
@Syldon gopt sollution to the chiplet heat problem. With same volts i oped extra 50mhz on to cpu and passed IBT and 10 loops of ycruncher and got cpu to use over 200w hehe.


----------



## poliacido

Probably rotating the copper plate covers better the chiplet? Because the area covered by the fins in the ek supremacy is not squared but is rectangular according to techpowerup is ~30.5 x 32.5 mm 
Maybe those 2 mm make some difference. Does anyone have the Velocity block? That covers 30.5 x 34.6mm and could be an interesting comparison


----------



## lordzed83

poliacido said:


> Probably rotating the copper plate covers better the chiplet? Because the area covered by the fins in the ek supremacy is not squared but is rectangular according to techpowerup is ~30.5 x 32.5 mm
> Maybe those 2 mm makes some difference. Does anyone has the Velocity block? That covers 30.5 x 34.6mm and could be an interesting comparison


Ye would be good to see alrd started looking for new block week ago but we got this comming so im waiting.






From what I'w spoke to 8pack this should cut 5-6c from my EK block. 
Also Direct IHS block sounds VERY interesting  You loose copper plate and tim cant wait for the test of those. You deffo dont want to **** up with that solution or swimming pool in pc  If I'd got one of those I'd run my pc upside down for a week to check if its leaking haha


----------



## poliacido

lordzed83 said:


> Ye would be good to see alrd started looking for new block week ago but we got this comming so im waiting.
> 
> https://youtu.be/dRNQE-zAhaE
> 
> From what I'w spoke to 8pack this should cut 5-6c from my EK block


There is also EK coming with the next products line Magnitude, we will see
https://www.ekwb.com/custom-loop/magnitude/


----------



## hifi12

Hi,

After further research on why I got bad temps, I've noticed that in ryzen master PPT is stuck at 6-7% and TDC stays at 0%. It appears that other ppl with the ch7 observe the same behavior.

The result seems to be that the motherboard think that the 3900x has still room and can still keep sucking power.

It looks like it can be the reason why my temps reach 95º in prime95 and aida64 and throttle.

Ppl are reporting that this behavior was the same with previous generation so my question is: is it a bug or a feature? Do they intend to trick the algorithm and rely only on temp limit to reach max performance? It doesn't really seem safe


----------



## oreonutz

hifi12 said:


> Hi,
> 
> After further research on why I got bad temps, I've noticed that in ryzen master PPT is stuck at 6-7% and TDC stays at 0%. It appears that other ppl with the ch7 observe the same behavior.
> 
> The result seems to be that the motherboard think that the 3900x has still room and can still keep sucking power.
> 
> It looks like it can be the reason why my temps reach 95º in prime95 and aida64 and throttle.
> 
> Ppl are reporting that this behavior was the same with previous generation so my question is: is it a bug or a feature? Do they intend to trick the algorithm and rely only on temp limit to reach max performance? It doesn't really seem safe


I really wish I could figure out how to replicate this bug. If thats the case though its also not relying on *TEMPERATURES* (sorry, accidentally said performance here earlier) or you would start noticing performance regression at around 80c.


----------



## enthilzar

@lordzed83
At least it was worth the work


----------



## gupsterg

Well I think 4x8GB 3800MHz has reasonable stability. Below was a run on a repost after initially posting system from shutdown.



Spoiler













> UEFI 2406/2501 on C7H defaults ProcODT as 60, where as UEFI 0068 is 40, like the C8H/F. ProcODT 60 was fine for 3666MHz, but 3733MHz would get stuck at POST in Q-CODE: C5 (instantly), once I set manually 40 I gained POST. 3800MHz would do the same, until I set 34.6.


Above was originally how I gained stability, at that point I also used SOC: 1.081 VDDG: 1.018. After several reruns of profile from say POST from shutdown, re-POST from OS, same POST rerunning of a test load, I could still have Q-CODE: C5 when board was posting.

Going to SOC: 1.087 VDDG: 1.025 seemed to help. Then yesterday when I did RAM Test of ~2600% (~1.5hrs), then stopped test, let rig idle, then on same POST reloaded RAM test, system rebooted ~1700% (~1hr) in and went Q-CODE: C5.

I bumped SOC to 1.093V, I then had pass of 3525%, stopped test let system idle, rerun 2200% on same POST, stopped test let system idle, rerun 4000% on same POST, so ~4hrs 43min uptime. Then I rebooted system (ie warm POST), RAM test failed at ~2600%.

The ***** in profile was when a warm POST was done it could fail.

I tried upping SOC/VDDG/VDIMM/lowering CAD Bus to increase signalling, this did not fix the breaking of profile on warm POST. Increasing CLDO_VDDP did. Went from 0.901 to 0.925, ~13200% (~8hrs) PASS on warm POST as shown in spoiler above.



lordzed83 said:


> I dont **** about DONE cleaned block while at it
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And most important whats the effect ??
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - 7c on cpu difference of cpu to tdie from 19c to 10c. So cut down basically 16c of Tdie. I know there is 7w more on max draw on before But thats from running VDDG of 1060mv to keep cpu stable due to temperature i'm now on 950mv. as sugested by @1usmus
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nick name said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did you make note of ambient temps? I only ask because a lot of the minimums on the before temps were higher than the minimums on the after temps.
Click to expand...

Looking at chipset/mobo/vrm temperature the runs were at differing ambient temps, which would effect results IMO.

Below is photo I took of CPU/block when removed it for placing R5 3600 in. I rotated the die shot to be as it would in socket.



Spoiler














IMO dies are not really outside of fin area...


----------



## lordzed83

@gupsterg I think its more about having inlet directly over chiplets than fins. Before when starting ycruncher Tdie temperature jumped +15c in 2 seconds to 100c while cpu was slowly climbing thats why i reset block 2 times and it was still behaving like this. Now it slowly going up.

Anyhow finished testing bit tighter timings setup


----------



## gupsterg

@lordzed83

Cheers for share  . I may try the mod at later date once finish some other testing.


----------



## hifi12

oreonutz said:


> Sorry @hifi12 But like @harderthanfire and @lordzed83 said, thats just how hot these Processors run, ESPECIALLY While at stock speeds. When I am running at Stock, hitting my CPU with a AIDA64 Load for even just 10 Mins see's Temps spike up to 89c, and on Prime 95 Small FFTs I see temps up to 96c, and I am running an EKWB with a 360mm RAD Thats 40mm Thick. The 3900x just runs HOT!
> 
> The way I deal with it is just by Manually setting Voltage down to 1.275, and then Per CCX Overclocking to get the most out of each CCX, that sees my best CCX at 4.4Ghz and My Worst at 4.25Ghz, but all at 1.275v which gives me still amazing performance, and then I see my Peak Temps only hit 85c during a Prime 95 Load which is MUCH more reasonable.
> 
> Let us know what you end up finding that works for you.


Hey, I didn't see your reply, sorry.

What I don't understand is that other people run this CPU at max temp in the high 70º, that's why I really start to blame the CH7 for this behavior.

But you say, you don't observe the bug I and other ch7 users have with PPT and TDC values and got same temps, so I don't know..

It does effectively cool things down when I set a negative offset of 0.1V or if I set EDC to 130W. But I don't want to do this in the long run.


----------



## lordzed83

gupsterg said:


> @lordzed83
> 
> Cheers for share  . I may try the mod at later date once finish some other testing.


after block operaton im so much more stable on temps managed to get 4385 stable cause not jumping to 109c on tdie


----------



## Jaju123

Currently stable to 2000% on RAM test 1.1.0.0 with 3600 CL15 B-die kit @ 1.39v and 3700x with PBO enabled.

3600mhz @ 14 15 14 14 28 with CR1. Also 67.1ms latency.

Don't think my CPU likes FCLK at 1900 mhz but will try some more now that the new DRAM calculator is out.


----------



## lordzed83

new chipset beta fix

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1mojPNWcOuuhxvdBkYJlkLbsDXwGLImGp/view


----------



## nick name

lordzed83 said:


> new chipset beta fix
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1mojPNWcOuuhxvdBkYJlkLbsDXwGLImGp/view


Source?


----------



## thegr8anand

On reddit. Fixes Destiny 2.


----------



## Xenozx

are these chipset drives for the x470 that help with support for the 3 series ryzen?


Question? If i change my BCLK in an attempt to get the PBO and everything to boost higher, does that make it impossible to set my memory and FCLK to 2:1? Reason i say this is when i change the BCLK to say 104.0 when i go under FCLK it still shows the same #'s like 1800, 1666, not adjusted #'s showing for the changed BCLK, but when you look at RAM speeds, 3200 turns into say 3222 because of the increased BCLK.


----------



## kmellz

For anyone that uses SVM-virtualization etc, those beta drivers apparently breaks it at the moment, but the ones released tomorrow(?) should be fine I guess.


----------



## Syldon

kmellz said:


> For anyone that uses SVM-virtulization etc, those beta drivers apparently breaks it at the moment, but the ones released tomorrow(?) should be fine I guess.


+rep thnx


----------



## MrPhilo

Tighten up abit on my timing (trfc now at 304 from 333). So far so good, best result so far for my 3800CL16, at least on Aida.

Unfortuntely can't lower my VDDG or SoC as I lose stability


----------



## webwilli

I´ve flashed the 2602 Bios.
So far, so good...

But now I´ve had an unknown device in the device manager:










AMD Security Accelerator

The driver is not a problem.
But I want to disable the device in the bios and I can´t find it there.
Anyone know where I can find the device?


----------



## AvengedRobix

my daily settings work very well.... NOW have any advice for me for push more RAM? not for stability but just for benching


----------



## harderthanfire

Swapped out my water cooling for a Dark Rock 4 Pro - temps are much lower both max and min.


Pretty much confirms for me that the waterblock design/orientation makes a huge difference to watercooling effectiveness on this chip.


----------



## xeizo

harderthanfire said:


> Swapped out my water cooling for a Dark Rock 4 Pro - temps are much lower both max and min.
> 
> 
> Pretty much confirms for me that the waterblock design/orientation makes a huge difference to watercooling effectiveness on this chip.


I have a Dark Rock Pro 4 and while it's good my Corsair H150i Pro 360 rad do get lower temps. 75C torture test instead of 80-81C. But the Dark Rock Pro is more silent during load, which is also important. I use it for my DAW now, which inherited the 2700X, DAW = you want silent. 

I'm now at 55GB/s+ bandwith for my 2x16GB dual rank memory membench stable, even tighter subtimings doesn't seem to do much, next step is 3800MHz:










Not very fun benchmarking when close to 30C in the room


----------



## lordzed83

Well AVOID them new beta chipset drivers









@webwilli why would You flash BETA bios that got loads of bugs and is slower than previous 3 ??


----------



## Stolar

Official asus page have only bios Version 2501. Please give my link to 2602 Bios or another new beta bios.
Please 
i Have ROG Crosshair VII and ryzen 7 3700x, 
MB crash after chanage ram speed in bios with C5 Q-CODE and only clear bios buton helps.
Please give my Good Bios.


----------



## xeizo

lordzed83 said:


> Well AVOID them new beta chipset drivers
> https://bpcprdstorageacc.blob.core..../7e03213100391b4e911a6f0266f287e108900742.png
> 
> 
> @webwilli why would You flash BETA bios that got loads of bugs and is slower than previous 3 ??


I would avoid it anyway, I'm told it kills virtualization. I hope the official driver won't be gimped.

Down to 64.5 ns! ( bios 2501 is not that bad, once you know your way around the bugs )










edit. and now it's verified not membench stable, I wish it was , I suppose 3800 1:1 is a real challenge


----------



## xeizo

Stolar said:


> Official asus page have only bios Version 2501. Please give my link to 2602 Bios or another new beta bios.
> Please
> i Have ROG Crosshair VII and ryzen 7 3700x,
> MB crash after chanage ram speed in bios with C5 Q-CODE and only clear bios buton helps.
> Please give my Good Bios.


Bios 2501 is the best so far, you better raise Vboot Dram Voltage to 1.35-1.4V and you wont get C5.


----------



## lordzed83

Stolar said:


> Official asus page have only bios Version 2501. Please give my link to 2602 Bios or another new beta bios.
> Please
> i Have ROG Crosshair VII and ryzen 7 3700x,
> MB crash after chanage ram speed in bios with C5 Q-CODE and only clear bios buton helps.
> Please give my Good Bios.


This bios is even worse if it goes for booting lol. Let me type it for You. ITS **** we tested it in every aspect and its worse in every possible way. Boots slow retrains memory on reboot loosess performance in every benchmark and game and its not stable.

You think why its not on Asus website ?? Cause we told em not to put it up !!!


----------



## chakku

Beta Chipset was meant for people who play Destiny 2 only for testing the game can launch now, there's a reason it was released on Dropbox by Robert Hallock and not on the official website..


----------



## Gigabytes

Stolar said:


> Official asus page have only bios Version 2501. Please give my link to 2602 Bios or another new beta bios.
> Please
> i Have ROG Crosshair VII and ryzen 7 3700x,
> MB crash after chanage ram speed in bios with C5 Q-CODE and only clear bios buton helps.
> Please give my Good Bios.


Here is the link https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?112279-X370-X470-AGESA-1003AB-Bioses

It's a fix for the game issue with Ryzen 3000 so I read. I am running it and have no major issues, the power down reset to F1 enter bios is working, that's enough reason for me to run it. Besides it will probably be 6 months before the BIOS matures.


----------



## CCoR

Anybody able to run a 5700 series card on C7H without being in PCIE 4.0 mode? No matter what setting I use it defaults to 4. Tried the 2 most recent bios' so far.


----------



## oreonutz

kmellz said:


> For anyone that uses SVM-virtualization etc, those beta drivers apparently breaks it at the moment, but the ones released tomorrow(?) should be fine I guess.


This is interesting. I hadn't heard that, and half my work is Virtualization. I installed the Drivers when I saw them this morning and fired up a few rounds of Destiny 2 While I had 2 VM's running in the background, One Running Data Recovery with R Studio on a Clients drive, the other Converting an Acronis Image into a VMWare VM. I Gave the one Running the Data Recovery Operation 2 Cores 4 Threads, and the One Virtualizing the Image 4 Cores 8 Threads, and was still getting 120+ FPS at 1440p with no Stuttering or Frame Time Issues at all. I am currently running a Virtual Machine right now actually, and have not had any issues. This is all within VMware Workstation Pro which does use SVM. Do you know if this only breaks a Certain type of Virtualization, Like Hyper V or Virtual Box? Or is this only with Bare Metal Virtualization, Like ESXi, XenServer, or Unraid?

Just curious.


----------



## oreonutz

hifi12 said:


> Hey, I didn't see your reply, sorry.
> 
> What I don't understand is that other people run this CPU at max temp in the high 70º, that's why I really start to blame the CH7 for this behavior.
> 
> But you say, you don't observe the bug I and other ch7 users have with PPT and TDC values and got same temps, so I don't know..
> 
> It does effectively cool things down when I set a negative offset of 0.1V or if I set EDC to 130W. But I don't want to do this in the long run.


Yeah I am not sure, Auto or PBO isn't giving me the results I need with Multi-Threaded Clocks, so I haven't done much with PPT and TDC and I am Per CCX Overclocking, which disables those calculation (Or more ignores them I should say). So I am not sure about the bug, I am sure it exists.

All I know is that heat is a problem with these chips that most everyone is seeing. Anyone who isn't seeing that is either running really good cooling, or has gotten really lucky or just not pushing their chip as far, however I could be wrong, I just know a lot of people that I trust in these forums are also seeing very high Temps under full load.

I have seen a few guys Like @lordzed83 Post that by Rotating the Block 90 degrees they are seeing a big difference in Temperatures, so I am going to definitely try this out when I get a chance as he is one of those guys on this forum who has a track record of knowing what he is doing, along with @gupsterg, @majestynl, @crakej, The Stilt, @mtrai, and all the other Legends that have been posting in these forums for Years to Decades. So I tend to pay close attention to what those guys are saying specifically (there are more than a dozen others as well just hard to name them all, but the guys who you can see posts from in this forum going back years who have a track record of being helpful and posting in depth and useful data as well as having a genuine passion for the tech, and not just posting every now and again when they are having problems, but posting whenever they find anything interesting and want to compare and improve) and when all of their numbers tend to be around what I am seeing with my own processor then I know I am fine, if they all seem to be much lower, then I usually know i am doing something wrong and then try to figure out what it is. In this case they all seem to be getting around the same Temps I am seeing, keep in mind some of them have bigger and beefier coolers then I do, so the ones with the slightly better numbers are usually because of that. So in this case I don't think there is too much of an issue seeing those kind of temps when pushing the chip to the max (Which stock does), as these chips just run hot.

That said you do seem to be seeing some other odd behavior, I unfortunately can't speak to that, but hopefully it will start to get ironed out shortly.


----------



## oreonutz

xeizo said:


> I would avoid it anyway, I'm told it kills virtualization.


You are the second person now I have read say that in this forum. I would have never installed this chipset had I heard this before I installed them to fix Destiny 2. That said, at least with a Hosted HyperVisor (Specifically using VMWare Workstation Pro 15) I have not had ANY Virtualization issues AT ALL, and I am running those Beta Chipset Drivers posted By AMD Robert over in Reddit. I have not run Benchmarks since, so I can't yet speak to if their is a slight performance regression like @lordzed83 alluded to, but I can say with absolute certainty, that at least with my configuration using VMWare Workstation Pro 15, Virtualization is working just fine. The HyperVisor appears to be intact 100% and the performance I have been seeing in VMs is the best I have seen yet on a Mainstream Desktop Platform.

So Just wondering if I am just an anomaly, or if this is just an issue with a specific hypervisor, or if someone who initially reported the issue actually just experienced a coincedence. It just has me curious, I am going to boot up to my ESXi Drive in the morning to see if I have problems there, but so far in Windows Virtualization has been awesome, even on these beta drivers (Which did Fix the Destiny 2 not launching issue for me by the way).


----------



## lordzed83

chakku said:


> Beta Chipset was meant for people who play Destiny 2 only for testing the game can launch now, there's a reason it was released on Dropbox by Robert Hallock and not on the official website..


Yup but gotta test if its any good. Found em unstable and slower


----------



## oreonutz

lordzed83 said:


> Yup but gotta test if its any good. Found em unstable and slower


I can't speak to if its slower, I did see your Cinebench benchmark showing it to be about 100 Points slower, but my own Cinebench Runs shows these drivers being within the Margin of error for me. I am running the same exact Per CCX Overclock at the same Voltage with the Same RAM speed of 3466Mhz at CL14 and have not experienced any regression. Not saying its not there as I haven't done in-depth testing only a few preliminary benchmark runs, and so far for me its been great, AND I can now run Destiny 2 which is awesome! But just because I haven't noticed any issues, doesn't mean they don't exist, I mainly just been running my normal day to day workflow, and for me performance during that has been just as kick ass as it has been. I am still on UEFI 2501 though, and still on Windows 10 1809 as I there are several changes in 1903 that I am avoiding for as long as I can.

On another note, if anyone is interested I have the perfect fix for stopping Windows Updates altogether, no worries about automatic updating because it simply won't work with my very easy trick, if anyone cares.

Also interested if anyone has tried my Auto Per CCX Overclocking Script yet and what you think of it if you had? Ok will shut up now!


----------



## mtrai

CCoR said:


> Anybody able to run a 5700 series card on C7H without being in PCIE 4.0 mode? No matter what setting I use it defaults to 4. Tried the 2 most recent bios' so far.


Here is the deal atm for this setup. I use it. If you leave it set to auto you will have all kinds of issues. You must set it to gen 3. Monitoring tools and such currently cannot read it all correctly on the 5700. For example Gpu-Z reports it it is running at pcie 4.0 while I am still using a 2700x which does not even have a pci 4.0 controller so it is impossible.

If you are just looking at monitoring tools know they are reporting a lot of incorrect info currently. So just set it to 3.0. This also applies as have read many issues on 570 board or a 3000 series cpu, and just setting it to gen 3 fixes so many different issues.


----------



## lordzed83

oreonutz said:


> I can't speak to if its slower, I did see your Cinebench benchmark showing it to be about 100 Points slower, but my own Cinebench Runs shows these drivers being within the Margin of error for me. I am running the same exact Per CCX Overclock at the same Voltage with the Same RAM speed of 3466Mhz at CL14 and have not experienced any regression. Not saying its not there as I haven't done in-depth testing only a few preliminary benchmark runs, and so far for me its been great, AND I can now run Destiny 2 which is awesome! But just because I haven't noticed any issues, doesn't mean they don't exist, I mainly just been running my normal day to day workflow, and for me performance during that has been just as kick ass as it has been. I am still on UEFI 2501 though, and still on Windows 10 1809 as I there are several changes in 1903 that I am avoiding for as long as I can.
> 
> On another note, if anyone is interested I have the perfect fix for stopping Windows Updates altogether, no worries about automatic updating because it simply won't work with my very easy trick, if anyone cares.
> 
> Also interested if anyone has tried my Auto Per CCX Overclocking Script yet and what you think of it if you had? Ok will shut up now!


By stability im like I'w tried running Ycruncher PI same Everything no go dropped 25mhz NO GO. Reinstalled older ones back to passing run after run after run. 
I was sure i lost cb points due to memory so spent 1 hour messing around with settings before i reverted chipset drivers all back to wheer it was.
Not sure why but on my system its as you see slower and less stable i could reinstall them after work and replicate but done it 2 times last night to be sure.


----------



## VPII

oreonutz said:


> I can't speak to if its slower, I did see your Cinebench benchmark showing it to be about 100 Points slower, but my own Cinebench Runs shows these drivers being within the Margin of error for me. I am running the same exact Per CCX Overclock at the same Voltage with the Same RAM speed of 3466Mhz at CL14 and have not experienced any regression. Not saying its not there as I haven't done in-depth testing only a few preliminary benchmark runs, and so far for me its been great, AND I can now run Destiny 2 which is awesome! But just because I haven't noticed any issues, doesn't mean they don't exist, I mainly just been running my normal day to day workflow, and for me performance during that has been just as kick ass as it has been. I am still on UEFI 2501 though, and still on Windows 10 1809 as I there are several changes in 1903 that I am avoiding for as long as I can.
> 
> On another note, if anyone is interested I have the perfect fix for stopping Windows Updates altogether, no worries about automatic updating because it simply won't work with my very easy trick, if anyone cares.
> 
> Also interested if anyone has tried my Auto Per CCX Overclocking Script yet and what you think of it if you had? Ok will shut up now!


My friend, not on here all that often, I remember seeing you post with the link to the revamped per ccx clocking tool, but I cannot seem to find it. I use it as I do manual oc with a set vcore which does not change from what is set in bios. Please can you show me the link or even pm me the link.

Your help will be greatly appreciated.


----------



## crakej

New Ryzen CPUs coming out.... including the 9 3900 65w tdp and 3900 Pro

https://hothardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-9-3900-ryzen-7-3700-and-ryzen-5-3500-zen-2-eec

I've been testing a CL16 profile at 3733 and it's as good as my CL14. Tiny loss in copy performance. I reckon CL15 GD disabled is prob sweet spot, but just can't get anything reliable with GD off (for 3600+), I wonder if it's power it needs to keep it off? I used to be able to boot to my desktop @ 3866 on my 1700x (golden chip that one) with GD on, but it was really unreliable. I can't do that with my 3900x.

It's very interesting learning the limits of this new platform - temps, timings, performance. Currently just seeing how much I can lower ram volts after going to CL16 from CL14 and checking performance. Will of course report anything interesting I find. I can't take it too seriously yet, not when I know the next bios will be reasonably different, having already experimented with 2602/AGESA1003 already. AB and ABA done, at least we know ABB (lol  ) is being worked on as we speak.

I wonder if we'll get an ABBA version that sings 'money money money' when it's done?

Funny thing coming back from 2602 to 2501, I think I've had just 1 C5 error! I guess I'm just getting more used to dealing with the CPU

I have not OCed my CPU at all. The only thing i've done is in the Power section - LLC2, manual, ultrafast switching @ 550MHz and 140% in the juice department. I think sadly my cpu will never run IF at 1900 - but never say never - I think part of the equation may well be the ram, not just the cpu - we shall see. It's interesting that the bios has dividers which go up really high for the IF - just wondering if it's future proofing or if they just haven't bothered leaving the max as 1900. I will keep trying though!

I do get the feeling that if I were to be able to go higher with ram at 1:1, I think I would have to start giving my cpu more juice

Edit: Just testing *1.38v* for my ram at 3733 CL16 - down from 1.475v for CL14!
Edit2: Settled on 1.385v for ram. Passed IBT V hard (non AVX ver). Performance is great, on IBT Just 2 seconds slower than my CL14 profile at 1.475v. A few other things to check before any results though....like mem stability.


----------



## kmellz

oreonutz said:


> This is interesting. I hadn't heard that, and half my work is Virtualization. I installed the Drivers when I saw them this morning and fired up a few rounds of Destiny 2 While I had 2 VM's running in the background, One Running Data Recovery with R Studio on a Clients drive, the other Converting an Acronis Image into a VMWare VM. I Gave the one Running the Data Recovery Operation 2 Cores 4 Threads, and the One Virtualizing the Image 4 Cores 8 Threads, and was still getting 120+ FPS at 1440p with no Stuttering or Frame Time Issues at all. I am currently running a Virtual Machine right now actually, and have not had any issues. This is all within VMware Workstation Pro which does use SVM. Do you know if this only breaks a Certain type of Virtualization, Like Hyper V or Virtual Box? Or is this only with Bare Metal Virtualization, Like ESXi, XenServer, or Unraid?
> 
> Just curious.


Saw it while looking through the reddit thread, one guy had maaassive problems with SVM enabled in BIOS, couldn't even get into windows if I recall. But if it's working fine for you I guess it might be system dependant!

Edit: https://community.amd.com/community...te-5-let-s-talk-clocks-voltages-and-destiny-2


----------



## xeizo

crakej said:


> New Ryzen CPUs coming out.... including the 9 3900 65w tdp and 3900 Pro
> 
> https://hothardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-9-3900-ryzen-7-3700-and-ryzen-5-3500-zen-2-eec
> 
> I've been testing a CL16 profile at 3733 and it's as good as my CL14. Tiny loss in copy performance. I reckon CL15 GD disabled is prob sweet spot, but just can't get anything reliable with GD off (for 3600+), I wonder if it's power it needs to keep it off? I used to be able to boot to my desktop @ 3866 on my 1700x (golden chip that one) with GD on, but it was really unreliable. I can't do that with my 3900x.
> 
> It's very interesting learning the limits of this new platform - temps, timings, performance. Currently just seeing how much I can lower ram volts after going to CL16 from CL14 and checking performance. Will of course report anything interesting I find. I can't take it too seriously yet, not when I know the next bios will be reasonably different, having already experimented with 2602/AGESA1003 already. AB and ABA done, at least we know ABB (lol  ) is being worked on as we speak.
> 
> I wonder if we'll get an ABBA version that sings 'money money money' when it's done?
> 
> Funny thing coming back from 2602 to 2501, I think I've had just 1 C5 error! I guess I'm just getting more used to dealing with the CPU
> 
> I have not OCed my CPU at all. The only thing i've done is in the Power section - LLC2, manual, ultrafast switching @ 550MHz and 140% in the juice department. I think sadly my cpu will never run IF at 1900 - but never say never - I think part of the equation may well be the ram, not just the cpu - we shall see. It's interesting that the bios has dividers which go up really high for the IF - just wondering if it's future proofing or if they just haven't bothered leaving the max as 1900. I will keep trying though!
> 
> I do get the feeling that if I were to be able to go higher with ram at 1:1, I think I would have to start giving my cpu more juice
> 
> Edit: Just testing *1.38v* for my ram at 3733 CL16 - down from 1.475v for CL14!
> Edit2: Settled on 1.385v for ram. Passed IBT V hard (non AVX ver). Performance is great, on IBT Just 2 seconds slower than my CL14 profile at 1.475v. A few other things to check before any results though....like mem stability.


Below is my AIDA64 membench stable setting for now at 3733MHz, 3800 mem/1900 IF is Windows/Games-stable but craps out after 5 min in AIDA64. I also went the lower volts route, currently at 1.4V but I will try lower as even at 1.4V mem temp is crawling slowly upwards during torture. Current setting is 16-16-16-16-30-42-1T, trfc at 298, ProcODT at 53.3, CAD at 24 Ohm, PowerDown and RTT_Nom disabled and RZQ3 + RZQ1, Extreme Phase on DRAM and 500MHz switching freq. I haven't tried everything at 3800MHz there's still a fair chance of getting it AIDA64 stable, I will get back to it, possibly later bioses will finally nail that freq. But happy for now!


----------



## xeizo

New driver, new Ryzen Master:

https://community.amd.com/community...te-5-let-s-talk-clocks-voltages-and-destiny-2


----------



## mtrai

CCoR said:


> Anybody able to run a 5700 series card on C7H without being in PCIE 4.0 mode? No matter what setting I use it defaults to 4. Tried the 2 most recent bios' so far.


Yes most monitoring tools are reporting it running at 4.0 until they get updated.

Though I needed to set it in the bios to Gen 3 for correct behavior as auto on the PCIe 16/8 was causing all kinds of issues for me. Radeon Setting can read both what the gpu can run at and what it is currently running at correctly. See my screenshot I just took.


----------



## oreonutz

VPII said:


> My friend, not on here all that often, I remember seeing you post with the link to the revamped per ccx clocking tool, but I cannot seem to find it. I use it as I do manual oc with a set vcore which does not change from what is set in bios. Please can you show me the link or even pm me the link.
> 
> Your help will be greatly appreciated.


I apologize just got back on. Here is the post where I posted the Auto Start Per CCX OC Script for anyone who is curious:

https://www.overclock.net/forum/28057590-post7664.html


----------



## VPII

oreonutz said:


> I apologize just got back on. Here is the post where I posted the Auto Start Per CCX OC Script for anyone who is curious:
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/28057590-post7664.html


Shot my friend, thanks Ill give it a shot

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## Martelele

Hello guys,today I wanted to flash bios to modded v2501 via asus flashback but it doesn't seem to work.Light blinks for about 5 seconds and then turn to a steady light.I tried 2 usb sticks formatted to fat32,I also tried vanilla v2501 but it doesn't seem to work either.Has anyone came across that issue and know what can I do about it to get it working? Cheers


----------



## chakku

Martelele said:


> Hello guys,today I wanted to flash bios to modded v2501 via asus flashback but it doesn't seem to work.Light blinks for about 5 seconds and then turn to a steady light.I tried 2 usb sticks formatted to fat32,I also tried vanilla v2501 but it doesn't seem to work either.Has anyone came across that issue and know what can I do about it to get it working? Cheers


Did you make sure to rename the .CAP to C7H.CAP/C7HWIFI.CAP and grab the correct file for WIFI or Non-WIFI?


----------



## xeizo

Martelele said:


> Hello guys,today I wanted to flash bios to modded v2501 via asus flashback but it doesn't seem to work.Light blinks for about 5 seconds and then turn to a steady light.I tried 2 usb sticks formatted to fat32,I also tried vanilla v2501 but it doesn't seem to work either.Has anyone came across that issue and know what can I do about it to get it working? Cheers


The stick can't be larger than 32GB, there can be problems with USB 3.0 sticks, USB 2.0 sticks are preferred. Bios must be renamed to C7H and be in the root of the stick. Some USB-sticks don't work for different reasons, I saw one user who tried 5 sticks before finding a working one. For myself I have a old Kingston Data Traveller 2.0 4GB which works perfect, I have it in the flash port all the time to save and recall bios settings.


----------



## Martelele

chakku said:


> Did you make sure to rename the .CAP to C7H.CAP/C7HWIFI.CAP and grab the correct file for WIFI or Non-WIFI?


Of course,that's the correct version for my non-wifi board.


----------



## Martelele

xeizo said:


> The stick can't be larger than 32GB, there can be problems with USB 3.0 sticks, USB 2.0 sticks are preferred. Bios must be renamed to C7H and be in the root of the stick. Some USB-sticks don't work for different reasons, I saw one user who tried 5 sticks before finding a working one. For myself I have a old Kingston Data Traveller 2.0 4GB which works perfect, I have it in the flash port all the time to save and recall bios settings.


I tried 8gb and 16gb stick,tried usb 2.0 as well as 3.0.I renamed the bios and made sure it's on the root of the stick.I also have Kingston data traveller but 8gb version.


----------



## Xploder270

I seem to be hitting a power limit of 115W on my 3700X regardless of limits set for PPT/TDC/EDC. 
Is that an intentional hard-coded limit? Does the 3800X show the same behvaviour?


----------



## xeizo

Xploder270 said:


> I seem to be hitting a power limit of 115W on my 3700X regardless of limits set for PPT/TDC/EDC.
> Is that an intentional hard-coded limit? Does the 3800X show the same behvaviour?


I shouldn't bother unless on LN2, with PBO it's 88W and that is pretty close to the limits of the chip. Almost zero OC on Air/Water.

Still performs much better than 2700X does at 170W.


----------



## Xploder270

Using x256 benchmark I only get 4100MHz all core with maxed limits and it seems to not go over 115W Power. This is at 70°C and low voltages. There is definitely some headroom I can't use.


----------



## mtrai

Martelele said:


> Hello guys,today I wanted to flash bios to modded v2501 via asus flashback but it doesn't seem to work.Light blinks for about 5 seconds and then turn to a steady light.I tried 2 usb sticks formatted to fat32,I also tried vanilla v2501 but it doesn't seem to work either.Has anyone came across that issue and know what can I do about it to get it working? Cheers


I have numerous USB sticks...however only 1 of them plays with my C7H flashback correctly no other works. Now the funny thing is on my C6H only 1 different usb sticks, I have, works. It is quite finicky.


----------



## Martelele

I found 2 different usb sticks in my house and fortunately the third one I tried worked.Thanks for you advice xeizo.


----------



## Martelele

mtrai said:


> I have numerous USB sticks...however only 1 of them plays with my C7H flashback correctly no other works. Now the funny thing is on my C6H only 1 different usb sticks, I have, works. It is quite finicky.


Hi dude,thanks for the information.I finally get it to work and I also wanted to let you know that your modded v2501 bios doesn't work on a non-wifi board,there are no additional settings as HPET or spread spectrum (used search for that).Can I kindly ask you to have a look into this as I have no knowledge about modding the bios? Cheers mate


----------



## xeizo

Xploder270 said:


> Using x256 benchmark I only get 4100MHz all core with maxed limits and it seems to not go over 115W Power. This is at 70°C and low voltages. There is definitely some headroom I can't use.


I doubt it's actually consuming 115W, have you checked in HWINFO64(package power)? When I stresstest it maxes out at 85W at 4150MHz and 1.35V, temps like 75C. No way you can be consuming 115W unless it's all AVX but then you should have higher temps even on water.


----------



## lordzed83

Chilled down in uk check my water from cpu temperature when reading stuff on internets 
https://bpcprdstorageacc.blob.core....3b5577a144ce71269b026b64a68e673c060e07bc.jpeg


----------



## crakej

So, got my 3733MTs profile stable at CL16, reducing ram voltage to 1.41v

Sitting looking at Ryzen Master, displaying my cpu voltage as 1.4562v, or thereabout, even under load it wasn't going much lower - 1.43xxv just didn't seem right. I've noticed that AISuite (and others) had shown me figures that were a LOT more believable, so I tested all the probe-it points and compared with RM and a few other monitoring apps. Only 1 monitoring app was run at once.

*RM is NOT showing me the right voltages. AISuite IS MUCH MORE ACCURATE!* HWInfo came out on top, with Aida and AISuite both in a close 2nd place.

You can also compare with settings that were entered in the UEFI. Auto values are entered correctly by the UEFI - like 1.8PLL and SB 1.05V, I think CPU defaults to 1.375.

I'm sure RM can show me the lower frequencies and sleeping cores, but NOT correct voltages. I also suspect max clocks are not right in RM as the other monitors tell another tail - which they seem to concur. RM is the only monitoring software that hardly ever, if ever, shows me proper boost frequencies/multipliers. More testing needed on the frequency side of things, but RM is NOT showing me the right voltages. So I don't think we need to worry about high VCore displayed in RM.

This is just showing what MY system does, it might be different for you, but I'/m going to ditch RM for the most part.

Edit: What RM calls 'CPU Voltage' is in fact (something like an average of) VID, It's not VCore. So whats the max VCore (or VID) we can have?


----------



## VPII

I've had my Ryzen 9 3900x now for a week. Been messing around trying to see what it can do with my flarex memory. From the start I got 3600 memory with 1800 IF working for benchmarks, not stable as timings was cl 14 the stock timings for my flarex set.

Unfortunately I lost that ability on the ram to the point where I decided to get a x570 mobo. Funds were an issue so I settled for a Gigabyte Aorus Elite. Big mistake. Firstly the pch chipset fan did not work even if set to full speed in bios. And my cpu overclocks would not work. I returned the board and will wait for a refund. No x570 Asus boards in South Africa as of yet.

I went back to my trusted c7h with 2501 bios flashed back again and I found 100% stable memory to be 3333 with 1666 IF. Ibasically only manual overclock and Im bench, and I mean only bench stable as follow using 1.35vcore set in bios. Vcore might be high but temps barely reach 80c when benching. Ccx clocks as follow.

Ccx0 - 44 x 100.8 = 4435
Ccx1 - 43.75 x 100.8 = 4410
Ccx2 - 43.5 x 100.8 = 4384
Ccx3 - 43.25 x 100.8 = 4359

Now these clocks are 100% bench stable. However, I found a quick way to confirm stability which is more severe than AVX and it is to run the FP64 Ray trace benchmark in Aida64. With the above clocks it failed in a matter of seconds but cpu temps jumped to 104c. I got a shock but found stability now at 4258mhz using 1.25vcore. The fp64 bench pass and puts it about in line with a 32core threadripper.

I did however find that vcore reported in hwinfo64 was the same as what is set in bios but in cpuz it was about 0.025 lower. When I checked with multimeter on probelt it appears the vcore in cpuz is accurate. If 1.35 set in bios it is actually 1.33v if 1.25 set in bios it is actually 1.225.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## oreonutz

Martelele said:


> Hello guys,today I wanted to flash bios to modded v2501 via asus flashback but it doesn't seem to work.Light blinks for about 5 seconds and then turn to a steady light.I tried 2 usb sticks formatted to fat32,I also tried vanilla v2501 but it doesn't seem to work either.Has anyone came across that issue and know what can I do about it to get it working? Cheers


Yes the Non-WIFI version of the Modded UEFI also did not work for me. I had the same exact experience as you. I use UEFI flashback alot and have tried multiple different times to get it to work. The Wifi version of the Modded UEFI works perfectly with the Wifi Board, but the Non Wifi version has an issue where its not recognized as genuine. I was planning on fixing this at some point, but there is a lot to learn with modding UEFI's so I haven't gotten around to it yet. I badly wanted to test it as well, but the maker of the modded version @mtrai unfortunately only has the Wifi Version of this board so he isn't able to validate our claims.


----------



## oreonutz

Martelele said:


> Hi dude,thanks for the information.I finally get it to work and I also wanted to let you know that your modded v2501 bios doesn't work on a non-wifi board,there are no additional settings as HPET or spread spectrum (used search for that).Can I kindly ask you to have a look into this as I have no knowledge about modding the bios? Cheers mate


Are you sure the Modded UEFI actually flashed? I already had the official 2501 flashed on my board when attempting to flash the Modded UEFI using Flashback and it would always take forever before it stopped flashing, but I would always end back up with my original Official 2501 UEFI. I also would search for HPET and Spread Spectrum and it wouldn't be there, and all my previous Saved profiles would still be in the Profile section of the UEFI, so I assumed the flash just failed.

I eventually plan to learn how to mod the UEFI, but haven't taken the time to study up on it yet.


----------



## Xploder270

xeizo said:


> I doubt it's actually consuming 115W, have you checked in HWINFO64(package power)? When I stresstest it maxes out at 85W at 4150MHz and 1.35V, temps like 75C. No way you can be consuming 115W unless it's all AVX but then you should have higher temps even on water.


It maxes out at 120W package power, regardless of PBO options. It looks like a hardcoded limit but someone on the /r/amd discord showed his 3700X running at 160W :/
Disclaimer: This is on an X470-F with AGESA 1.0.0.2.


----------



## xeizo

Xploder270 said:


> It maxes out at 120W package power, regardless of PBO options. It looks like a hardcoded limit but someone on the /r/amd discord showed his 3700X running at 160W :/
> Disclaimer: This is on an X470-F with AGESA 1.0.0.2.


It looks like that, package power has stopped working for me, it's frozen at 11W and TDC is stone dead. CPU + SOC goes up to 85W though and PPT is 88W. And that is with raising all values in the bios, but they do not register.

I think we can agree on this being a bug fest at the moment, it is not possible to draw any conclusions.


----------



## Axaion

Funny enough, with the new chipset driver i have the same performance as windows balanced, but just with 4c higher heat due to 1.4v vs 0.9-1.1v idles 

Guess im staying on windows balanced for a bit

But im also on 1809, due to my AE-5 Creative sound card not working in 1903..

(DONT BUY CREATIVE. LOL.)


----------



## mtrai

Martelele said:


> Hi dude,thanks for the information.I finally get it to work and I also wanted to let you know that your modded v2501 bios doesn't work on a non-wifi board,there are no additional settings as HPET or spread spectrum (used search for that).Can I kindly ask you to have a look into this as I have no knowledge about modding the bios? Cheers mate


I am aware for some reason it will not flash...I have been sick with Pneumonia so not really felt like much of anything.


----------



## mtrai

oreonutz said:


> Are you sure the Modded UEFI actually flashed? I already had the official 2501 flashed on my board when attempting to flash the Modded UEFI using Flashback and it would always take forever before it stopped flashing, but I would always end back up with my original Official 2501 UEFI. I also would search for HPET and Spread Spectrum and it wouldn't be there, and all my previous Saved profiles would still be in the Profile section of the UEFI, so I assumed the flash just failed.
> 
> I eventually plan to learn how to mod the UEFI, but haven't taken the time to study up on it yet.


Gonna try and and fix it today if I can find the strenght to sit at my desk for that long been very sick.


----------



## Jaju123

Axaion said:


> Funny enough, with the new chipset driver i have the same performance as windows balanced, but just with 4c higher heat due to 1.4v vs 0.9-1.1v idles
> 
> Guess im staying on windows balanced for a bit
> 
> But im also on 1809, due to my AE-5 Creative sound card not working in 1903..
> 
> (DONT BUY CREATIVE. LOL.)


I found that the minimum processor status was pegged at 99% in the new chipset driver profile. I put it back to 0% and now it goes down to 0.9V on the balanced profile. I guess it's not supposed to be stuck at 1.4V at idle?


----------



## Axaion

Jaju123 said:


> I found that the minimum processor status was pegged at 99% in the new chipset driver profile. I put it back to 0% and now it goes down to 0.9V on the balanced profile. I guess it's not supposed to be stuck at 1.4V at idle?


nope, should go to sub 1.0v idle

but eh, windows balanced works so far so ill just wait for more updates


----------



## mtrai

Oh and enough ASUS...both Gigabyte and ASRock have now released bios for x470 with 1.0.0.3abb.


----------



## crakej

mtrai said:


> Oh and enough ASUS...both Gigabyte and ASRock have now released bios for x470 with 1.0.0.3abb.


Shamino said they have it, so hopefully will come soon.

Take care of yourself for goodness sake! Your health is more important than a bios!

For me, new Ryzen Balanced power plan was at 100%/100% - but works perfectly, as it should at 99% also. My CPU is down-volting. Power goes crazy low - highish voltages (in R Master which is showing (avg?) VID) - but ridiculously low wattage 0.3w.

So when idle, VID (RM is showing VID remember) will hover around 1.45 to 1.5v (measured Vcore of 1.36x volts) with cores dropping down to .3w - not enough to damage the cores.


----------



## lordzed83

mtrai said:


> Oh and enough ASUS...both Gigabyte and ASRock have now released bios for x470 with 1.0.0.3abb.


Asus is testing theirs thats what they said 2 days ago


----------



## xeizo

crakej said:


> Shamino said they have it, so hopefully will come soon.
> 
> Take care of yourself for goodness sake! Your health is more important than a bios!


+1 on Health, this is only some PC:s not the most important stuff. Things will be sorted out, just take it easy


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> Gonna try and and fix it today if I can find the strenght to sit at my desk for that long been very sick.


Hey man, I have been there. Take your time to get better, we can wait.

I know teaching other people sucks, I hate when people ask me and I am not in the mood. But if you ever are in the mood to take some one under your wing, I very much would like to learn as much as possible from you about modding UEFI's. Hope you get better man!


----------



## Martelele

oreonutz said:


> Are you sure the Modded UEFI actually flashed? I already had the official 2501 flashed on my board when attempting to flash the Modded UEFI using Flashback and it would always take forever before it stopped flashing, but I would always end back up with my original Official 2501 UEFI. I also would search for HPET and Spread Spectrum and it wouldn't be there, and all my previous Saved profiles would still be in the Profile section of the UEFI, so I assumed the flash just failed.
> 
> I eventually plan to learn how to mod the UEFI, but haven't taken the time to study up on it yet.


I downloaded modded bios provided by mtrai but it seems that it flashes my bios with vanilla v2501.Everything seems fine but I can't find any additional features like HPET.


----------



## mtrai

/Edit Change the link to correct the error. It is just the bios the asus renamer was causing an erro.

I re-uped C7H 2501 mod Please try this one. Remember you have to rename for flashback. The name for flashback is C7H.cap It does take about 10 mins to flash with flashback. The blue flashback light should keep blinking during the entire flash. IF it only blinks 3 times it failed to read the USB stick.

removed link still does not flash correctly

Remember to to see HPET or Spread Spectrum and a bunch of other things you have to use F9 search and type in partial name of the option you want to find. Also see q-fan control as you should find you can greatly customize fan controls. Also check out the Advanced menu.

And lastly please let me know if this worked correctly.


----------



## xeizo

mtrai said:


> I re-uped C7H 2501 mod Please try this one. Remember you have to rename for flashback. I included the Asus renamer tool in the folder.
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1g5NrAa2ikr-nB7uMGiTT16uglhu9BNcG/view?usp=sharing
> 
> Remember to to see HPET or Spread Spectrum and a bunch of other things you have to use F9 search and type in partial name of the option you want to find. Also see q-fan control as you should find you can greatly customize fan controls. Also check out the Advanced menu.
> 
> And lastly please let me know if this worked correctly.


"We're sorry. You can't access this item because it is in violation of our Terms of Service."


----------



## thegr8anand

Guys got my 3900x and C7H. What's the basic oc i should use? Pbo or go manual?


----------



## mtrai

xeizo said:


> "We're sorry. You can't access this item because it is in violation of our Terms of Service."


It was cause of the asus renamer .exe I removed the renamer.

Try this link it is just the bios

Link removed still not flashing correctly.

Will need to rename it to C7H.cap and use flashback.


----------



## Jaju123

thegr8anand said:


> Guys got my 3900x and C7H. What's the basic oc i should use? Pbo or go manual?


I think just enable PBO, then focus on getting memory frequency up to 3800 with infinity fabric (FCLK) at 1900 or as close to there as possible (then optimise subtimings). Remember to keep FCLK and memory speed in 1:1 ratio.


----------



## thegr8anand

Jaju123 said:


> I think just enable PBO, then focus on getting memory frequency up to 3800 with infinity fabric (FCLK) at 1900 or as close to there as possible (then optimise subtimings). Remember to keep FCLK and memory speed in 1:1 ratio.



Performance Enhancer L1/L2/L3/L4?


----------



## Jaju123

thegr8anand said:


> Performance Enhancer L1/L2/L3/L4?


I dont think those options exist anymore for this CPU 

It's a shame as I used to use PE L3 and it worked very well on my 2700x.


----------



## xeizo

Jaju123 said:


> I dont think those options exist anymore for this CPU
> 
> It's a shame as I used to use PE L3 and it worked very well on my 2700x.


These cpus already runs hot, PE3/PE4 would create fire


----------



## majestynl

thegr8anand said:


> Performance Enhancer L1/L2/L3/L4?





Jaju123 said:


> I dont think those options exist anymore for this CPU
> 
> It's a shame as I used to use PE L3 and it worked very well on my 2700x.





xeizo said:


> These cpus already runs hot, PE3/PE4 would create fire



AFAIK PE levels where doing the same/almost same what we can do now in the Precision Boost Overdrive menu! And therefore is was not needed anymore.


----------



## Bart

PBO is horrible and unstable on X470, at least on my C7H. PE level 3 works flawlessly. Simply enabling PBO creates tons more voltage, while actually hurting performance. Yeah the clocks appear to be boosting higher, but with INSANE voltage (OVER 1.5V) and it benches way worse with PBO.


----------



## thegr8anand

Are you guys using LLC and other power settings from the bios?


----------



## crakej

I have mentioned it before, but on bios 2602, PE modes 1 to 4 were there and selectable.

I guess they will be in 1003ABB bios.


----------



## lordzed83

thegr8anand said:


> Are you guys using LLC and other power settings from the bios?


Yup same as on C6H and all ryzens but thats gfull manual oc


----------



## majestynl

Bart said:


> PBO is horrible and unstable on X470, at least on my C7H. PE level 3 works flawlessly. Simply enabling PBO creates tons more voltage, while actually hurting performance. Yeah the clocks appear to be boosting higher, but with INSANE voltage (OVER 1.5V) and it benches way worse with PBO.


No issues over here. I also mentioned and shared a test before:
On my test results the performance was hurting because it needed more voltage. When i applied + offset i got better performance instead of - offset or auto!



crakej said:


> I have mentioned it before, but on bios 2602, PE modes 1 to 4 were there and selectable.
> 
> I guess they will be in 1003ABB bios.


Okay but did you tried one of those PE modes with a 3x CPU ? Did it effect the boosts etc?



thegr8anand said:


> Are you guys using LLC and other power settings from the bios?


For manual OC i was using LLC2, my 3700x had awful vDroop/leakage! I didnt want to push more voltage on IDLE!


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> Okay but did you tried one of those PE modes with a 3x CPU ? Did it effect the boosts etc?


I didn't know what I was doing as I've never used PE mode before. I selected PE2 and rebooted, couldn't see much happening in Windows so turned it off as it changed my TDC to something sky high, though never saw it used.

Will have to check it out more when we get new bios.


----------



## kmellz

Not that I know if it affects anything, but was curious about all the people showing screenshots of having an amd ryzen _high_ performance power plan, while I did not. Found some reddit thread earlier discussing the new drivers (can't find it again now :/) and the OP mentioned that you can remove all your ryzen power plans (select another one first, then you can go into change plan and delete it), then reinstall driver, and you'll get the new ones! Worked for me. Some people seem to lose them all together though! Still a bit buggy.


----------



## AvengedRobix

Very happy for my second place


----------



## thegr8anand

How do i manually overclock? I set a core multipler but the core voltage stays 1.1 even when I manually set 1.325 in bios. Can anyone guide how it works?


----------



## Martelele

mtrai said:


> It was cause of the asus renamer .exe I removed the renamer.
> 
> Try this link it is just the bios
> 
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1ybsJf9Z5Wt-Dk-iCxkDNKzQCi8hX2Y_9
> 
> Will need to rename it to C7H.cap and use flashback.


Unfortunately it still doesn't work mate.It flashes but there are no additional features,looks and works as vanilla version.


----------



## Jaju123

Martelele said:


> Unfortunately it still doesn't work mate.It flashes but there are no additional features,looks and works as vanilla version.


you have to use the search function to find the hidden settings. you tried that right?


----------



## Martelele

Jaju123 said:


> you have to use the search function to find the hidden settings. you tried that right?


Of course.


----------



## AvengedRobix

mtrai said:


> /Edit Change the link to correct the error. It is just the bios the asus renamer was causing an erro.
> 
> I re-uped C7H 2501 mod Please try this one. Remember you have to rename for flashback. The name for flashback is C7H.cap It does take about 10 mins to flash with flashback. The blue flashback light should keep blinking during the entire flash. IF it only blinks 3 times it failed to read the USB stick.
> 
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1ybsJf9Z5Wt-Dk-iCxkDNKzQCi8hX2Y_9
> 
> Remember to to see HPET or Spread Spectrum and a bunch of other things you have to use F9 search and type in partial name of the option you want to find. Also see q-fan control as you should find you can greatly customize fan controls. Also check out the Advanced menu.
> 
> And lastly please let me know if this worked correctly.


for wifi version or not?


----------



## mtrai

AvengedRobix said:


> for wifi version or not?


The non wifi


----------



## mtrai

Okay thanks for checking. Okay here is what I am gonna do, tomorrow morning I am gone redo the entire mod on the non wifi C7H bios with a fresh download of it.

I am having a what the ll moment with this as it is showing the options showing when I look at any of these in AMIBCP.

I am sorry guys this is happening with the non wifi bios.


----------



## VPII

mtrai said:


> Okay thanks for checking. Okay here is what I am gonna do, tomorrow morning I am gone redo the entire mod on the non wifi C7H bios with a fresh download of it.
> 
> I am having a what the ll moment with this as it is showing the options showing when I look at any of these in AMIBCP.
> 
> I am sorry guys this is happening with the non wifi bios.


 @mtrai I just want to say thank you. I mean you are ill and yet you still here trying to help people. Thanks a lot. You truly are a person like no other. I wish you all the best and a happy and sweet recovery.


----------



## nick name

Is anyone running RAM at 3733MHz 14-16-14-14 with tuned subs . . . or close to it? If so -- what DRAM voltage are you running?


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> Is anyone running RAM at 3733MHz 14-16-14-14 with tuned subs . . . or close to it? If so -- what DRAM voltage are you running?


I do not run that tight, but 16-16-16-16-30-42-1T, I needed to go down to 1.4V to keep temps in check during AIDA64 membench. I would like to go even lower, but haven't tested so far. Anyway, its 1 hour+ stable in AIDA64. Not overnight stable, as I haven't tested it and really don't need such stability. 3800MHz signals error after 5 min, but I haven't tried all settings at 3800 yet.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Is anyone running RAM at 3733MHz 14-16-14-14 with tuned subs . . . or close to it? If so -- what DRAM voltage are you running?


1.*4*75v here...


----------



## xeizo

crakej said:


> 1.75v here...


What do you use to cool your RAM?


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> 1.75v here...


Really? What are your timings? 

This is what I'm working on getting stable right now. I've since found that 1.55V isn't always stable so I've moved it up to 1.58V.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> Really? What are your timings?
> 
> This is what I'm working on getting stable right now. I've since found that 1.55V isn't always stable so I've moved it up to 1.58V.


LoL, what are you both cooling your RAM with


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> LoL, what are you both cooling your RAM with


I have a fan that sits on my GPU directly in front of my RAM.


----------



## lordzed83

xeizo said:


> LoL, what are you both cooling your RAM with


Good will and ln2 by them temps 

Here is my memory cooler  hooked up to AIO header runs at 900rpm or so


----------



## majestynl

nick name said:


> Is anyone running RAM at 3733MHz 14-16-14-14 with tuned subs . . . or close to it? If so -- what DRAM voltage are you running?


3800mhz (1:1) 14 15 14 14 + TT (TightTimings) @ 1.5v. Running for a long time. Runs perfect and best latency so far. Full stable!

Check my older posts, do have Al details etc.


----------



## xeizo

lordzed83 said:


> Good will and ln2 by them temps
> 
> Here is my memory cooler  hooked up to AIO header runs at 900rpm or so


Love them ghetto mods


----------



## glnn_23

When I was running 2 x 8Gb TridentZ 4266 @ 3733c14-15-14 28 1T I used 1.4v Vdimm and 1.1v Soc in bios.
Using 4 dimms now


----------



## lordzed83

xeizo said:


> Love them ghetto mods


I was thinking if someone would make like memory slot 120mm fan adaptor on 3d printer. That wold be cool  One that you can put in blank ddr slot


----------



## lordzed83

majestynl said:


> 3800mhz (1:1) 14 15 14 14 + TT (TightTimings) @ 1.5v. Running for a long time. Runs perfect and best latency so far. Full stable!
> 
> Check my older posts, do have Al details etc.


what latency you get in Aida ??


----------



## oreonutz

AvengedRobix said:


> Very happy for my second place


Dude, Awesome f*ckin Job Man!


----------



## crakej

I've got a little ram cooling fan, but going to install EK FF5 blowing down onto ram and PCH

Voltage 1.475 (not 1.75!)


----------



## oreonutz

So I finally just got around to pushing my Ram Last night, had the urge to join in all the fun! I am on the 3900x and Crosshair VII Hero. I run 2 Kits of Flare X 3200CL14 for a total of 32GB. I went straight for the money shot of 3800Mhz with the FCLK at 1900Mhz, and I COULD NOT get the damn thing to post until I got my SOCv up to 1.175. The problem was once it was that high Windows HATED IT. My Mouse would Freeze during CB runs and randomly crash. I decided to isolate the issue by bringing the ram back down to 3200 but keeping the SOCv that high to see if I would see the same behavior and it wasn't as bad, but still existed, which lead me to believe it was a combination of the high SOCv and 1900Mhz FCLK. 

After trying to post with Lower SOCv and being unsuccessful with the RAM and FCLK so high, I finally dropped down to 3600Mhz and 1800Mhz FCLK. There I could still post with the much more reasonable 1.125v. I got the memory stabilize and pass 5000% in Kahru RAM Test, with Tuned Timings, the Main Ones being 14 14 15 14 28 43 288, using 1.5v (I unfortunately would get Memory Errors around 600% every time without bringing up the DRAMv so high. 

I have a few questions. When Stress Testing the Ram with AIDA64, after about 30 Mins my Ram Modules get up to around 50c. I have active cooling on them, but unfortunately they are controlled by CPU Temps, so when doing just the Mem Stresser the RPM stays low and I end up getting a Hardware Error Detected error once the DIMMS get around 50c. For some reason I thought I had a lot more headroom with temperature with RAM, what is the traditional wisdom on the limit of DRAM Temps, and the ideal range to keep them in?

Has anyone else needed such a high SOCv to get 4 dimms to post with the RAM at 3800Mhz and the FCLK at 1900Mhz?

Thank You Guys in advance for your help!


----------



## nick name

Fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck I wish I knew what caused the 2700X to fluctuate in its memory capabilities. This is infuriating. Making a ton of progress and it's as if some invisible switch is flipped and the CPU can no longer handle what it had been. I wish I knew how memory controllers worked so I could at least try to piece together something in my mind that might explain how it could work during some sessions and then not others.


----------



## oreonutz

nick name said:


> Fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck I wish I knew what caused the 2700X to fluctuate in its memory capabilities. This is infuriating. Making a ton of progress and it's as if some invisible switch is flipped and the CPU can no longer handle what it had been. I wish I knew how memory controllers worked so I could at least try to piece together something in my mind that might explain how it could work during some sessions and then not others.


I know for me on the 2700x one of the biggest factors when OC Memory and then having it work one session, and then not work the next was SOCv. I don't know this for sure, but I have a theory that the SOCv doesn't always take effect until cold boot, because I always try to work my voltages down as low as possible and usually do this by constantly rebooting and have everything continue to work fine. Then I power off my system, come back to it after a few hours, turn it on, and all the sudden it doesn't post any more. So I got into the habit of always turning off the PSU between SOCv adjustments to ensure that my memory settings were stable during Cold Boot, and SOCv, Boot DRAM Voltage, and Dram Voltage were always the biggest factors for me (In that order).

You probably know this already, but I hope it was at least somewhat helpful. (I would definitely try bumping up your SOCv a click or 2, and doing the same with your Boot DRAM Voltage, and then saving and forcing a Cold Boot until you got your old settings working.)


----------



## nick name

oreonutz said:


> I know for me on the 2700x one of the biggest factors when OC Memory and then having it work one session, and then not work the next was SOCv. I don't know this for sure, but I have a theory that the SOCv doesn't always take effect until cold boot, because I always try to work my voltages down as low as possible and usually do this by constantly rebooting and have everything continue to work fine. Then I power off my system, come back to it after a few hours, turn it on, and all the sudden it doesn't post any more. So I got into the habit of always turning off the PSU between SOCv adjustments to ensure that my memory settings were stable during Cold Boot, and SOCv, Boot DRAM Voltage, and Dram Voltage were always the biggest factors for me (In that order).
> 
> You probably know this already, but I hope it was at least somewhat helpful. (I would definitely try bumping up your SOCv a click or 2, and doing the same with your Boot DRAM Voltage, and then saving and forcing a Cold Boot until you got your old settings working.)


It hasn't been a practice of mine before, but I will try it out. I had settled for 3600MHz tight timings until the recent new AGESA updates so I wanted to see what is now possible. And honestly there was a ton of hope until things started to sheet the bed today. I had some very nice 3666MHz timings stable last night and some very decent 3733MHz timings stable more or less. It was basically every other test came out error free or with 1 error. Then I moved my PC and all of a sudden 3733MHz was spewing errors from the start. I just couldn't figure it out other than I unplugged the PC. So my mind goes to "memory holes" and somehow meaning there is a certain range that the CPU operates in that results in stable memory overclocks but if that range is some how shifted the overclocks go to sheet. It's incredibly frustrating. So if your method keeps the CPU at the range where it can operate better overclocks then I will try it.


----------



## nick name

On a separate note -- is everyone else getting Q-Code AA instead of 24 on 2501? Q-Code 24 on previous BIOS versions meaning new kernel.


----------



## oreonutz

nick name said:


> It hasn't been a practice of mine before, but I will try it out. I had settled for 3600MHz tight timings until the recent new AGESA updates so I wanted to see what is now possible. And honestly there was a ton of hope until things started to sheet the bed today. I had some very nice 3666MHz timings stable last night and some very decent 3733MHz timings stable more or less. It was basically every other test came out error free or with 1 error. Then I moved my PC and all off a sudden 3733MHz was spewing errors from the start. I just couldn't figure it out other than I unplugged the PC. So my mind goes to "memory holes" and somehow meaning there is a certain range that the CPU operates in that results in stable memory overclocks but if that range is some how shifted the overclocks go to sheet. It's incredibly frustrating. So if your method keeps the CPU at the range where it can operate better overclocks then I will try it.


Memory OCing is a frusterating beast! I have no idea if it will work for you, but I hope it will. I am still trying to nail the science down. 

That said, you mentioned you had moved the PC. Did you happen to be doing your Memory OCing on an open air test Bed and then move it into a case? Or was their a case ambient change? I haven't had this problem in years because I have been running AMD Systems as my main systems that I Overclock Memory on and with the Past 2 Generations I couldn't get my Memory at high enough Speeds for temperature to matter. But I remember this being an issue on my 6850k System, and my 6700k system before Clocking back down to reasonable Speeds on both (I ended up selling my 6700k shortly after.) 

Anyways, On those systems, and this seems to be repeating itself now, when I got the DRAM voltage around 1.5 or higher, I start to see the DIMM's approaching 45 to 50c when the memory is under heavy load. Once I get into that temperature range, I start to see memory errors, this happened on both the Intel systems, and its now happening on my AMD System. I am wondering if the issues you are seeing is also Temperature related, as these B DIE Kits (I am assuming you are running a BDie kit as well) seem to be particularly sensitive to Temperature.

I am waiting to see if any of the other Regulars on this forum comment on if they are seeing the same type of behavior with memory erroring once hitting certain temps, but for me it seems to be consistently happening around 50c.

If you are noticing the same, its worth trying to get an active fan on them to see if your stability improves.

Also the SOCv bug seems to be very real in my system, but it could just be my launch Board, as it seems to have quite a few tiny bugs that others with newer Crosshair VII Hero's don't seem to experience.



nick name said:


> On a separate note -- is everyone else getting Q-Code AA instead of 24 on 2501? Q-Code 24 on previous BIOS versions meaning new kernel.


I have not noticed that, but my Board is hidden in a case and a pain in the ass to get to, so I don't look at the post code unless I absolutely have to.


----------



## harderthanfire

nick name said:


> On a separate note -- is everyone else getting Q-Code AA instead of 24 on 2501? Q-Code 24 on previous BIOS versions meaning new kernel.



It is AA for me too


----------



## thegr8anand

My experience with 3900x/C7H has been awful. I was aware that it wasn't as snappy using it as i hoped it would be then i ran realbench 2.56 and its first test the image editing one and it scored only around 70000. Compared to 4790k it replaced which scored 161510.


https://i.redd.it/5ez5dkucbpd31.jpg

https://i.ibb.co/gPTRRCh/Real-Bench2-56.jpg

I have removed antivirus, aurasync etc every app thats not needed, back to old chipset drivers and 2501 bios and still max only 133000. I already reinstalled the os twice and will be doing it again later in evening and try with base drivers and no apps. Something is way off. I asked on reddit for other user scores. One said they got 163000 at 4.2 all core, other said 198000 at stock and 220000 at 4.2 all core. Even there its too much variation but i wished atleast it got 160k+.


Can any member here with 3700x/3800x/3700x share their RealBench 2.56 - Image Editing test scores?


Also slow boot every single time is such a pain.


----------



## oreonutz

thegr8anand said:


> My experience with 3900x/C7H has been awful. I was aware that it wasn't as snappy using it as i hoped it would be then i ran realbench 2.56 and its first test the image editing one and it scored only around 70000. Compared to 4790k it replaced which scored 161510.
> 
> 
> https://i.redd.it/5ez5dkucbpd31.jpg
> 
> https://i.ibb.co/gPTRRCh/Real-Bench2-56.jpg
> 
> I have removed antivirus, aurasync etc every app thats not needed, back to old chipset drivers and 2501 bios and still max only 133000. I already reinstalled the os twice and will be doing it again later in evening and try with base drivers and no apps. Something is way off. I asked on reddit for other user scores. One said they got 163000 at 4.2 all core, other said 198000 at stock and 220000 at 4.2 all core. Even there its too much variation but i wished atleast it got 160k+.
> 
> 
> Can any member here with 3700x/3800x/3700x share their RealBench 2.56 - Image Editing test scores?
> 
> 
> Also slow boot every single time is such a pain.


I will be happy to, give me a bit and I will run it, keep in mind I run a bunch of **** in the background though, so my score will probably be toward the lower end of what you can expect.


----------



## gupsterg

oreonutz said:


> So I finally just got around to pushing my Ram Last night, had the urge to join in all the fun! I am on the 3900x and Crosshair VII Hero. I run 2 Kits of Flare X 3200CL14 for a total of 32GB. I went straight for the money shot of 3800Mhz with the FCLK at 1900Mhz, and I COULD NOT get the damn thing to post until I got my SOCv up to 1.175. The problem was once it was that high Windows HATED IT. My Mouse would Freeze during CB runs and randomly crash. I decided to isolate the issue by bringing the ram back down to 3200 but keeping the SOCv that high to see if I would see the same behavior and it wasn't as bad, but still existed, which lead me to believe it was a combination of the high SOCv and 1900Mhz FCLK.
> 
> After trying to post with Lower SOCv and being unsuccessful with the RAM and FCLK so high, I finally dropped down to 3600Mhz and 1800Mhz FCLK. There I could still post with the much more reasonable 1.125v. I got the memory stabilize and pass 5000% in Kahru RAM Test, with Tuned Timings, the Main Ones being 14 14 15 14 28 43 288, using 1.5v (I unfortunately would get Memory Errors around 600% every time without bringing up the DRAMv so high.
> 
> I have a few questions. When Stress Testing the Ram with AIDA64, after about 30 Mins my Ram Modules get up to around 50c. I have active cooling on them, but unfortunately they are controlled by CPU Temps, so when doing just the Mem Stresser the RPM stays low and I end up getting a Hardware Error Detected error once the DIMMS get around 50c. For some reason I thought I had a lot more headroom with temperature with RAM, what is the traditional wisdom on the limit of DRAM Temps, and the ideal range to keep them in?
> 
> Has anyone else needed such a high SOCv to get 4 dimms to post with the RAM at 3800Mhz and the FCLK at 1900Mhz?
> 
> Thank You Guys in advance for your help!


See this post on what happened with me on 4x8GB. I yesterday retested which ProcODT is right for that config of RAM and MHz, only 34 & 32 POST for me.

When on 2700X having a fan on RAM did not aid me, best I got was 3666MHz C15 1T on 2x8GB. With the R5 3600 I have not removed the chassis fan pointing at RAM, will at some point to see it it affects my RAM MHz attained.



nick name said:


> On a separate note -- is everyone else getting Q-Code AA instead of 24 on 2501? Q-Code 24 on previous BIOS versions meaning new kernel.


Been as this on 2700X since UEFI with version 2xxx, also 3xxx is same.


----------



## thegr8anand

oreonutz said:


> I will be happy to, give me a bit and I will run it, keep in mind I run a bunch of **** in the background though, so my score will probably be toward the lower end of what you can expect.



Thanks. My 4790k score of 161k was with all the apps running, steam/battle.net/origin/epic/xbox and AV and other apps. As thats normal usage and expected the same with 3900x. Clean install with no apps is not normal usage but hope to decent scores for now.


----------



## oreonutz

thegr8anand said:


> Thanks. My 4790k score of 161k was with all the apps running, steam/battle.net/origin/epic/xbox and AV and other apps. As thats normal usage and expected the same with 3900x. Clean install with no apps is not normal usage but hope to decent scores for now.


I haven't used Realbench Since my days on FX and Haswell, so I have no IDEA if this is a decent score or not, although judging by your comment I would have to say its probably not. I didn't bother closing down any background processes, so that probably effected it a bit, a bunch of Chrome and Firefox Tabs, Discord, HWinfo, and 2 VMs, so maybe I will try another run after all that, but I like to know how the system performs during normal operation.

I wanted to see how my score compared against others, but for some reason at the end of the test it said it couldnt parse my system specs for some reason, so thats weird. Anyways, this is what I got. (Oh By the way, currently I am running an All Core OC of 4225Mhz at 1.27v, with my Ram at 3600Mhz CL14.



Image Editing
133,771
Time:39.8292


Encoding
189,579
Time:28.1043


OpenCL
127,387
KSamples/sec: 23433


Heavy Multitasking
283,036
Time:26.9647


System Score
183,443


----------



## thegr8anand

Don't think its a good score for image editing. What bios and chipset drivers are you on?


----------



## oreonutz

thegr8anand said:


> Don't think its a good score for image editing. What bios and chipset drivers are you on?


Just Updated with Screenshots for you. I am on the Newest Chipset just released in that Reddit Thread A day or 2 Ago (Which I can confirm I lost almost 150 CB Points after updating to it {but I can play Destiny 2 Now, so.... Worth It??? Not Sure})

And I am on 2501.

I normally Rock an Per CCX Overclock which would Probably Raise my score by a decent amount, but I lost stability when I started Pushing my Ram OC on that, and I am not yet done pushing my Ram so I am going to wait to Per CCX OC until after I have my RAM Dialed In.


----------



## oreonutz

thegr8anand said:


> Don't think its a good score for image editing. What bios and chipset drivers are you on?


Its also possible its just the way RealBench Tests. I don't know the methodology behind realbench, so I have no idea if there is any merit to this theory, but It is highly possible that for real Image Editing Benchmarks based on current Image Editing Software the 3000 Series parts could test a lot better. You would think these parts would at least edge out a 4790k, but its definitely also possible that there are still just some tasks that the chiplet design just isn't great at yet (or properly optimized for yet.)

Would definitely love to see some input from someone more informed on the subject then I.

I do know that for Pro Tools Performance, this system SMOKES Even the 9900k Based System in the Studio that I currently Mix with (where as the Previous Ryzen Parts still had issues when editing with tons of plugins) so They definitely have come along way!


----------



## oreonutz

gupsterg said:


> See this post on what happened with me on 4x8GB. I yesterday retested which ProcODT is right for that config of RAM and MHz, only 34 & 32 POST for me.
> 
> When on 2700X having a fan on RAM did not aid me, best I got was 3666MHz C15 1T on 2x8GB. With the R5 3600 I have not removed the chassis fan pointing at RAM, will at some point to see it it affects my RAM MHz attained.
> 
> 
> 
> Been as this on 2700X since UEFI with version 2xxx, also 3xxx is same.


I Really appreciate your post! I have downloaded your data and analyzing it now. I am about to try to get back to 3800Mhz using some of your data. I realized I didn't even bother tuning ProcODT when trying the first time, so I am about to try again. Wish me Luck!


----------



## gupsterg

oreonutz said:


> I Really appreciate your post! I have downloaded your data and analyzing it now. I am about to try to get back to 3800Mhz using some of your data. I realized I didn't even bother tuning ProcODT when trying the first time, so I am about to try again. Wish me Luck!


The quickest failing test for me is to set profile, go to OS, reboot and test (ie warm post). The linked post has warm post run of ~13K in Kahru RAM test.

I have managed to bring SOC & VDDG down to same levels as when using [email protected], see this ZIP.

I spent 1/2 an evening yesterday determining if CLDO_VDDP of 925mV was best for targeted settings. The conclusion was my HW/targeted settings, do not improve on stability with CLDO_VDDP past 925mV, I get hit and miss POST. Even though we can enter a 1mV increment it seems it is ~3mV step, ref Ryzen Master when you change CLDO_VDDP. I tested each step of CLDO_VDDP from ~900mV to 950mV, at that point I went back to 925mV.


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> what latency you get in Aida ??



With a 3800x at manual OC 4.4Ghz : *61,8ms*
With a 3700x at stock : *62,6ms*
With a 3700x at manual OC 4.3Ghz: *62,2ms*

Screenshots+settings shared before in earlier posts, but including again:

Edit: On the 3800x i also lowered the subtimings! (Check earlier posts for details)


----------



## xeizo

majestynl said:


> With a 3800x at manual OC 4.4Ghz : *61,8ms*
> With a 3700x at stock : *62,6ms*
> With a 3700x at manual OC 4.3Ghz: *62,2ms*
> 
> Screenshots+settings shared before in earlier posts, but including again:


Extremely good, even though I saw someone go below 60 ns on Crosshair VI. First time I saw that though. I'm happy with 65.8 ns AIDA64 membench stable on only 1.4V VDIMM. 24/7-setting.


----------



## mtrai

NON WIFI C7H 2501 MOD TEST

I need someone to test out my slightly modded C7H non wifi modded bios.

I only unhide spread spectrum and HPET just to test instead of doing the entire mod and still not having it work. YOu have to use search f9 to see these two options.

The reason I took this route is the previous mod should of work with no issue, so instead of spending a few hours I decided to only unhide a couple of options.

Please if you test this, please take a minute to make sure the flashblack blue light keeps blinking for a least a min before you walk away. If it only blinks 3 times it failed to read the USB drive or find a flash back file.

Keep in mind, you can use a saved .cmo user profile to restore your settings...however you need to do this before you change hept and spread spectrum.

/edit ALSO I would recommend user stay on 2501 AGESA 1.0.0.2 and skip the newer ones with just AGESA 1.0.0.3ab as 1.0.0.3ab has a very low boost in PBO vis the firmware and it is not gonna change. Not sure if this was intended or not, but in my testing and I have seen for others max boost is about 200 MHz lower across the board, however single core will go just a tiny bit higher.

WARNING THIS IS ONLY A PRELIMINARY TEST. I only need 1 or 2 people test. I have already renamed the file to the correct flashback for the non wifi C7H.

Please do not quote the link in this post as I will remove it since this is only a test.

Mod version 2 of non wifi 2501 can be found here. https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-269.html#post28072264 I still need verify it will flash but early testing showed it was working correctly before I did the full mod.


----------



## lordzed83

@majestynl nice Ill stick to my settings with 1.4volts hehe more on read and copy







passed 35k ramtest last night

Thick is GEARDOWN OFF


----------



## Keith Myers

*CPU Over temp error Press F1 for setup*

I keep getting random CPU Over temp error Press F1 for setup with the computer rebooted and sitting waiting at the BIOS splash screen. I lost another 4 hours of production again because it happened at 1:15AM while I am asleep and I didn't notice the monitor lit up with the error message until 5:15AM when the cat woke me up to go outside.

I have custom water cooling on the cpu. A 60mm X 360mm radiator with NF-A12X25 fans running at 2000rpm. The computer never breaks 70°C. The computer sits at 64-65°C. all day crunching with no problems.

So how can I be getting shut down on overtemp? When I entered the BIOS and looked at the Monitor screen, I saw just for moment before it cleared, that the cpu temp monitoring value was 77°C. in red.
As soon as I landed on the Monitor page, it cleared to 40°C. So why am I getting these erratic and incorrect cpu temp readouts that trip the error?

Where can I go in the BIOS and change the limits? I looked around and only can find settings for changing the overclock and power limits for overclocking. I don't want to override the normal values. I am not trying to wring every possible megahertz out of the cpu. Just run stable.


----------



## lordzed83

Keith Myers said:


> I keep getting random CPU Over temp error Press F1 for setup with the computer rebooted and sitting waiting at the BIOS splash screen. I lost another 4 hours of production again because it happened at 1:15AM while I am asleep and I didn't notice the monitor lit up with the error message until 5:15AM when the cat woke me up to go outside.
> 
> I have custom water cooling on the cpu. A 60mm X 360mm radiator with NF-A12X25 fans running at 2000rpm. The computer never breaks 70°C. The computer sits at 64-65°C. all day crunching with no problems.
> 
> So how can I be getting shut down on overtemp? When I entered the BIOS and looked at the Monitor screen, I saw just for moment before it cleared, that the cpu temp monitoring value was 77°C. in red.
> As soon as I landed on the Monitor page, it cleared to 40°C. So why am I getting these erratic and incorrect cpu temp readouts that trip the error?
> 
> Where can I go in the BIOS and change the limits? I looked around and only can find settings for changing the overclock and power limits for overclocking. I don't want to override the normal values. I am not trying to wring every possible megahertz out of the cpu. Just run stable.


Have a look on TDIE temperature on hw monutor. The CPU temperature DOES NOT trigger reboot i had 93c on cpu for 1 hour constant and radiator was too hot to touch. Tdie passes 110c and safety reboot.

Try turning SenceMI in tweekers paradise


----------



## Keith Myers

lordzed83 said:


> Have a look on TDIE temperature on hw monutor. The CPU temperature DOES NOT trigger reboot i had 93c on cpu for 1 hour constant and radiator was too hot to touch. Tdie passes 110c and safety reboot.
> 
> Try turning SenceMI in tweekers paradise


Run Linux so no Hw Monitor or Hwinfo. No Tdie or Tctrl either since k10temp is now broken for Ryzen 3000. Only fixed in the upstream kernels that haven't been released.
All I have for monitoring is the motherboard sensors exported by the BIOS WMI interface to the asus-wmi-sensors driver.

I looked all over the BIOS and never found the old SenseMI setting. BIOS is 2501. I'll go look again. What should I do with SenseMI? I know it used to be turned off or altered to get Tdie and Tctrl to look and behave normal, but these Ryzen 3000 don't use any offset anymore.


----------



## kmellz

lordzed83 said:


> @majestynl nice Ill stick to my settings with 1.4volts hehe more on read and copy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> passed 35k ramtest last night
> 
> Thick is GEARDOWN OFF


Did you have to do anything special to get GD off working? Or did it just always play nice. Haven't had any luck running higher mhz with it off, won't boot at all :/


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> NON WIFI C7H 2501 MOD TEST
> 
> I need someone to test out my slightly modded C7H non wifi modded bios.
> 
> I only unhide spread spectrum and HPET just to test instead of doing the entire mod and still not having it work. YOu have to use search f9 to see these two options.
> 
> The reason I took this route is the previous mod should of work with no issue, so instead of spending a few hours I decided to only unhide a couple of options.
> 
> Please if you test this, please take a minute to make sure the flashblack blue light keeps blinking for a least a min before you walk away. If it only blinks 3 times it failed to read the USB drive or find a flash back file.
> 
> Keep in mind, you can use a saved .cmo user profile to restore your settings...however you need to do this before you change hept and spread spectrum.
> 
> /edit ALSO I would recommend user stay on 2501 AGESA 1.0.0.2 and skip the newer ones with just AGESA 1.0.0.3ab as 1.0.0.3ab has a very low boost in PBO vis the firmware and it is not gonna change. Not sure if this was intended or not, but in my testing and I have seen for others max boost is about 200 MHz lower across the board, however single core will go just a tiny bit higher.
> 
> WARNING THIS IS ONLY A PRELIMINARY TEST. I only need 1 or 2 people test. I have already renamed the file to the correct flashback for the non wifi C7H.
> 
> Please do not quote the link in this post as I will remove it since this is only a test.
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1BqcqMQKRrhX7eOwZ-eNu8gNQeMSVxylF/view?usp=sharing


Just saw this. I will happily test for you as soon as I get back home, will be home in about an hour and a half, but will test first thing!


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> Run Linux so no Hw Monitor or Hwinfo. No Tdie or Tctrl either since k10temp is now broken for Ryzen 3000. Only fixed in the upstream kernels that haven't been released.
> All I have for monitoring is the motherboard sensors exported by the BIOS WMI interface to the asus-wmi-sensors driver.
> 
> I looked all over the BIOS and never found the old SenseMI setting. BIOS is 2501. I'll go look again. What should I do with SenseMI? I know it used to be turned off or altered to get Tdie and Tctrl to look and behave normal, but these Ryzen 3000 don't use any offset anymore.


If it's still there then I would imagine under Tweaker's Paradise. The default was 272 on Ryzen+ and going up reduces temp readings. If it is there then just using SenseMi Skew without changing the Offset usually means lower temp readings.


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> Run Linux so no Hw Monitor or Hwinfo. No Tdie or Tctrl either since k10temp is now broken for Ryzen 3000. Only fixed in the upstream kernels that haven't been released.
> All I have for monitoring is the motherboard sensors exported by the BIOS WMI interface to the asus-wmi-sensors driver.
> 
> I looked all over the BIOS and never found the old SenseMI setting. BIOS is 2501. I'll go look again. What should I do with SenseMI? I know it used to be turned off or altered to get Tdie and Tctrl to look and behave normal, but these Ryzen 3000 don't use any offset anymore.


 @nickname just beat me to the punch, but he is correct, its under Tweakers Paradise, if you enable Sense MI Skew without changing any numbers and leaving it at the default of 272 it will bring your temperature reading down by 5c, if you put in 282 it will bring your Temperature reading down by about 15c. I have not yet tested this on the 3000 Series, but this was the behavior with my 2700x in the Crosshair VII Hero, and I successfully used that to trick the board into boosting higher, so IF you really aren't having a temperature problem, and your board just thinks you are, this should help. But you might want to put a K Type Thermal Couple in that hole in the socket and monitor temps yourself before doing this just to make CERTAIN there really isn't a temperature problem happening. If software is relaying to you the wrong temperature, there could be an issue.

That said, I had this damn Buggy UEFI turn my damn Water Pump off on me about a week ago before I switched over to powering the Pump off a Molex Connection, during that time My Chip got to 109c before I noticed and NOTHING happened, it didn't shut off or anything. Turns out, when running an AIDA64 FP64 Test My CPU would get up to 110c and as soon as it would it triggered a reboot instantly. So it seems as if the only protection built into this board currently will not kick in until 110c (It may even be 115c and I just saw 110c before shut off as the temp reported in HWinfo usually lags behind a second or 2). So the fact that you are getting weird shut offs at 70c is kind of weird, I get over that temperature on my CPU constantly, and have never seen that behavior. 

Is it possible that this Temperature Protection behavior is built into your temperature monitoring tool, or possibly your linux distro somehow?


----------



## Keith Myers

The pump is powered directly off the PSU via a SATA connector. So the motherboard is not involved. The fans are powered off the cpu header. All my fan interfaces in the BIOS are disabled so that all fans receive nothing but +12V for full 100% speed.

I have a 40mm fan on the backside of the socket like I have always done with AMD cpus on CPU Opt header.Socket temp is 44°C. Water temp is 38°C. AIO Pump header is a ML-140 fan in the front of the case.

My driver provides the same readouts that HwInFo64 provides since it polls from the WMI interface in the BIOS. An absolute godsend compared to the old it87 driver I had to use in the beginning. The stock Linux AMD cpu temp driver k10temp is broken now for Ryzen 3000 parts because it hasn't been updated for the new PCI busID's of the new cpus. The driver is getting updated in the upstream kernels but won't be pulled into the main distros for some time I expect. This is my sensors output while the machine is crunching normally.
[email protected]:~$ sensors -u


Spoiler



asuswmisensors-isa-0000
Adapter: ISA adapter
CPU Core Voltage:
in0_input: 1.068
CPU SOC Voltage:
in1_input: 1.079
DRAM Voltage:
in2_input: 1.406
VDDP Voltage:
in3_input: 0.534
1.8V PLL Voltage:
in4_input: 1.831
+12V Voltage:
in5_input: 11.990
+5V Voltage:
in6_input: 4.905
3VSB Voltage:
in7_input: 3.335
VBAT Voltage:
in8_input: 3.292
AVCC3 Voltage:
in9_input: 3.357
SB 1.05V Voltage:
in10_input: 1.113
CPU Core Voltage:
in11_input: 1.087
CPU SOC Voltage:
in12_input: 1.093
DRAM Voltage:
in13_input: 1.450
CPU Fan:
fan1_input: 1979.000
Chassis Fan 1:
fan2_input: 1194.000
Chassis Fan 2:
fan3_input: 695.000
Chassis Fan 3:
fan4_input: 997.000
HAMP Fan:
fan5_input: 0.000
Water Pump:
fan6_input: 0.000
CPU OPT:
fan7_input: 5724.000
Water Flow:
fan8_input: 0.000
AIO Pump:
fan9_input: 1842.000
CPU Temperature:
temp1_input: 68.000
CPU Socket Temperature:
temp2_input: 44.000
Motherboard Temperature:
temp3_input: 41.000
Chipset Temperature:
temp4_input: 55.000
Tsensor 1 Temperature:
temp5_input: 38.000
CPU VRM Temperature:
temp6_input: 50.000
Water In:
temp7_input: 216.000
Water Out:
temp8_input: 216.000
CPU VRM Output Current:
curr1_input: 61.000

asus-isa-0000
Adapter: ISA adapter
cpu_fan:
fan1_input: 0.000

[email protected]:~$


----------



## majestynl

xeizo said:


> Extremely good, even though I saw someone go below 60 ns on Crosshair VI. First time I saw that though. I'm happy with 65.8 ns AIDA64 membench stable on only 1.4V VDIMM. 24/7-setting.


Thanks. Dunno maybe lowering to CL12 with 3600/3733.. cause don't think that's possible with 3800mhz! (for now).




lordzed83 said:


> @majestynl nice Ill stick to my settings with 1.4volts hehe more on read and copy
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> passed 35k ramtest last night
> 
> Thick is GEARDOWN OFF


Nice! But keep in mind read and copy is mostly higher on a 3900x in the first place. So probably with my timings you will get even better 



nick name said:


> If it's still there then I would imagine under Tweaker's Paradise. The default was 272 on Ryzen+ and going up reduces temp readings. If it is there then just using SenseMi Skew without changing the Offset usually means lower temp readings.


Did test SensemiSkew etc with current Bios and 3x CPU's. I saw no real impact as i saw with the 1x and 2x CPU's. Maybe a bug !!!


----------



## Keith Myers

oreonutz said:


> @nickname
> 
> Is it possible that this Temperature Protection behavior is built into your temperature monitoring tool, or possibly your linux distro somehow?


No, not that I am aware of. No user input on the monitoring sensor driver. It just reads what the BIOS provides.

You can set some temp limits in some buried deep cpufreq files if you have a laptop or similar. But I have never needed that and none are in effect.


----------



## nick name

Does anyone else seem to have a broken LN2 Mode? It says LN2 Mode at the top of my BIOS whether the jumper is in the On or Off position. However, it doesn't show LN2 Mode PLL voltage which is around 2.1V when it's actually on.


----------



## harderthanfire

Keith Myers said:


> I keep getting random CPU Over temp error Press F1 for setup with the computer rebooted and sitting waiting at the BIOS splash screen. I lost another 4 hours of production again because it happened at 1:15AM while I am asleep and I didn't notice the monitor lit up with the error message until 5:15AM when the cat woke me up to go outside.
> 
> I have custom water cooling on the cpu. A 60mm X 360mm radiator with NF-A12X25 fans running at 2000rpm. The computer never breaks 70°C. The computer sits at 64-65°C. all day crunching with no problems.
> 
> So how can I be getting shut down on overtemp? When I entered the BIOS and looked at the Monitor screen, I saw just for moment before it cleared, that the cpu temp monitoring value was 77°C. in red.
> As soon as I landed on the Monitor page, it cleared to 40°C. So why am I getting these erratic and incorrect cpu temp readouts that trip the error?
> 
> Where can I go in the BIOS and change the limits? I looked around and only can find settings for changing the overclock and power limits for overclocking. I don't want to override the normal values. I am not trying to wring every possible megahertz out of the cpu. Just run stable.



I used to get this, PWM was breaking sometimes and it shut my pump off. Make sure your pump etc is powered by molex or something to avoid this.


----------



## thegr8anand

oreonutz said:


> Its also possible its just the way RealBench Tests. I don't know the methodology behind realbench, so I have no idea if there is any merit to this theory, but It is highly possible that for real Image Editing Benchmarks based on current Image Editing Software the 3000 Series parts could test a lot better. You would think these parts would at least edge out a 4790k, but its definitely also possible that there are still just some tasks that the chiplet design just isn't great at yet (or properly optimized for yet.)
> 
> Would definitely love to see some input from someone more informed on the subject then I.
> 
> I do know that for Pro Tools Performance, this system SMOKES Even the 9900k Based System in the Studio that I currently Mix with (where as the Previous Ryzen Parts still had issues when editing with tons of plugins) so They definitely have come along way!



Found the culprit. Its Sonic Studio and Sonic Radar causing massive slowdown. As soon as removed them it became normal. Removing those doesn't remove the audio driver so completely safe to remove.


Scores with both removed: https://i.ibb.co/bzLsZ9R/Real-Bench-Image-Edit-Working.jpg


----------



## lordzed83

kmellz said:


> Did you have to do anything special to get GD off working? Or did it just always play nice. Haven't had any luck running higher mhz with it off, won't boot at all :/


ye play around with settings for memory 8 hours a day sicne 3900x came out  and other 16 hours of a day running memtests haah


----------



## lordzed83

@majestynl nope i see regression with cl14 everywhere besides latency. Plus you need to pump 100mv more in to ddr's not sure if thats good for pc that is mining birtcoins 24/7 do You ?? You ruynning Tweamgroup or Gskill ?? Cause i know gskill timings dont work with teamgroup sticks. I tried to get cl14 to pass 1000% even 1.6v is NO GO design does not like CL14. And its 3rd teamgroup kit and 3rd ryzen cpu i hit hard wall does not matter volts settings. 3733 is max i can get cl14 at


----------



## xeizo

thegr8anand said:


> Found the culprit. Its Sonic Studio and Sonic Radar causing massive slowdown. As soon as removed them it became normal. Removing those doesn't remove the audio driver so completely safe to remove.
> 
> 
> Scores with both removed: https://i.ibb.co/bzLsZ9R/Real-Bench-Image-Edit-Working.jpg


Thanks, best Geekbench score so far without changing anything else!


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> ye play around with settings for memory 8 hours a day sicne 3900x came out  and other 16 hours of a day running memtests haah


Right - my chip just doesn't do 1900 IF. Going to try experimenting with your 1001.8 BCLK OC next....


----------



## Keith Myers

harderthanfire said:


> I used to get this, PWM was breaking sometimes and it shut my pump off. Make sure your pump etc is powered by molex or something to avoid this.


I don't run any fan on PWM. I disable all fan controls in the BIOS and simply use the normal full +12V to power any device or fan. My pump is powered by a SATA connection.


----------



## harderthanfire

Keith Myers said:


> I don't run any fan on PWM. I disable all fan controls in the BIOS and simply use the normal full +12V to power any device or fan. My pump is powered by a SATA connection.



No idea then, I'd like to think the normal +12V would be fine.


----------



## crakej

Did you send me the settings for the 101.8BCLK OC? I can only find your IF=1900 profile, so just tried upping BCLK to 101.8 with FCLK at 1866, but didn't work first try - code 07 - think the CPU wants more juice.

Think I'll give it a rest for today....need to eat!


----------



## Keith Myers

Does anybody have a GB4 result for a 3900X? I don't know if mine is good or bad. Definitely better than my 2700X's. Also better than my TR 2920X.
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/14021787


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Right - my chip just doesn't do 1900 IF. Going to try experimenting with your 1001.8 BCLK OC next....


You still not tried settings I'w sent You and you are wasting time trying to get stuff working that Wont work cause bios is buggerd and You get c5 ??
**** You just reminded me why I dont help out ahyone anymore cause im wasting my time. Sent You priofile sent you txt file to put every setting iw got. Fail


----------



## thegr8anand

xeizo said:


> Thanks, best Geekbench score so far without changing anything else!



What was the score before.


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> You still not tried settings I'w sent You and you are wasting time trying to get stuff working that Wont work cause bios is buggerd and You get c5 ??
> **** You just reminded me why I dont help out ahyone anymore cause im wasting my time. Sent You priofile sent you txt file to put every setting iw got. Fail


You're not wasting your time man!

Of course I tried the settings you sent! I was trying to find the particular BCLK profile you sent as I have so many already from you and gups.... The testing I've done shows I need to tweak something though as I get code 07. No C5s actually so think I should be able to get it working as you only set a few key things in the profile, which all look like they should be fine with my memory. It's SR and can deff run 3800 easily.

I've never used BCLK so unsure how it affects CPU, voltages etc, so being wary! Your help is much appreciated - My google photos is full of pics of your posts with timings in them! 

I haven't even OCed the CPU yet - which is why I'm asking about it - I assume that increasing BCLK requires more VCore to remain stable? Didn't use BCLK on my 1700x


----------



## AvengedRobix

Keith Myers said:


> Does anybody have a GB4 result for a 3900X? I don't know if mine is good or bad. Definitely better than my 2700X's. Also better than my TR 2920X.
> https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/14021787


not on linux =(


----------



## Keith Myers

AvengedRobix said:


> not on linux =(


OK, Duh, just figured out if I put in Linux and 3900X into the Search function, out pops Linux and 3900X results. So I have a ways to go in tuning I see compared to some other scores. But almost all of the results are from the free application which doesn't allow comments. So I have no idea what the settings were that produced those results on that host.


----------



## Keith Myers

nick name said:


> If it's still there then I would imagine under Tweaker's Paradise. The default was 272 on Ryzen+ and going up reduces temp readings. If it is there then just using SenseMi Skew without changing the Offset usually means lower temp readings.


OK, found it in Tweakers Paradise. So Disabled it. But I also noticed right above it is "T offset" Definition is skews temperature compensation. Default is 63.

Anyone know what that one actually does?


----------



## lordzed83

@crakey as I said and i think someone else there is bug on some configurations where 1800 wont boot you NEED to have 101.8 and run 1 tick down on ddr and if and you got same. I cant boot up witb bclk with my serttings 07 or d5. Tahts why im on 101.8 and i like extra bclk for extra 0.01% performance lol


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> @crakey as I said and i think someone else there is bug on some configurations where 1800 wont boot you NEED to have 101.8 and run 1 tick down on ddr and if and you got same. I cant boot up witb bclk with my serttings 07 or d5. Tahts why im on 101.8 and i like extra bclk for extra 0.01% performance lol


I've got 4.3 AC OC @ 1.3812v, set ram to 3733, IF to 1866, almost all timings auto except primaries, ODT, GD=on, T1. Step BCLK up to 101.8 so ram speed is 3800.

When I try tomorrow will do with less CPU OC so I can give it a bit more juice. Temps are 85ish at load with 4.3GHz

I hadn't seen anyone having difficulty with 1800.....glad I'm not stuck there!


----------



## nick name

Does anyone know which integers to input in BIOS under the DRAM settings for AddrCmdSetup, CsOdtSetup, CkeSetup? Ryzen Timing Checker displays those as fractions(?) and I can't figure out which integer results in which fraction.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Does anyone know which integers to input in BIOS under the DRAM settings for AddrCmdSetup, CsOdtSetup, CkeSetup? Ryzen Timing Checker displays those as fractions(?) and I can't figure out which integer results in which fraction.


double post...


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Does anyone know which integers to input in BIOS under the DRAM settings for AddrCmdSetup, CsOdtSetup, CkeSetup? Ryzen Timing Checker displays those as fractions(?) and I can't figure out which integer results in which fraction.


Can you show us a screen shot?

Usually, if something is displayed like 6/7, then it means 6 or 7


----------



## thegr8anand

Its not fractions. Its showing 2 options. Go with the 2nd one. If 1/3 use 3.


----------



## thegr8anand

3733 runs perfectly @ 1.48v.












My Ram is 
*Team T-FORCE NIGHT HAWK Legend RGB 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3200 (PC4 25600) Desktop Memory Model TF7D416G3200HC14ADC01 *












Values were Manual 3733 Fast preset from 1.6.0.3 calculator, alt procodt and geardown enabled 

. Test was done at 1.48v. 1.45v didn't boot in windows. Entering values for 3800 and increasing to 1.52 at the same didn't post at all. Maybe 3733 is the best i can do.


----------



## oreonutz

*!*



mtrai said:


> NON WIFI C7H 2501 MOD TEST
> 
> I need someone to test out my slightly modded C7H non wifi modded bios.
> 
> I only unhide spread spectrum and HPET just to test instead of doing the entire mod and still not having it work. YOu have to use search f9 to see these two options.
> 
> The reason I took this route is the previous mod should of work with no issue, so instead of spending a few hours I decided to only unhide a couple of options.
> 
> Please if you test this, please take a minute to make sure the flashblack blue light keeps blinking for a least a min before you walk away. If it only blinks 3 times it failed to read the USB drive or find a flash back file.
> 
> Keep in mind, you can use a saved .cmo user profile to restore your settings...however you need to do this before you change hept and spread spectrum.
> 
> /edit ALSO I would recommend user stay on 2501 AGESA 1.0.0.2 and skip the newer ones with just AGESA 1.0.0.3ab as 1.0.0.3ab has a very low boost in PBO vis the firmware and it is not gonna change. Not sure if this was intended or not, but in my testing and I have seen for others max boost is about 200 MHz lower across the board, however single core will go just a tiny bit higher.
> 
> WARNING THIS IS ONLY A PRELIMINARY TEST. I only need 1 or 2 people test. I have already renamed the file to the correct flashback for the non wifi C7H.
> 
> Please do not quote the link in this post as I will remove it since this is only a test.
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1BqcqMQKRrhX7eOwZ-eNu8gNQeMSVxylF/view?usp=sharing


So Sorry this took me so long, ended up having a day of nothing but Fires to put out all over the damn city! The ISP went ALL WACKY Today here in town, dumb asses changed the Subnet on us, which in turn changed all of my Clients Static IPs! It was hell in a hand basket! And Because only a handful of them have Fail Over to a second circuit, I had to actually go on site for most clients, instead of handling the changes remotely!

Anyways, now that I am done venting... I haven't looked through the new posts on the Forum yet, so I don't know if anyone else got back to you on your UEFI, but I just tried it! Good News/ Bad News. 

Good News is it did definitely flash. For some reason after flashing I still could not search of HPET. But Spread Spectrum DID work... I say Did because after applying my saved profile from my UB Drive and rebooting back into the UEFI, when I searched for Spread Spectrum again it just disappeared!

Not sure why that was, but yeah, it did appear, then after applying my save, and rebooting it was just gone!

Otherwise it seemed to work great initially. Let me know if you need any more information!


----------



## Baio73

Just a quick question… in DRAM Calculator in the left column Profile version, V1 is for lucky chips, V2 for poor quality ones (like mine), but Manual what stands for?
Calculating with Manual I see some timings lower and other higher than V1/V2.

Baio


----------



## Keith Myers

*Overtemped in front of me while using the computer*



crakej said:


> I've got 4.3 AC OC @ 1.3812v, set ram to 3733, IF to 1866, almost all timings auto except primaries, ODT, GD=on, T1. Step BCLK up to 101.8 so ram speed is 3800.
> 
> When I try tomorrow will do with less CPU OC so I can give it a bit more juice. Temps are 85ish at load with 4.3GHz
> 
> I hadn't seen anyone having difficulty with 1800.....glad I'm not stuck there!


Sure would like to know how you guys are able to sustain an all-core overclock with temps at 85° C. I finally was using my system right when it overtemped and dropped to the BIOS splash screen. My trip point is absolutely 78° C. I am positive the BIOS is what is monitoring the temp and shutting the PC down. So where in the BIOS is this trip point set? I do know that the older AMD BIOS I used to have had a cpu over temp trip point setting. I used to set my FX-8350 for 70° when I normally ran around 62-65°C. I am only running 4.1Ghz all-core at 1.1V.

I found the air coming through the radiator very hot and the reservoir water was the same temperature. But the pump was running as I could feel the vibration. But I don't think I had any flow in the system.

So off to tear the system down and look for blockage or lack of flow. Switched out the cpu block for the Raystorm Pro so I could eliminate draining the system with minimal loss. I then could examine the Aqua block and see if it was blocked. No it wasn't. Turning the system back on with the Raystorm Pro showed that there was plenty of flow as it purged what little air entered the system when I switched blocks. The Raystorm Pro block is also a low resistance, high flowrate block so I considered that an advantage for my problem. Temps are only a couple of degrees worse than the Aqua Computer Kryos block. I think I need to add a flowmeter to the loop for troubleshooting and monitoring. There is a flowrate header on the mobo, might as well use it. Not sure what is going on. This is the third custom loop I've put together with same exact pump/reservoir/radiator/fans and the first time anything has given me any troubles.

So question to the group, is there some hidden cpu overtemp trip point buried way down in one of the esoteric BIOS menus I have not found yet?


----------



## thegr8anand

I have found setting 1.4125v vcore in RM does 1.325v (in hwinfo) when stressing all cores like Cinebench R20, temps around 85. Just a quick test done @ 4.25ghz all core this morning after ram oc'd to 3733. Will do more testing now that ram is stable oc'd.


----------



## VPII

This weekend Ill take my 3900x for a spin under dry ice. What I've learned is that the highest IF will go under extreme cooling is 1600 but lower may be better to help with cpu clocks. 

Another thing is not to touch any voltages except for vcore and vdimm. The other voltages should be left on Auto.

I told my friend Ill aim for 4.8ghz but he said 5ghz will work. But Ill see and post results when all done.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## gupsterg

nick name said:


> Does anyone else seem to have a broken LN2 Mode? It says LN2 Mode at the top of my BIOS whether the jumper is in the On or Off position. However, it doesn't show LN2 Mode PLL voltage which is around 2.1V when it's actually on.


The text "LN2 Mode" has always been there, when the switch is flipped you'll see Disabled / Enabled change.



Keith Myers said:


> OK, found it in Tweakers Paradise. So Disabled it. But I also noticed right above it is "T offset" Definition is skews temperature compensation. Default is 63.
> 
> Anyone know what that one actually does?


T offset.


----------



## crakej

I haven't touched Skew - should we be disabling it with Matisse?


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> I haven't touched Skew - should we be disabling it with Matisse?


Who knows i always had it off. cause im on Manual.


So we wont see new bios for 1.5 week by looks of it. Shamino is off so.


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> Who knows i always had it off. cause im on Manual.
> 
> 
> So we wont see new bios for 1.5 week by looks of it. Shamino is off so.


Saw that - was rather hoping to get ours today - oh well...

I've found myself a fairly stable cpu OC of 4.25GHz 1.368v which I'm going to use your BCLK profile on.

Just to be clear, I leave the IF at 1866 right?

Did you see this? Looks like someone managed to get ram fast enough to cancel out slow IF! 4466MTs

https://www.overclock.net/forum/13-...ry-fabric-x370-x470-x570-24.html#post28070134


----------



## mtrai

oreonutz said:


> So Sorry this took me so long, ended up having a day of nothing but Fires to put out all over the damn city! The ISP went ALL WACKY Today here in town, dumb asses changed the Subnet on us, which in turn changed all of my Clients Static IPs! It was hell in a hand basket! And Because only a handful of them have Fail Over to a second circuit, I had to actually go on site for most clients, instead of handling the changes remotely!
> 
> Anyways, now that I am done venting... I haven't looked through the new posts on the Forum yet, so I don't know if anyone else got back to you on your UEFI, but I just tried it! Good News/ Bad News.
> 
> Good News is it did definitely flash. For some reason after flashing I still could not search of HPET. But Spread Spectrum DID work... I say Did because after applying my saved profile from my UB Drive and rebooting back into the UEFI, when I searched for Spread Spectrum again it just disappeared!
> 
> Not sure why that was, but yeah, it did appear, then after applying my save, and rebooting it was just gone!
> 
> Otherwise it seemed to work great initially. Let me know if you need any more information!


Sounds a bit wonky but now I know we are making progress for the C7H non wifi. I am just baffled why the non wifi version is being so stubborn. Out of curiosity can you reset the bios to default, reboot and then try search again? It might have something to do with the saved profiled on non wifi version.


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> I haven't touched Skew - should we be disabling it with Matisse?


I set it [Disabled], habit from when on C6H what [Auto] defaulted to changed a few times...



crakej said:


> Did you see this? Looks like someone managed to get ram fast enough to cancel out slow IF! 4466MTs
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/13-...ry-fabric-x370-x470-x570-24.html#post28070134


It's nice result, but even 3800MHz C16 hit's lower ns, my setup. I guess it's nice tinkering exercise for owners of 2 CCD CPU, as the 1 CCD do not behave the same from Elmor's testing.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> I set it [Disabled], habit from when on C6H what [Auto] defaulted to changed a few times...
> 
> 
> 
> It's nice result, but even 3800MHz C16 hit's lower ns, my setup. I guess it's nice tinkering exercise for owners of 2 CCD CPU, as the 1 CCD do not behave the same from Elmor's testing.


Nice if you can't get 1900 FCLK as well 

I'm using the way @lordzed83 did it with the BCLK at 101.8 - but got loads to do so not much time at computer today..... very frustrating!


----------



## mtrai

Just wanted to give my thoughts on our bios situation.

We are gonna be in 2501 for a long time as both AGESA 1.0.0.3ab and 1.0.0.3abb have a weak boost per this:

Yes there is. Shamino an ASUS engineer confirmed this on the Rog forums. He stated AGESA 1.0.0.3ab has a week cpu boost.

"right now i only have the links for x570 for 1003ABB - dont be looking for boost changes, the higher booster is only due to the 1002 smu f/w, 1003's smu f/w is not the 'high booster', why the newer smu is a 'weaker' booster one can only guess."

This applies to any board bios with AGESA 1.0.0.3ab and 1.0.0.3abb

Source https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?112279-X370-X470-AGESA-1003AB-Bioses&p=779048#post779048

So what I am trying to do is get the non wifi C7H bios done correctly and working for folks who have that board. 

We already have my unlocked C7H Wifi bios.

Now that I realize we will be on this bios for many months I want to make this happen and get it working so bear with me, I did make some progress and it was confirmed. I am just at a loss of why the non wifi is being stubborn.


----------



## Jaju123

I am tempted to use the beta 2602 bios due to my board refusing to go below 1.45V at any point, even when completely idle. I am concerned for the longevity of my CPU (although it might in reality be boosting up and down very rapidly). It does this even with all-stock BIOS settings.

I heard there was a bug with SOC voltage on 2602. Is that true? Is this BIOS safe to use?


----------



## nick name

gupsterg said:


> The text "LN2 Mode" has always been there, when the switch is flipped you'll see Disabled / Enabled change.


I won't lie -- I couldn't remember what it said since it's been a while since I played with it so I moved the jumper to Enabled and nothing changed. Before it would automatically increase PLL voltage. Perhaps they just removed that.


----------



## nick name

What made me switch back to 2501 from 2602 is the wild swings DRAM voltage was taking. I thought it may have been a reporting bug, but since I'm on 2700X I assumed HWiNFO was reporting correctly.


----------



## gupsterg

@oreonutz

This is crazy. I undid the PBO OC on CPU. Rolled everything to stock. Setup 3800MHz 1:1:1 with my preferred timings, set SOC: 1.031V, CLDO_VDDG: 0.954V, CLDO_VDDP: 0.901V, VBOOT/VDIMM: 1.4V, VTTDDR: 0.7V and ProcODT: 34.3. System POST, ran Kahru RAM test for ~1269%. I then rebooted and set in MBIST > Data Eye > Pattern: 4. Now Kahru RAM test upto 4100%.

Data zip.



crakej said:


> Nice if you can't get 1900 FCLK as well


3533MHz is ~68ns, 3600MHz is ~67ns.

Sometimes do envy the 2 CCD CPU, as we tweaking it seems better on RAM front, besides benches better. I just can't get over the bang for buck the R5 3600. If the R5 3500 OC as well that may well be my next chip. I was just tinkering in OS earlier today, like down a update, running SFC to see if all is fine and when looking at the power meter it was barely higher than idle watts. So damn efficient it seems.


----------



## nick name

nick name said:


> Does anyone know which integers to input in BIOS under the DRAM settings for AddrCmdSetup, CsOdtSetup, CkeSetup? Ryzen Timing Checker displays those as fractions(?) and I can't figure out which integer results in which fraction.





crakej said:


> Can you show us a screen shot?
> 
> Usually, if something is displayed like 6/7, then it means 6 or 7





thegr8anand said:


> Its not fractions. Its showing 2 options. Go with the 2nd one. If 1/3 use 3.


I message @elmor and he, of course, was kind enough to reply back:

Hello,

Those are timing options for setup of various memory cycle transitions.

It's a 6-bit value (0-63), where bit 5 = 1 enables coarse delay (values 32-63). When coarse delay is enabled the setup time is 1 MCLK + the fine delay specified by bits [4:0]. Otherwise setup time is 1/2 MCLK + fine delay specified by bits [4:0] (values 0-31). Each step of the fine delay is 1/32 MCLK. I believe the coarse delay is what's specified as the numerator and the fine delay as the denumerator. So it's not an actual fraction.

Example:

Value 56 = 11 1000b

Bit 5 = 1 meaning coarse delay enabled = delay 1 MCLK, numerator = 1
Remove 32 from the value to get the fine delay = 24, 24*1/32 = delay 24/32 = 3/4 MCLK, denumerator = 24

Translated value = 1/24
Actual delay = 1+3/4 = 1.75 MCLK

Requires some specific knowledge and I don't know your level, let me know if anything doesn't make sense to you.

You should be able to try this by entering a value in your BIOS and then read it out by software.

/Jon


----------



## lordzed83

Jaju123 said:


> I am tempted to use the beta 2602 bios due to my board refusing to go below 1.45V at any point, even when completely idle. I am concerned for the longevity of my CPU (although it might in reality be boosting up and down very rapidly). It does this even with all-stock BIOS settings.
> 
> I heard there was a bug with SOC voltage on 2602. Is that true? Is this BIOS safe to use?


1 bug ?? More like multiple bugs in that bios


----------



## VPII

So my dry ice run went for a ball of do do. Qpost 4E, 4d, C5 and 1F or IF as soon as temps drop a lot. Ill give it another bash but first put the if and mem way low as in at least 2133 seen that IF under extreme cooling struggles. Only thing I think it may be. Obviously no such qpost codes in manual.

Such a waste of money getting the dice and it is a no go.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## crakej

VPII said:


> So my dry ice run went for a ball of do do. Qpost 4E, 4d, C5 and 1F or IF as soon as temps drop a lot. Ill give it another bash but first put the if and mem way low as in at least 2133 seen that IF under extreme cooling struggles. Only thing I think it may be. Obviously no such qpost codes in manual.
> 
> Such a waste of money getting the dice and it is a no go.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


I think in one of the G Nexus videos they said something about having to do it in a certain way, cooling it slowly. Can't remember the detail but I'm sure you'd find the video easy enough on their youtube channel.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I message @elmor and he, of course, was kind enough to reply back:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Those are timing options for setup of various memory cycle transitions.
> 
> It's a 6-bit value (0-63), where bit 5 = 1 enables coarse delay (values 32-63). When coarse delay is enabled the setup time is 1 MCLK + the fine delay specified by bits [4:0]. Otherwise setup time is 1/2 MCLK + fine delay specified by bits [4:0] (values 0-31). Each step of the fine delay is 1/32 MCLK. I believe the coarse delay is what's specified as the numerator and the fine delay as the denumerator. So it's not an actual fraction.
> 
> Example:
> 
> Value 56 = 11 1000b
> 
> Bit 5 = 1 meaning coarse delay enabled = delay 1 MCLK, numerator = 1
> Remove 32 from the value to get the fine delay = 24, 24*1/32 = delay 24/32 = 3/4 MCLK, denumerator = 24
> 
> Translated value = 1/24
> Actual delay = 1+3/4 = 1.75 MCLK
> 
> Requires some specific knowledge and I don't know your level, let me know if anything doesn't make sense to you.
> 
> You should be able to try this by entering a value in your BIOS and then read it out by software.
> 
> /Jon


Oh! RTC! I thought you meant the calculator (duh) - forgot you're on 2700x - RTC no longer works for Matisse


----------



## VPII

crakej said:


> I think in one of the G Nexus videos they said something about having to do it in a certain way, cooling it slowly. Can't remember the detail but I'm sure you'd find the video easy enough on their youtube channel.


My friend, thank you for the advice.... ill go slowly tomorrow morning winding it in.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## thegr8anand

Anyone able to oc ram to 3800 on 2602?


----------



## harderthanfire

Keith Myers said:


> Sure would like to know how you guys are able to sustain an all-core overclock with temps at 85° C. I finally was using my system right when it overtemped and dropped to the BIOS splash screen. My trip point is absolutely 78° C. I am positive the BIOS is what is monitoring the temp and shutting the PC down. So where in the BIOS is this trip point set? I do know that the older AMD BIOS I used to have had a cpu over temp trip point setting. I used to set my FX-8350 for 70° when I normally ran around 62-65°C. I am only running 4.1Ghz all-core at 1.1V.
> 
> I found the air coming through the radiator very hot and the reservoir water was the same temperature. But the pump was running as I could feel the vibration. But I don't think I had any flow in the system.
> 
> So off to tear the system down and look for blockage or lack of flow. Switched out the cpu block for the Raystorm Pro so I could eliminate draining the system with minimal loss. I then could examine the Aqua block and see if it was blocked. No it wasn't. Turning the system back on with the Raystorm Pro showed that there was plenty of flow as it purged what little air entered the system when I switched blocks. The Raystorm Pro block is also a low resistance, high flowrate block so I considered that an advantage for my problem. Temps are only a couple of degrees worse than the Aqua Computer Kryos block. I think I need to add a flowmeter to the loop for troubleshooting and monitoring. There is a flowrate header on the mobo, might as well use it. Not sure what is going on. This is the third custom loop I've put together with same exact pump/reservoir/radiator/fans and the first time anything has given me any troubles.
> 
> So question to the group, is there some hidden cpu overtemp trip point buried way down in one of the esoteric BIOS menus I have not found yet?



Is the POST screen displaying the CPU overtemp message when it makes you reboot if not it likely isn't temperature and could be overclock protection kicking in - this can happen if your CPU voltage is set too low and vdroop nails you when certain loads kick in. 1.1V for the record is super low to run a 3900X at, 1.3V is pretty standard or auto with an negative offset if using PBO. Try bumping up the voltage or leaving it on auto and see if the problem goes away, then you can gradually drop and find the lowest point if you really need to save on power.

If it is the CPU temp message then that should not trigger until over 100C on the tdie temp in HWINFO, I got this a couple of times when my pump shut off. Even setting the temp stuff to 120C+ in bios did not remove this limit so it might be something not changeable.


----------



## Nucky

@gupsterg how are you setting cldo vccp? I tried to copy your setting for that yesterday but it doesn't accept 0.xx for voltage. Are you just entering a value of 91?


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> Sounds a bit wonky but now I know we are making progress for the C7H non wifi. I am just baffled why the non wifi version is being so stubborn. Out of curiosity can you reset the bios to default, reboot and then try search again? It might have something to do with the saved profiled on non wifi version.


Sorry sir, worked pulled me away as usual, just catching up with the forum. I am pretty sure setting the UEFI back to defaults will fix this, as well, its just weird that HPET wouldn't show up under Search, I searched for "HPET", "High Precision" and "Timer", and couldn't get it under any of those search terms. I will load back defaults though in just a few minutes and set all my settings from scratch, reboot, and then see if Spread Spectrum remains. I have a feeling it will. So I can't wait for the hidden fan settings!

I am pulling resources together for starting to study modding them on my own, I am hoping to become of some use to you, I know it will take a while to get to that point, but when I set my mind to something I am usually pretty decent at making it happen.

Anyways, will report back shortly. 



mtrai said:


> Just wanted to give my thoughts on our bios situation.
> 
> We are gonna be in 2501 for a long time as both AGESA 1.0.0.3ab and 1.0.0.3abb have a weak boost per this:
> 
> Yes there is. Shamino an ASUS engineer confirmed this on the Rog forums. He stated AGESA 1.0.0.3ab has a week cpu boost.
> 
> "right now i only have the links for x570 for 1003ABB - dont be looking for boost changes, the higher booster is only due to the 1002 smu f/w, 1003's smu f/w is not the 'high booster', why the newer smu is a 'weaker' booster one can only guess."
> 
> This applies to any board bios with AGESA 1.0.0.3ab and 1.0.0.3abb
> 
> Source https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?112279-X370-X470-AGESA-1003AB-Bioses&p=779048#post779048
> 
> So what I am trying to do is get the non wifi C7H bios done correctly and working for folks who have that board.
> 
> We already have my unlocked C7H Wifi bios.
> 
> Now that I realize we will be on this bios for many months I want to make this happen and get it working so bear with me, I did make some progress and it was confirmed. I am just at a loss of why the non wifi is being stubborn.


You are the man @mtrai ! I know I do, and I know the community also, really appreciates your help. Anything you need from me, just let me know!



gupsterg said:


> @oreonutz
> 
> This is crazy. I undid the PBO OC on CPU. Rolled everything to stock. Setup 3800MHz 1:1:1 with my preferred timings, set SOC: 1.031V, CLDO_VDDG: 0.954V, CLDO_VDDP: 0.901V, VBOOT/VDIMM: 1.4V, VTTDDR: 0.7V and ProcODT: 34.3. System POST, ran Kahru RAM test for ~1269%. I then rebooted and set in MBIST > Data Eye > Pattern: 4. Now Kahru RAM test upto 4100%.
> 
> Data zip.


Man that is awesome! So I took a crack booting succesfully under 3800Mhz and 1900Mhz FCLK last night, and unfortunately was unsuccesful. I followed your data I thought verbatim, but just couldn't post. I also ended up getting a late page from a clients downed server, so I had to prematurely load back up my working stable 3600Mhz Profile to remote into the BMC and diagnose the issue (Some dumb ass decided it was a good idea to create a feed back loop on the network, long story) So I will take these new settings from you and try again.

Its pretty clear to me that I didn't win the silicon lottery on this one though, as I can not hold a stable OC as high as most of you guys with the 3900x are reporting, and also what I can obtain seems to be at a much higher Voltage curve, so it stands to reason that I also lost on the Memory Controller front as well, I may end up having to settle with 3600Mhz (which is a massive Increase over my 2700x, so ultimately its still a win, just disappointing.). But I will try again and report back!


----------



## Keith Myers

harderthanfire said:


> Is the POST screen displaying the CPU overtemp message when it makes you reboot if not it likely isn't temperature and could be overclock protection kicking in - this can happen if your CPU voltage is set too low and vdroop nails you when certain loads kick in. 1.1V for the record is super low to run a 3900X at, 1.3V is pretty standard or auto with an negative offset if using PBO. Try bumping up the voltage or leaving it on auto and see if the problem goes away, then you can gradually drop and find the lowest point if you really need to save on power.
> 
> If it is the CPU temp message then that should not trigger until over 100C on the tdie temp in HWINFO, I got this a couple of times when my pump shut off. Even setting the temp stuff to 120C+ in bios did not remove this limit so it might be something not changeable.


I don't run Windows, run Linux. So no other temp monitoring available other than the BIOS and the asus-wmi-sensor driver. I am running fixed multiplier of 41. I am running Auto. When I changed to fixed multiplier, the Vcore of the Auto clock dropped from 1.457V to 1.097V. It runs there without errors and thought that was what it needed. I am running with LLC4. I don't run Performance Enhancement nor PBO. Just the flat 41 multiplier.


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> Sure would like to know how you guys are able to sustain an all-core overclock with temps at 85° C. I finally was using my system right when it overtemped and dropped to the BIOS splash screen. My trip point is absolutely 78° C. I am positive the BIOS is what is monitoring the temp and shutting the PC down. So where in the BIOS is this trip point set? I do know that the older AMD BIOS I used to have had a cpu over temp trip point setting. I used to set my FX-8350 for 70° when I normally ran around 62-65°C. I am only running 4.1Ghz all-core at 1.1V.
> 
> I found the air coming through the radiator very hot and the reservoir water was the same temperature. But the pump was running as I could feel the vibration. But I don't think I had any flow in the system.
> 
> So off to tear the system down and look for blockage or lack of flow. Switched out the cpu block for the Raystorm Pro so I could eliminate draining the system with minimal loss. I then could examine the Aqua block and see if it was blocked. No it wasn't. Turning the system back on with the Raystorm Pro showed that there was plenty of flow as it purged what little air entered the system when I switched blocks. The Raystorm Pro block is also a low resistance, high flowrate block so I considered that an advantage for my problem. Temps are only a couple of degrees worse than the Aqua Computer Kryos block. I think I need to add a flowmeter to the loop for troubleshooting and monitoring. There is a flowrate header on the mobo, might as well use it. Not sure what is going on. This is the third custom loop I've put together with same exact pump/reservoir/radiator/fans and the first time anything has given me any troubles.
> 
> So question to the group, is there some hidden cpu overtemp trip point buried way down in one of the esoteric BIOS menus I have not found yet?


I REALLY Don't know how you are getting your PC to shut off on your at 78c. Something IS NOT RIGHT. Look around on these forums, literally NO ONE else is reporting their UEFI's Shutting there PC's Down once hitting 78c. I don't know if you have a corrupt UEFI, or something else built into your software, or some other component on your system. It does seem like its a Board Level protection, the problem is we all own this board and NONE of us have experienced this behavior from it. Its possible you have some kind of corruption in your board, in which case using BIOS Flashback to flash Vanilla 2501 MIGHT fix the issue, but it is just weird. THE ONLY PLACE in the current UEFI to set Temperature protections is in the DIGI+ Power Settings, and that is technically for VRM Thermal Settings, but you can head there and max that out, that is the only place in the entire UEFI to set such a limit.

You definitely have stumbled across a unique issue, it may be worth it to go through and isolate your hardware to find out what is causing it. I have had a look online and I can't find anyone else with THIS SPECIFIC Board having this problem.

I really wish I was in your area because I love Weird Unique issues to solve, and this would be a fun one to figure out. However I know its your work machine, so you just want it fixed, I would definitely start with first flashing a fresh 2501 Uefi, then Pulling out your drive, installing a fresh version of Windows, then see if you can repeat the problem on the Windows Platform, then if you can repeat the problem start Isolating hardware, one by one until you find the culprit. Definitely hope you are able to solve this. I know you are convinced its the UEFI, but if you flash the UEFI, and run stock and still see this issue, I would try just putting in a fresh drive and installing Windows and see if you see the same issue there, you may end up finding it is something unexpected to blame.


----------



## Keith Myers

Thanks, not sure if I want to go through the hassle of buying Windows just to troubleshoot this problem. I left Windows for a reason many years ago. My apps are not available on Windows.
The previous post has me thinking the cpu over temp error is a "red herring" and the suggestion that the UEFI overclock protection is kicking in and is just using the cpu overtemp error message.

But when I enter the BIOS with the F1 as demanded, it goes straight to the Monitor screen with CPU Temp value of 78° highlighted in red. As soon as you land on the page the red 78 switches to white numbers and starts dropping to idle temps.

I questioned whether the 1.1V Vcore was too low for 4100Mhz, but it does produce lower temps obviously and it passes hours of Prime95 small FFT's, hours of GSAT and the main one my actual BOINC loads 24/7 with no errors. But since the 1.1V is coming from the chip VID tables, figured AMD must have it right. 

As a thought, can someone set their 3900X for a 41 clock multiplier and everything on Auto and tell me what the Vcore value is set for. I guess I should reflash 2501 as the next step. Maybe my original flash from BIOS 1001 is corrupted or something.


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> I don't run Windows, run Linux. So no other temp monitoring available other than the BIOS and the asus-wmi-sensor driver. I am running fixed multiplier of 41. I am running Auto. When I changed to fixed multiplier, the Vcore of the Auto clock dropped from 1.457V to 1.097V. It runs there without errors and thought that was what it needed. I am running with LLC4. I don't run Performance Enhancement nor PBO. Just the flat 41 multiplier.


This has me really curious. I have a few hours to burn before I have to go solve another Mystery, wanted to see if I could help you solve yours in the meantime. Is there any possible way next time you get that on screen message that says your PC has been shutoff due to a temp of 78c or whatever the message is that you see, can you snap a photo of it and post it up here. I am going to try to track down the root cause of that message.


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> Thanks, not sure if I want to go through the hassle of buying Windows just to troubleshoot this problem. I left Windows for a reason many years ago. My apps are not available on Windows.
> The previous post has me thinking the cpu over temp error is a "red herring" and the suggestion that the UEFI overclock protection is kicking in and is just using the cpu overtemp error message.
> 
> But when I enter the BIOS with the F1 as demanded, it goes straight to the Monitor screen with CPU Temp value of 78° highlighted in red. As soon as you land on the page the red 78 switches to white numbers and starts dropping to idle temps.
> 
> I questioned whether the 1.1V Vcore was too low for 4100Mhz, but it does produce lower temps obviously and it passes hours of Prime95 small FFT's, hours of GSAT and the main one my actual BOINC loads 24/7 with no errors. But since the 1.1V is coming from the chip VID tables, figured AMD must have it right.
> 
> As a thought, can someone set their 3900X for a 41 clock multiplier and everything on Auto and tell me what the Vcore value is set for. I guess I should reflash 2501 as the next step. Maybe my original flash from BIOS 1001 is corrupted or something.


No need to buy Windows. Its free, just download it off there website, windows 10, You only have to buy a key for activation, and in this case there is no need to activate, windows will be fully functional you just can't change your background picture or personalize windows and will have an activation watermark, other than that you can install any program and use it all you want for testing. I have a Windows 10 Pro 1809 ISO in my Google Drive if you want it I will share with you, just download and use rufus (or the Linux Equivelent) to deploy the ISO to a flash drive and you are off to the races.

That said, what you described just now does sound like a UEFI related issue, which is just bizarre. So maybe start with a Fresh Flash to 2501. Also a Picture of the Error next time you see it would be awesome!

P.S.

I don't blame you for leaving Windows! It was the right decision!!! I much prefer linux but unfortunately have the opposite problem as you, most of my programs are not on Linux, and Most of my client base Workstations are on Windows, so I have to stay current with it, which is why I run it as my main OS, but You definitely made the right decision for yourself!


----------



## Keith Myers

oreonutz said:


> This has me really curious. I have a few hours to burn before I have to go solve another Mystery, wanted to see if I could help you solve yours in the meantime. Is there any possible way next time you get that on screen message that says your PC has been shutoff due to a temp of 78c or whatever the message is that you see, can you snap a photo of it and post it up here. I am going to try to track down the root cause of that message.


Easy to get a photo of the BIOS splash screen with the cpu temp error message Press F1 to enter Setup. Because that screen will stay on the monitor for hours until you respond to it.

Really difficult to capture the Monitor page with the red 78° C at the top because as soon as that page appears with the red 78° C. after hitting F1, it changes to white and the value starts dropping. You would have to be quick on the trigger for the snapshot. Or I just realized, you could start a movie capture and that would capture the events. I'll do that.


----------



## Keith Myers

oreonutz said:


> No need to buy Windows. Its free, just download it off there website, windows 10, You only have to buy a key for activation, and in this case there is no need to activate, windows will be fully functional you just can't change your background picture or personalize windows and will have an activation watermark, other than that you can install any program and use it all you want for testing. I have a Windows 10 Pro 1809 ISO in my Google Drive if you want it I will share with you, just download and use rufus (or the Linux Equivelent) to deploy the ISO to a flash drive and you are off to the races.
> 
> That said, what you described just now does sound like a UEFI related issue, which is just bizarre. So maybe start with a Fresh Flash to 2501. Also a Picture of the Error next time you see it would be awesome!
> 
> P.S.
> 
> I don't blame you for leaving Windows! It was the right decision!!! I much prefer linux but unfortunately have the opposite problem as you, most of my programs are not on Linux, and Most of my client base Workstations are on Windows, so I have to stay current with it, which is why I run it as my main OS, but You definitely made the right decision for yourself!


Yes. First step is to reflash 2501. It would be nice to get an new BIOS with the new AGESA instead. I also am going to see if I can pull down the upstream kernel k10temp driver or at least the code changes for Ryzen 3000 cpus and compile a new k10temp driver. I would like to have two independent methods of verifying the cpu temps.


----------



## harderthanfire

Keith Myers said:


> Thanks, not sure if I want to go through the hassle of buying Windows just to troubleshoot this problem. I left Windows for a reason many years ago. My apps are not available on Windows.
> The previous post has me thinking the cpu over temp error is a "red herring" and the suggestion that the UEFI overclock protection is kicking in and is just using the cpu overtemp error message.
> 
> But when I enter the BIOS with the F1 as demanded, it goes straight to the Monitor screen with CPU Temp value of 78° highlighted in red. As soon as you land on the page the red 78 switches to white numbers and starts dropping to idle temps.
> 
> I questioned whether the 1.1V Vcore was too low for 4100Mhz, but it does produce lower temps obviously and it passes hours of Prime95 small FFT's, hours of GSAT and the main one my actual BOINC loads 24/7 with no errors. But since the 1.1V is coming from the chip VID tables, figured AMD must have it right.
> 
> As a thought, can someone set their 3900X for a 41 clock multiplier and everything on Auto and tell me what the Vcore value is set for. I guess I should reflash 2501 as the next step. Maybe my original flash from BIOS 1001 is corrupted or something.



At 100% load my multiplier is at 41.5x and VCORE is at 1.275V and I am applying a negative 0.1V offset so it actually wants to be at 1.375V. You could try auto voltage with a 0.1v to 0.2v negative offset to get the power and heat savings and retain those clocks?



Maybe also try upping the current limit to 140% in the Digi+ menu, in case it is the VRM shutting you down due to hitting current limit, additionally make sure you are monitoring your VRM temps just in case long term loads are not creeping the VRM temps higher and higher.


----------



## Keith Myers

harderthanfire said:


> At 100% load my multiplier is at 41.5x and VCORE is at 1.275V and I am applying a negative 0.1V offset so it actually wants to be at 1.375V. You could try auto voltage with a 0.1v to 0.2v negative offset to get the power and heat savings and retain those clocks?
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe also try upping the current limit to 140% in the Digi+ menu, in case it is the VRM shutting you down due to hitting current limit, additionally make sure you are monitoring your VRM temps just in case long term loads are not creeping the VRM temps higher and higher.


OK, that sounds like my flash of 2501 is corrupted. No matter what multiplier I set the Vcore remains at 1.097V. It does not change. I would expect it to change with different clock multipliers as the Vcore should follow a VID lookup table. 

Is my thinking correct?

I am at 120% for current in the DigiVRM pages for both cpu and SOC. My VRM temps are fine at 45° C. right now under my normal BOINC loading.


----------



## thegr8anand

Spoiler



3733 runs perfectly @ 1.48v.












My Ram is 
*Team T-FORCE NIGHT HAWK Legend RGB 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3200 (PC4 25600) Desktop Memory Model TF7D416G3200HC14ADC01 *












Values were Manual 3733 Fast preset from 1.6.0.3 calculator, alt procodt and geardown enabled. Test was done at 1.48v. 1.45v didn't boot in windows. Entering values for 3800 and increasing to 1.52 at the same didn't post at all. Maybe 3733 is the best i can do.




Unable to tighten the timings anymore and didn't get much benefit from it. Its already at 1.5v. Bummer is 3800 just doesn't work for me so maybe 3733 is max for my ram.


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> Yes. First step is to reflash 2501. It would be nice to get an new BIOS with the new AGESA instead. I also am going to see if I can pull down the upstream kernel k10temp driver or at least the code changes for Ryzen 3000 cpus and compile a new k10temp driver. I would like to have two independent methods of verifying the cpu temps.


I am also wondering if that k10Temp Driver is somehow inadvertantly triggering your shutdown, Ryzen 3000 Is a significant change from Previous generations, it could be that the way the k10Temp Driver interacts with your current CPU/UEFI is what is causing the issue.

Might want to try sticking a thermal couple either as close to the CPU Socket as possible, or if you have a K Type Thermal Couple, Stick that in the hole in the socket to get the closest to accurate reading possible, this way you have a way to manually monitor your temps, and then uninstall that k10temp driver altogether and see if the behavior repeats itself.

Just a thought...


----------



## Keith Myers

oreonutz said:


> I am also wondering if that k10Temp Driver is somehow inadvertantly triggering your shutdown, Ryzen 3000 Is a significant change from Previous generations, it could be that the way the k10Temp Driver interacts with your current CPU/UEFI is what is causing the issue.
> 
> Might want to try sticking a thermal couple either as close to the CPU Socket as possible, or if you have a K Type Thermal Couple, Stick that in the hole in the socket to get the closest to accurate reading possible, this way you have a way to manually monitor your temps, and then uninstall that k10temp driver altogether and see if the behavior repeats itself.
> 
> Just a thought...


No, the k10temp driver isn't even loaded. Since it could not identify the cpu, it didn't even load and is missing from the lsmod output.


----------



## Keith Myers

Well I just reflashed 2501. No change. The CPU Voltage is stuck at 1.093V no matter what I put in as multiplier when I take it off Auto. So doesn't that mean my cpu is defective. It does not have the correct VID tables in it?

The only way to effect change in the Vcore is to add or subtract an offset or use a manual voltage. This is completely different than my 2700X's. I never change the CPU Voltage, just leave it on Auto and just set the multiplier and the Vcore changes accordingly with how large a multiplier I use and or how great the loading is. I let the cpu figure out what voltage it needs to be at to run whatever clock speed I have selected.

For example on my 2700X systems if I set the multiplier to stock 37 with CPU Voltage on Auto, it runs with 1.14V. When I change the multiplier to 40.25, the Vcore changes to 1.35V and then sags under load to about 1.33-1.34V.


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> No, the k10temp driver isn't even loaded. Since it could not identify the cpu, it didn't even load and is missing from the lsmod output.


My Bad, not the K10temp Driver, but the program you are using to Tap into WMI. 

WMI was Something that was infamous for causing CRAZY issues on both the Crosshair VII and VI Hero, it made the fans suddenly stop working, and corrupted the UEFI to the point where random shut downs would occur, and finally Elmor tracked it down, and it was the way WMI was interfacing sensor monitoring apps, and would cause really weird bugs. The only way to fix these bugs if you got them was to follow the following steps...

1) Factory Default the UEFI
2) Shut down the Computer and turn off the Power Supply so not even stand by power was going to the PC
3) Pull CMOS Battery
4) Hold down the power button on your system for 30 Seconds, Let go, then hold your power button again for another 30 Seconds. (This is a very important step that I originally skipped because I thought it made no sense when I had problems, but it turns out doing this helps drain all the caps on both your PSU and Motherboard, which is neccesary for this to work properly, so don't skip this step)
5) Wait 5 Minutes before doing anything else, leave PC and Power Supply off
6) Plug Power back into the PSU but DO NOT TURN ON THE PC (Or Put the CMOS Battery Back in just yet)
7) Use UEFI Flashback to Flash 2501 onto the CMOS. (Its important you use BIOS Flashback and not another flashing method)
8) Once the flashing is done, it is ok to put the CMOS Battery Back in.
9) Turn on the PC, enter UEFI and hit factory defaults.
10) Reboot and enter back into UEFI
11) Set up your settings FROM SCRATCH, without using a Profile.

If the settings were done right in that order, you will have cleared corruption from the UEFI Completely, and you should be fine to use your PC Normally.

However one of the WMI Issues was that we couldn't use more then one program that accessed the WMI Data at once. So We couldn't use CPU-z at the same time as having HWinfo open for instance, or HWinfo and AIDA64 at the same time.

This has definitely been fixed for us on the Windows side since, but it very well could still be an issue on the Linux side, but if you have corruption I would be willing to bet the program accessing the WMI is the problem! Good Luck!


----------



## Keith Myers

oreonutz said:


> My Bad, not the K10temp Driver, but the program you are using to Tap into WMI.
> 
> WMI was Something that was infamous for causing CRAZY issues on both the Crosshair VII and VI Hero, it made the fans suddenly stop working, and corrupted the UEFI to the point where random shut downs would occur, and finally Elmor tracked it down, and it was the way WMI was interfacing sensor monitoring apps, and would cause really weird bugs. The only way to fix these bugs if you got them was to follow the following steps...
> 
> 1) Factory Default the UEFI
> 2) Shut down the Computer and turn off the Power Supply so not even stand by power was going to the PC
> 3) Pull CMOS Battery
> 4) Hold down the power button on your system for 30 Seconds, Let go, then hold your power button again for another 30 Seconds. (This is a very important step that I originally skipped because I thought it made no sense when I had problems, but it turns out doing this helps drain all the caps on both your PSU and Motherboard, which is neccesary for this to work properly, so don't skip this step)
> 5) Wait 5 Minutes before doing anything else, leave PC and Power Supply off
> 6) Plug Power back into the PSU but DO NOT TURN ON THE PC (Or Put the CMOS Battery Back in just yet)
> 7) Use UEFI Flashback to Flash 2501 onto the CMOS. (Its important you use BIOS Flashback and not another flashing method)
> 8) Once the flashing is done, it is ok to put the CMOS Battery Back in.
> 9) Turn on the PC, enter UEFI and hit factory defaults.
> 10) Reboot and enter back into UEFI
> 11) Set up your settings FROM SCRATCH, without using a Profile.
> 
> If the settings were done right in that order, you will have cleared corruption from the UEFI Completely, and you should be fine to use your PC Normally.
> 
> However one of the WMI Issues was that we couldn't use more then one program that accessed the WMI Data at once. So We couldn't use CPU-z at the same time as having HWinfo open for instance, or HWinfo and AIDA64 at the same time.
> 
> This has definitely been fixed for us on the Windows side since, but it very well could still be an issue on the Linux side, but if you have corruption I would be willing to bet the program accessing the WMI is the problem! Good Luck!


Thanks for the outline. But the driver isn't a program, but a kernel module. It is simply an interface into the BIOS values from the WMI interface. There are no competing programs polling the WMI interface like on Windows.
If you want you can look at the code and see what it is doing. It's pretty basic. Take a look at the asus-wmi-sensors.c file
https://github.com/electrified/asus-wmi-sensors

I've asked AMD for tech assistance and am waiting for their reply. In the meantime I just decided to add 200mV in offset to the Auto value to get to the 1.3V everyone says the cpu should be using for 4100Mhz. Temps are up to the mid-70's now compared to the mid-60's I was running on Auto voltage.


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> Thanks for the outline. But the driver isn't a program, but a kernel module. It is simply an interface into the BIOS values from the WMI interface. There are no competing programs polling the WMI interface like on Windows.
> If you want you can look at the code and see what it is doing. It's pretty basic. Take a look at the asus-wmi-sensors.c file
> https://github.com/electrified/asus-wmi-sensors
> 
> I've asked AMD for tech assistance and am waiting for their reply. In the meantime I just decided to add 200mV in offset to the Auto value to get to the 1.3V everyone says the cpu should be using for 4100Mhz. Temps are up to the mid-70's now compared to the mid-60's I was running on Auto voltage.


I am not saying that it is a program, I am saying that in the past with this very board anything interfacing with WMI caused issues. Obviously I don't know if thats what your problem is, I am just trying to point out that it has caused hell with a lot of us, just because its part of the Kernel doesn't mean its interfacing with the WMI Properly (Its also possible that it had absolutely no problems interfacing with a past UEFI, but then started causing an issue once updated to the new UEFI). You can look back to around page 170 in this very thread and see the hell it caused a lot of us and it turned out to just be the way WMI was being forwarded to the OS. So if you are at your witts end you really have nothing to lose to try to clear out the corruption (if thats what it is) in your UEFI.

I appreciate that I kept referring to the driver interfacing with the WMI with the wrong terminology and apologize for that, but it doesn't change the fact that anything interfacing with the WMI caused huge issues for us in the past, it ended up needing a UEFI fix and the programs on windows that interfaced with it needed to change the way they interfaced with it in order for it to no longer be an issue for us. I do not know that these optimizations took place on the Linux side, so its an area to at least explore. I appreciate that its pretty simple code, and I also appreciate that there is no competing driver or program in your case so that does make this different, but there were people back then who only ran one Monitoring program who ran into this issue, so Its still an area I would look at.

I will go back in the forum and try to find when Elmor addressed this issue for us to highlight the similarities with your current situation, while definitely different symptoms, it seems that it could be the same root cause.

Hopefully AMD Support is helpful for you, but it would be interesting (Even though this is a pain in the ass because the graphics card is most likely in the way of the CMOS Battery) if you tried this fix and if it worked, I would definitely see if you could disable the interfacing driver as well to see if that helps. You never know. Might be a waste of time, but it also could end up giving you useful data.


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> I've asked AMD for tech assistance and am waiting for their reply. In the meantime I just decided to add 200mV in offset to the Auto value to get to the 1.3V everyone says the cpu should be using for 4100Mhz. Temps are up to the mid-70's now compared to the mid-60's I was running on Auto voltage.


Here is a collection of some of Elmors post discussing the WMI Interface Issue. However when going back and searching for these, I saw that you were actually in the discussion a lot of the times, usually talking about something else, but it means you are already probably aware of this issue, so sorry if I am telling you something you already know.

Just trying to suggest a possible connection with what you are experiencing, its never been past ASUS (Especially after losing Elmor) to reintroduce a bug after its been fixed.

Anyways, since I already have done the work of collecting the posts, to refresh our memories...

From Post: https://www.overclock.net/forum/27236713-post195.html


elmor said:


> Trying to find the reason this is happening. A basic system with AiSuite 3 installed doesn't show this issue. Seems like you all are using Corsair Link? Or similar software from NZXT?
> 
> *edit: Installed Corsair Link, then as soon as I changed the Fan Profile in AiSuite the board shuts down.*
> 
> I suggest you refrain from using any of those software (remove either AiSuite or others) until we've solved this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lol, too much hardware around here for debugging.





From Post: https://www.overclock.net/forum/27525526-post2559.html


elmor said:


> I'm still trying to get a 100% fixed version with the ACPI WMI interface (for C6/C7/ZE). I believe Global C-states are disabled when overclocking on the later BIOS versions since it was causing issues with Manual Mode voltage settings being reset. Manually setting Advanced\AMD CBS\Zen Common Options\Global C-states Control = Enabled should bring back "downvolting".





From Post: https://www.overclock.net/forum/27618490-post3298.html


elmor said:


> While waiting for something better, perhaps a few users could help me test a BIOS with an updated ACPI WMI interface that should fix the previous shortcomings. I only have a version for C7H Wi-Fi: http://www.mediafire.com/file/bj1e7tvzvypa9v8/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0012.zip/file
> 
> Updated software versions:
> 
> - HWInfo v5.88 or later
> - HWMonitor Beta: http://download.cpuid.com/betas/hwm_b17.zip
> - SIV 5.32 or later
> - CPU-Z Beta: http://download.cpuid.com/betas/cpuz_a0.zip
> - AIDA64 v5.98.4800 or later
> 
> If you currently have any of the issues listed below, your feedback would be very valuable.
> 
> - Bad SIO temperature readings, things like CPU temperature reading crazy values or not updating anymore
> - Fans permanently stopping or getting stuck at some percentage





From Post: https://www.overclock.net/forum/27531976-post2636.html


elmor said:


> C7H BIOS 0804
> 
> - Fully fixed ACPI WMI implementation Still some issues
> - Fixed CPU Socket/MB Temperatures swapped
> - Still AGESA 1.0.0.2
> 
> C7H http://www.mediafire.com/file/58436q88ph49be3/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-0804.zip
> C7H WIFI http://www.mediafire.com/file/t3hgg0g9agk9vc9/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0804.zip
> 
> 
> Please note that in order to have this BIOS update fix the sensor issues, you need to only use software which relies on our new interface. I'll try to compile a list of what's safe at a later time.
> 
> I'm looking into the issues with graphics cards only running at x8, got nothing concrete yet.


----------



## thegr8anand

Guys how are you oc'ing your ryzen 3000? Manual OC or Pbo?


----------



## mtrai

Who wants to test mod v2 of the non wifi 2501 bios for me?

You have to use flashback.

You cannot restore your settings even from 2501 .cmo Apparently restoring the .cmo settings breaks the search function.

There should be lots of new menus with new options etc however some settings can only be shown by search for notable are HPET and Spread Spectrum though there are many other options that can be searched for but they might break your system and need a cmos clear so use at your own risk.

Also while using flashback...please watch the blue light and make sure it keeps blinking for at least a minute before you walk away. If it only blinks 3 times it failed to read the flashback cap on the USB stick. The most common issue with this is the actual USB stick. Out of all my USB stick I only have 1 that will work with flashback. So please watch the light for a min to make sure it continues to blink. When the flash is done it was stop blinking. The flash takes about 10 mins

and please please report back. 

Please also verify all the new fan controls and q-fan control.

Assuming this one now works and flashes I will consolidate both the modded 2501 non wifi and wifi into a new thread for ease of access.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xBqUE2iW-7pIQaCuJuR3U7XzZIX1-Dm7/view?usp=sharing


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> Who wants to test mod v2 of the non wifi 2501 bios for me?
> 
> You have to use flashback.
> 
> You cannot restore your settings even from 2501 .cmo Apparently restoring the .cmo settings breaks the search function.
> 
> There should be lots of new menus with new options etc however some settings can only be shown by search for notable are HPET and Spread Spectrum though there are many other options that can be searched for but they might break your system and need a cmos clear so use at your own risk.
> 
> Also while using flashback...please watch the blue light and make sure it keeps blinking for at least a minute before you walk away. If it only blinks 3 times it failed to read the flashback cap on the USB stick. The most common issue with this is the actual USB stick. Out of all my USB stick I only have 1 that will work with flashback. So please watch the light for a min to make sure it continues to blink. When the flash is done it was stop blinking. The flash takes about 10 mins
> 
> and please please report back.
> 
> Please also verify all the new fan controls and q-fan control.
> 
> Assuming this one now works and flashes I will consolidate both the modded 2501 non wifi and wifi into a new thread for ease of access.
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xBqUE2iW-7pIQaCuJuR3U7XzZIX1-Dm7/view?usp=sharing


I am on it!!! Downloading now, will test in about 30 mins, mid game but will test just after


----------



## Keith Myers

*Overtemp error snapshot*

Well I didn't know how to turn on movie mode on my phone apparently so I missed the 85°C. temp value in red on the Cpu temp in Monitor. All I was able to grab was the initial snapshot of the error.
This event happened after I increased the Vcore to 1.30V per recommendation. Not sure now that the hypothesis that the automatic frequency scaling bugging out with the overtemp error as a substitute for the real error is good. My cpu is definitely tripping overtemp below what it should. I have removed the top panel of the case and the radiators exhaust directly up out to the room. I did not feel any extra heat or difference in normal running conditions.


Spoiler



Overtemp error


----------



## Keith Myers

*asus-wmi-sensors*



> I would definitely see if you could disable the interfacing driver as well to see if that helps. You never know. Might be a waste of time, but it also could end up giving you useful data.


If I remove the kernel module, I have no sensor readouts period. No cpu temp at all.

[Edit]I'll post to the module developer github page and ask if anyone else is having issues with the module on Ryzen 3000.

[Edit 2] It will be difficult to get to the cmos battery. I have all slots occupied with hybrid graphics cards. They would all have to be removed. This new upgrade has spent more time down and being deconstructed/reconstructed than it has been running. Never a problem with the 2700X it had in it before.

[Edit 3] Is 1.30V sufficient for 4150Mhz. I thought I read here in the forum many others running around this voltage for this clock. Do I have to increase the offset even more? No compute errors or system crashes have been experienced at any of the settings I have used other than the erratic overtemp error. Only when I get the overtemp error do I trash the tasks running on the cpu.

[Edit 4] Removed the k10temp driver since it wasn't doing anything anyway. Also removed the asus-wmi-sensor driver completely and then compiled off the latest master and reinstalled.
Also decided to try Auto for cpu multiplier and Auto for voltage. So letting the cpu work as intended without a manual clock multiplier. The stock readback voltage for Auto is 1.497V in the BIOS. 
Under idle in the Desktop, the cpu voltage is 1.35V and sags down to 1.32V under load with LLC3 for cpu and SoC. Currently at 77°C. with all the cores somewhere between 4050-4100Mhz. Will let 
that run until I get the next cpu overtemp error and will then rip the system apart to get to the cmos battery removal per oreonutz complete UEFI clearout procedure.


----------



## crakej

Been playing with BCLK OC to get 3800 that @lordzed83 gave me...

I just can't get to 101.8 - 101.6 is really stable, but whatever I try - giving ram more volts, various SoC and VDDG combinations, ODT, DrvStr etc.... doesn't seem to work.

Pulled OC right back to 4.1GHz to get stable on 101.6, so might try backing off to 4.0GHz give the CPU lots of leeway on voltage.

Can my IMC really suck that much?.....possibly!


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> If I remove the kernel module, I have no sensor readouts period. No cpu temp at all.
> 
> [Edit]I'll post to the module developer github page and ask if anyone else is having issues with the module on Ryzen 3000.
> 
> [Edit 2] It will be difficult to get to the cmos battery. I have all slots occupied with hybrid graphics cards. They would all have to be removed. This new upgrade has spent more time down and being deconstructed/reconstructed than it has been running. Never a problem with the 2700X it had in it before.
> 
> [Edit 3] Is 1.30V sufficient for 4150Mhz. I thought I read here in the forum many others running around this voltage for this clock. Do I have to increase the offset even more? No compute errors or system crashes have been experienced at any of the settings I have used other than the erratic overtemp error. Only when I get the overtemp error do I trash the tasks running on the cpu.
> 
> [Edit 4] Removed the k10temp driver since it wasn't doing anything anyway. Also removed the asus-wmi-sensor driver completely and then compiled off the latest master and reinstalled.
> Also decided to try Auto for cpu multiplier and Auto for voltage. So letting the cpu work as intended without a manual clock multiplier. The stock readback voltage for Auto is 1.497V in the BIOS.
> Under idle in the Desktop, the cpu voltage is 1.35V and sags down to 1.32V under load with LLC3 for cpu and SoC. Currently at 77°C. with all the cores somewhere between 4050-4100Mhz. Will let
> that run until I get the next cpu overtemp error and will then rip the system apart to get to the cmos battery removal per oreonutz complete UEFI clearout procedure.


I know this troubleshooting sucks, especially when you have work to do, I just hope it leads to a positive result.

So I would think even with the worst binned 3900x's, that 1.3v is MORE THAN Sufficient for 4150Mhz. I have by no means won the silicon lottery this time around, people are getting 4.4Ghz all cores on 1.3v or less, I can't even hold 4.3Ghz at 1.35v. But I can run 4.25 at 1.25v no problem, even stable for Sustained AVX Workloads.

Yeah I hate to have no temp monitors, but there is always K Type Thermal Couples! i


----------



## Keith Myers

oreonutz said:


> I know this troubleshooting sucks, especially when you have work to do, I just hope it leads to a positive result.
> 
> So I would think even with the worst binned 3900x's, that 1.3v is MORE THAN Sufficient for 4150Mhz. I have by no means won the silicon lottery this time around, people are getting 4.4Ghz all cores on 1.3v or less, I can't even hold 4.3Ghz at 1.35v. But I can run 4.25 at 1.25v no problem, even stable for Sustained AVX Workloads.
> 
> Yeah I hate to have no temp monitors, but there is always K Type Thermal Couples! i


You keep mentioning the hole in the bottom of the socket for putting in a K-type thermocouple. _*WHAT*_ hole ? ? ? I don't see any hole in the bottom of the socket.

All I see are surface mount resistors and caps.

[Edit] The next overtemp event, I am calling it quits on the 3900X and putting the 2700X back in. I will keep the BIOS at 2501 to only change one variable at a time. If I still get overtemp events on the 2700X with 2501 BIOS, I know the problem is with the BIOS. I will then backlevel to my previous 1001 BIOS. I have to get this resolved before the start of the yearly world contest I participate in August 15th. I need this system at full production. I am already down over 30K in production since changing over to the 3900X.


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> You keep mentioning the hole in the bottom of the socket for putting in a K-type thermocouple. _*WHAT*_ hole ? ? ? I don't see any hole in the bottom of the socket.
> 
> All I see are surface mount resistors and caps.
> 
> [Edit] The next overtemp event, I am calling it quits on the 3900X and putting the 2700X back in. I will keep the BIOS at 2501 to only change one variable at a time. If I still get overtemp events on the 2700X with 2501 BIOS, I know the problem is with the BIOS. I will then backlevel to my previous 1001 BIOS. I have to get this resolved before the start of the yearly world contest I participate in August 15th. I need this system at full production. I am already down over 30K in production since changing over to the 3900X.


Here ya go, Keith.

Edit:

I'm still on the 2700X and had no such events. However, I haven't done anything with a sustained load. Also on BIOS 2501 and everything is behaving as expected.


----------



## jfrob75

Keith,

I do not know if this will help you but I was running the blender benchmark for the cpu. During this time I was monitoring tdie and CPU temps with Aida64 sensor data. It completed the BMW rendering but crashed during the classroom rendering. The temps prior to crashing were around 83 deg C. Upon the computer posting it indicated a CPU overtemp, the first time I have encountered this. Since the max temp for the Ryzen 3000 is suppose to be 95 deg C I have a feeling that the BIOS may not be set to this temp. I have only seen this kind temp sustained during this benchmark. Cinebench R20 produces a temp around 76 deg C. Also I have the CPU overclocked to 4.35GHz @ 1.318v.

My system is as follows:

ASUS ROG Crosshair VII hero
Ryzen 9 3900x
GSkill 2x16 GB memory
Asus Vega 64 graphics
Corsair H150i PRO AIO, used liquid metal between IHS and Block.
BIOS 2501


----------



## Keith Myers

nick name said:


> Here ya go, Keith.
> 
> Edit:
> 
> I'm still on the 2700X and had no such events. However, I haven't done anything with a sustained load. Also on BIOS 2501 and everything is behaving as expected.


OK, thanks. That is a really, teeny tiny hole on the backside. Less than a mm in diameter. I can see why I never noticed it with my normal installation of a 40mm fan to the backside of the socket covering it up. And of course, that only gets you socket temp. Still too far away from package temp or the the myriad of on die sensors Ryzen is supposed to have. 

Does anyone know what exact temp sensor is responsible for the BIOS cpu temp error? Is is socket temp, package temp or one of the on die temps?


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> OK, thanks. That is a really, teeny tiny hole on the backside. Less than a mm in diameter. I can see why I never noticed it with my normal installation of a 40mm fan to the backside of the socket covering it up. And of course, that only gets you socket temp. Still too far away from package temp or the the myriad of on die sensors Ryzen is supposed to have.
> 
> Does anyone know what exact temp sensor is responsible for the BIOS cpu temp error? Is is socket temp, package temp or one of the on die temps?


 @elmor and @The Stilt have always answered my messages and they usually do so promptly. If you don't get an answer here then I would encourage you to give them a shout.


----------



## VPII

So my Dry ice run never happened even though I have the dry ice. Seems like this mobo freaks out when he notice the pot I'm fitting to it. The weirdest qpost errors, most commonly c5 but not always. I ended up reinstalling normal system and it could not even run stock, the highest I could run was 3.2ghz all core at 0.95vcore actual around 0.925v. 

After putting the mobo in the oven for snother 45min st 45c I got it back working as normal. I thought I try again but this time instead of art eraser Ill use vaseline for insulation..... same problem all qpost errors.

Well that is it, I am done and the board in the dishwasher for some cleaning. Im not even upset, just glad I got it working ss normal again, hope the same happens after cleaning.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## Keith Myers

jfrob75 said:


> Keith,
> 
> I do not know if this will help you but I was running the blender benchmark for the cpu. During this time I was monitoring tdie and CPU temps with Aida64 sensor data. It completed the BMW rendering but crashed during the classroom rendering. The temps prior to crashing were around 83 deg C. Upon the computer posting it indicated a CPU overtemp, the first time I have encountered this. Since the max temp for the Ryzen 3000 is suppose to be 95 deg C I have a feeling that the BIOS may not be set to this temp. I have only seen this kind temp sustained during this benchmark. Cinebench R20 produces a temp around 76 deg C. Also I have the CPU overclocked to 4.35GHz @ 1.318v.
> 
> My system is as follows:
> 
> ASUS ROG Crosshair VII hero
> Ryzen 9 3900x
> GSkill 2x16 GB memory
> Asus Vega 64 graphics
> Corsair H150i PRO AIO, used liquid metal between IHS and Block.
> BIOS 2501


Thanks for the post and other datum. I have had 4 overtemp events so far tripping at 78°C. The last one tripped at 83°C. which matches your event. My computers crunch numbers all day long and run flat out all the time. No temporary benchmark needed. Just real workload.


----------



## thegr8anand

I think there is a temp limit setting somewhere in bios. Did you guys check it?


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> OK, thanks. That is a really, teeny tiny hole on the backside. Less than a mm in diameter. I can see why I never noticed it with my normal installation of a 40mm fan to the backside of the socket covering it up. And of course, that only gets you socket temp. Still too far away from package temp or the the myriad of on die sensors Ryzen is supposed to have.
> 
> Does anyone know what exact temp sensor is responsible for the BIOS cpu temp error? Is is socket temp, package temp or one of the on die temps?


Sorry, had a long project this weekend, just getting back to my PC. Yeah it is a tiny hole, but its there for Hardcore OCers to get a good temp when Sub Ambient OC, it is reliable, it won't get you your on die temp measurements, but you can calibrate it to be as close to your ON Die sensors as possible.

This one Completely eludes me. Now @jfrob75 has seen this behavior as well, so we know its not just an isolated incident, but while searching google and duck duck go, I can't find anyone else running into this issue on Ryzen 3000, this is a weird one. I can not get my rig to replicate this issue, but it has to be some kind of UEFI Issue. I know Shamino is on vacation, but you may want to reach out to @The Stilt or @elmor to see if either of them has any idea why this might be happening.

I am sorry I couldn't be more helpful.


----------



## thegr8anand

Got my best possible timings at 3733 below 1.5v. Can't tighten anymore.


----------



## crakej

VPII said:


> So my Dry ice run never happened even though I have the dry ice. Seems like this mobo freaks out when he notice the pot I'm fitting to it. The weirdest qpost errors, most commonly c5 but not always. I ended up reinstalling normal system and it could not even run stock, the highest I could run was 3.2ghz all core at 0.95vcore actual around 0.925v.
> 
> After putting the mobo in the oven for snother 45min st 45c I got it back working as normal. I thought I try again but this time instead of art eraser Ill use vaseline for insulation..... same problem all qpost errors.
> 
> Well that is it, I am done and the board in the dishwasher for some cleaning. Im not even upset, just glad I got it working ss normal again, hope the same happens after cleaning.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


Seen this? https://community.hwbot.org/topic/190114-rog-crosshair-viii-ln2-oc-guide/?_fromLogout=1


----------



## VPII

crakej said:


> Seen this? https://community.hwbot.org/topic/190114-rog-crosshair-viii-ln2-oc-guide/?_fromLogout=1


Thanks @crakej but I think my problem is a little beyond. You see I had a similar issue before with my 2700X under driy ice and it resulted in similar issues. At present I am running single channel as I lost the first channel closest to the cpu. That was not lost due to dry ice, or the dish washer, it is lost as the board got a knock somewhere causing this issue. Now taken the availability of new Asus boards in South Africa, I may very well end up getting a Asus Prime X570 Pro, partly due to price, but after a really bad experience with the Gigabyte Aorus Elite X570, I'm really finding it hard to look elsewhere for a motherboard. Yes we have MSI here, but I am not convinced, Asrock availability is a problem as well so I'll settle for what ever I can get that I know. The board seems really good and has enough power for my 3900X.


----------



## oreonutz

thegr8anand said:


> Guys how are you oc'ing your ryzen 3000? Manual OC or Pbo?


I am manually OCing, AND Per CCX OCing. For people who need the highest Single Core Performance then PBO and Auto OC seems to be the way to go, because you seem to get the highest single core numbers that way, but for those of us that need the highest Multi-core Performance when under heavy load, PBO seems to have a problem (at least in my case) holding the All Core Clocks that a Manual OC can hold (which wasn't the case on the 2700x, but does seem to be the case with the 3000 Series), so I am manually OCing to get the best All Core Performance I can. 

For instance, when using PBO the Highest All Core Overclock under a Blender Render I can get is 4.15Ghz, and that usually drops down to 4.1 midway through a 10 Minutes Render. When Manual OCing I can easily hold 4.25Ghz (which makes a pretty big difference in terms of time to completion when Rendering Scenes that take 6 hours plus) All Core for the entire Render, with Less Voltage, and less Heat then PBO Uses. I can sustain 4.25Ghz even when using AVX at 1.25v. And then to top it off you can Per CCX Overclock, find your weakest CCX that was holding your all Core OC back and leave that at the highest Clock it can achieve, and then while keeping your voltage the same, Continue to up each CCX at a time until you find instability. This method takes a while, but I was able to up my voltage just to 1.275 which wasn't that much in terms of heat, and get 4.4Ghz on CCX 0, 4.35Ghz on CCX 1, 4.25Ghz on CCX 2 (which was the one holding my All Core Back) and 4.35Ghz on CCX 3 which increases performance that much more, and gives your Single Core score a bit of a boost. 

So in my opinion, until we get a UEFI that fixes the PBO Boost Algorithm to act more like it did on the 2700x, where we can achieve the same All Core OC under heavy all core load that we can manually, but then boost to higher clocks when under lightly threaded loads, then Manual OCing and Per CCX OCing is currently the way to go, unless of course I am just dumb and haven't figured out how to get PBO to Properly Boost All Core yet, but I have played with it for hours on multiple UEFI's with my Crosshair VII Hero and haven't been able to get my All Core to go above 4.15Ghz when under a heavy Blender Render, which is what I use to make sure my CPU is stable for my typical workloads.

Anyways, I know that was a long answer, but hope it answers your question.


----------



## nick name

Did we ever figure out which voltage this VDDP reading is? It seems to have a wide range so I'd like to figure out how to control it.


----------



## oreonutz

nick name said:


> Did we ever figure out which voltage this VDDP reading is? It seems to have a wide range so I'd like to figure out how to control it.


I'd like to know myself, I have noticed a pretty big swing myself.


----------



## Keith Myers

*mystery solved.*



oreonutz said:


> Sorry, had a long project this weekend, just getting back to my PC. Yeah it is a tiny hole, but its there for Hardcore OCers to get a good temp when Sub Ambient OC, it is reliable, it won't get you your on die temp measurements, but you can calibrate it to be as close to your ON Die sensors as possible.
> 
> This one Completely eludes me. Now @jfrob75 has seen this behavior as well, so we know its not just an isolated incident, but while searching google and duck duck go, I can't find anyone else running into this issue on Ryzen 3000, this is a weird one. I can not get my rig to replicate this issue, but it has to be some kind of UEFI Issue. I know Shamino is on vacation, but you may want to reach out to @The Stilt or @elmor to see if either of them has any idea why this might be happening.
> 
> I am sorry I couldn't be more helpful.


The mystery is finally solved. Was once again using the computer when I glanced over at the Gkrellm monitor that I have for displaying the health of the computer sensors. I saw the cpu temp at 92° C and 0 rpms on all five motherboard fan header fan outputs. Quickly grabbed a flashlight and started removing side panels and sure enough all fans were not spinning. I switched the cpu fan/radiator fans connection to the cpu opt header and no change, 0 rpm and then the system rebooted at 95°C on the cpu temp and dropped to the BIOS splash screen with the cpu overtemp error. Moving to the Monitor page I saw the cpu temp in red reporting 92°C and then it changed to white and started dropping. So on my system, 95° C. is the trip point for overtemp.

Just found enough bits and pieces to get the 3 radiator fans over onto a molex connector from the power supply and will now order a fan hub controller since I can't have the BIOS shut off the motherboard fan headers willy nilly. So your report of having the fans stop because of the BIOS is the correct answer. The molex connected radiator fans should keep the cpu temp under control though the RAM and VRMs and the graphics cards won't like having no airflow through the case.


----------



## lordzed83

Keith Myers said:


> The mystery is finally solved. Was once again using the computer when I glanced over at the Gkrellm monitor that I have for displaying the health of the computer sensors. I saw the cpu temp at 92° C and 0 rpms on all five motherboard fan header fan outputs. Quickly grabbed a flashlight and started removing side panels and sure enough all fans were not spinning. I switched the cpu fan/radiator fans connection to the cpu opt header and no change, 0 rpm and then the system rebooted at 95°C on the cpu temp and dropped to the BIOS splash screen with the cpu overtemp error. Moving to the Monitor page I saw the cpu temp in red reporting 92°C and then it changed to white and started dropping. So on my system, 95° C. is the trip point for overtemp.
> 
> Just found enough bits and pieces to get the 3 radiator fans over onto a molex connector from the power supply and will now order a fan hub controller since I can't have the BIOS shut off the motherboard fan headers willy nilly. So your report of having the fans stop because of the BIOS is the correct answer. The molex connected radiator fans should keep the cpu temp under control though the RAM and VRMs and the graphics cards won't like having no airflow through the case.


So basically I was right when I said You deffo should check temperatures cause on my C7H it was not bug but actual overheating of cpu that resoulted with safety reboot and i dont use any motherboard headers for cooling just pure PSU power baby.
Glad You got it figured out.


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> The mystery is finally solved. Was once again using the computer when I glanced over at the Gkrellm monitor that I have for displaying the health of the computer sensors. I saw the cpu temp at 92° C and 0 rpms on all five motherboard fan header fan outputs. Quickly grabbed a flashlight and started removing side panels and sure enough all fans were not spinning. I switched the cpu fan/radiator fans connection to the cpu opt header and no change, 0 rpm and then the system rebooted at 95°C on the cpu temp and dropped to the BIOS splash screen with the cpu overtemp error. Moving to the Monitor page I saw the cpu temp in red reporting 92°C and then it changed to white and started dropping. So on my system, 95° C. is the trip point for overtemp.
> 
> Just found enough bits and pieces to get the 3 radiator fans over onto a molex connector from the power supply and will now order a fan hub controller since I can't have the BIOS shut off the motherboard fan headers willy nilly. So your report of having the fans stop because of the BIOS is the correct answer. The molex connected radiator fans should keep the cpu temp under control though the RAM and VRMs and the graphics cards won't like having no airflow through the case.


Insane! Yeah that same thing happened to me! I also had to switch over to a molex connector! The weird part is I did NOT get a Over Temp Warning in UEFI at next boot, and I booted directly into the UEFI to check to make sure the fan profile was set correctly. Its worth noting that after setting all of my Fans to a 600RPM Minimum speed that I have not once had the fans stop working since, the bug still happens, but instead of them defaulting to 0rpm, they default to 600RPM, which is definitely a lot better than 0. But the pump Headers don't have that option, and obviously that is too sensitive of a function to just stop working, so Molex it was for the pump for me too.

Hopefully this gets fixed in the next update...

Glad you solved the mystery! I know this had to have been a hair pulling event!


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> Who wants to test mod v2 of the non wifi 2501 bios for me?
> 
> You have to use flashback.
> 
> You cannot restore your settings even from 2501 .cmo Apparently restoring the .cmo settings breaks the search function.
> 
> There should be lots of new menus with new options etc however some settings can only be shown by search for notable are HPET and Spread Spectrum though there are many other options that can be searched for but they might break your system and need a cmos clear so use at your own risk.
> 
> Also while using flashback...please watch the blue light and make sure it keeps blinking for at least a minute before you walk away. If it only blinks 3 times it failed to read the flashback cap on the USB stick. The most common issue with this is the actual USB stick. Out of all my USB stick I only have 1 that will work with flashback. So please watch the light for a min to make sure it continues to blink. When the flash is done it was stop blinking. The flash takes about 10 mins
> 
> and please please report back.
> 
> Please also verify all the new fan controls and q-fan control.
> 
> Assuming this one now works and flashes I will consolidate both the modded 2501 non wifi and wifi into a new thread for ease of access.
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xBqUE2iW-7pIQaCuJuR3U7XzZIX1-Dm7/view?usp=sharing


I am again, so sorry it took so long to get back to you on this, but I wanted to make sure my report was accurate.

I am pretty well versed in BIOS Flashback, but just to be certain I used the 6 Drives I have on hand that I KNOW FOR A FACT work with UEFI Flashback. I typically just use the one, and it NEVER leaves the BIOS Flashback Port, unless for some reason I have downloaded the UEFI onto a different machine, and even then I usually just dump it to that drive over the network.

Anyways, I have downloaded your newest UEFI 4 Different times to make sure it wasn't a problem with corruption while Downloading. Unfortunately, when flashing this UEFI I again get thrown back to the Vanilla 2501. It does appear to actually be flashing, as it does the standard 5 steady Blinks, and then starts blinking faster for about 6 to 7 minutes, before it does a combination of some fast blinks and some slow blinks, and then its done. So it did this every time I tried flashing it, it looked normal, just like every other successful flash.

However, once I boot into the UEFI none of the added options are there. Not HPET, Not Spread Spectrum (and yes to be clear I searched for both of those options using F9 and tried multiple different search terms to find them), no extra fan options in Q Monitoring, nothing. And then I decided to again read the file with EZ Flash in the UEFI to see if it sees it as a legit UEFI, and it does not. Your UEFI that worked for me though, the time before this, it does see that as a Genuine UEFI File.

Here is what EZ Flash says about this newest one:


Spoiler















I know it wouldn't work to flash it with EZ Flash regardless, I am just noting that usually with your modded files that work when using BIOS Flashback, EZ Flash will recognize it as a genuine file if you tell it to read it.

Anyways, I hope this was helpful, I am sorry to have a bad report. Let me know if you would like me to try something different.

Here is a report of exactly what I did, if you are curious:


Spoiler



1) I downloaded your File, which you already had named Properly. 
2) I backed up and deleted the current C7H.CAP File I had on my Flashback Drive. Then I pasted your C7H.CAP file on that drive. I set my UEFI Back to optimized defaults. 
3) I shut off the PC. 
4) I held down the Flashback button for 3 seconds until it flashed 5 Steady flashes, and then began flashing faster, indicating the flashing had begun. I stood there and watched it for about 2 Minutes to make sure it continued to flash, all appeared normal. I sat down to eat a cheese cake, but saw the reflection of the Blue Light off a near by speaker to make sure it was still flashing. About the time I finished up my cheese cake, about 6 minutes or so later, it ceased flashing. 
5) I turned on the PC. This time instead of booting right up, it actually took several minutes for it to post, I was actually starting to get pretty worried. It shut itself off and back on about 6 times, then about 5 minutes later I finally got a Post Beep and then it booted into the UEFI. 
6) I immediately searched for HPET and then Spread Spectrum and got neither. 
7) I loaded optimized defaults then reset and looked again, and again I found nothing. 
8) I then spent the next hour and a half flashing with my many different drives on hand that I know work with BIOS FLASHBACK and unfortunately did not get a satisfactory result with any of them. 
Hope this helps....


----------



## Keith Myers

Yes, the pump was already on a SATA connector so it never stopped pumping. Also explained why I felt intense heat in the radiator body and reservoir when it errored before. The pump was moving water around the system but no heat was being exchanged in the radiator with no airflow. But with every previous event I never saw the fans NOT spinning. The fans started spinning as soon as it rebooted on the overtemp error.

Has this been reported to ASUS? What is the best mechanism to report the failure of the fan header outputs going to zero? Remember, I do not use any kind of fan control curves. All my fan headers are disabled so the fans get nothing but +12V and run at 100%. Except when they don't obviously. Is this simply a BIOS bug turning off the outputs or do I possibly have a motherboard failure? I assume there is some hardware somewhere on the board that the BIOS sends commands to for control of the various headers.


----------



## harderthanfire

Keith Myers said:


> Yes, the pump was already on a SATA connector so it never stopped pumping. Also explained why I felt intense heat in the radiator body and reservoir when it errored before. The pump was moving water around the system but no heat was being exchanged in the radiator with no airflow. But with every previous event I never saw the fans NOT spinning. The fans started spinning as soon as it rebooted on the overtemp error.
> 
> Has this been reported to ASUS? What is the best mechanism to report the failure of the fan header outputs going to zero? Remember, I do not use any kind of fan control curves. All my fan headers are disabled so the fans get nothing but +12V and run at 100%. Except when they don't obviously. Is this simply a BIOS bug turning off the outputs or do I possibly have a motherboard failure? I assume there is some hardware somewhere on the board that the BIOS sends commands to for control of the various headers.



It has been reported to them on their forums so I hope they will fix it.


It isn't a fault with your board the PWM/12V bug is a BIOS bug but it has been around a few versions now.


Originally I thought it was just PWM signal was got lost/corrupted but as you say it happens even when PWM is not enabled.


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> Yes, the pump was already on a SATA connector so it never stopped pumping. Also explained why I felt intense heat in the radiator body and reservoir when it errored before. The pump was moving water around the system but no heat was being exchanged in the radiator with no airflow. But with every previous event I never saw the fans NOT spinning. The fans started spinning as soon as it rebooted on the overtemp error.
> 
> Has this been reported to ASUS? What is the best mechanism to report the failure of the fan header outputs going to zero? Remember, I do not use any kind of fan control curves. All my fan headers are disabled so the fans get nothing but +12V and run at 100%. Except when they don't obviously. Is this simply a BIOS bug turning off the outputs or do I possibly have a motherboard failure? I assume there is some hardware somewhere on the board that the BIOS sends commands to for control of the various headers.


I am pretty certain they are aware of this issue as more than a few of us have been screaming about it over on the ASUS ROG Forums, but in those forums I do believe there is somewhere to report bugs, we may want to individually all go complain about it there to try to make some noise about it, to make sure they take care of it. I would @ Shamino because he seems to be able to push things down the chain quicker like Elmor used to do, but last I heard he was taking a break for a while, not sure when he comes back.

I don't think you have a Motherboard Failure. However I do not yet know if this is simply a UEFI Bug, its been there since the first Ryzen 3000 Compatible UEFI, so I don't know if its just a bug in the UEFI, or its some kind of corruption that happens when flashing from an Older UEFI, or from certain sensors being accessed, like with the bug around the time of the 2000 series launch that ended up being corruption that caused both our fans to randomly stop working/or get stuck at certain RPMS, and in some cases caused our PC's to just randomly shut off. In those cases we had to do that thing I explained to you before where you pull out the UEFI Battery, drain the caps, Flash the UEFI fresh, load defaults, then go on from there, but then usually at some point the corruption would hit again until they fixed the bug in the uefi that caused the corruption to happen. In that case it was due to the interaction with between the Board and the OS when accessing WMI Sensors that somehow caused the corruption, so until the problem was fixed you could just avoid Accessing the WMI Sensors, which is easier to do on Windows, because with HWinfo you could just access the SVI2 Sensors instead, but I don't know whats causing the issue this time, so its hard to say what to avoid, if the problem is corruption at all.

If it is corruption though, it would be worth a shot to go through that process I explained to clear the corruption, I just have no idea how to avoid causing the corruption again.

Let me know if you want us to come over to the ROG Forums with you to make a post about it as well, there is more than one of us who has experienced this, and if we all make a small stink about it, they might make it a priority to fix.


----------



## mtrai

oreonutz said:


> I am again, so sorry it took so long to get back to you on this, but I wanted to make sure my report was accurate.
> 
> I am pretty well versed in BIOS Flashback, but just to be certain I used the 6 Drives I have on hand that I KNOW FOR A FACT work with UEFI Flashback. I typically just use the one, and it NEVER leaves the BIOS Flashback Port, unless for some reason I have downloaded the UEFI onto a different machine, and even then I usually just dump it to that drive over the network.
> 
> Anyways, I have downloaded your newest UEFI 4 Different times to make sure it wasn't a problem with corruption while Downloading. Unfortunately, when flashing this UEFI I again get thrown back to the Vanilla 2501. It does appear to actually be flashing, as it does the standard 5 steady Blinks, and then starts blinking faster for about 6 to 7 minutes, before it does a combination of some fast blinks and some slow blinks, and then its done. So it did this every time I tried flashing it, it looked normal, just like every other successful flash.
> 
> However, once I boot into the UEFI none of the added options are there. Not HPET, Not Spread Spectrum (and yes to be clear I searched for both of those options using F9 and tried multiple different search terms to find them), no extra fan options in Q Monitoring, nothing. And then I decided to again read the file with EZ Flash in the UEFI to see if it sees it as a legit UEFI, and it does not. Your UEFI that worked for me though, the time before this, it does see that as a Genuine UEFI File.
> 
> Here is what EZ Flash says about this newest one:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know it wouldn't work to flash it with EZ Flash regardless, I am just noting that usually with your modded files that work when using BIOS Flashback, EZ Flash will recognize it as a genuine file if you tell it to read it.
> Those are the 3 big issues.
> 
> 
> Anyways, I hope this was helpful, I am sorry to have a bad report. Let me know if you would like me to try something different.
> 
> Here is a report of exactly what I did, if you are curious:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 1) I downloaded your File, which you already had named Properly.
> 2) I backed up and deleted the current C7H.CAP File I had on my Flashback Drive. Then I pasted your C7H.CAP file on that drive. I set my UEFI Back to optimized defaults.
> 3) I shut off the PC.
> 4) I held down the Flashback button for 3 seconds until it flashed 5 Steady flashes, and then began flashing faster, indicating the flashing had begun. I stood there and watched it for about 2 Minutes to make sure it continued to flash, all appeared normal. I sat down to eat a cheese cake, but saw the reflection of the Blue Light off a near by speaker to make sure it was still flashing. About the time I finished up my cheese cake, about 6 minutes or so later, it ceased flashing.
> 5) I turned on the PC. This time instead of booting right up, it actually took several minutes for it to post, I was actually starting to get pretty worried. It shut itself off and back on about 6 times, then about 5 minutes later I finally got a Post Beep and then it booted into the UEFI.
> 6) I immediately searched for HPET and then Spread Spectrum and got neither.
> 7) I loaded optimized defaults then reset and looked again, and again I found nothing.
> 8) I then spent the next hour and a half flashing with my many different drives on hand that I know work with BIOS FLASHBACK and unfortunately did not get a satisfactory result with any of them.
> Hope this helps....


Are you willing to try another mod tomorrow? I am thinking but drinking so will not do the mod until the morning but we have a bios mod where Hpet and Spread Spectrum works....let me just try to gain fan control that works and leave out the rest as it is mostly useless anyway. Those are the three big issues anyway The C7H WIF mod 2501 works with no issue. So this is baffling to me.


----------



## Keith Myers

Well I just posted to the ROG forums. So how come there is no thread for the C7H? All I found was a communal X370/X40 thread for reporting bugs and it was labeled for Crosshair VI Hero.
It seems that fan control has been broken for years and never fixed. I never had the issue before because I don't do fan control. I never had the fan header output disappear on either my Prime Pro X370 or Crosshair VII Hero motherboards. I have 4 C7H systems. I stopped updating the BIOS on the C7H when the 1001 BIOS was released with a fixed WMI interface and I could finally move off the buggy and deprecated it87 module for sensor reporting and move to the very good asus-wmi-sensor driver module. Not a single problem with 1001 BIOS or that driver. Only started having issues with this 2501 BIOS. I got a case number from ASUS for the problem.They said I could revert to an earlier BIOS for the 3900X. I see there are two earlier versions before 2501. Will they have the fan bug also? Or are they known to work? I have also ordered a 10 port fan controller that is powered off of SATA that should be here on Tuesday.


----------



## MrPhilo

This is my 4.4Ghz OC Geekbench along with my Aida.

https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/14171506

Pretty happy with the result. AMD defo done a great job! Thats me with no more tinkering


----------



## Keith Myers

I just performed your complete UEFI clearout by pulling the CMOS battery and discharging the caps on the board. Reflashed a fresh copy of 2501 . . . . . and no change. Still stuck at 1.093V when Cpu Voltage is on Auto and Core multiplier is taken off Auto to a fixed multiplier. No matter what multiplier is used, the cpu voltage does not scale and is locked. So decided to go with 4150Mhz which is about 100Mhz above what Auto can manage with my load. Using a 0.1875 offset on top of the stuck 1.093V to arrive at 1.25V under Vdroop and BOINC load. Still lots better than the 1.35V that Auto cpu voltage comes up with. Temps better too of course with less voltage.

I hope this is the last teardown for a while and I can just use the system. It is my daily driver plus the 3rd highest producer in my fleet. Tops of all the three card hosts. Only the four card hosts beat it. Still have to change over to the fan controller when I get it this week.

FYI, the k10temp driver developer has put out a new commit to the driver that detects Ryzen 3000 correctly now and reports Tdie and Ttrl once again. Nice to have another independent cpu temp readout other than the WMI interface driver.


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> Are you willing to try another mod tomorrow? I am thinking but drinking so will not do the mod until the morning but we have a bios mod where Hpet and Spread Spectrum works....let me just try to gain fan control that works and leave out the rest as it is mostly useless anyway. Those are the three big issues anyway The C7H WIF mod 2501 works with no issue. So this is baffling to me.


I absolutely am willing to test it again for you! I can't explain it either. I hate to be so difficult! But yes I will test it as soon as I can, I believe I am working from home tomorrow, so I should be able to test it once you post, assuming I don't have to go put out a fire.


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> Well I just posted to the ROG forums. So how come there is no thread for the C7H? All I found was a communal X370/X40 thread for reporting bugs and it was labeled for Crosshair VI Hero.
> It seems that fan control has been broken for years and never fixed. I never had the issue before because I don't do fan control. I never had the fan header output disappear on either my Prime Pro X370 or Crosshair VII Hero motherboards. I have 4 C7H systems. I stopped updating the BIOS on the C7H when the 1001 BIOS was released with a fixed WMI interface and I could finally move off the buggy and deprecated it87 module for sensor reporting and move to the very good asus-wmi-sensor driver module. Not a single problem with 1001 BIOS or that driver. Only started having issues with this 2501 BIOS. I got a case number from ASUS for the problem.They said I could revert to an earlier BIOS for the 3900X. I see there are two earlier versions before 2501. Will they have the fan bug also? Or are they known to work? I have also ordered a 10 port fan controller that is powered off of SATA that should be here on Tuesday.


Yeah I think I am going to buy me another Aquacomputer Aquaero 6 XT, it works so well in my Server Build, and is Reliable, for my 3900x Build. But I ran all 4 Compatible UEFI Versions with the 3900x, UEFI 0068, 2406, 2501, 2602 (I think there may have been one more, but those are the 4 I am aware of off the top of my head) and with every single one of those I have experienced the Fan Header Issue. Previous to dropping in the 3900x, I was running my 2700x on UEFI 1002, this one had a fix for the fan header issues I had previously. This one, along with the updated versions of CPU-z. HWinfo64, and AIDA64, allowed me to run all 3 of those monitoring programs at once if I wanted, without an issue being caused, and because I was able to tune PBO exactly the way I liked it, I never bothered upgrading from it until I needed to for 3900x support. So In my opinion, with both the Crosshair VI Hero, and Crosshair VII Hero, this issue had been fixed (I also own the C6H and have a 2700x in it now) and experienced the Fan Header issue on both Boards until the WMI Sensor was fixed with their respective UEFI updates that were released within a week of each other, and haven't had the issue since.

So the 3 Forums that I post in and frequently keep up with over there (aren't neccesarily for reporting bugs, but usually someone from ASUS will take note of bugs posted in one of these forums) are:
The "Crosshair VII Hero UEFI Build Update" Thread:
https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?103702-Crosshair-VII-Hero-UEFI-Build-Update-Thread/

"Latest C7H BIOS" Thread:
https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?112003-Latest-C7H-BIOS

And then in General just keep looking out for Threads Started in the "Crosshair VI & VII Motherboards" Forums:
https://rog.asus.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?292-Crosshair-VI-Motherboards-(X370)

There forums aren't as nicely organized as they are over here at OCN, but you can still usually find what you need.

I wouldn't bother reverting to either of the UEFI's They Said to, unless you want to give them a report on those too, as I have experienced the issue on all 4 of the UEFI's I have flashed, and others here have too. But I do believe this issue was fixed with both the VI and VII hero, they just seemed to have broke it again...


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> I just performed your complete UEFI clearout by pulling the CMOS battery and discharging the caps on the board. Reflashed a fresh copy of 2501 . . . . . and no change. Still stuck at 1.093V when Cpu Voltage is on Auto and Core multiplier is taken off Auto to a fixed multiplier. No matter what multiplier is used, the cpu voltage does not scale and is locked. So decided to go with 4150Mhz which is about 100Mhz above what Auto can manage with my load. Using a 0.1875 offset on top of the stuck 1.093V to arrive at 1.25V under Vdroop and BOINC load. Still lots better than the 1.35V that Auto cpu voltage comes up with. Temps better too of course with less voltage.
> 
> I hope this is the last teardown for a while and I can just use the system. It is my daily driver plus the 3rd highest producer in my fleet. Tops of all the three card hosts. Only the four card hosts beat it. Still have to change over to the fan controller when I get it this week.
> 
> FYI, the k10temp driver developer has put out a new commit to the driver that detects Ryzen 3000 correctly now and reports Tdie and Ttrl once again. Nice to have another independent cpu temp readout other than the WMI interface driver.


This fleet sounds awesome. I need to read up on what it is you do, I am completely ignorant to what BOINC is, I should probably look it up. That is awesome that the developer is putting out a fix to give you some options!

I hope this is the last time you have to tear down too!


----------



## oreonutz

MrPhilo said:


> This is my 4.4Ghz OC Geekbench along with my Aida.
> 
> https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/14171506
> 
> Pretty happy with the result. AMD defo done a great job! Thats me with no more tinkering


I am so JEALOUS!!! I can not get my Rig to Post at 3800Mhz Ram, with 1900Mhz IF No Matter what I do! That latency is amazing! I am running 3600Mhz CL14 with IF at 1800Mhz and my Latency is right around 67ns, I am going to go for 3733Mhz CL15 and 1866Mhz IF Next and see what that yields for me.

Good Work my friend!!!


----------



## Keith Myers

oreonutz said:


> This fleet sounds awesome. I need to read up on what it is you do, I am completely ignorant to what BOINC is, I should probably look it up. That is awesome that the developer is putting out a fix to give you some options!
> 
> I hope this is the last time you have to tear down too!


BOINC stands for Berkeley Open Infrastructure for Network Computing. It is for distributed computing for science projects that engage volunteer or citizen science participants. BOINC is a platform that allows a science project to build on the backbone of BOINC and distribute their science applications. The only way for many scientists to afford a supercomputer or time on a supercomputer. BOINC computing is classed in the Top 500 supercomputer clusters in the world.

The developer is one of the main hwmon kernel maintainers. So pretty fast on updates.


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> BOINC stands for Berkeley Open Infrastructure for Network Computing. It is for distributed computing for science projects that engage volunteer or citizen science participants. BOINC is a platform that allows a science project to build on the backbone of BOINC and distribute their science applications. The only way for many scientists to afford a supercomputer or time on a supercomputer. BOINC computing is classed in the Top 500 supercomputer clusters in the world.
> 
> The developer is one of the main hwmon kernel maintainers. So pretty fast on updates.


Fricking Awesome! I have actually heard of that, My sister who is in the scientific community told me about it before, its just been a while. That is awesome man! So do you use the BOINC Network to number crunch yourself?


----------



## thegr8anand

The performance degradation is unreal on my 3900x. Maybe its my stupidity to stick with 1.0.0.3AB. I made a thread on reddit about it. I will be going to 1.0.0.2 and hopefully get the expected results.


https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cm21yb/going_from_4790k_to_3900x_my_benchmarks/


The benchmarks: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kNsDYVDy80Tn0StRkUWpmxeLVaamnJLd8zlEWeKUe8o/edit?usp=sharing


My avg and max fps dropped compared to 4790k but min fps increased in almost half the games. Games have definitely become stutter-free though as 4790k bottleneck is not anymore.


----------



## harderthanfire

thegr8anand said:


> The performance degradation is unreal on my 3900x. Maybe its my stupidity to stick with 1.0.0.3AB. I made a thread on reddit about it. I will be going to 1.0.0.2 and hopefully get the expected results.
> 
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cm21yb/going_from_4790k_to_3900x_my_benchmarks/
> 
> 
> The benchmarks: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kNsDYVDy80Tn0StRkUWpmxeLVaamnJLd8zlEWeKUe8o/edit?usp=sharing
> 
> 
> My avg and max fps dropped compared to 4790k but min fps increased in almost half the games. Games have definitely become stutter-free though as 4790k bottleneck is not anymore.



Likely not what you want to hear but I have a 2080 as well and my 3D Mark scores are slightly higher, though could be due to a higher overclock on my GPU (+125 core).


My min, max and avg fps seem higher than yours in general but my CPU scores are lower.


I am using PBO with a 200mhz auto OC and an undervolt of -0.1v vcore offset so my single/low load boost is pretty damn high (4.575ghz) but my all core is much lower (4.2ghz).


I'm guessing that for some games etc the boost is better than the all core/ccx OC.


Oh and I am on 1.0.0.2.


----------



## thegr8anand

That's not very good then.


----------



## Keith Myers

oreonutz said:


> Fricking Awesome! I have actually heard of that, My sister who is in the scientific community told me about it before, its just been a while. That is awesome man! So do you use the BOINC Network to number crunch yourself?


Yes, been crunching for Seti going on 18 years now. Been crunching for MilkyWay and Einstein since 2011 and added GPUGrid last year. Seti looks for extraterrestrial techno signatures in radio telescope data. MilkyWay is mapping the MilkyWay galaxy by observing tidal streams which were cannibalized by our galaxy from satellite galaxies and the mapping is giving hints of the shape and distribution of the dark matter halo surrounding the galaxy. Einstein is looking for gravity waves and colliding binary pulsars which probably produce gravity waves. GPUGrid is doing molecular dynamic simulations which gives hints about how molecules and atoms combine in collisions to give hints about new biomolecules and possible cures for diseases.

There are lots of BOINC projects in all fields of discovery. https://boinc.berkeley.edu/projects.php


----------



## AvengedRobix

Update of BIOS on C8H available 🙁


----------



## Hale59

AvengedRobix said:


> Update of BIOS on C8H available 🙁


ROG Crosshair VII overclocking thread


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> Yes, been crunching for Seti going on 18 years now. Been crunching for MilkyWay and Einstein since 2011 and added GPUGrid last year. Seti looks for extraterrestrial techno signatures in radio telescope data. MilkyWay is mapping the MilkyWay galaxy by observing tidal streams which were cannibalized by our galaxy from satellite galaxies and the mapping is giving hints of the shape and distribution of the dark matter halo surrounding the galaxy. Einstein is looking for gravity waves and colliding binary pulsars which probably produce gravity waves. GPUGrid is doing molecular dynamic simulations which gives hints about how molecules and atoms combine in collisions to give hints about new biomolecules and possible cures for diseases.
> 
> There are lots of BOINC projects in all fields of discovery. https://boinc.berkeley.edu/projects.php


So awesome! I am a huge Trekkie Nerd, so am Well aware of SETI, all of those projects are awesome and worthwile! I am going to take a look into it, definitely seems like its for an awesome cause and discovery!

What got you into it?


----------



## Keith Myers

oreonutz said:


> So awesome! I am a huge Trekkie Nerd, so am Well aware of SETI, all of those projects are awesome and worthwile! I am going to take a look into it, definitely seems like its for an awesome cause and discovery!
> 
> What got you into it?


I saw an article in one of my OS/2 Warp newsletters or online magazines. Started on Seti Classic in 2001 crunching on the cpu.


----------



## CharliesTheMan

Keith Myers said:


> I saw an article in one of my OS/2 Warp newsletters or online magazines. Started on Seti Classic in 2001 crunching on the cpu.


I've been lurking but following the thread and absorbing what you guys have been sharing, I just built an AMD 3600 on a CH7 machine a few weeks ago and it's been years since I was into overclocking and folding, I've been running a boring i7 notebook for a while and finally got to build a new machine, my first fullsize AMD build. So big thanks to all of you that are contributing to this thread, I'm constantly learning.

Your BOINC stuff is fascinating. I wanted to ask, did you guys lose very many people to bitcoin mining when it started to really take off a few years back? Or is the community more driven by ethics to put science first?


----------



## AvengedRobix

Hale59 said:


> ROG Crosshair VII overclocking thread


i say.. is a notice.. in x470 nothing new bios =(


----------



## Keith Myers

*Distributed computing*



CharliesTheMan said:


> I've been lurking but following the thread and absorbing what you guys have been sharing, I just built an AMD 3600 on a CH7 machine a few weeks ago and it's been years since I was into overclocking and folding, I've been running a boring i7 notebook for a while and finally got to build a new machine, my first fullsize AMD build. So big thanks to all of you that are contributing to this thread, I'm constantly learning.
> 
> Your BOINC stuff is fascinating. I wanted to ask, did you guys lose very many people to bitcoin mining when it started to really take off a few years back? Or is the community more driven by ethics to put science first?


I'm sure we lost a few volunteers. There even is an effort to encompass the miners with generating coin by participating in distributed computing projects. There is a account manager called Gridcoin that rewards you with coin by crunching for science. https://gridcoin.us/
I think that most participants are driven by ethics and wanting to crunch for favorite projects. A lot of people who have rare diseases or family with rare diseases crunch for a cure. Many projects add you as contributor to the scientific papers they produce. So that can be an incentive for some. The reason that all this got started by Berkeley is that they figured there were a lot of computing cycles being wasted displaying flying toasters. So Seti came up with their own screensaver to harness those wasted compute resources while a computer was turned on but doing nothing but idling. You can contribute to distributed computing with everything from your phone in your pocket to data center computing clusters. With Android, Linux, Windows or MacOS operating systems, you can contribute spare cpu or gpu cycles to distributed computing projects.


----------



## By-Tor

Prior to replacing my 1700X I flashed my Asus CH7 Hero with the latest BIOS on Asus's site (2501). After installing my new 3700X I'm having a heck of a time OCing it and my G.Skill 3200mhz Ripjaw, B-Die ram is running at 2133.

2501 has the AMD Agesa 1.0.0.2 that I have read about.

Is there another BIOS I should try?


With the 1700X on this MB I set it to D.O.C.P. Standard and then set the CPU multi to 40 and the RAM freq, to 3466 and it ran like that until I installed the 3700X.. If I select DOCP now it won't post and gives me a Q Code of "C5". I set the RAM freq to 3200 and it boots in, but the timing are 22.22.22.53 and they were 14.14.14.32.

Anyone have any advice in this matter?

TY


----------



## Keith Myers

By-Tor said:


> Prior to replacing my 1700X I flashed my Asus CH7 Hero with the latest BIOS on Asus's site (2501). After installing my new 3700X I'm having a heck of a time OCing it and my G.Skill 3200mhz Ripjaw, B-Die ram is running at 2133.
> 
> 2501 has the AMD Agesa 1.0.0.2 that I have read about.
> 
> Is there another BIOS I should try?
> 
> 
> With the 1700X on this MB I set it to D.O.C.P. Standard and then set the CPU multi to 40 and the RAM freq, to 3466 and it ran like that until I installed the 3700X.. If I select DOCP now it won't post and gives me a Q Code of "C5". I set the RAM freq to 3200 and it boots in, but the timing are 22.22.22.53 and they were 14.14.14.32.
> 
> Anyone have any advice in this matter?
> 
> TY


First thing you have to do before changing away from JEDEC 2133 RAM speed is to go into the Digi+VRM menu and scroll to the bottom to get to the boot up RAM voltage and change that to 1.35V. If you don't anytime you change to XMP RAM settings, you end up with C5 and have to do a BIOS clear to get back into the BIOS.


----------



## By-Tor

Keith Myers said:


> First thing you have to do before changing away from JEDEC 2133 RAM speed is to go into the Digi+VRM menu and scroll to the bottom to get to the boot up RAM voltage and change that to 1.35V. If you don't anytime you change to XMP RAM settings, you end up with C5 and have to do a BIOS clear to get back into the BIOS.


TY


----------



## By-Tor

Keith Myers said:


> First thing you have to do before changing away from JEDEC 2133 RAM speed is to go into the Digi+VRM menu and scroll to the bottom to get to the boot up RAM voltage and change that to 1.35V. If you don't anytime you change to XMP RAM settings, you end up with C5 and have to do a BIOS clear to get back into the BIOS.


Thanks. It's been so long since I OCed the 1700X I forgot all about setting that...


----------



## lordzed83

AvengedRobix said:


> Update of BIOS on C8H available 🙁


And Gigabyte got ABB and You loose pcie4.0 and from my playing around with x570 Elite on that bios its NOT BETTER still that 3600 is plain ****. Image ME not being able to crack 3600cl16 on a Bdie kit that works 3733cl18 XMP no problem on my 3900x and it even worked with XMP on my 2700x !!!!
Its either that motherboard is **** or the 3600 is ****... Think its the Lesser cause could not get 4100 all coore fully stable with 240 AIO  I'w left it on auto and 3200cl14 tight timings..... Possibly worst 3600 I'w seen around


----------



## lordzed83

thegr8anand said:


> The performance degradation is unreal on my 3900x. Maybe its my stupidity to stick with 1.0.0.3AB. I made a thread on reddit about it. I will be going to 1.0.0.2 and hopefully get the expected results.
> 
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cm21yb/going_from_4790k_to_3900x_my_benchmarks/
> 
> 
> The benchmarks: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kNsDYVDy80Tn0StRkUWpmxeLVaamnJLd8zlEWeKUe8o/edit?usp=sharing
> 
> 
> My avg and max fps dropped compared to 4790k but min fps increased in almost half the games. Games have definitely become stutter-free though as 4790k bottleneck is not anymore.


CAuse You loose performance from my testing with that crappy AB bios ??


----------



## oreonutz

By-Tor said:


> TY


Are you up and running now?


----------



## mtrai

lordzed83 said:


> CAuse You loose performance from my testing with that crappy AB bios ??


People really are not getting that all AGESA 1.0.0.3 bios are crap. We already have the combo for the Ryzen 3000 series on our board with 2501. It is gonna be a long time before anyone should be updating until the performance issues are fixed. And yes 1.0.0.3abb will removed PCIe 4.0 support from any X470 and X370 board regardless of the motherboard manufacturer.


----------



## By-Tor

oreonutz said:


> Are you up and running now?


Yes TY..

Setting at 4.167ghz on 1.33v, RAM at 3400mhz. Still a lot of playing around with it to do..


----------



## Xenozx

hi all, so i get the best performance by upping my bclk to 104, and leaving everything else on auto for the most part. i have -0.100 offset for voltage set in bios. the issue is when i change the BCLK, there is no way to link the fabric clock / FSB right? Like if your running 3200mhz memory, you want 1600mhz fclk and that will give you the lowest latency? Well when you change the bclk, the memory speed goes that same 04 bclk off but the fabric clock options stay the same so there now is no way to do exactly 2:1. this causes my memory latency to be really high 70ns+ is there anyway to fix this? performance wise at 104bclk this thing rocks, and kills all the reviews ive seen, and seems to keep pbo and stuff in place, and still downclocks and sleeps cores as needed.


----------



## Baio73

My two cents.

I've moved from a 2700x to a 3700x.
With the previous CPU there was no way I can run the RAM in sign (2x8 Corsair CMW16GX4M2C3600C18) higher than 3400MHz (with quite high timings). Tried almost everything from Ryzen Calculator, popped the VRAM up to 1.46v, SOC up to 1.2v, no way. I remember the previous kit (a G.Skill 3600 CAS 15) reached sometimes 3600 but with a boring workaround (had to set ervery step from 2133 to 3600, took me half an hour everytime).
With the 3700x I just entered the BIOS, set RAM Boot Voltage, reboot and set them to 3600 and they're working at the right speed and timings… and volts!
Very happy but I wonder how much time I spent on this stuff (and money, changed 3 RAM kits) and the CPU's MC was the culpirit… don't know if it's all in the new MC of 3xxx CPUs or it was my old 2700x an unlucky one.

Baio


----------



## oreonutz

Baio73 said:


> My two cents.
> 
> I've moved from a 2700x to a 3700x.
> With the previous CPU there was no way I can run the RAM in sign (2x8 Corsair CMW16GX4M2C3600C18) higher than 3400MHz (with quite high timings). Tried almost everything from Ryzen Calculator, popped the VRAM up to 1.46v, SOC up to 1.2v, no way. I remember the previous kit (a G.Skill 3600 CAS 15) reached sometimes 3600 but with a boring workaround (had to set ervery step from 2133 to 3600, took me half an hour everytime).
> With the 3700x I just entered the BIOS, set RAM Boot Voltage, reboot and set them to 3600 and they're working at the right speed and timings… and volts!
> Very happy but I wonder how much time I spent on this stuff (and money, changed 3 RAM kits) and the CPU's MC was the culpirit… don't know if it's all in the new MC of 3xxx CPUs or it was my old 2700x an unlucky one.
> 
> Baio


Yeah, on average it seems a big portion of 2000 Series owners had closer to your experience with the MC. It was definitely better than the 1000 Series, and I got lucky in that department as I was told there was no way I was going to be able to get my two 2x8GB Kits of FlareX 3200Ghz CL14 (so 32GBs of Ram Total) to run at its rated speed in my Crosshair VII Hero with the 2700x, and it actually only took me about 3 or 4 hours to get it dialed in with really tight timings, but going any higher then that seemed to be impossible. However I built at least a dozen of those systems with that exact combination (I Like to stick with what I know works for my clients) and I had situations on some 2700x's where I couldn't get the RAM to Post above 3000Mhz with just One of those same RAM Kits, so the quality of those 2nd Gen Ryzen parts MC really Varied. 

But this Generation you are hearing a lot less of those horror stories with RAM, you still find the average user having issues, but I found most of the complaints coming from the VBoot Reverting to the Stock VDimm Voltage and the user not realizing that is happening, once that gets worked out, assuming they were able to look it up online or have someone help them with it, then it seems most are hitting MUCH better speeds then we got stuck with last Gen.

So yeah, Good Job AMD!


----------



## thegr8anand

mtrai said:


> People really are not getting that all AGESA 1.0.0.3 bios are crap. We already have the combo for the Ryzen 3000 series on our board with 2501. It is gonna be a long time before anyone should be updating until the performance issues are fixed. And yes 1.0.0.3abb will removed PCIe 4.0 support from any X470 and X370 board regardless of the motherboard manufacturer.



I switched to 1.0.0.2 and its not an improvement. Single core boosts to 4300 max maybe 50mhz up from 1003. The degradation is when the pc was new and scored well without any apps compared to my usual setup. I would like to see your scores of Cpuz bench single core at stock if you get 545-550. This is what I got too on a fresh Windows but now down to 525-530 with everything installed.


----------



## Axaion

Does anyone actually care about PCI-e 4.0?, I sure dont, i didnt buy the mobo for it.

id rather have everything else working than pcie 4.0 and for them to fix QoL Bios issues (imo), that mtrai is trying to do for us


----------



## crakej

I've had the fan problem as well - though only a couple of times in one day. I just calibrated the fans in the bios and hasn't happened since. My CPU (pwm) AND my DC fans stopped. I had started IBT and sudenly thought....why is it so quiet? Temp was 70 and rising. No fans! Pump unaffected (thank godness!).

Not done a huge amount of OCing on week end as it was Pride here, so a bit of a party on Sunday 

What I have done though is work on trying to get a good all core OC. I can run 4.3GHz, but VCore was up around 1.38125v+ and I still didn't have decent (small fft) stability. This is with LLC2, so with LLC5 I could probably get that downa bit. (yet to test). Of course single CCDs have the advantage of requiring less VCore to start with - and less heat.

In the meantime I decided to get 4.2 proeprly stable to see exactly what's required. I'm not finiished yet but I have learned some stuff along the way. I've learned that (my) CCD1 is the weaker one, requiring more voltage than CCD0 for the same 4.2 OC. CCD0 does it at 1.355v, and I'm still testing how much more I need for CCD1. I am going to see what single core OC I can get later, but I'm guessing CCD1 will probably just never do 4.6, 4.5, or even 4.4 - well, maybe on one core.

I am seeing some with single CCD CPUs beating me in SC scores and some memory read operations. I understand how the CPUs work with one weaker CCD, but I think I've been a bit unlucky as other 3900x are running higher OCs with lower voltage than I can (so far), and my IO die seems to max out IF at 1866MTs as well, though I'm not sure you can find if it's the IF on the IO die or CCDs that's holding people back.

I need to do more work before I can really decide how my particular CPU behaves exactly, I just wanted to share my findings so far. I must admit, I would have thought all 3900x CPUs would have IO dies of the same, reasonable high quality, leaving the slightly slower ones for the slower CPUS. It seems as though the cheaper CPUs are just as likely to have a good IO and/or CPU die, capable of beating the 3900x in some situations.

It's quite possible I will find settings that hmake my CPU fly, already with memory, even at 3733CL16, I am still beating some with 3800CL16 - so that's interesting.

Anyone know if it's safe to turn off one CCD while testiing? I'm sure I read somewhere it's not recommended, but it wont do anything bad will it?


----------



## oreonutz

thegr8anand said:


> I switched to 1.0.0.2 and its not an improvement. Single core boosts to 4300 max maybe 50mhz up from 1003. The degradation is when the pc was new and scored well without any apps compared to my usual setup. I would like to see your scores of Cpuz bench single core at stock if you get 545-550. This is what I got too on a fresh Windows but now down to 525-530 with everything installed.


I am definitely not trying to be rude or a snob, I just don't know your level of knowledge with Windows and how it behaves. There is a lot you can do to configure windows, even after all your programs are installed to not hog up so many of your resources. Obviously with everything open and running in the background you are going to take a hit. After I start with a new Windows install and install only necessary drivers and run my benchmarks, say Cinebench, CPUz, Geek Bench, Firestrike, Timespy, and Super Position and then I log my scores. Then I install all my Windows Programs, so programs like Discord, HWinfo, Logitech Gaming Software, Aura Sync, Team Viewer, VNC, MSI After Burner, Google Drive, Nvidia's BS, Aida64, Chrome, Firefox, MS Office, Photoshop, Pro Tools, VMWare Workstation Pro, Blender, Handbrake, Netflix, Corsair iCue, The List goes on and on, Plus all the necessary Drivers to make every last peripheral work, Almost Everything I just mentioned has Services, Tasks and Crap Running in the Background, all set to auto start with windows whether I need it to or not, all eating at Valuable resources. So now I Run my Benchmarks again, and I will EASILY find a 10 Percent Decline on average or more from my overall Previous scores. Now the Ryzen 3900x has so many cores, that unless I am running benchmarks to gauge the performance loss, I probably wouldn't notice or care, unless The work I do on my PC necessitated that every single Core was utilized to its max during my task to decrease the amount of time it took to complete. But if that was the case, and honestly it just bugs me regardless so I do this any way, I would optimize Windows and all those installed programs to only run when I told them too, unless is was something that I absolutely needed running, even when My important task was being done. 

This means going into the Windows Task Scheduler and disabling every single task that wasn't necessary to start with the PC. Going into the Task Managers start up Tab and Doing the same, going into the Startup folder and clearing out the crap in there (Thats where icue likes to hide its startup task), Go into services and stop all the extra services you don't need from starting up. There are programs like "Autoruns" from Sysinternals that really help with all of this, so you can do most of this from one interface, you just have to know which Microsoft Services and Tasks are important for windows to work, and leave those alone. I also stop Windows from Spying on me, this is done by setting a few Group Policy settings, and stopping the "Connected User and Telemetry" BS Service, and you can also turn off all the privacy crap in the "Settings" page.

This whole process takes about 20 minutes if done properly, but you only have to do it every major Windows Update, so twice a year, and it makes a huge difference to the operation of your PC.

Or of course you can do what a few users would no doubt comment, and just switch to Linux.

But run your benchmarks after optimizing and restarting the PC, and you will see you will have clawed most of your performance back.

Something else you can do with both your benchmarks and your important task that needs 100 percent of your CPU Power, is just before running this benchmark or task, go into task manager (You can do this quickly by just hitting CTRL-Shift-ESC), go to the details tab, find the Benchmark or Task's EXE, right click on it, select "Set Priority", then select "High". Now when you run your Benchmark or you do your task, it will take Priority over all the rest of your background tasks for as long as the Task or Benchmark needs to complete, this is kind of the lazy way to get back your performance for that benchmark or task in Windows without having to Optimize Windows.

Sorry if you knew this already, just felt if you didn't, it could help you. Happy Benchmarking!


----------



## oreonutz

Axaion said:


> Does anyone actually care about PCI-e 4.0?, I sure dont, i didnt buy the mobo for it.
> 
> id rather have everything else working than pcie 4.0 and for them to fix QoL Bios issues (imo), that mtrai is trying to do for us


I 100% agree with that sentiment. If I ever want to do PCIE4 testing, and I don't feel like shelling out for an x570 Mobo, then I know I can just flash the UEFI back to a UEFI that supports it. But in my every day tasks, at least where technology is at right now, I could care less about PCIE4. My 1080ti isn't capable of it, and I have Countless NVMe Drives, pretty much all Samsung 960/970/Evo's/Pro's and They are all plenty of fast and wont get faster in a PCIE4 slot. In my opinion, at least for my work, buying a current PCIE4 Drive thats available now, wouldn't be worth the 20% or so Speed Increase or Read tasks, when I am not fully saturating the current Interface now. 

I might feel differently as that gap grows or as I adapt to a workflow that will utilize the increased speeds, but as of right now I would much rather the Stability and Speed Fixes to our current Platform.

Anyways, that was the long way of saying, I 100 percent agree with you, guess I should have just left it there... lol.


----------



## thegr8anand

oreonutz said:


> I am definitely not trying to be rude or a snob, I just don't know your level of knowledge with Windows and how it behaves. There is a lot you can do to configure windows, even after all your programs are installed to not hog up so many of your resources. Obviously with everything open and running in the background you are going to take a hit. After I start with a new Windows install and install only necessary drivers and run my benchmarks, say Cinebench, CPUz, Geek Bench, Firestrike, Timespy, and Super Position and then I log my scores. Then I install all my Windows Programs, so programs like Discord, HWinfo, Logitech Gaming Software, Aura Sync, Team Viewer, VNC, MSI After Burner, Google Drive, Nvidia's BS, Aida64, Chrome, Firefox, MS Office, Photoshop, Pro Tools, VMWare Workstation Pro, Blender, Handbrake, Netflix, Corsair iCue, The List goes on and on, Plus all the necessary Drivers to make every last peripheral work, Almost Everything I just mentioned has Services, Tasks and Crap Running in the Background, all set to auto start with windows whether I need it to or not, all eating at Valuable resources. So now I Run my Benchmarks again, and I will EASILY find a 10 Percent Decline on average or more from my overall Previous scores. Now the Ryzen 3900x has so many cores, that unless I am running benchmarks to gauge the performance loss, I probably wouldn't notice or care, unless The work I do on my PC necessitated that every single Core was utilized to its max during my task to decrease the amount of time it took to complete. But if that was the case, and honestly it just bugs me regardless so I do this any way, I would optimize Windows and all those installed programs to only run when I told them too, unless is was something that I absolutely needed running, even when My important task was being done.
> 
> This means going into the Windows Task Scheduler and disabling every single task that wasn't necessary to start with the PC. Going into the Task Managers start up Tab and Doing the same, going into the Startup folder and clearing out the crap in there (Thats where icue likes to hide its startup task), Go into services and stop all the extra services you don't need from starting up. There are programs like "Autoruns" from Sysinternals that really help with all of this, so you can do most of this from one interface, you just have to know which Microsoft Services and Tasks are important for windows to work, and leave those alone. I also stop Windows from Spying on me, this is done by setting a few Group Policy settings, and stopping the "Connected User and Telemetry" BS Service, and you can also turn off all the privacy crap in the "Settings" page.
> 
> This whole process takes about 20 minutes if done properly, but you only have to do it every major Windows Update, so twice a year, and it makes a huge difference to the operation of your PC.
> 
> Or of course you can do what a few users would no doubt comment, and just switch to Linux.
> 
> But run your benchmarks after optimizing and restarting the PC, and you will see you will have clawed most of your performance back.
> 
> Something else you can do with both your benchmarks and your important task that needs 100 percent of your CPU Power, is just before running this benchmark or task, go into task manager (You can do this quickly by just hitting CTRL-Shift-ESC), go to the details tab, find the Benchmark or Task's EXE, right click on it, select "Set Priority", then select "High". Now when you run your Benchmark or you do your task, it will take Priority over all the rest of your background tasks for as long as the Task or Benchmark needs to complete, this is kind of the lazy way to get back your performance for that benchmark or task in Windows without having to Optimize Windows.
> 
> Sorry if you knew this already, just felt if you didn't, it could help you. Happy Benchmarking!



I understand all that and some rogue apps cause issues because of windows which is same on amd/intel and i have tried so much to fix it. Maybe its common knowledge (i didn't know) the drop in performance or i never noticed before but the 4790k never had that problem. I mentioned that i wanted to benchmark as a pc is used normally with all the apps installed. Intel can simply run all-core and any oc gives it better performance than before. Here i have to trade-off better single core performance that comes at stock vs better multi-core that comes with all-core overclock. I was expecting it to be bit lower to 9900k but its no where close especially on normal usage (worse in games than 4790k and that hurts). Yay for more cores but that is it. If i only wanted to run a clean windows and only benchmark with nothing installed maybe then i would been satisfied. I probably got wrong expectations and thats my fault i understand. Now i am stuck with 3900x so have to use it and hope for improvement in future.


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> I've had the fan problem as well - though only a couple of times in one day. I just calibrated the fans in the bios and hasn't happened since. My CPU (pwm) AND my DC fans stopped. I had started IBT and sudenly thought....why is it so quiet? Temp was 70 and rising. No fans! Pump unaffected (thank godness!).
> 
> Not done a huge amount of OCing on week end as it was Pride here, so a bit of a party on Sunday
> 
> What I have done though is work on trying to get a good all core OC. I can run 4.3GHz, but VCore was up around 1.38125v+ and I still didn't have decent (small fft) stability. This is with LLC2, so with LLC5 I could probably get that downa bit. (yet to test). Of course single CCDs have the advantage of requiring less VCore to start with - and less heat.
> 
> In the meantime I decided to get 4.2 proeprly stable to see exactly what's required. I'm not finiished yet but I have learned some stuff along the way. I've learned that (my) CCD1 is the weaker one, requiring more voltage than CCD0 for the same 4.2 OC. CCD0 does it at 1.355v, and I'm still testing how much more I need for CCD1. I am going to see what single core OC I can get later, but I'm guessing CCD1 will probably just never do 4.6, 4.5, or even 4.4 - well, maybe on one core.
> 
> I am seeing some with single CCD CPUs beating me in SC scores and some memory read operations. I understand how the CPUs work with one weaker CCD, but I think I've been a bit unlucky as other 3900x are running higher OCs with lower voltage than I can (so far), and my IO die seems to max out IF at 1866MTs as well, though I'm not sure you can find if it's the IF on the IO die or CCDs that's holding people back.
> 
> I need to do more work before I can really decide how my particular CPU behaves exactly, I just wanted to share my findings so far. I must admit, I would have thought all 3900x CPUs would have IO dies of the same, reasonable high quality, leaving the slightly slower ones for the slower CPUS. It seems as though the cheaper CPUs are just as likely to have a good IO and/or CPU die, capable of beating the 3900x in some situations.
> 
> It's quite possible I will find settings that hmake my CPU fly, already with memory, even at 3733CL16, I am still beating some with 3800CL16 - so that's interesting.
> 
> Anyone know if it's safe to turn off one CCD while testiing? I'm sure I read somewhere it's not recommended, but it wont do anything bad will it?


Thats an interesting question there, I have no idea if turning off one CCD would hurt anything. Surely they woudn't give us that option, both in the UEFI and in Ryzen Master if it would hurt our CPU would they? ...It is AMD...

Yeah I feel the same as you. I love my 3900x, but I feel like I got myself a weaker one then a lot of people in the forums to. For instance, I just spent the last 4 to 5 hours Trying to get my CPU to post with 3733Mhz Ram 1866Mhz IF CL16. And even though with a CRAP TON Of Voltage to the Memory (I stopped at 1.8v) I COULD NOT get Windows to boot. I posted and got to the Windows Loading screen, but every single time I saw a glimpse of my Login Background Picture, Blue Screen or instant Reboot. I eventually even tried loosing the timings when I wasn't willing to go up further on the voltage, and it just wasn't happening. I did some further testing with My ram at 2133Mhz with the IF at both 1866Mhz and 1900Mhz, and even at the lower 1866Mhz with Timings on Auto It would crash at some point during the login process. So in my case, I am pretty sure My Infinity fabric just hates running at above 1800Mhz. I did get Windows to at least startup with 1833Mhz, But only for about 30 Seconds before a blue screen. So I don't know what the hell to try next. I tried different VDDG and VDDP voltage, a wide range of SOCv, Like I said I even went all the way up to 1.8v on the Damn memory with Active cooling on the Memory, and nothing seemed to make a damn bit of difference. So Finally I just settled on 1800Mhz IF, 3600Mhz DRam (which takes 1.5v to get past 2000 Percent on Ram Test, and then I just worked on getting all my timings down. I am not really sure what to try next with my Primary Timings, but I have then at 14-14-14-14-28-36-256 and thats rock solid, got my AIDA Mem Test Cache down to 67ns, and I have my secondary and Tertiary timings all down pretty low as well, but need to figure out the best method to getting them even lower. Since I am pretty sure I hit the cap on IF, I was do get all my timings as low as possible to be in that 65ns ballpark.

Anyways, I am in the same ballpark as you with my CCD's. The One holding me back won't let me go above 4250Mhz on my all Core, but at least it can do that at 1.25 to keep my heat down, but I can go all the way up 1.45 with crazy ass 100c and still can't pass a damn CB R20 Run, so yeah, I feel I have kind of lucked out on the Silicon Lottery as well. These are the woes of Overclocking I guess. Still, this thing smokes my 2700x, and I am quite happy with Performance in general, so theres that...


----------



## thegr8anand

Did you enable Geardown mode? That helped me oc ram to 3733 and without it it didn't work.


----------



## oreonutz

thegr8anand said:


> I understand all that and some rogue apps cause issues because of windows which is same on amd/intel and i have tried so much to fix it. Maybe its common knowledge (i didn't know) the drop in performance or i never noticed before but the 4790k never had that problem. I mentioned that i wanted to benchmark as a pc is used normally with all the apps installed. Intel can simply run all-core and any oc gives it better performance than before. Here i have to trade-off better single core performance that comes at stock vs better multi-core that comes with all-core overclock. I was expecting it to be bit lower to 9900k but its no where close especially on normal usage (worse in games than 4790k and that hurts). Yay for more cores but that is it. If i only wanted to run a clean windows and only benchmark with nothing installed maybe then i would been satisfied. I probably got wrong expectations and thats my fault i understand. Now i am stuck with 3900x so have to use it and hope for improvement in future.


I feel you on the trade off between single core and multi core, that does suck. Its something I didn't have to trade off with my 2700x because I was able to manipulate PBO to give me the best of both worlds, but I haven't figured out how to do that yet on the 3900x. That said, if its gaming performance you are after and is what is making you feel like you are losing out compared to your 4790k then you should put your processor back on auto and enjoy your higher gaming performance.

Also it seems your scores are much lower in gaming compared to a lot of other users here. There is a huge likely hood that you are suffering from some kind of Windows bug holding you back. Also its hard to compare against your old Platform when you haven't controlled for exact versions of both. You benchmarked on your old system before upgrading, but its possible and in fact highly likely that one of those many programs you have installed has a version update that is hindering performance that didn't happen on your old system. 

If you haven't already you probably want to do a complete scratch reinstall, then update your drivers, and install your programs, and stay on the older chipset (unless you play destiny 2) because the newer chipset as been reported to bring down performance.

At the end of the day, you jumped on to a new bleeding edge platform that is always going to cause problems. These are the woes of being an early adopter. If you feel like you are loosing out performance, you probably should just back to your old platform until these kinks get worked out. There is no doubt just looking at all the comparisons online between the 7th, 8th, and 9th gen CPU's against the 3900x that the 3900x even in its current state is a major upgrade over the Intel platform in almost every instance except for gaming. The 4790k, especially overclocked isn't that far away from a 7700k, and when you look at comparisons between the 7700k and the 3900x they trade blows depending on the title. So if you were expecting a huge uptick in gaming performance you probably had unrealistic expectations.

But the fact is, as driver and UEFI updates come out over the next year, the performance will only get better, but its still not likely that its going to be a huge leap over what it is now in gaming, and if that depresses you, its probably best you sell your CPU while its still worth its value, and jump back over to a platform that you feel is going to do the most for you. I have no doubt that something is going weird with your current setup, but without being there I can't say what, but the truth is AMD still isn't on top for gaming, so if you want that the 9700k/9900k are probably the better choice for you. It sucks that the case, but thats where we are at as it stands now.


----------



## oreonutz

thegr8anand said:


> Did you enable Geardown mode? That helped me oc ram to 3733 and without it it didn't work.


Yeah, I tried Auto, Geardown enabled, Geardown Disabled, didn't make much difference for me unfortunately. I did get past post, just couldn't actually boot into Windows. It seems my IF Clock wants to cap out at 1800Mhz. Will try again when I have more patients to keep getting up and Clearing the UEFI, but yeah for now I have a Spreadsheet about 10 pages long of the different settings I tried, and none seemed to make a damn bit of difference.

Appreciate the help though!


----------



## Takla

oreonutz said:


> There is a lot you can do to configure windows, even after all your programs are installed to not hog up so many of your resources
> 
> This means going into the Windows Task Scheduler and disabling every single task that wasn't necessary to start with the PC


I'd advice anyone who wants to minimize the impact of background processes to get  this official tool from microsoft, called autoruns. It has been insanely helpful. Simple launch it and uncheck the box for stuff you don't want to start automatically.


----------



## oreonutz

Takla said:


> I'd advice anyone who wants to minimize the impact of background processes to get  this official tool from microsoft, called autoruns. It has been insanely helpful. Simple launch it and uncheck the box for stuff you don't want to start automatically.


I 100 percent agree, that was somewhere in my 30 Paragraph response actually, lol. Careful not to uncheck any critical operations though, but as long as you have an image, go ham!


----------



## thegr8anand

oreonutz said:


> Yeah, I tried Auto, Geardown enabled, Geardown Disabled, didn't make much difference for me unfortunately. I did get past post, just couldn't actually boot into Windows. It seems my IF Clock wants to cap out at 1800Mhz. Will try again when I have more patients to keep getting up and Clearing the UEFI, but yeah for now I have a Spreadsheet about 10 pages long of the different settings I tried, and none seemed to make a damn bit of difference.
> 
> Appreciate the help though!



Didn't 1.0.0.3ab add more memory compatibility. Maybe try it for lower boost


----------



## Takla

oreonutz said:


> that was somewhere in my 30 Paragraph response actually


My bad. Skipped some parts. And yeah, when unchecking the boxes with Autoruns, Leave anything that has "IO" in it untouched as this can result in a black screen boot the next time you start windows. Actually, if you're really unsure about some processes, I can just give you the advice to leave anything in the "Known DLLs" and "Services" section untouched.


----------



## oreonutz

Takla said:


> My bad. Skipped some parts. And yeah, when unchecking the boxes with Autoruns, Leave anything that has "IO" in it untouched as this can result in a black screen boot the next time you start windows. Actually, if you're really unsure about some processes, I can just give you the advice to leave anything in the "Known DLLs" and "Services" section untouched.


Yeah I would agree with that. The first services tab for anything that isn't Microsoft you can go ham in, anything that is Microsoft just make sure you know what it is. Google it and see if its ok to disable it, these are things you learn after tinkering with Windows for years, but most can be figured out from a google search. The Second Services tab are drivers, I would leave those alone completely, and anything below that for the most part I wouldn't touch either. Above Services you have the Task Scheduler, for the most part I would leave microsoft crap alone and uncheck any of your installed programs that you don't need starting with the PC, and then at the top in the Multiple "Run" and "Run Once" section I would pull out anything you don't want starting with Windows Save "Security Heath" or whatever Microsoft renames the Defender Executable to in the next update.


----------



## mtrai

Just wanted to give an update on the progress with the non wifi C7H bios mod. Things are not progressing so well. While the C7H WIFI 2501 Modded bios works perfect...the non wifi is having many issues. Going to to do a deeper dive today...but if my guess is correct...it would require AFUGAN.exe /gan to flash and afugan does not support the new 32 Mb size bios. I am really baffled in why the wifi bios is different in this then the non wifi. I am gonna do a really deep dive into the non wifi bios today and check some things. On the C6H and C6H wifi the only difference was one had a wireless enable/disable option. But then again they do mess around with things.

WIFI ONLY Once again the C7H WIFI 2501 Modded bios link: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1q_LUDXgQRfALTBqkScaO0BIR5BQzTJKH Remember you have to use flashbac. the bios is already correctly named for flashback.


----------



## Martelele

mtrai said:


> Just wanted to give an update on the progress with the non wifi C7H bios mod. Things are not progressing so well. While the C7H WIFI 2501 Modded bios works perfect...the non wifi is having many issues. Going to to do a deeper dive today...but if my guess is correct...it would require AFUGAN.exe /gan to flash and afugan does not support the new 32 Mb size bios. I am really baffled in why the wifi bios is different in this then the non wifi. I am gonna do a really deep dive into the non wifi bios today and check some things. On the C6H and C6H wifi the only difference was one had a wireless enable/disable option. But then again they do mess around with things.
> 
> WIFI ONLY Once again the C7H WIFI 2501 Modded bios link: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1q_LUDXgQRfALTBqkScaO0BIR5BQzTJKH Remember you have to use flashbac. the bios is already correctly named for flashback.


Hi dude,I'm back home from holidays and will definitely follow your work and test it when it's out.Thanks for you hard work mate.


----------



## harderthanfire

Word of warning for those who CCX overclock. I reinstalled windows the other day and the order/number of my CCXs changed. 



What was my best overclocker went from CCX 2 to 1 and all the others changed too. This meant when I reapplied my CCX OC it was instantly unstable!


----------



## AvengedRobix

harderthanfire said:


> Word of warning for those who CCX overclock. I reinstalled windows the other day and the order/number of my CCXs changed.
> 
> 
> 
> What was my best overclocker went from CCX 2 to 1 and all the others changed too. This meant when I reapplied my CCX OC it was instantly unstable!



It's you're problem.. i re-install Windows 3 times.. install another win on onether SSD and the order of ccx never changed...order Is physics.. can't changed by Windows


----------



## harderthanfire

I thought that too but it def changed. Also it isn't physics, how ids/addresses are assigned is software not always hardware.

Even in HWINFO you can see the cores that are boosting highest are not the same cores as before and the cores themselves have not changed so it must be a software thing.


The my car isn't on fire so your car can't be on fire logic isn't much help to anyone, I'm not an idiot I have double and triple checked this as I thought it shouldn't/couldn't happen too.


What I did notice is before I reinstalled Windows my best cores/ccx were the highest numbered ones and now they are the lowest. I noticed almost everyone else in this thread and in others has their best ones in the lower numbered ones so I'm guessing they are supposed to be ordered roughly by quality, best to worst (at least from a chiplet level if not CCX).


----------



## oreonutz

harderthanfire said:


> I thought that too but it def changed. Also it isn't physics, how ids/addresses are assigned is software not always hardware.
> 
> Even in HWINFO you can see the cores that are boosting highest are not the same cores as before and the cores themselves have not changed so it must be a software thing.
> 
> 
> The my car isn't on fire so your car can't be on fire logic isn't much help to anyone, I'm not an idiot I have double and triple checked this as I thought it shouldn't/couldn't happen too.
> 
> 
> What I did notice is before I reinstalled Windows my best cores/ccx were the highest numbered ones and now they are the lowest. I noticed almost everyone else in this thread and in others has their best ones in the lower numbered ones so I'm guessing they are supposed to be ordered roughly by quality, best to worst (at least from a chiplet level if not CCX).


That is really interesting. There was a recent chipset change. Its possible if you installed this new chipset directly on your new windows build that it addresses the Cores differently then the older chipset, but doesn't change the order from people who had the older chipset installed earlier. I am just spit balling here, but could be possible.

Definitely interesting though, you had no problem arranging your order I take it (I meant changing the script to accommodate the new overclock)?

I noticed the new chipset made my script no longer work, had to adapt the way I was Booting into windows with the OC.


----------



## AvengedRobix

The only way to change a id of physics hw was with re-flash a BIOS.. prob have change Ryzen master.. i don't use it.. i use manual oc from bios and for core use the tool of der8auer or Asus turbo vcore


----------



## oreonutz

AvengedRobix said:


> The only way to change a id of physics hw was with re-flash a BIOS.. prob have change Ryzen master.. i don't use it.. i use manual oc from bios and for core use the tool of der8auer or Asus turbo vcore


To be fair, we had this same situation happen with Ryzen 2000 Series where the reported core order changed for some as well, I believe it was after a firmware update, so its not something that hasn't happened before.

Also, for Posterity's sake, the tool (called "Work Tool") that Der8auer used in his video was in fact made by Shamino who is an Engineer who works for Asus, Der8auer just got the tool from him. And I was able to make a script for it, so that upon Windows Booting your Per CCX Overclock applied automatically without having to open up any tool manually. I since got an updated version of the tool from Shamino that allows you to do the same thing without my complicated script, and works better with the new Chipsets, if anyone is interested. Standard Warnings apply, as you could kill your chip if you use this tool wrong and apply too much voltage.


----------



## AvengedRobix

I Say Who Is der8auer.. i soeak.of.roman for easyest conversation.. the last update sended by shamino have some bug.. i lf you connect Teo screen and launch the app change.. if the app open in primary monitor downclock the CPU ti 3800.. of open in secondari screen work very well .. anywhay, on My sistem ccx 0 and 1 rest ever the best After 3 fresh installation and a new SSD added for bench.. ccx 0 and 1 [email protected],35 ccx 2 and 3 [email protected],35


----------



## crakej

On the fan 'problem'. This has happened to me, most recently yesterday. I don't think power is being cut to the fans (certainly on my system) - something is wrong with temp reporting. I was running a test at 4.2GHz, fixed voltage, so really hot!

I started a run on P95 small FFTs and immediately noticed the silence! I had AISuite open at the time and the temp was still reading 49C! I know bios will cut-out if there's any danger so had a quick look around. Fans were spinning but slowly - idle speed. I quickly closed AUSuite and opened R Master where the temp was 95 and getting higher.

I stopped P95. Closed RM and re-booted. I re-calibrated fans in bios and it hasn't happened since.

My theory is that the temp sensor/reading ASUS is using (I'm guessing thruogh the WMI port?) is getting stuck - which is what I could see. It's hard to tell as I can't reproduce this fault - it seems random currently.

I did notice that one of my case fans settings had changed from DC to PWM in the bios - it must have happened when an OC failed and setting got cleared, or something like that. This wouldn't cause this problem though. I recommend you make sure fans are calibrated properly in the bios on each of your OC profiles.


----------



## oreonutz

AvengedRobix said:


> I Say Who Is der8auer.. i soeak.of.roman for easyest conversation.. the last update sended by shamino have some bug.. i lf you connect Teo screen and launch the app change.. if the app open in primary monitor downclock the CPU ti 3800.. of open in secondari screen work very well .. anywhay, on My sistem ccx 0 and 1 rest ever the best After 3 fresh installation and a new SSD added for bench.. ccx 0 and 1 [email protected],35 ccx 2 and 3 [email protected],35


I know about that version, wasn't the version I speak of though. He never released this one to the public. So just letting you know. And I was just being cheeky, my bad if my humor didn't come across. But yeah, I know the bugged version you were speaking of, and that was fixed, it just wasn't released to the public (That I am aware of)...


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> On the fan 'problem'. This has happened to me, most recently yesterday. I don't think power is being cut to the fans (certainly on my system) - something is wrong with temp reporting. I was running a test at 4.2GHz, fixed voltage, so really hot!
> 
> I started a run on P95 small FFTs and immediately noticed the silence! I had AISuite open at the time and the temp was still reading 49C! I know bios will cut-out if there's any danger so had a quick look around. Fans were spinning but slowly - idle speed. I quickly closed AUSuite and opened R Master where the temp was 95 and getting higher.
> 
> I stopped P95. Closed RM and re-booted. I re-calibrated fans in bios and it hasn't happened since.
> 
> My theory is that the temp sensor/reading ASUS is using (I'm guessing thruogh the WMI port?) is getting stuck - which is what I could see. It's hard to tell as I can't reproduce this fault - it seems random currently.
> 
> I did notice that one of my case fans settings had changed from DC to PWM in the bios - it must have happened when an OC failed and setting got cleared, or something like that. This wouldn't cause this problem though. I recommend you make sure fans are calibrated properly in the bios on each of your OC profiles.


Yeah, In my case my fans are calibrated properly, calibrating the fans are ALWAYS the first thing I do, then I make a Saved Profile of them directly to my USB, and I am constantly checking them to make sure. Your theory could be correct, as I believe the Motherboard adjust its fan based on the WMI sensor, and I don't monitor the WMI sensor. But here is the weird thing. My fans will cut completely out even when no work is being had, and I got up and physically check on them, they are not spinning at all, and the GPU Pump just stops pumping, even though its connected to a Chassis PWM Header that is set to a 600RPM Limit. The fans are also connected to Chassis Headers, with the same 600 RPM Limit, and they also just stop spinning. So something stupid is happening.


----------



## crakej

oreonutz said:


> Yeah, In my case my fans are calibrated properly, calibrating the fans are ALWAYS the first thing I do, then I make a Saved Profile of them directly to my USB, and I am constantly checking them to make sure. Your theory could be correct, as I believe the Motherboard adjust its fan based on the WMI sensor, and I don't monitor the WMI sensor. But here is the weird thing. My fans will cut completely out even when no work is being had, and I got up and physically check on them, they are not spinning at all, and the GPU Pump just stops pumping, even though its connected to a Chassis PWM Header that is set to a 600RPM Limit. The fans are also connected to Chassis Headers, with the same 600 RPM Limit, and they also just stop spinning. So something stupid is happening.


Bugged basically!


I meant to say about the removing of PCIE4 from bios - I'm not too bothered - or I wasn't until I read up on the situation. They're doing this mainly (my opinion) to differetiate X570 products. We already have it working fine on our boards - most using it for NVME - though I know some have 5700XTs running at PCIE4 (is it x8 only?).

AMD have decided it's easier to disable for all and that way there is no confusion, and no tech support from people it doesn't work for. On the one hand this is fair enough, but I really think it should be up to the vendor to decide if their boards can run it. Also, we were told quite early on that some baords would support PCIE4. I'm sure that most board deigners will have taken this into account when designing their X470 boards.

At best AMD made the decision to pull this feature WAY TOO LATE. At worst, they're doing it just to give X570 a leg up with an extra, exclusive feature. At this late stage, after users have found and used the feature, is taking the mickey.


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> Bugged basically!
> 
> 
> I meant to say about the removing of PCIE4 from bios - I'm not too bothered - or I wasn't until I read up on the situation. They're doing this mainly (my opinion) to differentiate X570 products. We already have it working fine on our boards - most using it for NVME - though I know some have 5700XTs running at PCIE4 (is it x8 only?).
> 
> AMD have decided it's easier to disable for all and that way there is no confusion, and no tech support from people it doesn't work for. On the one hand this is fair enough, but I really think it should be up to the vendor to decide if their boards can run it. Also, we were told quite early on that some baords would support PCIE4. I'm sure that most board designers will have taken this into account when designing their X470 boards.
> 
> At best AMD made the decision to pull this feature WAY TOO LATE. At worst, they're doing it just to give X570 a leg up with an extra, exclusive feature. At this late stage, after users have found and used the feature, is taking the mickey.


I agree. I honestly for myself don't care about having the PCIE4 feature, I would have just bought the Crosshair VIII Hero If I had. But that being said, I think its still messed up that they are removing it. They are obviously doing it to be able to sell more x570 boards. You notice how the announcement didn't come at Computex until after the media started pushing the narrative that it was unnecessary to buy an x570 board if you had a decent x470 board even for the 16 core in some cases. It wasn't until after about 2 full day of coverage like that from Places like Gamers Nexus, PCWorld, etc... That AMD Robert announced that to "Stop Confusion" they would be pulling support from the pre x570 boards. That was no mistake. Honestly, AMD has always been there for the little guy, and I think the right thing for them to do would be to pull support so that the normie doesn't get any ideas, but then to quietly put it back, and allow for us enthusiasts to work it out on our own. Actually, screw that, they shouldn't pull support at all, and they should just say, "Look, it isn't fully supported, we aren't going to stop you, but if you want to try go for it, just don't come crying to us if it doesn't work" That would leave us enthusiasts happy, and still give the normies a reason to buy x570. 

So even though I personally don't care, I still am peeved that they are pulling it, you know what I mean?


----------



## lordzed83

oreonutz said:


> I agree. I honestly for myself don't care about having the PCIE4 feature, I would have just bought the Crosshair VIII Hero If I had. But that being said, I think its still messed up that they are removing it. They are obviously doing it to be able to sell more x570 boards. You notice how the announcement didn't come at Computex until after the media started pushing the narrative that it was unnecessary to buy an x570 board if you had a decent x470 board even for the 16 core in some cases. It wasn't until after about 2 full day of coverage like that from Places like Gamers Nexus, PCWorld, etc... That AMD Robert announced that to "Stop Confusion" they would be pulling support from the pre x570 boards. That was no mistake. Honestly, AMD has always been there for the little guy, and I think the right thing for them to do would be to pull support so that the normie doesn't get any ideas, but then to quietly put it back, and allow for us enthusiasts to work it out on our own. Actually, screw that, they shouldn't pull support at all, and they should just say, "Look, it isn't fully supported, we aren't going to stop you, but if you want to try go for it, just don't come crying to us if it doesn't work" That would leave us enthusiasts happy, and still give the normies a reason to buy x570.
> 
> So even though I personally don't care, I still am peeved that they are pulling it, you know what I mean?


Typical corporation dodgy move. It should be up to Vendors if they want to keep or remove support for PCIE 4.0 on the top tier boards..

Lets assume that someone was building New rig and got himself Crosshair 7 instead of crosshair 8 cause he was like. Hmmm I dont need 8 for running my pcie4 NVME drive. Gets all hardware up and running just to hear well If You want New bios Tough **** pcie4,0 no more. And guy is like **** i wuld have went crosshair 8 if i knew they will cut the pcie4 support.


It's like santa giving you an new console for xmas you play n it he comes back few weeks later and sayd. Well Billy console was not for You i'm taking it back. ****ty move and ****ty excuse if you ask me It's not like people would whine to AMD about problems with pcie4 on motherboard but to the vendor.


----------



## oreonutz

lordzed83 said:


> Typical corporation dodgy move. It should be up to Vendors if they want to keep or remove support for PCIE 4.0 on the top tier boards..
> 
> Lets assume that someone was building New rig and got himself Crosshair 7 instead of crosshair 8 cause he was like. Hmmm I dont need 8 for running my pcie4 NVME drive. Gets all hardware up and running just to hear well If You want New bios Tough **** pcie4,0 no more. And guy is like **** i wuld have went crosshair 8 if i knew they will cut the pcie4 support.
> 
> 
> It's like santa giving you an new console for xmas you play n it he comes back few weeks later and sayd. Well Billy console was not for You i'm taking it back. ****ty move and ****ty excuse if you ask me It's not like people would whine to AMD about problems with pcie4 on motherboard but to the vendor.


100 Percent agree!


----------



## harderthanfire

oreonutz said:


> To be fair, we had this same situation happen with Ryzen 2000 Series where the reported core order changed for some as well, I believe it was after a firmware update, so its not something that hasn't happened before.
> 
> Also, for Posterity's sake, the tool (called "Work Tool") that Der8auer used in his video was in fact made by Shamino who is an Engineer who works for Asus, Der8auer just got the tool from him. And I was able to make a script for it, so that upon Windows Booting your Per CCX Overclock applied automatically without having to open up any tool manually. I since got an updated version of the tool from Shamino that allows you to do the same thing without my complicated script, and works better with the new Chipsets, if anyone is interested. Standard Warnings apply, as you could kill your chip if you use this tool wrong and apply too much voltage.



That would be useful for me if you could share that new tool please.


Yeah re-arranging the script wasn't really hard or a problem, just the time to find the correct stable setting for each CCX was annoying.


On the fan/temps issue: Just got the ASUS WMI with stuck temps happening to me right now but all my fans are running but yesterday my CPU fan stopped and rebooted due to the default 200RPM check so I don't think temps are related in my case but could be a general WMI issue.


----------



## lordzed83

I'w made small video how i got my pc set up atm for multitasking
[video]




[/video]


----------



## Keith Myers

In my case the temps were always reported correctly, either by the WMI interface or through the PCI interface. My fans actually stopped, not spinning at all, 0 rpm. I learned the temp sensor is NOT in the cpu die but in the I/O die.


----------



## crakej

Keith Myers said:


> In my case the temps were always reported correctly, either by the WMI interface or through the PCI interface. My fans actually stopped, not spinning at all, 0 rpm. I learned the temp sensor is NOT in the cpu die but in the I/O die.


My uderstanding is that there are >20 temp sensors all over the cpu, but when it reports 60c, that 60c could be anywhere, or that it is 60c somewhere on the cpu... I can't remember where I saw that...will keep an eye out.


----------



## Keith Myers

crakej said:


> My uderstanding is that there are >20 temp sensors all over the cpu, but when it reports 60c, that 60c could be anywhere, or that it is 60c somewhere on the cpu... I can't remember where I saw that...will keep an eye out.


I thought that tidbit of info only applied to the original Gen. 1 and Gen.+ Ryzens with the monolithic die. Do we know the chiplets have the same on die temp sensors. My comment was from a developer that the reported cpu temp gets put onto the bus by the I/O die. Could be the I/O die is maybe polling all the various on die chiplet temps?


----------



## lordzed83

Keith Myers said:


> I thought that tidbit of info only applied to the original Gen. 1 and Gen.+ Ryzens with the monolithic die. Do we know the chiplets have the same on die temp sensors. My comment was from a developer that the reported cpu temp gets put onto the bus by the I/O die. Could be the I/O die is maybe polling all the various on die chiplet temps?


I THINK that it reports Highest temperature of all sensors in cpu.


----------



## crakej

Keith Myers said:


> I thought that tidbit of info only applied to the original Gen. 1 and Gen.+ Ryzens with the monolithic die. Do we know the chiplets have the same on die temp sensors. My comment was from a developer that the reported cpu temp gets put onto the bus by the I/O die. Could be the I/O die is maybe polling all the various on die chiplet temps?





lordzed83 said:


> I THINK that it reports Highest temperature of all sensors in cpu.



That's my understanding of it. The chiplets must have their own sensors otherwise it couldn't regulate boost and other functions properly.


----------



## gupsterg

oreonutz said:


> I am again, so sorry it took so long to get back to you on this, but I wanted to make sure my report was accurate.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I am pretty well versed in BIOS Flashback, but just to be certain I used the 6 Drives I have on hand that I KNOW FOR A FACT work with UEFI Flashback. I typically just use the one, and it NEVER leaves the BIOS Flashback Port, unless for some reason I have downloaded the UEFI onto a different machine, and even then I usually just dump it to that drive over the network.
> 
> Anyways, I have downloaded your newest UEFI 4 Different times to make sure it wasn't a problem with corruption while Downloading. Unfortunately, when flashing this UEFI I again get thrown back to the Vanilla 2501. It does appear to actually be flashing, as it does the standard 5 steady Blinks, and then starts blinking faster for about 6 to 7 minutes, before it does a combination of some fast blinks and some slow blinks, and then its done. So it did this every time I tried flashing it, it looked normal, just like every other successful flash.
> 
> However, once I boot into the UEFI none of the added options are there. Not HPET, Not Spread Spectrum (and yes to be clear I searched for both of those options using F9 and tried multiple different search terms to find them), no extra fan options in Q Monitoring, nothing. And then I decided to again read the file with EZ Flash in the UEFI to see if it sees it as a legit UEFI, and it does not. Your UEFI that worked for me though, the time before this, it does see that as a Genuine UEFI File.
> 
> Here is what EZ Flash says about this newest one:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know it wouldn't work to flash it with EZ Flash regardless, I am just noting that usually with your modded files that work when using BIOS Flashback, EZ Flash will recognize it as a genuine file if you tell it to read it.
> 
> Anyways, I hope this was helpful, I am sorry to have a bad report. Let me know if you would like me to try something different.
> 
> Here is a report of exactly what I did, if you are curious:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 1) I downloaded your File, which you already had named Properly.
> 2) I backed up and deleted the current C7H.CAP File I had on my Flashback Drive. Then I pasted your C7H.CAP file on that drive. I set my UEFI Back to optimized defaults.
> 3) I shut off the PC.
> 4) I held down the Flashback button for 3 seconds until it flashed 5 Steady flashes, and then began flashing faster, indicating the flashing had begun. I stood there and watched it for about 2 Minutes to make sure it continued to flash, all appeared normal. I sat down to eat a cheese cake, but saw the reflection of the Blue Light off a near by speaker to make sure it was still flashing. About the time I finished up my cheese cake, about 6 minutes or so later, it ceased flashing.
> 5) I turned on the PC. This time instead of booting right up, it actually took several minutes for it to post, I was actually starting to get pretty worried. It shut itself off and back on about 6 times, then about 5 minutes later I finally got a Post Beep and then it booted into the UEFI.
> 6) I immediately searched for HPET and then Spread Spectrum and got neither.
> 7) I loaded optimized defaults then reset and looked again, and again I found nothing.
> 8) I then spent the next hour and a half flashing with my many different drives on hand that I know work with BIOS FLASHBACK and unfortunately did not get a satisfactory result with any of them.
> Hope this helps....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mtrai said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you willing to try another mod tomorrow? I am thinking but drinking so will not do the mod until the morning but we have a bios mod where Hpet and Spread Spectrum works....let me just try to gain fan control that works and leave out the rest as it is mostly useless anyway. Those are the three big issues anyway The C7H WIF mod 2501 works with no issue. So this is baffling to me.
Click to expand...

I tried a mod UEFI of my own yesterday, I will not see any of the options I change to USER appear in search, or even setting options which can be revealed in normal UEFI menus.

I believe in AMIBCP we are only modding 1 of 2 the UEFI "SETUP" ie the one which applies to Zen/Zen+ and not the one applying to Zen2.




harderthanfire said:


> Word of warning for those who CCX overclock. I reinstalled windows the other day and the order/number of my CCXs changed.
> 
> 
> 
> What was my best overclocker went from CCX 2 to 1 and all the others changed too. This meant when I reapplied my CCX OC it was instantly unstable!


Oh my. Did you use RM or the Shamino tool?


----------



## CCoR

mtrai said:


> Just wanted to give an update on the progress with the non wifi C7H bios mod. Things are not progressing so well. While the C7H WIFI 2501 Modded bios works perfect...the non wifi is having many issues. Going to to do a deeper dive today...but if my guess is correct...it would require AFUGAN.exe /gan to flash and afugan does not support the new 32 Mb size bios. I am really baffled in why the wifi bios is different in this then the non wifi. I am gonna do a really deep dive into the non wifi bios today and check some things. On the C6H and C6H wifi the only difference was one had a wireless enable/disable option. But then again they do mess around with things.
> 
> WIFI ONLY Once again the C7H WIFI 2501 Modded bios link: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1q_LUDXgQRfALTBqkScaO0BIR5BQzTJKH Remember you have to use flashbac. the bios is already correctly named for flashback.


Hey thanks for your contributions with modding BIOS'. I've recently tried to use your BIOS (modded) and the BIOS flash goes through all the proper visual steps (blinks and then does it updating like usual) but when I go to boot into BIOS, I can't find the any mods? It's as if it only flashed the stock BIOS. I'm on the C7H WiFi and 3800X. 

Any help would be appreciated. 

Thanks


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> My uderstanding is that there are >20 temp sensors all over the cpu, but when it reports 60c, that 60c could be anywhere, or that it is 60c somewhere on the cpu... I can't remember where I saw that...will keep an eye out.
> 
> 
> 
> Keith Myers said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought that tidbit of info only applied to the original Gen. 1 and Gen.+ Ryzens with the monolithic die. Do we know the chiplets have the same on die temp sensors. My comment was from a developer that the reported cpu temp gets put onto the bus by the I/O die. Could be the I/O die is maybe polling all the various on die chiplet temps?
> 
> 
> 
> lordzed83 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I THINK that it reports Highest temperature of all sensors in cpu.
> 
> 
> 
> crakej said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's my understanding of it. The chiplets must have their own sensors otherwise it couldn't regulate boost and other functions properly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Seems it is still a high number of on dies sensors on Zen2, see Mumak's post in 3xxx owners club.


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> I thought that tidbit of info only applied to the original Gen. 1 and Gen.+ Ryzens with the monolithic die. Do we know the chiplets have the same on die temp sensors. My comment was from a developer that the reported cpu temp gets put onto the bus by the I/O die. Could be the I/O die is maybe polling all the various on die chiplet temps?


I am 99% Certain that the Chiplets still have the 20 Plus Temp sensors built into them, and the way the Temperature reporting still works on all 3rd party tools is that the Highest Temperature from all of these sensors is reported. I can't find the posts where I read this right now, but I will dig for them later if you guys want a source, but I know AMD Robert talked about this, AND I believe Mumak with HWinfo has also confirmed this. (Sorry if this was settled already, just now jumping in the convo late, haven't caught up with all the posts yet. 

Also Ryzen Master with its newest update about a week ago changed this, but only in the RM Utility. Now instead of Reporting the Highest Temperature, they are reporting some kind of average, but as of yet have not provided the 3rd party developers with the necessary data on how this "average" is calculated. I just had a conversation with Mumak (Creator of Hwinfo) about this very thing in another thread late last night.

EDIT: The Conversation with Mumak is on the Following thread starting at the top of the page. As usual I was verbose as all hell, but the answers provided by Mumak were very insightful. It might piss a few of you off to learn the way AMD has been treating the 3rd party Developers.
https://www.overclock.net/forum/10-amd-cpus/1726514-amd-ryzen-7-3700x-3800x-ryzen-9-3900x-57.html


----------



## oreonutz

CCoR said:


> Hey thanks for your contributions with modding BIOS'. I've recently tried to use your BIOS (modded) and the BIOS flash goes through all the proper visual steps (blinks and then does it updating like usual) but when I go to boot into BIOS, I can't find the any mods? It's as if it only flashed the stock BIOS. I'm on the C7H WiFi and 3800X.
> 
> Any help would be appreciated.
> 
> Thanks


Now this is VERY interesting, as others have reported that Modded UEFI for the WIFI version to work just fine, including @mtrai himself. I have been testing the Non Wifi version for @mtrai each time he comes out with an update to try to fix it, and each time I run into the SAME EXACT problem you just described. BIOS Flashback also appears to flash just fine for me, as it doesn't error out, and blinks like normal like when a successful flash occurs, but then I also do not have any of the mods.

Since you are seeing the same problem, maybe the Versions @mtrai has been providing actually do work, and maybe there is an extra step involved to flash them. I only have one theory but hear me out.

Before you flashed the 2501 Mod for your WIFI board, were you on 2501 already? 

If you were, then I am wondering if, because the board sensed you were already on the correct firmware, it didn't bother actually applying the update. Maybe it just spends time comparing the 2 and then ultimately decides to just stick with the 2501 already on the board, and just sets factory defaults??? 

I don't know if this theory makes any sense at all, but it is the only damn thing I can think of. Obviously my theory goes out the window if you were on a previous UEFI before flashing the Mod though...

But every single time I flashed I was already on the Official 2501 before attempting to flash the MOD, I am going to wait back to hear from you, and if you say you were also on 2501 before flashing the mod, then I am going to downgrade my UEFI to a previous version, and then use BIOS Flashback to update to the Mod and see if it works then.

It would be awesome to finally figure this out, because @mtrai has been working hard on this and its been a bit of an annoyance to him that nothing seems to be doing the trick.

Anyways, let me know!


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> In my case the temps were always reported correctly, either by the WMI interface or through the PCI interface. My fans actually stopped, not spinning at all, 0 rpm. I learned the temp sensor is NOT in the cpu die but in the I/O die.





crakej said:


> My uderstanding is that there are >20 temp sensors all over the cpu, but when it reports 60c, that 60c could be anywhere, or that it is 60c somewhere on the cpu... I can't remember where I saw that...will keep an eye out.



You guys are actually both correct. The WMI Interface gets its temp from the I/O die which is the Die that reports the Motherboard Temps/VRM Temps/Fan Speeds and all of that, so when probing the WMI interface the info is coming from the I/O die, but in case of the CPU Temperature that the WMI reports I believe it is just getting the temperature from the Chiplet, its just reporting which ever sensor is the hottest on the core at any given time.

And then the TDie Temps, that is derived from all the sensors placed inside the cores. So Technically I believe you are both correct. This is based on information I have read from both Official and Non Official sources so I could have some of these details wrong, but at this time this is what I believe to be the case.


----------



## oreonutz

gupsterg said:


> I tried a mod UEFI of my own yesterday, I will not see any of the options I change to USER appear in search, or even setting options which can be revealed in normal UEFI menus.
> 
> I believe in AMIBCP we are only modding 1 of 2 the UEFI "SETUP" ie the one which applies to Zen/Zen+ and not the one applying to Zen2.


Interesting. Do you think that means we need a new version of AMIBCP???





gupsterg said:


> Oh my. Did you use RM or the Shamino tool?


He was using a Autostartup Script that I created that automatically sets your Per CCX OC by triggering the Shamino made Tool as soon as you boot into Windows.

EDIT: Crap I just realized I posted like 5 posts in a row. My bad guys, I will start to get better about consolidating my responses all in one post. Sorry about that...


----------



## CCoR

oreonutz said:


> CCoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey thanks for your contributions with modding BIOS'. I've recently tried to use your BIOS (modded) and the BIOS flash goes through all the proper visual steps (blinks and then does it updating like usual) but when I go to boot into BIOS, I can't find the any mods? It's as if it only flashed the stock BIOS. I'm on the C7H WiFi and 3800X.
> 
> Any help would be appreciated.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> Now this is VERY interesting, as others have reported that Modded UEFI for the WIFI version to work just fine, including @mtrai himself. I have been testing the Non Wifi version for @mtrai each time he comes out with an update to try to fix it, and each time I run into the SAME EXACT problem you just described. BIOS Flashback also appears to flash just fine for me, as it doesn't error out, and blinks like normal like when a successful flash occurs, but then I also do not have any of the mods.
> 
> Since you are seeing the same problem, maybe the Versions @mtrai has been providing actually do work, and maybe there is an extra step involved to flash them. I only have one theory but hear me out.
> 
> Before you flashed the 2501 Mod for your WIFI board, were you on 2501 already?
> 
> If you were, then I am wondering if, because the board sensed you were already on the correct firmware, it didn't bother actually applying the update. Maybe it just spends time comparing the 2 and then ultimately decides to just stick with the 2501 already on the board, and just sets factory defaults???
> 
> I don't know if this theory makes any sense at all, but it is the only damn thing I can think of. Obviously my theory goes out the window if you were on a previous UEFI before flashing the Mod though...
> 
> But every since time I flashed I was already on the Official 2501 before attempting to flash the MOD, I am going to wait back to hear from you, and if you say you were also on 2501 before flashing the mod, then I am going to downgrade my UEFI to a previous version, and then use BIOS Flashback to update to the Mod and see if it works then.
> 
> It would be awesome to finally figure this out, because @mtrai has been working hard on this and its been a bit of an annoyance to him that nothing seems to be doing the trick.
> 
> Anyways, let me know!
Click to expand...

I tried both to bbn o avail., but I at one point had the ability to see the mod options. I was prob on my 2700x though. Can't recall 100%. Either way, at one point the mod worked for me but not anymore.


----------



## oreonutz

CCoR said:


> I tried both to bbn o avail., but I at one point had the ability to see the mod options. I was prob on my 2700x though. Can't recall 100%. Either way, at one point the mod worked for me but not anymore.


HMMMM!

I wonder if AMD Put some Code in to make it not work somehow.

I wonder, what if we flash back to a really old UEFI made for the 2700x, something like 1002 or 0804 using UEFI Flashback. Then Once that Completes, immediately use BIOS Flashback to upgrade to the Modded 2501. If this is some kind of security put in, I wonder if that would defeat it.

Also, I believe @mtrai also made a Modded Version of both 2406 and 0068, I wonder if one of those were one of the UEFI's you tried that worked for you previously???


----------



## gupsterg

gupsterg said:


> I tried a mod UEFI of my own yesterday, I will not see any of the options I change to USER appear in search, or even setting options which can be revealed in normal UEFI menus.
> 
> I believe in AMIBCP we are only modding 1 of 2 the UEFI "SETUP" ie the one which applies to Zen/Zen+ and not the one applying to Zen2.
> 
> 
> 
> oreonutz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting. Do you think that means we need a new version of AMIBCP???
Click to expand...

Don't know.

From UEFI 2304 onwards the UEFI flash file became 32MB, it looks like 2 UEFIs in one. UEFITool seems to show like modules within the UEFI, which is in use depending on CPU used no idea. I believe segmentation is Zen/Zen+ and then Zen2.

I have done 2 mod UEFIs.

Each I updated the CPU microcode to latest using UBU. One had the options unlocked as I would say when using 2700X and the other did not. Each has same UEFI options, in menus and search function.



oreonutz said:


> He was using a Autostartup Script that I created that automatically sets your Per CCX OC by triggering the Shamino made Tool as soon as you boot into Windows.


Ahh yes I recall you sharing that.


----------



## crakej

Well I just had this happen....

I was playing with high speed ram (>4000) and getting some half decent results. I was not OCing CPU at all, just the ram. I went into bios to slacken a timing, booted, but VERY slowly.

When I checked, my CPU was running at *360MHz*! That's three-hundred and sixty MEGAHERTZ. I rebooted, got into bios and it said CPU was at 3.8GHz, but everything wa really slow so I just hit cmos clear button.

Once booted, with default settings, I STILL had the same problem! When I opened RM instead of saying 4600 max speed for the CCD it said 200! Even clear cmos did NOT help!

I wondered if I'd done something wrong, but I really didn't! I power cycled, into bios, STILL slow! Did an F5 for defaults, rebooted, and it's ok now.

I really don't like that it did that and can't help being a bit concerned about it - I might check with costomer support - I've never seen this reported.

I did have a screen snip but it seems it didn't save it before I rebooted.

Are people finding we need to raise VCore with ram OC like previous generations?


----------



## Dbsjej56464

crakej said:


> Well I just had this happen....
> 
> I was playing with high speed ram (>4000) and getting some half decent results. I was not OCing CPU at all, just the ram. I went into bios to slacken a timing, booted, but VERY slowly.
> 
> When I checked, my CPU was running at *360MHz*! That's three-hundred and sixty MEGAHERTZ. I rebooted, got into bios and it said CPU was at 3.8GHz, but everything wa really slow so I just hit cmos clear button.
> 
> Once booted, with default settings, I STILL had the same problem! When I opened RM instead of saying 4600 max speed for the CCD it said 200! Even clear cmos did NOT help!
> 
> I wondered if I'd done something wrong, but I really didn't! I power cycled, into bios, STILL slow! Did an F5 for defaults, rebooted, and it's ok now.
> 
> I really don't like that it did that and can't help being a bit concerned about it - I might check with costomer support - I've never seen this reported.
> 
> I did have a screen snip but it seems it didn't save it before I rebooted.
> 
> Are people finding we need to raise VCore with ram OC like previous generations?





That has randomly happened to me before too: https://i.redd.it/ktnxjp9mbnd31.jpg not sure what caused it. But not had it since


----------



## crakej

Sideways2k said:


> That has randomly happened to me before too: https://i.redd.it/ktnxjp9mbnd31.jpg not sure what caused it. But not had it since


Thats exactly the same!

What were you doing when it happened?


----------



## Dbsjej56464

crakej said:


> Thats exactly the same!
> 
> What were you doing when it happened?



At the time I'd just enabled PBO. Only clear CMOS fixed it


----------



## crakej

I think that's what I'd just done as well. Interesting.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> I think that's what I'd just done as well. Interesting.


I think I had it Once on hot day. Came back from work PC was mining so rebooted before starting to play my fav game of ramtest 
And pc felt SLOW AS **** like super slow in bios ect. Not looked on clock but rebooted 2 times im like hmm strange reflashed bios and was back to normal. So possible i had same thing just not looked in to it just went straight in to problem solution aka FLASH IT


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> I tried a mod UEFI of my own yesterday, I will not see any of the options I change to USER appear in search, or even setting options which can be revealed in normal UEFI menus.
> 
> I believe in AMIBCP we are only modding 1 of 2 the UEFI "SETUP" ie the one which applies to Zen/Zen+ and not the one applying to Zen2.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh my. Did you use RM or the Shamino tool?


I think you are on to something there. Will investagte but if this indeed the issue, that would explain why the mod version is not showing things in the non wifi version if you are a ryzen 3000.


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> I think you are on to something there. Will investagte but if this indeed the issue, that would explain why the mod version is not showing things in the non wifi version if you are a ryzen 3000.


I am most definitely on Ryzen 3000. Damn...


----------



## mtrai

CCoR said:


> Hey thanks for your contributions with modding BIOS'. I've recently tried to use your BIOS (modded) and the BIOS flash goes through all the proper visual steps (blinks and then does it updating like usual) but when I go to boot into BIOS, I can't find the any mods? It's as if it only flashed the stock BIOS. I'm on the C7H WiFi and 3800X.
> 
> Any help would be appreciated.
> 
> Thanks


I think gurstep hit the nail on the head...the modded bios only shows option if only a ryzen 2000 or lower. As I know there are 2 different CBS set up modules in the bios. One for the 1000/2000 and a different but almost identical one for the Ryzens 3000s. In this case since ASUS doubled the size of the bios, any module editing via hex editor will not flash as AFUGAN.exe cannot handle the 32 Mb bios.


----------



## mtrai

Can someone with a ryzen 2000 series test the non wifi 2501 modded bios. I think I figured out part of the issue but need to know if the modded bios with a 2000 cpu shows all the options. If I am correct that is a step in the right direction for resolving this mess.

NON WIFI Testing modded 2501 bios

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1xBqUE2iW-7pIQaCuJuR3U7XzZIX1-Dm7

Also could someone with a Ryzen 3000 with a WIFI board test my known working WIFI 2501 modded bios. If I am correctly you will not have any extra options from the modded bios.

WIFI Version below.
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1q_LUDXgQRfALTBqkScaO0BIR5BQzTJKH


----------



## kertsz

crakej said:


> Well I just had this happen....
> 
> I was playing with high speed ram (>4000) and getting some half decent results. I was not OCing CPU at all, just the ram. I went into bios to slacken a timing, booted, but VERY slowly.
> 
> When I checked, my CPU was running at *360MHz*! That's three-hundred and sixty MEGAHERTZ. I rebooted, got into bios and it said CPU was at 3.8GHz, but everything wa really slow so I just hit cmos clear button.
> 
> Once booted, with default settings, I STILL had the same problem! When I opened RM instead of saying 4600 max speed for the CCD it said 200! Even clear cmos did NOT help!
> 
> I wondered if I'd done something wrong, but I really didn't! I power cycled, into bios, STILL slow! Did an F5 for defaults, rebooted, and it's ok now.
> 
> I really don't like that it did that and can't help being a bit concerned about it - I might check with costomer support - I've never seen this reported.
> 
> I did have a screen snip but it seems it didn't save it before I rebooted.
> 
> Are people finding we need to raise VCore with ram OC like previous generations?





Sideways2k said:


> That has randomly happened to me before too: https://i.redd.it/ktnxjp9mbnd31.jpg not sure what caused it. But not had it since





crakej said:


> Thats exactly the same!
> 
> What were you doing when it happened?





Sideways2k said:


> At the time I'd just enabled PBO. Only clear CMOS fixed it





crakej said:


> I think that's what I'd just done as well. Interesting.





mtrai said:


> Can someone with a ryzen 2000 series test the non wifi 2501 modded bios. I think I figured out part of the issue but need to know if the modded bios with a 2000 cpu shows all the options. If I am correct that is a step in the right direction for resolving this mess.
> 
> NON WIFI Testing modded 2501 bios
> 
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1xBqUE2iW-7pIQaCuJuR3U7XzZIX1-Dm7
> 
> Also could someone with a Ryzen 3000 with a WIFI board test my known working WIFI 2501 modded bios. If I am correctly you will not have any extra options from the modded bios.
> 
> WIFI Version below.
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1q_LUDXgQRfALTBqkScaO0BIR5BQzTJKH


What happened to you is because everything you have connected to the 4pin sockets (3pin compatible), fan pumps etc. has stopped you.

It happened to me with 2501 and 2406. Whith 2304 no, but for other reasons my 2700X is better with bios 2203. If you have a 3xxx try 2304, with this I did not stop the fans.


----------



## crakej

Nope - my fans were spinning, the temp was stuck.


----------



## crakej

So I i've been experimenting a LOT over last few days...

Using low ODT can be VERY helpful getting higher ram OC on Matisse. On previous gen CPUs most of us would use somewhere in the region of 48 to 60ohms, usually needing to increase it for the faster ram profiles, but now we're using <=40ohms.

It seems like almost the oppossite - it's difficult to tell as many speeds will boot with almost any ProcODT - but now it does seem that the lower you go, the more likely you are to boot.

I don't use RM - I don't trust it, but I have noticed that ProcODT can be set as low as 28ohms in RM, though our bios does not support it (lowest is 30ohms on our board). So can RM set things not in our bios like the 28ohms? I would have thought not, but I have noticed the bios can enter timings that we can't enter, like tCke for example. When left on auto, the bios can set it to 0 (zero), but you try doing that in the bios (or RM) - you can't enter anything lower than 1.

My memory spec has RRDS and RRDL at 2.275 and 1.820ns respectively. Most ram has timings higher here and swapped around, the bigger timing is usually RRDL. In the bios you can't set either of the timings lower than 4 so I end up having to use 4, 4 instead of say 3, 2.

I've found 3733CL16 is almost as fast as 3733CL14 so not worrying too much about CL14 if I can't get it relialbe.

I've also played with high speeds >=4000MTs with the fabric at 1866 and have had some VERY interesting results. One test I did had my Aida copy speed go up to 65GB/s with 69ns latency!

I have a lot more to do before I can be 100% confident of what I'm doing. I have yet to find 100% stability with these OCs and will update with more information if and when I get things running properly. Ironically, I think I might be able to get stable if I was using 2602, I may experiment with that too.


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> So I i've been experimenting a LOT over last few days...
> 
> Using low ODT can be VERY helpful getting higher ram OC on Matisse. On previous gen CPUs most of us would use somewhere in the region of 48 to 60ohms, usually needing to increase it for the faster ram profiles, but now we're using <=40ohms.
> 
> It seems like almost the oppossite - it's difficult to tell as many speeds will boot with almost any ProcODT - but now it does seem that the lower you go, the more likely you are to boot.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I don't use RM - I don't trust it, but I have noticed that ProcODT can be set as low as 28ohms in RM, though our bios does not support it (lowest is 30ohms on our board). So can RM set things not in our bios like the 28ohms? I would have thought not, but I have noticed the bios can enter timings that we can't enter, like tCke for example. When left on auto, the bios can set it to 0 (zero), but you try doing that in the bios (or RM) - you can't enter anything lower than 1.
> 
> My memory spec has RRDS and RRDL at 2.275 and 1.820ns respectively. Most ram has timings higher here and swapped around, the bigger timing is usually RRDL. In the bios you can't set either of the timings lower than 4 so I end up having to use 4, 4 instead of say 3, 2.
> 
> I've found 3733CL16 is almost as fast as 3733CL14 so not worrying too much about CL14 if I can't get it relialbe.
> 
> I've also played with high speeds >=4000MTs with the fabric at 1866 and have had some VERY interesting results. One test I did had my Aida copy speed go up to 65GB/s with 69ns latency!
> 
> I have a lot more to do before I can be 100% confident of what I'm doing. I have yet to find 100% stability with these OCs and will update with more information if and when I get things running properly. Ironically, I think I might be able to get stable if I was using 2602, I may experiment with that too.


I also have been doing quite a bit of testing the last few nights, and actually noted the same exact thing. 36.9 Ohms seems to be the sweet spot for me.

But You Know what else I noticed?

I don't know if this is just RM reporting wrong, or if this really even matters, but its bugging me. I just went and got screenshots in the UEFI, and of Ryzen Master to show you guys.

Basically to sum it up quickly, the RttPark that I set in the UEFI, doesn't reflect in RM. It also doesn't matter which UEFI menu I set it in, or if I set it in all 3, no matter what, My RttPark Shows as RZQ/1, even though I set RZQ/5. I don't know if this impacts performance or stability in anyway, but I felt I should report it here, and see if any of you guys have noticed this.

So here is where I have set RTT Park In the UEFI:


Spoiler















And Here is what it reflects as in Ryzen Master:


Spoiler















And here are the other places I have found this setting and set it, and again, it doesn't matter if I leave them all auto, If I just change one of them, or if I change all of them, no matter what my RttPark reports the same in RM. (At Least with the combinations I have tried):



Spoiler























Any Ideas???


----------



## crakej

Yes. I have experienced the RTT not being able to be set a well.


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> Yes. I have experienced the RTT not being able to be set a well.


I have been trying to figure out if this really matters or not. Even though I have gotten substantially better at Memory Overclocking over the years, especially since the launch of 1st Gen Ryzen, I still don't know what every single settings does, and this is one of the ones that I am having a hard time finding information for exactly what it does, and how it affects a Memory Overclock.

Any Insight?


----------



## lordzed83

oreonutz said:


> I also have been doing quite a bit of testing the last few nights, and actually noted the same exact thing. 36.9 Ohms seems to be the sweet spot for me.
> 
> But You Know what else I noticed?
> 
> I don't know if this is just RM reporting wrong, or if this really even matters, but its bugging me. I just went and got screenshots in the UEFI, and of Ryzen Master to show you guys.
> 
> Basically to sum it up quickly, the RttPark that I set in the UEFI, doesn't reflect in RM. It also doesn't matter which UEFI menu I set it in, or if I set it in all 3, no matter what, My RttPark Shows as RZQ/1, even though I set RZQ/5. I don't know if this impacts performance or stability in anyway, but I felt I should report it here, and see if any of you guys have noticed this.
> 
> So here is where I have set RTT Park In the UEFI:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Here is what it reflects as in Ryzen Master:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And here are the other places I have found this setting and set it, and again, it doesn't matter if I leave them all auto, If I just change one of them, or if I change all of them, no matter what my RttPark reports the same in RM. (At Least with the combinations I have tried):
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any Ideas???


My Idea is to ignore what RM says as always and go with whats set on bios like it's been on all zen's beta bioses so far


----------



## oreonutz

lordzed83 said:


> My Idea is to ignore what RM says as always and go with whats set on bios like it's been on all zen's beta bioses so far


Lol. Probably a good philosphy to have. But as buggy as these bioses have been and the fact that I haven't been able to hit 3800, was wondering if that might have anything to do with it.


----------



## crakej

oreonutz said:


> I have been trying to figure out if this really matters or not. Even though I have gotten substantially better at Memory Overclocking over the years, especially since the launch of 1st Gen Ryzen, I still don't know what every single settings does, and this is one of the ones that I am having a hard time finding information for exactly what it does, and how it affects a Memory Overclock.
> 
> Any Insight?


Have to agree with lordzed83. I just don't trust anything RM says really. The only thing it appears to register correctly is the low cpu frequencies, but I don't care about that. It has 'CPU Voltage' which displays (I suspect an average) of VID, not VCore, and some things just don't display right, or at all. I also don't like how RM sets bios settings either, not that I really know, but I would prefer to know exactly what it's doing with my system.

I don't think RM detects higher cpu frequencies properly either - other apps that look at my multiplier, I can see boost happening as (nearly!) it should.

Of course I may be wrong about some of this, but I don't care - I prefer to know what is being set where and how - in the bios, which I can see more of my voltages in, and see what the bios has set auto timings to without booting widows.

Instead of promoting their own app and re-inventing the wheel, they need to give programmers the information they need to display information in their well established apps instead.


----------



## crakej

For those who leave their CPU alone, when you OC memory, do you find you need to add more to VCore. when I was using Zen1 on this board, it needed increasing, but not by much.

Also, is 1.375v the default VCore for Matisse?

God I need a new keyboard....my keys keep sticking..


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Have to agree with lordzed83. I just don't trust anything RM says really. The only thing it appears to register correctly is the low cpu frequencies, but I don't care about that. It has 'CPU Voltage' which displays (I suspect an average) of VID, not VCore, and some things just don't display right, or at all. I also don't like how RM sets bios settings either, not that I really know, but I would prefer to know exactly what it's doing with my system.
> 
> I don't think RM detects higher cpu frequencies properly either - other apps that look at my multiplier, I can see boost happening as (nearly!) it should.
> 
> Of course I may be wrong about some of this, but I don't care - I prefer to know what is being set where and how - in the bios, which I can see more of my voltages in, and see what the bios has set auto timings to without booting widows.
> 
> Instead of promoting their own app and re-inventing the wheel, they need to give programmers the information they need to display information in their well established apps instead.


You. If I change something in Bios MYSELF i know what I'w done can revert it or try different settign. With Ryzen master im not 100% sure what gets changed where with them bioses. I only use it as monitoring tool and for settings screenshots.

Nice ram tuning guide here
https://github.com/integralfx/MemTestHelper/blob/master/DDR4 OC Guide.md


----------



## nemiel

hello guys 



first plz ignore my terrible engl.


i have switched my 2700x to the new 3700x (latest bios).


with the 2700x i can run my 3200 cl14 ram in DOCP settings the 3700x with same settings runs in a C5 error. Is that a known problem with the Ryzen 3? better Ram controller terrible results?


----------



## Bart

nemiel said:


> hello guys
> 
> 
> 
> first plz ignore my terrible engl.
> 
> 
> i have switched my 2700x to the new 3700x (latest bios).
> 
> 
> with the 2700x i can run my 3200 cl14 ram in DOCP settings the 3700x with same settings runs in a C5 error. Is that a known problem with the Ryzen 3? better Ram controller terrible results?


Have you tried setting the RAM voltage manually? Some people have had issues with DOCP not applying the proper RAM voltage. Setting the RAM manually to the proper voltage (ie 1.35v) fixes that, since it tries to boot with the RAM voltage too low (1.2v).


----------



## crakej

Sorry - dupplicate


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> You. If I change something in Bios MYSELF i know what I'w done can revert it or try different settign. With Ryzen master im not 100% sure what gets changed where with them bioses. I only use it as monitoring tool and for settings screenshots.
> 
> Nice ram tuning guide here
> https://github.com/integralfx/MemTestHelper/blob/master/DDR4 OC Guide.md


Nice share - thanks for that!


----------



## nemiel

tried up to 1.4v manually allways c5


----------



## Bart

nemiel said:


> tried up to 1.4v manually allways c5


What BIOS are you running? Latest F5I?


----------



## Nucky

nemiel said:


> tried up to 1.4v manually allways c5


Did you change the boot voltage as well? If not, that will probably fix your issue.


----------



## nemiel

wheres the boot voltage option?


bios is 2501 1.0.0.2


----------



## crakej

nemiel said:


> wheres the boot voltage option?
> 
> 
> bios is 2501 1.0.0.2


Advanced Tweaker>DIGI Power> - Where you set LLC and power phases. It's at the bottom of that menu and must be set for successful boot. Also set your ProcODT at 40ohms (maybe less)


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Advanced Tweaker>DIGI Power> - Where you set LLC and power phases. It's at the bottom of that menu and must be set for successful boot. Also set your ProcODT at 40ohms (maybe less)


Decided to test long therm load stability.


----------



## AvengedRobix

every single mb of other brand was updated to agesa 1.0.0.3 ABB... here nothing.. officially we're lock to 1.0.0.2... grrrrrr


----------



## Axaion

Thats because Asus has only one bios guy, and that guy is on vacation iirc

Hopefully he'll do the minor changes when he comes back, no reason to not do them


----------



## nick name

Axaion said:


> Thats because Asus has only one bios guy, and that guy is on vacation iirc
> 
> Hopefully he'll do the minor changes when he comes back, no reason to not do them


Wait . . . what? One guy?


----------



## LethalSpoon

nick name said:


> Wait . . . what? One guy?


Maybe not literally, but yeah, Shamino is the only one doing something in Asus BIOS department.


----------



## crakej

ALL AGESA 1003 based bios have problems, most notably poor boost performance. This is with revisions AB AND ABB (AB is worse). AGESA code is provided by AMD. It's their fault things have been held up so much on this occassion.

ASUS having just one programmer is VERY unlikely! - several other ASUS boards have had updates this week.

2501 (AGESA1002) is pretty good. I used 2602 for about a week - It enabled me to work on my ram OC without all the C5 errors, then I went back to 2501 with the knowledge gained. Hardly seen a C5 since


----------



## VPII

nick name said:


> Ummmm . . . that seems like something you probably don't have any personal knowledge of in regards to how Shamino is as a person.


Hi @nick name clearly some people has no clue what is happening behind the scenes. I'm sad to say that I'm no longer a C7H user. Reason being, my C7H decided to say good bey when I fitted a Kingpin Dragon F1 Gemini on it, and I mean no Dry Ice touching it, it just decided to go. Warranty will not be honored as I stripped this board of all its dignity, it was bare naked. So right now I'm using an MSI Meg X570 Ace and I really enjoy this board, but it cannot match the 2D benchmark results I got with the C7H.


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> Have to agree with lordzed83. I just don't trust anything RM says really. The only thing it appears to register correctly is the low cpu frequencies, but I don't care about that. It has 'CPU Voltage' which displays (I suspect an average) of VID, not VCore, and some things just don't display right, or at all. I also don't like how RM sets bios settings either, not that I really know, but I would prefer to know exactly what it's doing with my system.
> 
> I don't think RM detects higher cpu frequencies properly either - other apps that look at my multiplier, I can see boost happening as (nearly!) it should.
> 
> Of course I may be wrong about some of this, but I don't care - I prefer to know what is being set where and how - in the bios, which I can see more of my voltages in, and see what the bios has set auto timings to without booting widows.
> 
> Instead of promoting their own app and re-inventing the wheel, they need to give programmers the information they need to display information in their well established apps instead.


I 100 Percent agree with you. I actually stay away from RM as much as possible. Have never been a fan of it, and have your exact sentiment. The only reason I am opening it now is to validate my memory overclock. There are certain numbers the UEFI doesn't tell you, specifically once you get down to the end of the tertiary timings. Also to be clear, I don't use Ryzen Master to make any changes at all what so ever, simply to monitor if changes were made. I make all my changes, no matter what it is, in the UEFI. 

We used to be able to use Ryzen Timing Checker once in Windows to validate everything was set correctly, but that unfortunately doesn't seem to work with Zen 2. So, the only tool I can find that seems to read Memory Timings is RM. And with the exception of RttPark it actually seems to be pretty accurate, I have painstakingly tested it, changing one Timing at a time and then booting up into windows and using RM to see if it read the change, and when it comes to the memory timings specifically, it always has. 

The only one it doesn't recognize a change on is RttPark. Its RM, so its very well its just a bug in RM, and you guys are right, the rest of RM is ****ty. It gives you an average temperature using some unknown calculation that they have not passed on to 3rd party monitoring app developers, it shows VID instead of Vcore, and the VID is often not the VID reported in our other trusted tools (namely HWinfo). Hell, it doesn't even let you set DRAM Voltage, its just a **** proprietary tool that I don't trust. 

That said until we get an updated version of RTC that works on Zen 2, or another program that can display all of our Ram Timing Settings I am not sure what else we are supposed to use to sanity check, especially the settings that the UEFI does not display a current reading for. I definitely feel you guys are right though, that RM should largely just be ignored, and in most cases not even opened, I unabashedly share your sentiment. It's just I would still like to know if it is correct with the RttPark setting. 

And outside of RM, it would be awesome if someone could explain what RttPark even does.

Anyways, sorry for typing so much, yet again....


----------



## oreonutz

lordzed83 said:


> You. If I change something in Bios MYSELF i know what I'w done can revert it or try different settign. With Ryzen master im not 100% sure what gets changed where with them bioses. I only use it as monitoring tool and for settings screenshots.
> 
> Nice ram tuning guide here
> https://github.com/integralfx/MemTestHelper/blob/master/DDR4 OC Guide.md


I am the same exact way! I REFUSE to use RM to set ANYTHING! I simply don't trust it. I only open it as a Secondary Monitoring tool, and even then Only to validate Memory settings used.

Thanks for the Ram Tuning Guide, this looks helpful!


----------



## mtrai

Not gonna wade into all this but all I am gonna say is we had a huge void once @elmor left ASUS with AMD. @Silentscone was s'posed to be our goto ASUS rep, however just like his names states he is silent with AMD but active with Intel. Only recently did @shamino1978 suddenly appear with active AMD support and contact with us. It is really appreciated. Much more then I or anyone can really express. The reason I gave all the the information in the first part of the post is to give people a history lesson. Yes even Elmor went on vacations. He would generally try to let us know he was and not to expect anything.

Elmor was a big reason I was able to continue with bios mods during a certain period when no one had the newest AMIBCP that ASUS had moved to. He gave me the clues I needed in PMs to figure out what new was needed without breaking any of his NDAs. While I have yet to have any direct dealings with Shamino I am pretty sure I would meet with the same enthusiasm and passion that Elmor shared.

The big difference and not a criticism is Shamino post mainly on the official Rog forums while Elmor posted both there and here. It is all good and really does not matter as there are several of us that visit both forums daily. So we still get the info without him having to put in extra unpaid work. No Elmor was never posting here in his official work.

Well I guess I did wade into this murky pool. Perhaps the brief history lesson will help some understand the entire situation.


----------



## mtrai

On a different note with the AGESA 1.0.0.3 bios a reddit user seems to have figure out how to restore the correct boost and not break PBO on ASUS boards but it requires AI suite. I have not tested this since I am still using 1.0.0.2 and on a 2700x.

Anyhow here are the steps.

Set your bclk to 99.8 in the bios.
Boot into windows.
Go into AI suite and then you can set your bclk to what you normally use without breaking any boosts.

I can't find the post again but it was a few days ago in r/amd. /edit found the post https://old.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cnh3j7/new_asus_bios_1003ab_base_clock_overclocking_bug/
Credit to /u/2001zhaozhao on reddit


Keep in mind you have to use AI suite to do this on each boot.
For the bclk option not to be grey out in AI Suite you do have to set it to 99.8 in the bios.



> Base clock overclocking has been an issue on my ASUS X370-F Gaming motherboard for quite a long time, and probably affects other ASUS boards with a separate CPU clock gen. Previously, if you set base clock anywhere above 100.6 MHz, the ryzen boost algorithm would disable itself essentially making the base clock overclock useless (since the whole point of BLCK overclocking was to take AMD's magical boosting algorithm and push it a bit further). But at least you could get that 0.6% extra performance without the BIOS becoming bugged.
> 
> Now after installing the 1.0.0.3AB update which rolled out yesterday for my board, BCLK overclocking is even more broken. If you set the value to anything above 100MHz it would disengage the boost, so even 100.6 does not work anymore.
> 
> Workaround:
> 
> 1. Go into BIOS and set base clock below 100 MHz (I used 99.8). Thankfully, this does not disengage the boost.
> 
> 2. Download the Asus AI Suite.
> 
> 3 In the overclocking menu you should be able to change the base clock to any value on the fly. Somehow the option only appears if the base clock is not 100MHz by default, which is why I had to use the 99.8 to get it to work.
> 
> 4. You need to do step 3 every time you restart. ):
> ...
> 
> 5.Profit
> 
> Using this workaround I am able to get my CPU up to 4.44 GHz max boost by setting 101.6 BCLK at +0.03v offset. It's a small improvement over stock but an improvement nonetheless. I also tried 102 which worked for a while before it bluescreened - I'll see if there's anything that can be done in the VRM settings to improve the stability, but for now I am happy with the result.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> -snip- I am still using 1.0.0.2 and on a 2700x.
> -snip-


 @mtrai Have you tried any faster memory speeds yet? I'm not guaranteed 100% stability with each boot, but it's getting more promising with 3670MHz with tighter timings and can sometimes roll that into 3740MHz being stable. I reached out to @elmor to see if there was a way to reproduce stable memory training at boot, but he said it isn't possible. He did mention we don't have the PMU Pattern Bits option that TR2 and Ryzen 3000 has. Is that something you could find in BIOS to enable for Ryzen 2000?


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> @mtrai Have you tried any faster memory speeds yet? I'm not guaranteed 100% stability with each boot, but it's getting more promising with 3670MHz with tighter timings and can sometimes roll that into 3740MHz being stable. I reached out to @elmor to see if there was a way to reproduce stable memory training at boot, but he said it isn't possible. He did mention we don't have the PMU Pattern Bits option that TR2 and Ryzen 3000 has. Is that something you could find in BIOS to enable for Ryzen 2000?


The issue is even if I could find it...we can no longer flash a modded bios that we have to hex edit with afugan it does not work with the larger bios. We can only flash modded bios that has only been touched with bcp currently. Due to how I run my PC...I have opted for 3590 ram speed with extremely tight timings.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> The issue is even if I could find it...we can no longer flash a modded bios that we have to hex edit with afugan it does not work with the larger bios. We can only flash modded bios that has only been touched with bcp currently. Due to how I run my PC...I have opted for 3590 ram speed with extremely tight timings.


Awww well that's too bad. It would have been nice to see if it could force more stable memory training. 

If you wanna waste a day playing with RAM it might be worth exploring. And if you're the type to leave your PC running for longer periods of time then it might be a safe bet for you. I power it down every night so I'm not sure I'm gonna be able to actually make use of the faster speeds since I can't realistically expect to run a memory test every time I power on. It's fun for me to play with though.


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> Awww well that's too bad. It would have been nice to see if it could force more stable memory training.
> 
> If you wanna waste a day playing with RAM it might be worth exploring. And if you're the type to leave your PC running for longer periods of time then it might be a safe bet for you. I power it down every night so I'm not sure I'm gonna be able to actually make use of the faster speeds since I can't realistically expect to run a memory test every time I power on. It's fun for me to play with though.


There is a feature on our boards we do not talk about nor do I think anyone has actually touched and used. In our dram timing options at the top is dram settings after training. You can actually input training timings on the main page and then set the dram timings for after training. I have not even personally used them. Give them a try.

For me it depends on what gpu drivers I am testing atm and how critical it is for finding bugs and issues on when I can use mostly working ram timings and speed. Currently doing some major testing of beta drivers. So at certain times I am more free to have an unstable system, but at other times I have eliminate my personal OC settings.


----------



## crakej

AISuite is working ok. Just doesn't show new voltages, but at leat they're fairly accurate when compared with my DMM. Set my fans up here as well. Ramping delay seems to be working fine.

You can just put AIOverclocker to <auto> and you will see APU Frequency appear in AISuite.

TPU section is also useful for changing/testing voltages without too many reboots.

Once you close the UI, it stops monitoring anything, so you can use other things like HWInfo safely once closed.

My keyboard is dying with keys sticking. V annoying - I don't want to spend $100 on one - can anyone recommend anything? I'm a messy person and so much dust and crap gets into my keyboard, so maybe I need to invest in one that can put up with my messiness!? Backlighting is useful to me, so long as it's not blue. Needs to be UK layout. Any recommendations?


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> There is a feature on our boards we do not talk about nor do I think anyone has actually touched and used. In our dram timing options at the top is dram settings after training. You can actually input training timings on the main page and then set the dram timings for after training. I have not even personally used them. Give them a try.
> 
> For me it depends on what gpu drivers I am testing atm and how critical it is for finding bugs and issues on when I can use mostly working ram timings and speed. Currently doing some major testing of beta drivers. So at certain times I am more free to have an unstable system, but at other times I have eliminate my personal OC settings.


I'm familiar with the after training controls and they don't do anything. I looked into it a little when I realized there is a tREFI option in there.


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> I'm familiar with the after training controls and they don't do anything. I looked into it a little when I realized there is a tREFI option in there.


I will see if I can get some further information about the after training settings. In fact, I will doing some testing on them now to see how it works. There might be another option somewhere in the bios that needs to be set that I have not paid any attention to.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> I will see if I can get some further information about the after training settings. In fact, I will doing some testing on them now to see how it works. There might be another option somewhere in the bios that needs to be set that I have not paid any attention to.


Yes, please.


----------



## nick name

@mtrai

It's results like this that keep me coming back.


----------



## nick name

What I'm working on now because 3740MHz is too hit or miss though.


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> Not gonna wade into all this but all I am gonna say is we had a huge void once @elmor left ASUS with AMD. @Silentscone was s'posed to be our goto ASUS rep, however just like his names states he is silent with AMD but active with Intel. Only recently did @shamino1978 suddenly appear with active AMD support and contact with us. It is really appreciated. Much more then I or anyone can really express. The reason I gave all the the information in the first part of the post is to give people a history lesson. Yes even Elmor went on vacations. He would generally try to let us know he was and not to expect anything.
> 
> Elmor was a big reason I was able to continue with bios mods during a certain period when no one had the newest AMIBCP that ASUS had moved to. He gave me the clues I needed in PMs to figure out what new was needed without breaking any of his NDAs. While I have yet to have any direct dealings with Shamino I am pretty sure I would meet with the same enthusiasm and passion that Elmor shared.
> 
> The big difference and not a criticism is Shamino post mainly on the official Rog forums while Elmor posted both there and here. It is all good and really does not matter as there are several of us that visit both forums daily. So we still get the info without him having to put in extra unpaid work. No Elmor was never posting here in his official work.
> 
> Well I guess I did wade into this murky pool. Perhaps the brief history lesson will help some understand the entire situation.


Appreciate the History lesson brother. I have been a passive member of this forum for years under a different name, only actually started interacting a few years ago so I don't have as much authority on the topic. But I am sure everyone appreciates the history lesson. We also really appreciate the work you do here, as I have said before, and I will probably say again, @mtrai is a Legend!


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> @mtrai
> 
> It's results like this that keep me coming back.


Hmm might just try those today and see...as I am seeing better performance with your timings I think.


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> AISuite is working ok. Just doesn't show new voltages, but at leat they're fairly accurate when compared with my DMM. Set my fans up here as well. Ramping delay seems to be working fine.
> 
> You can just put AIOverclocker to <auto> and you will see APU Frequency appear in AISuite.
> 
> TPU section is also useful for changing/testing voltages without too many reboots.
> 
> Once you close the UI, it stops monitoring anything, so you can use other things like HWInfo safely once closed.
> 
> My keyboard is dying with keys sticking. V annoying - I don't want to spend $100 on one - can anyone recommend anything? I'm a messy person and so much dust and crap gets into my keyboard, so maybe I need to invest in one that can put up with my messiness!? Backlighting is useful to me, so long as it's not blue. Needs to be UK layout. Any recommendations?


Whats your Budget. I know your not looking to spend much, but what is the most you are willing to spend, will start there and work my way back. Bit of a keyboard snob now, and am usually able to find great keyboards for good prices, I know I am in the US, but a lot of these keyboards have UK Versions being sold in the UK. My favorite keyboard by far is the Corsair k70 Lux, but thats about $150, there are definitely some damn good options for about half that out, it just all depends on the budget, but send me your budget and the area you are in, and I will look for some options online for your region, hopefully they'll be a few I have had experience with.


----------



## oreonutz

nick name said:


> What I'm working on now because 3740MHz is too hit or miss though.


Awww, I miss Ryzen Timing Checker so much...


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> @mtrai
> 
> It's results like this that keep me coming back.


Do you mind saving and sending me your bios settings as a CMO file so I can just load them in and see what happens?


----------



## lordzed83

nick name said:


> @mtrai
> 
> It's results like this that keep me coming back.


Dammmnnn that latency looks epic !!!!


----------



## lordzed83

My todays tune up FIX. I had cl14 but it olny gives in my case 0.1ns faster latency... So rolled back added juice in to my mem kits upped to 1.45 and went with tightening 2nd and 3rd tier timings. To get this stable i had to add even more juice in to VDDP also had to add juice in to pll so now on 1.82 or for love of god i could not get Ycruncher PI pass. I was passing ibt very high time after time no probs. Look at my wright and copy speeds 

Look at this ?? If i was to tune memory timings on this motherboard ( And i did on my spare build for my mate last weekend ) I would go insane took me 2 hours of rebootingh to get something descent before i gave up tweeking more cause of the stability and post !!
https://youtu.be/0ORo8Eha-ZE?t=291


----------



## mtrai

Hey y'all a newer version of AFU are now available. Give me some time to look into all this...there might still be some hope on modding the C7H for the 3000 series. I think it will able to flash the larger bios we have. However do not jump for joy as this will take some testing and will take many extra steps to get the the 3000 menus unlocked. So this will take a lot longer then just a few hours. Sorry I will not be able to work on it today as I have been drinking and I do not drink and hex edit or bios mods. And this is will be quite more complicated then any of my previous bios mods. Also it might be possible to even flash the large bios within windows without using flashback. I just found it a few minutes ago so still digesting all the info. I had already thought of the method to make bcp show the 3000 set up file but had no way to flash it...so I am hoping with the newest version of AFU we will succeed. The version of AFU we are using is from 2017 this one is from April 2018.


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> Hey y'all a newer version of AFU are now available. Give me some time to look into all this...there might still be some hope on modding the C7H for the 3000 series. I think it will able to flash the larger bios we have. However do not jump for joy as this will take some testing and will take many extra steps to get the the 3000 menus unlocked. So this will take a lot longer then just a few hours. Sorry I will not be able to work on it today as I have been drinking and I do not drink and hex edit or bios mods. And this is will be quite more complicated then any of my previous bios mods. Also it might be possible to even flash the large bios within windows without using flashback. I just found it a few minutes ago so still digesting all the info. I had already thought of the method to make bcp show the 3000 set up file but had no way to flash it...so I am hoping with the newest version of AFU we will succeed.


...Legend


----------



## nick name

lordzed83 said:


> Dammmnnn that latency looks epic !!!!


It get's into the mid to low 57ns when HWiNFO is closed and faster CPU speed. 



mtrai said:


> Do you mind saving and sending me your bios settings as a CMO file so I can just load them in and see what happens?


I can do that. How do I send it to you? Can I message it?

Also, my 3600MHz speed the timings are just a tad tighter. Heck, I can run 13-15-13-13 at 3600MHz.

Edit:
Heard back from @elmor and let me know the bad news on DRAM After Control:

They're an old relic. On pre-release Summit Ridge CPUs/AGESA timings could be altered in real-time which that menu is for. But it has since been locked, not sure why the menu is still in there. Maybe they hope it will be possible again in the future.

/Jon


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> It get's into the mid to low 57ns when HWiNFO is closed and faster CPU speed.
> 
> 
> 
> I can do that. How do I send it to you? Can I message it?
> 
> Also, my 3600MHz speed the timings are just a tad tighter. Heck, I can run 13-15-13-13 at 3600MHz.
> 
> Edit:
> Heard back from @elmor and let me know the bad news on DRAM After Control:
> 
> They're an old relic. On pre-release Summit Ridge CPUs/AGESA timings could be altered in real-time which that menu is for. But it has since been locked, not sure why the menu is still in there. Maybe they hope it will be possible again in the future. Like it ask how are you cooling and one answer is "I am not" I am thinking in my modded bios to hide them. And I think and take that with a grain of salt of how to fix the 3000 series as we already have 2501 for 1000/2000 series ryzen bios. We will know more in a few days after testing but been drinking so will not do mods.
> 
> /Jon



I just tested all ways to set them..and no they do not work..just taking up bios space. And seriously ASUS NEVER EVER CLEANS EP their bios...they leave ancient stuff. See some of my modded bios as I show some funny things they have left from like 10 years ago or more.

You will have to zip it and should be able to drop it into a post or PM. No worries...getting drunk here today the day after my 48th birthday.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> I just tested all ways to set them..and no they do not work..just taking up bios space. And seriously ASUS NEVER EVER CLEANS EP their bios...they leave ancient stuff. See some of my modded bios as I show some funny things they have left from like 10 years ago or more.
> 
> You will have to zip it and should be able to drop it into a post or PM. No worries...getting drunk here today the day after my 48th birthday.


Ayyy, happy belated. I just saved it so I will zip and ship it now. I also created a text file so you can scan through it too.


----------



## crakej

oreonutz said:


> Whats your Budget. I know your not looking to spend much, but what is the most you are willing to spend, will start there and work my way back. Bit of a keyboard snob now, and am usually able to find great keyboards for good prices, I know I am in the US, but a lot of these keyboards have UK Versions being sold in the UK. My favorite keyboard by far is the Corsair k70 Lux, but thats about $150, there are definitely some damn good options for about half that out, it just all depends on the budget, but send me your budget and the area you are in, and I will look for some options online for your region, hopefully they'll be a few I have had experience with.


Really needs to be under 100GBP. Was looking at your keyboard - it does look really nice...


----------



## crakej

mtrai said:


> ...getting drunk here today the day after my 48th birthday.


Best wishes @mtrai! :cheers: :drum: :drunken:


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Really needs to be under 100GBP. Was looking at your keyboard - it does look really nice...


I really like my Logitech G810, but it uses Logitech switches so it doesn't feel like other mech switches.


----------



## oreonutz

lordzed83 said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My todays tune up FIX. I had cl14 but it olny gives in my case 0.1ns faster latency... So rolled back added juice in to my mem kits upped to 1.45 and went with tightening 2nd and 3rd tier timings. To get this stable i had to add even more juice in to VDDP also had to add juice in to pll so now on 1.82 or for love of god i could not get Ycruncher PI pass. I was passing ibt very high time after time no probs. Look at my wright and copy speeds


Man, that is an AWESOME RESULT! So Far the best I have been able to achieve was the result below, but even though at the time it has passed Mem Test, after my attempt at getting up to 3800Mhz, when I went back down to 3600 I could no longer pass Mem Test, so Now I have had to loosen my timings, the difference is pretty drastic.

Here is my best result, this is at 3600Mhz, IF 1800Mhz, Timings (I Unfortunately had not taken any extra screen shots for this run so I am just listing the timing used from my notes): 14tcl-14trcdrd-14trcdwr-14trp-28tras-36trc-256trfc


Spoiler















And Here is My Result where I am Today. Ram-3600Mhz/IF-1800Mhz: 


Spoiler


----------



## crakej

Thanks for the keyboard suggestions.

I know I need to spend more than the 25 quid I spent on this pile of ****!

I do use Aida to see whats going on, but it doesn't truly reflect actual performance - I've had 4400MTs, 2200 MCLK and 1866 FCLK - this got me high transfer rates and I got latency down to 68ns, but peformance is a bit slower than 3733/1866 in most cases. I have a lot more work to do at high frequencies - working on 4466MTs but till getting the odd error here and there. Will post more results soon.

These are runs at 3733 and 4400.


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> Thanks for the keyboard suggestions.
> 
> I know I need to spend more than the 25 quid I spent on this pile of ****!


What is your region, I am looking up some options for you now, already found some great ones in the US, but I need to look in your region to see what is available there. I am assuming UK??? But Wanted to make sure of that.


----------



## crakej

oreonutz said:


> What is your region, I am looking up some options for you now, already found some great ones in the US, but I need to look in your region to see what is available there. I am assuming UK??? But Wanted to make sure of that.


Thanks! Yes, I'm in the UK.


This is a run from this morning at 4466. I'm so close to stability it's frustrating me! I may have to go to CL19 though. I can boot 4600MTs but it's v unstable - have yet to see if it's worth working on but mem speeds in aida were 59GB 59GB 65GB 68ns.


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> Thanks for the keyboard suggestions.
> 
> I know I need to spend more than the 25 quid I spent on this pile of ****!


OK So here we go. I am sorry everyone, I know this is not really appropriate to this thread, but its always good to help out a fellow member, and I rather not start its own thread to ask, simply because we know most of you who regularly post in here, and you guys can give good recommendations he trusts. Let me know if any of you guys have used this keyboard and can recommend or cross it off this list. But I am listing Sub 100 Quid Options, that I either Know are good choices, or look like good choices. Because I pretty much only use Cherry MX Switches myself, all these options below are going to include Keyboards with those switches. Prices Listed are the prices I found on Newegg UK at the Time of posting this, and include VAT. I hope one of these works for you @crakej



Spoiler




First off is one I know you will love, the only problem that I would have with it is that it is 10key Less, but for some that is a plus, otherwise this is the one I would nudge you towards, it can take years worth of dust and dirt, its got amazing switches, and is backlit for you.

Corsair Gaming K63 - £80.39 - https://www.newegg.com/global/uk-en...-mx-red/p/N82E16823816089?Item=9SIA85V6D43906



This one is more Gamery Style, but it has the 10 Key, and still is backlit with Cherry MX Red Switches. I have never used a G.Skill Keyboard, but we all love their Memory, and this Keyboard is the Cheapest so far on my list for you, and has great reviews!

G.Skill Ripjaws KM780R - £67.19 - https://www.newegg.com/global/uk-en...mx-red/p/N82E16823828014?Item=N82E16823828014
EDIT: Turns out the Reviews on this Keyboard are a bit mixed. It seems to mostly be software issues, which unless you need to create macros I would probably stay away from anyway, but there does seem to be some who have had quality control issues.


Here is another 10-Keyless, this one the major Difference being Cherry MX-Blue's Which I personally love even more than REDs, but they are loud with a lot of feedback, which some people don't like, but I happen to love. Also like the last few options, its Red Backlit. This one also has amazing reviews.

HyperX Alloy FPS Pro TenKeyLess - £75.59 - https://www.newegg.com/global/uk-en...x-blue/p/N82E16823455012?Item=N82E16823455012

There are a few others right around this same price point, but in your area on Newegg, with actual mechanical switches that aren't knock offs or by knock off brands, this appears to be the best selection at the lowest prices. As you go up in budget the options dramatically increase, as there are some pretty great options from Razer and Logitech, but for Sub £100 Pounds, my money would be on the Corsair, but the G.Skill and Hyper X Options aren't bad either. They all offer what you want, and with these particular switches will all last you along time. The Corsair I know for a fact will last you a long time because that exact Keyboard was my very first mechanical I ever own, and still works like it did when it was brand new, Sitting on my Girlfriends desk. Anyways, if you need to go cheaper I will start looking into used options in your area to see what I can find! Let me know what you think!

EDIT: Also I still want to see what Amazon Has to offer in your region, its just not as easy to refine your search for specific features, but will see if I can find a good option for you there.



EDIT 2:

Holy crap dude. Just searched Amazon in the UK, screw all the other options I listed above, I don't know if this price listed includes VAT or not, but dude, this is a fricking steal! This is my keyboard without the RGB for less then 100 Quid. Its still red backlit. Get IT!!!! You won't be disappointed!

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Corsair-Me...p_89:Corsair&rnid=1632651031&s=gateway&sr=8-2


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> Thanks! Yes, I'm in the UK.
> 
> 
> This is a run from this morning at 4466. I'm so close to stability it's frustrating me! I may have to go to CL19 though. I can boot 4600MTs but it's v unstable - have yet to see if it's worth working on but mem speeds in aida were 59GB 59GB 65GB 68ns.


Damn, that latency on your memory is literally just above mine now, within .5 ns!


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> Ayyy, happy belated. I just saved it so I will zip and ship it now. I also created a text file so you can scan through it too.


Damn man...just tried your settings..yeah hard on the training to post but once it does...so far everything seems fine. Gonna make a few changes now to get my CPU clocks back and let you know.


----------



## crakej

oreonutz said:


> EDIT: Also I still want to see what Amazon Has to offer in your region, its just not as easy to refine your search for specific features, but will see if I can find a good option for you there.[/s]
> 
> EDIT 2:
> 
> Holy crap dude. Just searched Amazon in the UK, screw all the other options I listed above, I don't know if this price listed includes VAT or not, but dude, this is a fricking steal! This is my keyboard without the RGB for less then 100 Quid. Its still red backlit. Get IT!!!! You won't be disappointed!
> 
> https://www.amazon.co.uk/Corsair-Me...p_89:Corsair&rnid=1632651031&s=gateway&sr=8-2


Well, you've sold me! It is for my C7H - so not that off subject - I need to know it works well with my system.

Now I can't decide which one..... you think Mk.1 is the best?

On another note, I'm just doing some tests with bios 2602 - how lovely for the motherboard to recover to safe boot SO quickly!

I found that 3800:1900 actually gets past C5 code - it tries really hard to train, but fails with Code 07. Just had to drop ODT to 30/32ohms. Not going to waste time on that though. I'm going to work on my 3733 and 4400+ profiles as I can get so much more done on this bios, then will go back to 2501.


----------



## crakej

mtrai said:


> On a different note with the AGESA 1.0.0.3 bios a reddit user seems to have figure out how to restore the correct boost and not break PBO on ASUS boards but it requires AI suite. I have not tested this since I am still using 1.0.0.2 and on a 2700x.
> 
> Anyhow here are the steps.
> 
> Set your bclk to 99.8 in the bios.
> Boot into windows.
> Go into AI suite and then you can set your bclk to what you normally use without breaking any boosts.
> 
> I can't find the post again but it was a few days ago in r/amd. /edit found the post https://old.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cnh3j7/new_asus_bios_1003ab_base_clock_overclocking_bug/
> Credit to /u/2001zhaozhao on reddit
> 
> Keep in mind you have to use AI suite to do this on each boot.
> For the bclk option not to be grey out in AI Suite you do have to set it to 99.8 in the bios.


I just tested this on 2602. Before I run AISuite, boost only goes to about 4.2xGHz.

I left AIOverclocker in the bios on auto instead of setting a BCLK or choosing DOCP. This means your FSB will show as 100, and it will show the APU Frequency in AISuite (APU frequency=BCLK). I set it to 100.2 and boosting started going up to 4.4x.

I was then able to set APU back to 100 and boost continued to work up to 4.45GHz. How very strange! So yes, this does help boost, but for me, it didn't restore it to the proper levels we get on AGESA 1002 where it's 4.5x under same conditions.


----------



## crakej

Would love to see your timings @nick name - impressive results!


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> I just tested this on 2602. Before I run AISuite, boost only goes to about 4.2xGHz.
> 
> I left AIOverclocker in the bios on auto instead of setting a BCLK or choosing DOCP. This means your FSB will show as 100, and it will show the APU Frequency in AISuite (APU frequency=BCLK). I set it to 100.2 and boosting started going up to 4.4x.
> 
> I was then able to set APU back to 100 and boost continued to work up to 4.45GHz. How very strange! So yes, this does help boost, but for me, it didn't restore it to the proper levels we get on AGESA 1002 where it's 4.5x under same conditions.


Like I said I did not test it out since I am still on 1.0.0.2 but glad to know it actually does help.



crakej said:


> Would love to see your timings @nick name - impressive results!


 I am currently using them will update with the timings in a couple of mins. Well I cannot get the timings checker to open. Using his timing .cmo setting and dialing back in my CPU overclock...here where I am with his settings. So far so good.


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> Ayyy, happy belated. I just saved it so I will zip and ship it now. I also created a text file so you can scan through it too.


Damn man your timings are rocking on my system...now I am just trying to get my CPU overclock back to where it was. Also one thing that would help you is if you set the memory clear to disabled in the bios. Then once you get it to memory train it does not do train again unless you pull the power or reset the bios.


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> Well, you've sold me! It is for my C7H - so not that off subject - I need to know it works well with my system.
> 
> Now I can't decide which one..... you think Mk.1 is the best?
> 
> On another note, I'm just doing some tests with bios 2602 - how lovely for the motherboard to recover to safe boot SO quickly!
> 
> I found that 3800:1900 actually gets past C5 code - it tries really hard to train, but fails with Code 07. Just had to drop ODT to 30/32ohms. Not going to waste time on that though. I'm going to work on my 3733 and 4400+ profiles as I can get so much more done on this bios, then will go back to 2501.


Dude Both Are awesome! I only prefer the MK 1 because it had a switch on it that would allow you to change the polling rate. This would make the Keyboard work in certain UEFI's and OS' that don't support the higher polling rates. The Mk 2 Doesn't have this switch and just runs at the higher polling rate by default. However, with the Crosshair VII this hasn't been an issue. With my old FX Sabertooth R3 board it was though. Otherwise, the MK 2 has some very subtle changes that are all pretty nice, the Corsair logo lighting up is probably the one I notice the most, although the volume rocker also has more texture and steps to it then the MK1 did. Other than those small changes, its an identical keyboard, and you wouldn't really be losing out by going with the Mk 1.

I am going to have to run some tests with 2602. I still haven't gotten boost to work properly for me in any of the UEFI's, but I am wondering if its because I am stubborn and haven't upgraded from Windows 10 1809 yet...


----------



## nick name

@mtrai Check that Windows Defender isn't flagging RTC. It did on mine and I had to allow it to run. 

And thanks for the tip on Memory Clear. I was waiting until I found a stable training to set it. 

I think I have a 99.9% stable setup for 3673Mhz. I tested a run yesterday with Karhu while watering the lawn.


----------



## crakej

Nice one!

It's good to see latency continuing to fall!


----------



## oreonutz

So when @crakej mentioned that he had a better Ram Overclocking experience on 2602, and that safe boot actually worked, I thought I should give it a try. 2602 is the only UEFI I haven't loaded yet. The reason was all the noted Performance Issues, but when I searched around a bit to see the specific issues, they all mostly seemed to be Boost Related. Since Boost is broken for me completely anyway, and I manually OC, I decided what the hell, let me give it a shot.

Before on 2501, I COULD NOT for the Life of me get 3800mhz Ram OR 1900Mhz IF to boot. Even when I set the ram to 2133Mhz auto Timings and 1900Mhz Infinity fabric, I STILL couldn't post. The ONE time I was able to get a post I had to set the damn SOCv to something absurd like 1.2v, and that caused stuttering issues with just moving the mouse on the desktop.

So far, my experience has been 1000 times better on 2602. I first got 3800Mhz Ram 1900Mhz IF to boot with the Ram timings all on auto. SOCv 1.13, DRAMv 1.47, and this is what that looked like in AIDA:



Spoiler















As you can see it had me boot to absurdly loose timings, but at least it actually boot. I was happy as hell. Now all I had to do was tighten those timings. I still am not done, I just couldn't contain my enthusiasm, I had to come post about it here. I still have almost all the tertiary timings set to auto, and have a lot of experimenting to do today to see how low I can go. But after about 20 successful Safe Boots, without me having to actually get up and hit the Clear CMOS Button, I was able to finally tighten the timings somewhat, and achieve a pretty noticeable uptick in both CPU and Memory Performance. 

Here is a CB Run I took late last night with the exact same All Core OC, the only changes are Ram Speed, IF Clock, and Timings.

3600Mhz CL14:


Spoiler























Now Here is the new Changes I made today. Ram at 3800Mhz - IF at 1900Mhz


Spoiler















I am finally happy to join the 3800Mhz Ram Party! Now if only I can figure out how to get the Latency as low as you guys! I still have to Mem Test, so know Idea if I am error Free or not, but the fact that Windows is working and seems to be faster, is better then where I was before! More Updates to Come!


----------



## mtrai

oreonutz said:


> So when @crakej mentioned that he had a better Ram Overclocking experience on 2602, and that safe boot actually worked, I thought I should give it a try. 2602 is the only UEFI I haven't loaded yet. The reason was all the noted Performance Issues, but when I searched around a bit to see the specific issues, they all mostly seemed to be Boost Related. Since Boost is broken for me completely anyway, and I manually OC, I decided what the hell, let me give it a shot.
> 
> Before on 2501, I COULD NOT for the Life of me get 3800mhz Ram OR 1900Mhz IF to boot. Even when I set the ram to 2133Mhz auto Timings and 1900Mhz Infinity fabric, I STILL couldn't post. The ONE time I was able to get a post I had to set the damn SOCv to something absurd like 1.2v, and that caused stuttering issues with just moving the mouse on the desktop.
> 
> So far, my experience has been 1000 times better on 2602. I first got 3800Mhz Ram 1900Mhz IF to boot with the Ram timings all on auto. SOCv 1.13, DRAMv 1.47, and this is what that looked like in AIDA:
> 
> As you can see it had me boot to absurdly loose timings, but at least it actually boot. I was happy as hell. Now all I had to do was tighten those timings. I still am not done, I just couldn't contain my enthusiasm, I had to come post about it here. I still have almost all the tertiary timings set to auto, and have a lot of experimenting to do today to see how low I can go. But after about 20 successful Safe Boots, without me having to actually get up and hit the Clear CMOS Button, I was able to finally tighten the timings somewhat, and achieve a pretty noticeable uptick in both CPU and Memory Performance.
> 
> Here is a CB Run I took late last night with the exact same All Core OC, the only changes are Ram Speed, IF Clock, and Timings.
> 
> 3600Mhz CL14:
> 
> Now Here is the new Changes I made today. Ram at 3800Mhz - IF at 1900Mhz
> 
> I am finally happy to join the 3800Mhz Ram Party! Now if only I can figure out how to get the Latency as low as you guys! I still have to Mem Test, so know Idea if I am error Free or not, but the fact that Windows is working and seems to be faster, is better then where I was before! More Updates to Come!


Grats on getting there. I Rght now I have given up on getting 3700+ stable on my poor abused 2700X. While I can get into windows and all it is just really hard on the CPUs IMC and I had to raise my core voltage to much to compensate as well as the dram voltage. The dram voltage at 1.71 did not bother me since my ram temps still hardly break the low 30 degrees even at that voltage. Right now I am working on my 5700 XT clocks again and of course having Vodka and soda.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> Grats on getting there. I Rght now I have given up on getting 3700+ stable on my poor abused 2700X. While I can get into windows and all it is just really hard on the CPUs IMC and I had to raise my core voltage to much to compensate as well as the dram voltage. The dram voltage at 1.71 did not bother me since my ram temps still hardly break the low 30 degrees even at that voltage. Right now I am working on my 5700 XT clocks again and of course having Vodka and soda.


Oh, wow. I've haven't ventured anywhere close to that with my voltage while attempting to get 3740MHz stable.


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> Grats on getting there. I Rght now I have given up on getting 3700+ stable on my poor abused 2700X. While I can get into windows and all it is just really hard on the CPUs IMC and I had to raise my core voltage to much to compensate as well as the dram voltage. The dram voltage at 1.71 did not bother me since my ram temps still hardly break the low 30 degrees even at that voltage. Right now I am working on my 5700 XT clocks again and of course having Vodka and soda.


Hell yeah, Gotta Continue to Celebrate that birthday week while you can!

Yeah I pushed up to 1.8v into my Poor Ram last time trying to get 3800Mhz Stable. I think that might have slightly harmed one of the ICs though, I am not 100 Percent positive on that because the Temps on the Ram never got above 47c, but when I gave up and went back to my 3600Mhz, I could no longer pass Mem Test, so IDK. But I do know that the 1.52v I thought I needed to run 3600Mhz Stable, it turned out I just needed to up my PLL Voltage just a hair, and then I was able to bring down both my SOCv to 1.13v (from 1.16v) and my DRAM Voltage to 1.46v. So Might want to try manually keying in your PLL Voltage and then just go up a tick, so 1.81 instead of the default 1.8v, it might help. That and also keying in the VREF voltage and VTTDDR Voltages seem to help too.

Have fun my friend! Gotta run to a Job on my day off, one of my A list clients just called, have to get her damn Internet back up at her house, should be a quick couple Hundred though. See you all in a few hours!


----------



## mtrai

oreonutz said:


> Hell yeah, Gotta Continue to Celebrate that birthday week while you can!
> 
> Yeah I pushed up to 1.8v into my Poor Ram last time trying to get 3800Mhz Stable. I think that might have slightly harmed one of the ICs though, I am not 100 Percent positive on that because the Temps on the Ram never got above 47c, but when I gave up and went back to my 3600Mhz, I could no longer pass Mem Test, so IDK. But I do know that the 1.52v I thought I needed to run 3600Mhz Stable, it turned out I just needed to up my PLL Voltage just a hair, and then I was able to bring down both my SOCv to 1.13v (from 1.16v) and my DRAM Voltage to 1.46v. So Might want to try manually keying in your PLL Voltage and then just go up a tick, so 1.81 instead of the default 1.8v, it might help. That and also keying in the VREF voltage and VTTDDR Voltages seem to help too.
> 
> Have fun my friend! Gotta run to a Job on my day off, one of my A list clients just called, have to get her damn Internet back up at her house, should be a quick couple Hundred though. See you all in a few hours!


GD it some many variables we have to account for. Though I switched back to working with my navi GPU 5700 XT ref and public drivers with mods Artic IV without the rear heatsink but stock back plate with pads for every place that would get hot and fans blowing on using teh stock back plate. I am the first I think to break 29k graphics on it.

https://i.imgur.com/0zKWdMG.jpg


----------



## jfrob75

oreonutz said:


> So when @crakej mentioned that he had a better Ram Overclocking experience on 2602, and that safe boot actually worked, I thought I should give it a try. 2602 is the only UEFI I haven't loaded yet. The reason was all the noted Performance Issues, but when I searched around a bit to see the specific issues, they all mostly seemed to be Boost Related. Since Boost is broken for me completely anyway, and I manually OC, I decided what the hell, let me give it a shot.
> 
> Before on 2501, I COULD NOT for the Life of me get 3800mhz Ram OR 1900Mhz IF to boot. Even when I set the ram to 2133Mhz auto Timings and 1900Mhz Infinity fabric, I STILL couldn't post. The ONE time I was able to get a post I had to set the damn SOCv to something absurd like 1.2v, and that caused stuttering issues with just moving the mouse on the desktop.
> 
> So far, my experience has been 1000 times better on 2602. I first got 3800Mhz Ram 1900Mhz IF to boot with the Ram timings all on auto. SOCv 1.13, DRAMv 1.47, and this is what that looked like in AIDA:
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As you can see it had me boot to absurdly loose timings, but at least it actually boot. I was happy as hell. Now all I had to do was tighten those timings. I still am not done, I just couldn't contain my enthusiasm, I had to come post about it here. I still have almost all the tertiary timings set to auto, and have a lot of experimenting to do today to see how low I can go. But after about 20 successful Safe Boots, without me having to actually get up and hit the Clear CMOS Button, I was able to finally tighten the timings somewhat, and achieve a pretty noticeable uptick in both CPU and Memory Performance.
> 
> Here is a CB Run I took late last night with the exact same All Core OC, the only changes are Ram Speed, IF Clock, and Timings.
> 
> 3600Mhz CL14:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now Here is the new Changes I made today. Ram at 3800Mhz - IF at 1900Mhz
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am finally happy to join the 3800Mhz Ram Party! Now if only I can figure out how to get the Latency as low as you guys! I still have to Mem Test, so know Idea if I am error Free or not, but the fact that Windows is working and seems to be faster, is better then where I was before! More Updates to Come!


Besides the issue with boosting with BIOS 2602 have you noticed any other issues?


----------



## AvengedRobix

i love 2602 ram side... 3800 gear off 1:1... 4000 cl15 1:2 with my 3600cl16 kit under 1.50V and NO c5 error and cmos button =) =)


----------



## crakej

oreonutz said:


> So when [MENTION=534648]
> 
> I am finally happy to join the 3800Mhz Ram Party! Now if only I can figure out how to get the Latency as low as you guys! I still have to Mem Test, so know Idea if I am error Free or not, but the fact that Windows is working and seems to be faster, is better then where I was before! More Updates to Come!


Well done! I still can't do it, but glad you got there!


----------



## nick name

When I was on 2602 I saw dramatic swings in RAM voltage.


----------



## crakej

jfrob75 said:


> Besides the issue with boosting with BIOS 2602 have you noticed any other issues?


I only ran it for 2 days last time. If you're trying to OC your ram, it can be useful as safe boot works and resets really quickly from bad OC.

It has lower performance overall than 1002 based bios. It also trains nearly every time you start up meaning slow start-up. It's just not ready for everyday use. Sleep is broken (though think it's broken in 2501 as well)

If you're experienced with bios settings and OCing then it might be worth trying out, but most have gone back to 2501 for one reason or another. There should be another bios out this week, though it shares similar boost problems, and removes PCIE 4.0 if that's important to you. Apparently AMD is more interested in removing (working) features than fixing their buggy bios code.


----------



## HalongPort

crakej said:


> There should be another bios out this week, though it shares similar boost problems, and removes PCIE 4.0 if that's important to you. Apparently AMD is more interested in removing (working) features than fixing their buggy bios code.


AMD isn't the old AMD anymore as Lisu Su said some time ago.
That's why X570 boards are more expensive and why AMD tries pushing those.

Anyway, since PCIe 4.0 is apparently working one should be able to add this or carry this feature over to new BIOS versions by modding it?


----------



## crakej

HalongPort said:


> AMD isn't the old AMD anymore as Lisu Su said some time ago.
> That's why X570 boards are more expensive and why AMD tries pushing those.
> 
> Anyway, since PCIe 4.0 is apparently working one should be able to add this or carry this feature over to new BIOS versions by modding it?


Not so easy - AMD only provides binaries to motherboard vendors - so will be quite a project to identify the code and restore it - and all for product segmentation and to drive us to upgrade our boards. Remember when they told us we wouldn't need to upgrade our boards all the time as the socket would'nt change for years? - while true, just about everything else changes! I didn't really care until I realised what they were doing.

Anyway, hopefully AGESA 1004 will be fit for purpose, and not too far away in the future. Maybe it will actually be ready for launch?..... sorry, I mean 2 months after launch...

AGESA 1002 is fairly reliable once you work out how to OC it without getting code C5 or 07. For those not OCing, it's def the one (2501) to choose right now.


----------



## nick name

I didn't realize the first time I tried 2602 how empty the AMD CBS menu is in this BIOS. Is that the same for Ryzen 3000?


----------



## crakej

Got new keyboard coming - Corsair K70 RGB MK.2 Mechanical Gaming Keyboard (Cherry MX Red Switches).

Do you have to use the iCUE software with it? Just wary of this software and how it interacts with our boards in the past. I'm not interested in RGB patterns so would prefer not to use it, or Aura, I just want to choose a colour and go. Another system mmonitoring tool, that's just what I need - not!


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I didn't realize the first time I tried 2602 how empty the AMD CBS menu is in this BIOS. Is that the same for Ryzen 3000?


Yes, they've removed lots of settings - not ones we use a lot to be fair, but they're gone.


----------



## nick name

@mtrai Bahhhh I was so close! The error came right before (I mean right before) the test finished. What a tease.


----------



## nick name

Sigh. It would have been glorious.


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> GD it some many variables we have to account for. Though I switched back to working with my navi GPU 5700 XT ref and public drivers with mods Artic IV without the rear heatsink but stock back plate with pads for every place that would get hot and fans blowing on using teh stock back plate. I am the first I think to break 29k graphics on it.
> 
> https://i.imgur.com/0zKWdMG.jpg


Dude, Congrats, that is Awesome! Killing it with the Overclocks!!!



jfrob75 said:


> Besides the issue with boosting with BIOS 2602 have you noticed any other issues?


No Not at all So far. I don't use Boost at all, so I have no idea how bad it is, but judging from what everyone else says, apparently its pretty busted. 

However, my experience has been solid. Its just as stable as before, I can actually hit 3800 Ram, 1900 IF (Something I couldn't do before), and Safe Boot ACTUALLY WORKS! So all you guys having those messed up issues with C5 and C9 at boot, you can just sit back and wait for it to post (If that even happens at all). For me I was hitting C9 errors, but that was when I was trying to set incredibly tight timings, and instead of just having on c9, it would beep at me (I have a CMOS Speaker Plugged in) 3 times, then reboot and retry. Most likely if you had Stable Memory before it will just work on the first retry. But for me It would retry automatically 3 times, and on the 4th reboot it would just automatically boot into safe mode, all you settings will be there in the UEFI, your memory just boots this one time at 2133Mhz, so if you set timings that just plain wont work like I did, you can go in and change just a few timings, save and reset and try again, all without having to do the annoying constant Clear CMOS and then Load your profile from a USB and start again. So in this way it is fricking WAY BETTER!

But no, I haven't noticed any adverse effects. My scores all increased, but thats because of the increase in memory speed, I have not done a one to one comparison with the Ram speed the same, but I definitely have not noticed any performance penalties, in fact it seems to boot a bit quicker.

I've only been with it for a day though, so If I come across anything I will certainly note it here!


----------



## nick name

oreonutz said:


> -snip-
> 
> when I was trying to set incredibly tight timings
> 
> -snip-



How tight?


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> Well done! I still can't do it, but glad you got there!


Thank You Brother I really appreciate it. I really thought that my IF Clock just couldn't go higher, but it turns out I was wrong, in my case if it wasn't the UEFI then it had to be manually setting all the Voltages, includding PLL (And Bringing up the PLL just a bit), VTTDDR, VDDG, and VDDP. Not sure what the hell of those did it for me, but even on the New UEFI with just the manual primary timings in I couldn't boot, I set all those and then slightly loosened my Primarys, and all the sudden she booted right up, so yeah it bit weird, but I plan on getting down to the bottom of it by changing setting by setting until I lose stability, then I will be able to be more confident in what exactly was causing me not to post.



nick name said:


> When I was on 2602 I saw dramatic swings in RAM voltage.


Now That is interesting. My Voltage has been exactly Rock Steady where I set it. That said, I completely Max out my VRM in the Digi+ Power Settings. So on The Ram VRM I set it to Extreme, 130%, Manual Switching Frequency, 600Khz, and I think thats it, but basically the most extreme of each, especially setting the Frequency Setting as High as it will go will help with Vdroop, the only draw back is a slight loss in VRM Efficiency and a tiny bit more heat, but in a well ventilated case thats not an issue.



nick name said:


> I didn't realize the first time I tried 2602 how empty the AMD CBS menu is in this BIOS. Is that the same for Ryzen 3000?


Yes, they trimmed a lot of stuff from it in 2602. There is still a fair bit there, but both the Overclocking and the CBS they trimmed down a fair bit.



crakej said:


> Got new keyboard coming - Corsair K70 RGB MK.2 Mechanical Gaming Keyboard (Cherry MX Red Switches).
> 
> Do you have to use the iCUE software with it? Just wary of this software and how it interacts with our boards in the past. I'm not interested in RGB patterns so would prefer not to use it, or Aura, I just want to choose a color and go. Another system monitoring tool, that's just what I need - not!


Thats my Keyboard baby! You will LOVE IT!!! I haven't had to buy another keyboard since! I think you will find it lives up to your standard, it can take a beating and in pretty easy to clean.

In regards to Icue, I forgot to mention one of the other really cool features of the mk2 Version. So there are 3 RGB Profiles on board. They all do Rainbow Stuff in different patterns. In order to customize your RGB Layout you do need iCue, but there is no Other reason to use iCue, and I personally HATE icue, not only is it buggy as **** and crashes all the time, but it also loves to take up resources for no god damn reason!

Anyways, this is all you have to do. (I Did this in a Virtual Machine using VMware Workstation, and just passed the Keyboard through to the VM, but you can also just install and then uninstall afterwards.) Install iCue, open it, take the few hours to painstakingly learn the Program and set up your RGB Lighting to your liking. Once you have it perfect, and you know you will not want to change it, save your profile to one of the Onboard Profiles. You have 3 Slots, you will have to overwrite one of them, I just over write the first profile on the keyboard so your profile is the default every single time the Keyboard comes on after having no power. Once the Profile is saved to the Keyboard, there is no longer any need what so ever for iCue, you can uninstall that stupid son of a ***** using the free version of Revo Uninstaller so you get rid of all the crap it leaves in the registry with it. Just keep the Install file in case you ever want to make a change. I have a VM dedicated just to making edits to my RGB, so if you are crafty with VM's you can do the same.

Hope this helps, can't wait to hear your impressions!!!



nick name said:


> How tight?


I think I was trying for 14 -14 - 15- 14 34- 42 294 or something ridiculous like that. Then I kept loosening it up from there, finally I booted with it at 16 17 17 17 36 58 364, but I also think setting those voltages manually might have something to do with me booting so I am going to investigate that as soon as I get a chance.


----------



## jfrob75

Thanks for the reply. I am also manually OC to 4.325 all cores with my memory at 3733. The one time I tried 3800 it would not post, probably because vboot was at 1.2. It was a PIA to recover from that so I never tried again. Sounds like 2602 might just be the ticket. I do encounter the occasional stop on code 7A, no idea why, but a reset and usually posts. Also occasionally after it has completed POST it drops or does not detect the keyboard. A reset resolves that issue. If I can get my 2933MHz memory to 3800 that would be awsome.


----------



## thegr8anand

I have been using 2501 and yes it boosts about 100mhz more than 2602. But the cold boot C5 issue is a pain as i have to clear cmos everytime and restore bios. Since i started with 2602 first was able to oc to 3733 from 3200 and it works fine in 2501. 



I would like to know if someone with 3200mhz xmp has been able to oc to 3800mhz on C7H.


----------



## crakej

Spoiler






oreonutz said:


> Thats my Keyboard baby! You will LOVE IT!!! I haven't had to buy another keyboard since! I think you will find it lives up to your standard, it can take a beating and in pretty easy to clean.
> 
> In regards to Icue, I forgot to mention one of the other really cool features of the mk2 Version. So there are 3 RGB Profiles on board. They all do Rainbow Stuff in different patterns. In order to customize your RGB Layout you do need iCue, but there is no Other reason to use iCue, and I personally HATE icue, not only is it buggy as **** and crashes all the time, but it also loves to take up resources for no god damn reason!
> 
> Anyways, this is all you have to do. (I Did this in a Virtual Machine using VMware Workstation, and just passed the Keyboard through to the VM, but you can also just install and then uninstall afterwards.) Install iCue, open it, take the few hours to painstakingly learn the Program and set up your RGB Lighting to your liking. Once you have it perfect, and you know you will not want to change it, save your profile to one of the Onboard Profiles. You have 3 Slots, you will have to overwrite one of them, I just over write the first profile on the keyboard so your profile is the default every single time the Keyboard comes on after having no power. Once the Profile is saved to the Keyboard, there is no longer any need what so ever for iCue, you can uninstall that stupid son of a ***** using the free version of Revo Uninstaller so you get rid of all the crap it leaves in the registry with it. Just keep the Install file in case you ever want to make a change. I have a VM dedicated just to making edits to my RGB, so if you are crafty with VM's you can do the same.
> 
> Hope this helps, can't wait to hear your impressions!!!






That is helpful, yes! Like I say, not too bothered by RGB effects - I'll prob just choose a couple of colours that make the keyboard easiest to see! A shame it doesn't work in conjunction with my system lighting, but I can live with that too. I'll just be happy to not have to check every line I type for missing characters. Only thing I don't like is putting shifted chars UNDER the non shifted, but I'm sure I'll get used to it, al la Commodore 

I must admit I'm quite intrigued by my board attempting to run 3800 where before it would not - it attempts training 3 times then fails with code 07 - I used to just get an instant C5, so not sure what's going on besides my using ODT=30ohms. I'm going to work on my 3733 profile a bit more today - it's performing pretty much as well as others' 3800 profiles....

I'll be interested to see your testing on this - which setting allowed you to do it? Did you actually try 3800 on 2501?


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> @mtrai Bahhhh I was so close! The error came right before (I mean right before) the test finished. What a tease.


Well your timings still rock man...they are far far better then I had gotten. So there is that. They still are blazing fast. Try it with Command rate set to 2t I am not seeing a real performance lose over our 1.5t.

Here is 3650 2t


----------



## oreonutz

jfrob75 said:


> Thanks for the reply. I am also manually OC to 4.325 all cores with my memory at 3733. The one time I tried 3800 it would not post, probably because vboot was at 1.2. It was a PIA to recover from that so I never tried again. Sounds like 2602 might just be the ticket. I do encounter the occasional stop on code 7A, no idea why, but a reset and usually posts. Also occasionally after it has completed POST it drops or does not detect the keyboard. A reset resolves that issue. If I can get my 2933MHz memory to 3800 that would be awsome.


Most likely your issue was Vboot. You may actually still be encountering a Vboot issue, both of the issues you are experiencing at boot (some times getting code 7a and then sometimes not having a keyboard detect) stopped for me the minute I set my Vboot to 1.45v. I bet you can get your memory there it just might take a bit of voltage to do it. Good Luck my friend!

Also, on 2501, just be sure to put a USB Flash Drive in your system, and just leave it there, then before attempting a Memory OC, or really any time you are about to make a major change, in the UEFI, go to Tools/Asus Profile and Save your Current Profile to your USB by selecting it, hitting "F2" and then naming it. As long as you do that before attempting a memory OC, all you have to do when your board decides to get stuck in a boot loop is hit the Clear CMOS button on the back of the board, then boot into the UEFI, go straight back to ASUS Profile and load your profile from the USB. That is an invaluable tool with 2501 and Previous UEFI's. Still a PIA, but if you haven't been doing that, then I can imagine why you haven't tried to OC further. With me, I am just Lazy, My Computer sits about 8 Feet away from where I do, and having to get up out my recliner every 4 Minutes to hit that damn Clear CMOS button was pissing me off, for that very reason 2602 has been a god send, lol.



thegr8anand said:


> I have been using 2501 and yes it boosts about 100mhz more than 2602. But the cold boot C5 issue is a pain as i have to clear cmos everytime and restore bios. Since i started with 2602 first was able to oc to 3733 from 3200 and it works fine in 2501.
> 
> I would like to know if someone with 3200mhz xmp has been able to oc to 3800mhz on C7H.


So yes, I have 4x8GB Kit of Flare X 3200Mhz CL14 Ram. And Using that exact Ram I am not running at 3800Mhz CL16 and will be tightening it up even further from there. There are also quite a few others on this forums that have done it since day 1.




crakej said:


> That is helpful, yes! Like I say, not too bothered by RGB effects - I'll prob just choose a couple of colours that make the keyboard easiest to see! A shame it doesn't work in conjunction with my system lighting, but I can live with that too. I'll just be happy to not have to check every line I type for missing characters. Only thing I don't like is putting shifted chars UNDER the non shifted, but I'm sure I'll get used to it, al la Commodore
> 
> I must admit I'm quite intrigued by my board attempting to run 3800 where before it would not - it attempts training 3 times then fails with code 07 - I used to just get an instant C5, so not sure what's going on besides my using ODT=30ohms. I'm going to work on my 3733 profile a bit more today - it's performing pretty much as well as others' 3800 profiles....
> 
> I'll be interested to see your testing on this - which setting allowed you to do it? Did you actually try 3800 on 2501?


What do you mean by putting Shifted Characters next to non Shifted? I'm sure what you mean is obvious, I am just dumb sometimes.

You have it attempting on 2501???? That is interesting.

Yeah your 3733 Profile is awesome. I may be dropping back down at some point to do testing between each. I unfortunately ended up having to work all night again, so haven't been able to get back to my testing, but am settings some time aside to get back to it tomorrow night, may do a little tonight too, just don't know how far I will get. Hopefully will have some answers for us soon!


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> Well your timings still rock man...they are far far better then I had gotten. So there is that. They still are blazing fast. Try it with Command rate set to 2t I am not seeing a real performance lose over our 1.5t.
> 
> Here is 3650 2t


Damn that latency is amazing!!!!!


----------



## thegr8anand

crakej said:


> That is helpful, yes! Like I say, not too bothered by RGB effects - I'll prob just choose a couple of colours that make the keyboard easiest to see! A shame it doesn't work in conjunction with my system lighting, but I can live with that too. I'll just be happy to not have to check every line I type for missing characters. Only thing I don't like is putting shifted chars UNDER the non shifted, but I'm sure I'll get used to it, al la Commodore
> 
> I must admit I'm quite intrigued by my board attempting to run 3800 where before it would not - it attempts training 3 times then fails with code 07 - I used to just get an instant C5, so not sure what's going on besides my using ODT=30ohms. I'm going to work on my 3733 profile a bit more today - it's performing pretty much as well as others' 3800 profiles....
> 
> I'll be interested to see your testing on this - which setting allowed you to do it? Did you actually try 3800 on 2501?



I synced Aura and Icue with a software JacknetRGB Sync it is compatible with other software too. But i found out using too much cpu to my liking and uninstalled it. When i want to show-off i can sync it but not great for daily usage.


----------



## MrPhilo

Is it worth it going to 2602 from 2501 if I have no problem with my 3800 ram oc? I manually OC my CPU anyways so boost isn't a problem.

I mean if the latency is better on 2602 I might try it, or if I can lower voltage that be a bonus too.


----------



## crakej

thegr8anand said:


> I synced Aura and Icue with a software JacknetRGB Sync it is compatible with other software too. But i found out using too much cpu to my liking and uninstalled it. When i want to show-off i can sync it but not great for daily usage.


Interesting - seems like a lot of bother lol. It's a shame they don't all use the same standard for RGB lighting - I'm sure it will come son though.

Thanks for sharing.


----------



## Xenozx

hi all, so i get the best performance by upping my bclk to 104, and leaving everything else on auto for the most part. i have -0.100 offset for voltage set in bios. the issue is when i change the BCLK, there is no way to link the fabric clock / FSB right? Like if your running 3200mhz memory, you want 1600mhz fclk and that will give you the lowest latency? Well when you change the bclk, the memory speed goes that same 04 bclk off but the fabric clock options stay the same so there now is no way to do exactly 2:1. this causes my memory latency to be really high 70ns+ is there anyway to fix this? performance wise at 104bclk this thing rocks, and kills all the reviews ive seen, and seems to keep pbo and stuff in place, and still downclocks and sleeps cores as needed.

when using a customer non 100 BCLK, is it possible, to link the infinty fabric clock to 1:2 so you dont get hit with the huge latency penalty?


----------



## crakej

Xenozx said:


> hi all, so i get the best performance by upping my bclk to 104, and leaving everything else on auto for the most part. i have -0.100 offset for voltage set in bios. the issue is when i change the BCLK, there is no way to link the fabric clock / FSB right? Like if your running 3200mhz memory, you want 1600mhz fclk and that will give you the lowest latency? Well when you change the bclk, the memory speed goes that same 04 bclk off but the fabric clock options stay the same so there now is no way to do exactly 2:1. this causes my memory latency to be really high 70ns+ is there anyway to fix this? performance wise at 104bclk this thing rocks, and kills all the reviews ive seen, and seems to keep pbo and stuff in place, and still downclocks and sleeps cores as needed.
> 
> when using a customer non 100 BCLK, is it possible, to link the infinty fabric clock to 1:2 so you dont get hit with the huge latency penalty?


I believe that if you set your mem speed, then fabric to match, then do your BCLK OC the link should remain as 1:1 - there are people who have 3800:1900FCLK running by setting mem at 3733, FCLK 1866, then upping BCLK to 101.8 which will get you 3800:1900. Doesn't work for everyone though.


----------



## crakej

MrPhilo said:


> Is it worth it going to 2602 from 2501 if I have no problem with my 3800 ram oc? I manually OC my CPU anyways so boost isn't a problem.
> 
> I mean if the latency is better on 2602 I might try it, or if I can lower voltage that be a bonus too.


It's worth giving it a go. I found my ideal ram OC on it then moved back to 2501 where the timings worked well. just keep an eye on your voltages.


----------



## thegr8anand

Is it possible to tighten these timings more?


----------



## nick name

@mtrai I've come to find that at those higher speeds (3740MHz) it doesn't matter if I loosen timings or alter voltages. It's either stable or not so I believe it's all down to memory training and the "mood" the IMC is in at the time. At this point I'm just trying to find a way to get my IMC in the "mood" in a repeatable manner. 

But that tight 3740MHz profile I was running was putting up some nice numbers. 59GB Read 58GB Write 55GB Copy and Latency in the high 56ns to low 57ns. I can't tell if there is any difference between 2501 and 2602 or if I would have seen the same results had I attempted running that setup on 2501.


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> @mtrai I've come to find that at those higher speeds (3740MHz) it doesn't matter if I loosen timings or alter voltages. It's either stable or not so I believe it's all down to memory training and the "mood" the IMC is at the time. At this point I'm just trying to find a way to get my IMC in the "mood" in a repeatable manner.
> 
> But that tight 3740MHz profile I was running was putting up some nice numbers. 59GB Read 58GB Write 55GB Copy and Latency in the high 56ns to low 57ns. I can't tell if there is any difference between 2501 and 2602 or if I would have seen the same results had I attempted running that setup on 2501.


That is a very good way to put...when the ram and IMC are in the right "mood" I am having the same issue with it at 3733 but not 3650.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> That is a very good way to put...when the ram and IMC are in the right "mood" I am having the same issue with it at 3733 but not 3650.


So you're getting 3650 stable? Because I feel much more confident about 3670 on my end.

If it were winter then I'd just leave the PC on once I had a solid memory training result(?). Is there a term for that?


----------



## nick name

@mtrai Did you get your RTC sorted?


----------



## lordzed83

thegr8anand said:


> Is it possible to tighten these timings more?


You could try find setting with Geardown OFf


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> So you're getting 3650 stable? Because I feel much more confident about 3670 on my end.
> 
> If it were winter then I'd just leave the PC on once I had a solid memory training result(?). Is there a term for that?


Well it does not get "moody" on boot ups and q-code F9 at 3650 for me.


----------



## kmellz

thegr8anand said:


> Is it possible to tighten these timings more?


You might actually have too tight timings, your latency seems very high for how low they are! The Mb/s seems fine though. But yeah, GD off is pretty much the only thing you can do there.


----------



## jfrob75

I took the plunge this morning and moved to bios 2602. So far it does seem to be an improvement, at least how it deals with memory overclocking, than 2501. I was able to boot into windows twice at 3800 but it was not close to being stable. Eventually went back to 3733. Here are my results @3733. Noticed on this bios that the 2 load line calibrations selection that were present in 2501 are not present in 2602. It is a nuisance that the bios goes thru what I call a soft power down during a restart from windows. Is this the memory training others were referencing?


----------



## thegr8anand

lordzed83 said:


> You could try find setting with Geardown OFf



Doesn't boot with GD off.




kmellz said:


> You might actually have too tight timings, your latency seems very high for how low they are! The Mb/s seems fine though. But yeah, GD off is pretty much the only thing you can do there.



These timings give the most consistent results, earlier with loosened timings the MB/s used to fluctuate a lot. Latency also went down from 65-66ns to below 65ns. I guess nothing can be done with 3800mhz not working for me. Pretty happy with this as the pc does feel just a little bit snappier than before.


----------



## thegr8anand

jfrob75 said:


> I took the plunge this morning and moved to bios 2602. So far it does seem to be an improvement, at least how it deals with memory overclocking, than 2501. I was able to boot into windows twice at 3800 but it was not close to being stable. Eventually went back to 3733. Here are my results @3733. Noticed on this bios that the 2 load line calibrations selection that were present in 2501 are not present in 2602. It is a nuisance that the bios goes thru what I call a soft power down during a restart from windows. Is this the memory training others were referencing?



Yeah 2602 is slow to boot. 2501 has its issues with cold boot C5 having to use clear cmos.


----------



## harderthanfire

Just an FYI but this is in the patch notes for the next major windows update (currently on the insiders slow ring):


"A CPU may have multiple “favored” cores (logical processors of the highest available scheduling class). To provide better performance and reliability, we have implemented a rotation policy that distributes work more fairly among these favored cores."


Looks like more improvements to handle CPUs like the 3900X - should hopefully help gain performance in general usage.


To me this makes me want to stick with per CCX overclocks or even PBO rather than straight all core as that extra 100mhz on a couple of cores will make a big difference if Windows actually sticks work on those more often!


----------



## oreonutz

MrPhilo said:


> Is it worth it going to 2602 from 2501 if I have no problem with my 3800 ram oc? I manually OC my CPU anyways so boost isn't a problem.
> 
> I mean if the latency is better on 2602 I might try it, or if I can lower voltage that be a bonus too.


I am sorry, I don't have comparable numbers yet to tell you if you would get lower latency. If you already have a great Memory OC, then the only benefit I could see is having Safe Boot work again. But if you aren't experiencing issues where you are having to constantly Clear CMOS, then I am not sure what other benefit you might see. I can tell you I wasn't able to lower my core voltage at all...



crakej said:


> Interesting - seems like a lot of bother lol. It's a shame they don't all use the same standard for RGB lighting - I'm sure it will come son though.
> 
> Thanks for sharing.


Actually, its a pain in the ass, but it is VERY possible to control all your lighting with the same program that connects to your board through cables. So this won't work to Control your Keyboard, Or Mice, that connect over USB, but this will work for Fans and Case Lighting. My favorite RGB Lighting Program is AURA Sync, because you can set it, then close the program, it does have a service that it runs in the background that is a pain in the ass because certain games flag it as a cheat service now, but I like the effects best with it. However, I have used this same method to hook up all my RGB to my Corsair Commander Pro, and of course if you are using Corsair to control everything, then you can control sync your keyboard, and you have the option of using SIV, an Independent Developer made tool that is hard as hell to understand, it has the worst layout in the history of programs in my opinion, but once you figure it out, you can control your Corsair Lighting with it, so its also a good option.

I only use Addressable RGB, so its easy for me since I am only using those headers on my board, but this works with non addressable too. I have Phanteks Halo's aRGB Fan Mounts that I mount to all my fans, and Corsair and NZXT light strips. All I had to do was look up the pin out for all these devices, they are all available online through searches. aRGB uses 3 Pins, a Hot, a Data, and a Ground. If you don't want to solder anything, and/or you want to test things quickly before soldering, you can get these https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01LZF1ZSZ/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1 Dupont Cables, and use those to wire the different cables together. Be sure to check how much Amperage your Motherboard Headers or aRGB Controller can handle, although in my experience if you put too many on the lights at the end of the chain at some point just won't light. I have used this method to successfully integrate all my Case Lighting from different manufactures to all be controlled by Aurasync. Obviously this doesn't help with Ram and Peripherals, but if you have Peripherals that are AuraSync Compatible, or Corsair Compatible, then use can just use which ever they are compatible with as the Control device, and then you could control everything with one program. So yeah, not enough people talk about this, but especially with those dupont connectors its actually pretty easy. They worked so well for me I didn't even have to solder my connections, I just hid all the Ketchup and Mustard cabling behind the rear side panel door, lol. My mood Lighting behind my TV is also connected through this method, so it makes it easy to control it all, and when I have guests over its easy to impress them with the Music Controlled RGB function from Aurasync, lol




harderthanfire said:


> Just an FYI but this is in the patch notes for the next major windows update (currently on the insiders slow ring):
> 
> 
> "A CPU may have multiple “favored” cores (logical processors of the highest available scheduling class). To provide better performance and reliability, we have implemented a rotation policy that distributes work more fairly among these favored cores."
> 
> 
> Looks like more improvements to handle CPUs like the 3900X - should hopefully help gain performance in general usage.
> 
> 
> To me this makes me want to stick with per CCX overclocks or even PBO rather than straight all core as that extra 100mhz on a couple of cores will make a big difference if Windows actually sticks work on those more often!


Hell yeah, this has to be the first time ever I was actually excited for a Windows Update. I am still rocking 1809, lol.



Xenozx said:


> hi all, so i get the best performance by upping my bclk to 104, and leaving everything else on auto for the most part. i have -0.100 offset for voltage set in bios. the issue is when i change the BCLK, there is no way to link the fabric clock / FSB right? Like if your running 3200mhz memory, you want 1600mhz fclk and that will give you the lowest latency? Well when you change the bclk, the memory speed goes that same 04 bclk off but the fabric clock options stay the same so there now is no way to do exactly 2:1. this causes my memory latency to be really high 70ns+ is there anyway to fix this? performance wise at 104bclk this thing rocks, and kills all the reviews ive seen, and seems to keep pbo and stuff in place, and still downclocks and sleeps cores as needed.
> 
> when using a customer non 100 BCLK, is it possible, to link the infinty fabric clock to 1:2 so you dont get hit with the huge latency penalty?


I wish I could join you with experimenting with the BCLK, but I learned the hardware last year with my 2700x, that raising the BCLK does NOT play well with RAID Controllers, NVMe's and Sata Ports connected through the chipset. I corrupted 3 Different Raid Arrays, 2 through the Hardware Raid Controller, One Windows Software Raid that I used for 3 Of my 860/850 Evo's for a high speed game drive, and corrupted my Windows Install on my NVMe. It was a ****ty night to say the least. Luckily I am bit paranoid when it comes to backups and I was able to restore everything but the game drive pretty quickly, and even the game drive was just game installs and I have Gigabit Fiber (even though Steam and the rest only let you download at about a 3rd of that speed) so I was back up and running in a few hours, but until I move all of these drives out of this RIG, I am not messing with BCLK overclocking again. It even messed with my Sound Card and USB DAC IO, it was not pretty. I learned that staying under 100.8 and you will be ok for the most part, but even that caused weird issues with my DAC so I have stayed away from it since.


----------



## jfrob75

Just happened to noticed that my reported bclk is now showing 100.0 MHz instead of 99.8 MHz under bios 2501. A small thing but nice none the less.


----------



## crakej

Some nice results!

We're all near the top transfer speeds 

I've experimented a LOT again today - I seem to able to have GearDown disabled most of the time, but I've not seen any measurable difference to having it on or off. Experimented with timings as well trying to cut latency, but I can't get past 64.8ns. Back to testing high speed ram OC tomorrow.

I keep forgetting about the PE modes - just switched on PE2 and it slowed down the cpu instead of boosting!

Thing of note on 2602: Rebooting is slow, but safe boot works - just hold power button in until pwr off, then power on again and it will recover quicker than booting/training. Nasty flashes on my display when rebooting, and really annoying is when you go into the bios and nothing appears on the display.
@oreonutz not really that bothered about RGB - certainly not getting the soldering iron out for it! But thanks for letting me know about the options!


----------



## Duvar

This is great too with 64GB DR Samsung B Dies on a C7H with a 3900X https://www.computerbase.de/forum/threads/amd-ryzen-ram-oc-community.1829356/page-666#post-22996066


----------



## crakej

Seems we're starting to learn what we need to do!

I'm having to resist doing more tests - I lost count of the reboots I've done today and I end up making mistakes when I'm tired!


----------



## jfrob75

crakej said:


> Some nice results!
> 
> We're all near the top transfer speeds
> 
> I've experimented a LOT again today - I seem to able to have GearDown disabled most of the time, but I've not seen any measurable difference to having it on or off. Experimented with timings as well trying to cut latency, but I can't get past 64.8ns. Back to testing high speed ram OC tomorrow.
> 
> I keep forgetting about the PE modes - just switched on PE2 and it slowed down the cpu instead of boosting!
> 
> Thing of note on 2602: Rebooting is slow, but safe boot works - just hold power button in until pwr off, then power on again and it will recover quicker than booting/training. Nasty flashes on my display when rebooting, and really annoying is when you go into the bios and nothing appears on the display.
> 
> @oreonutz not really that bothered about RGB - certainly not getting the soldering iron out for it! But thanks for letting me know about the options!


What is PE modes?


----------



## nick name

jfrob75 said:


> What is PE modes?


Performance Enhancer Levels


----------



## crakej

Oops - just did another hour of rebooting! No more tonight!
@jfrob75 like @nick name says + PE modes are meant to be an easy way to OC the CPU, which was introduced with zen+. Because of the way boosting works on zen 2, and the fact it hasn't been in the menu until we got these beta bios - no one has really tested it yet. My singular test was v un-scientific. Hopefully when it works it will help us to OC the CPU. I need to do some reading up on the subject!

Has anyone here with zen+ and 2602 tried PE modes?

I'm exhausted! Until tomorrow :asleepysm


----------



## Syldon

crakej said:


> Got new keyboard coming - Corsair K70 RGB MK.2 Mechanical Gaming Keyboard (Cherry MX Red Switches).
> 
> Do you have to use the iCUE software with it? Just wary of this software and how it interacts with our boards in the past. I'm not interested in RGB patterns so would prefer not to use it, or Aura, I just want to choose a colour and go. Another system mmonitoring tool, that's just what I need - not!


Personally I love Icue software. I bought the corsair silent a few years back. I managed to soak it in tea once, and I ordered another for the very next day.

My keyboard layout. I am born and bred Sunderland fan. I have relatives who are Newcastle Utd supporters, I love their face when they have to use my keyboard.





. I love it for games and such. The ability to hold a button down and have it spam that button while it is held is a massive thing for some game. Nothing worse than having to tap, tap, tap.

EDIT I should point out that this whole sequence is completed with just one key press.


----------



## crakej

Looking good!

Mine is 5 minutes away according to Amazon! Can't wait to have decent keyboard!


----------



## neikosr0x

crakej said:


> Looking good!
> 
> Mine is 5 minutes away according to Amazon! Can't wait to have decent keyboard!


hahahaha this corsair keyboard that i own is OP. I mean before i used to think "what difference a decent mechanical keyboard would be?" hahahaha silly me... is like day and night these things are amazing. And unlike Logitech ones this one are well made.


----------



## neikosr0x

Syldon said:


> Personally I love Icue software. I bought the corsair silent a few years back. I managed to soak it in tea once, and I ordered another for the very next day.
> 
> My keyboard layout. I am born and bred Sunderland fan. I have relatives who are Newcastle Utd supporters, I love their face when they have to use my keyboard.
> 
> This is the sort of stuff you can programme Icue to do. I love it for games and such. The ability to hold a button down and have it spam that button while it is held is a massive thing for some game. Nothing worse than having to tap, tap, tap.
> 
> EDIT I should point out that this whole sequence is completed with just one key press.


emmm how do you do it? hjahahah axD


----------



## Krisztias

Hi Guys,

a little off-topic, but in this thread are a lot DRAM Masters , so i must ask: can somebody evtl. help me about this problem? 

https://www.overclock.net/forum/13-...membench-0-8-dram-bench-528.html#post28085662

I don't know where to start.

Thank you!


----------



## crakej

Krisztias said:


> Hi Guys,
> 
> a little off-topic, but in this thread are a lot DRAM Masters , so i must ask: can somebody evtl. help me about this problem?
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/13-...membench-0-8-dram-bench-528.html#post28085662
> 
> I don't know where to start.
> 
> Thank you!


You need to tune your sub-timings! This is a great place to start: https://github.com/integralfx/MemTestHelper/blob/master/DDR4 OC Guide.md#tightening-timings

Lots of tips on how to use various different timings and their affect on other timings. Hope this helps


----------



## Krisztias

crakej said:


> You need to tune your sub-timings! This is a great place to start: https://github.com/integralfx/MemTestHelper/blob/master/DDR4 OC Guide.md#tightening-timings
> 
> Lots of tips on how to use various different timings and their affect on other timings. Hope this helps


Thank you very much, i look in to it!


----------



## nick name

Krisztias said:


> Hi Guys,
> 
> a little off-topic, but in this thread are a lot DRAM Masters , so i must ask: can somebody evtl. help me about this problem?
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/13-...membench-0-8-dram-bench-528.html#post28085662
> 
> I don't know where to start.
> 
> Thank you!


I get my best Aida results after the PC has been on for a bit. I get weaker Reads after a fresh boot and Copy is something that seems to randomly drop occasionally. Also, your latency will be higher if anything else is running in the background like HWiNFO, etc. You can check against random low readings by double-clicking the score you'd like to re-test individually.


----------



## oreonutz

Krisztias said:


> Thank you very much, i look in to it!


Your Speeds look very much in line with my 3600Mhz Speeds with everything on auto and just the DOCP Profile. That link @crakej just posted is a great place to help tighten up those timings. Also the DRam Calculator is a God Send that makes it pretty damn easy. Once you tighten them up, you should notice a pretty big difference.


----------



## Krisztias

nick name said:


> I get my best Aida results after the PC has been on for a bit. I get weaker Reads after a fresh boot and Copy is something that seems to randomly drop occasionally. Also, your latency will be higher if anything else is running in the background like HWiNFO, etc. You can check against random low readings by double-clicking the score you'd like to re-test individually.


Thank you for the tipp!


----------



## oreonutz

Syldon said:


> Personally I love Icue software. I bought the corsair silent a few years back. I managed to soak it in tea once, and I ordered another for the very next day.
> 
> My keyboard layout. I am born and bred Sunderland fan. I have relatives who are Newcastle Utd supporters, I love their face when they have to use my keyboard.
> 
> This is the sort of stuff you can programme Icue to do. I love it for games and such. The ability to hold a button down and have it spam that button while it is held is a massive thing for some game. Nothing worse than having to tap, tap, tap.
> 
> EDIT I should point out that this whole sequence is completed with just one key press.


Ummm. I am confused. This is an HCI Memory Test Video... Am I the only one seeing this???

EDIT: Nevermind, I am an Idiot, I just read the description of the video... That is cool, iCue is awesome for using macros and doing all kinds of stuff. But they have a long way to go before its stable. The way it interacts with certain Software and Hardware, its just not reliable enough yet. I know a lot of people have had good experiences with it, but I have tried it in 4 different rigs now, and every single one I have had both crashing issues, and issues with the Corsair Fan Controller just stopping working for instance. It also uses up a pretty big chunk of resources, not that that matters on the 3900x, but if you are benchmarking it does...


----------



## Krisztias

oreonutz said:


> Your Speeds look very much in line with my 3600Mhz Speeds with everything on auto and just the DOCP Profile. That link @crakej just posted is a great place to help tighten up those timings. Also the DRam Calculator is a God Send that makes it pretty damn easy. Once you tighten them up, you should notice a pretty big difference.


The problem is, these are the timings from the Calculator 3600 fast profile... I'm not sure, that I should thingten these timings further. It looks like my memory is @3200C14 not 3600C14 and don't know why. My 3333C14 profile looked better (higher read and copy speeds) with my 2700x than this. I expected to be 55-56k. Something is off, and have no clue what... Voltages? Resistances? Some option in BIOS what the Calculator recommends, but in reality degrades bandwith? Latency seems to be in-line with what is to be expected, I think. So, ??? :S


----------



## oreonutz

Krisztias said:


> The problem is, these are the timings from the Calculator 3600 fast profile... I'm not sure, that I should thingten these timings further. It looks like my memory is @3200C14 not 3600C14 and don't know why. My 3333C14 profile looked better (higher read and copy speeds) with my 2700x than this. I expected to be 55-56k. Something is off, and have no clue what... Voltages? Resistances? Some option in BIOS what the Calculator recommends, but in reality degrades bandwith? Latency seems to be in-line with what is to be expected, I think. So, ??? :S


Lets see those timings. Go Into your UEFI, go to the Tools Page, go into Asus User Profiles (or what ever they call it), click on a USB Thumb Drive in your Computer (Oh yeah, plug one of those into your computer by the way, lol), and then hit CTRL-F2 and name the profile. This is going to save every setting in your UEFI to a TXT File. Copy and paste that Text file into a spoiler window here for us. 

Also, when you boot back up, close every single background program you have going. iCue, Logitech, Google Chrome, HWinfo, EVERYTHING you can get away with not using for 5 minutes. Open Aida64. Hit CLTRL-SHIFT-ESC, this will open Task Manager. Click on the Details Tab. Highlight Aida64.exe then right click on it, go to Priority, and then choose High. Close task manager. Run the Memory Benchmark. Save a Screen shot. Post that here along with you Profile. Once you have done that I will go through it and try to help you as best as I can. I am by no means a memory expert, so if someone else wants to jump in and help as well, this will give them a starting point to know what your working with.


----------



## oreonutz

So I have an interesting one for you guys... This was inspired by @Keith Myers.

Him and I are over in the ASUS Forums, and we wanted to run Benchmarks that could be comparable across platforms. He is on Ubuntu 18.04, and I am on Windows 10. He is clocked 100Mhz Lower than I, but was SMOKING me in the same tests. This was across Geek Bench, and Blender Benchmark.

So I RUFUS'd Ubuntu on a USB, installed it to a Spare SSD, got all my drivers set up, then Ran my Benchmarks again, and I ended up pulling ahead. Its a DRASTIC Difference. I always knew Linux had an edge, I just didn't expect it to be so BIG.

Anyways, I haven't run Blender Benchmark on my Windows System since i upped my Memory speed, But I have run Geek Bench 4. Same exact version, with the same Overclock, same everything, just One On Ubuntu, and One on Windows. I will post The Blender Results when I run them again on Windows later today. Also Keep in mind, this is a pretty sanitized Windows Installation but there are still services and HWinfo running during the Benchmark run, but GeekBench is in High Priority mode to counter that a bit. Also keep in mind there could be a performance uplift to going to 1903 due to the AMD "Windows Scheduler Fix" supposedly in 1903. I plan to test that theory soon in a different post, so you might be able to get higher scores than I in Windows at the same settings, but I still thought this was a pretty interesting test...

Check out this MASSIVE difference, especially in the Interger Score...

4225Mhz All Core OC / 3800 Mhz CL16 Ram / 1900 Mhz IF - On Both Benchmarks

Windows 10 Enterprise 1809:
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/14279386

Ubuntu 18.04.3 LTS
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/14272021

EDIT: Blender Benchmarks, Same Settings. Not as drastic of a difference, but still decent. Thats a 18% Uplift for Ubuntu Over Windows in the Classroom Benchmark...

Windows 10 Enterprise 1809:
https://opendata.blender.org/benchmark/7f496bd8-09f5-46f8-b3bf-8ee951d4128b

Ubuntu 18.04.3 LTS:
https://opendata.blender.org/benchmark/344692b8-5934-4112-89cc-47bc1b65d633


----------



## Syldon

neikosr0x said:


> emmm how do you do it? hjahahah axD


Icue lets you define each movement specifically. That is mouse location, then mouse down to drag etc. You can even just record what ever it is you are doing. 

I know there was an app that allowed you to run HCI memtest with out doing this. I had this done before that app came along. Now people use the Ryzen Dram calculator from 1usmus as it combines it all in a much nicer interface. I really would have preferred to pay for the full version, but the developer would only take paypal. I don't use paypal.


----------



## Krisztias

oreonutz said:


> Lets see those timings. Go Into your UEFI, go to the Tools Page, go into Asus User Profiles (or what ever they call it), click on a USB Thumb Drive in your Computer (Oh yeah, plug one of those into your computer by the way, lol), and then hit CTRL-F2 and name the profile. This is going to save every setting in your UEFI to a TXT File. Copy and paste that Text file into a spoiler window here for us.
> 
> Also, when you boot back up, close every single background program you have going. iCue, Logitech, Google Chrome, HWinfo, EVERYTHING you can get away with not using for 5 minutes. Open Aida64. Hit CLTRL-SHIFT-ESC, this will open Task Manager. Click on the Details Tab. Highlight Aida64.exe then right click on it, go to Priority, and then choose High. Close task manager. Run the Memory Benchmark. Save a Screen shot. Post that here along with you Profile. Once you have done that I will go through it and try to help you as best as I can. I am by no means a memory expert, so if someone else wants to jump in and help as well, this will give them a starting point to know what your working with.


Here it is:


----------



## oreonutz

Krisztias said:


> Here it is:


Can you Close all your background programs, including HWinfo, everything, then open AIDA64, set it to High Priority in Task Manager, and run the Memory Benchmark again, screenshot it and post it here, por favor.


----------



## oreonutz

Krisztias said:


> Here it is:


Also, FYI, it looks like you are right where you are supposed to be. Keep In mind you only have a 1 CCD Chip, that means you are limited in the kind of Write numbers you can hit. This is explained pretty well in this video:


Spoiler










 by BuildZoid, whom is very knowledgeable and good at teaching on the subject. I queued up that video to the point where he talks about write speed, but I highly suggest watching that video and this video:


Spoiler










 to learn about the scaling of Memory at speeds and what is possible. His focus of the videos is something we already know, that you should run the IF at exactly half the Mem Clock or you get a latency penalty, but he has a chart in both of these videos, the second video has clock speeds listed closer to us, and it shows you what AIDA stats he is getting for each speed and Latency, so its a very helpful reference.

Also to learn more about the philosphy of lowering timings yourself, without the Ryzen Calcluator I highly suggest watching this video on your phone and Tuning your system with him, not by copying his numbers, but by listening to what he has to say about each timing and adjusting your own accordingly:


Spoiler











So, if you want to see some of the higher numbers like the people around these forums you will need to step up to 3733 or 3800Mhz which if you have the Flare X kit, or one similar it can do. Once you reach CL16 3800Mhz you will start to see your speeds approach other peoples. Also keep in mind that Windows Background services and programs play a HUGE role in those scores you recieve when benchmarking. I highly suggest tuning your System with Autoruns to stop background processes as much as possible, and always benchmark with your Benchmark (in this case Aida64) being the only thing open, and putting it into High Priority Mode before running the benchmark. Also close Any Monitoring software just while running the benchmark, you will see yourself, this makes a drastic difference.

Last but not least, I wanted to find some numbers posted around online for people who have a 1 CCD Chip like yourself, because that is a pretty big factor, you have half the cache, and are limited on what you can hit for write speed, that were at 3600. Not all these people are 3600 CL 14 with timings as tight as yours, (and I checked yours by the way, your timings look pretty tight), but this will give you an idea of what other people are getting with your speed and CCD Layout (Will list the chip before picture if info is not in picture). Also there is a small difference in performance that your memory seems to be a tad behind, but I would be willing to bet that comes down to Windows Background Services.



Spoiler

















Spoiler















3800x: 


Spoiler

















Spoiler















EDIT:

One other thing I just noticed looking at your Timings. You have manually Keyed in Settings for:


Spoiler



RttNom [Rtt_Nom Disable]
RttWr [Dynamic ODT Off]
RttPark [RZQ/5]
MemAddrCmdSetup [55]
MemCsOdtSetup [55]
MemCkeSetup [55]
MemCadBusClkDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]



For those settings specifically, Try setting them all to auto. The Ryzen Calculator is meant to be more of a guide, and I have noticed on our MoBo, letting it decide the Termination Voltages resulted in a slight Boost in Performance vs What I had keyed in manually. You might or might not see the same, but its worth a shot.

Also, I saw my best performance with the following timings on 3600Mhz, you might experiment and see if they help you as well. Although your Latency was better than mine, my Bandwidth was higher, so you might want to give it a shot, or maybe mix the 2, and see what you can get. (Disabling Gear down mode will help get better Performance, but with timings these low I couldn't get it to boot, so thats why I have it enabled)



Spoiler



Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
BCLK_Divider [Auto]
CPU Core Ratio [42.25]
Performance Bias [CB15]
Memory Frequency [DDR4-3600MHz]
FCLK Frequency [1800MHz]
Core Performance Boost [Auto]
SMT Mode [Auto]
EPU Power Saving Mode [Disabled]
TPU [Keep Current Settings]
Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto]
DRAM CAS# Latency [14]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [14]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [14]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [14]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [28]
Trc [36]
TrrdS [4]
TrrdL [6]
Tfaw [16]
TwtrS [4]
TwtrL [12]
Twr [12]
Trcpage [Auto]
TrdrdScl [4]
TwrwrScl [4]
Trfc [256]
Trfc2 [Auto]
Trfc4 [Auto]
Tcwl [14]
Trtp [8]
Trdwr [8]
Twrrd [4]
TwrwrSc [1]
TwrwrSd [7]
TwrwrDd [7]
TrdrdSc [1]
TrdrdSd [5]
TrdrdDd [5]
Tcke [1]
ProcODT [36.9 ohm]
Cmd2T [1T]
Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
Power Down Enable [Disabled]
RttNom [Rtt_Nom Disable]
RttWr [Dynamic ODT Off]
RttPark [RZQ/5]
MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
MemCkeSetup [Auto]
MemCadBusClkDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [Auto]
CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 5]
CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 8]
CPU Current Capability [130%]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
CPU Voltage Frequency [500]
CPU Power Duty Control [Extreme]
CPU Power Phase Control [Extreme]
CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 4]
VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 7]
VDDSOC Current Capability [130%]
VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed VDDSOC Switching Frequency(KHz) [600]
VDDSOC Phase Control [Extreme]
DRAM Current Capability [130%]
DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.52500]
VTTDDR Voltage [Auto]
VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
VDDP Voltage [Auto]
1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
PLL reference voltage [Auto]
T Offset [Auto]
Sense MI Skew [Auto]
Sense MI Offset [Auto]
Promontory presence [Auto]
Clock Amplitude [Auto]
CLDO VDDP voltage [Auto]
CPU Core Voltage [Manual mode]
- CPU Core Voltage Override [1.28125]
CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
- VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.13750]
DRAM Voltage [1.52000]
CLDO VDDG voltage [Auto]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
Firmware TPM [Disable]
Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
PSS Support [Auto]
SVM Mode [Enabled]
Onboard LED [Enabled]
Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
SATA Mode [AHCI]
NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
SMART Self Test [Enabled]
Fast Boot [Disabled]
AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]



My Aida64 Running these settings:


Spoiler


----------



## lordzed83

When someone asks when will 3900x be in stock.. I take my crystal ball out and still dont now


----------



## nick name

Syldon said:


> Icue lets you define each movement specifically. That is mouse location, then mouse down to drag etc. You can even just record what ever it is you are doing.
> 
> I know there was an app that allowed you to run HCI memtest with out doing this. I had this done before that app came along. Now people use the Ryzen Dram calculator from 1usmus as it combines it all in a much nicer interface. I really would have preferred to pay for the full version, but the developer would only take paypal. I don't use paypal.


I paid for Pro and got nothing for it. 

This will spawn windows for you though. 

https://github.com/integralfx/MemTestHelper


----------



## AvengedRobix

very good


----------



## oreonutz

AvengedRobix said:


> very good


Damn that is NICE! Fricking awesome!

I just hit my personal best numbers yet. Haven't tested stability yet though...



Spoiler


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> When someone asks when will 3900x be in stock.. I take my crystal ball out and still dont now


Lol! Love the picture man!

They're still in short supply then? A friend was enquiring if I could build a system for him with 3900X - I'd just assumed stock wasn't a problem....


Loving my new keyboard guys! Will take w while to get used to it, but it's a pleasure to type on.  Me and Icue are not getting on very well though. Not very intuitive! Still, got a nice plain uniform colour for now - I can't see what's going on with the rainbows! Downloaded some profiles too.


----------



## Zefram0911

The 3900X availability has popped up 5 times since yesterday on Amazon. I picked up one myself, arriving on Thursday. I think stock is starting to stabilize.


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> Lol! Love the picture man!
> 
> They're still in short supply then? A friend was enquiring if I could build a system for him with 3900X - I'd just assumed stock wasn't a problem....
> 
> 
> Loving my new keyboard guys! Will take w while to get used to it, but it's a pleasure to type on.  Me and Icue are not getting on very well though. Not very intuitive! Still, got a nice plain uniform colour for now - I can't see what's going on with the rainbows! Downloaded some profiles too.


Hell yeah man! I am glad you like it! Once you find the Profile you like, use iCue to save the profile to the first Memory Slot on the Keyboard, and then delete iCue, lol! Your Life will become easier on that day! LOL!


----------



## MrPhilo

Sometime I wish I got the 3900x instead of the 3800x just to have a nicer Aida score xD


----------



## oreonutz

MrPhilo said:


> Sometime I wish I got the 3900x instead of the 3800x just to have a nicer Aida score xD


Might as well just buy one and build another system, make your Soul happy!


----------



## crakej

Zefram0911 said:


> The 3900X availability has popped up 5 times since yesterday on Amazon. I picked up one myself, arriving on Thursday. I think stock is starting to stabilize.


This is good news!


----------



## crakej

MrPhilo said:


> Sometime I wish I got the 3900x instead of the 3800x just to have a nicer Aida score xD


Lol - sometimes I wish I'd got a 3800X for better value and better silicon!


----------



## crakej

oreonutz said:


> Hell yeah man! I am glad you like it! Once you find the Profile you like, use iCue to save the profile to the first Memory Slot on the Keyboard, and then delete iCue, lol! Your Life will become easier on that day! LOL!


I read somewhere that there's a way to transfer profiles to the keyboard without iCue, but can't see how...

I've got a nice neutral colour for now.

It's a great addition to my CH7 and work well with it. Of course I had to change the service to run manually as it was stopping CPU going down to 0%. V annoying! Do you know if the volume wheel is useable in other apps like video editing?

This is my current results from my 3733CL16 profile - not the highest Aida transfer scores, but highest CB15 I've ever had.


----------



## jfrob75

crakej said:


> I read somewhere that there's a way to transfer profiles to the keyboard without iCue, but can't see how...
> 
> I've got a nice neutral colour for now.
> 
> It's a great addition to my CH7 and work well with it. Of course I had to change the service to run manually as it was stopping CPU going down to 0%. V annoying! Do you know if the volume wheel is useable in other apps like video editing?
> 
> This is my current results from my 3733CL16 profile - not the highest Aida transfer scores, but highest CB15 I've ever had.


Here are my AIDA scores for 3733CL16 as well. I tried to tighten the timings up but anything tighter was not stable. I'm really happy with these results anyway.


----------



## Krisztias

oreonutz said:


> Also, FYI, it looks like you are right where you are supposed to be. Keep In mind you only have a 1 CCD Chip, that means you are limited in the kind of Write numbers you can hit. This is explained pretty well in this video:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nugwAOvijHQ&t=550s
> 
> 
> by BuildZoid, whom is very knowledgeable and good at teaching on the subject. I queued up that video to the point where he talks about write speed, but I highly suggest watching that video and this video:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10pYf9wqFFY
> 
> 
> to learn about the scaling of Memory at speeds and what is possible. His focus of the videos is something we already know, that you should run the IF at exactly half the Mem Clock or you get a latency penalty, but he has a chart in both of these videos, the second video has clock speeds listed closer to us, and it shows you what AIDA stats he is getting for each speed and Latency, so its a very helpful reference.
> 
> Also to learn more about the philosphy of lowering timings yourself, without the Ryzen Calcluator I highly suggest watching this video on your phone and Tuning your system with him, not by copying his numbers, but by listening to what he has to say about each timing and adjusting your own accordingly:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ORo8Eha-ZE&t=108s
> 
> 
> 
> So, if you want to see some of the higher numbers like the people around these forums you will need to step up to 3733 or 3800Mhz which if you have the Flare X kit, or one similar it can do. Once you reach CL16 3800Mhz you will start to see your speeds approach other peoples. Also keep in mind that Windows Background services and programs play a HUGE role in those scores you recieve when benchmarking. I highly suggest tuning your System with Autoruns to stop background processes as much as possible, and always benchmark with your Benchmark (in this case Aida64) being the only thing open, and putting it into High Priority Mode before running the benchmark. Also close Any Monitoring software just while running the benchmark, you will see yourself, this makes a drastic difference.
> 
> Last but not least, I wanted to find some numbers posted around online for people who have a 1 CCD Chip like yourself, because that is a pretty big factor, you have half the cache, and are limited on what you can hit for write speed, that were at 3600. Not all these people are 3600 CL 14 with timings as tight as yours, (and I checked yours by the way, your timings look pretty tight), but this will give you an idea of what other people are getting with your speed and CCD Layout (Will list the chip before picture if info is not in picture). Also there is a small difference in performance that your memory seems to be a tad behind, but I would be willing to bet that comes down to Windows Background Services.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3800x:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> One other thing I just noticed looking at your Timings. You have manually Keyed in Settings for:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> RttNom [Rtt_Nom Disable]
> RttWr [Dynamic ODT Off]
> RttPark [RZQ/5]
> MemAddrCmdSetup [55]
> MemCsOdtSetup [55]
> MemCkeSetup [55]
> MemCadBusClkDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> 
> 
> 
> For those settings specifically, Try setting them all to auto. The Ryzen Calculator is meant to be more of a guide, and I have noticed on our MoBo, letting it decide the Termination Voltages resulted in a slight Boost in Performance vs What I had keyed in manually. You might or might not see the same, but its worth a shot.
> 
> Also, I saw my best performance with the following timings on 3600Mhz, you might experiment and see if they help you as well. Although your Latency was better than mine, my Bandwidth was higher, so you might want to give it a shot, or maybe mix the 2, and see what you can get. (Disabling Gear down mode will help get better Performance, but with timings these low I couldn't get it to boot, so thats why I have it enabled)
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
> BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
> BCLK_Divider [Auto]
> CPU Core Ratio [42.25]
> Performance Bias [CB15]
> Memory Frequency [DDR4-3600MHz]
> FCLK Frequency [1800MHz]
> Core Performance Boost [Auto]
> SMT Mode [Auto]
> EPU Power Saving Mode [Disabled]
> TPU [Keep Current Settings]
> Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto]
> DRAM CAS# Latency [14]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [14]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [14]
> DRAM RAS# PRE Time [14]
> DRAM RAS# ACT Time [28]
> Trc [36]
> TrrdS [4]
> TrrdL [6]
> Tfaw [16]
> TwtrS [4]
> TwtrL [12]
> Twr [12]
> Trcpage [Auto]
> TrdrdScl [4]
> TwrwrScl [4]
> Trfc [256]
> Trfc2 [Auto]
> Trfc4 [Auto]
> Tcwl [14]
> Trtp [8]
> Trdwr [8]
> Twrrd [4]
> TwrwrSc [1]
> TwrwrSd [7]
> TwrwrDd [7]
> TrdrdSc [1]
> TrdrdSd [5]
> TrdrdDd [5]
> Tcke [1]
> ProcODT [36.9 ohm]
> Cmd2T [1T]
> Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
> Power Down Enable [Disabled]
> RttNom [Rtt_Nom Disable]
> RttWr [Dynamic ODT Off]
> RttPark [RZQ/5]
> MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
> MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
> MemCkeSetup [Auto]
> MemCadBusClkDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [Auto]
> CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 5]
> CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 8]
> CPU Current Capability [130%]
> CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
> CPU Voltage Frequency [500]
> CPU Power Duty Control [Extreme]
> CPU Power Phase Control [Extreme]
> CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
> VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 4]
> VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 7]
> VDDSOC Current Capability [130%]
> VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Manual]
> Fixed VDDSOC Switching Frequency(KHz) [600]
> VDDSOC Phase Control [Extreme]
> DRAM Current Capability [130%]
> DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
> DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
> Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
> DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.52500]
> VTTDDR Voltage [Auto]
> VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
> VDDP Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
> CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
> 2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
> PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
> PLL reference voltage [Auto]
> T Offset [Auto]
> Sense MI Skew [Auto]
> Sense MI Offset [Auto]
> Promontory presence [Auto]
> Clock Amplitude [Auto]
> CLDO VDDP voltage [Auto]
> CPU Core Voltage [Manual mode]
> - CPU Core Voltage Override [1.28125]
> CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
> - VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.13750]
> DRAM Voltage [1.52000]
> CLDO VDDG voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> 1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
> Firmware TPM [Disable]
> Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
> PSS Support [Auto]
> SVM Mode [Enabled]
> Onboard LED [Enabled]
> Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
> SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
> SATA Mode [AHCI]
> NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
> SMART Self Test [Enabled]
> Fast Boot [Disabled]
> AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
> 
> 
> 
> My Aida64 Running these settings:
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Thank you very much for your time and for the videos&explanation! 
I will look in deeper, and try to going higher with the frequency.


----------



## crakej

jfrob75 said:


> Here are my AIDA scores for 3733CL16 as well. I tried to tighten the timings up but anything tighter was not stable. I'm really happy with these results anyway.


Can we see your full timings please?


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> I read somewhere that there's a way to transfer profiles to the keyboard without iCue, but can't see how...
> 
> I've got a nice neutral colour for now.
> 
> It's a great addition to my CH7 and work well with it. Of course I had to change the service to run manually as it was stopping CPU going down to 0%. V annoying! Do you know if the volume wheel is useable in other apps like video editing?
> 
> This is my current results from my 3733CL16 profile - not the highest Aida transfer scores, but highest CB15 I've ever had.


I know what its like dealing with the Resource drain that is iCue, It sucks!

I would love to figure out how to transfer profiles directly to the Keyboard. I am sure there is a community made tool, but its still easy enough to just use iCue once you figure out how it works, just use it inside of a VM so you can shut down the VM afterwards and not have to deal with the Resource issues.

Love the Profile My Friend! I know we can get your CB15 Score up though. You have a 50Mhz advantage over me in your All Core OC, and even when my Ram was at 3600Mhz I was hitting 3300+ points consistently. I am posting this Screenshot below of a Run I just did just now while writing this. I have 17 Chrome tabs open, Aida64, HWinfo, Discord, and have a VM Open in the Background that I am VPN'd into a Clients Network on, doing some Configuring on a Router. I did not Put CB in High Priority mode either. And this is what I hit:



Spoiler















So with that said, I am willing to bet you have some kind of Windows Service running in the background that is dragging down your CB score. Take a look with Sysinternals tool called Autoruns, and see what you can find in the "Run", "RunOnce", "Task Scheduler", and the first "Services" sections that has no need starting with the system, uncheck them, then restart and run your Benchmark again. If you are able to stop a few Services and Tasks from Running, I bet you will get your best score yet!



Krisztias said:


> Thank you very much for your time and for the videos&explanation!
> I will look in deeper, and try to going higher with the frequency.


I am glad to help! I hope this does end up helping you. Also I think someone else posted this Link: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-memory-tweaking-overclocking-guide/

I would DEFINITELY read that before you start tweaking again. Its by the same guy who created the Ryzen Memory Calculator, and its incredibly helpfull! Good Luck!


----------



## crakej

Someone over on ROG forums is having trouble getting his GPU to run at x16

He's tried everything including bios settings to force x16. His NVMe is in the bottom slot. If he puts his 2700x in the board it works fine.

Anyone got any ideas?


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> Someone over on ROG forums is having trouble getting his GPU to run at x16
> 
> He's tried everything including bios settings to force x16. His NVMe is in the bottom slot. If he puts his 2700x in the board it works fine.
> 
> Anyone got any ideas?


Tell Him to set THESE EXACT Settings in the UEFI. Also, he should make sure he doesn't have an M.2 installed in the Slot above the Graphics Card, or ANYTHING plugged into the 2nd x16 PCIE Slot. If all he has plugged into his Rig is a Graphics card, and he is Sure its in the First slot, AND he only has ONE NVMe Drive, and He's SURE its plugged into the Bottom Slot, and he sets these following settings, then he should be running in x16 Mode. The best way to sanity check which mode you are running in btw, is by putting a load on your card by running a benchmark like Superposition, or Heaven or something like that, and then Checking GPU-z. Here are the settings:


Spoiler



M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Disabled(X8 mode)]
PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [GEN 3]
PCIEX8/X4_2 Mode [Auto]
PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
M.2_1 Link Mode [GEN 3]
M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]



If this doesn't work for him, it could be the UEFI he is running. Have him update to 2602 and see if he see's the same error there (Only if this doesn't work first.)


----------



## crakej

oreonutz said:


> Tell Him to set THESE EXACT Settings in the UEFI. Also, he should make sure he doesn't have an M.2 installed in the Slot above the Graphics Card, or ANYTHING plugged into the 2nd x16 PCIE Slot. If all he has plugged into his Rig is a Graphics card, and he is Sure its in the First slot, AND he only has ONE NVMe Drive, and He's SURE its plugged into the Bottom Slot, and he sets these following settings, then he should be running in x16 Mode. The best way to sanity check which mode you are running in btw, is by putting a load on your card by running a benchmark like Superposition, or Heaven or something like that, and then Checking GPU-z. Here are the settings:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Disabled(X8 mode)]
> PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [GEN 3]
> PCIEX8/X4_2 Mode [Auto]
> PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
> M.2_1 Link Mode [GEN 3]
> M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
> 
> 
> 
> If this doesn't work for him, it could be the UEFI he is running. Have him update to 2602 and see if he see's the same error there (Only if this doesn't work first.)


That's exactly what I thought. He's got 2 cards and they both do the same thing - x16 with 2700x, x8 with 3700x. I can see why he thinks it might be the CPU. I'll try get him to confirm the settings have been set right again.

He's on 2501 - it should be fine.

Thank you!


----------



## MrPhilo

Mr Sham just released an unverified version of ABB for us

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?112279-X370-X470-AGESA-1003AB-Bioses/page41#post780686


----------



## mtrai

damn you beat me to it. Kind of have to go through it and find your board but not an issue. I sorted it out to make it easier to find your board.

Per Shamino " Today 01:09 PM #407 "Non fully validated ABB versions of 370/470 if you wish to try"

C7H Wifi 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/i2niylkkh0z28o8/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-2701.rar?dl=0

C7H Non Wifi 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/4mgdinkmn5e1kq1/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-2701.rar?dl=0

Rog Strix B450

https://www.dropbox.com/s/zeuq42zor2ki47y/ROG-STRIX-B450-I-GAMING-ASUS-2701.rar?dl=0

Rog Strix x470
https://www.dropbox.com/s/p86b1o2frnsw25r/ROG-STRIX-X470-I-GAMING-ASUS-2701.rar?dl=0

Rog Crosshair VI Extreme
https://www.dropbox.com/s/b9a6xp23p39mk6t/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VI-EXTREME-ASUS-7401.rar?dl=0

C6H 
https://www.dropbox.com/s/j4jm5i1db55uc6f/CROSSHAIR-VI-HERO-ASUS-7401.rar?dl=0

C6H WIFI
https://www.dropbox.com/s/n6hqb8q0l66wrri/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VI-HERO-WIFI-AC-ASUS-7401.rar?dl=0+


----------



## Xenozx

so i fell off this thread a little, but i take it there still is no way to get the 3900x to boost up to 4.6ghz on the x470 crosshair boards yet? Is this a current beta bios limitation, and something that will be fixed? I noticed when I have PBO XFR enabled, my all core seems to do about 4000mhz and single core does 4200mhz. I little disapointed in these #'s, I can get 4200mhz all core and almost 4400mhz single core if i change my bclk to 104, but then my IF and ram timings dont match any more so i have a terrible latency of like 76ns

id like to go back to 100 bclk and just have a single core go up to 4.6, and all core maybe 4.2ish?


----------



## neikosr0x

Xenozx said:


> so i fell off this thread a little, but i take it there still is no way to get the 3900x to boost up to 4.6ghz on the x470 crosshair boards yet? Is this a current beta bios limitation, and something that will be fixed? I noticed when I have PBO XFR enabled, my all core seems to do about 4000mhz and single core does 4200mhz. I little disapointed in these #'s, I can get 4200mhz all core and almost 4400mhz single core if i change my bclk to 104, but then my IF and ram timings dont match any more so i have a terrible latency of like 76ns
> 
> id like to go back to 100 bclk and just have a single core go up to 4.6, and all core maybe 4.2ish?


You should check your config. My 3900x on Ch7 470x gets 4.616 boost some times 4.638ghz and during gaming 4.275/4.35ghz my latency is 64.3 at 3733cl16. I'm on 1.0.0.2 bios. CPU is at stock settings btw.


----------



## nick name

@mtrai This new BIOS 2701 seems to reduce RAM Copy bandwidth by around 3GB/s in Aida with my 2700X.

Edit:
Also seems to reduce Read by about 1GB/s.


----------



## jfrob75

crakej said:


> Can we see your full timings please?


I assume you want RM view of memory timings, so here it is.


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> @mtrai This new BIOS 2701 seems to reduce RAM Copy bandwidth by around 3GB/s in Aida with my 2700X.
> 
> Edit:
> Also seems to reduce Read by about 1GB/s.


I am having to start over completely with overclocks so really can't test it. My previous setting would all BSOD but such is the nature of trying to use previous settings .cmo with a new AGESA. I am not liking all the options that have been hidden, will work on that once I have my system stable again and finely tuned.

And I am hoping to work some magic on the non wifi and wifi for the ryzen 3000 series users. But as soon as I have the mod done for the 1000/2000 series for both boards I will release them and then see if I can trick AMIBCP, as I have given it a lot of thought on how I might just make this work.


----------



## nick name

The one good thing I can say of the 2701 BIOS is that it recovers MUCH faster after F9. Previous BIOS versions would sit for near a minute at F9, but now it restarts after seconds. Memory training is far quicker if you're dealing with F9 during the process.


----------



## thegr8anand

Drop in performance with 2701 like 2602. My max boost went down from 4350 to 4275. Single core performance went down from 528 to 518 in Cpuz. Multi down too with lower boost.


----------



## Krisztias

nick name said:


> @mtrai This new BIOS 2701 seems to reduce RAM Copy bandwidth by around 3GB/s in Aida with my 2700X.
> 
> Edit:
> Also seems to reduce Read by about 1GB/s.


It looks like my low read and copy bandwith is due to the "super fine tuned" AGESA then? Shamino1978 should know about this, it affects C8H too. I don't have Account on ROG forum, please somebody tell him about it.
Thanks.


----------



## oreonutz

So haven't updated to the New UEFI yet, think I am about to give myself a headache and do that, because I enjoy pain. But I have been working on this all damn night, and I FINALLY got My 3800Mhz Ram STABLE, Did the Karhu Ram Test to 4000% and didn't get ONE error. I tried my fricking hardest, (hence while I have been working on this since 1am my time last night, its 10:30am right now, as of time of posting) to not have to loosen timings. I had 16-16-16-16-32-48-364 and a slew of other Tertiary timings that I should have a RM Screenshot for I will post below. I tried raising and lowering everything from Ram Voltage, SOCv, VTTDDR, Ref Mem, PLL, CLDOVDDP, CLDOVDDG, VDDP, basically if there was a Ram Voltage, I tickled it up and down, sometimes more than a tickle. I also Played with The Cpu On-Die Termination Resistance, all the way from 32 Ohms, all the way Up to 60 Ohms. I had the most luck with that, but still it didn't matter what I did, I would end up with anywhere from 10 to 20 Errors by the time I got to 100 Percent during Karhu's Test. I definitely had the least amount of Errors with the ProcODT at 53 Ohms. Anything above that didn't seem to help at all.

So @crakej I finally know what was stopping me from booting. All these Settings I played with last night, I did exactly one at a time so I could get a better understanding of what setting did what. There are 2 Settings that my PC REFUSES to post at when my IF is set above 1833. That is Gear Down Disabled, and the One that Got me, Anything lower than 3 on Twrrd! I had tried auto, enabling and disabling Geardown Mode, but that fricking Twrrd I would always skip over! I also am pretty certain that last time I tried 3800 on 2501 that I had tried all the timings at Auto, but either the board just didn't try going higher itself on Twrrd, or I had accidentally skipped that one some how. Anyways, it was doing a pretty good job of foiling me last night too, I had to clear the UEFI at some point, and had to plug my numbers back in, and this time I had used a 1 for Twrrd, and I spent almost 2 hours figuring out which fricking settings was stopping me from booting!

Anyways, With these higher clocks, there is definitely seems to be a benefit if you are having memory errors to raising the ProcODT. Also, I can't get The Damn Board to boot with Disabling either RTTnom and/or RTTWr, even though that's what the calculator tells me to do. And with my Board, for some stupid reason it doesn't matter what I set for RttPark, it stays on RZQ/1 I have no Idea why, that figure will not Budge!

Anyways. My Results are a little bit worse then my best so far, but its 100 Percent Stable! So I am happy about that! Here is my old Best with Errors up the ass, and oh crap it turns out I don't have a screen shot of the timings for that one, but it was as follows: 



Spoiler



tCL: 16 - tRCDRD: 16 - tRCDWR: 16 - tRP: 16 - tRAS: 32 - tRC: 50 - tRRDS: 6 - tRRDL: 8 - tFAW: 24 - tWTRS: 5 - tWTRL: 14 - tWR: 14 - tRDRD SCL: 4 - tWRWR SCL: 4 - tRFC: 304 - tCWL: 16 - tRTP: 8 - tRDWR: 8 - tWRRD: 3 - tWRWR SC: 1 - tWRWR SD: 7 - tWRWR DD: 7 - tRDRD SD: 5 - tRDRD DD: 5 - tCKE: 1 












And Now Here is my 1000% Stable Screenshots:



Spoiler























Quite Proud. I wasn't smart enough to get a screenshot of me Passing Mem Test, but I will do it again and Post one over in the Ryzen Memory Forum for Validation later when I have more time!


----------



## harderthanfire

thegr8anand said:


> Drop in performance with 2701 like 2602. My max boost went down from 4350 to 4275. Single core performance went down from 528 to 518 in Cpuz. Multi down too with lower boost.



That's pretty much expected with that AGESA sadly, it happened to the X570 boards too - AMD still denying there is a problem....


----------



## lordzed83

well I'w ran tests on my profile from 2501 loaded no problem on to 2701. It's FASTER !!!

I gained performance in CB20 as You see and Completion time of 10xibt loop went down around 20 seconds !!! Went from around 162 GFlops to 167Gflops !!!!

Time to check memory stability


----------



## VPII

Look know this is not with a C7H mobo, but I wanted to drop it here as I've been following this thread and has been part of it for some time until my C7H died.

Now @lordzed83 what I find interesting is 1T command rate on yours and mine is 2T command rate. I ran mine 1T command rate but it failed in Karhu memtest at 2500% where as 2T went on for 7.5 hours or 22300% without an issue for which I have proof. Second screen grad is with 1T. Both with Geardown disabled.... had to check with Master Ryzen.


----------



## lordzed83

VPII said:


> Look know this is not with a C7H mobo, but I wanted to drop it here as I've been following this thread and has been part of it for some time until my C7H died.
> 
> Now @lordzed83 what I find interesting is 1T command rate on yours and mine is 2T command rate. I ran mine 1T command rate but it failed in Karhu memtest at 2500% where as 2T went on for 7.5 hours or 22300% without an issue for which I have proof. Second screen grad is with 1T. Both with Geardown disabled.... had to check with Master Ryzen.


I passed whas it 37 000% wirt ho nproblem on T1 no geardown Screenshot is somewhere around here And that was While running Nicehash mining not just memory test hahahaha.


Boots fast





NEW option on Performance Bias CB15 Agressive BSOD on windows loading when i tried  Now lets see if i can get CL14 on this bios


----------



## jfrob75

thegr8anand said:


> Drop in performance with 2701 like 2602. My max boost went down from 4350 to 4275. Single core performance went down from 528 to 518 in Cpuz. Multi down too with lower boost.


Based on my brief evaluation of the auto boosting I seem to see the same results. In 2501 my cpu would actually boost to 4650, 2602 was max 4500 and 2701 max is 4350. However when the memory frequency was increased from default the boost further decreased to 4275.


----------



## thegr8anand

Memory performance went down a bit as well. From 64-65 to 65-66 latency and about 1gb lower read, copy, write. Going back to 2501. Booting in 2701 was def a lot faster though.


----------



## lordzed83

thegr8anand said:


> Memory performance went down a bit as well. From 64-65 to 65-66 latency and about 1gb lower read, copy, write. Going back to 2501. Booting in 2701 was def a lot faster though.


Small hit on memory Big gains on spu speed so i thing im staying. Look my screenshot I'w not lost on transfers just rtinuy bit on latency !!!!


----------



## harderthanfire

2701 no good for me - if I set my RAM above 3200mhz PBO/auto OC stops working.


When I reboot it gets stuck on Q Code 01 - but then rebooting is fine.


When PBO does work it is weirdly capped at 4350 even with +200mhz turned on.


----------



## lordzed83

Looks like 2701 is not a bioss to use on AUTO looking by forums !!!


----------



## thegr8anand

lordzed83 said:


> Small hit on memory Big gains on spu speed so i thing im staying. Look my screenshot I'w not lost on transfers just rtinuy bit on latency !!!!



Yeah after your benchmark will be going back to 2701 for testing. What oc are you using for 7600+ cinebench r20 score? I get around 7400 with 4225mhz all-core oc.


----------



## lordzed83

thegr8anand said:


> Yeah after your benchmark will be going back to 2701 for testing. What oc are you using for 7600+ cinebench r20 score? I get around 7400 with 4225mhz all-core oc.


~


Im n 4377mhz all core with maxed out memory overclock and bcl1 of 101.8


----------



## lordzed83

VPII said:


> Look know this is not with a C7H mobo, but I wanted to drop it here as I've been following this thread and has been part of it for some time until my C7H died.
> 
> Now @lordzed83 what I find interesting is 1T command rate on yours and mine is 2T command rate. I ran mine 1T command rate but it failed in Karhu memtest at 2500% where as 2T went on for 7.5 hours or 22300% without an issue for which I have proof. Second screen grad is with 1T. Both with Geardown disabled.... had to check with Master Ryzen.


1 hour noo problem while having youtube working  does buit stutter cause no free mems ahah


----------



## thegr8anand

lordzed83 said:


> ~
> 
> 
> Im n 4377mhz all core with maxed out memory overclock and bcl1 of 101.8



What core voltage?


----------



## lordzed83

thegr8anand said:


> What core voltage?


1.35 no vdrop llc5 only for people with very strong custom loop. I'w hit 215w copu draw yesterday hehe sub 90c on tdie still limit is 110 when you get thermal safety reboot Tested


----------



## lordzed83

VPII said:


> Look know this is not with a C7H mobo, but I wanted to drop it here as I've been following this thread and has been part of it for some time until my C7H died.
> 
> Now @lordzed83 what I find interesting is 1T command rate on yours and mine is 2T command rate. I ran mine 1T command rate but it failed in Karhu memtest at 2500% where as 2T went on for 7.5 hours or 22300% without an issue for which I have proof. Second screen grad is with 1T. Both with Geardown disabled.... had to check with Master Ryzen.


10 000% on new bios think its enough


----------



## xeizo

For us with no custom loop I suppose it's better if boost actually works, but individual core OC in Ryzen Master do look like a great option.

Best is if AMD provides a AGESA which has everything working.

I have a 3900X incoming, will be interesting to see how it fares.


----------



## jfrob75

My overall evaluation, currently, of UEFI 2701 is it does seem to boot a bit faster. However, it still goes thru a power down sequence when doing a restart. So far have had only one POST hang in all the restarts I have done. As with 2602 I have not encountered my not detected keyboard error during a boot up. Memory speeds, for my system, appear to be unaffected. CinebenchR20 and R15 performance improved as shown below. Also provided is screen shot of RM showing mem timings. So the system is configured as it was under 2602. I did notice that CLDO VDDP and VDDG were not being set write when set to auto in the UEFI. This was causing memory instability, corrected once they were set correctly.


----------



## thegr8anand

lordzed83 said:


> 1.35 no vdrop llc5 only for people with very strong custom loop. I'w hit 215w copu draw yesterday hehe sub 90c on tdie still limit is 110 when you get thermal safety reboot Tested





jfrob75 said:


> My overall evaluation, currently, of UEFI 2701 is it does seem to boot a bit faster. However, it still goes thru a power down sequence when doing a restart. So far have had only one POST hang in all the restarts I have done. As with 2602 I have not encountered my not detected keyboard error during a boot up. Memory speeds, for my system, appear to be unaffected. CinebenchR20 and R15 performance improved as shown below. Also provided is screen shot of RM showing mem timings. So the system is configured as it was under 2602. I did notice that CLDO VDDP and VDDG were not being set write when set to auto in the UEFI. This was causing memory instability, corrected once they were set correctly.



Can you guys share a pic of your tweaker page from bios. Would like to see your settings in bios for manual oc.


----------



## crakej

jfrob75 said:


> I assume you want RM view of memory timings, so here it is.


Thank you!


----------



## crakej

I did quite a bit of testing yesterday on 2602 which ended with me finding I could run 3733CL13 @ 1.55v (yes, ram has cooling!).

I've not had a chance to tune and test yet - if I get worthy results I will post them here.
@oreonutz Good find man! I will try this too as I know I've always had tWRRD on auto. Of course I will let you know if this brings me success - it might bring others success as well!


----------



## lordzed83

WEll after fixing up all the drivers problems mining overnight no problems. Scores across the board went up besides latency of memory kit but still below 63 hehe


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> WEll after fixing up all the drivers problems mining overnight no problems. Scores across the board went up besides latency of memory kit but still below 63 hehe


Nice results man! Very encouraging!


----------



## gupsterg

Just wondering if any other 3xxx owner has same occur as my setup, tRTP of 5 will not apply, can be set/saved and POST occur, but can only be 6 or higher. RM concurs with what is shown in UEFI for tRTP in use.


----------



## thegr8anand

Can anybody tell me what the actual voltage is? I have set 1.325v in bios but in ryzen master its 1.1 and underload like CineR20 it drops to 1.050v. Is this vdroop? LLC is auto in bios.


----------



## VPII

thegr8anand said:


> Can anybody tell me what the actual voltage is? I have set 1.325v in bios but in ryzen master its 1.1 and underload like CineR20 it drops to 1.050v. Is this vdroop? LLC is auto in bios.


I found that cpuz shows the most accurate vcore. Tested with a multimeter to confirm.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## lordzed83

@thegr8anand I'd go with HW info vrm voltage. I always did and that worked fine for me


----------



## RossiOCUK

Official BIOS 2606 now available from ASUS.

https://www.asus.com/de/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO/HelpDesk_BIOS/


----------



## lordzed83

RossiOCUK said:


> Official BIOS 2606 now available from ASUS.
> 
> https://www.asus.com/de/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO/HelpDesk_BIOS/


So its the Fixed up AB version. Guess will take a while to get ABB to the Official state.


----------



## boatmurder

Does their new bios disable PCIe 4?


----------



## AvengedRobix

i'm wait for feedback from 2602 to 2606... i've too many profile who work perfect and spend too many hours to work to do this profile XD


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> Just wondering if any other 3xxx owner has same occur as my setup, tRTP of 5 will not apply, can be set/saved and POST occur, but can only be 6 or higher. RM concurs with what is shown in UEFI for tRTP in use.
> 
> View attachment 289200


Same here.


----------



## crakej

I'm still on 2602 and was just testing 3733CL13.....

I'm still finding best performance is with CL16. With CL14/13 I hit a wall where whatever I do with secondary timings performance is the same. Almost EXACTLY the same.

Running CB15/20 I could do 4 runs in a row with EXACTLY the same result - behaviour i've not seen before. Usually you'd see variation from run to run of at least a few points. CB15 was getting 3231 ever time. With CL16 I got my highest score of 3287.

I have to go do some boring stuff for a bit. As 2606 is a re-worked AB I will install it when I get back.

I wish ASUS would put a way of saving ALL profiles in one hit!


----------



## AvengedRobix

mmmm well... i've disabled CSM and boot is a little bit faster =)


----------



## majestynl

RossiOCUK said:


> Official BIOS 2606 now available from ASUS.
> 
> https://www.asus.com/de/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO/HelpDesk_BIOS/


not online yet on german link you gave. Also not on the default ENG version?!



boatmurder said:


> Does their new bios disable PCIe 4?


Probably on the newest agesa ABB


----------



## lordzed83

boatmurder said:


> Does their new bios disable PCIe 4?


AB not but ABB its there but works funky I dont have any pcie4 device to check.


----------



## nick name

Does 2606 return all the AMD CBS options?


----------



## nick name

gupsterg said:


> Just wondering if any other 3xxx owner has same occur as my setup, tRTP of 5 will not apply, can be set/saved and POST occur, but can only be 6 or higher. RM concurs with what is shown in UEFI for tRTP in use.
> 
> View attachment 289200


That kind of happens with my 2700X as well. At faster speeds it will change the 5 to 6.


----------



## crakej

majestynl said:


> not online yet on german link you gave. Also not on the default ENG version?!
> 
> Probably on the newest agesa ABB


Someone said it looked like it was still there in 2701 which is ABB - yet to hear if anyone has actually tested it though...


----------



## crakej

2606 looks ok so far - If anything, my performance has dropped a little, but it's too soon to say.

I'm using the same profiles as I did on 2602.

Windows still takes ages to shut down - is it just me or anyone else still have this problem? It's quicker to Shut Down then power-on then it is to do a windows reset.


----------



## Takla

crakej said:


> Windows still takes ages to shut down - is it just me or anyone else still have this problem? It's quicker to Shut Down then power-on then it is to do a windows reset.


If you mean that windows "Restart" still takes longer than "Shut Down" than yeah. Same issue here on C6H. Shut down takes 1-2sec max while restart takes ~6sec.


----------



## crakej

Takla said:


> If you mean that windows "Restart" still takes longer than "Shut Down" than yeah. Same issue here on C6H. Shut down takes 1-2sec max while restart takes ~6sec.


This is taking a good 25 seconds before the screen goes blank and shutdown begins properly - which takes 5 seconds!!


----------



## gupsterg

gupsterg said:


> Just wondering if any other 3xxx owner has same occur as my setup, tRTP of 5 will not apply, can be set/saved and POST occur, but can only be 6 or higher. RM concurs with what is shown in UEFI for tRTP in use.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 289200
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> crakej said:
> 
> 
> 
> Same here.
> 
> 
> 
> nick name said:
> 
> 
> 
> That kind of happens with my 2700X as well. At faster speeds it will change the 5 to 6.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Ok cheers guys +rep :thumb: .



thegr8anand said:


> Can anybody tell me what the actual voltage is? I have set 1.325v in bios but in ryzen master its 1.1 and underload like CineR20 it drops to 1.050v. Is this vdroop? LLC is auto in bios.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler



As you have done manual OC the CPU goes to "OC mode". In OC mode the CPU will show VID as ~1.1V as that is the ceiling VID of PState 0. The CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN Voltage will be most accurate, has 6.25mV granularity which the best your gonna get and CPU Core Voltage (VRM) will be next best to ref. You may as well hide the duplicated voltage which do not have (VRM) and use the (VRM).


----------



## majestynl

crakej said:


> Someone said it looked like it was still there in 2701 which is ABB - yet to hear if anyone has actually tested it though...


I see, 2606 is available when you select another OS.
The latest bios when selecting win10(64) is Version 2501!


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> 2606 looks ok so far - If anything, my performance has dropped a little, but it's too soon to say.
> 
> I'm using the same profiles as I did on 2602.
> 
> Windows still takes ages to shut down - is it just me or anyone else still have this problem? It's quicker to Shut Down then power-on then it is to do a windows reset.
> 
> 
> 
> Takla said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you mean that windows "Restart" still takes longer than "Shut Down" than yeah. Same issue here on C6H. Shut down takes 1-2sec max while restart takes ~6sec.
> 
> 
> 
> crakej said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is taking a good 25 seconds before the screen goes blank and shutdown begins properly - which takes 5 seconds!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

UEFI I have used on Matisse are 2406/0068/2501/2602/2701, all for shutdown quick, restart slightly delayed, but not 25sec/staring at blank screen.


----------



## thegr8anand

gupsterg said:


> Ok cheers guys +rep :thumb: .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As you have done manual OC the CPU goes to "OC mode". In OC mode the CPU will show VID as ~1.1V as that is the ceiling VID of PState 0. The CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN Voltage will be most accurate, has 6.25mV granularity which the best your gonna get and CPU Core Voltage (VRM) will be next best to ref. You may as well hide the duplicated voltage which do not have (VRM) and use the (VRM).



that voltage doesn't change at all when idle or under load. So LLC is useless when using manual voltage?


----------



## gupsterg

thegr8anand said:


> that voltage doesn't change at all when idle or under load. So LLC is useless when using manual voltage?


VID is not a voltage in the context you seem to be stating.

VID shows a request/set value.

As stated before when we manually OC, CPU enters "OC mode", the SMU will show monitoring SW a value of VID, which is ceiling VID for PState 0.

CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN and CPU Core Voltage (VRM) are actual voltage, ie what the CPU is getting/using.

If I explained more I would probably confuse you more.

LLC changes maybe useless. On Ryzen CPU SMU (System Management Unit) monitors actual voltage to CPU, it can null the effects of LLC if it is programmed to do so by firmware it uses.


----------



## thegr8anand

Really need a guide to overclock the 3900x. Unable to find one with shows actual. Bios set up.


----------



## oreonutz

thegr8anand said:


> Really need a guide to overclock the 3900x. Unable to find one with shows actual. Bios set up.


What do you need to know? Are you just trying to copy someone else UEFI's settings or what is it that you are trying to learn? Genuinly Curious, will see if I can help in my off time if you like.


----------



## gupsterg

thegr8anand said:


> Really need a guide to overclock the 3900x. Unable to find one with shows actual. Bios set up.


If you want VID to be relevant than do a Precision Boost Overclock.

If you go manual ratio VID will not be relevant, only vcore is.


----------



## harderthanfire

2606 super unstable for me, random reboots and then stuck on Q Code 01....


Back to 2501 and that 4575mhz boosting.


----------



## xeizo

harderthanfire said:


> 2606 super unstable for me, random reboots and then stuck on Q Code 01....
> 
> 
> Back to 2501 and that 4575mhz boosting.


I would say 2501 is super stable, haven't had a single glitch when in Windows. All the funky stuff is with boot, sleep and C5.


----------



## oreonutz

OK. I just flashed 2701. Boost is still broken for me, but Otherwise I LOVE IT! This one DEFINITELY boots faster. I said the last one booted faster, but I think you guys ended up proving me wrong on that one. The reason is I have a Raid Card in my system, any one familiar with booting with Server Raid cards in their system will tell you it adds any where from a Minute to 90 Seconds to your boot time, sometimes more. I don't need to boot off the RAID card, I only use it to add 8 Sata Ports to my system so I can all the drives I need hooked up, plus a small Storage Raid Array (4TB at Present). So I always go into the Boot settings, turn off CSM, and then disable "Option Roms" and back on my Favorite Pre-3000 series UEFI, this would basically ignore the RAID Card at boot, and increase my boot time considerably. Unfortunately that option hasn't been working completely since the 3000 series UEFI's. It does no longer display the Raid Boot Screen before post, but instead of showing the screen, it just sits there on a blank screen for the same amount of time as you would be looking at the RAID Option Rom, so its pretty pointless. Anyways, with this UEFI its getting closer to fixing that problem, its not as fast as UEFI 1002, but its much better than the previous UEFI's.

This UEFI also makes Windows reinitialize your hardware at first boot, I am guessing this is because of the Linux fix incorporated. But for instance when I first booted, My Sound Card (I have a Professional Studio Sound Card and External Dac) was no longer default, my Addresses on both my internal Intel Gbe NIC, and my 10Gbe Nic's statics were changed back to DHCP, and instead of being presented to the OS as LAN1 and Lan 2, they were now 3 & 4, and in order for my Graphics card to display properly I had to reboot, I am guessing it had to reinstall drivers for it. But after Reboot and setting everything up properly again, all was well.

I tried Both Performance Enhancer Level 3 and 4, as well as just plain Auto, Default, and then Optimized Defaults, nothing mattered, my Boost for single Core topped out at 4300, and my Boost for All Core was at 4Ghz exactly when under load. That stayed the same across all the different settings I made. 

Getting my Memory Overclock back was easy, I also tightened up my tRFC, something that caused memory errors last time before 100 Percent in Karhu's Mem Test, easily got to 1000% this time. And my Cinebench Scores were definitely higher, and I did not put on the Performance Bias.

Here is a Screenshot of my Results across, CB20, CPU-z. and AIDA64 for anyone who is curious. This is my Best Cinebench Score by a MILE so far. Oh yeah, Per CCX Overclocking is still working with the Specialized tool I have, it is broken on my old script that I gave out, but I have a new method of Booting into Windows with the Per CCX OC starting automatically,with a new tool, and its working BRILLIANTLY! Check it out below! (Anyone who is interested in the tool, just PM me, its not public because of the craziness that happened when the auto OC was first released and people started whining about blowing up their chips on Reddit)



Spoiler


----------



## thegr8anand

oreonutz said:


> What do you need to know? Are you just trying to copy someone else UEFI's settings or what is it that you are trying to learn? Genuinly Curious, will see if I can help in my off time if you like.



No. Ram is oc'dl. Now trying to oc the 3900x with manual oc. With so many settings unsure what to leave on auto and what to set manually. I wish to get atleast 4.3 oc as many have here. So just wish to know how to do it.


----------



## gupsterg

@thegr8anand

I hope this helps, rather than confuse.

Please understand VID is requested/set value.

Firstly look at my setup with stock CPU.



Spoiler














In this "mode" VID is relevant, it shows what SMU is requesting, vcore is what CPU is getting.

Next as stated PState 0 has 1.1V.



Spoiler














48 hexadecimal = 72 decimal, voltage steps are 0.00625V, 72x0.00625V = 0.45V, 1.55V - 0.45V = 1.1V.

Now let's change this PState.



Spoiler














Now lets see data.



Spoiler














In this "mode" VID is relevant, it shows what SMU is requesting, vcore is what CPU is getting.

Next lets change back PState 0 [Auto], let's change CPU ratio and do manual vcore.



Spoiler






















Now lets look at data.



Spoiler














In this "mode" VID is *not relevant*, it shows what SMU is requesting, vcore is what CPU is getting, we have overidden SMU VID request by manual voltage control.


----------



## harderthanfire

Not really sure what I've done but on 2501 I'm now getting 1 core boosting to 4600mhz and another boosting to 4625mhz! Maxed at 4550mhz and 4575mhz before.



I literally just entered in the bios the same settings I've been using since day 2. -0.1V vcore offset, PBO limits at 300, 200, 200, 10X scaler and +200mhz auto OC.


Even the crap chiplet is looking pretty good now.


----------



## gupsterg

@thegr8anand

Your CPU can be overclocked in differing methods.

What you currently are doing is not wrong.

You are expecting to see VID follow vcore, the method of OC you are using it will not, which is not an issue.


----------



## thegr8anand

@gupsterg Thank you!


----------



## oreonutz

Just realized I forgot to put the stupid MemTest in my Screenshot earlier, so just redid the screenshot. Definitely my best score yet, I am proud! LOL!

Per CCX Overclock CCX0 4.4Ghz / CCX1 4.35Ghz / CCX2 4.25Ghz / CCX3 4.3Ghz / Vcore 1.341v / Memory: 3800Mhz / IF: 1900Mhz / Primary Timings: 16,17,16,17,34,56,336 - All Stable

Results:


Spoiler


----------



## crakej

thegr8anand said:


> No. Ram is oc'dl. Now trying to oc the 3900x with manual oc. With so many settings unsure what to leave on auto and what to set manually. I wish to get atleast 4.3 oc as many have here. So just wish to know how to do it.


The voltage displayed in R Master doesn't seem to be VCore - it's just much easier (checked with DMM), to check your voltages with HWInfo or AISuite which are much more accurate. It's much clearer what is VCore and what is VID. Personally - I just use VCore for my OC (if I have one!)


----------



## crakej

Just enough time to tell you a couple of interesting things.

1st. Performance Enhancer Modes: Using bios 2606 I tested PE modes 1 to 4.

They do work! And I seem to get better boost. PE modes 2 and 3 I was seeing cores go to 4.53GHz, and more often then when I set up boost. I've never used these modes before having only had a zen 1 chip. It would be interesting for someone who knows what they're doing with PE modes to experiment. More of my cores were boosting higher.

I don't think 2501 has PE modes which is a shame as I'd probably get boost higher still. Can anyone confirm if the PE menu is in Extreme Tweaker on 2501?

Like I say - It was just an experiment, but one which yealded interesting results.

Problem was, I wasn't ab;e to push performance of my 3733 profile much more with PE3 on -but I literally only tried that once - rest of experiment I only set PE. Modes 1 and 2 with no extra VCore, 3 and 4 I gave just a little more juice via offset.

2nd. So far on 2606 I have not been able to better any benchmarks. Seems stable but still has a couple of quirks like 2602. When I finish testing I will post some results - but I'm getting nowhere near some of your scores.... you guys with your 1900FCLK!


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> The voltage displayed in R Master doesn't seem to be VCore - it's just much easier (checked with DMM), to check your voltages with HWInfo or AISuite which are much more accurate. It's much clearer what is VCore and what is VID. Personally - I just use VCore for my OC (if I have one!)


That is correct. The Voltage Displayed in Ryzen Master is not a Voltage at all, which I know is super confusing because they call it Voltage, but its actually just VID. As you can see in HWinfo, each Core has a VID, as simply as I can put it, all this is, is the CPU Requesting a Voltage from the VRM. The Voltage Being Requested is Called the VID. Just because the CPU requests this Voltage, DOES NOT MEAN the VRM actually delivers this Voltage, it verys on a ton of Factors, but generally, when you are _NOT_ in OC Mode, meaning You have set the Vcore in the UEFI to Auto OR to Offset, then the VRM will send the requested Voltage to the _CPU_. If there is an Offset then it will deliver the VID +/- the Offset, and of course there are still other factors at play like Vdroop, Efficiency, and more, but generally this is true.

When You have set the Vcore to Manual in the UEFI, and then you manually key in a Voltage, you are now in OC Mode. When in OC Mode the VID is COMPLETELY ignored by the VRM. This means when in OC Mode, if you open up Ryzen Master, it will display a "Voltage" (Which is really just VID), but that Voltage will not be anywhere close to what the Vcore actually is. This is because the CPU still is requesting Voltage, its just completely being ignored. So to get an accurate reading at all times, your best bet is to check the "SVI2 TFN CPU Core Voltage" Sensor in HWinfo, this will be the one that is closest to accurate, no matter which mode you happen to be in. Because it will also tell you what the VID is as well, there really is no reason to rely on RM for Voltage, as HWinfo will always display the Sensors you are looking for. Hope this explains in a way any one who wanted to know can understand, what VID is, and what Ryzen Master is actually displaying.


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> Just enough time to tell you a couple of interesting things.
> 
> 1st. Performance Enhancer Modes: Using bios 2606 I tested PE modes 1 to 4.
> 
> They do work! And I seem to get better boost. PE modes 2 and 3 I was seeing cores go to 4.53GHz, and more often then when I set up boost. I've never used these modes before having only had a zen 1 chip. It would be interesting for someone who knows what they're doing with PE modes to experiment. More of my cores were boosting higher.
> 
> I don't think 2501 has PE modes which is a shame as I'd probably get boost higher still. Can anyone confirm if the PE menu is in Extreme Tweaker on 2501?
> 
> Like I say - It was just an experiment, but one which yealded interesting results.
> 
> Problem was, I wasn't ab;e to push performance of my 3733 profile much more with PE3 on -but I literally only tried that once - rest of experiment I only set PE. Modes 1 and 2 with no extra VCore, 3 and 4 I gave just a little more juice via offset.
> 
> 2nd. So far on 2606 I have not been able to better any benchmarks. Seems stable but still has a couple of quirks like 2602. When I finish testing I will post some results - but I'm getting nowhere near some of your scores.... you guys with your 1900FCLK!


So I tested PE Modes 3 and 4 on 2701 and they didn't work for me, but I had my Ram set to 3800Mhz before playing with PE, maybe thats why I didn't notice a difference. I will have to do more testing.


----------



## gupsterg

gupsterg said:


> @thegr8anand
> 
> I hope this helps, rather than confuse.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Please understand VID is requested/set value.
> 
> Firstly look at my setup with stock CPU.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 289296
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In this "mode" VID is relevant, it shows what SMU is requesting, vcore is what CPU is getting.
> 
> Next as stated PState 0 has 1.1V.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 289298
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 48 hexadecimal = 72 decimal, voltage steps are 0.00625V, 72x0.00625V = 0.45V, 1.55V - 0.45V = 1.1V.
> 
> Now let's change this PState.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 289300
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now lets see data.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 289302
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In this "mode" VID is relevant, it shows what SMU is requesting, vcore is what CPU is getting.
> 
> Next lets change back PState 0 [Auto], let's change CPU ratio and do manual vcore.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 289304
> 
> 
> View attachment 289306
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now lets look at data.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 289308
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In this "mode" VID is *not relevant*, it shows what SMU is requesting, vcore is what CPU is getting, we have overidden SMU VID request by manual voltage control
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gupsterg said:
> 
> 
> 
> @thegr8anand
> 
> Your CPU can be overclocked in differing methods.
> 
> What you currently are doing is not wrong.
> 
> You are expecting to see VID follow vcore, the method of OC you are using it will not, which is not an issue.
> 
> 
> 
> thegr8anand said:
> 
> 
> 
> @gupsterg Thank you!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

No problem, just OC and enjoy :thumb: .


----------



## AvengedRobix

ok.. my quiet setup for daily use... hour and hour on [email protected] and work great =) if you want other details write


----------



## crakej

oreonutz said:


> So I tested PE Modes 3 and 4 on 2701 and they didn't work for me, but I had my Ram set to 3800Mhz before playing with PE, maybe thats why I didn't notice a difference. I will have to do more testing.


I don't know if you're meant to turn off other PBO setting which may interfere.....

As for R Master - I've been trying to work out what it is showing - I think it's either an average of all the VIDs or maybe it's showing the highest VID. I'm curious to know why they did this -just show me the real VCore!


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> I don't know if you're meant to turn off other PBO setting which may interfere.....
> 
> As for R Master - I've been trying to work out what it is showing - I think it's either an average of all the VIDs or maybe it's showing the highest VID. I'm curious to know why they did this -just show me the real VCore!


If its the same as it was with the 2700x, you can set other PBO settings in the BIOS to your hearts content, if PE3 or PE4 is enabled, it will simply ignore ALL the PBO settings in the UEFI. I am sure its probably still has the same behavior.

So as far as RM, as far as I can tell (and this is NOT documented anywhere, they hide this info from the rest of the world, but I have done a few experiments to figure this out), with the RM Version that came out with the Destiny 2 Fix, at that point they changed the "Voltage" reading to be an Average of VID across all Cores for a number of samples. I have tried to get HWinfo to mimic this behavior with its averaging feature, and I got pretty close, the problem is because HWinfo displays every single Core's VID, it obviously still never matched up perfectly. But My best Guess is its an average of the Highest VID reported at all times, across an average of somewhere between 5 to 20 Samples. I don't know RM's Polling rate, and thats why its hard to determine how many samples, but it appears to be an average over the course of about 5 to 10 Seconds. Sometimes RM appears to be polling at a 500ms Sample Rate, other times it appears to be sampling at 2 seconds, like HWinfo default, so yeah, hopefully someone smarter than me figures that one out. But I do know that it does now appear to be an average of the Core with the Highest VID, across a number of samples, which appears to span a time period of about 5 to 10 seconds. I would be interested to learn how close I am when we finally get more info on this.

With the RM that Launched with the New Processors up until that Update that came out with the Destiny Fix, it wasn't an average at all, it mimic'd almost exactly HWinfo's VID Number, it just displayed the VID of the Core with the Highest VID at any given time. I spent way more time then I would care to admit figuring that one out, but yeah, that is my best Theory based on the experiments I ran.


----------



## oreonutz

AvengedRobix said:


> ok.. my quiet setup for daily use... hour and hour on [email protected] and work great =) if you want other details write


DAMN That is SWEET! You got yourself a damn golden chip there! Nice Memory OC too! You got yourself a jealous admirer!


----------



## AvengedRobix

oreonutz said:


> DAMN That is SWEET! You got yourself a damn golden chip there! Nice Memory OC too! You got yourself a jealous admirer!


memory can work 3733 cl 14, 3800 cl 15 or 4400 cl 17... i'm doing some test for find best configuration... for now i'm surprise hot works at 4400 and IF 2:1


----------



## oreonutz

AvengedRobix said:


> memory can work 3733 cl 14, 3800 cl 15 or 4400 cl 17... i'm doing some test for find best configuration... for now i'm surprise hot works at 4400 and IF 2:1


Man that is awesome. If you don't mind me asking, what Kit are you running with? Is it a 2x8 Kit?

I have had to really get down into the weeds getting my 4x8GB Kit of Flare X 3200Mhz CL14 Ram above 3600Mhz, I almost gave up twice before I finally had success. But the pursuit is just so fun, I couldnt stop trying.


----------



## Duvar

AvengedRobix said:


> ok.. my quiet setup for daily use... hour and hour on [email protected] and work great =) if you want other details write


Looks nice and here the absolute opposite only a 6 Core + with a very strong undervolt/underclock 
Look at the CPU+SoC max Power, yours is 5.5x higher 
Your chip is very nice, congratulation.


----------



## AvengedRobix

oreonutz said:


> Man that is awesome. If you don't mind me asking, what Kit are you running with? Is it a 2x8 Kit?
> 
> I have had to really get down into the weeds getting my 4x8GB Kit of Flare X 3200Mhz CL14 Ram above 3600Mhz, I almost gave up twice before I finally had success. But the pursuit is just so fun, I couldnt stop trying.


i use this kit: https://www.gskill.com/product/165/...-ZDDR4-3600MHz-CL16-16-16-36-1.35V16GB-(2x8GB)


----------



## AvengedRobix

Duvar said:


> Looks nice and here the absolute opposite only a 6 Core + with a very strong undervolt/underclock
> Look at the CPU+SoC max Power, yours is 5.5x higher
> Your chip is very nice, congratulation.


Tnx.. i'm so lucky with this cpu =)


----------



## Duvar

AvengedRobix said:


> Tnx.. i'm so lucky with this cpu =)


Can you try 4.2GHz with 1.1-1.15V with your cpu? I want to see how much the CPU+SoC max Power will drop.


----------



## crakej

AvengedRobix said:


> ok.. my quiet setup for daily use... hour and hour on [email protected] and work great =) if you want other details write


Would love to see your timings and voltage settings please!

Very nice OC!


----------



## AvengedRobix

Duvar said:


> Can you try 4.2GHz with 1.1-1.15V with your cpu? I want to see how much the CPU+SoC max Power will drop.


ok


----------



## AvengedRobix

crakej said:


> Would love to see your timings and voltage settings please!
> 
> Very nice OC!


i'm going to do some photo in bios... i don't like install ryzen master XD


----------



## crakej

I've decided to try a couple of things tomorrow with my cooling....

I'm going to try mounting my head 180 degrees the other way - see if it works better that way. Once I've tested that, I'm going to apply LM as I'm currently using one of those graphite pads and I know the LM will give me at least 3 or 4 degrees less on my temps.

If I don't do it, I'll be wondering for ever if I should/shouldn't so just going to test it!


----------



## Duvar

AvengedRobix said:


> ok


Thx, nice drop in Power Consumption and temps, can you go lower with the voltage @ 4.2GHz or is this your limit?
You are not loosing much performance compared to 4.4GHz.
You dropped from 165.5W max an ~70°C to 118.4W max and 54.8°C while loosing only 440 points.


----------



## AvengedRobix

crakej said:


> I've decided to try a couple of things tomorrow with my cooling....
> 
> I'm going to try mounting my head 180 degrees the other way - see if it works better that way. Once I've tested that, I'm going to apply LM as I'm currently using one of those graphite pads and I know the LM will give me at least 3 or 4 degrees less on my temps.
> 
> If I don't do it, I'll be wondering for ever if I should/shouldn't so just going to test it!


i use LM on my GPU and work great but i'm don't like use on CPU because cancel the lithograpy =(


----------



## AvengedRobix

Duvar said:


> Thx, nice drop in Power Consumption and temps, can you go lower with the voltage @ 4.2GHz or is this your limit?
> You are not loosing much performance compared to 4.4GHz.


no it's the limit for 4,2... but better than 1,25 of silicon lottery XD


----------



## AvengedRobix

crakej said:


> Would love to see your timings and voltage settings please!
> 
> Very nice OC!


here the photo


----------



## LethalSpoon

I didnt try the last two betas and flash 2606 straight. Is the reset bugged? Every reset this thing shuts down before came to life again.


----------



## oreonutz

LethalSpoon said:


> I didnt try the last two betas and flash 2606 straight. Is the reset bugged? Every reset this thing shuts down before came to life again.


2602 did that. I haven't flashed 2606 yet, but 2701 is doing that as well.


----------



## oreonutz

AvengedRobix said:


> here the photo


You are the man! Also FYI, Sorry if you already knew this, but in the ASUS UEFI, you can take screenshots straight to a USB by hitting F12, makes it easy for taking screenshots in the future. 

I am going to try out your timings and see if my Chips like it. I can run one Kit much easier, keeping 2 Kits error free up in this Mhz range seems to be a bit of a challenge but still learning and experimenting.


----------



## mtrai

I am currently working on a a 2701 C7H wifi modded bios. It is not clean yet since I opened up some double options but it works great. Hard to explain would have to see it you can set either value.

However this is sort of new grounds as it was sorta of a different way to mod our bios. I do not know yet if it will show or work with Ryzen 3000 cpus yet at this time. I am now able to mod the bios and replace modules at will with out changing the bios size so flashback works nor do I lose the signed capsule. Once I have more info on this whole process I will publish it so other boards can take advantage of it. What this means is you will have to do the work to get there as I said it took me 7 straight hours today.

One thing of note...is spread spectrum now shows by default no need to search. Actually module hex editing is now working again once I figured it out. I guess a heavy week of drinking can be enlightening. This version of the 2701 C7H wifi does not include any of my previous fan controls. It took me 7 hours today to get to it. Hpet is searchable. 

Remember this may not yet work on 3000 series cpus but I am a step closer.

This also restores all the things ASUS took out of our bios especially in the CBS menu and I took the liberty of disabling the install ASUS Grid service. Though no extended fan control as I was tired.

This is the C7H WIFI modded bios.

C7HWIFI MODDED BIOS DOWNLOAD: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1aJ7g5iTk2HJFq19rcIUFkBPyarwEGsnZ/view?usp=sharing


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> I am currently working on a a 2701 C7H wifi modded bios. It is not clean yet since I opened up some double options but it works great. Hard to explain would have to see it you can set either value.
> 
> However this is sort of new grounds as it was sorta of a different way to mod our bios. I do not know yet if it will show or work with Ryzen 3000 cpus yet at this time. I am now able to mod the bios and replace modules at will with out changing the bios size so flashback works nor do I lose the signed capsule. Once I have more info on this whole process I will publish it so other boards can take advantage of it. What this means is you will have to do the work to get there as I said it took me 7 straight hours today.
> 
> One thing of note...is spread spectrum now shows by default no need to search. Actually module hex editing is now working again once I figured it out. I guess a heavy week of drinking can be enlightening. This version of the 2701 C7H wifi does not include any of my previous fan controls. It took me 7 hours today to get to it. Hpet is searchable.
> 
> Remember this may not yet work on 3000 series cpus but I am a step closer.
> 
> This also restores all the things ASUS took out of our bios especially in the CBS menu and I took the liberty of disabling the install ASUS Grid service. Though no extended fan control as I was tired.
> 
> This is the C7H WIFI modded bios.
> 
> C7HWIFI MODDED BIOS DOWNLOAD: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1aJ7g5iTk2HJFq19rcIUFkBPyarwEGsnZ/view?usp=sharing


Oh man, I can NOT WAIT to test the non Wifi. I am curious to know, and I know this takes for ever for you, so I understand if you don't get to it, but I wonder if its possible to disable Asus' 100 Percent Fan speed at 75c. That would be so awesome if it was possible. Also good move removing ASUS GRID BS. Does anyone not Disable that BS???


----------



## crakej

AvengedRobix said:


> here the photo


Wow! Impressive man - my cpu is a dog compared to yours!


----------



## MeatStepLively

Just installed the new bios 2606 for a 3700x. I’m still not getting the advertised boost clocks but, I definitely got performance increases. What’s weird is that I’m getting higher CB scores on tightly timed 3200 than I am at 3400 (both running chip stock w/ PBO. I’m running the 3200 at 14-14-14-28 1.35v. The temps spiked to 82c on my best test with Lvl 3 running but, my scores were only 10-15 points under this at default topping out at 68c. I’m going to run day to day with a .075 offset on the cpu and that setup is currently idling at 32c and scored within margin of my top score at 4909 . I’m really happy with this update. 











Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## lordzed83

Iw been using pc sicne iw set up everythig yestarday on this 2701. Generally. IT's great after I sorted drivers issues ect no stuttering ect. I did 2 raids in wow with crap running on background 1.5 hour or so no problems


----------



## mtrai

oreonutz said:


> Oh man, I can NOT WAIT to test the non Wifi. I am curious to know, and I know this takes for ever for you, so I understand if you don't get to it, but I wonder if its possible to disable Asus' 100 Percent Fan speed at 75c. That would be so awesome if it was possible. Also good move removing ASUS GRID BS. Does anyone not Disable that BS???


Gonna work on the non wifi tomorrow...I just did realize how much time it takes now...so many more bios modules and it takes time...it took me 7 hours today just fort the wifi version. I will say I think since I can once again hex edit the modules and keep the cap sighnature and bios size it might just work for the matisse cpus but as I say that I need to make sure I am modding the correct modules for matisse which I might not being doing...but now it is only a matter of time. I saw it once, a setup module for just Matisse but it pointless as there was no way to flash a hex edited modded bios at that point so I did not pay it much attention. Now I just got to find it again...and there are hundreds of modules.\

As to your question yes it can be done..however it would really be a custom bios just for you...it would be easier to let you select it and I would need to check it out. Thew fan mods are something I do not use at all so I just unlock them.

I am hoping Shamino will actually use my mods and see what should really be there.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> Gonna work on the non wifi tomorrow...I just did realize how much time it takes now...so many more bios modules and it takes time...it took me 7 hours today just fort the wifi version. I will say I think since I can once again hex edit the modules and keep the cap sighnature and bios size it might just work for the matisse cpus but as I say that I need to make sure I am modding the correct modules for matisse which I might not being doing...but now it is only a matter of time. I saw it once, a setup module for just Matisse but it pointless as there was no way to flash a hex edited modded bios at that point so I did not pay it much attention. Now I just got to find it again...and there are hundreds of modules.\
> 
> As to your question yes it can be done..however it would really be a custom bios just for you...it would be easier to let you select it and I would need to check it out. Thew fan mods are something I do not use at all so I just unlock them.
> 
> I am hoping Shamino will actually use my mods and see what should really be there.


You are working waaay too hard, friend. So thank you.


----------



## Synoxia

Ok ok i've just got 3700x on this board.
Gimme some advanced tuning tips guys. 
Does undervolt work or not work with zen 2 as it did with zen+? Seems like -0.05 is beneficial on some higher bins cpus... at stock. 
What if you enable PBO (scalar x10,manual 999 +200mhz)?
What about memory? I did 3533 c14 with 2700x stable 24/7. What's best for zen 2, 3600 c14, 3733c14?

EDIT: as expected autoboost and PBO on these CPU just suck. Never boosted above 4.3ghz, even with everything stock but just PBO + 200mhz. Just ridicolous. So, all core manual OC to 4.4ghz, or per CCX overclock with fixed voltage?


----------



## nick name

Synoxia said:


> Ok ok i've just got 3700x on this board.
> Gimme some advanced tuning tips guys.
> Does undervolt work or not work with zen 2 as it did with zen+? Seems like -0.05 is beneficial on some higher bins cpus... at stock.
> What if you enable PBO (scalar x10,manual 999 +200mhz)?
> What about memory? I did 3533 c14 with 2700x stable 24/7. What's best for zen 2, 3600 c14, 3733c14?
> 
> EDIT: as expected autoboost and PBO on these CPU just suck. Never boosted above 4.3ghz, even with everything stock but just PBO + 200mhz. Just ridicolous. So, all core manual OC to 4.4ghz, or per CCX overclock with fixed voltage?


Too large of a negative offset will result in the clock stretcher kicking in so be mindful of that and realize you can't rely on software to tell what the actual CPU speed is if that's the case. You have to benchmark and watch the score.


----------



## xeizo

Also manual OC to 4.4GHz looks a little bit too optimistic, it will be very hot even if it works, 4.25-4.3GHz for a steady OC is more realistic. Remember those "boosts" are like a fraction of a second.


----------



## crakej

So I managed to get 3800:1900 working!

Problem is - had to turn off a CCD to do it! I guess this means the other CCD is crappy. I must admit I really thought the £500 CPU was more likely to do this than a £260-360 CPU. I understand having one CCD thats a bit slower, just thought they'd be better binned at this price point.

I've yet to work out how to disable the other CCD as you can only disable one in the bios.

I may have to use RM for some experiments as it will let me enter values the bios will not, and disable the other CCD, then I can really see whats going on.

How frustrating - now I know half my CPU will do 3800:1900 quite easily!


----------



## thegr8anand

AvengedRobix said:


> here the photo



Can you also share how digi power control and tweaker paradise is setup in bios?


----------



## Synoxia

Thought that if 3900x can all core 4.4ghz on 12c a 8c 3700x shouldn't have any problem... whatever, it isn't hitting even hitting the advertised boost speed, never saw it higher than 4.3


----------



## xeizo

Synoxia said:


> Thought that if 3900x can all core 4.4ghz on 12c a 8c 3700x shouldn't have any problem... whatever, it isn't hitting even hitting the advertised boost speed, never saw it higher than 4.3


Depends on load, light load like gaming even 4.5 may be possible. But Cinebench R20 will probably not run above 4.3 or 4.2. Can be taken care of by using different profiles in Ryzen Master.


----------



## crakej

Had to laugh - I had a try doing an RM OC profile.

I know you guys probably noticed this long ago, but where's the voltages for ram?

The first time I actually try to use it - BIG fail!

Next: I sort out my cooling!


----------



## mtrai

I still do not know if the Ryzen 3000 is showing yet or not... no one lets me know other then one user...it would be nice if C7H WiFf user could let me know. This is different then previous mods I have done going about 6 months or so previously. I figured out how I could hex edit modules and also maintain the file size and capusile signature integrity so it was flashable without afugan.

Also I need to know if people want the total fan control, as that is about another 800 entries to edit no one has commented on that either.

If 3000 series are not working yet in the modded bios I will take the time to extract each module to see if I am missing something. As it stands now I am doing twice the modules so I was hoping it would work but there could be yet more modules I need to look at, however there are hundreds of them.

Once I work it all out I will let everyone know how, I am also checking out some different methods on editing the bios modules.


----------



## crakej

mtrai said:


> I still do not know if the Ryzen 3000 is showing yet or not... no one lets me know other then one user...it would be nice if C7H WiFf user could let me know. This is different then previous mods I have done going about 6 months or so previously. I figured out how I could hex edit modules and also maintain the file size and capusile signature integrity so it was flashable without afugan.
> 
> Also I need to know if people want the total fan control, as that is about another 800 entries to edit no one has commented on that either.
> 
> If 3000 series are not working yet in the modded bios I will take the time to extract each module to see if I am missing something. As it stands now I am doing twice the modules so I was hoping it would work but there could be yet more modules I need to look at, however there are hundreds of them.
> 
> Once I work it all out I will let everyone know how, I am also checking out some different methods on editing the bios modules.


I'd happily check it out if I had WiFi.... 

I wouldn't need the fan stuff personally. Which bios are you basing it on? 2501?


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> I'd happily check it out if I had WiFi....
> 
> I wouldn't need the fan stuff personally. Which bios are you basing it on? 2501?


He's basing it on the new 2701. I am SUPER excited to check out the non Wifi. I Hope someone out there with a WIFI Board will flash this and let us know how it works. This is important work Mtrai is doing, and he is putting in a lot of work for the community, would be so awesome if we could find another VII Hero Wifi board owner to test this with a 3000 CPU!

You know I want fan stuff, but I also don't want to make you slave away for another 8 hours just to bring it to me.


----------



## jfrob75

Updated to new released bios 2606. To me it performs much like 2701. the only issue I occasionally get is it will hang during post with a code of 8d. Can not find what this indicates, any idea is much appreciated. A reset usually results in successful post and boot into windows. The restart behavior, that others have mentioned, of going thru complete power down and turn on a few seconds later is not desirable. However, it does seem to boot a bit faster. Performance wise, since I manually OC, appears the same as 2602. 
Here are Aida64 memory benchmark results for 4 different bios's.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> -snip-
> 
> Next: I sort out my cooling!


Blow on it. 

But seriously -- what are you looking to do?


----------



## oreonutz

So, I have spent the last few minutes digging back into Ram Overclocking Theory 101. I found this helpful sheet I made myself back when Ryzen first came out. I am actually finding this incredibly useful now. For those Math nerds out there, you might like this too.

Of course now, we also have to take into account the Infinity Fabric speed, so just because a Memory Frequency at a Given CAS Latency yields lower latency in Theory, on the Intel Side this would generally be true, but on The Zen 2 Side there is also the Speed of the Fabric to account for, which this equation doesn't. Thats why even though in Theory we would yield lower latency per the Below Equation at a lower speed, that doesn't always add up to be true once the Infinity Fabric Gets a Bump. So Just keep that in Mind.

Also this doesn't equate for Subtimings either, which play a big role in this, although you can use the second equation below to calculate all of your subtimings at a given speed, if you know the Nano Seconds of them, which Thaiphoon Burner will tell you for your Primary timings, so I believe this will be helpful to those of you willing to put in the work. The Ryzen Memory Calculator kind of already does this for us, but this is the math theory that goes behind that. Let me know what you guys think.



Spoiler



Ram Nano Second Timings Calc Equation

(1 ÷ {Half of Ram Clock Speed}) x [Cas Latency Timing] = Time in Nano Seconds to complete Calculation.

ex.

If my RAM is 3200Mhz, and my CL is 14 Then The Equation looks like=

(1 ÷ 1.6) x 14 = nano seconds = 8.75 nano Seconds

as opposed to the same Ram Kit running at 3200Mhz at CL16

(1 ÷ 1.6) x 16 = 10 Nano Seconds
_Lower Nano Seconds Result is Better_

More Examples:
3466 @ CL15 = 8.655510675129833

3466 @ CL16 = 9.232544720138488

4000 @ CL17 = 8.5

3800 @ CL16 = 8.421052631578947

3733 @ CL15 = 8.036431824270024

3600 @ CL14 = 7.777777777777778

3800 @ CL15 = 7.894736842105263
_________________________________________________

How to Solve For CL when Desired Clock Speed & Nano Seconds Is Known 
_ex. is 3466Mhz with 8.75 nano seconds) = {CAS LATENCY}_

(1 ÷ 1.733 {Half of Clock Speed in Ghz}) x n{Unknown CAS Latency} = 8.75 {Known Nano Seconds}

0.577n = 8.75n {Now Divide each side by 0.577 to isolate n}

n = 8.75 ÷ 0.577

n = 15.16

_*In This Example The Desired CAS Latency to Plug in at this speed would be 15*_
__________________________________________________________

THEORETICAL MAX BANDWIDTH CALCULATION

MAX BANDWIDTH OF BUS (64Bit Per Channel) x Effective Memory Clock (Rated Speed) ÷ 8 = Theoretical Max

So My Ram is 3200Mhz on a Dual Channel Board. This looks like;

(128Bits x 3200Mhz) ÷ 8 = 51,200MBps 

Current Aida Read Result is: 49,606 / That is 96% Of the Max Theoretical Read Speed

If Triple Channel Memory at 1066Mhz Then

(192Bits x 1066Mhz) ÷ 8 = 25,584MBps 

Current Aida Read Result is 23,859 / That is 93% of the Max Theoretical Read Speed

Ex on Current Memory On Ryzen 3000 setup.

(128bits x 3800Mhz) ÷ 8 = 60,800MBps 

Result 1 for Aida Read Result = 59,268 / Thats 97% of Max Theoretical Read
Result 1 for Aida Write Result = 56,146 / Thats 92.3% of Max Theoretical Write

Result 2 For Aida Read Result = 60,189 / Thats 98.99% of Max Theoretical Read
Result 2 For Aida Write Result = 56,477 / Thats 92.3% of Max Theoretical Write


----------



## Synoxia

mtrai said:


> I still do not know if the Ryzen 3000 is showing yet or not... no one lets me know other then one user...it would be nice if C7H WiFf user could let me know. This is different then previous mods I have done going about 6 months or so previously. I figured out how I could hex edit modules and also maintain the file size and capusile signature integrity so it was flashable without afugan.
> 
> Also I need to know if people want the total fan control, as that is about another 800 entries to edit no one has commented on that either.
> 
> If 3000 series are not working yet in the modded bios I will take the time to extract each module to see if I am missing something. As it stands now I am doing twice the modules so I was hoping it would work but there could be yet more modules I need to look at, however there are hundreds of them.
> 
> Once I work it all out I will let everyone know how, I am also checking out some different methods on editing the bios modules.


Hi mtrai. First of all thanks for your work, i've been using your 2501 bios when i had my 2700x for the previous weeks, HPET off is awesome.
As soon i put the 3700x in however, i've been getting CPU fan error. A bios update fixed it but i don't know if your 2501 modded was working for other 3700x users... i was so concerned about fans not working that didn't check if modded options were available.

Now regarding 2701 modded bios, i can confirm that the bios itself works, but none of the modded options are available.

Guys, as my 3700x is not getting advertised single thread boost but mostly hovering around 4.275 i am now testing some CCX1 4.4ghz- CCX2 4.3ghz 1.34v. 
Seems stable for now but i have some concerns: gold star core is on the 2nd ccx... are 3700x designed this way or i am just unlucky? Most applications just target core 0 for single thread workloads and having the second CCX stronger than the first... 
Also, FIT tells maximum all core voltage is 1.325v but am a little skeptical... FIT told 1.38v was max for 2700x but pushing 1.4-1.42 didn't result in any degradation for users that did manage the processor temps (i'm mostly going to use it for gaming with a Noctua D15, so probably it will sit most of the times at 50-55c), how far electromigration is a concern on these 7nm cpus?

Ah and... some users reported agesa 1002 boosted advertised speeds... should i belive or just go CCX oc?


----------



## majestynl

Synoxia said:


> Thought that if 3900x can all core 4.4ghz on 12c a 8c 3700x shouldn't have any problem... whatever, it isn't hitting even hitting the advertised boost speed, never saw it higher than 4.3


Thanks to 3800x its not the case!
They used the better binned silicon for 3800x. And the 3700x the left overs


----------



## oreonutz

Synoxia said:


> Guys, as my 3700x is not getting advertised single thread boost but mostly hovering around 4.275 i am now testing some CCX1 4.4ghz- CCX2 4.3ghz 1.34v.
> Seems stable for now but i have some concerns: gold star core is on the 2nd ccx... are 3700x designed this way or i am just unlucky? Most applications just target core 0 for single thread workloads and having the second CCX stronger than the first...
> Also, FIT tells maximum all core voltage is 1.325v but am a little skeptical... FIT told 1.38v was max for 2700x but pushing 1.4-1.42 didn't result in any degradation for users that did manage the processor temps (i'm mostly going to use it for gaming with a Noctua D15, so probably it will sit most of the times at 50-55c), how far electromigration is a concern on these 7nm cpus?
> 
> Ah and... some users reported agesa 1002 boosted advertised speeds... should i belive or just go CCX oc?


Agesa 1002 Definitely got much closer to hitting those advertised boost speeds, however with most of us, me included, that will still only under lightly threaded loads. Once you really hit the processor with a heavy load, the Clocks you achieve will be MUCH Lower even on Agesa 1002. There are some who have seem to overcome that, but I am not one of those people, so hopefully someone can respond with more insight.

Personally I much prefer Per CCX Overclocking, and have a tool that You can have Windows Automatically Launch at Boot that I use for that. As far as the degredation question I can't answer if we can go higher than Fit like we could with the 2700x because the processors have not been out long enough to tell, however just like with the 2700x I have a feeling that as long as your chip cool under the higher voltage, you will probably be fine. My 2700x is still running at 1.45v when under full load under my manipulated PBO settings (and as high as 1.485v when boosting under lightly threaded loads) and hasn't lost a step since the week after launch when I first got her there. Obviously we can't say for sure if the same will be true with the 3000 series though, we kind of just have to wait and see. 

Here are 3 Benchmark results for you, they aren't exactly apples to apples because I believe the memory is at different speeds with the Auto Result, but Memory doesn't make a HUGE difference in CB20 and this will kind of give you an idea of the differences. Result 1 Will be what My Processor does at Stock (which incidentally is the same damn thing it does no matter how I manipulate PBO. Result 2 Will Be Manual Overclocking to the highest I can all core OC all my chips, and result 3 will be Per CCX OCing.

Result 1: Auto OC (This is actually my best Result with Auto OC, this was back on Agesa 1002, and the CPU actually Boosted to 4.1Ghz under Full load, which it has not done since, My Average Score now when running CB20 on Auto OC according to my Excel Spreadsheet is 6952 Points, but since You want to know how it would perform under Agesa 1002 I am posting that result) This was with 3600Mhz Memory.


Spoiler















Result 2: Manual All Core Overclock to 4225Mhz (My Max Stable Manual OC) / RAM: 3800Mhz CL16


Spoiler















Result 3: Per CCX OCing. CCX0: 4400Mhz / CCX1: 4350Mhz / CCX2: 4250Mhz / CCX3: 4300Mhz / RAM: 3800Mhz CL16


Spoiler


----------



## Synoxia

oreonutz said:


> Agesa 1002 Definitely got much closer to hitting those advertised boost speeds, however with most of us, me included, that will still only under lightly threaded loads. Once you really hit the processor with a heavy load, the Clocks you achieve will be MUCH Lower even on Agesa 1002. There are some who have seem to overcome that, but I am not one of those people, so hopefully someone can respond with more insight.
> 
> Personally I much prefer Per CCX Overclocking, and have a tool that You can have Windows Automatically Launch at Boot that I use for that. As far as the degredation question I can't answer if we can go higher than Fit like we could with the 2700x because the processors have not been out long enough to tell, however just like with the 2700x I have a feeling that as long as your chip cool under the higher voltage, you will probably be fine. My 2700x is still running at 1.45v when under full load under my manipulated PBO settings (and as high as 1.485v when boosting under lightly threaded loads) and hasn't lost a step since the week after launch when I first got her there. Obviously we can't say for sure if the same will be true with the 3000 series though, we kind of just have to wait and see.
> 
> Here are 3 Benchmark results for you, they aren't exactly apples to apples because I believe the memory is at different speeds with the Auto Result, but Memory doesn't make a HUGE difference in CB20 and this will kind of give you an idea of the differences. Result 1 Will be what My Processor does at Stock (which incidentally is the same damn thing it does no matter how I manipulate PBO. Result 2 Will Be Manual Overclocking to the highest I can all core OC all my chips, and result 3 will be Per CCX OCing.
> 
> Result 1: Auto OC (This is actually my best Result with Auto OC, this was back on Agesa 1002, and the CPU actually Boosted to 4.1Ghz under Full load, which it has not done since, My Average Score now when running CB20 on Auto OC according to my Excel Spreadsheet is 6952 Points, but since You want to know how it would perform under Agesa 1002 I am posting that result) This was with 3600Mhz Memory.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Result 2: Manual All Core Overclock to 4225Mhz (My Max Stable Manual OC) / RAM: 3800Mhz CL16
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Result 3: Per CCX OCing. CCX0: 4400Mhz / CCX1: 4350Mhz / CCX2: 4250Mhz / CCX3: 4300Mhz / RAM: 3800Mhz CL16
> 
> 
> Spoiler



Pretty much not worth the hassle of reflashing. Seems like im gonna find stability around 4.3-4.35 on this chip at 1.325v.
So unless 1002 agesa gives me 4.375ghz while gaming (like PBO used to do 4.3ghz while gaming on 2700x) CCX overclock is what everyone should be doing.
My 2700x was running the same as yours and still looks brand new. Key is not running processor 24/7 above 70c and as i said this won't be a problem because i am gaming.

I am jealous of those 3900x chiplets binned with the 1st ccx being stronger than others... my 3700x has 2nd ccx reaching 4375 but i want the first more powerful than the other (thanks windows scheduler, thanks)


----------



## xeizo

My 3700X is 4425MHz on three cores, 4350 on two and 4400 on the rest max boost. Under load, CB R20 is 4150-4175MHz, Membench which is lighter is 4270-4300MHz. Pretty ok imho. Auto OC, bios 2501.


----------



## Synoxia

xeizo said:


> My 3700X is 4425MHz on three cores, 4350 on two and 4400 on the rest max boost. Under load, CB R20 is 4150-4175MHz, Membench which is lighter is 4270-4300MHz. Pretty ok imho. Auto OC, bios 2501.


This under gaming workload? Settings?


----------



## xeizo

Synoxia said:


> This under gaming workload? Settings?


Gaming is similar to Membench, 4200-4300MHz.

Settings are nothing special, it's 2501 which has ok boost.


----------



## Yoizhik

Should i upgrade my c6h to c7h? I'm using 3800x on it. Does it worth to upgrade? I must pay 160-170$ more for a brand new c7h (there is no 2nd hand/used in my country currently)


----------



## crakej

Synoxia said:


> Pretty much not worth the hassle of reflashing. Seems like im gonna find stability around 4.3-4.35 on this chip at 1.325v.
> So unless 1002 agesa gives me 4.375ghz while gaming (like PBO used to do 4.3ghz while gaming on 2700x) CCX overclock is what everyone should be doing.
> My 2700x was running the same as yours and still looks brand new. Key is not running processor 24/7 above 70c and as i said this won't be a problem because i am gaming.
> 
> I am jealous of those 3900x CCDs binned with the 1st ccx being stronger than others... my 3700x has 2nd ccx reaching 4375 but i want the first more powerful than the other (thanks windows scheduler, thanks)


I think the bios chooses the fastest cores - but could be wrong. Another user has reported their fastest core actually changing after they had pushed their cpu hard.

Don't be jealous - my second CCD is a dog. Haven't fully tested yet but I think good one can do about 4.4GHz AC while the 2nd is <=4.21 for about the same voltage or more! My second CCD also prevents me running 3800:1900 easily (was very easy once i disabled CCD1). 

It may be possible, I have yet to test 2nd CCD properly, but it's MUCH weaker. Only the first CCD boosts to 4.6GHz (on 2501) and I did see some promising results using PE modes instead of PBO where cores were boosting higher than PBO was doing (on 2602, 2606). I really think this may be a good way to force your boost higher still if you have a good CCD.


----------



## xeizo

All this shows AMD has done some really good binning, from their point of view. Nothing free to be had


----------



## lordzed83

AvengedRobix said:


> no it's the limit for 4,2... but better than 1,25 of silicon lottery XD


Have You ever had chip from silicone lottery or just talking crap ?? Cause from my personal expirience top binned 2700x that was 4.2 would run 4375 same volts stable. They test cpus on loads You and most here not dare to test. If my 2700x could do 4375+3533ck14 and stay stable for 30 minutes of IBT AVX pulling 233 watts. Then those 3900x will be 4.4 all core heavy load stable at 1.33


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> I've decided to try a couple of things tomorrow with my cooling....
> 
> I'm going to try mounting my head 180 degrees the other way - see if it works better that way. Once I've tested that, I'm going to apply LM as I'm currently using one of those graphite pads and I know the LM will give me at least 3 or 4 degrees less on my temps.
> 
> If I don't do it, I'll be wondering for ever if I should/shouldn't so just going to test it!


O ye stuff like that wont let me sleep at night. Remember I went and struipped my waterblock to test the 90 degree turnaround 

If it goes for quality od 3900x SAME situation only 1st chiplet ion my 3900x boosts to almost 4600 stock second NOPE and from my tests of every single core Second chiplet is worse on all cores than first one :/


----------



## Synoxia

xeizo said:


> Gaming is similar to Membench, 4200-4300MHz.
> 
> Settings are nothing special, it's 2501 which has ok boost.


You didn't touch anything? You said autoOC... you set that to 200mhz? Are u on a custom loop?
2501 with everything stock gets me touching 4392 with mostly 4292 idle.


----------



## lordzed83

@jfrob75 TBH I like this weir bootup as I preffer to do COLD reboot when i cahnge something in bios so on 2501 i was like cahnge something in bioss reboot buut up press power button shot down then power on button to have same effect as them 1.0.0.3AB and ABB bioses have


----------



## lordzed83

Synoxia said:


> Thought that if 3900x can all core 4.4ghz on 12c a 8c 3700x shouldn't have any problem... whatever, it isn't hitting even hitting the advertised boost speed, never saw it higher than 4.3


3700x is leftovers from 3800x and 3950x.
like with 6core parts 3600>3600x>3900x


----------



## lordzed83

majestynl said:


> Thanks to 3800x its not the case!
> They used the better binned silicon for 3800x. And the 3700x the left overs


Not seen ay posting long while hows 3800 overclockign going ??


----------



## lordzed83

Yoizhik said:


> Should i upgrade my c6h to c7h? I'm using 3800x on it. Does it worth to upgrade? I must pay 160-170$ more for a brand new c7h (there is no 2nd hand/used in my country currently)


Not worth it. Not a clue what cooling You are using but for the moneys id upgrade memory or cooling instead.


----------



## lordzed83

xeizo said:


> All this shows AMD has done some really good binning, from their point of view. Nothing free to be had


Same as with Navi cards... AMD's products are faaaarrrr away from Overclockers dream :/ Where are times when I was flashing my 6950 to 6970 ?? Or people flashing 290 to 2900x ??. Or Running My 1090t [email protected] on 6 cores !!! Gone...

But with Intel starting to sell 9900ks there was no option of getting great clocking 9900k this year only at lunch :/


----------



## AvengedRobix

lordzed83 said:


> Have You ever had chip from silicone lottery or just talking crap ?? Cause from my personal expirience top binned 2700x that was 4.2 would run 4375 same volts stable. They test cpus on loads You and most here not dare to test. If my 2700x could do 4375+3533ck14 and stay stable for 30 minutes of IBT AVX pulling 233 watts. Then those 3900x will be 4.4 all core heavy load stable at 1.33


i've bought many cpu from SL... and i've sell to SL two 9900K.. i say what they do =) i'm ironic


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> I'd happily check it out if I had WiFi....
> 
> I wouldn't need the fan stuff personally. Which bios are you basing it on? 2501?


This is the 2701 one the AGESA 1.0.0.3abb beta version.


----------



## mtrai

Currently I am having an issue with Ryzen 3000 cpus seeing the bio mod changes. Since I can now hex edit the modules it will just take me some time to extract each module to find the Matisse set up one. I found it a few bios ago but did not really pay attention since we could no longer flash a hex edited bios then. 
However now that I worked out how to totally mod the bios and keep if flashable I will look for those 2 modules again. It will just take some as there are a few hundred to extract and make readable in text.
So currently my bios mods only work on Ryzen 1000 and 2000 CPUs. 

I will add the fan controls back in...I was just grumpy and tired yesterday after about 8 hours of working on the bios mod that I just wanted to have a drink at that point.

You can use your 2701 .cmo bios settings files with now issue after flashing the modded bios.


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> O ye stuff like that wont let me sleep at night. Remember I went and struipped my waterblock to test the 90 degree turnaround
> 
> If it goes for quality od 3900x SAME situation only 1st chiplet ion my 3900x boosts to almost 4600 stock second NOPE and from my tests of every single core Second chiplet is worse on all cores than first one :/


Lol yeh - me too!

Only just getting round to playing with cooler (had to go do more boring stuff). I think I can only rotate it 180, but that would mean water coming in over CCDs then leaving via io die (I think!) - going to open her up and check anyway, before I apply LM, this graphite pad makes it really easy. If it turn out my water in is already on the CCD side of the cpu, I wont move it.

As for 2nd CCD - mine is the same -none of the cores can hit same frequency of the slowest cores on my fastest CCD(0)  I will test CCD1 to see if it will run with FCLK1900 and what voltage it needs. Will be interesting to see if it can do it at all. With CCD0 I just plonked in timings and voltages and it booted 3800:1900 - really easily...


----------



## Synoxia

I'm wondering... are you guys experiencing high browsing temps too? like always 50-60c? I spread a ton of Noctua thermal paste with a d15...


----------



## xeizo

I have a new 3900X in the house, from a batch that arrived this Wednesday to the supplier(which is the official AMD partner here in Sweden). Sadly, I won't have time to mount it until Monday, but at least I wont have to chase a diminuitive ghost anymore 

Maybe I should treat it with some super duper paste, I've used MX2 the last couple of mounts, any suggestion what is possibly better? I don't want conductive paste, because of the risks involved.


----------



## Krisztias

Yoizhik said:


> Should i upgrade my c6h to c7h? I'm using 3800x on it. Does it worth to upgrade? I must pay 160-170$ more for a brand new c7h (there is no 2nd hand/used in my country currently)


If you have problems with overclocking your memory than do it!
I had a C6H too, first with 1700x, than with a 2700x, my memory is the 3200C14 FlareX kit. I wasn't able to reach anything over 3333C14 (but very thight! ) with both CPU's. I thougt, it can't be... than selled the CPU"s and the board, buyed the C8H WiFi along with a 3800X and bumm!
[email protected],45V, [email protected],5V and my daily driver [email protected],465V with the same memory kit! 



lordzed83 said:


> Not worth it. Not a clue what cooling You are using but for the moneys id upgrade memory or cooling instead.


If it's not B-die, definitely! The cooling is important, because these chips are really hot...


----------



## Synoxia

I've put a lot of thermal paste with spread method, are you getting this same behaviour? temps 50-65 all the time? (cooler is noctua d15)


----------



## kmellz

xeizo said:


> I have a new 3900X in the house, from a batch that arrived this Wednesday to the supplier(which is the official AMD partner here in Sweden). Sadly, I won't have time to mount it until Monday, but at least I wont have to chase a diminuitive ghost anymore
> 
> Maybe I should treat it with some super duper paste, I've used MX2 the last couple of mounts, any suggestion what is possibly better? I don't want conductive paste, because of the risks involved.


https://www.thermal-grizzly.com/en/products/16-kryonaut-en is what I'd recommend for thermal paste, never looked back after switching to it on everything!


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> Not seen ay posting long while hows 3800 overclockign going ??


Was playing around with the 2080ti. After 2 dying Radeon 7 the supplier didn't had any left so needed to switch. 

Running the 3800x currently still on manual OC 4.4ghz. Its a great chip, will tweak later again. Will try to get 4.5ghz stable with lowest voltage for daily use. But temps are not the best side of the 3000x series.


----------



## xeizo

kmellz said:


> https://www.thermal-grizzly.com/en/products/16-kryonaut-en is what I'd recommend for thermal paste, never looked back after switching to it on everything!


Thanks! Ordered two tubes of Kryonaut(in stock), I will put the 3700X in a Prime Pro after the 3900X has been seated in C7H and wanted some spare. The whole operation will be done on Monday


----------



## lordzed83

majestynl said:


> Was playing around with the 2080ti. After 2 dying Radeon 7 the supplier didn't had any left so needed to switch.
> 
> Running the 3800x currently still on manual OC 4.4ghz. Its a great chip, will tweak later again. Will try to get 4.5ghz stable with lowest voltage for daily use. But temps are not the best side of the 3000x series.


Faildeon 7 still cant bealive they made that junk


----------



## crakej

I just finished applying LM to my CPU . God it takes forever!

Anyway went to tighten last thumb screw on the head and the bloody thing sheered the post off clean, so I only have 3 out of 4 screws holding it firmly. I'll have to find some spares and take the whole damn things apart  I don't think there were any spares in the box...

At least it's working for now - I won't push it too hard until I get it fixed, but did test with 5 mins of small FFTs and it's still 5 degrees cooler than before!


----------



## Krisztias

majestynl said:


> Was playing around with the 2080ti. After 2 dying Radeon 7 the supplier didn't had any left so needed to switch.
> 
> Running the 3800x currently still on manual OC 4.4ghz. Its a great chip, will tweak later again. Will try to get 4.5ghz stable with lowest voltage for daily use. But temps are not the best side of the 3000x series.


Hi,

what voltages (VCore and VDDG) and LLC level do you need to achieve 4.4GHz?


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> Faildeon 7 still cant bealive they made that junk


Sorry can't agree. It was a great GPU with much power under the hood. 100x more fun to play with compared to a RTX card with all the nlockia features!




Krisztias said:


> Hi,
> 
> what voltages (VCore and VDDG) and LLC level do you need to achieve 4.4GHz?


Vcore 1.34.. LLC2.. vddg auto


----------



## jfrob75

A question for those that have done individual CCX oc'ing. If I want to do CCX oc'ing, using RM initially, do I need to have the BIOS core voltage set to auto and the core ratio set to auto?
I downloaded the scripting code produced by oreonutz but not exactly comfortable with inputting the correct info that it asks for. For example it asks for CCX number but with a 3900X you CCX 0,1 of CCD 0 and CCX0,1 of CCD1. Also what voltage do enter, CPU core voltage like what you would set it the BIOS?


----------



## oreonutz

jfrob75 said:


> A question for those that have done individual CCX oc'ing. If I want to do CCX oc'ing, using RM initially, do I need to have the BIOS core voltage set to auto and the core ratio set to auto?
> I downloaded the scripting code produced by oreonutz but not exactly comfortable with inputting the correct info that it asks for. For example it asks for CCX number but with a 3900X you CCX 0,1 of CCD 0 and CCX0,1 of CCD1. Also what voltage do enter, CPU core voltage like what you would set it the BIOS?


When CCX Overclocking with Ryzen Master, you can use it to control your voltage if your Voltage is set to auto in the UEFI. But the Idea with CCX Overclocking is to set your Voltage to a Static Manual Voltage, and see what you can do with each CCX at that Voltage. For this you would want to set the Voltage Manually in the UEFI. Once you do that, RM will no longer be able to adjust the Voltage, but you can still use it to adjust clocks.

The Tool I provided is simple, it goes in order from your first CCX to your Last, just as you would see them in HWinfo. So In Ryzen Master CCX 0 and CCX 1 is the first to CCX's in your first CCD, and then CCX 2 and 3 your last to CCX, which are in the Second CCD in Ryzen Master. It goes in order from first to last so its pretty simple. If you only have a 1 CCD chip, then you only worry about adjusting the CCX0 and CCX1. The VID in the Tool I provided is only as a safety measure, as you should be setting the Voltage manually in the UEFI. But as a safety measure, in case you didn't set the voltage manually in the UEFI, I set the VID to 1300mv, or 1.3v so that you don't accidentally burn up your chip. Hope that makes sense.

EDIT: 
BTW, it doesn't matter if you have the Ratio set to auto or if you have it set manually in the UEFI, once you run the Tool, or you set the CCX's in RM, it will take effect, despite whether you have the ratio set manually or on auto.

EDIT:

Also let me know if the Script still works for you. One of the chipset drivers I installed stopped it from working for me, so I have a new method of starting the Per CCX OC automatically if interested.


----------



## jfrob75

oreonutz said:


> When CCX Overclocking with Ryzen Master, you can use it to control your voltage if your Voltage is set to auto in the UEFI. But the Idea with CCX Overclocking is to set your Voltage to a Static Manual Voltage, and see what you can do with each CCX at that Voltage. For this you would want to set the Voltage Manually in the UEFI. Once you do that, RM will no longer be able to adjust the Voltage, but you can still use it to adjust clocks.
> 
> The Tool I provided is simple, it goes in order from your first CCX to your Last, just as you would see them in HWinfo. So In Ryzen Master CCX 0 and CCX 1 is the first to CCX's in your first CCD, and then CCX 2 and 3 your last to CCX, which are in the Second CCD in Ryzen Master. It goes in order from first to last so its pretty simple. If you only have a 1 CCD chip, then you only worry about adjusting the CCX0 and CCX1. The VID in the Tool I provided is only as a safety measure, as you should be setting the Voltage manually in the UEFI. But as a safety measure, in case you didn't set the voltage manually in the UEFI, I set the VID to 1300mv, or 1.3v so that you don't accidentally burn up your chip. Hope that makes sense.
> 
> EDIT:
> BTW, it doesn't matter if you have the Ratio set to auto or if you have it set manually in the UEFI, once you run the Tool, or you set the CCX's in RM, it will take effect, despite whether you have the ratio set manually or on auto.
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> Also let me know if the Script still works for you. One of the chipset drivers I installed stopped it from working for me, so I have a new method of starting the Per CCX OC automatically if interested.


Thanks for your quick response. To make sure I understand correctly, if I have the CPU core voltage set manually in the UEFI than either CCX oc'ing method will just require setting the desired the frequency. The voltage your script is asking for is precautionary and probably should match your manual setting but will not have any effect so long as you have it manually set in the UEFI.


----------



## oreonutz

jfrob75 said:


> Thanks for your quick response. To make sure I understand correctly, if I have the CPU core voltage set manually in the UEFI than either CCX oc'ing method will just require setting the desired the frequency. The voltage your script is asking for is precautionary and probably should match your manual setting but will not have any effect so long as you have it manually set in the UEFI.


Correct! And as long as you set it manually in the UEFI, RM also won't be able to adjust the voltage either.


----------



## ComansoRowlett

Hey guys, technically off topic but figured it would be a good piece of information for those who are curious. Although I don't own a C7H anymore I'm just naturally drawn to this forum, plenty of good guys around here. Anyway to the point: 2:1 can actually be overcome if your CPU/RAM kit/Mobo can handle it, but as you'll see here I came very close in the picture below. Unfortunately my IMC is limited to 4533 CL16, it will not post any higher no matter what I try. I actually get around 63.1ns with 1:1 since I switched from a 4600 CL19 kit to a 4800 A2 CL18 kit, and that was at the below timings. If anyone was actually able to pull off 4800MHz you could genuinely beat the latency penalty, at 4533 the bandwidth wasn't that much better vs 3733 but I assume the more clockspeed you reclaim that figure better. I suppose this is kind of pointless to point out but hey someone may take something from it! 

p.s 2:1 was done at the following timings - 16-18-17-17-38-55-1t (GDM)-360tRFC-16tcwl-30 tfaw almost everything else was auto meaning the board had set crazy loose timings for somethings but to be honest I could even do CL14 and I'd never beat the latency penalty at 4533 and wouldn't be 24/7.


----------



## Krisztias

majestynl said:


> Vcore 1.34.. LLC2.. vddg auto


Vcore is what you set in BIOS, or is this under heavy load?
I can reach with 1,34V in BIOS and LLC set to auto 4350MHz on my sample, that's why I'm asking. I would try to reach 4400 but not at any cost, the chip is hot like hell at this voltage.


----------



## majestynl

Krisztias said:


> Vcore is what you set in BIOS, or is this under heavy load?
> I can reach with 1,34V in BIOS and LLC set to auto 4350MHz on my sample, that's why I'm asking. I would try to reach 4400 but not at any cost, the chip is hot like hell at this voltage.


1.34 is what I set in bios. With load and vdroop it lands on 1.325-1.33v! This is with LLC2. 

You could try upping voltage 2 steps and with some LLC if you are comfortable with it?

Each chip has a certain point where the curve gets steeper (voltage/freqs) , you need to discover ! Personally I didn't get the feeling I hit that spot already that's why I saying i'm going to try 4.5ghz. 

Yeap these chips can run hot


----------



## crakej

Grrrr.... second attempt at this post, hopefully it won't vanish this time!

With my temps a bit lower, I was comparing what AISuite (or any other program monitoring WMI) and RM were saying.

At idle, RM will go as low as 34C - at the same time my Tdie never went below 45.6C, WMI never went below 45C. When load is applied to the CPU (small FFTs), WMI reading slowly rises to max 82c, RM rises to 92c - the SAME as Tdie.

So there's a 10C delta when under load - The software operating the fans thinks temps are 10C cooler - is this a potential problem?

Also, could I ask if anyone knows where I can get spare screw/stand-offs for my S36 cooler backplate - one of the stand-offs sheared off yesterday and I'd like to replace it as soon as I can - but I've been unable to track them down. Prob looking in the wrong place!


----------



## Krisztias

majestynl said:


> 1.34 is what I set in bios. With load and vdroop it lands on 1.325-1.33v! This is with LLC2.
> 
> You could try upping voltage 2 steps and with some LLC if you are comfortable with it?
> 
> Each chip has a certain point where the curve gets steeper (voltage/freqs) , you need to discover ! Personally I didn't get the feeling I hit that spot already that's why I saying i'm going to try 4.5ghz.
> 
> Yeap these chips can run hot


Thank you for your answer! 
I will try it out later, when I have time to up the LLC level to 2, see what happend's...
I have tried out the CCX OC, and gained +50MHz on CCX1 on the same Voltage!  Maybe, when you can't reach the desired 4500 all-core OC, or you want to go further, this tool can be helpful. I PM-ed oreonutz to get the tool and the instructions how to use it.


----------



## crakej

I noticed this - on AMDs web site yesterday, thought some might be interested. If you look at the new Epyc CPUs (or the 3900x for some reason), it actually says that they will go into boards for the zen 1 Epyc CPUs, but will need bios update. It also says to contact your manufacturer to check for PCIE4 and 3200MTs memory support. So it seems if you have a server class Zen 1 board, they're letting manufacturers decide on PCIE4 availability on those boards.

I just posted this for information because it does, at least slightly, suggest that removal of PCIE4 from older boards, in some cases, is just not necessary. I know server boards tend to be better designed and all of that - but they were designed as PCIE3, so it's interesting at least.

Curiously I was just looking at their online store to see what their spec sheet says for the 3900x, there is a link, that when you hover over gives you this information! Clearly it was not meant to be put on every product (and it is on a few non-Epyc products!) - Just Epyc.


On another note, I'm just trying to find a way to turn off my 2nd CCD from the bios - I can only find setting that turns off CCD0. I want to try and find the max CCD1 will do on it's own. I already know CCD0 goes up to 3800:1900 very easily, and that my Patriot Steels also works really well at 3800 way up to 4600MTs (I will be testing high speeds more as I've got latency down to 68ns @ 4533) - so I just want to see how my weakest part will perform (or not!). Do NOT want to use RM


----------



## crakej

Silicon Lottery stats are here - https://siliconlottery.com/pages/statistics and updated with Matisse stats.

It shows Intel stuff as well - Ryzen 3000 are at bottom of list as they're newest. Only the "top 6% of 3900X" they tested can achieve "4.2GHz OC @ 1.250v"!


----------



## thegr8anand

majestynl said:


> 1.34 is what I set in bios. With load and vdroop it lands on 1.325-1.33v! This is with LLC2.
> 
> You could try upping voltage 2 steps and with some LLC if you are comfortable with it?
> 
> Each chip has a certain point where the curve gets steeper (voltage/freqs) , you need to discover ! Personally I didn't get the feeling I hit that spot already that's why I saying i'm going to try 4.5ghz.
> 
> Yeap these chips can run hot


 @*oreonutz* 

I have set 1.35v in bios and LLC3, but with load CBR20 it drops to 1.269v. Do i increase the LLC or increase core voltage to get load voltage around 1.325-1.33v?












4.2 works fine at this setting but 4.225 cinebench crashes.


----------



## Takla

crakej said:


> Silicon Lottery stats are here - https://siliconlottery.com/pages/statistics and updated with Matisse stats.
> 
> It shows Intel stuff as well - Ryzen 3000 are at bottom of list as they're newest. Only the top 6% of 3900X they tested can achieve 4.2GHz OC @ 1.250v!


Your comment is so misleading it is straight up wrong. This was under prime95 small ffts, a very unrealistic heavy avx load. They were hitting thermal shutdown with any more voltage than that (thats why they had to settle this low). On normal workload they could easily do 1.35v @4.4 to 4.5ghz


----------



## crakej

thegr8anand said:


> @*oreonutz*
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I have set 1.35v in bios and LLC3, but with load CBR20 it drops to 1.269v. Do i increase the LLC or increase core voltage to get load voltage around 1.325-1.33v?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4.2 works fine at this setting but 4.225 cinebench crashes.


Very nice man! With LLC going up will give you less droop, but possibility of high spikes, or raise voltage. I'm not sure which brings more temp, but think it's prob more vcore. Experiment see which works for you - personally I don't use LLC until I have to, and I don't mind using LLC5 if the VCore isn't sky high, to get me what I want! 

I used LLC5 on my 1700X for 2 years with no problems - enabled me to run 4.2GHz


----------



## crakej

Takla said:


> Your comment is so misleading it is straight up wrong. This was under prime95 small ffts, a very unrealistic heavy avx load. They were hitting thermal shutdown with any more voltage than that (thats why they had to settle this low). On normal workload they could easily do 1.35v @4.4 to 4.5ghz


I only quoted Silicon Lottery. I made no claims and misled no one. The chart clearly shows it's AVX = that's how they grade the CPUs.


----------



## nick name

Takla said:


> Your comment is so misleading it is straight up wrong. This was under prime95 small ffts, a very unrealistic heavy avx load. They were hitting thermal shutdown with any more voltage than that (thats why they had to settle this low). On normal workload they could easily do 1.35v @4.4 to 4.5ghz


I'm gonna have to challenge you on this one. You interpreted it the way you did and you weren't steered to that conclusion.


----------



## oreonutz

nick name said:


> I'm gonna have to challenge you on this one. You interpreted it they way you did and you weren't steered to that conclusion.


I would have to conclude. I also think there is a big caveat with the Silicon Lottery numbers, but its not @crakej's fault, he is assuming people can read. Either way, you can comment to let people know, I was just planning to until I saw your comment, but there is no need to jump down anyone's throat. @crakej is an outstanding member of our community he is obviously not trying to mislead anyone, some more courtesy in the future would be appreciated.

That said, Just got off a 15 hour job! Catching up with the forum now, lol!


----------



## jfrob75

I am able to get per CCX OC of 43.5, 44, 43.5 and 43 at a voltage of 1.356 using RM. I have not tried using the script approach yet. A bit of a performance improvement over my all core OC of 43. However the all core OC of 43 only requires a voltage of 1.31. Overall pretty happy with the performance of the 3900X and it's memory ocing abilities. I have my memory running 800MHz over it's rated speed of 2933MHz. Who knows, may be this improves as the UEFI improves.


----------



## AvengedRobix

i'm on 2602.. only manual oc... the question is.. 2702 or 2606?


----------



## majestynl

thegr8anand said:


> @*oreonutz*
> 
> I have set 1.35v in bios and LLC3, but with load CBR20 it drops to 1.269v.


wow, thats terrible.... Are you sure you have enabled LLC3 on vcore? And not LLC on something different?


----------



## thegr8anand

I think I have the worst 3900x, nothing works over 4225 all core


----------



## oreonutz

thegr8anand said:


> I think I have the worst 3900x, nothing works over 4225 all core


You and me both, My chip is the same way, 4225 is all I can sustain all core without going over 1.3v, and I have to use at least LLC4, otherwise I get more Vdroop then I would like as well. I don't know if mine is quite as bad as yours in terms of Vdroop at 1.3v, but its still more then I would like unless I step up to LLC4.


----------



## thegr8anand

oreonutz said:


> You and me both, My chip is the same way, 4225 is all I can sustain all core without going over 1.3v, and I have to use at least LLC4, otherwise I get more Vdroop then I would like as well. I don't know if mine is quite as bad as yours in terms of Vdroop at 1.3v, but its still more then I would like unless I step up to LLC4.



How do you measure vdroop? Once you set manual vcore, vid doesn't matter correct? Even if vid drops to 1.263 from 1.344 underload like in the pic i posted above, Vcore stays the same always in hwinfo under load or no load. Meaning cpu is always getting 1.35v which i set in bios. In which case LLC has no use when setting manual vcore in bios? Am i correct?


----------



## kertsz

From BIOS 2304v, the fans connected to the motherboard stoped. Someone else happens?.


----------



## AvengedRobix

From 2602 ti 2701. .. problem persist.. every. Single time reboot PC shutdown and restart ☹


----------



## thegr8anand

I take it back. After extensive ccx testing, i finally have been able to oc 3900x to my satisfaction. 4425, 4425, 4275, 4225 on ccx 0,1,2,3 respectively. And the best part is almost everything in bios is on auto except vcore and ram settings! And the benchmarks are with all my apps running like steam, battle.net, icue, ghub, xbox, epic. Funny thing is even though RM shows ccx3 has the best core(c10) of the second ccd its the least oc'able ccx with just 4225mhz. 












The bios setup:


----------



## lordzed83

My full bios settings for 2701


----------



## LethalSpoon

AvengedRobix said:


> From 2602 ti 2701. .. problem persist.. every. Single time reboot PC shutdown and restart ☹


Annoying as hell when you are trying things and need to reboot frequently. Cmon Asus! :thumbsdow


----------



## lordzed83

LethalSpoon said:


> Annoying as hell when you are trying things and need to reboot frequently. Cmon Asus! :thumbsdow


I noticed after few days it stops doing it most of the time.


----------



## crakej

kertsz said:


> From BIOS 2304v, the fans connected to the motherboard stoped. Someone else happens?.


Not exactly - some have had them stop, or not spin up as temp was sticking, but rarely. Certainly not an every re-boot issue.


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> Not exactly - some have had them stop, or not spin up as temp was sticking, but rarely. Certainly not an every re-boot issue.


This is actually is an every boot issue for me. Its pissing me off, its even in 2701. Its not literally every boot, for example when I am memory tuning and rebooting a lot, then I won't see it every boot, but it has been an every day issue for me, because if I am not playing around in the UEFI then my computer is on all day, and every single day, sometimes earlier sometimes later, my damn fans will stop. I bought me another Aquaero XT 6 to make this no longer an issue, but its a shame because I like I using the UEFI to control fans, save for this BS issue, and the stupid fans at 100 Percent once getting hotter than 75c issue.


----------



## crakej

Been playing with my 4533 profile today - managed to get latency down to 67.5ns, but problems stabilizing. Will go through timings again tomorrow for another round of tightening, see if I can get more stability  Might test CL16 as well, but ram voltage already at 1.475.

The voltages in @lordzed83 profile seem like they might help me, not run enough tests yet but, so far they seem beneficial - but finished testing for tonight!

Also, tried to find out what default VCore is - by adding offset .00625 which got me something like 1.012v Is that right? Is default VCore really around 1.0xx Volts?


----------



## oreonutz

thegr8anand said:


> How do you measure vdroop? Once you set manual vcore, vid doesn't matter correct? Even if vid drops to 1.263 from 1.344 underload like in the pic i posted above, Vcore stays the same always in hwinfo under load or no load. Meaning cpu is always getting 1.35v which i set in bios. In which case LLC has no use when setting manual vcore in bios? Am i correct?


So you monitor Voltage with the "CPU Core Voltage (SVI2 TFN)" or "CPU Core Voltage" under the ASUS WMI Tab _in HWinfo_, Then you can gauge how bad your Vdroop is by seeing what your Reported CPUv is before putting the CPU under heavy load, and then seeing what the CPUv drops to Under Load. Don't use RM to monitor Voltage, all RM reports is VID, and that is not Accurate at all. Use HWinfo to monitor the Actual CPUv, and again vdroop is just the Loss of Voltage while under load. Hope that helps.

LLC is used to compensate for this Vdroop by pushing the Voltage up while under load, the problem with using too much LLC to compensate is that the higher the LLC the Higher the Voltage Overshoots when a load is finished. Unfortunately HWinfo does not report fast enough to be able to see the Overshoot, so you will never see it unless you put a high end Voltage Meter or Oscilloscope on the board, then you will see the higher the LLC the Higher Your Vcore will spike when leaving a heavy load, this has the potential to hurt your chip over time. However if you have great cooling you should still be ok, its just something to keep in mind. This is why generally most people recommend never going higher then the Second Highest LLC. I live on the dangerous side so I tend to use LLC Level 5 when trying to find how much Voltage is needed for a given Clock, and then will usually back off the LLC after and then just increase the Voltage by about 10 to 20mv, and call it a day.


----------



## oreonutz

Did anyone happen to see my Memory Latency, Bandwidth, and Timings Calculation post? I posted it the other day and I don't think anyone noticed it. I thought it was super interesing. Posted again below.



Spoiler



Ram Nano Second Timings Calc Equation

(1 ÷ {Half of Ram Clock Speed}) x [Cas Latency Timing] = Time in Nano Seconds to complete Calculation.

ex.

If my RAM is 3200Mhz, and my CL is 14 Then The Equation looks like=

(1 ÷ 1.6) x 14 = nano seconds = 8.75 nano Seconds

as opposed to the same Ram Kit running at 3200Mhz at CL16

(1 ÷ 1.6) x 16 = 10 Nano Seconds
_Lower Nano Seconds Result is Better_

More Examples:
3466 @ CL15 = 8.655510675129833

3466 @ CL16 = 9.232544720138488

4000 @ CL17 = 8.5

3800 @ CL16 = 8.421052631578947

3733 @ CL15 = 8.036431824270024

3600 @ CL14 = 7.777777777777778

3800 @ CL15 = 7.894736842105263
_________________________________________________

How to Solve For CL when Desired Clock Speed & Nano Seconds Is Known 
_ex. is 3466Mhz with 8.75 nano seconds) = {CAS LATENCY}_

(1 ÷ 1.733 {Half of Clock Speed in Ghz}) x n{Unknown CAS Latency} = 8.75 {Known Nano Seconds}

0.577n = 8.75n {Now Divide each side by 0.577 to isolate n}

n = 8.75 ÷ 0.577

n = 15.16

_*In This Example The Desired CAS Latency to Plug in at this speed would be 15*_
__________________________________________________________

THEORETICAL MAX BANDWIDTH CALCULATION

MAX BANDWIDTH OF BUS (64Bit Per Channel) x Effective Memory Clock (Rated Speed) ÷ 8 = Theoretical Max

So My Ram is 3200Mhz on a Dual Channel Board. This looks like;

(128Bits x 3200Mhz) ÷ 8 = 51,200MBps 

Current Aida Read Result is: 49,606 / That is 96% Of the Max Theoretical Read Speed

If Triple Channel Memory at 1066Mhz Then

(192Bits x 1066Mhz) ÷ 8 = 25,584MBps 

Current Aida Read Result is 23,859 / That is 93% of the Max Theoretical Read Speed

Ex on Current Memory On Ryzen 3000 setup.

(128bits x 3800Mhz) ÷ 8 = 60,800MBps 

Result 1 for Aida Read Result = 59,268 / Thats 97% of Max Theoretical Read
Result 1 for Aida Write Result = 56,146 / Thats 92.3% of Max Theoretical Write

Result 2 For Aida Read Result = 60,189 / Thats 98.99% of Max Theoretical Read
Result 2 For Aida Write Result = 56,477 / Thats 92.3% of Max Theoretical Write


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> Been playing with my 4533 profile today - managed to get latency down to 67.5ns, but problems stabilizing. Will go through timings again tomorrow for another round of tightening, see if I can get more stability  Might test CL16 as well, but ram voltage already at 1.475.
> 
> The voltages in @lordzed83 profile seem like they might help me, not run enough tests yet but, so far they seem beneficial - but finished testing for tonight!
> 
> Also, tried to find out what default VCore is - by adding offset .00625 which got me something like 1.012v Is that right? Is default VCore really around 1.0xx Volts?


The default Vcore is based on VID so changes depending on the Clocks which under Auto Ratio changes and is based on FIT calculations. So everyones default Voltage will change because FIT is chip dependent.


----------



## AvengedRobix

Very satisfied https://hwbot.org/submission/4219682_avengedrobix_cinebench___r20_ryzen_9_3900x_8157_marks


----------



## oreonutz

I am so STOKED! I get to FINALLY expand my EKWB Phoenix 360 MLC tomorrow with a New Pump and adding a Rad to the Loop. I can't fit any more hardware in the Old Ass Retro Case I rock, so am Setting up a Rad and Pump Station just next to the System on a Shelf I built for it. Will be a little Ghetto, but Should finally, hopefully, get my 3900x under Control under Heavy Load. At least thats the idea, we will see what happens once I add these new components to the loop. I am trying to get away with not Lapping the Block and IHS, mainly because I am planning on selling the 3900x when the 3950 Launches, and don't want the fact that I sanded the AMD Etching off the IHS to be a problem. Regardless, this is going to be a fun project! The List of parts I purchased are below.

Also, I guess no one cares about the Memory Latency Calculations I have posted twice now, I thought it was interesting stuff... Oh well.



Spoiler


----------



## crakej

oreonutz said:


> This is actually is an every boot issue for me. Its pissing me off, its even in 2701. Its not literally every boot, for example when I am memory tuning and rebooting a lot, then I won't see it every boot, but it has been an every day issue for me, because if I am not playing around in the UEFI then my computer is on all day, and every single day, sometimes earlier sometimes later, my damn fans will stop. I bought me another Aquaero XT 6 to make this no longer an issue, but its a shame because I like I using the UEFI to control fans, save for this BS issue, and the stupid fans at 100 Percent once getting hotter than 75c issue.


Seems different for everyone doesn't it? I've literally had it twice - and my problem is the temp that AISuite (and bios right?) uses (WMI) to control the fans gets stuck, so although the fans were on, they just sit there at idle 39C setting of 900rpm - NOT enough! I leave my machine running all the time as well. Not happened since installing 2606. I had it happen on 2501 and 2602.

It would drive me mad if that happened every day!


----------



## crakej

oreonutz said:


> I am so STOKED! I get to FINALLY expand my EKWB Phoenix 360 MLC tomorrow with a New Pump and adding a Rad to the Loop. I can't fit any more hardware in the Old Ass Retro Case I rock, so am Setting up a Rad and Pump Station just next to the System on a Shelf I built for it. Will be a little Ghetto, but Should finally, hopefully, get my 3900x under Control under Heavy Load. At least thats the idea, we will see what happens once I add these new components to the loop. I am trying to get away with not Lapping the Block and IHS, mainly because I am planning on selling the 3900x when the 3950 Launches, and don't want the fact that I sanded the AMD Etching off the IHS to be a problem. Regardless, this is going to be a fun project! The List of parts I purchased are below.
> 
> Also, I guess no one cares about the Memory Latency Calculations I have posted twice now, I thought it was interesting stuff... Oh well.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


I did see it thanks man - I have something similar from days before calculator - I just had a read and kind of take your experience on-board - we all have such different experiences and different calculations. It helps to give me ideas I might not of thought of. So thanks for useful post - the more information we share the better things get for alll of us... 

I passed out in front of computer while doing OCing. 5.30am and I need my bed!


----------



## thegr8anand

oreonutz said:


> So you monitor Voltage with the "CPU Core Voltage (SVI2 TFN)" or "CPU Core Voltage" under the ASUS WMI Tab _in HWinfo_, Then you can gauge how bad your Vdroop is by seeing what your Reported CPUv is before putting the CPU under heavy load, and then seeing what the CPUv drops to Under Load. Don't use RM to monitor Voltage, all RM reports is VID, and that is not Accurate at all. Use HWinfo to monitor the Actual CPUv, and again vdroop is just the Loss of Voltage while under load. Hope that helps.
> 
> LLC is used to compensate for this Vdroop by pushing the Voltage up while under load, the problem with using too much LLC to compensate is that the higher the LLC the Higher the Voltage Overshoots when a load is finished. Unfortunately HWinfo does not report fast enough to be able to see the Overshoot, so you will never see it unless you put a high end Voltage Meter or Oscilloscope on the board, then you will see the higher the LLC the Higher Your Vcore will spike when leaving a heavy load, this has the potential to hurt your chip over time. However if you have great cooling you should still be ok, its just something to keep in mind. This is why generally most people recommend never going higher then the Second Highest LLC. I live on the dangerous side so I tend to use LLC Level 5 when trying to find how much Voltage is needed for a given Clock, and then will usually back off the LLC after and then just increase the Voltage by about 10 to 20mv, and call it a day.



Yes figured it out. LLC5 or Auto didn't show any vdroop so remained the same. Once i changed LLC vdroop appeared in HwInfo. LLC4 has ~0.019v droop and LLC3 has ~0.031v. 



Is it possible LLC5/Auto give more constant voltage than the manual vcore set in bios. I mean if i set 1.325v in bios and LLC5/Auto don't show any vdroop, does it go above 1.325v under load or will never exceed 1.325v? (not talking about overshoot but constant voltage under load)


I guess 1.35 with LLC5 is not safe as Stilt has said 1.325v under max load should be safe?


Edit: Running at all stock settings and even increasing PPT/EDC/TDC in RM, the max vcore under load is 1.3v. Never went above that. Stilt recommended 1.325v. Now my happiness with awesome oc @ 1.35v is gone. Could it be risky?


----------



## thegr8anand

oreonutz said:


> Did anyone happen to see my Memory Latency, Bandwidth, and Timings Calculation post? I posted it the other day and I don't think anyone noticed it. I thought it was super interesing. Posted again below.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Ram Nano Second Timings Calc Equation
> 
> (1 ÷ {Half of Ram Clock Speed}) x [Cas Latency Timing] = Time in Nano Seconds to complete Calculation.
> 
> ex.
> 
> If my RAM is 3200Mhz, and my CL is 14 Then The Equation looks like=
> 
> (1 ÷ 1.6) x 14 = nano seconds = 8.75 nano Seconds
> 
> as opposed to the same Ram Kit running at 3200Mhz at CL16
> 
> (1 ÷ 1.6) x 16 = 10 Nano Seconds
> _Lower Nano Seconds Result is Better_
> 
> More Examples:
> 3466 @ CL15 = 8.655510675129833
> 
> 3466 @ CL16 = 9.232544720138488
> 
> 4000 @ CL17 = 8.5
> 
> 3800 @ CL16 = 8.421052631578947
> 
> 3733 @ CL15 = 8.036431824270024
> 
> 3600 @ CL14 = 7.777777777777778
> 
> 3800 @ CL15 = 7.894736842105263
> _________________________________________________
> 
> How to Solve For CL when Desired Clock Speed & Nano Seconds Is Known
> _ex. is 3466Mhz with 8.75 nano seconds) = {CAS LATENCY}_
> 
> (1 ÷ 1.733 {Half of Clock Speed in Ghz}) x n{Unknown CAS Latency} = 8.75 {Known Nano Seconds}
> 
> 0.577n = 8.75n {Now Divide each side by 0.577 to isolate n}
> 
> n = 8.75 ÷ 0.577
> 
> n = 15.16
> 
> _*In This Example The Desired CAS Latency to Plug in at this speed would be 15*_
> __________________________________________________________
> 
> THEORETICAL MAX BANDWIDTH CALCULATION
> 
> MAX BANDWIDTH OF BUS (64Bit Per Channel) x Effective Memory Clock (Rated Speed) ÷ 8 = Theoretical Max
> 
> So My Ram is 3200Mhz on a Dual Channel Board. This looks like;
> 
> (128Bits x 3200Mhz) ÷ 8 = 51,200MBps
> 
> Current Aida Read Result is: 49,606 / That is 96% Of the Max Theoretical Read Speed
> 
> If Triple Channel Memory at 1066Mhz Then
> 
> (192Bits x 1066Mhz) ÷ 8 = 25,584MBps
> 
> Current Aida Read Result is 23,859 / That is 93% of the Max Theoretical Read Speed
> 
> Ex on Current Memory On Ryzen 3000 setup.
> 
> (128bits x 3800Mhz) ÷ 8 = 60,800MBps
> 
> Result 1 for Aida Read Result = 59,268 / Thats 97% of Max Theoretical Read
> Result 1 for Aida Write Result = 56,146 / Thats 92.3% of Max Theoretical Write
> 
> Result 2 For Aida Read Result = 60,189 / Thats 98.99% of Max Theoretical Read
> Result 2 For Aida Write Result = 56,477 / Thats 92.3% of Max Theoretical Write



3733 at CL14 seems really good then (7.5ns). Max Bandwidth of 59728 Mb/s. 97.89% read and 97.25% write for me.


----------



## Pie_Eater

Hi - I have a 3700X on my CH7, I'm running an all core overclock of 4.3Ghz with a fixed voltage of 1.375 and LLC at level 5, cooling is via a BeQuiet SilentLoop 240mm AIO, temps rarely reach 75c under stress testing. Memory is a 16GB 3200 Samsung B-Die kit running at 3600 14-15-15-15-30 (66.7ns latency). I'd like some advice if possible, I have trawled through a lot of posts but have not been able to find what I'm looking for.

I'm a bit confused about the LLC issue with many people saying that level 5 is dangerous and should not be used long term whereas Buildzoid posted a lengthy video where he confirmed that the only way to counteract VDROOP at the socket is through increasing the LLC and he went as far as to say that Level 5 is what should be used. Is his testing flawed, has anyone else actually tested LLC on the board and documented that they have evidenced voltage spikes? I'm perfectly happy to accept that on lesser quality boards the voltage may not be as controlled but as I understand it the CH7 is pretty well specced out in this regard.



Spoiler











"According to FIT, the safe voltage levels for the silicon are around 1.325V in high-current loads and up to 1.47V in low-current loads (i.e ST)" (https://www.overclock.net/forum/10-amd-cpus/1728758-strictly-technical-matisse-not-really.html) I'm assuming that "high current loads" are usages like sustained video / 3D rendering and stress testing, and that a gaming rig with some very occasional video rendering would fall somewhere between the 1.325V and 1.47V so 1.375V should be OK for 24/7 use? I appreciate it depends on the silicone lottery so a definitive answer is not possible but generally would people agree with my assumption?

I am currently running BIOS 2501, I see that the only feature of 2606 Asus list is "Update overclocking auto-rules for Ryzen 3000 CPUs." which is of no use to me as I run a manual overclock, is there any point in me updating to this version. I would like additional memory / cpu stability so I can try to eke out a bit more performance but from what I can see 2606 does not help in this regard !?!

Thanks in advance.


----------



## crakej

It's my sister's birthday today - we're taking her out for lunch...

Is it bad that I just wanna stay home and play overclocking with my C7H and 3900X?  :tiredsmil  

....I am of course I am going lol.... but you know when you've got those nagging thoughts like 'oh! I didn't try that, I must do it now'? If I were to do that 1 test now I'd end up doing 50 tests!


----------



## Synoxia

which temp is more reliable?


----------



## ToguroSR

well ...2602 ...had no more cold boot issues ...but now with 2606 it's back . Did anyone else have this experience ? Using a 3600 with b-die ram


----------



## LethalSpoon

ToguroSR said:


> well ...2602 ...had no more cold boot issues ...but now with 2606 it's back . Did anyone else have this experience ? Using a 3600 with b-die ram


Not yet. No more C5 or hiccups booting with my RAM. Fingers crossed :guiltysmi


----------



## oreonutz

Synoxia said:


> which temp is more reliable?


Tdie in Hwinfo is the most reliable. AMD Switched to an Average Temp, so while it gives you a good overview of your Average temp, it is not realtime data, like HWinfo tdie is.


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> I did see it thanks man - I have something similar from days before calculator - I just had a read and kind of take your experience on-board - we all have such different experiences and different calculations. It helps to give me ideas I might not of thought of. So thanks for useful post - the more information we share the better things get for alll of us...
> 
> I passed out in front of computer while doing OCing. 5.30am and I need my bed!


Appreciate you brother! Sometimes I get to sensitive, lol!



thegr8anand said:


> Yes figured it out. LLC5 or Auto didn't show any vdroop so remained the same. Once i changed LLC vdroop appeared in HwInfo. LLC4 has ~0.019v droop and LLC3 has ~0.031v.
> 
> 
> 
> Is it possible LLC5/Auto give more constant voltage than the manual vcore set in bios. I mean if i set 1.325v in bios and LLC5/Auto don't show any vdroop, does it go above 1.325v under load or will never exceed 1.325v? (not talking about overshoot but constant voltage under load)
> 
> 
> I guess 1.35 with LLC5 is not safe as Stilt has said 1.325v under max load should be safe?
> 
> 
> Edit: Running at all stock settings and even increasing PPT/EDC/TDC in RM, the max vcore under load is 1.3v. Never went above that. Stilt recommended 1.325v. Now my happiness with awesome oc @ 1.35v is gone. Could it be risky?


The amount of LLC doesn't change between Manual Voltage and Auto Voltage. Your LLC level will still apply just the same amount when using Auto of Offset Voltage. Regarding the Voltage you are using, until we get into subambient overclocking, the Voltage you use is fine, as LONG AS you can keep the chip cool. So I wouldn't worry about using 1.35v as your daily driver, as long as your Temps don't meet or exceed 95c, and hopefully stay at least 10c below that at all times. If so then you are fine at your desired Voltage level.



thegr8anand said:


> 3733 at CL14 seems really good then (7.5ns). Max Bandwidth of 59728 Mb/s. 97.89% read and 97.25% write for me.


I agree, that does look like the sweet spot. As my original post with this said though, we also have to tak into consideration the speed of the infinity fabric, which this equation does not, so just because we get a low Latency with this equation, does not neccesarily mean we will get a lower latency overall, because the higher you crank to IF, the better your Latency gets, but with that said it does look like 3733 is the sweet spot if you can get CL14 with good Primary and Tertiary timings.



crakej said:


> It's my sister's birthday today - we're taking her out for lunch...
> 
> Is it bad that I just wanna stay home and play overclocking with my C7H and 3900X?  :tiredsmil
> 
> ....I am of course I am going lol.... but you know when you've got those nagging thoughts like 'oh! I didn't try that, I must do it now'? If I were to do that 1 test now I'd end up doing 50 tests!


LOL! This is the Daily struggle my friend! I am my own boss, so this kind of thing comes into play constantly when scheduling jobs, and more so when its personal outings. Is it bad I just prefer to stay in my room, in the air conditioning and tweak my PC, instead of go outside into the cruel world, and be bored for 3 hours????


----------



## thegr8anand

Are you sure 1.35v as daily driver/gaming is fine as long as temps stay below 85-90?


----------



## mtrai

oreonutz said:


> LOL! This is the Daily struggle my friend! I am my own boss, so this kind of thing comes into play constantly when scheduling jobs, and more so when its personal outings. Is it bad I just prefer to stay in my room, in the air conditioning and tweak my PC, instead of go outside into the cruel world, and be bored for 3 hours????


Welcome to my daily struggle as well keep in mind I live just a few steps of the Panama City Beach, Florida white sand beaches. Been once this year for about 30 mins. Though I do get daily outings with one of my dogs. Other one prefers to stay near the house. I would rather stay inside in AC mainly at my PC. Incidentally, we just turned our 2nd bedroom into my Geeky PC man cave. So now I can shut the door if I am in the middle of something and do now want the dogs to bother me but mostly they sleep now that I have this set up in my pc cave near me.

/edit I am still at a lose on the bios menu difference between Ryzen 1000/2000 series vs the 3000 series. I can't find one logical reason it is not showing. I spent the morning yesterday extracting every module in 2601 and looking at each one of them...several hundred and no unique set up menu I could find other then I did find an additional set up module but they are both identical other then offsets. But I had to get to testing the 2 5700 XT I had just got to decide which I was keeping as I cracked the die on my original one with a cooling mod I was trying.


----------



## LethalSpoon

Boosting behavior with the new BIOS is a mess. With all stock my 3700X boost over 4300MHz in CB15/20 and light threaded games, no problems at all. If I put the memory to 3600MHz (DOCP or manual) boost goes to 4275Mhz max no matter what. The funny thing is that if I set the RAM at AMD menu in the BIOS suddenly I see again bursts of 4300MHz in Shadow of the Tomb Raider or The Division 2. Asus plz! :heyyou:


----------



## thegr8anand

Can anybody tell me what Sense Mi Skew does? In LTT ryzen oc guide they were using an asus mobo and said to enable it.


----------



## Synoxia

Then my 3700x runs very hot at idle... everytime above 50c


----------



## crakej

oreonutz said:


> Appreciate you brother! Sometimes I get to sensitive, lol!
> 
> LOL! This is the Daily struggle my friend! I am my own boss, so this kind of thing comes into play constantly when scheduling jobs, and more so when its personal outings. Is it bad I just prefer to stay in my room, in the air conditioning and tweak my PC, instead of go outside into the cruel world, and be bored for 3 hours????


Ha! I'm like that too as only work i've done recently is for me! Very hard to not just do my OCing! It wasn't bad any way - nice lunch and home early enough to so more testing!

On the subject of VCore, there must still be a min and max? How does it know when setting an offset what voltage to set? What is the starting point? You spoke about FIT, but I thought that worked from your current VCore when OCing? How can I see what my default voltage is?


----------



## Takla

thegr8anand said:


> Can anybody tell me what Sense Mi Skew does? In LTT ryzen oc guide they were using an asus mobo and said to enable it.


Nothing. It is placebo. Like most of the settings they recommend. Pumping more voltages into your cpu/ram only increases instability risks. The times where more voltages is an option is long gone. These days you at most want to undervolt, and find the best spot between voltages and clock speed. Like, whats the point to go for 4.4ghz on the cpu @ 1.4v if you can get 4.3ghz @ 1.3v. Same with ram. Especially micron e-die. You should just leave all the voltages and settings in the bios at stock, and tweak speed and timings from there.

I did some serious testing my self with all the extra settings in the bios (trying some at the time, or all, or only like 1 or 2 settings). And never did any of these help for errors not to pop up. At most they took a couple of minutes longer to appear.


----------



## nick name

Takla said:


> Nothing. It is placebo. Like most of the settings they recommend. Pumping more voltages into your cpu/ram only increases instability risks. The times where more voltages is an option is long gone. These days you at most want to undervolt, and find the best spot between voltages and clock speed. Like, whats the point to go for 4.4ghz on the cpu @ 1.4v if you can get 4.3ghz @ 1.3v. Same with ram. Especially micron e-die. You should just leave all the voltages and settings in the bios at stock, and tweak speed and timings from there.
> 
> I did some serious testing my self with all the extra settings in the bios (trying some at the time, or all, or only like 1 or 2 settings). And never did any of these help for errors not to pop up. At most they took a couple of minutes longer to appear.


Samsung b-die (IMC permitting) seems to scale well with voltage.


----------



## nick name

@mtrai I meant to post this a while ago. Here are my daily timings for 3600Mhz. I have to use 1.48V on DRAM Voltage. Hopefully, you can use less.


----------



## majestynl

thegr8anand said:


> Can anybody tell me what Sense Mi Skew does? In LTT ryzen oc guide they were using an asus mobo and said to enable it.


Back in the days with Ryzen first release it was used to skew the temperatures because of the ~10c difference. Later AMD corrected much things how they approached the temps we see. Tdie/Tctl etc.
And they are still playing around with temp readings. If you ask me. They made it toooo difficult with their dozens of sensors. Hope they are happy with the approach. 



Takla said:


> Nothing. It is placebo. Like most of the settings they recommend.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Pumping more voltages into your cpu/ram only increases instability risks. The times where more voltages is an option is long gone. These days you at most want to undervolt, and find the best spot between voltages and clock speed. Like, whats the point to go for 4.4ghz on the cpu @ 1.4v if you can get 4.3ghz @ 1.3v. Same with ram. Especially micron e-die. You should just leave all the voltages and settings in the bios at stock, and tweak speed and timings from there.
> 
> I did some serious testing my self with all the extra settings in the bios (trying some at the time, or all, or only like 1 or 2 settings). And never did any of these help for errors not to pop up. At most they took a couple of minutes longer to appear.


uhmm it was NOT placebo before. I have done many testings with first gen Ryzen and Sense Mi Skew. i even reported i could fake the temps with that to boost higher in PBO!
Few weeks ago, i tried again but the skew didn't work for me. Probably its now a placebo for the 3x series. Or AMD killed the whole option. Cant say for sure! Will test with first gen again later!


----------



## MrPhilo

majestynl said:


> Back in the days with Ryzen first release it was used to skew the temperatures because of the ~10c difference. Later AMD corrected much things how they approached the temps we see. Tdie/Tctl etc.
> And they are still playing around with temp readings. If you ask me. They made it toooo difficult with their dozens of sensors. Hope they are happy with the approach.


Is there any reason to disable it anymore for 3000 series? I've always disabled it. Maybe I should leave it on Auto/Enabled now.


----------



## Takla

majestynl said:


> Probably its now a placebo for the 3x series. Or AMD killed the whole option. Cant say for sure! Will test with first gen again later!


Yeah. I can only comment for ryzen 3000. And for that it did nothing.


----------



## edu616

Greetings,

My friend just bought a 3700X. I have a 2700X and remember that changing PBO values depending on settings would net you certain frequencies (depending on your silicon). For Example my 2700X runs at 4250MHz at 1.32V for multi threaded applications like CB R15 and R20. Then for single threaded app it would boost to 4350MHz and voltage would increase to 1.4V depending on how the application works and handles the single cores. Does this still applies to 3700X or is PBO not working at all? What do you guys recommend? He also has this motherboard as I recommend it to him. Thanks!


----------



## Xenozx

hey i was reading in someone signature, that there is some kind of ram quality tester? that will rate it at say 93% or also give it a maximum potential overclock rating? are any of you familiar with this? I Know testing and changing timings and mhz a little at a time is best, but maybe this helps with a good starting point?

also, i have 2 kits of memory i am testing bout cl14 3200 kits. 1 is team dark b die single rank, and another is a flare x kit, dated july 2019, not sure if its b die is there any way to tell for sure without taking the heatspreader off and looking at the chips?

lastly i am running 3466 on the flare x kit now, and i have it set in bios to 15, 15, 15, 31, any idea why when i boot into windows it would show 16, 15, 15, 15 31?


----------



## thegr8anand

DRAM Calculator shows the quality and oc rating. I wouldn't be too reliant on the rating though. Thaiphoon burner shows the ram details, the die, rank etc. Look at youtube on how to use it.


As for the 15-16 thing, gear down mode might be enabled in bios. see if it boots with it disabled. Other wise like me it changes 13 to 14 regardless of it in bios.


----------



## thegr8anand

thegr8anand said:


> I take it back. After extensive ccx testing, i finally have been able to oc 3900x to my satisfaction. 4425, 4425, 4275, 4225 on ccx 0,1,2,3 respectively. And the best part is almost everything in bios is on auto except vcore and ram settings! And the benchmarks are with all my apps running like steam, battle.net, icue, ghub, xbox, epic. Funny thing is even though RM shows ccx3 has the best core(c10) of the second ccd its the least oc'able ccx with just 4225mhz.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The bios setup:



Haven't been able to stabilize this oc. Even though CBR20 runs fine but any long run test fails. I find Realbench stress test really good at stability testing. Temps keep rising and eventually reach 90 and instability is detected. I guess im just going to be satisfied with this processor.


----------



## Syldon

Xenozx said:


> hey i was reading in someone signature, that there is some kind of ram quality tester? that will rate it at say 93% or also give it a maximum potential overclock rating? are any of you familiar with this? I Know testing and changing timings and mhz a little at a time is best, but maybe this helps with a good starting point?
> 
> also, i have 2 kits of memory i am testing bout cl14 3200 kits. 1 is team dark b die single rank, and another is a flare x kit, dated july 2019, not sure if its b die is there any way to tell for sure without taking the heatspreader off and looking at the chips?
> 
> lastly i am running 3466 on the flare x kit now, and i have it set in bios to 15, 15, 15, 31, any idea why when i boot into windows it would show 16, 15, 15, 15 31?


You cannot use software to test the binning of memory modules. You would need an oscilloscope for that, as well as the knowledge to understand the outputs. The only thing that you can do via software is verify that the settings you have applied are working correctly.


----------



## Synoxia

This drives me crazy... everytime i knock the desk my PC shutdown and gives C5 error. Which means A2 dimm slot has moved, i have to reseat very tightly to make it boot again. Is it common that A2 slot on this motherboard, or even ryzen motherboards, is this fragile? I had the same issue on a X370 gigabyte. Could it be the DIMM itself?

Also, i am getting very high idle temps on a D15 with my 3700x... like 50-55c idle (hwinfo)... is it normal for these CPU? (because of the autoOC feature?)


----------



## majestynl

MrPhilo said:


> Is there any reason to disable it anymore for 3000 series? I've always disabled it. Maybe I should leave it on Auto/Enabled now.


I would leave it on auto to be sure!



Takla said:


> Yeah. I can only comment for ryzen 3000. And for that it did nothing.






Synoxia said:


> This drives me crazy... everytime i knock the desk my PC shutdown and gives C5 error. Which means A2 dimm slot has moved, i have to reseat very tightly to make it boot again. Is it common that A2 slot on this motherboard, or even ryzen motherboards, is this fragile? I had the same issue on a X370 gigabyte. Could it be the DIMM itself?
> 
> Also, i am getting very high idle temps on a D15 with my 3700x... like 50-55c idle (hwinfo)... is it normal for these CPU? (because of the autoOC feature?)



- Dunno i ony get C5 with Instability/Sometimes cold boot after unplugging ac cable from PSU. Can you double check if this happens on stock config. So no Mem OC?
- Idle temps are normal if you check the sensors with 3rd party monitoring tools. Did you check the idle temps with Ryzen master without anything open in background like other monitoring tools?


----------



## Nucky

So what is the verdict on 2606 vs 2501? Worth it or not?


----------



## neikosr0x

Synoxia said:


> This drives me crazy... everytime i knock the desk my PC shutdown and gives C5 error. Which means A2 dimm slot has moved, i have to reseat very tightly to make it boot again. Is it common that A2 slot on this motherboard, or even ryzen motherboards, is this fragile? I had the same issue on a X370 gigabyte. Could it be the DIMM itself?
> 
> Also, i am getting very high idle temps on a D15 with my 3700x... like 50-55c idle (hwinfo)... is it normal for these CPU? (because of the autoOC feature?)


Never had that issue with my ch7 neither with my x370 gigabyte so it is likely to be your ram stick or something you did.


----------



## Jaju123

Nucky said:


> So what is the verdict on 2606 vs 2501? Worth it or not?


I upgraded, cos might as well. Can't really tell any difference on any real metric. Haven't tried pushing memory any further. Can at least report it isn't any worse, but im not in the habit of staring at my maximum boost clocks all day long either.


----------



## nick name

@mtrai I've only had one successful POST at 3740MHz RAM on 2606 which I didn't expect since I used 2602 at that speed. Just in case you haven't played with it yet.


----------



## thegr8anand

How does BCLK overclock work?


----------



## andyliu

Hello,
I dont know if it's been asked before, but somehow the hwinfo64 is killing all the fans after running a while.
I updated to the latest bios 2606, and it is still happening.
Is there anything that I can do to solve the issue or what other software do you recommend me to use?

thanks for the help


----------



## oreonutz

Pie_Eater said:


> Hi - I have a 3700X on my CH7, I'm running an all core overclock of 4.3Ghz with a fixed voltage of 1.375 and LLC at level 5, cooling is via a BeQuiet SilentLoop 240mm AIO, temps rarely reach 75c under stress testing. Memory is a 16GB 3200 Samsung B-Die kit running at 3600 14-15-15-15-30 (66.7ns latency). I'd like some advice if possible, I have trawled through a lot of posts but have not been able to find what I'm looking for.
> 
> I'm a bit confused about the LLC issue with many people saying that level 5 is dangerous and should not be used long term whereas Buildzoid posted a lengthy video where he confirmed that the only way to counteract VDROOP at the socket is through increasing the LLC and he went as far as to say that Level 5 is what should be used. Is his testing flawed, has anyone else actually tested LLC on the board and documented that they have evidenced voltage spikes? I'm perfectly happy to accept that on lesser quality boards the voltage may not be as controlled but as I understand it the CH7 is pretty well specced out in this regard.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> https://youtu.be/UqBk9gSGK64
> 
> 
> 
> "According to FIT, the safe voltage levels for the silicon are around 1.325V in high-current loads and up to 1.47V in low-current loads (i.e ST)" (https://www.overclock.net/forum/10-amd-cpus/1728758-strictly-technical-matisse-not-really.html) I'm assuming that "high current loads" are usages like sustained video / 3D rendering and stress testing, and that a gaming rig with some very occasional video rendering would fall somewhere between the 1.325V and 1.47V so 1.375V should be OK for 24/7 use? I appreciate it depends on the silicone lottery so a definitive answer is not possible but generally would people agree with my assumption?
> 
> I am currently running BIOS 2501, I see that the only feature of 2606 Asus list is "Update overclocking auto-rules for Ryzen 3000 CPUs." which is of no use to me as I run a manual overclock, is there any point in me updating to this version. I would like additional memory / cpu stability so I can try to eke out a bit more performance but from what I can see 2606 does not help in this regard !?!
> 
> Thanks in advance.


Sorry I have been extremely busy working on a New Contract for a new Client. Currently have my entire Team Fitting out a brand new Building with Cabling, while I myself am Working on Getting an entire Cluster of Servers Built out to the Clients Spec, its a Crazy HUGE project. Had to put my own Water Cooling Project aside for the time being, as this project literally fell out of the sky from a BNI Meeting. Apparently the company whom originally won the Bid for this Contract went out of business and didn't bother telling any one, and just didn't show up, and my company came highly recommended from word of mouth through my BNI Network. They literally called and asked if I could assemble a team and start the very next day, was intense!

Anyways, Will talk more about that later if anyone cares, its a crazy insane project. 

I didn't see your question in the thread earlier, just saw it while reviewing. Buildzoid knows what he is talking about, so I always hold his advice with high regard when its within his area of expertise. There are somethings where he isn't as informed, but in this area he is incredibly informed. I myself run with high LLC, but it depends on the Board. As long as you can keep the temperatures in check, more then likely you are going to be fine, its more of a safety precaution as to why people advise you to lower your LLC to a level or 2 below the highest level. In fact there has been a number of times where Buildzoid himself has advocated from lowering LLC, and has done an entire 45 minutes video on why you don't want to run High LLC. But, this definitely depends on the board, and how over board they went with the LLC Compensation, and on our Board it appears to be no where near as bad, as say some MSI boards where its so bad that it overshoots by an entire 250mV. 

If you can't measure the overshoot yourself, I would always advise caution, and do your best to stay at least a level or 2 below the highest, and just run more voltage to counteract the vDroop, but at the end of the day it is completely up to you and what you are comfortable with. I can say that while I would never recommend any one else do this, because I don't want my advise to be the reason why you killed your chip, I am completely 100 Percent comfortable with running my own chip, at LLC5 with this specific Crosshair VII hero, because I don't find the overshoot to be bad at all. I do not have an Oscilloscope, but I have measured with my Fluke, and from what I can tell the Overshoot on LLC 5 is only about 50mv, which means the voltage reached during the overshoot isn't anywhere near as high as the Voltage the Chip pumps through itself on auto. Anyways, hope this helps...


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> Welcome to my daily struggle as well keep in mind I live just a few steps of the Panama City Beach, Florida white sand beaches. Been once this year for about 30 mins. Though I do get daily outings with one of my dogs. Other one prefers to stay near the house. I would rather stay inside in AC mainly at my PC. Incidentally, we just turned our 2nd bedroom into my Geeky PC man cave. So now I can shut the door if I am in the middle of something and do now want the dogs to bother me but mostly they sleep now that I have this set up in my pc cave near me.
> 
> /edit I am still at a lose on the bios menu difference between Ryzen 1000/2000 series vs the 3000 series. I can't find one logical reason it is not showing. I spent the morning yesterday extracting every module in 2601 and looking at each one of them...several hundred and no unique set up menu I could find other then I did find an additional set up module but they are both identical other then offsets. But I had to get to testing the 2 5700 XT I had just got to decide which I was keeping as I cracked the die on my original one with a cooling mod I was trying.


I love having a Man Cave, its where I spend Most of my time! LOL! I feel you though! And sorry about the pain in the Ass the UEFI has become for you. I would completely understand if you decided to scrap it until more information came to light about the topic. Regardless, you are the man brother!



thegr8anand said:


> Can anybody tell me what Sense Mi Skew does? In LTT ryzen oc guide they were using an asus mobo and said to enable it.





majestynl said:


> Back in the days with Ryzen first release it was used to skew the temperatures because of the ~10c difference. Later AMD corrected much things how they approached the temps we see. Tdie/Tctl etc.
> And they are still playing around with temp readings. If you ask me. They made it toooo difficult with their dozens of sensors. Hope they are happy with the approach.
> 
> 
> 
> uhmm it was NOT placebo before. I have done many testings with first gen Ryzen and Sense Mi Skew. i even reported i could fake the temps with that to boost higher in PBO!
> Few weeks ago, i tried again but the skew didn't work for me. Probably its now a placebo for the 3x series. Or AMD killed the whole option. Cant say for sure! Will test with first gen again later!



So Like @majestynl I did a crap ton of Testing with Sensi MI Skew, specifically with my 2700x, and I was able to use this to lower the Reported temperature to the CPU, which would help me able to maintain a higher boost for longer, without using the PE Modes. It worked Brilliantly. Basically, the way it worked, Your Allcore Multi threaded Boost was tied to the Tctl Temp, once you got above (I believe it was) 65c your all core Boost under load would drop pretty significantly, much like it does now. With Sense MI Skew, leaving the default at 272 it would lower your Tctl Temp by 5 Degrees. Obviously this doesn't ACTUALLY lower your Temps, just lowers the Reported temp to the CPU, and actually it lowered all CPU temps, including Tdie, and the CPU temps recorded in the Motherboard, but it was Tctl that Boost was tied to, so thats the temp you wanted to lower. Anyways, from my testing, if you put in 282, instead of 272 that would make your Tctl drop by about 15 Degrees C. This wasn't a linear scale, because after 282, it seems the temps would drop by a Random amount, and was hard to track, but I was able to use a Sense Mi Skew of 282 to successfully drop my reported Tctl by 15c which would be just enough to allow me to keep a sustained boost under-load. Then I would go into Hwinfo and add Plus 15 to the Tdie temp, to allow me to keep track of my real temp without having to constantly look at my Multi Meter.

Anyways, thats what the Sense Mi Skew did in the UEFI. That said I have no idea why LTT would recommend setting that to enable without explaining what it does. And furthermore, I haven't actually tested it with a Ryzen 3000 CPU yet to see if it actually still works. As someone else said, it may just do nothing now, but I couldn't tell you for sure without Hooking back up my Thermal Probe to the back of the socket and running my own tests again. Or you could just put your CPU under a CB15 loads, Run it for 3 RUns in a row and record your hottest Temp, then reboot, go into the UEFI and turn on Sense MI Skew, set it to 282, save and reboot then go back into Windows and Run CB15 again, again for 3 Runs in a row, and you will quickly be able to tell whether or not your Reported Temp is lower. If it is, this would help to trick FIT into boosting your CPU for Longer under heavy load (although like with Ryzen 2000 this could introduce instability if not controlling for other variables, like voltage.)


----------



## oreonutz

andyliu said:


> Hello,
> I dont know if it's been asked before, but somehow the hwinfo64 is killing all the fans after running a while.
> I updated to the latest bios 2606, and it is still happening.
> Is there anything that I can do to solve the issue or what other software do you recommend me to use?
> 
> thanks for the help


I am having this same issue, however I hadn't tracked the issue to HWinfo specifically. I had just assumed there was something messed up in The UEFI as this happened on this exact board (The Crosshair 7 Hero) after the 2000 Series launch, and it took ASUS a while to fix it. Although, the issue was with how HWinfo and other monitoring tools were interfacing with the WMI. It actually was not HWinfo's fault at all, but to paraphrase @Mumak it was thanks to "Asus Shoddy WMI Implementation" and it took them Months to finally fix it, so that when you used 2 different software Monitoring tools running at the same time it didn't cause your system to shutdown or your fans to have odd behavior. 

I wouldn't be surprised if this has somehow been reintroduced. I remember before Asus fixed the issue with their UEFI, HWinfo came out with a new version which essentially turned off WMI altogether, and then another Update after which used a different method to probe the WMI, and both of these versions worked perfectly. But perhaps ASUS has reintroduced that bug into their WMI implementation again, which is causing this issue when software monitoring tools probe it. It may work to simply go into HWinfo settings and turn off the "EC Support" inside of the Safety Tab. This will disable the ASUS sensors altogether, but won't effect the CPU based Sensors (Which tend to be the more accurate ones anyway) and may just cause this annoying issue to stop until ASUS fixes their bug again. 

This assumes a lot, and I could be way off base, I don't even know for a fact that this issue is being caused by software monitoring tools again, but if it were happening as a side effect of using software monitoring tools, then this may be a temporary work around to stop experiencing these annoying Fan stopping issues. (I am experiencing the same issue about once a day, and it is incredibly annoying, so I am going to try this myself and see if it helps, as HWinfo is the ONLY program that I allow to start with my PC, and it remains running until I shutdown.)

Also, maybe @Mumak with HWinfo might have an idea as to why this is happening. (Again, I don't know for sure that this is happening as a side affect of having HWinfo open, this is just the theory being proposed that I am exploring.)


----------



## Mumak

oreonutz said:


> I am having this same issue, however I hadn't tracked the issue to HWinfo specifically. I had just assumed there was something messed up in The UEFI as this happened on this exact board (The Crosshair 7 Hero) after the 2000 Series launch, and it took ASUS a while to fix it. Although, the issue was with how HWinfo and other monitoring tools were interfacing with the WMI. It actually was not HWinfo's fault at all, but to paraphrase @Mumak it was thanks to "Asus Shoddy WMI Implementation" and it took them Months to finally fix it, so that when you used 2 different software Monitoring tools running at the same time it didn't cause your system to shutdown or your fans to have odd behavior.
> 
> I wouldn't be surprised if this has somehow been reintroduced. I remember before Asus fixed the issue with their UEFI, HWinfo came out with a new version which essentially turned off WMI altogether, and then another Update after which used a different method to probe the WMI, and both of these versions worked perfectly. But perhaps ASUS has reintroduced that bug into their WMI implementation again, which is causing this issue when software monitoring tools probe it. It may work to simply go into HWinfo settings and turn off the "EC Support" inside of the Safety Tab. This will disable the ASUS sensors altogether, but won't effect the CPU based Sensors (Which tend to be the more accurate ones anyway) and may just cause this annoying issue to stop until ASUS fixes their bug again.
> 
> This assumes a lot, and I could be way off base, I don't even know for a fact that this issue is being caused by software monitoring tools again, but if it were happening as a side effect of using software monitoring tools, then this may be a temporary work around to stop experiencing these annoying Fan stopping issues. (I am experiencing the same issue about once a day, and it is incredibly annoying, so I am going to try this myself and see if it helps, as HWinfo is the ONLY program that I allow to start with my PC, and it remains running until I shutdown.)
> 
> Also, maybe @Mumak with HWinfo might have an idea as to why this is happening. (Again, I don't know for sure that this is happening as a side affect of having HWinfo open, this is just the theory being proposed that I am exploring.)


Yup, it looks like ASUS re-introduced this issue in latest BIOSes. WMI interface was originally developed to solve problems with concurrent access to the buggy SIO chip (IT8665) and that worked well for some time. But after switching the AGESA base from PinnaclePI to ComboPI it looks like the WMI implementation on BIOS side isn't working well.

EDIT: Disabling use of the WMI interface by putting AsusWMI=0 at the end of HWiNFO64.INI file might help to mitigate the problem.


----------



## Praetorr

Mumak said:


> Yup, it looks like ASUS re-introduced this issue in latest BIOSes. WMI interface was originally developed to solve problems with concurrent access to the buggy SIO chip (IT8665) and that worked well for some time. But after switching the AGESA base from PinnaclePI to ComboPI it looks like the WMI implementation on BIOS side isn't working well.
> 
> EDIT: Disabling use of the WMI interface by putting AsusWMI=0 at the end of HWiNFO64.INI file might help to mitigate the problem.


In my experience your intuition seems right on the mark. It seems Asus never learn from their incompetence....

P.S. thank you so much for everything you do! I've been a religious hwinfo user for many years, and it's by far my favorite sensor software.


----------



## Duvar

New Chipsetdriver was released just now, head over to AMD and download it.


----------



## lordzed83

Or just link the basterd ??

https://drivers.amd.com/drivers/amd_chipset_drivers_v1.8.19.0915.zip

think its minor fix ones cause nothing hcanged score whise


----------



## toxick

My Ryzen 3900X system.


----------



## oreonutz

toxick said:


> My Ryzen 3900X system.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Veo45i-QPxY&feature=youtu.be


I LOVE THE WAY this was shot! Fricken awesome! Only change I would make is redubbing the Music over in Post so it sounds as awesome as that camera Work looks! LOL! Seriously, loved it!


----------



## oreonutz

Mumak said:


> Yup, it looks like ASUS re-introduced this issue in latest BIOSes. WMI interface was originally developed to solve problems with concurrent access to the buggy SIO chip (IT8665) and that worked well for some time. But after switching the AGESA base from PinnaclePI to ComboPI it looks like the WMI implementation on BIOS side isn't working well.
> 
> EDIT: Disabling use of the WMI interface by putting AsusWMI=0 at the end of HWiNFO64.INI file might help to mitigate the problem.


 @Mumak Thank You for the quick response! I am going to try the AsusWMI=0 work around and report back in a few days to see if this issue has stopped. Thank you as always for your awesome work, both with this tool, and with the community!


----------



## xeizo

Popped in the 3900X today, loaded the exact same profile I used for 3700X and it worked right away. 3800MHz memory, boost to 4.6GHz. Haven't had time digging deeper, but it's smooth and fast. Memory bandwith went up with dual chiplets:










It took more time making the 3700X at home in a Prime Pro in my second rig. Or not the CPU, it even boosts better than on C7H. 4.45GHz on three cores. But the memory, that rig has crappy Hynix AFR 4x8GB and all above 2933MHz wouldn't even boot. In effect, the C7H now has a whopping 50% higher bandwidth! On the other hand, Linux(Arch) on that rig is fast, Geekbench 6150/38500 with Auto OC is rather great for a 3700X.


----------



## edu616

Just trying to get max boos on a 3700X with this board in at least one core but seems to be impossible. It was so easy with zen +. With my 2700X using Asus settings Performance enhancer level 3 and modifying my EDC to 156 I was able to run an all core OC of 4250MHz while gaming or heavy threaded apps, and 4350MHz (max for that processor) while doing single core tasks! Voltage and frequencies scaled correctly depending on the workload. Can someone point me in the right direction for the 3700X and this board? Thanks!


----------



## xeizo

Bios 2501 has the highest automatic boost, the newer biose(s) makes manual OC or per-CCX OC more worthwhile than before.


----------



## edu616

xeizo said:


> Bios 2501 has the highest automatic boost, the newer biose(s) makes manual OC or per-CCX OC more worthwhile than before.



Any advice on CCX OC how to start or a guide on it? Thanks!


----------



## Pietro

Regarding RAM OC on 2nd gen(Zen+) Ryzens which bios version was the best? The newer ones for 3rd gens that I tried with my 2700X are just poor and I had downclock ram from 3560CL14 to 3466CL14 to have it stable.


----------



## CJMitsuki

I think I may have a solution for the poor boosting performance due to the changes. If you have a tab in your "AMD CBS" menu called "SMU Options" then go to it and see if there are a couple of options named "CPPC" and "CPPC Preferred Cores" they will be set to AUTO but go ahead and set "CPPC" to Enabled and make sure all of those PPT and EDC options are set mack to their max so your cpu wont have an excuse to be dialed back. Save and Exit into the OS and download *Power Settings Utility.
*
Next open the utility as admin and scroll down and "processor performance autonomous mode" and try the enabled vs disabled setting and see if it makes a difference just make sure to hit apply to enable the setting. You can also play with many of the processor power management settings and tweak when and how fast your processor boosts and idles as well as how fast it reacts to loads and many other things that are hidden by microsoft. Its pretty safe to do so, just hit the "Export" button and save your current configuration file and play around with the options and if you like it you can export more setups and run them whenever or if you dont like it and want to revert back to normal then just hit the "Import" button and load your initial config you saved and Apply.
Ok, onto the next thing that may help you a bit more that I found useful. Download *QuickCPU* Install and then run the program as Administrator and look toward the bottom of the GUI at the 3 sliders and push all 3 to the right and hit apply and check your clocks in HwInfo64.

I went from gettting a 4.35ghz all core and 4.4ghz single core to getting 4.465ghz all core for short bursts and 4.5ghz single core on my 3700x after the process stated above. Hopefully this helps.


----------



## andyliu

Thanks to both @oreonutz, @Mumak, now I know I am not crazy about the fan stop working

only using hwinfo that's why I only ask about hwinfo. I dont recall using multiple monitoring software other than maybe windows task manager.
I will pay more attention to it next time so I can provide more clear detail. 
And I will uncheck the EC support to see if it happens again, thanks again for the replies


----------



## neikosr0x

CJMitsuki said:


> I think I may have a solution for the poor boosting performance due to the changes. If you have a tab in your "AMD CBS" menu called "SMU Options" then go to it and see if there are a couple of options named "CPPC" and "CPPC Preferred Cores" they will be set to AUTO but go ahead and set "CPPC" to Enabled and make sure all of those PPT and EDC options are set mack to their max so your cpu wont have an excuse to be dialed back. Save and Exit into the OS and download *Power Settings Utility.
> *
> Next open the utility as admin and scroll down and "processor performance autonomous mode" and try the enabled vs disabled setting and see if it makes a difference just make sure to hit apply to enable the setting. You can also play with many of the processor power management settings and tweak when and how fast your processor boosts and idles as well as how fast it reacts to loads and many other things that are hidden by microsoft. Its pretty safe to do so, just hit the "Export" button and save your current configuration file and play around with the options and if you like it you can export more setups and run them whenever or if you dont like it and want to revert back to normal then just hit the "Import" button and load your initial config you saved and Apply.
> Ok, onto the next thing that may help you a bit more that I found useful. Download *QuickCPU* Install and then run the program as Administrator and look toward the bottom of the GUI at the 3 sliders and push all 3 to the right and hit apply and check your clocks in HwInfo64.
> 
> I went from gettting a 4.35ghz all core and 4.4ghz single core to getting 4.465ghz all core for short bursts and 4.5ghz single core on my 3700x after the process stated above. Hopefully this helps.


looks interesting i will be trying it out tomorrow/later today xD, thanks so much, will post feedback!


----------



## Mumak

I notified ASUS about the problem with WMI monitoring in new BIOSes. Hopefully they fix it soon.


----------



## harderthanfire

Sadly the AsusWMI=0 didn't fix the issue for me, so lets hope they sort it in a bios update.


----------



## Takla

Mumak said:


> I notified ASUS about the problem with WMI monitoring in new BIOSes. Hopefully they fix it soon.


Damn. So this was an issue with hwinfo exclusively? it was reported in the rog forums a month ago.


----------



## Mumak

Takla said:


> Damn. So this was an issue with hwinfo exclusively? it was reported in the rog forums a month ago.


Not just HWiNFO but any other monitoring tool.
FYI, the report has now been escalated to the right persons.


----------



## crakej

So I meant to post this sooner, but been busy over last few days...

I found a problem with 2501, 2602 and 2606 - when OC fails

Although safe mode will kick in, it's NOT clearing the bios setting properly. Two examples below: One shows where I had been trying for a BCLK OC of 101.8, to achieve 3800:1900. When I hit CMos CLR button it started going through the motions of resetting back to default settings. Instead of showing me the 'your machine has started in safe mode', I had to press del to get into bios - it had started booting, but I stopped it by pressing reset. On entering the bios it was showing my ram as being at 3800MTs @ 1.2v(!) - everything else had been reset so UCLCK= 1/2 FCLK which enabled it to run. It nearly booted to desktop, but obviously at that voltage I got a blue screen just before the login screen.

Second example shows that my ram voltage at 1.51v while everything else had been reset properly after trying out some settings on a 4600MTs profile.

Why isn't it re-setting everything properly? I wonder what other settings have not been reset on Safe Boot or using CMos CLR button? This could make loads of my tests invalid if it's been happening at other times without me noticing


----------



## thegr8anand

Since yesterday my cpu is shutting down with cpu over temperature error as soon as it hits about 85deg. The only thing changed was the chipset driver but i don't think it should have this effect. Anybody know what could be causing this. I run cbr20 with hwinfo to see the temps and its happening around 85deg since yesterday. Fans didn't stop and were working full speed.


----------



## jfrob75

Do we know if any of the ASUS X570 boards are having similar issues associated with monitoring SW?


----------



## edu616

Just an update on CCX OC on the 3700X. I was able to do 4375MHz on CCX 0 and 4325MHz on CCX1 I have a set voltage of 1.32V and this way my CB 15 Score went from 2130 to 2265 also my single core score jumped from 198 to 203. I still do have a question using the Work tool your VID goes to hell 1.49 volts I was able to lower it manually but what should the safe VID be should it be same as my Vcore 1.32? 

Also I did this method as I could not reach 4.4 boost clock on any CCX even with PBO enabled and the 200MHz. Best I was doing was 3 cores went to 4350MHz which is why I decided to go this route and why my CB scores increased very well with CCX OC method. Thanks for reading!


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> So I meant to post this sooner, but been busy over last few days...
> 
> I found a problem with 2501, 2602 and 2606 - when OC fails
> 
> Although safe mode will kick in, it's NOT clearing the bios setting properly. Two examples below: One shows where I had been trying for a BCLK OC of 101.8, to achieve 3800:1900. When I hit CMos CLR button it started going through the motions of resetting back to default settings. Instead of showing me the 'your machine has started in safe mode', I had to press del to get into bios - it had started booting, but I stopped it by pressing reset. On entering the bios it was showing my ram as being at 3800MTs @ 1.2v(!) - everything else had been reset so UCLCK= 1/2 FCLK which enabled it to run. It nearly booted to desktop, but obviously at that voltage I got a blue screen just before the login screen.
> 
> Second example shows that my ram voltage at 1.51v while everything else had been reset properly after trying out some settings on a 4600MTs profile.
> 
> Why isn't it re-setting everything properly? I wonder what other settings have not been reset on Safe Boot or using CMos CLR button? This could make loads of my tests invalid if it's been happening at other times without me noticing


You just noticed ?? This is reason I cmos clear after tweeking any bios settings since Zen1 cause that bug of not full clear is olllddd.

Same as FAST BOOT messing up performance sometimes...


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> You just noticed ?? This is reason I cmos clear after tweeking any bios settings since Zen1 cause that bug of not full clear is olllddd.
> 
> Same as FAST BOOT messing up performance sometimes...



This is happening *after* CMos CLR AND/OR Safe boot. I don't use bios fastboot either.


----------



## Keith Myers

andyliu said:


> Thanks to both @oreonutz, @Mumak, now I know I am not crazy about the fan stop working
> 
> only using hwinfo that's why I only ask about hwinfo. I dont recall using multiple monitoring software other than maybe windows task manager.
> I will pay more attention to it next time so I can provide more clear detail.
> And I will uncheck the EC support to see if it happens again, thanks again for the replies


I don't use Windows nor HwInfo and the fan stoppage issue is present just because of the broken WMI interface in the BIOS.:thumbsdow


----------



## Keith Myers

Mumak said:


> Not just HWiNFO but any other monitoring tool.
> FYI, the report has now been escalated to the right persons.


Happens in Linux too. The sensor driver I use accesses the WMI interface. Not a HwInfo specific problem nor a Windows one.


----------



## Keith Myers

jfrob75 said:


> Do we know if any of the ASUS X570 boards are having similar issues associated with monitoring SW?


As far as I know, only one mobo vendor continues to use ITE SIO hardware. Most use Nuvoton sensor chips. There is no need for the WMI interface in the X570 BIOS' so likely no issues with fan stoppage on those boards.


----------



## Krisztias

jfrob75 said:


> Do we know if any of the ASUS X570 boards are having similar issues associated with monitoring SW?


I have Crosshair VIII Hero Wi-Fi with Nuvoton chip and I don't noticed anything. The reported values in HWiNFO are very accurate.
With the new beta BIOS 0017 I'm able to do CCX OC from BIOS and it's functioning


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> As far as I know, only one mobo vendor continues to use ITE SIO hardware. Most use Nuvoton sensor chips. There is no need for the WMI interface in the X570 BIOS' so likely no issues with fan stoppage on those boards.


Yeah, can confirm, its just effects the ITE Chips used by Asus, so Crosshair VI and VII hero, plus other ASUS boards using this Super IO chip are affected.

Keith how are you man? I don't know if you saw any of the comparison's I posted a week or 2 back, but there is indeed a HUGE difference in performance between Ubuntu and Windows 10, in favor of Linux. Its crazy. I then booted to my clean Windows 7 build, and ran the tests again, and it sat right in between the 2, Windows 7 is closer to Linux then Windows 10, but still doesn't give you the Performance that Linux does, especially on Integer performance.

I have been spreading my Bash wings again, and am falling back in love with Linux. Although I can't get my damn Sound card to work on Ubuntu, which sucks, but have been using this OS more and more every day! I also have Ubuntu 18.04.3 LTS running in a VM on my Ryzen 2700x Server which is permanently running Pi-Hole on my network, and is doing an Awesome Job. I Love it!

Anyways, just wanted to thank you for getting me back into Linux!


----------



## Baio73

Duvar said:


> New Chipsetdriver was released just now, head over to AMD and download it.


Downloaded and installed, as with ANY previous AMD's chipset driver set I can't get the Ryzen power profiles in Power Management.
Someone dropped me the installation file (AMD_Ryzen_Balanced-Driver.msi) but fails with this error:



Does anyone have any suggestion to workaround the problem?
It's quite annoying…

Baio

EDIT:
Never mind, I did it.
I installed the previous drivers at the time I had the 2700X in the case and the newer ones don't install the Ryzen power profiles.
Uninstalled and reinstalled, everything goes right now.


----------



## Mumak

Keith Myers said:


> As far as I know, only one mobo vendor continues to use ITE SIO hardware. Most use Nuvoton sensor chips. There is no need for the WMI interface in the X570 BIOS' so likely no issues with fan stoppage on those boards.


Yes, the ITE SIO was quite a disaster.. Not just because of the issues during monitoring, when a concurrent access during sensor read can cause SIO corruption. Hence ASUS switched to Nuvoton on X570.


----------



## Yoizhik

i'm gonna upgrade my c6h to c7h, should i worry about anything like some chronic error on this board?


----------



## kmellz

Baio73 said:


> Downloaded and installed, as with ANY previous AMD's chipset driver set I can't get the Ryzen power profiles in Power Management.
> Someone dropped me the installation file (AMD_Ryzen_Balanced-Driver.msi) but fails with this error:
> 
> 
> 
> Does anyone have any suggestion to workaround the problem?
> It's quite annoying…
> 
> Baio
> 
> EDIT:
> Never mind, I did it.
> I installed the previous drivers at the time I had the 2700X in the case and the newer ones don't install the Ryzen power profiles.
> Uninstalled and reinstalled, everything goes right now.


You can also manually remove any extra power profiles from the manager, just select another power profile than the one you want to remove first. Had to remove my old ones before the new installers could add the newer ones


----------



## Keith Myers

oreonutz said:


> Yeah, can confirm, its just effects the ITE Chips used by Asus, so Crosshair VI and VII hero, plus other ASUS boards using this Super IO chip are affected.
> 
> Keith how are you man? I don't know if you saw any of the comparison's I posted a week or 2 back, but there is indeed a HUGE difference in performance between Ubuntu and Windows 10, in favor of Linux. Its crazy. I then booted to my clean Windows 7 build, and ran the tests again, and it sat right in between the 2, Windows 7 is closer to Linux then Windows 10, but still doesn't give you the Performance that Linux does, especially on Integer performance.
> 
> I have been spreading my Bash wings again, and am falling back in love with Linux. Although I can't get my damn Sound card to work on Ubuntu, which sucks, but have been using this OS more and more every day! I also have Ubuntu 18.04.3 LTS running in a VM on my Ryzen 2700x Server which is permanently running Pi-Hole on my network, and is doing an Awesome Job. I Love it!
> 
> Anyways, just wanted to thank you for getting me back into Linux!


Ha ha good going Matt. I have helped convert a ton of Windows users, mainly at Seti because the Linux applications _*decimate*_ the Windows applications. It is easy to get up and running Linux and just takes some Googling for how to do things when you get stuck. What sound card is giving you troubles. I've never used a sound card and only the built-in audio on the motherboard and never have had any issues with sound in Linux. The sound hardware gets picked up automatically every time for me during installation.


----------



## Keith Myers

Mumak said:


> Yes, the ITE SIO was quite a disaster.. Not just because of the issues during monitoring, when a concurrent access during sensor read can cause SIO corruption. Hence ASUS switched to Nuvoton on X570.


I have fan stoppage in Linux with only the Linux asus-wmi-sensors driver polling the WMI interface. As far as I know and can tell from looking at the logs, no other program is polling the WMI interface. So no competing program is causing the issue. Just polling the interface does it.


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> Ha ha good going Matt. I have helped convert a ton of Windows users, mainly at Seti because the Linux applications _*decimate*_ the Windows applications. It is easy to get up and running Linux and just takes some Googling for how to do things when you get stuck. What sound card is giving you troubles. I've never used a sound card and only the built-in audio on the motherboard and never have had any issues with sound in Linux. The sound hardware gets picked up automatically every time for me during installation.


My sound card is supposed to be picked up automatically by Ubuntu, but I have reinstalled it twice, ran a million and one bash commands, installed all kinds of Sound Programs, nothing has fixed it so far. My Sound card is the HT Omega eClaro, which uses the C-Media CMI8788 Chipset. Linux does see the card, I was able to run some bash command and it does see it installed as a PCIExpress card, it just doesn't show up in Sound Control area, and thats regardless of the Linux Mixer I use, I forget what they are all called now, I haven't messed with it for several days now, but I tried all of them that I could find, and not one gave me access to my card. I even tried disabling the onboard Sound in the UEFI (Which is detected, NVidia's HDMI Sound is also detected) but that unfortunately didn't help at all. Not sure what to try next to get it to work. I use my Sound card because I also mix music on this PC which the sound travels through its own interface for that, but then when I play it back on my Surround sound setup it all goes through my Amp, and I need to be able to switch between normal Stereo, Dolby, and DTS, and this sound card allows me to do this effortlessly, along with all kinds of very important audio tools, it seriously is one of the best Sound Cards on the Market. It uses the same Chipset as the Asus Xonar card which is basically a dumbed down version of this card, and it does seem other people with that card have had trouble getting this card to work, but I can't find ONE of them who have posted about solving their issue. It kind of sucks. Of course I can still listen through my TV with the NVidia drivers, but that is no where near as good as my surround sound setup I have connected to my Amp.


----------



## oreonutz

All My New Water Cooling parts have arrived. About to start Flushing out my New Radiators. Here is everything I got! (If anyone Cares)



Spoiler


----------



## Takla

Yoizhik said:


> i'm gonna upgrade my c6h to c7h, should i worry about anything like some chronic error on this board?


That is not really an _upgrade_. Just a waste of money. Even if you'd sell the c6h for 90% of the new c7h


----------



## Pietro

Yoizhik said:


> i'm gonna upgrade my c6h to c7h, should i worry about anything like some chronic error on this board?


You shouldn't and upgrading from Crosshair VI to X470 is just wasting money, going to X570 too unless you need working pcie 4.0


----------



## oreonutz

Yoizhik said:


> i'm gonna upgrade my c6h to c7h, should i worry about anything like some chronic error on this board?


I wouldn't listen to everyone here on this, in fact don't even listen to me. What you should do is take a look at both boards and decide if its worth an upgrade to you. If you care about my opinion, I have both the Crosshair VI and VII Hero. I Love both boards, but there is no doubt that the VRM on the Crosshair VII Hero is Slightly better. The Crosshair VI hero has 2 More Sata Ports, which was a loss I felt when Upgrading my main Rig to the VII Hero. However I gained an Extra M2 Slot, which came in handy, and more IO options overall (save the loss of 2 Sata Ports, which I put to better use by utilizing the VI Hero with my 2700x in my Server build). 

If you plan on Upgrading to the 3950x, then the VII Hero is a Worth while upgrade. The VI Hero will run it just fine, but you will get a bit more headroom out of the VII Hero. Enough to make a difference, Probably not, but I know I would still prefer to have the VII Hero for it.

If you are getting a killer price on the VII Hero, and are able to sell the VI Hero to pay for most of it, or have another project to utilize the VI hero in, then you can't go wrong with the upgrade. Largely they are the same boards with minor Feature differences and a slightly bigger VRM. You also get a more accurate Probeit Points and Software Sensor Readouts if that matters to you. You can't go wrong with either board though, so ultimately it comes down to if you want to spend the money or not, as you really won't notice much of a difference with a 3000 Series chip. I advise looking at the Manual of both and comparing, and seeing if those differences will benefit you or not. One Thing we lost with the VII Hero that we had with the VI, that it seems no one other than me actually cared about was the Keybot Feature. I loved that because I sit so far away from my PC, and with Keybot, when you plugged your Keyboard into a certain USB Port, you could assign certain Hot Keys to do certain functions, one of them was to turn on the PC with CTRL+Enter, another was Turning on the PC and having it enter straight into the UEFI without having to spam other keys. They straight removed that in the VII hero, which sucked. But yeah, anyways, I will shut up now. Just make sure you do your research and make sure you will get a genuine improvement from the upgrade, because they are largely the same boards, just a slightly better VRM on the VII with slightly different features, and of course the board is one year newer, so thats one more year of Warranty coverage, if that matters to you.

EDIT: Regarding your actual question, no there is nothing catastrophic on the VII hero that the VI hero doesn't also have issues with. We are of course dealing with the Fan Shut down problem when using Software monitoring tools, basically the fans will randomly just stop spinning at some point, sometimes 5 minutes after opening a software monitoring tool, sometimes 2 days after running one, but eventually the fans will just stop. This issue however is also present on the VI hero as they both utilized the same IO Chip, and the issue has now been escalated to the Proper Asus Engineers, so hopefully both boards will have a UEFI fix for this soon. Other than that, your experience will largely be the same as it was on the VI hero.


----------



## Keith Myers

I did a search on that card and it has had issues going back to 12.04. Seems it is found by lspci and alsa but not used. The most recent post was from 2017 and said there is an open request at ALSA support to properly fix the problem.


> I have an HT Omega eClaro sound card based on the C-Media CMI8788 which is supported under ALSA with the snd-oxygen module.


Seems the snd-oxygen module needs to be loaded with ALSA. Also found two more posts.



> I fixed this by opening alsamixer in the terminal and setting the output to multichannel.
> 
> Then rebooted and selected the right setting in Ubuntu sound settings. All working now





> Someone suggested typing alsamixer in console, then pressing F6, choosing Xonar as soundcard and then there are switches like "Analog output" which you can change from "Front panel" to the ones in the back, for example. This helped me.


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> I did a search on that card and it has had issues going back to 12.04. Seems it is found by lspci and alsa but not used. The most recent post was from 2017 and said there is an open request at ALSA support to properly fix the problem.
> 
> Seems the snd-oxygen module needs to be loaded with ALSA. Also found two more posts.


I really appreciate the help. I found those same posts except for the very first one. Alsa was one of those Mixers I was talking about that I couldn't remember the name of. So I intstalled the snd-oxygen module and Opened up the Alsa Mixer and Pressed F6, the Multichannel Option they spoke of just doesn't exist for me, and when you hit F6 only the Sound Cards that show up in the Settings show up there. I also dug real deep and got other Mixer/Modules, what ever they are called, and installed them, it was the same story with every single one. I could not get any single one of them to actually use my damn card. When running the Bash command to show your sound card, it does indeed show up, but figuring out the right bash command to get Ubuntu to actually use it, well I could not find that. Suffice it to say, I backed up Ubuntu to an Image with Acronis, and then Ran every single damn Sudo Bash command I could find on the subject, I downloaded a Package manager GUI that is basically a searchable GUI of all the different Packages you can install in Gnome, and installed every single damn one having to do with Sound, restarted the Sound Drivers or whatever they are called on Linux a million times, restarted more times then I could count every single time I made a change, nothing seemed to make a difference. I do not give up lightly, I literally worked on this for 16 hours straight, I get a little obsessive compulsive and postponed jobs because I was dead set on figuring out how to get this to work. Finally I had to get to sleep because I had to get up to start a huge contract that I couldn't post pone and when I looked at the time I had to leave 4 hours from then, so I finally booted back into Windows, put on Star Trek TNG, and went to bed, lol. I haven't bothered installing it since. I have just been running Ubunti in a VM because I am loving messing with Linux again, but I don't like being with out my sound which is why I have been doing a lot of my playing around in the VM instead of booting off my Ubuntu SSD.


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> I did a search on that card and it has had issues going back to 12.04. Seems it is found by lspci and alsa but not used. The most recent post was from 2017 and said there is an open request at ALSA support to properly fix the problem.
> 
> Seems the snd-oxygen module needs to be loaded with ALSA. Also found two more posts.


I also spent a long time trying to get OSS to work because they definitely supported my Card, but unfortunately Ubuntu dropped OSS in Favor of ALSA, because ALSA was supposed to make all things sound related just work, and I found posts that suggested I could still get OSS to work, So about 4 hours was spent on this, ultimately though, I could just not get OSS to work properly.

Obviously I am still no expert with Linux, and am genuinely appreciative of any advice you give. Just wanted to make you aware that I am very adept at google, and tried literally every possible solution floated on forums, and nothing worked for me. But again, I am a noob with Linux, so there could be something that was obvious within the OS itself that I didn't try.


----------



## Yoizhik

oreonutz said:


> I wouldn't listen to everyone here on this, in fact don't even listen to me. What you should do is take a look at both boards and decide if its worth an upgrade to you. If you care about my opinion, I have both the Crosshair VI and VII Hero. I Love both boards, but there is no doubt that the VRM on the Crosshair VII Hero is Slightly better. The Crosshair VI hero has 2 More Sata Ports, which was a loss I felt when Upgrading my main Rig to the VII Hero. However I gained an Extra M2 Slot, which came in handy, and more IO options overall (save the loss of 2 Sata Ports, which I put to better use by utilizing the VI Hero with my 2700x in my Server build).
> 
> If you plan on Upgrading to the 3950x, then the VII Hero is a Worth while upgrade. The VI Hero will run it just fine, but you will get a bit more headroom out of the VII Hero. Enough to make a difference, Probably not, but I know I would still prefer to have the VII Hero for it.
> 
> If you are getting a killer price on the VII Hero, and are able to sell the VI Hero to pay for most of it, or have another project to utilize the VI hero in, then you can't go wrong with the upgrade. Largely they are the same boards with minor Feature differences and a slightly bigger VRM. You also get a more accurate Probeit Points and Software Sensor Readouts if that matters to you. You can't go wrong with either board though, so ultimately it comes down to if you want to spend the money or not, as you really won't notice much of a difference with a 3000 Series chip. I advise looking at the Manual of both and comparing, and seeing if those differences will benefit you or not. One Thing we lost with the VII Hero that we had with the VI, that it seems no one other than me actually cared about was the Keybot Feature. I loved that because I sit so far away from my PC, and with Keybot, when you plugged your Keyboard into a certain USB Port, you could assign certain Hot Keys to do certain functions, one of them was to turn on the PC with CTRL+Enter, another was Turning on the PC and having it enter straight into the UEFI without having to spam other keys. They straight removed that in the VII hero, which sucked. But yeah, anyways, I will shut up now. Just make sure you do your research and make sure you will get a genuine improvement from the upgrade, because they are largely the same boards, just a slightly better VRM on the VII with slightly different features, and of course the board is one year newer, so thats one more year of Warranty coverage, if that matters to you.
> 
> EDIT: Regarding your actual question, no there is nothing catastrophic on the VII hero that the VI hero doesn't also have issues with. We are of course dealing with the Fan Shut down problem when using Software monitoring tools, basically the fans will randomly just stop spinning at some point, sometimes 5 minutes after opening a software monitoring tool, sometimes 2 days after running one, but eventually the fans will just stop. This issue however is also present on the VI hero as they both utilized the same IO Chip, and the issue has now been escalated to the Proper Asus Engineers, so hopefully both boards will have a UEFI fix for this soon. Other than that, your experience will largely be the same as it was on the VI hero.


I'm gonna pay extra $100 for it, i know it doesn't make a difference $100 worth or even $30 maybe, but i've never been a fan of chipset fans and i don't need pcie 4.0 so i'm gonna pass c8h. I know its not logical but i guess you can say that i'm bored.


----------



## xXBROKENXx

oreonutz said:


> snip.


Not sure why you are even bothering with a sound card on the Asus ROG crosshair hero 7.

"Industry-leading ROG audio: ROG SupremeFX S1220 is combined with the venerable ESS® ES9023P to deliver high-fidelity audio to headsets and exotic cans."

Basically the ESS DAC is audiophile quality. No need for a sound card with that chip. Trust me, your sound card is inferior.

Edit, 
http://www.esstech.com/index.php/en...acs/sabre-hifi-stereo-integrated-dacs/es9023/

Also now on the Asus drivers for the CH7, you can now download Sony DTS. Trust me, the chip in the CH7 is awesome. Simple stupid word to use to describe the ESS, however it's still correct.


----------



## oreonutz

xXBROKENXx said:


> Not sure why you are even bothering with a sound card on the Asus ROG crosshair hero 7.
> 
> "Industry-leading ROG audio: ROG SupremeFX S1220 is combined with the venerable ESS® ES9023P to deliver high-fidelity audio to headsets and exotic cans."
> 
> Basically the ESS DAC is audiophile quality. No need for a sound card with that chip. Trust me, your sound card is inferior.
> 
> Edit,
> http://www.esstech.com/index.php/en...acs/sabre-hifi-stereo-integrated-dacs/es9023/
> 
> Also now on the Asus drivers for the CH7, you can now download Sony DTS. Trust me, the chip in the CH7 is awesome. Simple stupid word to use to describe the ESS, however it's still correct.


The Chip on the Crosshair VII hero is good, I was actually impressed with it. And I hacked DTS Support into the Realtek Drivers back with the Crosshair VI hero. One its not Reliable, 2 I need to be able to switch back and forth between DTS and Dolby Easily, while I could hack this in and have done in the past, you frequently get crazy artifacting errors and clock sync errors that can only be fixed on Reboot, I need it to be reliable right then and there. 4 While the Drivers and Dac are quite good, they are still no where near as clean the Dac on my eClaro. Are they Audiophile Quality, absolutely. Are they Studio Quality, no, they fall short. They are not anywhere near flat, even though they sound good, there is too much Crosstalk at High Volume, and to top it off the Signal To Noise ratio on the Input in particular is too high. For most people it is absolutely fine and I would recommend. But its not good enough for the work I do, plain and simple. I have actually switched out my own OPAMP on my Eclaro specifically for my Cans. Now The Eclaro is not my primary DAC for mixing, but it is for listening and gaming, and while the onboard is excellent, its still not what I am used to. So I appreciate that it is quite good and works for most people, but believe it or not their are people out there who require better. Now could I use onboard while Booting up to Ubuntu, absolutely, but its a pain in the ass to reroute my entire system every time I boot to Ubuntu, so I would prefer to get it working properly. 

I do appreciate that it is good enough for you though, and absolutely am not saying you shouldn't use it.


----------



## oreonutz

Yoizhik said:


> I'm gonna pay extra $100 for it, i know it doesn't make a difference $100 worth or even $30 maybe, but i've never been a fan of chipset fans and i don't need pcie 4.0 so i'm gonna pass c8h. I know its not logical but i guess you can say that i'm bored.


Trust me, I understand the Boredom my friend! I say go for it!


----------



## nick name

Heck, I use a Logitech USB dongle audio solution (from a G430) instead of the on-board because it's what I am used to in CSGO. 

And are all pump/reservoir combos that expensive?


----------



## oreonutz

nick name said:


> Heck, I use a Logitech USB dongle audio solution (from a G430) instead of the on-board because it's what I am used to in CSGO.
> 
> And are all pump/reservoir combos that expensive?


If you are talking about the One I bought. Yes, I bought the One I got because It came with everything I wanted, and was actually CHEAPER then the other D5 Combos on the Market. The one I wanted was the EKWB one, and that one was almost $200. I do believe there are other DDC Pump/Res combo's that can be had for around the same price I paid for mine, but yeah, for any D5 or DDC that I could find on Amazon, they are all around that price. I am sure your more seasoned Water Cooling Guru's on here could find you a better deal, but I had a **** ton of Amazon Credit saved up so I couldn't go over to another site, So I just took the Corsair one, I mean you get all the Different Inlet Options, A Temperature Probe, a Bunch of Mounting Brackets, its a genuine D5 Pump, and you get RGB to top it off for cheaper than the EK one, I thought it was a good deal! LOL!

Admittedly though, when it comes to water cooling, I am a relative noob. I have done I think 9 total Custom Water cooling builds now, but they were all for clients, and I used all EK Parts for all of them, and had Youtube as my teacher. This is the first time I have expanded outside of the EKWB eco system, and I definitely still have a lot to learn.


----------



## xXBROKENXx

oreonutz said:


> EDIT: Also, you got to love that your very first post here was to try to tell a Studio Engineer of 14 Years that his Professional Sound Card is inferior to onboard audio, without bothering to even google what the eClaro is... Priceless.


Before I even read your edit I realized that you are doing much more then what the average person needs. I figured studio engineer. I just figured to save the trouble if your just listening to FLAC files or MQA. I just happen to see people spending 500+ and all they do is game or FLAC ect. Yes, the ESS DAC is not as good as what's in the V30 or other dac's out there.


----------



## nick name

oreonutz said:


> If you are talking about the One I bought. Yes, I bought the One I got because It came with everything I wanted, and was actually CHEAPER then the other D5 Combos on the Market. The one I wanted was the EKWB one, and that one was almost $200. I do believe there are other DDC Pump/Res combo's that can be had for around the same price I paid for mine, but yeah, for any D5 or DDC that I could find on Amazon, they are all around that price. I am sure your more seasoned Water Cooling Guru's on here could find you a better deal, but I had a **** ton of Amazon Credit saved up so I couldn't go over to another site, So I just took the Corsair one, I mean you get all the Different Inlet Options, A Temperature Probe, a Bunch of Mounting Brackets, its a genuine D5 Pump, and you get RGB to top it off for cheaper than the EK one, I thought it was a good deal! LOL!
> 
> Admittedly though, when it comes to water cooling, I am a relative noob. I have done I think 9 total Custom Water cooling builds now, but they were all for clients, and I used all EK Parts for all of them, and had Youtube as my teacher. This is the first time I have expanded outside of the EKWB eco system, and I definitely still have a lot to learn.


Ahhhh, ok. That makes more sense then. I wasn't thinking of all of that. 

You got enough Amazon credit left to throw someone a bone? Wink wink.


----------



## oreonutz

xXBROKENXx said:


> Before I even read your edit I realized that you are doing much more then what the average person needs. I figured studio engineer. I just figured to save the trouble if your just listening to FLAC files or MQA. I just happen to see people spending 500+ and all they do is game or FLAC ect. Yes, the ESS DAC is not as good as what's in the V30 or other dac's out there.


Took out the edit. Yeah I would agree with that, most people its unnecessary to go higher. The Modified Realtek Chip on this board is actually really good. Further more, especially compared to what they did on the Crosshair VI Hero, they did a Phenomenal Job Isolating the The Driver from the noise from the rest of the PCB, it truly is one of the best Onboard Solutions I have seen. So yeah I would definitely largely agree with you. That said, even for people who don't work with audio professionally, chances are if they had a $500 Dac, they probably bought it before the Crosshair and still just want to use it because its what they love. Had you tricked them and hooked up the onboard in place of the Dac, they probably would never know, but still, who are we to take away the joy they get from spending money on gear they probably didn't need to begin with? lol. I definitely get your Point though, and definitely agree with it. But there are still imperfections in the chip, just for the average user, they couldn't tell the difference probably even if it was pointed out to them, and if you are just gaming or listening to Mp3s, it wouldn't matter anyway.


----------



## oreonutz

nick name said:


> Ahhhh, ok. That makes more sense then. I wasn't thinking of all of that.
> 
> You got enough Amazon credit left to throw someone a bone? Wink wink.


HAHAHAHA!!! Depends what that Bone is??? LOL! I might be able to spare enough for some Cookies or something, lol! Seriously, I had over $1200 in credit built up with Amazon, after that little excursion I think I am down to less then $300. I am saving that to put towards the 3950x when it releases. I actually went a little overboard, I meant to leave just enough to Cover it plus same day shipping costs, but couldn't stop buying ****, lol!


----------



## Takla

Yoizhik said:


> I'm gonna pay extra $100 for it, i know it doesn't make a difference $100 worth or even $30 maybe, but i've never been a fan of chipset fans and i don't need pcie 4.0 so i'm gonna pass c8h. I know its not logical but i guess you can say that i'm bored.


I wouldn't listen to everyone here on this, in fact don't even listen to me. If you really feel like literally burning your money, I say go for it! After all, we have people here who get an external sound card when in fact their mainboard already comes with a high end audio solution.


----------



## oreonutz

Takla said:


> I wouldn't listen to everyone here on this, in fact don't even listen to me. If you really feel like literally burning your money, I say go for it! After all, we have people here who get an external sound card when in fact their mainboard already comes with a high end audio solution.


LOL! Yup cause everyone here is an audio expert and has actually measured the performance of their onboard solution and said, yeah, it turns out my included Audio Dac on my $250 Motherboard Really Compares with a $400 sound card made for a Studio environment. Priceless.

You got to love how everyone is an expert on everything, and wants to tell everyone how to spend their own money. Dude wants to buy the Board. He asked us if their was anything wrong with it, not if he should or shouldn't buy it. Its his money, he wants the board, who the hell are we to tell him he is wasting his money? People are so funny. Oh thats right, the same people who get mad at people for posting facts, and calls them misleading for simply posting a link. Priceless...


----------



## xeizo

The biggest con with the C7H is the ITE chip sometimes making fans go crazy, or suddenly stop.


----------



## Mumak

Keith Myers said:


> I have fan stoppage in Linux with only the Linux asus-wmi-sensors driver polling the WMI interface. As far as I know and can tell from looking at the logs, no other program is polling the WMI interface. So no competing program is causing the issue. Just polling the interface does it.


Yeah, but besides the software the Embedded Controller is constantly polling the SIO as well and that is the cause of issues.


----------



## hurricane28

Good Job Assus, you managed to screw up again...


----------



## hurricane28

Mumak said:


> Yeah, but besides the software the Embedded Controller is constantly polling the SIO as well and that is the cause of issues.


Yes indeed, i remember spending months on this issue on the CH6 with you, Aida64, Elmor and The Stilt on this matter and there is still no real fix for it.. 
Its not Assus though, its Aida64, Hwinfo64 that is reading the ITE chip wrong they said.. Which is truly false as the ITE chip is at fault here and they keep using it. There is a reason why no one uses this erratic cheap chip and that is not because its very good...


----------



## Takla

oreonutz said:


> LOL! Yup cause everyone here is an audio expert and has actually measured the performance of their onboard solution and said, yeah, it turns out my included Audio Dac on my $250 Motherboard Really Compares with a $400 sound card made for a Studio environment.


So are you actually professionally producing any audio? If not, I don't see what your argument here is, other than some incredible mental gymnastic by you, to try and justify wasting hundreds of dollars.



oreonutz said:


> the same people who get mad...


I don't see anyone "mad" around here but you



oreonutz said:


> Oh thats right, the same people who get mad at people for posting facts, and calls them misleading for simply posting a link


I'm assuming you mean this? His comment was in fact misleading. He stated, and I quote "Only the "top 6% of 3900X" they tested can achieve "4.2GHz OC @ 1.250v"!" which is not true. These voltages and clocks only apply during prime95s avx2 load. No real world program with or without avx2 will actually reach these temps, which was the only thing holding them back from further increasing the voltages for a higher clock.


----------



## oreonutz

hurricane28 said:


> Yes indeed, i remember spending months on this issue on the CH6 with you, Aida64, Elmor and The Stilt on this matter and there is still no real fix for it..
> Its not Assus though, its Aida64, Hwinfo64 that is reading the ITE chip wrong they said.. Which is truly false as the ITE chip is at fault here and they keep using it. There is a reason why no one uses this erratic cheap chip and that is not because its very good...


To be fair, they did finally fix the issue with both the C6H and C7H, it worked great for about 7 months or so on both boards (I own and ran a 2700x in both). I believe, off the top of my head it was UEFI 1002 that finally had the fix working perfectly where I could use HWinfo, Aida64, and CPUz at the same time and didn't have random shutdowns or Fan's stopping on me.

Then the UEFI for the 3000 series was released. I initially updated the UEFI on both of my boards, the C7H because I had to, I dropped a 3900x in it. The C6H because I was curious if I could manipulate PBO even further than I could before (I Couldn't by the way). Shortly after upgrading to the Ryzen 3000 Compatible UEFI, the bug with the WMI was reintroduced, and now we are having this Shoddy fan issue on both boards. I brought the C6H back to my favorite Pre Zen2 UEFI using Flashback, and haven't had a problem on that board since. Unfortunately their isn't a Ryzen 3000 Compatible UEFI that has this issue solved yet.

However, @Mumak was nice enough to elevate this issue to the correct person at Asus, so hopefully we will see a fix soon. (Realistically though, we will probably see the fix in about 3 months Knowing Asus.)


----------



## oreonutz

Takla said:


> So are you actually professionally producing any audio? If not, I don't see what your argument here is, other than some incredible mental gymnastic by you, to try and justify wasting hundreds of dollars.
> 
> 
> I don't see anyone "mad" around here but you
> 
> 
> I'm assuming you mean this? His comment was in fact misleading. He stated, and I quote "Only the "top 6% of 3900X" they tested can achieve "4.2GHz OC @ 1.250v"!" which is not true. These voltages and clocks only apply during prime95s avx2 load. No real world program with or without avx2 will actually reach these temps, which was the only thing holding them back from further increasing the voltages for a higher clock.


Bro, every post you have made on this thread for the past few weeks that I have seen have been negative. Lighten up brother.

Yes, as I have mentioned, I am a Professional Audio Engineer. I Mix and Master Music Professionally. This is why I have the sound card, and regardless there is no need to justify my choice of hardware to you or anyone else. I am sorry the world sucks bro, no need to channel your anger to this thread, maybe take up exercising or breathing exercises or something.

Furthermore, he was just reporting the statistics posted by Silicon Lottery, it CLEARLY states in the statistics that they were testing with AVX2. We are enthusiasts, we can read, no need to jump down anyones throat for posting a link that we would find interesting. I actually agreed with your gripe on that, it obviously is a big caveat to say only 6% of chips can hit 4.2Ghz because that is only under the most stressful loads, but there is no need to be a d**k about it. I know its something you seem to excel at, but its unnecessary. Again, calm down, everything is going to be ok...


----------



## Mumak

hurricane28 said:


> Yes indeed, i remember spending months on this issue on the CH6 with you, Aida64, Elmor and The Stilt on this matter and there is still no real fix for it..
> Its not Assus though, its Aida64, Hwinfo64 that is reading the ITE chip wrong they said.. Which is truly false as the ITE chip is at fault here and they keep using it. There is a reason why no one uses this erratic cheap chip and that is not because its very good...


ASUS wasn't aware that the ITE chip is such a crap, they realized it too late when design was finished long ago and production ongoing.


----------



## Mumak

hurricane28 said:


> Good Job Assus, you managed to screw up again...
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQwqVEkruvo


I have put my comment beneath that YT video.


----------



## lordzed83

Mumak said:


> I have put my comment beneath that YT video.


Was about to tag You in that Vid. For Now I turned off monitoring in cfg as You suggested till they re-fix the problem. I know C8H does not use this crappy chip anymore Thankg god.


----------



## gupsterg

Mumak said:


> I notified ASUS about the problem with WMI monitoring in new BIOSes. Hopefully they fix it soon.


+rep :thumb: .



jfrob75 said:


> Do we know if any of the ASUS X570 boards are having similar issues associated with monitoring SW?


Not seen any reports, but they use differing Super IO chip, Nuvoton NCT6798.



Mumak said:


> Yes, the ITE SIO was quite a disaster.. Not just because of the issues during monitoring, when a concurrent access during sensor read can cause SIO corruption. Hence ASUS switched to Nuvoton on X570.


Don't know why it is, some seem to suffer badly with the ITE SIO, I really can't say I have. As you know owned C6H, C7H, ZE & ZEA and I don't use them lightly or without lengthy usage.

So far with 3xxx CPU + C7H only experienced 3x fan PWM shut off. 2x if I left Ryzen Master opened whilst other monitoring tools were open I had fan PWM become borked. 1x on an overnight run where only HWINFO had been opened it lost fan PWM, but the rig had been in use ~3 days.

This ZIP has TR+ZEA recent run data, touching ~100hrs test run. The rig had been in use prior to earliest dataset in ZIP, it is still running [email protected] and had HWINFO all the time open, at times CPU-Z, ASUS TurboV Core also opened.



Synoxia said:


> which temp is more reliable?


Both are reliable, but difference is later Ryzen Master is doings some averaging, HWINFO is not and I prefer the latter method.

Also see The Stilt's posted info here.


----------



## Synoxia

gupsterg said:


> +rep :thumb: .
> 
> 
> 
> Not seen any reports, but they use differing Super IO chip, Nuvoton NCT6798.
> 
> 
> 
> Don't know why it is, some seem to suffer badly with the ITE SIO, I really can't say I have. As you know owned C6H, C7H, ZE & ZEA and I don't use them lightly or without lengthy usage.
> 
> So far with 3xxx CPU + C7H only experienced 3x fan PWM shut off. 2x if I left Ryzen Master opened whilst other monitoring tools were open I had fan PWM become borked. 1x on an overnight run where only HWINFO had been opened it lost fan PWM, but the rig had been in use ~3 days.
> 
> This ZIP has TR+ZEA recent run data, touching ~100hrs test run. The rig had been in use prior to earliest dataset in ZIP, it is still running [email protected] and had HWINFO all the time open, at times CPU-Z, ASUS TurboV Core also opened.
> 
> 
> 
> Both are reliable, but difference is later Ryzen Master is doings some averaging, HWINFO is not and I prefer the latter method.
> 
> Also see The Stilt's posted info here.



3700x sitting at more than 60c in bios sound scary tough... i've put a small undervolt of -0.43 just to be sure meanwhile AMD fixes PBO... (in 1003 it boosts lower for 1002, this might be the reason?)
I am not concerned by voltages as others are. I have no problems if it hits 1.55v. What really concerns me is being both at 1.48v and +60c idle temp...


----------



## gupsterg

Mumak said:


> I have put my comment beneath that YT video.
> 
> 
> 
> lordzed83 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Was about to tag You in that Vid. For Now I turned off monitoring in cfg as You suggested till they re-fix the problem. I know C8H does not use this crappy chip anymore Thankg god.
Click to expand...

Seems the low tier boards have been gimped, considering the cost real shame TBH, link to The Stilt's post.

On C8H/F as it uses IR3555M I would have thought they'd have exposed internal mosfet temp reading. I can't recall if I saw data from an owner, even though read/take part in C8H/F thread. Perhaps Martin can state the case. 



Synoxia said:


> 3700x sitting at more than 60c in bios sound scary tough... i've put a small undervolt of -0.43 just to be sure meanwhile AMD fixes PBO... (in 1003 it boosts lower for 1002, this might be the reason?)
> I am not concerned by voltages as others are. I have no problems if it hits 1.55v. What really concerns me is being both at 1.48v and +60c idle temp...


BIOS aka UEFI is a mini operating system, very unlike Legacy BIOS. Ryzen seems to boost in UEFI, which most consider as "no load" situation, which it is not.

Get yourself a wall socket power meter, you will see when "idle" in UEFI your system could be pulling ~120W, when idle in OS it's ~60W.

If I enable Global C-State Control on UEFI 2602 onwards, then check in OS with Ryzen Master I do get ~0.25V idle voltage at xxMHz/sleep core status. Without using C-State control on later AGESA UEFIs I do not gain low VCORE at idle in OS. Did not have to do this on older AEGSA, I hope AMD retweak SMU FW in a newer release of AGESA...


----------



## Reikoji

Mumak said:


> I have put my comment beneath that YT video.


Reading the ASUS EC in HWiNFO for VRM or PCH temp doesnt seem to cause any problems with the Crosshair VIII Formula. I wonder about the accuracy tho. I have my formula block on water and it has idled as low as 17c


----------



## gupsterg

Reikoji said:


> Reading the ASUS EC in HWiNFO for VRM or PCH temp doesnt seem to cause any problems with the Crosshair VIII Formula. I wonder about the accuracy tho. I have my formula block on water and it has idled as low as 17c


I saw ~13C in OC3D for Formula, which would seem absurd considering he's not gonna be on below ambient cooling. Looking at the motherboard temp sensor is good indication of ambient from what I have experienced on AM4/SP3r2 boards from ASUS.


----------



## Reikoji

hurricane28 said:


> Good Job Assus, you managed to screw up again...
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQwqVEkruvo


Making mountains out of mole hills. Those are cheaper boards that simply have less sensors on them and that is one thing that lowers their cost. And with x570, they needed more ways to lower the board cost to make them a better buy for people that seek cheap things. I guess if VRM temp is important to you then you should be buying a crosshair series. Got a lot of people giving the excuse that "I dont LN2 OC so Why would I buy a crosshair" so now you have your damn reason. Stop cheaping out.


----------



## Reikoji

gupsterg said:


> I saw ~13C in OC3D for Formula, which would seem absurd considering he's not gonna be on below ambient cooling. Looking at the motherboard temp sensor is good indication of ambient from what I have experienced on AM4/SP3r2 boards from ASUS.
> 
> View attachment 290588


Must be an AC fairy that is focused on the VRM. :3

I actually havent really looked at the temp in bios. in HWiNFO when windows is running it will idle at 17c. Got as high as 22c under load.


----------



## Mumak

gupsterg said:


> I saw ~13C in OC3D for Formula, which would seem absurd considering he's not gonna be on below ambient cooling. Looking at the motherboard temp sensor is good indication of ambient from what I have experienced on AM4/SP3r2 boards from ASUS.
> 
> View attachment 290588


Indeed, looks suspicious. Either ASUS is somehow adjusting the value read, or the VRM is pretty inaccurate at lower temps.
Accuracy is something that many don't realize and it tends to be more precise only closer to hot values. That's because some vendors don't pay attention to accuracy at low temps, only need it when it reaches the critical value. Remember when older Intel CPUs had such inaccurate DTS sensors that Intel recommended to completely ignore values < 50 C (they were completely off in the low range)? The situation improved with later CPUs (up-to a uniform precision of +-5 C). https://www.hwinfo.com/forum/threads/cpu-core-temperature-measuring-facts-fictions.148/


----------



## Xenozx

so i have been toying with my BCLK overclock, and i noticed an interesting trend. I have tested up to 104.2 BCLK and had 0 stability issues. the interesting thing I noticed, and havent really read anywherere is I keep the multiplier on auto (BECAUSE I HAVE TOO TO KEEP PBO AND AUTO OVERCLOCK WORKING RIGHT???) and as the BCLK goes up, the multiplier will change. for example, if your running a 101.8 BCLK the multiplier will go from the stock 38, to 37.25. If you run 104.0 multiplier it will do 36.5, and if you go to 104.2 it will go to 36.25. obviously this keeping me from accomplishing my goal of a max overclock, because as i keep raising the BCLK, the overclock just normalizes. 

One thing i noticed that helps with bclk overclocking on 2606 bios is that when you set the FCLK to auto, it will actually 1:1 the ram speed and fabric clock, and on earlier bios it was off because the FCLK values where built with 100 BCLK in mind, and didnt change or update to adjusted values when you modified the BCLK, so now i am able to change the BCLK and keep coupled mode at any ram speed.

ive seen a few screenshots of people getting 59ns latecny on their ram in the 3600-3800 range, and I am running 3605mhz currently at 14,16,14,14 30 and the lowest i have seen is 69ns. usually its low 70's. my read speeds are about 54000. does that sound right for coupled mode on b die memory @ 3605mhz @ cl14?


----------



## xXBROKENXx

oreonutz said:


> Took out the edit. Yeah I would agree with that, most people its unnecessary to go higher. The Modified Realtek Chip on this board is actually really good. Further more, especially compared to what they did on the Crosshair VI Hero, they did a Phenomenal Job Isolating the The Driver from the noise from the rest of the PCB, it truly is one of the best Onboard Solutions I have seen. So yeah I would definitely largely agree with you. That said, even for people who don't work with audio professionally, chances are if they had a $500 Dac, they probably bought it before the Crosshair and still just want to use it because its what they love. Had you tricked them and hooked up the onboard in place of the Dac, they probably would never know, but still, who are we to take away the joy they get from spending money on gear they probably didn't need to begin with? lol. I definitely get your Point though, and definitely agree with it. But there are still imperfections in the chip, just for the average user, they couldn't tell the difference probably even if it was pointed out to them, and if you are just gaming or listening to Mp3s, it wouldn't matter anyway.


No need to delete the edit. 16+ hours for something that should have taken 5 minutes or less. Then some guy with no post count trying to tell you to relax will just put the frustration even more.

I'm not an audio guy. I'm a dumb Italian from Brooklyn who does construction. I've been there myself. Trying to perfect the smallest detail that should be a max 7 minutes turns into 2+ hours because the walls and the floors are uneven due to age.

But I get paid to make things perfect. So believe me I understand your frustration. Hope you get it solved.


----------



## gupsterg

Reikoji said:


> Making mountains out of mole hills. Those are cheaper boards that simply have less sensors on them and that is one thing that lowers their cost. And with x570, they needed more ways to lower the board cost to make them a better buy for people that seek cheap things. I guess if VRM temp is important to you then you should be buying a crosshair series. Got a lot of people giving the excuse that "I dont LN2 OC so Why would I buy a crosshair" so now you have your damn reason. Stop cheaping out.


Asus TUF X570 Plus Gaming ~£200
ASUS Prime X570 Pro ~£250
Asus ROG Strix X570 Gaming E ~£300

If I bought any of those boards I would expect to have VRM temp reading in SW monitoring.



Reikoji said:


> Must be an AC fairy that is focused on the VRM. :3
> 
> I actually havent really looked at the temp in bios. in HWiNFO when windows is running it will idle at 17c. Got as high as 22c under load.


Doesn't seem right to me. What was room ambient?



Mumak said:


> Indeed, looks suspicious. Either ASUS is somehow adjusting the value read, or the VRM is pretty inaccurate at lower temps.
> Accuracy is something that many don't realize and it tends to be more precise only closer to hot values. That's because some vendors don't pay attention to accuracy at low temps, only need it when it reaches the critical value. Remember when older Intel CPUs had such inaccurate DTS sensors that Intel recommended to completely ignore values < 50 C (they were completely off in the low range)? The situation improved with later CPUs (up-to a uniform precision of +-5 C). https://www.hwinfo.com/forum/threads/cpu-core-temperature-measuring-facts-fictions.148/


I agree, thanks for info  .

I've sat in room ambient with ~13C with C7H, seemed "on the money" to me, will be a shame if the X570 accuracy is not improved on. Below screenies are from same run at x%, to see how boosting was changing as temperature increased.



Spoiler


----------



## Reikoji

gupsterg said:


> Asus TUF X570 Plus Gaming ~£200
> ASUS Prime X570 Pro ~£250
> Asus ROG Strix X570 Gaming E ~£300
> 
> If I bought any of those boards I would expect to have VRM temp reading in SW monitoring.


Yea, but that still requires a sensor that they didnt put seem to put in. While X570 is all around more expensive, that might have rose each one by 50 coin if they did. Im sure many would have scoffed at a Asus TUF X570 Plus Gaming for ~£250 instead. They scoff at current prices.. IMO its a non-issue, since VRMs on these technically dont even need these heat sinks to survive.



gupsterg said:


> I've sat in room ambient with ~13C with C7H, seemed "on the money" to me, will be a shame if the X570 accuracy is not improved on. Below screenies are from same run at x%, to see how boosting was changing as temperature increased.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 290594
> 
> 
> View attachment 290596
> 
> 
> View attachment 290598
> 
> 
> View attachment 290600
> 
> 
> View attachment 290602
> 
> 
> View attachment 290604
> 
> 
> View attachment 290606
> 
> 
> View attachment 290608


If your water temperature is accurate, then I would say those VRM temps are pretty accurate too.

Oh, but thats a Hero hmmm. Not really bad Idle temps at least. I dont think its reporting with much different accuracy that it did on my Zenith Extreme with 1950x. as long as airflow was on that VRM it didnt get above 70C, and that VRM is by far weaker than these which should be cooler by every regard.


----------



## gupsterg

Reikoji said:


> Yea, but that still requires a sensor that they didnt put seem to put in. While X570 is all around more expensive, that might have rose each one by 50 coin if they did. Im sure many would have scoffed at a Asus TUF X570 Plus Gaming for ~£250 instead. They scoff at current prices.. IMO its a non-issue, since VRMs on these technically dont even need these heat sinks to survive.


I doubt very much implementing VRM temperature reading would cost £50 per board. Surprising thing is all those 3 boards use the same VRM  . Check out this PDF heading Thermal Shutdown Warning (THWn). IMO no need even for an external diode close to VRM to give temp reading....



Reikoji said:


> If your water temperature is accurate, then I would say those VRM temps are pretty accurate too.
> 
> Oh, but thats a Hero hmmm. Not really bad Idle temps at least. I dont think its reporting with much different accuracy that it did on my Zenith Extreme with 1950x. as long as airflow was on that VRM it didnt get above 70C, and that VRM is by far weaker than these which should be cooler by every regard.


Yes water temp is accurate.

Yes C7H, you'll maybe surprised to know C7H uses 10x IR355M for VCORE, ZE was 8x IR3555M, ZEA is 16x IR3555M. C8H/F also use IR3555M....

*** edit ***

It seems the Strix X570-E Gaming uses IR3555 60A mosfet (again has internal temp sensor) and the F is using same VRM as TUF/Prime, Buildzoid's video on F below spoiler.



Spoiler



https://youtu.be/CtvAd7y9B9o?t=835



TUF X570 info is HUB video.



Spoiler



https://youtu.be/_7PkZwY9PWM?t=229



TPU review on Prime X570 Pro.

Hardwareinside.de had Strix X570-E Gaming.



Spoiler


----------



## Reikoji

gupsterg said:


> I doubt very much implementing VRM temperature reading would cost £50 per board. Surprising thing is all those 3 boards use the same VRM  . Check out this PDF heading Thermal Shutdown Warning (THWn). IMO no need even for an external diode close to VRM to give temp reading....
> 
> 
> 
> Yes water temp is accurate.
> 
> Yes C7H, you'll maybe surprised to know C7H uses 10x IR355M for VCORE, ZE was 8x IR3555M, ZEA is 16x IR3555M. C8H/F also use IR3555M....
> 
> *** edit ***
> 
> It seems the Strix X570-E Gaming uses IR3555 60A mosfet (again has internal temp sensor) and the F is using same VRM as TUF/Prime.
> 
> TPU review on Prime X570 Pro.
> 
> Hardwareinside.de had Strix X570-E Gaming.


The Strix-E also costs more than the Strix-F, fancy that  Tho on OC3D it looks like hes using the Strix-E as one of the hidden-temp boards. Maybe he meant to display the Strix-F?


----------



## gupsterg

Reikoji said:


> The Strix-E also costs more than the Strix-F, fancy that  Tho on OC3D it looks like hes using the Strix-E as one of the hidden-temp boards. Maybe he meant to display the Strix-F?


I reckon the pricing between F & E is not down to just VRM, WIFI module as well  .

Whichever way you look at it, the mosfet on all 3 X570 boards I mentioned have internal temperature sensor  , just like C8H/F  .


----------



## Reikoji

gupsterg said:


> I reckon the pricing between F & E is not down to just VRM, WIFI module as well  .
> 
> Whichever way you look at it, the mosfet on all 3 X570 boards I mentioned have internal temperature sensor  , just like C8H/F  .


Ok so mayber its like 10 to 15 coin for the temp sensor that can be read from :3 that would surely have made those 3 boards overpriced !

Tho, if its there at all then ASUS could likely enable its sensing at any time.


----------



## gupsterg

Reikoji said:


> Ok so mayber its like 10 to 15 coin for the temp sensor that can be read from :3 that would surely have made those 3 boards overpriced !


LOL.


----------



## nick name

oreonutz said:


> HAHAHAHA!!! Depends what that Bone is??? LOL! I might be able to spare enough for some Cookies or something, lol! Seriously, I had over $1200 in credit built up with Amazon, after that little excursion I think I am down to less then $300. I am saving that to put towards the 3950x when it releases. I actually went a little overboard, I meant to leave just enough to Cover it plus same day shipping costs, but couldn't stop buying ****, lol!


Well I can't stand between a man and his future 3950X. That just wouldn't be right.


----------



## nick name

Reikoji said:


> Ok so mayber its like 10 to 15 coin for the temp sensor that can be read from :3 that would surely have made those 3 boards overpriced !
> 
> Tho, if its there at all then ASUS could likely enable its sensing at any time.


Perhaps those coins are large denominations?


----------



## oreonutz

Call to Action! I don't know if anyone else has posted this yet. But we can definitely help.


----------



## jfrob75

Here is another interesting video concerning Ryzen 3000 boosting.


----------



## oreonutz

OMG I was going crazy! Was trying to check the site and kept getting a "Temporary Error, Please Try Again" error. Now I can't even remember what I was going to post.... Anyone else notice OCN was down for like 30 Minutes or so?


----------



## xeizo

Minus offset at least benefits boost behaviour:


----------



## jfrob75

oreonutz said:


> OMG I was going crazy! Was trying to check the site and kept getting a "Temporary Error, Please Try Again" error. Now I can't even remember what I was going to post.... Anyone else notice OCN was down for like 30 Minutes or so?


Yep, experienced the same error.


----------



## Reikoji

oreonutz said:


> Call to Action! I don't know if anyone else has posted this yet. But we can definitely help.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-G1Ukrg-Wk





jfrob75 said:


> Here is another interesting video concerning Ryzen 3000 boosting.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2SzF3IiMaE


Yea, I was pretty sure from the beginning that this was down to the Boards Bios and not the processor. I got mine doing 4.6 with the Manual OC workaround so its pretty obvious the board could be doing by itself like its supposed to had the Bios/Agesa be on top of it.


----------



## Keith Myers

This XSPC X4 Photon 170 is my goto pump/reservoir. $110 at Amazon.com
https://www.amazon.com/XSPC-Photon-Reservoir-Pump-Combo/dp/B06XN5YCKF/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1JWVB2P3N12BE&keywords=xspc+x4+photon+170&qid=1566423767&s=gateway&sprefix=XSPC+X4%2Caps%2C205&sr=8-1

Good D5 pump with a fixed #4 pump setting. Don't need a variable speed as my opinion a pump should run at full speed all the time. Powered by a neat single sleeved SATA connection.


----------



## chakku

xeizo said:


> Minus offset at least benefits boost behaviour:


Have you confirmed an actual performance boost? Recorded max clocks will increase when you limit voltage on the CPUs because of clock stretching.


----------



## Keith Myers

Takla said:


> So are you actually professionally producing any audio? If not, I don't see what your argument here is, other than some incredible mental gymnastic by you, to try and justify wasting hundreds of dollars.
> 
> 
> I don't see anyone "mad" around here but you
> 
> 
> I'm assuming you mean this? His comment was in fact misleading. He stated, and I quote "Only the "top 6% of 3900X" they tested can achieve "4.2GHz OC @ 1.250v"!" which is not true. These voltages and clocks only apply during prime95s avx2 load. No real world program with or without avx2 will actually reach these temps, which was the only thing holding them back from further increasing the voltages for a higher clock.


Ha ha ha LOL. I guess all the distributed computing programs that run 24/7 aren't "real-world" programs. I can run the AVX or AVX2 programs for my science projects and the temps are insane even with custom water cooling.


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> Ha ha ha LOL. I guess all the distributed computing programs that run 24/7 aren't "real-world" programs. I can run the AVX or AVX2 programs for my science projects and the temps are insane even with custom water cooling.


Oh, what do you mean Keith??? Do you mean that Silicon Lottery tests with Prime 95 AVX2 Because there are ACTUALLY Programs out there that require that level of Stability??? NO WAY!!!! I call this Post Misleading!!!!

Let me see if I can muster up my Temper Tantrum Now... LOL!

I kid I kid, I will shut up now.


----------



## Takla

Keith Myers said:


> Ha ha ha LOL. I guess all the distributed computing programs that run 24/7 aren't "real-world" programs. I can run the AVX or AVX2 programs for my science projects and the temps are insane even with custom water cooling.


All commonly used real world programs that use avx2 run at least 10°c colder than what prime 95 achieves in less than 10 seconds of being started. (Although from a business standpoint I can totally see why silicon lottery uses the most stressing program, to cover themselves for legality reasons) Your high temps are probably due to leaving the boost on auto? Or maybe your water cooling is just not sufficient enough to transfer the heat away quickly enough (Silicon Lottery, for example, was using a mediocre (by comparison) 240mm All-in-One cooler which of course quickly hit the thermal threshold of 95°c)



oreonutz said:


> Oh, what do you mean Keith??? Do you mean that Silicon Lottery tests with Prime 95 AVX2 Because there are ACTUALLY Programs out there that require that level of Stability??? NO WAY!!!! I call this Post Misleading!!!!
> 
> Let me see if I can muster up my Temper Tantrum Now... LOL!
> 
> I kid I kid, I will shut up now.


Still salty about the fact that a $400 sound card is pure placebo I see. Some people find the truth simply too hard to accept I guess.


----------



## Keith Myers

oreonutz said:


> Oh, what do you mean Keith??? Do you mean that Silicon Lottery tests with Prime 95 AVX2 Because there are ACTUALLY Programs out there that require that level of Stability??? NO WAY!!!! I call this Post Misleading!!!!
> 
> Let me see if I can muster up my Temper Tantrum Now... LOL!
> 
> I kid I kid, I will shut up now.


Well for my SETI project I am currently running the MBv8_8.05r3345_avx_linux64 cpu app to crunch cpu tasks. Not too bad for temps but worse than the MBv8_8.22r3711_sse41_amd_x86_64-pc-linux-gnu app. I can keep that app under 80°C normally, more like 76-77° C. But it shaves 3 minutes off the crunch time of the cpu tasks compared to the SSE41 app. But faster crunching means the cpu is doing more work in a shorter time, so the energy usage has to go up. = more heat. But I really hammer the cpu with the MBv8_8.22r3712_avx2_x86_64-pc-linux-gnu app. That one spiked the temps to 95°C.

I just chuckle when I read posts that say so and so programs are an unrealistic test because no program runs that way continuously. Ha Ha ha LOL.


----------



## Reikoji

chakku said:


> Have you confirmed an actual performance boost? Recorded max clocks will increase when you limit voltage on the CPUs because of clock stretching.


For me its a performance loss.


----------



## nick name

Takla said:


> All commonly used real world programs that use avx2 run at least 10°c colder than what prime 95 achieves in less than 10 seconds of being started. (Although from a business standpoint I can totally see why silicon lottery uses the most stressing program, to cover themselves for legality reasons) Your high temps are probably due to leaving the boost on auto? Or maybe your water cooling is just not sufficient enough to transfer the heat away quickly enough (Silicon Lottery, for example, was using a mediocre (by comparison) 240mm All-in-One cooler which of course quickly hit the thermal threshold of 95°c)
> 
> 
> 
> Still salty about the fact that a $400 sound card is pure placebo I see. Some people find the truth simply too hard to accept I guess.


Why do you believe yourself to be a subject matter expert on so many different things? What are your credentials? Or are you just full of anecdotal evidence that you failed to actually comprehend?


----------



## Reikoji

nick name said:


> Why do you believe yourself to be a subject matter expert on so many different things? What are your credentials? Or are you just full of anecdotal evidence that you failed to actually comprehend?


I bet hes IT of 20 years


----------



## Baio73

oreonutz said:


> Call to Action! I don't know if anyone else has posted this yet. But we can definitely help.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-G1Ukrg-Wk


Am I blind or I can't see the URL for partecipating to the test?

Baio

Interesting…

I got 6/8 cores hitting 4.392MHz max boost with AMD Ryzen Balanced power plan
4/8 cores hitting 4.342MHz max boos with AMD Ryzen High Perfromance power plan

Second try on Balanced, 4.392MHz but only 4/8 cores.

BIOS 2501

Drivers/BIOS must have some problem…

Baio


----------



## oreonutz

Takla said:


> All commonly used real world programs that use avx2 run at least 10°c colder than what prime 95 achieves in less than 10 seconds of being started. (Although from a business standpoint I can totally see why silicon lottery uses the most stressing program, to cover themselves for legality reasons) Your high temps are probably due to leaving the boost on auto? Or maybe your water cooling is just not sufficient enough to transfer the heat away quickly enough (Silicon Lottery, for example, was using a mediocre (by comparison) 240mm All-in-One cooler which of course quickly hit the thermal threshold of 95°c)
> 
> 
> 
> Still salty about the fact that a $400 sound card is pure placebo I see. Some people find the truth simply too hard to accept I guess.


LOL, sorry, it was unnecessary, I just couldn't help myself. I don't know if you have any experience recording and mixing music, but when you are an Engineer, you want a completely Flat Output. You need to make sure that when you are coloring your palette, that there is nothing in your environment that boosts or attenuates any frequencies, this way when you shape the sound, you are not over (or under) compensating for a harmonic that others will not hear. Its for this reason that you require everything to be as flat as humanly possible. This even extends to the room you are mixing in, but especially starts with your equipment, and most especially your DAC, Clock, and Drivers. Even then you are constantly calibrating to make sure your environment isn't off by even a dB at any frequency. You are still always going to have imperfections, but over time you learn mixing an a particular envelope with a particular system you learn what those deficiencies are by listening to your mixes on a range of different systems, and begin to shape your mixes accordingly. This is why so many Engineers do not like changing the equipment they work on, as I mentioned to the member I was originally discussing this with, the On board sound on the Asus is perfectly adequate for most consumers, even for people starting out mixing, if you have a keen ear you can overcome the issues with it, but its a damn good consumer DAC, definitely better then any other On-Board sound I have listened to. But its no where near flat, it has a boost of around 1.5dB in the 200Hz range, and a sharp fall off with a High Q at around 50Hz, on top of that it also once you get past 8KHz it boosts and attenuates the further up the spectrum you go, if you look at it on a spectrum analyzer its almost like a small roller coaster, its only a delta of about 2db, and even though it does add character to whatever you are listening to, its again, just not flat. There is also a high signal to noise ratio, and after you drive your Monitors to over 75dB using the onboard audio you get some nasty crosstalk between channels, so its just not ideal for professional work. I hope that makes sense. Sorry for being a smart ass, I just get annoyed when people like to be d**ks for no reason, but thats no reason for me to act the same way. Hope that helps explain why certain people, especially audio professionals, but even audio enthusiasts get themselves something better.





Keith Myers said:


> Well for my SETI project I am currently running the MBv8_8.05r3345_avx_linux64 cpu app to crunch cpu tasks. Not too bad for temps but worse than the MBv8_8.22r3711_sse41_amd_x86_64-pc-linux-gnu app. I can keep that app under 80°C normally, more like 76-77° C. But it shaves 3 minutes off the crunch time of the cpu tasks compared to the SSE41 app. But faster crunching means the cpu is doing more work in a shorter time, so the energy usage has to go up. = more heat. But I really hammer the cpu with the MBv8_8.22r3712_avx2_x86_64-pc-linux-gnu app. That one spiked the temps to 95°C.
> 
> I just chuckle when I read posts that say so and so programs are an unrealistic test because no program runs that way continuously. Ha Ha ha LOL.


Your the man Keith! Still appreciate you getting me hooked back on Ubuntu, its insane the performance difference between Windows on most tasks!



nick name said:


> Why do you believe yourself to be a subject matter expert on so many different things? What are your credentials? Or are you just full of anecdotal evidence that you failed to actually comprehend?


This is my fault for continuing this, I don't want this thread to devolve into petty bickering, so I will just try to ignore d**k comments in the future so we can keep our normal level of decorum. You still want some Cookies my brother? What kind do you want??? LOL!


----------



## oreonutz

Baio73 said:


> Am I blind or I can't see the URL for partecipating to the test?
> 
> Baio
> 
> Interesting…
> 
> I got 6/8 cores hitting 4.392MHz max boost with AMD Ryzen Balanced power plan
> 4/8 cores hitting 4.342MHz max boos with AMD Ryzen High Perfromance power plan
> 
> Second try on Balanced, 4.392MHz but only 4/8 cores.
> 
> BIOS 2501
> 
> Drivers/BIOS must have some problem…
> 
> Baio


Hey brother, want to make sure you saw the link for entering. Its: https://forms.gle/ii4Vfgnktzxr12uZA


----------



## harderthanfire

chakku said:


> Have you confirmed an actual performance boost? Recorded max clocks will increase when you limit voltage on the CPUs because of clock stretching.



That's only if you go too far. You can get better boost and much better benchmark results with a negative offset compared to regular PBO or boost due to the better thermals but the amount you can offset is pure luck.


I can manage -0.1V and be rock solid stable, most others seem to manage -0.85, -0.75 or even -0.50.


Per CCX overclocking still had the best overall performance for me but until the AsusWMI bug is fixed I don't want to run that.


----------



## hurricane28

Mumak said:


> ASUS wasn't aware that the ITE chip is such a crap, they realized it too late when design was finished long ago and production ongoing.


It took them long enough though, they use this similar chip for over 5 years now. My 990FX Sabertooth had the same chip, perhaps slightly different but it had the same issues. 

Hopefully they never use this crap again. But then again, these chips are very cheap too. You can buy 15 of them for a couple of bucks.. 

Nevertheless, i haven't got this fan speed or any other problem when monitoring from this chip happening on my CH7, Good job Mumak, you're the best.


----------



## hurricane28

Mumak said:


> I have put my comment beneath that YT video.


Awesome comment Mumak. I just felt the need to show you and others what Assus is on about.. I simple don't like it when they BS around good questions and simply lying about and towards us and ever Reviewers.


----------



## chakku

harderthanfire said:


> That's only if you go too far. You can get better boost and much better benchmark results with a negative offset compared to regular PBO or boost due to the better thermals but the amount you can offset is pure luck.
> 
> 
> I can manage -0.1V and be rock solid stable, most others seem to manage -0.85, -0.75 or even -0.50.
> 
> 
> Per CCX overclocking still had the best overall performance for me but until the AsusWMI bug is fixed I don't want to run that.


It's not about stability, the system will appear fine and stable and boost clocks look to be increased but performance will decrease because monitoring software won't pick up the throttling going on in the CPU. From what has been reported on negative offset voltages any benefits appear to drop off beyond -0.025V to -0.05V and anything beyond results in worse performance/benchmarks. Only way to confirm it is with benchmark numbers as clock readings go out the window when you're limiting voltage to the CPU.


----------



## jaygau

oreonutz said:


> Tdie in Hwinfo is the most reliable. AMD Switched to an Average Temp, so while it gives you a good overview of your Average temp, it is not realtime data, like HWinfo tdie is.


We could debate a lot about that. I don't think this millisecond spark at 76C that HWinfo shows to you while your average temp during the display cycle was actually 65C is really representative of the reality. If AMD switched to average it's because they think it's a far better representation of the chip real temperature and I think they are right.


----------



## nick name

oreonutz said:


> -snip-
> 
> You still want some Cookies my brother? What kind do you want??? LOL!


Whoa there, Google. Calm down with the cookies. Lol.

Thank you, but you save up for that new 3950X.


----------



## gupsterg

jaygau said:


> We could debate a lot about that. I don't think this millisecond spark at 76C that HWinfo shows to you while your average temp during the display cycle was actually 65C is really representative of the reality. If AMD switched to average it's because they think it's a far better representation of the chip real temperature and I think they are right.


You may wish to read this post.


----------



## Mandarb

Anyone tried 2606? It didn't boost for me and the CPU was stuck at 3.8GHz. Anyone else seen this behaviour?


----------



## Duvar

Mandarb said:


> Anyone tried 2606? It didn't boost for me and the CPU was stuck at 3.8GHz. Anyone else seen this behaviour?


If CPU is stuck @ 3.8GHz or another Clockspeed, try enabling Core Performance Boost in the BIOS.


----------



## Yoizhik

latest stable bios is 2606, right?


----------



## Xenozx

Duvar said:


> If CPU is stuck @ 3.8GHz or another Clockspeed, try enabling Core Performance Boost in the BIOS.


i have this issue. Its stuck at 3.8 no matter what, until i open ryzen master and enable the media profiel, then it will jump up to 4.3 in cpu-z.


----------



## Xenozx

im on 2606 and when I change my core voltage from AUTO or MANUAL to - (negative) OFFSET and do 0.025 or 0.05 the core voltage goes from auto of 1.45 to 1.1 or less? Obviously thats why too low, and it didnt do this on older bios, any idea why 0.05 or any # really, drops it so low? I am not fat fingering and missing the .0 either.

i tried + offset for ****s and giggles, and same deal in oposite direction, starts at 1.1, and i have to do + .35 to get like a 1.4v voltage. 

problem is, if i go into windows its fine, until i open ryzen master and load a profile, as soon as I do that my screens go black and i cant even power or reset the computer without pulling the plug.


----------



## oreonutz

nick name said:


> Whoa there, Google. Calm down with the cookies. Lol.
> 
> Thank you, but you save up for that new 3950X.


LOL! I just really want to give someone some Cookies damnit! LOL!

Don't worry, I am getting that 3950x! Will have a perfectly good 3900x to sell at that point too, if anyone is interested!


----------



## nick name

oreonutz said:


> LOL! I just really want to give someone some Cookies damnit! LOL!
> 
> Don't worry, I am getting that 3950x! Will have a perfectly good 3900x to sell at that point too, if anyone is interested!


How many cookies do you want for that 3900X?


----------



## oreonutz

nick name said:


> How many cookies do you want for that 3900X?


I am supposed to be giving you the Cookies brother! That said, about 100 Brownies should do!


----------



## nick name

So here is a weird CPU (2700X) behavior I haven't seen before. BIOS 2606. New kernel. Fresh boot. Double checked that Minimum Processor State is below 50%. The workload was CB15.

Edit:

So I rebooted and ended up at a BSOD. Seleced UEFI and then once in the BIOS the keyboard and mouse wouldn't work (lights were on for the keyboard and mouse). So I just powered it down and turned it back on again. The weird part then was several rounds of memory training (my daily RAM settings never require memory training). After that all seems normal?


----------



## oreonutz

nick name said:


> So here is a weird CPU (2700X) behavior I haven't seen before. BIOS 2606. New kernel. Fresh boot. Double checked that Minimum Processor State is below 50%. The workload was CB15.


Check your power plan, which ever one you are using, make sure the minimum is at 5% and Max is at 100% (CPU Power I mean)

EDIT: Oh damn, you already said you had it below 50. Well ****... I don't know....


----------



## nick name

oreonutz said:


> I am supposed to be giving you the Cookies brother! That said, about 100 Brownies should do!


Crap. I don't know the conversion rate.


----------



## nick name

oreonutz said:


> Check your power plan, which ever one you are using, make sure the minimum is at 5% and Max is at 100% (CPU Power I mean)
> 
> EDIT: Oh damn, you already said you had it below 50. Well ****... I don't know....


It got weirder after that. I added an edit to that post.


----------



## oreonutz

nick name said:


> It got weirder after that. I added an edit to that post.


It looks like you had a corruption issue. Before you install windows next time, I would set your UEFI back to optimized defaults and leave your Ram at stock, then put your overclock back on both your Ram and CPU after Windows is installed. This very well could be a Ram Instability issue, but could also be an OC issue.


----------



## nick name

oreonutz said:


> It looks like you had a corruption issue. Before you install windows next time, I would set your UEFI back to optimized defaults and leave your Ram at stock, then put your overclock back on both your Ram and CPU after Windows is installed. This very well could be a Ram Instability issue, but could also be an OC issue.


Well, I run *DISM.exe /Online /Cleanup-image /Restorehealth* and *sfc /scannow* pretty frequently and only rarely does either reveal an issue and never an issue it can't correct so I'm not worried about corruption. Though it made me think the same as you so I ran both again, but no problems revealed. I went back to 2501 to run in the meantime though and keyed everything back in as it should be.  The RAM OC is proven stable and the CPU OC is PE 3. So if it persists then I will try pulling things back.


----------



## harderthanfire

chakku said:


> It's not about stability, the system will appear fine and stable and boost clocks look to be increased but performance will decrease because monitoring software won't pick up the throttling going on in the CPU. From what has been reported on negative offset voltages any benefits appear to drop off beyond -0.025V to -0.05V and anything beyond results in worse performance/benchmarks. Only way to confirm it is with benchmark numbers as clock readings go out the window when you're limiting voltage to the CPU.



I know fully well how clock stretching works and if you read my comment again I say that benchmarks are have much HIGHER numbers with the undervolt. No clock stretching is taking place on my rig unless I start going to crazy offsets like -0.2v and then it doesn't even stretch for long it just hits OC prot and reboots.



Most of the clock stretching stuff I've seen has been people trying to hard limit the VCORE instead of using an offset. Like that youtuber who limited his 3900X to 1.0v VCORE then said "look the frequency didn't go down much". 



The way offsets work the VCORE can still go up and down as normal it just trends lower, you only really run into issues on all core loads and AVX loads due to the vdroop that happens. As long as it doesn't vdroop lower than what is stable (stable both meaning hitting OC prot and clock stretching) for your individual chip you are fine, you can reduce the chance of this happening with higher LLC settings too.



If you collate all the information it is highly chip dependent, some people can hit -0.1v fine others are better at -0.75v, others at -0.5v. I don't know anybody that is limited to -0.05v on a 3900X though, I mean when the VCORE is hitting 1.45V to 1.5V on auto at times do you really think -0.05V is a useful/workable offset?


Those lower voltage numbers might be either people with a 3600X not 3900X or that is the SOC voltage, the SOC voltage has way less headroom.


----------



## harderthanfire

Mandarb said:


> Anyone tried 2606? It didn't boost for me and the CPU was stuck at 3.8GHz. Anyone else seen this behaviour?



2606 has super broken boost behavior, if you don't run at stock RAM settings boost is broken.


----------



## Synoxia

Did anyone test if 1003ABB improves performance compared to 1002? (despite lower clocks)
On 1002 my 3700x can hit 4.425 with autoOC +200mhz even with a offset of -0.3750. Pbo doesn't work for TDP limits and diminishes performance.


----------



## Xenozx

harderthanfire said:


> I know fully well how clock stretching works and if you read my comment again I say that benchmarks are have much HIGHER numbers with the undervolt. No clock stretching is taking place on my rig unless I start going to crazy offsets like -0.2v and then it doesn't even stretch for long it just hits OC prot and reboots.
> 
> 
> 
> Most of the clock stretching stuff I've seen has been people trying to hard limit the VCORE instead of using an offset. Like that youtuber who limited his 3900X to 1.0v VCORE then said "look the frequency didn't go down much".
> 
> 
> 
> The way offsets work the VCORE can still go up and down as normal it just trends lower, you only really run into issues on all core loads and AVX loads due to the vdroop that happens. As long as it doesn't vdroop lower than what is stable (stable both meaning hitting OC prot and clock stretching) for your individual chip you are fine, you can reduce the chance of this happening with higher LLC settings too.
> 
> 
> 
> If you collate all the information it is highly chip dependent, some people can hit -0.1v fine others are better at -0.75v, others at -0.5v. I don't know anybody that is limited to -0.05v on a 3900X though, I mean when the VCORE is hitting 1.45V to 1.5V on auto at times do you really think -0.05V is a useful/workable offset?
> 
> 
> Those lower voltage numbers might be either people with a 3600X not 3900X or that is the SOC voltage, the SOC voltage has way less headroom.


I have a 3900x, and if i use offset on 2606 in any way shape or form and boot into bios, it shows a voltage of around 1.1v. i am talking if I use a negative 0.05v. If I use a 0.5, i feel like would that make it .6v? thats way too low for the CPU to function isnt it? At 1.1v I can boot into windows, but have majorly degraded performance


----------



## gupsterg

This post by Shamino contains C7H & C7H WIFI beta UEFI which may have fixed fan/ASUS WMI issue, link.

C7H, beta 0002 fan issue fix UEFI, link.

C7HWIFI, beta 0002 fan issue fix UEFI, link.

Seem like AGESA ComboPi-AM4 1.0.0.3ABB UEFI.

Also 2703 "Official"

C7H, link.

C7HWIF, link.


----------



## oreonutz

gupsterg said:


> This post by Shamino contains C7H & C7H WIFI beta UEFI which may have fixed fan/ASUS WMI issue, link.
> 
> C7H, beta 0002 fan issue fix UEFI, link.
> 
> C7HWIFI, beta 0002 fan issue fix UEFI, link.
> 
> Seem like AGESA ComboPi-AM4 1.0.0.3ABB UEFI.
> 
> Also 2703 "Official"
> 
> C7H, link.
> 
> C7HWIF, link.


 @gupsterg You are the man as always! Thank You Sir


----------



## LethalSpoon

gupsterg said:


> This post by Shamino contains C7H & C7H WIFI beta UEFI which may have fixed fan/ASUS WMI issue, link.
> 
> C7H, beta 0002 fan issue fix UEFI, link.
> 
> C7HWIFI, beta 0002 fan issue fix UEFI, link.
> 
> Seem like AGESA ComboPi-AM4 1.0.0.3ABB UEFI.
> 
> Also 2703 "Official"
> 
> C7H, link.
> 
> C7HWIF, link.


Time to test. Thx *gupsterg*! :thumb:


----------



## nick name

I'd love to post over there at ROG, but they still haven't approved me. Sad trombone.


----------



## Yoizhik

I've just installed c7h in my case and i'm getting c5 errors. I've updated latest bios, tried clear cmos, updated previous bios (2500x) but still C5. It's a brand new unit i just bought it and i couldn't manage to start it. Help 😄


----------



## Axaion

Yoizhik said:


> I've just installed c7h in my case and i'm getting c5 errors. I've updated latest bios, tried clear cmos, updated previous bios (2500x) but still C5. It's a brand new unit i just bought it and i couldn't manage to start it. Help 😄


What ram do you have?, did you enable DOCP?, if you did dont forget to set your vboost ram voltage


----------



## Yoizhik

@Axapon, i coudln't even see bios setting but after i removed ram sticks and changed their positions everythins seems fine now, thanks.


----------



## kmellz

Notes for 2703 bios:

ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) BIOS 2703
1.Improve system performance.
2.Update AM4 Combo PI 1.0.0.3 Patch ABB
a.Fixes a compatibility issue with Destiny 2
b.Fixes an issue with certain Linux distros
c.Removes Gen 4 support when using Ryzen 3000 CPUs
3.Improves EZFlash performance to reduce boot time.


----------



## nick name

gupsterg said:


> This post by Shamino contains C7H & C7H WIFI beta UEFI which may have fixed fan/ASUS WMI issue, link.
> 
> C7H, beta 0002 fan issue fix UEFI, link.
> 
> C7HWIFI, beta 0002 fan issue fix UEFI, link.
> 
> Seem like AGESA ComboPi-AM4 1.0.0.3ABB UEFI.
> 
> Also 2703 "Official"
> 
> C7H, link.
> 
> C7HWIF, link.



Is that beta BIOS based off of the official 2703?


----------



## gupsterg

nick name said:


> Is that beta BIOS based off of the official 2703?


IMO gotta be.

2701 had date 14/08/2019.

2703 has date 20/08/2019.

0002 has date 23/08/2019.



Spoiler


----------



## neikosr0x

kmellz said:


> Notes for 2703 bios:
> 
> ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) BIOS 2703
> 1.Improve system performance.
> 2.Update AM4 Combo PI 1.0.0.3 Patch ABB
> a.Fixes a compatibility issue with Destiny 2
> b.Fixes an issue with certain Linux distros
> c.Removes Gen 4 support when using Ryzen 3000 CPUs
> 3.Improves EZFlash performance to reduce boot time.


I wonder if by "1. Improve system performance". They mean Boost behavior.


----------



## nick name

gupsterg said:


> IMO gotta be.
> 
> 2701 had date 14/08/2019.
> 
> 2703 has date 20/08/2019.
> 
> 0002 has date 23/08/2019.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 290968


Thanks, boss. I just flashed 2703 to see if it still had the reduced memory bandwidth problem that 2701 has.

Edit:
Aaaaaand it does. 

Does it also do that on Ryzen 3000 CPUs?


----------



## Duvar

gupsterg said:


> IMO gotta be.
> 
> 2701 had date 14/08/2019.
> 
> 2703 has date 20/08/2019.
> 
> 0002 has date 23/08/2019.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 290968


Should we install 0002 Bios, because its the latest?


----------



## gupsterg

neikosr0x said:


> I wonder if by "1. Improve system performance". They mean Boost behavior.


Unlikely SMU FW hasn't changed, v46.40.0. Which is what prior UEFIs with ComboPi-AM4 1.0.0.3AB and ABB have had.

My CPU on later SMU FW at stock same boost as UEFIs with ComboPi-AM4 1.0.0.2, where the difference is, is when I enable PBO+xxxMHz, later AGESA CPU won't break past ~4.275GHz, where as earlier on light/medium load I can see ACB of ~4.3-4.34GHz depending on CPU temperature.



nick name said:


> Thanks, boss. I just flashed 2703 to see if it still had the reduced memory bandwidth problem that 2701 has.
> 
> Edit:
> Aaaaaand it does.
> 
> Does it also do that on Ryzen 3000 CPUs?


On 3K CPU 0002 performs as it did before, say vs 2406/2501/0068/2602/2606/2701, not used 2703 yet, unlikely I will try that one.

WMV ZIP of RT ~3hrs run on [email protected] C16.



Duvar said:


> Should we install 0002 Bios, because its the latest?


To you I'd say go 0002.

Anyone that has in the past stated a preference for "Official" (whatever worth that has!) I'd say go 2703.


----------



## Duvar

BTW guys a fantastic Community Ryzen 3000 RAM Review: https://www.computerbase.de/2019-08/ram-oc-amd-ryzen-3000-test/

Great thx gupsterg, i will try 0002 BIOS.


----------



## neikosr0x

gupsterg said:


> Unlikely SMU FW hasn't changed, v46.40.0. Which is what prior UEFIs with ComboPi-AM4 1.0.0.3AB and ABB have had.
> 
> My CPU on later SMU FW at stock same boost as UEFIs with ComboPi-AM4 1.0.0.2, where the difference is, is when I enable PBO+xxxMHz, later AGESA CPU won't break past ~4.275GHz, where as earlier on light/medium load I can see ACB of ~4.3-4.34GHz depending on CPU temperature.


Oh what a shame, my CPU won't pass from 4.3Ghz~ at any given conf not even at stock. I will wait for new bios then. Hopefully, we can get a better boost behavior and better PBO support.

Thanks for your reply btw.


----------



## gupsterg

@mtrai

Dunno if you see this, I've not had time, but The Stilt shared info on SMU FW location few days back on reddit, link, scroll down from linked post.



Duvar said:


> BTW guys a fantastic Community Ryzen 3000 RAM Review: https://www.computerbase.de/2019-08/ram-oc-amd-ryzen-3000-test/
> 
> Great thx gupsterg, i will try 0002 BIOS.


Yeah nice, seen someone link on reddit, I must place in my C7H essential thread.

NP, look forward to your experience share :thumb: .



neikosr0x said:


> Oh what a shame, my CPU won't pass from 4.3Ghz~ at any given conf not even at stock. I will wait for new bios then. Hopefully, we can get a better boost behavior and better PBO support.
> 
> Thanks for your reply btw.


NP  .

That linked post to mtrai has also info on SMU FW that The Stilt has observed. He also stated in Strictly Matisse thread that it seems the boost behaviour change with SMU FW does not seem like mistake, but he also says who know AMD may change boost direction again. Hopefully with all the limelight this is getting on web, AMD will be forced to retweak SMU FW. Well I'm hoping  ...


----------



## nick name

After trying all the latest BIOS versions -- I would recommend anyone with a Ryzen 2000 CPU stay on 2501 (maybe 2606. I had a weird issue with CPU clocks and BSOD last night on 2606). For sure everything after 2606 has reduced memory bandwidth and that includes this latest beta BIOS 002.


----------



## gupsterg

oreonutz said:


> @gupsterg You are the man as always! Thank You Sir


NP  .



LethalSpoon said:


> Time to test. Thx *gupsterg*! :thumb:


NP  .



nick name said:


> I'd love to post over there at ROG, but they still haven't approved me. Sad trombone.


PM me username, will forward to a mod there. I've noted at times place get carpet bombed with spam posts, so I think they may have got tighter, but dunno...


----------



## andyliu

recently found out how my 2700x is underperform in comparison to the normal user has despite the version of BIOS.

with stock setting/PBO:
in aida 64, the L1 cache latency is 2.5+ whereas normal user has 0.9
L2, L3 cache latency are on par with other user
in cinebench r20, the single thread score is 360ish worst than 1700x

seeing that Asus finally catching up on BIOS(and hoping they fix the fan issue), I think i am going to pick up a 3700x to replace the 2700x.

Are there any suggestion/tips for using 3700x with C7H?

Thanks.


----------



## Synoxia

Everything i want to know is if 0002/2703 perform better/same as 2501. with ryzen 3k. Until then 2501 is a keeper even with c5 bug


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> @mtrai
> 
> Dunno if you see this, I've not had time, but The Stilt shared info on SMU FW location few days back on reddit, link, scroll down from linked post.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah nice, seen someone link on reddit, I must place in my C7H essential thread.
> 
> NP, look forward to your experience share :thumb: .
> 
> 
> 
> NP  .
> 
> That linked post to mtrai has also info on SMU FW that The Stilt has observed. He also stated in Strictly Matisse thread that it seems the boost behaviour change with SMU FW does not seem like mistake, but he also says who know AMD may change boost direction again. Hopefully with all the limelight this is getting on web, AMD will be forced to retweak SMU FW. Well I'm hoping  ...


Thanks for the link...so much on all this stuff that stuff gets lost. I will take a look at that later in more detail. Incidentally, I figured out how to get back to my proper boost with 2602 working on modding 0002 as I am now seeing the fan issue since I added 3 decorative fans that are actually attached to the motherboard headers. It seems to only affect certain fan headers though and it totally random.


----------



## Duvar

Hmm with 0002 Bios i have a 1.3ns worse latency with Aida...
Performance in CB 15/20 dropped too.


----------



## Synoxia

mtrai said:


> Thanks for the link...so much on all this stuff that stuff gets lost. I will take a look at that later in more detail. Incidentally, I figured out how to get back to my proper boost with 2602 working on modding 0002 as I am now seeing the fan issue since I added 3 decorative fans that are actually attached to the motherboard headers. It seems to only affect certain fan headers though and it totally random.


You can do the same with 0002? I don't even bother testing other bioses as 1002 gives me 4.425 single core boost with auto oc +200 on a 3700x.



Duvar said:


> Hmm with 0002 Bios i have a 1.3ns worse latency with Aida...
> Performance in CB 15/20 dropped too.


So 2501 then.


----------



## Duvar

Wait, maybe its only me and someone else might get better performance^^

Question: Which BIOS and Chipsetdriver are the best for us (performance wise)?

Was it Bios 2501? I think after 2501 i had problems with my 3800CL14 Settings.


----------



## mtrai

Synoxia said:


> You can do the same with 0002? I don't even bother testing other bioses as 1002 gives me 4.425 single core boost with auto oc +200 on a 3700x.
> 
> 
> 
> So 2501 then.


I meant 2701 I am working on the 0002 mod...but once again I am afraid it will only work with Ryzen 1000/2000 cpus. I am hoping Shamino provides me some guidance. Since 2501 it once again requires hex edits to fully unlock and unhide stuff in the bios especially the CBS menu stuff.


----------



## lordzed83

Duvar said:


> Hmm with 0002 Bios i have a 1.3ns worse latency with Aida...
> Performance in CB 15/20 dropped too.


It's nort bios... I bet You moved from old AGESA microcode You wont see those numbers again if You did.


----------



## lordzed83

Synoxia said:


> Everything i want to know is if 0002/2703 perform better/same as 2501. with ryzen 3k. Until then 2501 is a keeper even with c5 bug


Worse in benchmarks better in games Same as any ABB bios


----------



## lordzed83

@gupsterg installed 002 seems to run same as 2701 with fixes. Cant test much cause ******* summer came back today and im 6c up on ambient so back on 2701 i was not stable too hot for the edge of blade stabiity


----------



## Duvar

lordzed83 said:


> It's nort bios... I bet You moved from old AGESA microcode You wont see those numbers again if You did.


No didnt changed Chipset Driver. Yesterday i had 1.5ns better Latency and CB Scores, only updated the BIOS a couple hours ago.
Was on Beta Bios 2701 before.


----------



## thegr8anand

I have found stable clocks of 4400, 4400, 4250, 4225 using 1.35v vcore and llc5. Can run 10 passes of CBR20 and temp stays around 86 max. I have found loop passes of CBR20 a good test for clock stability as usually around 5th pass or so if a clock is unstable it will crash, 1st or 2nd pass if the clock is very unstable. 10 passes to see to see how much the temp increases back to back.


This is the performance i was originally expecting of the 3900x. In gaming temps stay way below 60. I know 1.35v is probably high but in gaming it will never go all-core load something like CBR20 etc. Running aida64 fpu or cpu+fpu take it over 90 but i think for me that type of load will never happen. Will stop with my tinkering of this cpu for almost a month now and be happy with it.


----------



## Xuso

*New bios 2703*

Now asus C7H has the latest version of 2703 BIOS
Link：https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/m...-ASUS-2703.zip

https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-2703.zip



ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO BIOS 2703
1.Improve system performance.
2.Update AM4 Combo PI 1.0.0.3 Patch ABB
3.Improves EZFlash performance to reduce boot time. 
a.Fixes a compatibility issue with Destiny 2
b.Fixes an issue with certain Linux distros 
c.Removes Gen 4 support when using Ryzen 3000 CPUs


----------



## LethalSpoon

No changes at all (I didnt expect any tbh). Boost is the same, PPT and TDC are dead in Ryzen Master, no PBO, no PE, and still shutdown randomly when reset. Is sad to see older boards like X370 Taichi working better than this one.


----------



## nick name

Has anyone ever been curious to see what the board would set your timings to if you set each one to Auto? And how that setup would perform? Well, wonder no more.


----------



## Xenozx

can anyone confirm if the new new 2703 bios will show each core frequency in aida64 now?


----------



## Axaion

Pretty sad about the boost clocks being garbo on new bios versions =\

That and i bet they havent fixed fans going to 100% on 72c either


----------



## Baio73

Xenozx said:


> can anyone confirm if the new new 2703 bios will show each core frequency in aida64 now?


Seems so.

Baio


----------



## mtrai

Here we go again...cross-posted my response from the rog forums.

"Modded 0002 C7HWIFI Okay I correct my minor issues...here is the link for the C7HWIFI note this. Also it it only works correctly with to show bios options as far as I know with ONLY Ryzen 1000/2000 series. I do not have a 3000 series to work with so I really have not been able to figure out what and why it is not working with it. I have had PMs that my modded bios boosted higher on the Ryzen 300 but cannot confirm.

The file is already correctly named for flashback. Spread Spectrum now appears in an actual menu..however you still need to search F9 to find HPET. Lots of fan controls and lots of other menus and also brought back the slimmed downed CBS menu what I mean is all the other menus that went missing are back. Everything we are used to being there is now back. What a PITA I have to fix our ASUS bios. I really feel bad for others as I just do not feel the need to "FIX" their bios to what should be there.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1x91eGq8D6X4ng-obFTAYjTrAb-OBWO2C/view?usp=sharing

Remember this is only for the C7HWIFI and the menu options only appear if you have a Ryzen 1000/2000 series cpu. I am hoping Shimano gives me some insight for 3000. Spread Spectrum no longer has to be searched it actually appears in a menu. HPET has to be searched.


----------



## Synoxia

lordzed83 said:


> Worse in benchmarks better in games Same as any ABB bios


Did someone test this? Is this statement valid for all gamses? Or threaded games (using all cores, but not fully, like ac odyssey) or light threaded (csgo, league of legends, emulators... anything up to 4 cores)


----------



## mtrai

Synoxia said:


> Did someone test this? Is this statement valid for all gamses? Or threaded games (using all cores, but not fully, like ac odyssey) or light threaded (csgo, league of legends, emulators... anything up to 4 cores)


While I tend to take his statements as face value over the years he rarely gives data points to look at at least on these kind of things...but his observations tend to mostly be spot on. So take that for worth it is worth. I have so many balls in the air I am not sure what I am testing for right now.


----------



## nick name

Hey @mtrai I don't know if it's worth modding any BIOS version after 2606 if they only work for Ryzen 1000 and 2000 since the subsequent BIOS versions have reduced memory bandwidth performance.


----------



## jfrob75

My findings with UEFI 2703;

Boost result with UEFI 2703 in default settings, right after loading the new UEFI, was 4550 on one core. Only saw this once with HWinfo64. The max boost for all other cores was 4475.

I than reboot going into UEFI to set my memory frequency and timings for 3733MHz. With the CPU still in AUTO for clock and voltage the max boost dropped to 4375MHz.

I now have the CPU core voltage in manual and set to 1.325 volts. Ran 20 minutes of all core CBR20 with the max all freq being 4075 and averaging a little over 4GHz all for the entire 20 minutes. Same result for Blender. Temp maxed out around 79 deg C for both runs.

I have OC'd all cores to 4.3GHz with a slightly lower core voltage and run CBR20 and blender successfully. So, it would appear that what ever the algorithm is for boosting the core clocks it is very conservative, at least based on the data I have access to.

The best boost my 3900X has seen was 4650 under UEFI 2501 but it other issues for me that do not occur in the later UEFI's.

FYI: After monitoring the core frequencies for over 1.5 hours and just going about my normal business I have one core that was boosted to 4500, 6 boosted 4350, 1 to 4425, 1 to 4450, 2 to 4300 and 1 to 4325.


----------



## vasyltheonly

So after reading through some of the posts here and my own experience, basically the best approach for 3000 series is to load a bios newer then 2501, tweak memory, save the profile, and revert to 2501. In my case my memory boots at 2501 no problem with the profile created on 2701, but does improve my latency ~2ns and read performance ~1gb. I'm not sure if this is a good approach, but just something to note. I manually OC since PBO only until PBO is fixed.


----------



## hurricane28

mtrai said:


> Here we go again...cross-posted my response from the rog forums.
> 
> "Modded 0002 C7HWIFI Okay I correct my minor issues...here is the link for the C7HWIFI note this. Also it it only works correctly with to show bios options as far as I know with ONLY Ryzen 1000/2000 series. I do not have a 3000 series to work with so I really have not been able to figure out what and why it is not working with it. I have had PMs that my modded bios boosted higher on the Ryzen 300 but cannot confirm.
> 
> The file is already correctly named for flashback. Spread Spectrum now appears in an actual menu..however you still need to search F9 to find HPET. Lots of fan controls and lots of other menus and also brought back the slimmed downed CBS menu what I mean is all the other menus that went missing are back. Everything we are used to being there is now back. What a PITA I have to fix our ASUS bios. I really feel bad for others as I just do not feel the need to "FIX" their bios to what should be there.
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1x91eGq8D6X4ng-obFTAYjTrAb-OBWO2C/view?usp=sharing
> 
> Remember this is only for the C7HWIFI and the menu options only appear if you have a Ryzen 1000/2000 series cpu. I am hoping Shimano gives me some insight for 3000. Spread Spectrum no longer has to be searched it actually appears in a menu. HPET has to be searched.


Nice work man. Is there any reason or benefit from me flashing this new BIOS for my 2600x?


----------



## gupsterg

mtrai said:


> Thanks for the link...so much on all this stuff that stuff gets lost. I will take a look at that later in more detail. Incidentally, I figured out how to get back to my proper boost with 2602 working on modding 0002 as I am now seeing the fan issue since I added 3 decorative fans that are actually attached to the motherboard headers. It seems to only affect certain fan headers though and it totally random.


NP. I've only really had 1x incident of fan header PWM going dead since going to Matisse, so not a biggie for me TBH. And I probably average a lot of hours stability testing, etc...



Duvar said:


> Hmm with 0002 Bios i have a 1.3ns worse latency with Aida...
> Performance in CB 15/20 dropped too.


Seems on the mark for me.

W10Px64 fully updated, went to Chipset driver package v1.8.19.0915 day or so ago, initially I used AMD Ryzen Balanced power plan as is, yesterday I lowered CPU min state to 5% instead of 99%.

3x AIDA64, 1x CBR15/20 MC/SC, CPU-Z on UEFI 0002 in this album.

This album has past benches, various UEFIs IIRC, initially on 16GB and later down screenies are 32GB. This album has UEFI 0068 with ComboPi-AM4 1.0.0.3AB/ABB CPU mCode injected into it. Some of the results are affected by the PBO+150MHz, so when comparing to 0002 album keep that in mind.



Duvar said:


> Wait, maybe its only me and someone else might get better performance^^
> 
> Question: Which BIOS and Chipsetdriver are the best for us (performance wise)?
> 
> Was it Bios 2501? I think after 2501 i had problems with my 3800CL14 Settings.


Only used 1.07.07.0725 & v1.8.19.0915, not used 1.07.29.0115. Between the 2 I have used there was nothing between them to say one was better or worse.

1.07.29.0115 supposedly has SW fix Destiny 2 to work, a workaround til ABB was out for peeps. So I didn't use as don't play games on R5 3600+C7H.

v1.8.19.0915 doesn't have anything but some fixes, see this post by Robert Hallock. I updated as AMD power plan changed from v4.0.0.0 to v5.0.0.0 and changelog stated:-



> Contains desktop idle optimizations for 3rd Gen AMD Ryzen™ Processors





lordzed83 said:


> @gupsterg installed 002 seems to run same as 2701 with fixes. Cant test much cause ******* summer came back today and im 6c up on ambient so back on 2701 i was not stable too hot for the edge of blade stabiity


2x RT 10K% passed for me on 0002. Seems sound enough for me, room ambient ~26C, by evening was ~24C, usual for me is ~22C.



LethalSpoon said:


> No changes at all (I didnt expect any tbh). Boost is the same, PPT and TDC are dead in Ryzen Master, no PBO, no PE, and still shutdown randomly when reset. Is sad to see older boards like X370 Taichi working better than this one.


PBO can be tinkered with, SMU FW just is not allowing same boost levels as UEFI using AGESA 1.0.0.2.

PE menu is there, which are just presets of PBO and will likely be hindered by SMU FW.

I don't get random shutdowns on UEFIs after 2602. What I do get is if I restart in OS, rig will shutdown, repower, retrain and go to OS. So a restart is pretty much an auto power up as if I'd done a shutdown. I think Matisse may need this to train up.

Not tested sleep/resume on 0002, has been borked on past UEFIs, in that my fans/pump went to 100%.


----------



## LethalSpoon

gupsterg said:


> PBO can be tinkered with, SMU FW just is not allowing same boost levels as UEFI using AGESA 1.0.0.2.
> 
> PE menu is there, which are just presets of PBO and will likely be hindered by SMU FW.
> 
> I don't get random shutdowns on UEFIs after 2602. What I do get is if I restart in OS, rig will shutdown, repower, retrain and go to OS. So a restart is pretty much an auto power up as if I'd done a shutdown. I think Matisse may need this to train up.
> 
> Not tested sleep/resume on 0002, has been borked on past UEFIs, in that my fans/pump went to 100%.


In my case PBO does nothing. I can enable it on Auto or mess with Scalar and PPT, TDC and EDC values and nothing changes, same speeds as stock. In fact in Ryzen Master PPT is always 88W no matter what, I wonder if this is all related :thinking:
TBH, would be great to know why some readings in Ryzen Master are broken with any BIOS in this motherboard, and if this is something fixable or not.

About the shutdown/reset thing, what annoys me the most is the randomness of it. Sometimes it does sometimes not, with the exact same configuration.


----------



## gupsterg

LethalSpoon said:


> In my case PBO does nothing. I can enable it on Auto or mess with Scalar and PPT, TDC and EDC values and nothing changes, same speeds as stock. In fact in Ryzen Master PPT is always 88W no matter what, I wonder if this is all related :thinking:
> TBH, would be great to know why some readings in Ryzen Master are broken with any BIOS in this motherboard, and if this is something fixable or not.


PBO+150MHz on an AEGSA 1.0.0.3AB/ABB UEFI does not break past 4.275GHz for me, same setup on AGESA 1.0.0.2 ~4.3-4.34GHz ACB depending on application loading it and CPU temp.

If you set PPT in AMD PBO, may that be located in AMD CBS/Overclocking you will see 88W in RM, even though it is taking effect, but SMU FW borking boost. Only way RM will display higher PPT is if you go to AMD CBS, NBIO menu, SMU options and change PPT there.

If you change PPT/TDC/EDC on PBO menu in Extreme Tweaker page, then RM will show values as set in there for me.

If I want correct SOC/VDDP/VDDG reading in RM, I use AMD Overclocking menu to set the values. I do place SOC on Extreme Tweaker to Offset mode/Auto/+, otherwise if left on [Auto] mode, when OC RAM, based on "auto rule" of UEFI ASUS FW will override the AMD FW setting (ie one in AMD Overclocking).



LethalSpoon said:


> About the shutdown/reset thing, what annoys me the most is the randomness of it. Sometimes it does sometimes not, with the exact same configuration.


Yeah I have noted at times on a restart it doesn't do it and other times it does, even though nothing has changed for settings, etc.

Resume from sleep still borked on UEFI 0002, posted in the thread where Shamnio released the UEFI.

I was wondering people using HWINFO v6.11.3895, do you see FCLK? only way I see it is if I do resume/sleep and then open HWINFO.


----------



## xeizo

About these random shutdowns on different bioses: I've pretty much isolated it to CLDO VDDP setting itself too low. 

At several times I've seen it stuck on 0.700V which will cause freezes or random reboots. Only thing needed to regain stability is, setting it to 0.900V and all is good. No freezes, no reboots.


----------



## xeizo

While at it, HWINFO64 doesn't work at all in the latest Windows Insider Preview from 190822, it worked in the one before. AIDA, CPU-Z and Ryzen Master works.


----------



## crakej

Is CCX OCing available in this bios? It's the only thing that might tempt me to install it.

I 'd rather stay with AGESA 1002 and a bios that isn't borked by AMD (on purpose?!) for now. Finding OC settings in recent bios is easy, then go back to 2501 for full functionality (as someone mentioned earlier)


----------



## Mandarb

crakej said:


> Is CCX OCing available in this bios? It's the only thing that might tempt me to install it.
> 
> I 'd rather stay with AGESA 1002 and a bios that isn't borked by AMD (on purpose?!) for now. Finding OC settings in recent bios is easy, then go back to 2501 for full functionality (as someone mentioned earlier)


While boost clocks are a bit lower on 2703 my actual performance numbers are higher, so I'm staying on 2703 with 1003ABB. 


What confuses me however is activating Performance Enhancer actually sees a performance regression for me. Is that seen by other people too?


----------



## Duvar

Thx gupsterg but i switched back to 2501 (with annoying C5 Bug)and performance is better in Games and Latency dropped @ 3.4GHz from 70.7ns on 0002 to 69.1 on 2501.
+ i havent installed AMDs Chipset Driver and i have pretty good performance, idle power consumption etc is fine, no problems there.
What was the benefit of installing the chipset driver?


----------



## Synoxia

Mandarb said:


> While boost clocks are a bit lower on 2703 my actual performance numbers are higher, so I'm staying on 2703 with 1003ABB.
> 
> 
> What confuses me however is activating Performance Enhancer actually sees a performance regression for me. Is that seen by other people too?


Yes PBO actually hampers performance in every bios for me.
Is 2703 better performing even in games? Which CPU?


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> Is CCX OCing available in this bios? It's the only thing that might tempt me to install it.
> 
> I 'd rather stay with AGESA 1002 and a bios that isn't borked by AMD (on purpose?!) for now. Finding OC settings in recent bios is easy, then go back to 2501 for full functionality (as someone mentioned earlier)


Nope, seems only C8H/F got that so far.

Thanks to The Stilt's post I have located the SMU FW and pulled them. He stated 4 instances to pull I seem to have had 2 more hits in search for hexadecimal of SMU FW version, dunno what those 2 hits are, have queried him in thread where info was.

So soon may try UEFI 0002 AGESA ComboPi-AM4 1.0.0.3ABB, but SMU FW 46.34.00. 



Duvar said:


> Thx gupsterg but i switched back to 2501 (with annoying C5 Bug)and performance is better in Games and Latency dropped @ 3.4GHz from 70.7ns on 0002 to 69.1 on 2501.
> + i havent installed AMDs Chipset Driver and i have pretty good performance, idle power consumption etc is fine, no problems there.
> *What was the benefit of installing the chipset driver?*


Placebo (LOL)  , of having the latest and greatest  . I just updated the driver as I wanted to, rather than a need, besides want I stated before, so far not found a difference.


----------



## Synoxia

gupsterg said:


> Nope, seems only C8H/F got that so far.
> 
> Thanks to The Stilt's post I have located the SMU FW and pulled them. He stated 4 instances to pull I seem to have had 2 more hits in search for hexadecimal of SMU FW version, dunno what those 2 hits are, have queried him in thread where info was.
> 
> So soon may try UEFI 0002 AGESA ComboPi-AM4 1.0.0.3ABB, but SMU FW 46.34.00.
> 
> 
> 
> Placebo (LOL)  , of having the latest and greatest  . I just updated the driver as I wanted to, rather than a need, besides want I stated before, so far not found a difference.


Do you think that what shamino said regarding 1002 boost being unsafe is true? I run 1002 with no PBO, no scalar and + 200mhz autoOC with a slight undervolt of -0.037 and maybe can push 0.043-0.05... idk if i should be concerned or not.
Someone said that he said that just because Asus is lagging behind other mobo makers which boost properly... idk what to do


----------



## mtrai

hurricane28 said:


> Nice work man. Is there any reason or benefit from me flashing this new BIOS for my 2600x?


Well mainly it has to do with having access to Spred Spectrum which is now actually an option in the bios once I unhide it and HPET via search. There are a lot more things you can touch and control as well in menus lots of fine control of the fans. The Pic is just one example.


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> Hey @mtrai I don't know if it's worth modding any BIOS version after 2606 if they only work for Ryzen 1000 and 2000 since the subsequent BIOS versions have reduced memory bandwidth performance.


I am not having that issue nor do I have the boost issue...it just took me starting over with my overclock and setting the bios correctly. I still get the same cpu boost on my 2700x and the same memory speeds and latency...well almost the same latency..yeah I did lose about 1.5 ns in latency but I was already down to 57.5 before that.

I am hoping Shamino on the rog forums might provide some insite on the bios modding. I can hope.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> I am not having that issue nor do I have the boost issue...it just took me starting over with my overclock and setting the bios correctly. I still get the same cpu boost on my 2700x and the same memory speeds and latency...well almost the same latency..yeah I did lose about 1.5 ns in latency but I was already down to 57.5 before that.
> 
> I am hoping Shamino on the rog forums might provide some insite on the bios modding. I can hope.


Really? You're seeing a change in latency, but not memory bandwidth (I'm checking with Aida)? I don't see a latency change, but do see about 2 GB/s reduction in memory bandwidth. How odd.


----------



## Synoxia

mtrai said:


> I am not having that issue nor do I have the boost issue...it just took me starting over with my overclock and setting the bios correctly. I still get the same cpu boost on my 2700x and the same memory speeds and latency...well almost the same latency..yeah I did lose about 1.5 ns in latency but I was already down to 57.5 before that.
> 
> I am hoping Shamino on the rog forums might provide some insite on the bios modding. I can hope.


yeah... i want so much disable HPET from bios but i can't on ryzen 3k


----------



## gupsterg

@The Stilt

Did as guided = 

WMV ZIP. 

Below is UEFI 2501, same CPU load, room ambient 28C as well.



Spoiler
















Synoxia said:


> Do you think that what shamino said regarding 1002 boost being unsafe is true? I run 1002 with no PBO, no scalar and + 200mhz autoOC with a slight undervolt of -0.037 and maybe can push 0.043-0.05... idk if i should be concerned or not.
> Someone said that he said that just because Asus is lagging behind other mobo makers which boost properly... idk what to do


Yeah ASUS can slow to push out updated AGESA UEFI, are they behind others on boost, don't think so.

His post, link.



shamino1978 said:


> every new bios i get asked the boost question all over again, i have not tested a newer version of AGESA that changes the current state of 1003 boost, not even 1004. if i do know of changes, i will specifically state this. They were being too aggressive with the boost previously, the current boost behavior is more in line with their confidence in long term reliability and i have not heard of any changes to this stance, tho i have heard of a 'more customizable' version in the future.


Perhaps all CPUs can't take the "aggressive" boost of 1.0.0.2 and perhaps some can.

To honest putting aside PBO+xxxMHz, on newer SMU FW my CPU at stock gets ~50mV more for all cores boost of 4.2GHz and it wasn't unstable on AGESA 1.0.0.2 at stock with lower voltage.

So I think AMD may just have made some errors, perhaps soon we'll see it sorted, but dunno.


----------



## Synoxia

gupsterg said:


> @The Stilt
> 
> Did as guided =
> 
> WMV ZIP.
> 
> Below is UEFI 2501, same CPU load, room ambient 28C as well.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 291252
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah ASUS can slow to push out updated AGESA UEFI, are they behind others on boost, don't think so.
> 
> His post, link.
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps all CPUs can't take the "aggressive" boost of 1.0.0.2 and perhaps some can.
> 
> To honest putting aside PBO+xxxMHz, on newer SMU FW my CPU at stock gets ~50mV more for all cores boost of 4.2GHz and it wasn't unstable on AGESA 1.0.0.2 at stock with lower voltage.
> 
> So I think AMD may just have made some errors, perhaps soon we'll see it sorted, but dunno.


Can or can't take meaning? In terms of temp, or the actual voltage curve on 1002 is too harsh (electromigration)


----------



## mtrai

Synoxia said:


> yeah... i want so much disable HPET from bios but i can't on ryzen 3k


Of course it would help if I actually had a ryzen 3000 series cpu to work with. Would be a lot easier to figure things out.


----------



## The Stilt

gupsterg said:


> @*The Stilt*
> 
> Did as guided =


----------



## gupsterg

Synoxia said:


> Can or can't take meaning? In terms of temp, or the actual voltage curve on 1002 is too harsh (electromigration)


I don't know, if you are worried then go to an newer AGESA UEFI.

What happens is the SMU profiles CPU, so based on it's unique characteristics it will do frequency/voltage curve as it see fit.

My CPU stock on AGESA prior to 1.0.0.3 would for say RAM test run average ACB ~4.2GHz with average ~1.325V CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN, which I thought was fine. Then with PBO +150MHz, scalar 6x, PPT 142W TDC 95A EDC 140A it would average ACB ~4.3-4.34GHz depending on CPU temp with ~1.425V, again I thought fine, as high load was lower frequency and lower voltage (ie P95 non AVX).

With AGESA 1.0.0.3 UEFI I think frequency/voltage curve is worse. At stock CPU for RAM test will now do average ACB ~4.2GHz with average ~1.375V CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN. If I try PBO OC it ends up peak at ~4.275GHz with average ~1.45V.

My CPU sample, IMO, is pants for stock freq/voltage curve on AEGSA 1.0.0.3 and super pants when use like PBO setup as AGESA 1.0.0.2. That's all I know.

I'm happy to stay on AGESA 1.0.0.2 as for my use case it's best performance, best frequency/voltage curve and to be frank I didn't have stability issue. Only reason why I try the newer UEFIs is because I like to tinker.



The Stilt said:


>


PM'd you mod UEFI.

Perhaps I should also place SMU FW (MP5) in?

HWINFO is also showing old CPU High Temperature Clock Limit with SMU mod.



Spoiler


----------



## AvengedRobix

when CCX oc in bios??? =( on beta if C8H is present


----------



## neikosr0x

The Stilt said:


>


I think he was trying to extract the SMU FW binaries from the 2501 Bios and swap it to the newest AGESA 1.0.0.3 for this board.


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> I don't know, if you are worried then go to an newer AGESA UEFI.
> 
> What happens is the SMU profiles CPU, so based on it's unique characteristics it will do frequency/voltage curve as it see fit.
> 
> My CPU stock on AGESA prior to 1.0.0.3 would for say RAM test run average ACB ~4.2GHz with average ~1.325V CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN, which I thought was fine. Then with PBO +150MHz, scalar 6x, PPT 142W TDC 95A EDC 140A it would average ACB ~4.3-4.34GHz depending on CPU temp with ~1.425V, again I thought fine, as high load was lower frequency and lower voltage (ie P95 non AVX).
> 
> With AGESA 1.0.0.3 UEFI I think frequency/voltage curve is worse. At stock CPU for RAM test will now do average ACB ~4.2GHz with average ~1.375V CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN. If I try PBO OC it ends up peak at ~4.275GHz with average ~1.45V.
> 
> My CPU sample, IMO, is pants for stock freq/voltage curve on AEGSA 1.0.0.3 and super pants when use like PBO setup as AGESA 1.0.0.2. That's all I know.
> 
> I'm happy to stay on AGESA 1.0.0.2 as for my use case it's best performance, best frequency/voltage curve and to be frank I didn't have stability issue. Only reason why I try the newer UEFIs is because I like to tinker.


Hmm interesting...following your progress...can you outline what you did? I might like to do this with my bios as 2501 was the last bios where I got my full boosts...however with 1.0.0.3abb I have managed to get my boost back but not as stable for daily use. I know you linked me some info on this...just not yet had the time to take a deep dive with it all.


----------



## hurricane28

mtrai said:


> Well mainly it has to do with having access to Spred Spectrum which is now actually an option in the bios once I unhide it and HPET via search. There are a lot more things you can touch and control as well in menus lots of fine control of the fans. The Pic is just one example.


Nice! I saw that there is another new BIOS out yet, 2703 on the ROG page. That is the same BIOS you modded correct?


----------



## lordzed83

Synoxia said:


> Did someone test this? Is this statement valid for all gamses? Or threaded games (using all cores, but not fully, like ac odyssey) or light threaded (csgo, league of legends, emulators... anything up to 4 cores)


I put it like this. You will never have performance and boots like on 2501 AGAIN cause AMD noticed that it kills CPUS at STOCK. Basically Zen 2 on 1.0.0.2 at stock settings can die just after warranty.

TLTR if You want to keep performance as it is You wont ever upgrade bios on Zen2.

I'w spend 1 week trying to get benchmarks to score SAME as on 1.0.0.2 bios with Faster memory settings ect. In my case latency is 0.4ns higher on new bioses. But I can maintain extra 25mhz stable on cpu with 1.0.0.3 so Benchmarks are slower but Wow And division 2 minimums are higher.

But thats on blade edge of stability and maxed out everything at thr 1.35 volts limit. If someone is running stock setup He will lose performance In game and Benchmarks and there is nothing anyone can do about it.

It'slike they kept fixing the security holes in cpus... I remember I lost sooo much on CB15 score from day 1 when i had my 2700x to 8 months later that extra 50mhz and moving from 3466cl14 to 3533cl14 would not give it back.

But system was more stable.

On top of everything Chipset drivers cut benchmark performance.


----------



## harderthanfire

Hitting 4.575mhz on bios 0002 which isn't bad for the newer agesa.


Not getting the fan stop bug anymore which is a god send so even though I've lost 50mhz or so boost going to stick with 0002 for now.


----------



## lordzed83

mtrai said:


> While I tend to take his statements as face value over the years he rarely gives data points to look at at least on these kind of things...but his observations tend to mostly be spot on. So take that for worth it is worth. I have so many balls in the air I am not sure what I am testing for right now.


You know Me well enough I play Benchmarks and tests for fun tcause i got no life. Used give data screenshots but repeting same stufg over and over again got me 1 bored 2 irritated cause people always wanted MORE.

Only reason Im not testing Your's moded bioses is that 4 of my memory sticks are able to do Flashback.... I used to do dos flash of older custom bioses but that does not work anymore. Could use HPET bioss dissable and spectrum but guess ill live without it.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Is CCX OCing available in this bios? It's the only thing that might tempt me to install it.
> 
> I 'd rather stay with AGESA 1002 and a bios that isn't borked by AMD (on purpose?!) for now. Finding OC settings in recent bios is easy, then go back to 2501 for full functionality (as someone mentioned earlier)


Well thing is amd did it cause some chips basically died on 1.0.0.2 at stocks settings its too aggressive gives to high boost and too many volts. Thats what they said yesterday or so,


----------



## lordzed83

Mandarb said:


> While boost clocks are a bit lower on 2703 my actual performance numbers are higher, so I'm staying on 2703 with 1003ABB.
> 
> 
> What confuses me however is activating Performance Enhancer actually sees a performance regression for me. Is that seen by other people too?


Same as I said to guy above. **** the benchmark numbers look at rendering time fps in games and stability.

And yes i was playing with it today same situation on stock boosts higher level 3 all core is just 4150


----------



## mtrai

hurricane28 said:


> Nice! I saw that there is another new BIOS out yet, 2703 on the ROG page. That is the same BIOS you modded correct?


I am not sure if 2703 os the same as I did not even look at it. But generally the "beta" becomes the release. The latest I modded was beta 0002 with the hope for "fan fix" Starting with 2701 I could actually have spread spectrum appear in the menus. Quite shocking...unfortunately I am still stuck with figuring out the support for Matisse Ryzen 3000 series cpus. I am at my wits ends and taking a few days break and hope a solution comes to me with some time off from the situation. It usually does. And hopefully Shamino will give me some insight like Elmor used to do and get me headed in the right direction. Elmor was always a major source of inspiration of where I should look or head in issues like this for me and would get me on the right path.


----------



## Axaion

I just updated from 1.0.0.2 to 1.0.0.3ABB and the volts are the same for me.
I did lose 80 MHz across all cores though.

Lost a few points in CPU-z bench (528 Single core now, was 531-532 before) 

But eh, rather have it not try and kill the chip, but all this boost madness is a major fail from AMD's side.


----------



## lordzed83

gupsterg said:


> Nope, seems only C8H/F got that so far.
> 
> Thanks to The Stilt's post I have located the SMU FW and pulled them. He stated 4 instances to pull I seem to have had 2 more hits in search for hexadecimal of SMU FW version, dunno what those 2 hits are, have queried him in thread where info was.
> 
> So soon may try UEFI 0002 AGESA ComboPi-AM4 1.0.0.3ABB, but SMU FW 46.34.00.
> 
> 
> 
> Placebo (LOL)  , of having the latest and greatest  . I just updated the driver as I wanted to, rather than a need, besides want I stated before, so far not found a difference.


I know that when installing Lew chipset drivers on 2501 i was loosing performance compared to lunch day chipset drivers. But that is not the case with ABB bioses.


----------



## lordzed83

Synoxia said:


> Do you think that what shamino said regarding 1002 boost being unsafe is true? I run 1002 with no PBO, no scalar and + 200mhz autoOC with a slight undervolt of -0.037 and maybe can push 0.043-0.05... idk if i should be concerned or not.
> Someone said that he said that just because Asus is lagging behind other mobo makers which boost properly... idk what to do


Ask Steve
https://youtu.be/oDVUdpcKZMA?t=1518


----------



## mtrai

lordzed83 said:


> You know Me well enough I play Benchmarks and tests for fun tcause i got no life. Used give data screenshots but repeting same stufg over and over again got me 1 bored 2 irritated cause people always wanted MORE.
> 
> Only reason Im not testing Your's moded bioses is that 4 of my memory sticks are able to do Flashback.... I used to do dos flash of older custom bioses but that does not work anymore. Could use HPET bioss dissable and spectrum but guess ill live without it.


No worries bud...I know how it is...and yes it gets tiresome at time to even post benchmarks. UMM there is new version I think of afufix64 released today or yesterday that may work..have not yet tested but damn it I cannot find my specific bios USB stick at the moment. The nice thing is I figured away to mod the bios without lossing the .cap signature.

Also remember the bios mod in the menus only works for Ryzen 1000/2000 CPU...still have not cracked that nut for Ryzen 3000 Cpus. However I have had PMs from people using Matisse 3000 series of having better performance and better boost on the mod vs the non modded 1.0.0.3abb bios.


----------



## lordzed83

Axaion said:


> I just updated from 1.0.0.2 to 1.0.0.3ABB and the volts are the same for me.
> I did lose 80 MHz across all cores though.
> 
> Lost a few points in CPU-z bench (528 Single core now, was 531-532 before)
> 
> But eh, rather have it not try and kill the chip, but all this boost madness is a major fail from AMD's side.


More like False advertising if You ask me. They wanted to chase intels gaming performance so they boosted the 3000 series to absolute maximum. When I see almost 1.5 volt going to one core... I'm passing rather stick to my all core overclock at 1.35.


----------



## lordzed83

mtrai said:


> No worries bud...I know how it is...and yes it gets tiresome at time to even post benchmarks. UMM there is new version I think of afufix64 released today or yesterday that may work..have not yet tested but damn it I cannot find my specific bios USB stick at the moment. The nice thing is I figured away to mod the bios without lossing the .cap signature.
> 
> Also remember the bios mod in the menus only works for Ryzen 1000/2000 CPU...still have not cracked that nut for Ryzen 3000 Cpus. However I have had PMs from people using Matisse 3000 series of having better performance and better boost on the mod vs the non modded 1.0.0.3abb bios.


Wow classic Monday evening so no more time for me to play around with settings. Flashed the 002 it works great.

All in all I always said everyone should run theirs own tests. I run all core overclock always did I cant remember Any of my cpus running stock... Even Cpu in my phone is overclocked on custom firmware 
I jsut hate the idea of pumping ****loads of extra volts in one core. My pc is Mining 24/7 and people care about 1 core boost where in reality even 15 year old Wow uses 3 cores nowadays. All games now run at 3+threads so that 1 or 2 core boosting high... never happends cause all cores are loaded


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> I don't know, if you are worried then go to an newer AGESA UEFI.
> 
> What happens is the SMU profiles CPU, so based on it's unique characteristics it will do frequency/voltage curve as it see fit.
> 
> My CPU stock on AGESA prior to 1.0.0.3 would for say RAM test run average ACB ~4.2GHz with average ~1.325V CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN, which I thought was fine. Then with PBO +150MHz, scalar 6x, PPT 142W TDC 95A EDC 140A it would average ACB ~4.3-4.34GHz depending on CPU temp with ~1.425V, again I thought fine, as high load was lower frequency and lower voltage (ie P95 non AVX).
> 
> With AGESA 1.0.0.3 UEFI I think frequency/voltage curve is worse. At stock CPU for RAM test will now do average ACB ~4.2GHz with average ~1.375V CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN. If I try PBO OC it ends up peak at ~4.275GHz with average ~1.45V.
> 
> My CPU sample, IMO, is pants for stock freq/voltage curve on AEGSA 1.0.0.3 and super pants when use like PBO setup as AGESA 1.0.0.2. That's all I know.


I have to agree with you. My 3900x also has this behaviour on 1003 - slightly higher volts for same, or slightly less ACBMHz.

I've still only ever seen a light load boosting properly - voltage and MHz drop the moment any real work starts....


----------



## Syldon

lordzed83 said:


> Wow classic Monday evening so no more time for me to play around with settings.



11pm UK time. Everything is shining like new pin waiting for this one.


----------



## AmxdPt

*3700x Voltage and Temperature*

Hello everyone, 

I bought the C7H and the 3700x and while i like the performance gains over my last build, i find it very odd that the CPU is, according to ryzen master, sitting at 40-45c idle most of the time.

When i run cinebench r20 it quicly jumps to 82 and the fans go balistic (100%)...

I have a H115i from corsair and, coming from a 1800x, it should be able to handle this CPU...

Running 2703 with CPU stock (clock and voltage) and PBO disabled.

Am i missing anything?

Thanks


----------



## mtrai

lordzed83 said:


> Wow classic Monday evening so no more time for me to play around with settings. Flashed the 002 it works great.
> 
> All in all I always said everyone should run theirs own tests. I run all core overclock always did I cant remember Any of my cpus running stock... Even Cpu in my phone is overclocked on custom firmware
> I jsut hate the idea of pumping ****loads of extra volts in one core. My pc is Mining 24/7 and people care about 1 core boost where in reality even 15 year old Wow uses 3 cores nowadays. All games now run at 3+threads so that 1 or 2 core boosting high... never happends cause all cores are loaded


I know we are both cut from the same cloth and do things pretty similar which is why I trust when you post results without the backup data people want to see...I think there are a small number of us that way. We just trust certain people results without them having to back it up, but the funny thing is if we want the timings or settings or whatever we all give it.


----------



## Duvar

AmxdPt said:


> Hello everyone,
> 
> I bought the C7H and the 3700x and while i like the performance gains over my last build, i find it very odd that the CPU is, according to ryzen master, sitting at 40-45c idle most of the time.
> 
> When i run cinebench r20 it quicly jumps to 82 and the fans go balistic (100%)...
> 
> I have a H115i from corsair and, coming from a 1800x, it should be able to handle this CPU...
> 
> Running 2703 with CPU stock (clock and voltage) and PBO disabled.
> 
> Am i missing anything?
> 
> Thanks


Try lowering the voltage (negative offset). Start with -0.025V and run Cinebench and check your scores, if they are ok (like @ stock voltage) try -0.05V etc until you reach the point, where your score is going down more than 100 points for example, because at a certain voltage, your scores will go down, find this spot for your cpu and you will get a lil bit lower temps/power consumption + adjust your fan curve in the bios.


----------



## AmxdPt

Duvar said:


> Try lowering the voltage (negative offset). Start with -0.025V and run Cinebench and check your scores, if they are ok (like @ stock voltage) try -0.05V etc until you reach the point, where your score is going down more than 100 points for example, because at a certain voltage, your scores will go down, find this spot for your cpu and you will get a lil bit lower temps/power consumption + adjust your fan curve in the bios.


At stock i'm getting 4860-4874 in cinebench r20

In order to get my temperatures to go low enough so my fans wont spin at 100% i need to set it at -0,1 offset voltage...

Of course i take a big performance hit there... 4307 - 4357

I don't understand what is going on...


----------



## oreonutz

AmxdPt said:


> At stock i'm getting 4860-4874 in cinebench r20
> 
> In order to get my temperatures to go low enough so my fans wont spin at 100% i need to set it at -0,1 offset voltage...
> 
> Of course i take a big performance hit there... 4307 - 4357
> 
> I don't understand what is going on...


You can set the fans Manually in the UEFI. However, Asus, in their INFINITE WISDOM, have made it so no matter what, after your PC Reaches 75c, your fans spin at 100 Percent. I think you fix that by using thier stupid Asus AISuite tool, but I finally just broke down and Plugged my Fans into a different Fan Controller. But I THINK if you use AISuite you can set a better Fan Curve that DOESN'T automatically go to 100 Percent at 75c. Before 75c you do have full control over your fan Speed though, you can control that in the UEFI.


----------



## Enzarch

Been lurking here a long time, figured I'd say hi and ask a couple Qs

Why is 'auto' PLL voltage so high? (over 2V) Is there any risk? I do seem to be able to get a bit more clock on auto than at 1.8V, seems marginal effect on temps

Anyone else use AIDA as their primary monitoring app? and notice more cpu performance degradation with it, more-so than others such as HWINFO (roughly 150pt loss in CBr20 vs -70pt)

3900x @ 4.5 / 4.5 / 4.425 / 4.45Ghz @ ~1.325V (load) (~7950pt CBr20)
B-Die @ 3600Mts 14-15-14-28 (~65.5nS)
BIOS v0002 (excited to see CCX OC coming to bios maybe)


----------



## Synoxia

lordzed83 said:


> Same as I said to guy above. **** the benchmark numbers look at rendering time fps in games and stability.
> 
> And yes i was playing with it today same situation on stock boosts higher level 3 all core is just 4150


Source that 1002 was killing cpus at stock? I run 1002 and 3700x with -0.037 undervolt and voltages/temp doesnt look scary.
X570 aorus xtreme is reaching advertised (and more) clockspeed on 1003abb agesa... check hardwareun
boxed review, i think there's a lot to be sorted out 
Ah btw folks, i wanted to point out that amd changed 2700x max boost on their website... from 4.350 to 4.3... and they also nerfed 2700x... prior to 3k bioses i was reaching 4.3 ghz in games, on 2501 bios 4225. (Pbo on)


----------



## Reikoji

Synoxia said:


> Source that 1002 was killing cpus at stock? I run 1002 with -0.037 undervolt and voltages/temp doesnt look scary


Yea dont buy that wild claim. I never heard about any chips dying due to any of the AGESA versions at stock either. The tech media, especially the anti-AMD ones, would have had articles about it. The voltage applied in 1.0.0.3 isn't even different than before. Still can see 1.5v applied, still adjusts voltage according to frequency and load at stock.

I also think that was a typo on the website or something for the 2700x. I bought a 2700x AMD50 and it has 4.3ghz boost on the box, and so did it say on neweggs info page as well. I think anywhere you could buy a 2700x from has always listed the boost as 4.3ghz, not 4.35. If that boost you are getting with the 2700x is with an x570 board bios then that just means Zen 2 woes are not limited to Zen 2.


----------



## nick name

oreonutz said:


> You can set the fans Manually in the UEFI. However, Asus, in their INFINITE WISDOM, have made it so no matter what, after your PC Reaches 75c, your fans spin at 100 Percent. I think you fix that by using thier stupid Asus AISuite tool, but I finally just broke down and Plugged my Fans into a different Fan Controller. But I THINK if you use AISuite you can set a better Fan Curve that DOESN'T automatically go to 100 Percent at 75c. Before 75c you do have full control over your fan Speed though, you can control that in the UEFI.


This guy knows my pain. 

And for the others that also do then the Noctua fan controller (NA FC1) is a God sent.


----------



## chakku

So I came back from a 2 week holiday (PC was off) and now my PC won't boot at all. The START light comes on, BIOS flashback appears to work fine since the activity LED on my USB drive starts flashing as well indicating it's being accessed but pressing the start button or any of the reset buttons don't do anything.

Has anyone come across this and can suggest some other troubleshooting steps? Clearing CMOS didn't work, I've removed everything but memory and CPU and it's still the same deal. I've shorted the pins on the PSU and it appears to be working fine there. Have also attempted to drain the caps and remove/replace the CMOS battery to no success.


----------



## nick name

chakku said:


> So I came back from a 2 week holiday (PC was off) and now my PC won't boot at all. The START light comes on, BIOS flashback appears to work fine since the activity LED on my USB drive starts flashing as well indicating it's being accessed but pressing the start button or any of the reset buttons don't do anything.
> 
> Has anyone come across this and can suggest some other troubleshooting steps? Clearing CMOS didn't work, I've removed everything but memory and CPU and it's still the same deal. I've shorted the pins on the PSU and it appears to be working fine there. Have also attempted to drain the caps and remove/replace the CMOS battery to no success.


Plug the machine into a different power outlet. Not a different outlet on the same surge protector. A completely different outlet.


----------



## chakku

nick name said:


> Plug the machine into a different power outlet. Not a different outlet on the same surge protector. A completely different outlet.


No luck there unfortunately. Checking again the BIOS flashback doesn't seem to engage the USB drive as long as it usually would, it might be failing for all I know. Any other ideas or has this motherboard somehow died in its sleep?


----------



## andyliu

chakku said:


> No luck there unfortunately. Checking again the BIOS flashback doesn't seem to engage the USB drive as long as it usually would, it might be failing for all I know. Any other ideas or has this motherboard somehow died in its sleep?


you can try remove the heatsink and see if it will power on.
I had experienced similar issue with my 2700x.
I power off my computer overnight and it wont power on the next day randomly.
I had to loose the waterblock that I had in order to power on.
not saying it might be the same for you, but it's easy to try


----------



## Baio73

chakku said:


> No luck there unfortunately. Checking again the BIOS flashback doesn't seem to engage the USB drive as long as it usually would, it might be failing for all I know. Any other ideas or has this motherboard somehow died in its sleep?


I can't understand if the flashback routine ends successfully or not.
With the latest BIOS the USB stick starts flashing then it stops from about 10 seconds and then restarts.
The first time I used it, I had the feeling it didn't success, but I only had to wait a bit longer..

Baio


----------



## Baio73

Axaion said:


> I just updated from 1.0.0.2 to 1.0.0.3ABB and the volts are the same for me.
> I did lose 80 MHz across all cores though.
> 
> Lost a few points in CPU-z bench (528 Single core now, was 531-532 before)
> 
> But eh, rather have it not try and kill the chip, but all this boost madness is a major fail from AMD's side.


I also lost a bunch of MHz of max boost, but my Cinebench15 score is exactly the same…

Baio


----------



## andyliu

pull the trigger when I saw openbox 3700x at micro center for $280 to swap my bad 2700x out
everything @ stock w/ BIOS 2703 except memory.
happy with the result


----------



## Axaion

oreonutz said:


> You can set the fans Manually in the UEFI. However, Asus, in their INFINITE WISDOM, have made it so no matter what, after your PC Reaches 75c, your fans spin at 100 Percent. I think you fix that by using thier stupid Asus AISuite tool, but I finally just broke down and Plugged my Fans into a different Fan Controller. But I THINK if you use AISuite you can set a better Fan Curve that DOESN'T automatically go to 100 Percent at 75c. Before 75c you do have full control over your fan Speed though, you can control that in the UEFI.


Yeah, i made an account on rog forums to ask them to please fix fans going 100% at 75c, and they just ignored me

One would think that would be one thing that shouldent be too hard for them to change at all


----------



## gupsterg

Axaion said:


> I just updated from 1.0.0.2 to 1.0.0.3ABB and the volts are the same for me.
> I did lose 80 MHz across all cores though.
> 
> Lost a few points in CPU-z bench (528 Single core now, was 531-532 before)
> 
> But eh, rather have it not try and kill the chip, but all this boost madness is a major fail from AMD's side.


Synoxia, see above, so this user/CPU sample is behaving differently and below on differing model another see as I do.



crakej said:


> I have to agree with you. My 3900x also has this behaviour on 1003 - slightly higher volts for same, or slightly less ACBMHz.
> 
> I've still only ever seen a light load boosting properly - voltage and MHz drop the moment any real work starts....





lordzed83 said:


> I know that when installing Lew chipset drivers on 2501 i was loosing performance compared to lunch day chipset drivers. But that is not the case with ABB bioses.


Yeah I thought stock CPU with OC RAM on UEFI 0002 performed well. As PBO+150MHz doesn't attain the same clocks as older AGESA UEFI doubt the performance will be there, will check. Must also test ratio OC as well, perhaps that will show gain of performance over older AGESA at same clocks.



Enzarch said:


> Been lurking here a long time, figured I'd say hi and ask a couple Qs
> 
> Why is 'auto' PLL voltage so high? (over 2V) Is there any risk? I do seem to be able to get a bit more clock on auto than at 1.8V, seems marginal effect on temps
> 
> Anyone else use AIDA as their primary monitoring app? and notice more cpu performance degradation with it, more-so than others such as HWINFO (roughly 150pt loss in CBr20 vs -70pt)
> 
> 3900x @ 4.5 / 4.5 / 4.425 / 4.45Ghz @ ~1.325V (load) (~7950pt CBr20)
> B-Die @ 3600Mts 14-15-14-28 (~65.5nS)
> BIOS v0002 (excited to see CCX OC coming to bios maybe)


On [Auto] PLL has remained 1.8V for me, but I also set it manually on OC profiles. Perhaps try that and check if LN2 mode switch is not set to On.



Synoxia said:


> Source that 1002 was killing cpus at stock? I run 1002 and 3700x with -0.037 undervolt and voltages/temp doesnt look scary.
> X570 aorus xtreme is reaching advertised (and more) clockspeed on 1003abb agesa... check hardwareun
> boxed review, i think there's a lot to be sorted out
> Ah btw folks, i wanted to point out that amd changed 2700x max boost on their website... from 4.350 to 4.3... and they also nerfed 2700x... prior to 3k bioses i was reaching 4.3 ghz in games, on 2501 bios 4225. (Pbo on)


I haven't seen a source. Odd post here or there on web that a CPU died and IIRC some at stock, so stats could just be with normal range.

Shamino has only given us an insight on reasoning for boost behaviour change, he hasn't clearly stated that AMD have given data or stated unequivocally that silicon deterioration had been observed.

To be honest yeah I like the boost on older AGESA with PBO, but if I look at it in terms of %, it's ~3.5% gain.

Now I have no source, but *just my opinion*.

What if this boost gimping on new AGESA is to keep product segmentation. For me if I looked at it, by gaining ~4.3-4.34GHz ACB on my R5 3600 I wouldn't buy or suggest buying a R5 3600X.

Currently a 3700X is ~£330, I have seen it as ~£300, would I buy a 3800X for ~£370-£380 if PBO OC allowed a boost gain on 3700X?


----------



## Synoxia

gupsterg said:


> Synoxia, see above, so this user/CPU sample is behaving differently and b
> elow on differing model another see as I do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah I thought stock CPU with OC RAM on UEFI 0002 performed well. As PBO+150MHz doesn't attain the same clocks as older AGESA UEFI doubt the performance will be there, will check. Must also test ratio OC as well, perhaps that will show gain of performance over older AGESA at same clocks.
> 
> 
> 
> On [Auto] PLL has remained 1.8V for me, but I also set it manually on OC profiles. Perhaps try that and check if LN2 mode switch is not set to On.
> 
> 
> 
> I haven't seen a source. Odd post here or there on web that a CPU died and IIRC some at stock, so stats could just be with normal range.
> 
> Shamino has only given us an insight on reasoning for boost behaviour change, he hasn't clearly stated that AMD have given data or stated unequivocally that silicon deterioration had been observed.
> 
> To be honest yeah I like the boost on older AGESA with PBO, but if I look at it in terms of %, it's ~3.5% gain.
> 
> Now I have no source, but *just my opinion*.
> 
> What if this boost gimping on new AGESA is to keep product segmentation. For me if I looked at it, by gaining ~4.3-4.34GHz ACB on my R5 3600 I wouldn't buy or suggest buying a R5 3600X.
> 
> Currently a 3700X is ~£330, I have seen it as ~£300, would I buy a 3800X for ~£370-£380 if PBO OC allowed a boost gain on 3700X?


Agreed. They figured out that higher bins chip can't gain +200 mhz as expected (remember Robert hallock's lie about 4.7 ghz and higher?) while i've seen lower bins such as 3600x reach more than 4.4... my 3700x personally never went past 4425 but i'd never buy a 3800x as you said if i was already reaching 4.5 with PBO. The only reason would be if 3800xs were hitting 4.7ghz+. Which isnt the case.


----------



## hurricane28

mtrai said:


> I am not sure if 2703 os the same as I did not even look at it. But generally the "beta" becomes the release. The latest I modded was beta 0002 with the hope for "fan fix" Starting with 2701 I could actually have spread spectrum appear in the menus. Quite shocking...unfortunately I am still stuck with figuring out the support for Matisse Ryzen 3000 series cpus. I am at my wits ends and taking a few days break and hope a solution comes to me with some time off from the situation. It usually does. And hopefully Shamino will give me some insight like Elmor used to do and get me headed in the right direction. Elmor was always a major source of inspiration of where I should look or head in issues like this for me and would get me on the right path.


I hear ya, i haven't had any fan issues anymore until recently.. I discovered lots of lag in games and my 40mm fan stopped spinning which is on the sys fan 3. I don't think they can fix the fan issues to be honest, this is why they went with novuton chips if i spelled this correct lol. Elmor had good reason to leave ROG imo, they are a mess right now. Hopefully they solve their crap out fairly quick. 

Hope you can sort it out man, have a good one.


----------



## Digitalwolf

Baio73 said:


> I also lost a bunch of MHz of max boost, but my Cinebench15 score is exactly the same…
> 
> Baio


Same for me with my cpu.


----------



## lordzed83

Synoxia said:


> Source that 1002 was killing cpus at stock? I run 1002 and 3700x with -0.037 undervolt and voltages/temp doesnt look scary.
> X570 aorus xtreme is reaching advertised (and more) clockspeed on 1003abb agesa... check hardwareun
> boxed review, i think there's a lot to be sorted out
> Ah btw folks, i wanted to point out that amd changed 2700x max boost on their website... from 4.350 to 4.3... and they also nerfed 2700x... prior to 3k bioses i was reaching 4.3 ghz in games, on 2501 bios 4225. (Pbo on)


 @Reikoji 

Well take that -offset taht typical JOE will never change then 

In general have a good read with al links posted in this topic
https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/cuj2aq/asuss_shamino_on_overclocknet_amd_reduced_boost/


No sure If You been around when 1800x ware dying on stock sometimes. Basically Killing themeselves and This is 7nm and voltage is more or less same level. Add voltage overshot when it jumps around cores taht you can see only on osciloscope ect. I see cores getting hit with voltage brick at stock settings on them, bioses.
If I remember correct 3 people had broken/dead cpus just in c6H topic. Not in mood of spending 1 hour on search option. For interested have a search.

Basically same as @gupsterg I'm sitting on few forums and always eye catching when someone is like. My CPu is not boosting at all anymore or is crashing had to rma and got new one sort of a deal. And With Zen2 AMD pushed thopse chips to limits like never before. Zen1 and Zen+ ware not pushed this hard. I think they just Tried to deliver the As fast or faster promise. Previous 2 gens could have been overclocked all core to Single core boost -50/100mhz... I l;ook at this 3900x bootsts to 4576 theer is no way it to run 12x4500 or 12x4450 OR EVER 12x4400 not without pumping crazy for 7nm volts. And I do love pumping volts but no way in hell i would pump 1.4 volts in to this silicone for 24/7 use not when I'm rendering and mining with cpu.


In the end its up to User if he is willing to play around with RMA if hes CPU brakes. I know that noone had any problems with getting CPU replaced by AMD when they broke just matter of waiting for shipping ect without spare cpu can take some time. And If they are Willing to replace with no questions asked solution. I think its sor of an Calculated risk deal. AKA we pushe them to absolute stable MAximum Some weaker ones will pack up. But in the end most users will have a faster out of box CPU.


At lest I'm in position of having Free express deliveries as an Postal worker. Stuff dies boom next day 9am delivery or dhl express to wherever on planet  So cost's Me nothing and is fast. And usually the Free RMA postage labels take time to sort out and are not fastest service.


----------



## lordzed83

And nice writeup of How 2 from ROG forum can be usefull for someone 



EZ_PC_TECH said:


> OK. So, the latest BIOS really improved performance, but not clocks. Here are several things that can help to maximize performance(not frequency):
> 
> 1) Set all C-states to ENABLED(not just global, but ALL).
> 2) Set negative voltage offset. For me, -0.075 worked the best.
> 3) When using a negative voltage offset, it's OK to set LLC to max level and then look for the lowest voltage that will keep the system stable without degrading performance. This way you'll have low idle temps and stable system.
> 4) Turn OFF PBO. It's in most useless for now and actually reduce the performance
> 5) Use default Performance Enhancer
> 6) If you can't post with 07 Q-code, this is most likely your FCLK. Set SOC offset to +0.025-0.05(Find the lowest that will work). It also will help if you are OCing FCLK to match your RAM frequency.
> 7) Test your OC with Cinebench R20 multi-core AND single-core. This is the fastest way to check the stability, and if your system passes 3 runs, it most likely will pass anything.
> 
> P.S.: _I was able to push my 3700X to 4550, but it requires more voltage, and we will hit the thermal limit sooner than chip will become unstable. It means, that we unlikely will see that +200Mhz that many people expect to see, not because the processor can't achieve it, but because you'll need 360mm AIO to keep temps under control with let's say 1.55V; However, the returns can't justify the power consumption, heat, and cost of cooling solution. _


----------



## lordzed83

I can say that on those 1.0.0.3ABB Bioses Memory tuning is Way better no reboot and q5 errors ect. I gotta say its first bios i managed to get memory so stable at timings soo tight. God damn its stable for 62.8ns !!!!


----------



## Axaion

More envious of those CPU temps, i have a Dark Rock Pro 4, and my cpu still hits 75c+ at times, making fans go to 100%.. which is... annoying as all hell, have a few 2k RPM fans as case fans, but usually run them at 900RPM, not about to go and buy new fans because asus cant be bothered to let us control them :\


----------



## AvengedRobix

lordzed83 said:


> I can say that on those 1.0.0.3ABB Bioses Memory tuning is Way better no reboot and q5 errors ect. I gotta say its first bios i managed to get memory so stable at timings soo tight. God damn its stable for 62.8ns !!!!


The new 0002 bios?


----------



## lordzed83

Axaion said:


> More envious of those CPU temps, i have a Dark Rock Pro 4, and my cpu still hits 75c+ at times, making fans go to 100%.. which is... annoying as all hell, have a few 2k RPM fans as case fans, but usually run them at 900RPM, not about to go and buy new fans because asus cant be bothered to let us control them :\


How You cant controll when You can set temperatures on fans in bios ?? I got my fan locked at 60% max for cpu.


----------



## thegr8anand

Found the perfect use of the wraith prism and its very high rpm fan, throwing air from the slow 200mm's directly at the ram and vrm's


----------



## xeizo

Yes, 0002 or 2703, which one is better to try out ABB?


----------



## thegr8anand

I'd say 2703.


----------



## xeizo

Nice use of the fan! I use a extra 140mm at a similar position, mainly to cool RAM. But I have three Prism now, maybe I will do something with them


----------



## xeizo

thegr8anand said:


> I'd say 2703.


Thanks! I will go for it!


----------



## Axaion

lordzed83 said:


> How You cant controll when You can set temperatures on fans in bios ?? I got my fan locked at 60% max for cpu.


Because when it hits 75c, the bios forces 100% fan speeds

Below that, sure we can control fans like we want, but that doesnt really help when it hits 76 or so in heavy games, or 83 in prime95 small FTTs

its 100% something Asus decided to do, since mtrei has modded bioses before to fix the issue, same as with HPET and Spread spectrum, they are force enabled with no toggles.. just "because"

but fans going up and down constantly is annoying, as i prefer a silent system, id rather hit 77c and have fan inaudible, than 73c and fans doing 40dB+ with 2k RPM

I was hoping they would have fixed all 3 when i wrote on rog forums, but alas, nothing so far.


----------



## Duvar

For me 2703 BIOS is better, lost performance with 0002 compared to 2703 and 2703 has the same ~performance like 2501 (but i din not test Boostclocks because i use 3.4GHz 24/7^^
No C5 Bug anymore and performance is ok, so go for 2703 guys.


----------



## Reikoji

lordzed83 said:


> @Reikoji
> 
> Well take that -offset taht typical JOE will never change then
> 
> In general have a good read with al links posted in this topic
> https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/cuj2aq/asuss_shamino_on_overclocknet_amd_reduced_boost/
> 
> 
> No sure If You been around when 1800x ware dying on stock sometimes. Basically Killing themeselves and This is 7nm and voltage is more or less same level. Add voltage overshot when it jumps around cores taht you can see only on osciloscope ect. I see cores getting hit with voltage brick at stock settings on them, bioses.
> If I remember correct 3 people had broken/dead cpus just in c6H topic. Not in mood of spending 1 hour on search option. For interested have a search.
> 
> Basically same as @gupsterg I'm sitting on few forums and always eye catching when someone is like. My CPu is not boosting at all anymore or is crashing had to rma and got new one sort of a deal. And With Zen2 AMD pushed thopse chips to limits like never before. Zen1 and Zen+ ware not pushed this hard. I think they just Tried to deliver the As fast or faster promise. Previous 2 gens could have been overclocked all core to Single core boost -50/100mhz... I l;ook at this 3900x bootsts to 4576 theer is no way it to run 12x4500 or 12x4450 OR EVER 12x4400 not without pumping crazy for 7nm volts. And I do love pumping volts but no way in hell i would pump 1.4 volts in to this silicone for 24/7 use not when I'm rendering and mining with cpu.
> 
> 
> In the end its up to User if he is willing to play around with RMA if hes CPU brakes. I know that noone had any problems with getting CPU replaced by AMD when they broke just matter of waiting for shipping ect without spare cpu can take some time. And If they are Willing to replace with no questions asked solution. I think its sor of an Calculated risk deal. AKA we pushe them to absolute stable MAximum Some weaker ones will pack up. But in the end most users will have a faster out of box CPU.
> 
> 
> At lest I'm in position of having Free express deliveries as an Postal worker. Stuff dies boom next day 9am delivery or dhl express to wherever on planet  So cost's Me nothing and is fast. And usually the Free RMA postage labels take time to sort out and are not fastest service.



I was there in the 1800x guniea pig days and still did not hear of any dying at stock. Same up to 1.5v. The only way I see these dying at stock is if people do what Steve from HWU did with his first Zen 2 CPU and accidently leave LLC at anything but auto when going back from manual OC to stock operation or changing that at all at stock config, which he left his at max LLC. I dont think the 1.4v-1.5v has been killing any Zen CPU's outside of that operator error.


----------



## renton82

Just installed 2703 bios and with same setting -0,1 offset, LLC3, DOCP standard, PBO and XFR enabled, i have an error as soon as i lunched OCCT and soon after blue screen, never happen with 2501...


----------



## Reikoji

renton82 said:


> Just installed 2703 bios and with same setting -0,1 offset, LLC3, DOCP standard, PBO and XFR enabled, i have an error as soon as i lunched OCCT and soon after blue screen, never happen with 2501...


That offset stuff doesnt really work. Its probably that with 2703, Frequency is no longer trying to scale back with the drop in voltage like it did with previous bios.

https://youtu.be/2wM3obN2pAE?list=PLv8HwYhBwOOqwmilDbjF6qsKKg-iRLz-0


----------



## renton82

Reikoji said:


> That offset stuff doesnt really work. Its probably that with 2703, Frequency is no longer trying to scale back with the drop in voltage like it did with previous bios.
> 
> https://youtu.be/2wM3obN2pAE?list=PLv8HwYhBwOOqwmilDbjF6qsKKg-iRLz-0


I think so, because i have never had a blue screen with previous bioses... so now it's more difficult to find stability because with previous bioses even if cpu needed more power it simply dropped performance...

So is it better to stay with 2501 or go for 2703?


----------



## harderthanfire

Reikoji said:


> That offset stuff doesnt really work. Its probably that with 2703, Frequency is no longer trying to scale back with the drop in voltage like it did with previous bios.
> 
> https://youtu.be/2wM3obN2pAE?list=PLv8HwYhBwOOqwmilDbjF6qsKKg-iRLz-0



That video is about a manual voltage not offsets?


I'm running a -0.1V offset with very similar settings on bios 0002 and have no issues.


I'd suggest giving 0002 a shot if 2703 is not working right for anyone.


----------



## nick name

Does anyone know if someone can directly apply a shared BIOS profile from another user? And if it matters if one user has a Wifi board and the other user does not?


----------



## Reikoji

harderthanfire said:


> That video is about a manual voltage not offsets?
> 
> 
> I'm running a -0.1V offset with very similar settings on bios 0002 and have no issues.
> 
> 
> I'd suggest giving 0002 a shot if 2703 is not working right for anyone.


The only difference would be loss of single core boost speeds. He only showed how far he went but -0.1V is no different than. He pulled the video with the erroneous results where he did this 1v deal at stock. I tried offsets myself and saw only performance regressions and wouldnt be surprised of going too far would lead to crashes. It may be stable for you up to a point but its not running as fast and definitely not faster. Tho if all you were looking for was lower temperatures and power use then thats ok too.


----------



## neikosr0x

Reikoji said:


> The only difference would be loss of single core boost speeds. He only showed how far he went but -0.1V is no different than. He pulled the video with the erroneous results where he did this 1v deal at stock. I tried offsets myself and saw only performance regressions and wouldnt be surprised of going too far would lead to crashes. It may be stable for you up to a point but its not running as fast and definitely not faster. Tho if all you were looking for was lower temperatures and power use then thats ok too.


on 1002, having -0.1v offset on the CPU gets me the same performance as stock but with better thermals at least when running Cinebench, on games either i get the same clocks or just 25mhz below. The other day i was using LLC at lvl4 with the -0.1v offside and i was getting a boost of 4.616 in 3 cores, and games like LOL would some times pick 4.525 4.47 but most of the time it would go around 4.3-4.375. Without the LLC lvl 4 it goes around 4.225 to 4.275 in most games, and 4.275/4.35 like LOL.


----------



## renton82

With CBR15/Aggresive mode (never seen this option in previous bioses), i have a blue screen on boot and many other errors, set to auto = no problem there is also CBR15/gentle option...


----------



## harderthanfire

Reikoji said:


> The only difference would be loss of single core boost speeds. He only showed how far he went but -0.1V is no different than. He pulled the video with the erroneous results where he did this 1v deal at stock. I tried offsets myself and saw only performance regressions and wouldnt be surprised of going too far would lead to crashes. It may be stable for you up to a point but its not running as fast and definitely not faster. Tho if all you were looking for was lower temperatures and power use then thats ok too.



I get better benchmark, game performance and higher boosts with the -0.1v offset. Given that the boost algorithm will boost higher if there is still voltage and power headroom (hence why PBO can be very useful) if the thermals are low enough I am not surprised.


It will vary greatly depending on cooling situation and chip quality though obviously. Given that youtuber specializes in low form factor cases I doubt the cooling they run is anywhere near as effective as what most people in this forum run.


I have noticed that the negative VCORE offset on the 1.0.0.3 AGESA is not as effective in terms of impacting performance as it was on the 1.0.0.2 AGESA so that might play a part too.


----------



## xeizo

Now running 2703, basically single core boost is gone and all single core benchmarks takes a huge hit. Multi is about the same, it runs on average 25MHz slower than 2501. 

Geekbench baseline comparison betewwn the two bioses, same settings:

https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/compare/14409787?baseline=14422866


----------



## renton82

I think i'll revert to 2501...


----------



## Syldon

nick name said:


> Does anyone know if someone can directly apply a shared BIOS profile from another user? And if it matters if one user has a Wifi board and the other user does not?


You should be able to share the CMO file, if the boards are identical.

Edited this post to add a comment from @mtrai


Edited a second time to delete the comments. @mtrai


----------



## Nucky

I'm still on 2501. Are there any known fixes for c5? I still get it randomly on cold boots and restarts.


----------



## Enzarch

gupsterg said:


> Enzarch said:
> 
> 
> 
> Been lurking here a long time, figured I'd say hi and ask a couple Qs
> 
> Why is 'auto' PLL voltage so high? (over 2V) Is there any risk? I do seem to be able to get a bit more clock on auto than at 1.8V, seems marginal effect on temps
> 
> Anyone else use AIDA as their primary monitoring app? and notice more cpu performance degradation with it, more-so than others such as HWINFO (roughly 150pt loss in CBr20 vs -70pt)
> 
> 3900x @ 4.5 / 4.5 / 4.425 / 4.45Ghz @ ~1.325V (load) (~7950pt CBr20)
> B-Die @ 3600Mts 14-15-14-28 (~65.5nS)
> BIOS v0002 (excited to see CCX OC coming to bios maybe)
> 
> 
> 
> On [Auto] PLL has remained 1.8V for me, but I also set it manually on OC profiles. Perhaps try that and check if LN2 mode switch is not set to On.
Click to expand...


Apologies, should have specified, this is only when OC. Just seems wildly high, but does seem to stabilize the last few MHz
Going to bios 2703 and continue testing.
(LN2 is off)


----------



## Enzarch

Nucky said:


> I'm still on 2501. Are there any known fixes for c5? I still get it randomly on cold boots and restarts.


Try setting RAM boot voltage fairly high. 1.4V+ (or whatever is safe for your chips)(bottom of 'Digi power menu')


----------



## Wonderful_Greg

Wrong thread. Sorry.


----------



## nick name

Syldon said:


> You should be able to share the CMO file, if the boards are identical.
> 
> The issue with wifi v's non wifi would most likely result in a bad format response. It does not make sense to use an information tag within the CMO file, so all the information will be applied sequentially. The left over info regarding Wifi will corrupt the data input.


That's what I was wondering about. How it applied it. Many thanks.


----------



## AvengedRobix

And nothing.. i'm try and re-try Port royal on 3900 and 9900.. 200pt less on 3900 [emoji45]

Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A6013 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## tryout1

just updated from 2501 to 2703, first thing i noticed is that i can now POST with IF 1900/3800 which is nice but not stable at least when testing with TestMem5. Rebooting on the other hand in Windows turns off the system now and starts it new which ****s up my Soundblaster Z :/ Allcore boost is now 4125-4150 instead of 4175 (1.0.0.2) and 4325-4350 instead of 4400 (1.0.0.2) doesn't matter tho will use my oc settings of 4325mhz allcore with 1.325v


----------



## xeizo

I went back to 2501


----------



## Mumak

xeizo said:


> While at it, HWINFO64 doesn't work at all in the latest Windows Insider Preview from 190822, it worked in the one before. AIDA, CPU-Z and Ryzen Master works.


What exactly happens in HWiNFO? Can you post the Debug File, I'd like to check it?


----------



## Mumak

gupsterg said:


> I was wondering people using HWINFO v6.11.3895, do you see FCLK? only way I see it is if I do resume/sleep and then open HWINFO.


Wait.. you get FCLK show after a S3 sequence? FCLK readout is disabled and locked on all production parts I've seen so far.
Can you post the Debug File?


----------



## jfrob75

Hey guys, and FYI. I would occasionally get an 8d Q-code during boot. I could not determine what it represents other than the possibility of it representing a parity error. I think I may have finally prevented it from occurring. I simply manually set the SOC voltage to 1.05. Since doing that it has not occurred. So, hopefully that is the cure.

This Q-code occurred on all UEFI's I have used, 2501, 2602, 2606, 2701 and 2703.


----------



## renton82

I noticed that with 2703, if i set bclk to Auto, bus speed is 100Mhz, with 2501 bus stay at 99.8 (even if i set to 100) is there a way to have a 100Mhz bus with 2501 bios?
And why, if i set manually bclk to, for example, 101Mhz, cpu speed become static? It remains at 3600Mhz...


----------



## mtrai

Syldon said:


> You should be able to share the CMO file, if the boards are identical.
> 
> The issue with wifi v's non wifi would most likely result in a bad format response. It does not make sense to use an information tag within the CMO file, so all the information will be applied sequentially. The left over info regarding Wifi will corrupt the data input.


Actually you can cross flash the wifi and non wifi version on the same board. It is more a bick of trickery within the bios...as the only difference is on the C6H wifi is has an option to disable the wifi on the C7HWifi it has the options to disable both wifi and bluetooth. I used to use .cmo files on my C6HWIFI when crossflashing to save time. Never bothered to test it out with my C7H WIFI since I do all of my own personal bios modding and never felt the need to crossflash my C7HWIFI

/edit Just confirmed it no longer works to use the cmo from one board to another if they are not identical so wifi now must have the wifi cmo and non wifi the same.

Note if you do use CMO wifi version it will still output in text that this options or enabled or disabled on the non wifi...that is how it behaved on my C6H WIFI flashed to non wifi...however it will not expose these options in the bios.



nick name said:


> That's what I was wondering about. How it applied it. Many thanks.


See my above reply. Incidentally starting a quite a few bios ago we can now even use .cmo settings from different bios. Keep in mind I have not actually retested this since we could use previous bios .cmo settings files. My testing on the C6H was a long time ago so cannot state anything with certainty with out retesting which I am not inclined to do.

Though in practice I would HIGHLY RECOMMEND NOT DOING THIS. Using anoter persons .cmo settings. As lots of settings are gonna depend on just which cpu and ram kit you are using...but it really cannot hurt our boards...also remember people have to use and need to use totally different voltage for stability. 

Just for you info though...the .cmo file will set even those hidden options that people cannot see on the ryzen 3000 cpus.

Which just gave me an idea, create a universal CMO with out all my other settings and have HPET and Spred Spectrum disabled and everything else at default. Once you change other settings...you would need to save the profile cause as soon as you reset to default then HPET and SS would go back to enabled with no way for you to change those settings.

So I might have a work around for ryzen 3000 cpus even if a bit cumbersome. At least for now. Will have to test this with people first.

Corrected since you tested this on a current bios, a shame but I am still hoping by using a modded bios as the basis to create the cmo that hpet and spread spectrum can be disabled on Matisse Cpus.


----------



## Axaion

Hey guys, i finally manually set my Ram timings, still at 3200CL 14, but anyway..
I did that, plus disabled PBO, and now i at least see some boost to 4.38Ghz on 3 cores, 4.35 on 3 others and 4.325 on the last ones.

Got my CPU-z single core up to 532.


Im still mad about fan speed and not being able to disable hpet and Spread Spectrum though.


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> I was wondering people using HWINFO v6.11.3895, do you see FCLK? only way I see it is if I do resume/sleep and then open HWINFO.





Mumak said:


> Wait.. you get FCLK show after a S3 sequence? FCLK readout is disabled and locked on all production parts I've seen so far.
> Can you post the Debug File?


i just see UCLK showing up since i installed this version...


----------



## Axaion

Same, ULCK only here too.


----------



## smokin_mitch

Mumak said:


> Wait.. you get FCLK show after a S3 sequence? FCLK readout is disabled and locked on all production parts I've seen so far.
> Can you post the Debug File?


I get UCLK and FLCK appear in hwinfo64 after resume from sleep how do I get a debug file to post to you?


----------



## oreonutz

lordzed83 said:


> How You cant controll when You can set temperatures on fans in bios ?? I got my fan locked at 60% max for cpu.


When Using Manual Fan Control In the UEFI and your tempeture is linked to your CPU temp, Asus FORCES your fans to 100% once your CPU temp hits 75c. If you have a way around this limitation, I would LOVE to know.


----------



## oreonutz

Does anyone know if 2703 has the same fixes to the Fan Controller that 0002 Has?


----------



## dgoc18

Same issues about FCLK bugs on status.


----------



## oreonutz

smokin_mitch said:


> I get UCLK and FLCK appear in hwinfo64 after resume from sleep how do I get a debug file to post to you?


So here is how to Create a Debug File For @Mumak

This is taken directly from his Website, at this link: https://www.hwinfo.com/forum/threads/read-this-before-submitting-a-report.241/



Spoiler



"In order to submit a bug report, please include the following information:

HWiNFO32/64 Report File (HTM or TXT preferred)
HWiNFO32/64 Debug File (HWiNFO32.DBG or HWiNFO64.DBG)
In case the application crashes or you are not able to create a Report File, please submit only the Debug File. This will help to find the reason of crash.
In order to create the Debug File, HWiNFO32/64 needs to be run in Debug Mode (this can be enabled after starting HWiNFO32/64 in the "Configure" section).










Then continue with the scan process. After the scan is finished, please close the application (in case of a crash or freeze, reboot the system).
You can find the Debug File in the HWiNFO32 installation folder, the filename is: HWiNFO32.DBG (on HWiNFO32) or HWiNFO64.DBG (on HWiNFO64)

Note:
Running HWiNFO32/64 in Debug Mode might be considerably slower than in normal mode (especially running from a flash drive or certain sensor scanning).
In case you would like to report an issue with sensors, please don't forget to open the Sensor window prior to creating the Report File and closing application.
If you experience a system crash, hang or BSOD, make sure that the "Debug Write Direct" option is enabled too, otherwise the resulting DBG file might not contain all information.
If the welcome screen of HWiNFO is disabled, so it's not possible to reach the Settings screen, Debug Mode can be enabled by editing the HWiNFO32.INI or HWiNFO64.INI and changing "DebugMode=0" to "DebugMode=1". "



Also, just some notes I have noticed when trying to do it myself. First, if you are like me, and you have HWinfo set to open straight to the Sensors screen, and have it configured not to open the "Welcome Screen" you will want to temporarily change that. You can go into settings and set both the Debug Mode and Turn the Welcome Screen Back on, and then close HWinfo, reopen it, and then when the welcome screen appears. Uncheck both items, so that everything opens up. It will take longer then normal because this is when it creates the report.

The other thing to note is that if you are like me, you might be running the Portable Version. If thats the case, the Debug file automatically saves itself, at least for me, inside my C:\Windows\System32 Folder.

And last, He also likes to have a report, you can make this at the same time you open the full program, just by clicking the save report button. Then you can submit both the Debug file and the HTML Report file, you can probably just attach both to this Forum, if not just upload it to a google drive or something and post the links to it here, or PM Mumak directly with them. Hope this helps.


----------



## Reikoji

gupsterg said:


> I haven't seen a source. Odd post here or there on web that a CPU died and IIRC some at stock, so stats could just be with normal range.
> 
> Shamino has only given us an insight on reasoning for boost behaviour change, he hasn't clearly stated that AMD have given data or stated unequivocally that silicon deterioration had been observed.
> 
> To be honest yeah I like the boost on older AGESA with PBO, but if I look at it in terms of %, it's ~3.5% gain.
> 
> Now I have no source, but *just my opinion*.
> 
> What if this boost gimping on new AGESA is to keep product segmentation. For me if I looked at it, by gaining ~4.3-4.34GHz ACB on my R5 3600 I wouldn't buy or suggest buying a R5 3600X.
> 
> Currently a 3700X is ~£330, I have seen it as ~£300, would I buy a 3800X for ~£370-£380 if PBO OC allowed a boost gain on 3700X?


They technically wouldnt need to boost gimp because I dont think the Silicon's are capable of speeds more than 50mhz above those listed boosts anyway. So theres no way someone would get a 3600 for example beyond 4250mhz without an actually ridiculous amount of voltage.


----------



## Reikoji

Mumak said:


> Wait.. you get FCLK show after a S3 sequence? FCLK readout is disabled and locked on all production parts I've seen so far.
> Can you post the Debug File?


Speaking of weird sensor readings, What is 'Temp5' and 'Temp9' for?

Hmm... my attempts to add a picture have failed. There we go, had to restart Chrome...


----------



## Syldon

deleted


----------



## Mumak

So it looks like a Suspend/Resume cycle does unlock FCLK reporting, that's interesting. Most probably the BIOS is not properly restoring the FCLK lock, which is some good news for us.
Note, that the value shown is the average value of FCLK measured during each polling cycle. So you might see values other than the expected discrete points.
Regarding Temp5 and similar to are most probably just mirrors of some existing values, or invalid ones coming from not connected sensors.


----------



## neikosr0x

ok so, Yesterday I decided to give 0002 a try and see how the BIOS behaves. 
At stock setting and just adjusting RAM Values, my CPU was boosting to 4.45~ in 3/4 of the cores and 4.35 in 5/8 the rest would just do around 4.2 and for SC task but on Multi-core CB run they would around 4.035 to 4.75 CB15 scores 3168~ very low compared to bios 2501 where I get 4.1 to 4.175 CB15 scores around 3248~. I can't remember the temps and voltages that I was getting at stock so I will post later on.

Now, I was reading how to get your CPU boosting a bit better and found a few posts that suggested enabling both options for CPPC and also to enable Global C states in the BIOS would give better boosting, which it did... after enabling those my CPU started to boost very easily to 4.550 on 4 of the cores and 4.5 in another 2 the rest would be doing 4.3 to 4.435. So what i did noticed was that the voltages were high even compared to the old 2501 BIOS "AGESA 10002", the CPU would indeed go into idle at 0.905v and apps like Steam or other wouldn't pull the CPU so fast into high voltages. But anything like watching a video in youtube or similar would make the CPU to pull constant 1.4 to 1.47v some time even pulling 1.48v, never going to a lower state and while gaming the CPU pulls 1.36to 1.38 sometimes more. Temperatures are at least 6 to 10C higher on this config and Clocks lowers while gaming compared to 2501 Bios.

On a side note memory latency was terrible, i haven't tried much yet but with the same RAM configuration i was on 64.6~ns with 58k/56~k/58.5~k and now on 0002 latency went to 68.7ns 56k/54/54k. thats R/W/C.


----------



## Rusakova

neikosr0x said:


> ok so, Yesterday I decided to give 0002 a try and see how the BIOS behaves.
> At stock setting and just adjusting RAM Values, my CPU was boosting to 4.45~ in 3/4 of the cores and 4.35 in 5/8 the rest would just do around 4.2 and for SC task but on Multi-core CB run they would around 4.035 to 4.75 CB15 scores 3168~ very low compared to bios 2501 where I get 4.1 to 4.175 CB15 scores around 3248~. I can't remember the temps and voltages that I was getting at stock so I will post later on.
> 
> Now, I was reading how to get your CPU boosting a bit better and found a few posts that suggested enabling both options for CPPC and also to enable Global C states in the BIOS would give better boosting, which it did... after enabling those my CPU started to boost very easily to 4.550 on 4 of the cores and 4.5 in another 2 the rest would be doing 4.3 to 4.435. So what i did noticed was that the voltages were high even compared to the old 2501 BIOS "AGESA 10002", the CPU would indeed go into idle at 0.905v and apps like Steam or other wouldn't pull the CPU so fast into high voltages. But anything like watching a video in youtube or similar would make the CPU to pull constant 1.4 to 1.47v some time even pulling 1.48v, never going to a lower state and while gaming the CPU pulls 1.36to 1.38 sometimes more. Temperatures are at least 6 to 10C higher on this config and Clocks lowers while gaming compared to 2501 Bios.
> 
> On a side note memory latency was terrible, i haven't tried much yet but with the same RAM configuration i was on 64.6~ns with 58k/56~k/58.5~k and now on 0002 latency went to 68.7ns 56k/54/54k. thats R/W/C.


I'm still waiting on my 3900X (ordered 32 days ago ... :-( )
What do you mean ... CPPC for better boosting ?


----------



## neikosr0x

Rusakova said:


> I'm still waiting on my 3900X (ordered 32 days ago ... :-( )
> What do you mean ... CPPC for better boosting ?


That is an option inside the BIOS, "CPPC to enabled, cppc_preffered_cores to enabled in SMU options and finally global c-states control to enabled.

edt: this is in 0002 Beta Bios.


----------



## gupsterg

Mumak said:


> Wait.. you get FCLK show after a S3 sequence? FCLK readout is disabled and locked on all production parts I've seen so far.
> Can you post the Debug File?


Not only me.

Originally I was gonna PM you, then what happened was on reddit I saw this, so I thought this was "public" and hence thought I'd get others data and then present to you. User on reddit has also C7HWIFI, dunno which UEFI he's using, but seems user is here as well  and you have the data  , sorry been busy with things, etc.



majestynl said:


> i just see UCLK showing up since i installed this version...


Gotta do sleep/resume.



Mumak said:


> So it looks like a Suspend/Resume cycle does unlock FCLK reporting, that's interesting. Most probably the BIOS is not properly restoring the FCLK lock, which is some good news for us.
> Note, that the value shown is the average value of FCLK measured during each polling cycle. So you might see values other than the expected discrete points.
> Regarding Temp5 and similar to are most probably just mirrors of some existing values, or invalid ones coming from not connected sensors.


So won't become a regular sensor  ...


----------



## gupsterg

@The Stilt

All 6 instances of SMU FW need to be swapped not 4, so SMU FW (MP5) needed to be also done  .

Many thanks for your post on reddit and time  .

I finally have PBO on AGESA 1.0.0.3ABB as I did on earlier  .

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1sK8WlxqrhsnBd6u2cGlMyCoIXuhJDdWC

Last test (ie with all SMU FW) room ambient had increased quite a bit. May also need to perhaps retweak scalar on later AGESA vs used on earlier.


----------



## Mumak

gupsterg said:


> So won't become a regular sensor  ...


That depends on AMD. I have asked them if there's really a need to lock-disable the FCLK counter. Once disabled by FW/BIOS, it can't be enabled by software.


----------



## gupsterg

Mumak said:


> That depends on AMD. I have asked them if there's really a need to lock-disable the FCLK counter. Once disabled by FW/BIOS, it can't be enabled by software.


Appreciate it  .

All your efforts badgering them in regard to VEGA did help, been busy with other things to say, but get solid info from the increased read outs/VR temps, etc.

Just gonna do some UEFIs with the SMU mod for members to use, then will aim to get that BCLK testing done, if not today defo tomorrow, as family will be out and it will be just me & PC  ....


----------



## Mumak

gupsterg said:


> Appreciate it  .
> 
> All your efforts badgering them in regard to VEGA did help, been busy with other things to say, but get solid info from the increased read outs/VR temps, etc.
> 
> Just gonna do some UEFIs with the SMU mod for members to use, then will aim to get that BCLK testing done, if not today defo tomorrow, as family will be out and it will be just me & PC  ....


Thanks  Please also have a look at the new TDIE1, wondering whether it correlates with RM


----------



## crakej

I have non WiFi and *could not* read a .cmo file from someone with WiFi - bios said something like 'wrong platform' and refused to load it.

I'm still a bit bewildered by the way voltage works on Matisse - like default VCore. If you have CPU on auto in the bios and do a - or + offset voltage, it looks like the CPU (in my case anyway) VCore is about 1.45v. When I set manual OC for CPU, it looks like default VCore is about 1.0v (when using offset)...... one volt? When OCing? Seems like a bad plan - though I did boot at 4.2GHz on 1.1v - performance was of course awful!

I've seen (unofficial) advice about max VCore of 1.35v, and nothing of the min default voltage... Why does bios set voltage 0.1v higher than recommended (1.45v) when on auto? This is why many use -0.1v offset - some with performance loss, some without.

I can report that sleep has not worked for me since 2501 - I get code E1 (might be 1E) and it just stops, so your session crashes and you can lose data. I got around slow windows shutdown using hibernate, which works really well - when I press power or shutdown, it just goes straight off. When you change bios settings that session will be ignored and you get a fresh kernel, so slightly slower boot (if you change settings), but much safer.

Not been around much over last few days but kept reading as much as possible, but might have missed something so sorry if repeating myself!


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> I have non WiFi and *could not* read a .cmo file from someone with WiFi - bios said something like 'wrong platform' and refused to load it.
> 
> I'm still a bit bewildered by the way voltage works on Matisse - like default VCore. If you have CPU on auto in the bios and do a - or + offset voltage, it looks like the CPU (in my case anyway) VCore is about 1.45v. When I set manual OC for CPU, it looks like default VCore is about 1.0v (when using offset)...... one volt? When OCing? Seems like a bad plan - though I did boot at 4.2GHz on 1.1v - performance was of course awful!
> 
> I've seen (unofficial) advice about max VCore of 1.35v, and nothing of the min default voltage... Why does bios set voltage 0.1v higher than recommended (1.45v) when on auto? This is why many use -0.1v offset - some with performance loss, some without.
> 
> I can report that sleep has not worked for me since 2501 - I get code E1 (might be 1E) and it just stops, so your session crashes and you can lose data. I got around slow windows shutdown using hibernate, which works really well - when I press power or shutdown, it just goes straight off. When you change bios settings that session will be ignored and you get a fresh kernel, so slightly slower boot (if you change settings), but much safer.
> 
> Not been around much over last few days but kept reading as much as possible, but might have missed something so sorry if repeating myself!


Well damn...it must of been the earlier bios version on the C6H boards must of been changed at some point. Will edit the info out since it no longer relevant and does not work any longer. However using a modded bios cmo on the same board should work, now just need to test if the modded settings stick on a non modded bios as I suspect they will.


----------



## mtrai

Syldon said:


> I will add this into my post.


See the corrected info....as I said I had not tested this on a C7H and it was many many C6H bios where I did. It no longer works. Must use the cmo from identical boards. Not a real issue as I still hoping that using a modded bios, making a cmo and hope that the settings will change even if not exposed on matisse bios.


----------



## kevaliar

Hey everyone, I transitioned to the 3800x with the CH7 motherboard and am running the 2501 bios. Can someone help me with why I can't AutoOC + xxx with Ryzen Master without the computer locking up in Windows? Enabling PBO is fine though.

When I manually changethe AutoOC settings in the bios, the system starts crawling, at around 300mhz according to hwinfo when I finally get into Windows. I briefly tried the 2606 bios to see if it made a difference but got the same issues.

Also, does anyone else's power plans keep switching to the windows balanced power plan upon restart? I am using the latest chipset drivers.

Thanks,

Kevaliar


----------



## LePr3

Can someone who's on Bios 2703 and a 2700x verify something for me? Change Performance Bias to "CB15 - Gentle" and run SiSoftware Sandra's test "Processor Multi-core Efficiency benchmark".
Take note of scores of no Performance Bias and after.

There's an absurd latency and bandwidth improvement, but I'm not sure if it translates to anything real world.

Green = No Performance Bias
Blue = CB15 - Gentle




















Ignore the processor name. Windows is in a VM with 6 cores 'cause Linux.

Also, can anyone who runs XFR/PBO on the 3000 series check something for me? If you set Windows Power Plan to Performance, do the cores get pegged to Max Frequency like on the 2000 series, and then throttle down when you put load on it? e.g CINEBENCH. Something like a screenie of your idle frequency in HWINFO with 100% min power plan and another with Cinebench running in the background will be greatly appreciated.


----------



## andyliu

currently on bios 2703 @C7H with 3700x and windows 10 1903 as daily driver
I have recently upgrade from 2700x to 3700x, exact same hardware, only swap out the CPU; also manually reconfigure every setting.

I am not sure if anyone else experiences the same
when I trying to turn on PC sometimes, I have noticed a few cold boot behavior where the computer will power on and off trying to train ram
In addition, it takes longer to restart computer than simply shutting it off.
and often it will power off completely then back on when restarting

If there was already discussion about it, sorry for not able to find it before I made the post.
Thanks


----------



## gupsterg

UEFI 2703 & 0002 with SMU FW 46.34.00 for C7H & C7HWIFI in this post.


----------



## crakej

mtrai said:


> Well damn...it must of been the earlier bios version on the C6H boards must of been changed at some point. Will edit the info out since it no longer relevant and does not work any longer. However using a modded bios cmo on the same board should work, now just need to test if the modded settings stick on a non modded bios as I suspect they will.


Previously I've found that using cmo from another (same model) to be really useful like this in the past. Like you say, just load the profile which has the settings you want (like HPET), add your settings and save, but not tried that for a while.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> UEFI 2703 & 0002 with SMU FW 46.34.00 for C7H & C7HWIFI in this post.


Thanks gupsterg!

So you've literally injected just the smu fw from AGESA 1002 into AGESA 1003ABB leaving everything else in-tact? This is great news -I've not moved from 2602 - was about to go back to 2501 with what I've learned about tuning my ram. Reviewing your data now...

To be clear, if people have have gained memory performance using the latest bios, stay on it right? Also, does this mean that the modded bioses share the unusual re-booting/mem training/code C5 problems of 2501?


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> UEFI 2703 & 0002 with SMU FW 46.34.00 for C7H & C7HWIFI in this post.


Gonna skip learning for the moment...and go straight to modding it and test out my cmo theory.


----------



## lordzed83

1usmus said:


> *DRAM Calculator for Ryzen™ 1.6.1*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Changelog:*
> 
> * NEW. Graph of random access to caches and DRAM. Please note , that the testing process may take several minutes.
> * NEW. FreezKiller - software that will make your frame rate as smooth as possible without sacrificing performance. New iteration of cleaning Standby caches without jerking. Just click the "Start" button, minimize the application and launch your game.
> * NEW. Samsung b-die , Hynix CJR and Micron E-die presets. Particular attention was paid to memory, which is based on Micron E-die chips.
> * Updated Memtest mode, the application will automatically configure all the parameters individually for your system in 1 click (just select MEMbench mode -> Memtest).
> * Improved support for 4 DIMM's.
> * Overclocking potential DRAM received an update (tab "Advanced").
> * Correction MEMbench algorithms. In some cases, you will get better results.
> * Included libraries for improved compatibility with some versions of Windows.
> * Bug fixes.
> 
> *Download:*
> Techpowerup link
> Guru3d link
> Сomputerbase.de link
> Techspot link



German link works


----------



## crakej

Forgot to mention....

AISuite seems to work well with fans as of last version, and I can turn off the 75c limit, it doesn't seem to work. When I'm testing I do tend to let my fans go to 100 if they need to. I'll then lower it slowly to see what speed is max effective speed for fans. I'm sure this must be a bios setting.......somewhere....!

Added bonus is that AISuite reports voltages pretty accurately when compared with DMM - shame they haven't got round to updating it to show Matisse voltages and settings, but I've had no problems with it for ages - -I just forget about it once fans are set up.


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> Forgot to mention....
> 
> AISuite seems to work well with fans as of last version, and I can turn off the 75c limit, it doesn't seem to work. When I'm testing I do tend to let my fans go to 100 if they need to. I'll then lower it slowly to see what speed is max effective speed for fans. I'm sure this must be a bios setting.......somewhere....!
> 
> Added bonus is that AISuite reports voltages pretty accurately when compared with DMM - shame they haven't got round to updating it to show Matisse voltages and settings, but I've had no problems with it for ages - -I just forget about it once fans are set up.


The settings are there. This is an album I took on the C6H a while ago...but the all the same options are in the C7H but just hidden.

https://imgur.com/a/bQUUKMu


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> The settings are there. This is an album I took on the C6H a while ago...but the all the same options are in the C7H but just hidden.
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/bQUUKMu


Damnit! THIS IS WHAT I WANT CONTROL OVER!!! Why Can't ASUS GIVE US THIS???????? Its our fricking PC, If we want to change the Critical Temperature from 75c, we Should have every ability to do so!


----------



## crakej

mtrai said:


> The settings are there. This is an album I took on the C6H a while ago...but the all the same options are in the C7H but just hidden.
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/bQUUKMu


Hmmmmm - wonder why they're hiding them from us?


----------



## thegr8anand

The fan bug has started happening to me now. Twice after running the pc about an hour or so. Will test the new 002+ bios.


----------



## oreonutz

gupsterg said:


> @The Stilt
> 
> All 6 instances of SMU FW need to be swapped not 4, so SMU FW (MP5) needed to be also done  .
> 
> Many thanks for your post on reddit and time  .
> 
> I finally have PBO on AGESA 1.0.0.3ABB as I did on earlier  .
> 
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1sK8WlxqrhsnBd6u2cGlMyCoIXuhJDdWC
> 
> Last test (ie with all SMU FW) room ambient had increased quite a bit. May also need to perhaps retweak scalar on later AGESA vs used on earlier.


Don't suppose I could ask you for that tweaked UEFI, I would love to test this myself, if possible.

EDIT: Never mind, I appreciate you posting the Link Again, I just saw it. You are awesome as always @gupsterg


----------



## oreonutz

thegr8anand said:


> The fan bug has started happening to me now. Twice after running the pc about an hour or so. Will test the new 002+ bios.


I keep hearing references to the 002+ Uefi, I have been offline for a few days, and only skimmed through posts I missed while gone. Is 002+ the same Beta 0002 Uefi posted about a week ago, or is there a newer Beta UEFI Out that I missed?

EDIT: Nevermind, I know what you are referring too now, sorry for being a dumb ass, lol.


----------



## gupsterg

gupsterg said:


> UEFI 2703 & 0002 with SMU FW 46.34.00 for C7H & C7HWIFI in this post.
> 
> 
> 
> crakej said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks gupsterg!
> 
> So you've literally injected just the smu fw from AGESA 1002 into AGESA 1003ABB leaving everything else in-tact?
Click to expand...

Yes.



crakej said:


> This is great news -I've not moved from 2602 - was about to go back to 2501 with what I've learned about tuning my ram. Reviewing your data now...


NP.



crakej said:


> To be clear, if people have have gained memory performance using the latest bios, stay on it right?


It's to give people a choice, so I guess stay on whatever works best for you.



crakej said:


> Also, does this mean that the modded bioses share the unusual re-booting/mem training/code C5 problems of 2501?


"Recovery" works, you shouldn't get Q-Code: C5, board should retry POST and if repeatedly fails use fail safe settings to POST.

The POST experience will be as was on UEFIs using AGESA 1.0.0.3AB/ABB.

All that changes is boost frequency behaviour.

At stock on modded UEFI I regain ~1.325V average CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN when CPU averages all cores boost of ~4.2GHz, as if I was on earlier AGESA UEFI.

When I do PBO+150MHz on modded UEFI I regain peaks of 4.35GHz with peak CPU Core Voltage SVI TFN ~1.437V, all cores boost will average close to ~4.3GHz, as CPU temps are bit higher due to ~29-30C room ambient I'm currently experiencing.



mtrai said:


> Gonna skip learning for the moment...and go straight to modding it and test out my cmo theory.


OK.

Because of editing the version string to have a "+", it creates changes in UEFI which make it hard to see the mod.

If you search say a stock UEFI for SMU version. 46.34.00 = 2E2200h, do endian conversion, 00222E00h is best to search for. I got 6 hits, SMU 1, 2 & 3. There are 3 unique SMU FW, duplicated twice, so you get 6 hits. Replace each one, where you find the version it's located 60h from beginning of FW module. From beginning of FW module 6Ch is length of a FW module.

SMU 1 len: 1A180h
SMU 2 len: 420h
SMU 3 len: CAB0h

As the older SMU 3 FW is shorter, in AGESA 1.0.0.3 UEFI I padded out the 120h left over data (ie filled with FFh).

Once SMU FW injected using HxD copy/paste overwrite, I used UEFITool to extract as is:-

Subtype GUID: AB56DC60-0057-11DA-A8DB-000102EEE626 from GUID: DAF4BF89-CE71-4917-B522-C89D32FBC59F

You can change version string by inserting bytes and editing in HxD, table length doesn't need to be change for correct display. 

The version change will be seen in OS/APPs, not in UEFI POST text/screens, that is a differing module when I last tinkered with it last. You then replace as is the edited module using UEFITool and save, file is ready to flash with flashback.


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> The settings are there. This is an album I took on the C6H a while ago...but the all the same options are in the C7H but just hidden.
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/bQUUKMu


 @shamino1978 I know you are an incredibly busy guy, so I am sorry to bug you with stuff that you shouldn't really be dealing with. But there are at least a Dozen of us here now that REALLY want to be able to over ride our Critical Fan Temperatures in UEFI. Right now, no matter what we do, If the CPU Temperature Rises above 75c, any fans that we control in UEFI that are controlled by the CPU Temperature, automatically Ramp up to 100 Percent. We really really want the ability to over-ride this without having to swap over to an external fan controller.

Is there ANY Possible way you could give us access to a UEFI, Beta or Otherwise, that will allow us to change that Critical Temperature. We would REALLY REALLY Appreciate it. Even if it meant all of us paypaling you a Few Bucks each, I am pretty sure I speak for all of us when I say we would GLADLY do that. If you look at the Screenshot in the Post I am quoting that is a screenshot of an Old Modded UEFI by @mtrai where he exposed the settings in your UEFI, so we know they exist, its just @mtrai hasn't been able to get the Mods to work on the Ryzen 3000 Series yet, so if we could have your help, either with a Beta UEFI that gives control back to us, or if you could drop @mtrai some pointers in making his Mods work with Matisse CPU's, either would be EXTREMELY Appreciated by your C7H and C6H community, and if you would like to be compensated for your time, I will organize a bit of a collection plate for you. 

I really appreciate your time! Sorry to bug you!


----------



## thegr8anand

oreonutz said:


> I keep hearing references to the 002+ Uefi, I have been offline for a few days, and only skimmed through posts I missed while gone. Is 002+ the same Beta 0002 Uefi posted about a week ago, or is there a newer Beta UEFI Out that I missed?





002 is modded 2703 Shamino posted in Asus forums for WMI fix for the fans. 002+ and 2703+ user @*gupsterg* modded each with Agesa 1002 firmware, he posted these today on asus forum.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> Yes.
> "Recovery" works, you shouldn't get Q-Code: C5, board should retry POST and if repeatedly fails use fail safe settings to POST.
> 
> The POST experience will be as was on UEFIs using AGESA 1.0.0.3AB/ABB.
> 
> All that changes is boost frequency behaviour.
> 
> At stock on modded UEFI I regain ~1.325V average CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN when CPU averages all cores boost of ~4.2GHz, as if I was on earlier AGESA UEFI.
> 
> When I do PBO+150MHz on modded UEFI I regain peaks of 4.35GHz with peak CPU Core Voltage SVI TFN ~1.437V, all cores boost will average close to ~4.3GHz, as CPU temps are bit higher due to ~29-30C room ambient I'm currently experiencing.


Thanks again! I used to do this years ago so know it's a pain! Will install shortly, but have friends coming for wine drinking so might leave testing until tomorrow. 

Will let you know my results as soon as I've tested.


----------



## thegr8anand

@gupsterg 0002+ didn't flash. It said its not a proper bios.


----------



## oreonutz

gupsterg said:


> Yes.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> NP.
> 
> 
> 
> It's to give people a choice, so I guess stay on whatever works best for you.
> 
> 
> 
> "Recovery" works, you shouldn't get Q-Code: C5, board should retry POST and if repeatedly fails use fail safe settings to POST.
> 
> The POST experience will be as was on UEFIs using AGESA 1.0.0.3AB/ABB.
> 
> All that changes is boost frequency behaviour.
> 
> At stock on modded UEFI I regain ~1.325V average CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN when CPU averages all cores boost of ~4.2GHz, as if I was on earlier AGESA UEFI.
> 
> When I do PBO+150MHz on modded UEFI I regain peaks of 4.35GHz with peak CPU Core Voltage SVI TFN ~1.437V, all cores boost will average close to ~4.3GHz, as CPU temps are bit higher due to ~29-30C room ambient I'm currently experiencing.
> 
> 
> 
> OK.
> 
> Because of editing the version string to have a "+", it creates changes in UEFI which make it hard to see the mod.
> 
> If you search say a stock UEFI for SMU version. 46.34.00 = 2E2200h, do endian conversion, 00222E00h is best to search for. I got 6 hits, SMU 1, 2 & 3. There are 3 unique SMU FW, duplicated twice, so you get 6 hits. Replace each one, where you find the version it's located 60h from beginning of FW module. From beginning of FW module 6Ch is length of a FW module.
> 
> SMU 1 len: 1A180h
> SMU 2 len: 420h
> SMU 3 len: CAB0h
> 
> As the older SMU 3 FW is shorter, in AGESA 1.0.0.3 UEFI I padded out the 120h left over data (ie filled with FFh).
> 
> Once SMU FW injected using HxD copy/paste overwrite, I used UEFITool to extract as is:-
> 
> Subtype GUID: AB56DC60-0057-11DA-A8DB-000102EEE626 from GUID: DAF4BF89-CE71-4917-B522-C89D32FBC59F
> 
> You can change version string by inserting bytes and editing in HxD, table length doesn't need to be change for correct display.
> 
> The version change will be seen in OS/APPs, not in UEFI POST text/screens, that is a differing module when I last tinkered with it last. You then replace as is the edited module using UEFITool and save, file is ready to flash with flashback.


I am about to Flash to your Mod in just a few minutes. Will let you know how it works out for me as well. This will be my Second time going back to using PB since "upgrading" from Agesa 1002. Can't wait to see if I can get that better Boost Behavior Back! (Now if only we could control the Critical Fan Temperature, and we would be in Crosshair Heaven!!! LOL!)


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> Thanks again! I used to do this years ago so know it's a pain! Will install shortly, but have friends coming for wine drinking so might leave testing until tomorrow.
> 
> Will let you know my results as soon as I've tested.


Enjoy the time with friends & :drink:  , chat soon  .



thegr8anand said:


> @gupsterg 0002+ didn't flash. It said its not a proper bios.


Use flashback method of flashing UEFI, I updated the ROG post with info, as someone also asked this on reddit, now seeing higher boost on 3900X.



Spoiler
















oreonutz said:


> I am about to Flash to your Mod in just a few minutes. Will let you know how it works out for me as well. This will be my Second time going back to using PB since "upgrading" from Agesa 1002. Can't wait to see if I can get that better Boost Behavior Back! (Now if only we could control the Critical Fan Temperature, and we would be in Crosshair Heaven!!! LOL!)


NP, look forward to your info.

IIRC, we asked Elmor about this in C6H thread, IIRC he may have (note may) stated due to things beyond his control it couldn't be done. As search the forum is a real mare I won't take the time to search it.


----------



## LethalSpoon

We should be able to control fan rpm choosing another value like VRM or chipset. At least the ones that aren't connected to CPU/AIO headers.


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> Enjoy the time with friends & :drink:  , chat soon  .
> 
> 
> 
> Use flashback method of flashing UEFI, I updated the ROG post with info, as someone also asked this on reddit, now seeing higher boost on 3900X.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 291666
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NP, look forward to your info.
> 
> IIRC, we asked Elmor about this in C6H thread, IIRC he may have (note may) stated due to things beyond his control it couldn't be done. As search the forum is a real mare I won't take the time to search it.


Anyhow you bios on my C7HWIFI flashed just fine. Testing it out then will add my mods to it.


----------



## Martelele

oreonutz said:


> I am about to Flash to your Mod in just a few minutes. Will let you know how it works out for me as well. This will be my Second time going back to using PB since "upgrading" from Agesa 1002. Can't wait to see if I can get that better Boost Behavior Back! (Now if only we could control the Critical Fan Temperature, and we would be in Crosshair Heaven!!! LOL!)


Hi mate,can you let me know if the HPET setting is present in the modified bios? I also do own the non wifi Crosshair VII mobo and that would be nice to know before flashing.Cheers


----------



## CharliesTheMan

I can confirm that flashing 002 via the USB Flashback method went flawless for me. I'm up and running now. I have a weird issue on stock 2703 with rebooting not working right, I'm worried that may still exist due to whatever gremlins are in the firmware. But everything else seems good.


----------



## harderthanfire

gupsterg said:


> Enjoy the time with friends & :drink:  , chat soon  .
> 
> 
> 
> Use flashback method of flashing UEFI, I updated the ROG post with info, as someone also asked this on reddit, now seeing higher boost on 3900X.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 291666
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NP, look forward to your info.
> 
> IIRC, we asked Elmor about this in C6H thread, IIRC he may have (note may) stated due to things beyond his control it couldn't be done. As search the forum is a real mare I won't take the time to search it.



Thanks for the boost mod, going to give it a go now too!


----------



## xeizo

Already thanked at ROG, but thanks again!


----------



## mtrai

LethalSpoon said:


> We should be able to control fan rpm choosing another value like VRM or chipset. At least the ones that aren't connected to CPU/AIO headers.


Those options already in asus bios...but as with all the others I showed it is a hidden option. Here is a pic of one of these settings lots of options to chose from. This is on my C7HWiFI 2501 modded bios. I just took the screen. Doing some testing so I reverted for now.


----------



## CharliesTheMan

Welp, I'm getting the best boost I've seen I believe on my lil ole Ryzen 3600, 4341.95 with optimized defaults and PBO set to max +150 with this 002 modded BIOS. Big thanks @gupsterg


----------



## mtrai

Martelele said:


> Hi mate,can you let me know if the HPET setting is present in the modified bios? I also do own the non wifi Crosshair VII mobo and that would be nice to know before flashing.Cheers


We have 2 different mods at the moment. @gupsterg was able to swap the SW FM out to an earlier bios version...my mod unlocks tons of hidden options, yes it is there in my mod. I have not yet merged his bios with mine...however keep in mind the options do not show if your using a Matisse 3000 series for some reason. Been trying to work it out but it is just trial and error on how to get them to show for matisse, since they do not show I have come up with a possible option to try yesterday but not had time to test it either. Also it is one of the ones that have to be searched.


----------



## kevaliar

CharliesTheMan said:


> Welp, I'm getting the best boost I've seen I believe on my lil ole Ryzen 3600, 4341.95 with optimized defaults and PBO set to max +150 with this 002 modded BIOS. Big thanks @gupsterg


Do you change the PBO settings with RM or inside the bios?


----------



## harderthanfire

@*gupsterg* getting locked to 4.3ghz and no boost with the 0002 modded wifi bios :/


Edit: So sorted it by only using the Asus PBO menu not the one in the AMD overclocking section, enabling Global C States and both CPPC settings. Seems to be boosting correctly now.


----------



## LethalSpoon

mtrai said:


> Those options already in asus bios...but as with all the others I showed it is a hidden option. Here is a pic of one of these settings lots of options to chose from. This is on my C7HWiFI 2501 modded bios. I just took the screen. Doing some testing so I reverted for now.


I cant understand why they hide those options from us, it doesn't make any sense at all :eh-smiley


----------



## renton82

CharliesTheMan said:


> I have a weird issue on stock 2703 with rebooting not working right, I'm worried that may still exist due to whatever gremlins are in the firmware.


Same behaviour here... every time i reboot with 2703, system shuts down for one or two seconds and than powers on again... does this modded bios have fixed it?


----------



## oreonutz

renton82 said:


> Same behaviour here... every time i reboot with 2703, system shuts down for one or two seconds and than powers on again... does this modded bios have fixed it?


I don't know about the modified 2703 UEFI, but the Modified 0002 UEFI and the Normal Beta 0002 UEFI both have this behavior. Its annoying, but at least the fan bug seems to be fixed.

I finally gave up and installed AISuite. I swore up and down I would NEVER install another piece of ASUS Software (Other than Lighting Service) because of the HAVOC its reeked on my systems in the past. I haven't had it installed long enough to know whether or not its going to reek havoc again, but so far so good. I also did an Acronis Image just before installing the tool to be on the safe side. It allowed me to override that ridiculously STUPID Critical Temperature at 75c, BS. Now I can run CBR20 and do a Blender Render without my ears having to suffer! I LOVE IT!


----------



## oreonutz

gupsterg said:


> Enjoy the time with friends & :drink:  , chat soon  .
> 
> 
> 
> Use flashback method of flashing UEFI, I updated the ROG post with info, as someone also asked this on reddit, now seeing higher boost on 3900X.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 291666
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NP, look forward to your info.
> 
> IIRC, we asked Elmor about this in C6H thread, IIRC he may have (note may) stated due to things beyond his control it couldn't be done. As search the forum is a real mare I won't take the time to search it.


So I was able to easily flash using BIOS FLASHBACK Your Mod for the Non-WIFI C7H. The Boost Behavior is definitely back to being like it was on Agesa 1002 which was awesome!

However, I forgot the reason why I went to Manual OC and Per CCX OCing in the first place, and thats that as soon as the Damn CPU goes above 75c the damn All Core Drops to 4000Ghz, which is stupid. Especially considering that EVEN WITH an Offset of 0.1v, its still pumping 1.35v down the damn CPU when under a CBR20 Load. Thats ridiculous. Then if I use even more of a Negative offset It Blue Screens upon loading into Windows. Considering My Chip can do 4300Mhz easily at 1.35v, I don't see why AMD Feels the Need to have their algorithm drop the Clocks so aggressively, while maintaining such a High Boost *VOLTAGE*(Before edit I accidentally said Frequency). If I could control that All Core Load Boost *Voltage* a little better, then I could easily keep my CPU Below 75c at Full Load, if I could get it to 1.25v, then under Full Load I would only be at about 73c, then I could maintain a 4225Mhz All Core load, and I would be happy. But I played with different Negative Offsets and all the PBO Options available to us in the UEFI, including the Stilts PE Options that he included with Zen+, and I couldn't find a combination that would allow an acceptable All Core Boost Frequency and Voltage. 

So as much as I love your Mod for the Lightly Threaded Load Performance, I still am back to Manual OCing and Per CCX Ocing. I am still on your UEFI though, and its working like a charm! Great Mod! If only AMD Would give us the tools to control PB Voltages at Different Loads, that would be amazing. But I guess I can keep dreaming...


----------



## oreonutz

Martelele said:


> Hi mate,can you let me know if the HPET setting is present in the modified bios? I also do own the non wifi Crosshair VII mobo and that would be nice to know before flashing.Cheers


I could not find The HPET Settings in the Mod, however I forgot to search for them, on my next boot I will do a search and see if they pop up and will report back, but I do know that they are not in the regular Menus.


----------



## Duvar

I saw lower CB Scores on 0002mod, will try 2703 mod now, maybe its better. Saw up to 4.375GHz Boost with my 3600 and only 197 SC Score with CB 15...


----------



## neikosr0x

@gupsterg

Bro, i'm having this weird behavior with my system after flashing the 0002+ for the CH7 non-wifi and my 3900x.

The machine itself is behaving as it was the stock 0002 bios if I enable PBO the CPU won't clock over 4200mhz and if I leave it stock then it boost to 4.450 maybe 4.5ghz so I'm not sure if I'm missing a point or it has something to do with my windows. Also, I'm using Ryzen Balanced plan but with Min: 0% and max 100%.

Forgot to mention that the CPU is not clocking down as in 2501 it just clocking very dynamic around 3.7ghz mark


----------



## renton82

But what is the "benefit" using 2703 instead of 2501 (newer vs older Agesa)?


----------



## crakej

My machine boosted to 4.6GHz within 5 mins of booting up.

Loading browser and doing a few things I saw boosts of 4.63GHz

Thank you gupsterg! Only VERY limited time to use it so far, just thought I'd let you know how it was going.


----------



## oreonutz

renton82 said:


> But what is the "benefit" using 2703 instead of 2501 (newer vs older Agesa)?


The only reason I upgraded to 0002 was to get rid of the damn Fan Bug. Also, I think a few people have noted better Memory OCing Stability, but I can't confirm as I am using the same 3800Mhz Memory with 1900 IF that I first got stable in 2501 with the same Timings, so I can only confirm that Upgrading didn't break my Memory OC. Other than that, the biggest benefit I can see if the Fan Controller not randomly cutting out on you.


----------



## neikosr0x

Ok i uninstalled and reinstalled all AMD chipset drivers ran CCleaner for temps and registry just in case xD, booted 100% defaults settings and i'm getting this!, yet it is very very aggressive, anything that i do like opening something like youtube or what ever gets me really high voltages 1.43v-1.48v-1.5v.


----------



## mtrai

oreonutz said:


> I could not find The HPET Settings in the Mod, however I forgot to search for them, on my next boot I will do a search and see if they pop up and will report back, but I do know that they are not in the regular Menus.


Gusterp does not have any of my mods. Remember they also do not show for Matisse 3000 cpus either. I am thinking I am gonna need Gurstep to undo a couple DMI changes he made in order for mods to work with his. But gonna retest it before I ask for that.


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> Gusterp does not have any of my mods. Remember they also do not show for Matisse 3000 cpus either. I am thinking I am gonna need Gurstep to undo a couple DMI changes he made in order for mods to work with his. But gonna retest it before I ask for that.


Yeah I knew you guys have seperate mods, but I am not sure if ASUS added back this functionality or not themselves, which is why I responded to his query. But @mtrai and @gupsterg are making Mods in this Thread, currently @mtrai is the one who is unhiding settings in the UEFI, but currently they are not working on Matisse (3000 Series) Processors. @gupsterg is making the mods that are bringing back the old Agesa 1002 Behavior, and injecting it into the new UEFI Agesa, its working great too, and works with Matisse Processors. However, there is currently no Mod that includes both, so if flashing to @gupsterg 0002+ or 2703+ Mod, do not expect any hidden settings in UEFI to be exposed.


----------



## mtrai

Honestly I do not expect any help from anyone or any of my sources on this matter. @the_stilt has some insite. It just is not making any sense to me as the CPU should be agnostic to the bios setup module. And I do not need him to undo the DMI changes...I made some mistake this morning with his bios and me modding it.

I did a quick mod just a while ago to test and it works...so I screwed something up this morning lol..anyhow just would not flash. So gonna start working on the full mods over the next day or two with the SMU FW that gustrep has inserted. But that damn issue is why the menu options do not appear for Matisse 3000 cpus baffles me. Once I have gotten the mods done...I think we will be at least able to disable both HPET and Spread spectrum via a default CMO with those settings...but this will require someone to flash my modded bios with 1000/2000 cpu create a a defualt cmo but with HEPT and SPREAD SPRECTRUM DISABLED as part of the default and then make it public so people with a matisse can use it to set those settings and then make changes. This is just theorycrafting at this point have not been able to test it. 

Just hit me..I could just disable them as defaults and we can test that out...unfortantly no fan controls for the the 3000 series that I can give for the 1000/2000 Incidentally I could do the same fan controls on my Intel 6600k on the Asus board I used. It is all standard.

/edit Just wanted to clarify when I said I did not really expect any help from anyone...I mean official people at various companies not y'all here and on other forums. Y'all all rock.


----------



## Xenozx

So ive tried every bios to date, and no matter what I do i cant get my 3900x to boost to anything over 4.45. I usually am stuck at like 4.25. I have tried every bios, installed every chipset driver, and reinstalled ryzen master so many times. I have the newest bios, newest chipset, and newest ryzen master right now. I gave up on trying to get boost and stuff to work properly, I would love to see single core of 4.6 even 1 core, but never anywhere close, and even worse if i do anything multi, it would drop down to like 3.85. 

so my solution is BCLK overclocking. I seem to get the best of both worlds.

I have a 104 bclk set. 
i have -0.1 offset voltage set in bios
level 4 OC profile loaded
Right now DOCP profile loaded for 3200 14 14 14 30, but running at 3266, going to tinker this up over 3600 in a bit.
Everything else is stock

This allows the chip to run at 

4395mhz most of the time. If I do a 

24 thread bench it will drop down to a minimum of about 4187mhz
12 thread bench it will drop down to a minimum of about 4239mhz
08 thread bench it will drop down to a minimum of about 4317mhz
04 thread bench it will drop down to a minimum of about 4343mhz
02 thread bench it will drop down to a minimum of about 4369mhz


I think that is pretty damn reasonable, and best of all even a 24 thread load wont put CPU temp over 80c. 

Considering my old 2700x topped out at an all core of 4.2ghz and was no where near as stable as this, ill call it a win. I will wait until asus figures out this whole boost clock crap cause right now it sucks. I wish i could still get a single core of 4.6, and say an all core of 4.2, but until then ill keep with this seems to be pretty damn good.

what do you guys think?

*actually it seems to boost up to 4.62ghz in certain situations*, so I am very happy with that. I will say performance has dropped a little on 2703, as the first cpu-z scores were on an older bios. I did get 3605mhz 15-15-15-30 running error free.


----------



## crakej

neikosr0x said:


> Ok i uninstalled and reinstalled all AMD chipset drivers ran CCleaner for temps and registry just in case xD, booted 100% defaults settings and i'm getting this!, yet it is very very aggressive, anything that i do like opening something like youtube or what ever gets me really high voltages 1.43v-1.48v-1.5v.


But only 1.7 watts - it's nothing! Max used was 10 watts - again nothing really.


----------



## harderthanfire

neikosr0x said:


> Ok i uninstalled and reinstalled all AMD chipset drivers ran CCleaner for temps and registry just in case xD, booted 100% defaults settings and i'm getting this!, yet it is very very aggressive, anything that i do like opening something like youtube or what ever gets me really high voltages 1.43v-1.48v-1.5v.



That looks exactly like expected. Those voltages are only high for very short periods of time so I would not worry.


----------



## AvengedRobix

I can't read all post because i've many problem in this day's... Any news? Where i can download 0002+?

Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A6013 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## crakej

Hmmm....

My machine just stopped! I thought it was a power cut or blown fuse at first. I had to power off the board until all power drained before it would power on again.

HWInfo was open and the last time I looked at it temps were fine and fans were fine.

This is on @gupsterg modded 2703, but i have no reason to suspect the firmware directly (unless anyone else is having probs). I have a profile from 2602 which only has mem OC 3733CL16 - nothing too stressful!

I can say that loading the memory OC has reduced the amount of boost I see with default settings from 4.63 to 4.5GHz - so far. Will experiment later with PBO/PE.


----------



## gupsterg

mtrai said:


> Anyhow you bios on my C7HWIFI flashed just fine. Testing it out then will add my mods to it.


NP  .



harderthanfire said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for the boost mod, going to give it a go now too!
> 
> 
> 
> harderthanfire said:
> 
> 
> 
> @*gupsterg* getting locked to 4.3ghz and no boost with the 0002 modded wifi bios :/
> 
> 
> Edit: So sorted it by only using the Asus PBO menu not the one in the AMD overclocking section, enabling Global C States and both CPPC settings. Seems to be boosting correctly now.
Click to expand...

NP  , to condense post rest in spoiler.



Spoiler



I use Extreme Tweaker page PBO menu to set parameters, only scalar change does not seem to apply which has been the case since UEFI 0068 had PBO menu on Extreme Tweaker. I then set only scalar in AMD Overclocking menu.

IMO it is best to change SOC voltage mode on Extreme Tweaker to Offset/+/Auto and set SOC voltage via AMD Overclocking menu. Then you will not see a peak of ~1.1V SOC at beginning of POST process. This is also the case with any unmodified UEFI from UEFI 2601 onwards. I also set CLDO_VDDP & CLDO_VDDG in AMD Overclocking menu with any UEFI after 2601 so far.

AMD Overclocking menu settings are retained for reapplication when board goes through "recovery" on failed POST. AMD CBS settings will reset and need to be changed before save & exit. This is also the case with any unmodified UEFI from UEFI 2601 onwards.

I have to also enable Global C-States Control to observe ~0.3V idle VID in Ryzen Master and ~0.9V with 2.2GHz in HWINFO when idle. This is the case also on some unmodified UEFIs.

Whatever idiosyncrasy, bugs, issues exist with unmodified UEFI will exist when SMU FW 46.34.00 is injected into UEFI, only boost behaviour for Stock PB/PBO OC should change, as how the SMU is profiling CPU changes. Manual OC should be the same performance, etc.





xeizo said:


> Already thanked at ROG, but thanks again!


NP  .



CharliesTheMan said:


> Welp, I'm getting the best boost I've seen I believe on my lil ole Ryzen 3600, 4341.95 with optimized defaults and PBO set to max +150 with this 002 modded BIOS. Big thanks @gupsterg


NP  , thanks for feedback.



renton82 said:


> Same behaviour here... every time i reboot with 2703, system shuts down for one or two seconds and than powers on again... does this modded bios have fixed it?


IMO the reasoning for this is as Shamino states:-



> If you mean ac power loss back to boot,
> This is not a bug, since board would need to boot safe settings for dram and apply dram vboot before going into user customized settings , else you would train oc dram with default volt, the bios can only apply volts after psp


Source link.



oreonutz said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> So I was able to easily flash using BIOS FLASHBACK Your Mod for the Non-WIFI C7H. The Boost Behavior is definitely back to being like it was on Agesa 1002 which was awesome!
> 
> However, I forgot the reason why I went to Manual OC and Per CCX OCing in the first place, and thats that as soon as the Damn CPU goes above 75c the damn All Core Drops to 4000Ghz, which is stupid. Especially considering that EVEN WITH an Offset of 0.1v, its still pumping 1.35v down the damn CPU when under a CBR20 Load. Thats ridiculous. Then if I use even more of a Negative offset It Blue Screens upon loading into Windows. Considering My Chip can do 4300Mhz easily at 1.35v, I don't see why AMD Feels the Need to have their algorithm drop the Clocks so aggressively, while maintaining such a High Boost *VOLTAGE*(Before edit I accidentally said Frequency). If I could control that All Core Load Boost *Voltage* a little better, then I could easily keep my CPU Below 75c at Full Load, if I could get it to 1.25v, then under Full Load I would only be at about 73c, then I could maintain a 4225Mhz All Core load, and I would be happy. But I played with different Negative Offsets and all the PBO Options available to us in the UEFI, including the Stilts PE Options that he included with Zen+, and I couldn't find a combination that would allow an acceptable All Core Boost Frequency and Voltage.
> 
> So as much as I love your Mod for the Lightly Threaded Load Performance, I still am back to Manual OCing and Per CCX Ocing. I am still on your UEFI though, and its working like a charm! Great Mod! If only AMD Would give us the tools to control PB Voltages at Different Loads, that would be amazing. But I guess I can keep dreaming...


NP  , thanks for feedback.



Duvar said:


> I saw lower CB Scores on 0002mod, will try 2703 mod now, maybe its better. Saw up to 4.375GHz Boost with my 3600 and only 197 SC Score with CB 15...


Thanks for feedback  , perhaps differing room temp, affecting CPU temp, leading to differing boost, dunno TBH. This post on ROG has my compare with past UEFIs, 0002 and 0002+. 



neikosr0x said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> @gupsterg
> 
> Bro, i'm having this weird behavior with my system after flashing the 0002+ for the CH7 non-wifi and my 3900x.
> 
> The machine itself is behaving as it was the stock 0002 bios if I enable PBO the CPU won't clock over 4200mhz and if I leave it stock then it boost to 4.450 maybe 4.5ghz so I'm not sure if I'm missing a point or it has something to do with my windows. Also, I'm using Ryzen Balanced plan but with Min: 0% and max 100%.
> 
> Forgot to mention that the CPU is not clocking down as in 2501 it just clocking very dynamic around 3.7ghz mark
> 
> 
> 
> neikosr0x said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ok i uninstalled and reinstalled all AMD chipset drivers ran CCleaner for temps and registry just in case xD, booted 100% defaults settings and i'm getting this!, yet it is very very aggressive, anything that i do like opening something like youtube or what ever gets me really high voltages 1.43v-1.48v-1.5v.
Click to expand...

See posted info above for which PBO menu to use, to condense post rest in spoiler.



Spoiler



I'm currently using AMD Chipset Driver package v1.8.19.0915, if using the Ryzen Balanced profile I would set min CPU state as 5% and also enabled Global C-State control, then I see improved idle clocks/voltage even on unmodified UEFI 0002. With these on modded UEFI you could potentially see increased boost than when doing the same on unmodded, depending on silicon characteristics and SMU profiling.

The max voltage your seeing can be very small bursts, which will have very low current, so not detrimental IMO. If you see consistent higher voltage when lower CPU load and increased frequency, again I'd think that would not be detrimental, as if it was high current/watt situation you'd see frequency curbed.

Organise the files in this ZIP by time.

P95 v28.8b3 RAM PBO+150 6x 105W 3800v4.2 1.068 1.013 1.4 0.7 room 28C 2hrs 12min.wmv is using "Official" UEFI 2501, PBO+150MHz, high load case averages ~4.09GHz with ~1.349V, room temp ~28C, run ~2hrs.

1.056 0.978 0.901 1.405 0.7 43.6 PSSE room 24C PASS 2hrs.wmv is using "beta" UEFI 2701, high load case averages ~4.1GHz with ~1.333V, room temp ~24C, run ~2hrs.

On 0002+ PBO+150MHz straight after ~4hrs RAM Test I did small ~5min run of P95, averages ~4.04GHz with ~1.325V.

PB/PBO end up the same in high load situation, the compare is:-

i) PBO+150MHz SMU FW 46.34.00 on UEFI 2501
ii) CPU stock, SMU FW 46.40.00 on UEFI 2701
iii) PBO+150MHz SMU FW 46.340.00 on UEFI 0002+





crakej said:


> My machine boosted to 4.6GHz within 5 mins of booting up.
> 
> Loading browser and doing a few things I saw boosts of 4.63GHz
> 
> Thank you gupsterg! Only VERY limited time to use it so far, just thought I'd let you know how it was going.


NP  , thanks for feedback.


----------



## neikosr0x

crakej said:


> Hmmm....
> 
> My machine just stopped! I thought it was a power cut or blown fuse at first. I had to power off the board until all power drained before it would power on again.
> 
> HWInfo was open and the last time I looked at it temps were fine and fans were fine.
> 
> This is on @gupsterg modded 2703, but i have no reason to suspect the firmware directly (unless anyone else is having probs). I have a profile from 2602 which only has mem OC 3733CL16 - nothing too stressful!
> 
> I can say that loading the memory OC has reduced the amount of boost I see with default settings from 4.63 to 4.5GHz - so far. Will experiment later with PBO/PE.


Yeap happens to me as well, as soon as I go and edit the memory speed settings in this case to 3733 the clocks goes down to 4.3ghz max, still haven't found a way to go around it.


----------



## Xenozx

Just curious why are you choosing the PBO of 150, instead of 200?


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> Hmmm....
> 
> My machine just stopped! I thought it was a power cut or blown fuse at first. I had to power off the board until all power drained before it would power on again.
> 
> HWInfo was open and the last time I looked at it temps were fine and fans were fine.
> 
> This is on @gupsterg modded 2703, but i have no reason to suspect the firmware directly (unless anyone else is having probs). I have a profile from 2602 which only has mem OC 3733CL16 - nothing too stressful!
> 
> I can say that loading the memory OC has reduced the amount of boost I see with default settings from 4.63 to 4.5GHz - so far. Will experiment later with PBO/PE.


AFAIK 2703 has borked ASUS WMI, so you could experience issues, read Mumaks post on how disable ASUS WMI, but you still could get issues.



Xenozx said:


> Just curious why are you choosing the PBO of 150, instead of 200?


When I got the CPU I tested +25MHz to +200MHz, past +150MHz a single core may yield a gain, but multiple cores didn't. I'd see slightly lower to same average boost for all cores as if I was on +150MHz.


----------



## 1usmus

mtrai said:


> Honestly I do not expect any help from anyone or any of my sources on this matter. @the_stilt has some insite. It just is not making any sense to me as the CPU should be agnostic to the bios setup module. And I do not need him to undo the DMI changes...I made some mistake this morning with his bios and me modding it.
> 
> I did a quick mod just a while ago to test and it works...so I screwed something up this morning lol..anyhow just would not flash. So gonna start working on the full mods over the next day or two with the SMU FW that gustrep has inserted. But that damn issue is why the menu options do not appear for Matisse 3000 cpus baffles me. Once I have gotten the mods done...I think we will be at least able to disable both HPET and Spread spectrum via a default CMO with those settings...but this will require someone to flash my modded bios with 1000/2000 cpu create a a defualt cmo but with HEPT and SPREAD SPRECTRUM DISABLED as part of the default and then make it public so people with a matisse can use it to set those settings and then make changes. This is just theorycrafting at this point have not been able to test it.
> 
> Just hit me..I could just disable them as defaults and we can test that out...unfortantly no fan controls for the the 3000 series that I can give for the 1000/2000 Incidentally I could do the same fan controls on my Intel 6600k on the Asus board I used. It is all standard.
> 
> /edit Just wanted to clarify when I said I did not really expect any help from anyone...I mean official people at various companies not y'all here and on other forums. Y'all all rock.


I don't think SMU modding is a good idea. AMD changed the maximum boost due to cases of failure of processors that run in stock. There are SMUs that have a more aggressive boost. You also need to know that the SMU is in 6 different files (and these are not the files that were mentioned on the previous pages), a partial change can cause unpredictable consequences for the power controller + you should know that AVFS version 43.34 is not perfect, it has flaws.

My duty is to warn.

In the near future there is something interesting that will interest enthusiasts. I advise you to just wait


----------



## nick name

Ayyyy, I just had my first instance of fan wonkiness and it was wonky. 

The fans that are set to run at 37% slowed down by about half. The AIO, which should always run at 100%, slowed down by about 30%. And then the fans I have set to 100% which are then controlled with an external controller jumped up by about 70%! It's almost as if the board sent the power from the two other headers to the third. Very weird.


----------



## xeizo

1usmus said:


> I have many secrets , like this picture. I don't think SMU modding is a good idea. AMD changed the maximum boost due to cases of failure of processors that run in stock. There are SMUs that have a more aggressive boost. You also need to know that the SMU is in 6 different files, a partial change can cause unpredictable consequences for the power controller + you should know that AVFS version 43.34 is not perfect, it has flaws.
> 
> My duty is to warn.
> 
> In the near future there is something interesting that will interest enthusiasts. I advise you to just wait


Interesting post! So if there is risk for failure shouldn't the AGESA 1.0.0.2 bioses be removed from download and AMD go out and recommend everyone to upgrade to a bios with a "safe" SMU?


----------



## gupsterg

1usmus said:


> I have many secrets , like this picture. I don't think SMU modding is a good idea. AMD changed the maximum boost due to cases of failure of processors that run in stock. There are SMUs that have a more aggressive boost. You also need to know that the SMU is in 6 different files, a partial change can cause unpredictable consequences for the power controller + you should know that AVFS version 43.34 is not perfect, it has flaws.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My duty is to warn.
> 
> In the near future there is something interesting that will interest enthusiasts. I advise you to just wait


a) SMU is not in 6 different files, there are 3 files, duplicated, so 2 instances of 3 files = 6 in total.

b) Anyone thinking there is major defect with SMU FW 46.34.00 should read this post by The Stilt.

c) There are more SMU FW than in your screenie, see The Stilt's post here.

d) If we think AGESA ComboPi-AM4 1.0.0.2 UEFI only came with the SMU FW 46.34.00 this post shows it didn't.

This is an interesting post on PBO if anyone wanna add it to their bookmarks.

Just as added info to anyone thinking I make changes to SMU FW 46.34.00, I don't. If I edited it, I have no means a) dissemble it b) reassemble it and make it pass PSP checks.


----------



## crakej

Thanks @gupsterg 

And you @1usmus - new calc working much better for me.

I can't wait for AMD to implement the tech that will enable the cpu to split single core workloads into multi-core workloads where possible, on the fly! Looks very interesting! Effectively it will automatically convert programs written in a single thread, on the fly into faster multicore workload 

I do hope there's more to come....they really did screw this launch! What could it be? Maybe removing PCIE3.0 or Sata?

Just playing with PE2, everything else is default. Single threaded load always on my second best core but was holding a good 4.45GHz on the core being used in CB20 which is not a light load  It's a bit scary though - when you look in RM, PE2 has adjusted my settings for PPT to 1000w, TDC and EDC to 1000A! Totally unnecessary surely? Light loads are still going up to 4.6GHz


----------



## gupsterg

@crakej

NP  .

@neikosr0x

In post 8904 in reply to you I linked a ZIP with WMVs showing P95 running on:-

i) PBO+150MHz SMU FW 46.34.00 on UEFI 2501, averages ~4.09GHz with ~1.349V, room temp ~28C, run ~2hrs.
ii) CPU stock, SMU FW 46.40.00 on UEFI 2701, averages ~4.1GHz with ~1.333V, room temp ~24C, run ~2hrs.

The share on UEFI 0002+ (SMU FW 46.34.00) was only 5min. Below is ~2hrs, averages ~4.07GHz with ~1.337V, room temp ~27C, run ~2hrs.



Spoiler














Nothing to me is indicating due to the SMU FW injection into later AGESA UEFI, I have on average higher frequency/voltage for high load situation. It is within "run to run" variance compared to the unmodified UEFIs shown/used before.


----------



## 1usmus

no need to be mad at me, not I came up with it 

Yes, I know, I saw the links but psptool appeared on June 6th(with many other secrets).
Identical checksums are not a guarantee and hwinfo screenshots are also not a confirmation of the system’s stable. Recent simulation results have forced AMD to change the maximum frequencies.
Believe me, AMD currently has a lot of secrets that can shock the public, your mod is great, but I can’t be sure of the early versions of SMU.

I’ll also write one more interesting thing, AMD has separated the 3x0-4x0 chipsets from 5x0. For X570, version SMU 47.12 is provided.



crakej said:


> Thanks @gupsterg
> 
> And you @1usmus - new calc working much better for me.
> 
> I can't wait for AMD to implement the tech that will enable the cpu to split single core workloads into multi-core workloads where possible, on the fly! Looks very interesting! Effectively it will automatically convert programs written in a single thread, on the fly into faster multicore workload
> 
> I do hope there's more to come....they really did screw this launch! What could it be? Maybe removing PCIE3.0 or Sata?
> 
> Just playing with PE2, everything else is default. Single threaded load always on my second best core but was holding a good 4.45GHz on the core being used in CB20 which is not a light load  It's a bit scary though - when you look in RM, PE2 has adjusted my settings for PPT to 1000w, TDC and EDC to 1000A! Totally unnecessary surely? Light loads are still going up to 4.6GHz


Does PE2 work in your system?


----------



## gupsterg

1usmus said:


> no need to be mad at me, not I came up with it
> 
> Yes, I know, I saw the links but psptool appeared on June 6th(with many other secrets).
> Identical checksums are not a guarantee and hwinfo screenshots are also not a confirmation of the system’s stable. Recent simulation results have forced AMD to change the maximum frequencies.
> Believe me, AMD currently has a lot of secrets that can shock the public, your mod is great, but I can’t be sure of the early versions of SMU.
> 
> I’ll also write one more interesting thing, AMD has separated the 3x0-4x0 chipsets from 5x0. For X570, version SMU 47.12 is provided


Not mad at all :thumb: , only sharing other information  , so who read your post can also see other information to make a decision if they should or should not use a "official" or modded UEFI with SMU FW 46.34.00.


----------



## xeizo

gupsterg said:


> Not mad at all :thumb: , only sharing other information  , so who read your post can also see other information to make a decision if they should or should not use a "official" or modded UEFI with SMU FW 46.34.00.


I will at least try, as 2501 currently gives me the best Geekbench which is a nice allround benchmark.


----------



## crakej

1usmus said:


> Does PE2 work in your system?


It's doing something. Single core tasks that are NOT light loads are now pushing 4.4xGHz sustained whereas before it would be about 4.1xGHz. VID @ about 1.46v on that core, 14 watts. Have more tests to do to get proper picture of what PE is doing. PE1 slowed down the CPU.


----------



## CharliesTheMan

@gupsterg I'm not positive if it's related but after flashback installing 002 I get this error message at boot. Edit: I should specify, I get it in Windows after it's booted up. Comes back after a reboot. Asus AI Suite seems to work, I only use it to adjust fan. Only negative I've had is this morning I had a random shut down of the system that required turning off power supply to boot. But the reboot issue is something I've had on every BIOS after 2501 (I'm not sure about 2606 but definitely had it on stock 2703).


----------



## mtrai

xeizo said:


> Interesting post! So if there is risk for failure shouldn't the AGESA 1.0.0.2 bioses be removed from download and AMD go out and recommend everyone to upgrade to a bios with a "safe" SMU?


The SM FW change is not something I will be doing...but perhaps you know why now when using AMIBCP latest version you can unhide the settings in the bios but only for Ryzen 1000/2000 cpus does not unhide for any Matisse cpu. Not asking you do it...but maybe you might know why or even have some guidance for me.


----------



## gupsterg

xeizo said:


> I will at least try, as 2501 currently gives me the best Geekbench which is a nice allround benchmark.


NP  .

I can only say so far I have seen nothing that makes me wanna go back to older UEFI with AGESA 1.0.0.2 or unmodded AGESA 1.0.0.3.

If I use old UEFI with 1.0.0.2 I do not have "recovery". Only old UEFI that has safeboot/mode working, but no "recovery" is 0068, which on my board on initial post goes to ~1.35V chipset voltage and only way I know to sort it for subsequent posts is set manually 1.05V. Say if I got stuck and needed to clear cmos I'd be back at ~1.35V for chipset.

If I use newer UEFI with 1.0.0.3 PBO+150MHz is capped to ~4.275GHz, CPU still uses same ~1.45V as if on older AGESA. At stock CPU uses ~+50mV more. Yes I have recovery and safeboot/mode.

AGESA 1.0.0.3 UEFI with SMU FW mod gets me what I'd like.



Spoiler














Soon I reckon I'm turning off P95 and doing some tests for Martin....

I will soon give a settings txt. I have watched voltages at post on digital multimeter and nothing is amiss...

I am using board to control fan/pump, etc, just like "official" UEFI and non issue...

This post is not aimed at you, but share to all...



CharliesTheMan said:


> @gupsterg I'm not positive if it's related but after flashback installing 002 I get this error message at boot


I do not use any ASUS SW other than ASUS TurboV Core. The only reason I use that ASUS SW is to capture settings for a profile. I use no driver even from ASUS, so I can give zero experience on this, sorry  .


----------



## xeizo

I will test gupsterg:s 0002+ tomorrow, as I wasn't too happy with 2703 and WMI is supposed to be fixed in 0002, I guess it's the best candidate to outplay 2501.

edit. btw as I have both Crosshair VII and Prime X470-Pro I've noticed auto vcore is much lower by default on Prime Pro using bios 5007, running vcore full auto on Prime Pro nets about the same temps and performance as -0.1V offset on C7H. Either Prime Pro is weak or C7H overvolts by ca 0.1V. I'm leaning on C7H overvolting.


----------



## 1usmus

mtrai said:


> The SM FW change is not something I will be doing...but perhaps you know why now when using AMIBCP latest version you can unhide the settings in the bios but only for Ryzen 1000/2000 cpus does not unhide for any Matisse cpu. Not asking you do it...but maybe you might know why or even have some guidance for me.


you must unlock it via hex, manually + you need to do this for both files (AMD made a surprise, 2 identical bios are stored in 32 megabytes)


----------



## AvengedRobix

Testing 0002+ Tnx @gupsterg ... we have a boost =)


----------



## crakej

I use AISuite and do NOT get that error.

After a bit of testing it seems that with the (gupsterg) modded bios boost performance is just better - for me anyway. What I thought was PE mode 2 helping me out definitely is NOT the case. It seems like it's the combination of smu firmware and bios 2703. Persistent boost in single core, heavy load is between 4.40 and 4.53GHz temps stay around 65c or less while doing CB20 single core. which I've not seen on previous bios.

So now I'm thinking PE1 and 2 don't do anything beyond default auto settings on my set-up. Will try PE3 and 4 tomorrow, but can't help thinking it will be limited by temp even if it does 'work'.


----------



## Reikoji

gupsterg said:


> NP  .
> 
> I can only say so far I have seen nothing that makes me wanna go back to older UEFI with AGESA 1.0.0.2 or unmodded AGESA 1.0.0.3.
> 
> If I use old UEFI with 1.0.0.2 I do not have "recovery". Only old UEFI that has safeboot/mode working, but no "recovery" is 0068, which on my board on initial post goes to ~1.35V chipset voltage and only way I know to sort it for subsequent posts is set manually 1.05V. Say if I got stuck and needed to clear cmos I'd be back at ~1.35V for chipset.
> 
> If I use newer UEFI with 1.0.0.3 PBO+150MHz is capped to ~4.275GHz, CPU still uses same ~1.45V as if on older AGESA. At stock CPU uses ~+50mV more. Yes I have recovery and safeboot/mode.
> 
> AGESA 1.0.0.3 UEFI with SMU FW mod gets me what I'd like.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 291872
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soon I reckon I'm turning off P95 and doing some tests for Martin....
> 
> I will soon give a settings txt. I have watched voltages at post on digital multimeter and nothing is amiss...
> 
> I am using board to control fan/pump, etc, just like "official" UEFI and non issue...
> 
> This post is not aimed at you, but share to all...
> 
> 
> 
> I do not use any ASUS SW other than ASUS TurboV Core. The only reason I use that ASUS SW is to capture settings for a profile. I use no driver even from ASUS, so I can give zero experience on this, sorry  .


They need to take whatever you did in that mod and put it into official bios... For the Crosshair VIII Formula first.


----------



## renton82

CharliesTheMan said:


> @gupsterg I'm not positive if it's related but after flashback installing 002 I get this error message at boot. Edit: I should specify, I get it in Windows after it's booted up. Comes back after a reboot. Asus AI Suite seems to work, I only use it to adjust fan. Only negative I've had is this morning I had a random shut down of the system that required turning off power supply to boot. But the reboot issue is something I've had on every BIOS after 2501 (I'm not sure about 2606 but definitely had it on stock 2703).


By chance have you enabled Performance Bias "CB15/Aggressive"?



Tank you very much @gupsterg ! Now my 3700X boosts at 4450Mhz, i'm on 0002+ bios! Only downside is that system shut down for a couple of seconds every time i reboot, never happened with 2501.


----------



## mtrai

1usmus said:


> you must unlock it via hex, manually + you need to do this for both files (AMD made a surprise, 2 identical bios are stored in 32 megabytes)


I know about the 2 in one bios but cannot find that matisse one again...saw it once but at that time was not concerned over it. So I have two possible ways I have thought of. Will test both as I have people that will test it since I do not have a matisse cpu yet.

This issue I am having does not relate to the smu thing. It has to do with un-hiding the options for the matisse as it requires using both bcp and then hex editing as well to fully unhide what people want. I went though the bios and thought I extracted every module and checked them. So I am missing the matisse setup module that I know I have seen once and only once.

Anyhow bcp cannot see it...but if I can find it again, then my thought was to replace the default for 1000/2000 mod and then use bcp and unlock the options, then extract it and replace it with the matisse module. But for the life of me I cannot find it again.
I am pretty sure you know what swapping around I am thinking of, so it gets a bit complicated. However this would fix a number of issues such as the fans shutting off and so on. And to show everything I would like I need to both use bcp and hex edit already. But I think this would work as long as I am careful.

The guid you show in your pic is empty.


----------



## mtrai

Reikoji said:


> They need to take whatever you did in that mod and put it into official bios... For the Crosshair VIII Formula first.


You need to keep in mind while I might agree on a number of mods we can do...they are also limited with various agreements so this would not possible in this case.

Some of the mods I do that unhide things are in violations of different agreements.

The difference is AMD will not be happy with his mod...but will everyone will turn a blind eye to my mods. Just remember all these tech companies do follower our mods closely. And they actually use them to bring new features. I am not gonna name one I know they did based on the modding community.


----------



## Reikoji

mtrai said:


> You need to keep in mind while I might agree on a number of mods we can do...they are also limited with various agreements so this would not possible in this case.
> 
> Some of the mods I do that unhide things are in violations of different agreements.
> 
> The difference is AMD will not be happy with his mod...but will everyone will turn a blind eye to my mods. Just remember all these tech companies do follower our mods closely. And they actually use them to bring new features. I am not gonna name one I know they did based on the modding community.


they should be pleased that isntead of one sueing them for false advertisement even tho thats not the case, they instead make it work as advertized in their own way.

i dont see whats taking AMD so long.


----------



## mtrai

Reikoji said:


> they should be pleased that isntead of one sueing them for false advertisement even tho thats not the case, they instead make it work as advertized in their own way.
> 
> i dont see whats taking AMD so long.


While we can implement these changes instantly...we DO NOT HAVE TO GO THROUGH A VALIDATION PROCESS. That process is lengthy just cause we have the knowledge, does not mean they can just take our findings and insert it into the next bios or agesa. People have to understand that.

Or in some cases they just ignore it...such as asus with the fan control issues. If they would just unhide most of the fan control options it would be problem solved but they have known for years. I had this issue going back to my 6600k build with the asus board. I even modded the bios back then to fix and pointed it out. THEY JUST DO NOT GIVE A DAMN ON IT. The fan cut off issue randomly is on them and they will not admit it nor will they a bios change since that would be admitting it is their issue. It affects a wide range of their boards. I am just being honest on this issue. They have known about my modded bios for years now that fixed this issue but officially ignore it. I am speaking of ASUS directly in this case. That is as far as I will go on this. AMD became aware of a entirely differently mod that I and two others worked out many years ago and ran with it which got freesync where it is.


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> While we can implement these changes instantly...we DO NOT HAVE TO GO THROUGH A VALIDATION PROCESS. That process is lengthy just cause we have the knowledge, does not mean they can just take our findings and insert it into the next bios or agesa. People have to understand that.
> 
> Or in some cases they just ignore it...such as asus with the fan control issues. If they would just unhide most of the fan control options it would be problem solved but they have known for years. I had this issue going back to my 6600k build with the asus board. I even modded the bios back then to fix and pointed it out. THEY JUST DO NOT GIVE A DAMN ON IT. The fan cut off issue randomly is on them and they will not admit it nor will they a bios change since that would be admitting it is their issue. It affects a wide range of their boards. I am just being honest on this issue. They have known about my modded bios for years now that fixed this issue but officially ignore it. I am speaking of ASUS directly in this case. That is as far as I will go on this.


And we appreciate your Honesty and Insight into this!

As a sidenote, I would like to note, that at least Shamino, I don't know if he did it in his off time or what, has provided a fix to the Fan Cutting out Issue. If we didn't have him though, and Elmor before him, I fear you would be 150% correct, ASUS just ignores us and doesn't even acknowledge problems, especially when its caused by them. Thank God employee's like Elmor and Shamino exist, or we would probably still be sitting here with this fan problem.

Its definitely been fixed for me in the 0002 Uefi, so I am happy about that. I also finally broke down and installed AISuite, and to my surprise it has not yet rained down Chaos on my system. In fact, for the first time in my YEARS of experience with AISuite, it actually is allowing me to set my fan curve and then fully close down AISuite. I don't even have to allow AISuite to boot at startup, all I have to do is allow the "AsusFanControlService" and "Asus System Control Service" Services to start automatically with my PC, and after boot if I want I can even manually stop "AsusFanControlService" and my Fan Curves set in AISuite in my Previous Boot, will still take effect, even without opening AISuite. 

Last time I used AISuite I swore up and down I would NEVER install another piece of ASUS Software again, and that was on my 1600x Build about 3 Months after launch, and thats because It was causing Random Shutdowns and all kinds of Random BS that I tracked backed to ASUS and their Various Services, and those Issues largely stopped happening once I painstakingly got rid of all of their Malware-Like Software. Back then you would HAVE to keep AISuite running in the Background to keep your Fan Profile Active, it had been that way ever since I could remember. I remember even my Sabertooth 990FX and even going back to my Maximus Gene V, this is how it was. Anyways, I found that the one ASUS software I could run without many issues was the LightingService, but anything else would always cause havoc. This not being able to over ride the damn Critical Temperature in UEFI was just driving me crazy, so I finally imaged my Install, and then installed AISuite, and to my surprise, at least so far, their have been no adverse affects, and I don't even have to keep the damn software open like I used to have to in the past. So at least there has been some good work going on over at ASUS, because this surprised the hell out of me, I thought for sure I would be restoring my image by today. Fingers Crossed!

Anyways, As always @mtrai, you are the man, and we appreciate all the work you do here!



mtrai said:


> AMD became aware of a entirely differently mod that I and two others worked out many years ago and ran with it which got freesync where it is.


Dude, I had no Idea, that is awesome! That is why you are a LEGEND in this Community! Hope to hear more about this story one day!


----------



## Reikoji

mtrai said:


> While we can implement these changes instantly...we DO NOT HAVE TO GO THROUGH A VALIDATION PROCESS. That process is lengthy just cause we have the knowledge, does not mean they can just take our findings and insert it into the next bios or agesa. People have to understand that.
> 
> Or in some cases they just ignore it...such as asus with the fan control issues. If they would just unhide most of the fan control options it would be problem solved but they have known for years. I had this issue going back to my 6600k build with the asus board. I even modded the bios back then to fix and pointed it out. THEY JUST DO NOT GIVE A DAMN ON IT. The fan cut off issue randomly is on them and they will not admit it nor will they a bios change since that would be admitting it is their issue. It affects a wide range of their boards. I am just being honest on this issue. They have known about my modded bios for years now that fixed this issue but officially ignore it. I am speaking of ASUS directly in this case. That is as far as I will go on this. AMD became aware of a entirely differently mod that I and two others worked out many years ago and ran with it which got freesync where it is.


that may be so, but the issue i see is AMD hasnt really given much of any assurance that they are working on the boost clock issue, just some shadey changing to the product page about needing ideal conditions to reach the boost clocks. needs more social input on the situations. we just got too many people calling false advertisement and other such mess. The vast majority of users are too unknowlegeable or scared to find resolutions like the mod or going manual, and expect quicker resolutions.


----------



## mtrai

oreonutz said:


> And we appreciate your Honesty and Insight into this!
> 
> As a sidenote, I would like to note, that at least Shamino, I don't know if he did it in his off time or what, has provided a fix to the Fan Cutting out Issue. If we didn't have him though, and Elmor before him, I fear you would be 150% correct, ASUS just ignores us and doesn't even acknowledge problems, especially when its caused by them. Thank God employee's like Elmor and Shamino exist, or we would probably still be sitting here with this fan problem.
> 
> Its definitely been fixed for me in the 0002 Uefi, so I am happy about that. I also finally broke down and installed AISuite, and to my surprise it has not yet rained down Chaos on my system. In fact, for the first time in my YEARS of experience with AISuite, it actually is allowing me to set my fan curve and then fully close down AISuite. I don't even have to allow AISuite to boot at startup, all I have to do is allow the "AsusFanControlService" and "Asus System Control Service" Services to start automatically with my PC, and after boot if I want I can even manually stop "AsusFanControlService" and my Fan Curves set in AISuite in my Previous Boot, will still take effect, even without opening AISuite.
> 
> Last time I used AISuite I swore up and down I would NEVER install another piece of ASUS Software again, and that was on my 1600x Build about 3 Months after launch, and thats because It was causing Random Shutdowns and all kinds of Random BS that I tracked backed to ASUS and their Various Services, and those Issues largely stopped happening once I painstakingly got rid of all of their Malware-Like Software. Back then you would HAVE to keep AISuite running in the Background to keep your Fan Profile Active, it had been that way ever since I could remember. I remember even my Sabertooth 990FX and even going back to my Maximus Gene V, this is how it was. Anyways, I found that the one ASUS software I could run without many issues was the LightingService, but anything else would always cause havoc. This not being able to over ride the damn Critical Temperature in UEFI was just driving me crazy, so I finally imaged my Install, and then installed AISuite, and to my surprise, at least so far, their have been no adverse affects, and I don't even have to keep the damn software open like I used to have to in the past. So at least there has been some good work going on over at ASUS, because this surprised the hell out of me, I thought for sure I would be restoring my image by today. Fingers Crossed!
> 
> Anyways, As always @mtrai, you are the man, and we appreciate all the work you do here!
> 
> 
> 
> Dude, I had no Idea, that is awesome! That is why you are a LEGEND in this Community! Hope to hear more about this story one day!


Yeah that is because it allows bios changes to the hidden options so it works but it still is within the bios already. that fan control it gives you should appear in the bios and which is why it works It is changing hidden settings but with all the asus bloatware which we should be able to do withing the bios itself since it is there.


----------



## mtrai

Reikoji said:


> that may be so, but the issue i see is AMD hasnt really given much of any assurance that they are working on the boost clock issue, just some shadey changing to the product page about needing ideal conditions to reach the boost clocks. needs more social input on the situations. we just got too many people calling false advertisement and other such mess. The vast majority of users are too unknowlegeable or scared to find resolutions like the mod or going manual, and expect quicker resolutions.


I agree however I am kind of limited in how to explain things...as some things were things I knew were coming.

I cannot as another user here @1usmus can recomend do this due our our understanding of bios...however I have been testing this with a few of my own mods..not fully modded to see. I will post later on this as it matter depending on which Ryzen version you are using and what is going on. And yes it matters just as much as being able to just unhide options...so I will stick to the unmodified version as I work this out and I mean no SMU FM mod just to eliminate that as that is new. My Goal is to enable all these hidden options on the Ryzen 3000 series but I am hampered by not having one, it makes it difficult which something should work but it does not.

I do my best, but I am just a person that is limited.


----------



## oreonutz

Reikoji said:


> that may be so, but the issue i see is AMD hasnt really given much of any assurance that they are working on the boost clock issue, just some shadey changing to the product page about needing ideal conditions to reach the boost clocks. needs more social input on the situations. we just got too many people calling false advertisement and other such mess.


So I typed out WAY MORE than I intended to when first responding to this comment, this takes up probably an entire page, so I am putting my response behind a Spoiler, so people who don't want to read it can scroll past in one scroll, instead of 50. Sorry...



Spoiler



You know. I am very happy with the performance of my CPU. I am pretty sure there is more left in the tank that I am not fully utilizing yet, but I am still waiting on a way to manipulate PBO more like it was with the 2700x, where you could get top notch Single Threaded and Lightly Threaded Workloads, without having to give up top Notch Heavy Multithreaded and All Core Workloads. So Far, throughout all the UEFI's, and PB, PBO, and Auto OC Options, both in UEFI and in RM, have I yet found a way to get my CPU to Boost past 4100Mhz in an All Core Situation where My CPU is hotter than 65c. It used to be WAY MORE Controllable with Zen+, it obviously wasn't direct control, but between the PE Options, the PBO Options, and a working SensiMI Skew, you could always manipulate it in such a way, no matter the UEFI, that you would get performance that would maximize what your Chip was capable of in both Multithreaded and Lightly Threaded workloads. I have spent weeks with this Processor now, I had it 4 days after launch, and I STILL have not found that balance when Working with PB, instead I am using Per CCX OC, which works great for me, but I still feel there is more to get with a Boost Algorithm that I can more easily manipulate.

Anyways, all that is to say, that regardless, I am still amazed at the performance of this chip, and incredibly happy with it. I also saw through AMD's Marketing a mile away, and only ever started to believe that above 4.6Ghz would be a reality when Robert Hallock put out that PBO Video a few days before launch. I thought to myself, there is no way Robert would put that out in a video, if at least the top binned Chips weren't capable of doing that. But, taking that and putting it aside, I still thought that the Ghz of the Zen 2 CPU's were being focused on too much, and it always came down to the overall performance you would get out of the chip and how that compared to Intel, not the Rated Speed of the chip. To me it didn't matter if the Chips topped out at 4Ghz, if they still matched or beat a 9900k at that speed. So I am still happy with the end product and am not one to scream bloody murder over it and get the law involved.

...That said. I 100 Percent understand the average consumer's urge to want to sue AMD over this. When you get down to it, how they marketed these new chips really come DANGEROUSLY Close, if not exceeding, the requirements for a False Advertising Case.

I am not a lawyer (I just play one on TV, lol.) No For real though, I am not a lawyer, I just have a few close Friends that are lawyers and have more then a Dozen Law Firms as clients, so I am around the rhetoric and lining of thinking constantly. I have no brought this up with any of them, so I have no idea if they would agree with me here or not, I could be just flat wrong. But that said, I have seen cases brought my clients against local Businesses for False Advertisement, and see them win (even in one high profile Local Case), and in my opinion that case in particular was a weaker case then a purchaser or especially a preorderer of AMD's Chip would have. 

Not only do you have that damaging Robert Hallock Video. But at the time of Launch, and not even fixed until about a Month AFTER orders were first being filled, there was no disclaimer on the box saying you wouldn't hit the rated speeds. It simply said a base and boost clock. Especially for your normal every day consumer, its not unreasonable to believe your processor would hit that speed at least some of the time during a real workload. And for a good chunk of consumers, whether due to their board or other external factors, they just aren't seeing anywhere near that boost speed. 

No Matter which way you slice it, this really was Over sold by AMD. They could have easily dropped the Boost Speed Printed on their box and in their marketing by 300Mhz, and they STILL Would have sold just as well, and then you would have had Millions of People happy that they were seeing Higher Speeds out of the box, instead of Slower. This really was a marketing blunder by AMD. And to think, a judge let a case against AMD over that stupid "Definition of a Core" case for the FX era CPU's, its not a stretch at all to think a Judge would allow a case against AMD to happen over this Clock Speed Debacle. 

I absolutely won't be joining a class action against AMD. I think it will hurt them in the Long run, and we need them to be a big player in the market to keep moving the industry forward. Plus I am just a fan of AMD overall. But that said, looking at this objectively, they really messed up, and should have never advertised the Boost speeds they did. I do think there is a case against them for false advertising. I don't know if its a winnable case, but even if AMD successfully defends against the case, its a waste of time, money, and resources that they could have easily avoided by just being more honest about what the average consumer will see, instead of putting a number on the box that will barely be achieved by a vast majority of their users chips while at idle, let alone while doing actual work. It was shoddy marketing at best, and at worst, meets the definition for false advertising. I am sure I am not the only person who would agree with that, even though I largely think the Chips are damn good. Anyways, thats my 2000 cents on the matter, I will shut up now...


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> Yeah that is because it allows bios changes to the hidden options so it works but it still is within the bios already. that fan control it gives you should appear in the bios and which is why it works It is changing hidden settings but with all the asus bloatware which we should be able to do withing the bios itself since it is there.


100 Percent Whole HEARTEDLY AGREE!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> I agree however I am kind of limited in how to explain things...as some things were things I knew were coming.
> 
> I cannot as another user here @1usmus can recomend do this due our our understanding of bios...however I have been testing this with a few of my own mods..not fully modded to see. I will post later on this as it matter depending on which Ryzen version you are using and what is going on. And yes it matters just as much as being able to just unhide options...so I will stick to the unmodified version as I work this out and I mean no SMU FM mod just to eliminate that as that is new. My Goal is to enable all these hidden options on the Ryzen 3000 series but I am hampered by not having one, it makes it difficult which something should work but it does not.
> 
> I do my best, but I am just a person that is limited.


I am tempted to start a Collection plate to get you a 3600 Just for testing. Its not that expensive, I know I will throw in to get you one.

Anyone else down???


----------



## mtrai

oreonutz said:


> I am tempted to start a Collection plate to get you a 3600 Just for testing. Its not that expensive, I know I will throw in to get you one.
> 
> Anyone else down???


Thanks but it gonna take a bit more then that...according to @1usmus I hate to call it out but that guid provided an empty module for the matisse as where to look.


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> Thanks but it gonna take a bit more then that....


IDK, I just looked up the Price. Right now on Amazon you can snag a 3600 non X for $200, Here: https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-36...=3600+ryzen+5&qid=1566953122&s=gateway&sr=8-2

You could drop that in your Current Board, and have what you need to do all your own testing. Don't get me wrong, I am MORE THAN HAPPY to continue to be your 3900x Guinnea Pig with a Crosshair VII Hero Non Wifi, and I will happily continue to test for you for as long as you need it. But obviously it slows you down, as I am not always available to test right away, so it takes time in between each revision, where as if you had your own, you could easily just test yourself.

You do enough Awesome stuff for this community and ask nothing from us. I know I am willing to throw down what I can to get you one. $200 plus about $15 in taxes (I have Prime Shipping so no need to pay for Shipping) and we can get @mtrai is own Ryzen 3rd Gen CPU. That means if only 9 of us throw down $25 we could have this in @mtrai's hands by the start of next week. I personally get paid a few days from now and am down to not only throw down but make sure he gets the processor. 

Its up to everyone else in the community if you can afford to throw down or not, but you already have me, so thats only 8 more people with an average of $25 donation... I think its possible...

Either message back here in this thread or PM me if you agree.


----------



## crakej

AMD made a mess of the launch there's no doubt about that. They're spending far too much time removing stuff like pcie 4 (and other settings) for nothing really while we still don't have cpus/UEFI working to spec.

I did actually think that by spending more for 3900X that we (I) would get better quality silicon that hit spec easily, so I'm a bit disappointed, but these chips are no slow-coaches and perform amazingly.

If AMD did their job properly, people wouldn't need to mod the UEFI. I really hope they learn from this! I agree had they advertised boost speed 200/300MHz less, they would have over delivered, and we'd be much happier!

Things being like they are, I can't see the 3950X reaching it's boost rating of 4.7GHz - what will happen?


----------



## Reikoji

crakej said:


> AMD made a mess of the launch there's no doubt about that. They're spending far too much time removing stuff like pcie 4 (and other settings) for nothing really while we still don't have cpus/UEFI working to spec.
> 
> I did actually think that by spending more for 3900X that we (I) would get better quality silicon that hit spec easily, so I'm a bit disappointed, but these chips are no slow-coaches and perform amazingly.
> 
> If AMD did their job properly, people wouldn't need to mod the UEFI. I really hope they learn from this! I agree had they advertised boost speed 200/300MHz less, they would have over delivered, and we'd be much happier!
> 
> Things being like they are, I can't see the 3950X reaching it's boost rating of 4.7GHz - what will happen?


If it were me I would just manually set CCX0 to 4.7, core voltage to 1.4625, and all other CCX's to 4.2 (3.5 if I were on 'air')... but thats just me, as a knowledgeable, neva skrrd user willing to make it work somehow :3. Hopefully tho they will have a proper AGESA by the launch of the 3950x where no one needs to even think about stuff like that.


----------



## oreonutz

Reikoji said:


> If it were me I would just manually set CCX0 to 4.7, core voltage to 4.625, and all other CCX's to 4.2 (3.5 if I were on 'air')... but thats just me, as a knowledgeable, neva skrrd user willing to make it work somehow :3. Hopefully tho they will have a proper AGESA by the launch of the 3950x where no one needs to even think about that.


Do you have a way to set different voltages to different CCX's? I currently believe I have every publicly available tool for Per CCX Overclocking, (and one that isn't publicly available but that I have been sharing with the community) and while one of the first versions of one of the tools allowed you to set a different VID across different CCX's as a feature, this feature unfortunately didn't actually work, no matter what you did it would set that VID across all CCXs. And then later versions of this tool just allowed you to set one VID across all CCX's. If you know of a way to set different Voltages or VID's across CCX's, please please please share.


----------



## gupsterg

AvengedRobix said:


> I can't read all post because i've many problem in this day's... Any news? Where i can download 0002+?
> 
> 
> AvengedRobix said:
> 
> 
> 
> Testing 0002+ Tnx @gupsterg ... we have a boost =)
Click to expand...

Sorry missed your original post, glad you found it and thanks for feedback  .



mtrai said:


> The SM FW change is not something I will be doing...but perhaps you know why now when using AMIBCP latest version you can unhide the settings in the bios but only for Ryzen 1000/2000 cpus does not unhide for any Matisse cpu. Not asking you do it...but maybe you might know why or even have some guidance for me.


While back I used AMIBCP on a UEFI that supports Matisse, I unhid options as we would when on 1xxx/2xxx, saved & exited AMIBCP. I then extracted the GUID I thought was the "Setup" we see in AMIBCP, using UEFITool, again 2 modules due to the duplication in UEFI, they were the same and no changes when compared with stock.

I then decided to compare the stock UEFI and modded UEFI in HxD, too many changes to say ahh this is it. I then abandoned it for another time.

My current opinion is I have what I want from Matisse. 4x8GB at nice MHz, PBO back where I wanted, so I may have spare time to look at how we unide options for Matisse, as soon as finish some tests for Martin and myself.

Chat soon  .



renton82 said:


> By chance have you enabled Performance Bias "CB15/Aggressive"?


Gentle is all I can use, Aggressive system will stop code on W10 loading. Gentle gives very little gains in CBR15, like 6 points on my R5 3600. Not tried the other, IIRC AIDA.



renton82 said:


> Tank you very much @gupsterg ! Now my 3700X boosts at 4450Mhz, i'm on 0002+ bios! Only downside is that system shut down for a couple of seconds every time i reboot, never happened with 2501.


NP, thanks for using and feedback  .



crakej said:


> I use AISuite and do NOT get that error.
> 
> After a bit of testing it seems that with the (gupsterg) modded bios boost performance is just better - for me anyway. What I thought was PE mode 2 helping me out definitely is NOT the case. It seems like it's the combination of smu firmware and bios 2703. Persistent boost in single core, heavy load is between 4.40 and 4.53GHz temps stay around 65c or less while doing CB20 single core. which I've not seen on previous bios.
> 
> So now I'm thinking PE1 and 2 don't do anything beyond default auto settings on my set-up. Will try PE3 and 4 tomorrow, but can't help thinking it will be limited by temp even if it does 'work'.


Few pages back there was discussion on Sense Mi Skew, I tested it and T Offset and few other settings. I made no records as was just pressed for time and doing it as is. Like 1usmus stated some things in UEFI seem to be there, that do not function for Matisse.

It may be the Performance Enhancer settings do nothing for Matisse, I dunno, I only used PE: [Default] so far. As PE1/2 were just presets of PPT/TDC/EDC/Scalar for PBO, so if you kept PE [Auto/Default] and entered those values in PBO menu, you'd have the same. PE3/4 had in addition, had tweak to SMU, as that was developed for Pinnacle Ridge I doubt same tweak apply to Matisse, again dunno, just an opinion. 



Reikoji said:


> They need to take whatever you did in that mod and put it into official bios... For the Crosshair VIII Formula first.


If you wanna be a candidate, I'm willing if you are  .


----------



## Reikoji

oreonutz said:


> Do you have a way to set different voltages to different CCX's? I currently believe I have every publicly available tool for Per CCX Overclocking, (and one that isn't publicly available but that I have been sharing with the community) and while one of the first versions of one of the tools allowed you to set a different VID across different CCX's as a feature, this feature unfortunately didn't actually work, no matter what you did it would set that VID across all CCXs. And then later versions of this tool just allowed you to set one VID across all CCX's. If you know of a way to set different Voltages or VID's across CCX's, please please please share.


Being able to set per-ccx voltage would be a godsend ! but no... we cant do that, hopefully just 'yet'. Theres nothing wrong with 1.4625v LLC Auto/off/0 for all cores, tho  you can trust me.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> Few pages back there was discussion on Sense Mi Skew, I tested it and T Offset and few other settings. I made no records as was just pressed for time and doing it as is. Like 1usmus stated some things in UEFI seem to be there, that do not function for Matisse.
> 
> It may be the Performance Enhancer settings do nothing for Matisse, I dunno, I only used PE: [Default] so far. As PE1/2 were just presets of PPT/TDC/EDC/Scalar for PBO, so if you kept PE [Auto/Default] and entered those values in PBO menu, you'd have the same. PE3/4 had in addition, had tweak to SMU, as that was developed for Pinnacle Ridge I doubt same tweak apply to Matisse, again dunno, just an opinion.


I just wanted to see if PE does do anything for Matisse - if not, we can all just forget about it! This CPU IS really well tuned, I'd be surprised if PE3/4 will work, especially as they usually want more voltage, which at default is already 1.45v so there's not much leeway for adding any more!


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> I just wanted to see if PE does do anything for Matisse - if not, we can all just forget about it! This CPU IS really well tuned, I'd be surprised if PE3/4 will work, especially as they usually want more voltage, which at default is already 1.45v so there's not much leeway for adding any more!


+rep'd to your previous post, totally agree try x and share what we see  , let's see what later AGESA brings  .

I do hope like Shaminio stated we see more customisable options that affect boost.

Perhaps this "who ha" will bring AMD to do it ASAP, I saw Guru3D run a news article on the boost behaviour with Shaminio's post. More pressure may result in action, but dunno....


----------



## crakej

Off topic I know, but thought you might like to know about this.

I have Fractal Design S36 AIO. One of the stand-offs sheared off a couple of weeks ago. Dropped them an email, they just asked what address and sent spares out to me straight away, no other questions asked, nothing. Just straight forward, decent product support. VERY happy!


----------



## Mumak

FYI
HWiNFO v6.11-3900 Beta released, news:
- Updated reporting of CPU VDD and SoC SVI2 current/power on some MSI mainboards.
- Added monitoring of per-CCD Tdie temperatures for AMD Zen2.


----------



## gupsterg

@Mumak, nice  & thanks :thumb: …



Spoiler


----------



## Mumak

gupsterg said:


> @Mumak, nice  & thanks :thumb: …
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 291996



These values should cover the CCD and most probably the execution (IA) cores only. Unlike Tctl/Tdie which seems to cover other parts like L3 too (though still not being the hot spot).
The CCD Tdie values should be closer to Ryzen Master reported temperature, but HWiNFO doesn't average them nor apply any slew rate (which is most probably done by RM).


----------



## crakej

Mumak said:


> These values should cover the CCD and most probably the execution (IA) cores only. Unlike Tctl/Tdie which seems to cover other parts like L3 too (though still not being the hot spot).
> The CCD Tdie values should be closer to Ryzen Master reported temperature, but HWiNFO doesn't average them nor apply any slew rate (which is most probably done by RM).


Thanks for the update. I prefer NOT having averaged or slewed results - well, averages are OK but only if you know that's what they are. Will load after my current test.


----------



## gupsterg

Mumak said:


> These values should cover the CCD and most probably the execution (IA) cores only. Unlike Tctl/Tdie which seems to cover other parts like L3 too (though still not being the hot spot).
> The CCD Tdie values should be closer to Ryzen Master reported temperature, but HWiNFO doesn't average them nor apply any slew rate (which is most probably done by RM).


This now makes sense  .

I was busy yesterday and noted TDIE1 exceed tCTL/tDIE only in one test case P95 4K 4096K 27000MB, based on that and update to HWINFO, I reckon "on the money now"  . I will retest with new version today  .



Spoiler














*** edit ***

It as as before, so all good IMO :thumb:.



Spoiler














Disregard the ASUS WMI reading for CPU temp, for some reason on high load test case it desyncs, will later catch up. I think this is ASUS issue not HWINFO...


----------



## crakej

*PE modes in Matisse*

OK - I didn't want to spend a day testing PE, so my testing is brief, but results ARE repeatable - I wouldn't quote them otherwise! Here is what I found enabling PE modes 1-4 - nothing else, everything at default. Tests done with HWInfo and CB15

PE modes 1 and 2, as reported earlier, don't bring any performances increase for single OR multithreaded workloads. They DO change PPT etc (PE2 puts PPT at 1000w and TDC/EDC at 1000A), but to no obvious effect.

So Auto, PE1 and PE2 don't seem to be worth enabling on Matisse. PE4 reduces PPT etc to normal levels, so has no hope of helping us. All these scored +>3150 consistently.

PE3 is different! CB15 scores went CONSISTENTLY to 3196-3200 (at least 50 points more)!

What was happening was that I was getting a min ACB of x41.8 compared to x41.3 on modes auto, 1, 2, and 4. 500MHz is a worthy gain! I ran CB15 a few times and did not lose any performance. There were times that a few (at least 4) cores boosted to 4.2GHz, but only while temp was below 80c, when they all held at 4.18GHz. Max boost 'only' seems to get to 4.58GHz on PE3 where auto showed boosts to 4.6GHz. [edit: have seen one or two really brief boosts to 4.63GHz light load]

Single threaded test maxed out at 4.45GHz with no obvious increase in CB15 SC tests which score 205.

I did NOT add any extra voltage! I didn't want to take any unnecessary chances. I'm going to try adding PE3 to one of my ram profiles and see if I get better performance there.

In summary - try PE3! Please take care - I take no responsibility if this mode (any modes!) breaks your cpu! Test the config and make sure nothing is wrong! Will update after last tests.


----------



## crakej

PE3 with Ram OC to 3733CL14:

As in my previous tests PE3 has given me a modest 500MHz ACB improvement with some cores going further when temps permit. This has brought me my highest CB15 scores so far (I've not done much CPU OCing as yet)

So using PE3 is a nice easy way to get a bit more out of your Matisse CPU by the looks of it. More testing is required. Temps are a bit higher and I need to tune the memory profile a bit to get full stability as IBT was freezing a bit while running Very High test and failed. (I think I had a couple of things too tight in this profile).

So, *PE3 does something!* I would recommend trying it out and seeing what it does for you - but at your own risk! I used NO EXTRA CPU VOLTAGE.


----------



## xeizo

Running on gupsterg:S 0002+ now, same memory bandwith, latency is better in Geekbench by 5ns, about same Geekbench score, CPUZ is better multi, worse single, HWINFO64 shows great boost clocks, the "bad" cluster is now better reaching 4400MHz on two cores(4625MHz on two for the "good" cluster). Cinebench is better multi, single is nowhere near what old chipset drivers + 1.0.0.2 gave.

Boost only works well with PBO and locked PPT to 142W, with Auto OC, override and unlocked PPT boost is stuck around 4300MHz and benchmarks are way worse.

Great to not have C5!

Temps looks to be higher than 2501, had to adjust my AIO fan curve as the water heated up quickly.

3800MHz mem 1900/1900/1900 worked at first boot, which is good.

CB15 is good, only consuming max 141W CPU + SOC vs 177W for Crakej above. 36W less and score is quite close!  (Because PBO PPT is locked at 142W)


----------



## gupsterg

@crakej

+rep, thanks for share  .

@xeizo

+rep, thanks for share  .

For others viewing thread.

Post 8904 has a ZIP with WMVs for neikosr0x in reply/spoiler.

Post 8913 had preliminary test on 0002+, tested for ~7hrs, see WMV/Settings txt & AMD Overclocking menu setup in this ZIP. Today I have done another rerun on same setup, see WMVs in this ZIP at point 33min, 1hrs & 2hrs.

To recap:-

i) PBO+150MHz SMU FW 46.34.00 on UEFI 2501, averages ~4.09GHz with ~1.349V, room temp ~28C, run ~2hrs.
ii) CPU stock, SMU FW 46.40.00 on UEFI 2701, averages ~4.1GHz with ~1.333V, room temp ~24C, run ~2hrs.
iii) PBO+150MHz SMU FW 46.34.00 on UEFI 0002+, averages ~4.1GHz with ~1.348V, room temp ~22C, run ~2hrs.

Test case i compared with iii shows in high load/current situation CPU is behaving similar.

Test case ii compared with iii shows in high load/current situation the CPU is in no danger, as CPU is stock in case ii, CPU is using SMU FW 46.40.00.

All I can tell so far and simply put, SMU FW 46.34.00 is more opportunistic in lower load/current situation.


----------



## Hunk

Hello, after bios update to 0002 beta to fix fan issues i can't use XMP anymore because system cycle reboots with post 4d. Bios 2501 works stable. I tried manual settings with no result. Even if i only increase dram voltage to 1.3 it gives me 4d post (OEM memory category). Other bios changes work.

After i clear cmos system boots with default settings and mem at 2133, dunno if it stable but once it crashed at Windows boot screen and rebooted with the same 4d post. Any advises? 

Mem is this one: https://www.corsair.com/ww/en/Categ...Vengeance-PRO-RGB-White/p/CMW16GX4M2C3600C18W


----------



## xeizo

Hunk said:


> Hello, after bios update to 0002 beta to fix fan issues i can't use XMP anymore because system cycle reboots with post 4d. Bios 2501 works stable. I tried manual settings with no result. Even if i only increase dram voltage to 1.3 it gives me 4d post (OEM memory category). Other bios changes work.
> 
> After i clear cmos system boots with default settings and mem at 2133, dunno if it stable but once it crashed at Windows boot screen and rebooted with the same 4d post. Any advises?
> 
> Mem is this one: https://www.corsair.com/ww/en/Categ...Vengeance-PRO-RGB-White/p/CMW16GX4M2C3600C18W


Why are you running 1.3V VDIMM when it clearly says 1.35V in the spec sheet for your memory as OC setting?


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> Sorry missed your original post, glad you found it and thanks for feedback  .
> 
> 
> 
> While back I used AMIBCP on a UEFI that supports Matisse, I unhid options as we would when on 1xxx/2xxx, saved & exited AMIBCP. I then extracted the GUID I thought was the "Setup" we see in AMIBCP, using UEFITool, again 2 modules due to the duplication in UEFI, they were the same and no changes when compared with stock.
> 
> I then decided to compare the stock UEFI and modded UEFI in HxD, too many changes to say ahh this is it. I then abandoned it for another time.
> 
> My current opinion is I have what I want from Matisse. 4x8GB at nice MHz, PBO back where I wanted, so I may have spare time to look at how we unide options for Matisse, as soon as finish some tests for Martin and myself.
> 
> Chat soon  .


That was the same for me a while back...with the early matisse support, I found a setup module with the matisse things...since that one time never found it again. Trying an experiment with bios I am modding currently as I did find a 2nd setup module.


----------



## ajlueke

Just a link to my observations with Crosshair VII overclocking on a 3900X.

https://community.amd.com/thread/242916

It does seem like the single threaded performance caps off at the same performance you get at 1.3V manually. Even though Ryzen master or HWinfo show additional voltage, that doesn't translate into any additional performance.


----------



## Martelele

mtrai said:


> That was the same for me a while back...with the early matisse support, I found a setup module with the matisse things...since that one time never found it again. Trying an experiment with bios I am modding currently as I did find a 2nd setup module.


Hello,I just wanted to let you know that I really appreciate your work and I hope that you will find the way to mod bios for non wifi version.I will keep an eye on the thread and I can also help you in testing it.Cheers


----------



## mtrai

Martelele said:


> Hello,I just wanted to let you know that I really appreciate your work and I hope that you will find the way to mod bios for non wifi version.I will keep an eye on the thread and I can also help you in testing it.Cheers


I can mod the non wifi with no issue but if your using a ryzen 3000 cpu the hidden options are still hidden but show on 1000/2000


----------



## Martelele

mtrai said:


> I can mod the non wifi with no issue but if your using a ryzen 3000 cpu the hidden options are still hidden but show on 1000/2000


I'm using Ryzen 3600X,is there still a hope to get it to work?


----------



## mtrai

Martelele said:


> I'm using Ryzen 3600X,is there still a hope to get it to work?


There is hope...I am still searching for the key to make it work with the 3000 series.


----------



## Hunk

xeizo said:


> Why are you running 1.3V VDIMM when it clearly says 1.35V in the spec sheet for your memory as OC setting?


That was just an example, of course i tried different values and XMP profile values.


----------



## xeizo

Hunk said:


> That was just an example, of course i tried different values and XMP profile values.


Ok, I've never used XMP/D.O.C.P anyways, using Taiphoon Burner and Ryzen Dram Calculator have been rock solid. Every bios so far boots at 3800MHz mem at first try using my tried and tested profile which is always saved on my Bios Flashback USB-stick.


----------



## oreonutz

Hunk said:


> That was just an example, of course i tried different values and XMP profile values.


I dont know if you tried going into the DIGI+ Settings, go all the way to the bottom, find the setting called VDIMM Boot Voltage, and set that to 1.4v. Go back and set your XMP Profile and your Memory Voltage to 1.35v, save and reboot. You will be fine after this.


----------



## AvengedRobix

crakej said:


> OK - I didn't want to spend a day testing PE, so my testing is brief, but results ARE repeatable - I wouldn't quote them otherwise! Here is what I found enabling PE modes 1-4 - nothing else, everything at default. Tests done with HWInfo and CB15
> 
> PE modes 1 and 2, as reported earlier, don't bring any performances increase for single OR multithreaded workloads. They DO change PPT etc (PE2 puts PPT at 1000w and TDC/EDC at 1000A), but to no obvious effect.
> 
> So Auto, PE1 and PE2 don't seem to be worth enabling on Matisse. PE4 reduces PPT etc to normal levels, so has no hope of helping us. All these scored +>3150 consistently.
> 
> PE3 is different! CB15 scores went CONSISTENTLY to 3196-3200 (at least 50 points more)!
> 
> What was happening was that I was getting a min ACB of x41.8 compared to x41.3 on modes auto, 1, 2, and 4. 500MHz is a worthy gain! I ran CB15 a few times and did not lose any performance. There were times that a few (at least 4) cores boosted to 4.2GHz, but only while temp was below 80c, when they all held at 4.18GHz. Max boost 'only' seems to get to 4.58GHz on PE3 where auto showed boosts to 4.6GHz. [edit: have seen one or two really brief boosts to 4.63GHz light load]
> 
> Single threaded test maxed out at 4.45GHz with no obvious increase in CB15 SC tests which score 205.
> 
> I did NOT add any extra voltage! I didn't want to take any unnecessary chances. I'm going to try adding PE3 to one of my ram profiles and see if I get better performance there.
> 
> In summary - try PE3! Please take care - I take no responsibility if this mode (any modes!) breaks your cpu! Test the config and make sure nothing is wrong! Will update after last tests.


For me PE1 PE2 and PE3 change nothing


----------



## Hunk

oreonutz said:


> I dont know if you tried going into the DIGI+ Settings, go all the way to the bottom, find the setting called VDIMM Boot Voltage, and set that to 1.4v. Go back and set your XMP Profile and your Memory Voltage to 1.35v, save and reboot. You will be fine after this.


Thanks, but the same error. Tried previous bios 2606 with the same result... Will try DRAM Calculator, mb XMP is borked or something.


----------



## Xenozx

i just want to say i went over my friends house yesterday, and helped him get his 3900x up and running, originally we were going to put it in his X470 strix board, but due to some issues we ended up having to put it in his older asus X370 prime board. Literally, I did nothing but pop the chip in and boot into windows (was a 1700x in that machine before) and it was boosting 4.6ghz. I left everything auto and he was pulling CPU-Z scores of 525 single and 8500 multi scores. Doing the same thing on my x470 crosshair i get about 480 single and 7600 multi. ***! He didnt even have ryzen master installed, I have to isntall that just to get it to come out of a fixed 3.8ghz.....

how is that old ass x370 board more ready to support ryzen 3 then the top of the line crosshair vii !?!?!?!?!


----------



## xeizo

Xenozx said:


> i just want to say i went over my friends house yesterday, and helped him get his 3900x up and running, originally we were going to put it in his X470 strix board, but due to some issues we ended up having to put it in his older asus X370 prime board. Literally, I did nothing but pop the chip in and boot into windows (was a 1700x in that machine before) and it was boosting 4.6ghz. I left everything auto and he was pulling CPU-Z scores of 525 single and 8500 multi scores. Doing the same thing on my x470 crosshair i get about 480 single and 7600 multi. ***! He didnt even have ryzen master installed, I have to isntall that just to get it to come out of a fixed 3.8ghz.....
> 
> how is that old ass x370 board more ready to support ryzen 3 then the top of the line crosshair vii !?!?!?!?!


Ryzen is a SOC, it's barely it needs a motherboard at all, the less fluff on the board the better scores. Saw some Youtube-video running 3900X on a barebones A320-board and scores where super fast, the VRM was cooking but everything worked.

I see similar results with my Prime X470-Pro which has a 3700X I used to run on C7H, it scores better on the Prime Pro both single and multi.

All the extra features on the C7H generates a performance hit.

My current CPUZ with C7H/3900X in a very varm room using PBO:
https://valid.x86.fr/ymw77c ( 536/8311 )

Oh, and temps is a dealbreaker for Ryzen, if you have great cooling there is a substantial performance boost.


----------



## crakej

AvengedRobix said:


> For me PE1 PE2 and PE3 change nothing


Interesting.

Which cpu and bios are you running?


----------



## oreonutz

Hunk said:


> Thanks, but the same error. Tried previous bios 2606 with the same result... Will try DRAM Calculator, mb XMP is borked or something.


Yeah, just put in your xmp profile for your primary timings manually, like don't actually pick the xmp profile, but go to tools in the UEFI, There is a tool under tools that allow you to look at your Ram SPD. Grab the timings from the XMP row, and plug all them in manually, set your RAM Speed, make sure to set the Boot VDIMM Voltage and the Ram Voltage, then reboot, you should be good to go (Leave the rest of the timings on auto for now)


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> Interesting.
> 
> Which cpu and bios are you running?


Hey Brother, Been Meaning to ask you. How is that Keyboard working for you?


----------



## neikosr0x

zGunBLADEz said:


> im seeing this price right>?
> 
> seeing all the problems the previous one had still have issues and problems even the wifi version (sarcastic) only 2 oficial bios available.
> 
> are you serious asus>?


Just to clarify this card isn't bad at all. We are lacking some support and bios are somewhat slow especially with Ryzen 3000 but the motherboard is really good. And judging by the x570 prices well... it is what it is, lol.


----------



## oreonutz

neikosr0x said:


> Just to clarify this card isn't bad at all. We are lacking some support and bios are somewhat slow especially with Ryzen 3000 but the motherboard is really good. And judging by the x570 prices well... it is what it is, lol.


Damn, thats an OLD Post you commented on there! LOL!


----------



## xeizo

neikosr0x said:


> Just to clarify this card isn't bad at all. We are lacking some support and bios are somewhat slow especially with Ryzen 3000 but the motherboard is really good. And judging by the x570 prices well... it is what it is, lol.


I see a lot of Ryzen bluescreens mentioned on Reddit, my C7H has never bluescreened and I experiment A LOT. Solid board. And memory OC is epic.

Hardware is excellent except I/O-chip which is crap, bios support is lacking but despite buggy features all bioses I've tested have been super stable when running. I've been running 2700X, 3700X and 3900X on this board.


----------



## xeizo

oreonutz said:


> Damn, thats an OLD Post you commented on there! LOL!


LoL, but now it's been said again, solid board, solid community less than solid support 

edit. Shamino of Asus is a breath of fresh air though, sharing beta bioses on ROG Forum, worth mentioning imho


----------



## crakej

oreonutz said:


> Hey Brother, Been Meaning to ask you. How is that Keyboard working for you?


It's good to go back to cherry after so many years! Reminds me of the excellent IBM keyboards that came with the AT.

I love the sound, I love everything! Good recommendation! 

I used to love these when I was coding - could type stuff nice and quickly! Still getting used to it so making mistakes still, but getting better every day.


----------



## AvengedRobix

crakej said:


> Interesting.
> 
> Which cpu and bios are you running?


3900X and 0002+


----------



## Reikoji

Xenozx said:


> i just want to say i went over my friends house yesterday, and helped him get his 3900x up and running, originally we were going to put it in his X470 strix board, but due to some issues we ended up having to put it in his older asus X370 prime board. Literally, I did nothing but pop the chip in and boot into windows (was a 1700x in that machine before) and it was boosting 4.6ghz. I left everything auto and he was pulling CPU-Z scores of 525 single and 8500 multi scores. Doing the same thing on my x470 crosshair i get about 480 single and 7600 multi. ***! He didnt even have ryzen master installed, I have to isntall that just to get it to come out of a fixed 3.8ghz.....
> 
> how is that old ass x370 board more ready to support ryzen 3 then the top of the line crosshair vii !?!?!?!?!


good thing you didnt load up the evil 1.0.0.3ABB bios !


----------



## crakej

AvengedRobix said:


> 3900X and 0002+


Did you have any other boost settings active?

Working well for me! I didn't change any other CPU OC related settings or voltages.


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> It's good to go back to cherry after so many years! Reminds me of the excellent IBM keyboards that came with the AT.
> 
> I love the sound, I love everything! Good recommendation!
> 
> I used to love these when I was coding - could type stuff nice and quickly! Still getting used to it so making mistakes still, but getting better every day.


Well Hell yeah! I am glad it puts a smile on your face! So glad you asked! What I love most of all is how rugged the damn thing is! I put it through hell, and its like, Give me more! LOL!

Anyways, glad its working out for you!


----------



## Xenozx

xeizo said:


> Ryzen is a SOC, it's barely it needs a motherboard at all, the less fluff on the board the better scores. Saw some Youtube-video running 3900X on a barebones A320-board and scores where super fast, the VRM was cooking but everything worked.
> 
> I see similar results with my Prime X470-Pro which has a 3700X I used to run on C7H, it scores better on the Prime Pro both single and multi.
> 
> All the extra features on the C7H generates a performance hit.
> 
> My current CPUZ with C7H/3900X in a very varm room using PBO:
> https://valid.x86.fr/ymw77c ( 536/8311 )
> 
> Oh, and temps is a dealbreaker for Ryzen, if you have great cooling there is a substantial performance boost.


its kinda dumb IMO. I just feel like asus would take a priority in sorting out the bios'es on their newer boards, I am sure its fully possible to get it just like on the older ones. The good news is I atleast seem to be getting the performance I want out of the chip by bclk overclocking.

my cpuz results with 104 bclk and pbo

https://valid.x86.fr/287tw3



crakej said:


> OK - I didn't want to spend a day testing PE, so my testing is brief, but results ARE repeatable - I wouldn't quote them otherwise! Here is what I found enabling PE modes 1-4 - nothing else, everything at default. Tests done with HWInfo and CB15
> 
> PE modes 1 and 2, as reported earlier, don't bring any performances increase for single OR multithreaded workloads. They DO change PPT etc (PE2 puts PPT at 1000w and TDC/EDC at 1000A), but to no obvious effect.
> 
> So Auto, PE1 and PE2 don't seem to be worth enabling on Matisse. PE4 reduces PPT etc to normal levels, so has no hope of helping us. All these scored +>3150 consistently.
> 
> PE3 is different! CB15 scores went CONSISTENTLY to 3196-3200 (at least 50 points more)!
> 
> What was happening was that I was getting a min ACB of x41.8 compared to x41.3 on modes auto, 1, 2, and 4. 500MHz is a worthy gain! I ran CB15 a few times and did not lose any performance. There were times that a few (at least 4) cores boosted to 4.2GHz, but only while temp was below 80c, when they all held at 4.18GHz. Max boost 'only' seems to get to 4.58GHz on PE3 where auto showed boosts to 4.6GHz. [edit: have seen one or two really brief boosts to 4.63GHz light load]
> 
> Single threaded test maxed out at 4.45GHz with no obvious increase in CB15 SC tests which score 205.
> 
> I did NOT add any extra voltage! I didn't want to take any unnecessary chances. I'm going to try adding PE3 to one of my ram profiles and see if I get better performance there.
> 
> In summary - try PE3! Please take care - I take no responsibility if this mode (any modes!) breaks your cpu! Test the config and make sure nothing is wrong! Will update after last tests.


Bro thank you, I had moved to LEVEL 4 when i upgraded bios instead of keeping it at 3. I lost performance thinking it was due to the bios change, but after reading what you wrote, came home, rebooted, only changed level 4 to level 3, and booted into windows, and saw my scores shoot up about 8 points single core and 150 points multi in cpu-z benchmark

level 3 seems to be the way to go!


----------



## nick name

Has anyone tried changing the EDC value with PE 3 to see how that impacts your CPU performance?


----------



## oreonutz

nick name said:


> Has anyone tried changing the EDC value with PE 3 to see how that impacts your CPU performance?


I have not, about to do my own testing with PE3. Just did all my benchmarks with my current all core OC to get a point of comparison from.

I remember sometimes, when using PE3 on the 2700x, on certain UEFI's changing PBO settings wouldn't have an effect when using PE3 or PE4. Hopefully it does with this UEFI though, because according to Elmor when The C7H first launched, PE3 just disables the SMU Power Calculation, but it does not change any PBO settings. So Hopefully we can manipulate PBO Settings with PE3 set, if so that should yield the best Results. For Reference on what the PE Settings Used to do, at least back at 2000 Series Launch:



elmor said:


> *Level 1*
> 
> PPT Limit = 1000W
> TDC Limit = 1000A
> EDC Limit = 150A
> Customized Precision Overdrive (Scalar) = 10X
> 
> *Level 2*
> 
> PPT Limit = 1000W
> TDC Limit = 1000A
> EDC Limit = 1000A
> Customized Precision Overdrive (Scalar) = 10X
> 
> *Level 3 (OC)*
> 
> Tweak from The Stilt which disables the power and current calculation, you might see the SMU calculated power/current in HWInfo showing 0 when using it.
> 
> *Level 4 (OC)*
> 
> The tweak from The Stilt + Level 2 XFR2 settings. I think Level 4 is way higher than most will be able to run, typically yielding something like 4.35G 1T and 4.30G nT frequency.
> 
> 2) Yes, default Windows 10 balanced. The Ryzen Balanced profile has the minimum processor state set a bit too high for Level 3/4 to work properly.
> 3) Voltage requests are sent from the CPU just like at default, so this mode is best used with CPU Core Voltage = Offset mode
> 4) The settings are listed in there as well, +50mV offset to whatever the CPU requested and will depend on the specific CPU sample. IIRC on one of the chips I tested that resulted in 1.48V in 1T scenarios and 1.36V when fully loaded


Who Knows if this is how they still work though? As unfortunately Elmor is no longer with Asus to give us insights like this any more... Sad Face...


----------



## crakej

Xenozx said:


> Bro thank you, I had moved to LEVEL 4 when i upgraded bios instead of keeping it at 3. I lost performance thinking it was due to the bios change, but after reading what you wrote, came home, rebooted, only changed level 4 to level 3, and booted into windows, and saw my scores shoot up about 8 points single core and 150 points multi in cpu-z benchmark
> 
> level 3 seems to be the way to go!


NP -I'm wondering how you got higher results than me?! You're using 104BCLK OC as well as PE3?


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Has anyone tried changing the EDC value with PE 3 to see how that impacts your CPU performance?


Not yet! Is it safe to raise EDC higher that 145A?


----------



## astur_torque

xeizo said:


> Why are you running 1.3V VDIMM when it clearly says 1.35V in the spec sheet for your memory as OC setting?


The less voltage being stable, the better..

I have mine 3733 Mhz 16-19-19-19-36 Micron D die with 1,33V

They get very hot with that frequency and with less tension, they don't heat up so much


----------



## xeizo

astur_torque said:


> The less voltage being stable, the better..
> 
> I have mine 3733 Mhz 16-19-19-19-36 Micron D die with 1,33V
> 
> They get very hot with that frequency and with less tension, they don't heat up so much


I know, I run 3800MHz 16-16-16-16-30 at 1.35V which is 1.33V under load. But he was asking why it didn't boot, that was a potential source for failure.


----------



## xeizo

PE3 did something, scores overall slightly better with the exception of Geekbench multi. Of note, the system is boosting to 4.51GHz according to Geekbench. A guy on another forum was listing 3900X:s boosting over 4.5GHz running Geekbench the other day, and it was like 9 systems of several thousands in the GB database, so this is pretty much it in the form of boost. Thanks to gupsterg:s mod-bios 

(this is with PBO and no override)

edit. also of note, this maxes out at 144.5W CPU + SOC power so still within spec for PBO.


----------



## astur_torque

xeizo said:


> I know, I run 3800MHz 16-16-16-16-30 at 1.35V which is 1.33V under load. But he was asking why it didn't boot, that was a potential source for failure.


Ah, of course, i did,nt read that

Enviado desde mi ONEPLUS A5000 mediante Tapatalk


----------



## xeizo

astur_torque said:


> Ah, of course, i did,nt read that
> 
> Enviado desde mi ONEPLUS A5000 mediante Tapatalk


NP


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> Not yet! Is it safe to raise EDC higher that 145A?


So I spent the last 7 Hours or so Messing with PBO and PE3. I definitely got the Best PBO behavior I have seen yet with that, and with EDC set to 145a. For me the trick was lowering my LLC to level 3 instead of level 4 so that I would get a little bit more Vdroop to hit the 1.275 target under full all core load, with an offset of -.0675. This would allow me to all core boost to 4.15 All Core and stay under 75c under full load with CB R20. Unfortunately though when my Room Temp would rise just 1 Degree from 27c to 28c, then I would go from having a 4.15 all core to a 4.1 all core, sometimes 4.05 All Core. The Single Core was the best yet I have seen though, was consistently hitting 4.6Ghz on my best Core, and 4.575 and 4.55 on the rest of the cores periodically which was awesome to see. I just can't wait until we get better control of PBO though, because when benchmarking things like Firestrike I noticed a few cores going below 4.1Ghz which actually would end up giving me a worse score then I was getting with my 4.25Ghz All Core. I still need a strong all core, so I am going back to per CCX Ocing, I get the most consistent and highest results with it, but can't wait until PBO gets dialed in to get high Multi and Single Core Scores. This was SO CLOSE with PE3, but still not quite. 

Anyways, thank you for your earlier post, its got me the closest I have been with PB since launch!


----------



## xeizo

oreonutz said:


> So I spent the last 7 Hours or so Messing with PBO and PE3. I definitely got the Best PBO behavior I have seen yet with that, and with EDC set to 145a. For me the trick was lowering my LLC to level 3 instead of level 4 so that I would get a little bit more Vdroop to hit the 1.275 target under full all core load, with an offset of -.0675. This would allow me to all core boost to 4.15 All Core and stay under 75c under full load with CB R20. Unfortunately though when my Room Temp would rise just 1 Degree from 27c to 28c, then I would go from having a 4.15 all core to a 4.1 all core, sometimes 4.05 All Core. The Single Core was the best yet I have seen though, was consistently hitting 4.6Ghz on my best Core, and 4.575 and 4.55 on the rest of the cores periodically which was awesome to see. I just can't wait until we get better control of PBO though, because when benchmarking things like Firestrike I noticed a few cores going below 4.1Ghz which actually would end up giving me a worse score then I was getting with my 4.25Ghz All Core. I still need a strong all core, so I am going back to per CCX Ocing, I get the most consistent and highest results with it, but can't wait until PBO gets dialed in to get high Multi and Single Core Scores. This was SO CLOSE with PE3, but still not quite.
> 
> Anyways, thank you for your earlier post, its got me the closest I have been with PB since launch!


I run LLC lvl2 and -0.1V offset, as my 3900X is a rather hot one. Much hotter than my 3700X under the same cooling conditions. But PBO was was all time best with PE3, so useful discussion.


----------



## nick name

oreonutz said:


> -snip-
> 
> I remember sometimes, when using PE3 on the 2700x, on certain UEFI's changing PBO settings wouldn't have an effect when using PE3 or PE4. Hopefully it does with this UEFI though, because according to Elmor when The C7H first launched, PE3 just disables the SMU Power Calculation, but it does not change any PBO settings. So Hopefully we can manipulate PBO Settings with PE3 set, if so that should yield the best Results. For Reference on what the PE Settings Used to do, at least back at 2000 Series Launch:
> -snip-



Yeah, those values didn't work as they should before, but when the new Combo Pi AGESA versions starting rolling out they began to work in BIOS instead of just with Ryzen Master.


----------



## oreonutz

xeizo said:


> I run LLC lvl2 and -0.1V offset, as my 3900X is a rather hot one. Much hotter than my 3700X under the same cooling conditions. But PBO was was all time best with PE3, so useful discussion.


Definitely Useful! Learning more about the boost behavior, at least with this particular UEFI, every day!


So, Since my last Post a few hours ago, I have spent time dialing in my Per CCX OC. I found the method that worked best for me to bench each CCX. I am thinking about giving Process Lasso a shot to help with this in the future, but for now I just did it the ghetto way.

I opened up Blender (I started with Cinebench, but it Resets the Affinity at the start and end of each test, so that was a pain in my a$$), opened up the Fishy Cat Project, Set the Threads to a manual 6. Then Went in to task manager and set the Affinity to 6 Threads at a time, starting with the first 6 threads, which correspond to Core's 1 through 3, and their threads. Then I would start the Render. After 3 Minutes into the Render, if Blender Didn't Crash I would use my Per CCX Tool to upscale the CCX Clocks by 25 Mhz. I would continue this until Blender would crash, then scale that CCX Back 25Mhz. Then continue the process for the next 3 CCX. 

Once I had each CCX Dialed In it was time to see if the Max I achieved with each CCX by themselves, would hold when testing 2 CCX's at a time, and then eventually the entire Chip at a time. Because Running more than one CCX at a time generates more heat, its unlikely that the chip will remain stable without pushing up the Voltage, which I wasn't willing to do. My Voltage was set at 1.35v by the way when under full load. So I continued the process as before, except this time instead of setting Blender to a manual 6 threads, I set it to a Manual 24 Threads. The Cool thing about Blender is, once you set the affinity, it doesn't matter if you set more threads in Blender then you gave it affinity for, it will still only use the cores you gave it affinity for. So I set 24 Threads, then set a manual 12 Threads in affinity, so that the entire first CCD (or 1st 2 CCX's) were being tested. If Blender Crashed I would scale back one of the CCX's by 25Mhz and then try again until it didn't crash. Then I moved on to the Next CCD and did the same process, then moved on to testing the entire chip until I was finally stable for an entire Fishy Cat Render.

Once I finished this I went to Cinebench R20 and did 10 Benchmarks in a Row and remained stable for the entire 10. I took note of the final score and went through the rest of my benchmark suite. This is my best scores across the entire suite to date. I am sure a lot of you have beaten these scores, so I am not claiming they are the best, just my best. Except for my Geekbench Score, its my best Windows Geekbench Score, but my Linux Geekbench Score with an All core OC of 4225Mhz still CRUSHES my Best Windows Geekbench score. Other than that though, I got my best Firestrike, CPUz, Cinebench R20, R15 All Core and Single Core's to date! I threw Aida Mem Bench in, thats no where near my best, but I just through it in for good measure.

Let me know if any of you guys have had similar luck Per CCX OCing. If you need the tools, just let me know! (I can boot into Windows with my Per CCX OC taking effect, so no need to open RM every single Boot to apply)

BTW, This is Where I finally Settled. CCX0=4450Mhz / CCX1=4475Mhz / CCX2=4275Mhz / CCX3=4250Mhz



Spoiler


----------



## xeizo

oreonutz said:


> Definitely Useful! Learning more about the boost behavior, at least with this particular UEFI, every day!
> 
> 
> So, Since my last Post a few hours ago, I have spent time dialing in my Per CCX OC. I found the method that worked best for me to bench each CCX. I am thinking about giving Process Lasso a shot to help with this in the future, but for now I just did it the ghetto way.
> 
> I opened up Blender (I started with Cinebench, but it Resets the Affinity at the start and end of each test, so that was a pain in my a$$), opened up the Fishy Cat Project, Set the Threads to a manual 6. Then Went in to task manager and set the Affinity to 6 Threads at a time, starting with the first 6 threads, which correspond to Core's 1 through 3, and their threads. Then I would start the Render. After 3 Minutes into the Render, if Blender Didn't Crash I would use my Per CCX Tool to upscale the CCX Clocks by 25 Mhz. I would continue this until Blender would crash, then scale that CCX Back 25Mhz. Then continue the process for the next 3 CCX.
> 
> Once I had each CCX Dialed In it was time to see if the Max I achieved with each CCX by themselves, would hold when testing 2 CCX's at a time, and then eventually the entire Chip at a time. Because Running more than one CCX at a time generates more heat, its unlikely that the chip will remain stable without pushing up the Voltage, which I wasn't willing to do. My Voltage was set at 1.35v by the way when under full load. So I continued the process as before, except this time instead of setting Blender to a manual 6 threads, I set it to a Manual 24 Threads. The Cool thing about Blender is, once you set the affinity, it doesn't matter if you set more threads in Blender then you gave it affinity for, it will still only use the cores you gave it affinity for. So I set 24 Threads, then set a manual 12 Threads in affinity, so that the entire first CCD (or 1st 2 CCX's) were being tested. If Blender Crashed I would scale back one of the CCX's by 25Mhz and then try again until it didn't crash. Then I moved on to the Next CCD and did the same process, then moved on to testing the entire chip until I was finally stable for an entire Fishy Cat Render.
> 
> Once I finished this I went to Cinebench R20 and did 10 Benchmarks in a Row and remained stable for the entire 10. I took note of the final score and went through the rest of my benchmark suite. This is my best scores across the entire suite to date. I am sure a lot of you have beaten these scores, so I am not claiming they are the best, just my best. Except for my Geekbench Score, its my best Windows Geekbench Score, but my Linux Geekbench Score with an All core OC of 4225Mhz still CRUSHES my Best Windows Geekbench score. Other than that though, I got my best Firestrike, CPUz, Cinebench R20, R15 All Core and Single Core's to date! I threw Aida Mem Bench in, thats no where near my best, but I just through it in for good measure.
> 
> Let me know if any of you guys have had similar luck Per CCX OCing. If you need the tools, just let me know! (I can boot into Windows with my Per CCX OC taking effect, so no need to open RM every single Boot to apply)
> 
> BTW, This is Where I finally Settled. CCX0=4450Mhz / CCX1=4475Mhz / CCX2=4275Mhz / CCX3=4250Mhz
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Thanks for sharing! Good to see I'm not that far in most scores while consuming 15W less max from the CPU, my max actual vcore was only 1.37V and max VRM-temp only 42C. I guess I shouldn't push it further, as I have a lot less cooling than you have. I'm happy enough using PBO/PE3 and reaching this level of performance. The performance will ryze when ambient temps gets lower 

It is interesting to see how you eek out the last drop of performance using CCX-torture in Blender.


----------



## crakej

My results have improved today with less ambient temp on PE3  CB15 went up to 3329 and 211

This is good enough for me until I get ability to OC manual properly from the bios. Hopefully we'll be able to OC each CCD and/or CCX from there soon.

I was wondering how the CPU copes with CCXs running at different speeds and how that might affect ram performance, but it seems ok from what people are doing....


----------



## neikosr0x

xeizo said:


> I see a lot of Ryzen bluescreens mentioned on Reddit, my C7H has never bluescreened and I experiment A LOT. Solid board. And memory OC is epic.
> 
> Hardware is excellent except I/O-chip which is crap, bios support is lacking but despite buggy features all bioses I've tested have been super stable when running. I've been running 2700X, 3700X and 3900X on this board.


For me this mobo has be very very solid just now that i had issues with ryzen 3000 but mostly due to AMD than anything else. I don't have any bluescreen with this board except when im playing with my ram. had my 1700x 2700x and 3900x running here. I used to have a gigabyte gaming 5 for the 1700x but it was very very ****ty board honestly.


----------



## oreonutz

xeizo said:


> Thanks for sharing! Good to see I'm not that far in most scores while consuming 15W less max from the CPU, my max actual vcore was only 1.37V and max VRM-temp only 42C. I guess I shouldn't push it further, as I have a lot less cooling than you have. I'm happy enough using PBO/PE3 and reaching this level of performance. The performance will ryze when ambient temps gets lower
> 
> It is interesting to see how you eek out the last drop of performance using CCX-torture in Blender.


LOL! Appreciate it! The CCX Torture was fun! I then Tortured it with IBT Maximum, and then Y Cruncher, She Got HOTTTTT!!! It Pushed just shy of 200WATTS!!!! Down the CPU! That was insane!!! 104c!!!! But she remained stable the entire time! So I am golden!!!! Happy right now! Getting a nap now...

I am interested in checking out your scores, I am sure you have posted them in the past, but I am too tired to go hunting for them, if you get a min at some point today, post them again so I can check them out. I won't be back on until sometime this afternoon, got to get to sleep then to a few jobs, but will check it out when I get back on.

Have a good day everyone!


----------



## nick name

I wanted to try re-test 2703 and verify the reduced memory bandwidth I was seeing before. It's still a problem, but I've also found that CBR15 Aggresive results in bluescreens while trying to boot with my 2700X.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> I wanted to try re-test 2703 and verify the reduced memory bandwidth I was seeing before. It's still a problem, but I've also found that CBR15 Aggresive results in bluescreens while trying to boot with my 2700X.


I haven't heard of anyone having success booting with CBR15 Aggresive!


----------



## harderthanfire

oreonutz said:


> LOL! Appreciate it! The CCX Torture was fun! I then Tortured it with IBT Maximum, and then Y Cruncher, She Got HOTTTTT!!! It Pushed just shy of 200WATTS!!!! Down the CPU! That was insane!!! 104c!!!! But she remained stable the entire time! So I am golden!!!! Happy right now! Getting a nap now...
> 
> I am interested in checking out your scores, I am sure you have posted them in the past, but I am too tired to go hunting for them, if you get a min at some point today, post them again so I can check them out. I won't be back on until sometime this afternoon, got to get to sleep then to a few jobs, but will check it out when I get back on.
> 
> Have a good day everyone!



Make sure you test your per CCX on prime95 small FFT AVX workloads. I've had everything else be stable but that one workload have errors (though it is one of the most demanding things a CPU can do).


----------



## crakej

xeizo said:


> I haven't heard of anyone having success booting with CBR15 Aggresive!


I haven't either.

A point about performance bias settings though - if you load a profile from a previous bios that had CB15 performance bias enabled, it may automatically change it to CB15 Aggressive, so check that if loading older profiles - may stop you booting or running properly.


----------



## xeizo

crakej said:


> I haven't either.
> 
> A point about performance bias settings though - if you load a profile from a previous bios that had CB15 performance bias enabled, it automatically changes it to CB15 Aggressive, so check that if loading older profiles - may stop you booting or running properly.


It didn't for me, it choose Gentle ...


----------



## mtrai

I have a C7H 0002+ bios hopefully with the options unhid for matisse ryzen 3000 cpus. I hope actually. I think I figured it all out. PM if you wish to test it and let me know. If it works I will do the rest of the C6h and C7h Wifi.


----------



## crakej

xeizo said:


> It didn't for me, it choose Gentle ...


Have edited my post to say it might do that - mine was on aggressive -thanks for sharing


----------



## crakej

mtrai said:


> I have a C7H 0002+ bios hopefully with the options unhid for matisse ryzen 3000 cpus. I hope actually. I think I figured it all out. PM if you wish to test it and let me know. If it works I will do the rest of the C6h and C7h Wifi.


I'm happy to try it out if it will help....


----------



## Hunk

oreonutz said:


> Yeah, just put in your xmp profile for your primary timings manually, like don't actually pick the xmp profile, but go to tools in the UEFI, There is a tool under tools that allow you to look at your Ram SPD. Grab the timings from the XMP row, and plug all them in manually, set your RAM Speed, make sure to set the Boot VDIMM Voltage and the Ram Voltage, then reboot, you should be good to go (Leave the rest of the timings on auto for now)


Well, it didn't work. Looks like some kind of incompatibility on newer bioses and these memory sticks i dunno.

Some observations: any changes to dram settings and i have double start on cold boot with mixed results, some give me 4d, some boot ok (like XMP 3600 timings but 2133 clock and 1.2V). Dram calculator values don't boot with different post value. On default settings and dram voltage higher or lower than 1.2V posts to 4d. Frustrating that with only changing dram boot voltage to suggested 1.4 gives me 4d on apply+reboot but works on cold boot.

But still 1.4 boot voltage + 1.35 (or whatever) and everything else on default or auto always stuck at 4d. Sigh.


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> I'm happy to try it out if it will help....


PM'ed you the link. 



crakej said:


> sending


Here is the link let me know when you download it, don't want it in the public until I know it works.


----------



## crakej

Hunk said:


> Well, it didn't work. Looks like some kind of incompatibility on newer bioses and these memory sticks i dunno.
> 
> Some observations: any changes to dram settings and i have double start on cold boot with mixed results, some give me 4d, some boot ok (like XMP 3600 timings but 2133 clock and 1.2V). Dram calculator values don't boot with different post value. On default settings and dram voltage higher or lower than 1.2V posts to 4d. Frustrating that with only changing dram boot voltage to suggested 1.4 gives me 4d on apply+reboot but works on cold boot.
> 
> But still 1.4 boot voltage + 1.35 (or whatever) and everything else on default or auto always stuck at 4d. Sigh.


How did you flash your bios? Try boot voltage and voltage at 1.35v...


----------



## crakej

mtrai said:


> PM'ed you the link.


Downloaded. Just going to eat but will test asap.


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> Downloaded. Just going to eat but will test asap.


can you delete the link.


----------



## crakej

mtrai said:


> can you delete the link.


Done.

So this is 002+ by gupsterg with menus unlocked? About to install.


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> Done.
> 
> So this is 002+ by gupsterg with menus unlocked? About to install.



Yeah IF it is now working will do it to the other versions we have. Gotta walk one of the dogs.


----------



## crakej

mtrai said:


> Yeah it is now working will do it to the other versions we have. Gotta walk one of the dogs.


Confirmed - lots of new settings including fan settings! Thank you @mtrai  Rep+


----------



## gupsterg

@mtrai

I did not get a chance today to try "unhide" option UEFI on Matisse, but when I compared say a stock UEFI to one where I used AMIBCP to unide an option, it only changed data in first 100000h (capsule headers stripped).

First UEFI is 1xxx/2xxx CPUs, second is 3xxx.

The "Setup" module we may see in UEFITool is not what AMIBCP changed when I did what I did. Anyhow I hope your efforts bare fruit, but here is some mapping I have done, still work in progress.

View attachment 32MB UEFI info.txt


*** edit ***

Ahh I see efforts have bared fruit :thumb: .


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> Confirmed - lots of new settings including fan settings! Thank you @mtrai  Rep+



WOO F'ing HOO!!! I have the C7H Wifi version ready will work on 2703 for both boards and then whatever is the public for the C6H

I will do a write up in a few days and posts on how to. As it is a lot more complicated then the original bios modding we used to do and bit weirder which is one of the issues I was having. While both the 1000/2000 and the 3000 have a set up module then are two more modules that they both share in common for set up. And to make it worse they the 2 setup modules both use the guids. And of course you need the other tools...but there is a step to skip with UEFITool. But I guess you know that already as well.


----------



## crakej

mtrai said:


> WOO F'ing HOO!!! I have the C7H Wifi version ready will work on 2703 for both boards and then whatever is the public for the C6H
> 
> I will do a write up in a few days and posts on how to. As it is a lot more complicated then the original bios modding we used to do and bit weirder which is one of the issues I was having. While both the 1000/2000 and the 3000 have a set up module then are two more modules that they both share in common for set up. And to make it worse they the 2 setup modules both use the guids. And of course you need the other tools...but there is a step to skip with UEFITool. But I guess you know that already as well.


Lol!  :thumbsups

I know how frustrating these things can be! It's brilliant when you get results!

In the tools menu, there is a fan setting with choices like box, tower, desktop - something like that. I'm intrigued what it does... there are various settings in Advanced - USB settings for each of the different chipsets. Also there was something extra in the Extreme Tweaker menu but already can't remember what it was lol.

Suffice to say, I have have new settings to play with!


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> Lol!  :thumbsups
> 
> I know how frustrating these things can be! It's brilliant when you get results!
> 
> In the tools menu, there is a fan setting with choices like box, tower, desktop - something like that. I'm intrigued what it does... there are various settings in Advanced - USB settings for each of the different chipsets. Also there was something extra in the Extreme Tweaker menu but already can't remember what it was lol.
> 
> Suffice to say, I have have new settings to play with!


That is a old dead zombie option...however it is cute when is ask what cooling are you using and the last option is "I'm not" so I show it as basically a form of an easter egg.

I am gonna start on the other 2 in just a few and hope to have them out tonight.


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> Lol!  :thumbsups
> 
> !


Is is a recent read out of my settings a few days ago on 0002 they will be close to what I use. As there are a lot of new options that are enable by default that do not need to be. They help with faster boot up to more performance in windows. Also remember HPET has to be searched with F9 SS is in the the main settings menu.

Also there are a ton of options that unhidden available for advanced users but have to be searched

The setting below are for the 0002 with the SMU FW mod.

[/spoiler]
[2019/08/26 13:00:04]
Ai Overclock Tuner [D.O.C.P. Standard]
D.O.C.P. [D.O.C.P DDR4-4140 19-19-19-39-1.35V]
eCLK Mode [Synchronous mode]
BCLK Frequency [101.4000]
BCLK_Divider [Auto]
Performance Enhancer [Level 3 (OC)]
CPU Core Ratio [37.00]
Performance Bias [CBR15 Gentle]
Memory Frequency [DDR4-3515MHz]
Core Performance Boost [Enabled]
SMT Mode [Auto]
TPU [Keep Current Settings]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
Max CPU Boost Clock Override [Auto]
Platform Thermal Throttle Limit [Auto]
TRC_EOM [Auto]
TRTP_EOM [Auto]
TRRS_S_EOM [Auto]
TRRS_L_EOM [Auto]
TWTR_EOM [Auto]
TWTR_L_EOM [Auto]
TWCL_EOM [Auto]
TWR_EOM [Auto]
TFAW_EOM [Auto]
TRCT_EOM [Auto]
TREFI_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_DD_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SD_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SC_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SCL_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_DD_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SD_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SC_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SCL_EOM [Auto]
TWRRD_EOM [Auto]
TRDWR_EOM [Auto]
TWRRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
Mem Over Clock Fail Count [2]
DRAM CAS# Latency [14]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [14]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [14]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [14]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [28]
Trc [44]
TrrdS [6]
TrrdL [9]
Tfaw [36]
TwtrS [4]
TwtrL [12]
Twr [10]
Trcpage [Auto]
TrdrdScl [2]
TwrwrScl [2]
Trfc [240]
Trfc2 [Auto]
Trfc4 [Auto]
Tcwl [14]
Trtp [8]
Trdwr [Auto]
Twrrd [3]
TwrwrSc [1]
TwrwrSd [7]
TwrwrDd [7]
TrdrdSc [1]
TrdrdSd [5]
TrdrdDd [5]
Tcke [9]
ProcODT [Auto]
Cmd2T [Auto]
Gear Down Mode [Auto]
Power Down Enable [Disabled]
RttNom [Auto]
RttWr [Auto]
RttPark [Auto]
MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
MemCkeSetup [Auto]
MemCadBusClkDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [Auto]
CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 3]
CPU Current Capability [120%]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
CPU Voltage Frequency [500]
CPU Power Duty Control [Extreme]
CPU Power Phase Control [Extreme]
CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 3]
VDDSOC Current Capability [120%]
VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed VDDSOC Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
VDDSOC Phase Control [Extreme]
DRAM Current Capability [110%]
DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.60000]
VTTDDR Voltage [0.81250]
VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
VDDP Voltage [Auto]
1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
PLL reference voltage [Auto]
T Offset [Auto]
Sense MI Skew [Auto]
Sense MI Offset [Auto]
Promontory presence [Auto]
Clock Amplitude [Auto]
CLDO VDDP voltage [Auto]
CPU Core Voltage [Offset mode]
CPU Offset Mode Sign [+]
- CPU Core Voltage Offset [0.01250]
CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
- VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.12500]
DRAM Voltage [1.60000]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
Firmware TPM [Disable]
Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
PSS Support [Auto]
SVM Mode [Disabled]
Onboard LED [Enabled]
Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
SATA Mode [AHCI]
NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
SMART Self Test [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [GEN 3]
PCIEX8/X4_2 Mode [Auto]
PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
SB Link Mode [Auto]
Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
When system is in working state [On]
When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [On]
Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
Wi-Fi Controller [Disabled]
Bluetooth Controller [Disabled]
ErP Ready [Disabled]
Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
Power On By RTC [Disabled]
Network Stack [Disabled]
Device [Samsung SSD 850 EVO 250GB]
Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
WalgreenInfinitive [Auto]
EPSON Storage 1.00 [Auto]
SanDisk Cruzer 1.26 [Auto]
U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
U31G1_5 [Enabled]
U31G1_6 [Enabled]
U31G1_7 [Enabled]
U31G1_8 [Enabled]
U31G1_9 [Enabled]
U31G1_10 [Enabled]
USB11 [Enabled]
USB12 [Enabled]
USB13 [Enabled]
USB14 [Enabled]
USB15 [Enabled]
CPU Temperature [Monitor]
MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
PCH Temperature [Monitor]
T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
5V Voltage [Monitor]
12V Voltage [Monitor]
CPU Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [200 RPM]
CPU Fan Profile [Standard]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 3 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [Auto]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Source [CPU]
HAMP Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
HAMP Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
HAMP Fan Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
PSPP Policy [Auto]
Fast Boot [Enabled]
NVMe Support [Enabled]
Next Boot after AC Power Loss [Normal Boot]
AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
Boot Logo Display [Enabled]
POST Delay Time [3 sec]
Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
Launch CSM [Enabled]
Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
OS Type [Other OS]
Setup Animator [Disabled]
ASUS Grid Install Service [Disabled]
Profile Name []
Save to Profile [1]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
BCLK Frequency [Auto]
CPU Ratio [Auto]
DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A2]
Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
Core Performance Boost [Auto]
Memory interleaving [Auto]
IOMMU [Auto]
Global C-state Control [Auto]
Power Supply Idle Control [Auto]
DRAM ECC Enable [Auto]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
Mode0 [Auto]
[\SPOILER]

I give up right now on the spoiler tag grrr


----------



## xeizo

Excellent mtrai! Looking forward for testing the 0002+ for C7H non WiFi


----------



## mtrai

Almost all hidden options are now exposed

Work in progress if something does work just let me know. Getting tired been at this for this days will update this post as I complete the mods. These now include all Ryzen CPUs generations. First I must say a big thanks to several people for help with testing, support, possible ideas and words of encouragement. So a shout out to @oreonutz you have been a great help with this endevor with your patience in testing flawed mods and your constant good words. @gupsterg your incites have always been helpful @crakej same for you too, y'all both do so much testing and people just do not realize the hidden knowledge that y'all both have. And do have to give a thanks for to @gupsterg for his SMU FW moddified bios. 

Remember this is coming from a very OLD TIMER in both senses of the word. I am old and have been on OCN forever it seems now.

Remember you have to rename and use flashback to flash these.

USE AT YOUR OWN RISK who am I kidding we have the most solid flashback of boards.

I will post screenshots...but here is a earlier one in album form missing the spread spectrum showing in a menu as it can be done now. This is from a very old bios but the options are the same for the things we all want. https://imgur.com/a/bQUUKMu

Anyhow currently what should be ready to go and available for download is:

C7H non wifi 0002+ with previous SMU FW

C7H WIFI 0002+ previous SMU FW

C7H WIFI 2703+ Previous SMU FW

More are coming but got to take my dogs for walks.


Download Link: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1EqMzOL7-xy6tGeSrMfc3CFw2c5nrAA2z

I will update this post as I complete new mods.


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> Almost all hidden options are now exposed
> 
> Work in progress if something does work just let me know. Getting tired been at this for this days will update this post as I complete the mods. These now include all Ryzen CPUs generations. First I must say a big thanks to several people for help with testing, support, possible ideas and words of encouragement. So a shout out to @oreonutz you have been a great help with this endevor with your patience in testing flawed mods and your constant good words. @gupsterg your incites have always been helpful @crakej same for you too, y'all both do so much testing and people just do not realize the hidden knowledge that y'all both have. And do have to give a thanks for to @gupsterg for his SMU FW moddified bios.
> 
> Remember this is coming from a very OLD TIMER in both senses of the word. I am old and have been on OCN forever it seems now.
> 
> Remember you have to rename and use flashback to flash these.
> 
> USE AT YOUR OWN RISK who am I kidding we have the most solid flashback of boards.
> 
> I will post screenshots...but here is a earlier one in album form missing the spread spectrum showing in a menu as it can be done now. This is from a very old bios but the options are the same for the things we all want. https://imgur.com/a/bQUUKMu
> 
> Anyhow currently what should be ready to go and available for download is:
> 
> C7H non wifi 0002+ with previous SMU FW
> 
> C7H WIFI 0002+ previous SMU FW
> 
> C7H WIFI 2703+ Previous SMU FW
> 
> More are coming but got to take my dogs for walks.
> 
> 
> Download Link: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1EqMzOL7-xy6tGeSrMfc3CFw2c5nrAA2z
> 
> I will update this post as I complete new mods.


As always, YOU ARE THE MAN AND A LEGEND @mtrai! I have to run out to work, but I am going to flash this as fast as I can and hopefully give a report before leaving. THANK YOU!!!!!


----------



## oreonutz

TRULY FRICKIN BRILLAINT GUYS! I just read through the last page, and I wish I was here for that. I love to see brilliance in the making! You guys are awesome! I have to catch up later. Rebooting now! Much Love to @mtrai, @crakej and @gupsterg!

Also @mtrai, Your UEFI needs a name. Something short and sweet. May I dub it "0002Exposed+" Its perfect! 0002 Says the UEFI Modified, Exposed clarify's your mod exposing ASUS hidden settings that we have been craving for, and + Indicates @gupsterg's awesome SMU Mod. Maybe someone can come up with something better, but I am thinking it works pretty well! Anyways, Will see you guys late tonight!


----------



## oreonutz

harderthanfire said:


> Make sure you test your per CCX on prime95 small FFT AVX workloads. I've had everything else be stable but that one workload have errors (though it is one of the most demanding things a CPU can do).


Nope! Thank You though, I appreciate your words of wisdom, its something I have ALWAYS DONE on past CPU's. On the 2700x for example, no problem! But Prime95 Small FFT's on a 2 CCD chips, BURNS THEM INTO THE GROUND. EVEN with a Voltage of 1.15v, My CPU Burns to 91c, even with my 3 Radiators (2 280's {one 45mm, one 60mm} and 1 360 45mm). With the Voltage I am putting the chip under, I tried Small FFT's and INSTANTLY SAW 111c! NOT DOING IT AGAIN! LOL! I put my chip through hell, but the Most intense workload I throw at it is AVX Renders in Blender, so I tested with those Workloads while gone today, and it passed with flying colors, a 7 Hour straight Render, hit a peak of 86c, and stable as bird. So I am Happy! As soon as a Chiplet Optomized Block is released, I will be mounting it, and at that Point I am hoping contact will be better with the IHS and do a better job of cooling the Chiplets, and hopefully at that point I will be able to make it Prime 95 Small FFT's Stable, but as of right now, not worrying about it.

Stilt also said something along the same lines, I would dig up the post but I am in a Hurry, @gupsterg knows what I am talking about though, he is the one who brought it to my attention. Right now, Validating with Prime 95 Small FFT's for 2 CCD Chips is a BAD IDEA if you are running over 1.2. However, Y Cruncher and IBT Maximum, no problem, it got Toasty as hell at 102 during Y Cruncher, but it successfully passed, so thats good enough for me! Obviously if I was setting this up for a client I would be dialing way back, but since I know my own workload, I know that this is MattTheTechLV stable. (MattTheTechLV is normally my Username, I have NO IDEA why I used my childhood nickname while signing up for this forum a few years ago! LOL)


----------



## oreonutz

Hunk said:


> Well, it didn't work. Looks like some kind of incompatibility on newer bioses and these memory sticks i dunno.
> 
> Some observations: any changes to dram settings and i have double start on cold boot with mixed results, some give me 4d, some boot ok (like XMP 3600 timings but 2133 clock and 1.2V). Dram calculator values don't boot with different post value. On default settings and dram voltage higher or lower than 1.2V posts to 4d. Frustrating that with only changing dram boot voltage to suggested 1.4 gives me 4d on apply+reboot but works on cold boot.
> 
> But still 1.4 boot voltage + 1.35 (or whatever) and everything else on default or auto always stuck at 4d. Sigh.


I am sorry man. I will take some time aside to help you out if you want it tomorrow. Heading out to work now, I am confident we could get you past this, I just need some time to do it, and won't have it until tomorrow. If you have the time, Use Thaiphoon Burner to Read Your SPD on one of your Modules (assuming they are all the same, if they aren't then get me one for each) make sure to check the box that says to report in ns, then export to a html file and PM to me, I will take a look at it tomorrow and see if I can come up with a profile to help you out. 

Just look up directions on exporting an XMP profile with Thaiphoon Burner for Ryzen Memory Calculator, and follow those directions, I don't need you to put it in the Memory Calculator, I use my own Calculations, I just need the HTML Export from Thaiphoon burner, and those directions tell you how to do that. Talk to you soon!


----------



## oreonutz

Not Enough time for a report, I am running so fricking LATE! 

I LOVE IT @mtrai!!!! RUNNING IT RIGHT NOW!!! Fan OPTIONS are amazing!!!! I got it all setup, but have to disable AISuite now to see how it works. No Time to do that right now. Will play with it when I get back and fill out a full report! Have a good night everyone!


----------



## CCoR

Has anybody tested the new unlocked options for ryzen 3000 users? Just tried 0002 and still can't seem to see hidden options. Gonna try 2703 version next

edit: looks like some unlocked settings did in fact show up on 0002 version but cant pull HPET setting
edit2: same goes with 2703, there are new unlocked settings such as the main ones for fan and 300/400/500 chipset common options but cant find HPET


----------



## crakej

CCoR said:


> Has anybody tested the new unlocked options for ryzen 3000 users? Just tried 0002 and still can't seem to see hidden options. Gonna try 2703 version next
> 
> edit: looks like some unlocked settings did in fact show up on 0002 version but cant pull HPET setting
> edit2: same goes with 2703, there are new unlocked settings such as the main ones for fan and 300/400/500 chipset common options but cant find HPET


Hit F9(I think) for search in bios, enter <hpet> and it should find it


----------



## CCoR

crakej said:


> Hit F9(I think) for search in bios, enter <hpet> and it should find it


nope cant pull it up


----------



## crakej

CCoR said:


> nope cant pull it up


Strange - maybe he didn't unlock that yet.....

Can't you just disable it in the windows device manager for now?


----------



## Reikoji

Mumak said:


> So it looks like a Suspend/Resume cycle does unlock FCLK reporting, that's interesting. Most probably the BIOS is not properly restoring the FCLK lock, which is some good news for us.
> Note, that the value shown is the average value of FCLK measured during each polling cycle. So you might see values other than the expected discrete points.
> Regarding Temp5 and similar to are most probably just mirrors of some existing values, or invalid ones coming from not connected sensors.


I dont know if this is known, but power and temperature readings, both in HWinfo and Ryzen master, appear highly dependant on the voltage that is set in bios.

I was playing around to see how if I could do 3.8ghz at 1v on my 3900x. I set the frequency and voltage in Ryzen master, ran, didnt crash. But, Power Draw on HWinfo was still showing well above 160w on CPU package and temperatures above 65c. I went into bios to set 3.8ghz and 1.05v, boot back into windows and run cenebench again. This time I top out at 42c and 92w on CPU package power. From what I noticed, changing the core voltage in Ryzen master doesnt change the CPU Core Voltage (SVI2 TFN) reading. It stays at whatever was set in bios.

Also, where might we find where the Temperature limit for Zen 2 is? It doesnt seem to be displaying for me.


----------



## Mumak

Reikoji said:


> Also, where might we find where the Temperature limit for Zen 2 is? It doesnt seem to be displaying for me.


This is shown in the main window. If you're running in Sensor-only mode, you will need to disable this and then check in the main window under the CPU node.
Many users forgot that such a screen exists as they're running always in Sensor-only.


----------



## Reikoji

Mumak said:


> This is shown in the main window. If you're running in Sensor-only mode, you will need to disable this and then check in the main window under the CPU node.
> Many users forgot that such a screen exists as they're running always in Sensor-only.


Thanks, found it.


----------



## Reikoji

Some screens.

1st: 3.8ghz and 1.05v Set in bios

2nd: 3.8ghz and 1.4625v set in bios, changed to 1.05 in ryzen master.

This is pretty funny actually. Ryzen master can set up Per-CCX clock speeds, but can only change the VID. Asus AI suite cant change the CPU clock speed of zen 2, but can change the Vcore voltage properly resulting in the correct power draw for the loads. Need to use both to avoid having to go into bios for correct voltages for the speeds set with Ryzen master


----------



## glnn_23

CH7/3900x testing 2 x 8Gb G.Skill 4266 @ 4400c17 with ramtest
In bios vdimm 1.425v and soc 1.12v


----------



## crakej

Reikoji said:


> Some screens.
> 
> 1st: 3.8ghz and 1.05v Set in bios
> 
> 2nd: 3.8ghz and 1.4625v set in bios, changed to 1.05 in ryzen master.
> 
> This is pretty funny actually. Ryzen master can set up Per-CCX clock speeds, but can only change the VID. Asus AI suite cant change the CPU clock speed of zen 2, but can change the Vcore voltage properly resulting in the correct power draw for the loads. Need to use both to avoid having to go into bios for correct voltages for the speeds set with Ryzen master


You can set CPU multiplier and BCLK (Says APU Frequ) in AISuite - if you set it to 3900 it will put cpu in OC mode, fixed frequency until you reboot.


----------



## mtrai

CCoR said:


> nope cant pull it up


I will take a look at it. There are a lot of things that have to be changed...in multiple places. I just woked up and got the dogs walked and having coffee after that will look into. I was trying to take some shortcuts, to save some time after I got one working correctly so will recheck all my work...it will be an easy fix. Will re-upload the correct bios. 

Incidentally can you do a search for MSI and let me know what turns up? Don't change any of these settings just want to see if they show as well. These are very advanced options.


----------



## Reikoji

crakej said:


> You can set CPU multiplier and BCLK (Says APU Frequ) in AISuite - if you set it to 3900 it will put cpu in OC mode, fixed frequency until you reboot.


I dont have APU frequency  I've applied settings on that screen and its never changed the frequency.


----------



## tryout1

i have to admit @mtrai and @gupsterg did an more than outstanding job with their work i'm speechless, using the *C7H-0002+1.cap* unlocked options.cap it seems that it even fixed the issue with restarting i had with official 2703 (restarting shut my system down and started it up fresh, instead of yeah restarting), 3800/1900 IF works too, boost is pretty good if not amazing now but i hope we can finetune PBO etc more cause if i can somehow run 4325mhz at 1.325v instead of the 1.41-1.43v it puts in now but small steps for now. +rep from me for sure

I even made 2 screenshots while playing Control and i was amazed that it even measured 4475mhz on one core. Right now i'm using "default" PE with no undervolting just +150Mhz for AutoOC.
With stock 2703 before, PE2 was like 4250mhz @ 1.4v and PE3 4300mhz at 1.41-1.47v (varied a lot)

I put both screens in the spoiler tag cause they are big and secondly the first pic could contain some CONTROL spoilers



Spoiler


----------



## nick name

Off-topic, but if you don't get the Humble Bundle newsletter then you can subscribe to it and get Dirt Rally for free. 

https://www.humblebundle.com/store/..._dirtrally&hmb_medium=banner#checkout-section


----------



## gupsterg

CCoR said:


> Has anybody tested the new unlocked options for ryzen 3000 users? Just tried 0002 and still can't seem to see hidden options. Gonna try 2703 version next
> 
> edit: looks like some unlocked settings did in fact show up on 0002 version but cant pull HPET setting
> edit2: same goes with 2703, there are new unlocked settings such as the main ones for fan and 300/400/500 chipset common options but cant find HPET
> 
> 
> 
> crakej said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hit F9(I think) for search in bios, enter <hpet> and it should find it
> 
> 
> 
> CCoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> nope cant pull it up
> 
> 
> 
> crakej said:
> 
> 
> 
> Strange - maybe he didn't unlock that yet.....
> 
> Can't you just disable it in the windows device manager for now?
> 
> 
> 
> mtrai said:
> 
> 
> 
> I will take a look at it. There are a lot of things that have to be changed...in multiple places. I just woked up and got the dogs walked and having coffee after that will look into. I was trying to take some shortcuts, to save some time after I got one working correctly so will recheck all my work...it will be an easy fix. Will re-upload the correct bios.
> 
> Incidentally can you do a search for MSI and let me know what turns up? Don't change any of these settings just want to see if they show as well. These are very advanced options.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

0002+E (E short for exposed @oreonutz  ), not tried mtrai's UEFI, but mine is showing options as show. ASUS Grid disabled by default or should I hide it as well  ...

@mtrai

What I did was split the UEFI in half. Opened the Matisse one in AMIBCP, it will then make changes to relevant UEFI, saved changed UEFI.

If I flashed only the Matisse UEFI board will not post, so there is something or a reference which relates to first half of UEFI, dunno. If I place back the first half of UEFI then board will post and album as linked is what I have.


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> 0002+E (E short for exposed @oreonutz  ), not tried mtrai's UEFI, but mine is showing options as show. ASUS Grid disabled by default or should I hide it as well  ...
> 
> @mtrai
> 
> What I did was split the UEFI in half. Opened the Matisse one in AMIBCP, it will then make changes to relevant UEFI, saved changed UEFI.
> 
> If I flashed only the Matisse UEFI board will not post, so there is something or a reference which relates to first half of UEFI, dunno. If I place back the first half of UEFI then board will post and album as linked is what I have.


Matisse has dependencies within 1000/2000 portion...kind of sloppy IMO I am just having to go over what I did yesterday and should not of tried to take a few short cuts.


----------



## gupsterg

tryout1 said:


> i have to admit @mtrai and @gupsterg did an more than outstanding job with their work i'm speechless, using the *C7H-0002+1.cap* unlocked options.cap it seems that it even fixed the issue with restarting i had with official 2703 (restarting shut my system down and started it up fresh, instead of yeah restarting), 3800/1900 IF works too, boost is pretty good if not amazing now but i hope we can finetune PBO etc more cause if i can somehow run 4325mhz at 1.325v instead of the 1.41-1.43v it puts in now but small steps for now. +rep from me for sure
> 
> I even made 2 screenshots while playing Control and i was amazed that it even measured 4475mhz on one core. Right now i'm using "default" PE with no undervolting just +150Mhz for AutoOC.
> With stock 2703 before, PE2 was like 4250mhz @ 1.4v and PE3 4300mhz at 1.41-1.47v (varied a lot)
> 
> I put both screens in the spoiler tag cause they are big and secondly the first pic could contain some CONTROL spoilers
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Nice :thumb: , glad it has worked well for you  .

The SMU mod TBH is 10min job once you know what to do, there is WMV in ZIP of this post so you can see what is done.

I will share a screen capture video of unlocking of options as well when share link to UEFI 0002+E that way people can see what is done.



mtrai said:


> Matisse has dependencies within 1000/2000 portion...kind of sloppy IMO I am just having to go over what I did yesterday and should not of tried to take a few short cuts.


I don't think it has dependencies. For example 1xxx/2xxx CPU microcode/SMU/PMU FW is in 1st UEFI, 3xxx is in 2nd.

When I compared some sections yesterday with say a 16MB UEFI which has Matisse support modules are same.

IMO it's maybe down to how having the 1001000h data for 1xxx/2xxx at front shunts some locations for 3xxx portion.


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> Nice :thumb: , glad it has worked well for you  .
> 
> The SMU mod TBH is 10min job once you know what to do, there is WMV in ZIP of this post so you can see what is done.
> 
> I will share a screen capture video of unlocking of options as well when share link to UEFI 0002+E that way people can see what is done.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think it has dependencies. For example 1xxx/2xxx CPU microcode/SMU/PMU FW is in 1st UEFI, 3xxx is in 2nd.
> 
> When I compared some sections yesterday with say a 16MB UEFI which has Matisse support modules are same.
> 
> IMO it's maybe down to how having the 1001000h data for 1xxx/2xxx at front shunts some locations for 3xxx portion.


I did not phase it correctly...but yeah it needs those module to load not exactly dependent but the bios looks for them when booting. I even tried replacing the matisse set up over the 1000/2000 it boots to windows fine but bios is just a black screen.


----------



## crakej

Reikoji said:


> I dont have APU frequency  I've applied settings on that screen and its never changed the frequency.


In the bios you need to set Ai Overclock Tuner (where you normally select DOCP/manual) and leave it on auto, then you'll be able to change it. You can do this even if you're manually setting ram speed/timings. This also makes your cpu clock run at x100.00 exactly instead of 99.8 or whatever it does...


----------



## thegr8anand

@mtrai great work!


is there a c7h non-wifi 2703+unlocked options? I just see 0002+2 in your link. What does +2 mean btw? Haven't been following the thread past 2 days.


----------



## mtrai

thegr8anand said:


> @mtrai great work!
> 
> 
> is there a c7h non-wifi 2703+unlocked options? I just see 0002+2 in your link. What does +2 mean btw? Haven't been following the thread past 2 days.


Internal for me but it means revision 2


----------



## crakej

mtrai said:


> I did not phase it correctly...but yeah it needs those module to load not exactly dependent but the bios looks for them when booting. I even tried replacing the matisse set up over the 1000/2000 it boots to windows fine but bios is just a black screen.


Keep forgetting - I searched for HPET and MSI but it didn't find anything. Also, On Matisse, we do see the AMD OC Menu with SoC Voltage and VDDG - just in case it saves you any time! Thanks so much for doing this - I know it's pain-staking, mind numbing stuff!


----------



## Synoxia

Now that 1002 and 2703 have been restored to proper boosting thanks to @mtrai and @gupsterg <3, which is better? Does 2703 have memory bandwith decrease?


----------



## AvengedRobix

@mtrai ... difference between 002+ and 2703?


----------



## crakej

Synoxia said:


> Now that 1002 and 2703 have been restored to proper boosting thanks to @mtrai <3, which is better? Does 2703 have memory bandwith decrease?


Not 100% sure, but I think performance was slightly less on 0002, +-30 CB15 points (multicore) for me in limited tests - which isn't a huge amount.


----------



## MrPhilo

I scored a G.Skill RGB 4266 for £120 on eBay! So far it's been great, a lot better than my 3600CL16 one.

I can get same timing with TRCRD at 16 now instead of 17 along with it being at 1.415v, I have not tried for CL14 as I haven't seen a massive benefit yet for it in terms of performance.

I've also flashed the modded bios 0002 and I can't find HPET either. Either way the FAN control already make it a great mod. Thanks mtrai and all the people who helped him test it 

EDIT: Do people have Spread Sprectrum enabled for Ryzen 3000? or disabled?


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> Keep forgetting - I searched for HPET and MSI but it didn't find anything. Also, On Matisse, we do see the AMD OC Menu with SoC Voltage and VDDG - just in case it saves you any time! Thanks so much for doing this - I know it's pain-staking, mind numbing stuff!


Yes it is. And quite daunting. It takes a lot of time for each bios.


----------



## Synoxia

mtrai said:


> Yes it is. And quite daunting. It takes a lot of time for each bios.


Hi mtrai, thank you for the bios mod. I can confirm HPET and Spread spectrum are nowhere to be found in the bios. (F9 Search)


----------



## gupsterg

MrPhilo said:


> EDIT: Do people have Spread Sprectrum enabled for Ryzen 3000? or disabled?


SB Clock Spread Spectrum on Extreme Tweaker in yet to be released UEFI 0002+E is working.

So I won't be exposing/making edits for the one seen in "Search".

Never before seen static BCLK in CPU-Z, ASUS gotta expose this like it is on X570.

Below screenie is not even with Ai Tuner: Manual and BLCK manually set to 100MHz, purely defaults with just SB Clock Spread Spectrum on Extreme Tweaker set to Disabled.









DirectKey seemed like a option a tinker would want, but sadly doesn't seem to work....


----------



## mtrai

Synoxia said:


> Hi mtrai, thank you for the bios mod. I can confirm HPET and Spread spectrum are nowhere to be found in the bios. (F9 Search)


Whiich one?


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> SB Clock Spread Spectrum on Extreme Tweaker in yet to be released UEFI 0002+E is working.
> 
> So I won't be exposing/making edits for the one seen in "Search".
> 
> Never before seen static BCLK in CPU-Z, ASUS gotta expose this like it is on X570.
> 
> Below screenie is not even with Ai Tuner: Manual and BLCK manually set to 100MHz, purely defaults with just SB Clock Spread Spectrum on Extreme Tweaker set to Disabled.
> 
> View attachment 292528
> 
> 
> DirectKey seemed like a option a tinker would want, but sadly doesn't seem to work....


Did you plug a button to the 2 reset pins?


----------



## Synoxia

mtrai said:


> Whiich one?


1002 CHWIFI bios. Also boost frequency behaviour seems the one of 1003ABB. I am seeing lower overall boosts with one core occasionally hitting 4.400 with Auto OC 200mhz enabled. on 1002 i was seeing all cores being able to hitt 4.425 sometimes.


----------



## gupsterg

gupsterg said:


> DirectKey seemed like a option a tinker would want, but sadly doesn't seem to work....
> 
> 
> 
> mtrai said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did you plug a button to the 2 reset pins?
Click to expand...

Yep.

Tried short/long press, disabled > save & exit > re-enabled > save & exit. Tried also mobo onboard reset button. No worky  ....

Fan stop also doesn't seem to work  ....


----------



## AvengedRobix

i've try to flash 0002+2 on 3900X by @mtrai but not any difference betwen 0002+... No spread spectrum and no hpet =(


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> Yep.
> 
> Tried short/long press, disabled > save & exit > re-enabled > save & exit. Tried also mobo onboard reset button. No worky  ....
> 
> Fan stop also doesn't seem to work  ....


Last time I actually used it was on a z170 board..never bothered with the x370 or x470


----------



## CCoR

AvengedRobix said:


> i've try to flash 0002+2 on 3900X by @mtrai but not any difference betwen 0002+... No spread spectrum and no hpet =(



Hmm i dont see 0002+2 file from link, i do see the 2703 +2 though. 
Gonna test this one out.
Edit: 2703 +2 still not showing hpet or other settings. In fact the few unlocked settings that I had b4 inside amd CBS are missing


----------



## Synoxia

mtrai said:


> Internal for me but it means revision 2


C7HWIFI 0002+ unlocked options doesn't show unlocked options for me and doesn't reach 4.425 like 2501 bios. 
3700X cpu here


----------



## mtrai

AvengedRobix said:


> i've try to flash 0002+2 on 3900X by @mtrai but not any difference betwen 0002+... No spread spectrum and no hpet =(


I am rechecking them all, seems I might of replaced some modules with unedited and some not. Was trying to rush it last night.


----------



## mtrai

It seems in my rush...to get a few extra out I replaced the unedited modules. Been going through them all day today.


----------



## Synoxia

Options are not shown in bios, plus boost beahviour 2501 vs 002 unlocked


----------



## mtrai

ASUS AMI bios modules for the C7H. Just finished cataloging them all today. Just an FYI for people that are doing things with bios. These are the GUID to quickly locate the. @gupsterg let me know if I missed any...though I think I got them all. 

The Reason I am posting this is 4 modules need hex editing for the 1000/2000 and also 4 modules need hex editing to fully unlock things. Plus each bios has to be ran through the latest version of AMIBCP and every option has to be changed to USER in 2 different places. I do it how I like my bios with all options available. Though I do leave the ones that I know not to work or actually dangerous to adjust. So for one bios it really is hundreds of edits in AMIBCP and Hex editor plus extracting and converting the modules.

For future reference for others basically a an FYI for anyone who want to bios mod, on these new combo bios it is actually 2 bios in one. One for the 1000/2000 and one for the 3000, so for sake of modding for capability you need to mod both modules. Further it is an actual requiement to hex edit the 3000 ones for the options to show. Most will show just using AMIBCP on the 1000/2000 modules, less needs to hex edited.

1000/2000

BBB77CB9-762D-436C-AC40-8EE4901C3446 PBS Menu 
07D279A1-34E4-4168-993B-178B3ACC68EF AMD Overclocking
3E7788CA-2BFC-4FCE-8122-5176CA492D9F CBS Setup
899407D7-99FE-43D8-9A21-79EC328CAC21 Form set up generally do not touch
A5E369C8-ABF9-4B43-B212-FF1BFD35666D AMD CBS
BBB77CB9-762D-436C-AC40-8EE4901C3446 AMD PBS
2CE5604F-A982-4D2E-8FD0-D1600C2E1515 PCI Subsystem Settings
7250FD57-BF4E-47B5-98A5-C7AE2D1B8F5C Intel PRO/1000 Network Connection
C74F06D2-ED92-489B-879C-C0E428A22167 RaidExpert Conguration Utility
ECEBCB00-D9C8-11E4-AF3D-8CDCD426C973 HTTP Boot Configuration
2CE5604F-A982-4D2E-8FD0-D1600C2E1515 PCI Subsystem Settings
7CA1024F-EB17-11E5-9DBA-28D2447C4829 File Explorer Tls Auth Configuration
70E1A818-0BE1-4449-BFD4-9EF68C7F02A8 Recovery

8F4B8F82-9B91-4028-86E6-F4DB7D4C1DFF Blank
B1DA0ADF-4F77-4070-A88E-BFFE1C60529A 


Matisse
BBB77CB9-762D-436C-AC40-8EE4901C3446 PBS Menu
A2702A3C-62FD-402D-B8C3-1D18F6C6FDE5 AMD Overclocking
8E38A88A-C267-4131-A8CD-C0BC80A24CB5 CBS Setup
C74F06D2-ED92-489B-879C-C0E428A22167 RaidExpert Conguration Utility
BB8C2CF3-A5E3-49EF-941B-4A01FAC6FD5F AMD PBS
899407D7-99FE-43D8-9A21-79EC328CAC21 Form set up generally do not touch
ECEBCB00-D9C8-11E4-AF3D-8CDCD426C973 HTTP Boot Configuration
7250FD57-BF4E-47B5-98A5-C7AE2D1B8F5C Intel PRO/1000 Network Connection
2CE5604F-A982-4D2E-8FD0-D1600C2E1515 PCI Subsystem Settings
7CA1024F-EB17-11E5-9DBA-28D2447C4829 File Explorer Tls Auth Configuration
70E1A818-0BE1-4449-BFD4-9EF68C7F02A8 Recovery

27F51949-1577-4CF6-B2E2-AE9392A4EBB7 Blank 
2F2295B6-1BB6-4CB7-BB9E-15C2C3424277 Blank
3ACEB0C0-3C72-11E4-9A56-74D435052646 Blank
D4A3C1FE-4518-42B6-9014-70AB3BD3A403 Blank
9FB1A1F3-3B71-4324-B39A-745CBB015FFF Blank
5BEDB5CC-D830-4EB2-8742-2D4CC9B54F2C Blank
3ACEB0C0-3C72-11E4-9A56-74D435052646 Blank
EE4E5898-3914-4259-9D6E-DC7BD79403CF Blank
0A845224-8675-4241-8AE9-4D94C93DEB90
A29A63E3-E4E7-495F-8A6A-07738300CBB3
D57C852E-809F-45CF-A377-D77BC0CB78EE
0718AD81-F26A-4850-A6EC-F268E309D707
8F4B8F82-9B91-4028-86E6-F4DB7D4C1DFF


----------



## mtrai

To everyone boost is not something I deal with. I only unlock the hidden options...and yes I made a few mistakes last night in my rush and excitement. Will have it corrected as fast as I can. I spent the day extracting every damn modules and cataloging them to make it easier for me and others...it will all be corrected. So please bare with me.


----------



## nick name

nick name said:


> Off-topic, but if you don't get the Humble Bundle newsletter then you can subscribe to it and get Dirt Rally for free.
> 
> https://www.humblebundle.com/store/..._dirtrally&hmb_medium=banner#checkout-section



Has everyone gotten their free copy of DiRT RALLY ?


----------



## Reikoji

nick name said:


> Has everyone gotten their free copy of DiRT RALLY ?


Yay, free benchmark material.


----------



## LePr3

mtrai said:


> Almost all hidden options are now exposed
> 
> C7H WIFI 0002+ previous SMU FW
> 
> C7H WIFI 2703+ Previous SMU FW
> 
> More are coming but got to take my dogs for walks.
> 
> I will update this post as I complete new mods.


 Is there another way to flash these aside from BIOS Flashback? I've been lurking the thread, and every modded BIOS I've tried to flash from either gupsterg or mtrai has hasn't worked for me - through flashback, in the BIOS, or afuefix64. I've been renaming them to C7HWIFI.CAP for BIOS Flashback, and it doesn't work; it doesn't even try. Doing the same procedure for a unmodded BIOS works, so I'm left confused.


Using Afuefix64 results in an error message saying size mismatch despite being the same size. I'm using an older version of afuefix, though so I'm not sure if that affects anything.
Any guidance would be appreciated.


----------



## neikosr0x

Reikoji said:


> Yay, free benchmark material.


Yea, Yesterday i was playing CONTROL... and the CPU was frequently boosting to 4.5 4.475 probably the 40% of my play time. the average was 4.375~


----------



## Reikoji

By power of manual-fiddling:

https://beta.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/3971

4.65ghz single core

4450/4450/4400/4400 for all-core.


----------



## crakej

LePr3 said:


> Is there another way to flash these aside from BIOS Flashback? I've been lurking the thread, and every modded BIOS I've tried to flash from either gupsterg or mtrai has hasn't worked for me - through flashback, in the BIOS, or afuefix64. I've been renaming them to C7HWIFI.CAP for BIOS Flashback, and it doesn't work; it doesn't even try. Doing the same procedure for a unmodded BIOS works, so I'm left confused.
> 
> 
> Using Afuefix64 results in an error message saying size mismatch despite being the same size. I'm using an older version of afuefix, though so I'm not sure if that affects anything.
> Any guidance would be appreciated.


I believe there is a newer version of afuefix64 available - not sure if it can use the new bigger bios files though. Did you try through EZFlash in the bios? Has worked for me before.


----------



## crakej

Reikoji said:


> By power of manual-fiddling:
> 
> https://beta.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/3971
> 
> 4.65ghz single core
> 
> 4450/4450/4400/4400 for all-core.


What settings did you use for boost?


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Has everyone gotten their free copy of DiRT RALLY ?


Yes - thanks for sharing! 

My results at 2046 x 1440:


----------



## Reikoji

crakej said:


> What settings did you use for boost?


Its manual with Ryzen master. PBO is too stupid to accomplish 4.65 :3


----------



## tryout1

so i tinkered around with the cpu today, a tiny bit. What i mean especially is that i set an offset undervolt of -0.75v and i'm surprised that i see with the modded bios only a drop of 25mhz allcore singlecore on the other hand didn't boost to 4450-4475mhz anymore but i saw max 4400mhz which suffices imho. Did a cinebench r20 run with the UV settings and i saw 5k points with mostly about 4175mhz which i even had before with no UV applied but temps dropped down from about 70°C to 63 °C. So basically i leave that as it is atm and start tinkering with PE3. CONTROL used about 4300-4325mhz instead of the 4350mhz which i posted yesterday and voltage were mostly at about 1.331-1.36v i think that's a very good tradeoff.



Spoiler


----------



## Synoxia

tryout1 said:


> so i tinkered around with the cpu today, a tiny bit. What i mean especially is that i set an offset undervolt of -0.75v and i'm surprised that i see with the modded bios only a drop of 25mhz allcore singlecore on the other hand didn't boost to 4450-4475mhz anymore but i saw max 4400mhz which suffices imho. Did a cinebench r20 run with the UV settings and i saw 5k points with mostly about 4175mhz which i even had before with no UV applied but temps dropped down from about 70°C to 63 °C. So basically i leave that as it is atm and start tinkering with PE3. CONTROL used about 4300-4325mhz instead of the 4350mhz which i posted yesterday and voltage were mostly at about 1.331-1.36v i think that's a very good tradeoff.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Which cooler is reaching this? My 3700x never seen above 4.425...


----------



## crakej

Reikoji said:


> Its manual with Ryzen master. PBO is too stupid to accomplish 4.65 :3


But what settings did you use to get your high boost? May we see please?


----------



## tryout1

Synoxia said:


> Which cooler is reaching this? My 3700x never seen above 4.425...


system is watercooled with 2x 360 radiators (CPU+GPU), cpu heatsink is *EK Supremacy EVO* tho


----------



## gupsterg

UEFI 0002+E tested so far:-

SB Clock Spread Spectrum on Extreme Tweaker works.
TDP Configuration on Extreme Tweaker is useless as doesn't allow you to exceed fused cTDP, only = or < fused cTDP.
Allow Fan Stop in Q-Fan does not work.
DirectKey option on Boot menu does not work.



Spoiler


----------



## Synoxia

gupsterg said:


> UEFI 0002+E tested so far:-
> 
> SB Clock Spread Spectrum on Extreme Tweaker works.
> TDP Configuration on Extreme Tweaker is useless as doesn't allow you to exceed fused cTDP, only = or < fused cTDP.
> Allow Fan Stop in Q-Fan does not work.
> DirectKey option on Boot menu does not work.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 292620


I can't see sb spread spectrum and hpet on that bios. Also i have 1003abb boost behaviour instead of 1002. XD something went wrong


----------



## Reikoji

crakej said:


> But what settings did you use to get your high boost? May we see please?


Scarry ones.


----------



## smokin_mitch

I've got a beast of a 3800x OC to 4.5ghz and 3800mhz ram using the ryzen dram calculators 3800 fast preset


----------



## gupsterg

gupsterg said:


> UEFI 0002+E tested so far:-
> 
> SB Clock Spread Spectrum on Extreme Tweaker works.
> TDP Configuration on Extreme Tweaker is useless as doesn't allow you to exceed fused cTDP, only = or < fused cTDP.
> Allow Fan Stop in Q-Fan does not work.
> DirectKey option on Boot menu does not work.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 292620
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Synoxia said:
> 
> 
> 
> I can't see sb spread spectrum and hpet on that bios. Also i have 1003abb boost behaviour instead of 1002. XD something went wrong
Click to expand...

The UEFI is not yet linked, you have used mtrai's version. As he has no 3xxx CPU, he couldn't test and may have missed setting some options. I don't know can only assume as not used or viewed his UEFI in AMIBCP/HxD.

Seems to me unhiding Memory Presets is pointless as well. Some of the settings like ProcODT change from [Auto] to a manual "auto rule" value, which did not occur on 1xxx/2xxx CPU. Likely to cause confusion/issues IMO.



Spoiler


----------



## Synoxia

So what i have to use?


----------



## crakej

Thanks for sharing the settings!


----------



## gupsterg

Synoxia said:


> So what i have to use?


If mtrai version is not showing you settings then use what you would like to.

If you are waiting for link of UEFI 0002+E, you need to wait, as I need to check what does work and what doesn't, sorry. 



crakej said:


> Thanks for sharing the settings!


NP.

Played with NB Frequency on Extreme Tweaker, another non functioning option. Input value range seem like MHz, allows [Auto/400-6300 range]. No program shows a behaviour change, correlation to the fact changing value had an effect. Tried default UEFI settings with it changed and OC profile.



Spoiler


----------



## Synoxia

gupsterg said:


> If mtrai version is not showing you settings then use what you would like to.
> 
> If you are waiting for link of UEFI 0002+E, you need to wait, as I need to check what does work and what doesn't, sorry.
> 
> 
> 
> NP.
> 
> Played with NB Frequency on Extreme Tweaker, another non functioning option. Input value range seem like MHz, allows [Auto/400-6300 range]. No program shows a behaviour change, correlation to the fact changing value had an effect. Tried default UEFI settings with it changed and OC profile.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 292634


Thank you for your work, i will wait for this ver.


----------



## gupsterg

Question for those that have used modded UEFI with HPET exposed in search, how have you determined it functions?

My W10P x64 install by default did not have useplatformclock true in bcd. So I set it as true, then I ran timer test with HPET [Auto] and then disabled, result is same, see WMVs in this ZIP.

For me way to have 10mhz timer was to use bcdedit /set useplatformclock false to disable HPET.



Synoxia said:


> Thank you for your work, i will wait for this ver.


NP, trying to finish testing ASAP.


----------



## oreonutz

Hey guys, sorry I have been absent the past day. Work got crazy for me, so I haven't had as much time to play as I normally do. Will be gone for most the day today to most likely. Just got Mtrai's Version 2, about to flash and then see what the differences are.

I haven't had time to see what most of the exposed settings do, but I am currently enjoying the fan settings which are AMAZING! And I am not even sure what spread spectrum does, but I have it disabled, and my PC has still be stable, so thats awesome. Appreciate your more in depth investigation @gupsterg. @mtrai, amazing work! Will Flash your second version and try to give you a good analysis before I leave for the day.


----------



## nick name

tryout1 said:


> system is watercooled with 2x 360 radiators (CPU+GPU), cpu heatsink is *EK Supremacy EVO* tho


So very minimal then.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> Question for those that have used modded UEFI with HPET exposed in search, how have you determined it functions?
> 
> My W10P x64 install by default did not have useplatformclock true in bcd. So I set it as true, then I ran timer test with HPET [Auto] and then disabled, result is same, see WMVs in this ZIP.
> 
> For me way to have 10mhz timer was to use bcdedit /set useplatformclock false to disable HPET.
> 
> 
> 
> NP, trying to finish testing ASAP.


Surely if it's disabled in the bios then it's easy to check the device manager to see if the device is present?


----------



## crakej

Is there a 2703+E Ver 2 in the work @mtrai ?

I think it performs a little better for me. I'm in NO rush - i'm running pretty stable lol!


----------



## gupsterg

gupsterg said:


> Question for those that have used modded UEFI with HPET exposed in search, how have you determined it functions?
> 
> My W10P x64 install by default did not have useplatformclock true in bcd. So I set it as true, then I ran timer test with HPET [Auto] and then disabled, result is same, see WMVs in this ZIP.
> 
> For me way to have 10mhz timer was to use bcdedit /set useplatformclock false to disable HPET.
> 
> 
> 
> crakej said:
> 
> 
> 
> Surely if it's disabled in the bios then it's easy to check the device manager to see if the device is present?
Click to expand...

Will still be there.

I disabled :-

HPET in SB
MsiDis in HPET

*** edit ***

UEFI 0002+E tested so far:-

SB Clock Spread Spectrum on Extreme Tweaker works.
TDP Configuration on Extreme Tweaker is useless as doesn't allow you to exceed fused cTDP, only = or < fused cTDP.
NB Frequency on Extreme Tweaker has no functionality.
Allow Fan Stop in Q-Fan has no functionality.
DirectKey option on Boot menu has no functionality..
HPET in SB & MsiDis in HPET in "Search" has no functionality.


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> Is there a 2703+E Ver 2 in the work @mtrai ?
> 
> I think it performs a little better for me. I'm in NO rush - i'm running pretty stable lol!


it is now up for that bios version, working 002+ corrected some of my oversights and added some more fan control.

New version of 2703+ just uploaded. Direct link https://drive.google.com/file/d/1jOTHXSUiqpjRZWQ1LvkQuMLh3Yxokgc-/view?usp=sharing

Can you check to make sure HPET is searchable and Spread Spectrum is now showing in the menu?


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> Will still be there.
> 
> I disabled :-
> 
> HPET in SB
> MsiDis in HPET
> 
> *** edit ***
> 
> UEFI 0002+E tested so far:-
> 
> SB Clock Spread Spectrum on Extreme Tweaker works.
> TDP Configuration on Extreme Tweaker is useless as doesn't allow you to exceed fused cTDP, only = or < fused cTDP.
> NB Frequency on Extreme Tweaker has no functionality.
> Allow Fan Stop in Q-Fan has no functionality.
> DirectKey option on Boot menu has no functionality..
> HPET in SB & MsiDis in HPET in "Search" has no functionality.


HPET in SB works for me in search...I have tested it on my system previously.
Yeah the TDP is pretty useless
I really do not use the fan control so I do not know what really works there.

Personally when you dig deep in the bios you find tons of zombie options.


----------



## gupsterg

mtrai said:


> HPET in SB works for me in search...I have tested it on my system previously.


When you tested it, what was the test? cheers  .

Device manager never loses it, timer programs react as shown...


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> When you tested it, what was the test? cheers  .
> 
> Device manager never loses it, timer programs react as shown...


WinTimer Tester 1.1 This is with it off in the bios.

Retest after this command bcdedit /deletevalue useplatformclock

It still detects HPET which I always thought was odd. So maybe it really does not work in the bios. If that is the case then it needs to be disabled as well in bcdedit as that can cause timer conflict issues.


----------



## crakej

mtrai said:


> it is now up for that bios version, working 002+ corrected some of my oversights and added some more fan control.
> 
> New version of 2703+ just uploaded. Direct link https://drive.google.com/file/d/1jOTHXSUiqpjRZWQ1LvkQuMLh3Yxokgc-/view?usp=sharing
> 
> Can you check to make sure HPET is searchable and Spread Spectrum is now showing in the menu?


Sadly can't flash the WiFi version on non-WiWi


----------



## gupsterg

mtrai said:


> WinTimer Tester 1.1 This is with it off in the bios.
> 
> Retest after this command bcdedit /deletevalue useplatformclock
> 
> It still detects HPET which I always thought was odd. So maybe it really does not work in the bios. If that is the case then it needs to be disabled as well in bcdedit as that can cause timer conflict issues.


+rep for experience share  .

Your data is as mine  .

ie if HPET is set to disabled in UEFI, we still have HPET in device manager, we still have to edit bcd to disable HPET.

What this means is the UEFI option is not working.



> - HPET disabled in BIOS: OS/software can't access HPET and has to fall back to the TSC-based timer
> - HPET enabled in BIOS, but disabled by OS (useplatformclock false): OS will use TSC-based timer, but any software can still access HPET
> - HPET enabled in BIOS, and enabled by OS (useplatformclock true): OS and all software will use HPET as primary timer


Source/quote link.

If I use the timer_test_x64, I will always have HPET timer available, if it was disabled it would not show.

View attachment timer_test_x64.zip


----------



## crakej

Disabling in Device manager? Is that the same as useplatformlock false?


----------



## crakej

Going to see if latest Afuefix64 can handle bigger bios file - will enable me to flash WiFi bios hopefully.


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> Going to see if latest Afuefix64 can handle bigger bios file - will enable me to flash WiFi bios hopefully.


I am working on the non wifi as fast as I can but without making mistakes


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> Sadly can't flash the WiFi version on non-WiWi


Well Rejoice new version of the 002+ C7H NON WIFI uploaded with even more fan controls. Jeese spent all that time on it and realize all the hex editing on this was correct as it was the first one I did so I did not try to take any shortcuts...but many more fan options. Can you check that HPET is searchable and Spread Spectrum and the now non hidden fan controls show?

Direct link: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1HEaMRlEj9mhhr0BMjBDECkZtc8SVy0E9


----------



## mtrai

LePr3 said:


> Is there another way to flash these aside from BIOS Flashback? I've been lurking the thread, and every modded BIOS I've tried to flash from either gupsterg or mtrai has hasn't worked for me - through flashback, in the BIOS, or afuefix64. I've been renaming them to C7HWIFI.CAP for BIOS Flashback, and it doesn't work; it doesn't even try. Doing the same procedure for a unmodded BIOS works, so I'm left confused.
> 
> 
> Using Afuefix64 results in an error message saying size mismatch despite being the same size. I'm using an older version of afuefix, though so I'm not sure if that affects anything.
> Any guidance would be appreciated.


Flashback is finicky on what USB sticks will work...out of all my USB sticks only one will actually work with flashback on my C7HWIFI, the funny thing is it will not work for flashback on C6H WIFI but another stick and only that stick will work with that board. So try different USB sticks...also have found the smaller size the better USB stick for flashback.


----------



## crakej

mtrai said:


> Well Rejoice new version of the 002+ C7H NON WIFI uploaded with even more fan controls. Jeese spent all that time on it and realize all the hex editing on this was correct as it was the first one I did so I did not try to take any shortcuts...but many more fan options. Can you check that HPET is searchable and Spread Spectrum and the now non hidden fan controls show?
> 
> Direct link: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1HEaMRlEj9mhhr0BMjBDECkZtc8SVy0E9


Thanks @mtrai! I'll give it a go.

The new Afuefix64 doesn't like the new rom format, but it does look like there might be some switches to do it if you know what you're doing. This was the output I got trying the new /ATR:U and D switches. Anyone able to shed any light?

Edit: second thought, will try it out tomorrow - someone I know passed away today and I'm just not focused.


----------



## AvengedRobix

mmmm 2501 is with agesa 1.0.0.2? i've noted in far cry 5 i drop 10 fps with agesa 1.0.0.3 =(


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> Thanks @mtrai! I'll give it a go.
> 
> The new Afuefix64 doesn't like the new rom format, but it does look like there might be some switches to do it if you know what you're doing. This was the output I got trying the new /ATR:U and D switches. Anyone able to shed any light?
> 
> Edit: second thought, will try it out tomorrow - someone I know passed away today and I'm just not focused.


Sorry to hear that.

Also these are the latest switches for AFUWIN64 there are a few more I think.


- AFUWINx64 5.12.00.1904
- AFUWINGUIx64 5.12.00.1904

Commands
The mandatory field is used to select an operation mode.
- /FV Copy Secure FV to EFI.
- /O Save current ROM image to file 
- /U Display ROM File's ROMID 
- /S Refer to Options: /S 
- /D Verification test of given ROM File without flashing BIOS.
- /A: Refer to Options: /A:
- /OAD Refer to Options: /OAD
- /CLNEVNLOG Clear Event Log.
Options
The optional field used to supply more information for flashing BIOS ROM. Following lists the supported optional parameters and format:
- /CMD: Send special command to BIOS. /CMD:{xxx, xxx, xxx}
- /OEMCMD: Send special value to BIOS. /OEMCMD:xxx
- /DPC Don't Check Aptio 4 and Aptio 5 platform.
- /PW: Input password for file.
- /MEUL: Program ME Entire Firmware Block, which supports
Production.BIN and PreProduction.BIN files.
- /Q Silent execution 
- /X Don't Check ROM ID 
- /S Display current system's ROMID 
- /JBC Don't Check AC adapter and battery 
- /CLRCFG Program without preserving setup configuration
- /BCPALL Save all question values before flash
- /HOLEOUT: Save specific ROM Hole according to RomHole GUID. 
NewRomHole1.BIN /HOLEOUT:GUID 
- /SP Preserve Setup setting. 
- /Rn Preserve SMBIOS type N during programming(n=0-255) 
- /R Preserve ALL SMBIOS structure during programming 
- /B Program Boot Block 
- /P Program Main BIOS 
- /K Program all non-critical blocks.
- /N Program NVRAM 
- /Kn Program n'th non-critical block(n=0-15). 
- /RLC: To set default option for Rom layout change.(E:Entire ROM, A:
Abort, F:Force)
- /HOLE: Update specific ROM Hole according to RomHole GUID. 
NewRomHole1.BIN /HOLE:GUID 
- /L Program all ROM Holes. 
- /Ln Program n'th ROM Hole only(n=0-15). 
- /ECUF Update EC BIOS when newer version is detected. 
- /E Program Embedded Controller Block.
- /ME Program ME Entire Firmware Block. 
- /MEUF  Program ME Ignition Firmware Block. 
- /A: Oem Activation file 
- /OAD Delete Oem Activation key 
- /CLNEVNLOG Clear Event Log.
- /CAPSULE Override Secure Flash policy to Capsule 
- /RECOVERY Override Secure Flash policy to Recovery 
- /EC Program Embedded Controller Block. (Flash Type) 
- /REBOOT Reboot after programming. 
- /SHUTDOWN Shutdown after programming. 
- /FDR Flash Flash-Descriptor Region.(*1)
- /GBER Flash GBE Region.(*1)
- /MER Flash Entire ME Region.(*1)
- /OPR Flash Operation Region of SPS.(*1)
- /PDR Flash PDR Region.(*1)


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> Sorry to hear that.
> 
> Also these are the latest switches for AFUWIN64 there are a few more I think.
> 
> 
> - AFUWINx64 5.12.00.1904
> - AFUWINGUIx64 5.12.00.1904
> 
> Commands
> The mandatory field is used to select an operation mode.
> - /FV Copy Secure FV to EFI.
> - /O Save current ROM image to file
> - /U Display ROM File's ROMID
> - /S Refer to Options: /S
> - /D Verification test of given ROM File without flashing BIOS.
> - /A: Refer to Options: /A:
> - /OAD Refer to Options: /OAD
> - /CLNEVNLOG Clear Event Log.
> Options
> The optional field used to supply more information for flashing BIOS ROM. Following lists the supported optional parameters and format:
> - /CMD: Send special command to BIOS. /CMD:{xxx, xxx, xxx}
> - /OEMCMD: Send special value to BIOS. /OEMCMD:xxx
> - /DPC Don't Check Aptio 4 and Aptio 5 platform.
> - /PW: Input password for file.
> - /MEUL: Program ME Entire Firmware Block, which supports
> Production.BIN and PreProduction.BIN files.
> - /Q Silent execution
> - /X Don't Check ROM ID
> - /S Display current system's ROMID
> - /JBC Don't Check AC adapter and battery
> - /CLRCFG Program without preserving setup configuration
> - /BCPALL Save all question values before flash
> - /HOLEOUT: Save specific ROM Hole according to RomHole GUID.
> NewRomHole1.BIN /HOLEOUT:GUID
> - /SP Preserve Setup setting.
> - /Rn Preserve SMBIOS type N during programming(n=0-255)
> - /R Preserve ALL SMBIOS structure during programming
> - /B Program Boot Block
> - /P Program Main BIOS
> - /K Program all non-critical blocks.
> - /N Program NVRAM
> - /Kn Program n'th non-critical block(n=0-15).
> - /RLC: To set default option for Rom layout change.(E:Entire ROM, A:
> Abort, F:Force)
> - /HOLE: Update specific ROM Hole according to RomHole GUID.
> NewRomHole1.BIN /HOLE:GUID
> - /L Program all ROM Holes.
> - /Ln Program n'th ROM Hole only(n=0-15).
> - /ECUF Update EC BIOS when newer version is detected.
> - /E Program Embedded Controller Block.
> - /ME Program ME Entire Firmware Block.
> - /MEUF Program ME Ignition Firmware Block.
> - /A: Oem Activation file
> - /OAD Delete Oem Activation key
> - /CLNEVNLOG Clear Event Log.
> - /CAPSULE Override Secure Flash policy to Capsule
> - /RECOVERY Override Secure Flash policy to Recovery
> - /EC Program Embedded Controller Block. (Flash Type)
> - /REBOOT Reboot after programming.
> - /SHUTDOWN Shutdown after programming.
> - /FDR Flash Flash-Descriptor Region.(*1)
> - /GBER Flash GBE Region.(*1)
> - /MER Flash Entire ME Region.(*1)
> - /OPR Flash Operation Region of SPS.(*1)
> - /PDR Flash PDR Region.(*1)


I unfortunately didn't have time to test before I left. I am at work already. Just wanted to let you know I appreciate you, and as soon as I get home late tonight I will get back to testing!
@crakej, so sorry to hear about someone you know passing. Much Love brother! Let us know if you need anything!


----------



## Delta9k

*Am I punking out?*

I've been sitting on a 3900X for a while (haven't even broken the seal on the box) with the intention of updating my C7H/2700X (system details in sig) with just a CPU swap. I haven't pulled the trigger on the swap due to the bios/related issues etc., plus the system runs/performs like a top, and has since build-out at zen+ launch time (ain't broke don't fix it). I have a 3800X/x570 board combo on my test bench setup and it's a beast. I am not supporting/or bashing vendors, just noting that I have zen2/x570 experience and that it has been good. I am now leaning towards just leaving the C7H/2700X as is and just building out a new box around the 3900X on a x570 board (TBD). I mean it would be righteous to run zen2 on my x470 C7H -But perhaps the C7H is best suited for zen+, where it definitively is the best board for that gen and kills it.

Don't hate on me - I love my C7H so much so that I can't bear the thought of ruining our relationship.


----------



## xeizo

Delta9k said:


> I've been sitting on a 3900X for a while (haven't even broken the seal on the box) with the intention of updating my C7H/2700X (system details in sig) with just a CPU swap. I haven't pulled the trigger on the swap due to the bios/related issues etc., plus the system runs/performs like a top, and has since build-out at zen+ launch time (ain't broke don't fix it). I have a 3800X/x570 board combo on my test bench setup and it's a beast. I am not supporting/or bashing vendors, just noting that I have zen2/x570 experience and that it has been good. I am now leaning towards just leaving the C7H/2700X as is and just building out a new box around the 3900X on a x570 board (TBD). I mean it would be righteous to run zen2 on my x470 C7H -But perhaps the C7H is best suited for zen+, where it definitively is the best board for that gen and kills it.
> 
> Don't hate on me - I love my C7H so much so that I can't bear the thought of ruining our relationship.


We all have our reasons, 3900X runs great on the C7H though. Particularly using the 0002+ bios by gupsterg.

I went the other way, I will build a ultra cheap Linux-box around my beloved 2700X, trying to be as cheap as I can using leftovers etc and mod VRM cooling on that ultra cheap mobo I will use. Ryzen is a SOC so performance will be the same as a high end mobo, the challenge is to render it reliable on 4+3 phases in a way more fun than using high end parts 

I also have a 3700X which runs more than excellent on the Prime Pro.


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> Disabling in Device manager? Is that the same as useplatformlock false?


Seems disabling device does nothing.




Spoiler






















So to me seems as if there is no point in exposing HPET option in UEFI, it does nothing also. Only thing we are able to do is change what is primary timer using BCDEDIT.



> - HPET disabled in BIOS: OS/software can't access HPET and has to fall back to the TSC-based timer
> - HPET enabled in BIOS, but disabled by OS (useplatformclock false): OS will use TSC-based timer, but any software can still access HPET
> - HPET enabled in BIOS, and enabled by OS (useplatformclock true): OS and all software will use HPET as primary timer





crakej said:


> Edit: second thought, will try it out tomorrow - someone I know passed away today and I'm just not focused.


Sorry to read this, sad part of circle of life....


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> Seems disabling device does nothing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 292820
> 
> 
> View attachment 292824
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So to me seems as if there is no point in exposing HPET option in UEFI, it does nothing also. Only thing we are able to do is change what is primary timer using BCDEDIT.


TBH I never really bothered to check this setting since I am running with the 10 mhz clock. Thanks for being thorough. Gonna remove from my already released bios today. I have already removed a few other options. I knew there were zombie options that I had exposed but it really did not affect me and mostly it was only me using my modded bios.


----------



## gupsterg

Memory Frequency [Auto] changing to [Undefined] when "we" mod I have fixed in UEFI 0002+E.

I have also fixed help string for VDDSOC Switching frequency, min/max matches what is settable. The settable values of 400-600kHz are "true", while back when I was discussing 1000kHz mod with Elmor he verified with oscilloscope the UEFI setting was correct but help string wrong.

Q-Fan page also going Undefined for Chassis/Ext fans I also fixed string.

I am also modding to allow 85C temperature input on max temperature for a fan header.

Also modding to see min % for a header can be say 0% and perhaps will then Allow Fan Stop option to work.

"Zombie" settings I'm gonna aim to keep out of UEFI 0002+E.


----------



## xeizo

gupsterg said:


> Memory Frequency [Auto] changing to [Undefined] when "we" mod I have fixed in UEFI 0002+E.
> 
> I have also fixed help string for VDDSOC Switching frequency, min/max matches what is settable. The settable values of 400-600kHz are "true", while back when I was discussing 1000kHz mod with Elmor he verified with oscilloscope the UEFI setting was correct but help string wrong.
> 
> Q-Fan page also going Undefined for Chassis/Ext fans I also fixed string.
> 
> I am also modding to allow 85C temperature input on max temperature for a fan header.
> 
> Also modding to see min % for a header can be say 0% and perhaps will then Allow Fan Stop option to work.
> 
> "Zombie" settings I'm gonna aim to keep out of UEFI 0002+E.


Yes, if you manage to hide all Zombie options it would be really awesome!


----------



## gupsterg

xeizo said:


> Yes, if you manage to hide all Zombie options it would be really awesome!


The string issue for Memory Frequency [Auto], menu option Chassis / Ext. fan only occurs when we mod UEFI for exposing options. As the SMU FW mod did not have anything to do with UEFI options we did not see that occur.

The module which will be edited to say set customisation, can be reinserted into another UEFI that has same options, so won't need to do all the settings again as far as I can tell.

Minimum duty cycle for fan as 0% is working when mode is Auto/DC, but not PWM. I believe when set mode is set to [Auto], if a fan is PWM, then that mode is active, so perhaps not a biggie. I am gonna have one more crack at it to see what happens or just leave it as is.

Fan stop works if fan mode is [Auto/DC] not when [PWM], again my belief is when [Auto] is used and a fan is PWM, then that mode is active, so perhaps not a biggie. AFAIK there is nothing I maybe able to do there.

To wet your appetite here is preliminary screenies, fan stop profile test WMV (see Chassis 1 sensor in HWINFO far left), ZIP link.

Prospective change log of UEFI 0002+E



Spoiler



Exposed:-

Extreme Tweaker has SB Clock Spread Sprectrum setting.
CPU Configuration page has NX Mode & C6 Mode setting. 
Onboard Devices Configuration has Super I/O Clock Skew setting.

Allow Fan Stop on Fan headers CHA1-3, HAMP, EXT 1-4.

Other edits:-

Memory Frequency [Auto] became [Undefined], so string resolved.

VDDSOC Switching Frequency control help string min/max kHz corrected from 300/500kHz to 400/600kHz.

Chassis Fan(s) Configuration & Ext. Fan(s) Configuration became [Undefined], so string resolved.

Fan header Upper Temperature allows 85C input
Fan header min. Duty Cycle (%) allows 0% input

ASUS Grid Install Service defaults to [Disabled]


----------



## crakej

So I read the docs that come with the new afuefix64.efi which seems to provide a way to flash both parts of the bios, known as p and [D]own.

It seems to be disabled in the bios! When you give the command /CMD:{TOP16M} you get the error saying the bios does not support OEMCMD function.

The other command that looked promising was the new /ATR:U or (D) but it complains that the rom IDs can't be the same on AMD Twin Roms.

I tried all the command variations I could think of - it really does seem these commands are NOT supported at the bios level - which is why we can't just use EZFlash in the bios. Again AMD are hindering us, trying to block us from making our machines work better! It's a bit like the mobile phone dev community which irons out errors and makes roms more up to date, and much quicker than manufacturers can - even though they try their best to tie everyone's hands!


----------



## crakej

IBT AVX still won't run for me..... why not I wonder?


----------



## GlitchSpider

Hello guys.

Best BIOS of the CH7 for a 2600X? 

Enviado desde mi SM-G970F mediante Tapatalk


----------



## nick name

GlitchSpider said:


> Hello guys.
> 
> Best BIOS of the CH7 for a 2600X?
> 
> Enviado desde mi SM-G970F mediante Tapatalk


I would recommend 2501 or 2606. However, if you use anything in the AMD CBS menus then 2501. Other than that they seem to be the same for Ryzen 2000 CPUs. And better than BIOS versions prior to the Combo Pi AGESA versions.


----------



## CCoR

gupsterg said:


> The string issue for Memory Frequency [Auto], menu option Chassis / Ext. fan only occurs when we mod UEFI for exposing options. As the SMU FW mod did not have anything to do with UEFI options we did not see that occur.
> 
> The module which will be edited to say set customisation, can be reinserted into another UEFI that has same options, so won't need to do all the settings again as far as I can tell.
> 
> Minimum duty cycle for fan as 0% is working when mode is Auto/DC, but not PWM. I believe when set mode is set to [Auto], if a fan is PWM, then that mode is active, so perhaps not a biggie. I am gonna have one more crack at it to see what happens or just leave it as is.
> 
> Fan stop works if fan mode is [Auto/DC] not when [PWM], again my belief is when [Auto] is used and a fan is PWM, then that mode is active, so perhaps not a biggie. AFAIK there is nothing I maybe able to do there.
> 
> To wet your appetite here is preliminary screenies, fan stop profile test WMV (see Chassis 1 sensor in HWINFO far left), ZIP link.
> 
> Prospective change log of UEFI 0002+E
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Exposed:-
> 
> Extreme Tweaker has SB Clock Spread Sprectrum setting.
> CPU Configuration page has NX Mode & C6 Mode setting.
> Onboard Devices Configuration has Super I/O Clock Skew setting.
> 
> Allow Fan Stop on Fan headers CHA1-3, HAMP, EXT 1-4.
> 
> Other edits:-
> 
> Memory Frequency [Auto] became [Undefined], so string resolved.
> 
> VDDSOC Switching Frequency control help string min/max kHz corrected from 300/500kHz to 400/600kHz.
> 
> Chassis Fan(s) Configuration & Ext. Fan(s) Configuration became [Undefined], so string resolved.
> 
> Fan header Upper Temperature allows 85C input
> Fan header min. Duty Cycle (%) allows 0% input
> 
> ASUS Grid Install Service defaults to [Disabled]


Eta?? Want to use my pc one last time b4 this hurricane hits us lol


----------



## GlitchSpider

*GlitchSpider*



nick name said:


> I would recommend 2501 or 2606. However, if you use anything in the AMD CBS menus then 2501. Other than that they seem to be the same for Ryzen 2000 CPUs. And better than BIOS versions prior to the Combo Pi AGESA versions.


I don't know if they solved it but one month ago the postcode was in 8, even all the setup at stock clocks in all situations. 

Now, I have BIOS 1103. Works great, but I have AGESA 1.0.0.6. 

Thanks.


----------



## nick name

GlitchSpider said:


> I don't know if they solved it but one month ago the postcode was in 8, even all the setup at stock clocks in all situations.
> 
> Now, I have BIOS 1103. Works great, but I have AGESA 1.0.0.6.
> 
> Thanks.


That post code for me is when my system reboots due to insufficient power (VCORE). So at stock that doesn't bode well. The biggest benefit I saw from the new BIOS versions with the new Combo Pi AGESA versions is the ability to run a greater negative VCORE offset, though it doesn't sound like that works for you. At stock. Which is very weird. And unfortunate.


----------



## oreonutz

Hey @mtrai and @gupsterg I am BACK! I had a HELLISH Job this weekend. Had to wire an entire Mansion for one of my rich clients, was supposed to have my team with me, but every single one of those bastards called in on me. So I had to wire up this entire new mansion myself with both Coax and Cat6, then get the Network, Phones, Camera's, and TV's Working along with the Server to control Camera's and Network. It was a LOT to do without help. Sorry it took the entire weekend with me mostly off line.

Just read through the forum. Anything you guys want me to test? Is there a new 0002+E I should test? I finally did some tests on the original for the Added Fan Control, and I don't get it. I thought that all those added values would over ride the Manual CPU Controls, but it seems to use a mix of the 2, and while my critical Temp does kick in later than 75, I set it at 92, and it still seems to kick in around 81c, so not sure whats happening there. But eager to test the newest version of 0002+E Available. I have a pretty relaxing work week this week, almost every single job is from home, so I should be on pretty much non stop.
@crakej, hope you are all good man. Hopes and Prayers for your friend.


----------



## vasyltheonly

Anyone know what the temperature is when the motherboard would auto shut off? While gaming in BFV my PC keeps shutting down due to CPU temperature, even though it's less then 75°C. This is on the mod 002 bios.


----------



## oreonutz

vasyltheonly said:


> Anyone know what the temperature is when the motherboard would auto shut off? While gaming in BFV my PC keeps shutting down due to CPU temperature, even though it's less then 75°C. This is on the mod 002 bios.


When In Manual OC Mode (So a Manual VCore being set in UEFI) then the Board Automatically shuts down once the TCTL Temp Hits 115c. As soon as that temperature is exceeded, the chip shuts down to protect itself, and actually it Thermal Reboots, at least for me.

I am pretty sure when not in Manual OC Mode, the same will happen, but I believe the Processor Throttles HARD once you hit 95c in Auto Mode to avoid you from reaching 115c. In OC Mode, the CPU will NOT Throttle AT ALL, and will keep the same Core Overclock if Stable up until the PC Thermal Reboots.


----------



## vasyltheonly

oreonutz said:


> When In Manual OC Mode (So a Manual VCore being set in UEFI) then the Board Automatically shuts down once the TCTL Temp Hits 115c. As soon as that temperature is exceeded, the chip shuts down to protect itself, and actually it Thermal Reboots, at least for me.
> 
> I am pretty sure when not in Manual OC Mode, the same will happen, but I believe the Processor Throttles HARD once you hit 95c in Auto Mode to avoid you from reaching 115c. In OC Mode, the CPU will NOT Throttle AT ALL, and will keep the same Core Overclock if Stable up until the PC Thermal Reboots.


See that's what I thought. Coming from intel I thought it would be at least over 100C. I turned on logging in HWINFO and the highest recorded temperature before the shutdown was 71.1C TCTL. So either A it's treating my all core OC as an over temperature crash, or B something else entirely is happening and there's a settings that is setting a temperate of 72ish as the max temp.


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> IBT AVX still won't run for me..... why not I wonder?



I think its the Code used to execute the AVX Workload that doesn't work properly on Ryzen.

You can however use Y Cruncher to do the same thing, I have setup a profile that works amazing well for stress testing, and I actually love it because it tells you which thread it fails on, if it fails. It Numbers the Threads 0 thru 23, so that takes a bit of getting used to, as 0 & 1 is Core 0, 2 & 3 is Core 1, and So On. So when CCX OCing, it took me a bit to get used to knowing that when Core 10 Failed, I actually needed to lower the Clock on CCX 1, not CCX 3 like I thought I was supposed to at first. I ended up lowering CCX 3 all the way to 3600Mhz and was still failing on that core, and I was like "What the Hell, it can't do AVX Workloads at it fricking BASE CLOCK!!!!" LOL! Then I realized my mistake, and was quickly able to fix it. I now have a AVX Stable Per CCX OC that also Passes Prime 95 Small FFTs for 10 Minutes, which is awesome, as before that seemed impossible at a reasonable clock.

Anyways, my favorite for stress testing AVX in Y Cruncher is opening it up, typing "1" for Component Stress Testing, "7" for disabling every test, "11" for Enabling just "BBP - BBP Digital Extraction" which is an AVX Floating Point Operation that stresses JUST the CPU, Cache, and FPU with an AVX Torture Workload that puts about 130 Amps of Current down the CPU at about 1.3v. 

Then Once enabling BBP, hit "4" which will then ask you to put in a Number in Seconds that you want each iteration of the stresser to use, I put in 30 Seconds so that its a really quick test that will instantly tell me what core failed, then I can make adjustments and move on, or if no core fails, I can change my Per CCX on the Fly in between iterations until a Core Does fail, so it makes it quick and easy to dial in an AVX Stable Per CCX OC. 

Once all those settings are set I hit "9" to save the test config, and then I just call it "1". Then you can hit 0 to start the stress testing.

The cool thing about saving the config is next time you can simply just hit "1", "8" To Load a Config, "1" to load your Config that you named '1', and then "0" to start the stress testing and you are good to go, you get used to hitting that fast every time you need to stop. I love me IBT, but I am finding Y Cruncher to be just as Useful with more types of tests available. I still love IBT for its Linpack testing that does hit your CPU with a workload that is different then what Y Cruncher does, but In stead of spending time trying to get AVX to work in IBT, I found this to be just as effective in Y Cruncher. Anyways, Hope that helps!


----------



## oreonutz

vasyltheonly said:


> See that's what I thought. Coming from intel I thought it would be at least over 100C. I turned on logging in HWINFO and the highest recorded temperature before the shutdown was 71.1C TCTL. So either A it's treating my all core OC as an over temperature crash, or B something else entirely is happening and there's a settings that is setting a temperate of 72ish as the max temp.


How do you know its shutting down due to over temperature? Does something come up telling you that on Boot?


----------



## vasyltheonly

oreonutz said:


> How do you know its shutting down due to over temperature? Does something come up telling you that on Boot?


Once its reboots, there's a message saying CPU shutdown due to over temperature protection. So a small update I definitely think its my OC. Changing CPU temperature to ignore in the BIOS actually lets me hit temps of 78C+ (after making my fans useless) and then it crashes but now without the error message. Maybe my OC is stable enough at lower temps but once the CPU gets heated, it crashes.


----------



## oreonutz

vasyltheonly said:


> Once its reboots, there's a message saying CPU shutdown due to over temperature protection. So a small update I definitely think its my OC. Changing CPU temperature to ignore in the BIOS actually lets me hit temps of 78C+ (after making my fans useless) and then it crashes but now without the error message. Maybe my OC is stable enough at lower temps but once the CPU gets heated, it crashes.


So we had one other member (actually 2 if memory serves) who had this issue earlier on, and I think both cases it ended up being corruption in your UEFI. Your Best bet is to get rid of this odd behaviour is going to be a pain in your ass but should get rid of it. 

Your OC, even if it was unstable, shouldn't be causing a "thermal shutoff/reboot" error unless you hit 115c.

To clear this you are going to have to follow this process:


Spoiler



1. Download whatever UEFI you prefer, Personally I like 0002+E because that gives me extra Fan Controls, Solves the Fan Control Bug, and gives the best boost in the event I feel like playing with PB. Put this UEFI on a USB Stick, name it C7H.cap, and put that stick in the BIOS Flashback Port.

2. Completely Shutdown your PC.

3. Unplug from Wall (or turn off the Power Supply Switch)

4. Pull the CMOS Battery

5. With everything still off, and the CMOS Battery Out, Press and hold down the Power Button on your PC for 60 Seconds. I prefer to repeat this Step 3 Times so that I can be sure all the power is drained, and I won't have to repeat this again. The point of this step is to completely drain all the Power out of all the Capacitors on the board, once all the Power is completely drained from the System and the CMOS Battery is out, Every Setting being stored in the CMOS, including the corruption, will now no longer be stored.

6. Still, without plugging in the CMOS Battery, flip the Switch on your Power supply to the On Position.

7. Hold the BIOS Flashback Button on the back of your Board for 3 to 5 Seconds until the light begins to flash, indicate that it is flashing the UEFI.

8. Wait about 5 Minutes or so for that to complete, you know its down when the light on the button is no longer beeping.

9. Turn on the PC and go directly into the UEFI and confirm you are in a fresh UEFI, and it is indeed the new version you flashed. Once you confirm that, turn off the PC

10. Put your CMOS Battery Back in.

Now turn on the PC, and set up all your settings. However, it is VERY IMPORTANT, when you set up your settings DO NOT USE any of your past saved profiles, as they could contain the corruption in them. So its important to set up all of your preferred UEFI setting from scratch. This is made much easier, if before you began this process you went into the The ASUS Profile Tool in the tools section of the UEFI, and hit CTRL+F2 and then name the file, and then transfer this file to your Phone or another Computer. This is a text file of all of your settings, so if you have this backed up you can just go straight down the line, setting all of your settings manually, and not forget any.


Anyways, I hope this helps, once you do this, I know its a pain in the butt, but once you do that you should no longer have that issue. It seems to be a rare one, but that is how you fix it. You also may get lucky, you could just flash a fresh UEFI using BIOS Flashback, and that may just get rid of the corruption, so you could just try that first and see if it fixes your issue, but either way what you are experiencing is not normal and should be fixed. Hope this helps!


----------



## vasyltheonly

oreonutz said:


> So we had one other member (actually 2 if memory serves) who had this issue earlier on, and I think both cases it ended up being corruption in your UEFI. Your Best bet is to get rid of this odd behaviour is going to be a pain in your ass but should get rid of it.
> 
> Your OC, even if it was unstable, shouldn't be causing a "thermal shutoff/reboot" error unless you hit 115c.
> 
> To clear this you are going to have to follow this process:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 1. Download whatever UEFI you prefer, Personally I like 0002+E because that gives me extra Fan Controls, Solves the Fan Control Bug, and gives the best boost in the event I feel like playing with PB. Put this UEFI on a USB Stick, name it C7H.cap, and put that stick in the BIOS Flashback Port.
> 
> 2. Completely Shutdown your PC.
> 
> 3. Unplug from Wall (or turn off the Power Supply Switch)
> 
> 4. Pull the CMOS Battery
> 
> 5. With everything still off, and the CMOS Battery Out, Press and hold down the Power Button on your PC for 60 Seconds. I prefer to repeat this Step 3 Times so that I can be sure all the power is drained, and I won't have to repeat this again. The point of this step is to completely drain all the Power out of all the Capacitors on the board, once all the Power is completely drained from the System and the CMOS Battery is out, Every Setting being stored in the CMOS, including the corruption, will now no longer be stored.
> 
> 6. Still, without plugging in the CMOS Battery, flip the Switch on your Power supply to the On Position.
> 
> 7. Hold the BIOS Flashback Button on the back of your Board for 3 to 5 Seconds until the light begins to flash, indicate that it is flashing the UEFI.
> 
> 8. Wait about 5 Minutes or so for that to complete, you know its down when the light on the button is no longer beeping.
> 
> 9. Turn on the PC and go directly into the UEFI and confirm you are in a fresh UEFI, and it is indeed the new version you flashed. Once you confirm that, turn off the PC
> 
> 10. Put your CMOS Battery Back in.
> 
> Now turn on the PC, and set up all your settings. However, it is VERY IMPORTANT, when you set up your settings DO NOT USE any of your past saved profiles, as they could contain the corruption in them. So its important to set up all of your preferred UEFI setting from scratch. This is made much easier, if before you began this process you went into the The ASUS Profile Tool in the tools section of the UEFI, and hit CTRL+F2 and then name the file, and then transfer this file to your Phone or another Computer. This is a text file of all of your settings, so if you have this backed up you can just go straight down the line, setting all of your settings manually, and not forget any.
> 
> 
> Anyways, I hope this helps, once you do this, I know its a pain in the butt, but once you do that you should no longer have that issue. It seems to be a rare one, but that is how you fix it. You also may get lucky, you could just flash a fresh UEFI using BIOS Flashback, and that may just get rid of the corruption, so you could just try that first and see if it fixes your issue, but either way what you are experiencing is not normal and should be fixed. Hope this helps!


I think I'll have to go the fun route eventually... Reverted to a stock 2703 BIOS and was still getting the temperature message. I want to say it is a corrupted BIOS. A few times during the 2501 BIOS the motherboard would enter BIOS recovery mode when I tried to tweak my memory, and I would just exit and everytime since a new BIOS or MOD I've been using a backed up memory profile to revert to. So the combination of the two probably caused this issue. Oh well, leaving on a business trip on Tuesday, plenty of time to let the capacitors discharge the corruption lol.


----------



## crakej

vasyltheonly said:


> I think I'll have to go the fun route eventually... Reverted to a stock 2703 BIOS and was still getting the temperature message. I want to say it is a corrupted BIOS. A few times during the 2501 BIOS the motherboard would enter BIOS recovery mode when I tried to tweak my memory, and I would just exit and everytime since a new BIOS or MOD I've been using a backed up memory profile to revert to. So the combination of the two probably caused this issue. Oh well, leaving on a business trip on Tuesday, plenty of time to let the capacitors discharge the corruption lol.


Are you using offset voltage for the CPU? If not, try using it instead of putting fixed voltage in.


----------



## crakej

oreonutz said:


> I think its the Code used to execute the AVX Workload that doesn't work properly on Ryzen.
> 
> You can however use Y Cruncher to do the same thing, I have setup a profile that works amazing well for stress testing, and I actually love it because it tells you which thread it fails on, if it fails. It Numbers the Threads 0 thru 23, so that takes a bit of getting used to, as 0 & 1 is Core 0, 2 & 3 is Core 1, and So On. So when CCX OCing, it took me a bit to get used to knowing that when Core 10 Failed, I actually needed to lower the Clock on CCX 1, not CCX 3 like I thought I was supposed to at first. I ended up lowering CCX 3 all the way to 3600Mhz and was still failing on that core, and I was like "What the Hell, it can't do AVX Workloads at it fricking BASE CLOCK!!!!" LOL! Then I realized my mistake, and was quickly able to fix it. I now have a AVX Stable Per CCX OC that also Passes Prime 95 Small FFTs for 10 Minutes, which is awesome, as before that seemed impossible at a reasonable clock.
> 
> Anyways, my favorite for stress testing AVX in Y Cruncher is opening it up, typing "1" for Component Stress Testing, "7" for disabling every test, "11" for Enabling just "BBP - BBP Digital Extraction" which is an AVX Floating Point Operation that stresses JUST the CPU, Cache, and FPU with an AVX Torture Workload that puts about 130 Amps of Current down the CPU at about 1.3v.
> 
> Then Once enabling BBP, hit "4" which will then ask you to put in a Number in Seconds that you want each iteration of the stresser to use, I put in 30 Seconds so that its a really quick test that will instantly tell me what core failed, then I can make adjustments and move on, or if no core fails, I can change my Per CCX on the Fly in between iterations until a Core Does fail, so it makes it quick and easy to dial in an AVX Stable Per CCX OC.
> 
> Once all those settings are set I hit "9" to save the test config, and then I just call it "1". Then you can hit 0 to start the stress testing.
> 
> The cool thing about saving the config is next time you can simply just hit "1", "8" To Load a Config, "1" to load your Config that you named '1', and then "0" to start the stress testing and you are good to go, you get used to hitting that fast every time you need to stop. I love me IBT, but I am finding Y Cruncher to be just as Useful with more types of tests available. I still love IBT for its Linpack testing that does hit your CPU with a workload that is different then what Y Cruncher does, but In stead of spending time trying to get AVX to work in IBT, I found this to be just as effective in Y Cruncher. Anyways, Hope that helps!


 It should work on Ryzen! It did before Zen2! I'm sure I've seen others using it but maybe they're using the non AVX version which works fine....


----------



## xeizo

vasyltheonly said:


> I like 0002+E


Eh, AFAIK gupsterg hasn't released that one yet, or have I missed something obvious  "Normal" 0002+ is available and is what I run.


----------



## oreonutz

vasyltheonly said:


> I think I'll have to go the fun route eventually... Reverted to a stock 2703 BIOS and was still getting the temperature message. I want to say it is a corrupted BIOS. A few times during the 2501 BIOS the motherboard would enter BIOS recovery mode when I tried to tweak my memory, and I would just exit and everytime since a new BIOS or MOD I've been using a backed up memory profile to revert to. So the combination of the two probably caused this issue. Oh well, leaving on a business trip on Tuesday, plenty of time to let the capacitors discharge the corruption lol.


Sucks I know. Before leaving on your trip, remember to pull the CMOS battery and power. When you get back, corruption should be good and Gone!!


----------



## oreonutz

xeizo said:


> Eh, AFAIK gupsterg hasn't released that one yet, or have I missed something obvious  "Normal" 0002+ is available and is what I run.


Well I know it gets confusing because we have 2 guys making these UEFI's for the community, but technically there is a 0002+E Floating out there. I know @gupsterg and @mtrai intend to release a fixed up version of it, so I think thats why they told people to wait, but the link is in the forum, and it wasn't gup who posted it . I Would repost it, but I figured its probably best if everyone waits for the one that has their blessing and isn't intended as a beta, but closer to a finished product.

That said, I have to say, I am loving it! @mtrai and @gupsterg do great work!


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> It should work on Ryzen! It did before Zen2! I'm sure I've seen others using it but maybe they're using the non AVX version which works fine....


I can't find the post right now, but someone else had said the AVX version just isn't working on Zen2. I also can't get it to work. You would think it should, but it doesn't. Take the same file, put it on your FX system, or your intel system, or even your Zen+ System, and it works great, but on Zen 2, just won't start....

Should try Y Cruncher though, I mean I know you have used it, but try the stress testing option in it specifically using the options I mentioned, I think you'll like it because of the feature of which core failed when one does fail, and because their AVX load is sends a crap ton of Current into your CPU, it is QUICK to find instability! Great Tool in my opinion, wish I would have started using it as a stress tester earlier.


----------



## crakej

oreonutz said:


> I can't find the post right now, but someone else had said the AVX version just isn't working on Zen2. I also can't get it to work. You would think it should, but it doesn't. Take the same file, put it on your FX system, or your intel system, or even your Zen+ System, and it works great, but on Zen 2, just won't start....
> 
> Should try Y Cruncher though, I mean I know you have used it, but try the stress testing option in it specifically using the options I mentioned, I think you'll like it because of the feature of which core failed when one does fail, and because their AVX load is sends a crap ton of Current into your CPU, it is QUICK to find instability! Great Tool in my opinion, wish I would have started using it as a stress tester earlier.


I'm happy using non-avx for now, just wondered if it was just me that still couldn't run it.

I'll drop the author an email with debug info.


----------



## hurricane28

I flashed 2703 BIOS and there are A LOT of settings missing and boost clocks are all over the place.. Its not stable as well as when i was in BIOS it completely froze on me.. I can't even tune my RAM settings due to lack of settings.. What is going on here? lol.

Previous BIOS i could get 4.250 GHz with 3466 MHz and now it only boosts to 4.175 GHz no matter what i set in BIOS.. Someone care to explain on wth is going on here?


----------



## xeizo

LoL very OT but I just received my ultra cheap 85€ B450 Aorus M which will run my old 2700X. To my surprise, the box was actually _printed_ with "Ryzen 3000 Ready"" not even a sticker! Nice 

As this board, apart from being cheap, has a real crappy VRM I will apply sticky thermal matter I have a unused sheet of and a number of alu heatsinks on the exposed mos-fets, and use two fans(Silent Typhoon) blowing downward from the top of the case(Phanteks Eclipse P400). I will use a Noctua NH-D14 for the CPU. I have 2x8GB Kingston Hyper X 2666MHz being leftover, a leftover GTX980, a unused 650W Cooler Master modular PSU and a 512GB Intel 660p NVME-drive. Will be a nice Linux-system I hope.

It's cooler outside, the 3900X is now hitting above 4600MHz on four cores


----------



## xeizo

hurricane28 said:


> I flashed 2703 BIOS and there are A LOT of settings missing and boost clocks are all over the place.. Its not stable as well as when i was in BIOS it completely froze on me.. I can't even tune my RAM settings due to lack of settings.. What is going on here? lol.
> 
> Previous BIOS i could get 4.250 GHz with 3466 MHz and now it only boosts to 4.175 GHz no matter what i set in BIOS.. Someone care to explain on wth is going on here?


Sounds like some voltage is way off, check all voltages in particular SOC/VDDP/VDDG/VTT/VDIMM, did you flash using Bios Flashback?


----------



## crakej

hurricane28 said:


> I flashed 2703 BIOS and there are A LOT of settings missing and boost clocks are all over the place.. Its not stable as well as when i was in BIOS it completely froze on me.. I can't even tune my RAM settings due to lack of settings.. What is going on here? lol.
> 
> Previous BIOS i could get 4.250 GHz with 3466 MHz and now it only boosts to 4.175 GHz no matter what i set in BIOS.. Someone care to explain on wth is going on here?


What bios were you on?

ALL bios based on AGESA 1003xx and newer have reduced boost.


----------



## gupsterg

gupsterg said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> The string issue for Memory Frequency [Auto], menu option Chassis / Ext. fan only occurs when we mod UEFI for exposing options. As the SMU FW mod did not have anything to do with UEFI options we did not see that occur.
> 
> The module which will be edited to say set customisation, can be reinserted into another UEFI that has same options, so won't need to do all the settings again as far as I can tell.
> 
> Minimum duty cycle for fan as 0% is working when mode is Auto/DC, but not PWM. I believe when set mode is set to [Auto], if a fan is PWM, then that mode is active, so perhaps not a biggie. I am gonna have one more crack at it to see what happens or just leave it as is.
> 
> Fan stop works if fan mode is [Auto/DC] not when [PWM], again my belief is when [Auto] is used and a fan is PWM, then that mode is active, so perhaps not a biggie. AFAIK there is nothing I maybe able to do there.
> 
> To wet your appetite here is preliminary screenies, fan stop profile test WMV (see Chassis 1 sensor in HWINFO far left), ZIP link.
> 
> Prospective change log of UEFI 0002+E
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Exposed:-
> 
> Extreme Tweaker has SB Clock Spread Sprectrum setting.
> CPU Configuration page has NX Mode & C6 Mode setting.
> Onboard Devices Configuration has Super I/O Clock Skew setting.
> 
> Allow Fan Stop on Fan headers CHA1-3, HAMP, EXT 1-4.
> 
> Other edits:-
> 
> Memory Frequency [Auto] became [Undefined], so string resolved.
> 
> VDDSOC Switching Frequency control help string min/max kHz corrected from 300/500kHz to 400/600kHz.
> 
> Chassis Fan(s) Configuration & Ext. Fan(s) Configuration became [Undefined], so string resolved.
> 
> Fan header Upper Temperature allows 85C input
> Fan header min. Duty Cycle (%) allows 0% input
> 
> ASUS Grid Install Service defaults to [Disabled]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CCoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Eta?? Want to use my pc one last time b4 this hurricane hits us lol
Click to expand...

Sorry, just making sure I have things as good as I can.

I have changed Allow Fan Stop help string to state in bright yellow text which modes it works with.



Spoiler














When PWM mode is selected Allow Fan Stop will change to [Disabled] if [Enabled], this is default behaviour of UEFI and I can not change this I spent a while checking this, out of my ability.

Then I also spent time checking:-

Setup GUID: 899407D7-99FE-43D8-9A21-79EC328CAC21
AMITSESetupData GUID: FE612B72-203C-47B1-8560-A66D946EB371

Even if I mod to allow input of 0% for lowest duty cycle of a fan header, it will get reverted back to 20% when fan header in PWM mode, only [Auto] and [DC Mode] allow less than 20%.

Even if I set the PWM mode manual profile for a fan header using AMIBCP, to have default value of less than 20%, I see the value once then something in UEFI reverts it back to 20% and does not allow for it to be inputted.

Only the HAMP header for some reason allows 0%, it will stick and I have found no reason why so far why that is the only one.



Spoiler














If I can't resolve this then I'll just set back input range of min 20% for PWM mode and [Auto/DC Mode] will allow 0% and fan stop. 



oreonutz said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Hey @mtrai and @gupsterg I am BACK! I had a HELLISH Job this weekend. Had to wire an entire Mansion for one of my rich clients, was supposed to have my team with me, but every single one of those bastards called in on me. So I had to wire up this entire new mansion myself with both Coax and Cat6, then get the Network, Phones, Camera's, and TV's Working along with the Server to control Camera's and Network. It was a LOT to do without help. Sorry it took the entire weekend with me mostly off line.
> 
> Just read through the forum. Anything you guys want me to test? Is there a new 0002+E I should test? I finally did some tests on the original for the Added Fan Control, and I don't get it. I thought that all those added values would over ride the Manual CPU Controls, but it seems to use a mix of the 2, and while my critical Temp does kick in later than 75, I set it at 92, and it still seems to kick in around 81c, so not sure whats happening there. But eager to test the newest version of 0002+E Available. I have a pretty relaxing work week this week, almost every single job is from home, so I should be on pretty much non stop.
> 
> @crakej, hope you are all good man. Hopes and Prayers for your friend.


I have not tried or viewed mtrai UEFI.

I should hopefully be able to link mine tomorrow or so.


----------



## xeizo

@gupsterg , thanks for the update on your progress!  Looking forward for your version of tidying up in the bios! Amazing work.


----------



## gupsterg

xeizo said:


> @gupsterg , thanks for the update on your progress!  Looking forward for your version of tidying up in the bios! Amazing work.


Thanks, been a learning curve as well  .

Below is "Setup" module IFR txts, compare in say WinMerge, all edits were by hand.

View attachment Setup_Module_Mod.zip


The UEFI is divided into 1xxx+2xxx & 3xxx, each has that same module, so I mod one file, UEFITool allows it to be added to each, same with AMITSESetupData. Only issue I found is C7H UEFI has different modules of same GUID vs C7HWIFI, so I will need to do the two files again.

When next UEFI lands, I again just add those files, we haven't had new settings appear in those files for a while, so the wait will not be long...


----------



## hurricane28

crakej said:


> What bios were you on?
> 
> ALL bios based on AGESA 1003xx and newer have reduced boost.


It was indeed prior to 1003.. why did they lower max boost clocks for? Its only 50 MHz but still, more is more.


----------



## xeizo

hurricane28 said:


> It was indeed prior to 1003.. why did they lower max boost clocks for? Its only 50 MHz but still, more is more.


According to @Shamino of Asus it has something to do with reliability, he did not specify in which regard, but he did say high boost is likely not coming back.


----------



## hurricane28

xeizo said:


> According to @Shamino of Asus it has something to do with reliability, he did not specify in which regard, but he did say high boost is likely not coming back.


Who's That? New R&D engineer? I heard about high voltages etc. first it was fine now it isn't.. hard to keep up on what is save and who to believe these days man.. 

What about these missing RAM settings? I can't tweak my RAM anymore and the calculator is useless now with this new BIOS. 

The positive side it that it holds higher boost clocks compared to previous BIOS so that's a good thing.


----------



## xeizo

hurricane28 said:


> Who's That? New R&D engineer? I heard about high voltages etc. first it was fine now it isn't.. hard to keep up on what is save and who to believe these days man..
> 
> What about these missing RAM settings? I can't tweak my RAM anymore and the calculator is useless now with this new BIOS.
> 
> The positive side it that it holds higher boost clocks compared to previous BIOS so that's a good thing.


Shamino is the bios guy at Asus, he has a long presence and is very respected in the OC community. If he says high boost isn't coming back it's likely true.

What do you mean by "missing RAM settings"? I haven't seen ANY bios missing RAM settings. Can you post a screenshot of your bios?


----------



## Keith Myers

Are you sure it is not the bug in the BIOS that shuts off the fan headers? That's what my computer kept doing until I removed all the fans from the motherboard headers and plugged them into a SATA powered fan controller.


----------



## Keith Myers

oreonutz said:


> Sucks I know. Before leaving on your trip, remember to pull the CMOS battery and power. When you get back, corruption should be good and Gone!!


Didn't help me removing the battery and discharging all the caps before flashing the 2501 BIOS. Still had the WMI interface fan zero speed bug.


----------



## xeizo

Keith Myers said:


> Didn't help me removing the battery and discharging all the caps before flashing the 2501 BIOS. Still had the WMI interface fan zero speed bug.


Have you tried gupstergs 0002+ bios? It includes Shaminos fan speed fix, and has the SMU from 2501.


----------



## Keith Myers

xeizo said:


> Have you tried gupstergs 0002+ bios? It includes Shaminos fan speed fix, and has the SMU from 2501.


No. I wait for official BIOS' I just hope the beta 0002 BIOS becomes official soon. I haven't seen any posts that the 0002 BIOS actually fixes the fan issue. Does it?


----------



## Reikoji

xeizo said:


> Shamino is the bios guy at Asus, he has a long presence and is very respected in the OC community. If he says high boost isn't coming back it's likely true.


Sounded like his theory to me. Its impossible for AMD to simply leave this as is in any case. They advertised one thing, and its not being gotten at stock, and there is literally no reason for it outside of bugs.

EDIT: I say its impossible to leave it as is... but, Since they put MAX BOOST on the box, they technically dont have to do a thing at this point.


----------



## hurricane28

xeizo said:


> Shamino is the bios guy at Asus, he has a long presence and is very respected in the OC community. If he says high boost isn't coming back it's likely true.
> 
> What do you mean by "missing RAM settings"? I haven't seen ANY bios missing RAM settings. Can you post a screenshot of your bios?


Ok fair enough, so he makes the BIOS or is he only R&D like Elmor was? 

I am missing quite a few settings in AMD CBS, or they are hidden? For the rest, this BIOS seems to be pretty good as far as i can tell.


----------



## crakej

hurricane28 said:


> Ok fair enough, so he makes the BIOS or is he only R&D like Elmor was?
> 
> I am missing quite a few settings in AMD CBS, or they are hidden? For the rest, this BIOS seems to be pretty good as far as i can tell.


He is *AN* engineer - NOT 'THE' engineer, we works on ROG boards.

Which settings are missing?


----------



## hurricane28

crakej said:


> He is *AN* engineer - NOT 'THE' engineer, we works on ROG boards.
> 
> Which settings are missing?


Alright, cool.

I only see these settings in CBS, should i reflash the BIOS?


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> No. I wait for official BIOS' I just hope the beta 0002 BIOS becomes official soon. I haven't seen any posts that the 0002 BIOS actually fixes the fan issue. Does it?


Yes the 0002 Bios 100 Percent fixed the fan Issue for me

And in regards to the other post, he wasn't having the fan stopping issue, thats not what we were trying to solve. We were trying to solve that stupid Temperature issue, same one you were running into, but yours was a result of the fans dropping out, his fans aren't dropping out he is already on the 0002 BIOS, his PC was just shutting down the second he hit 75c, so that same issue you had where when you booted up it said it hit the 78c or whatever it was for you, temperature limit, he was having a similar issue, just different circumstances. Definitely corruption in the BIOS, and most likely clearing that corruption will fix the issue. Where as the fan Issue was a problem WITH the BIOS, so it doesn't matter if you clear corruption, if you flash to a bios with the fan bug, then the fan bug will come back. So yeah, different issues. Hopefully clearing the corruption will solve the issue for him.

Good to see ya Keith! I HIGHLY Recommend you flash the 0002 UEFI, it has 100 Percent solved the fan issue for me.


----------



## oreonutz

hurricane28 said:


> Alright, cool.
> 
> I only see these settings in CBS, should i reflash the BIOS?


No That is correct for the BIOS You Flashed, they removed all the other settings you are not seeing in the newest UEFI's. If you want the settings you used to have you need to either go back to an earlier UEFI that had it, or Use @mtrai's UEFI with those settings exposed. @gupsterg is working on a version as well that will hopefully be released sometime in the next few days, so keep your eye's peeled on the Forum and when Gups posts it, you can be one of the first to flash it and get your settings back.


----------



## hurricane28

oreonutz said:


> No That is correct for the BIOS You Flashed, they removed all the other settings you are not seeing in the newest UEFI's. If you want the settings you used to have you need to either go back to an earlier UEFI that had it, or Use @mtrai's UEFI with those settings exposed. @gupsterg is working on a version as well that will hopefully be released sometime in the next few days, so keep your eye's peeled on the Forum and when Gups posts it, you can be one of the first to flash it and get your settings back.


Hm okay... So now the community "fixes" Asus BIOS now?lol. Why did they remove all these settings? I am totally for less settings on these boards as most of them are double or don't even do anything but i think some of the missing settings are actually necessary for overclocking properly.

Hope we see new BIOS soon.


----------



## renton82

I noticed that my pc always has a double boot, it powers on than power off and than power on again and boots. Is it normal? I'm on 0002+


----------



## CCoR

renton82 said:


> I noticed that my pc always has a double boot, it powers on than power off and than power on again and boots. Is it normal? I'm on 0002+


Normal, I'm not sure but its normal for 0002 bios behavior..


----------



## crakej

hurricane28 said:


> Alright, cool.
> 
> I only see these settings in CBS, should i reflash the BIOS?


Hmmm - I don't remember that from 2703 (Using 0002 currently) but look in the AMD OC menu and you should most things there.


----------



## crakej

Personally I've found that 0002+E doesn't boost as well as 2703+ did. Anyone else found that??

I'm tempted to go back to it now ambient temps have dropped and boosting is better.


----------



## renton82

What is difference between 2703+ and 0002+?


----------



## ajlueke

*High Boost*



xeizo said:


> According to @Shamino of Asus it has something to do with reliability, he did not specify in which regard, but he did say high boost is likely not coming back.


Yeah, the real question is why?

I did a few observations using Ryzen Master, and noted it was hitting about a 1.48Vcore for 4.525 GHz during Cinebench R20 (single) for a score of 509. 

So as an experiment I disable "Core performance boost" entirely in UEFI. I then used Ryzen master to set my fastest core to 4.6 GHz, set the VCore to 1.48V, and then used process lasso to limit Cinebench to only that fastest core. I then ran the single threaded bench, and it held 4.6 all day with a score of 524. So the silicon, CAN do that speed, and what's more, it can do the speed with the identical voltage that is already being applied. So why doesn't it do it during boost?


----------



## Hale59

https://twitter.com/AMDRyzen/status/1168901636162539536


----------



## Keith Myers

oreonutz said:


> Yes the 0002 Bios 100 Percent fixed the fan Issue for me
> 
> And in regards to the other post, he wasn't having the fan stopping issue, thats not what we were trying to solve. We were trying to solve that stupid Temperature issue, same one you were running into, but yours was a result of the fans dropping out, his fans aren't dropping out he is already on the 0002 BIOS, his PC was just shutting down the second he hit 75c, so that same issue you had where when you booted up it said it hit the 78c or whatever it was for you, temperature limit, he was having a similar issue, just different circumstances. Definitely corruption in the BIOS, and most likely clearing that corruption will fix the issue. Where as the fan Issue was a problem WITH the BIOS, so it doesn't matter if you clear corruption, if you flash to a bios with the fan bug, then the fan bug will come back. So yeah, different issues. Hopefully clearing the corruption will solve the issue for him.
> 
> Good to see ya Keith! I HIGHLY Recommend you flash the 0002 UEFI, it has 100 Percent solved the fan issue for me.


Thanks for confirming the fans are fixed in the 0002 BIOS Matt. I will still wait for the official BIOS. Yes, I never could figure out why I was getting an overtemp shutdown and reboot at 78° C. when the limit is supposed to be 95° C. Hope the motherboard discharge procedure you provided works for him. The next time I tear the machine down again so I can access the fan headers occluded by gpus, I can switch all the fans back to the motherboard headers again for a test. After the official fixed BIOS of course. Other than not being able to see all the fan rpms, I don't need the fan headers for either power or control since I run them at 100% all the time. The fan controller does that job perfectly now. The one rpm for the rad fans from the controller is sufficient. Saves space in the monitoring program too which is hard to fit onto the desktop with all the sensors showing.


----------



## gupsterg

ROG C7H UEFI 0002+E download link  .

ROG C7HWIFI UEFI 0002+E download link  .

Rename file C7H 0002+E.CAP to C7H.CAP and flash using flashback.
Rename file C7HWIFI 0002+E.CAP to C7HWIFI.CAP and flash using flashback.

Please see readme.txt for changes  , further information can be gained checking "Source" directory (contains some file/stages prior to modding), compare files with "Modded" folder. For example files ending in IFR.txt use Winmerge to see differences. Some differences can't be seen unless you compare in HxD, etc.



hurricane28 said:


> Alright, cool.
> 
> I only see these settings in CBS, should i reflash the BIOS?


You must be on 1xxx/2xxx CPU, AFAIK this is AMD's fault as AMD CBS, etc are their menus from AGESA....



crakej said:


> Hmmm - I don't remember that from 2703 (Using 0002 currently) but look in the AMD OC menu and you should most things there.


AMD Overclocking Menu is 3xxx only.



Hale59 said:


> https://twitter.com/AMDRyzen/status/1168901636162539536


Sweet :thumb: .


----------



## netman

xeizo said:


> According to @Shamino of Asus it has something to do with reliability, he did not specify in which regard, but he did say high boost is likely not coming back.


seems Amd changed their mind:



Hale59 said:


> https://twitter.com/AMDRyzen/status/1168901636162539536



but i wonder how many weeks (or better months) we have to wait to get a new bios with this fixes from asus for our ch7 - not that i have any higher expectations regarding the bios support of asus anymore, but i thank god we have this nice community here that really makes great effort with the modded bioses - and hope you can keep this up


----------



## xeizo

https://twitter.com/1usmus/status/1168911500586749959?s=20

September 10 to the board makers, I guess 3950X is the same date!


----------



## xeizo

Thanks, waiting for non-WiFi though


----------



## Reikoji

Hale59 said:


> https://twitter.com/AMDRyzen/status/1168901636162539536


But, Shamino said "Boosts clocks are here to stay" :|



netman said:


> seems Amd changed their mind:


Fact is AMD never said anything of the sort. It was just his theory. Opinion. There was literally no way they would have advertised these boost clocks if the processors couldnt do it. been a bios issue from the start, but the bios man found himself unable to admit a bios error.. Him and others, such as Derbaur, have been too eager to say AMD Wont or cant fix this, or simply lied about it. Theyre all likely to get shat in the face soon.

I eagerly await the firmware update


----------



## hwalsh01

Ive just moved onto this board with a 3800x. I'm running 2703 but i also get the strange double boot behaviour. Hoping somebody can point me in the right direction toward fixing it. Everything is set to default except im using DOCP as i could get the dram calculator timings to work.


----------



## Axaion

Am i the only one whos annoyed by the absolute trash tier fan controls on the board?, forcing 100% fan speeds at 75c is so. annoying.

Also, HPET and Spread Spectrum needs toggles, due to some software (cough creative) being terrible with one or the other of them, causing stutters for some people, would be nice to flick a bios setting to fix things.


----------



## nick name

Axaion said:


> Am i the only one whos annoyed by the absolute trash tier fan controls on the board?, forcing 100% fan speeds at 75c is so. annoying.
> 
> Also, HPET and Spread Spectrum needs toggles, due to some software (cough creative) being terrible with one or the other of them, causing stutters for some people, would be nice to flick a bios setting to fix things.


I used to complain about that 75C threshold for 100% fan speed until I just broke down and bought an external Noctua controller. I shouldn't have to do that, but it seemed like something they were never going to change.


----------



## Bart

Axaion said:


> Am i the only one whos annoyed by the absolute trash tier fan controls on the board?, forcing 100% fan speeds at 75c is so. annoying.


I paid $20 for a used Sunbeam 6 x 30W fan controller. I love that thing more than most of my family! Not a fan of current PWM control mechanisms (even though I use PWM hubs too), as I HATE fan control software. With PWM, I set it up manually in the BIOS and forget it.


----------



## AvengedRobix

Try 0002+E and nothing.. my Daily settings of RAM don't work and only f9.. return ti 0002+ [emoji3525]

Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A6013 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## hurricane28

gupsterg said:


> ROG C7HWIFI UEFI 0002+E download link  .
> 
> Rename file C7HWIFI 0002+E.CAP to C7HWIFI.CAP and flash using flashback.
> 
> Please see readme.txt for changes  , further information can be gained checking "Source" directory (contains some file/stages prior to modding), compare files with "Modded" folder. For example files ending in IFR.txt use Winmerge to see differences. Some differences can't be seen unless you compare in HxD, etc.
> 
> C7H will soon be shared  .
> 
> 
> 
> You must be on 1xxx/2xxx CPU, AFAIK this is AMD's fault as AMD CBS, etc are their menus from AGESA....
> 
> 
> 
> AMD Overclocking Menu is 3xxx only.
> 
> 
> 
> Sweet :thumb: .


I am still on my 2600x. BIOS 2703 has better boost clocks and holds them there, but it feels less stable than previous BIOS's due to lack of this CBS. I guess we have to wait for you or AMD to fix this AMD CBS?


----------



## Reikoji

ajlueke said:


> Yeah, the real question is why?
> 
> I did a few observations using Ryzen Master, and noted it was hitting about a 1.48Vcore for 4.525 GHz during Cinebench R20 (single) for a score of 509.
> 
> So as an experiment I disable "Core performance boost" entirely in UEFI. I then used Ryzen master to set my fastest core to 4.6 GHz, set the VCore to 1.48V, and then used process lasso to limit Cinebench to only that fastest core. I then ran the single threaded bench, and it held 4.6 all day with a score of 524. So the silicon, CAN do that speed, and what's more, it can do the speed with the identical voltage that is already being applied. So why doesn't it do it during boost?


Some tips on using process lasso with cenebench? i try to make it not able to use the 1st 3 cores, or any other cores, but it uses them anyway.


----------



## gupsterg

Reikoji said:


> But, Shamino said "Boosts clocks are here to stay" :|
> 
> 
> 
> Fact is AMD never said anything of the sort. It was just his theory. Opinion. There was literally no way they would have advertised these boost clocks if the processors couldnt do it. been a bios issue from the start, but the bios man found himself unable to admit a bios error.. Him and others, such as Derbaur, have been too eager to say AMD Wont or cant fix this, or simply lied about it. Theyre all likely to get shat in the face soon.
> 
> I eagerly await the firmware update


Shaminio stated what he did based on what would have been situation then. To hang him for giving his opinion and some of it would likely be based on industry knowledge/experience is frankly shameless.

I don't recall der8auer say they won't change boost behaviour. Personally I reckon we gotta thank der8auer. Guy got the data, spent 3 days collating, do you not think efforts like that highlighted to AMD there's an issue? Do you not think his data may have created pressure on AMD to respond?



nick name said:


> I used to complain about that 75C threshold for 100% fan speed until I just broke down and bought an external Noctua controller. I shouldn't have to do that, but it seemed like something they were never going to change.


Extended to 85C in UEFI 0002+E, modules can be added to another UEFI to make it do that without having to spend time I originally did.



AvengedRobix said:


> Try 0002+E and nothing.. my Daily settings of RAM don't work and only f9.. return ti 0002+ [emoji3525]
> 
> Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A6013 utilizzando Tapatalk


Nothing was changed to create that.

UEFI 0002+E is same as UEFI 0002+, it only has the things stated in readme.txt as changes, which do not relate to your issue, all changes are only pure cosmetics of UEFI GUI and some settings exposed.



hurricane28 said:


> I am still on my 2600x. BIOS 2703 has better boost clocks and holds them there, but it feels less stable than previous BIOS's due to lack of this CBS. I guess we have to wait for you or AMD to fix this AMD CBS?


Probably next AGESA IMO, but dunno, assuming and just an opinion.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> I am still on my 2600x. BIOS 2703 has better boost clocks and holds them there, but it feels less stable than previous BIOS's due to lack of this CBS. I guess we have to wait for you or AMD to fix this AMD CBS?


You can use PE 3 to hold ACB speeds indefinitely. You can also control what that ACB speed is by adjusting EDC from BIOS or with Ryzen Master.


----------



## Reikoji

gupsterg said:


> Shaminio stated what he did based on what would have been situation then. To hang him for giving his opinion and some of it would likely be based on industry knowledge/experience is frankly shameless.
> 
> I don't recall der8auer say they won't change boost behaviour. Personally I reckon we gotta thank der8auer. Guy got the data, spent 3 days collating, do you not think efforts like that highlighted to AMD there's an issue? Do you not think his data may have created pressure on AMD to respond?


Derbaur whole heartily agreed with shaminos theory, and added he doesnt believe the silicon is good enough quality to do the boost clocks, and its fairly easy to show hes wrong about that. I believe amd has been investigating and working on the boost issue well before his survey too, like a week at least after these launched. the AMD community forums has been lit for a long time over this. he helped but hes not the sole savior that wringed a response from AMD. lots of other negative press from various other youtubers prior as well.


----------



## bozydar

I have been reading this thread for couple of days trying to decide if this motherboard is a good choice for my new PC.

I bought 3700X and 2x16 GB RAM (hoping to get 3600 CAS 16) and now I am looking for a motherboard.

Would you recommend this motherboard or maybe I should buy something based on X570... 
I hate chipset fans (that is why I am looking at X470 motherboards) and I do not need PCIE 4 or newest USB connectors. I am going to upgrade my CPU to 3950X in the future.

I need stability. Not going to OC CPU much…


----------



## Synoxia

Axaion said:


> Am i the only one whos annoyed by the absolute trash tier fan controls on the board?, forcing 100% fan speeds at 75c is so. annoying.
> 
> Also, HPET and Spread Spectrum needs toggles, due to some software (cough creative) being terrible with one or the other of them, causing stutters for some people, would be nice to flick a bios setting to fix things.


this @gupsterg if you are able to show HPET in 0002+E i'll thank you infinitely
HPET off in bios removes microstutter from many games and no it's not placebo. RTSS cap + freesync 60HZ stable and some games will still microstutter (ac odyssey cough, or any other dinosaur engine game cough)

BTW i have some considerations now that i've been using both 0002 smus... 46.34 (older higher boosting) is way smoother and stable for me in games while running much cooler on AVG with the same undervolt.. i still have hopes for old boost clocks coming back... maybe with 3950x release.

Guys i've noticed other processors are idling at 2000mhz with 0.20v ... why my 3700x only idles to 0.80v?


----------



## Axaion

Id be willing to donate 50 USD for them to 'just' fix it on official BIOS'es - Its absolutely disgraceful we have to mod BIOSes to get basic configurations and features thats been about for literal DECADES lol

Also, i dont have the Wifi board, so i gotta hope mtrei doesnt throw in the hat on trying to make hpet and such actually work, iirc he wrote before that it said in bios it was off, but it wasnt really as it was still active in windows.

We should bribe them lol.


----------



## nick name

Axaion said:


> Id be willing to donate 50 USD for them to 'just' fix it on official BIOS'es - Its absolutely disgraceful we have to mod BIOSes to get basic configurations and features thats been about for literal DECADES lol
> 
> Also, i dont have the Wifi board, so i gotta hope mtrei doesnt throw in the hat on trying to make hpet and such actually work, iirc he wrote before that it said in bios it was off, but it wasnt really as it was still active in windows.
> 
> We should bribe them lol.


What I think is kinda funny is that I assume ASUS is practicing a bit of CYA when they leave it at 75*C in an attempt to prevent folks from baking their CPUs, but yet they continue to put out BIOS versions where fans will just.f*cking.stop. 

I don't actually have anything else bad to say about ASUS and love their Crosshair VII, but thinking and talking about that 75*C threshold again reminded me of all the frustration I had with it (and my 3000 RPM Noctua fans).


----------



## hurricane28

gupsterg said:


> Shaminio stated what he did based on what would have been situation then. To hang him for giving his opinion and some of it would likely be based on industry knowledge/experience is frankly shameless.
> 
> I don't recall der8auer say they won't change boost behaviour. Personally I reckon we gotta thank der8auer. Guy got the data, spent 3 days collating, do you not think efforts like that highlighted to AMD there's an issue? Do you not think his data may have created pressure on AMD to respond?
> 
> 
> 
> Extended to 85C in UEFI 0002+E, modules can be added to another UEFI to make it do that without having to spend time I originally did.
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing was changed to create that.
> 
> UEFI 0002+E is same as UEFI 0002+, it only has the things stated in readme.txt as changes, which do not relate to your issue, all changes are only pure cosmetics of UEFI GUI and some settings exposed.
> 
> 
> 
> Probably next AGESA IMO, but dunno, assuming and just an opinion.


Bummer man, but thnx.


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> You can use PE 3 to hold ACB speeds indefinitely. You can also control what that ACB speed is by adjusting EDC from BIOS or with Ryzen Master.


I don't have to, boost on this BIOS is the best i've seen. It never drops below 4.175 GHz with static volts of 1.375 it goes all the way up to 4.250 GHz in some cases. 

The problem is the Memory as i can't set the memory timings as in mus calculator.


----------



## gupsterg

xeizo said:


> Thanks, waiting for non-WiFi though


Post updated with C7H UEFI 0002+E  .



AvengedRobix said:


> Try 0002+E and nothing.. my Daily settings of RAM don't work and only f9.. return ti 0002+ [emoji3525]
> 
> 
> gupsterg said:
> 
> 
> 
> UEFI 0002+E is same as UEFI 0002+, it only has the things stated in readme.txt as changes, which do not relate to your issue, all changes are only pure cosmetics of UEFI GUI and some settings exposed.
Click to expand...

This test run was from cold post this morning, note the 19C water temperature, PC had been fully powered off from wall socket all night, PBO+150MHz 3800MHz 4x8GB as used on prior beta/official/modded UEFIs works.

All I can say is if a OC profile does not work on UEFI 0002+E which had been determined on a differing UEFI, it may have not been fully stable.

The purpose of UEFI 0002+E has only been to expose some hidden settings, change input range for fan profiles. Nothing relating to anything else was touched at all.

It can take me ~2hrs to do mod to say 1xxx/2xxx portion of UEFI, then another ~2hrs to do 3xxx portion. The C7H does not use same modules as C7HWIFI for context of mod, so again ~4hrs.

In future I can now take those modded modules and just replace then into a UEFI, as long the stock "fabric" of Setup/AMITSESetupData does not change.



hurricane28 said:


> I am still on my 2600x. BIOS 2703 has better boost clocks and holds them there, but it feels less stable than previous BIOS's due to lack of this CBS. I guess we have to wait for you or AMD to fix this AMD CBS?


I would think so.



Reikoji said:


> Derbaur whole heartily agreed with shaminos theory, and added he doesnt believe the silicon is good enough quality to do the boost clocks, and its fairly easy to show hes wrong about that. I believe amd has been investigating and working on the boost issue well before his survey too, like a week at least after these launched. the AMD community forums has been lit for a long time over this. he helped but hes not the sole savior that wringed a response from AMD. lots of other negative press from various other youtubers prior as well.


Never said or thought he was sole saviour, he was there from the beginning highlighting issue and pointing out to AMD, all I can see he has worked with AMD and not against them 

Of your previous post, most distasteful part is:-

"Him and others, such as Derbaur, have been too eager to say AMD Wont or cant fix this, or simply lied about it. Theyre all likely to get shat in the face soon."

I do not ever recall any of them saying AMD won't fix, please do provide the "source" material.

I'll be honest at times posts which I have read towards say Elmor, The Stilt, [email protected], der8auer, Shamnino and others, I do think why do they bother with the communities", as at times they really seem unappreciated to me.



Synoxia said:


> this @gupsterg if you are able to show HPET in 0002+E i'll thank you infinitely
> HPET off in bios removes microstutter from many games and no it's not placebo. RTSS cap + freesync 60HZ stable and some games will still microstutter (ac odyssey cough, or any other dinosaur engine game cough)
> 
> BTW i have some considerations now that i've been using both 0002 smus... 46.34 (older higher boosting) is way smoother and stable for me in games while running much cooler on AVG with the same undervolt.. i still have hopes for old boost clocks coming back... maybe with 3950x release.
> 
> Guys i've noticed other processors are idling at 2000mhz with 0.20v ... why my 3700x only idles to 0.80v?


At present I have no plans to do further work on C7H/C7HWIFI UEFI 0002+E, links are up, any one wanna mod feel free. Perhaps on next UEFI I will unhide those options in search.



hwalsh01 said:


> Ive just moved onto this board with a 3800x. I'm running 2703 but i also get the strange double boot behaviour. Hoping somebody can point me in the right direction toward fixing it. Everything is set to default except im using DOCP as i could get the dram calculator timings to work.


The double post is needed due to post process to apply settings you'd like.

See this post, this "fake boot" isn't just a thing on AMD board, but also Intel, see this old post by [email protected]



bozydar said:


> I have been reading this thread for couple of days trying to decide if this motherboard is a good choice for my new PC.
> 
> I bought 3700X and 2x16 GB RAM (hoping to get 3600 CAS 16) and now I am looking for a motherboard.
> 
> Would you recommend this motherboard or maybe I should buy something based on X570...
> I hate chipset fans (that is why I am looking at X470 motherboards) and I do not need PCIE 4 or newest USB connectors. I am going to upgrade my CPU to 3950X in the future.
> 
> I need stability. Not going to OC CPU much…


Personally I reckon this board is it. VRM way overkill for a normal user/CPU it's likely to support. Plenty of good features, I have had mine since launch.

Used R7 2700X and R5 3600 with it. Best RAM MHz I got with 2700X was ~3666MHz for RAM Test pass with 2x8GB, 4x8GB was bit pants ~3333MHz. I didn't believe at the time the board was an issue to hold back RAM MHz, the R5 3600 has proved that.


----------



## 1usmus

Reikoji said:


> Derbaur whole heartily agreed with shaminos theory, and added he doesnt believe the silicon is good enough quality to do the boost clocks, and its fairly easy to show hes wrong about that. I believe amd has been investigating and working on the boost issue well before his survey too, like a week at least after these launched. the AMD community forums has been lit for a long time over this. he helped but hes not the sole savior that wringed a response from AMD. lots of other negative press from various other youtubers prior as well.



Derbaur loves pulling a blanket over himself. There is one problem - the labeling of cores. Almost 3 months ago, I notified AMD that most processors will not reach their maximum boost for a number of reasons. The update that the community will receive in a week partially solves these shortcomings.

https://twitter.com/uzzi38/status/1169142110223773696


I will explain in brief what is happening. ASICs for each core are defined at the factory. The goal of successful cores is to achieve a certain frequency within the FIT, which is in the region of 1.487 volts for a low current load. The stability of the system is monitored by Clock Stretcher technology and AVFS, which automatically adjusts the real core frequency depending on the information received from dozens of sensors. If we try to load an unsuccessful core - it will not get the maximum frequency, we will get a bottleneck by current, voltage or temperature. Most processors of the Zen + and Zen 2 generation have non-optimal core markings.
As an example, I will show you the results of testing my own instances of 2700X, 3700X and 3900X.

*AMD Core's marking*


Spoiler























*Real Situation*


Spoiler
































This is only a small part of the material that will be published shortly on TPU. I was afraid to publish a full report immediately after the processor releases so as not to make a holiday for Intel fans and not to upset you. Everything is solved, there are no hardware defects.


----------



## xeizo

1usmus said:


> Derbaur loves pulling a blanket over himself. There is one problem - the labeling of cores. Almost 3 months ago, I notified AMD that most processors will not reach their maximum boost for a number of reasons. The update that the community will receive in a week partially solves these shortcomings.
> 
> https://twitter.com/uzzi38/status/1169142110223773696
> 
> 
> I will explain in brief what is happening. ASICs for each core are defined at the factory. The goal of successful cores is to achieve a certain frequency within the FIT, which is in the region of 1.487 volts for a low current load. The stability of the system is monitored by Clock Stretcher technology and AVFS, which automatically adjusts the real core frequency depending on the information received from dozens of sensors. If we try to load an unsuccessful core - it will not get the maximum frequency, we will get a bottleneck by current, voltage or temperature. Most processors of the Zen + and Zen 2 generation have non-optimal core markings.
> As an example, I will show you the results of testing my own instances of 2700X, 3700X and 3900X.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is only a small part of the material that will be published shortly on TPU. I was afraid to publish a full report immediately after the processor releases so as not to make a holiday for Intel fans and not to upset you. Everything is solved, there are no hardware defects.


Very interesting info, a lot of good things ahead it seems


----------



## Synoxia

“AMD is pleased with the strong momentum of 3rd Gen AMD Ryzen™ processors in the PC enthusiast and gaming communities. We closely monitor community feedback on our products and understand that some 3rd Gen AMD Ryzen users are reporting boost clock speeds below the expected processor boost frequency. While processor boost frequency is dependent on many variables including workload, system design, and cooling solution, we have closely reviewed the feedback from our customers and have identified an issue in our firmware that reduces boost frequency in some situations. We are in the process of preparing a BIOS update for our motherboard partners that addresses that issue and includes additional boost performance optimizations. We will provide an update on September 10 to the community regarding the availability of the BIOS.”


It is very likely that 3950x will be released on 9/9 or 10/09. They just can't go wrong with that. Let's see what happens 
@1usmus Should i stop undervolting my 3700x on agesa 1002? I feel like it can boost more frequently if i leave it on auto or undervolt less (currently -0.03125, maybe i try to reach a max voltage of 1.48 single core)


----------



## 1usmus

Synoxia said:


> “AMD is pleased with the strong momentum of 3rd Gen AMD Ryzen™ processors in the PC enthusiast and gaming communities. We closely monitor community feedback on our products and understand that some 3rd Gen AMD Ryzen users are reporting boost clock speeds below the expected processor boost frequency. While processor boost frequency is dependent on many variables including workload, system design, and cooling solution, we have closely reviewed the feedback from our customers and have identified an issue in our firmware that reduces boost frequency in some situations. We are in the process of preparing a BIOS update for our motherboard partners that addresses that issue and includes additional boost performance optimizations. We will provide an update on September 10 to the community regarding the availability of the BIOS.”
> 
> 
> It is very likely that 3950x will be released on 9/9 or 10/09. They just can't go wrong with that. Let's see what happens
> 
> @1usmus Should i stop undervolting my 3700x on agesa 1002? I feel like it can boost more frequently if i leave it on auto or undervolt less (currently -0.03125, maybe i try to reach a max voltage of 1.48 single core)


or 16 + 7 

As far as I know, negative offset is disabled. But most users try to make an undervolt.
I use -0.0125 only for reinsurance, because auto can set 1.65 volts if I use BCLK 102.0 (sometimes I come across such a bug)


----------



## Synoxia

1usmus said:


> or 16 + 7
> 
> As far as I know, negative offset is disabled. But most users try to make an undervolt.
> I use -0.0125 only for reinsurance, because auto can set 1.65 volts if I use BCLK 102.0 (sometimes I come across such a bug)


What do you mean by "undervolt disabled"? Temps seem to be lower with undervolting and also performance decreases/system gets unstable sometimes

And why you use bclk 102 if your scores are lower compared to bclk 100?


----------



## 1usmus

Synoxia said:


> What do you mean by "undervolt disabled"? Temps seem to be lower with undervolting and also performance decreases/system gets unstable sometimes
> 
> And why you use bclk 102 if your scores are lower compared to bclk 100?



In the literal sense, most of the comparison results that are published in threads are statistical error.
+ - 5 degrees or + - 30 points in CB. Also, PBO has a maximum margin of ten percent and tests in the 1000 1000 1000 mode will also not work. There is software locking for arithmetic performance and there is a constant active EDC throttling , which users are not able to change. There are a lot of surprises.

For example, BCLK 102 will allow me to get 4642 MHz in the CB20, while 1.487 volts will not be exceeded. If I use the SMU mod, the maximum frequency is 4717 MHz in the load, but the result is worse than on a BIOS without mode with a frequency of 4642 MHz. 
SMU 46.34.00 has a "fake" frequency, but it still has some heat reserve for certain processor instructions (if you do not go into details, each processor instruction emits a certain amount of "heat" and the frequency is regulated depending on the results).


----------



## ajlueke

Reikoji said:


> Some tips on using process lasso with cenebench? i try to make it not able to use the 1st 3 cores, or any other cores, but it uses them anyway.


Hello!

When you right click on the application and select affinity, make to use the "always" affinity setting versus "current". You can switch it back later if you want to use the application with other cores again.


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> Thanks for confirming the fans are fixed in the 0002 BIOS Matt. I will still wait for the official BIOS. Yes, I never could figure out why I was getting an overtemp shutdown and reboot at 78° C. when the limit is supposed to be 95° C. Hope the motherboard discharge procedure you provided works for him. The next time I tear the machine down again so I can access the fan headers occluded by gpus, I can switch all the fans back to the motherboard headers again for a test. After the official fixed BIOS of course. Other than not being able to see all the fan rpms, I don't need the fan headers for either power or control since I run them at 100% all the time. The fan controller does that job perfectly now. The one rpm for the rad fans from the controller is sufficient. Saves space in the monitoring program too which is hard to fit onto the desktop with all the sensors showing.


Well since you did the BIOS Corruption Fix, I know it didn't fix the fan issue, but has the Over Temperature problem come back? I know you are on a Fan Controller now, but obviously with what you do you go over 78c pretty regularly, so I would think that if it was still an issue for you, you would have seen it even after switching to an external Fan Controller. So clearing the BIOS may not have fixed the fan issue, mainly because the fan issue was a "feature" of the BIOS, but it may have solved the Premature Over Temp issue.

Just curious, I know you have your reasons, but as it seems even official BIOSes from Asus tend to be not any different then their "Official" BIOSes, how come you want to wait for an Official BIOS? Just curious.

Hope all is well brother! Work has kept me SLAMMED this past week!


----------



## oreonutz

Axaion said:


> Am i the only one whos annoyed by the absolute trash tier fan controls on the board?, forcing 100% fan speeds at 75c is so. annoying.
> 
> Also, HPET and Spread Spectrum needs toggles, due to some software (cough creative) being terrible with one or the other of them, causing stutters for some people, would be nice to flick a bios setting to fix things.


Yeah, you DEFINITELY are not the only one annoyed by that. I have been shouting about it on here for what feels like Months! Whats Cool is the 0002+E Bioses, both from @gupsterg, and @mtrai fix that issue for me, I can now over ride that limit in the UEFI, it just takes a bit of playing around to get it just right.

Also I know it Sucks, because personally I HATE Asus software with a Passion, but the newest version of AISuite actually has not caused chaos on my system, and that allows you to over ride the 75c Critical Temp Limit, and whats awesome is you can now use it to set up your fan curve and override the Critical Fan temp, save the Profile, then close AISuite forever, stop it from starting up from your system, just don't uninstall it, and as long as you let the ASUSFanControlService continue to start automatically with your system, you fan Curve will continue to work! So Until The recent BIOS Mods from Gupsterg and Mtrai, thats how I finally defeated that STUPID 100 Percent Fan speed at 75c, and it worked quite well. The only issue I had with it is it took about 7 seconds for your faster Fan Speed to kick in after hitting a Temperature that you configured it to raise fan speeds at, so it was really slow to react which sucked, but it was definitely better then having my ear drums blown every time I did a cinebench run. The BIOS Mods largely fix that issue though.

Hope that helps.


----------



## oreonutz

gupsterg said:


> ROG C7H UEFI 0002+E download link  .
> 
> ROG C7HWIFI UEFI 0002+E download link  .
> 
> Rename file C7H 0002+E.CAP to C7H.CAP and flash using flashback.
> Rename file C7HWIFI 0002+E.CAP to C7HWIFI.CAP and flash using flashback.
> 
> Please see readme.txt for changes  , further information can be gained checking "Source" directory (contains some file/stages prior to modding), compare files with "Modded" folder. For example files ending in IFR.txt use Winmerge to see differences. Some differences can't be seen unless you compare in HxD, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> You must be on 1xxx/2xxx CPU, AFAIK this is AMD's fault as AMD CBS, etc are their menus from AGESA....
> 
> 
> 
> AMD Overclocking Menu is 3xxx only.
> 
> 
> 
> Sweet :thumb: .


Dude, Gups... You are simply AMAZING! Thank You for this, about to test it out shortly. I really really LOVE @mtrai's Version, so I know yours is going to be awesome as well! We seriously have the BEST Mobo Community I have ever been apart of, you guys have all been awesome! Let me know if you need anything brother! Will report on my experience in the next day or so, but as my needs have already been met by the past versions, I already know I am going to be happy!


----------



## oreonutz

Reikoji said:


> But, Shamino said "Boosts clocks are here to stay" :|
> 
> 
> 
> Fact is AMD never said anything of the sort. It was just his theory. Opinion. There was literally no way they would have advertised these boost clocks if the processors couldnt do it. been a bios issue from the start, but the bios man found himself unable to admit a bios error.. Him and others, such as Derbaur, have been too eager to say AMD Wont or cant fix this, or simply lied about it. Theyre all likely to get shat in the face soon.
> 
> I eagerly await the firmware update


I don't know brother, I think that may be a little too harsh. Both Shamino and Derbauer do a lot to help this community, and I both think they are both doing there best to both help consumers of AMD Products, and help put Pressure on AMD to do something about this. If it weren't for Derbauers Video and all of us Participating in it, the likelihood of AMD providing this upcoming fix was extremely unlikely. Had they planned on this prior to that video and the attention it got, we would have heard about it by now, these processors launched on July 7th, its been almost exactly 2 Months, things really started to get heated about this issue in our community in August, and all AMD did was put a note on their website saying that the Boost speed printed on the Box would only be reached under "Nominal" conditions. It was pretty clear they did not intend to fix this issue. I agree with you that it would have been bad for them, given they advertised those speeds, but we were given EVERY REASON to believe that they were not intending to do anything about it.

Furthermore Shamino is way closer to this then any of us are, he is knowledgeable and informed, he also goes out of his way to give us Beta BIOSes when he clearly doesn't have to. I know dealing with ASUS has sucked this generation, but he makes it at least a little bit better then it would be if he wasn't here, and he gives us insight from time to time about what goes on behind the scenes. So its up to you, I clearly can't tell you what to think or believe, but I would definitely reevaluate your position and attitude towards those 2 people in particular whom are an asset to our community, if I were in your shoes, but again, thats just me.

I also would be careful about praising this upcoming "fix" until we actually see it. I am just as hopeful as you that this fixes both the stock Boost frequencies, and the PBO algorithm. I really really hope this delivers what the community has been begging for, but it also could end up being another bug ridden Agesa. Also the chances of us actually receiving it this month our pretty slim, remember the "Community Announcement" about this fix will be given on September 10th. At that point we will probably get a date that the Motherboard Manufacturers will be receiving this new Agesa, and then from there we have to wait for ASUS to actually deliver it to us. Chances are it will be Shamino who delivers us a Beta Bios with this "Fix" included. So just some stuff to think about. I really can't wait for it either, its just wise to temper expectations, and try to give respect where respect is due. Anyways, going back to work now. Much Love everyone!

EDIT: Also a small point of fact. You said that:



Reikoji said:


> _...been a bios issue from the start, but the bios man found himself unable to admit a bios error..._


We know now, due to both help from The Stilt, and then put into action by @gupsterg in the form of a Mod, that the Boosting behavior _and_ the algorithm that dictates it, is all contained inside the SMU Modules that AMD includes in their AGESA's. We know this is a Black Box and that the Motherboard manufacturers DO NOT have the ability to edit or manipulate the code contained in the SMU. Both it and the Agesa are complete Black Boxes of Binary that are handed off to the Mobo Manufacturers to then insert into their UEFI's. At this point in time there has not been one Motherboard Manufacturer that has shown the ability to manipulate or edit the Agesa or SMU. The best they can do is the same @gupsterg did, and include a different SMU with a different Agesa. We will know if this changes in the future, if for instance one of the Motherboard Manufacturers quietly turn back on PCIE4 for their x470/x370 Motherboards, but as of now this has been outside of their ability. This means that the boosting Behavior was 100 Percent out of the control of Motherboard Manufacturers, including Shamino at ASUS, and in fact this entire time this problem has been an inhouse AMD Problem, 100 Percent! I too want it fixed, but we need to put the blame where the blame belongs, and this is 100 Percent an AMD Bug, not a Bios bug that any of the Motherboard Manufacturers had control over. THE ONLY REASON there is any differences in performance between motherboards come down to differences in SMU Versions used, and differences in the one thing they are allowed to control, and that is the default PPT, TDC, and EDC values that their boards use at default, the Base Clock their Motherboards use at default, and the VRM of those individual boards. The SMU however, is the biggest determining factor as to how a CPU boosts, and that is 100 Pecent out of every motherboard Manufacturers hands.

Anyways, I am done with my facts rant of the day now, I will shut up and get back to work. LOL!


----------



## Reikoji

gupsterg said:


> Never said or thought he was sole saviour, he was there from the beginning highlighting issue and pointing out to AMD, all I can see he has worked with AMD and not against them
> 
> Of your previous post, most distasteful part is:-
> 
> "Him and others, such as Derbaur, have been too eager to say AMD Wont or cant fix this, or simply lied about it. Theyre all likely to get shat in the face soon."
> 
> I do not ever recall any of them saying AMD won't fix, please do provide the "source" material.
> 
> I'll be honest at times posts which I have read towards say Elmor, The Stilt, [email protected], der8auer, Shamnino and others, I do think why do they bother with the communities", as at times they really seem unappreciated to me.


https://youtu.be/DgSoZAdk_E8?t=1038



ajlueke said:


> Hello!
> 
> When you right click on the application and select affinity, make to use the "always" affinity setting versus "current". You can switch it back later if you want to use the application with other cores again.



I did that but no dice.



oreonutz said:


> I don't know brother, I think that may be a little too harsh. Both Shamino and Derbauer do a lot to help this community, and I both think they are both doing there best to both help consumers of AMD Products, and help put Pressure on AMD to do something about this. If it weren't for Derbauers Video and all of us Participating in it, the likelihood of AMD providing this upcoming fix was extremely unlikely. Had they planned on this prior to that video and the attention it got, we would have heard about it by now, these processors launched on July 7th, its been almost exactly 2 Months, things really started to get heated about this issue in our community in August, and all AMD did was put a note on their website saying that the Boost speed printed on the Box would only be reached under "Nominal" conditions. It was pretty clear they did not intend to fix this issue. I agree with you that it would have been bad for them, given they advertised those speeds, but we were given EVERY REASON to believe that they were not intending to do anything about it.
> 
> Furthermore Shamino is way closer to this then any of us are, he is knowledgeable and informed, he also goes out of his way to give us Beta BIOSes when he clearly doesn't have to. I know dealing with ASUS has sucked this generation, but he makes it at least a little bit better then it would be if he wasn't here, and he gives us insight from time to time about what goes on behind the scenes. So its up to you, I clearly can't tell you what to think or believe, but I would definitely reevaluate your position and attitude towards those 2 people in particular whom are an asset to our community, if I were in your shoes, but again, thats just me.
> 
> I also would be careful about praising this upcoming "fix" until we actually see it. I am just as hopeful as you that this fixes both the stock Boost frequencies, and the PBO algorithm. I really really hope this delivers what the community has been begging for, but it also could end up being another bug ridden Agesa. Also the chances of us actually receiving it this month our pretty slim, remember the "Community Announcement" about this fix will be given on September 10th. At that point we will probably get a date that the Motherboard Manufacturers will be receiving this new Agesa, and then from there we have to wait for ASUS to actually deliver it to us. Chances are it will be Shamino who delivers us a Beta Bios with this "Fix" included. So just some stuff to think about. I really can't wait for it either, its just wise to temper expectations, and try to give respect where respect is due. Anyways, going back to work now. Much Love everyone!
> 
> EDIT: Also a small point of fact. You said that:
> 
> 
> 
> We know now, due to both help from The Stilt, and then put into action by @gupsterg in the form of a Mod, that the Boosting behavior is the algorithm that dictates it, is all contained inside the SMU Modules that AMD includes in their AGESA's. We know this is a Black Box and that the Motherboard manufacturers DO NOT have the ability to edit or manipulate the code contained in the SMU. Both it and the Agesa are complete Black Boxes of Binary that are handed off to the Mobo Manufacturers to then insert into their UEFI's. At this point in time there has not been one Motherboard Manufacturer that has shown the ability to manipulate or edit the Agesa or SMU. The best they can do is the same @gupsterg did, and include a different SMU with a different Agesa. We will know if this changes in the future, if for instance one of the Motherboard Manufacturers quietly turn back on PCIE4 for their x470/x370 Motherboards, but as of now this has been outside of their ability. This means that the boosting Behavior was 100 Percent out of the control of Motherboard Manufacturers, including Shamino at ASUS, and in fact this entire time this problem has been an inhouse AMD Problem, 100 Percent! I too want it fixed, but we need to put the blame where the blame belongs, and this is 100 Percent an AMD Bug, not a Bios bug that any of the Motherboard Manufacturers had control over. THE ONLY REASON there is any differences in performance between motherboards come down to differences in SMU Versions used, and differences in the one thing they are allowed to control, and that is the default PPT, TDC, and EDC values that their boards use at default, the Base Clock their Motherboards use at default, and the VRM of those individual boards. The SMU however, is the biggest determining factor as to how a CPU boosts, and that is 100 Pecent out of every motherboard Manufacturers hands.
> 
> Anyways, I am done with my facts rant of the day now, I will shut up and get back to work. LOL!


But we have SMU mods, that require flashing of bios with those mods...


Man its whatever. They said what they said and maybe i'm the only one that took it to heart. But, IMO, these individuals had ZERO hope that this would be resolved by AMD. Thats just how I take it. And if it doesn't get resolved, well that just means another False Advertisement suite and we all can get a little money from it...


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> I don't have to, boost on this BIOS is the best i've seen. It never drops below 4.175 GHz with static volts of 1.375 it goes all the way up to 4.250 GHz in some cases.
> 
> The problem is the Memory as i can't set the memory timings as in mus calculator.


I haven't tested without PE 3 so that seems like a nice increase in performance from its previous boost behavior. 

I, however, haven't seen any reduction in memory performance. If anything I've seen an increase?

What timings are you trying?


----------



## nick name

nick name said:


> I haven't tested without PE 3 so that seems like a nice increase in performance from its previous boost behavior.
> 
> I, however, haven't seen any reduction in memory performance. If anything I've seen an increase?
> 
> What timings are you trying?


Ok. I tried PBO with the Scalar to 10x and PPT, TDC at 1000 and EDC at 200. The results seemed better than they were, but still not a solid as PE 3. A quick CB 15 run saw 40.5 ~ 40.8 (fluctuating) and PE 3 would have that at 42.8 (static) with EDC at 200. And with lower EDC (160) puts the multiplier at 42. 

So PE 3 is still the best way to hit and stay at higher multipliers.


----------



## oreonutz

Reikoji said:


> Man its whatever. They said what they said and maybe i'm the only one that took it to heart. But, IMO, these individuals had ZERO hope that this would be resolved by AMD. Thats just how I take it. And if it doesn't get resolved, well that just means another False Advertisement suite and we all can get a little money from it...


I am confused. Even if that is true, why does that bother you???? Did you actually believe that AMD would resolve this? Given there COMPLETE and UTTER Silence on the matter? They literally did ONE THING, and that was put up a definition on their website, quietly I might add, that said that we would only see those boost clocks under nominal Conditions. We wouldn't have known about it if other users like us didn't go on the site and find it, and then report it to publications who then made sure we all heard about it. And then there was their Reddit Posts. Instead of even acknowledging to us that there even was a problem with their boosting, they instead tried to reset and re-calibrate our expectations. They wanted us to believe that this was all actually completely normal, and that not hitting the boost frequency was completely expected and not a bug on their end. They did this for almost 2 Months straight now. So after all of that, you truly believed that they intended to fix this issue?

And even if you did, could you Really hold it against others in the community, people who interact and work with AMD regularly who get more inside information and insight then we ever will, and everything even they are seeing leads them also to believe that AMD had no intentions of fixing this, do you really hold malice towards these individuals for expressing their discontent? 

Even furthermore, in the case of Debauer, he could have just complained and/or shut up and not said anything about it, instead he gets us, the community who actually bought and use these chips, to submit our data and runs a very detailed analysis on our data, and shows us that yes, this was indeed a problem, when other publications were out there saying this was just a motherboard issue. He proved that no, it didn't matter what motherboard you had, this issue was a chip issue, and more then half of all 3000 series owners were experiencing it. He then puts out another video giving us all this data, and because of the stink it made with the press, this forces AMD's hand to at the very least finally break their silence on the matter to give us some confidence that they were doing something about it, at the very worst he is the sole reason they ARE doing something about it. It is extremely likely that if not for the enthusiasm and work that Debauer put in to this issue for US, that we would not be seeing this fix, and would instead be still complaining about this on forums today. It is possible that AMD were planning a fix already, but if so they did not give ANYONE any indication of this, where as in the past with other issues that effect far less people, like the Linux issues and Destiny 2 issues, they were FAST to speak up about it and say they were aware of the issue and put forth their intentions to fix it. But on this issue they were silent. 

So given all of that, I would say we have Debauer to AT LEAST thank for AMD speaking up about it finally.

And again, I ask you, given all of this, could you REALLY hold it against someone for voicing their discontent on this issue? Maybe you can, but I certainly can not. In fact I take the very opposite stance and am extremely thankful that we have people in this community with the enthusiasm and drive that they do have to speak up and do something about it. Again, thats just me though... 

Sorry, I really will shut up now...


----------



## oreonutz

Reikoji said:


> But we have SMU mods, that require flashing of bios with those mods...


I am confused by what your point is here. Yes we have SMU Mods. Are you aware of why these SMU Mods work? They are not actually Modded SMU's that @gupsterg went out and manipulated to make our CPU's Boost Higher. All he did was take a SMU from the Agesa 1002 that had the better boosting, and insert it into our newer UEFI. I don't mean to belittle his work at all, that was still an insanely time consuming task for him to take on, and I really thank him for it. But he, or any of the bios manufacturers, do NOT have the ability to actually manipulate the SMU itself, the SMU comes direct from AMD and it STAYS EXACTLY how they program it. Not ASUS, GIGABYTE, ASROCK, MSI, or even @gupsterg, have the ability to change that SMU once AMD delivers it. (Not yet anyway...)


----------



## Reikoji

oreonutz said:


> I am confused. Even if that is true, why does that bother you???? Did you actually believe that AMD would resolve this? Given there COMPLETE and UTTER Silence on the matter? They literally did ONE THING, and that was put up a definition on their website, quietly I might add, that said that we would only see those boost clocks under nominal Conditions. We wouldn't have known about it if other users like us didn't go on the site and find it, and then report it to publications who then made sure we all heard about it. And then there was their Reddit Posts. Instead of even acknowledging to us that there even was a problem with their boosting, they instead tried to reset and re-calibrate our expectations. They wanted us to believe that this was all actually completely normal, and that not hitting the boost frequency was completely expected and not a bug on their end. They did this for almost 2 Months straight now. So after all of that, you truly believed that they intended to fix this issue?
> 
> And even if you did, could you Really hold it against others in the community, people who interact and work with AMD regularly who get more inside information and insight then we ever will, and everything even they are seeing leads them also to believe that AMD had no intentions of fixing this, do you really hold malice towards these individuals for expressing their discontent?
> 
> Even furthermore, in the case of Debauer, he could have just complained and/or shut up and not said anything about it, instead he gets us, the community who actually bought and use these chips, to submit our data and runs a very detailed analysis on our data, and shows us that yes, this was indeed a problem, when other publications were out there saying this was just a motherboard issue. He proved that no, it didn't matter what motherboard you had, this issue was a chip issue, and more then half of all 3000 series owners were experiencing it. He then puts out another video giving us all this data, and because of the stink it made with the press, this forces AMD's hand to at the very least finally break their silence on the matter to give us some confidence that they were doing something about it, at the very worst he is the sole reason they ARE doing something about it. It is extremely likely that if not for the enthusiasm and work that Debauer put in to this issue for US, that we would not be seeing this fix, and would instead be still complaining about this on forums today. It is possible that AMD were planning a fix already, but if so they did not give ANYONE any indication of this, where as in the past with other issues that effect far less people, like the Linux issues and Destiny 2 issues, they were FAST to speak up about it and say they were aware of the issue and put forth their intentions to fix it. But on this issue they were silent.
> 
> So given all of that, I would say we have Debauer to AT LEAST thank for AMD speaking up about it finally.
> 
> And again, I ask you, given all of this, could you REALLY hold it against someone for voicing their discontent on this issue? Maybe you can, but I certainly can not. In fact I take the very opposite stance and am extremely thankful that we have people in this community with the enthusiasm and drive that they do have to speak up and do something about it. Again, thats just me though...
> 
> Sorry, I really will shut up now...


As with any company, I dont think they can say much of anything until they figure something out. Takes time sometimes, and we really dont want them to rush a fix that could end up bricking our CPUs. The Destiny 2 fix, idle temps, voltage reporting, etc as well, they just figured that out faster. Everything is coming as it comes. Not too much different than the time its been taking to get a new official bios.

And Like I sad, Derbaurs survey did help, and helped show that the AORUS Extreme wasnt the end-all only board that can hit boost clocks, but hes not the only one that helped. There are literally thousands of people who helped garner a response from AMD. AND imo, he didnt need to say all that at the end of his video. I would have no qualms if "AMD cant or wont fix this" never came out of his mouth. As I sad, hes an influential person and that will lead thousands to also believe AMD can't or wont fix this.... even in their Tweet, the influenced voice their swayed opinion.

But, thats just me... Thinking too far into things.


----------



## gupsterg

Reikoji said:


> https://youtu.be/DgSoZAdk_E8?t=1038


Repeatedly he said "might".

"....AMD might not..."

Which to me is not a clearly defined factual statement meaning no.

"...maybe AMD may need to push vcore"

Again "maybe" "may" is not a clear cut definition...

And clearly states is "not an official statement"...

But I guess it has to, be as everything on the internet is true and factual....


----------



## oreonutz

Reikoji said:


> As with any company, I dont think they can say much of anything until they figure something out. Takes time sometimes, and we really dont want them to rush a fix that could end up bricking our CPUs. The Destiny 2 fix, idle temps, voltage reporting, etc as well, they just figured that out faster. Everything is coming as it comes. Not too much different than the time its been taking to get a new official bios.
> 
> And Like I sad, Derbaurs survey did help, and helped show that the AORUS Extreme wasnt the end-all only board that can hit boost clocks, but hes not the only one that helped. There are literally thousands of people who helped garner a response from AMD. AND imo, he didnt need to say all that at the end of his video. I would have no qualms if "AMD cant or wont fix this" never came out of his mouth. As I sad, hes an influential person and that will lead thousands to also believe AMD can't or wont fix this.... even in their Tweet, the influenced voice their swayed opinion.
> 
> But, thats just me...


Of course it takes time brother. NO ONE said any different. But when you have at least half of your user base with problems, EVEN if you DON'T know the answer of how to fix it, you make a statement acknowledging the problem and your intent to fix it as soon as possible. This is STANDARD practice. Again, with the Linux and Destiny Issues, they didn't know how to fix it, those issues were reported literally the DAY AFTER the launch. And Literally TWO HOURS after the first publications went live reporting the problem, AMD had contacted them to inform them that they were aware of the issue, and were working on a fix. We in fact did not get this fix until almost 3 weeks after launch, BUT AMD Addressed that their was an issue, along with their intent to fix it. This is not the only example of this, I could site dozens more if you wish, just from AMD.

However with this issue in-particular, they did not address it AT ALL. All they did was put up a statement on their site saying these boost clocks would only be seen under "nominal Conditions" and then AMD Robert tried to reset peoples expectations on a Reddit post. So instead of assuring people they were aware of the problem and express their intent to fix it, AS IS THERE STANDARD in this situation, they tried to tell us it was normal and expected. This is the sign of a company with no intentions to fix this particular problem, not the opposite.

And again, in the case of debauer. YES, HE ABSOLUTELY DID HAVE to add those comments at the end of the video. He works closely with AMD, on top of all the AMD silence and attempting of resetting expectations on this issue that were publicly known, he privately communicates with him and is given even more reason to believe they have no reason to fix this. If you are a youtuber who gets millions of views and you believe that a company you are working with has no intentions of fixing a problem, the RIGHT THING TO DO is to SAY SO. This helps put EVEN MORE pressure on the company to get them to act on the issue.

I understand that as purchasers of AMD products we tend to have emotional connections with them, and therefore get upset when others are seen as attacking this company that we support, but that is an emotional and irrational response that we should do our best to suppress. It is natural, so I don't hold it against you, I have the same reactions, but you have to catch yourself and think about things rationally. It makes no sense to defend AMD here, it also makes no sense to attack someone who only had intentions of helping us. You can disagree with how he went about helping us, but you can't deny that it got the response we were all hoping for. If you look at this situation analytically and take your emotions out of it, you will see that actually these people that your emotions are telling you to be mad at, our in fact our allies and should be praised as such. Not that they don't make mistakes too, because they absolutely do, but this was DEFINITELY not one of them.

EDIT:

In regards to your edit to Debauers statements, about how he phrased his statement would give people the wrong impression... 

I could see how some might get that impression. But the truth is, he was helping save AMD's Reputation by forcing their hand and making them do something about it. AMD Reputation was taking a MUCH bigger hit the more and more this issue kept popping up all over the media and forums. And Furthermore, fanboys have all the ammo they will ever need to hate who ever they want to hate, Debauer being honest and saying he is not sure that AMD will ever fix this issue, is just that, debauer being honest and stating how he feels. Yes other people spoke up about this too, but his video was the final nail in the coffin because it included very detailed data that is hard to dispute. So regardless of how he phrased it, he definitely helped, and its never wise to hate someone over being honest and speaking how they feel, regardless if they are influential or not, its specifically because he is influential that AMD is finally doing something about this.

Anyways, I have spent far too long on this already. I like ya brother, we have talked a bit on this forum and I always make sure to read your posts, I just felt I should chime in to try to have you think of a different perspective on this, but ultimately thats up to you. I do 100 percent understand your feelings, I share them as far as the frustration with this process, I just think its wise to realize whom the allies are, and whom is causing the issues. In this case I do believe that the people you think are the problem, are in fact the ones helping us with our problem. But again, for real, I am just shutting up now!


----------



## Reikoji

Whatever... this is just a case of 'cant say anything bad about one everyone loves'. Lets drop it and move on.


----------



## Synoxia

1usmus said:


> In the literal sense, most of the comparison results that are published in threads are statistical error.
> + - 5 degrees or + - 30 points in CB. Also, PBO has a maximum margin of ten percent and tests in the 1000 1000 1000 mode will also not work. There is software locking for arithmetic performance and there is a constant active EDC throttling , which users are not able to change. There are a lot of surprises.
> 
> For example, BCLK 102 will allow me to get 4642 MHz in the CB20, while 1.487 volts will not be exceeded. If I use the SMU mod, the maximum frequency is 4717 MHz in the load, but the result is worse than on a BIOS without mode with a frequency of 4642 MHz.
> SMU 46.34.00 has a "fake" frequency, but it still has some heat reserve for certain processor instructions (if you do not go into details, each processor instruction emits a certain amount of "heat" and the frequency is regulated depending on the results).


Wow, how did you manage to get +8 single core points? Doesn't 3900x have a PPT of 142w? How did you increase it to 160? PBO seem to not be working or reducing performance on this board

So basically you're telling me that stock 0002 1003abb that won't ever touch 4.400 and has an avg frequency of 4.200-4250 is faster than 00002 1002 46.34 which on the same undervolt settings (-0.3125, but not +200 mhz autoOC as it doesn't work on new SMU apparently) spikes to 4.450 with an avg frequency of 42750-4.325?
Or that 102 BCLK on stock 0002 (1003ABB) bios is faster than agesa 1002 stock?

Couldn't it just be that +2 frequency on BCLK just improved the system overall?


----------



## oreonutz

Reikoji said:


> Whatever... this is just a case of 'cant say anything bad about one everyone loves'. Lets drop it and move on.


LOL! Yup thats it 100 Percent. I just spent an hour of my life explaining to you exactly why I felt you were being harsh with someone trying to help us, gave you extremely detailed reasons along with very reasonable analysis on the situation, and then it all gets boiled down in a few seconds to me just defending someone because "Everyone Loves Them". LOL! Sometimes I don't know why I even try.

I do believe that is absolutely the case, I just think the Irony is you don't realize whom is the one with the symptoms. 

Moving on...


----------



## Reikoji

Synoxia said:


> Wow, how did you manage to get +8 single core points? Doesn't 3900x have a PPT of 142w? How did you increase it to 160? PBO seem to not be working or reducing performance on this board
> 
> So basically you're telling me that stock 0002 1003abb that won't ever touch 4.400 and has an avg frequency of 4.200-4250 is faster than 00002 1002 46.34 which on the same undervolt settings (-0.3125, but not +200 mhz autoOC as it doesn't work on new SMU apparently) spikes to 4.450 with an avg frequency of 42750-4.325?
> Or that 102 BCLK on stock 0002 (1003ABB) bios is faster than agesa 1002 stock?
> 
> Couldn't it just be that +2 frequency on BCLK just improved the system overall?


For whatever reason, you cant increase the PPT in Ryzen master. You have to change it in bios by setting PBO to manual and entering the PPT you desire. Same with TDC and EDC.


----------



## oreonutz

hwalsh01 said:


> Ive just moved onto this board with a 3800x. I'm running 2703 but i also get the strange double boot behaviour. Hoping somebody can point me in the right direction toward fixing it. Everything is set to default except im using DOCP as i could get the dram calculator timings to work.


With this BIOS the Double Boot is related to your memory overclock. Unfortunately its just training your Ram with every boot. I do believe there is a way to fix it by dialing in the training settings in the AMD CBS Submenu, but I unfortunately do not know which are the best settings to set that both fix the issue, and allow you to continue to post with Memory Overclocks. I can tell you that eventually the issue seemed to have gone away for me, but I am not 100 Percent sure as to what setting I set fixed it. Hopefully someone else can chime in on this here. I am sure it will be fixed in a future UEFI, and definitely there are past UEFI's that didn't have this issue, but I also believe higher memory OC's are possible on this UEFI, so its a double edge sword. However, if you are just going to run DOCP, you probably would be better off just going to 2501, you should have no issue posting with your DOCP in that UEFI, and I don't believe that UEFI suffered from the double boot issue at default.


----------



## Reikoji

oreonutz said:


> LOL! Yup thats it 100 Percent. I just spent an hour of my life explaining to you exactly why I felt you were being harsh with someone trying to help us, gave you extremely detailed reasons along with very reasonable analysis on the situation, and then it all gets boiled down in a few seconds to me just defending someone because "Everyone Loves Them". LOL! Sometimes I don't know why I even try.
> 
> I do believe that is absolutely the case, I just think the Irony is you don't realize whom is the one with the symptoms.
> 
> Moving on...


All of us.


----------



## Synoxia

Reikoji said:


> For whatever reason, you cant increase the PPT in Ryzen master. You have to change it in bios by setting PBO to manual and entering the PPT you desire. Same with TDC and EDC.


Yeah i thought you couldn't even modify PPT in the BIOS. Seems that you can on 1002. Doesn't make any difference though as expected


----------



## Reikoji

Synoxia said:


> Yeah i thought you couldn't even modify PPT in the BIOS. Seems that you can on 1002. Doesn't make any difference though as expected


Nah. I got PPT 355, TDC and EDC at 250 and it simply never attempts to reach any of them.


----------



## nick name

Reikoji said:


> For whatever reason, you cant increase the PPT in Ryzen master. You have to change it in bios by setting PBO to manual and entering the PPT you desire. Same with TDC and EDC.


If you're looking to increase it in Ryzen Master it will be capped at what is set in BIOS. You should find that it can be reduced, but not increased beyond what is set in BIOS. So if you haven't changed it in BIOS then Ryzen Master will be capped at the default values. 

If you want to be able to test values within Windows then you'll want to set the highest values you wish to test in BIOS first and then you can work the values down and up (to what is set in BIOS) during a Windows session.


----------



## mtrai

All I can say is the correct people at AMD are aware of this boost behavior and it is being looked at...just like all I can say is the navi issues are a top priority. I can't say more then that. Hell I bo
ught 3 navis just to test a theory and they are aware of my findings. 1 of the 3 was just a complete dud many different BSOD that appeared not related to the gpu but was due to the bad gpu. Including several windows corruptions and needed a back up to restore.


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> I haven't tested without PE 3 so that seems like a nice increase in performance from its previous boost behavior.
> 
> I, however, haven't seen any reduction in memory performance. If anything I've seen an increase?
> 
> What timings are you trying?


Ye, boost clocks are best as it ever been though. The only think is lacking RAM settings in CBS.

I am running 3466 MHz CL14, The Stilt settings in RAM profiles. Its been running fine ever since, even without the CBS so maybe they left it out as it doesn't really do any thing or is not necessary? Idk man.


----------



## oreonutz

gupsterg said:


> Extended to 85C in UEFI 0002+E, modules can be added to another UEFI to make it do that without having to spend time I originally did.


Hey Gups! Great UEFI My Man!

What would it take for me to further Edit that Limit to 93c in your UEFI? I Have insanely fast fans, and my Fan Curve gets Fairly aggressive after 80c, but I only want it to hit 75% at 85 c, 85% at 90c, and then balls to the wall 100% at 93c. That way I can have that protection when I absolutely need it, but during benchmarking and rendering I can keep my Rig Silent, even for those moments where I might hit 85c. Your Mod DEFINITELY helps, I just am wondering what I need to do to up that critical temp further?

Keep in mind I don't know the first thing about hex editing UEFI's yet, but am definitely willing to learn, your just WAY further along than I in terms of the understanding necessary to do so.


----------



## ajlueke

Hmm, does the Cinebench process actually show only a single core for the affinity in the application list? I haven't had any problems getting it to take with "always" affinity.

As for your statements about Derbauer and those videos, I do agree. They made statements such as "maybe the silicon can't do it" which was actually pretty easy to debunk, as i did in my own testing. Those videos actually have made people believe that it is a fundamental flaw in the hardware that AMD can't fix as indicated in the last comments in the AMD community thread. And that AMD is up to shady business.

https://community.amd.com/thread/241742

So, intentional or not, those videos do seem to have spread misinformation about the nature of the issue. There are individuals now that believe there is a fundamental flaw underlying the boost issues, and that AMD has been nefariously plotting to cover it up, and citing these videos as sources. And it all fairness, I do think AMD was working on the issue. It seems unlikely that AMD would release the 3950X this month to reviewers using the 1.0.0.3XX AGESA and have it not hit 4.7GHz. They likely saw the same kinds of boosting issues in the internal testing there. 

You need to be really carefully about labeling what is speculation, as exactly that. Suggesting that the silicon can't hit boost clocks is a pretty major statement, especially with no evidence to prove that. On top of that, it is pretty easy to show that the silicon CAN in fact hit the boost clocks at the voltage PB already provides, and the issues could lie with some other internal limiter or the algorithm itself. You need to make sure any conclusions you draw are supported by the data at hand and you only report that which your data supports. That's not only good science, but good reporting.


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> All I can say is the correct people at AMD are aware of this boost behavior and it is being looked at...just like all I can say is the navi issues are a top priority. I can't say more then that. Hell I bo
> ught 3 navis just to test a theory and they are aware of my findings. 1 of the 3 was just a complete dud many different BSOD that appeared not related to the gpu but was due to the bad gpu. Including several windows corruptions and needed a back up to restore.


LEGEND!... *Nough* Said...


----------



## oreonutz

ajlueke said:


> Hmm, does the Cinebench process actually show only a single core for the affinity in the application list? I haven't had any problems getting it to take with "always" affinity.
> 
> As for your statements about Derbauer and those videos, I do agree. They made statements such as "maybe the silicon can't do it" which was actually pretty easy to debunk, as i did in my own testing. Those videos actually have made people believe that it is a fundamental flaw in the hardware that AMD can't fix as indicated in the last comments in the AMD community thread. And that AMD is up to shady business.
> 
> https://community.amd.com/thread/241742
> 
> So, intentional or not, those videos do seem to have spread misinformation about the nature of the issue. There are individuals now that believe there is a fundamental flaw underlying the boost issues, and that AMD has been nefariously plotting to cover it up, and citing these videos as sources. And it all fairness, I do think AMD was working on the issue. It seems unlikely that AMD would release the 3950X this month to reviewers using the 1.0.0.3XX AGESA and have it not hit 4.7GHz. They likely saw the same kinds of boosting issues in the internal testing there.
> 
> You need to be really carefully about labeling what is speculation, as exactly that. Suggesting that the silicon can't hit boost clocks is a pretty major statement, especially with no evidence to prove that. On top of that, it is pretty easy to show that the silicon CAN in fact hit the boost clocks at the voltage PB already provides, and the issues could lie with some other internal limiter or the algorithm itself. You need to make sure any conclusions you draw are supported by the data at hand and you only report that which your data supports. That's not only good science, but good reporting.


I again have to agree, and disagree. I agree that people very well could be drawing the wrong conclusions based on the statements in Debauers Video, people often do even when things are pretty clearly stated. People can't decide on whether or not to do a useful video, based on whether or not bad faith actors will take such a video and twist it to support their twisted conclusions. 

I think this video was absolutely 100 Percent necessary. You may be right that they intended to fix the Agesa for the 3950x launch, but that is no Guarantee that we would see those same fixes within a timely manner. And AMD has always been vocal whenever there has been an issue that they have had an intention to fix, they did the opposite in this case and tried to make us believe there was no problem. 

I definitely agree that the silicon can do it, but I am pretty sure that was just speculation on Debauers part, maybe he shouldn't have said that, but the video was done in good faith, and its reasonable to assume he has more information then we do on the subject. I have a feeling he wouldn't have done this video had he thought AMD had an intention to fix it. I do know that its a reasonable conclusion to draw that they did not intend to fix it, just based on AMD's own Recent history on how they react to issues. And at the VERY LEAST, had that video not come out, we DEFINITELY would still be here hoping for a fix today. The Forums would only be gaining more and more posts with people complaining about it, and more and more articles would be coming out about how "These Processors are great, but have Clock Speed 'Problems", like the articles and videos we have been seeing. So regardless of any damage done by people taking this video and clipping one opinion in a video full of data, I believe its reasonable to draw the conclusion that this video did much more overall good to the community than harm considering the even worse effect the growing chorus of that type of coverage can have on a product and the general consumer's view of it, vs One Video where one false opinion was stated at the end of it, that only Intel Fanboys will use as ammunition to try to support their losing case. Truth is AMD's daily silence on the issue was far more damaging than that one video.

Regardless these are amazing processors, and I have every intention to buy a 3950x on Launch, I would even be happy if they lowered their boost clocks on the chip before launch to be honest, because I know clock speed isn't everything, and these chips are damn amazing, but when they print a clock speed on a box, a processor needs to hit that clock speed.

Anyways, the rest of your statement I would agree with, and from the sounds of things there are going to be some pretty cool tools coming down the pipe for us by the time the 3950x launches, so I am excited regardless. Its a good time to be an AMD Owning, CPU Enthusiast!


----------



## mtrai

oreonutz said:


> LEGEND!... *Nough* Said...


Thanks...navi waterblock comes today...sometime next week I expect the other navi to come back from RMA. Hoping. Anyhow it might be possible to enable crossfire with bios editing...as I know SLI can be done. But I need to decided if I should keep it or not. In a waiting pattern on the the 3950X or a house...however actual houses are in low supply on the market in my area due to hurricane Michael last year. The only one in our price range is already under contract.


----------



## gupsterg

Synoxia said:


> Yeah i thought you couldn't even modify PPT in the BIOS. Seems that you can on 1002. Doesn't make any difference though as expected


Every UEFI I have modified it.

In a UEFI where you do not have Precision Boost on Extreme Tweaker ie AGESA 1.0.0.2 you set PPT in PBO menu of AMD CBS/AMD Overclocking. If you want Ryzen Master to reflect that setting back you will need to also make SMU PPT value in AMD CBS > NBIO > SMU match PBO PPT.

On a UEFI which has Precision Boost on Extreme Tweaker if you use that menu you will see the set values in Ryzen Master.

Ryzen Master will not show PPT/TDC rising, as I believe the SMU is not giving it correct monitoring data.




oreonutz said:


> Hey Gups! Great UEFI My Man!
> 
> What would it take for me to further Edit that Limit to 93c in your UEFI? I Have insanely fast fans, and my Fan Curve gets Fairly aggressive after 80c, but I only want it to hit 75% at 85 c, 85% at 90c, and then balls to the wall 100% at 93c. That way I can have that protection when I absolutely need it, but during benchmarking and rendering I can keep my Rig Silent, even for those moments where I might hit 85c. Your Mod DEFINITELY helps, I just am wondering what I need to do to up that critical temp further?
> 
> Keep in mind I don't know the first thing about hex editing UEFI's yet, but am definitely willing to learn, your just WAY further along than I in terms of the understanding necessary to do so.


For example a Zen2 owner, on a C7H, in the modded directory you will find:-

899407D7-99FE-43D8-9A21-79EC328CAC21_Zen2_mod.sct

Referencing the correct txt, wishing to say make CPU fan header allow higher input would look for:-

The first instance is for "PWM"



Code:


0x48EA0 			Numeric: CPU Upper Temperature, VarStoreInfo (VarOffset/VarName): 0x9, VarStore: 0x1B, QuestionId: 0x27B7, Size: 1, Min: 0x14, Max 0x55, Step: 0x1 {07 91 A1 09 A5 09 B7 27 1B 00 09 00 04 10 14 55 01}

The second instance is for "DC"



Code:


0x48EED 			Numeric: CPU Upper Temperature, VarStoreInfo (VarOffset/VarName): 0xA, VarStore: 0x1B, QuestionId: 0x27B8, Size: 1, Min: 0x14, Max 0x55, Step: 0x1 {07 91 A1 09 A5 09 B8 27 1B 00 0A 00 04 10 14 55 01}

Between the {} is code, to the left of { you are seeing the variable/code given a txt label. Max 0x55 = Max 85C

So you want 93C, in hex is 5D, you search the sct in HxD for relevant code string, say for "PWM" search:-



Code:


07 91 A1 09 A5 09 B7 27 1B 00 09 00 04 10 14 55 01

Change 55 to 5D.



Code:


07 91 A1 09 A5 09 B7 27 1B 00 09 00 04 10 14 5D 01

After you saved changes to sct, load the C7H UEFI in UEFITool, search for the GUID:- 899407D7-99FE-43D8-9A21-79EC328CAC21

The second instance will be for Zen2, replace as is the PE32 image with modded sct, save the UEFI, flash.

I have a quarterly report I must prep, so busy, after the 12th will do a thread on Win RAID on modding and link here.


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> Thanks...navi waterblock comes today...sometime next week I expect the other navi to come back from RMA. Hoping. Anyhow it might be possible to enable crossfire with bios editing...as I know SLI can be done. But I need to decided if I should keep it or not. In a waiting pattern on the the 3950X or a house...however actual houses are in low supply on the market in my area due to hurricane Michael last year. The only one in our price range is already under contract.


Well then the Choice is clear, DEFINITELY the 3950x! LOL!!!

I know the holding pattern you are in though, I am in the same one currently. I am already perfecting my bots so that I don't have the same problem sniping one on launch day that I had on the launch day with the 3900x. I messed up my damn code, and because of it I had to wait nearly 5 days for my damn chip! Not this time! LOL!

Dude that is awesome man! I can't wait to hear if you got Crossfire working, and how it does on titles like Tombraider and other modern titles that support Crossfire!


----------



## oreonutz

gupsterg said:


> For example a Zen2 owner, on a C7H, in the modded directory you will find:-
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 899407D7-99FE-43D8-9A21-79EC328CAC21_Zen2_mod.sct
> 
> Referencing the correct txt, wishing to say make CPU fan header allow higher input would look for:-
> 
> The first instance is for "PWM"
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> 0x48EA0 			Numeric: CPU Upper Temperature, VarStoreInfo (VarOffset/VarName): 0x9, VarStore: 0x1B, QuestionId: 0x27B7, Size: 1, Min: 0x14, Max 0x55, Step: 0x1 {07 91 A1 09 A5 09 B7 27 1B 00 09 00 04 10 14 55 01}
> 
> The second instance is for "DC"
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> 0x48EED 			Numeric: CPU Upper Temperature, VarStoreInfo (VarOffset/VarName): 0xA, VarStore: 0x1B, QuestionId: 0x27B8, Size: 1, Min: 0x14, Max 0x55, Step: 0x1 {07 91 A1 09 A5 09 B8 27 1B 00 0A 00 04 10 14 55 01}
> 
> Between the {} is code, to the left of { you are seeing the variable/code given a txt label. Max 0x55 = Max 85C
> 
> So you want 93C, in hex is 5D, you search the sct in HxD for relevant code string, say for "PWM" search:-
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> 07 91 A1 09 A5 09 B7 27 1B 00 09 00 04 10 14 55 01
> 
> Change 55 to 5D.
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> 07 91 A1 09 A5 09 B7 27 1B 00 09 00 04 10 14 5D 01
> 
> After you saved changes to sct, load the C7H UEFI in UEFITool, search for the GUID:- 899407D7-99FE-43D8-9A21-79EC328CAC21
> 
> The second instance will be for Zen2, replace as is the PE32 image with modded sct, save the UEFI, flash.
> 
> I have a quarterly report I must prep, so busy, after the 12th will do a thread on Win RAID on modding and link here.



Thank You So Much for this Info! About to dive in head first when I get off tonight. One more thing. These tools you said I need, I already have UEFITool as that is needed to flash EPROMS of corrupted BIOS Chips (Although I don't know if the version matters as mine is probably pretty old), but the other tools, are those all included in one of the Zips you have given out in the past? Or are they easy to find?


----------



## 1usmus

I'm shocked...

Do you think 1-2 day after the video a new firmware was born ????? this is not serious. I was not mistaken by a forum? is it really OCN? how easily your trust was won by a man who at one time sold silver lids for Intel processors. None of those listed, except for *Stilt*, even stuttered about real problems. "Silicon quality theory" such words are a shame for a true enthusiast. This is the most primitive that a child can come up with if he is asked a question about the processor.I see only an attempt to make money on a problem that has a different character. I hope there is no need to explain how people make money on fakes and videos on YouTube :doh:

I also like the thesis "He spreads bios - that means he saves the community." What is this misunderstanding? there are direct responsibilities of the community manager

I ask you, leave alone the settings that currently do not work. I'm talking about scalar, offset and PBO. It is a waste of time and nerves.


----------



## gupsterg

oreonutz said:


> [/SPOILER]
> 
> Thank You So Much for this Info! About to dive in head first when I get off tonight. One more thing. These tools you said I need, I already have UEFITool as that is needed to flash EPROMS of corrupted BIOS Chips (Although I don't know if the version matters as mine is probably pretty old), but the other tools, are those all included in one of the Zips you have given out in the past? Or are they easy to find?


HxD, link.

UEFITool out of UBU I have been using, link.

IFR txt can be created using a compiled version of this, attached below is one from Feb, if when ran complains about a missing dll then use tomrus88's version link that is newer than donovan6000's, but slightly older than Longsoft.

View attachment IRFExtractor.zip


----------



## oreonutz

1usmus said:


> I'm shocked...
> 
> Do you think 1-2 day after the video a new firmware was born ????? this is not serious. I was not mistaken by a forum? is it really OCN?
> 
> I also like the thesis "He spreads bios - that means he saves the community." What is this misunderstanding? there are direct responsibilities of the community manager
> 
> I ask you, leave alone the settings that currently do not work. I'm talking about scalar, offset and PBO. It is a waste of time and nerves.


Who said anything about there being a firmware born after a video? We still don't have a firmware, and likely won't with these fixes for sometime. Although you have indicated we will have some awesome features coming down the pipe soon, some that were intended to fix some of the boosting issues I believe you mentioned. But its clear that AMD did not have any intentions of addressing this issue publicly (making a statement to calm the nerves of People freaking out over forums everywhere, and having news stories constantly being made about it), and its extremely clear that the video in question definitely pushed them into doing so.

I am not sure the issue you have with people showering praise on other people for doing awesome stuff, I have also done the same for you because I believe your tool is amazing, and also a huge help for the community. Should I not do that as well? Theres no need to be Salty brother.

Agreed, PBO and the Scaler are BROKEN as is. If you have been playing with them lately, that actually explains your saltiness here, lol!

Seriously though, I am a strong believer in open source developers and I think you are an amazing one. Sorry if saying that in a forum makes anyone upset...

Sensai Noticed Me!!! LOL!


----------



## oreonutz

gupsterg said:


> HxD, link.
> 
> UEFITool out of UBU I have been using, link.
> 
> IFR txt can be created using a compiled version of this, attached below is one from Feb, if when ran complains about a missing dll then use tomrus88's version link that is newer than donovan6000's, but slightly older than Longsoft.
> 
> View attachment 293372


Thank you brother! Downloading now! Really do appreciate the guidance here! Learning more every day thanks to the awesome community here. Hope no one gets mad at me for saying so!


----------



## mtrai

5700 XT graphics 28711 with just my puny 2700x...already in striking distance of the 2080 ti and UPS has not even come yet today Amazed what the c7H WIFI can do when unleashed....24k physics is amazing.


----------



## 1usmus

oreonutz said:


> Who said anything about there being a firmware born after a video? We still don't have a firmware, and likely won't with these fixes for sometime. Although you have indicated we will have some awesome features coming down the pipe soon, some that were intended to fix some of the boosting issues I believe you mentioned. But its clear that AMD did not have any intentions of addressing this issue, and its extremely clear that the video in question definitely pushed them into doing so.
> 
> I am not sure the issue you have with people showering praise on other people for doing awesome stuff, I have also done the same for you because I believe your tool is amazing, and also a huge help for the community. Should I not do that as well? Theres no need to be Salty brother.
> 
> Agreed, PBO and the Scaler are BROKEN as is. If you have been playing with them lately, that actually explains your saltiness here, lol!
> 
> Seriously though, I am a strong believer in open source developers and I think you are an amazing one. Sorry if saying that in a forum makes anyone upset...


This is not only happening in this thread, many people are just guests, many people write in private messages. This message was addressed to the target audience. An artificial panic was created and on it the video enthusiast earned great money.
My difference from other enthusiasts is that I don’t get any material benefit.

Yes, you're right, I spent a lot of time on what was originally broken. I am very disappointed that the 3900X demonstrates identical performance at 3600 MHz and at 4300 MHz, subject to maximum overclocking of RAM. For me it was a shock. For me, the shock is still 1.5 volts for 7nm. For me, the shock is the fan of the chipset, which is installed right under the video card. I’m upset by the memory controller, which is almost 10 years old. I can’t even write a review for the motherboard. I have nothing to show people, we do not need 100500 phases or 400 settings items in the BIOS that do not work. I see screens, RGB and a bunch of useless plastic. In fact, i can list for a very long time. You are also right that AMD has taken a position of silence.


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> 5700 XT graphics 28711 with just my puny 2700x...already in striking distance of the 2080 ti and UPS has not even come yet today Amazed what the c7H WIFI can do when unleashed....24k physics is amazing.


Damn, that is impressive.

I have not worked hard at improving this score at all I always just like to get a baseline before making a hardware change, and this was me just before switching out thermal paste on my 1080ti a few days ago. So I just have a small OC on my 1080ti and on my CPU. But still, am surprised you are so DAMN CLOSE considering the 3900x vs the 2700x, and the 5700xt vs the 1080ti.

I hadn't realized the 5700xt came so close to the 1080ti in Performance. Mine is watercooled too....


Spoiler














Link= https://www.3dmark.com/fs/20297211


----------



## gupsterg

R5 3600
C7HWIFI UEFI 0002+E
F4-3200C14Q-32GVK

ZIP contains WMVs from same run, each point I open 3x CPU-Z, AIDA64, Ryzen Master and ASUS TurboV Core, all access Super IO chip.

i) Fans all worked as they should.

ii) When some ask "Q-Code changes from AA > d3 > F8 this maybe issue", I hope the files show stability was not affected.



oreonutz said:


> Agreed, PBO and the Scaler are BROKEN as is. If you have been playing with them lately, that actually explains your saltiness here, lol!


As you can see in Ryzen Master, it can reflect settings in UEFI. I just need to use correct menus.

For PBO I use Extreme Tweaker menu. Scalar change there has no effect, but in AMD Overclocking it does, allows CPU to use more voltage and sustain frequency. I also set SOC/VDDP/VDDG there, rest Extreme Tweaker.

On the scalar change affecting my CPUs voltage/sustained frequency I have tested a few times, on past UEFI and current.



oreonutz said:


> Thank you brother! Downloading now! Really do appreciate the guidance here! Learning more every day thanks to the awesome community here. Hope no one gets mad at me for saying so!


NP.


----------



## oreonutz

1usmus said:


> This is not only happening in this thread, many people are just guests, many people write in private messages. This message was addressed to the target audience. An artificial panic was created and on it the video enthusiast earned great money.
> My difference from other enthusiasts is that I don’t get any material benefit.
> 
> Yes, you're right, I spent a lot of time on what was originally broken. I am very disappointed that the 3900X demonstrates identical performance at 3600 MHz and at 4300 MHz, subject to maximum overclocking of RAM. For me it was a shock. For me, the shock is still 1.5 volts for 7nm. For me, the shock is the fan of the chipset, which is installed right under the video card. I’m upset by the memory controller, which is almost 10 years old. I can’t even write a review for the motherboard. I have nothing to show people, we do not need 100500 phases or 400 settings items in the BIOS that do not work. I see screens, RGB and a bunch of useless plastic. In fact, i can list for a very long time. You are also right that AMD has taken a position of silence.


I 100 Percent agree with everything you said. 100 Percent. It is disappionting, I really do share your frustration. 

Sorry, I felt this was directed at me because I was defending Debauer earlier. I really am not even a fan of his, I just don't like to see people get trashed when they are trying to help the community. On the other hand, I had not thought of it from the monetization angle. His video, to me, did not seem to come off as being done for the money, but at the same time I do not watch his content regularly, or follow him closely, so I could just be wrong on that. Not sure.

Regardless, I follow your work closely, and I do think the work you do is awesome. I 100 Percent would throw a $10 donation at your paypal because I have used it so much in trying to determine the perfect calculation between timings for my DIMMS. I have finally found an equation that works damn good for me, and its all thanks to your tool and you helping to get me a great starting point. I noticed your tool doesn't even seem to have a donate button, which I found both Odd, and refreshing. But if you change your mind on that I would be happy to throw some money at you, and I am sure others would too.

I can only imagine how disillusioned I would get in your shoes with the current state of things. So my bad for getting out of pocket. You do amazing work man, let me know if you ever need any kind of assistance. I'll shut up now.


----------



## 1usmus

oreonutz said:


> I 100 Percent agree with everything you said. 100 Percent. It is disappionting, I really do share your frustration.
> 
> Sorry, I felt this was directed at me because I was defending Debauer earlier. I really am not even a fan of his, I just don't like to see people get trashed when they are trying to help the community. On the other hand, I had not thought of it from the monetization angle. His video, to me, did not seem to come off as being done for the money, but at the same time I do not watch his content regularly, or follow him closely, so I could just be wrong on that. Not sure.
> 
> Regardless, I follow your work closely, and I do think the work you do is awesome. I 100 Percent would throw a $10 donation at your paypal because I have used it so much in trying to determine the perfect calculation between timings for my DIMMS. I have finally found an equation that works damn good for me, and its all thanks to your tool and you helping to get me a great starting point. I noticed your tool doesn't even seem to have a donate button, which I found both Odd, and refreshing. But if you change your mind on that I would be happy to throw some money at you, and I am sure others would too.
> 
> I can only imagine how disillusioned I would get in your shoes with the current state of things. So my bad for getting out of pocket. You do amazing work man, let me know if you ever need any kind of assistance. I'll shut up now.



I have no conflicts with him, i normally communicate with him, but I do not share similar ways of publishing problems.

Thank you for your words, I am glad that my efforts were not wasted


----------



## oreonutz

1usmus said:


> I have no conflicts with him, i normally communicate with him, but I do not share similar ways of publishing problems.
> 
> Thank you for your words, I am glad that my efforts were not wasted


That makes sense.

NP! And definitely not wasted at all! I am a bit of a math nerd, so reading your piece you did over on TechPowerUp, and then using your Ryzen Calculator to really dial in my timings at my desired frequency were both an incredible help. Especially when I then started exploring the calculations used to arrived at each timing, and how they are all related to eachother, it blew my mind. I still have so much to learn, but I felt that your Piece along with that tool advanced my understanding of Memory timings in a weekend, which was awesome. Still constantly putting that knowledge to the test and expanding on it, so again, big thanks!


----------



## Praetorr

1usmus said:


> I have no conflicts with him, i normally communicate with him, but I do not share similar ways of publishing problems.
> 
> Thank you for your words, I am glad that my efforts were not wasted


As one of the people who admittedly PMd you trying to fish for information, thank you for all that you've done for this community! For many of us enthusiasts who lack any real connections in the industry, it can be challenging to discern rumor from unofficial truth. Those such as yourself who share what you can when you can are appreciated.


----------



## AvengedRobix

Guy's.. for a Friends, best BIOS for a 2700x?

Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A6013 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## Keith Myers

oreonutz said:


> Well since you did the BIOS Corruption Fix, I know it didn't fix the fan issue, but has the Over Temperature problem come back? I know you are on a Fan Controller now, but obviously with what you do you go over 78c pretty regularly, so I would think that if it was still an issue for you, you would have seen it even after switching to an external Fan Controller. So clearing the BIOS may not have fixed the fan issue, mainly because the fan issue was a "feature" of the BIOS, but it may have solved the Premature Over Temp issue.
> 
> Just curious, I know you have your reasons, but as it seems even official BIOSes from Asus tend to be not any different then their "Official" BIOSes, how come you want to wait for an Official BIOS? Just curious.
> 
> Hope all is well brother! Work has kept me SLAMMED this past week!


Normally I don't get that close to 78° C. Stay between 72 and 78 most of the time. But I did just look over and see 79.5° C. and the machine didn't overtemp. So maybe that issue is resolved with the 2703 BIOS. 

Leery of the BETA BIOS because they aren't coming through the official channel. Even though I guess the guy that hosts them is an actual ASUS employee?? But the BIOS is labeled beta and who knows how many more versions of beta are coming. I don't like to flash unless I have too. It takes time to flash and re-enter all the values for a stable system.


----------



## Reikoji

ajlueke said:


> Hmm, does the Cinebench process actually show only a single core for the affinity in the application list? I haven't had any problems getting it to take with "always" affinity.
> 
> As for your statements about Derbauer and those videos, I do agree. They made statements such as "maybe the silicon can't do it" which was actually pretty easy to debunk, as i did in my own testing. Those videos actually have made people believe that it is a fundamental flaw in the hardware that AMD can't fix as indicated in the last comments in the AMD community thread. And that AMD is up to shady business.
> 
> https://community.amd.com/thread/241742
> 
> So, intentional or not, those videos do seem to have spread misinformation about the nature of the issue. There are individuals now that believe there is a fundamental flaw underlying the boost issues, and that AMD has been nefariously plotting to cover it up, and citing these videos as sources. And it all fairness, I do think AMD was working on the issue. It seems unlikely that AMD would release the 3950X this month to reviewers using the 1.0.0.3XX AGESA and have it not hit 4.7GHz. They likely saw the same kinds of boosting issues in the internal testing there.
> 
> You need to be really carefully about labeling what is speculation, as exactly that. Suggesting that the silicon can't hit boost clocks is a pretty major statement, especially with no evidence to prove that. On top of that, it is pretty easy to show that the silicon CAN in fact hit the boost clocks at the voltage PB already provides, and the issues could lie with some other internal limiter or the algorithm itself. You need to make sure any conclusions you draw are supported by the data at hand and you only report that which your data supports. That's not only good science, but good reporting.


I have unchecked core 0 to core 2 from always yet it still uses those cores anyway.


----------



## xeizo

Base performance of the Ryzen 3000 is excellent, despite buggy bioses and dubious design boards. I like these CPUs. A lot. 

I'm real happy I went with Crosshair VII this time, I mostly did because I'm accustomed to Asus bios layout and hence a less steep learning curve. And I DO NOT like _small_ fans.

The experience so far has been greatly enhanced by this community, it's bioses, and even more by 1usmus Dram Calculator, which is a real piece of art in a technical way. RDC made my RAM way better than I thought would have been possible. Thanks once again 

In a sense, problems are made to be solved, which is fine for us enthusiasts who enjoys an interesting journey. Not so much so for the general comsumers, "it just works" is a worn out expression, but exactly that is what people expects to see. Way to go for AMD.


----------



## Synoxia

mtrai said:


> 5700 XT graphics 28711 with just my puny 2700x...already in striking distance of the 2080 ti and UPS has not even come yet today Amazed what the c7H WIFI can do when unleashed....24k physics is amazing.


just... how? Shouldn't 5700 xt be a 22k graphics score?


----------



## peksi

gupsterg said:


> ...
> 899407D7-99FE-43D8-9A21-79EC328CAC21_Zen2_mod.sct
> ...


I had to signup and post just because this GUID reminded me of some findings I made with a Linux tool called efivar & efibootmgr. I was trying to display UEFI boot manager automatically at each boot instead of hitting F8 each time. With "efibootmgr -t N" I was able to set a timeout of N seconds, but the screen after POST remained blank approximately the amount I specified, before continuing with the default boot selection. More interestingly, though, a related timeout setting in UEFI BIOS was unhidden in the Boot page.

So I was thinking that perhaps there are other settings that could be messed with. Invoking "efivar -l" outputs an extensive list of GUID-name pairs. Some of them look quite generic while some look very specific to ASUS/CH7 settings. So, maybe these are settings that ASUS has deemed to be okay to be left open for the end users.

Anyways, below is the alphabetically ordered list of GUID-name pairs from CH7 non-WiFi 2703 UEFI as well as an example output of some random variable. Maybe someone can figure out (if not already done) what kind of runtime modifications can be done with them.

GUID-name list


Spoiler



$ efivar -l
01368881-c4ad-4b1d-b631-d57a8ec8db6b-FPDT_Volatile
01368881-c4ad-4b1d-b631-d57a8ec8db6b-MonotonicCounter
15a9dd61-e4f8-4a99-80db-353b13d76490-NVRAM_Verify
1b838190-4625-4ead-abc9-cd5e6af18fe0-HiiDB
29749bad-401b-4f6d-b124-cece8c590c48-DownCoreStatus
2e0585e9-2b5e-4f1e-bbeb-e632c5ef44b8-AsusRomLayout
3a997502-647a-4c82-998e-52ef9486a247-AmdSetup
4034591c-48ea-4cdc-864f-e7cb61cfd0f2-BiosEventLog
4034591c-48ea-4cdc-864f-e7cb61cfd0f2-FTMActiveFlag
4034591c-48ea-4cdc-864f-e7cb61cfd0f2-MyFav
4599d26f-1a11-49b8-b91f-858745cff824-StdDefaults
45cf35f6-0d6e-4d04-856a-0370a5b16f53-DefaultBootOrder
4b3082a3-80c6-4d7e-9cd0-583917265df1-MaximumTableSize
4b3082a3-80c6-4d7e-9cd0-583917265df1-SmbiosEntryPointTable
4b3082a3-80c6-4d7e-9cd0-583917265df1-SmbiosEntryPointTableF000
4b3082a3-80c6-4d7e-9cd0-583917265df1-SmbiosScratchBuffer
4b3082a3-80c6-4d7e-9cd0-583917265df1-SmbiosV3EntryPointTable
4b3082a3-80c6-4d7e-9cd0-583917265df1-WriteOnceStatus
4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName1
4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName1_CPU
4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName2
4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName2_CPU
4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName3
4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName3_CPU
4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName4
4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName4_CPU
4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName5
4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName5_CPU
4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName6
4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName6_CPU
4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName7
4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName7_CPU
4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName8
4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName8_CPU
4db88a62-6721-47a0-9082-280b00323594-FPLayoutOrder
5e9a565f-cdc0-413b-ad13-1fe8713ffdcd-PcieSataModVar
5ed15dc0-edef-4161-9151-6014c4cc630c-AOD_SETUP
69ecc1be-a981-446d-8eb6-af0e53d06ce8-NewOptionPolicy
701d2531-684f-40d1-a1d5-e1466fb38321-FTMEventLog
77fa9abd-0359-4d32-bd60-28f4e78f784b-CurrentPolicy
79941ecd-ed36-49d0-8124-e4c31ac75cd4-AmdAcpiVar
7b59104a-c00d-4158-87ff-f04d6396a915-SecureBootSetup
81c76078-bfde-4368-9790-570914c01a65-SetUpdateCountVar
8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-Boot0000
8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-Boot0002
8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-BootCurrent
8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-BootOptionSupport
8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-BootOrder
8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-ConIn
8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-ConInDev
8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-ConOut
8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-ConOutDev
8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-dbDefault
8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-dbxDefault
8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-ErrOut
8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-ErrOutDev
8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-KEK
8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-KEKDefault
8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-OsIndications
8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-OsIndicationsSupported
8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-PK
8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-PKDefault
8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-PlatformLang
8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-PlatformLangCodes
8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-SecureBoot
8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-SetupMode
8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-SignatureSupport
8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-Timeout
8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-VendorKeys
97e8965f-c761-4f48-b6e4-9ffa9cb2a2d6-DeploymentModeNv
a339d746-f678-49b3-9fc7-54ce0f9df226-AMD_PBS_SETUP
a6f44860-b2e8-4fda-bd45-78368994b6ae-HddSmartInfo
a7e92950-4ec9-4502-8576-f851308f8c18-XhciDID
ad3f6761-f0a3-46c8-a4cb-19b70ffdb305-ApSyncFlagNv
bb983ccf-151d-40e1-a07b-4a17be168292-MemoryOverwriteRequestControlLock
c05fba7d-7a92-49e0-bcee-233b14dca803-VARSTORE_OCMR_SETTINGS_NAME
c811fa38-42c8-4579-a9bb-60e94eddfb34-AMITSESetup
c89dc9c7-5105-472c-a743-b1621e142b41-CMOSfailflag
cba83c4a-a5fc-48a8-b3a6-d33636166544-WpBufAddr
d047ab6d-49eb-4a1f-a0bf-ac949bbea113-EntBootMode
d1405d16-7afc-4695-bb12-41459d3695a2-NetworkStackVar
d719b2cb-3d3a-4596-a3bc-dad00e67656f-db
d719b2cb-3d3a-4596-a3bc-dad00e67656f-dbx
e20939be-32d4-41be-a150-897f85d49829-MemoryOverwriteRequestControl
e57abcbd-9456-4639-8f65-06aab41d840f-NvHdd0
e57abcbd-9456-4639-8f65-06aab41d840f-NvHdd1
e57abcbd-9456-4639-8f65-06aab41d840f-NvHdd10
e57abcbd-9456-4639-8f65-06aab41d840f-NvHdd2
e57abcbd-9456-4639-8f65-06aab41d840f-NvHdd4
eaec226f-c9a3-477a-a826-ddc716cdc0e3-OfflineUniqueIDRandomSeed
eaec226f-c9a3-477a-a826-ddc716cdc0e3-OfflineUniqueIDRandomSeedCRC
eaec226f-c9a3-477a-a826-ddc716cdc0e3-UnlockIDCopy
ec87d643-eba4-4bb5-a1e5-3f3e36b20da9-AutoDetectData
ec87d643-eba4-4bb5-a1e5-3f3e36b20da9-BootFromUSB
ec87d643-eba4-4bb5-a1e5-3f3e36b20da9-FirstBootFlag
ec87d643-eba4-4bb5-a1e5-3f3e36b20da9-ForceCsmEnable
ec87d643-eba4-4bb5-a1e5-3f3e36b20da9-PreVgaInfo
ec87d643-eba4-4bb5-a1e5-3f3e36b20da9-QFan
ec87d643-eba4-4bb5-a1e5-3f3e36b20da9-QFanConfig
ec87d643-eba4-4bb5-a1e5-3f3e36b20da9-Setup
ec87d643-eba4-4bb5-a1e5-3f3e36b20da9-SetupACPIRAM
ec87d643-eba4-4bb5-a1e5-3f3e36b20da9-SetupAPMFeatures
ec87d643-eba4-4bb5-a1e5-3f3e36b20da9-SetupHWMFeatures
ec87d643-eba4-4bb5-a1e5-3f3e36b20da9-SetupHWMOneof
ec87d643-eba4-4bb5-a1e5-3f3e36b20da9-SetupLedData
ec87d643-eba4-4bb5-a1e5-3f3e36b20da9-UsbSupport
fb5703f5-f8a7-f401-18b4-3f108deb2612-TotalNumberOfRootBridges
fe26a894-d199-47d4-8afa-070e3d54ba86-AMD_RAID



Example: content of AmdSetup variable


Spoiler






Code:


$ efivar -p -n 3a997502-647a-4c82-998e-52ef9486a247-AmdSetup
GUID: 3a997502-647a-4c82-998e-52ef9486a247
Name: "AmdSetup"
Attributes:
	Non-Volatile
	Boot Service Access
	Runtime Service Access
Value:
00000000  5b 0f c0 30 31 02 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |[..01...........|
00000010  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000020  0a ff 03 01 01 0f 00 00  03 00 01 00 00 00 ff ff  |................|
00000030  03 ff f5 0f 03 ff ff 05  00 00 02 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000040  00 00 00 00 00 48 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |.....H..........|
00000050  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000060  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000070  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000080  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000090  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
000000a0  01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 01 01 03 ff ff ff ff  |................|
000000b0  ff 03 03 03 03 00 ff 03  03 ff 07 07 07 ff 03 ff  |................|
000000c0  ff ff 0b 0c 20 32 3c ff  ff 03 03 00 64 00 00 00  |.... 2<.....d...|
000000d0  ff ff 00 00 01 ff ff ff  ff ff ff 00 39 ff ff 00  |............9...|
000000e0  1a ff ff 00 12 00 00 00  00 03 00 03 00 38 01 00  |.............8..|
000000f0  c0 00 00 84 00 ff ff ff  ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff  |................|
00000100  ff ff ff ff ff 00 00 00  ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff  |................|
00000110  ff ff 00 ff ff 08 ff ff  08 01 ff 00 ff ff ff ff  |................|
00000120  ff ff ff ff ff 01 00 ff  ff ff 00 03 01 00 00 00  |................|
00000130  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000140  00 00 00 03 00 00 01 00  01 01 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 00  |................|
00000150  00 00 ff 00 00 ff 00 8e  00 00 00 5f 00 00 00 8c  |..........._....|
00000160  00 00 00 0f c8 00 00 00  0f 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000170  00 00 00 00 01 64 00 00  00 00 02 00 01 00 0f 0f  |.....d..........|
00000180  00 01 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 0f 11  |................|
00000190  00 03 00 04 00 00 00 0f  0f ff ff fc ff fb ff ff  |................|
000001a0  ff 00 00 03 00 04 00 00  00 28 0a 00 00 00 00 00  |.........(......|
000001b0  0f 00 00 0f 0f 02 0f 0f  00 00 00 00 0f 0f 0f 0f  |................|
000001c0  0f 00 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f  0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f  |................|
000001d0  0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f  0f 00 00 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f  |................|
000001e0  0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f  0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f  |................|
000001f0  0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f  0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f  |................|
00000200  00 ff 0f 0f 0f 02 ff 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000210  00 0f 00 00 0f ff 00 ff  f8 03 10 0e 00 00 ff 00  |................|
00000220  00 00 0f 00 01 68 10 00  00 01 ff 0f 00 ff 00 00  |.....h..........|
00000230  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000240  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000250  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000260  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000270  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000280  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000290  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
000002a0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
000002b0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
000002c0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
000002d0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
000002e0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
000002f0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000300  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000310  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000320  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000330  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000340  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000350  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000360  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000370  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000380  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000390  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
000003a0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
000003b0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
000003c0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
000003d0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
000003e0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
000003f0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000400  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000410  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000420  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000430  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000440  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000450  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000460  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000470  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000480  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000490  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
000004a0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
000004b0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
000004c0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
000004d0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
000004e0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
000004f0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000500  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000510  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000520  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000530  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000540  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000550  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000560  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000570  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000580  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000590  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
000005a0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
000005b0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
000005c0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
000005d0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
000005e0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
000005f0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000600  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
00000610  00                                                |.               |


----------



## AvengedRobix

very happy =)


----------



## Synoxia

AvengedRobix said:


> very happy =)


How can u use cas 15 on ryzen? lol


----------



## Reikoji

Synoxia said:


> How can u use cas 15 on ryzen? lol


Heard you have to disable/enable gear down. but, i havent been able to set an odd cas either way.


----------



## nick name

Synoxia said:


> How can u use cas 15 on ryzen? lol


You can use an odd value with GDM disabled and when you're not on the brink of stability.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> 5700 XT graphics 28711 with just my puny 2700x...already in striking distance of the 2080 ti and UPS has not even come yet today Amazed what the c7H WIFI can do when unleashed....24k physics is amazing.


This inspired me to re-take the top spot for the 2700X and 1070ti combo. Someone else had claimed the top spot, but I didn't look closely enough at his scores to realize I could overtake him without cold winter weather. So now that the 2700X does much better on the Combined Score I have re-claimed my top spot (my graphics and physics scores were initially better than his top score). And when the weather cools off and I can get better graphics scores then I will really overtake him. 

https://www.3dmark.com/search#/?mod...gpuName=NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti&gpuCount=1


----------



## gupsterg

Synoxia said:


> How can u use cas 15 on ryzen? lol
> 
> 
> 
> Reikoji said:
> 
> 
> 
> Heard you have to disable/enable gear down. but, i havent been able to set an odd cas either way.
Click to expand...

Does work....



peksi said:


> I had to signup and post just because this GUID reminded me of some findings I made with a Linux tool called efivar & efibootmgr. I was trying to display UEFI boot manager automatically at each boot instead of hitting F8 each time. With "efibootmgr -t N" I was able to set a timeout of N seconds, but the screen after POST remained blank approximately the amount I specified, before continuing with the default boot selection. More interestingly, though, a related timeout setting in UEFI BIOS was unhidden in the Boot page.
> 
> So I was thinking that perhaps there are other settings that could be messed with. Invoking "efivar -l" outputs an extensive list of GUID-name pairs. Some of them look quite generic while some look very specific to ASUS/CH7 settings. So, maybe these are settings that ASUS has deemed to be okay to be left open for the end users.
> 
> Anyways, below is the alphabetically ordered list of GUID-name pairs from CH7 non-WiFi 2703 UEFI as well as an example output of some random variable. Maybe someone can figure out (if not already done) what kind of runtime modifications can be done with them.
> 
> GUID-name list
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> $ efivar -l
> 01368881-c4ad-4b1d-b631-d57a8ec8db6b-FPDT_Volatile
> 01368881-c4ad-4b1d-b631-d57a8ec8db6b-MonotonicCounter
> 15a9dd61-e4f8-4a99-80db-353b13d76490-NVRAM_Verify
> 1b838190-4625-4ead-abc9-cd5e6af18fe0-HiiDB
> 29749bad-401b-4f6d-b124-cece8c590c48-DownCoreStatus
> 2e0585e9-2b5e-4f1e-bbeb-e632c5ef44b8-AsusRomLayout
> 3a997502-647a-4c82-998e-52ef9486a247-AmdSetup
> 4034591c-48ea-4cdc-864f-e7cb61cfd0f2-BiosEventLog
> 4034591c-48ea-4cdc-864f-e7cb61cfd0f2-FTMActiveFlag
> 4034591c-48ea-4cdc-864f-e7cb61cfd0f2-MyFav
> 4599d26f-1a11-49b8-b91f-858745cff824-StdDefaults
> 45cf35f6-0d6e-4d04-856a-0370a5b16f53-DefaultBootOrder
> 4b3082a3-80c6-4d7e-9cd0-583917265df1-MaximumTableSize
> 4b3082a3-80c6-4d7e-9cd0-583917265df1-SmbiosEntryPointTable
> 4b3082a3-80c6-4d7e-9cd0-583917265df1-SmbiosEntryPointTableF000
> 4b3082a3-80c6-4d7e-9cd0-583917265df1-SmbiosScratchBuffer
> 4b3082a3-80c6-4d7e-9cd0-583917265df1-SmbiosV3EntryPointTable
> 4b3082a3-80c6-4d7e-9cd0-583917265df1-WriteOnceStatus
> 4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName1
> 4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName1_CPU
> 4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName2
> 4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName2_CPU
> 4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName3
> 4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName3_CPU
> 4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName4
> 4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName4_CPU
> 4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName5
> 4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName5_CPU
> 4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName6
> 4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName6_CPU
> 4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName7
> 4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName7_CPU
> 4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName8
> 4b5b31ae-024a-412b-b2f4-5c70632605c7-ProfileName8_CPU
> 4db88a62-6721-47a0-9082-280b00323594-FPLayoutOrder
> 5e9a565f-cdc0-413b-ad13-1fe8713ffdcd-PcieSataModVar
> 5ed15dc0-edef-4161-9151-6014c4cc630c-AOD_SETUP
> 69ecc1be-a981-446d-8eb6-af0e53d06ce8-NewOptionPolicy
> 701d2531-684f-40d1-a1d5-e1466fb38321-FTMEventLog
> 77fa9abd-0359-4d32-bd60-28f4e78f784b-CurrentPolicy
> 79941ecd-ed36-49d0-8124-e4c31ac75cd4-AmdAcpiVar
> 7b59104a-c00d-4158-87ff-f04d6396a915-SecureBootSetup
> 81c76078-bfde-4368-9790-570914c01a65-SetUpdateCountVar
> 8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-Boot0000
> 8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-Boot0002
> 8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-BootCurrent
> 8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-BootOptionSupport
> 8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-BootOrder
> 8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-ConIn
> 8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-ConInDev
> 8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-ConOut
> 8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-ConOutDev
> 8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-dbDefault
> 8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-dbxDefault
> 8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-ErrOut
> 8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-ErrOutDev
> 8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-KEK
> 8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-KEKDefault
> 8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-OsIndications
> 8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-OsIndicationsSupported
> 8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-PK
> 8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-PKDefault
> 8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-PlatformLang
> 8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-PlatformLangCodes
> 8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-SecureBoot
> 8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-SetupMode
> 8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-SignatureSupport
> 8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-Timeout
> 8be4df61-93ca-11d2-aa0d-00e098032b8c-VendorKeys
> 97e8965f-c761-4f48-b6e4-9ffa9cb2a2d6-DeploymentModeNv
> a339d746-f678-49b3-9fc7-54ce0f9df226-AMD_PBS_SETUP
> a6f44860-b2e8-4fda-bd45-78368994b6ae-HddSmartInfo
> a7e92950-4ec9-4502-8576-f851308f8c18-XhciDID
> ad3f6761-f0a3-46c8-a4cb-19b70ffdb305-ApSyncFlagNv
> bb983ccf-151d-40e1-a07b-4a17be168292-MemoryOverwriteRequestControlLock
> c05fba7d-7a92-49e0-bcee-233b14dca803-VARSTORE_OCMR_SETTINGS_NAME
> c811fa38-42c8-4579-a9bb-60e94eddfb34-AMITSESetup
> c89dc9c7-5105-472c-a743-b1621e142b41-CMOSfailflag
> cba83c4a-a5fc-48a8-b3a6-d33636166544-WpBufAddr
> d047ab6d-49eb-4a1f-a0bf-ac949bbea113-EntBootMode
> d1405d16-7afc-4695-bb12-41459d3695a2-NetworkStackVar
> d719b2cb-3d3a-4596-a3bc-dad00e67656f-db
> d719b2cb-3d3a-4596-a3bc-dad00e67656f-dbx
> e20939be-32d4-41be-a150-897f85d49829-MemoryOverwriteRequestControl
> e57abcbd-9456-4639-8f65-06aab41d840f-NvHdd0
> e57abcbd-9456-4639-8f65-06aab41d840f-NvHdd1
> e57abcbd-9456-4639-8f65-06aab41d840f-NvHdd10
> e57abcbd-9456-4639-8f65-06aab41d840f-NvHdd2
> e57abcbd-9456-4639-8f65-06aab41d840f-NvHdd4
> eaec226f-c9a3-477a-a826-ddc716cdc0e3-OfflineUniqueIDRandomSeed
> eaec226f-c9a3-477a-a826-ddc716cdc0e3-OfflineUniqueIDRandomSeedCRC
> eaec226f-c9a3-477a-a826-ddc716cdc0e3-UnlockIDCopy
> ec87d643-eba4-4bb5-a1e5-3f3e36b20da9-AutoDetectData
> ec87d643-eba4-4bb5-a1e5-3f3e36b20da9-BootFromUSB
> ec87d643-eba4-4bb5-a1e5-3f3e36b20da9-FirstBootFlag
> ec87d643-eba4-4bb5-a1e5-3f3e36b20da9-ForceCsmEnable
> ec87d643-eba4-4bb5-a1e5-3f3e36b20da9-PreVgaInfo
> ec87d643-eba4-4bb5-a1e5-3f3e36b20da9-QFan
> ec87d643-eba4-4bb5-a1e5-3f3e36b20da9-QFanConfig
> ec87d643-eba4-4bb5-a1e5-3f3e36b20da9-Setup
> ec87d643-eba4-4bb5-a1e5-3f3e36b20da9-SetupACPIRAM
> ec87d643-eba4-4bb5-a1e5-3f3e36b20da9-SetupAPMFeatures
> ec87d643-eba4-4bb5-a1e5-3f3e36b20da9-SetupHWMFeatures
> ec87d643-eba4-4bb5-a1e5-3f3e36b20da9-SetupHWMOneof
> ec87d643-eba4-4bb5-a1e5-3f3e36b20da9-SetupLedData
> ec87d643-eba4-4bb5-a1e5-3f3e36b20da9-UsbSupport
> fb5703f5-f8a7-f401-18b4-3f108deb2612-TotalNumberOfRootBridges
> fe26a894-d199-47d4-8afa-070e3d54ba86-AMD_RAID
> 
> 
> 
> Example: content of AmdSetup variable
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> $ efivar -p -n 3a997502-647a-4c82-998e-52ef9486a247-AmdSetup
> GUID: 3a997502-647a-4c82-998e-52ef9486a247
> Name: "AmdSetup"
> Attributes:
> Non-Volatile
> Boot Service Access
> Runtime Service Access
> Value:
> 00000000  5b 0f c0 30 31 02 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |[..01...........|
> 00000010  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000020  0a ff 03 01 01 0f 00 00  03 00 01 00 00 00 ff ff  |................|
> 00000030  03 ff f5 0f 03 ff ff 05  00 00 02 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000040  00 00 00 00 00 48 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |.....H..........|
> 00000050  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000060  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000070  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000080  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000090  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 000000a0  01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 01 01 03 ff ff ff ff  |................|
> 000000b0  ff 03 03 03 03 00 ff 03  03 ff 07 07 07 ff 03 ff  |................|
> 000000c0  ff ff 0b 0c 20 32 3c ff  ff 03 03 00 64 00 00 00  |.... 2<.....d...|
> 000000d0  ff ff 00 00 01 ff ff ff  ff ff ff 00 39 ff ff 00  |............9...|
> 000000e0  1a ff ff 00 12 00 00 00  00 03 00 03 00 38 01 00  |.............8..|
> 000000f0  c0 00 00 84 00 ff ff ff  ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff  |................|
> 00000100  ff ff ff ff ff 00 00 00  ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff  |................|
> 00000110  ff ff 00 ff ff 08 ff ff  08 01 ff 00 ff ff ff ff  |................|
> 00000120  ff ff ff ff ff 01 00 ff  ff ff 00 03 01 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000130  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000140  00 00 00 03 00 00 01 00  01 01 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 00  |................|
> 00000150  00 00 ff 00 00 ff 00 8e  00 00 00 5f 00 00 00 8c  |..........._....|
> 00000160  00 00 00 0f c8 00 00 00  0f 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000170  00 00 00 00 01 64 00 00  00 00 02 00 01 00 0f 0f  |.....d..........|
> 00000180  00 01 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 0f 11  |................|
> 00000190  00 03 00 04 00 00 00 0f  0f ff ff fc ff fb ff ff  |................|
> 000001a0  ff 00 00 03 00 04 00 00  00 28 0a 00 00 00 00 00  |.........(......|
> 000001b0  0f 00 00 0f 0f 02 0f 0f  00 00 00 00 0f 0f 0f 0f  |................|
> 000001c0  0f 00 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f  0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f  |................|
> 000001d0  0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f  0f 00 00 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f  |................|
> 000001e0  0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f  0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f  |................|
> 000001f0  0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f  0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f 0f  |................|
> 00000200  00 ff 0f 0f 0f 02 ff 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000210  00 0f 00 00 0f ff 00 ff  f8 03 10 0e 00 00 ff 00  |................|
> 00000220  00 00 0f 00 01 68 10 00  00 01 ff 0f 00 ff 00 00  |.....h..........|
> 00000230  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000240  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000250  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000260  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000270  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000280  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000290  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 000002a0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 000002b0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 000002c0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 000002d0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 000002e0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 000002f0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000300  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000310  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000320  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000330  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000340  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000350  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000360  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000370  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000380  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000390  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 000003a0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 000003b0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 000003c0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 000003d0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 000003e0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 000003f0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000400  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000410  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000420  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000430  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000440  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000450  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000460  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000470  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000480  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000490  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 000004a0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 000004b0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 000004c0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 000004d0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 000004e0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 000004f0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000500  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000510  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000520  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000530  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000540  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000550  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000560  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000570  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000580  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000590  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 000005a0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 000005b0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 000005c0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 000005d0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 000005e0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 000005f0  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000600  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
> 00000610  00                                                |.               |


Thanks.



Keith Myers said:


> Normally I don't get that close to 78° C. Stay between 72 and 78 most of the time. But I did just look over and see 79.5° C. and the machine didn't overtemp. So maybe that issue is resolved with the 2703 BIOS.
> 
> Leery of the BETA BIOS because they aren't coming through the official channel. Even though I guess the guy that hosts them is an actual ASUS employee?? But the BIOS is labeled beta and who knows how many more versions of beta are coming. I don't like to flash unless I have too. It takes time to flash and re-enter all the values for a stable system.


Seems as if after UEFI 2501 a bug has crept in, ie 2606 and as they seem to "build" on prior UEFI it's also in 2703 and as 0002 is based on that it has it as well.

See WMV in this ZIP.

To me "official" really carries no weight...


----------



## neikosr0x

Is it normal to get some regression when OCing ram? I was running it at 3733 where my COPY speeds were 5850x/5900x, Now i'm running 3800mhz and COPY speeds are 5590x/5650x. RAM latency tho did got better from 65.3~ to 64.3~ ran some game benchmarks and it went better as well. But it is odd when looking at the COPY speeds, A few months ago when i was trying to OC the ram to 3800 it was getting 60000/61500~.


----------



## 1usmus

*DRAM Calculator for Ryzen 1.6.2*


*Changelog:*

* NEW. Memory status. Information about the available memory.
* NEW. CAD_BUS received very flexible settings. Thanks to these flexible settings, it is possible to disable GDM (1T mode) without losing stability for Zen 2. DR also got the opportunity to disable GDM at low frequencies (up to 3200 MHz inclusive). Compatibility with previous generations is required to be tested.
* Updated function to determine the maximum available memory for testing (Memtest mode). At the moment, the test should not go into drives or a swap file.
* tRDWR has been changed in most profiles, this is a bonus to the chance to get a stable system.
* Most presets received small changes, in particular Micron e-die .
* Improved support for 4 modules.
* Bug fixes.

*Download:*

Techpowerup link
Guru3d link
Сomputerbase.de link

I sent an archive for all resources, it will take some time.


----------



## crakej

1usmus said:


> *DRAM Calculator for Ryzen 1.6.2*
> 
> 
> *Changelog:*
> 
> * NEW. Memory status. Information about the available memory.
> * NEW. CAD_BUS received very flexible settings. Thanks to these flexible settings, it is possible to disable GDM (1T mode) without losing stability for Zen 2. DR also got the opportunity to disable GDM at low frequencies (up to 3200 MHz inclusive). Compatibility with previous generations is required to be tested.
> * Updated function to determine the maximum available memory for testing (Memtest mode). At the moment, the test should not go into drives or a swap file.
> * tRDWR has been changed in most profiles, this is a bonus to the chance to get a stable system.
> * Most presets received small changes, in particular Micron e-die .
> * Improved support for 4 modules.
> * Bug fixes.
> 
> *Download:*
> 
> Techpowerup link
> Guru3d link
> Сomputerbase.de link
> 
> I sent an archive for all resources, it will take some time.


Thanks 1usmus - much appreciated.


----------



## xeizo

Many thanks for the new RDC!


----------



## mtrai

Synoxia said:


> just... how? Shouldn't 5700 xt be a 22k graphics score?


Well I have a finely tuned systems as my physics scores also reflects for just my 2700x. 

I use a soft power play table, overclock to the max stable and also set some some power paremters higher using MorePowerTool. All within safe levels if you know what your doing. 

Several things I have noticed was that performance scales almost lineal with the vram clock. However the you are gonna be limited to the vram clock mostly.

The 2nd thing I really noted was that you can gain performance with more power as long as can you can keep everything cool. While undervolting is one viable option people are pushing the undervolting too low and are actually losing performance.

@oreonutz Haha I am dumb my waterblock arrived yesterday but I forgot to order fittings.
@1usmus Yes all your work is very much appreciated.


----------



## Mumak

oreonutz said:


> We know now, due to both help from The Stilt, and then put into action by @gupsterg in the form of a Mod, that the Boosting behavior _and_ the algorithm that dictates it, is all contained inside the SMU Modules that AMD includes in their AGESA's. We know this is a Black Box and that the Motherboard manufacturers DO NOT have the ability to edit or manipulate the code contained in the SMU. Both it and the Agesa are complete Black Boxes of Binary that are handed off to the Mobo Manufacturers to then insert into their UEFI's. At this point in time there has not been one Motherboard Manufacturer that has shown the ability to manipulate or edit the Agesa or SMU. The best they can do is the same @gupsterg did, and include a different SMU with a different Agesa. We will know if this changes in the future, if for instance one of the Motherboard Manufacturers quietly turn back on PCIE4 for their x470/x370 Motherboards, but as of now this has been outside of their ability. This means that the boosting Behavior was 100 Percent out of the control of Motherboard Manufacturers, including Shamino at ASUS, and in fact this entire time this problem has been an inhouse AMD Problem, 100 Percent! I too want it fixed, but we need to put the blame where the blame belongs, and this is 100 Percent an AMD Bug, not a Bios bug that any of the Motherboard Manufacturers had control over. THE ONLY REASON there is any differences in performance between motherboards come down to differences in SMU Versions used, and differences in the one thing they are allowed to control, and that is the default PPT, TDC, and EDC values that their boards use at default, the Base Clock their Motherboards use at default, and the VRM of those individual boards. The SMU however, is the biggest determining factor as to how a CPU boosts, and that is 100 Pecent out of every motherboard Manufacturers hands.
> 
> Anyways, I am done with my facts rant of the day now, I will shut up and get back to work. LOL!


AGESA isn't a black box, it's available in source code to ODMs (and some others ;-)). Black boxes are the firmware packages (PSP, SMU, etc.).


----------



## Synoxia

nick name said:


> You can use an odd value with GDM disabled and when you're not on the brink of stability.


Yeah thanks lol managed to do it. 3800 c15-16-17-16-32-48 at 1.495v. I was previously stable by 10000 sec GSAT at 14-16restthesame + GDM on but system was a bit jerky, turns out that maybe this might be better, who knows


----------



## ajlueke

Reikoji said:


> I have unchecked core 0 to core 2 from always yet it still uses those cores anyway.


Hello there. From the "Always" screen you have up in the image select "Select Affinity" and uncheck them in the box that opens up rather than in that pull down.


----------



## harderthanfire

1usmus said:


> or 16 + 7
> 
> As far as I know, negative offset is disabled. But most users try to make an undervolt.
> I use -0.0125 only for reinsurance, because auto can set 1.65 volts if I use BCLK 102.0 (sometimes I come across such a bug)



Negative offsets work as expected for me so I don't think it is disabled totally, it may depend on what other settings are set to. For me the max voltage is lowered by roughly the offset amount as is the min voltage - measured voltage too and not just reported in HWINFO.


You can also tell that it does something because if you set it too low things get seriously unstable.


----------



## harderthanfire

1usmus said:


> *DRAM Calculator for Ryzen 1.6.2*
> 
> 
> *Changelog:*
> 
> * NEW. Memory status. Information about the available memory.
> * NEW. CAD_BUS received very flexible settings. Thanks to these flexible settings, it is possible to disable GDM (1T mode) without losing stability for Zen 2. DR also got the opportunity to disable GDM at low frequencies (up to 3200 MHz inclusive). Compatibility with previous generations is required to be tested.
> * Updated function to determine the maximum available memory for testing (Memtest mode). At the moment, the test should not go into drives or a swap file.
> * tRDWR has been changed in most profiles, this is a bonus to the chance to get a stable system.
> * Most presets received small changes, in particular Micron e-die .
> * Improved support for 4 modules.
> * Bug fixes.
> 
> *Download:*
> 
> Techpowerup link
> Guru3d link
> Сomputerbase.de link
> 
> I sent an archive for all resources, it will take some time.



Thanks a lot for this, my 4 modules of Micron e-die in particular thank you as well.


----------



## Reikoji

ajlueke said:


> Hello there. From the "Always" screen you have up in the image select "Select Affinity" and uncheck them in the box that opens up rather than in that pull down.


Ah ok. thanks

Add: Still no workie  Or maybe it is. I'll check a few more times.

Nope, still uses the 1st CCX regardless of ommiting those cores from the affinity. Lemme try with R20.


----------



## Reikoji

1usmus said:


> *DRAM Calculator for Ryzen 1.6.2*
> 
> 
> *Changelog:*
> 
> * NEW. Memory status. Information about the available memory.
> * NEW. CAD_BUS received very flexible settings. Thanks to these flexible settings, it is possible to disable GDM (1T mode) without losing stability for Zen 2. DR also got the opportunity to disable GDM at low frequencies (up to 3200 MHz inclusive). Compatibility with previous generations is required to be tested.
> * Updated function to determine the maximum available memory for testing (Memtest mode). At the moment, the test should not go into drives or a swap file.
> * tRDWR has been changed in most profiles, this is a bonus to the chance to get a stable system.
> * Most presets received small changes, in particular Micron e-die .
> * Improved support for 4 modules.
> * Bug fixes.
> 
> *Download:*
> 
> Techpowerup link
> Guru3d link
> Сomputerbase.de link
> 
> I sent an archive for all resources, it will take some time.


Sweet. A lot of values chaned for my 4-dimm setup.



gupsterg said:


> Does work....


Didnt say it didnt... I use 4-dimm which is probably why it doesnt work for me.


----------



## oreonutz

Mumak said:


> AGESA isn't a black box, it's available in source code to ODMs (and some others ;-)). Black boxes are the firmware packages (PSP, SMU, etc.).


Didn't realize that. Appreciate the correction. I knew they could see the Agesa Binary, I just thought it was next to impossible to decipher. But good to know I was wrong!

I love what you have done with adding the Sensors to each CCD. In my case it turns out that my 1st CCD is CONSIDERABLY Hotter than my 2nd CCD, by about 10c. When it comes to the data you have seen, is that normal? I am about to run some tests as soon as I have a minute with Mounting my Block in different Orientations, so see if I can get a more even temperature between the 2, or at the very least see if I can have my 1st CCD be the Cooler CCD.

Do you still have plans on exposing more of the on die Sensors to us? Would love to be one of the Beta's for you on that, if you need any.


----------



## oreonutz

AvengedRobix said:


> very happy =)


DAMN BROTHER!!!! How the HELL???????????????

Seriously, Well Done Brother!!!! That is the HIGHEST Score I have seen on a 3900x!

So I haven't read below, you might have already posted details, but if you haven't please do. Is this with Ambient Cooling? Are all Core's Clocked at 4600Mhz, or are you using one of our tools to Per CCX Overclock? What Cooler are you using? So many damn Questions! I know I have been a bastard to you in the past, but seriously, I am impressed!


----------



## Mumak

oreonutz said:


> Do you still have plans on exposing more of the on die Sensors to us? Would love to be one of the Beta's for you on that, if you need any.


Not sure about that yet. It turns out that on MTS the additional sensors (dozens) cover the IOD only, so it wouldn't be much useful and cause even more clutter in the sensors window and confusion to users.


----------



## oreonutz

nick name said:


> This inspired me to re-take the top spot for the 2700X and 1070ti combo. Someone else had claimed the top spot, but I didn't look closely enough at his scores to realize I could overtake him without cold winter weather. So now that the 2700X does much better on the Combined Score I have re-claimed my top spot (my graphics and physics scores were initially better than his top score). And when the weather cools off and I can get better graphics scores then I will really overtake him.
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/search#/?mod...gpuName=NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti&gpuCount=1


Hell Yeah! You got him by more then 100 Points! Thats a SOLID WIN! You really have got that 2700x PBO'ing NICELY!!! I love it! I thought Mine was good. My EDOC (Every Day OC) was PBO, 4225 All Core, 4350 4 Core, 4450 Dual Core, 4500 Single Core (off the top of my head, its been a while now, and sometimes depending on the boot I remember I would get lucky and that Single Core would push up to 4550, but more often then not it was 4500), It looks like you have gotten yourself 4562 for your single core PBO, which suggests you are probably using a BCLK of somewhere between 100.2 to 100.8, am I right?

Anyway, Great Score man!!! Can't wait to see your Winter Scores!


----------



## oreonutz

Mumak said:


> Not sure about that yet. It turns out that on MTS the additional sensors (dozens) cover the IOD only, so it wouldn't be much useful and cause even more clutter in the sensors window and confusion to users.


Yeah I could see that, but if it was possible to have it as a feature we could turn on, even if it needed to be done by adding a CMD Line to the .ini, that would still be awesome! I definitely understand for the normal user dabbling with HWinfo that could get confusing and cause more people to send questions your way causing headaches, so definitely don't want that, but if it was a quiet feature that just some of us more advanced users could turn on, would be amazing! But obviously shouldn't be a priority, just a nicety if you have the extra time one day. 

You do amazing work Martin, as always appreciate you! Will Donate more on my next Check because I use your tool so heavily I want to make sure I contribute to the development in any way I can!

EDIT: Also, about what I noticed with my CCD1 Being 10c hotter than CCD2. Is that something you have seen alot of, and normal? Or do you mainly see people with more Even CCD Temps? Just curious if my case is unique or not.


----------



## oreonutz

gupsterg said:


> To me "official" really carries no weight...


I am of this same exact Mindset. I used to be more Like @Keith Myers back in the Core 2 Duo days, when ASUS' Official UEFI's actually seemed to be well polished. Does anybody remember those days??? Don't get me wrong, I am super thankful for the Beta BIOS' that we are able to get our hands on and tinker with these days, but it does seem that even the "Official" Bioses are Beta.



gupsterg said:


> See WMV in this ZIP


So please forgive my lack of knowledge here, but what is the significance of PT PCIE Port 7 being set to 17337? What is that setting "PT PCIE Port" supposed to do? I feel like I should know this, but When I have played with it my self I couldn't seem to figure out what it did, and there seems to be a lack of information online, at least in the quick searches I did. Sorry for asking you so many questions, but I really do appreciate your Knowledge and insight.


----------



## Keith Myers

oreonutz said:


> I am of this same exact Mindset. I used to be more Like @Keith Myers back in the Core 2 Duo days, when ASUS' Official UEFI's actually seemed to be well polished. Does anybody remember those days??? Don't get me wrong, I am super thankful for the Beta BIOS' that we are able to get our hands on and tinker with these days, but it does seem that even the "Official" Bioses are Beta.
> 
> 
> 
> So please forgive my lack of knowledge here, but what is the significance of PT PCIE Port 7 being set to 17337? What is that setting "PT PCIE Port" supposed to do? I feel like I should know this, but When I have played with it my self I couldn't seem to figure out what it did, and there seems to be a lack of information online, at least in the quick searches I did. Sorry for asking you so many questions, but I really do appreciate your Knowledge and insight.


Except when dealing with AMD Tech Support, if you mention you are not running an "official" BIOS, they will just ignore you and say they provide no support for any BIOS obtained outside the official channel. I can list the responses from AMD Tech Support I have received from my support ticket if needed.(Service Request:8200891654)


----------



## Reikoji

1usmus said:


> *DRAM Calculator for Ryzen 1.6.2*
> 
> 
> *Changelog:*
> 
> * NEW. Memory status. Information about the available memory.
> * NEW. CAD_BUS received very flexible settings. Thanks to these flexible settings, it is possible to disable GDM (1T mode) without losing stability for Zen 2. DR also got the opportunity to disable GDM at low frequencies (up to 3200 MHz inclusive). Compatibility with previous generations is required to be tested.
> * Updated function to determine the maximum available memory for testing (Memtest mode). At the moment, the test should not go into drives or a swap file.
> * tRDWR has been changed in most profiles, this is a bonus to the chance to get a stable system.
> * Most presets received small changes, in particular Micron e-die .
> * Improved support for 4 modules.
> * Bug fixes.
> 
> *Download:*
> 
> Techpowerup link
> Guru3d link
> Сomputerbase.de link
> 
> I sent an archive for all resources, it will take some time.


All given settings of 1.6.2 work except the suggested DRAM voltages. none of the safe presets at any speed will post. using the voltage suggestions of 1.6.0.3, everything now posts, even the fast presets.


----------



## nick name

AvengedRobix said:


> very happy =)


This has to be a bugged score, right?


----------



## nick name

oreonutz said:


> Hell Yeah! You got him by more then 100 Points! Thats a SOLID WIN! You really have got that 2700x PBO'ing NICELY!!! I love it! I thought Mine was good. My EDOC (Every Day OC) was PBO, 4225 All Core, 4350 4 Core, 4450 Dual Core, 4500 Single Core (off the top of my head, its been a while now, and sometimes depending on the boot I remember I would get lucky and that Single Core would push up to 4550, but more often then not it was 4500), It looks like you have gotten yourself 4562 for your single core PBO, which suggests you are probably using a BCLK of somewhere between 100.2 to 100.8, am I right?
> 
> Anyway, Great Score man!!! Can't wait to see your Winter Scores!


Thanks! It's actually just a misreading if anything reports higher than 4.35GHz. I use PE 3 with a 100.2 BCLK so it doesn't droop to 99.8 BCLK. I can manipulate my multiplier with PE 3 though. Warm temps with a 200 EDC usually boots at 42.8 and sometimes 43, but if I want to make it boot higher then I can use Sense Mi Skew set to 282 and it will boot up to 43.5 (not stable with warm ambients). I just lower it down to 43 by reducing EDC with Ryzen Master. 

Previously I couldn't get a good Combined Score in Firestrike which is what allowed that guy to surpass me though I think I was using looser RAM timings. And there might be some adjustments from AMD that brought my Combined Score up too.


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> Except when dealing with AMD Tech Support, if you mention you are not running an "official" BIOS, they will just ignore you and say they provide no support for any BIOS obtained outside the official channel. I can list the responses from AMD Tech Support I have received from my support ticket if needed.(Service Request:8200891654)


I can understand that. In that case I would just flash to an "Official BIOS" though. If there was a Beta Bios that had the fixes I wanted, personally I would use that BIOS unless I discovered that there was problems with the BIOS, and they Outweighed the Positive features I was looking for in the Beta BIOS. And then in that case, if a Need arose for me to submit a support ticket with AMD, I would just flash the official BIOS before making that support call, assuming that the symptoms I was reaching out to AMD for persisted in this "Official" BIOS (If they don't, then its reasonable to assume the Beta BIOS is the problem, and at that point there is no need to call AMD until an Official BIOS Came out that showed the same symptoms.)

Again, I am sure you have your reasons, just personally, unless I knew there was some horrible issue with the BETA BIOS, and I knew the Beta BIOS had a fix I desired, I would go for it, especially because submitting a ticket to AMD or ASUS isn't something I do regularly, but again your situation may differ and I completely understand that.


----------



## Reikoji

nick name said:


> This has to be a bugged score, right?


That or Chiller/LN2 score.


----------



## Keith Myers

oreonutz said:


> I can understand that. In that case I would just flash to an "Official BIOS" though. If there was a Beta Bios that had the fixes I wanted, personally I would use that BIOS unless I discovered that there was problems with the BIOS, and they Outweighed the Positive features I was looking for in the Beta BIOS. And then in that case, if a Need arose for me to submit a support ticket with AMD, I would just flash the official BIOS before making that support call, assuming that the symptoms I was reaching out to AMD for persisted in this "Official" BIOS (If they don't, then its reasonable to assume the Beta BIOS is the problem, and at that point there is no need to call AMD until an Official BIOS Came out that showed the same symptoms.)
> 
> Again, I am sure you have your reasons, just personally, unless I knew there was some horrible issue with the BETA BIOS, and I knew the Beta BIOS had a fix I desired, I would go for it, especially because submitting a ticket to AMD or ASUS isn't something I do regularly, but again your situation may differ and I completely understand that.


I logged the ticket for the stuck cpu VID values for any fixed cpu multiplier and the stopped fans against BIOS 2503. The 2703 BIOS fixes the stuck VID issue. The fans are still not fixed in 2703. I have informed the AMD Tech Support agent assigned to my ticket that the official BIOS is still broken regarding the fans issue.


----------



## oreonutz

nick name said:


> Thanks! It's actually just a misreading if anything reports higher than 4.35GHz. I use PE 3 with a 100.2 BCLK so it doesn't droop to 99.8 BCLK. I can manipulate my multiplier with PE 3 though. Warm temps with a 200 EDC usually boots at 42.8 and sometimes 43, but if I want to make it boot higher then I can use Sense Mi Skew set to 282 and it will boot up to 43.5 (not stable with warm ambients). I just lower it down to 43 by reducing EDC with Ryzen Master.
> 
> Previously I couldn't get a good Combined Score in Firestrike which is what allowed that guy to surpass me though I think I was using looser RAM timings. And there might be some adjustments from AMD that brought my Combined Score up too.


Yeah, I miss Sensi MI Skew. I LOVED Using that to trick the Processor into keeping my All Core underload Higher. It doesn't work with Matisse Chips unfortunately. How I controlled my Chip and got it so damn high was with PE4. I have 2 2700x, and before I sold 2, I had 4, of those 4 only 2 were stable with PE4, naturally those are the 2 I kept. I love PE4 because You got the PE3 Tweak that ASUS inserted from The Stilt, that disabled the Power and Current Calculation in the SMU allowing you to hold your Boosts for longer, plus Maxed out PPT, TDC, and EDC, which just meant Crazy Boosts for every load situation. Then from there use the Voltage Offsets and small BCLK Adjustments, along with SenseMI Skew when needed, and you were able to really control how your CPU Boosted. I hope at some point they give us that level of control with Matisse. And although he didn't say what form it took, @1usmus did give us reason to believe that we will get something nice in a future update that will make us happy on the Boost front, I really can't wait to see what it is! I also am pretty sure I saw Shamino hint at something as well!


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> I logged the ticket for the stuck cpu VID values for any fixed cpu multiplier and the stopped fans against BIOS 2503. The 2703 BIOS fixes the stuck VID issue. The fans are still not fixed in 2703. I have informed the AMD Tech Support agent assigned to my ticket that the official BIOS is still broken regarding the fans issue.


Yup, it is.

The 0002 Issue has both the Stuck VID problem solved as well as the Fan issue. Hopefully they incorporate both into a future Official UEFI soon. So far by far, 0002 is the best for me. Actually, I prefer 0002+E, as it gives me EVERYTHING I want, Full Range Fan Control so I can FINALLY Have what ever Critical Temperature I want (No More 100% Fan Speed once I hit 75c), the best Boost Algorithm for those times I feel like leaving the CPU on Default (Which I rarely do, but still its cool to see those high boost numbers when I do) Great Memory OC Support, and the Fan Fixes. The only reason I would want to upgrade from this UEFI is to check out whatever this new feature is that 1usmus has me excited for, Until then, I am quite happy with this UEFI. I am running completely stable with a Per CCX Overclock that automatically takes effect once booting into Windows (Unfortunately there is no Per CCX Tool in BIOS or one for Linux Yet), but I have; CCX0:4450 / CCX1: 4475 / CCX2: 4275 / CCX3: 4250 - And I absolutely LOVE IT!!!!


----------



## nick name

oreonutz said:


> Yeah, I miss Sensi MI Skew. I LOVED Using that to trick the Processor into keeping my All Core underload Higher. It doesn't work with Matisse Chips unfortunately. How I controlled my Chip and got it so damn high was with PE4. I have 2 2700x, and before I sold 2, I had 4, of those 4 only 2 were stable with PE4, naturally those are the 2 I kept. I love PE4 because You got the PE3 Tweak that ASUS inserted from The Stilt, that disabled the Power and Current Calculation in the SMU allowing you to hold your Boosts for longer, plus Maxed out PPT, TDC, and EDC, which just meant Crazy Boosts for every load situation. Then from there use the Voltage Offsets and small BCLK Adjustments, along with SenseMI Skew when needed, and you were able to really control how your CPU Boosted. I hope at some point they give us that level of control with Matisse. And although he didn't say what form it took, @1usmus did give us reason to believe that we will get something nice in a future update that will make us happy on the Boost front, I really can't wait to see what it is! I also am pretty sure I saw Shamino hint at something as well!


Once I learned that Ryzen Master could change EDC (changing EDC in BIOS previously did nothing with PE 3 & 4 but now works) I would find a spot between PE 3 & 4 for daily use. But when overclocking -- PE 3 with BCLK and cold winter air I was getting 2058 in CB15. I think this winter I will be able to break 2060 if I still have this 2700X. 

But according to The Stilt the new ASUS boards weren't and aren't going to have something like PE 3 and 4, but he said a while ago that the new CPUs behave similarly. Or I guess they were supposed to.


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> I logged the ticket for the stuck cpu VID values for any fixed cpu multiplier and the stopped fans against BIOS 2503. The 2703 BIOS fixes the stuck VID issue. The fans are still not fixed in 2703. I have informed the AMD Tech Support agent assigned to my ticket that the official BIOS is still broken regarding the fans issue.


Wait, AMD didn't just point you to the motherboard vendor? Kind of seems like something they would expect ASUS to fix. Unless they are just providing polite service to you while they escalate it to engineers at AMD and ASUS. So I guess that's good on AMD.


----------



## Keith Myers

nick name said:


> Wait, AMD didn't just point you to the motherboard vendor? Kind of seems like something they would expect ASUS to fix. Unless they are just providing polite service to you while they escalate it to engineers at AMD and ASUS. So I guess that's good on AMD.


They advised and prompted me to update to the latest ASUS BIOS. Then asked whether it fixed the stuck VID problem. Previously, they asked for screenshots of the stuck VID in the BIOS, and what my monitoring software was (GKrellm and asus-wmi-sensors) after they realized that I was a Linux user. That surprised them and the first agent did not know how to handle the support request and passed it up to level 2 tech support. That agent was not familiar with Linux either or the tools available to me. They were surprised when I provided the output of lscpu and lshw in place of the requested Hwinfo export. They also asked what power supply I was using and how old it was. Obviously they don't get much requests from Linux users.


----------



## Mumak

oreonutz said:


> EDIT: Also, about what I noticed with my CCD1 Being 10c hotter than CCD2. Is that something you have seen alot of, and normal? Or do you mainly see people with more Even CCD Temps? Just curious if my case is unique or not.


I haven't tested that many systems to provide a sufficient advice, but I'm pretty sure this depends on type of workload. If the workload is not evenly spread across the CCDs then it seems unusual. In such case I'd perhaps check mounting of the heatsink.


----------



## crakej

My CCD1 gets hotter - but it's favoured by all tasks as CCD1 can boost higher, so it's warmer. Sometimes 10c or more (v briefly)

@Mumak - i'm on ver 6.11-3900 and it's showing me 3 CCD values - 1, 2, and 5 (though results for 5 are greyed out). Apologies if this is already fixed.

@gupsterg I mentioned the other day that I thought I got better boost in 2703+ compared to 0002x - I've checked and pleased to say I'm wrong - it's dependant on what ram speed I'm running which I'd completely forgotten! I knew something was not right about it lol.


----------



## Mumak

crakej said:


> @Mumak - i'm on ver 6.11-3900 and it's showing me 3 CCD values - 1, 2, and 5 (though results for 5 are greyed out). Apologies if this is already fixed.


Hm, that's interesting and not expected. Please provide the HWiNFO Debug File, I need to analyze that.


----------



## crakej

Mumak said:


> Hm, that's interesting and not expected. Please provide the HWiNFO Debug File, I need to analyze that.


NP - will do that now with screen capture and update.

Edit - usefully, I pressed exit (sorry!) by mistake. Re-starting it and CCD5 has gone. My machine had been hibernating and running a long time. If it happens again, I will screen capture immediately!

How do I create a debug file? Is it different to turning on logging? I'll stay on this version for a while see if it happens again.


----------



## mtrai

The Physics and Combined scores both started increasing on AMD CPU only with the release of Windows 10 1903 Microsoft has been making improvements in the Windows 10 scheduler and how it handles multi core AMD cpus. Note this improvement does not help Intel cpus at all.

And then of course we know how AMD drivers work...they just get better and better over time and now the chipsets are really getting worked on as well.

24 555 with AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT(1x) and AMD Ryzen 7 2700X
Graphics Score 29 339
Physics Score 24 268
Combined Score 11 136

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/20365665

I pretty much now average over 29.2 in graphics and and 24+k on physics and 11k with combined. Keep in mind windows can decide to run some stuff in the background and drop both physics and combined for that run.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> The Physics and Combined scores both started increasing on AMD CPU only with the release of Windows 10 1903 Microsoft has been making improvements in the Windows 10 scheduler and how it handles multi core AMD cpus. Note this improvement does not help Intel cpus at all.
> 
> And then of course we know how AMD drivers work...they just get better and better over time and now the chipsets are really getting worked on as well.
> 
> 24 555 with AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT(1x) and AMD Ryzen 7 2700X
> Graphics Score 29 339
> Physics Score 24 268
> Combined Score 11 136
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/fs/20365665
> 
> I pretty much now average over 29.2 in graphics and and 24+k on physics and 11k with combined. Keep in mind windows can decide to run some stuff in the background and drop both physics and combined for that run.


That's a mighty fine Graphics Score. Mighty fine.


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> That's a mighty fine Graphics Score. Mighty fine.


About to take my CPU water block off and use the fittings on the 5700 XT waterblock. And switch my CPU back to my big AIO as I have never been really happy with how my CPU waterblock only cools the same as my AIO did on my 2700X


----------



## gupsterg

Synoxia said:


> How can u use cas 15 on ryzen? lol
> 
> 
> 
> Reikoji said:
> 
> 
> 
> Heard you have to disable/enable gear down. but, i havent been able to set an odd cas either way.
> 
> 
> 
> gupsterg said:
> 
> 
> 
> Does work....
> 
> 
> Reikoji said:
> 
> 
> 
> Didnt say it didnt... I use 4-dimm which is probably why it doesnt work for me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Again does work, as I also use 4 dimms.



oreonutz said:


> So please forgive my lack of knowledge here, but what is the significance of PT PCIE Port 7 being set to 17337? What is that setting "PT PCIE Port" supposed to do? I feel like I should know this, but When I have played with it my self I couldn't seem to figure out what it did, and there seems to be a lack of information online, at least in the quick searches I did. Sorry for asking you so many questions, but I really do appreciate your Knowledge and insight.


No idea, been short on time, may at some point see if I can sort it, but I have sent WMVs of UEFI compares to Shamino, hoping ASUS fix it.



crakej said:


> @gupsterg I mentioned the other day that I thought I got better boost in 2703+ compared to 0002x - I've checked and pleased to say I'm wrong - it's dependant on what ram speed I'm running which I'd completely forgotten! I knew something was not right about it lol.


NP.


----------



## Reikoji

gupsterg said:


> Again does work, as I also use 4 dimms.





nick name said:


> You can use an odd value with GDM disabled and when you're not on the brink of stability.


/SHRUG


----------



## Duvar

mtrai said:


> The Physics and Combined scores both started increasing on AMD CPU only with the release of Windows 10 1903 Microsoft has been making improvements in the Windows 10 scheduler and how it handles multi core AMD cpus. Note this improvement does not help Intel cpus at all.
> 
> And then of course we know how AMD drivers work...they just get better and better over time and now the chipsets are really getting worked on as well.
> 
> 24 555 with AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT(1x) and AMD Ryzen 7 2700X
> Graphics Score 29 339
> Physics Score 24 268
> Combined Score 11 136
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/fs/20365665
> 
> I pretty much now average over 29.2 in graphics and and 24+k on physics and 11k with combined. Keep in mind windows can decide to run some stuff in the background and drop both physics and combined for that run.


Great score.

Here my 3600 with a 1080Ti https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/38470560?
and my old 8700k with same GPU but slow RAM 3400 CL18-20...^^: https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/27466648?


----------



## oreonutz

nick name said:


> Once I learned that Ryzen Master could change EDC (changing EDC in BIOS previously did nothing with PE 3 & 4 but now works) I would find a spot between PE 3 & 4 for daily use. But when overclocking -- PE 3 with BCLK and cold winter air I was getting 2058 in CB15. I think this winter I will be able to break 2060 if I still have this 2700X.
> 
> But according to The Stilt the new ASUS boards weren't and aren't going to have something like PE 3 and 4, but he said a while ago that the new CPUs behave similarly. Or I guess they were supposed to.


Well thats unfortunate that the Performance Enhancers aren't coming to the new boards. For the 2000 Series in particular, they were AMAZING!

Your Score is DAMN GOOD!

Your CB R15 Scores made me curious to see what my Best Scores were for my 2700x when it was in my Crosshair VII Hero. That was a different NVMe Drive that I used for all my crazy 2700x Benching. So I dug that up, plugged it in, did 2 Quick Benchmark runs on my 3900x to get a comparison between the new and the old. But My Top Score you are not at all far from. According to my notes, my top score was done with a Small BCLK OC of 100.6, using SenseMI Skew of 292, and with an Air Duct I Rigged to go from my one of my Room AC Vents Directly Over MY Radiator Fan Intake. I want to do that again some day soon, but my better half came in my Man Cave and had a damn heart attack when she saw my elaborate contraption and realized thats why I had the Air Conditioner set to 60F in the House, LOL! I told her Next Time I did it I would install a New Unit on the Roof just for my Room and she rolled her eyes, lol (I Think she thought I was joking, LOL!)

Anyways, here are my best Scores from my 2700x, Multicore and Single Score, with my 3900x result that I did today on top. (I know there are people here who got better then this, but for "Ambient" OC, I thought I did good!)

Multicore Score:


Spoiler
















Singlecore Score:


Spoiler


----------



## AvengedRobix

oreonutz said:


> DAMN BROTHER!!!! How the HELL???????????????
> 
> Seriously, Well Done Brother!!!! That is the HIGHEST Score I have seen on a 3900x!
> 
> So I haven't read below, you might have already posted details, but if you haven't please do. Is this with Ambient Cooling? Are all Core's Clocked at 4600Mhz, or are you using one of our tools to Per CCX Overclock? What Cooler are you using? So many damn Questions! I know I have been a bastard to you in the past, but seriously, I am impressed!


Watercooling with a 360 monsta... 4600 on 6 core and 4550 on other 6... Ram 3800C15


----------



## AvengedRobix

Reikoji said:


> That or Chiller/LN2 score.


Water with a 360 monsta



nick name said:


> This has to be a bugged score, right?


Bugged? ***?


----------



## oreonutz

Mumak said:


> I haven't tested that many systems to provide a sufficient advice, but I'm pretty sure this depends on type of workload. If the workload is not evenly spread across the CCDs then it seems unusual. In such case I'd perhaps check mounting of the heatsink.





crakej said:


> My CCD1 gets hotter - but it's favoured by all tasks as CCD1 can boost higher, so it's warmer. Sometimes 10c or more (v briefly)


My 1st CCD Is also my Favored CCD, but even when running a Cinebench Or Blender Run where all Cores are Pegged to 100 Percent and the Vcore is the Same across all Cores, my 1st CCD is between 8 and 10c Hotter on Average. I still haven't had time to rotate my Block again, but I know its properly mounted as when I last rotated my block (before this Beta Version of HWinfo was released) I not only manually spread the thermal paste, but I very painstakingly made sure to spread even pressure across the IHS as I mounted the Block, I am as certain as I could possibly be that it is mounted properly, but I have a feeling the orientation of my Block matters with this Chiplet layout, I plan to get some data on that this weekend when I hopefully have a good amount of time to try different mounting positions with my block.



crakej said:


> @gupsterg I mentioned the other day that I thought I got better boost in 2703+ compared to 0002x - I've checked and pleased to say I'm wrong - it's dependant on what ram speed I'm running which I'd completely forgotten! I knew something was not right about it lol.


I was going to post when I saw you post that, but I figured you would do some further testing on it. I did my own testing between the 2 Versions and saw no difference in boost performance between the 2 when both were set up exactly the same. They also both seem to have the same memory performance as well. At least for me and my chip. But thats awesome that you were able to validate that with your testing as well.


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> The Physics and Combined scores both started increasing on AMD CPU only with the release of Windows 10 1903 Microsoft has been making improvements in the Windows 10 scheduler and how it handles multi core AMD cpus. Note this improvement does not help Intel cpus at all.
> 
> And then of course we know how AMD drivers work...they just get better and better over time and now the chipsets are really getting worked on as well.
> 
> 24 555 with AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT(1x) and AMD Ryzen 7 2700X
> Graphics Score 29 339
> Physics Score 24 268
> Combined Score 11 136
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/fs/20365665
> 
> I pretty much now average over 29.2 in graphics and and 24+k on physics and 11k with combined. Keep in mind windows can decide to run some stuff in the background and drop both physics and combined for that run.


Damn, your combined score kicks mine in the butt! And you are right up on me with the rest of the scores. I am still on 1809 because I don't enjoy being Windows Beta Testers, So I block their ability to update my PC, I control my own Update Cycle. I am waiting for their Soundcard Bug with 1903 to be fixed before I update, but this looks like a reason to update. I usually wait about a month until after the next big Release when I finally jump onto the one Prior, so for instance I jumped to 1809 about a Month after 1903 Released. But I might have to reconsider this time...


----------



## oreonutz

gupsterg said:


> Again does work, as I also use 4 dimms.


Sounds Like we got quite the 4 Dimm Club going on here. I also am on 4 Dimms! I can confirm that Odd CL's work for me as well, although I am yet to get 15tCAS error free yet, still on 16c. But working my there slowly but surely, still haven't loaded up the new Ryzen Calc to see if I can update my calculations a bit...



gupsterg said:


> No idea, been short on time, may at some point see if I can sort it, but I have sent WMVs of UEFI compares to Shamino, hoping ASUS fix it.


Cool no problem. I was just curious, but completely understand! Hope you get a respite from work soon! Mine has been kicking my ass! In fact I shouldn't even be on this forum now, I should be building a new set of Server VM's, but... I don't feel like it right now... LOL! Been working my ass off lately!


----------



## oreonutz

AvengedRobix said:


> Watercooling with a 360 monsta... 4600 on 6 core and 4550 on other 6... Ram 3800C15


Well Fricking Nice! So Jealous and Envious of your Silicon! I have a 360 45mm, a 280 45mm, and a 280 60mm, all Hooked up to ONLY my 3900x, and I still can't pump more then 1.325v into my Chip with an All Core Load without going over 90c. Once of these days I am going to get thermals under control, then Hopefully be able to push my 1st CCD to 4.6Mhz, but for now I have to settle for 4.5Ghz and 4.475Ghz for the 1st CCD.


----------



## AvengedRobix

oreonutz said:


> Well Fricking Nice! So Jealous and Envious of your Silicon! I have a 360 45mm, a 280 45mm, and a 280 60mm, all Hooked up to ONLY my 3900x, and I still can't pump more then 1.325v into my Chip with an All Core Load without going over 90c. Once of these days I am going to get thermals under control, then Hopefully be able to push my 1st CCD to 4.6Mhz, but for now I have to settle for 4.5Ghz and 4.475Ghz for the 1st CCD.


very high temp... but to me the summer was finished =) .. i've near 20C on the room.... and now waiting for better temp to bench =)


----------



## crakej

oreonutz said:


> I was going to post when I saw you post that, but I figured you would do some further testing on it. I did my own testing between the 2 Versions and saw no difference in boost performance between the 2 when both were set up exactly the same. They also both seem to have the same memory performance as well. At least for me and my chip. But thats awesome that you were able to validate that with your testing as well.


Well, turns out I learned something interesting about memory timing and how they effect boost.

I've found out that tWTRS, tWTRL, tWR and tRTP can effect max boost. In fact, just changing tRTP from 12 to 6 can improve performance and be the difference between max boost being 4.625GHz, instead of 4.53GHz or 4.50GHz.

I'm going to do more experimenting tomorrow testing best values for these timings - too tired to do more now, but maybe this is why some have trouble with boosting with higher ram OC.


----------



## Reikoji

AvengedRobix said:


> very high temp... but to me the summer was finished =) .. i've near 20C on the room.... and now waiting for better temp to bench =)


what voltage setting?


----------



## edu616

Does performance Enhancer work with 3000 series cpus? I was trying to read back but couldn’t find anything meaningful. Thanks!


----------



## nick name

AvengedRobix said:


> Water with a 360 monsta
> 
> 
> Bugged? ***?


i have no idea what bug -- it just seems too high when considering core count and increased IPC. Do you put your PC to sleep or anything that might alter the timer benchmarks rely on?


----------



## nick name

edu616 said:


> Does performance Enhancer work with 3000 series cpus? I was trying to read back but couldn’t find anything meaningful. Thanks!


PE 3 and 4 do not work the same on 3000 as they did on 2000 CPUs.


----------



## vasyltheonly

Duvar said:


> Great score.
> 
> Here my 3600 with a 1080Ti https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/38470560?
> and my old 8700k with same GPU but slow RAM 3400 CL18-20...^^: https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/27466648?


Are we still comparing benchmarks? 3600x on brink of stability and 2080Ti overclocked to all I could at these summer temps. Winter needs to come.
https://www.3dmark.com/spy/8048214


----------



## Synoxia

@Shamino cmon. give us 1004 beta bio\s!


----------



## AvengedRobix

nick name said:


> i have no idea what bug -- it just seems too high when considering core count and increased IPC. Do you put your PC to sleep or anything that might alter the timer benchmarks rely on?


Too High???? Are you kidding??

Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A6013 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## hurricane28

I withdraw my earlier statement that this BIO is good, its not. 

I can't boot normally as it starting to hang on random post codes, the fan erratic issue is back and i am missing a ton of settings for ram.. I can't even do a normal reboot because i get random post code too and i have to press reset button on my case in order to properly reboot.. 

I guess these nightmares never end when using Assus...


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> @Mumak - i'm on ver 6.11-3900 and it's showing me 3 CCD values - 1, 2, and 5 (though results for 5 are greyed out). Apologies if this is already fixed.
> 
> 
> 
> Mumak said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hm, that's interesting and not expected. Please provide the HWiNFO Debug File, I need to analyze that.
> 
> 
> 
> crakej said:
> 
> 
> 
> NP - will do that now with screen capture and update.
> 
> Edit - usefully, I pressed exit (sorry!) by mistake. Re-starting it and CCD5 has gone. My machine had been hibernating and running a long time. If it happens again, I will screen capture immediately!
> 
> How do I create a debug file? Is it different to turning on logging? I'll stay on this version for a while see if it happens again.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

 @crakej

Info on gaining debug file.
@Mumak

Seems another has similar bug, link, that user is on OCN, but I forget his username here, he uses same avatar as on his YT profile, perhaps another will recognise.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> @crakej
> 
> Info on gaining debug file.


Thanks for that - have enabled debug mode. I haven't found anything so far to cause it again - i'll keep my eyes open though


----------



## hurricane28

Do more people have these weird issues with BIOS 2703 like me?


----------



## Mumak

gupsterg said:


> Seems another has similar bug, link, that user is on OCN, but I forget his username here, he uses same avatar as on his YT profile, perhaps another will recognise.


Thanks for letting me know. I responded to him on reddit, hopefully he can provide the DBG for analysis.


----------



## xeizo

hurricane28 said:


> Do more people have these weird issues with BIOS 2703 like me?


Just tested it briefly, didn't notice anything abnormal except low boost. I run gupsterg 0002+ and for me it's rock solid. Can't complain.


----------



## hurricane28

xeizo said:


> Just tested it briefly, didn't notice anything abnormal except low boost. I run gupsterg 0002+ and for me it's rock solid. Can't complain.


Okay, are you on 3rd or second ryzen CPU? I flashed 2501 now and it seems a lot better.


----------



## Axaion

Synoxia said:


> @Shamino cmon. give us 1004 beta bio\s!


Id rather have toggles for hpet, spread spectrum and actual useful fan controls than a rushed 1004 bios


----------



## xeizo

hurricane28 said:


> Okay, are you on 3rd or second ryzen CPU? I flashed 2501 now and it seems a lot better.


3900X

2501 is good performance, but has boot issues and Destiny 2/Linux/RDRANDR-bug, and fans can potentially stop

0002+ has same performance and fixes for all of the above


----------



## nick name

AvengedRobix said:


> Too High???? Are you kidding??
> 
> Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A6013 utilizzando Tapatalk


I was being genuine because I didn't know, but after doing some math I can see that I was underestimating the 3900X. I also misremembered the score.


----------



## hurricane28

xeizo said:


> 3900X
> 
> 2501 is good performance, but has boot issues and Destiny 2/Linux/RDRANDR-bug, and fans can potentially stop
> 
> 0002+ has same performance and fixes for all of the above


Alright, i am on 2600 x and flashed 2501 BIOS which is the best so far. Boost is same but more settings in BIOS etc. Destiny 2 is always a pain for me due to bufferbloat on my end... I hope my isp will fix it soon.


----------



## xeizo

hurricane28 said:


> Alright, i am on 2600 x and flashed 2501 BIOS which is the best so far. Boost is same but more settings in BIOS etc. Destiny 2 is always a pain for me due to bufferbloat on my end... I hope my isp will fix it soon.


If you are on 2600X you should probably go back to the last Pinnacle-Pi 1.0.0.6 Bios, that would be 1201, to get the best performance. Even though some have said the newer bioses have better memory OC even on Ryzen 2000 they are mostly made for Ryzen 3000.


----------



## hurricane28

xeizo said:


> If you are on 2600X you should probably go back to the last Pinnacle-Pi 1.0.0.6 Bios, that would be 1201, to get the best performance. Even though some have said the newer bioses have better memory OC even on Ryzen 2000 they are mostly made for Ryzen 3000.


Probably. 2501 runs great here though, if i get any issues i flash to the BIOS 1201 like you said and try. Thnx.


----------



## AvengedRobix

Update... Patriot Viper 4400 + Gskill 3600 C16

CB20








CB15








CPUZ


----------



## nick name

AvengedRobix said:


> Update... Patriot Viper 4400 + Gskill 3600 C16
> 
> CB20
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CB15
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CPUZ


Bravo! That is awesome.


----------



## kevaliar

Hi can anyone enlighten me on how people are able to bclk overclock? When I set the bclk over 100 in the bios, whether it's 2501 and 0002+, the system defaults to 3.9ghz and 1.1 core volts. Please advise!!! 

(Only way around this was using ai suite, which I prefer not to use.)


----------



## xeizo

kevaliar said:


> Hi can anyone enlighten me on how people are able to bclk overclock? When I set the bclk over 100 in the bios, whether it's 2501 and 0002+, the system defaults to 3.9ghz and 1.1 core volts. Please advise!!!
> 
> (Only way around this was using ai suite, which I prefer not to use.)


I do not know, but it's not AMDs fault, I have another board which is a Gigabyte B450 and bclk works just fine. Running bclk 102 totally without issues.

I haven't actually tested bclk on my Asus boards, as they have performed plenty good anyway. But I suppose I will run into the same problem as you, will test when I have the time.


----------



## nick name

kevaliar said:


> Hi can anyone enlighten me on how people are able to bclk overclock? When I set the bclk over 100 in the bios, whether it's 2501 and 0002+, the system defaults to 3.9ghz and 1.1 core volts. Please advise!!!
> 
> (Only way around this was using ai suite, which I prefer not to use.)


This is almost certainly not the problem, but have you enabled virtualization?


----------



## crakej

AvengedRobix said:


> Update... Patriot Viper 4400 + Gskill 3600 C16
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> CB20
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CB15
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CPUZ


I'd love to see your settings for this. Not sure mine will ever do that well! I have the patriot Steels too, If I disable CCD2 I can do 1900:1900 but can't see any other way...


----------



## edu616

nick name said:


> edu616 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Does performance Enhancer work with 3000 series cpus? I was trying to read back but couldnâ€™️t find anything meaningful. Thanks!
> 
> 
> 
> PE 3 and 4 do not work the same on 3000 as they did on 2000 CPUs.
Click to expand...


Thanks for the info!


----------



## AvengedRobix

crakej said:


> I'd love to see your settings for this. Not sure mine will ever do that well! I have the patriot Steels too, If I disable CCD2 I can do 1900:1900 but can't see any other way...


Patriots steel was good.. but they don't support gear mode off =(


----------



## AvengedRobix

nick name said:


> Bravo! That is awesome.


Tnx but i'm so far to the best.. i need more cold temp =)


----------



## crakej

edu616 said:


> Thanks for the info!


PE3 does work for me on my 3900x, just enable it and turn on PBO. Boosts higher for longer.


----------



## crakej

AvengedRobix said:


> Patriots steel was good.. but they don't support gear mode off =(


I'm running geardown-off right now, just had to find the right timings.


----------



## crakej

kevaliar said:


> Hi can anyone enlighten me on how people are able to bclk overclock? When I set the bclk over 100 in the bios, whether it's 2501 and 0002+, the system defaults to 3.9ghz and 1.1 core volts. Please advise!!!
> 
> (Only way around this was using ai suite, which I prefer not to use.)


I've not seen this when using BCLK - I set everything up, then move it up .2 at a time. Everything seems fine.

Are you leaving AI Overclock setting to <auto>? Try to enter your timings manually and leave it on <auto> instead of <DOCP> or <Manual>


----------



## AvengedRobix

crakej said:


> I'm running geardown-off right now, just had to find the right timings.


gear off 3800 15-15-15? my gskill can do but patriot nothing =( subtiming in photo.. don't look primary


----------



## Nighthog

@AvengedRobix

What kind of cooling are you running to be able to hit such speed at that voltage on your 3900X?

You mentioned 360 Monsta? what more, specific water block? cold-room? High_Flow?

Is your silicon just that good?

I presume it was ALL core OC @ 4.6+Ghz? That's kinda crazy if that's just regular water on that chip.


----------



## AvengedRobix

Nighthog said:


> @AvengedRobix
> 
> What kind of cooling are you running to be able to hit such speed at that voltage on your 3900X?
> 
> You mentioned 360 Monsta? what more, specific water block? cold-room? High_Flow?
> 
> Is your silicon just that good?
> 
> I presume it was ALL core OC @ 4.6+Ghz? That's kinda crazy if that's just regular water on that chip.


Wb is a EK supremacy EVO... Temp Room is 18C...
Is not all core 4.6+... 6 core yes and six 4550


----------



## Nighthog

AvengedRobix said:


> Wb is a EK supremacy EVO... Temp Room is 18C...
> Is not all core 4.6+... 6 core yes and six 4550


That's still real good I've not really gotten even 4.5Ghz to work at all in OC. Most cores start to give trouble above or around 4.4Ghz in stability for me on a bottom barrel 3800X. Seems your "bad" CCD is better than the chip I have.


----------



## crakej

AvengedRobix said:


> gear off 3800 15-15-15? my gskill can do but patriot nothing =( subtiming in photo.. don't look primary


Thanks for sharing. I can't do 3800 because of my crappy CCD2. Didn't spend much time testing it with one CCD - seemed pointless.

What program are you using to display the values?

For my 3733 Profile is very similar to you, but I'm using SoC @ 1.081v, so maybe you would attain GD=off with more SoC? Also, I leave tRDWR and tWRRD on auto mostly, though sometimes set them when I've tuned everything. Sometimes it just want them on auto. I have the 3 CadBus timings set at 56. Patriots seem to like having tRCDRW 1 above the other primaries - 14 15 14 14 28 42 4 6 16 4 12 12. Lastly, I sound tRTP was better on 12 for max performance.

Whats your VCore set at?


----------



## AvengedRobix

crakej said:


> Thanks for sharing. I can't do 3800 because of my crappy CCD2. Didn't spend much time testing it with one CCD - seemed pointless.
> 
> What program are you using to display the values?
> 
> For my 3733 Profile is very similar to you, but I'm using SoC @ 1.081v, so maybe you would attain GD=off with more SoC? Also, I leave tRDWR and tWRRD on auto mostly, though sometimes set them when I've tuned everything. Sometimes it just want them on auto. I have the 3 CadBus timings set at 56. Patriots seem to like having tRCDRW 1 above the other primaries - 14 15 14 14 28 42 4 6 16 4 12 12. Lastly, I sound tRTP was better on 12 for max performance.
> 
> Whats your VCore set at?


no.. not any program.. i write in notepad XD


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> -snip-
> 
> Lastly, I sound tRTP was better on 12 for max performance.
> 
> -snip-


In your own testing or did you learn that elsewhere?


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> In your own testing or did you learn that elsewhere?


My own testing - tested a few times as well.


----------



## crakej

AvengedRobix said:


> no.. not any program.. i write in notepad XD


What's your VCore set at for that OC?


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> My own testing - tested a few times as well.


How did you quantify it? Or are you speaking more to the feel of the game? And which games?


----------



## AvengedRobix

crakej said:


> What's your VCore set at for that OC?


1.40/1.42

Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A6013 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> How did you quantify it? Or are you speaking more to the feel of the game? And which games?


re-runs of CB15 and 20 -I run it 5 or 6 times every time i change something. Results do vary slightly from boot to boot as well, but only by <5 poitns. I tested all even values from 6 up to 14 (max). tWTRS, tWTRL and tWR are at 4, 12, 12.

Of course these settings work well with my other settings - I wouldn't be surprised if they need tweaking at other speeds, but I wouldn't have thought by much.


----------



## crakej

AvengedRobix said:


> 1.40/1.42
> 
> Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A6013 utilizzando Tapatalk


Wow - a golden CPU indeed! Do you use offset mode? I don't think mine will even do 4400, 4400 at that voltage!


----------



## thegr8anand

@AvengedRobix, the numbers look amazing but i am a bit skeptical. Do you run open bench? As long as you are able to keep it under 80-85 somehow even at 1.4/1.42v then yeah you have an amazing chip and setup.


----------



## crakej

thegr8anand said:


> @AvengedRobix, the numbers look amazing but i am a bit skeptical. Do you run open bench? As long as you are able to keep it under 80-85 somehow even at 1.4/1.42v then yeah you have an amazing chip and setup.


and with CCD1 doing 4600, CCD2 doing 4500!

1.36v (DMM measured 1.362v, but I reckon the bios maybe sets 1.35v) seems to be the default VCore unless you use an offset, in which case it seems to default to 1.0v (on my board)

Of course RM shows something like 1.46, but we now know that's derived from VID, not VCore

@AvengedRobix - when you say 1.4/1.42v where are you entering that voltage? Bios CPU Voltage?


Forgive me but I don't use R Master - it tries to apply values that are out of rage if you try and enter them yourself in the bios - though the bios can do this as well.....Try setting tCKE to 0 - you can't do it.....but the bios can, and does!

I have to ask myself why AMD wants us to use RM and not the bios for OCing?

In a perfect world AMD would give the damn documentation to vendors so they can fix their UEFIs quickly, and much more easily than having to guess what code does (or should be doing). Sadly, it's a little more complex than that. Still, it something to aim for perhaps?


----------



## AvengedRobix

thegr8anand said:


> @AvengedRobix, the numbers look amazing but i am a bit skeptical. Do you run open bench? As long as you are able to keep it under 80-85 somehow even at 1.4/1.42v then yeah you have an amazing chip and setup.


I don't try real bench.. this settings Is only for bench and hwbot.. for Daily i stay at 4,4 all core 1,30V.. at 1,4 i've not problem because i've a chiller and keep water near 10C.. on cb20 or geekbench4 touch only 63C max

Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A6013 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## AvengedRobix

crakej said:


> and with CCD1 doing 4600, CCD2 doing 4500!
> 
> 
> 
> 1.36v (DMM measured 1.362v, but I reckon the bios maybe sets 1.35v) seems to be the default VCore unless you use an offset, in which case it seems to default to 1.0v (on my board)
> 
> 
> 
> Of course RM shows something like 1.46, but we now know that's derived from VID, not VCore
> 
> 
> 
> @AvengedRobix - when you say 1.4/1.42v where are you entering that voltage? Bios CPU Voltage?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Forgive me but I don't use R Master - it tries to apply values that are out of rage if you try and enter them yourself in the bios - though the bios can do this as well.....Try setting tCKE to 0 - you can't do it.....but the bios can, and does!
> 
> 
> 
> I have to ask myself why AMD wants us to use RM and not the bios for OCing?
> 
> 
> 
> In a perfect world AMD would give the damn documentation to vendors so they can fix their UEFIs quickly, and much more easily than having to guess what code does (or should be doing). Sadly, it's a little more complex than that. Still, it something to aim for perhaps?


When i'm benching start with 1.45 in BIOS.. 1.43 in Windows.. i don't use RM from AMD.. i use Asus vcore and the tool of shamino ti set ccx

Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A6013 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## Hale59

https://twitter.com/1usmus/status/1171078479259082758


----------



## crakej

AvengedRobix said:


> When i'm benching start with 1.45 in BIOS.. 1.43 in Windows.. i don't use RM from AMD.. i use Asus vcore and the tool of shamino ti set ccx
> 
> Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A6013 utilizzando Tapatalk


I see!

Still, it's quite impressive! Thanks for sharing details.


----------



## AvengedRobix

crakej said:


> I see!
> 
> 
> 
> Still, it's quite impressive! Thanks for sharing details.


When return ti home i post my BIOS Setting.. of anyone have advice Is bene accepted [emoji16]

Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A6013 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## hurricane28

Int the name of all there is holy... why did Assus put back the fan issue again...?! Now i am getting this fan issue again and my system feels wonky when the issue is there.. It even happens when i am not using monitoring software at all.. 

It was going so well and now they screwed it up again..


----------



## Synoxia

www.reddit.com/r/MSI_Gaming/comments/d1rv4f/x570_agesa_1003abba_beta_bios/ beta bioses ABBA with boost fix already available for MSI boards.


----------



## xeizo

gupsterg! SMU 46.49 provided by 1usmus

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1z6imw1yKkS0CmFvLgytaJn9aN7enW0eJ/view

as Asus will not be fast, 0002+ could be 0002++ with this?


----------



## Synoxia

If he bothered modding the bios, he would have surely shared it with us. Probably he didn't because tomorrow asus COULD officially release the new abba bioses.


----------



## nick name

Coming soon:


----------



## Synoxia

nick name said:


> Coming soon:


When will 1004 ACDC bios come out? Need 5ghz PBO fix!


----------



## The Stilt

Here are modified bioses for Crosshair VII boards, which include the new SMU 46.49.0 release that improves boost behavior / margin on 3000-series CPUs.

Do note that these are totally untested, rebuilt bioses. Despite I fully expect them to work, there is no guarantee what so ever that they actually do.

Also since the bioses have been rebuilt, their original signatures allowing them to be flashed using official software (e.g. EzFlash) tools are invalid. Because of that, *they can be only flashed in using the Flashback feature*.

In case they do not work or introduce some kind of an issue, you can revert to original bios by using Flashback function.

Also note that these bioses ARE NOT based AGESA 1.0.0.3ABBA code revision, as the whole code base has not been upgraded (only the SMU firmwares).
Therefore the behavior might not be identical to true 1.0.0.3ABBA bios builds.

Naming: Official bios build, M = Modification, FI = 4649 (ASCII)

Crosshair VII Hero 0002M-FI

Crosshair VII Hero Wi-Fi 0002M-FI

Please let me know if they work or not, so that I can take them down if they're not working.


----------



## crakej

The Stilt said:


> Here are modified bioses for Crosshair VII boards, which include the new SMU 46.49.0 release that improves boost behavior / margin on 3000-series CPUs.
> 
> Do note that these are totally untested, rebuilt bioses. Despite I fully expect them to work, there is no guarantee what so ever that they actually do.
> 
> Also since the bioses have been rebuilt, their original signatures allowing them to be flashed using official software (e.g. EzFlash) tools are invalid. Because of that, *they can be only flashed in using the Flashback feature*.
> 
> In case they do not work or introduce some kind of an issue, you can revert to original bios by using Flashback function.
> 
> Also note that these bioses ARE NOT based AGESA 1.0.0.3ABBA code revision, as the whole code base has not been upgraded (only the SMU firmwares).
> Therefore the behavior might not be identical to true 1.0.0.3ABBA bios builds.
> 
> Naming: Official bios build, M = Modification, FI = 4649 (ASCII)
> 
> Crosshair VII Hero 0002M-FI
> 
> Crosshair VII Hero Wi-Fi 0002M-FI
> 
> Please let me know if they work or not, so that I can take them down if they're not working.


Thanks @The Stilt - testing now....


----------



## mtrai

The Stilt said:


> Here are modified bioses for Crosshair VII boards, which include the new SMU 46.49.0 release that improves boost behavior / margin on 3000-series CPUs.
> 
> Do note that these are totally untested, rebuilt bioses. Despite I fully expect them to work, there is no guarantee what so ever that they actually do.
> 
> Also since the bioses have been rebuilt, their original signatures allowing them to be flashed using official software (e.g. EzFlash) tools are invalid. Because of that, *they can be only flashed in using the Flashback feature*.
> 
> In case they do not work or introduce some kind of an issue, you can revert to original bios by using Flashback function.
> 
> Also note that these bioses ARE NOT based AGESA 1.0.0.3ABBA code revision, as the whole code base has not been upgraded (only the SMU firmwares).
> Therefore the behavior might not be identical to true 1.0.0.3ABBA bios builds.
> 
> Naming: Official bios build, M = Modification, FI = 4649 (ASCII)
> 
> Crosshair VII Hero 0002M-FI
> 
> Crosshair VII Hero Wi-Fi 0002M-FI
> 
> Please let me know if they work or not, so that I can take them down if they're not working.


Thanks will test the wifi version after I get done with my dog walks and report back.


----------



## hurricane28

The Stilt said:


> Here are modified bioses for Crosshair VII boards, which include the new SMU 46.49.0 release that improves boost behavior / margin on 3000-series CPUs.
> 
> Do note that these are totally untested, rebuilt bioses. Despite I fully expect them to work, there is no guarantee what so ever that they actually do.
> 
> Also since the bioses have been rebuilt, their original signatures allowing them to be flashed using official software (e.g. EzFlash) tools are invalid. Because of that, *they can be only flashed in using the Flashback feature*.
> 
> In case they do not work or introduce some kind of an issue, you can revert to original bios by using Flashback function.
> 
> Also note that these bioses ARE NOT based AGESA 1.0.0.3ABBA code revision, as the whole code base has not been upgraded (only the SMU firmwares).
> Therefore the behavior might not be identical to true 1.0.0.3ABBA bios builds.
> 
> Naming: Official bios build, M = Modification, FI = 4649 (ASCII)
> 
> Crosshair VII Hero 0002M-FI
> 
> Crosshair VII Hero Wi-Fi 0002M-FI
> 
> Please let me know if they work or not, so that I can take them down if they're not working.


Awesome work as always The Stilt! IMO they should fire their software team and hire people like you instead. 

Remember you helped me a lot with the fan issues on CH6? Guess what, its back.. Not as bad as before luckily but it still present. Maybe the IT controller goes bad over time as not every one is affected?


----------



## nick name

Synoxia said:


> When will 1004 ACDC bios come out? Need 5ghz PBO fix!


Slow clap.


----------



## crakej

The Stilt said:


> Here are modified bioses for Crosshair VII boards, which include the new SMU 46.49.0 release that improves boost behavior / margin on 3000-series CPUs.
> 
> Do note that these are totally untested, rebuilt bioses. Despite I fully expect them to work, there is no guarantee what so ever that they actually do.
> 
> Also since the bioses have been rebuilt, their original signatures allowing them to be flashed using official software (e.g. EzFlash) tools are invalid. Because of that, *they can be only flashed in using the Flashback feature*.
> 
> In case they do not work or introduce some kind of an issue, you can revert to original bios by using Flashback function.
> 
> Also note that these bioses ARE NOT based AGESA 1.0.0.3ABBA code revision, as the whole code base has not been upgraded (only the SMU firmwares).
> Therefore the behavior might not be identical to true 1.0.0.3ABBA bios builds.
> 
> Naming: Official bios build, M = Modification, FI = 4649 (ASCII)
> 
> Crosshair VII Hero 0002M-FI
> 
> Crosshair VII Hero Wi-Fi 0002M-FI
> 
> Please let me know if they work or not, so that I can take them down if they're not working.


I can confirm non wifi flashes fine. Seeing some improvement even at stock (though nothing mind bending! - +50 points CB15) - but have only briefly looked. Going for a closer look at things and some tests with memory OC.

Thanks again!

EDIT: WOW! Idle temp has dropped below 40c! (According to R Master) Idle VCore is now dropping, as is VID. Ryzen Master reporting CPU voltage as less than 1v???????


----------



## Synoxia

1002 with modded smu by the stilt working for me.
Boost SEEMS similiar for now to 2501 bios regarding peak boost clocks, however it SEEMS marginally better in under load conditions (previously i was NEVER able to hit 4.400 under a cinebench single core load, now i am able to)

WIFI version.

P.S i was able to hit one time 4.450 with my 3700x on 0002+ modded with 1002smu, let's see if with some undervolt i can do it on this bios  (noctua d15)


yeah, as i was writing this it happened. Everything stock, only fan curve, grid install and onboard devices changed. ONLY PBO changed to +200 mhz, everything else default (Everything cpu related apart of pbo is stock)

Now everything i need is HPET off in bios.


----------



## crakej

So far, performance is better though clocks aren't much better. I've only bettered my CB15 score by 4points.

I didn't play much under default settings, but on 2501 default settings, I would see 4.6/4.63GHz on light loads, which I didn't see, but I need to test longer (not tonight).

I can definitely say performance has increased and temps have dropped. I think my CCD2 might be doing more work than it was, but that's just a theory ATM!

For BIOS OCers, things aren't too different settings-wise (so far) but for Ryzen Master OCers they will have to get used to the new voltage readout and lower temps (Idle 27c).

Clearly RM is still fudging these values in some way, and/or smoothing them more. I'm still confused as to why they even put a 'CPU Voltage' read-out when it's still not a 'real' voltage at all.

I enabled both settings (CPPC I think) for telling OS which cores to use, and dfc and c-states, but still fastest cores are not selected.. In fact now it's picking the slowest core on CCD1 sometimes. Not sure release ver of windows has the newest scheduler.

Thanks again to @The Stilt for giving us the opportunity to try this out. If we don't get new bios tomorrow we'll still be able to test the new SMU and boost behaviour. 

One last thing - Ryzen Master is still incapable of showing correct max core speeds. Where HWInfo shows me Core 0 had max of 4.60GHz, RM shows the max for core 0 as 4293MHz. Which is right? Answers on a postcard..., but my money is on HWInfo, and AISuite, and Aida64. Good thing really or everyone would be thinking that their 4.6GHz boost CPU could only attain 4.293GHz.

It's very late, I'm not going to test any more or I'll make errors, but this is very encouraging!


----------



## Synoxia

crakej said:


> So far, performance is better though clocks aren't much better. I've only bettered my CB15 score by 4points.
> 
> I didn't play much under default settings, but on 2501 default settings, I would see 4.6/4.63GHz on light loads, which I didn't see, but I need to test longer (not tonight).
> 
> I can definitely say performance has increased and temps have dropped. I think my CCD2 might be doing more work than it was, but that's just a theory ATM!
> 
> For BIOS OCers, things aren't too different settings-wise (so far) but for Ryzen Master OCers they will have to get used to the new voltage readout and lower temps (Idle 27c).
> 
> Clearly RM is still fudging these values in some way, and/or smoothing them more. I'm still confused as to why they even put a 'CPU Voltage' read-out when it's still not a 'real' voltage at all.
> 
> I enabled both settings (CPPC I think) for telling OS which cores to use, and dfc and c-states, but still fastest cores are not selected.. In fact now it's picking the slowest core on CCD1 sometimes. Not sure release ver of windows has the newest scheduler.
> 
> Thanks again to @The Stilt for giving us the opportunity to try this out. If we don't get new bios tomorrow we'll still be able to test the new SMU and boost behaviour.
> 
> One last thing - Ryzen Master is still incapable of showing correct max core speeds. Where HWInfo shows me Core 0 had max of 4.60GHz, RM shows the max for core 0 as 4293MHz. Which is right? Answers on a postcard..., but my money is on HWInfo, and AISuite, and Aida64. Good thing really or everyone would be thinking that their 4.6GHz boost CPU could only attain 4.293GHz.
> 
> It's very late, I'm not going to test any more or I'll make errors, but this is very encouraging!


I use Win 10 1903 (18950 insider build) and windows seem to prefer usage of CCX 1 despite CCX2 having a gold star core. However in games like AC Odyssey the most of the load is on the grey star and circle core of CCX 1.


----------



## nick name

Dang, I didn't even notice that it wasn't just the memory bandwidth that was reduced but also actual CPU performance. Anything after BIOS 2606 drops my Cinebench 15 score 100+ points. Still using my 2700X on a CH7.


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> So far, performance is better though clocks aren't much better. I've only bettered my CB15 score by 4points.
> 
> I didn't play much under default settings, but on 2501 default settings, I would see 4.6/4.63GHz on light loads, which I didn't see, but I need to test longer (not tonight).
> 
> I can definitely say performance has increased and temps have dropped. I think my CCD2 might be doing more work than it was, but that's just a theory ATM!
> 
> For BIOS OCers, things aren't too different settings-wise (so far) but for Ryzen Master OCers they will have to get used to the new voltage readout and lower temps (Idle 27c).
> 
> Clearly RM is still fudging these values in some way, and/or smoothing them more. I'm still confused as to why they even put a 'CPU Voltage' read-out when it's still not a 'real' voltage at all.
> 
> I enabled both settings (CPPC I think) for telling OS which cores to use, and dfc and c-states, but still fastest cores are not selected.. In fact now it's picking the slowest core on CCD1 sometimes. Not sure release ver of windows has the newest scheduler.
> 
> Thanks again to @The Stilt for giving us the opportunity to try this out. If we don't get new bios tomorrow we'll still be able to test the new SMU and boost behaviour.
> 
> One last thing - Ryzen Master is still incapable of showing correct max core speeds. Where HWInfo shows me Core 0 had max of 4.60GHz, RM shows the max for core 0 as 4293MHz. Which is right? Answers on a postcard..., but my money is on HWInfo, and AISuite, and Aida64. Good thing really or everyone would be thinking that their 4.6GHz boost CPU could only attain 4.293GHz.
> 
> It's very late, I'm not going to test any more or I'll make errors, but this is very encouraging!


Does anyone know which UEFI @The Stilt Modified to insert the new SMU into? Don't want to lose the Fan Fixes we got with the 0002 Beta UEFI, and am about to leave for a long nights work in about an hour, don't want to flash this and then have my fans turn off at some point while I am gone. (I remote into my PC often, and leave it rendering while I am gone, so it pretty much stays on 24/7 and don't want to flash this new UEFI if the Fan bug will crawl back.

Regardless, awesome post @The Stilt! Can't wait to have time to properly test it!


----------



## The Stilt

oreonutz said:


> Does anyone know which UEFI @*The Stilt* Modified to insert the new SMU into? Don't want to lose the Fan Fixes we got with the 0002 Beta UEFI, and am about to leave for a long nights work in about an hour, don't want to flash this and then have my fans turn off at some point while I am gone. (I remote into my PC often, and leave it rendering while I am gone, so it pretty much stays on 24/7 and don't want to flash this new UEFI if the Fan bug will crawl back.
> 
> Regardless, awesome post @*The Stilt* ! Can't wait to have time to properly test it!


C7H bioses are 0002 based.


----------



## oreonutz

The Stilt said:


> C7H bioses are 0002 based.


So AMAZING! My FAVORITE UEFI! Thank You @The Stilt! About to flash now, as this is the only UEFI that doesn't suffer from the Stupid Fan Bug!

+Rep for being a Legend!


----------



## gupsterg

nick name said:


> Coming soon:
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Back on 15/07/19  .



The Stilt said:


> Here are modified bioses for Crosshair VII boards, which include the new SMU 46.49.0 release that improves boost behavior / margin on 3000-series CPUs.
> 
> Do note that these are totally untested, rebuilt bioses. Despite I fully expect them to work, there is no guarantee what so ever that they actually do.
> 
> Also since the bioses have been rebuilt, their original signatures allowing them to be flashed using official software (e.g. EzFlash) tools are invalid. Because of that, *they can be only flashed in using the Flashback feature*.
> 
> In case they do not work or introduce some kind of an issue, you can revert to original bios by using Flashback function.
> 
> Also note that these bioses ARE NOT based AGESA 1.0.0.3ABBA code revision, as the whole code base has not been upgraded (only the SMU firmwares).
> Therefore the behavior might not be identical to true 1.0.0.3ABBA bios builds.
> 
> Naming: Official bios build, M = Modification, FI = 4649 (ASCII)
> 
> Crosshair VII Hero 0002M-FI
> 
> Crosshair VII Hero Wi-Fi 0002M-FI
> 
> Please let me know if they work or not, so that I can take them down if they're not working.


Nice  , added my mix to your great share Roger :thumb: .

C7H & C7HWIFI UEFI 0002M-FIE

At stock it give me same average voltage as SMU FW 46.34.00, 46.40.00 used to be higher mV.



Spoiler














And PBO+150MHz is as nice as SMU FW 46.34.00  , 46.40.00 used to be higher mV and didn't break ~4.275GHz  .



Spoiler


----------



## nick name

The Stilt said:


> C7H bioses are 0002 based.


You wouldn't happen to know why my 2700X sees a drop in performance on BIOS versions after 2606 would you? Reduced memory bandwidth in Aida tests and reduced score in Cinebench 15? It's a drop of 100+ (around 120) points in Cinebench.


----------



## The Stilt

nick name said:


> You wouldn't happen to know why my 2700X sees a drop in performance on BIOS versions after 2606 would you? Reduced memory bandwidth in Aida tests and reduced score in Cinebench 15? It's a drop of 100+ (around 120) points in Cinebench.


Both the CPU microcode and SMU FWs are identical between e.g. 2606 & 2703, so IMO it can only be configuration differences (PPT/TDC/EDC limits or so).


----------



## oreonutz

gupsterg said:


> Nice  , added my mix to your great share Roger :thumb: .


Please don't hate me for this Question @gupsterg. I swear once I get confident in doing this myself, I will. But is there anyway you can drop a C7H non Wifi of your "Mix"?

I prefer your fan adjustments, and am more confident in my ability to make the one change I need to to it. (Unless you want to go ahead and make the Critical Fan Speed 92c While your at it, lol)

Have no problem dropping you some Sheckles for your time!


----------



## Synoxia

@The Stilt are 1CCD bins (3800x,3700x etc) binned that not all cores can reach 4.4ghz? with 46.49 on my 3700x only ccx 1 circle reaches 4.4 consistently, grey star reaches 4.450 sometimes, gold star barely reaches 4.4.
This after 2 hour of light thread gaming and browsing (league of legends,chrome) only +200 mhz is enabled, no PBO, ryzen power plan (3k series chipset driver, the one with 99% min)

p.s amd says PBO is aggressive... but if i remember correctly, PBO on zen+ basically made a 2700x perma run at 4.250-4.3 ghz while gaming, even multithreaded like assassin creed... while i am playing ac odyssey the max i see is 4225, the same clock speed of 2700x post precision boost nerf (and the change on their page to max boost 4.3)


----------



## The Stilt

Synoxia said:


> @*The Stilt* are 1CCD bins (3800x,3700x etc) binned that not all cores can reach 4.4ghz? with 46.49 on my 3700x only ccx 1 circle reaches 4.4 consistently, grey star reaches 4.450 sometimes, gold star barely reaches 4.4.
> This after 2 hour of light thread gaming and browsing (league of legends,chrome) only +200 mhz is enabled, no PBO, ryzen power plan (3k series chipset driver, the one with 99% min)
> 
> p.s amd says PBO is aggressive... but if i remember correctly, PBO on zen+ basically made a 2700x perma run at 4.250-4.3 ghz while gaming, even multithreaded like assassin creed... while i am playing ac odyssey the max i see is 4225, the same clock speed of 2700x post precision boost nerf (and the change on their page to max boost 4.3)


I recall AMD admitting that not all cores within a CCD necessarily can do the advertised Fmax.

I think it was related to this: https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-3000-turbo-boost-frequency-analysis,6253.html


----------



## nick name

The Stilt said:


> Both the CPU microcode and SMU FWs are identical between e.g. 2606 & 2703, so IMO it can only be configuration differences (PPT/TDC/EDC limits or so).


Sigh. Unfortunately, I know that I always set those the same. I use Performance Enhancer 3 and set PPT to 1000 TDC to 1000 and EDC to 200. Literally, I key in every setting the same for each BIOS version. RAM timings and speed all the same. But performance after 2606 takes a hit. BIOS versions 2701, 2703, 0002 and your 0002 all behave the same in terms of RAM bandwidth in Aida and CPU performance in Cinebench 15. The only thing I can think of is maybe the Performance Bias/Cache settings? After 2606 they split the CB15 settings into Gentle and Aggressive. However, I set it to Geekbench/Aida, but maybe that setting doesn't do anything anymore? 

At least you helped me rule some things out so I appreciate your help.


----------



## Synoxia

The Stilt said:


> I recall AMD admitting that not all cores within a CCD necessarily can do the advertised Fmax.
> 
> I think it was related to this: https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-3000-turbo-boost-frequency-analysis,6253.html


Only one core on our Ryzen 5 3600X processor will hit AMD's rated boost frequency. AMD confirmed some cores in Ryzen 3000-series processors are faster than others, which is denoted in Ryzen Master. That means that not all cores on can hit the single-core turbo frequencies. Instead, there are a mix of fast and slow cores.

AMD admited there are *faster cores* which is ok, zen+ was like that, but they didn't admit that *not all cores are able to reach boost speed* atleast according to this review. I thought that just 2CCD+ cpus had speed diversity... thought 3700x would work same as 2700x where all cores could 4.35ghz (one at time of course)

https://i.redd.it/543iuprz6c911.jpg 2700x boost for reference (spread spectrum makes it boost to 4.341 instead of 4350)


----------



## The Stilt

nick name said:


> Sigh. Unfortunately, I know that I always set those the same. I use Performance Enhancer 3 and set PPT to 1000 TDC to 1000 and EDC to 200. Literally, I key in every setting the same for each BIOS version. RAM timings and speed all the same. But performance after 2606 takes a hit. BIOS versions 2701, 2703, 0002 and your 0002 all behave the same in terms of RAM bandwidth in Aida and CPU performance in Cinebench 15. The only thing I can think of is maybe the Performance Bias/Cache settings? After 2606 they split the CB15 settings into Gentle and Aggressive. However, I set it to Geekbench/Aida, but maybe that setting doesn't do anything anymore?
> 
> At least you helped me rule some things out so I appreciate your help.


What about if you set Performance Enhancer to "default" and Performance Bias to "none"?
Any difference?


----------



## Synoxia

The Stilt said:


> What about if you set Performance Enhancer to "default" and Performance Bias to "none"?
> Any difference?


1002 smu vs 1003ABBA SMU, same undervolt settings (-0.03100) what is going on here?


----------



## nick name

The Stilt said:


> What about if you set Performance Enhancer to "default" and Performance Bias to "none"?
> Any difference?


Honestly I wouldn't know without re-testing all of them. I'm familiar with my Cinebench score running with a 42.8 multiplier with PE 3 forcing it to hold throughout the test, but I've never run with only PBO. Your PE levels really are the best way to run a 2700X. On 2606 and previous BIOS versions my CB 15 score at 42.8 is 1970 ~ 1980. On any BIOS after it's around 1840 ~ 1850. And in Aida the Copy bandwidth suffers the most losing up to 4000 MB/s depending on RAM speed. 

What I did just test is what Performance Bias set to none on 2606 would produce and that only lowered my CB 15 score by 20 points at a 42.8 multiplier and a negligible reduction in Aida bandwidth.


----------



## crakej

I'm really not doing any more tonight!

But I did try one last thing before bed - can this SMU get my memory running at 3800:1900:1900?

Answer is YES! Way too tired to try get stable, but have booted to bios several times, and twice to windows password login. Totally unstable, but previously it was totally un-bootable! Now I get a post beep every time I test more settings.

SoC is 1.11825v, CDDG 1.090v CL16.... I had completely given up on 1900 FCLK. Until now! Had to turn off GearDown before it booted strangely. I'm sure enabled with right timings if I need it. I'm pretty optimistic.

I wonder if this means others can increase their FCLKs? Will get stable tomorrow with lower volts if I can.


----------



## xeizo

Great waking up seeing both The Stilt and gupsterg having done work! Unfortunately I have to go to my daytime work now, but I have some fun times ahead tonight 

Running the new 5216 ABB bios on another rig with Prime Pro/3700X, it has the "bad" SMU 46.40 but actually boosts to advertised speed on two cores, performance is great but I can see why it boosts lower than SMU 46.34 in particular under full load. Power limit is hard locked, it doesn't matter which bios settings or what Ryzen Master shows in PPT, TDC, EDC it stays within official TDP anyway. Quite good for power saving rigs, but not fun for tweaking. Of note it stays at about the same frequencies as my 2700X in yet another rig, but while the 2700X consumes 150W full load at those frequencies(about the same as my 3900X) the 3700X doesn't pass 70W. Less than half power consumption for the 8-core IS impressive. Also, as IPC and general performance is better.


----------



## gupsterg

oreonutz said:


> Please don't hate me for this Question @gupsterg. I swear once I get confident in doing this myself, I will. But is there anyway you can drop a C7H non Wifi of your "Mix"?
> 
> I prefer your fan adjustments, and am more confident in my ability to make the one change I need to to it. (Unless you want to go ahead and make the Critical Fan Speed 92c While your at it, lol)
> 
> Have no problem dropping you some Sheckles for your time!


The linked ZIP has both  , I've changed txt from:

C7H C7HWIFI UEFI 0002M-FIE

to

C7H & C7HWIFI UEFI 0002M-FIE



xeizo said:


> Great waking up seeing both The Stilt and gupsterg having done work! Unfortunately I have to go to my daytime work now, but I have some fun times ahead tonight
> 
> Running the new 5216 ABB bios on another rig with Prime Pro/3700X, it has the "bad" SMU 46.40 but actually boosts to advertised speed on two cores, performance is great but I can see why it boosts lower than SMU 46.34 in particular under full load. Power limit is hard locked, it doesn't matter which bios settings or what Ryzen Master shows in PPT, TDC, EDC it stays within official TDP anyway. Quite good for power saving rigs, but not fun for tweaking. Of note it stays at about the same frequencies as my 2700X in yet another rig, but while the 2700X consumes 150W full load at those frequencies(about the same as my 3900X) the 3700X doesn't pass 70W. Less than half power consumption for the 8-core IS impressive. Also, as IPC and general performance is better.


I'd say I had my best runs of PBO+150MHz on SMU FW 46.49.00.

0002M-FIE_R532G_P1503800v4.2 Benches album, link.
0002+_R532G_P1503800v4.2 Benches album, link.
0002_R532G_B3800v4.2 Benches album (no PBO+150MHz due to SMU FW 46.40.00 crippled it on my CPU), link.
Historical mix of UEFIs 2406/2501/0068, link.

*** edit ***

Nice average MHz, RT WMV ZIP Link, little higher on MAX & average CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN than SMU FW 46.34.00, but not by miles ~+25mV on max, ~+10mV on average, past SMU WMV link.


----------



## oreonutz

gupsterg said:


> The linked ZIP has both  , I've changed txt from:
> 
> C7H C7HWIFI UEFI 0002M-FIE
> 
> to
> 
> C7H & C7HWIFI UEFI 0002M-FIE


Thank You Kind Sir! Now I just have to take the time to bump up the Max Critical Temp.


----------



## mtrai

Damn guys...who knew bios modding would the new thing again lol. There is no real harm or issues in swapping out modules as I have learned over the years. As far as the SMU FW changes this is agkin to to Intel ME swaps. Now that the ball is rolling though I will just mostly mind my own business and use gupsterg and the stilts bios as 3 different modified bios would only serve to muddy the waters. Especially when they are all doing the same things.

But kudos to the others who stepped up in this entire process and took it even further then I was looking at. Y'all know who you are.


----------



## mtrai

The Stilt said:


> Here are modified bioses for Crosshair VII boards, which include the new SMU 46.49.0 release that improves boost behavior / margin on 3000-series CPUs.
> 
> Do note that these are totally untested, rebuilt bioses. Despite I fully expect them to work, there is no guarantee what so ever that they actually do.
> 
> Also since the bioses have been rebuilt, their original signatures allowing them to be flashed using official software (e.g. EzFlash) tools are invalid. Because of that, *they can be only flashed in using the Flashback feature*.
> 
> In case they do not work or introduce some kind of an issue, you can revert to original bios by using Flashback function.
> 
> Also note that these bioses ARE NOT based AGESA 1.0.0.3ABBA code revision, as the whole code base has not been upgraded (only the SMU firmwares).
> Therefore the behavior might not be identical to true 1.0.0.3ABBA bios builds.
> 
> Naming: Official bios build, M = Modification, FI = 4649 (ASCII)
> 
> Crosshair VII Hero 0002M-FI
> 
> Crosshair VII Hero Wi-Fi 0002M-FI
> 
> Please let me know if they work or not, so that I can take them down if they're not working.


Not sure if I posted but you WiFI version is 100% fine to flash. And works just fine.

I do have a question that has bothered me for a long time...your ASUS ram presets....you have a few with 1.8 and 1.9 volts so I assume they are safe. I am pretty sure they are since I have at times ran my samsung b-die at 1.82 volts for a long periods of time.


----------



## Synoxia

crakej said:


> I'm really not doing any more tonight!
> 
> But I did try one last thing before bed - can this SMU get my memory running at 3800:1900:1900?
> 
> Answer is YES! Way too tired to try get stable, but have booted to bios several times, and twice to windows password login. Totally unstable, but previously it was totally un-bootable! Now I get a post beep every time I test more settings.
> 
> SoC is 1.11825v, CDDG 1.090v CL16.... I had completely given up on 1900 FCLK. Until now! Had to turn off GearDown before it booted strangely. I'm sure enabled with right timings if I need it. I'm pretty optimistic.
> 
> I wonder if this means others can increase their FCLKs? Will get stable tomorrow with lower volts if I can.


I dont think you even need that much SOC... my 3700x can run 1900 fclk with 1.08 vsoc, 0.97 vddg and 0.93 vddp. Probably what's holding you back are the ram. try safe 1usmus preset


----------



## Synoxia

gupsterg said:


> Back on 15/07/19  .
> 
> 
> 
> Nice  , added my mix to your great share Roger :thumb: .
> 
> C7H & C7HWIFI UEFI 0002M-FIE
> 
> At stock it give me same average voltage as SMU FW 46.34.00, 46.40.00 used to be higher mV.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 294412
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And PBO+150MHz is as nice as SMU FW 46.34.00  , 46.40.00 used to be higher mV and didn't break ~4.275GHz  .
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 294414


Hi @gupsterg. Does this have HPET functionality exposed?


----------



## mtrai

Synoxia said:


> Hi @gupsterg. Does this have HPET functionality exposed?


Several us thoroughly tested the HPET option we could expose. It makes no different wether it was on auto, enabled, or disabled, so it is now a zombie option that is still in the bios so no need to show it since it does not do anything. 

You can still disable it but it requires the bcdedit and also disabling it in device manager.


----------



## Synoxia

mtrai said:


> Several us thoroughly tested the HPET option we could expose. It makes no different wether it was on auto, enabled, or disabled, so it is now a zombie option that is still in the bios so no need to show it since it does not do anything.
> 
> You can still disable it but it requires the bcdedit and also disabling it in device manager.


So you tell me that the enormous microstutter difference i was seeing on 2700x with bcdedit useplatformclock /false + bios OFF is placebo. Interesting. It should still be exposed in bios regardless in my opinion, like all mobo manifacturers do.

P.S i hardly find believable that "HPET enabled" didn't make a difference, because in games that can actually decrease FPS numbers, it has been tested. While hpet off is untestable if we talk about numbers.


----------



## crakej

Synoxia said:


> I dont think you even need that much SOC... my 3700x can run 1900 fclk with 1.08 vsoc, 0.97 vddg and 0.93 vddp. Probably what's holding you back are the ram. try safe 1usmus preset


Ram is fine - it's my CCD2 which is weak. I can run 1900:1900 no problem on CCD1. Ram runs fine up to 4600 (so far), but never been able to boot at all with 1900:1900 before this SMU FW.


----------



## gupsterg

oreonutz said:


> Thank You Kind Sir! Now I just have to take the time to bump up the Max Critical Temp.


Just curious, is it as you have a 3900X you see high sporadic temps? I thought 85C would have been enough, are peeps really needing like 90C?



Synoxia said:


> Hi @gupsterg. Does this have HPET functionality exposed?
> 
> 
> 
> mtrai said:
> 
> 
> 
> Several us thoroughly tested the HPET option we could expose. It makes no different wether it was on auto, enabled, or disabled, so it is now a zombie option that is still in the bios so no need to show it since it does not do anything.
> 
> You can still disable it but it requires the bcdedit and also disabling it in device manager.
> 
> 
> 
> Synoxia said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you tell me that the enormous microstutter difference i was seeing on 2700x with bcdedit useplatformclock /false + bios OFF is placebo. Interesting. It should still be exposed in bios regardless in my opinion, like all mobo manifacturers do.
> 
> P.S i hardly find believable that "HPET enabled" didn't make a difference, because in games that can actually decrease FPS numbers, it has been tested. While hpet off is untestable if we talk about numbers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

It isn't exposed, for reasoning as stated by mtrai.

I can't recall if the information I had referenced was correct, what I read at the time was why you'd see the decrease in FPS is as count was being done correctly. Without correct timer, what the system believes as time may be skewed. So you will see an improved benchmark as system thinks it did x in y time, when in reality it didn't. If I remember correctly this is also the reasoning behind HWBot not allowing W10 results, don't know if it still stands.

As the option is only revealed in search, so requires a user to find, it doesn't create clutter in menus. I will consider exposing it in next release. Is it only the HPET option you used?


----------



## mtrai

Synoxia said:


> So you tell me that the enormous microstutter difference i was seeing on 2700x with bcdedit useplatformclock /false + bios OFF is placebo. Interesting. It should still be exposed in bios regardless in my opinion, like all mobo manifacturers do.
> 
> P.S i hardly find believable that "HPET enabled" didn't make a difference, because in games that can actually decrease FPS numbers, it has been tested. While hpet off is untestable if we talk about numbers.


No what I am saying it for our motherboards the HPET option does not disable HPET it does not make any changes at all no matter what you set it in the bios when the option is there. And what Gusterp said. We were the two that was really testing it out...you can find our discussions and findings in this thread.


----------



## Synoxia

gupsterg said:


> Just curious, is it as you have a 3900X you see high sporadic temps? I thought 85C would have been enough, are peeps really needing like 90C?
> 
> 
> 
> It isn't exposed, for reasoning as stated by mtrai.
> 
> I can't recall if the information I had referenced was correct, what I read at the time was why you'd see the decrease in FPS is as count was being done correctly. Without correct timer, what the system believes as time may be skewed. So you will see an improved benchmark as system thinks it did x in y time, when in reality it didn't. If I remember correctly this is also the reasoning behind HWBot not allowing W10 results, don't know if it still stands.
> 
> As the option is only revealed in search, so requires a user to find, it doesn't create clutter in menus. I will consider exposing it in next release. Is it only the HPET option you used?


*As the option is only revealed in search, so requires a user to find, it doesn't create clutter in menus* This. If you or someone else might expose it i'd be happy about it. To each it's own. I see a decrease in microstutter in some games, if it's placebo i'll take it. I used both HPET options off with bcdedit /false, SB hpet was it called? can't remember.


----------



## hurricane28

I really regret flashing to 2703 BIOS... I flashed 2 BIOS's and i still have issues with the fans and now the system is not stable anymore..I am on 2501 now and it gives me memory error 61 and the system doesn't come out of sleep and i have to push the reset button in order to get my PC back.. 

I pulled the BIOS battery etc. reset nothing works. What is the best BIOS for 2000 series CPU's?


----------



## thegr8anand

gupsterg said:


> Just curious, is it as you have a 3900X you see high sporadic temps? I thought 85C would have been enough, are peeps really needing like 90C?



All Fan headers, all temperature points, allows 85C maximum input.


Does this mean max critical temp is 85 in your bios instead of 95? Have just flashed your non-wifi bios.


----------



## The Stilt

What HPET mod are we talking about exactly?

PCH Configuration \ SB Debug Configuration \ SB MISC DEBUG Configuration?

I can easily check if the toggle actually does anything.


----------



## Synoxia

The Stilt said:


> What HPET mod are we talking about exactly?
> 
> PCH Configuration \ SB Debug Configuration \ SB MISC DEBUG Configuration?
> 
> I can easily check if the toggle actually does anything.



Why not just make it available? I want some placebo. Give to me 

Btw, both the HPET settings.


----------



## nick name

@The Stilt Is it possible to mod in the PMU Pattern Bits option into AMD CBS that is on TR2 and Ryzen 3000? AMD CBS longer has any MBIST options in BIOS versions after 2501.


----------



## The Stilt

nick name said:


> @*The Stilt* Is it possible to mod in the PMU Pattern Bits option into AMD CBS that is on TR2 and Ryzen 3000? AMD CBS longer has any MBIST options in BIOS versions after 2501.


For AM4 the controls are only defined for Raven and 3000-series CPUs.
Would require modifying and recompiling the CBS code to include it, which is not something I am willing and frankly probably not able to do.


----------



## The Stilt

Synoxia said:


> Why not just make it available? I want some placebo. Give to me
> 
> Btw, both the HPET settings.


Both?
I have no idea what you have been modding, so please elaborate


----------



## hurricane28

I could use some help here plz? My board is freaking out and i have no idea what to do.. what BIOS should i flash for my current system?


----------



## nick name

The Stilt said:


> For AM4 the controls are only defined for Raven and 3000-series CPUs.
> Would require modifying and recompiling the CBS code to include it, which is not something I am willing and frankly probably not able to do.


Ahhh ok, thank you.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> I could use some help here plz? My board is freaking out and i have no idea what to do.. what BIOS should i flash for my current system?


You may need to go back to the last 1000 series BIOS before Combo Pi AGESA versions. While there are added benefits seen in the 2000 series BIOS versions I can't recall any complaints similar to yours stemming from using BIOS 1201 or 1103.


----------



## mtrai

The Stilt said:


> What HPET mod are we talking about exactly?
> 
> PCH Configuration \ SB Debug Configuration \ SB MISC DEBUG Configuration?
> 
> I can easily check if the toggle actually does anything.


there are two options in the bios. Under Chipset then South Bridge---->SB Debug Configuration-----> SB MISC DEBUG The two options are HPET in SB and MsiDIS in HPET

I am currently modding Gursterp bios to open up more options this is the C7H Wifi if you have that board I can send it to you in bit when I finally finish it up.
@oreonutz I should have some cookies for you tomorrow sometime.


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> You may need to go back to the last 1000 series BIOS before Combo Pi AGESA versions. While there are added benefits seen in the 2000 series BIOS versions I can't recall any complaints similar to yours stemming from using BIOS 1201 or 1103.


Thnx man, i flashed BIOS 1103 now and it seems that its better indeed. Still testing though and in 24 hours i know more. Sorry if i sound salty at times but these things just frustrates the living crap out of me man.. 

I mean, why does it always have to be like this? All these issues with BIOS while i hear nothing from Gigabyte and MSI.. I don't understand why Asus is struggling so much with this while MSi and Gigabyte have issues but not nearly as severe as Asus has..


----------



## Axaion

The Stilt said:


> What HPET mod are we talking about exactly?
> 
> PCH Configuration \ SB Debug Configuration \ SB MISC DEBUG Configuration?
> 
> I can easily check if the toggle actually does anything.


Sorry for the quote, and the .. derpy answer to this

But were looking fot he HPET setting that effects the windows timer, if that makes sense, for example when i force 0.5ms timer resolution i get 0.4991ms instead of 0.500ms, even with bcdedit in windows, if we manage to turn off the right hpet setting that should be a nice stable 0.500ms 

I suck at explaining things.


----------



## Synoxia

The Stilt said:


> Both?
> I have no idea what you have been modding, so please elaborate


There were 2 hoet options, sb hpet and hpet control if i remember correctly. They could only be found via f9 search
https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...yzen-bios-mods-how-update-bios-correctly.html if you have a spare zen or zen+ chip you can try these bios mods and see for yourself. Just f9 "HPET"



Axaion said:


> Sorry for the quote, and the .. derpy answer to this
> 
> But were looking fot he HPET setting that effects the windows timer, if that makes sense, for example when i force 0.5ms timer resolution i get 0.4991ms instead of 0.500ms, even with bcdedit in windows, if we manage to turn off the right hpet setting that should be a nice stable 0.500ms
> 
> I suck at explaining things.


 i was using that program too with 2700x + bios mod and i could get 0,5 and 1ms timer. Now only 0,4991 with 3700x


----------



## thegr8anand

First time happened, pc crashed when i tried to run CBr20 with HwInfo. Suspected its the wmi what others had mentioned before and it worked fine once i disabled wmi monitoring in HwInfo. v0002m-fie gupsterg bios and v6.11.3910 HwInfo.


----------



## Duvar

Already posted here? https://extreme.pcgameshardware.de/...-problem-machen-die-runde-5.html#post10013930


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Thnx man, i flashed BIOS 1103 now and it seems that its better indeed. Still testing though and in 24 hours i know more. Sorry if i sound salty at times but these things just frustrates the living crap out of me man..
> 
> I mean, why does it always have to be like this? All these issues with BIOS while i hear nothing from Gigabyte and MSI.. I don't understand why Asus is struggling so much with this while MSi and Gigabyte have issues but not nearly as severe as Asus has..


Don't be afraid of 1201. That is probably the more refined BIOS.


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> Don't be afraid of 1201. That is probably the more refined BIOS.


Thnx man, i will test this BIOS and if it works i stick with it, have no time for these testing anymore.


----------



## The Stilt

At least on C8F I tested it with, toggling HPET and MsiEn (BCP) options did nothing.

I made a small tool you can check the current status with: https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ag6oE4SOsCmDhWggvkhweKnIxH3R?e=XFX7BQ

Extract and run HPET.exe with admin rights.


----------



## nick name

The Stilt said:


> At least on C8F I tested it with, toggling HPET and MsiEn (BCP) options did nothing.
> 
> I made a small tool you can check the current status with: https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ag6oE4SOsCmDhWggvkhweKnIxH3R?e=XFX7BQ
> 
> Extract and run HPET.exe with admin rights.


With HPET disabled in Device Manager this shows both HPET versions as Enabled. Is it checking that it is Enabled in BIOS and not that it is disabled in Device Manager?


----------



## Axaion

The Stilt said:


> At least on C8F I tested it with, toggling HPET and MsiEn (BCP) options did nothing.
> 
> I made a small tool you can check the current status with: https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ag6oE4SOsCmDhWggvkhweKnIxH3R?e=XFX7BQ
> 
> Extract and run HPET.exe with admin rights.


Both are enabled for me, even with me using bcdedit to disable it

=\


----------



## The Stilt

nick name said:


> With HPET disabled in Device Manager this shows both HPET versions as Enabled. Is it checking that it is Enabled in BIOS and not that it is disabled in Device Manager?





Axaion said:


> Both are enabled for me, even with me using bcdedit to disable it
> 
> =\


It reads the status from the hardware.
Similarily the bios controls the hardware only.

Disabling the HPET from OS does not turn it off at hardware level, it only tells the software not to use it (e.g. BCDEDIT).

I can easily make the app to turn it off, if thats something you want?
Ideally of course, the option would be set from the bios.


----------



## Axaion

The Stilt said:


> It reads the status from the hardware.
> Similarily the bios controls the hardware only.
> 
> Disabling the HPET from OS does not turn it off at hardware level, it only tells the software not to use it (e.g. BCDEDIT).
> 
> I can easily make the app to turn it off, if thats something you want?
> Ideally of course, the option would be set from the bios.


Id love a bios with that and spread spectrum off, hell im willing to pay 50usd or something for it lol

I dont understand how ASUS will let us mess with voltages that can kill chips and so on, but wont give us small functions like this, that allows us to disable hpet and spread spectrum - or ramp fans to 100% at 75c lol

Would the app run as a background service?, like SetTimerResolutionService does, that would be the second best option i think

Anything is better than nothing though


----------



## nick name

Axaion said:


> Id love a bios with that and spread spectrum off, hell im willing to pay 50usd or something for it lol
> 
> I dont understand how ASUS will let us mess with voltages that can kill chips and so on, but wont give us small functions like this, that allows us to disable hpet and spread spectrum - or ramp fans to 100% at 75c lol
> 
> Would the app run as a background service?, like SetTimerResolutionService does, that would be the second best option i think
> 
> Anything is better than nothing though


If you're using a Ryzen 1000 or 2000 series CPU then I believe our early BIOS versions had the option.


----------



## nick name

The Stilt said:


> It reads the status from the hardware.
> Similarily the bios controls the hardware only.
> 
> Disabling the HPET from OS does not turn it off at hardware level, it only tells the software not to use it (e.g. BCDEDIT).
> 
> I can easily make the app to turn it off, if thats something you want?
> Ideally of course, the option would be set from the bios.


No, you don't have to for me. I just wanted to verify I understood what the program read so I didn't misunderstand it.


----------



## Axaion

nick name said:


> If you're using a Ryzen 1000 or 2000 series CPU then I believe our early BIOS versions had the option.


on 3700x sadly


----------



## mtrai

Axaion said:


> Id love a bios with that and spread spectrum off, hell im willing to pay 50usd or something for it lol
> 
> I dont understand how ASUS will let us mess with voltages that can kill chips and so on, but wont give us small functions like this, that allows us to disable hpet and spread spectrum - or ramp fans to 100% at 75c lol
> 
> Would the app run as a background service?, like SetTimerResolutionService does, that would be the second best option i think
> 
> Anything is better than nothing though


I can give you almost all of that, which board do you have? I seem to be the only one taking the hours needed to show all those options anyhow. if C7H wifi I am good to go otherwise it will be tomorrow for C7H non wifi. HPET is just something we cannot actually change on a bios level...just need the bcdedit and disable it in device manager...it is a zombie option on the bios level. The bios can already do a lot more then ASUS shows us especially with fan control. Previously until AMD and yes AMD added it spread spectrum was available via search but now it is in an actual menu. The pic is just one example.


----------



## Synoxia

The Stilt said:


> It reads the status from the hardware.
> Similarily the bios controls the hardware only.
> 
> Disabling the HPET from OS does not turn it off at hardware level, it only tells the software not to use it (e.g. BCDEDIT).
> 
> I can easily make the app to turn it off, if thats something you want?
> Ideally of course, the option would be set from the bios.


Yes, yes! That's everything i ask for. Hpet disabled from bios. I've run the app with admin rights and ofc it shows "enabled" on both options even with bcdedit /false and disabled in device manager.

Asus should hire you so we can go back to something like elmor era where we had proper support from asus


----------



## Axaion

mtrai said:


> I can give you almost that, which board do you have? I seem to be the only one taking the hours needed to show all those options anyhow. if C7H wifi I am good to go otherwise it will be tomorrow for C7H non wifi. HPET is just something we cannot actually change on a bios level...just need the bcdedit and disable it in device manager...it is a zombie option on the bios level.


Im on non-wifi sadly.
Seems even with bcdedit and disabling it in device manager i still get 0.4991ms Timer Resolution when its actually set to 0.500ms =\

On the other hand, i kind of feel like it would be better to wait for the next official bios to base mods off


best would obviously be asus actually doing it themselves, so we all have options on what settings we would like to use


----------



## Synoxia

Axaion said:


> Im on non-wifi sadly.
> Seems even with bcdedit and disabling it in device manager i still get 0.4991ms Timer Resolution when its actually set to 0.500ms =\
> 
> On the other hand, i kind of feel like it would be better to wait for the next official bios to base mods off
> 
> 
> best would obviously be asus actually doing it themselves, so we all have options on what settings we would like to use


Asus is really lagging in bios releases. Actually i prefer 0002 because it works, who knows what bugs will 1003abba bring.


----------



## Duvar

You can see my results here with my 3600 C7H WIFI: https://extreme.pcgameshardware.de/prozessoren/470191-sammelthread-amd-ryzen-2148.html#post10014154
Left picture old BIOS, right new Stilt Bios. (stock vs stock)
Pretty hard drop of Vcore (~70mV) and max CPU+SoC Power (-~20%).


Edit: Here with PBO ON +200 with my 3600
But keep in mind RAM only 2133MHz.


Edit2: Is it normal, that Boostclocks going down when you overclock your RAM?
I now see 25-50MHz less, only 2 Cores boosting to 4.375GHz after RAM OC. (3800CL16 1:1)

Edit3:

But to be honest, i dont care about boost clocks, i will stick with my strong UV settings, more than enough CPU Power for my GTX 1080Ti, RAM OC is enough and is doing its magic


----------



## Synoxia

Duvar said:


> You can see my results here with my 3600 C7H WIFI: https://extreme.pcgameshardware.de/prozessoren/470191-sammelthread-amd-ryzen-2148.html#post10014154
> Left picture old BIOS, right new Stilt Bios. (stock vs stock)
> Pretty hard drop of Vcore (~70mV) and max CPU+SoC Power (-~20%).
> 
> 
> Edit: Here with PBO ON +200 with my 3600
> But keep in mind RAM only 2133MHz.
> 
> 
> Edit2: Is it normal, that Boostclocks going down when you overclock your RAM?
> I now see 25-50MHz less, only 2 Cores boosting to 4.375GHz after RAM OC. (3800CL16 1:1)
> 
> Edit3:
> 
> But to be honest, i dont care about boost clocks, i will stick with my strong UV settings, more than enough CPU Power for my GTX 1080Ti, RAM OC is enough and is doing its magic


dat 3600x bin... all core reaching 4.4ghz... damn. Something is not clear here btw, you said strong undervolt, 70mv? you mean -0.075? Well i am using -0.03125 offset and my single core voltage is lower than yours... strange, isn't it?
Anyway, why 3800 has lower boost than 2100? I think because more VDDSOC voltage = more heat to the chip


----------



## Duvar

No my strong UV is pic 3. 0.926V under CB Multi Load @ 3.5GHz and those ~70mV difference you can see @ that link above (german forum) between old BIOS vs new BIOS everything @ stock. (those pictures can be seen @ the german forum).

But another thing i want to say is, if i compare my strong UV settings with the results @ computerbase here: AMD Ryzen 9 3900X, 7 3700X & 5 3600 im Test: Benchmarks in Apps und Games - ComputerBase

You will see, that in CB 15 i am ~2-3% faster than a 2600X in multi and ~5% slower in single core (result).
But that doesnt mean that a 2600X is faster compared to my strong UV setting and i tested a lot and i am a lil bit faster than a 2700X with 3200CL14 RAM (but not optimized subtimings) in games and that is really more than enough for my GTX 1080Ti (also crazy UV ~120W Power Consumption) + i am playing on a UHD 60Hz Monitor, so very high resolution and i am 99.99% always gpu bound.
Here you can see Power Consumption of my 3600 and GTX 1080Ti, if you watch closely, you will see ~16W AVG CPU+SoC Power and ~120W max (not AVG) GPU Power:






If you see the result at the end, you will see, that my CPU is pushing 128,9FPS min FPS, but my GPU max of 120,5FPS. (good balance in this test)
You know what i mean, i dont need more CPU Power and this test was done at 1440p ultra (guys in german forums wanted that resolution) and i am playing with UHD resolution, which will result in a brutal gpu bottleneck, so cpu wise more than enough headroom for my GTX 1080Ti. A 2080Ti would also be too slow with that resolution. I am only surfing or playing games, no heavy tasks, so i dont need that much cpu power, if someone is rendering etc, thats another story... ( or 1080p 144Hz)


----------



## mtrai

Axaion said:


> Im on non-wifi sadly.
> Seems even with bcdedit and disabling it in device manager i still get 0.4991ms Timer Resolution when its actually set to 0.500ms =\
> 
> On the other hand, i kind of feel like it would be better to wait for the next official bios to base mods off
> 
> 
> best would obviously be asus actually doing it themselves, so we all have options on what settings we would like to use


on Win 10 1903 it should be 10 in wintimertester


----------



## mtrai

well my non wifi vertion should be tomorrow...as it takes about 6 hours to mod each bios I am using gursterp 002 with the ABBA SMU FW , the wifi version is doine...though I do set it to only just gen 3 on pcie 16/8 to avoid boot issues if using a Navi gpu. If I feel like it. It is a lot of work.


----------



## mtrai

Synoxia said:


> So you tell me that the enormous microstutter difference i was seeing on 2700x with bcdedit useplatformclock /false + bios OFF is placebo. Interesting. It should still be exposed in bios regardless in my opinion, like all mobo manifacturers do.
> 
> P.S i hardly find believable that "HPET enabled" didn't make a difference, because in games that can actually decrease FPS numbers, it has been tested. While hpet off is untestable if we talk about numbers.


I am gonna be blunt.

Listen up and learn. 

Those of us who can mod the bios have tested this the option does work. It does nothing no matter what setting you set. It is a zombie option.
Which means they did not clean the bios code...nothing I nor anyone else does will make it work.

Stop *****ing at us, it it on others. Maybe try bithcing at ASUS.

Non of us get paid or make money from making trying to make the bios work ...and I mean the way way WE WANT IT.

Pay me and will give the bios you want or mostly want.

But stop badgering us..you are the reason I went underground a few years ago......the same reason some of the same people vanish/

Actually this goes out to everyone. This is the reason the people go missing. They get burnt out and never return.. I know a number of them.


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> there are two options in the bios. Under Chipset then South Bridge---->SB Debug Configuration-----> SB MISC DEBUG The two options are HPET in SB and MsiDIS in HPET
> 
> I am currently modding Gursterp bios to open up more options this is the C7H Wifi if you have that board I can send it to you in bit when I finally finish it up.
> 
> @oreonutz I should have some cookies for you tomorrow sometime.


Meesa LOVE COOKIES! LOL!

I am finally about to install this UEFI. Just checking in here first to see how things are going with it so far.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> I am gonna be blunt.
> 
> Listen up and learn.
> 
> Those of us who can mod the bios have tested this the option does work. It does nothing no matter what setting you set. It is a zombie option.
> Which means they did not clean the bios code...nothing I nor anyone else does will make it work.
> 
> Stop *****ing at us, it it on others. Maybe try bithcing at ASUS.
> 
> Non of us get paid or make money from making trying to make the bios work ...and I mean the way way WE WANT IT.
> 
> Pay me and will give the bios you want or mostly want.
> 
> But stop badgering us..you are the reason I went underground a few years ago......the same reason some of the same people vanish/
> 
> Actually this goes out to everyone. This is the reason the people go missing. They get burnt out and never return.. I know a number of them.



Come here, man. Bring it in. Give me a hug. Come feel the love. Deep breath. Breathe in the love. Feel the warmth. You being upset is fine -- just don't forget this love we have for you too.


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> I am gonna be blunt.
> 
> Listen up and learn.
> 
> Those of us who can mod the bios have tested this the option does work. It does nothing no matter what setting you set. It is a zombie option.
> Which means they did not clean the bios code...nothing I nor anyone else does will make it work.
> 
> Stop *****ing at us, it it on others. Maybe try bithcing at ASUS.
> 
> Non of us get paid or make money from making trying to make the bios work ...and I mean the way way WE WANT IT.
> 
> Pay me and will give the bios you want or mostly want.
> 
> But stop badgering us..you are the reason I went underground a few years ago......the same reason some of the same people vanish/
> 
> Actually this goes out to everyone. This is the reason the people go missing. They get burnt out and never return.. I know a number of them.


Specifically @Synoxia , if you follow this very thread between @mtrai, @gupsterg, and a few others, not even that long ago, you will find that they investigated this very thing with the HPET setting quite thoroughly. They found that the reason it was hidden, was because it actually did nothing. You have to change the Timer setting in Windows, and with Boot Switches, it does not matter at least on this board if the setting was set in UEFI or not, if you changed the setting with the Boot Switch and in Windows, then it changes, or if you leave it alone then it defaults to the Windows Timer. So those are your options, at this time on this board the HPET setting unfortunately does nothing. At least that was my take away from their conversation, and they posted pretty exhaustive evidence on the topic, you probably only have to go back about 20 pages or so for it, probably easier just to search either of those names and HPET with the advance search, they will probably all pop up and give you all the information you need on the topic.

I know it sucks that Asus just removes features and tells no one, this community works hard on restoring functionality we liked that was removed, and this time both @mtrai and @gupsterg and a few others in the conversation, found out that even when it was restored it was a zombie setting.

EDIT: I just went back and read some more of the thread. One I think there was a misunderstanding. @Synoxia, @mtrai was not saying that using the Boot setting with Platform Clock off, plus disabinling The Timer in Device Manager was placebo, in fact he was saying the exact opposite. He was saying the UEFI Setting in the BIOS was a placebo, and the only way to effectively disable the HPET Timer was to use the BCDEdit and Device Manager Setting. He and Gups went through and exposed the hidden HPET in BIOS, and they found that no matter what it was set to, it made absolutely no difference. The way it is supposed to work, and the way it has worked on past boards is its supposed to over ride the OS Setting, it no longer does this, and is just what is now called a "Zombie Setting" which is why ASUS hid it. Its on ASUS to fix it the setting themselves, as our modding Community can only expose there setting, not actually program it to make it work.

However I also saw @The Stilt 's post about this, and how in his research disabling HPET from the BCDEdit and Device Manager is a placebo, and that its only possible to disable through the BIOS. The Problem is the setting in BIOS that can be exposed is proven to be a Zombie setting, so it would seem we need Asus to fix this, or if the Stilt can design a program to give this functionality without the help of the BIOS, then that might be another option. But hopefully his program was not planning on tapping into the hidden UEFI setting to do so, because if so, we may find that this wouldn't work either.

Crazy stuff, ASUS just needs to give their customers what they want. But definitely our modding community is doing all they can, so we should probably focus our energy at bothering ASUS about it, unless the Stilt has a work around in mind, and he doesn't mind wasting some time on it. Obviously time is valuable.


----------



## oreonutz

nick name said:


> Come here, man. Bring it in. Give me a hug. Come feel the love. Deep breath. Breathe in the love. Feel the warmth. You being upset is fine -- just don't forget this love we have for you too.


Wheres My Hug????? LOL!


----------



## nick name

oreonutz said:


> Wheres My Hug????? LOL!


New phone. Who dis?


----------



## Axaion

mtrai said:


> on Win 10 1903 it should be 10 in wintimertester


Oh i wasnt talking about that timer, (I run 1809 and its indeed 10mhz, sadly..) i was talking about the timer resolution of the OS, which is normally at 15.656ms, according to timertool

But i use background service from guru3d, to make it 0.5ms, alas, it still shows up at 0.4991ms

On my old 2600k that was 0.500ms with hpet disabled in bios and windows, and spread spectrum off

I suck at explaining things, so i hope this screenshot makes more sense

I hope you know you're awesome though!


----------



## oreonutz

nick name said:


> New phone. Who dis?


LOL. It's your cousin's Boyfriends Sisters Uncle, and I want a HUG DAMNIT!


----------



## Synoxia

mtrai said:


> I am gonna be blunt.
> 
> Listen up and learn.
> 
> Those of us who can mod the bios have tested this the option does work. It does nothing no matter what setting you set. It is a zombie option.
> Which means they did not clean the bios code...nothing I nor anyone else does will make it work.
> 
> Stop *****ing at us, it it on others. Maybe try bithcing at ASUS.
> 
> Non of us get paid or make money from making trying to make the bios work ...and I mean the way way WE WANT IT.
> 
> Pay me and will give the bios you want or mostly want.
> 
> But stop badgering us..you are the reason I went underground a few years ago......the same reason some of the same people vanish/
> 
> Actually this goes out to everyone. This is the reason the people go missing. They get burnt out and never return.. I know a number of them.


I see, then the buttery smooth gameplay i have been seeing must have been one hell of a placebo 

Did i harass you in any way? Did i beg you to mod the bios? I did not.

What i did was saying how awesome would it be to disable hpet from bios and the one i actually asked to if it was possible to do this is thestilt.

If you want to do it is simply courtesy and community sharing, which is the whole point of everyone being in a forum (atleast in my point of view). 

Asking to be paid in a forum sound kinda pathetic to me but to each it's own as i said. 

There was one guy that said he would pay 50$ for it, ask him in case you need money.

Let's just chill


----------



## oreonutz

Synoxia said:


> I see, then the buttery smooth gameplay i have been seeing must have been one hell of a placebo
> 
> Did i harass you in any way? Did i beg you to mod the bios? I did not.
> 
> What i did was saying how awesome would it be to disable hpet from bios and the one i actually asked to if it was possible to do this is thestilt.
> 
> If you want to do it is simply courtesy and community sharing, which is the whole point of everyone being in a forum (atleast in my point of view).
> 
> Asking to be paid in a forum sound kinda pathetic to me but to each it's own as i said.
> 
> There was one guy that said he would pay 50$ for it, ask him in case you need money.
> 
> Let's just chill


He was not calling what you experienced a Placebo at all. You guys had a misunderstanding. I know its a lot to read, but I detailed it pretty well In my post that I tagged you in. You should get a much better understanding of what he was actually saying there.

And don't take it personally, to him it feels like people are demanding things of him all the time, you were probably the last straw, and I think it was all over a misunderstanding. He never called what you experienced a Placebo. If you are curious to find out what it is going on, I won't bore you by typing it all again, just read my post a few posts back.


----------



## hurricane28

mtrai said:


> I am gonna be blunt.
> 
> Listen up and learn.
> 
> Those of us who can mod the bios have tested this the option does work. It does nothing no matter what setting you set. It is a zombie option.
> Which means they did not clean the bios code...nothing I nor anyone else does will make it work.
> 
> Stop *****ing at us, it it on others. Maybe try bithcing at ASUS.
> 
> Non of us get paid or make money from making trying to make the bios work ...and I mean the way way WE WANT IT.
> 
> Pay me and will give the bios you want or mostly want.
> 
> But stop badgering us..you are the reason I went underground a few years ago......the same reason some of the same people vanish/
> 
> Actually this goes out to everyone. This is the reason the people go missing. They get burnt out and never return.. I know a number of them.



I hear ya man and i agree. 

But you guys get nothing but love from my end man, the thing that pisses me off is Assus incompetence.. Its awesome what you guys do but on the other side its kinda sad that an community has to fix the BIOS because Assus is incompetent.. Why aren't we stepping up with all of us? I mean, now Assus is not going to "fix" their BIOS because the community does it for them for free.. 

I don't want to sound like an ass or anything, just saying that we need to step up towards Assus that they need to step up their software team.

Would you agree?


----------



## gupsterg

nick name said:


> @The Stilt Is it possible to mod in the PMU Pattern Bits option into AMD CBS that is on TR2 and Ryzen 3000? AMD CBS longer has any MBIST options in BIOS versions after 2501.
> 
> 
> 
> The Stilt said:
> 
> 
> 
> For AM4 the controls are only defined for Raven and 3000-series CPUs.
> Would require modifying and recompiling the CBS code to include it, which is not something I am willing and frankly probably not able to do.
Click to expand...

+ rep for this info. Previously I had been able to mod UEFI to show menu and then dawned on me it's just text if I have no variable/code to link to. I did do a thread on r/AMD, paging Robert Hallock to enable on 1xxx/2xxx AM4 CPU as I have it on TR1950X...



thegr8anand said:


> All Fan headers, all temperature points, allows 85C maximum input.
> 
> 
> Does this mean max critical temp is 85 in your bios instead of 95? Have just flashed your non-wifi bios.


TjMax of 95C (ie throttle temp) is not changed in my mod UEFIs, the OTP of 115C is also unchanged.

What is changed is fan profile allows greater than 75C for max temperature, so you can set upto 85C. The reason for this mod was people keeping saying "....my fans go 100%, when temp goes past 75C, why can I not set higher temp, so fans use my set duty cycle..."



oreonutz said:


> Specifically @Synoxia , if you follow this very thread between @mtrai, @gupsterg, and a few others, not even that long ago, you will find that they investigated this very thing with the HPET setting quite thoroughly. They found that the reason it was hidden, was because it actually did nothing. You have to change the Timer setting in Windows, and with Boot Switches, it does not matter at least on this board if the setting was set in UEFI or not, if you changed the setting with the Boot Switch and in Windows, then it changes, or if you leave it alone then it defaults to the Windows Timer. So those are your options, at this time on this board the HPET setting unfortunately does nothing. At least that was my take away from their conversation, and they posted pretty exhaustive evidence on the topic, you probably only have to go back about 20 pages or so for it, probably easier just to search either of those names and HPET with the advance search, they will probably all pop up and give you all the information you need on the topic.
> 
> I know it sucks that Asus just removes features and tells no one, this community works hard on restoring functionality we liked that was removed, and this time both @mtrai and @gupsterg and a few others in the conversation, found out that even when it was restored it was a zombie setting.
> 
> EDIT: I just went back and read some more of the thread. One I think there was a misunderstanding. @Synoxia, @mtrai was not saying that using the Boot setting with Platform Clock off, plus disabinling The Timer in Device Manager was placebo, in fact he was saying the exact opposite. He was saying the UEFI Setting in the BIOS was a placebo, and the only way to effectively disable the HPET Timer was to use the BCDEdit and Device Manager Setting. He and Gups went through and exposed the hidden HPET in BIOS, and they found that no matter what it was set to, it made absolutely no difference. The way it is supposed to work, and the way it has worked on past boards is its supposed to over ride the OS Setting, it no longer does this, and is just what is now called a "Zombie Setting" which is why ASUS hid it. Its on ASUS to fix it the setting themselves, as our modding Community can only expose there setting, not actually program it to make it work.
> 
> However I also saw @The Stilt 's post about this, and how in his research disabling HPET from the BCDEdit and Device Manager is a placebo, and that its only possible to disable through the BIOS. The Problem is the setting in BIOS that can be exposed is proven to be a Zombie setting, so it would seem we need Asus to fix this, or if the Stilt can design a program to give this functionality without the help of the BIOS, then that might be another option. But hopefully his program was not planning on tapping into the hidden UEFI setting to do so, because if so, we may find that this wouldn't work either.
> 
> Crazy stuff, ASUS just needs to give their customers what they want. But definitely our modding community is doing all they can, so we should probably focus our energy at bothering ASUS about it, unless the Stilt has a work around in mind, and he doesn't mind wasting some time on it. Obviously time is valuable.


The Stilt is stating that the HW for HPET is not switched off when "HPET In SB" option is toggled, this is the same conclusion I arrived at, mtrai initially thought toggle was working, when I asked if he could show the test he used it was same as my results.

Below screenie HPET is "false" via BCD and device disabled in device manager (which did nothing as see the text next to 14MHz) and as HPET is "false" ie HPET isn't primary timer we see the 10MHz, which AFAIK is TSC.



Spoiler














Which is as stated before:-

- HPET disabled in BIOS: OS/software can't access HPET and has to fall back to the TSC-based timer
- HPET enabled in BIOS, but disabled by OS (useplatformclock false): OS will use TSC-based timer, but any software can still access HPET
- HPET enabled in BIOS, and enabled by OS (useplatformclock true): OS and all software will use HPET as primary timer

Some info here and from that page:-



> Note
> 
> Cases might exist where QueryPerformanceFrequency doesn't return the actual frequency of the hardware tick generator. For example, in many cases, QueryPerformanceFrequency returns the TSC frequency divided by 1024; and on Hyper-V, the performance counter frequency is always 10 MHz when the guest virtual machine runs under a hypervisor that implements the hypervisor version 1.0 interface. As a result, don't assume that QueryPerformanceFrequency will return the precise TSC frequency.


----------



## mtrai

Synoxia said:


> I see, then the buttery smooth gameplay i have been seeing must have been one hell of a placebo
> 
> Did i harass you in any way? Did i beg you to mod the bios? I did not.
> 
> What i did was saying how awesome would it be to disable hpet from bios and the one i actually asked to if it was possible to do this is thestilt.
> 
> If you want to do it is simply courtesy and community sharing, which is the whole point of everyone being in a forum (atleast in my point of view).
> 
> Asking to be paid in a forum sound kinda pathetic to me but to each it's own as i said.
> 
> There was one guy that said he would pay 50$ for it, ask him in case you need money.
> 
> Let's just chill


Dude your are the reason people stop doing things like this.

We have given the reasons why it does not work. if you feel we all are wrong...then f'ing learn to do it yourself. Enough said I will not spend anymore time explaining it to your or others. I am DONE.


----------



## mtrai

hurricane28 said:


> I hear ya man and i agree.
> 
> But you guys get nothing but love from my end man, the thing that pisses me off is Assus incompetence.. Its awesome what you guys do but on the other side its kinda sad that an community has to fix the BIOS because Assus is incompetent.. Why aren't we stepping up with all of us? I mean, now Assus is not going to "fix" their BIOS because the community does it for them for free..
> 
> I don't want to sound like an ass or anything, just saying that we need to step up towards Assus that they need to step up their software team.
> 
> Would you agree?


I agree..and this is not just an AMD thing I had to do this on my intel boards as well but was rather quiet about it.


----------



## mtrai

@gupsterg yes I did as I did not do though stetting but I had it disabled the device manager and did not give it any thought until we had our discussions. Which is why my timers were showing correct. Just something people need to keep in mind that you may know what you need to set things and not even realize it is not normal thing to set up. As he said I made an assumption that it worked since my timer in wintimertest showed what I expected but I forgot that it was disabled in device manager.


----------



## mtrai

HPET on or off vai the bios.

The definite conclusions from @mtrai, @gupsterg and @The Stilt are it DOES NOT WORK.

Tye key point is the setting when you disable it in the bios..then IT WOULD NOT APPEAR IN THE DEVICE MANAGER but yet it does and then using programs to test the timer being used showed us it was the timer being used. But then using the method I suggested show how to changed the timer used.


----------



## xeizo

Ok, now running the ABBA-SMU bios by gupsterg. Memory seems a little better, but boost is "worse". No reaching 4600MHz anymore. Did a baseline in Geekbench between both SMU:s(46.34 vs 46.49) same settings, it's really within the margin of error. Both are Auto OC so no manual sauce involved:

https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/compare/14597169?baseline=14533245


----------



## xeizo

I did a reset and had Ryzen Master activate PBO instead, results became a whole lot better. Never dips below 4100MHz in CB20 now.

https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/compare/14597875?baseline=14533245

https://valid.x86.fr/11dscb

What is interesting is CPU + SOC maxed out at 139W and Tdie never reached 80C so this is a very energy efficient bios.


----------



## Duvar

xeizo said:


> I did a reset and had Ryzen Master activate PBO instead, results became a whole lot better. Never dips below 4100MHz in CB20 now.
> 
> https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/compare/14597875?baseline=14533245
> 
> https://valid.x86.fr/11dscb
> 
> What is interesting is CPU + SOC maxed out at 139W and Tdie never reached 80C so this is a very energy efficient bios.


Yes i saw the same ~20% more energy efficient, but i lost 2 points in SC CB15 even though same clock of 4.2GHz @ stock.


----------



## netman

in their blog : https://community.amd.com/community...update-on-3rd-gen-amd-ryzen-boost-frequencies amd suggests PCMark® 10 as Programm to test maximum Boost as Cinebench 1T is working to long


----------



## ajlueke

The Stilt said:


> Here are modified bioses for Crosshair VII boards, which include the new SMU 46.49.0 release that improves boost behavior / margin on 3000-series CPUs.
> 
> Do note that these are totally untested, rebuilt bioses. Despite I fully expect them to work, there is no guarantee what so ever that they actually do.
> 
> Also since the bioses have been rebuilt, their original signatures allowing them to be flashed using official software (e.g. EzFlash) tools are invalid. Because of that, *they can be only flashed in using the Flashback feature*.
> 
> In case they do not work or introduce some kind of an issue, you can revert to original bios by using Flashback function.
> 
> Also note that these bioses ARE NOT based AGESA 1.0.0.3ABBA code revision, as the whole code base has not been upgraded (only the SMU firmwares).
> Therefore the behavior might not be identical to true 1.0.0.3ABBA bios builds.
> 
> Naming: Official bios build, M = Modification, FI = 4649 (ASCII)
> 
> Crosshair VII Hero 0002M-FI
> 
> Crosshair VII Hero Wi-Fi 0002M-FI
> 
> Please let me know if they work or not, so that I can take them down if they're not working.


UEFI flashed and working properly on my VII WIFI.

Ran a quick userbenchmark both before (2703) and after flashing (Stilt Modded) which I have attached.

I definitely see an uplift across the board with the modded UEFI.


----------



## Duvar

If you look at my results you will see a significant drop in Vcore:

First picture during SC Test with old BIOS (2703)

Second picture with TheStilts new SMU 0002 mod:


----------



## hurricane28

mtrai said:


> I agree..and this is not just an AMD thing I had to do this on my intel boards as well but was rather quiet about it.


Only on Asus boards or also on other brands?


----------



## xeizo

Duvar said:


> If you look at my results you will see a significant drop in Vcore:
> 
> First picture during SC Test with old BIOS (2703)
> 
> Second picture with TheStilts new SMU 0002 mod:


Yes, quite lower, I used -0.1V offset before and now -0.04V and vcore is lower anyway.


----------



## Synoxia

mtrai said:


> Dude your are the reason people stop doing things like this.
> 
> We have given the reasons why it does not work. if you feel we all are wrong...then f'ing learn to do it yourself. Enough said I will not spend anymore time explaining it to your or others. I am DONE.


I can feel whatever way i want, again? Stop spreading your own frustration over me, you speak like i've been begging you 24/7 to do it which is simply not true.




> Tye key point is the setting when you disable it in the bios..then IT WOULD NOT APPEAR IN THE DEVICE MANAGER but yet it does and then using programs to test the timer being used showed us it was the timer being used. But then using the method I suggested show how to changed the timer used.


If it doesn't show in device manager it should be disabled. bcdedit /false should be used along bios toggle.




xeizo said:


> Ok, now running the ABBA-SMU bios by gupsterg. Memory seems a little better, but boost is "worse". No reaching 4600MHz anymore. Did a baseline in Geekbench between both SMU:s(46.34 vs 46.49) same settings, it's really within the margin of error. Both are Auto OC so no manual sauce involved:
> 
> https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/compare/14597169?baseline=14533245


Did you run cinebench MT while testing this? You have to use cinebench single core


----------



## The Stilt

Here's a tool which can both check HPET status and toggle it.

https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ag6oE4SOsCmDhWlrFpLLnrzRPWq0?e=EW5Vx7

"HPET Status" displays the current status, same as before.
"HPET" disables HPET and its memory decoding (at FED00000h).

Admin rights required, as usual.
I can make a quiet version too, that disables HPET directly without the window staying on the screen.
You could add it to the startup folder, so that its executed every time the system starts up.

Personally I see no need for disabling HPET, but anyway.

C7H is equipped with an external Pll, so the spread shouldn't be present anyhow.
There might be some autorules thou, which decide if the internal Pll or external Pll gets used.
Does the SB Spread Spectrum option in Extreme Tweaker not work?


----------



## xeizo

Synoxia said:


> Did you run cinebench MT while testing this? You have to use cinebench single core


It was a quick test, CB20 single core takes forever... 
You can see single core in both cpuz and Geekbench in my screenshot. 

However, if you read my next post after that too you should have seen scores improved when switching on PBO contrary to Auto OC in that screen. 

6150 single core in Geekbench is really good.

Also, I like multicore benchmarks more as they stress the whole system and it's a twelve core not a single core P4 so multi is very relevant


----------



## Synoxia

The Stilt said:


> Here's a tool which can both check HPET status and toggle it.
> 
> https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ag6oE4SOsCmDhWlrFpLLnrzRPWq0?e=EW5Vx7
> 
> "HPET Status" displays the current status, same as before.
> "HPET" disables HPET and its memory decoding (at FED00000h).
> 
> Admin rights required, as usual.
> I can make a quiet version too, that disables HPET directly without the window staying on the screen.
> You could add it to the startup folder, so that its executed every time the system starts up.
> 
> Personally I see no need for disabling HPET, but anyway.
> 
> C7H is equipped with an external Pll, so the spread shouldn't be present anyhow.
> There might be some autorules thou, which decide if the internal Pll or external Pll gets used.
> Does the SB Spread Spectrum option in Extreme Tweaker not work?


Thank you very much. Unfortunately though, as soon i reboot the system hpet becomes enabled again for some reason. Also ryzen master which should be using HPET works, and timer is still skewed at 0,4992


----------



## The Stilt

Synoxia said:


> Thank you very much. Unfortunately though, as soon i reboot the system hpet becomes enabled again for some reason...


Naturally.
There is no way to make the change permanent, as AGESA will reinit it at reset.
Chaning it permanently would require access to the bios source, which obviously isn't possible to me.


----------



## Synoxia

The Stilt said:


> Naturally.
> There is no way to make the change permanent, as AGESA will reinit it at reset.
> Chaning it permanently would require access to the bios source, which obviously isn't possible to me.



I see. Thank you anyway for you efforts. So unfortunate ASUS does this to their customers...


----------



## nick name

Synoxia said:


> I see. Thank you anyway for you efforts. So unfortunate ASUS does this to their customers...


Does what?


----------



## The Stilt

Synoxia said:


> I see. Thank you anyway for you efforts. So unfortunate ASUS does this to their customers...


In my opinion it has nothing to do with ASUS.
By default HPET and Spread Spectrum (for internal Pll) are enabled in AGESA and AMD has implemented their control through a debug menu, which isn't intended to the end-users.
The debug menu also appears to a remainder of old reference code, since it is clear that it isn't working.

Since these options (HPET and SSC) are supposed to be enabled at all times (at default), implementing control for them would require custom code from ASUS side.
Sure, they can be disabled at bios build time, but obviously you cannot disable these features in public bios builds.

Are there any AM4 motherboards from any ODM, which would provide a functional HPET control?


----------



## Synoxia

The Stilt said:


> In my opinion it has nothing to do with ASUS.
> By default HPET and Spread Spectrum (for internal Pll) are enabled in AGESA and AMD has implemented their control through a debug menu, which isn't intended to the end-users.
> The debug menu also appears to a remainder of old reference code, since it is clear that it isn't working.
> 
> Since these options (HPET and SSC) are supposed to be enabled at all times (at default), implementing control for them would require custom code from ASUS side.
> Sure, they can be disabled at bios build time, but obviously you cannot disable these features in public bios builds.
> 
> Are there any AM4 motherboards from any ODM, which would provide a functional HPET control?


My old x370 aorus k7 had the option shown in bios.


----------



## The Stilt

Synoxia said:


> My old x370 aorus k7 had the option shown in bios.


Did it actually work?


----------



## gupsterg

mtrai said:


> @gupsterg yes I did as I did not do though stetting but I had it disabled the device manager and did not give it any thought until we had our discussions. Which is why my timers were showing correct. Just something people need to keep in mind that you may know what you need to set things and not even realize it is not normal thing to set up. As he said I made an assumption that it worked since my timer in wintimertest showed what I expected but I forgot that it was disabled in device manager.


All good chap  .




The Stilt said:


> Here's a tool which can both check HPET status and toggle it.
> 
> https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ag6oE4SOsCmDhWlrFpLLnrzRPWq0?e=EW5Vx7
> 
> "HPET Status" displays the current status, same as before.
> "HPET" disables HPET and its memory decoding (at FED00000h).
> 
> Admin rights required, as usual.
> I can make a quiet version too, that disables HPET directly without the window staying on the screen.
> You could add it to the startup folder, so that its executed every time the system starts up.
> 
> Personally I see no need for disabling HPET, but anyway.
> 
> C7H is equipped with an external Pll, so the spread shouldn't be present anyhow.
> There might be some autorules thou, which decide if the internal Pll or external Pll gets used.
> Does the SB Spread Spectrum option in Extreme Tweaker not work?


+rep for tools  and your observations  .

Yes it works, for when BCLK is [Auto]. Once you set a manual BCLK you don't need to tinker with SB Spread Spectrum. I believe then external is used and it's fixed frequency.



Synoxia said:


> My old x370 aorus k7 had the option shown in bios.


I reckon as The Stilt has pointed out that the AEGSA hasn't got the functionality it would have become dead option.

For example these were dead on 1xxx/2xxx CPU and I also think on 3xxx.

DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
PLL Tune R1 [Auto]


----------



## crakej

Synoxia said:


> I can feel whatever way i want, again? Stop spreading your own frustration over me, you speak like i've been begging you 24/7 to do it which is simply not true.


When someone has made it very clear how long these things take, and they have made every effort to accommodate you, you just want more - "even if it is placebo".

You don't think that's even a tiny bit unreasonable?

Why shouldn't @mtrai be pee'd off and frustrated? You clearly don't read everything, or have a poor understanding of what you're reading. Then @The Stilt helps out by giving you exactly what you need, and the only way you'll get it, and you're like, thanks for your 'efforts'.

I was going to say something sooner, but I thought you might have actually understood what you were being told. You can feel however you like, yes, but so can those you keep asking for stuff that takes a day, and doesn't do what you want.

I'm really happy with the bios changes that mtrai, gupsterg and The Stilt have made available to us. Thank you! 

How lucky are we?


----------



## ajlueke

ajlueke said:


> UEFI flashed and working properly on my VII WIFI.
> 
> Ran a quick userbenchmark both before (2703) and after flashing (Stilt Modded) which I have attached.
> 
> I definitely see an uplift across the board with the modded UEFI.


Just a different way of looking at the data. The Stilt's modded BIOS has more of an impact the fewer cores are in use. Once all cores are loaded the modded 0002 and 2703 are within a margin of error. 

Still, 4% at 4core and below is nothing to sneeze at. Thanks for going through the trouble!


----------



## Axaion

The Stilt said:


> Here's a tool which can both check HPET status and toggle it.
> 
> https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ag6oE4SOsCmDhWlrFpLLnrzRPWq0?e=EW5Vx7
> 
> "HPET Status" displays the current status, same as before.
> "HPET" disables HPET and its memory decoding (at FED00000h).
> 
> Admin rights required, as usual.
> I can make a quiet version too, that disables HPET directly without the window staying on the screen.
> You could add it to the startup folder, so that its executed every time the system starts up.
> 
> Personally I see no need for disabling HPET, but anyway.
> 
> C7H is equipped with an external Pll, so the spread shouldn't be present anyhow.
> There might be some autorules thou, which decide if the internal Pll or external Pll gets used.
> Does the SB Spread Spectrum option in Extreme Tweaker not work?


Thank you, while it doesnt fix the 0.4991 issue i have, it does disable hpet (maybe windows wants to reboot before it effects the timer?, no idea.)
Ive no idea if its placebo or not, but if its working placebo it works for me lol
A quiet version would be awesome!, as per what you wrote in your post after this is probably the closest well get to hpet off for quite a few AM4 boards anyway

Regardless of if you make a quiet version or not, thank you so much for just this tool


----------



## nick name

Axaion said:


> Thank you, while it doesnt fix the 0.4991 issue i have, it does disable hpet (maybe windows wants to reboot before it effects the timer?, no idea.)
> Ive no idea if its placebo or not, but if its working placebo it works for me lol
> A quiet version would be awesome!, as per what you wrote in your post after this is probably the closest well get to hpet off for quite a few AM4 boards anyway
> 
> Regardless of if you make a quiet version or not, thank you so much for just this tool


Can I ask why you want it to to be .5000? 

I've read up on it in the past, but have forgotten all of it since.


----------



## gupsterg

ajlueke said:


> Just a different way of looking at the data. The Stilt's modded BIOS has more of an impact the fewer cores are in use. Once all cores are loaded the modded 0002 and 2703 are within a margin of error.
> 
> Still, 4% at 4core and below is nothing to sneeze at. Thanks for going through the trouble!


Thanks for data  .

I guess the way the SMU FW will impact a CPU will depend on various factors, besides silicon characteristics. 

My R5 3600 will do ACB of 4.2GHz on all UEFIs when loaded with say Kahru RAM Test. Where the SMU FW comes into play for my CPU sample is when I do PBO+xxxMHz.

This ZIP has WMVs of PBO+150MHz on "Official" UEFI 2501 & 2703 and also 0002 with SMU FW 46.34.00.

Today did another rerun of UEFI 0002M-FIE and gotta say SMU FW 46.49.00 is it for now  ...


----------



## Axaion

nick name said:


> Can I ask why you want it to to be .5000?
> 
> I've read up on it in the past, but have forgotten all of it since.


Mouse input feels better to me with it on 0.500, for whatever reason, iirc it also gave me a more stable mousetester Update Time


----------



## The Stilt

Axaion said:


> A quiet version would be awesome!, as per what you wrote in your post after this is probably the closest well get to hpet off for quite a few AM4 boards anyway


https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ag6oE4SOsCmDhWrGbyyFX9d1MHjV?e=eZyaGp

Unless you specify "Status" command, the program doesn't print anything or wait for input.

If you want the app to run every time the system starts up, I suggest you extract the contents of the folder to sysroot\Windows\system32.
Then create a shortcut for HPET.exe and place it in the folder that is opened when you open run (Winkey + R) and type "shell:startup".

The application or its driver (inpout) won't be running in the background, but the driver will remain installed in the system.
The driver can be uninstalled from Device Manage (Show hidden devices >> Non-Plug and Play Drivers >> inpoutx64) if the application is no longer needed.
Then you can remove the three files from the System32 folder as well. The folder the files are extracted to doesn't have to be System32 however, whatever location it is, it must be included in the PATH environment variable (so that the driver can be found).


----------



## ajlueke

gupsterg said:


> Thanks for data  .
> 
> I guess the way the SMU FW will impact a CPU will depend on various factors, besides silicon characteristics.
> 
> My R5 3600 will do ACB of 4.2GHz on all UEFIs when loaded with say Kahru RAM Test. Where the SMU FW comes into play for my CPU sample is when I do PBO+xxxMHz.
> 
> This ZIP has WMVs of PBO+150MHz on "Official" UEFI 2501 & 2703 and also 0002 with SMU FW 46.34.00.
> 
> Today did another rerun of UEFI 0002M-FIE and gotta say SMU FW 46.49.00 is it for now  ...


Thanks for the info!

I must be hitting the FIT voltage limit on my 3900X as turning on PBO in any form doesn't seem to impact my performance at all. The uptick from the modded 46.49.00 is pretty nice though, it took me from 74th percentile in userbenchmark to 99th. Which, is interesting that a sub 5% gain, could move my result that much. It is a testament to just how similar the performance of all 3900Xs is in userbenchmark. 

I can't complain too much though, since my CPU result, in that benchmark at least, is better than 99% of the other 3900Xs tested.


----------



## crakej

The new R Master seems to report higher frequencies better - I actually see 4.5 on it.

HWInfo is still better though, showing us the proper multiplier for each core. 5 cores are happy to boost to 4.6 (not ACB!) - but it seems to be only for lighter loads. Sometimes I'll get the odd 4.63 reported.


----------



## Axaion

The Stilt said:


> https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ag6oE4SOsCmDhWrGbyyFX9d1MHjV?e=eZyaGp
> 
> Unless you specify "Status" command, the program doesn't print anything or wait for input.
> 
> If you want the app to run every time the system starts up, I suggest you extract the contents of the folder to sysroot\Windows\system32.
> Then create a shortcut for HPET.exe and place it in the folder that is opened when you open run (Winkey + R) and type "shell:startup".
> 
> The application or its driver (inpout) won't be running in the background, but the driver will remain installed in the system.
> The driver can be uninstalled from Device Manage (Show hidden devices >> Non-Plug and Play Drivers >> inputx64) if the application is no longer needed.
> Then you can remove the three files from the System32 folder as well. The folder the files are extracted to doesn't have to be System32 however, whatever location it is, it must be included in the PATH environment variable (so that the driver can be found).


That is absolutely awesome.


----------



## Synoxia

The Stilt said:


> Did it actually work?


I have no such tool to prove if it was working, but i *think* there was a reduction in dpc latency shown by latmon and smoother games. Might be placebo, i don't really know. Only way to test it is using a GB/MSI motherboard and try it.




crakej said:


> When someone has made it very clear how long these things take, and they have made every effort to accommodate you, you just want more - "even if it is placebo".
> 
> You don't think that's even a tiny bit unreasonable?
> 
> Why shouldn't @mtrai be pee'd off and frustrated? You clearly don't read everything, or have a poor understanding of what you're reading. Then @The Stilt helps out by giving you exactly what you need, and the only way you'll get it, and you're like, thanks for your 'efforts'.
> 
> I was going to say something sooner, but I thought you might have actually understood what you were being told. You can feel however you like, yes, but so can those you keep asking for stuff that takes a day, and doesn't do what you want.
> 
> I'm really happy with the bios changes that mtrai, gupsterg and The Stilt have made available to us. Thank you!
> 
> How lucky are we?


What? Accomodate me? I asked once and left him alone after that, why would he be upset with me?

Unfortunately even if Stilt solution didn't work as expected in the end, i still thanked him, what else i have to do? 

I think i have already shown enough respect for the likes of iusmus stilt and guptserg, even mtrai until he started all of this.


----------



## The Stilt

Synoxia said:


> I have no such tool to prove if it was working, but i *think* there was a reduction in dpc latency shown by latmon and smoother games. Might be placebo, i don't really know. Only way to test it is using a GB/MSI motherboard and try it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What? Accomodate me? I asked once and left him alone after that, why would he be upset with me?
> 
> Unfortunately even if Stilt solution didn't work as expected in the end, i still thanked him, what else i have to do?
> 
> I think i have already shown enough respect for the likes of iusmus stilt and guptserg, even mtrai until he started all of this.


MSI B350I at least seems to have this option (Advanced >> Integrated peripherals).
If I manage to make a working bios for it, I'll try it and see if it works or not.

What tools am I supposed to check the HPET with and what exactly am I looking for?


----------



## boatmurder

finally got a zen2. Might be just a stepping stone until i see reviews of the 3950X.
Anyway. It's set into a C7H. I installed the latest 2703 BIOS from ASUS homepage via flashback.

It did fine picking up the 3200 CL14 XMP/DOCP settings, and responded well to lowering timings.
However, after increasing memory frequency just slightly i get the 2:1 effect leaving me with abysmal mid-80s timings on as little as 3333 or 3400MHz. The automatic adjustment for 1:1 FCLK does not appear to work at all.

There is a very obvious dropdown menu to manually configure FCLK. But whenever i lay hands on it and reboot, the board will get stuck on random POST codes and not even cycle over to safe defaults. Only way to get back to BIOS is resetting CMOS.


Have any of you run into this problem, and how did you work your way around it?


----------



## The Stilt

Guess what, the HPET option MSI has added separately to their bios...
Does exactly nothing.

Neither of the two HPET (MSI's own or AMD's chipset) options or the Msi option do.

Rebuilt the 1.0.0.3 1.CM based bios from June to 1.0.0.3ABBA level, FW wise (all blocks).
Suprisingly that made a huge difference in the overall functionality, eventhou I originally thought the issues were at MSI's side.
All boot issues and hanging menus seem to be gone. Didn't expect that from the AMD stack update alone.



Spoiler


----------



## xeizo

You have a setting to lock UCLK=MEMCLK and a setting for the speed of Infinity Fabric, both are under the AMD menus.

There are a few things to consider, like SOC, VTT, VDDP, VDDG, what memory do you have and can you post a screenshot of Ryzen Master?


----------



## Synoxia

The Stilt said:


> Guess what, the HPET option MSI has added separately to their bios...
> Does exactly nothing.
> 
> Neither of the two HPET (MSI's own or AMD's chipset) options or the Msi option do.
> 
> Rebuilt the 1.0.0.3 1.CM based bios from June to 1.0.0.3ABBA level, FW wise (all blocks).
> Suprisingly that made a huge difference in the overall functionality, eventhou I originally thought the issues were at MSI's side.
> All boot issues and hanging menus seem to be gone. Didn't expect that from the AMD stack update alone.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Curious, as AMD themselves were recommending to disable hpet for a 5% perf gain.
Source https://www.anandtech.com/show/12678/a-timely-discovery-examining-amd-2nd-gen-ryzen-results/3

Another interesting thing is that on my previous x370 disabling HPET effectively made ryzen master unable to start, which indicated HPET function was effectively disabled.

Wondering what's really going on here...


----------



## boatmurder

xeizo said:


> You have a setting to lock UCLK=MEMCLK and a setting for the speed of Infinity Fabric, both are under the AMD menus.


Thank you, i thought this would be enabled by default. Will give it a shot in a moment before i go to sleep.
*update[/b9


xeizo said:



There are a few things to consider, like SOC, VTT, VDDP, VDDG, what memory do you have and can you post a screenshot of Ryzen Master?

Click to expand...

My RAM:









Sadly AMD do not provide Ryzen Master for Linux.


update
gave it a shot. Well, 3 actually.
Found the uclk==memclk you mentioned. Set it, left FCLK above alone (Auto) at first. Reboot. 83ns latency.
Alright, maybe i still do need to set the FCLK manually and Auto is worthless.


Spoiler














Reboot, test, 83ns.

Back to BIOS. the FCLK setting from the menu where i set UCLK == MEMCLK did save something called FCLK, but apparently *not this* FCLK, which i previously changed and failed to boot with.


Spoiler














Now with 1:1 locked and FCLK already configured through the other menu... what could go wrong if i just put the 1667 in here as well.
Reboot -> stuck on random POST code, same issue as before.

And just to make things even more confusing, after snooping around the menus for a bit i've also found a THIRD FCLK.


Spoiler















Changing this one does literally nothing. It does not even detect as a change to be saved when i press F10 to save+quit.


Sorry to be a bother guys, I'm probably missing something extremely obvious here.*


----------



## The Stilt

Synoxia said:


> Curious, as AMD themselves were recommending to disable hpet for a 5% perf gain.
> Source https://www.anandtech.com/show/12678/a-timely-discovery-examining-amd-2nd-gen-ryzen-results/3
> 
> Another interesting thing is that on my previous x370 disabling HPET effectively made ryzen master unable to start, which indicated HPET function was effectively disabled.
> 
> Wondering what's really going on here...


At least on Kaby Lake (which had huge issues with HPET), disabling HPET through BCDEdit was enough.
It is possible that the HPET bios option has worked on the original Gen. 1 and Gen. 2 targeting software stacks (Summit and PinnaclePI), but has been removed / breaked since.
AGESA itself definitely allows disabling HPET during compile time, but the issue is that there is no way to provide a toggle for it without implementing custom code.


----------



## Synoxia

The Stilt said:


> At least on Kaby Lake (which had huge issues with HPET), disabling HPET through BCDEdit was enough.
> It is possible that the HPET bios option has worked on the original Gen. 1 and Gen. 2 targeting software stacks (Summit and PinnaclePI), but has been removed / breaked since.
> AGESA itself definitely allows disabling HPET during compile time, but the issue is that there is no way to provide a toggle for it without implementing custom code.


Seems like on Zen2 this is not the case as bcdedit /false will still result in skewed timer a user was mentioning previously (0,4992). As always, we are beta testers and not costumers...

Let's hope amd/asus do something but i think chances are very low. Thanks for your support with this issue.


----------



## AvengedRobix

i'm going OT... my last result (AMD cut result of graphics score =( )


----------



## edu616

boatmurder said:


> xeizo said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have a setting to lock UCLK=MEMCLK and a setting for the speed of Infinity Fabric, both are under the AMD menus.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you, i thought this would be enabled by default. Will give it a shot in a moment before i go to sleep.
> *update[/b9
> 
> 
> xeizo said:
> 
> 
> 
> There are a few things to consider, like SOC, VTT, VDDP, VDDG, what memory do you have and can you post a screenshot of Ryzen Master?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My RAM:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sadly AMD do not provide Ryzen Master for Linux.
> 
> 
> update
> gave it a shot. Well, 3 actually.
> Found the uclk==memclk you mentioned. Set it, left FCLK above alone (Auto) at first. Reboot. 83ns latency.
> Alright, maybe i still do need to set the FCLK manually and Auto is worthless.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Reboot, test, 83ns.
> 
> Back to BIOS. the FCLK setting from the menu where i set UCLK == MEMCLK did save something called FCLK, but apparently *not this* FCLK, which i previously changed and failed to boot with.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now with 1:1 locked and FCLK already configured through the other menu... what could go wrong if i just put the 1667 in here as well.
> Reboot -> stuck on random POST code, same issue as before.
> 
> And just to make things even more confusing, after snooping around the menus for a bit i've also found a THIRD FCLK.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Changing this one does literally nothing. It does not even detect as a change to be saved when i press F10 to save+quit.
> 
> 
> Sorry to be a bother guys, I'm probably missing something extremely obvious here.*
Click to expand...

*


How do you test for infinity fabric latency? Right now I have stable 3,734 speeds with FCLK at 1,867, MCLK at 1,867 and UCLK==MCLK. I was able to change this last one using F9 as I wasn’t able to find it otherwise (UCLK however I do not now if it actually applied as when I saved it did not state that it changed). I have it with CL 16 timings but I do have Samsung B-Die so I should be able to get better timings. I just need to know how to check the latency to make sure that the UCLK settings was actually applied and I’m running 1:1. Thanks!*


----------



## crakej

edu616 said:


> How do you test for infinity fabric latency? Right now I have stable 3,734 speeds with FCLK at 1,867, MCLK at 1,867 and UCLK==MCLK. I was able to change this last one using F9 as I wasn’t able to find it otherwise (UCLK however I do not now if it actually applied as when I saved it did not state that it changed). I have it with CL 16 timings but I do have Samsung B-Die so I should be able to get better timings. I just need to know how to check the latency to make sure that the UCLK settings was actually applied and I’m running 1:1. Thanks!


You just need to set FCLK on the extreme tweaker page - leave the other ones you found....

Also, instead of using DOCP, leave that setting on auto, and enter your memory settings manually, from the extreme tweaker menu as well.


----------



## xeizo

crakej said:


> You just need to set FCLK on the extreme tweaker page - leave the other ones you found....
> 
> Also, instead of using DOCP, leave that setting on auto, and enter your memory settings manually, from the extreme tweaker menu as well.


DOCP support is spotty on C7H so I agree on "do not use it". Another benefit of leaving it on auto is BCLK stays at an exact 100.

About the different settings for CLK, below 3600MHz only using FCLK seems to work but above 3600 my board always stops using synchronized mode. It's easy to see in AIDA64 cache and mem benchmark as latency is off when it is not synchronized. I now have 64.5ns latency at 3800MHz, which only works when setting both FCLK, UCLK=MEMCLK and Infinity Fabric, if I don't latency is worse.

The later bioses for C7H are all very confusing as the same settings can be found in up to three places, a major redesign of the bios is much needed.


----------



## neikosr0x

AvengedRobix said:


> i'm going OT... my last result (AMD cut result of graphics score =( )


yea, i kind of saw a bit of graphics performance hit but i'm get to keep testing, RAM and latencies in general are really good tho. 64ns 0.9ns 2.6ns 9.7ns R/W/C Higher that before and RAM OC more stable and snappy at 3800mhz CL16 for now. 

But when i'm gaming i'm seeing some GPU utilization % drop that i wasn't experiencing before. is not much of a performance hit on my last try but it is definitely there.


----------



## ajlueke

boatmurder said:


> finally got a zen2. Might be just a stepping stone until i see reviews of the 3950X.
> Anyway. It's set into a C7H. I installed the latest 2703 BIOS from ASUS homepage via flashback.
> 
> It did fine picking up the 3200 CL14 XMP/DOCP settings, and responded well to lowering timings.
> However, after increasing memory frequency just slightly i get the 2:1 effect leaving me with abysmal mid-80s timings on as little as 3333 or 3400MHz. The automatic adjustment for 1:1 FCLK does not appear to work at all.
> 
> There is a very obvious dropdown menu to manually configure FCLK. But whenever i lay hands on it and reboot, the board will get stuck on random POST codes and not even cycle over to safe defaults. Only way to get back to BIOS is resetting CMOS.
> 
> 
> Have any of you run into this problem, and how did you work your way around it?


I had a similar issue, if I set the RAM clock on the main UEFI page, auto scaling of infinity fabric and northbridge did not work. If I set the RAM speed on the main page, and also set it in the AMD Overclocking menu, then Infinity Fabric and northbridge scale normally up to 3600 MHz. I had to set it in both places for the auto scaling. Everything else can be set in "Extreme Tweaker" (timings). All FCLK settings can be left on auto unless you are planning on going over 3600 MHz. 

I currently have my Corsair Dominator kit (4X8GB) at 3600 CL16, 1.35V and it scales correctly on the fabric (1800MHz) and northbridge (1800MHz in CPUz)


----------



## AvengedRobix

What modded BIOS have a fix for fan?

Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A6013 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## neikosr0x

AvengedRobix said:


> What modded BIOS have a fix for fan?
> 
> Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A6013 utilizzando Tapatalk


0002/stiltmod


----------



## CCoR

mtrai said:


> there are two options in the bios. Under Chipset then South Bridge---->SB Debug Configuration-----> SB MISC DEBUG The two options are HPET in SB and MsiDIS in HPET
> 
> I am currently modding Gursterp bios to open up more options this is the C7H Wifi if you have that board I can send it to you in bit when I finally finish it up.
> 
> @oreonutz I should have some cookies for you tomorrow sometime.


Interested in this mod as well, thanks again for your hard work! It's very appreciated!


----------



## mtrai

C7H WIFI 002+ bios based on Gursterg 1.0.0.3 ABBA SMU FW change. /EDIT updated link to provide actual flashable modded bios. I did something with it AMIBCP and did not noticed when I resaved it it has stripped the secure capsule signing out of the save. Fixed now. Sorry that I did not catch it mis-behaving and doing that.

Donwload: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1urdsgPj_PE6Wc3CWdVHNZeNh86pWT6bB


----------



## CCoR

mtrai said:


> C7H WIFI 002+ bios based on Gursterg 1.0.0.3 ABBA SMU FW change.
> 
> Donwload: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1urdsgPj_PE6Wc3CWdVHNZeNh86pWT6bB


You the man!
Rebooting. .


----------



## CCoR

CCoR said:


> You the man!
> Rebooting. .


Hmm USB flashback wont take 

NOTE: Just flashed stilts new ABBA and that worked fine. Dont think its the USB drive/formatting.


----------



## boatmurder

ajlueke said:


> I had a similar issue, if I set the RAM clock on the main UEFI page, auto scaling of infinity fabric and northbridge did not work. If I set the RAM speed on the main page, and also set it in the AMD Overclocking menu, then Infinity Fabric and northbridge scale normally up to 3600 MHz. I had to set it in both places for the auto scaling. Everything else can be set in "Extreme Tweaker" (timings). All FCLK settings can be left on auto unless you are planning on going over 3600 MHz.
> 
> I currently have my Corsair Dominator kit (4X8GB) at 3600 CL16, 1.35V and it scales correctly on the fabric (1800MHz) and northbridge (1800MHz in CPUz)


My board seems to be special kind of troll.
Getting clocks to sync the way you described did not work, but you and xeizo with his DOCP comment on another reply still inspired me to poke around for different solutions.
And i've found one.

DOCP off (AI Overclock Tuner set to "default")
Set memory frequency and fclk in the Extreme Tweaker tab.
Set memory frequency as well as timings (hexadecimal!) in Advanced Tab - strictly speaking i am not certain setting the memory freq here again matters. Works for now, anyway.








pictured CL14 3400 did not boot successfully, but 3466 CL16 (15 with geardown rounding it up i assume) has passed preliminary testing and i'm below 70ns latency for the first time on zen2 









The DDR-Timing settings provided in the extreme tweaker menu MUST NOT BE TOUCHED for my board if i want to run more than 3200MHz with 1:1, or it will go back to getting stuck on random post codes and begging for Reset CMOS.
Curiously, running less than 3200MHz with FCLK-setting and timings in extreme tweaker does work as expected. This 2703 ABB Bios is all kinds of messed up.


----------



## edu616

crakej said:


> edu616 said:
> 
> 
> 
> How do you test for infinity fabric latency? Right now I have stable 3,734 speeds with FCLK at 1,867, MCLK at 1,867 and UCLK==MCLK. I was able to change this last one using F9 as I wasnâ€™️t able to find it otherwise (UCLK however I do not now if it actually applied as when I saved it did not state that it changed). I have it with CL 16 timings but I do have Samsung B-Die so I should be able to get better timings. I just need to know how to check the latency to make sure that the UCLK settings was actually applied and Iâ€™️m running 1:1. Thanks!
> 
> 
> 
> You just need to set FCLK on the extreme tweaker page - leave the other ones you found....
> 
> Also, instead of using DOCP, leave that setting on auto, and enter your memory settings manually, from the extreme tweaker menu as well.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply, with the setting I mentioned I’m getting 65.7ns in AIDA64 test so not bad.


----------



## thedotlair

*ignore - found them after logging in*


----------



## Reikoji

This is with Core performance boost and and Performance enhancement (Level3(OC)) also enabled. EDIT: Core performance boost actually not necessary, its all Performance enhancer.

I am pleased with ABBA.


----------



## AvengedRobix

mtrai said:


> C7H WIFI 002+ bios based on Gursterg 1.0.0.3 ABBA SMU FW change.
> 
> 
> 
> Donwload: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1urdsgPj_PE6Wc3CWdVHNZeNh86pWT6bB


Don't work and not flashable

Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A6013 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## ajlueke

boatmurder said:


> My board seems to be special kind of troll.
> Getting clocks to sync the way you described did not work, but you and xeizo with his DOCP comment on another reply still inspired me to poke around for different solutions.
> And i've found one.
> 
> DOCP off (AI Overclock Tuner set to "default")
> Set memory frequency and fclk in the Extreme Tweaker tab.
> Set memory frequency as well as timings (hexadecimal!) in Advanced Tab - strictly speaking i am not certain setting the memory freq here again matters. Works for now, anyway.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pictured CL14 3400 did not boot successfully, but 3466 CL16 (15 with geardown rounding it up i assume) has passed preliminary testing and i'm below 70ns latency for the first time on zen2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The DDR-Timing settings provided in the extreme tweaker menu MUST NOT BE TOUCHED for my board if i want to run more than 3200MHz with 1:1, or it will go back to getting stuck on random post codes and begging for Reset CMOS.
> Curiously, running less than 3200MHz with FCLK-setting and timings in extreme tweaker does work as expected. This 2703 ABB Bios is all kinds of messed up.


Hmm, setting the timings in extreme tweaker always works fine for me. I should add that I also set ProcODT to 40 ohms in extreme tweaker, and set the DRAM boot voltage to 1.35V in the Digi menu.


----------



## mtrai

AvengedRobix said:


> Don't work and not flashable
> 
> Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A6013 utilizzando Tapatalk


Found the issue a corrected version is now up.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1urdsgPj_PE6Wc3CWdVHNZeNh86pWT6bB


----------



## mtrai

CCoR said:


> Hmm USB flashback wont take
> 
> NOTE: Just flashed stilts new ABBA and that worked fine. Dont think its the USB drive/formatting.


I have it on my personal system...so that would be odd. Let me look at at it later. I quickly found the issue for some reason the security was stripped of it in AMIBCP for the one I previously uploaded. A working version is no up on my gdrive.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1urdsgPj_PE6Wc3CWdVHNZeNh86pWT6bB


----------



## AvengedRobix

mtrai said:


> How so? You diud use flashback, and put it on a KNOWN working USB stick with flashback?


Yes.. USB drive work fine.. After try and re-try i re-flash 0002+e

Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A6013 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## mtrai

AvengedRobix said:


> Yes.. USB drive work fine.. After try and re-try i re-flash 0002+e
> 
> Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A6013 utilizzando Tapatalk


Found the issues and uploaded a corrected version of it.


----------



## AvengedRobix

mtrai said:


> Found the issues and uploaded a corrected version of it.


When finish ti work i try.. tnx

Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A6013 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## vasyltheonly

Can someone explain which setting I need to set to get my all cores to boost higher on the ABBA bios? My single core boosts to 4425mhz with PBO+150 on my 3600X, but at C20 multi or any gaming it goes down to 4175mhz at 1.330ish volts. I've been running an all core 4.3 at this same voltage. I thought with ryzen overclocking was useless because everything did it for you. Any input? Or am I expecting too much.


----------



## dreckschmeck

Reikoji said:


> This is with Core performance boost and and Performance enhancement (Level3(OC)) also enabled. EDIT: Core performance boost actually not necessary, its all Performance enhancer.
> 
> I am pleased with ABBA.


hej there, how did you crank EDC up to 230?


----------



## Reikoji

dreckschmeck said:


> hej there, how did you crank EDC up to 230?


should be one of the options available when you set Precision Boost overdriver to manual in bios. If not, may just be limited to x570.


----------



## dreckschmeck

Reikoji said:


> should be one of the options available when you set Precision Boost overdriver to manual in bios. If not, may just be limited to x570.


ah yea, i guess it is then. have mine set at 250 nothing changes. This is the x470 aus crosshair vii thread you know


----------



## xeizo

vasyltheonly said:


> Can someone explain which setting I need to set to get my all cores to boost higher on the ABBA bios? My single core boosts to 4425mhz with PBO+150 on my 3600X, but at C20 multi or any gaming it goes down to 4175mhz at 1.330ish volts. I've been running an all core 4.3 at this same voltage. I thought with ryzen overclocking was useless because everything did it for you. Any input? Or am I expecting too much.


4175MHz in CB20 is good, Auto OC/PBO doesn't allow much more. If you want more, manual OC or per-CCX OC is they way to go. Only comfort is the Auto OC consumes less energy.


----------



## Nucky

To anyone that has flashed the stilt mod bios is the c5 issue still around or non existent? I'm running 2703 right now with no issues other than low boost. Would like to get boost working again but I don't want to reintroduce c5 on cold boot.


----------



## Reikoji

dreckschmeck said:


> ah yea, i guess it is then. have mine set at 250 nothing changes. This is the x470 aus crosshair vii thread you know


I'm an invader ! I do have a Crosshair VII Hero tho, I'm just not using it :3

Are you setting the precision boost overdrive from the extreme tweaker page?


----------



## Dbsjej56464

Would it be possible to get someone talented to inject the ABBA agesa into the latest C6H bios? I have the FW thanks to The Stilt but not the agesa! Unless I'm misunderstanding what people are saying and they are referring to the FW


----------



## AvengedRobix

mtrai said:


> Found the issues and uploaded a corrected version of it.


work but on manual OC is very unstable... i've some crash with my profile who i use form day one =(


----------



## Richard Palmer

Nucky said:


> To anyone that has flashed the stilt mod bios is the c5 issue still around or non existent? I'm running 2703 right now with no issues other than low boost. Would like to get boost working again but I don't want to reintroduce c5 on cold boot.


I've had issues with the C5 error when running dual channel with every iteration of Bios versions so far. I can run 2 sticks in the furthest 2 slots, but as soon as I try dual channel. I get a C5 error until i take all but the Right-most stick out :*(


----------



## nick name

Richard Palmer said:


> I've had issues with the C5 error when running dual channel with every iteration of Bios versions so far. I can run 2 sticks in the furthest 2 slots, but as soon as I try dual channel. I get a C5 error until i take all but the Right-most stick out :*(


Lol. Richard Palmer . . . I see what you did there. Or what your parents did there.


----------



## VPII

*VPII*



Richard Palmer said:


> I've had issues with the C5 error when running dual channel with every iteration of Bios versions so far. I can run 2 sticks in the furthest 2 slots, but as soon as I try dual channel. I get a C5 error until i take all but the Right-most stick out :*(


 @Richard Palmer , well it seems you have the same issue I had with two C7H boards.... one memory bank went missing and it was the two slots closest to the cpu socket. It happened twice to me, could not RMA as I stripped the boards for LN2 clocking so could not get RMA. Funny thing is my Msi Meg X570 Ace also gave me issues and had to be RMA, shop told me water marks on board with pictures, I told them it is not water marks but Acetone which will not conduct electricity, you could see the marks was somewhat oily, but I got my refund and all good.


----------



## AvengedRobix

i like to share my config for four dimm of ram...
completely full rock solid...

Freq 3800Mhz
FCLK 1900Mhz
Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto]
DRAM CAS# Latency [15]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [15]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [16]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [15]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [30]
Trc [45]
TrrdS [4]
TrrdL [6]
Tfaw [16]
TwtrS [4]
TwtrL [12]
Twr [12]
Trcpage [Auto]
TrdrdScl [4]
TwrwrScl [4]
Trfc [294]
Trfc2 [336]
Trfc4 [Auto]
Tcwl [16]
Trtp [12]
Trdwr [Auto]
Twrrd [4]
TwrwrSc [1]
TwrwrSd [7]
TwrwrDd [7]
TrdrdSc [1]
TrdrdSd [5]
TrdrdDd [5]
Tcke [1]
ProcODT [40 ohm]
Cmd2T [1T]
Gear Down Mode [Disabled]
Power Down Enable [Disabled]
RttNom [RZQ/7]
RttWr [RZQ/3]
RttPark [RZQ/1]
MemAddrCmdSetup [56]
MemCsOdtSetup [56]
MemCkeSetup [56]
MemCadBusClkDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [20.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]

CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
- VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.08125]
DRAM Voltage [1.45000] 

If anyone want try post the result


----------



## ClintLeo

Hi

I tried your settings,which was just changing my timings slighlty,moving from c16 to c15 and I seem to have gained only a 200MB\s but an increase in .05v for ram and .025 for SOC.
I did gain .2ns on the latency,from 64,5 to 64,3.
Although I must add,I still need to test that 3800 C16 at 1,4v was stable for my kit.

Thanx for the settings,was nice to check if my system would boot at 3800c15.
Even when I had my Intel system I couldn't get a stable OC on my ram,so just ran stock 3733c17.


----------



## boatmurder

ajlueke said:


> Hmm, setting the timings in extreme tweaker always works fine for me. I should add that I also set ProcODT to 40 ohms in extreme tweaker, and set the DRAM boot voltage to 1.35V in the Digi menu.


messing with procODT reliably stopped my 2700X from booting throughout all bios versions i installed before zen2.
Dunno. Maybe my board's just all kinds of messed up, but I'm just happy i found something that works fine. Actually works more than fine.

I was betting on being able to run my 64GB at stock speeds with zen2. I was hoping for a little more... and after some initial frustration, i ended up with more than i even hoped for.
These AMD Overclocking settings appear to run through an entirely different training routine than the extreme tweaker. In individual testing with the extreme tweaker settings, before i discovered this other menu, 3400MHz on just two of the four sticks was already puking up errors.

Who knows, maybe my old CPU could have done more with this menu? 2666 was the best i could get out of it with 64GB https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/13781908 (3066 for 32) It's already sold and shipped off, no way to try now.
With the 3800X i started out completely messed up, not even getting proper sync at 3200 https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/14592725
Went through somewhat refined timings which were an absolute horror to set with constant clear cmos https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/14592900
And have now come to 3533 16-15-15-15-34-50 using 1.42V, which made it through 5.5 hours / 2 passes of memtest86. https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/14616308


I'll take a break to actually enjoy my new hardware at this point. Spent the better part of my free time since tuesday just staring at bios and memtest, hah.


----------



## AvengedRobix

ClintLeo said:


> Hi
> 
> I tried your settings,which was just changing my timings slighlty,moving from c16 to c15 and I seem to have gained only a 200MB\s but an increase in .05v for ram and .025 for SOC.
> I did gain .2ns on the latency,from 64,5 to 64,3.
> Although I must add,I still need to test that 3800 C16 at 1,4v was stable for my kit.
> 
> Thanx for the settings,was nice to check if my system would boot at 3800c15.
> Even when I had my Intel system I couldn't get a stable OC on my ram,so just ran stock 3733c17.


have you try every single timing?


----------



## ClintLeo

AvengedRobix said:


> have you try every single timing?



Hi,yeah,maybe this is just the best my 3700x can do with the Corsair Vengance kit.


----------



## AvengedRobix

ClintLeo said:


> Hi,yeah,maybe this is just the best my 3700x can do with the Corsair Vengance kit.


mmm ok.. Vengeance lose efficienci at low timing =(


----------



## xeizo

Asus already has a beta ABBA-bios for the Prime X370/470-boards provided by Asus Germany, available at hardwareluxx.de , bios 5220.

Meaning it shouldn't take too long from now to get a official ABBA-bios for C7H 

This beta works well, and boosts well, but only on Auto OC. PBO can't even be activated, nothing happens it just returns to Auto OC. Probably why its a Beta. Performance is there, not better than 5007 in everything but CB15/20 is better.


----------



## neikosr0x

xeizo said:


> Asus already has a beta ABBA-bios for the Prime X370/470-boards provided by Asus Germany, available at hardwareluxx.de , bios 5220.
> 
> Meaning it shouldn't take too long from now to get a official ABBA-bios for C7H
> 
> This beta works well, and boosts well, but only on Auto OC. PBO can't even be activated, nothing happens it just returns to Auto OC. Probably why its a Beta. Performance is there, not better than 5007 in everything but CB15/20 is better.


Could you please share the link I went there but couldn't find the download links for them.


----------



## xeizo

neikosr0x said:


> Could you please share the link I went there but couldn't find the download links for them.



https://cloud.asustreiber.de/s/L3CFKKATBfaPp85

You can find bioses in the first post in each dedicated thread for a certain mobo.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Have 32gb (4x8gb) B Die stable at 3800mhz cl14


----------



## sharyn

Hi guys, is there any OC tutorial for noobs?


----------



## Richard Palmer

VPII said:


> @Richard Palmer , well it seems you have the same issue I had with two C7H boards.... one memory bank went missing and it was the two slots closest to the cpu socket. It happened twice to me, could not RMA as I stripped the boards for LN2 clocking so could not get RMA. Funny thing is my Msi Meg X570 Ace also gave me issues and had to be RMA, shop told me water marks on board with pictures, I told them it is not water marks but Acetone which will not conduct electricity, you could see the marks was somewhat oily, but I got my refund and all good.


Well that just sucks. I've put my old 1700x back in and both channels work just fine with that CPU. With 2501 I was able to get it running on 2 channels for about 10 minutes or so before BSOD and then C5. It's just a really odd issue, but if it doesn't get fixed before long I'm probably just going to but the bullet and get an X570 :/


----------



## Pietro

I upgraded from 2700X to 3900X and have a sily question how overclock this cpu on crosshair vii manually? I set cpu voltage to 1.3V and regardless if it is multiplier 42.5, 42.75, 43, LL4 or LL5 under heavy load with CPU, FPU and Cache set on in AIDA in hwinfo I still see that those 12 VIDs are on up to 1.060V is how supposed to be and hwinfo is reading it wrong or not? Because in idling I also see up to 1.1V, but when it comes to stock those vids in aida are getting 1.325-1.35V. Are there any other settings I need to set unlock higher VID? Second question is in what app I should test 1900MHz Inifnity Fabric Stability, Karhu Ramtest is enough or this really doesn't stress inifnity, but only I/O die where memory controller is and sticks itself?


----------



## Synoxia

CJMitsuki said:


> Have 32gb (4x8gb) B Die stable at 3800mhz cl14


Insane as always, lol. How could you run BCLK oc on C7H? Mine has XFR disabled when trying BCLK over 100mhz.
Also, how did you change PBO settings this time? I have the same CPU.


----------



## VPII

Richard Palmer said:


> Well that just sucks. I've put my old 1700x back in and both channels work just fine with that CPU. With 2501 I was able to get it running on 2 channels for about 10 minutes or so before BSOD and then C5. It's just a really odd issue, but if it doesn't get fixed before long I'm probably just going to but the bullet and get an X570 :/


Well if it is working with the 1700x without an issue then I doubt that it is the board giving you issues. When I had my second C7H fail on me, mostly due to my own doing I decided to go with a X570 board, but due to pricing here in South Africa I ended up getting the MSI Meg X570 Ace which I am pretty happy about, the one thing which made this board good for me is the Qpost LCD on the board. I just cannot see myself using a board without it anymore.


----------



## crakej

Richard Palmer said:


> Well that just sucks. I've put my old 1700x back in and both channels work just fine with that CPU. With 2501 I was able to get it running on 2 channels for about 10 minutes or so before BSOD and then C5. It's just a really odd issue, but if it doesn't get fixed before long I'm probably just going to but the bullet and get an X570 :/


Did your timings try using tRDWR and tRWRD on <auto>? This may help you.

2501 is NOT an easy bios to set up memory, either try the modded 0002 bios or 2703.

I see quite a few newbies here - could I request that you go to the Tools>Quick Links>Edit Signature (top of this screen) and put in the basic details of your systems - it makes it much easier for us to help you


----------



## CJMitsuki

Synoxia said:


> Insane as always, lol. How could you run BCLK oc on C7H? Mine has XFR disabled when trying BCLK over 100mhz.
> Also, how did you change PBO settings this time? I have the same CPU.



You can re-enable PBO when bclk OCing with Ryzen Master. Its pushes you into Manual OC when changing the bclk for some unknown reason. As for PBO you just have to enable it in the AMD CBS or AMD Overclocking section. Remember to turn Performance Enhancer to Default bc it will override the PBO settings with its own. The limits for the PPT 395 for the C7H, TDC is 255, and EDC is 255. Also, I wouldnt ever use the Aida/Geekbench bias anymore. Something changed in it and it will double your effective latency from 27ns to around 51ns according to SiSoft Sandra and Passmark Perf Test. The other Bias settings arent worth a crap either...Aggressive is unbootable and Gentle is well...too gentle. 



To everyone that worked on those bios mods, awesome job. Although AMDs most recent SMU update is too weak on the boosting for me. It does boost a higher single core clock by 25mhz but overall is a performance loss for my setup. The previous one is great for memory and cpu though, its the best bios to date with the 0002+ SMU Mod. The newer firmware seems to drop cpu performance if my memory settings arent a specific setup and the cpu doesnt have a specific voltage. I will keep testing newer mods but for now the 0002+ that Mtrai had uploaded worked best for my specific case. The newer SMU is amazing on the efficiency though.


----------



## oreonutz

Pietro said:


> I upgraded from 2700X to 3900X and have a sily question how overclock this cpu on crosshair vii manually? I set cpu voltage to 1.3V and regardless if it is multiplier 42.5, 42.75, 43, LL4 or LL5 under heavy load with CPU, FPU and Cache set on in AIDA in hwinfo I still see that those 12 VIDs are on up to 1.060V is how supposed to be and hwinfo is reading it wrong or not? Because in idling I also see up to 1.1V, but when it comes to stock those vids in aida are getting 1.325-1.35V. Are there any other settings I need to set unlock higher VID? Second question is in what app I should test 1900MHz Inifnity Fabric Stability, Karhu Ramtest is enough or this really doesn't stress inifnity, but only I/O die where memory controller is and sticks itself?


If you set Vcore Manually in UEFI, IGNORE the VID reading COMPLETELY. VID is only an Identifier, NOT a Voltage. It is only used when Voltage is set to Auto or Offset in the UEFI. As soon as your VCore is set manually in UEFI VID has absolutely NO EFFECT and should be completely ignored. The Voltage you should be looking at is "SVI2 TFN" in HWinfo. Even when Using or Offset Voltage you should ALWAYS be looking at SVI12 TFN regardless, as it is the ACTUAL voltage your CPU is receiving, and therefore is the relevant Voltage you should be concerned with. VID IS ONLY a Value in Voltage that the CPU is Requesting from the VRM, so thats all the number is, a Request from the CPU to the VRM asking for an amount of Voltage. The actual Voltage the CPU receives is based on a number of variables like Vdroop, LLC, ETC, which is why you want to pay attention to an Actual Voltage Readout, and in this case SVI2 TFN is the most accurate. Hope that helps clarify that for you.

Both Karhu and Your Normal Stability Tests like Y-Cruncher, AIDA64, and Blender, (Or whatever Stability test you are comfortable with using) will let you know if you are stable. Karhu will let you know if your Memory is stable at this IF Clock, Your other normal Stability Tests will let you know if Your CPU is stable at your new IF Clock.

The IF Clock effects more then just the RAM, but the entire System, which is why you need to test stability of both RAM and the CPU. Hope this helps.


----------



## mtrai

CJMitsuki said:


> You can re-enable PBO when bclk OCing with Ryzen Master. Its pushes you into Manual OC when changing the bclk for some unknown reason. As for PBO you just have to enable it in the AMD CBS or AMD Overclocking section. Remember to turn Performance Enhancer to Default bc it will override the PBO settings with its own. The limits for the PPT 395 for the C7H, TDC is 255, and EDC is 255. Also, I wouldnt ever use the Aida/Geekbench bias anymore. Something changed in it and it will double your effective latency from 27ns to around 51ns according to SiSoft Sandra and Passmark Perf Test. The other Bias settings arent worth a crap either...Aggressive is unbootable and Gentle is well...too gentle.
> 
> 
> 
> To everyone that worked on those bios mods, awesome job. Although AMDs most recent SMU update is too weak on the boosting for me. It does boost a higher single core clock by 25mhz but overall is a performance loss for my setup. The previous one is great for memory and cpu though, its the best bios to date with the 0002+ SMU Mod. The newer firmware seems to drop cpu performance if my memory settings arent a specific setup and the cpu doesnt have a specific voltage. I will keep testing newer mods but for now the 0002+ that Mtrai had uploaded worked best for my specific case. The newer SMU is amazing on the efficiency though.


I am working a new one based just on the stilt so we can compare the wifi one is done...gonna start on the non wifi shortly after some more coffee. Incidentally I thought of a shorter way to get these out faster since the set up menus rarely change I can re-use the previous hex edited modules. Yesterday redoing the the C7HWIFI using this it only took me about an hour or so vs the about 6 hours with all the hex editing. 

I would of had it ready but the damn MS store would not work yesterday morning and eventually me trying to fix finally bonked my windows install and I had to reinstall it and pretty much everything else.

As for performance bias I with you now..these new ones are well just not worth it. And PE4 **** I am not sure what the hell it does now but makes the system unstable, and yess while I can boot with aggressive it will quickly crash in almost anything that stresses anything.

Lastly these new one to play with to see which performs better would of have been out earlier but I rake a sandbur across both my eyelids and for the last week have barely been able to keep my eyes open and look at my pc screen.

both abb and abba do require you to examine all your settings especially your ram settings...especially the end termination ones ie pro odt behaves differently just between the two. While you can use a previous bios settings CMO file from another 002 bios just keep in mind some of the ram timing settings will have to be looked at again. This is a common procedure that NEEDS to be done with any major changes in the bios such a SMU FW swap or bios version change.


----------



## mtrai

Here we go. New 0002 bios mod based just on The_Stilts 0002 SMU FW replacement this is for both the WIFI and Non-wifi, they are both in the download.

Some highlights and instructions as usual. I am not responsible for any damage to your system so use at your own risk which is pretty much nil due to flashback. But I still need to say it.

Pasting the read me contained within the zip as well. Note I have not yet actually tested the non-wifi version as I do not have that board.



> 09/15/2019
> 
> This mod is solely based on the Stilts 002 SMU FW update with bios options un-hidden for both previous Ryzen Gen (1000/2000) and Matisse (3000) CPUs.
> 
> Personal changes to defaults:
> 
> Mem Over Clock Fail Count is set 2 to help with mem overclock training.
> 
> PCIEx 16/8_1 mode is set to Gen 3 in both failsafe and optimal for stability with RX 5700 GPU this will have no effect on earlier gpus. Default is AUTO and would cause a number of issues.
> 
> ASUS GRID Install Service is now set to disable in both failsafe and optimal...who needs bloatware.
> 
> Install Instrutions:
> 
> Must use USB stick for Flash back.
> 
> Rename the correct bios you need WIFI or non WIFI to the correct flashback name.
> 
> Correct naming for non WIFI is C7H
> 
> Correct naming for WIFI is C7HWIFI
> 
> Tip for flashback: Flashback can be finicky on USB sticks that work, try more then one.
> 
> If you press the button and it only blinks 3 times and then goes solid it is not flashing either due to name not correct, or usb stick issue with flashback.
> 
> Thanks MTRAI


Note fan mode is not unhidden as it unhides other useless message but it is still in the read me notes.

Download link: https://drive.google.com/open?id=14xf1-SzYcoBfDTC7VgluvpSelbnubQr2


----------



## Synoxia

CJMitsuki said:


> You can re-enable PBO when bclk OCing with Ryzen Master. Its pushes you into Manual OC when changing the bclk for some unknown reason. As for PBO you just have to enable it in the AMD CBS or AMD Overclocking section. Remember to turn Performance Enhancer to Default bc it will override the PBO settings with its own. The limits for the PPT 395 for the C7H, TDC is 255, and EDC is 255. Also, I wouldnt ever use the Aida/Geekbench bias anymore. Something changed in it and it will double your effective latency from 27ns to around 51ns according to SiSoft Sandra and Passmark Perf Test. The other Bias settings arent worth a crap either...Aggressive is unbootable and Gentle is well...too gentle.
> 
> 
> 
> To everyone that worked on those bios mods, awesome job. Although AMDs most recent SMU update is too weak on the boosting for me. It does boost a higher single core clock by 25mhz but overall is a performance loss for my setup. The previous one is great for memory and cpu though, its the best bios to date with the 0002+ SMU Mod. The newer firmware seems to drop cpu performance if my memory settings arent a specific setup and the cpu doesnt have a specific voltage. I will keep testing newer mods but for now the 0002+ that Mtrai had uploaded worked best for my specific case. The newer SMU is amazing on the efficiency though.


I see, it was like this on gen 2 ryzen too but you could force it by enalbing "core performance boost" in the bios. I can confirm a small BCLK oc helps these cpu, i went from to 64.9 to 63.5 latency in AIDA like nothing with just 101 bclk... gave it an additional +20mhz just for the sake of seeing more of 4.44 ghz peaks and called it a deal. Now just need to retest the whole setup again i guess XD

EDIT: cjmitsuki, did you knew that you can enable AutoOC along with PBO in ryzen master? "Realistical single core boost" remains the same but as your running higher BCLK than me you can have higher "eye candy" peaks than me. Stock will use 44,5 multipler sometimes, so it's possible i can have a 4.5 peak effectively negating the reason to purchase a 3800x


----------



## Keith Myers

Pietro said:


> I upgraded from 2700X to 3900X and have a sily question how overclock this cpu on crosshair vii manually? I set cpu voltage to 1.3V and regardless if it is multiplier 42.5, 42.75, 43, LL4 or LL5 under heavy load with CPU, FPU and Cache set on in AIDA in hwinfo I still see that those 12 VIDs are on up to 1.060V is how supposed to be and hwinfo is reading it wrong or not? Because in idling I also see up to 1.1V, but when it comes to stock those vids in aida are getting 1.325-1.35V. Are there any other settings I need to set unlock higher VID? Second question is in what app I should test 1900MHz Inifnity Fabric Stability, Karhu Ramtest is enough or this really doesn't stress inifnity, but only I/O die where memory controller is and sticks itself?


You need BIOS 2703 minimum to get the VID's reported correctly for the 3900X.


----------



## speedgoat

you guys, you think you might have pushed the boost a wee bit too much maybe ? 

all good so far, on The Stilt's modded bios with 3800X, im not sure im seeing much lower temps but somehow i can run 3800C15 more reliably

Thank you!


----------



## nick name

speedgoat said:


> you guys, you think you might have pushed the boost a wee bit too much maybe ?
> 
> all good so far, on The Stilt's modded bios with 3800X, im not sure im seeing much lower temps but somehow i can run 3800C15 more reliably
> 
> Thank you!


Yeah, definitely some weird BCLK behavior going in that screenshot.


----------



## Synoxia

nick name said:


> Yeah, definitely some weird BCLK behavior going in that screenshot.


Mine? Just 101.2 BCLK, -0.03125 undervolt + PBO 355 255 255 and AutoOC 200mhz, whats weird?

EDIT: actually i think the guy who posted before you has a weird bclk behavior... from 50mhz min to 100mhz avg and 102.7 max... what?


----------



## speedgoat

i think it was just a HWiNFO bug guys.. i hope this didnt really happen


----------



## Synoxia

speedgoat said:


> i think it was just a HWiNFO bug guys.. i hope this didnt really happen


Yes ofcourse his is a hwinfo bug lol 5.2ghz... ours are real every ryzen 3k can have a small boost with BCLK


----------



## CharliesTheMan

crakej said:


> I see quite a few newbies here - could I request that you go to the Tools>Quick Links>Edit Signature (top of this screen) and put in the basic details of your systems - it makes it much easier for us to help you


Thanks, this actually reminded me to get my butt in gear and do it.


----------



## mtrai

@Synoxia Just for you ;-) I included Hpet in both the modded bios I uploaded today.


----------



## Y2BNE1

Maybe someone can help me out here, or share their experiences. I am trying to get 64GB of Crucial Ballistix Sport AT (BLS4K16G4D32AEST) working on my C7H WIFI mobo with 3800x. So far I've tried few different bioses with the following results:

Asus 2501:
- Able to run RAM @ 3400mhz @ cl14 with 1.38v (24hrs of prime95 and 24 hours of google stress test app without errors)
- Does not boost very high (4.35ghz or so)
- No issues booting/rebooting once ram vboot voltage is 1.37 or 1.38+
- Many bios menus/options are hidden

Asus 2703:
- not stable at DOCP, even with increased voltages to the ram/soc. I get random hangs (qcode F1/02/07) when cold booting or rebooting windows

0002-FI
- Basically same issues as Asus 2703
- Boost to 4.575ghz easily

So far 2501 is the most stable bios that works with my RAM. Would anyone happen to know if there are some default settings that are set in 2501 bios that I could replicate in 0002 to get my RAM working? Also is there a guide I could use to try to get latest AGESA into 2501 bios?


----------



## The Stilt

Y2BNE1 said:


> Maybe someone can help me out here, or share their experiences. I am trying to get 64GB of Crucial Ballistix Sport AT (BLS4K16G4D32AEST) working on my C7H WIFI mobo with 3800x. So far I've tried few different bioses with the following results:
> 
> Asus 2501:
> - Able to run RAM @ 3400mhz @ cl14 with 1.38v (24hrs of prime95 and 24 hours of google stress test app without errors)
> - Does not boost very high (4.35ghz or so)
> - No issues booting/rebooting once ram vboot voltage is 1.37 or 1.38+
> - Many bios menus/options are hidden
> 
> Asus 2703:
> - not stable at DOCP, even with increased voltages to the ram/soc. I get random hangs (qcode F1/02/07) when cold booting or rebooting windows
> 
> 0002-FI
> - Basically same issues as Asus 2703
> - Boost to 4.575ghz easily
> 
> So far 2501 is the most stable bios that works with my RAM. Would anyone happen to know if there are some default settings that are set in 2501 bios that I could replicate in 0002 to get my RAM working? Also is there a guide I could use to try to get latest AGESA into 2501 bios?


The PMU FW (IMC) has changed recently.
Probably could do a hybrid build, but I have to try few things first since the new PMU uses decryption keys whereas the old one didn't.


----------



## nick name

The Stilt said:


> The PMU FW (IMC) has changed recently.
> Probably could do a hybrid build, but I have to try few things first since the new PMU uses decryption keys whereas the old one didn't.


Would that only have an impact on Ryzen 3000 CPUs? Or was there a change for the Ryzen 2000 CPU IMC firmware too? Or am I just misunderstanding all of this?


----------



## The Stilt

nick name said:


> Would that only have an impact on Ryzen 3000 CPUs? Or was there a change for the Ryzen 2000 CPU IMC firmware too? Or am I just misunderstanding all of this?


No.
ZP PMU FW has been the same since AGESA 1.0.0.6 (PinnaclePi) bios, build 1103.


----------



## nick name

The Stilt said:


> No.
> ZP PMU FW has been the same since AGESA 1.0.0.6 (PinnaclePi) bios, build 1103.


Sigh. Intellectually, I knew that. But the bit of me that buys lotto tickets still had his fingers crossed.


----------



## boatmurder

Y2BNE1 said:


> C7H WIFI 2703 bios with 3800X and 64GB of RAM


my recent experience https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-951.html#post28125516
tl/dr turn of DOCP (reset to defaults to be sure), manually set timings through AMD overclocking menu instead of extreme tweaker, manually set DRAM and FCLK frequency and DRAM voltage.

i still get good boosting behavior. Single threaded tasks like cinebench 1T or Dwarf Fortress worldgen will switch between cores and hit 4.45GHz on all of them. Cinebench MT runs at 4.275GHz, prime95 dynamically changes from around 4.325 to 4.125 depending on the specific test. (it's fun to watch voltages go down and current go up / vice versa). * 
I'm planning to write a simple graph to track frequency over time, atm i'm just tracking frequency by watching a report of _current_ frequency from "watch -n 0.5 cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpufreq/scaling_cur_freq" terminal output, lol. Geekbench report says there ought to be a few 4.475 moments in there at least.

* these are all stock without pbo, increased frequency limit or anything else. 
your mileage will vary here. I've got an average or slightly below average 3800X for clocks according to the silicon lottery stats.


----------



## Y2BNE1

The Stilt said:


> The PMU FW (IMC) has changed recently.
> Probably could do a hybrid build, but I have to try few things first since the new PMU uses decryption keys whereas the old one didn't.


Would this mean that newer bios (2703) has PMU Firmware that does not work well with my ram? FYI, if i simply remove 2 sticks (down to 32GB) everything works without any issues.



boatmurder said:


> my recent experience https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-951.html#post28125516
> tl/dr turn of DOCP (reset to defaults to be sure), manually set timings through AMD overclocking menu instead of extreme tweaker, manually set DRAM and FCLK frequency and DRAM voltage.
> 
> i still get good boosting behavior. Single threaded tasks like cinebench 1T or Dwarf Fortress worldgen will switch between cores and hit 4.45GHz on all of them. Cinebench MT runs at 4.275GHz, prime95 dynamically changes from around 4.325 to 4.125 depending on the specific test. (it's fun to watch voltages go down and current go up / vice versa). *
> I'm planning to write a simple graph to track frequency over time, atm i'm just tracking frequency by watching a report of _current_ frequency from "watch -n 0.5 cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpufreq/scaling_cur_freq" terminal output, lol. Geekbench report says there ought to be a few 4.475 moments in there at least.
> 
> 
> * your mileage will vary here. I've got an average or slightly below average 3800X for clocks according to the silicon lottery stats.


Just tried that, and does not seem to help in my case with my random freezes/qcodes. I don't actually have problem booting OS, but overall 2703 or 0002-FI has much more random freezes and crashes when compared to 2501 BIOS. 

For me, to reliably show issues:

1. Boot OS and then restart, BIOS would usually get stuck on 1F code, and to get back to normal I just need to reset the box. 
2. Start prime95 Large FFTs and windows usually crashes within few minutes (video just disappears, but it appears that whatever operation was started continues to run)

None of these are issues when I use 2501 bios.


----------



## xeizo

I've had no crashes with 0002M-FIE, but boost is worse, it looks like 50MHz lower overall on every core compared to 0002+. Or 2501 which has the same SMU.

But benchmark scores are overall the same or sometimes better, single core looks to have improved some.

The bios is hard locked at 145W power and 98A current no matter what settings, only way to improve scores is to lower temps. Or turn to manual OC of course.

The 5220 Beta for the Prime-boards which is a full ABBA-bios boosts way better than this SMU-modded bios, so there is hope for the next official bios.


----------



## Reikoji

speedgoat said:


> you guys, you think you might have pushed the boost a wee bit too much maybe ?
> 
> all good so far, on The Stilt's modded bios with 3800X, im not sure im seeing much lower temps but somehow i can run 3800C15 more reliably
> 
> Thank you!


Ryzen 5ghz confirmed !


----------



## Pietro

xeizo said:


> I've had no crashes with 0002M-FIE, but boost is worse, it looks like 50MHz lower overall on every core compared to 0002+. Or 2501 which has the same SMU.
> 
> But benchmark scores are overall the same or sometimes better, single core looks to have improved some.
> 
> The bios is hard locked at 145W power and 98A current no matter what settings, only way to improve scores is to lower temps. Or turn to manual OC of course.
> 
> The 5220 Beta for the Prime-boards which is a full ABBA-bios boosts way better than this SMU-modded bios, so there is hope for the next official bios.


I have crashes on this bios and 2703 too on ram and fclk set to 3800MHz, it can run for long in prime, cinbench and karhu ram test for 3 hours, but as soon I will test cinebench in single core mode it crashes. The same situation is in bios with manual OC to 4.2GHz allcore regardless of voltage which freezes in bios, but can run in prime. The other things are those cold boots. I didn't test it on 2501 yet, but compared to my new 3900X, 2700X was rock solid in both manual OC and PBO with rams set to 3600CL14(I have 2x16GB micron edies) and I never had to use clear cmos button, sometimes even to boot.


----------



## Reikoji

Were Precision boost overdrive wattage and current limits manually adjustable the same way before Zen 2 launched for Zen +?


----------



## xeizo

Reikoji said:


> Were Precision boost overdrive wattage and current limits manually adjustable the same way before Zen 2 launched for Zen +?


No, there are a lot less settings if you pop in a Zen+


----------



## AmxdPt

Is there any news about the new 1.0.0.3 ABBA for the Crosshair 7 hero? Not even a beta?


----------



## Pietro

Pietro said:


> I have crashes on this bios and 2703 too on ram and fclk set to 3800MHz, it can run for long in prime, cinbench and karhu ram test for 3 hours, but as soon I will test cinebench in single core mode it crashes. The same situation is in bios with manual OC to 4.2GHz allcore regardless of voltage which freezes in bios, but can run in prime. The other things are those cold boots. I didn't test it on 2501 yet, but compared to my new 3900X, 2700X was rock solid in both manual OC and PBO with rams set to 3600CL14(I have 2x16GB micron edies) and I never had to use clear cmos button, sometimes even to boot.


Tested 2501 the same behaviour. I'm really not happy that I can't do 1900MHz on FCLK with 3900X which supposed to be higher binned chip and when it is everything fine in stress test unless one single thread is loaded a bit heavier on stock. Ram is stable since I was testing it 

For those that have 2x16GB or 4x8GB what are your settings to get FCLK to work on 1900MHz?
SOC 1.10625V tried higher up to 1.125V, but no change, LLC 5.
CLDO VDDG 1.050V so max Stilt wrote tested 1.075V still froze in bios.
CLDO VDDP 1.050V
Any sugestions hot to get it work again on 1900 inifnity?

RAM is stable on both 3733MHz and 3800MHz in 1:1:1, tested 5000% in karhu software, almost the same timings and I can't lower on 3733MHz than what I have on 3800MHz.


----------



## CCoR

mtrai said:


> Here we go. New 0002 bios mod based just on The_Stilts 0002 SMU FW replacement this is for both the WIFI and Non-wifi, they are both in the download.
> 
> Some highlights and instructions as usual. I am not responsible for any damage to your system so use at your own risk which is pretty much nil due to flashback. But I still need to say it.
> 
> Pasting the read me contained within the zip as well. Note I have not yet actually tested the non-wifi version as I do not have that board.
> 
> 
> 
> Note fan mode is not unhidden as it unhides other useless message but it is still in the read me notes.
> 
> Download link: https://drive.google.com/open?id=14xf1-SzYcoBfDTC7VgluvpSelbnubQr2



Just tried flashing but it goes through the usual mult long blinks like it usually does as if it did succuessfully flash but after the process finishes, it doesnt flash the proper modded bios. Verified this by noticing that the asus grid install and mem over clock fail count aren't modified from their usual defaults.

Can anybody else verify that it's not just me? My back up USB drive went missing, so I haven't tired another drive yet. Stilts bios flashes fine


----------



## AvengedRobix

Pietro said:


> Tested 2501 the same behaviour. I'm really not happy that I can't do 1900MHz on FCLK with 3900X which supposed to be higher binned chip and when it is everything fine in stress test unless one single thread is loaded a bit heavier on stock. Ram is stable since I was testing it
> 
> 
> 
> For those that have 2x16GB or 4x8GB what are your settings to get FCLK to work on 1900MHz?
> 
> SOC 1.10625V tried higher up to 1.125V, but no change, LLC 5.
> 
> CLDO VDDG 1.050V so max Stilt wrote tested 1.075V still froze in bios.
> 
> CLDO VDDP 1.050V
> 
> Any sugestions hot to get it work again on 1900 inifnity?
> 
> 
> 
> RAM is stable on both 3733MHz and 3800MHz in 1:1:1, tested 5000% in karhu software, almost the same timings and I can't lower on 3733MHz than what I have on 3800MHz.


4x8.. 3800cl15 fclk 1900.. soc V 1.075 

Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A6013 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## netman

AmxdPt said:


> Is there any news about the new 1.0.0.3 ABBA for the Crosshair 7 hero? Not even a beta?


sadly that is typical Asus - its a shame how long we always have to wait for Bioses with new Agesa Versions for the Top X470 Mobo, and i am not even thinking of an official bios but even a beta version is still not available. And still i would not complain if the bioses we get after such a long waiting time would run smooth and without problems, but sadly its exact the other way around - wait long time and then get bioses full of new bugs

For me asus bios support is dead - and if there wasn't this great community here with a few guys that use their spare free time to give us great modded bioses with the new updates i would already have got rid of my ch7. 

But one thing for me is clear - the ch7 was my first Asus Mobo after a long time and it will for sure be my last one also in a long time


----------



## darkage

netman said:


> sadly that is typical Asus - its a shame how long we always have to wait for Bioses with new Agesa Versions for the Top X470 Mobo, and i am not even thinking of an official bios but even a beta version is still not available. And still i would not complain if the bioses we get after such a long waiting time would run smooth and without problems, but sadly its exact the other way around - wait long time and then get bioses full of new bugs
> 
> For me asus bios support is dead - and if there wasn't this great community here with a few guys that use their spare free time to give us great modded bioses with the new updates i would already have got rid of my ch7.
> 
> But one thing for me is clear - the ch7 was my first Asus Mobo after a long time and it will for sure be my last one also in a long time


are the other brands allready with new bios? are they working? up to 3 weeks AMD told, its AMD fault AGESA code not ROG


----------



## xeizo

darkage said:


> are the other brands allready with new bios? are they working? up to 3 weeks AMD told, its AMD fault AGESA code not ROG


MSI and Biostar has no new bioses for any board. Asus, Gigabyte and Asrock already has ABBA for all X570 models. No one has ABBA for X470/B450. Asus isn't worst, obviously.

Prime X470/X370-Pro at least has unofficial Betas of ABBA, works great btw.


----------



## netman

you guys are right there seems to be no x470/370/b450/b350 ABBA Bioses so far but i am curious what Brands will at least have beta or even final bioses for most of their x370/x470 and also B350/450 Boards out in 1-2 weeks and if we have at least a official beta for our ch7 in that period of time  

just remember agesa 1.0.0.3 the ch7 was one of the last boards to get the new bios (i think it was 2406 0n 07-05-19) and even after this long time for asus to test and tweak the bios it was full of bugs (fans, some mice and keyboards not working) and it lastet another 2 Weeks till we got an official new bios from asus that fixed this bugs 

so for me asus is really worst regarding bios support ...


----------



## Axaion

Maybe Asus will use some of the time on letting US control how fans should ramp up, and letting US decide if we want spread spectrum and HPET or not.

Seeing as theyre entirely willing to let us smash in voltages and other stuff that will literally fry stuff, that -shouldnt- be a hard ask.

Shrug, who am i kidding, theyll keep ignoring our pleas for such things.


----------



## netman

@axiaon 
and that is the next reason why i really some sort of hate the asus bios "support" meanwhile

without the great community here the whole situation would really be a pain in the ass


----------



## mtrai

CCoR said:


> Just tried flashing but it goes through the usual mult long blinks like it usually does as if it did succuessfully flash but after the process finishes, it doesnt flash the proper modded bios. Verified this by noticing that the asus grid install and mem over clock fail count aren't modified from their usual defaults.
> 
> Can anybody else verify that it's not just me? My back up USB drive went missing, so I haven't tired another drive yet. Stilts bios flashes fine


Are you on the non wifi? I cannot test that one. I know the wifi works fine as I am using it. Checking it now on the non wifi. Also it can take up to 15 minutes to flash and the blue flashback light should be blinking the entire time. Double checking everything Mem over fail shjould actually show 2 forgot how that works.. with settings it sets it what I set it to then -1 however asus grid should show disabled. I am seeing that in the my modded bios. Thanks for the heads up. 

I re uploaded it however no changes were made to the non wifi..notice a small QOL in the wifi one that needed correcting. I did note that my own WIFI had a mistake with the ASUS grid service to enable which I corrected. I did not notice this since I use a saved .cmo bios settings and load it after flashing however the non wifi was correctly disabled. I cannot test the non wifi anymore since we can no longer cross flash.

Please keep in mind these are hundreds of changes I have to make and I am only human. I do my best.

Asking a friend to double check the non wifi to make sure it flashes.


----------



## Pietro

AvengedRobix said:


> 4x8.. 3800cl15 fclk 1900.. soc V 1.075


What kind of CLDO VDDG are you using?



AmxdPt said:


> Is there any news about the new 1.0.0.3 ABBA for the Crosshair 7 hero? Not even a beta?


Some said that this week, but we will see.


----------



## mtrai

Axaion said:


> Maybe Asus will use some of the time on letting US control how fans should ramp up, and letting US decide if we want spread spectrum and HPET or not.
> 
> Seeing as theyre entirely willing to let us smash in voltages and other stuff that will literally fry stuff, that -shouldnt- be a hard ask.
> 
> Shrug, who am i kidding, theyll keep ignoring our pleas for such things.


It is not matter of them letting US know...but actually exposing all the fan controls which controls everything you are talking about. All this CRAP is already in the bios they just freaking (not the word I would actually use)HIDE IT. That is one things my bios shows. Yes you can get fine control of all your onboard fans with the options they have hidden.

I have previously posted albums with all the fan controls we could have from ASUS...but instead we have to get them from users like me. Anyhow I cannot find the imgur album link for it at the moment but not only can you control ramp up and down time, but rpm ramp up etc, as well as you can tell a fan header which onboard sensor to use for fan speed and a number of other things...including fan stop. Here are some examples from the C6H but the options are the same on the C7H and C8H as well as every other ASUS bios I have looked at.

https://i.imgur.com/FMBPLcV.png

https://i.imgur.com/t9SNFDx.png

[Imgur](https://i.imgur.com/BxLlLFM.png)

https://i.imgur.com/HrY6KhT.png


----------



## AvengedRobix

Pietro said:


> What kind of CLDO VDDG are you using?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some said that this week, but we will see.


0.950

Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A6013 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## CCoR

mtrai said:


> Are you on the non wifi? I cannot test that one. I know the wifi works fine as I am using it. Checking it now on the non wifi. Also it can take up to 15 minutes to flash and the blue flashback light should be blinking the entire time. Double checking everything Mem over fail shjould actually show 2 forgot how that works.. with settings it sets it what I set it to then -1 however asus grid should show disabled. I am seeing that in the my modded bios. Thanks for the heads up.
> 
> I re uploaded it however no changes were made to the non wifi..notice a small QOL in the wifi one that needed correcting. I did note that my own WIFI had a mistake with the ASUS grid service to enable which I corrected. I did not notice this since I use a saved .cmo bios settings and load it after flashing however the non wifi was correctly disabled. I cannot test the non wifi anymore since we can no longer cross flash.
> 
> Please keep in mind these are hundreds of changes I have to make and I am only human. I do my best.
> 
> Asking a friend to double check the non wifi to make sure it flashes.


Thanks for the speedy reply, yes, I'm on the wifi version. I've reflashed many times, the flashing process goes through as if its working but when I load bios it seems like some of the changes that I was looking forward to such as hpet are missing. Besides the asus grid option and hpet, what else can I look for that would be a recent change to your most current iteration of c7hwifi?

Anyways no biggie, at least we got zen boosting better now


----------



## mtrai

CCoR said:


> Thanks for the speedy reply, yes, I'm on the wifi version. I've reflashed many times, the flashing process goes through as if its working but when I load bios it seems like some of the changes that I was looking forward to such as hpet are missing. Besides the asus grid option and hpet, what else can I look for that would be a recent change to your most current iteration of c7hwifi?
> 
> Anyways no biggie, at least we got zen boosting better now


There is an issue betweem the 1000/2000 ryzen and Matisse 3000 in getting options to show. While things shows for the 1000/2000 I have to hex edit those same things for ryzen 3000 to make them show....since I do have a 3000 it makes it hard.. I do this but it makes it hard for me to see. Let me send you my c7h wifi bios it should be the same but I could of made of mistake and see.


----------



## viilutaja

Can somebody answer If I should go with Crosshair VII Hero or Crosshair VI Hero when using 3200CL14 FlareX memory (currently 2x8Gb, but want to buy an extra 2x8GB kit).
I have seen that this FlareX kit can do 3733Mhz on Crosshair VI motherboard, but I am not sure what kind of speeds i will get with 4 sticks. Is Crosshair VII board better with 4x sticks with 3400+ Mhz?
And I plan to pair the board with 3900X.
Why I am asking is the price difference of the boards. I could get brand new CH VI with around 107 euros. And the CH VII is around 260 euros. That is quite the difference.


----------



## Pietro

viilutaja said:


> Can somebody answer If I should go with Crosshair VII Hero or Crosshair VI Hero when using 3200CL14 FlareX memory (currently 2x8Gb, but want to buy an extra 2x8GB kit).
> I have seen that this FlareX kit can do 3733Mhz on Crosshair VI motherboard, but I am not sure what kind of speeds i will get with 4 sticks. Is Crosshair VII board better with 4x sticks with 3400+ Mhz?
> And I plan to pair the board with 3900X.
> Why I am asking is the price difference of the boards. I could get brand new CH VI with around 107 euros. And the CH VII is around 260 euros. That is quite the difference.


For that price VI is no brainer and it has t-topology ram chain so on paper it is better for 4 sticks. Regarding speed it depends it probably can do 3600 higher speeds also depends on what your cpu can do infinity fabric for example I have 2x16GB dual rank micron edies(and Stilt said that people seem to get it better on 4x8GB single stics than 2x16GB), ram is stable in karhu ram tester and others on 3800MHz CL16, but cpu isn't in full stress tests, especially under single thream 100% load on stock, tested 3 different bioses so it is probably inifnity, I have VII. I saw few people doing 3733, 3800 CL16 on 4x16GB micron e-dies and samsungs b-dies, it is more down to both ram sticks quality and 3900X. Short answer you should go for VI, because it is cheaper and cpu bin matters now more.


----------



## viilutaja

Pietro said:


> For that price VI is no brainer and it has t-topology ram chain so on paper it is better for 4 sticks. Regarding speed it depends it probably can do 3600 higher speeds also depends on what your cpu can do infinity fabric for example I have 2x16GB dual rank micron edies(and Stilt said that people seem to get it better on 4x8GB single stics than 2x16GB), ram is stable in karhu ram tester and others on 3800MHz CL16, but cpu isn't in full stress tests, especially under single thream 100% load on stock, tested 3 different bioses so it is probably inifnity, I have VII. I saw few people doing 3733, 3800 CL16 on 4x16GB micron e-dies and samsungs b-dies, it is more down to both ram sticks quality and 3900X. Short answer you should go for VI, because it is cheaper and cpu bin matters now more.


Thanks for clarifying. The price difference is way too big, I can save the money for big Navi card that comes later in this year.


----------



## CCoR

mtrai said:


> There is an issue betweem the 1000/2000 ryzen and Matisse 3000 in getting options to show. While things shows for the 1000/2000 I have to hex edit those same things for ryzen 3000 to make them show....since I do have a 3000 it makes it hard.. I do this but it makes it hard for me to see. Let me send you my c7h wifi bios it should be the same but I could of made of mistake and see.


Ok sweet, ready when you are!


----------



## chakku

Seems like 2801 BIOS is out with ABBA?

https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...VII-HERO/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-2801.zip
https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-2801.zip


----------



## crakej

chakku said:


> Seems like 2801 BIOS is out with ABBA?
> 
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...VII-HERO/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-2801.zip
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-2801.zip


Nice find! Testing now....


----------



## crakej

@The Stilt How do I check which PMU this bios is using?

It's got the 'correct' SMU, but my ram OC from 0002E fails. I booted to desktop, loaded CB15, hit run and it crashed.

Machine went into an endless loop, unable to boot. I'd get as far as the beep, code 27>AA like normal, then just goes back to 14/15 restarting the process.

Had to hit CLR/CMOS.

Will try again in a while, but it's not encouraging! If it's a different PMU then maybe we need to re-tune memory?

EDIT: *my OC profile was corrupt* - all working fine now. Now for testing.


----------



## neikosr0x

crakej said:


> @The Stilt How do I check which PMU this bios is using?
> 
> It's got the 'correct' SMU, but my ram OC from 0002E fails. I booted to desktop, loaded CB15, hit run and it crashed.
> 
> Machine went into an endless loop, unable to boot. I'd get as far as the beep, code 27>AA like normal, then just goes back to 14/15 restarting the process.
> 
> Had to hit CLR/CMOS.
> 
> Will try again in a while, but it's not encouraging! If it's a different PMU then maybe we need to re-tune memory?


Bro is your CPU boosting to 4.6 at all when using 3800mhz ram? mine doesn't go past 4.55ghz


----------



## crakej

neikosr0x said:


> Bro is your CPU boosting to 4.6 at all when using 3800mhz ram? mine doesn't go past 4.55ghz


You mean with bios 2801? On 2801 I haven't seen any boosts to 4.6 at default settings so far. Max has been 4.55GHz

I'm just about to try my profile from 0002 again with 3733CL14 PE3 which was boosting properly to 4.6, but it failed when I tried earlier...

I can't boot 3800:1900 on prev bios, not tried on this one, but it's never worked well for me


----------



## neikosr0x

crakej said:


> You mean with bios 2801? On 2801 I haven't seen any boosts to 4.6 at default settings so far. Max has been 4.55GHz
> 
> I'm just about to try my profile from 0002 again with 3733CL14 PE3 which was boosting properly to 4.6, but it failed when I tried earlier...
> 
> I can't boot 3800:1900 on prev bios, not tried on this one, but it's never worked well for me


oh for me is not a problem boot at 3800 and it works very stable, but the clocks won't go pass 4.55ghz. PE3 works better than before but still CPU not going over 4.55 i think is to the ram pushing the CPU too hard. or lack in some voltage for the cpu controller. any guess?


----------



## crakej

neikosr0x said:


> oh for me is not a problem boot at 3800 and it works very stable, but the clocks won't go pass 4.55ghz. PE3 works better than before but still CPU not going over 4.55 i think is to the ram pushing the CPU too hard. or lack in some voltage for the cpu controller. any guess?


I just found out my profile was corrupt so that's why I had re-boots. Much better now I put new profile in manually!

With my OC, I'm getting occasional boosts to 4.6, but v light load. PE3 does seem to be holding cores up to 4.2ACB for longer.

This is my first test though!


----------



## neikosr0x

crakej said:


> I just found out my profile was corrupt so that's why I had re-boots. Much better now I put new profile in manually!
> 
> With my OC, I'm getting occasional boosts to 4.6, but v light load. PE3 does seem to be holding cores up to 4.2ACB for longer.
> 
> This is my first test though!


i will clock my RAM back to 3733 and see if the CPU boost to 4.6ghz on the 0002+ bios i was getting 4.625ghz easily but with this one still nothing.


----------



## crakej

neikosr0x said:


> i will clock my RAM back to 3733 and see if the CPU boost to 4.6ghz on the 0002+ bios i was getting 4.625ghz easily but with this one still nothing.


I'd agree it doesn't seem so good on this bios. It's not bad, but you can see it's not quite performance of 0002E. It could be many reasons.

Ambient is a degree or 2 higher here so I don't think it's that. It's just not getting to 4.6 as easily as 0002E was. I had to wait quite a while to see 4.6 appearing at all.

It will be interesting to find out from The Stilt if it has most up to date PMU...


----------



## mtrai

C7H and C7H WIFI bios 2801 Pretty sure this will be the official full ABBA bios for us. As always takes a long time to actually appear on the support webpages.

https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...VII-HERO/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-2801.zip

https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-2801.zip


Spoiler for untruncated links.



Spoiler



C7H and C7H WIFI bios 2801

https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...VII-HERO/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-2801.zip

https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-2801.zip


----------



## crakej

On 2801 if memory training fails with code F9 and 1 long, 2 short beeps, 3 (or however many you set it to in bios) times you would expect Safe mode to load.

It does not. Instead of getting the screen saying 'Safe Mode....press F1...' to enter the bios, you have to press or it will boot, with default settings, which takes 3 'restarts' (ages) instead of Just doing 1 restart to Safe Mode. It keeps settings in the <Advanced Tweaker> tab (even though it boots with default settings) and wipes anything in CBS or AMD OCing regardless of your settings telling it not to.

I'm getting a LOT of blue screens with the exact settings I was using from 0002E (while running the Aida tests), but still experimenting.

Although these files are on the main server from 7.30am this morning I'm not seeing it propagating to regional sites still - anyone found 2801 in their region yet?

EDIT: Loading and booting with defaults, and then re-loading my profile seems to have settled things down... (still testing!)


----------



## nick name

Welp, I'm gonna see if 2801 also gimps my 2700X. 

Wish I knew why.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Welp, I'm gonna see if 2801 also gimps my 2700X.
> 
> Wish I knew why.


Ha! 

Because we just can't leave it alone!


----------



## nick name

nick name said:


> Welp, I'm gonna see if 2801 also gimps my 2700X.
> 
> Wish I knew why.


Welp, 2801 gimps the 2700X just like the other BIOS versions after 2606 have.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Welp, 2801 gimps the 2700X just like the other BIOS versions after 2606 have.


Oh man! That sucks!

No chance of a new cpu for a present?


----------



## minal

nick name said:


> Welp, 2801 gimps the 2700X just like the other BIOS versions after 2606 have.


Is there a consensus on what is the best BIOS version for the 2700X? 

I'm still on 2203 which is fine except it introduced that blank screen with cursor delay when booting compared to what I had previously. Additional fan controls from modified BIOS also sounds appealing, but I'm not tweaking anything right now so I've just let things be. People complaining about mouse problems in BIOS and then gimping 2000 series CPUs kept me from upgrading.


----------



## xeizo

Strange if 2000-series is Gimped in those bios versions, I also have a Gigabyte B450 with ABB bios on it. It performs as well as what I ever got out of C7H, no regression at all, if anything even faster. Can't see why ABB/ABBA should be worse on Asus.


----------



## nick name

minal said:


> Is there a consensus on what is the best BIOS version for the 2700X?
> 
> I'm still on 2203 which is fine except it introduced that blank screen with cursor delay when booting compared to what I had previously. Additional fan controls from modified BIOS also sounds appealing, but I'm not tweaking anything right now so I've just let things be. People complaining about mouse problems in BIOS and then gimping 2000 series CPUs kept me from upgrading.


I use Performance Enhancer 3 so if you're like me in that sense then I'd recommend 1201 if you want to avoid any fans problems. If you can avoid those fan problems with hardware mitigation then using 2501 or 2606 is fine. With 2606 you'll lose a lot of AMD CBS options though you may find you don't need them. 



xeizo said:


> Strange if 2000-series is Gimped in those bios versions, I also have a Gigabyte B450 with ABB bios on it. It performs as well as what I ever got out of C7H, no regression at all, if anything even faster. Can't see why ABB/ABBA should be worse on Asus.


Well I use Performance Enhancer 3 and haven't tested with regular PBO/XFR. I've read folks saying that regular PBO/XFR performs better with the newer BIOS versions.


----------



## zaubara

I wonder if 2801 finally fixes the fan issues, apart from the 0002 beta which seemed to help (only had a few hours of testing in).
Just flashed the 2801 on my Ryzen 2700x, and indeed the PBO seemed to have regressed massively a few releases ago.

But here's my guess: the PBO settings are just not applied correctly.
PPT TDC and EDC seem to work (at least they're shown in Ryzen Master), but with disabled Performance Enhancer (Default) or lvl 1 and 2 they don't change anything for me.
The other settings definitely do not work, regardless of the level - so setting PBO max OC to 200MHz does the same as 25MHz on lvl3 and above - nothing. I would've expected the max boost to decrease, but it doesn't. Scalar doesn't seem to change anything either.

On Performance Enhancer 3, things seem to be "Okay". Since the max PBO Mhz doesnt work, I need to limit EDC to 168, so the all core doesn't exceed 4250, otherwise it's crashtastic on heavy load. I think the chip could handle 4300 however, maybe more, especially on single core.
With LV3 LLC and -0.075V I can reach 4350 single and 4250 all core, stable-ish (quite untested, but booted to windows and prime stable for a few minutes now).
Memory only works up to 3466 at tight timings though, 3600+ won't work reliably even with super relaxed timings.
I was hoping the Flare X would clock higher (although that screams SOC to me).

One thing I would really Asus to do in regards to BIOS features is to extend the XFR/PBO, so single core can actually outpace the number on the box.
There's still no way to crank that up without manually punching numbers in, right?


----------



## Praetorr

2801 working pretty well for me thus far with a 3900X. Cleared CMOS prior to updating and updated using the BIOS flashback on the back of the board.

3600mhzCL14 RAM working fine, as it did in 002. Single threaded performance in CB20 up to 513, my highest yet (no PBO/AutoOC). Fastest core in said CB20 ran consistently at 4400mhz with occasional brief blips at 4425mhz. I haven't seen 4600mhz pop-up in HWiNFO, only 4550mhz, but that was true for me in early 1.0.0.2 AGESA BIOS as well.

Another plus, the fan smoothing options did nothing for me in 002, but in 2801 they appear to work. Setting my case fans to a 7.7 second ramp-up time definitely has helped smooth out Zen's penchant to constantly ramp your fans up and down endlessly.


----------



## ajlueke

Hello, 

Just looking for some quick information. I have been playing around with different overclock settings, and it doesn't seem like they do much on the 3900X. Running at stock with PBO disabled, gives me exactly the same single threaded scores as with PBO enabled at a +100MHz to Fmax. Multi threaded scores get a bit of a boost from removing the EDC limit, but then quickly max out as well.

I noticed, in the Stilt's post "Matisse, Strictly Technical" that he notes the Ryzen 3000 is, even at stock, are extremely voltage bound. The silicon "fitness monitoring feature" (FIT) simply won't let the CPUs boost higher. Is there any information from AMD on what this feature is exactly? A slide deck, white paper etc?

Most of the information I can find on Precision Boost 2 indicates that if PPT, TDC, EDC or Temp limits aren't met, then the processor will boost until it hits one of these or Fmax. When I add a +100Mhz to Fmax, my CPU is sub 60C in single threaded workloads, and PPT, TDC, EDC are not met. Yet, the CPU doesn't boost any higher or gain and performance over stock. I assume this is FIT at work, since my voltage stops at the same spot (1.48V or so). 

So why isn't this published? Is there any literature on it at all?


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Oh man! That sucks!
> 
> No chance of a new cpu for a present?


As of now I don't foresee getting a new CPU soon.


----------



## Pietro

mtrai said:


> C7H and C7H WIFI bios 2801 Pretty sure this will be the official full ABBA bios for us. As always takes a long time to actually appear on the support webpages.
> 
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...VII-HERO/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-2801.zip
> 
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-2801.zip
> 
> 
> Spoiler for untruncated links.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> C7H and C7H WIFI bios 2801
> 
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...VII-HERO/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-2801.zip
> 
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-2801.zip


Tested and big NO from me. System refuses to be stable with infinity set on 1866MHz which was perfectly fine with every other version they just refused to work stable with 1900MHz just like 2801 with 1866 because it behaves exactly the same, performance is also worse so I'm back to 0002M-FIE.


----------



## Synoxia

Pietro said:


> Tested and big NO from me. System refuses to be stable with infinity set on 1866MHz which was perfectly fine with every other version they just refused to work stable with 1900MHz just like 2801 with 1866 because it behaves exactly the same, performance is also worse so I'm back to 0002M-FIE.


Thank you @mtrai. for me is a big YES instead. 
Somehow, somewhat, proper 1.0.03ABBA improved the boost even more, with my 3700x i went from 4.300-4326 while playing AC odyssey to 4.326-4352 with spikes up to 4.400 (bclk oc). 
Also now i see my 3700x idling correctly to 2.8 and now it holds clocks more instead of jumping to 4/// and 3.6 costantly. This decreased fan harshness and now my system is finally quiet!

EDIT: also gaming is now noticeably smoother and this is not placebo, i'm talking as a guy that can't play without frametiming=monitorhz (only accomplished by using RTSS + FRTC in my case). Now if this has to do with new ram stick that does not suffer from random reboot when ragepunching desk or the bios itself, i dont know 



nick name said:


> As of now I don't foresee getting a new CPU soon.


Good choice. As of now we are all beta testers of this product, maybe an oxymoron but it seems even more betatesting than gen 1 ryzen lol. Wait few months until they fix major issues, shortages end, price drops, binning gets better and you will get the best cpu for your needs.

2700x users don't really need to upgrade, only needed if A: you need single core perf for old unoptimized games or B: you need more cores then you buy 3900-3950x


----------



## chakku

I didn't get to use 0002 as my motherboard was being RMA'd for 3 weeks but 2801 works well for me, big step up from 2501/2701/2703 and as mentioned about it feels very smooth. Booting is faster and idle voltages are actually right, getting around 1V when the CPU is idling at 2.8-3.1GHz, up to 1.48V when single core is boosting to 4.4GHz on 3700X.

Same stable 3733C16 dual rank memory OC is working as it did with previous versions, I may try for 3800/1900 again now that DRAM calc has been updated with some slightly different settings. (Last version I used was 1.6.0.3 and now it is 1.6.2).


----------



## Pietro

Synoxia said:


> Thank you @mtrai. for me is a big YES instead.
> 
> 
> 2700x users don't really need to upgrade, only needed if A: you need single core perf for old unoptimized games or B: you need more cores then you buy 3900-3950x


I did upgrade from 2700X to 3900X and in F1 2018 Australia 3 laps, heavy rain average number of FPS looked like that:
2700X manual OC 4.15GHz allcore ram - 3600CL14 - average 93 fps
2700X PE3 with minus offset of 60mV + BCLK, frequency in games 4225-4275MHz - average 96 fps
3900X stock, ram 3800CL16 - 96 fps
3900X CCX OC, ram 3800CL16 - 100 fps

So, yeah if you don't need extra cores and have 2700X you should wait until they will fix Zen2 and present Zen3 aka Zen2+ in 7 nm EUV, it simply not worth it.


----------



## nick name

Synoxia said:


> -snip-
> 
> 
> 
> Good choice. As of now we are all beta testers of this product, maybe an oxymoron but it seems even more betatesting than gen 1 ryzen lol. Wait few months until they fix major issues, shortages end, price drops, binning gets better and you will get the best cpu for your needs.
> 
> 2700x users don't really need to upgrade, only needed if A: you need single core perf for old unoptimized games or B: you need more cores then you buy 3900-3950x


None of those are my reason for not getting a new 3900X right now. My reason is: broke


----------



## minal

nick name said:


> I use Performance Enhancer 3 so if you're like me in that sense then I'd recommend 1201 if you want to avoid any fans problems. If you can avoid those fan problems with hardware mitigation then using 2501 or 2606 is fine. With 2606 you'll lose a lot of AMD CBS options though you may find you don't need them.
> 
> Well I use Performance Enhancer 3 and haven't tested with regular PBO/XFR. I've read folks saying that regular PBO/XFR performs better with the newer BIOS versions.





zaubara said:


> I wonder if 2801 finally fixes the fan issues, apart from the 0002 beta which seemed to help (only had a few hours of testing in).
> Just flashed the 2801 on my Ryzen 2700x, and indeed the PBO seemed to have regressed massively a few releases ago.
> 
> But here's my guess: the PBO settings are just not applied correctly.
> PPT TDC and EDC seem to work (at least they're shown in Ryzen Master), but with disabled Performance Enhancer (Default) or lvl 1 and 2 they don't change anything for me.
> The other settings definitely do not work, regardless of the level - so setting PBO max OC to 200MHz does the same as 25MHz on lvl3 and above - nothing. I would've expected the max boost to decrease, but it doesn't. Scalar doesn't seem to change anything either.
> 
> On Performance Enhancer 3, things seem to be "Okay". Since the max PBO Mhz doesnt work, I need to limit EDC to 168, so the all core doesn't exceed 4250, otherwise it's crashtastic on heavy load. I think the chip could handle 4300 however, maybe more, especially on single core.
> With LV3 LLC and -0.075V I can reach 4350 single and 4250 all core, stable-ish (quite untested, but booted to windows and prime stable for a few minutes now).
> Memory only works up to 3466 at tight timings though, 3600+ won't work reliably even with super relaxed timings.
> I was hoping the Flare X would clock higher (although that screams SOC to me).
> 
> One thing I would really Asus to do in regards to BIOS features is to extend the XFR/PBO, so single core can actually outpace the number on the box.
> There's still no way to crank that up without manually punching numbers in, right?


When did the fan issues start, and is the cause understood? I really don't want such hassles.

I'm not using PE (default) and just have PBO and CPB enabled. I also have a -68.75 mV Vcore offset. My focus is stability and silence rather than max performance.


----------



## Synoxia

Pietro said:


> I did upgrade from 2700X to 3900X and in F1 2018 Australia 3 laps, heavy rain average number of FPS looked like that:
> 2700X manual OC 4.15GHz allcore ram - 3600CL14 - average 93 fps
> 2700X PE3 with minus offset of 60mV + BCLK, frequency in games 4225-4275MHz - average 96 fps
> 3900X stock, ram 3800CL16 - 96 fps
> 3900X CCX OC, ram 3800CL16 - 100 fps
> 
> So, yeah if you don't need extra cores and have 2700X you should wait until they will fix Zen2 and present Zen3 aka Zen2+ in 7 nm EUV, it simply not worth it.


These will come handy in the long term for gaming but apart from that, you could stream or install something on CCD2. The best CPU for gaming is 3850x, 3900x has CCX latency with 4 core games (hello league of legends)

Where Zen2 really helps is in ST performance. League of legends, csgo, emulators for example. This if you only game ofcourse, if you do some rendering then 3900x is really good.


----------



## Keith Myers

I played around with 2801 this afternoon seeing what kinds of clocks I could get. I ran Geekbench4 and 5 benchmarks. When I had everything on Auto and Performance Enhancer 3 enabled, I managed to get within about 25Mhz of the max boost clock on my 3900X. So I guess that matches up with what AMD said to expect with the 1.0.0.3 ABBA AGESA.

"processor_frequency": {
"minimum": 3987,
"maximum": 4572,
"median": 4569,
"mean": 4563,
"stddev": 55.012630505762402,

https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/14646684


----------



## Keith Myers

> When did the fan issues start, and is the cause understood? I really don't want such hassles.


The fan issues started with the very first Combi BIOS for Ryzen 3000. Just now fixed in the official 2801 BIOS.


----------



## starrbuck

BIOS 2801 appears to work exactly the same (good) as 0002M-FIE with my 3700X and 3200MHz B-die OC'd to 3600MHz. No issues to report.


----------



## minal

Keith Myers said:


> The fan issues started with the very first Combi BIOS for Ryzen 3000.


Which version is that?


----------



## martinhal

How is the Ryzen 3000 performance on this board ? Is it worth going to X570 ?


----------



## nick name

minal said:


> Which version is that?


It's the first version starting with a 2 which I think was 2103.


----------



## chakku

chakku said:


> I didn't get to use 0002 as my motherboard was being RMA'd for 3 weeks but 2801 works well for me, big step up from 2501/2701/2703 and as mentioned about it feels very smooth. Booting is faster and idle voltages are actually right, getting around 1V when the CPU is idling at 2.8-3.1GHz, up to 1.48V when single core is boosting to 4.4GHz on 3700X.
> 
> Same stable 3733C16 dual rank memory OC is working as it did with previous versions, I may try for 3800/1900 again now that DRAM calc has been updated with some slightly different settings. (Last version I used was 1.6.0.3 and now it is 1.6.2).


To add to this: All previous BIOSes (didn't test 0002) did not boot a 3800/1900 no matter the settings/how loose the timings were.

I am now typing this from my PC fully running at 3800/1900 on DRAM Calc FAST timings, will do stability testing overnight. Even if not stable this is a huge improvement.










Seems my latency has gone up a fair bit for some reason though? I've checked on RM and it's definitely running coupled mode, 1:1 UCLK. Any ideas?



Spoiler



3733C16 from BIOS 2501:









3800C16 from BIOS 2801: (Very similar subtimings):


----------



## Keith Myers

chakku said:


> To add to this: All previous BIOSes (didn't test 0002) did not boot a 3800/1900 no matter the settings/how loose the timings were.
> 
> I am now typing this from my PC fully running at 3800/1900 on DRAM Calc FAST timings, will do stability testing overnight. Even if not stable this is a huge improvement.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seems my latency has gone up a fair bit for some reason though? I've checked on RM and it's definitely running coupled mode, 1:1 UCLK. Any ideas?
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 3733C16 from BIOS 2501:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3800C16 from BIOS 2801: (Very similar subtimings):


I saw a 10ns jump in idle latency from the previous 2703 BIOS to the 2801. Couldn't figure out why since the RAM timings were exactly the same for 3600/1800 CL14. Then noticed finally that when I reset to defaults and cleared the BIOS in prep for flashing the 2801 that I had not noticed that SVM was enabled which I normally have disabled. Disabled it and regained my latency from the 2703 BIOS and back to 66ns instead of 78ns. You might want to check that.


----------



## minal

nick name said:


> It's the first version starting with a 2 which I think was 2103.


Oh. Luckily I haven't had fan issues with 2203. Maybe I'll stay put a while longer and let the BIOS dust settle.


----------



## chakku

Keith Myers said:


> I saw a 10ns jump in idle latency from the previous 2703 BIOS to the 2801. Couldn't figure out why since the RAM timings were exactly the same for 3600/1800 CL14. Then noticed finally that when I reset to defaults and cleared the BIOS in prep for flashing the 2801 that I had not noticed that SVM was enabled which I normally have disabled. Disabled it and regained my latency from the 2703 BIOS and back to 66ns instead of 78ns. You might want to check that.


Hmm I double checked and SVM was definitely disabled. It's part of my profile to be set to Disabled so I would have been surprised if it reset somehow. Would have been nice if that were the fix.


----------



## crakej

chakku said:


> To add to this: All previous BIOSes (didn't test 0002) did not boot a 3800/1900 no matter the settings/how loose the timings were.
> 
> I am now typing this from my PC fully running at 3800/1900 on DRAM Calc FAST timings, will do stability testing overnight. Even if not stable this is a huge improvement.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seems my latency has gone up a fair bit for some reason though? I've checked on RM and it's definitely running coupled mode, 1:1 UCLK. Any ideas?
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 3733C16 from BIOS 2501:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3800C16 from BIOS 2801: (Very similar subtimings):


Nice!

Still no luck for me with 1900 FCLK - You put the settings in exactly as in the calculator? ProcODT etc? Did you set anything in <Advanced> tab? I suspect my 2nd CCD is just never going to be happy with it...


----------



## xeizo

chakku said:


> Hmm I double checked and SVM was definitely disabled. It's part of my profile to be set to Disabled so I would have been surprised if it reset somehow. Would have been nice if that were the fix.


I've had that latency jumping up on earlier bioses, setting uclk=memclk and the exact Infinity Fabric frequency under AMD CBS a couple of submenus down has always fixed it. I have fine latency with 2801.


----------



## mtrai

I am gonna start work on the C7H and C7h Wifi bios mods with 2801 today. Took the day off yesterday from that but ended up still not being able to game as I was chasing down a GPU driver issue which I could not reproduce.


----------



## Pietro

crakej said:


> Nice!
> 
> Still no luck for me with 1900 FCLK - You put the settings in exactly as in the calculator? ProcODT etc? Did you set anything in <Advanced> tab? I suspect my 2nd CCD is just never going to be happy with it...


You can try one from here - link


----------



## crakej

Pietro said:


> You can try one from here - link


Thanks! It's interesting to see what other users have had to do - there's plenty of stuff I can try from that  Rep+


----------



## CyborgD

Hello everyone, fairly new here but not entirely new to overclocking. First off, i want to say thanks to the efforts of the contributors of modded bios setups. These have helped me out a ton and I'm very grateful to you all.

Currently running a R7 3700X all settings stock atm with no issues such as bluescreens etc. HWinfo64 reports frequent jumps to the expected 4.4Ghz on some cores @ 1.48v being the highest i have seen the voltage bump up to. so I'm happy with the result. This is running the newly discovered 2801 Bios for the CH7 Hero non wifi variant, had decent clocks previously running the "CROSSHAIR VII HERO - 0002MFI" but this latest one seems to have more consistent results. CPU is cooled with a H100i Platinum.

So now the rambling is out of the way, i would like to see if anyone has any decent advice on overclocking my ram, its a pair of F4-3200C16-8GTZR. The bios seems to have a TON of options in regards to setting up timings with a few menus repeating themselves in different locations. I'm currently having no issues running them at the rated 16-18-18-38 1.35v as per official documentation. Does anyone have these? Have you managed some good timings to eek out better performance? I would love to find out.


----------



## mtrai

Modded 2801 C7H WIFI 

Gen 3 is preset for for the pcie 16/8 slot
Mem fail count is set to 3
Asus Grid Install is disabled.
Spread Spectrum is in the menus.
Full Fan Controls are unhidden
And so on same as my previous bios.
Remember you need to use flashback and rename the bios file for the wifi which C7HWIFI.cap
I loaded my 002 the stilts bios .cmo settings from a USB drive with no issues.

C7H WIFI Download Link: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1T0k1fo-iTCwIvpCVFDKHXbQfmHnZKeZn

C7H NON Wifi 2801 Download link: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1DOXvnDTZuNUoXGvRuaBlck-0rIKtJTet


----------



## Gigabytes

crakej said:


> Thanks! It's interesting to see what other users have had to do - there's plenty of stuff I can try from that  Rep+


You can try my settings to achieve a 1900 fclk, been running this configuration for months. Have another one in the experimental stage with individual core clocks and much lower voltages in some cases, but it is still not 100% stable and I don't get a lot of time to work on it so it's a long term project.

[2019/09/20 06:04:53]
Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
BCLK_Divider [Auto]
Performance Enhancer [Auto]
CPU Core Ratio [43.00]
Performance Bias [None]
Memory Frequency [DDR4-3800MHz]
FCLK Frequency [1900MHz]
Core Performance Boost [Disabled]
SMT Mode [Enabled]
TPU [Keep Current Settings]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
Max CPU Boost Clock Override [Auto]
Platform Thermal Throttle Limit [Auto]
Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto]
DRAM CAS# Latency [16]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [17]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [16]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [16]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [34]
Trc [50]
TrrdS [6]
TrrdL [8]
Tfaw [24]
TwtrS [5]
TwtrL [14]
Twr [14]
Trcpage [Auto]
TrdrdScl [4]
TwrwrScl [4]
Trfc [304]
Trfc2 [186]
Trfc4 [128]
Tcwl [16]
Trtp [8]
Trdwr [8]
Twrrd [3]
TwrwrSc [1]
TwrwrSd [7]
TwrwrDd [7]
TrdrdSc [1]
TrdrdSd [5]
TrdrdDd [5]
Tcke [1]
ProcODT [34.3 ohm]
Cmd2T [1T]
Gear Down Mode [Disabled]
Power Down Enable [Disabled]
RttNom [Rtt_Nom Disable]
RttWr [Dynamic ODT Off]
RttPark [RZQ/5]
MemAddrCmdSetup [0]
MemCsOdtSetup [0]
MemCkeSetup [0]
MemCadBusClkDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 4]
CPU Current Capability [120%]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Auto]
VRM Spread Spectrum [Disabled]
Active Frequency Mode [Disabled]
CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
CPU Power Phase Control [Extreme]
CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 4]
VDDSOC Current Capability [120%]
VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed VDDSOC Switching Frequency(KHz) [400]
VDDSOC Phase Control [Extreme]
DRAM Current Capability [100%]
DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
DRAM Switching Frequency [Auto]
DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.47500]
VTTDDR Voltage [0.73750]
VPP_MEM Voltage [2.50000]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
VDDP Voltage [0.90000]
1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
PLL reference voltage [Auto]
T Offset [Auto]
Sense MI Skew [Auto]
Sense MI Offset [Auto]
Promontory presence [Auto]
Clock Amplitude [Auto]
CLDO VDDP voltage [1050]
CPU Core Voltage [Manual mode]
- CPU Core Voltage Override [1.36250]
CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
- VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.10000]
DRAM Voltage [1.47500]
CLDO VDDG voltage [1.060]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
Firmware TPM [Disable]
Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
PSS Support [Auto]
SVM Mode [Disabled]
Onboard LED [Disabled]
Q-Code LED Function [Disabled after POST]
SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
SATA Mode [AHCI]
NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
SMART Self Test [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
HD Audio Controller [Disabled]
M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Disabled(X8 mode)]
PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [GEN 3]
PCIEX8/X4_2 Mode [GEN 3]
PCIEX4_3 Mode [GEN 2]
M.2_1 Link Mode [GEN 3]
SB Link Mode [GEN 3]
Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
When system is in working state [On]
When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [On]
Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
ErP Ready [Disabled]
Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
Power On By RTC [Disabled]
Network Stack [Disabled]
Device [WDC WD40EZRZ-00GXCB0]
Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
USB2.0 FlashDisk 1100 [Auto]
U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
U31G1_5 [Enabled]
U31G1_6 [Enabled]
U31G1_7 [Enabled]
U31G1_8 [Enabled]
U31G1_9 [Enabled]
U31G1_10 [Enabled]
USB11 [Enabled]
USB12 [Enabled]
USB13 [Enabled]
USB14 [Enabled]
USB15 [Enabled]
CPU Temperature [Monitor]
MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
PCH Temperature [Monitor]
T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
5V Voltage [Monitor]
12V Voltage [Monitor]
CPU Q-Fan Control [Auto]
CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [200 RPM]
CPU Fan Profile [Standard]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 3 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [Auto]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Source [CPU]
HAMP Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
HAMP Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
HAMP Fan Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
PSPP Policy [Auto]
Fast Boot [Enabled]
NVMe Support [Enabled]
Next Boot after AC Power Loss [Normal Boot]
AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
Boot Logo Display [Enabled]
POST Delay Time [3 sec]
Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
Launch CSM [Enabled]
Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
OS Type [Other OS]
Setup Animator [Disabled]
ASUS Grid Install Service [Enabled]
Load from Profile [1]
Profile Name [[email protected]]
Save to Profile [1]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
BCLK Frequency [Auto]
CPU Ratio [Auto]
DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A2]
Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
Custom Pstate0 [Auto]
CCD Control [Auto]
Core control [Auto]
SMT Control [Auto]
L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
Platform First Error Handling [Enabled]
Core Performance Boost [Auto]
Global C-state Control [Auto]
DRAM ECC Enable [Auto]
DRAM scrub time [Auto]
Poison scrubber control [Auto]
Redirect scrubber control [Auto]
Redirect scrubber limit [Auto]
NUMA nodes per socket [Auto]
Memory interleaving [Auto]
Memory interleaving size [Auto]
1TB remap [Auto]
DRAM map inversion [Auto]
ACPI SRAT L3 Cache As NUMA Domain [Auto]
ACPI SLIT Distance Control [Auto]
ACPI SLIT remote relative distance [Auto]
GMI encryption control [Auto]
xGMI encryption control [Auto]
CAKE CRC perf bounds Control [Auto]
4-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
3-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
Disable DF to external IP SyncFloodPropagation [Auto]
Disable DF sync flood propagation [Auto]
CC6 memory region encryption [Auto]
Memory Clear [Auto]
Overclock [Auto]
Power Down Enable [Auto]
Cmd2T [Auto]
Gear Down Mode [Auto]
CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
Data Poisoning [Auto]
DRAM Post Package Repair [Disable]
RCD Parity [Auto]
DRAM Address Command Parity Retry [Auto]
Write CRC Enable [Auto]
DRAM Write CRC Enable and Retry Limit [Auto]
Disable Memory Error Injection [True]
DRAM ECC Symbol Size [Auto]
DRAM UECC Retry [Auto]
TSME [Auto]
Data Scramble [Auto]
DFE Read Training [Auto]
FFE Write Training [Auto]
PMU Pattern Bits Control [Auto]
MR6VrefDQ Control [Auto]
CPU Vref Training Seed Control [Auto]
Chipselect Interleaving [Auto]
BankGroupSwap [Auto]
BankGroupSwapAlt [Auto]
Address Hash Bank [Auto]
Address Hash CS [Auto]
Address Hash Rm [Auto]
SPD Read Optimization [Enabled]
MBIST Enable [Disabled]
Pattern Select [PRBS]
Pattern Length [3]
Aggressor Channel [1 Aggressor Channel]
Aggressor Static Lane Control [Disabled]
Target Static Lane Control [Disabled]
Worst Case Margin Granularity [Per Chip Select]
Read Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
Read Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
Write Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
Write Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
IOMMU [Auto]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [Auto]
FCLK Frequency [Auto]
SOC OVERCLOCK VID [0]
UCLK DIV1 MODE [Auto]
VDDP Voltage Control [Auto]
VDDG Voltage Control [Auto]
SoC/Uncore OC Mode [Auto]
LN2 Mode [Auto]
ACS Enable [Auto]
PCIe Ten Bit Tag Support [Auto]
cTDP Control [Auto]
EfficiencyModeEn [Auto]
Package Power Limit Control [Auto]
APBDIS [Auto]
DF Cstates [Auto]
CPPC [Auto]
CPPC Preferred Cores [Auto]
BoostFmaxEn [Auto]
Early Link Speed [Auto]


----------



## Synoxia

Gigabytes said:


> You can try my settings to achieve a 1900 fclk, been running this configuration for months. Have another one in the experimental stage with individual core clocks and much lower voltages in some cases, but it is still not 100% stable and I don't get a lot of time to work on it so it's a long term project.
> 
> [2019/09/20 06:04:53]
> Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
> BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
> BCLK_Divider [Auto]
> Performance Enhancer [Auto]
> CPU Core Ratio [43.00]
> Performance Bias [None]
> Memory Frequency [DDR4-3800MHz]
> FCLK Frequency [1900MHz]
> Core Performance Boost [Disabled]
> SMT Mode [Enabled]
> TPU [Keep Current Settings]
> Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
> Max CPU Boost Clock Override [Auto]
> Platform Thermal Throttle Limit [Auto]
> Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto]
> DRAM CAS# Latency [16]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [17]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [16]
> DRAM RAS# PRE Time [16]
> DRAM RAS# ACT Time [34]
> Trc [50]
> TrrdS [6]
> TrrdL [8]
> Tfaw [24]
> TwtrS [5]
> TwtrL [14]
> Twr [14]
> Trcpage [Auto]
> TrdrdScl [4]
> TwrwrScl [4]
> Trfc [304]
> Trfc2 [186]
> Trfc4 [128]
> Tcwl [16]
> Trtp [8]
> Trdwr [8]
> Twrrd [3]
> TwrwrSc [1]
> TwrwrSd [7]
> TwrwrDd [7]
> TrdrdSc [1]
> TrdrdSd [5]
> TrdrdDd [5]
> Tcke [1]
> ProcODT [34.3 ohm]
> Cmd2T [1T]
> Gear Down Mode [Disabled]
> Power Down Enable [Disabled]
> RttNom [Rtt_Nom Disable]
> RttWr [Dynamic ODT Off]
> RttPark [RZQ/5]
> MemAddrCmdSetup [0]
> MemCsOdtSetup [0]
> MemCkeSetup [0]
> MemCadBusClkDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 4]
> CPU Current Capability [120%]
> CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Auto]
> VRM Spread Spectrum [Disabled]
> Active Frequency Mode [Disabled]
> CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
> CPU Power Phase Control [Extreme]
> CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
> VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 4]
> VDDSOC Current Capability [120%]
> VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Manual]
> Fixed VDDSOC Switching Frequency(KHz) [400]
> VDDSOC Phase Control [Extreme]
> DRAM Current Capability [100%]
> DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
> DRAM Switching Frequency [Auto]
> DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.47500]
> VTTDDR Voltage [0.73750]
> VPP_MEM Voltage [2.50000]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
> VDDP Voltage [0.90000]
> 1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
> CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
> 2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
> PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
> PLL reference voltage [Auto]
> T Offset [Auto]
> Sense MI Skew [Auto]
> Sense MI Offset [Auto]
> Promontory presence [Auto]
> Clock Amplitude [Auto]
> CLDO VDDP voltage [1050]
> CPU Core Voltage [Manual mode]
> - CPU Core Voltage Override [1.36250]
> CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
> - VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.10000]
> DRAM Voltage [1.47500]
> CLDO VDDG voltage [1.060]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> 1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
> Firmware TPM [Disable]
> Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
> PSS Support [Auto]
> SVM Mode [Disabled]
> Onboard LED [Disabled]
> Q-Code LED Function [Disabled after POST]
> SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
> SATA Mode [AHCI]
> NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
> SMART Self Test [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> HD Audio Controller [Disabled]
> M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Disabled(X8 mode)]
> PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [GEN 3]
> PCIEX8/X4_2 Mode [GEN 3]
> PCIEX4_3 Mode [GEN 2]
> M.2_1 Link Mode [GEN 3]
> SB Link Mode [GEN 3]
> Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
> USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
> When system is in working state [On]
> When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [On]
> Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
> Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
> ErP Ready [Disabled]
> Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
> Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
> Power On By RTC [Disabled]
> Network Stack [Disabled]
> Device [WDC WD40EZRZ-00GXCB0]
> Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
> XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
> USB2.0 FlashDisk 1100 [Auto]
> U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
> U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
> U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> U31G1_5 [Enabled]
> U31G1_6 [Enabled]
> U31G1_7 [Enabled]
> U31G1_8 [Enabled]
> U31G1_9 [Enabled]
> U31G1_10 [Enabled]
> USB11 [Enabled]
> USB12 [Enabled]
> USB13 [Enabled]
> USB14 [Enabled]
> USB15 [Enabled]
> CPU Temperature [Monitor]
> MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
> PCH Temperature [Monitor]
> T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
> HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
> CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
> AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
> W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
> W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
> 3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
> 5V Voltage [Monitor]
> 12V Voltage [Monitor]
> CPU Q-Fan Control [Auto]
> CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [200 RPM]
> CPU Fan Profile [Standard]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 3 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [Auto]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> HAMP Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> HAMP Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> HAMP Fan Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
> AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> PSPP Policy [Auto]
> Fast Boot [Enabled]
> NVMe Support [Enabled]
> Next Boot after AC Power Loss [Normal Boot]
> AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
> Boot Logo Display [Enabled]
> POST Delay Time [3 sec]
> Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
> Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
> Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
> Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
> Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
> Launch CSM [Enabled]
> Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
> Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
> Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
> Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
> OS Type [Other OS]
> Setup Animator [Disabled]
> ASUS Grid Install Service [Enabled]
> Load from Profile [1]
> Profile Name [[email protected]]
> Save to Profile [1]
> CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
> VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> BCLK Frequency [Auto]
> CPU Ratio [Auto]
> DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A2]
> Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
> Custom Pstate0 [Auto]
> CCD Control [Auto]
> Core control [Auto]
> SMT Control [Auto]
> L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
> L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
> Platform First Error Handling [Enabled]
> Core Performance Boost [Auto]
> Global C-state Control [Auto]
> DRAM ECC Enable [Auto]
> DRAM scrub time [Auto]
> Poison scrubber control [Auto]
> Redirect scrubber control [Auto]
> Redirect scrubber limit [Auto]
> NUMA nodes per socket [Auto]
> Memory interleaving [Auto]
> Memory interleaving size [Auto]
> 1TB remap [Auto]
> DRAM map inversion [Auto]
> ACPI SRAT L3 Cache As NUMA Domain [Auto]
> ACPI SLIT Distance Control [Auto]
> ACPI SLIT remote relative distance [Auto]
> GMI encryption control [Auto]
> xGMI encryption control [Auto]
> CAKE CRC perf bounds Control [Auto]
> 4-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
> 3-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
> Disable DF to external IP SyncFloodPropagation [Auto]
> Disable DF sync flood propagation [Auto]
> CC6 memory region encryption [Auto]
> Memory Clear [Auto]
> Overclock [Auto]
> Power Down Enable [Auto]
> Cmd2T [Auto]
> Gear Down Mode [Auto]
> CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
> CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
> Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
> Data Poisoning [Auto]
> DRAM Post Package Repair [Disable]
> RCD Parity [Auto]
> DRAM Address Command Parity Retry [Auto]
> Write CRC Enable [Auto]
> DRAM Write CRC Enable and Retry Limit [Auto]
> Disable Memory Error Injection [True]
> DRAM ECC Symbol Size [Auto]
> DRAM UECC Retry [Auto]
> TSME [Auto]
> Data Scramble [Auto]
> DFE Read Training [Auto]
> FFE Write Training [Auto]
> PMU Pattern Bits Control [Auto]
> MR6VrefDQ Control [Auto]
> CPU Vref Training Seed Control [Auto]
> Chipselect Interleaving [Auto]
> BankGroupSwap [Auto]
> BankGroupSwapAlt [Auto]
> Address Hash Bank [Auto]
> Address Hash CS [Auto]
> Address Hash Rm [Auto]
> SPD Read Optimization [Enabled]
> MBIST Enable [Disabled]
> Pattern Select [PRBS]
> Pattern Length [3]
> Aggressor Channel [1 Aggressor Channel]
> Aggressor Static Lane Control [Disabled]
> Target Static Lane Control [Disabled]
> Worst Case Margin Granularity [Per Chip Select]
> Read Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
> Read Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
> Write Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
> Write Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
> IOMMU [Auto]
> Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
> Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [Auto]
> FCLK Frequency [Auto]
> SOC OVERCLOCK VID [0]
> UCLK DIV1 MODE [Auto]
> VDDP Voltage Control [Auto]
> VDDG Voltage Control [Auto]
> SoC/Uncore OC Mode [Auto]
> LN2 Mode [Auto]
> ACS Enable [Auto]
> PCIe Ten Bit Tag Support [Auto]
> cTDP Control [Auto]
> EfficiencyModeEn [Auto]
> Package Power Limit Control [Auto]
> APBDIS [Auto]
> DF Cstates [Auto]
> CPPC [Auto]
> CPPC Preferred Cores [Auto]
> BoostFmaxEn [Auto]
> Early Link Speed [Auto]


You can also try BCLK. My system doesn't even post at 1933 but with 1915 (102.6) i have 10000% total stable and 633% single hcimemtest


----------



## ryouiki

I haven't been keeping up with the BIOS situation lately and just flashed 2801, which seems to work fine.

That said, did ASUS remove a large number of options from this BIOS? I noticed trying to put my settings back in after using flashback that Bank Group Swap and similar options are no longer exposed.


----------



## Synoxia

ryouiki said:


> I haven't been keeping up with the BIOS situation lately and just flashed 2801, which seems to work fine.
> 
> That said, did ASUS remove a large number of options from this BIOS? I noticed trying to put my settings back in after using flashback that Bank Group Swap and similar options are no longer exposed.


Advanced > AMD cbs > NBIO > DDR4 stuff, here you will find bank group swap. I suggest enabling BGS alt.


----------



## CCoR

mtrai said:


> Modded 2801 C7H WIFI
> 
> Gen 3 is preset for for the pcie 16/8 slot
> Mem fail count is set to 3
> Asus Grid Install is disabled.
> Spread Spectrum is in the menus.
> Full Fan Controls are unhidden
> And so on same as my previous bios.
> Remember you need to use flashback and rename the bios file for the wifi which C7HWIFI.cap
> I loaded my 002 the stilts bios .cmo settings from a USB drive with no issues.
> 
> C7H WIFI Download Link: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1T0k1fo-iTCwIvpCVFDKHXbQfmHnZKeZn
> 
> C7H NON Wifi 2801 Download link: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1DOXvnDTZuNUoXGvRuaBlck-0rIKtJTet


Hey again mtrai!

So thanks again for your hard work, just wanted to keep you posted on this weird issue I've been having lately with your modded BIOS'. Seems like they're are not flashing correctly, just tried flashing this new one from 0002 and after it did all the usual light blinks that go along with properly flashing, I loaded into BIOS and it still said I was on 0002 after trying to update to your latest 2801 mod. For kicks and giggles, I tried flashing the one released originally from ASUS (2801) and that worked fine after performing flashback (CH7WIFI.CAP) method. 

Any suggestions as to how I can your bios to flash properly?

Thanks!


----------



## mtrai

I just realized that ASUS completely removed HPET from bios 2801 so weather it was working or not it is no longer an option in the bios...while it still appears in the AMIBCP menus it is no longer in any module within the bios.


----------



## mtrai

CCoR said:


> Hey again mtrai!
> 
> So thanks again for your hard work, just wanted to keep you posted on this weird issue I've been having lately with your modded BIOS'. Seems like they're are not flashing correctly, just tried flashing this new one from 0002 and after it did all the usual light blinks that go along with properly flashing, I loaded into BIOS and it still said I was on 0002 after trying to update to your latest 2801 mod. For kicks and giggles, I tried flashing the one released originally from ASUS and that worked fine after performing flashback (CH7WIFI.CAP) method.
> 
> Any suggestions as to how I can your bios to flash properly?
> 
> Thanks!


 So we 
I am baffled as it flashes fine on my C7HWiFi...about to flash it again as I was double checking the hpet missing even from search to find out it really is now gone. You can try the other method using a dos usb stick in the other thread. Things we know then it is not your usb stick. Give me a few minutes and let me flash this wifi bios again.


----------



## CCoR

mtrai said:


> So we
> I am baffled as it flashes fine on my C7HWiFi...about to flash it again as I was double checking the hpet missing even from search to find out it really is now gone. You can try the other method using a dos usb stick in the other thread. Things we know then it is not your usb stick. Give me a few minutes and let me flash this wifi bios again.


Ok sweet, thanks! Let me know

Will try and look up this dos usb method you speak of..


----------



## mtrai

CCoR said:


> Ok sweet, thanks! Let me know
> +
> Will try and look up this dos usb method you speak of..


I created a folder for you and just uploaded the one I just flashed. Let me know if the blue flashback light blinks more then 3 times and does not go solid.

I PM'ed you the link

On a side note there are a number of options now missing not just HPET that were available via search nor are they to be found in the modules within the bios either.


----------



## chakku

crakej said:


> Nice!
> 
> Still no luck for me with 1900 FCLK - You put the settings in exactly as in the calculator? ProcODT etc? Did you set anything in <Advanced> tab? I suspect my 2nd CCD is just never going to be happy with it...


Everything as per the calc on the first page except voltage at 1.4V instead of the recommended 1.42V and tRTP at Auto instead of the recommended timing. Only 'Advanced' tab stuff I have is the vboot voltage matching DRAM voltage and manually entered PLL voltage plus Spread Spectrum disabled and Memory Clear disabled.



xeizo said:


> I've had that latency jumping up on earlier bioses, setting uclk=memclk and the exact Infinity Fabric frequency under AMD CBS a couple of submenus down has always fixed it. I have fine latency with 2801.


That seemed to have dropped it to 71ns or so but still much higher than what I would expect it to be, especially when my 3733 settings were sometimes dipping to 65ns.

Even tightened my timings and it' still 70-71ns



Spoiler


----------



## hurricane28

What is this about HPET all of a sudden? 

This is what i found about it: https://community.amd.com/thread/224053

I tinkered with it myself too and notice nothing significantly to be honest. But if the discussion is that it should be the decision of the customer than yes i agree there should be such an option. 

But hey, this is Assus man lol. No seriously, when was the last time we heard from them?


----------



## xeizo

chakku said:


> That seemed to have dropped it to 71ns or so but still much higher than what I would expect it to be, especially when my 3733 settings were sometimes dipping to 65ns.
> 
> Even tightened my timings and it' still 70-71ns
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Strange, I can't put my finger on why at the moment, I haven't seen that high latency with any of the bioses from 2501 and onwards.


----------



## mtrai

hurricane28 said:


> What is this about HPET all of a sudden?
> 
> This is what i found about it: https://community.amd.com/thread/224053
> 
> I tinkered with it myself too and notice nothing significantly to be honest. But if the discussion is that it should be the decision of the customer than yes i agree there should be such an option.
> 
> But hey, this is Assus man lol. No seriously, when was the last time we heard from them?


Nothing much actually some people were upset after I stopped including the option in search...though testing showed at least for me and the_stilt it did not actually do anything or make any changes, but due to popular demand I went back to unhiding it. Now it is just gone with 2801. I just wanted it to be clear that I did not purposely leave it hidden.

Just heard from Shimino today on the Rog forums he really does not come to OCN.


----------



## ryouiki

Synoxia said:


> Advanced > AMD cbs > NBIO > DDR4 stuff, here you will find bank group swap. I suggest enabling BGS alt.


Yeah thats the thing... in 2801 under the AMD CBS menu all of these options are no longer available. I only have a toggled for something called Mode 0.


----------



## mtrai

ryouiki said:


> Yeah thats the thing... in 2801 under the AMD CBS menu all of these options are no longer available. I only have a toggled for something called Mode 0.


You have to use a moddified bios in order for all those options to again show. They removed them several bios versions ago ahem I mean HID them.


----------



## Pietro

mtrai said:


> Modded 2801 C7H WIFI
> 
> Gen 3 is preset for for the pcie 16/8 slot
> Mem fail count is set to 3
> Asus Grid Install is disabled.
> Spread Spectrum is in the menus.
> Full Fan Controls are unhidden
> And so on same as my previous bios.
> Remember you need to use flashback and rename the bios file for the wifi which C7HWIFI.cap
> I loaded my 002 the stilts bios .cmo settings from a USB drive with no issues.
> 
> C7H WIFI Download Link: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1T0k1fo-iTCwIvpCVFDKHXbQfmHnZKeZn
> 
> C7H NON Wifi 2801 Download link: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1DOXvnDTZuNUoXGvRuaBlck-0rIKtJTet


This seems to work for my 3900X fine, after initial test or at least much better than original non modified 2801 which wasn't even stable 3733MHz, like I mentioned earlier:



Pietro said:


> Tested and big NO from me. System refuses to be stable with infinity set on 1866MHz which was perfectly fine with every other version they just refused to work stable with 1900MHz just like 2801 with 1866 because it behaves exactly the same, performance is also worse so I'm back to 0002M-FIE.


Still 1900MHz on inifnity fabric is not possible to be stable for me with 3900X. There are also plenty of boxes like this here in bios tabs(have non wifi version) screens from ROG forum showing how it looks there.


----------



## Synoxia

mtrai said:


> You have to use a moddified bios in order for all those options to again show. They removed them several bios versions ago ahem I mean HID them.


I am using the stock 2801 you provided and i can see bankgroupswap alt.

Regarding HPET stuff, go Gigabyte for ryzen 3k. Or just move to Intel (BUT NOT ASUS MOTHERBOARD!) i regret so much buying a rog vega, not only because it runs hot but because now i can't swap motherboards or lose rgb sync :/


----------



## CCoR

Pietro said:


> This seems to work for my 3900X fine, after initial test or at least much better than original non modified 2801 which wasn't even stable 3733MHz, like I mentioned earlier:
> 
> 
> 
> Still 1900MHz on inifnity fabric is not possible to be stable for me with 3900X. There are also plenty of boxes like this here in bios tabs(have non wifi version) screens from ROG forum showing how it looks there.


Hmm, so you were able to flash mtaris modded bios? Can you verify by seeing if the default options he changed such as "asus grid.." is disabled?
About to flash the bios again..brb


----------



## hurricane28

mtrai said:


> Nothing much actually some people were upset after I stopped including the option in search...though testing showed at least for me and the_stilt it did not actually do anything or make any changes, but due to popular demand I went back to unhiding it. Now it is just gone with 2801. I just wanted it to be clear that I did not purposely leave it hidden.
> 
> Just heard from Shimino today on the Rog forums he really does not come to OCN.


Ah i see, so regardless people want to have the option in BIOS. understandable. 

why is he not coming here? He's not on the ROG forums either though.. nothing from Asus lately man.


----------



## Synoxia

hurricane28 said:


> Ah i see, so regardless people want to have the option in BIOS. understandable.
> 
> why is he not coming here? He's not on the ROG forums either though.. nothing from Asus lately man.


Asus just suck for ryzen. Boycott them and go gigabyte. Simple. They are plain stupid because 1st gen and 2nd gen ryzen had lot of and better support. Now that 3k gen is out and is more profitable what they do? They abandon ryzen motherboards. GJ.


----------



## Gigabytes

Synoxia said:


> You can also try BCLK. My system doesn't even post at 1933 but with 1915 (102.6) i have 10000% total stable and 633% single hcimemtest


I have been able to get one post with a 1933 FCLK, was a while back and involved some fairly high voltages. Lowered some voltages a bit and restarted, never been able to get it back since even with original voltages. Am going to revisit this when I upgrade to a open loop, have been using my original 120mm Radiator closed loop with push/pull fans from my original 1700X and while it's ok, it's not ideal for this 3900X. 

Have another profile based off my [email protected] with a bit of a BCLK boost, have been trying to get 103+ but there are major stability issues, I might try to tone that down like you suggest. Also have a [email protected] profile where I am bringing voltages down, going well but then I got sidetracked with overclocking cores. Figured it would be best to get to know where my cores stand before diving into voltage reduction. Am hoping in the next few months to get all my profiles stable then merge settings into one when I upgrade cooling.

Fun times when real life gives me the opportunity to play.


----------



## liakou

mtrai said:


> You have to use a moddified bios in order for all those options to again show. They removed them several bios versions ago ahem I mean HID them.


Im using the official 2801 bios and I have the CBS options appearing, including BGS & BGS alt. Maybe the type of CPU plays a role here?


----------



## Synoxia

BCLK overclocking is a monster. I've noticed a very subtle microstutter in gaming when going over 102.2 BCLK on my system that's not present with lower BCLK and more voltage (i used to have -0.03750 offset), meaning single core loads are a not completely stable. These cpu are really pushed near the edge of stability, but still there's something to gain. 
More voltage produces less clock speed but more stability, also single core eye candy are better (don't call them "peaks", please.) Now i don't have microstutters anymore, will try playing with voltage and LLC to finally find best compromise.
From a raw performance standpoint instead, more bclk is totally worth it and will also improve multithread clocks slightly.
At 102.6 BCLK i had CBR15 single core 208-210 with my memory setup, what are your results?
@CJMitsuki i am using same BCLK/FCLK settings as you now, enable 200mhz auto OC then go Ryzen master enable pbo AND THEN you enable auto OC + PBO values. With your exotic cooling solution and ABBA bios you could see peaks of 4.550-4575


----------



## AmxdPt

I don't get the 3700X temperatures at all...

Running negative offset of -0.05v and still get 80-82 degrees while running cinebench r20...

Of course the fans ramp up to 100% because we can only se the fan curve so far as 75º degrees...

Is anyone facing the same thing?

thanks


----------



## Praetorr

AmxdPt said:


> I don't get the 3700X temperatures at all...
> 
> Running negative offset of -0.05v and still get 80-82 degrees while running cinebench r20...
> 
> Of course the fans ramp up to 100% because we can only se the fan curve so far as 75º degrees...
> 
> Is anyone facing the same thing?
> 
> thanks


That's largely just par for the course with Zen 2. From what I've gathered, it mostly boils down to two main things:

1) Zen Tdie reports what could be generally described as a "hot spot" temperature. Whereas Intel tends to report a Tcase temp at the IHS and then individual core temperatures. So what you're seeing for Tdie on AMD is likely the hottest part of the entire CPU (or at least the current hottest of the 20+ temp sensors).

2) 7nm is just plain hard to cool. The core density is very tight, and it's challenging for the heat to get from the cores onto the IHS (and subsequently to the cooler, of course).


----------



## chakku

xeizo said:


> Strange, I can't put my finger on why at the moment, I haven't seen that high latency with any of the bioses from 2501 and onwards.


Managed to get it down to 69ish with Power Down disabled, which was one of the differences I found with my settings compared to 3733. I also loaded up my 3733 profile and got the same latency.. The other settings that were different I'm not sure would have an impact on this and to be honest I never set these myself, it could be a change in the BIOS defaults or something?

RCD Parity [Disabled] -> [Auto]
DRAM Address Command Parity Retry [Disabled] -> [Auto]
Write CRC Enable [Disabled] -> [Auto]
DRAM Write CRC Enable and Retry Limit [Disabled] -> [Auto]


----------



## neikosr0x

AmxdPt said:


> I don't get the 3700X temperatures at all...
> 
> Running negative offset of -0.05v and still get 80-82 degrees while running cinebench r20...
> 
> Of course the fans ramp up to 100% because we can only se the fan curve so far as 75º degrees...
> 
> Is anyone facing the same thing?
> 
> thanks


check your paste mate, Not even my 3900x gets that hot with stock voltages. R20 is more likely to get me 72/76c


----------



## Axaion

neikosr0x said:


> check your paste mate, Not even my 3900x gets that hot with stock voltages. R20 is more likely to get me 72/76c


Eh, my 3700x does the same as his, I have a Dark Rock 4 Pro, as a cooler.

Also, ambient temps and case airflow matters quite a bit too.


----------



## harderthanfire

Getting the fan stop bug on 2801 again, back to the modified 01


----------



## AmxdPt

neikosr0x said:


> check your paste mate, Not even my 3900x gets that hot with stock voltages. R20 is more likely to get me 72/76c


Think for a bit, your cpu takes a lot less time to complete the task, if it took as long as the 3700x you'd see the same temperatures.

The issue is not the paste nor the user.



Axaion said:


> Eh, my 3700x does the same as his, I have a Dark Rock 4 Pro, as a cooler.
> 
> Also, ambient temps and case airflow matters quite a bit too.


I have a Thermaltake Core P3 (open case) with a h115i from corsair

Any tips anyone?

Thanks


----------



## mtrai

CCoR just pointed out something to me and I checked my own 2801 modded bios. I did not check this when I flashed the 2801 unedited but it showing 0002 x64 within the bios and AIDA and windows reports 2801.

Can someone that flashed the original only check to see what showing in the bios vs within windows.


----------



## Pietro

mtrai said:


> CCoR just pointed out something to me and I checked my own 2801 modded bios. I did not check this when I flashed the 2801 unedited but it showing 0002 x64 within the bios and AIDA and windows reports 2801.
> 
> Can someone that flashed the original only check to see what showing in the bios vs within windows.


0002 in bios, but in windows I can see 2801 in CPU-z it is "2801 - AMD Agesa Combo-AM4 1.0.0.3" within windows, but bios is very inconsistent regarding ram results, especially latency, in 0002M it was moving in range 67-68 ns, on yours it is 67-80ish.


----------



## neikosr0x

AmxdPt said:


> Think for a bit, your cpu takes a lot less time to complete the task, if it took as long as the 3700x you'd see the same temperatures.
> 
> The issue is not the paste nor the user.
> 
> 
> 
> I have a Thermaltake Core P3 (open case) with a h115i from corsair
> 
> Any tips anyone?
> 
> Thanks


 Maybe, but the 3900x produces more watts of heat and has one extra Die/core on the same surface. I'm also using a h115i, it might be because it is getting cold in here but the only time i got 81c on CB20 was while using PE3 or OC to 4.25/4.3 cant remember. Could be ambient temp or case, thats why i said "weird" i dont own a 3700x to see myself.


----------



## hurricane28

Synoxia said:


> Asus just suck for ryzen. Boycott them and go gigabyte. Simple. They are plain stupid because 1st gen and 2nd gen ryzen had lot of and better support. Now that 3k gen is out and is more profitable what they do? They abandon ryzen motherboards. GJ.


Yep, that would be a good idea man. The problem is is that i can't sell this board as it is now.. I simply can't sell an broken product or a product that lacks support for in the future sadly so im stuck with Assus for now. 

You read that correct, i call them Assus from now on as they behave as asses so its Assus from now on lol. Why do you think Elmor (Jon) left in the first place? I think he abandoned ship on the right time if you ask me and i do not blame him at all as he did more for the community that Assus ever did. 

As for Gigabyte, a friend of mine who is also on this forum has an x470 Gigabyte board and doesn't even have half the problems Assus has with AGESA and it costs 100 euro's less, so its all crap they tell us man. I can assure you that this is my last Motherboard i bought from Assus. 

Sorry if im salty but i speak the truth and if someone has a problem with that you can just ignore me.


----------



## Praetorr

harderthanfire said:


> Getting the fan stop bug on 2801 again, back to the modified 01


Seriously? I mean... They wouldn't be incompetent enough to have just forgotten about the fan fix, could they be? That's impossible.

Right guys?

Right?!


----------



## hurricane28

Praetorr said:


> Seriously? I mean... They wouldn't be incompetent enough to have just forgotten about the fan fix, could they be? That's impossible.
> 
> Right guys?
> 
> Right?!



They are mate, they really are.. They struggle with this issue since the beginning of the CH6 and stil can't completely fix it.. On BIOS 2501 i don't have the problem but on 2703 i did among other problems too. 
But if you ask them its the AGESA code so don'te ven bother lol. Just buy Gigabyte from now on, much better support and quality BIOS than this rubbish. 

Everything went from bad to worse since Elmor left them, its only getting worse from now on, mark my words.


----------



## Duvar

With my 2 CH Boards (6+7 Hero WIFI) i was struggling between Gigabyte Aorus Gaming 7 vs the ASUS ones, i said to my self, Elmor is there, The Stilt is there, great community is there, so go for ASSUS...
Now the have me on my ASSUS^^ To be honest, the ASUS Boards working fine for me, but the BIOS Situation and the fact, that the boot time is soooo long, i will go Gigabyte again. (had the Z370 Gaming 7 with my 8700k and were pretty happy with it)


----------



## Praetorr

hurricane28 said:


> They are mate, they really are.. They struggle with this issue since the beginning of the CH6 and stil can't completely fix it.. On BIOS 2501 i don't have the problem but on 2703 i did among other problems too.
> But if you ask them its the AGESA code so don'te ven bother lol. Just buy Gigabyte from now on, much better support and quality BIOS than this rubbish.
> 
> Everything went from bad to worse since Elmor left them, its only getting worse from now on, mark my words.


Yeah, I think you're right. I recently put a 3600X + 2060 Super system together for my brother, and we used the Gigabyte X570 Pro WiFi. He's had absolutely zero issues. Flawless from day one.

Guess paying the ROG tax didn't pay off... Shame.


----------



## hurricane28

Praetorr said:


> Yeah, I think you're right. I recently put a 3600X + 2060 Super system together for my brother, and we used the Gigabyte X570 Pro WiFi. He's had absolutely zero issues. Flawless from day one.
> 
> Guess paying the ROG tax didn't pay off... Shame.


Yep, i am going to sell this board and get myself an Gigabyte i think, i can't deal with this nonsense anymore man, too busy for this crap. 
We don't even get an answer from Assus anymore, go look on the forums too, no one from Assus is there.. its pathetic to say the least.. Now users from this forum "have to" mod their BIOS because they are too lazy?! Ridiculous and infuriating man.. Gigabyte uses the same controller as Assus and has ZERO issues.. 

I have recorded that the fans go nuts in BIOS man, so its not software but Assus implementation of the sensor that is faulty and they blame ITE for it.. Yeah its a cheapo chip but others can work with it so why not Assus? 

I know a nice slogan for them: "Assus, we engineered no fan technology" lmao.


----------



## chakku

I've never experienced the fan stop issue - what exactly is it? Headers no longer working or?


----------



## Pietro

CyborgD said:


> Hello everyone, fairly new here but not entirely new to overclocking. First off, i want to say thanks to the efforts of the contributors of modded bios setups. These have helped me out a ton and I'm very grateful to you all.
> 
> Currently running a R7 3700X all settings stock atm with no issues such as bluescreens etc. HWinfo64 reports frequent jumps to the expected 4.4Ghz on some cores @ 1.48v being the highest i have seen the voltage bump up to. so I'm happy with the result. This is running the newly discovered 2801 Bios for the CH7 Hero non wifi variant, had decent clocks previously running the "CROSSHAIR VII HERO - 0002MFI" but this latest one seems to have more consistent results. CPU is cooled with a H100i Platinum.


And I'm back to 0002M-FIE, so far the most consistent performer, both stock 2801 and modded version were giving me less FPS and worse latencies with a lot of inconstincency where latency was jumping from 67.2 ns to 82 or more ns, now again it is 67-67.6ns regardless if it stock or CCX OC.


----------



## hurricane28

chakku said:


> I've never experienced the fan stop issue - what exactly is it? Headers no longer working or?


Yes, its the system fans that stop working or going nuts all of a sudden. 

This is what i am seeing on a bad BIOS: 




The only solution is to flash BIOS with proper WMI implementation but even that is no guarantee.


----------



## Keith Myers

chakku said:


> I've never experienced the fan stop issue - what exactly is it? Headers no longer working or?


Yes the fan header outputs just go to zero and your fans stop. Next is a cpu overtemp fault that reboots you to the BIOS screen where the computer will just sit forever until you notice the CPU overtemp error Press F1 message. Entering the BIOS then turns the fan header outputs back on.

Happens in Linux and Windows.


----------



## liakou

Someone enlighten me please. 

About the PPT and TDC readings in RM which are zero, as well as CPU package in HWinfo, is it something normal with this board?
Regardless the readings, does PBO work at all?


----------



## Axaion

Huh, my fans bug in a different manner, mine pumps one fan to 1000RPM and then decides to stay there till reboot heh

but this is on 2703, havent been able to update cause of scanning HDDs for errors (damn that takes a long ass while.)


----------



## mtrai

Duvar said:


> With my 2 CH Boards (6+7 Hero WIFI) i was struggling between Gigabyte Aorus Gaming 7 vs the ASUS ones, i said to my self, Elmor is there, The Stilt is there, great community is there, so go for ASSUS...
> Now the have me on my ASSUS^^ To be honest, the ASUS Boards working fine for me, but the BIOS Situation and the fact, that the boot time is soooo long, i will go Gigabyte again. (had the Z370 Gaming 7 with my 8700k and were pretty happy with it)


Do you happen to have usb hard drives plugged in? If so set the USB to partial initialization


----------



## xeizo

Anyone noticed ROG Forum being down all day? "502 bad gateway", ongoing DOS attack or what?


----------



## Axaion

Maybe their BIOS team is the same as their website team


----------



## Duvar

mtrai said:


> Do you happen to have usb hard drives plugged in? If so set the USB to partial initialization


No i dont, only have a 1TB 970EVO NVMe.


----------



## Syldon

Axaion said:


> Maybe their BIOS team is the same as their website team


Avatar seems very fitting


----------



## hurricane28

Axaion said:


> Maybe their BIOS team is the same as their website team


lmao.


----------



## nick name

Honestly I understand you guys are frustrated, but this isn't the place to vent all that. Nobody wants to hear it anymore. If you want to discuss the problems that exist in the BIOS then that's what goes here. If you want to complain and moan about the speed at which the BIOS team at ASUS is working then take it somewhere else. I mean if nobody is responding to you over at the ASUS ROG forums then they certainly aren't going to read your complaints here and that just leaves you bothering the users here. 

So help folks here troubleshoot or identify problems that might exist -- don't sit here and rag on ASUS. Please.


----------



## kazablanka

hurricane28 said:


> lmao.


Ιts time to come to msi


----------



## hurricane28

kazablanka said:


> Ιts time to come to msi


I guess so man, Gigabyte is also not bad. A friend of mine who worked in a retail store also said that ROG boards has the highest RMA rate out of all their lineup.. The store i bought my CH6 said the same and they are also fed up with the problems. If they continue this way, no smart person is buying ROG anymore.


----------



## seansplayin

Memory training failure: Ch7 (bios 601) & 2700x
System has been stable for many many months running memory settings from Ryzen Dram Calc “fast timings” on 3600 memory speed page. 
Moved hardware into a new custom case and now will not train memory. 
On first boot in new case would only train at 2133 regardless of voltage, or timings. Unplugged psu for 5 minutes and Voila memory trained on my saved profile. Two days later I crashed while raising Radeon VII HBM speed to 1150mhz. Now I cannot get system memory to train.
When I moved hardware from old case to new case I did not remove CPU, water block, memory or nvme’s and I’m using the same PSU.
My next step I think I’m going to reflash the bios.
Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## kazablanka

hurricane28 said:


> I guess so man, Gigabyte is also not bad. A friend of mine who worked in a retail store also said that ROG boards has the highest RMA rate out of all their lineup.. The store i bought my CH6 said the same and they are also fed up with the problems. If they continue this way, no smart person is buying ROG anymore.


Great board but I hate it's bios. I have been in love with my meg x570 ace ,everything works great from the first bios to the last one. Ch7 was a drama for me.


----------



## Gigabytes

nick name said:


> Honestly I understand you guys are frustrated, but this isn't the place to vent all that. Nobody wants to hear it anymore. If you want to discuss the problems that exist in the BIOS then that's what goes here. If you want to complain and moan about the speed at which the BIOS team at ASUS is working then take it somewhere else. I mean if nobody is responding to you over at the ASUS ROG forums then they certainly aren't going to read your complaints here and that just leaves you bothering the users here.
> 
> So help folks here troubleshoot or identify problems that might exist -- don't sit here and rag on ASUS. Please.


I tend to agree. I come here for information and have to scroll through post after post of blah to get to any real information. Their issues are probably caused by AI suite or Ryzen master (even if removed) corrupting the bios or they have used a modded bios with all those fan controls exposed and made settings that have damaged the chip responsible for fan control. I set my fan control in the bios once when I installed the new CPU then tweaked it once a few weeks later, it's super quiet and efficient.


----------



## hurricane28

kazablanka said:


> Great board but I hate it's bios. I have been in love with my meg x570 ace ,everything works great from the first bios to the last one. Ch7 was a drama for me.


Yeah, bit too expensive for me man.


----------



## nick name

Hey did everyone get the free copies of the Batman games offered in the Epic Games Store?

https://www.epicgames.com/store/en-US/collection/batman-free-week


----------



## klusek

mtrai said:


> CCoR just pointed out something to me and I checked my own 2801 modded bios. I did not check this when I flashed the 2801 unedited but it showing 0002 x64 within the bios and AIDA and windows reports 2801.
> 
> Can someone that flashed the original only check to see what showing in the bios vs within windows.


I have the orginal 2801 bios flashed via EZ FLASH in bios, and it shows "2801 x64" in the bios.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Synoxia said:


> BCLK overclocking is a monster. I've noticed a very subtle microstutter in gaming when going over 102.2 BCLK on my system that's not present with lower BCLK and more voltage (i used to have -0.03750 offset), meaning single core loads are a not completely stable. These cpu are really pushed near the edge of stability, but still there's something to gain.
> More voltage produces less clock speed but more stability, also single core eye candy are better (don't call them "peaks", please.) Now i don't have microstutters anymore, will try playing with voltage and LLC to finally find best compromise.
> From a raw performance standpoint instead, more bclk is totally worth it and will also improve multithread clocks slightly.
> At 102.6 BCLK i had CBR15 single core 208-210 with my memory setup, what are your results?
> @CJMitsuki i am using same BCLK/FCLK settings as you now, enable 200mhz auto OC then go Ryzen master enable pbo AND THEN you enable auto OC + PBO values. With your exotic cooling solution and ABBA bios you could see peaks of 4.550-4575


Those higher clocks with that bios do look nice but in fact drop the all core performance. Im not a fan of the "new" boost behavior and still prefer the original. Right now im testing manual OC with a bclk increase. I have my 32gb ram up to 3844mhz cl14 so far and that will probably be all that the mobo will allow right now. It is definitely a limitation on the motherboard as I see no stability issues and If i use Turbo Vcore to increase the bclk the motherboard will reset the system as soon as I go above the 1922mhz FCLK mark. Stability is still 100% all the way until that point and never any memory errors or BSOD. It almost feels like they implemented the limit instead of it being any type of hardware limit. As stable as it is I feel like I could easily push 4266mhz @ cl16 1:1 or higher. Ive never seen a system go from 100% stable to unable to boot all within a 15mhz increase to the memory. It just doesnt make sense at all. Usually youd gradually start to see signs of instability as you pushed closer to that state but nope, its 100% then 0% which leads me to believe that it is not a silicon limit but possibly on the firmware or bios side. Maybe some kind of error in the AMD firmware since this limit seems to be across the board on all of the processors, not exactly sure but theres no way this is the behavior of the silicon.


----------



## mtrai

klusek said:


> I have the orginal 2801 bios flashed via EZ FLASH in bios, and it shows "2801 x64" in the bios.


Well that is just odd.


----------



## ryouiki

liakou said:


> Im using the official 2801 bios and I have the CBS options appearing, including BGS & BGS alt. Maybe the type of CPU plays a role here?


Maybe so, I'm still on 2700X and CBS menu is almost empty... waiting to see what 3950X reviews look like before going to that or 3900X.


----------



## CCoR

klusek said:


> I have the orginal 2801 bios flashed via EZ FLASH in bios, and it shows "2801 x64" in the bios.


 yes this is correct. Original 2801 will show correct version info. The modded 2801 on the other hand shows 0002 as version number.


----------



## Synoxia

CJMitsuki said:


> Those higher clocks with that bios do look nice but in fact drop the all core performance. Im not a fan of the "new" boost behavior and still prefer the original. Right now im testing manual OC with a bclk increase. I have my 32gb ram up to 3844mhz cl14 so far and that will probably be all that the mobo will allow right now. It is definitely a limitation on the motherboard as I see no stability issues and If i use Turbo Vcore to increase the bclk the motherboard will reset the system as soon as I go above the 1922mhz FCLK mark. Stability is still 100% all the way until that point and never any memory errors or BSOD. It almost feels like they implemented the limit instead of it being any type of hardware limit. As stable as it is I feel like I could easily push 4266mhz @ cl16 1:1 or higher. Ive never seen a system go from 100% stable to unable to boot all within a 15mhz increase to the memory. It just doesnt make sense at all. Usually youd gradually start to see signs of instability as you pushed closer to that state but nope, its 100% then 0% which leads me to believe that it is not a silicon limit but possibly on the firmware or bios side. Maybe some kind of error in the AMD firmware since this limit seems to be across the board on all of the processors, not exactly sure but theres no way this is the behavior of the silicon.


I have higher multicore and single score on 2801 ABBA compared to 2501, not sure on what are u experiencing.
In my case i hit some instability at 1926 FLCK, then hard cap.
No post, only 07 code and it needs to clear cmos. 
Do you experience the same?


----------



## mtrai

CCoR said:


> yes this is correct. Original 2801 will show correct version info. The modded 2801 on the other hand shows 0002 as version number.





klusek said:


> I have the orginal 2801 bios flashed via EZ FLASH in bios, and it shows "2801 x64" in the bios.





mtrai said:


> Well that is just odd.


I figured it out why it is showing as it does. On this one I took a short cut and re-used the already edited modules from 002+ instead of doing it all all over again..which is fine since these set up modules do not change often however an unintended consequence was it is shewing 002 in the bios it is still 2801 with all the 1.0.0.3 ABBA changes in the other untouched modules of the bios.

Going forward I am gonna hunt that modules down and Re-edit them on a newer release module instead of using old work to avoid this. However once again this is just a cosmetic issue I am not going back to fix.

People please understand a full bios edit takes hours and hours so I thought I would try this method. I do not care what some random dude on the rog forums stating it only takes 5 mins at most but these are hundred of edits across 9 different modules plus within BCP as well to make it all work correctly for Ryzen 1000/2000 and also Ryzen Matisse 3000 cpus. They involve different methods depending on the cpu series. And yes 9 is an odd number which also does not make that much sense to me since it should be an even number but it is really 9. And dont even get me started on another manufactuer bios implementation yes I am looking at you ASRock. At least ASUS follows AMD guidelines for the bios structure.

Also do not expect much from me as I am planning on gaming all week and enjoying myself.


----------



## mtrai

ryouiki said:


> Maybe so, I'm still on 2700X and CBS menu is almost empty... waiting to see what 3950X reviews look like before going to that or 3900X.


This is a 2 fold thing. AMD changed some things in the bio structure. ASUS did not pay attention so these things do not show but are still present. This goes back a couple of bios version ago. I have that fixed in my modded bios. The options are back and even more.


----------



## LethalSpoon

Am I the only one with worse RAM latency in BIOS 2801 (same settings)?


----------



## crakej

LethalSpoon said:


> Am I the only one with worse RAM latency in BIOS 2801 (same settings)?


Mine is better by 2ns...


----------



## Pietro

LethalSpoon said:


> Am I the only one with worse RAM latency in BIOS 2801 (same settings)?


Not only you, I saw other people, but the worst part for me is inconsistency on 000M-Fie there is stable 67.0-68.0 ns on 2801 modded or not it fluctuates 67.2-82 ns.


----------



## kertsz

mtrai said:


> Modded 2801 C7H WIFI
> 
> Gen 3 is preset for for the pcie 16/8 slot
> Mem fail count is set to 3
> Asus Grid Install is disabled.
> Spread Spectrum is in the menus.
> Full Fan Controls are unhidden
> And so on same as my previous bios.
> Remember you need to use flashback and rename the bios file for the wifi which C7HWIFI.cap
> I loaded my 002 the stilts bios .cmo settings from a USB drive with no issues.
> 
> C7H WIFI Download Link: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1T0k1fo-iTCwIvpCVFDKHXbQfmHnZKeZn
> 
> C7H NON Wifi 2801 Download link: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1DOXvnDTZuNUoXGvRuaBlck-0rIKtJTet


I currently use the "ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-0002.CAP", modified version ... through which I correct the fan stop problem.

¿With your BIOS I will correct it too?. They stop meaninglessly, and from what I have read this new 2801 does not correct it.

Can I update with your BIOS mod without problem? Will I correct the fan problem?

Thank you


----------



## LethalSpoon

crakej said:


> Mine is better by 2ns...


So I have your 2ns now. Mind if I send them back to you? :laughings

Time to make a serious research to clarify whats going on with my RAM :hmmsmiley


----------



## xeizo

LethalSpoon said:


> So I have your 2ns now. Mind if I send them back to you? :laughings
> 
> Time to make a serious research to clarify whats going on with my RAM :hmmsmiley


I don't know. I've had 64.5-64.7 through all bios versions from 2501 onwards, running all the modded ones and now 2801. I've been using the same memory profile all the time, all settings are manual. Booted at first boot with every bios.


----------



## mtrai

kertsz said:


> I currently use the "ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-0002.CAP", modified version ... through which I correct the fan stop problem.
> 
> ¿With your BIOS I will correct it too?. They stop meaninglessly, and from what I have read this new 2801 does not correct it.
> 
> Can I update with your BIOS mod without problem? Will I correct the fan problem?
> 
> Thank you


I have not had any fan stop issues with it but I I also do not use any critical fans actually plugged into my motherboard.


----------



## Praetorr

What do you guys think about manually enabling Global C-States in the AMD CBS menu?

From my research, it seems some people are convinced they don't function correctly with Zen 2, while others think that it's critical to have them enabled to allow cores to downclock correctly.

I can say that having just switched them on for the first time I've now witnessed a 4625mhz boost for the first time... Previous highest on 2801 was 4550mhz with C-States on Auto (i.e., disabled).


----------



## Axaion

Ah yeah, jesus im having fan-stop bug too, but it only happens under load for whatever reason?..

Ran a quick cpu-z bench and i hit 80c in no time cause of it

This was on 2703, well. effin. donezo. Asus.


----------



## Praetorr

So as to the question I posed in my last post about Global C-State Control...

Somewhat to my surprise, Robert Hallock responded to a PM I sent him on Reddit, and I found it extremely helpful. Apologies if this is already well known to some.

To quote Robert: "Let me be clear: global c-states should remain ENABLED for best performance. And to your inferred point: I have in the past seen some motherboards choose to override Global C-States when fclk exceeds 1800MHz, though the motherboards I have been alerted to have since fixed this in successive BIOS updates."


----------



## crakej

I've never had stopping fans either.

I had something that others had on 2501, which I thought at first was them stopping, but they were spinning. They just didn't ramp up causing temps to rise fairly quickly until i got thermal shutdown. It has not happened since. I use AISuite for fan control.

As far as memory goes. The new SMU and PMU firmwares have been refined. To expect memory to work flawlessly from an older profile, 100% of the time is unrealistic. The update has enabled some who couldn't run 3800:1900 (for example), who now can. Some users will need to retune their memory voltages, or timings, or both, to attain the same results they had previously. A few will need to make a bit more effort to find possibly just one setting that's not working as it did before for their memory.

This is normal.


----------



## mtrai

Axaion said:


> Ah yeah, jesus im having fan-stop bug too, but it only happens under load for whatever reason?..
> 
> Ran a quick cpu-z bench and i hit 80c in no time cause of it
> 
> This was on 2703, well. effin. donezo. Asus.


Since 0002 the fan issue was fixed...I assume it is also in 2801 since I have not had any issues with it since I plugged some extra fans in to my actual motherboard. My modified 002 and 2801 open up a whole lot of of addition fan functions to prevent this and control fan behavior. Do not worry about it showing 0002 x 64 on the 2801 it is a just a glitch on my part, as well as the cpu multiplier having an addition box...it is just showing you how the bios actually sees what we input, mistake on my part. And on the Save exit screen there are a lot of boxes those have to do with USB drives and I really do not know how to not have them showing as it is not something I show but rather coming from a different option in another menu which allows you set you usb drives to auto, partial init or full init. Auto and Full causes people with these drives to take 2 to 3 minutes to boot up but partial only takes them 20 to 30 seconds, but once again the settings is hidden from us normal bios user.


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> I've never had stopping fans either.
> 
> I had something that others had on 2501, which I thought at first was them stopping, but they were spinning. They just didn't ramp up causing temps to rise fairly quickly until i got thermal shutdown. It has not happened since. I use AISuite for fan control.
> 
> As far as memory goes. The new SMU and PMU firmwares have been refined. To expect memory to work flawlessly from an older profile, 100% of the time is unrealistic. The update has enabled some who couldn't run 3800:1900 (for example), who now can. Some users will need to retune their memory voltages, or timings, or both, to attain the same results they had previously. A few will need to make a bit more effort to find possibly just one setting that's not working as it did before for their memory.
> 
> This is normal.


EXACTLY....once the bios is updated almost without fail...you will need to retune your ram settings. You can use your previous settings as a baseline but you need to keep in mind things will have changed and you will need to look at each ram setting all over again on a one by one basis but also keeping in mind that one setting can also affect a different setting. This is not just AMD but also happens with Intel. The difference is that Intel is more forgiving and the CPU is not tied to the ram.


----------



## nick name

Don't forget to take advantage of the 6 free Batman games offered by the Epic Games Store. Time is running out.

https://www.epicgames.com/store/en-US/collection/batman-free-week


----------



## hurricane28

mtrai said:


> (B)Since 0002 the fan issue was fixed(B)...I assume it is also in 2801 since I have not had any issues with it since I plugged some extra fans in to my actual motherboard. My modified 002 and 2801 open up a whole lot of of addition fan functions to prevent this and control fan behavior. Do not worry about it showing 0002 x 64 on the 2801 it is a just a glitch on my part, as well as the cpu multiplier having an addition box...it is just showing you how the bios actually sees what we input, mistake on my part. And on the Save exit screen there are a lot of boxes those have to do with USB drives and I really do not know how to not have them showing as it is not something I show but rather coming from a different option in another menu which allows you set you usb drives to auto, partial init or full init. Auto and Full causes people with these drives to take 2 to 3 minutes to boot up but partial only takes them 20 to 30 seconds, but once again the settings is hidden from us normal bios user.


Nope, i flashed 2703 and had issues with the fans again, flashed back to 2501 and system is running sweet again. 

On a positive note, Asus ROG is not the only one with problems it seems:


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Nope, i flashed 2703 and had issues with the fans again, flashed back to 2501 and system is running sweet again.
> 
> On a positive note, Asus ROG is not the only one with problems it seems:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQTOkshYPoQ&list=LLHHmdY5-k_ujhXpW5LR4vEg&index=2&t=0s


Ummmm, that's not really related. That video is about a small group of folks that received pre-production boards.


----------



## starrbuck

nick name said:


> Honestly I understand you guys are frustrated, but this isn't the place to vent all that. Nobody wants to hear it anymore. If you want to discuss the problems that exist in the BIOS then that's what goes here. If you want to complain and moan about the speed at which the BIOS team at ASUS is working then take it somewhere else. I mean if nobody is responding to you over at the ASUS ROG forums then they certainly aren't going to read your complaints here and that just leaves you bothering the users here.
> 
> So help folks here troubleshoot or identify problems that might exist -- don't sit here and rag on ASUS. Please.


I agree and would personally appreciate if you folks no longer running this board OR if your only point is to rag on ASUS, please knock it off. It's not helpful.


----------



## Keith Myers

Axaion said:


> Ah yeah, jesus im having fan-stop bug too, but it only happens under load for whatever reason?..
> 
> Ran a quick cpu-z bench and i hit 80c in no time cause of it
> 
> This was on 2703, well. effin. donezo. Asus.


Update the BIOS to 2801 and the fan stop issue is resolved.


----------



## LethalSpoon

mtrai said:


> EXACTLY....once the bios is updated almost without fail...you will need to retune your ram settings. You can use your previous settings as a baseline but you need to keep in mind things will have changed and you will need to look at each ram setting all over again on a one by one basis but also keeping in mind that one setting can also affect a different setting. This is not just AMD but also happens with Intel. The difference is that Intel is more forgiving and the CPU is not tied to the ram.


The thing is that it happened with two diferent profiles (3 if we count DOCP one), all of them 100% stable (karhu, tm5, ...) after flashed the new 2801 and setting all manually. 2ns more across the board (write, copy and read speeds are ok btw). I cant figure whats going on :thinking:


----------



## thegr8anand

Probably some new app. More apps in active/background, higher the latency for me.


Is the 2801 out officially?


----------



## crakej

thegr8anand said:


> Is the 2801 out officially?


Yes. 

https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...18.2138956883.1569346702-999233849.1568046968


----------



## Axaion

mtrai said:


> Since 0002 the fan issue was fixed...I assume it is also in 2801 since I have not had any issues with it since I plugged some extra fans in to my actual motherboard. My modified 002 and 2801 open up a whole lot of of addition fan functions to prevent this and control fan behavior. Do not worry about it showing 0002 x 64 on the 2801 it is a just a glitch on my part, as well as the cpu multiplier having an addition box...it is just showing you how the bios actually sees what we input, mistake on my part. And on the Save exit screen there are a lot of boxes those have to do with USB drives and I really do not know how to not have them showing as it is not something I show but rather coming from a different option in another menu which allows you set you usb drives to auto, partial init or full init. Auto and Full causes people with these drives to take 2 to 3 minutes to boot up but partial only takes them 20 to 30 seconds, but once again the settings is hidden from us normal bios user.


Super late, i know, but finally updated to your 2801 based bios for non-wifi.

Anyway, i noticed you said you stopped making BIOS'es because of the time, which is 100% understandable 

Couldent get Spread Spectrum disable to work though, same with fans not going full tilt at 75C - but eh, least i havent had fan stop since so thats a plus 

Thanks for your work though, and enjoy the huge amount of free time you have now


----------



## neikosr0x

LethalSpoon said:


> Am I the only one with worse RAM latency in BIOS 2801 (same settings)?


mine is basically the same 64/64.2ns


----------



## starrbuck

neikosr0x said:


> mine is basically the same 64/64.2ns


Mine did not change either. Fan issue seems to be solved too.


----------



## nick name

The Stilt said:


> What about if you set Performance Enhancer to "default" and Performance Bias to "none"?
> Any difference?


In the event you don't recall we were speaking about a reduction in performance with the 2700X on BIOS versions after 2606. 

I've recently found that it isn't only when using PE 3 that the 2700X loses performance, but also when setting the multiplier in BIOS. 

And no new information has come from the ROG forums either.


----------



## mtrai

Axaion said:


> Super late, i know, but finally updated to your 2801 based bios for non-wifi.
> 
> Anyway, i noticed you said you stopped making BIOS'es because of the time, which is 100% understandable
> 
> Couldent get Spread Spectrum disable to work though, same with fans not going full tilt at 75C - but eh, least i havent had fan stop since so thats a plus
> 
> Thanks for your work though, and enjoy the huge amount of free time you have now


Did not say I was stopping. Was just saying that someone on the rog forums commented that it only takes 5 minutes to do a bios a bios mod.


----------



## Axaion

mtrai said:


> Did not say I was stopping. Was just saying that someone on the rog forums commented that it only takes 5 minutes to do a bios a bios mod.


I could have sworn you made a thread here too, heh. not that it matters now then


----------



## AvengedRobix

We have any possibilty to see ccx oc in BIOS? [emoji853][emoji3525]

Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A6013 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## nick name

The Epic Games Store has a couple more games free this week:

https://www.epicgames.com/store/en-US/collection/free-games-collection

Of note is Metro 2033 Redux as it has a benchmark that may be useful to some.


----------



## AvengedRobix

Question...i've 2 ch7.. on the First flash BIOS and date and time was reset ti default.. on second no.. flash BIOS and time and date rest.. what Is the normal situation?

Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A6013 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## mightyrepooc

Hi everyone, 

i have a big problem since yesterday. My pc will not boot anymore (not even post) and stops at q-code 55 with the white led on. I overclocked it weeks ago with the BCLK to 103.4 and memory speed was set to slightly above 3200 mhz (i got 3600 DR memory samsung b-dies - F4-3600C17D-32GTZR). Bios was lately updated to Version 2703. Everything worked fine (benchmarks, mem tests etc.) But sometimes, when the monitors went in standby my pc crashed with qcode 8 and red led on). It booted fine after this crash, sometimes with the error of CPU Fan speed not readable. 

Yesterday, just played a game, pc crashed with qcode 8 and since then i only get qcode 55 when trying to boot. Tried cmos reset, re-seating cpu and cpu cooler, even removed the nvm ssds and gpu. But no luck.

Does someone have experienced this before? I need help 

Edit: Running the 2700x.


----------



## wonderiuy

Hello, I'm not an overclocker and I don't write so much on this forum, but reading it with pleasure.
CH7 (non WiFi) wiht 2700x and Corsair Vengeance RGB 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4 DRAM 3466MHz C16 is my setup.
When i bought the mobo bios 804 was the first update i could do and upgraded to 804 which served quite well. THe only problem was that the RAM cannot run at 3466 (1,35V) without error, so it was limited to 3333
I waited 1 year with 804 and finally decided to try 2801, hoping in something which could run the RAM to 3466.
I've noticed that the Vcore is higher, the CPU temperature is slightly higher, the W used is higher and the RAM still dont run at 3466 (1,35V, tried 1,4 without success) without error, so down again to 3333.
SHould i revert back to 804 or do you have any advice for me?
Thank you in advance


----------



## Bart

mightyrepooc said:


> Hi everyone,
> 
> i have a big problem since yesterday. My pc will not boot anymore (not even post) and stops at q-code 55 with the white led on. I overclocked it weeks ago with the BCLK to 103.4 and memory speed was set to slightly above 3200 mhz (i got 3600 DR memory samsung b-dies - F4-3600C17D-32GTZR). Bios was lately updated to Version 2703. Everything worked fine (benchmarks, mem tests etc.) But sometimes, when the monitors went in standby my pc crashed with qcode 8 and red led on). It booted fine after this crash, sometimes with the error of CPU Fan speed not readable.
> 
> Yesterday, just played a game, pc crashed with qcode 8 and since then i only get qcode 55 when trying to boot. Tried cmos reset, re-seating cpu and cpu cooler, even removed the nvm ssds and gpu. But no luck.
> 
> Does someone have experienced this before? I need help
> 
> Edit: Running the 2700x.


My C7H did a weird thing where it started acting up out of the blue and refused to boot at anything less than insanely horrible RAM timings. XMP just QUIT working for some reason. So I did something I've never had to do in decades of PC building: pulled the CMOS battery and left it out for a half hour. Put it back in, and XMP miraculously started working again.

Unplug the PSU, pull the CMOS battery, leave it out for 30 minutes, put it back. See if that helps.


----------



## Rusakova

mightyrepooc said:


> Hi everyone,
> 
> i have a big problem since yesterday. My pc will not boot anymore (not even post) and stops at q-code 55 with the white led on. I overclocked it weeks ago with the BCLK to 103.4 and memory speed was set to slightly above 3200 mhz (i got 3600 DR memory samsung b-dies - F4-3600C17D-32GTZR). Bios was lately updated to Version 2703. Everything worked fine (benchmarks, mem tests etc.) But sometimes, when the monitors went in standby my pc crashed with qcode 8 and red led on). It booted fine after this crash, sometimes with the error of CPU Fan speed not readable.
> 
> Yesterday, just played a game, pc crashed with qcode 8 and since then i only get qcode 55 when trying to boot. Tried cmos reset, re-seating cpu and cpu cooler, even removed the nvm ssds and gpu. But no luck.
> 
> Does someone have experienced this before? I need help
> 
> Edit: Running the 2700x.


You could also try flashing another BIOS using flashback if Bart's solution doesn't work.
q code 55 is "memory not installed" so try with 1 stick at the time.


----------



## darkage

wonderiuy said:


> Hello, I'm not an overclocker and I don't write so much on this forum, but reading it with pleasure.
> CH7 (non WiFi) wiht 2700x and Corsair Vengeance RGB 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4 DRAM 3466MHz C16 is my setup.
> When i bought the mobo bios 804 was the first update i could do and upgraded to 804 which served quite well. THe only problem was that the RAM cannot run at 3466 (1,35V) without error, so it was limited to 3333
> I waited 1 year with 804 and finally decided to try 2801, hoping in something which could run the RAM to 3466.
> I've noticed that the Vcore is higher, the CPU temperature is slightly higher, the W used is higher and the RAM still dont run at 3466 (1,35V, tried 1,4 without success) without error, so down again to 3333.
> SHould i revert back to 804 or do you have any advice for me?
> Thank you in advance


sell the 2700X, buy a 3000 series cpu, used all generations of ryzen and some FX, this 3000 series has nothing to do with all past amd cpus, runing 3200c14 [email protected] 3800c16-1.40v no problem, never ever with past gen cpus


----------



## Axaion

So, seems that ive been a bit mistaken, and that we want HPET on in the bios, but disabled in windows, along with forcing 0.5ms windows timer, doing that i actually manage to get 0.500ms timer.

Guess we just need asus to let us decide how fans work, even over 75c, and allow us to disable spread spectrum


----------



## nick name

wonderiuy said:


> Hello, I'm not an overclocker and I don't write so much on this forum, but reading it with pleasure.
> CH7 (non WiFi) wiht 2700x and Corsair Vengeance RGB 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4 DRAM 3466MHz C16 is my setup.
> When i bought the mobo bios 804 was the first update i could do and upgraded to 804 which served quite well. THe only problem was that the RAM cannot run at 3466 (1,35V) without error, so it was limited to 3333
> I waited 1 year with 804 and finally decided to try 2801, hoping in something which could run the RAM to 3466.
> I've noticed that the Vcore is higher, the CPU temperature is slightly higher, the W used is higher and the RAM still dont run at 3466 (1,35V, tried 1,4 without success) without error, so down again to 3333.
> SHould i revert back to 804 or do you have any advice for me?
> Thank you in advance


With the 2700X you want to run one of these BIOS versions: 1103, 1201, or 2501, 2606. BIOS versions past 2606 have reduced CPU performance for my 2700X. The first two named BIOS versions are the last BIOS versions with the previous AGESA and the latter two are using the new AGESA versions. 

With the newer BIOS versions (2501, 2606) I've found that I can use a slightly larger negative VCORE offset than with BIOS versions 1103 or 1201. And I have also seen slightly higher Auto voltages on BIOS 2801, but you can probably reduce that with a negative offset. Again, I don't recommend BIOS versions after 2606 with the 2700X due to reduced performance. 

Which RAM slots did you install your RAM into? If they are in slots A2 and B2 then try increasing your DRAM voltage to about 1.37V. I found that my kit doesn't run XMP/DOCP without errors at 1.35V because the BIOS sets some timings slightly faster than the actual XMP profile prescribes. 

Lastly, you're going need to use the BIOS flashback feature to return to those earlier BIOS versions (804, 1103, 1201).


----------



## mightyrepooc

Rusakova said:


> You could also try flashing another BIOS using flashback if Bart's solution doesn't work.
> q code 55 is "memory not installed" so try with 1 stick at the time.


Thanks for the advises. I tried the three latest bios versions but no luck. I also removed cmos battery for 30 mins but still qcode 55. I already tried one stick at a time before which didn't work. 

I will go and buy new ram sticks tomorrow and see if it is really "no memory installed". But for now i cannot get a running system again :/


----------



## Duvar

Where is the man to beat my result here?^^

https://wotencore.net/3142_de1 (Downloadlink ~1GB)

Use the same settings 768p, no AA and Ultra.


----------



## Zefram0911

new chipset drivers dropped. changelog doesn't say much.

1.9.27.1033

*Package Includes:*
AMD Chipset Drivers
AMD Ryzen™ Power Plans (required for UEFI CPPC2 in Windows® 10 May 2019 Update)
Contains desktop idle optimizations for 3rd Gen AMD Ryzen™ Processors


----------



## nick name

Duvar said:


> Where is the man to beat my result here?^^
> 
> https://wotencore.net/3142_de1 (Downloadlink ~1GB)
> 
> Use the same settings 768p, no AA and Ultra.



Was ist das?


----------



## minal

nick name said:


> With the 2700X you want to run one of these BIOS versions: 1103, 1201, or 2501, 2606. BIOS versions past 2606 have reduced CPU performance for my 2700X. The first two named BIOS versions are the last BIOS versions with the previous AGESA and the latter two are using the new AGESA versions.
> 
> With the newer BIOS versions (2501, 2606) I've found that I can use a slightly larger negative VCORE offset than with BIOS versions 1103 or 1201. And I have also seen slightly higher Auto voltages on BIOS 2801, but you can probably reduce that with a negative offset. Again, I don't recommend BIOS versions after 2606 with the 2700X due to reduced performance.


Nice, this info should be kept as a useful reference. 

What are your reasons on 1103 vs 1201, and 2501 vs 2606 ?


----------



## nick name

minal said:


> Nice, this info should be kept as a useful reference.
> 
> What are your reasons on 1103 vs 1201, and 2501 vs 2606 ?


1103 and 1201 are the most mature BIOS versions running on the previous AGESA. They also don't suffer some of the fan issues 2501 and 2606 do as it was sorted out in BIOS versions prior to the 1103. 

BIOS versions 2501 and 2606 remedy problems found in previous 2000 series BIOS versions, but maintain the benefits those versions had over 1103 and 1201. Some of those benefits being: greater VCORE offset stability, ability to set EDC within BIOS when using PE 3 and 4, ability to set EDC higher than 168, and possibly some other CPU enhancements I may have observed but couldn't verify.


----------



## Synoxia

Axaion said:


> So, seems that ive been a bit mistaken, and that we want HPET on in the bios, but disabled in windows, along with forcing 0.5ms windows timer, doing that i actually manage to get 0.500ms timer.
> 
> Guess we just need asus to let us decide how fans work, even over 75c, and allow us to disable spread spectrum


BIOS is on by default... i use bcedit /false and timer is still 0,4997


----------



## minal

nick name said:


> 1103 and 1201 are the most mature BIOS versions running on the previous AGESA. They also don't suffer some of the fan issues 2501 and 2606 do as it was sorted out in BIOS versions prior to the 1103.
> 
> BIOS versions 2501 and 2606 remedy problems found in previous 2000 series BIOS versions, but maintain the benefits those versions had over 1103 and 1201. Some of those benefits being: greater VCORE offset stability, ability to set EDC within BIOS when using PE 3 and 4, ability to set EDC higher than 168, and possibly some other CPU enhancements I may have observed but couldn't verify.


Thanks for the additional details. What I meant is why do you recommend both 1103 and 1201? What do you prefer about 1103 vs 1201? Similarly for 2501 vs 2606.


----------



## Axaion

Synoxia said:


> BIOS is on by default... i use bcedit /false and timer is still 0,4997


I should probably have written how to.

ON in bios
open CMD as admin
bcdedit /set disabledynamictick yes
bcdedit /set useplatformtick yes
bcdedit /set useplatformclock no

That gives me a perfect 0.5ms timer resolution

Also, seems windows in their infinite "WE KNOW WHAT WERE DOING" Wisdom, has forced 10mhz QPC timer on us, causing some rather poor syncing on USB polling for example, that part we can do nothing about yet =\


----------



## nick name

minal said:


> Thanks for the additional details. What I meant is why do you recommend both 1103 and 1201? What do you prefer about 1103 vs 1201? Similarly for 2501 vs 2606.


I can't really point out any benefits to one over the other beyond 1201 likely to be a more polished versions of 1103.

Kind of a similar story for 2501 and 2606, however, you lost a lot of AMD CBS options in 2606 so if you utilize those then stick with 2501 because they seem to perform the same with the 2700X.


----------



## minal

nick name said:


> I can't really point out any benefits to one over the other beyond 1201 likely to be a more polished versions of 1103.
> 
> Kind of a similar story for 2501 and 2606, however, you lost a lot of AMD CBS options in 2606 so if you utilize those then stick with 2501 because they seem to perform the same with the 2700X.


Got it, thanks.


----------



## neikosr0x

Zefram0911 said:


> new chipset drivers dropped. changelog doesn't say much.
> 
> 1.9.27.1033
> 
> *Package Includes:*
> AMD Chipset Drivers
> AMD Ryzen™ Power Plans (required for UEFI CPPC2 in Windows® 10 May 2019 Update)
> Contains desktop idle optimizations for 3rd Gen AMD Ryzen™ Processors


well just installed it and my CPU doesn't over 4.3ghz in any core other than the first 4 cores before i was getting 4.5ghz minimum across all 6 first cores and on the others some would do 4.375 to not less than 3.325ghz

EDIT: Well, while using windows it doesn't really go over 4.3 on the other cores. But when playing games it does jump as usual. btw guys, With the latest Official BIOS for CH7 non-wif /n 3900x, are you seeing 4.6 at all?


----------



## dkarDaGobert

yes my 3900x hits the 4.6Ghz mark with latest 2801 bios


----------



## Reikoji

dkarDaGobert said:


> yes my 3900x hits the 4.6Ghz mark with latest 2801 bios


Nice. Wish mine could do a 4.65 :3 4.625 is the highest on 2 of the cores.


----------



## tryout1

so probably i overread it but is bclk oc with the ryzen 3xxx dead now? Wanted to give a 101.8bclk so that my ram runs at 3800/1900IF and noticed that my clocks are stuck at 3614Mhz, even just bumping from 100 to 100.2 seems to trigger it. Looks to me like upping even the bclk even 1 notch disables the auto-oc function which worked with my 2700x before as i thought 103bclk is the cap. Just wanted to give the cpu the max it can get using the 0002M-FI Bios, default and level 3 don't really do much it seems only that level 3 pulls about 50mv more without actually increasing the clocks but keep the allcore higher when streaming which was around 4275-4325mhz (lvl3) vs 4200-4250mhz (default).


----------



## nick name

tryout1 said:


> so probably i overread it but is bclk oc with the ryzen 3xxx dead now? Wanted to give a 101.8bclk so that my ram runs at 3800/1900IF and noticed that my clocks are stuck at 3614Mhz, even just bumping from 100 to 100.2 seems to trigger it. Looks to me like upping even the bclk even 1 notch disables the auto-oc function which worked with my 2700x before as i thought 103bclk is the cap. Just wanted to give the cpu the max it can get using the 0002M-FI Bios, default and level 3 don't really do much it seems only that level 3 pulls about 50mv more without actually increasing the clocks but keep the allcore higher when streaming which was around 4275-4325mhz (lvl3) vs 4200-4250mhz (default).


Something similar happened with the 2700X if you didn't also enable Core Performance Boost. Do you have it enabled?


----------



## tryout1

nick name said:


> Something similar happened with the 2700X if you didn't also enable Core Performance Boost. Do you have it enabled?


yeah was on and tried "disable" but still at 3.6Ghz sadly


----------



## ubbernewb

this the crosshair vii hero 470 thread? if so "A" what is good cpu software will tell me what voltage im running "B" how to set cpu voltage manauly i set to manual but wont let me change it "C" cpu-z says im at 4.00 ghz but when i run Cinebench 15 my score STINKS shows it below a 1700x? im on a 3900x


----------



## mightyrepooc

mightyrepooc said:


> Thanks for the advises. I tried the three latest bios versions but no luck. I also removed cmos battery for 30 mins but still qcode 55. I already tried one stick at a time before which didn't work.
> 
> I will go and buy new ram sticks tomorrow and see if it is really "no memory installed". But for now i cannot get a running system again :/


Uodate from my site: Installed new ram, still dame behaviour. I assume the mother board is bricked. I will meet a friend of mine tomorrow and try to run my 2700x on his crosshair vi. And we will try his 3600x on my crosshair vii. Will report which device causes the error (cpu or motherboard)...


----------



## AvengedRobix

Daily and gaming Setting


----------



## speedgoat

can i ask something please ? every now and then i see BCLK jumps to 102s 103.s and the like, this does not only affect the core boost freq but also it looks like its consistently affecting the mem clock the UCLK too. do you guys believe that this could be happening for real or is it a reporting bug ? 
its a 3800X on a C7H with ABBA, should be 100.00 BCLK and the 6.123930 HwiNFO 

its a little scary if its really happening


----------



## dkarDaGobert

wont get faster..


----------



## Reikoji

speedgoat said:


> can i ask something please ? every now and then i see BCLK jumps to 102s 103.s and the like, this does not only affect the core boost freq but also it looks like its consistently affecting the mem clock the UCLK too. do you guys believe that this could be happening for real or is it a reporting bug ?
> its a 3800X on a C7H with ABBA, should be 100.00 BCLK and the 6.123930 HwiNFO
> 
> its a little scary if its really happening


Its giving you 4.6ghz boost on a 4.5ghz max boost processor it seems. I wouldnt worry about it :3


----------



## speedgoat

Reikoji said:


> Its giving you 4.6ghz boost on a 4.5ghz max boost processor it seems. I wouldnt worry about it :3


BCLK at 103% unintentionally.. i am afraid this is how nvmes get fried if not the IMC with the IF going 1960MHz

the thing is if i shut down HWiNFO and open it again the reading disappears so i am thinking its just a bug but has anyone else noticed their BCLK jumping ? 

i am also running fixed SoC at 1.08 and a constant offset 0.1V


----------



## nick name

speedgoat said:


> BCLK at 103% unintentionally.. i am afraid this is how nvmes get fried if not the IMC with the IF going 1960MHz
> 
> the thing is if i shut down HWiNFO and open it again the reading disappears so i am thinking its just a bug but has anyone else noticed their BCLK jumping ?
> 
> i am also running fixed SoC at 1.08 and a constant offset 0.1V


I've seen one or two reports of it on here.


----------



## chakku

How is PBO+AutoOC working on BIOS 2801? Is it still performing worse in single core or do you see cores actually boosting beyond their rated turbos (ie above 4.4GHz on 3700X)? Does PBO on its own boost to max turbo?


----------



## harderthanfire

chakku said:


> How is PBO+AutoOC working on BIOS 2801? Is it still performing worse in single core or do you see cores actually boosting beyond their rated turbos (ie above 4.4GHz on 3700X)? Does PBO on its own boost to max turbo?



My housemate installed a 3700X yesterday on 2801 and he is seeing the odd core above 4.4 but mostly around or slightly lower.


----------



## xeizo

chakku said:


> How is PBO+AutoOC working on BIOS 2801? Is it still performing worse in single core or do you see cores actually boosting beyond their rated turbos (ie above 4.4GHz on 3700X)? Does PBO on its own boost to max turbo?


It's worse than 0002M-FIE according to readings in HWINFO64, about 25MHz less, but running benchmarks single core score is overall the same. Multicore has taken a hit though, about 1000p less in Geekbench 4.

Interesting is, the 5220-bios for the Prime-boards has no problem boosting up to and above boost speed and benchmarks are the best of any bios for those boards, to me it seems the C7H bios is still bugged. Not a "final" bios imho.


----------



## MrPhilo

A bit late to the party as my system was already performing fine.

Decided to flash the ABBA bios (2801) and remove my 4.4Ghz manual OC and see how far my CPU can go up to.

Both my CCX can go to 4.5Ghz or above! 4.55Ghz seems to be max for my 3800x (obviously not all core).

This is Auto + 3800CL16 for RAM and 1900 FCLK etc


----------



## chakku

harderthanfire said:


> My housemate installed a 3700X yesterday on 2801 and he is seeing the odd core above 4.4 but mostly around or slightly lower.





xeizo said:


> It's worse than 0002M-FIE according to readings in HWINFO64, about 25MHz less, but running benchmarks single core score is overall the same. Multicore has taken a hit though, about 1000p less in Geekbench 4.
> 
> Interesting is, the 5220-bios for the Prime-boards has no problem boosting up to and above boost speed and benchmarks are the best of any bios for those boards, to me it seems the C7H bios is still bugged. Not a "final" bios imho.


I tried them out last night and it still seems weirdly broken on 2801. With PBO+200 my hard cap frequency was 4350, with PBO+100 or less it was 4375 and with PBO and no AutoOC it was also 4375.

What I have found works best for me is Performance Enhancer, which I thought may have just been leftover from Ryzen 2000 and wasn't changed for Ryzen 3000, however Level 2 is essentially PBO with the limits maxed out (1000 on all settings confirmed in Ryzen Master, while enabling PBO would cap these at 355 or so) and while it appears to be less frequent possibly due to holding boosts on multiple cores longer, leaving HWiNFO running overnight confirmed I am boosting to 4.4 on all four of my best cores as reported by RM, ie Gold Star, Silver Star and two white dots and to 4375 on all other cores. This is with the Ryzen Balanced power plan though, I don't intend to use Level 3 as I did with the 2700X if it means needing to use the Windows Power Plan.


----------



## xeizo

Prime Pro with bios 5220 boosts my 3700X above 4.4GHz on 7 of 8 cores, up to 4467MHz and that is almost immediately and BCLK is only 99.8. Much better boost behaviour than C7H despite being a "lesser" board. I think something is bugged in the C7H bios. Or my 3700X has over achieving silicon, and my 3900X under achieving, but boost was great with the 0002+ bios.


----------



## Synoxia

To me it just seems that 2801 has a bugged bios. My 3700x should idle at 2200 or atleast is what im seeing on other 3700x users, instead i idle at 2.8 only. I think this is hampering max single core a little.
My cb single score is 206 with a 101.8 BCLK, which is totally wrong as 3800x with 4.5 boost have like 210. If i leave everything stock except ram i get 203...


----------



## dkarDaGobert

ok final one


----------



## Synoxia

I've essentially turned a 3700x into a 3800x, IF it's stable and IF stock voltage are fine (no LLC, only Vsoc llc 2, IF is not infinity fabric)

EDIT: at idle even boosts to 4575... either AMD bins their cpu too safely or golden chip


----------



## neikosr0x

dkarDaGobert said:


> ok final one


All your CPU config is at stock? or are you using some different values?


----------



## dkarDaGobert

neikosr0x said:


> All your CPU config is at stock? or are you using some different values?





Spoiler



[2019/10/02 12:06:31]
Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
BCLK_Divider [Auto]
Performance Enhancer [Level 3 (OC)]
CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
Performance Bias [Auto]
Memory Frequency [DDR4-3800MHz]
FCLK Frequency [1900MHz]
Core Performance Boost [Enabled]
SMT Mode [Auto]
TPU [Keep Current Settings]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Enabled]
Max CPU Boost Clock Override [Auto]
Platform Thermal Throttle Limit [Auto]
Mem Over Clock Fail Count [2]
DRAM CAS# Latency [16]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [15]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [15]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [15]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [30]
Trc [44]
TrrdS [4]
TrrdL [4]
Tfaw [16]
TwtrS [4]
TwtrL [12]
Twr [10]
Trcpage [Auto]
TrdrdScl [4]
TwrwrScl [4]
Trfc [280]
Trfc2 [192]
Trfc4 [132]
Tcwl [16]
Trtp [8]
Trdwr [8]
Twrrd [1]
TwrwrSc [1]
TwrwrSd [7]
TwrwrDd [7]
TrdrdSc [1]
TrdrdSd [5]
TrdrdDd [5]
Tcke [1]
ProcODT [34.3 ohm]
Cmd2T [1T]
Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
Power Down Enable [Disabled]
RttNom [Rtt_Nom Disable]
RttWr [Dynamic ODT Off]
RttPark [RZQ/5]
MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
MemCkeSetup [Auto]
MemCadBusClkDrvStren [20.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [20.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [20.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [20.0 Ohm]
CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 3]
CPU Current Capability [140%]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
CPU Voltage Frequency [400]
CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
CPU Power Phase Control [Power Phase Response]
Manual Adjustment [Ultra Fast]
CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 3]
VDDSOC Current Capability [140%]
VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed VDDSOC Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
VDDSOC Phase Control [Optimized]
DRAM Current Capability [130%]
DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [400]
DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.38000]
VTTDDR Voltage [Auto]
VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
VDDP Voltage [Auto]
1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
PLL reference voltage [Auto]
T Offset [Auto]
Sense MI Skew [Enabled]
Sense MI Offset [Auto]
Promontory presence [Auto]
Clock Amplitude [Normal]
CLDO VDDP voltage [900]
CPU Core Voltage [Offset mode]
CPU Offset Mode Sign [-]
- CPU Core Voltage Offset [0.05000]
CPU SOC Voltage [Auto]
DRAM Voltage [1.38000]
CLDO VDDG voltage [0.950]
1.8V PLL Voltage [1.80000]
1.05V SB Voltage [1.05000]
Firmware TPM [Disable]
Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
PSS Support [Auto]
SVM Mode [Disabled]
Onboard LED [Disabled]
Q-Code LED Function [Disabled after POST]
SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
SATA Mode [AHCI]
NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
SMART Self Test [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Enabled]
HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
PCIEX8/X4_2 Mode [Auto]
PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
SB Link Mode [Auto]
Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
When system is in working state [Off]
When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [Off]
Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
ErP Ready [Disabled]
Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
Power On By RTC [Disabled]
Network Stack [Disabled]
Device [WDC WD80EFAX-68LHPN0]
Legacy USB Support [Disabled]
XHCI Hand-off [Disabled]
U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
U31G1_5 [Enabled]
U31G1_6 [Enabled]
U31G1_7 [Enabled]
U31G1_8 [Enabled]
U31G1_9 [Enabled]
U31G1_10 [Enabled]
USB11 [Enabled]
USB12 [Enabled]
USB13 [Enabled]
USB14 [Enabled]
USB15 [Enabled]
CPU Temperature [Monitor]
MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
PCH Temperature [Monitor]
T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
5V Voltage [Monitor]
12V Voltage [Monitor]
CPU Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [6.4 sec]
CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [200 RPM]
CPU Fan Profile [Standard]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [5.1 sec]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Silent]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [5.1 sec]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Silent]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
Chassis Fan 3 Smoothing Up/Down Time [5.1 sec]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Silent]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
HAMP Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [5.1 sec]
HAMP Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
HAMP Fan Profile [Silent]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
PSPP Policy [Auto]
Fast Boot [Enabled]
NVMe Support [Enabled]
Next Boot after AC Power Loss [Normal Boot]
AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
Boot Logo Display [Disabled]
POST Report [5 sec]
Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
Launch CSM [Disabled]
OS Type [Windows UEFI mode]
Setup Animator [Disabled]
ASUS Grid Install Service [Disabled]
Load from Profile [1]
Profile Name [16.15.15.15.30]
Save to Profile [1]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
VDDSOC Voltage [1.05000]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
BCLK Frequency [Auto]
CPU Ratio [Auto]
DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A2]
Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
Custom Pstate0 [Auto]
CCD Control [Auto]
Core control [Auto]
SMT Control [Auto]
L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Enable]
L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Enable]
Platform First Error Handling [Enabled]
Core Performance Boost [Auto]
Global C-state Control [Enabled]
DRAM ECC Enable [Disabled]
DRAM scrub time [Auto]
Poison scrubber control [Auto]
Redirect scrubber control [Auto]
Redirect scrubber limit [Auto]
NUMA nodes per socket [Auto]
Memory interleaving [Auto]
Memory interleaving size [512 Bytes]
1TB remap [Auto]
DRAM map inversion [Auto]
ACPI SRAT L3 Cache As NUMA Domain [Auto]
ACPI SLIT Distance Control [Auto]
ACPI SLIT remote relative distance [Auto]
GMI encryption control [Auto]
xGMI encryption control [Auto]
CAKE CRC perf bounds Control [Auto]
4-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
3-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
Disable DF to external IP SyncFloodPropagation [Auto]
Disable DF sync flood propagation [Auto]
CC6 memory region encryption [Auto]
Memory Clear [Auto]
Overclock [Enabled]
Memory Clock Speed [1900MHz]
Tcl [Auto]
Trcdrd [Auto]
Trcdwr [Auto]
Trp [Auto]
Tras [Auto]
Trc Ctrl [Auto]
TrrdS [Auto]
TrrdL [Auto]
Tfaw Ctrl [Auto]
TwtrS [Auto]
TwtrL [Auto]
Twr Ctrl [Auto]
Trcpage Ctrl [Auto]
TrdrdScL Ctrl [Auto]
TwrwrScL Ctrl [Auto]
Trfc Ctrl [Auto]
Trfc2 Ctrl [Auto]
Trfc4 Ctrl [Auto]
Tcwl [Auto]
Trtp [Auto]
Tcke [Auto]
Trdwr [Auto]
Twrrd [Auto]
TwrwrSc [Auto]
TwrwrSd [Auto]
TwrwrDd [Auto]
TrdrdSc [Auto]
TrdrdSd [Auto]
TrdrdDd [Auto]
ProcODT [Auto]
Power Down Enable [Auto]
Cmd2T [1T]
Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Manual]
RttNom [Rtt_Nom Disable]
RttWr [Dynamic ODT Off]
RttPark [RZQ/5]
Data Poisoning [Auto]
DRAM Post Package Repair [Disable]
RCD Parity [Auto]
DRAM Address Command Parity Retry [Auto]
Write CRC Enable [Auto]
DRAM Write CRC Enable and Retry Limit [Auto]
Disable Memory Error Injection [True]
DRAM ECC Symbol Size [Auto]
DRAM UECC Retry [Auto]
TSME [Auto]
Data Scramble [Auto]
DFE Read Training [Enable]
FFE Write Training [Enable]
PMU Pattern Bits Control [Manual]
PMU Pattern Bits [a]
MR6VrefDQ Control [Auto]
CPU Vref Training Seed Control [Auto]
Chipselect Interleaving [Auto]
BankGroupSwap [Enabled]
BankGroupSwapAlt [Disabled]
Address Hash Bank [Auto]
Address Hash CS [Auto]
Address Hash Rm [Auto]
SPD Read Optimization [Enabled]
MBIST Enable [Disabled]
Pattern Select [PRBS]
Pattern Length [3]
Aggressor Channel [1 Aggressor Channel]
Aggressor Static Lane Control [Disabled]
Target Static Lane Control [Disabled]
Worst Case Margin Granularity [Per Chip Select]
Read Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
Read Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
Write Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
Write Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
IOMMU [Enabled]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Enable]
Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [Auto]
FCLK Frequency [1900MHz]
SOC OVERCLOCK VID [0]
UCLK DIV1 MODE [UCLK==MEMCLK]
VDDP Voltage Control [Auto]
VDDG Voltage Control [Auto]
SoC/Uncore OC Mode [Disabled]
LN2 Mode [Disabled]
ACS Enable [Auto]
PCIe Ten Bit Tag Support [Auto]
cTDP Control [Auto]
EfficiencyModeEn [Auto]
Package Power Limit Control [Auto]
APBDIS [Auto]
DF Cstates [Auto]
CPPC [Enabled]
CPPC Preferred Cores [Enabled]
BoostFmaxEn [Auto]
Early Link Speed [Auto]


----------



## neikosr0x

dkarDaGobert said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> [2019/10/02 12:06:31]
> Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
> BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
> BCLK_Divider [Auto]
> Performance Enhancer [Level 3 (OC)]
> CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
> Performance Bias [Auto]
> Memory Frequency [DDR4-3800MHz]
> FCLK Frequency [1900MHz]
> Core Performance Boost [Enabled]
> SMT Mode [Auto]
> TPU [Keep Current Settings]
> Precision Boost Overdrive [Enabled]
> Max CPU Boost Clock Override [Auto]
> Platform Thermal Throttle Limit [Auto]
> Mem Over Clock Fail Count [2]
> DRAM CAS# Latency [16]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [15]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [15]
> DRAM RAS# PRE Time [15]
> DRAM RAS# ACT Time [30]
> Trc [44]
> TrrdS [4]
> TrrdL [4]
> Tfaw [16]
> TwtrS [4]
> TwtrL [12]
> Twr [10]
> Trcpage [Auto]
> TrdrdScl [4]
> TwrwrScl [4]
> Trfc [280]
> Trfc2 [192]
> Trfc4 [132]
> Tcwl [16]
> Trtp [8]
> Trdwr [8]
> Twrrd [1]
> TwrwrSc [1]
> TwrwrSd [7]
> TwrwrDd [7]
> TrdrdSc [1]
> TrdrdSd [5]
> TrdrdDd [5]
> Tcke [1]
> ProcODT [34.3 ohm]
> Cmd2T [1T]
> Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
> Power Down Enable [Disabled]
> RttNom [Rtt_Nom Disable]
> RttWr [Dynamic ODT Off]
> RttPark [RZQ/5]
> MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
> MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
> MemCkeSetup [Auto]
> MemCadBusClkDrvStren [20.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [20.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [20.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [20.0 Ohm]
> CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 3]
> CPU Current Capability [140%]
> CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
> CPU Voltage Frequency [400]
> CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
> CPU Power Phase Control [Power Phase Response]
> Manual Adjustment [Ultra Fast]
> CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
> VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 3]
> VDDSOC Current Capability [140%]
> VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Manual]
> Fixed VDDSOC Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
> VDDSOC Phase Control [Optimized]
> DRAM Current Capability [130%]
> DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
> DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
> Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [400]
> DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.38000]
> VTTDDR Voltage [Auto]
> VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
> VDDP Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
> CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
> 2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
> PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
> PLL reference voltage [Auto]
> T Offset [Auto]
> Sense MI Skew [Enabled]
> Sense MI Offset [Auto]
> Promontory presence [Auto]
> Clock Amplitude [Normal]
> CLDO VDDP voltage [900]
> CPU Core Voltage [Offset mode]
> CPU Offset Mode Sign [-]
> - CPU Core Voltage Offset [0.05000]
> CPU SOC Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM Voltage [1.38000]
> CLDO VDDG voltage [0.950]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [1.80000]
> 1.05V SB Voltage [1.05000]
> Firmware TPM [Disable]
> Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
> PSS Support [Auto]
> SVM Mode [Disabled]
> Onboard LED [Disabled]
> Q-Code LED Function [Disabled after POST]
> SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
> SATA Mode [AHCI]
> NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
> SMART Self Test [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Enabled]
> HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
> M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
> PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
> PCIEX8/X4_2 Mode [Auto]
> PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
> M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
> M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
> SB Link Mode [Auto]
> Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
> USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
> When system is in working state [Off]
> When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [Off]
> Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
> Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
> ErP Ready [Disabled]
> Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
> Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
> Power On By RTC [Disabled]
> Network Stack [Disabled]
> Device [WDC WD80EFAX-68LHPN0]
> Legacy USB Support [Disabled]
> XHCI Hand-off [Disabled]
> U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
> U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
> U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> U31G1_5 [Enabled]
> U31G1_6 [Enabled]
> U31G1_7 [Enabled]
> U31G1_8 [Enabled]
> U31G1_9 [Enabled]
> U31G1_10 [Enabled]
> USB11 [Enabled]
> USB12 [Enabled]
> USB13 [Enabled]
> USB14 [Enabled]
> USB15 [Enabled]
> CPU Temperature [Monitor]
> MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
> PCH Temperature [Monitor]
> T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
> HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
> CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
> AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
> W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
> W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
> 3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
> 5V Voltage [Monitor]
> 12V Voltage [Monitor]
> CPU Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [6.4 sec]
> CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [200 RPM]
> CPU Fan Profile [Standard]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
> Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [5.1 sec]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Silent]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
> Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [5.1 sec]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Silent]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
> Chassis Fan 3 Smoothing Up/Down Time [5.1 sec]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Silent]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
> HAMP Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [5.1 sec]
> HAMP Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> HAMP Fan Profile [Silent]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
> AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> PSPP Policy [Auto]
> Fast Boot [Enabled]
> NVMe Support [Enabled]
> Next Boot after AC Power Loss [Normal Boot]
> AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
> Boot Logo Display [Disabled]
> POST Report [5 sec]
> Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
> Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
> Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
> Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
> Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
> Launch CSM [Disabled]
> OS Type [Windows UEFI mode]
> Setup Animator [Disabled]
> ASUS Grid Install Service [Disabled]
> Load from Profile [1]
> Profile Name [16.15.15.15.30]
> Save to Profile [1]
> CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
> VDDSOC Voltage [1.05000]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> BCLK Frequency [Auto]
> CPU Ratio [Auto]
> DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A2]
> Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
> Custom Pstate0 [Auto]
> CCD Control [Auto]
> Core control [Auto]
> SMT Control [Auto]
> L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Enable]
> L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Enable]
> Platform First Error Handling [Enabled]
> Core Performance Boost [Auto]
> Global C-state Control [Enabled]
> DRAM ECC Enable [Disabled]
> DRAM scrub time [Auto]
> Poison scrubber control [Auto]
> Redirect scrubber control [Auto]
> Redirect scrubber limit [Auto]
> NUMA nodes per socket [Auto]
> Memory interleaving [Auto]
> Memory interleaving size [512 Bytes]
> 1TB remap [Auto]
> DRAM map inversion [Auto]
> ACPI SRAT L3 Cache As NUMA Domain [Auto]
> ACPI SLIT Distance Control [Auto]
> ACPI SLIT remote relative distance [Auto]
> GMI encryption control [Auto]
> xGMI encryption control [Auto]
> CAKE CRC perf bounds Control [Auto]
> 4-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
> 3-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
> Disable DF to external IP SyncFloodPropagation [Auto]
> Disable DF sync flood propagation [Auto]
> CC6 memory region encryption [Auto]
> Memory Clear [Auto]
> Overclock [Enabled]
> Memory Clock Speed [1900MHz]
> Tcl [Auto]
> Trcdrd [Auto]
> Trcdwr [Auto]
> Trp [Auto]
> Tras [Auto]
> Trc Ctrl [Auto]
> TrrdS [Auto]
> TrrdL [Auto]
> Tfaw Ctrl [Auto]
> TwtrS [Auto]
> TwtrL [Auto]
> Twr Ctrl [Auto]
> Trcpage Ctrl [Auto]
> TrdrdScL Ctrl [Auto]
> TwrwrScL Ctrl [Auto]
> Trfc Ctrl [Auto]
> Trfc2 Ctrl [Auto]
> Trfc4 Ctrl [Auto]
> Tcwl [Auto]
> Trtp [Auto]
> Tcke [Auto]
> Trdwr [Auto]
> Twrrd [Auto]
> TwrwrSc [Auto]
> TwrwrSd [Auto]
> TwrwrDd [Auto]
> TrdrdSc [Auto]
> TrdrdSd [Auto]
> TrdrdDd [Auto]
> ProcODT [Auto]
> Power Down Enable [Auto]
> Cmd2T [1T]
> Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
> CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
> CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
> Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Manual]
> RttNom [Rtt_Nom Disable]
> RttWr [Dynamic ODT Off]
> RttPark [RZQ/5]
> Data Poisoning [Auto]
> DRAM Post Package Repair [Disable]
> RCD Parity [Auto]
> DRAM Address Command Parity Retry [Auto]
> Write CRC Enable [Auto]
> DRAM Write CRC Enable and Retry Limit [Auto]
> Disable Memory Error Injection [True]
> DRAM ECC Symbol Size [Auto]
> DRAM UECC Retry [Auto]
> TSME [Auto]
> Data Scramble [Auto]
> DFE Read Training [Enable]
> FFE Write Training [Enable]
> PMU Pattern Bits Control [Manual]
> PMU Pattern Bits [a]
> MR6VrefDQ Control [Auto]
> CPU Vref Training Seed Control [Auto]
> Chipselect Interleaving [Auto]
> BankGroupSwap [Enabled]
> BankGroupSwapAlt [Disabled]
> Address Hash Bank [Auto]
> Address Hash CS [Auto]
> Address Hash Rm [Auto]
> SPD Read Optimization [Enabled]
> MBIST Enable [Disabled]
> Pattern Select [PRBS]
> Pattern Length [3]
> Aggressor Channel [1 Aggressor Channel]
> Aggressor Static Lane Control [Disabled]
> Target Static Lane Control [Disabled]
> Worst Case Margin Granularity [Per Chip Select]
> Read Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
> Read Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
> Write Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
> Write Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
> IOMMU [Enabled]
> Precision Boost Overdrive [Enable]
> Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [Auto]
> FCLK Frequency [1900MHz]
> SOC OVERCLOCK VID [0]
> UCLK DIV1 MODE [UCLK==MEMCLK]
> VDDP Voltage Control [Auto]
> VDDG Voltage Control [Auto]
> SoC/Uncore OC Mode [Disabled]
> LN2 Mode [Disabled]
> ACS Enable [Auto]
> PCIe Ten Bit Tag Support [Auto]
> cTDP Control [Auto]
> EfficiencyModeEn [Auto]
> Package Power Limit Control [Auto]
> APBDIS [Auto]
> DF Cstates [Auto]
> CPPC [Enabled]
> CPPC Preferred Cores [Enabled]
> BoostFmaxEn [Auto]
> Early Link Speed [Auto]


thanks mate i will check and see what happens with my CPU lol i'm not getting more than 5.550 in this BIOS and voltages are not going pass 1.48v it usually needs 1.5v to reach 4.6+


----------



## Synoxia

Does your 3700x idle to 2200 with this board? (ryzen balanced power plan)


----------



## tryout1

Synoxia said:


> I've essentially turned a 3700x into a 3800x, IF it's stable and IF stock voltage are fine (no LLC, only Vsoc llc 2, IF is not infinity fabric)
> 
> EDIT: at idle even boosts to 4575... either AMD bins their cpu too safely or golden chip


nice, sadly still no dice for me bclk oc caps my cpu at 3600mhz wanted to try the same :thumb:


----------



## Axaion

Anyone with ram speeds over 3400mhz, and latencymon that wants to check if it increases these dramatically ?,makes them spike up by x3

Its in the second tab.

Highest measured interrupt to process latency (µs): 
Average measured interrupt to process latency (µs): 

Highest measured interrupt to DPC latency (µs): 
Average measured interrupt to DPC latency (µs):


----------



## dkarDaGobert

Highest measured interrupt to process latency (µs): 650,50
Average measured interrupt to process latency (µs): 5,862050

Highest measured interrupt to DPC latency (µs): 648,20
Average measured interrupt to DPC latency (µs): 1,065503


logged 1min while browsing


Your system appears to be suitable for handling real-time audio and other tasks without dropouts. 
LatencyMon has been analyzing your system for 0:01:00 (h:mm:ss) on all processors.


----------



## Axaion

dkarDaGobert said:


> Highest measured interrupt to process latency (µs): 650,50
> Average measured interrupt to process latency (µs): 5,862050
> 
> Highest measured interrupt to DPC latency (µs): 648,20
> Average measured interrupt to DPC latency (µs): 1,065503
> 
> 
> logged 1min while browsing
> 
> 
> Your system appears to be suitable for handling real-time audio and other tasks without dropouts.
> LatencyMon has been analyzing your system for 0:01:00 (h:mm:ss) on all processors.


At what memory speed?, is it the same at or below 3400mhz ram speed?

Just trying to find out if my system is screwy


----------



## dkarDaGobert

Axaion said:


> At what memory speed?, is it the same at or below 3400mhz ram speed?
> 
> Just trying to find out if my system is screwy



https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-978.html#post28145658


----------



## Axaion

dkarDaGobert said:


> https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-978.html#post28145658


Mhm, yeah something is wrong on my end.

Thanks for testing!


----------



## Synoxia

Axaion said:


> Mhm, yeah something is wrong on my end.
> 
> Thanks for testing!


Something is clearly wrong on your end. Mine is 30-40ms idle costantly with spikes to 100-120 from ndis.sys and very, very rarely 220 from tcpip.sys.


----------



## neikosr0x

dkarDaGobert said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> [2019/10/02 12:06:31]
> Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
> BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
> BCLK_Divider [Auto]
> Performance Enhancer [Level 3 (OC)]
> CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
> Performance Bias [Auto]
> Memory Frequency [DDR4-3800MHz]
> FCLK Frequency [1900MHz]
> Core Performance Boost [Enabled]
> SMT Mode [Auto]
> TPU [Keep Current Settings]
> Precision Boost Overdrive [Enabled]
> Max CPU Boost Clock Override [Auto]
> Platform Thermal Throttle Limit [Auto]
> Mem Over Clock Fail Count [2]
> DRAM CAS# Latency [16]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [15]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [15]
> DRAM RAS# PRE Time [15]
> DRAM RAS# ACT Time [30]
> Trc [44]
> TrrdS [4]
> TrrdL [4]
> Tfaw [16]
> TwtrS [4]
> TwtrL [12]
> Twr [10]
> Trcpage [Auto]
> TrdrdScl [4]
> TwrwrScl [4]
> Trfc [280]
> Trfc2 [192]
> Trfc4 [132]
> Tcwl [16]
> Trtp [8]
> Trdwr [8]
> Twrrd [1]
> TwrwrSc [1]
> TwrwrSd [7]
> TwrwrDd [7]
> TrdrdSc [1]
> TrdrdSd [5]
> TrdrdDd [5]
> Tcke [1]
> ProcODT [34.3 ohm]
> Cmd2T [1T]
> Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
> Power Down Enable [Disabled]
> RttNom [Rtt_Nom Disable]
> RttWr [Dynamic ODT Off]
> RttPark [RZQ/5]
> MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
> MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
> MemCkeSetup [Auto]
> MemCadBusClkDrvStren [20.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [20.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [20.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [20.0 Ohm]
> CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 3]
> CPU Current Capability [140%]
> CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
> CPU Voltage Frequency [400]
> CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
> CPU Power Phase Control [Power Phase Response]
> Manual Adjustment [Ultra Fast]
> CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
> VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 3]
> VDDSOC Current Capability [140%]
> VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Manual]
> Fixed VDDSOC Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
> VDDSOC Phase Control [Optimized]
> DRAM Current Capability [130%]
> DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
> DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
> Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [400]
> DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.38000]
> VTTDDR Voltage [Auto]
> VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
> VDDP Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
> CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
> 2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
> PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
> PLL reference voltage [Auto]
> T Offset [Auto]
> Sense MI Skew [Enabled]
> Sense MI Offset [Auto]
> Promontory presence [Auto]
> Clock Amplitude [Normal]
> CLDO VDDP voltage [900]
> CPU Core Voltage [Offset mode]
> CPU Offset Mode Sign [-]
> - CPU Core Voltage Offset [0.05000]
> CPU SOC Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM Voltage [1.38000]
> CLDO VDDG voltage [0.950]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [1.80000]
> 1.05V SB Voltage [1.05000]
> Firmware TPM [Disable]
> Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
> PSS Support [Auto]
> SVM Mode [Disabled]
> Onboard LED [Disabled]
> Q-Code LED Function [Disabled after POST]
> SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
> SATA Mode [AHCI]
> NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
> SMART Self Test [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Enabled]
> HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
> M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
> PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
> PCIEX8/X4_2 Mode [Auto]
> PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
> M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
> M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
> SB Link Mode [Auto]
> Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
> USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
> When system is in working state [Off]
> When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [Off]
> Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
> Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
> ErP Ready [Disabled]
> Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
> Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
> Power On By RTC [Disabled]
> Network Stack [Disabled]
> Device [WDC WD80EFAX-68LHPN0]
> Legacy USB Support [Disabled]
> XHCI Hand-off [Disabled]
> U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
> U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
> U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> U31G1_5 [Enabled]
> U31G1_6 [Enabled]
> U31G1_7 [Enabled]
> U31G1_8 [Enabled]
> U31G1_9 [Enabled]
> U31G1_10 [Enabled]
> USB11 [Enabled]
> USB12 [Enabled]
> USB13 [Enabled]
> USB14 [Enabled]
> USB15 [Enabled]
> CPU Temperature [Monitor]
> MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
> PCH Temperature [Monitor]
> T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
> HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
> CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
> AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
> W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
> W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
> 3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
> 5V Voltage [Monitor]
> 12V Voltage [Monitor]
> CPU Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [6.4 sec]
> CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [200 RPM]
> CPU Fan Profile [Standard]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
> Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [5.1 sec]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Silent]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
> Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [5.1 sec]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Silent]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
> Chassis Fan 3 Smoothing Up/Down Time [5.1 sec]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Silent]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
> HAMP Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [5.1 sec]
> HAMP Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> HAMP Fan Profile [Silent]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
> AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> PSPP Policy [Auto]
> Fast Boot [Enabled]
> NVMe Support [Enabled]
> Next Boot after AC Power Loss [Normal Boot]
> AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
> Boot Logo Display [Disabled]
> POST Report [5 sec]
> Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
> Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
> Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
> Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
> Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
> Launch CSM [Disabled]
> OS Type [Windows UEFI mode]
> Setup Animator [Disabled]
> ASUS Grid Install Service [Disabled]
> Load from Profile [1]
> Profile Name [16.15.15.15.30]
> Save to Profile [1]
> CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
> VDDSOC Voltage [1.05000]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> BCLK Frequency [Auto]
> CPU Ratio [Auto]
> DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A2]
> Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
> Custom Pstate0 [Auto]
> CCD Control [Auto]
> Core control [Auto]
> SMT Control [Auto]
> L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Enable]
> L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Enable]
> Platform First Error Handling [Enabled]
> Core Performance Boost [Auto]
> Global C-state Control [Enabled]
> DRAM ECC Enable [Disabled]
> DRAM scrub time [Auto]
> Poison scrubber control [Auto]
> Redirect scrubber control [Auto]
> Redirect scrubber limit [Auto]
> NUMA nodes per socket [Auto]
> Memory interleaving [Auto]
> Memory interleaving size [512 Bytes]
> 1TB remap [Auto]
> DRAM map inversion [Auto]
> ACPI SRAT L3 Cache As NUMA Domain [Auto]
> ACPI SLIT Distance Control [Auto]
> ACPI SLIT remote relative distance [Auto]
> GMI encryption control [Auto]
> xGMI encryption control [Auto]
> CAKE CRC perf bounds Control [Auto]
> 4-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
> 3-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
> Disable DF to external IP SyncFloodPropagation [Auto]
> Disable DF sync flood propagation [Auto]
> CC6 memory region encryption [Auto]
> Memory Clear [Auto]
> Overclock [Enabled]
> Memory Clock Speed [1900MHz]
> Tcl [Auto]
> Trcdrd [Auto]
> Trcdwr [Auto]
> Trp [Auto]
> Tras [Auto]
> Trc Ctrl [Auto]
> TrrdS [Auto]
> TrrdL [Auto]
> Tfaw Ctrl [Auto]
> TwtrS [Auto]
> TwtrL [Auto]
> Twr Ctrl [Auto]
> Trcpage Ctrl [Auto]
> TrdrdScL Ctrl [Auto]
> TwrwrScL Ctrl [Auto]
> Trfc Ctrl [Auto]
> Trfc2 Ctrl [Auto]
> Trfc4 Ctrl [Auto]
> Tcwl [Auto]
> Trtp [Auto]
> Tcke [Auto]
> Trdwr [Auto]
> Twrrd [Auto]
> TwrwrSc [Auto]
> TwrwrSd [Auto]
> TwrwrDd [Auto]
> TrdrdSc [Auto]
> TrdrdSd [Auto]
> TrdrdDd [Auto]
> ProcODT [Auto]
> Power Down Enable [Auto]
> Cmd2T [1T]
> Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
> CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
> CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
> Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Manual]
> RttNom [Rtt_Nom Disable]
> RttWr [Dynamic ODT Off]
> RttPark [RZQ/5]
> Data Poisoning [Auto]
> DRAM Post Package Repair [Disable]
> RCD Parity [Auto]
> DRAM Address Command Parity Retry [Auto]
> Write CRC Enable [Auto]
> DRAM Write CRC Enable and Retry Limit [Auto]
> Disable Memory Error Injection [True]
> DRAM ECC Symbol Size [Auto]
> DRAM UECC Retry [Auto]
> TSME [Auto]
> Data Scramble [Auto]
> DFE Read Training [Enable]
> FFE Write Training [Enable]
> PMU Pattern Bits Control [Manual]
> PMU Pattern Bits [a]
> MR6VrefDQ Control [Auto]
> CPU Vref Training Seed Control [Auto]
> Chipselect Interleaving [Auto]
> BankGroupSwap [Enabled]
> BankGroupSwapAlt [Disabled]
> Address Hash Bank [Auto]
> Address Hash CS [Auto]
> Address Hash Rm [Auto]
> SPD Read Optimization [Enabled]
> MBIST Enable [Disabled]
> Pattern Select [PRBS]
> Pattern Length [3]
> Aggressor Channel [1 Aggressor Channel]
> Aggressor Static Lane Control [Disabled]
> Target Static Lane Control [Disabled]
> Worst Case Margin Granularity [Per Chip Select]
> Read Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
> Read Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
> Write Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
> Write Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
> IOMMU [Enabled]
> Precision Boost Overdrive [Enable]
> Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [Auto]
> FCLK Frequency [1900MHz]
> SOC OVERCLOCK VID [0]
> UCLK DIV1 MODE [UCLK==MEMCLK]
> VDDP Voltage Control [Auto]
> VDDG Voltage Control [Auto]
> SoC/Uncore OC Mode [Disabled]
> LN2 Mode [Disabled]
> ACS Enable [Auto]
> PCIe Ten Bit Tag Support [Auto]
> cTDP Control [Auto]
> EfficiencyModeEn [Auto]
> Package Power Limit Control [Auto]
> APBDIS [Auto]
> DF Cstates [Auto]
> CPPC [Enabled]
> CPPC Preferred Cores [Enabled]
> BoostFmaxEn [Auto]
> Early Link Speed [Auto]


Ok tried everything... If i leave everything stock in bios i have no problems getting 4.6ghz for 40%~ of the CB run. But after i change my ram to 3800mhz the CPU would just do 4.550ghz lol


----------



## ClintLeo

dkarDaGobert said:


> Highest measured interrupt to process latency (µs): 650,50
> Average measured interrupt to process latency (µs): 5,862050
> 
> Highest measured interrupt to DPC latency (µs): 648,20
> Average measured interrupt to DPC latency (µs): 1,065503
> 
> 
> logged 1min while browsing
> 
> 
> Your system appears to be suitable for handling real-time audio and other tasks without dropouts.
> LatencyMon has been analyzing your system for 0:01:00 (h:mm:ss) on all processors.


Highest measured interrupt to process latency (µs): 101.258593
Average measured interrupt to process latency (µs): 4.155829

Highest measured interrupt to DPC latency (µs): 67.695352
Average measured interrupt to DPC latency (µs): 1.422609

What would these stats mean?


----------



## Synoxia

ClintLeo said:


> Highest measured interrupt to process latency (µs): 101.258593
> Average measured interrupt to process latency (µs): 4.155829
> 
> Highest measured interrupt to DPC latency (µs): 67.695352
> Average measured interrupt to DPC latency (µs): 1.422609
> 
> What would these stats mean?


its the latency in microseconds of the processor interrupts

Highest measured interrupt to process latency (µs): 140,20
Average measured interrupt to process latency (µs): 3,600394

Highest measured interrupt to DPC latency (µs): 137,40
Average measured interrupt to DPC latency (µs): 1,195289

what i am really wondering is if those 100ms spikes are caused by the precision boost algorithm.


----------



## narukun

Can anyone please recommend me the best and latest custom bios for this motherboard? I'll really appreciate it!


----------



## Axaion

Soo, re-installed, tried Ryzen Dram calc with safe settings and all that, still, whenever i got over 3400mhz ram speed, it double/triples in user process interrupt :\

Either my CPU is a potato
Or Asus is a potato
Or Windows 10 1706/1809 is a potato

Seems.. odd.. 3400 CL14.. 1.4v, no issues.. 3600 CL anything, doesnt matter it goes up up and away for me :\

Eternally stuck on 70µs memory latency sucksssss


----------



## Reikoji

Axaion said:


> Soo, re-installed, tried Ryzen Dram calc with safe settings and all that, still, whenever i got over 3400mhz ram speed, it double/triples in user process interrupt :\
> 
> Either my CPU is a potato
> Or Asus is a potato
> Or Windows 10 1706/1809 is a potato
> 
> Seems.. odd.. 3400 CL14.. 1.4v, no issues.. 3600 CL anything, doesnt matter it goes up up and away for me :\
> 
> Eternally stuck on 70µs memory latency sucksssss


Make the dive to 1.5v vdimm. Go for broke !


----------



## Axaion

Reikoji said:


> Make the dive to 1.5v vdimm. Go for broke !


I tried 1.45v for even 3600 CL 16, no dice lol

If anyone wants to share a working profile for 3600~ id try that, although i dont see why it would fix it, would be worth a shot tho.

Also yes, i can boot with 3733 speeds no problem, just... it messes stuff up! :|


----------



## crakej

Axaion said:


> Soo, re-installed, tried Ryzen Dram calc with safe settings and all that, still, whenever i got over 3400mhz ram speed, it double/triples in user process interrupt :\
> 
> Either my CPU is a potato
> Or Asus is a potato
> Or Windows 10 1706/1809 is a potato
> 
> Seems.. odd.. 3400 CL14.. 1.4v, no issues.. 3600 CL anything, doesnt matter it goes up up and away for me :\
> 
> Eternally stuck on 70µs memory latency sucksssss


You really need to update Windows - you can rule it out then. The Window mem manager has been updated so it is worth doing anyway.


----------



## Baio73

Does anyone have experience with those RAM?

G.Skill F4-4000C17D-16GTZR

I'm thinking about taking a used kit (should be new).

Baio


----------



## liakou

Baio73 said:


> Does anyone have experience with those RAM?
> 
> G.Skill F4-4000C17D-16GTZR
> 
> I'm thinking about taking a used kit (should be new).
> 
> Baio


If you found a good price for it, get it. 
Im using this kit @3600 14-15-14-28 1.43v


----------



## Axaion

Reikoji said:


> Make the dive to 1.5v vdimm. Go for broke !





crakej said:


> You really need to update Windows - you can rule it out then. The Window mem manager has been updated so it is worth doing anyway.


Waiting for 1909 to get out before i go over 1809 really.

Not that 1903/1909 would fix something like this, it really makes zero sense lol


----------



## Hale59

SMU 46.53.00 (there is backward compatibility with AGESA 1.0.0.3ABBA)

https://twitter.com/1usmus/status/1181305859831455745


----------



## Hale59

In the new BIOS (AGESA 1.0.0.4), users will see the option "Max Voltage Offset", which is designed to improve the results of PBO.

https://twitter.com/1usmus/status/1181296476795936768


----------



## Hale59

https://twitter.com/KOMACHI_ENSAKA/status/1181310427893878786


----------



## Takla

Axaion said:


> Waiting for 1909 to get out before i go over 1809 really.
> 
> Not that 1903/1909 would fix something like this, it really makes zero sense lol


A fresh windows installation can help with memory issues (due to windows corruption)
Could also try these 2 commands in safe mode (hold shift and click "restart" in the windows start menu, than go to Troubleshoot > Advanced Options > Startup Settings > Restart > Press 4 once prompted to pick an option)

Once you're in safe mode, enter this into CMD



Code:


SFC /ScanNow

after that is done open CMD again and enter this



Code:


DISM /Online /Cleanup-Image /RestoreHealth

See if that helps.

Otherwise, grab the newest W10 build from here
https://uupdump.ml/known.php?q=amd64
(Newest build atm is 18995, the one at the top)
Select your language, than your OS type (pro) and than "Create download package".
A zip file will be downloaded. Extract its content somewhere. Than double click the .cmd file and let it do its thing.
Once it is done you will have the newest windows .iso in one of the folders that were created during the process.
Now you can either mount the .iso and install its content or apply it to a USB thumb drive with this tool and than boot into it to start the installation process.


----------



## Axaion

Ive tested with clean installs on a different SSD, its not my OS, its either BIOS, CPU, or Motherboard for whatever reason.

And the ram i have are the G.Skill FlareX 3200 CL14 1.35, wont go 0.1mhz over 3400 before it does it.
Yes, ive reset bios, and loaded defaults.
Yep, i flashed a different bios, stock bios, modded bios, both.

im at the point where id be willing to load someones elses BIOS profile and not care if it set my board on fire.


----------



## Hepe

So out of curiosity, do the newer AGESA versions have any impact on PBO or memory overclocking performance with a 2700X? I'm still on the 1103 BIOS, PBO enabled with a -0.065mV offset, RAM settings attached.
Does it make any sense in updating the BIOS until upgrading the CPU to a 3000-series?

Also, any comments on the memory settings, I haven't messed with the RAM timings in a while. I was toying with the idea of bumping the BCLK a bit to push the RAM to 3500Mhz, but honestly I'm not sure what the impact of upping the BCLK would be to the CPU clocks. From what I understand, the C7H's PBO implementation is pretty bad with BCLK overclocking.


----------



## LethalSpoon

I keep searching why my latency went up 2ns. I tried a fresh Windows install, with only drivers, and the only way I can reach 65ns again with all my 3666 configurations is booting in safe mode. This is driving me nuts.


----------



## nick name

LethalSpoon said:


> I keep searching why my latency went up 2ns. I tried a fresh Windows install, with only drivers, and the only way I can reach 65ns again with all my 3666 configurations is booting in safe mode. This is driving me nuts.


Is your CPU running at the same speed when you test?


----------



## LethalSpoon

nick name said:


> Is your CPU running at the same speed when you test?


Yep, always stock settings. All the other memory numbers are ok, and benches results are good. Around 4950 in CB20 and 2200 in CB15. The issue is only with latency numbers in Aida :thinking:


----------



## Zefram0911

Do we know if any of the bios modders are looking to add the new SMU, that was shown a day or two ago (previous posts copied the tweets), that's suppose to be backwards compatible with 1.0.0.3. or are we waiting for the more official releases?


----------



## Sel3

Hello, guys.
So, I have some issue with vcore dropping while full loading (take a look for screenshot)
I've tried LLC leves - 1, 2, 3, 4,5 - nothing helps me.
Manual vcore in bios - doesn't helps me too.
offset (+) - doesn't helps me too.
I have no idea what can do with it. May be somebody have idea?


----------



## nick name

Hepe said:


> So out of curiosity, do the newer AGESA versions have any impact on PBO or memory overclocking performance with a 2700X? I'm still on the 1103 BIOS, PBO enabled with a -0.065mV offset, RAM settings attached.
> Does it make any sense in updating the BIOS until upgrading the CPU to a 3000-series?
> 
> Also, any comments on the memory settings, I haven't messed with the RAM timings in a while. I was toying with the idea of bumping the BCLK a bit to push the RAM to 3500Mhz, but honestly I'm not sure what the impact of upping the BCLK would be to the CPU clocks. From what I understand, the C7H's PBO implementation is pretty bad with BCLK overclocking.


Not a lot of change. Why do you use PBO and not the Performance Enhancers 3 or 4?

And RAM doesn't seem to benefit at all. 

You can feel safe to try any of them up to BIOS 2606 without much concern beyond some wonky fan stopping bug. There does seem to be benefit in undervolting capability, but your mileage will vary. After BIOS 2606 I see a reduction in performance on my 2700X and the Performance Bias options for Cinebench are bugged leading to BSOD during boot.


----------



## starrbuck

nick name said:


> Why do you use PBO and not the Performance Enhancers 3 or 4?


Does anyone have definitive answers on the differences between PE1, 2, 3, and 4?


----------



## nick name

starrbuck said:


> Does anyone have definitive answers on the differences between PE1, 2, 3, and 4?


For which CPU? It doesn't behave the same with new Ryzen 3000 CPUs.


----------



## speedgoat

@LethalSpoon you might be running stuff in the background but not on safe mode that increase latency ? 
just by removing "geforce experience" i get 0.5 improvement


----------



## starrbuck

nick name said:


> For which CPU? It doesn't behave the same with new Ryzen 3000 CPUs.


I have a 3000-series now so I lean that way. I did notice the behavior was different upgrading from a 2700X.


----------



## TOMRUS

Have ASUS ever fixed that bug where changing BCLK from 100MHz to something else breaks CPU boost completely? This is so annoying and completely negates the point of having adjustable BCLK on this board...


----------



## AvengedRobix

AvengedRobix said:


> Daily and gaming Setting


settings for the ram?


----------



## LethalSpoon

speedgoat said:


> @LethalSpoon you might be running stuff in the background but not on safe mode that increase latency ?
> just by removing "geforce experience" i get 0.5 improvement


Fresh Windows install, with even less crap than when I got 65,5-65.7ns consistently. At this point nothing makes any sense.


----------



## nick name

LethalSpoon said:


> Fresh Windows install, with even less crap than when I got 65,5-65.7ns consistently. At this point nothing makes any sense.


This may sound odd, but I get lower latencies after the PC has been on for a bit. Testing after a reboot brings it up a bit, but not really as much as you're seeing.


----------



## Synoxia

Hale59 said:


> In the new BIOS (AGESA 1.0.0.4), users will see the option "Max Voltage Offset", which is designed to improve the results of PBO.
> 
> https://twitter.com/1usmus/status/1181296476795936768


Awesome. Awesome. We all know 3000 series don't need 1.3v to run at 4ghz? Ok? So basically set a minus offset like we always do and raise max voltage offset.
This way we can improve MT loads without hampering ST loads.

@mtrai @gupsterg just letting you know smu 46.53 is available on 1usmus twitter ;P


----------



## xeizo

The modders are absent for the moment, unfortunately I do not have the time to learn to mod bioses right now. Last mobo bios I modded was for Abit NF7-S, even if I remembered how, that knowledge is rather irrelevant today


----------



## mtrai

I have been sick all week and not at my PC.


----------



## xeizo

mtrai said:


> I have been sick all week and not at my PC.


OH, sorry to hear, take care of yourself and do not worry about bioses!


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

Hey all ,

Which M2 Port do i have to choose when i want to stay with x16 PCIe Lanes when m2 ssd is installed ?Or are there any other limitations using a m2 in this board?

Would you guys also recommend a fan or something that cools it a bit more ,maybe also a waterblock?

Good Night 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## Duvar

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> Hey all ,
> 
> Which M2 Port do i have to choose when i want to stay with x16 PCIe Lanes when m2 ssd is installed ?Or are there any other limitations using a m2 in this board?
> 
> Would you guys also recommend a fan or something that cools it a bit more ,maybe also a waterblock?
> 
> Good Night
> 
> Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


You have to use the one at the bottom. (under the GPU)


----------



## xeizo

Duvar said:


> You have to use the one at the bottom. (under the GPU)


And the small M.2 cooler from the top spot can be used at the bottom one instead.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

xeizo said:


> And the small M.2 cooler from the top spot can be used at the bottom one instead.





Duvar said:


> You have to use the one at the bottom. (under the GPU)


Thank you guys ! 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## Baio73

liakou said:


> If you found a good price for it, get it.
> Im using this kit @3600 14-15-14-28 1.43v


Got them… can you please post your BIOS values?
Does the DOCP profile work for you? I select it, but stil have RAM @3600MHz instead of 4000.
Thanks!

Baio


----------



## LethalSpoon

nick name said:


> This may sound odd, but I get lower latencies after the PC has been on for a bit. Testing after a reboot brings it up a bit, but not really as much as you're seeing.


Installed LatencyMon to se what the hell is going on, and Nvidia driver latency was all over the place. Changed global 3d power setting in Nvidia control panel to max performance, and voila! my latency dropped fron 67,5-67,8 to 66,2. Not perfect but Im the right way.

I feel relieved and stupid at the same time :eh-smiley


----------



## mtrai

xeizo said:


> OH, sorry to hear, take care of yourself and do not worry about bioses!


I am feeling better and been catching up with everything.

I am gonna quote since I know he is correct. It is not as simple as 1usmus thought, no disrespect to him. So no modded bios until we actually get an updated bios with 1.0.0.4 from ASUS.



The Stilt said:


> As said before, just the SMU isn't enough.
> 
> The ABL, PSP FWs, bootloaders, keys / tokens, need to be updated as well to make them work properly together.
> In addition to that, there are new modules which need to be added. Then the existing customization block, used in AGESA 1.0.0.3 versions is no longer compatible with 1.0.0.4 and that prevents the system from booting.
> 
> Even if the customization block issue wouldn't exist, the proper update would require too much work.
> 
> Performance wise, based on my experience there is no point either.


----------



## liakou

Baio73 said:


> Got them… can you please post your BIOS values?
> Does the DOCP profile work for you? I select it, but stil have RAM @3600MHz instead of 4000.
> Thanks!
> 
> Baio


Here are my settings.

I haven't bothered with DOCP at all since those are 4000 kits and that would mean I'd have to set the IF @2000 and this doesn't offer any positive results.
Went straight for the sweet spot.


----------



## speedgoat

LethalSpoon said:


> Installed LatencyMon to se what the hell is going on, and Nvidia driver latency was all over the place. Changed global 3d power setting in Nvidia control panel to max performance, and voila! my latency dropped fron 67,5-67,8 to 66,2. Not perfect but Im the right way.
> 
> I feel relieved and stupid at the same time :eh-smiley


same here actually, good find !
but i somehow wonder is this a setting messing with aida64 or does it really increase the latency by that much ?


----------



## Duvar

Is GPU idle Power Consumption not higher if we set it to max?
With my 1080Ti after a restart 50W higher idle power consumption, i think its not worth it.


----------



## oreonutz

Holy Crap! I have been gone for almost exactly a Month, and have missed out on 300 Pages of Posts! Someone Fill me In! LOL! What have I missed?

What is the new best UEFI to use right now. I am still using the Mod By @mtrai as I loved the performance, but after being on it for 6 weeks and finally having some time, I am ready to experiment with something new. Any one have an opinion on some of the newest UEFI's to come out? About to go looking myself, but figured I would ask before I look.


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> I have been sick all week and not at my PC.


Sounds like we have been in the same boat. I got sick as hell on my Birthday last week, and have had ONE HELL of the last 30 days. But finally getting back to normal, and realized I have been so busy I hadn't jumped on the forums in about a month, so wanted to check in with you guys.

What UEFI are you currently running, and have you gotten yourself a 3000 Series Chip yet by chance? (I Hope you start to feel a bit better soon!)


----------



## mtrai

oreonutz said:


> Sounds like we have been in the same boat. I got sick as hell on my Birthday last week, and have had ONE HELL of the last 30 days. But finally getting back to normal, and realized I have been so busy I hadn't jumped on the forums in about a month, so wanted to check in with you guys.
> 
> What UEFI are you currently running, and have you gotten yourself a 3000 Series Chip yet by chance? (I Hope you start to feel a bit better soon!)


Thanks and yes I am. No the 3950 has not released yet. Grin.

The last one that was released that several of us modded and changed the SMU. So from about a month or so ago. Just finished putting the waterblock on my 2nd 5700 XT now to install it.


----------



## Baio73

liakou said:


> Here are my settings.
> 
> I haven't bothered with DOCP at all since those are 4000 kits and that would mean I'd have to set the IF @2000 and this doesn't offer any positive results.
> Went straight for the sweet spot.


Thanks man, I'm gonna give it a try.

Baio


----------



## LethalSpoon

speedgoat said:


> same here actually, good find !
> but i somehow wonder is this a setting messing with aida64 or does it really increase the latency by that much ?


I isolated the issue. All the latency is added by monitor (Gsync and refresh rate/oc). This is without all of that,


----------



## Axaion

Yeah, im pretty sure my motherboard is a lemon, i can run 1900 FCLCK fine, even with 3400mhz CL14-13-13, with no changes in latencymon, but even 3600 anything bam, zoom, pow. welcome to the jungle!, and it goes haywire.

Guess ill have to find the tightest timings i can at 3400 then

For reference, with 3400, AND 3400 FCLK 1900 - i get This result
Highest measured interrupt to process latency (µs): 10.808877
Average measured interrupt to process latency (µs): 2.630609

Highest measured interrupt to DPC latency (µs): 7.395547
Average measured interrupt to DPC latency (µs): 0.655871

with 3600, i get this pile o garbo.

Highest measured interrupt to process latency (µs): 29.297803
Average measured interrupt to process latency (µs): 6.248048

Highest measured interrupt to DPC latency (µs): 7.680007
Average measured interrupt to DPC latency (µs): 2.649649

Also yes, i tested both with memtest to see if they were stable 

just venting a bit, hopefully if anyone else has same issue they can try out 3400mhz memory speed


----------



## LethalSpoon

Axaion said:


> Also yes, i tested both with memtest to see if they were stable
> 
> just venting a bit, hopefully if anyone else has same issue they can try out 3400mhz memory speed


Did you monitor what drivers, services or process jump in terms of latency when you change your RAM speed?


----------



## Axaion

LethalSpoon said:


> Did you monitor what drivers, services or process jump in terms of latency when you change your RAM speed?


None of them, thats the funny part, it just goes up without reason


----------



## wingman99

Axaion said:


> None of them, thats the funny part, it just goes up without reason


When memory signal transmission is corrupted the CPU will re-transmit the data sometimes increasing the latency.


----------



## Axaion

wingman99 said:


> When memory signal transmission is corrupted the CPU will re-transmit the data sometimes increasing the latency.


Sure, if i wasnt able to run 3733 without problems (except derpy latency), or 1900 fclck without any side effect, bar the obvious memory latency hit due to desync (no negative impact in latencymon), even at looser timings too.

Also, it has no negative impact on memory latency, its SYSTEM latency its messing up

But yeah, my pc is haunted. lol


----------



## neikosr0x

Axaion said:


> Sure, if i wasnt able to run 3733 without problems (except derpy latency), or 1900 fclck without any side effect, bar the obvious memory latency hit due to desync (no negative impact in latencymon), even at looser timings too.
> 
> Also, it has no negative impact on memory latency, its SYSTEM latency its messing up
> 
> But yeah, my pc is haunted. lol


if yours is haunted what can i say about mine hahahaha. Mine runs just fine at 1900fclck sync and all at 3800mhz ram freq. But my cpu wont go over 5.575ghz if i change ram frequency hahahaha. before it couldnt reach anything higher than 4.55


----------



## Hale59

neikosr0x said:


> if yours is haunted what can i say about mine hahahaha. Mine runs just fine at 1900fclck sync and all at 3800mhz ram freq. But my cpu wont go over 5.575ghz if i change ram frequency hahahaha. before it couldnt reach anything higher than 4.55


over 5.575ghz?


----------



## neikosr0x

Hale59 said:


> over 5.575ghz?


that clearly a typo lol 4.575 xD


----------



## lordzed83

oreonutz said:


> Holy Crap! I have been gone for almost exactly a Month, and have missed out on 300 Pages of Posts! Someone Fill me In! LOL! What have I missed?
> 
> What is the new best UEFI to use right now. I am still using the Mod By @mtrai as I loved the performance, but after being on it for 6 weeks and finally having some time, I am ready to experiment with something new. Any one have an opinion on some of the newest UEFI's to come out? About to go looking myself, but figured I would ask before I look.



I'm on World of Warcraft classic addiction sicne came out myself so dont check forums. TBH since I'w set up my mems ocs everything I'w not had any bsods reboots or problems at all So left it as it is not like i can get any more out of the 1.0.03 ABB anyway gotta way till next month for 1.0.0.4


This is interesting . Test of block orientation ect on 3000series cpus. As we know rotated works best 
https://www.igorslab.media/en/ryzen...ymmetrical-design-with-interesting-results/2/


----------



## Hale59

lordzed83 said:


> This is interesting . Test of block orientation ect on 3000series cpus. As we know rotated works best
> https://www.igorslab.media/en/ryzen...ymmetrical-design-with-interesting-results/2/


https://www.overclock.net/forum/61-...fficial-heatkiller-club-399.html#post28153410


----------



## Reikoji

lordzed83 said:


> I'm on World of Warcraft classic addiction sicne came out myself so dont check forums. TBH since I'w set up my mems ocs everything I'w not had any bsods reboots or problems at all So left it as it is not like i can get any more out of the 1.0.03 ABB anyway gotta way till next month for 1.0.0.4
> 
> 
> This is interesting . Test of block orientation ect on 3000series cpus. As we know rotated works best
> https://www.igorslab.media/en/ryzen...ymmetrical-design-with-interesting-results/2/


And thats something ive always suspected with these older style AIO cold plates :3


----------



## nick name

Reikoji said:


> And thats something ive always suspected with these older style AIO cold plates :3


Hopefully Asetek is working on something new for their next generation. I'd personally love something made for Threadripper with an AM4 mount.


----------



## mightyrepooc

mightyrepooc said:


> Uodate from my site: Installed new ram, still dame behaviour. I assume the mother board is bricked. I will meet a friend of mine tomorrow and try to run my 2700x on his crosshair vi. And we will try his 3600x on my crosshair vii. Will report which device causes the error (cpu or motherboard)...


Old topic, but i would like to update so if any one finds this got some help:

Summary: Ryzen 2700x does not boot to post and gives error 55 (no memory installed). Slightly overclocked with BLCK to 103.4 and little soc voltage + offset. RAM was set to 3200 Mhz running without errors.

So what i have been trough: I tested my 2700x on an Crosshair VI from a friend and it gives the same error. Tested his 3600x on my board, running fine. So the CPU is defect. Creating an RMA ticket at AMD support, they accepted it and i needed to send my 2700x to the netherlands. I bought a 3600x in that time because i wasn't sure if it wasn't my fault with to much soc voltage to burn the CPU. But AMD send me a brand new 2700x. I will keep the 3600x tough because RAM is running at 3800 Mhz without problems and performance increased heavily with it. 

So thanks again for any advise!


----------



## nick name

mightyrepooc said:


> Old topic, but i would like to update so if any one finds this got some help:
> 
> Summary: Ryzen 2700x does not boot to post and gives error 55 (no memory installed). Slightly overclocked with BLCK to 103.4 and little soc voltage + offset. RAM was set to 3200 Mhz running without errors.
> 
> So what i have been trough: I tested my 2700x on an Crosshair VI from a friend and it gives the same error. Tested his 3600x on my board, running fine. So the CPU is defect. Creating an RMA ticket at AMD support, they accepted it and i needed to send my 2700x to the netherlands. I bought a 3600x in that time because i wasn't sure if it wasn't my fault with to much soc voltage to burn the CPU. But AMD send me a brand new 2700x. I will keep the 3600x tough because RAM is running at 3800 Mhz without problems and performance increased heavily with it.
> 
> So thanks again for any advise!


Which BIOS version? And if you're using 2703 or 2801 then are you using the Performance Bias feature set to either Cinebench option?


----------



## ryouiki

Well 2700X replaced with 3900X, CBS menu has returned so I can access BGS options again, memory will now go past 3200 (right now stopped at 4x8 / 3600 14-15-15-14-28 / 1.4V).

I really haven't kept up to date that well with the 3000 series, is negative voltage offset on vcore still recommended against? Honestly the temperatures are surprising on this chip, it seems to run very close to what the 2700X was doing before.

The only unexpected behavior now is the system will always power off temporarily when it is restarted.


----------



## mightyrepooc

nick name said:


> Which BIOS version? And if you're using 2703 or 2801 then are you using the Performance Bias feature set to either Cinebench option?


Pretty sure it error came when board was still on 2606. I updated vie flashback to 2801 as soon as the error 55 appears. I never used any performance bias option. Also in the current setup with the 3600x (running bios 2801) i do not use the performance bias feature. Should i use it?


----------



## Shadowized

I think I've hit a wall and would appreciate some advice.

I put this system together recently and so far things have been fine with the kit of memory I bought (F4-3200C14D-32GVK, dual rank b-die) and have been poking at it trying to make it push past my current stable 24/7 settings of 3600MHz 16-16-16-32-48-288-1t @ 1.40v (I could probably reduce the voltage more and it would still be stable), Ideally I aim for 3733-3800MHz but the second I raise it from 3600 MEM/FCLK to even 3666 it just pukes on itself and enters ram training mode, the strangeness I'm having though is that it will occasionally post and get into windows or memtest86+ and go for a little bit without trouble, but when I reboot to change something it will begin failing and going back to ram training again, occasionally getting stuck with a 15 q-code.

I've tried raising the voltages one by one to narrow it down and even went as far as trying with awful timings of 20-20-20-40-80 @ 1.46v, but the end results were relatively the same failure rates on getting past the ram training, maybe 1 in 6 times it works and that won't hold past a reboot or two when wanting to adjust settings. I noticed that I can't set some of the voltages that the dram calculator suggests like vref CHA/B (DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA / CHB) which I noticed don't go anywhere near the 0.72~ range that I should be setting them to, nor VDDIO / VTT which don't get read on the sensors in any program Ive tried.

the only thing I haven't really touched was the CadBus / Setups, but I'm still really new to the platform and at a bit of a loss on what else to try next, I'm in no means unhappy with my ram OC so far but I can't help but feel it can go higher if I can just figure out why it fails with just a mundane bump in frequency, otherwise I can go the other direction and just work on tightening timings further, has anyone experienced similar or know of a setting/timing which would help with what I'm describing?



Code:


[b]Voltages[/b]
CPU Core Voltage [Offset mode]
CPU Offset Mode Sign [-]
- CPU Core Voltage Offset [b][0.11250][/b] (tried just leaving it on auto, no diff)
CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
- VDDSOC Voltage Override [b][1.07500][/b] (tried up to 1.2)
DRAM Voltage [b][1.40000][/b] (tried up to 1.5)
CLDO VDDG voltage [b][0.960][/b] (tried up to 1.1)
CLDO VDDP voltage [b][920][/b] (tried up to 1000)
VPP_MEM Voltage [b][2.52000][/b]

[b]Phase[/b]
CPU Load-line Calibration [b][Level 3][/b]
CPU Current Capability [b][120%][/b]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [b][Manual][/b]
CPU Voltage Frequency [b][400][/b]
CPU Power Duty Control [b][T.Probe][/b]
CPU Power Phase Control [b][Power Phase Response][/b]
CPU Power Thermal Control [b][120][/b]
VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [b][Level 3][/b]
VDDSOC Current Capability [b][120%][/b]
VDDSOC Switching Frequency [b][Auto][/b]
VDDSOC Phase Control [b][Power Phase Response][/b]
DRAM Current Capability [b][120%][/b]
DRAM Power Phase Control [b][Extreme][/b]
DRAM Switching Frequency [b][Manual][/b]
Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [b][400][/b]
DRAM VBoot Voltage [b][1.40000][/b]

[b]Timings[/b]
DRAM CAS# Latency [b][16][/b]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [b][16][/b]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [b][16][/b]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [b][16][/b]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [b][32][/b]
Trc [b][48][/b]
TrrdS [b][6][/b]
TrrdL [b][8][/b]
Tfaw [b][24][/b]
TwtrS [b][4][/b]
TwtrL [b][12][/b]
Twr [b][12][/b]
Trcpage [b][Auto][/b]
TrdrdScl [b][5][/b]
TwrwrScl [b][5][/b]
Trfc [b][288][/b]
Trfc2 [b][Auto][/b]
Trfc4 [b][Auto][/b]
Tcwl [b][16][/b]
Trtp [b][8][/b]
Trdwr [b][8][/b]
Twrrd [b][4][/b]
TwrwrSc [b][1][/b]
TwrwrSd [b][7][/b]
TwrwrDd [b][7][/b]
TrdrdSc [b][1][/b]
TrdrdSd [b][5][/b]
TrdrdDd [b][5][/b]
Tcke [b][Auto][/b]
ProcODT [b][53.3 ohm][/b] (tried 60, 48)
Cmd2T [b][1T][/b]
Gear Down Mode [b][Enabled][/b]
Power Down Enable [b][Disabled][/b]
RttNom [b][Rtt_Nom Disable][/b] (tried on, auto, RZQ/7)
RttWr [b][RZQ/3][/b]
RttPark [b][RZQ/1][/b]
MemAddrCmdSetup [b][Auto][/b]
MemCsOdtSetup [b][Auto][/b]
MemCkeSetup [b][Auto][/b]
MemCadBusClkDrvStren [b][Auto][/b] (Auto = 24)
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [b][Auto][/b] (Auto = 24)
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [b][Auto][/b] (Auto = 24)
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [b][Auto][/b] (Auto = 24)


----------



## Hale59

ryouiki said:


> Well 2700X replaced with 3900X, CBS menu has returned so I can access BGS options again, memory will now go past 3200 (right now stopped at 4x8 / 3600 14-15-15-14-28 / 1.4V).
> 
> I really haven't kept up to date that well with the 3000 series, is negative voltage offset on vcore still recommended against? Honestly the temperatures are surprising on this chip, it seems to run very close to what the 2700X was doing before.
> 
> The only unexpected behavior now is the system will always power off temporarily when it is restarted.


Try this - Do you have a C-State and DF State enabled? Try -0.0385v offset and LLC 1


----------



## ryouiki

Hale59 said:


> Try this - Do you have a C-State and DF State enabled? Try -0.0385v offset and LLC 1


Thanks for this, after these options were enabled single core boost now touches 4550 quite often. I played around with negative offset and landed on somewhere around 0.06* (can't remember exact value) for now, doesn't appear to have any negative impact on single/multi-core benchmarks, any lower however and the system will not successfully resume from sleep.

I really wish ASUS would document what the default value is when "Auto" is set in the options.

Also finally managed to get 4x8 @ 3600 14-15-14-14-28 working/stable with Gear Down disabled @ 1.42V, so I think I'm going to leave it there.


----------



## ClintLeo

Can someone please share a link to bios version 2703 that has the modded Agesa code?

I'm having problems with 2801 and I know the stock 2703 worked great for me.


----------



## Gothmog

Hey guys, unfortunately i cant read a ton of history on this thread regarding newer bios versions, so i will waste a few minutes of your time with this question, sorry in advance. I have stuck with 1201 bios since on any other bios my 2700x oc was unstable and generally had terrible experience with any newer bios. i might have to update my bios version for other reasons. Is there any new good version or should i expect the same ****ty instability that i experience many months ago when i tried newer bios versions ?


----------



## nick name

Gothmog said:


> Hey guys, unfortunately i cant read a ton of history on this thread regarding newer bios versions, so i will waste a few minutes of your time with this question, sorry in advance. I have stuck with 1201 bios since on any other bios my 2700x oc was unstable and generally had terrible experience with any newer bios. i might have to update my bios version for other reasons. Is there any new good version or should i expect the same ****ty instability that i experience many months ago when i tried newer bios versions ?


I would try 2501/2606. Versions 2703/2801 have reduced CPU performance when using a fixed multiplier.


----------



## oreonutz

lordzed83 said:


> I'm on World of Warcraft classic addiction sicne came out myself so dont check forums. TBH since I'w set up my mems ocs everything I'w not had any bsods reboots or problems at all So left it as it is not like i can get any more out of the 1.0.03 ABB anyway gotta way till next month for 1.0.0.4
> 
> 
> This is interesting . Test of block orientation ect on 3000series cpus. As we know rotated works best
> https://www.igorslab.media/en/ryzen...ymmetrical-design-with-interesting-results/2/


Appreciate the post. Its the same for me, have the 3900x Purring along and loving it. No weird Random Crashes, its literally been up 24/7 for over a month now, save the reboot I did to try out 1003ABBA and its been running great!

I still have to get a new block for my CPU, but haven't had much time to install one, hoping to knock this out around Black Friday.

Hope all is well with everyone!


----------



## oreonutz

ClintLeo said:


> Can someone please share a link to bios version 2703 that has the modded Agesa code?
> 
> I'm having problems with 2801 and I know the stock 2703 worked great for me.


The Advanced Search Feature on this forum works incredibly well. But that being said I figured I would help you out real quick. @gupsterg is the person who created the mod you are looking for, the download will include the BIOS with the SMU Modded, for both 2703 and 0002, for both the WIFI and Non WIFI versions of the Crosshair VII Hero. Make sure you flash the correct one for your Board, and make sure you use BIOS Flashback to flash it. (It will flash without using BIOS Flashback, but you will run into anomalies using other methods, I STRONGLY advise using Flashback, but its your decision.)

Here is the Link to the Post where Gupsterg Posted it, its in the Rog Forums, however had you searched it here, it would have brought you to Gupsterg's Post where he linked to his ROG Post, thats How I found it just now for you:
https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...ero-Essential-Info-Thread&p=782282#post782282

And Here is the Direct Link to his Google Drive Post:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1YdYb5JpX_tIM0vV5HvnXenDW0OmX84C4

Good Luck!


----------



## ClintLeo

oreonutz said:


> The Advanced Search Feature on this forum works incredibly well. But that being said I figured I would help you out real quick. @gupsterg is the person who created the mod you are looking for, the download will include the BIOS with the SMU Modded, for both 2703 and 0002, for both the WIFI and Non WIFI versions of the Crosshair VII Hero. Make sure you flash the correct one for your Board, and make sure you use BIOS Flashback to flash it. (It will flash without using BIOS Flashback, but you will run into anomalies using other methods, I STRONGLY advise using Flashback, but its your decision.)
> 
> Here is the Link to the Post where Gupsterg Posted it, its in the Rog Forums, however had you searched it here, it would have brought you to Gupsterg's Post where he linked to his ROG Post, thats How I found it just now for you:
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...ero-Essential-Info-Thread&p=782282#post782282
> 
> And Here is the Direct Link to his Google Drive Post:
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1YdYb5JpX_tIM0vV5HvnXenDW0OmX84C4
> 
> Good Luck!



Thank you

Sorry for not using search but I posted before I left for work.
I always use the flash back feature,thank you for the heads up.

Clint


----------



## Azad

Guys since 2501 when i boot i have d8 error, without having set any password for bios, same thing with the last bios.


----------



## starrbuck

Azad said:


> Guys since 2501 when i boot i have d8 error, without having set any password for bios, same thing with the last bios.


Are you using the flashback method to update?


----------



## Azad

I update the Bios in the bios.


I have this problem since 2606, went straight to 2801, then went back to 2501 which did not have this problem but it occured too, so now i'm back at 2801.


----------



## crakej

Azad said:


> I update the Bios in the bios.
> 
> 
> I have this problem since 2606, went straight to 2801, then went back to 2501 which did not have this problem but it occured too, so now i'm back at 2801.


Re-flash using USB Flashback


----------



## Synoxia

Does AI Charger work with android devices? Which ports on this motherboard are fast charging ones?
Is PLL undervolting worth it? Seems like it's lowering temps drastically without any stability problems


----------



## narukun

Hey guys any ideas about this? I have a Ryzen 9 3900x, Windows 1903, I already tried installing asus chipset drivers and amd site ones...


----------



## ryouiki

narukun said:


> Hey guys any ideas about this? I have a Ryzen 9 3900x, Windows 1903, I already tried installing asus chipset drivers and amd site ones...


Hard to say for sure... If you got into properties -> details -> property (hardware ID's) and grab the vendor/device/subsys information then could probably have a better idea of what this belongs to.

There are a handful of items related to the board (PSP/SMBus/GPIO/AMD PCI/etc.) but those should have all been covered by the AMD chipset installer.


----------



## Azad

crakej said:


> Re-flash using USB Flashback


 Thanks it worked ! 

I did not know there was a difference in flashing.


----------



## narukun

ryouiki said:


> Hard to say for sure... If you got into properties -> details -> property (hardware ID's) and grab the vendor/device/subsys information then could probably have a better idea of what this belongs to.
> 
> There are a handful of items related to the board (PSP/SMBus/GPIO/AMD PCI/etc.) but those should have all been covered by the AMD chipset installer.


Thank you for helping me, ryouiki, I got the info and looked on Google, I know what it is now!, I forgot I didn't install NVIDIA USB Type C drivers, since I don't use that I always disable it.


----------



## zaubara

Anyone ever encountered "USB-Lag" on an overclocked 2700X under heavy load?
When i hit it with prime95, everything runs stable and temps are fine (using a custom water loop).
After a few minutes, the mouse and keyboard stop working every few seconds for a bit. The intervals get shorter and the duration increases with time. When I stop the test, everything goes back to normal. Until then, prime95 kept on chugging without an error.
With a more unstable overclock, I had that happen even ingame.

I'm currently on the 0002M-FIE Non-Wifi + 2700X, running with PBO and OC lv3 with EDC manually raised to 165W (so it pushes all core to 4.25) with DDR4 at 3533.
Temps all seem fine, but my waterblock doesn't cool the VRMs, there's no active cooling apart from the case airflow. The VRM temps are reported at around 62°C when it starts happening, so that seems fine as well.
Any ideas? Thanks.


----------



## Yoizhik

Does 2801 fixing fan speed issue? My case fans are going crazy sometimes.


----------



## vasyltheonly

Yoizhik said:


> Does 2801 fixing fan speed issue? My case fans are going crazy sometimes.


I'm having an issue where my fans to 100% after my PC goes to sleep. So definitely something else is wrong. If I look at HWInfo, its says the fan is at 872RPM and pump is at 4656RRPM even though I can tell its maxing out.


----------



## neikosr0x

vasyltheonly said:


> I'm having an issue where my fans to 100% after my PC goes to sleep. So definitely something else is wrong. If I look at HWInfo, its says the fan is at 872RPM and pump is at 4656RRPM even though I can tell its maxing out.


In my case i never had any fan problems with the latest bios.


----------



## hughjazz44

Synoxia said:


> Is PLL undervolting worth it? Seems like it's lowering temps drastically without any stability problems


Undervolting PLL doesn't lower temps. Having a lower PLL just affects the sensor readings. So if it's not at 1.8v, then the readings are incorrect.


----------



## Logue

Hi everyone! I've had this board for a while now, and I had a 3600 installed but recently upgraded to a 3800X (deals!). I have the motherboard set to PBO OC, with everything mostly at default, except the PBO menu, some voltages, tweaks to the LLC and Current Capabilities, but that's it. I have my memory OCd to 3666 and have the IF clock at 1833 MHz (max I can reach with my CPU without stability problems or no POST at all). The memory is a 16GB Corsair Vengeance RGB 3600Mhz kit with standard timings of 18-19-19-39 (@1.35v). I have it set to 3666MHz - 16-16-16-28-42 @1.42v with almost all subtimings manually adjusted as well...

However, I need some help dialing the memory OC because my system won't boot straight away (kinda weird): If I turn it off (through the common Windows menu), if I try to turn it on again, it does, but it cycles some 2 or 3 times. The first cycle is interrupted by a sudden power off, then it comes back on by itself, cycles a little bit more and then it finally boots, normally, without any errors. Everytime I want to turn the system on is kinda boring since I have to wait 10-20 seconds to get an output to the monitor (oh yeah, btw, during this cycling event, there's no image displayed to the monitor, just the motherboard "trying" to POST).

The system has been MemTested up until 1200% (left it at night) and no errors were found. So, I've included a Ryzen Master screenshot to show more information for you guys, but basically I'd like to know which timings I'm supposed to tweak to get rid of this very annoying issue, since this problem DOES NOT happen if I Load Optimize Defaults, leave memory at D.O.C.P. (3600/18-19-19-39 with the rest at Auto).

Ryzen Master Screenshot https://i.imgur.com/PLY2xsZ.png


----------



## vasyltheonly

neikosr0x said:


> vasyltheonly said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm having an issue where my fans to 100% after my PC goes to sleep. So definitely something else is wrong. If I look at HWInfo, its says the fan is at 872RPM and pump is at 4656RRPM even though I can tell its maxing out.
> 
> 
> 
> In my case i never had any fan problems with the latest bios.
Click to expand...

So my fan is DC, pump is PWM. The second my monitor goes dark, screen timeout 30 minutes, my fans go to 100%. It's repeatable and a reboot gets it out of it. At this point I won't bother for a fix as bios 1.0.0.4 will most likely release soon and break a few more things.


----------



## AvengedRobix

Asrock release beta BIOS for all mb

Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A6013 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## Synoxia

Can you guys confirm that the 1st and 3rd slot from the cpu left to right (Should be A1 and B1) don't overclock aswell as 2nd and 4th slot (A2, B2)?
Basically i was trying to troubleshoot why i couldn't overclock additional 16gb to same speed and found out that those slots can't post 3800 speed even on auto timings, let alone my 3000% hci stable settings 
So either RMA the board or change to something else.

EDIT: i'm 100% sure. It's this trash of a motherboard. A2 and B2slot are fine, but A1 and B1 are amazingly bottlenecking my ram overclock. I can run 3800 with tight timings on A2 and B2 but anything above 3533 won't even post on a1 and b1 slot. Awesome asus.


----------



## MrPhilo

Synoxia said:


> Can you guys confirm that the 1st and 3rd slot from the cpu left to right (Should be A1 and B1) don't overclock aswell as 2nd and 4th slot (A2, B2)?
> Basically i was trying to troubleshoot why i couldn't overclock additional 16gb to same speed and found out that those slots can't post 3800 speed even on auto timings, let alone my 3000% hci stable settings
> So either RMA the board or change to something else.
> 
> EDIT: i'm 100% sure. It's this trash of a motherboard. A2 and B2slot are fine, but A1 and B1 are amazingly bottlenecking my ram overclock. I can run 3800 with tight timings on A2 and B2 but anything above 3533 won't even post on a1 and b1 slot. Awesome asus.


This had always been the case for Ryzen motherboard. 2 will always achieve a better clock than slot 1.


----------



## Synoxia

MrPhilo said:


> This had always been the case for Ryzen motherboard. 2 will always achieve a better clock than slot 1.


Every ryzen motherboard or just x470 c7h hero?


----------



## andyliu

Synoxia said:


> Every ryzen motherboard or just x470 c7h hero?


it depends on the layout of the memory trace/path.

daisy chain vs t-topology. for daisy chain, A1,B1 will have weaker signal integrity. 

and that's why in the manual it will tell you to use A2, B2 if you only use 2 dimms of memory

If you look at the manual from other brand (assuming daisy chain as well), I am pretty sure they will all tell you to use the same memory slot, regardless how they want to name it.


----------



## Synoxia

andyliu said:


> it depends on the layout of the memory trace/path.
> 
> daisy chain vs t-topology. for daisy chain, A1,B1 will have weaker signal integrity.
> 
> and that's why in the manual it will tell you to use A2, B2 if you only use 2 dimms of memory
> 
> If you look at the manual from other brand (assuming daisy chain as well), I am pretty sure they will all tell you to use the same memory slot, regardless how they want to name it.


So basically if i swap C7H hero for a c6h hero which should be T-Topology instead i could get all dimms to proper speed?


----------



## alex7913

Synoxia said:


> So basically if i swap C7H hero for a c6h hero which should be T-Topology instead i could get all dimms to proper speed?


Unlikely, although motherboard design do affect the overclock ability, what really bottlenecked the overclocking ability is the memory controller.

The memory controller on Ryzen handles 2 DIMMs better 4, so even you get a motherboard with T-Topo design, yes it might overclock better, but don't expect to run very high.


----------



## Syldon

Best I ever had on the CH6 was 3466 using the dimms I have now along with a 1800X. Since moving to the 2700X I have never got 4 sticks to run beyond 3200. I eventually gave the sticks away to my son. 

AMD stated that for beyond 16GB use 2 X 16 over 4 X 8 on the CH7. I do not know how this applies to the newest Ryzen as haven't upgraded since 2700x release.


----------



## AvengedRobix

Not one mb of asus is a T-Topoplogy.. all Daisy Chain


----------



## netman

AvengedRobix said:


> Not one mb of asus is a T-Topoplogy.. all Daisy Chain


the asus crosshair 6 is definitely with T-Topologiy (Third-generation ASUS T-Topology) - so it would be better to inform yourself before posting things like that. 

if you don't believe me - just look at the asus side for the ch6: https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VI-HERO/


----------



## crakej

AvengedRobix said:


> Asrock release beta BIOS for all mb
> 
> Inviato dal mio ONEPLUS A6013 utilizzando Tapatalk


What AGESA ver?


----------



## andyliu

Synoxia said:


> So basically if i swap C7H hero for a c6h hero which should be T-Topology instead i could get all dimms to proper speed?


all dimms as in all 4? or just 2

t-topology theoretically works better for 4 dimms, but weaker for 2 dimms (ex. 4400Mhz for 4dimms vs 4133 for 2dimms)
whereas daisy chain works better for 2 dimms and weaker for 4 dimms (ex. 4400Mhz for 2dimms vs 4133 for 4dimms)

the ram oc capability for both 2/4 dimms can/should be improved overtime thru bios update.
but the physical limitation for signal integrity will be there.

How you purchase the ram can also be a factor as well.
buying a pack of 4 dimms is actually different than buying 2 pack of 2 dimms
motherboard manufacture does their best to max the compatibility, but not all ram created equal. 
Hence, the manufacturers provide QVL list.

I dont think it matter that much unless you push for extreme OC. At least I have no issue to run all 4 dimms (2 pack of 2FlareX) @ 3200Mhz w/ tight timing on my C7H. 
As long as you populate the proper slot, you should be able to get desired speed.


----------



## oreonutz

AvengedRobix said:


> Not one mb of asus is a T-Topoplogy.. all Daisy Chain


That is incorrect. The Crosshair 6 Hero is most DEFINITELY T-Topology. It is the only Generation that got that treatment though, they moved on to Daisy Chain with the 7 Hero. If you need proof, there are a dozen places that document this, but just from a quick search, the official Product Page for the Crosshair 6 Hero lists it, just scroll down to the Blurp about DDR4 Memory: https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VI-HERO/


----------



## oreonutz

Synoxia said:


> So basically if i swap C7H hero for a c6h hero which should be T-Topology instead i could get all dimms to proper speed?


So I haven't gone through and read all your Posts on this topic, So I am not even sure what CPU you are Rocking. But, If you have a 3rd Gen CPU, you should definitely be able to get all 4 DIMMS working atleast 3600 (assuming the Memory is Capable of that), if its a 2000 Series or 1000 Series Processor, then it gets a little harryier. I have both the C6H and C7H, and with the 3000 Series Chip in either, I can get to 3800Mhz on All 4 Dimms in either. Its a little more work in the C7H because you REALLY have to dial in each and every timing, and that can take literally all day, sometimes 2, but it will boot once you have it dialed in. But your first problem is going to be how strong your Memory Controller is on your Chip. With a strong enough Memory Controller you can get all 4 DIMMS up to speed on either board. With the C6H It does seem to be a little easier in my experience to get all 4 DIMMS at a higher speed, but it comes at the expense of lower OC on the Chip itself, the C7H seems to be better balanced in that regard.

In short, I would not bother changing your board, instead I would work on Your Timings. And Keep in mind when running 4 Dimms it helps to Raise the ProcODT, on my chip its sweet spot is 53.3 Ohms, and Enable Gear Down Mode to start, it will make it easier for all 4 Dimms to Boot, then once you dial in all your timings and know it will work, then you can work on trying to get it to work with Gear Down disabled. Also with my Chip, I couldn't get all 4 Dimms to boot at 3800 with tWRRD Below 3 (That one took me forever to figure out). Hope this helps.

EDIT: Now I actually went back and Bothered to read the issue you were having, lol. It is true that the Topology layout is the reason why A1 and B1 aren't quite as strong as A2 and B2, but the reason they switched away from T-Topology were it caused a bunch of other issues with the Speed of the Chip. So you may be able to get a higher Ram OC easier on the C6H, but then you will have other issues that you are not having on the C7H. For Instance, on my C6H, when I get my RAM Up to 3800Mhz, My Chip refuses to CPU any higher then 4.15Ghz, when my C7H can do 4.3Ghz all Core at the same 1.3v No Problem. It simply hard Shuts down when doing a Stress Test if I bring my CPU OC any higher then 4.15 while my Ram is Clocked to 3800Mhz. There are also more stability issues with regards to the Ram on the C6H. It is possible to work most of these issues out, but overall you are better off dealing with the Daisy Chain Topology on the 3000 Series. You can Overcome it, just by Using a tickle more Voltage on both the SOCv and the DRAM Voltage, raising your PROCodt, and dialing in your CLDO VDDP and CLDO VDDG. It might also help to Slightly Raise your VTT DDR and your PLL Voltage. I Run 4 Sticks of Skill Flare X 3200Mhz CL14 8GB, at 3800Mhz on the C7H, with the IF at 1900Mhz, it just took me literally 2 entire Days just to get it to boot, and about 2 Weeks to Dial it in with Timings that I am Happy with (CL16-17-16-17-34-56-336, and I can go tighter that would just take a lot more work to stabilize, this got me where I wanted to be in terms of Latency, which is 66ns as measured by AIDA64), so it DEFINITELY is possible, it just depends on your Kit, your Memory Controller, and your patience. I definitely would be willing to try and help you if you want it.


----------



## oreonutz

Anyword on Beta BIOSES for Agesa 1004 Yet???


----------



## oreonutz

zaubara said:


> Anyone ever encountered "USB-Lag" on an overclocked 2700X under heavy load?
> When i hit it with prime95, everything runs stable and temps are fine (using a custom water loop).
> After a few minutes, the mouse and keyboard stop working every few seconds for a bit. The intervals get shorter and the duration increases with time. When I stop the test, everything goes back to normal. Until then, prime95 kept on chugging without an error.
> With a more unstable overclock, I had that happen even ingame.
> 
> I'm currently on the 0002M-FIE Non-Wifi + 2700X, running with PBO and OC lv3 with EDC manually raised to 165W (so it pushes all core to 4.25) with DDR4 at 3533.
> Temps all seem fine, but my waterblock doesn't cool the VRMs, there's no active cooling apart from the case airflow. The VRM temps are reported at around 62°C when it starts happening, so that seems fine as well.
> Any ideas? Thanks.


YES, I have.

This issue sucks to deal with, but it comes down to this, Your Overclock is unstable. It took me FOREVER to 100 Percent verify that this was the case with me. But in the end, after days of Research and testing, I am certain this is the case. Basically, just to make sure we are on the same page, what happens is, when under full load (or sometimes not even when under full load, just under some load), all the sudden when moving your mouse it stops and gets stuck for a few seconds, then it fixes itself, then it happens again a few seconds later. Everything else continues to work, for instance if you had a video on the screen it would still be playing just your mouse gets stuck, and the same happens for any other USB Input devices you may have plugged in.

I have only seen this happen due to 3 main reasons; 
1) My Overclock ended up being too high, it wasn't quite high enough for it to crash in Cinebench, it would even survive 10 Runs of R15 Back to back, but in the long run, lowering the OC just by 25Mhz was enough to stop this issue from happening. 
2) My SOCv was too high. In my case I though I needed my SOCv to be higher to get all 4 of my DIMMS to run at a higher speed, which was true, just not as high as I thought I needed. This happened with my 2700x when I had my SOCv as high as 1.25v, and it happened on my 3900x when I had my SOCv as high as 1.2v. Lowering my SOCv back down to a reasonable number, On the 2700 that would be lower then 1.2v preferably, and on the 3900x that would be lower then 1.1875 Preferably, fixed this issue.
3) The only other time I have seen this issue it had nothing to do with the Chip at all, it was in fact the Graphics Cards driver acting up. Never seen this with an NVidia card, but unfortunately have seen it all too often with AMD Graphics Card. Particularly when the December 2018 Big Update came, I had to deal with quite a few customers having weird ass issues due to their AMD Card Drivers after they automatically updated.

In your case its likely to be one of the 1st two, as the latest AMD Graphics card drivers haven't suffered from this issue for quite a few months. They finally ironed out their issues around March this year. So I would start with just lowering your OC by about 25Mhz or so at a time until the issue disappears. Let me know if this helps.


----------



## Synoxia

oreonutz said:


> So I haven't gone through and read all your Posts on this topic, So I am not even sure what CPU you are Rocking. But, If you have a 3rd Gen CPU, you should definitely be able to get all 4 DIMMS working atleast 3600 (assuming the Memory is Capable of that), if its a 2000 Series or 1000 Series Processor, then it gets a little harryier. I have both the C6H and C7H, and with the 3000 Series Chip in either, I can get to 3800Mhz on All 4 Dimms in either. Its a little more work in the C7H because you REALLY have to dial in each and every timing, and that can take literally all day, sometimes 2, but it will boot once you have it dialed in. But your first problem is going to be how strong your Memory Controller is on your Chip. With a strong enough Memory Controller you can get all 4 DIMMS up to speed on either board. With the C6H It does seem to be a little easier in my experience to get all 4 DIMMS at a higher speed, but it comes at the expense of lower OC on the Chip itself, the C7H seems to be better balanced in that regard.
> 
> In short, I would not bother changing your board, instead I would work on Your Timings. And Keep in mind when running 4 Dimms it helps to Raise the ProcODT, on my chip its sweet spot is 53.3 Ohms, and Enable Gear Down Mode to start, it will make it easier for all 4 Dimms to Boot, then once you dial in all your timings and know it will work, then you can work on trying to get it to work with Gear Down disabled. Also with my Chip, I couldn't get all 4 Dimms to boot at 3800 with tWRRD Below 3 (That one took me forever to figure out). Hope this helps.
> 
> EDIT: Now I actually went back and Bothered to read the issue you were having, lol. It is true that the Topology layout is the reason why A1 and B1 aren't quite as strong as A2 and B2, but the reason they switched away from T-Topology were it caused a bunch of other issues with the Speed of the Chip. So you may be able to get a higher Ram OC easier on the C6H, but then you will have other issues that you are not having on the C7H. For Instance, on my C6H, when I get my RAM Up to 3800Mhz, My Chip refuses to CPU any higher then 4.15Ghz, when my C7H can do 4.3Ghz all Core at the same 1.3v No Problem. It simply hard Shuts down when doing a Stress Test if I bring my CPU OC any higher then 4.15 while my Ram is Clocked to 3800Mhz. There are also more stability issues with regards to the Ram on the C6H. It is possible to work most of these issues out, but overall you are better off dealing with the Daisy Chain Topology on the 3000 Series. You can Overcome it, just by Using a tickle more Voltage on both the SOCv and the DRAM Voltage, raising your PROCodt, and dialing in your CLDO VDDP and CLDO VDDG. It might also help to Slightly Raise your VTT DDR and your PLL Voltage. I Run 4 Sticks of Skill Flare X 3200Mhz CL14 8GB, at 3800Mhz on the C7H, with the IF at 1900Mhz, it just took me literally 2 entire Days just to get it to boot, and about 2 Weeks to Dial it in with Timings that I am Happy with (CL16-17-16-17-34-56-336, and I can go tighter that would just take a lot more work to stabilize, this got me where I wanted to be in terms of Latency, which is 66ns as measured by AIDA64), so it DEFINITELY is possible, it just depends on your Kit, your Memory Controller, and your patience. I definitely would be willing to try and help you if you want it.



Hi, thank you for the long and detailed answer. Yes i have a 3rd gen cpu (3700x) and seems it's memory controller is quite fine, i can run 3800c16 at 1.03 soc. I' be really glad if you could help me reaching 3800 c16 with all 4 dimms.
For now i've confirmed both sticks are capable of running 3800c16 with the newer stick being able to do same settings but with -1.5 voltage 3000% hci stable.
It's the A1 and b1 slots that really really suck... they can't post more than 3533 and sometimes refuse to post above 3400 speed. What i can do?
I've already tried with 1.10 vdsoc and more vddg... procdt is at 40 ohm. Might you share your settings txt?

EDIT: it posted, finally. Idk what did it between cad bus 60 and RZQ 3 on RTTwr or PLL or whatever.. i pumped everything to max volt to see if its gonna post. Now to check out what does make them to POST and reduce voltages to sane levels again.

EDIT2: "Sane" voltage of 1.48v DRAM posted both sticks, PLL back to old 3000% stable with 2 sticks values, same goes for VPP, CLD0 VDDP and CLDO VDDG. VDDSOC still at 1.10 (Should be the memory controller so i guess i need it that high but not sure) 
Now test for stability and go back again to raise things if things go wrong.
Are cadbus TIMINGS addrcmd, csodt and cke safe at values of 60 like dram calc says?


----------



## oreonutz

Synoxia said:


> Hi, thank you for the long and detailed answer. Yes i have a 3rd gen cpu (3700x) and seems it's memory controller is quite fine, i can run 3800c16 at 1.03 soc. I' be really glad if you could help me reaching 3800 c16 with all 4 dimms.
> For now i've confirmed both sticks are capable of running 3800c16 with the newer stick being able to do same settings but with -1.5 voltage 3000% hci stable.
> It's the A1 and b1 slots that really really suck... they can't post more than 3533 and sometimes refuse to post above 3400 speed. What i can do?
> I've already tried with 1.10 vdsoc and more vddg... procdt is at 40 ohm. Might you share your settings txt?
> 
> EDIT: it posted, finally. Idk what did it between cad bus 60 and RZQ 3 on RTTwr or PLL or whatever.. i pumped everything to max volt to see if its gonna post. Now to check out what does make them to POST and reduce voltages to sane levels again.
> 
> EDIT2: "Sane" voltage of 1.48v DRAM posted both sticks, PLL back to old 3000% stable with 2 sticks values, same goes for VPP, CLD0 VDDP and CLDO VDDG. VDDSOC still at 1.10 (Should be the memory controller so i guess i need it that high but not sure)
> Now test for stability and go back again to raise things if things go wrong.
> Are cadbus TIMINGS addrcmd, csodt and cke safe at values of 60 like dram calc says?


HELL YEAH! Sorry man I got caught up on a Job this weekend. I only am just now logging back in. But am so glad you got it posted! I would be happy to share my settings with you if you would like, but it looks like you got it up and running! I Do believe they are safe at those values, although I didn't need to get those ones so high to post, for me it was more VPP, VLDO VDDP, CLDO VDDG, SOCv, and ProcODT, along with a few of the lower timings. My CAD Bus Drive Strength Timings are 24-20-24-24 (AddrCmd is 20). If you need me to send you my Txt of Settings I will export them on my next reboot, just send me an email, and I will email them back to you if you want them. (Email gets my attention, where as this site has no alerts or notifications, so I only see messages when I actually think of checking it) My Email is [email protected] .

Glad to hear you got it posting through!


----------



## Synoxia

oreonutz said:


> HELL YEAH! Sorry man I got caught up on a Job this weekend. I only am just now logging back in. But am so glad you got it posted! I would be happy to share my settings with you if you would like, but it looks like you got it up and running! I Do believe they are safe at those values, although I didn't need to get those ones so high to post, for me it was more VPP, VLDO VDDP, CLDO VDDG, SOCv, and ProcODT, along with a few of the lower timings. My CAD Bus Drive Strength Timings are 24-20-24-24 (AddrCmd is 20). If you need me to send you my Txt of Settings I will export them on my next reboot, just send me an email, and I will email them back to you if you want them. (Email gets my attention, where as this site has no alerts or notifications, so I only see messages when I actually think of checking it) My Email is [email protected] .
> 
> Glad to hear you got it posting through!


I've raised vddsoc a bit, removed cadbus at 60 and lowered dram voltage (4 sticks get hot) now i am 1300% HCI stable 
Now need to wait for new 1.0.0.4 bios and free performance D:

EDIT: f9 code sometimes when i reboot. Cold boot issues from 1st gen ryzen era again?


----------



## chakku

And now we wait for 1.0.0.4 BIOS, something to look forward to after I've been happy with 2801 and not having to think about my system for a while now.


----------



## Synoxia

chakku said:


> And now we wait for 1.0.0.4 BIOS, something to look forward to after I've been happy with 2801 and not having to think about my system for a while now.



1.0.0.4 bioses are out for some asus x570 boards now. Namely strix, viii impact and another one. I hope asus is just properly testing those bioses and not just lagging behind as asrock have beta bioses already out for all the three generations of motherboards, not mentioning msi and gigabyte who were like always the first to release bioses.


Does somebody have any hint for the cold boot/reboot issue? Basically what otherwise it's a 1300% HCI stable oc sometimes fails to post with either 15 or F9 code. I've tried raising vddsoc and vboot voltage without success.


----------



## aleks bedini

Hello,

I have a 2700x with mounted on a crosshair 7 hero BIOS verison 2801. PLease explain what do you mean by gimps?


----------



## nick name

aleks bedini said:


> Hello,
> 
> I have a 2700x with mounted on a crosshair 7 hero BIOS verison 2801. PLease explain what do you mean by gimps?


You didn't quote the post you are asking about. Could you be more specific please.


----------



## oreonutz

Synoxia said:


> I've raised vddsoc a bit, removed cadbus at 60 and lowered dram voltage (4 sticks get hot) now i am 1300% HCI stable
> Now need to wait for new 1.0.0.4 bios and free performance D:
> 
> EDIT: f9 code sometimes when i reboot. Cold boot issues from 1st gen ryzen era again?


Hell yeah Man! Hopefully My long winded comments about some of the Voltages that helped me get there, helped you. Sorry I wasn't more helpful, been a crazy couple of months for me. But I am glad you got there! Its a lovely thing to have all 4 Dimms working, giving you 32GBs of 3800Mhz RAM, with all the cores and the speed of Zen2, and being able to Run Multiple VM's, Mix in a Pro Tools Session, while a Video Is rendering at breakneck speeds in One VM, and a Kernel is being Compiled in another! The just pure Horsepower that the Zen Cores offer us is just astounding!

Anyways, the F9 Code is a weird thing, hopefully that gets worked out.

I can not wait for 1004 either! The ONLY Thing I don't like about Running 2801 on Auto and letting the Cores do their thing, is My Multicore Performance, its the only reason I am still Per CCX Overclocking, and that works great and gives me a good balance between Single Core Performance, while still giving me the absolute maximum Multi Core Performance. But My Testing Shows that I still get about 5 Percent higher Single Core Performance when just letting PB Do its thing vs using Per CCX OC, simply because I can't get my Strongest CCX as High as it will go when Under Auto, while still being Multi Core Stable under Load. Even just another 50Mhz per Core under full MC Load is intriguing to me, and may be enough for me to just leave the Chip on auto. But we shall see. Hopefully we will get our Bios soon. And hopefully it is as stable as our current Bios.


----------



## oreonutz

nick name said:


> You didn't quote the post you are asking about. Could you be more specific please.


LOL! Right???

I was thinking he was asking how do you run Gimp at first??? LOL! I was about to post a Link to Gimp. Truly is a great Image Editor and Processor! LOL!

My Second thought was thinking about that scene in Pulp Fiction. I wanted to say, Zed Dead baby, Zeds Dead... LOL!


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

nick name said:


> Welp, 2801 gimps the 2700X just like the other BIOS versions after 2606 have.


TLDR...Good to know, thanks !





aleks bedini said:


> Hello,
> 
> 
> 
> I have a 2700x with mounted on a crosshair 7 hero BIOS verison 2801. PLease explain what do you mean by gimps?


Gimp=when a software or Firmware update makes your hardware less efficient .

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## Synoxia

oreonutz said:


> Hell yeah Man! Hopefully My long winded comments about some of the Voltages that helped me get there, helped you. Sorry I wasn't more helpful, been a crazy couple of months for me. But I am glad you got there! Its a lovely thing to have all 4 Dimms working, giving you 32GBs of 3800Mhz RAM, with all the cores and the speed of Zen2, and being able to Run Multiple VM's, Mix in a Pro Tools Session, while a Video Is rendering at breakneck speeds in One VM, and a Kernel is being Compiled in another! The just pure Horsepower that the Zen Cores offer us is just astounding!
> 
> Anyways, the F9 Code is a weird thing, hopefully that gets worked out.
> 
> I can not wait for 1004 either! The ONLY Thing I don't like about Running 2801 on Auto and letting the Cores do their thing, is My Multicore Performance, its the only reason I am still Per CCX Overclocking, and that works great and gives me a good balance between Single Core Performance, while still giving me the absolute maximum Multi Core Performance. But My Testing Shows that I still get about 5 Percent higher Single Core Performance when just letting PB Do its thing vs using Per CCX OC, simply because I can't get my Strongest CCX as High as it will go when Under Auto, while still being Multi Core Stable under Load. Even just another 50Mhz per Core under full MC Load is intriguing to me, and may be enough for me to just leave the Chip on auto. But we shall see. Hopefully we will get our Bios soon. And hopefully it is as stable as our current Bios.


Do you have f9 errors at boot too? Btw yeah 1.0.0.4 will surely give more multithread performance so stay tuned for that, i've seen some review where a 3800x gone from boosting 4250 during karhu ram test to 4325.




Wuest3nFuchs said:


> TLDR...Good to know, thanks !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gimp=when a software or Firmware update makes your hardware less efficient .
> 
> Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


And this, my friends, is why you should never be a fanboy of a company. Intel and AMD pursue the same goal: money.

This is the 2nd time i see AMD do this, in the past they removed HBM overclockability from R9 Fury because of "safety" reasons when Vega launched.

Now, without getting into any conspiracy statements... do not update unless you need security enhancements and even then... see intel nerfing it's processors with spectre patches... who cares about meltdown and spectre when hackers to gain access to PC have to pass through human firewall


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

Synoxia said:


> Do you have f9 errors at boot too? Btw yeah 1.0.0.4 will surely give more multithread performance so stay tuned for that, i've seen some review where a 3800x gone from boosting 4250 during karhu ram test to 4325.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And this, my friends, is why you should never be a fanboy of a company. Intel and AMD pursue the same goal: money.
> 
> 
> 
> This is the 2nd time i see AMD do this, in the past they removed HBM overclockability from R9 Fury because of "safety" reasons when Vega launched.
> 
> 
> 
> Now, without getting into any conspiracy statements... do not update unless you need security enhancements and even then... see intel nerfing it's processors with spectre patches... who cares about meltdown and spectre when hackers to gain access to PC have to pass through human firewall


thanks to you guys .i wanted to update bios for my 2700x .
which one is the Last known working without any issues or degradations .
Should i try 2606? 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## Hale59

AGESA 1.0.0.4B NEW FEATURES

SMU 46.54 (additional boost)
CPU Ratio Apply Mode (CPU or CCX)
VDDG CCD/IOD Voltage Control Mode (Async or Sync + manual adjustment)
PBO Max Offset Voltage (-0.1v max)
Indirect Branch Prediction Speculation
Performance increase etc
https://twitter.com/1usmus/status/1188018589112123393


----------



## Hale59

"Guys, I have a double impression of the new agesa 1004B, there are good points and bad ones. For example, I have problems with boost, PBO and undervoltage." https://twitter.com/1usmus/status/1189631381414076416


----------



## Synoxia

This has been happening to me forever. It uses grey star instead of yellow star.


----------



## ryouiki

Anyone happen to be running this board with G.SKILL F4-3600C15-D?

I bought one of these kits to play around with, but thus far haven't been able to get anything close to stable w/ 3900x outside of 3200CL14. Standard DOCP (3600Cl15), safe timings from calculator, etc. all either fail to boot into Windows or results in a full memory dump immediately after starting to test memory. At 3200CL14 I can run 10,000% coverage with no issues. I even replaced the kit with an identical one and had the same issues.

I'm somewhat at a loss here, this should in theory be better bin then my FlareX 3200CL14, yet that at least would pass Karhu @ 2000% coverage with 3600Cl14-15-14-14 / FCLK 1800.

I've tried all sorts of changes to procODT, raising lower SOC/VDDP/VDDG/etc. without any luck. Either I'm missing something important, or my 3900x has a terrible IMC?


----------



## crakej

ryouiki said:


> Anyone happen to be running this board with G.SKILL F4-3600C15-D?
> 
> I bought one of these kits to play around with, but thus far haven't been able to get anything close to stable w/ 3900x outside of 3200CL14. Standard DOCP (3600Cl15), safe timings from calculator, etc. all either fail to boot into Windows or results in a full memory dump immediately after starting to test memory. At 3200CL14 I can run 10,000% coverage with no issues. I even replaced the kit with an identical one and had the same issues.
> 
> I'm somewhat at a loss here, this should in theory be better bin then my FlareX 3200CL14, yet that at least would pass Karhu @ 2000% coverage with 3600Cl14-15-14-14 / FCLK 1800.
> 
> I've tried all sorts of changes to procODT, raising lower SOC/VDDP/VDDG/etc. without any luck. Either I'm missing something important, or my 3900x has a terrible IMC?


ProcODT should be 40ohms or less for 3900x. What voltages have you tried?

Also, have you tried enabling/disabling GearDown?

I can't believe your IMC would be that bad!


----------



## ryouiki

crakej said:


> ProcODT should be 40ohms or less for 3900x. What voltages have you tried?
> 
> Also, have you tried enabling/disabling GearDown?
> 
> I can't believe your IMC would be that bad!


For ProcODT i've tried 34.3/36.9/40 (previously I had 4x8 FlareX using 40 for this setting).

Voltages have been all over the place. First I tried leaving the board mainly on auto + DOCP when that failed I attempted to raise VDIMM since these modules are rated at 1.35V so I attempted up raise them up gradually from there just in case they weren't getting quite enough.

After that I attempted to use the settings on the calculator for 3600/1800 safe and fast... that put SOC at 1.1, VDDP @ 900mv and VDDG at 0.950V. I've tried raising lower both VDDG and VDDP without any real behavior changes. Strangely enough lowering SOC to about 1.05 let the test run for a few seconds longer, but still resulted in memory dump/reboot.

Currently only running 2 DIMMS in A2/B2 @3200CL14 @ 1.35 and calculator fast timings which is working fine, but the FlareX kit managed that will all 4 slots populated. I've also ran the FlareX 4x8 at 3600/1800 14-15-14-14 @ 1.42 w/ Geardown off, and it would at least clear 2000% coverage.

I guess next step try to reseat and clear CMOS/start settings over again. I did notice something really odd when dropping from 4 DIMM to 2 that the processor now clocks higher (max 4 DIMM 4.550, max 2 DIMM 4.625).


----------



## crakej

ryouiki said:


> I guess next step try to reseat and clear CMOS/start settings over again. I did notice something really odd when dropping from 4 DIMM to 2 that the processor now clocks higher (max 4 DIMM 4.550, max 2 DIMM 4.625).


Yes, this is next thing to do. Also try swapping the Dimms around.

Did you enter all the CAD settings? Also, in Calculator, are you using settings from your memory or R-XMP?


----------



## Jaju123

ryouiki said:


> Anyone happen to be running this board with G.SKILL F4-3600C15-D?
> 
> I bought one of these kits to play around with, but thus far haven't been able to get anything close to stable w/ 3900x outside of 3200CL14. Standard DOCP (3600Cl15), safe timings from calculator, etc. all either fail to boot into Windows or results in a full memory dump immediately after starting to test memory. At 3200CL14 I can run 10,000% coverage with no issues. I even replaced the kit with an identical one and had the same issues.
> 
> I'm somewhat at a loss here, this should in theory be better bin then my FlareX 3200CL14, yet that at least would pass Karhu @ 2000% coverage with 3600Cl14-15-14-14 / FCLK 1800.
> 
> I've tried all sorts of changes to procODT, raising lower SOC/VDDP/VDDG/etc. without any luck. Either I'm missing something important, or my 3900x has a terrible IMC?


I have that kit. For me it behaves very unusual and is unstable above 1.42V. I can only get stability at 1.42V or below, and am currently running 3800mhz @ cl16 with DRAM calculator timings for "FAST" present (as far as I remember) using the exported XMP settings.


----------



## Flexarius

Hi,

is there any news when AGESA 1.0.0.4. comes out, Beta too?


----------



## nick name

Flexarius said:


> Hi,
> 
> is there any news when AGESA 1.0.0.4. comes out, Beta too?


Hey, I don't have any news about a new BIOS, but I saw you're sig says 2700X. Are you still running a 2700X?


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

Hi all.

Is there a good guide/info with custom pstates/throttling for a 2700x ?



Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## Flexarius

nick name said:


> Hey, I don't have any news about a new BIOS, but I saw you're sig says 2700X. Are you still running a 2700X?


Hi,

no, now 3900X.


----------



## oreonutz

Synoxia said:


> Do you have f9 errors at boot too? Btw yeah 1.0.0.4 will surely give more multithread performance so stay tuned for that, i've seen some review where a 3800x gone from boosting 4250 during karhu ram test to 4325.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And this, my friends, is why you should never be a fanboy of a company. Intel and AMD pursue the same goal: money.
> 
> This is the 2nd time i see AMD do this, in the past they removed HBM overclockability from R9 Fury because of "safety" reasons when Vega launched.
> 
> Now, without getting into any conspiracy statements... do not update unless you need security enhancements and even then... see intel nerfing it's processors with spectre patches... who cares about meltdown and spectre when hackers to gain access to PC have to pass through human firewall


My Very first F9 Code was today... I had never gotten one before today, and the only change I made was I finally upgraded my Windows 10 from 1809 to 1903. Since then I have had a few weird things happen, Mainly just my Outlook going crazy on me, constantly opening and closing at random, which is weird, and all of the sudden my PCIE Sound card has just randomly quit working. I leave my computer on for Months at a time, so its been on without a reboot since I made the upgrade to 1903 about a week ago, and then 2 days ago my Sound Card just quit working. Unfortunately with this Sound Card if you Disable in Device Manager, it forces a reboot for changes to take effect, so I can't use the Disable then Reenable trick. That same thing happened for the 3rd time today, in the middle of watching a Youtube Video in the background while working in a VM, my Sound just cut out. I rebooted to get my sound back, and then during reboot, instead of posting, it got stuck at post code F9. So not sure what that is about. I just shut off the PSU, then turned it back on, and its been working fine since, but I am not impressed with 1903. I have been meaning to install 1903 because of that supposed Windows Update included in 1903 that is supposed to favor your strong cores. But the thing is, even on 1809 that was already working for me after installing the September Chipset Drivers, and I have noticed no difference at all in better performance, in fact my single core CB15 score dropped by a point on Average.

Still the only thing that FINALLY pushed me to upgrade to 1903 was I wanted to install the Outer Worlds, I have the Microsoft Game Pass thing, and its so fricking stupid, but the Windows Store FORCES you to have 1903 in order to even DOWNLOAD The Outer Worlds. I have always hated the Windows store, so I have away around using it to install, but only after starting the download process so I can intercept the link to the download, then I can use the link to download the Install File with Jdownloader, which allows me to have 4 Simultaneous connections to download at my full Gigabit speed, instead of being capped at the 25MBps that Microsoft Caps you at through the store. Then You simply use Powershell to install the game, and you are good to go. Had I done the install with Powershell I am confident the Outer Worlds would have installed just fine on 1809, but I had no way of getting the damn .EAppxBundle Install File for Outer Worlds because it won't even let you DOWNLOAD the damn file unless you are updated. So stupid! So I updated my damn machine, and now I have these 3 issues, I am hoping the F9 Boot Code was just a fluke, but we shall see. Under 1809 My Computer has been Perfectly stable since the 0002 UEFI, and has Remained so through all the Mods of 0002 and now 2801. 2801 was just as Rock Steady Reliable as 0002 for the last 3 weeks up until I upgraded to Win10 1903. Thinking about using my Acronis Image to just roll back to 1809 for the time being.

Anyways, will shut up now...


----------



## ryouiki

crakej said:


> Yes, this is next thing to do. Also try swapping the Dimms around.
> 
> Did you enter all the CAD settings? Also, in Calculator, are you using settings from your memory or R-XMP?


Pretty much entered everything in the calculator, and tried both timings from R-XMP and exported from Taiphoon/imported into calculator.



Jaju123 said:


> I have that kit. For me it behaves very unusual and is unstable above 1.42V. I can only get stability at 1.42V or below, and am currently running 3800mhz @ cl16 with DRAM calculator timings for "FAST" present (as far as I remember) using the exported XMP settings.


Thanks! I will give this a try... usually when I try new speed I start high and lower VDIMM after, but I will try to start at a lower setting to see if that helps.


----------



## crakej

ryouiki said:


> Pretty much entered everything in the calculator, and tried both timings from R-XMP and exported from Taiphoon/imported into calculator.
> 
> Thanks! I will give this a try... usually when I try new speed I start high and lower VDIMM after, but I will try to start at a lower setting to see if that helps.


Ram voltage can be VERY sensitive - mine is too. Literally one step too high or low and stability is gone. Hopefully now you'll be ok!

Also, I use LLC for my CPU & SoC, level 2


----------



## Hale59

"My dears, I have prepared my own power profile for Ryzen, it will fix all problems with boost and also reduce the temperature in idle and loads where all the cores are not involved. On average, I get a difference of 200-250 MHz"
https://twitter.com/1usmus/status/1190701909474258944
"Release date - 4 November"


----------



## nick name

Anyone have an idea of at what temps you can experience GPU degradation? The fans on my PC stopped and because I use a NZXT Kraken GPU AIO cooler mount, with the fan and AIO pump attached to the mobo, it stopped cooling the GPU, VRM, and memory. The GPU got up to 94*C, but my card doesn't have temp measurements for the memory and VRM so that max temp is unknown. As soon as I realized I shut the PC down though it ran without cooling for probably around 30 seconds. 

I can't imagine it didt any harm, but for future I'd like to know.


----------



## Axaion

Honestly, its pure scumbag that asus havent issues a recall on these super buggy mobos yet.


----------



## dansi

Axaion said:


> Honestly, its pure scumbag that asus havent issues a recall on these super buggy mobos yet.


Hi may I know which areas are Asus x570 buggy in?
Because gigabyte x570 is also problematic if you visit the official thread here.
So we want to know maybe is AMD the culprit


----------



## Axaion

dansi said:


> Hi may I know which areas are Asus x570 buggy in?
> Because gigabyte x570 is also problematic if you visit the official thread here.
> So we want to know maybe is AMD the culprit


AMD didnt release the board, Asus and gigabyte did.

Also, this is an x470 asus board, not x570.


----------



## crakej

Axaion said:


> AMD didnt release the board, Asus and gigabyte did.
> 
> Also, this is an x470 asus board, not x570.


What's wrong with your board? Why not RMA?

Most of the problems most people were having were a result of buggy code from AMD. There have been some problems with fans, but to the most part they have been solved.

My machine has been running really stable for last few weeks. Only problems I've had really are Windows based.


----------



## aleks bedini

Hello Wuest3nFuchs

Thanks for the explanation, I think i am facing that same situation here.
I am new in this forum and I hope you can help me solve the following issue.

My build:
CPU: 2700x
Cooler: Noctua NH D14 (AM4 brackets)
RAM: Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro White 2*8GB placed on A2 B2, Rated at 3000 OCed at 3200 with stock timings
GPU: EVGA GTX 1070 FTW
MB/BIOS: Crosshair 7 Hero / 2801
PSU: Coolermaster 650 W Bronze
M.2: HP ADATA 120GB mounted in the lower slot near the chipset
SSD: Samsung 250 GB Pro Evo
HDD: Hitachi 500GB and WD 500GB
OS: Windows 10 latest version, also all drivers are up to date

BCLK=100, PE=2, XFR=Activated Mode0, enabled, PBO enabled, base clock 3.7Ghz, CPU Voltage manually set to 1.4, RAM voltage manually set to 1.36, SoC voltage manually set to 1.21

The issue I am having is sudden stuttering during CSGO and BF1 where FPS drop down to 30 periodically.
Well in CSGO the FPS drop is displayed in the net graph with a normal pre-drop value being 250-299, while in BF1 it always shows 60/61 FPS yet it drops quite below.
In both games this FPS drop impacts my mouse aiming and it happens periodically making it impossible to engage a serious CSGO or BF1 competitive match.
Tdie while playing csgo is 50 Max so i do not think it is the temps

Please advice


----------



## Axaion

crakej said:


> What's wrong with your board? Why not RMA?
> 
> Most of the problems most people were having were a result of buggy code from AMD. There have been some problems with fans, but to the most part they have been solved.
> 
> My machine has been running really stable for last few weeks. Only problems I've had really are Windows based.


So far ive had, Fan-stop, Fan-stuck at 100% thats pure board related (choice by asus using a ****ty chip for control.)
Not reaching proper boost clocks yet either, AMD scammed us so far, by releasing an unfinihed product, asus followed that choice.
And the RAM issues im whining about, obviously, cant get over 3400mhz without it messing up, no matter how loose i make the timings, with a b-die kit (FlareX 3200Mhz CL14 1.35v)

Only thing stopping me from just trashing this thing is me being cheap lmao

Its 100% they wont find an issue with RMA since its too random and shops in denmark are.. useless after 14 days in my experience unless its super obvious.

/rant


----------



## nick name

Can someone help -- I can't remember if anyone made a modded 2601 BIOS that actually fixed the stopping fans issue.


----------



## Hale59

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/1usmus-custom-power-plan-for-ryzen-3000-zen-2-processors/


----------



## 1usmus

*1usmus Custom Power Plan for Ryzen 3000 Zen 2 Processors*

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/1usmus-custom-power-plan-for-ryzen-3000-zen-2-processors/


----------



## xeizo

1usmus said:


> *1usmus Custom Power Plan for Ryzen 3000 Zen 2 Processors*
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/review/1usmus-custom-power-plan-for-ryzen-3000-zen-2-processors/


Thanks! Will be really interesting to test when not working, probably have some free time on Wednesday


----------



## dkarDaGobert

at least for me it changed some numbers 
before i was only able to see 3-4 cores boosting to/above 4,6Ghz
now it looks like this








(PBO enabled, Performance Enhancer: Level3 (OC) )


----------



## djase45

Hi,
I have 2x8 16gb G.Skill F4-3200C14-8GTZRX but none of the dram calculator timings works.
I've got bsod or errors.






Can anyone help me?
Cheers.


----------



## nick name

djase45 said:


> Hi,
> I have 2x8 16gb G.Skill F4-3200C14-8GTZRX but none of the dram calculator timings works.
> I've got bsod or errors.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can anyone help me?
> Cheers.


Which RAM slots are you using?


----------



## djase45

nick name said:


> Which RAM slots are you using?


A2/B2.


----------



## andyliu

Axaion said:


> So far ive had, Fan-stop, Fan-stuck at 100% thats pure board related (choice by asus using a ****ty chip for control.)
> Not reaching proper boost clocks yet either, AMD scammed us so far, by releasing an unfinihed product, asus followed that choice.
> And the RAM issues im whining about, obviously, cant get over 3400mhz without it messing up, no matter how loose i make the timings, with a b-die kit (FlareX 3200Mhz CL14 1.35v)
> 
> Only thing stopping me from just trashing this thing is me being cheap lmao
> 
> Its 100% they wont find an issue with RMA since its too random and shops in denmark are.. useless after 14 days in my experience unless its super obvious.
> 
> /rant


dont have fan issue w/ bios 2801, and I always retrain or retune all the fan curve without loading previous one
they did **** up in one of the BIOS update, but has been fixed?

As far as ram goes, make sure you are install them @ A2,B2 if you only using 2 dimms.
I personally have no issue to O.C Flare X kit to 3600 w/ 4 dimms setup. Dont like the voltage @ 1.45 so I just go with 3200Mhz with tighter timing.
Have seem so many people complaining about ram O.C lately, only to find out they did not follow simple user manual and blame ASUS.


----------



## andyliu

djase45 said:


> A2/B2.


instead of manual profile version, try V1 or V2?
at least in my case, they gives different result w/ the different profile.


----------



## djase45

andyliu said:


> instead of manual profile version, try V1 or V2?
> at least in my case, they gives different result w/ the different profile.


I'll try, thank you.
:thumb:


----------



## chakku

Did anyone notice apparently 2901 is on the ASUS server?

https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-2901.zip
https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...VII-HERO/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-2901.zip

Am not home so have not tested if this is 1.0.0.4B or not.


----------



## djase45

chakku said:


> Did anyone notice apparently 2901 is on the ASUS server?
> 
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-2901.zip
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...VII-HERO/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-2901.zip
> 
> Am not home so have not tested if this is 1.0.0.4B or not.


1003ABBA is still left with 49er SMU









What's the point to release 1003, while everyone waiting for 1004 ? Really, Asus ?


----------



## andyliu

chakku said:


> Did anyone notice apparently 2901 is on the ASUS server?
> 
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-2901.zip
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...VII-HERO/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-2901.zip
> 
> Am not home so have not tested if this is 1.0.0.4B or not.


here is the update log 
ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO BIOS 2901
01. Update Memory Overclocking Rules
02. Fixed a display issue for Ryzen 3000 CPUs in the CPU Configuration tab
03. Fixed an issue with the HDD LED not working sometimes when using SATA M.2s with Ryzen 3000 CPUs


----------



## speedgoat

hi, has anybody seen this before ? i am getting an error 8, i guess CPU, if i enable global c-state. It will run ok on first boot but will always crush when i restart/shutdown with these enabled.Its a 3800x on abba but i am under the impression i got the same behavior on abb also. 
would there be a bios setting that interferes with the pc shutting down ?


----------



## Axaion

andyliu said:


> dont have fan issue w/ bios 2801, and I always retrain or retune all the fan curve without loading previous one
> they did **** up in one of the BIOS update, but has been fixed?
> 
> As far as ram goes, make sure you are install them @ A2,B2 if you only using 2 dimms.
> I personally have no issue to O.C Flare X kit to 3600 w/ 4 dimms setup. Dont like the voltage @ 1.45 so I just go with 3200Mhz with tighter timing.
> Have seem so many people complaining about ram O.C lately, only to find out they did not follow simple user manual and blame ASUS.


Of course its in A2/B2 (2nd and 4th slot.)

Im a magical unicorn that will lose hardware silicon lottery 99% of the time, for example i can go 3400 CL14-13-13-13 1.45 with no ram related issues, but 3433?, Bam, it wont even matter what the timings are, or the voltage, it just goes "no u."

I would have gone back to my 2600k if i hadnt given it away..

Sigh, heres hoping bios updates fixes it.


----------



## lordzed83

1usmus said:


> *1usmus Custom Power Plan for Ryzen 3000 Zen 2 Processors*
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/review/1usmus-custom-power-plan-for-ryzen-3000-zen-2-processors/


Great work I see You finally are getting some recognition/respect from tech media  Is the move from 5th november to 7th november of tr and 3950 Yours work hehe. Running benchmarks on New power plan


----------



## R0CK3T

lordzed83 said:


> Great work I see You finally are getting some recognition/respect from tech media  Is the move from 5th november to 7th november of tr and 3950 Yours work hehe. Running benchmarks on New power plan


Seems to be working, but half oh my cores are a potato.


----------



## Jaju123

ryouiki said:


> Pretty much entered everything in the calculator, and tried both timings from R-XMP and exported from Taiphoon/imported into calculator.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks! I will give this a try... usually when I try new speed I start high and lower VDIMM after, but I will try to start at a lower setting to see if that helps.


Did you manage to get it stable?


----------



## Pietro

andyliu said:


> here is the update log
> ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO BIOS 2901
> 01. Update Memory Overclocking Rules
> 02. Fixed a display issue for Ryzen 3000 CPUs in the CPU Configuration tab
> 03. Fixed an issue with the HDD LED not working sometimes when using SATA M.2s with Ryzen 3000 CPUs


Updated, 3800/1900MHz edie dual rank still not stable for me on 3900X.



speedgoat said:


> hi, has anybody seen this before ? i am getting an error 8, i guess CPU, if i enable global c-state. It will run ok on first boot but will always crush when i restart/shutdown with these enabled.Its a 3800x on abba but i am under the impression i got the same behavior on abb also.
> would there be a bios setting that interferes with the pc shutting down ?


I can't use c-state enabled too, it crashes after some time on desktop so no benefits with using 1usmuss new ryzen balanced plan since it tops on 4550MHz with this disable compared o 4625MHz when it is on identical behaviour on few different bios versions.


----------



## Synoxia

1usmus power plan option missing from asus bios: 
Power supply control (hidden, can be shown with bios mod)
PPC Adjustment
AMD CoolnQuiet (can be shown with bios mod, not sure)

Anyway if asus 1.0.0.4 bios comes buggy after being the last to release i'm gonna swap board for a MSI/Gigabyte.

EDIT: didn't check 2901 bios and i won't.


----------



## andyliu

Axaion said:


> Of course its in A2/B2 (2nd and 4th slot.)
> 
> Im a magical unicorn that will lose hardware silicon lottery 99% of the time, for example i can go 3400 CL14-13-13-13 1.45 with no ram related issues, but 3433?, Bam, it wont even matter what the timings are, or the voltage, it just goes "no u."
> 
> I would have gone back to my 2600k if i hadnt given it away..
> 
> Sigh, heres hoping bios updates fixes it.


maybe just a bad memory controller on the CPU itself then?
I had terrible luck w/ the 2700x that I replaced with 3700x.
that CPU had such terrible L1 cache latency (2.5ns+) that it even lost to 1700x in cinebench
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cuo2as/upgrading_from_a_poor_binned_2700x_to_3700x_d/

or like the initial 1700x that I had when ryzen first released. It wouldn't post beyond DDR4-3000Mhz. replaced w/ another 1700x, no issue at all.
def not alone in that bad silicon lotterey luck wonderland ;p


----------



## netman

i get more and more annoyed with asus, as it seems new Red Dead Redemption 2 needs Agesa 1.0.0.4 to work on Ryzen (3000) Systems (still needs to be confirmed yet but read it on reddit and on some forums), wonder how long we have to wait again (while most of the other Manufacturers at least get a Beta with Agesa 1.0.0.4 out) its a shame.


----------



## untouchable247

netman said:


> i get more and more annoyed with asus, as it seems new Red Dead Redemption 2 needs Agesa 1.0.0.4 to work on Ryzen (3000) Systems (still needs to be confirmed yet but read it on reddit and on some forums), wonder how long we have to wait again (while most of the other Manufacturers at least get a Beta with Agesa 1.0.0.4 out) its a shame.


Not true, runs just fine with my 3700x and PI 1.0.0.3 ABBA (bios 2801, gonna try 2901).

EDIT: 2901 also works.


----------



## netman

ah thx for your info - so alt least one thing not to blame asus for  - but there are at least a few reports that only a bios update to 1.0.0.4 (not only asus board) helped to get RDR2 running (on ryzen systems) - i wonder whats the problem there...


----------



## crakej

Axaion said:


> So far ive had, Fan-stop, Fan-stuck at 100% thats pure board related (choice by asus using a ****ty chip for control.)
> Not reaching proper boost clocks yet either, AMD scammed us so far, by releasing an unfinihed product, asus followed that choice.
> And the RAM issues im whining about, obviously, cant get over 3400mhz without it messing up, no matter how loose i make the timings, with a b-die kit (FlareX 3200Mhz CL14 1.35v)
> 
> Only thing stopping me from just trashing this thing is me being cheap lmao
> 
> Its 100% they wont find an issue with RMA since its too random and shops in denmark are.. useless after 14 days in my experience unless its super obvious.
> 
> /rant


I've not seen many people with fan problems recently. My fans have certainly been running fault free for at least 2/3 months now.

I have to point out that buying 3200MTs memory and expecting it to run any faster, let alone above 3400MTs, is just not realistic. Yes, it happens sometimes that these kits can be pushed further, but it's rated at 3200MTs for a reason. It would be sold for a higher price if the manufacturer could guarantee higher performance.

I agree AMD released their product before proper testing had been done, but I'm not sure I'd go as far as calling it a scam. Misleading us? Possibly, but I have to say I'm still happy with my 24 thread, very capable CPU. If they can fix the boost problem, I'll be completely happy.

Things are looking like they will improve - having people like @1usmus helping our case has already improved things - even without his power plan, my CPU boosts to 4.63GHz (for light loads), but I'm hoping to do some testing of the new plan to see what it brings.

It's great to have a new bios with more things fixed. I'd rather they release something that is more reliable than just throwing another buggy beta out. I will be installing shortly.


----------



## crakej

ASUS have released Armoury Crate for the CH7. I think this is meant to be a replacement for AISuite, but it's useless as that!

Release notes:
Armoury Crate Installer
Note: Please uninstall your existing AURA software before installing Armoury Crate*.

*The most recent versions of the Aura software can still be downloaded from the aura sync website: https://www.asus.com/campaign/aura/global/download.html

I really wouldn't install it. It only works for Aura - you can't monitor anything else with it. It might detect other ROG hardware, like GPU, Keyboard, but nothing else as of yet.

If you really want to try it, download the file. Do not run the 'SetupROGLSLService.exe' in the root directory -click through the SetupROGLSLService directory until you find the SetupROGLSLService_2.0.3.0_20190719 directory, and execute SetupROGLSLService.exe there.

Then install Armoury Crate beta from the Microsoft Store if it doesn't do it automatically (it should).

I can't believe they released this when the current release of AISuite has not been updated to support Ryzen 3000 CPUs properly, with many voltages and controls missing, so neither of these programs properly supports our motherboards.

And yes, besides the missing voltages and controls, AISuite works great for me.


----------



## CJMitsuki

CH8 has had 1.0.0.4 beta for a short while now, it runs great actually. I dont use 1usmus power profile as Ive always tuned my own and it provides a bit better results vs. that power profile in my case at least.


----------



## andyliu

crakej said:


> ASUS have released Armoury Crate for the CH7. I think this is meant to be a replacement for AISuite, but it's useless as that!
> 
> Release notes:
> Armoury Crate Installer
> Note: Please uninstall your existing AURA software before installing Armoury Crate*.
> 
> *The most recent versions of the Aura software can still be downloaded from the aura sync website: https://www.asus.com/campaign/aura/global/download.html
> 
> I really wouldn't install it. It only works for Aura - you can't monitor anything else with it. It might detect other ROG hardware, like GPU, Keyboard, but nothing else as of yet.
> 
> If you really want to try it, download the file. Do not run the 'SetupROGLSLService.exe' in the root directory -click through the SetupROGLSLService directory until you find the SetupROGLSLService_2.0.3.0_20190719 directory, and execute SetupROGLSLService.exe there.
> 
> Then install Armoury Crate beta from the Microsoft Store if it doesn't do it automatically (it should).
> 
> I can't believe they released this when the current release of AISuite has not been updated to support Ryzen 3000 CPUs properly, with many voltages and controls missing, so neither of these programs properly supports our motherboards.
> 
> And yes, besides the missing voltages and controls, AISuite works great for me.


tried it, while the aura control works, the lightingservice is constant 3%-5% cpu usage hog 
I noticed that behavior after I came back to my desktop and saw a huge spike on CPU usage for one core.
I then just sit there seeing that service fluctuating between 3-5% cpu usage.
decided to uninstall it and now all the light is fixed to red on my board 
I have no idea how to change the lighting back to default lightning.
reset / update the BIOS does not seem to change the behavior either.


----------



## crakej

CJMitsuki said:


> CH8 has had 1.0.0.4 beta for a short while now, it runs great actually. I dont use 1usmus power profile as Ive always tuned my own and it provides a bit better results vs. that power profile in my case at least.


Good to hear - then I'm sure we'll have it soon enough on the CH7 

Bios 2901 does seem to have brought some performance back for me. The power profile may be giving me better results, but not by a huge margin. I'll do some experimenting tomorrow. Want to try work out what '01. Update Memory Overclocking Rules'


----------



## crakej

andyliu said:


> tried it, while the aura control works, the lightingservice is constant 3%-5% cpu usage hog
> I noticed that behavior after I came back to my desktop and saw a huge spike on CPU usage for one core.
> I then just sit there seeing that service fluctuating between 3-5% cpu usage.
> decided to uninstall it and now all the light is fixed to red on my board
> I have no idea how to change the lighting back to default lightning.
> reset / update the BIOS does not seem to change the behavior either.


I forgot to mention the CPU use!

Uninstall it and remove the service. Install Aura - fix your lighting, and uninstall Aura!


----------



## Synoxia

crakej said:


> I forgot to mention the CPU use!
> 
> Uninstall it and remove the service. Install Aura - fix your lighting, and uninstall Aura!


If you do so lights are reset every time you reboot.


CJMitsuki said:


> CH8 has had 1.0.0.4 beta for a short while now, it runs great actually. I dont use 1usmus power profile as Ive always tuned my own and it provides a bit better results vs. that power profile in my case at least.


Might you want to share it?
Asus is just trashing their old boards, it's a shame they are lagging so hard


----------



## kingmob

netman said:


> ah thx for your info - so alt least one thing not to blame asus for  - but there are at least a few reports that only a bios update to 1.0.0.4 (not only asus board) helped to get RDR2 running (on ryzen systems) - i wonder whats the problem there...


Can't get it to run with this motherboard and 3900x. Are there any better options for motherboards in the x570 line or is this just a ryzen issue? Pretty tired of seeing basic tier mobos getting updated before the supposed flagship.


----------



## crakej

Synoxia said:


> If you do so lights are reset every time you reboot.


Mine don't, but then I only use the default 'rainbow' setting.


----------



## andyliu

crakej said:


> I forgot to mention the CPU use!
> 
> Uninstall it and remove the service. Install Aura - fix your lighting, and uninstall Aura!


I could never get old aura to work ;P which one do you download?


----------



## ryouiki

Jaju123 said:


> Did you manage to get it stable?


I tried a number of things without much luck and finally pulled the whole thing apart, cleaned memory contacts, upgraded to BIOS 2901 and gave it another try.

Right now I have 4x8 of F4-3600C15-8GTZ running @ 3600 14-14-14-14-28-293-1T @ 1.4V, but have only tried with Gear Down mode enabled. This has passed 10,000% coverage, so that is the best result thus far.

I tried some simple tests of 3800 / 1900 FCLK, but I can't even get the board to boot like this, it will always result in F9 error. I can boot with FCLK @ 1900 if memory frequency is lower, but not both at the same time.


----------



## crakej

andyliu said:


> I could never get old aura to work ;P which one do you download?


Check here for the latest ver:

https://www.asus.com/campaign/aura/uk/download.html


----------



## Duvar

New BIOS for download BUT WITHOUT AGESA 1004 https://www.asus.com/de/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WI-FI/HelpDesk_Download/
What is ASUS doing? I am speechless!


----------



## crakej

Duvar said:


> New BIOS for download BUT WITHOUT AGESA 1004 https://www.asus.com/de/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WI-FI/HelpDesk_Download/
> What is ASUS doing? I am speechless!


Well, for me this new bios improved performance. It's based on code that's been pretty reliable. Other boards have the beta of 1004 - we will no doubt get a release soon as reports sound positive.

If you read back a couple of pages you will see we've already been discussing this.


----------



## Duvar

crakej said:


> Well, for me this new bios improved performance. It's based on code that's been pretty reliable. Other boards have the beta of 1004 - we will no doubt get a release soon as reports sound positive.
> 
> If you read back a couple of pages you will see we've already been discussing this.


Thx, i now checked the last 2-3 pages here. Do you have some numbers, of what exactly improved and by how much?
What about those mem oc rules?


----------



## crakej

Duvar said:


> Thx, i now checked the last 2-3 pages here. Do you have some numbers, of what exactly improved and by how much?
> What about those mem oc rules?


Not had time to do proper testing yet, but on 2901 my scores for CB15 are 200+ points better......nearer to where they had been.

Not worked out what the 'mem oc rules' changes are yet! I do wish they would give more info in the release notes!


----------



## Synoxia

crakej said:


> Not had time to do proper testing yet, but on 2901 my scores for CB15 are 200+ points better......nearer to where they had been.
> 
> Not worked out what the 'mem oc rules' changes are yet! I do wish they would give more info in the release notes!


I had nothing to do and flashed 2901, aida is the same, cinebench not tested, same config (pbo+mem oc), what i noticed is memory clear is now disabled automatically on this bios



crakej said:


> Well, for me this new bios improved performance. It's based on code that's been pretty reliable. Other boards have the beta of 1004 - we will no doubt get a release soon as reports sound positive.
> 
> If you read back a couple of pages you will see we've already been discussing this.


Basically asus waiting for others to do their work... what a pathetic company... 1103 is still beta on asus boards where msi and gb already have an official stable release. And asus has like x3-4 the money MSI or GB have. Shame.


----------



## Duvar

Synoxia said:


> I had nothing to do and flashed 2901, aida is the same, cinebench not tested, same config (pbo+mem oc), what i noticed is memory clear is now disabled automatically on this bios
> 
> 
> 
> Basically asus waiting for others to do their work... what a pathetic company... 1103 is still beta on asus boards where msi and gb already have an official stable release. And asus has like x3-4 the money MSI or GB have. Shame.


Can you test cinebench pls, because crakej said he got +200 points, this is a huge difference.

Next time i will stick on gigabyte (Aorus). Was pretty happy with the Z370 Aorus Gaming 7 with my 8700k, only picked the C7H WIFI because i had hopes, that the bigger community and guys like Stilt and co will support us with mod bios etc.
And yeah some guys are very helpful here, but ASUS will not be my first choice next time, thats for sure.


----------



## Synoxia

Duvar said:


> Can you test cinebench pls, because crakej said he got +200 points, this is a huge difference.
> 
> Next time i will stick on gigabyte (Aorus). Was pretty happy with the Z370 Aorus Gaming 7 with my 8700k, only picked the C7H WIFI because i had hopes, that the bigger community and guys like Stilt and co will support us with mod bios etc.
> And yeah some guys are very helpful here, but ASUS will not be my first choice next time, thats for sure.


Asus have been really good on 1st gen ryzen with elmor, where gb was trash and buggy all the time (I can confirm this as i've owned gigabyte x370 aorus k7 and c7h hero)
Gigabyte have been trying to get good with gen 2 ryzen and definetely with gen 3 as they seen that it was a pretty profitable platform, you can tell this just by looking at x370 and x470 aesthetic difference in gigabyte boards... X370 looked cheap in every possible way where x470 aorus k7 have refined design and overkill VRM.
Now that elmor left asus we are basically left like sheep without shepherd , c8h hero is basically a c7hero with increased price and better support for gen 3 which is trash anyway as you can see they still have beta 1103 while gb and msi have official releases out.

P.S multicore scores are the same for me on a 3700x if not a little bit lower.


----------



## nick name

Are the fan issues fixed now? With 2901?

It wasn't as much of a problem for me before because my CPU AIO would just slow down, but now that I have an AIO on my GPU -- those headers just shut off. And that's happened to me twice now. Once causing the GPU to turn itself off.


----------



## Synoxia

nick name said:


> Are the fan issues fixed now? With 2901?
> 
> It wasn't as much of a problem for me before because my CPU AIO would just slow down, but now that I have an AIO on my GPU -- those headers just shut off. And that's happened to me twice now. Once causing the GPU to turn itself off.


I don't know because i've never had a fan issue (if you don't count the 100% fan at 75c as an issue) i'd suggest you to stay away from latest bioses anyway... just runs the supported ones for 2700x.


----------



## lordzed83

Duvar said:


> Can you test cinebench pls, because crakej said he got +200 points, this is a huge difference.
> 
> Next time i will stick on gigabyte (Aorus). Was pretty happy with the Z370 Aorus Gaming 7 with my 8700k, only picked the C7H WIFI because i had hopes, that the bigger community and guys like Stilt and co will support us with mod bios etc.
> And yeah some guys are very helpful here, but ASUS will not be my first choice next time, thats for sure.


I have HAD gigaszite aorous elite x570 its worst thing i worked with in last 4 years HANDS DOWN.
@Synoxia i see you have had simillar experience with gigaszit


----------



## neikosr0x

lordzed83 said:


> I have HAD gigaszite aorous elite x570 its worst thing i worked with in last 4 years HANDS DOWN.
> 
> @Synoxia i see you have had simillar experience with gigaszit


Oh don't even mention i got that Gigabyte x370 gaming 5 and honestly was a bad bad bad mobo... the VRMs were always going nuts and the bios was sooooo limited, you couldn't do **** on that boards, ended up passing it to my gf with my old 1700x.


----------



## tryout1

andyliu said:


> I could never get old aura to work ;P which one do you download?


Try this version CLICK it's the *only *version which works on my end.

Plus i exchanged my 3700x for a 3900x and actually saw up to 4580Mhz SC and 4200Mhz MC in Cinebench R15, in Borderlands 3 i see sometimes 4500-4550Mhz which seems fine too. 1usmus Profile did nothing for me probably cause i used the CPPC + C-State stuff already since 0002+E mod bios, right now i'm still on 0002 Stilt Bios.


----------



## nick name

Synoxia said:


> I don't know because i've never had a fan issue (if you don't count the 100% fan at 75c as an issue) i'd suggest you to stay away from latest bioses anyway... just runs the supported ones for 2700x.


If you haven't yet then I'd try switching the temp sensor from CPU to something like Motherboard for the fan header you're using. Then the fans won't get up to 100% when the CPU hits 75*C. Of course you'll still want to set a reasonable temp for that sensor, but that doesn't take long to get dialed in.


----------



## westk

The 2901 have all the same version of the 0002+

Same CPU microcode too


----------



## Stag1

WOW 2901.Single core boost 4666 on 3800x.Never has that happened before.


----------



## oreonutz

westk said:


> The 2901 have all the same version of the 0002+
> 
> Same CPU microcode too


That is interesting. So Far 0002+ has been my favorite BIOS, although 2801 has been rock solid for me as well. Any reason to upgrade to 2901? I have everything dialed in so well, its tempting to try it, but I have Red Dead Redemption running so flawlessly finally, I don't want to disrupt that.

For me the secret was to use only Vulkan, to shut down almost every background program running, and to disable all the exploitation protections in Settings\Security\App & Browser Control\Exploit Protection Settings\Program Settings Then adding all the RDR2 Exe's to the list, and settings all the protections to disable, and there is like 20 of them, Once I did that I so far haven't seen another crash, fingers Crossed...


----------



## oreonutz

netman said:


> i get more and more annoyed with asus, as it seems new Red Dead Redemption 2 needs Agesa 1.0.0.4 to work on Ryzen (3000) Systems (still needs to be confirmed yet but read it on reddit and on some forums), wonder how long we have to wait again (while most of the other Manufacturers at least get a Beta with Agesa 1.0.0.4 out) its a shame.


I get frustrated with Asus as well. But DEFINITELY not true that RDR2 won't work on ASUS Boards, at least the Crosshair VII Hero, which is the one I use in my daily gaming rig. It was buggy as ****, but I managed to get all the kinks ironed out. One would argue, and they would be right, that you shouldn't have to iron out the kinks, the game should just work, but I would argue that this is as much or more on the Game Developer then the Platform, You would think they would test it on popular platforms that gamers use, and iron out the kinks before release, but I guess then we would have to believe that Game Developers didn't see their customers as Paying Beta Testers.

Anyways, I have a 3900x, I am on Bios 2801, and the Crosshair VII Hero, with a 4x8GB kit of DDR4 running at 3800Mhz CL16, and after about 4 hours of tinkering I have gotten the crashes to stop. I also had major problems with the launcher, but fixed those pretty quickly on by starting the game in safe mode and then setting my graphic settings in safe mode, after that I didn't have another problem launching the game. From that point it was just the game crashing at Random Points, and I believed I have solved that buy closing a bunch of background programs that seem to be conflicting with RDR2's EXE, and also turned off the exploit protections for RDR2's EXE's, also I am using only Vulkan, as Direct X 12 not only performs worse, but appears to be less stable as well in this title. Hope that helps.


----------



## netman

thanks for investigations and your suggestions i will gonna try that out and see if i get it to work with the 3600 that will hopefully arrive tomorrow. Now with the 2700X it does not work at all with the ch7 no matter if i use 2801/2901 or and old one for pinnacle like 1201.

but as i already used a fresh installed windows 10 with just chipset, audio and graphicsdrivers and nothing else installed i wonder it will help ...


----------



## CharliesTheMan

netman said:


> thanks for investigations and your suggestions i will gonna try that out and see if i get it to work with the 3600 that will hopefully arrive tomorrow. Now with the 2700X it does not work at all with the ch7 no matter if i use 2801/2901 or and old one for pinnacle like 1201.
> 
> but as i already used a fresh installed windows 10 with just chipset, audio and graphicsdrivers and nothing else installed i wonder it will help ...


For whatever it's worth, I'm running 2901 with a 3600. I was running the 0002+ custom modified BIOS for quite a while and stable. 2901 out of the box seems to scale through the frequencies a little more responsive of what the workload is, but that's so minor it's subjective with my human brain. Also with all settings reset to default and auto and D.O.C.P. enabled for my RAM.


----------



## CharliesTheMan

I have a question for you guys, it's not BIOS version dependent as I've seen it on multiple BIOS versions and I don't know if it's coming from the board, power supply, or some software glitch, or a setting. When my computer goes to sleep overnight, and I walk in and wake up, type in my passcode, the computer runs fine about a minute or 2 minutes sometimes. After that, it will green screen and reboot, and give me a "Driver Power State Failure" error while rebooting. This is consistent enough that I know in the last few weeks it's done it at least 6 out of 7 days in a week. 

My specs should be in my sig, but it's a C7H with 3600, EVGA RTX 2070 (last four driver versions have all not affected this issue) and Thermaltake Toughpower Grand RGB 750 PS. Ram is Trident Z RGB 3600 2 x 8 GB in correct slots.


----------



## toxick

For about tree mounts since I received Ryzen 3900X, I kept it 1:1 DDR4 MT/s 3800 – fClk 1900MHz and so far I didn't see any boost of CPU high than 4.55GHz. After I saw the custom Power Plan release by 1usmus, I hoped for a change, but nothing.
I reversed the power plan AMD Ryzen Balanced and I reduced DDR4 MT/s 3200 – fClk 1600MHz, the cpu now boosts to 4.65GHz.


----------



## neikosr0x

toxick said:


> For about tree mounts since I received Ryzen 3900X, I kept it 1:1 DDR4 MT/s 3800 – fClk 1900MHz and so far I didn't see any boost of CPU high than 4.55GHz. After I saw the custom Power Plan release by 1usmus, I hoped for a change, but nothing.
> I reversed the power plan AMD Ryzen Balanced and I reduced DDR4 MT/s 3200 – fClk 1600MHz, the cpu now boosts to 4.65GHz.


You and I have the same problem, but that must be BIOS related. Mine is not going over 4.575 or 4.550ghz when setting the ram to 3600+ or 3800 like I'm doing just now. But i would rather sacrifice 0.050mhz on the CPU side than my 3800 cl16 RAM. Hopping for the new AGESA fixes this issue as it wasn't present on revs before 0002.


----------



## speedgoat

happens to me too on 3800x, i see max boosts with mem below 3800MHz


----------



## MrPhilo

speedgoat said:


> happens to me too on 3800x, i see max boosts with mem below 3800MHz


I get boost to 4550 on like 4 of my 3800x and 4525 on another 3 and 4475 on one more with 3800Mhz

So boost is working fine for me, I wonder if I can go higher than 4550 if I went lower though on my ram and fclk, is it confirmed that anything below 3800 tends to clock higher? Because i'll start looking into 3600cl14 for my ram


----------



## nick name

If anyone with a 2700X that uses PE 3/4 or a fixed multiplier in BIOS is interested in whether the CPU performance problem present in BIOS versions after 2606 are still present in 2901 -- it is. You'll see lower Cinebench scores and lower Aida64 RAM Copy bandwidth performance in the screens. Also, I'm running BIOS 1201 to avoid the fan problems though the CPU performance is the same from 1201 up to 2606. 

Both of these runs are at 4.2GHz.


----------



## lordzed83

Well installed 2901 it works


----------



## harderthanfire

No fan issues here on 2901 though it seems exactly the same as 2801 pretty much xD


----------



## MrPhilo

Only issue I have on 2901 is everytime I restart I get q code 8 error. Anyone else?


----------



## djase45

MrPhilo said:


> Only issue I have on 2901 is everytime I restart I get q code 8 error. Anyone else?


no issue here.


----------



## speedgoat

MrPhilo said:


> Only issue I have on 2901 is everytime I restart I get q code 8 error. Anyone else?


i mentioned it a couple of days ago, when i have global c-state active i get an error 8 on every restart.. cant find why, i also get it on 2901
i knew this from before but i only got interested in the issue lately because of 1usmus' power plan


----------



## Synoxia

speedgoat said:


> i mentioned it a couple of days ago, when i have global c-state active i get an error 8 on every restart.. cant find why, i also get it on 2901
> i knew this from before but i only got interested in the issue lately because of 1usmus' power plan


8d error i'm having that since i've upgraded to ryzen 3000, regardless of bios version. Happens randomly. Just reboot again.


----------



## bigfootnz

MrPhilo said:


> Only issue I have on 2901 is everytime I restart I get q code 8 error. Anyone else?


I had same error on CH6 and 3900x, increasing VDDG (and mybe also SOC) has solved my problem with 8 error.


----------



## Synoxia

toxick said:


> For about tree mounts since I received Ryzen 3900X, I kept it 1:1 DDR4 MT/s 3800 – fClk 1900MHz and so far I didn't see any boost of CPU high than 4.55GHz. After I saw the custom Power Plan release by 1usmus, I hoped for a change, but nothing.
> I reversed the power plan AMD Ryzen Balanced and I reduced DDR4 MT/s 3200 – fClk 1600MHz, the cpu now boosts to 4.65GHz.


I'm trying to guess what's happening, because it happens to ALL zen 3 cpu i've seen.
Can you please share what you modified to run 3800/1900 ? especially vsoc, vddg and cld0 vddp. Do the same for 3200/1600. 
My guess is the I/O die produces more heat = less boost. 
3800 ram = more strain, more power (power = heat) to IMC which is contained in the I/O die
1900 FCLK = more strain on the infinity fabric, more power, more heat
And dont forget that you need more voltage to both IF and IMC to achieve those which again translates in additional heat.

My 3700x doesn't boost to 4.450 as often it did with only 2 sticks of ram compared to 4 sticks, so probably it's the higher vDDSOC that's causing this.\

EDIT: i am now 1on1 testing those voltages, going from 0.975 VDDG to 0.950 made my peak boost in cinebench single core go from 4380 avg to 4396 according to ryzen master, 0.900 however dialed back to 4360 so my guess is my FCLK is not stable at 0.900, anyway this just confirms that the cpu is working as intended, if I/O die produces more heat then of course the whole die heats up too (so CCDs do) and then it's just XFR temp scaling obviously. 
TLDR: don't overvolt/push IF too much or tradeoffs with mhz/better cooling solution is required


----------



## crakej

Sorry not been around - I've m managed to get a cold, but will report my findings as soon as I can.

I actually lost those 200+ points a bios or 2 ago, so regained them. Still only done limited testing though.

No fan probs on 2901 for me. Sometimes when I wake my PC after hibernating, it runs at 1.0GHz unless I reboot.


----------



## Baio73

What AGESA version should the 2901 BIOS carry?
CPU-Z says it's still 1.0.0.3.

Baio


----------



## djase45

Baio73 said:


> What AGESA version should the 2901 BIOS carry?
> CPU-Z says it's still 1.0.0.3.
> 
> Baio


yep, still in 1.0.0.3


----------



## speedgoat

Synoxia said:


> 8d error i'm having that since i've upgraded to ryzen 3000, regardless of bios version. Happens randomly. Just reboot again.


nah its something different than the random code 8, this is happening every single time


----------



## Synoxia

Baio73 said:


> What AGESA version should the 2901 BIOS carry?
> CPU-Z says it's still 1.0.0.3.
> 
> Baio


At this point just hope they don't put 1.0.0.4b, otherwhise it's another long wait. 1.0.0.4b reduces performance compared to 1.0.0.4


----------



## lordzed83

Synoxia said:


> At this point just hope they don't put 1.0.0.4b, otherwhise it's another long wait. 1.0.0.4b reduces performance compared to 1.0.0.4


Reducen on manual oc or stock ??


----------



## dkarDaGobert

2901 is doing nice here 
it also hit 4,675 on #2 and #1 sometimes


----------



## Synoxia

dkarDaGobert said:


> 2901 is doing nice here
> it also hit 4,675 on #2 and #1 sometimes


Are you still using PE3 on your 3900x? Btw that's a golden sample 3900x for sure and your ram too lol, i have the same config but with a 3700x and a true vega 64... Might you share your bios settings? D:

Btw my 3700x doesn't idle at lower than 2.8 for some reason


----------



## dkarDaGobert

Synoxia said:


> Are you still using PE3 on your 3900x? Btw that's a golden sample 3900x for sure and your ram too lol, i have the same config but with a 3700x and a true vega 64... Might you share your bios settings? D:
> 
> Btw my 3700x doesn't idle at lower than 2.8 for some reason



ill share it tomorrow after my karhu run finishs
yeah im also still using pe3. idle <2.8ghz might be depend on your windows power plan. im using a custom one from the computerbase.de board.


----------



## Synoxia

dkarDaGobert said:


> ill share it tomorrow after my karhu run finishs
> yeah im also still using pe3. idle <2.8ghz might be depend on your windows power plan. im using a custom one from the computerbase.de board.


Is this outperforming 1usmus one?


----------



## Forsaken1

2901 nice boost on 3800x.


----------



## smokin_mitch

bios 2901 seems bugged for me, when waking from sleep it changes fclk from 1900 to 1800 and halves my mem clock from 1900 to 950, I went back to bios 2801


----------



## Baio73

djase45 said:


> yep, still in 1.0.0.3





Synoxia said:


> At this point just hope they don't put 1.0.0.4b, otherwhise it's another long wait. 1.0.0.4b reduces performance compared to 1.0.0.4


I was asking because I tried 1usmus Power Plan (https://www.techpowerup.com/review/1usmus-custom-power-plan-for-ryzen-3000-zen-2-processors/2.html) but it onlyu applies to AGESA 1.0.0.4 or later. And I had a blue screen this morning (Sistem_Exception_Error) when resuming from sleep.

Baio


----------



## neikosr0x

Baio73 said:


> I was asking because I tried 1usmus Power Plan (https://www.techpowerup.com/review/1usmus-custom-power-plan-for-ryzen-3000-zen-2-processors/2.html) but it onlyu applies to AGESA 1.0.0.4 or later. And I had a blue screen this morning (Sistem_Exception_Error) when resuming from sleep.
> 
> Baio


On my 3900x, I ran two runs of 2 different games and Both tests gave me around 100-150mhz more on average on my 2 or 3 best cores. they were averaging 4.379 / 4.368 / 4.360 others just 4.1xx. The CPU ran a bit cool, Also note that I'm running the latest bios which also gave me better ram stability.


----------



## neikosr0x

MrPhilo said:


> Only issue I have on 2901 is everytime I restart I get q code 8 error. Anyone else?


No issues mate, Double check your config probably you are missing something also do not load your old bios profiles if you are of course.


----------



## MrPhilo

speedgoat said:


> i mentioned it a couple of days ago, when i have global c-state active i get an error 8 on every restart.. cant find why, i also get it on 2901
> i knew this from before but i only got interested in the issue lately because of 1usmus' power plan


Thanks, turning C State off fixed this for me.



neikosr0x said:


> No issues mate, Double check your config probably you are missing something also do not load your old bios profiles if you are of course.


Yeah I never load old bios profile, I always just start from scratch to avoid problems.

I have fixed it as quoted from the first quote.


----------



## Synoxia

lordzed83 said:


> Reducen on manual oc or stock ??


Can't tell, the tests i've seen shown config with stock autoOC where 1.0.04b was underperforming at HIGHER clock speeds than 1.0.0.4 or 1.0.0.3ABBA.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

aleks bedini said:


> Hello Wuest3nFuchs
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for the explanation, I think i am facing that same situation here.
> 
> I am new in this forum and I hope you can help me solve the following issue.
> 
> 
> 
> My build:
> 
> CPU: 2700x
> 
> Cooler: Noctua NH D14 (AM4 brackets)
> 
> RAM: Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro White 2*8GB placed on A2 B2, Rated at 3000 OCed at 3200 with stock timings
> 
> GPU: EVGA GTX 1070 FTW
> 
> MB/BIOS: Crosshair 7 Hero / 2801
> 
> PSU: Coolermaster 650 W Bronze
> 
> M.2: HP ADATA 120GB mounted in the lower slot near the chipset
> 
> SSD: Samsung 250 GB Pro Evo
> 
> HDD: Hitachi 500GB and WD 500GB
> 
> OS: Windows 10 latest version, also all drivers are up to date
> 
> 
> 
> BCLK=100, PE=2, XFR=Activated Mode0, enabled, PBO enabled, base clock 3.7Ghz, CPU Voltage manually set to 1.4, RAM voltage manually set to 1.36, SoC voltage manually set to 1.21
> 
> 
> 
> The issue I am having is sudden stuttering during CSGO and BF1 where FPS drop down to 30 periodically.
> 
> Well in CSGO the FPS drop is displayed in the net graph with a normal pre-drop value being 250-299, while in BF1 it always shows 60/61 FPS yet it drops quite below.
> 
> In both games this FPS drop impacts my mouse aiming and it happens periodically making it impossible to engage a serious CSGO or BF1 competitive match.
> 
> Tdie while playing csgo is 50 Max so i do not think it is the temps
> 
> 
> 
> Please advice


you got a PM [emoji106]

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## speedgoat

MrPhilo said:


> Thanks, turning C State off fixed this for me.
> 
> I switched vrms and llc all back to auto and now im booting/rebooting with C state active, just need to check one by one the settings to find which one interferes with C state.
> 
> Btw with almost all auto, very small offset, C-state active, CPPC enabled, PBO off and 1usmus power plan my 3800X is booting like there's no tomorrow


----------



## dkarDaGobert

Synoxia said:


> Might you share your bios settings? D:



thats my setting




Spoiler



[2019/11/09 15:20:54] Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
BCLK_Divider [Auto]
Performance Enhancer [Level 3 (OC)]
CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
Performance Bias [Auto]
Memory Frequency [DDR4-3800MHz]
FCLK Frequency [1900MHz]
Core Performance Boost [Enabled]
SMT Mode [Auto]
TPU [Keep Current Settings]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Enabled]
Max CPU Boost Clock Override [Auto]
Platform Thermal Throttle Limit [Auto]
Mem Over Clock Fail Count [2]
DRAM CAS# Latency [16]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [15]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [15]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [15]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [30]
Trc [45]
TrrdS [4]
TrrdL [4]
Tfaw [16]
TwtrS [4]
TwtrL [12]
Twr [10]
Trcpage [Auto]
TrdrdScl [4]
TwrwrScl [4]
Trfc [280]
Trfc2 [192]
Trfc4 [132]
Tcwl [16]
Trtp [8]
Trdwr [8]
Twrrd [4]
TwrwrSc [1]
TwrwrSd [7]
TwrwrDd [7]
TrdrdSc [1]
TrdrdSd [5]
TrdrdDd [5]
Tcke [1]
ProcODT [40 ohm]
Cmd2T [1T]
Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
Power Down Enable [Disabled]
RttNom [RZQ/7]
RttWr [RZQ/3]
RttPark [RZQ/1]
MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
MemCkeSetup [Auto]
MemCadBusClkDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [20.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 3]
CPU Current Capability [140%]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
CPU Voltage Frequency [400]
CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
CPU Power Phase Control [Power Phase Response]
Manual Adjustment [Ultra Fast]
CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 3]
VDDSOC Current Capability [140%]
VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed VDDSOC Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
VDDSOC Phase Control [Optimized]
DRAM Current Capability [130%]
DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [400]
DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.39000]
VTTDDR Voltage [0.70000]
VPP_MEM Voltage [2.50000]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [0.50000]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [0.50000]
VDDP Voltage [Auto]
1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
PLL reference voltage [Auto]
T Offset [Auto]
Sense MI Skew [Enabled]
Sense MI Offset [Auto]
Promontory presence [Auto]
Clock Amplitude [Normal]
CLDO VDDP voltage [900]
CPU Core Voltage [Offset mode]
CPU Offset Mode Sign [-]
- CPU Core Voltage Offset [0.00625]
CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
- VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.10000]
DRAM Voltage [1.39000]
CLDO VDDG voltage [0.950]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
Firmware TPM [Disable]
Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
PSS Support [Auto]
SVM Mode [Disabled]
Onboard LED [Disabled]
Q-Code LED Function [Disabled after POST]
SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
SATA Mode [AHCI]
NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
SMART Self Test [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Enabled]
HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
PCIEX8/X4_2 Mode [Auto]
PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
SB Link Mode [Auto]
Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
When system is in working state [Off]
When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [Off]
Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
ErP Ready [Enable(S4+S5)]
Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
Power On By RTC [Disabled]
Network Stack [Disabled]
Device [WDC WD80EFAX-68LHPN0]
Legacy USB Support [Disabled]
XHCI Hand-off [Disabled]
U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
U31G1_5 [Enabled]
U31G1_6 [Enabled]
U31G1_7 [Enabled]
U31G1_8 [Enabled]
U31G1_9 [Enabled]
U31G1_10 [Enabled]
USB11 [Enabled]
USB12 [Enabled]
USB13 [Enabled]
USB14 [Enabled]
USB15 [Enabled]
CPU Temperature [Monitor]
MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
PCH Temperature [Monitor]
T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
5V Voltage [Monitor]
12V Voltage [Monitor]
CPU Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [2.6 sec]
CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [200 RPM]
CPU Fan Profile [Standard]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [2.6 sec]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Silent]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [2.6 sec]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Silent]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
Chassis Fan 3 Smoothing Up/Down Time [2.6 sec]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Silent]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
PSPP Policy [Auto]
Fast Boot [Disabled]
AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
Boot Logo Display [Disabled]
POST Report [3 sec]
Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
Launch CSM [Disabled]
OS Type [Other OS]
Setup Animator [Disabled]
ASUS Grid Install Service [Disabled]
Load from Profile [1]
Profile Name [iasmus]
Save to Profile [2]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
BCLK Frequency [Auto]
CPU Ratio [Auto]
DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A1]
Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
Custom Pstate0 [Auto]
CCD Control [Auto]
Core control [Auto]
SMT Control [Auto]
L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Enable]
L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Enable]
Platform First Error Handling [Enabled]
Core Performance Boost [Auto]
Global C-state Control [Enabled]
DRAM ECC Enable [Disabled]
DRAM scrub time [Auto]
Poison scrubber control [Auto]
Redirect scrubber control [Auto]
Redirect scrubber limit [Auto]
NUMA nodes per socket [Auto]
Memory interleaving [Auto]
Memory interleaving size [512 Bytes]
1TB remap [Auto]
DRAM map inversion [Auto]
ACPI SRAT L3 Cache As NUMA Domain [Auto]
ACPI SLIT Distance Control [Auto]
ACPI SLIT remote relative distance [Auto]
GMI encryption control [Auto]
xGMI encryption control [Auto]
CAKE CRC perf bounds Control [Auto]
4-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
3-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
Disable DF to external IP SyncFloodPropagation [Auto]
Disable DF sync flood propagation [Auto]
CC6 memory region encryption [Auto]
Memory Clear [Auto]
Overclock [Enabled]
Memory Clock Speed [Auto]
Tcl [Auto]
Trcdrd [Auto]
Trcdwr [Auto]
Trp [Auto]
Tras [Auto]
Trc Ctrl [Auto]
TrrdS [Auto]
TrrdL [Auto]
Tfaw Ctrl [Auto]
TwtrS [Auto]
TwtrL [Auto]
Twr Ctrl [Auto]
Trcpage Ctrl [Auto]
TrdrdScL Ctrl [Auto]
TwrwrScL Ctrl [Auto]
Trfc Ctrl [Auto]
Trfc2 Ctrl [Auto]
Trfc4 Ctrl [Auto]
Tcwl [Auto]
Trtp [Auto]
Tcke [Auto]
Trdwr [Auto]
Twrrd [Auto]
TwrwrSc [Auto]
TwrwrSd [Auto]
TwrwrDd [Auto]
TrdrdSc [Auto]
TrdrdSd [Auto]
TrdrdDd [Auto]
ProcODT [Auto]
Power Down Enable [Auto]
Cmd2T [Auto]
Gear Down Mode [Auto]
CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
Data Poisoning [Auto]
DRAM Post Package Repair [Disable]
RCD Parity [Auto]
DRAM Address Command Parity Retry [Auto]
Write CRC Enable [Auto]
DRAM Write CRC Enable and Retry Limit [Auto]
Disable Memory Error Injection [True]
DRAM ECC Symbol Size [Auto]
DRAM UECC Retry [Auto]
TSME [Auto]
Data Scramble [Auto]
DFE Read Training [Enable]
FFE Write Training [Enable]
PMU Pattern Bits Control [Manual]
PMU Pattern Bits [a]
MR6VrefDQ Control [Auto]
CPU Vref Training Seed Control [Auto]
Chipselect Interleaving [Auto]
BankGroupSwap [Enabled]
BankGroupSwapAlt [Disabled]
Address Hash Bank [Auto]
Address Hash CS [Auto]
Address Hash Rm [Auto]
SPD Read Optimization [Enabled]
MBIST Enable [Disabled]
Pattern Select [PRBS]
Pattern Length [3]
Aggressor Channel [1 Aggressor Channel]
Aggressor Static Lane Control [Disabled]
Target Static Lane Control [Disabled]
Worst Case Margin Granularity [Per Chip Select]
Read Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
Read Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
Write Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
Write Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
IOMMU [Disabled]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [Auto]
FCLK Frequency [1900MHz]
SOC OVERCLOCK VID [0]
UCLK DIV1 MODE [UCLK==MEMCLK]
VDDP Voltage Control [Auto]
VDDG Voltage Control [Auto]
SoC/Uncore OC Mode [Disabled]
LN2 Mode [Disabled]
ACS Enable [Auto]
PCIe Ten Bit Tag Support [Auto]
cTDP Control [Auto]
EfficiencyModeEn [Auto]
Package Power Limit Control [Auto]
APBDIS [1]
DF Cstates [Enabled]
Fixed SOC Pstate [P0]
CPPC [Enabled]
CPPC Preferred Cores [Enabled]
BoostFmaxEn [Auto]
Early Link Speed [Auto]


----------



## Synoxia

dkarDaGobert said:


> thats my setting
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> [2019/11/09 15:20:54] Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
> BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
> BCLK_Divider [Auto]
> Performance Enhancer [Level 3 (OC)]
> CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
> Performance Bias [Auto]
> Memory Frequency [DDR4-3800MHz]
> FCLK Frequency [1900MHz]
> Core Performance Boost [Enabled]
> SMT Mode [Auto]
> TPU [Keep Current Settings]
> Precision Boost Overdrive [Enabled]
> Max CPU Boost Clock Override [Auto]
> Platform Thermal Throttle Limit [Auto]
> Mem Over Clock Fail Count [2]
> DRAM CAS# Latency [16]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [15]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [15]
> DRAM RAS# PRE Time [15]
> DRAM RAS# ACT Time [30]
> Trc [45]
> TrrdS [4]
> TrrdL [4]
> Tfaw [16]
> TwtrS [4]
> TwtrL [12]
> Twr [10]
> Trcpage [Auto]
> TrdrdScl [4]
> TwrwrScl [4]
> Trfc [280]
> Trfc2 [192]
> Trfc4 [132]
> Tcwl [16]
> Trtp [8]
> Trdwr [8]
> Twrrd [4]
> TwrwrSc [1]
> TwrwrSd [7]
> TwrwrDd [7]
> TrdrdSc [1]
> TrdrdSd [5]
> TrdrdDd [5]
> Tcke [1]
> ProcODT [40 ohm]
> Cmd2T [1T]
> Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
> Power Down Enable [Disabled]
> RttNom [RZQ/7]
> RttWr [RZQ/3]
> RttPark [RZQ/1]
> MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
> MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
> MemCkeSetup [Auto]
> MemCadBusClkDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [20.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 3]
> CPU Current Capability [140%]
> CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
> CPU Voltage Frequency [400]
> CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
> CPU Power Phase Control [Power Phase Response]
> Manual Adjustment [Ultra Fast]
> CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
> VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 3]
> VDDSOC Current Capability [140%]
> VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Manual]
> Fixed VDDSOC Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
> VDDSOC Phase Control [Optimized]
> DRAM Current Capability [130%]
> DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
> DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
> Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [400]
> DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.39000]
> VTTDDR Voltage [0.70000]
> VPP_MEM Voltage [2.50000]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [0.50000]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [0.50000]
> VDDP Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
> CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
> 2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
> PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
> PLL reference voltage [Auto]
> T Offset [Auto]
> Sense MI Skew [Enabled]
> Sense MI Offset [Auto]
> Promontory presence [Auto]
> Clock Amplitude [Normal]
> CLDO VDDP voltage [900]
> CPU Core Voltage [Offset mode]
> CPU Offset Mode Sign [-]
> - CPU Core Voltage Offset [0.00625]
> CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
> - VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.10000]
> DRAM Voltage [1.39000]
> CLDO VDDG voltage [0.950]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> 1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
> Firmware TPM [Disable]
> Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
> PSS Support [Auto]
> SVM Mode [Disabled]
> Onboard LED [Disabled]
> Q-Code LED Function [Disabled after POST]
> SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
> SATA Mode [AHCI]
> NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
> SMART Self Test [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Enabled]
> HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
> M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
> PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
> PCIEX8/X4_2 Mode [Auto]
> PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
> M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
> M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
> SB Link Mode [Auto]
> Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
> USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
> When system is in working state [Off]
> When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [Off]
> Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
> Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
> ErP Ready [Enable(S4+S5)]
> Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
> Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
> Power On By RTC [Disabled]
> Network Stack [Disabled]
> Device [WDC WD80EFAX-68LHPN0]
> Legacy USB Support [Disabled]
> XHCI Hand-off [Disabled]
> U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
> U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
> U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> U31G1_5 [Enabled]
> U31G1_6 [Enabled]
> U31G1_7 [Enabled]
> U31G1_8 [Enabled]
> U31G1_9 [Enabled]
> U31G1_10 [Enabled]
> USB11 [Enabled]
> USB12 [Enabled]
> USB13 [Enabled]
> USB14 [Enabled]
> USB15 [Enabled]
> CPU Temperature [Monitor]
> MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
> PCH Temperature [Monitor]
> T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
> HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
> CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
> AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
> W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
> W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
> 3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
> 5V Voltage [Monitor]
> 12V Voltage [Monitor]
> CPU Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [2.6 sec]
> CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [200 RPM]
> CPU Fan Profile [Standard]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
> Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [2.6 sec]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Silent]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
> Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [2.6 sec]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Silent]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
> Chassis Fan 3 Smoothing Up/Down Time [2.6 sec]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Silent]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> PSPP Policy [Auto]
> Fast Boot [Disabled]
> AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
> Boot Logo Display [Disabled]
> POST Report [3 sec]
> Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
> Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
> Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
> Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
> Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
> Launch CSM [Disabled]
> OS Type [Other OS]
> Setup Animator [Disabled]
> ASUS Grid Install Service [Disabled]
> Load from Profile [1]
> Profile Name [iasmus]
> Save to Profile [2]
> CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
> VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> BCLK Frequency [Auto]
> CPU Ratio [Auto]
> DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A1]
> Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
> Custom Pstate0 [Auto]
> CCD Control [Auto]
> Core control [Auto]
> SMT Control [Auto]
> L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Enable]
> L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Enable]
> Platform First Error Handling [Enabled]
> Core Performance Boost [Auto]
> Global C-state Control [Enabled]
> DRAM ECC Enable [Disabled]
> DRAM scrub time [Auto]
> Poison scrubber control [Auto]
> Redirect scrubber control [Auto]
> Redirect scrubber limit [Auto]
> NUMA nodes per socket [Auto]
> Memory interleaving [Auto]
> Memory interleaving size [512 Bytes]
> 1TB remap [Auto]
> DRAM map inversion [Auto]
> ACPI SRAT L3 Cache As NUMA Domain [Auto]
> ACPI SLIT Distance Control [Auto]
> ACPI SLIT remote relative distance [Auto]
> GMI encryption control [Auto]
> xGMI encryption control [Auto]
> CAKE CRC perf bounds Control [Auto]
> 4-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
> 3-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
> Disable DF to external IP SyncFloodPropagation [Auto]
> Disable DF sync flood propagation [Auto]
> CC6 memory region encryption [Auto]
> Memory Clear [Auto]
> Overclock [Enabled]
> Memory Clock Speed [Auto]
> Tcl [Auto]
> Trcdrd [Auto]
> Trcdwr [Auto]
> Trp [Auto]
> Tras [Auto]
> Trc Ctrl [Auto]
> TrrdS [Auto]
> TrrdL [Auto]
> Tfaw Ctrl [Auto]
> TwtrS [Auto]
> TwtrL [Auto]
> Twr Ctrl [Auto]
> Trcpage Ctrl [Auto]
> TrdrdScL Ctrl [Auto]
> TwrwrScL Ctrl [Auto]
> Trfc Ctrl [Auto]
> Trfc2 Ctrl [Auto]
> Trfc4 Ctrl [Auto]
> Tcwl [Auto]
> Trtp [Auto]
> Tcke [Auto]
> Trdwr [Auto]
> Twrrd [Auto]
> TwrwrSc [Auto]
> TwrwrSd [Auto]
> TwrwrDd [Auto]
> TrdrdSc [Auto]
> TrdrdSd [Auto]
> TrdrdDd [Auto]
> ProcODT [Auto]
> Power Down Enable [Auto]
> Cmd2T [Auto]
> Gear Down Mode [Auto]
> CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
> CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
> Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
> Data Poisoning [Auto]
> DRAM Post Package Repair [Disable]
> RCD Parity [Auto]
> DRAM Address Command Parity Retry [Auto]
> Write CRC Enable [Auto]
> DRAM Write CRC Enable and Retry Limit [Auto]
> Disable Memory Error Injection [True]
> DRAM ECC Symbol Size [Auto]
> DRAM UECC Retry [Auto]
> TSME [Auto]
> Data Scramble [Auto]
> DFE Read Training [Enable]
> FFE Write Training [Enable]
> PMU Pattern Bits Control [Manual]
> PMU Pattern Bits [a]
> MR6VrefDQ Control [Auto]
> CPU Vref Training Seed Control [Auto]
> Chipselect Interleaving [Auto]
> BankGroupSwap [Enabled]
> BankGroupSwapAlt [Disabled]
> Address Hash Bank [Auto]
> Address Hash CS [Auto]
> Address Hash Rm [Auto]
> SPD Read Optimization [Enabled]
> MBIST Enable [Disabled]
> Pattern Select [PRBS]
> Pattern Length [3]
> Aggressor Channel [1 Aggressor Channel]
> Aggressor Static Lane Control [Disabled]
> Target Static Lane Control [Disabled]
> Worst Case Margin Granularity [Per Chip Select]
> Read Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
> Read Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
> Write Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
> Write Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
> IOMMU [Disabled]
> Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
> Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [Auto]
> FCLK Frequency [1900MHz]
> SOC OVERCLOCK VID [0]
> UCLK DIV1 MODE [UCLK==MEMCLK]
> VDDP Voltage Control [Auto]
> VDDG Voltage Control [Auto]
> SoC/Uncore OC Mode [Disabled]
> LN2 Mode [Disabled]
> ACS Enable [Auto]
> PCIe Ten Bit Tag Support [Auto]
> cTDP Control [Auto]
> EfficiencyModeEn [Auto]
> Package Power Limit Control [Auto]
> APBDIS [1]
> DF Cstates [Enabled]
> Fixed SOC Pstate [P0]
> CPPC [Enabled]
> CPPC Preferred Cores [Enabled]
> BoostFmaxEn [Auto]
> Early Link Speed [Auto]


Thank you. Do you also have some fans above ram? 1.38v for that is insane  congrats


----------



## djase45

dkarDaGobert said:


> thats my setting
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> [2019/11/09 15:20:54] Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
> BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
> BCLK_Divider [Auto]
> Performance Enhancer [Level 3 (OC)]
> CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
> Performance Bias [Auto]
> Memory Frequency [DDR4-3800MHz]
> FCLK Frequency [1900MHz]
> Core Performance Boost [Enabled]
> SMT Mode [Auto]
> TPU [Keep Current Settings]
> Precision Boost Overdrive [Enabled]
> Max CPU Boost Clock Override [Auto]
> Platform Thermal Throttle Limit [Auto]
> Mem Over Clock Fail Count [2]
> DRAM CAS# Latency [16]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [15]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [15]
> DRAM RAS# PRE Time [15]
> DRAM RAS# ACT Time [30]
> Trc [45]
> TrrdS [4]
> TrrdL [4]
> Tfaw [16]
> TwtrS [4]
> TwtrL [12]
> Twr [10]
> Trcpage [Auto]
> TrdrdScl [4]
> TwrwrScl [4]
> Trfc [280]
> Trfc2 [192]
> Trfc4 [132]
> Tcwl [16]
> Trtp [8]
> Trdwr [8]
> Twrrd [4]
> TwrwrSc [1]
> TwrwrSd [7]
> TwrwrDd [7]
> TrdrdSc [1]
> TrdrdSd [5]
> TrdrdDd [5]
> Tcke [1]
> ProcODT [40 ohm]
> Cmd2T [1T]
> Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
> Power Down Enable [Disabled]
> RttNom [RZQ/7]
> RttWr [RZQ/3]
> RttPark [RZQ/1]
> MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
> MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
> MemCkeSetup [Auto]
> MemCadBusClkDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [20.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 3]
> CPU Current Capability [140%]
> CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
> CPU Voltage Frequency [400]
> CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
> CPU Power Phase Control [Power Phase Response]
> Manual Adjustment [Ultra Fast]
> CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
> VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 3]
> VDDSOC Current Capability [140%]
> VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Manual]
> Fixed VDDSOC Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
> VDDSOC Phase Control [Optimized]
> DRAM Current Capability [130%]
> DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
> DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
> Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [400]
> DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.39000]
> VTTDDR Voltage [0.70000]
> VPP_MEM Voltage [2.50000]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [0.50000]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [0.50000]
> VDDP Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
> CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
> 2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
> PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
> PLL reference voltage [Auto]
> T Offset [Auto]
> Sense MI Skew [Enabled]
> Sense MI Offset [Auto]
> Promontory presence [Auto]
> Clock Amplitude [Normal]
> CLDO VDDP voltage [900]
> CPU Core Voltage [Offset mode]
> CPU Offset Mode Sign [-]
> - CPU Core Voltage Offset [0.00625]
> CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
> - VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.10000]
> DRAM Voltage [1.39000]
> CLDO VDDG voltage [0.950]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> 1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
> Firmware TPM [Disable]
> Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
> PSS Support [Auto]
> SVM Mode [Disabled]
> Onboard LED [Disabled]
> Q-Code LED Function [Disabled after POST]
> SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
> SATA Mode [AHCI]
> NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
> SMART Self Test [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Enabled]
> HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
> M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
> PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
> PCIEX8/X4_2 Mode [Auto]
> PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
> M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
> M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
> SB Link Mode [Auto]
> Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
> USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
> When system is in working state [Off]
> When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [Off]
> Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
> Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
> ErP Ready [Enable(S4+S5)]
> Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
> Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
> Power On By RTC [Disabled]
> Network Stack [Disabled]
> Device [WDC WD80EFAX-68LHPN0]
> Legacy USB Support [Disabled]
> XHCI Hand-off [Disabled]
> U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
> U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
> U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> U31G1_5 [Enabled]
> U31G1_6 [Enabled]
> U31G1_7 [Enabled]
> U31G1_8 [Enabled]
> U31G1_9 [Enabled]
> U31G1_10 [Enabled]
> USB11 [Enabled]
> USB12 [Enabled]
> USB13 [Enabled]
> USB14 [Enabled]
> USB15 [Enabled]
> CPU Temperature [Monitor]
> MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
> PCH Temperature [Monitor]
> T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
> HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
> CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
> AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
> W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
> W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
> 3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
> 5V Voltage [Monitor]
> 12V Voltage [Monitor]
> CPU Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [2.6 sec]
> CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [200 RPM]
> CPU Fan Profile [Standard]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
> Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [2.6 sec]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Silent]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
> Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [2.6 sec]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Silent]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
> Chassis Fan 3 Smoothing Up/Down Time [2.6 sec]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Silent]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> PSPP Policy [Auto]
> Fast Boot [Disabled]
> AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
> Boot Logo Display [Disabled]
> POST Report [3 sec]
> Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
> Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
> Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
> Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
> Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
> Launch CSM [Disabled]
> OS Type [Other OS]
> Setup Animator [Disabled]
> ASUS Grid Install Service [Disabled]
> Load from Profile [1]
> Profile Name [iasmus]
> Save to Profile [2]
> CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
> VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> BCLK Frequency [Auto]
> CPU Ratio [Auto]
> DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A1]
> Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
> Custom Pstate0 [Auto]
> CCD Control [Auto]
> Core control [Auto]
> SMT Control [Auto]
> L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Enable]
> L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Enable]
> Platform First Error Handling [Enabled]
> Core Performance Boost [Auto]
> Global C-state Control [Enabled]
> DRAM ECC Enable [Disabled]
> DRAM scrub time [Auto]
> Poison scrubber control [Auto]
> Redirect scrubber control [Auto]
> Redirect scrubber limit [Auto]
> NUMA nodes per socket [Auto]
> Memory interleaving [Auto]
> Memory interleaving size [512 Bytes]
> 1TB remap [Auto]
> DRAM map inversion [Auto]
> ACPI SRAT L3 Cache As NUMA Domain [Auto]
> ACPI SLIT Distance Control [Auto]
> ACPI SLIT remote relative distance [Auto]
> GMI encryption control [Auto]
> xGMI encryption control [Auto]
> CAKE CRC perf bounds Control [Auto]
> 4-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
> 3-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
> Disable DF to external IP SyncFloodPropagation [Auto]
> Disable DF sync flood propagation [Auto]
> CC6 memory region encryption [Auto]
> Memory Clear [Auto]
> Overclock [Enabled]
> Memory Clock Speed [Auto]
> Tcl [Auto]
> Trcdrd [Auto]
> Trcdwr [Auto]
> Trp [Auto]
> Tras [Auto]
> Trc Ctrl [Auto]
> TrrdS [Auto]
> TrrdL [Auto]
> Tfaw Ctrl [Auto]
> TwtrS [Auto]
> TwtrL [Auto]
> Twr Ctrl [Auto]
> Trcpage Ctrl [Auto]
> TrdrdScL Ctrl [Auto]
> TwrwrScL Ctrl [Auto]
> Trfc Ctrl [Auto]
> Trfc2 Ctrl [Auto]
> Trfc4 Ctrl [Auto]
> Tcwl [Auto]
> Trtp [Auto]
> Tcke [Auto]
> Trdwr [Auto]
> Twrrd [Auto]
> TwrwrSc [Auto]
> TwrwrSd [Auto]
> TwrwrDd [Auto]
> TrdrdSc [Auto]
> TrdrdSd [Auto]
> TrdrdDd [Auto]
> ProcODT [Auto]
> Power Down Enable [Auto]
> Cmd2T [Auto]
> Gear Down Mode [Auto]
> CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
> CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
> Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
> Data Poisoning [Auto]
> DRAM Post Package Repair [Disable]
> RCD Parity [Auto]
> DRAM Address Command Parity Retry [Auto]
> Write CRC Enable [Auto]
> DRAM Write CRC Enable and Retry Limit [Auto]
> Disable Memory Error Injection [True]
> DRAM ECC Symbol Size [Auto]
> DRAM UECC Retry [Auto]
> TSME [Auto]
> Data Scramble [Auto]
> DFE Read Training [Enable]
> FFE Write Training [Enable]
> PMU Pattern Bits Control [Manual]
> PMU Pattern Bits [a]
> MR6VrefDQ Control [Auto]
> CPU Vref Training Seed Control [Auto]
> Chipselect Interleaving [Auto]
> BankGroupSwap [Enabled]
> BankGroupSwapAlt [Disabled]
> Address Hash Bank [Auto]
> Address Hash CS [Auto]
> Address Hash Rm [Auto]
> SPD Read Optimization [Enabled]
> MBIST Enable [Disabled]
> Pattern Select [PRBS]
> Pattern Length [3]
> Aggressor Channel [1 Aggressor Channel]
> Aggressor Static Lane Control [Disabled]
> Target Static Lane Control [Disabled]
> Worst Case Margin Granularity [Per Chip Select]
> Read Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
> Read Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
> Write Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
> Write Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
> IOMMU [Disabled]
> Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
> Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [Auto]
> FCLK Frequency [1900MHz]
> SOC OVERCLOCK VID [0]
> UCLK DIV1 MODE [UCLK==MEMCLK]
> VDDP Voltage Control [Auto]
> VDDG Voltage Control [Auto]
> SoC/Uncore OC Mode [Disabled]
> LN2 Mode [Disabled]
> ACS Enable [Auto]
> PCIe Ten Bit Tag Support [Auto]
> cTDP Control [Auto]
> EfficiencyModeEn [Auto]
> Package Power Limit Control [Auto]
> APBDIS [1]
> DF Cstates [Enabled]
> Fixed SOC Pstate [P0]
> CPPC [Enabled]
> CPPC Preferred Cores [Enabled]
> BoostFmaxEn [Auto]
> Early Link Speed [Auto]


Thanks I have the same spec. as you: 3900x, c7h and F4-3200C14D-16GTZRX but after entering your settings, during a membench the pc reboot:/


----------



## Synoxia

djase45 said:


> Thanks I have the same spec. as you: 3900x, c7h and F4-3200C14D-16GTZRX but after entering your settings, during a membench the pc reboot:/


Is that 8gb single rank stick or 16gb dual rank? We are using 4 sticks of 8gb single rank.

Btw i've put 1.42v and read delay 17 to test it, i think he has fan over rams or very good b-die
@dkarDaGobert where did you find Fixed SOC pstate 0?


----------



## djase45

Synoxia said:


> Is that 8gb single rank stick or 16gb dual rank? We are using 4 sticks of 8gb single rank.
> 
> Btw i've put 1.42v and read delay 17 to test it, i think he has fan over rams or very good b-die
> 
> @dkarDaGobert where did you find Fixed SOC pstate 0?


2x8gb G.Skill F4-3200C14-8GTZRX.

I can't go beyond 3600CL16.


----------



## dkarDaGobert

Synoxia said:


> Thank you. Do you also have some fans above ram? 1.38v for that is insane  congrats


its 1,39  nah theres no ram fan usually, just place on above rams when i test my rams with vdimm >1,5V (but it seems my ram doesnt like higher voltages)


Synoxia said:


> Is that 8gb single rank stick or 16gb dual rank? We are using 4 sticks of 8gb single rank.
> 
> Btw i've put 1.42v and read delay 17 to test it, i think he has fan over rams or very good b-die
> 
> @*dkarDaGobert* where did you find Fixed SOC pstate 0?



its two sets of rams. all 8GB single rank








G.Skill F4-3200C14-8GTZR + G.Skill F4-3200C14-8GTZ


Soc pstate0 menu appears if you enable APBDIS


----------



## djase45

I give up, no one offers his help.
Goodbye.


----------



## Praetorr

djase45 said:


> I give up, no one offers his help.
> Goodbye.


Don't take this the wrong way, but you're going to have to just try different settings and voltages, and perhaps worst case accept that you just didn't win the silicon lottery. 

No one realistically can do that for you, and for a lot of people the nitty gritty of RAM OCing just isn't worth the effort. There's no need to feel scorned.


----------



## Bart

Or maybe you have a flaky board too. I thought mine was solid as a rock, but it's been acting weird lately. Heck, I can't even get into my BIOS anymore. If I hit the DEL key at any time during boot, the system hangs, LOL! But if I don't touch it, it boots into Windows just fine, DOCP properly set and all. But the only time I can get into the BIOS is to reset the CMOS, it's a pain.


----------



## CJMitsuki

Bart said:


> Or maybe you have a flaky board too. I thought mine was solid as a rock, but it's been acting weird lately. Heck, I can't even get into my BIOS anymore. If I hit the DEL key at any time during boot, the system hangs, LOL! But if I don't touch it, it boots into Windows just fine, DOCP properly set and all. But the only time I can get into the BIOS is to reset the CMOS, it's a pain.



If you didnt validate stability through memory testing then more than just those weird occurrences will end up happening up to and including corruption of the system files in the OS leading to a clean reinstall. DOCP isnt really great for anything IMO, horrible timings.




djase45 said:


> I give up, no one offers his help.
> Goodbye.



Ram OCing takes a massive amount of time to get nailed down, if you give up that quickly then you really shouldn't mess with pushing your ram overclock in the first place. Many people that attempt to push ram end up reinstalling OS several times due to trying and failing and you have to have a great deal of patience to deal with it. You aren't going to notice a huge difference in your system with an OC like you have already achieved. If you arent satisfied with it though then you are going to have to learn like many others did...Through failing many times and getting upset but going back at it for many, many hours until you learn it. Ive been doing it for several years and pushing it to the edge is still something I fail at sometimes before I get it dialed in. Its something you will have to accept or give up trying to push for more. Its not like OCing a cpu in the least, it takes much more determination and validation through very small changes and long hours of testing only to find out that that one change did nothing. I personally think youre fine with what you got and are probably right in giving up. Go enjoy what you have.


----------



## neikosr0x

djase45 said:


> 2x8gb G.Skill F4-3200C14-8GTZRX.
> 
> I can't go beyond 3600CL16.


U probably did already, but first things is to try 3600, or higher with really loose timings and from there see if it works lowering the cycles... Not all RAM would clock as high as others even if they are the same Die. I will try passing my config on to you later to see if it help.


----------



## Baio73

neikosr0x said:


> On my 3900x, I ran two runs of 2 different games and Both tests gave me around 100-150mhz more on average on my 2 or 3 best cores. they were averaging 4.379 / 4.368 / 4.360 others just 4.1xx. The CPU ran a bit cool, Also note that I'm running the latest bios which also gave me better ram stability.


Did you find all the BIOS values indicated in the guide?
I was able to locate only 2 out of 5, even using the search option.

Baio


----------



## neikosr0x

Baio73 said:


> Did you find all the BIOS values indicated in the guide?
> I was able to locate only 2 out of 5, even using the search option.
> 
> Baio


Nope this bios doesn't hold those to be changed. Just 3 of them but it should work a bit as compared the old Ryzen Balanced Power profile i was getting something around 4.19x or 4.25x at best on averages of course.


----------



## Bart

CJMitsuki said:


> If you didnt validate stability through memory testing then more than just those weird occurrences will end up happening up to and including corruption of the system files in the OS leading to a clean reinstall. DOCP isnt really great for anything IMO, horrible timings.


I suspect I may have PSU issues. DOCP at 3200 CL14 has been fine for me, tested thoroughly. New PSU lands any minute now.


----------



## toxick

Hello!

I cleared the BIOS, everything on AUTO, PBO OFF(it is found in three places), CLO VDDG-1V, SOC-1.05V, DRAM 3800-1.4V(cl16...etc) , DRAM boot voltage-1,4V, FCLK-1900MHz, Fast Boot-Enabled, CSM (Compatibility Support Mode)\Launch CSM-Disabled, Secure Boot-Windows UEFI mode, Asus Grid Install Service-Disabled, Power Plan Balanced.

I hope it helps!


----------



## MrPhilo

speedgoat said:


> MrPhilo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks, turning C State off fixed this for me.
> 
> I switched vrms and llc all back to auto and now im booting/rebooting with C state active, just need to check one by one the settings to find which one interferes with C state.
> 
> Btw with almost all auto, very small offset, C-state active, CPPC enabled, PBO off and 1usmus power plan my 3800X is booting like there's no tomorrow
> 
> 
> 
> Thats amazing, all my cores went to 4.5Ghz with 3 going to 4.55Ghz before anyways. But seeing 4.6Ghz makes me want to try!
> 
> PBO off, did you also +200mhz in the settings?
Click to expand...


----------



## liakou

toxick said:


> Hello!
> 
> I cleared the BIOS, everything on AUTO, PBO OFF(it is found in three places), CLO VDDG-1V, SOC-1.05V, DRAM 3800-1.4V(cl16...etc) , DRAM boot voltage-1,4V, FCLK-1900MHz, Fast Boot-Enabled, CSM (Compatibility Support Mode)\Launch CSM-Disabled, Secure Boot-Windows UEFI mode, Asus Grid Install Service-Disabled, Power Plan Balanced.
> 
> I hope it helps!


Hi there,
are the rest of your DRAM timings and settings left on AUTO? If not, could you share them with me?
I got the same kit as yours and i'm interested in trying this config as it appears it's not based on the DRAM Calculator.


----------



## oreonutz

djase45 said:


> I give up, no one offers his help.
> Goodbye.


Seriously?

Maybe us enthusiasts should band together and start offering services for the... Well not enthusiasts is the nice way to put it... They Pay us $100 an Hour, Pay to send their Rigs Over to one of Us, and we spend the 6 to 60 Hours Necessary to achieve the highest Memory Overclock Possible on their Rig. Then maybe the word will get out their that forums like these, while an amazing resource for us all to come together and share information and help each other on a volunteer basis, is not a one stop shop for someone to spend 16 hours walking someone through the intricacies of Overclocking. People here are always happy to help, but you can't expect us all to drop everything we are doing in our normal lives to jump on the forum the second we have a notification to help someone squeeze that extra 4% out of their ram kit. Post your question, and if it gets buried and no one answers it within a day or 2, post it again, someone will take interest and get back to you, but on their own time, and maybe they will have a tip for you to try. But ESPECIALLY when it comes to memory overclocking, you have to put in the leg work and do the necessary research to get the performance you are trying to get, it is not easy, and if you are going to do it properly and have it 100 percent stable, it is going to take you literally days to even weeks to get dialed in just right, and the only person willing to spend the time to tune your rig perfectly is you, while a lot of us love solving puzzles and helping, unfortunately there is just not enough time in the day to respond to every single question every day. This means, from time to time, questions are going to go missed, other people with other comments, questions, or concerns are going to post their comment, and yours might just get buried. It happens... Don't take offense, just ask again. Maybe get a little more detailed, try to present your question differently, different people on this forum respond to different types of questions. And often, people jump on here at different times of the day, and probably won't read every single post since they last signed on, so again, try posting again at a different time.

So if this is something you want to do, be prepared to put in the time, be patient with your fellow forum members, and for god sake's, don't go getting all pissy about people not helping you, I think you will find that in life in general, people are much more inclined to help you if you aren't moaning, whining, and complaining. This is just life.

Or on the flip side, to bring my idea back in, if you just can't be bothered and want someone else to put in the leg work for you, you have to 1) Send them your System because they have to be in front of it to properly tune it (or buy yourself an KVM Over-IP and give us the creds to login so we can tune the BIOS Ourselves), and 2) Be Prepared to be a decent chunk of change for it to be worth the enthusiasts Time 3) Know that it will take at least a full day to tune it just right, minimum. Even for the Experts among us out here, no 2 Kits of Memory are exactly alike, and if you want Maximum possible performance, and not just most the way there, that takes time to validate, so that you aren't calling a week or month later crying about how its crashing during a certain workload. 

This isn't for the impatient and faint of heart.

Sorry everyone, I just logged in and read that, saw that he literally posted maybe 3 posts on the topic within the time frame of a day, gave up, and complained that no one was willing to help him, and it reminded me of some of my clients that I fired that expect you do throw in everything plus the kitchen sink, and then not pay for it... Sent me into a rant, I think I will shut up now.

Any word on the Agesa 1004 Bios yet????


----------



## gupsterg

Hi peeps, been away and not read the thread in a fare while, will aim to at some point  .



djase45 said:


> I give up, no one offers his help.
> Goodbye.


I'm using 4x8GB with R5 3600+C7HWIFI, UEFI 2801 has been pretty sound, I had noted at times when I expected the board to power down and up on a UEFI setting change it did not for some, this seems to have been rectified in UEFI 2901.

I decided to take my usual 3800MHz C16 profile and aim to cut VDIMM from ~1.405V, meddling with the PMU menu I seemed to have gained it now with ~1.35V. All in all it's best to ref guides you see on Ryzen memory OC and invest time yourself IMO, a good one here.

This ZIP has my base profile with 3800MHz C16 @ 1.35V settings and test data. If you are gonna set SOC via AMD OC menu do change SOC mode on Extreme Tweaker page to [Offset/+/Auto].

3x AIDA64



Spoiler














3x AIDA64 with +100MHz PBO



Spoiler


----------



## mtrai

oreonutz said:


> Seriously?
> 
> Maybe us enthusiasts should band together and start offering services for the... Well not enthusiasts is the nice way to put it... They Pay us $100 an Hour, Pay to send their Rigs Over to one of Us, and we spend the 6 to 60 Hours Necessary to achieve the highest Memory Overclock Possible on their Rig. Then maybe the word will get out their that forums like these, while an amazing resource for us all to come together and share information and help each other on a volunteer basis, is not a one stop shop for someone to spend 16 hours walking someone through the intricacies of Overclocking. People here are always happy to help, but you can't expect us all to drop everything we are doing in our normal lives to jump on the forum the second we have a notification to help someone squeeze that extra 4% out of their ram kit. Post your question, and if it gets buried and no one answers it within a day or 2, post it again, someone will take interest and get back to you, but on their own time, and maybe they will have a tip for you to try. But ESPECIALLY when it comes to memory overclocking, you have to put in the leg work and do the necessary research to get the performance you are trying to get, it is not easy, and if you are going to do it properly and have it 100 percent stable, it is going to take you literally days to even weeks to get dialed in just right, and the only person willing to spend the time to tune your rig perfectly is you, while a lot of us love solving puzzles and helping, unfortunately there is just not enough time in the day to respond to every single question every day. This means, from time to time, questions are going to go missed, other people with other comments, questions, or concerns are going to post their comment, and yours might just get buried. It happens... Don't take offense, just ask again. Maybe get a little more detailed, try to present your question differently, different people on this forum respond to different types of questions. And often, people jump on here at different times of the day, and probably won't read every single post since they last signed on, so again, try posting again at a different time.
> 
> So if this is something you want to do, be prepared to put in the time, be patient with your fellow forum members, and for god sake's, don't go getting all pissy about people not helping you, I think you will find that in life in general, people are much more inclined to help you if you aren't moaning, whining, and complaining. This is just life.
> 
> Or on the flip side, to bring my idea back in, if you just can't be bothered and want someone else to put in the leg work for you, you have to 1) Send them your System because they have to be in front of it to properly tune it (or buy yourself an KVM Over-IP and give us the creds to login so we can tune the BIOS Ourselves), and 2) Be Prepared to be a decent chunk of change for it to be worth the enthusiasts Time 3) Know that it will take at least a full day to tune it just right, minimum. Even for the Experts among us out here, no 2 Kits of Memory are exactly alike, and if you want Maximum possible performance, and not just most the way there, that takes time to validate, so that you aren't calling a week or month later crying about how its crashing during a certain workload.
> 
> This isn't for the impatient and faint of heart.
> 
> Sorry everyone, I just logged in and read that, saw that he literally posted maybe 3 posts on the topic within the time frame of a day, gave up, and complained that no one was willing to help him, and it reminded me of some of my clients that I fired that expect you do throw in everything plus the kitchen sink, and then not pay for it... Sent me into a rant, I think I will shut up now.
> 
> Any word on the Agesa 1004 Bios yet????


Well said...I was *** when I saw it.


----------



## crakej

oreonutz said:


> Seriously?


Completely agree! We do our best to help people - there are over 1000 pages of help here now which includes a LOT of information on how to OC memory, amongst other things. We cannot be expected to just respond instantly.

Maybe ASUS should pay people to be on here keeping users happy - but they don't, and I can't see them doing so any time soon.


----------



## CCoR

Page count here is on 1004.. Hopefully thats a sign! lol


----------



## lordzed83

gupsterg said:


> Hi peeps, been away and not read the thread in a fare while, will aim to at some point  .
> 
> 
> 
> I'm using 4x8GB with R5 3600+C7HWIFI, UEFI 2801 has been pretty sound, I had noted at times when I expected the board to power down and up on a UEFI setting change it did not for some, this seems to have been rectified in UEFI 2901.
> 
> I decided to take my usual 3800MHz C16 profile and aim to cut VDIMM from ~1.405V, meddling with the PMU menu I seemed to have gained it now with ~1.35V. All in all it's best to ref guides you see on Ryzen memory OC and invest time yourself IMO, a good one here.
> 
> This ZIP has my base profile with 3800MHz C16 @ 1.35V settings and test data. If you are gonna set SOC via AMD OC menu do change SOC mode on Extreme Tweaker page to [Offset/+/Auto].
> 
> 3x AIDA64
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 305580
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3x AIDA64 with +100MHz PBO
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 305582


Smae System been super stable since 2701 bios only updated to 2801 and 2901 loaded settings and its working no problem


----------



## netman

oreonutz said:


> Any word on the Agesa 1004 Bios yet????


hmm asrock, msi and even biostar have for lots of their B450/X470 Boards a bios with Agesa 1.0.0.4B (at least a beta) online - its only gigabyte and of course Asus that do not even offer at least a beta bios with newest Agesa for at least one of their B450/X470 Boards.

i regret my decision to switch from Asrock to Asus more and more with every single day - sorry for my ranting i know people here are not to blame for the situation but is really making me a little bit a sort of depressive


----------



## neikosr0x

CCoR said:


> Page count here is on 1004.. Hopefully thats a sign! lol


hahahaha a a sign of the gods.


----------



## Synoxia

I mean the dude i asked before and gupsterg shared their own profiles with their respective specs... more than that you really can't ask. 
Only someone that has more hours of HCI testing than game knows how valuable something like that is.
I own same ram as that guy i can't recall the name noe (im from mobile) and so far i squeezed that extra 4% and still tweaking. 24/7 HCI testing. 
Atleast 1000% to move to the next tweak and then atleast 3000% when you gave up tweaking to THINK it's stable.
Then just look for microstutters/random bsods... basically it takes forever to be sure your OC is 100% stable.
I do have one question though... how reliable is "memory quality %" of dram calc? For both of my 2 kits it says i can do 4133 c16


----------



## darkage

netman said:


> hmm asrock, msi and even biostar have for lots of their B450/X470 Boards a bios with Agesa 1.0.0.4B (at least a beta) online - its only gigabyte and of course Asus that do not even offer at least a beta bios with newest Agesa for at least one of their B450/X470 Boards.
> 
> i regret my decision to switch from Asrock to Asus more and more with every single day - sorry for my ranting i know people here are not to blame for the situation but is really making me a little bit a sort of depressive


why do you want a beta bios? to complain against asus and chvii? more? thats all you do
this is a great motherboard they released a stable bios last week enjoy it and wait


----------



## Hale59

Looks like I received a fault Ryzen 3000.

Previously had a 2600X that became faulty after 5 months. It would let me get into UEFI and everything. Except it wouldn't let me load or re-install windows. RMAed it and sold the new one before the box was opened.

After a few months of using a laptop, decide to get a Ryzen 3000. All the Bios give a Post Code 0d. Except Bios 2304. With it I can get into UEFI. Lots of data missing.
- Motherboard gives me Post Code 02 or A9
- Motherboard Onboard LED yellow
- In the Main page of UEFI, says that I only have 8GB of memory installed, while physically having 16GB installed.
- It gets better, when I navigate into UEFI - Tool\ASUS SPD information, one can see that there is 8GB of memory installed on DIMM_A2, and another 8GB installed on DIMM_B2.
- Change RAM volatge and it accepts after saving.
- All the Stilt RAM settings are gone. 
- If, lets say, I change the Core Ratio to 42, it accepts, but after saving, it reverts to Core Ratio 36.

Tomorrow going to RMA it, because I this CPU is faulty. Or is it the MOBO?

If you think it is the MOBO, chip in with a comment.


----------



## chakku

I can't comment on what the cause would be but I would have a hard time believing you could run into two faulty processors when they're borderline unheard of. The issue will almost always be with something else.


----------



## Hale59

chakku said:


> I can't comment on what the cause would be but I would have a hard time believing you could run into two faulty processors when they're borderline unheard of. The issue will almost always be with something else.


You might be right. But last time I had the all system sent to the Distributor (where I bought the stuff) and they concluded all the parts are 100% except the CPU. Then they replaced the CPU.


----------



## westk

Its the mobo. try the 2901 BIOS with flashback option. This will erase everything in the ROM.


----------



## Hale59

westk said:


> Its the mobo. try the 2901 BIOS with flashback option. This will erase everything in the ROM.


Read my initial post. All Bios give me Post Code 0d, and no UEFI, nothing. Except Bios 2304, which lets me in.


----------



## Synoxia

darkage said:


> why do you want a beta bios? to complain against asus and chvii? more? thats all you do
> this is a great motherboard they released a stable bios last week enjoy it and wait


A beta bios is a beta. It MIGHT be stable but very likey buggy. We are aware of that.
We complain about official bios releases being slow and often buggy.
3700x users advice: i've found out that a very small offset of -0.00625 + x2 scalar makes it boost to 4.4ghz more often while auto sits mostly on 4380.
However i noticed that hwinfo effective minimum clocks are 20mhz slower... cpu ranges from 4218 to 4245 usually, now 4195 to 4245. 
Not a big change but i didn't expect this, these cpus OBVIOUSLY do not need 1.36v to run at 4200 i wonder why multicore decreased...


----------



## gupsterg

Hale59 said:


> Read my initial post. All Bios give me Post Code 0d, and no UEFI, nothing. Except Bios 2304, which lets me in.


0d with Q-LED: DRAM (Yellow, below Q-Code display) means faulty DRAM.



Spoiler


----------



## Hale59

gupsterg said:


> 0d with Q-LED: DRAM (Yellow, below Q-Code display) means faulty DRAM.


Post Code 0d with no Onboard lights on. (**EDIT**: ALL THE BIOS EXCEPT BIOS 2304).

Post Code 02 or A9 with first yellow light on (**EDIT**: Bios 2304 only) - Yes, it is written that has something to do with RAM. But RAM controller is in CPU.
BUT:
- About after it was diagnosed as working 100%, about 5 months ago, the RAM sticks were never used again. Only now.
- As stated before, with this new CPU (3600), the first window in the UEFI (under Bios 2304) says that I only have 8GB of memory installed, while physically having 16GB installed.
It gets better, when I navigate into UEFI - Tool\ASUS SPD information, one can see that there is 8GB of memory installed on DIMM_A2, and another 8GB installed on DIMM_B2.
Strange.


----------



## netman

Synoxia said:


> A beta bios is a beta. It MIGHT be stable but very likey buggy. We are aware of that.
> We complain about official bios releases being slow and often buggy.



Thats the point, and in my situation i do not get Red Dead Redemption 2 to start, whether with the 2700X i got before nor with the 3600 i got since Monday. I do not know if its related to the bios but there are a lot of Ryzen 3XXX users out there saying that updating their Boards Bioses to Agesa 1.0.0.4b helped. 

I do not know if the bios would help in my case, but i also do not know what would be so special about my other hardware that prevents RDR2 from starting 

R5 3600, CH7, 32 GB Crucial Ballistics 3200 C15 (also tried with 16GB Gskill 3200 C14 B-Dies), 1080TI, Darkpower Pro 850 and Creative ZXR (but also tried with onboard Sound) and a fresh installed Win10 with all updates and just the Chipset and Graphics Drivers but no chance. 

And i do not have the possibility to test if Agesa 1.0.0.4 also helps in my case as Asus still not provides it for one of the top notch X470 Boards, i know there are others here that got RDR2 running on the CH7 but i honestly do not know what else i could try to get it running as the bios - so thats why i even would take a beta


----------



## Takla

netman said:


> Thats the point, and in my situation i do not get Red Dead Redemption 2 to start, whether with the 2700X i got before nor with the 3600 i got since Monday. I do not know if its related to the bios but there are a lot of Ryzen 3XXX users out there saying that updating their Boards Bioses to Agesa 1.0.0.4b helped.
> 
> I do not know if the bios would help in my case, but i also do not know what would be so special about my other hardware that prevents RDR2 from starting
> 
> R5 3600, CH7, 32 GB Crucial Ballistics 3200 C15 (also tried with 16GB Gskill 3200 C14 B-Dies), 1080TI, Darkpower Pro 850 and Creative ZXR (but also tried with onboard Sound) and a fresh installed Win10 with all updates and just the Chipset and Graphics Drivers but no chance.
> 
> And i do not have the possibility to test if Agesa 1.0.0.4 also helps in my case as Asus still not provides it for one of the top notch X470 Boards, i know there are others here that got RDR2 running on the CH7 but i honestly do not know what else i could try to get it running as the bios - so thats why i even would take a beta



You are delusional if you seriously think this is a bios issue and not Rockstar being pure incompetent greedy scum.


----------



## crakej

Hale59 said:


> Read my initial post. All Bios give me Post Code 0d, and no UEFI, nothing. Except Bios 2304, which lets me in.


You *HAVE to use bios flashback* to install latest bios - if you don't, it will NOT properly update the bios.

So I would try reflashing 2901 using flashback before I do anything else.

With Ryzen 3000 the options are different in the bios. There are no ram presets for 3000 CPUs.


----------



## Hepe

So I started messing with the ASUS Performance Enhancer and BCLK yesterday and I'm quite puzzled to say the least with the results thus far.

I'm currently running a 100.4MHz BCLK in BIOS, PBO on and PE3 with -0.0625 vcore offset and according to HWInfo and CPU-Z my all-core load vcore is around 1.221v-1.25v. Also, according to CPU-Z the BCLK jumps quite randomly between 90 and 100.5MHZ whereas according to HWInfo the BCLK stays at 100.4MHz flat.

With only PBO on the all-core vcore would stay between 1.331-1.35v under prime95 blended, with PBO+PE3 the vcore is ~0.1v lower. After 50 minutes of prime95 blended the CPU temps haven't exceeded 67C, whereas with only PBO the temps would hit the 75C limit after a couple of minutes.

So what in the heck is happening here? Should I trust CPU-Z or HWInfo, is HWInfo showing the BCLK wrong and if it is, how can the BCLK jump by as much as 10MHz? Also, how can the all-core load vcore be so low with PE3, when all I've heard is that the Performance Enhancers increase the vcore too much.

I'm on the BIOS 1103, Windows Balanced Power Plan in use and newest chipset drivers installed.


----------



## Hale59

crakej said:


> You *HAVE to use bios flashback* to install latest bios - if you don't, it will NOT properly update the bios.
> 
> So I would try reflashing 2901 using flashback before I do anything else.
> 
> With Ryzen 3000 the options are different in the bios. There are no ram presets for 3000 CPUs.


Yes, I understand. Perhaps I should have explained on my initial post about the FLASHBACK (one of the reasons I bought this board).
I Flashbacked Bios at least twice per Bios. I did everything by the book or by instructions. Cleared CMOS, removed battery, reinstalled each components several times. RAM was installed with softly, medium and firm pressure. The only option left was to put them in place with an hammer, LOL.

50 bucks and is on its way for inspection. I have no worries because all the components are under warranty. Just frustration.


----------



## ClintLeo

netman said:


> Thats the point, and in my situation i do not get Red Dead Redemption 2 to start, whether with the 2700X i got before nor with the 3600 i got since Monday. I do not know if its related to the bios but there are a lot of Ryzen 3XXX users out there saying that updating their Boards Bioses to Agesa 1.0.0.4b helped.
> 
> I do not know if the bios would help in my case, but i also do not know what would be so special about my other hardware that prevents RDR2 from starting
> 
> R5 3600, CH7, 32 GB Crucial Ballistics 3200 C15 (also tried with 16GB Gskill 3200 C14 B-Dies), 1080TI, Darkpower Pro 850 and Creative ZXR (but also tried with onboard Sound) and a fresh installed Win10 with all updates and just the Chipset and Graphics Drivers but no chance.
> 
> And i do not have the possibility to test if Agesa 1.0.0.4 also helps in my case as Asus still not provides it for one of the top notch X470 Boards, i know there are others here that got RDR2 running on the CH7 but i honestly do not know what else i could try to get it running as the bios - so thats why i even would take a beta


Try deleting your settings folder in the User\Documents.

I was able to start RDR2 on launch day but on the next day it wouldn't start for me but once I deleted the settings folder it started.
I have a 3700x and 1080Ti,ran it on Windows 8,1 for the 1st few days and now I'm on W10 LTSC.
I used a modded version of bios 2703 and now on 2901 and besides that 1 problem with the settings folder everything has been great.

Just my 2c


----------



## Hale59

@gupsterg, is this the RAM you are using on your 3800MHz C16 profile?
http://computeruniverse.discount/co...16gb-ddr4-k2-3200-c14-16gvk-f4-3200c14d-16gvk


----------



## crakej

Hale59 said:


> Yes, I understand. Perhaps I should have explained on my initial post about the FLASHBACK (one of the reasons I bought this board).
> I Flashbacked Bios at least twice per Bios. I did everything by the book or by instructions. Cleared CMOS, removed battery, reinstalled each components several times. RAM was installed with softly, medium and firm pressure. The only option left was to put them in place with an hammer, LOL.
> 
> 50 bucks and is on its way for inspection. I have no worries because all the components are under warranty. Just frustration.


Very frustrating for you! It does sound like something isn't right ..... hope you get it fixed nice and quickly


----------



## gupsterg

gupsterg said:


> 0d with Q-LED: DRAM (Yellow, below Q-Code display) means faulty DRAM.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 305646
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hale59 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Post Code 0d with no Onboard lights on. (**EDIT**: ALL THE BIOS EXCEPT BIOS 2304).
> 
> Post Code 02 or A9 with first yellow light on (**EDIT**: Bios 2304 only) - Yes, it is written that has something to do with RAM. But RAM controller is in CPU.
> BUT:
> - About after it was diagnosed as working 100%, about 5 months ago, the RAM sticks were never used again. Only now.
> - As stated before, with this new CPU (3600), the first window in the UEFI (under Bios 2304) says that I only have 8GB of memory installed, while physically having 16GB installed.
> It gets better, when I navigate into UEFI - Tool\ASUS SPD information, one can see that there is 8GB of memory installed on DIMM_A2, and another 8GB installed on DIMM_B2.
> Strange.
Click to expand...

Q-Code: 0d Q-LED: DRAM usually means fault with RAM. This could be an issue with the RAM slot on MOBO, could be the DIMMs, may also be the IMC (dunno), all I know is it occurs in relation to RAM.

I have read others shares that they inadvertently managed to bend a pin on CPU when installing and not noticed, perhaps that has happened, dunno to be honest.

If you checked all you can and don't have access to spare parts to systematically check what is the cause of issue, then I'm afraid via the web you may not solve this. I hope you resolve this without much headache  .



Hale59 said:


> @gupsterg, is this the RAM you are using on your 3800MHz C16 profile?
> http://computeruniverse.discount/co...16gb-ddr4-k2-3200-c14-16gvk-f4-3200c14d-16gvk


Pretty much.I have F4-3200C14Q-32GVK, made up of 4 dimms of F4-3200C14-8GVK. From your screenies you have G.Skill Flare X 3200MHz C14 kit, this is exactly the same bin of RAM I have but differing heat spreader  .



Hepe said:


> So I started messing with the ASUS Performance Enhancer and BCLK yesterday and I'm quite puzzled to say the least with the results thus far.
> 
> I'm currently running a 100.4MHz BCLK in BIOS, PBO on and PE3 with -0.0625 vcore offset and according to HWInfo and CPU-Z my all-core load vcore is around 1.221v-1.25v. Also, according to CPU-Z the BCLK jumps quite randomly between 90 and 100.5MHZ whereas according to HWInfo the BCLK stays at 100.4MHz flat.
> 
> With only PBO on the all-core vcore would stay between 1.331-1.35v under prime95 blended, with PBO+PE3 the vcore is ~0.1v lower. After 50 minutes of prime95 blended the CPU temps haven't exceeded 67C, whereas with only PBO the temps would hit the 75C limit after a couple of minutes.
> 
> So what in the heck is happening here? Should I trust CPU-Z or HWInfo, is HWInfo showing the BCLK wrong and if it is, how can the BCLK jump by as much as 10MHz? Also, how can the all-core load vcore be so low with PE3, when all I've heard is that the Performance Enhancers increase the vcore too much.
> 
> I'm on the BIOS 1103, Windows Balanced Power Plan in use and newest chipset drivers installed.


Ryzen has no HW for accurate BCLK read back, some programs may show fluctuation when it is not happening.


----------



## Synoxia

speedgoat said:


> MrPhilo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks, turning C State off fixed this for me.
> 
> I switched vrms and llc all back to auto and now im booting/rebooting with C state active, just need to check one by one the settings to find which one interferes with C state.
> 
> Btw with almost all auto, very small offset, C-state active, CPPC enabled, PBO off and 1usmus power plan my 3800X is booting like there's no tomorrow
> 
> 
> 
> My guess is Ram OC interferes with the boosting algorithm. Or did you find differently? A 3800x boosting to 4.6 is insane man
Click to expand...


----------



## speedgoat

Synoxia said:


> speedgoat said:
> 
> 
> 
> My guess is Ram OC interferes with the boosting algorithm. Or did you find differently? A 3800x boosting to 4.6 is insane man
> 
> 
> 
> to be honest i had no time to check C-State because i ve spend the last 2 days in utter terror of what happened to my pc with the win 1909 update.. CB scores and CPU-Z all down 10 to 15% and my latency from 63 up to 68 ns..
> it could be my current corrupted win but i feel 1909 is not for me
Click to expand...


----------



## netman

Takla said:


> You are delusional if you seriously think this is a bios issue and not Rockstar being pure incompetent greedy scum.


i do not know - it but what i can say is that if you read trough threads an articles on problems with RDR2 there are a lot of people with Ryzen Systems that had problems with the game crashing, got this solved by updating their bios to Agesa 1.0.0.4. But i cannot test it as i got no 1.0.0.4 for my CH7 from Asus. Besides of that you are right the way Rockstar ported RDR2 onto PC Platform is really a piece of ****.

by the way now even gigabyte released agesa 1.0.0.4 to most of their B450 and X470 Boards so the only manufacturer that has not even released a 1.0.0.4 Beta Bios for one single of their B450/X470 Boards is *ASUS*


----------



## Shadowized

speedgoat said:


> CB scores and CPU-Z all down 10 to 15% and my latency from 63 up to 68 ns..
> it could be my current corrupted win but i feel 1909 is not for me


This made me curious so I just tested it with 1909 18363.476, and my findings are the opposite, in fact I've gained some performance or stayed within margin of error, the biggest jump was in R20 multi, though I'm currently on 2801 bios, I was tempted to go try the 2901 to see if it would allow me to boost higher because atm its usually topping out at 4.55-4.575 but figured I would hold off until 1.0.0.4 agesa drops since everything has been super stable (except for one random BSOD due to BattlEye).

seems like finally MS have released a decent update to the scheduler.


----------



## speedgoat

Shadowized said:


> This made me curious so I just tested it with 1909 18363.476, and my findings are the opposite, in fact I've gained some performance or stayed within margin of error, the biggest jump was in R20 multi, though I'm currently on 2801 bios, I was tempted to go try the 2901 to see if it would allow me to boost higher because atm its usually topping out at 4.55-4.575 but figured I would hold off until 1.0.0.4 agesa drops since everything has been super stable (except for one random BSOD due to BattlEye).
> 
> seems like finally MS have released a decent update to the scheduler.


3 days ago i opted for this windows insider thing, updated to the beta 1911 more or less by accident, removed it.. i might have corrupted my win thats why 1909 was such a massive failure.


----------



## MrPhilo

netman said:


> Synoxia said:
> 
> 
> 
> A beta bios is a beta. It MIGHT be stable but very likey buggy. We are aware of that.
> We complain about official bios releases being slow and often buggy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thats the point, and in my situation i do not get Red Dead Redemption 2 to start, whether with the 2700X i got before nor with the 3600 i got since Monday. I do not know if its related to the bios but there are a lot of Ryzen 3XXX users out there saying that updating their Boards Bioses to Agesa 1.0.0.4b helped.
> 
> I do not know if the bios would help in my case, but i also do not know what would be so special about my other hardware that prevents RDR2 from starting
Click to expand...

What fixed it for and 2 other friends who have Ryzen is just changing your default speaker sound to another. Like a headphone or Nvidia high definition and it launched fine.


----------



## crakej

Shadowized said:


> This made me curious so I just tested it with 1909 18363.476, and my findings are the opposite, in fact I've gained some performance or stayed within margin of error, the biggest jump was in R20 multi, though I'm currently on 2801 bios, I was tempted to go try the 2901 to see if it would allow me to boost higher because atm its usually topping out at 4.55-4.575 but figured I would hold off until 1.0.0.4 agesa drops since everything has been super stable (except for one random BSOD due to BattlEye).
> 
> seems like finally MS have released a decent update to the scheduler.


Same here - slightly better performance for multi and single core. Not checked latency yet.

I updated to 2901 the other day. I've had 3 blue screens since. This could have been windows, or could have been the Netflix app. Windows got corrupt files so updated to 1909 and all seems to be working fine.

Edit: Def something to do with display driver(Adrenalin 2019 Edition 19.11.1)/Netflix app.


----------



## liakou

crakej said:


> Same here - slightly better performance for multi and single core. Not checked latency yet.
> 
> I updated to 2901 the other day. I've had 3 blue screens since. This could have been windows, or could have been the Netflix app. Windows got corrupt files so updated to 1909 and all seems to be working fine.
> 
> Edit: Def something to do with display driver(Adrenalin 2019 Edition 19.11.1)/Netflix app.


No crashing issues here, BIOS 2901, Windows 10 1909 update, latest Adrenalin on Vega64 and been watching loads of Netflix via the app. 
I noted this though, my RAM config while being totally stable with prior BIOS versions @1.43v, after the 2901 update it gave me errors, so I bumped the voltage at 1.43,5v on this BIOS and it's error free again.


----------



## Synoxia

They are the last as always with updates, if 1.0.0.4 comes buggy on b450-x470, be sure to TRASH them on every forum/website you can. 
We paid for the most expensive x470 board and this is the support we get?


----------



## nick name

While I have my own little quarrel with ASUS right now I don't think the speed at which they put out BIOS versions that include the latest AGESA from AMD should be the source of such harsh criticism. I understand the frustration at the speed at which they are delivering BIOS versions, but it fits in-line with the speed at which they delivered BIOS versions in the past. It's just now there is something to look forward to in a new delivery. And let us not forget that this board was some of the best X470 hardware at its release. And when you compare its price then to the cost of X570 boards now then perhaps you will feel a little better about what its price was. 

I'm just asking for everyone to use a different perspective when looking at things. And if anything -- its AMD's fault. Intel boards don't have to deal with the abundance of BIOS versions because of the usual lack of backwards compatibility. ASUS and other AMD board vendors have to make sure so many things don't break when they release a new BIOS it makes me wonder how much some vendors are or aren't testing with the speed at which they deliver new BIOS versions.


----------



## netman

MrPhilo said:


> What fixed it for and 2 other friends who have Ryzen is just changing your default speaker sound to another. Like a headphone or Nvidia high definition and it launched fine.


i gave even this a try but i did not help me i really don't know what else i could do - only thing left i did not do is update Agesa on CH7 to 1.0.0.4 as we still lack the new version 



Synoxia said:


> We paid for the most expensive x470 board and this is the support we get?


unfortnately since elmor left Asus and the rog devision this is the support we get - and thats why the ch7 is my first asus mobo in den last 10 Years and also will be the last one for me. The Buildquality and the components of the CH7 is great without any question but software and bios are *****. 
I mean without the modders here wie still would not have a really useable fan control and a new bios mostly takes a week ore more longer than other manufacturers and are still full of bugs 

Yes all this development takes time but how do the other manufacturers manage this and when i look at asrock (where i have a few B450 Boards) they do not have more bugs or problems as the asus bioses that take a lot longer to be released.

over the weekend i am gonna try to put my ssd and 1080ti into my other pc with the b450 Asrock Board and an 3600 with Agesa 1.0.0.4 and see if RDR2 starts there or not i am really curious about it


----------



## xeizo

I'm running 1.0.0.4B on my Gigabyte B450 board right now, with 1usmus powerplan, pity it has a 2700X. Only letdown is Ryzen Master doesn't work anymore. I suppose it needs updating to the new code as well, no new Ryzen Master on the AMD site though.

Would rather have the latest bios code on my C7H with 3900X ...


----------



## Synoxia

nick name said:


> While I have my own little quarrel with ASUS right now I don't think the speed at which they put out BIOS versions that include the latest AGESA from AMD should be the source of such harsh criticism. I understand the frustration at the speed at which they are delivering BIOS versions, but it fits in-line with the speed at which they delivered BIOS versions in the past. It's just now there is something to look forward to in a new delivery. And let us not forget that this board was some of the best X470 hardware at its release. And when you compare its price then to the cost of X570 boards now then perhaps you will feel a little better about what its price was.
> 
> I'm just asking for everyone to use a different perspective when looking at things. And if anything -- its AMD's fault. Intel boards don't have to deal with the abundance of BIOS versions because of the usual lack of backwards compatibility. ASUS and other AMD board vendors have to make sure so many things don't break when they release a new BIOS it makes me wonder how much some vendors are or aren't testing with the speed at which they deliver new BIOS versions.


If you take more time to deliver updates, it can only mean 2 things: either you are testing it extensively to release it without bugs or your just bad. 
As Asus releases come with bugs anyway it's the second. I would rather go back and buy a gigabyte/msi board now, who cares of good hardware if you have 0 support software? 

OT
Is the same thing with high-end androids, either they do planned obsolescence or you buy it from a very good company that will support it through the years (maybe Xiaomi or Huawei?), i have yet to encounter a phone that lasted as much as my first iphone 4 without ios 7 update (which also was the last Steve jobs phone) and my father's Huawei original p8 lite (not 2018, that was crap obsolete after 1 year) which still run smoothly.
Asus is like samsung. The first year of warranty you are god-like top of the end everything and then it gets slower and slower, plus only late security patches.
/OT

EDIT: To new x570 boards? Better compare this 280 eur board to the likes of asrock/gb/msi which all were below 230

EDIT2: ah and another thing i noticed, someone manage to get 61-62 ns aida64 on ryzen 3000 while i can only get to 64.2 at the same settings, these crap asus boards also have unjustified 2-3ns of ram latency for no reason at all.

EDIT3: Also i don't damn like the way they treat their forums, X370 magically just disappeared from forum section, renamed now in X470 and X570 motherboards... then "other series boards" like they're saying "x370,b450,b350 etc all are trash compared to the NEWTOPOFTHELINEROGRGBOMGLMAO boards" same thing goes for intel.
Just a small thing, but i dislike this company every day it passes

EDIT4: Don't tell me i am being overly aggressive with asus, it's just... i had enough of seeing people complain on them without them doing anything. 

P.S I actually prefer GB approach for example, just one forum for every board. That way you don't make your product segmentation obvious.


----------



## speedgoat

my view is C7H and C6H are still very good mobos, i would defo prefer them to many x570 never mind about the silly chipset fan and all, but even on pure performance terms so asus might not be neither bad or useless, they could also be in the business of promoting harder their most recent product line 

what pisses me off massively is i get the feeling x470 is sort of obsoleted now.. i just bought the board 10 months ago and i actually paid 320 euros for it, makes you feel a bit of an idiot i actually planned getting the overkill mobo at this point because i was more or less certain i would go for a zen 2.

all in all never again asus for me


----------



## Synoxia

speedgoat said:


> my view is C7H and C6H are still very good mobos, i would defo prefer them to many x570 never mind about the silly chipset fan and all, but even on pure performance terms so asus might not be neither bad or useless, they could also be in the business of promoting harder their most recent product line
> 
> what pisses me off massively is i get the feeling x470 is sort of obsoleted now.. i just bought the board 10 months ago and i actually paid 320 euros for it, makes you feel a bit of an idiot i actually planned getting the overkill mobo at this point because i was more or less certain i would go for a zen 2.
> 
> all in all never again asus for me


Eh. It's exactly this. x470 is obsolete in asus eye. I understand that a company has to focus on the new releases first, but the way they do blatantly proves they just don't care of their old products at all.
They have plenty of money to do proper x370 and x470 support, they just don't want because they're greedy.
My next motherboard is gigabyte.


----------



## crakej

I think what @nick name was getting at is that this is a COMMUNITY SUPPORT forum - not an ASUS forum.

YOU might have interpreted YOUR relationship with ASUS the way you do - that doesn't mean you're right, or that anyone here cares about your very specific problems. Some people here will never be happy whichever board they have. Also, computers are INCREDIBLY complex containing BILLIONS of components - people ARE going to have problems.

It's also untrue to paint this picture of 'this manufacturer is better than another'. You will find people complaining to ALL manufacturers. To make statements like 'x570 have it and I'm not seeing any errors' means NOTHING. EVERY CPU is slightly different, as is every motherboard - the way silicon is made dictates that. Then millions of people plug in millions/billions of different components...

If there were any major problems with this board, the forums would be a lot busier than they are (like when board was launched). Yes some people continue to have problems - it's the nature of the business I'm afraid. Millions of users are happy - they just don't post about being happy with their products.

If your problems really are that awful, send everything back - get a refund - buy another brand - get a professional to have a look at it - or just RMA. Whining here, when so many try to help in their free time, just makes for unpleasant reading.

Harass ASUS - not the community who are mostly happy with their products, and do their best to help others with problems. It's not ASUS fault that AMD decided they were going to have to update the chipset every year, requiring so many firmware updates.


----------



## Synoxia

crakej said:


> I think what @nick name was getting at is that this is a COMMUNITY SUPPORT forum - not an ASUS forum.
> 
> YOU might have interpreted YOUR relationship with ASUS the way you do - that doesn't mean you're right, or that anyone here cares about your very specific problems. Some people here will never be happy whichever board they have. Also, computers are INCREDIBLY complex containing BILLIONS of components - people ARE going to have problems.
> 
> It's also untrue to paint this picture of 'this manufacturer is better than another'. You will find people complaining to ALL manufacturers. To make statements like 'x570 have it and I'm not seeing any errors' means NOTHING. EVERY CPU is slightly different, as is every motherboard - the way silicone is made dictates that. Then millions of people plug in millions/billions of different components...
> 
> If there were any major problems with this board, the forums would be a lot busier than they are (like when board was launched). Yes some people continue to have problems - it's the nature of the business I'm afraid. Millions of users are happy - they just don't post about being happy with their products.
> 
> If your problems really are that awful, send everything back - get a refund - but another brand - get a professional to have a look at it - or just RMA. Whining here, when so many try to help in their free time, just makes for unpleasant reading.
> 
> Harass ASUS - not the community who are mostly happy with their products, and do their best to help others with problems. It's not ASUS fault that AMD decided they were going to have to update the chipset every year, requiring so many firmware updates.


Ehm? Who did harass the community? All im doing is harass asus for the good of the community so they are advised and buy other brands.
People are always complaining anything but there are objective facts: like that asus has a higher %rma rate and that's the last in updating things.
Yeah sure like they're gonna refund me now after 1 year lol

P.S my very specific problems? No one cares? lol i dont have problems with fan 100% at 75 or either the fan stop bug but those are OBJECTIVE problems and a lot of people are complaining since 2703.


----------



## lordzed83

Synoxia said:


> Eh. It's exactly this. x470 is obsolete in asus eye. I understand that a company has to focus on the new releases first, but the way they do blatantly proves they just don't care of their old products at all.
> They have plenty of money to do proper x370 and x470 support, they just don't want because they're greedy.
> My next motherboard is gigabyte.


Please Sell the motherboard buy Gigabyte do ALL OF US a favour and leave this subforums. Then You can go to gigabyte motherboard topic and complain there. If You want give me Paypal i send you 10 quid for shipment of this motherboard to whoever buys it so i wont need to read your's whining here every freaking day. Not even joking give me paypal.


----------



## Synoxia

lordzed83 said:


> Please Sell the motherboard buy Gigabyte do us a favour and leave this subforums.


Unfortunately i don't have infinite amount of money and don't want to sell/buy at loss. I'd rather get an asus rep read this and fix stuff.
Atleast i post something useful, what else are you doing except lurking?


----------



## lordzed83

Synoxia said:


> Unfortunately i don't have infinite amount of money and don't want to sell/buy at loss. I'd rather get an asus rep read this and fix stuff.
> Atleast i post something useful, what else are you doing except lurking?


Iw been here on asus Ryzen forums longer than You got ruzen helped develop and tes dram calculator. I got my Crosshair VII for FREE for helping people out on this forums....


----------



## lordzed83

Synoxia said:


> Ehm? Who did harass the community? All im doing is harass asus for the good of the community so they are advised and buy other brands.
> People are always complaining anything but there are objective facts: like that asus has a higher %rma rate and that's the last in updating things.
> Yeah sure like they're gonna refund me now after 1 year lol
> 
> P.S my very specific problems? No one cares? lol i dont have problems with fan 100% at 75 or either the fan stop bug but those are OBJECTIVE problems and a lot of people are complaining since 2703.


Want complain about Asus ?? This is correct forums if You cant find where it is :
https://rog.asus.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?292


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Same here - slightly better performance for multi and single core. Not checked latency yet.
> 
> I updated to 2901 the other day. I've had 3 blue screens since. This could have been windows, or could have been the Netflix app. Windows got corrupt files so updated to 1909 and all seems to be working fine.
> 
> Edit: Def something to do with display driver(Adrenalin 2019 Edition 19.11.1)/Netflix app.


Well Been on 2901 since it came out all stable like before. No problems with setting fans in case. No Cold boot problems. Memory Training all fast and good. Not lost any performance.

Also installed new updates in wondows and stripped NGreedia drivers. So far best bios for my 3900x.

Ran a quick check scores same as older ones.


----------



## Axaion

Id be happier if ASUS listened and added spread spectrum toggles plus let -us- control fans, so they wouldent be forrced to 100% at 75c, which 3000 series hits super easy

wrroom
WROOOOM
wwhiirrr
WROOOOOOM!
wrom?
WROOOmmm
Whirrr
WROOOM

Driving me nuts, Oh well, my board or CPU is a lemon anyway - probably going to sell it next year and just go intel again lol


----------



## darkage

lordzed83 said:


> Please Sell the motherboard buy Gigabyte do ALL OF US a favour and leave this subforums. Then You can go to gigabyte motherboard topic and complain there. If You want give me Paypal i send you 10 quid for shipment of this motherboard to whoever buys it so i wont need to read your's whining here every freaking day. Not even joking give me paypal.


AMEN!!


----------



## xeizo

Whiners are gonna whine, just wish they go to another forum and do it. C7H is a great board, possibly far from the best as a Zen 2 platform but still great. Memory OC is mint. For the money, my Prime Pro performs a lot better/dollar but that's a value board, which it fulfills.

I suppose 1004B will be released in time for when 3950X hits retail, still ten days left.


----------



## nick name

Welp I finally figured out what was causing the performance drop in BIOS versions after 2606 with my 2700X. The dumb thing is that when I brought it up with @The Stilt a while back he pointed me in the right direction, but for whatever reason the problem didn't cure itself after I made the changes under his direction. It's fixed now though. And the culprit was . . . Performance Bias Aida/Geekbench. 

Now, I haven't gone back and tested 2703 and 2801 so perhaps there was something different when I tested back then, but it's fixed on 2901 now. 

What frustrated me was how ASUS kept insisting it was my "unoptimized" system though I provided them evidence to the contrary. I mean who would assume it had anything to do with my Windows install or hardware if the only variable that changed and brought about the symptoms was updating my BIOS? That drove me nuts.


----------



## Keith Myers

@nick name . . . so do I understand correctly you get _LESS_ performance when Performance Bias is set to Aida/Geekbench? Or the reverse as stated?


----------



## lordzed83

Axaion said:


> Id be happier if ASUS listened and added spread spectrum toggles plus let -us- control fans, so they wouldent be forrced to 100% at 75c, which 3000 series hits super easy
> 
> wrroom
> WROOOOM
> wwhiirrr
> WROOOOOOM!
> wrom?
> WROOOmmm
> Whirrr
> WROOOM
> 
> Driving me nuts, Oh well, my board or CPU is a lemon anyway - probably going to sell it next year and just go intel again lol


Not sure about that problem I have my fans LOCKED at 65% MAX even when i was testing OVER 100c on cpu die it never gotten pass that.


----------



## Axaion

lordzed83 said:


> Not sure about that problem I have my fans LOCKED at 65% MAX even when i was testing OVER 100c on cpu die it never gotten pass that.



What, really?, im on 2901 too.

Maybe its a non-wifi only issue?, no idea..


----------



## Synoxia

I guess this is just gonna be filled by people that just don't want to admit that what they purchased is now trash, so to each their own.
Happy to know that @nick name issues are now solved and it wasn't ASUS/AMD gimping or ignoring old cpus.



lordzed83 said:


> Please Sell the motherboard buy Gigabyte do ALL OF US a favour and leave this subforums. Then You can go to gigabyte motherboard topic and complain there. If You want give me Paypal i send you 10 quid for shipment of this motherboard to whoever buys it so i wont need to read your's whining here every freaking day. Not even joking give me paypal.


I hope you do realize that what you just said is immature and sounds pathetic from someone that old. D:



Axaion said:


> What, really?, im on 2901 too.
> 
> Maybe its a non-wifi only issue?, no idea..


Fan stop issue seems to happen on c6h hero too so it's definetely a bios issue, where 100% at 75c is working as intended by asus. 
Unfortunately if you have high rpm fans you have a problem because 100% means 2000+ rpm


----------



## neikosr0x

Axaion said:


> What, really?, im on 2901 too.
> 
> Maybe its a non-wifi only issue?, no idea..


neither my non-wifi board goes to 100%


----------



## Bart

C7H non-wifi here too, PWM works just fine, never had a fan issue with ANY bios version.


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> @nick name . . . so do I understand correctly you get _LESS_ performance when Performance Bias is set to Aida/Geekbench? Or the reverse as stated?


I get less performance using Aida/Geekbench. Prior to BIOS 2703 Aida/Geekbench was the better all around performer, but now it reduces performances in Cinebench and Aida (didn't test Geekbench).


----------



## nick name

I've had fans stopping and slowing with the 2000 series BIOS versions which had me switch all the way back to 1201 because my GPU pump and fan run off mobo headers. I'm on 2901 now and haven't seen any fan slowing or stopping as I had before. 

As far as fans ramping up to 100% at 75*C -- there is a work-around. You can set which temp sensor to monitor for each fan header so instead of it responding to CPU temps you can have it respond to motherboard temps. Of course it isn't ideal, but if you can correlate CPU temps with motherboard temps then you should be ok.


----------



## nick name

Synoxia said:


> I guess this is just gonna be filled by people that just don't want to admit that what they purchased is now trash, so to each their own.
> Happy to know that @nick name issues are now solved and it wasn't ASUS/AMD gimping or ignoring old cpus.


Well I wouldn't say ASUS did anything yet. They didn't do anything to help though they thought they were being helpful. So the communication was there -- it just wasn't as helpful as it could have been.

I'd say more that I found the culprit responsible for the performance loss I see with my 2700X and know now not to use the setting until it's fixed. I can't imagine it is behaving as designed.


----------



## Keith Myers

nick name said:


> I get less performance using Aida/Geekbench. Prior to BIOS 2703 Aida/Geekbench was the better all around performer, but now it reduces performances in Cinebench and Aida (didn't test Geekbench).


Thanks for the clarification. I have had that Performance Bias set since the beginning and have never tested without it. Guess I need to turn it off and test Geekbench and see if it makes any difference. 
I run Linux so only Geekbench available to me. Still curious what if any change has occurred simply because of the BIOS updates.


----------



## crakej

Synoxia said:


> I guess this is just gonna be filled by people that just don't want to admit that what they purchased is now trash, so to each their own.
> Happy to know that @nick name issues are now solved and it wasn't ASUS/AMD gimping or ignoring old cpus.
> 
> I hope you do realize that what you just said is immature and sounds pathetic from someone that old. D:
> 
> Fan stop issue seems to happen on c6h hero too so it's definetely a bios issue, where 100% at 75c is working as intended by asus.
> Unfortunately if you have high rpm fans you have a problem because 100% means 2000+ rpm


First - as I tried explaining - complaining or whining here won't make an iota of difference. THIS IS NOT AN ASUS FORUM. It's for users of their hardware, and I'm afraid none of us can bring your problems to the attention of ASUS any better than you can over on the ROG forums, or through proper channels for reporting bugs.

ASUS (like others) are not perfect, but my £300 board is NOT trash! The quality is excellent. It's running reliably for last 2/3 bios versions.

You have been 'trashing' ASUS for some time, and making (many) unqualified statements like 'Fan stop issue seems to happen on c6h hero too so it's definetely a bios issue'. What do you know about Firmware design or programming? Electronics? Maybe you're a Computer Scientist? Where are your FACTS to back up these 'definet' (definite?) statements you keep making?

You should have RMAed before your warranty ran out. Surely you knew that?


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> Thanks for the clarification. I have had that Performance Bias set since the beginning and have never tested without it. Guess I need to turn it off and test Geekbench and see if it makes any difference.
> I run Linux so only Geekbench available to me. Still curious what if any change has occurred simply because of the BIOS updates.


The Geekbench setting was something I would always use to it has become one of the things I instinctively set when I setup a new BIOS and had been doing so when trying BIOS 2701, 2703, 2801, 2901. I thought I had ruled it out as the setting that was lowering my 2700X performance, but I hadn't so discovering it now was kind of embarrassing. 

So if you are using the Geekbench setting with a 2700X please let me know if you come to the same conclusion: that it reduces CPU performance compared to previous BIOS versions pre-2703 and compared to the other Performance Bias options. 

If curious -- I am using the Cinebench Gentle option now. Is it called Gentle? I can't remember, but whatever it is it is not the Aggressive option.


----------



## Keith Myers

nick name said:


> The Geekbench setting was something I would always use to it has become one of the things I instinctively set when I setup a new BIOS and had been doing so when trying BIOS 2701, 2703, 2801, 2901. I thought I had ruled it out as the setting that was lowering my 2700X performance, but I hadn't so discovering it now was kind of embarrassing.
> 
> So if you are using the Geekbench setting with a 2700X please let me know if you come to the same conclusion: that it reduces CPU performance compared to previous BIOS versions pre-2703 and compared to the other Performance Bias options.
> 
> If curious -- I am using the Cinebench Gentle option now. Is it called Gentle? I can't remember, but whatever it is it is not the Aggressive option.


I only run BIOS 1002 on my 2700X's. I run the 2801 BIOS on my 3900X though. That is the one I need to test without Aida64/Geekbench.


----------



## xeizo

I have never used the AIDA setting, when they changed to Cinebench Gentle/Aggressive I tested aggressive first and the screen went black during boot. Always been running Gentle since. My Geekbench 4 is good 6150/51000 so no particular performance loss on 3900X with 2901.

2901 is not the best performing bios though, 1002 is still the highest boosting bios, and the modded FIE-bios have had the best benchmark numbers for me.

One bug that is still standing out is, that at least for me, it's impossible to unlock TDP. It's hard locked at 145W/95A whatever the settings in bios or Ryzen Master are. If Asus can't solve it I guess the new killer feature of setting a lower TDP won't work as well. I hope they make PPT/TDC/EDC settings work. Only upside it's safe not being able to barbecue the CPU.

My cheap Gigabyte Aorus M can extract a higher power consumption from the CPU than the mighty C7H with the Gigabytes 150A VRM vs the 600A VRM on the C7H.


----------



## Duvar

PPT/TDC does nothing for me with the C7H WIFI, i can only adjust power consumption with EDC.
Currently running my 3600 with 44/30/40 with +150 Auto OC Scalar 1x.
Getting 1500 in CB15 MC and 205 for SC. HWMonitor shows max 42W for the cpu power (without Soc).
Clockspeed drops in mc to 3.85GHz but in games i have 4.35GHz.
BIOS 2901.


----------



## MrPhilo

Synoxia said:


> I guess this is just gonna be filled by people that just don't want to admit that what they purchased is now trash, so to each their own.
> Happy to know that @nick name issues are now solved and it wasn't ASUS/AMD gimping or ignoring old cpus.
> 
> I hope you do realize that what you just said is immature and sounds pathetic from someone that old. D:
> 
> Fan stop issue seems to happen on c6h hero too so it's definetely a bios issue, where 100% at 75c is working as intended by asus.
> Unfortunately if you have high rpm fans you have a problem because 100% means 2000+ rpm


How is it trash? because theres maybe like a few people complaining doesn't mean everyone is having a problem? Can you stop assuming everyone has the same problem as you, you and a few others aren't the majority.

The ones who have problems will always complain the loudest, so it seems like a lot. But it's probably just less than 10 or a bit more having trouble.

I have no problem at all with my setup atm with the latest bios. So stop including the ones that have no problem in with your problem.


----------



## Synoxia

MrPhilo said:


> How is it trash? because theres maybe like a few people complaining doesn't mean everyone is having a problem? Can you stop assuming everyone has the same problem as you, you and a few others aren't the majority.
> 
> The ones who have problems will always complain the loudest, so it seems like a lot. But it's probably just less than 10 or a bit more having trouble.
> 
> I have no problem at all with my setup atm with the latest bios. So stop including the ones that have no problem in with your problem.


Dude everyone is having a problem if asus releases bios late and it does buggy.
I do not have the fan stop bug nor i have issues with the 100% at 75 or whatever. 
Customers have the right to speak and must speak they think they are not being treated well for a 300 usd board, doesn't matter if it's just a few people.


----------



## MrPhilo

Synoxia said:


> Dude everyone is having a problem if asus releases bios late and it does buggy.
> I do not have the fan stop bug nor i have issues with the 100% at 75 or whatever.
> Customers have the right to speak and must speak they think they are not being treated well for a 300 usd board, doesn't matter if it's just a few people.


Yes thats fine but dont use 'everyone'. Not everyone is having problem, that is your problem. This is why you need to stop assuming.

If I was having problems I'll also be complaining but I'm not.


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> -snip-
> 
> My cheap Gigabyte Aorus M can extract a higher power consumption from the CPU than the mighty C7H with the Gigabytes 150A VRM vs the 600A VRM on the C7H.


The ASUS Prime Pro X470 board I had prior was the same. It would allow more power than the Crosshair which allowed for higher manual overclocks. ASUS confirmed the Prime Pro was better for manual overclocking as well.


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> I only run BIOS 1002 on my 2700X's. I run the 2801 BIOS on my 3900X though. That is the one I need to test without Aida64/Geekbench.


Do you use Performance Enhancer 3/4 with your 2700X?


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> The ASUS Prime Pro X470 board I had prior was the same. It would allow more power than the Crosshair which allowed for higher manual overclocks. ASUS confirmed the Prime Pro was better for manual overclocking as well.


I have a Prime Pro too, with a 3700X, works really well nothing to complain about and it can pull out 105W+ from the 65W 3700X meaning great boost behaviour. C7H is hard locked to TDP with Zen 2, but it wasn't with the 2700X, a clear regression in bios quality.

To somewhat defend Asus bios hackers, the Prime Pro and even more so Aorus M has much more simple bioses than the C7H. It could be the C7H bios is too complicated with too many features for the staff to maintain. But I think they should do the effort, as it is a expensive board and probably sold in quite large numbers too.

The only thing that stands out as better on the C7H is memory OC which actually is great.


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> I have a Prime Pro too, with a 3700X, works really well nothing to complain about and it can pull out 105W+ from the 65W 3700X meaning great boost behaviour. C7H is hard locked to TDP with Zen 2, but it wasn't with the 2700X, a clear regression in bios quality.
> 
> To somewhat defend Asus bios hackers, the Prime Pro and even more so Aorus M has much more simple bioses than the C7H. It could be the C7H bios is too complicated with too many features for the staff to maintain. But I think they should do the effort, as it is a expensive board and probably sold in quite large numbers too.
> 
> The only thing that stands out as better on the C7H is memory OC which actually is great.


Yeah, I remember seeing my Prime Pro pulling 220W in HWiNFO and don't see anything close to that at the same clocks on the CH7.


----------



## Keith Myers

nick name said:


> Do you use Performance Enhancer 3/4 with your 2700X?


No. I just set a manual multiplier since I run cpus/gpus flat out all the time. I have 40.25 multiplier and that is where I end up anyway on Auto with Performance Enhancer on 3 when running a constant compute load. I can keep the Vcore lower too which reduces the heat generation by keeping boost out of the equation.


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> No. I just set a manual multiplier since I run cpus/gpus flat out all the time. I have 40.25 multiplier and that is where I end up anyway on Auto with Performance Enhancer on 3 when running a constant compute load. I can keep the Vcore lower too which reduces the heat generation by keeping boost out of the equation.


Well the nice thing with the new BIOS versions is that you can manipulate Performance Enhancers 3/4 in BIOS by setting EDC. 

What voltage do you set for 40.25 and what do your ambient and system temps look like? I'd imagine you could get up to 41.5 24/7 no problem using a negative voltage offset.


----------



## CJMitsuki

nick name said:


> I get less performance using Aida/Geekbench. Prior to BIOS 2703 Aida/Geekbench was the better all around performer, but now it reduces performances in Cinebench and Aida (didn't test Geekbench).



Using the Aida Bias kills the effective latency which Aida does not show. You need to use Passmark Performance Test or SiSoft Sandra for the real latency of the system. This is why I dont understand why anyone uses Aida to gauge performance of memory when it does nothing of the sort and is pretty bad in anything but maybe the cache performance. Use the above mentioned tests or GB3/4 or something much better that could reveal what is causing the lowered performance in the setting. In this case it is the increased latency which I found out when I ran Passmarks Test and confirmed with SiSoft Sandra. The effective latency goes up to around 50ns when it should be around 27-28ns which is on par with the effective latency of Ryzen+.


----------



## Keith Myers

nick name said:


> Well the nice thing with the new BIOS versions is that you can manipulate Performance Enhancers 3/4 in BIOS by setting EDC.
> 
> What voltage do you set for 40.25 and what do your ambient and system temps look like? I'd imagine you could get up to 41.5 24/7 no problem using a negative voltage offset.


I'm still on 2801. Haven't bothered with 2901 since I expect AGESA 1.0.0.4 to be out around the 25th for the 3950X. When you go to a fixed multiplier, the VID is very low. Starts out a 1.095V. So to get sufficient voltage to run the 40.25 multiplier, I have to add POSITIVE offset of 0.1875V to get to a BIOS set voltage of 1.2825V. With LLC3 set I end up at 1.24V under BOINC load. Temps are anywhere from 68-82° C. depending on whether the A/C is on, the window is open and the outside temps are under 70°F. Cooling with a 360mm radiator custom loop just for the 3900X. 3 EVGA Hybrid Turing cards in the case also. Ambient is around 27° C. in my rooms normally. Five crunchers running all the time. When the thermostat gets to 80° F. I turn on the A/C set to 78°F. Two in each bedroom and another in the living room. Two a room is all my 20A circuits can handle.

The case is not very conducive to keeping cool since it has tempered glass sides, front and top. But they stopped making my previous case so had to settle. Actually stole the perforated top off my older case to swap out the tempered glass top. Helps with the temps a bunch. I would have preferred the older model but I couldn't locate one anywhere. No parts from the older model either. The case is the Thermaltake Level 20 VT which is just the clone of the Thermaltake Core X9 with tempered glass panels on all sides. I would have much preferred to build in another Core X9. Even the Core X5 would have sufficed. But sadly the Core X models are no more.


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> I'm still on 2801. Haven't bothered with 2901 since I expect AGESA 1.0.0.4 to be out around the 25th for the 3950X. When you go to a fixed multiplier, the VID is very low. Starts out a 1.095V. So to get sufficient voltage to run the 40.25 multiplier, I have to add POSITIVE offset of 0.1875V to get to a BIOS set voltage of 1.2825V. With LLC3 set I end up at 1.24V under BOINC load. Temps are anywhere from 68-82° C. depending on whether the A/C is on, the window is open and the outside temps are under 70°F. Cooling with a 360mm radiator custom loop just for the 3900X. 3 EVGA Hybrid Turing cards in the case also. Ambient is around 27° C. in my rooms normally. Five crunchers running all the time. When the thermostat gets to 80° F. I turn on the A/C set to 78°F. Two in each bedroom and another in the living room. Two a room is all my 20A circuits can handle.
> 
> The case is not very conducive to keeping cool since it has tempered glass sides, front and top. But they stopped making my previous case so had to settle. Actually stole the perforated top off my older case to swap out the tempered glass top. Helps with the temps a bunch. I would have preferred the older model but I couldn't locate one anywhere. No parts from the older model either. The case is the Thermaltake Level 20 VT which is just the clone of the Thermaltake Core X9 with tempered glass panels on all sides. I would have much preferred to build in another Core X9. Even the Core X5 would have sufficed. But sadly the Core X models are no more.


I got a little lost with the mentions of the 3900X thrown in. I can only help with the 2700X. Even if you're simply going to work with a 40.25 multiplier you can use PE 3 to get there by reducing EDC in BIOS. And that will allow for a fixed all-core workload and still allow the CPU to achieve max speeds on fewer and single core workloads so it may be worth consideration.


----------



## mikelimtw

Synoxia said:


> Dude everyone is having a problem if asus releases bios late and it does buggy.
> I do not have the fan stop bug nor i have issues with the 100% at 75 or whatever.
> Customers have the right to speak and must speak they think they are not being treated well for a 300 usd board, doesn't matter if it's just a few people.


Yes, but as pointed out before, this is not an official Asus ROG Forum. Your complaints here make not one lick of difference and only serves to annoy others. If you have a legitimate complaint, go to the Asus ROG Forum to voice it. That is your right. But you're now abusing the right of everyone else here to enjoy this forum for its stated purpose.


----------



## mikelimtw

I am new to the Asus Crosshair VII board. I just purchased it for use with my Ryzen 3900X upgrade. Can someone please point me to a good resource that explains all the different overclocking parameters in the BIOS and also perhaps offers some good guides on how to use those features? Thanks!


----------



## Keith Myers

nick name said:


> I got a little lost with the mentions of the 3900X thrown in. I can only help with the 2700X. Even if you're simply going to work with a 40.25 multiplier you can use PE 3 to get there by reducing EDC in BIOS. And that will allow for a fixed all-core workload and still allow the CPU to achieve max speeds on fewer and single core workloads so it may be worth consideration.


Thanks for the help nick name. I strayed off-topic. I don't have any issues running my 2700X hosts at 4.025Ghz with the BIOS just set on Auto and some LLC3. End up around 1.33-1.34V.

My current problem is with the strangeness of the 2801 BIOS with the 3900X. With the early BIOS' when you switched to a fixed multiplier on the 3900X, the VID was stuck at 1.017V for ALL multipliers. I tested all the way up to 43 multiplier. I logged a problem report with AMD on the matter that the BIOS was not scaling the VID when mulitpliers changed. I had never seen this issue on any previous AMD cpu. Didn't get fixed until the 2703 BIOS. At least it scales . . . _slightly_ but it doesn't ramp anywhere as much as needed or like past processors.

That is why I have to add positive offset. I have tried the normal Auto and Performance Boost and Performance Enhancer settings and none of them can maintain the highest all-core frequency that I can get with just a fixed multiplier. My workload is nothing similar at all to what all of you run for testing. So none of the proffered examples help me since they are not applicable to my workload. When I do anything other than run fixed, all my crunching times suffer. I have never tried the power settings since I don't understand them one bit.


----------



## Gregor-

smokin_mitch said:


> bios 2901 seems bugged for me, when waking from sleep it changes fclk from 1900 to 1800 and halves my mem clock from 1900 to 950, I went back to bios 2801


This. I'm back to 2801.

Is 2901 breaking clock coupling and memory overclock after a resume from sleep for anyone else? Before sleep the clocks are 1900/1900, aida64 read is 56xxx-57xxx MB/s with latency at 64-65ns. On resume after sleep clocks are 1800/950, aida64 read barely hits 51xxx MB/s and latency is 75ns+.

I'm using the 1usmus pp, so I switched that back to ryzen balanced. Rebooted, slept/resumed. Same issue. Then I reinstalled the newest am4 x470 chipset drivers from amd. Rebooted, slept/resumed. Still no joy.

I reflashed 2901 to rule out bios corruption, manually redid all the bios settings, reinstalled 109.27.1033. Same issue.

Tried various other things to no avail.

Reflashed 2801, redid everything else. Now sleep/resume is working normally and restoring coupled settings. I ran 2901 for about a week before I gamed after sleep/resume. Lower FPS than normal in a game. That was what it took for me to notice the performance drop and start looking at hwinfo64, aida64, and Ryzen Master.

I'm on a C7H non wifi, with a 3700x and 2x F4-3600C15-8GTZ.


----------



## AvengedRobix

Think to buy another MB for my sampple of 16 core.. =(


----------



## netman

over the last week i tried to get Red Dead Redemption 2 to work on my PC (first a 2700X on the CH7 with 32 GB Ram, a 1080ti and a Creative zxr pcie Soundcard, then the same but with an new 3600) but no chance the Game just crashed when starting up the Rockstar Launcher. 

so over the weekend i took the time to put my cpu,ram, graphics card, sound card and ssd into my second pc with a Asrock B450 Pro4 that normaly runs an old 1600x - so i updated the bios on the asrock board to the newest Agesa 1.0.0.4b (what cannot be done on my CH7 as there is no new Agesa up to now) and what should i say even without a fresh win 10 install (yes i just have thrown in the ssd installed on the ch7 system) RDR2 startet up without any problems and i could play my first 3 hours without any crash or problems. 

so i wonder what else could it be than the not existing agesa 1.0.0.4 on the ch7 the keeps the game crashing for me ? because beside the asrock b450 board the rest of my system was absolutely the same as on the ch7 pc, its frustrating that a cheap b450 Board can do what high class asus x470 board cannot. 

and of course i made up a ticket direct at asus but i got no response up to now and i sadly do no expect any other response than that i got onto my other tickets regarding the ch7 (as for example on the missing features for the fan control, and that i cannot prevent the fans to ramp up full speed when the cpu is reaching 75°), and that was that asus will look into it and then after a few weeks without any response and me asking again if they will come up with a solution my mails were just ignored. 

also on the rog forum, posts regarding this problems are mostly ignored after e certain time without any solution - so my observation is, even if one like me posts his problems onto the official asus forums or use their ticket system - asus sadly gives a damn **** **** about it

i am sorry if i am too one of the guys here annoying the people with his ranting and whining, but at least i hope that it prevents some people from buying asus high priced mobos, because when you have a problem with it and the community is not able to fix it, you are absolutely left alone by asus themselves.


----------



## lordzed83

netman said:


> over the last week i tried to get Red Dead Redemption 2 to work on my PC (first a 2700X on the CH7 with 32 GB Ram, a 1080ti and a Creative zxr pcie Soundcard, then the same but with an new 3600) but no chance the Game just crashed when starting up the Rockstar Launcher.
> 
> so over the weekend i took the time to put my cpu,ram, graphics card, sound card and ssd into my second pc with a Asrock B450 Pro4 that normaly runs an old 1600x - so i updated the bios on the asrock board to the newest Agesa 1.0.0.4b (what cannot be done on my CH7 as there is no new Agesa up to now) and what should i say even without a fresh win 10 install (yes i just have thrown in the ssd installed on the ch7 system) RDR2 startet up without any problems and i could play my first 3 hours without any crash or problems.
> 
> so i wonder what else could it be than the not existing agesa 1.0.0.4 on the ch7 the keeps the game crashing for me ? because beside the asrock b450 board the rest of my system was absolutely the same as on the ch7 pc, its frustrating that a cheap b450 Board can do what high class asus x470 board cannot.
> 
> and of course i made up a ticket direct at asus but i got no response up to now and i sadly do no expect any other response than that i got onto my other tickets regarding the ch7 (as for example on the missing features for the fan control, and that i cannot prevent the fans to ramp up full speed when the cpu is reaching 75°), and that was that asus will look into it and then after a few weeks without any response and me asking again if they will come up with a solution my mails were just ignored.
> 
> also on the rog forum, posts regarding this problems are mostly ignored after e certain time without any solution - so my observation is, even if one like me posts his problems onto the official asus forums or use their ticket system - asus sadly gives a damn **** **** about it
> 
> i am sorry if i am too one of the guys here annoying the people with his ranting and whining, but at least i hope that it prevents some people from buying asus high priced mobos, because when you have a problem with it and the community is not able to fix it, you are absolutely left alone by asus themselves.


I tell You what it is. RDR2 port quality is Total TRASH... Game wins worst port of 2019 by mile. Rockstar pulled GTA4 with this game aka It will Never run good they mess about for 6 minths with trying to patch it up and after most of money from sales been made. They leave it as it is.

Only reason why RDR2 came out on PC as fast is.... Failure of Online service to make descent money... It's nowhere near as much as GTA5 Online makes them. So Knowing that this Wont make them bilions of dollars they decided speed port it to pc. Get it running cash in what they can and move Dev team to GTA6.


Is there anything I missd ??


----------



## lordzed83

mikelimtw said:


> I am new to the Asus Crosshair VII board. I just purchased it for use with my Ryzen 3900X upgrade. Can someone please point me to a good resource that explains all the different overclocking parameters in the BIOS and also perhaps offers some good guides on how to use those features? Thanks!


https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?101617-Crosshair-VII-Hero-Essential-Info-Thread


----------



## Axaion

Yeah, you missed the part where it works on a cheapo b450 board but not this "ASUS CAN MAKE NO MISTAKES CAUSE THEY AWESOME!" board.

Seeing as thats the only change he seemed to have made, its obvious the asus board is the reason it didnt run.


----------



## xeizo

Would be silly if I have to move my games to my Gigabyte B450-board, which of course also has Agesa 1004B. So far Rockstar/RDR2 seems to be the only one having problems, no small player though.

edit. C7H bios will probably be delayed as far as I can see, as currently Asus X570-boards with Agesa 1004B can't take any PCIE cards except the main graphics card. I suppose they have to solve that one first. Lousy QC when such a large bug slips through.


----------



## netman

lordzed83 said:


> I tell You what it is. RDR2 port quality is Total TRASH... Game wins worst port of 2019 by mile. Rockstar pulled GTA4 with this game aka It will Never run good they mess about for 6 minths with trying to patch it up and after most of money from sales been made. They leave it as it is.
> 
> Is there anything I missd ??


i am with you that the quality of this port by Rockstar should have been much better (regarding performance and launcher programming), but i also must admit i never saw a more beautiful and more atmospheric game than RDR2 so far on PC - i really love it only after 3 hours of play so far and even tough there are some performance problems 

but as i know that Rockstar did not make the best work i also know and that is the point i can run it on a cheap asrock b450 Board because they are able to bring new agesa updates also to their cheap boards in time (and i did not find any serious bug so far ) - and asus is not capable of doing the same for their top notch X470 Board 



Axaion said:


> Yeah, you missed the part where it works on a cheapo b450 board but not this "ASUS CAN MAKE NO MISTAKES CAUSE THEY AWESOME!" board.
> 
> Seeing as thats the only change he seemed to have made, its obvious the asus board is the reason it didnt run.


you got the point the only change between the 2 systems was the motherboard and its really annoying that one has to live with this poor service from one of the biggest players in this business



xeizo said:


> Would be silly if I have to move my games to my Gigabyte B450-board, which of course also has Agesa 1004B. So far Rockstar/RDR2 seems to be the only one having problems, no small player though.
> 
> edit. C7H bios will probably be delayed as far as I can see, as currently Asus X570-boards with Agesa 1004B can't take any PCIE cards except the main graphics card. I suppose they have to solve that one first. Lousy QC when such a large bug slips through.


 yeah i know its only one game (and a buggy one) but with a 1.0.0.4 Bios for our ch7 i could have played it from the beginning without a problem ... and wasn't it gigabyte that also seems to have problems with non booting systems when using pcie Cards with their first 1.0.0.4 Bios ? but other than asus they already seem to have worked this out with new bioses


----------



## kundica

netman said:


> over the last week i tried to get Red Dead Redemption 2 to work on my PC (first a 2700X on the CH7 with 32 GB Ram, a 1080ti and a Creative zxr pcie Soundcard, then the same but with an new 3600) but no chance the Game just crashed when starting up the Rockstar Launcher.
> 
> 
> 
> so over the weekend i took the time to put my cpu,ram, graphics card, sound card and ssd into my second pc with a Asrock B450 Pro4 that normaly runs an old 1600x - so i updated the bios on the asrock board to the newest Agesa 1.0.0.4b (what cannot be done on my CH7 as there is no new Agesa up to now) and what should i say even without a fresh win 10 install (yes i just have thrown in the ssd installed on the ch7 system) RDR2 startet up without any problems and i could play my first 3 hours without any crash or problems.
> 
> 
> 
> so i wonder what else could it be than the not existing agesa 1.0.0.4 on the ch7 the keeps the game crashing for me ? because beside the asrock b450 board the rest of my system was absolutely the same as on the ch7 pc, its frustrating that a cheap b450 Board can do what high class asus x470 board cannot.
> 
> 
> 
> and of course i made up a ticket direct at asus but i got no response up to now and i sadly do no expect any other response than that i got onto my other tickets regarding the ch7 (as for example on the missing features for the fan control, and that i cannot prevent the fans to ramp up full speed when the cpu is reaching 75°), and that was that asus will look into it and then after a few weeks without any response and me asking again if they will come up with a solution my mails were just ignored.
> 
> 
> 
> also on the rog forum, posts regarding this problems are mostly ignored after e certain time without any solution - so my observation is, even if one like me posts his problems onto the official asus forums or use their ticket system - asus sadly gives a damn **** **** about it
> 
> 
> 
> i am sorry if i am too one of the guys here annoying the people with his ranting and whining, but at least i hope that it prevents some people from buying asus high priced mobos, because when you have a problem with it and the community is not able to fix it, you are absolutely left alone by asus themselves.


I'm not convinced it's an issue with the C7H that can be resolved by Asus despite it working in the new system for you. I've had zero issues running the game on my C7H with bios 2801 and 2901. Neither has my buddy with the same motherboard. 

Sent from my LG V30 using Tapatalk


----------



## netman

well as the motherboard was the only thing i changed in the whole system - i cannot nail it down to something else - maybe its the sum of my whole system - for example i do not know what graphics card you and your buddy have and if you use a dedicated sound card es i do with the zxr. 

i will try it again on the ch7 with the same parts if we sometime in the future hopefully will also get a bios update with the new agesa and if it then works for me there is no other conclusion as that it was the missing 1.0.0.4 Agesa for my CH7 in combination with the rest of my system.

but all that is not the real problem - the real problem is how asus behave against their customers if you try to get help from them via their official communication networks (means their official forums and their ticket system) as i just was ignored by them with the problems i had  and it was only this community here that helped me sort out what was possible ...

with the knowledge i have now how asus treats their customers the best i could have done was to give back the ch7 and get my money back from the shop - but i never thought that the support would be as bad as it turned out to be, i just hope that when they put out the 1.0.0.4 Agesa for the Ch7 it will work without serius bugs (and maybe there happens a wonder and asus unhides the whole fan controls and even let the us decide whether and when the fans ramp up to 100%  ) and then i make my freedom with it until hopefully next year B550 shows up with some boards without Chipset Fan and i can switch back to Asrock again. 

Asrock also have their problems but at least they try to sort things out and help their customers as good as they can - and i never felt like that when contacting asus support(that are at least my personal experiences with 10 years of Asrock Boards before my try to switch to Asus)


----------



## mtrai

netman said:


> well as the motherboard was the only thing i changed in the whole system - i cannot nail it down to something else - maybe its the sum of my whole system - for example i do not know what graphics card you and your buddy have and if you use a dedicated sound card es i do with the zxr.
> 
> i will try it again on the ch7 with the same parts if we sometime in the future hopefully will also get a bios update with the new agesa and if it then works for me there is no other conclusion as that it was the missing 1.0.0.4 Agesa for my CH7 in combination with the rest of my system.
> 
> but all that is not the real problem - the real problem is how asus behave against their customers if you try to get help from them via their official communication networks (means their official forums and their ticket system) as i just was ignored by them with the problems i had  and it was only this community here that helped me sort out what was possible ...
> 
> with the knowledge i have now how asus treats their customers the best i could have done was to give back the ch7 and get my money back from the shop - but i never thought that the support would be as bad as it turned out to be, i just hope that when they put out the 1.0.0.4 Agesa for the Ch7 it will work without serius bugs (and maybe there happens a wonder and asus unhides the whole fan controls and even let the us decide whether and when the fans ramp up to 100%  ) and then i make my freedom with it until hopefully next year B550 shows up with some boards without Chipset Fan and i can switch back to Asrock again.
> 
> Asrock also have their problems but at least they try to sort things out and help their customers as good as they can - and i never felt like that when contacting asus support(that are at least my personal experiences with 10 years of Asrock Boards before my try to switch to Asus)


ASUS WILL NEVER UNHIDE THE FULL FAN CONTROL!!!! This applies to not only AMD but also INTEL boards. Only my modded bios does that. Been that way for almost a decade, sorry to tell you. ASROCK does not hide a number of options that ASUS does but that is a different matter as their bios structure is a MESS and hard to work with.

My personal suggestion and I hate to say it is to use a seperatly powered fan controller with the ASUS boards. I know we should not have to but that is best solution other then using my modded bios. Yes it fixes all the fan issues as far as I know but my fans are controlled via the externally powered fan controller or power cables both sata and other type, but I have never tested the fans being connected to the actual motherboard.


----------



## Paddydapro

*Can't get win 10 to install on Crosshair VII hero wifi with 850 evo 500gb*

So I finally got this board a few days ago, updated bios to 2901 made a windows media creation tool stick with the latest 1909 editions and chose pro version when prompted by the windows install wizard after rebooting with the stick in the mobo.

The thing is I can choose the ssd no problem but after the first reboot in the windows install process EVEN IF I REMOVE THE USB STICK or leave it in, I tried both.. It won't see the ssd in bios anymore only if i enable cfm again. But if I enable CFM again the partition is not bootable and it doesn't matter if its in gpt or mbr if its ntfs or what else I tried all combinations. 

Am I missing something basic or what is going on here I really don't know anymore.. I even tried 3 different bioses and also 3 different windows versions with different ages since release. It definitely isn't a boot priority thing! It has something to do with the ssd not being converted to windows boot manager thingy before the first reboot happens..

or furthermore windows is partitioned to gpt with all standard windows volumes after the restart but can only be recognized by the windows install wizard again but even if I install windows over the existing one or clean the drive it doesn't matter still doesn't work..

Does anyone of you have any Idea what it could be? Would really appreciate every bit of help I can get because I want to start OC'ing as soon as possible


----------



## Synoxia

netman said:


> i am with you that the quality of this port by Rockstar should have been much better (regarding performance and launcher programming), but i also must admit i never saw a more beautiful and more atmospheric game than RDR2 so far on PC - i really love it only after 3 hours of play so far and even tough there are some performance problems
> 
> but as i know that Rockstar did not make the best work i also know and that is the point i can run it on a cheap asrock b450 Board because they are able to bring new agesa updates also to their cheap boards in time (and i did not find any serious bug so far ) - and asus is not capable of doing the same for their top notch X470 Board
> 
> 
> 
> you got the point the only change between the 2 systems was the motherboard and its really annoying that one has to live with this poor service from one of the biggest players in this business
> 
> 
> yeah i know its only one game (and a buggy one) but with a 1.0.0.4 Bios for our ch7 i could have played it from the beginning without a problem ... and wasn't it gigabyte that also seems to have problems with non booting systems when using pcie Cards with their first 1.0.0.4 Bios ? but other than asus they already seem to have worked this out with new bioses


Don't act like that or, you will trigger people with buyer's remorse that will fight you fight nais and teeth D: just sell c7h and never buy asus again for AMD.

Source: my previous vega strix was a thermal throttling noisytrash but Nvidia card is awesome, my previous intel boards were ok too.

P.S if you have a quick google about asus being late you will find even Zenphone users complaining LOL


----------



## Gigabytes

netman said:


> well as the motherboard was the only thing i changed in the whole system - i cannot nail it down to something else - maybe its the sum of my whole system - for example i do not know what graphics card you and your buddy have and if you use a dedicated sound card es i do with the zxr.
> 
> i will try it again on the ch7 with the same parts if we sometime in the future hopefully will also get a bios update with the new agesa and if it then works for me there is no other conclusion as that it was the missing 1.0.0.4 Agesa for my CH7 in combination with the rest of my system.
> 
> but all that is not the real problem - the real problem is how asus behave against their customers if you try to get help from them via their official communication networks (means their official forums and their ticket system) as i just was ignored by them with the problems i had  and it was only this community here that helped me sort out what was possible ...
> 
> with the knowledge i have now how asus treats their customers the best i could have done was to give back the ch7 and get my money back from the shop - but i never thought that the support would be as bad as it turned out to be, i just hope that when they put out the 1.0.0.4 Agesa for the Ch7 it will work without serius bugs (and maybe there happens a wonder and asus unhides the whole fan controls and even let the us decide whether and when the fans ramp up to 100%  ) and then i make my freedom with it until hopefully next year B550 shows up with some boards without Chipset Fan and i can switch back to Asrock again.
> 
> Asrock also have their problems but at least they try to sort things out and help their customers as good as they can - and i never felt like that when contacting asus support(that are at least my personal experiences with 10 years of Asrock Boards before my try to switch to Asus)


Yes you you basically just swapped motherboards along with virtually every driver associated with the motherboard, am confident your issue is related to corruption in the drivers.


----------



## crakej

Synoxia said:


> Don't act like that or, you will trigger people with buyer's remorse that will fight you fight nais and teeth D: just sell c7h and never buy asus again for AMD.
> 
> Source: my previous vega strix was a thermal throttling noisytrash but Nvidia card is awesome, my previous intel boards were ok too.
> 
> P.S if you have a quick google about asus being late you will find even Zenphone users complaining LOL


Says someone who has ZERO qualifications to state something like this.

ASUS are not perfect, No vendor ever is, but you are giving people the completly wrong idea. You're not happy, by god we get that, but you have to accept that me, others here, and MOST customers, are happy with our boards - they're great quality and mine has been running reliably for some time now.

Why don't you take your own advice? Sell your board - and disappear.


----------



## lordzed83

Axaion said:


> What, really?, im on 2901 too.
> 
> Maybe its a non-wifi only issue?, no idea..


I had fans problem since C6H just learned to work around it playing around quith Qfan in bios. I dont use any of Asus Trash windows software. Everything set up from bios level.






In the end I tested 3 brands of 120mm fans and it is Fan dependant. One out 3 fans i tested kinda works. Whole Cpu fan control been ****ed from day one of Crosshair VI I nly got fan to shift air around VRM's So got mulltiple options. You could Run DC mode but that limits yo 60% minimum. OR play around with quick fan so you can have options like me with 65% max ion 75c.


----------



## lordzed83

Axaion said:


> Yeah, you missed the part where it works on a cheapo b450 board but not this "ASUS CAN MAKE NO MISTAKES CAUSE THEY AWESOME!" board.
> 
> Seeing as thats the only change he seemed to have made, its obvious the asus board is the reason it didnt run.


ITs not asus only thing ofc noone checks ****....

@netman Gigabyte
https://youtu.be/z_ty-gajwoA?t=90 


Its motherboard lottery. When RDR2 came out i went over 20 reviews and problem is on random motherboards from random vendors. Two Gigabyte x570 WITH 1.0.0.4b bios one brand new from box other abused. With New bios it's crashing with ABBA bios it would not even run... Deffo an Asus thing..

@Synoxia OFC for You its asus only thing... Not like brand new GIGABYTE x570 motherboards cant run RDR2... I'm still waiting for that paypal so i can donate you them 10 euros so you can afford to sell the Asus Trash and MOVE ON.


----------



## LethalSpoon

I didnt have any issues so far with latest 2901 BIOS, but that fact doesnt prevent me from being critic with Asus. They lag hard behind all other vendors in terms of AGESA updates, and things like hidding fan control options in BIOS shows how lazy they are. Imagine if we didn't have communities like this to share info and try to solve the problems, we would be left alone in the dust since their own support forums are almost useless.


----------



## Synoxia

lordzed83 said:


> ITs not asus only thing ofc noone checks ****....
> 
> @netman Gigabyte
> https://youtu.be/z_ty-gajwoA?t=90
> 
> 
> Its motherboard lottery. When RDR2 came out i went over 20 reviews and problem is on random motherboards from random vendors. Two Gigabyte x570 WITH 1.0.0.4b bios one brand new from box other abused. With New bios it's crashing with ABBA bios it would not even run... Deffo an Asus thing..
> 
> @Synoxia OFC for You its asus only thing... Not like brand new GIGABYTE x570 motherboards cant run RDR2... I'm still waiting for that paypal so i can donate you them 10 euros so you can afford to sell the Asus Trash and MOVE ON.



1.0.0.4 atleast lets people play (even with crashs) and btw i'm not gonna discuss over how trash RDR2 port is because that's another matter.
Never said it's an asus only thing, i have many other arguments about this company underdelivering to what we paid for.


Same. I never had 
How about i give you 15 and you ignore my user/do whatever you can to not see my posts anymore? 
Jesus christ you're old, do you realize that bragging to pay someone else because you just can't argue/agree with their opinion is immature? 
LOL i can't remember anyone in the high schools doing something like that and it wasn't so far ago either!




crakej said:


> Says someone who has ZERO qualifications to state something like this.
> 
> ASUS are not perfect, No vendor ever is, but you are giving people the completly wrong idea. You're not happy, by god we get that, but you have to accept that me, others here, and MOST customers, are happy with our boards - they're great quality and mine has been running reliably for some time now.
> 
> Why don't you take your own advice? Sell your board - and disappear.


Imagine asking for qualifications. On a FORUM. 
Anyways... you are/someone else is happy? Who said i can't accept that? Have i ever told someone "you don't have to be happy because asus is trash"?
My board now run reliably too, however there are some quirks already pointed out in the thread that makes me think this is not a premium 300 usd experience board, especially if we look at other vendors.
Because i'd rather get asus fix their thing together and give me a proper experience instead of selling a functional board at loss. That and i have a rog strix gpu, need aura.
Like i have to explain my economical reasons... damn




LethalSpoon said:


> I didnt have any issues so far with latest 2901 BIOS, but that fact doesnt prevent me from being critic with Asus. They lag hard behind all other vendors in terms of AGESA updates, and things like hidding fan control options in BIOS shows how lazy they are. Imagine if we didn't have communities like this to share info and try to solve the problems, we would be left alone in the dust since their own support forums are almost useless.


Pretty much this


----------



## netman

Gigabytes said:


> Yes you you basically just swapped motherboards along with virtually every driver associated with the motherboard, am confident your issue is related to corruption in the drivers.


the only time i installed any drivers was on the ch7 with a fresh install of windows 10 - after this on my ch7 system only the newest nvidia driver without gaming expericene, the newest Zxr driver and of course the newest amd chipset driver was installed and with this setup RDR2 did crash directly after starting the launcher. How should the drivers be corrupted after a fresh install so they could prevent rdr2 from running on my ch7 system. 

if anything then the drivers could be corrupted after throwing the win 10 ssd without touching windows 10 or installing any new drivers but if they are really corrupted then rdr2 should certainly not run anymore but the opposite is true and then the game worked and is still working without any problem on the B450 system with thrown in win10 ssd.




lordzed83 said:


> ITs not asus only thing ofc noone checks ****....
> 
> Its motherboard lottery. When RDR2 came out i went over 20 reviews and problem is on random motherboards from random vendors. Two Gigabyte x570 WITH 1.0.0.4b bios one brand new from box other abused. With New bios it's crashing with ABBA bios it would not even run... Deffo an Asus thing.


the point is, when RDR2 launched a lot of people also with different brands than asus had problems - also asrock nad gigabyte like in your vid - but they and rockstar managed to sort things out - but for me on the ch7 it did not sort out and the only thing i did not try with the CH7 is updating to Agesa 1.0.0.4 as i can't do it without a bios from asus (and updating to agesa 1.0.0.4 helped a lot of people when you search over the net for RDR2 problems) 

But of course there could still be some problems on Boards from other Manufacturers that also still have problems with RDR2 and that i do not know of - what i can say so far is an my ch7 i does still not work and on the cheap asrock i works for me. If Asus comes out with agesa 1.0.0.4 for the CH7 i will directly try to run RDR2 on it again and if it works then it should be quite clear that the agesa was the problem why ever and if not i do not know what else i can do than changing my graphics card. Because everything else i tried already. 

But i think we should leave this for now, i am not here to spam the whole thread with this problem - just wanted to report that i have this problem on ch7 and think its agesa related as it works on asrock with newer agesa - and if i can try new agesa on ch7 i will report back here and clear up if this solved the problem or if i was wrong and it still does not work, or i found another solution. Hope thats ok.


----------



## Axaion

lordzed83 said:


> ITs not asus only thing ofc noone checks ****....
> 
> @netman Gigabyte
> https://youtu.be/z_ty-gajwoA?t=90
> 
> 
> Its motherboard lottery. When RDR2 came out i went over 20 reviews and problem is on random motherboards from random vendors. Two Gigabyte x570 WITH 1.0.0.4b bios one brand new from box other abused. With New bios it's crashing with ABBA bios it would not even run... Deffo an Asus thing..
> 
> @Synoxia OFC for You its asus only thing... Not like brand new GIGABYTE x570 motherboards cant run RDR2... I'm still waiting for that paypal so i can donate you them 10 euros so you can afford to sell the Asus Trash and MOVE ON.


That just means the other boards that wont run it either are just as bad, that does NOT excuse asus, or the others from not being able to do what a cheapo board can do.


I dont understand why people praise asus bios so much either though, it has hidden features, and a boatload of duplicate features, i mean.. why? its just needless clutter to have duplicates


----------



## harderthanfire

Asus always used to be miles ahead in terms of options and general features in their bioses as well as the UI being less horrific than other vendors.


The issue is the likes of Gigabyte have completely rewritten their bioses and now they are nice to use and are packed full of similar options to Asus. Basically the rest of the board vendors have caught up so it is much more obvious when Asus has an issue as they can't hide behind the feature set etc.


That all being said I'll continue to buy Asus boards as I feel their hardware is top notch - their choice of VRM design especially I feel is generally excellent across the board. I just wish they would put some care into their bios like other vendors have recently. I echo the statements of this ain't a thread to moan to Asus in.


More on topic, has anyone managed to get 4 sticks of Micron E-Die to OC much or managed to tighten timings at all as even using the calculator I'm getting basically no luck and given some people have gotten similar sticks to add over 1000mhz more than advertised it is super depressing I can't even get 66mhz.


----------



## Takla

Paddydapro said:


> So I finally got this board a few days ago, updated bios to 2901 made a windows media creation tool stick with the latest 1909 editions and chose pro version when prompted by the windows install wizard after rebooting with the stick in the mobo.



Huh. I re installed windows yesterday too. had the same issue with 7601 bios on my c6h. what I did to fix this: disable csm > save and exit. go into bios again > change boot device only to the usb stick (set every over device to disabled) > save and exit.
Once you're in the w10 installation process, and you get to the part where there is no device found, close the dialog and press shift+f10 to open cmd. type in diskpart > press enter on keyboard >list disk > enter and select your ssd by typing: select disk 0 (or what ever number it has) than press enter and type in: clean > press enter > and finally, type in "exit". Now your ssd will be effectively blank. It still won't show up at this point. So the last step is to flip the power switch of your psu (believe me, this is what did it for me) and wait 15 seconds than turn it back on and start again with the installation process of w10. this time your ssd should finally show up.


there seems to be a problem with the windows driver while installing which you can work around with the psu trick.


----------



## lordzed83

@Synoxia [email protected] my payplay DO IT or You are only just trash talking ?? If not give me Yours as I said.
With dedication





@Axaion I had Gigabyte x570 elite and Msi x570 gaming. Gigabyte plain Trash worst bios i ever played with would rather go back to jumpers like on my 286sx MSI not bad bios actually but i got history of burned motherboards from MSI 3x x99 and one z77. But my mate seems to not have any problems after iw sbuild him system on it.
If I was to grab new motherboard TODAY id get ASRock x570 Tachi i know chipset fan design is rubish as gpu is blocking any airflow. But besides that Solid motherboards from what I'w seen around forums.

@netman AGESA is the problem have You missed Destiny 2 problem on ryzen ??
https://hothardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-3000-zen-2-destiny-2-bungie-crash

I made good call waiting with buying RDR2 till i see if its actually descent so cant check if this weeks rockstars update fixed it. It's hard to say whats messed up. As 1.0.0.4 seems to not fix RDR2 problem on all motherboards. Could be 1 tiny detail if it works on some motherboards with ABBA. We see when 1.0.0.4 eventually lands on C7H.


----------



## lordzed83

LethalSpoon said:


> I didnt have any issues so far with latest 2901 BIOS, but that fact doesnt prevent me from being critic with Asus. They lag hard behind all other vendors in terms of AGESA updates, and things like hidding fan control options in BIOS shows how lazy they are. Imagine if we didn't have communities like this to share info and try to solve the problems, we would be left alone in the dust since their own support forums are almost useless.


It's been wayy better 3+ years ago. Looks like Its not worth forking out extra cash for 'premium' moptherboards anymore. Better off buying mid range one every 2 years. Then You got latest stuff and updates. Cause once next chipset lands support is dead. I think Intel and their's 1 chipset/ 1cpu is kinda responsible. 
Been Years of no big bios updates for previous generations motherboards so they could run new cpus. I bet the teams working on bioses got shrunk and thats the effect.


----------



## Synoxia

lordzed83 said:


> @Synoxia [email protected] my payplay DO IT or You are only just trash talking ?? If not give me Yours as I said.
> With dedication
> https://youtu.be/IcGNMjyceS4
> 
> @Axaion I had Gigabyte x570 elite and Msi x570 gaming. Gigabyte plain Trash worst bios i ever played with would rather go back to jumpers like on my 286sx MSI not bad bios actually but i got history of burned motherboards from MSI 3x x99 and one z77. But my mate seems to not have any problems after iw sbuild him system on it.
> If I was to grab new motherboard TODAY id get ASRock x570 Tachi i know chipset fan design is rubish as gpu is blocking any airflow. But besides that Solid motherboards from what I'w seen around forums.
> 
> @netman AGESA is the problem have You missed Destiny 2 problem on ryzen ??
> https://hothardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-3000-zen-2-destiny-2-bungie-crash
> 
> I made good call waiting with buying RDR2 till i see if its actually descent so cant check if this weeks rockstars update fixed it. It's hard to say whats messed up. As 1.0.0.4 seems to not fix RDR2 problem on all motherboards. Could be 1 tiny detail if it works on some motherboards with ABBA. We see when 1.0.0.4 eventually lands on C7H.


15 eur aren't going to make me bankrupt and would be glad if i could help a man buying some dignity, unfortunately i do not own criptocurrency, don't want to bother registering anothermail/buying prep card so deal with it as giving to random dude on the internet paypal email, name and address seems very unwise 

Anyway, this could sound a bit AMD biased but in fact isn't. I think software should accomodate hardware and not the contrary. So trash coding both by bungi & rockstar.


----------



## Axaion

lordzed83 said:


> @Axaion I had Gigabyte x570 elite and Msi x570 gaming. Gigabyte plain Trash worst bios i ever played with would rather go back to jumpers like on my 286sx MSI not bad bios actually but i got history of burned motherboards from MSI 3x x99 and one z77. But my mate seems to not have any problems after iw sbuild him system on it.
> If I was to grab new motherboard TODAY id get ASRock x570 Tachi i know chipset fan design is rubish as gpu is blocking any airflow. But besides that Solid motherboards from what I'w seen around forums.


Its funny you mention ASRock, because i came from an ASRock Z68 Extreme4, and that bios was not cluttered with duplicates and to the point
Also had toggles for hpet, spread spectrum, and decent fan controls

Also felt nice that it booted muuuuuch faster than newer platforms does, apparently the new updates for the x570 taichi boots fast for an AMD system too.

Not that id consider it, i loathe motherboard fans with a passion, they always fail or are loud


----------



## LethalSpoon

lordzed83 said:


> It's been wayy better 3+ years ago. Looks like Its not worth forking out extra cash for 'premium' moptherboards anymore. Better off buying mid range one every 2 years. Then You got latest stuff and updates. Cause once next chipset lands support is dead. I think Intel and their's 1 chipset/ 1cpu is kinda responsible.
> Been Years of no big bios updates for previous generations motherboards so they could run new cpus. I bet the teams working on bioses got shrunk and thats the effect.


Less people working on BIOS and more regular updates, the recipe for disaster. At this point I would be happy if they manage to get AGESA 1.0.0.4 out before end of the month and doesnt break anything too hard


----------



## lordzed83

Axaion said:


> Its funny you mention ASRock, because i came from an ASRock Z68 Extreme4, and that bios was not cluttered with duplicates and to the point
> Also had toggles for hpet, spread spectrum, and decent fan controls
> 
> Also felt nice that it booted muuuuuch faster than newer platforms does, apparently the new updates for the x570 taichi boots fast for an AMD system too.
> 
> Not that id consider it, i loathe motherboard fans with a passion, they always fail or are loud


Werll all x570 motherboards got fans for chipset besides 2 on super rippoff boards lol. Them chipsets are hot.


----------



## lordzed83

LethalSpoon said:


> Less people working on BIOS and more regular updates, the recipe for disaster. At this point I would be happy if they manage to get AGESA 1.0.0.4 out before end of the month and doesnt break anything too hard


Ye when we had Elmopr around we had access to the test bioses use at own risk ones was good fun trying them out buit not anymore


----------



## lcbbcl

@Synoxia Don't bother to argue, are some people who will say that they don't have problems, and who have problems are isolated cases.
Today i found that my bios after a regular pc reboot give me a cpu fan error and when i enter bios i saw my CPU temp at -10C wow, but its ok is asus with the most advanced crap


----------



## Hale59

Regarding Bios 1.0.0.4 for Asus X470, I found this Twitter explanation:

https://twitter.com/1usmus/status/1197045117191897088


----------



## darkage

lcbbcl said:


> @Synoxia Don't bother to argue, are some people who will say that they don't have problems, and who have problems are isolated cases.
> Today i found that my bios after a regular pc reboot give me a cpu fan error and when i enter bios i saw my CPU temp at -10C wow, but its ok is asus with the most advanced crap


the problem is people say asus is crap, going to z or x or whatever, its all the same you know?
so comes to one point where it is all like mimimimimimimimi , and here how many have that big issues?
i do not have any problem with my chvii/3700x/rx5700xt other have, pc building is this ,this is why its fun


----------



## Hale59

I think people must stop complaining about people that complain.

Just like people, components are not made equal. There are many variables. 

I had a CHVII for 1 year and it became faulty.

If you cannot offer a solution, or don't like what you read, scroll down.


----------



## Paddydapro

I finally got my board to install windows by not going with the 850 evo ssd as boot drive but with my old af vertex 3 drive from ages ago. Pretty sad that it's kinda impossible to install windows on the 850 evo.. 

Anyways Windows runs fine and I even ran Cinebench R20 and got 7300 multi and 508 single core score which is pretty OK i guess for my test setup with amd boxed cooler..

Sadly I just got a new problem.. I installed all drivers etc and while rebooting after installing chipset, audio and wifi drivers I now get bootloops for like 2 minutes with multiple automatic hard resets by the mobo until the board shows error code 94 (pci bus enumeration).. now If I hold power button and press it again after it shuts down 5 seconds later, the board goes to save mode and I have to press F1 to go to the bios.. there obviously all settings will be reset and the voltage goes to 1.5V again which is insane..
Now, If I just escape and continue I can get to windows.. even writing this from the new PC right now. 

What I noticed is, that my gpu (only pci device) is only connected via 8 lanes.. what is this board even doing, it's like it's drunk or something with this much trouble I'm getting.. is it the revision? it's 1.xx btw.

In all other aspects the board feels super solid and everything else works even get 4,6ghz boost out of the box etc. I really hope someone has an idea what this error 94 is about? obviously tried switching pci slots and everything I could change in bios that could affect it..


----------



## crakej

Paddydapro said:


> I finally got my board to install windows by not going with the 850 evo ssd as boot drive but with my old af vertex 3 drive from ages ago. Pretty sad that it's kinda impossible to install windows on the 850 evo..
> 
> Anyways Windows runs fine and I even ran Cinebench R20 and got 7300 multi and 508 single core score which is pretty OK i guess for my test setup with amd boxed cooler..
> 
> Sadly I just got a new problem.. I installed all drivers etc and while rebooting after installing chipset, audio and wifi drivers I now get bootloops for like 2 minutes with multiple automatic hard resets by the mobo until the board shows error code 94 (pci bus enumeration).. now If I hold power button and press it again after it shuts down 5 seconds later, the board goes to save mode and I have to press F1 to go to the bios.. there obviously all settings will be reset and the voltage goes to 1.5V again which is insane..
> Now, If I just escape and continue I can get to windows.. even writing this from the new PC right now.
> 
> What I noticed is, that my gpu (only pci device) is only connected via 8 lanes.. what is this board even doing, it's like it's drunk or something with this much trouble I'm getting.. is it the revision? it's 1.xx btw.
> 
> In all other aspects the board feels super solid and everything else works even get 4,6ghz boost out of the box etc. I really hope someone has an idea what this error 94 is about? obviously tried switching pci slots and everything I could change in bios that could affect it..


Which slot is your NVME drive in? Top or bottom? Use bottom slot or it will steal 8 lanes from the GPU.


----------



## Synoxia

Hale59 said:


> Regarding Bios 1.0.0.4 for Asus X470, I found this Twitter explanation:
> 
> https://twitter.com/1usmus/status/1197045117191897088


Is @1usmus internal to asus? If this statement is true then why did they release 1.0.0.4 for x570?


----------



## Hale59

Synoxia said:


> Is @1usmus internal to asus? If this statement is true then why did they release 1.0.0.4 for x570?


I'm sure you can ask the question directly to him.


----------



## Synoxia

Hale59 said:


> I'm sure you can ask the question directly to him.


I've just did? Trying to raise post count?


----------



## crakej

Synoxia said:


> Is @1usmus internal to asus? If this statement is true then why did they release 1.0.0.4 for x570?


No... He's nothing to do with ASUS.


----------



## lordzed83

Synoxia said:


> Is @1usmus internal to asus? If this statement is true then why did they release 1.0.0.4 for x570?


No hes not He's Independent from vendors just got connections by now. Andy why ???? Because x570 did not had same bug ??? I assume You got no clue that them microcodes are separate for different chipsets.....


----------



## lordzed83

Paddydapro said:


> I finally got my board to install windows by not going with the 850 evo ssd as boot drive but with my old af vertex 3 drive from ages ago. Pretty sad that it's kinda impossible to install windows on the 850 evo..
> 
> Anyways Windows runs fine and I even ran Cinebench R20 and got 7300 multi and 508 single core score which is pretty OK i guess for my test setup with amd boxed cooler..
> 
> Sadly I just got a new problem.. I installed all drivers etc and while rebooting after installing chipset, audio and wifi drivers I now get bootloops for like 2 minutes with multiple automatic hard resets by the mobo until the board shows error code 94 (pci bus enumeration).. now If I hold power button and press it again after it shuts down 5 seconds later, the board goes to save mode and I have to press F1 to go to the bios.. there obviously all settings will be reset and the voltage goes to 1.5V again which is insane..
> Now, If I just escape and continue I can get to windows.. even writing this from the new PC right now.
> 
> What I noticed is, that my gpu (only pci device) is only connected via 8 lanes.. what is this board even doing, it's like it's drunk or something with this much trouble I'm getting.. is it the revision? it's 1.xx btw.
> 
> In all other aspects the board feels super solid and everything else works even get 4,6ghz boost out of the box etc. I really hope someone has an idea what this error 94 is about? obviously tried switching pci slots and everything I could change in bios that could affect it..


Have You tried updating Firmware of the SSD ?? I'm using 860 evo and firmware update fixed some minor bugs and speed. And if it goes for speed. as @crakej said use bottom NVME slot or you will drop gpu from x16 to x8. If You have it so just Set it to gen 3 in bios from Auto to manual.


----------



## Synoxia

Small ot for a bit of fun https://www.asus.com/zentalk/thread-81203-1-1.html even zenphone users are mad LOL


----------



## lordzed83

Synoxia said:


> Small ot for a bit of fun https://www.asus.com/zentalk/thread-81203-1-1.html even zenphone users are mad LOL


Ye great 3 year old news about phone noone cares about anymore.


----------



## andyliu

Synoxia said:


> Small ot for a bit of fun https://www.asus.com/zentalk/thread-81203-1-1.html even zenphone users are mad LOL


while I had zenphone 2 and I was upset on how ****ty Asus handle the updates. it was a 200 bux budget phone w/ intel processor.
Intel killed processor for cellphone line made matter worst. I load the phone w/ some survey program and let it pay off the 200 bux w/ amazon gift card.
I dont bother spam the forum I just don't buy Asus cellphone line at all. It was my only 3rd party phone, but ya I basically say **** 3rd party and stick w/ google 
because all cellphone vendor sucks at update their phone.

personally, though, I don't see the need to spam this thread w/ lack of or slow update info though.
I am used to the old "every time you ask, it gets N day delay from elmor", so I am just patient enough and wait.
I have no issue w/ slow update but it does suck w/ no info, especially gets much worst after elmor left. Elmor will at least give us some info.

you are free to post whatever you want.
however, my suggestion is to keep this thread more technically related and create a different thread to complain about the lack of support.
After all, this is a user shared forum. I come to this thread to check for overclocking/technically related info, not how you not getting the update as I am


----------



## lordzed83

andyliu said:


> while I had zenphone 2 and I was upset on how ****ty Asus handle the updates. it was a 200 bux budget phone w/ intel processor.
> Intel killed processor for cellphone line made matter worst. I load the phone w/ some survey program and let it pay off the 200 bux w/ amazon gift card.
> I dont bother spam the forum I just don't buy Asus cellphone line at all. It was my only 3rd party phone, but ya I basically say **** 3rd party and stick w/ google
> because all cellphone vendor sucks at update their phone.
> 
> personally, though, I don't see the need to spam this thread w/ lack of or slow update info though.
> I am used to the old "every time you ask, it gets N day delay from elmor", so I am just patient enough and wait.
> I have no issue w/ slow update but it does suck w/ no info, especially gets much worst after elmor left. Elmor will at least give us some info.
> 
> my suggestion is to keep this thread more technically related and create a different thread to complain about the lack of support.
> After all, this is a user shared forum. I come to this thread to check for overclocking/technically related info, not how you not getting the update as I am


You remember that post from @elmor Hope Hes own company is going fantastic. TBH If 1.0.0.4b is not out in next 3 weeks we can basically call it quits.


----------



## TOMRUS

1.0.0.4B is coming soon, ASUS already posted test versions for some 3xx and 4xx series boards (Prime X370-Pro, ROG Strix B450-F Gaming, Prime X470-Pro).


----------



## xeizo

Yes, just installed it(5406) on my Prime Pro/3700X, slight regression in the Cinebenches vs ABBA but nothing big. Everything works and seems stable. No boost over 4.4GHz anymore, ABBA boosted to 4442MHz on 5 cores regularly. The 3700X is now a 3700X and not a halfway to a 3800X, as it was with ABBA. A more precise product placement from AMD I suppose. So, nothing to yearn for performance wise, but possibly less bugs etc.

The 2700X on my Aorus M had no regression at all going from ABBA to 1004B.


----------



## speedgoat

TOMRUS said:


> 1.0.0.4B is coming soon, ASUS already posted test versions for some 3xx and 4xx series boards (Prime X370-Pro, ROG Strix B450-F Gaming, Prime X470-Pro).


apparently an asus employee published some here 

https://www.hardwareluxx.de/communi...-bios-agesa-ubersicht-22-11-19-a-1228903.html


----------



## Synoxia

xeizo said:


> Yes, just installed it(5406) on my Prime Pro/3700X, slight regression in the Cinebenches vs ABBA but nothing big. Everything works and seems stable. No boost over 4.4GHz anymore, ABBA boosted to 4442MHz on 5 cores regularly. The 3700X is now a 3700X and not a halfway to a 3800X, as it was with ABBA. A more precise product placement from AMD I suppose. So, nothing to yearn for performance wise, but possibly less bugs etc.
> 
> The 2700X on my Aorus M had no regression at all going from ABBA to 1004B.


Basically i am the only one with a trash 3700x that boosts 4.425 on one core, 4.450 on the other then only one at 4.400 LOL

EDIT: btw, at this point let's wait for agesa 1.0.0.5 xDD


----------



## nick name

Synoxia said:


> Basically i am the only one with a trash 3700x that boosts 4.425 on one core, 4.450 on the other then only one at 4.400 LOL
> 
> EDIT: btw, at this point let's wait for agesa 1.0.0.5 xDD


Wait . . . isn't a 3700X only supposed to boost to 4.4GHz? I guess there is that extra bit (the +200) but I thought that didn't actually work for most folks.


----------



## Synoxia

nick name said:


> Wait . . . isn't a 3700X only supposed to boost to 4.4GHz? I guess there is that extra bit (the +200) but I thought that didn't actually work for most folks.


Yeah the problem is that only 2 cores of the cpu *consistently* boost to 4.4, where 2700x consistently boosted to 4.350 on all cores (Not simultaneously ofc)
Overall, my experience from 2700x to 3700x felt yes, a performance bump (but small) but overall 2700x at the time had a better "premium feel" experience in my opinion


----------



## neikosr0x

Synoxia said:


> Basically i am the only one with a trash 3700x that boosts 4.425 on one core, 4.450 on the other then only one at 4.400 LOL
> 
> EDIT: btw, at this point let's wait for agesa 1.0.0.5 xDD


Bro, try playing with SOC voltages + / -, VDDP and VDDG + / -. Close everything running in the background and make sure on 1 monitoring tool is running when performing the test. In my case lowering or increasing the SOC volt, VDDP and VDDG too much would cause the CPU not to Boost to 4.625. This happening with RAM speeds higher that 3466 in my case. So running my RAM at 3800 requires me to play with it.


----------



## Paddydapro

crakej said:


> Which slot is your NVME drive in? Top or bottom? Use bottom slot or it will steal 8 lanes from the GPU.


This is the solution. I had a sata m.2 ssd in the top slot thinking it would be the preferred one but yeah I changed it and gpu is now at 16 lanes, so thank you very much for suggesting this you really helped me 

On the second note I need your guys help yet again.. I have 4 insane b-die sticks. The kits were 3600c15 but they have way more potential. I somehow I can't seem to get over 2800mhz, docp doesn't work either.. I tried inputting even slow setting from the ryzen ram calculator but not even those are booting.. retry button doesnt help either. I was on the x99 platform before and the sticks did 3333mhz cl14 on there so this should be an easy task for the crosshair with the 3900x. While booting/training i get Q-codes 05 sometimes, 07 very often also a lot of F9's and sometimes 22. Am I missing anything here? obviously set the fclk to half mem speed and uclk on auto.
I'm on 1.4V ram boot voltage and 1.4V normal ram voltage also set the vrm to 500khz and so on. soc at 1.1V


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> ASUS WILL NEVER UNHIDE THE FULL FAN CONTROL!!!! This applies to not only AMD but also INTEL boards. Only my modded bios does that. Been that way for almost a decade, sorry to tell you. ASROCK does not hide a number of options that ASUS does but that is a different matter as their bios structure is a MESS and hard to work with.
> 
> My personal suggestion and I hate to say it is to use a seperatly powered fan controller with the ASUS boards. I know we should not have to but that is best solution other then using my modded bios. Yes it fixes all the fan issues as far as I know but my fans are controlled via the externally powered fan controller or power cables both sata and other type, but I have never tested the fans being connected to the actual motherboard.


Yup, I second this.

I finally broke down and Bought another Aquaero 6 XT For my Ryzen Build. It works beautifully too. Should of done it years ago to be honest...


----------



## lordzed83

Synoxia said:


> Yeah the problem is that only 2 cores of the cpu *consistently* boost to 4.4, where 2700x consistently boosted to 4.350 on all cores (Not simultaneously ofc)
> Overall, my experience from 2700x to 3700x felt yes, a performance bump (but small) but overall 2700x at the time had a better "premium feel" experience in my opinion


And that's the difference. 3700x is the bottom of the barel 8 core chip. Nothing to fix.... You got 2 good cores and 6 ****ty ones. My 3900x got 3 ****ty cores...


----------



## oreonutz

lordzed83 said:


> And that's the difference. 3700x is the bottom of the barel 8 core chip. Nothing to fix.... You got 2 good cores and 6 ****ty ones. My 3900x got 3 ****ty cores...


Yup, this is the truth.

Anyone else thinking about jumping on the 3950x the second its released?


----------



## lordzed83

oreonutz said:


> Yup, this is the truth.
> 
> Anyone else thinking about jumping on the 3950x the second its released?


Remember I#w spend 2 days testing every sing core in my 3900x and them 3 are liteary 50-75mhz lower potential than the rest. And does not matter if i pump extra 50mv they are just not having it....


----------



## lordzed83

Paddydapro said:


> This is the solution. I had a sata m.2 ssd in the top slot thinking it would be the preferred one but yeah I changed it and gpu is now at 16 lanes, so thank you very much for suggesting this you really helped me
> 
> On the second note I need your guys help yet again.. I have 4 insane b-die sticks. The kits were 3600c15 but they have way more potential. I somehow I can't seem to get over 2800mhz, docp doesn't work either.. I tried inputting even slow setting from the ryzen ram calculator but not even those are booting.. retry button doesnt help either. I was on the x99 platform before and the sticks did 3333mhz cl14 on there so this should be an easy task for the crosshair with the 3900x. While booting/training i get Q-codes 05 sometimes, 07 very often also a lot of F9's and sometimes 22. Am I missing anything here? obviously set the fclk to half mem speed and uclk on auto.
> I'm on 1.4V ram boot voltage and 1.4V normal ram voltage also set the vrm to 500khz and so on. soc at 1.1V


Try those at 1.4 3800/1900 They worked for everyone I'w sent them settings to. That's the settings Zen2 3rd version of calculator was fixed up with.









With that kit You could MAybe get away with 3800cl14 at 1.45 volts my kit is binned for speed not latency.


----------



## Paddydapro

lordzed83 said:


> Try those at 1.4 3800/1900 They worked for everyone I'w sent them settings to. That's the settings Zen2 3rd version of calculator was fixed up with.
> 
> With that kit You could maybe get away with 3800cl14 at 1.45 volts my kit is binned for speed not latency.


I will try what you sent me but just so you know I want to run 4 sticks.. I am running one stick right now tho because if I clear cmos on 2901 bios and set everything to default, timings everything at auto and only adjust the ram frequency to 2733 with if and uclk at 1367 it boots to 2800 somehow i tried all sticks on all different ram slots, tried one, two and four sticks in the board but I can't get 3600 on any combination :/ I am so close to sending the board back it's just a few months old and I just got the 3900x a few weeks ago..

Anyways is it possible to adjust timings etc in the ryzen master software? didn't try that one yet I will google that right now but I really think my board is gone for good in the ram department because even on x99 i was able to run 3333 cl13 on air with 4 sticks. will get back to you when I tried your settings 

btw. is it possible I got a bad bios flash or something? is there a possibility to check or reflash? I flashed with flashback option because the bios was not ready for ryzen 3000.


----------



## Gregor-

smokin_mitch said:


> bios 2901 seems bugged for me, when waking from sleep it changes fclk from 1900 to 1800 and halves my mem clock from 1900 to 950, I went back to bios 2801



This is my issue with 2901. Great except for the sleep bug. 

Is 2901 breaking clock coupling and memory overclock after a resume from sleep for anyone else? Before sleep the clocks are 1900/1900, aida64 read is 56xxx-57xxx MB/s with latency at 64-65ns. On resume after sleep clocks are 1800/950, aida64 read barely hits 51xxx MB/s and latency is 75ns+.


I reinstalled the newest am4 x470 chipset drivers from amd. Rebooted, slept/resumed. Still no joy.


I reflashed 2901 to rule out bios corruption, manually redid all the bios settings, reinstalled 109.27.1033. Same issue.


Tried various other things to no avail.


Reflashed 2801, redid everything else. Now sleep/resume is working normally and restoring coupled settings. 


C7h
3700x
2x F4-3600C15-8GTZ


Edit: Just found my earlier post. It wasn't showing up for me so I tried it again. Sorry about the double post.


----------



## oreonutz

Paddydapro said:


> I will try what you sent me but just so you know I want to run 4 sticks.. I am running one stick right now tho because if I clear cmos on 2901 bios and set everything to default, timings everything at auto and only adjust the ram frequency to 2733 with if and uclk at 1367 it boots to 2800 somehow i tried all sticks on all different ram slots, tried one, two and four sticks in the board but I can't get 3600 on any combination :/ I am so close to sending the board back it's just a few months old and I just got the 3900x a few weeks ago..
> 
> Anyways is it possible to adjust timings etc in the ryzen master software? didn't try that one yet I will google that right now but I really think my board is gone for good in the ram department because even on x99 i was able to run 3333 cl13 on air with 4 sticks. will get back to you when I tried your settings
> 
> btw. is it possible I got a bad bios flash or something? is there a possibility to check or reflash? I flashed with flashback option because the bios was not ready for ryzen 3000.


Its definitely possible to run all 4 Sticks at 3800Mhz CL16 and lower, 1900IF. More than a few of us on here run that exact config. I run 4x8GB Sticks of 3200Mhz CL14 Gskill Flare X at 3800Mhz CL16, using 1.45v DIMMv and 1.12v SOCv. The Trick is dialing in the timings manually, timing by timing. Took me literally weeks to get just right. And I am sure, based on some of our fellow Forum Members, I could get my timings even tighter, but it was a pain in my ass just getting here, and I am happy with here, so I stopped. But its definitely possible man, just literally set a Voltage, and Timing at a time, go slow. You will get there. I am running 2801 UEFI. Also don't bother with DOCP, or Auto Timings, dial in each yourself, trust me on this.


----------



## lordzed83

Paddydapro said:


> I will try what you sent me but just so you know I want to run 4 sticks.. I am running one stick right now tho because if I clear cmos on 2901 bios and set everything to default, timings everything at auto and only adjust the ram frequency to 2733 with if and uclk at 1367 it boots to 2800 somehow i tried all sticks on all different ram slots, tried one, two and four sticks in the board but I can't get 3600 on any combination :/ I am so close to sending the board back it's just a few months old and I just got the 3900x a few weeks ago..
> 
> Anyways is it possible to adjust timings etc in the ryzen master software? didn't try that one yet I will google that right now but I really think my board is gone for good in the ram department because even on x99 i was able to run 3333 cl13 on air with 4 sticks. will get back to you when I tried your settings
> 
> btw. is it possible I got a bad bios flash or something? is there a possibility to check or reflash? I flashed with flashback option because the bios was not ready for ryzen 3000.


Not a clue about sleep my pc is or in Rendering more or in gaming more or in mining mode. Its on 100% load 24/7. If im going over forums its mining in background. Gotta work for itself.


----------



## xeizo

Well, back to the 1004B-bios for Prime Pro, as some things is to expect for C7H. 

In general, multi performance is 0.5% lower, while single thread seems slightly better. 

Latency is 3-4ns better than ABBA with the same settings. That is great, as low latency matters particularly in gaming. 

VDDG is now split in four different places to set, and it matters, because it's only when I use a VDDG of 950mV I can get the 4442MHz boost which is now back even with 1004B. Default is 1.1V which is too high imho. Even if only one of the four settings is on Auto, it will default to 1.1V so one needs to change all four. Two under Asus menu, and two under AMD CBS.

The CPU runs cool, I couldn't get Tdie over 72C even with torture. And package power goes up to 120W with the 3700X, which means it is not too power limited which is one of the worst things with the current C7H bios which locks power down to 145W max for the 3900X regardless of settings.


----------



## crakej

I've got 1 'good' CCD and one c**p one, which maxes out at bout 4.45GHz av on all6 threads.

The 'best' CCD, 1 core goes to 4.63, one to 4.6 (less often) and the slowest about 4.5 - if I'm lucky.

Any other 3900x owners feeling just a tiny bit cheated by AMD making the 3950 that much better tuned? 16 cores peforming with less power than my 12 cores, of the same design? Coming from the 1700x, having read everything about the 2700x and how it could boiost many cores UNDER LOAD pretty capably. Currently NONE of my cores boost to anywhere near 4.6GHz UNDER LOAD. Zero.

My ACB get about 4.2GHz accross ALL cores - BOTH CCDs. AMD have slightly misled people - where they really don't need to. You wouild think these big companies would know by now - Under Proimise - Over Deliver.
@xeizo - thanks for posting that informattion. Have they granted Prime Pro users full OC control from the BIOS, including being able to clock each core independantly? I'm hoping CH7 will get that functionality as I don't want to OC with R Master.


----------



## Paddydapro

oreonutz said:


> Its definitely possible to run all 4 Sticks at 3800Mhz CL16 and lower, 1900IF. More than a few of us on here run that exact config. I run 4x8GB Sticks of 3200Mhz CL14 Gskill Flare X at 3800Mhz CL16, using 1.45v DIMMv and 1.12v SOCv. The Trick is dialing in the timings manually, timing by timing. Took me literally weeks to get just right. And I am sure, based on some of our fellow Forum Members, I could get my timings even tighter, but it was a pain in my ass just getting here, and I am happy with here, so I stopped. But its definitely possible man, just literally set a Voltage, and Timing at a time, go slow. You will get there. I am running 2801 UEFI. Also don't bother with DOCP, or Auto Timings, dial in each yourself, trust me on this.


So I don't actually know what's going on but I tried two sticks in the recommended A2+B2 channel and got 2400mhz to boot after that I opened ryzen master and typed in some timings for 3200mhz and it somehow booted first try first training procedure.. I smelled blood and tried 3400, 3600, 3800.. but sadly couldn't do fclk 1900 maybe you have some tips what voltages t adjust or what to do to get it running.. well I am now at 3733 cl14 62ns delay on aida around 60000mb/s on all 3 and it's running ultra stable, tried witcher and other games, benchmarks of all kinds. 

Well that's really great and all but only 2 sticks.. so i thought okay lets try the other memorykit on the same channels.. boom okay instaboot with same 3733cl14.. again after tests rock solid stable.

Next I tried both pair of sticks on the A1 and B1 channel only but maximum I got to boot with cl20 or something was 3200.. I really don't know what's going on with those two slots but one of em is definitely defect or something.. When I put in all 4 sticks again.. It wont boot at all or boot at 1866 or so which is under fkn jdec lol.. well **** I just wanted to build a new pc and now I have pc problems for a week straight.. first windows install corrupted and wouldn't work at all on 850 evo so i got a vertex3 installed it and cloned it to my new m.2 drive but I still wasted 4 days for that.. Now I am at 3 days of fiddling with the ram, I am so exhausted right now I just want it to work normally.. If this goes on I won't have a lot of free return days left on my parts if something isn't good..

Is there any way of getting this thing stable or should I just rma it? Don't even know if they will do something about it and my other pc actually died 5 days ago while installing windows on the other one.. my luck has left me it seems.

sorry for the ramble but I am so done right now..


----------



## Synoxia

lordzed83 said:


> Try those at 1.4 3800/1900 They worked for everyone I'w sent them settings to. That's the settings Zen2 3rd version of calculator was fixed up with.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With that kit You could MAybe get away with 3800cl14 at 1.45 volts my kit is binned for speed not latency.



On 4 dimms what would you tune back? I don't expect these to be stable on 4 dimms, calculator gets twrrd from 1 to 4 when using 4 dimms for example

EDIT: tm5 immediately throws up errors even with twrrd 4 D:


----------



## speedgoat

Gregor- said:


> This is my issue with 2901. Great except for the sleep bug.
> 
> Is 2901 breaking clock coupling and memory overclock after a resume from sleep for anyone else? Before sleep the clocks are 1900/1900, aida64 read is 56xxx-57xxx MB/s with latency at 64-65ns. On resume after sleep clocks are 1800/950, aida64 read barely hits 51xxx MB/s and latency is 75ns+.


yeah i ve seen this happen a couple of times too


----------



## andyliu

Paddydapro said:


> So I don't actually know what's going on but I tried two sticks in the recommended A2+B2 channel and got 2400mhz to boot after that I opened ryzen master and typed in some timings for 3200mhz and it somehow booted first try first training procedure.. I smelled blood and tried 3400, 3600, 3800.. but sadly couldn't do fclk 1900 maybe you have some tips what voltages t adjust or what to do to get it running.. well I am now at 3733 cl14 62ns delay on aida around 60000mb/s on all 3 and it's running ultra stable, tried witcher and other games, benchmarks of all kinds.
> 
> Well that's really great and all but only 2 sticks.. so i thought okay lets try the other memorykit on the same channels.. boom okay instaboot with same 3733cl14.. again after tests rock solid stable.
> 
> Next I tried both pair of sticks on the A1 and B1 channel only but maximum I got to boot with cl20 or something was 3200.. I really don't know what's going on with those two slots but one of em is definitely defect or something.. When I put in all 4 sticks again.. It wont boot at all or boot at 1866 or so which is under fkn jdec lol.. well **** I just wanted to build a new pc and now I have pc problems for a week straight.. first windows install corrupted and wouldn't work at all on 850 evo so i got a vertex3 installed it and cloned it to my new m.2 drive but I still wasted 4 days for that.. Now I am at 3 days of fiddling with the ram, I am so exhausted right now I just want it to work normally.. If this goes on I won't have a lot of free return days left on my parts if something isn't good..
> 
> Is there any way of getting this thing stable or should I just rma it? Don't even know if they will do something about it and my other pc actually died 5 days ago while installing windows on the other one.. my luck has left me it seems.
> 
> sorry for the ramble but I am so done right now..


for memory OC, the highest overclock that you can achieve will be A2+B2 > 4 sticks > A1+B1 (the reason that user manual tells you to use A2,B2 if you only plan to use 2 sticks)
it's the how memory trace being laid out (daisy chain) and how you install the ram will affect the signal integrity and affect memory OC
it is possible that you might get better OC result w/ different board, but you will experience similar degradation based on how you install the ram


----------



## Paddydapro

andyliu said:


> for memory OC, the highest overclock that you can achieve will be A2+B2 > 4 sticks > A1+B1 (the reason that user manual tells you to use A2,B2 if you only plan to use 2 sticks)
> it's the how memory trace being laid out (daisy chain) and how you install the ram will affect the signal integrity and affect memory OC
> it is possible that you might get better OC result w/ different board, but you will experience similar degradation based on how you install the ram


Yes you are totally right it should be worse on daisy chain than on T-topology but buildzoid still easily managed 3800+ with daisychain on 4 dimms with great timings while T topology could maybe do 4k

But the sad thing is even on only 2 dimms with very loose timings those two slots aren't that great.

Can someone with 4 dimms maybe get me some of their timings and settings from ryzen master so I have all on one page? would be nice to try those when lordzed said the calc doesn't spit out good timings for 4 dimms..


----------



## lordzed83

Synoxia said:


> On 4 dimms what would you tune back? I don't expect these to be stable on 4 dimms, calculator gets twrrd from 1 to 4 when using 4 dimms for example
> 
> EDIT: tm5 immediately throws up errors even with twrrd 4 D:


Hmm Try geardown mode enabled. Dont have XP with 4 sticks. If id go for more memory i would have went 2x16 dual rank, on x470/x570 due to circut design more twoards 2 sticks where x370 was 4 sticks design. 

Maybe try something like 1800/3600cl14
@gupsterg should have some settings to try for 4 sticks.


----------



## oreonutz

Paddydapro said:


> So I don't actually know what's going on but I tried two sticks in the recommended A2+B2 channel and got 2400mhz to boot after that I opened ryzen master and typed in some timings for 3200mhz and it somehow booted first try first training procedure.. I smelled blood and tried 3400, 3600, 3800.. but sadly couldn't do fclk 1900 maybe you have some tips what voltages t adjust or what to do to get it running.. well I am now at 3733 cl14 62ns delay on aida around 60000mb/s on all 3 and it's running ultra stable, tried witcher and other games, benchmarks of all kinds.
> 
> Well that's really great and all but only 2 sticks.. so i thought okay lets try the other memorykit on the same channels.. boom okay instaboot with same 3733cl14.. again after tests rock solid stable.
> 
> Next I tried both pair of sticks on the A1 and B1 channel only but maximum I got to boot with cl20 or something was 3200.. I really don't know what's going on with those two slots but one of em is definitely defect or something.. When I put in all 4 sticks again.. It wont boot at all or boot at 1866 or so which is under fkn jdec lol.. well **** I just wanted to build a new pc and now I have pc problems for a week straight.. first windows install corrupted and wouldn't work at all on 850 evo so i got a vertex3 installed it and cloned it to my new m.2 drive but I still wasted 4 days for that.. Now I am at 3 days of fiddling with the ram, I am so exhausted right now I just want it to work normally.. If this goes on I won't have a lot of free return days left on my parts if something isn't good..
> 
> Is there any way of getting this thing stable or should I just rma it? Don't even know if they will do something about it and my other pc actually died 5 days ago while installing windows on the other one.. my luck has left me it seems.
> 
> sorry for the ramble but I am so done right now..


No man, the ramble is completely fine. I understand, I have a habit of not being able to shutup myself. So that OC You got on your 2 Sticks is BAD ASS! Much better then my 4 at 3800 CL16. I would definitely Run 3733Mhz CL14 if I could over 3800Mhz CL16. Its just such a pain in the ass to dial in. 

So for me, with 4 sticks some of the most important Voltages and Timings were:

CPU ODT: Raise this to stabalize your OC. The sweet spot for me is 53.3 Ohms.

Unfortunately, I know its possible to do this without, because some on here have done, but I finally stopped trying and settled on what I landed on, and unfortunately that means leaving Gear Down Mode Enabled, make sure to set this manually. At very least set it to Enable to get it to boot, and then play with your settings to get it to boot with it disabled later.

For me setting CadBusDriveStrength to the following worked the best for 4 Sticks:
ClkDrvStren: 24
AddrcmdDrvStren: 20
CsODTCmdDrvStren: 24
CkeDrvStren: 20

For me Setting the Following for Data Bus Config User Control's Worked Best:
RttNom: RZQ/7
RttWr: RZQ/3
RttPark: RZQ/1

Some More Important Voltages would that worked for me:
CLDO VDDG: 0.9474
CLDO VDDP: 0.8589

Then I also remember one timing in particular that tripped me up, I ended up not being able to post at all with it below 8 when trying to post with 3800Mhz, and that was:
TrdWr: 8

I can email you over my exact settings if you like, but remember, for the most part, dial in all the timing and voltages in manually, do not leave them on auto. There are a few that I found I could leave on auto, but not many. Mine worked for me to boot, and then I am confident that if you wanted to dial them in to be even tighter you definitely could.

Another important setting to set in the Bios is your VDimmBoot Voltage, make sure to put that a bit higher then your actually VDimm Voltage. For me I run my VDimm at 1.45v, so I set my VDimmBoot (or whatever that settings is called) to 1.47v. Setting that any lower would cause my PC to seemingly randomly not post when Cold Booting.

Hopefully that helps. You can email me if you like, I don't check Overclock.net as much as I used to, been incredibly busy with work lately, so you can email me at [email protected] and I will shoot you over my Bios Settings TXT File so you can see if that will help you boot, then dial it in from there. Good Luck!


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> I've got 1 'good' CCD and one c**p one, which maxes out at bout 4.45GHz av on all6 threads.
> 
> The 'best' CCD, 1 core goes to 4.63, one to 4.6 (less often) and the slowest about 4.5 - if I'm lucky.
> 
> Any other 3900x owners feeling just a tiny bit cheated by AMD making the 3950 that much better tuned? 16 cores peforming with less power than my 12 cores, of the same design? Coming from the 1700x, having read everything about the 2700x and how it could boiost many cores UNDER LOAD pretty capably. Currently NONE of my cores boost to anywhere near 4.6GHz UNDER LOAD. Zero.
> 
> My ACB get about 4.2GHz accross ALL cores - BOTH CCDs. AMD have slightly misled people - where they really don't need to. You wouild think these big companies would know by now - Under Proimise - Over Deliver.


Yeah, I feel, just a little bit, I don't know if Cheated is the word I want to convey, that may be a little strong for how I personally feel, but definitely a bit disappointed. I would have bought the chip anyway, because I needed the cores, and in that aspect I am still happy with my purchase, but yeah I definitely wished it was better silicon. That said, I plan on jumping on the 3950x the second it goes on Sale, and then Sell my 3900x. Then I won't feel so... Disappointed.


----------



## nick name

If it helps anyone -- here the US Best Buy has been selling the 3900X at its MSRP without the mark-up that other sellers are applying. Seems to have been so for the past several days so I don't know what their stock looks like.


----------



## Synoxia

lordzed83 said:


> Hmm Try geardown mode enabled. Dont have XP with 4 sticks. If id go for more memory i would have went 2x16 dual rank, on x470/x570 due to circut design more twoards 2 sticks where x370 was 4 sticks design.
> 
> Maybe try something like 1800/3600cl14
> 
> @gupsterg should have some settings to try for 4 sticks.


I already got them at 3800 c16 1000 hci, found out that tuning SCL to 2 istantly gives errors in tm5, i will try other timings


----------



## lordzed83

oreonutz said:


> Yeah, I feel, just a little bit, I don't know if Cheated is the word I want to convey, that may be a little strong for how I personally feel, but definitely a bit disappointed. I would have bought the chip anyway, because I needed the cores, and in that aspect I am still happy with my purchase, but yeah I definitely wished it was better silicon. That said, I plan on jumping on the 3950x the second it goes on Sale, and then Sell my 3900x. Then I won't feel so... Disappointed.


I expected 3900x be using top binned 6core ccx's like wayy better than 3600x...


----------



## Paddydapro

Guys.. it's done.. It was fkn ryzen master that caused issues with my overclocking.. i really don't know how it did it but i was curios when i just startet on the new pc and put in some timings in the master software and it was able to try and boot it, it failed but it tried but this somehow overwrote all my bios oc settings everytime.. it tried really low tertieries or something with whatever frequency I tried and that's why my oc's failed.. after i found out i started at 3000mhz cl22 and worked my way up to 3733cl26 i know its trash lol but still once at 3733 i worked my way down the cl route and am now at cl13 guys it's insane.. I am so happy and at a loss of words that after nearly 5 days of trying i am finally ready to go.. also tried cl12 but it wouldnt boot even at 1,55volts.. lol will maybe when rig is under water try again at 1,7 or so we'll see.. i didn't tighten tertiarys yet so dont judge me on my latency etc. will post my aida and cpuz now for you to see.. will never open ryzen master again until i need ccx oc xD


----------



## nick name

Paddydapro said:


> Guys.. it's done.. It was fkn ryzen master that caused issues with my overclocking.. i really don't know how it did it but i was curios when i just startet on the new pc and put in some timings in the master software and it was able to try and boot it, it failed but it tried but this somehow overwrote all my bios oc settings everytime.. it tried really low tertieries or something with whatever frequency I tried and that's why my oc's failed.. after i found out i started at 3000mhz cl22 and worked my way up to 3733cl26 i know its trash lol but still once at 3733 i worked my way down the cl route and am now at cl13 guys it's insane.. I am so happy and at a loss of words that after nearly 5 days of trying i am finally ready to go.. also tried cl12 but it wouldnt boot even at 1,55volts.. lol will maybe when rig is under water try again at 1,7 or so we'll see.. i didn't tighten tertiarys yet so dont judge me on my latency etc. will post my aida and cpuz now for you to see.. will never open ryzen master again until i need ccx oc xD


Wait, so you were overclocking in Ryzen Master? Your CPU and RAM? You weren't using BIOS to set any of it?


----------



## Synoxia

https://www.amd.com/en/support/chipsets/amd-socket-am4/x570
https://www.asus.com/it/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WI-FI/HelpDesk_BIOS/
https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-3001.zip
https://www.hardwareluxx.de/communi...-bios-agesa-ubersicht-22-11-19-a-1228903.html
F5 & lurk time quicklinks D: i really hope they have it ready atleast now... it's 5:00 25/11 europe so my guess is atleast 8 hours to go

Btw cant believe x370-b450-x470 pro and strix boards have atleast a beta but enthusiast boards do not :/


----------



## sprousaTM

Hey guys,

been a quiet reader for some time now after I bought a crosshair VII for a good price. Running a 3800x with custom loop and 2x8 gb b-die RAM.

While I had this setup running for a bit, I just recently tried out some RAM OC using the dram calc settings.

For some reason that I do not understand, I am not able to set any value to clDO vddp voltage. Ryzen master is showing 1.1v for it when in Windows.

3800mhz, fclk1900 and cl16 works as far as karhu is concerned (10000%+).

Anything I have to set, to change values to clDO vddp?

Greetings from Germany,


----------



## darkage

almost here i think
https://www.hardwareluxx.de/communi...s-agesa-ubersicht-22-11-19-a-1228903.html#2.6

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?102858-Asus-Strix-X470-F-Gaming-owners-thread/page176


----------



## xeizo

sprousaTM said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> been a quiet reader for some time now after I bought a crosshair VII for a good price. Running a 3800x with custom loop and 2x8 gb b-die RAM.
> 
> While I had this setup running for a bit, I just recently tried out some RAM OC using the dram calc settings.
> 
> For some reason that I do not understand, I am not able to set any value to clDO vddp voltage. Ryzen master is showing 1.1v for it when in Windows.
> 
> 3800mhz, fclk1900 and cl16 works as far as karhu is concerned (10000%+).
> 
> Anything I have to set, to change values to clDO vddp?
> 
> Greetings from Germany,



You have VDDP a couple levels down under AMD CBS, I use 900mV VDDP and 950mV for VDDG both on C7H and Prime Pro. C7H memory running 3800MHz.


----------



## Synoxia

1st gen of asus only prime x370 pro has beta 1.0.0.4
2nd gen 4 b450 boards have official 1.0.0.4 release and 1 beta, no sign of c7h hero bios.... :/


----------



## sprousaTM

xeizo said:


> You have VDDP a couple levels down under AMD CBS, I use 900mV VDDP and 950mV for VDDG both on C7H and Prime Pro. C7H memory running 3800MHz.


So do I just override vddp, vddg voltage with the values I need plus the same value in clDO vddg voltage again that I previously set for vddg voltage?


----------



## lordzed83

Synoxia said:


> 1st gen of asus only prime x370 pro has beta 1.0.0.4
> 2nd gen 4 b450 boards have official 1.0.0.4 release and 1 beta, no sign of c7h hero bios.... :/


You know that after all thiw whining and waiting it will have bugs like every single bios on new agesa microcode. I bet boot up problems and hibernation bug and fan's sstill not working with everything.

OO I see people posted whats not working on stix 

"VDDG is too high by default in this bios, 1.1V, I had to lower it to 950mV to regain the same boost as ABBA. A tricky bit is VDDG is now in four places, two under Asus menu and two under AMD CBS. One has to set 950mV on all four. Anyway, my 3700X boosts to 4442MHz which is not bad.

Overall performance, mult thread seems a little bit lower than ABBA but single thread is better. Again, like latency, single thread is more important on the desktop."


Reminds me like one bios almost fried my 1700x when i booted to windows with 1.750v in to cpu haha.


BTW assus dropped x370 suport by looks of it. Name is gone from official forums hahaha 
So x470 will be gone after x670 boards come out


----------



## xeizo

sprousaTM said:


> So do I just override vddp, vddg voltage with the values I need plus the same value in clDO vddg voltage again that I previously set for vddg voltage?


Yes, check with Ryzen Master that the right voltages has become active.


----------



## neikosr0x

lordzed83 said:


> You know that after all thiw whining and waiting it will have bugs like every single bios on new agesa microcode. I bet boot up problems and hibernation bug and fan's sstill not working with everything.
> 
> OO I see people posted whats not working on stix
> 
> "VDDG is too high by default in this bios, 1.1V, I had to lower it to 950mV to regain the same boost as ABBA. A tricky bit is VDDG is now in four places, two under Asus menu and two under AMD CBS. One has to set 950mV on all four. Anyway, my 3700X boosts to 4442MHz which is not bad.
> 
> Overall performance, mult thread seems a little bit lower than ABBA but single thread is better. Again, like latency, single thread is more important on the desktop."
> 
> 
> Reminds me like one bios almost fried my 1700x when i booted to windows with 1.750v in to cpu haha.
> 
> 
> BTW assus dropped x370 suport by looks of it. Name is gone from official forums hahaha
> So x470 will be gone after x670 boards come out


6xxx boards will be zen3 based so a totally different socket it wouldn't surprise me.


----------



## nick name

Synoxia said:


> https://www.amd.com/en/support/chipsets/amd-socket-am4/x570
> https://www.asus.com/it/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WI-FI/HelpDesk_BIOS/
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-3001.zip
> https://www.hardwareluxx.de/communi...-bios-agesa-ubersicht-22-11-19-a-1228903.html
> F5 & lurk time quicklinks D: i really hope they have it ready atleast now... it's 5:00 25/11 europe so my guess is atleast 8 hours to go
> 
> Btw cant believe x370-b450-x470 pro and strix boards have atleast a beta but enthusiast boards do not :/


https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-3001.zip link is 404.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-3001.zip link is 404.


Yes, that's why he told you to hit F5 until something is there ... (can take hours ... or days)


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> Yes, that's why he told you to hit F5 until something is there ... (can take hours ... or days)


Lol I stopped reading once I saw that link. I'm an idiot. 

So it sounds like that link may never work if the BIOS is any iteration after 01.


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> Yes, that's why he told you to hit F5 until something is there ... (can take hours ... or days)


Lol I stopped reading once I saw that link. I'm an idiot. 

So it sounds like that link may never work if the BIOS is any iteration after 01.


----------



## Synoxia

nick name said:


> Lol I stopped reading once I saw that link. I'm an idiot.
> 
> So it sounds like that link may never work if the BIOS is any iteration after 01.


AHAHAHAHAHAH the greediness is real, you saw 3001 and just clicked it without even reading D: asus is making us crawl for this new bios!

It's very likely that's 3001 btw if you look at the name scheme of all 400 boards... ROG Strix B450-F Gaming	
*Test 3001* 2901 so im 99% sure 1.0.0.4b is going to be 3001.

p.s a bit of speculation involved, i think that we are always last because c7h is not mainstream... (ofcourse is not, 300 fuarking dollars and poor support)


----------



## hurricane28

Synoxia said:


> https://www.amd.com/en/support/chipsets/amd-socket-am4/x570
> https://www.asus.com/it/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WI-FI/HelpDesk_BIOS/
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-3001.zip
> https://www.hardwareluxx.de/communi...-bios-agesa-ubersicht-22-11-19-a-1228903.html
> F5 & lurk time quicklinks D: i really hope they have it ready atleast now... it's 5:00 25/11 europe so my guess is atleast 8 hours to go
> 
> Btw cant believe x370-b450-x470 pro and strix boards have atleast a beta but enthusiast boards do not :/


I am surprised that you are surprised though lol. 

I been with Assus for years and they still haven't changed with in this regard. Support and the lack of feed back in any kind of form is nonexistent which makes me reluctant to buy any Assus motherboards in the near future as this is simply unacceptable for a premium product. Even "cheap" Gigabyte boards have new BIOS with new AGESA and running without any problems and Assus ROG is still working on problems they should have fixed a long time ago.


----------



## lordzed83

hurricane28 said:


> I am surprised that you are surprised though lol.
> 
> I been with Assus for years and they still haven't changed with in this regard. Support and the lack of feed back in any kind of form is nonexistent which makes me reluctant to buy any Assus motherboards in the near future as this is simply unacceptable for a premium product. Even "cheap" Gigabyte boards have new BIOS with new AGESA and running without any problems and Assus ROG is still working on problems they should have fixed a long time ago.


At lest You made peace with situation not like @Synoxia I'm not buying asus motherboard. Next up for me is ASRock


----------



## Synoxia

lordzed83 said:


> At lest You made peace with situation not like @Synoxia I'm not buying asus motherboard. Next up for me is ASRock


Why make peace when i can trash the company that did not fullfill my expectations? If i can get less sales to them i am happy D:
@hurricane28 imagine someone that had preorded 3950x because they can and wanted to "be the first" on launch date... only to be left with a useless product because asus has yet to update the bios LOL


----------



## liakou

xeizo said:


> Yes, that's why he told you to hit F5 until something is there ... (can take hours ... or days)


----------



## Synoxia

https://www.amd.com/en/support/chipsets/amd-socket-am4/x470
New chipset driver.
I can't wait for someone that bought 3950x only to be left it in the box, asus forum will be a complain fest


----------



## xeizo

Synoxia said:


> https://www.amd.com/en/support/chipsets/amd-socket-am4/x470
> New chipset driver.
> I can't wait for someone that bought 3950x only to be left it in the box, asus forum will be a complain fest


Not yet, looks like extreme few people where able to get one so the fest will be kinda empty ...


----------



## lordzed83

Synoxia said:


> https://www.amd.com/en/support/chipsets/amd-socket-am4/x470
> New chipset driver.
> I can't wait for someone that bought 3950x only to be left it in the box, asus forum will be a complain fest


How did You come up with delusional conclusion like than when actual numbers are
Whole UK had 10 or 12 CPU's 6 at OCUK Scan had 4 those are best stock chaps.
Poland ZERO
Switzerland ZERO.


No one to complain cause u cant buy one and possibly wont in 2019... Most got ETA 2020


----------



## crakej

xeizo said:


> Not yet, looks like extreme few people where able to get one so the fest will be kinda empty ...


It's my understanding the CPU will work fine without 1004b, just not optimally, so even if someone does get one, it won't be sitting in the box.


----------



## neikosr0x

lordzed83 said:


> How did You come up with delusional conclusion like than when actual numbers are
> Whole UK had 10 or 12 CPU's 6 at OCUK Scan had 4 those are best stock chaps.
> Poland ZERO
> Switzerland ZERO.
> 
> 
> No one to complain cause u cant buy one and possibly wont in 2019... Most got ETA 2020


Got mine from Scans 2 days before the launch. muahahahahaha then they were all sold out by launch day with the 3900x


----------



## lordzed83

neikosr0x said:


> Got mine from Scans 2 days before the launch. muahahahahaha then they were all sold out by launch day with the 3900x


Saturday ?? Gibbo was hoping for few more units in OCUK on saturday monday nothign came in lol.....

This 3950 lunch is some sort of bull**** tbh its as paper as Nvidias gpu...... but they ware suppose to be out in September pushed to November and still stock is non existant


----------



## xeizo

lordzed83 said:


> Saturday ?? Gibbo was hoping for few more units in OCUK on saturday monday nothign came in lol.....
> 
> This 3950 lunch is some sort of bull**** tbh its as paper as Nvidias gpu...... but they ware suppose to be out in September pushed to November and still stock is non existant


As everyone expected, Rome is selling like hotcakes and there is much more revenue in selling Rome. And now Threadripper, with higher margins too, competes for the same chiplets. And TSMC is under assault from Apple, Qualcomm, Huawei and Nvidia who all wants the same wafers.

3600-3900X are defect chiplets that wouldn't work in Rome/Threadripper, that's why they are obtainable.


----------



## oreonutz

lordzed83 said:


> Saturday ?? Gibbo was hoping for few more units in OCUK on saturday monday nothign came in lol.....
> 
> This 3950 lunch is some sort of bull**** tbh its as paper as Nvidias gpu...... but they ware suppose to be out in September pushed to November and still stock is non existant


Yeah, I tried my damnedest to get the darn chip. I used every contact I have, something I have never done before, I thought for sure if I tried hard enough I could secure me a sample. On top of that I had my bot ready to buy one the second they went live on Amazon and Newegg. And Both of my Bots, and my contacts, came up Empty. Word is there wasn't even 100 Of these chips world wide. I don't know how accurate that is, I can't get an Official word on it, but its probably not far off. Disappointing... I have to go in and rewrite my bot now, looks like these retailers are catching on...


----------



## Synoxia

crakej said:


> It's my understanding the CPU will work fine without 1004b, just not optimally, so even if someone does get one, it won't be sitting in the box.


AMD said that 3950x will only be supported from 1.0.0.4

source https://www.tomshw.it/hardware/ryzen-9-3950x-25-novembre/


----------



## gupsterg

lordzed83 said:


> @gupsterg should have some settings to try for 4 sticks.


Still on this.



Synoxia said:


> I already got them at 3800 c16 1000 hci, found out that tuning SCL to 2 istantly gives errors in tm5, i will try other timings


Doubt you'll be able to use SCL [email protected], I think I may have seen 1 share so far run on my web travels, could be wrong, will recheck.


----------



## arvinz

Howdy, long time lurker, first time poster. Been following since probably page 860. I suppose I'm one of the lucky ones that have a 3950X on order arriving tomorrow and trying to find info about if it will work with the CH7 with latest BIOS, which is the 2901 I believe. Should I hang tight before popping this chip in or wait till next AGESA update? Thoughts?


----------



## Synoxia

arvinz said:


> Howdy, long time lurker, first time poster. Been following since probably page 860. I suppose I'm one of the lucky ones that have a 3950X on order arriving tomorrow and trying to find info about if it will work with the CH7 with latest BIOS, which is the 2901 I believe. Should I hang tight before popping this chip in or wait till next AGESA update? Thoughts?


As i've previously said, probably it won't work because AMD decided that you need 1.0.0.4b for 3950x and because asus is trash, always late with updates.


----------



## arvinz

Synoxia said:


> As i've previously said, probably it won't work because AMD decided that you need 1.0.0.4b for 3950x and asus is trash and always late with updates.


That's what I figured. And no news from Asus on when that's dropping for our boards I take it?


----------



## oreonutz

arvinz said:


> Howdy, long time lurker, first time poster. Been following since probably page 860. I suppose I'm one of the lucky ones that have a 3950X on order arriving tomorrow and trying to find info about if it will work with the CH7 with latest BIOS, which is the 2901 I believe. Should I hang tight before popping this chip in or wait till next AGESA update? Thoughts?


There is no reason it shouldn't work. I've looked into this, its optimized for Agesa 1004, but its been in labs since Agesa 1002, you should be fine. Let us know, we are all curious! I am so jealous!


----------



## arvinz

oreonutz said:


> There is no reason it shouldn't work. I've looked into this, its optimized for Agesa 1004, but its been in labs since Agesa 1002, you should be fine. Let us know, we are all curious! I am so jealous!


Will let you know! I'm currently running a 2700X on BIOS 1201! It's been running solid and I didn't want to mess anything up by upgrading the BIOS until I got a new CPU. It should arrive tomorrow.


----------



## oreonutz

arvinz said:


> Will let you know! I'm currently running a 2700X on BIOS 1201! It's been running solid and I didn't want to mess anything up by upgrading the BIOS until I got a new CPU. It should arrive tomorrow.


Might as well upgrade to 2901 now. Synoxia's source is correct, but I know a total of ONE person with the chip right now, and he has it running on an Asrock B450 Board with agesa 1003ABBA which is exactly what 2901 is, so, in theory, you should be fine, it just won't be optimized, but really that doesn't matter all that much. In a year or so Asus should give us our 1004 Bios, once everyone else is on 1006. lol.

Really curious to know your experience!


----------



## arvinz

oreonutz said:


> Might as well upgrade to 2901 now. Synoxia's source is correct, but I know a total of ONE person with the chip right now, and he has it running on an Asrock B450 Board with agesa 1003ABBA which is exactly what 2901 is, so, in theory, you should be fine, it just won't be optimized, but really that doesn't matter all that much. In a year or so Asus should give us our 1004 Bios, once everyone else is on 1006. lol.
> 
> Really curious to know your experience!


Sounds good, will definitely be testing it out this weekend. I know there are several changes going from BIOS 1201 > 2901 but is there any specific options you guys recommend I change in BIOS? Based on the last few hundred pages here, I've read a ton about all the new features and all the BIOS modding that the community has had to do to unhide or enable things. I'll make sure to have latest chipset drivers (I believe new ones just got released today?) and be running on Ryzen balanced power plan.


----------



## oreonutz

arvinz said:


> Sounds good, will definitely be testing it out this weekend. I know there are several changes going from BIOS 1201 > 2901 but is there any specific options you guys recommend I change in BIOS? Based on the last few hundred pages here, I've read a ton about all the new features and all the BIOS modding that the community has had to do to unhide or enable things. I'll make sure to have latest chipset drivers (I believe new ones just got released today?) and be running on Ryzen balanced power plan.


You can just start on Optimized defaults and go from there. Really the only settings to worry about other then your preferences, are your Ram Overclocking. Some people have a hell of a time with DOCP and this board on the newer BIOS', so I would test to make sure you don't have any issues booting with your preferred memory speed on the 2700x after updating to the newest BIOS, and as long as you don't your preferred settings should be fine. One of the big ones that I had to set with prior BIOSes, that I don't know if it needs to be set on 2901, but I do it anyway, is the BootDimmVoltage (I always forget the exact name of the setting, but it has Boot and Dimm and V in it, lol) setting, to make sure that the Ram gets the Voltage it needs to post, so maybe just make sure you set that, if your normal Dimm Voltage is 1.35v, then I would set it to something like 1.37v just to make sure it gets enough. Other than that, I really can't think of anything special. Maybe someone else has some thoughts on that.


----------



## Hale59

chakku said:


> I can't comment on what the cause would be but I would have a hard time believing you could run into two faulty processors when they're borderline unheard of. The issue will almost always be with something else.





westk said:


> Its the mobo. try the 2901 BIOS with flashback option. This will erase everything in the ROM.





gupsterg said:


> 0d with Q-LED: DRAM (Yellow, below Q-Code display) means faulty DRAM.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 305646





crakej said:


> You *HAVE to use bios flashback* to install latest bios - if you don't, it will NOT properly update the bios.
> 
> So I would try reflashing 2901 using flashback before I do anything else.
> 
> With Ryzen 3000 the options are different in the bios. There are no ram presets for 3000 CPUs.





gupsterg said:


> Q-Code: 0d Q-LED: DRAM usually means fault with RAM. This could be an issue with the RAM slot on MOBO, could be the DIMMs, may also be the IMC (dunno), all I know is it occurs in relation to RAM.
> 
> I have read others shares that they inadvertently managed to bend a pin on CPU when installing and not noticed, perhaps that has happened, dunno to be honest.
> 
> If you checked all you can and don't have access to spare parts to systematically check what is the cause of issue, then I'm afraid via the web you may not solve this. I hope you resolve this without much headache  .


OK, got feedback from the Distributor - Faulty motherboard and it will be credited.
A short summary from them:

"Seriously suspect your motherboard is at fault. If multiple CPUs have displayed the same behaviour then it can't be the CPUs. You also mentioned that certain BIOSs that support 3000-series work to a small extent while others don't work at all. This is not how it should behave at all, which further points towards the motherboard. We had your Ryzen 3600 running on multiple motherboards. Not only did it POST, but we ran stress tests on it as well without an issue. Scoring was also well within margin of error - faulty CPUs will normally either fail the tests, or the score will be below what is expected.

With our test Ryzen 2600 I cannot find fault with your board, but I cannot get it working with your Ryzen 3600. That said, your Ryzen 3600 works perfectly on both a Gigabyte GA-A320M-S2H and MSI B450 Gaming Pro Carbon AC (some of the boards available for testing). It boots to Windows, passes OCCT stress tests, and benchmarks perfectly in Cinebench (scoring to within 2% of what is expected of the chip).

Your components were tested individually with the hardware we have here, eg your CPU was tested with our motherboard/PSU/RAM, your motherboard was tested with our CPU/PSU/RAM, your RAM was tested with our CPU/motherboard/PSU, etc. It is very difficult to properly diagnose hardware if multiple potentially faulty components are used, so parts are isolated for testing. The BIOS 2304 used on your motherboard as well as the latest version from Asus' website were used. It is indeed a strange issue and not one we've come across before, but it is likely to the difference in power delivery between 2000-series and 3000-series CPUs."

I'm screwed. Retailer going to credit me, BUT they no longer have CH7's for sale.


----------



## Axaion

no c7h for sale?, id say you lucked out.
Get something good instead lol


----------



## Hale59

Axaion said:


> no c7h for sale?, id say you lucked out.
> Get something good instead lol


Have been had bad luck with ASUS mobos.
Those are ASUS motherboards which I RMAed within their respective 3 year warranty:
ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI)


MAXIMUS VII FORMULA/WATCH DOGS


CROSSHAIR V FORMULA-Z


CROSSHAIR V FORMULA-Z


CROSSHAIR V FORMULA


OFFTOPIC:

I think this time going to try something else. Probably a MSI.

Here is what I like in a mobo:
- A nice an easy to navigate UEFI
- Bios Flash
- Start Button
- Reset Button
- Onboard Leds 
- Q-Leds

Here is a list of what is available at the Retailer. NOTE: Note taking X570. a X470 suffices.
If you are inclined to chip in with a suggestion, shout:
https://www.evetech.co.za/PC-Components/amd-motherboards-29.aspx


----------



## Synoxia

Hale59 said:


> Have been had bad luck with ASUS mobos.
> Those are ASUS motherboards which I RMAed within their respective 3 year warranty:
> ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI)
> 
> 
> MAXIMUS VII FORMULA/WATCH DOGS
> 
> 
> CROSSHAIR V FORMULA-Z
> 
> 
> CROSSHAIR V FORMULA-Z
> 
> 
> CROSSHAIR V FORMULA
> 
> 
> OFFTOPIC:
> 
> I think this time going to try something else. Probably a MSI.
> 
> Here is what I like in a mobo:
> - A nice an easy to navigate UEFI
> - Bios Flash
> - Start Button
> - Reset Button
> - Onboard Leds
> - Q-Leds
> 
> Here is a list of what is available at the Retailer. NOTE: Note taking X570. a X470 suffices.
> If you are inclined to chip in with a suggestion, shout:
> https://www.evetech.co.za/PC-Components/amd-motherboards-29.aspx


Hardware-wise c7h should be the best but given the actual software support... I suggest either Asrock Taichi (so you get good asus hardware but with proper support) or Gigabyte Aorus K7.
I've heard bullzoid saying x570 aorus master is the best all around premium motherboard (pricechecked, otherwhise X570 aqua and the other one from gigabyte with fanless chipset lol)




arvinz said:


> Sounds good, will definitely be testing it out this weekend. I know there are several changes going from BIOS 1201 > 2901 but is there any specific options you guys recommend I change in BIOS? Based on the last few hundred pages here, I've read a ton about all the new features and all the BIOS modding that the community has had to do to unhide or enable things. I'll make sure to have latest chipset drivers (I believe new ones just got released today?) and be running on Ryzen balanced power plan.


Load optimized default
Tool -> disable asus grid install
Boot -> remove anything isn't Windows manager
Press F6, let motherboard auto-set the fans (you need this to set a lower curve for high rpm fans)

Extreme tweaker
Straight up put vddg 0.950 and vddsoc 1.08 (probably your 3950x will run 3800 at 1.0 but whatever, do some testmem5 & HCI to settle a lower voltage) FCLK 1900, memory 3800 with timing preset from DRAM Calculator or... 
do us a favor and try 1.1 VDDG, 1.15 SOC and test if you can boot 1933 fclk ,3866 mem or even 2000fclk 4000mhz mem LOL

Advanced
Onboard devices -> Toggle off anything you don't need, manually set GPU to gen 3

IMPORTANT! press f9 and type CPPC, enable both options then again search states and enable both DF and C-states.

Now you have optimized your processor


----------



## Hale59

Synoxia said:


> Hardware-wise c7h should be the best but given the actual software support... I suggest either Asrock Taichi (so you get good asus hardware but with proper support) or Gigabyte Aorus K7.
> I've heard bullzoid saying x570 aorus master is the best all around premium motherboard (pricechecked, otherwhise X570 aqua and the other one from gigabyte with fanless chipset lol)


Why are you recommending X570?


----------



## Synoxia

Hale59 said:


> Why are you recommending X570?


I did not recommend x570, i just said what i think is good. 



 Use this

Anyway if you could grab x570 cheap then go for it. Just make sure it has everything you need and has good VRM, haven't you been reading past posts? 
Buying premium isn't worth anymore because mobo makers drop support. C7h example if i could go back now i'd have bought a good b450... i remember there were some good MSI and asrock models... then sell and buy b550.
C6hero owners for example just lost their 300USD because they have no support anymore.


----------



## Hale59

Synoxia said:


> I did not recommend x570, i just said what i think is good. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ti38JS8RuPU&t=288s Use this
> 
> Anyway if you could grab x570 cheap then go for it. Just make sure it has everything you need and has good VRM, haven't you been reading past posts?
> Buying premium isn't worth anymore because mobo makers drop support. C7h example if i could go back now i'd have bought a good b450... i remember there were some good MSI and asrock models... then sell and buy b550.
> C6hero owners for example just lost their 300USD because they have no support anymore.


Bruh, did you read my initial post, or are you just posting to increase you post counting?
I gave you a link were I have to buy the AMD boards, because my credits are there. And I gave a list of things on a mobo.
Cheap X570? Like the ASUS TUF Gaming X570-Plus (Wi-Fi)? NOOOO!! I said only X470. If you cared to read my initial post...


----------



## Synoxia

Hale59 said:


> Bruh, did you read my initial post, or are you just posting to increase you post counting?
> I gave you a link were I have to buy the AMD boards, because my credits are there. And I gave a list of things on a mobo.
> Cheap X570? Like the ASUS TUF Gaming X570-Plus (Wi-Fi)? NOOOO!! I said only X470. If you cared to read my initial post...


I have been polite and that was a legit question from my side, like to say "have a read to what've discussed so you can decide between old or new gen"
Then i linked you a video from a well-known overclocker rambling about ALL AM4 boards, you expect me to go look on this list and tell you what board to get when you didn't even tell the budget and also being arrogant?
That's a big no from me


----------



## Hale59

Synoxia said:


> I have been polite and that was a legit question from my side, like to say "have a read to what've discussed so you can decide between old or new gen"
> Then i linked you a video from a well-known overclocker rambling about ALL AM4 boards, you expect me to go look on this list and tell you what board to get when you didn't even tell the budget and also being arrogant?
> That's a big no from me


Listen to me, nobody is being arrogant. How can you presume that? You seem to be the arrogant one because, a while ago you replied to one of my posts, asking if a certain individual (that I mentioned) works for AMD, when he said that Bios 1.0.0.4 for the X470 have being delayed. You have almost a 1000 posts made, you should know who that person is. And he is a member of this forum. Therefore your question there was arrogant and accusing me of making posts to increase my post counting.

You forget that this Thread is about CH7, and if I asked for a board suggestion, it was an offtopic matter. It should have been answered with a short answer. Had you been paying attention for my initial post, you would not flood this thread with videos. And I know about that video.

On my initial post I said the retailer will give me credit for my old CH7. And that and there is my budget. But you cannot read between the lines.
If they give credit for my CH7, the value of a CH7 is my credit, my budget.
And I said no X570. Only X470.
Then I gave you a link from my retailer, were all the AMD boards are. If you cared opening my retailer link, you would not have suggested Asrock and Giga, because my retailer does not have them!!

Now, take me to your drug dealer, because the drugs you are taking are simply ****.


----------



## crakej

Synoxia said:


> AMD said that 3950x will only be supported from 1.0.0.4
> 
> source https://www.tomshw.it/hardware/ryzen-9-3950x-25-novembre/


Yes, we knoiw that. It's an AM4 CPU, it will work, but most likely not optimally. They've been testing these things for months without 1004.


----------



## gupsterg

Hale59 said:


> OK, got feedback from the Distributor - Faulty motherboard and it will be credited.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> A short summary from them:
> 
> "Seriously suspect your motherboard is at fault. If multiple CPUs have displayed the same behaviour then it can't be the CPUs. You also mentioned that certain BIOSs that support 3000-series work to a small extent while others don't work at all. This is not how it should behave at all, which further points towards the motherboard. We had your Ryzen 3600 running on multiple motherboards. Not only did it POST, but we ran stress tests on it as well without an issue. Scoring was also well within margin of error - faulty CPUs will normally either fail the tests, or the score will be below what is expected.
> 
> With our test Ryzen 2600 I cannot find fault with your board, but I cannot get it working with your Ryzen 3600. That said, your Ryzen 3600 works perfectly on both a Gigabyte GA-A320M-S2H and MSI B450 Gaming Pro Carbon AC (some of the boards available for testing). It boots to Windows, passes OCCT stress tests, and benchmarks perfectly in Cinebench (scoring to within 2% of what is expected of the chip).
> 
> Your components were tested individually with the hardware we have here, eg your CPU was tested with our motherboard/PSU/RAM, your motherboard was tested with our CPU/PSU/RAM, your RAM was tested with our CPU/motherboard/PSU, etc. It is very difficult to properly diagnose hardware if multiple potentially faulty components are used, so parts are isolated for testing. The BIOS 2304 used on your motherboard as well as the latest version from Asus' website were used. It is indeed a strange issue and not one we've come across before, but it is likely to the difference in power delivery between 2000-series and 3000-series CPUs."
> 
> I'm screwed. Retailer going to credit me, BUT they no longer have CH7's for sale.


Shame, at least you can move forward and get back on rig  .



Hale59 said:


> Have been had bad luck with ASUS mobos.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Those are ASUS motherboards which I RMAed within their respective 3 year warranty:
> ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI)
> 
> 
> MAXIMUS VII FORMULA/WATCH DOGS
> 
> 
> CROSSHAIR V FORMULA-Z
> 
> 
> CROSSHAIR V FORMULA-Z
> 
> 
> CROSSHAIR V FORMULA
> 
> 
> OFFTOPIC:
> 
> I think this time going to try something else. Probably a MSI.
> 
> Here is what I like in a mobo:
> - A nice an easy to navigate UEFI
> - Bios Flash
> - Start Button
> - Reset Button
> - Onboard Leds
> - Q-Leds
> 
> Here is a list of what is available at the Retailer. NOTE: Note taking X570. a X470 suffices.
> If you are inclined to chip in with a suggestion, shout:
> https://www.evetech.co.za/PC-Components/amd-motherboards-29.aspx


Shame, I can only speak highly of my experience.

I've owned ASUS P5K Premium since launch, to date still OC's the Q6600 G0 like bitach on steroids, still can pull ~100hrs+ continuous running on OC CPU/RAM with [email protected] run on CPU/GPU.

My ASUS Maximus VII Hero I was virtually in tears when I sent that packing. It rocked a i5 4690K at 4.9GHz all day long, again crazy hours of usage I clocked on it.

The ASUS Crosshair VI Hero pre-ordered on launch, cracking mobo, even when I had the ASUS Crosshair VII Hero I was feeling I was betraying the board by selling it off, same feeling I had with Zenith Extreme, had that since launch and kept for 2yrs.

The ASUS Crosshair VII Hero has gone strength to strength IMO. Amazing to see how by just going say Zen>Zen+>Zen2 same mobo and RAM I've been using since Zen can now do 3800MHz C16 1T on 4 dimms and at flipping 1.35V. The Zenith Extreme Alpha has been a nerdy wet dream, yeah I managed to pull a nut stud off the socket a week ago when changing the TR1950X to TR2920X, but was able to repair at home.

Even though the R5 3600+C7H combo is working so well, I'm enamoured to the ZEA. Just bought 2x Adata SX8200 Pro to place with the Intel 660P on the ZEA for 3TBs of NVME storage, hoping to purchase an ASUS Hyper X16 M.2 V2 card to slap in some more PCI-E storage.

A lot of the boards stated above have had multiple CPU changes, RAM, GPU, storage and other than what happened with the ZEA socket nut stud not had an issue to RMA, etc.


----------



## speedgoat

on other news i saw a nice little program on reddit this morning that checks the single boost with 100% light load 
if anyone wants to use 
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/e29uk2/3950x_percore_maximum_boost_clock_results/

my 3800X is not boosting too bad with just 1usmus power plan and a little offset too


----------



## lordzed83

New version of master is out
https://www.guru3d.com/files-details/amd-ryzen-master-utility-download.html
@crakej tbh I dont think there will be much differance remember 3950 was supposed to come out in September and we had ABBA bioses. So only thing i can think off will be lack of 'fixed' boost clocks and wont be boosting to speed on box. Like our's 3900 dont boost to 4600.
Ofc other optimalisations will be lacking.

I deffo do benchmark run ABBA vs 1.0.0.4 if we get it just to see if there are any gains on overclocked system. Stock will be deffo better due to boost but are there gains with same clocks and memory settings ?? 
@gupsterg same had every motherboard dead at some point besides asus. Ehhh good old ECS motherboards now that was proper cheap trash remember that company ??  Or ABIT ???


----------



## lordzed83

Hale59 said:


> OK, got feedback from the Distributor - Faulty motherboard and it will be credited.
> A short summary from them:
> 
> "Seriously suspect your motherboard is at fault. If multiple CPUs have displayed the same behaviour then it can't be the CPUs. You also mentioned that certain BIOSs that support 3000-series work to a small extent while others don't work at all. This is not how it should behave at all, which further points towards the motherboard. We had your Ryzen 3600 running on multiple motherboards. Not only did it POST, but we ran stress tests on it as well without an issue. Scoring was also well within margin of error - faulty CPUs will normally either fail the tests, or the score will be below what is expected.
> 
> With our test Ryzen 2600 I cannot find fault with your board, but I cannot get it working with your Ryzen 3600. That said, your Ryzen 3600 works perfectly on both a Gigabyte GA-A320M-S2H and MSI B450 Gaming Pro Carbon AC (some of the boards available for testing). It boots to Windows, passes OCCT stress tests, and benchmarks perfectly in Cinebench (scoring to within 2% of what is expected of the chip).
> 
> Your components were tested individually with the hardware we have here, eg your CPU was tested with our motherboard/PSU/RAM, your motherboard was tested with our CPU/PSU/RAM, your RAM was tested with our CPU/motherboard/PSU, etc. It is very difficult to properly diagnose hardware if multiple potentially faulty components are used, so parts are isolated for testing. The BIOS 2304 used on your motherboard as well as the latest version from Asus' website were used. It is indeed a strange issue and not one we've come across before, but it is likely to the difference in power delivery between 2000-series and 3000-series CPUs."
> 
> I'm screwed. Retailer going to credit me, BUT they no longer have CH7's for sale.


Mo vote goes for ASRock x470 Tachi if you dont need all them usb ports.


----------



## arvinz

What benchmarks would you guys like to see with my 3950X running on currrent BIOS/AGESA? System specs are:

-CH7 (non-wifi) – currently running BIOS 1201 with my 2700X, will upgrade to 2901
-16GB Trident Z DDR4-3200 CL14 (currently running at 3333 at CL14)
-Asus Strix 2080ti OC
-Kraken X62
-Samsung 970 Pro 1TB

Need to install latest Ryzen Master, AMD chipset drivers, use Ryzen balanced power plan.


----------



## lordzed83

arvinz said:


> What benchmarks would you guys like to see with my 3950X running on currrent BIOS/AGESA? System specs are:
> 
> -CH7 (non-wifi) – currently running BIOS 1201 with my 2700X, will upgrade to 2901
> -16GB Trident Z DDR4-3200 CL14 (currently running at 3333 at CL14)
> -Asus Strix 2080ti OC
> -Kraken X62
> -Samsung 970 Pro 1TB
> 
> Need to install latest Ryzen Master, AMD chipset drivers, use Ryzen balanced power plan.


works no problem as expected.

You can try 1201 vs 2019 
CB20 and memory benchmark.

Quite interested to see how bios versions will affect score


----------



## Synoxia

lordzed83 said:


> works no problem as expected.
> 
> You can try 1201 vs 2019
> CB20 and memory benchmark.
> 
> Quite interested to see how bios versions will affect score


I don't think 1201 will work for him as zen2 code was included since 2501 i think.


----------



## AvengedRobix

i'm bored to waiting a new bios.. ordered a impact x570 and a taichi TRX40


----------



## Synoxia

AvengedRobix said:


> i'm bored to waiting a new bios.. ordered a impact x570 and a taichi TRX40


Was it like a month waiting for the bios release? Anyways, impact is the best ram overclocking according to BZ and taichi is good allroundboard, but why asus again i might ask?


----------



## arvinz

Synoxia said:


> I don't think 1201 will work for him as zen2 code was included since 2501 i think.


Yeah, I plan to upgrade to 2901 with the 2700x in there, then swap it out to the 3950X. The chip just arrived


----------



## AvengedRobix

Synoxia said:


> Was it like a month waiting for the bios release? Anyways, impact is the best ram overclocking according to BZ and taichi is good allroundboard, but why asus again i might ask?


i use am4 platform only for bench.. under dry ice and sometimes under ln2.. for me now the impact is the best


----------



## hurricane28

lordzed83 said:


> At lest You made peace with situation not like @Synoxia I'm not buying asus motherboard. Next up for me is ASRock


O i am not at peace bro, i just don't expect anything from Assus anymore. My board is running fine and i keep it like this as long as possible. If it doesn't run anymore i get Gigabyte and break this board in half, that way i at least have some fun with it lol.


----------



## Synoxia

hurricane28 said:


> O i am not at peace bro, i just don't expect anything from Assus anymore. My board is running fine and i keep it like this as long as possible. If it doesn't run anymore i get Gigabyte and break this board in half, that way i at least have some fun with it lol.


This comment made my day AHAHAHAH

Btw at this point let's just hope that gigabyte becomes like AMD for Intel... so they will be forced to do something good.


----------



## lordzed83

It wont It's been like this for 1.5 and its getting WORSE not better.
@hurricane28 as i said You amde peace with situation... **** have not changed for better AND WONT and if someone thinks it will hes a sucker. You know best ASUS is like Nvidia they are making BANK on products and they will sell and are selling like mad with Asus tax on top. And when 2 years ago I seen where money ware going... Now ?? You pay more for nothing extra. That Support for me was always the reason to buy Asus. With it gone You pay More for LESS. Thats why I build 2 Zen2 setupf for mates avoiding Asus motherboards. Gigabyte is still total trash in bios department MSI was better but no clue how it handles heavy overclocking with 24/7 100% load. For myself ASRock.


----------



## innaig86

Hi guys,
I've a 2700x on PE lev2 and a -0.1 offset on cpu voltage.
I've noticed HUGE differences between voltages reported by Ryzen Master and HWinfo.
At the same time, Master sees a range btw 1.5v and 1.54v (now, while typing this), but HWinfo sees 1.35-1.425v.
So which one I can rely on?

bios 2801. (should I upgrade?)

In addition to this, I'm not sure I'm running the best oc I can get from this setup, so can you suggest a set of bios settings for a good oc for daily use?
Cpu cooler: corsair H100i

Thanks


----------



## Syldon

innaig86 said:


> Hi guys,
> I've a 2700x on PE lev2 and a -0.1 offset on cpu voltage.
> I've noticed HUGE differences between voltages reported by Ryzen Master and HWinfo.
> At the same time, Master sees a range btw 1.5v and 1.54v (now, while typing this), but HWinfo sees 1.35-1.425v.
> So which one I can rely on?
> 
> bios 2801. (should I upgrade?)
> 
> In addition to this, I'm not sure I'm running the best oc I can get from this setup, so can you suggest a set of bios settings for a good oc for daily use?
> Cpu cooler: corsair H100i
> 
> Thanks


maybe this will help


----------



## bMind

Uhm..Halp? I just noticed my CPU (2700X) on C7H is not downvolting. I know it was with the settings I had, but now it's not (on bios 2801). I flashed 2901 and went back to stock settings and it's the same. In windows (10 x64) I am running Balanced plan. Any ideas?


----------



## harderthanfire

bMind said:


> Uhm..Halp? I just noticed my CPU (2700X) on C7H is not downvolting. I know it was with the settings I had, but now it's not (on bios 2801). I flashed 2901 and went back to stock settings and it's the same. In windows (10 x64) I am running Balanced plan. Any ideas?



Check in the advanced power plan settings the CPU isn't set to 100% on both max and min, or 99% on the min or something. Stick the min on 0%. If they doesn't work you might need to enable C states in the bios.


----------



## bMind

harderthanfire said:


> Check in the advanced power plan settings the CPU isn't set to 100% on both max and min, or 99% on the min or something. Stick the min on 0%. If they doesn't work you might need to enable C states in the bios.


Always had min on 5%, max at 100% and cooling active. Damn..it was working before 😞

edit. I tried power saving power plan and it both downclocks and downvolts :?


----------



## crakej

bMind said:


> Always had min on 5%, max at 100% and cooling active. Damn..it was working before 😞
> 
> edit. I tried power saving power plan and it both downclocks and downvolts :?


Are you using *Ryzen* Balanced (which you shouldn't need to change anything on, but it does sometimes work) power plan?


----------



## neikosr0x

Wow still no 1.0.0.4 Bios for the TOP motherboard from asus? ***...


----------



## Synoxia

neikosr0x said:


> Wow still no 1.0.0.4 Bios for the TOP motherboard from asus? ***...


Welcome to the club. Wanna fire asus together?


----------



## bMind

crakej said:


> Are you using *Ryzen* Balanced (which you shouldn't need to change anything on, but it does sometimes work) power plan?


Hello good Sir. No, I might not have too many posts under my belt but I'm a good reader  And thankfully this thread/forum taught me a lot and one of those things is not to use Ryzen Balanced Plan even if it gets selected after installing drivers  I know standard Windows Balanced plan is the way to go. I also installed latest chipset drivers from AMD website, still nada.


----------



## speedgoat

Synoxia said:


> Welcome to the club. Wanna fire asus together?


all last week more or less i am starting my day by refreshing this website and cursing them, last couple of days i curse them first and then refresh


----------



## hurricane28

Synoxia said:


> This comment made my day AHAHAHAH
> 
> Btw at this point let's just hope that gigabyte becomes like AMD for Intel... so they will be forced to do something good.


Ye, they probably won't man. That is why i call them Assus man. 

I know a new slogan for them too: "Assus, we engineered no fan technology" lmao. 

Other manufacturers also used the same EC chip and have no problems with it. Gigabyte has the same and everything is accurate and it works, even their software..


----------



## neikosr0x

Synoxia said:


> Welcome to the club. Wanna fire asus together?


it just got to the point where it is ridiculous. Seems like they do not care nor have enough people to work for it. What a way to trash their own brand.


----------



## xeizo

bMind said:


> Hello good Sir. No, I might not have too many posts under my belt but I'm a good reader  And thankfully this thread/forum taught me a lot and one of those things is not to use Ryzen Balanced Plan even if it gets selected after installing drivers  I know standard Windows Balanced plan is the way to go. I also installed latest chipset drivers from AMD website, still nada.


No, if you have the latest AMD chipset drivers and the latest Windows 10 November Update "Ryzen Balanced" IS the way to go. It simply works the best, 1usmus Universal 1.1 power plan also works very well. Can be found for download on Techpowerup.com.

Regarding not idling down, you need to have CPPC enabled in the bios(there is more to read about bios settings at Techpowerup by the download article for 1usmus power plan).

To get low idle = silent fans, set minimum power to 0-5% in your chosen power plan, default is 99% so weak idling of course.


----------



## xeizo

I suppose the reason Asus has a hard time putting out a new C7H bios is because the current bios already has a few bugs and is a quite complicated/full bios. Migrating 1004B with over 100 changes from ABBA, that affects things, may be hard. Prime Pro/F-bios is much more simple, and 1004B bios works rather well on those boards(I have the Prime Pro besides the C7H).

Gigabytes bios is very simple in settings compared to Asus bios, no wonder they are faster at implementing new AGESA:s.

Regardless, most boards seem to have received 1004B by now so Asus should really concentrate on getting one out for the C7H. Delaying things generates bad rep and makes one less likely to buy the C9H when that time comes. Or any Asus TRX40-board for that matter.


----------



## bMind

xeizo said:


> No, if you have the latest AMD chipset drivers and the latest Windows 10 November Update "Ryzen Balanced" IS the way to go. It simply works the best, 1usmus Universal 1.1 power plan also works very well. Can be found for download on Techpowerup.com.
> 
> Regarding not idling down, you need to have CPPC enabled in the bios(there is more to read about bios settings at Techpowerup by the download article for 1usmus power plan).
> 
> To get low idle = silent fans, set minimum power to 0-5% in your chosen power plan, default is 99% so weak idling of course.


As I said..when I pick power saving plan it downclocks and downvolts just fine so I don't think it's bios? But I definitely might be wrong. I tested Ryzen Balanced and with changing min cpu to 5% or 0% it made no difference. As for 1usmus Universal 1.1 power plan, ain't that for Ryzen 3000? I have 2700X so I'm not sure it applies.


----------



## xeizo

bMind said:


> As I said..when I pick power saving plan it downclocks and downvolts just fine so I don't think it's bios? But I definitely might be wrong. I tested Ryzen Balanced and with changing min cpu to 5% or 0% it made no difference. As for 1usmus Universal 1.1 power plan, ain't that for Ryzen 3000? I have 2700X so I'm not sure it applies.


1usmus Universal is for ANY processor with the latest Windows Update, running it just fine on my Aourus M with 2700X, it downclocks well and boost is great 4435MHz on five cores.

edit. there is also some Windows programs preventing idle, like Corsair iCue which can be good to know.


----------



## bMind

xeizo said:


> 1usmus Universal is for ANY processor with the latest Windows Update, running it just fine on my Aourus M with 2700X, it downclocks well and boost is great 4435MHz on five cores.


Oh, ok, I'm using what Ive found in the techpowerup thread. Someone mentioned 2700X there and was flamed that it's for 2nd gen Ryzen 3X00 bla bla.. I'll try it then and report back. Won't hurt..I think


----------



## speedgoat

exciting new instability issue to keep me entertained until the next one, 

every now and then the UCLK gets limited to 950 MHz, usually after cpu goes to sleep but this does not happen every time it goes to sleep. After that massive latency occurs and it is always fixed with a reboot. 
any ideas why this could be happening ?


----------



## bMind

@xeizo Same thing with 1usmus power plans. That is soo confusing. The worst part is that I don't know when this started to happen. I made fresh install of Windows few months back, I can't say it was working since then because I just noticed it. Damn it!


----------



## crakej

bMind said:


> As I said..when I pick power saving plan it downclocks and downvolts just fine so I don't think it's bios? But I definitely might be wrong. I tested Ryzen Balanced and with changing min cpu to 5% or 0% it made no difference. As for 1usmus Universal 1.1 power plan, ain't that for Ryzen 3000? I have 2700X so I'm not sure it applies.


Like I said - Ryzen Balanced _should_ work. Power saving works because it reduces everything it can to save power - at the expense of performance.

Setting lowest power state for the cpu, in any power plan, to less than the default should gain you further savings by downclocking the CPU to lower than the CPU rated speed. In the case of the 3900x that's 3.80GHz. This can help temps.

Make sure C-States and df -c-states are enabled as well as CPPC2.


----------



## xeizo

Regarding bioses, my Aorus M now received it's THIRD 1004B-bios! This time it fixes the problems 1004B have been having with PCIE audio cards. Gigabyte is really on top of their game nowadays. Pity I only run the 2700X on it ....


----------



## bMind

crakej said:


> Like I said - Ryzen Balanced _should_ work. Power saving works because it reduces everything it can to save power - at the expense of performance.
> 
> Setting lowest power state for the cpu, in any power plan, to less than the default should gain you further savings by downclocking the CPU to lower than the CPU rated speed. In the case of the 3900x that's 3.80GHz. This can help temps.
> 
> Make sure C-States and df -c-states are enabled as well as CPPC2.


I can't find CPPC, I've seen it should be in AMD CBS? Yeah?


----------



## crakej

bMind said:


> I can't find CPPC, I've seen it should be in AMD CBS? Yeah?


Yes, it's there somewhere - not at my pc at the moment.... does anyone else remember where it is?


----------



## bMind

crakej said:


> Yes, it's there somewhere - not at my pc at the moment.... does anyone else remember where it is?


Global C-States in AMD CBS\CPU Common Options controls both C-States and DF C-States looking at the description, but nothing comes close (to me) to CPPC.


----------



## bMind

@crakej I think I've found the culprit

1903 Windows May update introduced this (I think) and I had this set all the way to the right. I think it's best to set in the middle?

etit. Attached file, removed link.


----------



## darkage

in bios press F9 for search


----------



## bMind

darkage said:


> in bios press F9 for search


Believe me I tried, but the search function is not working for all the settings. I know because I tried with things I know where they are, like C-States etc.


----------



## Jaju123

Response regarding AGESA 1.0.0.4 bios from ASUS:

"Thank you for contacting Asus support. My name is Arsen.

Unfortunately at the moment there is no release date announced. We do not have an ETA for this currently."

LOL


----------



## neikosr0x

Jaju123 said:


> Response regarding AGESA 1.0.0.4 bios from ASUS:
> 
> "Thank you for contacting Asus support. My name is Arsen.
> 
> Unfortunately at the moment there is no release date announced. We do not have an ETA for this currently."
> 
> LOL


Then they expect people to pay 360£ or 500£ for a mobo that they will not properly support after 8 months.


----------



## speedgoat

neikosr0x said:


> Then they expect people to pay 360£ or 500£ for a mobo that they will not properly support after 8 months.


ETA is when they sold a few more X570 mobos


----------



## Synoxia

Jaju123 said:


> Response regarding AGESA 1.0.0.4 bios from ASUS:
> 
> "Thank you for contacting Asus support. My name is Arsen.
> 
> Unfortunately at the moment there is no release date announced. We do not have an ETA for this currently."
> 
> LOL


I mean, can we get techpowerup/tomshardware ecc or something to do an article on this? This is beyond pathetic actually

They really dropped support on a board which is still in warranty... is this a reason to RMA?



xeizo said:


> No, if you have the latest AMD chipset drivers and the latest Windows 10 November Update "Ryzen Balanced" IS the way to go. It simply works the best, 1usmus Universal 1.1 power plan also works very well. Can be found for download on Techpowerup.com.
> 
> Regarding not idling down, you need to have CPPC enabled in the bios(there is more to read about bios settings at Techpowerup by the download article for 1usmus power plan).
> 
> To get low idle = silent fans, set minimum power to 0-5% in your chosen power plan, default is 99% so weak idling of course.


Does ryzen balanced get better performance than 1usmus on ryzen 3k despite ABBA instead of 1.0.0.4? Btw your 2700x boosts higher than my 3700x D:


----------



## ClintLeo

I can't wait for 1.0.0.4,with all the complaints currently it must be so good it will make my 3700x perform like a 5.0ghz 3700x.


----------



## nick name

Goodness this thread is turning into a mess. Can you guys stop the complaining please . . . it isn't serving anyone other than a small handful of you guys. Or create a new thread. Then maybe your complaints might turn up in Google searches.


----------



## speedgoat

nick name said:


> Goodness this thread is turning into a mess. Can you guys stop the complaining please . . . it isn't serving anyone other than a small handful of you guys. Or create a new thread. Then maybe your complaints might turn up in Google searches.


my friend, you and everybody else, i do not force you to read my posts, you are very much welcome to ignore them entirely, would it be a big problem if i asked you not to dictate what i am writing ? 
Feel free though to point to me how complaining is a violation of T&C of this group.


----------



## Rusakova

speedgoat said:


> my friend, you and everybody else, i do not force you to read my posts, you are very much welcome to ignore them entirely, would it be a big problem if i asked you not to dictate what i am writing ?
> Feel free though to point to me how complaining is a violation of T&C of this group.


No, but the title of this thread is " ROG Crosshair VII overclocking thread" not *****ing about lack of new BIOS from Asus.


----------



## speedgoat

Rusakova said:


> No, but the title of this thread is " ROG Crosshair VII overclocking thread" not *****ing about lack of new BIOS from Asus.


strictly OC speaking i was actually interested in this Per-CCX OC feature but sadly there is no ****ing ETA for this either !!!


----------



## xeizo

Rusakova said:


> No, but the title of this thread is " ROG Crosshair VII overclocking thread" not *****ing about lack of new BIOS from Asus.


Can be hard to maximize OC without a proper working bios, we all know AMD initially released Alpha-status AGESA for Zen 2 ...


----------



## xeizo

Synoxia said:


> I mean, can we get techpowerup/tomshardware ecc or something to do an article on this? This is beyond pathetic actually
> 
> They really dropped support on a board which is still in warranty... is this a reason to RMA?
> 
> 
> 
> Does ryzen balanced get better performance than 1usmus on ryzen 3k despite ABBA instead of 1.0.0.4? Btw your 2700x boosts higher than my 3700x D:



On Zen 2 they seem to be about on par, with Zen+ 1usmus is definetely better.

Yes, my 2700X looks to be a very good sample, running on a low end Aorus M too. But it is cooled by Noctua NH-D14 which really is an excellent cooler.


----------



## smokin_mitch

speedgoat said:


> exciting new instability issue to keep me entertained until the next one,
> 
> every now and then the UCLK gets limited to 950 MHz, usually after cpu goes to sleep but this does not happen every time it goes to sleep. After that massive latency occurs and it is always fixed with a reboot.
> any ideas why this could be happening ?


go back to bios 2801 fixed the issue for me


----------



## speedgoat

smokin_mitch said:


> go back to bios 2801 fixed the issue for me


 thank you ! i ll try this , i got ram working really good in 2901 with 3800C14 but this is getting me tired now

btw i ve seen your posts in reddit about your 3800X.. your chip is awesome !!!


----------



## Takla

nick name said:


> Goodness this thread is turning into a mess. Can you guys stop the complaining please . . . it isn't serving anyone other than a small handful of you guys. Or create a new thread. Then maybe your complaints might turn up in Google searches.



Just put these kind of people on ignore list. It's not like they ever contribute anything valuable anyway. So you don't miss out on anything


----------



## xeizo

Can you guys stop complaining on the complainers, it's turning into a mess ...


----------



## nick name

speedgoat said:


> my friend, you and everybody else, i do not force you to read my posts, you are very much welcome to ignore them entirely, would it be a big problem if i asked you not to dictate what i am writing ?
> Feel free though to point to me how complaining is a violation of T&C of this group.


You misunderstand the point of this thread. I know I can ignore you or anyone's posts, but it clutters everything and makes navigating the thread much more difficult.


----------



## Synoxia

Yeah please, just ignore us. I get that you 2700x user or some 3000 user are perfectly fine with the bs asus is throwing us after paying 300eur board, that does not mean that we should be fine too.


----------



## Axaion

Takla said:


> Just put these kind of people on ignore list. It's not like they ever contribute anything valuable anyway. So you don't miss out on anything


I dont know man, personally i read through the thread before buying the board, i read the OP too. 

My choices were between this and the x470 taichi, i got this because the OP made it seem like Asus finally had great support, i read quite a bit of the thread for the same and all that.

If i had found out about the various issues, poor support (lol, no support) from ASUS, i would have gotten the Taichi in a heartbeat, the reasons i got this over the taichi was this is a Daisy Chain board (and for whatever reason mine is FUBAR.), It has a good VRM for x470, and it seemed like a good community of happy people without issues, even good asus support

But nope.

And the whole "go to ASUS forums" is laughable, no one reads those, ASUS doesnt even read them, themselves.

/rant


----------



## xeizo

I got this because I was generally happy with Asus boards all the way back to P5Q DeLuxe, lastly running the Maximus VII Hero and X470 Prime Pro. 

There was talk about 12/16 core needing a lot of VRM and C7H has it, so I got it.

Now, the beefy VRM on the C7H sits mostly idle as there is no way to unlock power consumption on the current bioses. Absolute max is 98A/145W vs the 600A capability of the C7H. My cheap Aorus M handles more than that, I've been pushing my 2700X to 160W and over 100A on Aorus M. My Prime Pro has 240A capability, it would be a breeze for it running the 3900X. Currently, there's no benefit running the 3900X on the C7H. If things doesn't improve maybe I will put the 3900X in the Prime Pro, the 3700X in the Aorus M and let the C7H have the 2700X, and downgrade the C7H bios to a good Zen+ bios as the ancient board it is according to Asus.

The only thing C7H has going for it is memory OC which is quite good, and that's why I haven't switched CPU:s yet.


----------



## neikosr0x

Axaion said:


> I dont know man, personally i read through the thread before buying the board, i read the OP too.
> 
> My choices were between this and the x470 taichi, i got this because the OP made it seem like Asus finally had great support, i read quite a bit of the thread for the same and all that.
> 
> If i had found out about the various issues, poor support (lol, no support) from ASUS, i would have gotten the Taichi in a heartbeat, the reasons i got this over the taichi was this is a Daisy Chain board (and for whatever reason mine is FUBAR.), It has a good VRM for x470, and it seemed like a good community of happy people without issues, even good asus support
> 
> But nope.
> 
> And the whole "go to ASUS forums" is laughable, no one reads those, ASUS doesnt even read them, themselves.
> 
> /rant


Asus forums are useless, Mods and Asus dudes don't even bother fixing the issues on their product. And the only way of punishing them is in their pockets so next time i'll just going to get something that has actual support and not just trashed after 8 months.


----------



## darkage

neikosr0x said:


> Asus forums are useless, Mods and Asus dudes don't even bother fixing the issues on their product. And the only way of punishing them is in their pockets so next time i'll just going to get something that has actual support and not just trashed after 8 months.


asrock is a spinoff asus brand msi is what it is gigabyte you know just google, its all the same, i have rog mobs since last century and it has allways been like this, i had other brands and none is better, and yes the rog forum is dead it was a great place aroun ten years ago, know just dead, to bad, they dont care for you coming to forums and saiyng all are moving to another brand there are direct email support to asus to top end 
[email protected] just spam them not us here


----------



## neikosr0x

darkage said:


> asrock is a spinoff asus brand msi is what it is gigabyte you know just google, its all the same, i have rog mobs since last century and it has allways been like this, i had other brands and none is better, and yes the rog forum is dead it was a great place aroun ten years ago, know just dead, to bad, they dont care for you coming to forums and saiyng all are moving to another brand there are direct email support to asus to top end
> [email protected] just spam them not us here


dude you can stop being a child and grow up already, as I have only complained about any situation once... only once so you can stop saying I'm spamming. It is indeed a forum where I spoke about how they are really behind others and seem not to care about people spending 250£+ for a board that is not getting supported as it suppose to... And yes I'm telling people that the best way to punish them apart from complaining is if we stop buying their things.


----------



## darkage

neikosr0x said:


> dude you can stop being a child and grow up already, as I have only complained about any situation once... only once so you can stop saying I'm spamming. It is indeed a forum where I spoke about how they are really behind others and seem not to care about people spending 250£+ for a board that is not getting supported as it suppose to... And yes I'm telling people that the best way to punish them apart from complaining is if we stop buying their things.


i have grown enough, its not for you its for everyone, so stop being such a princess


----------



## neikosr0x

darkage said:


> i have grown enough, its not for you its for everyone, so stop being such a princess


ahahahaha "princess" and you call me a spammer what a kiddo. Don't even bother replying kid. Next time at least use your "30+" to actually help others on the forum not just talking crap at others.


----------



## darkage

will do 
thanks


----------



## crakej

bMind said:


> I can't find CPPC, I've seen it should be in AMD CBS? Yeah?


It's on *CBS>NBIO>SMU* Common Options.

There you will find DF C-States and CPPC2 (enable both CPPC2 options) there.

What CPU are you runnning?


----------



## speedgoat

xeizo said:


> Absolute max is 98A/145W vs the 600A capability of the C7H.


the latest Hwinfo includes an EDC reading and im seeing a max of 110A there. Never been not even close to the W limit though.


----------



## bMind

crakej said:


> It's on *CBS>NBIO>SMU* Common Options.
> 
> There you will find DF C-States and CPPC2 (enable both CPPC2 options) there.
> 
> What CPU are you runnning?


2700X

I posted before that even without finding the setting it started to work. It was Windows thing, 1903 introduced Performance and Energy slider that was set all the way to the right for me. I've put it in the middle and it started to downclock and downvolt. Should I keep it this way?


----------



## nick name

bMind said:


> 2700X
> 
> I posted before that even without finding the setting it started to work. It was Windows thing, 1903 introduced Performance and Energy slider that was set all the way to the right for me. I've put it in the middle and it started to downclock and downvolt. Should I keep it this way?


If you want to be able to reach the highest single core speeds then you'll want your CPU to be able to reach its lower p states on cores not in use. So down-clocking is good. If you're running a fixed multiplier then down-clocking just saves power.


----------



## Synoxia

I wrote bullzoid and techpowerup about this, let's see what happens


----------



## crakej

bMind said:


> 2700X
> 
> I posted before that even without finding the setting it started to work. It was Windows thing, 1903 introduced Performance and Energy slider that was set all the way to the right for me. I've put it in the middle and it started to downclock and downvolt. Should I keep it this way?


I'm on Win 1909 - I have the slider all the way to the right and I still have down-clocking going on. You will lose some performance to save power by lowering that slider.

I'm not sure 2xxx CPUs supports CPPC2 - if not - it probably won't appear in the menus.

Could you put your system details in your sig or use the rigbuilder to include details under your posts please? It makes it a bit easier for us to offer you help.


----------



## bMind

nick name said:


> If you want to be able to reach the highest single core speeds then you'll want your CPU to be able to reach its lower p states on cores not in use. So down-clocking is good. If you're running a fixed multiplier then down-clocking just saves power.


Embarrassing but I'm still not doing any OC on it..just trying to debug wha't with something that was working :/



crakej said:


> I'm on Win 1909 - I have the slider all the way to the right and I still have down-clocking going on. You will lose some performance to save power by lowering that slider.
> 
> I'm not sure 2xxx CPUs supports CPPC2 - if not - it probably won't appear in the menus.
> 
> Could you put your system details in your sig or use the rigbuilder to include details under your posts please? It makes it a bit easier for us to offer you help.


I don't think it's there for 2xxx Ryzens. Anyway, I don't know, I'll test when I'll update to 1909, I thought last big update it forced on me was this, but it appears I'm still on 1903. Sig..yes..I'll copy yours


----------



## Moutsatsos

Hello,I want to buy a 3800X and was thinking to pair it with a cheap CH7,any issues so far or i should just go for a Gb x570 pro or elite just to be sure?


----------



## crakej

Moutsatsos said:


> Hello,I want to buy a 3800X and was thinking to pair it with a cheap CH7,any issues so far or i should just go for a Gb x570 pro or elite just to be sure?


Personally I'm happy with my board. There are a few people having the odd problem, but for most of us we're running pretty reliably and stable. Yes, we're still waiting for 1004b (or c) bios, but with my 3900x things are running really well. 1004x will bring some improvement when it comes, but I'm not expecting any huge performance gains from it, and neither should anyone else - things are tuned pretty well already.

Other than that, x570 brings you PCIE 4 (this board did until AMD removed it). It's a great deal for a premium AM4 board.


----------



## speedgoat

Moutsatsos said:


> Hello,I want to buy a 3800X and was thinking to pair it with a cheap CH7,any issues so far or i should just go for a Gb x570 pro or elite just to be sure?


Hello, im kind of pleased with the performance of the board in overall too but Asus seems to be very reluctant supporting it, if you check this link below theres about 30ish X470 boards 25ish of them already have 1.0.0.4 and the c7h is still missing this despite being still one of the most expensive x470.

https://www.hardwareluxx.de/communi...-bios-agesa-ubersicht-28-11-19-a-1228903.html 

so if you are buying specs i guess its kind of alright but if you are also interested of buying the commitment of asus to support the board, well currently they are not being very enthusiastic about it


----------



## thegr8anand

Coming here after month or two. Updated to 2901 and my previous settings seem to working fine. 

Have been using per ccx oc and was wondering if auto mode is decent enough to use now?


----------



## bMind

@crakej I updated to 1909 today and it's still the same. If I crank up the slider all the way to the right it's not downclocking and downvolting and it does not matter what power plan I use (other than powersaving that is). I need to have it in the middle. I tested this on balanced, Ryzen balanced, 1usmus Ryzen Power Plan and Ryzen Universal. I'm sticking with the last one for now since that apparently is the one to be used with 1909 and any Ryzen. Maybe it's working for you because you're on 3900X and have CPPC2?


----------



## crakej

bMind said:


> @crakej I updated to 1909 today and it's still the same. If I crank up the slider all the way to the right it's not downclocking and downvolting and it does not matter what power plan I use (other than powersaving that is). I need to have it in the middle. I tested this on balanced, Ryzen balanced, 1usmus Ryzen Power Plan and Ryzen Universal. I'm sticking with the last one for now since that apparently is the one to be used with 1909 and any Ryzen. Maybe it's working for you because you're on 3900X and have CPPC2?


I do remember others having this problem some time back, but can't remember exactly what it was. I'm still thinking about it, I'll let you know if I remember.

You're not OCing the cpu currently - have you changed any other settings, or is everything else default? At least we can rule out windows for now as well.

Could you do a screenshot of HWInfo?


----------



## Pietro

How many of you have that has 3900X and C-States set on are getting system to freeze and pc needs a gard reset? Since I had that on different bioses and power plans is it still a buggy bios or my cpu is faulty?


----------



## xeizo

Pietro said:


> How many of you have that has 3900X and C-States set on are getting system to freeze and pc needs a gard reset? Since I had that on different bioses and power plans is it still a buggy bios or my cpu is faulty?


No, it's stable, but some of Nvidias drivers have been wonky with the latest Windows updates. The solution is to perform a clean install of the driver(selectable in the Nvidia install program). Not installing GeForce Experience may also improve things.


----------



## neikosr0x

Pietro said:


> How many of you have that has 3900X and C-States set on are getting system to freeze and pc needs a gard reset? Since I had that on different bioses and power plans is it still a buggy bios or my cpu is faulty?


are you using any CPU voltage offset?


----------



## xeizo

neikosr0x said:


> are you using any CPU voltage offset?


You may be on to something, too much offset guarantees a freeze, in that case use less offset. Simple as that.


----------



## bMind

crakej said:


> I do remember others having this problem some time back, but can't remember exactly what it was. I'm still thinking about it, I'll let you know if I remember.
> 
> You're not OCing the cpu currently - have you changed any other settings, or is everything else default? At least we can rule out windows for now as well.
> 
> Could you do a screenshot of HWInfo?


Sure, no rush, I've been like this god knows how long, probably since fresh install or something. 

No, I'm not changing much. I'm setting up memory to D.O.C.P so it works on the default timings for my RAM (3200MHz CL14), but I'm not changing anything in terms of an OC profile to Stilt settings or any other hither speeds or tighter timings. I enable cpu virtualization for work. I enable the setting in APM to allow wake from LAN (the one that is disables the enable S3/S5 states). And I think that's it, some stuff related to onboard lightning but that's not related I guess.

edit. Adding screenshot I forgot to attach..


----------



## neikosr0x

xeizo said:


> You may be on to something, too much offset guarantees a freeze, in that case use less offset. Simple as that.


hahahaha looks like you are the one on something xD, Because i'm just asking the guy if he uses offset on his CPU to discard the possibility.


----------



## nick name

neikosr0x said:


> hahahaha looks like you are the one on something xD, Because i'm just asking the guy if he uses offset on his CPU to discard the possibility.


He said "on to something" not "on something".


----------



## speedgoat

hi, is your FCLK constantly on the defined value or is it dynamic ? 
i was under the impression it should be static, yet i noticed mine fluctuates.


----------



## Pietro

neikosr0x said:


> are you using any CPU voltage offset?





xeizo said:


> You may be on to something, too much offset guarantees a freeze, in that case use less offset. Simple as that.





neikosr0x said:


> hahahaha looks like you are the one on something xD, Because i'm just asking the guy if he uses offset on his CPU to discard the possibility.


I'm using them voltages and LLC on auto, pbo turned off, performance enhacer on default, but still have freezes. When C-state is set as on or off(only on auto it somehow works, boosting up to 4550MHz) 3-5 minutes on system and my monitors turn off with "no signal" message. Different bioses, chipset drivers, gpu drivers(I'm using AMD card Vega) still the same behaviour on every power plan.

Regarding 3900X cpu quality:
- Infinity max stable clock 1866MHz on 0.95V on 2x16GB 3733MHz CL16 micron e-die
- CCX OC, on 1.325V: CCX0 - 4450MHz, CCX1 - 4400MHz, CCX2 - 4225MHz, CCX3 - 4175MHz
- IMC/Soc 1.05-1.1V memory set on 3800MHz CL16 stable for hours in karhu software RAM Test, but infinity can't handle 1900MHz and benchmark results are worse with some crashes under low/high loads, changing voltages to in range of 1.05-1.125 doesn't change situation so max is 1866MHz at last on my Crosshair VII


----------



## darkage

Pietro said:


> I'm using them voltages and LLC on auto, pbo turned off, performance enhacer on default, but still have freezes. When C-state is set as on or off(only on auto it somehow works, boosting up to 4550MHz) 3-5 minutes on system and my monitors turn off with "no signal" message. Different bioses, chipset drivers, gpu drivers(I'm using AMD card Vega) still the same behaviour on every power plan.
> 
> Regarding 3900X cpu quality:
> - Infinity max stable clock 1866MHz on 0.95V on 2x16GB 3733MHz CL16 micron e-die
> - CCX OC, on 1.325V: CCX0 - 4450MHz, CCX1 - 4400MHz, CCX2 - 4225MHz, CCX3 - 4175MHz
> - IMC/Soc 1.05-1.1V memory set on 3800MHz CL16 stable for hours in karhu software RAM Test, but infinity can't handle 1900MHz and benchmark results are worse with some crashes under low/high loads, changing voltages to in range of 1.05-1.125 doesn't change situation so max is 1866MHz at last on my Crosshair VII


this can be a gpu or psu problem, try with bios in default and watch voltages is hwinfo or aida etc, dont use any asus software


----------



## crakej

bMind said:


> Sure, no rush, I've been like this god knows how long, probably since fresh install or something.
> 
> No, I'm not changing much. I'm setting up memory to D.O.C.P so it works on the default timings for my RAM (3200MHz CL14), but I'm not changing anything in terms of an OC profile to Stilt settings or any other hither speeds or tighter timings. I enable cpu virtualization for work. I enable the setting in APM to allow wake from LAN (the one that is disables the enable S3/S5 states). And I think that's it, some stuff related to onboard lightning but that's not related I guess.
> 
> edit. Adding screenshot I forgot to attach..


Thanks - can we have a shot of the Sensors screen after things have been running a while as well?... like this one I just took on my system..

Can you do it with that slider to the right for performance setting please.


----------



## speedgoat

so my response came from this [email protected]

Thank you for your response.
Unfortunately, I am unable to provide you with the information being requested. In the event that Agesa will be provided for any of our motherboards you can check our website for further information once it becomes available. The following websites will assist: https://www.asus.com/us/News/ and https://edgeup.asus.com/


----------



## nick name

Didn't someone like the The Stilt say the 1.0.0.4 AGESA wasn't anything special and that the SMU was the same or basically the same?


----------



## speedgoat

nick name said:


> Didn't someone like the The Stilt say the 1.0.0.4 AGESA wasn't anything special and that the SMU was the same or basically the same?


i think he did mention something in these lines in a reddit post i saw a few days ago yeah, it was regarding whether 3950 would work without it. 

to be honest im not expecting anything spectacular its just on principle im disappointed, i asked if they plan to offer, when would that be and if they would consider the lack of it being a valid reason for me to RMA the board


----------



## Synoxia

nick name said:


> Didn't someone like the The Stilt say the 1.0.0.4 AGESA wasn't anything special and that the SMU was the same or basically the same?


https://www.notebookcheck.net/Lates...times-for-Ryzen-3000-processors.440380.0.html nothing special but i still want it, 300 eur premium board experience should not be this

Fun pic below, we aren't alone friends


----------



## nick name

Synoxia said:


> https://www.notebookcheck.net/Lates...times-for-Ryzen-3000-processors.440380.0.html nothing special but i still want it, 300 eur premium board experience should not be this
> 
> Fun pic below, we aren't alone friends


****


----------



## fredshino

Guys, I got a 3900x on a CH VII non-wifi. Latest BIOS 2901.

Settings on Level 4 (OC). PBO on manual +200.

Voltage on auto.

I'm getting 1.48v on Ryzen Master, single core load.

What am I doing wrong?


----------



## darkage

fredshino said:


> Guys, I got a 3900x on a CH VII non-wifi. Latest BIOS 2901.
> 
> Settings on Level 4 (OC). PBO on manual +200.
> 
> Voltage on auto.
> 
> I'm getting 1.48v on Ryzen Master, single core load.
> 
> What am I doing wrong?


nothing, 1.50v spike is normal, use hwinfo last beta to monitor voltages


----------



## speedgoat

fredshino said:


> Guys, I got a 3900x on a CH VII non-wifi. Latest BIOS 2901.
> 
> Settings on Level 4 (OC). PBO on manual +200.
> 
> Voltage on auto.
> 
> I'm getting 1.48v on Ryzen Master, single core load.
> 
> What am I doing wrong?


L4 shows very little if any performance improvement to me nothing like the Zen+ behavior on L4 or L3. PBO also shows little improvement when on. 

Voltage being on auto and bursting 1.5V single supposedly is fine but i prefer a small offset since i will hit the same boosts single on 1.47V or 1.45V for example. 

One thing i noticed from your printscreen is i think you dont have C-States enabled because you have Peak Core V=Average core V. Although i ve seen a few crashes with C-States enabled i use it, i think it all runs cooler with it on


----------



## darkage

speedgoat said:


> L4 shows very little if any performance improvement to me nothing like the Zen+ behavior on L4 or L3. PBO also shows little improvement when on.
> 
> Voltage being on auto and bursting 1.5V single supposedly is fine but i prefer a small offset since i will hit the same boosts single on 1.47V or 1.45V for example.
> 
> One thing i noticed from your printscreen is i think you dont have C-States enabled because you have Peak Core V=Average core V. Although i ve seen a few crashes with C-States enabled i use it, i think it all runs cooler with it on


to work as 1usmus states all c states should be enabled, total new platform, i never used c states before  but it boosts as should 
have you tried 1usmus power plan and recomendations?


----------



## speedgoat

darkage said:


> to work as 1usmus states all c states should be enabled, total new platform, i never used c states before  but it boosts as should
> have you tried 1usmus power plan and recomendations?


in my case the plan defo works better in SC boost, the 2nd version of it especially the "universal" because the 1st one also increased boost but didn't allow the cores to drop to 2200MHz on idle, or in anycase this is how Hwinfo displayed them. 

But in general the bios optimizations he suggested for the plan they all improved my system


----------



## darkage

speedgoat said:


> in my case the plan defo works better in SC boost, the 2nd version of it especially the "universal" because the 1st one also increased boost but didn't allow the cores to drop to 2200MHz on idle, or in anycase this is how Hwinfo displayed them.
> 
> But in general the bios optimizations he suggested for the plan they all improved my system


the universal is for 3000 series the other is for 2000 series, i think mine dont go that low as welçl ( hwinfo also) but keep working better than amd latest balanced plan included in chipset drivers 1.11.22.454 and the boost is great allmost all cores 4400+ some 4450


----------



## speedgoat

darkage said:


> the universal is for 3000 series the other is for 2000 series


i didnt know that i thought both were for 3000 series.

im getting regularly 4.600 MHz on my best 2 cores, and all of them always over 4.500 even at 1.45V max so the plan defo improved my system


----------



## crakej

Synoxia said:


> https://www.notebookcheck.net/Lates...times-for-Ryzen-3000-processors.440380.0.html nothing special but i still want it, 300 eur premium board experience should not be this
> 
> Fun pic below, we aren't alone friends


Nice, search results about Zenfone.

Have you started a specific thread anywhere about your 'concerns'? This thread is a public thread about OCing the CH7. Yes, we expect to hear about problems, but when a few people feel disenfranchised, in this case for late updates, they need to start a thread specifically about that.

The ROG forums are not what they once were, but I know for a fact they do keep an eye on it. You could also try in these new threads getting the attention of someone from ASUS, like Raja, who was VERY enthused when AM4 launched - not so much now - he's @[email protected] here and on ROG. You can send him direct messages on ROG.

The next bios isn't going to do anything amazing. It will bring some improvement, but nothing massive. I've seen other boards have had several releases already as there have been problems, even on x570 boards.

2901 is a (near as damn-it) stable bios. I'm in no rush - I'm happy to wait for much less buggy release. ASUS have a huge product stack - they have to decide which order to update their code-base for various products, and they do change the order. It can be frustrating, but please, can we just talk here about OCing what we have?

If you're serious about your complaints, start those threads, and by all means link to them here, but lets get back to the subject of this thread.


----------



## Synoxia

crakej said:


> Nice, search results about Zenfone.
> 
> Have you started a specific thread anywhere about your 'concerns'? This thread is a public thread about OCing the CH7. Yes, we expect to hear about problems, but when a few people feel disenfranchised, in this case for late updates, they need to start a thread specifically about that.
> 
> The ROG forums are not what they once were, but I know for a fact they do keep an eye on it. You could also try in these new threads getting the attention of someone from ASUS, like Raja, who was VERY enthused when AM4 launched - not so much now - he's @[email protected] here and on ROG. You can send him direct messages on ROG.
> 
> The next bios isn't going to do anything amazing. It will bring some improvement, but nothing massive. I've seen other boards have had several releases already as there have been problems, even on x570 boards.
> 
> 2901 is a (near as damn-it) stable bios. I'm in no rush - I'm happy to wait for much less buggy release. ASUS have a huge product stack - they have to decide which order to update their code-base for various products, and they do change the order. It can be frustrating, but please, can we just talk here about OCing what we have?
> 
> If you're serious about your complaints, start those threads, and by all means link to them here, but lets get back to the subject of this thread.





EDIT: i am done, i don't want to start another discussion in this thread.


Did someone reach 1933 fclk on this board?


----------



## gupsterg

Synoxia said:


> Did someone reach 1933 fclk on this board?


Boards are not the limiting factor for FCLK, the CPUs are.


----------



## fredshino

speedgoat said:


> L4 shows very little if any performance improvement to me nothing like the Zen+ behavior on L4 or L3. PBO also shows little improvement when on.
> 
> Voltage being on auto and bursting 1.5V single supposedly is fine but i prefer a small offset since i will hit the same boosts single on 1.47V or 1.45V for example.
> 
> One thing i noticed from your printscreen is i think you dont have C-States enabled because you have Peak Core V=Average core V. Although i ve seen a few crashes with C-States enabled i use it, i think it all runs cooler with it on


Thanks! I was messing with some RAM timings and I think I bricked my board or something. It's not posting anymore.

I have tried so far:

1) Clear CMOS
2) Reflash 2901 using BIOS flashback
3) 1 and 2 multiple times in different order.
4) Turning off the power supply and removing the battery for about 2 hours.
5) Booting with 1 RAM stick on A2 only
6) Booting with a different pair of RAM (Hynix CJR instead of my B-die)
7) Reseating the CPU

When I turn the PC on, after some seconds I see my keyboard light up, I see an underscore character on the top left of my screen and then it reboots. It does that on an endless loop.

Any ideas on how to fix this?


----------



## darkage

no q code led error number?


----------



## fredshino

It's cycling really fast and in a loop so I'm not sure if I can catch the last code before it reboots.

OK, so I filmed it in slow motion and it looks like it's doing this:

91 -> 92 -> B2 -> 99 -> about here I see the underscore char on the top left of my screen -> 9C -> green led under codes turns off -> I think here is when it reboots -> 8 -> AD -> A6 -> AB and then a bunch of others...

Does this make any sense to you? I checked the manual and none of these seem like errors, just normal boot stuff.


----------



## speedgoat

fredshino said:


> It's cycling really fast and in a loop so I'm not sure if I can catch the last code before it reboots.
> 
> OK, so I filmed it in slow motion and it looks like it's doing this:
> 
> 91 -> 92 -> B2 -> 99 -> about here I see the underscore char on the top left of my screen -> 9C -> green led under codes turns off -> I think here is when it reboots -> 8 -> AD -> A6 -> AB and then a bunch of others...
> 
> Does this make any sense to you? I checked the manual and none of these seem like errors, just normal boot stuff.


that doesnt sound too good  i think the only way i can manage to brick the board is messing with the FCLK too much but clear cmos would sort this out or removing one ram. Do you have maybe a zen + to see if the board boots ?


----------



## fredshino

Crap... I don't. Sold my 2700x already.

I guess I'm gonna buy an x570 board and then try to RMA this one.

Should I go for the CH VIII or do you guys suggest any other boards?


----------



## speedgoat

fredshino said:


> Crap... I don't. Sold my 2700x already.
> 
> I guess I'm gonna buy an x570 board and then try to RMA this one.
> 
> Should I go for the CH VIII or do you guys suggest any other boards?


i would suggest you try it first with another CPU in case you busted the mem controller in the CPU and the board is alright, im just speculating here, not sure.. 
also i have actually seen once a board that eventually worked after a few re-flashes


----------



## bMind

crakej said:


> Thanks - can we have a shot of the Sensors screen after things have been running a while as well?... like this one I just took on my system..
> 
> Can you do it with that slider to the right for performance setting please.


Ok, so I made both, slider in the middle and slider to the right. This is during light use, I've been playing music, having a stream open or something, browsing internet. Normally I would have higher CPU usage due VM's and some other more demanding tasks.


----------



## crakej

bMind said:


> Ok, so I made both, slider in the middle and slider to the right. This is during light use, I've been playing music, having a stream open or something, browsing internet. Normally I would have higher CPU usage due VM's and some other more demanding tasks.


Thanks - After a brief look, you have nothing to worry about! Though I will look closer in the morning. In both situations your CPU IS down-clocking. With slider to the right it doesn't down-clock as much for high performance. With it in the middle, down-clocking is goes much further.

You can see from the power consumption (watts) that with it to the right, minimal power usage is only higher for the CPU/SoC. Because of the way the sensors work, you won't always see things down-clocking in the way you think, but if you look over at the watts/amps, they are dropping low, even if the read clock-speeds don't appear to.

The latest Ryzen Balanced power profile seems to work almost the same as the version @1usmus made for us. You should be able to leave min processor state at 100% or 99% (whatever that profile comes with) unless you want to reduce power consumption and/or temps at the expense of a bit of performance.

I'm very tired at the mo and have a damn toothache, I'll review my answer in the morning - unless someone beats me to it!


----------



## crakej

speedgoat said:


> i would suggest you try it first with another CPU in case you busted the mem controller in the CPU and the board is alright, im just speculating here, not sure..
> also i have actually seen once a board that eventually worked after a few re-flashes


I would 2nd that. Perhaps you have a local store which might test your parts for a small fee?

What happens when you have NO memory plugged in? You should get a memory error.

Any beeps going on?


----------



## fredshino

crakej said:


> I would 2nd that. Perhaps you have a local store which might test your parts for a small fee?
> 
> What happens when you have NO memory plugged in? You should get a memory error.
> 
> Any beeps going on?


Sorry I couldn't wait but I have good news. Got a new Prime X570-Pro (the CH VIII was just too expensive and I don't need the extra features) and it's working flawlessly. Gonna send my CH VII for RMA.

Do you guys have any experience with ASUS' RMA process? Is it as ****ty as all other manufacturers?


----------



## crakej

fredshino said:


> Sorry I couldn't wait but I have good news. Got a new Prime X570-Pro (the CH VIII was just too expensive and I don't need the extra features) and it's working flawlessly. Gonna send my CH VII for RMA.
> 
> Do you guys have any experience with ASUS' RMA process? Is it as ****ty as all other manufacturers?


Glad you got it sorted. Last time I used RMA (in the UK) it was OK - I just had to make sure I was on top of it!


----------



## bMind

crakej said:


> Thanks - After a brief look, you have nothing to worry about! Though I will look closer in the morning. In both situations your CPU IS down-clocking. With slider to the right it doesn't down-clock as much for high performance. With it in the middle, down-clocking is goes much further.
> 
> You can see from the power consumption (watts) that with it to the right, minimal power usage is only higher for the CPU/SoC. Because of the way the sensors work, you won't always see things down-clocking in the way you think, but if you look over at the watts/amps, they are dropping low, even if the read clock-speeds don't appear to.
> 
> The latest Ryzen Balanced power profile seems to work almost the same as the version @1usmus made for us. You should be able to leave min processor state at 100% or 99% (whatever that profile comes with) unless you want to reduce power consumption and/or temps at the expense of a bit of performance.
> 
> I'm very tired at the mo and have a damn toothache, I'll review my answer in the morning - unless someone beats me to it!


Yeah, I see it in the wattage it's just strange for me that I don't see it in the clocks and voltages :? I have the 1usmus Ryzen Universal plan on, so far with minimum 5%, I can check 99% (that was default).

Also..no worries, health comes first and toothache is a b$%!*, believe me I know. You can't think straight.


----------



## darkage

bMind said:


> Yeah, I see it in the wattage it's just strange for me that I don't see it in the clocks and voltages :? I have the 1usmus Ryzen Universal plan on, so far with minimum 5%, I can check 99% (that was default).
> 
> Also..no worries, health comes first and toothache is a b$%!*, believe me I know. You can't think straight.


do you have both powerplans installed as image bellow ?
if not you need to uninstall any old 1usmus before that


----------



## Pietro

darkage said:


> this can be a gpu or psu problem, try with bios in default and watch voltages is hwinfo or aida etc, dont use any asus software


It is probably poor quality CPU(or at least one or couple of cores), since my ryzen is stable with global c-states cotrol set on auto(boosting in that case is limited to 4550MHz, allcore to 4075MHz), cpu and gpu both test stressed many times before so PSU is fine, a couple of days ago I upgraded my gpu and behaviour was the same black screen after few minutes with c-states set on. I tried couple of things and didn't help, so I thought that maybe my 3900X needs a higher voltage to work properly, so I've just set core voltage offset on +0.03V, hwinfo still shows still up to 1.5V(allcore cinebench run up to 1.3V), but some cores are boosting to 4625 MHz and screen didn't go black after 3-10 minutes. It is 30 minutes since I set that offset voltage and PC still didn't crash. It looks like one of cores needs higher voltage on some certain clocks. I hope +0.03V offest fixed issue, but well it should work out of the box.


----------



## darkage

amd will replace the cpu without much problem, contact them and explain what happens, they are very fast with rma 
good luck


----------



## Pietro

Before doing RMA I do some tests.

Well new bios for Croshair VII is not going to be released anytime soon, but If they were so bad why they updated bios to 1.0.0.4B for X570 boards:



> I wrote to ASUS about 1004b
> 
> Answer is the following:
> 
> We thank you in advance for your inquiry.
> 
> After the updates rolled out for many of our boards, we've been told of several issues with this update. Therefore, we decided to withhold the update for our premium boards until we can offer a stable BIOS version. We ask for her presence.
> 
> greetings
> 
> https://www.hardwareluxx.de/communi...ir-vii-hero-x470-1199003-53.html#post27251721


----------



## Synoxia

Pietro said:


> Before doing RMA I do some tests.
> 
> Well new bios for Croshair VII is not going to be released anytime soon, but If they were so bad why they updated bios to 1.0.0.4B for X570 boards:


I've already answered on rog forum (where i don't care to be banned) about this, the answer is right in the question


----------



## bMind

darkage said:


> do you have both powerplans installed as image bellow ?
> if not you need to uninstall any old 1usmus before that


Yup, got both and I did remove them manually before reinstalling. I'm using the Universal one for my 2700X on Windows 10 1909.


----------



## gupsterg

speedgoat said:


> hi, is your FCLK constantly on the defined value or is it dynamic ?
> i was under the impression it should be static, yet i noticed mine fluctuates.


FCLK can be dynamic, see The Stilt's post here.

I'm using UEFI 2901, fully updated W10 Pro, Ryzen Balanced power profile. I tried enabling DF CStates on my R5 3600, CPU is using PBO +150MHz and RAM is 3800MHz with 1:1:1 FCLK:UCLK:MEMCLK. I do not see dynamic FCLK, what settings/setup are you using?

*** edit ***

Global C-State Control: [Auto] must not default to [Enabled], had to set it as [Enabled] and then have dynamic FCLK  .



Spoiler













 @Mumak, luv'ing the new monitoring data available in HWINFO for Matisse :thumb: .


----------



## Mumak

gupsterg said:


> FCLK can be dynamic, see The Stilt's post here.
> 
> I'm using UEFI 2901, fully updated W10 Pro, Ryzen Balanced power profile. I tried enabling DF CStates on my R5 3600, CPU is using PBO +150MHz and RAM is 3800MHz with 1:1:1 FCLK:UCLK:MEMCLK. I do not see dynamic FCLK, what settings/setup are you using?
> 
> *** edit ***
> 
> Global C-State Control: [Auto] must not default to [Enabled], had to set it as [Enabled] and then have dynamic FCLK  .
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 310262
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @Mumak, luv'ing the new monitoring data available in HWINFO for Matisse :thumb: .


No TDC? Looks like your CPU is running out of spec as the telemetry is off. I had the same issue with PRO 3900 CPU on C6H. 65W TDP running at >100W, too hot and no TDC reported.
ASUS somehow forgot to fix telemetry for Matisse on 3xx/4xx boards. After they sent me the fixed BIOS all worked well.


----------



## xeizo

Mumak said:


> No TDC? Looks like your CPU is running out of spec as the telemetry is off. I had the same issue with PRO 3900 CPU on C6H. 65W TDP running at >100W, too hot and no TDC reported.
> ASUS somehow forgot to fix telemetry for Matisse on 3xx/4xx boards. After they sent me the fixed BIOS all worked well.


TDC, EDC, PPT haven't worked for a while in the C7H bios, basically it's frozen, and Package Power in HWINFO shows 10W so is totally off. The bios can't exceed 145W/98A so that is off too. Things works, but reporting is super buggy.


----------



## gupsterg

Mumak said:


> No TDC? Looks like your CPU is running out of spec as the telemetry is off. I had the same issue with PRO 3900 CPU on C6H. 65W TDP running at >100W, too hot and no TDC reported.
> ASUS somehow forgot to fix telemetry for Matisse on 3xx/4xx boards. After they sent me the fixed BIOS all worked well.


No TDC in HWINFO  , even at stock. Ryzen Master will show TDC, but no activity  . Even at stock PPT is frozen as xeizo states, may that be HWINFO or Ryzen Master. Only EDC has activity in both apps, not sure it works correctly though for reading.

This ZIP has screenie video of HWINFO and Ryzen Master.



xeizo said:


> TDC, EDC, PPT haven't worked for a while in the C7H bios, basically it's frozen, and Package Power in HWINFO shows 10W so is totally off. The bios can't exceed 145W/98A so that is off too. Things works, but reporting is super buggy.


Set PPT/TDC/EDC via the AMD Overclocking menu, then Ryzen Master will show it as you set it and I believe when I last checked if I lowered EDC from 140A I lost performance in benchmark.


----------



## Mumak

That's exactly how it was on my C6H. Moreover at full load the 65W CPU was running >75 C, clearly out of spec as the telemetry wasn't working.
It's a BIOS bug and once I upgraded to a fixed version, all was OK including power consumption, TDC level and temps (61 C now at full load).
I have a fixed BIOS for C6H only, will need to check with ASUS if/when they will release a fix.

I'm still wondering how such a significant problem went unnoticed for such a long time!
And it's not just ASUS, some others were doing this intentionally because they saw better performance. They didn't care the CPUs run out of spec!


----------



## xeizo

Mumak said:


> That's exactly how it was on my C6H. Moreover at full load the 65W CPU was running >75 C, clearly out of spec as the telemetry wasn't working.
> It's a BIOS bug and once I upgraded to a fixed version, all was OK including power consumption and temps.
> I have a fixed BIOS for C6H only, will need to check with ASUS if/when they will release a fix.
> 
> I'm still wondering how such a significant problem went unnoticed for such a long time!


If they where monitoring forums they would have known, if you could somehow influence Asus to make a fixed bios for C7H it would be really great.

In fact, this is a way more important bug to fix than to get 1004B.


----------



## gupsterg

Mumak said:


> That's exactly how it was on my C6H. Moreover at full load the 65W CPU was running >75 C, clearly out of spec as the telemetry wasn't working.
> It's a BIOS bug and once I upgraded to a fixed version, all was OK including power consumption, TDC level and temps (61 C now at full load).
> I have a fixed BIOS for C6H only, will need to check with ASUS if/when they will release a fix.
> 
> I'm still wondering how such a significant problem went unnoticed for such a long time!
> And it's not just ASUS, some others were doing this intentionally because they saw better performance. They didn't care the CPUs run out of spec!


I can't say I've noted CPU temperature being wrong on R5 3600 on any of the UEFI that supported Matisse. I will later today be using a R7 3700X and if there's an issue on that front I'll share.

The issue with PPT/TDC/EDC readings has been around for ages, IIRC even on 2700X the readings were whack. IIRC even Threadripper 1/2 on ZE/ZEA is borked for that aspect .

Thanks for info on ASUS have a fix :thumb: , I'll PM a few to see what they say for C7H.


----------



## Mumak

I have sent an inquiry.
Currently I have fixed BIOSes for C6H and C6H WIFI-AC if anyone's interested.


----------



## gupsterg

Mumak said:


> I have sent an inquiry.
> Currently I have fixed BIOSes for C6H and C6H WIFI-AC if anyone's interested.


+rep :thumb: , you da man!  , I think I'll have to send a crimbo donation your way  .


----------



## Mumak

gupsterg said:


> The issue with PPT/TDC/EDC readings has been around for ages, IIRC even on 2700X the readings were whack. IIRC even Threadripper 1/2 on ZE/ZEA is borked for that aspect .


PPT/TDC/EDC monitoring is substantially different on Zen2 CPUs. Not even sure if this is even possible to work properly on Zen1.
The problem seen with Zen2 CPUs is of a different nature, the entire Power Management/telemetry and monitoring can work if the BIOS would properly configure it.


----------



## xeizo

Seems they somehow "forgot", but if it was possible to fix for C6H it should be possible for C7H as well. My Gigabyte B450 board shows correct readings with a 2700X. My Prime Pro with 3700X is as borked as the C7H in that regard, and that is with 1004B. Only difference is it is possible to override power consumption with the Prime Pro, useful if cooling is good.

(somehow ironic that C7H is more limited than the Prime Pro when the Prime Pro has a much weaker VRM)


----------



## Mumak

Got response, fixed BIOSes are already scheduled for release.


----------



## xeizo

Mumak said:


> Got response, fixed BIOSes are already scheduled for release.


That is fantastic news, this has been a nagging issue for a long time now, looking forward to see it being fixed!


----------



## Mumak

Here you go, Beta BIOSes that should fix the telemetry problem on Matisse + C6H/C7H:
CROSSHAIR VI HERO: www.hwinfo.com/beta/ASUS/CROSSHAIR-VI-HERO-ASUS-0001.7z
CROSSHAIR VI HERO WIFI-AC: www.hwinfo.com/beta/ASUS/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VI-HERO-WIFI-AC-ASUS-0001.7z
CROSSHAIR VII HERO: www.hwinfo.com/beta/ASUS/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-0002.7z
CROSSHAIR VII HERO WIFI: www.hwinfo.com/beta/ASUS/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0002.7z


----------



## darkage

are they based in 2901 the chvii bios? or older?


----------



## Mumak

AGESA 1.0.0.4, so I guess the latest.


----------



## darkage

Mumak said:


> AGESA 1.0.0.4, so I guess the latest.


thanks, rep ++++


----------



## Rusakova

Mumak said:


> Here you go, Beta BIOSes that should fix the telemetry problem on Matisse + C6H/C7H:
> CROSSHAIR VI HERO: www.hwinfo.com/beta/ASUS/CROSSHAIR-VI-HERO-ASUS-0001.7z
> CROSSHAIR VI HERO WIFI-AC: www.hwinfo.com/beta/ASUS/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VI-HERO-WIFI-AC-ASUS-0001.7z
> CROSSHAIR VII HERO: www.hwinfo.com/beta/ASUS/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-0002.7z
> CROSSHAIR VII HERO WIFI: www.hwinfo.com/beta/ASUS/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0002.7z


BIOS naming is a bit confusing, since 0002 beta was already released in August 2019.
But they do have different hash values than previous ones. Hmmm.


----------



## xeizo

I just renamed the zip-file to 0002-FIX to not overwrite the old one, Bios Flashback worked at first try. All the dials in Ryzen Master are moving now, so it is indeed the fix. It's AGESA 1.0.0.4B too. Everything is great! 

Edit. And my old Memory OC, 3800 1:1:1 worked at first try as well!


----------



## liakou

Thanks!! Working perfect for me! All readings are now shown properly in RM and now I can see 3 cores of my CPU boosting to 4.6! 
All this time before only 1 core would boost @4.625 max while my second best would reach max 4.575.
Using 1usmus Universal plan.


----------



## darkage

all ok here also, so far
[email protected]/1900 no problem
boost no problem
no idea why they are so afraid to launch this beta???
thanks mumak


----------



## Gregor-

darkage said:


> all ok here also, so far
> [email protected]/1900 no problem
> boost no problem
> no idea why they are so afraid to launch this beta???
> thanks mumak



This one still has the sleep bug which breaks the mem OC and decouples it from IF. 2801 is the latest version that doesn't have that bug. So far.


Anyone want to check your numbers after sleep/resume to confirm? I'll probably keep this one anyway and just disable sleep until they have a 1.0.0.4X release for the c7h that fixes it.



Thanks for the update and all the work you do on hwinfo, Mumak.


----------



## speedgoat

doesn't work for me atm 

first boot blue screen, moved the RAM to safe 3200C14 from 3800C14 that anyway is a bit of an exaggeration to see if this helps but then i got many crashes on aida 64 esp but even idle with code 8.

i will try again but the crashes were so random and so frequent i couldnt figure out anything


----------



## mtrai

Rusakova said:


> BIOS naming is a bit confusing, since 0002 beta was already released in August 2019.
> But they do have different hash values than previous ones. Hmmm.


ASUS beta bios are always 0001 and 0002. It is just the way they do it.


----------



## xeizo

Super stable for me, tried a lot of different settings and no hiccup so far. I don't use sleep as I think it is annoying. I just shut down when I'm done.

One core boosts to 4.6GHz with 1usmus 1.1, but overall performance is slightly worse than 2901. About 0.5% slower in CBs. Slightly higher latency in AIDA, but 65ns is OK anyway.

It definetely is a performance regression for me, probably why it isn't released, but it feels great that Telemetry is working as it should for the first time with Zen 2.


----------



## Synoxia

xeizo said:


> Super stable for me, tried a lot of different settings and no hiccup so far. I don't use sleep as I think it is annoying. I just shut down when I'm done.
> 
> One core boosts to 4.6GHz with 1usmus 1.1, but overall performance is slightly worse than 2901. About 0.5% slower in CBs. Slightly higher latency in AIDA, but 65ns is OK anyway.
> 
> It definetely is a performance regression for me, probably why it isn't released, but it feels great that Telemetry is working as it should for the first time with Zen 2.


What does it mean by "telemetry"? I'm gonna test the bios now, after a month it should be somewhat stable i hope.


----------



## darkage

speedgoat said:


> doesn't work for me atm
> 
> first boot blue screen, moved the RAM to safe 3200C14 from 3800C14 that anyway is a bit of an exaggeration to see if this helps but then i got many crashes on aida 64 esp but even idle with code 8.
> 
> i will try again but the crashes were so random and so frequent i couldnt figure out anything


maybe some software conflit? did you update by flashback?
try to reinstall amd chipset drivers
dont use old bios profiles


----------



## speedgoat

darkage said:


> maybe some software conflit? did you update by flashback?
> try to reinstall amd chipset drivers
> dont use old bios profiles


yeah flashback, also tried to reinstall chipset drivers but got a crash in the middle of it.
actually yes i did use an old bios profile, i was also wondering if that messed things up. 

you guys all used Global C-state Control = Enabled, CPPC = Enabled
,CPPC Preferred Cores = Enabled ?


----------



## Synoxia

speedgoat said:


> yeah flashback, also tried to reinstall chipset drivers but got a crash in the middle of it.
> actually yes i did use an old bios profile, i was also wondering if that messed things up.
> 
> you guys all used Global C-state Control = Enabled, CPPC = Enabled
> ,CPPC Preferred Cores = Enabled ?


Probably this, i had crash on startup on 1000% hci stable settings... i guess we have to put everything back manually


EDIT: yeah i use CPPC enabled stuff.


----------



## darkage

speedgoat said:


> yeah flashback, also tried to reinstall chipset drivers but got a crash in the middle of it.
> actually yes i did use an old bios profile, i was also wondering if that messed things up.
> 
> you guys all used Global C-state Control = Enabled, CPPC = Enabled
> ,CPPC Preferred Cores = Enabled ?


yes, for me cppc preferred cores i use disabled
never use old bios profiles, bios moved from agesa 
good luck


----------



## Synoxia

For me aida latency is worse (0.1-0.2sn) and boost seem to be completely trash, it doesn't boost to 4425 and 4450 anymore (3700x).
We'll see if amd did magic and performance + stability is better overall. Boot time cut by 3 seconds for me, not impressive but good.

EDIT: yeah now 3700x feels like a 3700x and not halfway a 3800x like another used said. Sad from AMD that they cripple our processors for segmentation... anyway my worst cores gained +25mhz while my best lost 50-25mhz.


----------



## darkage

boost is the same for me
latency is the same
maybe a lot of background programs?


----------



## bloot

Is CPU Core Ratio (Per CCX) available on the C7H 1.0.0.4 beta bios? It is not on the C6H one


----------



## Pietro

xeizo said:


> Super stable for me, tried a lot of different settings and no hiccup so far. I don't use sleep as I think it is annoying. I just shut down when I'm done.
> 
> One core boosts to 4.6GHz with 1usmus 1.1, but overall performance is slightly worse than 2901. About 0.5% slower in CBs. Slightly higher latency in AIDA, but 65ns is OK anyway.
> 
> It definetely is a performance regression for me, probably why it isn't released, but it feels great that Telemetry is working as it should for the first time with Zen 2.


With 1usmus 1.1 profile single core performance went up from 518 to 522 in CB20, multi is worse by 200 points. Boots times didn't improve, latency very similar and still in range of 67.2-67.5ns for 3733MHz CL16 micron edies.



bloot said:


> Is CPU Core Ratio (Per CCX) available on the C7H 1.0.0.4 beta bios? It is not on the C6H one


No and I doubt it will be anytime soon.


----------



## xeizo

For me, multi is back to same performance as 2801, 2901 was worse. Single core is problematic though, weak boost behaviour for me. 2901 was the best bios for single core. But, since this is a 12-core cpu I suppose I prefer better multi.


----------



## xbb-

Does it solve the "double POST" problem?


----------



## crakej

bloot said:


> Is CPU Core Ratio (Per CCX) available on the C7H 1.0.0.4 beta bios? It is not on the C6H one


If not, then I'm disappointed and won't be installing. I do not like that AMD is forcing us to OC using R Master. I want to be able to do this all from the bios so I can run whatever I want on my PC with it OCed the way I want it.

Again (for once I agree with @Synoxia) AMD are using firmware to define their product stack. We were meant to have PCIE4 (we did for a while) and we were meant to be having proper OC controls with AGESA 1004. Removing functionality like this is just trying to force us to update hardware we don't need to update.

Before the launch of AM4 CPUs, we were told that we'd have the same socket for years, allowing us to upgrade easily. They did NOT tell us they would release a new chipset every year, and that you would require that chipset to have full functionality and bios settings!

So, unless I want to use RM and Windows, I can't OC the CPU properly from the bios.  I wonder if we could mod the bios to get those bios settings? I'm sure someone will do that if it's possible.


----------



## Pietro

xbb- said:


> Does it solve the "double POST" problem?


You mean a one from cold boot with overclocked ram and inifnity? - no.


----------



## darkage

Pietro said:


> You mean a one from cold boot with overclocked ram and inifnity? - no.


i never had double post with oc memory
do you use mem 1:1?


----------



## Synoxia

crakej said:


> If not, then I'm disappointed and won't be installing. I do not like that AMD is forcing us to OC using R Master. I want to be able to do this all from the bios so I can run whatever I want on my PC with it OCed the way I want it.
> 
> Again (for once I agree with @Synoxia) AMD are using firmware to define their product stack. We were meant to have PCIE4 (we did for a while) and we were meant to be having proper OC controls with AGESA 1004. Removing functionality like this is just trying to force us to update hardware we don't need to update.
> 
> Before the launch of AM4 CPUs, we were told that we'd have the same socket for years, allowing us to upgrade easily. They did NOT tell us they would release a new chipset every year, and that you would require that chipset to have full functionality and bios settings!
> 
> So, unless I want to use RM and Windows, I can't OC the CPU properly from the bios.  I wonder if we could mod the bios to get those bios settings? I'm sure someone will do that if it's possible.


Just wait until someone is able to hack these firmwares... imagine swapping a 3800x firmware on 3700x cpu, many users already found that their single cores at 1.5v can go way above spec. 
I might actually say that (for gaming atleast) best purchase was made by z370 8600-8700k users that now have an upgrade path into 9900 when it becomes cheaper. 
Maximum game compatibility (yes, i still can't run properly some old titles that i used to run with higher fps on 4.2ghz i5 750) and not having to deal with AMD typical "beta at launch" state is a big deal.
AMD is just as shady as Intel, they just don't have their money to be as greedy. Check R9 Fury HBM clock disable for example and threadripper 3rd gen.

For comparisons 1.0.0.3abba after 3 hours, 1.0.0.4 (beta) after 2 hours. I won't post 1.0.0.2 because AMD said longevity problems blablabla, that was *4* of my cpu cores reaching 4.450.

When cinebenching single core, on abba 2901 i was mostly around 4380 with frequent peaks to 4.400-4.425 and some 4360 4200. On 1.0.0.4 my avg is 4350-4360 and it just stays like that.

Imho let's wait for the proper release before jumping to conclusions.


----------



## 621670

Is there any point of updating to the AGESA 1004 Beta BIOS if I still am on Zen+?


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

fredshino said:


> It's cycling really fast and in a loop so I'm not sure if I can catch the last code before it reboots.
> 
> 
> 
> OK, so I filmed it in slow motion and it looks like it's doing this:
> 
> 
> 
> 91 -> 92 -> B2 -> 99 -> about here I see the underscore char on the top left of my screen -> 9C -> green led under codes turns off -> I think here is when it reboots -> 8 -> AD -> A6 -> AB and then a bunch of others...
> 
> 
> 
> Does this make any sense to you? I checked the manual and none of these seem like errors, just normal boot stuff.


Try another PSU before buying a new one!

I had this issue while doing too much -offset on a x470 TUF with a 2400g and a bequiet 550 straight Power11. 
And as schon as i switchen to my daugherts ssd zag this happens...






Only changed the PSU to my old enermax and it started like there was nothing.
Put in the bequiet PSU again change bios and fixed ! 



Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## gupsterg

Mumak said:


> AGESA 1.0.0.4, so I guess the latest.


Nice  , VDDG can now be set for CCD/IOD.



Spoiler
















xeizo said:


> I just renamed the zip-file to 0002-FIX to not overwrite the old one, Bios Flashback worked at first try. All the dials in Ryzen Master are moving now, so it is indeed the fix. It's AGESA 1.0.0.4B too. Everything is great!
> 
> Edit. And my old Memory OC, 3800 1:1:1 worked at first try as well!


Yep Ryzen Master and HWINFO working correctly  , screenie video and settings.txt and PBO +150MHz 3800MHz 1:1:1 seems to have taken at prior UEFI settings  .

I earlier posted incorrectly how I set UEFI to have RM show info correctly.

I set PPT/TDC/EDC in PBO menu on Extreme Tweaker. Scalar I set in AMD OC menu and SOC/VDDP/VDDG.



Spoiler






















If I set SOC on Extreme Tweaker at POST it will bounce to ~1.1V then set value, I use DMM to see this. If I use AMD OC menu it will be as set all through POST. SOC voltage mode I set as Offset/+/Auto on Extreme Tweaker and manual value in AMD OC menu.



bloot said:


> Is CPU Core Ratio (Per CCX) available on the C7H 1.0.0.4 beta bios? It is not on the C6H one


I didn't see it, C8H/C8F has had this since Aug 19  , link.


----------



## Synoxia

User32 said:


> Is there any point of updating to the AGESA 1004 Beta BIOS if I still am on Zen+?


nope



gupsterg said:


> Nice  , VDDG can now be set for CCD/IOD.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 310334


You mean a different vddg voltage for each CCD? So only useful for 3950x/3900x? IOD meaning?


----------



## crakej

Synoxia said:


> nope
> 
> You mean a different vddg voltage for each CCD? So only useful for 3950x/3900x? IOD meaning?


No.....

IOD = IO Die - so one voltage for that and one for both CCDs


----------



## Synoxia

crakej said:


> No.....
> 
> IOD = IO Die - so one voltage for that and one for both CCDs


lolwhat? i thought vddg voltage was a single entry... did i understand correctly i repeat is 1 vddg for the cdds and one for the io die?

What would be the advantage of having different entries? Can you reliably undervolt the other one and in which case


----------



## arvinz

Installed the 3950X about an hr ago and updated BIOS to this latest 002 beta with 1.0.0.4. Seems to be running fairly smoothly. Haven't done a lot of messing around with bios settings yet. Would love everyone's input on what settings to put for auto, and non-auto/all core OC.

So far this is what I've done:

Loaded optimal defaults

-Disable asus grid install
-Manually set GPU to gen 3
-CPPC - enable both options
-DF and C-states enabled
-Using Ryzen balanced Power Plan on Windows 10 1909 (haven't installed 1usmus's version yet)

Used Ryzen DRAM calculator to OC CL14 3200 to CL16 3600 (Going to mess with this and OC as much as I can)

Ran a few C20 benches, got around 9060..I'm seeing others hitting the 10K mark, would love to know how.


----------



## gupsterg

Synoxia said:


> You mean a different vddg voltage for each CCD? So only useful for 3950x/3900x? IOD meaning?
> 
> 
> 
> crakej said:
> 
> 
> 
> No.....
> 
> IOD = IO Die - so one voltage for that and one for both CCDs
> 
> 
> 
> Synoxia said:
> 
> 
> 
> lolwhat? i thought vddg voltage was a single entry... did i understand correctly i repeat is 1 vddg for the cdds and one for the io die?
> 
> What would be the advantage of having different entries? Can you reliably undervolt the other one and in which case
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

As crakej said, I asked The Stilt a while back and he had no idea at the time, from past discussions it seems AMD doesn't really give out much info, unless they choose to.

I may play with the two settings today, yesterday had no time for tinkering, only managed the update last night. So far I set CCD/IOD VDDG the same 980mV as I used on prior UEFI to have 1900MHz FCLK, etc.



arvinz said:


> Installed the 3950X about an hr ago and updated BIOS to this latest 002 beta with 1.0.0.4. Seems to be running fairly smoothly. Haven't done a lot of messing around with bios settings yet. Would love everyone's input on what settings to put for auto, and non-auto/all core OC.
> 
> So far this is what I've done:
> 
> Loaded optimal defaults
> 
> -Disable asus grid install
> -Manually set GPU to gen 3
> -CPPC - enable both options
> -DF and C-states enabled
> -Using Ryzen balanced Power Plan on Windows 10 1909 (haven't installed 1usmus's version yet)
> 
> Used Ryzen DRAM calculator to OC CL14 3200 to CL16 3600 (Going to mess with this and OC as much as I can)
> 
> Ran a few C20 benches, got around 9060..I'm seeing others hitting the 10K mark, would love to know how.


Nice  .

When you say "-DF and C-states enabled" you've enabled Global C-State Control in the AMD CBS CPU options section? as if I did not do it there I didn't have dynamic FCLK, which in your screenie seems to be static.


----------



## speedgoat

so indeed my problem was the previous bios profile and when i entered the settings manually it booted instantly, no crashes so far even with 3800C14 Ram, it might be stable. 

I see the same other people mentioned, small increase in MC and small reduction in SC for CB 15-20, the core boost has also been reduced slightly, the temps are a little better, latency is +0.1 0.2 but then again i think Aida latency and boost are related. One other positive is i use Farcry 5 benchmark to try and test performance, i got straight away +2 FPS there from my best score ever, im thinking it looks as if it has regressed a bit in performance in CB and Cpu-Z but it has probably increased a little. 

Because its been mentioned recently If anyone else is getting the bug where UCLK crashes to 950MHz after sleep have a look at what your FCLK is doing then, mine if uncoupled boots to close to 3.000 MHz, i cant see this being very healthy, this is from 2901 though.


----------



## Synoxia

gupsterg said:


> Nice  , VDDG can now be set for CCD/IOD.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 310334
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep Ryzen Master and HWINFO working correctly  , screenie video and settings.txt and PBO +150MHz 3800MHz 1:1:1 seems to have taken at prior UEFI settings  .
> 
> I earlier posted incorrectly how I set UEFI to have RM show info correctly.
> 
> I set PPT/TDC/EDC in PBO menu on Extreme Tweaker. Scalar I set in AMD OC menu and SOC/VDDP/VDDG.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 310336
> 
> 
> View attachment 310338
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If I set SOC on Extreme Tweaker at POST it will bounce to ~1.1V then set value, I use DMM to see this. If I use AMD OC menu it will be as set all through POST. SOC voltage mode I set as Offset/+/Auto on Extreme Tweaker and manual value in AMD OC menu.
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't see it, C8H/C8F has had this since Aug 19  , link.


What aida latency do you get with those settings? Also, are those 4 dimms, passively or actively cooled? Thank you


----------



## harderthanfire

Struggling to boost to 4.6 on my 3900X with the .2 bios, I don't remember what magic set of settings I had before that made it boost fully.


----------



## xeizo

harderthanfire said:


> Struggling to boost to 4.6 on my 3900X with the .2 bios, I don't remember what magic set of settings I had before that made it boost fully.


Single core boost is basically borked in this bios, the 3900X performs exactly as a 3700X in single core. Multi is very good though. But the borked single core must be the clear reason why this isn't official. 

So far, 2801 performed the best of the later bioses.

Also, CPU power is hard locked at 105W in Ryzen Master and is totally impossible to unlock. It limits max performance tremendously. My 2700X happily sips 160-170W. Of course, there's still manual per CCX OC in Ryzen Master left, which can give massive performance improvements, but it would be great if Auto/PBO actually worked just a little. Especially since Robert Hallock has talked it up so much.

I've tried A LOT of settings by now, and there's no settings that does anything good. A saving grace is, it's pretty stable, the only setting bluescreening is CB15 Aggressive which has always done so since it went live.
.


----------



## gupsterg

Synoxia said:


> What aida latency do you get with those settings?


This was 0002 AGESA 1.0.0.4.



Spoiler



PBO +200MHz











Older runs same timings.



Spoiler



PBO +100MHz









Stock CPU











Little bit tweaked timings.



Spoiler














To me it would seem Zen2 vs Zen/Zen+ reaches a point of diminshing return on timings quicker. So I'd crank up FCLK/UCLK/MEMCLK and keep to 1:1:1 and lower as needed without having to pump the volts if you get what I mean.



Synoxia said:


> Also, are those 4 dimms, passively or actively cooled? Thank you


The Zen2+C7H setup is open air case, does have a fan pointed at ram, not very fast or loud, Arctic Cooling F12 PWM. I may soon use the Zen2+C7H setup in a case or I may splurge on a R9 3900X, dunno at present.


----------



## Synoxia

gupsterg said:


> This was 0002 AGESA 1.0.0.4.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> PBO +200MHz
> 
> View attachment 310584
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Older runs same timings.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> PBO +100MHz
> 
> View attachment 310578
> 
> 
> Stock CPU
> 
> View attachment 310580
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Little bit tweaked timings.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 310576
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To me it would seem *Zen2 vs Zen/Zen+ reaches a point of diminshing return on timings quicker.* So I'd crank up FCLK/UCLK/MEMCLK and keep to 1:1:1 and lower as needed without having to pump the volts if you get what I mean.
> 
> 
> 
> The Zen2+C7H setup is open air case, does have a fan pointed at ram, not very fast or loud, Arctic Cooling F12 PWM. I may soon use the Zen2+C7H setup in a case or I may splurge on a R9 3900X, dunno at present.


Yes i've figured this a few hours ago. 

I've turned on GDM again, went from 32-48-288 to 34-50-300 TRFC and i've just lost 0.1 ns. 
You are just 0.2 ns from me with mostly auto settings vs mostly Dram calculator fast... 
I've found out that 4 dimms get very hot in my case when gaming (around 50c, maybe because of extra gpu heat) so even if with HCI only stresstest i was 2000% stable up to 58c my new methodology of testing which involves AC odyssey at 4k 200% res scale borderless mode (LOL) + HCI 700000 total will get the ram in the 60ish c... need to lower the voltage (1.42) and settle for a more relaxed memory profile


----------



## gupsterg

gupsterg said:


> To me it would seem Zen2 vs Zen/Zen+ reaches a point of diminshing return on timings quicker. So I'd crank up FCLK/UCLK/MEMCLK and keep to 1:1:1 and lower as needed without having to pump the volts if you get what I mean.
> 
> 
> 
> Synoxia said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes i've figured this a few hours ago.
> 
> I've turned on GDM again, went from 32-48-288 to 34-50-300 TRFC and i've just lost 0.1 ns.
> You are just 0.2 ns from me with mostly auto settings vs mostly Dram calculator fast...
> I've found out that 4 dimms get very hot in my case when gaming (around 50c, maybe because of extra gpu heat) so even if with HCI only stresstest i was 2000% stable up to 58c my new methodology of testing which involves AC odyssey at 4k 200% res scale borderless mode (LOL) + HCI 700000 total will get the ram in the 60ish c... need to lower the voltage (1.42) and settle for a more relaxed memory profile
Click to expand...

A few days ago I spent time knocking down timings, I tested reuns of Kahru RAM test on:-

i) Full POST.
ii) Warm POST.
iii) Same POST.

The gains of performance outside of a RAM bench were negligible, what did happen was I hurt stability on "repeat'n'rinse".

So when I set just say 16-16-16-16-40-56, SCL 4 & 4, TRFC 323, TRTP 8 and use say SOC: 1.062V, CLDO_VDDP: 0.927V, CLDO_VDDG: 0.980V, VDIMM: 1.35V, I'm at the "sweet spot" for what the combined HW does, peformance and voltages IMO.

One thing I have noted, it does not matter if motherboard is Daisy Chain Topology or T-Topology, if using 4 dimms, test moving the dimms around the slots, it may improve stability. I tested this with 3x Threadripper CPUs on Zenith Extreme Alpha and 2x Zen2 with Crosshair VII Hero and used F4-3200C14Q-32GVK & F4-3200C14Q-32GTZSW. A board and RAM kit will show favouritism to where you place the dimms and the CPUs I used all then favoured the setup of RAM in x slots, if I'm explaining myself right.


----------



## Synoxia

gupsterg said:


> A few days ago I spent time knocking down timings, I tested reuns of Kahru RAM test on:-
> 
> i) Full POST.
> ii) Warm POST.
> iii) Same POST.
> 
> The gains of performance outside of a RAM bench were negligible, what did happen was I hurt stability on "repeat'n'rinse".
> 
> So when I set just say 16-16-16-16-40-56, SCL 4 & 4, TRFC 323, TRTP 8 and use say SOC: 1.062V, CLDO_VDDP: 0.927V, CLDO_VDDG: 0.980V, VDIMM: 1.35V, I'm at the "sweet spot" for what the combined HW does, peformance and voltages IMO.
> 
> One thing I have noted, it does not matter if motherboard is Daisy Chain Topology or T-Topology, if using 4 dimms, test moving the dimms around the slots, it may improve stability. I tested this with 3x Threadripper CPUs on Zenith Extreme Alpha and 2x Zen2 with Crosshair VII Hero and used F4-3200C14Q-32GVK & F4-3200C14Q-32GTZSW. A board and RAM kit will show favouritism to where you place the dimms and the CPUs I used all then favoured the setup of RAM in x slots, if I'm explaining myself right.


Yeah i've tested this too, IMHO i think that in the case of daisy chains like ours, if you place the "weaker" ram in the strongest slot (A2, B2) is better because the speed of the system will be based on the slowest kit.
Anyways in my case i think it's about temperature, not settings related. I might be lucky to have a resiliant to temperature B-DIE (most get unstable past 50c) but still over 60c is very bad for stability... 
When i had 2 dimms i had 15c difference, are there any other settings that influence ram temperature other than dram voltage?

P.S you use the same exact vddsoc as me LOL brother

VDDG/FCLK stability is tricky... i had random crashes few days ago even if stable on HCI memtest, bumped vddg to 0.963 and they are no more. I guess it wasn't stable after all because degradation at 0.950v sounds stupid to me


----------



## speedgoat

completely Dram Calculator fast preset with GDM on, its 4x8GB B-dies and i gave it 1.46V i have ram fans. 
i m getting the feeling aida is somehow unreliable, if you happen to have good SC boost it will show considerably lower latency for very average timings


----------



## gupsterg

@Mumak

Testing so far with R7 3700 & HWINFO in this ZIP (organise by time to see tinkering process  ).

In file 140 95 154 9x R4 RT 1.062 0.927 0.980 1.35 0.675 43.6 room 18C PASS 180%, CPU temp I believe error out at 105C, is limited in UEFI at 85C.

In file 140 95 154 10x R4 RT 1.062 0.927 0.980 1.35 0.675 43.6 room 18C PASS 205%, CPU 6 T1 effective clock went to ~4.5GHz when core was stock clocks.

All in all, all working well  . I reckon these minor bug outs, maybe down to the multiple monitoring tools I had open at screen capture.



speedgoat said:


> Because its been mentioned recently If anyone else is getting the bug where UCLK crashes to 950MHz after sleep have a look at what your FCLK is doing then, mine if uncoupled boots to close to 3.000 MHz, i cant see this being very healthy, this is from 2901 though.


Not yet encountered this.



Synoxia said:


> Yeah i've tested this too, IMHO i think that in the case of daisy chains like ours, if you place the "weaker" ram in the strongest slot (A2, B2) is better because the speed of the system will be based on the slowest kit.
> Anyways in my case i think it's about temperature, not settings related. I might be lucky to have a resiliant to temperature B-DIE (most get unstable past 50c) but still over 60c is very bad for stability...
> When i had 2 dimms i had 15c difference, are there any other settings that influence ram temperature other than dram voltage?
> 
> P.S you use the same exact vddsoc as me LOL brother
> 
> VDDG/FCLK stability is tricky... i had random crashes few days ago even if stable on HCI memtest, bumped vddg to 0.963 and they are no more. I guess it wasn't stable after all because degradation at 0.950v sounds stupid to me


On the ZEA (T-Topology) and C7H (Daisy Chain Topology), weaker dimms best to place in slots closer to CPU is what both boards seem to show me. This process has improved IMO tweakability of RAM, allowed ProcODT wider range to be used for testing, etc.

The R7 3700X initially was tested with same SOC/CLDO_VDDP/CLDO_VDDG as R5 3600, today so far I have managed to get it down from 1.062/0.927/0.980 to 1.043/0.921/0.972, VDIMM/VTTDDR/ProcODT is still the same as used with R5 3600, 1.35/0.675/43.6.



speedgoat said:


> completely Dram Calculator fast preset with GDM on, its 4x8GB B-dies and i gave it 1.46V i have ram fans.
> i m getting the feeling aida is somehow unreliable, if you happen to have good SC boost it will show considerably lower latency for very average timings


Some what CPU clock affects RAM latency, CPU cache runs at CPU clock, so again can be affected by this aspect.


----------



## lordzed83

Ran quick test deffo performance went up by good bit








This is with 25mhz less. I'd say gain looks around 30mhz of 1.0.0.3


----------



## gupsterg

If anyone is interested UEFI 0002 is using AGESA 1.0.0.4B (The Stilt's post states SMU version 46.54 is B)



Spoiler














Today I got the power meter on wall socket, the R7 3700X shows the same aspect as R5 3600. Once ~>60W is pulled through CPU the boost algorithm will curb ACB down from what I see with Kahru RAM Test, which pulls ~60W on both CPUs. Well interested to try a 2 CCD chip like R9 3900X, to see if it also is limited to ~60W a CCD. Best ACB for Kahru RAM test on R7 3700X so far is ~4.3GHz and R5 3600 was ~4.35GHz with PBO+150MHz. When I tested PBO+100MHz on R7 3700X I saw only 1 core touch 4.425GHz momentarily and all were pretty much ~4.3GHz.

CB20 with any performance bias, on 3733MHz C16 with 105W CPU PPT/TDC/EDC on R7 3700X is ~5040 multi and ~508 single, this seems very similar to stock R7 3800X.



Spoiler














Pretty much PBO+150MHz made the R5 3600 a R5 3600X, the R7 3700X with just 105W CPU PPT/TDC/EDC is a R7 3800X. Only gripe about the R7 3700X is FCLK, nuts it just misses 1900MHz by ~3.5MHz. Ah well, perhaps next roll of silicon lottery  .

*** edit ***

A compare of P95 of R5 3600 using PBO+150MHz vs R7 3700X PBO as 105W CPU, link to ZIP. Other than extra cores/threads each is averaging very similar for MHz, temps, etc.


----------



## Synoxia

gupsterg said:


> @Mumak
> 
> Testing so far with R7 3700 & HWINFO in this ZIP (organise by time to see tinkering process  ).
> 
> In file 140 95 154 9x R4 RT 1.062 0.927 0.980 1.35 0.675 43.6 room 18C PASS 180%, CPU temp I believe error out at 105C, is limited in UEFI at 85C.
> 
> In file 140 95 154 10x R4 RT 1.062 0.927 0.980 1.35 0.675 43.6 room 18C PASS 205%, CPU 6 T1 effective clock went to ~4.5GHz when core was stock clocks.
> 
> All in all, all working well  . I reckon these minor bug outs, maybe down to the multiple monitoring tools I had open at screen capture.
> 
> 
> 
> Not yet encountered this.
> 
> 
> 
> On the ZEA (T-Topology) and C7H (Daisy Chain Topology), weaker dimms best to place in slots closer to CPU is what both boards seem to show me. This process has improved IMO tweakability of RAM, allowed ProcODT wider range to be used for testing, etc.
> 
> The R7 3700X initially was tested with same SOC/CLDO_VDDP/CLDO_VDDG as R5 3600, today so far I have managed to get it down from 1.062/0.927/0.980 to 1.043/0.921/0.972, VDIMM/VTTDDR/ProcODT is still the same as used with R5 3600, 1.35/0.675/43.6.
> 
> 
> 
> Some what CPU clock affects RAM latency, CPU cache runs at CPU clock, so again can be affected by this aspect.



Oh? On my board A1 B1 slot (the ones closer to cpu) gave me many headaches to reach the same speed, sometimes even refused to post.

Btw, i tried loading your settings with mostly auto and just trtp trfc and primary timings tweaked, i can't reach stability in ac odyssey + hci memtest load. 
Now 3 options
-1.0.0.4 is trash and should go back to ABBA for memory overclocking like they say in C8H thread
-My FCLK is unstable but then how the bloody hell have i been able to pass 3000% HCI on same/lower vddsoc-vddg + fast preset timings? (i did not include ac odyssey in the test till now tho, i thought it was a good idea to produce both a high temp scenario + realistic workload somewhat)
-I should forget this methodology of testing as nothing will heat up the ram past 52c (they get into the 60ish with this methodology) or either forget ram overclocking if i want them to be passively cooled, 4 DIMMS runs too hot for overclocking


----------



## gupsterg

Synoxia said:


> Oh? On my board A1 B1 slot (the ones closer to cpu) gave me many headaches to reach the same speed, sometimes even refused to post.
> 
> Btw, i tried loading your settings with mostly auto and just trtp trfc and primary timings tweaked, i can't reach stability in ac odyssey + hci memtest load.
> Now 3 options
> -1.0.0.4 is trash and should go back to ABBA for memory overclocking like they say in C8H thread
> -My FCLK is unstable but then how the bloody hell have i been able to pass 3000% HCI on same vddsoc-vddg? (i did not include ac odyssey in the test till now tho, i thought it was a good idea to produce both a high temp scenario + realistic workload somewhat)
> -I should forget this methodology of testing as nothing will heat up the ram past 52c (they get into the 60ish with this methodology) or either forget ram overclocking if i want them to be passively cooled, 4 DIMMS runs too hot for overclocking


Dimm slots go like this B1 B2 A1 A2. If using 2 dimms you must use B2 A2, as these are the last slots for each memory channel and termination of signally needs to be on these slots. When using 4 dimms, weakest to best dimms I organise as the slots are, so weakest go in B1, next best B2 and so on.

I can't say AGESA 1.0.0.4B is trash, not had any issues TBH, only some testing is not captured, but below is list so far.



Spoiler



FCP = Full cold post
WP = Warm post
SP = rerun of a test on same post as prior test











My best CB20 run so far without performance bias.



Spoiler



CPU using PBO settings of 105W CPU, RAM timings all Auto except 16-16-16-16-38-54, SCL 4 & 4, TRFC 318 TRTP 8











Just gonna drop SOC/CLDO_VDDP/CLDO_VDDG a bit more, may tweak some timings and calling it a day for profile, will change GPU and get some other tests done.


----------



## Synoxia

gupsterg said:


> Dimm slots go like this B1 B2 A1 A2. If using 2 dimms you must use B2 A2, as these are the last slots for each memory channel and termination of signally needs to be on these slots. When using 4 dimms, weakest to best dimms I organise as the slots are, so weakest go in B1, next best B2 and so on.
> 
> I can't say AGESA 1.0.0.4B is trash, not had any issues TBH, only some testing is not captured, but below is list so far.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> FCP = Full cold post
> WP = Warm post
> SP = rerun of a test on same post as prior test
> 
> View attachment 310674
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My best CB20 run so far without performance bias.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> CPU using PBO settings of 105W CPU, RAM timings all Auto except 16-16-16-16-38-54, SCL 4 & 4, TRFC 318 TRTP 8
> 
> View attachment 310676
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just gonna drop SOC/CLDO_VDDP/CLDO_VDDG a bit more, may tweak some timings and calling it a day for profile, will change GPU and get some other tests done.


So it could be the FCLK then? Thought i didn't get errors and went past 3000% HCI sometimes, only now i've been getting some crashes and bumped it to 0.960 (from 0.950).

THIS IS WITHOUT AC ODYSSEY INVOLVED
When i was first figuring out time ago why i couldn't boot 3800 with 4 dimms, i've "binned" both set of sticks by overclocking them at once for 3800 c16 calc fast preset, one does it at 1.415 and the other one at 1.42, 2000% HCI.
Then reached 3000% hci stability, called it a day. Then i had a crash while gaming... bumped FCLK. One user suggested me it could have been the gpu increasing the heat in the case, so i thought why not leave a game playing like at 8k resolution but capped to 17fps, producing a 70-80% gpu load? 
Then i got the idea of using AC odyssey along with HCI memtest because these Anvil engines are very sensitive to RAM for some reason, they heat ram and if you have unstable ram they will fail to launch many times
Now this got my ram +5-6c and maybe it's this that's causing instability? 
I've tried upping TRFC and even load your auto settings which are looser than mine except for TRCDRD.

I've now re-loaded ABBA and my .CMO file, gonna leave hci + odyssey overnight again. Or should i drop this methodology of testing?


----------



## gupsterg

Synoxia said:


> So it could be the FCLK then? Thought i didn't get errors and went past 3000% HCI sometimes, only now i've been getting some crashes and bumped it to 0.960 (from 0.950).


Dunno, sorry.



Synoxia said:


> THIS IS WITHOUT AC ODYSSEY INVOLVED
> When i was first figuring out time ago why i couldn't boot 3800 with 4 dimms, i've "binned" both set of sticks by overclocking them at once for 3800 c16 calc fast preset, one does it at 1.415 and the other one at 1.42, 2000% HCI.
> Then reached 3000% hci stability, called it a day. Then i had a crash while gaming... bumped FCLK. One user suggested me it could have been the gpu increasing the heat in the case, so i thought why not leave a game playing like at 8k resolution but capped to 17fps, producing a 70-80% gpu load?
> Then i got the idea of using AC odyssey along with HCI memtest because these Anvil engines are very sensitive to RAM for some reason, they heat ram and if you have unstable ram they will fail to launch many times
> Now this got my ram +5-6c and maybe it's this that's causing instability?


My Threadripper rig lacks airflow, as there is a 360mm rad at front of case, with fans on outer side of rad pushing air in. Top of case has another 360mm rad and fans on inside as exhaust, then there is a 140mm fan on rear of case as exhaust.



Spoiler














Even in the summer (~24C say here in the UK), I can't say I saw greater than ~50C, below is ~9hr run of RAM test, room ambient at start night time ~25C and in the morning ~23C.



Spoiler














Perhaps you need to improve case air flow, dunno just a suggestion crossing my mind.



Synoxia said:


> I've tried upping TRFC and even load your auto settings which are looser than mine except for TRCDRD.
> 
> I've now re-loaded ABBA and my .CMO file, gonna leave hci + odyssey overnight again. Or should i drop this methodology of testing?


Dunno, sorry.


----------



## xeizo

ABBA is better single can be seen in Geekbench, it wins all single core benches but one vs 1004B:s best run.

https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/compare/15010431?baseline=15003026


----------



## speedgoat

Synoxia said:


> -I should forget this methodology of testing as nothing will heat up the ram past 52c (they get into the 60ish with this methodology) or either forget ram overclocking if i want them to be passively cooled, 4 DIMMS runs too hot for overclocking


your ram temps suggest that perhaps you have a general airflow issue, this sounds too much for reasonable Vs.. You can also have a look at a ram fan, i use this corsair "dominator" which is kind of okish and relatively quiet at 2000rpm but this will only make things better by a few degrees esp at low speed


----------



## gupsterg

xeizo said:


> ABBA is better single can be seen in Geekbench, it wins all single core benches but one vs 1004B:s best run.
> 
> https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/compare/15010431?baseline=15003026
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


May be the case for the 8 core above CPUs, dunno. Below was PBO +200MHz on the R5 3600 on AGESA 1.0.0.4B, seems about what I'd see on prior.



Spoiler














Just did ~1.5hrs HCI v6.0 PBO 105W 6x 3733MHz SOC: 1.037V CLDO_VDDP: 0.918V CLDO_VDDG: 0.969V VDIMM: 1.35V VTTDDR: 0.675V, no issues. All recorded testing for today in this ZIP, plenty of RAM test, some P95, RealBench and HCI, some benches.

I believe we have what we gonna get with Matisse about when UEFI 2801 came out, UEFI 2901 was previously what I felt was a good UEFI, now I reckon it's AGESA 1.0.04B based. Gonna place some more NVMe in the ASUS Hyper x16 card, set the other 16x slot to 4x/4x, see if things fall over with more PCI-E lanes in use.

*** edit ***

First of the day CB20.



Spoiler


----------



## mtrai

Can someone remind me which was the best bios for over clocking on the 2700X as the elusive 3950X seems to be a pipe dream for the future, so I can roll back.


----------



## xeizo

I don't know if it's necessary to go back, my 2700X on the Aorus M B450 with AGESA 1004B runs better than ever. Boosts to 4435MHz on five cores and general performance is excellent.


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> I don't know if it's necessary to go back, my 2700X on the Aorus M B450 with AGESA 1004B runs better than ever. Boosts to 4435MHz on five cores and general performance is excellent.


I'm gonna need you to show me that boost.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> Can someone remind me which was the best bios for over clocking on the 2700X as the elusive 3950X seems to be a pipe dream for the future, so I can roll back.


BIOS 2901 seems pretty strong. Just know that the Performance Bias Geekbench/Aida setting is broken. It reduces performance.


----------



## Synoxia

I can confirm now the same thing that applies for other asus motherboards: ram overclocking on 1.0.0.4b is worse but you get better latencies. 
On 1.0.0.3abba with these settings i am rock solid stable 15k total 1000%+ per thread but 65.1ns (yes, even with the methodology of ac odyssey + hci which trashes the ram with gpu heat) on 1.0.0.4b i am unstable but i get 64.1-64.2.
Overall i am still on 2901 abba because i am not willing to trade the better single core for multithread + bios cut times.


----------



## speedgoat

perhaps i would also consider going back to 2901 but i am concerned because of the below statement :



Mumak said:


> No TDC? Looks like your CPU is running out of spec as the telemetry is off. I had the same issue with PRO 3900 CPU on C6H. 65W TDP running at >100W, too hot and no TDC reported.
> ASUS somehow forgot to fix telemetry for Matisse on 3xx/4xx boards. After they sent me the fixed BIOS all worked well.


 @Mumak can you please provide us more info on this ? what are the implications of the cpu making the wrong decisions based on the wrong telemetry (i saw you wrote something in these lines on reddit), and was this a global issue i suppose too yeah ?


----------



## Mumak

speedgoat said:


> perhaps i would also consider going back to 2901 but i am concerned because of the below statement :
> @Mumak can you please provide us more info on this ? what are the implications of the cpu making the wrong decisions based on the wrong telemetry (i saw you wrote something in these lines on reddit), and was this a global issue i suppose too yeah ?


In this case I believe the CPUs were not getting proper telemetry data about actual power consumption, hence they might run above limits. Which might be a good 'feature' for some, but not all.


----------



## Synoxia

xeizo said:


> I don't know if it's necessary to go back, my 2700X on the Aorus M B450 with AGESA 1004B runs better than ever. Boosts to 4435MHz on five cores and general performance is excellent.


Better than my 3700x, 4425 on one core xd


----------



## Dbsjej56464

Mumak said:


> In this case I believe the CPUs were not getting proper telemetry data about actual power consumption, hence they might run above limits. Which might be a good 'feature' for some, but not all.


 I brought this up when Zen2 first came out and it was just ignored by ASUS. None of the Zen2 supported bios showed the correct telemetry data. I knew my old 3600 was being pushed more than normal. So it's taken months to be fixed. Thanks for sharing the beta all the same.

Have you noticed any reduction with your boosting? Or could that just be due to the telemetry working correctly? I've only had my 3800X for a few days so hard to tell.


----------



## Mumak

I think that most (if not all) ODMs knew well the CPUs were running out of spec, but intentionally ignored this as they saw "improved performance". And none wanted to be the first one who looses the race by putting things into order.


----------



## xeizo

Mumak said:


> I think that most (if not all) ODMs knew well the CPUs were running out of spec, but intentionally ignored this as they saw "improved performance". And none wanted to be the first one who looses the race by putting things into order.


So everything before 1004B Beta/Test may be intentional OC by default from Asus? IF so, 4.6GHz for 3900X is even more optimistic than before, like it can never happen. 

Strange though, that multicore performs the same/better with the Beta, it's only single core boost which goes down noticeably.

One more thing, temp is more restricted in the Beta. I never got above 75C how hard I tried. 2901 easily goes to 80C.

Anyway, looks like we have to wait for a "good" bios in all aspects.

There's always CCX OC to circumvent the limits, that's what OC:ers do, but it would be nice to have it in the bios to not have to be dependent on Ryzen Master.


----------



## xeizo

Synoxia said:


> Better than my 3700x, 4425 on one core xd


Mostly because of the NH-D14 on it, that's a shockingly good cooler. Probably much better than the Corsair H150 on my 3900X rig.


----------



## Synoxia

xeizo said:


> Mostly because of the NH-D14 on it, that's a shockingly good cooler. Probably much better than the Corsair H150 on my 3900X rig.


I have D15 with 1 fan less.
https://www.overclock.net/forum/246...ami-s-noctua-nh-d14-vs-nh-d15-comparison.html d15 performs better than d14 and i never got something like that on 2700x, maybe because of my "silent fan curve" which is 600-900 max under normal use


----------



## xeizo

Synoxia said:


> I have D15 with 1 fan less.
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/246...ami-s-noctua-nh-d14-vs-nh-d15-comparison.html d15 performs better than d14 and i never got something like that on 2700x, maybe because of my "silent fan curve" which is 600-900 max under normal use


I use both fans, and have two Silent Typhoons straight above blowing down.


----------



## Synoxia

xeizo said:


> I use both fans, and have two Silent Typhoons straight above blowing down.


When i had 2700x i had both fans, i think that you just have a good cpu D:


----------



## xeizo

Synoxia said:


> When i had 2700x i had both fans, i think that you just have a good cpu D:


Probably, it just loves taking a beating. I'm more impressed by the cheap Aorus M handling it. The Silent Typhoons are for the Aorus M or the VRM would overheat.


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> I don't know if it's necessary to go back, my 2700X on the Aorus M B450 with AGESA 1004B runs better than ever. Boosts to 4435MHz on five cores and general performance is excellent.


So can we get a screenshot of this?


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> So can we get a screenshot of this?


I will, in time, just no hurry as I don't use that PC that much I'm mostly on the 3900X rig and forum fame has low priority.


----------



## MacMus

Guys what do u suggest Crosshair Hero or Formula ?

Does Asus have issue with external sound cards?


----------



## Synoxia

MacMus said:


> Guys what do u suggest Crosshair Hero or Formula ?
> 
> Does Asus have issue with external sound cards?


I suggest another brand.

PCI E sound card or USB? I use USB and have no problems with buzzing or groundloop


Guys, what's your preference, do you use VDDSOC LLC or not?


----------



## harderthanfire

MacMus said:


> Guys what do u suggest Crosshair Hero or Formula ?
> 
> Does Asus have issue with external sound cards?



I use a PCI-E sound card and have no issues on my Hero Wifi.


----------



## xeizo

Built in sound on C7H is quite good, may be enough for most users.

Personally I run a USB 3.1 interface and balanced interconnects to a powerful headphone amp/studio monitors. Sounds better in every way.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> So can we get a screenshot of this?


After being in Windows for 5 minutes, it's a little tired today. 4436MHz only on four cores ...


----------



## Synoxia

xeizo said:


> After being in Windows for 5 minutes, it's a little tired today. 4436MHz only on four cores ...


Ahhh but it's bclk oc... i can do 4.6ghz with my 3700x with that, obviously not stable


----------



## xeizo

Synoxia said:


> Ahhh but it's bclk oc... i can do 4.6ghz with my 3700x with that, obviously not stable


I never said it wasn't BCLK, and it's very stable, I run Windows Insider on that rig and do constant Windows Upgrades. It's also my "Skyrim Box" with plenty of mods. Never had anything crash or wack out, all benchmarks runs as they should.

It wouldn't be stable with a Samsung drive, they hate BCLK, but I run Intel 660p on that box and 660p doesn't seem to mind.


----------



## Synoxia

xeizo said:


> I never said it wasn't BCLK, and it's very stable, I run Windows Insider on that rig and do constant Windows Upgrades. It's also my "Skyrim Box" with plenty of mods. Never had anything crash or wack out, all benchmarks runs as they should.
> 
> It wouldn't be stable with a Samsung drive, they hate BCLK, but I run Intel 660p on that box and 660p doesn't seem to mind.


You might want to benchmark the applications you're using. I am stable too, problem is only cinebench goes up, games are about the same if not worse, not worth


----------



## xeizo

Synoxia said:


> You might want to benchmark the applications you're using. I am stable too, problem is only cinebench goes up, games are about the same if not worse, not worth


For me it's worth it, since I have slow memory on that box. Any extra bandwith is beneficial, in particular in games = moar fps. If running already fast memory, it wouldn't be worth it. I don't use BCLK on my 3900X or my 3700X rig.


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> I will, in time, just no hurry as I don't use that PC that much I'm mostly on the 3900X rig and forum fame has low priority.


Honestly, I just don't trust that the AGESA is actually boosting your 2700X above factory clocks.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> Honestly, I just don't trust that the AGESA is actually boosting your 2700X above factory clocks.


It doesn't, 43.5 * 102 = 4437MHz! But it do boost max on most cores, not only a single core like Zen 2 often does.


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> It doesn't, 43.5 * 102 = 4437MHz! But it do boost max on most cores, not only a single core like Zen 2 often does.


Yeah, I didn't see the images before I posted. And I did double-check. 

But you not mentioning BCLK was very deceiving.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> Yeah, I didn't see the images before I posted. And I did double-check.
> 
> But you not mentioning BCLK was very deceiving.


Not meant to be deceiving, just mentioning the actual clocks which is true.


----------



## Synoxia

As i said, benchmark the application you are using, don't stop at cinebench. You will find you score the same/lower.
Example i did ac odyssey benchmark, that game is heavy cpu limited. Scored the same or +1 fps avg but lower 1% lows


----------



## xeizo

Synoxia said:


> As i said, benchmark the application you are using, don't stop at cinebench. You will find you score the same/lower.
> Example i did ac odyssey benchmark, that game is heavy cpu limited. Scored the same or +1 fps avg but lower 1% lows


That doesn't matter in my case, I'm not CPU limited I'm RAM bandwith limited in the games I use on that PC and BCLK 102 gives some extra fps. I have to use that solution as those Hynix AFR DR sticks don't do 2866/2933/3000.


----------



## Synoxia

xeizo said:


> That doesn't matter in my case, I'm not CPU limited I'm RAM bandwith limited in the games I use on that PC and BCLK 102 gives some extra fps. I have to use that solution as those Hynix AFR DR sticks don't do 2866/2933/3000.


Ac odyssey likes ram too, 3733c14 can outperform very relaxed 3800c16 sometimes... anyways i hope you're good with it D:

I'm testing the capabilities of my 3700x in manual OC, seems like i've got a trash bin like always when i purchase a cpu, can't do 4.325-4.3 ghz, throws errors istantly


----------



## lordzed83

xeizo said:


> So everything before 1004B Beta/Test may be intentional OC by default from Asus? IF so, 4.6GHz for 3900X is even more optimistic than before, like it can never happen.
> 
> Strange though, that multicore performs the same/better with the Beta, it's only single core boost which goes down noticeably.
> 
> One more thing, temp is more restricted in the Beta. I never got above 75C how hard I tried. 2901 easily goes to 80C.
> 
> Anyway, looks like we have to wait for a "good" bios in all aspects.
> 
> There's always CCX OC to circumvent the limits, that's what OC:ers do, but it would be nice to have it in the bios to not have to be dependent on Ryzen Master.


Think main positive of running all core overclock, I dont care if boost is ****ed in one version of bios or the other. Dial in my setting and it runs at lest i know if there is actual gain from changes made in the code iotself not just better boosting on stock.


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> Not meant to be deceiving, just mentioning the actual clocks which is true.


You were mentioning clocks reached with the new AGESA, implying that it was responsible for higher clocks. That was not the case as it was your BCLK increase that was responsible for the higher clocks.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> You were mentioning clocks reached with the new AGESA, implying that it was responsible for higher clocks. That was not the case as it was your BCLK increase that was responsible for the higher clocks.


My point was really that 1004B doesn't handicap the 2700X, if we forget about the actual freq it boosts just fine to the max multiplier of 43.5. So, no need to go back to older bios.

About the Telemetry, strange enough it do seem to work on the Prime Pro with bios 5406(1004B) and single core boosts as it should with the 3700X. But Ryzen Master shows less parameters than C7H test, in example no CPU Power that dial is missing, so it's not the full Telemetry. And it's only C7H and the test bios which has worse single core boost.

Yes, the test bios is fine, except single core boost. Running CCX OC it may be a keeper. I haven't tested, but at Reddit someone says 1004B needs PPT/TDC/EDC all set to zero and scalar to 10x for boost to work. It may be so in some cases, but it works on Prime Pro and Aorus M without those settings.


----------



## luckz

I'm still on 0601, would an update to 1201 or even one of the newest help things like NVMe performance or only memory timings?


----------



## gPoydo14

*I need help!!*

Guys, I need your help. I just recently bought a C7H(what a board) with a 3600x and 2x8gb 3200CL16 corsair vengeance pro RGB ram. My GPU is a rx580 8gb.
So, I was tweaking my ram subtimings(trying to lower from 16-18-18 to 16-17-17 @3466mhz), and when I restarted to test, my PC simply wouldn't post. It turns on, the GPU fans doesn't move, no beep, no nothing, it just turns on and nothing happens forever. Ever since this, It just doesn't post UNLESS I click the safe boot button this board has, which works, but if I enter the BIOS through safe boot, change anything and click "save changes and exit", then the exactly same thing happen again: Nothing.

THE Q-LED debbug shows 14 or 0d.

I can get to windows tho if I just safe boot, enter bios and boot override into my SSD without making any change. If I make even a slight change like just turning on/off some LED, it will ask to "save changes and exit" and i'll be stuck again.

When I get to windows, everything works the same, I can even game and overclock everything just as normal, as if nothing happened. Except that I got in through safe boot, so my config is all on Auto and my ram is 2133 locked.

I already tried Clear CMOS, tried changing all kinds of configs in the bios, tried reinserting my GPU and ram sticks... Tried the retry button, tried turning the PC off and on instead of just restarting

Please help, I'm worried as **** and in panic


----------



## gupsterg

xeizo said:


> My point was really that 1004B doesn't handicap the 2700X, if we forget about the actual freq it boosts just fine to the max multiplier of 43.5. So, no need to go back to older bios.
> 
> About the Telemetry, strange enough it do seem to work on the Prime Pro with bios 5406(1004B) and single core boosts as it should with the 3700X. But Ryzen Master shows less parameters than C7H test, in example no CPU Power that dial is missing, so it's not the full Telemetry. And it's only C7H and the test bios which has worse single core boost.
> 
> Yes, the test bios is fine, except single core boost. Running CCX OC it may be a keeper. I haven't tested, but at Reddit someone says 1004B needs PPT/TDC/EDC all set to zero and scalar to 10x for boost to work. It may be so in some cases, but it works on Prime Pro and Aorus M without those settings.


Before I thought AGESA 1.0.0.4B was performing fine, I now I think it has a bug, I also think AGESA 1.0.0.3ABBA also does. I believe for some SKUs the EDC change is not occuring.

Under AGESA 1.0.0.4B the R7 3700X was gaining as I'd think it would with PBO tweaks. The R5 3600 I had used only for a very little while on AGESA 1.0.0.4B, it too had seemed fine.

Yesterday I replaced the R7 3700X with R5 3600. First run of the day of CB20 is always the best on my rig under PBO, as the location the PC is in, can have a room ambient of 16C or lower. The CB20 result was not great IMO.

First up is older UEFI 0002 with AEGSA 1.0.0.3ABB, but SMU FW v46.34.00.



Spoiler



Room ambient 20C









Room ambient 16C











Next AGESA 1.0.0.4B



Spoiler



Room ambient 18C









Room ambient 16C











Now in above somewhat PBO+xxxMHz has changed between each, but the PBO+150MHz on old UEFI 0002 with SMU FW mod is the fastest. It could be said, perhaps I have clock stretching occurring on PBO+200MHz, but from the Kahru RAM test data I think it is evident there is a bug on setting EDC.

In the ZIP you'll see in the EDC working folder the R7 3700X can go past the fused 90A EDC value. In the EDC not working folder the R5 3600 can't go past 90A EDC value, even when 0 is used or 100A or 140A. 0 = use fused EDC value IMO, EDC 0 or [Auto] (fused in both cases) gives best average boost clock in Kahru RAM Test.

If I have time I'll try to rerun tests again with like settings on each UEFI, but I pretty convinced EDC is not taking past fused value on for some SKUs. I will tomorrow have a R9 3900X to try.

*** edit ***

R5 3600 PPT/TDC/EDC not changed, room ambient 16C.



Spoiler


----------



## darkage

for me what works best is ppt tdc edc all set to 0 and scalar to 10X as stated above, older settings from abba that worked fine just give worst results with 1004b
lets hope for a next good bios release


----------



## Synoxia

Honestly i just use ABBA now. Super stable. wait for agesa 1.0.0.5 D:


----------



## harderthanfire

gPoydo14 said:


> Guys, I need your help. I just recently bought a C7H(what a board) with a 3600x and 2x8gb 3200CL16 corsair vengeance pro RGB ram. My GPU is a rx580 8gb.
> So, I was tweaking my ram subtimings(trying to lower from 16-18-18 to 16-17-17 @3466mhz), and when I restarted to test, my PC simply wouldn't post. It turns on, the GPU fans doesn't move, no beep, no nothing, it just turns on and nothing happens forever. Ever since this, It just doesn't post UNLESS I click the safe boot button this board has, which works, but if I enter the BIOS through safe boot, change anything and click "save changes and exit", then the exactly same thing happen again: Nothing.
> 
> THE Q-LED debbug shows 14 or 0d.
> 
> I can get to windows tho if I just safe boot, enter bios and boot override into my SSD without making any change. If I make even a slight change like just turning on/off some LED, it will ask to "save changes and exit" and i'll be stuck again.
> 
> When I get to windows, everything works the same, I can even game and overclock everything just as normal, as if nothing happened. Except that I got in through safe boot, so my config is all on Auto and my ram is 2133 locked.
> 
> I already tried Clear CMOS, tried changing all kinds of configs in the bios, tried reinserting my GPU and ram sticks... Tried the retry button, tried turning the PC off and on instead of just restarting
> 
> Please help, I'm worried as **** and in panic



What bios version are you running? I'd try getting latest and flashing it using bios flashback. Failing that try resetting to optimised defaults but set the pci-e gen and number of lanes manually.


Lastly try with just one ram stick and in each of the slots in turn. 0D is usually ram so also try using one of the presets like the 3200mhz preset or your ram's DOCP profile. It could be something like the board over or under volting the ram by default.


----------



## neikosr0x

After running a few test with my 3900x and all settings manually dialed in just as before, im getting worse performance on MT and ST on ST is not much but MT gives 3185 points on CB15 and 210 on ST even with PE3 i'm getting 3225 points compared to 2901Bios where i was getting 3267 Points on MT and 212 on ST all on CB15 of course. The CPU used to hit 4.625Ghz more regularly and in 2 o 3 cores depending. but on this BETA i'm just able to get 4.60 on 1 core and very rarely.


----------



## 1usmus

*Let's find the best CPU water block for Ryzen 3000!*

I propose to talk 

https://www.reddit.com/r/watercooli...find_the_best_cpu_water_block_for_ryzen_3000/


----------



## xeizo

1usmus said:


> *Let's find the best CPU water block for Ryzen 3000!*
> 
> I propose to talk
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/watercooli...find_the_best_cpu_water_block_for_ryzen_3000/


Interesting, it sure ain't Asetek/Corsair AIO, I'm leaning on a NH-D15 actually being better than that. Custom loop is a different animal, but while it seems plenty fun I have a hard time justifying the cost. But that's just me.

I do want to know which block is the best


----------



## kmellz

The new Arctic Liquid Freezer II's are pretty ******* awesome for the money. Upgraded from gen 1 240 to gen 2 240, sweet stuff. The small vrm fan is amazing too, even though it's not super needed for this mobo, but nice with extra airflow in that area, also for memory.
Running the pump+vrm fan at 100%, still silent. Highly recommended!


----------



## Takla

1usmus said:


> *Let's find the best CPU water block for Ryzen 3000!*
> 
> I propose to talk
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/watercooli...find_the_best_cpu_water_block_for_ryzen_3000/



Completely worthless to collect this kind of information from random users. Most people are simply way too stupid to properly provide meaningful informations.


Try to get gamers nexus or hardware unboxed to do the tests instead.


----------



## Takla

1usmus said:


> *Let's find the best CPU water block for Ryzen 3000!*
> 
> I propose to talk
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/watercooli...find_the_best_cpu_water_block_for_ryzen_3000/



Completely worthless to collect this kind of information from random users. Most people are simply way too stupid to properly provide meaningful informations. Also, there are waaay too many variables to account for.

Try to get gamers nexus or hardware unboxed to do the tests instead.


----------



## Syldon

1usmus said:


> *Let's find the best CPU water block for Ryzen 3000!*
> 
> I propose to talk
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/watercooli...find_the_best_cpu_water_block_for_ryzen_3000/


I love the idea, but it really needs to be done on a single test bench to show valid results. Variations in application of thermal paste, voltages used, chip quality and even air cooling quality, as well as ambient temps are just a few of the variations that will skew the results.

The main thing I would want from a cooling solution is knowing how the cooling plate is applied to the hot areas of the chip. Most chips come with a monolithic approach so cooling models are centred around that. Zen's heating concerns are off centre, and this is where the main problem lies IMHO. Having a cooling solution with a large enough foot plate or one that is offset in the direction of the heat created by a ZEN 3000 series chip would be something I would be more interested in.


----------



## CharliesTheMan

I figured I'd ask in here first since I know a lot of you guys and I'm kind of in a time crunch. I've got an Asus Strix X-470 motherboard that came with no CPU back plate, the one with four holes that the cooler mounts to, when I bought it. I need the CPU back plate because the aftermarket coolers I've got still require having it. 

Would any of you either have one you'd sell, or can tell me where to get an Asus part like that shipped quickly? My stepson is getting all the parts for his first "real" computer for Christmas, and I'm planning for he and I to build it together Christmas day.


----------



## bMind

Ok, as a summary to my downvolting and downclocking issues on 2700X. The fact that I don't see voltage and frequency drops but I do see lower wattage is ok? Because that does seem strange for me but I am noob when it comes to those things.


----------



## Syldon

bMind said:


> Ok, as a summary to my downvolting and downclocking issues on 2700X. The fact that I don't see voltage and frequency drops but I do see lower wattage is ok? Because that does seem strange for me but I am noob when it comes to those things.


Watt=amp X voltage. So wattage is y9our total power applied. Can you post a screenshot of what it is your are seeing. It may be that you are looking at the wrong data point. Ideally use HWinfo.

*EDIT* I just updated to 2901 on a 2700x CPU. My voltage doesn't downvolt either. The total power used is remaining high also with amps not dropping below 16a. On prior bios revisions, the total power usage on downclock would drop all the way down to 1-2w.


----------



## CharliesTheMan

I'm trying to install the latest beta BIOS with the fixed telemetry on my Crosshair VII Hero using USB flashback like always. Same USB drive I've always used, but I get a solid blue light instead of the flashback taking place. Tried multiple downloads of the file. Anyone know what I could be doing wrong? I'm about to flashback the latest official BIOS and see if that works, just to try and eliminate some variables. 

Anyone got any ideas what would be preventing this over USB flashback? Tried both renaming the .cap file manually and with the asus BIOS renamer, different downloads, neither worked.


----------



## neikosr0x

CharliesTheMan said:


> I'm trying to install the latest beta BIOS with the fixed telemetry on my Crosshair VII Hero using USB flashback like always. Same USB drive I've always used, but I get a solid blue light instead of the flashback taking place. Tried multiple downloads of the file. Anyone know what I could be doing wrong? I'm about to flashback the latest official BIOS and see if that works, just to try and eliminate some variables.
> 
> Anyone got any ideas what would be preventing this over USB flashback? Tried both renaming the .cap file manually and with the asus BIOS renamer, different downloads, neither worked.


maybe wrong USB port? or USB stick not formated with the popper format? fat32 btw


----------



## lordzed83

1usmus said:


> *Let's find the best CPU water block for Ryzen 3000!*
> 
> I propose to talk
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/watercooli...find_the_best_cpu_water_block_for_ryzen_3000/


In gotta say its useless. But I did research of all blocks. And If You are interester Heatkiller IV is BEST ZEN2 waterblock end of topic


----------



## xeizo

Syldon said:


> Watt=amp X voltage. So wattage is y9our total power applied. Can you post a screenshot of what it is your are seeing. It may be that you are looking at the wrong data point. Ideally use HWinfo.
> 
> *EDIT* I just updated to 2901 on a 2700x CPU. My voltage doesn't downvolt either. The total power used is remaining high also with amps not dropping below 16a. On prior bios revisions, the total power usage on downclock would drop all the way down to 1-2w.


If you want downvolt you need to set a lower min power in advanced settings for your Windows Powerplan. Default for Ryzen Balanced is 99% min power(and 100% max). Some use 5% min power, I use 0%, it doesn't matter because Ryzen boost is superfast. The benefit is slightly lower idle temps, like almost ambience, and so even more quiet fans when like writing here.


----------



## CharliesTheMan

neikosr0x said:


> maybe wrong USB port? or USB stick not formated with the popper format? fat32 btw


Thanks for the quick reply. I had formatted a few times making double sure. It ended up working fine with a different USB drive, which of course was full so I had to move data off of it. I'm usually tripping over spare flash drives until I really need one lol. Anyway, I got it working and appreciate the help.


----------



## Synoxia

With the new chipset driver, which plan is best to use for performance on 1.0.0.3abba? 1usmus ryzen power plan, 1usmus universal, amd balanced or amd high performance


----------



## gupsterg

So I now have a R9 3900X as well  _and_ this is a _FCLK Clock Edition_  .

Initially I set 3800MHz 1:1:1 (FCLK:UCLK:MEMCLK) on the R9 3900X as I would on the R5 3600.

ProcODT 43.6,
VDIMM 1.35V
VTTDDR 0.675V
SOC 1.062V
CLDO_VDDP 0.927V
CLDO_VDDG 0.980V

This failed Kahru RAM Test 8%  . I bumped ProcODT to 48 and failed Kahru RAM Test 80%  . Again I bumped ProcODT, went 53 and Kahru RAM Test upto 460%  and failed at 607%  .

As the R9 3900X was having a greater load line effect than than the single die R5 3600 & R7 3700X I decided to bump SOC/CLDO_VDDP/CLDO_VDDG a step each and now at ~1313% and counting  .

When I targeted 3800MHz on my R5 3600 I found out which slots on my mobo favored which dimms. This held true also for the R7 3700X, ie same dimms favored same slots, it also seems the R9 3900X is the same also.

R9 3900X Kahru RAM Test screenie album, link. I'm using the beta 0002 UEFI with Combo-AM4 1.0.04B.



Spoiler


----------



## oreonutz

Hey My Fellow Bad Ass Enthusiasts! Hurry Up and head to Newegg and Refresh refresh refresh, its in Stock I just snagged ONE! At a freaking $150 Premium, but figured it was worth the Christmas Price! Hurry Up and Go Get Em!!!!


Spoiler


----------



## nick name

Syldon said:


> Watt=amp X voltage. So wattage is y9our total power applied. Can you post a screenshot of what it is your are seeing. It may be that you are looking at the wrong data point. Ideally use HWinfo.
> 
> *EDIT* I just updated to 2901 on a 2700x CPU. My voltage doesn't downvolt either. The total power used is remaining high also with amps not dropping below 16a. On prior bios revisions, the total power usage on downclock would drop all the way down to 1-2w.


Did you check your Windows power plan to make sure Minimum Processor State is below 50%?


----------



## xeizo

Synoxia said:


> With the new chipset driver, which plan is best to use for performance on 1.0.0.3abba? 1usmus ryzen power plan, 1usmus universal, amd balanced or amd high performance


The new Ryzen Balanced has the best single core by quite a bit, multicore are about the same with all the plans.


----------



## oreonutz

Damnit, is there still no 1004 Released for our Board???

Also, has anyone here actually tried running the 3950x on our Crosshair VII Hero with AGESA 1003? I know there is a theory out there that it won't work, but I am curious if anyone has actually tried it and have actual real experience with it. Appreciate you guys as always! Hope everyone is well!


----------



## 621670

harderthanfire said:


> I use a PCI-E sound card and have no issues on my Hero Wifi.


Creative X-Fi Fata1ty on a CH7 to replace the Supr(e)memeFX, no issues here either.


----------



## gupsterg

oreonutz said:


> Hey My Fellow Bad Ass Enthusiasts! Hurry Up and head to Newegg and Refresh refresh refresh, its in Stock I just snagged ONE! At a freaking $150 Premium, but figured it was worth the Christmas Price! Hurry Up and Go Get Em!!!!
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Nice :thumb: , core war has been won!  ...



oreonutz said:


> Damnit, is there still no 1004 Released for our Board???
> 
> Also, has anyone here actually tried running the 3950x on our Crosshair VII Hero with AGESA 1003? I know there is a theory out there that it won't work, but I am curious if anyone has actually tried it and have actual real experience with it. Appreciate you guys as always! Hope everyone is well!


IIRC few pages back didn't an owner use a 3950X on AEGSA 1.0.0.3ABBA UEFI?

On another note just stop RT @ 4075%.



Spoiler











My R5 3600 had UF stamped on IHS, the R7 3700X UG. As the R7 3700X didn't do FCLK 1900MHz I thought perhaps the stamp indicates some about "quality". Doesn't seem so, as the R9 3900X has UG and has eased into FCLK 1900MHz nicely.


----------



## oreonutz

MacMus said:


> Guys what do u suggest Crosshair Hero or Formula ?


I recommend the Hero over the Formula all day. Only reason to get the Formula is if you want 5Gb Network, but in my opinion its better to save the money and get a 10Gbe Nic on your own, and a Full Cover Waterblock, and still save about $100.



MacMus said:


> Does Asus have issue with external sound cards?





harderthanfire said:


> I use a PCI-E sound card and have no issues on my Hero Wifi.





User32 said:


> Creative X-Fi Fata1ty on a CH7 to replace the Supr(e)memeFX, no issues here either.


Just as everyone Else said, nope not a problem at all. I run an HT OMEGA E-Claro, and it works beautifully!


----------



## oreonutz

gupsterg said:


> Nice :thumb: , core war has been won!  ...
> 
> 
> 
> IIRC few pages back didn't an owner use a 3950X on AEGSA 1.0.0.3ABBA UEFI?
> 
> On another note just stop RT @ 4075%.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> https://youtu.be/nS2us1Pfv9M
> 
> 
> 
> My R5 3600 had UF stamped on IHS, the R7 3700X UG. As the R7 3700X didn't do FCLK 1900MHz I thought perhaps the stamp indicates some about "quality". Doesn't seem so, as the R9 3900X has UG and has eased into FCLK 1900MHz nicely.


DUDE!!!! NICE MAN!!! That Ram OC is AMAZING! I can't get my timings Quite as good as yours, but I do have it just as stable with a very similar OC.

That said, what REALLY brought my envy up was those CPU TEMPS! I know RT doesn't really stress the CPU that hard even when hitting all Threads at 100%, but still those temps look pretty damn good. Say you hit your CPU with a CB R20 Run, what is your Max Temp During that run? It looks to me based on what I saw in that video, that your TDIE/TCTL Won't go above about 73c. Which beats me by about 5c. Fricking Nice man!

And thanks for the heads up, I will dig through the last few pages to see if I can find the post. Hoping I don't have to get me a new Board just to drop in my shiny new 3950x when it Arrives.


----------



## xeizo

oreonutz said:


> DUDE!!!! NICE MAN!!! That Ram OC is AMAZING! I can't get my timings Quite as good as yours, but I do have it just as stable with a very similar OC.
> 
> That said, what REALLY brought my envy up was those CPU TEMPS! I know RT doesn't really stress the CPU that hard even when hitting all Threads at 100%, but still those temps look pretty damn good. Say you hit your CPU with a CB R20 Run, what is your Max Temp During that run? It looks to me based on what I saw in that video, that your TDIE/TCTL Won't go above about 73c. Which beats me by about 5c. Fricking Nice man!
> 
> And thanks for the heads up, I will dig through the last few pages to see if I can find the post. Hoping I don't have to get me a new Board just to drop in my shiny new 3950x when it Arrives.


The 1004B bios he uses shows 5C lower max temps than all the earlier bioses, so while he have great cooling it's not magic


----------



## bMind

Syldon said:


> Watt=amp X voltage. So wattage is y9our total power applied. Can you post a screenshot of what it is your are seeing. It may be that you are looking at the wrong data point. Ideally use HWinfo.
> 
> *EDIT* I just updated to 2901 on a 2700x CPU. My voltage doesn't downvolt either. The total power used is remaining high also with amps not dropping below 16a. On prior bios revisions, the total power usage on downclock would drop all the way down to 1-2w.


Sure thing! Bam! There you go.


----------



## gupsterg

oreonutz said:


> DUDE!!!! NICE MAN!!! That Ram OC is AMAZING! I can't get my timings Quite as good as yours, but I do have it just as stable with a very similar OC.
> 
> That said, what REALLY brought my envy up was those CPU TEMPS! I know RT doesn't really stress the CPU that hard even when hitting all Threads at 100%, but still those temps look pretty damn good. Say you hit your CPU with a CB R20 Run, what is your Max Temp During that run? It looks to me based on what I saw in that video, that your TDIE/TCTL Won't go above about 73c. Which beats me by about 5c. Fricking Nice man!
> 
> And thanks for the heads up, I will dig through the last few pages to see if I can find the post. Hoping I don't have to get me a new Board just to drop in my shiny new 3950x when it Arrives.


Tnx  , sample is nice and responding.
CPU temps may settle some more for same test as TIM not yet really had time to cure. Not yet done a CB20, but will let you know, rig under other testing at present.



xeizo said:


> The 1004B bios he uses shows 5C lower max temps than all the earlier bioses, so while he have great cooling it's not magic


I haven't used R9 3900X on older UEFI, here is compare of my R5 3600 on same settings and room ambient within a degree of each test run.

Screen shot compare



Spoiler














Source files in this ZIP.


----------



## Keith Myers

1usmus said:


> *Let's find the best CPU water block for Ryzen 3000!*
> 
> I propose to talk
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/watercooli...find_the_best_cpu_water_block_for_ryzen_3000/


Currently testing a new Optimus Foundation block that is redesigned to have full coverage of the finstack array over a dual die Ryzen 3000. The second image in your Reddit link is like the Raystorm Pro I replaced with the Foundation block. The Raystorm Pro has the finstack array 90° rotated from optimal and the block can't be rotated. The Aquacomputer Cuplex Kryos block has the finstack array oriented optimally like the Foundation block but doesn't quite catch all the dies like in the first Reddit image. This is the image that Foundation uses to show the die coverage of the block.


----------



## gupsterg

@oreonutz

CB20 multi, HWINFO polling interval 500ms, room ambient 18C, open air rig.

EK Supremacy Acetal (copper), 360mm slim rad CPU only, EK DDC pump/res (100mm), coolant distilled water with ~20% mix of Mayhems XT-1 clear concentrate.

CPU installed only few hours ago, TIM AS5 spread by plastic card strip on IHS.



Spoiler


----------



## oreonutz

gupsterg said:


> as if I did not do it there I didn't have dynamic FCLK, which in your screenie seems to be static.


Forgive my Ignorance, I have not been keeping up with the new information as much as I would like to these past several weeks. What would be the benefit of running with a Dynamic FClk?


----------



## oreonutz

gupsterg said:


> @oreonutz
> 
> CB20 multi, HWINFO polling interval 500ms, room ambient 18C, open air rig.
> 
> EK Supremacy Acetal (copper), 360mm slim rad CPU only, EK DDC pump/res (100mm), coolant distilled water with ~20% mix of Mayhems XT-1 clear concentrate.
> 
> CPU installed only few hours ago, TIM AS5 spread by plastic card strip on IHS.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 311646


Thank You as always @gupsterg!

Your temps are looking pretty damn good, but when adjusting for Ambient it does appear we are much closer then I originally thought, still nice. 

Forgive my ignorance once again, I have missed so much! (Just found out about the 1004 Beta BIOS, I missed that when I posted earlier) But, in your screenshot of HWinfo, I noticed an "Effective Clock". What the hell is that??? I am confused because the Clocks are already Dynamic, when power states change, the clock seems to change just fine, but now there is this effective clock, not sure what to make of it...


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> Currently testing a new Optimus Foundation block that is redesigned to have full coverage of the finstack array over a dual die Ryzen 3000. The second image in your Reddit link is like the Raystorm Pro I replaced with the Foundation block. The Raystorm Pro has the finstack array 90° rotated from optimal and the block can't be rotated. The Aquacomputer Cuplex Kryos block has the finstack array oriented optimally like the Foundation block but doesn't quite catch all the dies like in the first Reddit image. This is the image that Foundation uses to show the die coverage of the block.


I just check out their site and that block looks like it would work better for just about everything.


----------



## Hale59

Keith Myers said:


> Currently testing a new Optimus Foundation block that is redesigned to have full coverage of the finstack array over a dual die Ryzen 3000. The second image in your Reddit link is like the Raystorm Pro I replaced with the Foundation block. The Raystorm Pro has the finstack array 90° rotated from optimal and the block can't be rotated. The Aquacomputer Cuplex Kryos block has the finstack array oriented optimally like the Foundation block but doesn't quite catch all the dies like in the first Reddit image. This is the image that Foundation uses to show the die coverage of the block.


Not for me.
No springs, no washers and you have to remove the back plate (can't use it).
I will wait for HeatKiller V Pro (seems to be in the pipeline)


----------



## CodeZ1LLa

Keep us updated, please. I have a Raystorm pro right now and was thinking about Optimus, but it's hard to pull the trigger since Raystorm Pro performs exceptionally well for me. Here is my temps after 1 hour of Prime95:









The temps stay at 61.5C an entire hour, with jus a few split-second spikes to 69C. You say that the fins are not in the optimal position, and I know that is no way to rotate the block with a pro bracket, but you can use Raystorm Neo bracket and rotate it. Also, you can simply rotate just a cold plate. Can you just tell me based on what tests you think it's not optimal for zen2? Igor's or something else? 
Thanks!


----------



## CodeZ1LLa

nick name said:


> I just check out their site and that block looks like it would work better for just about everything.


It seems like the CCDs are positioned differently when installed. They must be not on top, but on the right side closer to the RAM. So their image doesn't make much sense for me. Correct me if I'm wrong


----------



## Keith Myers

Hale59 said:


> Not for me.
> No springs, no washers and you have to remove the back plate (can't use it).
> I will wait for HeatKiller V Pro (seems to be in the pipeline)


Optimus WC did say they would provide redesigned mounting studs to use the stock AMD backplate.


----------



## gupsterg

oreonutz said:


> Forgive my Ignorance, I have not been keeping up with the new information as much as I would like to these past several weeks. What would be the benefit of running with a Dynamic FClk?


Dunno TBH. From what The Stilt mentioned I would assume it may save some power, dunno, only guessing.

I just liked the idea and so rolling with it  .



oreonutz said:


> Thank You as always @gupsterg!
> 
> Your temps are looking pretty damn good, but when adjusting for Ambient it does appear we are much closer then I originally thought, still nice.
> 
> Forgive my ignorance once again, I have missed so much! (Just found out about the 1004 Beta BIOS, I missed that when I posted earlier) But, in your screenshot of HWinfo, I noticed an "Effective Clock". What the hell is that??? I am confused because the Clocks are already Dynamic, when power states change, the clock seems to change just fine, but now there is this effective clock, not sure what to make of it...


NP  .

Yeah ambient & open air is favoring kit, soon this will all be in a case. Will be interesting to see how the profile holds up then  .

RE Effective clock see this, even though HWINFO was my go to monitoring app before now it's utter heaven with Matisse  .

CB20 CPU default, Ryzen Power Plan, Core Parking 8%, CPPC On, CPPC Preferred Cores On, 3800MHz C16, room ambient 16C.



Spoiler
















Keith Myers said:


> Currently testing a new Optimus Foundation block that is redesigned to have full coverage of the finstack array over a dual die Ryzen 3000. The second image in your Reddit link is like the Raystorm Pro I replaced with the Foundation block. The Raystorm Pro has the finstack array 90° rotated from optimal and the block can't be rotated. The Aquacomputer Cuplex Kryos block has the finstack array oriented optimally like the Foundation block but doesn't quite catch all the dies like in the first Reddit image. This is the image that Foundation uses to show the die coverage of the block.
> 
> 
> Spoiler


:drool:



Spoiler














Added to my wish list, plus rep for informing on this :thumb: , look forward to your experience share Keith  .


----------



## Keith Myers

CodeZ1LLa said:


> Keep us updated, please. I have a Raystorm pro right now and was thinking about Optimus, but it's hard to pull the trigger since Raystorm Pro performs exceptionally well for me. Here is my temps after 1 hour of Prime95:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You say that the fins are not in the optimal position, and I know that is no way to rotate the block with a pro bracket, but you can use Raystorm Neo bracket and rotate it. Also, you can simply rotate just a cold plate. Can you just tell me based on what tests you think it's not optimal for zen2? Igor's or something else?
> Thanks!


I had temps around 62-64° for an hour run of Prime95. But Prime95 is my quick and dirty stability test to prove settings are a good candidate for my real workload of Seti. Seti works the cpu much harder than Prime95. I am 10° hotter when running Seti compared to Prime.

I agree that image that Optimus uses does not accurately portray the location of the dies and cpu when mounted in the socket. This is the actual location.


----------



## Keith Myers

The Raystorm Pro is no slouch. It makes up for lack of 100% die coverage by having massive flowrate through the block. It is one of the least restrictive blocks on the market. I had a 100 rpm drop in my flowmeter for the Optimus block compared to the Raystorm Pro showing it is more restrictive. Kind of obvious when you look at the feature size of the finstack array fins and channels compared to the Raystorm Pro. The finstack feature size is smaller even than the Aquacomputer Cuplex Kryos Silver/PVD block which has 2° less temps than the Raystorm Pro on the same test workload.


----------



## lordzed83

Keith Myers said:


> The Raystorm Pro is no slouch. It makes up for lack of 100% die coverage by having massive flowrate through the block. It is one of the least restrictive blocks on the market. I had a 100 rpm drop in my flowmeter for the Optimus block compared to the Raystorm Pro showing it is more restrictive. Kind of obvious when you look at the feature size of the finstack array fins and channels compared to the Raystorm Pro. The finstack feature size is smaller even than the Aquacomputer Cuplex Kryos Silver/PVD block which has 2° less temps than the Raystorm Pro on the same test workload.


Not seen those blocks before !!! They are great !!! Whats the temoerature drop vs what u had before ??


----------



## roco_smith

Mumak said:


> Here you go, Beta BIOSes that should fix the telemetry problem on Matisse + C6H/C7H:
> CROSSHAIR VI HERO: www.hwinfo.com/beta/ASUS/CROSSHAIR-VI-HERO-ASUS-0001.7z
> CROSSHAIR VI HERO WIFI-AC: www.hwinfo.com/beta/ASUS/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VI-HERO-WIFI-AC-ASUS-0001.7z
> CROSSHAIR VII HERO: www.hwinfo.com/beta/ASUS/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-0002.7z
> CROSSHAIR VII HERO WIFI: www.hwinfo.com/beta/ASUS/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0002.7z



Why there is no a Bios Beta for Crosshair VI Extreme :thumbsdow


----------



## Keith Myers

*Optimus Foundation cpu block*



lordzed83 said:


> Not seen those blocks before !!! They are great !!! Whats the temperature drop vs what u had before ??


I have not wanted to post my observations yet since I changed more than one variable in the block changeover. I had to remove my socket fan to use the Optimus block because the backplate needed to be removed. So I lost the cooling that was part of my baseline for the other blocks. I am waiting on the new studs to use the backplate again and to reinstall my socket fan so only one variable was changed.

As a guess, from the temps I am seeing now, I will achieve the 5-6° that Optimus says they see in their tests. I see as low as 66° currently on my normal BOINC/Seti workload.

I purchased the black aluminum/acetal/copper version since I never stated which model before.

I run Linux so the test suites available to me are different than the tests most of the forum inhabitants use. I use Prime95 Torture test Option 11, min FFT = 8K, max FFT = 24K with 2000MB engaged. That heats up the cpu the most for me and most closely approximates my normal BOINC/Seti workload. But still does not work the cpu as hard as Seti does. End up around 72° for my Prime test.

I have run the y-cruncher VST AVX2 torture test also and that does not work the cpu as hard as my Prime95 small FFT settings. I stabilize at 70° for that test.

Computer runs all-core manual lock at 4150Mhz at 1.24V loaded. Memory is at 3600Mhz CL14 Fast settings. Cpu is a 3900X. System name is Serenity in my signature.


----------



## oreonutz

If anyone cares, the 3950x Literally JUST came back into stock on Newegg. Have at it!

https://www.newegg.com/amd-ryzen-9-...tion=3950x&cm_re=3950x-_-19-113-616-_-Product


----------



## nick name

oreonutz said:


> If anyone cares, the 3950x Literally JUST came back into stock on Newegg. Have at it!
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/amd-ryzen-9-...tion=3950x&cm_re=3950x-_-19-113-616-_-Product


Wow, I'm not sure that I've ever seen something actually sold by Newegg marked up. Third-parties do it all the time, but I really can't remember ever seeing Newegg do it themselves. They added another $150 to the price.


----------



## oreonutz

nick name said:


> Wow, I'm not sure that I've ever seen something actually sold by Newegg marked up. Third-parties do it all the time, but I really can't remember ever seeing Newegg do it themselves. They added another $150 to the price.


Yeah, its messed up! But I intend on getting my $150 back. For now however, I want to have fun with my new shiny toy!

Here is a screenshot of Newegg's Price Gouging:



Spoiler


----------



## Keith Myers

oreonutz said:


> Yeah, its messed up! But I intend on getting my $150 back. But for not, I want to have fun with my new shiny toy!
> 
> Here is a screenshot of Newegg's Price Gouging:
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


They have been doing it for a while. Witness the $530 price of the 3900X. They are taking the profit to the bank over the MAP wholesale price they purchase the processors from AMD or their distributors.
Simple market economics of supply and demand. Strange to see though from a major online retailer that typically sells hundreds of items daily at "loss-leader" pricing to capture online eyeballs. You would think they have no online competitors. But they do. Case in point, Amazon is still selling the 3900X at the original MSRP price of $499.99.


----------



## neikosr0x

nick name said:


> Wow, I'm not sure that I've ever seen something actually sold by Newegg marked up. Third-parties do it all the time, but I really can't remember ever seeing Newegg do it themselves. They added another $150 to the price.


1297$$$ wowwww


----------



## mtrai

oreonutz said:


> If anyone cares, the 3950x Literally JUST came back into stock on Newegg. Have at it!
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/amd-ryzen-9-...tion=3950x&cm_re=3950x-_-19-113-616-_-Product


Well at USD 1297.99 NO THANKS. USD 498.00 above MSRP. Note Sold and Shipped by DealsADay


----------



## Delta9k

mtrai said:


> Well at USD 1297.99 NO THANKS. USD 498.00 above MSRP. Note Sold and Shipped by DealsADay


Not hard to pass up that deal at all. That's outrageous.


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> Well at USD 1297.99 NO THANKS. USD 498.00 above MSRP. Note Sold and Shipped by DealsADay


Yeah, that's what I expect from third-party sellers. I guess it's nice that Newegg didn't take it that far.


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> Well at USD 1297.99 NO THANKS. USD 498.00 above MSRP. Note Sold and Shipped by DealsADay





Delta9k said:


> Not hard to pass up that deal at all. That's outrageous.


Yeah, I don't blame you!

I probably should have been more clear when I posted the Link. Unfortunately, when Newegg sales out Stock, they put on the same product page the cheapest 3rd Party option, and then when they get their stock back in, if you go to that same link it will show the Product at their Pricing.

When I posted this, it was being sold for $900, which is still a hefty mark up to be sure, but figured some of you may be willing to pay the $150 mark up to get your hands on the chip. I didn't think about every one who would click the link after Newegg's stock sold out and see "DealsaDay" selling the same chip at $1299. Obviously Do not buy from these 3rd party rip off artists, I apologize for not being more clear to begin with.

However if you do want a chip, bookmark that link, periodically refresh the page, and you will eventually see it, if you are persistent enough, being sold by Newegg for whatever price Newegg thinks they can get away with selling it at. If you feel you can wait until Mid January for the chip though, it may be best just to wait, because Stock is supposed to finally be plentiful, and the prices are supposed to drop back down towards MSRP, so you will probably be able to snag one for MSRP with a little patience.


----------



## speedgoat

i found a sort of decent price in Europe if someone is interested but im not sure if this guy posts abroad, i can see though he has 20+ pieces available now. I bought quite a few pieces of them in the past but it was actually when i was living in the country. 

https://arvutitark.ee/est/tootekata...-Processor-64M-Cache-up-to-450-GHz-Box-476323


----------



## oreonutz

WOOOO HOOOOO!!!!

It's out for Delivery, by Tonight, I will have the 3950x In my Crosshair VII Hero!



Spoiler


----------



## xeizo

Congrats! Exciting, I would of course want one too, but well I save my money for Nvidia Ampere on 7nm EUV. Or Big Navi if it ticks the right boxes. Will be a much bigger improvement overall for the same a lot of money


----------



## Keith Myers

oreonutz said:


> WOOOO HOOOOO!!!!
> 
> It's out for Delivery, by Tonight, I will have the 3950x In my Crosshair VII Hero!
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Looking forward to your impressions and build log. Envious. I am just not willing to pay a $150 premium over MSRP yet.

I am hoping that yields and inventory eventually improve so that the they will sell at MSRP. I waited a month before I picked up my 3900 at MSRP, below in fact because I got to apply Amazon CC reward points.

[Edit] I actually found the 3950X at Amazon at MSRP later that day and ordered it. Might be here before the weekend.


----------



## Delta9k

oreonutz said:


> Yeah, I don't blame you!
> 
> I probably should have been more clear when I posted the Link. Unfortunately, when Newegg sales out Stock, they put on the same product page the cheapest 3rd Party option, and then when they get their stock back in, if you go to that same link it will show the Product at their Pricing.


No worries Matt - I don't think anyone was calling you out. It was good of you to mention it.
I already have a 3800x and 3900x. As far as the 3950X - I am not going to pay any uplift over msrp for one. It would be great to have and I might snap on one at msrp if opportunity presents itself. At this point though, with two 2700X systems, and the two previously mentioned 3000 series CPUs - I may just wait now for the 4000 series. 

Heck, I still have a system built around an 8700K too - perhaps I should have a little garage sale first before going shopping again. Nahhh I love'm all.


----------



## Synoxia

When its 1.0.0.5 supposed to be out?


----------



## darkage

Synoxia said:


> When its 1.0.0.5 supposed to be out?


when AMD decides 
if they ever make a 1.0.0.5 agesa for x470
there is no stable 1.0.0.4b yet


----------



## Synoxia

darkage said:


> when AMD decides
> if they ever make a 1.0.0.5 agesa for x470
> there is no stable 1.0.0.4b yet


Obviously i was askin about x570 1.0.0.5. x470 will have it if ever after months.


----------



## darkage

Synoxia said:


> Obviously i was askin about x570 1.0.0.5. x470 will have it if ever after months.


So why asking here?


Enviado do meu ONEPLUS A3003 através do Tapatalk


----------



## mtrai

oreonutz said:


> Yeah, I don't blame you!
> 
> I probably should have been more clear when I posted the Link. Unfortunately, when Newegg sales out Stock, they put on the same product page the cheapest 3rd Party option, and then when they get their stock back in, if you go to that same link it will show the Product at their Pricing.
> 
> When I posted this, it was being sold for $900, which is still a hefty mark up to be sure, but figured some of you may be willing to pay the $150 mark up to get your hands on the chip. I didn't think about every one who would click the link after Newegg's stock sold out and see "DealsaDay" selling the same chip at $1299. Obviously Do not buy from these 3rd party rip off artists, I apologize for not being more clear to begin with.
> 
> However if you do want a chip, bookmark that link, periodically refresh the page, and you will eventually see it, if you are persistent enough, being sold by Newegg for whatever price Newegg thinks they can get away with selling it at. If you feel you can wait until Mid January for the chip though, it may be best just to wait, because Stock is supposed to finally be plentiful, and the prices are supposed to drop back down towards MSRP, so you will probably be able to snag one for MSRP with a little patience.


No one was calling you out...far from...I was just pointing it out as some people might of missed the pricing and brought for more then they budgeted for.


----------



## Synoxia

darkage said:


> So why asking here?
> 
> 
> Enviado do meu ONEPLUS A3003 através do Tapatalk



Generally asking* not specific to any board, but supposedly x570 come first.
Because i can. It's still relevant to c7h overclocking.

Btw i'm getting random reboots overnight when testing hci memtest + odyssey.
Ram errors usually throw errors right? So it must be the Infinity Fabric?
Or fan stop bug?
If i remember correctly leavin hwinfo with asus wmi tab open could lead to fan stop after 75c


----------



## harderthanfire

Synoxia said:


> Generally asking* not specific to any board, but supposedly x570 come first.
> Because i can. It's still relevant to c7h overclocking.
> 
> Btw i'm getting random reboots overnight when testing hci memtest + odyssey.
> Ram errors usually throw errors right? So it must be the Infinity Fabric?
> Or fan stop bug?
> If i remember correctly leavin hwinfo with asus wmi tab open could lead to fan stop after 75c



Fan stop bug was fixed several bioses ago so unless you're on an old one it is likely infinity fabric or an actual overheat.


----------



## R0CK3T

Hi Guys,

Beta BIOS that should fix the telemetry problem on Matisse C7H AGESA 1.0.0.4:

CROSSHAIR VII HERO: http://www.hwinfo.com/beta/ASUS/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-0002.7z
CROSSHAIR VII HERO WIFI: http://www.hwinfo.com/beta/ASUS/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0002.7z


This is a repost of Mumak.


----------



## Synoxia

harderthanfire said:


> Fan stop bug was fixed several bioses ago so unless you're on an old one it is likely infinity fabric or an actual overheat.


Infinity fabric then. Actual overheat is not a possibility as D15 + PBO alone won't allow more than 75c afaik

Is it the only solution to raise VDDG? Or could it be also low VDDSOC (but vddsoc cause hci errors ad not reboot i think?)


----------



## crakej

Synoxia said:


> Infinity fabric then. Actual overheat is not a possibility as D15 + PBO alone won't allow more than 75c afaik
> 
> Is it the only solution to raise VDDG? Or could it be also low VDDSOC (but vddsoc cause hci errors ad not reboot i think?)


VDDG should be lower than VDDSoC, never above.


----------



## Synoxia

crakej said:


> VDDG should be lower than VDDSoC, never above.


That doesn't answer the question. VDDG is 0.980 and vddsoc is 1.08


----------



## crakej

Synoxia said:


> That doesn't answer the question. VDDG is 0.980 and vddsoc is 1.08


Then yes, you can raise it.


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> Looking forward to your impressions and build log. Envious. I am just not willing to pay a $150 premium over MSRP yet.
> 
> I am hoping that yields and inventory eventually improve so that the they will sell at MSRP. I waited a month before I picked up my 3900 at MSRP, below in fact because I got to apply Amazon CC reward points.
> 
> [Edit] I actually found the 3950X at Amazon at MSRP later that day and ordered it. Might be here before the weekend.


Hell Yeah man! Can't wait to hear your Impressions! My 3950x and my Shiny New Optimus Block are here, and I finally have an hour or 2 to upgrade, so about to throw it in now!


----------



## CharliesTheMan

R0CK3T said:


> Hi Guys,
> 
> Beta BIOS that should fix the telemetry problem on Matisse C7H AGESA 1.0.0.4:
> 
> CROSSHAIR VII HERO: http://www.hwinfo.com/beta/ASUS/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-0002.7z
> CROSSHAIR VII HERO WIFI: http://www.hwinfo.com/beta/ASUS/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0002.7z
> 
> 
> This is a repost of Mumak.


Are these the same ones from like three or four days ago, or updated since then?


----------



## Keith Myers

oreonutz said:


> Hell Yeah man! Can't wait to hear your Impressions! My 3950x and my Shiny New Optimus Block are here, and I finally have an hour or 2 to upgrade, so about to throw it in now!


I'm hoping for even less temps and lower Vcore based on reviews. Based on what I'm seeing with the 3900X and the Optimus Foundation block, I should rarely break 70° C. under BOINC load.


----------



## xeizo

CharliesTheMan said:


> Are these the same ones from like three or four days ago, or updated since then?


It was last modified the exact same second of December 5 as the previously linked bios. I would say it is the same.


----------



## Synoxia

crakej said:


> Then yes, you can raise it.


I know i can, but i'm wonderin if that's the only value i should raise to fix IF instability


----------



## crakej

Synoxia said:


> I know i can, but i'm wonderin if that's the only value i should raise to fix IF instability


I'm looking for that too - but still on ABBA bios. Beta bios has some extra IF voltages you can set, but not sure if they'll help those of us who can't run 1900 FCLK


----------



## xeizo

crakej said:


> I'm looking for that too - but still on ABBA bios. Beta bios has some extra IF voltages you can set, but not sure if they'll help those of us who can't run 1900 FCLK


According to that silicon lottery site only 12% of the 3950X can do 1900, 3950X is very binned so 3900X is probably even more rare. I've been lucky, both my 3900X and even my 3700X does 1900.


----------



## CodeZ1LLa

xeizo said:


> According to that silicon lottery site only 12% of the 3950X can do 1900, 3950X is very binned so 3900X is probably even rarer. I've been lucky, both my 3900X and even my 3700X does 1900.


yep. I have a 3700X that takes 1900 without any extra tweaking. I think they just trying to make their binned CPU "special"


----------



## neikosr0x

CodeZ1LLa said:


> yep. I have a 3700X that takes 1900 without any extra tweaking. I think they just trying to make their binned CPU "special"


maybe, yeap. Mine does 1900 with no problems.


----------



## gupsterg

xeizo said:


> According to that silicon lottery site only 12% of the 3950X can do 1900, 3950X is very binned so 3900X is probably even more rare. I've been lucky, both my 3900X and even my 3700X does 1900.


I doubt very much any aspect of FCLK/IO die is binned in the way we would like to think. I believe only CCD is binned.

I have a R5 3600 purchased at launch which maxes out at ~1911MHz FCLK, has been stomping 3800MHz 1:1:1 on all UEFIs on 4x8GB.

A R7 3700X week 43 year 19 production is ~4MHz shy of FCLK 1900MHz.

3x R9 3900X, all week 44 year 19, SUT (UG) stamp on IHS. Only one does FCLK 1900MHz, maxes out at ~1904MHz FCLK. One of is shy of 1900MHz by ~8MHz, another ~4MHz. The ones which do not reach 1900MHz I have tried older/newer UEFIs and plenty of tweaks and so far do not budge to 1900MHz. One of the the R9 3900X it was a struggle to gain 3733MHz 1:1:1 on 4x8GB, so you have CCD variance, FCLK variance and UCLK (ie IMC). IMO it's no wonder official RAM speed is 3200MHz and optimal OC by AMD is highlighted as 3600MHZ 1:1:1. 

It just would not be economic to be binning all aspects of CPU IMO.


----------



## oreonutz

For what its worth, I was worried my 3950x wouldn't do 1900Mhz, some of you might remember it was a B**ch getting my 3900x to post at 1900Mhz IF. Well I haven't upgraded BIOS yet, so I am still on UEFI 2801, but I am using the EXACT same settings I was using with my 3900x, to boot my 3950x, and its working great! Just passed 4000% Karhu Memtest and climbing. I have not started my OC Battle yet though, Right now I am running the chip at 4.3Ghz 1.25v (which is already better then my 3900x would do) to get some Thermal Data on my new Optimus Block, and then over the break I will see how far I can OC this baby. But so far, 1900Mhz, on my One Sample, has not been an issue.


----------



## Delta9k

Good for you and glad to hear it. I still haven't taken the plunge with my C7H - and popping in a 3000 series CPU. My 3800X and 3900X both have no issues hitting 1900 IF on my Aorus Master x570. I originally bought the 3900X to use on my C7H as a CPU only upgrade replacing my 2700X but seeing how its been a struggle for more than not making the switch to the 3000 series CPU's I've not made the attempt. You give me inspiration. I may just make the move over xmas break. 

When I look at what my C7H/2700X is doing though, it seems a shame to break the system apart. All cores boost to 4.35 often up to 4 at a time. Though benchmarks between the 2700X and even just the 3800X really show the difference in IPC Zen+ vs. Zen2 and I would really like to bring that uplift in performance over to my C7H, daily driver...


----------



## Synoxia

gupsterg said:


> I doubt very much any aspect of FCLK/IO die is binned in the way we would like to think. I believe only CCD is binned.
> 
> I have a R5 3600 purchased at launch which maxes out at ~1911MHz FCLK, has been stomping 3800MHz 1:1:1 on all UEFIs on 4x8GB.
> 
> A R7 3700X week 43 year 19 production is ~4MHz shy of FCLK 1900MHz.
> 
> 3x R9 3900X, all week 44 year 19, SUT (UG) stamp on IHS. Only one does FCLK 1900MHz, maxes out at ~1904MHz FCLK. One of is shy of 1900MHz by ~8MHz, another ~4MHz. The ones which do not reach 1900MHz I have tried older/newer UEFIs and plenty of tweaks and so far do not budge to 1900MHz. One of the the R9 3900X it was a struggle to gain 3733MHz 1:1:1 on 4x8GB, so you have CCD variance, FCLK variance and UCLK (ie IMC). IMO it's no wonder official RAM speed is 3200MHz and optimal OC by AMD is highlighted as 3600MHZ 1:1:1.
> 
> It just would not be economic to be binning all aspects of CPU IMO.


But how does one test for IF stability? HCI memtest won't crash/have errors with unstable IF

My 3700x can post 1926 without issues at 0.985 vdd volt


----------



## ryouiki

Delta9k said:


> Good for you and glad to hear it. I still haven't taken the plunge with my C7H - and popping in a 3000 series CPU. My 3800X and 3900X both have no issues hitting 1900 IF on my Aorus Master x570.


From my own experience I could not get C7H to boot past 1800+ FCLK with 3900X (always F9 on debug LED), but same chip/memory in X570 Aorus Master booted at 1900 first attempt. Seems like many people are able to get 1900 on C7H though, so not really sure why these boards behave so differently.

Probably going to reassemble the C7H into a second machine and drop a 3800X into it, so will see how thing work out next attempt.


----------



## oreonutz

ryouiki said:


> From my own experience I could not get C7H to boot past 1800+ FCLK with 3900X (always F9 on debug LED), but same chip/memory in X570 Aorus Master booted at 1900 first attempt. Seems like many people are able to get 1900 on C7H though, so not really sure why these boards behave so differently.
> 
> Probably going to reassemble the C7H into a second machine and drop a 3800X into it, so will see how thing work out next attempt.


So It was a PAIN IN MY A$$ to originally get my C7H to post past 1800Mhz. I really thought my chip just couldn't do it. Turns out, its the way ASUS handles some of the Tertiary timings on the board. If you are using XMP/DOCP or Tuning the Memory yourself, but leaving some of the more seemingly obscure settings on Auto, this is most likely the reason you are not posting. Furthermore I am using all 4 Sticks of Ram which made it more necessary to tune for each individual timing. Unfortunately its not as easy as just plugging in the numbers from the Ryzen Timing Calc, although extremely helpful, there were, for myself anyway, a few timings I had to loosen from what the Calc gave me, before it would finally boot, but once it booted, it was rock stable. The One in particular for me, that was just a no boot until dialed in perfectly was Trdwr. For me, anything below 8 Would mean a Post Code error on the board, the Calc said to use a 3 or an 8 I believe, so of course when dialing them in I used the lower number, turns out that was my biggest mistake. Once I switched that number over to 8 it started posting every single time. It turns out these tertiary timings are controlled not by the stick of Ram, but by the motherboard itself. This is why it seems some boards will boot at higher IF or MemClocks then others, some boards hold profile's that are better suited for higher speeds/IF for more Memory Kits if the timing is left on Auto then others. Dial them in yourself, and you will most likely boot just fine as well, as long as your chip can handle it, and in your case it seems it can.

EDIT: Something you can do to test this for yourself is to write down ALL of the timings your Gigabyte board is using for Kit of Memory. Make sure to get even the more obscure Timings as well.

Then Put your chip and memory into your C7H board, and see if it boots, it probably won't. Then Dial in the same exact timings as your Gigabyte board, and see it boot up just fine.


----------



## oreonutz

Delta9k said:


> Good for you and glad to hear it. I still haven't taken the plunge with my C7H - and popping in a 3000 series CPU. My 3800X and 3900X both have no issues hitting 1900 IF on my Aorus Master x570. I originally bought the 3900X to use on my C7H as a CPU only upgrade replacing my 2700X but seeing how its been a struggle for more than not making the switch to the 3000 series CPU's I've not made the attempt. You give me inspiration. I may just make the move over xmas break.
> 
> When I look at what my C7H/2700X is doing though, it seems a shame to break the system apart. All cores boost to 4.35 often up to 4 at a time. Though benchmarks between the 2700X and even just the 3800X really show the difference in IPC Zen+ vs. Zen2 and I would really like to bring that uplift in performance over to my C7H, daily driver...


Those are some Beautiful clocks on your 2700x good sir!

I loved PBO Ocing on my 2700x's. It was so much fun to be able to see 4 Cores go so high, and handle all I could throw at it. The 3000 Series is just different, now we get to play with Per CCX Overclocking though, which is its own challenge and fun. Can't wait to see how your C7H handles your 3000 Series chip!


----------



## oreonutz

Synoxia said:


> But how does one test for IF stability? HCI memtest won't crash/have errors with unstable IF
> 
> My 3700x can post 1926 without issues at 0.985 vdd volt


This is actually a really good question. Hopefully someone knows the answer too. Right now, I have NO IDEA how one would test for IF stability specifically. My thinking is, as long as the CPU is stable as a whole, ie no weird issues or crashing, then obviously the IF is stable. However, if there is crashing, how does one determine if the IF is the reason you are crashing? I don't currently know the answer to this question, and would love to find out. Would also love to know some theories behind stressing the IF.


----------



## ryouiki

oreonutz said:


> This is actually a really good question. Hopefully someone knows the answer too. Right now, I have NO IDEA how one would test for IF stability specifically. My thinking is, as long as the CPU is stable as a whole, ie no weird issues or crashing, then obviously the IF is stable. However, if there is crashing, how does one determine if the IF is the reason you are crashing? I don't currently know the answer to this question, and would love to find out. Would also love to know some theories behind stressing the IF.


Completely unstable IF seems to result in crashing... that said semi-unstable IF seems to result in WHEA errors being generated. I noticed initially after IF overclock that I would get very occasional WHEA error (maybe once per 24 hours). This was with Karhu passing at 10000%, but raising VDDG eventually made these go completely away.


----------



## CodeZ1LLa

Synoxia said:


> But how does one test for IF stability? HCI memtest won't crash/have errors with unstable IF
> 
> My 3700x can post 1926 without issues at 0.985 vdd volt


Which MoBo you have? Have you adjusted any voltages or settings to post 1926? 
Thanks!


----------



## Synoxia

CodeZ1LLa said:


> Which MoBo you have? Have you adjusted any voltages or settings to post 1926?
> Thanks!


vddsoc 1.10 llc 3 0.985 vdd that's what i remember. BCLK 102.4

this mobo


----------



## Delta9k

oreonutz said:


> This is actually a really good question. Would also love to know some theories behind stressing the IF.


 I would as well... 

My simple input for discussion is that I am not sure how one would "stress test" for the IF stability - other than what one does typically Karhu, prime95 etc. I think its more about observation i.e., system crashes and memory r/w performance. I look at latency, Mem/write and Mem/copy results in tools like Aida 64 etc. If you are not seeing the throughput/transfer performance that you should, it could indicate issues with the IF not being stable - even if not crashing your system or causing errors.

Forgive my rambling... 
I messed around with a friends system we were dialing his 3700X in. For context, he as a 2x16 kit of 3600 16-16-16-36. Fired off like a champ with IF 1800 and with solid marks across several bench mark suites and AIDA. We thought sweet, now lets bump her up and see if we can get a 3800 with a 1900 on the IF. Cool, we did with just a little more dram voltage and with 900/950 on the VDDs respectively. Sure bet, fired right up, passed the usual stress tests etc - but we noticed Mem copy and writes were less and latency was greater , and I mean like 6-8ns more. We dialed it back down a bit to 3733/1866 on the IF and redid the gambit again - This time we saw same perceived stability as we had before but now, also improved results in mem R/W transfers and better latency than with either the stock 3600/1800 or the 3800/1900 Bumping it back up to 3800/1900 provided again, worse results - So, long story short - Valid or not, it appears that IF stability can be observed via memory performance/throughput - makes sense to my ant-like brain because of the chip-lets have to navigate the IF for mem ops and if the IF is not stable mem performance will suffer even if the stability is not great enough to throw errors or crash/boot lock a system.


----------



## gupsterg

gupsterg said:


> I doubt very much any aspect of FCLK/IO die is binned in the way we would like to think. I believe only CCD is binned.
> 
> I have a R5 3600 purchased at launch which maxes out at ~1911MHz FCLK, has been stomping 3800MHz 1:1:1 on all UEFIs on 4x8GB.
> 
> A R7 3700X week 43 year 19 production is ~4MHz shy of FCLK 1900MHz.
> 
> 3x R9 3900X, all week 44 year 19, SUT (UG) stamp on IHS. Only one does FCLK 1900MHz, maxes out at ~1904MHz FCLK. One of is shy of 1900MHz by ~8MHz, another ~4MHz. The ones which do not reach 1900MHz I have tried older/newer UEFIs and plenty of tweaks and so far do not budge to 1900MHz. One of the the R9 3900X it was a struggle to gain 3733MHz 1:1:1 on 4x8GB, so you have CCD variance, FCLK variance and UCLK (ie IMC). IMO it's no wonder official RAM speed is 3200MHz and optimal OC by AMD is highlighted as 3600MHZ 1:1:1.
> 
> It just would not be economic to be binning all aspects of CPU IMO.
> 
> 
> 
> Synoxia said:
> 
> 
> 
> But how does one test for IF stability? HCI memtest won't crash/have errors with unstable IF
> 
> My 3700x can post 1926 without issues at 0.985 vdd volt
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong. As I understand it, you are always using the IF, link to wiki. Zen2 from what I have read is using IF2.



Spoiler


----------



## Axaion

Well good news is that 2901 lets me run 3800mhz cl16 without the weird error i had before, its just not stable cause my ram goes over 54c lol.

So thats something, maybe well see the next bios update when 4000 Series CPU's land.


----------



## nick name

Axaion said:


> Well good news is that 2901 lets me run 3800mhz cl16 without the weird error i had before, its just not stable cause my ram goes over 54c lol.
> 
> So thats something, maybe well see the next bios update when 4000 Series CPU's land.


Do you use an AIO? I do and it allows me to stand a fan on my GPU pointing at my RAM which keeps that RAM temps much lower than without.


----------



## Axaion

nick name said:


> Do you use an AIO? I do and it allows me to stand a fan on my GPU pointing at my RAM which keeps that RAM temps much lower than without.


Nope, Dark Rock 4 Pro


----------



## dkarDaGobert

i've upgraded from 2x 2x8GB 3200C14 to 2x16GB 3600C16 gskills - also bdies.
finally able to get 3800C14 
right now on the latest beta bios - still waiting for the 1004b to be released...


----------



## nick name

dkarDaGobert said:


> i've upgraded from 2x 2x8GB 3200C14 to 2x16GB 3600C16 gskills - also bdies.
> finally able to get 3800C14
> right now on the latest beta bios - still waiting for the 1004b to be released...


Waaaaaait. The Stilt released his Ryzen 3000 compatible Ryzen Timing Checker?


----------



## dkarDaGobert

no


----------



## Delta9k

dkarDaGobert said:


> i've upgraded from ...


NICE!


----------



## Synoxia

gupsterg said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong. As I understand it, you are always using the IF, link to wiki. Zen2 from what I have read is using IF2.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 313356


Yes but that doesn't answer the question.
Let's put it in another way: if i put to test only HCI and have 3000%, then put AC odyssey + HCI and same 3000%, then test it again another day over night and find your PC rebooted... did this several times, how do you exactly diagnose it's the IF, and how you deal with it? I am now testing to 1.10 vddg, 950 CLDO vddp, 900 VDDP and 1.10 VDDSOC. 
Lets see if this crashes again. I've paused windows update now, just to make it sure.


----------



## oreonutz

dkarDaGobert said:


> i've upgraded from 2x 2x8GB 3200C14 to 2x16GB 3600C16 gskills - also bdies.
> finally able to get 3800C14
> right now on the latest beta bios - still waiting for the 1004b to be released...


That is awesome!

Forgive me if the answer to this is obvious, Its just not jumping out at me right now... @nick name asked you if The Stilt had released his Ryzen 3000 Compatible Ryzen Timing Checker Program, and you responded with no. But in your screenshot you are using RTC to Show your Timings, and in the past, we all have tried running RTC on Ryzen 3000 and it has refused to work. I haven't tried it lately, but if their isn't a new version, how did you get it to work?

EDIT: I am super Curious now. I just tried opening it and it still doesn't open for me, I tried to remove the CPU Check from the program, but my coding skills are stuck in the early 2000's, clearly I am doing something wrong because that just breaks the EXE altogether. The only thing I can think of is either A) You have a special version, B) RTC Suddenly works with the 1004 Beta BIOS (Which I have not installed yet) or C) You edited the code of RTC to make it work on Zen2. 

Would love to know which! I miss my RTC!


----------



## gupsterg

Synoxia said:


> But how does one test for IF stability? HCI memtest won't crash/have errors with unstable IF
> 
> My 3700x can post 1926 without issues at 0.985 vdd volt
> 
> 
> 
> gupsterg said:
> 
> 
> 
> Correct me if I'm wrong. As I understand it, you are always using the IF, link to wiki. Zen2 from what I have read is using IF2.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 313356
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Synoxia said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes but that doesn't answer the question.
> Let's put it in another way: if i put to test only HCI and have 3000%, then put AC odyssey + HCI and same 3000%, then test it again another day over night and find your PC rebooted... did this several times, how do you exactly diagnose it's the IF, and how you deal with it? I am now testing to 1.10 vddg, 950 CLDO vddp, 900 VDDP and 1.10 VDDSOC.
> Lets see if this crashes again. I've paused windows update now, just to make it sure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

I believe it did to your 1st quoted post in this post and previously I answered your 2nd quoted post in another post in this thread when you stated the same thing before.

The IF is the inter connect between CPU dies & IO die, you will always be using it. IMO logic would dictate you can't really target IF without loading the other elements, as that's how the programs we use work. I don't think there is a program we can use to target just IF and I do not think we have access to a program that may show us say debug/counters/monitoring data for IF to know what is going on with it in the way we may want to for OC'ing.


----------



## Synoxia

gupsterg said:


> I believe it did to your 1st quoted post in this post and previously I answered your 2nd quoted post in another post in this thread when you stated the same thing before.
> 
> The IF is the inter connect between CPU dies & IO die, you will always be using it. IMO logic would dictate you can't really target IF without loading the other elements, as that's how the programs we use work. I don't think there is a program we can use to target just IF and I do not think we have access to a program that may show us say debug/counters/monitoring data for IF to know what is going on with it in the way we may want to for OC'ing.


Yes i understand, what i mean is if you follow some method to know it's the IF and then you raise voltage... the only thing i can think of is going by exclusion, pumping other voltages to max, if it's stable then lower vddg until it's not anymore?


----------



## gupsterg

Synoxia said:


> Yes i understand, what i mean is if you follow some method to know it's the IF and then you raise voltage... the only thing i can think of is going by exclusion, pumping other voltages to max, if it's stable then lower vddg until it's not anymore?


Pretty much all the 5x Zen2 CPUs I have pretty much used same method.

I'll set:-

SOC: 1.025V
CLDO_VDDP: 0.901V
CLDO_VDDG: 0.951

VDIMM/BOOT: 1.35V
VTTDDR: 0.675V

Increase MEMCLK & FCLK and see if HW complete POST. If not POST I meddle with ProcODT, usually by this stage I can get to OS.

I check if profile stable in OS, if not I bump each by a step excluding VDIMM/BOOT & VTTDDR, then just rinse & repeat. If/once I'm near say SOC: 1.075V usually I only meddle with CLDO_VDDP and or CLDO_VDDG.

All I've just set 16-16-16-16-40-56, SCL 4 & 4, TRFC 323, TRTP 8. All snagged 3733MHz 1:1:1, only 2 3800MHz, using F4-3200C14Q-32GVK, none needed VDIMM/BOOT more than 1.35V and VTTDDR: 0.675. All sorta ended up close to each other for SOC, etc.

This is a recent test, when home can share more from that run where I stop RT, then run RB, then RT, then Blender, then more RT, IIRC same POST I did ~20hrs testing, with stop starts.


----------



## Synoxia

gupsterg said:


> Pretty much all the 5x Zen2 CPUs I have pretty much used same method.
> 
> I'll set:-
> 
> SOC: 1.025V
> CLDO_VDDP: 0.901V
> CLDO_VDDG: 0.951
> 
> VDIMM/BOOT: 1.35V
> VTTDDR: 0.675V
> 
> Increase MEMCLK & FCLK and see if HW complete POST. If not POST I meddle with ProcODT, usually by this stage I can get to OS.
> 
> I check if profile stable in OS, if not I bump each by a step excluding VDIMM/BOOT & VTTDDR, then just rinse & repeat. If/once I'm near say SOC: 1.075V usually I only meddle with CLDO_VDDP and or CLDO_VDDG.
> 
> All I've just set 16-16-16-16-40-56, SCL 4 & 4, TRFC 323, TRTP 8. All snagged 3733MHz 1:1:1, only 2 3800MHz, using F4-3200C14Q-32GVK, none needed VDIMM/BOOT more than 1.35V and VTTDDR: 0.675. All sorta ended up close to each other for SOC, etc.
> 
> This is a recent test, when home can share more from that run where I stop RT, then run RB, then RT, then Blender, then more RT, IIRC same POST I did ~20hrs testing, with stop starts.


In my use-case i think AC odyssey in 4k 200% seem to strain the system more than HCI alone. Anyone know another memory/cpu sensitive game but more taxing on gpu? 
Now that i've got a 2080 super 1 FPS 4k 200% is not enough to heat the GPU, it only reaches 50c.... unrealistic as usually it averages in the 55s, maybe 60.

Btw if anyone was wondering, i reflashed 1.0.0.4, bumped TRFC to 336, dram volt to 1.43500 from 1.42 vddg 1.010 and vddsoc to 1.10.
So far is 1500% (single) 21500 total %^ in HCI (+ ac odyssey 4k 200% res scale running)
I'm slowly dialing back vddg now, so far 0.985 is still 1000% hci.
Maybe it was vddsoc? Will find out and write here.


----------



## nick name

Merry Christmas, ya filthy animals.


----------



## MrPhilo

Well I got the 3900x for XMAS even though I have a 3800x. Hopefully it can do 1900 FLCK!


----------



## kratosatlante

hello, someone is running 4x8 to 4266 or 4400, with 2x8 viper steell (PVS416G440C9K) run ok with bios 2901, 2801, and 002+ but 4x8 at the moment I could not pass the 3800


----------



## TOMRUS

3004 bios update is released.


----------



## darkage

Where?

Enviado do meu ONEPLUS A3003 através do Tapatalk


----------



## Reous

darkage said:


> Where?


Direct links are available here:
https://www.hardwareluxx.de/communi...s-agesa-ubersicht-26-12-19-a-1228903.html#2.6


----------



## oreonutz

Reous said:


> Direct links are available here:
> https://www.hardwareluxx.de/communi...s-agesa-ubersicht-26-12-19-a-1228903.html#2.6


I wonder if this is the same as the Beta BIOS we already have. Going to flash it to VII Hero, and the VI Hero to my VI Hero later tonight and see if I can find a difference. If anyone beats me to it and wants to save me the time, would love to hear your report.


----------



## oreonutz

Also, on a side note. I know a lot of you guys are like me, and have upgrades from the VI Hero to The VII Hero. If thats the case, and you have a Crosshair VI Hero you would like to get rid of for around $100 or so, shoot me a message, I need one for my Test Bench, as my Crosshair VI Hero had to get moved into another Build.


----------



## Rusakova

oreonutz said:


> I wonder if this is the same as the Beta BIOS we already have. Going to flash it to VII Hero, and the VI Hero to my VI Hero later tonight and see if I can find a difference. If anyone beats me to it and wants to save me the time, would love to hear your report.


They have different hash values so different BIOS. I don't like the fact that the 3004 BIOS comes with an exe file with a filename like this "ûú BIOSRenamer.exe".


----------



## darkage

Its the brenamer exe i think to biosflash

Enviado do meu ONEPLUS A3003 através do Tapatalk


----------



## oreonutz

darkage said:


> Its the brenamer exe i think to biosflash
> 
> Enviado do meu ONEPLUS A3003 através do Tapatalk


Yeah, German Site, so I am sure that is bound to happen (Character Conversion)


----------



## smokin_mitch

Reous said:


> Direct links are available here:
> https://www.hardwareluxx.de/communi...s-agesa-ubersicht-26-12-19-a-1228903.html#2.6



just tried bios 3004 on my crosshair vii wifi and it has the same sleep bug as bios 2901 and the agesa 1004 beta, I run 3800/1900 ram/fclk and when waking from sleep it drops fclk to 1800mhz and uclk to 950mhz so 2:1 mode, so I rolled back to bios 2801 which doesn't have this issue


----------



## xeizo

smokin_mitch said:


> just tried bios 3004 on my crosshair vii wifi and it has the same sleep bug as bios 2901 and the agesa 1004 beta, I run 3800/1900 ram/fclk and when waking from sleep it drops fclk to 1800mhz and uclk to 950mhz so 2:1 mode, so I rolled back to bios 2801 which doesn't have this issue


I stopped using sleep because of that bug, always shutting down with F4. Personally I don't need sleep. But of course Asus needs to fix this for those who does.


----------



## darkage

hardwareluxx is down, any other host?


----------



## xeizo

darkage said:


> hardwareluxx is down, any other host?


Yes the Asus product page, just replace "2901" with "3004" in the download link


----------



## darkage

xeizo said:


> Yes the Asus product page, just replace "2901" with "3004" in the download link


got it, thanks +rep


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> Yes the Asus product page, just replace "2901" with "3004" in the download link


Yeah, that is what I did. 

https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-3004.zip

That link is for the WiFi version.

Link below is for non-WiFi:

https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...VII-HERO/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-3004.zip


----------



## crakej

smokin_mitch said:


> just tried bios 3004 on my crosshair vii wifi and it has the same sleep bug as bios 2901 and the agesa 1004 beta, I run 3800/1900 ram/fclk and when waking from sleep it drops fclk to 1800mhz and uclk to 950mhz so 2:1 mode, so I rolled back to bios 2801 which doesn't have this issue


Same here - I use hybrid sleep/hibernate and that works fine (bios 2901). A bit slower yes, but not that bad - and clock are what they should be. I should point out I don't use R Master for OCing.


----------



## crakej

xeizo said:


> Yes the Asus product page, just replace "2901" with "3004" in the download link


Thanks for posting!


----------



## Synoxia

Check if it says 0002 or 3004 in the bios.


----------



## crakej

Anyone got any tips re: moving from 1003 to 1004b?

I knew updating AGESA would likely mean re-tuning settings, but not this badly! Profile from 2901 is TOTALLY unstable! Lots of blue screens, so guessing a voltage somewhere is behaving differently and needs a bit more... testing with defaults for now. Will try get memory running nicely later.

Checking out new extra VDDG voltage controls which might allow me to gain 3800/1900, though not too bothered by that any more. Have had mem running at 4600 which almost eliminates the bottleneck of UCLK/2, but a lot more testing needed!

Happy Christmas/Holidays Everyone! ????


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> Anyone got any tips re: moving from 1003 to 1004b?
> 
> I knew updating AGESA would likely mean re-tuning settings, but not this badly! Profile from 2901 is TOTALLY unstable! Lots of blue screens, so guessing a voltage somewhere is behaving differently and needs a bit more... testing with defaults for now. Will try get memory running nicely later.
> 
> Checking out new extra VDDG voltage controls which might allow me to gain 3800/1900, though not too bothered by that any more. Have had mem running at 4600 which almost eliminates the bottleneck of UCLK/2, but a lot more testing needed!
> 
> Happy Christmas/Holidays Everyone! ????


Merry Christmas!

Go back to your 1003 Bios. Load your last profile that you hopefully had saved to a USB Drive. Once Loaded, Go to save profile, and hit Ctrl + F2 to save settings as Text File. Boot into OS and Transfer that Text File to your phone or another PC, or Print it. Upgrade back to 1004, and painstakingly go through every single settings tweaking it back to the way you had it before. There are definitely some different default voltages and memory settings here, so all needs to be tweaked manually, hopefully you already have everything set manually before on 1003, so going through and resetting manually on 1004 should be a 15 minute endeavor with the list of settings.

Hope that helps.


----------



## speedgoat

guys has anyone tried to import the bios settings profile from the beta 1.0.0.4 to this 3004 ? would it work this time ?


----------



## crakej

oreonutz said:


> Merry Christmas!
> 
> Go back to your 1003 Bios. Load your last profile that you hopefully had saved to a USB Drive. Once Loaded, Go to save profile, and hit Ctrl + F2 to save settings as Text File. Boot into OS and Transfer that Text File to your phone or another PC, or Print it. Upgrade back to 1004, and painstakingly go through every single settings tweaking it back to the way you had it before. There are definitely some different default voltages and memory settings here, so all needs to be tweaked manually, hopefully you already have everything set manually before on 1003, so going through and resetting manually on 1004 should be a 15 minute endeavor with the list of settings.
> 
> Hope that helps.


Will do exactly this - have a pic on my phone of the settings. 

Do we know what the 2 'new' VDDG voltage settings would normally default to? I'm guessing what ever you set the main VDDG voltage to?


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> Will do exactly this - have a pic on my phone of the settings.
> 
> Do we know what the 2 'new' VDDG voltage settings would normally default to? I'm guessing what ever you set the main VDDG voltage to?


Yeah, I think they are just duplicates, could be wrong on that though, I did just treated them like duplicates, and I booted just fine, still not sure if I like the upgrade though, have more testing to do.


----------



## liakou

speedgoat said:


> guys has anyone tried to import the bios settings profile from the beta 1.0.0.4 to this 3004 ? would it work this time ?


I imported them and everything's fine. But I also imported previously with the beta bios and everything was fine as well, just had to make some slight voltage changes related to my RAM OC as this AGESA didn't like my previous settings causing Windows BSOD's.


----------



## neikosr0x

Can anyone report how the CPU behaves on the new BIOS "3004", compared to the old one or vs the BEta 1.0.0.4b?


----------



## Synoxia

neikosr0x said:


> Can anyone report how the CPU behaves on the new BIOS "3004", compared to the old one or vs the BEta 1.0.0.4b?


I've loaded previous beta settings into this one. Can't spot any differences for now. Maybe the EDC bug is fixed but i am lazy now to do tests

P.S to previous 1.0.0.3ABBA users: your overclock is likely to be unstable but fear not, you may find that you can bump TRFC and still have lower latencies like in my case... i'm 64.7 on 1.0.0.4 with 336 compared to 65.1 on 1.0.0.3abba with 294 trfc.


----------



## crakej

Up and running after entering setting manually - Now stable again.

The new VDDG settings allow you to feed the CCD or IODie IF more or less voltage - will experiment with that later..... Performance seems slightly less than bios 2901 so far.... very slightly less.


----------



## LethalSpoon

Flashed and running fine after some voltage tweaks with the same RAM settings. Now that telemetry works as intended my boost is worse, over 100 points lost in CB20 Multi and 25-50MHz in games. Time to play with PBO :kungfu:


----------



## Synoxia

crakej said:


> Up and running after entering setting manually - Now stable again.
> 
> The new VDDG settings allow you to feed the CCD or IODie IF more or less voltage - will experiment with that later..... Performance seems slightly less than bios 2901 so far.... very slightly less.


What i am seeing on my config is: you have to feed CCD IF but seems that you can lower IOD IF without problems. Maybe this will help in fixing high TCL/tdie temperature compared to CCD temperature.


Btw, i want to reopen one discussion about timers and bcdedit commands to find the most optimal settings for perfect smooth and latency sensitive enviroments like gaming in very low framerates and audio content.
On this particular board seems like using


> bcdedit /set useplatformtick yes


 fixes the odd timer 0.4991 and gives you even 0.5. This smooths a lot of tiny microstutters in exchange for a tiny bit of latency (doesn't bother me).


> bcdedit /set Disabledynamictick yes


 seems a must because it's just a power saving feature desktop users just don't need.
I've been running


> bcdedit /set useplatformclock false


 for a while but general consensus seems to be /deletevalue is better because OS won't use HPET unless it needs it.






This youtuber which i don't know if it's reliable or not tested with an ASUS board (which is not C7H, mind you!) and found out that between false and deletevalue there's no difference or you might even lose FPS.
MIND that these are just RAW numbers that usually don't tell the whole story, one example is skylake intel vs ryzen where frametimes were much more consistent in some games on ryzen and you could tell this just by looking at some realtime benchmark of games. Same thing goes for SMT on/OFF where usually SMT on have higher avg fps but trash frametime consistency 1% lows.


----------



## johnfreeman

Need some feedback from you guys, especially those using VII hero together with 3950x. Any issues with it? How dumb would it be getting vii hero now, instead of viii hero? Not really interested pcie4 so i would like to avoid paying extra for x570 and dealing with higher power draw + active cooling.


----------



## oreonutz

johnfreeman said:


> Need some feedback from you guys, especially those using VII hero together with 3950x. Any issues with it? How dumb would it be getting vii hero now, instead of viii hero? Not really interested pcie4 so i would like to avoid paying extra for x570 and dealing with higher power draw + active cooling.


I quite like the pairing. Though to be honest I have had the 3950x installed for a little over a week in my C7H, and haven't done much testing with it, but its boosting great, running fine, and the little bit of Per CCX Overclocking I have done I am quite impressed with. Before the 3950x I had my 3900x installed in it since Launch and Its a great pairing. I do seem to get less Single Core Cores compared to others, but that may be because I am pushing my IF harder. Regardless, if you don't need PCIE4 the C7H and the C6H are both amazing boards for Zen2 Chips (The 3900x now Lives in my C6H Build.)


----------



## ryouiki

johnfreeman said:


> Need some feedback from you guys, especially those using VII hero together with 3950x. Any issues with it? How dumb would it be getting vii hero now, instead of viii hero? Not really interested pcie4 so i would like to avoid paying extra for x570 and dealing with higher power draw + active cooling.


Unless you already have one, or you are getting it really cheap, can't see how it would make sense to buy a VII Hero now. Unless you specifically need some non-standard feature it offers, there arguably better X570 offerings that cost less then current retail price of this board.

On top of that you are likely to get more timely support/updates with a X570 board... you can look back in this thread and see the frustration at the poor update speed ASUS provides for their BIOS/AGESA versions on the VI/VII, buggy fan controller behavior, sleep issues, etc.


----------



## Axaion

If you want to talk about timers, prepare to get annoyed by the 10mhz QPC timer since 1809.. :\


----------



## crakej

dkarDaGobert said:


> i've upgraded from 2x 2x8GB 3200C14 to 2x16GB 3600C16 gskills - also bdies.
> finally able to get 3800C14
> right now on the latest beta bios - still waiting for the 1004b to be released...


I'm also very curios how you have RTC running on Zen 2???? We need it!


----------



## TOMRUS

crakej said:


> I'm also very curios how you have RTC running on Zen 2???? We need it!


Why not use Ryzen Master? It gives basically same info as RTC.
Also it should not me that hard to make RTC work with Zen 2, because at least memory timings part still works fine in my open source reverse engineered version (CAD bus stuff is broken and I have no idea how to fix it)...
https://github.com/tomrus88/RTCSharp


----------



## speedgoat

liakou said:


> I imported them and everything's fine. But I also imported previously with the beta bios and everything was fine as well, just had to make some slight voltage changes related to my RAM OC as this AGESA didn't like my previous settings causing Windows BSOD's.


thanks ! i installed it too and imported the profile from beta and all went well, did not have to make any adjustments to the bios profile yet.

overally im kind of happy with it, i think Ram was defo not affected and perhaps PBO actually works more now buti havent spent too much time with it


----------



## nick name

If you're running a 2700X with this latest 3004 BIOS then make sure you have the latest Ryzen Master version installed. My previous Ryzen Master install (unsure which) was borked in many ways with the latest (I'm assuming) AGESA.


----------



## crakej

TOMRUS said:


> Why not use Ryzen Master? It gives basically same info as RTC.
> Also it should not me that hard to make RTC work with Zen 2, because at least memory timings part still works fine in my open source reverse engineered version (CAD bus stuff is broken and I have no idea how to fix it)...
> https://github.com/tomrus88/RTCSharp


Thanks for sharing.....I will have a play with this.... Only working in Debug mode for some reason at the moment (VS19) but will have a proper look tomorrow.

I don't like Ryzen Master. The timings aren't even in the correct bios order as they are in RTC. I also do not like OCing from anywhere but the bios. If I boot Linux it means I have no OC. - and you also still have to use some bios settings. Why on earth has it become reliant on AMD software to OC my hardware, which I should be able to do without any OS ......from my hardware!?

I had thought we might have proper per CCX/CCD CPU OCing available in this bios (AGESA 1004b) but it's still not there  Might have to give in soon and use it just for CPU OC, do mem from the bios, but I'm just not keen.


----------



## xeizo

Single core is about as borked as it was in the test bios 0002 when using 3004. 

Confirmed by multiple benchmarks, I guess it's actually the same bios. 

Single core never goes above 4525MHz on the fastest core, both 2801/2901 hits 4600MHz and it shows in benchmarks. In Geekbench it's a clear loss in all SC tests but one vs 2901. Multicore is ok. 
Telemetry works, which is the only good thing. Still not a keeper, 2801/2901 are both more in the sort of keepers imho. Way to go Asus.


----------



## westk

Same versions. AGESA is 1.0.0.4


----------



## xeizo

USB is borked too, I get intermittent USB signal errors using bios 3004, never happened on 2901. Off it goes!

edit. back on 2901 and the errors are gone, as expected, and single core is back to normal.


----------



## Keith Myers

johnfreeman said:


> Need some feedback from you guys, especially those using VII hero together with 3950x. Any issues with it? How dumb would it be getting vii hero now, instead of viii hero? Not really interested pcie4 so i would like to avoid paying extra for x570 and dealing with higher power draw + active cooling.


No problem with the 3900X on my C7H and still no problem with my 3950X.


----------



## bushd0c

Tried the 3004 / Agesa 1004b Bios w/3700x (used flashback for flashing 3004)

Could no longer run my Ram at 3733 Mhz
USB seems to be borked (<- USB-Keyboard no longer working all the time)

Returning to 2901 ... Shame 

Update: Had to use flashback-method to flash 2901 to get 3733Mhz working again.


----------



## mito1172

bushd0c said:


> Tried the 3004 / Agesa 1004b Bios w/3700x:
> 
> Could no longer run my Ram at 3733 Mhz
> USB seems to be borked (<- USB-Keyboard no longer working all the time)
> 
> Returning to 2901 ... Shame


The usb issue was 1 time C6H. I will go back to the previous bios if it happens again


----------



## liakou

xeizo said:


> USB is borked too, I get intermittent USB signal errors using bios 3004, never happened on 2901. Off it goes!
> 
> edit. back on 2901 and the errors are gone, as expected, and single core is back to normal.


Did you apply the same settings that you were using with the previous BIOS?
If yes, the USB issues that you describe can be related to your voltage settings, specifically check your VDDG voltage, as this BIOS version might not like the setting that you were stable before and might need a slight increase.
Had this before between BIOS revisions and different AGESA versions where a lower VDDG setting would cause latency issues in Windows and therefore USB dropouts, as well as audio distortion.


----------



## xeizo

liakou said:


> Did you apply the same settings that you were using with the previous BIOS?
> If yes, the USB issues that you describe can be related to your voltage settings, specifically check your VDDG voltage, as this BIOS version might not like the setting that you were stable before and might need a slight increase.
> Had this before between BIOS revisions and different AGESA versions where a lower VDDG setting would cause latency issues in Windows and therefore USB dropouts, as well as audio distortion.


Interesting, could potentially be the issue. I set all settings the same and the new duplicate VDDG to same value on both. Ryzen Master showed the same correct values as before, everything else was stable, all benchmarks and so. But this bios can of course have this issue, even if Ryzen Master still shows the same voltages. 900mV VDDP and 950mV VDDG.

Anyway, I wont likely go back since performance also was clearly lower than 2901. Geekbench shows a massive regression, especially in single core tasks.


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> Interesting, could potentially be the issue. I set all settings the same and the new duplicate VDDG to same value on both. Ryzen Master showed the same correct values as before, everything else was stable, all benchmarks and so. But this bios can of course have this issue, even if Ryzen Master still shows the same voltages. 900mV VDDP and 950mV VDDG.
> 
> Anyway, I wont likely go back since performance also was clearly lower than 2901. Geekbench shows a massive regression, especially in single core tasks.


I know that with the 2700X Ryzen the older version of Ryzen Master I was running broke in many ways. Are you on the latest version of Ryzen Master?


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> I know that with the 2700X Ryzen the older version of Ryzen Master I was running broke in many ways. Are you on the latest version of Ryzen Master?


Yes, latest Ryzen Master and latest drivers. Doesn't matter now as I'm back on 2901.


----------



## crakej

Don't forget guys - you MUST use flashback to apply these bios files. If you don't, it won't write the whole bios and you'll get problems.

As discussed earlier - you can't just load profiles from previous bios with different AGESA version - even if it seems to work. My 3733 profile failed when loaded in, worked fine when entered manually.

I've not had any USB problems. CPU is not hitting 4.6GHz at all since update, though I'll be doing more experimenting.


----------



## Synoxia

crakej said:


> Don't forget guys - you MUST use flashback to apply these bios files. If you don't, it won't write the whole bios and you'll get problems.
> 
> As discussed earlier - you can't just load profiles from previous bios with different AGESA version - even if it seems to work. My 3733 profile failed when loaded in, worked fine when entered manually.
> 
> I've not had any USB problems. CPU is not hitting 4.6GHz at all since update, though I'll be doing more experimenting.


I've ported my 0002 settins to 3004. These seem to be fine as both are 1.0.0.4


----------



## smokin_mitch

crakej said:


> Don't forget guys - you MUST use flashback to apply these bios files. If you don't, it won't write the whole bios and you'll get problems.
> 
> As discussed earlier - you can't just load profiles from previous bios with different AGESA version - even if it seems to work. My 3733 profile failed when loaded in, worked fine when entered manually.
> 
> I've not had any USB problems. CPU is not hitting 4.6GHz at all since update, though I'll be doing more experimenting.


I've never used flashback to update bios, I'm wondering if this is causing the sleep issue on bios 2901 and 3004, I might give 3004 another try but use flashback to update then enter all my settings manually again


----------



## crakej

smokin_mitch said:


> I've never used flashback to update bios, I'm wondering if this is causing the sleep issue on bios 2901 and 3004, I might give 3004 another try but use flashback to update then enter all my settings manually again


I'm afraid it won't fix that 

If you have a 3xxx CPU you must update using flashback, I think 2xxx CPUs 'get away with it' as their code is written first, but since the bios file got bigger, we've had to use flashback.


----------



## smokin_mitch

crakej said:


> I'm afraid it won't fix that
> 
> If you have a 3xxx CPU you must update using flashback, I think 2xxx CPUs 'get away with it' as their code is written first, but since the bios file got bigger, we've had to use flashback.


I've always just used ezy flash 3 from within bios to update and never had an issue

and your right using bios flashback didn't fix the sleep bug so I rolled back to bios 2801


----------



## xeizo

I've always used Flashback, 3004 is just not a great bios and flakey USB is a showstopper even if it possibly can be fixed with higher VDDG(meaning higher temps, even lower boost). 

We will have to wait further to get a great one, in the meantime 2901 is sort of OK.


----------



## crakej

xeizo said:


> I've always used Flashback, 3004 is just not a great bios and flakey USB is a showstopper even if it possibly can be fixed with higher VDDG(meaning higher temps, even lower boost).
> 
> We will have to wait further to get a great one, in the meantime 2901 is sort of OK.


Whats going on with your USB? Mine seems ok on 3004. VDDG is 0.950v


----------



## darkage

here 3004 just as good as 2901, use 1usmus power and memory settings and just the same as 2901
biosflashback is a must, one of the great rog features, and all bios updates should use it as its safer and works just fine


----------



## xeizo

crakej said:


> Whats going on with your USB? Mine seems ok on 3004. VDDG is 0.950v


Using USB audio interfaces there is USB signal error(shows in the driver control panel) and drop outs, never happened on any earlier bios. I use Professional USB audio interfaces(I have several) and listen a lot to Tidal Master and FLAC files with Potplayer(apart from making my own music, I'm a gigging electric guitarist). The drop outs are gross and regular, rending audio unusable. Back to 2901 all is good. Also, both my other PC:s with 1004B are perfectly fine.


----------



## xeizo

darkage said:


> here 3004 just as good as 2901, use 1usmus power and memory settings and just the same as 2901
> biosflashback is a must, one of the great rog features, and all bios updates should use it as its safer and works just fine


As a sidenote, I have found the Balanced Powerplan in the latest AMD drivers performs even better than 1usmus.


----------



## harderthanfire

3004 seems ok but not hitting 4.6ghz which is annoying. I'd just managed to get 4.6ghz to work on 0004 so going to mess with voltages/PBO until I get it there again.


----------



## xeizo

harderthanfire said:


> 3004 seems ok but not hitting 4.6ghz which is annoying. I'd just managed to get 4.6ghz to work on 0004 so going to mess with voltages/PBO until I get it there again.


If you run Geekbench and compare with earlier bios you will see a massive decrease in single core performance on all part tests. Multi is ok.


----------



## lordzed83

xeizo said:


> If you run Geekbench and compare with earlier bios you will see a massive decrease in single core performance on all part tests. Multi is ok.


Not with Manual overclocking You wont. so far 3004 scores best number I ever had on my system.


----------



## xeizo

lordzed83 said:


> Not with Manual overclocking You wont. so far 3004 scores best number I ever had on my system.


Yes, manual(CCX) may be a different beast. I'm talking about default/auto/PBO which 2901 does a lot better.

And I'm talking about single core, you show multi and I already said multi performs ok with 3004. The USB-issues makes it unattractive for me anyway.


----------



## andyliu

xeizo said:


> Yes, manual(CCX) may be a different beast. I'm talking about default/auto/PBO which 2901 does a lot better.
> 
> And I'm talking about single core, you show multi and I already said multi performs ok with 3004. The USB-issues makes it unattractive for me anyway.


for me, 3004 perform even better
I did manually select enable PBO instead of auto
using the AMD power plan in the AMD chipset driver, (change the min to 5% so it downclock)
did my normal memory OC, that's about all the change I made. (same oc as all the previous bios for my 4 dimm Flare-X at 3200Mhz)
everything seems ok for my 3700x
3 core to 4400Mhz, 3 core 4375, 2 core 4325.

not really experiencing any USB issue, only recent USB related issue was between Microsoft update & the HyperX Cloud II headset
not sure if it's similar to what you experiencing but doesn't hurt to check the symptom 
here is the link https://www.reddit.com/r/HyperX/comments/cwtyuw/windows_10_1903_issues_with_hyperx_cloud_ii/
I end up just replace the headset and haven't had an issue.


----------



## speedgoat

xeizo said:


> As a sidenote, I have found the Balanced Powerplan in the latest AMD drivers performs even better than 1usmus.


im finding the balanced power plan is now basically identical in performance to 1usmus power plan, cant really tell which one is working better


----------



## oreonutz

lordzed83 said:


> Not with Manual overclocking You wont. so far 3004 scores best number I ever had on my system.


DAMN NICE!!! Best I have hit on my 3900x is 7704, that is killer right there! Of course now I have to chase 10,000 with my 3950x, haven't tried yet, not sure how attainable that is.


----------



## stinger2k

Stable 24/7 Setting but with different RTT-Values than on Agesa 1.0.0.3
Setting up CLDO_VDDP Voltage to 918mV for Stability Reasons.


----------



## Synoxia

I recommend to anyone testing for IF stability to do some extensive cpu test. I can't stress this enough. HCI memtest WILL NOT fail if your IF is unstable. I repeat it WILL NOT, i've got 3000%+ with HCI alone.
What i do instead is use AC odyssey maxed with DSR and resolution scale along with HCI overnight as i've previously stated.
What this does is produce a realistic workload with some heat coming from gpu and also some stress on cpu.


----------



## xeizo

Something odd happened today, without me changing anything suddenly BCLK was 101.7MHz. That means memory at 3866MHz! And boosting to 4650MHz on two cores, 4600 on one, 4575 on two and the worst core at 4400MHz. FCLK/UCLK still at 1900MHz. Pretty strange.

I've been running 102MHz BCLK on my Aorus M since day one without a single glitch, so maybe it will hold, don't know haven't done any stability testing yet but Windows/apps tugs along just fine.

It has never happened before, my BCLK has been 99.98-100MHz all the time so I can't explain this at all.










edit. The Cinebenches liked it, this is with just PBO and PPT/TDC/EDC all set to zero(and now boost is 4677MHz!):


----------



## darkage

how did you set your AI O. tuner? auto/ manual / default?


----------



## xeizo

darkage said:


> how did you set your AI O. tuner? auto/ manual / default?


Auto, I have never touched that one and assumes it's at the same setting it always has been. I could be wrong, but this behaviour is totally new for me.


----------



## darkage

xeizo said:


> Auto, I have never touched that one and assumes it's at the same setting it always has been. I could be wrong, but this behaviour is totally new for me.


must be another setting  so many duplicates, but never seen it before
this is with 
ppt - 0
tdc - 0
edc - 0
scalar - 10X
do you set it in CBS?


----------



## xeizo

darkage said:


> must be another setting  so many duplicates, but never seen it before
> this is with
> ppt - 0
> tdc - 0
> edc - 0
> scalar - 10X
> do you set it in CBS?


Yes, but only in in Asus PBO, CBS is Auto.

I did a reboot and BCLK is back to 100, must be another iteration of Asus buggy bioses. However it was fully stable while it lasted, so maybe I should set a BCLK of 101.7 ....


----------



## LukeT32

So..... New to AMD user here. My last AMD system was the Athlon 64 days. I am building a system for a friend and running into a few issues with this brand new build. I have a 3600x, C7H wifi and a Samsung 860 evo 1 TB m.2 drive. I updated to the 3004 using bios flashback without issue (all my Intel builds are ASUS boards). I am unable to get the m.2 drive to be recognized by the bios. It is installed in under the GPU just above PCI slot #1. I have scanned the bios and don't see any sata/m.2 settings. The only thing I have seen that seems strange is under the sata section of the bios it gives you the option to rename the m.2 (grey) to any name. I don't see any mention of only being able to use the "vertical" m.2 slot of sata any where in the manual.

My second question is in regards to ram settings/support. I have a 3600mhz g.skill kit from the QVL but I do not see anywhere in bios to select "XMP". I see where I can manually select the frequency/timings individually of the ram. I assumed by getting a kit off the QVL it would be a set it and forget style setup. The actual end user of the PC is not very tech savy. So requiring modification/setting changes on a regular basis isn't an option.

Thanks in advance for your help.


----------



## oreonutz

LukeT32 said:


> So..... New to AMD user here. My last AMD system was the Athlon 64 days. I am building a system for a friend and running into a few issues with this brand new build. I have a 3600x, C7H wifi and a Samsung 860 evo 1 TB m.2 drive. I updated to the 3004 using bios flashback without issue (all my Intel builds are ASUS boards). I am unable to get the m.2 drive to be recognized by the bios. It is installed in under the GPU just above PCI slot #1. I have scanned the bios and don't see any sata/m.2 settings. The only thing I have seen that seems strange is under the sata section of the bios it gives you the option to rename the m.2 (grey) to any name. I don't see any mention of only being able to use the "vertical" m.2 slot of sata any where in the manual.
> 
> My second question is in regards to ram settings/support. I have a 3600mhz g.skill kit from the QVL but I do not see anywhere in bios to select "XMP". I see where I can manually select the frequency/timings individually of the ram. I assumed by getting a kit off the QVL it would be a set it and forget style setup. The actual end user of the PC is not very tech savy. So requiring modification/setting changes on a regular basis isn't an option.
> 
> Thanks in advance for your help.


So on AMD, in regards to Asus, XMP is called DOCP, you will find it in Extreme Tweaker under the OC settings, you can select Automatic, Manual, or DOCP. Select DOCP Profile 1 or 2, and that will lock your XMP in.

As far as Your M.2, its not under the Sata Settings. Its in with the PCIE Settings, under advanced and *"OnBoard Devices Configuration"* I Believe. So, you should not plug it into the M.2 Above the Graphics card slot, but the one below the second x16 Slot. The Bottom M.2 is Slot 1, the Top M.2 is Slot 2. You can of course use slot 2, but then that drops both your 1st x16 Slot to x8 and Your 2nd x16 Slot to x4 (instead of x8). So its better to use the Bottom M.2 Slot, then your First x16 PCIE Slot for the Graphics card can get the full x16.

Otherwise, if you want your graphics to have x8, you can make the second M.2 Work by going into the Advanced Settings\Onboard Devices Configuration, going to the "M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration" Settings, and putting it on Automatic, so that it automatically drops the 2nd PCIEx16 Slot to x4, which will then activate the second M.2 Slot.

Basically you should just put the M.2 in the Bottom most slot if you are only using 1 M.2, then it will just work.

Hope this helps!


----------



## ryouiki

LukeT32 said:


> ... I am unable to get the m.2 drive to be recognized by the bios. It is installed in under the GPU just above PCI slot #1...
> 
> ...My second question is in regards to ram settings/support. I have a 3600mhz g.skill kit from the QVL but I do not see anywhere in bios to select "XMP"...
> 
> Thanks in advance for your help.


For a single NVME drive you want to use the bottom slot, though I am not sure why it is not detecting the drive... not an issue I ever experienced even with populating both slots... unless NVME raid is enabled, then you have to configure the drive via RaidXpert.

For XMP it is called DOCP on this board, and there should be a setting in Extreme Tweaker Menu under AI Overlock Tuning? that enables this... I don't have Crosshair VII in a functional system right now, so I can't see the actual BIOS menu.


----------



## oreonutz

@LukeT32 So You will find DOCP Under This Setting:



Spoiler















And Then if you don't want to move the M.2 to the Bottom M.2 Slot, you need to make sure this setting is set to "Auto". But remember, that will Force your first PCIEx16 slot to x8, and it will force your second PCIE Slot to x4 (The Top M.2 Slot Shares Bandwidth with the 2nd PCIEx16 Slot)



Spoiler


----------



## LukeT32

oreonutz said:


> So on AMD, in regards to Asus, XMP is called DOCP, you will find it in Extreme Tweaker under the OC settings, you can select Automatic, Manual, or DOCP. Select DOCP Profile 1 or 2, and that will lock your XMP in.
> 
> As far as Your M.2, its not under the Sata Settings. Its in with the PCIE Settings, under advanced and *"OnBoard Devices Configuration"* I Believe. So, you should not plug it into the M.2 Above the Graphics card slot, but the one below the second x16 Slot. The Bottom M.2 is Slot 1, the Top M.2 is Slot 2. You can of course use slot 2, but then that drops both of your x16 Slots to x8. So its better to use the Bottom M.2 Slot, then your First x16 PCIE Slot for the Graphics card can get the full x16.
> 
> Otherwise, if you want your graphics to have x8, you can make the second M.2 Work by going into the Advanced Settings\Onboard Devices Configuration, going to the PCIEx16_2 Settings, and putting it on Automatic, so that it automatically drops the 2nd PCIEx16 Slot to x8, which will then activate the second M.2 Slot.
> 
> Basically you should just put the M.2 in the Bottom most slot, then it will just work.
> 
> Hope this helps!


I appreciate the fast response. I successfully found DOCP and have it set up. Thank you very much.

I also installed the m.2 drive into the top slot which had the heatsink installed on it from the factory. I dug a lot deeper in the manual and found that only the bottom m.2 slot supports SATA. ASUS pulls a fast one on you and the heatsink works on both slots as well. All I want the heatsink for is hiding the ugly green PCB on the m.2 drive.  I appreciate everyones help and have Windows installing now.


----------



## oreonutz

LukeT32 said:


> I appreciate the fast response. I successfully found DOCP and have it set up. Thank you very much.
> 
> I also installed the m.2 drive into the top slot which had the heatsink installed on it from the factory. I dug a lot deeper in the manual and found that only the bottom m.2 slot supports SATA. ASUS pulls a fast one on you and the heatsink works on both slots as well. All I want the heatsink for is hiding the ugly green PCB on the m.2 drive.  I appreciate everyones help and have Windows installing now.


SWEET! Glad to Hear it! Hope your Build Shreds some sweet FPS for your Friend! Enjoy!


----------



## darkage

this is a nice cooler for m.2 nvme drives, and really works, link from eBay, but can be found in ali also, black /red /gold
https://www.ebay.com/itm/M-2-NGFF-N...rentrq:5bd09ac416f0ad31c3e08035ff8e0c4e|iid:1


----------



## MrPhilo

stinger2k said:


> Stable 24/7 Setting but with different RTT-Values than on Agesa 1.0.0.3
> Setting up CLDO_VDDP Voltage to 918mV for Stability Reasons.


Any chance you can link the Zen 2 Timing Checker?


----------



## LukeT32

Got everything up and running tonight. Besides the obvious windows updates, asus driver updates and changing the power plan to performance any other settings to change?


----------



## oreonutz

LukeT32 said:


> Got everything up and running tonight. Besides the obvious windows updates, asus driver updates and changing the power plan to performance any other settings to change?


Just get the newest Chipset Driver from AMD.com and set your fan profiles, and do your benchmarking to make sure performance is good and you should be set.



darkage said:


> this is a nice cooler for m.2 nvme drives, and really works, link from eBay, but can be found in ali also, black /red /gold
> https://www.ebay.com/itm/M-2-NGFF-N...rentrq:5bd09ac416f0ad31c3e08035ff8e0c4e|iid:1


Also, not sure who asked about NVMe Heatsinks. But if you are going to use one, do yourself a favor and only put the Thermal Pad on the Controller and not the NAND Flash chips itself, also can put one long strip along the entire backside of the NVMe for those NVMe drives that don't have any flash on the back of them (which is most). This way the one on the backside spreads the heat from the PCB Evenly across the Flash Memory, and then the One on the controller helps dissipate the heat that needs to be dissipated, but leaves the Flash Modules themselves hot, which is how they prefer to operate under load. This one change will ensure longevity for your NVMe. If you don't hit your NVMe hard with constant workloads it will realistically be fine if you put the Thermal Pad on the Flash Chips, its still best practice for the longevity of the drive to make sure the controller stays cool while the Flash remains hot. Just FYI for anyone who did not know this.


----------



## netman

well i am a bit in trouble with my new 3700x and the ch7 - i was on 02 Bios and tried to flash new 3004 via flasback (renamed to c7h.cap) waited till flashing blue light goes out and now i am stuck at qcode 07

clear cmos and safe boot button do not help - maybe finally i managed to brick it before new b550s arrive  


any suggestions ?


----------



## andyliu

netman said:


> well i am a bit in trouble with my new 3700x and the ch7 - i was on 02 Bios and tried to flash new 3004 via flasback (renamed to c7h.cap) waited till flashing blue light goes out and now i am stuck at qcode 07
> 
> clear cmos and safe boot button do not help - maybe finally i managed to brick it before new b550s arrive
> 
> 
> any suggestions ?


shouldn't it be C7H instead of lower case c7h? not sure if you can actually flash with lower case c7h
sometimes I will also pull the power for 30 sec before re-flash if it's not going well the first time.
also make sure the usb is in fat32 format as well.


----------



## netman

yes i wrote it C7H.CAP - and stick was fat32 - also tried it fresh formatted. 

But Problem is solved now it was a bad stick - even tough i used this one many times for flashback - tried 2 different ones an finally was lucky - system is up and running again.

now its time for tuning - hope i can get my 32 GB micron e-dies (also have some gskill b-dies but only 16GB so i would like to go with the microns) to run at 3800 with some descent timings ...


----------



## oreonutz

netman said:


> yes i wrote it C7H.CAP - and stick was fat32 - also tried it fresh formatted.
> 
> But Problem is solved now it was a bad stick - even tough i used this one many times for flashback - tried 2 different ones an finally was lucky - system is up and running again.
> 
> now its time for tuning - hope i can get my 32 GB micron e-dies (also have some gskill b-dies but only 16GB so i would like to go with the microns) to run at 3800 with some descent timings ...


OK Good, glad the problem is solved. These are hard boards to brick, but I have done it in the past, and know how to recover it. Was in the process of writing a lengthy post on how to do just that. But as you don't need it anymore, I am forgoing writing the rest. But rest assured, had you bricked the board, it is definitely possible to recover from it without having to send it in.


----------



## narukun

Hey guys this is my score using bios 2901 agesa 1003, do you think would be worth it to try agesa 1004?


----------



## netman

@oreonutz
thanks for your effort - hope you did not spend to much time in writing down the whole procedure - i also hope i will never need it ^^

another thing i am struggeling at the moment is to reach 1900 Mhz FCLK with my 3700X - how do you guys try to reach it ? what voltages do i have to try trough - only vddsoc ? and where should i start- 0,950 ?

are there some settings i can try and if these do not work i just have to accept that my 3700x will never reach 1900 FCLK ... 

e-dies seem to work with 3800Mhz (just low timings at the moment)


----------



## smokin_mitch

netman said:


> @oreonutz
> thanks for your effort - hope you did not spend to much time in writing down the whole procedure - i also hope i will never need it ^^
> 
> another thing i am struggeling at the moment is to reach 1900 Mhz FCLK with my 3700X - how do you guys try to reach it ? what voltages do i have to try trough - only vddsoc ? and where should i start- 0,950 ?
> 
> are there some settings i can try and if these do not work i just have to accept that my 3700x will never reach 1900 FCLK ...
> 
> e-dies seem to work with 3800Mhz (just low timings at the moment)


1.05v-1.1v soc, and in the advanced\amd overlocking\ VDDP manual 900 and VDDG manual 950 is a good place to start to try fclk at 1900mhz


----------



## netman

smokin_mitch said:


> 1.05v-1.1v soc, and in the advanced\amd overlocking\ VDDP manual 900 and VDDG manual 950 is a good place to start to try fclk at 1900mhz


thx a lot - i am able to boot with this settings (1.05 soc, vddp 900, vddg 950) - but nearly imidiatly after entering windows i get a blue screen - so whats the next step try to rise soc from 1.05 to 1.1 or try to raise vddp and/or vddg ?


----------



## oreonutz

netman said:


> thx a lot - i am able to boot with this settings (1.05 soc, vddp 900, vddg 950) - but nearly imidiatly after entering windows i get a blue screen - so whats the next step try to rise soc from 1.05 to 1.1 or try to raise vddp and/or vddg ?


I wouldn't go as high as 1.1SocV, but I would tick it up a bit, I use 4 Dimms and it takes me 1.12SOCv, I would try not to go about 1.15socV, because in my experience thats when really weird errors start to creep in.

I would also check your memory timings, I would really loosen them up, this way you can see if the PC runs nice and stable without aggressive timings. Once you have the PC stable at 1900Mhz IF just really loose timings, then you have validated that 1900Mhz is possible and stable on your build, thats when I would very slowly start tuning down your timings, one at a time, this way you can catch when instability starts to happen, and know which timing to keep loose. Also raising ODT Terminiation to somewhere inbetween 40ohms and 53.3ohms really helped stabalize lower timings for me. Also lowering (instead of raising) "CLDO VDDP" Helped me reach stability on at 1900Mhz on my 3900x, I believe I found stability at 870mV. Note "CLDO VDDP" voltage is different from just plain VDDP voltage, that seems to do fine right at 900mV. 

Good Luck Brother!


----------



## oreonutz

narukun said:


> Hey guys this is my score using bios 2901 agesa 1003, do you think would be worth it to try agesa 1004?


Damn man! That is a damn good score with the 3900x. If you did that with normal Boosting, I would say you are dialed in pretty good. Of course a tinkerer always loves to tinker more, who knows how your CPU is going to behave once you upgrade though. What I would suggest is going into the UEFI and saving your exact profile the way it is now onto a Thumb Drive, this way you can restore to those exact settings later if need be (Don't just save it to the boards UEFI Profile Slots, because once you upgrade the BIOS those may disappear, definitely save it to a USB Drive.) I would also use the "CTRL+F2" option while you are at it to get a TXT File of all your settings that you can use to manually tune your UEFI settings once you upgrade.

Then once you are sure you have a good backup of your profile, and a backup of the 2901 UEFI File, go ahead and upgrade. Make sure to use the tested and true Flashback Method to update your BIOS, there have been reports of bugs using other methods. Then, instead of restoring your profile from your file, use that TXT file to manually Key in your settings (There have been multiple reports of people restoring settings from old UEFI Versions Profile saves, only for the stability to go wonky once booted into windows, other people have reported it worked just fine though, so I guess its just luck of the draw, but to make sure that things are going to operate as they should, I would dial in the settings manually to ensure everything is working properly.)

Once you have dialed back in your settings, start your benchmarking and see if you gained or lost performance, or if its exactly the same. I have seen reports on here of people getting better scores, and about the same number of reports of people saying they lost performance. So it seems to be luck of the draw. As always, there is a pretty wide variance in Cinebench though, so I would not only do multiple runs and average those runs before and after upgrading, but I would use multiple benchmarks to validate your performance as well. Y Cruncher is a pretty consistent one, Geek Bench is ok, and to test to see if GPU performance was positively or negatively effected I would through something like Firestrike, Timespy, and SuperPosition in there as well. Once you have done multiple runs of various benchmarks, averaged your multiple runs of each test and logged all results, you will get a pretty good idea of whether or not you gained or lost performance, or if its on average about the same.

Anyways, that's my 2 cents on the matter. I have yet to do my testing on the new UEFI to see how my performance has changed, been insanely busy working, and I recently upgraded from the 3900x to the 3950x so even though I have noticed a slight uptick in overall performance, thats more likely due to the increase in single core performance from the chip upgrade then anything else. Looking forward to your results.

And remember, if you end up hating it, you can always use Flashback to Flash back to 2901, restore your settings from the flash drive, and then you will be right back where you are now, with that bad ass Cinebench score! Good Luck!


----------



## xeizo

I would say that was impossible using the boost mechanism unless he has exotic cooling, possibly. Nah, that is CCX OC or static bios OC. And the guy seems to know what he is doing 100% 

I just touched CCX OC in Ryzen Master for like half an hour and went straight to 7800p, so if he's been doing it all day 8000p might be achievable.

There was a previous post stating that bios 3004 had better scores with CCX OC, so it may be worthwhile, boosting in particular single core is much worse though.


----------



## oreonutz

xeizo said:


> I would say that was impossible using the boost mechanism unless he has exotic cooling, possibly. Nah, that is CCX OC or static bios OC. And the guy seems to know what he is doing 100%
> 
> I just touched CCX OC in Ryzen Master for like half an hour and went straight to 7800p, so if he's been doing it all day 8000p might be achievable.
> 
> There was a previous post stating that bios 3004 had better scores with CCX OC, so it may be worthwhile, boosting in particular single core is much worse though.


Yeah, who knows, the variance from chip to chip seems to be so high, that I gave up guessing. Just the 8 3000 Series chips I have had through my lab since launch, 2 of which I own, the variance on boosting has been wildly different. That said, I have never seen any of the 3900x hit 8000 without serious tweaking. Per CCX OCing is how I run my chip, and the Highest I have hit in Cinebench is 8006. That said My Good CCX still wasn't that great, and my bad CCX was way below average. You get lucky enough to get a decent bin on both, and you can probably hit some crazy high scores.

Would definitely be interested to find out how he was running his OC though, the fact that CB Recognizes his chip as running at its Base Clock, means he was either using PBO or he was CCX Overclocking, because typically when Manual OCing, it will show the Clock of the Manual OC.

(And I Hate Ryzen Master, it messes with BIOS Settings, and can cause instability when running Benchmarks, at least it has with me in the past, not to mention it lowers you score if you leave it running while testing. Granted you can just set your Per CCX OC then just close it, but there is still the matter of it changing your AMD CBS and OC settings in the UEFI/Advanced Page, and I hate that it does that. We have better tools that do the same thing and are light weight, not to mention you can use them to trigger your Per CCX OC on Boot. I think you and I have discussed that in the past, but just in case I figured I would bring that up, would be happy to send you the tool if you would like it. Its light weight, its instant, it doesn't cause instability, and to quote the Great Poet Jen-Hsun Huang, "It Just Works!" LOL!


----------



## djase45

Hey guys,

First of all, Happy New Year to you,

I would like to know if there are any particular options to activate in the bios to get the most out of my 3900x.

Thank you.


----------



## smokin_mitch

netman said:


> thx a lot - i am able to boot with this settings (1.05 soc, vddp 900, vddg 950) - but nearly imidiatly after entering windows i get a blue screen - so whats the next step try to rise soc from 1.05 to 1.1 or try to raise vddp and/or vddg ?



Id increase soc to 1.1v that's fine I wouldn't go much higher than 1.1v though, also vddp and vddg you could slowly increase until you get stability


----------



## nick name

Welp, I just had my fans slow down on BIOS 3004. Anyone else?


----------



## gupsterg

stinger2k said:


> Stable 24/7 Setting but with different RTT-Values than on Agesa 1.0.0.3
> Setting up CLDO_VDDP Voltage to 918mV for Stability Reasons.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


4x16GB at 3800MHz :drool: , +rep for posting info :thumb: .


----------



## djase45

djase45 said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> First of all, Happy New Year to you,
> 
> I would like to know if there are any particular options to activate in the bios to get the most out of my 3900x.
> 
> Thank you.


----------



## narukun

oreonutz said:


> Damn man! That is a damn good score with the 3900x. If you did that with normal Boosting, I would say you are dialed in pretty good. Of course a tinkerer always loves to tinker more, who knows how your CPU is going to behave once you upgrade though. What I would suggest is going into the UEFI and saving your exact profile the way it is now onto a Thumb Drive, this way you can restore to those exact settings later if need be (Don't just save it to the boards UEFI Profile Slots, because once you upgrade the BIOS those may disappear, definitely save it to a USB Drive.) I would also use the "CTRL+F2" option while you are at it to get a TXT File of all your settings that you can use to manually tune your UEFI settings once you upgrade.
> 
> Then once you are sure you have a good backup of your profile, and a backup of the 2901 UEFI File, go ahead and upgrade. Make sure to use the tested and true Flashback Method to update your BIOS, there have been reports of bugs using other methods. Then, instead of restoring your profile from your file, use that TXT file to manually Key in your settings (There have been multiple reports of people restoring settings from old UEFI Versions Profile saves, only for the stability to go wonky once booted into windows, other people have reported it worked just fine though, so I guess its just luck of the draw, but to make sure that things are going to operate as they should, I would dial in the settings manually to ensure everything is working properly.)
> 
> Once you have dialed back in your settings, start your benchmarking and see if you gained or lost performance, or if its exactly the same. I have seen reports on here of people getting better scores, and about the same number of reports of people saying they lost performance. So it seems to be luck of the draw. As always, there is a pretty wide variance in Cinebench though, so I would not only do multiple runs and average those runs before and after upgrading, but I would use multiple benchmarks to validate your performance as well. Y Cruncher is a pretty consistent one, Geek Bench is ok, and to test to see if GPU performance was positively or negatively effected I would through something like Firestrike, Timespy, and SuperPosition in there as well. Once you have done multiple runs of various benchmarks, averaged your multiple runs of each test and logged all results, you will get a pretty good idea of whether or not you gained or lost performance, or if its on average about the same.
> 
> Anyways, that's my 2 cents on the matter. I have yet to do my testing on the new UEFI to see how my performance has changed, been insanely busy working, and I recently upgraded from the 3900x to the 3950x so even though I have noticed a slight uptick in overall performance, thats more likely due to the increase in single core performance from the chip upgrade then anything else. Looking forward to your results.
> 
> And remember, if you end up hating it, you can always use Flashback to Flash back to 2901, restore your settings from the flash drive, and then you will be right back where you are now, with that bad ass Cinebench score! Good Luck!


Wow thank you so much for all the info, I think I'm gonna try the new bios and just rollback in case I'm not happy, my scores are with manual Overclock, CCD0 at 4.5ghz and CCD1 at 4.4ghz using 1.387v


----------



## djase45

as always here, I'm just ignored.


----------



## Bart

djase45 said:


> as always here, I'm just ignored.


Stop asking dumb questions then. You're being ignored because your questions are stupid, and indicate that you're a noob who hasn't done any damn research on his own. Do some research and learn something. Maybe try READING this entire thread and actually LEARNING something on your own.


----------



## xeizo

djase45 said:


> as always here, I'm just ignored.


Pretty much everything needed to know is already in this very thread, with screenshots, possibly not anyone having the time to do a writeup at the moment.


----------



## oreonutz

djase45 said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> First of all, Happy New Year to you,
> 
> I would like to know if there are any particular options to activate in the bios to get the most out of my 3900x.
> 
> Thank you.


If any one thing came to mind I would post it. I figured someone else would get back to you, because at the time nothing came to mind. The 3900x works great out of the box, so really the best thing you can do for performance is to tweak your memory to get as close as you can to 3800Mhz with IF at 1900Mhz, with your timings as low as possible.

As far as specific settings to tweak, there is no one that will get you better performance. Basically you have to do experimenting with your specific chip to see what works better for you. Sorry I didn't post this earlier, I did think about it, I just wasnt sure it would be too useful for you, but hopefully it is.


----------



## Enzarch

oreonutz said:


> And I Hate Ryzen Master, it messes with BIOS Settings, and can cause instability when running Benchmarks, at least it has with me in the past, not to mention it lowers you score if you leave it running while testing. Granted you can just set your Per CCX OC then just close it, but there is still the matter of it changing your AMD CBS and OC settings in the UEFI/Advanced Page, and I hate that it does that. We have better tools that do the same thing and are light weight, not to mention you can use them to trigger your Per CCX OC on Boot. I think you and I have discussed that in the past, but just in case I figured I would bring that up, would be happy to send you the tool if you would like it. Its light weight, its instant, it doesn't cause instability, and to quote the Great Poet Jen-Hsun Huang, "It Just Works!" LOL!


Well, I had been waiting for per CCX to come to the Asus BIOS, I should have known better, Could you slip me a line on that tool you speak of?


----------



## oreonutz

Enzarch said:


> Well, I had been waiting for per CCX to come to the Asus BIOS, I should have known better, Could you slip me a line on that tool you speak of?



Of Course, PM incoming in about 10 mins, let me dig up the link


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

tldr 

is the NEW 3004 bios the agesa 1004 combo Patch,really they did it?

Is it good/fine with a 2700x?

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## nick name

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> tldr
> 
> is the NEW 3004 bios the agesa 1004 combo Patch,really they did it?
> 
> Is it good/fine with a 2700x?
> 
> Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


So far so good except one instance of fans slowing.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

nick name said:


> So far so good except one instance of fans slowing.


thx man looking forward flashing it!

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## nick name

Oof. Another couple of instances of fans slowing. Think I'm gonna go back to 2901.


----------



## bushd0c

edit: post moved

Cheers!


----------



## netman

where am i supposed to set vddg and vddp on the ch7 ? because on auto the ch7 give a lot of voltage in my opinion - but there is cldo vddg voltage in extreme tweaker, then there is vddg and vddp in tweakers paradise and there are things to set on advanced -amd overclocking ? 

and furthermore it seems vddg can be set like 0,xxx in V and vddp like xxx in mV ?


edit: it seems cldo vddg (0,950) in extreme tweaker and cldo vddp (900)in tweaker's paradise are the ones to be set....


----------



## crakej

Happy New Year everyone!

I've had the flu over Christmas and still suffering a bit 

Because of this I haven't been able to do the testing I want to do on this new bios.

Has anyone noticed any of the great improvements we were promised with AGESA 1004b?

So far I've been able to lower my VDDG back down to 0.95v, and I can run my RAM at XMP 4400 without setting anything else - previously I had to change VDDP to .925 to get that to boot. I also had hoped per CCX/CCD OCing would come to the bios.

We can't expect anything huge to be fair - these chips run amazing already, but I'd like to have that bit more control from the bios.

Last, I was wondering why UCLCK gets divided by 2 for high speed ram? I mean, if I can run 3733:1866:1866, why can't I run say 3800:1866:1866 instead of 3800:1866:950? Why is it that UCLCK can only be /2 instead of say /1.5 or 1.25? Perhaps @1usmus might know.

Hope I'm not repeating myself or anyone else - hopefully I'll be well and back on the ball soon!


----------



## Synoxia

crakej said:


> Happy New Year everyone!
> 
> I've had the flu over Christmas and still suffering a bit
> 
> Because of this I haven't been able to do the testing I want to do on this new bios.
> 
> Has anyone noticed any of the great improvements we were promised with AGESA 1004b?
> 
> So far I've been able to lower my VDDG back down to 0.95v, and I can run my RAM at XMP 4400 without setting anything else - previously I had to change VDDP to .925 to get that to boot. I also had hoped per CCX/CCD OCing would come to the bios.
> 
> We can't expect anything huge to be fair - these chips run amazing already, but I'd like to have that bit more control from the bios.
> 
> Last, I was wondering why UCLCK gets divided by 2 for high speed ram? I mean, if I can run 3733:1866:1866, why can't I run say 3800:1866:1866 instead of 3800:1866:950? Why is it that UCLCK can only be /2 instead of say /1.5 or 1.25? Perhaps @1usmus might know.
> 
> Hope I'm not repeating myself or anyone else - hopefully I'll be well and back on the ball soon!


Honestly the only thin i noticed is that i am unstable again from 0002 to 3004 bios. I hate my life and 1900 fclk


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> So far so good except one instance of fans slowing.


My fans have been ok (touch wood) - though not been pushing my machine lately. What was happening when they slowed?


----------



## Synoxia

@gupsterg do you think i can push more than 1.10vddsoc, should i?

Someone with 4 dimms and 1900 fclk on bios 3004 can share their settings txt?


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> My fans have been ok (touch wood) - though not been pushing my machine lately. What was happening when they slowed?


I was sitting at the desktop which is why I noticed it because I could see the HWiNFO sensors. So it may happen more frequently without me noticing. 

Looking at how they are behaving now it seems different than the previous fan bug as they also occasionally spin up faster than they're set. According to HWiNFO.


----------



## gupsterg

@nick name

Not noted any issues with fan headers on UEFI 3004, pretty much constantly using rig since flashing the file on release, even left running overnight some nights.

I'm using:-

CPU_FAN supplies power & PWM to rear case fan, Be Quiet Silent Wings 3 PWM 140mm set to max (1000rpm).
CHA_FAN1 supplies PWM to 3x Arctic Cooling F12 PWM fans, powered by 4 in 1 cable with molex.
CHA_FAN2 supplies power & PWM to case fan pointed at RAM, Be Quiet Silent Wings 3 PWM 140mm set to max (1000rpm).
CHA_FAN3 supplies PWM to 4x Arctic Cooling F12 PWM fans, powered by 4 in 1 cable with molex
H_AMP supplies PWM to EK D5 pump.

@Synoxia

Not seen a need to use SOC 1.1V for any of the 5x Zen2 CPUs I've used on C7HWIFI with F4-3200C14Q-32GVK and or F4-3200C14Q-32GTZSW.

Latest runs with sample 1 of 3 R9 3900X in this ZIP, the benchmarks were run whilst HWINFO was minimized. This profile is still under testing, organise files by time to see order of testing and it's all on one POST of rig.

The settings txt note SOC voltage mode is [Offset/+/Auto] and *I set 1.025V in AMD Overclocking menu*, reasoning this way through POST process SOC does not peak to ~1.1V and then set value. CLDO_VDDP & CLDO_VDDG both set in AMD Overclocking menu. CLDO_VDDP 0.901, both CLDO_VDDG setttings as 0.951V, when I do play with these voltages I change in increments of 3mV. You'll see in Ryzen Master if you change to say 0.900V it will be lower than 0.9V, if I stick to 3mV steps Ryzen Master reflects set value better. Do also note how the Phy menu has:-

DFE Read Training [Enable]
FFE Write Training [Disable]

Without that setup the voltages used wouldn't work from when I last checked.

The data ZIP is from rig made of:-

R9 3900X
C7HWIFI
F4-3200C14Q-32GVK

RX VEGA 64 (Water block EK)

1x Intel 660P 1TB NVMe in M2_1 slot on mobo
2x Adata SX8200 Pro 1TB NVMe on ASUS Hyper M2 x16 Card and PCIEX8/4_2 slot is set to 4x/4x in UEFI settings

1x Seagate 2TB SATA HDD
1X HGST 2TB SATA HDD

Bykski A-Ryzen-ThV2-X (TIM AS5)
2x Magicool G2 Slim 360mm rad with 3x Arctic Cooling F12 PWM on top rad, 4x on front rad.
EK-XRES Revo 140 D5 PWM
Coolant is distilled water with ~20 mix of Mayhems XT-1 Clear Concentrate
2x Be Quiet Silent Wings 3 PWM 140mm (1000rpm) fans used, one as case exhaust, another to improve airflow over RAM.

Loop order is pump/res > GPU block > CPU block > top rad > front rad. Inline water temperature probe on top rad is used for rad fan/pump profiles in UEFI. 

Cooler Master V850 (OEM Seasonic)

All housed in Be Quiet Dark Base 900 with mesh mod to front and top panel has some plastic guides removed from behind mesh to improve exhausting air flow from case.



Spoiler


----------



## Synoxia

gupsterg said:


> @nick name
> 
> Not noted any issues with fan headers on UEFI 3004, pretty much constantly using rig since flashing the file on release, even left running overnight some nights.
> 
> I'm using:-
> 
> CPU_FAN supplies power & PWM to rear case fan, Be Quiet Silent Wings 3 PWM 140mm set to max (1000rpm).
> CHA_FAN1 supplies PWM to 3x Arctic Cooling F12 PWM fans, powered by 4 in 1 cable with molex.
> CHA_FAN2 supplies power & PWM to case fan pointed at RAM, Be Quiet Silent Wings 3 PWM 140mm set to max (1000rpm).
> CHA_FAN3 supplies PWM to 4x Arctic Cooling F12 PWM fans, powered by 4 in 1 cable with molex
> H_AMP supplies PWM to EK D5 pump.
> 
> @Synoxia
> 
> Not seen a need to use SOC 1.1V for any of the 5x Zen2 CPUs I've used on C7HWIFI with F4-3200C14Q-32GVK and or F4-3200C14Q-32GTZSW.
> 
> Latest runs with sample 1 of 3 R9 3900X in this ZIP, the benchmarks were run whilst HWINFO was minimized. This profile is still under testing, organise files by time to see order of testing and it's all on one POST of rig.
> 
> The settings txt note SOC voltage mode is [Offset/+/Auto] and *I set 1.025V in AMD Overclocking menu*, reasoning this way through POST process SOC does not peak to ~1.1V and then set value. CLDO_VDDP & CLDO_VDDG both set in AMD Overclocking menu. CLDO_VDDP 0.901, both CLDO_VDDG setttings as 0.951V, when I do play with these voltages I change in increments of 3mV. You'll see in Ryzen Master if you change to say 0.900V it will be lower than 0.9V, if I stick to 3mV steps Ryzen Master reflects set value better. Do also note how the Phy menu has:-
> 
> DFE Read Training [Enable]
> FFE Write Training [Disable]
> 
> Without that setup the voltages used wouldn't work from when I last checked.
> 
> The data ZIP is from rig made of:-
> 
> R9 3900X
> C7HWIFI
> F4-3200C14Q-32GVK
> 
> RX VEGA 64 (Water block EK)
> 
> 1x Intel 660P 1TB NVMe in M2_1 slot on mobo
> 2x Adata SX8200 Pro 1TB NVMe on ASUS Hyper M2 x16 Card and PCIEX8/4_2 slot is set to 4x/4x in UEFI settings
> 
> 1x Seagate 2TB SATA HDD
> 1X HGST 2TB SATA HDD
> 
> Bykski A-Ryzen-ThV2-X (TIM AS5)
> 2x Magicool G2 Slim 360mm rad with 3x Arctic Cooling F12 PWM on top rad, 4x on front rad.
> EK-XRES Revo 140 D5 PWM
> Coolant is distilled water with ~20 mix of Mayhems XT-1 Clear Concentrate
> 2x Be Quiet Silent Wings 3 PWM 140mm (1000rpm) fans used, one as case exhaust, another to improve airflow over RAM.
> 
> Loop order is pump/res > GPU block > CPU block > top rad > front rad. Inline water temperature probe on top rad is used for rad fan/pump profiles in UEFI.
> 
> Cooler Master V850 (OEM Seasonic)
> 
> All housed in Be Quiet Dark Base 900 with mesh mod to front and top panel has some plastic guides removed from behind mesh to improve exhausting air flow from case.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 316966


I i remember correctly you've been using 1.10v on vddsoc with your zen 3600x.
Are you rock solid at these settings? Try my methodology of running AC odyssey + HCI memtest overnight. It will result in a reboot even on 3000%+ HCI memory conf


----------



## gupsterg

Synoxia said:


> I i remember correctly you've been using 1.10v on vddsoc with your zen 3600x.
> Are you rock solid at these settings? Try my methodology of running AC odyssey + HCI memtest overnight. It will result in a reboot even on 3000%+ HCI memory conf


Nope R5 3600 (non X), set value 1.062V, effective ~1.05V, again 4x8GB. I used to use PBO+150MHz on it, PPT/TDC/EDC set as 105W CPU.

I don't own AC Odyssey, will try HCI soon. Profile seems reasonable enough to me so far, I continued to ~10hrs uptime, link to ZIP (from the point [email protected] was run, it was later paused and minimized whilst other tests ran).


----------



## lordzed83

This 3004 runs very nice


----------



## harderthanfire

@gupsterg how is that Bykski block doing on the 3900X and coverage issues or weirdness due to the chiplets? I've been looking at picking up one of those myself.


----------



## gupsterg

harderthanfire said:


> @gupsterg how is that Bykski block doing on the 3900X and coverage issues or weirdness due to the chiplets? I've been looking at picking up one of those myself.


Buy it with your eyes closed  . Best ~£44 I spent back in 2018, it bested the EK Threadripper block and AM4. My slight crude compare, prior in that thread is shot of fin mock up on AM4 CPU IHS.

*** edit ***



lordzed83 said:


> This 3004 runs very nice


Yeah I liking it as well  .

@Synoxia

Here is another test run of ~9.5hrs, made up of ~3.25hrs RT, ~3.33hrs HCI and ~2.66hrs Y-Cruncher, on same profile as prior post.


----------



## Synoxia

gupsterg said:


> Buy it with your eyes closed  . Best ~£44 I spent back in 2018, it bested the EK Threadripper block and AM4. My slight crude compare, prior in that thread is shot of fin mock up on AM4 CPU IHS.
> 
> *** edit ***
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah I liking it as well  .
> 
> @Synoxia
> 
> Here is another test run of ~9.5hrs, made up of ~3.25hrs RT, ~3.33hrs HCI and ~2.66hrs Y-Cruncher, on same profile as prior post.



Yeah whatever, i think i am set at 1.10v vddsoc and 0.995vddg. 
Shouldn't cause any long term issues so i am fine. Anyone found out how to solve EDC bug of 1.0.0.4b?


----------



## netman

Synoxia said:


> Anyone found out how to solve EDC bug of 1.0.0.4b?


isn't setting it to 0 a solution ? but i wonder where can i set edc in 3004 bios i have not found it ?


----------



## gupsterg

netman said:


> isn't setting it to 0 a solution ? but i wonder where can i set edc in 3004 bios i have not found it ?


0 uses default values of PPT/TDC/EDC, so the same as [Auto] from what I have experienced.

You can change PPT/TDC/EDC in three places, I prefer the two listed below and I'd set in one place only.

i) Extreme Tweaker > Precision Boost Overdrive, set Precision Boost Overdrive to Manual, then the PBO Limits section will appear.

ii) Advanced > AMD Overclocking > Precision Boost Overdrive, set Precision Boost Overdrive to Advanced, then the PBO Limits section will appear and select manual for that option.



Spoiler


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

nick name said:


> Oof. Another couple of instances of fans slowing. Think I'm gonna go back to 2901.


so the ch7 Fan control is buggy?

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## nick name

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> so the ch7 Fan control is buggy?
> 
> Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


I'm not entirely sure. I haven't had any fan shut downs, but I've had some slow downs. Also, they seem to fluctuate up about 20% at idle. It's a bit odd.

Edit:
They seem to speed up under load (Cinebench) too. They shouldn't do anything until 75*C and the CPU is far from it.


----------



## netman

@gupsterg

thanks a lot that was exactly what i needed to know


----------



## Synoxia

Nothing. I just can't get stable on this damn 3004 bios. I'm gonna try @gupsterg 4 dimm 3600x profile. Ill report back. 
Would be really awesome if somebody else tried my method of AC odyssey + HCI memtest.
Windows update are off, gpu, cpu shouldn't be overheating at all, unless i am getting the fan stop bug overnight... i just can't figure out these damn auto reboots


----------



## Baio73

*RAM OC not good for power saving*

Hi there,
I've occed my G.Skill in sign using this list (thanks to @liakou):

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1A0vQnelyY-R96lO6p1gwJXcYEaBHW4UfRbrMhvLT11E/edit

RAM are rock solid (passed several hours under MemTest86) @3600 CL 14 1.40v, but I need to disable the suspension as at every wake-up the first thing I do (like just open the browser) crashes the PC into a BSOD. If I leave all RAM settings to AUTO in the BIOS, everything works fine.
I'm on 3004 BIOS and use the Balanced power saving plan… I also installed 1usmus one but never used as I didn't find al the BIOS parameters to tweak.
Any idea?
Thanks in advance.

Baio


----------



## oreonutz

Regarding testing Infinity Fabric, I am pretty sure I have found a good method. It involves testing Y-Cruncher using the BBP Extraction Stress Test only. If the IF isn't stable, your Mouse will be Sticky, like it will work for one second, then be stuck for another second, and remains in that loop until you end the test. I have tested on 3 Different Chips now, my 3900x, My 3950x, and My Clients 3800x, and all 3 of them when running that test, and have SOCv either too low or too High, that exact scenario will happen. I don't know for sure if its the IF causing the issue, but it is my suspicion. On the 3800x I had to raise the SOCv to 1.08v and "CLDO VDDG" to .960 before the Hiccups would stop happening when running Y-Cruncher BBP Stress Test, with boosting on, and the IF at 1900Mhz, Ram at 3800Mhz. When I Keep the Ram at 3200, IF at 1600Mhz, or Ram at 3600Mhz and IF at 1800Mhz, I would not have this problem with the SOCv left at Auto, but when testing that it was the SOCv and CLDO VDDG that caused the issue, once I lowered them both enough, the problem would reintroduce itself, so I think this may be a valid test for Infinity Fabric, but would love for guys smarter than I to replicate this and see if they come to the same conclusion as I.

I don't have AC Odyssey, so I can't test @Synoxia 's method.


----------



## oreonutz

Synoxia said:


> Nothing. I just can't get stable on this damn 3004 bios. I'm gonna try @gupsterg 4 dimm 3600x profile. Ill report back.
> Would be really awesome if somebody else tried my method of AC odyssey + HCI memtest.
> Windows update are off, gpu, cpu shouldn't be overheating at all, unless i am getting the fan stop bug overnight... i just can't figure out these damn auto reboots


And Damn, I didn't realize there were so many Bugs reported with 3004. I just rolled out a client, a twitch streamer, to 3004 when I installed his 3800x in his Crosshair VII hero last night, had I actually paid attention to this thread the last few days, I might have known to just stick with 2801, which is what I went back to because of Issues I was having stabilizing my RAM OC at 3800Mhz, that works perfectly on 2801. I was sure I could work out the Bugs when I had time though, I figured it was able to be overcome with time, I just haven't had it, so I went back to 2801. But now I am seeing all these reports about random reboots and stability issues, I really hope my client doesn't experience this with his fancy new Processor and RTX 2060 Super, I don't feel like Driving back there, such a long fricking drive! And walking through a Novice on a BIOS update, and then even worse, setting up his BIOS Profile from Scratch, is not something I am looking forward too. Hope to god he doesn't have these issues, as I only did a 30 Minute Stability Test on the CPU, with Y-Cruncher, which he passed with Flying Colors, and a 30 Min Stability test on the RTX 2060 Super, but thats all I had time for...

Is everyone having issues with 3004, or is it just a few of you who have upgraded that are having issues?


----------



## harderthanfire

I've got no issues with 3004 so far after using it for a week or so.


----------



## gupsterg

Synoxia said:


> Nothing. I just can't get stable on this damn 3004 bios. I'm gonna try @gupsterg 4 dimm 3600x profile. Ill report back.


It was a R5 3600, *non X*.

I had that CPU from launch date til now, below is a screenie from UEFI 2801, on that test run it clocked ~15hrs before I shut it down.



Spoiler














It had had mixed testing on that post, see the list below, FP = Full POST, SP = Same POST testing and the test count is denoted by number.



Spoiler














From UEFI 2901 I could knock VDIMM/VBOOT from 1.405V to 1.35V and VTTDDR from 0.712V to 0.675V, whilst still keeping same RAM MHz/timings on 4x8GB. I had also started setting Phy as I do on R9 3900X.

DFE Read Training [Enable]
FFE Write Training [Disable]



oreonutz said:


> Is everyone having issues with 3004, or is it just a few of you who have upgraded that are having issues?


I really can't say I've had an issue yet, happy with it.

Fan headers work as they should, I'm using all the onboard ones. Fan profile is using a temp probe connected to "Water In", I also have one on "Water Out". Planning on placing one near case air intake and connected to T_Sensor so log that data point for runs as well as room ambient.

A PCI-E slot I'm bifurcating to 4x/4x to allow me to use 2x NVMe via ASUS Hyper x16 Card V2 and have M.2_1 slot of mobo in use with another.

Currently use about 5x rear IO USB continuously, off and on twin USB 2.0/3.0 on case connected to headers on mobo.

Feels like I'm using a good amount of feature set of mobo.


----------



## oreonutz

gupsterg said:


> It was a R5 3600, *non X*.
> 
> I really can't say I've had an issue yet, happy with it.
> 
> Fan headers work as they should, I'm using all the onboard ones. Fan profile is using a temp probe connected to "Water In", I also have one on "Water Out". Planning on placing one near case air intake and connected to T_Sensor so log that data point for runs as well as room ambient.
> 
> A PCI-E slot I'm bifurcating to 4x/4x to allow me to use 2x NVMe via ASUS Hyper x16 Card V2 and have M.2_1 slot of mobo in use with another.
> 
> Currently use about 5x rear IO USB continuously, off and on twin USB 2.0/3.0 on case connected to headers on mobo.
> 
> Feels like I'm using a good amount of feature set of mobo.


That is so awesome to see! I am glad the Features are all working great for you too. Because of all my past problems with the Fan Headers on this damn Board, even though they seem to be fixed now for everyone, I had finally ordered me another Aquaero 6 XT back when I was still having problems and installed in my 3950x Build finally a few weeks back. So Now The Only thing Plugged into the Crosshair 7 Hero's MB Header is One of my Pumps, Everything else, including my Other Pump is plugged into my Aquaero 6 XT or its Quadro. I also use a Water In, a Water Out, I have a Water in and out for each Radiator, and have an Ambient Sensor placed directly in front of my Main Intake for Ambient, and then Have a Sensor Placed in the hottest spot I could find for my 10Gbe NIC, My VRM, and Each of my NVMe SSD's (Specifically on the Controller of Each NVMe SSD's, where I have an EKWB Heatsink Connected via a Thermal Pad to only the Controller on the Top of the NVMe, and then another Thermal Pad the Entire Length of the Bottom of the NVMe, this to Spread the heat of the flash and the Controller evenly across the bottom of the SSD, but the only thing being actively cooled on the top of the SSD where the Modules actually sit is the Controller itself, allowing the Flash Modules to stay hot while Writing.)

I then create an equation based on the delta between the Water Out for each Radiator Ambient to create a Fan Curve that each set of Radiator Fan's Operate at. The result is amazing. I can keep my PC Whisper Quiet at almost all times, but only increase Fan Noise when its absolutely necessary, and that only happens when the Delta between Ambient and Water Out goes above 6 degrees 
for That set of fans on the Rad, and then increases as the difference grows from there. And then I do the same for the Side Intake Fans that I use to Cool my VRM, SSD, and 10Gbe Network Card, so if any of them increase in Temperature above the desired Delta I set of each device's Measured Temp and Room ambient, then the Fan Meant to control that component increases in speed on a curve that increases when the delta increases and vice Versa. Its the best way I found to ensure the system operates at the temperatures I desire, despite the fluctuations in my Room temperature, which here in Vegas is Quite Drastic, depending on the time of day and the season. I honestly don't know how I ever settled for less now that I have really gotten into the guts of what the Aquaero is capable of.

I Love that your setup as well, seems you are getting the most for your money! I always look forward to your posts!


----------



## xeizo

3004 is not stable with my Steinberg/Yamaha USB audio interfaces, all previous bioses works flawless. Also single core boost is terrible when using PBO. I'm staying at 2901 because of those reasons, 2901 has great performance.

1004B works flawless on my Prime Pro and my Aorus M though, with the same audio interfaces, and single core is great.


----------



## Synoxia

Funny thing is i was stable on 0002 bios... how can asus even break release bios compared to beta is out of my mind! Might downgrade to 2901 again, SC loss in performance is too big with EDC bug, and i dont think that the better ram latency 1.0.0.4b provides can offset that


----------



## LethalSpoon

oreonutz said:


> Is everyone having issues with 3004, or is it just a few of you who have upgraded that are having issues?


Mine is running fine, no issues at all.


----------



## Enzarch

3004 is providing me with the best performance so far, though I am manual CCX OC

4.5Ghz CCD0 / 4.4GHz CCD1 @ 1.323V (load)


----------



## xProlific

My experience so far on 3004 with a 3900x. I initially saw a performance regression of about 80 points from 2901 CB20, I enabled PBO, default settings, and I am now seeing a performance improvement from 2901. Correct me if I am wrong but it was my understanding that on previous BIOSes that PBO gave no improvement, I did not test this feature myself on previous BIOSes so I cannot confirm this myself. 

Ram Overclocking: I am running Ram @3733MHz using the fast preset of in DRAM Calculator on 2901 I ran RAM @3600 with absolutely no issues. The only setting I modify from the provided preset are the CAD Bus timings which DRAM Calculator recommends I set to all three to 0 but provides an alternate value of 56. Here I use the alternate value of 56 because I find myself unstable using the recommended value of 0, I am not sure what exactly this setting does so maybe someone can explain that to me and why using the alternate value offers me more stability.

I tested my RAM for stability at these settings overnight using Karhu Ram Test and I was 100% stable with no errors. I however found myself often getting BSOD at or shortly after boot and I am not sure why that is, user Baio73 also reported a similar issues. I have since increased DRAM boot voltage from the recommended 1.45 to 1.465 and I have issues of BSOD have subsided. My only concern is that an overnight RAM test is not enough to guarantee system stability and maybe that is just an issue on this particular Bios but that seems strange to me.

The only other issue I am having on this Bios is the occasional CPU Fan error on post. I am not sure if that is because my PWM fans are are running too slow or something else. My CPU runs at about 30-31 degrees at idle using a NH-U12A and this is with a 2080ti in the system likely generating additional heat.


----------



## narukun

I had to go back to 2901 because it is faster on stock, between 4325 and 4650mhz, while 3004 is 4300~4500mhz barely reaching 4650mhz, besides that, I didn't notice any improvement.

btw I'm using the ryzen 3900x


----------



## Synoxia

oreonutz said:


> Regarding testing Infinity Fabric, I am pretty sure I have found a good method. It involves testing Y-Cruncher using the BBP Extraction Stress Test only. If the IF isn't stable, your Mouse will be Sticky, like it will work for one second, then be stuck for another second, and remains in that loop until you end the test. I have tested on 3 Different Chips now, my 3900x, My 3950x, and My Clients 3800x, and all 3 of them when running that test, and have SOCv either too low or too High, that exact scenario will happen. I don't know for sure if its the IF causing the issue, but it is my suspicion. On the 3800x I had to raise the SOCv to 1.08v and "CLDO VDDG" to .960 before the Hiccups would stop happening when running Y-Cruncher BBP Stress Test, with boosting on, and the IF at 1900Mhz, Ram at 3800Mhz. When I Keep the Ram at 3200, IF at 1600Mhz, or Ram at 3600Mhz and IF at 1800Mhz, I would not have this problem with the SOCv left at Auto, but when testing that it was the SOCv and CLDO VDDG that caused the issue, once I lowered them both enough, the problem would reintroduce itself, so I think this may be a valid test for Infinity Fabric, but would love for guys smarter than I to replicate this and see if they come to the same conclusion as I.
> 
> I don't have AC Odyssey, so I can't test @Synoxia 's method.


Honestly i prefer to ditch out stresstests, too many times a "stable oc" failed randomly into a game. 
Prefer memory/cpu hungry games like trash Ubisoft ports or rendering programs like Handbrake, along with a stresstest that isn't a power virus like P95. 
It has to stress the machine with reasonable level of heat tho.
Try to find some demos of the game if there are any, there's also ubisoft subscription service free for 1st month that you can just cancel 20 minutes later just like amazon prime trial.
Or, grey methods. I wouldn't find those ethic breaking as long you're not actually playing the game.
Or, if you liked The witcher 3, you might aswell buy it and enjoy it as it's a good RPG (just not a proper assassin creed game like 2)


----------



## oreonutz

Synoxia said:


> Honestly i prefer to ditch out stresstests, too many times a "stable oc" failed randomly into a game.
> Prefer memory/cpu hungry games like trash Ubisoft ports or rendering programs like Handbrake, along with a stresstest that isn't a power virus like P95.
> It has to stress the machine with reasonable level of heat tho.
> Try to find some demos of the game if there are any, there's also ubisoft subscription service free for 1st month that you can just cancel 20 minutes later just like amazon prime trial.
> Or, grey methods. I wouldn't find those ethic breaking as long you're not actually playing the game.
> Or, if you liked The witcher 3, you might aswell buy it and enjoy it as it's a good RPG (just not a proper assassin creed game like 2)


Real world testing is always a good idea as well. But for times when you literally only have 30 mins to an hour to configure and make sure something will reasonably stay stable having a trusted set of Stress Testers is always a good idea. Y-Cruncher is perfect for this, because its not just one set of Stress Tests, its a real world application that can be used as a Benchmark and Stress Test as well, it heats up almost as much as Prime 95, but its completely configurable as far as how long each test lasts, the type of workload, and the amount of memory used, but where as P95 will burn up the Zen2 Parts to an insanely high level, Y-Cruncher hits hits consistently just below that, making for a perfect stability test. Plus with P95 I haven't been able to replicate the IF Issues, where as with Y-Cruncher I have. Not at all knocking your method, it may work really well, I just believe I found a way that works for me, looking to see if others can verify if the method works for them as well.


----------



## Synoxia

oreonutz said:


> Real world testing is always a good idea as well. But for times when you literally only have 30 mins to an hour to configure and make sure something will reasonably stay stable having a trusted set of Stress Testers is always a good idea. Y-Cruncher is perfect for this, because its not just one set of Stress Tests, its a real world application that can be used as a Benchmark and Stress Test as well, it heats up almost as much as Prime 95, but its completely configurable as far as how long each test lasts, the type of workload, and the amount of memory used, but where as P95 will burn up the Zen2 Parts to an insanely high level, Y-Cruncher hits hits consistently just below that, making for a perfect stability test. Plus with P95 I haven't been able to replicate the IF Issues, where as with Y-Cruncher I have. Not at all knocking your method, it may work really well, I just believe I found a way that works for me, looking to see if others can verify if the method works for them as well.


You sell computers, right? That's a good point. In that case better to aim for "90% sure ocs" like 3600c16 or 3733c17 should be easy and reachable by all zen 2 processors + rams without hassle.
In my case that's not an option however as it's my own PC, main use gaming and i am extremely sensitive to microstutters. 
In my own experience even if the system is stable in 99% of the cases and you don't lose performance like AVG fps or cinebench scores that 1% is enough to cause very tiny microspikes that annoys me. (This especially bothers you if you play in low fps, otherwise moslty a non issue for majority of people...)
So i test overnight my system, sometimes even 2-3 days, when testing for GPU oc i completely ignore programs like valley etc... pick a game, pull 4k DSR with stupid quality, play in 40 fps with freesync/gsync for hours and then if it's stable add 5-10 mhz, +5mv. When satisfied, i dial back 5 mhz for that extra stability. 
Ofcourse i already start from a point where "stability is possible" by doing some silicon statistic researchs. Especially since today's hardware is less "straightforward" than old hardware overclocking... there's no more "unstable, just add voltage".
Electromigration is an issue and things scale backwards with temp more than they scale onward with voltage (example? Ram, especially if you want stupid low TRFC, you need to find compromise voltage or/and add airflow, AMD and NVIDIA gpus, vega being the worst offender... either go liquid or you're better off undervolting rather than overclocking )


----------



## Keith Myers

y-cruncher is becoming my preferred stress tester over Prime95 also. I can pass an hour of Prime95 custom small FFT with 13GB of memory but it will fail within the first or second iteration of y-cruncher test applications.


----------



## gupsterg

oreonutz said:


> I Love that your setup as well, seems you are getting the most for your money! I always look forward to your posts!


NP and likewise I also like to see your posts  .



oreonutz said:


> ...but where as P95 will burn up the Zen2 Parts to an insanely high level, Y-Cruncher hits hits consistently just below that, making for a perfect stability test.


I used find Y-Cruncher was appropriate on temps for Zen/Zen2, but on Zen+ could have some higher temp hits. Then also be aware near launch of Zen (AM4) I was using Y-Cruncher a lot and a stable profile on a later version started having issues, when I reverted to older version it passed. I contacted author and he could replicate issue and later fixed it.

So don't rely on just a program, go multiple and always think to yourself these programs can also have bugs.



Keith Myers said:


> y-cruncher is becoming my preferred stress tester over Prime95 also. I can pass an hour of Prime95 custom small FFT with 13GB of memory but it will fail within the first or second iteration of y-cruncher test applications.


As stated by oreonutz Y-Cruncher stresses CPU differently, if that profile/CPU had been sensitive to P95 then perhaps it would have failed quicker in that than Y-Cruncher.

On Threadripper 1000/2000 series I used 2 differing P95, firstly was a version recommended by The Stilt. This didn't recognise CPU as Zen, thus used different instructions set. This would have higher power usage than later version and lower averaged CPU MHz. Where as the later version used slightly less power but had slightly higher averaged CPU MHz. I used both, thinking I was doing a more complete test. One day I had ran each for 1hr, then as I moved to Realbench (which most will regard as weak test) it failed in 2 minutes. I had also experienced near Zen launch (AM4) that Realbench could show WHEA errors on some CPU samples quicker than others.

I have had now 5x Zen AM4, 3x Zen+ AM4, 5x Zen2 AM4, 1x Zen sTR4, 2x Zen+ sTR4, based on tinkering with these I always throw several different programs at them first. Whatever made them fail first, I'll target getting reasonable stability in that and then usually rest fail in place easier.

So IMO Y-Cruncher is not better than P95, Y-Cruncher/P95 are no better than Realbench and any of those is no better than running a game. The best program for a setup is what makes it fail quicker, which could differ on combined HW and settings targetted, etc, etc...


----------



## oreonutz

gupsterg said:


> NP and likewise I also like to see your posts  .
> 
> 
> 
> I used find Y-Cruncher was appropriate on temps for Zen/Zen2, but on Zen+ could have some higher temp hits. Then also be aware near launch of Zen (AM4) I was using Y-Cruncher a lot and a stable profile on a later version started having issues, when I reverted to older version it passed. I contacted author and he could replicate issue and later fixed it.
> 
> So don't rely on just a program, go multiple and always think to yourself these programs can also have bugs.
> 
> 
> 
> As stated by oreonutz Y-Cruncher stresses CPU differently, if that profile/CPU had been sensitive to P95 then perhaps it would have failed quicker in that than Y-Cruncher.
> 
> On Threadripper 1000/2000 series I used 2 differing P95, firstly was a version recommended by The Stilt. This didn't recognise CPU as Zen, thus used different instructions set. This would have higher power usage than later version and lower averaged CPU MHz. Where as the later version used slightly less power but had slightly higher averaged CPU MHz. I used both, thinking I was doing a more complete test. One day I had ran each for 1hr, then as I moved to Realbench (which most will regard as weak test) it failed in 2 minutes. I had also experienced near Zen launch (AM4) that Realbench could show WHEA errors on some CPU samples quicker than others.
> 
> I have had now 5x Zen AM4, 3x Zen+ AM4, 5x Zen2 AM4, 1x Zen sTR4, 2x Zen+ sTR4, based on tinkering with these I always throw several different programs at them first. Whatever made them fail first, I'll target getting reasonable stability in that and then usually rest fail in place easier.
> 
> So IMO Y-Cruncher is not better than P95, Y-Cruncher/P95 are no better than Realbench and any of those is no better than running a game. The best program for a setup is what makes it fail quicker, which could differ on combined HW and settings targetted, etc, etc...


I would 100 Percent agree with that!

I was actually just about to respond to @Synoxia, that he is also correct, you need to use multiple programs to find stability. Never rely on just one, and of course ALWAYS throw real world Applications in the Mix, ESPECIALLY which ever set of applications will get used most on the PC. So both of you are 100 Percent correct.

I was specifically referring to finding errors in the Infinity Fabric. I keep coming across this issue, I have seen it on many Zen Parts at one point or another that I have tested, and I have tested quite a few, and this problem is specifically having the Mouse Micro stutter when moving across the screen just in the desktop. Sometimes when under heavy load, some times when under no load, and I have always known it was a stability issue, but I have been trying to chase down what exactly is causing it when it happens, and I now believe that it is issues with the IF, when not given enough voltage for stability, either SOCv or VLDO VDDG, usually when pushing the memory to the max, and thus the IF to the Max. I used to think it was just the RAM hitting its limit, but I no longer believe that is the case but I have tested the same kit in multiple PC's and the point of those stutters are always different, which is why I now believe it to be the IF. So the first thing I want to do when setting up a new Zen part is to find that limit at which the IF is stressed so hard that those stutters take place, so I know what the breaking point is and can dial back from there, and it seems Y-Crunchers BBP Test specifically helps me find that limit the quickest, so thats what I was specifically referring to, and I wondered if anyone else has come across this, and if they have if they think my hypothesis of it being caused by instability in the IF is consistent with their findings.

But when looking for all around stability of your, or your clients CPU, Yes, use every single possible test you have in your tool box, because guaranteed, the one you didn't use, will be the one that would have found an issue, especially when trying to dial in an aggressive overclock, and cutting testing early thinking its fine, only to find out days later when the PC crashes during something important that your assumption was incorrect...

Happens to the best of us, but yes, always use what you have, or you may regret it later...

That said, as @Keith Myers Said, I am becoming quite fond of Y-Cruncher and the amount of variation in testing possible with their Stress test suite. I never used it much before, and I am finding it quite useful these days!


----------



## oreonutz

Synoxia said:


> You sell computers, right? That's a good point. In that case better to aim for "90% sure ocs" like 3600c16 or 3733c17 should be easy and reachable by all zen 2 processors + rams without hassle.
> In my case that's not an option however as it's my own PC, main use gaming and i am extremely sensitive to microstutters.
> In my own experience even if the system is stable in 99% of the cases and you don't lose performance like AVG fps or cinebench scores that 1% is enough to cause very tiny microspikes that annoys me. (This especially bothers you if you play in low fps, otherwise moslty a non issue for majority of people...)
> So i test overnight my system, sometimes even 2-3 days, when testing for GPU oc i completely ignore programs like valley etc... pick a game, pull 4k DSR with stupid quality, play in 40 fps with freesync/gsync for hours and then if it's stable add 5-10 mhz, +5mv. When satisfied, i dial back 5 mhz for that extra stability.
> Ofcourse i already start from a point where "stability is possible" by doing some silicon statistic researchs. Especially since today's hardware is less "straightforward" than old hardware overclocking... there's no more "unstable, just add voltage".
> Electromigration is an issue and things scale backwards with temp more than they scale onward with voltage (example? Ram, especially if you want stupid low TRFC, you need to find compromise voltage or/and add airflow, AMD and NVIDIA gpus, vega being the worst offender... either go liquid or you're better off undervolting rather than overclocking )


I don't Sell computers, but I do service a wide range of clients who will use me to Build them their PC, and every PC that our company does source runs through my lab for testing. I definitely could see how it may seem like I sell PC's though, but no we provide all PC's at Cost unless I build them myself, what I am providing is my service to ensure the Workstation is tailored to my clients specific need, regardless of which Vendor Provided the PC. I know it may sound like quibbling over semantics, but I am not in the business of profiting off selling PC's. (I didn't take offense to that or anything, just providing context to my position.)

That said, Yes, I do often need to find stability quickly, but "stable enough" is not, and has never been my goal. I need 100 Percent Stability in my clients systems or I provide my time for free if a System becomes unstable during their important workloads. I realize my last post wasn't clear and made it seem like I use only Y-Cruncher to find stability, I was mainly referring to finding stability for the IF specifically since its been an issue I have been chasing down for a while. My big thing is not only testing every stress tester in my suite, but creating a stress test around my clients specific workload, to ensure that when they are using my custom tailored Workstation for their workload, that it remains stable for as many years as possible, while also giving them the most performance I can without being on that edge of instability.


----------



## gupsterg

@oreonutz

The mouse stutter is IF related as you describe IMO. On HWBOT the extreme overclockers will disable DF C-States to remedy this when targetting high OC.

It was great that a prior version of HWINFO showed DF C-State changes via FCLK counter, but Martin had to change back to static counter as some CPUs could show incorrect variance of FCLK. I'm hoping AMD firmware changes will correct the counter.

Yeah I like Y-Cruncher due to it varying usage of CPU, may that be instruction set and or loading. When change from one set to another occurs, besides the loading change, clocks can peak higher/drop greatly, which in a way can cause destabilisation IMO.

Besides doing various apps to test a profile I always test on say differing POST, same POST, etc.

Dunno if it's the increased complexity of Zen/Zen+/Zen2, than say older Intel CPUs I've had in the past, but it seems on these CPUs you need to test more.


----------



## MrPhilo

Enzarch said:


> 3004 is providing me with the best performance so far, though I am manual CCX OC
> 
> 4.5Ghz CCD0 / 4.4GHz CCD1 @ 1.323V (load)


Have you confirmed your CPU FIT is fine at 1.325v? You could see degradation if not.


----------



## Synoxia

100% stability is also my goal. Just... don't use power viruses like P95. I couldn't yet find ANY application that isn't a stresstest (so another power virus) that causes such temps.
Y cruncher up and down clockspeed seems a good way to test ryzen as clocks fluctuate a lot


----------



## Enzarch

MrPhilo said:


> Have you confirmed your CPU FIT is fine at 1.325v? You could see degradation if not.


Im sure I am above it, but thats OC life. Temps never exceed 70c, so hoping that helps with long term, Otherwise I will update and inform if I have any issues.


----------



## Keith Myers

I still use Prime95 along with stressapptest for testing an aggressive overclock. They allow me to zero in quickly on potential candidates. Final arbiter is my actual BOINC load. I went pretty low in Vcore recently that held up to both Prime95 and y-cruncher, yet found the desktop rebooted a couple of times and unloaded BOINC. So split the difference between my ultra-low Vcore and my existing stable voltage. Looking good so far.


----------



## neikosr0x

Enzarch said:


> Im sure I am above it, but thats OC life. Temps never exceed 70c, so hoping that helps with long term, Otherwise I will update and inform if I have any issues.


if i'm not mistaken you are just fine at 1.325volt as Low current load for Ryzen 3000 goes around 1.47~+ while High Current load would be 1.325v~ so that is "safe" it might have some degradation over time but as you said, that comes with all OCs. The voltage tolerance will vary from chip to chip but generally, you would be just fine at that voltage.


----------



## Enzarch

neikosr0x said:


> if i'm not mistaken you are just fine at 1.325volt as Low current load for Ryzen 3000 goes around 1.47~+ while High Current load would be 1.325v~ so that is "safe" it might have some degradation over time but as you said, that comes with all OCs. The voltage tolerance will vary from chip to chip but generally, you would be just fine at that voltage.


This was my understanding as well, I actually run somewhat higher voltage (~1.345V) and use a bit less LLC so it droops to ~1.322V under full load as this should help prevent/reduce errant transient spikes.


----------



## Zefram0911

Is there anything else we're looking forward to in terms of bios releases? or is this pretty much end game until Ryzen 4000?


----------



## Axaion

Spread Spectrum and HPET toggles that work would be nice. 
CCX OC would be nice
Remove all duplicate entries would be nice.

bottom line, asus has a lot of stuff left to fix


----------



## oreonutz

^^^^^^

I Second That!


----------



## oreonutz

So I finally Just now got to CCX OCing my 3950x. The Voltage I am running at is the absolute maximum I am comfortable running my chip, only because I can't sufficiently cool it if I go any higher (I barely can sufficiently cool it now, so I will be backing off this, just wanted to see how high I could push clocks at this voltage), and I think I am pleased with the results, although I am not currently well versed in other's 3950x Benchmarking Results.

Here is just used CB R20, ran 3 times in a row to validate it can hold the OC without Crashing. As I will be dialing back from here, I have not done my stability testing yet, as I plan on dropping my Voltage by at least another 50mV and then finding my max Per CCX OC there.

But I have been wanting to see my chip hit past 10,000 on CB R20, and I just blew past that! Curious to see your guy's with 3950x CB Results, want to find my next goal to go for the next time I get a few minutes on my hands.



Spoiler


----------



## MrPhilo

neikosr0x said:


> Enzarch said:
> 
> 
> 
> Im sure I am above it, but thats OC life. Temps never exceed 70c, so hoping that helps with long term, Otherwise I will update and inform if I have any issues.
> 
> 
> 
> if i'm not mistaken you are just fine at 1.325volt as Low current load for Ryzen 3000 goes around 1.47~+ while High Current load would be 1.325v~ so that is "safe" it might have some degradation over time but as you said, that comes with all OCs. The voltage tolerance will vary from chip to chip but generally, you would be just fine at that voltage.
Click to expand...




Enzarch said:


> neikosr0x said:
> 
> 
> 
> if i'm not mistaken you are just fine at 1.325volt as Low current load for Ryzen 3000 goes around 1.47~+ while High Current load would be 1.325v~ so that is "safe" it might have some degradation over time but as you said, that comes with all OCs. The voltage tolerance will vary from chip to chip but generally, you would be just fine at that voltage.
> 
> 
> 
> This was my understanding as well, I actually run somewhat higher voltage (~1.345V) and use a bit less LLC so it droops to ~1.322V under full load as this should help prevent/reduce errant transient spikes.
Click to expand...

Someone had reported degradation on 1.3v as his FIT was reported to be 1.275v on Reddit ok full load. This was within 3 month. Obviously this is your CPU, so you're free to run it at what you want but I thought I inform others in case they read the thread. Here's a good post on Reddit https://www.reddit.com/r/amd/comments/eb1ncb/_/fb26qa0


----------



## Enzarch

MrPhilo said:


> Someone had reported degradation on 1.3v as his FIT was reported to be 1.275v on Reddit ok full load. This was within 3 month. Obviously this is your CPU, so you're free to run it at what you want but I thought I inform others in case they read the thread. Here's a good post on Reddit https://www.reddit.com/r/amd/comments/eb1ncb/_/fb26qa0


Just for future clarity, I redid the "FIT test" and also came up with about 1.275-1.284V.

I'll be continuing @ <1.325V, and I will inform if/when I experience any degradation.

With the complexity and density of these chips there are just a lot more variables and thus more of a gamble when pushing limits.


----------



## oreonutz

Enzarch said:


> Just for future clarity, I redid the "FIT test" and also came up with about 1.275-1.284V.
> 
> I'll be continuing @ <1.325V, and I will inform if/when I experience any degradation.
> 
> With the complexity and density of these chips there are just a lot more variables and thus more of a gamble when pushing limits.


Exactly. Every Chip Experiences Degradation over time, and I have not had enough samples Pass through my lab to say definitively whether or not this is going to be a wide scale problem for people who are pushing 1.3v or more through their chip. What I can say is, because of the Multi-Threaded nature of my clients workloads, all of the 3000 Series Chips I have in Production are Overclocked to just a few ticks below what I determined to be their Maximum achievable Overclocks on Ambient Cooling (as a matter of Practice I usually find the Maximum Clocks I can achieve at a Voltage that lands me at around 90c when under Full Load in a 30c environment. This is Vegas, so 30c Environments are common when problems with air conditioning come up. Once I find that max and Stability Test with it, Its my practice to back off by 50 to 100mv, and about 100Mhz, and then stability test again, then I have a good understanding of the limits under different conditions, and a reasonable expectation of stability even under harsher conditions.) 

All 9 Samples (Plus my 2) are all still just as stable as they were on day 1. In fact one of my Builds just had its very first shutdown for maintenance this past Saturday since the 1st Day it went into production (July 29th was its first day in production). Its a 3900x, being used as a VDI Server (a VM Host that clients remote into from their Thin Clients), OC'd using the custom Per CCX Software that I have shared with a bunch of you guys here on the forum, so that at boot it automatically Overclocks all CCX's to their Predetermined clocks, in this case its 4500, 4475, 4325, 4300, using a Vcore of 1.295v as Measured with a Multi Meter at the Probe Points when Under Full Load. It runs 3 VM's, 2 with 4 Cores 8 Threads each, One with 3 Cores, 6 Threads each, 1 Core and 2 Threads are reserved for the host. The Host is also a WSUS Server, and a File Server. It is in use anywhere between 65% and 100% usage on the CPU at all times about 10 Hours a day, and then at Night still see's significant usage because of the Employee's who remote into their VM's from home. I Pulled the Server down Saturday Night due to a UPS that took a crap on me, and wanted to switch it out with one of our Rack Mounted ones, and this build doesn't have redundant power supplies, so I pulled it down while doing the swap out. I have been reading these threads on 3000 Series Degradation, so I wanted to use this chance to test this processor before putting it back online for my clients, I ran every test imaginable, put it through my entire stability suite, and as far as I can tell, the CPU is performing just as solid as it was on day one.

The other couple 3900x and now 3950x's that I have in production are either being used in Architectural Firms, Render Farms, Recording/Video Studios, or as a general Use VDI Host. All are being hit hard throughout the day, and not one has shown any sign of Degradation, yet, and all are somewhere between 1.25v and 1.35v when under full load. If this changes I will definitely report on it, but as it stands now, it would be my assessment that either the people with reports are very unlucky and just got poor silicon, or they are attributing user error to degradation, which because of the complicated nature of these CPU's is an Extremely easy assumption to make if you are looking for an easy answer, to a not so easy question.

Anyways, no one asked, but that is my current assessment. I do have a small amount of these chips in production, and already have about another dozen planned to be rolled out in the next few months, so my data I believe will be useful in determining if this truly is a problem, although we really need data collected over a 3 to 5 year period before we can really tell a complete story. For now, I definitely wouldn't worry about it, and just make sure that you research how your processor works, set your voltages manually, and have fun.


----------



## oreonutz

So this is my first time signing up and posting to HWbot. My name is "MattTheTechLV" on HWbot, the same as it is all over the internet, except for on this forum, because I was stupid when I opened my account and used my High School Nickname instead of my current handle, and now they won't let me change it, so, that sucks...

Anyways, I am pretty sure all you guys with 3950x must not be posting your scores to HWbot, because somehow I just took the Number 10 Spot for Worldwide Submissions of 16 Core CPU's. If you Include only the 3950x, then I took the 8th spot, and if you include only the Ambient Cooling Submissions of 16 Core CPU's then I am the number 6th Spot! Pretty Exciting! Although I am sure a few of you guys will post your scores and beat me out, I want to see it, it will motivate me to try to push my chip harder. All I have done is a simple Per CCX OC on my 3950x, my 1st 2 CCX are at 4450Mhz, and my last 2 are at 4350Mhz. When Under Full load, after VDroop I am at 1.3v, and this was done on Water. Would love to see some of you guys submit your scores and beat me!

Here is my submission:
https://hwbot.org/submission/432773...___r20_with_benchmate_ryzen_9_3950x_10409_pts

Here is the Rankings for 16 Core CPUs:
https://hwbot.org/benchmark/cinebench_-_r20_with_benchmate/rankings?cores=16#start=0#interval=20

And here is my Screenshot for this forum, that has the HWinfo information included:


Spoiler


----------



## gupsterg

Axaion said:


> Spread Spectrum and HPET toggles that work would be nice.
> CCX OC would be nice
> Remove all duplicate entries would be nice.
> 
> bottom line, asus has a lot of stuff left to fix


Personally I like how the ASUS UEFI is for menus.

AMD CBS is what AMD AGESA exposes.

AMD Overclocking Menu is AMD AGESA keeping settings related to OC in a place. If you check out reddit profile of Robert Hallock you'll see a comment about this and how they did the help strings for it. Then also settings in AMD OC menu do not revert to defaults when the board recovers from failed POST, AMD CBS will reset, so I find this aspect of AMD OC menu handy.

Anything outside of those menus is ASUS exposing settings. Any setting which is duplicated out of say AMD CBS/OC menus, will be there as set after board recovers from failed POST.

I think it's case of people not aware of these aspects and lack of comms from ASUS on them.

As stated by The Stilt HPET has been taken away by AMD (only very early AEGSA allowed toggling) and he did explain that the platform operates best with it. Even Elmor's C6H highlights PDF states HPET on is best for platform. There are also post by Robert Hallock on reddit stating this.

As the board uses an external PLL for BCLK and when we set manually BCLK this is used, there is no spread spectrum toggle IMO as we fix BCLK, so would be a useless feature IMO. If the reasoning for having access to spread spectrum is to gain say 100MHz reading in SW monitoring, just be aware Ryzen has no HW to accurately relay BCLK to SW, so as other methods are used, some may experience inaccurate read back.


----------



## oreonutz

gupsterg said:


> Personally I like how the ASUS UEFI is for menus.
> 
> AMD CBS is what AMD AGESA exposes.
> 
> AMD Overclocking Menu is AMD AGESA keeping settings related to OC in a place. If you check out reddit profile of Robert Hallock you'll see a comment about this and how they did the help strings for it. Then also settings in AMD OC menu do not revert to defaults when the board recovers from failed POST, AMD CBS will reset, so I find this aspect of AMD OC menu handy.
> 
> Anything outside of those menus is ASUS exposing settings. Any setting which is duplicated out of say AMD CBS/OC menus, will be there as set after board recovers from failed POST.
> 
> I think it's case of people not aware of these aspects and lack of comms from ASUS on them.
> 
> As stated by The Stilt HPET has been taken away by AMD (only very early AEGSA allowed toggling) and he did explain that the platform operates best with it. Even Elmor's C6H highlights PDF states HPET on is best for platform. There are also post by Robert Hallock on reddit stating this.
> 
> As the board uses an external PLL for BCLK and when we set manually BCLK this is used, there is no spread spectrum toggle IMO as we fix BCLK, so would be a useless feature IMO. If the reasoning for having access to spread spectrum is to gain say 100MHz reading in SW monitoring, just be aware Ryzen has no HW to accurately relay BCLK to SW, so as other methods are used, some may experience inaccurate read back.


The knowledge in your head is admirable. You just taught me a few things I did not know. Granted that may not be hard to do, depending on the subject, but I appreciate this post. Thanks again @gupsterg, for spreading your knowledge to the community! (I knew that the AMD CBS Menu reset with a BIOS Reset, and AMD Overclocking doesn't, I did not know that was by design. I also didn't realize that AMD was responsible for taking away HPET, and that using the HPET was considered by AMD to be best for the platform. Would love to see some 3rd party testing on this from a trusted source, but still good to know!)


----------



## gupsterg

oreonutz said:


> The knowledge in your head is admirable. You just taught me a few things I did not know. Granted that may not be hard to do, depending on the subject, but I appreciate this post. Thanks again @gupsterg, for spreading your knowledge to the community! (I knew that the AMD CBS Menu reset with a BIOS Reset, and AMD Overclocking doesn't, I did not know that was by design. I also didn't realize that AMD was responsible for taking away HPET, and that using the HPET was considered by AMD to be best for the platform. Would love to see some 3rd party testing on this from a trusted source, but still good to know!)


NP  .

Below is extract (translated) from The Stilt's C7H review.



> As the software side of AMD's Ryzen processors continues to evolve, ASUS has decided to include in its bios the CBS (Common Board Settings) menu known from the AMD reference code. Certain processor features such as Precision Boost Override values ​​are currently only adjustable via this menu. Because the CBS menu's control options are the same for all motherboards and are quickly updated by AMD to reflect the latest changes to AGESA, incorporating that menu into bios is a great and right decision.


In that same review you'll also see:-



> Unlike Asus and Gigabyte motherboards, the MSI BIOS does not contain any AMD CBS menu. Instead, MSI has decided to integrate *some* of its settings into its own interface under processor settings.


Dunno if this aspect had changed, as review is old, but I'd rather have the options then not.


----------



## Synoxia

gupsterg said:


> NP  .
> 
> Below is extract (translated) from The Stilt's C7H review.
> 
> 
> 
> In that same review you'll also see:-
> 
> 
> 
> Dunno if this aspect had changed, as review is old, but I'd rather have the options then not.


Yes i would do the same. As i've posted earlier btw, i think this specific motherboard works best at default + use disabledynamictick yes and useplatformtick yes


----------



## Axaion

gupsterg said:


> Personally I like how the ASUS UEFI is for menus.
> 
> AMD CBS is what AMD AGESA exposes.
> 
> AMD Overclocking Menu is AMD AGESA keeping settings related to OC in a place. If you check out reddit profile of Robert Hallock you'll see a comment about this and how they did the help strings for it. Then also settings in AMD OC menu do not revert to defaults when the board recovers from failed POST, AMD CBS will reset, so I find this aspect of AMD OC menu handy.
> 
> Anything outside of those menus is ASUS exposing settings. Any setting which is duplicated out of say AMD CBS/OC menus, will be there as set after board recovers from failed POST.
> 
> I think it's case of people not aware of these aspects and lack of comms from ASUS on them.
> 
> As stated by The Stilt HPET has been taken away by AMD (only very early AEGSA allowed toggling) and he did explain that the platform operates best with it. Even Elmor's C6H highlights PDF states HPET on is best for platform. There are also post by Robert Hallock on reddit stating this.
> 
> As the board uses an external PLL for BCLK and when we set manually BCLK this is used, there is no spread spectrum toggle IMO as we fix BCLK, so would be a useless feature IMO. If the reasoning for having access to spread spectrum is to gain say 100MHz reading in SW monitoring, just be aware Ryzen has no HW to accurately relay BCLK to SW, so as other methods are used, some may experience inaccurate read back.


On the Bloated BIOS with duplicate entries, I guess thats more taste then, But it should say that it clears those settings on boot failure somewhere in that case imho

Id just personally like to be able to choose wether i want HPET on or off in bios, regardless of how it may be deemed to perform, just like im able to kill stuff by giving it insane amounts of voltage 

Unrelated to Quote, I finally "fixed" the issue i had with RAM speed and Average DPC latency to user interrupt, updating bios to 3001 fixed it for me so far, finally able to run 3800 CL16 1.4v, horrible case airflow, so they hit like 53c under load though, lol.


----------



## gupsterg

Axaion said:


> On the Bloated BIOS with duplicate entries, I guess thats more taste then, But it should say that it clears those settings on boot failure somewhere in that case imho
> 
> Id just personally like to be able to choose wether i want HPET on or off in bios, regardless of how it may be deemed to perform, just like im able to kill stuff by giving it insane amounts of voltage.


I agree, with both of your points.


----------



## neikosr0x

New Chipset drivers https://drivers.amd.com/drivers/amd_software_2.01.15.2138.zip


----------



## Synoxia

Axaion said:


> On the Bloated BIOS with duplicate entries, I guess thats more taste then, But it should say that it clears those settings on boot failure somewhere in that case imho
> 
> Id just personally like to be able to choose wether i want HPET on or off in bios, regardless of how it may be deemed to perform, just like im able to kill stuff by giving it insane amounts of voltage
> 
> Unrelated to Quote, I finally "fixed" the issue i had with RAM speed and Average DPC latency to user interrupt, updating bios to 3001 fixed it for me so far, finally able to run 3800 CL16 1.4v, horrible case airflow, so they hit like 53c under load though, lol.


under which load? how many sticks? rgb ram? Mine hit 62c under HCI 1000%+


----------



## Axaion

Synoxia said:


> under which load? how many sticks? rgb ram? Mine hit 62c under HCI 1000%+


memtest 1000%, FlareX 3200 CL14's

Pretty sure we want to put a fan towards them, i just cant cause Tower CPU cooler, heh


----------



## darkage

after the last bio 3004 ( or windows update?) i have two issues 
1 - my FCLK now its allways fixed at 1900, before it would balance as the pc was idle or not
2 - my sapphire rx5700xt is not present in the bios tool tab, keep asking to choose a graphic card, before it showed all info there as for the memory kit
anyone has something like this?
not sure if it is due to bios or windows update


----------



## gupsterg

darkage said:


> my FCLK now its allways fixed at 1900, before it would balance as the pc was idle or not


From HWiNFO v6.21-4040 Beta the FCLK count can not reflect DF CStates, see this thread, perhaps that is the reason.


----------



## darkage

ah, ok 
thanks


----------



## oreonutz

Hey Guys. Looking for members of the community who want to beta test a new feature in a popular Program we all use. 

This feature now gives you the ability to take the Value of One Temp Sensor, and then subtract the value of another Temperature Sensor. The result will be displayed as new Sensor.

This feature could be extremely useful for certain USB Fan Controllers, that allow you to import sensors from other software. This would now give you the ability to base a fan curve off of a Delta Sensor, instead of Water Temperature, saving you a pretty penny on a more expensive fan controller.

I need some other community members that are as excited about this feature as I am to help me test it. Let me know if you are interested.


----------



## gupsterg

@oreonutz

Sweet new feature  , unfortunately don't have a controller to take advantage of this new feature.


----------



## Mumak

gupsterg said:


> From HWiNFO v6.21-4040 Beta the FCLK count can not reflect DF CStates, see this thread, perhaps that is the reason.


I'm switching to yet another method of reporting FCLK. This is already implemented in build 4050.

BTW, not sure if anyone noticed this, but this build also extends reporting of parameters like TDC, PPT, average temp to Zen/Zen+ (ZP/PiR, RV/RV2) families too.


----------



## gupsterg

gupsterg said:


> From HWiNFO v6.21-4040 Beta the FCLK count can not reflect DF CStates, see this thread, perhaps that is the reason.
> 
> 
> 
> Mumak said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm switching to yet another method of reporting FCLK. This is already implemented in build 4050.
> 
> BTW, not sure if anyone noticed this, but this build also extends reporting of parameters like TDC, PPT, average temp to Zen/Zen+ (ZP/PiR, RV/RV2) families too.
Click to expand...

Ahh nice  , this new one doesn't reflect DF CState as well? As not seen my system do it unless I use the older version of HWINFO.

Sweet had been after than on Zen/Zen+, but alas I have disposed of those CPUs. Toying with which Zen2 to do the same, so ready for Zen3  . Really have liked these new updates to HWINFO, thank you Martin for them :thumb: .


----------



## Mumak

gupsterg said:


> Ahh nice  , this new one doesn't reflect DF CState as well? As not seen my system do it unless I use the older version of HWINFO.


Not sure yet. Older versions were reporting the Effective FCLK (which sometimes went out of range), then I switched to a specific setpoint and now to another one that should be reporting the target frequency.



gupsterg said:


> Sweet had been after than on Zen/Zen+, but alas I have disposed of those CPUs. Toying with which Zen2 to do the same, so ready for Zen3  . Really have liked these new updates to HWINFO, thank you Martin for them :thumb: .


Yeah, unfortunately I was only now been able to gather the required knowledge for Zen1. But I'm already well equipped and have a lot of support for Renoir and Zen3 too


----------



## darkage

Mumak said:


> I'm switching to yet another method of reporting FCLK. This is already implemented in build 4050.
> 
> BTW, not sure if anyone noticed this, but this build also extends reporting of parameters like TDC, PPT, average temp to Zen/Zen+ (ZP/PiR, RV/RV2) families too.


not working here yet


----------



## harderthanfire

Anyone else getting an issue in HWINFO where some of the mobo values are not working? I really would like the pump RPM to display and it does show up in AI Suite, though I'd rather never have to run that.


----------



## Mumak

harderthanfire said:


> Anyone else getting an issue in HWINFO where some of the mobo values are not working? I really would like the pump RPM to display and it does show up in AI Suite, though I'd rather never have to run that.


That means monitoring is disabled for those values. Just hit the Ins key over them.


----------



## harderthanfire

Awesome, thank you.


----------



## Mumak

Sorry guys, I was wrong. The latest change to FCLK reporting wasn't included in build 4050 yet.
But it's inside build 4052 that I provided to @oreonutz for testing of the formulas for custom sensors.


----------



## gupsterg

Mumak said:


> Not sure yet. Older versions were reporting the Effective FCLK (which sometimes went out of range), then I switched to a specific setpoint and now to another one that should be reporting the target frequency.


Yeah I had a CPU at stock would go out of range and 2 others were fine, one way I could make those 2 flake out for FCLK counter was lowering SOC.



Mumak said:


> Yeah, unfortunately I was only now been able to gather the required knowledge for Zen1. But I'm already well equipped and have a lot of support for Renoir and Zen3 too


Nice  .



harderthanfire said:


> Anyone else getting an issue in HWINFO where some of the mobo values are not working? I really would like the pump RPM to display and it does show up in AI Suite, though I'd rather never have to run that.


You can also right click a sensor to bring up context menu.



Spoiler
















Mumak said:


> Sorry guys, I was wrong. The latest change to FCLK reporting wasn't included in build 4050 yet.
> But it's inside build 4052 that I provided to @oreonutz for testing of the formulas for custom sensors.


The new FCLK counter doesn't also reflect DF CStates, not a biggie. I've just kept the old beta if ever need to see if UEFI is doing DF CStates. Thanks for new feature of custom sensors  .


----------



## Mumak

gupsterg said:


> The new FCLK counter doesn't also reflect DF CStates, not a biggie. I've just kept the old beta if ever need to see if UEFI is doing DF CStates. Thanks for new feature of custom sensors  .


I'll reconsider adding the Effective FCLK as a secondary value, but that would probably raise even more questions from users...


----------



## gupsterg

Mumak said:


> I'll reconsider adding the Effective FCLK as a secondary value, but that would probably raise even more questions from users...


I think best to stick with one which doesn't flake out and not to do a secondary counter. In my opinion it was too easy to make the counter flake out and as one CPU did it at stock I think AMD need to improve the implementation. 

I recall a few posts in here, when some were getting FCLK going past set value thinking it was an issue with their HW/actually happening and may harm CPU/etc.

So far tested UEFI at full defaults, 1:1:1 (FCLK:UCLK:MEMCLK) with 3600MHz and 3666MHz, been fine for reporting.


----------



## Mumak

gupsterg said:


> I think best to stick with one which doesn't flake out and not to do a secondary counter. In my opinion it was too easy to make the counter flake out and as one CPU did it at stock I think AMD need to improve the implementation.
> 
> I recall a few posts in here, when some were getting FCLK going past set value thinking it was an issue with their HW/actually happening and may harm CPU/etc.
> 
> So far tested UEFI at full defaults, 1:1:1 (FCLK:UCLK:MEMCLK) with 3600MHz and 3666MHz, been fine for reporting.


Yeah, you're right.. and if AMD will fix the effective FCLK counter, I will replace it.


----------



## nick name

@Mumak Quick question. Is there a way to un-select a sensor after it's been highlighted? It annoys me when I've clicked on a sensor and it stays highlighted and I can't un-select it.


----------



## ThrashZone

nick name said:


> @Mumak Quick question. Is there a way to un-select a sensor after it's been highlighted? It annoys me when I've clicked on a sensor and it stays highlighted and I can't un-select it.


Hi,
Drag one side over a little so you have a little white paper showing and click on it.
Or just narrow the far right readings usually Average which that column can also be removed in settings.


----------



## nick name

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Drag one side over a little so you have a little white paper showing and click on it.
> Or just narrow the far right readings usually Average which that column can also be removed in settings.


Ayyy clicking on Logging Start and then just canceling that gets rid of the highlight. High five.


----------



## Mumak

nick name said:


> @Mumak Quick question. Is there a way to un-select a sensor after it's been highlighted? It annoys me when I've clicked on a sensor and it stays highlighted and I can't un-select it.


Hit the Tab key, or press any of the buttons at bottom.


----------



## oreonutz

Mumak said:


> Sorry guys, I was wrong. The latest change to FCLK reporting wasn't included in build 4050 yet.
> But it's inside build 4052 that I provided to @oreonutz for testing of the formulas for custom sensors.


Still looking for more people to help Beta test the new build, but have a couple people testing so far, and have it running on 5 systems in lab, and is working great!
@Mumak killed it with this new feature! I am not sure if very many people realize just how useful this is yet, but I am sure more will over time, for real thank you to Martin for working on a solution for this for the community. This tool is invaluable.


----------



## darkage

oreonutz said:


> Still looking for more people to help Beta test the new build, but have a couple people testing so far, and have it running on 5 systems in lab, and is working great!
> 
> @Mumak killed it with this new feature! I am not sure if very many people realize just how useful this is yet, but I am sure more will over time, for real thank you to Martin for working on a solution for this for the community. This tool is invaluable.


i'm allways in beta software, so if you want i can use it, just don't know how can be of great help, but if needed i'm here to use and test it


----------



## oreonutz

darkage said:


> i'm allways in beta software, so if you want i can use it, just don't know how can be of great help, but if needed i'm here to use and test it


I already posted somewhere else in the forum, so just going to copy and paste here for you:

If anyone needs help setting this up just Quote or PM me, and I will help out. This link will only be good until the next official/beta release on the HWinfo Site, but that will include this feature, so if this link doesn't work for you in the future, just grab the newest version off of HWinfo's Site, the directions to set it up will be the same, unless otherwise noted in the build notes by @Mumak.

Beta Build of HWiNFO: www.hwinfo.com/beta/hwi64_621_4052.zip

Directions:
It's based on the custom sensor feature, so make sure to read up on that first, here: https://www.hwinfo.com/forum/threads/custom-user-sensors-in-hwinfo.5817/

Make sure to create the above described custom sensor entry in the registry, and for the "Value", use a string (REG_SZ) with the following format:
"value_name1" - "value_name2".
So if your sensor values are called "Water temp" and "Ambient temp", put the following into registry as Value: (You can copy and paste into registry and then just change the names to your specific sensor names, Quotations needed around each sensor name as in below example)


Spoiler



"Water temp" - "Ambient temp"



Strings are case-sensitive. 

Also, if you have multiple values with the same name, you might need to rename the desired value to be unique for that formula to work.

Currently, the following operations are supported: +, -, *, /, min(x,y,...), max(x,y,...). You can also use regular numbers in the formula.
You can of course use an unlimited amount of operands i.e.: "Water temp" - "Ambient temp" * 1000 + "Temp2" ...

Feel free to let us know how this has worked for you. Will be happy to pass your feedback along. And Martin is rather accessible if you rather deal with him yourself, I just don't want to overload on him if we don't have to, he was incredibly nice to push this in for us so quickly. Will be donating another $20 to him Monday night, if anyone else cares to join in, the more the Merrier, he has a paypal on his HWinfo.com Site that you can donate directly to. (BTW, this was not requested by him, just want to show him that we appreciate him, he specifically told me he doesn't do this for the money when I offered him some up front, so that makes me want to give him my money more!)


----------



## nick name

Mumak said:


> Hit the Tab key, or press any of the buttons at bottom.


Crap. I can't believe I didn't think to hit Tab. Thank you for that help.


----------



## oreonutz

nick name said:


> Crap. I can't believe I didn't think to hit Tab. Thank you for that help.


Don't feel bad, when I saw your post, I wanted to +1 because I had the same exact question, I only really care about clearing it for when I am about to do a screenshot and the only way I had ever found to clear it was to hit the settings cog. But by the time I read your comment, @Mumak had already posted the response, and I wanted faceplant. Can't believe I didn't think of that either, lol. :doh:

So, all I am trying to say is, you are not alone my friend.


----------



## gupsterg

gupsterg said:


> I think best to stick with one which doesn't flake out and not to do a secondary counter. In my opinion it was too easy to make the counter flake out and as one CPU did it at stock I think AMD need to improve the implementation.
> 
> I recall a few posts in here, when some were getting FCLK going past set value thinking it was an issue with their HW/actually happening and may harm CPU/etc.
> 
> So far tested UEFI at full defaults, 1:1:1 (FCLK:UCLK:MEMCLK) with 3600MHz and 3666MHz, been fine for reporting.
> 
> 
> 
> Mumak said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, you're right.. and if AMD will fix the effective FCLK counter, I will replace it.
Click to expand...

I'm hoping AMD do fix it, as this was only way to see DF CStates in action. I know previously with other AMD HW your communication of issues has helped, may not have been implemented straight away, but did happen from what I can tell. Just curious are they aware and what is their stance on it?


----------



## Mumak

gupsterg said:


> I'm hoping AMD do fix it, as this was only way to see DF CStates in action. I know previously with other AMD HW your communication of issues has helped, may not have been implemented straight away, but did happen from what I can tell. Just curious are they aware and what is their stance on it?


I believe they are aware of it.


----------



## bonomork

Just a quick question: can a negative offset of -0.100v to affect the boost clock ?


----------



## MrPhilo

bonomork said:


> Just a quick question: can a negative offset of -0.100v to affect the boost clock ?


Yes, my 3900x max boost was 4.6 instead of 4.65 when I used offset


----------



## bonomork

Thank you MrPhilo, I'll check the boost behaviour decreasing the offset


----------



## Synoxia

I've set EDC, PPT to 0 and EDC to 1 as suggested by C8H thread. This is unbeveliable, ill try some actual benchmarks.


----------



## harderthanfire

Yeah the seems to work great!


----------



## harderthanfire

Ok maybe not, these setting have a super aggressive all core boost that when I was undervolting lead to clock stretching. So turn off undervolts before trying. Numbers on the benchmarks are really good single core, middle of the road multi.


----------



## darkage

Synoxia said:


> I've set EDC, PPT to 0 and EDC to 1 as suggested by C8H thread. This is unbeveliable, ill try some actual benchmarks.


LOL, with the settings posted in CHVIII


----------



## neikosr0x

harderthanfire said:


> Yeah the seems to work great!


Can you share, what exactly did you do? Bios versiona / settings / Windows / chipsetdrivers ver. Please just to try myself and report.


----------



## neikosr0x

emmm well... Just tried them and the performance is insane lol...

Edit: I just did a Cinebench 15 run, and i got 4 cores to boost to 4.6+ two to 4.650 and two more to 4.6


----------



## Synoxia

neikosr0x said:


> emmm well... Just tried them and the performance is insane lol...
> 
> Edit: I just did a Cinebench 15 run, and i got 4 cores to boost to 4.6+ two to 4.650 and two more to 4.6


I have 94 in cb15 SC. On which bios are u doin this? Im on 1.0.3abba


----------



## neikosr0x

Synoxia said:


> I have 94 in cb15 SC. On which bios are u doin this? Im on 1.0.3abba


This is Windows 1909, Ryzen Balanced from previous chipset driver and 2901Bios "1.0.0.3abba". Some gaming which utilizes few CPU cores more than anything else.

Edit: Cb15 Scores 3304 MT and 214ST while having Hwinfo opened.


----------



## harderthanfire

neikosr0x said:


> This is Windows 1909, Ryzen Balanced from previous chipset driver and 2901Bios "1.0.0.3abba". Some gaming which utilizes few CPU cores more than anything else.
> 
> Edit: Cb15 Scores 3304 MT and 214ST while having Hwinfo opened.



I'm seeing similar numbers on my 3900X on the latest bios.


----------



## bonomork

Something really strange happened.. I've decreased 0.050V negative offset and I've noticed a performance decrease about 1%. Then I removed any negative offset and any cores was not able to boost @ 4,35GHz even if I noticed voltage spikes @ 1,5V.
I've installed the latest chipset drivers (they automatically setted Amd Ryzen balanced plan) and with the previous negative offset -0.100V finally I get 4,35 GHz boost without any 1,5V spikes.
Could you please explain this ?


----------



## xeizo

bonomork said:


> Something really strange happened.. I've decreased 0.050V negative offset and I've noticed a performance decrease about 1%. Then I removed any negative offset and any cores was not able to boost @ 4,35GHz even if I noticed voltage spikes @ 1,5V.
> I've installed the latest chipset drivers (they automatically setted Amd Ryzen balanced plan) and with the previous negative offset -0.100V finally I get 4,35 GHz boost without any 1,5V spikes.
> Could you please explain this ?


Obviously Asus C7H overvolts which makes a negative offset almost mandatory. The Prime Pro doesn't overvolt, no offset is necessary.


----------



## speedgoat

ok i had to try this PPT/TDC/EDC madness ... Blue screen after a couple of mins with "DPC Watchdog Violation" 
but i did see the increased boost too


----------



## MrPhilo

WAIT LOL, ITS OP AS HELL


----------



## xsidex

What are the settings you guys are talking about for PPT/TDC and EDC?


----------



## speedgoat

i just went PPT TDC 0 and EDC 1, and when i tried it and it failed i did leave an 0.1 offset going


----------



## oreonutz

xsidex said:


> What are the settings you guys are talking about for PPT/TDC and EDC?





speedgoat said:


> i just went PPT TDC 0 and EDC 1, and when i tried it and it failed i did leave an 0.1 offset going


So I have not done enough testing on this yet, as I needed my 3950x Build and my 3900x Build stable for a massive project I am working on for the rest of this week, so I only got to test on my 3950x Build for about 20 Mins before reverting back to my Per CCX OC.

I will quote what the original poster in the Crosshair VIII Thread said below, so everyone knows the settings to try, and where they came from. But before I quote it, I just want to say that I tested those exact settings on my board, and it made no difference at all for me. I am going to try changing all 3 "Precision Boost Override" sections settings to this, and see if that helps, but at least on my Crosshair VII Hero, making those changes exactly as said in his post made no difference in both Single Core Overclocking and All Core Overclocking for me, in fact the All Core Overclocking was worse then just settings the Performance Enhancer setting to Level 3, because with that I at least get an All Core Overclock of 4.15 to 4.2Ghz, depending on my Room Temperature at boot. With the quoted settings I was only boosting to 4Ghz all Core during CBR20 and a 3 Minute Blender Run. The Single Core Boosting was no worse or no better than normal. Will do more testing later though to see if I can replicate the success everyone else is showing, its possible because of the the limited amount of time that I had, that I overlooked and missed something in the Bios.

But for everyone who is asking what settings to try, here is the post everyone Keeps referring to. This was posted by @Giustaf. 
Link to post is here: https://www.overclock.net/forum/28284160-post1932.html

Relevant Quote for the Settings:


Giustaf said:


> SETTINGS:
> The EDC limit set to 1 really works for boosting all cores and single core to their MAX! Thanks to the guy that figured this out.
> 
> Here is what I did to get it to work
> Set your ram timmings to whatever you prefer.
> And the fclk to half that of your ram speed.
> 
> In extreme Tweaker/core performance boost
> 
> set it to – Auto
> 
> In extreme Tweaker/precision boost overdrive
> 
> precision boost overdrive = auto
> max cpu boost clock override = auto
> platform throttle limit = auto
> Set all 3 options to AUTO
> 
> In extreme Tweaker/digi+ power control
> cpu load-line calibration set to = LEVEL 3
> cpu current capability to 140%
> 
> In advanced/amd cbs/nbio common options/xfr enhancement/accepted
> precision boost overdrive = auto
> and precision boost overdrive = auto
> 
> 
> now in
> advanced/amd overclocking/amd overclocking/precision boost override
> precision boost override set this to -advanced
> PBO limits to manual
> PPT limit =0
> TDC limit =0
> EDC limit =1
> precision boost overdrive scalar - manual =10x
> max cpu boost clock override =200mhz
> and the thermal throttle to =200
> save and restart.


----------



## MrPhilo

Althought I got the boost, it restarted after using my PC awhile. Assuming it wasn't as stable, that is with a 200Mhz+

I am using 0Mhz which is just stock and has been running fine so far, still testing. Boost max is back to 4.65Ghz, but that is with my best CCD (all 6 cores), all my other one is 4.4-4.475Ghz.


----------



## speedgoat

i removed the offset and didnt get any blue screen yet, im seeing ridiculous high boost but im not really convinced atm i see a performance increase


----------



## darkage

speedgoat said:


> i removed the offset and didnt get any blue screen yet, im seeing ridiculous high boost but im not really convinced atm i see a performance increase


your CPU EDC LIMIT is way higher then mine when i use this settings, is this a bug report? my goes as high as 2000% +
not using the settings because i have no idea of this, it works but!


----------



## speedgoat

darkage said:


> your CPU EDC LIMIT is way higher then mine when i use this settings, is this a bug report? my goes as high as 2000% +
> not using the settings because i have no idea of this, it works but!


im thinking (also hopping)this 6,800+% of EDC limit 1 corresponds to the 68.7A pulled in the EDC reading and i got it after one CB20 run, so i guess this is probably ok to pull

but all in all, without testing it much, im thinking this trick just messes with how clock is measured and i saw no meaningful performance increase


----------



## Mumak

The clocks you're getting should be real (the multiplier is really read as such) and the effective clocks confirm this.
I think with these settings you uncovered some bug in the SMU clock limiting algorithms, the EDC throttler doesn't seem to properly enforce the limit.


----------



## nick name

Mumak said:


> The clocks you're getting should be real (the multiplier is really read as such) and the effective clocks confirm this.
> I think with these settings you uncovered some bug in the SMU clock limiting algorithms, the EDC throttler doesn't seem to properly enforce the limit.


Are the folks also using PE 3 or 4? Perhaps it's still causing some FIT limits to be ignored.


----------



## speedgoat

Mumak said:


> The clocks you're getting should be real (the multiplier is really read as such) and the effective clocks confirm this.
> I think with these settings you uncovered some bug in the SMU clock limiting algorithms, the EDC throttler doesn't seem to properly enforce the limit.


im constantly seeing a small discrepancy on the clocks between RM and Hwinfo when trying this, also never seen anything above 4.525MHz in RM.. basically i think it all looks ordinary when only looking at RM


----------



## Axaion

Shrug, well the EDC thing gave me WHEA errors in games, so thats too bad, was nice finally getting 240fps in league though


----------



## neikosr0x

Axaion said:


> Shrug, well the EDC thing gave me WHEA errors in games, so thats too bad, was nice finally getting 240fps in league though


hahahaahah you should be ok without the anyways i don't get 240 fps constantly in league but i do get it for a nice period of time.


----------



## boldenc

the 1 EDC setting didn't work for me on the X570 TUF Plus. I am getting lower scores than just using the default settings for single and multi thread tests.


----------



## Mumak

speedgoat said:


> im constantly seeing a small discrepancy on the clocks between RM and Hwinfo when trying this, also never seen anything above 4.525MHz in RM.. basically i think it all looks ordinary when only looking at RM


Clocks reported by RM should match the Effective Clock in HWiNFO, but there are small discrepancies expected too as the measuring interval of both tools is not the same.


----------



## Ipak

Those settings on x470 prime pro give awesome boost in multicore clocks, but when single core load happens it downclocks to around 1GHZ wut, 

Upon further testing, i tried different power plan, Ryzen High Performace fix single core clocks with those settings, CPU-z scores are insane 550 single, almost 8400 multi for 3900x


----------



## darkage

it may be a bug, but is it safe to use this settings ?


----------



## xeizo

darkage said:


> it may be a bug, but is it safe to use this settings ?


Not on C7H, I tried it twice, both time blackscreen and immediate restart. Windows DO NOT like such things and will start trying to repair itself, and eventually lock you out if it deems it can't. Dangerous, I will not try this one more time.


----------



## speedgoat

xeizo said:


> Not on C7H, I tried it twice, both time blackscreen and immediate restart. Windows DO NOT like such things and will start trying to repair itself, and eventually lock you out if it deems it can't. Dangerous, I will not try this one more time.


did you also had a negative offset ? i noticed a few people that had crashes with it run offsets


----------



## Axaion

I didnt have offsets and had crashes

It did run very nicely till it crashed, and it didnt crash due to temps, as max temps was 71c with cpu-z or cinebench r15


----------



## Praetorr

Can anyone comment on the supposed "sleep bug" in 3004? I've seen seemingly one guy in particular (can't recall the name) discuss it on Reddit and OC.net, but I'm wondering if others have any issues? I think it's basically the system just not being able to successfully wake from sleep. 

I'm debating "upgrading" from 2801, but since it works pretty well for me, and the stock boost seems worse in 3004 (I have a 3900X), it seems hard to justify. Just curious what others thoughts are both to the above specific question and in general.


----------



## darkage

i disable hibernate so no problem here


----------



## smokin_mitch

Praetorr said:


> Can anyone comment on the supposed "sleep bug" in 3004? I've seen seemingly one guy in particular (can't recall the name) discuss it on Reddit and OC.net, but I'm wondering if others have any issues? I think it's basically the system just not being able to successfully wake from sleep.
> 
> I'm debating "upgrading" from 2801, but since it works pretty well for me, and the stock boost seems worse in 3004 (I have a 3900X), it seems hard to justify. Just curious what others thoughts are both to the above specific question and in general.



Memory overclocking is bugged on bios 2901 and 3004 when waking from sleep it'll drop from 1:1 mode down to 2:1


----------



## Dollar

smokin_mitch said:


> Memory overclocking is bugged on bios 2901 and 3004 when waking from sleep it'll drop from 1:1 mode down to 2:1



I thought this only happened if you were using FCLK higher than 1800? Praetorr's signature shows memory at 3600c14 so it shouldn't be a problem if that's the case.


----------



## vasyltheonly

So who do I get pissed at/thank for finally making my manual OC of [email protected] on the 3600x worthless? Because this little, PPT, TDC, and EDC values of 0,0, and 1 got me almost as good of results. Here are some numbers:
Program(Avg of runs) 4.35 PBO(0,0,1)
Aida(3) Read/Latency 54920/65.6 54782/66
C20Multi(3) 3981 3887
C20Single(1) 506 514
C15Single(3) 203 208
I now see a boost of 4475mhz here are there when running single task/sitting idle. All core voltage is 1.36ish while benching. 
During gaming I see most of the cores fluctuate at 4.375-4.350 (only validated tried in red dead). Voltage is about 1.41ish and up. 
Definitely interesting results. I will test a bit more just to really see how the other values effect it all. (LLC, Current, Scalar etc)


----------



## Praetorr

Thanks for the responses! It sounds like I may be OK to use 3004 then. I'll wait a bit to see if anyone has any horror stories to share or anything like that.


----------



## neikosr0x

Praetorr said:


> Thanks for the responses! It sounds like I may be OK to use 3004 then. I'll wait a bit to see if anyone has any horror stories to share or anything like that.


3004 Runs very well, the only bad about it is that it clocks less than 2901. But other than that runs just fine.


----------



## MrPhilo

I wouldn't use the boost tweak 0 0 1. I think I screwed up my 3900x. It freezes or reboots now while in Windows at stock (0 0 0 and 0Mhz).

I changed my RAM and FCLK to 3600 and 1800 and it's running fine now, I'm assuming this is due to FCLK or the IF being more unstable now? It has been running fine for month till now at 0.951v for VDDG, tried running at 1.001 and it's still unstable and reboots or freezes in Window. My SoC is at 1.1v, I have not tried increasing that, my RAM is now at 3600CL16, same timing as my 3800CL16.

Any ideas what I can do to run back at 3800 and 1900 FCLK?


----------



## oreonutz

MrPhilo said:


> I wouldn't use the boost tweak 0 0 1. I think I screwed up my 3900x. It freezes or reboots now while in Windows at stock (0 0 0 and 0Mhz).
> 
> I changed my RAM and FCLK to 3600 and 1800 and it's running fine now, I'm assuming this is due to FCLK or the IF being more unstable now? It has been running fine for month till now at 0.951v for VDDG, tried running at 1.001 and it's still unstable and reboots or freezes in Window. My SoC is at 1.1v, I have not tried increasing that, my RAM is now at 3600CL16, same timing as my 3800CL16.
> 
> Any ideas what I can do to run back at 3800 and 1900 FCLK?


I had the same issue when I ran my 3950x incredibly hard.

Turn off your rig, power cycle your Power Supply. Turn on your PC, go into the BIOS and Load Optimized Defaults. Reboot, now if you have a Profile you can load BEFORE you did the Tweak, load it, you should be back to normal.

Something about bringing these chips to the edge of stability and really pushing them, especially on this particular board, makes things get all wonky and unpredictable. Going through the exact procedure above fixed that for me, and now things are back to normal. Not sure if some hidden flag gets changed in the BIOS or something when pushing it so hard, but at least in my case It has been recoverable. Hopefully this helps you.


----------



## MrPhilo

oreonutz said:


> MrPhilo said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wouldn't use the boost tweak 0 0 1. I think I screwed up my 3900x. It freezes or reboots now while in Windows at stock (0 0 0 and 0Mhz).
> 
> I changed my RAM and FCLK to 3600 and 1800 and it's running fine now, I'm assuming this is due to FCLK or the IF being more unstable now? It has been running fine for month till now at 0.951v for VDDG, tried running at 1.001 and it's still unstable and reboots or freezes in Window. My SoC is at 1.1v, I have not tried increasing that, my RAM is now at 3600CL16, same timing as my 3800CL16.
> 
> Any ideas what I can do to run back at 3800 and 1900 FCLK?
> 
> 
> 
> I had the same issue when I ran my 3950x incredibly hard.
> 
> Turn off your rig, power cycle your Power Supply. Turn on your PC, go into the BIOS and Load Optimized Defaults. Reboot, now if you have a Profile you can load BEFORE you did the Tweak, load it, you should be back to normal.
> 
> Something about bringing these chips to the edge of stability and really pushing them, especially on this particular board, makes things get all wonky and unpredictable. Going through the exact procedure above fixed that for me, and now things are back to normal. Not sure if some hidden flag gets changed in the BIOS or something when pushing it so hard, but at least in my case It has been recoverable. Hopefully this helps you.
Click to expand...

I will give this a try when I go home after work. 

Hopefully I won't need to replace my 3900x... Only had it for 1 month!


----------



## oreonutz

MrPhilo said:


> I will give this a try when I go home after work.
> 
> Hopefully I won't need to replace my 3900x... Only had it for 1 month!


No you should be fine. These chips are more resilient then some may lead you to believe. You can kill them easily, but that is more with SOCv then with Corev. As long as you don't let your Corev hit a sustain of 100c or more for a long period of time, you will be fine (And even then you should be fine, I let mine do a 30 Minute Blender Render at 110c sustained, and thats the first time I thought I may have damaged my chip, after investigating it was the SOCv I was using at those current levels that actually caused the issue). 

It just seems with the VII hero that after a current limit has been hit, the chip seems to to behave unpredictably, and previous overclocks no longer work, like what you would expect from a degraded chip, which is pretty scarry. But just power Cycling the Power Supply, going back to optimized defaults, and then either loading a previous profile or just setting your settings in the BIOS from scratch should have you right back to where you were before. 

From experience I would make sure you just keep your SOCv as low as possible, as that seems to be what triggers the most issues with these chips, the previous SOCv that I ran of 1.1625v with 4 Sticks of 3200CL14 running at 3800CL16 ended up being too high and is what caused my issue. Turns out the chip has no issues running at 1.095v with the same 4 Sticks and Same Ram OC, which brings the heat on the SOCv down considerably.

Anyways, I think you will be fine, the EDC Bug OC's that I have seen screenshots of, looks to use similar clocks to what all of us who are Per CCX Overclocking are doing, it just uses a lot more Voltage, which could be pretty bad for a sustained period of time under high current loads, but unless you see it shoving something like 180amps down your chip and hitting temps above 110c tdie, you should be fine. Good luck, let me know if it helped you out as much as it did me.


----------



## Gigabytes

I have done the EDC tweaks suggested however I did not increase CPU LLC or set CPU current to 140%. In effect the system is at stock other than the EDC tweaks and memory overclocked to 3800. Indeed max clock across all cores has increased 0.200 ghz, cores that used to peak at 4.450 now peak at 4.650, weaker cores that peaked a 4.250 now peak at 4.450. Max temp under load has gone from 71c to 75c. CPU voltage and current draw change is negligible if any. Seems like a solid change.


----------



## harderthanfire

Gigabytes said:


> I have done the EDC tweaks suggested however I did not increase CPU LLC or set CPU current to 140%. In effect the system is at stock other than the EDC tweaks and memory overclocked to 3800. Indeed max clock across all cores has increased 0.200 ghz, cores that used to peak at 4.450 now peak at 4.650, weaker cores that peaked a 4.250 now peak at 4.450. Max temp under load has gone from 71c to 75c. CPU voltage and current draw change is negligible if any. Seems like a solid change.



Basically the same thing for me with slightly lower temps.



I have tried the LLC and CPU current changes and they made basically no difference to me.


Windows has been up for over 24 hours now which includes some gaming and benchmark running so it looks stable for me.


----------



## MrPhilo

oreonutz said:


> I had the same issue when I ran my 3950x incredibly hard.
> 
> Turn off your rig, power cycle your Power Supply. Turn on your PC, go into the BIOS and Load Optimized Defaults. Reboot, now if you have a Profile you can load BEFORE you did the Tweak, load it, you should be back to normal.
> 
> Something about bringing these chips to the edge of stability and really pushing them, especially on this particular board, makes things get all wonky and unpredictable. Going through the exact procedure above fixed that for me, and now things are back to normal. Not sure if some hidden flag gets changed in the BIOS or something when pushing it so hard, but at least in my case It has been recoverable. Hopefully this helps you.


Still the same problem. I did a usb flashback as well to 3004.

I decided to increase my SoC from 1.1v slowly until 1.1375v where it has now stop freezing and crashing so far.

I am still testing but will update, no idea if the EDC bug was the main cause of it though.


----------



## oreonutz

MrPhilo said:


> Still the same problem. I did a usb flashback as well to 3004.
> 
> I decided to increase my SoC from 1.1v slowly until 1.1375v where it has now stop freezing and crashing so far.
> 
> I am still testing but will update, no idea if the EDC bug was the main cause of it though.


Have you recently decreased your SOC LLC? If you used to have a higher SOC LLC, and you decreased it, that could have something to do with why you need to set a high level then before.


----------



## MrPhilo

oreonutz said:


> Have you recently decreased your SOC LLC? If you used to have a higher SOC LLC, and you decreased it, that could have something to do with why you need to set a high level then before.


I did use to use 1.125v as thats what I needed with my 3800x before I upgraded to 3900x during the sales in Christmas.

I decided to lower voltage slowly on VDDG and SoC and it was running fine from around beginning of January until now, maybe I just messed up somewhere.

It's working great now anyways, so all good  - Back to normal, I don't think i'll try the EDC thing until some more clarification and test just in case.


----------



## garf333

Hi all,

Just would like some ideas on how to better overclock my RAM on our board.

I have a 3700X, and 64GB of 4x16GB Dual Rank Hynix AFRs rated at 3200 16 18 18 36

I've so far tightened up timings by doing 1.4V and running 14 17 17 30, but still at 3200.

Now, I'd like to push to 3333 or 3400 but can't seem to do so. Running Memtest86+ and just 3266 will result in failures after just 10 minutes of running (my current settings will run 4 passes of memtest86+ w/o issues).

Related settings I've changed:
VSOC - 1.05 (reading 1.03 in BIOS)
DRAM Switching Speed - 450KHz
Voltage - 1.4
Primary Timings - 14 17 17 17 
TRAS - 30 
TRC - 38
TRFC - 496 (480 is memtest unstable)
TWR - 12 (10 is memtest unstable)

The rest are pretty much on auto.

Edit: Running on the 3004 BIOS.

Is there anything else I should try? I haven't tried with the PROCODT or any other CLKDRV settings, as based on some initial tweaking they haven't made my system more/less stable.

Thank you!


----------



## Schmuckley

I like how Flanker drops a fan to cool the vrms onto the pot stud like I used to. I may have learned that from him, tbh.

-1 for not 38mm finger chopper!

Vince pot, it is what it is.


----------



## Gigabytes

garf333 said:


> Hi all,
> 
> Just would like some ideas on how to better overclock my RAM on our board.
> 
> I have a 3700X, and 64GB of 4x16GB Dual Rank Hynix AFRs rated at 3200 16 18 18 36
> 
> I've so far tightened up timings by doing 1.4V and running 14 17 17 30, but still at 3200.
> 
> Now, I'd like to push to 3333 or 3400 but can't seem to do so. Running Memtest86+ and just 3266 will result in failures after just 10 minutes of running (my current settings will run 4 passes of memtest86+ w/o issues).
> 
> Related settings I've changed:
> VSOC - 1.05 (reading 1.03 in BIOS)
> DRAM Switching Speed - 450KHz
> Voltage - 1.4
> Primary Timings - 14 17 17 17
> TRAS - 30
> TRC - 38
> TRFC - 496 (480 is memtest unstable)
> TWR - 12 (10 is memtest unstable)
> 
> The rest are pretty much on auto.
> 
> Edit: Running on the 3004 BIOS.
> 
> Is there anything else I should try? I haven't tried with the PROCODT or any other CLKDRV settings, as based on some initial tweaking they haven't made my system more/less stable.
> 
> Thank you!


Have your tried the Calculator?


----------



## Baio73

Praetorr said:


> Can anyone comment on the supposed "sleep bug" in 3004? I've seen seemingly one guy in particular (can't recall the name) discuss it on Reddit and OC.net, but I'm wondering if others have any issues? I think it's basically the system just not being able to successfully wake from sleep.
> 
> I'm debating "upgrading" from 2801, but since it works pretty well for me, and the stock boost seems worse in 3004 (I have a 3900X), it seems hard to justify. Just curious what others thoughts are both to the above specific question and in general.


Here I am… under 3004 if I OC my RAM to 3600 CAS14, everytime the pc wakes, the OS crashes into a BSOD. Odd to say, with previous BIOS I used the same values and had no problem.
I've experienced less crashes if I set the RAM with D.O.C.P. profile (4000MHz), no crash at all if I leave everything on Auto in the BIOS (2300MHz).
Still no solution found, as I don't think there is a particoular BIOS voice related to the awakening from sleep.

Baio


----------



## garf333

Gigabytes said:


> Have your tried the Calculator?


Yes I have. That's actually how I got to CL14 in the first place. Trying to push high however and the calculator (even 3266) starts recommending C16 even for FAST settings.

Want to keep it at C14 if possible, and I'm sure (?) that it can do a few MHZ above, since my current C14 is stable already with 1.38/39 volts and otherwise very little tweaking. Just don't know where to start pushing.

I'm attaching my stable settings so far. 

The timings and subtimings are all manually dialed in. The clk strengths and procODTs were automatically determined by the board.


----------



## MrPhilo

Has anyone enabled SOC/Uncore OC mode in AMD OC menu? It comes disabled for me and googling around people recommend to turn it on since it forces everything to run at max.


----------



## crakej

PPT=0, TDC=0, EDC=1 Didn't do much for my multi-core speed, and HALVED my single core speed to around 2.2GHz! Though I tried this with all my other settings, including PE3.

Sleep still doesn't work for me. Works great on my laptop (3500U) - so I use Hybrid Sleep/Hibernate


----------



## garf333

garf333 said:


> Yes I have. That's actually how I got to CL14 in the first place. Trying to push high however and the calculator (even 3266) starts recommending C16 even for FAST settings.
> 
> Want to keep it at C14 if possible, and I'm sure (?) that it can do a few MHZ above, since my current C14 is stable already with 1.38/39 volts and otherwise very little tweaking. Just don't know where to start pushing.
> 
> I'm attaching my stable settings so far.
> 
> The timings and subtimings are all manually dialed in. The clk strengths and procODTs were automatically determined by the board.


Got my memory stable at 3600 C16 at 16 20 20 40 60. TRFC is somewhere near 600. Most of the other timings are closer to my 3200 C14 timings previously posted.

All at 1.38V. Haven't run a memtest but 1usmus and the extreme TM5 benches seem stable. I guess I have to try a few games to see if it's really 'stable'.

I guess for 4 DIMM dual rank hynix AFRs, this is about as good as it can get.


----------



## gupsterg

MrPhilo said:


> Has anyone enabled SOC/Uncore OC mode in AMD OC menu? It comes disabled for me and googling around people recommend to turn it on since it forces everything to run at max.


Does work, but didn't improve stability for me on a unstable profile. Enabling it is the same as disabling DF CStates, found in AMD CBS > NBIO Common options > SMU Common Options. IMO they (AMD) placed it in OC menu as it's buried deep in AMD CBS.

Make sure Global C-States Control is [Enabled] in UEFI, leave DF CStates & SOC/Uncore OC mode at defaults, then use HWINFO v6.20-4030 and observe FCLK counter, you should see it down clock at idle. When you set DF CStates as disabled and or SOC/Uncore OC mode as enabled, FCLK counter in HWINFO won't down clock at idle.


----------



## MrPhilo

gupsterg said:


> MrPhilo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Has anyone enabled SOC/Uncore OC mode in AMD OC menu? It comes disabled for me and googling around people recommend to turn it on since it forces everything to run at max.
> 
> 
> 
> Does work, but didn't improve stability for me on a unstable profile. Enabling it is the same as disabling DF CStates, found in AMD CBS > NBIO Common options > SMU Common Options. IMO they (AMD) placed it in OC menu as it's buried deep in AMD CBS.
> 
> Make sure Global C-States Control is [Enabled] in UEFI, leave DF CStates & SOC/Uncore OC mode at defaults, then use HWINFO v6.20-4030 and observe FCLK counter, you should see it down clock at idle. When you set DF CStates as disabled and or SOC/Uncore OC mode as enabled, FCLK counter in HWINFO won't down clock at idle.
Click to expand...

I see, that makes sense now! Hope you're enjoy your HotUKDeals 3900x the other week 🙂

Also when I have DRAM Boot Voltage set to a figure, anything I change in bios shuts off and reboot. While it's on auto and I change a setting it doesn't shut down and reboot and just applies it as normal and boot as normal. Anyone else the same?


----------



## gupsterg

MrPhilo said:


> I see, that makes sense now! Hope you're enjoy your HotUKDeals 3900x the other week 🙂


No problem , indeed am :thumb: .



MrPhilo said:


> Also when I have DRAM Boot Voltage set to a figure, anything I change in bios shuts off and reboot. While it's on auto and I change a setting it doesn't shut down and reboot and just applies it as normal and boot as normal. Anyone else the same?


I believe this is to make sure settings are applied correctly. This can also occur on ASUS Intel boards and so not limited to AMD editions, old post here but from [email protected]


----------



## RaptorTP

Hey guys,
i hope you can help me. Google find this thread about the Asus C7H.
I also use with together with a Ryzen 7 3700x and 32 GB G.Skill Trident Z Neo 3600 16-19-19-39.

RAM OC costs to much time. (before i hab Crucial Ballistix @ 3733 MHz ... stable i guess, but anyway.

What i am trying now is Undervolting !
My CPU gets cooled by a NH-D15S. 
And i found out, that i am able to fix the CPU Voltage to 1,2625V for fixed 4,20 GHz.

Have to Test it in Games. In CB20 i get now over 5000 Points and the system fells faster.

I also want to undervolt every other Voltage because this board takes a lot of voltage on several Volts when XMP (DOCP) is active.

Can somebody tell me how low you can get will SoC oder PLL ... which Prog i should use to Test "fast" stability of the system for a rough test.

I want to get the system cool & silent as much as i can.

i turnes out that the fixed Voltage and Clockspeed is the best solution.

I have a saved profile in the bios to test before & after 😉

let me know your thoughts or experience in Undervolting.


----------



## harderthanfire

I like to use offsets for undervolting and I only ever undervolt the vcore and not the SOC voltages.


----------



## RaptorTP

With offset you will loose performance if you go with more than -0,075V

That is what i can tell you 

But with fixed voltage and fixed Clock i get always my 5000 Points in Cinebench 20.
Like i wrote - i have to confirm that i also have in games a benefit.

In temps i have, for sure.
And the Results in CB20 are not fluctuate anymore.

I really googled a lot, and can´t find something informative for the Ryzen Plattform.

Later this day i try to take some extrem values just to check how far i can go down with voltages  without loosing performance but coming down with temps and noise  << SILENT FREAK


----------



## speedgoat

RaptorTP said:


> With offset you will loose performance if you go with more than -0,075V
> /QUOTE]
> 
> the limit is not fixed at -0.075V, it perhaps depends on your silicon quality, i notice lose of performance (i guess by that we mean CB score which god knows what relation it has on real performance) if i go past roughly -0.125V me.


----------



## RaptorTP

i will for sure go with fixed voltage.
And i will confirm the performance before & after.

But if somone says - you can go with 1.6V PPL, i do this for a year without problems .. something like that would be interesting for me.
That´s are infos that i am searching for.


----------



## 1usmus

*DRAM Calculator for Ryzen 1.7.0*










*Download:*
Techpowerup link
Guru3d link
Сomputerbase.de link


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

1usmus said:


> *DRAM Calculator for Ryzen 1.7.0*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Download:*
> 
> Techpowerup link
> 
> Guru3d link
> 
> Сomputerbase.de link


thx 1usmus

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## crakej

1usmus said:


> *DRAM Calculator for Ryzen 1.7.0*
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Download:*
> 
> 
> Techpowerup link
> Guru3d link
> Сomputerbase.de link


Thanks for the update @1usmus! Will check it out later...


----------



## lordzed83

1usmus said:


> *DRAM Calculator for Ryzen 1.7.0*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Download:*
> Techpowerup link
> Guru3d link
> Сomputerbase.de link


OOO something new to try out THANKS !!!


----------



## Axaion

Thanks 1usmus!


----------



## oreonutz

1usmus said:


> *DRAM Calculator for Ryzen 1.7.0*
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Download:*
> Techpowerup link
> Guru3d link
> Сomputerbase.de link


Awesome @1usmus, TY! New Toys to play with!


----------



## crakej

So - I often run World Community Grid in the background. I've now had 2 crashes that have happened when it's running - system just reboots. It's not temp as it doesn't use much CPU in the background. This has happened on bios 2901 and 3004.

Also, did anyone else find that the 'new' chipset drivers were old? Everything was current already.

Lastly the SLEEP problem - after an update my power plan was put on High Perf without me realizing. I notice when I woke my machine and had code 30 (Wake from Sleep) when it should have been 40 (Wake from hybrid sleep). Of course this meant my memclk was something like 900MHz - should be 1866MHz. I changed back to Ryzen Balanced which uses hybrid sleep, let the machine Sleep/Hibernate, when it woke, memclk was back to 1866MHz - without rebooting Windows......kind of.


----------



## Baio73

crakej said:


> [CUT]
> 
> Lastly the SLEEP problem - after an update my power plan was put on High Perf without me realizing. I notice when I woke my machine and had code 30 (Wake from Sleep) when it should have been 40 (Wake from hybrid sleep). Of course this meant my memclk was something like 900MHz - should be 1866MHz. I changed back to Ryzen Balanced which uses hybrid sleep, let the machine Sleep/Hibernate, when it woke, memclk was back to 1866MHz - without rebooting Windows......kind of.


This is a very helpful post to me.
I'm struggling a lot with sleep/hibernation, as I'm experiencing BSOD after the pc wakes up from sleep and reboots while it sleeps.
I'm on 1usmus power plan at the moment, gonna try with Ryzen Balanced.
How did you set in BIOS Gear Down Mode and Power Down Enable?
Did you disabled hibernation as in many forums is indicated to be helpful?

Thanks!

Baio


----------



## mtrai

ASUS quietly released an updated bios 3004 today. Same notes so not sure what changed


----------



## oreonutz

mtrai said:


> ASUS quietly released an updated bios 3004 today. Same notes so not sure what changed


....Weird


----------



## nick name

oreonutz said:


> ....Weird


Weird indeed. Why not re-name it with whatever changes they made?

Edit:
I'm not seeing it yet.


----------



## Zefram0911

Isn't 3004 the same one released at the end of last month?


----------



## Baio73

mtrai said:


> ASUS quietly released an updated bios 3004 today. Same notes so not sure what changed


Where did you notice it?
I've just checked Asus website, I only found the "original" one…
Did you downloaded it to see if the 2 files are identical?

Baio


----------



## gupsterg

mtrai said:


> ASUS quietly released an updated bios 3004 today. Same notes so not sure what changed


Checked global/UK site and not gained one. You have link/site which it on?


----------



## MrPhilo

crakej said:


> So - I often run World Community Grid in the background. I've now had 2 crashes that have happened when it's running - system just reboots. It's not temp as it doesn't use much CPU in the background. This has happened on bios 2901 and 3004.


I had this, I had to increase my SoC which seems to fix it. Also some other people reported the same on Reddit and increasing SoC fixed it for them.


----------



## Baio73

Baio73 said:


> This is a very helpful post to me.
> I'm struggling a lot with sleep/hibernation, as I'm experiencing BSOD after the pc wakes up from sleep and reboots while it sleeps.
> I'm on 1usmus power plan at the moment, gonna try with Ryzen Balanced.
> How did you set in BIOS Gear Down Mode and Power Down Enable?
> Did you disabled hibernation as in many forums is indicated to be helpful?
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Baio


Nothing to do… "PAGE_FAULT" also this morning with Ryzen Balanced profile in use.
It's something related to the RAM for sure, as I don't have the problem if I keep them on Auto inthe BIOS.

It's getting really upsetting. 

Baio


----------



## crakej

Baio73 said:


> Nothing to do… "PAGE_FAULT" also this morning with Ryzen Balanced profile in use.
> It's something related to the RAM for sure, as I don't have the problem if I keep them on Auto inthe BIOS.
> 
> It's getting really upsetting.
> 
> Baio


I disabled Sleep and enabled Hybrid Sleep. You can use any profile you want... so long as you change these settings in your chosen profile. I knew someone was having trouble!

I have GearDown=disabled and PowerDown=disabled.


----------



## crakej

MrPhilo said:


> I had this, I had to increase my SoC which seems to fix it. Also some other people reported the same on Reddit and increasing SoC fixed it for them.


Thanks! Very helpful - I will try increasing it slightly.


----------



## Baio73

crakej said:


> I disabled Sleep and enabled Hybrid Sleep. You can use any profile you want... so long as you change these settings in your chosen profile. I knew someone was having trouble!
> 
> I have GearDown=disabled and PowerDown=disabled.


Ok, thanks… I'll give those settings a try.
Did you notice if this problem is related to RAM overclock?
I don't have any BSOD after sleep if I keep the RAM in Auto and BSOD appear as I set the RAM to 3600 or even @4000 using D.O.C.P.

Baio


----------



## crakej

Baio73 said:


> Ok, thanks… I'll give those settings a try.
> Did you notice if this problem is related to RAM overclock?
> I don't have any BSOD after sleep if I keep the RAM in Auto and BSOD appear as I set the RAM to 3600 or even @4000 using D.O.C.P.
> 
> Baio


I haven't noticed if it's related to ram OC - I'm guessing not - does it down-clock when you have ram on auto?

Maybe your BSODs are being caused by a low voltage somewhere?


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> Checked global/UK site and not gained one. You have link/site which it on?


They pulled it but I did download it not installed...it was dated 01-31-2020


----------



## gupsterg

mtrai said:


> ASUS quietly released an updated bios 3004 today. Same notes so not sure what changed
> 
> 
> 
> gupsterg said:
> 
> 
> 
> Checked global/UK site and not gained one. You have link/site which it on?
> 
> 
> 
> mtrai said:
> 
> 
> 
> They pulled it but I did download it not installed...it was dated 01-31-2020
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Does it differ to prior release when compared in say HxD, UEFITool, etc?

Perhaps UBU may show some OPROM has been updated?

Interesting, perhaps some bug fixes are in the pipeline prior to another AGESA based UEFI...


----------



## Synoxia

So... is the EDC bug still there on 1.0.0.4b and has someone managed to fix it? I am getting less boost at 90 edc when overclocking the IF/RAM because obviously the IMC draws more power but still locked at 90 edc


----------



## crakej

EDC doesn't seem to be stuck for me...

In the meantime - I got another 16GB ram today 

Once I got it all working I logged into Windows to find nothing on my 2nd display. Played around with connections - all good, so couldn't work out why installing another 16GB had stopped my 2nd display from working (no signal). After a while I decided to try plugging the 2nd display into another output - and it worked?!

Perhaps it's something to do with the GPU using slightly different memory map after going to 32GB? It really shouldn't be affected, should it?


----------



## bonomork

Just a raw o.c. on 3200C14 G.Skill b-die @ 3466C14 1,4V
Boot np, some memtest (7 cycles), some CB etc., but I'hadn't time to stress it more. 
It seems stable and flawless. 

Any suggestion by DRAM overclockers on the settings in the attachment ?


----------



## TOMRUS

Where is VDDCR SOC voltage setting in BIOS located (or how it's named if different), I can't seems to find it anywhere?
After upgrading to latest BIOS this voltage is set to 1.363V for me (was 1.1V on old BIOS) and I want to lower it back...


----------



## crakej

bonomork said:


> Just a raw o.c. on 3200C14 G.Skill b-die @ 3466C14 1,4V
> Boot np, some memtest (7 cycles), some CB etc., but I'hadn't time to stress it more.
> It seems stable and flawless.
> 
> Any suggestion by DRAM overclockers on the settings in the attachment ?


You could try these timings....I've grouped them - only change 1 group at a time! For a more thorough method, do each timing one at a time, lowering the setting -1

tRas 30
tRC 44

tRRDS 4
tRRDL 6
tFAW 24 (probably lower)

tWRTS 4
tWRTL 12
tRW 12 (poss 24)

tRDRDSCL 2
tWRWRSCL 2

tRFC can come down

tRTP 12 (though 8 MIGHT work better for you here)

tRDWR 6
tWRRD AUTO

The Ryzen Ram Calculator work very well for getting good working timings of course - these are just what I've used in the past with similar RAM. Hope it helps.


----------



## crakej

TOMRUS said:


> Where is VDDCR SOC voltage setting in BIOS located (or how it's named if different), I can't seems to find it anywhere?
> After upgrading to latest BIOS this voltage is set to 1.363V for me (was 1.1V on old BIOS) and I want to lower it back...


SoC is directly below the CPU voltage on the same (main) page you set the XMP and Multipliers.

I'm curious - your Ryzen Master displays VDDR SoC along with EDC etc. - mine does NOT??? It says it doesn't need updating - maybe it's lying!

Edit: No Worries - downloaded the new RM from AMD and have same readouts now. If anyone else thinks RM has not updated for a while, same thing might happen to you - Auto Update was FAILING


----------



## TOMRUS

crakej said:


> SoC is directly below the CPU voltage on the same (main) page you set the XMP and Multipliers.


Hmm, are you sure that VDDCR SOC voltage is same thing as SOC voltage? Because all monitoring software shows my SOC voltage around 1.087V which is ok. VDDCR SOC could be something different or Ryzen Master is bugged...


----------



## crakej

TOMRUS said:


> Hmm, are you sure that VDDCR SOC voltage is same thing as SOC voltage? Because all monitoring software shows my SOC voltage around 1.087V which is ok. VDDCR SOC could be something different or Ryzen Master is bugged...


Yes - it's the same:

CPU Core (VDDCR CPU) and
CPU SoC (VDDCR SoC)

are the main CPU voltages. Peak Core Voltage should be between 1.1 and 1.3xv. SoC Shows the bios setting for SoC (in my cased 1.1v) - if you measure that voltage with DMM it's always lower than bios setting, like 1.082v.

RM does NOT show current SoC voltage - just what it was set at. AISuite reports it pretty accurately.


----------



## bonomork

crakej said:


> You could try these timings....I've grouped them - only change 1 group at a time! For a more thorough method, do each timing one at a time, lowering the setting -1
> 
> tRas 30
> tRC 44
> 
> tRRDS 4
> tRRDL 6
> tFAW 24 (probably lower)
> 
> tWRTS 4
> tWRTL 12
> tRW 12 (poss 24)
> 
> tRDRDSCL 2
> tWRWRSCL 2
> 
> tRFC can come down
> 
> tRTP 12 (though 8 MIGHT work better for you here)
> 
> tRDWR 6
> tWRRD AUTO
> 
> The Ryzen Ram Calculator work very well for getting good working timings of course - these are just what I've used in the past with similar RAM. Hope it helps.


Thank you. This what I get from DRAM Calculator


----------



## crakej

bonomork said:


> Thank you. This what I get from DRAM Calculator


You should be able to use those timings fine.... some that I have shown lower may also work for you, but that is a pretty good idea of what I'd set my b-die to!


----------



## gupsterg

TOMRUS said:


> Hmm, are you sure that VDDCR SOC voltage is same thing as SOC voltage? Because all monitoring software shows my SOC voltage around 1.087V which is ok. VDDCR SOC could be something different or Ryzen Master is bugged...


For me Ryzen Master on Crosshair VII Hero will only show set SOC voltage correctly if I set SOC Voltage on Extreme Tweaker as Offset/+/Auto and then adjust SOC Voltage in AMD Overclocking menu (found end of Advanced page). This has been the case on few versions of Ryzen Master, UEFI versions and differing Zen2 CPUs.



Spoiler


----------



## Dollar

I noticed cldo_vddg resets to 0.950v after waking from sleep on the crosshair VI. Does this also happen on the VII?


----------



## crakej

Dollar said:


> I noticed cldo_vddg resets to 0.950v after waking from sleep on the crosshair VI. Does this also happen on the VII?


We have found that UCLK drops to 950MHz after sleep. Hybrid sleeps works ok though.


----------



## Baio73

crakej said:


> We have found that UCLK drops to 950MHz after sleep. Hybrid sleeps works ok though.


So UCLK drop can possibly be the reason why, if I OC the RAM in sign, I get BSOD on the first thing a do after a wakeup.
This does not happen if I leave RAM to AUTO, maybe because @2133MHz even a UCLK value of 950MHz can keep the RAM functioning, but if I set them to 3600 or 4000MHz, maybe BSOD appear as UCLK @950MHz is not enough… can this be true?

How can I check UCLK?
I looked into Ryzen Master but didn't find it.

Baio


----------



## neikosr0x

gupsterg said:


> For me Ryzen Master on Crosshair VII Hero will only show set SOC voltage correctly if I set SOC Voltage on Extreme Tweaker as Offset/+/Auto and then adjust SOC Voltage in AMD Overclocking menu (found end of Advanced page). This has been the case on few versions of Ryzen Master, UEFI versions and differing Zen2 CPUs.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 325092


are you using EDC setting to 1? to get the 4.650 boost on the cores?


----------



## crakej

Baio73 said:


> So UCLK drop can possibly be the reason why, if I OC the RAM in sign, I get BSOD on the first thing a do after a wakeup.
> This does not happen if I leave RAM to AUTO, maybe because @2133MHz even a UCLK value of 950MHz can keep the RAM functioning, but if I set them to 3600 or 4000MHz, maybe BSOD appear as UCLK @950MHz is not enough… can this be true?
> 
> How can I check UCLK?
> I looked into Ryzen Master but didn't find it.
> 
> Baio


I don't think it should cause a BSOD - My machine carries on running - just slower than it should! Try disabling sleep and enabling fast reboot (Hybrid sleep)


----------



## crakej

neikosr0x said:


> are you using EDC setting to 1? to get the 4.650 boost on the cores?


Yes...... No...

I've got EDC at 16, PTT and TDP are at 0. All cores can now boost to 4.6 CCD1, 4.4 on CCD2. ACB on R15/20 is 4.2xGHz+

EDC at 16 helps single core workloads which now boost up to 4.5 on a heavy load. If you have EDC=1 then FIT will keep trying to keep the load below 1A, which you don't want!

This thread has information about what EDC setting is best for which CPU. https://www.overclock.net/forum/13-amd-general/1741052-edc-1-pbo-turbo-boost.html


----------



## gupsterg

As usual my reddit threads tank . Nice finish to day 2 of testing with Micron E die.



gupsterg said:


> For me Ryzen Master on Crosshair VII Hero will only show set SOC voltage correctly if I set SOC Voltage on Extreme Tweaker as Offset/+/Auto and then adjust SOC Voltage in AMD Overclocking menu (found end of Advanced page). This has been the case on few versions of Ryzen Master, UEFI versions and differing Zen2 CPUs.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 325092
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> neikosr0x said:
> 
> 
> 
> are you using EDC setting to 1? to get the 4.650 boost on the cores?
Click to expand...

Nope, CPU is stock.


----------



## crakej

Ryzen Master does not work well for me at all. The newer one often refuses point blank to run, asking me to re-install, or doing nothing at all.

I now get code D3 when loading RM - even if it loads (un)successfully. I have removed and re-installed it a couple of times but no difference - it installs fine then doesn't work.


----------



## Baio73

crakej said:


> I don't think it should cause a BSOD - My machine carries on running - just slower than it should! Try disabling sleep and enabling fast reboot (Hybrid sleep)


I tried those settings with my previous OS installation and had no luck.
Now I've gone through a Windows reinstallation and tried again… and it seems to work with RAM OC @3600 and settings as in post n. 9826:

https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-983.html#post28155608

Monitoring UCLK through HWiNFO64 it seems to follow FCLK settings pre and post Hybrid Sleep.

Baio


----------



## gupsterg

I am now balled over with the price/performance of *Micron E die*  ...

First this screenie, left to right:-


3x AIDA64 for usual timings I use on Samsung B die
3x AIDA64 for current timings I'm using on Micron E die.
Initial testing for the Micron E die profile as used for 3x AIDA64.
3737% RAM Test for 3x AIDA64 3800C16, but VDIMM 1.365V.

Next 12.5K PASS in Kahru RAM Test for 3800C16 1.365V.



Spoiler











Here's an updated ZIP for 3800MH testing so far, organise files by time, Setup means profile set in UEFI, WP means a Warm Post test run, SPx means count of testing on Same Post, when a filename is repeated exactly I'm just capturing data of the same test run but later in it.



crakej said:


> Ryzen Master does not work well for me at all. The newer one often refuses point blank to run, asking me to re-install, or doing nothing at all.
> 
> I now get code D3 when loading RM - even if it loads (un)successfully. I have removed and re-installed it a couple of times but no difference - it installs fine then doesn't work.


Not updated to latest yet. I use it only to capture timings info, etc for my records and sharing with others. All my profiles are UEFI settings based.


----------



## oreonutz

gupsterg said:


> I am now balled over with the price/performance of *Micron E die*  ...
> 
> First this screenie, left to right:-
> 
> 
> 3x AIDA64 for usual timings I use on Samsung B die
> 3x AIDA64 for current timings I'm using on Micron E die.
> Initial testing for the Micron E die profile as used for 3x AIDA64.
> 3737% RAM Test for 3x AIDA64 3800C16, but VDIMM 1.365V.
> 
> Next 12.5K PASS in Kahru RAM Test for 3800C16 1.365V.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> https://youtu.be/sJ9cBKZ2me4
> 
> 
> 
> Here's an updated ZIP for 3800MH testing so far, organise files by time, Setup means profile set in UEFI, WP means a Warm Post test run, SPx means count of testing on Same Post, when a filename is repeated exactly I'm just capturing data of the same test run but later in it.
> 
> 
> 
> Not updated to latest yet. I use it only to capture timings info, etc for my records and sharing with others. All my profiles are UEFI settings based.


Great Post, and amazing find @gupsterg, as always! Somewhat surprising but these tests seem to back up your findings. Love, and appreciate your work as always!

EDIT: @gupsterg, I am curious. What is the current price for both of those kits if we were to go pick them up today?


----------



## gupsterg

oreonutz said:


> Great Post, and amazing find @gupsterg, as always! Somewhat surprising but these tests seem to back up your findings. Love, and appreciate your work as always!
> 
> EDIT: @gupsterg, I am curious. What is the current price for both of those kits if we were to go pick them up today?


Thanks :thumb: , I mainly bought the kit as wanted to experience it first hand rather than all the reads of others I had done. I also found when I read others shares I couldn't see testing I might do. When I saw the kit on promo this week I couldn't resist.

I paid £100 just few days ago for the Crucial Ballistix Sport LT 3200MHz C16 2x16GB kit (BLS2K16G4D32AESB). The G.Skill Ripjaws V 3200MHz C14 4x8GB kit (F4-3200C14Q-32GVK) back in Q1 2018 I was very lucky to even buy at £265, IIRC they were £300+ kit at the time. Samsung B die of 3200MHz C14 isn't cheap even now.


----------



## Baio73

Baio73 said:


> I tried those settings with my previous OS installation and had no luck.
> Now I've gone through a Windows reinstallation and tried again… and it seems to work with RAM OC @3600 and settings as in post n. 9826:
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...vii-overclocking-thread-983.html#post28155608
> 
> Monitoring UCLK through HWiNFO64 it seems to follow FCLK settings pre and post Hybrid Sleep.
> 
> Baio


No way…
Left the pc in hybrid sleep before lunch, came back a few minutes ago and again BSOD as I woke up the pc.
This thing is becoming really upsetting… bought a 4000MHz kit and must use it @2133??

Baio


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> Not updated to latest yet. I use it only to capture timings info, etc for my records and sharing with others. All my profiles are UEFI settings based.


Looks like latest in your screen shots. I only OC in UEFI as well 

I'm going to see what AMD tech support say about it. I've never been keen on RM generating strange Q-Codes while I go about my day....

At the moment, it shows me the splash-screen, then nothing, the the process IS there in memory. I have to kill it off or it tells me it's already running - that's if I don't get the error telling me to re-install!


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> Thanks :thumb: , I mainly bought the kit as wanted to experience it first hand rather than all the reads of others I had done. I also found when I read others shares I couldn't see testing I might do. When I saw the kit on promo this week I couldn't resist.
> 
> I paid £100 just few days ago for the Crucial Ballistix Sport LT 3200MHz C16 2x16GB kit (BLS2K16G4D32AESB). The G.Skill Ripjaws V 3200MHz C14 4x8GB kit (F4-3200C14Q-32GVK) back in Q1 2018 I was very lucky to even buy at £265, IIRC they were £300+ kit at the time. Samsung B die of 3200MHz C14 isn't cheap even now.


I just got a 2nd kit of Patriot Steel 4400c19s (2x8GB) for £100 - all four running at 3733C14 quite nicely  More experimenting to be done with them!


----------



## crakej

Baio73 said:


> No way…
> Left the pc in hybrid sleep before lunch, came back a few minutes ago and again BSOD as I woke up the pc.
> This thing is becoming really upsetting… bought a 4000MHz kit and must use it @2133??
> 
> Baio


I'm not sure what to suggest here - though if it were mine I'd probably be trying slightly higher voltages. What's your GearDown setting? I used to have the 4266s and they had to have GD=ON

Edit: My G.Skills failed before I got my 3900x


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> Looks like latest in your screen shots. I only OC in UEFI as well
> 
> I'm going to see what AMD tech support say about it. I've never been keen on RM generating strange Q-Codes while I go about my day....
> 
> At the moment, it shows me the splash-screen, then nothing, the the process IS there in memory. I have to kill it off or it tells me it's already running - that's if I don't get the error telling me to re-install!


Mine is not latest AFAIK, as I know I have not downloaded a copy in a while  . Latest I also believe allows CPPC changes, which mine doesn't.

You must have been on an earlier version than I use. When I launch RM I'll see d3 then F8 on Q-Code, I believe this also happens on other mobos. I believe from sometimes reading other mobo threads, the AGESA dictates we see the same Q-Codes.



Spoiler
















crakej said:


> I just got a 2nd kit of Patriot Steel 4400c19s (2x8GB) for £100 - all four running at 3733C14 quite nicely  More experimenting to be done with them!


Sweet :thumb: .

I was bit of a disbeliever that perhaps Micron E couldn't do high MHz with stability testing of length. I've just passed ~15.5hrs mixed testing.

This week I saw a R5 3600 going for ~£150 new, then say 2x8GB kit of 3200C16 Micron E ~£55, seen an open box C7HWIFI ~£150. That would be a stonking combo, with possibility of 3800MHz FCLK/UCLK/MEMCLK and once Zen2 is out you got another gen CPU support besides capability of upto 16C/32T.


----------



## nick name

I'm still toying with the idea of putting myself $500 in debt and getting a 3900X, but until then I have to keep playing with my 2700X. And my latest play session yielded some new high scores for me. I hit 2102 in CB15, but didn't screenshot that score because I was going to keep trying and ended up getting distracted. So here is my 2100 score.


----------



## Logue

Hi everyone! I'd like some help to try and tune my memory... I've decided to stay at 1800MHz FCLK because although my 3800X can do 1833 and even 1866 (no POST with 1900), it's kind of unstable and I don't mind the marginal gains I may have by trading it for less stability (it's my daily system and it's not everyday that I want to/can be dealing with instability). So, with that in mind, I'll be staying in the original base clock of my memory as well (its rated for 3600MHz). So, the memory I have is a Corsair kit of 2x8Gb sticks 1R Samsung B-Die C18 - Part number: CMW16GX4M2C3600C18. According to Ryzen DRAM Calc, I could push it to 14-14-14-28, but Windows doesn't seem to like it. I've only tried the timings in the calculator, so right now I'm running with the SAFE setting in the Calc, which gives me these settings:



Spoiler
















This is what Ryzen Master shows:



Spoiler














 
As you can see, I'm not using PBO, just auto overclocking. PBO is disabled in BIOS.
BIOS version 3004 (latest) and latest chipset drivers installed. Windows 10 1903 with latest updates and using AMD Ryzen Balanced Power Plan.
This is a screenshot of what the Ryzen DRAM Calc suggests with the Fast preset:



Spoiler














 
Also, I'm using Global C-States Enabled and some other tweaks. I can't really POST with the FAST settings. Sometimes the system posts, but Windows doesn't finish starting (never get to Login screen, have a BSOD first with different messages everytime). If anyone can give me some tips, I'm all ears (or... eyes, in this case).


----------



## cheddle

hey guys, I just moved to a 3900x and the latest bios (3004 I think, its 1.0.0.4a) 

I notice in Ryzen Master im not able to set PPT/TDC or EDC and they all show incorect values... is this a known issue? many of the other values in Ryzen Master are also broken.

I have tried setting these values manually in AMD CBS with no change to what is shown in ryzen master


----------



## speedgoat

cheddle said:


> hey guys, I just moved to a 3900x and the latest bios (3004 I think, its 1.0.0.4a)
> 
> I notice in Ryzen Master im not able to set PPT/TDC or EDC and they all show incorect values... is this a known issue? many of the other values in Ryzen Master are also broken.
> 
> I have tried setting these values manually in AMD CBS with no change to what is shown in ryzen master


Perhaps you need to uninstall reinstall the chipset ? This usually fixes the RM issues for me


----------



## cheddle

speedgoat said:


> Perhaps you need to uninstall reinstall the chipset ? This usually fixes the RM issues for me


ill give that a go, recommend a method for uninstalling the chipset drivers?


----------



## speedgoat

cheddle said:


> ill give that a go, recommend a method for uninstalling the chipset drivers?


i haven't done really anything special, you can do it from control panel->programs->uninstall.
You are possibly better off if you uninstall RM too and reinstall this after the updated chipset, i had a couple of small issues installing just one of these 2 and leaving the other from before


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> Mine is not latest AFAIK, as I know I have not downloaded a copy in a while  . Latest I also believe allows CPPC changes, which mine doesn't.
> 
> You must have been on an earlier version than I use. When I launch RM I'll see d3 then F8 on Q-Code, I believe this also happens on other mobos. I believe from sometimes reading other mobo threads, the AGESA dictates we see the same Q-Codes.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 325584
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sweet :thumb: .
> 
> I was bit of a disbeliever that perhaps Micron E couldn't do high MHz with stability testing of length. I've just passed ~15.5hrs mixed testing.
> 
> This week I saw a R5 3600 going for ~£150 new, then say 2x8GB kit of 3200C16 Micron E ~£55, seen an open box C7HWIFI ~£150. That would be a stonking combo, with possibility of 3800MHz FCLK/UCLK/MEMCLK and once Zen2 is out you got another gen CPU support besides capability of upto 16C/32T.


I've only just updated RM - the 'old' ver doesn't show CPU and SoC dials at the top like yours...... I also used to get code D3 followed by F8, but now it stops on D3 and goes no further. I'm wondering if it doesn't like me using zero for PPT and EDC, but I see others using that 'bug' that are able to run RM normally

£55 quid for 16GB of ANY DDR4 3200MTs memory is a steal! There are definitely some great deals to be had.


----------



## Synoxia

Is "Max voltage Offset" feature found in "SMU common options" better than extreme tweaker offset? I've noticed that with it VID never exceeds the limit you imposed while with extweaker you would get eg. vid 1.50 but real voltage 1.481v
Also, i've put PPT 125, TDC 80, EDC 125 and my 3700x never reaches 4.400 on 1.0.0.4b... are you sure EDC is not broken?


----------



## Baio73

crakej said:


> I'm not sure what to suggest here - though if it were mine I'd probably be trying slightly higher voltages. What's your GearDown setting? I used to have the 4266s and they had to have GD=ON
> 
> Edit: My G.Skills failed before I got my 3900x


Voltage is set to 1.40v, GD was always set to disabled.
Now I've turned it on and seems to be stable after wakeups… I'm gonna monitor it!
Thanks very much for your help!

Baio


----------



## gupsterg

An updated ZIP for Micron E die 3800MHz mixed testing of ~31hrs continuous uptime, organise files by time.

Filenames at beginning have:-


Setup means test on POST when profile setup in UEFI.
FCP means a full fold POST, ie power supply switched off from wall prior to POST.
FP means a full POST from shutdown.
WP means a warm POST test run.
SPx means count of testing on same Post.
When a filename is repeated exactly, just capturing data of the same test run but later.



crakej said:


> I've only just updated RM - the 'old' ver doesn't show CPU and SoC dials at the top like yours...... I also used to get code D3 followed by F8, but now it stops on D3 and goes no further. I'm wondering if it doesn't like me using zero for PPT and EDC, but I see others using that 'bug' that are able to run RM normally


You must have had an older version for sure. In my screenie, in prior post, recent past Ryzen Master versions:-

v2.0.0.1192
v2.0.1.1233
v2.0.2.1271
v2.1.0.1422

As I was using v2.1.0.1422 you must have been using one prior to that, current is v2.1.1.1472.

Only thing I am aware of, Ryzen Master may not open if it detects other apps that maybe doing monitoring. For example I can have HWINFO open prior to opening RM, but if CPU-Z and or TurboV is open, RM will not launch. So for my screenies I open Ryzen Master, then CPU-Z/TurboV.



crakej said:


> £55 quid for 16GB of ANY DDR4 3200MTs memory is a steal! There are definitely some great deals to be had.


And one with potential to hit 3800MHz is damn fine going, in everyday usage and many benches your not even gonna miss have the slightly tighter timings Samsung B die can do.

Few days ago Crucial updated their product section, prior to this 4000MHz was about the max you could get a kit at, now they too have 4400MHz C19. They have also launched some new ranges, updated heatspreaders, etc.



Spoiler














The 3200MHz C16 kit I got seems to have hit decent timings/performance and stability at 1.365V, gonna be testing lower soon. I read a 21 page thread on OCUK prior to purchase. I can't recall others gaining [email protected], perhaps later kits bin has improved, perhaps I got lucky, dunno. Tempted to try some more of Micron E  .


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> You must have had an older version for sure. In my screenie, in prior post, recent past Ryzen Master versions:-
> 
> v2.0.0.1192
> v2.0.1.1233
> v2.0.2.1271
> v2.1.0.1422
> 
> As I was using v2.1.0.1422 you must have been using one prior to that, current is v2.1.1.1472.
> 
> Only thing I am aware of, Ryzen Master may not open if it detects other apps that maybe doing monitoring. For example I can have HWINFO open prior to opening RM, but if CPU-Z and or TurboV is open, RM will not launch. So for my screenies I open Ryzen Master, then CPU-Z/TurboV.
> 
> 
> And one with potential to hit 3800MHz is damn fine going, in everyday usage and many benches your not even gonna miss have the slightly tighter timings Samsung B die can do.
> 
> Few days ago Crucial updated their product section, prior to this 4000MHz was about the max you could get a kit at, now they too have 4400MHz C19. They have also launched some new ranges, updated heatspreaders, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 325798
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The 3200MHz C16 kit I got seems to have hit decent timings/performance and stability at 1.365V, gonna be testing lower soon. I read a 21 page thread on OCUK prior to purchase. I can't recall others gaining [email protected], perhaps later kits bin has improved, perhaps I got lucky, dunno. Tempted to try some more of Micron E  .


Funny thing is I kept checking for an update within RM and it kept telling me there was 'no update available' and that it was 'up to date'. It's only when I saw screenies with the extra dial I realised there must be a new version, and downloaded it from the AMD web site.

£55! If I hadn't bought this kit I might have bought 4 of those E-Dies! £110 for 32GB!

Edit: If I want to use RM, I have to keep re-installing it because of this error. Then it will run 1st, maybe 2nd time, then it doesn't work again.


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> Funny thing is I kept checking for an update within RM and it kept telling me there was 'no update available' and that it was 'up to date'. It's only when I saw screenies with the extra dial I realised there must be a new version, and downloaded it from the AMD web site.


One version I had it would update if you manually clicked check for update, after it downloaded/installed I had issues  . So after that experience I blocked it in firewall to be able to access the internet  ...



crakej said:


> £55! If I hadn't bought this kit I might have bought 4 of those E-Dies! £110 for 32GB!


You'd have needed a username change cramkej   .

I'm now on same post test 10, uptime of 38hrs. Literally my jaw has dropped on level of stability with very reasonably priced kit. Even though I don't need the low profile design of them, it's plus IMO that is useful and the look has grown on me  .



Spoiler
















crakej said:


> Edit: If I want to use RM, I have to keep re-installing it because of this error. Then it will run 1st, maybe 2nd time, then it doesn't work again.


Dunno chap, not had this.


----------



## xProlific

Logue said:


> Hi everyone! I'd like some help to try and tune my memory... I've decided to stay at 1800MHz FCLK because although my 3800X can do 1833 and even 1866 (no POST with 1900), it's kind of unstable and I don't mind the marginal gains I may have by trading it for less stability (it's my daily system and it's not everyday that I want to/can be dealing with instability). So, with that in mind, I'll be staying in the original base clock of my memory as well (its rated for 3600MHz). So, the memory I have is a Corsair kit of 2x8Gb sticks 1R Samsung B-Die C18 - Part number: CMW16GX4M2C3600C18. According to Ryzen DRAM Calc, I could push it to 14-14-14-28, but Windows doesn't seem to like it. I've only tried the timings in the calculator, so right now I'm running with the SAFE setting in the Calc, which gives me these settings:


What worked for me was setting the Cad Bus Timing User Controls from 0 to the alt value in the calculator for all three options, this was 55 for me at 3600 fast preset. Another thing was trCDRD I keep this at 16 as anything below that gives me instability on my particular set of Ram. Your results may vary but that is what worked for me.


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> Dunno chap, not had this.


Well, it seems to be working 9/10 times now - having installed (and un-installed) it so many times. If it's failing to initialize something is wrong somewhere! I'll call AMD when I can be bothered to go through the whole experience! There were even a couple of times where the installer just installed it - as though it wasn't installed already - usually it wants to un-install 1st.


----------



## Synoxia

Synoxia said:


> Is "Max voltage Offset" feature found in "SMU common options" better than extreme tweaker offset? I've noticed that with it VID never exceeds the limit you imposed while with extweaker you would get eg. vid 1.50 but real voltage 1.481v
> Also, i've put PPT 125, TDC 80, EDC 125 and my 3700x never reaches 4.400 on 1.0.0.4b... *are you sure EDC is not broken*?


EDC turbo boost for me is big no. I dont trust buggy stuff, it also decreases the performance of low intensity tasks like application loading


----------



## gupsterg

An updated ZIP, organise files by time. On Micron E die 3800MHz Phase 1 mixed testing of ~48hrs continuous uptime, Phase 2 I have lowered VDIMM to set value of 1.36V, from past experience with board a read with DMM on Probeit point for this would be ~1.364V.

Filenames at beginning have:-


Setup means test on POST when profile setup in UEFI.
FCP means a full fold POST, ie power supply switched off from wall prior to POST.
FP means a full POST from shutdown.
WP means a warm POST test run.
SPx means count of testing on same Post.
When a filename is repeated exactly, just capturing data of the same test run but later.



crakej said:


> Well, it seems to be working 9/10 times now - having installed (and un-installed) it so many times. If it's failing to initialize something is wrong somewhere! I'll call AMD when I can be bothered to go through the whole experience! There were even a couple of times where the installer just installed it - as though it wasn't installed already - usually it wants to un-install 1st.


Sweet  .


----------



## harderthanfire

gupsterg said:


> An updated ZIP, organise files by time. On Micron E die 3800MHz Phase 1 mixed testing of ~48hrs continuous uptime, Phase 2 I have lowered VDIMM to set value of 1.36V, from past experience with board a read with DMM on Probeit point for this would be ~1.364V.
> 
> Filenames at beginning have:-
> 
> 
> Setup means test on POST when profile setup in UEFI.
> FCP means a full fold POST, ie power supply switched off from wall prior to POST.
> FP means a full POST from shutdown.
> WP means a warm POST test run.
> SPx means count of testing on same Post.
> When a filename is repeated exactly, just capturing data of the same test run but later.
> 
> 
> 
> Sweet  .



I really wish my E die worked this well. Can't seem to get stable timings better than stock D.O.C.P.


----------



## gupsterg

@harderthanfire

You got 3600C16 bin? I've only got 3200C16. It's passed [email protected] for ~24hrs continuous mixed testing now.


----------



## harderthanfire

gupsterg said:


> @*harderthanfire*
> 
> You got 3600C16 bin? I've only got 3200C16. It's passed [email protected] for ~24hrs continuous mixed testing now.



Yeah 3600C16 bin - I am running 4 8gb sticks though which likely isn't helping.


----------



## gupsterg

harderthanfire said:


> Yeah 3600C16 bin - I am running 4 8gb sticks though which likely isn't helping.


Dunno, yeah I'm doing dual rank over RAM PCB, where as your setup is via mobo dimm slots. It could well be the signally defects can occur more via slots/mobo and as C7H is daisy chain, 2 slots are are at a disadvantage.

Surprised though as I've used 4x8GB of Samsung B die single rank/sided, did snag 3800MHz C16 with some nice stock voltages; not got 4 sticks of Micron E (yet!  ). Plus I think you got a R9 3900X, which is supposed to be better for 2 dimms per channel from what The Stilt posted near launch of Matisse.

Last night wrapped up the testing of [email protected] once reached ~24hrs uptime, set 1.355V and continuing today.



Spoiler











Since installing the kit on the 7th of Feb not given it and the rig a break from usage, am impressed with kit. Perhaps there's a lot of variability on them, dunno. These dimms are also 8 layer PCB vs the 10 layer G.Skill kits I've used, so really quite impressed.


----------



## Synoxia

Thank you guys for ignoring me since 5 pages ago, lol


----------



## neikosr0x

Synoxia said:


> Thank you guys for ignoring me since 5 pages ago, lol


awwww, poor guy! You are not alone in this world my friend hahaha lol.


----------



## oreonutz

Synoxia said:


> Is "Max voltage Offset" feature found in "SMU common options" better than extreme tweaker offset? I've noticed that with it VID never exceeds the limit you imposed while with extweaker you would get eg. vid 1.50 but real voltage 1.481v
> Also, i've put PPT 125, TDC 80, EDC 125 and my 3700x never reaches 4.400 on 1.0.0.4b... are you sure EDC is not broken?


I don't know the answer to this unfortunately. But if it helps I will bump it for you...

EDIT: That is an interesting observation about the Max Voltage Offset setting in SMU Common Options, I am going to play with that and see if I can use it to dial in my desired voltage better when using Auto OC. Appreciate the tip!


----------



## crakej

Synoxia said:


> Thank you guys for ignoring me since 5 pages ago, lol


Don't know the answer either - and can only assume EDC does work.

I'm still having problems with RM not working....


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> Don't know the answer either - and can only assume EDC does work.
> 
> I'm still having problems with RM not working....


Hey I have the answer to RM Not working! LOL!


STOP USING IT!!!!! ITS S**T! 

LOL, theres my 2 cents on the matter, lol!

J/K, btw, I know there is valid reasons to use it, I just found ways to get around using it. I find it only necessary to use on OEM Ryzen Builds where there is no other way to OC or Tweak the Processor or Memory, then its valuable software and worth putting up with the Bugs, but on a proper Mobo, screw that damn software package, lol!


----------



## gupsterg

harderthanfire said:


> Yeah 3600C16 bin - I am running 4 8gb sticks though which likely isn't helping.


You're gonna hate my kit :blushsmil ...

[email protected] with Micron E die 2x16GB 3200C16 bin

~9hrs Kahru RAM Test
~10hrs HCI v6.0
~4hrs Y-Cruncher

so far ~23.5hrs continuous uptime testing for that profile.



Synoxia said:


> Is "Max voltage Offset" feature found in "SMU common options" better than extreme tweaker offset? I've noticed that with it VID never exceeds the limit you imposed while with extweaker you would get eg. vid 1.50 but real voltage 1.481v
> Also, i've put PPT 125, TDC 80, EDC 125 and my 3700x never reaches 4.400 on 1.0.0.4b... are you sure EDC is not broken?


The one on Extreme Tweaker is a global offset, ie all states get a +/- as you set, just be aware the SMU can detect these changes (as well as LLC) and decide to intervene as it wish, as this is via VRM controller.

The Max voltage Offset in AMD CBS should only affect peak voltage, ie the max boost of single/low thread count situations, based on silicon characteristics you could lose frequency as then SMU will think if I can't give x juice then I can't give y boost at peak. This was my experience when I last used it. This AFAIK is via SMU, so it knows you set it and should do as you want it to, if you get what I mean.

105W CPU values are 142/95/140, I'd give that to your R7 3700X. TBH I haven't experienced issues of boost on R5 3600, R7 3700X & R9 3900X with 1.0.0.4B. As before, you stated your RAM used to get warmer than say mine, perhaps it's temps which are inhibiting your boost.



Synoxia said:


> EDC turbo boost for me is big no. I dont trust buggy stuff, it also decreases the performance of low intensity tasks like application loading


Not done the PBO values which bug SMU.



Synoxia said:


> Thank you guys for ignoring me since 5 pages ago, lol


I HTH :grouphug: .


----------



## crakej

oreonutz said:


> Hey I have the answer to RM Not working! LOL!
> 
> 
> STOP USING IT!!!!! ITS S**T!
> 
> LOL, theres my 2 cents on the matter, lol!
> 
> J/K, btw, I know there is valid reasons to use it, I just found ways to get around using it. I find it only necessary to use on OEM Ryzen Builds where there is no other way to OC or Tweak the Processor or Memory, then its valuable software and worth putting up with the Bugs, but on a proper Mobo, screw that damn software package, lol!


Couldn't agree more - I don't use it for OCing either! I occasionally run it for monitoring only.

I've tested more by going back to default settings for EVERYTHING, but it fails there too. After doing that test, my fastest core CHANGED on CCD1. I've always had more problems than most with RM, but after updating to latest version I'm having all these failures, so starting to think this is hardware related. I could pop my 1700x and test that, but my board isn't old and not been messed around with like my 'old' CH7. 

Guess if I have to RMA the CPU I'll get another go at the IMC and CCD 'Lottery', though like all lotteries, you can lose!

Also experimented with my XMP profiles earlier, but neither of them work with 4 dimms  With 2 dimms I could OC memory to 4600MTs as well as my XMP speeds (4266, 4400MTs). Any advice on using 4 b-die dimms instead of 2? Working well at 3733CL14 though so not too fussed, the with OCing i was close to 70ns while running 4400/4600


----------



## Synoxia

crakej said:


> Couldn't agree more - I don't use it for OCing either! I occasionally run it for monitoring only.
> 
> I've tested more by going back to default settings for EVERYTHING, but it fails there too. After doing that test, my fastest core CHANGED on CCD1. I've always had more problems than most with RM, but after updating to latest version I'm having all these failures, so starting to think this is hardware related. I could pop my 1700x and test that, but my board isn't old and not been messed around with like my 'old' CH7.
> 
> Guess if I have to RMA the CPU I'll get another go at the IMC and CCD 'Lottery', though like all lotteries, you can lose!
> 
> Also experimented with my XMP profiles earlier, but neither of them work with 4 dimms  With 2 dimms I could OC memory to 4600MTs as well as my XMP speeds (4266, 4400MTs). Any advice on using 4 b-die dimms instead of 2? Working well at 3733CL14 though so not too fussed, the with OCing i was close to 70ns while running 4400/4600


I've uninstalled Ryzen master after hearing it can mess up with CPPC.

I am back on 2901 now... is any modded bios in sight? With spectrum and HPET options?


----------



## netman

Synoxia said:


> is any modded bios in sight? With spectrum and HPET options?


unfortunately nothing - i miss the full control of the fans  ....


----------



## oreonutz

netman said:


> unfortunately nothing - i miss the full control of the fans  ....


I finally Got Sick of it, and Bought an Aquaero. I also have purchased several AquaComputer Quadro's now as well for other builds, and I would HIGHLY recommend those for any one that doesn't need all the extra water cooling features, but just wants to have complete control of their fans, with no limits at all, and sick of ASUS' Fan Controllers. Grab yourself a Quadro on Amazon, its only compatible with PWM fans, but assuming that what you are using anyway, you will love this. 

The Software that comes with it, "Aquasuite", allows you to do a lot of really powerful things, like if you wanted to take 2 Temperature Probes, plug them into the Quadro, stick one in front of the Front Intake, and One after the Exhaust, you can create a Temperature Differential Virtual Sensor between the 2, and then base your fan curves off of that. Once your Curves are setup you never have to open Aquasuite again if you don't want to, and your fan curves will just work. 

The Aquaero is more powerful in this regard because it will actually do the processing necessary for those virtual sensors on board of the Aquaero, meaning you could even disconnect its USB, and boot into Linux and its fan curves will still work, but if you do all your work in Windows, The Quadro will be enough for most people. 

You will no longer have any fan malfunctions, and there is no limit, either High or Low, on how you set your fan curve. You also can import ANY sensor off of HWinfo, or direct from your Mobo, that you want to base your Fan Curve off of, and can do really cool things like set a fan to only turn on at all once a certain temperature is reached, or to have all your fan curves respond to which ever temperature in your system is highest, literally the possibilities are endless. This is the sole reason You see me no longer in here b***hing about ASUS' bugged fan Controller and Super IO Chip, I decided to just stop using it and got something MUCH better.

Rant Over...


----------



## gupsterg

My rig has not had downtime since 07/02/20, I've not experienced issues of fan control on UEFI 3004.

I use:-

CPU_OPT & CPU_FAN to power and provide PWM to Silent Wings 3 140mm 1000 rpm fans.

CHA_FAN1 & CHA_FAN3 provide PWM via 2x 4in1 cables to 7x Arctic Cooling F12 PWM fans, power is via molex on the 4 in 1 cable.

H_AMP provides PWM to EK D5 pump and is powered by molex.

I use Water_In and Water_Out for 2 temperature sensors in water loop, T_Sensor to measure case air intake temperature.

In UEFI all fans/pump are set as PWM, have custom fan profiles, CPU_OPT & CPU_FAN based on CPU temperature and everything else Water_In.


----------



## hurricane28

Me neither, this seems to be a very solid BIOS for me and i am still rocking my 2600x. 

The only "problem" i have is that 3466 MHz is not stable anymore for some reason. No matter what setting i use 3466 MHz can pass TM5 but Windows and games crash.. Maybe the CPU degraded? I am running stock clocks though.


----------



## crakej

I've had no trouble with fans for some time....


----------



## lordzed83

I can say I'm having no problems with 3004. That's why I'm not posting much everything works


----------



## minal

> kernel: mce: [Hardware Error]: CPU 0: Machine Check: 0 Bank 22: faa000000000080b
> kernel: mce: [Hardware Error]: TSC 0 MISC d012000200000000 SYND 5d000000 IPID 1002e00000002
> kernel: mce: [Hardware Error]: PROCESSOR 2:800f82 TIME 1581941715 SOCKET 0 APIC 0 microcode 800820d
> kernel: mce: [Hardware Error]: CPU 10: Machine Check: 0 Bank 5: bea0000000000108
> kernel: mce: [Hardware Error]: TSC 0 ADDR 1ffffb5a17a24 MISC d012000100000000 SYND 4d000000 IPID 500b000000000
> kernel: mce: [Hardware Error]: PROCESSOR 2:800f82 TIME 1581941715 SOCKET 0 APIC 5 microcode 800820d
> kernel: mce: [Hardware Error]: CPU 12: Machine Check: 0 Bank 5: bea0000000000108
> kernel: mce: [Hardware Error]: TSC 0 ADDR 1ffffb568bf9e MISC d012000100000000 SYND 4d000000 IPID 500b000000000
> kernel: mce: [Hardware Error]: PROCESSOR 2:800f82 TIME 1581941715 SOCKET 0 APIC 9 microcode 800820d


I got a spontaneous reboot (no errors in system log) and MCE errors (upon reboot) overnight, while the machine was idle. I haven't made any hardware changes recently... incredibly coming on two years! BIOS settings haven't changed recently either, and I've forgotten which BIOS I'm on or what Vcore offset I used..

I hope it's a fluke (or cosmic rays...) because I really don't feel like getting into hardware/stability testing again.


----------



## bonomork

I'm still on 1103 bios (2700X) and all is fine. Do you think worth to upgrade it and if so to which version ?


----------



## Praetorr

bonomork said:


> I'm still on 1103 bios (2700X) and all is fine. Do you think worth to upgrade it and if so to which version ?


I'm not personally aware of any compelling reason to upgrade unless you're planning to install a Ryzen 3000 series CPU in the near future.


----------



## bonomork

Praetorr said:


> I'm not personally aware of any compelling reason to upgrade unless you're planning to install a Ryzen 3000 series CPU in the near future.


I think i'll skip 3000 series, next upgrade will be Zen 3 if suitable.
I know that the many of recent BIOS are for 3000 series, but I would like to know if there is a better bios for my 2700X (PE 2, I dont plan to use PE 3 or PE4).


----------



## nick name

bonomork said:


> I think i'll skip 3000 series, next upgrade will be Zen 3 if suitable.
> I know that the many of recent BIOS are for 3000 series, but I would like to know if there is a better bios for my 2700X (PE 2, I dont plan to use PE 3 or PE4).


You've probably told me before, but why don't you use PE 3?


----------



## bonomork

nick name said:


> You've probably told me before, but why don't you use PE 3?


As far as I know PE3 doesn't increase the boost speed over 4,35MHz. My 2700X with negative offset .1 is doing 4,1/4,2 all cores and 4,35MHz max boost. Likely I'm missing something, what's the advantage of PE 3 vs. PE 2 ?


----------



## Georgi Velev

Guys, 
I'm having trouble trouble shoothing my CPU. It runs on very high voltages the moment i put it in the socket. The MB is running on the latest bios for the C7H. I have a custom loop that keeps it on around 55C on idle and 75ish during cinebench. 

The current settings when the screenshot was taken are all voltages on auto except SOC which is on 1.1v. PBO set to Auto limits +200Mhz. Ram clocked to 3600 and FCLK 1800. 
I have tried all windows power settings and each except the power saving plan keep the CPU at the same values. Power saver puts it ~1.2V.
It is a 24/7 build that when "idling" has some light load like Chrome on constantly 

Do you have any idea what i might be missing?


----------



## crakej

Georgi Velev said:


> Guys,
> I'm having trouble trouble shoothing my CPU. It runs on very high voltages the moment i put it in the socket. The MB is running on the latest bios for the C7H. I have a custom loop that keeps it on around 55C on idle and 75ish during cinebench.
> 
> The current settings when the screenshot was taken are all voltages on auto except SOC which is on 1.1v. PBO set to Auto limits +200Mhz. Ram clocked to 3600 and FCLK 1800.
> I have tried all windows power settings and each except the power saving plan keep the CPU at the same values. Power saver puts it ~1.2V.
> It is a 24/7 build that when "idling" has some light load like Chrome on constantly
> 
> Do you have any idea what i might be missing?


Enable C-States and DF C-States in the bios.

Check that watts that the cores are using - You will find voltages that 'high' to be normal on Ryzen 3xxx, but usually on light loads using very little power (watts). My CPU you would see 1.5v max on all 12 cores.


----------



## speedgoat

Georgi Velev said:


> Guys,
> I'm having trouble trouble shoothing my CPU. It runs on very high voltages the moment i put it in the socket. The MB is running on the latest bios for the C7H. I have a custom loop that keeps it on around 55C on idle and 75ish during cinebench.
> 
> The current settings when the screenshot was taken are all voltages on auto except SOC which is on 1.1v. PBO set to Auto limits +200Mhz. Ram clocked to 3600 and FCLK 1800.
> I have tried all windows power settings and each except the power saving plan keep the CPU at the same values. Power saver puts it ~1.2V.
> It is a 24/7 build that when "idling" has some light load like Chrome on constantly
> 
> Do you have any idea what i might be missing?


i would suggest you try the bios settings of "1usmus power plan" whatever is present in C7H if i remember well:
Global C-state Control = Enabled
CPPC = Enabled
CPPC Preferred Cores = Enabled
and also perhaps the power plan itself too

perhaps also limit the minimum processor state in whatever power plan you are using, i have it at 30%s


----------



## nick name

bonomork said:


> As far as I know PE3 doesn't increase the boost speed over 4,35MHz. My 2700X with negative offset .1 is doing 4,1/4,2 all cores and 4,35MHz max boost. Likely I'm missing something, what's the advantage of PE 3 vs. PE 2 ?



PE 3 makes the CPU ignore some FIT parameters and allows for the CPU to hold its all-core speed indefinitely. At the same time you don't lose any performance during single and fewer core loads. And with BIOS versions now you can actually set EDC in BIOS to change the multiplier though I still prefer using Ryzen Master to adjust the multiplier at my leisure. 

Previously PPT TDC and EDC had different limits, but now they can all be set to 1000. The only thing that actually impacts is EDC which was previously capped at 168. Now it can affect the multiplier up to around 188.

So what I do is use PE 3 and set EDC to 188 in BIOS (what is set in BIOS is the ceiling in Ryzen Master). With cooler ambient temps that EDC value translates to an all-core multiplier of 4.3GHz at boot. That 4.3GHz isn't stable for all workloads without more cooling though so I reduce EDC to 144 with Ryzen Master (saved profile) for daily use. If I want more speed then I simply increase EDC in Ryzen Master to say 168 and that produces a multiplier of 42.5. And there is granularity there. You can adjust EDC in a manner that allows for .25 multiplier increments.

If ASUS baked this feature into Ryzen 3000 then I probably would have upgraded already. In my opinion it's the most useful feature of the board with Ryzen 2000 CPUs.


----------



## bonomork

nick name said:


> PE 3 makes the CPU ignore some FIT parameters and allows for the CPU to hold its all-core speed indefinitely. At the same time you don't lose any performance during single and fewer core loads. And with BIOS versions now you can actually set EDC in BIOS to change the multiplier though I still prefer using Ryzen Master to adjust the multiplier at my leisure.
> 
> Previously PPT TDC and EDC had different limits, but now they can all be set to 1000. The only thing that actually impacts is EDC which was previously capped at 168. Now it can affect the multiplier up to around 188.
> 
> So what I do is use PE 3 and set EDC to 188 in BIOS (what is set in BIOS is the ceiling in Ryzen Master). With cooler ambient temps that EDC value translates to an all-core multiplier of 4.3GHz at boot. That 4.3GHz isn't stable for all workloads without more cooling though so I reduce EDC to 144 with Ryzen Master (saved profile) for daily use. If I want more speed then I simply increase EDC in Ryzen Master to say 168 and that produces a multiplier of 42.5. And there is granularity there. You can adjust EDC in a manner that allows for .25 multiplier increments.
> 
> If ASUS baked this feature into Ryzen 3000 then I probably would have upgraded already. In my opinion it's the most useful feature of the board with Ryzen 2000 CPUs.


O.K. I will give it a try, cooling is enough (any suggested parameter to be changed in BIOS ?)


----------



## nick name

bonomork said:


> O.K. I will give it a try, cooling is enough (any suggested parameter to be changed in BIOS ?)


Here are some screens:


----------



## nick name

Anyone in the US looking for some good CHEAP Samsung b-die? Newegg has a sale on a kit someone here has.

https://www.newegg.com/patriot-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820225142


----------



## bonomork

Thank you Nick Name, what about CPU temp ?


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Anyone in the US looking for some good CHEAP Samsung b-die? Newegg has a sale on a kit someone here has.
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/patriot-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820225142


And in the UK you can get the 4400MTs kit here https://www.pcdevelopment.co.uk/product/51673043.aspx?src=GoogleShopping just £124.20 in VAT

I have 2 kits of this memory running well at 3733 CL14


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> And in the UK you can get the 4400MTs kit here https://www.pcdevelopment.co.uk/product/51673043.aspx?src=GoogleShopping just £124.20 in VAT
> 
> I have 2 kits of this memory running well at 3733 CL14


I couldn't remember if you had the 4000 or 4400 originally. My bad.


----------



## nick name

bonomork said:


> Thank you Nick Name, what about CPU temp ?


That's hard to speak to. Can you be more specific in your question please.


----------



## bonomork

nick name said:


> That's hard to speak to. Can you be more specific in your question please.


I mean under load (gaming / benchmarks)


----------



## nick name

bonomork said:


> I mean under load (gaming / benchmarks)


My VCORE offset is -.075V (which is stable for 99% of workloads at 4.25GHz) and while gaming my temps are about 25 ~ 35*C above ambient under my 360 AIO with push/pull. In Cinebench the temp is about 40 ~ 45*C above ambient. I idle at around 3 ~ 4*C above ambient. 

Keep in mind that warmer ambient temps will mean the CPU pulls a little more voltage and that will increase the delta a bit.

Edit:
I should also mention that I use an open air case. It's a Thermaltake Core P3.


----------



## samgu

Hi! I have a chance to purchase a brand new CH7 for 165 euros (maybe less). I am building a PC for gaming and was liking for a board with at least a giga lan port and good sound. I was thinking in the Aorus elite X570, but the CH7 looks good for that price. Any thoughts about that? I think hearing from owners would be good to contribute os this decision. Will I lose too much if I get CH7 instead of a X570 (besides PCI-E 4.0)? Thank you!!


----------



## gupsterg

Some timings I've used so far on the Micron E 2x16GB, link.

I managed to get SOC down to 1.025V as well, in this ZIP is most recent testing, 3x AIDA64 link.

Previously on 4x8GB (single sided/rank) when using 3800MHz, I had seen I could set tRTP 5, but it would still be 6 (left screenie). On 2x16GB (dual sided/rank) you can set below 10, but it does not take (right screenie).



Spoiler


----------



## crakej

samgu said:


> Hi! I have a chance to purchase a brand new CH7 for 165 euros (maybe less). I am building a PC for gaming and was liking for a board with at least a giga lan port and good sound. I was thinking in the Aorus elite X570, but the CH7 looks good for that price. Any thoughts about that? I think hearing from owners would be good to contribute os this decision. Will I lose too much if I get CH7 instead of a X570 (besides PCI-E 4.0)? Thank you!!


It's a good board for that price. It had teething troubles like many boards do - but most of us are running pretty satisfactorily currently.

My only thought would be that x570 will more than likely be 'more compatible' with Zen 3 (Ryzen 4xxxx) than x470 - if that's important to you.

AMD are keeping their promise about the CPU socket - but (so far) they have updated the chipset with ever new CPU generation, meaning if we want a CPU to work at it's best, we still have to update our boards. It also means they have to produce new firmware and manufacturers have to then update all their boards, like the CH7.

I've got 3900x on my CH7 and it's bl00dy amazing! Very fast. Very satisfying to use.


----------



## samgu

crakej said:


> samgu said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi! I have a chance to purchase a brand new CH7 for 165 euros (maybe less). I am building a PC for gaming and was liking for a board with at least a giga lan port and good sound. I was thinking in the Aorus elite X570, but the CH7 looks good for that price. Any thoughts about that? I think hearing from owners would be good to contribute os this decision. Will I lose too much if I get CH7 instead of a X570 (besides PCI-E 4.0)? Thank you!!
> 
> 
> 
> It's a good board for that price. It had teething troubles like many boards do - but most of us are running pretty satisfactorily currently.
> 
> My only thought would be that x570 will more than likely be 'more compatible' with Zen 3 (Ryzen 4xxxx) than x470 - if that's important to you.
> 
> AMD are keeping their promise about the CPU socket - but (so far) they have updated the chipset with ever new CPU generation, meaning if we want a CPU to work at it's best, we still have to update our boards. It also means they have to produce new firmware and manufacturers have to then update all their boards, like the CH7.
> 
> I've got 3900x on my CH7 and it's bl00dy amazing! Very fast. Very satisfying to use. /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
Click to expand...

Thank you for your feedback. I understand I am in a terrible to time to build a gaming PC, because Nvidia will present Ampere next month, Intel will bring “new” CPUs in April, big Navi and new Ryzen may come in the next semester. Have I forgot anything? 🙂 Só getting a good deal is what I am more concerned right now, so I can sell the parts I buy now and purchase new one IF I need to. CH7 has everything I want (10 giga Ethernet and pci 4.0 would be nice), and the guy is selling has the original box, invoice and if I buy a MSI RTX 2070 Super he is also selling he may sell both for 600 euros, which makes it even a better deal.


----------



## gupsterg

gupsterg said:


> Some timings I've used so far on the Micron E 2x16GB, link.
> 
> I managed to get SOC down to 1.025V as well, in this ZIP is most recent testing, 3x AIDA64 link.
> 
> Previously on 4x8GB (single sided/rank) when using 3800MHz, I had seen I could set tRTP 5, but it would still be 6 (left screenie). On 2x16GB (dual sided/rank) you can set below 10, but it does not take (right screenie).
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 328498


A member in the Ryzen RAM OC thread pointed out that tRTP needs to be even with GDME, link.

Thanks to the OCN member @2600ryzen post it provoked further investigation. I read a Micron DDR4 white paper and found at end of page 93/top page 94:-



> When operating in 2N gear-down mode, the following MR settings apply:
> 
> • CAS latency (MR0[6:4,2]): Even number of clocks
> • Write recovery and read to precharge (MR0[11:9]): Even number of clocks
> • Additive latency (MR1[4:3]): CL - 2
> • CAS WRITE latency (MR2 A[5:3]): Even number of clocks
> • CS to command/address latency mode (MR4[8:6]): Even number of clocks
> • CA parity latency mode (MR5[2:0]): Even number of clocks


So with GDME below must be even:-

• tCL
• tWR
• tCWL
• tRTP

Now I have tRTP of 8 with 3800MHz  , in turn allowed me to drop tRAS from 45 to 43, tRC from 63 to 61. Not yet benched setup, but seems as if stability maybe attainable.



Spoiler














So surprised this ~£100 32GB kit has some more to give  .

*** edit ***

Passed ~14k% Kahru RAM Test.



Spoiler


----------



## crakej

New Ryzen Master is out for those interested - either need to update or get from AMD site https://www.amd.com/en/technologies/ryzen-master

I only found out because I'm doing warranty check on my CPU. They told me to use the MS Install/uninstall Troubleshooter and try re-installing with the new version.

Will let you know if it continues to work for me....


----------



## gupsterg

Further tweaked BLS2K16G4D32AESB



Spoiler














Kahru RAM Test ~12K% PASS
HCI v6.0 ~300% PASS
Y Cruncher ~1hrs PASS
P95 non AVX 4K 8192K 26GB ~2hrs PASS
RB Stress mode 32GB ~2hrs PASS

Total ~17hrs testing in this ZIP.

I have further enhanced tRFC from 570 to 551, so far ~18hrs testing done and not yet benched it.


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> New Ryzen Master is out for those interested - either need to update or get from AMD site https://www.amd.com/en/technologies/ryzen-master
> 
> I only found out because I'm doing warranty check on my CPU. They told me to use the MS Install/uninstall Troubleshooter and try re-installing with the new version.
> 
> Will let you know if it continues to work for me....


DEATH TO RM!!!

Lol! I know such a helpful post right? LOL! I will bow out now...


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> New Ryzen Master is out for those interested - either need to update or get from AMD site https://www.amd.com/en/technologies/ryzen-master
> 
> I only found out because I'm doing warranty check on my CPU. They told me to use the MS Install/uninstall Troubleshooter and try re-installing with the new version.
> 
> Will let you know if it continues to work for me....


Hmmm, just downloaded and version is same as past version.









Not had an issue with older or current RM for what I use it TBH.


----------



## crakej

It is still working for me! Glad I only use it for monitoring!

I thought the ver no looked the same - but it's definitely different!


----------



## oreonutz

samgu said:


> Thank you for your feedback. I understand I am in a terrible to time to build a gaming PC, because Nvidia will present Ampere next month, Intel will bring “new” CPUs in April, big Navi and new Ryzen may come in the next semester. Have I forgot anything? 🙂 Só getting a good deal is what I am more concerned right now, so I can sell the parts I buy now and purchase new one IF I need to. CH7 has everything I want (10 giga Ethernet and pci 4.0 would be nice), and the guy is selling has the original box, invoice and if I buy a MSI RTX 2070 Super he is also selling he may sell both for 600 euros, which makes it even a better deal.


It is an amazing price for a GREAT BOARD! Is that for a new CH7 Hero on a site somewhere? Or is that a used price for the board somewhere?

I ask because I would love to purchase a few at that price if they are available somewhere.

You will love the board, just pair it with a $100us 10Gbe PCIE Nic, and then you are good to go!


----------



## Synoxia

Hello guys. I am wondering if anyone made a modded bios with HPET and spread spectrum options working on ryzen 3k. 
I want to test myself if these options are working. 
I would like to to test PMT timer. (hpet disabled in bios, forced ON in windows)


----------



## crakej

Synoxia said:


> Hello guys. I am wondering if anyone made a modded bios with HPET and spread spectrum options working on ryzen 3k.
> I want to test myself if these options are working.
> I would like to to test PMT timer. (hpet disabled in bios, forced ON in windows)


It's been removed from the bios as it's NOT recommended by AMD.


----------



## gupsterg

Just wanted to share this ZIP, order files by time, ~49hrs back to back mixed testing of [email protected]

I have owned Zen/Zen+/Zen2, on AM4 & sTR4, used several kits of G.Skill, all Samsung B die, bins 3200C14, 3600C15, 4000C18. None of those have given me the OC buzz that the Crucial Ballistix Sport LT 2x16GB kit (BLS2K16G4D32AESB) have. Main reason being is for ~£100 I got 32GB of DDR4 with nice OC headroom and not lacking in performance vs Samsung B die.

Phenomenal value for sure.



crakej said:


> New Ryzen Master is out for those interested - either need to update or get from AMD site https://www.amd.com/en/technologies/ryzen-master
> 
> I only found out because I'm doing warranty check on my CPU. They told me to use the MS Install/uninstall Troubleshooter and try re-installing with the new version.
> 
> Will let you know if it continues to work for me....
> 
> 
> 
> gupsterg said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm, just downloaded and version is same as past version.
> 
> View attachment 329948
> 
> 
> Not had an issue with older or current RM for what I use it TBH.
> 
> 
> 
> crakej said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is still working for me! Glad I only use it for monitoring!
> 
> I thought the ver no looked the same - but it's definitely different!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Nothing looks differing to me TBH. Even when you click the OC section it allows to you see core performance ordering as OS state vs SMU.

Anyhow enjoy chap  .


----------



## crakej

gupsterg said:


> Nothing looks differing to me TBH. Even when you click the OC section it allows to you see core performance ordering as OS state vs SMU.
> 
> Anyhow enjoy chap  .


Really? The layout of the cores changed as did the colours in the histogram - for me anyway!


----------



## crakej

Been playing with PPT EDC and TDP a bit....

Isn't PPT meant to be the power limit for the CPU in watts? My CPU watts goes up say 40% and goes red. Guess we still have something not right.

I've still had best results using the 'bugged' settings of 0,0,18 for PPT, EDC, TDC


----------



## Synoxia

crakej said:


> It's been removed from the bios as it's NOT recommended by AMD.


AMD doesn't recommend manual overclocking either, you shouldn't always follow their recommendation, we are here because we like to fiddle. It's not like forcing hpet off would burn the processor.


----------



## Synoxia

Guys, which one was the last mtrai or someone else modded bios with HPET exposed that also support ryzen 3k?

And the best memory + manual OC bios?


----------



## Synoxia

Hello i've been trying to mod the c7h bios with a friend. I can confirm HPET is definetely not in the code for these new BIOSES, because otherwise HPET off + bcdedit /set useplatformclock yes should result in 3.7 ACPI timer.

What AMD says doesn't count, even if tsc + hpet works best for them i'd want to try ACPI regardless instead of synthetic tsc 10khz timer >1809 brings.

Anyone knows when did they start to deliberately remove the toggle? Or atleast, what's the earliest bios that supports 3k gen cpu, so we can mod that and test if it works?


----------



## Schmuckley

lordzed83 said:


> @elmor I had a read of PDF file. Some fantastic things upgraded/fixed !!!! XFR finally will be working like I wanted it to on Zen 1 for WoW in 3D player like myself 1 core going that high is EPIC. As it basically runs on 1 core and many games need 1 core when on 3d due to how software is :/
> 
> OO ace You been playing around with der8auer
> https://youtu.be/ogYess5WelY


Isn't that steponz?
I swear I saw him for a minute there. But then it was just Roman, Roman, and more Roman.
Ok. And a torch, and Flanker uses Kingpin pots.

Do I need to show ya'll how to properly rape a chip with a Crosshair VII?

Lemme get a spare for the same price (shoulda bought 2) and I will.

Then buy the LET and all! 

Give me time..6 weeks..2 chips.

No pretty vid like Mr. Roman, just results.

That is top-notch video, kudos!


----------



## nick name

Anyone in the US looking at buying a Ryzen 3900X? Because several places have them on sale for about $419 right now. And that price puts it about the same or cheaper per core than a 3700X.


----------



## Keith Myers

Already have one. A 3950X too. The old 2700X rig would be a good candidate though and I think the 280 CLC could handle it if I kept the clocks restricted.


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> Already have one. A 3950X too. The old 2700X rig would be a good candidate though and I think the 280 CLC could handle it if I kept the clocks restricted.


This might be the time unless you're waiting for the new CPUs. And as always -- pretty envious of all of your rigs. Though I know you're actually doing much more with them than I actually would.


----------



## Schmuckley

lordzed83 said:


> @elmor I had a read of PDF file. Some fantastic things upgraded/fixed !!!! XFR finally will be working like I wanted it to on Zen 1 for WoW in 3D player like myself 1 core going that high is EPIC. As it basically runs on 1 core and many games need 1 core when on 3d due to how software is :/
> 
> OO ace You been playing around with der8auer
> https://youtu.be/ogYess5WelY


I see Steponz.

Oh! And Roman.

God bless Roman, I have learned and profited so much from the info he provides.

Not buying his funky pot, though.


----------



## Schmuckley

Synoxia said:


> AMD doesn't recommend manual overclocking either, you shouldn't always follow their recommendation, we are here because we like to fiddle. It's not like forcing hpet off would burn the processor.


OCN isn't about vendor recommendations, baby! :lachen:

It's about getting what you can out of what the vendors provide, permission or no.

That's real.

Here, XS, I'll even throw [H] in there. HWBot.
No others.


----------



## Keith Myers

nick name said:


> This might be the time unless you're waiting for the new CPUs. And as always -- pretty envious of all of your rigs. Though I know you're actually doing much more with them than I actually would.


I don't know. The $418 price is pretty attractive. I could put a lot more cores to use crunching Einstein Gravity Wave WU's which the 2700X is currently running.

Now that Seti is winding down, I need to pick another cpu project worthy of all the cores I have available.

The cost per core is really attractive with the 3950X though.

Maybe the upcoming Zen 3 cpus will force the same price reductions on the older Zen 2 stack. Later this year obviously.


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> I don't know. The $418 price is pretty attractive. I could put a lot more cores to use crunching Einstein Gravity Wave WU's which the 2700X is currently running.
> 
> Now that Seti is winding down, I need to pick another cpu project worthy of all the cores I have available.
> 
> The cost per core is really attractive with the 3950X though.
> 
> Maybe the upcoming Zen 3 cpus will force the same price reductions on the older Zen 2 stack. Later this year obviously.


Or . . . orrrrrr . . . hear me out here . . . perhaps the Threadripper rig needs some attention? I'm not saying you need to double the cores, but you could. And if you don't mind buying used then you could find a nice drop-in solution.


----------



## Keith Myers

nick name said:


> Or . . . orrrrrr . . . hear me out here . . . perhaps the Threadripper rig needs some attention? I'm not saying you need to double the cores, but you could. And if you don't mind buying used then you could find a nice drop-in solution.


I was really upset I could not move to TR3 without a motherboard change. I do have a good choice on my short list though. The 3960X is enticing.

I'm still awaiting the shipment of my new Optimus Cooling TR block I ordered back in December. I want to push the 2920X further in clocks with better cooling. The 3960X would be handled very well with that block I believe.


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> I was really upset I could not move to TR3 without a motherboard change. I do have a good choice on my short list though. The 3960X is enticing.
> 
> I'm still awaiting the shipment of my new Optimus Cooling TR block I ordered back in December. I want to push the 2920X further in clocks with better cooling. The 3960X would be handled very well with that block I believe.


Completely out of left field -- do you have special coverage for all your PC gear with your homeowner's insurance?


----------



## Keith Myers

nick name said:


> Completely out of left field -- do you have special coverage for all your PC gear with your homeowner's insurance?


No not special coverage. Just general coverage for personal property.


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> No not special coverage. Just general coverage for personal property.


That may be worth asking them about. I believe some offer separate coverage for events that aren't exactly catastrophic loss. Also, I believe some policies cap PC losses regardless of the actual losses. Policies operating under old assumptions of one PC in a household, etc.


----------



## Keith Myers

nick name said:


> That may be worth asking them about. I believe some offer separate coverage for events that aren't exactly catastrophic loss. Also, I believe some policies cap PC losses regardless of the actual losses. Policies operating under old assumptions of one PC in a household, etc.


I believe I am covered for all PC's. I asked them about that back when I started building up the farm. I also asked about the astrophotography gear and the stereo gear.


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> I believe I am covered for all PC's. I asked them about that back when I started building up the farm. I also asked about the astrophotography gear and the stereo gear.


Smart man. 

Alright tomorrow is when the new 3900X gets here. Anyone want any direct comparisons between a 2700X and a 3900X I might be able to make happen?


----------



## Keith Myers

nick name said:


> Smart man.
> 
> Alright tomorrow is when the new 3900X gets here. Anyone want any direct comparisons between a 2700X and a 3900X I might be able to make happen?


Maybe a quick outline showing clocks achieved for memory and cores. Temp comparisons under the same loading.

Higher memory clocks are the biggest differences. The IMC in the Ryzen 3000 is a lot more robust than the Zen+ models.


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> Maybe a quick outline showing clocks achieved for memory and cores. Temp comparisons under the same loading.
> 
> Higher memory clocks are the biggest differences. The IMC in the Ryzen 3000 is a lot more robust than the Zen+ models.


With the 2700X I run PE 3 which ignores FIT parameters and holds all-core speeds at a fixed multiplier. I've been setting it to run a 41 multiplier for daily use, but can get it up to 43 for things like gaming. It wouldn't be stable at all workloads that high though. I'll do some benchmark runs to log temps later in the day when the ambient in the room goes up. 

And my particular 2700X runs the following for RAM daily @ 1.47V and SOC 1.0V on a Samsung 2x8GB 3600CL15 b-die kit. I'm excited to see what this kit will do with the new IMC.


----------



## nick name

Soooooo 3900X installed and I wanted to do some base runs with everything set to Auto with nothing setup except my fans. What I've found is that leaving Memory Clock and IF set to Auto causes the system to hang frequently to the point of being unusable. And even setting those to match the RAM at 2133MHz causes the same thing. The only thing that seems to fix it is enabling DOCP and setting IF to 1800. 

Is this a known issue? I don't remember anyone mentioning it, but I very likely missed it. BIOS 3004.

And it took me a good minute to figure out due to the hangs and so I couldn't reset HWiNFO to watch Memory Clock and IF fluctuating as they were left on Auto. That's when I figured it out.


----------



## nick name

Will you guys forgive me if I ask questions about things you have all likely discussed already? I read a lot of it at the time, but since it didn't pertain to me I can't recollect it now.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Will you guys forgive me if I ask questions about things you have all likely discussed already? I read a lot of it at the time, but since it didn't pertain to me I can't recollect it now.


Of course we don't mind!

As far as your problem above goes, I don't remember that happening for me. I'm guessing you've already reset the bios defaults? You could try reinstalling the chipset drivers and R Master....

I'll let you know if I think of anything!


----------



## Synoxia

Hello guys. If one wanted to max out C7H hero VRM and stability potential for a benchmark/high manual OC, what do i have to do? I increased cpu 140% current capability, vrm and sb spread spectrum disabled, both VRM options to Extreme (power duty and the other one) with frequency 500khz. 
I use LLC 5 because Bz tested that it doesn't overshoot but just hold steady voltage. What else i can do? I modded my own bios so i have all options available. 
Does Clock amplitude High help in stability?


----------



## Keith Myers

I never have installed any chipset drivers since Linux. Same for RM. I get JEDEC 2100 if I reset or reflash the BIOS and it boots always. Then I set DOCP to get it to read the DIMM SPD's. So that gets me to 3200. I then set my fans and turn off the unnecessary junk on the motherboard and save that as Default profile. Then can always return to base stock. Then change the core clocks and memory clocks to overclock profiles.

Never had any of my Ryzen's not boot to the BIOS. Have had some cases of the Threadripper hanging though which required a reflash of the BIOS to get back to the BIOS.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Of course we don't mind!
> 
> As far as your problem above goes, I don't remember that happening for me. I'm guessing you've already reset the bios defaults? You could try reinstalling the chipset drivers and R Master....
> 
> I'll let you know if I think of anything!


I started to think it was all those things even though I made sure everything was up-to-date before the switch before I dropped the new CPU in, but then I was finally able to see the Memory Clock and IF changing at the same time and not to the same speed and noticed that it coincided with the hangs. 

Another odd thing is that setting BCLK to 100.2 makes the CPU stay at a multiplier of 38. I wanna say someone made mention of something like this.


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> I never have installed any chipset drivers since Linux. Same for RM. I get JEDEC 2100 if I reset or reflash the BIOS and it boots always. Then I set DOCP to get it to read the DIMM SPD's. So that gets me to 3200. I then set my fans and turn off the unnecessary junk on the motherboard and save that as Default profile. Then can always return to base stock. Then change the core clocks and memory clocks to overclock profiles.
> 
> Never had any of my Ryzen's not boot to the BIOS. Have had some cases of the Threadripper hanging though which required a reflash of the BIOS to get back to the BIOS.


Luckily my PC booted right up after the CPU was installed. I made sure to clear CMOS before I pulled the old 2700X out.


----------



## nick name

@crakej What temps are you seeing on your 3900X? At stock my CPU is getting up to 69*C (CCD1) and 73*C (CCD2) during Cinebench 15 runs with this mostly stock setup. The ambient in this room is 29*C at the moment so please keep that in mind if you're comparing my temps directly to yours. 

At idle temp is 32.5*C (CCD1) and 37.3*C (CCD2).


----------



## PolRoger

nick name... 

My 3900X PBO DOCP 3733C17 kit running (all core/thread) World Community Grid load:


----------



## nick name

PolRoger said:


> nick name...
> 
> My 3900X PBO DOCP 3733C17 kit running (all core/thread) World Community Grid load:


I appreciate that I just can't relate. I don't know what that workload is similar to. I did notice that your CCD1 and CCD2 idle temps are basically the same. Mine are 5*C different.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Been playing with PPT EDC and TDP a bit....
> 
> Isn't PPT meant to be the power limit for the CPU in watts? My CPU watts goes up say 40% and goes red. Guess we still have something not right.
> 
> I've still had best results using the 'bugged' settings of 0,0,18 for PPT, EDC, TDC


How are you setting those? I can't find them in BIOS anymore. There aren't where they were with the 2700X installed.


----------



## PolRoger

nick name said:


> I appreciate that I just can't relate. I don't know what that workload is similar to. I did notice that your CCD1 and CCD2 idle temps are basically the same. Mine are 5*C different.


It is a pretty (constant) high stress work load... Probably similar to running something like ASUS RealBench?... But not as hard/stressful as AVX/FMA enabled Prime 95 small fft.

If you want I could run a PBO CB R20 run on my setup for you?


----------



## nick name

PolRoger said:


> It is a pretty (constant) high stress work load... Probably similar to running something like ASUS RealBench?... But not as hard/stressful as AVX/FMA enabled Prime 95 small fft.
> 
> If you want I could run a PBO CB R20 run on my setup for you?


Do you have CB15? If not I won't say no to a CB20 run. Many thanks. 

What are you using for cooling?


----------



## PolRoger

nick name said:


> Do you have CB15? If not I won't say no to a CB20 run. Many thanks.
> 
> What are you using for cooling?


Yes I can run a CB R15...

Foe cooling I'm running open bench style with custom water... On this setup... XSPC "thick" 360 rad with Swiftech MCP 655 pump and a Corsair XC7 water block.

To find PBO limits in BIOS go to Advanced tab: AMD Overclocking:


----------



## PolRoger

nick name...

CB R15 PBO DOCP:


----------



## nick name

@PolRoger In regards to my differing CCD temps I wanna say my AIO cold plate may be less than flat. That or my 2700X and 3900X both have not flat IHS.

And I thought I had looked through everything in BIOS. Thanks for that.


----------



## PolRoger

nick name said:


> In regards to my differing CCD temps I wanna say my AIO cold plate may be less than flat. That or my 2700X and 3900X both have not flat IHS.
> 
> And I thought I had looked through everything in BIOS. Thanks for that.


Maybe it is the flatness of your cold plate or the IHS or perhaps the mount pressure is slightly off?...

But also remember the 3950X and 3900X have two chiplet(s) under the IHS and AMD bins them differently usually one stronger and one not so strong. You could also have variations in silicon with one chiplet being more towards lower leakage (runs hotter) and one being somewhat higher leakage (runs cooler). It could also be that the cooling fins cut into the bottom of your particular cold plate don't have 100% complete coverage over the offset location of both CCD chiplets under IHS? Anyways I've noticed/seen temp variations between CCD before.


----------



## gupsterg

nick name said:


> @crakej What temps are you seeing on your 3900X? At stock my CPU is getting up to 69*C (CCD1) and 73*C (CCD2) during Cinebench 15 runs with this mostly stock setup. The ambient in this room is 29*C at the moment so please keep that in mind if you're comparing my temps directly to yours.
> 
> At idle temp is 32.5*C (CCD1) and 37.3*C (CCD2).


I had 3x R9 3900X, same batch code, etc, only serials differed, see this post. Other tests I did from about here.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> @crakej What temps are you seeing on your 3900X? At stock my CPU is getting up to 69*C (CCD1) and 73*C (CCD2) during Cinebench 15 runs with this mostly stock setup. The ambient in this room is 29*C at the moment so please keep that in mind if you're comparing my temps directly to yours.
> 
> At idle temp is 32.5*C (CCD1) and 37.3*C (CCD2).


Here's a CB15 run on my 3900x. I should note I don't currently have the best settings as have been experimenting, but pretty much there.....


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Here's a CB15 run on my 3900x. I should note I don't currently have the best settings as have been experimenting, but pretty much there.....


What is Zen2 Timing Checker?


----------



## Keith Myers

> That or my 2700X and 3900X both have not flat IHS.


Guaranteed that they are not. Every one of my cpus has had a concavity in one plane and convexity in the other plane. The only way to get a flat IHS is to sand it down.


----------



## Keith Myers

> It could also be that the cooling fins cut into the bottom of your particular cold plate don't have 100% complete coverage over the offset location of both CCD chiplets under IHS?


Agree on the comment about one good die and one so-so die.

Also why I am so thrilled to have the new Optimus Cooling Foundation blocks on my 3900X and 3950X. The fin-stack array is large enough to cover both dies and the jet plate is positioned ideally to cool all the chiplets including the IOD.


----------



## Hale59

nick name said:


> What is Zen2 Timing Checker?


https://www.computerbase.de/forum/threads/amd-ryzen-ram-oc-community.1829356/page-893#post-23529759


----------



## nick name

Hale59 said:


> https://www.computerbase.de/forum/threads/amd-ryzen-ram-oc-community.1829356/page-893#post-23529759


Thank you for that.


----------



## nick name

Something weird that's happened a good handful of times today is the CPU running loads at less than 2 GHz per core. I can't figure out why either.


----------



## neikosr0x

nick name said:


> Something weird that's happened a good handful of times today is the CPU running loads at less than 2 GHz per core. I can't figure out why either.


It happened to me a week ago, when i was testing the PBO bug. I left my PC idling just downloading something and when i came back all cores were around the 2ghz mark temps were normal and voltages normal on the low side of course. Restarted my system without PBO and everything went back to normal i did try the PBO thing again and it worked just fine but since i was just testing i reverted back to stock.


----------



## PolRoger

Keith Myers said:


> Agree on the comment about one good die and one so-so die.
> 
> Also why I am so thrilled to have the new Optimus Cooling Foundation blocks on my 3900X and 3950X. The fin-stack array is large enough to cover both dies and the jet plate is positioned ideally to cool all the chiplets including the IOD.


I'm also running a Foundation block on a 3950X setup... Nice high quality water blocks. 

I've noticed some of your previous comments about SETI shutting down at the end of the month. If you are looking for another project to contribute some "crunching cycles" to?? Perhaps World Community Grid? You may already belong to another team/projects but I'm participating in a smaller team over at TechPowerUp Forums and we would always welcome a new member. 

https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/forums/world-community-grid-wcg.68/

https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/seti-at-home-shutting-down/


----------



## Keith Myers

PolRoger said:


> I'm also running a Foundation block on a 3950X setup... Nice high quality water blocks.
> 
> I've noticed some of your previous comments about SETI shutting down at the end of the month. If you are looking for another project to contribute some "crunching cycles" to?? Perhaps World Community Grid? You may already belong to another team/projects but I'm participating in a smaller team over at TechPowerUp Forums and we would always welcome a new member.
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/forums/world-community-grid-wcg.68/
> 
> https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/seti-at-home-shutting-down/


Thanks for the invite. Will stick with my present GPUUG team. Already crunching for other projects for ten years. Will just move resource shares at the end of Seti. Probably will add another cpu project and likely will be Universe.


----------



## nick name

neikosr0x said:


> It happened to me a week ago, when i was testing the PBO bug. I left my PC idling just downloading something and when i came back all cores were around the 2ghz mark temps were normal and voltages normal on the low side of course. Restarted my system without PBO and everything went back to normal i did try the PBO thing again and it worked just fine but since i was just testing i reverted back to stock.


Thank you. Yeah, I read the Stilt's post on the EDC bug and it pointed to the EDC bug and using an EDC too low will cause this. He said, though, it's helpful for finding the optimal EDC value as you just increase EDC by one above the value that creates the slowdown.


----------



## nick name

I still can't get BCLK above 100 without the multiplier locking at 38 though. Does anyone remember a cause for this and a solution?


----------



## nick name

I'm running 3800MHz/1900MHz and the only voltage I set was DRAM and SOC. Leaving the rest on Auto I assumed would produce predictable results as I understood VDDG to be a derived from SOC. However Ryzen Master shows much higher voltage than I expected. Is an explanation available? Is concern warranted? Instruction welcomed.


----------



## gupsterg

nick name said:


> I'm running 3800MHz/1900MHz and the only voltage I set was DRAM and SOC. Leaving the rest on Auto I assumed would produce predictable results as I understood VDDG to be a derived from SOC. However Ryzen Master shows much higher voltage than I expected. Is an explanation available? Is concern warranted? Instruction welcomed.


Ryzen Master shows you set and not actual.

As you have OC'd FCLK/UCLK/MEMCLK, as per AMD AGESA "auto rule" (know this from past discussions with The Stilt) CLDO_VDDP & CLDO_VDDG set value has increased. It will still be capped by set value of SOC.

I set SOC on Extreme Tweaker on Offset/Auto/+, then set SOC/CLDO_VDDP/CLDO_VDDG within AMD OC menu, then Ryzen Master reflects them accurately.

CLDO_VDDP/CLDO_VDDG stock is 0.9V/0.95V, to get this I need to set UEFI as 901mV/951mv, then Ryzen Master shows 0.9V/0.95V. In my experience, if I change values of CLDO_VDDP/CLDO_VDDG in steps of ~+/-3mV, then set value in UEFI shows correctly in Ryzen Master.


----------



## nick name

gupsterg said:


> Ryzen Master shows you set and not actual.
> 
> As you have OC'd FCLK/UCLK/MEMCLK, as per AMD AGESA "auto rule" (know this from past discussions with The Stilt) CLDO_VDDP & CLDO_VDDG set value has increased. It will still be capped by set value of SOC.
> 
> I set SOC on Extreme Tweaker on Offset/Auto/+, then set SOC/CLDO_VDDP/CLDO_VDDG within AMD OC menu, then Ryzen Master reflects them accurately.
> 
> CLDO_VDDP/CLDO_VDDG stock is 0.9V/0.95V, to get this I need to set UEFI as 901mV/951mv, then Ryzen Master shows 0.9V/0.95V. In my experience, if I change values of CLDO_VDDP/CLDO_VDDG in steps of ~+/-3mV, then set value in UEFI shows correctly in Ryzen Master.


I set VDDG 1.0V as I have SOC set to 1.1V and that reflects in Ryzen Master. I left VDDP on Auto though. What should I set that to? Is there a rule for it? I can't remember what or if I read about it.


----------



## gupsterg

nick name said:


> I set VDDG 1.0V as I have SOC set to 1.1V and that reflects in Ryzen Master. I left VDDP on Auto
> though. What should I set that to?


What you need, stock is 0.9V.



nick name said:


> Is there a rule for it? I can't remember what or if I read about it.


Only things I am aware of are:-

i) SOC voltage dictates and caps what CLDO_VDDP & CLDO_VDDG can be.

ii) There needs to be ~40mV gap between SOC (effective voltage) and CLDO_VDDG, for CLDO_VDDG to be as you requested. For example you set SOC as 1025mV in UEFI, effective is 1000mV, then effective CLDO_VDDG won't go past ~960mV even if you request higher, as there is some loss from what I understood from The Stilt's post, link.

iii) Due to the loss stated on CLDO_VDDG I would assume a similar loss exists on CLDO_VDDP, so again you'd need a gap between it and SOC for it to apply as set.


----------



## nick name

gupsterg said:


> What you need, stock is 0.9V.
> 
> 
> 
> Only things I am aware of are:-
> 
> i) SOC voltage dictates and caps what CLDO_VDDP & CLDO_VDDG can be.
> 
> ii) There needs to be ~40mV gap between SOC (effective voltage) and CLDO_VDDG, for CLDO_VDDG to be as you requested. For example you set SOC as 1025mV in UEFI, effective is 1000mV, then effective CLDO_VDDG won't go past ~960mV even if you request higher, as there is some loss from what I understood from The Stilt's post, link.
> 
> iii) Due to the loss stated on CLDO_VDDG I would assume a similar loss exists on CLDO_VDDP, so again you'd need a gap between it and SOC for it to apply as set.



Many thanks, good sir. 

I'm trying to get FCLK higher than 1900MHz to POST but it keeps stopping at post code 07. I've tried more voltage on SOC and VDDG, but haven't made any adjustments to VDDP. Would you expect any change in behavior if I were to set VDDP manually?


----------



## nick name

Baaahhhhhhh. This BCLK thing is driving me nuts. Anything above 100 makes the CPU multiplier stay at 38. I can't figure this out.


----------



## gupsterg

nick name said:


> Many thanks, good sir.


NP  



nick name said:


> I'm trying to get FCLK higher than 1900MHz to POST but it keeps stopping at post code 07. I've tried more voltage on SOC and VDDG, but haven't made any adjustments to VDDP. Would you expect any change in behaviour if I were to set VDDP manually?


Perhaps.

Q-Code: 07 for me so far has only happened when I push FCLK too high.

I've had so far 5x Zen2, 1x R5 3600, 1x R7 3700X and 3x R9 3900X. The R5 3600 & R9 3900X (1 of 3) I have used the most, these are the only 2 CPUs that I gained 3800MHz 1:1:1.

I've manually set stock SOC/CLDO_VDDP/CLDO_VDDG and then bumped as needed.

For 3800MHz 1:1:1, I set in UEFI for:

i) R5 3600 SOC: 1.062V/ CLDO_VDDP:0.927V / CLDO_VDDG:0.977V.

ii) R9 3900X SOC: 1.025V/ CLDO_VDDP:0.901V / CLDO_VDDG:0.951V.

The R5 3600X I have used with 2x8GB & 4x8GB Samsung B die. The R9 3900X I have used with 4x8GB Samsung B die and 2x16GB Micron E die.

By tweaking BCLK below is max FCLK I can gain on each CPU.



Spoiler



R5 3600 Batch Code: BF 1922SUT









R9 3900X Batch Code: BF 1944SUT


----------



## nick name

gupsterg said:


> NP
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps.
> 
> Q-Code: 07 for me so far has only happened when I push FCLK too high.
> 
> I've had so far 5x Zen2, 1x R5 3600, 1x R7 3700X and 3x R9 3900X. The R5 3600 & R9 3900X (1 of 3) I have used the most, these are the only 2 CPUs that I gained 3800MHz 1:1:1.
> 
> I've manually set stock SOC/CLDO_VDDP/CLDO_VDDG and then bumped as needed.
> 
> For 3800MHz 1:1:1, I set in UEFI for:
> 
> i) R5 3600 SOC: 1.062V/ CLDO_VDDP:0.927V / CLDO_VDDG:0.977V.
> 
> ii) R9 3900X SOC: 1.025V/ CLDO_VDDP:0.901V / CLDO_VDDG:0.951V.
> 
> The R5 3600X I have used with 2x8GB & 4x8GB Samsung B die. The R9 3900X I have used with 4x8GB Samsung B die and 2x16GB Micron E die.
> 
> By tweaking BCLK below is max FCLK I can gain on each CPU.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> R5 3600 Batch Code: BF 1922SUT
> 
> View attachment 332618
> 
> 
> R9 3900X Batch Code: BF 1944SUT
> 
> View attachment 332620


Damn it. So you've been able to use BCLK without problems? It's driving me nuts that I can't get it to work. I've used Ryzen Master to get it going after boot, but that's extremely annoying.

I'm also trying to get my RAM stable. It's functionally stable, but ends up with about 15 errors after 5 hours of Karhu. I've tried a little more voltage though that produced the same result so I'm backing timings off a wee bit. 

What was fun was running 4400MHz with ease. Not stable, but how quickly the board can POST with it seemed very promising. And seeing 60000MB+ across Read Write and Copy is also fun.


----------



## nick name

Has anyone else created a Windows shortcut to reboot into UEFI? God I wish I had googled this before.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Has anyone else created a Windows shortcut to reboot into UEFI? God I wish I had googled this before.


No! That would be very handy!

I know some have had their memory faster than 1900FCLK, but not many. What voltage you hitting the ram with? You could try hitting it with 1.5v to see if it's bootable.

Ryzen Timing Checker 2 - I did mean to post the link as well, completely forgot then been busy!


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> No! That would be very handy!
> 
> I know some have had their memory faster than 1900FCLK, but not many. What voltage you hitting the ram with? You could try hitting it with 1.5v to see if it's bootable.
> 
> Ryzen Timing Checker 2 - I did mean to post the link as well, completely forgot then been busy!


It is handy! I typed it up. You can also google it to find my source at https://www.tenforums.com/tutorials...boot-uefi-firmware-settings-windows-10-a.html

https://www.overclock.net/forum/13-...membench-0-8-dram-bench-685.html#post28367238

I typed it up because I had to go through the comments to find a solution to it taking a while to reboot and I added that solution into my command. 

I've also been running 1.5V on DRAM and no other higher voltages get me a boot faster than 1900MHz.


----------



## Krisztias

Wohooo:


----------



## nick name

Krisztias said:


> Wohooo:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...ature=emb_logo


So that link seems to be broken.


----------



## Krisztias

nick name said:


> So that link seems to be broken.


corrected


----------



## nick name

Krisztias said:


> corrected


I saw that video, but Der8auer doesn't show any temps.

Edit:

New video with temps.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Funny thing is I kept checking for an update within RM and it kept telling me there was 'no update available' and that it was 'up to date'. It's only when I saw screenies with the extra dial I realised there must be a new version, and downloaded it from the AMD web site.
> 
> £55! If I hadn't bought this kit I might have bought 4 of those E-Dies! £110 for 32GB!
> 
> Edit: If I want to use RM, I have to keep re-installing it because of this error. Then it will run 1st, maybe 2nd time, then it doesn't work again.


Did you get your Ryzen Master sorted? There is a registry trick that fixes it. I found it with google.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Did you get your Ryzen Master sorted? There is a registry trick that fixes it. I found it with google.


Thanks for the shortcut!

I never have to bash my delete key - I just press it when my keyboard becomes live after post, if you see a code 99 you know it's going into the bios. Very occasionally it doesn't work, but I'd say 99.9% of the time I only press it once  Shortcut does make thing real easy though!

Now I have the latest RM it seems to be working ok. However, why does Windows not select the fastest cores my system selects?

On my 3900x, Windows favourite cores are both on CCX0 of CCD1, which doesn't make any sense when you have 2 CCDs right?

Is there now a way to make Windows use the system selected fastest cores?


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Thanks for the shortcut!
> 
> I never have to bash my delete key - I just press it when my keyboard becomes live after post, if you see a code 99 you know it's going into the bios. Very occasionally it doesn't work, but I'd say 99.9% of the time I only press it once  Shortcut does make thing real easy though!
> 
> Now I have the latest RM it seems to be working ok. However, why does Windows not select the fastest cores my system selects?
> 
> On my 3900x, Windows favourite cores are both on CCX0 of CCD1, which doesn't make any sense when you have 2 CCDs right?
> 
> Is there now a way to make Windows use the system selected fastest cores?


The 1usmus power plan is supposed to force use of best cores whereas Windows doesn't.


----------



## pschorr1123

crakej said:


> Thanks for the shortcut!
> 
> I never have to bash my delete key - I just press it when my keyboard becomes live after post, if you see a code 99 you know it's going into the bios. Very occasionally it doesn't work, but I'd say 99.9% of the time I only press it once  Shortcut does make thing real easy though!
> 
> Now I have the latest RM it seems to be working ok. However, why does Windows not select the fastest cores my system selects?
> 
> On my 3900x, Windows favourite cores are both on CCX0 of CCD1, which doesn't make any sense when you have 2 CCDs right?
> 
> Is there now a way to make Windows use the system selected fastest cores?


Robert Hallock did a post on reddit that answers your question: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/dzjs7i/fastest_cores_is_windows_right_or_ryzen_master/


----------



## PolRoger

I've been testing some faster/tighter memory settings for my setup vs. XMP/Auto sub timings...

Last night I was running/testing 3600/3733 15-15-15-15-30 GDM (disabled) and today I thought I'd see if I could run/dial in a 3800C16 GDM enabled...

I've noticed that some of you all like to run C14 with tight subs! 

For me I'm not sure that it is worth the higher voltages needed to stabilize? Maybe its fine to achieve better benchmarking results but is it really necessary for daily use??

PBO 3800C16 with DRAM voltage @1.375v BIOS a quick 1hr. AIDA64 memory/cache stress:


----------



## crakej

pschorr1123 said:


> Robert Hallock did a post on reddit that answers your question: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/dzjs7i/fastest_cores_is_windows_right_or_ryzen_master/


Thank you! Don't know how I missed this!

I'm still a little mystified - though I'm guessing the higher temp of using 2 cores on one CCX is still better than the load crossing CCXs.

He also states that the preferred cores are 'burned in' at the factory - but on my CPU, they have changed - once. I know others have had theirs change too.


----------



## pschorr1123

crakej said:


> Thank you! Don't know how I missed this!
> 
> I'm still a little mystified - though I'm guessing the higher temp of using 2 cores on one CCX is still better than the load crossing CCXs.
> 
> He also states that the preferred cores are 'burned in' at the factory - but on my CPU, they have changed - once. I know others have had theirs change too.


I think that varies by AGESA and he stated in one of his Youtube interviews that in the future RM and Windows were going to be more consistent but that wouldn't be possible if they were indeed "burned in" at the factory. IDK, I prefer the older way of binning cores to hit max boost clocks as this 1/1000th of a second on a couple select cores leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I see stuff getting bounced around different cores via the scheduler like musical chairs. Even CB 15 single will bounce between 2 cores. I used to think maybe it did that intentionally to reduce heat in such a small area of the die but have not read anything to indicate any truth to that. IMO they could have lowered the advertised max boost by 100mhz then the placebo "Auto OC" setting might have actually done something on more than just the 3600.


----------



## speedgoat

pschorr1123 said:


> I think that varies by AGESA and he stated in one of his Youtube interviews that in the future RM and Windows were going to be more consistent but that wouldn't be possible if they were indeed "burned in" at the factory. IDK, I prefer the older way of binning cores to hit max boost clocks as this 1/1000th of a second on a couple select cores leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I see stuff getting bounced around different cores via the scheduler like musical chairs. Even CB 15 single will bounce between 2 cores. I used to think maybe it did that intentionally to reduce heat in such a small area of the die but have not read anything to indicate any truth to that.


i never got Hallock's explanation about firmware generated core ranking given that i noticed a few times the core priorities changing in my system, i believe even with the same AGESA in use


----------



## PolRoger

nick name said:


> I still can't get BCLK above 100 without the multiplier locking at 38 though. Does anyone remember a cause for this and a solution?





nick name said:


> Baaahhhhhhh. This BCLK thing is driving me nuts. Anything above 100 makes the CPU multiplier stay at 38. I can't figure this out.


I was looking into this on my setups... 

It seems that for ASUS motherboards (perhaps other brands as well?) when you manually set BCLK above 100 it will disable Core Performance Boost which caps your 3000 series processor at its base default speed/voltage (so for a 3900X ~3.8GHz/1.1v). 

The only way I've found so far to run higher BCLK at higher overclocks is to run a manually static overclock with a manually set vcore. It looks to me like the PBO auto/boosting features won't function above 100 bclk?? This behavior is consistent across ASUS X370/X470 and X570 chipsets.

3900X @42.75x with 1.30v BIOS LLC level 1 3800C16:


----------



## nick name

PolRoger said:


> I was looking into this on my setups...
> 
> It seems that for ASUS motherboards (perhaps other brands as well?) when you manually set BCLK above 100 it will disable Core Performance Boost which caps your 3000 series processor at its base default speed/voltage (so for a 3900X ~3.8GHz/1.1v).
> 
> The only way I've found so far to run higher BCLK at higher overclocks is to run a manually static overclock with a manually set vcore. It looks to me like the PBO auto/boosting features won't function above 100 bclk?? This behavior is consistent across ASUS X370/X470 and X570 chipsets.
> 
> 3900X @42.75x with 1.30v BIOS LLC level 1 3800C16:


That's what it seems like. The CPB being disabled with higher BCLK. 

If you go into Ryzen Master and apply a PBO profile it immediately seems to activate CPB though I haven't determine if it actually changes the PPT, TDC, EDC values. That last bit I mention because I'm using the EDC bug.

Edit:
OK. EDC doesn't seem to change when Appying a PBO profile in Ryzen Master so the EDC bug persists and CPB becomes active.


----------



## PolRoger

nick name said:


> That's what it seems like. The CPB being disabled with higher BCLK.
> 
> If you go into Ryzen Master and apply a PBO profile it immediately seems to activate CPB though I haven't determine if it actually changes the PPT, TDC, EDC values. That last bit I mention because I'm using the EDC bug.
> 
> Edit:
> OK. EDC doesn't seem to change when Appying a PBO profile in Ryzen Master so the EDC bug persists and CPB becomes active.


I'm thinking now that this might just be an ASUS BIOS quirk as my ASRock X570 Taichi motherboard seems to allow setting higher BCLK while keeping CPB/PBO active...

Default PBO XMP3200C14 set with 100.2 BCLK:


----------



## nick name

PolRoger said:


> I'm thinking now that this might just be an ASUS BIOS quirk as my ASRock X570 Taichi motherboard seems to allow setting higher BCLK while keeping CPB/PBO active...
> 
> Default PBO XMP3200C14 set with 100.2 BCLK:


I just learned that if you don't set DOCP and use Manual for RAM instead you don't see the BCLK droop in Windows. With DOCP BCLK drops to 99.8 and with Manual it stays at 100. And I don't know if what I'm doing relies on the former but I can use TurboV in Windows to adjust BCLK on the fly. I didn't try to use TurboV to adjust BCLK when using DOCP before.


----------



## Synoxia

@gupsterg what did you end up setting your 3200c14 tridentz kit at? was it a RGB kit? 
I am looking to experiment further with this 4 dimm RGB kit 3200c14.
@crakej You have this kit too? Wanna share your txt? 

https://www.gskill.com/product/165/...GBDDR4-3200MHz-CL14-14-14-34-1.35V16GB-(2x8GB)

I've got 2 of these


----------



## nick name

Synoxia said:


> @gupsterg what did you end up setting your 3200c14 tridentz kit at? was it a RGB kit?
> I am looking to experiment further with this 4 dimm RGB kit 3200c14.
> @crakej You have this kit too? Wanna share your txt?
> 
> https://www.gskill.com/product/165/...GBDDR4-3200MHz-CL14-14-14-34-1.35V16GB-(2x8GB)
> 
> I've got 2 of these


I have a G.Skill 3600CL15 kit which I believe is a hair better than the 3200CL14 kit, but I wanna say folks pretty much achieve the same clocks with them. 

I finally got an overnight stable result last night with these timings. The one thing I changed last night that I hadn't before was tWTRS from 3 to 4. 

The voltages aren't quite tuned.

DRAM at 1.5V
SOC 1.106V (LLC at 4)
VDDG 1.05V

I also have Karhu set to test CPU cache under the Advanced tab.


----------



## crakej

I have 4 x Patriot Steel 4400 running 3700CL14 currently.

As for BCLK - yes, if set to <Manual> or <auto> it will set BCLK at 100MHz - I've not experimented much with BCLK other than trying to get ram up to 3800MTs utilizing it - which I couldn't quite do. I don't remember if boost was still working. It can be adjusted in AISuite or Turbo V - if you change BCLCK to 101 in AISuite, it changes the base clock of the cpu to 3838, from 3800.


----------



## 1M4TO

hello, can some one help?
i bought an evga 2080s and when i put it on SLOT 1 i got white led...so i replaced the videocard and with the new one replaced (same 2080s) i still have white led.., and get with both no signal.
so then i tought it was the motherboard, but before send it back, i plug into slot one the audio card (SB zx) and the videocard on pci express Slot 2 (3/8x), and everything is working fine but whenever i play cod warzone the lag is incredible, whatevere i do, even with low resolution per say, it still jump between 250 fps to 20/30 in the worse scenario..
any idea?
can it be the cpu as well?


----------



## 621670

I'm on Zen+, is my IMC just garbage or am I not autistic enough for RAM overclocking? Whatever I do, I can't get DRAM Calc's Safe or Fast timings stable.

Ryzen 2600 @ 3.9/~1.18V
CH7 on latest BIOS
GSkill 2x16GB 3200 CL14 kit


----------



## nick name

User32 said:


> I'm on Zen+, is my IMC just garbage or am I not autistic enough for RAM overclocking? Whatever I do, I can't get DRAM Calc's Safe or Fast timings stable.
> 
> Ryzen 2600 @ 3.9/~1.18V
> CH7 on latest BIOS
> GSkill 2x16GB 3200 CL14 kit


What can you get? And into which RAM slots did you install?


----------



## nick name

1M4TO said:


> hello, can some one help?
> i bought an evga 2080s and when i put it on SLOT 1 i got white led...so i replaced the videocard and with the new one replaced (same 2080s) i still have white led.., and get with both no signal.
> so then i tought it was the motherboard, but before send it back, i plug into slot one the audio card (SB zx) and the videocard on pci express Slot 2 (3/8x), and everything is working fine but whenever i play cod warzone the lag is incredible, whatevere i do, even with low resolution per say, it still jump between 250 fps to 20/30 in the worse scenario..
> any idea?
> can it be the cpu as well?


What did you have previously? Did that work in the top GPU slot? 

And which CPU are you using?


----------



## 1M4TO

nick name said:


> What did you have previously? Did that work in the top GPU slot?
> 
> And which CPU are you using?


hi there, thanks..
i have a 3700x and the last videocard i had on the slot 1 was an evga 2080 ti and was working fine..
no idea whats going on, i tried pubg and its working fine buttersmooth 200+ fps @ 3440=1440p, i start to think its just cod warzone that is actually ****..
my fps goes right from 130 to down as low as 40 even less.. gunfight are impossible the fps spike and stutter make it unplayable..
not too mention with both 2080 super xc evga got the same problem.
Anyway i tried to put my sb zx on slot 1 as i said and i noticed it only working properly the left side of the headphones..., now im wondering if its a motherboard problem or could it be also cpu problem?


----------



## nick name

1M4TO said:


> hi there, thanks..
> i have a 3700x and the last videocard i had on the slot 1 was an evga 2080 ti and was working fine..
> no idea whats going on, i tried pubg and its working fine buttersmooth 200+ fps @ 3440=1440p, i start to think its just cod warzone that is actually ****..
> my fps goes right from 130 to down as low as 40 even less.. gunfight are impossible the fps spike and stutter make it unplayable..
> not too mention with both 2080 super xc evga got the same problem.
> Anyway i tried to put my sb zx on slot 1 as i said and i noticed it only working properly the left side of the headphones..., now im wondering if its a motherboard problem or could it be also cpu problem?


Have you made sure that you've set FCLK and not left it on Auto?


----------



## 1M4TO

nick name said:


> Have you made sure that you've set FCLK and not left it on Auto?


its on auto but on ryzen master they are both set memory and fabric to 1800, i dont think its that the problem of a not working properly pci express slot 1.
The videocard seem to work properly on the second pci express 8x slot, but the game stutter like hell.


----------



## nick name

1M4TO said:


> its on auto but on ryzen master they are both set memory and fabric to 1800, i dont think its that the problem of a not working properly pci express slot 1.
> The videocard seem to work properly on the second pci express 8x slot, but the game stutter like hell.


Yeah, I'm not sure it will help with the PCIe slot problem, but it may help with the game lag. Your FCLK may be downclocking while left on Auto. There is an OC mode in the BIOS to keep FCLK and MEMCLK from downclocking, but I've found that setting FLCK instead of leaving it set to Auto does the same thing. When they start to downclock it adds lag and they seem to downclock when they shouldn't. But that has been my experience and may not be what you're seeing.


----------



## crakej

1M4TO said:


> hi there, thanks..
> i have a 3700x and the last videocard i had on the slot 1 was an evga 2080 ti and was working fine..
> no idea whats going on, i tried pubg and its working fine buttersmooth 200+ fps @ 3440=1440p, i start to think its just cod warzone that is actually ****..
> my fps goes right from 130 to down as low as 40 even less.. gunfight are impossible the fps spike and stutter make it unplayable..
> not too mention with both 2080 super xc evga got the same problem.
> Anyway i tried to put my sb zx on slot 1 as i said and i noticed it only working properly the left side of the headphones..., now im wondering if its a motherboard problem or could it be also cpu problem?


What happens if you put the GPU in slot 1, and remove the sound card?

What bios ver are you on?


----------



## Kildar

Any real difference between the C7H and the C8H other than PCI 4?

I can get a 7 for just $159 and was just wondering. I have a 6 now.


----------



## nick name

Kildar said:


> Any real difference between the C7H and the C8H other than PCI 4?
> 
> I can get a 7 for just $159 and was just wondering. I have a 6 now.


That question may be better answered in the C8 thread. Did you ask there too?


----------



## 1M4TO

crakej said:


> What happens if you put the GPU in slot 1, and remove the sound card?
> 
> What bios ver are you on?


white led, no signal..
1) when sound card on slot 1 just left headphone phone works, as far as i remember the past week the evga 2080ti was working fine on slot 1, i got 2 samples of evga 2080 s here and none of them work on slot 1, got white led (VGA) when booting.
2)tried to clean the slot, no luck.
i tried flashing the new bios, all stock, tried disabling csm but none of the thing worked so far. 
the problem with the game seems to point to the game itself and the solution is to re download it agan (185gb, sigh) im almost done and i give it another try.
what bother me is the non working properly pci express top slot, no idea why, it just work per say half way (see the soundcard).
any other pci express slot works fine , i didn't tried the bottom slot with the videocard for obiouvs reason (4x if i' right?).
The bios im on is the latest from asus, 3004, flashed yesterday to try to see if it would solve the problem, but it didn't.
I cannot try another videocard on the top slot since the corona virus restriction (im from italy and we are forced to home).
My conclusion is that it can be the motherboard or the cpu (if this is related to the pci express behavior, im not even sure).
One more thing, while i had the 2080ti evga it blew up one day and i got a replacement, not sure this could have damaged the pci slot maybe?
the weird thing is, why the replaement work in the top slot? unfortunately i have no more the TI.
thanks for help, btw.

p.s. surfing the web i noticed other peoples having my same issue, not specific to this board or videocard, ofc, no work on top slot, works on others.

found a post with a guy saying he swapped the psu and the videocard worked again. i have here an old xfx 750 bronze gonna give a try.


----------



## nick name

1M4TO said:


> white led, no signal..
> 1) when sound card on slot 1 just left headphone phone works, as far as i remember the past week the evga 2080ti was working fine on slot 1, i got 2 samples of evga 2080 s here and none of them work on slot 1, got white led (VGA) when booting.
> 2)tried to clean the slot, no luck.
> i tried flashing the new bios, all stock, tried disabling csm but none of the thing worked so far.
> the problem with the game seems to point to the game itself and the solution is to re download it agan (185gb, sigh) im almost done and i give it another try.
> what bother me is the non working properly pci express top slot, no idea why, it just work per say half way (see the soundcard).
> any other pci express slot works fine , i didn't tried the bottom slot with the videocard for obiouvs reason (4x if i' right?).
> The bios im on is the latest from asus, 3004, flashed yesterday to try to see if it would solve the problem, but it didn't.
> I cannot try another videocard on the top slot since the corona virus restriction (im from italy and we are forced to home).
> My conclusion is that it can be the motherboard or the cpu (if this is related to the pci express behavior, im not even sure).
> One more thing, while i had the 2080ti evga it blew up one day and i got a replacement, not sure this could have damaged the pci slot maybe?
> the weird thing is, why the replaement work in the top slot? unfortunately i have no more the TI.
> thanks for help, btw.
> 
> p.s. surfing the web i noticed other peoples having my same issue, not specific to this board or videocard, ofc, no work on top slot, works on others.
> 
> found a post with a guy saying he swapped the psu and the videocard worked again. i have here an old xfx 750 bronze gonna give a try.



You didn't think it was important to tell us that the previous card in that slot blew up? And that even the sound card fails to work properly in that slot?

Now when you say "blew up" what precisely do you mean?


----------



## 1M4TO

nick name said:


> You didn't think it was important to tell us that the previous card in that slot blew up? And that even the sound card fails to work properly in that slot?
> 
> Now when you say "blew up" what precisely do you mean?


the 2080ti just dies, no led worki,g the card seem just dead, no idea what happened to the card, evga replaced it.
As for the sound card, at first i didnt realized only the left headset was working, the sound card seem to wrk properly but under some test i realized that le right side wasnt working at all.
Do you think the motherboard slot 1 is gone?


----------



## nick name

1M4TO said:


> the 2080ti just dies, no led worki,g the card seem just dead, no idea what happened to the card, evga replaced it.
> As for the sound card, at first i didnt realized only the left headset was working, the sound card seem to wrk properly but under some test i realized that le right side wasnt working at all.
> Do you think the motherboard slot 1 is gone?


That's what it sounds like.


----------



## Axaion

Kildar said:


> Any real difference between the C7H and the C8H other than PCI 4?
> 
> I can get a 7 for just $159 and was just wondering. I have a 6 now.


seems to have actual support from assus

also seems like you can use 2x nvme m.2 drives and not have your gpu forced into PCI-E 3.0 x8 mode


----------



## nick name

Axaion said:


> seems to have actual support from assus
> 
> also seems like you can use 2x nvme m.2 drives and not have your gpu forced into PCI-E 3.0 x8 mode


No if you populate that second slot it does go x8. Whether that will impact your GPU depends on the GPU.


----------



## Axaion

nick name said:


> No if you populate that second slot it does go x8. Whether that will impact your GPU depends on the GPU.


Well then.. lol :\


----------



## Zefram0911

new chipset drivers. idk what's new.


https://www.amd.com/en/support/chipsets/amd-socket-am4/x470


----------



## djase45

Zefram0911 said:


> new chipset drivers. idk what's new.
> 
> 
> https://www.amd.com/en/support/chipsets/amd-socket-am4/x470


PCI Express driver got updated to 1.0.0.76 from 1.0.0.75

2.2.0.124 something got updated to 2.2.0.126

AMD GPIO V2 from a quick check.

EDIT: GPIO so general purpose input output.


----------



## crakej

1M4TO said:


> the 2080ti just dies, no led worki,g the card seem just dead, no idea what happened to the card, evga replaced it.
> As for the sound card, at first i didnt realized only the left headset was working, the sound card seem to wrk properly but under some test i realized that le right side wasnt working at all.
> Do you think the motherboard slot 1 is gone?


It does sound like it. That slot is supplied by the CPU though so might be the CPU. Do you have a friend you could test your GPUs for you? At least rule those out? Better still, get your CPU tested.

I wonder if Aida or Sandra might be able to see whats going on with the slot/CPU? You could try running some tests with gpu in slot 2, nothing in slot 1....


----------



## nick name

A small cold front is moving through the area so I'm taking advantage of the cooler air to benchmark. My scores are going up. Some CB15 scores run with per CCD OC and EDC bug runs.


----------



## Synoxia

nick name said:


> I have a G.Skill 3600CL15 kit which I believe is a hair better than the 3200CL14 kit, but I wanna say folks pretty much achieve the same clocks with them.
> 
> I finally got an overnight stable result last night with these timings. The one thing I changed last night that I hadn't before was tWTRS from 3 to 4.
> 
> The voltages aren't quite tuned.
> 
> DRAM at 1.5V
> SOC 1.106V (LLC at 4)
> VDDG 1.05V
> 
> I also have Karhu set to test CPU cache under the Advanced tab.


Hello, are these RGB ram? Did you test it with a game + ram test? I've found out that games raise ram temps considerably, how are yours under load? Mine in games can go up to 50c. 
Nice results btw. Didn't someone say that SOC LLC was unsafe?





djase45 said:


> PCI Express driver got updated to 1.0.0.76 from 1.0.0.75
> 
> 2.2.0.124 something got updated to 2.2.0.126
> 
> AMD GPIO V2 from a quick check.
> 
> EDIT: GPIO so general purpose input output.


I wonder what these drivers do in first place... they seem like meme driver


----------



## nick name

Synoxia said:


> Hello, are these RGB ram? Did you test it with a game + ram test? I've found out that games raise ram temps considerably, how are yours under load? Mine in games can go up to 50c.
> Nice results btw. Didn't someone say that SOC LLC was unsafe?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -snip-


No, these sticks aren't RGB. And I have a fan sitting on top of my GPU directly in front of my RAM sticks so they are actively cooled. Without the fan my RAM will approach the temps you see, but with the fan they stay closer to 40 ~ 42*C with ambient temps at 30*C. 

And LLC can be unsafe at its highest settings as the voltage overshoot can get out-of-hand so wise folks recommend using the second highest setting at most.


----------



## Synoxia

While we are stuck with the same bios since 4 months, c8h users got a small free performance boost this month. Never Asus again.


Made some benchmarks with 1201 and flashed the 1302 Bios yesterday (Flash, CMOS Reset and Proflle loaded without any harm) and found some small performance improvements:

[email protected], RAM 3733CL16, FCLK 1866.5, PBO+PB2 Auto

Before (1201) vs After (1302)
-------------------------------------------

CB20 MC: 7004 vs 7081
CB20 SC: 518 vs 523
PC Mark 10: 7646 vs 7656
CPU-Z 539.6/8202.9 vs 550.5/8319.0


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> A small cold front is moving through the area so I'm taking advantage of the cooler air to benchmark. My scores are going up. Some CB15 scores run with per CCD OC and EDC bug runs.


What settings are you using??? Your score is much higher than mine.... (3300 max)


----------



## harderthanfire

Getting annoying bclk droop even in manual mode with it set to 100 or auto mode. Any ideas how to stop it drooping to 98.7 or whatever? If I set it to 101 it droops to 99.7 which I can live with but dropping below 99 when I set it to 100 actually starts to impact performance as I'm using a static overclock.


----------



## crakej

harderthanfire said:


> Getting annoying bclk droop even in manual mode with it set to 100 or auto mode. Any ideas how to stop it drooping to 98.7 or whatever? If I set it to 101 it droops to 99.7 which I can live with but dropping below 99 when I set it to 100 actually starts to impact performance as I'm using a static overclock.


For your ram settings - you need to use <auto> or <manual> set, NOT DOCP


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> What settings are you using??? Your score is much higher than mine.... (3300 max)


I am using the EDC bug for the scores in the 3300 ~ 3400 range. The 3400 scores are with the colder air and the 3300 are with normal ambient. The highest scores were benchmark runs with CCD overclocking and definitely not stable beyond benchmarking.

500 PPT 500 TDC 2 EDC with 10X Scalar and +200MHz and a VCORE Offset -.06ish. I say -.06ish because with warmer ambient temps I can use up around -.075 because the CPU doesn't try to boost as high, but with cooler ambient temps the CPU tries to boost higher and those speeds need more voltage.


----------



## nick name

harderthanfire said:


> Getting annoying bclk droop even in manual mode with it set to 100 or auto mode. Any ideas how to stop it drooping to 98.7 or whatever? If I set it to 101 it droops to 99.7 which I can live with but dropping below 99 when I set it to 100 actually starts to impact performance as I'm using a static overclock.


That's much more droop than I ever saw. I only drooped to 99.8 when DOCP set BCLK to 100. When I would set a manual BCLK over 100 it wouldn't droop at all.


----------



## harderthanfire

crakej said:


> For your ram settings - you need to use <auto> or <manual> set, NOT DOCP


I'm using manual.

I'm pretty sure it never used to droop this far, I did recently update windows to version 2004 via the insiders slow ring so I could use WSL 2 - could it be the constant use of a mini VM causing it maybe?


----------



## nick name

harderthanfire said:


> I'm using manual.
> 
> 
> I'm pretty sure it never used to droop this far, I did recently update windows to version 2004 via the insiders slow ring so I could use WSL 2 - could it be the constant use of a mini VM causing it maybe?


Hmmmm. Is that something Windows would influence? I thought it was something handled at the board level? 

And are you using any Load Line Calibration settings in BIOS?


----------



## PolRoger

nick name said:


> I am using the EDC bug for the scores in the 3300 ~ 3400 range. The 3400 scores are with the colder air and the 3300 are with normal ambient. The highest scores were benchmark runs with CCD overclocking and definitely not stable beyond benchmarking.


I tried a per CCX overclock on my setup and tested up towards ~ 44.75x/44.25x... I think I'm going need better cooling/lower temps to push much higher.


----------



## nick name

PolRoger said:


> I tried a per CCX overclock on my setup and tested up towards ~ 44.75x/44.25x... I think I'm going need better cooling/lower temps to push much higher.


I think this one is my best.


----------



## PolRoger

nick name said:


> I think this one is my best.


Nice... That would currently put you at #24 over on HWBOT for the 3900X Cinebench R15 benchmark.


----------



## nick name

PolRoger said:


> Nice... That would currently put you at #24 over on HWBOT for the 3900X Cinebench R15 benchmark.


I have a score for my 2700X at 2100 (2102 is my top score but not recorded) that would have put me high over there too, but I couldn't figure out their submission requirements. Also their tool was flagged by Kaspersky so I didn't install it. I'm happy knowing myself though. 

I own the top score for Firestrike with a 2700X and 1070 ti. Proud of that one too. I think Time Spy also. Those were using colder outdoor air with AIOs though.


----------



## BIRDMANv84

Going to return my current memory kit - Patriot Viper Steel Series DDR4 16GB (2 x 8GB) 4000MHz Performance Memory Kit - PVS416G400C9K. I'm just not happy with the results I get when I downclock it to 3800mhz, and it wont boot at 3600mhz which is what I was targeting. Any recommendations on a 3600mhz 16G kit for around $150usd, using a CH7, R5 3600x. So far Ive only got my eyes on 2 kits, the Gskill F4-3600C15D-16GTZ and TeamGroup TF6D416G4000HC18EDC01 any help would be appreciated


----------



## nick name

BIRDMANv84 said:


> Going to return my current memory kit - Patriot Viper Steel Series DDR4 16GB (2 x 8GB) 4000MHz Performance Memory Kit - PVS416G400C9K. I'm just not happy with the results I get when I downclock it to 3800mhz, and it wont boot at 3600mhz which is what I was targeting. Any recommendations on a 3600mhz 16G kit for around $150usd, using a CH7, R5 3600x. So far Ive only got my eyes on 2 kits, the Gskill F4-3600C15D-16GTZ and TeamGroup TF6D416G4000HC18EDC01 any help would be appreciated



I use a G.Skill 3600C15 kit, but I'm not sure you won't see the same problems you're seeing with your current kit. At the moment I can't think of why the RAM would be the reason for your difficulties. 

Have you described the problems you're having in here before?


----------



## harderthanfire

nick name said:


> Hmmmm. Is that something Windows would influence? I thought it was something handled at the board level?
> 
> And are you using any Load Line Calibration settings in BIOS?



LLC setting are all stock except DRAM boot voltage. I did try disabling spread spectrum but it didn't help. I have a feeling it is virtualisation related. I've never had a vm running 24/7 before.


----------



## nick name

harderthanfire said:


> LLC setting are all stock except DRAM boot voltage. I did try disabling spread spectrum but it didn't help. I have a feeling it is virtualisation related. I've never had a vm running 24/7 before.


I turned on CPU virtualization and it didn't produce a BCLK droop. I'd try adding some LLC and seeing if that changes anything.


----------



## harderthanfire

nick name said:


> I turned on CPU virtualization and it didn't produce a BCLK droop. I'd try adding some LLC and seeing if that changes anything.



Did you actually launch a VM? I've always had it turned on in bios, I've just not had a VM running and looked at the BCLK whilst it is before.


----------



## Baio73

*Strange problem with latest chipset drivers (v2.03.12.0657)*

Hi there... since the first time I tried to install the new driver, I get this error:



After 8 hours is still stuck on 0%.
I read somewhere that driver should be installed anyway (people who have compared files versions).

The problem is since then Ryzen Timing Checker reports this error on startup:



I tried to install an older version but it states it can't because a newer version is already installed.
Then tried to uninstall the actual version from Control Panel and says "There are no uninstallable driver found".

Is there any utility (on DDU style for VGA) to get totally rid of those drivers?
Or what else can I do?

Thanks.

Baio


----------



## nick name

harderthanfire said:


> Did you actually launch a VM? I've always had it turned on in bios, I've just not had a VM running and looked at the BCLK whilst it is before.


No, I didn't. 

Have you tried setting LLC?


----------



## nick name

Baio73 said:


> Hi there... since the first time I tried to install the new driver, I get this error:
> 
> 
> 
> After 8 hours is still stuck on 0%.
> I read somewhere that driver should be installed anyway (people who have compared files versions).
> 
> The problem is since then Ryzen Timing Checker reports this error on startup:
> 
> 
> 
> I tried to install an older version but it states it can't because a newer version is already installed.
> Then tried to uninstall the actual version from Control Panel and says "There are no uninstallable driver found".
> 
> Is there any utility (on DDU style for VGA) to get totally rid of those drivers?
> Or what else can I do?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Baio


You can uninstall AMD chipset drivers the same way you'd uninstall a program in Programs and Features.

And Ryzen Timing Checker will not work with Ryzen 3000 CPUs and The Stilt stated that he won't work to make it compatible as it would be to burdensome.


----------



## pschorr1123

nick name said:


> You can uninstall AMD chipset drivers the same way you'd uninstall a program in Programs and Features.
> 
> And Ryzen Timing Checker will not work with Ryzen 3000 CPUs and The Stilt stated that he won't work to make it compatible as it would be to burdensome.


 @BUFUMAN posted this link in another forum for a Zen2 Timing Checker. I have downloaded and ran myself no issues so far.

link:https://www.computerbase.de/forum/threads/amd-ryzen-ram-oc-community.1829356/page-893#post-23529759

should be 1st post Z2TC.7z

perhaps this was written using the new API AMD announced a while back


----------



## Baio73

nick name said:


> You can uninstall AMD chipset drivers the same way you'd uninstall a program in Programs and Features.


As in my post, already tried but it says ""There are no uninstallable driver found".



> And Ryzen Timing Checker will not work with Ryzen 3000 CPUs and The Stilt stated that he won't work to make it compatible as it would be to burdensome.


Got it.

Baio


----------



## crakej

BIRDMANv84 said:


> Going to return my current memory kit - Patriot Viper Steel Series DDR4 16GB (2 x 8GB) 4000MHz Performance Memory Kit - PVS416G400C9K. I'm just not happy with the results I get when I downclock it to 3800mhz, and it wont boot at 3600mhz which is what I was targeting. Any recommendations on a 3600mhz 16G kit for around $150usd, using a CH7, R5 3600x. So far Ive only got my eyes on 2 kits, the Gskill F4-3600C15D-16GTZ and TeamGroup TF6D416G4000HC18EDC01 any help would be appreciated


I've got the 4400s running 3733 CL14 - great results.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I am using the EDC bug for the scores in the 3300 ~ 3400 range. The 3400 scores are with the colder air and the 3300 are with normal ambient. The highest scores were benchmark runs with CCD overclocking and definitely not stable beyond benchmarking.
> 
> 500 PPT 500 TDC 2 EDC with 10X Scalar and +200MHz and a VCORE Offset -.06ish. I say -.06ish because with warmer ambient temps I can use up around -.075 because the CPU doesn't try to boost as high, but with cooler ambient temps the CPU tries to boost higher and those speeds need more voltage.


Thanks

I'm using the 'bug' too. got PPT 0 TDC 0 EDC 19 - as per TheStilt - still experimenting with EDC to get it right... I haven't tried undervolting at all - yet!


----------



## harderthanfire

nick name said:


> No, I didn't.
> 
> Have you tried setting LLC?



Yeah LLC made no difference to the BCLK


----------



## nick name

harderthanfire said:


> Yeah LLC made no difference to the BCLK


I could try running a VM. What do you use? I have no experience with virtual machines.


----------



## harderthanfire

nick name said:


> I could try running a VM. What do you use? I have no experience with virtual machines.



Hyper-V - it is in add/remove windows features in control panel.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Thanks
> 
> I'm using the 'bug' too. got PPT 0 TDC 0 EDC 19 - as per TheStilt - still experimenting with EDC to get it right... I haven't tried undervolting at all - yet!


Have you tried using high values for PPT and TDC? And The Stilt said to find the "best" EDC value you drop it until your CPU starts to run at around 2 GHz and then increase EDC by 1. That put me at an EDC of 2. And don't forget maxing out the scalar and the 200MHz. 

And I recently learned that a negative offset can be a bit of a moving target if your ambient temps change dramatically. Like using colder outside air for cooling. As the CPU wants to boost higher it needs more voltage so a smaller offset is needed to prevent clock stretching. With regular ambient temps I'm running -.06875V, but could go a touch higher before stretching kicks in. I can use a -.1000V offset, but that absolutely results in clock stretching.


----------



## nick name

harderthanfire said:


> Hyper-V - it is in add/remove windows features in control panel.


Well what do ya know. Simply installing those Window's features brought my BCLK down to 99.3 and it's never drooped below 99.8 before. So I'm guessing that's it. I can't point at which feature as the culprit though as I installed about 5.


----------



## harderthanfire

nick name said:


> Well what do ya know. Simply installing those Window's features brought my BCLK down to 99.3 and it's never drooped below 99.8 before. So I'm guessing that's it. I can't point at which feature as the culprit though as I installed about 5.



Ok at least I know now I can manage it by bumping it up in bios by 1 when I have them turned on and put it back to normal when not. Thanks for your help.


----------



## Hepe

Speaking of BCLK, I've been messing with upping the BCLK and it seems I'm stuck at 100.8MHz. For some reason the system becomes unstable and for example HWInfo crashed when loading SATA/ATAPI information if I plug in 101MHz BCLK. 
So is this just a bug, I've seen people running above 103MHz without issues. 100.8MHz works just fines, running prime95 for hours is no problem.


----------



## nick name

Hepe said:


> Speaking of BCLK, I've been messing with upping the BCLK and it seems I'm stuck at 100.8MHz. For some reason the system becomes unstable and for example HWInfo crashed when loading SATA/ATAPI information if I plug in 101MHz BCLK.
> So is this just a bug, I've seen people running above 103MHz without issues. 100.8MHz works just fines, running prime95 for hours is no problem.


I couldn't answer that. I can't run BCLK above 100 without the CPU getting stuck at around 38 multiplier. Though you may want to try more PLL voltage.


----------



## harderthanfire

nick name said:


> I couldn't answer that. I can't run BCLK above 100 without the CPU getting stuck at around 38 multiplier. Though you may want to try more PLL voltage.



Mine does that if I go over 101 - so annoying.


----------



## Hepe

nick name said:


> I couldn't answer that. I can't run BCLK above 100 without the CPU getting stuck at around 38 multiplier. Though you may want to try more PLL voltage.


I was actually surprised to see that the boosting worked normally when I upped the BCLK, not sure if this has to do with the BIOS version. I'm still using BIOS 1103 from November 2018, as I didn't see a need to update with a 2700X. Not sure if the multipliers are locked if I go over 101, it would seem not since I got almost 1900 points in Cinebench R15 with 101 BCLK.


----------



## The Sandman

Hepe said:


> Speaking of BCLK, I've been messing with upping the BCLK and it seems I'm stuck at 100.8MHz. For some reason the system becomes unstable and for example HWInfo crashed when loading SATA/ATAPI information if I plug in 101MHz BCLK.
> So is this just a bug, I've seen people running above 103MHz without issues. 100.8MHz works just fines, running prime95 for hours is no problem.





harderthanfire said:


> Mine does that if I go over 101 - so annoying.



On my C6H I run a PE3 w/101.8Bclk = 4255/4428MHz not an issue. My chip will use either 41.8 or 42 multiplier depending on ambient temp at boot.

Don't forget you may need to drop a divider on memory depending on current dram oc if any.


----------



## nick name

Hepe said:


> I was actually surprised to see that the boosting worked normally when I upped the BCLK, not sure if this has to do with the BIOS version. I'm still using BIOS 1103 from November 2018, as I didn't see a need to update with a 2700X. Not sure if the multipliers are locked if I go over 101, it would seem not since I got almost 1900 points in Cinebench R15 with 101 BCLK.


Ahhhh sorry. I didn't check your sig and didn't notice you were running a 2700X. And I haven't updated my sig yet. I didn't have those problems running 101+ on BCLK, but I didn't do it for anything other than benchmarking. 

But do try more PLL voltage. Which SATA drives do you use?


----------



## Hepe

nick name said:


> Ahhhh sorry. I didn't check your sig and didn't notice you were running a 2700X. And I haven't updated my sig yet. I didn't have those problems running 101+ on BCLK, but I didn't do it for anything other than benchmarking.
> 
> But do try more PLL voltage. Which SATA drives do you use?


SATA drives are:

1x Samsung 850 EVO 500GB
1x Samsung 860 QVO 1TB
1x Samsung HD642JJ 640GB hard drive

And also a Samsung 960 EVO 500GB NVME SSD as the OS drive.

EDIT: I tried upping the PLL, doesn't seem to work for me. I think this is some kind of bug, as 100.8MHz BCLK is stable. But anyhoo, 3494MHz RAM @ 14-14-15-14-28 and tightened subtimings, this is still honestly better than I was expecting.


----------



## nick name

Hepe said:


> SATA drives are:
> 
> 1x Samsung 850 EVO 500GB
> 1x Samsung 860 QVO 1TB
> 1x Samsung HD642JJ 640GB hard drive
> 
> And also a Samsung 960 EVO 500GB NVME SSD as the OS drive.
> 
> EDIT: I tried upping the PLL, doesn't seem to work for me. I think this is some kind of bug, as 100.8MHz BCLK is stable. But anyhoo, 3494MHz RAM @ 14-14-15-14-28 and tightened subtimings, this is still honestly better than I was expecting.


I think it's one of your drives. I have a 850 so I don't think it's that. Perhaps that HD64 drive?


----------



## ahujet

What BIOS version would you guys recommend for ryzen 7 2700x?


----------



## nick name

ahujet said:


> What BIOS version would you guys recommend for ryzen 7 2700x?


The latest BIOS works great for a 2700X.


----------



## ahujet

nick name said:


> The latest BIOS works great for a 2700X.


I've read in this thread that they've gimped 2700x in later BIOS versions. Also does PCIE 4.0 work with ryzen 3000 series on this motherboard?


----------



## crakej

ahujet said:


> I've read in this thread that they've gimped 2700x in later BIOS versions. Also does PCIE 4.0 work with ryzen 3000 series on this motherboard?


Dunno about the 2xxx being gimped....

Yes, PCIE 4 is supported up to bios ver 2606 - then they disable it (stupid, yes - they even re-enabled it on one of their B450 boards - go figure)

I can't remember which bios around that time was best though!


----------



## nick name

ahujet said:


> I've read in this thread that they've gimped 2700x in later BIOS versions. Also does PCIE 4.0 work with ryzen 3000 series on this motherboard?


That may have been me saying that, but it isn't the BIOS -- it's the Performance Bias feature that reduced performance. If you use Aida/Geekbench it reduces performance. Cinebench Gentle doesn't though. And that's actually true on Ryzen 3000 as well.


----------



## ahujet

Thanks for replies, so as I understand I should update to the latest BIOS, also can you downgrade to any BIOS version from the latest one? I know that on some ASUS boards you can't downgrade past certain version when they change BIOS file format and stuff.


----------



## nick name

ahujet said:


> Thanks for replies, so as I understand I should update to the latest BIOS, also can you downgrade to any BIOS version from the latest one? I know that on some ASUS boards you can't downgrade past certain version when they change BIOS file format and stuff.


Yeah, you can downgrade. You just have to flash an old BIOS (waaaaay back in the BIOS versions) and then flash the BIOS you want to use. To do that you use the BIOS Flashback feature with a USB stick.


----------



## shamino1978

nick name said:


> I couldn't answer that. I can't run BCLK above 100 without the CPU getting stuck at around 38 multiplier. Though you may want to try more PLL voltage.


ok added an option in tweakers paradise:
force disable oc mode
to maintain default settings when oc bclk.


https://www.dropbox.com/s/ptgj3y6d6k7dif7/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0013.rar?dl=0
you need to do set 3 things for this to work:
force disable oc mode set enable
core performance boost option in main menu set enable
vcore swithc to offset mode auto setting (to prevent vcore being overriden with a manual voltage)

bioses with this option for other boards will follow later.


----------



## Kildar

Anyway to customized bios to allow pcie 4.0?


----------



## nick name

shamino1978 said:


> ok added an option in tweakers paradise:
> force disable oc mode
> to maintain default settings when oc bclk.
> 
> 
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/ptgj3y6d6k7dif7/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0013.rar?dl=0
> you need to do set 3 things for this to work:
> force disable oc mode set enable
> core performance boost option in main menu set enable
> vcore swithc to offset mode auto setting (to prevent vcore being overriden with a manual voltage)
> 
> bioses with this option for other boards will follow later.


Waaaaait. Is this _The _Shamino?

And is that the only change in that BIOS or is there anything else to play with that is newer than what is in 3004.


----------



## nick name

shamino1978 said:


> ok added an option in tweakers paradise:
> force disable oc mode
> to maintain default settings when oc bclk.
> 
> 
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/ptgj3y6d6k7dif7/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0013.rar?dl=0
> you need to do set 3 things for this to work:
> force disable oc mode set enable
> core performance boost option in main menu set enable
> vcore swithc to offset mode auto setting (to prevent vcore being overriden with a manual voltage)
> 
> bioses with this option for other boards will follow later.


The fix works to allow for BCLK adjustments and maintaining Core Performance Boost. Many thanks. 

First bug or odd behavior I've found is with RAM timings left on Auto. It's only two in particular as they are the only ones I leave set to Auto. I leave them on Auto because each channel is usually set separate of the other and are usually something like 8/2 on one channel and 9/1 on the other channel.


----------



## nick name

shamino1978 said:


> ok added an option in tweakers paradise:
> force disable oc mode
> to maintain default settings when oc bclk.
> 
> 
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/ptgj3y6d6k7dif7/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0013.rar?dl=0
> you need to do set 3 things for this to work:
> force disable oc mode set enable
> core performance boost option in main menu set enable
> vcore swithc to offset mode auto setting (to prevent vcore being overriden with a manual voltage)
> 
> bioses with this option for other boards will follow later.


This BIOS seems less reliable at booting the same settings from 3004. The new BIOS is behaving the same as if I were trying to boot higher than 1900MHz FCLK on BIOS 3004 showing Q Code 07 or 22.


----------



## nick name

I hate how dead this thread is now.


----------



## Zefram0911

we havent had a new bios in over 3 months.


----------



## nick name

Zefram0911 said:


> we havent had a new bios in over 3 months.


Well there is one a few posts up, but it doesn't seem to address anything other than BCLK overclocking and maintaining XFR. Which it does. That and Shamino's post leads me to believe that there will be a new BIOS very soon.


----------



## Synoxia

Let's hope. My c7h has only been unstable lately, with microstutters being visible on desktop that need to be fixed with load defaults and then load the previous profile...


----------



## nick name

Synoxia said:


> Let's hope. My c7h has only been unstable lately, with microstutters being visible on desktop that need to be fixed with load defaults and then load the previous profile...


I think it's in AMD CBS -- a setting to force the FCLK UCLK to stay at max. Perhaps what you're seeing is when they downclock briefly and that de-sync being the source of your stutters. Do you set FCLK in BIOS or leave it to Auto?


----------



## Flexarius

nick name said:


> I have a G.Skill 3600CL15 kit which I believe is a hair better than the 3200CL14 kit, but I wanna say folks pretty much achieve the same clocks with them.
> 
> I finally got an overnight stable result last night with these timings. The one thing I changed last night that I hadn't before was tWTRS from 3 to 4.
> 
> The voltages aren't quite tuned.
> 
> DRAM at 1.5V
> SOC 1.106V (LLC at 4)
> VDDG 1.05V
> 
> I also have Karhu set to test CPU cache under the Advanced tab.



Hi nick name,

would you please post/send me your complete Asus CH7 Settings? I have the Gskill 3600CL15 Kit to (4x8GB) too. I'm intreste in Settings: Data Bus Configuration User Controls etc. (Rtt...) I think all your settings would helf me 

My machine runs 3800/1900MHz, but with coldstart problems and it is sometime instable.

Thank you


----------



## nick name

Flexarius said:


> Hi nick name,
> 
> would you please post/send me your complete Asus CH7 Settings? I have the Gskill 3600CL15 Kit to (4x8GB) too. I'm intreste in Settings: Data Bus Configuration User Controls etc. (Rtt...) I think all your settings would helf me
> 
> My machine runs 3800/1900MHz, but with coldstart problems and it is sometime instable.
> 
> Thank you


My settings won't work well for you as I only have a 2x8GB kit and those settings I run on Auto. Your 4x8GB will need different values. Higher ProcODT and other resistances. Have you used the DRAM Calculator?


----------



## Flexarius

nick name said:


> My settings won't work well for you as I only have a 2x8GB kit and those settings I run on Auto. Your 4x8GB will need different values. Higher ProcODT and other resistances. Have you used the DRAM Calculator?


Yes i use DRAM Calculator, but some cold start problems every day. I have to load my saved Asus profil again and there are still problems getting this to work. If it successful loaded in UEFI, i can run windows stable - but i have to complete my RAM-Test tools to find the best settings. 
I will try your 3800/1900 MHz settings (your Pic ZenTimmings 1.04 - pages back). Need some some inspirations in you complete Asus UEFI settings.

I know the Settings RTT Settings etc. for 4 DIMMs are different to your 2 DIMMs, but the rest should work for me too (Main Settings for CPU and Board etc.). 

Not many people use the GSkill 3600C15 today and there are some "special" Settings for the F4-3600C15-8GTZ etc.

Maybe you see some false settings in my pic and give advise to get this faster/stable.

Thanks


My current settings - yours bellow :


----------



## nick name

Flexarius said:


> Yes i use DRAM Calculator, but some cold start problems every day. I have to load my saved Asus profil again and there are still problems getting this to work. If it successful loaded in UEFI, i can run windows stable - but i have to complete my RAM-Test tools to find the best settings.
> I will try your 3800/1900 MHz settings (your Pic ZenTimmings 1.04 - pages back). Need some some inspirations in you complete Asus UEFI settings.
> 
> I know the Settings RTT Settings etc. for 4 DIMMs are different to your 2 DIMMs, but the rest should work for me too (Main Settings for CPU and Board etc.).
> 
> Not many people use the GSkill 3600C15 today and there are some "special" Settings for the F4-3600C15-8GTZ etc.
> 
> Maybe you see some false settings in my pic and give advise to get this faster/stable.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> My current settings - yours bellow :


Well I leave the resistances on Auto so I can't shed any light there, but one thing I always do is leave tRDWR and tWRRD on Auto as the board sets those differently per channel. You won't see that while in Windows, but if you look at them in BIOS you'll see them set to something like 10/1 on one channel and 9/1 on the other channel when set to Auto.

Edit:

Something else I've been doing lately is setting all primaries higher so that I can go lower on tRFC. At 14-15-14-14-30-44 I couldn't go lower than 310 on tFRC, however, with 16-16-16-16-34-50 I have been able to run 250 on tRFC and that seems to do better. I haven't tested overnight yet but it seems promising.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> The fix works to allow for BCLK adjustments and maintaining Core Performance Boost. Many thanks.
> 
> First bug or odd behavior I've found is with RAM timings left on Auto. It's only two in particular as they are the only ones I leave set to Auto. I leave them on Auto because each channel is usually set separate of the other and are usually something like 8/2 on one channel and 9/1 on the other channel.


I've always set those to auto as well for the same reason. I've now got 4 sticks and if I leave the rest on auto (I do) this is what I get:


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I've always set those to auto as well for the same reason. I've now got 4 sticks and if I leave the rest on auto (I do) this is what I get:


Did you see that new BIOS on the previous page? It doesn't seem to POST as reliably as 3004 does at the same settings, but the BCLK overclocking works with it.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Did you see that new BIOS on the previous page? It doesn't seem to POST as reliably as 3004 does at the same settings, but the BCLK overclocking works with it.


I've not installed it as not using BCLK currently, but I did notice it wasn't working how it had worked last time I tried.

My chip won't do 1900FCLK sadly but my performance seems pretty good with 3700 1850FCLK - It has booted at 1900 before, so could do more experimenting but think it's prob a no-go for me 

I've recently got an HTC Vive Cosmos to ease the shut-down boredom - which is running really well on my machine... Also been doing lots of video editing in Davinci Resolve 16 which works like a dream!


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I've not installed it as not using BCLK currently, but I did notice it wasn't working how it had worked last time I tried.
> 
> My chip won't do 1900FCLK sadly but my performance seems pretty good with 3700 1850FCLK - It has booted at 1900 before, so could do more experimenting but think it's prob a no-go for me
> 
> I've recently got an HTC Vive Cosmos to ease the shut-down boredom - which is running really well on my machine... Also been doing lots of video editing in Davinci Resolve 16 which works like a dream!


Aww, that's a bummer on the 1900 FCLK. Mine won't POST at anything higher than 1900 FCLK unless it's just a slight BCLK overclock. And Shamino didn't come back to answer if there is anything else new in the BIOS and I didn't notice anything other than its peculiar behavior that I mentioned before. 

Oooh a Vive. I don't have binocular vision so I don't think I'd ever buy one, but I do wish I knew someone that had one so I could see if the experience is diminished for someone that only uses one eye. 

I've been looking for an excuse to play with Davinci. What videos do you edit? Work or pleasure?


----------



## Praetorr

How do you guys keep your memory and IMC clocks sync'd when going over 3600mhz on the RAM? On BIOS 3004, I get major issues as soon as I set my memory to anything over 3600mhz. Super frustrating, as I've got a (seemingly) pretty nicely binned SoC in my 3900X, based on prior testing with another board.


----------



## nick name

Praetorr said:


> How do you guys keep your memory and IMC clocks sync'd when going over 3600mhz on the RAM? On BIOS 3004, I get major issues as soon as I set my memory to anything over 3600mhz. Super frustrating, as I've got a (seemingly) pretty nicely binned SoC in my 3900X, based on prior testing with another board.


I set FCLK manually as well.


----------



## Praetorr

nick name said:


> I set FCLK manually as well.


Interesting, and thanks for responding. So setting FCLK manually is all you do to ensure things stay 1:1:1 > 3600mhz memory speeds? I thought I had tried that, but maybe I also changed some other settings that are bugged.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Aww, that's a bummer on the 1900 FCLK. Mine won't POST at anything higher than 1900 FCLK unless it's just a slight BCLK overclock. And Shamino didn't come back to answer if there is anything else new in the BIOS and I didn't notice anything other than its peculiar behavior that I mentioned before.
> 
> Oooh a Vive. I don't have binocular vision so I don't think I'd ever buy one, but I do wish I knew someone that had one so I could see if the experience is diminished for someone that only uses one eye.
> 
> I've been looking for an excuse to play with Davinci. What videos do you edit? Work or pleasure?


I don't have binocular vision either, but it seems to work fine for me. Even some 3d! It seems to help me use my eyes together. I wear my distance glasses while using it too.

A friend was doing a #StayAtHome challenge - he climbed the height of Everest, on his stairs at home! He live streamed it and I'm editing the footage from that. So pleased with the way my machine chomps through it!

It's a shame Shamino didn't let us know anything else about future bios. I'm really peeved that we haven't been given proper control of CPU OC in the bios like x570 boards have received - CCD and CCX OCing. It feels like that's another thing we're not getting to try and make us buy a new board.

Having to buy a new board every year if you choose to upgrade your CPU, and want full functionality, seems a bit greedy to me. Remember being told we wouldn't have to upgrade our boards as new chips would run? We don't have to - unless we want the chip to work as advertised.

I'm also at the point where it seems the mess that's in the bioses (duplicate and triplicate settings, some work, some don't) is not going away any time soon either, but it sure feels like we're being left behind all in the name of product stack variation.....a bit like the PCIE debacle - and yes, they could re-enable PCIE4 like they've done on at least 1 of their B450 boards.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I don't have binocular vision either, but it seems to work fine for me. Even some 3d! It seems to help me use my eyes together. I wear my distance glasses while using it too.
> 
> A friend was doing a #StayAtHome challenge - he climbed the height of Everest, on his stairs at home! He live streamed it and I'm editing the footage from that. So pleased with the way my machine chomps through it!
> 
> It's a shame Shamino didn't let us know anything else about future bios. I'm really peeved that we haven't been given proper control of CPU OC in the bios like x570 boards have received - CCD and CCX OCing. It feels like that's another thing we're not getting to try and make us buy a new board.
> 
> Having to buy a new board every year if you choose to upgrade your CPU, and want full functionality, seems a bit greedy to me. Remember being told we wouldn't have to upgrade our boards as new chips would run? We don't have to - unless we want the chip to work as advertised.
> 
> I'm also at the point where it seems the mess that's in the bioses (duplicate and triplicate settings, some work, some don't) is not going away any time soon either, but it sure feels like we're being left behind all in the name of product stack variation.....a bit like the PCIE debacle - and yes, they could re-enable PCIE4 like they've done on at least 1 of their B450 boards.


Ahhh well the only time I think a 3D movie has worked for me is at the edges of scenes where I am using peripheral vision. I only have direct vision in one eye at a time and the other eye is only peripheral vision. I can switch between them though so that's fun. I almost got caught when renewing my license once after I thought I had read all the lines displayed through the machine and the lady administering the test was like . . . aaaaand so I quickly switched eyes and completed the test. 

And I'd like some CCD and CCX control in BIOS as well. I think I'm gonna stick with 4400 CCD1 and 4300 CCD2 at 1.3V for daily use. The few loads that take advantage of max speeds are brief and unimportant.


----------



## ToguroSR

Hey guys,

Currently having some weird issues after using the calculator. I have Ryzen 3600 on a Crosshair VII Hero with kit of 16GB Samsung B-die 3200 CL14.

Soooo...I used the calculator to set the fast timings for 3600 Mhz on the memory and it worked, even thou i get 2-3 cold boots every time i start the pc once it passes that it works flawlessly and passes every test. Now, the issue appears if try to revert back to stock xmp profile or any other set of settings for the memory. The system will not completely boot. It will want to reach the bios screen but as soon as it reaches that point it restarts and the only way to get out of it is to either clear cmos or shut down the system to trigger the oc fail message. So right now i am stuck with a motherboard that will only boot with the fast preset at 3600 or with everything on auto and so the memory will be at 2133.

I have tried everything i can think of, reflash to an older bios, clear c-mos and remove the battery, tried with a different kit of ram ...and the same happens even thou it is completely different and not b-die. I am out if ideas...did anyone experience such a thing ?


----------



## crakej

ToguroSR said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> Currently having some weird issues after using the calculator. I have Ryzen 3600 on a Crosshair VII Hero with kit of 16GB Samsung B-die 3200 CL14.
> 
> Soooo...I used the calculator to set the fast timings for 3600 Mhz on the memory and it worked, even thou i get 2-3 cold boots every time i start the pc once it passes that it works flawlessly and passes every test. Now, the issue appears if try to revert back to stock xmp profile or any other set of settings for the memory. The system will not completely boot. It will want to reach the bios screen but as soon as it reaches that point it restarts and the only way to get out of it is to either clear cmos or shut down the system to trigger the oc fail message. So right now i am stuck with a motherboard that will only boot with the fast preset at 3600 or with everything on auto and so the memory will be at 2133.
> 
> I have tried everything i can think of, reflash to an older bios, clear c-mos and remove the battery, tried with a different kit of ram ...and the same happens even thou it is completely different and not b-die. I am out if ideas...did anyone experience such a thing ?


What method do you use to flash your bios? You should be using FlashBack with bios on USB stick.


----------



## ToguroSR

crakej said:


> What method do you use to flash your bios? You should be using FlashBack with bios on USB stick.


I have tried all the options...bios flashback, internet, ezflash ...nothing seems to work ...so i can not set any other settings for the memory...any kit of memory  ...this ridiculous ....i mean i had my fair share of issues with the crosshair vi and the vii .....but this pretty much just makes me want go a different route in the future ...


----------



## Kildar

Kick your mem volt a notch or two and set mem boot to 1.45.



ToguroSR said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> Currently having some weird issues after using the calculator. I have Ryzen 3600 on a Crosshair VII Hero with kit of 16GB Samsung B-die 3200 CL14.
> 
> Soooo...I used the calculator to set the fast timings for 3600 Mhz on the memory and it worked, even thou i get 2-3 cold boots every time i start the pc once it passes that it works flawlessly and passes every test. Now, the issue appears if try to revert back to stock xmp profile or any other set of settings for the memory. The system will not completely boot. It will want to reach the bios screen but as soon as it reaches that point it restarts and the only way to get out of it is to either clear cmos or shut down the system to trigger the oc fail message. So right now i am stuck with a motherboard that will only boot with the fast preset at 3600 or with everything on auto and so the memory will be at 2133.
> 
> I have tried everything i can think of, reflash to an older bios, clear c-mos and remove the battery, tried with a different kit of ram ...and the same happens even thou it is completely different and not b-die. I am out if ideas...did anyone experience such a thing ?


----------



## ToguroSR

Kildar said:


> Kick your mem volt a notch or two and set mem boot to 1.45.


Tried that too ...tried different settings from the calculator also ....nothing works ....all i can do is stay with the 3600 fast preset. I will send the board to rma next month ....so that i can get smt to put my cpu on until it comes back. I did manage to post with XMP with agesa 0.0.7.2 ...the first one that supports Ryzen 3000....but as soon as i flashed back to the latest bios or the one before that ....bam ....back to this. The thing is ....it did work properly when the 3004 first appeared ....everything went haywire after using the fast preset from the calculator...


----------



## Praetorr

ToguroSR said:


> Tried that too ...tried different settings from the calculator also ....nothing works ....all i can do is stay with the 3600 fast preset. I will send the board to rma next month ....so that i can get smt to put my cpu on until it comes back. I did manage to post with XMP with agesa 0.0.7.2 ...the first one that supports Ryzen 3000....but as soon as i flashed back to the latest bios or the one before that ....bam ....back to this. The thing is ....it did work properly when the 3004 first appeared ....everything went haywire after using the fast preset from the calculator...


Have you tried playing with vSoC? I've had good success with 1.0V on my 3900X, and my brother's 3600X seems to like 1.1V. In the past, did you ever run a very high (1.2+V manual/effective-after-offset or use vSoC LLC)? If the latter is true, you may have degraded the SoC on your chip, depending on silicon lottery and/or temperature.


----------



## ToguroSR

Praetorr said:


> Have you tried playing with vSoC? I've had good success with 1.0V on my 3900X, and my brother's 3600X seems to like 1.1V. In the past, did you ever run a very high (1.2+V manual/effective-after-offset or use vSoC LLC)? If the latter is true, you may have degraded the SoC on your chip, depending on silicon lottery and/or temperature.


Yup tried that too ...only thing i did not try is a new cpu ...but i will have to wait till next month for that


----------



## Praetorr

Sorry to hear about your trouble, brother. That was my only idea.


----------



## harderthanfire

Personally I've never gotten settings from the calc to actually. Even doing the manual import of RAM info stuff. But I do use 4 sticks of Micron E-die so I expect it needs manual tuning.


Your Samsung B-die should be fine to use the calc though, that is super weird. Good luck with the RMA, it certainly sounds like something broke.


----------



## nick name

ToguroSR said:


> Yup tried that too ...only thing i did not try is a new cpu ...but i will have to wait till next month for that


Have you tried pulling the CPU so the system thinks a new one is installed? It's a pain in the ass method, but I'm not entirely sure what's going on here so maybe it's worth trying.


----------



## ToguroSR

nick name said:


> Have you tried pulling the CPU so the system thinks a new one is installed? It's a pain in the ass method, but I'm not entirely sure what's going on here so maybe it's worth trying.





harderthanfire said:


> Personally I've never gotten settings from the calc to actually. Even doing the manual import of RAM info stuff. But I do use 4 sticks of Micron E-die so I expect it needs manual tuning.
> 
> 
> Your Samsung B-die should be fine to use the calc though, that is super weird. Good luck with the RMA, it certainly sounds like something broke.


Well good news ....board is back to normal after exchanging the cpu with the 2600 from my wife's system )) and the 3600 also works as intended on her system ...so nothing broke .....that was close ...was feeling like tossing the damn board out the window )) ....now rocking the 2600 ...till next month when i get a 3900 or a 3950

Thanks for trying to help guys and for the idea with pulling the cpu


----------



## nick name

ToguroSR said:


> Well good news ....board is back to normal after exchanging the cpu with the 2600 from my wife's system )) and the 3600 also works as intended on her system ...so nothing broke .....that was close ...was feeling like tossing the damn board out the window )) ....now rocking the 2600 ...till next month when i get a 3900 or a 3950
> 
> Thanks for trying to help guys and for the idea with pulling the cpu


So you're saying your wife manufactured this problem to trick you into giving her your better CPU? Bravo.


----------



## ToguroSR

nick name said:


> So you're saying your wife manufactured this problem to trick you into giving her your better CPU? Bravo.


I guess that's what just happened ))))


----------



## poliacido

Do you think it is better to install the bios with the Flashback function? I have a new 3600 incoming because it seems my 2700X starts to have some signs of degradation


----------



## Baio73

poliacido said:


> Do you think it is better to install the bios with the Flashback function? I have a new 3600 incoming because it seems my 2700X starts to have some signs of degradation


Yes, Flashback is the best choice.

Baio


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> Do you think it is better to install the bios with the Flashback function? I have a new 3600 incoming because it seems my 2700X starts to have some signs of degradation


If you're on the latest BIOS then all you really need to do is replace the CPU and the board should go into "New CPU Mode" which resets everything. However, the best practice is probably to flash the BIOS again with Flashback.


----------



## poliacido

nick name said:


> If you're on the latest BIOS then all you really need to do is replace the CPU and the board should go into "New CPU Mode" which resets everything. However, the best practice is probably to flash the BIOS again with Flashback.


Nope, i am on an old bios.... like 2203 iirc. Didn't feel the need to upgrade it with my CPU. How is it going with the 3004? I see Asus is not updating it since last year....


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> Nope, i am on an old bios.... like 2203 iirc. Didn't feel the need to upgrade it with my CPU. How is it going with the 3004? I see Asus is not updating it since last year....


I was running 3004 on my 2700X with no issues. I'd upgrade, but you don't need. But of course I recommend it for your new CPU.


----------



## kmellz

New drivers that I hadn't noticed (doesn't seem to be mentioned yet here either), week old https://www.amd.com/en/support/chipsets/amd-socket-am4/x470


----------



## harderthanfire

kmellz said:


> New drivers that I hadn't noticed (doesn't seem to be mentioned yet here either), week old https://www.amd.com/en/support/chipsets/amd-socket-am4/x470



Oooh it has a powerplan update.


----------



## nick name

harderthanfire said:


> Oooh it has a powerplan update.


I didn't notice that. Do you know what's different with it?


----------



## harderthanfire

nick name said:


> I didn't notice that. Do you know what's different with it?



No clue, and I'm using a static oc anyway so not sure why I was excited xD


----------



## poliacido

Are you still using the 1usmus profile for 3xxx cpus or do you recommend use Ryzen balanced or Win balanced?


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> Are you still using the 1usmus profile for 3xxx cpus or do you recommend use Ryzen balanced or Win balanced?


The 1usmus is supposed to force Windows to use the best core which was the reasons I was using it myself, however, if you're running a static OC then that probably doesn't matter.


----------



## poliacido

nick name said:


> The 1usmus is supposed to force Windows to use the best core which was the reasons I was using it myself, however, if you're running a static OC then that probably doesn't matter.


I am using PBO, are you still using it?

EDIT: i've just set the 1usmus universal plan


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> I am using PBO, are you still using it?
> 
> EDIT: i've just set the 1usmus universal plan


Lately, I've been playing with CCD overclocking. Using 44 on CCD1 and 43 or 42 on CCD2 depending on which voltage I am running. I'f I am running 42 then I can use around 1.23V ~ 1.25V and if I wanna run 43 then something like 1.3V. 

The workloads that utilize the faster single-core speed of PBO (or the EDC bug which I was using) are usually short and unimportant in my usage. And with PBO my all-core speed is usually around 4.0GHz and 4.2GHz using EDC bug with higher temps than per CCD clocking. And with per CCD clocking I see all-core of an average 4.3GHz ~ 4.35GHz with lower temps than using EDC bug. 

Other benefit of a fixed multiplier is higher Aida core to cache bandwidth which I assume translates to better performance, but I can't verify that.


----------



## neikosr0x

nick name said:


> Lately, I've been playing with CCD overclocking. Using 44 on CCD1 and 43 or 42 on CCD2 depending on which voltage I am running. I'f I am running 42 then I can use around 1.23V ~ 1.25V and if I wanna run 43 then something like 1.3V.
> 
> The workloads that utilize the faster single-core speed of PBO (or the EDC bug which I was using) are usually short and unimportant in my usage. And with PBO my all-core speed is usually around 4.0GHz and 4.2GHz using EDC bug with higher temps than per CCD clocking. And with per CCD clocking I see all-core of an average 4.3GHz ~ 4.35GHz with lower temps than using EDC bug.
> 
> Other benefit of a fixed multiplier is higher Aida core to cache bandwidth which I assume translates to better performance, but I can't verify that.


Hey bro could you share your CPU PBO settings? for the bug just to have a look at it. thanks

EDIT: also what power plan are you using.


----------



## nick name

neikosr0x said:


> Hey bro could you share your CPU PBO settings? for the bug just to have a look at it. thanks
> 
> EDIT: also what power plan are you using.


Sure thing. Power plan is 1usmus.

EDC bug is: 

In the PBO menu: PPT TDC at 500 and EDC at 2 with 10X Scalar and 200MHz (I don't think PPT and TDC matter for the bug as some people don't set them).
And with a CPU core offset of around -.05V ~ .062V.

If you see your CPU speed randomly drop down to around 2GHz then go back and increase EDC by 1. Whenever the behavior stops you're at your optimal EDC value for the bug (according to The Stig).


----------



## neikosr0x

nick name said:


> Sure thing. Power plan is 1usmus.
> 
> EDC bug is:
> 
> In the PBO menu: PPT TDC at 500 and EDC at 2 with 10X Scalar and 200MHz (I don't think PPT and TDC matter for the bug as some people don't set them).
> And with a CPU core offset of around -.05V ~ .062V.
> 
> If you see your CPU speed randomly drop down to around 2GHz then go back and increase EDC by 1. Whenever the behavior stops you're at your optimal EDC value for the bug (according to The Stig).


thanks mate, btw do you have a particular link to the stilts post?


----------



## nick name

neikosr0x said:


> thanks mate, btw do you have a particular link to the stilts post?


https://www.overclock.net/forum/13-amd-general/1741052-edc-1-pbo-turbo-boost-48.html#post28358202


----------



## neikosr0x

nick name said:


> https://www.overclock.net/forum/13-amd-general/1741052-edc-1-pbo-turbo-boost-48.html#post28358202


Again, thank you mate!


----------



## Pietro

shamino1978 said:


> ok added an option in tweakers paradise:
> force disable oc mode
> to maintain default settings when oc bclk.
> 
> 
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/ptgj3y6d6k7dif7/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0013.rar?dl=0
> you need to do set 3 things for this to work:
> force disable oc mode set enable
> core performance boost option in main menu set enable
> vcore swithc to offset mode auto setting (to prevent vcore being overriden with a manual voltage)
> 
> bioses with this option for other boards will follow later.


Do you have maybe a version for non wifi crosshair VII?


----------



## ortizjammet

Pietro said:


> Do you have maybe a version for non wifi crosshair VII?



you can flash this on a non-wifi board. its the same board. use bios flashback.



shamino1978 said:


> ok added an option in tweakers paradise:
> force disable oc mode
> to maintain default settings when oc bclk.
> 
> 
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/ptgj3y6d6k7dif7/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0013.rar?dl=0
> you need to do set 3 things for this to work:
> force disable oc mode set enable
> core performance boost option in main menu set enable
> vcore swithc to offset mode auto setting (to prevent vcore being overriden with a manual voltage)
> 
> bioses with this option for other boards will follow later.


can eCLK mode with BCLK 1 and BCLK 2 enabled back on zen2?


----------



## kmellz

This post/thread also has some more specific settings
https://www.overclock.net/forum/13-amd-general/1741052-edc-1-pbo-turbo-boost.html#post28299504


----------



## Pietro

ortizjammet said:


> you can flash this on a non-wifi board. its the same board. use bios flashback.
> 
> 
> 
> can eCLK mode with BCLK 1 and BCLK 2 enabled back on zen2?


Well it doesn't flash for me.


----------



## poliacido

Pietro said:


> Well it doesn't flash for me.


You can't. As far as i know you can't flash the wifi on the non-wifi.... at least on the release, i don't know if they changed it....


----------



## crakej

poliacido said:


> You can't. As far as i know you can't flash the wifi on the non-wifi.... at least on the release, i don't know if they changed it....


You used to be able to, but only using Afuefix.exe, but that no longer works with the bioses that support Ryzen 3xxx - it's been disabled in the bios (unless someone has found a way around it?)

I've been running the AMD power plan since ver 5, which seems pretty similar to 1usmus profile, so just stuck with it.

As for the EDC 'bug' - the values I use are 0, 0 and for EDC it's at 19 currently.


----------



## poliacido

crakej said:


> You used to be able to, but only using Afuefix.exe, but that no longer works with the bioses that support Ryzen 3xxx - it's been disabled in the bios (unless someone has found a way around it?)
> 
> I've been running the AMD power plan since ver 5, which seems pretty similar to 1usmus profile, so just stuck with it.
> 
> As for the EDC 'bug' - the values I use are 0, 0 and for EDC it's at 19 currently.


Is the edc bug stable in your pc? I saw a video on YT of buildzoid and he said that is not so stable, he advise to just set the PBO parameters at certain values (can't remember now i have to look at it again).
At the moment i'm still at default with the 1usmus profile.... i still have to mess around with some PBO settings. Also i don't think my memory is capable to hit 3600mhz(with a reasonable voltage)... still have to try it though


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> Is the edc bug stable in your pc? I saw a video on YT of buildzoid and he said that is not so stable, he advise to just set the PBO parameters at certain values (can't remember now i have to look at it again).
> At the moment i'm still at default with the 1usmus profile.... i still have to mess around with some PBO settings. Also i don't think my memory is capable to hit 3600mhz(with a reasonable voltage)... still have to try it though


The EDC bug can be stable. I gave up using it because I get more performance using CCD clocking.


----------



## Logue

Hey everyone, I'd like some help to check my settings since I think my setup is running a little bit warm.
I have a 3800X in a Crosshair VII Hero (BIOS 3004 - latest) with a Noctua NH-D15 SE AM4 (single fan in the middle), running latest Windows 10 1909 (v. 18363.815).
I've provided a screenshot of HWInfo64 (v. 6.25-4135) so you guys can see. I've opened HWInfo after starting up the PC and I've not done anything particularly heavy with it since the startup (mostly Chrome browsing, some apps in the background) - I've also added a screenshot of my Icon Tray so you can see what's running: iCUE, Logitech Software, Asus Software (for fan profiles), Fiio software (for my DAC/AMP), a quick Power Plan switcher, Unified Remote and AMD Software for my 5700XT. I left HWInfo running in the background so I could look at averages later on and you can see it's been running for about 2 hours (bottom right corner).

As you can see in the HWInfo screenshot, even tho I have a NH-D15 installed, my avg CPU temp is 57.0ºC, with a minimum of 47.9ºC and a max of 77ºC (CPU TCtl/TDie HWInfo reading). That's a little high even for someone living in a hot country, right? (Windows says it's 29ºC outside in my city at the time of the screenshot). Also, I see my voltages never go below 0.9v as I think this CPU should according to AMD in some other posts I read on reddit - at some point my screen even turned off as I wasn't using the PC, meaning it was basically fully idling. Minimum voltage (Cores VID) is 1.138v in a period of 2 hours... is that right?

I'm using AMD Chipset version 2.01.15.2138 since there have been reports 2.04 may have bugs in it. Also using Ryzen Balanced power plan.

Since I have made some modifications to the BIOS (meaning, it's not all stock, not that I have a custom BIOS version...), I'll post below the full settings I have (saved through BIOS User Profile thingy on USB):



Spoiler



Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
BCLK_Divider [Auto]
Performance Enhancer [Default]
CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
Performance Bias [None]
Memory Frequency [DDR4-3600MHz]
FCLK Frequency [1800MHz]
Core Performance Boost [Enabled]
SMT Mode [Enabled]
TPU [Keep Current Settings]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
Max CPU Boost Clock Override [200MHz]
Platform Thermal Throttle Limit [Auto]
Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto]
DRAM CAS# Latency [14]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [16]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [14]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [14]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [28]
Trc [42]
TrrdS [4]
TrrdL [6]
Tfaw [16]
TwtrS [4]
TwtrL [12]
Twr [12]
Trcpage [Auto]
TrdrdScl [4]
TwrwrScl [4]
Trfc [288]
Trfc2 [Auto]
Trfc4 [Auto]
Tcwl [14]
Trtp [8]
Trdwr [8]
Twrrd [3]
TwrwrSc [1]
TwrwrSd [7]
TwrwrDd [7]
TrdrdSc [1]
TrdrdSd [5]
TrdrdDd [5]
Tcke [1]
ProcODT [34.3 ohm]
Cmd2T [1T]
Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
Power Down Enable [Disabled]
RttNom [Rtt_Nom Disable]
RttWr [Dynamic ODT Off]
RttPark [RZQ/5]
MemAddrCmdSetup [55]
MemCsOdtSetup [55]
MemCkeSetup [55]
MemCadBusClkDrvStren [30.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [20.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [20.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 1]
CPU Current Capability [100%]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
CPU Voltage Frequency [500]
CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
CPU Power Phase Control [Power Phase Response]
Manual Adjustment [Ultra Fast]
CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 1]
VDDSOC Current Capability [100%]
VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed VDDSOC Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
VDDSOC Phase Control [Power Phase Response]
Manual Adjustment [Ultra Fast]
DRAM Current Capability [100%]
DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.45000]
VTTDDR Voltage [0.72500]
VPP_MEM Voltage [2.50000]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
VDDP Voltage [0.90000]
1.8V Standby Voltage [1.80000]
CPU 3.3v AUX [3.30000]
2.5V SB Voltage [2.50000]
DRAM R1 Tune [63]
DRAM R2 Tune [63]
DRAM R3 Tune [63]
DRAM R4 Tune [63]
PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
PLL reference voltage [Auto]
T Offset [Auto]
Sense MI Skew [Enabled]
Sense MI Offset [Auto]
Promontory presence [Enabled]
Clock Amplitude [Auto]
CLDO VDDP voltage [900]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
- VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.05000]
DRAM Voltage [1.45000]
CLDO VDDG voltage [0.950]
1.8V PLL Voltage [1.80000]
1.05V SB Voltage [1.05000]
Security Device Support [Enable]
SHA-1 PCR Bank [Enabled]
SHA256 PCR Bank [Enabled]
Pending operation [None]
Platform Hierarchy [Enabled]
Storage Hierarchy [Enabled]
Endorsement Hierarchy [Enabled]
TPM2.0 UEFI Spec Version [TCG_2]
Physical Presence Spec Version [1.3]
Firmware TPM [Enable]
Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Disabled]
PSS Support [Enabled]
SVM Mode [Enabled]
Onboard LED [Enabled]
Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
SATA Mode [AHCI]
NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
SMART Self Test [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
HD Audio Controller [Disabled]
M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [GEN 3]
PCIEX8/X4_2 Mode [GEN 3]
PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
M.2_1 Link Mode [GEN 3]
M.2_2 Link Mode [GEN 3]
SB Link Mode [GEN 3]
Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
When system is in working state [On]
When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [Off]
Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
ErP Ready [Disabled]
Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
Power On By RTC [Disabled]
Network Stack [Disabled]
Device [ST6000DM004-2EH11C]
Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
SanDisk [Auto]
U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
U31G1_5 [Enabled]
U31G1_6 [Enabled]
U31G1_7 [Enabled]
U31G1_8 [Enabled]
U31G1_9 [Enabled]
U31G1_10 [Enabled]
USB11 [Enabled]
USB12 [Enabled]
USB13 [Enabled]
USB14 [Enabled]
USB15 [Enabled]
CPU Temperature [Monitor]
MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
PCH Temperature [Monitor]
T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
5V Voltage [Monitor]
12V Voltage [Monitor]
CPU Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [255 sec]
CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [300 RPM]
CPU Fan Profile [Manual]
CPU Upper Temperature [75]
CPU Fan Max. Duty Cycle (%) [40]
CPU Middle Temperature [60]
CPU Fan Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [25]
CPU Lower Temperature [40]
CPU Fan Min. Duty Cycle (%) [17]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [255 sec]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [300 RPM]
Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Manual]
Chassis Fan 2 Upper Temperature [75]
Chassis Fan 2 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [40]
Chassis Fan 2 Middle Temperature [60]
Chassis Fan 2 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [25]
Chassis Fan 2 Lower Temperature [40]
Chassis Fan 2 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [17]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
PSPP Policy [Auto]
Fast Boot [Enabled]
NVMe Support [Enabled]
Next Boot after AC Power Loss [Fast Boot]
AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
Boot Logo Display [Enabled]
POST Delay Time [0 sec]
Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
Launch CSM [Disabled]
OS Type [Windows UEFI mode]
Setup Animator [Disabled]
ASUS Grid Install Service [Disabled]
Load from Profile [1]
Profile Name [3600MHZ]
Save to Profile [1]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
BCLK Frequency [Auto]
CPU Ratio [Auto]
DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A2]
Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
Custom Pstate0 [Auto]
L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Enable]
L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Enable]
Core Performance Boost [Auto]
Global C-state Control [Enabled]
DRAM ECC Enable [Disabled]
DRAM scrub time [Auto]
Poison scrubber control [Auto]
Redirect scrubber control [Auto]
Redirect scrubber limit [Auto]
NUMA nodes per socket [Auto]
Memory interleaving [Auto]
Memory interleaving size [Auto]
1TB remap [Auto]
DRAM map inversion [Auto]
ACPI SRAT L3 Cache As NUMA Domain [Auto]
ACPI SLIT Distance Control [Auto]
ACPI SLIT remote relative distance [Auto]
GMI encryption control [Auto]
xGMI encryption control [Auto]
CAKE CRC perf bounds Control [Auto]
4-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
3-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
Disable DF to external IP SyncFloodPropagation [Auto]
Disable DF sync flood propagation [Auto]
CC6 memory region encryption [Auto]
Memory Clear [Auto]
Overclock [Enabled]
Memory Clock Speed [Auto]
Tcl [Auto]
Trcdrd [Auto]
Trcdwr [Auto]
Trp [Auto]
Tras [Auto]
Trc Ctrl [Auto]
TrrdS [Auto]
TrrdL [Auto]
Tfaw Ctrl [Auto]
TwtrS [Auto]
TwtrL [Auto]
Twr Ctrl [Auto]
Trcpage Ctrl [Auto]
TrdrdScL Ctrl [Auto]
TwrwrScL Ctrl [Auto]
Trfc Ctrl [Auto]
Trfc2 Ctrl [Auto]
Trfc4 Ctrl [Auto]
Tcwl [Auto]
Trtp [Auto]
Tcke [Auto]
Trdwr [Auto]
Twrrd [Auto]
TwrwrSc [Auto]
TwrwrSd [Auto]
TwrwrDd [Auto]
TrdrdSc [Auto]
TrdrdSd [Auto]
TrdrdDd [Auto]
ProcODT [Auto]
Power Down Enable [Auto]
Cmd2T [Auto]
Gear Down Mode [Auto]
CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
Data Poisoning [Auto]
DRAM Post Package Repair [Disable]
RCD Parity [Auto]
DRAM Address Command Parity Retry [Auto]
Write CRC Enable [Auto]
DRAM Write CRC Enable and Retry Limit [Auto]
Disable Memory Error Injection [True]
DRAM ECC Symbol Size [Auto]
DRAM UECC Retry [Auto]
TSME [Auto]
Data Scramble [Auto]
DFE Read Training [Auto]
FFE Write Training [Auto]
PMU Pattern Bits Control [Auto]
MR6VrefDQ Control [Auto]
CPU Vref Training Seed Control [Auto]
Chipselect Interleaving [Auto]
BankGroupSwap [Auto]
BankGroupSwapAlt [Auto]
Address Hash Bank [Auto]
Address Hash CS [Auto]
Address Hash Rm [Auto]
SPD Read Optimization [Enabled]
MBIST Enable [Disabled]
Pattern Select [PRBS]
Pattern Length [3]
Aggressor Channel [1 Aggressor Channel]
Aggressor Static Lane Control [Disabled]
Target Static Lane Control [Disabled]
Worst Case Margin Granularity [Per Chip Select]
Read Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
Read Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
Write Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
Write Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
IOMMU [Auto]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [Auto]
FCLK Frequency [Auto]
SOC OVERCLOCK VID [0]
UCLK DIV1 MODE [UCLK==MEMCLK]
VDDP Voltage Control [Auto]
VDDG Voltage Control [Auto]
SoC/Uncore OC Mode [Enabled]
LN2 Mode [Disabled]
ACS Enable [Auto]
PCIe Ten Bit Tag Support [Auto]
Max Voltage Offset [Auto]
cTDP Control [Auto]
EfficiencyModeEn [Auto]
Package Power Limit Control [Auto]
APBDIS [Auto]
DF Cstates [Auto]
CPPC [Enabled]
CPPC Preferred Cores [Enabled]
BoostFmaxEn [Auto]
Early Link Speed [Auto]


----------



## nick name

Logue said:


> Hey everyone, I'd like some help to check my settings since I think my setup is running a little bit warm.
> I have a 3800X in a Crosshair VII Hero (BIOS 3004 - latest) with a Noctua NH-D15 SE AM4 (single fan in the middle), running latest Windows 10 1909 (v. 18363.815).
> I've provided a screenshot of HWInfo64 (v. 6.25-4135) so you guys can see. I've opened HWInfo after starting up the PC and I've not done anything particularly heavy with it since the startup (mostly Chrome browsing, some apps in the background) - I've also added a screenshot of my Icon Tray so you can see what's running: iCUE, Logitech Software, Asus Software (for fan profiles), Fiio software (for my DAC/AMP), a quick Power Plan switcher, Unified Remote and AMD Software for my 5700XT. I left HWInfo running in the background so I could look at averages later on and you can see it's been running for about 2 hours (bottom right corner).
> 
> As you can see in the HWInfo screenshot, even tho I have a NH-D15 installed, my avg CPU temp is 57.0ºC, with a minimum of 47.9ºC and a max of 77ºC (CPU TCtl/TDie HWInfo reading). That's a little high even for someone living in a hot country, right? (Windows says it's 29ºC outside in my city at the time of the screenshot). Also, I see my voltages never go below 0.9v as I think this CPU should according to AMD in some other posts I read on reddit - at some point my screen even turned off as I wasn't using the PC, meaning it was basically fully idling. Minimum voltage (Cores VID) is 1.138v in a period of 2 hours... is that right?
> 
> I'm using AMD Chipset version 2.01.15.2138 since there have been reports 2.04 may have bugs in it. Also using Ryzen Balanced power plan.
> 
> Since I have made some modifications to the BIOS (meaning, it's not all stock, not that I have a custom BIOS version...), I'll post below the full settings I have (saved through BIOS User Profile thingy on USB):
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
> BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
> BCLK_Divider [Auto]
> Performance Enhancer [Default]
> CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
> Performance Bias [None]
> Memory Frequency [DDR4-3600MHz]
> FCLK Frequency [1800MHz]
> Core Performance Boost [Enabled]
> SMT Mode [Enabled]
> TPU [Keep Current Settings]
> Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
> Max CPU Boost Clock Override [200MHz]
> Platform Thermal Throttle Limit [Auto]
> Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto]
> DRAM CAS# Latency [14]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [16]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [14]
> DRAM RAS# PRE Time [14]
> DRAM RAS# ACT Time [28]
> Trc [42]
> TrrdS [4]
> TrrdL [6]
> Tfaw [16]
> TwtrS [4]
> TwtrL [12]
> Twr [12]
> Trcpage [Auto]
> TrdrdScl [4]
> TwrwrScl [4]
> Trfc [288]
> Trfc2 [Auto]
> Trfc4 [Auto]
> Tcwl [14]
> Trtp [8]
> Trdwr [8]
> Twrrd [3]
> TwrwrSc [1]
> TwrwrSd [7]
> TwrwrDd [7]
> TrdrdSc [1]
> TrdrdSd [5]
> TrdrdDd [5]
> Tcke [1]
> ProcODT [34.3 ohm]
> Cmd2T [1T]
> Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
> Power Down Enable [Disabled]
> RttNom [Rtt_Nom Disable]
> RttWr [Dynamic ODT Off]
> RttPark [RZQ/5]
> MemAddrCmdSetup [55]
> MemCsOdtSetup [55]
> MemCkeSetup [55]
> MemCadBusClkDrvStren [30.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [20.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [20.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 1]
> CPU Current Capability [100%]
> CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
> CPU Voltage Frequency [500]
> CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
> CPU Power Phase Control [Power Phase Response]
> Manual Adjustment [Ultra Fast]
> CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
> VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 1]
> VDDSOC Current Capability [100%]
> VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Manual]
> Fixed VDDSOC Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
> VDDSOC Phase Control [Power Phase Response]
> Manual Adjustment [Ultra Fast]
> DRAM Current Capability [100%]
> DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
> DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
> Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
> DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.45000]
> VTTDDR Voltage [0.72500]
> VPP_MEM Voltage [2.50000]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
> VDDP Voltage [0.90000]
> 1.8V Standby Voltage [1.80000]
> CPU 3.3v AUX [3.30000]
> 2.5V SB Voltage [2.50000]
> DRAM R1 Tune [63]
> DRAM R2 Tune [63]
> DRAM R3 Tune [63]
> DRAM R4 Tune [63]
> PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
> PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
> PLL reference voltage [Auto]
> T Offset [Auto]
> Sense MI Skew [Enabled]
> Sense MI Offset [Auto]
> Promontory presence [Enabled]
> Clock Amplitude [Auto]
> CLDO VDDP voltage [900]
> CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
> CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
> - VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.05000]
> DRAM Voltage [1.45000]
> CLDO VDDG voltage [0.950]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [1.80000]
> 1.05V SB Voltage [1.05000]
> Security Device Support [Enable]
> SHA-1 PCR Bank [Enabled]
> SHA256 PCR Bank [Enabled]
> Pending operation [None]
> Platform Hierarchy [Enabled]
> Storage Hierarchy [Enabled]
> Endorsement Hierarchy [Enabled]
> TPM2.0 UEFI Spec Version [TCG_2]
> Physical Presence Spec Version [1.3]
> Firmware TPM [Enable]
> Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Disabled]
> PSS Support [Enabled]
> SVM Mode [Enabled]
> Onboard LED [Enabled]
> Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
> SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
> SATA Mode [AHCI]
> NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
> SMART Self Test [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> HD Audio Controller [Disabled]
> M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
> PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [GEN 3]
> PCIEX8/X4_2 Mode [GEN 3]
> PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
> M.2_1 Link Mode [GEN 3]
> M.2_2 Link Mode [GEN 3]
> SB Link Mode [GEN 3]
> Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
> USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
> When system is in working state [On]
> When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [Off]
> Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
> Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
> ErP Ready [Disabled]
> Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
> Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
> Power On By RTC [Disabled]
> Network Stack [Disabled]
> Device [ST6000DM004-2EH11C]
> Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
> XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
> SanDisk [Auto]
> U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
> U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
> U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> U31G1_5 [Enabled]
> U31G1_6 [Enabled]
> U31G1_7 [Enabled]
> U31G1_8 [Enabled]
> U31G1_9 [Enabled]
> U31G1_10 [Enabled]
> USB11 [Enabled]
> USB12 [Enabled]
> USB13 [Enabled]
> USB14 [Enabled]
> USB15 [Enabled]
> CPU Temperature [Monitor]
> MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
> PCH Temperature [Monitor]
> T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
> HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
> CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
> AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
> W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
> W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
> 3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
> 5V Voltage [Monitor]
> 12V Voltage [Monitor]
> CPU Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [255 sec]
> CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [300 RPM]
> CPU Fan Profile [Manual]
> CPU Upper Temperature [75]
> CPU Fan Max. Duty Cycle (%) [40]
> CPU Middle Temperature [60]
> CPU Fan Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [25]
> CPU Lower Temperature [40]
> CPU Fan Min. Duty Cycle (%) [17]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [255 sec]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [300 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Manual]
> Chassis Fan 2 Upper Temperature [75]
> Chassis Fan 2 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [40]
> Chassis Fan 2 Middle Temperature [60]
> Chassis Fan 2 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [25]
> Chassis Fan 2 Lower Temperature [40]
> Chassis Fan 2 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [17]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
> PSPP Policy [Auto]
> Fast Boot [Enabled]
> NVMe Support [Enabled]
> Next Boot after AC Power Loss [Fast Boot]
> AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
> Boot Logo Display [Enabled]
> POST Delay Time [0 sec]
> Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
> Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
> Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
> Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
> Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
> Launch CSM [Disabled]
> OS Type [Windows UEFI mode]
> Setup Animator [Disabled]
> ASUS Grid Install Service [Disabled]
> Load from Profile [1]
> Profile Name [3600MHZ]
> Save to Profile [1]
> CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
> VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> BCLK Frequency [Auto]
> CPU Ratio [Auto]
> DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A2]
> Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
> Custom Pstate0 [Auto]
> L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Enable]
> L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Enable]
> Core Performance Boost [Auto]
> Global C-state Control [Enabled]
> DRAM ECC Enable [Disabled]
> DRAM scrub time [Auto]
> Poison scrubber control [Auto]
> Redirect scrubber control [Auto]
> Redirect scrubber limit [Auto]
> NUMA nodes per socket [Auto]
> Memory interleaving [Auto]
> Memory interleaving size [Auto]
> 1TB remap [Auto]
> DRAM map inversion [Auto]
> ACPI SRAT L3 Cache As NUMA Domain [Auto]
> ACPI SLIT Distance Control [Auto]
> ACPI SLIT remote relative distance [Auto]
> GMI encryption control [Auto]
> xGMI encryption control [Auto]
> CAKE CRC perf bounds Control [Auto]
> 4-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
> 3-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
> Disable DF to external IP SyncFloodPropagation [Auto]
> Disable DF sync flood propagation [Auto]
> CC6 memory region encryption [Auto]
> Memory Clear [Auto]
> Overclock [Enabled]
> Memory Clock Speed [Auto]
> Tcl [Auto]
> Trcdrd [Auto]
> Trcdwr [Auto]
> Trp [Auto]
> Tras [Auto]
> Trc Ctrl [Auto]
> TrrdS [Auto]
> TrrdL [Auto]
> Tfaw Ctrl [Auto]
> TwtrS [Auto]
> TwtrL [Auto]
> Twr Ctrl [Auto]
> Trcpage Ctrl [Auto]
> TrdrdScL Ctrl [Auto]
> TwrwrScL Ctrl [Auto]
> Trfc Ctrl [Auto]
> Trfc2 Ctrl [Auto]
> Trfc4 Ctrl [Auto]
> Tcwl [Auto]
> Trtp [Auto]
> Tcke [Auto]
> Trdwr [Auto]
> Twrrd [Auto]
> TwrwrSc [Auto]
> TwrwrSd [Auto]
> TwrwrDd [Auto]
> TrdrdSc [Auto]
> TrdrdSd [Auto]
> TrdrdDd [Auto]
> ProcODT [Auto]
> Power Down Enable [Auto]
> Cmd2T [Auto]
> Gear Down Mode [Auto]
> CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
> CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
> Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
> Data Poisoning [Auto]
> DRAM Post Package Repair [Disable]
> RCD Parity [Auto]
> DRAM Address Command Parity Retry [Auto]
> Write CRC Enable [Auto]
> DRAM Write CRC Enable and Retry Limit [Auto]
> Disable Memory Error Injection [True]
> DRAM ECC Symbol Size [Auto]
> DRAM UECC Retry [Auto]
> TSME [Auto]
> Data Scramble [Auto]
> DFE Read Training [Auto]
> FFE Write Training [Auto]
> PMU Pattern Bits Control [Auto]
> MR6VrefDQ Control [Auto]
> CPU Vref Training Seed Control [Auto]
> Chipselect Interleaving [Auto]
> BankGroupSwap [Auto]
> BankGroupSwapAlt [Auto]
> Address Hash Bank [Auto]
> Address Hash CS [Auto]
> Address Hash Rm [Auto]
> SPD Read Optimization [Enabled]
> MBIST Enable [Disabled]
> Pattern Select [PRBS]
> Pattern Length [3]
> Aggressor Channel [1 Aggressor Channel]
> Aggressor Static Lane Control [Disabled]
> Target Static Lane Control [Disabled]
> Worst Case Margin Granularity [Per Chip Select]
> Read Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
> Read Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
> Write Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
> Write Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
> IOMMU [Auto]
> Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
> Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [Auto]
> FCLK Frequency [Auto]
> SOC OVERCLOCK VID [0]
> UCLK DIV1 MODE [UCLK==MEMCLK]
> VDDP Voltage Control [Auto]
> VDDG Voltage Control [Auto]
> SoC/Uncore OC Mode [Enabled]
> LN2 Mode [Disabled]
> ACS Enable [Auto]
> PCIe Ten Bit Tag Support [Auto]
> Max Voltage Offset [Auto]
> cTDP Control [Auto]
> EfficiencyModeEn [Auto]
> Package Power Limit Control [Auto]
> APBDIS [Auto]
> DF Cstates [Auto]
> CPPC [Enabled]
> CPPC Preferred Cores [Enabled]
> BoostFmaxEn [Auto]
> Early Link Speed [Auto]


It looks like your case air temp is high.


----------



## Logue

What about voltages? Idle at 1.138v is normal? I know that if I change the power plan to Power Saving, the CPU does get colder but it becomes limited to 2.2GHz, which is fine for idle but not for anything else. My case is a 400C and I have all Noctua fans everywhere.


----------



## darkage

try setting the bios to stock and watch if it stays the same
your average speed is to high so your temps are to high average,
i have a 3700X and with the nh-d15 (one fan) and 1usmus universal power plan i have this temps and average speeds


----------



## nick name

Logue said:


> What about voltages? Idle at 1.138v is normal? I know that if I change the power plan to Power Saving, the CPU does get colder but it becomes limited to 2.2GHz, which is fine for idle but not for anything else. My case is a 400C and I have all Noctua fans everywhere.


What are the placements and orientations of your fans?

And have you set a negative offset for your CPU voltage in BIOS?


----------



## gooshpitz

Does anyone else have the q code cycling 3 times after shut down? The ram is stable.


----------



## speedgoat

@Logue
perhaps re-paste and re-seat the cooler too except looking at the bios because your max temp of 77C is kind of high given you only pulled 67.5W there


----------



## Logue

nick name said:


> What are the placements and orientations of your fans?
> 
> And have you set a negative offset for your CPU voltage in BIOS?


I have 2x 140mm in the front as intakes, CPU cooler is installed vertically (meaning, paralell to front fans), 1x 120mm at the back as exhaust. I also have 1x140mm at the top, but that only turns on when GPU temps > 55ºC (basically, when gaming...) - controlled through a Commander Pro (some of them, the front ones and the CPU cooler one are connected to the motherboard). And about the negative offset, I can only apply a negative offset of up to -0.100v (after that, system crashes when loading Windows). Using that, temps drop a little, but so does the boost clocks (máx at 4.425 instead of 4.525).



darkage said:


> try setting the bios to stock and watch if it stays the same
> your average speed is to high so your temps are to high average,
> i have a 3700X and with the nh-d15 (one fan) and 1usmus universal power plan i have this temps and average speeds


Since I have a lot of values changed in BIOS, I may try stock to see if temps go down, but I'd still have to tweak a few things (like RAM clocks/timings) and some VRM stuff (could that be impacting it?)



speedgoat said:


> @Logue
> perhaps re-paste and re-seat the cooler too except looking at the bios because your max temp of 77C is kind of high given you only pulled 67.5W there


I'm changing cases this week, tho the new one isn't the best for temps either, maybe even worse (currently have a 400C, going for a 680X, both Corsair). So when that arrives, I'll take the oportunity to repaste e remount the cooler. What I find weird is that my chip likes to keep frequencies super high and with super high voltages (of up to 1.5v) even tho' I'm idle... Maybe because of some software/Windows bugs? Idk, maybe I should format this and reinstall Windows too.

P.S.: Just as I write this it just occurred to me that maybe Corsair ICue and the Commander Pro may be to blame for all of this.


----------



## speedgoat

ok i have barely used ICue but i do remember many ppl mentioning it messed with temps and was keeping high idle voltages






Logue said:


> I have 2x 140mm in the front as intakes, CPU cooler is installed vertically (meaning, paralell to front fans), 1x 120mm at the back as exhaust. I also have 1x140mm at the top, but that only turns on when GPU temps > 55ºC (basically, when gaming...) - controlled through a Commander Pro (some of them, the front ones and the CPU cooler one are connected to the motherboard). And about the negative offset, I can only apply a negative offset of up to -0.100v (after that, system crashes when loading Windows). Using that, temps drop a little, but so does the boost clocks (máx at 4.425 instead of 4.525).
> 
> 
> Since I have a lot of values changed in BIOS, I may try stock to see if temps go down, but I'd still have to tweak a few things (like RAM clocks/timings) and some VRM stuff (could that be impacting it?)
> 
> 
> I'm changing cases this week, tho the new one isn't the best for temps either, maybe even worse (currently have a 400C, going for a 680X, both Corsair). So when that arrives, I'll take the oportunity to repaste e remount the cooler. What I find weird is that my chip likes to keep frequencies super high and with super high voltages (of up to 1.5v) even tho' I'm idle... Maybe because of some software/Windows bugs? Idk, maybe I should format this and reinstall Windows too.
> 
> P.S.: Just as I write this it just occurred to me that maybe Corsair ICue and the Commander Pro may be to blame for all of this.


----------



## liakou

speedgoat said:


> ok i have barely used ICue but i do remember many ppl mentioning it messed with temps and was keeping high idle voltages


That is true indeed. 
Until I got rid of it, iCue was constantly keeping my idle voltage @1v+ never dropping thus giving me high idle temps.
Being free of it now my idle voltage settles below 1V and temps are normal.


----------



## poliacido

Today i messed around with some PBO settings... no matter what i set my 3600 doesn't change its freq not even by 50mhz from the stock settings...
I set PTT 300, TDC and EDC 230, scalar 4x and +200mhz for max boost (or whatever it is called in the bios), tried with the 1usmus and ryzen power profiles it doesn't matter... 
Tried single and multi core load but the frequencies just stay at default


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> Today i messed around with some PBO settings... no matter what i set my 3600 doesn't change its freq not even by 50mhz from the stock settings...
> I set PTT 300, TDC and EDC 230, scalar 4x and +200mhz for max boost (or whatever it is called in the bios), tried with the 1usmus and ryzen power profiles it doesn't matter...
> Tried single and multi core load but the frequencies just stay at default


Try the EDC bug. I run Auto Auto then 2 for EDC.


----------



## poliacido

nick name said:


> Try the EDC bug. I run Auto Auto then 2 for EDC.


tried that... nothing changes
also i noticed the total power draw never exceeds the 65w of the cpu (like it is at default)

EDIT: worth to mention the cpu should at least hit 4.2 with 1 core but it will just go for 4.1 at max no matter what setting i put in


----------



## nick name

poliacido said:


> tried that... nothing changes
> also i noticed the total power draw never exceeds the 65w of the cpu (like it is at default)
> 
> EDIT: worth to mention the cpu should at least hit 4.2 with 1 core but it will just go for 4.1 at max no matter what setting i put in


Hmmm. Which BIOS?


----------



## poliacido

nick name said:


> Hmmm. Which BIOS?


latest


----------



## hurricane28

Hi guys, 

I have an weird issue and i would like to get some info as to what is causing this. 

The issue is that i can game for hours on end without any problem but sometimes my PC shuts down and the motherboard shows qcode 8. I can't find anything about that code in the manual but some people claim its the CPU or motherboard dying? 

Nothing is over heating or high voltage. Only the RAM is overclocked to 3466 MHz but now i am trying to replicate the issue on DOCP setting 3200 MHz.

Oh and i am on the latest BIOS btw.


----------



## harderthanfire

hurricane28 said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> I have an weird issue and i would like to get some info as to what is causing this.
> 
> The issue is that i can game for hours on end without any problem but sometimes my PC shuts down and the motherboard shows qcode 8. I can't find anything about that code in the manual but some people claim its the CPU or motherboard dying?
> 
> Nothing is over heating or high voltage. Only the RAM is overclocked to 3466 MHz but now i am trying to replicate the issue on DOCP setting 3200 MHz.
> 
> Oh and i am on the latest BIOS btw.



Does it shut down whilst using the PC or is it only when it is idle? Also check windows event log.


I thought mine was doing this at one point but turned out to be windows update constantly rebooting me.


----------



## hurricane28

it does it when i am gaming so yeah when i am using it. Its completely random though as when i stress test it with OCCT for a couple of hours i have no issues. One day its perfect the other problems.


----------



## liakou

hurricane28 said:


> it does it when i am gaming so yeah when i am using it. Its completely random though as when i stress test it with OCCT for a couple of hours i have no issues. One day its perfect the other problems.


Did you replicate the issue with DOCP?


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> I have an weird issue and i would like to get some info as to what is causing this.
> 
> The issue is that i can game for hours on end without any problem but sometimes my PC shuts down and the motherboard shows qcode 8. I can't find anything about that code in the manual but some people claim its the CPU or motherboard dying?
> 
> Nothing is over heating or high voltage. Only the RAM is overclocked to 3466 MHz but now i am trying to replicate the issue on DOCP setting 3200 MHz.
> 
> Oh and i am on the latest BIOS btw.


I see that code when I am running without enough power. If the only thing overclocked was the RAM then I'd add a hair more voltage there.


----------



## speedgoat

can you tell if its your ram overheating or not ? cause i have noticed sometimes in the past too temps in excess of 50C which eventually will crash it 

i know for sure b-dies have a temp sensor and hynix wont, but im not sure if e-dies do have 



hurricane28 said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> I have an weird issue and i would like to get some info as to what is causing this.
> 
> The issue is that i can game for hours on end without any problem but sometimes my PC shuts down and the motherboard shows qcode 8. I can't find anything about that code in the manual but some people claim its the CPU or motherboard dying?
> 
> Nothing is over heating or high voltage. Only the RAM is overclocked to 3466 MHz but now i am trying to replicate the issue on DOCP setting 3200 MHz.
> 
> Oh and i am on the latest BIOS btw.


----------



## ZednGrace

*Latency vs ddr4 overclocking*

Good morning all! This is my first post -- please be kind I'm new to Ryzen with 3900x and C7H. Ram is G.Skill 4x8GB F4-3600C16Q-32GVKC @ 16-19-19-39. I can post at 3800/1900, but Aida latency goes up from 70.2 stock to 78.4! The computer is stable, but performance in CB20 goes down. I am not currently overclocking, only using DOCP and modifying ram settings to 3800/1900. It have read the majority of this thread, but most tips pertain to Samsung B die and little on Hynix D die. Does anyone have suggested settings for D die? I tried applying settings from the Ryzen DRam Calculator, but system doesn't boot.


----------



## Hale59

ZednGrace said:


> Good morning all! This is my first post -- please be kind I'm new to Ryzen with 3900x and C7H. Ram is G.Skill 4x8GB F4-3600C16Q-32GVKC @ 16-19-19-39. I can post at 3800/1900, but Aida latency goes up from 70.2 stock to 78.4! The computer is stable, but performance in CB20 goes down. I am not currently overclocking, only using DOCP and modifying ram settings to 3800/1900. It have read the majority of this thread, but most tips pertain to Samsung B die and little on Hynix D die. Does anyone have suggested settings for D die? I tried applying settings from the Ryzen DRam Calculator, but system doesn't boot.


Download DRAM Calculator for Ryzen: 
https://www.techpowerup.com/download/ryzen-dram-calculator/

Instructions and tips how to use it:
https://www.overclock.net/forum/13-...locking-dram-am4-membench-0-8-dram-bench.html


----------



## andyliu

hurricane28 said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> I have an weird issue and i would like to get some info as to what is causing this.
> 
> The issue is that i can game for hours on end without any problem but sometimes my PC shuts down and the motherboard shows qcode 8. I can't find anything about that code in the manual but some people claim its the CPU or motherboard dying?
> 
> Nothing is over heating or high voltage. Only the RAM is overclocked to 3466 MHz but now i am trying to replicate the issue on DOCP setting 3200 MHz.
> 
> Oh and i am on the latest BIOS btw.


maybe try re-seat the CPU?

I have had some weird issue of clock in the windows will randomly go out of sync
tried reinstall windows, reflash BIOS, it still happen

Nothing else was wrong other than the clock would randomly become out of sync.
So i just ignore it and use it as is because there wasn't any impact to the stability.
it recently start giving me weird qcode 8 once a while so I decided to re-seat my CPU, havne't had issue since.


----------



## pschorr1123

ZednGrace said:


> Good morning all! This is my first post -- please be kind I'm new to Ryzen with 3900x and C7H. Ram is G.Skill 4x8GB F4-3600C16Q-32GVKC @ 16-19-19-39. I can post at 3800/1900, but Aida latency goes up from 70.2 stock to 78.4! The computer is stable, but performance in CB20 goes down. I am not currently overclocking, only using DOCP and modifying ram settings to 3800/1900. It have read the majority of this thread, but most tips pertain to Samsung B die and little on Hynix D die. Does anyone have suggested settings for D die? I tried applying settings from the Ryzen DRam Calculator, but system doesn't boot.


Your latency may have gone up because your MEM clock and Infinity Fabric Clock are no longer at 1:1 ratio. At 3733 and above it defaults to a 2:1 ratio in order to run RAM at >4000 MTS. You can go into you bios under AMD CBS and manually set the Fabric speed and the Mem clock to force a 1:1 ratio. You can use Ryzen Master to verify that coupled mode is on and Mem clock and Fabric Clock are same speed (ie for 3600 both should be 1800) like in pic below (or 1900 for 3800 MTS)


----------



## hurricane28

Thnx guys, 

i will try to replicate the issue on DOCP settings and if it does i re-seat the CPU.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Thnx guys,
> 
> i will try to replicate the issue on DOCP settings and if it does i re-seat the CPU.


Did you try more DRAM voltage yet?


----------



## sonic2911

Is there any ways that the 2700x can boost over 4.1 all cores with PE3? It locks at 4.1 on mine.


----------



## Syldon

sonic2911 said:


> Is there any ways that the 2700x can boost over 4.1 all cores with PE3? It locks at 4.1 on mine.


The clock boost is based on what cooling you achieve at boot. I seem to think that PE3 gives me 4250. I run with PE4 at 4350 now. I have ran at this speed on various revisions.

There are some things you can do with playing with the bclk ratio to push the frequency higher. I would take a look at what temps you are getting before trying stuff like that. 

I just use an AIO on a 120mm radiator.


----------



## sonic2911

Syldon said:


> sonic2911 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is there any ways that the 2700x can boost over 4.1 all cores with PE3? It locks at 4.1 on mine.
> 
> 
> 
> The clock boost is based on what cooling you achieve at boot. I seem to think that PE3 gives me 4250. I run with PE4 at 4350 now. I have ran at this speed on various revisions.
> 
> There are some things you can do with playing with the bclk ratio to push the frequency higher. I would take a look at what temps you are getting before trying stuff like that.
> 
> I just use an AIO on a 120mm radiator.
Click to expand...

AFAIK PE3 lock EDC 145 so how can you go further than that? Weird? Any settings? Also what is your temp?


----------



## Syldon

sonic2911 said:


> AFAIK PE3 lock EDC 145 so how can you go further than that? Weird? Any settings? Also what is your temp?


All my settings are still under any post I make. Verifications and such should still be in my history, which will have screen shots of test runs etc.
Look in user CP. Everyone can add theirs too. It makes it easier for people to make comparisons.


----------



## nick name

sonic2911 said:


> AFAIK PE3 lock EDC 145 so how can you go further than that? Weird? Any settings? Also what is your temp?


Depending on which BIOS you're using you can adjust EDC in BIOS. Or if you're on a BIOS that can't do that then you do it in Ryzen Master.


----------



## Synoxia

https://www.guru3d.com/news-story/amd-starts-rolling-out-agesa-1-5-bios-firmware.html

who's ready to jump on the wait train? I estimate 4 months for the new bios to come out. 

Who adds more?


----------



## hurricane28

I think i solved my problem. 

It was caused by SenseMI.... Even on stock settings it doesn't work properly. I think maybe because i am on the newest BIOS that is more geared towards 3000 series CPU's. 

I am still testing though but it looks better as of now. I also think that my motherboard is going down or i need to flash BIOS again. When ever i try to enter BIOS by pressing del key it some times hangs and i have to restart. Also when i am in BIOS F10 key doesn't work so i have to go to the save tab in order to save my settings. I think its RMA time for my board but I'm still testing.


----------



## harderthanfire

Synoxia said:


> https://www.guru3d.com/news-story/amd-starts-rolling-out-agesa-1-5-bios-firmware.html
> 
> who's ready to jump on the wait train? I estimate 4 months for the new bios to come out.
> 
> Who adds more?



Hopefully we can either get a beta/test bios or someone will swap out the AGESA's on a custom bios for us if Asus take ages.


I'm guessing it will partly depend on what AMD has changed.


----------



## nick name

@crakej Hey you wanna try a fun project with me? I'm thinking about adding a pump/reservoir to my Fractal Design S36 AIO.


----------



## neikosr0x

Just had this weird random behavior.

So basically just restarted out of the blue the CPU is reporting this, i tried restarting a few times and same thing. I'm going to reset the bios settings if doesn't work some cmos clearing. But i was wondering if any of you experienced something similar.

Windows 10 pro 1909 25-02-2020 ram is OC from 3600 to 3733 at 1.36 volt. soc is set around to 1.065v~ for months with no issues.


----------



## sonic2911

Anyone still have the zen+ 2700x? Which is the best bios with them? I'm using the latest now but someone recommend me use the one with AGESA 1003ABBA which is better with zen+. So what bios are you using?


----------



## nick name

sonic2911 said:


> Anyone still have the zen+ 2700x? Which is the best bios with them? I'm using the latest now but someone recommend me use the one with AGESA 1003ABBA which is better with zen+. So what bios are you using?


I was using 3004 on 2700X after using everything else before. Your best is 3004 for now.


----------



## oreonutz

neikosr0x said:


> Just had this weird random behavior.
> 
> So basically just restarted out of the blue the CPU is reporting this, i tried restarting a few times and same thing. I'm going to reset the bios settings if doesn't work some cmos clearing. But i was wondering if any of you experienced something similar.
> 
> Windows 10 pro 1909 25-02-2020 ram is OC from 3600 to 3733 at 1.36 volt. soc is set around to 1.065v~ for months with no issues.


Looks like ASUS WMI Controller Problems creeping in again. They love to rear their head from time to time. Hopefully it isn't also causing havoc with your fans, its why I switched to the Aquaero for Fan Control and Monitoring, still use HWinfo of course, but when the ASUS WMI Flips out, it doesn't affect my Pumps and Fans. Interestingly though, I have been noticing my Tdie Temps say crazy High or Low Temps randomly lately. I thought it might have been related some software I had installed recently, so I restored to an image I took before I installed that software, and I just noticed I am still having this issue. This is not the WMI though, because these are temps reported by the CPU itself, not the Mobo, so not sure what is going on here...

Oh, and hello everyone! Been a while! LOL... Staind is now playing in my head...










*EDIT:* Those ASUS WMI Problems tend to happen when you run 2 different programs at the same time that access the WMI. So for instance, if you ran HWinfo and AIDA64 at the same time, or HWinfo and CPUz, or the ASUS AISuite Software and HWinfo at the same time, things like that, tend to make the WMI go crazy under certain BIOS releases. Not sure if you had 2 of those programs opened at the same time recently, just trying to give you a possible scenario to consider.

Also, when this issue happens, and a CMOS Clear does not fix it, there is a procedure to run through that will, but you won't like it. Basically you have to cut all power to the system, clear PSU Caps of all power, Use Flashback to Flash the BIOS without turning on the PC, then Turn on the PC, Clear BIOS, Then Set up your BIOS Settings either from scratch or a prior profile (From before this issue happened), and that will take care of it.

Also of note, if you recently enabled one of the ASUS OC Profiles in the Bios, that one with Level 1 through 4, Levels 3 and 4 disable Power Monitoring. That will cause the WMI Sensors to stop working, but they will be replaced with other Sensors for the most part, from the Super IO Chip. So thats all I can think of on the topic...


----------



## neikosr0x

oreonutz said:


> Looks like ASUS WMI Controller Problems creeping in again. They love to rear their head from time to time. Hopefully it isn't also causing havoc with your fans, its why I switched to the Aquaero for Fan Control and Monitoring, still use HWinfo of course, but when the ASUS WMI Flips out, it doesn't affect my Pumps and Fans. Interestingly though, I have been noticing my Tdie Temps say crazy High or Low Temps randomly lately. I thought it might have been related some software I had installed recently, so I restored to an image I took before I installed that software, and I just noticed I am still having this issue. This is not the WMI though, because these are temps reported by the CPU itself, not the Mobo, so not sure what is going on here...
> 
> Oh, and hello everyone! Been a while! LOL... Staind is now playing in my head...
> 
> *EDIT:* Those ASUS WMI Problems tend to happen when you run 2 different programs at the same time that access the WMI. So for instance, if you ran HWinfo and AIDA64 at the same time, or HWinfo and CPUz, or the ASUS AISuite Software and HWinfo at the same time, things like that, tend to make the WMI go crazy under certain BIOS releases. Not sure if you had 2 of those programs opened at the same time recently, just trying to give you a possible scenario to consider.
> 
> Also, when this issue happens, and a CMOS Clear does not fix it, there is a procedure to run through that will, but you won't like it. Basically you have to cut all power to the system, clear PSU Caps of all power, Use Flashback to Flash the BIOS without turning on the PC, then Turn on the PC, Clear BIOS, Then Set up your BIOS Settings either from scratch or a prior profile (From before this issue happened), and that will take care of it.
> 
> Also of note, if you recently enabled one of the ASUS OC Profiles in the Bios, that one with Level 1 through 4, Levels 3 and 4 disable Power Monitoring. That will cause the WMI Sensors to stop working, but they will be replaced with other Sensors for the most part, from the Super IO Chip. So thats all I can think of on the topic...


Thanks man, yea well resetting the bios and clearing the cmos didn't do s**t, what did the trick was to change the IO from Default to auto and back... lol


----------



## Shadowized

anyone know why Cinebench scores vary so wildly for me lately? some days 3220~, some days almost 3300, is it just ambient room temps? perhaps I need an AIO to reduce temp spikes or something?


----------



## oreonutz

Shadowized said:


> anyone know why Cinebench scores vary so wildly for me lately? some days 3220~, some days almost 3300, is it just ambient room temps? perhaps I need an AIO to reduce temp spikes or something?


Thats just CB. Its VERY Sensitive to open Programs and Windows Services. Like EXTREMELY SO. Even running Discord, Spotify, or hell even HWinfo in the Background can reduce your score by a few percentage points. Easiest way to get a more consistent score is to go into task manager (CTRL+Shift+Escape), go to the details tab, find Cinebench, right click on it, select Priority, and then put it into High Priority Mode. Realtime tends to cause issues, so I would stick with High Priority. What this will do is cause any other open program to not respond during the Cinebench Run, allowing CB to use closer to 100% of your CPU Power. Your runs will be more consistent than before using this method, but keep in mind, even doing this, you will see a variation of around +/- at least 5%.


----------



## nick name

Shadowized said:


> anyone know why Cinebench scores vary so wildly for me lately? some days 3220~, some days almost 3300, is it just ambient room temps? perhaps I need an AIO to reduce temp spikes or something?


Unless you're running a fixed multiplier then scores will fluctuate with temps. This will also happen with an AIO, but if you're current cooling is a mid-range air cooler then a good AIO will get you some more performance.


----------



## Shadowized

a 100 point swing with nothing else open and fresh reboots? I'm thinking its a bug with the performance enhancer lvl3 setting or something, because when I tried the EDC bug talked about in the thread a bit, with 0-0-17~ it got normal multi scores similar to what i was getting on the previous bios but much worst single scores (185 vs 217~). I'm so confused, Perf enhancer set to default, auto, or lvl 4 score around the same worse than lvl 3 so I guess perhaps theres some way to mitigate this? any way I can replicate its behavior but avoid the weirdness?


----------



## oreonutz

Shadowized said:


> a 100 point swing with nothing else open and fresh reboots? I'm thinking its a bug with the performance enhancer lvl3 setting or something, because when I tried the EDC bug talked about in the thread a bit, with 0-0-17~ it got normal multi scores similar to what i was getting on the previous bios but much worst single scores (185 vs 217~). I'm so confused, Perf enhancer set to default, auto, or lvl 4 score around the same worse than lvl 3 so I guess perhaps theres some way to mitigate this? any way I can replicate its behavior but avoid the weirdness?


The PE Settings in General have weird behavior on Zen2. I personally have not seen the performance be consistent between boots, it seems to make changes to to the CPU OC Based on the conditions of the CPU at Boot, so the OC seems to change from Boot to Boot when using level 3 or 4, at least this is the hypothesis I have come to after playing with them for a few weeks. I finally settled on per CCD OCing, and have been happy ever since.

That said, 100 Point swings in CB do happen. Even on Fresh Boots, because of how sensitive CB is. Even if you have closed every program, check your services, there are over a few dozen running at random times which throw off your CB Score. Obviously if you have noticed your score being more inconsistent then normal, then you are probably right, there is probably something else going on, and performance enhancer is likely the culprit, also Ryzen is very Temperature Sensitive, so even the time of day and ambient temp in your room could be effecting your Performance. But all that said, Especially CBR15 does tend to give you a variance of around +/- 1-3%, so when you are normally scoring around 3200, then a 100 Point swing is not terribly uncommon (Although usually in R15 it is more like a 10 to 30 Point Swing between runs)


----------



## Shadowized

oreonutz said:


> (Although usually in R15 it is more like a 10 to 30 Point Swing between runs)


yeah I fully expect some changes between runs, but 100~ points between boots is just weird, my setup is very minimal and i have disabled almost every possible service so there is nothing in the background enabled that consumes CPU past 5 seconds after login. guess I'll try to poke around at the other sub-menus for PBO and see if I can bypass what lvl3 is doing to the EDC. hopefully the AIO I want comes back in stock soon, would be nice to at least see if it can make any difference.


----------



## oreonutz

Shadowized said:


> yeah I fully expect some changes between runs, but 100~ points between boots is just weird, my setup is very minimal and i have disabled almost every possible service so there is nothing in the background enabled that consumes CPU past 5 seconds after login. guess I'll try to poke around at the other sub-menus for PBO and see if I can bypass what lvl3 is doing to the EDC. hopefully the AIO I want comes back in stock soon, would be nice to at least see if it can make any difference.


For consistency, I highly recommend Per CCX Overclocking. Most of us who prefer consistent Multi-Threaded performance, and decent Single Threaded Performance (Granted it won't be as high as with PBO, but its not much lower, and most of us buy a 16 core system for the MultiThreaded performance not the single core performance) don't look back after a solid Per CCX OC. With PB, ESPECIALLY WITH PE on the Crosshair VI and VII Boards, expect a wide variation on performance. Without PE you can get a nice PB Dialed in, but keep in mind PE3 and 4 straight up over ride PBO Settings and certain AMD OC settings in the BIOS, but don't show you which ones, so you could end up pulling your hair out trying to find out why a setting seems to be working one day and not working the next. Its irritating to say the least. Once you have a Per CCX Dialed in, it simply stays there, and your MultiThreaded performance is extremely consistent.

Glad to see someone else knows how to properly tune Windows, most people just let their services run wild so I assumed yours were as well. Hats off good sir.

*EDIT:* Also as someone who has gone through the chasing more performance through better cooling I can tell you first hand that it will make a difference, but depending on your cooler now, it may be a smaller difference then you think. Definitely the cooler you can get your chip, the better your PB Performance will be. But Typically going from a typical $50 Air Cooler, to a $120 or so AIO, will usually only net you about 4 to 5c at most. Depending on the AIO, you might be able to get 6c, but I wouldn't expect much more than that. That will translate into about 2% to 5% more performance at most. You will be closer to 5% for single threaded runs that are in short bursts, and closer to 2 to 3% for MultiThreaded loads. So just don't expect much more, but you will get more.

I ended up going from a 240mm AIO, to 360AIO, to 360 Custom Loop, to 360 + 2x 280 Custom Loop, and I still was not satisfied with my PB Performance on Zen 2. I was spoiled with PBO on Zen+, and it just doesn't work the same any more. That said, the difference in the Per CCX OC I can hold between the 360mm Rad I started with on Zen2, and the Loop I have now is pretty significant because of the amount of heat I can now dissipate, so cooling does help, but its definitely diminishing returns after a certain point. Anyways, Good Luck Good Sir! And Seriously take a look at Per CCX OCing, as long as you aren't chasing the pinnacle of Single Core Performance, but decent Single Core Performance and the Most Multithreaded performance you can squeeze out of your chip, then you will not be disappointed with Per CCX OCing. I have a tool I can send you that will help (So you don't have to rely on Ryzen Master).


----------



## Shadowized

Yeah, well currently its just an older NH-D14SE2011 so I should be able to get around 8-12c taken off the top easy enough which should give me a bit more headroom for manual CCX tuning. Plus my 3900X isn't exactly great compared to the 3950X's in regard to binning, then again I'm not expecting miracles or anything just hoping for a bit more consistency. I was fairly happy on 2801 bios but after updating some programs I kept getting the occasional crash after months and months of stability so I figured it was worth trying to see if it resolved those issues only to create new ones ))


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> @crakej Hey you wanna try a fun project with me? I'm thinking about adding a pump/reservoir to my Fractal Design S36 AIO.


I have considered this! I just don't trust myself enough to do it! How much improvement do you think it would bring?

While i'm here, I Use PE3, scalar is X10 +200Mhz as well as EDC 'bug'. I've not played much lately to be honest.

Only issue I have with shutting down my PC is that it takes ages, but I guess this is because of the ram being written to HD as I use hybrid hibernate and having 32GB....

On AISuite - which I've used reasonably well for some time - I made a little discovery the other day by chance. I was looking at task manager and happened to notice over 12 MILLION handles were being used. Looked at the details tab to see which process was the offender, and it's AISuite. As my machine hibernates instead of shutting down, the total just keeps going up. It's not taking memory - just handles, but MILLIONS of them!

I'll report this to them of course! I really wish they'd fix our bios, take out all the duplicate and triplicate settings - it's a mess. As for next AGESA, I don't really need it. It would be nice if ASUS would restore our PCIE4 functionality - just like they did with B450 board(s?)...


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I have considered this! I just don't trust myself enough to do it! How much improvement do you think it would bring?
> 
> While i'm here, I Use PE3, scalar is X10 +200Mhz as well as EDC 'bug'. I've not played much lately to be honest.
> 
> Only issue I have with shutting down my PC is that it takes ages, but I guess this is because of the ram being written to HD as I use hybrid hibernate and having 32GB....
> 
> On AISuite - which I've used reasonably well for some time - I made a little discovery the other day by chance. I was looking at task manager and happened to notice over 12 MILLION handles were being used. Looked at the details tab to see which process was the offender, and it's AISuite. As my machine hibernates instead of shutting down, the total just keeps going up. It's not taking memory - just handles, but MILLIONS of them!
> 
> I'll report this to them of course! I really wish they'd fix our bios, take out all the duplicate and triplicate settings - it's a mess. As for next AGESA, I don't really need it. It would be nice if ASUS would restore our PCIE4 functionality - just like they did with B450 board(s?)...


I'm not sure if there would be any improvement. Other than adding more thermal mass -- I'm not sure how else it would change the performance characteristics. My assumption is that another (faster) pump would increase the flow rate over the cold plate and in turn would increase the temp drop across it. I was told it wouldn't be much though. 

And I don't use Hibernate at all. How does turning on the PC behave?

And you're the only person I can think of that doesn't have a terrible experience with AI Suite. You're the AI Suite Whisperer.


----------



## Shadowized

crakej said:


> On AISuite - which I've used reasonably well for some time - I made a little discovery the other day by chance. I was looking at task manager and happened to notice over 12 MILLION handles were being used. Looked at the details tab to see which process was the offender, and it's AISuite. As my machine hibernates instead of shutting down, the total just keeps going up. It's not taking memory - just handles, but MILLIONS of them!


that handle leak has been an issue for a long long time, I noticed it on one of my friends builds like 2 years ago, normally I'd install it to check something if I'm too lazy to go into the bios but uninstall it immediately afterward because it leaves lingering drivers/services running on the system, requiring me to delete them manually which I find totally unacceptable. I think that issue exists in GPU Tweak as well.


----------



## ZednGrace

pschorr1123 said:


> Your latency may have gone up because your MEM clock and Infinity Fabric Clock are no longer at 1:1 ratio. At 3733 and above it defaults to a 2:1 ratio in order to run RAM at >4000 MTS. You can go into you bios under AMD CBS and manually set the Fabric speed and the Mem clock to force a 1:1 ratio. You can use Ryzen Master to verify that coupled mode is on and Mem clock and Fabric Clock are same speed (ie for 3600 both should be 1800) like in pic below (or 1900 for 3800 MTS)


Thanks for your reply. I downloaded the Ryzen DRAM Calculator. I was able to apply the 3800 safe settings and it lowered my latency in AIDA64 to 69.5! It passes Memory tests with no errors. I tried the 3800 fast settings, but it didn't boot. I will try to lower some of the 3800 safe settings to get a better latency result. So far, I'm pretty happy with the 3800 safe settings and results with CineBench20 and AIDA64. That's running 4x8GB of G.Skill Ripjaws 3600cas16 ram.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I'm not sure if there would be any improvement. Other than adding more thermal mass -- I'm not sure how else it would change the performance characteristics. My assumption is that another (faster) pump would increase the flow rate over the cold plate and in turn would increase the temp drop across it. I was told it wouldn't be much though.
> 
> And I don't use Hibernate at all. How does turning on the PC behave?
> 
> And you're the only person I can think of that doesn't have a terrible experience with AI Suite. You're the AI Suite Whisperer.


I'll probably leave that mod then.....

PC turns on fine, boots VERY quickly!

I've many years of software/firmware engineering under my belt. I've been aware of the problems of multiple monitoring programs and software/hardware locks that don't work for years, so I just don't do that. PCs were never designed for the multi-threaded OSes of today.
@Shadowized I've never noticed the handle leak as it's not affected my system in any measurable way. A shame a bug like this is still here after all that time. It really shouldn't be too hard for ASUS to work out!

I use AISuite because it reports the most accurate voltages that I've tested (with DM, somewhere back in this thread). Only other use I have for it is fan control. ASUS seem incapable of finishing software (or firmware) properly. About the only thing they've posted lately is the incredibly useless Crate. They posted versions which don't even work properly and install (even more) drivers/services than any ASUS software before! The damn thing also takes up measurable clock cycles and is VERY hard to remove.

Ironically, having bought a Corsair K70 MKII keyboard, I had to install iCue to set lighting to something sensible. They have improved this software A LOT over the last year or so. Although I don't have it loaded in memory, it is installed and not interfering with anything. It's also now capable of controlling Aura lighting and monitoring the system/fans BETTER than AISuite or Crate (WAY better than Crate). ASUS should take ahead - and be ashamed.


----------



## narukun

Hey guys any good Custom Bios you can recommend me? I have the no wifi VII hero


----------



## Baio73

crakej said:


> I'll probably leave that mod then.....
> 
> PC turns on fine, boots VERY quickly!
> 
> I've many years of software/firmware engineering under my belt. I've been aware of the problems of multiple monitoring programs and software/hardware locks that don't work for years, so I just don't do that. PCs were never designed for the multi-threaded OSes of today.
> 
> @Shadowized I've never noticed the handle leak as it's not affected my system in any measurable way. A shame a bug like this is still here after all that time. It really shouldn't be too hard for ASUS to work out!
> 
> I use AISuite because it reports the most accurate voltages that I've tested (with DM, somewhere back in this thread). Only other use I have for it is fan control. ASUS seem incapable of finishing software (or firmware) properly. About the only thing they've posted lately is the incredibly useless Crate. They posted versions which don't even work properly and install (even more) drivers/services than any ASUS software before! The damn thing also takes up measurable clock cycles and is VERY hard to remove.
> 
> Ironically, having bought a Corsair K70 MKII keyboard, I had to install iCue to set lighting to something sensible. They have improved this software A LOT over the last year or so. Although I don't have it loaded in memory, it is installed and not interfering with anything. It's also now capable of controlling Aura lighting and monitoring the system/fans BETTER than AISuite or Crate (WAY better than Crate). ASUS should take ahead - and be ashamed.


iCUE latest versions are way far better now... I can't really think of my rig without Commander Pro and iCUE controlling quite everything.

The real issue is that if you use it as resident (and you have to do as not everything has firmware settings), it continuosly bumps the Ryzen cores to Turbo mode and doesn't not allow the voltages to sleep resulting in higher temperatures even at idle.

Baio


----------



## sonic2911

I can go over 4100 a little bit with Vcore 1.325, so is that temperature hot or ok? Noctua D15 is my solution now and I have to remove the front panel of my Phanteks Evolv to get more airflow.
I stressed it for ~18hrs, is that enough for stable? If I turn on the SenseMi Skew with 272 offset, it will be cooler and boost more, so is it safe for daily run? And finally how to keep my fan from silent then run max speed suddenly then slow down, it keeps happening even light tasks.


----------



## sonic2911

I don't know why the Core VID is not consistent, after restart couple times, it goes up, and Vcore goes up too. Can I lock it? It goes to 1.4v sometimes, the Core VID.


----------



## Keith Myers

> And finally how to keep my fan from silent then run max speed suddenly then slow down, it keeps happening even light tasks.


Use the BIOS fan control settings and either drive off the motherboard temp readback instead of the cpu or use the long baseline smoothing fan control settings. Something like the 15 seconds setting.


----------



## sonic2911

Keith Myers said:


> Use the BIOS fan control settings and either drive off the motherboard temp readback instead of the cpu or use the long baseline smoothing fan control settings. Something like the 15 seconds setting.


Thanks, I will try. I only run the auto optimize for them before

Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## Dude970

I read this whole thread, and now built a rig. Time to play


----------



## sonic2911

Dude970 said:


> I read this whole thread, and now built a rig. Time to play


Buy another mb )

Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## Dude970

sonic2911 said:


> Buy another mb )
> 
> Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk


Lol, why it's a good board.


----------



## Bart

The latest BIOS update for this thing actually solved a problem I've had forever, where the stupid RGB would not stop on power down, no matter what the BIOS was set to. It only took god knows how many months, but they *finally* fixed it. Better late than never I guess, LOL!


----------



## sonic2911

Bart said:


> The latest BIOS update for this thing actually solved a problem I've had forever, where the stupid RGB would not stop on power down, no matter what the BIOS was set to. It only took god knows how many months, but they *finally* fixed it. Better late than never I guess, LOL!


Stealth mode always 

Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## sonic2911

Dude970 said:


> Lol, why it's a good board.


Actually this is my 1st hi-end asus board and I did RMA it once, and I see too many complaints about it and asus customer service. Usually I go with gigabyte when I pick blue team. So my next build will be msi.

Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## crakej

Baio73 said:


> iCUE latest versions are way far better now... I can't really think of my rig without Commander Pro and iCUE controlling quite everything.
> 
> The real issue is that if you use it as resident (and you have to do as not everything has firmware settings), it continuosly bumps the Ryzen cores to Turbo mode and doesn't not allow the voltages to sleep resulting in higher temperatures even at idle.
> 
> Baio


I only use it to tone down the lighting on my keyboard - and motherboard now, so don't need it resident fortunately, but do wonder why ASUS can't sort it's own software out!? I still feel more effort goes into the Intel side of things. At least with AISuite you can monitor all your voltages on an intel board - on our AMD boards, they don't even show all of the voltages! And Ryzen has been here for 3+ years!

Commander Pro does look interesting, so thanks for mentioning it.... thought of offloading that all from the MB is tempting


----------



## crakej

sonic2911 said:


> Actually this is my 1st hi-end asus board and I did RMA it once, and I see too many complaints about it and asus customer service. Usually I go with gigabyte when I pick blue team. So my next build will be msi.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk


The board is good! Yes, there have been problems - ASUS has been very up and down with support which has tried many of our patience, but the board is good, now we know most of it's oddities! I'm glad I didn't shell out the £200 extra I'd have to have paid for the CH8 or other x570 boards! For me, this is an expensive motherboard!


----------



## sonic2911

crakej said:


> The board is good! Yes, there have been problems - ASUS has been very up and down with support which has tried many of our patience, but the board is good, now we know most of it's oddities! I'm glad I didn't shell out the £200 extra I'd have to have paid for the CH8 or other x570 boards! For me, this is an expensive motherboard!


Of course, It's very good..when It works

Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## Bart

Bart said:


> The latest BIOS update for this thing actually solved a problem I've had forever, where the stupid RGB would not stop on power down, no matter what the BIOS was set to. It only took god knows how many months, but they *finally* fixed it. Better late than never I guess, LOL!


I'm quoting myself, since the problem came back. My PC wants disco lights no matter what I set in the BIOS. Damn I hate Asus, LOL! Thank god this piece of crap is my 3rd PC, and the first two are Gigabyte boards.


----------



## darkage

You have to set it to Turn off with aura, then remove aura and it will stay as you setup 

Enviado do meu ONEPLUS A3003 através do Tapatalk


----------



## Bart

darkage said:


> You have to set it to Turn off with aura, then remove aura and it will stay as you setup
> 
> Enviado do meu ONEPLUS A3003 através do Tapatalk


Oh crap, really? So Aura over-rides the BIOS then? Damn, that seems a bit silly. Thanks for the heads up! I'm an old man, and apparently not used to software that overrides my bloody BIOS, that's a new one for me. Usually the BIOS has the last word, not in this case it seems!


----------



## darkage

Yeah
Stupid, but true
worst is from time to time it goes mad and have to go back to aura 

Enviado do meu ONEPLUS A3003 através do Tapatalk


----------



## Bart

The things we do just for pretty lights. I really should not have taken LSD in my youth!!


----------



## Axaion

Hopefully Asus actually gives us 4000 series support though..


----------



## djase45

Axaion said:


> Hopefully Asus actually gives us 4000 series support though..


_*AMD announces Ryzen 4000 CPUs will only be compatible with the latest AM4 motherboards.*_
https://www.pcgamer.com/amd-ryzen-4000-zen-3-motherboard-compatibility/


----------



## Axaion

If they work on x570, they work on x470
Question is, if they want to limit us on firmware to disallow it

..and this being asus im having doubts lol


----------



## Shadowized

Axaion said:


> If they work on x570, they work on x470
> Question is, if they want to limit us on firmware to disallow it
> 
> ..and this being asus im having doubts lol


depends if the interface for the CPU requires PCIE 4.0, that's the only difference I can think of. though I wouldn't mind an upgrade as I've been somewhat unhappy with the Asus bios and how all over the place it is with settings that simply don't work.


----------



## Synoxia

To be honest? AMD excuses to sell more chipsets. Hope Intel answers back with competition soon enough.


----------



## darkage

Q: What about (X pre-500 Series chipset)?
A: AMD has no plans to introduce “Zen 3” architecture support for older chipsets. While we wish could enable full support for every processor on every chipset, the flash memory chips that store BIOS settings and support have capacity limitations. Given these limitations, and the unprecedented longevity of the AM4 socket, there will inevitably be a time and place where a transition to free up space is necessary—the AMD 500 Series chipsets are that time.

https://community.amd.com/community...gZX6kV7Cefhs6YL_0R_6tNI98oGxQkCVr00qi-MPWWKn0


----------



## Axaion

Yeah, load of crock, they -can- give us support, just remove support for older cpus on the new "branch" of firmware, but that wont happen

great excuse to have people dosh out more money for more boards.


----------



## neikosr0x

darkage said:


> Q: What about (X pre-500 Series chipset)?
> A: AMD has no plans to introduce “Zen 3” architecture support for older chipsets. While we wish could enable full support for every processor on every chipset, the flash memory chips that store BIOS settings and support have capacity limitations. Given these limitations, and the unprecedented longevity of the AM4 socket, there will inevitably be a time and place where a transition to free up space is necessary—the AMD 500 Series chipsets are that time.
> 
> https://community.amd.com/community...gZX6kV7Cefhs6YL_0R_6tNI98oGxQkCVr00qi-MPWWKn0


wow that was some cheap play from their part. saying AM4 support but then going with the chipset kind of ****? hahahaha, i do understand their position but it was very cheap from their part.


----------



## kmellz

Hopefully we'll get it, and a choice if you want to keep support for older cpus if necessary.
Otherwise it feels pretty useless buying anything new, since next release will probably be a completely new socket with ddr5 etcetc :<


----------



## nick name

kmellz said:


> Hopefully we'll get it, and a choice if you want to keep support for older cpus if necessary.
> Otherwise it feels pretty useless buying anything new, since next release will probably be a completely new socket with ddr5 etcetc :<


I believe early AMD road maps show ddr5 coming in 2022.


----------



## Hale59

https://hwbot.org/submission/4432718_noms_hwbot_x265_benchmark___4k_ryzen_3_3300x_10.878_fps


----------



## sonic2911

Aida64 stress temperature, is it normal?


----------



## Praetorr

sonic2911 said:


> Aida64 stress temperature, is it normal?


I would consider those abnormally high temps for Zen+, unless you have somewhat anemic cooling or a fairly high ambient temp. My 2700X would basically never go over 80C under any circumstance with a Noctua NH-D15S.


----------



## sonic2911

Praetorr said:


> I would consider those abnormally high temps for Zen+, unless you have somewhat anemic cooling or a fairly high ambient temp. My 2700X would basically never go over 80C under any circumstance with a Noctua NH-D15S.


That's what I think, It's just 2yrs with lightly used and I never OC until last month. Replace thermal paste help? I recently mod my evolv case to gain airflow too.









Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## Praetorr

I don't think a good repaste could do any harm, at the very least. So it's worth a shot.

I can't really see your cooler in that pic, but if it is the stock cooler, perhaps your temps aren't too out of the ordinary. You'd have to see what kind of temps people get with the same cooler.


----------



## sonic2911

Praetorr said:


> I don't think a good repaste could do any harm, at the very least. So it's worth a shot.
> 
> I can't really see your cooler in that pic, but if it is the stock cooler, perhaps your temps aren't too out of the ordinary. You'd have to see what kind of temps people get with the same cooler.


I'm using Noctua D15 now


----------



## Baio73

crakej said:


> Commander Pro does look interesting, so thanks for mentioning it.... thought of offloading that all from the MB is tempting


Software control VS BIOS control?
No doubt for me!!

Baio


----------



## crakej

neikosr0x said:


> wow that was some cheap play from their part. saying AM4 support but then going with the chipset kind of ****? hahahaha, i do understand their position but it was very cheap from their part.


Totally

Also, our boards CAN run PCIE 4 - they did for months before they disabled it. We also have bigger bios chips.

We were told AM4 will be around for years, you'll be able to drop any AM4 CPU into your board blah blah blah, not telling us they'd produce a new chipset EVERY TIME there was a new CPU, and that you would HAVE to buy new MB/chipset to 'unlock' all the features of that CPU.

AMD is maximising sales by differentiating platforms in a way they said they wouldn't. VERY disappointing if this comes to pass, as I for one, cannot afford another MB and CPU every damn year.

Edit - they may as well change the socket - won't make much difference to users.


----------



## oreonutz

Bart said:


> The things we do just for pretty lights. I really should not have taken LSD in my youth!!


LOL! 100% With you brother! LOL! Now I just stare at the lights on my pretty computer all night long in a daze, HAHAHA!


----------



## oreonutz

sonic2911 said:


> Aida64 stress temperature, is it normal?


Yup that's normal. Aida pushes the Zen+ and Zen 2 Chips extremely hard. On top of that what is missing for context in that screenshot is room ambient. Its impossible to know if that temperature is within the "normal" zone if people don't know your room ambient. But by looking at your Motherboard Sensor, and your airflow setup, I feel pretty confident in guestimating that your room is a bit hotter than most. A lot of people who post their screenshots on here are sitting in room ambients of around 22 to 24c. I live in Vegas, so my Room temperature is always closer to 27 to 31c. In this Screenshot from you, it appears that your Room Temperature is somewhere in the ballpark of mine, right around 28c or so. If thats the case, then that tDie Temp in that screen shot is totally normal after a few mins of stressing the CPU, Cache, Memory, and FPU. That absolutely slams the Zen+ Architecture. But it will show if you are stable or not, even at those high temps. Then what you will want to do is download Blender and do a Classroom Render 2 to 3 times in a row. That will be about 30 Minutes or so, maybe a little more for you to render out. You temps should be closer to your actual real world max temp when under heavy load, somewhere closer to 80c-85c. You pass that and you are all good.

95c is absolutely not something you want to see in everyday operation, but it is normal for an AIDA CPu/FPU/Cache/Ram Test under air, especially with a ~+5c ambient delta over most people you will compare against. 

(Also a Good Repaste and Remount Never hurt anyone! Do your best to get the paste spread acrossed the entire IHS, and then apply mounting pressure evenly while screwing down. A Good Mount vs a Bad Mount might just bring your temps a good 5 to 8c lower (Possibly even more)



djase45 said:


> _*AMD announces Ryzen 4000 CPUs will only be compatible with the latest AM4 motherboards.*_
> https://www.pcgamer.com/amd-ryzen-4000-zen-3-motherboard-compatibility/


This is a REAL CRAP Move if they really do it. I am hopeful that it will be up to the board partners, and since we are rocking a flagship from x470 (And Some of us also have the flagship from x370) that they will be allowed to carry forward. If you notice that Slide showed that x370 wasn't compatible with 3000 Series chips, when we all know they totally were (I am running my 3900x in a Crosshair VI Hero in my server as we speak), so lets hope they aren't already forgetting their roots and going full Intel. If they are, then I hope to god Intel can start to steal AMD's move, Drop prices by 40% and start being more consumer friendly, because this is going to be screwed up if we start to have both major x86 chip makers with Anti-Consumer Friendly Practices!

I just hope, despite their statement, that its left up to the board manufacturers, and they use the fact that they don't kick you off of their last board as a marketing ploy. Personally that would be a marketing ploy that works for me, If say Gigabyte (or ASUS) said that they are keeping 4000 Series support for all their x370 Boards, and the rest of the Board Makers didn't do that, I would probably jump to Gigabyte even though I haven't used a Gigabyte board for a personal board in over 10 years. Same if Asus did it, I already run primarily only ASUS boards simply because I like the hardware quality and am familiar with the BIOS, but at this point I was seriously thinking of testing the waters for my next board, if they came out and said the same, I would definitely make my next purchase with them, I like to reward consumer friendly behavior, and I'd like to think I am not the only consumer who thinks that way...


----------



## nick name

Hale59 said:


> https://hwbot.org/submission/4432718_noms_hwbot_x265_benchmark___4k_ryzen_3_3300x_10.878_fps


Oooooooh. Is that under LN2?


----------



## nick name

sonic2911 said:


> Aida64 stress temperature, is it normal?


What offset are you running on CPU voltage?


----------



## sonic2911

nick name said:


> What offset are you running on CPU voltage?


I ran -.05 but since a shutdown suddenly with cb r20, I changed to -.0325

Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Totally
> 
> Also, our boards CAN run PCIE 4 - they did for months before they disabled it. We also have bigger bios chips.
> 
> We were told AM4 will be around for years, you'll be able to drop any AM4 CPU into your board blah blah blah, not telling us they'd produce a new chipset EVERY TIME there was a new CPU, and that you would HAVE to buy new MB/chipset to 'unlock' all the features of that CPU.
> 
> AMD is maximising sales by differentiating platforms in a way they said they wouldn't. VERY disappointing if this comes to pass, as I for one, cannot afford another MB and CPU every damn year.
> 
> Edit - they may as well change the socket - won't make much difference to users.


I'm gonna disagree. If you're just now entering the Ryzen ecosystem you have lots of options when it comes to motherboards. If you've been in the ecosystem for a bit then you can keep the same board you started off with when upgrading CPUs. There's no reason AMD shouldn't improve the chipset with their CPUs since you don't have to change boards. They said they'd keep the socket -- that doesn't mean that they wouldn't improve or change the chipsets for new-comers. 

Being upset with AMD upgrading chipsets feels like being upset AMD upgraded their CPUs.


----------



## nick name

sonic2911 said:


> I ran -.05 but since a shutdown suddenly with cb r20, I changed to -.0325
> 
> Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk


What is the ambient temperature of the room?


----------



## sonic2911

nick name said:


> What is the ambient temperature of the room?


I'm still at work now, I will find out when I'm home. Honestly my room is quite hot in this summer (Texas)

Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## nick name

sonic2911 said:


> I'm still at work now, I will find out when I'm home. Honestly my room is quite hot in this summer (Texas)
> 
> Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk


Ayyyy, I'm in Texas too. My room gets up to 87*F toward the end of the day. Sooner if I'm playing games.


----------



## sonic2911

nick name said:


> Ayyyy, I'm in Texas too. My room gets up to 87*F toward the end of the day. Sooner if I'm playing games.


Houston?

Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## nick name

sonic2911 said:


> Houston?
> 
> Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk


San Antonio.


----------



## nick name

I ordered a portable AC for the room the PC is in that's getting delivered today. I'm pretty excited about that.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I'm gonna disagree. If you're just now entering the Ryzen ecosystem you have lots of options when it comes to motherboards. If you've been in the ecosystem for a bit then you can keep the same board you started off with when upgrading CPUs. There's no reason AMD shouldn't improve the chipset with their CPUs since you don't have to change boards. They said they'd keep the socket -- that doesn't mean that they wouldn't improve or change the chipsets for new-comers.
> 
> Being upset with AMD upgrading chipsets feels like being upset AMD upgraded their CPUs.


I take your point, but my board is just over 1 year old and I'm being told i can't put a current (when it comes out) CPU in it. AMD have been very good with their planning, but not good enough to let a chipset mature for more than 1 release cycle (currently just over 12 months), giving us even more upgrade options?

It affectively prices me out. It make zero sense for me to invest in a new CPU, that will only be 'unlocked' to it's full potential if I get a new, expensive MB. Especially with a socket change coming up. There's also no point me investing in a new MB until socket change for the same reason.

Looking at the slide, B550 has what our chipsets had before AMD screwed it up by disabling it. ASUS even did the 'impossible' and re-enabled PCIE 4 on at least one of their B450 boards. Take our CH7s. When they designed them, they knew about Ryzen 3000, they took it into account. They probably knew a bit about Ryzen 4000 as well. We have massive power delivery on our boards - there so that we can use these CPUs to their full.

Yes, we have 'choices', but if you were just coming into the AMD PC arena, would you buy a 2nd hand X470 knowing it doesn't support any future CPUs?. Yes some will, but I sure wouldn't. My last ASUS MB has lasted more than 8 years and allowed me to put in more and more powerful CPUs. It's still running now as my server.

I'm sure 4xxx will work on our boards, but they'll make it so you wished you had a 'properly' compatible board.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I ordered a portable AC for the room the PC is in that's getting delivered today. I'm pretty excited about that.


I was thinking of getting one of those cube chillers and feeding their air to my machine. I need to rearrange my hardware and (huge) case. I have all these places y ou could put fans, but as I haven't filled the case with fans there's all these places where air can just flow out - I'm wondering if I should close off all the unused fan grills so air goes where I want it.....?


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I take your point, but my board is just over 1 year old and I'm being told i can't put a current (when it comes out) CPU in it. AMD have been very good with their planning, but not good enough to let a chipset mature for more than 1 release cycle (currently just over 12 months), giving us even more upgrade options?
> 
> It affectively prices me out. It make zero sense for me to invest in a new CPU, that will only be 'unlocked' to it's full potential if I get a new, expensive MB. Especially with a socket change coming up. There's also no point me investing in a new MB until socket change for the same reason.
> 
> Looking at the slide, B550 has what our chipsets had before AMD screwed it up by disabling it. ASUS even did the 'impossible' and re-enabled PCIE 4 on at least one of their B450 boards. Take our CH7s. When they designed them, they knew about Ryzen 3000, they took it into account. They probably knew a bit about Ryzen 4000 as well. We have massive power delivery on our boards - there so that we can use these CPUs to their full.
> 
> Yes, we have 'choices', but if you were just coming into the AMD PC arena, would you buy a 2nd hand X470 knowing it doesn't support any future CPUs?. Yes some will, but I sure wouldn't. My last ASUS MB has lasted more than 8 years and allowed me to put in more and more powerful CPUs. It's still running now as my server.
> 
> I'm sure 4xxx will work on our boards, but they'll make it so you wished you had a 'properly' compatible board.


I get what you're saying now. Sorry I hadn't read about Ryzen 4000 not working in our boards. I don't know how I feel about that.


----------



## oreonutz

So this is BULL*****! According to Hardware Unboxed's Most recent video, they reached out to AMD Directly, and AMD told them that they will not be supplying the AGESA Code necessary to Board Manufacturers, to allow board manufacturers to support x470/x370. This is ABSOLUTE HORSE S**T! Seriously! I am pissed. Definitely down to join any campaign to get AMD's Attention that this is not a good move. Any Ideas?


----------



## Axaion

Yeah, thats why i was fairly pissed
Its not even gonna be Asus's fault, its purely on AMD, Sorry about that one Asus.


----------



## neikosr0x

They are literally ******* customers up just to help board partners they saw the prices for new Intel boards and they are going to do the same on AM4 from now. They SAID AM4 Socket until 2020 releasing boards 300x/400x/500x on AM4 just to then release a new 600x board with AM4 and cut support for a ~ 2 years old board just WOW. The VRM and the whole power delivery on 470x is massive for what we need for a 3950x CPU, but somehow the problem is the BIOS space? wasn't a problem for 370x and their tiny BIOS space. They should have been clear on the restrictions taking into account Generations of boards and not Socket. Let's see what comes around.


----------



## oreonutz

neikosr0x said:


> They are literally ******* customers up just to help board partners they saw the prices for new Intel boards and they are going to do the same on AM4 from now. They SAID AM4 Socket until 2020 releasing boards 300x/400x/500x on AM4 just to then release a new 600x board with AM4 and cut support for a ~ 2 years old board just WOW. The VRM and the whole power delivery on 470x is massive for what we need for a 3950x CPU, but somehow the problem is the BIOS space? wasn't a problem for 370x and their tiny BIOS space. They should have been clear on the restrictions taking into account Generations of boards and not Socket. Let's see what comes around.


Yeah this is absolute BS.

And to be clear. We here, assuming you are in this thread, all Have x470 Crosshair VII Hero Boards. Our Boards HAVE 32MB ROM's. Also, those of us with x370 Crosshair VI Hero's ALSO HAVE 32MB ROM's. The easiest way to tell if you do is to simply look at your BIOS download size. If its 32MB, then its a 32MB ROM. 

So they are ending support for our boards even if they don't have to. I am copying and pasting this from another thread where I wrote it:

... its still them drawing an arbitrary line in the sand For one of 3 reasons. A) Greed - They feel they have dominance now, so they are allowed be Greedy, which is messed up. B) Laziness - Almost worst then greed, because they don't feel like paying their engineers to write a bit more code to support x/370/x470 Chipsets for board makers who choose to support it. Or C) Succumbing to Board Makers Demand to make more money - I am guessing it might have to do with a mix of 2 of the 3. I have a feeling board makers weren't too happy with x570 adoption, and want to force the hand of more Ryzen Users onto the newer more expensive motherboards. If this turns out to be the case, this is going to be an interesting story.

And

...No doubt they ONLY Released this information this early to gauge consumer reaction. If there is significant pushback, they will likely reverse course and say that this was miscommunication, and AMD has no intention of going through with this, they would say something along the lines of that this was being discussed but not ultimately decided on, some PR BS Like that. But, if people are indifferent, then they will see they can get away with walking all over us.


----------



## djase45

Just don't upgrade then unless you need to. A lot of us would upgrade just because we could, not because we needed to. Skipping upgrade is the only way to really send a message.


----------



## neikosr0x

djase45 said:


> Just don't upgrade then unless you need to. A lot of us would upgrade just because we could, not because we needed to. Skipping upgrade is the only way to really send a message.


Oh they will, if they are going the way Nvidia did it will be their worst mistake.


----------



## Axaion

djase45 said:


> Just don't upgrade then unless you need to. A lot of us would upgrade just because we could, not because we needed to. Skipping upgrade is the only way to really send a message.


Thats what im doing, probably just gonna go back to intel again, unless 4000 series is somehow super amazing (i cant see it being better than 10900k for gaming though, time will tell)


----------



## oreonutz

Axaion said:


> Thats what im doing, probably just gonna go back to intel again, unless 4000 series is somehow super amazing (i cant see it being better than 10900k for gaming though, time will tell)


Thing is. Even though I have never owned a bad Intel product, and I have owned a bad AMD Product, I still don't want to reward Intel, as crappy as this move is from AMD, and it WILL drive me away from them, the really crappy part about it is Intel STILL TO THIS DAY has horrible Anti-Consumer Practices. So I feel going back into their hands is almost rewarding the worst of 2 evils.

I do definitely want to send the message to AMD that this is not OK. We need competition instead of a one sided battle, otherwise this is how these companies will act, so If Intel does come out with a better product, then I may just buy it to at least reward competition, but I can't buy them just because AMD pissed me off this one time, because as bad as this one time is, it doesn't even come close to the years of these same types of moves from Intel. What it does show is that with a lack of Competition, AMD is willing to do the same crappy stuff that Intel (And to a lesser extent NVidia) does on a regular basis.


----------



## Shadowized

I think the biggest issue with all of it, is the fact that AMD delayed their B550 series, forcing people to choose between expensive X570 at the time of 3000 series launch, or much cheaper b450 which perform identical. so the pushback from the community is pretty justified.


----------



## oreonutz

Shadowized said:


> I think the biggest issue with all of it, is the fact that AMD delayed their B550 series, forcing people to choose between expensive X570 at the time of 3000 series launch, or much cheaper b450 which perform identical. so the pushback from the community is pretty justified.


Agreed. Whats weird is over on the thread someone created just for this news, there seems to be as many (or More) people defending AMD, then there are who are mad about this. We are never going to get AMD to reverse course if people aren't vocal about their distaste of this. 

There is ONLY ONE REASON that AMD released this information officially this early. And that is to Test and Gauge Consumer Response. If there is not enough outrage, AMD WILL stick to this decision, because our community will have shown that it doesn't really care. If However there is enough outrage, and it overwhelming shows that people are against this move, AMD will undoubtedly release a statement saying something along the lines of "AMD has no intentions of dropping support for x370/x470/b350/b450. We were toying with the idea of it as a means to help Motherboard Makers with their Bios size space issues, but we have ultimately decided to leave the choice on whether or not to support the older platforms up to them." But if their is not enough outrage, this BS PR Statement will never come. It truly is up to us making noise, and I just hope we make enough.


----------



## crakej

Do we see a pattern here?

From protecting us from PCIE 4 that 'might not work' (it worked) to bios 'isn't big enough'. Hmmmmm....


----------



## Hale59

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/gfws07/an_excellent_formulation_of_thoughts_on_am4/


----------



## speedgoat

bought a 2700X and a C7H in February 18 for 650 euros, amd has firstly completely evaporated the value of zen+ due to their pricing policies and their almost total lack of interest in supporting it further since zen 2 came out and now they absolutely priced me out on the board too. 
All in all i guess i could see them at around 250 or less used after a bit over 2 years. Great investment...


----------



## sonic2911

Welcome to blue team then ) amd had a bad move..

Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## 1usmus

*DRAM Calculator for Ryzen 1.7.1
*










* New presets adapted to latest AGESA 
* DRAM PCB revision - presets became more "flexible"
* New features (overclocking assist) and etc.
* Reading timings for all Ryzen's (even Zen3)

*Guide (DE)* >> https://www.computerbase.de/2020-05/dram-calculator-for-ryzen-1.7.1/
*Guide (EN)* >> https://wccftech.com/dram-calculator-for-ryzen-1-7-1-download/

*Download:*

Techpowerup link
Guru3d link
WCCFTECH link
Сomputerbase.de link
Techspot link


----------



## Dash8Q4

Oh man. Reading these posts makes me wonder if I should return my C7H back to amazon while I can and go back to a X570 TUF gaming plus wifi. The reasons I got this c7h was support for the front usb type C and more fan headers. I was also planning on upgrading the CPU to the 4000 series thinking they would still work on X470 no problem.
Thoughts folks?


----------



## Axaion

If you can, 100% return it
See if you can get a MSI x570 tomahawk, should be like 200 bucks or so if it hasnt inflated, and is available


----------



## nick name

Axaion said:


> If you can, 100% return it
> See if you can get a MSI x570 tomahawk, should be like 200 bucks or so if it hasnt inflated, and is available


Didn't MSI just make a better $200 board that has upgraded power delivery?


----------



## Axaion

nick name said:


> Didn't MSI just make a better $200 board that has upgraded power delivery?


Yeah, thats the x570 tomahawk


----------



## nick name

Axaion said:


> Yeah, thats the x570 tomahawk


Ahh so it is. They confuse me with their MEG and MAG and MPG ****.


----------



## Dash8Q4

I pulled the trigger on a Gigabyte X570 Aorus Elite because I need the USB ports and also lots of fan headers. Last week it was on sale for $280CAD but that was gone. Got it for $300CAD before tax.
Will be returning the C7H to amazon this week.


----------



## Mordorr

This sucks.
Own this board + 2700X. When i buy it i read full future support until this year and no this...

If i knew it, i would buy a crap board and a first generation Ryzen....

Not happy with this, AMD.


----------



## Dash8Q4

Axaion said:


> If you can, 100% return it
> See if you can get a MSI x570 tomahawk, should be like 200 bucks or so if it hasnt inflated, and is available


Yeah that one isn’t available. How is the X570 Gaming Pro Carbon? The wifi version is on sale for the same price as the Gigabyte Aorus Elite.


----------



## Hepe

I would like to personally thank AMD for nerfing this motherboard I bought at launch for 320 euros not once, but twice. First by gutting the PCI-E 4.0 support that was already built in to the board but now cutting the upgrade path I was aiming for with Zen3 and essentially cutting the resale value in half by making this board utterly pointless for anyone in second hand market. 
What AMD has pulled here such a massive middle finger to the vast majority of their customer base it's astounding. 

The most messed up part about this whole thing is that since AMD themselves completely botched the B550 chipset to the point that it will come out 11 months after the Zen2 launch, that for Zen2 AMD essentially forced the entire midrange market to either B450 or lower end X470, since those were literally the only option in the sub 180 euro range. So a merry F U to everyone in the mid-range from AMD, be sure to buy our B550 boards for the CPU you probably now have already used for ten months so you can enjoy the last gasp of AM4 with a board that you didn't even need if it wasn't for our completely arbitrary chipset limitations.

I am so done with this.


----------



## sonic2911

I ran Prime95 (v28) about 6hrs, Vcore is set Auto, LLC is auto too. So increasing Vcore will help?


----------



## mito1172

Cards burst in our hands, gentlemen. 4000 series processor was a lie


----------



## harderthanfire

The only annoying part for me really is that I'll need to buy a new board for 4000 series then it's a new socket for 5000 series/zen4 so new board again, then we may be getting DDR5 for 6000 series which is likely to again need a new board. So it's like being on Intel for me for the next 3 CPU release cycles.


Not going to switch though until we get the new chipset/CPUs later in the year (presuming there will be a new chipset with 4000 series desktop).


----------



## crakej

1usmus said:


> *DRAM Calculator for Ryzen 1.7.1
> *
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> * New presets adapted to latest AGESA
> * DRAM PCB revision - presets became more "flexible"
> * New features (overclocking assist) and etc.
> * Reading timings for all Ryzen's (even Zen3)
> 
> *Guide (DE)* >> https://www.computerbase.de/2020-05/dram-calculator-for-ryzen-1.7.1/
> *Guide (EN)* >> https://wccftech.com/dram-calculator-for-ryzen-1-7-1-download/
> 
> *Download:*
> 
> Techpowerup link
> Guru3d link
> WCCFTECH link
> Сomputerbase.de link
> Techspot link



Thanks 1usmus - Will have a look at this - great to have timings displayed in app again.


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> [/spoiler]
> 
> Thanks 1usmus - Will have a look at this - great to have timings displayed in app again.


Oh dude, I missed that one. Hell yeah @1usmus! Awesome implementation with showing Timings in the calculator! You are the man!

BTW, if you don't mind, curious what your thoughts are around AMD dropping Support for x470/b450 for the upcoming launch?


----------



## ClintLeo

Can someone show where AMD said that x470 will support 4000 series CPU's?

I bought this board with my 2700x thinking that I will upgrade my cpu in the future but not once did I see an official article saying
4000 series support.
I knew it would be a 3000 series cpu.


----------



## nick name

ClintLeo said:


> Can someone show where AMD said that x470 will support 4000 series CPU's?
> 
> I bought this board with my 2700x thinking that I will upgrade my cpu in the future but not once did I see an official article saying
> 4000 series support.
> I knew it would be a 3000 series cpu.


It was more AMD saying they would support AM4 through 2020.


----------



## ClintLeo

nick name said:


> It was more AMD saying they would support AM4 through 2020.


They have,the new 3100 and 3300 just came out,so they still didn't lie.


----------



## oreonutz

ClintLeo said:


> They have,the new 3100 and 3300 just came out,so they still didn't lie.


lol! The Gymnastics being performed here! Just Epic! Seriously where are the Gold Metals at, these guys are true legends over here. :kookoo: :doh:


----------



## ClintLeo

For AMD to take on Intel properly they will need to upgrade sockets,that is a fact.
Look what happened when they didn't,they went from Phenom II which was very good at the time to bulldozer.

They became lazy and Intel didn't have to do much work to stay ahead and now people are angry at AMD,even though they said 
AM4 support till 2020,not which CPU's they will recieve in 2020.

The manufacturers that lied are the motherboard makers that say something like "You want full access to the full featured MSI UEFI bios without compromising support for ANY AM4 product"
That was an MSI post about why you would buy a B450 board.

It isn't AMD's fault if someone jumped to the conclusion that they can upgrade and didn't have the proper proof or believed a Mobo manufacturer.

Just one little note,the next Agesa is also for B450\X470 so AMD are still supporting the AM4 boards.


----------



## andyliu

both hardware unboxed and gamer nexus sum it up pretty well.

also, the manufacturer is continuing to develop product.
by the time you see a release of a product, they already working toward the next-gen with engineering sample and bios.
pretty sure they will be aware if there is any physical change to the socket on how to layout everything.
just like there were short period of time for the pci-e 4.0 support for older board.

I haven't really been paying attention as I don't have a need to upgrade.
However, I do know PCI-e 4.0 was the only thing that separated the 2 tiers (400 vs 500).
AMD quickly came out to stop PCI-e 4.0, but they didn't do the same for MSI b450 max line up because there wasn't b550 for the budget-oriented.
MSI refresh their line up with Max series to deal with the rom size issue, and AMD came out a year later telling you not supported due to the rom size limitation?

Honestly, if AMD did announce zen3 will only be available w/ 500+ series last year, I think ppl will be more likely ok with actual technical upgrade w/ pci-e 4.0
new buyer will go buy 500 series, (but there was no b550 and ppl hated fan lol) 
people already own older board will evaluate the need to upgrade and decide.

but telling you it is due to the rom size ... that's a joke.

but anyway, we will see how it turns out, AND MAYBE JUST MAYBE I WILL SEE NEW BIOS FOR MY C7H before AMD figure out


----------



## Baio73

ClintLeo said:


> For AMD to take on Intel properly they will need to upgrade sockets,that is a fact.
> Look what happened when they didn't,they went from Phenom II which was very good at the time to bulldozer.
> 
> They became lazy and Intel didn't have to do much work to stay ahead and now people are angry at AMD,even though they said
> AM4 support till 2020,not which CPU's they will recieve in 2020.
> 
> The manufacturers that lied are the motherboard makers that say something like "You want full access to the full featured MSI UEFI bios without compromising support for ANY AM4 product"
> That was an MSI post about why you would buy a B450 board.
> 
> It isn't AMD's fault if someone jumped to the conclusion that they can upgrade and didn't have the proper proof or believed a Mobo manufacturer.
> 
> Just one little note,the next Agesa is also for B450\X470 so AMD are still supporting the AM4 boards.


Correct.
But let's say mobo maklers have made their advertisement, the community has believed it and AMD has done NOTHING untill a couple of days ago to break the illusion.
Not a good move in my opinion.

Baio


----------



## Baio73

andyliu said:


> but telling you it is due to the rom size ... that's a joke.


There are technical reasons that make me think that it's not a joke (Steve from GN has explained that very well).
And there are some hard facts that make me believe it is a joke all the way... there are X470 motherboards with 32Mb BIOS chips and there are X570 motherboards with only 16Mb (I believe especially from Gigabyte).

So I can conclude we are talking of some good technical reasons very very very badly advertised.
Nothing new for AMD.

Baio


----------



## crakej

ClintLeo said:


> For AMD to take on Intel properly they will need to upgrade sockets,that is a fact.
> Look what happened when they didn't,they went from Phenom II which was very good at the time to bulldozer.
> 
> They became lazy and Intel didn't have to do much work to stay ahead and now people are angry at AMD,even though they said
> AM4 support till 2020,not which CPU's they will recieve in 2020.
> 
> The manufacturers that lied are the motherboard makers that say something like "You want full access to the full featured MSI UEFI bios without compromising support for ANY AM4 product"
> That was an MSI post about why you would buy a B450 board.
> 
> It isn't AMD's fault if someone jumped to the conclusion that they can upgrade and didn't have the proper proof or believed a Mobo manufacturer.
> 
> Just one little note,the next Agesa is also for B450\X470 so AMD are still supporting the AM4 boards.


The point is the socket is NOT changing. It's still AM4, but won't be compatible with AM4 boards that aren't even 2 years old. The way AMD are doing things, they may as well change the socket every release. Taking PCIE away, after it was working already, was ridiculous. I believe ASUS also re-enabled it on one of their B450s - even though this was 'impossible'.

AMD marketed AM4 as being something we wouldn't have to be updating our motherboards every year for, because AM4 CPU pinouts would be AM4 'through 2020'. Its misleading - at least - yes, it's still AM4, but the (new) chipset will be the only one to natively support Ryzen 4000. Every chipset release has done this, you can run the new CPU, but not all functions are enabled on anything, but boards with the new chipset.


----------



## Keith Myers

> For AMD to take on Intel properly they will need to upgrade sockets,that is a fact.


I agree, it's about time for AMD to upgrade to a "big-boy" socket. How many of you have damaged a PGA cpu when trying to remove a cooler and yanked the cpu out of the socket bending the pins. Any cooler that has mountings that does not allow twisting the cooler freely to break the adhesion of the thermal paste knows what I am speaking of.

I know that many cooler manufacturers will welcome a LGA based AM5 socket that allows consolidation with one mounting kit.


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> I agree, it's about time for AMD to upgrade to a "big-boy" socket. How many of you have damaged a PGA cpu when trying to remove a cooler and yanked the cpu out of the socket bending the pins. Any cooler that has mountings that does not allow twisting the cooler freely to break the adhesion of the thermal paste knows what I am speaking of.
> 
> I know that many cooler manufacturers will welcome a LGA based AM5 socket that allows consolidation with one mounting kit.


IDK That is a double Edge Sword.

So 100% I hear you on messing up the CPU Pins while taking the Cooler Off. I still somehow manage to do it to this day every now n again, and I have a ton of experience with them. I literally and pulling off Coolers from AM3/AM4 Sockets AT LEAST Once a week, sometimes more, and every now and again, no matter how much I wiggle and think I have broken suction with the Paste, when Pulling off I still sometimes manage to bring the damn thing with me. However I have learned to ALWAYS pull Straight up, and its been a LONG time since I have actually bent a pin because of it.

However, obviously not everyone is as familiar with the procedure as we are, so I definitely get that probably someone somewhere everyday is bending pins due to this problem. The Thing is, The last time I did it was over 3 Years ago where the Pins actually bent, and I was able to bend them back. I have, so far to this date, not once lost a CPU to that happening, I have always succesfully been able to repair the pins.

The Problem is, even though that problem does not exist on LGA Sockets, those fragile ass, crooked ass, angled ass, pins on those LGA Sockets are a freaking NIGHTMARE to bend back into place if you ever had the misfortune of accidently dropping something in the Socket. I unfortunately have, or have had MoBo's Delivered to me where someone along the process either removed or never put on the Socket Protection Cover, and it was delivered to me bent. I have only been successful a handful of times repairing LGA Mobo's and have had to send more than a few back to the Board Maker for RMA in my day. Where as I am still yet to have to do that with PGA.

I definitely am not saying we all wouldn't welcome an actual socket upgrade, I just also think we may want to be careful what we wish for. I would definitely prefer some kind of Hybrid, where we keep the PGA Socket, but upgrade it not be so Damn Easy to pull a CPU out when the Thermal Paste gets Glued to the Cooler. Anyways My 2 Cents.

This isn't aimed at you Keith, this is in rebuttal to the past few comments from yesterday defending AMD's Move:
Further more, despite what everyone says, the facts are that AMD is not adding Technology to this upcoming generation that would make it impossible for them to unofficially support the x470/b450 Boards, if that were the case they would have said so instead of going with the BIOS excuse, which while true on a lot of the boards, is definitely not true for all. So arguments saying that technology needs to move on, I definitely see where you are coming from, but the Tech is not moving above what x470 can handle for this generation, and AMD did set expectations that this upcoming Generation would be compatible. So this is 100 Percent on them, they should have made this clear before the Launch of Zen2, and then there would be a ton of us with x570 Boards instead of sticking with x470. Its 100 Percent on them, and I think we shouldn't be so quick to go out of our way to defend what is a crappy move all around, when they are the ones who set expectations to begin with.


----------



## Keith Myers

I know what you are saying. But I just watched a YT video just a couple days ago where an experienced builder managed to bend the cpu pins and somehow successfully bent them back. I thought the corner pin was fractured at the base for sure and there would be no way to bend it back without it breaking off. The cpu went back into the socket with a bit of force but the surgery was successful.

I have bent a few pins in my day also.
I too have learned to pull straight up even when I have thought I did a good job of breaking the TIM adhesion. Still managed to pull the cpu out of the socket. At least it is easier to get a knife blade under the IHS between it and the cold plate to separate the two and not damage the cpu.

But the pin count on the AMD packages can only go higher with PCIE 4.0 AND DDR5 coming. Might be smart to start thinking of the LGA socket. You wouldn't want to make the Threadripper a PGA beast of 4000 pins would you?

I have had to reclaim the LGA socket pins before also. I had my first experience with LGA only a couple of years ago in fact since I hadn't touched an Intel cpu since they still were PGA based. Had to learn a quick lesson in how the LGA socket and its pins were designed. I agree with your sentiment about how fragile those pins can be. I learned that those pins undergo both lateral and vertical positional translation when the cpu is inserted in the socket and socket torque does matter. I had to massage the outer row of pin positions on my X99 board to get the "D" DIMM channel recognized. The socket pins have something like 40 micron absolute positional accuracy and the substrate keying notches of the cpu allow for a lot of slop.

My comment had NOTHING to do with the firestorm the X570/B550/Zen 3 announcement caused. I was just commenting on the PGA socket, nothing more and nothing about future platforms or future chipsets.


----------



## crakej

My sx8200NP NVME drive is only writing at (less than) half speed! Should be 1.2GB/s or more, but now it's only 500MB/s

I don't think it's motherboard - drive is running at PCIE3x4 as always - but wondered if anyone thought it might be in some way....

Think I might have to RMA it as can't get it to work as it used to 

Edit: just realized this must be why my shutdown is so slow - writing memory to disk at less than half speed it should be....


----------



## harderthanfire

I've broken a couple of LGA sockets by nudging the pins when removing a cpu 


I much prefer PGA, just give the block a slight twist before removing to free it from the CPU.


----------



## nick name

harderthanfire said:


> I've broken a couple of LGA sockets by nudging the pins when removing a cpu
> 
> 
> I much prefer PGA, just give the block a slight twist before removing to free it from the CPU.


Yeah, it does kinda come down to which pins you want to bend (if any do get bent). If the mobo is cheaper then I'd rather risk that, but fixing pins on a CPU does seem like it would be an easier job.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> My sx8200NP NVME drive is only writing at (less than) half speed! Should be 1.2GB/s or more, but now it's only 500MB/s
> 
> I don't think it's motherboard - drive is running at PCIE3x4 as always - but wondered if anyone thought it might be in some way....
> 
> Think I might have to RMA it as can't get it to work as it used to
> 
> Edit: just realized this must be why my shutdown is so slow - writing memory to disk at less than half speed it should be....


That seems like SATA speeds. Where is the drive installed? And what other drives are installed?


----------



## Axaion

crakej said:


> My sx8200NP NVME drive is only writing at (less than) half speed! Should be 1.2GB/s or more, but now it's only 500MB/s
> 
> I don't think it's motherboard - drive is running at PCIE3x4 as always - but wondered if anyone thought it might be in some way....
> 
> Think I might have to RMA it as can't get it to work as it used to
> 
> Edit: just realized this must be why my shutdown is so slow - writing memory to disk at less than half speed it should be....


how full is it?, does TRIM work correctly?


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> I know what you are saying. But I just watched a YT video just a couple days ago where an experienced builder managed to bend the cpu pins and somehow successfully bent them back. I thought the corner pin was fractured at the base for sure and there would be no way to bend it back without it breaking off. The cpu went back into the socket with a bit of force but the surgery was successful.
> 
> I have bent a few pins in my day also.
> I too have learned to pull straight up even when I have thought I did a good job of breaking the TIM adhesion. Still managed to pull the cpu out of the socket. At least it is easier to get a knife blade under the IHS between it and the cold plate to separate the two and not damage the cpu.
> 
> But the pin count on the AMD packages can only go higher with PCIE 4.0 AND DDR5 coming. Might be smart to start thinking of the LGA socket. You wouldn't want to make the Threadripper a PGA beast of 4000 pins would you?
> 
> I have had to reclaim the LGA socket pins before also. I had my first experience with LGA only a couple of years ago in fact since I hadn't touched an Intel cpu since they still were PGA based. Had to learn a quick lesson in how the LGA socket and its pins were designed. I agree with your sentiment about how fragile those pins can be. I learned that those pins undergo both lateral and vertical positional translation when the cpu is inserted in the socket and socket torque does matter. I had to massage the outer row of pin positions on my X99 board to get the "D" DIMM channel recognized. The socket pins have something like 40 micron absolute positional accuracy and the substrate keying notches of the cpu allow for a lot of slop.
> 
> My comment had NOTHING to do with the firestorm the X570/B550/Zen 3 announcement caused. I was just commenting on the PGA socket, nothing more and nothing about future platforms or future chipsets.


I know! And you make some great points! Sorry my second half of my message was not at all directed at you, because I know all you were talking about is that its time for an upgraded socket. And I 100% agree with that. LGA Does offer a lot of advantages. I just am not looking forward to having issues with Motherboard pins. But there are ups and downs to both, and you are right, it may be time to move on!


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> My sx8200NP NVME drive is only writing at (less than) half speed! Should be 1.2GB/s or more, but now it's only 500MB/s
> 
> I don't think it's motherboard - drive is running at PCIE3x4 as always - but wondered if anyone thought it might be in some way....
> 
> Think I might have to RMA it as can't get it to work as it used to
> 
> Edit: just realized this must be why my shutdown is so slow - writing memory to disk at less than half speed it should be....


Yeah, I would check that TRIM is indeed issuing commands, and I would check to see how full the drive is. Performance obviously will go down as the drive fills up, but if you leave some over provisioning space at the end of the drive, then degredation in speed is no where near as bad.

Also, obviously check to make sure you are in the correct spot. On this board both have full throughput, but only if you run your second PCIEx16 slot at x4. I know you know your system well, so everything I just said you most likely already considered, but its definitely all the stuff I would double check before RMA. I would also completely backup the drive (As you will have to for RMA anyway) then secure wipe it, and test the drive speed now that its Empty again. If speed still sucks then its either a Bandwidth issue in the Mobo, A Driver Issue (Some NVMe Drive have performance Drivers that work better than the Ones Microsoft comes with), or an issue with the Drive itself.

Good Luck!


Also, I PGA Pins are definitely easier to bend back. The General wisdom was that you would prefer to have to bend the pins on the cheaper item, but the reality is, you can usually get RMA for either, and PGA is simply easier to bend back then LGA. But if progress demands LGA, then thats what it demands. I know I will at least appreciate no longer pulling the damn CPU Off with the cooler again! LOL!


----------



## Keith Myers

harderthanfire said:


> I've broken a couple of LGA sockets by nudging the pins when removing a cpu
> 
> 
> I much prefer PGA, just give the block a slight twist before removing to free it from the CPU.


But it is impossible to twist the cpu if the coldplate is mounted on studs that pass through the mounting mechanism.


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> But it is impossible to twist the cpu if the coldplate is mounted on studs that pass through the mounting mechanism.


Yup! Exactly! I am going to try your Knife Trick next time. I have these long ass Razer Blades, I never thought to try that until your post.

My Normal Trick is to Boot the PC Up, and run AIDA64 or Y-Cruncher for about 10 Minutes, then as soon as I am ready to demount the cooler, shut off the PC, and Get to work Instantly. Usually in that case I can get the Cooler or Block off without pulling out the chip. But if you let it cool off for more then about 2 to 3 mins, then you will still have the issue. I think a Razor might actually be the better bet.

The More You Know!


----------



## Keith Myers

Or if the coldplate/block is small enough and doesn't cover the release latch on the socket, let the lever up and just pull straight up pulling the cpu out of the socket to remove from the coldplate later.


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> Or if the coldplate/block is small enough and doesn't cover the release latch on the socket, let the lever up and just pull straight up pulling the cpu out of the socket to remove from the coldplate later.


LOL! You can tell we have both been around the block! LOL! Unfortunately I haven't been able to do that in quite some time, but is always awesome when you can get away with that!


----------



## oreonutz

So, I had a good day yesterday. I will now be an official member of the Crosshair VIII Hero Forums. Decided it was time to move on up after the recent AMD Announcement. Figured I would figure out what x570 was about, and might just grab x670 when that launches too. Then I will have at least 1 Board from Every Generatation. I can start hanging them up on my wall as Trophies, lol! I am running out of reasons to build new PC's. I am already maintaining 9 In this house, 5 for serious work/functions. The Other as entertainment PC's around the house.

But anyways, I also got shouted out by Gamers Nexus, which was awesome! I gave him that Software that I have spread around the forum to helps CCX Overclock, and that was awesome that he shouted me out, I didn't expect that. It was in the Newest Video he just released. I am EvocatiProductions on Youtube (My Old Studio Production Company). So That was cool!

https://youtu.be/NfW4LSfRPlE?t=344


----------



## ClintLeo

I have had to fix atleast 5 bent pins over my time with AMD which was from about 2007 to 2013 and then 2019(fortunately now so far) to now and I would rather straighten the pins than try to fix an Intel socket.


----------



## nick name

oreonutz said:


> So, I had a good day yesterday. I will now be an official member of the Crosshair VIII Hero Forums. Decided it was time to move on up after the recent AMD Announcement. Figured I would figure out what x570 was about, and might just grab x670 when that launches too. Then I will have at least 1 Board from Every Generatation. I can start hanging them up on my wall as Trophies, lol! I am running out of reasons to build new PC's. I am already maintaining 9 In this house, 5 for serious work/functions. The Other as entertainment PC's around the house.
> 
> But anyways, I also got shouted out by Gamers Nexus, which was awesome! I gave him that Software that I have spread around the forum to helps CCX Overclock, and that was awesome that he shouted me out, I didn't expect that. It was in the Newest Video he just released. I am EvocatiProductions on Youtube (My Old Studio Production Company). So That was cool!
> 
> https://youtu.be/NfW4LSfRPlE?t=344


I only watched part of that stream, but it's awesome that you got that shout-out. 

I haven't been using much CCD/CCX overclocking lately because my ambient room temps increase quite a bit through the day and that makes the voltages in the morning unstable in the late afternoons. However, I got myself a portable air conditioner (other solutions weren't feasible) and that seems to be doing the trick so I'll be going back to CCD overclocking. 

I do wish the best cores were on the first CCX of a CCD instead of the second CCX. It seems like Windows uses that first CCX more than the second so setting the second one a touch faster seems useless.


----------



## Keith Myers

ClintLeo said:


> I have had to fix atleast 5 bent pins over my time with AMD which was from about 2007 to 2013 and then 2019(fortunately now so far) to now and I would rather straighten the pins than try to fix an Intel socket.


I won't argue on which is easier to fix. I fixed my LGA socket with a high intensity LED flashlight and workbench illuminated magnifying glass of about 10X power and a sewing needle. I used the LED to illuminate the ball ends of the pins and moved the out of place ones back into place with the sewing needle by matching the illuminated ball heads in both row and column locations of adjacent rows and columns. Took about 90 minutes to move about 24 pins and most of that was setup time experimenting in what the best visualization was.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> That seems like SATA speeds. Where is the drive installed? And what other drives are installed?


It's installed in the lower slot - where it's been since I put it in there. I've added my old drive to the bottom pcie x16(x4) port recently, but this started before that....



Axaion said:


> how full is it?, does TRIM work correctly?


Still got 154GB left of 446, so should be plenty shouldn't it? Drive has been trimmed as well.

Looking on XPG/ADATA website is not encouraging - I can't find any trace of my drive's model SX8200NP 480GB - Just the SX8200PNP 512 or 512 Pro


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> I won't argue on which is easier to fix. I fixed my LGA socket with a high intensity LED flashlight and workbench illuminated magnifying glass of about 10X power and a sewing needle. I used the LED to illuminate the ball ends of the pins and moved the out of place ones back into place with the sewing needle by matching the illuminated ball heads in both row and column locations of adjacent rows and columns. Took about 90 minutes to move about 24 pins and most of that was setup time experimenting in what the best visualization was.


Just like photography . . . working with small things is all about lighting, lighting, lighting. And cursing. Cursing, cursing, cursing.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> It's installed in the lower slot - where it's been since I put it in there. I've added my old drive to the bottom pcie x16(x4) port recently, but this started before that....
> 
> 
> 
> Still got 154GB left of 446, so should be plenty shouldn't it? Drive has been trimmed as well.
> 
> Looking on XPG/ADATA website is not encouraging - I can't find any trace of my drive's model SX8200NP 480GB - Just the SX8200PNP 512 or 512 Pro


I can't say I've seen this or read anything similar. That performance sounded like SATA speeds, but I can't think of how that slot would get constricted to any type of SATA mode.

Can you move a bunch of files from it to reduce its capacity and see if that improves performance?


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I can't say I've seen this or read anything similar. That performance sounded like SATA speeds, but I can't think of how that slot would get constricted to any type of SATA mode.
> 
> Can you move a bunch of files from it to reduce its capacity and see if that improves performance?


It's my boot drive... I will try this though..


----------



## nick name

I've just realized that I can use a muuuuuch larger VCORE offset before clock stretching kicks in if I'm not using the EDC bug. 

While I understand the benefits of the EDC bug -- I want to lower temps by lowering voltages. In that vein I was also using CCD clocking because I could set a static VCORE, but it's difficult to find a voltage that works across all workloads (browsing, gaming, folding). 

So if you're using the EDC bug to boost performance, but want lower temps and are like me who saw clock stretching at offsets greater than -.05V then perhaps try regular PBO with a larger offset. The behavior I'm seeing is the larger offset allowing the CPU to clock slightly higher (not EDC bug higher though closer) but without the clock stretching that I'd get with the EDC bug. 

Now because I'm not using the EDC bug I'm not seeing the sexy 46.75 multiplier I was before -- I am still close the the 46 that's on the box though. Cinebench R20 with the larger offset scored 523 on Single Core and the Multicore score is around where the EDC bug would be. 

Now the numbers: with the EDC bug I was using -.05V before clock stretching and with auto PBO settings (with +200MHz also) I'm using -.1625V before I see clock stretching. The temps kinda stayed the same because it's running a higher multiplier so if you shoot for temps then find an offset in the middle that doesn't let the CPU multiplier increase. 

The posted picture is a CB 20 run with my Core #9 highlighted as it's the core that starts clock stretching first. It's my weakest core. I love all my cores, but #9 is just . . .


----------



## Shadowized

nick name said:


> I've just realized that I can use a muuuuuch larger VCORE offset before clock stretching kicks in if I'm not using the EDC bug.


I noticed similar but with the CPPC2/Global C-State settings, with those enabled my board refuses to get into the OS at anything above -0.0625v offset, but with those settings off I can normally do -0.1250v, What are your PBO settings at (PPT, TDC, EDC)?


----------



## tcclaviger

oreonutz said:


> OK. So I finally have a version of my Auto PerCCX Overclock Autostart script that I am comfortable sharing. Please don't rip me apart too much as I only dabble in scripting here in there to get things done, and still have a lot to learn. I just spent the last hour trying to figure out how to get this damn script to launch in the background so the CMD Windows don't pop up, and for whatever reason when the damn Task Scheduler Launches the script that way, no matter how I do it, it doesn't set the clocks. So for now this is the best way I have found to do it.
> 
> First Disclaimers and Warnings.
> 
> This uses a PerCCX Overclock tool that ASUS Uses, and I believe our very own @shamino1978 made. According to The Stilt, this Tool is not meant to be used by novice users, and if you don't set your voltage manually in the UEFI there is a chance you could damage your chip if you set the wrong VID with this tool. So as a safety precaution, I would definitely set your own VCore in the UEFI before using this tool. When you set your own VCore via the manual method (NOT OFFSET) in the UEFI it does not matter what the VID is set to because it is ignored. However, as a safety precaution my Script is set to use a VID of 1.3v, I would leave that part of the script alone just in case you end up having to boot your board from factory default and forget to set your vcore manually, as 1.3v is not enough to hurt anything. Even so, please understand you are using this tool and my script entirely at your own risk, please make sure you understand what you are doing, before using this script.
> 
> OK now that we got that out of the way, I am providing a zip file via my google drive share. Once downloaded you need to unzip its contents which will create a folder called "perccx0723", the way this script is designed that folder needs to be at the root of your c drive with the files directly inside of it.
> 
> Inside this folder you will find all the files that originally came with the tool plus "autostart.bat", "autoccx.vbs" and "Per CCX Overclock.xml". Once the folder is on your C Drive, you can go to Computer Management/Task Scheduler/Task Scheduler Library and select the "Action" Menu followed by "Import Task". Then browse to "C:\perccx0723\" and select the "Per CCX Overclock.xml" file. This will import the task that I have set up to automatically start with your PC as your User, this is the one way that I could get this script to properly launch upon the start of the PC. It has a 15 Second delay. You can of course edit any of the tasks parameters, but I found the way I have configured it to work every single boot. (Where as without the 15s delay for instance, it only worked sometimes, and without being configured as starting with your user logged in, it wouldn't launch at all, so I believe I have it configured already to work the best.)
> 
> If you rather set up the Task Scheduler yourself, what you need to know is that the "Autoccx.vbs" is the script that sets your Per CCX Overclock, and so that is the file that needs to be launched with the PC. The autostart.bat is just a simple bat file that tells it to open the script in a command window.
> 
> Now for the most important part. How you set your Per CCX Overclock is by opening that "AutoCCX.vbs" file in notepad and editing your clocks for each ccx in that file. I did my best to make it as readable as possible, you should be able to find the Clocks listed in Mhz, and edit them to your liking. It goes in order from CCX0 through CCX 3. All you need to do is edit in your desired Clocks for each ccx and then save the file, then make sure that file launches automatically and it will set your Per CCX Overclock. You can simply double click the file after editing it and watch your clocks in HWinfo to verify that its working as intended. I also included a file titled "reset to 4250 Allcore.vbs" which will set all your clocks to 4.25Ghz, so you can sanity check that your edited script is working.
> 
> Again, I want to reiterate that this tool is NOT INTENDED to set your Voltages, only your Clocks per CCX, so PLEASE Make sure you set your VCore Manually in the UEFI before using this tool.
> 
> Sorry for being so verbose, I just want to make sure anyone who uses this completely understands what this is.
> 
> Other than that, Happy Per CCX Overclocking, once you have this script set right, you no longer have to open up Ryzen Master Every single time you restart, the script will do that work for you! ENJOY!!!
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/16aZuX3SNGsR96sCjZeL7s7AyAiHzjpwQ/view?usp=sharing


oreonutz, a huge thank you for posting this. There were a few steps involved in getting the latest windows 10 build to play nicely with the script at startup, but it worked with minimal effort. I will not detail the steps, frankly, if someone can't figure them out, they shouldn't be in the Task Scheduler in the first place imho.

As a result of this awesome script, plus Shamino's awesome tool, 1usmus's great calculator tool and a little silicon lottery luck I've gotten this as my daily setup:

R20 temps are in the low 60s Tdie, actual voltage using a DMM not an unreliable software tool is 1.291 @ full AVX load, 1.302 @ R20 load.
Super happy with the results so far, this is my Baseline, and I've not even begun to push to challenge the HWBOT scores (well within striking distance when I get frisky with voltage ) 
On an "Obsolete" C6E even


----------



## Dollar

tcclaviger said:


> oreonutz, a huge thank you for posting this. There were a few steps involved in getting the latest windows 10 build to play nicely with the script at startup, but it worked with minimal effort. I will not detail the steps, frankly, if someone can't figure them out, they shouldn't be in the Task Scheduler in the first place imho.
> 
> As a result of this awesome script, plus Shamino's awesome tool, 1usmus's great calculator tool and a little silicon lottery luck I've gotten this as my daily setup:
> 
> R20 temps are in the low 60s Tdie, actual voltage using a DMM not an unreliable software tool is 1.291 @ full AVX load, 1.302 @ R20 load.
> Super happy with the results so far, this is my Baseline, and I've not even begun to push to challenge the HWBOT scores (well within striking distance when I get frisky with voltage )
> On an "Obsolete" C6E even



I see you're using four single rank sticks in the calculator. Are you using the new recommended termination block of 7/OFF/5 or the old 7/3/1 which is the same as auto?


----------



## oreonutz

tcclaviger said:


> oreonutz, a huge thank you for posting this. There were a few steps involved in getting the latest windows 10 build to play nicely with the script at startup, but it worked with minimal effort. I will not detail the steps, frankly, if someone can't figure them out, they shouldn't be in the Task Scheduler in the first place imho.
> 
> As a result of this awesome script, plus Shamino's awesome tool, 1usmus's great calculator tool and a little silicon lottery luck I've gotten this as my daily setup:
> 
> R20 temps are in the low 60s Tdie, actual voltage using a DMM not an unreliable software tool is 1.291 @ full AVX load, 1.302 @ R20 load.
> Super happy with the results so far, this is my Baseline, and I've not even begun to push to challenge the HWBOT scores (well within striking distance when I get frisky with voltage )
> On an "Obsolete" C6E even


Super Glad to be of Service! And those C6 Boards aren't so obsolete after all. Yeah AMD Killed them off from future support, but I am still using mine with a 3900x and the Per CCX OC Tool, and its working amazingly well. 

Also, there is a slightly newer version of this tool, that allows you to skip my VBS Scirpt altogether, and just use Task Scheduler to Enforce the CCX OC at Boot. Functionally it will be the exact same as what you are doing now with the script, it will just be a tad easier to change if you want to change Freqs, because you no longer need to edit my script, but a much simpler txt file. Will PM if interested.

So glad to be of help!


----------



## tcclaviger

Dollar said:


> I see you're using four single rank sticks in the calculator. Are you using the new recommended termination block of 7/OFF/5 or the old 7/3/1 which is the same as auto?


7/OFF/5 currently. I think I'm being limited by my Fabric the cpu likes, doesnt behave well at 3800/1900 even with loose timings, but 3600/1800 plays very nicely. Just got the temporary rig build completed today, waiting on my Kryosgraphics NEXT block for my 2080ti to finish it up, once completely done I'll tweak it to "just right" e.g. try 3666/3733 etc etc.




oreonutz said:


> Super Glad to be of Service! And those C6 Boards aren't so obsolete after all. Yeah AMD Killed them off from future support, but I am still using mine with a 3900x and the Per CCX OC Tool, and its working amazingly well.
> 
> Also, there is a slightly newer version of this tool, that allows you to skip my VBS Scirpt altogether, and just use Task Scheduler to Enforce the CCX OC at Boot. Functionally it will be the exact same as what you are doing now with the script, it will just be a tad easier to change if you want to change Freqs, because you no longer need to edit my script, but a much simpler txt file. Will PM if interested.
> 
> So glad to be of help!




Regarding the new tool:

I am definitely interested, always one to simplify!

Loving the ability to Process Lasso games onto the strong CCX, the OS fluff/bs onto the weak CCX and have better multi-core than PBO for both  It's awesome and anyone who doesn't see the value in this is blind.

About the Zen 3 support.. we'll see... clearly 128mb roms as the limitation is a straight up lie. There are $700 X570 boards out there with 128mb roms so...

When it's time, I'll be diving into modifying the BIOS. 

What has happened before, will happen again, and in time the popular boards will have the code injected into custom BIOS files to correct a great injustice.

In the end, even if it absolutely cannot be done, the board was a steal at $180 bucks, new, and there's no chance a 3900x is going to choke a 2080ti in 3440x1440 anytime soon so w/e.

Like NVME not available on X79, AM3 chips running on AM2(+?) socket board, etc etc, you cannot keep the modding community down.


----------



## nick name

Shadowized said:


> I noticed similar but with the CPPC2/Global C-State settings, with those enabled my board refuses to get into the OS at anything above -0.0625v offset, but with those settings off I can normally do -0.1250v, What are your PBO settings at (PPT, TDC, EDC)?


I left those on Auto.


----------



## harderthanfire

nick name said:


> I left those on Auto.



What LLC settings? I'm worried about vdroop with that low an offset.


----------



## nick name

harderthanfire said:


> What LLC settings? I'm worried about vdroop with that low an offset.


Level 4 on everything.


----------



## oreonutz

harderthanfire said:


> What LLC settings? I'm worried about vdroop with that low an offset.


I used to be the same way, With Zen and Zen+ I rocked at least a level 2 LLC so I got very little Vdroop. Then I started reading white papers on how Vdroop actually worked, and looked at the Voltage Curve through a Scope, and its changed my entire perspective. Setting those Higher LLC's do actually cause more voltage to be shoved down the CPU both at the start of a Heavy Load when the Vdroop kicks in and overshoots, and then at the tail of the load when when the the Voltage naturally goes back up. I have no idea how much of an effect this has on a CPU over time, but those Spikes, when your Voltage is set to 1.3v for instance, can be as high as 1.4v or even higher, and even for literally only a split second, I realized it was a better idea to just set a slightly higher voltage, and allow for a more modest Vdroop setting. And whats crazy is, ever since I started to take that approach, I have found it easier to keep the CPU Stable, not sure why that is, maybe in this case causation isn't correlation, but it seemed so for me.

Also, the other thing about Zen2, is, since it is so hard to undervolt without getting weird performance issues, instead of actually undervolting, I noticed just using a lower LLC setting of 4 or 5, will get you that Voltage droop that is so down low under load, that you are effectively undervolting, yet the same performance issues don't occur. 

Its completely opposite of the way I used to do things, but it has worked for me, so maybe it might for you too? Not sure because all of our samples are different, but food for thought at least.


----------



## nick name

oreonutz said:


> I used to be the same way, With Zen and Zen+ I rocked at least a level 2 LLC so I got very little Vdroop. Then I started reading white papers on how Vdroop actually worked, and looked at the Voltage Curve through a Scope, and its changed my entire perspective. Setting those Higher LLC's do actually cause more voltage to be shoved down the CPU both at the start of a Heavy Load when the Vdroop kicks in and overshoots, and then at the tail of the load when when the the Voltage naturally goes back up. I have no idea how much of an effect this has on a CPU over time, but those Spikes, when your Voltage is set to 1.3v for instance, can be as high as 1.4v or even higher, and even for literally only a split second, I realized it was a better idea to just set a slightly higher voltage, and allow for a more modest Vdroop setting. And whats crazy is, ever since I started to take that approach, I have found it easier to keep the CPU Stable, not sure why that is, maybe in this case causation isn't correlation, but it seemed so for me.
> 
> Also, the other thing about Zen2, is, since it is so hard to undervolt without getting weird performance issues, instead of actually undervolting, I noticed just using a lower LLC setting of 4 or 5, will get you that Voltage droop that is so down low under load, that you are effectively undervolting, yet the same performance issues don't occur.
> 
> Its completely opposite of the way I used to do things, but it has worked for me, so maybe it might for you too? Not sure because all of our samples are different, but food for thought at least.


Your fears about LLC aren't unwarranted, but you know that. I'm comfortable at Level 4 because it's not the highest and smarter folks than me recommend using no higher than the second highest level on a board. That may be me interpreting what they said incorrectly though. 

As far as undervolting -- I assumed clock stretching would behave the same as what I saw while using the EDC bug, but it doesn't. I can undervolt up to -.1625V before I see clock stretching with regular PBO while right after -.05V I saw it with the EDC bug. And someone earlier mentioned failing to boot with a large undervolt while using Eco mode. 

And I've also considered removing LLC and letting vdroop serve as and undervolt. I haven't actually tried it yet though.


----------



## tcclaviger

nick name said:


> Your fears about LLC aren't unwarranted, but you know that. I'm comfortable at Level 4 because it's not the highest and smarter folks than me recommend using no higher than the second highest level on a board. That may be me interpreting what they said incorrectly though.
> 
> As far as undervolting -- I assumed clock stretching would behave the same as what I saw while using the EDC bug, but it doesn't. I can undervolt up to -.1625V before I see clock stretching with regular PBO while right after -.05V I saw it with the EDC bug. And someone earlier mentioned failing to boot with a large undervolt while using Eco mode.
> 
> And I've also considered removing LLC and letting vdroop serve as and undervolt. I haven't actually tried it yet though.


Your thoughts on using vdroop as an undervolt is exactly how to safely run the processor. Anyone running an LLC setting where a load applied causes no Vdroop is slowly murdering their CPU because of transients, this has been a huge misunderstanding for at least 10 years, you WANT your CPU to droop at load as much as you can allow it to for a daily OC. For pushing limits/records, sure, spike away!!

Are you guys actually measuring with DMM or using software? I can tell you for sure, even asus WMI monitor is way way off, as well as SVI2 TFN on actual voltages shoved through various components. Here are the results I got measuring vs software during full load scenarios using LLC 2:

Vcore: Offset - 0.110
VID: 1.35
SVI2 TFN: 1.265
DMM: 1.308
Asus WMI/OC Panel: 1.340

BIOS setting RAM : 1.455
DMM: 1.451
WMI/OC Panel: 1.495

BIOS PLL Set: 1.78
DMM: 1.78
WMI/OC Panel: 1.825 

Something worth keeping in mind is using Ultra Fast on phase control and setting the response freq as high as possible while using current balance instead of t.probe will improve the accuracy and decrease the duration of the voltage over/under shoot that occurs at load/unload. You'll need to ensure your VRMs are well cooled to max all Digi+ settings out safely though, especially for sustained workloads like long Blender runs.

There's a massive difference between running it in PBO with the highest negative offset possible before stretching occurs vs running all core manual or ccx overclock at a given voltage. All core and by ccx doesn't downclock/undervolt the CPU in the same way as running tweaked PBO, it is far more abusive than running a well tweaked PBO. If your work flow needs it, sure go right ahead, just set LLC at a point where the droop drops it into the sub 1.3 range if you give 2 ***** about the processor.

Benchmark differences are minimal between a pushed PBO vs all core/CCX OC:

R20:
CCX OC: 7850
Single core: 512
PBO: 7480
Single core: 525

Corona 1.3:
CCX OC: 7,327,460 Rays/s
PBO: 7,165,920 Rays/s

With the above settings, offset -0.110, LLC2, maxed out Digi+ settings, PBO Auto/scalar auto, I achieve the best PBO results, it hits 4.65 at the start of a workload and holds between 4591 and 4617 single threaded and 4165 - 4217 multithreaded. Idles at stupid low voltages, too low to measure properly without an o-scope, but it's idleing at 30C with water temps at 25C atm pulling only 12watts and peaking at 151watts under full load. Running per CCX, lowest idle consumption was around 40 watts when using 1.3vcore, so, it's definitely not sleeping the cores, just running full voltage at almost zero current at idle, not super dangerous, but not necessary.

As much as I wanted to use CCX ocing, is simply offers no meaningful performance increase to me or my work flow that is worth the potential risk to the CPU. 

After much tweaking I found this to be my stable limit on RAM/IF, not bad for a T-Topology board and c14 3200 B-Die:


----------



## Shadowized

tcclaviger said:


> As much as I wanted to use CCX ocing, is simply offers no meaningful performance increase to me or my work flow that is worth the potential risk to the CPU.
> After much tweaking I found this to be my stable limit on RAM/IF, not bad for a T-Topology board and c14 3200 B-Die:


Those are some solid numbers, my findings are similar in that for some reason my CPU really likes to be undervolted and I get way better results with negative offset of around 0.0500-0.0625v~ than I do at stock, I could go further but I prefer keeping my c-state / df state settings enabled so the cores turn off instead of just downclocking (both on auto results in the cores never sleeping from what I saw in RM).


----------



## harderthanfire

Looks like AMD backtracked over the x470 b450 stuff so if Asus work with AMD our board will work with Zen 3!


----------



## Hepe

Well, it looks like a 4900X (or whatever it will be) is back on the menu after all. Now the question is how long ASUS will take to release the beta-bioses, or if they will release them at all. Judging by the recent Gamers Nexus video, ASUS was quite eager to ditch support for older boards.


----------



## Axaion

Yeah, now we can shift the blame from AMD to Asus \o

I really do hope we get updated bioses for 4000 series CPU's, and that Asus doesnt drag its feet on it


----------



## oreonutz

harderthanfire said:


> Looks like AMD backtracked over the x470 b450 stuff so if Asus work with AMD our board will work with Zen 3!


I Don't Understand how this turned into a Double Post. So Deleted the contents of this one, because no one needed this message twice....


----------



## oreonutz

harderthanfire said:


> Looks like AMD backtracked over the x470 b450 stuff so if Asus work with AMD our board will work with Zen 3!


Wait what!? I just got up (Late work night last night), havent checked any news yet. Where did you hear this, links??



Also, real Quick guys. I don't need this or I would have purchased it already, but a Kit of 3000Mhz CL14 B-Die that CERTAINLY can be Overclocked, 32GB in a 2x16GB Kit, for only $150. Would Swoop up while you can. Being sold by @Tobiman

https://www.overclock.net/forum/146...2-3000mhz-c14-samsung-b-die.html#post28459180


----------



## Axaion

oreonutz said:


> Wait what!? I just got up (Late work night last night), havent checked any news yet. Where did you hear this, links??
> 
> 
> 
> Also, real Quick guys. I don't need this or I would have purchased it already, but a Kit of 3000Mhz CL14 B-Die that CERTAINLY can be Overclocked, 32GB in a 2x16GB Kit, for only $150. Would Swoop up while you can. Being sold by @Tobiman
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/146...2-3000mhz-c14-samsung-b-die.html#post28459180


https://old.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/gmp45o/the_zen_3_architecture_is_coming_to_amd_x470_and/

and


----------



## oreonutz

Axaion said:


> https://old.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/gmp45o/the_zen_3_architecture_is_coming_to_amd_x470_and/
> 
> and
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emtRzJW7yrg


Hell yeah, Thank You! Checking now!


----------



## Shadowized

that AMD announcement makes sense and it seems like a logical solution to just split the branches, one bios for existing cpus, and one for 3000-4000, since the 1000 and 2000 series don't need anything they can just feature lock the existing bios and call it a day, only really requiring one new set of bios for 3000-4000 cpus.



Hepe said:


> Well, it looks like a 4900X (or whatever it will be) is back on the menu after all. Now the question is how long ASUS will take to release the beta-bioses, or if they will release them at all. Judging by the recent Gamers Nexus video, ASUS was quite eager to ditch support for older boards.


Hopefully they don't take too long, but based on that GN video combined with how slow Asus have been to push updates or really do anything to improve their bios over the years it, unless there is a rapid shift to improve things (most notably their attitude and communication) I think this is probably the last board I will own from them, it's already very hard to recommend them compared to other vendors but it really seems as though they've become the corsair of motherboards, where you're essentially paying a markup for their brand name and nothing more.


----------



## oreonutz

Shadowized said:


> that AMD announcement makes sense and it seems like a logical solution to just split the branches, one bios for existing cpus, and one for 3000-4000, since the 1000 and 2000 series don't need anything they can just feature lock the existing bios and call it a day, only really requiring one new set of bios for 3000-4000 cpus.
> 
> 
> 
> Hopefully they don't take too long, but based on that GN video combined with how slow Asus have been to push updates or really do anything to improve their bios over the years it, unless there is a rapid shift to improve things (most notably their attitude and communication) I think this is probably the last board I will own from them, it's already very hard to recommend them compared to other vendors but it really seems as though they've become the corsair of motherboards, where you're essentially paying a markup for their brand name and nothing more.


Yeah, I can't say this will be my last ASUS Board, I really do enjoy the quality of their products, and I already jumped on a Crosshair VIII Hero Board, there announcement that they wouldn't support 400 Series board was the push I needed to finally jump on the x570 Platform, and now they reversed course, which I am glad they did, it means I can still use my Crosshair VII Hero in my Test Bench for the new Chips, so thats awesome.

But I am really disappointed to hear that ASUS was the one board partner that was either Pushing Against supporting 400 Series boards, or at the least not caring that AMD Dropped Support. That just confirmed what a lot of us think, that ASUS really is just not the most Consumer Friendly brand, and that is disappointing to hear. Knowing them, it will be like a month or more after launch until we finally get our BIOS for the 4000 Series. But because we have a very active modding community here, I have a feeling we will atleast have a community made BIOS that will give us support, just may be a little buggy.

Its interesting to see how the "Confirming You own a Zen3 Chip and 400 Series Board before giving you the BIOS" will work.

Also, the One Time Flash forward was interesting. But I would like to state here, that for us, the One Way flash will most likely not be an issue because we have BIOS Flashback, so almost certainly we will be able to flash back to an older BIOS if we want that way. But EVEN IF they lock us out of Flashing Back to an Older BIOS with BIOS Flashback, It is SUPER SIMPLE to completely erase the CMOS with an EEPROM Reader, and then Write the Older BIOS back to the CMOS that way. And that can be done on Any Motherboard, so there will definitely be ways to Flash Back if you know what you are doing, or know someone like me who can walk you through it.


----------



## Shadowized

oreonutz said:


> Its interesting to see how the "Confirming You own a Zen3 Chip and 400 Series Board before giving you the BIOS" will work.


indeed that is a strange sentence because what, is it a call from AMD to the board partners to all make some kind of "type in your serial# to download bios" page on their sites? or perhaps AMD will make their own codex of which boards support which CPU and link to the bios needed? I dunno but I definitely had to re-read that line a few times while going over the post.


----------



## nick name

It may not be any sort of "official verification" and it may just be something captcha like. Just something that asks if you are using a Ryzen 4000 CPU to make certain you're aware of it.


----------



## oreonutz

nick name said:


> It may not be any sort of "official verification" and it may just be something captcha like. Just something that asks if you are using a Ryzen 4000 CPU to make certain you're aware of it.


That would definitely be preferable. You know the second one of us has the BIOS its getting shared on here anyway. Can Confirm, I don't care what anyone tells me, the second I have it, if it isn't easy to get, I will be posting it on here for you to use. Obviously as always, you flash at your own risk, and I definitely understand the desire to keep it out of peoples hands who don't know what they are doing. But if you are on this forum you are presumably an enthusiast who hopefully knows the risk, so I definitely would post it up here in a second.


----------



## ClintLeo

Now that people complained and got what THEY wanted,if something goes wrong it is then AMD's fault and not theirs for pushing it.
So great for the people.


----------



## oreonutz

ClintLeo said:


> Now that people complained and got what THEY wanted,if something goes wrong it is then AMD's fault and not theirs for pushing it.
> So great for the people.


LOL. Are you actually mad that AMD is Keeping their Promise? Not sure how that hurts you? Just as it was for the launch of the 3000 Series and 300 Series Boards, if people can't figure out how to download and install their Bios correctly, then its on that person, and they probably should have stuck with the newer board. Beta support is meant to be for people who can handle doing a little work on their own, and everyone understands that. If not thats why forums like these exist, so we can walk people through these types of issues and get them up and running. But in no way does this make AMD the bad guy for keeping their promise.

This comment strikes me as Complaining for the sake of Complaining.

U Mad Bro?


----------



## Dude970

Very well said, no need for blame game comments. You can figure it out or not your choice. No need to go there


----------



## Baio73

WELL DONE AMD!

I own a X570 board, so I was not directly envolved, but I think they took the right decision for the brand's reputation.

I just can't understand why upgrading the BIOS to the Zen3 compatible version should be a no-return action... can't think of any technical reason, and do think about many marketing reasons, as this means you won't be able to sell your mobo as used to people with a Zen - Zen+ - Zen2 CPUs...

Baio


----------



## oreonutz

Baio73 said:


> WELL DONE AMD!
> 
> I own a X570 board, so I was not directly envolved, but I think they took the right decision for the brand's reputation.
> 
> I just can't understand why upgrading the BIOS to the Zen3 compatible version should be a no-return action... can't think of any technical reason, and do think about many marketing reasons, as this means you won't be able to sell your mobo as used to people with a Zen - Zen+ - Zen2 CPUs...
> 
> Baio


100 Percent Agree!

And, I think I know the reason they are not supporting a return to the older bios. I don't believe they made this decision for those of us with 32MB Roms, because our CPU's will be able to support the 3000 Series and the 4000 Series, so for us flashing back won't be an issue. But I believe they don't want to confuse the situation, so they are just saying plain and simple that once you flash forward, you won't be able to flash back, giving people the expectation that they can only go one way.

The Reason for this is that there will be a bunch of 16MB Rom boards on the 400 Series (There are way more 16MB Rom Boards then there are 32MB Rom Boards) And for a good portion of these boards, they won't be able to fit the code for the Older and the Newer CPU's in the Rom, so for this reason they only want to support the one way jump, they can build in code to make the transition easier, so if you have a 3000 Series Chip, and then you flash forward to the 4000 Series chip, once the flashing is done they can build in some type of message on boot that will say that the flash was successful and to go ahead and swap the chips. However going from the New Bios to the Old, that Code will not be there, and they are afraid that a lot of people will bork the process, so they just don't want to support it at all. It does make sense when you think of it from that perspective.

However, with all that being said. For those of us with BIOS Flashback, it won't matter, we could use BIOS Flashback to flash to the Older Bios and it will almost certainly work.

However, if they put in code to actively block us from Flashing from the New Firmware to the old, then all we will have to do is use an EEPROM Reader/Writer to Completely Erase the CMOS Ourselves, and then write the Older Bios to the CMOS. This will 100 Percent work, so for anyone who does want to sell a Board and make it compatible with an Older CPU, this is absolutely a way to do it, no matter what AMD decides to block, just look up EEPROM Reader, do your research, and you will get through it. Either that or Ask me, I will help you through it, this is the same process I use to Unbrick boards that have had bad flashes all the time.


----------



## crakej

oreonutz said:


> 100 Percent Agree!
> 
> And, I think I know the reason they are not supporting a return to the older bios. I don't believe they made this decision for those of us with 32MB Roms, because our CPU's will be able to support the 3000 Series and the 4000 Series, so for us flashing back won't be an issue. But I believe they don't want to confuse the situation, so they are just saying plain and simple that once you flash forward, you won't be able to flash back, giving people the expectation that they can only go one way.
> 
> The Reason for this is that there will be a bunch of 16MB Rom boards on the 400 Series (There are way more 16MB Rom Boards then there are 32MB Rom Boards) And for a good portion of these boards, they won't be able to fit the code for the Older and the Newer CPU's in the Rom, so for this reason they only want to support the one way jump, they can build in code to make the transition easier, so if you have a 3000 Series Chip, and then you flash forward to the 4000 Series chip, once the flashing is done they can build in some type of message on boot that will say that the flash was successful and to go ahead and swap the chips. However going from the New Bios to the Old, that Code will not be there, and they are afraid that a lot of people will bork the process, so they just don't want to support it at all. It does make sense when you think of it from that perspective.
> 
> However, with all that being said. For those of us with BIOS Flashback, it won't matter, we could use BIOS Flashback to flash to the Older Bios and it will almost certainly work.
> 
> However, if they put in code to actively block us from Flashing from the New Firmware to the old, then all we will have to do is use an EEPROM Reader/Writer to Completely Erase the CMOS Ourselves, and then write the Older Bios to the CMOS. This will 100 Percent work, so for anyone who does want to sell a Board and make it compatible with an Older CPU, this is absolutely a way to do it, no matter what AMD decides to block, just look up EEPROM Reader, do your research, and you will get through it. Either that or Ask me, I will help you through it, this is the same process I use to Unbrick boards that have had bad flashes all the time.


ASUS already removed the ability to flash newer bios from afuefix.exe, but flashback should work just fine....can't see why not...

This is what I had to say on YouTube after watching the GN video Re: Zen 3 on our boards...

I think AMD have been quite 'clever' here... As mentioned, some 4xx board had (some have!) PCIE 4 disabled half way through their life. AMD used PCIE 4 to differentiate products - but now they have done this, everyone is extremely grateful (including me) that their 1year old product will support the next CPU.

For me, is still startlingly obvious that PCIE 4 is being removed unnecessarily. They claimed to be protecting us, but when our boards were designed, manufacturers knew PCIE4 was coming, and (most) designed for it, many still run bios with it enabled... so although I'm happy about this, I STILL believe they should leave PCIE4 in tact, (especially) as it would fall under the same 'beta' conditions as the rest of the bios. MSI (and ASUS in at least 1 case) have already done the 'impossible' and re-enabled it on some B450 boards. B550 looks like it's a modest upgrade to X470. I'm happy though that I have an upgrade path which doesn't require an expensive MB update immediately.

So - AMD can now say 'we gave you Zen 3 support' - which makes it a lot harder to complain about PCIE 4, when they've already 'gone out of their way' to support us users. I bet X670 will get something that everyone will complain about! I also think AMD probably thought this would happen anyway. I think X470/B450 was meant to have PCIE4 and they realized they needed to differentiate 5xx chipsets to drive sales of the new boards by saying PCIE4 was a 5xx chipset exclusive.


----------



## Pietro

I'm on 3004 bios, I'm trying CCX OC on 1.28V LLC4(so around 1.26V during load) and I'm getting reset and message "CPU Over Temperature press f1 to run setup" despite cpu vrms being 46 and cpu 81 in hwinfo. I'm testing in prime without AVX instructions to identify which core fails. Total CPU Package power consumption is ~170W. I even set all fans to max, because I tought that is again bios bug that turns off cpu fan, but that is not the reason and it's spinning. Is it again another bug in CVII or just one of CCXs not being stable?


----------



## nick name

Pietro said:


> I'm on 3004 bios, I'm trying CCX OC on 1.28V LLC4(so around 1.26V during load) and I'm getting reset and message "CPU Over Temperature press f1 to run setup" despite cpu vrms being 46 and cpu 81 in hwinfo. I'm testing in prime without AVX instructions to identify which core fails. Total CPU Package power consumption is ~170W. I even set all fans to max, because I tought that is again bios bug that turns off cpu fan, but that is not the reason and it's spinning. Is it again another bug in CVII or just one of CCXs not being stable?


I haven't had any fan problems on 3004 and haven't run into any CPU Over Temp problems. Did you see what the die temps were? My die temps are almost always a little higher than Tdie/Tctl.


----------



## oreonutz

Pietro said:


> I'm on 3004 bios, I'm trying CCX OC on 1.28V LLC4(so around 1.26V during load) and I'm getting reset and message "CPU Over Temperature press f1 to run setup" despite cpu vrms being 46 and cpu 81 in hwinfo. I'm testing in prime without AVX instructions to identify which core fails. Total CPU Package power consumption is ~170W. I even set all fans to max, because I tought that is again bios bug that turns off cpu fan, but that is not the reason and it's spinning. Is it again another bug in CVII or just one of CCXs not being stable?


Its another bug. I forget what is necessary to overcome it. I think a clean flash.

@Keith Myers Can enlighten us for sure though, he was the first to discover this bug and overcome it (That I am aware of).


----------



## nick name

oreonutz said:


> Its another bug. I forget what is necessary to overcome it. I think a clean flash.
> 
> @Keith Myers Can enlighten us for sure though, he was the first to discover this bug and overcome it (That I am aware of).


Going back it looks like @Keith Myers fixed his issue by updating to 2801. So I'm not sure there was a "fix". Perhaps re-flashing the BIOS with Flashback will work.


----------



## Keith Myers

oreonutz said:


> Its another bug. I forget what is necessary to overcome it. I think a clean flash.
> 
> @Keith Myers Can enlighten us for sure though, he was the first to discover this bug and overcome it (That I am aware of).


Yes, the prime reason was the fans actually turning off in earlier BIOS'. But even after moving all fans to an external controller, I was still getting the CPU OT error.
A clean flashback of 2801 straightened up the internal BIOS registers that were still hanging on to the OT fault.
But I never have attempted any per CCX OC, I just run at fixed multipliers for all cores, so don't know if that changes the symptom and solution.


----------



## crakej

Keith Myers said:


> Yes, the prime reason was the fans actually turning off in earlier BIOS'. But even after moving all fans to an external controller, I was still getting the CPU OT error.
> A clean flashback of 2801 straightened up the internal BIOS registers that were still hanging on to the OT fault.
> But I never have attempted any per CCX OC, I just run at fixed multipliers for all cores, so don't know if that changes the symptom and solution.


I had this as well, but a long time ago, pretty sure that prob is fixed on recent bios, I've certainly not had it happen in ages. I use the motherboard headers.


----------



## CommanderDante

Hi, I had no time for tinkering with my PC for about a year... but the time has come, the moment is at hand [...].

3800XT and 3900XT are around the corner, I am finally going to replace my loyal R5 2600 @ 4.2GHz. I have some questions for you guyz, since you are more on a topic lately and most likely smarter than me on such topics:

1) Will 3600XT, *3800XT*, *3900XT *require bios update (we all know that Asus sucks due to greedy-way limited manpower)? Or it will use AGESA 1.0.0.4B/1.0.0.5 (which is not yet available for us) microcode?
2) Does C7H support currently CCD/CCX OC (I see that you are talking about it above)? I was even thinking to get rid of C7H and get B550 Aorus Master... 
3) Do we have any data on 1.0.0.5 AGESA bios update?  

Since CPU change is also good excuse to change bulky and not that awesome performing AC cooler (DRP4) that makes me angry every time I must access GPU (remove it) and blocks RGB (IO/RAM) :> 
I was thinking about building (again) small Alphacool loop (280x30 + D5). Or I can go... for the first time with AIO... Corsair H115i/H150i Pro XT should be pretty legit (I don't like stuff that doesn't allow maintenance). 
LC loop won't be a drama overkill for Ryzen low OC capabilities & C7H? I would be happy to max turbo speeds as much as possible and hold such config until AM5 second gen release (we all know that 1st DDR5 gen. will suck, like always). I am using PC mainly for 4K gaming and some davinci resolve stuff.


----------



## Pietro

CommanderDante said:


> Hi, I had no time for tinkering with my PC for about a year... but the time has come, the moment is at hand [...].
> 
> 3800XT and 3900XT are around the corner, I am finally going to replace my loyal R5 2600 @ 4.2GHz. I have some questions for you guyz, since you are more on a topic lately and most likely smarter than me on such topics:
> 
> 1) Will 3600XT, *3800XT*, *3900XT *require bios update (we all know that Asus sucks due to greedy-way limited manpower)? Or it will use AGESA 1.0.0.4B/1.0.0.5 (which is not yet available for us) microcode?
> 2) Does C7H support currently CCD/CCX OC (I see that you are talking about it above)? I was even thinking to get rid of C7H and get B550 Aorus Master...
> 3) Do we have any data on 1.0.0.5 AGESA bios update?
> 
> Since CPU change is also good excuse to change bulky and not that awesome performing AC cooler (DRP4) that makes me angry every time I must access GPU (remove it) and blocks RGB (IO/RAM) :>
> I was thinking about building (again) small Alphacool loop (280x30 + D5). Or I can go... for the first time with AIO... Corsair H115i/H150i Pro XT should be pretty legit (I don't like stuff that doesn't allow maintenance).
> LC loop won't be a drama overkill for Ryzen low OC capabilities & C7H? I would be happy to max turbo speeds as much as possible and hold such config until AM5 second gen release (we all know that 1st DDR5 gen. will suck, like always). I am using PC mainly for 4K gaming and some davinci resolve stuff.


1. There might not be 3600XT, 3800XT or 3900XT, but 3650X and 3750X which will be just 4XXX APUs with broken vega gpu where it will be turned off as igorslab says in newest rumor. Crosshair VII probably will get microcode, but Asus is always late to the party so expect a month or two after every other brands will get one and at least a month after their X570 update.
2. It does in ryzen master, but unfortunately we don't have an option in bios like CH8 to make it pernament regardless of system.
3. No.


----------



## oreonutz

CommanderDante said:


> 2) Does C7H support currently CCD/CCX OC (I see that you are talking about it above)? I was even thinking to get rid of C7H and get B550 Aorus Master...


Regarding CCX OC, our board does not have any CCX OCing in the BIOS, but we do have a tool that will allow us to CCX OC once in Windows, and you can set it to execute at Windows Bootup, so that as long as you are using Windows, it will automatically launch your OC at boot, so you don't have to fiddle with Ryzen Master at all. Let me know if you want me to send you this tool.


----------



## Dude970

oreonutz said:


> Regarding CCX OC, our board does not have any CCX OCing in the BIOS, but we do have a tool that will allow us to CCX OC once in Windows, and you can set it to execute at Windows Bootup, so that as long as you are using Windows, it will automatically launch your OC at boot, so you don't have to fiddle with Ryzen Master at all. Let me know if you want me to send you this tool.


What tool is this you mentioned?


----------



## arvinz

oreonutz said:


> Regarding CCX OC, our board does not have any CCX OCing in the BIOS, but we do have a tool that will allow us to CCX OC once in Windows, and you can set it to execute at Windows Bootup, so that as long as you are using Windows, it will automatically launch your OC at boot, so you don't have to fiddle with Ryzen Master at all. Let me know if you want me to send you this tool.


Would love this tool as I hate setting the CCX OC's through Ryzen Master; I often find myself forgetting to start it when I start my computer or when I wake it up from sleep it resets. Could you get me some info on that app?


----------



## CommanderDante

So I see I must prepare to buy a new mobo... Also I always overclock in bios, I don't want any bloatware running in the background. 
I can't wait. I must get new CPU in first two weeks of July (preferred earlier) and I need my PC working. So waiting for bios is not an option...


----------



## oreonutz

CommanderDante said:


> So I see I must prepare to buy a new mobo... Also I always overclock in bios, I don't want any bloatware running in the background.
> I can't wait. I must get new CPU in first two weeks of July (preferred earlier) and I need my PC working. So waiting for bios is not an option...


LOL. I feel you on the bloatware. Not a fan myself.

This is an Internal Asus Engineer Tool that just needs to run once to execute the clocks and then closes. That's why its much preferred over Ryzen Master, which is actual Bloatware. Suit yourself though. @arvinz & @Dude970 I got you, will have a PM From me shortly.


----------



## oreonutz

Dude970 said:


> What tool is this you mentioned?





arvinz said:


> Would love this tool as I hate setting the CCX OC's through Ryzen Master; I often find myself forgetting to start it when I start my computer or when I wake it up from sleep it resets. Could you get me some info on that app?


PM's Sent. Enjoy.

Also remember that this tool will allow you to disable safety's in your board, so be careful as to what you do with it. If you set your BIOS To Manual Voltage, and set your VCore Manually, there is little Risk. But if you want to be able to change your voltage on the fly, then you have to set your VCore to either auto or offset in the BIOS, and in that case you can do some serious damage by setting the VID too high with this tool. So just be careful.


----------



## nick name

Does anyone here ever run the CPU-Z benchmark?


----------



## oreonutz

nick name said:


> Does anyone here ever run the CPU-Z benchmark?


I do from time to time. Why Whats up? Oh by the way how is the CCX OC Bloatware working for you brother? lol


----------



## nick name

oreonutz said:


> I do from time to time. Why Whats up? Oh by the way how is the CCX OC Bloatware working for you brother? lol


Honestly, I haven't been using it because at the time I had some issues I was working on and then forgot. Because of the issues I've been trying to tweak EDC bug. I, though, would absolutely use the tool if I was running a per CCD clock as my daily. 

As far as CPU-Z benchmark -- I am trying to find a list of high scores for single-thread. When I google all I find is one entry and lists for top clocks.


----------



## oreonutz

nick name said:


> Honestly, I haven't been using it because at the time I had some issues I was working on and then forgot. Because of the issues I've been trying to tweak EDC bug. I, though, would absolutely use the tool if I was running a per CCD clock as my daily.
> 
> As far as CPU-Z benchmark -- I am trying to find a list of high scores for single-thread. When I google all I find is one entry and lists for top clocks.


I have yet to try to get the highest Single Core Scores, but give me a minute and I will send you what I have.

Regarding the CCX Bloatware, whats awesome about it is you don't have to use it to set your CCX at boot. You can literally use it over and over to change your clocks on the fly. And its much better than Ryzen Master because it doesn't set other settings in your BIOS, it leaves you BIOS completely alone, and you can try changing your CCX Clocks on the Fly until you find what is right, and can completely close it once you set you clocks. (In fact, it doesn't stay open, because you change the clocks in the settings.csv file, then you launch set.exe, it literally opens for less then 3 seconds, it changes your clocks then closes, so its awesome to just change your clocks and your voltage on the fly -if voltage is set to auto in the bios.)

Also, you don't have to even technically have to Per CCX OC, you can set all CCX to the Same Clock, and just allcore OC, completely up to you.

Anyways, let me see if I can dig up my latest Benchmark run with CPUz.


----------



## oreonutz

Here is a Screenshot that has a CPUz Benchmark, this is using The PerCCX OC shown in HWinfo, so it won't be as high as you could get using PBO, but hopefully will give you something to compare against.


----------



## nick name

oreonutz said:


> I have yet to try to get the highest Single Core Scores, but give me a minute and I will send you what I have.
> 
> Regarding the CCX Bloatware, whats awesome about it is you don't have to use it to set your CCX at boot. You can literally use it over and over to change your clocks on the fly. And its much better than Ryzen Master because it doesn't set other settings in your BIOS, it leaves you BIOS completely alone, and you can try changing your CCX Clocks on the Fly until you find what is right, and can completely close it once you set you clocks. (In fact, it doesn't stay open, because you change the clocks in the settings.csv file, then you launch set.exe, it literally opens for less then 3 seconds, it changes your clocks then closes, so its awesome to just change your clocks and your voltage on the fly -if voltage is set to auto in the bios.)
> 
> Also, you don't have to even technically have to Per CCX OC, you can set all CCX to the Same Clock, and just allcore OC, completely up to you.
> 
> Anyways, let me see if I can dig up my latest Benchmark run with CPUz.


I have full faith in the tool. I just haven't been doing much all-core or per CCD clocking. 

My latest CPU-Z single is 573 and I finally broke 540 on single in CB 20.


----------



## oreonutz

nick name said:


> I have full faith in the tool. I just haven't been doing much all-core or per CCD clocking.
> 
> My latest CPU-Z single is 573 and I finally broke 540 on single in CB 20.


NICE!

So I am the opposite of you, I haven't done much PBO OCing. Every single time I work on it, I can't get it to give me Multicore Load Clocks above 4100, and usually its closer to 4000. It PISSES ME OFF! LOL! And I have tweaked and tweaked and tweaked. I also kept having it change its behavior between reboots, which also pissed me off. 

I am sure if I spent a lot more time with it, I could get it dialed in better, but even when running PBO It felt like something was broken, because even with my System optimized where I was able to get 10,400+ CBR20 Scores, in that same exact clean environment but using PBO, The Highest Single Core Score I have gotten was 505, and that was my best run, my normal highest is 500 or 501. I see a bunch of you guys getting 520 and above, and I have as of yet not been able to get anywhere close to that.

I have a feeling it has to do with my MoBo, I have one of the first Boards out of the First Batch of C7H, its the one with some weird BIOS issues, like the SB Voltage always reading higher than its supposed to, and I have a feeling that something is going on that isn't allowing my Single Core to hold boost, either that or a BIOS Setting I have set is wrong. Using the EDC Bug I have gotten a boost on my single core as high as 4.75Ghz, which was awesome to see, but that's when I got that 505 CBR20 result, I even tried running it again under a completely clean Win10 Install, and STILL only got 504 as my Top Single Core Score. So Something, either my error or a board problem, just hates allowing my single core score to go higher.

Hoping when I install the C8H that that problem gets left behind.

And I know you do (Regarding the tool), when you do try it, let me know how you like it! You got great Scores in my opinion, so you are doing great!


----------



## nick name

oreonutz said:


> NICE!
> 
> So I am the opposite of you, I haven't done much PBO OCing. Every single time I work on it, I can't get it to give me Multicore Load Clocks above 4100, and usually its closer to 4000. It PISSES ME OFF! LOL! And I have tweaked and tweaked and tweaked. I also kept having it change its behavior between reboots, which also pissed me off.
> 
> I am sure if I spent a lot more time with it, I could get it dialed in better, but even when running PBO It felt like something was broken, because even with my System optimized where I was able to get 10,400+ CBR20 Scores, in that same exact clean environment but using PBO, The Highest Single Core Score I have gotten was 505, and that was my best run, my normal highest is 500 or 501. I see a bunch of you guys getting 520 and above, and I have as of yet not been able to get anywhere close to that.
> 
> I have a feeling it has to do with my MoBo, I have one of the first Boards out of the First Batch of C7H, its the one with some weird BIOS issues, like the SB Voltage always reading higher than its supposed to, and I have a feeling that something is going on that isn't allowing my Single Core to hold boost, either that or a BIOS Setting I have set is wrong. Using the EDC Bug I have gotten a boost on my single core as high as 4.75Ghz, which was awesome to see, but that's when I got that 505 CBR20 result, I even tried running it again under a completely clean Win10 Install, and STILL only got 504 as my Top Single Core Score. So Something, either my error or a board problem, just hates allowing my single core score to go higher.
> 
> Hoping when I install the C8H that that problem gets left behind.
> 
> And I know you do (Regarding the tool), when you do try it, let me know how you like it! You got great Scores in my opinion, so you are doing great!



What I've recently starting playing with is PPT. i was always trying to use negative offset to reduce voltages to reduce all-core temps and that always gimped single-core temps. Then it clicked in my head . . . just reduce PPT a little bit. So I've been playing with CPU Core Voltage on Auto and reducing PPT by a hair. Literally just reducing PPT by 2. That hinders all-core speed by a smidge, but lets single-core do its thing. That's what I've been playing with. With the EDC bug. So EDC at 2 or whatever you choose to use. 

That's letting a couple cores get to 4.7GHz on my best CCD (hoping the new XT CPUs are two good CCDs). So letting voltages run they way they want I've been able to control temps for all-core by gently reducing PPT while letting CPU Core Voltage run at Auto. *** I can't remember what I typed at this point. The power went out and this is what was saved.


----------



## oreonutz

nick name said:


> What I've recently starting playing with is PPT. i was always trying to use negative offset to reduce voltages to reduce all-core temps and that always gimped single-core temps. Then it clicked in my head . . . just reduce PPT a little bit. So I've been playing with CPU Core Voltage on Auto and reducing PPT by a hair. Literally just reducing PPT by 2. That hinders all-core speed by a smidge, but lets single-core do its thing. That's what I've been playing with. With the EDC bug. So EDC at 2 or whatever you choose to use.
> 
> That's letting a couple cores get to 4.7GHz on my best CCD (hoping the new XT CPUs are two good CCDs). So letting voltages run they way they want I've been able to control temps for all-core by gently reducing PPT while letting CPU Core Voltage run at Auto. *** I can't remember what I typed at this point. The power went out and this is what was saved.


I will definitely give that a try. Back when Build Zoid released his video on the PPT, TDC, and EDC settings, I played with those then to see if I could mimic's and unfortunately even though I got my Single Core to Boost to 4.75Ghz which was fricking awesome to see, Cinebench didn't seem to care, even when I forced CB to use my best core that was constantly boosting to between 4.6 and 4.7Ghz, and forced every other task to use every other core, it made no difference, thats the run where I got 505 instead of my previous best of 504. So thats when I just figured either I or my board was cursed. And I don't believe I was using a Voltage offset at the time, but I could be wrong about that, so I will try again and make sure I have no offset this time, and see if it helps.

Appreciate the knowledge!


----------



## CubanB

I have the CH VI and have been thinking about switching to this board (vs waiting for B550). It's not replacing it, it's for a separate system.

I just wanted to ask if you guys are happy with the current version of BIOS and if everything is stable and working as intended? I don't mean advanced features like CCX OC, but the basics in terms of long term stability?

Two things I've seen elsewhere online.. one is after a cold boot or BSOD.. the first boot up takes a really long time while it is memory training? Is that a one off thing for certain users, or is that constant for everyone? And secondly, going in and out of sleep, does it do this reliably?


----------



## oreonutz

CubanB said:


> I have the CH VI and have been thinking about switching to this board (vs waiting for B550). It's not replacing it, it's for a separate system.
> 
> I just wanted to ask if you guys are happy with the current version of BIOS and if everything is stable and working as intended? I don't mean advanced features like CCX OC, but the basics in terms of long term stability?
> 
> Two things I've seen elsewhere online.. one is after a cold boot or BSOD.. the first boot up takes a really long time while it is memory training? Is that a one off thing for certain users, or is that constant for everyone? And secondly, going in and out of sleep, does it do this reliably?


BIOS is definitely stable, I think most of us are definitely getting along fine in terms of Stability. To be honest its really almost an identical situation to the C6H. I own and use both for 3000 based Systems, my 3950x is in the C7H, my 3900x is in a C6H, and they really are almost an identical experience. My C6H doesn't handle Auto very well, so in order to boot I have to to set either a + Offset for Voltage, or Just set a manual Multiplier and Voltage, and my C7H doesn't have that issue, other than that they really are extremely similar experiences, even down to the BIOS.

As far as Sleep, I have noticed more than a few users talk about sleep issues with this board, but I don't personally use sleep or Hibernation, my PC is either On or Off, but I do know others have had problems, not sure if they have been resolved or not.

As far as boot up time, its not so bad, my C6H is definitely another 8 seconds longer or so, but its pretty identical to that experience. If you dial in your BIOS settings correctly you can get a 30 second boot time or so, but I'd say the average boot time is about 40 to 45 seconds or so. Definitely not the best, but also definitely not as bad as it was at Launch of both the C7H and C6H, both of these boards had HORRIBLE boot times for about 4 months after launch until they finally got addressed.

Anyways, I am definitely happy, no stability issues on either, if you are used to the C6H, your experience on this board will be pretty identical, better VRM, and a few upgraded feature sets, but for the most part you won't notice much of a change. Hopefully someone else will elaborate on their sleeping issues and whether or not if those have been fixed.


----------



## ubbernewb

is there a beta bios for the vii hero x470 non wifi thats better for 3900x then 3004 offical?


----------



## nick name

ubbernewb said:


> is there a beta bios for the vii hero x470 non wifi thats better for 3900x then 3004 offical?


There's a BIOS that has a fix for BCLK, but that's all I know that's different about it. Also, there are some RAM timings that get set very high when left on Auto so you'll wanna keep an eye out for that. It was posted by Shamino a few months back.


----------



## Pietro

ubbernewb said:


> is there a beta bios for the vii hero x470 non wifi thats better for 3900x then 3004 offical?


No and the latest beta is for wifi version.

From r/AMD:



> I was just talking to Asus whether my B450 E-Gaming will get support. Apparently Asus won't support ANY of their B450 or X470 boards for Zen 3. A representative answered to my email that they're going to support X570 and B550 boards only.


----------



## Logue

Hey everyone! Would it be possible to mod the 3004 BIOS in order to use the Q-Code LEDs to display the CPU temperature after POST? I know some MoBos have this option, but the C7H doesn't...


----------



## nick name

Pietro said:


> No and the latest beta is for wifi version.
> 
> From r/AMD:


Which beta are you talking about? Are we talking about the same one?


----------



## oreonutz

Pietro said:


> No and the latest beta is for wifi version.
> 
> From r/AMD:


That sounds like ASUS. Expect this to change, they like to keep CSR in the dark, so they are most likely just repeating the most recent information they were given. I would NOT expect Asus to have a BIOS ready for the 4000 Series at launch, but I would expect that one would reach us a month or 2 after launch.


----------



## Pietro

nick name said:


> Which beta are you talking about? Are we talking about the same one?


Probably, it was posted here in this thread, but that is only for wifi version ov CH7 it doesn't work with normal version.



oreonutz said:


> That sounds like ASUS. Expect this to change, they like to keep CSR in the dark, so they are most likely just repeating the most recent information they were given. I would NOT expect Asus to have a BIOS ready for the 4000 Series at launch, but I would expect that one would reach us a month or 2 after launch.


I think they first need to sell B550, X570 and X670 chipset based boards, then in Q1 2020 Asus will release bios for their premium B450 and X470 motherboards and maybe after 6 months from Zen3 debut they'll do it for rest of 4XX.


----------



## Rusakova

Pietro said:


> Probably, it was posted here in this thread, but that is only for wifi version ov CH7 it doesn't work with normal version.
> 
> 
> 
> I think they first need to sell B550, X570 and X670 chipset based boards, then in Q1 2020 Asus will release bios for their premium B450 and X470 motherboards and maybe after 6 months from Zen3 debut they'll do it for rest of 4XX.


If that is going to be the case then I will get a MSI X570 Tomahawk board and dump this unsupported ROG pos and never look back.


----------



## xeizo

It looks like Asus doesn't want to keep it's customers, they somehow believe they will get by with new and unknowing ones. I say good luck to them. No more Asus since they A. don't communicate B. has below subpar support.


----------



## oreonutz

xeizo said:


> It looks like Asus doesn't want to keep it's customers, they somehow believe they will get by with new and unknowing ones. I say good luck to them. No more Asus since they A. don't communicate B. has below subpar support.


I have had 3 Interactions with Asus Support. 2 Were freaking HORRIBLE. One was about an issue with Router Firmware back when the RT-AC68P First Launched. Had to speak with some dude in India, which I have nothing against, it would just be nice to be able to understand a motha F**ka. Said he would call me back, never did, then I could never get someone on the Phone again. Ended up having to flash to Custom Firmware for about a year until they finally fixed their issue (OpenVPN was BUSTED at Launch). 

2nd Interaction Was Over my Sisters Phone that took a crap. She had an Extended Support Plan with them. We went back and forth with them for 6 MONTHS! They kept sending back the phone Broken, and then the last time we sent it in, they sent it back with a Note saying our support plan was expired, they literally just played hot potato through the mail with us for 6 and a half months until the warranty ran out, and then gave us the Finger. I reported them to the BBB and to my Governor, ended up getting a Free Phone out of them literally a year and a half after the fact. Sold It right away, Will NEVER deal with their phones ever again.

Then I had an X99 Board. Memory channels went out on 2 of the 4 Channels. It was a long wait, about 3 weeks, but eventually they got back to me and said the Pins were bent, but still honored the warranty and sent me a new Board, that had the issue fixed.

They contract out their support, and the Motherboard guys that they had me working with were pretty alright. But I will never buy another one of their phones again, and I like their consumer Routers for Access Points on a PFSense Router, but don't bother reaching out to support, you won't be able to understand them, and they will tell you they will call you back and never will.

Its a shame that the Consumer Facing guys at ASUS are gone now. Shamino I think is still there but he is a busy guy. @elmor was literally the best thing that ever happened to ASUS, and when he left, things just haven't been the same For ASUS Mobo Customers.

Luckily Elmor has his own company now and makes all kinds of cool Gadgets. I highly recommend checking them out! He deserves our support for all the years of awesome he gave this community.


----------



## Geezerman

I picked up a new Crosshair VII in the box for a song. Just want to build a general purpose PC for now,no overclocking. 
Want to use a ryzen 5 2600X or a ryzen 5 3600 CPU, and G.Skill 2 x 8GB 3200 speed ram, probably Hynix chips?, set to XMP profile, or whatever AMD calls it.

Question, in regards to the infinity fabric, ram speed, and CPU choice. Is the 2600X a better choice for me with no overclocking, or is the 3600 just fine?

thanks


----------



## oreonutz

Geezerman said:


> I picked up a new Crosshair VII in the box for a song. Just want to build a general purpose PC for now,no overclocking.
> Want to use a ryzen 5 2600X or a ryzen 5 3600 CPU, and G.Skill 2 x 8GB 3200 speed ram, probably Hynix chips?, set to XMP profile, or whatever AMD calls it.
> 
> Question, in regards to the infinity fabric, ram speed, and CPU choice. Is the 2600X a better choice for me with no overclocking, or is the 3600 just fine?
> 
> thanks


Go 3600 all the way, especially if not overclocking.


----------



## Geezerman

oreonutz said:


> Go 3600 all the way, especially if not overclocking.


thanks man. does the 3200 speed ram jive OK with the infinity fabric and that board and a 3600?


----------



## oreonutz

Geezerman said:


> thanks man. does the 3200 speed ram jive OK with the infinity fabric and that board and a 3600?


Definitely does! You can even most likely clock up to 3600Mhz with your 3200Mhz relatively easy. But if all you want is 3200 XMP (DOCP Is what ASUS Calls it on AMD) then you literally set it and forget it. Don't forget to update the BIOS first, it most likely came with a Pre Ryzen 3000 Bios. Easy to do on this board though, all you have to do is download the BIOS on another PC, extract the BIOS file from the Zip, rename it to C7H.CAP. Throw that file on the Root of a Flash Drive, and plug that into the Bios Flashback Port on the back of the Motherboard. Then, even without a CPU or Ram or GPU in the PC, as long as it has Power from the 24pin and 8pin, press and hold the Bios Flashback button on the Back of the Mobo for 4 Seconds, let go, and then leave it alone until it stops flashing (Should take about 5 to 6 mins) then once you put in the New CPU, it will be good and ready to boot without issues.


----------



## Geezerman

oreonutz said:


> Definitely does! You can even most likely clock up to 3600Mhz with your 3200Mhz relatively easy. But if all you want is 3200 XMP (DOCP Is what ASUS Calls it on AMD) then you literally set it and forget it. Don't forget to update the BIOS first, it most likely came with a Pre Ryzen 3000 Bios. Easy to do on this board though, all you have to do is download the BIOS on another PC, extract the BIOS file from the Zip, rename it to C7H.CAP. Throw that file on the Root of a Flash Drive, and plug that into the Bios Flashback Port on the back of the Motherboard. Then, even without a CPU or Ram or GPU in the PC, as long as it has Power from the 24pin and 8pin, press and hold the Bios Flashback button on the Back of the Mobo for 4 Seconds, let go, and then leave it alone until it stops flashing (Should take about 5 to 6 mins) then once you put in the New CPU, it will be good and ready to boot without issues.


no worries, I setup a Crosshair VI with 2700X, for my sister, she's 65, as a general purpose PC, and did the easy bios flash. I'm the resident odd duck around here. I don't overclock, I don't game, but I like gaming motherboards, RGB lights, and glass cases, and I qualify for senior citizen citizen discounts now.

Any performance advantage with a x570 board over this crosshair VII with a 3600 CPU? besides PCIe 4.0?


----------



## oreonutz

Geezerman said:


> no worries, I setup a Crosshair VI with 2700X, for my sister, she's 65, as a general purpose PC, and did the easy bios flash. I'm the resident odd duck around here. I don't overclock, I don't game, but I like gaming motherboards, RGB lights, and glass cases, and I qualify for senior citizen citizen discounts now.
> 
> Any performance advantage with a x570 board over this crosshair VII with a 3600 CPU? besides PCIe 4.0?


Not that I have noticed. I just bought an x570 board for myself (after AMD said they would no longer support x470 on 4000 Series Chips, but before they retracted that statement) and havent had a chance to set it up. But I have a few clients with 3000 Series chips on x570, and No, their performance isn't any better. So you will be fine with the C7H.


----------



## Geezerman

oreonutz said:


> Not that I have noticed. I just bought an x570 board for myself (after AMD said they would no longer support x470 on 4000 Series Chips, but before they retracted that statement) and havent had a chance to set it up. But I have a few clients with 3000 Series chips on x570, and No, their performance isn't any better. So you will be fine with the C7H.


thanks for your time. According to the sticker on the C7H ,near the CPU socket, the bios is 2304, so it should be fine for 3000 processors


----------



## Shadowized

Geezerman said:


> thanks for your time. According to the sticker on the C7H ,near the CPU socket, the bios is 2304, so it should be fine for 3000 processors


it won't be an issue anyway since with the CH7 you just use the USB port to flash it without a CPU. I had to do that for my board as the bios didn't support the 3900X out of the box and wouldnt boot til I did that.


----------



## CubanB

oreonutz said:


> BIOS is definitely stable, I think most of us are definitely getting along fine in terms of Stability. To be honest its really almost an identical situation to the C6H. I own and use both for 3000 based Systems, my 3950x is in the C7H, my 3900x is in a C6H, and they really are almost an identical experience. My C6H doesn't handle Auto very well, so in order to boot I have to to set either a + Offset for Voltage, or Just set a manual Multiplier and Voltage, and my C7H doesn't have that issue, other than that they really are extremely similar experiences, even down to the BIOS.
> 
> As far as Sleep, I have noticed more than a few users talk about sleep issues with this board, but I don't personally use sleep or Hibernation, my PC is either On or Off, but I do know others have had problems, not sure if they have been resolved or not.
> 
> As far as boot up time, its not so bad, my C6H is definitely another 8 seconds longer or so, but its pretty identical to that experience. If you dial in your BIOS settings correctly you can get a 30 second boot time or so, but I'd say the average boot time is about 40 to 45 seconds or so. Definitely not the best, but also definitely not as bad as it was at Launch of both the C7H and C6H, both of these boards had HORRIBLE boot times for about 4 months after launch until they finally got addressed.
> 
> Anyways, I am definitely happy, no stability issues on either, if you are used to the C6H, your experience on this board will be pretty identical, better VRM, and a few upgraded feature sets, but for the most part you won't notice much of a change. Hopefully someone else will elaborate on their sleeping issues and whether or not if those have been fixed.


 Thanks for sharing your experiences, that helps a lot.

If anyone else uses sleep feature in Windows, please share your experiences.


----------



## Dude970

I use sleep with mine and have had no issues.


----------



## xeizo

Windows 10 2004 was a healthy boost, best score ever in Geekbench 4 for me. And I'm currently running the stock cooler Wraith Prism.


----------



## MrPhilo

oreonutz said:


> PM's Sent. Enjoy.
> 
> Also remember that this tool will allow you to disable safety's in your board, so be careful as to what you do with it. If you set your BIOS To Manual Voltage, and set your VCore Manually, there is little Risk. But if you want to be able to change your voltage on the fly, then you have to set your VCore to either auto or offset in the BIOS, and in that case you can do some serious damage by setting the VID too high with this tool. So just be careful.


Can you also send me it too please?


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> Windows 10 2004 was a healthy boost, best score ever in Geekbench 4 for me. And I'm currently running the stock cooler Wraith Prism.


Was there anything in it specifically for AMD or CPU scheduling?


----------



## crakej

I haven't used sleep on this board for some time because when the displays sleep, they come back with all the windows re-sized and not where they were before.

I use hybrid sleep/hibernate which seems to work fine....


----------



## crakej

Holy Moley!

There's a NEW file on our Product Page!

*Version - 2020/05/20 479.09 KBytes

Armoury Crate Installer
Note: Left double-click to run the ArmouryCrateInstallTool .exe file after download and unzip the “ArmouryCrateInstallTool.zip” file. The .exe file will install Armoury Crate app automatically.*

They removed the bugged out useless installer from the 'Utils' section quietly replacing it with it's very own section at the bottom. I have to say AISuite is a DREAM compared to the last version of this they posted, which was bugged more than you can imagine, installed LOADS of crap services, and didn't even really work with our boards at all.

I'll not be the rushing to try this release out. Once burned and all that....


----------



## xeizo

I believe that Windows own Balanced powerplan in Windows 2004 is now the best, best performance anyway compared to 1usmus, Ryzen Balanced and the computerbase community plan 1004B. Windows powerplan gives 100p more in Cinebench R20 than the others and also feels more responsive.

I have also activated Hardware accelerated Scheduling, for now only supported on Intel IGP and Nvidia, with Nvidia using the Developer driver 450.99. It doesn't affect CPU benchmarks, but the desktop feels more smooth, in particular browsers.


----------



## tcclaviger

1904 - top

2004 - bottom

exactly the same configuration/services/priorities/cooling/ambient/windows power plan etc. Literally an Apples to Apples comparison of the same computer a few days apart...


----------



## oreonutz

MrPhilo said:


> Can you also send me it too please?


Of Course. Give me a bit, and I will send it over


----------



## oreonutz

MrPhilo said:


> Can you also send me it too please?


Sorry, had a long day. Just now got back to the forum. Sent the Tool. Enjoy!


----------



## minal

Could some voltage settings, perhaps combined with lower ambient temperature, cause instability?

Lately, once every few weeks I find my system, which stays on 24/7, has become unresponsive or rebooted overnight. The wireless keyboard and mouse can't connect to the receiver, and there is no SSH response from another computer. System logs show no errors or crashes. It seems to happen at the coldest time of the night/early morning, around 6-8am, with the system idle, though not sure if that's coincidence.

Most settings are on Auto, with just the following voltages changed manually: 



> CPU Core Voltage [Offset mode]
> CPU Offset Mode Sign [-]
> - CPU Core Voltage Offset [0.06875]
> CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
> - VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.00000]
> DRAM Voltage [1.35000]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [1.80000]
> 1.05V SB Voltage [1.05000]


I'm thinking of reverting to Auto one by one (except for DRAM voltage of course) until the instability ceases, though it's difficult to test since it happens very infrequently. The CPU undervolting is the most meaningful change to me, with the purpose of having as quiet a computer as possible by keeping heat down.


----------



## nick name

minal said:


> Could some voltage settings, perhaps combined with lower ambient temperature, cause instability?
> 
> Lately, once every few weeks I find my system, which stays on 24/7, has become unresponsive or rebooted overnight. The wireless keyboard and mouse can't connect to the receiver, and there is no SSH response from another computer. System logs show no errors or crashes. It seems to happen at the coldest time of the night/early morning, around 6-8am, with the system idle, though not sure if that's coincidence.
> 
> Most settings are on Auto, with just the following voltages changed manually:
> 
> I'm thinking of reverting to Auto one by one (except for DRAM voltage of course) until the instability ceases, though it's difficult to test since it happens very infrequently. The CPU undervolting is the most meaningful change to me, with the purpose of having as quiet a computer as possible by keeping heat down.


This sounds like the lightest loads at the highest frequency isn't getting enough voltage. That happens to me and the temp does contribute to that as it tries to boost higher when cooler. 

What you can do instead of only undervolting as much is coupling it with a reduced PPT.

Edit:
I initially said to reduce EDC (which you can), but I meant PPT.


----------



## CCoR

oreonutz said:


> I have yet to try to get the highest Single Core Scores, but give me a minute and I will send you what I have.
> 
> Regarding the CCX Bloatware, whats awesome about it is you don't have to use it to set your CCX at boot. You can literally use it over and over to change your clocks on the fly. And its much better than Ryzen Master because it doesn't set other settings in your BIOS, it leaves you BIOS completely alone, and you can try changing your CCX Clocks on the Fly until you find what is right, and can completely close it once you set you clocks. (In fact, it doesn't stay open, because you change the clocks in the settings.csv file, then you launch set.exe, it literally opens for less then 3 seconds, it changes your clocks then closes, so its awesome to just change your clocks and your voltage on the fly -if voltage is set to auto in the bios.)
> 
> Also, you don't have to even technically have to Per CCX OC, you can set all CCX to the Same Clock, and just allcore OC, completely up to you.
> 
> Anyways, let me see if I can dig up my latest Benchmark run with CPUz.


May you send tool please?


----------



## CCoR

oreonutz said:


> I have yet to try to get the highest Single Core Scores, but give me a minute and I will send you what I have.
> 
> Regarding the CCX Bloatware, whats awesome about it is you don't have to use it to set your CCX at boot. You can literally use it over and over to change your clocks on the fly. And its much better than Ryzen Master because it doesn't set other settings in your BIOS, it leaves you BIOS completely alone, and you can try changing your CCX Clocks on the Fly until you find what is right, and can completely close it once you set you clocks. (In fact, it doesn't stay open, because you change the clocks in the settings.csv file, then you launch set.exe, it literally opens for less then 3 seconds, it changes your clocks then closes, so its awesome to just change your clocks and your voltage on the fly -if voltage is set to auto in the bios.)
> 
> Also, you don't have to even technically have to Per CCX OC, you can set all CCX to the Same Clock, and just allcore OC, completely up to you.
> 
> Anyways, let me see if I can dig up my latest Benchmark run with CPUz.


May you please send tool? Thanks!


----------



## minal

nick name said:


> This sounds like the lightest loads at the highest frequency isn't getting enough voltage. That happens to me and the temp does contribute to that as it tries to boost higher when cooler.
> 
> What you can do instead of only undervolting as much is coupling it with a reduced PPT.
> 
> Edit:
> I initially said to reduce EDC (which you can), but I meant PPT.


 Thanks for your input. This sounds plausible. Do you have a way to test this hypothesis, and the stability of related settings?

I've already reduced my Power Point usage to zero, or do you mean a different PPT? :biggrinsm 

I aim to keep my 2700X's settings as non-exotic as possible for best stability. Precision Boost Overdrive and Core Performance Boost are Enabled, while Performance Enhancer at Default, though I don't recall anymore what default actually means.


----------



## oreonutz

CCoR said:


> May you please send tool? Thanks!


Of course! Tool Sent!


----------



## CubanB

Is anyone running the July/August BIOS that had PCIE4.0 support or was it too buggy and better to update?


----------



## oreonutz

CubanB said:


> Is anyone running the July/August BIOS that had PCIE4.0 support or was it too buggy and better to update?


Depends on how you are running your Setup. I went back to the PCIE4 BIOS to do some M.2 Testing not too long ago, and it worked great. The Boost was broken at launch, but if you are running an All Core or Per CCX OC, then for the most part the experience will be fine. There were some stability issues, and Memory Compatibility wasn't quite as good as it is with the previous 5 or 6 BIOSes, but you could get it working. Somethings to consider, there was a Boot DRAM Voltage issue, where on boot your DRAM Voltage would not be applied, so it would boot at that 1.2v unless you went and changed the Boot DRAM Voltage, and then it would apply that Voltage at boot, and then apply your normal DRAM Voltage after post. Also, back then no matter what Boot times would take about 60 seconds or so to get past post, and would always retrain memory, no matter if it was a cold or warm boot. So as long as you don't mind those issues, as well as some potential SuperIO Issues, then you will be fine.

I would atleast give it a shot, and see how it behaves for you, and then if its too messed up then you can always reflash to a newer BIOS. Good luck!


----------



## DDSZ

@oreonutz, can I have the tool too?

My new 3900x should arrive today 
Quite sad to see no BIOS updates since December
Also, is anyone using Unraid with this board?


----------



## oreonutz

DDSZ said:


> @oreonutz, can I have the tool too?
> 
> My new 3900x should arrive today
> Quite sad to see no BIOS updates since December
> Also, is anyone using Unraid with this board?


Nope, sorry, no one else gets the tool! LOL!

I'll send it over in a bit. I have used the board with Unraid, The IOMMU Groups are pretty decent for the most part. I do not run this board on a daily UnRaid though, I just was curious to see if it would go good in my Server, ended up using an actual Server board though for the BMC.


----------



## nick name

Has anyone run the 3DMark Fire Strike benchmark lately? It seems the latest AMD Ryzen High Performance power plan completely tanks CPU performance.

Edit:
NVM it just happened with the 1usmus power plan too. I can't seem to track this down. With the AMD Ryzen plan I only had one good run in about seven runs. All the 1usmus runs were fine except for one. Can't figure this out yet.


----------



## sonic2911

There are something that I don't understand. While test with CB R20, Vcore is 1.3 max clock 4125 and heat about 70*, effective clock also max. But while playing video games (warzone in this case), max clock still 4125 but effective clock is not 100%, and why is vcore higher than 1.3 and heat is just 50ish...? So in the long term, will it degrade my chip?


----------



## sonic2911

I also have a weird bug today, my rig was stable 4098mhz all cores with 1.28v vcore but today after boot I check it's 4125mhz but vcore is 1.28 or 1.27. It was crashed after a couple cb20 rounds (qcode 8) I tried to offset +.0375v but still crash (qcode 8) sometimes while doing specific tasks like Scan for replaygain in foobar2k..
I don't know what happened.

Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## xeizo

It's warmer outside now, so it's warmer inside too = less performance. Ryzen is very temperature dependent.

I don't think these degrades easily, I have run my 3700X folding 24/7 for nine weeks, it performs exactly as from the beginning. I used to run my 3900X too but stopped it after five weeks because it became too hot in my room. It also performs as when it was new. They look way more robust than suspected.

I started folding in march, but this script didn't pick me up until a month later
https://folding.extremeoverclocking.com/user_summary.php?s=&u=1128449

You can see the peak at the beginning when it was cold outside and I could run two more of my boxes.

However, this did kill my GTX1080Ti ...


----------



## FJSAMA

Does anyone knows how to fix the cold boot ( or double boot) problem with this 3004 bios? 
When I was using 2801 and 2903 with mem oc it usually did that for the first 2 or 3 times and then normalized for the next boots ( only if I left pc turned off for more than 3 days it would do that for the next boot.) Now with this bios it seems I can't get rid of the double boot and even restart problem.


----------



## WinterActual

Guys I have a problem with the latest chipset drivers. Basically when I try to install them it says the system is not compatible for RAID installation or system update is required. I have everything updated to the latest version, including the BIOS (3004), Win (2004), etc. I am NOT using RAID and never been on this system. In the bios everything is set to ahci, everything related to RAID is disabled/turned off. The only explanation I have is the outdated agesa provided by ASUS and I assume the latest chipset drivers require 1.0.0.5 and not this crappy 1004 beta. Still, if you have any ideas, please do tell me. I tried everything - removing the old drivers, ddu (even if its just for gpu drivers lol), deleting the old drivers from the driver store and what not..


----------



## nick name

WinterActual said:


> Guys I have a problem with the latest chipset drivers. Basically when I try to install them it says the system is not compatible for RAID installation or system update is required. I have everything updated to the latest version, including the BIOS (3004), Win (2004), etc. I am NOT using RAID and never been on this system. In the bios everything is set to ahci, everything related to RAID is disabled/turned off. The only explanation I have is the outdated agesa provided by ASUS and I assume the latest chipset drivers require 1.0.0.5 and not this crappy 1004 beta. Still, if you have any ideas, please do tell me. I tried everything - removing the old drivers, ddu (even if its just for gpu drivers lol), deleting the old drivers from the driver store and what not..


On the AMD download page there is the chipset drivers and separate RAID drivers. Did you download the correct one?


----------



## WinterActual

Yes, I don't download the RAID drivers, just the chipset drivers and I still get this message.


----------



## nick name

WinterActual said:


> Yes, I don't download the RAID drivers, just the chipset drivers and I still get this message.
> 
> -snip-


Hmmmm, I wonder if it's because you're already on Windows 2004? I'm still on 1909 and had no difficulty installing the new chipset driver.


----------



## kmellz

There's actually a new driver released today also btw
https://www.amd.com/en/support/chipsets/amd-socket-am4/x470


----------



## mimosoft

Chipsetdrivers were leaked here: https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?118343-DRIVERS-AMD-Chipset-SATA-(3xx-4xx-5xx-TRX40)

- AMD Chipset Drivers :
Package : 2.05.04.352 WHQL [04/05/2020]

And available at Asrock: https://download.asrock.com/Drivers/AMD/CPU/Chipset(v2.05.04.352).zip

On AMDs website they seem to be older.


----------



## xeizo

I'm on 2004 and have had no particular problems with the chipset driver.

Strange with this new one today, it is 2.04.28.626, but I'm running 2.05.04.352 which is a week newer according to the actual driver installation file inside the archive. I got it from the Asrock support pages some days ago and seemingly it works well. The components inside are exactly the same, it's only the PSP(security processor) and the PCI driver which has been updated from the old drivers.

edit. mimosoft beat me!


----------



## darkage

so the new amd 2.04.28.626 are older then the old 2.05.04.352 ?
so as i was allready with 2.05.04.352 its not worth to try this new amd version?
lol


----------



## xeizo

No. it's no point "updating" it's the same versions of all the components.

My guess is AMD having problems with the actual installer program, as it seems to bug out for many, so they choose to release a slightly older version of the installer which possibly is more compatible than the leaked Asrock one.

edit. As a sidenote, I have skipped AIO and gone for Noctua, lower temps and much less noise. Recommended on the 3900X 
I kept the Corsair Mag Lev fans on top and the middle one blows directly towards the RAM, now I never have above 35C RAM temp. And I changed all the NZXT stock fans to Noctua Chromax.black fans 4 in total. Also much less noise.


----------



## darkage

Noctua rock, using a d15 with one chromax fan
to bad there is no d15-s all black 
thanks for the advice


----------



## WinterActual

nick name said:


> Hmmmm, I wonder if it's because you're already on Windows 2004? I'm still on 1909 and had no difficulty installing the new chipset driver.


Its not because it was the same when I was on 1909 with the previous chipset driver version (I mean the previous version is giving me the same error on win 1909). The only version that installs ok is the one from the Crosshair support page.


----------



## darkage

this leaked/asrock one install just fine
i use insider windows and no problem with it, got from rog forum


----------



## nick name

The leaked ones and the new AMD site ones are the same driver versions once you start the installer though they are different installer versions.


----------



## Jaju123

Has Asus confirmed yet that this board will be updated to support Zen 3? Thanks


----------



## mimosoft

Asus does nothing for X470 at the moment.


----------



## xeizo

mimosoft said:


> Asus does nothing for X470 at the moment.


They put up Armoury Crate on the download page ...


----------



## mimosoft

Is that something? xD


----------



## xeizo

No


----------



## CubanB

Does anyone who has the non wifi version of this board know if there is still the wifi socket on the board itself? So that you can plug in your own ASUS WIFI GO Module and wifi card, and run it as normal? I have the Hero VI version of this board and it's possible to do this, but having trouble finding any information on whether or not the VII version can also do this?

I know that I'd have to drill holes out of the IO, but I'm more concerned with the slot on the board itself, and whether the BIOS lets you activate it. I run a lot of expansion cards and the current worldwide situation means stocks are low and prices are sky high.. so I may have to go with non wifi version.


----------



## DDSZ

CubanB said:


> Does anyone who has the non wifi version of this board know if there is still the wifi socket on the board itself? So that you can plug in your own ASUS WIFI GO Module and wifi card, and run it as normal? I have the Hero VI version of this board and it's possible to do this, but having trouble finding any information on whether or not the VII version can also do this?
> 
> I know that I'd have to drill holes out of the IO, but I'm more concerned with the slot on the board itself, and whether the BIOS lets you activate it. I run a lot of expansion cards and the current worldwide situation means stocks are low and prices are sky high.. so I may have to go with non wifi version.


No, there is no slot for the module on wifi-less C7H


----------



## FJSAMA

FJSAMA said:


> Does anyone knows how to fix the cold boot ( or double boot) problem with this 3004 bios?
> When I was using 2801 and 2903 with mem oc it usually did that for the first 2 or 3 times and then normalized for the next boots ( only if I left pc turned off for more than 3 days it would do that for the next boot.) Now with this bios it seems I can't get rid of the double boot and even restart problem.


Does anyone has same problem when mem ocing?
It seems to train it always has to shutdown and then power up again, even when I'm doing a restart.


----------



## CubanB

DDSZ said:


> No, there is no slot for the module on wifi-less C7H


Thanks.


----------



## xeizo

The board holds up well in Time Spy, despite unimpressive boost behaviour on my 3900X with latest bios. Using a 2070 Super it's neck to neck with 9900K/RTX2080 on Z390:










The 2070 Super in question, which is a drop in replacement with similar performance as my toasted GTX1080Ti


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> The board holds up well in Time Spy, despite unimpressive boost behaviour on my 3900X with latest bios. Using a 2070 Super it's neck to neck with 9900K/RTX2080 on Z390:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The 2070 Super in question, which is a drop in replacement with similar performance as my toasted GTX1080Ti


Christ, that CPU cooler clearance.


----------



## xeizo

Yes, the NH-D15 is BIG. But cooling performance is awesome - it's excused


----------



## smokin_mitch

After seeing the timespy leaks of the rumored 3800XT I thought I'd see what my launch day 3800x can do https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/47472367? looks like I don't need to upgrade until zen3 and I think I'll be looking at getting the 16 core 4950x

I wonder how long it's gonna take Asus to put out a bios that supports zen3 on our C7H boards? I may have to buy an x570 or x670 board if I want a 4950x on launch


----------



## smokin_mitch

CubanB said:


> Thanks for sharing your experiences, that helps a lot.
> 
> If anyone else uses sleep feature in Windows, please share your experiences.



I use sleep an had to fallback to bios version 2801 on my C7H wifi due to all newer bios versions screwing up my ram/fclk overclock settings when waking from sleep


----------



## xeizo

2080 Ti is a beast! 

Yes, 4950X and RTX3000 is on the horizon, will be a interesting fall. Let's hope Asus makes it possible to still use the C7H, but I have no high hopes.


----------



## liakou

xeizo said:


> The board holds up well in Time Spy, despite unimpressive boost behaviour on my 3900X with latest bios. Using a 2070 Super it's neck to neck with 9900K/RTX2080 on Z390:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The 2070 Super in question, which is a drop in replacement with similar performance as my toasted GTX1080Ti


TIP:
Use 2 separate PCI-E power cables from your PSU to your GPU.


----------



## xeizo

I don't see the point, 2070 Super only draws max 215W, I used one cable with 1080Ti and it was drawing 270W. Used it for three years, no problems in benchmarks or games. Only thing with dual cables is it hinders airflow which is also very important.

I use a Corsair RM850x which has strong rails, it's made for coping with SLI which automatically means only one cable/gpu.


----------



## Shadowized

yeah, a lot of the newer PSU's dont really need two cables for <250W, they are rated much better than say something from 10+ years ago.


----------



## Yoizhik

smokin_mitch said:


> After seeing the timespy leaks of the rumored 3800XT I thought I'd see what my launch day 3800x can do https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/47472367? looks like I don't need to upgrade until zen3 and I think I'll be looking at getting the 16 core 4950x
> 
> I wonder how long it's gonna take Asus to put out a bios that supports zen3 on our C7H boards? I may have to buy an x570 or x670 board if I want a 4950x on launch


What ram do you have?


----------



## xeizo

Feels very much like next board will be a MSI board, but first we will have to see what happens when Zen 3 launches. No point buying a board in advance if there will be showstoppers.

If Asus surprises with a Beta-bios, but that won't likely happen, they look totally under the ice right now. Scandals with graphics cards and laptops too, cheaper models handicapped by faulty cooling to make the higher models look better. Imagine they where once the leaders.


----------



## WinterActual

The X570-E got a new bios (today I think oO) so our turn may come soon.


----------



## speedgoat

hello, has anybody tried any fixed OC lately ? I have a very early 3800X chip and i never saw the point of not leaving it on auto because i felt it needed too much voltage not to lose considerable single core boost but i just tried it out of curiosity about a week ago and its stable at [email protected]
Havent run Prime95 because im not comfortable with temps over 80+ degrees but it hasn't crashed at all on heavy daily usage for this week, idle temps are in the low 30s with an AIO and CB20 runs at at mid 70s. 
Im surprised because i thought it would take way more V than 1.28 for a stable 4.400 MHz , it sounds silly but i was under the impression i needed roughly 1,35ish for that frequency last year so im wondering if something has somehow improved ?


----------



## xeizo

Seems normal, my 3900X does 4400 on the good CCD and 4250 on the bad using fixed CCD freq. However I don't use CCD clocking daily as I think it's annoying to have to start Ryzen Master, apply, and reboot each time. So PBO it is. If only Asus had CCD clocking in bios like many other motherboards.

1.35V have never been reasonable AFAIK, it gets too hot under full load.


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> Seems normal, my 3900X does 4400 on the good CCD and 4250 on the bad using fixed CCD freq. However I don't use CCD clocking daily as I think it's annoying to have to start Ryzen Master, apply, and reboot each time. So PBO it is. If only Asus had CCD clocking in bios like many other motherboards.
> 
> 1.35V have never been reasonable AFAIK, it gets too hot under full load.


My 3900X does the same 4400 and 4250 at 1.2625V with LLC 4 which droops down to 1.244V under CB20 runs and can run Folding even at higher ambient room temps.


----------



## smokin_mitch

Yoizhik said:


> What ram do you have?


G.skill trident z royal 4400 https://www.gskill.com/product/165/...alDDR4-4400MHz-CL18-19-19-39-1.40V16GB-(2x8GB)

Its ok B-die I guess but mine hits a wall at 17 on Tcrd @ 3800mhz cant go any lower without errors


----------



## smokin_mitch

xeizo said:


> 2080 Ti is a beast!
> 
> Yes, 4950X and RTX3000 is on the horizon, will be a interesting fall. Let's hope Asus makes it possible to still use the C7H, but I have no high hopes.


yeah looking forward to getting my hands on a 4950x + 3080ti hopefully before the end of 2020


----------



## Pietro

nick name said:


> My 3900X does the same 4400 and 4250 at 1.2625V with LLC 4 which droops down to 1.244V under CB20 runs and can run Folding even at higher ambient room temps.


I wish I had just as good chip as you guys regarding CCX OC. Few months ago users said that my 3900X looked like it is broken and I should do RMA. So I finally did, unfortunately they shipped to me 2003SUT and I was looking for 2010 or later which overclock better, it is still silicon lottery, but they mostly do better than last years cpus, I lost again and my doesn't overclock well. It doesn't work on 1900MHz of inifnity fabric either, but that was expected since most two chiplet ryzens don't and you have to be very lucky again. At least this one doesn't crash on stock and single thread has 531 points in Cinebench R20 on 2x16 3733CL16 edies. I still have "over temperature fails" when temperature is perfectly fine in testing stability of CCX OC.


----------



## nick name

Pietro said:


> I wish I had just as good chip as you guys regarding CCX OC. Few months ago users said that my 3900X looked like it is broken and I should do RMA. So I finally did, unfortunately they shipped to me 2003SUT and I was looking for 2010 or later which overclock better, it is still silicon lottery, but they mostly do better than last years cpus, I lost again and my doesn't overclock well. It doesn't work on 1900MHz of inifnity fabric either, but that was expected since most two chiplet ryzens don't and you have to be very lucky again. At least this one doesn't crash on stock and single thread has 531 points in Cinebench R20 on 2x16 3733CL16 edies. I still have "over temperature fails" when temperature is perfectly fine in testing stability of CCX OC.


Awww man that's a bummer.


----------



## Pietro

nick name said:


> Awww man that's a bummer.



I never had a luck with asus boards and ryzen's so I didn't have a high expectations, but I'm still dissapointed. New 3600s batches from 2010 onwards get 4.4-4.5GHz on 1.275V or lower for many people, there some that can OC to 4.6GHz and tops at 4.7GHz, but that's on over 1.325V



oreonutz said:


> Regarding CCX OC, our board does not have any CCX OCing in the BIOS, but we do have a tool that will allow us to CCX OC once in Windows, and you can set it to execute at Windows Bootup, so that as long as you are using Windows, it will automatically launch your OC at boot, so you don't have to fiddle with Ryzen Master at all. Let me know if you want me to send you this tool.


May you send me a tool too?


----------



## xeizo

3900X uses/used crap dies, now later on in the cycle AMD has a lot more good dies. Sounds like a good reason why they are releasing a refresh, stupid to give away the now better dies for free.


----------



## Pietro

xeizo said:


> 3900X uses/used crap dies, now later on in the cycle AMD has a lot more good dies. Sounds like a good reason why they are releasing a refresh, stupid to give away the now better dies for free.


3900X just like 3950X is their cpu from top lineup, they should be using top bins there from the start since we were paying premium. We will see if the manufacturing process will have to mature again since they wille be using N7P in their 4XXX cpus.


----------



## pschorr1123

xeizo said:


> The board holds up well in Time Spy, despite unimpressive boost behaviour on my 3900X with latest bios. Using a 2070 Super it's neck to neck with 9900K/RTX2080 on Z390:
> snip


I see you got the "early production" NH D15 fans with the lame white writing on the front of the fan frames that I got with my NH D15 cromax. I took a black sharpie to fix mine as it really triggered my OCD, lol!


----------



## xeizo

Pietro said:


> 3900X just like 3950X is their cpu from top lineup, they should be using top bins there from the start since we were paying premium. We will see if the manufacturing process will have to mature again since they wille be using N7P in their 4XXX cpus.


It's not top CPU, Rome is top CPU, then comes Threadripper, lastly comes Ryzen R9. Rome has sold really well, that's where the good dies presumably went. 3950X is a lot better than 3900X though, it has two "good" dies if not the best, while all 3900X I know of have a "good" and a "bad" one glued together. Not that it matters for gaming, one good die is enough for all games.


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> It's not top CPU, Rome is top CPU, then comes Threadripper, lastly comes Ryzen R9. Rome has sold really well, that's where the good dies presumably went. 3950X is a lot better than 3900X though, it has two "good" dies if not the best, while all 3900X I know of have a "good" and a "bad" one glued together. Not that it matters for gaming, one good die is enough for all games.


This is what I'm hoping a 3900XT solves. Using two good dies instead of one. I'd imagine the bad die is what holds back all-core speeds when running PBO as the good die is set to run according to the limitations of the bad die. So if we have two good dies then all-core speeds can run faster instead of this three-legged race with a fast kid tied to a slow kid.


----------



## xeizo

pschorr1123 said:


> I see you got the "early production" NH D15 fans with the lame white writing on the front of the fan frames that I got with my NH D15 cromax. I took a black sharpie to fix mine as it really triggered my OCD, lol!


LoL glad I don't have that much OCD


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> This is what I'm hoping a 3900XT solves. Using two good dies instead of one. I'd imagine the bad die is what holds back all-core speeds when running PBO as the good die is set to run according to the limitations of the bad die. So if we have two good dies then all-core speeds can run faster instead of this three-legged race with a fast kid tied to a slow kid.


Lets hope that, but I wouldn't hold my breath, old habits die hard. Anyway, I'm waiting for Zen3, and more info about X670 which is said to solve a few shortcomings of the current platforms.


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> Lets hope that, but I wouldn't hold my breath, old habits die hard. Anyway, I'm waiting for Zen3, and more info about X670 which is said to solve a few shortcomings of the current platforms.


Same. If I'm able to I am gonna do 4000 with X670 so I can sell the CPU with the mobo. I gave away my 2700X so that changed my plans a bit.


----------



## The Stilt

xeizo said:


> It's not top CPU, Rome is top CPU, then comes Threadripper, lastly comes Ryzen R9. Rome has sold really well, that's where the good dies presumably went. 3950X is a lot better than 3900X though, it has two "good" dies if not the best, while all 3900X I know of have a "good" and a "bad" one glued together. Not that it matters for gaming, one good die is enough for all games.


Rome is a different die, different minor revision of the die, with different fuses, firmwares and microcodes and documentation.
3950X is the best bin there is. Server CPUs such as Rome have entirely different desired characteristics anyhow.


----------



## xeizo

The Stilt said:


> Rome is a different die, different minor revision of the die, with different fuses, firmwares and microcodes and documentation.
> 3950X is the best bin there is. Server CPUs such as Rome have entirely different desired characteristics anyhow.


Aha, thanks, that was new info much appreciated!

But I suppose they fight over the same wafers though, or? Different processes too?

edit. while we have a well educated visitor, any new leaks on the XT-revision or Zen3?


----------



## The Stilt

xeizo said:


> Aha, thanks, that was new info much appreciated!
> 
> But I suppose they fight over the same wafers though, or? Different processes too?
> 
> edit. while we have a well educated visitor, any new leaks on the XT-revision or Zen3?


Nothing suggests that they would be using different processes. The die size appears to be pretty much identical, but I'm not sure if anyone has done a layout comparison between the two.
For whatever reason, AMD has decided to make different documentation, software and firmware stacks and even the physical fuse layout for the two parts. Thats not something what is done just for the appearances (i.e. product segmentation), because doing and maintaining it costs a lot of money.
And no, despite the different IOD on MTS and SSP thats not the reason. The CPU core microcodes are not cross-compatible either.

Personally I haven't heard anything about any new parts however, it appears that the process has matured to a point where releasing higher clocked SKUs could make sense. So despite I haven't heard anything about such parts, I wouldn't be surprised if they would emerge at some point soon.
If such CPUs would emerge, I'd assume the differences to be rather modest in a sense what they're able to do at stock. Most likely hunting down the more recently produced CPU batches would largely achieve the same thing.


----------



## nick name

The Stilt said:


> Nothing suggests that they would be using different processes. The die size appears to be pretty much identical, but I'm not sure if anyone has done a layout comparison between the two.
> For whatever reason, AMD has decided to make different documentation, software and firmware stacks and even the physical fuse layout for the two parts. Thats not something what is done just for the appearances (i.e. product segmentation), because doing and maintaining it costs a lot of money.
> And no, despite the different IOD on MTS and SSP thats not the reason. The CPU core microcodes are not cross-compatible either.
> 
> Personally I haven't heard anything about any new parts however, it appears that the process has matured to a point where releasing higher clocked SKUs could make sense. So despite I haven't heard anything about such parts, I wouldn't be surprised if they would emerge at some point soon.
> If such CPUs would emerge, I'd assume the differences to be rather modest in a sense what they're able to do at stock. Most likely hunting down the more recently produced CPU batches would largely achieve the same thing.


Are you doing any work with ASUS on the new X670 boards in any capacity? 

And do you have any new data on safe voltages for all-core and per CCD overclocking?


----------



## The Stilt

nick name said:


> Are you doing any work with ASUS on the new X670 boards in any capacity?
> 
> And do you have any new data on safe voltages for all-core and per CCD overclocking?


No, at least not at this point.
The time for the next gen platforms, whatever they will be called isn't just yet anyhow.

Personaly I haven't seen any use for per CCX overclocking in the past, but that might change if the more mature silicon can now reach n-core frequencies that are comparable to the current boost speeds (since boost will always be lost). Voltage characteristics are silicon specific and practically are never going to change with time for the same piece of silicon. The FIT testing method allows the user to test the maximum voltage that can be used for the specific piece of silicon in question. The voltage allowed by FIT at stock settings (i.e. 1x scalar), is the maximum voltage that produces the realiability that AMD has targeted. I cannot tell exactly how long the lifespan of the CPUs at those voltages is, simply because it varies between the different SKUs, because it is an approximation to begin with (i.e. a target that might or might not be met) and also because I don't know the PERFECTLY EXACT figures. What I do know, is that it is a LONG time. Much longer than the CPUs will stay relevant for the vast majority of people.


----------



## nick name

The Stilt said:


> No, at least not at this point.
> The time for the next gen platforms, whatever they will be called isn't just yet anyhow.
> 
> Personaly I haven't seen any use for per CCX overclocking in the past, but that might change if the more mature silicon can now reach n-core frequencies that are comparable to the current boost speeds (since boost will always be lost). Voltage characteristics are silicon specific and practically are never going to change with time for the same piece of silicon. The FIT testing method allows the user to test the maximum voltage that can be used for the specific piece of silicon in question. The voltage allowed by FIT at stock settings (i.e. 1x scalar), is the maximum voltage that produces the realiability that AMD has targeted. I cannot tell exactly how long the lifespan of the CPUs at those voltages is, simply because it varies between the different SKUs, because it is an approximation to begin with (i.e. a target that might or might not be met) and also because I don't know the PERFECTLY EXACT figures. What I do know, is that it is a LONG time. Much longer than the CPUs will stay relevant for the vast majority of people.


Roger that.

And I appreciate your thorough answer. When I have my PC Folding I run it: CCD1 at 4400 and CCD2 at 4250 with 1.26V that droops to 1.24V under load. I assumed that voltage was fine based off of essentially what you described. When I observed stock clock and voltages it would run around 1.23V ~ 1.28V though at lower multipliers than 44 and 42.5 which is why I use per CCD clocking for Folding. But I run the EDC bug for everything else which actually gets my CPU to boost to 4.6GHz and higher. 

And I really only worry because I'll sell this CPU someday and I want to do so with the confidence I'm not screwing someone over with a chip I degraded.


----------



## xeizo

They seem more durable than suspected for 7nm, I ran my 3900X for seven weeks 24/7 folding the AVX client for Covid-19 research using PBO and had constant temps of 85-90C. No observable degradation, the chip can still produce benchmark numbers that are better than ever before. 

I stopped running the 3900X rig because it became too hot in the room with several rigs running. They where putting out 1.5kW together, vacuum cleaning made the fuses blow in the house. But my 3700X has been doing the same for ten weeks. It just keeps on going at a steady 8x4.1GHz. I'm close to 100 million credits at FAH now. I have three small rigs running 

https://folding.extremeoverclocking.com/user_summary.php?s=&u=1128449


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> They seem more durable than suspected for 7nm, I ran my 3900X for seven weeks 24/7 folding the AVX client for Covid-19 research using PBO and had constant temps of 85-90C. No observable degradation, the chip can still produce benchmark numbers that are better than ever before.
> 
> I stopped running the 3900X rig because it became too hot in the room with several rigs running. They where putting out 1.5kW together, vacuum cleaning made the fuses blow in the house. But my 3700X has been doing the same for ten weeks. It just keeps on going at a steady 8x4.1GHz. I'm close to 100 million credits at FAH now. I have three small rigs running
> 
> https://folding.extremeoverclocking.com/user_summary.php?s=&u=1128449


If you really wanna blow some fuses add a window AC or portable AC into the mix!


----------



## Keith Myers

> vacuum cleaning made the fuses blow in the house.


Ha ha LOL, I learned the same thing when I had 5 crunchers running and plugged in the vacuum into the same circuit that was running the two most powerful crunchers. Popped the circuit breaker. I had to make sure I used a different outlet on a less used circuit every time I vacuumed.


----------



## shamino1978

took a while , c7h with per ccx oc in bios
c7h wifi
https://www.dropbox.com/s/now64b3d8dklk3a/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-3101.rar?dl=0

c7h
https://www.dropbox.com/s/6pdd90ma8zausun/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-3101.rar?dl=0


----------



## xeizo

shamino1978 said:


> took a while , c7h with per ccx oc in bios
> c7h wifi
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/now64b3d8dklk3a/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-3101.rar?dl=0
> 
> c7h
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/6pdd90ma8zausun/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-3101.rar?dl=0


***! A new bios, and with per CCX OC! Thanks Shamino, the perfect gift, will keep us going during Covid-summer. Best news today


----------



## Reous

This Bios also have new Agesa ComboAM4 1006 


https://www.hardwareluxx.de/index.p...0-agesa-nomenklatur-startet-mit-b550-neu.html


----------



## xeizo

Reous said:


> This Bios also have new Agesa ComboAM4 1006
> 
> 
> https://www.hardwareluxx.de/index.p...0-agesa-nomenklatur-startet-mit-b550-neu.html


Looks like Asus is first this time!


----------



## xeizo

First bug discovered, it's not possible to change VDDG! It's stuck at 1.1V whatever settings I use. Leads to slightly higher temps, but shouldn't affect stability in a negative direction. Could possibly be beneficial for memory OC, but still a bug.

All else seems to work, will save the per CCX adventure for a rainy day soon. Today is a lousy OC day, it's very hot! 

How it looks


----------



## darkage

does anyone have any idea if the EDC bug is working ?


----------



## Ryoz

shamino1978 said:


> took a while , c7h with per ccx oc in bios
> c7h wifi
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/now64b3d8dklk3a/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-3101.rar?dl=0
> 
> c7h
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/6pdd90ma8zausun/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-3101.rar?dl=0


Shamino, is there any new BIOS for C6H?


----------



## nick name

shamino1978 said:


> took a while , c7h with per ccx oc in bios
> c7h wifi
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/now64b3d8dklk3a/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-3101.rar?dl=0
> 
> c7h
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/6pdd90ma8zausun/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-3101.rar?dl=0


This.is.awesome. Many thanks.


----------



## nick name

My first bug.

Hitting F4 and keying down to Aura Off and pressing Enter locked the system. Or it was just a random lockup with bad timing.

Edit:
Ok just confirmed. Keying over to Aura Off locks the system or locks out input. Voltage and temp readings seem to freeze so I'm guessing it locks the system.


----------



## nick name

darkage said:


> does anyone have any idea if the EDC bug is working ?


At first glance it does appear to still work. I haven't tested without it yet though so perhaps the boost behavior is improved.

Edit:
Yeah, it's working. I still can't reach 4.6GHz without the EDC bug. In brief CB20 runs and CPUZ benchmarks the EDC bug may be actually be better too.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> My first bug.
> 
> Hitting F4 and keying down to Aura Off and pressing Enter locked the system. Or it was just a random lockup with bad timing.
> 
> Edit:
> Ok just confirmed. Keying over to Aura Off locks the system or locks out input. Voltage and temp readings seem to freeze so I'm guessing it locks the system.


Well, it's a beta bios, bugs are to be expected. Very nice to be able to test though. And hopefully official version has less bugs.


----------



## tcclaviger

Just swapped from C6E to C7H, what a disaster.

All 30 fans go to 2400 RPM the moment the CPU hits 72, can't stop it, why you do dis ASooSe? It's a hot CPU generation, so momentarily tapping 72 is quite common in all core workloads...

Bclk over 101, even 101.2 disables PB and XFR, tried using RM to enable PBO like I had to on my C6E using identical settings, doesn't work on C7H...

No CPU temp on Qcode...***...

PBO doesn't act the same. On C6E I was pulling over 220 amp and 200 watts, on C7H it refuses to exceed 168amps and 170 watts with the same settings...

Performance is down multi, single, and memory vs C6E with identical settings. Tried 2901, 3001(I think it was) and the above brand new AGESA1006 bios. 

Swapping back tonight until Zen 3 comes out, maybe Asus will have the C7H sorted by it's third birthday....


----------



## neikosr0x

nick name said:


> At first glance it does appear to still work. I haven't tested without it yet though so perhaps the boost behavior is improved.
> 
> Edit:
> Yeah, it's working. I still can't reach 4.6GHz without the EDC bug. In brief CB20 runs and CPUZ benchmarks the EDC bug may be actually be better too.


I get slightly worse performance at stock, and PBO doesn't seem to work now it might get 50mhz, 75mhz more, on multi-T runs but that's it, tried with many settings and same thing. EDC bug does works it seems.


----------



## darkage

nick name said:


> At first glance it does appear to still work. I haven't tested without it yet though so perhaps the boost behavior is improved.
> 
> Edit:
> Yeah, it's working. I still can't reach 4.6GHz without the EDC bug. In brief CB20 runs and CPUZ benchmarks the EDC bug may be actually be better too.


thanks
will flash later


----------



## djase45

darkage said:


> does anyone have any idea if the EDC bug is working ?


Have people reported damage from it?


----------



## crakej

shamino1978 said:


> took a while , c7h with per ccx oc in bios
> c7h wifi
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/now64b3d8dklk3a/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-3101.rar?dl=0
> 
> c7h
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/6pdd90ma8zausun/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-3101.rar?dl=0


Thank you SO much man!


----------



## xeizo

How well PBO works is maybe moot, as this bios is for testing CCX OC ....

Mine boosts to 4.6GHz, but only on one core. Performance is roughly the same. Minus 100p in CB20 but could as well be because it's very hot weather today. Always affects CB.


----------



## crakej

tcclaviger said:


> Just swapped from C6E to C7H, what a disaster.
> 
> All 30 fans go to 2400 RPM the moment the CPU hits 72, can't stop it, why you do dis ASooSe? It's a hot CPU generation, so momentarily tapping 72 is quite common in all core workloads...
> 
> Bclk over 101, even 101.2 disables PB and XFR, tried using RM to enable PBO like I had to on my C6E using identical settings, doesn't work on C7H...
> 
> No CPU temp on Qcode...***...
> 
> PBO doesn't act the same. On C6E I was pulling over 220 amp and 200 watts, on C7H it refuses to exceed 168amps and 170 watts with the same settings...
> 
> Performance is down multi, single, and memory vs C6E with identical settings. Tried 2901, 3001(I think it was) and the above brand new AGESA1006 bios.
> 
> Swapping back tonight until Zen 3 comes out, maybe Asus will have the C7H sorted by it's third birthday....


Swapping to the C7H with 'identical' settings is NEVER going to work! The board has a different layout, especially the memory bus. You need to start from scratch - new board and chipset... new settings!


----------



## nick name

tcclaviger said:


> Just swapped from C6E to C7H, what a disaster.
> 
> All 30 fans go to 2400 RPM the moment the CPU hits 72, can't stop it, why you do dis ASooSe? It's a hot CPU generation, so momentarily tapping 72 is quite common in all core workloads...
> 
> Bclk over 101, even 101.2 disables PB and XFR, tried using RM to enable PBO like I had to on my C6E using identical settings, doesn't work on C7H...
> 
> No CPU temp on Qcode...***...
> 
> PBO doesn't act the same. On C6E I was pulling over 220 amp and 200 watts, on C7H it refuses to exceed 168amps and 170 watts with the same settings...
> 
> Performance is down multi, single, and memory vs C6E with identical settings. Tried 2901, 3001(I think it was) and the above brand new AGESA1006 bios.
> 
> Swapping back tonight until Zen 3 comes out, maybe Asus will have the C7H sorted by it's third birthday....


Yeah, I noticed that the CH7 won't pull as many amps compared to the X470 Prime back when I was using a 2700X also. 

And I have the same quarrel about the fans as I run 3000 RPM Noctuas so them going to 100% during normal usage is a problem. I only run them at 100% when benchmarking. I bought an external controller as my solution though I can see why that isn't ideal. 

If you're using BCLK then you want to go into Tweakers Paradise and set Force Disable OC Mode to Enabled.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> Yeah, I noticed that the CH7 won't pull as many amps compared to the X470 Prime back when I was using a 2700X also.
> 
> And I have the same quarrel about the fans as I run 3000 RPM Noctuas so them going to 100% during normal usage is a problem. I only run them at 100% when benchmarking. I bought an external controller as my solution though I can see why that isn't ideal.
> 
> If you're using BCLK then you want to go into Tweakers Paradise and set Force Disable OC Mode to Enabled.


Yes, my Prime Pro happily exceeds it's 3700Xs specs with a large margin. The C7H is hard to get past 140W/95A, sometimes it does but it looks random. In example FAH AVX pulled some 180W.


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> First bug discovered, it's not possible to change VDDG! It's stuck at 1.1V whatever settings I use. Leads to slightly higher temps, but shouldn't affect stability in a negative direction. Could possibly be beneficial for memory OC, but still a bug.
> 
> 
> 
> -snip-


I'm not seeing the same problem with VDDG voltages. I can set both to whatever I want.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I'm not seeing the same problem with VDDG voltages. I can set both to whatever I want.


Same here....

Saved bios profiles not working for me - though think they are at least 2 versions old...... first time I've had to plug settings in in ages! Looking forward to the ccx OCing as well.


----------



## nick name

A little quality of life change. VDDP Voltage in Tweakers Paradise isn't setup as mV anymore.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Same here....
> 
> Saved bios profiles not working for me - though think they are at least 2 versions old...... first time I've had to plug settings in in ages! Looking forward to the ccx OCing as well.


Oh, yeah. I didn't use a profile either. I believe Xeizo said on Reddit that he did.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> xeizo said:
> 
> 
> 
> First bug discovered, it's not possible to change VDDG! It's stuck at 1.1V whatever settings I use. Leads to slightly higher temps, but shouldn't affect stability in a negative direction. Could possibly be beneficial for memory OC, but still a bug.
> 
> 
> 
> -snip-
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not seeing the same problem with VDDG voltages. I can set both to whatever I want.
Click to expand...

Me too, but if you check in Ryzen Master it is still at 1.1V....


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> crakej said:
> 
> 
> 
> Same here....
> 
> Saved bios profiles not working for me - though think they are at least 2 versions old...... first time I've had to plug settings in in ages! Looking forward to the ccx OCing as well.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, yeah. I didn't use a profile either. I believe Xeizo said on Reddit that he did.
Click to expand...

Yes, I did, but it was saved in 3004 which may be why it works


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> Me too, but if you check in Ryzen Master it is still at 1.1V....


Mine works. Though Ryzen Master and HWiNFO are showing different values for SOC.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> xeizo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Me too, but if you check in Ryzen Master it is still at 1.1V....
> 
> 
> 
> Mine works. Though Ryzen Master and HWiNFO are showing different values for SOC.
Click to expand...

Interesting, I will check again. I could have missed a setting. Not at home right now, but I'll check back!


----------



## nick name

This BIOS has the same RAM timing bug that 0013 has. If you leave tRDWR and tWRRD on Auto they get set very high.


----------



## xeizo

xeizo said:


> Interesting, I will check again. I could have missed a setting. Not at home right now, but I'll check back!


Yes, it was VDDG IOD, it was somehow on auto meaning it didn't transfer with the profile. Just changing that setting and everything is back to normal.


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> Yes, it was VDDG IOD, it was somehow on auto meaning it didn't transfer with the profile. Just changing that setting and everything is back to normal.


I was thinking that you set one and not the other which makes sense if you were using a previous profile since it's now CCD and IOD. 

Hmmm, your SOC voltage reports the same as you set it in Ryzen Master. I wonder why mine doesn't. HWiNFO is fine, but Ryzen Master is lower.


----------



## xeizo

Looks like C8H got a new beta bios too:

https://www.overclock.net/forum/28489558-post2533.html

"preview bios...... :
(ironically, as thestilt published the telemetry skews, new options in tweakers paradise core/soc telemetry offsets, for user to manually "exploit" if they choose to, nothing done at defaults)"

I wonder if we have those setting too? Has anyone checked?


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> Looks like C8H got a new beta bios too:
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/28489558-post2533.html
> 
> "preview bios...... :
> (ironically, as thestilt published the telemetry skews, new options in tweakers paradise core/soc telemetry offsets, for user to manually "exploit" if they choose to, nothing done at defaults)"
> 
> I wonder if we have those setting too? Has anyone checked?


No, unfortunately not.


----------



## nick name

I think it's funny we've posted screenshots of it, but haven't actually mentioned that current voltages don't display on Extreme Tweaker screen.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> I think it's funny we've posted screenshots of it, but haven't actually mentioned that current voltages don't display on Extreme Tweaker screen.


LoL, the bug was too obvious. I've never looked there anyway. I always check voltages in Windows, but they can be useful for some I reckon.


----------



## tcclaviger

crakej said:


> tcclaviger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just swapped from C6E to C7H, what a disaster.
> 
> All 30 fans go to 2400 RPM the moment the CPU hits 72, can't stop it, why you do dis ASooSe? It's a hot CPU generation, so momentarily tapping 72 is quite common in all core workloads...
> 
> Bclk over 101, even 101.2 disables PB and XFR, tried using RM to enable PBO like I had to on my C6E using identical settings, doesn't work on C7H...
> 
> No CPU temp on Qcode...***...
> 
> PBO doesn't act the same. On C6E I was pulling over 220 amp and 200 watts, on C7H it refuses to exceed 168amps and 170 watts with the same settings...
> 
> Performance is down multi, single, and memory vs C6E with identical settings. Tried 2901, 3001(I think it was) and the above brand new AGESA1006 bios.
> 
> Swapping back tonight until Zen 3 comes out, maybe Asus will have the C7H sorted by it's third birthday....
> 
> 
> 
> Swapping to the C7H with 'identical' settings is NEVER going to work! The board has a different layout, especially the memory bus. You need to start from scratch - new board and chipset... new settings!
Click to expand...

Well aware of the topology change, but the same setting DO work at 3600/1800 and 3733/1866, with identical timings, TM5 stable so....

Everything is slower though, single core, multicore, ram latency, bandwidth, etc.

It's a slower board, which is bull**** since were forced to leave the top Asus AM4 board to be able to use Zen3 and possibly for XTs as well.


----------



## nick name

tcclaviger said:


> Well aware of the topology change, but the same setting DO work at 3600/1800 and 3733/1866, with identical timings, TM5 stable so....
> 
> Everything is slower though, single core, multicore, ram latency, bandwidth, etc.
> 
> It's a slower board, which is bull**** since were forced to leave the top Asus AM4 board to be able to use Zen3 and possibly for XTs as well.


Yeah, I'm not seeing the board ever pull more that just a hair over 100A when watching HWiNFO CPU Core Current SVI2 TFN.


----------



## whz1234

There are lots of bugs but we finally get PER CCX OC and the newest agesa.

Bug#1 it freezes when you attempt to change language
Bug#2 No voltages reading in OC panel


The system cannot boot even I have the same exact timings/settings for RAM which can boot at the last non-beta Bios. This is sad.


----------



## nick name

whz1234 said:


> There are lots of bugs but we finally get PER CCX OC and the newest agesa.
> 
> Bug#1 it freezes when you attempt to change language
> Bug#2 No voltages reading in OC panel
> 
> 
> The system cannot boot even I have the same exact timings/settings for RAM which can boot at the last non-beta Bios. This is sad.


Hmmm it sounds like if you try to use anything in that top menu (language, Aura) it freezes. 


I've had no problems running anything I could before.


----------



## smokin_mitch

on this new beta bios v3101 I'm getting freezing issue when I try to adjust fan curve/profiles in bios


----------



## nick name

smokin_mitch said:


> on this new beta bios v3101 I'm getting freezing issue when I try to adjust fan curve/profiles in bios


I think that the "graphical options" all freeze the system. You can adjust fans by going to Monitor and then at the bottom. I actually prefer that way as you can key in the values instead of trying to move a damn dot on a graph.


----------



## smokin_mitch

nick name said:


> I think that the "graphical options" all freeze the system. You can adjust fans by going to Monitor and then at the bottom. I actually prefer that way as you can key in the values instead of trying to move a damn dot on a graph.


I rolled back to bios v2801 I'll give 3101 another try with on the weekend when I have more time to play around


----------



## whz1234

yeah, but there is a really nice improvement that pressing clear bios button now will not wipe out everything you entered before, it just takes you into bios again and all the values are there unlike the old bios you have to enter everything again.


----------



## smokin_mitch

shamino1978 said:


> took a while , c7h with per ccx oc in bios
> c7h wifi
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/now64b3d8dklk3a/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-3101.rar?dl=0
> 
> c7h
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/6pdd90ma8zausun/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-3101.rar?dl=0


Hey shamino thanks for the beta bios to try out but I've had an issue with every bios since bios 2901 onwards (2901,3004,3101) with FCLK/UCLK dropping out of sync with ram after waking from sleep, they go from 1:1:1 mode (1900mhz) to running 1900mhz ram / 1800mhz FCLK / 950mhz UCLK do you know why it does this? I've included a screen shot of hwinfo64 showing the issue and I have had to go back to bios 2801 which works fine


----------



## RedSector73

shamino1978 said:


> took a while , c7h with per ccx oc in bios
> c7h wifi
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/now64b3d8dklk3a/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-3101.rar?dl=0
> 
> c7h
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/6pdd90ma8zausun/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-3101.rar?dl=0



Thankyou. Installed the CH8 Hero wifi on my machine last night. (3900x cpu)

(1) Saved user profiles need to be manually readded (ie manual memory o/c, etc), you can't reuse a saved one from a previous BIOS 
(which you could with all previous BIOS, which is why I'm mentioning this)

(2) My SATA controller default to RAID, so most you likely will need to change that back to AHCI.

(3) The CPU voltages finally display correctly in this bios, ie cLDO VDDP Voltage used to display as 950 (all previous BIOS) when it was 0.950 (now displays correctly)


----------



## xeizo

smokin_mitch said:


> shamino1978 said:
> 
> 
> 
> took a while , c7h with per ccx oc in bios
> c7h wifi
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/now64b3d8dklk3a/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-3101.rar?dl=0
> 
> c7h
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/6pdd90ma8zausun/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-3101.rar?dl=0
> 
> 
> 
> Hey shamino thanks for the beta bios to try out but I've had an issue with every bios since bios 2901 onwards (2901,3004,3101) with FCLK/UCLK dropping out of sync with ram after waking from sleep, they go from 1:1:1 mode (1900mhz) to running 1900mhz ram / 1800mhz FCLK / 950mhz UCLK do you know why it does this? I've included a screen shot of hwinfo64 showing the issue and I have had to go back to bios 2801 which works fine
Click to expand...

Yes, the sleep issue is persistent on all bioses after 2801. Because of that I do not use sleep.


----------



## shamino1978

smokin_mitch said:


> Hey shamino thanks for the beta bios to try out but I've had an issue with every bios since bios 2901 onwards (2901,3004,3101) with FCLK/UCLK dropping out of sync with ram after waking from sleep, they go from 1:1:1 mode (1900mhz) to running 1900mhz ram / 1800mhz FCLK / 950mhz UCLK do you know why it does this? I've included a screen shot of hwinfo64 showing the issue and I have had to go back to bios 2801 which works fine


ok will try to fix


----------



## Ryoz

shamino1978 said:


> ok will try to fix


The FCLK/UCLK out of sync after sleep issue also happen with latest C6H bios as well, hope you can fix it. Thanks.


----------



## darkage

the c-states keep turning to Auto after being turned on anyone else with this bug?

AMD CBS\ CPU commom options\ 
global c-state control 
dram ecc enable

AMD CBS\ NBIO commom options\ SMU commom options
DF states
CPPC
CPPC preferred cores

as i use mostly 1usmus powerplan 24/7 will have to go back to last bios i think


----------



## Pietro

How are the voltage spikes under CCX OC for LL5, LL4 and LL3? What is healthier for Zen 2 1.25-1.255V on LL5 or 1.275V on LL4? Are there really bad micro volatge spikes up damaging chips on higher load line calibrations?


----------



## nick name

Pietro said:


> How are the voltage spikes under CCX OC for LL5, LL4 and LL3? What is healthier for Zen 2 1.25-1.255V on LL5 or 1.275V on LL4? Are there really bad micro volatge spikes up damaging chips on higher load line calibrations?


The over-shoots aren't measurable through software so I couldn't answer about the safety off LLC 5, but LLC 4 I assume is safe. I run 1.2625V for 4400/4250 and that droops down to 1.244V with LLC 4.


----------



## Dollar

darkage said:


> the c-states keep turning to Auto after being turned on anyone else with this bug?
> 
> AMD CBS\ CPU commom options\
> global c-state control
> dram ecc enable
> 
> AMD CBS\ NBIO commom options\ SMU commom options
> DF states
> CPPC
> CPPC preferred cores
> 
> as i use mostly 1usmus powerplan 24/7 will have to go back to last bios i think


Auto often defaults to ON for those. And 1usmus power plans aren't needed anymore as long as your windows is up to date.

https://twitter.com/1usmus/status/1266433229378260993



> it is no longer relevant, as AMD and Microsoft have already made changes


----------



## Pietro

nick name said:


> The over-shoots aren't measurable through software so I couldn't answer about the safety off LLC 5, but LLC 4 I assume is safe. I run 1.2625V for 4400/4250 and that droops down to 1.244V with LLC 4.


It drops for me to 1.232 and that is not stable to mantain 4.4, 4.3, 4.25, 4.25.



Dollar said:


> Auto often defaults to ON for those. And 1usmus power plans aren't needed anymore as long as your windows is up to date.
> 
> https://twitter.com/1usmus/status/1266433229378260993


I'm still getting higher clocks on 1usmus and community V3 plan than on ryzen balanced tested on 1909, 2004 and two newer betas.


----------



## nick name

Pietro said:


> It drops for me to 1.232 and that is not stable to mantain 4.4, 4.3, 4.25, 4.25.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm still getting higher clocks on 1usmus and community V3 plan than on ryzen balanced tested on 1909, 2004 and two newer betas.


I'd just play with voltages a little bit until you find what works. Are you using TurboV Core to adjust voltages in Windows?

As far as power plans -- are you on the latest AMD chipset drivers with the latest AMD Ryzen power plans? I believe it's the AMD Ryzen High Performance plan that people say is better now and not the Balanced.


----------



## darkage

I keep 1usmus as i get better boost with it as long as c-states are on, with this bios they go back to auto as soon as i Turn off the PC using Windows insider and several 2004 

Enviado do meu ONEPLUS A3003 através do Tapatalk


----------



## Enzarch

Pietro said:


> How are the voltage spikes under CCX OC for LL5, LL4 and LL3? What is healthier for Zen 2 1.25-1.255V on LL5 or 1.275V on LL4? Are there really bad micro volatge spikes up damaging chips on higher load line calibrations?


It is always safer to run less LLC and allow a reasonable amount of droop; I believe these chips are particularly sensitive to transient spikes under heavy load. IMO is why we see some degrading/failing early with what should be safe(ish) voltages. The higher voltage at low load/idle isnt harmful. 

I have been running 1.344V which will droop to as low as 1.322V for 9+ months (4.4/4.5Ghz)
This is, however, a gaming rig that does not see full load 24/7. Nor am I recommending these voltages.


----------



## sonic2911

I don't know why the clock speed is changed everytime I reboot. Like I maxed 4125 @1.33v then I restarted windows due to update then it's max 4074 @1.31v but it's hotter than the former. I set PE3, LLC3, vcore auto.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> I'd just play with voltages a little bit until you find what works. Are you using TurboV Core to adjust voltages in Windows?
> 
> As far as power plans -- are you on the latest AMD chipset drivers with the latest AMD Ryzen power plans? I believe it's the AMD Ryzen High Performance plan that people say is better now and not the Balanced.


Yes, I only use the Ryzen High Performance power plan now, it doesn't get hot like older High Performance plans and it really is higher performance. Games are noticeably more smooth than using balanced.


----------



## tcclaviger

After much fighting with the motherboard, I've identified a bug...

In the Extreme Tweaker menu, the option to disable overclocking, for use when leaving PB2/XFR2 enabled with increased Bclk over 101 and maintaining boost capability is bugged. If I leave it enabled with Performance Boost set to enabled, it boot loops when loading into windows.

If I disable the Disable Overclocking option, boot, then use Ryzen Master to enable boosting (same method required on Crosshair VI), it works perfectly.

Scores are now inline with Crosshair Vi Extreme, similar boost speeds. There's a slight shift, less multi-core performance (like 0.5% less) but a slight single core increase (like 1%). A trade off I am totally fine with. I suspect the score difference is down to AGESA 1004 vs 1006 on C6E and C7H respectively.

Once I fixed boost + Bclk overclocking, power draw came right back up to where it was on C6E, within 5 watts, so it's not clock stretching or miss-reporting etc. All Benches return the tiny nt reduction with tiny st increase. THIS is the type of small change I expected going from T-Topology to Daisy Chain, so, it may have nothing to do with AGESA.

Also verified the temperature threshold reported by Gamers Nexus, 55c, does indeed trigger a bump to single core boosting. At 57 it scores 537 st in R20 repeatable and consistently, under 55 it hits 541/542 back and forth consistently. Reported speeds are identical, but there's clearly less micro-throttling going on based on score.


----------



## nick name

tcclaviger said:


> After much fighting with the motherboard, I've identified a bug...
> 
> In the Extreme Tweaker menu, the option to disable overclocking, for use when leaving PB2/XFR2 enabled with increased Bclk over 101 and maintaining boost capability is bugged. If I leave it enabled with Performance Boost set to enabled, it boot loops when loading into windows.
> 
> If I disable the Disable Overclocking option, boot, then use Ryzen Master to enable boosting (same method required on Crosshair VI), it works perfectly.
> 
> Scores are now inline with Crosshair Vi Extreme, similar boost speeds. There's a slight shift, less multi-core performance (like 0.5% less) but a slight single core increase (like 1%). A trade off I am totally fine with. I suspect the score difference is down to AGESA 1004 vs 1006 on C6E and C7H respectively.
> 
> Once I fixed boost + Bclk overclocking, power draw came right back up to where it was on C6E, within 5 watts, so it's not clock stretching or miss-reporting etc. All Benches return the tiny nt reduction with tiny st increase. THIS is the type of small change I expected going from T-Topology to Daisy Chain, so, it may have nothing to do with AGESA.
> 
> Also verified the temperature threshold reported by Gamers Nexus, 55c, does indeed trigger a bump to single core boosting. At 57 it scores 537 st in R20 repeatable and consistently, under 55 it hits 541/542 back and forth consistently. Reported speeds are identical, but there's clearly less micro-throttling going on based on score.



I'm not understanding what you're saying with Performance Boost set to Enabled. In what menu are you seeing that? AMD CBS? And where in Ryzen Master do you Enable it?


----------



## KnightBus

Hi,

is there any way of reducing GPU-fan ramp up during startup with a BIOS mod? ASUS and AMD say it's a "new safety feature" of Ryzen 3000 to test the fans.
Now my once super silent pc keeps getting a heart attack during post...


----------



## smokin_mitch

shamino1978 said:


> ok will try to fix


That would be awesome!!!


----------



## ahujet

Will they ever fix the bug where when you go into bios all chasis and cpu fans fan speed sometimes locks to 100% it's super annoying especially when you have high RPM fans..


----------



## tcclaviger

@nick name The option I'm referring to is in tweakers paradise, the very top option that was causing problems. Performance boost option is in extreme tweaker, next to SMT entry.

I think I figured out what was going on, it was boot looping due to CPU boost speed vs voltage. Moving LLC from auto to 3 with stock voltage got 103.4 stable. The bios enabled bclk+boost behaves a bit differently than RM boost + bclk, and needs more voltage to be stable.

To re-enable PB2/XFR2 in Ryzen master, you just turn PBO on and it'll start boosting again, as long as PBO is also enabled in bios, and performance boost is set to enabled (not auto) in bios.

Now playing with EDC bug.... Holy Jesus my chip is a happy boosting freak on AGESA 1006 + EDC bug, and this is with warmer ambients, water is at 28c (usually 25c), which "just" tips it past a boost threshold unfortunately. Seeing claimed boost peaks of 4766, but benchmark scores indicate it s more like 4625-4650. All core is holding solid at 4.38- 4.41.
R20: nt 7760 st 541
R15: nt 3380 st 219
CPU-Z: nt 8770 st 565
Geekbench 4: nt 53761 st 6480

This now puts it right inline with C6E scores when it was colder, like 6c colder, crossing back over that boost temperature threshold. Going to see what it does now colder tonight.
@Shamino thanks for 3101 man!!


----------



## WinterActual

I flashed the bios and my experience is that my CPU won't boost as high as before. I was getting 4175mhz with the 3004 bios, now I get 4050-4100 at best (same settings - PBO ON, 300/230/230, +200mhz). Also for some reason the chassis fans are going nuts if the sensor is set to CPU. The MB option is working fine but if I set the fans' source to CPU they completely ignore the temps ive set and go to 100%. Thats not a big deal but I expected at least the same boost if not higher (so I finally reach the 4.2 lol).


----------



## nick name

WinterActual said:


> I flashed the bios and my experience is that my CPU won't boost as high as before. I was getting 4175mhz with the 3004 bios, now I get 4050-4100 at best (same settings - PBO ON, 300/230/230, +200mhz). Also for some reason the chassis fans are going nuts if the sensor is set to CPU. The MB option is working fine but if I set the fans' source to CPU they completely ignore the temps ive set and go to 100%. Thats not a big deal but I expected at least the same boost if not higher (so I finally reach the 4.2 lol).


Are you using the same CPU Core Voltage settings and same LLC settings as before?

Also, you'll likely do better with the EDC bug than with boosted PPT TDC and EDC. 

I use an external controller for my fans so I can't compare the behavior them between the different BIOS versions.


----------



## nick name

tcclaviger said:


> @nick name The option I'm referring to is in tweakers paradise, the very top option that was causing problems. Performance boost option is in extreme tweaker, next to SMT entry.
> 
> I think I figured out what was going on, it was boot looping due to CPU boost speed vs voltage. Moving LLC from auto to 3 with stock voltage got 103.4 stable. The bios enabled bclk+boost behaves a bit differently than RM boost + bclk, and needs more voltage to be stable.
> 
> To re-enable PB2/XFR2 in Ryzen master, you just turn PBO on and it'll start boosting again, as long as PBO is also enabled in bios, and performance boost is set to enabled (not auto) in bios.
> 
> Now playing with EDC bug.... Holy Jesus my chip is a happy boosting freak on AGESA 1006 + EDC bug, and this is with warmer ambients, water is at 28c (usually 25c), which "just" tips it past a boost threshold unfortunately. Seeing claimed boost peaks of 4766, but benchmark scores indicate it s more like 4625-4650. All core is holding solid at 4.38- 4.41.
> R20: nt 7760 st 541
> R15: nt 3380 st 219
> CPU-Z: nt 8770 st 565
> Geekbench 4: nt 53761 st 6480
> 
> This now puts it right inline with C6E scores when it was colder, like 6c colder, crossing back over that boost temperature threshold. Going to see what it does now colder tonight.
> @Shamino thanks for 3101 man!!


Oh you mean Core Performance Boost. 

How much voltage do you have to add with BCLK at 103.4?


----------



## roco_smith

shamino1978 said:


> took a while , c7h with per ccx oc in bios
> c7h wifi
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/now64b3d8dklk3a/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-3101.rar?dl=0
> 
> c7h
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/6pdd90ma8zausun/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-3101.rar?dl=0


People that own the top of the line X370 Crosshair VI Extreme board will have mercy from Asus support also ? :skull:


----------



## WinterActual

nick name said:


> Are you using the same CPU Core Voltage settings and same LLC settings as before?
> 
> Also, you'll likely do better with the EDC bug than with boosted PPT TDC and EDC.


In one of Buildzoid vids he said the best LLC is the auto (for ryzen) so it was on auto and it still is. Isn't the EDC bug dangerous? I mean I believe it will degrade the CPU quite fast isn't it?


----------



## nick name

WinterActual said:


> In one of Buildzoid vids he said the best LLC is the auto (for ryzen) so it was on auto and it still is. Isn't the EDC bug dangerous? I mean I believe it will degrade the CPU quite fast isn't it?


The EDC bug will use the same voltages as plain PBO. The Stilt stated he didn't see anything worrisome. You'll likely need a little LLC for higher speed single-core bursts though. LLC 2 should be ok, but I think at most you'd need is LLC 3. 

https://www.overclock.net/forum/28358202-post480.html


----------



## WinterActual

Ok I tried before reading your post and actually my 3600 went to 4250! But I think it was somehow sluggish. I believe it was not the LLC level 3 but the undervolt. Should I leave it to -0.05 or just disable the uv?


----------



## tcclaviger

I recently saw the same info about FIT being totally disabled if using the EDC bug. That might be true on the sub-asus boards, gigabyte/msi/ASRock etc, but my system voltage limits are the same EDC bug or PBO without EDC bug.

LLC auto is, absolutely, technically the safest. It minimizes overshoot on load and undershoot on unload. 

The thing missed frequently, and it's a hold over from all the years of Intel, is that LLC 1/2/3 on Ryzen with C6/C7 doesn't raise the loaded voltage a whole lot but it does transition much faster, maintaining stability. 

I backed off from 103.4 to 101 this morning, I was able to attain almost identical scores by lowering to 101, EDC bug on, offset voltage but set to auto, LLC 1 and raising fclk and ram 1 strap.


----------



## nick name

WinterActual said:


> Ok I tried before reading your post and actually my 3600 went to 4250! But I think it was somehow sluggish. I believe it was not the LLC level 3 but the undervolt. Should I leave it to -0.05 or just disable the uv?


Depending on how you're running your CPU (PBO or EDC bug) an undervolt will trigger clock stretching at different voltages. If you're only using an undervolt of -.05V it isn't a problem with LLC4, but with no or lower level LLC that undrevolt could cause clock stretching with the EDC bug. 

You can verify with HWiNFO and see what the Effective Clock is during a CB20 run. If there is clock stretching you'll see it on your weakest core first. My weakest core is core 9.


----------



## tcclaviger

As Nick name mentions, clock rates are voltage dependant and will not always indicate actual performance.

I've given up paying attention to actual clock boost rates, and only look at performance as an indicator of maintained speeds.

If I clock stretch I can hit 4766 MHz st boost, but see a CB R20 st of 524, if I don't stretch and see an indicated boost of 4733, but score 541, clearly the extra voltage was needed to maintain higher average speed, thus performance.

To find your scaling rate, run R20/R15 st at a fixed 3.8, fixed 4.0, and fixed 4.2. now you have scaling intervals so you can predict 4.4 and 4.6 etc.

R15 also works, but the smaller scale makes it less granular.

For my system R15 is clock Clock speed / 21 = non-clock stretched score, when it dips below 21 I know it's stretching.

Ensure tests are run with the same pririoty, power plan, and other applications open to get consistency and you'll likely find that this is the best way to home in on "ideal" settings that balance speed/temp/voltage.


----------



## nick name

tcclaviger said:


> As Nick name mentions, clock rates are voltage dependant and will not always indicate actual performance.
> 
> I've given up paying attention to actual clock boost rates, and only look at performance as an indicator of maintained speeds.
> 
> If I clock stretch I can hit 4766 MHz st boost, but see a CB R20 st of 524, if I don't stretch and see an indicated boost of 4733, but score 541, clearly the extra voltage was needed to maintain higher average speed, thus performance.
> 
> To find your scaling rate, run R20/R15 st at a fixed 3.8, fixed 4.0, and fixed 4.2. now you have scaling intervals so you can predict 4.4 and 4.6 etc.
> 
> R15 also works, but the smaller scale makes it less granular.
> 
> For my system R15 is clock Clock speed / 21 = non-clock stretched score, when it dips below 21 I know it's stretching.
> 
> Ensure tests are run with the same pririoty and other applications open to get consistency and you'll likely find that this is the best way to home in on "ideal" settings that balance speed/temp/voltage.


You don't have to go through all that trouble to spot clock stretching as it can be seen with HWiNFO looking at Effective Clock.


----------



## tcclaviger

Clocks are irrelevant, performance is. Ignore clocks, test performance, just my opinion and method.

Did some further verification:
R20 scaling is speed / 8.56 = st score

So 541 = 4630 average st boost clock, what I'm getting now, so the value of 4733 or 4766 shown is totally useless other than marketing.

Interestingly the stock numbers I've seen thrown around often for 3900x of 515-520 averages out to st boost of 4450, but will show 4550-4600 in hwinfo. So, no, the indicated -4600 boosting in AGESA 1004 or 1006 isn't actually holding the speed it's microthrottling faster than is visible to hwinfo or ryzen master.

MHZ numbers are obsolete in the age of Zen 2 boosting aside from marketing and verifying boost functionality. The actual indicated number holds no value, none whatsoever.


----------



## nick name

tcclaviger said:


> Clocks are irrelevant, performance is. Ignore clocks, test performance, just my opinion and method.
> 
> Did some further verification:
> R20 scaling is speed / 8.56 = st score
> 
> So 541 = 4630 average st boost clock, what I'm getting now, so the value of 4733 or 4766 shown is totally useless other than marketing.
> 
> Interestingly the stock numbers I've seen thrown around often for 3900x of 515-520 averages out to st boost of 4450, but will show 4550-4600 in hwinfo. So, no, the indicated -4600 boosting in AGESA 1004 or 1006 isn't actually holding the speed it's microthrottling faster than is visible to hwinfo or ryzen master.
> 
> MHZ numbers are obsolete in the age of Zen 2 boosting aside from marketing and verifying boost functionality. The actual indicated number holds no value, none whatsoever.


It doesn't sound like you're familiar with what I'm talking about. Do you have HWiNFO? At first I didn't know what Effective Clock was displaying in HWiNFO, but it's different than Core Clock and Core Ratio. Core Clock will show speed factoring BCLK x multiplier and Core Ratio is CPU multiplier. Effective Clock (when under full load like CB20) will show the actual speed of the CPU and that will show you clock stretching.


----------



## nick name

@tcclaviger The first core to start clock stretching is core 9 on my CPU and then core 7 is next. I ran a negative offset that would induce stretching in core 9 and then increased it until I saw it in core 7. In the screen grab with core 7 highlighted you can actually see stretching across almost all of the cores.


----------



## Synoxia

New bios seems to suck. (Unexpected?) my 3700x will never boost like 1.0.0.3abba again it seems. + now i have issues running the same dram oc.


----------



## nick name

Synoxia said:


> New bios seems to suck. (Unexpected?) my 3700x will never boost like 1.0.0.3abba again it seems. + now i have issues running the same dram oc.


Did you use a saved profile? Or did you key everything in fresh?


----------



## darkage

my 3700X boost better with 1usmus PP than last bios
ram no problem 3800C15-16-16-16


----------



## xeizo

I think the bios performs as it should, no problems here. 

But it's worth mentioning that Ryzens biggest enemy against top performance is temps, it is getting hotter outside now as summer is coming and it is warmer inside for most people. This means Ryzen boosts noticeably worse because of higher ambient temps, unless you increase your fan speed and bring performance back to normal.

Ryzen has several boost tresholds, if you was just 1-2 degrees from a treshold before, the warmer ambient temps will tick the treshold and in an instant your boost speeds are 50MHz lower and performance drops by a fair bit.

Ryzens should work the best on Svalbard.


----------



## Synoxia

nick name said:


> Did you use a saved profile? Or did you key everything in fresh?


Everything fresh


----------



## xeizo

Synoxia said:


> Everything fresh


I used a saved profile, my memory is stable at the exact same settings I had before.


----------



## Synoxia

xeizo said:


> I used a saved profile, my memory is stable at the exact same settings I had before.


Yeah MB this time. I had accidentally reseated the ram in the wrong order and everything seems to work.
I have 4 dimms, i wonder why if i swap slots i can't even post 3733 and 3800.. i have 1 kit from 2018 and one from 2019. 2019 is now in A2 B2 while 2018 in A1 B1. 
Does this mean 2018 kit is stronger and because of that, even if a1 b1 are weaker signal slots, they can withstand 3800?


----------



## nick name

Synoxia said:


> Yeah MB this time. I had accidentally reseated the ram in the wrong order and everything seems to work.
> I have 4 dimms, i wonder why if i swap slots i can't even post 3733 and 3800.. i have 1 kit from 2018 and one from 2019. 2019 is now in A2 B2 while 2018 in A1 B1.
> Does this mean 2018 kit is stronger and because of that, even if a1 b1 are weaker signal slots, they can withstand 3800?


Weird. Maybe that is the case and you have the stronger kit in the weaker slots and it compensates?


----------



## hurricane28

Hi guys, 

I have a weird issue and i would like some opinions. 

yesterday i was playing Warframe and the PC completely locked up for no apparent reason. It began with lots of lag and stutter but after that everything locked up completely and couldn't do anything. 
I had before that the PC shuts itself down in !code 08 but nothing like this before. 

I looked in HWinfo64 but couldn't find anything, Windows log also show nothing. All i did was installing AMD chipset driver and installing the newest Nvidia display drivers. I doubt that these things are the issues though. 
I suspect the PSU but the voltages are fine and within spec.
I did stresstests with OCCT and RAM Tm5 and other RAM testing programs but can't detect any issue or instability. voltages and temps are good too.

Anyone an idea what can cause this behavior?


----------



## xeizo

I had two unkown of lockdowns right before my GTX1080Ti died, never before, never after. I don't say that is your problem, but as a tip on what could be going on.


----------



## hurricane28

Hmm, that might be the problem indeed. I also have connection problems with my second screen as sometimes it doesn't turn on at all. And when i want to go in BIOS i get black screen. 

Im going to contact my retail store and see what they say about that. Thnx for the tip.


----------



## Baio73

hurricane28 said:


> Hmm, that might be the problem indeed. I also have connection problems with my second screen as sometimes it doesn't turn on at all. And when i want to go in BIOS i get black screen.
> 
> Im going to contact my retail store and see what they say about that. Thnx for the tip.


If you suspect the VGA, try some benchmark and see what happens.

Baio


----------



## hurricane28

Ye i already tried that but all seems normal. I think im gonna unhook the second monitor and see what happens. If i remember correctly same sort of issue happened when i used it as my main which is why i bought my new monitor lol. The second one seemed to work fine for a while but it might be broken, who knows. Im gonna test some more.


----------



## nick name

@hurricane28 Playing with voltages yesterday I encountered similar behavior running CB20 while trying to find the minimal voltage requirements. It seems like a new behavior -- like the CPU tries to keep on trucking where previously it would lock-up and restart. I was trying so many things yesterday I can't remember the setup that brought about the behavior. Now I wish I would have made a note. 

Are you running LLC and/or voltage offsets? Your HWiNFO looks like you're running a negative offset or no/low LLC.

PS
I am also running latest chipset and GPU drivers and Windows 2004. So the behavior may stem from one of those.


----------



## hurricane28

Interesting..

I was running 3800 Mhz CL18 fine for weeks now and all of a sudden it became unstable or something i guess. I backed off to 3666 MHz at same timings and all feels better now. Might be the Fclk not liking 1900. 

CPU is at stock, only RAM is overclocked. No need to overclock the CPU as in most cases it gives negative results as the boost is higher on auto than on manual overclocking.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Interesting..
> 
> I was running 3800 Mhz CL18 fine for weeks now and all of a sudden it became unstable or something i guess. I backed off to 3666 MHz at same timings and all feels better now. Might be the Fclk not liking 1900.
> 
> CPU is at stock, only RAM is overclocked. No need to overclock the CPU as in most cases it gives negative results as the boost is higher on auto than on manual overclocking.


When I first installed my 3900X the FCLK UCLK were down clocking because I didn't set FCLK. I'm assuming you set FCLK, but I believe there is also a setting in AMD CBS that is something like "set FCLK UCLK Max". I wonder if it's relevant now in the sense that you have to activate it.

Edit:
Sorry, not AMD CBS it's AMD Overclocking.


----------



## tcclaviger

@hurricane28 It's almost certainly your fclk not being happy at 1900. I can't, for example use the 1900/3800 divider, but I can use the 1866/3733 divider and raise bclk and be stable at 1895/3790.

Just something about that last little bit it's hard to achieve.

The circumstances of your crashes exactly match what happens to mine when running ram/fclk at their limit, and have the CPU configured to boost much more aggressively than stock if I don't increase LLC to 2. 

My theory, it's an error in cache or schdduler or something else outside the pipeline causing it. I say that because, like you, I was running all kinds of stress tests and it would pass, but would "slow-roll-crash" randomly when multitasking while gaming, took about 3 hours to isolate it to CPU voltage as it presented more like a GPU or RAM fault.

On another note, for a non-encoding rig, mostly gaming and multitasking, would you guys be comfortable with the below ccx OC voltages?

1.25 Manual Vcore
LLC 3
1.231 full sag voltage
44-43.75-43-43

Balance power plan so it parks/idles unused cores.


----------



## tcclaviger

@elmor and @Shamino at what LLC setting on the C7H is the transient range minimized, peak to peak?


----------



## xeizo

Affirmative, 1900/3800 can be almost stable, it runs all benchmarks but crashes sometimes in the PiP Boy menus in Fallout 76(never in actual gameplay). The game just closes and goes to desktop without any message. Lowering to 1866/3733 I can run all day, superstable.

Fallout 76 uses RAM extensively, it produces higher RAM temps than anything else.


----------



## Elrick

nick name said:


> If you really wanna blow some fuses add a window AC or portable AC into the mix!



You need a proper *3-Phase* setup.

That will help with huge amounts of electricity needed when operating a number of PCs needing lots of juice immediately and often.

Single Phase will always fail, due to being for limited electronic components being used at the same time.


----------



## xeizo

Elrick said:


> You need a proper *3-Phase* setup.
> 
> That will help with huge amounts of electricity needed when operating a number of PCs needing lots of juice immediately and often.
> 
> Single Phase will always fail, due to being for limited electronic components being used at the same time.


I could tap the power for my PC:s from the same outlet as the washing machine, it's 3-phase 

But, I think I'll rather do lighter folding instead, folding is already handicapped from summer temps!


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> When I first installed my 3900X the FCLK UCLK were down clocking because I didn't set FCLK. I'm assuming you set FCLK, but I believe there is also a setting in AMD CBS that is something like "set FCLK UCLK Max". I wonder if it's relevant now in the sense that you have to activate it.
> 
> Edit:
> Sorry, not AMD CBS it's AMD Overclocking.


Very interesting, i will look at this setting. Thnx!


----------



## hurricane28

tcclaviger said:


> @hurricane28 It's almost certainly your fclk not being happy at 1900. I can't, for example use the 1900/3800 divider, but I can use the 1866/3733 divider and raise bclk and be stable at 1895/3790.
> 
> Just something about that last little bit it's hard to achieve.
> 
> The circumstances of your crashes exactly match what happens to mine when running ram/fclk at their limit, and have the CPU configured to boost much more aggressively than stock if I don't increase LLC to 2.
> 
> My theory, it's an error in cache or schdduler or something else outside the pipeline causing it. I say that because, like you, I was running all kinds of stress tests and it would pass, but would "slow-roll-crash" randomly when multitasking while gaming, took about 3 hours to isolate it to CPU voltage as it presented more like a GPU or RAM fault.
> 
> On another note, for a non-encoding rig, mostly gaming and multitasking, would you guys be comfortable with the below ccx OC voltages?
> 
> 1.25 Manual Vcore
> LLC 3
> 1.231 full sag voltage
> 44-43.75-43-43
> 
> Balance power plan so it parks/idles unused cores.


interesting indeed. 

The question becomes now that how am i stable for weeks and now in having these issues all of a sudden? I can pass memtests and OCCT for hours without any issue but still i have mouse cursor issues and Warframe feels laggy and sometimes crashes. I tested my PSU as well and no issues. Nothing gets hot or is over volted either. 

I m gonna try lowering the Fclk and see how it goes. Currently im running 1800 Fclk 3733 MHz RAM.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> When I first installed my 3900X the FCLK UCLK were down clocking because I didn't set FCLK. I'm assuming you set FCLK, but I believe there is also a setting in AMD CBS that is something like "set FCLK UCLK Max". I wonder if it's relevant now in the sense that you have to activate it.
> 
> Edit:
> Sorry, not AMD CBS it's AMD Overclocking.


I'll experiment with this too.

So far i'm running stack CPU and memory (not even my XMP settings work any more  ) CPU is boosting to 4.5, but effective clock shows 3.5 max. I'm assuming this is because of the light loads?

When running CB15, I'm getting 'boost' of 4.2, but effective is at 4.1. Does this mean I'm getting clock stretching at default?

I want to play with CCX OCing in bios, so wanted to make sure I know whats going on as I was one of those who preferred not to use software OCing

I'll also be playing with ram OC from scratch - want to find what has changed making it harder to OC my ram.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I'll experiment with this too.
> 
> So far i'm running stack CPU and memory (not even my XMP settings work any more  ) CPU is boosting to 4.5, but effective clock shows 3.5 max. I'm assuming this is because of the light loads?
> 
> When running CB15, I'm getting 'boost' of 4.2, but effective is at 4.1. Does this mean I'm getting clock stretching at default?
> 
> I want to play with CCX OCing in bios, so wanted to make sure I know whats going on as I was one of those who preferred not to use software OCing
> 
> I'll also be playing with ram OC from scratch - want to find what has changed making it harder to OC my ram.


I've seen clock stretching with no LLC and more or less stock CPU settings.


----------



## neikosr0x

nick name said:


> I've seen clock stretching with no LLC and more or less stock CPU settings.


I'm running my 3900x with stock settings on the latest beta bios, and while I'm getting 4.080mhz on cb20 my effective clock is 4.055avg, with LLC on auto.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I've seen clock stretching with no LLC and more or less stock CPU settings.


Glad I'm not the only one seeing this.

I found that if I look at R Master, it seems to show the 'effective' clocks too.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I've seen clock stretching with no LLC and more or less stock CPU settings.


Was it you that mentioned about tRDWR being as high as 18 - instead of something like 8?

What is going on with ram OC? After 3 hours, I still don't have a stable 3733 OC which I've had for months!

Anyone got any ideas on whats changed memory-wise? @1usmus?

It's driving me nuts!


----------



## Ramad

crakej said:


> Was it you that mentioned about tRDWR being as high as 18 - instead of something like 8?
> 
> What is going on with ram OC? After 3 hours, I still don't have a stable 3733 OC which I've had for months!
> 
> Anyone got any ideas on whats changed memory-wise? @*1usmus* ?
> 
> It's driving me nuts!


Can you try setting drive strengths to:


Addr...: 28 
Odt....: 16
Cke...: 28

And the resistors to:


20
30
20
30

Try it while setting SOC voltage to 1.25V. Let us know how it goes.


----------



## Dude970

I played with the new BIOS today with mixed results. For instance R20 SC went up a little, but all core went down. Just need to tweak more.

I have played with the RAM, was able to rock 1900/3800 with 3004, its a little different with 3101.

Im still new to AMD, and still in sponge mode learning


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Was it you that mentioned about tRDWR being as high as 18 - instead of something like 8?
> 
> What is going on with ram OC? After 3 hours, I still don't have a stable 3733 OC which I've had for months!
> 
> Anyone got any ideas on whats changed memory-wise? @1usmus?
> 
> It's driving me nuts!


Yeah, tRDWR and tWRRD, when left on auto, gets set high with BIOS 0013 and 3101. For me it was 18 and 7 so I have to set them manually which doesn't set different values for each channel like Auto normally would. 

My RAM setup seems solid though there is a dip in SiSoftware Sandra inter-core bandwidth at 16x64kB, 8x256kB, and 4x1MB. I guess I should run an overnight test to know for sure. So I'll do that tonight. 

One thing that has changed that I couldn't do before is boot at 4600MHz though I'm not sure if I ever tried with the timings I was successful with this time. And honestly I can't really remember what was successful this time -- it may have been 22-24-22-22. I just can't really remember as I did it on a lark.

And we all know it's a short drive. Lol.


----------



## nick name

Ramad said:


> Can you try setting drive strengths to:
> 
> 
> Addr...: 28
> Odt....: 16
> Cke...: 28
> 
> And the resistors to:
> 
> 
> 20
> 30
> 20
> 30
> 
> Try it while setting SOC voltage to 1.25V. Let us know how it goes.


Can I ask why you suggest those values? And with such high SOC voltage? I thought SOC at 1.2V was still the safe max?


----------



## nick name

Ta Daaaaaaa. It's 4600MHz RAM, but it's terrible performance. Also 1.63V.


----------



## crakej

Thanks for replies and ideas..... I will have another try - I've not even gone as far as 1.1v SoC yet as didn't need to before.

Will try doing tRDWR tWRRD manually - they were coming out as 8 and 4 for me previously.

When it didn't crash my CB15 score was something like 2934, where previously I got around 3300. That's a really big difference and not much different from everything at default!

I do wish AMD would tell us what the differences were! I know it's a beta bios, but I thought they had at least figured out XMP which also doesn't work for me any more. I also used to be able to boot 4600, but can't even do 4266 or 4400 XMP any more.


----------



## crakej

I'm giving in for tonight - too tired! Thanks for the suggestions 

Backed off to 3666 and it's working FASTER!

To be continued tomorrow ........


----------



## gtz

Anybody else having issues with the new beta bios? I flashed it various ways and it just locks up my BIOS. Sometimes I can go a few seconds sometimes it is currently instant had to flash bios 3004.


----------



## nick name

gtz said:


> Anybody else having issues with the new beta bios? I flashed it various ways and it just locks up my BIOS. Sometimes I can go a few seconds sometimes it is currently instant had to flash bios 3004.


I definitely haven't experienced that and haven't seen anyone else report that. 

What manner did you use to flash? I used a USB stick and BIOS Flashback.


----------



## gtz

I used the flash back and updated thru bios. Both instances the bios is unstable and won't load into windows. I find it very weird.


----------



## xeizo

gtz said:


> I used the flash back and updated thru bios. Both instances the bios is unstable and won't load into windows. I find it very weird.


Is it the old VBOOT DRAM VOLTAGE that is too low? It's been a bug for several bios versions, if you don't set it manual you can only boot with 2133MHz RAM. I use 1.4V, always works. I used bios flashback and applied the profile from 3004, not a single hiccup.


----------



## Synoxia

gtz said:


> Anybody else having issues with the new beta bios? I flashed it various ways and it just locks up my BIOS. Sometimes I can go a few seconds sometimes it is currently instant had to flash bios 3004.


Happened to me too. Ram overclock was unstable.


----------



## kmellz

So far no issues at all with new bios, with some small tweaks 1900/3800 is stable for me again now!


----------



## gtz

xeizo said:


> Is it the old VBOOT DRAM VOLTAGE that is too low? It's been a bug for several bios versions, if you don't set it manual you can only boot with 2133MHz RAM. I use 1.4V, always works. I used bios flashback and applied the profile from 3004, not a single hiccup.





Synoxia said:


> Happened to me too. Ram overclock was unstable.


The BIOS won't even let me save settings. A soon as I click on save settings and exit it freezes. Just tried flashing it again and same issue. Even downloaded again to see if the file got corrupted. Honestly just wanted to try CCD/CCX overclocking on my 3950x.


----------



## xeizo

gtz said:


> The BIOS won't even let me save settings. A soon as I click on save settings and exit it freezes. Just tried flashing it again and same issue. Even downloaded again to see if the file got corrupted. Honestly just wanted to try CCD/CCX overclocking on my 3950x.


Sounds like a hardware failure, or a corrupted USB-stick, my bios is as smooth as always no difference from earlier bioses.


----------



## crakej

gtz said:


> I used the flash back and updated thru bios. Both instances the bios is unstable and won't load into windows. I find it very weird.


What do you mean 'thru bios'? Flashback must be done with the machine OFF and NOT through the bios.

Just wanted to make that clear.

Bios loaded fine for me though I am having problems with ram OC compared to previous bios.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> What do you mean 'thru bios'? Flashback must be done with the machine OFF and NOT through the bios.
> 
> Just wanted to make that clear.
> 
> Bios loaded fine for me though I am having problems with ram OC compared to previous bios.


You try re-seating your RAM lately?


----------



## gtz

crakej said:


> What do you mean 'thru bios'? Flashback must be done with the machine OFF and NOT through the bios.
> 
> Just wanted to make that clear.
> 
> Bios loaded fine for me though I am having problems with ram OC compared to previous bios.


I tried both options.

First try thru BIOS second time using BIOS flash back.

Re downloaded BIOS, same issue. 

I gave up on the BIOS, back to 3004 and no issues what so ever. I just find it extremely odd that all past BIOS have worked flawlessly.


----------



## crakej

gtz said:


> I tried both options.
> 
> First try thru BIOS second time using BIOS flash back.
> 
> Re downloaded BIOS, same issue.
> 
> I gave up on the BIOS, back to 3004 and no issues what so ever. I just find it extremely odd that all past BIOS have worked flawlessly.


OK - Through the bios doesn't work any more.

Very odd that it's not working for you -maybe you have some hardware combination that the new bios doesn't like..... can't think of anything else at moment!
@nick name - I will try re-seating again - you never know!

Those of you who got your ram OC working, what changes did you have to make to your profiles to get things running again?


----------



## xeizo

crakej said:


> OK - Through the bios doesn't work any more.
> 
> Very odd that it's not working for you -maybe you have some hardware combination that the new bios doesn't like..... can't think of anything else at moment!
> 
> @nick name - I will try re-seating again - you never know!
> 
> Those of you who got your ram OC working, what changes did you have to make to your profiles to get things running again?


None, running the exact same settings as the last several months. Been gaming for hours on hours without any glitch.


----------



## darkage

here all the same
just input all the values, same voltages etc
team darkl 8pack [email protected]/1.39v 1900fclk


----------



## crakej

Interesting - all I did was update the bios and my settings (freshly input) - and my XMP no longer works either.

I'm working on a friends computer (2200G on MSI B450 - surprisingly quick) at the moment - will open mine up later and have a clean and re-seat.

Thanks guys.


----------



## shamino1978

not fully tested, just if you want to try:

c7h wifi
https://www.dropbox.com/s/1sbvnmsjo4rvv3l/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-3103.rar?dl=0

c7h
https://www.dropbox.com/s/bpp04gx94oxtcpd/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-3103.rar?dl=0


----------



## nick name

shamino1978 said:


> not fully tested, just if you want to try:
> 
> c7h wifi
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/1sbvnmsjo4rvv3l/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-3103.rar?dl=0
> 
> c7h
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/bpp04gx94oxtcpd/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-3103.rar?dl=0


Will try. Anything you want us to look at in particular?


----------



## xeizo

shamino1978 said:


> not fully tested, just if you want to try:
> 
> c7h wifi
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/1sbvnmsjo4rvv3l/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-3103.rar?dl=0
> 
> c7h
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/bpp04gx94oxtcpd/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-3103.rar?dl=0


Yes, will try of course. What is the difference? AGESA v2 1.0.0.2 I dream/wish/hope


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> Yes, will try of course. What is the difference? AGESA v2 1.0.0.2 I dream/wish/hope


No, it's 1.0.0.6.


----------



## nick name

shamino1978 said:


> not fully tested, just if you want to try:
> 
> c7h wifi
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/1sbvnmsjo4rvv3l/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-3103.rar?dl=0
> 
> c7h
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/bpp04gx94oxtcpd/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-3103.rar?dl=0


When on Auto tRDWR and tWRRD are still being set high as they did with 0013 and 3101.


----------



## nick name

BIOS version 3103 fixes the graphical areas of the BIOS so there is no more lock-up.

Voltages are also displaying.


----------



## xeizo

That's nice! It's seem to have introduced the excessive Power Reporting Deviation as seen in the C8H Beta bios. Similar to like all Gigabyte boards.

So what does that do? I have to use less minus offset for vcore, which is good really, one shouldn't have to use minus offset. But it is faulty telemetry.

Performancewise, it's as always with Ryzen, minor deviations regardless of settings but with less minus offset it performs a lot like 3101. With the same offset, single core boost is lower. 3004 still has slightly higher scores.

Asus WMI reporting seem to lock up alot in HWINFO64, but that could as well be a bug in HWINFO64(todays Beta)


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> That's nice! It's seem to have introduced the excessive Power Reporting Deviation as seen in the C8H Beta bios. Similar to like all Gigabyte boards.
> 
> So what does that do? I have to use less minus offset for vcore, which is good really, one shouldn't have to use minus offset. But it is faulty telemetry.
> 
> Performancewise, it's as always with Ryzen, minor deviations regardless of settings but with less minus offset it performs a lot like 3101. With the same offset, single core boost is lower. 3004 still has slightly higher scores.
> 
> Asus WMI reporting seem to lock up alot in HWINFO64, but that could as well be a bug in HWINFO64(todays Beta)


Oh I didn't even notice that. Lemme go back and check.

Edit:
I'm not seeing it in BIOS. Are you talking about in BIOS or in HWiNFO?


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> Oh I didn't even notice that. Lemme go back and check.
> 
> Edit:
> I'm not seeing it in BIOS. Are you talking about in BIOS or in HWiNFO?


Which comment do you mean?

If it's Power Reporting Deviation it can be seen in HWINFO64 since a couple of Betas. Caused some stir in the Tech Press. Basically boards reports less power than they consume to boost higher. Undervolting achieves a similar thing. This bios has HWINFO64 report a lot more minus deviation under load(idle figures are of no importance) than 3004 and 3101.


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> Which comment do you mean?
> 
> If it's Power Reporting Deviation it can be seen in HWINFO64 since a couple of Betas. Caused some stir in the Tech Press. Basically boards reports less power than they consume to boost higher. Undervolting achieves a similar thing. This bios has HWINFO64 report a lot more minus deviation under load(idle figures are of no importance) than 3004 and 3101.


I thought you meant the setting was added to BIOS as they did with the CH8. I didn't see the setting in BIOS. And I haven't downloaded the HWiNFO version with it in there.


----------



## darkage

are you guys having the same boost performance as with 3101? mine is a bit lower in hwinfo with bosst tester
memory is all ok 3800/1900


----------



## xeizo

darkage said:


> are you guys having the same boost performance as with 3101? mine is a bit lower in hwinfo with bosst tester
> memory is all ok 3800/1900


Yes, boost seems worse, and 3101 was worse than 3004. But the deviations are really small and shouldn't be noticeable in real usage. I haven't seen 4600MHz on a regular basis since bios 2801, from there it's downhill all the way. Benchmarks don't differ much though.

It's hard to draw any exact conclusions as Windows have been updated numerous times since, with mitigations for this and that, and ambient temps are now much higher than when 2801 was new.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> I thought you meant the setting was added to BIOS as they did with the CH8. I didn't see the setting in BIOS. And I haven't downloaded the HWiNFO version with it in there.


Oh, no setting in bios, at least not visible. But if it's there it looks like it's ON now while it was OFF in 3101. Deviations are now much larger.


----------



## xeizo

So far only thing not working is Asus WMI in HWINFO64, as I said it could be a bug in the program. All else, the bios looks stable, has changed a lot of settings and rebooted numerous times by now. All benchmarks run as they should. 4.6GHz single core boost is a no go regardless of -0.1V offset to no offset and a lot of settings inbetween. I saw it now and then in 3004, but not often, never in 3101. 2801 even boosted to 4625MHz sometimes.


----------



## Pietro

tcclaviger said:


> @hurricane28 It's almost certainly your fclk not being happy at 1900. I can't, for example use the 1900/3800 divider, but I can use the 1866/3733 divider and raise bclk and be stable at 1895/3790.
> 
> Just something about that last little bit it's hard to achieve.
> 
> The circumstances of your crashes exactly match what happens to mine when running ram/fclk at their limit, and have the CPU configured to boost much more aggressively than stock if I don't increase LLC to 2.
> 
> My theory, it's an error in cache or schdduler or something else outside the pipeline causing it. I say that because, like you, I was running all kinds of stress tests and it would pass, but would "slow-roll-crash" randomly when multitasking while gaming, took about 3 hours to isolate it to CPU voltage as it presented more like a GPU or RAM fault.
> 
> On another note, for a non-encoding rig, mostly gaming and multitasking, would you guys be comfortable with the below ccx OC voltages?
> 
> 1.25 Manual Vcore
> LLC 3
> 1.231 full sag voltage
> 44-43.75-43-43
> 
> Balance power plan so it parks/idles unused cores.


I have now on mine 3900X 2003SUT:

1.269 Manual Vcore
LLC 4
1.25 full sag voltage in blender bench classroom 
44.25-44.25-42.5-42.5

You meant windows balance power plan or ryzen balance power plan? What needs to be set in bios to park unused cores?

Edit: looking how load is dispered between, I still prefer community v3 plan which uses my six fastest cores, rest has 0% load, in balanced profile it uses all cores on very low load.


----------



## intellitour

Thanks! Will test it asap


----------



## smokin_mitch

shamino1978 said:


> not fully tested, just if you want to try:
> 
> c7h wifi
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/1sbvnmsjo4rvv3l/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-3103.rar?dl=0
> 
> c7h
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/bpp04gx94oxtcpd/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-3103.rar?dl=0


Is there a fix for the windows 10 sleep issue with FCLK/UCLK dropping out of sync with ram running at 3800 in this test bios?


----------



## Dude970

smokin_mitch said:


> Is there a fix for the windows 10 sleep issue with FCLK/UCLK dropping out of sync with ram running at 3800 in this test bios?


Did you try it, it says not fully tested


----------



## xeizo

SB 1.05 Voltage is way too high in this bios, had to lower it to 1.025V to get a "normal" 1.056V reading in HWINFO64. 1.8V PLL voltage is also too high, had to lower it to 1.75V to get a 1.79V reading in HWINFO64.

Multicore in this bios performs as always, very well, single core boost is the worst so far of any bios. My 3900X performs like a 3700X in single core regardless of setting. That won't change with per CCX OC as I won't likely get above 4.4GHz for any CCX, so basically I have a 12-core 3700X 

Best single core boost of any bios was the old beta 0002+, it performed as expected.


----------



## Logue

@xeizo Isn't this normal? Some voltages read wrong by HWInfo? Should we trust the reading in HWInfo/BIOS or should we set these (SB and 1.8 PLL voltages) to their "normal" in BIOS or so they READ normally in BIOS/HWInfo?


----------



## xeizo

Logue said:


> @xeizo Isn't this normal? Some voltages read wrong by HWInfo? Should we trust the reading in HWInfo/BIOS or should we set these (SB and 1.8 PLL voltages) to their "normal" in BIOS or so they READ normally in BIOS/HWInfo?


I can't say with confidence, but HWINFO shows the same readings as in bios. Looks like HWINFO shows true values. After lowering the voltages to read "right" I have noticed no stability issues, which means it do look like they are set too high by default.


----------



## xeizo

This is best R20 score using PBO on 3103, single core is dud, I could get it up to 509 with higher vcore but far from early bioses scores. Multi is ok, best I could get from 3004 was 7370, only 20p difference. 











Looking att Geekbench history, variances are small through different bios versions, could as well be different Windows stuff going on in the background:










https://browser.geekbench.com/user/75195

Summary is, single core boost is half dead.

Remains to explore per CCX OC, but it's a lot more time consuming to find stable settings, I will return to that. Excellent having it in the bios now, thank you very much for that feature!


----------



## DDSZ

4325/4325/4100/4100 @ 1.2 LLC4 been working well for me for a week 
Will try 3103 today


----------



## xeizo

AIDA64 cache and mem, and CPU-Z with bios 3103:










Highest single core I ever got in CPU-Z using Auto/PBO was 543, in this bench it's not that far behind










I had to back off from 3800 memory/1900MHz IF because in ONE game a certain menu would freeze, even though all benchmarks would run. It never freezes with 3733/1866 so that is what I have been running for some time. Very stable, but memory scores are bit lower than before.


----------



## xeizo

DDSZ said:


> 4325/4325/4100/4100 @ 1.2 LLC4 been working well for me for a week
> Will try 3103 today


Great score! I briefly tested CCX OC using Ryzen Master some months ago, I got up to 7700+ in CB R20, but I thought it was too finicky to use Ryzen Master and stopped exploring it more. It will be fun starting doing it in the bios instead


----------



## DDSZ

xeizo said:


> Great score! I briefly tested CCX OC using Ryzen Master some months ago, I got up to 7700+ in CB R20, but I thought it was too finicky to use Ryzen Master and stopped exploring it more. It will be fun starting doing it in the bios instead


Cinebench and Ryzen Master made it quite easy. I found that the system isn't rebooting/bsoding even if you set too high frequencies. Cinebench just crashes, I set lower freq and re-test. And after finding the sweet spot I proceeded to some proper stability tests.
However I wasn't chasing higher freqs, but lower volts, so the score could be better


----------



## xeizo

DDSZ said:


> Cinebench and Ryzen Master made it quite easy. I found that the system isn't rebooting/bsoding even if you set too high frequencies. Cinebench just crashes, I set lower freq and re-test. And after finding the sweet spot I proceeded to some proper stability tests.
> However I wasn't chasing higher freqs, but lower volts, so the score could be better


Lower volts are useful, less heat, less fan noise


----------



## xeizo

I've played around a lot with powerplans, all I can say is Ryzen High Performance powerplan from the latest drivers seem to outdo them all. Including Community 1004B, 1usmus, and Windows Ultimate powerplan. Recommended!


----------



## Axaion

do you mind doing a latencymon test, and check what these values are after 30~ seconds in the "Stats" tab?

Highest measured interrupt to process latency (µs): 
Average measured interrupt to process latency (µs): 

Highest measured interrupt to DPC latency (µs): 
Average measured interrupt to DPC latency (µs):


----------



## tcclaviger

New BIOS is a beast, did a R20 545 single core today, will post screenies when I get home. In the mean time, meet the highest windows Geekbench 4 single core score that doesn't have wonky multicore scores from disabling the second CCD to OC 1 CCX really high. These are DAILY settings.
@Shamino you guys killed it with this BIOS, scores in all BMs are rediculous consistent and high.

Also fills in as a nice proxy for what to expect from 3900XT when well configured.

https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/15571218

According HWBOT it's a US st record and world record for ambient cooling....

I know HWBOT is a microcosm but hey, I'll take it.


----------



## xeizo

tcclaviger said:


> New BIOS is a beast, did a R20 545 single core today, will post screenies when I get home. In the mean time, meet the highest windows Geekbench 4 single core score that doesn't have wonky multicore scores from disabling the second CCD to OC 1 CCX really high. These are DAILY settings.
> @Shamino you guys killed it with this BIOS, scores in all BMs are rediculous consistent and high.
> 
> Also fills in as a nice proxy for what to expect from 3900XT when well configured.
> 
> https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/15571218


Great score! Promising for when doing some CCX OC, I beat you in the Ray Tracing sub benchmark though - with only PBO


----------



## xeizo

Axaion said:


> do you mind doing a latencymon test, and check what these values are after 30~ seconds in the "Stats" tab?
> 
> Highest measured interrupt to process latency (µs):
> Average measured interrupt to process latency (µs):
> 
> Highest measured interrupt to DPC latency (µs):
> Average measured interrupt to DPC latency (µs):


Why is that so interesting? I've never had any problem with audio, only using USB interfaces though not onboard.


----------



## xeizo

@Shamino You never said it, but I suppose these beta bioses has full support for XT-series?


----------



## Axaion

xeizo said:


> Why is that so interesting? I've never had any problem with audio, only using USB interfaces though not onboard.


Just to compared to what i usually get is all
speaking of usb dacs, my 2nd creative G6 just killed its own AMP again lmao


----------



## xeizo

Axaion said:


> Just to compared to what i usually get is all
> speaking of usb dacs, my 2nd creative G6 just killed its own AMP again lmao


Oh, sorry to hear, I use a separate headphone amp. The Presonus HP4. It drives just about anything extreme loud 

(killer features of the HP4 is it takes balanced in, meaning all RF noise from the PC is fully gone, and it has passthrough to monitors. Also balanced)


----------



## xeizo

First test of CCX OC in bios, just picking random values of:

CCX0 = 4400
CCX1 = 4300
CCX2 = 4200
CCX3 = 4200

VID = 1.25V
VCORE = 1.25V
LLC = 3
PERFORMANCE ENHANCER = PE3










Not even breaking 70C and noticeably better performance than PBO! 
Will be interesting to see how it holds stability wise, will take som time to find out. And if anything is possible to improve. This was the exact first boot using this feature. Thanks @Shamino once again!

One bonus feature is the fans are now pumping much less, so in effect the rig is more silent!

I can see now why Shamino has put so much effort into implementing this, it do look like a much better alternative than PBO.

edit. CB15, max temp did go up to 72C










edit 2. I had to adjust the settings for CB R20 to run:

CCX0 = 4400
CCX1 = 4300
CCX2 = 4200
CCX3 = 4200

VID = 1.25V -> 1.26V
VCORE = 1.25V -> 1.26V
LLC = 3 -> 4
PERFORMANCE ENHANCER = PE3

Max temp 76.5C Max droop 1.188V


----------



## xeizo

Interesting is, max power consumption in CB R20 landed at 144W, it's the same as with PBO. The performance enhancement is only from using a lower vcore. Is it possible AMD has locked down max power consumption in AGESA 1.0.0.6? Maybe to promote XT with a higher limit set in firmware, just speculating wildly. Or is it because R20 uses AVX which is always locked down?


----------



## xeizo

Result in Geekbench with the above settings, easily my best result despite no boost available


----------



## xeizo

And having no boost makes single core in CB R20 rather unexciting, 4400MHz for CCX0 means it performs exactly like a 3700X. So, the next goal must be to try to raise the frequency of CCX0 if possible.


----------



## tcclaviger

@xeizo I limit the CPU to 150 via PPT in PBO so the multi-core is pulled back from what it could be to ensure longevity. The current PBO config dumps dangerous amounts of vcore (1.275 in p95 small @ 4.225) on 100% load if I don't limit it. My tested FIT limit is 1.206, so I'm preventing the board from screaming past that lol.

Honestly, I bought the 3900 because I wanted to play with dual CCD, thread count is more than I need.

To answer your 144 watt question directly. No. I've seen 225 watts pulled on my 3900x using 1006 in R20. Not easy to cool!!!!!!! My very good custom loop was in the tdie 80s at 225.


The trade off of CCX OCing is not worth it for many use cases, but totally worth it for others. Just identify your use case honestly and asses which is better for you.

That 7500/500 nt/st R20 are pretty good scores for by ccx at those speeds.
Using some tight B-Dies will get you nearly there with PBO enabled, trading st for nt. As I recall stock + PBO was 7450/537 with 3733/1866 14-14-14-14-28-42-260.

Per CCX + tight ram is stupid fast 🙂. 8040/520 R20 at benchmark only settings is most I've done, chickened out with vcore levels around 1.44 loaded.

Daily per CCX settings at 4425-4400-4300-4325 1.23 loaded was like 7850/513 or something like that, RAM and IF really do help a ton and are worth the time with the limited Zen 2 headroom on frequency.

Unconstrained PBO+Bclk is like 7780/545, not safe, but fast lol.
.


----------



## xeizo

tcclaviger said:


> @xeizo I limit the CPU to 150 via PPT in PBO so the multi-core is pulled back from what it could be to ensure longevity. The current PBO config dumps dangerous amounts of vcore (1.275 in p95 small @ 4.225) on 100% load if I don't limit it. My tested FIT limit is 1.206, so I'm preventing the board from screaming past that lol.
> 
> Honestly, I bought the 3900 because I wanted to play with dual CCD, thread count is more than I need.
> 
> To answer your 144 watt question directly. No. I've seen 225 watts pulled on my 3900x using 1006 in R20. Not easy to cool!!!!!!! My very good custom loop was in the tdie 80s at 225.
> 
> 
> The trade off of CCX OCing is not worth it for many use cases, but totally worth it for others. Just identify your use case honestly and asses which is better for you.
> 
> That 7500/500 nt/st R20 are pretty good scores for by ccx at those speeds.
> Using some tight B-Dies will get you nearly there with PBO enabled, trading st for nt. As I recall stock + PBO was 7450/537 with 3733/1866 14-14-14-14-28-42-260.
> 
> Per CCX + tight ram is stupid fast 🙂. 8040/520 R20 at benchmark only settings is most I've done, chickened out with vcore levels around 1.44 loaded.
> 
> Daily per CCX settings at 4425-4400-4300-4325 1.23 loaded was like 7850/513 or something like that, RAM and IF really do help a ton and are worth the time with the limited Zen 2 headroom on frequency.
> 
> Unconstrained PBO+Bclk is like 7780/545, not safe, but fast lol.
> .


Thanks! A very informative post, I appreciate it 

Well, going forward and past 4400MHz wasn't an easy task. 4400MHz looks like a brick wall on my sample, I had to raise Vcore to 1.319V which droops to 1.231V in CB R20, and use LLC5 instead of LLC4. And now it's starting pulling watts, 165W, and package temp reached 85C. One CCD is 85C, while the other is cooler at 77C. So, yeah, power draw is like I used to see it on this bios too.

Now the scores are starting to surpass PBO with some margin, 7607/512 is a OK score as I see it. I'm only using a Noctua NH-D15 and I would guess I'm already close to the limit for my rig, going further I would need some much more exotic cooling. Isn't done yet though, I have to see if this is stable in all conditions first, will take a few days before I can deem it stable but most settings which runs CB R20 are pretty stable.










CPU-Z bench got a nice boost to, now both 9900K and 9700K are beaten in single core 










And Geekbench:
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/15572256









Memory latency saw a small improvement when CCX0 is faster


----------



## tcclaviger

Nice, I find 4400 to be a wall as well. I can only force my way past into the 4500 area through voltage and bclk tuning.

Can I offer though, back off LLc to 3 or 4 and raise vcore a couple of notches. You're likely hurting stability with LLC 5, counter intuitively. Here are some GREAT informative LLC videos.

TLDW: Everything Mobo manufacturers have been saying for years about LLC is a lie. Use the right level, less is bad, more is bad, there is definitely a "correct" amount. On C7H that amount seems to be level 3, suplemented by correct vcore that allows load voltage to drop all the way to where you want it.

Also, per AMD Robert, per CCX still idles the cores and drops vcore at idle down to under 0.7 volts when parked. I've seen it on my own system, so ensure you use the balanced power plan and leave C-states and Cool N Quiet enabled if you leave your rig on 24/7 with long idle stretches. Your CPU will last a huge deal longer.

The tech explanation:

https://youtu.be/bUaP0r5-xhY

Practical Demo:

https://youtu.be/9pa9-wjKQp8

My vcore "safe" level theory:

Whatever stock vcore is (auto vcore, auto LLC, no PBO) during R20 nt runs is a safe vcore if R20 is the hardest workload you see. So, for me, that's 1.315 @ 4200, so targeting under that voltage somewhere for all core is inherently safe according to FIT.

Prime95 with avx2 at 192 fft size is the hardest test for stability, but almost nothing hits the CPU that hard in practice, including blender.

Idle voltages are almost totally irrelevant if your CPU is parking most cores at idle.

Keep in mind as well, C7H is F A R better than most boards at displaying accurate vcores that are in line with SVI2 TFN if reading the (VRM) values since it's reading from die sense not super io. RAM voltages set in bios are + 0.00 to + 0.01 volts according to my fluke meter, so very accurate.

B-Die known safe @ 1.5 volts if you have good air flow, at 1.5 mine idle ambient + 5c, doing memory intense tasks is ambient + 17c. No reason to keep B-Die at 1.35 or 1.4, it loves voltage!!!


----------



## Pietro

tcclaviger said:


> Nice, I find 4400 to be a wall as well. I can only force my way past into the 4500 area through voltage and bclk tuning.
> 
> Can I offer though, back off LLc to 3 or 4 and raise vcore a couple of notches. You're likely hurting stability with LLC 5, counter intuitively. Here are some GREAT informative LLC videos.
> 
> TLDW: Everything Mobo manufacturers have been saying for years about LLC is a lie. Use the right level, less is bad, more is bad, there is definitely a "correct" amount. On C7H that amount seems to be level 3, suplemented by correct vcore that allows load voltage to drop all the way to where you want it.
> 
> Also, per AMD Robert, per CCX still idles the cores and drops vcore at idle down to under 0.7 volts when parked. I've seen it on my own system, so ensure you use the balanced power plan and leave C-states and Cool N Quiet enabled if you leave your rig on 24/7 with long idle stretches. Your CPU will last a huge deal longer.
> 
> The tech explanation:
> 
> https://youtu.be/bUaP0r5-xhY
> 
> Practical Demo:
> 
> https://youtu.be/9pa9-wjKQp8
> 
> My vcore "safe" level theory:
> 
> Whatever stock vcore is (auto vcore, auto LLC, no PBO) during R20 nt runs is a safe vcore if R20 is the hardest workload you see. So, for me, that's 1.315 @ 4200, so targeting under that voltage somewhere for all core is inherently safe according to FIT.
> 
> Prime95 with avx2 at 192 fft size is the hardest test for stability, but almost nothing hits the CPU that hard in practice, including blender.
> 
> Idle voltages are almost totally irrelevant if your CPU is parking most cores at idle.
> 
> Keep in mind as well, C7H is F A R better than most boards at displaying accurate vcores that are in line with SVI2 TFN if reading the (VRM) values since it's reading from die sense not super io. RAM voltages set in bios are + 0.00 to + 0.01 volts according to my fluke meter, so very accurate.
> 
> B-Die known safe @ 1.5 volts if you have good air flow, at 1.5 mine idle ambient + 5c, doing memory intense tasks is ambient + 17c. No reason to keep B-Die at 1.35 or 1.4, it loves voltage!!!



LL4 is really that bad LL3 will give to high vdrop to my 3900X be stable, did someone mesure what are the micro voltage spikes on differen LLC on C7H? On 1.26875 and LL4 it drops to 1.25V under full load which is needed to get first chiplet to 4425MHz fully stable.

What is the name of Cool N Quiet in C7H bios since I can't find it, I see there only c-states.




xeizo said:


> Thanks! A very informative post, I appreciate it
> 
> Well, going forward and past 4400MHz wasn't an easy task. 4400MHz looks like a brick wall on my sample, I had to raise Vcore to 1.319V which droops to 1.231V in CB R20, and use LLC5 instead of LLC4. And now it's starting pulling watts, 165W, and package temp reached 85C. One CCD is 85C, while the other is cooler at 77C. So, yeah, power draw is like I used to see it on this bios too.
> 
> Now the scores are starting to surpass PBO with some margin, 7607/512 is a OK score as I see it. I'm only using a Noctua NH-D15 and I would guess I'm already close to the limit for my rig, going further I would need some much more exotic cooling. Isn't done yet though, I have to see if this is stable in all conditions first, will take a few days before I can deem it stable but most settings which runs CB R20 are pretty stable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CPU-Z bench got a nice boost to, now both 9900K and 9700K are beaten in single core
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Geekbench:
> https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/15572256
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Memory latency saw a small improvement when CCX0 is faster


Well on LL5 it doesn't drop and you shouldn't use LL5. Numbers shown by VID are wrong and meaningless after oc in C7H, you should look at CPU Core Voltage SVI2 TFN in hwinfo. Constant not dropping down on LL5 1.312V is the reason why you have 85 *C in cinebench. Lower that at least to 1.27V since I still haven't seen anyone that degraded their chips at that voltage, at least so far.


----------



## tcclaviger

In order to achieve peak Ryzen boost performance, you will need to modify certain values on the C7H in a specific way. I don't know or care how other boards differ or are able/unable to do the following better or worse. Simply don't care, if it's not Asus or EVGA it doesn't exist and since EVGA doesn't make AM4 boards...

First, you'll want to push your IF (Fclk) to the peak frequency it's stable. Start at 1800, with memory timings loose for 3600. Leaving everything else about the CPU stock. Get into windows, run TM5 10 iterations and verify it doesn't crash. Then run R15 and R20 multithread tests and finish with a quick Realbench and firestrike run. If it passes these IF is likely (not yet 100%) stable. 

Second, work those memory timings. If you didn't buy B-die, sorry for you, go buy some, it's not that expensive these days at $120 for 3200C14 16gb. Grab yourself 1usmus's excellent ryzen dram calculator and punch in 3600 and appropriate settings for dimm/cpu/chipset and look at the timings it spits out. For the C7H, in my experience, I did not have to change much aside from disabling power down mode, setting primary, secondary, and tertiary timings and increasing DRAM voltage to 1.45. Gear Down mode is nice to disable, but doesn't matter much if you're already running an "even" number CAS latency. I could not get GD off stable with 4 sticks of B-Die at the speeds/latencies I wanted so left it on.

Third, verify memory stability with a few different tests, run a few games, general use etc. If it's stable, awesome, try cranking TRFC down a little at a time. TRFC2 = TRFC /1.346, TRFC4 = TRFC2 / 1.625. Ok so now you've your near ideal timings found. Next step, pushing it. 

Four, up Fclk to 1833 and ram to 3666, retest. If stable, move up to 1866/3733, retest. If stable (probably won't be) up to 1900/3800. If not stable throw volts at the problem, it's fine with B-Die. Go to 1.5 if you have to, its ok. Ok now you've found best Fclk and best Memory speeds/timings (or nearly done so). Good enough for now.

Here... We... Go... (Don't use OCCT/IBT/Prime95 until the end when I mention it).

First and foremost, if you're not actively cooling the VRMs for this, you're going to run into some very high temp. Secondly, if you're not running at a MINIMUM an NH-D14 or equivalent massive cooler don't even try this (open loop water preferred).

Step 1: Remove that ridiculous negative offset voltage you're running... it doesn't help for the following and will cause instability guaranteed. Do NOT apply a positive offset for the below method, it triggers dangerously high voltages at even the +0.00625 (first notch), I have observed 1.58v with just LLC 1 and +0.00625 in this configuration.

Step 2: Raise bclk to 101 to get away from the CPU's clock gen and get onto the motherboard clock gen.

Step 3: Set LLC to 2 and CPU Voltage to Offset, -, auto (yes it matters), SOC to 1.1, SOC LLC to 1, and ramp up all the VRM settings as I have in the screen shots.

Step 4: Enable PBO as you see in this screenshot.

Step 5: DISABLE "Force OC Mode Disabled" option in Tweakers Paradise and Enable "Performance Boost" as in the screen shots.

Step 6: Boot to windows, open Ryzen Master and click on profile 1, then select Precision Boost Overdrive tab on the top, double check TDC/PPT values and raise them to the limits you specified earlier in the bios. Now click Apply on the bottom, it may want a reboot. Just go through it. When you reboot it'll auto run RM and let it start boosting as normal again. Each time you boot up, you'll need to enter RM and reapply PBO. It doesn't always need a reboot though, only when changing the PPT/TDC values in the software.

Step 7: stability test, benchmark etc, until you're satisfied it's stable.

Step 8: Go into bios and enable Force OC Mode Disabled. It does a number of things, but first it makes it so you no longer need to use RM to enable boosting, it'll boost automatically again, yay! Secondly, it'll push the CPU a little higher in single/light threaded work-loads. It'll actually push both higher and try to hold it longer during more intense work-loads. This can and likely will lead to instability issues leading to a need to increase LLC to 3 or 4. If it won't stabilize at LLC 4, it's just unlucky CPU (or in other words, if it'll run at 101 bclk with the other settings, you'll be boosting at or over 4.75 ghz single core, lucky you).

Step 9: Slowly walk the Bclk up, adjusting Fclk/Memory divider to stay near the max known stable frequencies. I use R20 as a quick check for this and it works very well. Fire it up, if it's not stable like this it should black screen restart quickly indicating the CPU didn't like that boost frequency at the voltage available.

Step 10: When you've found the max bclk above 100 and below 103.4 that you can run in this configuration, stability test it using a variety of applications and games. For me, Control will always trigger a soft-crash when the PC is on the knife edge of stability. It'll pass everything else, but Control for whatever reason, will crash within 5 minutes going to desktop but not crashing the PC. When this occurs, I back off Bclk by 0.2 mhz, and it'll find its happy place and be stable.

*** If it refuses to stabilize with Force OC Mode Disabled set to Enabled, just leave it disabled and use Ryzen Master to get boosting back. It's harder to stabilize with it set to enabled.

Now you'll need to check if your settings are safe! Save these settings in a OC Profile slot, then reset CPU to default and turn on PBO with values of 300 in all. Start up Prime95 with AVX2, 192 FFT size, run in place. Let it run for a couple minutes monitoring your SVI2TFN voltage, clock speed, and EDC/PPT/TDC values. Keep those numbers handy. 
Reload the settings you saved earlier and load up Prime95. Make sure HWINFO shows peak values, run the same 192 fft avx2 test, but only leave it up for about 2 minutes. Now look at the values vs the previous ones. Go back into PBO in Bios and set the PPT to 10 watts below what the previous test was or less and you're good to go. You'll notice, the second Prime95 run the values will be higher for Vcore, clock speed, and ppt/tdc. Why? Because the combination of Bclk+Force OC Mode Disabled + EDC bug is somehow confusing FIT on the C7H leading to PPT values of up to 250 watts, at least on my system. With a PPT value of 150, as I recommend you preserve the very high single core boosts you now have, as well as moderately threaded boosting, but the lower PPT value forces the CPU to lower vcore and thereby slow down and reduce thermals and potential for electromigration during extreme loads like Prime 95.

The BMs below are done with the EDB bug but 150 PPT and 105 TDC to limit multicore draw. Voltages with this method will be stock/near stock, and thus be safe. These aren't glory runs, these are daily settings, which is what makes this method awesome, it gets you too and past some people's glory runs in a safe manner stable all day. There IS the chance your CPU simply will not run in this manner above with stability, theer's some silicon lottery involved. This also makes it far more temperature sensitive, as temps go up, there's no headroom to increase voltages etc, so cooling is KEY. I notice a stability transition around 26c air temp in my office, below and I can push higher, above and I have to back off bclk to 101.


----------



## tcclaviger

@Pietro it depends on your settings, but, you're getting only 18mv of droop, certainly your getting some low undershoot values with such little droop head room.

Zen 2 will cut idle voltages during manual overclocked down to .7 or less, higher base voltage with lower LLC will both more gentle and more stable. Watch and Comprehend the videos above idle set to 1.3 drooping to 1.25 is better than 1.27 droploping to 1.25.

LLC is not the sledgehammer to force stability it's often used for.


----------



## Keith Myers

So where do I set or change the BIOS settings to not hit a CPU overtemp error when running small AVX2 BBP test in y-cruncher. I thought the standard limit was 95°C. I am on custom cooling and ZenMonitor was only maxed out at 80° C. on both Tdie and CCD1 and CCD2 when the system shut down and rebooted into a CPU Overtemp error. Was only running fixed manual multiplier of 43 and CPU Core Voltage SVI2 of 1.28V. SVI2 CPU Core Voltage was at 1.25V under load at LLC3. CPU Core Power SVI2 was only running 122W. SOC Power SVI2 was only 18W so that totals only up to 140W so that should have been safe and within the stock power package power limit of 142 Watts, Right? The VRM temp was only at 62° C. also.

I don't think I should have shut down until I hit 95° C. Correct? Any help here, please. I can never find the settings you all play with in the BIOS. I run just the stock BIOS with no Performance Enhancer or PBO, just a fixed all-core OC for crunching. This was just a stress test extreme. I don't actually run any AVX2 instructions for BOINC crunching. The hottest I get under actual BOINC loading is 70-72° C.

System was Serenity in my signature and component details.


----------



## xeizo

tcclaviger said:


> Nice, I find 4400 to be a wall as well. I can only force my way past into the 4500 area through voltage and bclk tuning.
> 
> Can I offer though, back off LLc to 3 or 4 and raise vcore a couple of notches. You're likely hurting stability with LLC 5, counter intuitively. Here are some GREAT informative LLC videos.
> 
> TLDW: Everything Mobo manufacturers have been saying for years about LLC is a lie. Use the right level, less is bad, more is bad, there is definitely a "correct" amount. On C7H that amount seems to be level 3, suplemented by correct vcore that allows load voltage to drop all the way to where you want it.
> 
> Also, per AMD Robert, per CCX still idles the cores and drops vcore at idle down to under 0.7 volts when parked. I've seen it on my own system, so ensure you use the balanced power plan and leave C-states and Cool N Quiet enabled if you leave your rig on 24/7 with long idle stretches. Your CPU will last a huge deal longer.
> 
> The tech explanation:
> 
> https://youtu.be/bUaP0r5-xhY
> 
> Practical Demo:
> 
> https://youtu.be/9pa9-wjKQp8
> 
> My vcore "safe" level theory:
> 
> Whatever stock vcore is (auto vcore, auto LLC, no PBO) during R20 nt runs is a safe vcore if R20 is the hardest workload you see. So, for me, that's 1.315 @ 4200, so targeting under that voltage somewhere for all core is inherently safe according to FIT.
> 
> Prime95 with avx2 at 192 fft size is the hardest test for stability, but almost nothing hits the CPU that hard in practice, including blender.
> 
> Idle voltages are almost totally irrelevant if your CPU is parking most cores at idle.
> 
> Keep in mind as well, C7H is F A R better than most boards at displaying accurate vcores that are in line with SVI2 TFN if reading the (VRM) values since it's reading from die sense not super io. RAM voltages set in bios are + 0.00 to + 0.01 volts according to my fluke meter, so very accurate.
> 
> B-Die known safe @ 1.5 volts if you have good air flow, at 1.5 mine idle ambient + 5c, doing memory intense tasks is ambient + 17c. No reason to keep B-Die at 1.35 or 1.4, it loves voltage!!!


Thanks! Again, a very informative post 

Yes, I use C-states and CNQ, idle are down to 0.7V according to Ryzen Master. Thanks for the tip on the balanced Power Plan. I will also test to lower LLC/raise vcore, seams reasonable to do so.
I have good airflow, memory stays normally at 30C-32C under most conditions, but I have found 1.35V to be enough for 3733MHz fully stable and I don't know if it's worth going higher on Vdimm just to reach 3800 stable. I reach 3800 as is, but it makes one game crap out in the menus only. Performance difference is neglible as far as I can see. I have 2x16GB and it is dual rank so they are bound to clock a little less than 2x8GB single rank.


----------



## xeizo

So I backed down to LLC4, and of course I had to raise vcore for R20 to run through. Now 1.33V which droops to 1.306V according to CPU Core Voltage(SVI2 TFN). Silly of me to look at VID before, but it was many months since I last OC:d I have forgotten plenty  
I gained 1.1-1.5C by doing so, not a big gain but at least something. 7664 is close to the best score I ever got!

Edit, I saw droop to 1.27V suggested, I'm pretty sure my CPU won't do 4425MHz at that setting. Possibly 4400. It's not very good silicon, unlucky in the lottery.










And a suicide run of CPU-Z with BCLK 101, 4470MHz, not stable at all but fun


----------



## xeizo

So I backed down to LLC3, and it would run, it shaved off another 1.5C. Vdroop is now 1.294V, and I think I'm pretty close to the lowest I can go on 4425MHz for CCX0. Max power is 158W contrary to 165W before, so 7W less heat.


----------



## xeizo

LLC3 was not stable after all, it crapped out in Geekbench, so a little more vcore and now the droop is to 1.3000V. 159.68W so still a slight power saver. Geekbench, CPU-Z, CB R15 and CB R20 all runs.

edit. Fun to see Core VID(Effective) is now 1337! LoL  Is it a Easter Egg?


----------



## Pietro

xeizo said:


> LLC3 was not stable after all, it crapped out in Geekbench, so a little more vcore and now the droop is to 1.3000V. 159.68W so still a slight power saver. Geekbench, CPU-Z, CB R15 and CB R20 all runs.
> 
> edit. Fun to see Core VID(Effective) is now 1337! LoL  Is it a Easter Egg?


You should still use lower voltage droping to 1.27V(and that is high too) and less. As for the core vid after you overclock manually you can think about them as random values. You should only look at cpu core voltage (SVI2 TFN) values for zen2 voltage.


----------



## xeizo

Pietro said:


> You should still use lower voltage droping to 1.27V and less. As for the core vid after you overclock manually you can think about them as random values.


Yes, I got that about VID a couple of posts ago. 1.27V is a no go if I want CCX0 to run at 4425MHz, droop can be no less than 1.3V as far as I can see. Brick wall around 4400MHz. 


But I suppose I'll take the risk and see how long it holds out, this is not my only PC so not end of the world if I degrade the CPU. But it shouldn't really degrade should it, as long as I don't do renders day and night. I have core parking and idle voltage is 0.7V according to Ryzen Master, 1.3V on occasional load shouldn't be that much of a problem.

edit. You look to have a way better chip than me, I have garbage silicon so I have to give it a beating 🙂


----------



## darkage

Pietro said:


> You should still use lower voltage droping to 1.27V(and that is high too) and less. As for the core vid after you overclock manually you can think about them as random values. You should only look at cpu core voltage (SVI2 TFN) values for zen2 voltage.


why 1.27V ?
vcore accepted as secure was not 1.35V ?
1.27v you cant run at high speeds unless golden boys 
my 3700X does CCX OVCK 4.4/4.375 at 1.30V LLC 3 and never drops under 1.29V 
is it really that dangerous?


----------



## xeizo

darkage said:


> Pietro said:
> 
> 
> 
> You should still use lower voltage droping to 1.27V(and that is high too) and less. As for the core vid after you overclock manually you can think about them as random values. You should only look at cpu core voltage (SVI2 TFN) values for zen2 voltage.
> 
> 
> 
> why 1.27V ?
> vcore accepted as secure was not 1.35V ?
> 1.27v you cant run at high speeds unless golden boys
> my 3700X does CCX OVCK 4.4/4.375 at 1.30V LLC 3 and never drops under 1.29V
> is it really that dangerous?
Click to expand...

Yes, I would like to know more too. Anyway, if the chips degrade that easy mine is already degraded as I ran folding 24/7 for five weeks straight on it with steady temps of 85-90C(FAH AVX client) .

Now reaching 82C in CB20 for a few seconds doesn't sound that scary in comparison.


----------



## tcclaviger

4400 at 1.3 is about right for most 3900x from what I've seen. Some of us got lucky and get it at lower voltage but still hit the same wall for the most part. 

I expect your configuration will be mostly safe/stable, mostly depends on workflow. For a moderate use/gaming pc certainly ok, for a boinc/folding/rendering rig I'd not leave as is as the 1.3 loaded is within the 1.325 spec, but the total current draw is going to be much higher than spec.


----------



## xeizo

tcclaviger said:


> 4400 at 1.3 is about right for most 3900x from what I've seen. Some of us got lucky and get it at lower voltage but still hit the same wall for the most part.
> 
> I expect your configuration will be mostly safe/stable, mostly depends on workflow. For a moderate use/gaming pc certainly ok, for a boinc/folding/rendering rig I'd not leave as is as the 1.3 loaded is within the 1.325 spec, but the total current draw is going to be much higher than spec.



Thanks! I will not be rendering much on this rig from now on, since I killed my GTX1080Ti when folding(folding on a 270W GPU is bound to create problems). I have other rigs with much less current draw for that, I can run several instead of one beefy to spread the load. This is mostly a gaming rig as it's usecase. I have another rig for DAW which is really silent, and several rendering stations.

I will test gaming going forward, so far it looks promising but it will take some time to deem the config OK.


----------



## Pietro

darkage said:


> why 1.27V ?
> vcore accepted as secure was not 1.35V ?
> 1.27v you cant run at high speeds unless golden boys
> my 3700X does CCX OVCK 4.4/4.375 at 1.30V LLC 3 and never drops under 1.29V
> is it really that dangerous?


I can't find it now, but I remember for sure there were few people that degraded Zen 2 on 1.275V, but it was not used from the start since they started with voltages over 1.3V for months.


----------



## tcclaviger

The anecdotal evidence I've read always has a qualifier when you start digging into their configuration that clearly exacerbated the voltage used, like...

Disabling idle/parking of cores on high speed manual OCs so it idles at full voltage 24/7
Running DC projects/Rendering 24/7
High SOC voltages
terrible cooling and YOLOing 85+c temps because "stock cooler is enough"
Setting OC using VID or Ryzen Master voltage not SVI2TFN
Extreme LLC settings to "stabilize vcore" (droop is good, droop is healthy, droop increases stability)
etc, etc, etc

Those configuration/use scenarios are all punishing in their own ways.

Similar to the people complaining about "60c idle temps, it never down clocks", they always have some piece of software running or a configuration error (like C-states disabled) triggering the CPU to stay fully awake full time.

Xeizo, based on what you've posted about your configuration I see no reason to worry.

Also, take that Intel, single threading exceeding all but the top SKU and not dependent on "perfect storm" to boost to speed, with 150PPT/105TDC limits in place:


----------



## Pietro

tcclaviger said:


> The anecdotal evidence I've read always has a qualifier when you start digging into their configuration that clearly exacerbated the voltage used, like...
> 
> Disabling idle/parking of cores on high speed manual OCs so it idles at full voltage 24/7
> Running DC projects/Rendering 24/7
> High SOC voltages
> terrible cooling and YOLOing 85+c temps because "stock cooler is enough"
> Setting OC using VID or Ryzen Master voltage not SVI2TFN
> Extreme LLC settings to "stabilize vcore" (droop is good, droop is healthy, droop increases stability)
> etc, etc, etc
> 
> Those configuration/use scenarios are all punishing in their own ways.
> 
> Similar to the people complaining about "60c idle temps, it never down clocks", they always have some piece of software running or a configuration error (like C-states disabled) triggering the CPU to stay fully awake full time.
> 
> Xeizo, based on what you've posted about your configuration I see no reason to worry.
> 
> Also, take that Intel, single threading exceeding all but the top SKU and not dependent on "perfect storm" to boost to speed, with 150PPT/105TDC limits in place:


One guy had stock cooler, rest had good ones and they didn't do avx rendering in all times. There are wars in reddit what voltage is safe and those saying anythin other than 1.2V or FIT under prime95 after pbo are donwvoted. We don't have a cool and quiet option in bios so we can only use LL3 with reasonable voltage if what Buildzoid said about asus boards it is true and setting global c-states control as on, from what I've seen community plan v3, ryzen balanced/windows balanced doesn't change a lot apart that the latter uses second, slower chiplet more ofted, voltages behaviour looked similar, but still vids after overclocking manually are not accurate and close to random values. We still don't how our semistastic voltage on LL3 affects chips longterm:
https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/eu3fbl/r5_3600_degradation_testing/


----------



## darkage

I dont know, but 1,27v is more like Intel safe voltage than AMD, i had AMD as far as k6 i allways overclocked my CPUs and never had any problem with 1,30+ v with AMD CPUs, now this ryzen thing is all knew but for sure my 3700x has been overclocked, pbo tested, edc bug tested and now ccx overclocked and it runs as day one, and pbo uses very high voltages, very high even with stock settings 

Enviado do meu ONEPLUS A3003 através do Tapatalk


----------



## Pietro

darkage said:


> I dont know, but 1,27v is more like Intel safe voltage than AMD, i had AMD as far as k6 i allways overclocked my CPUs and never had any problem with 1,30+ v with AMD CPUs, now this ryzen thing is all knew but for sure my 3700x has been overclocked, pbo tested, edc bug tested and now ccx overclocked and it runs as day one, and pbo uses very high voltages, very high even with stock settings
> 
> Enviado do meu ONEPLUS A3003 através do Tapatalk


7 nm is different and parts of cpu like infinity fabric line, ccxes are more fragile on high current loads with high voltage than Inte's 14++++++++++++++ nm. PBO still uses AMD's load, current, temperature curve to adjust voltage which is less constant than under manual overclock that turns most of limits, edc bug remodeles for example only hidden AVX load limit.


----------



## darkage

Pietro said:


> 7 nm is different and parts of cpu like infinity fabric line, ccxes are more fragile on high current loads with high voltage than Inte's 14++++++++++++++ nm. PBO still uses AMD's load, current, temperature curve to adjust voltage which is less constant than under manual overclock that turns most of limits, edc bug remodeles for example only hidden AVX load limit.


this is a guide from asus, oficial, no mention to 1.30V+ being dangerous X570 guide with 3800X 

https://edgeup.asus.com/2019/how-to-get-the-most-out-of-third-gen-ryzen-cpus-and-the-x570-platform/


----------



## DDSZ

Well, Im able to run 4450/4450/4250/4250 @ 1.275 LLC4
https://valid.x86.fr/dhxz0c


----------



## tcclaviger

Nice DDSV.

Reddit is full of Parrots for the most part, who do open loop for looks and think an 011D gas good open loop support. People who think info presented by a guy who claims, but won't identify whom, to work for a MB manufacturer is law. He hasn't presented a single piece of info anyone with an O-scope couldn't get.

Keep in mind 7nm is just a name, the traces are considerably larger than the name 7nm implies, this is why high voltage is OK, the density of those wider traces is tighter, thus the insulating material is small, and amperage will degrade said thinner layer rapidly since there's less of it than on 12nm, but the trace itself is fine to carry high voltage low amperage.

Use logic...
Stock the chip goes to 1.5v intermittently and 1.481 frequently on 1 core, but I've seen 1.4ish with 4 core work loads spread across all CCXs

Stock the chip is limited by Amperage not voltage or power in prime 95 and some other high power apps


Clearly AMD is more concerned with total package amperage drawn not voltage. Claiming a limited 1.325 max all core voltage is an indirect method to limit amperage that all motherboards can implement equally, citing an ameprage limit is more obtuse as many laymen won't understand it clearly and not all boards control it quite right.

I think I'm going to buy a 3600 when xt releases and do some testing of time to degrade using my spare parts (C6E with Monoblock).

1.3 volts all core load, stock ameprage limit for 1 month on p95 followed by 1.3 volts no amperage limit for 1 month p95.

1 month of p95 is surely equal to years worth of typical use for gaming PCs.

My theory is test 1 will show no change while test 2 won't make it a full month, if it does last month 2 I'll throw a 1.325v at stock EDC +10% as the 3rd test.

I'm confident none of the claimed degraded chips were degraded as a direct result of voltage, but due to amperage instead.


----------



## Pietro

tcclaviger said:


> Nice DDSV.
> 
> Reddit is full of Parrots for the most part, who do open loop for looks and think an 011D gas good open loop support. People who think info presented by a guy who claims, but won't identify whom, to work for a MB manufacturer is law. He hasn't presented a single piece of info anyone with an O-scope couldn't get.
> 
> Keep in mind 7nm is just a name, the traces are considerably larger than the name 7nm implies, this is why high voltage is OK, the density of those wider traces is tighter, thus the insulating material is small, and amperage will degrade said thinner layer rapidly since there's less of it than on 12nm, but the trace itself is fine to carry high voltage low amperage.
> 
> Use logic...
> Stock the chip goes to 1.5v intermittently and 1.481 frequently on 1 core, but I've seen 1.4ish with 4 core work loads spread across all CCXs
> 
> Stock the chip is limited by Amperage not voltage or power in prime 95 and some other high power apps
> 
> 
> Clearly AMD is more concerned with total package amperage drawn not voltage. Claiming a limited 1.325 max all core voltage is an indirect method to limit amperage that all motherboards can implement equally, citing an ameprage limit is more obtuse as many laymen won't understand it clearly and not all boards control it quite right.
> 
> I think I'm going to buy a 3600 when xt releases and do some testing of time to degrade using my spare parts (C6E with Monoblock).
> 
> 1.3 volts all core load, stock ameprage limit for 1 month on p95 followed by 1.3 volts no amperage limit for 1 month p95.
> 
> 1 month of p95 is surely equal to years worth of typical use for gaming PCs.
> 
> My theory is test 1 will show no change while test 2 won't make it a full month, if it does last month 2 I'll throw a 1.325v at stock EDC +10% as the 3rd test.
> 
> I'm confident none of the claimed degraded chips were degraded as a direct result of voltage, but due to amperage instead.


If you're gonna really buy ryzen 3600 look for at least 2010 batch, those from march overclock typically 4.4-4.5GHz on reasonable voltages.


I can confirm that using LL3 that drops to the same voltage under for example CB20, Blender render load is more stable and I can achiever higher OC on first chiplet.

LL4 1.26875V -> 1.250V under load, CCX1 - 4425MHz, CCX2 - 4425MHz, CCX3 - 4250MHz, CCX4 - 4250MHz 

LL3 1.28125V -> 1.250V under load, so far CCX1 - 4450MHz, CCX2 - 4450MHz, CCX3 - 4250MHz, CCX4 - 4250MHz 

Setting global c-states control as enabled is enough to get cores to sleep regardless of power plan.


----------



## dkarDaGobert

shamino1978 said:


> not fully tested, just if you want to try:
> 
> c7h wifi
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/1sbvnmsjo4rvv3l/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-3103.rar?dl=0
> 
> c7h
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/bpp04gx94oxtcpd/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-3103.rar?dl=0


i tried it and just swapped back to 3004.
had two insta reboots while running kahru at around 3k%.
also my sound crashed a few times (soundblaster ae-9)


now with 3004 its running smooth as before with the following settings:


Spoiler






Code:


[2020/06/17 15:34:16]
Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
BCLK_Divider [Auto]
Performance Enhancer [Level 3 (OC)]
CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
Performance Bias [Auto]
Memory Frequency [DDR4-3800MHz]
FCLK Frequency [1900MHz]
Core Performance Boost [Enabled]
SMT Mode [Auto]
TPU [Keep Current Settings]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Enabled]
Max CPU Boost Clock Override [Auto]
Platform Thermal Throttle Limit [Auto]
Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto]
DRAM CAS# Latency [14]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [15]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [10]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [14]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [22]
Trc [36]
TrrdS [4]
TrrdL [4]
Tfaw [16]
TwtrS [3]
TwtrL [8]
Twr [10]
Trcpage [Auto]
TrdrdScl [2]
TwrwrScl [2]
Trfc [247]
Trfc2 [192]
Trfc4 [132]
Tcwl [14]
Trtp [8]
Trdwr [8]
Twrrd [2]
TwrwrSc [1]
TwrwrSd [6]
TwrwrDd [6]
TrdrdSc [1]
TrdrdSd [4]
TrdrdDd [4]
Tcke [1]
ProcODT [40 ohm]
Cmd2T [1T]
Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
Power Down Enable [Disabled]
RttNom [RZQ/7]
RttWr [RZQ/3]
RttPark [RZQ/1]
MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
MemCkeSetup [Auto]
MemCadBusClkDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 3]
CPU Current Capability [140%]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
CPU Voltage Frequency [400]
CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
CPU Power Phase Control [Power Phase Response]
Manual Adjustment [Ultra Fast]
CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 3]
VDDSOC Current Capability [140%]
VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed VDDSOC Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
VDDSOC Phase Control [Power Phase Response]
Manual Adjustment [Fast]
DRAM Current Capability [130%]
DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [400]
DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.47000]
VTTDDR Voltage [0.73750]
VPP_MEM Voltage [2.50000]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [0.50000]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [0.50000]
VDDP Voltage [Auto]
1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
PLL reference voltage [Auto]
T Offset [Auto]
Sense MI Skew [Enabled]
Sense MI Offset [Auto]
Promontory presence [Auto]
Clock Amplitude [Normal]
CLDO VDDP voltage [900]
CPU Core Voltage [Offset mode]
CPU Offset Mode Sign [-]
- CPU Core Voltage Offset [0.00625]
CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
- VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.10000]
DRAM Voltage [1.47000]
CLDO VDDG voltage [0.970]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
Firmware TPM [Disable]
Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Disabled]
PSS Support [Auto]
SVM Mode [Enabled]
Onboard LED [Disabled]
Q-Code LED Function [Disabled after POST]
SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
SATA Mode [AHCI]
NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
SMART Self Test [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
HD Audio Controller [Disabled]
M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
PCIEX8/X4_2 Mode [Auto]
PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
SB Link Mode [Auto]
Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
When system is in working state [On]
When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [On]
Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
ErP Ready [Disabled]
Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
Power On By RTC [Disabled]
Network Stack [Disabled]
Device [WDC WD80EFAX-68LHPN0]
Legacy USB Support [Disabled]
XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
U31G1_5 [Enabled]
U31G1_6 [Enabled]
U31G1_7 [Enabled]
U31G1_8 [Enabled]
U31G1_9 [Enabled]
U31G1_10 [Enabled]
USB11 [Enabled]
USB12 [Enabled]
USB13 [Enabled]
USB14 [Enabled]
USB15 [Enabled]
CPU Temperature [Monitor]
MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
PCH Temperature [Monitor]
T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor1  Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor2  Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor3  Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
5V Voltage [Monitor]
12V Voltage [Monitor]
CPU Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [3.8 sec]
CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [200 RPM]
CPU Fan Profile [Standard]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [5.1 sec]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Silent]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [5.1 sec]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Silent]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [MotherBoard]
Chassis Fan 3 Smoothing Up/Down Time [5.1 sec]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Silent]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
PSPP Policy [Auto]
Fast Boot [Disabled]
AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
Boot Logo Display [Disabled]
POST Report [3 sec]
Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
Launch CSM [Disabled]
OS Type [Windows UEFI mode]
Setup Animator [Disabled]
ASUS Grid Install Service [Disabled]
Load from Profile [5]
Profile Name [aktuell]
Save to Profile [5]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
BCLK Frequency [Auto]
CPU Ratio [Auto]
DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A2]
Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
Custom Pstate0 [Auto]
L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
Core Performance Boost [Auto]
Global C-state Control [Auto]
DRAM ECC Enable [Auto]
DRAM scrub time [Auto]
Poison scrubber control [Auto]
Redirect scrubber control [Auto]
Redirect scrubber limit [Auto]
NUMA nodes per socket [Auto]
Memory interleaving [Auto]
Memory interleaving size [Auto]
1TB remap [Auto]
DRAM map inversion [Auto]
ACPI SRAT L3 Cache As NUMA Domain [Auto]
ACPI SLIT Distance Control [Auto]
ACPI SLIT remote relative distance [Auto]
GMI encryption control [Auto]
xGMI encryption control [Auto]
CAKE CRC perf bounds Control [Auto]
4-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
3-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
Disable DF to external IP SyncFloodPropagation [Auto]
Disable DF sync flood propagation [Auto]
CC6 memory region encryption [Auto]
Memory Clear [Auto]
Overclock [Auto]
Power Down Enable [Auto]
Cmd2T [Auto]
Gear Down Mode [Auto]
CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
Data Poisoning [Auto]
DRAM Post Package Repair [Disable]
RCD Parity [Auto]
DRAM Address Command Parity Retry [Auto]
Write CRC Enable [Auto]
DRAM Write CRC Enable and Retry Limit [Auto]
Disable Memory Error Injection [True]
DRAM ECC Symbol Size [Auto]
DRAM UECC Retry [Auto]
TSME [Auto]
Data Scramble [Auto]
DFE Read Training [Auto]
FFE Write Training [Auto]
PMU Pattern Bits Control [Auto]
MR6VrefDQ Control [Auto]
CPU Vref Training Seed Control [Auto]
Chipselect Interleaving [Auto]
BankGroupSwap [Auto]
BankGroupSwapAlt [Auto]
Address Hash Bank [Auto]
Address Hash CS [Auto]
Address Hash Rm [Auto]
SPD Read Optimization [Enabled]
MBIST Enable [Disabled]
Pattern Select [PRBS]
Pattern Length [3]
Aggressor Channel [1 Aggressor Channel]
Aggressor Static Lane Control [Disabled]
Target Static Lane Control [Disabled]
Worst Case Margin Granularity [Per Chip Select]
Read Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
Read Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
Write Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
Write Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
IOMMU [Auto]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [Auto]
FCLK Frequency [Auto]
SOC OVERCLOCK VID [0]
UCLK DIV1 MODE [Auto]
VDDP Voltage Control [Auto]
VDDG Voltage Control [Auto]
SoC/Uncore OC Mode [Auto]
LN2 Mode [Auto]
ACS Enable [Auto]
PCIe Ten Bit Tag Support [Auto]
Max Voltage Offset [Auto]
cTDP Control [Auto]
EfficiencyModeEn [Auto]
Package Power Limit Control [Auto]
APBDIS [Auto]
DF Cstates [Auto]
CPPC [Auto]
CPPC Preferred Cores [Auto]
BoostFmaxEn [Auto]
Early Link Speed [Auto]






/edit
have to set cppc and apbdis again 
/edit2
with my old settings 28k% safe. will wait with 1006 until a final version arrives..


----------



## gtz

For anyone following, BIOS 3103 is stable compared to 3101. I honestly don't know why 3101 would crash but 3103 is working flawlessly. Now to do do per core overclocking.


----------



## xeizo

It is cooler today, exact same settings as in earlier post 4425/4300/4200/4200 1.300V LLC3, Ryzen Balanced Powerplan, C-states is enabled










And I'm back at the 7700+ I remember from when I tested CCX OC in Ryzen Master many months ago


----------



## xeizo

So while gaming, not very demanding, one hour in Fallout 76 1440p Ultra:










Like a walk in the park!

Of notice is, gameplay is more smooth than using PBO, and animations are better. For example the climbing in and out of the Power Armor chassis animation was not fully in sync before now that particular animation is flawless.

Overall, it feels like CCX OC gives a overall better feel of performance with little effort. Now I just have to see how well this works in the long run.


----------



## Pietro

Keith Myers said:


> So where do I set or change the BIOS settings to not hit a CPU overtemp error when running small AVX2 BBP test in y-cruncher. I thought the standard limit was 95°C. I am on custom cooling and ZenMonitor was only maxed out at 80° C. on both Tdie and CCD1 and CCD2 when the system shut down and rebooted into a CPU Overtemp error. Was only running fixed manual multiplier of 43 and CPU Core Voltage SVI2 of 1.28V. SVI2 CPU Core Voltage was at 1.25V under load at LLC3. CPU Core Power SVI2 was only running 122W. SOC Power SVI2 was only 18W so that totals only up to 140W so that should have been safe and within the stock power package power limit of 142 Watts, Right? The VRM temp was only at 62° C. also.
> 
> I don't think I should have shut down until I hit 95° C. Correct? Any help here, please. I can never find the settings you all play with in the BIOS. I run just the stock BIOS with no Performance Enhancer or PBO, just a fixed all-core OC for crunching. This was just a stress test extreme. I don't actually run any AVX2 instructions for BOINC crunching. The hottest I get under actual BOINC loading is 70-72° C.
> 
> System was Serenity in my signature and component details.


It is a our board's bios bug, I have that too.


----------



## crakej

shamino1978 said:


> not fully tested, just if you want to try:
> 
> c7h wifi
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/1sbvnmsjo4rvv3l/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-3103.rar?dl=0
> 
> c7h
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/bpp04gx94oxtcpd/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-3103.rar?dl=0


Thanks again!

Unfortunately, although my (manually entered) profiles boot - Windows gets stuck in a boot loop, which is an improvement, but I still can't find what's stopping me from booting at the speeds I've been using for months.

Nether XMP profile boots at all.

I would have to go right back to 3200 to see whats happening, but I think it's just easier to go back to 3004 even though it doesn't boost amazingly, it was VERY stable. I've even removed and re-seated my sticks.

Something about memory OC has changed, or my ram broke when I installed the beta (almost impossible!) - what changed in this version?


----------



## crakej

Keith Myers said:


> So where do I set or change the BIOS settings to not hit a CPU overtemp error when running small AVX2 BBP test in y-cruncher. I thought the standard limit was 95°C. I am on custom cooling and ZenMonitor was only maxed out at 80° C. on both Tdie and CCD1 and CCD2 when the system shut down and rebooted into a CPU Overtemp error. Was only running fixed manual multiplier of 43 and CPU Core Voltage SVI2 of 1.28V. SVI2 CPU Core Voltage was at 1.25V under load at LLC3. CPU Core Power SVI2 was only running 122W. SOC Power SVI2 was only 18W so that totals only up to 140W so that should have been safe and within the stock power package power limit of 142 Watts, Right? The VRM temp was only at 62° C. also.
> 
> I don't think I should have shut down until I hit 95° C. Correct? Any help here, please. I can never find the settings you all play with in the BIOS. I run just the stock BIOS with no Performance Enhancer or PBO, just a fixed all-core OC for crunching. This was just a stress test extreme. I don't actually run any AVX2 instructions for BOINC crunching. The hottest I get under actual BOINC loading is 70-72° C.
> 
> System was Serenity in my signature and component details.


I remember in thee early days this board would (in my case) restart at 95 degrees. Fortunately I don't reach those temp[s any more!


----------



## xeizo

crakej said:


> shamino1978 said:
> 
> 
> 
> not fully tested, just if you want to try:
> 
> c7h wifi
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/1sbvnmsjo4rvv3l/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-3103.rar?dl=0
> 
> c7h
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/bpp04gx94oxtcpd/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-3103.rar?dl=0
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks again!
> 
> Unfortunately, although my (manually entered) profiles boot - Windows gets stuck in a boot loop, which is an improvement, but I still can't find what's stopping me from booting at the speeds I've been using for months.
> 
> Nether XMP profile boots at all.
> 
> I would have to go right back to 3200 to see whats happening, but I think it's just easier to go back to 3004 even though it doesn't boost amazingly, it was VERY stable. I've even removed and re-seated my sticks.
> 
> Something about memory OC has changed, or my ram broke when I installed the beta (almost impossible!) - what changed in this version?
Click to expand...

Sorry to hear! My RAM is as stable as usual, exact samme settings. Still only need 1.35V for 3733MHz to be fully stable. I even have PLL and SOC rather low, so I guess I got a great IO-die but mediocre chiplets on my 3900X. I would say my chiplets are a 3700X and a 3600, while 3950X have two better than 3800X chiplets.


----------



## Keith Myers

crakej said:


> I remember in thee early days this board would (in my case) restart at 95 degrees. Fortunately I don't reach those temp[s any more!


Well I entered 95° C. in the Thermal Design temp limit in the PBO overclocking section as an experiment and only changed that. Tried my y-cruncher stress test again and still CPU overtemped at 82.6° C. So that was useless. I just would like to know why my mobo overtemps 15° C. sooner than the default 95° C. limit of the cpu spec.

If I didn't run A/C or leave a window open when it is cooler, I could see that my computer would shut down under my crunching load. I would like to have that safety cushion that everyone but me seems to have. As it is right now, I only have a 8-10 °C. safety cushion instead of the standard 20-25° C. of headroom I am supposed to have.


----------



## xeizo

Keith Myers said:


> crakej said:
> 
> 
> 
> I remember in thee early days this board would (in my case) restart at 95 degrees. Fortunately I don't reach those temp[s any more!
> 
> 
> 
> Well I entered 95Â° C. in the Thermal Design temp limit in the PBO overclocking section as an experiment and only changed that. Tried my y-cruncher stress test again and still CPU overtemped at 82.6Â° C. So that was useless. I just would like to know why my mobo overtemps 15Â° C. sooner than the default 95Â° C. limit of the cpu spec.
> 
> If I didn't run A/C or leave a window open when it is cooler, I could see that my computer would shut down under my crunching load. I would like to have that safety cushion that everyone but me seems to have. As it is right now, I only have a 8-10 Â°C. safety cushion instead of the standard 20-25Â° C. of headroom I am supposed to have.
Click to expand...

As I said earlier, when I folded on this rig it was 85-90C for weeks 24/7. Not a single shutdown.


----------



## crakej

At long last I figured out how to get my memory profiles to boot!

I usually leave tRDWR and tWRRD to their own devices (auto) as like @nick name I get diff values for Chan A and Chan B. I also have to use GDN whereas I could do 3733 with looser timings and GDN=off previously.

I need to test more - I'm not getting performance I was before but I need to fine tune again. The values here are not working quite as well as before, with worst CB R15 multi score in a while. I also note my SoC is lower than expected (used to show 1.081v here previously).

So, now I can boot with decent ram speed I can review my other settings at last! Thanks for all suggestions


----------



## xeizo

Great to hear things works!

Regarding CB15, I can't recall if I ever had a better CB15 score, but it looks pretty good with the current CCX OC setting:


----------



## finas

shamino1978 said:


> not fully tested, just if you want to try:
> 
> c7h wifi
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/1sbvnmsjo4rvv3l/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-3103.rar?dl=0
> 
> c7h
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/bpp04gx94oxtcpd/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-3103.rar?dl=0




Any new one for the CH8 VIII ( impact ) ?
I am running the 2101 that you posted. It has many many bugs fixed, to the point that I am about the recover my faith in Asus. I can even use offset voltage on my 3950x now. Anyway, the 2101 and the 1302 versions have a nasty usability bug:
- if you select the memory speed or fclk and press the up or down arrow to change the values it will go to the beginning of the list instead of going to the value below or after. for instance if fclk is 1800, before it would go to 1833 or 1766 but now it goes to the lowest value. 

Anyway, version 2010 has been released. Is it newer or older than 2101?


----------



## crakej

xeizo said:


> Great to hear things works!
> 
> Regarding CB15, I can't recall if I ever had a better CB15 score, but it looks pretty good with the current CCX OC setting:
> 
> 
> Spoiler


My score is around 3100, but been up to 3324 before.....


----------



## fearnor

shamino1978 said:


> not fully tested, just if you want to try:
> 
> c7h wifi
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/1sbvnmsjo4rvv3l/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-3103.rar?dl=0
> 
> c7h
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/bpp04gx94oxtcpd/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-3103.rar?dl=0


Hi Shamino,


I want to report a bug in the CROSSHAIR VII HERO WIFI BIOS. My board is on BIOS 3004 and the "Restore On AC Power Loss" setting has never worked for me on any BIOS version. Setting the value of "Restore On AC Power Loss" to "Power On" or "Last State" does not have any effect (does not work as intended) when the AC power goes out and then comes back i.e. the PC remains powered off instead of powering on.


Thanks!


----------



## xeizo

I want to report ... that my CCX OC is still stable after a few days and numerous hours of gaming. The tip about keeping C-states + CNQ on was great, as idle cores are parking and saving voltage and idle/surfing is because of that very silent! I will never go back to Auto/PBO 

Now, if only Asus/Shamino could release this Beta bios for X470 Prime Pro(and Strix X470-F as they seem to use the same bios code) as well so I could give my 3700X the same treatment. That would be ideal. And btw, while at it, plz fix the 99.8MHz instead of 100MHz bug in that bios - I suppose exposing spread spectrum for everyone to toggle will do the trick.


----------



## DDSZ

xeizo said:


> I want to report ... that my CCX OC is still stable after a few days and numerous hours of gaming. The tip about keeping C-states + CNQ on was great, as idle cores are parking and saving voltage and idle/surfing is because of that very silent! I will never go back to Auto/PBO
> 
> Now, if only Asus/Shamino could release this Beta bios for X470 Prime Pro(and Strix X470-F as they seem to use the same bios code) as well so I could give my 3700X the same treatment. That would be ideal. And btw, while at it, plz fix the 99.8MHz instead of 100MHz bug in that bios - I suppose exposing spread spectrum for everyone to toggle will do the trick.


I found that enabling DOCP makes bclk 99.8MHz, but if I go Manual and enter exactly the same settings, it will show as 100.


----------



## speedgoat

"CNQ" is cool n quiet ? can this be activated on c7h ? 
fixed OC with c-states enabled is awesome, using it for a few weeks too very happy with me system. 




xeizo said:


> I want to report ... that my CCX OC is still stable after a few days and numerous hours of gaming. The tip about keeping C-states + CNQ on was great, as idle cores are parking and saving voltage and idle/surfing is because of that very silent! I will never go back to Auto/PBO
> 
> Now, if only Asus/Shamino could release this Beta bios for X470 Prime Pro(and Strix X470-F as they seem to use the same bios code) as well so I could give my 3700X the same treatment. That would be ideal. And btw, while at it, plz fix the 99.8MHz instead of 100MHz bug in that bios - I suppose exposing spread spectrum for everyone to toggle will do the trick.


----------



## xeizo

speedgoat said:


> "CNQ" is cool n quiet ? can this be activated on c7h ?
> fixed OC with c-states enabled is awesome, using it for a few weeks too very happy with me system.


CNQ = Cool 'N Quiet is activated/deactivated in the Powerplan, there is a toggle for that in the plans. It's usually on by default, but if someone accidentally deactivated it just activate it again using a fixed OC.


----------



## xeizo

DDSZ said:


> I found that enabling DOCP makes bclk 99.8MHz, but if I go Manual and enter exactly the same settings, it will show as 100.


I don't remember that ever happening for me, I don't believe I use D.O.C.P on that system as it has 4x Hynix RAM needing a lot of manual wizardry to work at even specified settings. I will have to go back and check it up, but I don't think that's the solution. Anway, to be able to do per CCX OC would be even better!


----------



## Rusakova

crakej said:


> At long last I figured out how to get my memory profiles to boot!
> 
> I usually leave tRDWR and tWRRD to their own devices (auto) as like @nick name I get diff values for Chan A and Chan B. I also have to use GDN whereas I could do 3733 with looser timings and GDN=off previously.
> 
> I need to test more - I'm not getting performance I was before but I need to fine tune again. The values here are not working quite as well as before, with worst CB R15 multi score in a while. I also note my SoC is lower than expected (used to show 1.081v here previously).
> 
> So, now I can boot with decent ram speed I can review my other settings at last! Thanks for all suggestions


I'm having issues with 3103 as well. It flashes fine and boots fine. I can surf, play music and watch a movie without issues.
But the second I put some load on the CPU for more than 8 secs or so, the system restarts. No BSOD or errors just a restart.
If I check the event log it shows a WHEA error with the following...



> A fatal hardware error has occurred.
> 
> Reported by component: Processor Core
> Error Source: Machine Check Exception
> Error Type: Bus/Interconnect Error
> Processor APIC ID: 0


So I'm guessing it's connected to the 3800 MHz / 1900 fclk combo.
Currently back with 3004 which have no issues with ram at 3800 MHz (1.35v) and 1900 fclk.
Oh well .. I might try 3103 again later.


----------



## Nighthog

If you guys have reboot issues with AGESA ComboAM4V2PI 1.0.0.2 (over from the Gigabyte boards)

1: Try changing your VSOC OVER VOLTAGE SETTING, I suspect it's really low... like set to trip on 1.100V AUTO settings.

2: It might be new AGESA doesn't like high VSOC overall. You need to find stable setting below 1.100V. (I found settings in the 1.000-1.050V SOC that function without reboots)

FCLK is more sensitive to your voltage choices in the new AGESA if I would say anything.


----------



## crakej

DDSZ said:


> I found that enabling DOCP makes bclk 99.8MHz, but if I go Manual and enter exactly the same settings, it will show as 100.


If you set that to manual or auto, you'll get 100Mhz


----------



## xeizo

crakej said:


> If you set that to manual or auto, you'll get 100Mhz


Yes, I have heard that but as far as I can recall Prime Pro doesn't have manual BCLK so it is impossible 

My C7H never had a problem with BCLK.


----------



## xeizo

Nighthog said:


> If you guys have reboot issues with AGESA ComboAM4V2PI 1.0.0.2 (over from the Gigabyte boards)
> 
> 1: Try changing your VSOC OVER VOLTAGE SETTING, I suspect it's really low... like set to trip on 1.100V AUTO settings.
> 
> 2: It might be new AGESA doesn't like high VSOC overall. You need to find stable setting below 1.100V. (I found settings in the 1.000-1.050V SOC that function without reboots)
> 
> FCLK is more sensitive to your voltage choices in the new AGESA if I would say anything.


I have heard that from several sources by now, my 3103 experience have been rock stable but I was already using a moderate SOC of 1.079V. Hearing this again, I figure I might even be able to lower it more


----------



## speedgoat

i m getting this error like once every couple of days and an instant reboot since the 2nd of june me, actually im getting it when the system is idle or on very light loads, i have a long list of troubleshooting it but im suspecting more my win 2004 build than anything else and im still on 3004 bios
@xeizo thanks i ll check it !



Rusakova said:


> I'm having issues with 3103 as well. It flashes fine and boots fine. I can surf, play music and watch a movie without issues.
> But the second I put some load on the CPU for more than 8 secs or so, the system restarts. No BSOD or errors just a restart.
> If I check the event log it shows a WHEA error with the following...
> 
> 
> 
> So I'm guessing it's connected to the 3800 MHz / 1900 fclk combo.
> Currently back with 3004 which have no issues with ram at 3800 MHz (1.35v) and 1900 fclk.
> Oh well .. I might try 3103 again later.


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> CNQ = Cool 'N Quiet is activated/deactivated in the Powerplan, there is a toggle for that in the plans. It's usually on by default, but if someone accidentally deactivated it just activate it again using a fixed OC.


In Windows power plan? The AMD plan?


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> In Windows power plan? The AMD plan?


Yes, advanced/detailed settings


----------



## Dollar

xeizo said:


> Yes, advanced/detailed settings



Are you using a custom plan or something? I don't see any CnQ in the ryzen balanced plan settings. Maybe hit us with a screenshot


----------



## xeizo

Dollar said:


> xeizo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, advanced/detailed settings
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you using a custom plan or something? I don't see any CnQ in the ryzen balanced plan settings. Maybe hit us with a screenshot
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure I've seen it in there and 1usmus also recommends it being enabled. Could have been the 1usmus plan, which I don't use anymore.
Can't check, on cellphone now, but a quick Google revealed that C-states is essentially the same thing but some manufacturers still has it in the bios for unknown reasons.
Summary : use C-states enabled and you are set!


----------



## xeizo

Dollar said:


> Are you using a custom plan or something? I don't see any CnQ in the ryzen balanced plan settings. Maybe hit us with a screenshot


Apparently it's called "System Cooling Policy" in the AMD plan:


----------



## Logue

I'd just like to say that, by far, the best way to get high clocks with Ryzen 3000 is with the EDC bug. I've never seen my chip like this (screenshot of desktop idle)


----------



## nick name

Logue said:


> I'd just like to say that, by far, the best way to get high clocks with Ryzen 3000 is with the EDC bug. I've never seen my chip like this (screenshot of desktop idle)


Something to note is that you can't use as large an offset as you can with regular PBO. Clock stretching will kick in much sooner.


----------



## Logue

I'm using Auto voltage, LLC3 (CPU) and LLC2 (SOC) and 140%/140%/130% for the current limits. Temps get pretty high if I run an all-core load (CB20, y-cruncher, etc.), but as I don't do that almost ever (this is the gaming build), I think I'm fine, right?


----------



## smokin_mitch

Logue said:


> I'm using Auto voltage, LLC3 (CPU) and LLC2 (SOC) and 140%/140%/130% for the current limits. Temps get pretty high if I run an all-core load (CB20, y-cruncher, etc.), but as I don't do that almost ever (this is the gaming build), I think I'm fine, right?


what values do you use for the EDC bug and what bios version are you on?


----------



## Logue

I'm using 0/0/1 (PPT, TDC, EDC), BIOS 3103 (beta)


----------



## xeizo

The advantage with CCX OC is you can control exact how much power/heat you will allow for a certain power level. Yes, you may loose out on some single core, but then instead multi core is better than any boost. But the biggest advantage I've found so far is gaming, the PC is overall less prone to stutter. All animations are very smooth ingame. Still stable after several days using 4425/4300/4200/4200 with 3733 mem 1:1. I'm pretty sure I won't do PBO/Auto anymore


----------



## crakej

xeizo said:


> The advantage with CCX OC is you can control exact how much power/heat you will allow for a certain power level. Yes, you may loose out on some single core, but then instead multi core is better than any boost. But the biggest advantage I've found so far is gaming, the PC is overall less prone to stutter. All animations are very smooth ingame. Still stable after several days using 4425/4300/4200/4200 with 3733 mem 1:1. I'm pretty sure I won't do PBO/Auto anymore


Having waited for CCX OC in the bios, I wanted to ask what voltage range is acceptable. You can't control CCX voltage can you?

Looking fwd to not having to chase boost we'll never get...


----------



## xeizo

crakej said:


> Having waited for CCX OC in the bios, I wanted to ask what voltage range is acceptable. You can't control CCX voltage can you?
> 
> Looking fwd to not having to chase boost we'll never get...


No, it's the same vcore for all CCX. There is a lot of opinion on voltage range, but so far from reading numerous posts it seems 1.35V before droop is considered the absolute max. Will generate a lot of heat though, needs high end cooling.
I've seen it stated that AMD recommends 1.325V after droop as the absolute max. I could believe that as it's usually the same as the multi boost vcore I have using PBO.
Now later CPU samples looks to have much better silicon meaning with those you will see great numbers with much lower vcore/lower heat.
My CPU is a early one with what I consider trash silicon. I use 1.33V before drop which is 1.300V under load using LLC3. A Noctua NH-D15 handles it well, and it's about as far as I'm comfortable going. Would have been nice to have lower vcore stable, but my CPU just won't reach higher frequencies stable with lower vcore.
There is a reason high single core boost needs 1.5V!

I'm happy with the current Geekbench 5 score, 1342/14068:

https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/2682647

I don't loose that much on single core since one CCX is over 4.4GHz.


----------



## crakej

xeizo said:


> No, it's the same vcore for all CCX. There is a lot of opinion on voltage range, but so far from reading numerous posts it seems 1.35V before droop is considered the absolute max. Will generate a lot of heat though, needs high end cooling.
> I've seen it stated that AMD recommends 1.325V after droop as the absolute max. I could believe that as it's usually the same as the multi boost vcore I have using PBO.
> Now later CPU samples looks to have much better silicon meaning with those you will see great numbers with much lower vcore/lower heat.
> My CPU is a early one with what I consider trash silicon. I use 1.33V before drop which is 1.300V under load using LLC3. A Noctua NH-D15 handles it well, and it's about as far as I'm comfortable going. Would have been nice to have lower vcore stable, but my CPU just won't reach higher frequencies stable with lower vcore.
> There is a reason high single core boost needs 1.5V!
> 
> I'm happy with the current Geekbench 5 score, 1342/14068:
> 
> https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/2682647
> 
> I don't loose that much on single core since one CCX is over 4.4GHz.


Thanks - that's good enough to get me started. My 3900x is also a crappy early one.... but performance is good.


----------



## wolfgang91

Hi! 
I really like to give a try to the new beta BIOS 3103. Just in case it doesn't work fine with my rig... Is it possible to return back to my actual 3004 BIOS easily? I mean, just flash again the old BIOS and that's all?
Thank you in advance.


----------



## crakej

wolfgang91 said:


> Hi!
> I really like to give a try to the new beta BIOS 3103. Just in case it doesn't work fine with my rig... Is it possible to return back to my actual 3004 BIOS easily? I mean, just flash again the old BIOS and that's all?
> Thank you in advance.


Yes, but always use the flashback method.


----------



## wolfgang91

crakej said:


> Yes, but always use the flashback method.


Great. Yes, I always use that method, but it is always convenient to remember it. Thank you!
Cheers.


----------



## Rusakova

So I decided to try 3103 again and so far so good. I did a clear CMOS and then set SOC voltage to 1.050v in bios and so far so good.
Running 3800 MHz cl16 with 1900 fclk since this morning. Just did a 2 hour gaming session and no issues so far.


----------



## wolfgang91

Trying BIOS 3103. Flashing and booting without problems. Tweaking CCX OC by now, not very high OC because I need a silent rig, but It goes well at the moment (42,5-42,5-41,75-41,5 @ 1,237 LLC3, which means 1,20 at full load). The CPU seems to be cooler at the same voltage than before... 4 or 5 degrees Celsius less passing CB20. 
DOCP works fine. I've not tried manual RAM OC yet, but 3600 16-16-16-36 booted easily. 



DDSZ said:


> I found that enabling DOCP makes bclk 99.8MHz, but if I go Manual and enter exactly the same settings, it will show as 100.


The same happened to me (but I remember happened also with the previous BIOS sometimes). It's easily fixed setting values manually, as you mentioned. The issue is that when you set DOCP in BIOS, it shows BCLK 100 there, but when you go into Windows, HWinfo shows a BCLK of 99,8 and core frequencies drop accordingly)

I will continue tweaking when I have the time...

Cheers


----------



## oreonutz

So I have been doing a lot of testing on this recently (CCX OCing) and I found the best results going with Level 1 LLC, So the Biggest amount of VDroop, and then using a Voltage of around 1.4v. Because of the level of Vdroop, even the Lightest Single Core Load doesn't go above 1.381v, and when you compare that to the Single Core Voltage given to the CPU during a Stock PB2 Load of the same type, its still much lower (My Chip will give 1.45v at stock to a light single core load). This allows me to push my 1st to CCX's a bit Higher than I can on a Level 3 or 4 LLC with a Lower Voltage set. And then during the 60 to 70% lightly threaded to multi threaded loads the Voltage delivered to the Chip is somewhere around 1.36v to 1.315v, so temperatures are still in check, and the amount of current into each chip is still relatively low, especially compared to the same loads under a Stock PB2 scenario.

Then with the Heavier All Core Loads, anything from CBR15, to CBR20, to IBT or Y-Cruncher BBP Stress Test, You get as high as 1.3v during the CB R15, down to 1.285v for the CB R20, to 1.275v for the Heaviest AVX2 Loads from the Likes of IBT or BBP.

It seems to scale really well this way, allowing stability to hold for the Higher Clocks on CCX1 and 2, giving you a really best of both worlds approach. Of course the one draw back is just like running a PBO OC, your Idle Temps a bit higher in the 40 to 50c range, instead of being in the low 30 to 40 range when running a more traditional Low Voltage with a average LLC, but I find that it allows me to push all My CCX's higher then when I was running Auto LLC or a Level 3 or 4. My stability has also been amazing, and I agree that your Gaming Workloads benefit from much smoother gameplay overall when using CCX OC, as well as your Multi Threaded Performance being Much more Reliable and Predictable, rather then being all over the place like with PBO.

Also, I saw someone asked about setting Voltages for individual CCX's. This was something I inquired to an Engineer about, but he said it wasn't possible. But that basically by setting the Voltage to be high enough for all cores, the CCX's are still only going to draw the power they need, so even if the Clocks are lower on CCX 3 and 4, by setting a voltage high enough for CCX1 and 2 you aren't hurting 3 and 4 because they are only going to draw the amount of current at that voltage that they need to complete their load. This is part of the reason why you will see CCD 1 often has a higher Temperature then CCD2, is because CCX1 is often being used more, so needs more current, while CCD2 is being used less, so is drawing less current. Hopefully that makes sense.

Anyways I would love to see if someone else as the same experience as I use, using a high SET Voltage, but a much lower LLC. For me since setting it this way I have gained a tiny bit of performance from the higher clocks I can push, and stability has been completely rock solid, would love to see if others have the same experience when using the same exact method.


----------



## nick name

oreonutz said:


> So I have been doing a lot of testing on this recently (CCX OCing) and I found the best results going with Level 1 LLC, So the Biggest amount of VDroop, and then using a Voltage of around 1.4v. Because of the level of Vdroop, even the Lightest Single Core Load doesn't go above 1.381v, and when you compare that to the Single Core Voltage given to the CPU during a Stock PB2 Load of the same type, its still much lower (My Chip will give 1.45v at stock to a light single core load). This allows me to push my 1st to CCX's a bit Higher than I can on a Level 3 or 4 LLC with a Lower Voltage set. And then during the 60 to 70% lightly threaded to multi threaded loads the Voltage delivered to the Chip is somewhere around 1.36v to 1.315v, so temperatures are still in check, and the amount of current into each chip is still relatively low, especially compared to the same loads under a Stock PB2 scenario.
> 
> Then with the Heavier All Core Loads, anything from CBR15, to CBR20, to IBT or Y-Cruncher BBP Stress Test, You get as high as 1.3v during the CB R15, down to 1.285v for the CB R20, to 1.275v for the Heaviest AVX2 Loads from the Likes of IBT or BBP.
> 
> It seems to scale really well this way, allowing stability to hold for the Higher Clocks on CCX1 and 2, giving you a really best of both worlds approach. Of course the one draw back is just like running a PBO OC, your Idle Temps a bit higher in the 40 to 50c range, instead of being in the low 30 to 40 range when running a more traditional Low Voltage with a average LLC, but I find that it allows me to push all My CCX's higher then when I was running Auto LLC or a Level 3 or 4. My stability has also been amazing, and I agree that your Gaming Workloads benefit from much smoother gameplay overall when using CCX OC, as well as your Multi Threaded Performance being Much more Reliable and Predictable, rather then being all over the place like with PBO.
> 
> Also, I saw someone asked about setting Voltages for individual CCX's. This was something I inquired to an Engineer about, but he said it wasn't possible. But that basically by setting the Voltage to be high enough for all cores, the CCX's are still only going to draw the power they need, so even if the Clocks are lower on CCX 3 and 4, by setting a voltage high enough for CCX1 and 2 you aren't hurting 3 and 4 because they are only going to draw the amount of current at that voltage that they need to complete their load. This is part of the reason why you will see CCD 1 often has a higher Temperature then CCD2, is because CCX1 is often being used more, so needs more current, while CCD2 is being used less, so is drawing less current. Hopefully that makes sense.
> 
> Anyways I would love to see if someone else as the same experience as I use, using a high SET Voltage, but a much lower LLC. For me since setting it this way I have gained a tiny bit of performance from the higher clocks I can push, and stability has been completely rock solid, would love to see if others have the same experience when using the same exact method.



What speeds did you move up to now versus LLC 4? 

I run 44 and 42.5 with 1.26V that droops to 1.244V.


----------



## wolfgang91

Hi, continue testing the CCX OC with new beta BIOS 3103. This BIOS seems to be very stable, no problems so far. 
For now, I have CCD0 at 4375 and CCD1 at 4250, 1.29 in BIOS LLC3 (1.26 full load). Perhaps I could get 25 mhz more in best CCX of each CCD at the same voltage ...
RAM with DOCP by now. No problems.


Spoiler















What do you think about my settings? I’ve set Core VID at 1,325, is it correct? And, a question: I see that the processor is reaching the EDC limit of 140 amps. Is there any way to exceed that limit, as in PBO OC? 
I’ve noticed some curious thing. I usually render a lot of videos with Camtasia. I’ve noticed that with this per CCX OC, render times are longer than, for example, fixed 4150 mhz for all cores. Is it normal?
Thank you in advance.


----------



## tcclaviger

After playing with EDC bug for a week I decided to do some curve tracking of performance vs temp and test out like 20 different settings.

I've now come up with the best 24/7 settings I think. It scores better than EDC bug, pushes lower voltages, runs cooler and is more stable, see below screen shots.

If I need more multicore performance, just switch from balanced to high performance and multicore scores jump to 7650r20 nt, 14300gb5 nt etc. Otherwise stays in balanced and gets stupidly high single core performance. 

Bclk:103.4
Performance Boost: Enabled
PBO: Manual
TDC - 95, EDC - 140, PPT -142
Scalar 2x, Auto OC 200, 
Core voltage: Auto (no offset)
LLC: 3 with maxed vrm settings top to bottom
Force Overclock Mode Disable : Enabled

Balanced Plan:
Minimum Unparked Cores:25%
Minimum Processor State: 1%

Any deviation from the above settings is a performance loss. Raising minimum Unparked cores will cut boosting down a lot, rasing minimum processor state will cut boosting as well.

Cores all wake from parking nearly instantly so....don't see the point in keeping them all awake to only reduce single thread performance.

Balanced Plan:
https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/2727347

High Performance Plan:
https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/2726705


----------



## WinterActual

ASUS pushed some new chipset drivers on the support website -> AMD Chipset Driver V2.04.09.131 for Windows 10 64-bit. But when downloaded it says they are for B550. DId Asus screw these one up?


----------



## xeizo

WinterActual said:


> ASUS pushed some new chipset drivers on the support website -> AMD Chipset Driver V2.04.09.131 for Windows 10 64-bit. But when downloaded it says they are for B550. DId Asus screw these one up?


Something fishy about that, the AMD plan also looks to have higher number 2.04.28.626. 28 is higher than 09 in my book. Don't know what is going on, but the AMD drivers work really well so I don't see the need for pushing those.


----------



## djase45

*Version 3103*
2020/06/2315 MBytes
ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO BIOS 3103
*"01. [E] Improve system performance.
02. Update AMD AM4 AGESA Combo PI V1 1.0.0.6*

Before running the USB BIOS Flashback tool, please rename the BIOS file(C7H.CAP)using


----------



## xeizo

djase45 said:


> *Version 3103*
> 2020/06/2315 MBytes
> ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO BIOS 3103
> *"01. [E] Improve system performance.
> 02. Update AMD AM4 AGESA Combo PI V1 1.0.0.6*
> 
> Before running the USB BIOS Flashback tool, please rename the BIOS file(C7H.CAP)using


Nice, so Asus has deemed it as stable as we have!


----------



## Keith Myers

*The correct solution found finally!*



Keith Myers said:


> Well I entered 95° C. in the Thermal Design temp limit in the PBO overclocking section as an experiment and only changed that. Tried my y-cruncher stress test again and still CPU overtemped at 82.6° C. So that was useless. I just would like to know why my mobo overtemps 15° C. sooner than the default 95° C. limit of the cpu spec.
> 
> If I didn't run A/C or leave a window open when it is cooler, I could see that my computer would shut down under my crunching load. I would like to have that safety cushion that everyone but me seems to have. As it is right now, I only have a 8-10 °C. safety cushion instead of the standard 20-25° C. of headroom I am supposed to have.


A big thank you to Asmodian over on the 3950 Overclocking thread that finally gave me the correct solution for my CPU Overtemp issue that has plagued me on every one of my C7H boards since I got them.

To not produce a CPU Overtemp at 80° C. all you have to do is turn off CPU Temperature monitoring in the Monitor section. Monitor >> Cpu temperature >> Ignore/Monitor needs to be changed to Ignore.

The cpu still shows the actual cpu temperature in the BIOS Status side panel and it still exports the cpu temp to the OS and any sensor monitors you might use. I easily cruised past 80° C. when testing with AVX2 y-cruncher tests to get to a 90.2 ° C. stabilized temp through several cycles of the tests and no CPU Overtemp errors.


----------



## nick name

djase45 said:


> *Version 3103*
> 2020/06/2315 MBytes
> ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO BIOS 3103
> *"01. [E] Improve system performance.
> 02. Update AMD AM4 AGESA Combo PI V1 1.0.0.6*
> 
> Before running the USB BIOS Flashback tool, please rename the BIOS file(C7H.CAP)using


Darn, that means that the RAM timing bug is still there.

I can download the BIOS by changing the link, but I can't see it available on their page. Also, it's not Friday. They usually release on a Friday. 

https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-3103.zip

Edit:
Actually I can see it if I select "Other" for OS.

Edit 2:
RAM Auto timings bug is still present.


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> A big thank you to Asmodian over on the 3950 Overclocking thread that finally gave me the correct solution for my CPU Overtemp issue that has plagued me on every one of my C7H boards since I got them.
> 
> To not produce a CPU Overtemp at 80° C. all you have to do is turn off CPU Temperature monitoring in the Monitor section. Monitor >> Cpu temperature >> Ignore/Monitor needs to be changed to Ignore.
> 
> The cpu still shows the actual cpu temperature in the BIOS Status side panel and it still exports the cpu temp to the OS and any sensor monitors you might use. I easily cruised past 80° C. when testing with AVX2 y-cruncher tests to get to a 90.2 ° C. stabilized temp through several cycles of the tests and no CPU Overtemp errors.


Well aren't we silly for not figuring to do that. Glad you go it sorted.

Edit:
Is it the CPU Fan monitoring?


----------



## roco_smith

Keith Myers said:


> A big thank you to Asmodian over on the 3950 Overclocking thread that finally gave me the correct solution for my CPU Overtemp issue that has plagued me on every one of my C7H boards since I got them.
> 
> To not produce a CPU Overtemp at 80° C. all you have to do is turn off CPU Temperature monitoring in the Monitor section. Monitor >> Cpu temperature >> Ignore/Monitor needs to be changed to Ignore.
> 
> The cpu still shows the actual cpu temperature in the BIOS Status side panel and it still exports the cpu temp to the OS and any sensor monitors you might use. I easily cruised past 80° C. when testing with AVX2 y-cruncher tests to get to a 90.2 ° C. stabilized temp through several cycles of the tests and no CPU Overtemp errors.


thanks for the the trick


----------



## darkage

1.05 and 1.8 voltages are still high if set to auto just like the beta, if it was not fully tested before, was it tested before release or is this the beta bios ?


----------



## smokin_mitch

nick name said:


> Darn, that means that the RAM timing bug is still there.
> 
> I can download the BIOS by changing the link, but I can't see it available on their page. Also, it's not Friday. They usually release on a Friday.
> 
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-3103.zip
> 
> Edit:
> Actually I can see it if I select "Other" for OS.
> 
> Edit 2:
> RAM Auto timings bug is still present.





darkage said:


> 1.05 and 1.8 voltages are still high if set to auto just like the beta, if it was not fully tested before, was it tested before release or is this the beta bios ?


This makes me not even want to try this bios I'm still on bios 2801 as it doesn't have the fabric clock sleep/wake bug like all the newer bios versions which I'm guessing is still present in bios 3103, this may be my last ASUS mobo as their bios updates are getting bad with all these bugs


----------



## Keith Myers

nick name said:


> Well aren't we silly for not figuring to do that. Glad you go it sorted.
> 
> Edit:
> Is it the CPU Fan monitoring?


No right at the top of the Monitor page. First entry. The part that simply refers to displayed temps. Instead of it displaying the CPU Temperature, change to Ignore. The setting will change to Ignore and not display any value other than Ignore. The temp however is still shown in the Hardware Monitor side panel in the BIOS.


----------



## oreonutz

nick name said:


> What speeds did you move up to now versus LLC 4?
> 
> I run 44 and 42.5 with 1.26V that droops to 1.244V.


I was on 43.50, 43.25, 42.50, 42.00 For my Everyday CCX OC. (It was higher, but had random stability issues, and hitching happen, so ended up settling at that OC with 1.26v Set in the Bios, that dropped to around 1.245v or so.)

And I realize this isn't a Huge Jump, and also My Idle Temps are higher, as well as my under load temps being higher as well, but I could not keep this 100 Percent stable before with Higher LLC, now with Level 1 LLC I can.

I am now on 44.50, 44, 43.50, 43.00, with 1.4v VID Set in Bios, LLC1, but with Vdroop at Full MultiCore Load, depending on the Intensity of that load (EX Non AVX Vs AVX) I get between 1.29v to 1.275v. And then for the Heavier Lightly Threaded Loads I will get somewhere between 1.325v to 1.3v. And then for those Bursty Single Threaded to Lightly Threaded loads I will be between 1.325v to 1.38v. So for instance after booting into Windows, and just moving around the Mouse or jumping into a Youtube video, My Voltage will be jumping between 1.35v up to 1.38v, and the temps will be jumping from 45c (Which is around my lower Idle Temps now) to 55c. So it definitely is running hotter for those lighter to idle loads then before, but its definitely still within spec, and if you study the behavior with how it runs at stock, its very very similar, this would actually be lower voltage, the only difference with stock is that it will allow the voltage to drop off to save power during idle which will drop temps, and because I am running on a High Power Profile mine is not doing that (It would if I used Balance, I just prefer to have the faster response time).

So the higher idle temps is definitely what I find to be the biggest draw back, but I can live with that, my testing has found that in games like Realm Royale, R6S, GTA5, and Apex Legends, which are all games that I play fairly regularly, My Max FPS has gone up anywhere between 4% to 16% depending on the title. That part I don't care much about though, its the Average and the Lows, or the Frametime Consistency that I care more about, and that has been the part that seemed to have really get the Boost, My Lows have increased anywhere from 7% to 20% on average, and the Frametime Consistency while I don't have a single number percentage boost I can claim, every title I play has seen a tightening of those frame times, with a Lot Less Spikes, making for an even smoother experience.

When it came to R6S in particular, since upgrading to Zen2 I had been having a problem where every 180 to 400s or so I would have a bad Frame Time Spike, that resulted in a Noticeable Stutter. It would only last literally a half a second, but It bothered the hell out of me. It happened whether I kept the CPU Stock, or if I Per CCX OC'd. I thought it was down to memory, and I think that was part of it, because I also recently sorted out some Memory OC Issues I was having, and that helped a lot, as did having a Stable Per CCX OC, but it would still happen every now and again. Since Upgrading to the Newest Bios that Shamino Released, and then dialing in my new CCX OC, I have yet to have that Frametime Spike issue happen again. I play this game on 2 different Rigs, one is a 2700x Rig, and then my main 3950x Rig, and it was always frustrating that it would only happen on the 3950x rig, but now it seems to be fixed, so that made me happy. It could also have been a combination of something in the BIOS, and my better Memory tune, but either way the 1% Lows are up, as well as the Frametimes being Tighter with this new OC, so that is awesome.

Percentage Wise, when comparing my the Uplift Per CCX from the Old CCX Clock to the New One, Its not a huge Jump, but regardless it has seemed to help Tremendously, and that Might just also be using the Lower LLC as well. Ryzen seems to like it. Maybe its in my head, but thats why I think it would be awesome for others to try the same method and see if it works for them as well.

Anyways, I have written a book again, so I will go do something else. Much Love!


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> A big thank you to Asmodian over on the 3950 Overclocking thread that finally gave me the correct solution for my CPU Overtemp issue that has plagued me on every one of my C7H boards since I got them.
> 
> To not produce a CPU Overtemp at 80° C. all you have to do is turn off CPU Temperature monitoring in the Monitor section. Monitor >> Cpu temperature >> Ignore/Monitor needs to be changed to Ignore.
> 
> The cpu still shows the actual cpu temperature in the BIOS Status side panel and it still exports the cpu temp to the OS and any sensor monitors you might use. I easily cruised past 80° C. when testing with AVX2 y-cruncher tests to get to a 90.2 ° C. stabilized temp through several cycles of the tests and no CPU Overtemp errors.


That is so insane!

I wonder why only some of us have this issue??? You know I also run a 3950x and 3900x on both a Crosshair VII and VI Hero respectively, and I do not turn of the CPU Monitoring in the Monitor section of the Bios, and I run my CPU Frequently above 80c. When Working the CPU will Spend literally 3 Quarters of the Day between 78c and 88c, and I have only ever seen that hard reset once, where it just resets, then upon post you get the F1 screen where it says the CPU is over its Temp Limit, and to hit F1 to go into the bios or Continue or whatever. I saw that One time, very early on after installing my 3950x, and I simply did a Bios Flash and upgraded to the newest Version out at the time, and I have never seen that warning again.

But I have seen more then a few times in both this Thread and the C6H Thread Users asking about this issue, and all of them, including you, have had it happen frequently, on multiple Bios Versions. And I think you may be the only one Running Linux, the others I think were all running Windows, obviously that should have nothing to do with it anyway, but once we saw it happened to people on both OS, then it was just curious as to what is causing it.

Its awesome that you have now found a way to get past that stupid issue, I just wonder why it is that only some of us have this issue and have to turn off CPU Monitoring in the BIOS, while the majority of us do not. So weird, I wonder what the difference is???




nick name said:


> Darn, that means that the RAM timing bug is still there.
> 
> I can download the BIOS by changing the link, but I can't see it available on their page. Also, it's not Friday. They usually release on a Friday.
> 
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-3103.zip
> 
> Edit:
> Actually I can see it if I select "Other" for OS.
> 
> Edit 2:
> RAM Auto timings bug is still present.


Sorry I missed this post. What is the RAM Timing Bug? Is it auto Timing Secondary and Tertiary Ram Timings in DOCP Profiles incorrectly?




wolfgang91 said:


> Hi, continue testing the CCX OC with new beta BIOS 3103. This BIOS seems to be very stable, no problems so far.
> For now, I have CCD0 at 4375 and CCD1 at 4250, 1.29 in BIOS LLC3 (1.26 full load). Perhaps I could get 25 mhz more in best CCX of each CCD at the same voltage ...
> RAM with DOCP by now. No problems.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What do you think about my settings? I’ve set Core VID at 1,325, is it correct? And, a question: I see that the processor is reaching the EDC limit of 140 amps. Is there any way to exceed that limit, as in PBO OC?
> I’ve noticed some curious thing. I usually render a lot of videos with Camtasia. I’ve noticed that with this per CCX OC, render times are longer than, for example, fixed 4150 mhz for all cores. Is it normal?
> Thank you in advance.



To answer a few of your Questions. I am not familiar with Camtasia. But, if it is like most Video Programs when it comes to rendering, a Higher Clock Speed on the same exact processor almost always means a shorter Render Time. Sometimes its minuscule depending on the Clock Speed increase, but it should never be longer if all other variables are accounted for (Background Processes, Ram Speed, etc...) So It definitely should not be happening that your All Core 4150Mhz OC is faster then your 4375Mhz, 4375Mhz, 4250Mhz, 4250Mhz CCX OC. All 4 of your CCX are above 4150Mhz, so you should be seeing at least a 5% or more increase. I would double check that you don't have some other task going on in the background while you are rendering that wasn't happening when you were doing your rendering on the Old OC. I would also make sure that when testing, you are rendering the same exact project before, with the same exact edits, because depending on the plugins, effects, and transitions that you have in your project, you could have wildly different render times. (For example if its the same project you are rendering, but the first had only a few plugins, while the 2nd you might have added a bunch more, that would definitely effect render times, so it wouldn't be a good "Benchmark" because you are rendering 2 different projects at this point). Also things like Windows Updates, and services like Google Drive or One Drive syncing with the cloud, could all effect your performance if they happen to have been running when you were doing your render, so just do your best to control all variables to make sure that its an apples to apples test between the 2.

If after controlling all variables you are still seeing a render time increase between Overclocks, then its likely that your second OC is not stable. It may be stable enough to finish the render without crashing, but stability isn't just whether or not a CPU Crashes while doing a task, its also that it can perform this task without errors occurring in the CPU, and you may be experiencing errors that are causing the program to recalculate certain tasks. If this happens, more Rendering programs have a log that will list out errors, so if Camtasia has such a log you may be able to check it to see if errors popped up in your recent render that did not pop up in your older render, and then you dig deeper into the error details to find out if it is indeed OC Related.

And last, your Ram could also have a huge effect. So if you were rendering with a higher Ram Speed or Tighter Timings before, and then either you lowered that Ram Speed, or Lowered the Timings with the New OC, that absolutely will have an effect on the Render Times. I know that @nick name was saying that there is some kind of Ram Auto Timing Bug with this newest BIOS Update. If it turns out that this bug he is talking about has to do with the Motherboard setting higher Timings For the same XMP/DOCP Profiles then it was setting in the Old Bios, then that too could also account for your performance loss, even if you were setting the same DOCP Profile. This is because that XMP/DOCP Profile only includes Ram Timings for the Primary Timings, and then One or 2 Secondary Timings. All Other Secondary and Tertiary timings are up to the Motherboard to fill in, and if it is setting much higher Timings then it was before, that could account for a decrease in performance, and depending on how dependent a task is on memory, it could be a pretty substantial decrease in performance. Rendering can be a pretty Ram dependent task, so its also possible this is what you are seeing. 

If this does turn out to be the issue, you can easily account for this by downgrading back to the old BIOS, putting in the Same DOCP Profile, booting to Windows, and then using the Timing Checker Tool to Write down all of Your Timings that the Ram is at. Then upgrade the Bios again, and manually dial in all of those timings yourself in the new bios instead of selecting DOCP, you manually select the Ram Speed, Manually input the DRAM Voltage, and then go into the Timing Section of the Bios and One By One enter in each Timing. Then You will have the same exact Ram Performance that you had before, and if this was indeed the reason for the performance drop, it will now be fixed, and now you can see the true performance increase from the Per CCX OC.

Anyways, I hope that helps.

To address your other question, that CCX OC that you set looks great! You can definitely tune it further, but if its stable and it gives you a performance Increase over your old OC that you are happy with, and its not burning up your processor, then that is really all that matters! Enjoy!


----------



## WinterActual

xeizo said:


> but the AMD drivers work really well so I don't see the need for pushing those.


Well I can't tell because I can't install any chipset drivers after 1.11.22.454. The newest version and the ones provided by ASUS (tried em, to see if they will install for me even if it says B550 lol) both give me the Installation is not compatible for raid error. I am not using RAID tho. I just gave up, there's no solution to this problem (even windows reinstall).


----------



## oreonutz

WinterActual said:


> Well I can't tell because I can't install any chipset drivers after 1.11.22.454. The newest version and the ones provided by ASUS (tried em, to see if they will install for me even if it says B550 lol) both give me the Installation is not compatible for raid error. I am not using RAID tho. I just gave up, there's no solution to this problem (even windows reinstall).


ASUS has messed up Software. I recommend only downloading the Chipset Drivers directly from the AMD Website for your Chipset, since your in this forum I would assume you are also running the Crosshair VII Hero, so just go to AMD's Website, then to the Drivers Section, and select Chipset Drivers for x470, then grab the newest Ones.

But before installing them Remove/Rename all past AMD Driver Folders from your PC, the Asus ones in particular tend to mess crap up. So This Means;

"C:\AMD" Folder, (You don't have to delete it, in fact just to be on the safe side I wouldn't delete it, just Rename it, so for the C:\AMD Folder I would rename it to "C:\AMD.Backup", this way when you go to install the new drivers, when the Install Packages search for previous Drivers on your system, nothing in that folder Pops Up, Then I would Use the same technique for the Other Folders I am about to Mention.)

"C:\ProgramData\AMD"
"C:\ProgramData\AMD AutoUpdate"
"C:\ProgramData\ASUS\(Driver Install Folder) - If you don't have any other ASUS Software installed that you rely on, Like Aura, Or AISuite, then you can just rename the Entire ASUS Folder, but if you do Use Asus Software, then you are going to want to go into the ASUS Folder and only Rename the Folders that Contain Driver Install Files in them, You can tell just by going into the folder and seeing if it has AMD Chipset Driver Install Files In them.
"C:\Users\*USERNAME*\AppData\Local\Temp\(Any AMDChipset Driver Folder)"
"C:\Users\*USERNAME*\Appdata\Roaming\AMD"

After Finally Removing\Renaming all of the Places the Driver will Check before it goes to install the Driver that you actually intend to install, You will have avoided most of the issues that come along with trying to upgrade a driver and having it error out and fail.

The last thing you have to remember, after renaming those folders, is to right click on the Driver install file, and choose "Run as Administrator" (Instead of just double Clicking on it). Even if you are in an Administrator Account, if you do not Right click on many install files and choose to Run as Administrator when installing them, they often launch with only User Rights, and parts of the install will not install correctly. So just remember to launch it with Administrator Rights, and then it should install correctly.

The last piece of advice I can give, is to make sure you choose a "Custom" install, instead of whatever the default option is, then it will allow you to uncheck things you do not need, and uncheck the Raid Driver. Then your new driver should install without an issue. Hopefully this works for you. If it doesn't, there will be a Log File in the Appdata\AMD Folder that will let you know where the hang up was, you can go through that yourself, or post it here, and we can go through it for you to find out why exactly your install is failing, but hopefully just following these directions will solve that issue for you. Good Luck!

*EDIT:* @WinterActual Its also worth checking in the BIOS/UEFI to see if you are inadvertently running in RAID IDE Mode. Even if you are not actually running your Disks in RAID, The BIOS Could still be Set to SATA RAID/IDE Mode. If it is, you are not going to want to change it, because then you won't be able to boot, its a bit of a pain in the Ass to convert a RAID/IDE Installation to an AHCI Installation, but it is possible, and just checking to see which mode you are Under will tell you a lot. 

You can check this, by going into The Bios, Then Going over to the "Advanced" Section. Then Going to "SATA Configuration" Then Seeing what option is displayed next to "SATA Mode" If its anything other than "AHCI", then this is why you are seeing your issue. Let us know.


----------



## darkage

this bios is slower, LLC 3 drops a lot more, i cant use my CCX settings as vdrop is to high at LLC compared to beta 3103

dont know if doing something wrong, but will flash beta again and compare

anyone else with this kind problems?


----------



## nick name

darkage said:


> this bios is slower, LLC 3 drops a lot more, i cant use my CCX settings as vdrop is to high at LLC compared to beta 3103
> 
> dont know if doing something wrong, but will flash beta again and compare
> 
> anyone else with this kind problems?


The creation dates seem to be the same for the beta 3103 and the ASUS site 3103.


----------



## xeizo

darkage said:


> this bios is slower, LLC 3 drops a lot more, i cant use my CCX settings as vdrop is to high at LLC compared to beta 3103
> 
> dont know if doing something wrong, but will flash beta again and compare
> 
> anyone else with this kind problems?


Thanks for that info, I will continue to run the Beta and not bother with this release. The Beta works pretty awesome for me.


----------



## nick name

@oreonutz It's with tRDWR and tWRRD which I would always leave on Auto because it would set each channel slightly different. If left on Auto now it sets it very high -- 18 and 7.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> @oreonutz It's with tRDWR and tWRRD which I would always leave on Auto because it would set each channel slightly different. If left on Auto now it sets it very high -- 18 and 7.


Could be an adjustment to work with the newer AMD Ryzen certified memory sticks with Micron E-die or Hynix DJR chips, they have a lot more relaxed timings than what works for Samsung B-die. 18 and 7 is exactly what I get with Hynix DJR on B550. Just speculation though, don't take my words for it.


----------



## WinterActual

oreonutz said:


> --------------------------------


There fixes are not working. I tried various tools and what not. Nothing works. We even have a thread here -> https://www.reddit.com/r/AMDHelp/comments/fx2oou/cant_install_new_chipset_drivers/ with users suffering from the same problem, using different mobos and CPUs (MSI, 3700x, etc). No one can't find a proper solution. Its lost cause. I even tried reaching amd robert or however his name was on reddit - no answer. But lets answer to your quote more directly - I don't have those folders because I already tried cleaning them up long time ago. The removal of those folders is not fixing it for me, and also everything in the BIOS is set to AHCI. I dont have a single option set to RAID. Everything is latest - windows, bios, etc.

About the new official bios by ASUS - I get the same performance like in the beta bios with with very higher temps that vary a lot. In the beta my temps were very stable and were increasing accordingly, now its jumping all over the place for some reason. I am using the same settings as before, same power plan, etc. I may roll back to the beta tbf.


----------



## xeizo

WinterActual said:


> There fixes are not working. I tried various tools and what not. Nothing works. We even have a thread here -> https://www.reddit.com/r/AMDHelp/comments/fx2oou/cant_install_new_chipset_drivers/ with users suffering from the same problem, using different mobos and CPUs (MSI, 3700x, etc). No one can't find a proper solution. Its lost cause. I even tried reaching amd robert or however his name was on reddit - no answer. But lets answer to your quote more directly - I don't have those folders because I already tried cleaning them up long time ago. The removal of those folders is not fixing it for me, and also everything in the BIOS is set to AHCI. I dont have a single option set to RAID. Everything is latest - windows, bios, etc.
> 
> About the new official bios by ASUS - I get the same performance like in the beta bios with with very higher temps that vary a lot. In the beta my temps were very stable and were increasing accordingly, now its jumping all over the place for some reason. I am using the same settings as before, same power plan, etc. I may roll back to the beta tbf.


Strange issue, I have four Ryzen mobos and latest chipset drivers installed fine on all of them. Windows 10 2004 19041 on three, and Windows insider 20xxx-something on one.


----------



## WinterActual

The latest chipset driver that I can install is 454. But I am not capable to see whats the difference between the installers to see whats causing the problem.


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> Could be an adjustment to work with the newer AMD Ryzen certified memory sticks with Micron E-die or Hynix DJR chips, they have a lot more relaxed timings than what works for Samsung B-die. 18 and 7 is exactly what I get with Hynix DJR on B550. Just speculation though, don't take my words for it.


It was also present in the old beta BIOS 0013 Shamino posted 3 months ago.


----------



## nick name

I don't see new chipset drivers on the AMD site. The one I see is from June 3rd.


----------



## roco_smith

darkage said:


> this bios is slower, LLC 3 drops a lot more, i cant use my CCX settings as vdrop is to high at LLC compared to beta 3103
> 
> dont know if doing something wrong, but will flash beta again and compare
> 
> anyone else with this kind problems?


Is happen to me as well with my CH6E Ryzen 3900X with bios 7803 my previus CCX OC is very inestable and crash Cinebench R20 AIDA and some others benchmarks , also my temp increase about 2 to 3% .I just back to Bios 7704 and everything is fine again


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> It was also present in the old beta BIOS 0013 Shamino posted 3 months ago.


Well, those memory types where available late 2019.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> I don't see new chipset drivers on the AMD site. The one I see is from June 3rd.


Isn't it new enough?


----------



## darkage

xeizo said:


> Isn't it new enough?


LOL


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> Isn't it new enough?


I'm just trying to figure out which "new" chipset driver is being discussed.


----------



## Shadowized

Is there any setting I should attempt to change to make my ram boot correctly at 1.38v? I've been 100% stable for months now at that voltage but I notice that occasionally, when doing a cold boot, rebooting, or hitting save settings in the bios it enters ram training, does the usual RGB disco vomit, fails, and boots at 2133MHz then I just load my profile and it works fine? I tested my ram repeatedly and never had an error from it, 1.40v works fine but 1.375 - 1.380v fails simply by entering bios and hitting save settings and it just seems strange that it would fail training, but memtest86, kahru, testmem5, and prime95 have zero issues. I did notice though that when it fails it resets my c-state, DF Cstates, and CPPC settings.

currently using SOC 1.050v, VDDG_CCD/IOD @ 1.000v, CLDO_VDDP @ 0.950v, dram @ 1.400v and vram boot is set but I dunno.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> I'm just trying to figure out which "new" chipset driver is being discussed.


I'm too lazy to backtrack but supposedly Asus posted a new driver the other day, but with a older version number than AMD. At least that's what it looks like.

To complicate matters so did Asrock release a driver with even higher version number a month ago, but all the components inside are the same as AMD.

I haven't bothered downloading the Asus driver and check what's inside.


----------



## WinterActual

Also the ASUS driver states its for B550.


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> I'm too lazy to backtrack but supposedly Asus posted a new driver the other day, but with a older version number than AMD. At least that's what it looks like.
> 
> To complicate matters so did Asrock release a driver with even higher version number a month ago, but all the components inside are the same as AMD.
> 
> I haven't bothered downloading the Asus driver and check what's inside.


Ahhh I see. I go straight to AMD for chipset drivers.


----------



## nick name

Shadowized said:


> Is there any setting I should attempt to change to make my ram boot correctly at 1.38v? I've been 100% stable for months now at that voltage but I notice that occasionally, when doing a cold boot, rebooting, or hitting save settings in the bios it enters ram training, does the usual RGB disco vomit, fails, and boots at 2133MHz then I just load my profile and it works fine? I tested my ram repeatedly and never had an error from it, 1.40v works fine but 1.375 - 1.380v fails simply by entering bios and hitting save settings and it just seems strange that it would fail training, but memtest86, kahru, testmem5, and prime95 have zero issues. I did notice though that when it fails it resets my c-state, DF Cstates, and CPPC settings.
> 
> currently using SOC 1.050v, VDDG_CCD/IOD @ 1.000v, CLDO_VDDP @ 0.950v, dram @ 1.400v and vram boot is set but I dunno.


Did you remember to set DRAM Boot Voltage?


----------



## Logue

So, it might be a silly question I have, but, why can I complete Blender in loop for a long time with 4.35GHz @ 1.35v all core on my 3800X (by Per CCX OC, but all at 43.50 and 1.35VID - BIOS setting, real voltages droop a little), but with PBO enabled (142,95,140, 2x scalar), the frequencies stay only at 4.15GHz but basically at the same voltage (1.3V~1.33V VID, 1.35V SVI TFN2)???
I use a Noctua NH-D15 (single fan in the middle, but it's still a better cooler than stock) and it still seems that it doesn't provide me with that much extra head room for PBO or Auto OC (PBO disabled). With the EDC bug, I can reach 4.25~4.35 in Blender, but gaming benchmarks seem to say it's a decrease in performance (albeit by a small margin). Running LLC3 and max VRM settings all the way, voltage at Auto (no offset). BIOS 3103 (latest).


----------



## minal

Keith Myers said:


> A big thank you to Asmodian over on the 3950 Overclocking thread that finally gave me the correct solution for my CPU Overtemp issue that has plagued me on every one of my C7H boards since I got them.
> 
> To not produce a CPU Overtemp at 80° C. all you have to do is turn off CPU Temperature monitoring in the Monitor section. Monitor >> Cpu temperature >> Ignore/Monitor needs to be changed to Ignore.
> 
> The cpu still shows the actual cpu temperature in the BIOS Status side panel and it still exports the cpu temp to the OS and any sensor monitors you might use. I easily cruised past 80° C. when testing with AVX2 y-cruncher tests to get to a 90.2 ° C. stabilized temp through several cycles of the tests and no CPU Overtemp errors.


Nice. Overtemp at 80C is ridiculous. I hope with this change your system still shuts down at ~100C or so for safety. Ignoring monitoring seems more like a workaround than an actual solution.


----------



## Shadowized

nick name said:


> Did you remember to set DRAM Boot Voltage?


yeah, which is why I'm kinda confused. but whatever I guess I'll just leave it at 1.4v so long as the training doesn't keep failing and putting me at 2133 occasionally when I reboot.


----------



## Keith Myers

minal said:


> Nice. Overtemp at 80C is ridiculous. I hope with this change your system still shuts down at ~100C or so for safety. Ignoring monitoring seems more like a workaround than an actual solution.


Yes, I agree it is a workaround. But kinda strange how ASUS labelled the setting and where they put it in the BIOS sections. There still is the Thermal limit setting in the Overclocking section where you can set a thermal limit. I tried that and it had no effect. Must be specific to the boost limits or something.

I would have thought it should be labeled as it was in the older AMD generations of just Thermal Limit or Safety Shutdown limit. In the older boards, the manual for the Monitor Menus says:

"Select *Ignore* if you do not wish to _display_ the detected temperatures"

I have always interpreted that as what it says verbatim, it just affects whether the temperatures are displayed. I always thought that if you set to Ignore then you won't have any detected temperatures.

It works that way for ignoring a fan output. The fan output of an ignored fan header is always 0 rpm or blank. But OTOH if you don't have a fan connected to the cpu fan header, the undetected sense of any fan rpm is actionable to protect the cpu cooling. You have to set the cpu fan header in the Monitor section to ignore if for example you are using liquid cooling and externally controlling fans or you will get the F1 cpu fan not detected error in the BIOS startup.


----------



## wolfgang91

oreonutz said:


> To answer a few of your Questions. I am not familiar with Camtasia. But, if it is like most Video Programs when it comes to rendering, a Higher Clock Speed on the same exact processor almost always means a shorter Render Time. Sometimes its minuscule depending on the Clock Speed increase, but it should never be longer if all other variables are accounted for (Background Processes, Ram Speed, etc...) So It definitely should not be happening that your All Core 4150Mhz OC is faster then your 4375Mhz, 4375Mhz, 4250Mhz, 4250Mhz CCX OC. All 4 of your CCX are above 4150Mhz, so you should be seeing at least a 5% or more increase. I would double check that you don't have some other task going on in the background while you are rendering that wasn't happening when you were doing your rendering on the Old OC. I would also make sure that when testing, you are rendering the same exact project before, with the same exact edits, because depending on the plugins, effects, and transitions that you have in your project, you could have wildly different render times. (For example if its the same project you are rendering, but the first had only a few plugins, while the 2nd you might have added a bunch more, that would definitely effect render times, so it wouldn't be a good "Benchmark" because you are rendering 2 different projects at this point). Also things like Windows Updates, and services like Google Drive or One Drive syncing with the cloud, could all effect your performance if they happen to have been running when you were doing your render, so just do your best to control all variables to make sure that its an apples to apples test between the 2.
> 
> If after controlling all variables you are still seeing a render time increase between Overclocks, then its likely that your second OC is not stable. It may be stable enough to finish the render without crashing, but stability isn't just whether or not a CPU Crashes while doing a task, its also that it can perform this task without errors occurring in the CPU, and you may be experiencing errors that are causing the program to recalculate certain tasks. If this happens, more Rendering programs have a log that will list out errors, so if Camtasia has such a log you may be able to check it to see if errors popped up in your recent render that did not pop up in your older render, and then you dig deeper into the error details to find out if it is indeed OC Related.
> 
> And last, your Ram could also have a huge effect. So if you were rendering with a higher Ram Speed or Tighter Timings before, and then either you lowered that Ram Speed, or Lowered the Timings with the New OC, that absolutely will have an effect on the Render Times. I know that @nick name was saying that there is some kind of Ram Auto Timing Bug with this newest BIOS Update. If it turns out that this bug he is talking about has to do with the Motherboard setting higher Timings For the same XMP/DOCP Profiles then it was setting in the Old Bios, then that too could also account for your performance loss, even if you were setting the same DOCP Profile. This is because that XMP/DOCP Profile only includes Ram Timings for the Primary Timings, and then One or 2 Secondary Timings. All Other Secondary and Tertiary timings are up to the Motherboard to fill in, and if it is setting much higher Timings then it was before, that could account for a decrease in performance, and depending on how dependent a task is on memory, it could be a pretty substantial decrease in performance. Rendering can be a pretty Ram dependent task, so its also possible this is what you are seeing.
> 
> If this does turn out to be the issue, you can easily account for this by downgrading back to the old BIOS, putting in the Same DOCP Profile, booting to Windows, and then using the Timing Checker Tool to Write down all of Your Timings that the Ram is at. Then upgrade the Bios again, and manually dial in all of those timings yourself in the new bios instead of selecting DOCP, you manually select the Ram Speed, Manually input the DRAM Voltage, and then go into the Timing Section of the Bios and One By One enter in each Timing. Then You will have the same exact Ram Performance that you had before, and if this was indeed the reason for the performance drop, it will now be fixed, and now you can see the true performance increase from the Per CCX OC.
> 
> Anyways, I hope that helps.
> 
> To address your other question, that CCX OC that you set looks great! You can definitely tune it further, but if its stable and it gives you a performance Increase over your old OC that you are happy with, and its not burning up your processor, then that is really all that matters! Enjoy!


Hi, and thank you very much for your extensive and clear explanation. I’ve been checking all the variables and It was definitely the RAM. I didn’t really know that it was so important when rendering, I thought rendering performance was just a matter of CPU, but thanks to your nice post I’ve realized that RAM really matters. In these last days, I had set some lower RAM frequency (3600 DOCP) and my previous tests were done with faster settings (3733 and tighter timings), so that was the reason for the longer rendering times. I’ve set all like it was before, and I have a bit shorter rendering times than with the previous 4150 mhz OC.

Yes I am quite a bit happy with this OC, it is a step forward in performance and efficiency thanks to the new per CCX OC feature! Little by little I refine it more. I have found that by raising the SOC a little I get the same performance with less voltage for the cpu. To be continued....
Thanks once more.
Cheers.


----------



## tcclaviger

smokin_mitch said:


> nick name said:
> 
> 
> 
> Darn, that means that the RAM timing bug is still there.
> 
> I can download the BIOS by changing the link, but I can't see it available on their page. Also, it's not Friday. They usually release on a Friday.
> 
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-3103.zip
> 
> Edit:
> Actually I can see it if I select "Other" for OS.
> 
> Edit 2:
> RAM Auto timings bug is still present.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> darkage said:
> 
> 
> 
> 1.05 and 1.8 voltages are still high if set to auto just like the beta, if it was not fully tested before, was it tested before release or is this the beta bios ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This makes me not even want to try this bios I'm still on bios 2801 as it doesn't have the fabric clock sleep/wake bug like all the newer bios versions which I'm guessing is still present in bios 3103, this may be my last ASUS mobo as their bios updates are getting bad with all these bugs
Click to expand...

I do not have the fabric clock bug on the 3101 bios. Sleeps @ 1868 and stays 1:1 after waking up.

3101 effectively makes the C7H the best Ryzen 3000 PBO board on the market.

Why?

Force OC mode disable + PCIE 3 being less finicky with bclk + bclk at 104.

C8H has all the same ability except I've read a lot about PCIE 4.0 not tolerating raised bclk well.

549 R20, 221 R15 single cores 566.8/193/576 cpu-z single scores totally stable. No EDC bug, PBO enabled but with stock values of 95-140-142, scalar 8, auto OC 200, LLC 2, auto voltage.

This configuration allows the core to boost beyond the 4650 limit because it disables the multiplier adaptation typically applied using bclk OC when force of mode disabled is set to enabled.

It's visible immediately in the "base speed" which for me shows as 3933 instead of 3800 and boost speeds are peaking at 4758 with sustained multipliers bouncing between 45.25 and 45.75 @ 104bclk, so...4706 to 4758.

Other boards and the C7E with force OC mode disabled set to disabled, will adjust the multiplier down to 37, or whatever gets it closest to 3800 base speed.

I would not believe this worked except the scores clearly reflect the speeds beating even 3950x single scores indicating it is, indeed holding boosts beyond advertised max.

When exceeding 104 bclk, the CPU gives all the tell tale signs of too little voltage for a given speed aka needs more voltage because it's boosting over where my chip is stable. R20 crashes with the warning msg box, and other benchmark crash in the same way the do when they're "just" under the required voltage to be stable.

I suspect the 4750 @ 1.5v is essentially "the wall" for Zen 2 cores, reflected in the 3800xt and 3900xt revised speeds and the 3950x. I don't believe AMD there's a "improved process" more like "excess of 3950x CCDs to clear out before Zen 3 launch".

See CPU-Z link in sig for example of why bclk+force oc mode disabled+pbo = win


----------



## nick name

tcclaviger said:


> -snip-
> 
> I suspect the 4750 @ 1.5v is essentially "the wall" for Zen 2 cores, reflected in the 3800xt and 3900xt revised speeds and the 3950x. I don't believe AMD there's a "improved process" more like "excess of 3950x CCDs to clear out before Zen 3 launch".
> 
> See CPU-Z link in sig for example of why bclk+force oc mode disabled+pbo = win


Yeah, BCLK with EDC bug only gets wonky on single-core loads at their peak speeds. I would have to add a little voltage to make certain that I don't crash during the lightest, bursty loads. (Phrasing) 

If you look at one of the recent 3900XT Geekbench 5 runs the speed is above 4.7GHz, but I have no idea how they have the CPU setup as Geekbench reports the max speed at 4.36GHz on the score page. When you add .gb5 to the URL to view the details is where you see the 4.7GHz+ speeds.

https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/2664749.gb5

I don't know why you wouldn't believe that the process improved as it matured, but there is probably some more to it than that. Clearing out their better surplus silicon with a re-launch is a good idea especially if they are better performing parts. I'm eager to see if both CCDs are of the same better quality or if they continued with the one better than the other.


----------



## xeizo

Two good CCD will most likely continue to be a 3950X exclusive, a nice price premium for that.


----------



## tcclaviger

thanks for the .gb5 link addition to provide details of a given run. .gb4 seems to also work on the v4 results, very much appreciated!

Makes spotting all core OC and XOC results much easier.

I hope we get two good CCDs but, why would they? Every good second CCD could have been a 3600xt and is money lost for AMD.


----------



## Logue

Logue said:


> So, it might be a silly question I have, but, why can I complete Blender in loop for a long time with 4.35GHz @ 1.35v all core on my 3800X (by Per CCX OC, but all at 43.50 and 1.35VID - BIOS setting, real voltages droop a little), but with PBO enabled (142,95,140, 2x scalar), the frequencies stay only at 4.15GHz but basically at the same voltage (1.3V~1.33V VID, 1.35V SVI TFN2)???
> I use a Noctua NH-D15 (single fan in the middle, but it's still a better cooler than stock) and it still seems that it doesn't provide me with that much extra head room for PBO or Auto OC (PBO disabled). With the EDC bug, I can reach 4.25~4.35 in Blender, but gaming benchmarks seem to say it's a decrease in performance (albeit by a small margin). Running LLC3 and max VRM settings all the way, voltage at Auto (no offset). BIOS 3103 (latest).


Any ideas? Is this normal behavior?


----------



## nick name

tcclaviger said:


> thanks for the .gb5 link addition to provide details of a given run. .gb4 seems to also work on the v4 results, very much appreciated!
> 
> Makes spotting all core OC and XOC results much easier.
> 
> I hope we get two good CCDs but, why would they? Every good second CCD could have been a 3600xt and is money lost for AMD.


No problem for the Geekbench trick. I can't remember who taught it to me.

And two good CCDs is just a hope that maybe the process has matured enough that they aren't really making any "bad" ones anymore. Not that I guess it really matters to me as I don't plan to buy anything until Ryzen 4000 comes out. Or maybe even 4000XT.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> No problem for the Geekbench trick. I can't remember who taught it to me.
> 
> And two good CCDs is just a hope that maybe the process has matured enough that they aren't really making any "bad" ones anymore. Not that I guess it really matters to me as I don't plan to buy anything until Ryzen 4000 comes out. Or maybe even 4000XT.


Will definetely be a Zen 3, looking forward having IF above 2000MHz  Why would they spec RAM speeds above 5GHz on the new mobos if something wasn't coming?


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> Will definetely be a Zen 3, looking forward having IF above 2000MHz  Why would they spec RAM speeds above 5GHz on the new mobos if something wasn't coming?


That recent APU leak with the incredible RAM speed, timings, and latency looked fun. It might be fun buying a future APU just for the better latency and RAM overclocking.

Edit:
Those APUs may also be why new mobos support such fast RAM.


----------



## smokin_mitch

tcclaviger said:


> I do not have the fabric clock bug on the 3101 bios. Sleeps @ 1868 and stays 1:1 after waking up.
> 
> 3101 effectively makes the C7H the best Ryzen 3000 PBO board on the market.
> 
> Why?
> 
> Force OC mode disable + PCIE 3 being less finicky with bclk + bclk at 104.
> 
> C8H has all the same ability except I've read a lot about PCIE 4.0 not tolerating raised bclk well.
> 
> 549 R20, 221 R15 single cores 566.8/193/576 cpu-z single scores totally stable. No EDC bug, PBO enabled but with stock values of 95-140-142, scalar 8, auto OC 200, LLC 2, auto voltage.
> 
> This configuration allows the core to boost beyond the 4650 limit because it disables the multiplier adaptation typically applied using bclk OC when force of mode disabled is set to enabled.
> 
> It's visible immediately in the "base speed" which for me shows as 3933 instead of 3800 and boost speeds are peaking at 4758 with sustained multipliers bouncing between 45.25 and 45.75 @ 104bclk, so...4706 to 4758.
> 
> Other boards and the C7E with force OC mode disabled set to disabled, will adjust the multiplier down to 37, or whatever gets it closest to 3800 base speed.
> 
> I would not believe this worked except the scores clearly reflect the speeds beating even 3950x single scores indicating it is, indeed holding boosts beyond advertised max.
> 
> When exceeding 104 bclk, the CPU gives all the tell tale signs of too little voltage for a given speed aka needs more voltage because it's boosting over where my chip is stable. R20 crashes with the warning msg box, and other benchmark crash in the same way the do when they're "just" under the required voltage to be stable.
> 
> I suspect the 4750 @ 1.5v is essentially "the wall" for Zen 2 cores, reflected in the 3800xt and 3900xt revised speeds and the 3950x. I don't believe AMD there's a "improved process" more like "excess of 3950x CCDs to clear out before Zen 3 launch".
> 
> See CPU-Z link in sig for example of why bclk+force oc mode disabled+pbo = win


Ok I guess I'll try this bios seeing as the sleep bug is fixed 

*edit Its not fixed for me still drops fclk and uclk when waking from sleep to 1800/950 from 1900


----------



## nick name

I still can't figure out why Rzen Master shows my SOC voltage at 1.081V while HWiNFO shows it as it's set in BIOS. Does anyone else suffer from this?


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> I still can't figure out why Rzen Master shows my SOC voltage at 1.081V while HWiNFO shows it as it's set in BIOS. Does anyone else suffer from this?


Yes, about the same, It's the same thing on B550. Can have something to do with the new AGESAS.


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> Yes, about the same, It's the same thing on B550. Can have something to do with the new AGESAS.


It's doing it on 1.0.0.4 too.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> It's doing it on 1.0.0.4 too.


Aha, I never noticed it back then as I was running 1.1V at that time so everything looked the same. Lately I've been lowering SOC, 1.05V in bios gives 1.037V in HWINFO. Ryzen Master still shows 1.1 though.


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> Aha, I never noticed it back then as I was running 1.1V at that time so everything looked the same. Lately I've been lowering SOC, 1.05V in bios gives 1.037V in HWINFO. Ryzen Master still shows 1.1 though.


Mine displays 1.081V while I set 1.106V (06 for droop). When I go lower I get USB issues.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> Mine displays 1.081V while I set 1.106V (06 for droop). When I go lower I get USB issues.


OK, no USB issues here neither on C7H nor B550-F, I run USB-drives, USB-audio and of course keyboard/mouse.


----------



## tcclaviger

Saw that, the 4700G looks like a fun CPU to play with 2k+ IF, 4k+ ram, 8/16 and a high enough stock turbo limit that a mere 106 bclk will give very good single core performance. Not to mention, less hot l3 cache to cool, with igpu disabled there will be a lot of dark silicon to help sink heat and make cooling easier. Yes please.

I forsee a lot of tweaked 4700G setups smacking the 3700x/3800x/3800xt around lol (probably why they're dragging ass on releasing it).

I mean I would love to have 2k IF 3900xt with dual 4.7 capable CCDs but...

Regarding 2k IF on xt refresh... Not a chance if going by the tests listed so far. All of them (for all 3 chips) are 1500, 1600, or 1800 memory except 1. That 1 is 2010 ram, but not synchronized IF, obvious by the lack of score efficiency at 4525 it scores like my 3900 at 4300.

To me it seems the CCDs are not what's holding back IF, it's IO die/substrate/motherboard. I suspect this is why enabling LN2 mode in AMD section can stabilize 1900IF on system that otherwise cannot run 1900IF, as it will be increasing hidden board voltages even if all user configurable voltages remain identical.


----------



## Elrick

tcclaviger said:


> I forsee a lot of tweaked 4700G setups smacking the 3700x/3800x/3800xt around lol (probably why they're dragging ass on releasing it).



ONLY when AMD releases such tech.

Intel will never operate in that manner. You'll be extremely lucky in getting a max of 7 to 10% increase in speeds, compared to the forth coming releases due from AMD.

Now you know why we are sticking with the superior PC hardware performer, for 2020 :thumb: .


----------



## minal

How can one tell if Cool'n'Quiet is enabled? Looking through my saved BIOS settings file, I found no mention of "cool", "quiet" or "cnq".

If frequency is dynamically scaling, does it mean it is enabled? 

Looking at the utility CoreFreq, I noticed that CnQ is shown as OFF. I want to verify the actual state, since CoreFreq is under constant development.


----------



## crakej

oreonutz said:


> I
> 
> Anyways, I have written a book again, so I will go do something else. Much Love!


Your books are proving to be very useful!


----------



## crakej

tcclaviger said:


> To me it seems the CCDs are not what's holding back IF, it's IO die/substrate/motherboard. I suspect this is why enabling LN2 mode in AMD section can stabilize 1900IF on system that otherwise cannot run 1900IF, as it will be increasing hidden board voltages even if all user configurable voltages remain identical.


I've not heard this before. What does it do and is it safe to do this when not running LN2?


----------



## oreonutz

tcclaviger said:


> To me it seems the CCDs are not what's holding back IF, it's IO die/substrate/motherboard. I suspect this is why enabling LN2 mode in AMD section can stabilize 1900IF on system that otherwise cannot run 1900IF, as it will be increasing hidden board voltages even if all user configurable voltages remain identical.


That is an incredibly interesting theory. I had to read twice because at first I thought you were saying putting your Chips under LN2 Helped with the IF Clock, when in fact I am pretty sure that is only true until about -45c or so, after that you start to drop IF Stability hard unless you drop the IF Clocks to around 1400Mhz or so.

But then I re-read what you said, and you aren't saying to put it under LN2 at all, your saying just to put the board into LN2 Mode, and this will increase the Voltages given to Voltages that aren't visible to the user. That would be very interesting if true, I wonder how we would go about validating that?

Have you had better luck stabilizing a higher IF Clock with LN2 Mode on? Or is this just something that people have noted around the forum? (Not trying to dismiss it, just want to understand how many people have experienced this. If this is the case then I think understanding why IF is stabilized under LN2 Mode, could help a lot of people out.)


----------



## kmellz

That's some interesting stuff, been having some random stability issues at 1900/3800 so gonna enable that and see if it changes anything!


----------



## nick name

smokin_mitch said:


> Ok I guess I'll try this bios seeing as the sleep bug is fixed
> 
> *edit Its not fixed for me still drops fclk and uclk when waking from sleep to 1800/950 from 1900


I don't think this will fix it, but have you enabled the options that lock FCLK and prevent it from downclocking?


----------



## nick name

tcclaviger said:


> Saw that, the 4700G looks like a fun CPU to play with 2k+ IF, 4k+ ram, 8/16 and a high enough stock turbo limit that a mere 106 bclk will give very good single core performance. Not to mention, less hot l3 cache to cool, with igpu disabled there will be a lot of dark silicon to help sink heat and make cooling easier. Yes please.
> 
> I forsee a lot of tweaked 4700G setups smacking the 3700x/3800x/3800xt around lol (probably why they're dragging ass on releasing it).
> 
> I mean I would love to have 2k IF 3900xt with dual 4.7 capable CCDs but...
> 
> Regarding 2k IF on xt refresh... Not a chance if going by the tests listed so far. All of them (for all 3 chips) are 1500, 1600, or 1800 memory except 1. That 1 is 2010 ram, but not synchronized IF, obvious by the lack of score efficiency at 4525 it scores like my 3900 at 4300.
> 
> To me it seems the CCDs are not what's holding back IF, it's IO die/substrate/motherboard. I suspect this is why enabling LN2 mode in AMD section can stabilize 1900IF on system that otherwise cannot run 1900IF, as it will be increasing hidden board voltages even if all user configurable voltages remain identical.


I was thinking the same thing about the new 4700G. Rumors point to a release this month so maybe on 07/07 with the other CPUs?

And don't forget that LN2 mode also increases voltages you can adjust too. Off the top-of-my-head -- I think it increases PLL from 1.8V to 2.1V+.


----------



## nick name

kmellz said:


> That's some interesting stuff, been having some random stability issues at 1900/3800 so gonna enable that and see if it changes anything!


Let us know if you're doing it in BIOS or with the board jumper.


----------



## tcclaviger

oreonutz said:


> tcclaviger said:
> 
> 
> 
> To me it seems the CCDs are not what's holding back IF, it's IO die/substrate/motherboard. I suspect this is why enabling LN2 mode in AMD section can stabilize 1900IF on system that otherwise cannot run 1900IF, as it will be increasing hidden board voltages even if all user configurable voltages remain identical.
> 
> 
> 
> That is an incredibly interesting theory. I had to read twice because at first I thought you were saying putting your Chips under LN2 Helped with the IF Clock, when in fact I am pretty sure that is only true until about -45c or so, after that you start to drop IF Stability hard unless you drop the IF Clocks to around 1400Mhz or so.
> 
> But then I re-read what you said, and you aren't saying to put it under LN2 at all, your saying just to put the board into LN2 Mode, and this will increase the Voltages given to Voltages that aren't visible to the user. That would be very interesting if true, I wonder how we would go about validating that?
> 
> Have you had better luck stabilizing a higher IF Clock with LN2 Mode on? Or is this just something that people have noted around the forum? (Not trying to dismiss it, just want to understand how many people have experienced this. If this is the case then I think understanding why IF is stabilized under LN2 Mode, could help a lot of people out.)
Click to expand...

I found 3 or 4 references to people trying it on Google and getting 1900 stable after turning on the LN2 option in the AMD section on chips that otherwise we're limited to 1866, like mine which was not fully stable at 1866.

I can't post at 1900 with LN2 disabled I can with it Enabled. I'm not stable at 1900 either way, but am stable at 1895 with it enabled, but unstable at 1895 with it disabled. No placebo, definite change in behaviour.

I am NOT suggesting to flip the LN2 switch on the board!! (For anyone else reading in the future).

Board switch = very not ok on ambient lol.

I cranked my office AC down to 60, waited for water temp to = air temp and gave it a shot. Worked. Ran a battery of tests for thermals/performance to find any outlier data suggesting higher heat production or increased hidden latencies, nothing negative at all. Have now verified safe/working correct at normal 25c water temps.

I did notice, when going from auto vcore voltage to manual, it defaulted to 1.7v, so for ccx and all core OC, just check that in bios immediately after boot when enabling.

It's passed 20 run TM5, 999 minutes of Superposition stress, 10.5 hours p95, and works as expected 100% stable in every app/game so far for the last 3 days since I enabled it, CPU is happily boosting to 4740 without the EDC bug using:
TDC 105, EDC 154, PPT 200.
Scalar: 8
Auto OC: 200
Force OC mode Disabled: Enabled
AMD Overclock LN2: Enabled
CLDO VDDG: .95 (both)
CLDO VDDP: .95
Vcore: Auto
LLC: 3
BCLK: 103.8
IF strap: 1800
SOC: 1.08
PLL: 1.83


It beat my GB4 per CCX OC multicore score while boosting, and is currently listed as fastest non-LN2 single core in GB4 on hwbot at 6558.

Note: Multicore scores below are TDC limited, they scale much higher if I raise limits, but, I have no need, more interested in single core high as possible with still better than stock multicore at low power/heat.


----------



## tcclaviger

Working on stabilizing this now:


----------



## kmellz

nick name said:


> Let us know if you're doing it in BIOS or with the board jumper.


Using the bios setting


----------



## nick name

tcclaviger said:


> Working on stabilizing this now:


Something in my system doesn't want to boot at BCLK as high as yours. That kind of bums me out.


----------



## smokin_mitch

nick name said:


> I don't think this will fix it, but have you enabled the options that lock FCLK and prevent it from downclocking?


yeah tried that also and no luck, guess I'm stuck on bios 2801 forever.....


----------



## tcclaviger

Looking promising, had to back off 1 notch on bclk, but seems...good so far? Need to TM5 the tighter timings and give it a few days to have things randomly crash if they're going to.

BCLK - From what I've read, certain NVME drives don't play nice with it, but, I've not had that issue with these 3 M.2s I've been using whatsoever. SN 550, XLR8 3030, or the Intel 660, all play nice at raised bclk, and one of them is in a PCIE slot adapter running through the chipset in 2.0 mode for mass storage and keep the gpu at x16.

From your SIG specs, i would point at the 970 drive, they're amazing drives but it's the only thing that I see that might be the issue...

I do have wifi disabled... if that matters I don't know.

Optane, I know doesn't like boosted bus speeds.


----------



## oreonutz

tcclaviger said:


> I found 3 or 4 references to people trying it on Google and getting 1900 stable after turning on the LN2 option in the AMD section on chips that otherwise we're limited to 1866, like mine which was not fully stable at 1866.
> 
> I can't post at 1900 with LN2 disabled I can with it Enabled. I'm not stable at 1900 either way, but am stable at 1895 with it enabled, but unstable at 1895 with it disabled. No placebo, definite change in behaviour.
> 
> I am NOT suggesting to flip the LN2 switch on the board!! (For anyone else reading in the future).
> 
> Board switch = very not ok on ambient lol.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I cranked my office AC down to 60, waited for water temp to = air temp and gave it a shot. Worked. Ran a battery of tests for thermals/performance to find any outlier data suggesting higher heat production or increased hidden latencies, nothing negative at all. Have now verified safe/working correct at normal 25c water temps.
> 
> I did notice, when going from auto vcore voltage to manual, it defaulted to 1.7v, so for ccx and all core OC, just check that in bios immediately after boot when enabling.
> 
> It's passed 20 run TM5, 999 minutes of Superposition stress, 10.5 hours p95, and works as expected 100% stable in every app/game so far for the last 3 days since I enabled it, CPU is happily boosting to 4740 without the EDC bug using:
> TDC 105, EDC 154, PPT 200.
> Scalar: 8
> Auto OC: 200
> Force OC mode Disabled: Enabled
> AMD Overclock LN2: Enabled
> CLDO VDDG: .95 (both)
> CLDO VDDP: .95
> Vcore: Auto
> LLC: 3
> BCLK: 103.8
> IF strap: 1800
> SOC: 1.08
> PLL: 1.83
> 
> 
> It beat my GB4 per CCX OC multicore score while boosting, and is currently listed as fastest non-LN2 single core in GB4 on hwbot at 6558.
> 
> Note: Multicore scores below are TDC limited, they scale much higher if I raise limits, but, I have no need, more interested in single core high as possible with still better than stock multicore at low power/heat.


Nice. Going to give this a run with my 3900x on my Test Bench. It has no problem booting at 1900 FClock, but every now and again there are weird stability issues, so I dropped it down to 1800 and those disappeared. The Chip is currently in my Server, but am doing some serious upgrading this next weekend, so I will pop the 2700x back into the server for now, pop the 3900x into my new test bench, and then get to testing.

Unfortunately regarding BCLK that is something you have to be careful with. For anyone running Just a graphics card, and One Sata Drive it shouldn't be much of an issue, but for those of us who have workstations set up, that use Raid Arrays with Raid Cards and 10Gb Network Cards, and even NVMe Drives, you can cause yourself real issues going above 101 BCLK. And the hard part is that every device is different, so some Devices might not have problems until they reach 103BCLK, others Might have an issue once you hit 101.2 BCLK, so I would just advise if you have a NVMe Drive to just back it up before Raising BCLK because you don't know at which point it will start complaining, and unfortunately it will not give any warning signs, at 102.4 It might boot Fine and show no ill signs, but then raising to 102.6 all the sudden it might no longer boot, and then you might find when lowering it back to 100 It still might boot because the installation is now corrupt, so just have your data backed up. (And you can't count on a SKU being safe because of tolerances within silicon. So someone might report that a 970 Pro is fine with BCLK Overclocking, but because of Silicon Tolerances one persons 970 Pro can tolerate BCLK OCing just Fine, while the next persons might become Unstable and Corrupt the Drive under the same BCLK, so just be backed up before playing around just to be safe.)



Spoiler



I thought myself that people warning about that were overblown about 2 years ago with my 2nd Gen Ryzen System, where I had a SATA Raid Setup Through the onboard Sata Ports using Windows Raid for my Game Drive, and a Raid Card with 4 HDD's setup in a Raid 5 on an LSI Raid Card, as well as my Sound Card, and an NVMe, along with a 10Gbe Nic Card, all running on my Crosshair VII Hero. I cranked my BCLK up to 103, and keep in mind before this I had been running at 100.8 Which helped improve PBO Big time on the 2700x, so I was Benchmarking in a little competition and wanted to push it even further, and when I hit 103 BCLK all the sudden after post My System wouldn't boot.

In one swoop, I had Corrupted my NVMe Boot Drive (Which is why Windows Wouldn't Boot), my Raid 5 Array, and My Raid 0 Windows Array. Before I had found out all I had lost, I originally figured I just used more BCLK Then my NVMe Could Handle, so I booted off of my Windows 7 SSD that I also had in the system, which had no problems booting, and thats when I realized that My Sound card and 10Gbe Nic's both wouldn't work with the BCLK Cranked so high, which wasn't a huge deal because once I brought the BCLK back down to 100.8 they both started working again (After a full Power Cycle), but the Windows Array, because it was RAID 0 Was just lost, which was fine, the only reason it was running RAID 0 was because it was just a 3x 500GB SATA SSD Array that I used for a Games drive and a Scratch Disk, so nothing was lost that wasn't backed up or mattered, but the Raid 5 Array (and the Boot Drive) was a pain in the ass, I didn't actually lose any data, all was backed up but I was curious to see if I could recover the data, and it was all recoverable, but in order for the Array to function properly again at full speed with the Cache working, I had to completely rebuild the array, which was just a Pain in the Ass. My Windows Install also was completely corrupted on my NVMe, so I ended up having to deploy my last Image from the week prior to get that back up and running.

After this I did a bit more digging and it appears that a lot of devices are extremely BCLK Sensitive, and RAID especially is extremely sensitive to BCLK. Even more surprising is devices like Sound cards and NIC's can also be sensitive to BCLK, so its generally a bad idea to run a BCLK so high if you have any of these external cards plugged into your system. But if you use just a GPU and a Sata SSD, and have nothing else plugged into the system, like a lot of people do, then you will most likely be fine, just if you notice devices starting to have weird behavior where they just stop working, then your BCLK may be too high. Lowering BCLK and Cold Booting will generally get them to start working again. 

Obviously you havent been having any issues, but I would let other people know to be careful when pushing the BCLK so hard if they do have NVMe's and are running RAID in their System. Some NVMe's appear to not be as sensitive too it, but it would still be a great idea to back it up (Or Image your NVMe before pushing BCLK, just to be on the safe side) it seems to be a Silicon Lottery type thing with NVMe's as even with the Same exact SKU, some NVMe's don't have any trouble, while others might encounter a similar issue that I have. So you might be able to push your NVMe just fine, just keep in mind that when you push BLCK you are literally Overclocking Pretty Much Everything plugged into the Mobo, including your SSD's.



Anyways, didn't mean to make that so long, I am extremely envious of your OC, it looks to finally be performing like PBO Should be, so its good to see someone pulling actually awesome numbers out of it!


----------



## nick name

tcclaviger said:


> Looking promising, had to back off 1 notch on bclk, but seems...good so far? Need to TM5 the tighter timings and give it a few days to have things randomly crash if they're going to.
> 
> BCLK - From what I've read, certain NVME drives don't play nice with it, but, I've not had that issue with these 3 M.2s I've been using whatsoever. SN 550, XLR8 3030, or the Intel 660, all play nice at raised bclk, and one of them is in a PCIE slot adapter running through the chipset in 2.0 mode for mass storage and keep the gpu at x16.
> 
> From your SIG specs, i would point at the 970 drive, they're amazing drives but it's the only thing that I see that might be the issue...
> 
> I do have wifi disabled... if that matters I don't know.
> 
> Optane, I know doesn't like boosted bus speeds.


That's what weird. I used to use high BCLK when benchmarking my 2700X. The only thing different now is the CPU.

Edit:
I mis-remembered and I didn't use BCLK as high as 103+ and the behavior is POST with no Windows. Just the ASUS splash screen so I'm guessing it's the NVME drive.


----------



## garf333

Just wanted to chime in... Seems memory overclock is a little more stable with the newer BIOS.

I used to get idle BSODs with memory overclock on AFRs to 3600 MHz, and couldn't find the right setting to loosen to get it 100% stable.

Using completely the same settings, it seems I'm no longer getting BSODs on idle.


----------



## xeizo

garf333 said:


> Just wanted to chime in... Seems memory overclock is a little more stable with the newer BIOS.
> 
> I used to get idle BSODs with memory overclock on AFRs to 3600 MHz, and couldn't find the right setting to loosen to get it 100% stable.
> 
> Using completely the same settings, it seems I'm no longer getting BSODs on idle.


Hynix AFR on 3600? That is not everyday, as they usually clock like ****. Could explain some of the BSODs, just amazing they even boot


----------



## nick name

smokin_mitch said:


> yeah tried that also and no luck, guess I'm stuck on bios 2801 forever.....


Including using APBDIS? That will let you set a fixed SOC P-state of 0. I'm not sure if that's what the other setting does or not.


----------



## nick name

So how is the LN2 BIOS setting working out for everyone? I can't boot with it enabled.


----------



## tcclaviger

Still fine for me, have run the chip up to 220 watts (SMU in hwinfo) thus far testing out the Optimus Foundation block, nothing weird observed.

104 and 104.2 bclk are achievable, bringing 4770ish single core, but they take a positive voltage offset, not ok imho (puts single core boost max at 1.512-1.515 ish).

Scalar now actually does something paired with 103 or higher bclk. I can use it to fine tune stability and boost speeds from 103-103.8 bclk, so, while it seems like 99% placebo usually there is "some" value to it lol.

It behaves like a very mild "FIT limit" override now.

Regarding bclk, I've never had an issue with it, I don't think I've run stock FSB/Bclk since at least the Duron 600 days even, on either side, Intel or AMD.

On the other hand, it is a real issue because people do end up with corrupted drives at times.

I do tend to not use anything PCIE aside from 1 or 2 GPUs, though the $7 NVME to PCIE adapter seems flawless so far lmao.

I would never advise running any production or mission critical machine like this, at least, not without *extensive* testing and validation before deployment.

Nor would I advise it for anyone who can't afford to replace something that gets killed easily. I have a plethora of PC parts sitting around, backups to backups, so if something dies.... Meh, NEXT, lol.


----------



## garf333

xeizo said:


> Hynix AFR on 3600? That is not everyday, as they usually clock like ****. Could explain some of the BSODs, just amazing they even boot


Yeah, it's interesting I got these to 3600 at all. First time to "win" the silicon lottery.

I have these Vengeance LPX sticks on 3600mhz at 1.39V @ 16-19-19-20-38-58
TWR - 18
TFAW - 32
TRFC - 510

AIDA giving me 69.x - 70ns runs.

Running a 3700X with just PBO on a minor negative voltage offset.

Several 4 pass memtest86 runs all came back clean but was running into idle BSODs with the old BIOS, but "stable" while the computer is actually in use.

Noticed reboots are faster with this BIOS too, but cold boot/double pumps still take as long as ever.

These sticks would actually do 3733 @ 16-21-21-21 and it was memtest stable but every 2nd cold boot would fail. I don't know which voltages to tweak for that so I went back to 3600...


----------



## tcclaviger

Did you leave ram boot voltage at auto? Changing it will trigger double posts every time it starts up, once to train timing at 1.2, shutdown, then boots with trained timings at bios set boot voltage.


----------



## garf333

I set it to 1.39V, same as the DRAM Voltage.

Hitting the power button turns it on, it turns off once, then it will turn on for good.

Most of my timings are manually dialed in except for a few (TRFC2, some other minor timings)

Any way to speed this up or is this the fastest it will go?

Edit: Uploading my RAM timings.

SOC 1.06 I think.
VDDG/VDDP are on auto.


----------



## nick name

Apparently you don't need the latest BIOS to run the new 3900XT. In this Geekbench 5 run they're using BIOS 3004.

https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/2802539
https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/2802539.gb5


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> Apparently you don't need the latest BIOS to run the new 3900XT. In this Geekbench 5 run they're using BIOS 3004.
> 
> https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/2802539
> https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/2802539.gb5


Judging by that score, I should not change to a XT, I get massive better multicore with CCX OC on my regular X. And same single core.

Did a baseline to compare:

https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/compare/2682647?baseline=2802539


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> Judging by that score, I should not change to a XT, I get massive better multicore with CCX OC on my regular X. And same single core.
> 
> Did a baseline to compare:
> 
> https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/compare/2682647?baseline=2802539


Yeah that isn't a good example for a score. There are better scores I've seen. 

There is a 1423 Single Core score on a CH8, but none of the multi-core scores are great. And that makes me believe that the 3900XT is gonna stick with the one good and one bad CCD. Perhaps, though, the bad CCD is going to be an old good CCD from a 3900X and the new good CCD will be the better silicon.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> Yeah that isn't a good example for a score. There are better scores I've seen.
> 
> There is a 1423 Single Core score on a CH8, but none of the multi-core scores are great. And that makes me believe that the 3900XT is gonna stick with the one good and one bad CCD. Perhaps, though, the bad CCD is going to be an old good CCD from a 3900X and the new good CCD will be the better silicon.


I think you hit the head of the nail there! Of course, why waste TWO perfectly good dies on mere consumers. Yes, I believe that too. XT is for clearing stock I recon, there is both good and bad stock so while CCX0 is actually better than ever before CCX1 may even be worse than what we are used too. Remember, Intel has nothing to compete in multi anyway. Even with a boat anchor for CCX1 it will beat 10900K in multi.

A better CCX0 is a welcome addition though. Discovered yesterday that my 3900X CCX0 ain't that bad, when I tried CCX OC on my 3700X. It is way worse than my 3900X and could hardly beat out it's PBO scores stable. And it took much too high vcore to get anywhere above what PBO performs.


----------



## neikosr0x

xeizo said:


> Judging by that score, I should not change to a XT, I get massive better multicore with CCX OC on my regular X. And same single core.
> 
> Did a baseline to compare:
> 
> https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/compare/2682647?baseline=2802539


yea they are just a refresh so makes sense AMD they want to keep prices up a bit to sell the ZEN3 at a good price. But i do expect this round of zen2 cpu to be even more stable and responsive.


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> Judging by that score, I should not change to a XT, I get massive better multicore with CCX OC on my regular X. And same single core.
> 
> Did a baseline to compare:
> 
> https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/compare/2682647?baseline=2802539


When you look at the RAM for all the runs it does appear that they're running DOCP so I'd imagine those scores could be dramatically better with tuned and overclocked RAM. That 1423 score is just a hair higher than my 1410 run I just did while the 1423 run was at about 100MHz faster speeds.


----------



## garf333

Now that we have a per CCX overclock, are there any changes with the "rules" needed to overclock?

Never tried all core OC before, but with the per CCX, this may be interesting...


----------



## nick name

garf333 said:


> Now that we have a per CCX overclock, are there any changes with the "rules" needed to overclock?
> 
> Never tried all core OC before, but with the per CCX, this may be interesting...


Well an all-core OC is going to be limited by the weaker CCD. For me -- I can't really go past 4.4GHz on CCD1 and 4.25GHz on CCD2. For those speeds 1.26250V with LLC 4 is stable (droops to 1.244V). I can't find stability beyond that regardless of voltage.


----------



## zrav

Going from BIOS 2901 to 3103 performance dropped across the board for me, mostly multi core. I used to get 5060-ish CB20 scores on my 3700X, now its around 200 points less with the same settings. I spent half a day experimenting with loads of configurations, and with more aggressive settings I was able to equalize the single core perf, but multi core is still around 100 points short. Only thing that didn't get worse was memory latency and temps. Reading through the thread it seems very few of you had performance regressions, no?


----------



## neikosr0x

zrav said:


> Going from BIOS 2901 to 3103 performance dropped across the board for me, mostly multi core. I used to get 5060-ish CB20 scores on my 3700X, now its around 200 points less with the same settings. I spent half a day experimenting with loads of configurations, and with more aggressive settings I was able to equalize the single core perf, but multi core is still around 100 points short. Only thing that didn't get worse was memory latency and temps. Reading through the thread it seems very few of you had performance regressions, no?


It is totally normal to lose performance with the last 4 bios or so i believe all ch7 owners had experienced it.


----------



## xeizo

Best performing bios for Zen 2 was the Beta-bios 0002+, now running CCX OC with 3103 meaning boost behavior doesn't matter

These new bioses ain't that bad, 3700X on my B550-F with AGESA V2 1.0.0.2 bios hits the best CB R20 and CB15 scores I ever had using PBO on Auto. I suppose some settings have to be treated different for best performance compared to older bioses.


----------



## crakej

I'm on (CB R15) 3262 - top score used to be 3324. SC 205 (Same)

I'm using PE3 +200 Scalar x10. I've got cores boosting up to 4.6 4.65 and 4.6 on CCX1, but there's stretching occurring..... not much, but it's there. Defalt voltage for CPU with LLC1. PPT TDC and EDC at 4096 4096 20

I tried to boot 1900:3800 with LN2 enabled in bios, but didn't work for me 

More experiments tomorrow.


----------



## garf333

nick name said:


> Well an all-core OC is going to be limited by the weaker CCD. For me -- I can't really go past 4.4GHz on CCD1 and 4.25GHz on CCD2. For those speeds 1.26250V with LLC 4 is stable (droops to 1.244V). I can't find stability beyond that regardless of voltage.


What's the best way to find the 'safe' voltage for high load on Ryzen? It's frequently called the "FIT" voltage if Im not mistaken? 

Is it still run PBO and Prime95 and check HWInfo?

Sorry, I'm not really in the loop WRT to this.


----------



## crakej

garf333 said:


> What's the best way to find the 'safe' voltage for high load on Ryzen? It's frequently called the "FIT" voltage if Im not mistaken?
> 
> Is it still run PBO and Prime95 and check HWInfo?
> 
> Sorry, I'm not really in the loop WRT to this.


It's my understanding that at defaults -the CPU will use up to 1.5v *on light loads*

Max voltage I'm not so sure on - but some people use 1.325v *as max voltage on 3xxx CPUs, based on tests the Stilt did on CPUs he had* - more information here https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cd5fc4/3900x_maximum_overclock_and_voltage/

Suffice to say - there is no exact answer!


----------



## nick name

garf333 said:


> What's the best way to find the 'safe' voltage for high load on Ryzen? It's frequently called the "FIT" voltage if Im not mistaken?
> 
> Is it still run PBO and Prime95 and check HWInfo?
> 
> Sorry, I'm not really in the loop WRT to this.


Yeah, it's keeping the CPU at stock and then running something that will load all cores and then see what the voltages are.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I'm on (CB R15) 3262 - top score used to be 3324. SC 205 (Same)
> 
> I'm using PE3 +200 Scalar x10. I've got cores boosting up to 4.6 4.65 and 4.6 on CCX1, but there's stretching occurring..... not much, but it's there. Defalt voltage for CPU with LLC1. PPT TDC and EDC at 4096 4096 20
> 
> I tried to boot 1900:3800 with LN2 enabled in bios, but didn't work for me
> 
> More experiments tomorrow.


I run 1900 FCLK daily, but can't POST with LN2 enabled.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> I run 1900 FCLK daily, but can't POST with LN2 enabled.


I remember I tested it a long time ago, it promptly refused to boot, never tested it since


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I run 1900 FCLK daily, but can't POST with LN2 enabled.


I've found that I'm able to reduce my VDDG down to .950 for 1st time in ages. Haven't tried this low for some time. Might have to try 1900 again


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I've found that I'm able to reduce my VDDG down to .950 for 1st time in ages. Haven't tried this low for some time. Might have to try 1900 again


Ayyyy. Fingers crossed.


----------



## Syldon

garf333 said:


> What's the best way to find the 'safe' voltage for high load on Ryzen? It's frequently called the "FIT" voltage if Im not mistaken?
> 
> Is it still run PBO and Prime95 and check HWInfo?
> 
> Sorry, I'm not really in the loop WRT to this.


Voltages are not the most destructive element with regards to the CPU. The amount of damage done by electromigration is minimal. The majority of damage done by over-volting is the result of the heat generated. LN2 cooling is indicative of just this.

Therefore when setting up your CPU, temps become the most critical indicator. With Ryzen I find 80c is the most that you should be accepting under full load. That will leave you some tolerance to spare.


----------



## Geezerman

I'm using bios 2304 from May 2019 with a 2600X. All at stock for the moment. Is there a better bios to use?
Thanks


----------



## nick name

Geezerman said:


> I'm using bios 2304 from May 2019 with a 2600X. All at stock for the moment. Is there a better bios to use?
> Thanks


If I remember correctly I was very happy with 3001 performance on my 2700X.


----------



## nick name

I've been looking at some of the XT Geekbench scores and it appears there are a few runs that were done with all-core overclocks. I saw several (on 3600XT, 3800XT, 3900XT) at 4.5GHz and one at 4.525GHz. That seems promising -- especially on the 3900XT.


----------



## tcclaviger

nick name said:


> I've been looking at some of the XT Geekbench scores and it appears there are a few runs that were done with all-core overclocks. I saw several (on 3600XT, 3800XT, 3900XT) at 4.5GHz and one at 4.525GHz. That seems promising -- especially on the 3900XT.


Agree on the 3900xt being a positive indicator for dual good CCDs. Just with GB could show max temp and voltage info, but, we'll know soon.

In the end, while AMD LN2 option did allow higher fclk use, it was not 100% stable at anything over 1882ish fclk. 

So fclk is my hard bottleneck 😞. First time I've ever had a bus limit an overclock before temp/voltage/speed did so.


----------



## crakej

I noticed a couple of you are using a different Timing Checker than I've been using (black background)

Anyone got a link for that?


----------



## Delta9k

crakej said:


> I noticed a couple of you are using a different Timing Checker than I've been using (black background)
> 
> Anyone got a link for that?


This one, Zen Timings ?

https://github.com/irusanov/ZenTimings/releases


----------



## nick name

tcclaviger said:


> Agree on the 3900xt being a positive indicator for dual good CCDs. Just with GB could show max temp and voltage info, but, we'll know soon.
> 
> In the end, while AMD LN2 option did allow higher fclk use, it was not 100% stable at anything over 1882ish fclk.
> 
> So fclk is my hard bottleneck 😞. First time I've ever had a bus limit an overclock before temp/voltage/speed did so.


I think I'm more excited about the 4700G though. As something to play with -- it seems very promising.

I can't even POST with LN2 mode.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> I think I'm more excited about the 4700G though. As something to play with -- it seems very promising.
> 
> I can't even POST with LN2 mode.


4700G definetely more promising judging from the leaks, but then Zen3 ain't that far away


----------



## tcclaviger

So 3900xt seems to be better all core OC than 3900x, but still a strong/weak CCD arrangement, just both are stronger than average 3900x CCDs, if you have a strong 3900x there's no change in all core OC. Per CCX is likely better, no one has posted anything yet, no mention of IF yet on any reviews. 

Of more interest, what the reviews show is that the 3000 series SKU selection is more about core count and boost is more about motherboard selection.

Differing sites show wildly differing boost behavior, boost levels, and performance as a result.

It's hilarious to see reviewers down on the XTs when they loved the x counterparts in 2019, all because of price creep on the x parts adjusting expectations.


----------



## nick name

tcclaviger said:


> So 3900xt seems to be better all core OC than 3900x, but still a strong/weak CCD arrangement, just both are stronger than average 3900x CCDs, if you have a strong 3900x there's no change in all core OC. Per CCX is likely better, no one has posted anything yet, no mention of IF yet on any reviews.
> 
> Of more interest, what the reviews show is that the 3000 series SKU selection is more about core count and boost is more about motherboard selection.
> 
> Differing sites show wildly differing boost behavior, boost levels, and performance as a result.
> 
> It's hilarious to see reviewers down on the XTs when they loved the x counterparts in 2019, all because of price creep on the x parts adjusting expectations.


I've heard several reviewers say that their XT skus all hit 1900 FCLK no problem. And Level1Tech showed their 3900XT at 46.75 43.75 at 1.4V (that voltage is probably more than most are comfortable are at though). 

LTT mentioned a BIOS version for XT processors, but said they didn't use it as AMD said old BIOS versions should run the XT skus.


----------



## crakej

Delta9k said:


> This one, Zen Timings ?
> 
> https://github.com/irusanov/ZenTimings/releases


Thank you!


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I've heard several reviewers say that their XT skus all hit 1900 FCLK no problem. And Level1Tech showed their 3900XT at 46.75 43.75 at 1.4V (that voltage is probably more than most are comfortable are at though).
> 
> LTT mentioned a BIOS version for XT processors, but said they didn't use it as AMD said old BIOS versions should run the XT skus.


I've noticed that if I leave hwinfo for a few hours, my cores are boosting to 4.6 or more much more often than they used to - I've even seen one core boost to 46.3 that I've never seen go over 4.3 (core 5).

Have yet to try pushing the CPU OC in the bios.... more fun!

1.4v........hmmmmmm


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I've heard several reviewers say that their XT skus all hit 1900 FCLK no problem. And Level1Tech showed their 3900XT at 46.75 43.75 at 1.4V (that voltage is probably more than most are comfortable are at though).
> 
> LTT mentioned a BIOS version for XT processors, but said they didn't use it as AMD said old BIOS versions should run the XT skus.


I've noticed that if I leave hwinfo for a few hours, my cores are boosting to 4.6 or more much more often than they used to - I've even seen one core boost to 46.3 that I've never seen go over 4.3 (core 5).

Have yet to try pushing the CPU OC in the bios.... more fun!

1.4v........hmmmmmm


----------



## bMind

I know a lot of you are running newer generations of Ryzens with your CH VII, but for someone stuck with 2700X, what would you say is the bios version I should use?

I've been updating from time to time when I saw some good info here or saw that they bumped Agesa or something, figured out it won't hurt  It does not bring any instability to the system (other than I feel it messed up downclocking/downvolting a some time ago) but for a long time I feel like I'm not gaining anything.


----------



## Delta9k

bMind said:


> I know a lot of you are running newer generations of Ryzens with your CH VII, but for someone stuck with 2700X, what would you say is the bios version I should use?
> 
> I've been updating from time to time when I saw some good info here or saw that they bumped Agesa or something, figured out it won't hurt  It does not bring any instability to the system (other than I feel it messed up downclocking/downvolting a some time ago) but for a long time I feel like I'm not gaining anything.


I may not be any help, I am still running 1103 on my C7H/2700X that I've had since the Zen+ launch. I am still pleased with the performance I'm getting out of this setup and how well PBO works. I have a 3900X to pop in it but I have yet been able to convince myself to break up the marriage of this particular combo C7H / 2700X . 

You should not feel "stuck" with your 2700X - I have 3950X thru 3800X systems, and this ole girl (C7H/2700X) can still play and contribute. It's pretty much only benchmark numbers that throw shade on her.


----------



## tryout1

Did somebody try standby with the new bios 3103, does it fix the standby UCLK issue? I'm just on the fence if i should upgrade cause 3004 works flawless so far beside that problem.

Get's stuck like this instead of the 1900/1900 i set in bios.


----------



## Fight Game

if it ain't broke, don't try to fix it! there's nothing magical about a bios update that will suddenly make everything run a lot better. if you're able to overclock a little (manual, auto, or pbo) then you should probably leave it alone imo


----------



## xeizo

Fight Game said:


> if it ain't broke, don't try to fix it! there's nothing magical about a bios update that will suddenly make everything run a lot better. if you're able to overclock a little (manual, auto, or pbo) then you should probably leave it alone imo


So you don't want showstopper bugs to be fixed?

About pure perfomance I can agree, these chips where near 100% utilized from the scratch. CCX OC in the bios is sort of a must have feature though.


----------



## Fight Game

if you are experiencing a problem, then yes, try an update. and ccx oc may be valuable to a select few but the vast majority are just using pbo


----------



## bushd0c

*bushd0c*



zrav said:


> Going from BIOS 2901 to 3103 performance dropped across the board for me, mostly multi core. I used to get 5060-ish CB20 scores on my 3700X, now its around 200 points less with the same settings. I spent half a day experimenting with loads of configurations, and with more aggressive settings I was able to equalize the single core perf, but multi core is still around 100 points short. Only thing that didn't get worse was memory latency and temps. Reading through the thread it seems very few of you had performance regressions, no?


Yeah, 2901, worked best (performance wise) for my 3700x, too. Even the temps seem higher with 3103. Thinking of going back to 2901.


----------



## smokin_mitch

tryout1 said:


> Did somebody try standby with the new bios 3103, does it fix the standby UCLK issue? I'm just on the fence if i should upgrade cause 3004 works flawless so far beside that problem.
> 
> Get's stuck like this instead of the 1900/1900 i set in bios.


nope still not fixed go back to bios 2801 if you want sleep to work without dropping fclk/uclk speeds


----------



## djase45

ASUS today announced that the new BIOS with AMD AGESA 1.0.0.2 update for X570 and B550 series motherboards are now available for download. While the existing BIOS support Ryzen 3000XT processors, the new BIOS optimize the performance of the latest AMD Ryzen 3000XT series processors (Ryzen 9 3900XT, Ryzen 7 3800XT, and Ryzen 5 3600XT). The UEFI BIOS updates are available from the respective motherboard support pages, and can be accessed via the ASUS Support website.

*300 and 400 Series*
BIOS updates with AGESA 1.0.0.6 for ASUS 300 and 400 series motherboards will be available for download on the ASUS support website by the end of July.

Upcoming BIOS updates for ASUS 400 series motherboards will support future Zen 3-based processors and Ryzen 4000 CPUs.

*Easy UEFI BIOS update for instant compatibility with AMD Ryzen 3000XT processors*
Updating an ASUS AM4 series motherboard for compatibility with the latest AMD Ryzen 3000XT processors takes just moments, via one of two simple methods.

With the ASUS-exclusive USB BIOS Flashback feature - which is built in to selected ASUS motherboards - users need only to download the latest UEFI BIOS to a USB flash drive and connect the motherboard's power supply; then insert a FAT32-formatted USB drive and press the motherboard's USB BIOS Flashback or Reset button. No AM4 processor or memory modules need to be in place, and the update will complete in a few moments.

Alternatively, users may update via the EZ Flash 3 utility that's integrated with the ASUS UEFI BIOS. This tool allows the update to be applied via an inserted USB drive or downloaded directly from the internet.

Source : https://www.techpowerup.com/269639/new-bios-for-amd-am4-series-asus-motherboards-now-available


----------



## tcclaviger

Hey look, x470 Crosshair VII flex 

https://www.pcbenchmarks.net/fastest-desktop.html


----------



## nick name

tcclaviger said:


> Hey look, x470 Crosshair VII flex
> 
> https://www.pcbenchmarks.net/fastest-desktop.html


What is that for? Do you have to run all the benchmarks?


----------



## xeizo

tcclaviger said:


> Hey look, x470 Crosshair VII flex
> 
> https://www.pcbenchmarks.net/fastest-desktop.html


That's a great score, I'm 1300p behind, don't know what you did 

(I'm still on the 99% percentile, so not that many systems above)










https://www.passmark.com/baselines/V10/display.php?id=126619511392


----------



## tcclaviger

nick name said:


> What is that for? Do you have to run all the benchmarks?


It's just a total system benchmark. It's hard to pass using XOC because it stresses everything so the "semi-stable" sketchy settings often used for records usually don't work well in it, however, it's scoring algorithm is inherently biased towards Intel. 2D score is based on raw calls/second to the CPU and the memory score obviously Intel kills AMD in. Those two scores are very heavily weighted, more so than the others.


----------



## nick name

tcclaviger said:


> It's just a total system benchmark. It's hard to pass using XOC because it stresses everything so the "semi-stable" sketchy settings often used for records usually don't work well in it, however, it's scoring algorithm is inherently biased towards Intel. 2D score is based on raw calls/second to the CPU and the memory score obviously Intel kills AMD in. Those two scores are very heavily weighted, more so than the others.


What's the fastet you've booted your RAM at?

Actually, that's a question for everyone. I haven't gotten past 4600MHz yet.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> What's the fastet you've booted your RAM at?
> 
> Actually, that's a question for everyone. I haven't gotten past 4600MHz yet.


I havent tried over 3866MHz, it boots but it is not stable 1:1 of course. Above that you need a multiplier which I haven't tested but I'm under the impression there is no performance to be gained because of that multiplier. Or?


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> I havent tried over 3866MHz, it boots but it is not stable 1:1 of course. Above that you need a multiplier which I haven't tested but I'm under the impression there is no performance to be gained because of that multiplier. Or?


I do it just to play, but the latency penalty is about 3~4ns in Aida. There is bandwidth to be gained though.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> I do it just to play, but the latency penalty is about 3~4ns in Aida. There is bandwidth to be gained though.


Could be a fun project, lax the timings to 20-22-22-22-22-80 2T 1.5V or something and skyrocket the frequency

Let's hope Zen3 will bring something in the form of FCLK


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> Could be a fun project, lax the timings to 20-22-22-22-22-80 2T 1.5V or something and skyrocket the frequency
> 
> Let's hope Zen3 will bring something in the form of FCLK


Oh, I needed 1.7V for high speeds and tight timings.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> Oh, I needed 1.7V for high speeds and tight timings.


LoL I don't think I will put 1.7V into my rather expensive B-die anytime soon


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> LoL I don't think I will put 1.7V into my rather expensive B-die anytime soon


Ahhh, but my new 3600C15 b-die kit only cost $125 from Newegg.

https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232306


----------



## nick name

Man, I'm starting to get frustrated with not being able to run BCLK anywhere near as high as I could with my 2700X (all other components the same). 

I set the FCLK and DRAM speeds lower to compensate for a 101.8 BCLK and once I get into Windows I get what seems to be a memory related BSOD. It's driving me bonkers.

Maybe it's Kaspersky related?


----------



## tcclaviger

I'm working on a guide for this setup now, specific to the C7H, some of it may apply to C7H/E and C8H, but won't apply to non-asus, as only Asus has the setting. There are some nuances I've discovered not really clearly discussed elsewhere.

Things have changed a lot since July 2019 when most guides/reviews were done and lots of folks are still operating on those old guidelines based buggy AGESA and BIOSes. Not to mention chip quality has seemingly come up a lot in the last 3-4 months.

For example, 3800/1900 is stable at 100.2 bclk up to 103.8 (1916 fclk is stable actually, this on a chip I was convinced wasn't 1900 capable after adjusting a few settings) instant crashes at 100 bclk though, all other settings the same.

Should have it done in a day or two, with a variety of configs to demonstrate how different PBO settings raise or lower different performance metrics.

I'll also throw in an ambient difference test to show "just" how temp sensitive Zen 2 is, people seem to not understand the level of picky that it is.

Maybe Jay can read it and figure out why he's bad at OCing Ryzen.


----------



## nick name

tcclaviger said:


> I'm working on a guide for this setup now, specific to the C7H, some of it may apply to C7H/E and C8H, but won't apply to non-asus, as only Asus has the setting. There are some nuances I've discovered not really clearly discussed elsewhere.
> 
> Things have changed a lot since July 2019 when most guides/reviews were done and lots of folks are still operating on those old guidelines based buggy AGESA and BIOSes. Not to mention chip quality has seemingly come up a lot in the last 3-4 months.
> 
> For example, 3800/1900 is stable at 100.2 bclk up to 103.8 (1916 fclk is stable actually, this on a chip I was convinced wasn't 1900 capable after adjusting a few settings) instant crashes at 100 bclk though, all other settings the same.
> 
> Should have it done in a day or two, with a variety of configs to demonstrate how different PBO settings raise or lower different performance metrics.
> 
> I'll also throw in an ambient difference test to show "just" how temp sensitive Zen 2 is, people seem to not understand the level of picky that it is.
> 
> Maybe Jay can read it and figure out why he's bad at OCing Ryzen.


Yeah, I'm gonna talk about the Jay thing first. I have come to the conclusion that he isn't a reliable source on anything. I unsubbed from his channel a while ago and his content is only getting worse.

As far as BCLK -- I couldn't use BCLK with the EDC bug because it would put me above 4.7GHz and that would cause random crashes. Heck, simply hitting 4.7GHz caused light-load random crashes. But I've just learned I can prevent that by making sure the CPU doesn't add more than 50MHz and at 4.675GHz I'm absolutely fine. So now I can run BCLK 100.6 all day. 100.8 BCLK is a hard no for me. Both at POST and when in Windows and using TurboV to set it. 

And it's absolutely because the temp swings in the room my PC is in will absolutely change CPU behavior. You're right in that most folks don't realize how much their ambient room/case temp will dictate how their CPU behaves. 

Now I wish I could use the same BCLK and PBO method that you use because I really wanna compare it to the EDC bug, but I just can't figure out what's going on with BCLKs I used to use on my 2700X.

Here is a nice Aida run with BCLK 100.6. I ran it several times because I thought they were fluke readings, but they were very repeatable.


----------



## tcclaviger

Looks almost identical to my Aida run lol. As it should I guess.

Just have 3 more configs to get screen shots of the I'll start compiling it.

Regarding bclk I have found that PLL voltage can assist 😛

Try a little nudge up, like 30 MV to 1.83 or 1.84.

Non EDC bug 103.8.
EDC bug 101.2.

Those are my limits, as you mention EDC let's it boost so high bclk must be lower. 4747 is max, if I go higher it falls over and reboots. When EDC boosting ensure you raise LLC, it helps, a lot, though it does ramp voltages a touch. I try to limit it to 2x-5x scalar with bug and use 1 for EDC to avoid failure to boost bug, otherwise voltage gets out of control.

Regarding performance, EDC bug does outscore non bug single and all core, but, the difference is in the 2-3% range tops.


----------



## nick name

tcclaviger said:


> Looks almost identical to my Aida run lol. As it should I guess.
> 
> Just have 3 more configs to get screen shots of the I'll start compiling it.
> 
> Regarding bclk I have found that PLL voltage can assist 😛
> 
> Try a little nudge up, like 30 MV to 1.83 or 1.84.
> 
> Non EDC bug 103.8.
> EDC bug 101.2.
> 
> Those are my limits, as you mention EDC let's it boost so high bclk must be lower. 4747 is max, if I go higher it falls over and reboots. When EDC boosting ensure you raise LLC, it helps, a lot, though it does ramp voltages a touch. I try to limit it to 2x-5x scalar with bug and use 1 for EDC to avoid failure to boost bug, otherwise voltage gets out of control.
> 
> Regarding performance, EDC bug does outscore non bug single and all core, but, the difference is in the 2-3% range tops.


I actually tried up to 2.0V on PLL. No joy.

And the ambient temp in the room the PC is in is usually around 80*F so I'm never gonna be stable at high speed on single-core and I've come to accept that. It would be nice to run single-core at 4747 though. One thing I never use is scalar. Maybe I'll try 4.7GHz with scalar too. I use 2 for EDC. 

On a separate note. I've found this to be helpful when looking at the NBIO options under AMD CBS. I'd imagine you'd enjoy looking through it too.

https://developer.amd.com/wp-content/resources/56745_0.80.pdf


----------



## tcclaviger

Thanks, I'll have a read!

I've got 8 different configurations tested and composite performance screenshots for them. Need to do the write up now. I think some people running all core OCs are going to be a touch surprised at just how little they gain and how much is lost running at the internet's claimed "safe voltages"...

Here's the per CCX results from what a lot people say is "safe", 1.237vcore and the closest to stock I can run baseline with 1900 IF setup, which is 100.2 bclk but PBO disabled.


----------



## Baio73

tcclaviger said:


> I'm working on a guide for this setup now, specific to the C7H, some of it may apply to C7H/E and C8H, but won't apply to non-asus, as only Asus has the setting. There are some nuances I've discovered not really clearly discussed elsewhere.
> 
> Things have changed a lot since July 2019 when most guides/reviews were done and lots of folks are still operating on those old guidelines based buggy AGESA and BIOSes. Not to mention chip quality has seemingly come up a lot in the last 3-4 months.
> 
> For example, 3800/1900 is stable at 100.2 bclk up to 103.8 (1916 fclk is stable actually, this on a chip I was convinced wasn't 1900 capable after adjusting a few settings) instant crashes at 100 bclk though, all other settings the same.
> 
> Should have it done in a day or two, with a variety of configs to demonstrate how different PBO settings raise or lower different performance metrics.
> 
> I'll also throw in an ambient difference test to show "just" how temp sensitive Zen 2 is, people seem to not understand the level of picky that it is.
> 
> Maybe Jay can read it and figure out why he's bad at OCing Ryzen.


AWSOME!
I'm willing to read it even if I have a C8F.

Baio


----------



## tcclaviger

Ran into an anomaly for all core which I need to figure out before I can proceed. Something is reporting a false value.

It violates Ohms Power law, and therefor is impossible.

Will figure it out tomorrow, something fishy is going on with power reporting during all core and CCX OC because PBO power number match AX1200i reported values but all core does not.


----------



## bMind

Delta9k said:


> I may not be any help, I am still running 1103 on my C7H/2700X that I've had since the Zen+ launch. I am still pleased with the performance I'm getting out of this setup and how well PBO works. I have a 3900X to pop in it but I have yet been able to convince myself to break up the marriage of this particular combo C7H / 2700X .
> 
> You should not feel "stuck" with your 2700X - I have 3950X thru 3800X systems, and this ole girl (C7H/2700X) can still play and contribute. It's pretty much only benchmark numbers that throw shade on her.


I didn't mean that I'm stuck with it as a bad thing. 2700X was my first decent processor and first from AMD and I do not regret the switch. For the money? Outstanding for my type of use.

I was just wondering if there are some versions that are more tuned to the old gen than new ones, since from what I'm reading, 2700X does not benefit from a lot of the new bells and whistles new bioses have.



smokin_mitch said:


> nope still not fixed go back to bios 2801 if you want sleep to work without dropping fclk/uclk speeds


I might drop down to 2901 or 2801 and see.


----------



## nick name

bMind said:


> I didn't mean that I'm stuck with it as a bad thing. 2700X was my first decent processor and first from AMD and I do not regret the switch. For the money? Outstanding for my type of use.
> 
> I was just wondering if there are some versions that are more tuned to the old gen than new ones, since from what I'm reading, 2700X does not benefit from a lot of the new bells and whistles new bioses have.
> 
> 
> 
> I might drop down to 2901 or 2801 and see.


With my old 2700X I would use PE 3 and then adjust EDC to change the all-core multiplier. With older BIOS versions that had to be done with Ryzen Master and didn't work in BIOS. With newer BIOS versions (can't remember exactly when it started) you could do it in BIOS. Before I pulled the 2700X out -- I was happy with BIOS 3004.


----------



## crakej

tcclaviger said:


> I'm working on a guide for this setup now, specific to the C7H, some of it may apply to C7H/E and C8H, but won't apply to non-asus, as only Asus has the setting. There are some nuances I've discovered not really clearly discussed elsewhere.
> 
> Things have changed a lot since July 2019 when most guides/reviews were done and lots of folks are still operating on those old guidelines based buggy AGESA and BIOSes. Not to mention chip quality has seemingly come up a lot in the last 3-4 months.
> 
> For example, 3800/1900 is stable at 100.2 bclk up to 103.8 (1916 fclk is stable actually, this on a chip I was convinced wasn't 1900 capable after adjusting a few settings) instant crashes at 100 bclk though, all other settings the same.
> 
> Should have it done in a day or two, with a variety of configs to demonstrate how different PBO settings raise or lower different performance metrics.
> 
> I'll also throw in an ambient difference test to show "just" how temp sensitive Zen 2 is, people seem to not understand the level of picky that it is.
> 
> Maybe Jay can read it and figure out why he's bad at OCing Ryzen.


I'd be very interested to know what settings you used to get 3800:1900 working...

Edit: Does anyone use the channel interleaving settings at all?


----------



## WinterActual

I am noob, thats for sure, so I may messed up something, but I am running my 3600mhz CL18 on 3800mhz CL16 1:1:1 100bclk, no problem. Its 3800-1900-1900, everywhere. I thought its common thing? Whats so special about it? (I am asking as complete noob regarding ram oc, so my post may be dumb and funny, sorry guys lol)


----------



## xeizo

WinterActual said:


> I am noob, thats for sure, so I may messed up something, but I am running my 3600mhz CL18 on 3800mhz CL16 1:1:1 100bclk, no problem. Its 3800-1900-1900, everywhere. I thought its common thing? Whats so special about it? (I am asking as complete noob regarding ram oc, so my post may be dumb and funny, sorry guys lol)


I think he meant with a raised BCLK, or maybe not, don't know. Both my Ryzen 3000s does 1900 FCLK 3800 Mem, but I've heard most are unstable above 1867MHz.


----------



## tcclaviger

3800/1900 is far more common on single CCD chips when you just throw it in an set the dividers. On dual CCD chips, it often requires playing with settings to get it fully stable, but some of them Dual CCDs are fine at 1900. This is why Silicon Lottery was selling 1900 stable 3900/3950s for a premium even though they weren't the best binned for core speed/voltage scaling.

It does seem to be getting more frequent, or, people are claiming stability when it is semi-stable. 1900 is finicky like that on dual CCD chips, it'll appear stable, everything will work, and 12+ hours later, you'll throw a bus error, which is sometimes caught by WHEA and corrected and sometimes not, causing a BSOD or data corruption, leading to a slow crash where everything just slows down over 30 second to 1 minute period until it completely hangs but doesn't BSOD. Simply running a series of stress tests and benchmarks that pass will not validate it. It requires time, use, and is a pain in the rear to validate.

The settings I used are a composite of little tidbits I found from various sources all thrown into one configuration. Credit for various things will be provided and sourcing for people to go read deeper if they want to. I am attempting to make this as easily digestible as possible (and failing so far).

The analysis is taking longer to prepare than I expected, as I have no established work flow for this since I never do presented data analysis at home and don't have any of my templates to use that I have at work (and they cannot come off the air-gap network there). At home I chuck it all in an excel table and do the analysis in my head since I'm not showing anyone else usually.


----------



## nick name

Something I toyed with today was reducing IF bandwidth to see if I could increase IF speed above 1900MHz. I could not.


----------



## tcclaviger

I was playing today a bit, decided to make a serious attempt:

https://www.passmark.com/baselines/V10/display.php?id=126688515112


----------



## tcclaviger

Whelp as promised, here you go, I hope it's not 100% crap and at least helps 1 person, I know a lot (all) of this is already known by many of you. I know, I'm wordy, just trying to convey points fully and as accurately as I can.


----------



## darkage

tcclaviger said:


> Whelp as promised, here you go, I hope it's not 100% crap and at least helps 1 person, I know a lot (all) of this is already known by many of you. I know, I'm wordy, just trying to convey points fully and as accurately as I can.


thanks man!
allways good to have someone interested in this and share it with others


----------



## xeizo

tcclaviger said:


> I was playing today a bit, decided to make a serious attempt:
> 
> https://www.passmark.com/baselines/V10/display.php?id=126688515112


That is extreme! Well done!


----------



## xeizo

tcclaviger said:


> Whelp as promised, here you go, I hope it's not 100% crap and at least helps 1 person, I know a lot (all) of this is already known by many of you. I know, I'm wordy, just trying to convey points fully and as accurately as I can.


Thanks for the effort, I will read through it, interesting stuff indeed!


----------



## tcclaviger

Please, if you have points of contention let me know, I believe in life long learning and have no issues admitting I'm wrong or learning from other enthusiasts.


----------



## nick name

tcclaviger said:


> Whelp as promised, here you go, I hope it's not 100% crap and at least helps 1 person, I know a lot (all) of this is already known by many of you. I know, I'm wordy, just trying to convey points fully and as accurately as I can.


What's the normal ambient temperature of the room your machine is in? How much does it fluctuate? Your performance makes me think it's closer to 20*C -- is that correct?


----------



## nick name

I would clarify this:

"On the C7H *(at LLC X)* you GET exactly what you SET, so add a +0.0125 and you will see up to 1.5125 vcore etc during boosting."


----------



## nick name

tcclaviger said:


> I was playing today a bit, decided to make a serious attempt:
> 
> https://www.passmark.com/baselines/V10/display.php?id=126688515112


I get in the 99 percentile on everything except my GPU scores. Those are at 77 and 80 percentile. It makes me sad.


----------



## tcclaviger

nick name said:


> I would clarify this:
> 
> "On the C7H *(at LLC X)* you GET exactly what you SET, so add a +0.0125 and you will see up to 1.5125 vcore etc during boosting."


Very good point, will update after verifying.

nick_name: My room is usually about 23c, it's fairly tightly controlled with AC. I can drive it down to about 17c when I want to hold 20c water temps for benchmarks.


----------



## nick name

tcclaviger said:


> Very good point, will update after verifying.
> 
> nick_name: My room is usually about 23c, it's fairly tightly controlled with AC. I can drive it down to about 17c when I want to hold 20c water temps for benchmarks.


Ahh, I'd make mention of that in your disclaimers. There will be a lot of folks that are closer to 26+*C and we both know that change in temp will yield different results.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> Ahh, I'd make mention of that in your disclaimers. There will be a lot of folks that are closer to 26+*C and we both know that change in temp will yield different results.


Not to mention different cases, or even open rig, makes a big difference. Maybe not with custom loop, but in many other scenarios


----------



## crakej

I've been playing around with this bios and various different settings, but I can't get anything like the performance I got from 2801, where I could run 3800:1900 and my 4400MTs XMP profile just worked.

I was also able to run at 4466MTs and 4600MTs, but can't do anything over 3733MTs now - not that it's awful performance, just could be (and used to be) better. Been up since 7am testing profiles that I entered by hand to no avail.

It could be that now I have 4 sticks it just won't do it, but it really should - at least the XMP profile. I may re-install 2801 and test with 4 sticks.


----------



## crakej

tcclaviger said:


> Very good point, will update after verifying.
> 
> nick_name: My room is usually about 23c, it's fairly tightly controlled with AC. I can drive it down to about 17c when I want to hold 20c water temps for benchmarks.


Thanks for sharing your report!

Always good to have new contributors.... with differing views and techniques.

Rep+


----------



## tcclaviger

I will include it, the relative performance would be effected for PB2/PBO results compared to static OC, favoring static.

EDIT: Revisions added, thank you for the input, attachment updated.


----------



## tcclaviger

Double post, can't seem to locate the delete post button lol.


----------



## Keith Myers

I have a point of contention. You only seem to have considered rendering and such for almost all core loading. But did you consider distributed computing at all where the cpu is primarily engaged in cpu only mathematical processing with some support of gpu mathematical processing also?

In my testing, I can never get much more than 4025-4150Mhz clocks on average across 90-95% of all cores. And the voltages on Auto or PBO are very high with accompanied temperatures.

I find a static all-core overclock to give much better performance at much lower voltages and temperatures. The amount of cpu time the cores spend on a tasks is also on the order of at least 30 minutes to as much as 8 hours. So much longer than a simple run through a benchmark or rendering test.

I have reviewed your paper but don't see anything of value in it for my use case.


----------



## kratosatlante

crakej said:


> I've been playing around with this bios and various different settings, but I can't get anything like the performance I got from 2801, where I could run 3800:1900 and my 4400MTs XMP profile just worked.
> 
> I was also able to run at 4466MTs and 4600MTs, but can't do anything over 3733MTs now - not that it's awful performance, just could be (and used to be) better. Been up since 7am testing profiles that I entered by hand to no avail.
> 
> It could be that now I have 4 sticks it just won't do it, but it really should - at least the XMP profile. I may re-install 2801 and test with 4 sticks.




Same here new bios dont work xmp 4400 and 4266, cant boot 2 stiks 4000 only 3933(4stisks limit same), bios 2801 load easy xmp 4400, now have 4stiks viper 4400cl19, thanks for remember which bios work, if this week arrive ram cooler have time for some test


----------



## nick name

Jesus Christ did I almost have a heart attack. Has anyone ever corrupted a BIOS in a manner that only the specific FCLK speed running at the time of corruption was what suffered after the corruption? Welp it happened to me and since the manner of the corruption seems now to only have impacted FCLK 1900 it was terribly hard to sort out. 

It's been such a scramble for the last few hours that I can't even accurately recount what the actual f*ck I did to sort it. 

I didn't assume BIOS corruption until after pulling and switching RAM kits that I ran at slower speeds to rule out RAM at which point I decided to try FCLK 1900 again. And that's when the ***** started again and made me think that can't be hardware so I re-flashed the BIOS. 

And now -- everything is fine. 

Now right after I get that sorted a file naming Windows 10 bug rears its head and destroys a 225GB file I downloaded on another machine. 

Tonight is not my night.

Edit:
I think I downclocked the FCLK and RAM and still had the same problem until I switched RAM kits without changing BIOS settings. Perhaps it was hardware mounts, but after installing the different kit I had problems again at FCLK 1900.


----------



## kratosatlante

nick name said:


> Jesus Christ did I almost have a heart attack. Has anyone ever corrupted a BIOS in a manner that only the specific FCLK speed running at the time of corruption was what suffered after the corruption? Welp it happened to me and since the manner of the corruption seems now to only have impacted FCLK 1900 it was terribly hard to sort out.
> 
> It's been such a scramble for the last few hours that I can't even accurately recount what the actual f*ck I did to sort it.
> 
> I didn't assume BIOS corruption until after pulling and switching RAM kits that I ran at slower speeds to rule out RAM at which point I decided to try FCLK 1900 again. And that's when the ***** started again and made me think that can't be hardware so I re-flashed the BIOS.
> 
> And now -- everything is fine.
> 
> Now right after I get that sorted a file naming Windows 10 bug rears its head and destroys a 225GB file I downloaded on another machine.
> 
> Tonight is not my night.


you have the message bios recovery mode etc etc? 
i haved 3 times, latest reflashed and get one time more, restart and work well for now


----------



## nick name

kratosatlante said:


> you have the message bios recovery mode etc etc?
> i haved 3 times, latest reflashed and get one time more, restart and work well for now


No, I didn't see anything like that. Nothing indicated a bad BIOS.


----------



## DDSZ

Well, I'm running 3103 and just for the test I did set 18-22-22-42-64 640 @ 1.45V for my dual rank JJRs, the highest I could get is DRAM = 4066 MHz and IF = 1900, didn't try tightening it, but it even passed 10 tm5 cycles of 1usmus config without errors. 
Still can't manage to get 3800/1900 CL 16 stable 
Do you think it is safe to run DR JJRs >1.45V with fans on them?


----------



## oreonutz

Keith Myers said:


> I have a point of contention. You only seem to have considered rendering and such for almost all core loading. But did you consider distributed computing at all where the cpu is primarily engaged in cpu only mathematical processing with some support of gpu mathematical processing also?
> 
> In my testing, I can never get much more than 4025-4150Mhz clocks on average across 90-95% of all cores. And the voltages on Auto or PBO are very high with accompanied temperatures.
> 
> I find a static all-core overclock to give much better performance at much lower voltages and temperatures. The amount of cpu time the cores spend on a tasks is also on the order of at least 30 minutes to as much as 8 hours. So much longer than a simple run through a benchmark or rendering test.
> 
> I have reviewed your paper but don't see anything of value in it for my use case.


I am in the same boat as Keith. I actually find the work that @tcclaviger does to be awesome, and the White Paper he wrote to be extremely informative. It's just that not everyone's sample is capable of recreating the same awesome results he is able to achieve with his sample.

I actually was quite happy at first, mimicking tcclaviger's settings and then dialing them in for my 3950x, because I was getting all core boosts to 4300Mhz (which still isn't as good as my Per CCX but damn near close) while providing amazing single core boosts up to 4.75Ghz. The problem was it turned out not to be stable. I worked for over a week on tuning the EDC, TDC, and PPT to achieve the same clocks, but remain stable, and no matter how I configured it, it just wouldn't stay stable. And the thing was, it was fine under heavy all core loads, or even heavy lightly threaded loads, just at some point, usually either while idling or watching a youtube video it would just crash, giving the watchdog or other hardware error. It seems the CPU would trip over itself while boosting during either idle or near idle workloads. And when raising the EDC high enough to no longer be exploiting the bug, the awesome clock results for all core would disappear.

Unfortunately AMD has yet to provide a method of control over PBO OC's that will allow you to tune exact voltages at exact clocks on exact cores, if I did have that level of control I could set up an excellent PBO overclock, but unfortunately the way PBO works, the Cores determine their own boost based on the parameters you set with PPT, EDC, and TDC, and none of my 3 samples will give me an all core boost I am happy with AND remain stable. 

I do know that it is possible with some samples though, as I have a clients CPU, a recent 3900x Retail sample, that was able to hold an all core of 4350Mhz under a full AVX2 Load, Boost to 4.65Ghz for the Lightly Threaded Loads, and still remain stable through extensive stress testing. So I know that it is possible, but it is heavily dependent on the specific sample, so some people will be able to hit a good balance of High All Core and High Single Core clocks, while others even using the same exact settings on the same model Board, with all the same variables will not. It leads to some people swearing PBO is the answer, and others hating it, when really PBO can be both, it just depends on the specific silicon you received in your sample unfortunately.

I really hope that we get much more specific controls in PBO's next iteration. It would be nice to have controls over voltages used on individual core's clocks, and work load types. And then just like with normal all core overclocking, if the CPU can't hit it, then it crashes and you try something different, instead of letting the CPU control those variables itself. I understand why they do it that way, but for advanced users it would be nice to have further controls.

For instance, I would like to tune my sample to have cores 1 and 2 to hit 4.75Ghz at 1.46v during a single or dual core load, have cores 1, 2, 3, & 4 hit 4.5Ghz during a 4 Core load at 1.42v, and then to have an all core load at 4.35Ghz at 1.3v. These are all clocks and work loads that I have observed my CPU of being able to hit regularly under PBO, and while it will repeatedly give those voltages itself when using PBO, for the Single, Dual, and 4 Core Work loads, it unfortunately will drop the all core load to 4.1Ghz or lower at 1.3v, even though my sample can easily hit 4.35Ghz at 1.3v across all cores all day. 

The situation is different on every CPU as to how PBO behaves, but being able to finely tune the CPU during a particular workload type would be the ultimate OC achievement for Zen, and allow us to really push these CPU's to their max. 

Anyways, thats my book for the day...


----------



## oreonutz

DDSZ said:


> Do you think it is safe to run DR JJRs >1.45V with fans on them?


Yes, more than safe. They don't even need the fans unless the Heat is messing with Stability. DDR4 (All DDR4, not just J-Die/JJR, B-Die, E-Die, etc...) is safe running at heat in excess of 70c. I would personally start to get concerned past 70c, but that is what they are rated to run at Spec. They are also more than safe to run voltages in excess of 1.5v, and with cooling you can run them up to around 1.75v without having any issues. DDR4 is hard to destroy with anything below 70c/1.7v. You are way more likely to run into issues with Stability (especially on Temp sensitive Silicon like B-Die) due to temperature or running higher voltages, before you ever come close to actually damaging the DIMMs.

Sources:


Spoiler



Paper on different Operating Temperatures of Samsung DDR4, doesn't list a Temp at which it degrades, but does state that the operating Temperature is set withing 0c and 85c, and in Extended mode can go up to 95c. Just search the document for Temperature to read up on it.
https://www.samsung.com/semiconduct.../11/DDR4_Device_Operations_Rev11_Oct_14-0.pdf

Micron DDR4 Spec Sheet, also lists operating Temperature as being between 40c and 85c, this is for Server Memory specifically, but these are the same IC's that go into their Consumer Memory:
https://www.micron.com/-/media/clie...ducts/data-sheet/dram/ddr4/8gb_ddr4_sdram.pdf

Another Server Manufacturer Document that Lists the DDR4 JEDEC Operating Temperature Spec as being Between 0 and 85c:
https://www.vikingtechnology.com/wp...4_or_288_pin_ULP_Mini-DIMM_PS9ZUxx72x8xxx.pdf

As an aside, all of these documents refer to tCase, which is the ambient temperature of the Enclosure that the DDR4 is in (or more specifically the Ambient Temperature as measured at the base of the DDR4 DIMM), not actually the Temperature of the DIMMS themselves (Which would obviously be hotter), and this is all in reference to a specific feature of DDR4, which is the ability of the DDR4 IC's to change their tREFI Refresh Rates based on Temperature, basically stating that the Refresh Rate would Double after exceeding 85c tCase.

Obviously in consumer applications you never want your Memory Temp to go this high, this just speaks to the fact that the actual IC's on your DDR4 PCB are Rated to go well above 70c, and you do not have to worry about degrading your DDR4 by exceeding 70c, your memory will be just fine. You just may have problems holding stability at high overclocks when approaching those high temperatures. Also, keep in mind that what kills components is Heat (and sometimes Amperage) not Voltage. So when you are setting Voltages higher then 1.7v, what you want to keep in mind is the heat on the IC's of your DDR4, as long as you are keeping that Temperature below 85c, you are completely safe. Hopefully this helps to demonstrate the fact that you do not have to worry about your DDR4 dying on you when dealing with temperatures less than 85c or using Voltages that while still higher than stock, are also keeping the Temps below 85c, as long as they are you are fine, even in an every day scenario. (The only other factor to consider is sending a High amount of current through your DIMMs that degrade or kill it, but you would need to run Voltage higher than 2v before you have to concern yourself with that.)

OK I will shut up now, hope this helps.


----------



## bMind

smokin_mitch said:


> nope still not fixed go back to bios 2801 if you want sleep to work without dropping fclk/uclk speeds





nick name said:


> With my old 2700X I would use PE 3 and then adjust EDC to change the all-core multiplier. With older BIOS versions that had to be done with Ryzen Master and didn't work in BIOS. With newer BIOS versions (can't remember exactly when it started) you could do it in BIOS. Before I pulled the 2700X out -- I was happy with BIOS 3004.


Thank you for taking time to answer  It doesn't hurt to try 3004 as well.

My reason for this question is not because I'm getting lower performance or unable to get some tight timings to work on newer bioses..I would love to get more of my system tbh..but I'm aware that it's not a magic switch you flip and it requires a lot of a) knowledge so you not **** up things b) time to do all of it  I lack both  But I'm not against learning things or have problems with it


----------



## tcclaviger

@Keith Myers - I used to participate a lot in DC work, and yes it's a special case. Since it runs 24/7 if allowed to do at full or near full load, it would definitely benefit from a static setup, it simply slipped mind while I was writing, I will revisit. In my opinion DC is a case where I would shoot for a voltage target and speed would be secondary, tryin to Target the best voltage to speed ratio possible, something like aiming for 4000 @ 1v or as close as possible.

@oreonutz - Absolutely this is CPU sample specific, it's even board sample and RAM sample specific because. The granular controls of voltage you mention would be a major boon in finding perfect boosting tailored to each sample. Scalar just isn't adequate in doing so currently. I also ran into the problem you mention of low usage crashes, strangely the fix was windows power plan settings, something I'll do a short write up on.


I've done a bunch of gaming and synthetic 3d testing. Have to compile the data and have a good look at it still. It could be that the differences are even smaller in gaming than the synthetics, making it all a moot point and essentially changing OCing Zen 2 into a pick your preference because ultimately it doesn't matter. 

I'm going to rerun the earlier configs using blender, which I should have included. This time recording average voltage, speed, and temp for each configuration to compare.

I'm curious, and it gives me something to do while still on "work from home" status due to pandemic.


----------



## kratosatlante

crakej said:


> I've been playing around with this bios and various different settings, but I can't get anything like the performance I got from 2801, where I could run 3800:1900 and my 4400MTs XMP profile just worked.
> 
> I was also able to run at 4466MTs and 4600MTs, but can't do anything over 3733MTs now - not that it's awful performance, just could be (and used to be) better. Been up since 7am testing profiles that I entered by hand to no avail.
> 
> It could be that now I have 4 sticks it just won't do it, but it really should - at least the XMP profile. I may re-install 2801 and test with 4 sticks.


try reflashing bios, for me work


----------



## tcclaviger

Here is me eating my words about gaming performance with low voltage static OC vs bclk raising and boosting... *It doesn't matter, just pick your OC preference and enjoy 0-4% performance difference depending on game.* The differences are EXTREMELY small.

For these the GPU was locked at 1995/8100, a speed I know it can stay at through everything without hitting power limits, water bounced between 25 and 26, so pretty stable. 

Games are picked because... they're what I have with built in BMs, no other reason.

(SofTR is Shadow of the Tomb Raider) now off to enjoy some Death Stranding at 4k.


----------



## tcclaviger

@DDSZ , very nice! Wish I could get mine to go that speed.

HWBOT submissions are down, have this waiting to get posted, will be 2nd on 3900x aida read bandwidth, but its very much not a daily setting ...


----------



## nick name

tcclaviger said:


> @DDSZ , very nice! Wish I could get mine to go that speed.
> 
> HWBOT submissions are down, have this waiting to get posted, will be 2nd on 3900x aida read bandwidth, but its very much not a daily setting ...


This is the best I've done. Also not a daily.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> This is the best I've done. Also not a daily.


Don't get why I can't get those speed any more! Re-flashing!

This was my best.....

I did find my machine quite snappy running my ram at 4400+....very snappy, but obviously you pay with latency..


----------



## tcclaviger

nick name said:


> tcclaviger said:
> 
> 
> 
> @DDSZ , very nice! Wish I could get mine to go that speed.
> 
> HWBOT submissions are down, have this waiting to get posted, will be 2nd on 3900x aida read bandwidth, but its very much not a daily setting ...
> 
> 
> 
> This is the best I've done. Also not a daily.
Click to expand...

Rawr, frisky. Very nice.


----------



## majsterz

How to get best performance from 3800x on the newest bios(3103)? I`m using kraken x62 cooling for cpu.


----------



## nick name

majsterz said:


> How to get best performance from 3800x on the newest bios(3103)? I`m using kraken x62 cooling for cpu.


If you aren't gonna play with BCLK then I'd use the EDC bug.


----------



## majsterz

There is an new setting in extreme tweaker that allow you to choose between 2 things. One is for AiO cooling, is it gonna change anything? And is PBO even working on this bios?


----------



## nick name

majsterz said:


> There is an new setting in extreme tweaker that allow you to choose between 2 things. One is for AiO cooling, is it gonna change anything? And is PBO even working on this bios?


Are you talking about TPU?


----------



## majsterz

Yes TPU. Does it affect anything?


----------



## nick name

majsterz said:


> Yes TPU. Does it affect anything?


It's more an auto-overclocking tool and shouldn't be used. 

Have you seen the thread about the EDC bug?


----------



## majsterz

I heard about it but never dive deep into, so i dont know how excatly it is working. Can you please send me this thread?


----------



## nick name

majsterz said:


> I heard about it but never dive deep into, so i dont know how excatly it is working. Can you please send me this thread?


https://www.overclock.net/forum/13-amd-general/1741052-edc-1-pbo-turbo-boost.html

I set EDC to 2 and leave PPT and TDC at Auto.


----------



## hurricane28

Hi guys, 

I finally did it! 

Made my first custom water loop, let me know what you think


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> I finally did it!
> 
> Made my first custom water loop, let me know what you think


Hey, jerk. Don't just tease us with pictures. How are your thermals compared to what you were using before? What components are you using? How much did it cost? How long did it take? 

Also, I like it.


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> Hey, jerk. Don't just tease us with pictures. How are your thermals compared to what you were using before? What components are you using? How much did it cost? How long did it take?
> 
> Also, I like it.


Lol aight. 

Thermals dropped by minimal 5c compared to my Eisbaer cooler. I used the same radiator only with an different CPU block pump.

EK-Velocity - AMD Copper + Plexi, Aqua-Computer ULTITUBE D5 100 PRO reservoir with D5 NEXT pump and exchanged the loud Noctua NF-F12 industrial ppc 3K rpm fans for Nidec 120mm Gentle Typhoon Performance Fan - 1850rpm, 58cfm - Black Edition, EK-DuraClear 3/8 ID - 1/2 OD - 9,5/12,7mm 3M, Alphacool HF 13/10 compression fitting G1/4 - deep black sixpack

I also got an nice new LED strip: Phanteks Neon Digital RGB-LED-Strip 1000mm this thing makes stuff glowing blue so nice imo.

As you can see on the picture i used an siring to fill the loop, it gives so much control. 
I also rotated the CPU block one notch to the right so the inlet port is more above the actual die and cores of the CPU like the heatkiller blocks have. This results in another 2-3 c temp drop! 
At first i uses Thermal grizzly hydronaut but Cooler Master gel maker nano is better.


----------



## Hequaqua

hurricane28 said:


> Lol aight.
> 
> Thermals dropped by minimal 5c compared to my Eisbaer cooler. I used the same radiator only with an different CPU block pump.
> 
> EK-Velocity - AMD Copper + Plexi, Aqua-Computer ULTITUBE D5 100 PRO reservoir with D5 NEXT pump and exchanged the loud Noctua NF-F12 industrial ppc 3K rpm fans for Nidec 120mm Gentle Typhoon Performance Fan - 1850rpm, 58cfm - Black Edition, EK-DuraClear 3/8 ID - 1/2 OD - 9,5/12,7mm 3M, Alphacool HF 13/10 compression fitting G1/4 - deep black sixpack
> 
> I also got an nice new LED strip: Phanteks Neon Digital RGB-LED-Strip 1000mm this thing makes stuff glowing blue so nice imo.
> 
> As you can see on the picture i used an siring to fill the loop, it gives so much control.
> I also rotated the CPU block one notch to the right so the inlet port is more above the actual die and cores of the CPU like the heatkiller blocks have. This results in another 2-3 c temp drop!
> At first i uses Thermal grizzly hydronaut but Cooler Master gel maker nano is better.


Don't forget about your US Based tech support!.....lmao

Looks good man! :thumb:


----------



## hurricane28

Hequaqua said:


> Don't forget about your US Based tech support!.....lmao
> 
> Looks good man! :thumb:


LMAO, yeah man your help was greatly appreciated!


----------



## nick name

@hurricane28 So you dropped 5*C with the different block and then another 2-3*C after rotating it? Do you think it was just the block or did the different pump contribute?


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> @hurricane28 So you dropped 5*C with the different block and then another 2-3*C after rotating it? Do you think it was just the block or did the different pump contribute?



Yes that's basically it. 

I think the block is much better than the ALphacool due to the location of the channels. Now when i rotated the block i get even lower temps. 

The pump plays it part yes but i think the CPU block does the most.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Yes that's basically it.
> 
> I think the block is much better than the ALphacool due to the location of the channels. Now when i rotated the block i get even lower temps.
> 
> The pump plays it part yes but i think the CPU block does the most.


Very nice. Maybe one day I'll step my cooling game up.


----------



## majsterz

I read the thread about the EDC bug and its not that i expected. Constant core boost on idle makes this option unacceptable for me.


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> Very nice. Maybe one day I'll step my cooling game up.


Nice. Take note that this is not for the faint at heart! Take time to choose the correct components and take time to build it.


----------



## crakej

I'm still having slow shutdown/reboot problems. I had been using hybrid sleep previously, but removed it because of this problem. Problem is, I still have original problem!

I decided to check out if the sleep 'problem' is still present on our boards - you know when you wake it up and HWInfo now says your memory speed has gone down to 1800/950 (FCLK/UCLK) from 1866/1866 - so yeah, that's still there.....

Checking with Aida64 shows that in fact FCLK is still running at 1866, it's just the UCLK which has dropped, everything else is the same.

Interestingly my CB R15 score goes up 40 points after waking my PC. I assume this is because although latency is worse (73ns), data transfer is slightly faster.

So now I have 2 problems I need fixing - my slow shutdown, and this damn sleep bug!


----------



## hurricane28

The only issue i have now is that when i restart and press del key too soon it doesn't boot at all and the screens stay black.. Reboots are slow too but that's windows i think.


----------



## WinterActual

Guys I would like to ask if someone knows if the offset is set to Auto, is it dynamic like in the core multiplier or its just constant like manually adjusting it but its just auto generated number?


----------



## nick name

WinterActual said:


> Guys I would like to ask if someone knows if the offset is set to Auto, is it dynamic like in the core multiplier or its just constant like manually adjusting it but its just auto generated number?


Which offset?


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I'm still having slow shutdown/reboot problems. I had been using hybrid sleep previously, but removed it because of this problem. Problem is, I still have original problem!
> 
> I decided to check out if the sleep 'problem' is still present on our boards - you know when you wake it up and HWInfo now says your memory speed has gone down to 1800/950 (FCLK/UCLK) from 1866/1866 - so yeah, that's still there.....
> 
> Checking with Aida64 shows that in fact FCLK is still running at 1866, it's just the UCLK which has dropped, everything else is the same.
> 
> Interestingly my CB R15 score goes up 40 points after waking my PC. I assume this is because although latency is worse (73ns), data transfer is slightly faster.
> 
> So now I have 2 problems I need fixing - my slow shutdown, and this damn sleep bug!



If it's still slow then maybe it's still writing data before it shuts down like it would with hybrid sleep?


----------



## WinterActual

nick name said:


> Which offset?


Core voltage offset.


----------



## xeizo

WinterActual said:


> nick name said:
> 
> 
> 
> Which offset?
> 
> 
> 
> Core voltage offset.
Click to expand...

It's dynamic, it lowers(or raises) the average vcore. When lowering multi gets better and single worse, when raising single gets better and multi worse. Most uses minus offset to lower temps, but not by too much to not kill single core performance.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> If it's still slow then maybe it's still writing data before it shuts down like it would with hybrid sleep?


That's what I thought - but ended up re-installing Windows having tried removing the hibertfil.sys and turning all that off - what fun, but now reboots properly. Strange - I asked it to preserve my personal files only, but some apps remain installed like FireFox and Thunderbird...

Edit:So those apps were not installed - but they were in my start menu - so had to reinstall them anyway!

I've now discovered that I'm having WHEA errors, which I've NEVER had before. I'm seeing it in my logs when it boots up. Then No more happen.... just the one????


----------



## WinterActual

xeizo said:


> It's dynamic, it lowers(or raises) the average vcore. When lowering multi gets better and single worse, when raising single gets better and multi worse. Most uses minus offset to lower temps, but not by too much to not kill single core performance.


If its dynamic Ill just leave it on manual -0.0750 like I always did with my Ryzen. I was just curious if the Auto could be better but apparently it won't.


----------



## crakej

Wow

Having re-installed windows, I now get my best scores ever! I've included my HWInfo output as I can see some stretching going on (thought one core did actually boost to 4.5), and also wondered if anyone can spot anything useful.

Noticed cpu core voltages never go up to 1.5v as they did in previous ver of HWInfo

Also, what does Power Reporting Deviation mean?


----------



## nick name

WinterActual said:


> If its dynamic Ill just leave it on manual -0.0750 like I always did with my Ryzen. I was just curious if the Auto could be better but apparently it won't.


I mean it might be better if you use Auto and LLC 1 or 2.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I mean it might be better if you use Auto and LLC 1 or 2.


Maybe I should try offset auto voltage as well?....


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Maybe I should try offset auto voltage as well?....


Worth a shot.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Worth a shot.


Hmmmm - seems ok. 1st image is while running P95, 2nd is after running it. Not looking too bad, but some of these figures are scary! Too high for load? I'm using LLC1 currently

Also of note, the Power Reporting Deviation is much better, though still not entirely sure what this is.

I also tried putting the CPU power Switching Frequency to <auto> to see what it would do -harder to boot up, and voltages up to 1.4v under load. Put it back to <manual> Freq 450.....


----------



## WinterActual

LLC 1 is too low.


----------



## nick name

@crakej The Stilt's explanation of the new HWiNFO reading:

https://www.hwinfo.com/forum/thread...er-reporting-deviation-metric-in-hwinfo.6456/

With me -- using LLC 1 and Auto I don't see higher voltages than I would with LLC 4 and an offset. So during a CB20 run it's around 1.2V ~ 1.28V. The higher end of that are brief instances and not sustained. It usually stays around 1.24V for most of the workload.


----------



## thegr8anand

Hello guys,

I am coming here after long time. I had been using 3004 bios and ccx software set at 4.4, 4.4, 4.2, 4.2. Read that 3103 by Shamino allowed CCX in bios and surprisingly i just used these in bios and all my settings from 3004 to 3103 and all seems to working fine.

I want to ask those who have keeping up with OC, is PBO better now than using CCX OC? What are you guys using for OC. The main complain i had was lower single-thread performance as at highest it was locked to 4.4. Has there been any improvements in the past few months?


----------



## xeizo

thegr8anand said:


> Hello guys,
> 
> I am coming here after long time. I had been using 3004 bios and ccx software set at 4.4, 4.4, 4.2, 4.2. Read that 3103 by Shamino allowed CCX in bios and surprisingly i just used these in bios and all my settings from 3004 to 3103 and all seems to working fine.
> 
> I want to ask those who have keeping up with OC, is PBO better now than using CCX OC? What are you guys using for OC. The main complain i had was lower single-thread performance as at highest it was locked to 4.4. Has there been any improvements in the past few months?


No, but there is better silicon out that boosts higher, you can't simulate better silicon in software. I run CCX OC too, 4.425, 4.3, 4.2, 4.2. It's better than PBO in every way for me, since I have a old chip.

However, on my 3700X and 2700X PBO is great as they can't OC as high as 3900X.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> @crakej The Stilt's explanation of the new HWiNFO reading:
> 
> https://www.hwinfo.com/forum/thread...er-reporting-deviation-metric-in-hwinfo.6456/
> 
> With me -- using LLC 1 and Auto I don't see higher voltages than I would with LLC 4 and an offset. So during a CB20 run it's around 1.2V ~ 1.28V. The higher end of that are brief instances and not sustained. It usually stays around 1.24V for most of the workload.


Interesting, and a bit scary to think my cpu has been hitting what I now know to be high voltages! Watts and consumption seem high at 142w (cpu+soc)

I'm getting this using PE3 scalar x10 +200MHz..... Maybe lowering some of these will actually get me better performance at lower volts...... I've been using this OC for a long time - going to have a look back and see what voltages were on previous bioses.

Thanks for that link.... very useful!

Edit - I forgot, I'm using PE3 AND the EDC 'bug'! I must disable one or both now! I have no idea what my cpu would 'normally' like at load! It's boosting higher and scores are highest, but almost certainly at the expense some cpu lifetime!


----------



## WinterActual

Try with lower scalar (like x5) and default PE (or 2, because 3's values were too aggressive I believe).


----------



## crakej

WinterActual said:


> Try with lower scalar (like x5) and default PE (or 2, because 3's values were too aggressive I believe).


I will try that, thanks 

I put everything to default to have a look.... this is what I get..... - aren't these voltages high?


----------



## thegr8anand

Thanks @*crakej* 

Anyone know why i don't see Power Reporting Deviation? I am using the latest beta. Also iirc you had to turn off some HwInfo settings like HPET, polling etc for it to run correctly with Ryzen. Is that still true?


----------



## nick name

thegr8anand said:


> Thanks @*crakej*
> 
> Anyone know why i don't see Power Reporting Deviation? I am using the latest beta. Also iirc you had to turn off some HwInfo settings like HPET, polling etc for it to run correctly with Ryzen. Is that still true?


If you've customized your HWiNFO sensors then it will be at the bottom of the list of sensors. If you're using an all-core overclock then it won't show until you use PBO.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I will try that, thanks
> 
> I put everything to default to have a look.... this is what I get..... - aren't these voltages high?


What load was that? Cinebench? That's higher than I see with Cinebench, but I don't use scalar.


----------



## thegr8anand

@crakej @xeizo


What bios settings are you using for your CCX overclocks? Mainly CPU Core Ratio and CPU Core Voltage, DIGI Power settings and what VID for CCX page?


----------



## xeizo

thegr8anand said:


> @crakej @xeizo
> 
> 
> What bios settings are you using for your CCX overclocks? Mainly CPU Core Ratio and CPU Core Voltage, DIGI Power settings and what VID for CCX page?


As you use the CCX menu the normal core ratio can be on auto, under CCX OC I use 44.25, 43.0, 42.0, 42.0. VID is what I set vcore as, 1.33V. Vcore is of course 1.33V, I use LLC3(droops to 1.300V under load), 140% power for the VRM, Asus Optimized and 500kHz switching frequency

I've seen some here use a lot lower vcore, that's not possible for me if I want one high clocking CCX, which I want to benefit single core. Even if some here seems to have unreal good silicon mine is not that bad really. Look at reviews, they are up at 1.42V regularly to get to 4.3GHz. I can at least get to 4.425GHz with 1.3V. In reality pretty good. My 3700X is way worse and creeps up towards 1.4V to get any frequency.

Been stable for a couple of weeks now, keeping Global C-state enabled in bios makes the rig keep cool and be quiet in idle. Using AMD Ryzen Balanced Powerplan makes sure the fastest CCX gets the single core jobs.


----------



## thegr8anand

xeizo said:


> As you use the CCX menu the normal core ratio can be on auto, under CCX OC I use 44.25, 43.0, 42.0, 42.0. VID is what I set vcore as, 1.33V. Vcore is of course 1.33V, I use LLC3(droops to 1.300V under load), 140% power for the VRM, Asus Optimized and 500kHz switching frequency
> 
> I've seen some here use a lot lower vcore, that's not possible for me if I want one high clocking CCX, which I want to benefit single core. Even if some here seems to have unreal good silicon mine is not that bad really. Look at reviews, they are up at 1.42V regularly to get to 4.3GHz. I can at least get to 4.425GHz with 1.3V. In reality pretty good. My 3700X is way worse and creeps up towards 1.4V to get any frequency.
> 
> Been stable for a couple of weeks now, keeping Global C-state enabled in bios makes the rig keep cool and be quiet in idle. Using AMD Ryzen Balanced Powerplan makes sure the fastest CCX gets the single core jobs.



Thanks. How much droop with 1.33v and LLC3 happens when you run CBr20?


----------



## xeizo

thegr8anand said:


> Thanks. How much droop with 1.33v and LLC3 happens when you run CBr20?


As I wrote, from 1.33V to 1.30V


----------



## Syldon

nick name said:


> @crakej The Stilt's explanation of the new HWiNFO reading:
> 
> https://www.hwinfo.com/forum/thread...er-reporting-deviation-metric-in-hwinfo.6456/
> 
> With me -- using LLC 1 and Auto I don't see higher voltages than I would with LLC 4 and an offset. So during a CB20 run it's around 1.2V ~ 1.28V. The higher end of that are brief instances and not sustained. It usually stays around 1.24V for most of the workload.


Do you think this is why we see high voltages on our board when set to auto? And the reason most people here use an minus offset when tweaking for power needs.


----------



## ClintLeo

I'm having a problem with hwinfo and W7.
If I use the latest bios(3103) hwinfo freezes in less than 5 minutes,if I put the modded version of 2701 it works without a problem.

Does anyone know if there is a setting I can change that will get it to work?


----------



## thegr8anand

ClintLeo said:


> I'm having a problem with hwinfo and W7.
> If I use the latest bios(3103) hwinfo freezes in less than 5 minutes,if I put the modded version of 2701 it works without a problem.
> 
> Does anyone know if there is a setting I can change that will get it to work?



IIRC ASUS WMI sensors used to cause problems for me so i just disable those in HwInfo.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> What load was that? Cinebench? That's higher than I see with Cinebench, but I don't use scalar.


Yes - R15 as that's what I've run all my other tests with.

This isn't with scalar - this is everything at default.

When it's OCed - using PE3 and scalar I'm seeing up to 1.38v on cores (under load), but wattage has gone up, some cores using up to 10 watts instead of max 6.766w


----------



## hurricane28

I was manually overclocking on the newest BIOS (3103) and discovered that this is actually an pretty decent chip. 

I can run 4.3 GHz 3600 MHz RAM at 1.300 vcore under load. I think its pretty good huh for an 3600 chip?


----------



## tcclaviger

After playing with and testing my 3600xt, I hereby brand all "voltages over 1.3 are teh badzor" to be bollox if using PBO.

Stock the thing goes straight to 4.325ghz and 1.37 GET vcore during all core loads. That's all auto, PBO disabled.

Interestingly, the single thread vcore is lower than my 3900x, and pings straight to 46.25 multiplier, the max allowed by the 3600xt at like 1.46 GET.

The stock behavior is nearly identical to turning on the EDC bug using my 3900x. Speeds/Voltages almost identical, it's like AMD built the EDC bug into the 3600xt.

Turn on PBO, raise limits to 200-150-200, and nothing changes, vcore and speeds are the same, as expected.

If it can do it stock, stop being chicken when using PBO/EDC bug.

Just my .02.

Sadly, my fairly good November 2019 3900x is better silicon than my April 3600 XT. Unrucky.

Here are day 1, ambient cooling 3600xt results on my C7H, its not too bad a chip, but could have been better. Runs done with PBO without using EDC bug (not needed on it):


----------



## crakej

tcclaviger said:


> After playing with and testing my 3600xt, I hereby brand all "voltages over 1.3 are teh badzor" to be bollox if using PBO.
> 
> Stock the thing goes straight to 4.325ghz and 1.37 GET vcore during all core loads. That's all auto, PBO disabled.
> 
> Interestingly, the single thread vcore is lower than my 3900x, and pings straight to 46.25 multiplier, the max allowed by the 3600xt at like 1.46 GET.
> 
> The stock behavior is nearly identical to turning on the EDC bug using my 3900x. Speeds/Voltages almost identical, it's like AMD built the EDC bug into the 3600xt.
> 
> Turn on PBO, raise limits to 200-150-200, and nothing changes, vcore and speeds are the same, as expected.
> 
> If it can do it stock, stop being chicken when using PBO/EDC bug.
> 
> Just my .02.
> 
> Sadly, my fairly good November 2019 3900x is better silicon than my April 3600 XT. Unrucky.
> 
> Here are day 1, ambient cooling 3600xt results on my C7H, its not too bad a chip, but could have been better. Runs done with PBO without using EDC bug (not needed on it):


Very nice SC performance! How many watts are your cores consuming?


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Yes - R15 as that's what I've run all my other tests with.
> 
> This isn't with scalar - this is everything at default.
> 
> When it's OCed - using PE3 and scalar I'm seeing up to 1.38v on cores (under load), but wattage has gone up, some cores using up to 10 watts instead of max 6.766w


Oh, yeah I don't recommend any PE levels. I would just use the EDC bug.


----------



## tcclaviger

@crakej usually up to about 15 each, same as my 3900, some things pull 17.5 per core.

For a 3600 series it's good. It's extremely close to my 3900x on single core boosting, and higher frequency in multicore.

As I type this on my phone it's running TM5 anta preset boosting all core between 4547-4597 (I know, light load), and gaming is the same ballpark, 4550-4625.

Going to be selling my 3900x now, I wanted to play with a dual CCD, but I never really needed it.

Took most of the 3dmark top spots for 3600xts paired to 2080ti last night lol (easy challenge, not many pair these two). Can say the 3600xt doesn't bottleneck a 2080ti above 1080p.


----------



## xeizo

tcclaviger said:


> @crakej usually up to about 15 each, same as my 3900, some things pull 17.5 per core.
> 
> For a 3600 series it's good. It's extremely close to my 3900x on single core boosting, and higher frequency in multicore.
> 
> As I type this on my phone it's running TM5 anta preset boosting all core between 4547-4597 (I know, light load), and gaming is the same ballpark, 4550-4625.
> 
> Going to be selling my 3900x now, I wanted to play with a dual CCD, but I never really needed it.
> 
> Took most of the 3dmark top spots for 3600xts paired to 2080ti last night lol (easy challenge, not many pair these two). Can say the 3600xt doesn't bottleneck a 2080ti above 1080p.


Cool, 3600XT looks like a great chip! Personally I'm done tweaking the 3000-series at the moment, bought a new electric bass for those bored moments before the 4000-series hits us  (I'm a guitarist, but I need to understand bassists so better become one)


----------



## ClintLeo

thegr8anand said:


> IIRC ASUS WMI sensors used to cause problems for me so i just disable those in HwInfo.


Thank you,I will give that a try.


----------



## tcclaviger

The transplant has begun...

No radiators anymore 🙂. Mocking up how exactly this is going to work.

How many cases will the C7H live in lol. This is #4, and likely the last for a few years.


----------



## nick name

tcclaviger said:


> The transplant has begun...
> 
> No radiators anymore 🙂. Mocking up how exactly this is going to work.
> 
> How many cases will the C7H live in lol. This is #4, and likely the last for a few years.


Why you do dis? 

Are you putting something else in the larger case?


----------



## tcclaviger

Honestly, sick of the 900D, it's going to get serious surgery (icebox surgery). It's a flimsy case and a pain to move around, plus it was designed 10 years ago and is lacking some nice features that even budget cases have now.

Back when SLI kinda made sense, so did a big case, I was running triple 980s, then dual 1080ti, but I have zero use for a big case these days.

The chiller will let me run everything colder and quieter, and the Lancool II Mesh will do great keeping anything not under water cool.

I had considered the 220T, but it's a touch too short to hold my boxfish + Revo Dual D5 pump array, they fit like a glove in the LC II Mesh.


----------



## crakej

tcclaviger said:


> @crakej usually up to about 15 each, same as my 3900, some things pull 17.5 per core.
> 
> For a 3600 series it's good. It's extremely close to my 3900x on single core boosting, and higher frequency in multicore.
> 
> As I type this on my phone it's running TM5 anta preset boosting all core between 4547-4597 (I know, light load), and gaming is the same ballpark, 4550-4625.
> 
> Going to be selling my 3900x now, I wanted to play with a dual CCD, but I never really needed it.
> 
> Took most of the 3dmark top spots for 3600xts paired to 2080ti last night lol (easy challenge, not many pair these two). Can say the 3600xt doesn't bottleneck a 2080ti above 1080p.


Wow!

I'm worrying a bit less now! I know someone has discussed max voltage/wattage these CPUs should take, so going to find that as well just to compare our readings. My chip is an early one so not expecting miracles, just want to know what I'm doing before I move on to CCX OC.


----------



## nick name

tcclaviger said:


> Honestly, sick of the 900D, it's going to get serious surgery (icebox surgery). It's a flimsy case and a pain to move around, plus it was designed 10 years ago and is lacking some nice features that even budget cases have now.
> 
> Back when SLI kinda made sense, so did a big case, I was running triple 980s, then dual 1080ti, but I have zero use for a big case these days.
> 
> The chiller will let me run everything colder and quieter, and the Lancool II Mesh will do great keeping anything not under water cool.
> 
> I had considered the 220T, but it's a touch too short to hold my boxfish + Revo Dual D5 pump array, they fit like a glove in the LC II Mesh.


Ahhh. I forgot you had a chiller. What's your solution for the condensation going to be?


----------



## tcclaviger

For the moment low humidity and ambients and limiting the target temp to roughly dew point, ultimately, a chill box and freezing the moisture to a radiator.

Done.

Think she likes cold much? No EDC bug, just a little BCLK and takes off like a rocket lol. 4.77ghz boost single.

50f doesn't cause condensation, house must be dryer than I thought.

100000000000000000000000000x better than radiator based water cooling. I wish I'd done this years ago (when I first thought about it).


----------



## crakej

tcclaviger said:


> For the moment low humidity and ambients and limiting the target temp to roughly dew point, ultimately, a chill box and freezing the moisture to a radiator.
> 
> Done.
> 
> Think she likes cold much? No EDC bug, just a little BCLK and takes off like a rocket lol. 4.77ghz boost single.
> 
> 50f doesn't cause condensation, house must be dryer than I thought.
> 
> 100000000000000000000000000x better than radiator based water cooling. I wish I'd done this years ago (when I first thought about it).


Mental!

My score on CB20 SC is only 180! Surely the 3900x should be able to beat the 3600xt?

Does anyone else get clock stretching at defaults?


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Mental!
> 
> My score on CB20 SC is only 180! Surely the 3900x should be able to beat the 3600xt?
> 
> Does anyone else get clock stretching at defaults?


Jesus that's a low score. You really gotta stop using PE3.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Jesus that's a low score. You really gotta stop using PE3.


You mean do CCX instead?

Been reading about voltage - so much opinion out there! Some say max is 1.35v, some 1.325v, and some say higher. My cores at defaults do up to 1.388v, 7w.

I may do a few experiments on this bios with just mem OC, no PE3, just PBO.... I also read somewhere that Keeping SoC and ProC ODT as low as possible help keeping the fabric reliable at higher speeds, so experimenting with that too....


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> You mean do CCX instead?
> 
> Been reading about voltage - so much opinion out there! Some say max is 1.35v, some 1.325v, and some say higher. My cores at defaults do up to 1.388v, 7w.
> 
> I may do a few experiments on this bios with just mem OC, no PE3, just PBO.... I also read somewhere that Keeping SoC and ProC ODT as low as possible help keeping the fabric reliable at higher speeds, so experimenting with that too....


No, no. I mean use the EDC bug. No PE3 -- just EDC bug. I don't use scalar either. If anything adjust PPT a smidge with a little extra TDC. 

Have you tried it yet?


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> No, no. I mean use the EDC bug. No PE3 -- just EDC bug. I don't use scalar either. If anything adjust PPT a smidge with a little extra TDC.
> 
> Have you tried it yet?


I've just tried turning off PE3 - everything else the same including the EDC 'bug'...

Highest scores ever (again) for CB15 3387, SC 214. CB20 7677 SC 527

Edit: I will try turning off scalar tomorrow..


----------



## crakej

So am experimenting this morning with just EDC bug, set at 20 currently.

I noticed the profile I was experimenting with had lost all it's settings in <advanced> so went and put those all to what I've been using previously.

So, disabled PE3 and scalar, put the bios 'right' and booted. Before I could enter my windows pin (I think while windows is loading its memory manager) screen went black and got bios code 8. The only way to come back from this is to power off at the power supply. Then I got 3 beeps x 3, which if mem serves me right (ha!?) is a memory error, so will be reseating memory as well.

Only way to get it to run was to put everything back to auto in <advanced> section of bios, or load original profile with PE3 enabled!?

So re-seating, then testing as I enable each setting group in <advanced>

Edit: re-seating is done. using EDC bug alone i'm getting lower scores than with scalar as well - not much lower, but consistently lower. Goinbg to try add back the stuff to <advanced> see what that gains me...


----------



## nick name

@crakej You'll want to be careful with the EDC bug and too high an EDC value. What happens when the EDC value is too high is certain workloads drop down to below 2.0GHz. Can't explain why, but it's something to keep an eye out for. I've found that I need to use EDC 2.

Also, with the EDC bug you might see single thread speeds that will crash your PC because of insufficient power. Sitting at Windows log on is a place I've seen that happen before.


----------



## tcclaviger

EDC set to 1, always worked best for bugging for me on C7H.

New daily settings TDC-70, EDC-100, PPT- strangely irrelevant, the board ignores it, no idea *** is going on, can set to 100 and watch it hit 131. 

No EDC bug, it's not useful on my 3600xt. Causes too aggressive all core boosting leading to instability, probably because of temps.

It'd be great if Asus would let us disable Spread Spectrum at 100bclk, it definitely limits IF speeds. Just bump to 100.2 and bam, stable, zero other changes, it kind of accomplishes SS disabled, but is a weird work around.

https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/15648979


https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/3057971

Gaming performance is inconsistent between 3600xt and 3900x tweaked. It's becomes title specific, with small 2-3% deviations between them. Close enough that I don't care since I game with g-sync


----------



## nick name

tcclaviger said:


> EDC set to 1, always worked best for bugging for me.
> 
> New daily settings lol, no EDC bug, it's not useful on my 3600xt. Causes too aggressive all core boosting.
> 
> It'd be great if Asus would let us disable Spread Spectrum at 100bclk, it definitely limits IF speeds. Just bump to 100.2 and bam, stable, zero other changes, it kind of accomplishes SS disabled, but is a weird work around.


I don't set DOCP. I set to Manual and input all. Setting BCLK to 100 keeps it at 100 whereas DOCP lets it droop to 99.8. 

Every time I try to use Benchmate my Kaspersky flags it.


----------



## tcclaviger

Well strap me to a pig and call me a squealer, it worked.

Thanks, this is why I love OC forums, sometimes we all look past the obvious.

I wonder what this does for fclk stability higher up? 3800/1900 with 100 bclk booted and is stable now.

Interesting, I'll give that an attempt. Never once have I bothered to flip the DOCP setting off DOCP, but still manually enter everything lol.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I don't set DOCP. I set to Manual and input all. Setting BCLK to 100 keeps it at 100 whereas DOCP lets it droop to 99.8.
> 
> Every time I try to use Benchmate my Kaspersky flags it.


I leave it on <auto> and it does the same....

Could I ask you to post your current bios profile for your 3900x? It would be interesting to see what you've settled on and the differences between our settings.. will post mine shortly!

Edit: Here's my profile which passes benching and which run reliably: 3733 PE3 and EDC



Spoiler






Code:


[2020/07/27 08:30:52]
Ai Overclock Tuner [Auto]
Performance Enhancer [Level 3 (OC)]
CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
Performance Bias [Auto]
Memory Frequency [DDR4-3733MHz]
FCLK Frequency [1867MHz]
Core Performance Boost [Enabled]
SMT Mode [Auto]
Core VID [Auto]
CCX0 Ratio [Auto]
CCX1 Ratio [Auto]
CCX0 Ratio [Auto]
CCX1 Ratio [Auto]
TPU [Keep Current Settings]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Manual]
PPT Limit [4096]
TDC Limit [4096]
EDC Limit [20]
Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [Manual]
Customized Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [10X]
Max CPU Boost Clock Override [200MHz]
Platform Thermal Throttle Limit [Auto]
Mem Over Clock Fail Count [3]
DRAM CAS# Latency [14]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [15]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [14]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [14]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [28]
Trc [42]
TrrdS [4]
TrrdL [4]
Tfaw [16]
TwtrS [4]
TwtrL [12]
Twr [10]
Trcpage [Auto]
TrdrdScl [2]
TwrwrScl [2]
Trfc [298]
Trfc2 [Auto]
Trfc4 [Auto]
Tcwl [14]
Trtp [8]
Trdwr [Auto]
Twrrd [Auto]
TwrwrSc [Auto]
TwrwrSd [Auto]
TwrwrDd [Auto]
TrdrdSc [Auto]
TrdrdSd [Auto]
TrdrdDd [Auto]
Tcke [1]
ProcODT [34.3 ohm]
Cmd2T [1T]
Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
Power Down Enable [Disabled]
RttNom [RZQ/7]
RttWr [RZQ/3]
RttPark [RZQ/1]
MemAddrCmdSetup [0]
MemCsOdtSetup [0]
MemCkeSetup [0]
MemCadBusClkDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [Auto]
CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 2]
CPU Current Capability [140%]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
CPU Voltage Frequency [450]
CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
CPU Power Phase Control [Power Phase Response]
Manual Adjustment [Ultra Fast]
CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 2]
VDDSOC Current Capability [130%]
VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed VDDSOC Switching Frequency(KHz) [550]
VDDSOC Phase Control [Optimized]
DRAM Current Capability [120%]
DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [400]
DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.47500]
Force OC Mode Disable [Disabled]
VTTDDR Voltage [Auto]
VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
VDDP Voltage [Auto]
1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
PLL reference voltage [Auto]
T Offset [Auto]
Sense MI Skew [Enabled]
Sense MI Offset [Auto]
Promontory presence [Auto]
Clock Amplitude [Auto]
CLDO VDDP voltage [Auto]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
- VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.08125]
DRAM Voltage [1.47500]
VDDG CCD Voltage Control [0.950]
VDDG IOD Voltage Control [0.950]
1.8V PLL Voltage [1.97000]
1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
Firmware TPM [Disable]
Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
PSS Support [Auto]
NX Mode [Enabled]
SVM Mode [Enabled]
Onboard LED [Enabled]
Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
SATA Mode [AHCI]
NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
SMART Self Test [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
PCIEX16_1 Bandwidth [Auto Mode]
PCIEX16_2 Bandwidth [Auto Mode]
M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
PCIEX8/X4_2 Mode [Auto]
PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
SB Link Mode [Auto]
Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
When system is in working state [On]
When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [On]
Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
ErP Ready [Disabled]
Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
Power On By RTC [Disabled]
Network Stack [Disabled]
Device [SanDisk Ultra II 480GB]
Legacy USB Support [Disabled]


PSPP Policy [Auto]
Fast Boot [Enabled]
NVMe Support [Enabled]
Next Boot after AC Power Loss [Normal Boot]
AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
Boot Logo Display [Enabled]
POST Delay Time [3 sec]
Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
Launch CSM [Disabled]
OS Type [Other OS]
Setup Animator [Disabled]
ASUS Grid Install Service [Disabled]
Load from Profile [2]
Profile Name [3733PE3EDC]
Save to Profile [7]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
BCLK Frequency [Auto]
CPU Ratio [Auto]
DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A1]
Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
Custom Pstate0 [Auto]
L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Enable]
L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Enable]
Core Performance Boost [Auto]
Global C-state Control [Enabled]
DRAM ECC Enable [Auto]
DRAM scrub time [Auto]
Poison scrubber control [Auto]
Redirect scrubber control [Auto]
Redirect scrubber limit [Auto]
NUMA nodes per socket [Auto]
Memory interleaving [Auto]
Memory interleaving size [Auto]
1TB remap [Auto]
DRAM map inversion [Auto]
ACPI SRAT L3 Cache As NUMA Domain [Auto]
ACPI SLIT Distance Control [Auto]
ACPI SLIT remote relative distance [Auto]
GMI encryption control [Auto]
xGMI encryption control [Auto]
CAKE CRC perf bounds Control [Auto]
4-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
3-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
Disable DF to external IP SyncFloodPropagation [Auto]
Disable DF sync flood propagation [Auto]
CC6 memory region encryption [Auto]
Memory Clear [Disabled]
Overclock [Enabled]
Memory Clock Speed [Auto]
Tcl [Auto]
Trcdrd [Auto]
Trcdwr [Auto]
Trp [Auto]
Tras [Auto]
Trc Ctrl [Auto]
TrrdS [Auto]
TrrdL [Auto]
Tfaw Ctrl [Auto]
TwtrS [Auto]
TwtrL [Auto]
Twr Ctrl [Auto]
Trcpage Ctrl [Auto]
TrdrdScL Ctrl [Auto]
TwrwrScL Ctrl [Auto]
Trfc Ctrl [Auto]
Trfc2 Ctrl [Auto]
Trfc4 Ctrl [Auto]
Tcwl [Auto]
Trtp [Auto]
Tcke [Auto]
Trdwr [Auto]
Twrrd [Auto]
TwrwrSc [Auto]
TwrwrSd [Auto]
TwrwrDd [Auto]
TrdrdSc [Auto]
TrdrdSd [Auto]
TrdrdDd [Auto]
ProcODT [Auto]
Power Down Enable [Auto]
Cmd2T [Auto]
Gear Down Mode [Auto]
CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
Data Poisoning [Auto]
DRAM Post Package Repair [Disable]
RCD Parity [Auto]
DRAM Address Command Parity Retry [Auto]
Write CRC Enable [Auto]
DRAM Write CRC Enable and Retry Limit [Auto]
Disable Memory Error Injection [True]
DRAM ECC Symbol Size [Auto]
DRAM UECC Retry [Auto]
TSME [Auto]
Data Scramble [Auto]
DFE Read Training [Auto]
FFE Write Training [Auto]
PMU Pattern Bits Control [Auto]
MR6VrefDQ Control [Auto]
CPU Vref Training Seed Control [Auto]
Chipselect Interleaving [Auto]
BankGroupSwap [Disabled]
BankGroupSwapAlt [Enabled]
Address Hash Bank 2 ColXor [3f8]
Address Hash Bank [Auto]
Address Hash CS [Auto]
Address Hash Rm [Auto]
SPD Read Optimization [Enabled]
MBIST Enable [Disabled]
Pattern Select [PRBS]
Pattern Length [3]
Aggressor Channel [1 Aggressor Channel]
Aggressor Static Lane Control [Disabled]
Target Static Lane Control [Disabled]
Worst Case Margin Granularity [Per Chip Select]
Read Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
Read Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
Write Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
Write Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
IOMMU [Auto]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [Auto]
FCLK Frequency [Auto]
SOC OVERCLOCK VID [0]
UCLK DIV1 MODE [Auto]
VDDP Voltage Control [Auto]
VDDG Voltage Control [Auto]
SoC/Uncore OC Mode [Auto]
LN2 Mode [Auto]
ACS Enable [Auto]
PCIe Ten Bit Tag Support [Auto]
Max Voltage Offset [Auto]
cTDP Control [Auto]
EfficiencyModeEn [Auto]
Package Power Limit Control [Auto]
APBDIS [Auto]
DF Cstates [Enabled]
CPPC [Enabled]
CPPC Preferred Cores [Enabled]
BoostFmaxEn [Auto]
Early Link Speed [Auto]


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I leave it on <auto> and it does the same....
> 
> Could I ask you to post your current bios profile for your 3900x? It would be interesting to see what you've settled on and the differences between our settings.. will post mine shortly!
> 
> Edit: Here's my profile which passes benching and which run reliably: 3733 PE3 and EDC
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> [2020/07/27 08:30:52]
> Ai Overclock Tuner [Auto]
> Performance Enhancer [Level 3 (OC)]
> CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
> Performance Bias [Auto]
> Memory Frequency [DDR4-3733MHz]
> FCLK Frequency [1867MHz]
> Core Performance Boost [Enabled]
> SMT Mode [Auto]
> Core VID [Auto]
> CCX0 Ratio [Auto]
> CCX1 Ratio [Auto]
> CCX0 Ratio [Auto]
> CCX1 Ratio [Auto]
> TPU [Keep Current Settings]
> Precision Boost Overdrive [Manual]
> PPT Limit [4096]
> TDC Limit [4096]
> EDC Limit [20]
> Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [Manual]
> Customized Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [10X]
> Max CPU Boost Clock Override [200MHz]
> Platform Thermal Throttle Limit [Auto]
> Mem Over Clock Fail Count [3]
> DRAM CAS# Latency [14]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [15]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [14]
> DRAM RAS# PRE Time [14]
> DRAM RAS# ACT Time [28]
> Trc [42]
> TrrdS [4]
> TrrdL [4]
> Tfaw [16]
> TwtrS [4]
> TwtrL [12]
> Twr [10]
> Trcpage [Auto]
> TrdrdScl [2]
> TwrwrScl [2]
> Trfc [298]
> Trfc2 [Auto]
> Trfc4 [Auto]
> Tcwl [14]
> Trtp [8]
> Trdwr [Auto]
> Twrrd [Auto]
> TwrwrSc [Auto]
> TwrwrSd [Auto]
> TwrwrDd [Auto]
> TrdrdSc [Auto]
> TrdrdSd [Auto]
> TrdrdDd [Auto]
> Tcke [1]
> ProcODT [34.3 ohm]
> Cmd2T [1T]
> Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
> Power Down Enable [Disabled]
> RttNom [RZQ/7]
> RttWr [RZQ/3]
> RttPark [RZQ/1]
> MemAddrCmdSetup [0]
> MemCsOdtSetup [0]
> MemCkeSetup [0]
> MemCadBusClkDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [Auto]
> CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 2]
> CPU Current Capability [140%]
> CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
> CPU Voltage Frequency [450]
> CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
> CPU Power Phase Control [Power Phase Response]
> Manual Adjustment [Ultra Fast]
> CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
> VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 2]
> VDDSOC Current Capability [130%]
> VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Manual]
> Fixed VDDSOC Switching Frequency(KHz) [550]
> VDDSOC Phase Control [Optimized]
> DRAM Current Capability [120%]
> DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
> DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
> Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [400]
> DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.47500]
> Force OC Mode Disable [Disabled]
> VTTDDR Voltage [Auto]
> VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
> VDDP Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
> CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
> 2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
> PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
> PLL reference voltage [Auto]
> T Offset [Auto]
> Sense MI Skew [Enabled]
> Sense MI Offset [Auto]
> Promontory presence [Auto]
> Clock Amplitude [Auto]
> CLDO VDDP voltage [Auto]
> CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
> CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
> - VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.08125]
> DRAM Voltage [1.47500]
> VDDG CCD Voltage Control [0.950]
> VDDG IOD Voltage Control [0.950]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [1.97000]
> 1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
> Firmware TPM [Disable]
> Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
> PSS Support [Auto]
> NX Mode [Enabled]
> SVM Mode [Enabled]
> Onboard LED [Enabled]
> Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
> SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
> SATA Mode [AHCI]
> NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
> SMART Self Test [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
> PCIEX16_1 Bandwidth [Auto Mode]
> PCIEX16_2 Bandwidth [Auto Mode]
> M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
> PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
> PCIEX8/X4_2 Mode [Auto]
> PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
> M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
> M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
> SB Link Mode [Auto]
> Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
> USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
> When system is in working state [On]
> When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [On]
> Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
> Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
> ErP Ready [Disabled]
> Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
> Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
> Power On By RTC [Disabled]
> Network Stack [Disabled]
> Device [SanDisk Ultra II 480GB]
> Legacy USB Support [Disabled]
> 
> 
> PSPP Policy [Auto]
> Fast Boot [Enabled]
> NVMe Support [Enabled]
> Next Boot after AC Power Loss [Normal Boot]
> AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
> Boot Logo Display [Enabled]
> POST Delay Time [3 sec]
> Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
> Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
> Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
> Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
> Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
> Launch CSM [Disabled]
> OS Type [Other OS]
> Setup Animator [Disabled]
> ASUS Grid Install Service [Disabled]
> Load from Profile [2]
> Profile Name [3733PE3EDC]
> Save to Profile [7]
> CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
> VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> BCLK Frequency [Auto]
> CPU Ratio [Auto]
> DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A1]
> Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
> Custom Pstate0 [Auto]
> L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Enable]
> L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Enable]
> Core Performance Boost [Auto]
> Global C-state Control [Enabled]
> DRAM ECC Enable [Auto]
> DRAM scrub time [Auto]
> Poison scrubber control [Auto]
> Redirect scrubber control [Auto]
> Redirect scrubber limit [Auto]
> NUMA nodes per socket [Auto]
> Memory interleaving [Auto]
> Memory interleaving size [Auto]
> 1TB remap [Auto]
> DRAM map inversion [Auto]
> ACPI SRAT L3 Cache As NUMA Domain [Auto]
> ACPI SLIT Distance Control [Auto]
> ACPI SLIT remote relative distance [Auto]
> GMI encryption control [Auto]
> xGMI encryption control [Auto]
> CAKE CRC perf bounds Control [Auto]
> 4-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
> 3-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
> Disable DF to external IP SyncFloodPropagation [Auto]
> Disable DF sync flood propagation [Auto]
> CC6 memory region encryption [Auto]
> Memory Clear [Disabled]
> Overclock [Enabled]
> Memory Clock Speed [Auto]
> Tcl [Auto]
> Trcdrd [Auto]
> Trcdwr [Auto]
> Trp [Auto]
> Tras [Auto]
> Trc Ctrl [Auto]
> TrrdS [Auto]
> TrrdL [Auto]
> Tfaw Ctrl [Auto]
> TwtrS [Auto]
> TwtrL [Auto]
> Twr Ctrl [Auto]
> Trcpage Ctrl [Auto]
> TrdrdScL Ctrl [Auto]
> TwrwrScL Ctrl [Auto]
> Trfc Ctrl [Auto]
> Trfc2 Ctrl [Auto]
> Trfc4 Ctrl [Auto]
> Tcwl [Auto]
> Trtp [Auto]
> Tcke [Auto]
> Trdwr [Auto]
> Twrrd [Auto]
> TwrwrSc [Auto]
> TwrwrSd [Auto]
> TwrwrDd [Auto]
> TrdrdSc [Auto]
> TrdrdSd [Auto]
> TrdrdDd [Auto]
> ProcODT [Auto]
> Power Down Enable [Auto]
> Cmd2T [Auto]
> Gear Down Mode [Auto]
> CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
> CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
> Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
> Data Poisoning [Auto]
> DRAM Post Package Repair [Disable]
> RCD Parity [Auto]
> DRAM Address Command Parity Retry [Auto]
> Write CRC Enable [Auto]
> DRAM Write CRC Enable and Retry Limit [Auto]
> Disable Memory Error Injection [True]
> DRAM ECC Symbol Size [Auto]
> DRAM UECC Retry [Auto]
> TSME [Auto]
> Data Scramble [Auto]
> DFE Read Training [Auto]
> FFE Write Training [Auto]
> PMU Pattern Bits Control [Auto]
> MR6VrefDQ Control [Auto]
> CPU Vref Training Seed Control [Auto]
> Chipselect Interleaving [Auto]
> BankGroupSwap [Disabled]
> BankGroupSwapAlt [Enabled]
> Address Hash Bank 2 ColXor [3f8]
> Address Hash Bank [Auto]
> Address Hash CS [Auto]
> Address Hash Rm [Auto]
> SPD Read Optimization [Enabled]
> MBIST Enable [Disabled]
> Pattern Select [PRBS]
> Pattern Length [3]
> Aggressor Channel [1 Aggressor Channel]
> Aggressor Static Lane Control [Disabled]
> Target Static Lane Control [Disabled]
> Worst Case Margin Granularity [Per Chip Select]
> Read Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
> Read Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
> Write Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
> Write Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
> IOMMU [Auto]
> Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
> Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [Auto]
> FCLK Frequency [Auto]
> SOC OVERCLOCK VID [0]
> UCLK DIV1 MODE [Auto]
> VDDP Voltage Control [Auto]
> VDDG Voltage Control [Auto]
> SoC/Uncore OC Mode [Auto]
> LN2 Mode [Auto]
> ACS Enable [Auto]
> PCIe Ten Bit Tag Support [Auto]
> Max Voltage Offset [Auto]
> cTDP Control [Auto]
> EfficiencyModeEn [Auto]
> Package Power Limit Control [Auto]
> APBDIS [Auto]
> DF Cstates [Enabled]
> CPPC [Enabled]
> CPPC Preferred Cores [Enabled]
> BoostFmaxEn [Auto]
> Early Link Speed [Auto]


Here are mine



Spoiler



*Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]*
BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
BCLK_Divider [Auto]
*Performance Enhancer [Default]*
CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
*Performance Bias [None]
Memory Frequency [DDR4-3800MHz]
FCLK Frequency [1900MHz]*
Core Performance Boost [Enabled]
SMT Mode [Enabled]
Core VID [Auto]
CCX0 Ratio [Auto]
CCX1 Ratio [Auto]
CCX0 Ratio [Auto]
CCX1 Ratio [Auto]
TPU [Keep Current Settings]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Manual]
*PPT Limit [142]
TDC Limit [115]
EDC Limit [2]
Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [Manual]
Customized Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [3X]
Max CPU Boost Clock Override [Auto]*
Platform Thermal Throttle Limit [Auto]
*Mem Over Clock Fail Count [20]*
*DRAM CAS# Latency [14]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [16]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [14]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [14]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [34]
Trc [50]
TrrdS [4]
TrrdL [4]
Tfaw [16]
TwtrS [4]
TwtrL [8]
Twr [10]
Trcpage [Auto]
TrdrdScl [3]
TwrwrScl [3]
Trfc [250]
Trfc2 [Auto]
Trfc4 [Auto]
Tcwl [14]
Trtp [8]
Trdwr [8]
Twrrd [3]
TwrwrSc [1]
TwrwrSd [6]
TwrwrDd [6]
TrdrdSc [1]
TrdrdSd [4]
TrdrdDd [4]
Tcke [1]
ProcODT [Auto]
Cmd2T [1T]*
Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
Power Down Enable [Disabled]
RttNom [Auto]
RttWr [Auto]
RttPark [Auto]
MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
MemCkeSetup [Auto]
MemCadBusClkDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [Auto]
*CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 4]
CPU Current Capability [140%]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
CPU Voltage Frequency [500]
CPU Power Duty Control [Extreme]
CPU Power Phase Control [Extreme]
CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 4]
VDDSOC Current Capability [140%]
VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed VDDSOC Switching Frequency(KHz) [600]
VDDSOC Phase Control [Extreme]
DRAM Current Capability [130%]
DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.53000]*
Force OC Mode Disable [Enabled]
VTTDDR Voltage [Auto]
VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
VDDP Voltage [Auto]
1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
PLL reference voltage [Auto]
T Offset [Auto]
*Sense MI Skew [Disabled]*
Sense MI Offset [Auto]
Promontory presence [Auto]
Clock Amplitude [Auto]
*CLDO VDDP voltage [1.000]
CPU Core Voltage [Offset mode]
CPU Offset Mode Sign [-]
- CPU Core Voltage Offset [0.02500]
CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
- VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.10625]
DRAM Voltage [1.53000]
VDDG CCD Voltage Control [1.050]
VDDG IOD Voltage Control [1.050]*
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
Firmware TPM [Disable]
Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
PSS Support [Auto]
NX Mode [Enabled]
SVM Mode [Disabled]
Onboard LED [Enabled]
Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
SATA Mode [AHCI]
NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
SMART Self Test [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
HD Audio Controller [Disabled]
PCIEX16_1 Bandwidth [Auto Mode]
PCIEX16_2 Bandwidth [Auto Mode]
M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
PCIEX8/X4_2 Mode [Auto]
PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
SB Link Mode [Auto]
Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
When system is in working state [Off]
When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [Off]
Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
Wi-Fi Controller [Disabled]
Bluetooth Controller [Disabled]
ErP Ready [Disabled]
Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
Power On By RTC [Disabled]
Network Stack [Disabled]
Device [Samsung SSD 850 EVO 1TB]
Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
SanDisk [Auto]
U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
U31G1_5 [Enabled]
U31G1_6 [Enabled]
U31G1_7 [Enabled]
U31G1_8 [Enabled]
U31G1_9 [Enabled]
U31G1_10 [Enabled]
USB11 [Enabled]
USB12 [Enabled]
USB13 [Enabled]
USB14 [Enabled]
USB15 [Enabled]
CPU Temperature [Monitor]
MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
PCH Temperature [Monitor]
T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Fan Speed [Ignore]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
5V Voltage [Monitor]
12V Voltage [Monitor]
CPU Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
PSPP Policy [Auto]
Fast Boot [Enabled]
NVMe Support [Enabled]
Next Boot after AC Power Loss [Normal Boot]
AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
Boot Logo Display [Enabled]
POST Delay Time [3 sec]
Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
Launch CSM [Enabled]
Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
OS Type [Other OS]
Setup Animator [Disabled]
ASUS Grid Install Service [Disabled]
Load from Profile [3]
Profile Name [32 GB]
Save to Profile [5]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
BCLK Frequency [Auto]
CPU Ratio [Auto]
DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A1]
Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
Custom Pstate0 [Auto]
L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
Core Performance Boost [Auto]
Global C-state Control [Auto]
DRAM ECC Enable [Auto]
DRAM scrub time [Auto]
Poison scrubber control [Auto]
Redirect scrubber control [Auto]
Redirect scrubber limit [Auto]
NUMA nodes per socket [Auto]
Memory interleaving [Auto]
Memory interleaving size [Auto]
1TB remap [Auto]
DRAM map inversion [Auto]
ACPI SRAT L3 Cache As NUMA Domain [Auto]
ACPI SLIT Distance Control [Auto]
ACPI SLIT remote relative distance [Auto]
GMI encryption control [Auto]
xGMI encryption control [Auto]
CAKE CRC perf bounds Control [Auto]
4-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
3-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
Disable DF to external IP SyncFloodPropagation [Auto]
Disable DF sync flood propagation [Auto]
CC6 memory region encryption [Auto]
Memory Clear [Auto]
Overclock [Auto]
Power Down Enable [Auto]
Cmd2T [Auto]
Gear Down Mode [Auto]
CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
Data Poisoning [Auto]
DRAM Post Package Repair [Disable]
RCD Parity [Auto]
DRAM Address Command Parity Retry [Auto]
Write CRC Enable [Auto]
DRAM Write CRC Enable and Retry Limit [Auto]
Disable Memory Error Injection [True]
DRAM ECC Symbol Size [Auto]
DRAM UECC Retry [Auto]
TSME [Auto]
Data Scramble [Auto]
*DFE Read Training [Enable]
FFE Write Training [Enable]
PMU Pattern Bits Control [Manual]
PMU Pattern Bits [a]*
MR6VrefDQ Control [Auto]
CPU Vref Training Seed Control [Auto]
Chipselect Interleaving [Auto]
BankGroupSwap [Auto]
BankGroupSwapAlt [Auto]
Address Hash Bank [Auto]
Address Hash CS [Auto]
Address Hash Rm [Auto]
SPD Read Optimization [Enabled]
MBIST Enable [Disabled]
Pattern Select [PRBS]
Pattern Length [3]
Aggressor Channel [1 Aggressor Channel]
Aggressor Static Lane Control [Disabled]
Target Static Lane Control [Disabled]
Worst Case Margin Granularity [Per Chip Select]
Read Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
Read Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
Write Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
Write Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
IOMMU [Auto]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [Auto]
FCLK Frequency [Auto]
SOC OVERCLOCK VID [0]
UCLK DIV1 MODE [Auto]
VDDP Voltage Control [Auto]
VDDG Voltage Control [Auto]
SoC/Uncore OC Mode [Enabled]
LN2 Mode [Auto]
ACS Enable [Auto]
PCIe Ten Bit Tag Support [Auto]
Max Voltage Offset [Auto]
*cTDP Control [Manual]
cTDP [225]*
EfficiencyModeEn [Auto]
*Package Power Limit Control [Manual]
Package Power Limit [225]
APBDIS [1]
DF Cstates [Disabled]
Fixed SOC Pstate [P0]
CPPC [Enabled]*
CPPC Preferred Cores [Auto]
BoostFmaxEn [Auto]
Early Link Speed [Auto]



Some of those settings are me figuring stuff out though. So they're gonna change.


----------



## darkage

what happened to ccx ovc?
not using my CHVII for now but was using the ccx ovc, is there any problem ?


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Here are mine
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> *Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]*
> BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
> BCLK_Divider [Auto]
> *Performance Enhancer [Default]*
> CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
> *Performance Bias [None]
> Memory Frequency [DDR4-3800MHz]
> FCLK Frequency [1900MHz]*
> Core Performance Boost [Enabled]
> SMT Mode [Enabled]
> Core VID [Auto]
> CCX0 Ratio [Auto]
> CCX1 Ratio [Auto]
> CCX0 Ratio [Auto]
> CCX1 Ratio [Auto]
> TPU [Keep Current Settings]
> Precision Boost Overdrive [Manual]
> *PPT Limit [142]
> TDC Limit [115]
> EDC Limit [2]
> Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [Manual]
> Customized Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [3X]
> Max CPU Boost Clock Override [Auto]*
> Platform Thermal Throttle Limit [Auto]
> *Mem Over Clock Fail Count [20]*
> *DRAM CAS# Latency [14]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [16]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [14]
> DRAM RAS# PRE Time [14]
> DRAM RAS# ACT Time [34]
> Trc [50]
> TrrdS [4]
> TrrdL [4]
> Tfaw [16]
> TwtrS [4]
> TwtrL [8]
> Twr [10]
> Trcpage [Auto]
> TrdrdScl [3]
> TwrwrScl [3]
> Trfc [250]
> Trfc2 [Auto]
> Trfc4 [Auto]
> Tcwl [14]
> Trtp [8]
> Trdwr [8]
> Twrrd [3]
> TwrwrSc [1]
> TwrwrSd [6]
> TwrwrDd [6]
> TrdrdSc [1]
> TrdrdSd [4]
> TrdrdDd [4]
> Tcke [1]
> ProcODT [Auto]
> Cmd2T [1T]*
> Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
> Power Down Enable [Disabled]
> RttNom [Auto]
> RttWr [Auto]
> RttPark [Auto]
> MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
> MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
> MemCkeSetup [Auto]
> MemCadBusClkDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [Auto]
> *CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 4]
> CPU Current Capability [140%]
> CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
> CPU Voltage Frequency [500]
> CPU Power Duty Control [Extreme]
> CPU Power Phase Control [Extreme]
> CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
> VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 4]
> VDDSOC Current Capability [140%]
> VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Manual]
> Fixed VDDSOC Switching Frequency(KHz) [600]
> VDDSOC Phase Control [Extreme]
> DRAM Current Capability [130%]
> DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
> DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
> Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
> DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.53000]*
> Force OC Mode Disable [Enabled]
> VTTDDR Voltage [Auto]
> VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
> VDDP Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
> CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
> 2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
> PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
> PLL reference voltage [Auto]
> T Offset [Auto]
> *Sense MI Skew [Disabled]*
> Sense MI Offset [Auto]
> Promontory presence [Auto]
> Clock Amplitude [Auto]
> *CLDO VDDP voltage [1.000]
> CPU Core Voltage [Offset mode]
> CPU Offset Mode Sign [-]
> - CPU Core Voltage Offset [0.02500]
> CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
> - VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.10625]
> DRAM Voltage [1.53000]
> VDDG CCD Voltage Control [1.050]
> VDDG IOD Voltage Control [1.050]*
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> 1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
> Firmware TPM [Disable]
> Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
> PSS Support [Auto]
> NX Mode [Enabled]
> SVM Mode [Disabled]
> Onboard LED [Enabled]
> Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
> SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
> SATA Mode [AHCI]
> NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
> SMART Self Test [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> HD Audio Controller [Disabled]
> PCIEX16_1 Bandwidth [Auto Mode]
> PCIEX16_2 Bandwidth [Auto Mode]
> M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
> PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
> PCIEX8/X4_2 Mode [Auto]
> PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
> M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
> M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
> SB Link Mode [Auto]
> Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
> USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
> When system is in working state [Off]
> When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [Off]
> Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
> Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
> Wi-Fi Controller [Disabled]
> Bluetooth Controller [Disabled]
> ErP Ready [Disabled]
> Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
> Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
> Power On By RTC [Disabled]
> Network Stack [Disabled]
> Device [Samsung SSD 850 EVO 1TB]
> Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
> XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
> SanDisk [Auto]
> U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
> U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
> U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> U31G1_5 [Enabled]
> U31G1_6 [Enabled]
> U31G1_7 [Enabled]
> U31G1_8 [Enabled]
> U31G1_9 [Enabled]
> U31G1_10 [Enabled]
> USB11 [Enabled]
> USB12 [Enabled]
> USB13 [Enabled]
> USB14 [Enabled]
> USB15 [Enabled]
> CPU Temperature [Monitor]
> MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
> PCH Temperature [Monitor]
> T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Fan Speed [Ignore]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
> HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
> CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
> AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
> W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
> W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
> 3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
> 5V Voltage [Monitor]
> 12V Voltage [Monitor]
> CPU Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
> AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
> PSPP Policy [Auto]
> Fast Boot [Enabled]
> NVMe Support [Enabled]
> Next Boot after AC Power Loss [Normal Boot]
> AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
> Boot Logo Display [Enabled]
> POST Delay Time [3 sec]
> Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
> Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
> Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
> Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
> Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
> Launch CSM [Enabled]
> Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
> Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
> Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
> Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
> OS Type [Other OS]
> Setup Animator [Disabled]
> ASUS Grid Install Service [Disabled]
> Load from Profile [3]
> Profile Name [32 GB]
> Save to Profile [5]
> CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
> VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> BCLK Frequency [Auto]
> CPU Ratio [Auto]
> DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A1]
> Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
> Custom Pstate0 [Auto]
> L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
> L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
> Core Performance Boost [Auto]
> Global C-state Control [Auto]
> DRAM ECC Enable [Auto]
> DRAM scrub time [Auto]
> Poison scrubber control [Auto]
> Redirect scrubber control [Auto]
> Redirect scrubber limit [Auto]
> NUMA nodes per socket [Auto]
> Memory interleaving [Auto]
> Memory interleaving size [Auto]
> 1TB remap [Auto]
> DRAM map inversion [Auto]
> ACPI SRAT L3 Cache As NUMA Domain [Auto]
> ACPI SLIT Distance Control [Auto]
> ACPI SLIT remote relative distance [Auto]
> GMI encryption control [Auto]
> xGMI encryption control [Auto]
> CAKE CRC perf bounds Control [Auto]
> 4-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
> 3-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
> Disable DF to external IP SyncFloodPropagation [Auto]
> Disable DF sync flood propagation [Auto]
> CC6 memory region encryption [Auto]
> Memory Clear [Auto]
> Overclock [Auto]
> Power Down Enable [Auto]
> Cmd2T [Auto]
> Gear Down Mode [Auto]
> CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
> CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
> Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
> Data Poisoning [Auto]
> DRAM Post Package Repair [Disable]
> RCD Parity [Auto]
> DRAM Address Command Parity Retry [Auto]
> Write CRC Enable [Auto]
> DRAM Write CRC Enable and Retry Limit [Auto]
> Disable Memory Error Injection [True]
> DRAM ECC Symbol Size [Auto]
> DRAM UECC Retry [Auto]
> TSME [Auto]
> Data Scramble [Auto]
> *DFE Read Training [Enable]
> FFE Write Training [Enable]
> PMU Pattern Bits Control [Manual]
> PMU Pattern Bits [a]*
> MR6VrefDQ Control [Auto]
> CPU Vref Training Seed Control [Auto]
> Chipselect Interleaving [Auto]
> BankGroupSwap [Auto]
> BankGroupSwapAlt [Auto]
> Address Hash Bank [Auto]
> Address Hash CS [Auto]
> Address Hash Rm [Auto]
> SPD Read Optimization [Enabled]
> MBIST Enable [Disabled]
> Pattern Select [PRBS]
> Pattern Length [3]
> Aggressor Channel [1 Aggressor Channel]
> Aggressor Static Lane Control [Disabled]
> Target Static Lane Control [Disabled]
> Worst Case Margin Granularity [Per Chip Select]
> Read Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
> Read Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
> Write Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
> Write Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
> IOMMU [Auto]
> Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
> Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [Auto]
> FCLK Frequency [Auto]
> SOC OVERCLOCK VID [0]
> UCLK DIV1 MODE [Auto]
> VDDP Voltage Control [Auto]
> VDDG Voltage Control [Auto]
> SoC/Uncore OC Mode [Enabled]
> LN2 Mode [Auto]
> ACS Enable [Auto]
> PCIe Ten Bit Tag Support [Auto]
> Max Voltage Offset [Auto]
> *cTDP Control [Manual]
> cTDP [225]*
> EfficiencyModeEn [Auto]
> *Package Power Limit Control [Manual]
> Package Power Limit [225]
> APBDIS [1]
> DF Cstates [Disabled]
> Fixed SOC Pstate [P0]
> CPPC [Enabled]*
> CPPC Preferred Cores [Auto]
> BoostFmaxEn [Auto]
> Early Link Speed [Auto]
> 
> 
> 
> Some of those settings are me figuring stuff out though. So they're gonna change.


Thanks - very interesting. I haven't tried some of those and/or not tried going so high on some of them. My chip is rubbish though - if I used LLC4 I wouldn't get much of a droop, but I may experiment more.


----------



## Pietro

Do you think we have any chances that modders will unlock PCIe 4.0 lines from CPU on C7H in future?


----------



## crakej

Pietro said:


> Do you think we have any chances that modders will unlock PCIe 4.0 lines from CPU on C7H in future?


ASUS has already unlocked it on at least one B450 board and I'm sure I've read of others doing this on their B450 Pro or whatever they called the boards which filled the gap until B550 came along.

Board designers knew PCIE 4.0 was coming on Zen 2, that would go in this (and other) boards. Some have kept back to the bios that last had it as it works fine.


----------



## crakej

I've been experimenting with settings based on my profile on the previous page....

I've been playing with Boost settings and found they don't have much effect on my overall performance. Scalar and the 0-200MHz settings made barely any perceptible difference on single or multi thread loads.

I used RM to see boost speed. EDC is at 20 (though I think 21 might be my sweet spot). With or without PE3 RM reported the cores boosting up to 4.5GHz, though I could see sometimes the cpu would switch threads with speed staying at 4.5. Seem to get better SC results when the task stays mostly on one core, rather than switching, even if on same CCX.

I've found that the CPU 'effective' speed (HWInfo) can be misleading (a little) in that (even at defaults) it can show stretching of about 200MHz which I'm not sure is happening as this reading is a kind of average.

It seems my CPU needs more juice than the average 3900x, though I do still have lots of experiments to do, including the SoC and VDDG voltages. I still can't boot with either of my XMP profiles as I could before so need to do some work there - I've booted with my memory at 4600MTs before, but since ver 3xxx bios i've not been able to do that, though that might be because I've got 4 dimms now.

So loads to still experiment with, but I am thinking of selling it and going back to my 1700x which can run memory faster than this at 1:1. I'll pick up a zen 3 when the silicon is more mature than my 3900x which came straight from the factory close to launch.

Happy for any suggestions and/or corrections! 

Edit: Just thinking about my 1700x - it also runs at 4.2GHz which is fastest speed I see most of the time on my 3900x !


----------



## nick name

So the new 3600C15 I bought turned out to be better than the old, but not capable of 14-14-14-14. The new 4400C19 can do 14-13-13-13. Though there are some saying that the memory controller rounds up the odd values to even values. I know it will change tCL, but that's a verifiable change. Anyone know anything for certain?


----------



## BIRDMANv84

I have been playing around a tiny bit with my 3900x, been running default/auto speed and voltages since I installed it with pbo disabled. I’ve never got around to trying the edc bug ( I’m an amateur at this please bear with me) but last week I set the voltage to 1.25 @ 4.3ghz on all cores. No issues or anything I guess I just want to know if Ryzen Master is the only way to do a per ccx oc? I had nothing but issues with RM last year on my old AMD setup and swore I would never touch that software again. Any specific mobos that will let me change this right in the bios without using RM? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## nick name

BIRDMANv84 said:


> I have been playing around a tiny bit with my 3900x, been running default/auto speed and voltages since I installed it with pbo disabled. I’ve never got around to trying the edc bug ( I’m an amateur at this please bear with me) but last week I set the voltage to 1.25 @ 4.3ghz on all cores. No issues or anything I guess I just want to know if Ryzen Master is the only way to do a per ccx oc? I had nothing but issues with RM last year on my old AMD setup and swore I would never touch that software again. Any specific mobos that will let me change this right in the bios without using RM?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yeah, the latest BIOS (3103) has it.


----------



## BIRDMANv84

Sweet dude thank you, I’ll give it a download tonight 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Veii

*Step 1-5 / Getting to know your Boosting Ryzen*

@BIRDMANv84 as the remake of 1usmus iOC guide was never written
Use this little post and the linked one , as help for your work

Between PBO with AutoOC and per CCX fixed OC the tutorial nearly is identical, except that you skip 4-5 steps on per CCX OC
You've likely also noticed this voltage post

Preparation Work:
- grab the windows per CCX OC tool from the first linked post
- get y-cruncher, OCCT, Cinebench R15/R20
- find your sheet creation program of choice, google/ms sheet works well
- fix your vSOC, cLDO_VDDP, VDDG CCD & IOD (use double stepping from VDDP->VDDG to account for per CCX OC on the CCD side of things)
- grab ryzen master, skip HWInfo for now
- activate inside the BIOS CPPC and CPPC preferred cores - use windows 1909 or higher, and grab the 1usmus power profile from TechPowerUP

Step 1:
- Enable pbo , 0mhz uplift, 1x scalar ~ double the rated PPT 115W = 230PPT , 200 TDC, 210 EDC
- Run Y-Cruncher with all tests enabled for 3 cycles, Cinebench both and OCCT Medium Dataset AVX2 / note down the current applied voltage on this test on a google sheet. Split it into cores, split these cores into your CCX, and split that again into 1 or two CCDs 
- ^ do the same on y-cruncher but enforce it to only use 1 core ~ follow the x370 taichi post on how to do so

Step 2:
- Disable PBO fully, keep up 1usmus powerplan, keep the custom voltage except for auto vCore
- let Ryzen Master open and open Computer Management -> Performance -> Monitoring Tools -> Performance Monitor.
on the green little *+* sign -> Processor Information -> % Processor Performance -> add each of the threads like i have 


Spoiler












^ intel System








^ AMD 3600 System


if you have no background tools (HWInfo will mess sleeping up, figured it out too late)
you should see which cores are actually golden, while each of them should sleep if the wake up time is not that often
You can verify that with Ryzen Master
- This should deliver you on stock an ACPI value of each cores and soo show which one on which CCX can keep the boost up
Ryzen master and HWInfo both use a different method to figure out real golden cores, while CPPC Preferred Cores will transmit the FIT Module data to windows and not let it overwrite by Ryzen Master or HWInfo
- Step 2 consists of the same Y-Cruncher suite where you have 2min each test to note down the allowed boosting voltage. Watch your cores and watch which one boosts and how much voltage it takes. Note this down again next to your PBO voltages
Note down your Peak ACPI value from the Performance Monitor like shown, note down which is the golden core which are the remain 2nd and 3rd place ones 

Step 3:
Everything except for Cinebench can be forced with the CMD launch method to one core.
- Run Both Cinebench's on stock and doublecheck your ★★★ and ★★ cores. Ryzen Matisse will optimally let one 2 or 3 CCX to sleep and keep only one active, inside this one the 1 or 2 remain cores should keep up 300-500Mhz while two will shuffle and share the load of Cinebench Single core. Note this voltage down and note down which of these cores do switch load ! Doublecheck if they appear to be the noted two ★★★ or ★★★ + ★★ inside the same CCX

Step 4:
- Switch to OCCT medium Dataset AVX2 and start using the windows CCX OC tool
- My recommendation is to start at 4300 for 4 CCX units, and 4100 for 2 CCX units
- My recommendation also is to use a fixed stepping and work with one CCD
~ this is an abstract pattern i figured out on Matisse. 
Between two CCX inside one CCD exists a fixed offset of 75-100Mhz. Using 25, 50Mhz or 125Mhz difference results in instant crashes. Figure this difference out and push that one CCD first up till at least one of both CCX start to crash. Could be 4500Mhz or 4600Mhz, then start to push one to 4450 and the other to 4650 and similar 
- Figure this pattern out and when you think you reached peak stability, double check with y-cruncher all core load 1 cycle if your cores crash. Doublecheck at the end the same thing with Cinebench R20 as AVX + AVX2 are wonderful stability killers 

Step 5:
- Save and keep this voltage documentation safe ! It's unique to your CPU
- Use for this testing a maximum voltage of 1.2875v VID, and adjust loadline. 
- If possible adjust VDDG CCD higher but keep my voltage scaling patterns from the main post, else you crash everything 
- After your debug list is done, you should notice how your silicon behaves and what the absolute lowest peak voltage is that you can run. Up to silicon luck this value will be higher (without PBO on single golden cores, as only avg all core voltage is influenced by PBO) This will be your maximum vCore you can use including vdroop.

Step 6-9 will cover how to optimise PBO with Auto OC & default boosting
But anything till step 5, the whole voltage pattern of your CPU on each of this loads and the written down "highest voltage drop on a harsh test" is key in finetuning PBO PPT, TDC, EDC.
Keep in mind, after you move away from per CCX to Enchanced PBO:
- Once enabling PBO, the allcore load (about 80-100mV bump) will be higher and the cpu has to throttle down.
- if you abuse or not abuse the EDC Bug (it's pretty much the same work just with a different range) you will have to tame the excessive pushed allcore voltage with TDC & EDC - both on 100% full throttle on these harsh tests till you meet the identical allcore voltage at XYZ frequency 

But again, Step 6-9 for finetuning PBO are another huge topic 
Get to know your CPU and later we can talk
Some like constant frequency, just finetuning PBO with higher boost limits is at the absolute end still the better way to go 
Working against the FIT module and 4th gen boosting system, is sub optimal ~ although easier :thumb:


----------



## BIRDMANv84

Thank you Veii, I will definitely take this into consideration, first time messing with this processor and I’ve just been gathering as much info as I can. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## lordzed83

@crakej You got this 3103 figured out yet ?? Still playaing Wow Classic so not been messing around much. Took me ******* ages to figure out *** is up with 3800/1900 had to get my volts down on SOC VDDG CCD & IOD.


----------



## Veii

lordzed83 said:


> @crakej You got this 3103 figured out yet ?? Still playaing Wow Classic so not been messing around much. Took me ******* ages to figure out *** is up with 3800/1900 had to get my volts down on SOC VDDG CCD & IOD.


When you work your procODT down to 28ohm - the chance increases to hit maximum FCLK limits
When you lower procODT, vSOC needs to be lowered with it 
You did all that so far and so far so good, only your high procODT is bothering you hit maximum FCLK

On memory you have under CAD_BUS TIMINGs a fixed value of 56-56-56
if this is done due to board autoprediction and 0-0-0 doesn't work, use 1-1-1 
Else you need to figure this cutting timing (it's a cutoff delay) for 3800MT/s , which is different than 3734MT/s

tRFC it's suggested either to use the same across the whole range or focus on getting it correctly calculated 
Nothing else to complain so far ~ only your procODT is high preventing you from hitting higher Fabric Clock


----------



## crakej

I've been spending some time playing with VSoC, VDDG and CLDO_VDDP

I know that R Master shows the wrong Soc voltage (still!), but are VDDG and CLDO wrong as well?

I ask as RM is showing me CLDO voltage (it's on auto) of 0.9976 (prob 1.0v) - yet VDDG is set to .950v

I know that the controller should make sure that CLDO is at least 50mv lower than VDDG, but if these reading are right, that is not happening. I tried setting CLDO to 900mv, but that fails. How can we know what to do?!?!

Soc is at 1.08v - if I have VDDG at 1.03v - it does not boot, failing when windows loads it's mem manager just before login. This happens with CLDO on <auto>, 0.980v or 0.990v. The only way it works on this profile is having VDDG at 0.950 and CLDO on <auto> which shows as 0.997v in RM.

What's going on??


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I've been spending some time playing with VSoC, VDDG and CLDO_VDDP
> 
> I know that R Master shows the wrong Soc voltage (still!), but are VDDG and CLDO wrong as well?
> 
> I ask as RM is showing me CLDO voltage (it's on auto) of 0.9976 (prob 1.0v) - yet VDDG is set to .950v
> 
> I know that the controller should make sure that CLDO is at least 50mv lower than VDDG, but if these reading are right, that is not happening. I tried setting CLDO to 900mv, but that fails. How can we know what to do?!?!
> 
> Soc is at 1.08v - if I have VDDG at 1.03v - it does not boot, failing when windows loads it's mem manager just before login. This happens with CLDO on <auto>, 0.980v or 0.990v. The only way it works on this profile is having VDDG at 0.950 and CLDO on <auto> which shows as 0.997v in RM.
> 
> What's going on??


In Ryzen Master it shows what I set for VDDG/VDDP.

And someone told me how to make Ryzen Master show the correct SOC value, but I can't remember who it was. If you input it under Advanced > AMD OC that will be what Ryzen Master displays. They used a weird method. I just set it in Extreme Tweaker and under Advanced.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> In Ryzen Master it shows what I set for VDDG/VDDP.
> 
> And someone told me how to make Ryzen Master show the correct SOC value, but I can't remember who it was. If you input it under Advanced > AMD OC that will be what Ryzen Master displays. They used a weird method. I just set it in Extreme Tweaker and under Advanced.


That's what I thought - so why is my bios setting CLDO higher than VDDG? I thought if you entered them 'wrong' the bios would automatically set CLDO 50mv lower than VDDG?

Another thing I noticed is that if I leave my RTT settings on <auto> bios chooses 7,3,1 which is what Dram Calc used to recommend, but now it suggests 7, off, 5, which if I enter I cannot boot, so assuming this is a Calc problem with my particular memory.

Will be playing with DIGI Power profiles to see how they affect the same profile next as I reckon my voltages are pretty high - even for early silicon.

As far as Soc voltage goes you're right. You have to set it in Advanced>AMD for it to show correctly in RM - but it should affect anything, should it? Maybe i'll just do it anyway, but when I last tested with my DM setting it in Extreme Tweaker DOES set it.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> That's what I thought - so why is my bios setting CLDO higher than VDDG? I thought if you entered them 'wrong' the bios would automatically set CLDO 50mv lower than VDDG?
> 
> Another thing I noticed is that if I leave my RTT settings on <auto> bios chooses 7,3,1 which is what Dram Calc used to recommend, but now it suggests 7, off, 5, which if I enter I cannot boot, so assuming this is a Calc problem with my particular memory.
> 
> Will be playing with DIGI Power profiles to see how they affect the same profile next as I reckon my voltages are pretty high - even for early silicon.
> 
> As far as Soc voltage goes you're right. You have to set it in Advanced>AMD for it to show correctly in RM - but it should affect anything, should it? Maybe i'll just do it anyway, but when I last tested with my DM setting it in Extreme Tweaker DOES set it.


Those are what my RTT values look like with 4 DIMMS.


----------



## lordzed83

Veii said:


> When you work your procODT down to 28ohm - the chance increases to hit maximum FCLK limits
> When you lower procODT, vSOC needs to be lowered with it
> You did all that so far and so far so good, only your high procODT is bothering you hit maximum FCLK
> 
> On memory you have under CAD_BUS TIMINGs a fixed value of 56-56-56
> if this is done due to board autoprediction and 0-0-0 doesn't work, use 1-1-1
> Else you need to figure this cutting timing (it's a cutoff delay) for 3800MT/s , which is different than 3734MT/s
> 
> tRFC it's suggested either to use the same across the whole range or focus on getting it correctly calculated
> Nothing else to complain so far ~ only your procODT is high preventing you from hitting higher Fabric Clock


Mate i see ya nw here im the guy with most ocd 3900x here sicne day 1 

OFC you not noticed im running 3800/1900 **** im one of first that had it stable with torment tests. Let me get screenshot iof running this cpu for 8 hours at 100c on cores max load 
Juist dont have time to mess around much with this **** atm 

62.6ns stable with 4377 all core overclock thats what i been running **** One year almost 24/7 mining rendering and wow 
https://i.imgur.com/muPjkMH.png

With my cooling watts are not problem i can cool down 1kw of heat no problem

Was helping 1usmus to figure out Ryzen calculator and some options in there are my sugesions


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> That's what I thought - so why is my bios setting CLDO higher than VDDG? I thought if you entered them 'wrong' the bios would automatically set CLDO 50mv lower than VDDG?
> 
> Another thing I noticed is that if I leave my RTT settings on <auto> bios chooses 7,3,1 which is what Dram Calc used to recommend, but now it suggests 7, off, 5, which if I enter I cannot boot, so assuming this is a Calc problem with my particular memory.
> 
> Will be playing with DIGI Power profiles to see how they affect the same profile next as I reckon my voltages are pretty high - even for early silicon.
> 
> As far as Soc voltage goes you're right. You have to set it in Advanced>AMD for it to show correctly in RM - but it should affect anything, should it? Maybe i'll just do it anyway, but when I last tested with my DM setting it in Extreme Tweaker DOES set it.


I just run everything manual as ya know pisses me off you cant see whats auto sends ....

Interesting this bios is some performance gains but IF got very tricky to get stable


----------



## Veii

lordzed83 said:


> Mate i see ya nw here im the guy with most ocd 3900x here sicne day 1
> 
> OFC you not noticed im running 3800/1900 **** im one of first that had it stable with torment tests. Let me get screenshot iof running this cpu for 8 hours at 100c on cores max load
> Juist dont have time to mess around much with this **** atm
> 
> 62.6ns stable
> https://i.imgur.com/muPjkMH.png


I'm jumping across the forum when time is available 
Thought it was a good place to write that tiny per CCX OC guide for Birdman
Don't have the units infront of me to make a big guide like planed or make preset sheets for voltage notedown

Only thing that bothers me is that you didn't fix tRFC as 288-214-132 , or at least 288-288-288
even this AGESA still predicts a mess, and it is being used for calculating the remain auto changing timings
What you see are only fixed delay timings, although not all of them - the rest of the mode changes up to workload
Soo accuracy on tRFC is important just for the stability on different type of datasets , else it gets autocorrect and wastes time


----------



## lordzed83

Veii said:


> I'm jumping across the forum when time is available
> Thought it was a good place to write that tiny per CCX OC guide for Birdman
> Don't have the units infront of me to make a big guide like planed or make preset sheets for voltage notedown
> 
> Only thing that bothers me is that you didn't fix tRFC as 288-214-132 , or at least 288-288-288
> even this AGESA still predicts a mess, and it is being used for calculating the remain auto changing timings
> What you see are only fixed delay timings, although not all of them - the rest of the mode changes up to workload
> Soo accuracy on tRFC is important just for the stability on different type of datasets , else it gets autocorrect and wastes time


Changed it around was sure tey been ok never changed those and always worked fine on auto other ones


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> I just run everything manual as ya know pisses me off you cant see whats auto sends ....
> 
> Interesting this bios is some performance gains but IF got very tricky to get stable


Hey man - good to see you!

I've found exactly the same - slight performance increase - but can't get IF to 1900 at all now, though my system performs pretty good @ 3733:1866. XMP profiles for 4266 and 4400 now don't work at all.

I worked out that the 3103 bios has been setting my VDDG @ 1.1v and CLDO @ 1.0v (on this 3733 profile) which was not the case before. The only reason I use R Master now is to see the few settings it does show the <auto> values for - like ODT, RTT, Cadbus and some of the timings.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Hey man - good to see you!
> 
> I've found exactly the same - slight performance increase - but can't get IF to 1900 at all now, though my system performs pretty good @ 3733:1866. XMP profiles for 4266 and 4400 now don't work at all.
> 
> I worked out that the 3103 bios has been setting my VDDG @ 1.1v and CLDO @ 1.0v (on this 3733 profile) which was not the case before. The only reason I use R Master now is to see the few settings it does show the <auto> values for - like ODT, RTT, Cadbus and some of the timings.


I can't get 32GB in four DIMMS up past 4000MHz either. Though I didn't have 32GB to test on previous BIOS versions.


----------



## kratosatlante

nick name said:


> I can't get 32GB in four DIMMS up past 4000MHz either. Though I didn't have 32GB to test on previous BIOS versions.


In first bios can do 4066 , 4x8gb viper 4400c19, dont remember witch bios , now bios 3103 only 3933 four stick, but 4533 cl16 with 2sticks


----------



## neikosr0x

Does anyone have any experience with G.Skill F4-4000C18-8GTZR kit? 4x8 btw...


----------



## crakej

Hmmm - I wonder why this bios seems harder to stabilize?

I'm glad it's not just me then!


----------



## crakej

kratosatlante said:


> In first bios can do 4066 , 4x8gb viper 4400c19, dont remember witch bios , now bios 3103 only 3933 four stick, but 4533 cl16 with 2sticks


I have same memory as you - whats your performance like at 3933/4533? What are you running FCLK at?

Would be interesting to see your bios profiles


----------



## kratosatlante

crakej said:


> I have same memory as you - whats your performance like at 3933/4533? What are you running FCLK at?
> 
> Would be interesting to see your bios profiles


Hello 3933 I did not test test but enter the OS and see that it did not restart need cl16, cl15 with gdm off or 2T dont work, I have some 4533, running 3800/1900 but with bclk 99.8, my CPU does not want to do 3800 reais although with the last bios I could do it and it seemed stable, after Reflashing the bios don't save that profile, for now i can't find the exact point of cld vddp, vddg iod / ccd and vsoc, currently 3792/1896 cl 14 trfc228 1.55v bios (1.515 hwinfo) I can also do cl13 2t with the 4 stick But with a not so reasonable voltage, more tests are missing and if I can reduce the voltage by raising some values. With bios profiles do you mean the txt that is saved on a pendrive?

4533 firt screen all second software closed, for some reason aida install dont work, only portable, second with some softwares open
3 screen actual stable config pROODT 32(34 and 36 work) vsoc 1.06250, cld vddp 927 , vddg 977 , cad 24-20-24-24 for some reason 60-20-20-24 work but if shut down pc o reload profile form bios hard to post very hard, continue all test 24-20-24-24


----------



## crakej

kratosatlante said:


> Hello 3933 I did not test test but enter the OS and see that it did not restart need cl16, cl15 with gdm off or 2T dont work, I have some 4533, running 3800/1900 but with bclk 99.8, my CPU does not want to do 3800 reais although with the last bios I could do it and it seemed stable, after Reflashing the bios don't save that profile, for now i can't find the exact point of cld vddp, vddg iod / ccd and vsoc, currently 3792/1896 cl 14 trfc228 1.55v bios (1.515 hwinfo) I can also do cl13 2t with the 4 stick But with a not so reasonable voltage, more tests are missing and if I can reduce the voltage by raising some values. With bios profiles do you mean the txt that is saved on a pendrive?
> 
> 4533 firt screen all second software closed, for some reason aida install dont work, only portable, second with some softwares open
> 3 screen actual stable config pROODT 32(34 and 36 work) vsoc 1.06250, cld vddp 927 , vddg 977 , cad 24-20-24-24 for some reason 60-20-20-24 work but if shut down pc o reload profile form bios hard to post very hard, continue all test 24-20-24-24


This is great info thanks! I hadn't tried going lower than the XMP yet....

I found at 3733MTs I had to have VSoC @ 1.08125 and the bios was putting 1.1v for VDDG and 1.0 for CLDO - I'll try your slightly lower voltages see if I can get away with that.... but the bios was putting them 0.1v apart, not 0.5v.

I may try a pre-3xxx bios later to really try figure out what's changed.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> This is great info thanks! I hadn't tried going lower than the XMP yet....
> 
> I found at 3733MTs I had to have VSoC @ 1.08125 and the bios was putting 1.1v for VDDG and 1.0 for CLDO - I'll try your slightly lower voltages see if I can get away with that.... but the bios was putting them 0.1v apart, not 0.5v.
> 
> I may try a pre-3xxx bios later to really try figure out what's changed.


Ye this bios is just weird on IF.....


----------



## crakej

I've loaded bios 2606 (the last one with PCIE 4 enable) to experiment with. My ambient temp is 27/28C so might not be able to achieve as much as I'd like....

I've not run any proper tests yet, but I can tell you what I've noticed straight away... using my 3733 profile with PE3 and EDC 'bug' (or not as the case may be) - as close to the profile that I had running on 3103.

*Proc ODT* had to be on auto (36.9) or no boot. 3101 boots with Proc ODT as low as 30, though doesn't do me any good having it any lower.

The bios is setting my *CLDO_VDDP at 1.1v!* This suggests to me that bios would be setting VDDG at 1.2v (based on my experiments bios puts .1v distance, not .05v), though I've not checked this properly yet.

*Boot time is VERY quick!* So quick that if trying to get safe mode by holding power button in, it often doesn't work and you have to go through the lengthy CMOS reset and boot.

I have to mention *PCIE 4* - All these bioses had many versions before with PCIE 4 enabled - on purpose. AMD have disabled this feature for no reason at all. Everything is running well from the PCIE 4 root, which made windows reload some drivers to take account of. Shame I don't have a cards sitting around to test it....

*RTT and CADBus* are the same here - 7, 3, 1 and 0, 0, 0 respectively.

*CPU idle voltages* are lower, CB R15 Multi score is just under that of same profile on 3103 (apart from no PE3). SC seems worse so far but not properly tested.... which leads me to....

*PBO* - it's NOT working the same as on 3103! Had same manual settings as 3103 - 4096, 4096, 20. The EDC 'bug' doesn't seem to be present - EDC NEVER exceeds 100% in the few tests run so far, though multi score is nearly as high as ever.

Don't have a huge amount of time today, but I will be doing more tests over the weekend, especially with voltages. If you want me to test anything on this bios, let me know!


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> I've loaded bios 2606 (the last one with PCIE 4 enable) to experiment with. My ambient temp is 27/28C so might not be able to achieve as much as I'd like....
> 
> I've not run any proper tests yet, but I can tell you what I've noticed straight away... using my 3733 profile with PE3 and EDC 'bug' (or not as the case may be) - as close to the profile that I had running on 3103.
> 
> *Proc ODT* had to be on auto (36.9) or no boot. 3101 boots with Proc ODT as low as 30, though doesn't do me any good having it any lower.
> 
> The bios is setting my *CLDO_VDDP at 1.1v!* This suggests to me that bios would be setting VDDG at 1.2v (based on my experiments bios puts .1v distance, not .05v), though I've not checked this properly yet.
> 
> *Boot time is VERY quick!* So quick that if trying to get safe mode by holding power button in, it often doesn't work and you have to go through the lengthy CMOS reset and boot.
> 
> I have to mention *PCIE 4* - All these bioses had many versions before with PCIE 4 enabled - on purpose. AMD have disabled this feature for no reason at all. Everything is running well from the PCIE 4 root, which made windows reload some drivers to take account of. Shame I don't have a cards sitting around to test it....
> 
> *RTT and CADBus* are the same here - 7, 3, 1 and 0, 0, 0 respectively.
> 
> *CPU idle voltages* are lower, CB R15 Multi score is just under that of same profile on 3103 (apart from no PE3). SC seems worse so far but not properly tested.... which leads me to....
> 
> *PBO* - it's NOT working the same as on 3103! Had same manual settings as 3103 - 4096, 4096, 20. The EDC 'bug' doesn't seem to be present - EDC NEVER exceeds 100% in the few tests run so far, though multi score is nearly as high as ever.
> 
> Don't have a huge amount of time today, but I will be doing more tests over the weekend, especially with voltages. If you want me to test anything on this bios, let me know!


After week of ******* arounf with this 3103 came to conclusion its not worth it 2703 is my bios of choice got this mega stable and its well faster than 3103 on STABLE settings. I played arouind with Proc ODT and in my case memory gets unstable below 34 most stable been 36 from start of zen on Teamgroup memory.


----------



## WinterActual

ASUS pushed new bios for the X570 ->

Improve system performance and stability
Improve Fan control function
Improve DRAM stability
Update AM4 AGESA combo V2 PI 1.0.8.0
Improve system stability
Improve DRAM performance

I hope we get that one too because I would like to see the improved fan control function. If they finally removed the 60% lower limit for the DC fans.


----------



## kmellz

WinterActual said:


> ASUS pushed new bios for the X570 ->
> 
> Improve system performance and stability
> Improve Fan control function
> Improve DRAM stability
> Update AM4 AGESA combo V2 PI 1.0.8.0
> Improve system stability
> Improve DRAM performance
> 
> I hope we get that one too because I would like to see the improved fan control function. If they finally removed the 60% lower limit for the DC fans.


I can set mine lower, you have to do the auto tune thing first though I think. I wish they'd redo the whole fan part though, it's super buggy :|


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> After week of ******* arounf with this 3103 came to conclusion its not worth it 2703 is my bios of choice got this mega stable and its well faster than 3103 on STABLE settings. I played arouind with Proc ODT and in my case memory gets unstable below 34 most stable been 36 from start of zen on Teamgroup memory.


I might go back to 2801 which was best for me... 2606 is way too buggy.


----------



## WinterActual

kmellz said:


> I can set mine lower, you have to do the auto tune thing first though I think. I wish they'd redo the whole fan part though, it's super buggy :|


Yes, I am aware of the Auto giving the option to go below 60% but its not working for me. If I set it to auto it just ramps the fans to something way above 60%. I am using Argus monitor atm but I prefer to control my fans through the bios.


----------



## nick name

WinterActual said:


> Yes, I am aware of the Auto giving the option to go below 60% but its not working for me. If I set it to auto it just ramps the fans to something way above 60%. I am using Argus monitor atm but I prefer to control my fans through the bios.


Yeah, I use an external Noctua controller for my fans as they're all high speed so hitting 100% at 75*C is super annoying.


----------



## kmellz

WinterActual said:


> Yes, I am aware of the Auto giving the option to go below 60% but its not working for me. If I set it to auto it just ramps the fans to something way above 60%. I am using Argus monitor atm but I prefer to control my fans through the bios.


Use auto first and apply that, then you can set the fans to manual and set whatever you like! Use the graphical interface to do it though (yeah it sucks balls) since using the text field inputs doesn't seem to allow certain numbers which is ********..


----------



## WinterActual

ASUS are kinda lazy/clueless about this for a long time, ain't they? This is my 4 or 5th BIOS update since I have the mb and this problem/bug is still present..


----------



## mimosoft

New chipset driver available:



AMD Software Release Notes ver. 2.07.21.306



Package Contents and Compatible Operating Systems



This Software package contains various independent drivers (Column 1) designed to support the following Microsoft® Windows® platforms (Column 2). Operating System support may vary depending on your specific AMD product



Driver Name OS Supported Supported Version

AMD Ryzen Power Plan Windows 10 6.0.0.3

AMD PCI Device Driver Windows 10 1.0.0.80

Windows 7 1.0.0.67

AMD I2C Driver Windows 10 1.2.0.102

AMD UART Driver Windows 10 1.2.0.112

AMD GPIO2 Driver Windows 10 2.2.0.130

PT GPIO Driver Windows 10 2.0.1.0

AMD PSP Driver Windows 10 4.13.0.0

Windows 7 4.10.0.1

AMD IOV Driver Windows 10 1.2.0.49

Windows 7 1.2.0.43

AMD SMBUS Driver Windows 10 5.12.0.38

Windows 7 5.12.0.38

AMD SFH Driver Windows 10 1.0.0.308

AMD MicroPEP Driver Windows 10 1.0.27.0

AMD USB 3.0 Driver for ZP Windows 7 2.0.0.60

PT USB 3.1 Driver Windows 7 1.0.5.3

AMD SATA Driver Windows 7 1.2.1.402

AMD USB 3.1 Driver Windows 7 1.0.0.12



Source 1: https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/X570-AORUS-MASTER-rev-11-12/support#support-dl-driver-chipset

Source 2: https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...-SATA-(3xx-4xx-5xx-TRX40)&p=812702#post812702


----------



## Logue

Is this new chipset validated? Where is it from? Just asking because the AMD website still lists 2.07.14.327 version as latest. Any actual improvements?


----------



## HammerNL

*SVM causing stutter/frame time spikes*

Since a couple of days i'm running WSL2 (windows linux subsystem), so that required SVM to be turned on in the bios. So far so good, however in the evening when I started playing a game (overwatch) I immediately noticed random stutters. This never happened before, and the only thing that had changed was the SVM/WSL2. If I disable SVM everything is fine.

I used afterburner to monitor framestimes. spikes go up to 60/100ms:
This is with SVM off (don't mind the single spike here, that is from going into the menu)








This is with SVM on









Have anyone experienced something similar. I don't know how to 'fix' this problem. (Yeah, turn off svm every time I want to play a game...) 

2700x 
16GB DDR4 3600
512GB NVMe
Latest windows 2004
Latest bios (also tried earlier one)
Latest chipset


----------



## nick name

HammerNL said:


> Since a couple of days i'm running WSL2 (windows linux subsystem), so that required SVM to be turned on in the bios. So far so good, however in the evening when I started playing a game (overwatch) I immediately noticed random stutters. This never happened before, and the only thing that had changed was the SVM/WSL2. If I disable SVM everything is fine.
> 
> I used afterburner to monitor framestimes. spikes go up to 60/100ms:
> This is with SVM off (don't mind the single spike here, that is from going into the menu)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is with SVM on
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have anyone experienced something similar. I don't know how to 'fix' this problem. (Yeah, turn off svm every time I want to play a game...)
> 
> 2700x
> 16GB DDR4 3600
> 512GB NVMe
> Latest windows 2004
> Latest bios (also tried earlier one)
> Latest chipset


I'm afraid I can't think of anyone that has cured the problem. And I see the problem as BCLK going wonky with SVM enabled. It jumps around way more than you'd expect.


----------



## HammerNL

nick name said:


> I'm afraid I can't think of anyone that has cured the problem. And I see the problem as BCLK going wonky with SVM enabled. It jumps around way more than you'd expect.


Is this tied to a specific Ryzen version/this motherboard or is it more a 'general problem'


----------



## nick name

HammerNL said:


> Is this tied to a specific Ryzen version/this motherboard or is it more a 'general problem'


SVM doesn't get spoken about frequently, but every time it comes up it wonkiness seems to get mentioned. I wanna say I only remember talking about it in this thread so it might be the board. You'd have to investigate other boards. My gut tells me that it isn't the board though.


----------



## Synoxia

I think the new bios will not come on c7h hero sadly. RIP


----------



## djase45

Why would you say that?


----------



## nick name

HammerNL said:


> Since a couple of days i'm running WSL2 (windows linux subsystem), so that required SVM to be turned on in the bios. So far so good, however in the evening when I started playing a game (overwatch) I immediately noticed random stutters. This never happened before, and the only thing that had changed was the SVM/WSL2. If I disable SVM everything is fine.
> 
> I used afterburner to monitor framestimes. spikes go up to 60/100ms:
> This is with SVM off (don't mind the single spike here, that is from going into the menu)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is with SVM on
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have anyone experienced something similar. I don't know how to 'fix' this problem. (Yeah, turn off svm every time I want to play a game...)
> 
> 2700x
> 16GB DDR4 3600
> 512GB NVMe
> Latest windows 2004
> Latest bios (also tried earlier one)
> Latest chipset



Are you using DOCP? Try changing from DOCP to Manual (you'll have to enter in your RAM settings manually so make note). In the very brief testing I've done it seems to keep BCLK stable.

Edit:
Maybe disregard this. I just saw BCLK drop down to 6MHz in CPU-Z. That may have been an idle state though. While it seems to help -- it may not be a cure.

Edit 2:
I haven't seen BCLK drop under load yet so perhaps the previous drop was an idle state. I'll try some gaming.

Edit 3:
I logged about 10 minutes of game play with HWiNFO and BCLK never dropped below 100MHz. So perhaps not using DOCP is a cure?

Edit 4:
Hmmmm. I went and enabled DOCP and haven't seen any BCLK drops with it either. Perhaps it's something the latest BIOS fixed for Ryzen 3000 CPUs?

Edit 5:
Yeah, color me confuzzled. SVM doesn't produce the same wonkiness that it used to with my 3900X.

Edit 6:
I forgot to turn on HyperV.


----------



## cluster edge

HammerNL said:


> Since a couple of days i'm running WSL2 (windows linux subsystem), so that required SVM to be turned on in the bios. So far so good, however in the evening when I started playing a game (overwatch) I immediately noticed random stutters. This never happened before, and the only thing that had changed was the SVM/WSL2. If I disable SVM everything is fine.
> 
> I used afterburner to monitor framestimes. spikes go up to 60/100ms:
> This is with SVM off (don't mind the single spike here, that is from going into the menu)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is with SVM on
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have anyone experienced something similar. I don't know how to 'fix' this problem. (Yeah, turn off svm every time I want to play a game...)
> 
> 2700x
> 16GB DDR4 3600
> 512GB NVMe
> Latest windows 2004
> Latest bios (also tried earlier one)
> Latest chipset


Probably its tied to the core isolation from Microsoft defender, which activated when you turn on svm (and probably as you using wsl2 its came from HyperV components)
Check this https://www.tenforums.com/tutorials...WZaVCP-3x49mkb143edgZ3jTVAQj2WvoEFx5abaMra5OQ


----------



## nick name

cluster edge said:


> Probably its tied to the core isolation from Microsoft defender, which activated when you turn on svm (and probably as you using wsl2 its came from HyperV components)
> Check this https://www.tenforums.com/tutorials...WZaVCP-3x49mkb143edgZ3jTVAQj2WvoEFx5abaMra5OQ


Ahhhh, yeah that's what I was doing different in that testing. No HyperV. I completely forgot to install it.


----------



## HammerNL

nick name said:


> Are you using DOCP? Try changing from DOCP to Manual (you'll have to enter in your RAM settings manually so make note). In the very brief testing I've done it seems to keep BCLK stable.


Thx for taking time investigating, i'm running in manual mode, however I've not paid much attention to the BLCK to be honest. I will report back when I do some runs. 



cluster edge said:


> Probably its tied to the core isolation from Microsoft defender, which activated when you turn on svm (and probably as you using wsl2 its came from HyperV components)
> Check this https://www.tenforums.com/tutorials...WZaVCP-3x49mkb143edgZ3jTVAQj2WvoEFx5abaMra5OQ


Good suggestion, unfortunately this setting is already turned off.


----------



## k_night

Hi, everyone!
There is a problem with a long initialization\start of the BIOS. Experimentally, I found out that the problem is due to a long" training " of RAM.
The boot time to the Asus logo - 23 seconds
Boot time to the desktop - 28 seconds

Asus Crosshair Rog VII Hero (3103) + R 3900x + 4x8 HyperX Predator HX430C15PB3K

Fast Boot - enable
CSM - disable

Poked around in the memory timings, changed the values of RRT_NOM, RRT_WR, RRT_PARK. After that, the mobo will boot for a long time, rebooting on the F9 code. As a result, it loaded, but resetting the timings of RAM frequency to default values. At the same time, the boot time to the Asus logo - 10 seconds, and the boot time to the desktop is 17 seconds.

If you try to manually re-set the frequency, all the voltages and resistances, and the main memory timings, the system starts loading again for a long time.
For a long time, I picked different combinations of values, set absolutely all the values with my hands, but in the end, either the motherboard still reset everything to default, or loaded with a longer memory training.

Has anyone solved the problem of long loading\initialization of the BIOS?


----------



## neikosr0x

k_night said:


> Hi, everyone!
> There is a problem with a long initialization\start of the BIOS. Experimentally, I found out that the problem is due to a long" training " of RAM.
> The boot time to the Asus logo - 23 seconds
> Boot time to the desktop - 28 seconds
> 
> Asus Crosshair Rog VII Hero (3103) + R 3900x + 4x8 HyperX Predator HX430C15PB3K
> 
> Fast Boot - enable
> CSM - disable
> 
> Poked around in the memory timings, changed the values of RRT_NOM, RRT_WR, RRT_PARK. After that, the mobo will boot for a long time, rebooting on the F9 code. As a result, it loaded, but resetting the timings of RAM frequency to default values. At the same time, the boot time to the Asus logo - 10 seconds, and the boot time to the desktop is 17 seconds.
> 
> If you try to manually re-set the frequency, all the voltages and resistances, and the main memory timings, the system starts loading again for a long time.
> For a long time, I picked different combinations of values, set absolutely all the values with my hands, but in the end, either the motherboard still reset everything to default, or loaded with a longer memory training.
> 
> Has anyone solved the problem of long loading\initialization of the BIOS?


I am having a similar issue with mine actually, im using G.skills 4000 cl18 running at 3600 cl16 for now and it i play around with those i get a similar response now, the thing is that i am having very strange behavior and seems to be a bit off. Sometimes when doing a cold boot it will boot fast with no issues and other times will train the memory sometimes directly to the bios or directly to windows. I have gotten random blue screens and applications crashing out of the blue, but every time i run a stability test everything seems to be fine.... ran AIDA64 test for 4 hours and not a single error, ran Tm5 and nothing... so i am a bit puzzle i'm not sure if its CPU related or maybe my Mobo not working properly.


----------



## darkage

disable fast boot in bios and in power plan 
its a crap feature


----------



## t4t3r

I noticed a couple days ago that my UCLK gets cut in half after my machine wakes up from sleep (3900x running 1900IF and 3800mhz memory - UCLK drops down to 950mhz after sleep) - anyone else experienced this issue with C7H Wifi? May have to plug my 3700x back in to see if it behaves the same or not.


----------



## xeizo

t4t3r said:


> I noticed a couple days ago that my UCLK gets cut in half after my machine wakes up from sleep (3900x running 1900IF and 3800mhz memory - UCLK drops down to 950mhz after sleep) - anyone else experienced this issue with C7H Wifi? May have to plug my 3700x back in to see if it behaves the same or not.


It's and old and well known bug, most of us in here don't use sleep anymore(because of that)


----------



## t4t3r

xeizo said:


> It's and old and well known bug, most of us in here don't use sleep anymore(because of that)


Thanks, I should've searched first as I figured that might be the case. Such a great board aside from a couple of these small issues.


----------



## liakou

t4t3r said:


> I noticed a couple days ago that my UCLK gets cut in half after my machine wakes up from sleep (3900x running 1900IF and 3800mhz memory - UCLK drops down to 950mhz after sleep) - anyone else experienced this issue with C7H Wifi? May have to plug my 3700x back in to see if it behaves the same or not.


Never had that issue happening with my system so I always have sleep enabled, yet I've seen others here report the issue from time to time. Not sure what can actually trigger it after the Sleep state.


----------



## smokin_mitch

t4t3r said:


> I noticed a couple days ago that my UCLK gets cut in half after my machine wakes up from sleep (3900x running 1900IF and 3800mhz memory - UCLK drops down to 950mhz after sleep) - anyone else experienced this issue with C7H Wifi? May have to plug my 3700x back in to see if it behaves the same or not.


go back to bios 2801 every newer bios has this bug


----------



## Praetorr

You can also avoid the sleep bug by keeping your IF speed =< 3600mhz. That's why I've decided to just stick with 3600mhzCL14. Plenty fast (for me), and I can use sleep without worry.


----------



## crakej

smokin_mitch said:


> go back to bios 2801 every newer bios has this bug


I use hybrid sleep/hibernate which avoids this bug. Disable sleep!


----------



## crakej

I've been experimenting with different bios versions - on 3004 currently. Interesting going through the versions knowing what I know now!

I can again run 1900:1900 but alas with UCLK always dropping to 950. Check out the voltages the bios chooses for SoC and VDDG/VDDP - they don't make sense to me! I set these voltages to to see whats going on...

I thought VDDG had to be LOWER than SoC (1.08v)? Is this voltage too high for VDDG (1.148v)?


----------



## xeizo

Considering I run VDDG 0.950V and VDDP 0.900V at heavily overclocked CCX OC and 3800MHz c16 1:1:1 that looks ridiculous high!

My daily driver settings:


----------



## crakej

xeizo said:


> Considering I run VDDG 0.950V and VDDP 0.900V at heavily overclocked CCX OC and 3800MHz c16 1:1:1 that looks ridiculous high!
> 
> My daily driver settings:


Those are my (marked red on my image) auto settings on bios 3004. I can actually run with SoC on auto, VDDG set at .950 and VDDP on .900 @ 3733, but last time I used 3103, the bios was just changing my settings to those in my last image. Doing a few more tests on this bios this today....


----------



## t4t3r

xeizo said:


> Considering I run VDDG 0.950V and VDDP 0.900V at heavily overclocked CCX OC and 3800MHz c16 1:1:1 that looks ridiculous high!
> 
> My daily driver settings:


Identical voltages here on 3800 (my 1.1 SOC results in 1.08 get) just lower timings as I'm running 2x8gb only. Nice results on 4x8.

That 1.15 on VDDG is definitely higher than needed.


----------



## crakej

This bios (3004) I'm no longer able to boot 3800 or XMP profiles - I could do both of these things before 3xxx bios.

My machine is stable running with 1.1v SoC and VDDG of 1v, VDDP .950v @ 3733 - any lower and I get random reboots.


----------



## Veii

crakej said:


> I thought VDDG had to be LOWER than SoC (1.08v)? Is this voltage too high for VDDG (1.148v)?


This message was already answered
But yes, SOC is autocorrected upwards
You run 1.2vSOC here
A bios bug to have such high cLDO VDDG voltage
Sometimes it happens that cLDO_VDDP is 1.15v which pushes SOC to >1.3v


----------



## crakej

Veii said:


> This message was already answered
> But yes, SOC is autocorrected upwards
> You run 1.2vSOC here
> A bios bug to have such high cLDO VDDG voltage
> Sometimes it happens that cLDO_VDDP is 1.15v which pushes SOC to >1.3v


My SoC was 1.08v (not autocorrected upwards!) - checked with DM, while VDDG was (1.14v) - that was on bios > 2901. Edit: I had this as


----------



## Veii

crakej said:


> My SoC was 1.08v (not autocorrected upwards!) - checked with DM, while VDDG was (1.14v) - that was on bios VDDG , VDDG -> SOC always in 50mV steps and does so also autocorrect
> 
> Bios issues aside,
> I can't understand how that would work - as SVI2 reading is wrong too
> Same as SMU would tell what voltage it requests, but not what the Unit does autocorrect to by itself
> VDDG i know is variable, neverless what is says on screen
> But either
> A: applied VDDG is wrong and manually choked ~ never pulled that much
> B: You measured on a wrong point, but not what it autocorrected to
> As VDDG can't be higher than SOC - there is no place it can create voltage inside the unit without pulling it from the SOC line :thinking:


----------



## crakej

Veii said:


> On which points did you measure ?
> SMU and SVI2 near VRMs reading, should show it pretty accurate what it tried to be
> VDDG can't be higher than SOC when they are on the same line and split apart from SOC
> It has to have pulled power from somewhere else.
> The only way this would have worked, is if they aren't on the same line ~ but such design i'm hearing for the first time.
> As the CPU according to AMD does push both cLDO_VDDP -> VDDG , VDDG -> SOC always in 50mV steps and does so also autocorrect
> 
> Bios issues aside,
> I can't understand how that would work - as SVI2 reading is wrong too
> Same as SMU would tell what voltage it requests, but not what the Unit does autocorrect to by itself
> VDDG i know is variable, neverless what is says on screen
> But either
> A: applied VDDG is wrong and manually choked ~ never pulled that much
> B: You measured on a wrong point, but not what it autocorrected to
> As VDDG can't be higher than SOC - there is no place it can create voltage inside the unit without pulling it from the SOC line :thinking:


Measured from the Probit point which has always been pretty reliable in the past.

I have to admit I've never seen this before. I can only think that your 'solution' A: above to be correct. There is no brobit point for VDDG of course... Previously when tuning I gradually increased VDDG until I was stable, and with my crappy chip that is around 1.0v/1.03v with SoC at 1.08125v.

So this is the 1st time I allowed the bios to do SoC, VDDG and VDDP all on - certainly on bios 3004. Pretty sure I never put them on on 3103 either - I just wanted to see what it reckoned it wanted. I'm going to do another test on that and see what happens. I know what's meant to happen which is why it surprised me

Edit: Check out what it chose for my default settings! *No OC of any kind.* 2133 T2! (amongst other useless choices)


----------



## crakej

So, when I load my 3733 profile and put SoC VDDG and VDDP on - this is what I get - every boot!

I'm going to get my meter out tomorrow to confirm it. SVI2 are varying a bit, showing between 1.08 and 1.09v on SoC, which is prob what I see when I set it to 1.1v

Got friends coming over so not enough time to test now...... this is going to be bugging me until I can test it again!

This is crazy!


----------



## Synoxia

What was the lowest ram latency achieved on c7h hero and what is a realistic expectation with normal/trash b-die bin?


----------



## xeizo

Synoxia said:


> What was the lowest ram latency achieved on c7h hero and what is a realistic expectation with normal/trash b-die bin?


I haven't done extreme tweaking but I have fairly trash B-die and AIDA64 latency on my daily driver setting(as seen a couple of posts back) is 64ns. Those with prime B-die may have a few ns less.

On my second rig with Hynix DJR at 3800MHz(on B550) I get 67.2ns, quite good considering it was exactly half the price.


----------



## t4t3r

Synoxia said:


> What was the lowest ram latency achieved on c7h hero and what is a realistic expectation with normal/trash b-die bin?


No issues running straight 14s at 3800 on both a 3700x and 3900x. Can also go a tick or two below 14 on some of the primaries. Aida latency results around 63ns which can probably go a little lower with some more tweaks. Limiter from my C7H seems to be the memory clock speed which maxes out on my board at 4266 I believe.


----------



## nick name

t4t3r said:


> No issues running straight 14s at 3800 on both a 3700x and 3900x. Can also go a tick or two below 14 on some of the primaries. Aida latency results around 63ns which can probably go a little lower with some more tweaks. Limiter from my C7H seems to be the memory clock speed which maxes out on my board at 4266 I believe.


Max at 4266 at 16GB or 32GB?


----------



## t4t3r

nick name said:


> Max at 4266 at 16GB or 32GB?


16gb


----------



## nick name

t4t3r said:


> 16gb


Hmmm, I can go up to 4600 and sometimes 4666. What voltages have you tried? And have you tried 2T?


----------



## t4t3r

nick name said:


> Hmmm, I can go up to 4600 and sometimes 4666. What voltages have you tried? And have you tried 2T?


1.5v. Haven't tried 2T, only 1T. Was 4600+ on 3103 bios?


----------



## nick name

t4t3r said:


> 1.5v. Haven't tried 2T, only 1T. Was 4600+ on 3103 bios?


Ahhh, yeah you're gonna need more than 1.5V. And yeah -- 3103.


----------



## t4t3r

nick name said:


> Ahhh, yeah you're gonna need more than 1.5V. And yeah -- 3103.


Gotcha, interesting. I will have to test it out with some more voltage. I figured it was board-limited as I could boot several pairs of sticks 4600+ at reasonable voltages on Z490, Z490 being a better memory OC platform aside. 

It will be interesting to see if screenshots/rumors are true for IF/memory scaling on Ryzen 4000 and how well these boards that will be 2-ish years old can handle the speeds and bandwidth.


----------



## nick name

t4t3r said:


> Gotcha, interesting. I will have to test it out with some more voltage. I figured it was board-limited as I could boot several pairs of sticks 4600+ at reasonable voltages on Z490, Z490 being a better memory OC platform aside.
> 
> It will be interesting to see if screenshots/rumors are true for IF/memory scaling on Ryzen 4000 and how well these boards that will be 2-ish years old can handle the speeds and bandwidth.


I've been popping over to the Intel thread to see what voltages they're running at equivalent speeds and timings and it does appear to be about the same voltages that I've been able to use too. Though not always.

And I've been watching those leaks too. I'm hoping to run 4400MHz with the new chips.


----------



## minal

Is there a spread spectrum setting in any version of the BIOS for this board? I read that disabling it can fix the BCLK to 100 MHz instead of the 99.8 MHz I see typically. Just a minor, inconsequential quibble, but still a little eyesore. I also wonder if it helps with stability, not that I have any issues.

Using the search function in BIOS 2203 I see only VRM spread spectrum on Auto, and disabling it had no noticeable effect on BCLK. I've read others mention SB spread spectrum (on C8H) and CPU spread spectrum.


----------



## Dollar

minal said:


> Is there a spread spectrum setting in any version of the BIOS for this board? I read that disabling it can fix the BCLK to 100 MHz instead of the 99.8 MHz I see typically. Just a minor, inconsequential quibble, but still a little eyesore. I also wonder if it helps with stability, not that I have any issues.
> 
> Using the search function in BIOS 2203 I see only VRM spread spectrum on Auto, and disabling it had no noticeable effect on BCLK. I've read others mention SB spread spectrum (on C8H) and CPU spread spectrum.



Do you have DOCP enabled? I know i have read about others getting 100 BCLK when they use auto or manual BCLK but when they used DOCP for their memory they get 99.8. It's almost as if ASUS is turning spread spectrum on when DOCP is used.


----------



## nick name

minal said:


> Is there a spread spectrum setting in any version of the BIOS for this board? I read that disabling it can fix the BCLK to 100 MHz instead of the 99.8 MHz I see typically. Just a minor, inconsequential quibble, but still a little eyesore. I also wonder if it helps with stability, not that I have any issues.
> 
> Using the search function in BIOS 2203 I see only VRM spread spectrum on Auto, and disabling it had no noticeable effect on BCLK. I've read others mention SB spread spectrum (on C8H) and CPU spread spectrum.


Don't run DOCP if you want BCLK to stay at 100. Set it to Manual and set your timings manually.


----------



## minal

Dollar said:


> Do you have DOCP enabled? I know i have read about others getting 100 BCLK when they use auto or manual BCLK but when they used DOCP for their memory they get 99.8. It's almost as if ASUS is turning spread spectrum on when DOCP is used.





nick name said:


> Don't run DOCP if you want BCLK to stay at 100. Set it to Manual and set your timings manually.


Ah, yes I am using DOCP. Thanks for revealing the secret.


----------



## Xzow

For Ryzen 3xxx overclocking (3700x specifically) do you guys leave voltage on auto? I heard that the way it works with the 3xxx series is that putting it on static voltage just hurts performance.


----------



## WinterActual

Ill rather hurt performance than hurt the cpu itself, because the auto shoots way higher voltages sometimes. (regardless of the mb brand)


----------



## nick name

Xzow said:


> For Ryzen 3xxx overclocking (3700x specifically) do you guys leave voltage on auto? I heard that the way it works with the 3xxx series is that putting it on static voltage just hurts performance.


I've never tried leaving it on Auto as I don't know what the board is gonna try to set.


----------



## nick name

Ok I gave it a quick try. I'm not sure if the board would have used more voltage for a higher multiplier. 

SVI2 1.3V 
VID 1.1V


----------



## nick name

Ayyy the site's back up.


----------



## crakej

Hey! That took a while!
I've been meaning to ask you about CPU voltage - I've always left mine on auto with Ryzen 3xxx. Also, does offset work with CPU/SoC? Whats best way do you think?

Current experience is that it stays within the limits AMD states -i.e. up to 1.5v VID on light loads.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Hey! That took a while!
> I've been meaning to ask you about CPU voltage - I've always left mine on auto with Ryzen 3xxx. Also, does offset work with CPU/SoC? Whats best way do you think?
> 
> Current experience is that it stays within the limits AMD states -i.e. up to 1.5v VID on light loads.


I don't think I've tried any SOC and related voltages with an offset. I know with SOC less than 1.1V I get USB dropouts at 1900 FCLK.


----------



## crakej

And you've never had the CPU on Auto? You're doing CCX OC right? High LLC if I remember right....


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> And you've never had the CPU on Auto? You're doing CCX OC right? High LLC if I remember right....


I'm running EDC bug with Auto CPU voltage and LLC currently.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> I'm running EDC bug with Auto CPU voltage and LLC currently.


So the CPU isn't needing LLC? I've been using CPU LLC = 2 as thought (like previous chips) it might need that while OCing RAM - i might try without....


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> So the CPU isn't needing LLC? I've been using CPU LLC = 2 as thought (like previous chips) it might need that while OCing RAM - i might try without....


Sorry I left out the 3. I'm running LLC 3 with it.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Sorry I left out the 3. I'm running LLC 3 with it.


Doesn't seem to matter what I do on bios 3004+ - just won't do XMP or 3800 at all. Keep getting code 07 which I haven't had in quite some time!


----------



## lordzed83

something different but some could be interested nicked of chinese to put on my yt for ez watch


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> something different but some could be interested nicked of chinese to put on my yt for ez watch


Thanks

Impressive - especially the 'low' FPS. I wonder what AMD will bring to the table..... and the RTX3090


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Thanks
> 
> Impressive - especially the 'low' FPS. I wonder what AMD will bring to the table..... and the RTX3090


Im grabbing 3080 day 1 as im a 4k monitor user was waiting for gpu thats not on old node. AMD have **** all in high end so NV is still only option especially i want Ray tracing for Cyberpunk and WoW Shadowlands





Pascal titan with block can retire after 4 years. It mined me over 2000 pounds profit so paid for this 3080


----------



## Rusakova

lordzed83 said:


> Im grabbing 3080 day 1 as im a 4k monitor user was waiting for gpu thats not on old node. AMD have **** all in high end so NV is still only option especially i want Ray tracing for Cyberpunk and WoW Shadowlands
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pascal titan with block can retire after 4 years. It mined me over 2000 pounds profit so paid for this 3080


You are in for a surprise....


----------



## nick name

Rusakova said:


> You are in for a surprise....


Awww c'mon man. Do you know something we don't or are you looking at the same leaks we are?


----------



## mimosoft

Hello community. I upgraded from 2x 16GB to 4x 16GB Crucial Ballistix Sport LT (BLS16G4D30AESC) ram with Micron E-Die.
Now i get errors on ram test software by karhu after a few minutes.

Maybe you can check my settings and give me some advice.Thank you.


----------



## Enzarch

nick name said:


> Awww c'mon man. Do you know something we don't or are you looking at the same leaks we are?


I assume everyone is looking at the same leaks, but drawing varying conclusions, as there is so little actual information.
That said, there is no reason to think (with the few tidbits we have) that AMD wont compete at the 3080 level
I suggest everyone holds their horses for now. Nvidia still has a few more cards to launch too.


----------



## lordzed83

Rusakova said:


> You are in for a surprise....


What Surprice looks fantastic not as good as it looked on 3D monitor but that died and cant get any 3d monitors anymore. Seen good 40% jump from my Titan in 4K thats what I need for [email protected]


----------



## lordzed83

Enzarch said:


> I assume everyone is looking at the same leaks, but drawing varying conclusions, as there is so little actual information.
> That said, there is no reason to think (with the few tidbits we have) that AMD wont compete at the 3080 level
> I suggest everyone holds their horses for now. Nvidia still has a few more cards to launch too.


I'm Done with AMD's gpu they can literary **** off with their's fairytales. Waiting for Fury X cost me 120 pounds cause 980ti went up in price. Waiting for Vega64 cost me 90 pounds cause it turned out crap and VN cards went up AGAIN. They can start selling bikes if You ask me. If AMD showed me Taytraced benchmark beating 3080 this week they would get my money I'm not playing no waiting games ever again. Can Always get another Gpu next year if there is something out. Gotta be honest I'w spent more on chemicanls in lockdown than 3080 costs to keeop Me entertained at lest thats still cheap as hell.
Besides that You must have missed leaked New AMD benchmarks.


https://cdn.wccftech.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/AMD-Radeon-RX-6000-Series-RDNA-2-Graphics-Card_Alleged-Benchmarks_2.png










Nothing to wait for Amd delivers 1.5 years Too late AGAIN


If 3080 it 20% faster than 2020ti Its fantastic upgrade for me You know why ?? Cause It's free upgrade as my pascal titan mined me over 2000 quid while I have it. And 3080 Will mine mi more for upgrade


----------



## neikosr0x

mimosoft said:


> Hello community. I upgraded from 2x 16GB to 4x 16GB Crucial Ballistix Sport LT (BLS16G4D30AESC) ram with Micron E-Die.
> Now i get errors on ram test software by karhu after a few minutes.
> 
> Maybe you can check my settings and give me some advice.Thank you.
> 
> View attachment 2458728


Try higher PROCODT try with Power Down, Gear down = AUTO, you could also try lowering SOC voltage and play around with DRAM controller current parameters under "ADVANCED" in Dram calculator tweaker.


----------



## kmellz

I'm more concerned about DLSS and RTX equivalents with amd, performance will probably be great, but those 2 functions are getting really good now with Ampere. Will amd be able to run these enabled in some way, or will it only have more generalized stuff that isn't implemented much yet? Might go nvidia now and then possibly amd later when stuff gets more generally implemented instead


----------



## kmellz

This looks promising too, just have to wait for that one BIOS dude to get around to our board 😂

__
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/iroe3e


----------



## lordzed83

kmellz said:


> This looks promising too, just have to wait for that one BIOS dude to get around to our board 😂
> 
> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/iroe3e


With how rescent bioses been i ended up on 2801 i consider it best bios for C7H and maximum overclock on everything 24/7

And yes for me Raytracing is Selling point Turding had not enough jump of performance from watercooling titan for over 1000 pounds but 40% upgrade @4K and Raytracing for 650 pounds when i can sell titan for 300 and i mined 2000 pounds on it. It's free and minung starts again


----------



## pschorr1123

lordzed83 said:


> I'm Done with AMD's gpu they can literary **** off with their's fairytales. Waiting for Fury X cost me 120 pounds cause 980ti went up in price. Waiting for Vega64 cost me 90 pounds cause it turned out crap and VN cards went up AGAIN. They can start selling bikes if You ask me. If AMD showed me Taytraced benchmark beating 3080 this week they would get my money I'm not playing no waiting games ever again. Can Always get another Gpu next year if there is something out. Gotta be honest I'w spent more on chemicanls in lockdown than 3080 costs to keeop Me entertained at lest thats still cheap as hell.
> Besides that You must have missed leaked New AMD benchmarks.
> 
> 
> https://cdn.wccftech.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/AMD-Radeon-RX-6000-Series-RDNA-2-Graphics-Card_Alleged-Benchmarks_2.png
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing to wait for Amd delivers 1.5 years Too late AGAIN
> 
> 
> If 3080 it 20% faster than 2020ti Its fantastic upgrade for me You know why ?? Cause It's free upgrade as my pascal titan mined me over 2000 quid while I have it. And 3080 Will mine mi more for upgrade


I agree with you 100% but there are 2 "big Navis" the leaks you posted are Navi 22 which is meant for 3070 and below. Navi 21 is meant for 3080. However, Nvidias Ray Tracing will be superior on Ampere also no AIB Navi parts until next year and we all know too well RTI can't make a proper cooler to save their lives and well then there are the driver issues. Raja Koduri was the dude responsible for the "poor Volta BS" he's out and doing the same hype train bs for Intel now.

What would be suck is if Navi 22 launched before Navi 21. A day late and a buck short again.......


----------



## nick name

mimosoft said:


> Hello community. I upgraded from 2x 16GB to 4x 16GB Crucial Ballistix Sport LT (BLS16G4D30AESC) ram with Micron E-Die.
> Now i get errors on ram test software by karhu after a few minutes.
> 
> Maybe you can check my settings and give me some advice.Thank you.


Hmmm, I can't say I've read about anyone trying to stabilize 64 GB at that speed. Have you tried using 2T?


----------



## mimosoft

I tried to change some settings but I still got errors. Finally windows didn't boot even with default bios values (2400MHz, etc.). So i had to install Windows again. xD

I returned to my old settings an did not get any errors for one hour. Sometimes pc hardware is acting really weird.


----------



## Krisztias

lordzed83 said:


> With how rescent bioses been i ended up on 2801 i consider it best bios for C7H and maximum overclock on everything 24/7
> 
> And yes for me Raytracing is Selling point Turding had not enough jump of performance from watercooling titan for over 1000 pounds but 40% upgrade @4K and Raytracing for 650 pounds when i can sell titan for 300 and i mined 2000 pounds on it. It's free and minung starts again


Hi!

2000 pounds looks great, which coin have you mined with it, if I may ask?


----------



## Enzarch

lordzed83 said:


> I'm Done with AMD's gpu they can literary **** off with their's fairytales. Waiting for Fury X cost me 120 pounds cause 980ti went up in price. Waiting for Vega64 cost me 90 pounds cause it turned out crap and VN cards went up AGAIN. They can start selling bikes if You ask me. If AMD showed me Taytraced benchmark beating 3080 this week they would get my money I'm not playing no waiting games ever again. Can Always get another Gpu next year if there is something out. Gotta be honest I'w spent more on chemicanls in lockdown than 3080 costs to keeop Me entertained at lest thats still cheap as hell.
> Besides that You must have missed leaked New AMD benchmarks.
> 
> 
> https://cdn.wccftech.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/AMD-Radeon-RX-6000-Series-RDNA-2-Graphics-Card_Alleged-Benchmarks_2.png
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing to wait for Amd delivers 1.5 years Too late AGAIN
> 
> 
> If 3080 it 20% faster than 2020ti Its fantastic upgrade for me You know why ?? Cause It's free upgrade as my pascal titan mined me over 2000 quid while I have it. And 3080 Will mine mi more for upgrade





pschorr1123 said:


> I agree with you 100% but there are 2 "big Navis" the leaks you posted are Navi 22 which is meant for 3070 and below. Navi 21 is meant for 3080. However, Nvidias Ray Tracing will be superior on Ampere also no AIB Navi parts until next year and we all know too well RTI can't make a proper cooler to save their lives and well then there are the driver issues. Raja Koduri was the dude responsible for the "poor Volta BS" he's out and doing the same hype train bs for Intel now.
> 
> What would be suck is if Navi 22 launched before Navi 21. A day late and a buck short again.......


Trust me, I a have been just as frustrated as you with the last 6 years of AMD GPUs, and they certainly put themselves in a position for no one to wait, in fact, I will probably try to get my hands on a FE 3080 day one (especially since resale should be very high). And they REALLY needed to not be late this time, though I suppose a bit over a month is far better than a year. 

Nah, I dont miss any leaks, With some quick napkin math, assuming 80CUs at 2GHz and a decent memory config, there is no way those benchmarks are Navi 21, more likely Navi 22 as said by pschorr. But theres a ton of things we know almost nothing about such as raytracing performance or other features. AMD is doing a great job of keeping everyone in the dark; NOW is the time to show something.

The old AMD reference blower is gone, they have already shown and stated directly they are doing a proper dual axial cooler this time (not that that implies it has to be 'good'). But it also doesnt need to anywhere near as good as the Nvidia coolers: 7nm TSMC will be a lot more efficient at least. (not that it matters to us watercoolers) Also the speculated reason for the later launch is to polish drivers.

I am more hopeful for RTG than I have been in a long time, but as I said, Ill probably pick up a 3080 in the meantime, definitely too many failed promises in recent history.


----------



## Enzarch

Anyway, back to topic, does anyone think we will see a new or modified BIOS with PCIe 4.0 re-enabled, would be nice with these new GPUs right around the corner (yeah yeah, I know, minimal difference in real performance)


----------



## crakej

Enzarch said:


> Anyway, back to topic, does anyone think we will see a new or modified BIOS with PCIe 4.0 re-enabled, would be nice with these new GPUs right around the corner (yeah yeah, I know, minimal difference in real performance)


Sadly I doubt it. They did it to differentiate the x570/b550 stack.

ASUS and others *DID* restore PCIE 4 on some of their B450s while waiting for the B550, but I wouldn't hold your breath. Even on those, they only enabled it on the NVME port, not the x16 port.


----------



## Rusakova

lordzed83 said:


> I'm Done with AMD's gpu they can literary **** off with their's fairytales. Waiting for Fury X cost me 120 pounds cause 980ti went up in price. Waiting for Vega64 cost me 90 pounds cause it turned out crap and VN cards went up AGAIN. They can start selling bikes if You ask me. If AMD showed me Taytraced benchmark beating 3080 this week they would get my money I'm not playing no waiting games ever again. Can Always get another Gpu next year if there is something out. Gotta be honest I'w spent more on chemicanls in lockdown than 3080 costs to keeop Me entertained at lest thats still cheap as hell.
> Besides that You must have missed leaked New AMD benchmarks.
> 
> 
> https://cdn.wccftech.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/AMD-Radeon-RX-6000-Series-RDNA-2-Graphics-Card_Alleged-Benchmarks_2.png
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing to wait for Amd delivers 1.5 years Too late AGAIN
> 
> 
> If 3080 it 20% faster than 2020ti Its fantastic upgrade for me You know why ?? Cause It's free upgrade as my pascal titan mined me over 2000 quid while I have it. And 3080 Will mine mi more for upgrade


This is by far the most bland benchmark I have ever seen. It shows what exactly? 
Nothing is the answer. It shows a 2080 Ti scoring from 6100 to 7800 points and an unnamed AMD GPU, which could easily be something entirely else than a RDNA2 based one.
If it indeed is a RDNA2 card, then who says it's the best they have to offer?
If you want to buy a 3080 then by all means do so. It's your money after all.
But you are still in for a surprise if you think AMD can't compete with Ampere.


----------



## nick name

Rusakova said:


> This is by far the most bland benchmark I have ever seen. It shows what exactly?
> Nothing is the answer. It shows a 2080 Ti scoring from 6100 to 7800 points and an unnamed AMD GPU, which could easily be something entirely else than a RDNA2 based one.
> If it indeed is a RDNA2 card, then who says it's the best they have to offer?
> If you want to buy a 3080 then by all means do so. It's your money after all.
> But you are still in for a surprise if you think AMD can't compete with Ampere.


Dang it. There you go again with the vague insistence you have information about the new AMD cards. So do you know something we don't or have you seen something online that we haven't seen yet?


----------



## antostorny

Hi all,

I want to update my config replacing my R7 1800X and GTX 1070 with a new R9 3900XT (since new Ryzen 4000 will not be available for my Crosshair VI Hero) and new GTX 3080. Which bios should I install in order to install a "XT" CPU and at the same time activate the support for pci-e 4.0?

Furthermore in my motherboard is installed the version 7501, so probably i need to downgrade the BIOS. Is it possible?

Thanks and regards

EDIT: Sorry, wrong thread...


----------



## crakej

What power phase control settings are people using for their most stable memory OCs? Mine are below...

I did an experiment (on bios 3004) to see if this profile would run better with CPU and SoC using <Extreme> (full phase) - I can't even boot! How could just changing this stop me from booting?


----------



## VnnAmed

Hi is there a post here somewhere with settings that should be changed for manual OC? I know that I could go through the thread but it's 606 pages right now and you know... I dont have a week.
So does someone have a post saved with things that should be changed?

I have 2700x BTW.

Also here are my current settings



Code:


[2020/09/19 12:51:21]
Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
eCLK Mode [Synchronous mode]
BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
BCLK_Divider [Auto]
Performance Enhancer [Auto]
CPU Core Ratio [41.25]
Performance Bias [Auto]
Memory Frequency [DDR4-3400MHz]
Core Performance Boost [Disabled]
SMT Mode [Enabled]
TPU [Keep Current Settings]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
Max CPU Boost Clock Override [Auto]
Platform Thermal Throttle Limit [Auto]
TRC_EOM [Auto]
TRTP_EOM [Auto]
TRRS_S_EOM [Auto]
TRRS_L_EOM [Auto]
TWTR_EOM [Auto]
TWTR_L_EOM [Auto]
TWCL_EOM [Auto]
TWR_EOM [Auto]
TFAW_EOM [Auto]
TRCT_EOM [Auto]
TREFI_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_DD_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SD_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SC_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SCL_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_DD_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SD_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SC_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SCL_EOM [Auto]
TWRRD_EOM [Auto]
TRDWR_EOM [Auto]
TWRRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto]
DRAM CAS# Latency [16]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [18]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [16]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [16]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [34]
Trc [56]
TrrdS [6]
TrrdL [6]
Tfaw [24]
TwtrS [4]
TwtrL [12]
Twr [24]
Trcpage [Auto]
TrdrdScl [4]
TwrwrScl [4]
Trfc [544]
Trfc2 [Auto]
Trfc4 [Auto]
Tcwl [16]
Trtp [10]
Trdwr [8]
Twrrd [1]
TwrwrSc [1]
TwrwrSd [7]
TwrwrDd [7]
TrdrdSc [1]
TrdrdSd [5]
TrdrdDd [5]
Tcke [1]
ProcODT [53.3 ohm]
Cmd2T [1T]
Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
Power Down Enable [Disabled]
RttNom [RZQ/7]
RttWr [Dynamic ODT Off]
RttPark [RZQ/5]
MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
MemCkeSetup [Auto]
MemCadBusClkDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
CPU Load-line Calibration [Auto]
CPU Current Capability [140%]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
CPU Voltage Frequency [500]
CPU Power Duty Control [Extreme]
CPU Power Phase Control [Power Phase Response]
Manual Adjustment [Ultra Fast]
CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Auto]
VDDSOC Current Capability [140%]
VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed VDDSOC Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
VDDSOC Phase Control [Power Phase Response]
Manual Adjustment [Ultra Fast]
DRAM Current Capability [130%]
DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.35000]
VTTDDR Voltage [Auto]
VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
VDDP Voltage [Auto]
1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
PLL reference voltage [Auto]
T Offset [Auto]
Sense MI Skew [Auto]
Sense MI Offset [Auto]
Promontory presence [Auto]
Clock Amplitude [Auto]
CLDO VDDP voltage [Auto]
CPU Core Voltage [Manual mode]
- CPU Core Voltage Override [1.28125]
CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
- VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.09375]
DRAM Voltage [1.35000]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
Firmware TPM [Disable]
Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
PSS Support [Auto]
SVM Mode [Disabled]
Onboard LED [Enabled]
Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
SATA Mode [RAID]
NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
SMART Self Test [Enabled]
HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
PCIEX8/X4_2 Mode [Auto]
PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
SB Link Mode [Auto]
Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
When system is in working state [On]
When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [On]
Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
ErP Ready [Disabled]
Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
Power On By RTC [Disabled]
Network Stack [Disabled]
Device [N\A]
Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
U31G1_5 [Enabled]
U31G1_6 [Enabled]
U31G1_7 [Enabled]
U31G1_8 [Enabled]
U31G1_9 [Enabled]
U31G1_10 [Enabled]
USB11 [Enabled]
USB12 [Enabled]
USB13 [Enabled]
USB14 [Enabled]
USB15 [Enabled]
CPU Temperature [Monitor]
MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
PCH Temperature [Monitor]
T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor1  Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor2  Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor3  Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
5V Voltage [Monitor]
12V Voltage [Monitor]
CPU Q-Fan Control [Auto]
CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [200 RPM]
CPU Fan Profile [Standard]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 3 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [Auto]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Source [CPU]
HAMP Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
HAMP Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
HAMP Fan Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
PSPP Policy [Auto]
Fast Boot [Disabled]
AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
Boot Logo Display [Disabled]
POST Report [5 sec]
Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
Launch CSM [Disabled]
OS Type [Other OS]
Setup Animator [Disabled]
ASUS Grid Install Service [Enabled]
Load from Profile [6]
Profile Name [8h 4125 3400]
Save to Profile [6]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
BCLK Frequency [Auto]
CPU Ratio [Auto]
DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A2]
Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
Core Performance Boost [Auto]
Memory interleaving [Auto]
IOMMU [Auto]
Global C-state Control [Auto]
Power Supply Idle Control [Auto]
DRAM ECC Enable [Auto]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
Mode0 [Auto]


----------



## nick name

@VnnAmed This was written based on older BIOS and Ryzen Master versions, but the principle should still be the same. I can't confirm because I don't have my 2700X anymore though so if you have any questions give me a shout.









Asus Strix/Crosshair VII PE Level 3 and 4 multiplier...


Edit (add): On the Crosshair VII with the latest 2203 BIOS you can control the multiplier for PE 3 and I'm assuming PE 4 from within BIOS by adjusting EDC under PBO options after setting it to manual. However, while it allows you to adjust EDC without being ignored it will also cap EDC to what...




www.overclock.net





The biggest difference from when I first wrote that is that you can now use BIOS to change EDC values while using PE 3 whereas when I first wrote it you could only use Ryzen Master in BIOS.

The benefit to that method is that you achieve the same all-core speed (without downclocking) during all workloads and still maintain the ability to clock higher during fewer-core and single-core workloads.

Edit:
You can also use a negative offset on the CPU voltage with that method. You'll have to play with it to determine what's stable for you.


----------



## crakej

VnnAmed said:


> Hi is there a post here somewhere with settings that should be changed for manual OC? I know that I could go through the thread but it's 606 pages right now and you know... I dont have a week.
> So does someone have a post saved with things that should be changed?
> 
> I have 2700x BTW.
> 
> Also here are my current settings
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> [2020/09/19 12:51:21]
> Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
> eCLK Mode [Synchronous mode]
> BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
> BCLK_Divider [Auto]
> Performance Enhancer [Auto]
> CPU Core Ratio [41.25]
> Performance Bias [Auto]
> Memory Frequency [DDR4-3400MHz]
> Core Performance Boost [Disabled]
> SMT Mode [Enabled]
> TPU [Keep Current Settings]
> Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
> Max CPU Boost Clock Override [Auto]
> Platform Thermal Throttle Limit [Auto]
> TRC_EOM [Auto]
> TRTP_EOM [Auto]
> TRRS_S_EOM [Auto]
> TRRS_L_EOM [Auto]
> TWTR_EOM [Auto]
> TWTR_L_EOM [Auto]
> TWCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWR_EOM [Auto]
> TFAW_EOM [Auto]
> TRCT_EOM [Auto]
> TREFI_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_DD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SC_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_DD_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SD_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SC_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWRRD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDWR_EOM [Auto]
> TWRRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto]
> DRAM CAS# Latency [16]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [18]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [16]
> DRAM RAS# PRE Time [16]
> DRAM RAS# ACT Time [34]
> Trc [56]
> TrrdS [6]
> TrrdL [6]
> Tfaw [24]
> TwtrS [4]
> TwtrL [12]
> Twr [24]
> Trcpage [Auto]
> TrdrdScl [4]
> TwrwrScl [4]
> Trfc [544]
> Trfc2 [Auto]
> Trfc4 [Auto]
> Tcwl [16]
> Trtp [10]
> Trdwr [8]
> Twrrd [1]
> TwrwrSc [1]
> TwrwrSd [7]
> TwrwrDd [7]
> TrdrdSc [1]
> TrdrdSd [5]
> TrdrdDd [5]
> Tcke [1]
> ProcODT [53.3 ohm]
> Cmd2T [1T]
> Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
> Power Down Enable [Disabled]
> RttNom [RZQ/7]
> RttWr [Dynamic ODT Off]
> RttPark [RZQ/5]
> MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
> MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
> MemCkeSetup [Auto]
> MemCadBusClkDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [24.0 Ohm]
> CPU Load-line Calibration [Auto]
> CPU Current Capability [140%]
> CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
> CPU Voltage Frequency [500]
> CPU Power Duty Control [Extreme]
> CPU Power Phase Control [Power Phase Response]
> Manual Adjustment [Ultra Fast]
> CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
> VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Auto]
> VDDSOC Current Capability [140%]
> VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Manual]
> Fixed VDDSOC Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
> VDDSOC Phase Control [Power Phase Response]
> Manual Adjustment [Ultra Fast]
> DRAM Current Capability [130%]
> DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
> DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
> Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
> DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.35000]
> VTTDDR Voltage [Auto]
> VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
> VDDP Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
> CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
> 2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
> PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
> PLL reference voltage [Auto]
> T Offset [Auto]
> Sense MI Skew [Auto]
> Sense MI Offset [Auto]
> Promontory presence [Auto]
> Clock Amplitude [Auto]
> CLDO VDDP voltage [Auto]
> CPU Core Voltage [Manual mode]
> - CPU Core Voltage Override [1.28125]
> CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
> - VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.09375]
> DRAM Voltage [1.35000]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> 1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
> Firmware TPM [Disable]
> Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
> PSS Support [Auto]
> SVM Mode [Disabled]
> Onboard LED [Enabled]
> Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
> SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
> SATA Mode [RAID]
> NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
> SMART Self Test [Enabled]
> HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
> M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
> PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
> PCIEX8/X4_2 Mode [Auto]
> PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
> M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
> M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
> SB Link Mode [Auto]
> Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
> USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
> When system is in working state [On]
> When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [On]
> Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
> Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
> ErP Ready [Disabled]
> Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
> Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
> Power On By RTC [Disabled]
> Network Stack [Disabled]
> Device [N\A]
> Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
> XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
> U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
> U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
> U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> U31G1_5 [Enabled]
> U31G1_6 [Enabled]
> U31G1_7 [Enabled]
> U31G1_8 [Enabled]
> U31G1_9 [Enabled]
> U31G1_10 [Enabled]
> USB11 [Enabled]
> USB12 [Enabled]
> USB13 [Enabled]
> USB14 [Enabled]
> USB15 [Enabled]
> CPU Temperature [Monitor]
> MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
> PCH Temperature [Monitor]
> T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor1  Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor2  Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor3  Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
> HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
> CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
> AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
> W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
> W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
> 3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
> 5V Voltage [Monitor]
> 12V Voltage [Monitor]
> CPU Q-Fan Control [Auto]
> CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [200 RPM]
> CPU Fan Profile [Standard]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Auto]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 3 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [Auto]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> HAMP Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> HAMP Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> HAMP Fan Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
> AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> PSPP Policy [Auto]
> Fast Boot [Disabled]
> AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
> Boot Logo Display [Disabled]
> POST Report [5 sec]
> Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
> Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
> Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
> Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
> Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
> Launch CSM [Disabled]
> OS Type [Other OS]
> Setup Animator [Disabled]
> ASUS Grid Install Service [Enabled]
> Load from Profile [6]
> Profile Name [8h 4125 3400]
> Save to Profile [6]
> CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
> VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> BCLK Frequency [Auto]
> CPU Ratio [Auto]
> DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A2]
> Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
> Core Performance Boost [Auto]
> Memory interleaving [Auto]
> IOMMU [Auto]
> Global C-state Control [Auto]
> Power Supply Idle Control [Auto]
> DRAM ECC Enable [Auto]
> Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
> Mode0 [Auto]


I've never owned a 2xxx CPU, but there is easy to find information via google to get you started.

best settings for 2700x on crosshair 7 - Google Search


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> @VnnAmed This was written based on older BIOS and Ryzen Master versions, but the principle should still be the same. I can't confirm because I don't have my 2700X anymore though so if you have any questions give me a shout.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asus Strix/Crosshair VII PE Level 3 and 4 multiplier...
> 
> 
> Edit (add): On the Crosshair VII with the latest 2203 BIOS you can control the multiplier for PE 3 and I'm assuming PE 4 from within BIOS by adjusting EDC under PBO options after setting it to manual. However, while it allows you to adjust EDC without being ignored it will also cap EDC to what...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The biggest difference from when I first wrote that is that you can now use BIOS to change EDC values while using PE 3 whereas when I first wrote it you could only use Ryzen Master in BIOS.
> 
> The benefit to that method is that you achieve the same all-core speed (without downclocking) during all workloads and still maintain the ability to clock higher during fewer-core and single-core workloads.
> 
> Edit:
> You can also use a negative offset on the CPU voltage with that method. You'll have to play with it to determine what's stable for you.


I knew you'd be the right guy for this question!

While you're around, can I ask what power settings you've settled on for your stable OC?


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I knew you'd be the right guy for this question!
> 
> While you're around, can I ask what power settings you've settled on for your stable OC?


Too be honest -- I haven't. I still have random reboots at super light loads with the EDC bug. It seems there are guys with the CH8 that are experiencing the same. When my CPU is at the highest frequencies (4.65GHz+) under light loads it will sometimes shutdown. I've tried giving it a little more voltage, but haven't found anything that cures it completely. Again, this is with the EDC bug.

With normal PBO my CPU never hits 4.6GHz so I'm guessing it's just not a better specimen. 

I'm hoping the new PBO Fmax feature from the The Stilt makes it down to us so I can see if that cures that problem. It seems it makes the CPU behave the same way as the EDC bug, but in a designed way that at least The Stilt understands.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Too be honest -- I haven't. I still have random reboots at super light loads with the EDC bug. It seems there are guys with the CH8 that are experiencing the same. When my CPU is at the highest frequencies (4.65GHz+) under light loads it will sometimes shutdown. I've tried giving it a little more voltage, but haven't found anything that cures it completely. Again, this is with the EDC bug.
> 
> With normal PBO my CPU never hits 4.6GHz so I'm guessing it's just not a better specimen.
> 
> I'm hoping the new PBO Fmax feature from the The Stilt makes it down to us so I can see if that cures that problem. It seems it makes the CPU behave the same way as the EDC bug, but in a designed way that at least The Stilt understands.


Interesting. I don't have that problem. I did, but not now - trying to think what I did to stop it..... I will let you know when (if!) I remember what I did....

How about the switching frequencies? do you use those much?

I've not seen anything about the 'PBO Fmax' feature from The Stilt yet. Isn't there an Fmax setting in our bios? Would you mind sharing which thread that's in so I can have a read about it?


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Interesting. I don't have that problem. I did, but not now - trying to think what I did to stop it..... I will let you know when (if!) I remember what I did....
> 
> How about the switching frequencies? do you use those much?
> 
> I've not seen anything about the 'PBO Fmax' feature from The Stilt yet. Isn't there an Fmax setting in our bios? Would you mind sharing which thread that's in so I can have a read about it?


Yeah, I've played with switching frequencies. That didn't help so I am just running it at Extreme.

It's over in the CH8 thread. Shamino dropped a couple beta BIOS versions with it. The Stilt said there is nothing that would prevent it working on a CH7 and that it's up to ASUS to decide if they want to include it.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Yeah, I've played with switching frequencies. That didn't help so I am just running it at Extreme.
> 
> It's over in the CH8 thread. Shamino dropped a couple beta BIOS versions with it. The Stilt said there is nothing that would prevent it working on a CH7 and that it's up to ASUS to decide if they want to include it.


I'll have a look - thanks. Don't suppose Shamino mentioned if we're getting any more bios releases on C7H?


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I'll have a look - thanks. Don't suppose Shamino mentioned if we're getting any more bios releases on C7H?


No I haven't seen anything from him about a BIOS for us.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> No I haven't seen anything from him about a BIOS for us.


Wow! That looks amazing!

It would be very cool if @shamino1978 has time to bring Fmax to CH7...... along with any other [email protected] we may (or may not ) be getting


----------



## WinterActual

We should get a new bios for the Ryzen 4000 support, thats for sure.


----------



## crakej

WinterActual said:


> We should get a new bios for the Ryzen 4000 support, thats for sure.


I think we already support it.


----------



## Pietro

crakej said:


> I think we already support it.


3103 bios still doesn't support Zen 3 and Crosshair VII didn't get a a version with agesa 1.0.8.1 like X570 and B550 Asus boards which have first Zen 3 support. Maybe Asus will give a beta in December, I don't expect it to be released in October.


----------



## crakej

Pietro said:


> 3103 bios still doesn't support Zen 3 and Crosshair VII didn't get a a version with agesa 1.0.8.1 like X570 and B550 Asus boards which have first Zen 3 support. Maybe Asus will give a beta in December, I don't expect it to be released in October.


It's my understanding that the AGESA Combo versions are the ones that will first support the next gen CPUs. AGESA version numbers are re-used. I think we will get further AGESA updates, how many is anyone's guess. They ddn't want us to have Ryzen 4000/5000 (whatever they're going to call them) support in the first place.


----------



## Pietro

crakej said:


> It's my understanding that the AGESA Combo versions are the ones that will first support the next gen CPUs. AGESA version numbers are re-used. I think we will get further AGESA updates, how many is anyone's guess. They ddn't want us to have Ryzen 4000/5000 (whatever they're going to call them) support in the first place.


1.0.8.1 it's a combo version with already implemented microcodes, but the problem is when Asus will release non public beta like we usually get here from some users in this thread, that's keeping me from selling 3900X, but I will also more money if I'll sell it later. Asus is always late to the party.


----------



## Rusakova

Pietro said:


> 1.0.8.1 it's a combo version with already implemented microcodes, but the problem is when Asus will release non public beta like we usually get here from some users in this thread, that's keeping me from selling 3900X, but I will also more money if I'll sell it later. Asus is always late to the party.


Which is exactly why I will switch to an MSI MAG X570 Tomahawk once it's in stock again. (oct.. 6)
This is supposed to be a top end board ... *TOP END*!
But instead we get disabled PCIe 4.0 and possible no / very late Ryzen 3 support. Finally the latest 3103 bios is very wonky when it comes to
running 1900 FCLK's. So thank you Asus, but no thanks. I know they are swimming in cash, but things change very quickly in the tech world.


----------



## Y2BNE1

mimosoft said:


> Hello community. I upgraded from 2x 16GB to 4x 16GB Crucial Ballistix Sport LT (BLS16G4D30AESC) ram with Micron E-Die.
> Now i get errors on ram test software by karhu after a few minutes.
> 
> Maybe you can check my settings and give me some advice.Thank you.
> 
> View attachment 2458728


Hopefully this helps you or someone else who wants to try to use 64GB (4x16). I've been running this for about a year now 100% stable.










I am running RAM @ 1.38v and make sure to set 1.38 for VBOOT voltage as well, otherwise my system would not cold start every time.


----------



## WinterActual

Guys I have a quick question. I want to test something with the data provided by the 1usmus new CTR tool. When I input the CCX data in the bios, should I also modify the core clock ratio in the main bios screen to match the CCX ratio or leave the core clock ratio to Auto and modify just the CCX values? Thanks in advance!


----------



## nick name

WinterActual said:


> Guys I have a quick question. I want to test something with the data provided by the 1usmus new CTR tool. When I input the CCX data in the bios, should I also modify the core clock ratio in the main bios screen to match the CCX ratio or leave the core clock ratio to Auto and modify just the CCX values? Thanks in advance!


No. Leave it on Auto.


----------



## WinterActual

Thanks mate!


----------



## Naeem

I have few questions about C7H my C6H died and need to replace it i have a 1800x already so i want to use it but planning to upgrade to Zen 3 in future


1 : Does C7H support PCI E 4.0 with zen 2 ?
2 : Is it getting Offical zen 3 suppport from Asus?
3 How is ram overclocking and stabilty with this motherboard ?


----------



## nick name

Naeem said:


> I have few questions about C7H my C6H died and need to replace it i have a 1800x already so i want to use it but planning to upgrade to Zen 3 in future
> 
> 
> 1 : Does C7H support PCI E 4.0 with zen 2 ?
> 2 : Is it getting Offical zen 3 suppport from Asus?
> 3 How is ram overclocking and stabilty with this motherboard ?


1. Not on any current BIOS versions.
2. Not certain, but I'm pretty confident that it will.
3. Fantastic for me.


----------



## lordzed83

Naeem said:


> I have few questions about C7H my C6H died and need to replace it i have a 1800x already so i want to use it but planning to upgrade to Zen 3 in future
> 
> 
> 1 : Does C7H support PCI E 4.0 with zen 2 ?
> 2 : Is it getting Offical zen 3 suppport from Asus?
> 3 How is ram overclocking and stabilty with this motherboard ?


1 no
2 who knows
3 fantastic


----------



## Brko

Naeem said:


> I have few questions about C7H my C6H died and need to replace it i have a 1800x already so i want to use it but planning to upgrade to Zen 3 in future
> 
> 
> 1 : Does C7H support PCI E 4.0 with zen 2 ?
> 2 : Is it getting Offical zen 3 suppport from Asus?
> 3 How is ram overclocking and stabilty with this motherboard ?


C7H:
1. No
2. Probably yes
3. Better than on C6H

But if you are buying new board, go for good ans equipped B550 board. For example B550-E Gaming or B550 Aorus Pro or B550 Gaming Edge or something. 

You will get:
1. PCI E 4.0 support over CPU Zen2 or Zen3
2. 100% support for Zen3 (both Vermeer and Warhol)
3. Great RAM OC, far better than on C7H

If my C6H dies out, B550 is only way to go. B450 and X470 board are out of the question, even if we talk about C7H.

Allegedly, you CAN run 1800X on B550 but if you cannot, you could wait for Zen3 in few weeks time (launch could be by the end of October).


----------



## DDSZ

Naeem said:


> 1 : Does C7H support PCI E 4.0 with zen 2 ?


I'm not sure, but there is *2406 *bios which has some kind of PCI-E 4.0 support, but personally I've never tried it


----------



## t4t3r

Brko said:


> C7H:
> 1. No
> 2. Probably yes
> 3. Better than on C6H
> 
> But if you are buying new board, go for good ans equipped B550 board. For example B550-E Gaming or B550 Aorus Pro or B550 Gaming Edge or something.
> 
> You will get:
> 1. PCI E 4.0 support over CPU Zen2 or Zen3
> 2. 100% support for Zen3 (both Vermeer and Warhol)
> 3. Great RAM OC, far better than on C7H
> 
> If my C6H dies out, B550 is only way to go. B450 and X470 board are out of the question, even if we talk about C7H.
> 
> Allegedly, you CAN run 1800X on B550 but if you cannot, you could wait for Zen3 in few weeks time (launch could be by the end of October).


My C7H handles memory OCing as well as any other high(er)-end boards out there, maybe even better than most.


----------



## WinterActual

Brko said:


> 3. Great RAM OC, far better than on C7H


Doubt it.


----------



## Pietro

We’re excited to announce the AMD Ryzen 5000 Series desktop processors with the groundbreaking “Zen 3” architecture today. Based on the new levels of gaming performance the 5000 Series enables, we’re certain many of you are already excited to upgrade and making plans to do so. In an effort to keep you informed as promised on May 19, we’re sharing more on the status of BIOS updates for motherboards with AMD 400 Series chipsets.
The process is underway, and we have already begun providing our motherboard partners with the software code to add Ryzen 5000 Series support for 400 Series motherboard BIOSes.
*You can expect the first beta releases of these BIOSes to be available for download starting in January 2021.* The BIOSes will be made available directly from your preferred motherboard vendor when they are ready – exact timing and availability will depend on the development, implementation, and test schedule for your specific motherboard vendor and model.
One change from our May 19 update on this topic: Users will not have to verify processor ownership with AMD – we have streamlined the process.
As always, users should verify the processors supported by a BIOS update before flashing, as support for legacy CPUs may be removed to make way for the Ryzen 5000 Series. This may make the update a “one-way” process for some motherboards.
Please confirm you have a processor supported by the new BIOS before flashing to ensure you can boot your PC after the update.
As a reminder, this is the final upgrade path AMD can enable for 400 Series motherboards. Ryzen CPU releases beyond the “Zen 3” architecture will require a new motherboard. We continue to recommend that new AMD customers purchase an AMD B550 or X570 motherboard for the best/easiest user experience.

from AMD, CPUs available from 5th November and bioses for B450 and X470 from January of 2021 it will backfire again, a month mayeb would be acceptable, but problably more than 2?


----------



## mimosoft

Lol 2021


----------



## Hepe

Kinda seems like us C7H owners will be waiting for those BIOSes until April, if Asus' track record is anything to go by


----------



## smokin_mitch

Hepe said:


> Kinda seems like us C7H owners will be waiting for those BIOSes until April, if Asus' track record is anything to go by


I think I'll end up buying a C8H dark + 5950x and use my C7H + 3800x to upgrade a rig for a family member screw waiting months for bios updates


----------



## kmellz

Yeah with the track record for this board it doesn't feel like we'll be getting bioses anytime soon


----------



## WinterActual

Do you guys think its good trade off to switch my C7H Wifi for B550-E? Its VRM seems beefier for some reason, I am not expert but this is what I am seeing. It also has qled display and 1220 sound chip, intel lan, basically mini CH7 imo.


----------



## DDSZ

DDSZ said:


> I'm not sure, but there is *2406 *bios which has some kind of PCI-E 4.0 support, but personally I've never tried it


So I've just installed 2406 after 3103, and it shows as PCI-E 4.0, but gives almost zero difference in Time Spy compared to PCI-E 3.0, so I guess I'll switch back to 3103 for now


----------



## Pietro

WinterActual said:


> Do you guys think its good trade off to switch my C7H Wifi for B550-E? Its VRM seems beefier for some reason, I am not expert but this is what I am seeing. It also has qled display and 1220 sound chip, intel lan, basically mini CH7 imo.


It depends on financial loss you'll get on swap, which will be probably big and even hard to sell C7H now.


----------



## WinterActual

I am talking purely mobo to mobo trade off, the money are not a factor. My wife could use better mb for my 3600 when I switch to 5000 so I was planning to give her my C7H. But I don't want to go for X570. I don't like the idea of the small fan lol. And I was wondering if B550-E is good choice compared to the Crosshair 7 feature and vrm wise. Also back then I bought my C7H for 20$ more than B450 Tomahawk so....


----------



## smokin_mitch

WinterActual said:


> I am talking purely mobo to mobo trade off, the money are not a factor. My wife could use better mb for my 3600 when I switch to 5000 so I was planning to give her my C7H. But I don't want to go for X570. I don't like the idea of the small fan lol. And I was wondering if B550-E is good choice compared to the Crosshair 7 feature and vrm wise. Also back then I bought my C7H for 20$ more than B450 Tomahawk so....


check out the new crosshair viii dark hero x570 and no chipset fan ROG Crosshair VIII Dark Hero | Motherboards | ASUS Global

I'll be replacing my C7H with this and a 5000 series cpu


----------



## Pietro

WinterActual said:


> I am talking purely mobo to mobo trade off, the money are not a factor. My wife could use better mb for my 3600 when I switch to 5000 so I was planning to give her my C7H. But I don't want to go for X570. I don't like the idea of the small fan lol. And I was wondering if B550-E is good choice compared to the Crosshair 7 feature and vrm wise. Also back then I bought my C7H for 20$ more than B450 Tomahawk so....


It's a better board in both terms, but is worth to spend so much? I'm not so sure. Considering VRM temps on overclocked 3950X 200W B550-E had 58, cheaper MSI B550 Edge Wifi(Tomahawk with bigger heatsink + some features) - 59, Aourus Pro - 61(Elite with bigger heatsing + some features), B550-F Gaming 59, B550 Tomahawk 62. On 13.10.2020 will be amazon prime days maybe look then for promo on them. They are kind of on pair with C7H + Pcie 4.0 and erlier Zen 3 support + probably warhol Zen 3+ known as refresh, B550-E is upgrade.


----------



## WinterActual

What temps the C7H gives with oced 3950x?


----------



## xeizo

Some Asus rep has told a Redditer C7H won't get Zen 3 support, ever


__
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/ja23gg

Hmm


----------



## mimosoft

My next "Ass" mainboard won't be an Asus one. I ordered msi x570 tomahawk wifi


----------



## Brko

I would not bet on it. This is customer service and they told me that Zen2 will not be supported for C6H...


----------



## xeizo

We will see, we won't cry if Shamino provides us a super beta bios not on the download page


----------



## Syldon

xeizo said:


> Some Asus rep has told a Redditer C7H won't get Zen 3 support, ever
> 
> 
> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/ja23gg
> 
> Hmm


I just came here to point this out. Shame on Asus, this is the worst case for customer service I have seen in a long time. Nothing more than a cash grab. Asus just lost any chance of getting money from me. I was about to buy 2 X CH8. My principles say look elsewhere.


*EDIT*
And if you wish to inform Asus of your disgust, then here is a good place to start. Just don't have a birthday in November or December as it is not supported either.


----------



## RossiOCUK

Not surprising at all, this is very typical of ASUS of late. 

But for the love of god, do not forget this when you buy another motherboard.


----------



## lordzed83

100% expected this said C7H that Elmor gave me for help trubleshoting x370 and forum/owners is my last Asus motherboard due to Bios support gowing out of window last...


----------



## nick name

@The Stilt Posted on Reddit that he was "rather certain" this wasn't the case.


----------



## bonomork

RossiOCUK said:


> Not surprising at all, this is very typical of ASUS of late.
> 
> But for the love of god, do not forget this when you buy another motherboard.


I'll not forget it


----------



## nick name

It appears the ASUS Deutschland twitter account told Planet 3DNow that ASUS isn't dropping support for Ryzen 5000 on X470 boards. 



__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1316004902393442305


----------



## xeizo

Good news, a small media storm can do wonders


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> Good news, a small media storm can do wonders


I don't think that's what happened. I'd bet it was just a customer service rep that got some bad info.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> I don't think that's what happened. I'd bed it was just a customer service rep that got some bad info.


Yes, that's entirely possible. Also the rep may have interpreted the fact bioses aren't expected for launch as no support. But they are expected for January.


----------



## LethalSpoon

I´ll try an Aorus B550 Pro this week, and if is not pure garbage, I think is time to ditch the CH7 and avoid another BIOS drama the next months.


----------



## nick name

What BIOS drama are you guys all collectively referencing? I can't think of any BIOS delays that prevented CH7 owners from being able to utilize their CPUs. I can think of some bugs, but that isn't specific to CH7 and all vendors have their problems.


----------



## WinterActual

The drama is that (IF) ASUS support the new CPUs, the bios will come at very late date. Something like april, instead of Jan.


----------



## Syldon

nick name said:


> What BIOS drama are you guys all collectively referencing? I can't think of any BIOS delays that prevented CH7 owners from being able to utilize their CPUs. I can think of some bugs, but that isn't specific to CH7 and all vendors have their problems.


There isn't an issue anymore. 

Asus did a very quick U-turn. They were telling people not to expect an update that would make provision for the Ryzen 5000 series. They were also telling people to purchase the x570 boards instead. That info was confirmed by an engineer from Asus in an email with reference to an escalated customer service issue. This fact was not denied by Asus. All Asus have now said is that they will support the X470 in a future date.

I don't see how falls into a category of "bad information being given out".


----------



## nick name

WinterActual said:


> The drama is that (IF) ASUS support the new CPUs, the bios will come at very late date. Something like april, instead of Jan.


I don't see a basis for that belief is what I'm trying to say. I know it's what you guys are saying, but why do you believe that will be the case?


----------



## Syldon

WinterActual said:


> The drama is that (IF) ASUS support the new CPUs, the bios will come at very late date. Something like april, instead of Jan.


There is no set agenda from any board maker for implementation of the bios. You don't even know if what AMD releases will be stable. We can call Asus for not trying, but the timeline is not something that you can make demands on imho.


----------



## nick name

Syldon said:


> There isn't an issue anymore.
> 
> Asus did a very quick U-turn. They were telling people not to expect an update that would make provision for the Ryzen 5000 series. They were also telling people to purchase the x570 boards instead. That info was confirmed by an engineer from Asus in an email with reference to an escalated customer service issue. This fact was not denied by Asus. All Asus have now said is that they will support the X470 in a future date.
> 
> I don't see how falls into a category of "bad information being given out".


You're assuming that information was correct. A customer service rep saying an engineer told them isn't an official statement from ASUS.


----------



## Syldon

nick name said:


> You're assuming that information was correct. A customer service rep saying an engineer told them isn't an official statement from ASUS.


It hasn't been denied by Asus. And since there is a lot of stink regarding this, don't you think the first thing Asus would do it post a denial. My believe is that Asus had no intention of committing anyone to the task of implementing the bios. I also believe that this is not the case anymore due to the stink that has prevailed. Which is great news for all concerned here.


----------



## nick name

Syldon said:


> It hasn't been denied by Asus. And since there is a lot of stink regarding this, don't you think the first thing Asus would do it post a denial. My believe is that Asus had no intention of committing anyone to the task of implementing the bios. I also believe that this is not the case anymore due to the stink that has prevailed. Which is great news for all concerned here.


The ASUS Deutschland Twitter account denied it near right away.


----------



## xeizo

The Swedish Asus rep posted a official statement at Sweclockers


Asus.David
Asus ♥ ★
PlatsHägerstenRegistreradSep 2006
Här kommer vår officiella kommentar:
"ASUS will follow AMD’s decision: beta BIOS support for 400-series motherboards will be ready starting in Jan/2021, all ASUS X470, B450 & B450 II motherboards available on the market will be compatible via a BIOS update. When or if AMD sends us the required Agesa update, ASUS will follow AMD’s support plan to release the new BIOS."


----------



## Syldon

nick name said:


> The ASUS Deutschland Twitter account denied it near right away.


Denied the event actually happened or informed people that they will be supporting the new CPUs? 

We all know that Asus will support the upcoming Ryzen 5000 series on 470 boards. My point was they did not deny that the mail send out by one of their engineers actually happened, or do you have a link stating otherwise?


----------



## crakej

I thought the new AGESA was already released? 1.0.0.6 AND 1.0.0.8 Combi?

I'm thinking of selling my 3900x and putting my 1700X back in for a few months while the silicone matures for 5900X.

And isn't X570/B550 the end of the road for AM4?


----------



## shamino1978

test bios that fixes s3 resume fclk back to 1800








ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0019.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## nick name

shamino1978 said:


> test bios that fixes s3 resume fclk back to 1800
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0019.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Seems to be working for me now.


----------



## mimosoft

@shamino1978 ist there a "non wifi" bios, too? Thank you for your support.


----------



## nick name

shamino1978 said:


> test bios that fixes s3 resume fclk back to 1800
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0019.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


It seems there is a lack of or weird reporting of EDC with this BIOS version. It's either not reporting (in HWiNFO) or showing 0 (in Ryzen Master). Other than that FCLK has been behaving as expected.


----------



## xeizo

mimosoft said:


> @shamino1978 ist there a "non wifi" bios, too? Thank you for your support.


I want to test this bios as well, I have non-WiFi


----------



## xeizo

crakej said:


> I thought the new AGESA was already released? 1.0.0.6 AND 1.0.0.8 Combi?
> 
> I'm thinking of selling my 3900x and putting my 1700X back in for a few months while the silicone matures for 5900X.
> 
> And isn't X570/B550 the end of the road for AM4?


1.0.0.6 does not have Zen 3 support, it is AGESA V1. The bioses with 1.0.8.0-1.1.0.0 have initial Zen 3 support, they are AGESA V2 and so far only available for B550/X570. AMD has said these early bioses do not support all features of Zen 3. Full support will come with later bioses, but 1.0.8.0 is at least promised to boot a Zen 3.


----------



## Cedric205

shamino1978 said:


> test bios that fixes s3 resume fclk back to 1800
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0019.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Can we get HPET and BCLK Frequency and SB Clock Spread Spectrum controls?


----------



## nick name

shamino1978 said:


> test bios that fixes s3 resume fclk back to 1800
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0019.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


You sneaky, sneaky devil. You gave us the new Fmax feature from The Stilt. Thank you, sir.


----------



## nick name

Cedric205 said:


> Can we get HPET and BCLK Frequency and SB Clock Spread Spectrum controls?


We likely won't get HPET and Spread Spectrum. What do you mean by BLCK Frequency? Because you can change BCLK in the BIOS.


----------



## nick name

For folks unfamiliar with the new PBO Fmax Enhancer by The Stilt:









ASUS ROG X570 Crosshair VIII Overclocking &amp...


Hello, Just for information / update, for me BIOS 2206 don't have the reboot / shutdown problem. I had this problem since 2010, 2103 and 2204. My performance are the same as 1302 BIOS. Now i have even a better stability with my ram at 3733 Mhz, with lower SOC voltage (1.1 in 1302 to 1.05 in 2206).




www.overclock.net


----------



## crakej

xeizo said:


> 1.0.0.6 does not have Zen 3 support, it is AGESA V1. The bioses with 1.0.8.0-1.1.0.0 have initial Zen 3 support, they are AGESA V2 and so far only available for B550/X570. AMD has said these early bioses do not support all features of Zen 3. Full support will come with later bioses, but 1.0.8.0 is at least promised to boot a Zen 3.


Thanks for clarifying that - I always thought the Combo bios were the ones transitioning to new CPUs...

I wonder if AMD will do AM4+ next or will they go straight to a new form factor? What do you think?


----------



## crakej

shamino1978 said:


> test bios that fixes s3 resume fclk back to 1800
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0019.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Thanks again Shamino for supporting us! Will there be non-wifi ver or does it need more testing?


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> For folks unfamiliar with the new PBO Fmax Enhancer by The Stilt:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ASUS ROG X570 Crosshair VIII Overclocking &amp...
> 
> 
> Hello, Just for information / update, for me BIOS 2206 don't have the reboot / shutdown problem. I had this problem since 2010, 2103 and 2204. My performance are the same as 1302 BIOS. Now i have even a better stability with my ram at 3733 Mhz, with lower SOC voltage (1.1 in 1302 to 1.05 in 2206).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


Thanks for sharing this again - got it bookmarked now for when us non-wifi people get our update!


----------



## DDSZ

crakej said:


> Thanks again Shamino for supporting us! Will there be non-wifi ver or does it need more testing?


It is there, simply by removing "-WIFI" from the dropbox url 

UPD: fake


----------



## mimosoft

Removing "-wifi" doesn't work for me.


----------



## DDSZ

mimosoft said:


> Removing "wifi" doesnt work for me.


Oh, that's just me being stupid, yeah 
For a second I thought that I broke the system and got the right link 
Hope it will be released with the non-beta WIFI version in couple of weeks


----------



## crakej

DDSZ said:


> Oh, that's just me being stupid, yeah
> For a second I thought that I broke the system and got the right link
> Hope it will be released with the non-beta WIFI version in couple of weeks


I did the same - thought yay! Then figured it out...... Duh...


----------



## Ryoz

shamino1978 said:


> test bios that fixes s3 resume fclk back to 1800
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0019.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


No fix for c6h?


----------



## oile

Ryoz said:


> No fix for c6h?


We are long forgotten


----------



## toxick

When I shut down the computer the LED's on the motherboard turn on.
I changed the settings on BIOS section RGB LED lighting:
-I sett OFF When system is in working state.
-I sett OFF When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states but it keeps resetting after the second turn off.
I tried all bios versions and nothing works. How can I fix this issue?


----------



## Dude970

__





We'll be back.






rog.asus.com


----------



## WinterActual

toxick said:


> When I shut down the computer the LED's on the motherboard turn on.
> I changed the settings on BIOS section RGB LED lighting:
> -I sett OFF When system is in working state.
> -I sett OFF When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states but it keeps resetting after the second turn off.
> I tried all bios versions and nothing works. How can I fix this issue?


You must turn them off in AURA also.


----------



## VnnAmed

Hi, I have a recurring issue when during stress testing my pc crashes and motherboard shows error 8. Is that the memory controller on the cpu crashing from heat?


----------



## nick name

VnnAmed said:


> Hi, I have a recurring issue when during stress testing my pc crashes and motherboard shows error 8. Is that the memory controller on the cpu crashing from heat?


I see that when there is insufficient voltage.


----------



## VnnAmed

nick name said:


> I see that when there is insufficient voltage.


Cpu or soc? or both?


----------



## nick name

VnnAmed said:


> Cpu or soc? or both?


I can't say I've experienced a crash from insufficient SOC voltage. CPU and DRAM voltages are the only ones I've seen crashes on with CPU causing the error 8.


----------



## lordzed83

@1usmus wassup man played around with yer new toy for fun combined with new 0019 beta bios. Not bad toy mate. Got few sugestions of things You could ADD if ya like.
What I noticed with high overclock on memory that after CTR ends up finding stable cores CB20 run after is not stable. I Know I'm pushing this platform to the limit but tahts why we are here are we not ?? I cant select AVX HIGH grayed out not a clue why ?? Could You add option of Running cb20 at every Stage as a stability/score?? Also option of Locking Ref Voltage so lets say I want to run cpu at 1344mv and let CTR find what is maximum stable OC at that voltage (usefull under water i pump over 200w in to this cpu with manual oc and mega heavy AVX load on my 24/7 clock settings 7700 score give or take)
Also in Benchmark Cant see option of running Benchmark how do I run Benchmark and Send ONLY without running CTR for 30 minutes??
I know limits of this cpu inside out by now so dont look at cycle time since iw been playing with CTR 8 hours now great toy 
Thanks for great toy YURI


----------



## lordzed83

@1usmus forgot screenshot hahahah









@crakej this 0019 bios not bad


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> @1usmus forgot screenshot hahahah
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2462666
> 
> 
> 
> @crakej this 0019 bios not bad


Wow - impressive results! Sadly I don't have the WiFi CH7 - you can't flash that ver to the non-WiFi version any more 

Very much looking fwd to being able to play though my chip is not a great one for OCing. When I used 1usmus' new app I couldn't get my cores anywhere near to the speed yours are going! I got 4.3 and 4.1 for my CCDs though I need to play around a bit more. Currently my best CPU performance is using PE3 and the EDB 'bug'.


----------



## crakej

New chipset (and display) drivers available from AMD



https://www.amd.com/en/support/chipsets/amd-socket-am4/x470


----------



## Synoxia

Finally a bios that is not trash? Scaler x4, pbo fmax enabled, 75 mhz override 3600 c16 mem. Later i've increased PPT to 135 and TDC to 115 and multicore is 5070 now. I've also got rid of the x4 scaler for now since it didn't seem to increase performance (should probably test into a game or something rather than cinebench)


----------



## xeizo

@shamino1978 , would love to have this Fmax bios for the C7H non wifi too


----------



## lordzed83

@crakej took some playing around stabylising ect got 3800 blck and /ccx oc working at same time had to dial back cpu a bit to get 3800.on 776x scores but RENDERING stable not just cb20 stable 
Assume ya seen leaked geekbench 5 score of 5900x
Thats mine atm as I was thinking dont think Zen3 will be worth money for upgrade and ill wait for zen4 with ddr5


https://bpccdn.fra1.digitaloceanspaces.com/original/3X/6/d/6d36b645d611476b31952feb9cd2bd30614bf40c.png


----------



## xeizo

lordzed83 said:


> @crakej took some playing around stabylising ect got 3800 blck and /ccx oc working at same time had to dial back cpu a bit to get 3800.on 776x scores but RENDERING stable not just cb20 stable
> Assume ya seen leaked geekbench 5 score of 5900x
> Thats mine atm as I was thinking dont think Zen3 will be worth money for upgrade and ill wait for zen4 with ddr5
> 
> 
> https://bpccdn.fra1.digitaloceanspaces.com/original/3X/6/d/6d36b645d611476b31952feb9cd2bd30614bf40c.png


Zen 3 will certainly not be worth it for anything multicore intensive, Zen 2 is already very good at that. The big sale point of Zen 3 is GAMING, single core is much improved as is latency and even memory OC. All things that benefits games, but does nothing much for traditional productivity apps.


----------



## lordzed83

xeizo said:


> Zen 3 will certainly not be worth it for anything multicore intensive, Zen 2 is already very good at that. The big sale point of Zen 3 is GAMING, single core is much improved as is latency and even memory OC. All things that benefits games, but does nothing much for traditional productivity apps.


I dobnt think Zen3 will be any different at 4k gaming tahn Zen2. By looking at leaked zen3 benchmarks from today and yeaterday I think it should be called ZEN2+ not Zen3. Cause Zen3 is what I was hoping Zen2 will be 1x8 not 2x4 configuration was my biggest disapoitment of zen 2 cause of inner ccx latency due to design. Still not sure why they went with that for Zen2 chiplet on zen 3 are same size more or less so i assume it was Choice. And all of us here pushing zen to max know stability drawbacks this solution has.

if ya missed.


https://bpccdn.fra1.digitaloceanspaces.com/original/3X/3/e/3ea24a1781364d80aa19bf869bd79a523db844c0.png


----------



## xeizo

lordzed83 said:


> I dobnt think Zen3 will be any different at 4k gaming tahn Zen2. By looking at leaked zen3 benchmarks from today and yeaterday I think it should be called ZEN2+ not Zen3. Cause Zen3 is what I was hoping Zen2 will be 1x8 not 2x4 configuration was my biggest disapoitment of zen 2 cause of inner ccx latency due to design. Still not sure why they went with that for Zen2 chiplet on zen 3 are same size more or less so i assume it was Choice. And all of us here pushing zen to max know stability drawbacks this solution has.
> 
> if ya missed.
> 
> 
> https://bpccdn.fra1.digitaloceanspaces.com/original/3X/3/e/3ea24a1781364d80aa19bf869bd79a523db844c0.png


One, Geekbench 4 sucks, they should have used Geekbench 5 instead which shows much closer to real performance differences.
Two, 4.51GHz all core is extreme high for a 3900X, requires two Platinum CCD:s which are almost unobtainable.
Three, despite the extreme OC on the 3900X it's still much slower in single core.
Four, as I said, multi core is nothing to write home about. It's gaming performance. 4k will only fare even if the GPU is the bottleneck, if the CPU is bottleneck 5900X WILL be faster in 4k too. Graphics cards are getting better so the bottleneck will start moving towards the CPU soon.

With that said, of course the next platform with DDR5 will be a bigger jump. It's not like a 3900X will be unusable after November 5.


----------



## lordzed83

xeizo said:


> One, Geekbench 4 sucks, they should have used Geekbench 5 instead which shows much closer to real performance differences.
> Two, 4.51GHz all core is extreme high for a 3900X, requires two Platinum CCD:s which are almost unobtainable.
> Three, despite the extreme OC on the 3900X it's still much slower in single core.
> Four, as I said, multi core is nothing to write home about. It's gaming performance. 4k will only fare even if the GPU is the bottleneck, if the CPU is bottleneck 5900X WILL be faster in 4k too. Graphics cards are getting better so the bottleneck will start moving towards the CPU soon.
> 
> With that said, of course the next platform with DDR5 will be a bigger jump. It's not like a 3900X will be unusable after November 5.


OWO only posted cause no 5900x benchmark in GB5 so cant compare


System manufacturer System Product Name vs System manufacturer System Product Name - Geekbench Browser


TWO you are looking at extreme Maybe check MY DAILY SCORES 5595/541110





System manufacturer System Product Name - Geekbench Browser


Benchmark results for a System manufacturer System Product Name with an AMD Ryzen 9 3900X processor.



browser.geekbench.com




Tree SINGLE CORE SCORES are ****ing useless in every benchmark due to Intel and AMD using basically HAX to get good numbers. You ever seen those Boost numbers in workload or games answer is NO. Need to wait for proper tests not cheated sintetics
Four Multicore is what is important for Video rendering and performance hit while Gaming when You are heavy multitasker like myself. Ever tried rendering while gaming ?? Yes I do that sometimes.

Generally totally not impressed with scores on few benchmarks I'w seen around internet. Think IT's more of an AMD hype Waiting for 4k Gaming scores.


----------



## nick name

lordzed83 said:


> OWO only posted cause no 5900x benchmark in GB5 so cant compare
> 
> 
> System manufacturer System Product Name vs System manufacturer System Product Name - Geekbench Browser
> 
> 
> TWO you are looking at extreme Maybe check MY DAILY SCORES 5595/541110
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> System manufacturer System Product Name - Geekbench Browser
> 
> 
> Benchmark results for a System manufacturer System Product Name with an AMD Ryzen 9 3900X processor.
> 
> 
> 
> browser.geekbench.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tree SINGLE CORE SCORES are ****ing useless in every benchmark due to Intel and AMD using basically HAX to get good numbers. You ever seen those Boost numbers in workload or games answer is NO. Need to wait for proper tests not cheated sintetics
> Four Multicore is what is important for Video rendering and performance hit while Gaming when You are heavy multitasker like myself. Ever tried rendering while gaming ?? Yes I do that sometimes.
> 
> Generally totally not impressed with scores on few benchmarks I'w seen around internet. Think IT's more of an AMD hype Waiting for 4k Gaming scores.


What are you going on about? Why are you trying to trash talk these benchmarks? And are you trying to downplay the performance of the new 5000 CPUs? Why? 

If you're happy with what you have now -- you don't need to say anything about what's new.


----------



## xeizo

I have a hard time deciding if I should go with 5800X + a RX6***-card, or a 5950X and buy a new graphics card later. 2070 Super is really enough for my needs, so I'll probably go with the 5950X only because of better binning of the dies.


----------



## lordzed83

nick name said:


> What are you going on about? Why are you trying to trash talk these benchmarks? And are you trying to downplay the performance of the new 5000 CPUs? Why?
> 
> If you're happy with what you have now -- you don't need to say anything about what's new.


Why not ? So far I see it as disappoitment instead of product everyone hyped to be ground breaking. Thats first Zen i wont buy by looks of it and had previous ones day 1.


----------



## lordzed83

@crakej hope this bios lands for You to Try out spend some more time tweeking had 1000% Hci pass overnight forgot to grab screenshot bit more tweeking just to double check.
So far iw invested aeound 20 hours in tweeking and 2 whole nights on stability testing on 0019 bios. Ye thiz iz good


----------



## Keith Myers

Since I don't game, the synthetic benchmarks are much closer to my real workload than any gaming benchmarks.


----------



## lordzed83

xeizo said:


> I have a hard time deciding if I should go with 5800X + a RX6***-card, or a 5950X and buy a new graphics card later. 2070 Super is really enough for my needs, so I'll probably go with the 5950X only because of better binning of the dies.


Id go for 5950 that cause its full 8 cores/ccx and will be best for GAMING and WORKLOAD and 9500 will be good in both but 5800x will be better in gaming and 5950x better in workloads and gaming.
If i not blown up 2k on my 350z upgrades cause had nothign to spend money on id grab 5950x anyway just to see how far i can push that.
I'm waiting for ampNOThere to actually get delivereed 14 in queue and got it at FE price. Then just Hard mod watercool it should last 2 years 
Would maybe gotten 6900xtx but dont think it will be as good as 3080 especially I use CUDA software for video processing. Would have went 3090 if that had drivers like titan its well useless without them lol


----------



## nick name

lordzed83 said:


> Why not ? So far I see it as disappoitment instead of product everyone hyped to be ground breaking. Thats first Zen i wont buy by looks of it and had previous ones day 1.


If you say so.


----------



## Elrick

lordzed83 said:


> Why not ? So far I see it as disappoitment instead of product everyone hyped to be ground breaking.


Agreed. All the hype is again overblown since of course it's a new model worth promoting here. It's Industry standard to always do this every time so as to move the new stock when it arrives into retailers.



lordzed83 said:


> Thats first Zen i wont buy by looks of it and had previous ones day 1.


Of course all the new/future bios's (from all the mainboard makers) that will be released shall indeed cripple/hamper all the previous cpu models, so do expect to eventually upgrade to the 5000x series whether you want to or not.

Not saying I'll never go with the 5000x series but it's the current game plan that I have been playing for some time now, with all of these new Zen Model cpus.


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> @crakej hope this bios lands for You to Try out spend some more time tweeking had 1000% Hci pass overnight forgot to grab screenshot bit more tweeking just to double check.
> So far iw invested aeound 20 hours in tweeking and 2 whole nights on stability testing on 0019 bios. Ye thiz iz good
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2462903


I hope so too! Will be very interested to see what my chip can do with fmax.

Interesting seeing the perf of 5900x - my 3900x is from early silicon and not an amazing OCer, so may sell for a 5900x, or keep 3900x/CH7 and sell my 1700x. Then I could upgrade to an RX6000 until we get the new platform..... We can't drop our 3900/5900x into AM5 (or whatever next platform will be called) so if you like keeping up to date with hardware, you'd have to buy new cpu, mem and motherboard next year.


----------



## lordzed83

@crakej Just wanted bios with good memory and /ccx oc option and looks like this is the one.


----------



## lordzed83

Mate completing new build for Zen3 got the block i told him to get today





Thats how they actually look not just photos


----------



## Keith Myers

lordzed83 said:


> Mate completing new build for Zen3 got the block i told him to get today
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thats how they actually look not just photos


New competitor to the Optimus blocks. At least for Ryzen. No sign of a Threadripper block so far.


----------



## Cncrcmoto

shamino1978 said:


> test bios that fixes s3 resume fclk back to 1800
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0019.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Thank you for sharing! This was the first BIOS I've flashed that wasn't directly from the ASUS site. Fmax feature works great (nice little improvement to PBO) and the per CCX overclocking options are awesome too!

No issues.


----------



## xeizo

Cncrcmoto said:


> Thank you for sharing! This was the first BIOS I've flashed that wasn't directly from the ASUS site. Fmax feature works great (nice little improvement to PBO) and the per CCX overclocking options are awesome too!
> 
> No issues.


Yes, looks great, but the more we want it for C7H non-WiFi. Those bioses can't be that different, should be an easy task to compile a non-WiFi version, we had it with the earlier beta bioses.


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> @crakej Just wanted bios with good memory and /ccx oc option and looks like this is the one.


Yes - that's all I want too!


----------



## T[]RK

nick name said:


> -- you don't need to say anything about what's new.


It’s actually called “personal opinion”. You may like it, you may don’t. It’s up to you.



lordzed83 said:


> I see it as disappoitment instead of product everyone hyped to be ground breaking.


Well, i don’t think it’s disappointment, but also don’t ground breaking. I think that AMD actually can make it earlier (this should be Ryzen 3000, not Ryzen 5000). But look’s like it was their big plan. If just release Ryzen 5000 instead of Ryzen 1000... where to go next year? With Ryzen 1000 release first you got whole road map... I would like to see real test at least. I know that some YouTube channels already got CPUs and do testings. We will see everything (or at least most of it) at 5th november.



xeizo said:


> Those bioses can't be that different, should be an easy task to compile a non-WiFi version,


I guess Shamino prefere testing on Wi-Fi boards to catch problems with Wi-Fi module and it’s interference (but it’s just a guess). Non Wi-Fi version probably will be final (on ASUS site?).


----------



## crakej

T[]RK said:


> I guess Shamino prefere testing on Wi-Fi boards to catch problems with Wi-Fi module and it’s interference (but it’s just a guess). Non Wi-Fi version probably will be final (on ASUS site?).


I might be wrong, but when the CH6 came out, bios updates went to non-wifi boards 1st. Then the CH7 came and they decided toi give wifi users the updates first.

Also, we used to be able to use Afuefix64 to flash a wifi bios to the non-wifi, but they disabled use of Afuefix64 to update the newer, larger bios packages, and also locked it so wifi bios is identified as wrong bios to flash.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I might be wrong, but when the CH6 came out, bios updates went to non-wifi boards 1st. Then the CH7 came and they decided toi give wifi users the updates first.
> 
> Also, we used to be able to use Afuefix64 to flash a wifi bios to the non-wifi, but they disabled use of Afuefix64 to update the newer, larger bios packages, and also locked it so wifi bios is identified as wrong bios to flash.


This is how I understood it also.


----------



## lordzed83

@Keith Myers once he ends up building new rig i post some temps on this block and Zen3 hes first WC build hehe


----------



## lordzed83

@crakej difference is you can flash non wifi bios on wifi board been there dine that


----------



## Keith Myers

lordzed83 said:


> @Keith Myers once he ends up building new rig i post some temps on this block and Zen3 hes first WC build hehe


It will be a while before I build a Zen 3 rig I think. Will wait till the X470 bios' get their required updates.


----------



## toxick

Hello,
Something seems to be missing from the red marked area. Can someone figure out what exactly it is?


----------



## oreonutz

Cyber Punk was just pushed back to December 10th. F-M-L.


----------



## oreonutz

toxick said:


> Hello,
> Something seems to be missing from the red marked area. Can someone figure out what exactly it is?
> View attachment 2463598
> View attachment 2463597


Why Do you think something is missing from there? Is the board not performing as it should? Just giving it a once over it looks as it is supposed to, its common for there to be variance in the positioning of components on the board, it just looks like a component got shifted slightly to the left. I could be wrong, hard to know without both testing the board and getting out a multimeter, but unless you are experiencing an issue, I wouldn't think there is something wrong there.


----------



## noname00

toxick said:


> Hello,
> Something seems to be missing from the red marked area. Can someone figure out what exactly it is?


It look like there's something there, all I was able to find are these two images:


https://greentechreviews.ru/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/8-12.jpg




https://www.planet3dnow.de/cms/wp-content/gallery/asus-crosshair-vii-hero/l02.jpg



I don't own this motherboard, but hopefully there's someone that can help you with more details.


----------



## lordzed83

Keith Myers said:


> It will be a while before I build a Zen 3 rig I think. Will wait till the X470 bios' get their required updates.


After the leaks so far I dont think its worth swapping from Zen2 anyway we see next week. I'd rather wait for DDR5 and new socket also.


----------



## crakej

toxick said:


> Hello,
> Something seems to be missing from the red marked area. Can someone figure out what exactly it is?
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2463598
> 
> View attachment 2463597


It looks like it might be a ceramic fuse.... can't be sure though...


----------



## lordzed83

OK Guys what ya think about Big navi. I'm still getting 3080 if 6800xt was 600 id bite (got 3080at 700 coming this max next week). 6900xt shame its not 800 as we know AMD could have drop it at 800 and totally wipe floor with NV but shown how crap 3090 is and everyone knew that. 6800 Hmm tough on this one not a 4k card but 1440p is great and so id 3070. Would need to see actual numbers if i was 1440p person to decide if i want 6800 or 3070


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> OK Guys what ya think about Big navi. I'm still getting 3080 if 6800xt was 600 id bite (got 3080at 700 coming this max next week). 6900xt shame its not 800 as we know AMD could have drop it at 800 and totally wipe floor with NV but shown how crap 3090 is and everyone knew that. 6800 Hmm tough on this one not a 4k card but 1440p is great and so id 3070. Would need to see actual numbers if i was 1440p person to decide if i want 6800 or 3070


Do we know the prices yet? I think AMD shouldn't over price the 6800/6800XT which are the ones I'd be considering. I do wonder why AMD have gone back to 256bit mem bus though - my old Sapphire R9 280x Toxic had 384 bit bus.... and are they relying on PCIE 3 or even 4 to get the performance we're seeing so far......?


----------



## xeizo

crakej said:


> Do we know the prices yet? I think AMD shouldn't over price the 6800/6800XT which are the ones I'd be considering. I do wonder why AMD have gone back to 256bit mem bus though - my old Sapphire R9 280x Toxic had 384 bit bus.... and are they relying on PCIE 3 or even 4 to get the performance we're seeing so far......?


They have Infinity cache which the say is better than a 384-bit bus, the new shared memory only works with Zen 3(and a 500-board) and surely relies on PCIE4.0. 6800 is 579$, 6800XT is 649$ and 6900XT is 999$.
All cards have 16GB which is great, MS Flight Sim will love it.


----------



## crakej

xeizo said:


> They have Infinity cache which the say is better than a 384-bit bus, the new shared memory only works with Zen 3(and a 500-board) and surely relies on PCIE4.0. 6800 is 579$, 6800XT is 649$ and 6900XT is 999$.
> All cards have 16GB which is great, MS Flight Sim will love it.


Wow - those are big prices for AMD! I'm not sure I can justify that much money as I don't game a huge amount.

Shared mem only works with Zen 3? That's really interesting -maybe they're using the fabric to access it instead of PCIE? It's my understanding that the lanes from the cpu can operate as either............ And only with 500 series boards? That's harsh as well. What's the point in buying a card that doesn't work to it's full potential on your board?

That, and those prices make me re-consider NVidia... I'm not buying a new board just to make my GPU work properly. I wonder if this is another one of their artificial limitations?

Edit: been reading up about specs here *AMD Big Navi release date, price and specs: everything we know about RDNA 2*
I'm sure it won't be long before people realize that AMD are asking us not only to buy a new GPU, but to buy a new CPU AND MOTHERBOARD to support it, so add £700 to that price - or a bit less if you have a 500 motherboard already.

I'm interested to know more about the electronics and how this fast mem access works, but as above, I suspect it's something to do with the Fabric, in which case it's possible Zen 2 could do this as well, as I know the PCIE lanes work the same on Zen 2 (i.e. as pcie lanes or Fabric).

Sorry, but until I see something more positive, I'm rather cynical about this launch. It really does look (at this point) that these performance figures are ONLY attainable with Zen 3 AND a 500 series motherboard. I'm missing out on 500 ass the socket is going to change, so I'm not going to invest in new motherboard and CPU now.

AMD - you might be shooting yourself in the foot.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Wow - those are big prices for AMD! I'm not sure I can justify that much money as I don't game a huge amount.
> 
> Shared mem only works with Zen 3? That's really interesting -maybe they're using the fabric to access it instead of PCIE? It's my understanding that the lanes from the cpu can operate as either............ And only with 500 series boards? That's harsh as well. What's the point in buying a card that doesn't work to it's full potential on your board?
> 
> That, and those prices make me re-consider NVidia... I'm not buying a new board just to make my GPU work properly. I wonder if this is another one of their artificial limitations?
> 
> Edit: been reading up about specs here *AMD Big Navi release date, price and specs: everything we know about RDNA 2*
> I'm sure it won't be long before people realize that AMD are asking us not only to buy a new GPU, but to buy a new CPU AND MOTHERBOARD to support it, so add £700 to that price - or a bit less if you have a 500 motherboard already.
> 
> I'm interested to know more about the electronics and how this fast mem access works, but as above, I suspect it's something to do with the Fabric, in which case it's possible Zen 2 could do this as well, as I know the PCIE lanes work the same on Zen 2 (i.e. as pcie lanes or Fabric).
> 
> Sorry, but until I see something more positive, I'm rather cynical about this launch. It really does look (at this point) that these performance figures are ONLY attainable with Zen 3 AND a 500 series motherboard. I'm missing out on 500 ass the socket is going to change, so I'm not going to invest in new motherboard and CPU now.
> 
> AMD - you might be shooting yourself in the foot.


Yup to get full power ya need PCIE4.0 so we on x470.... are like need new mb soz lads.... numbers snown ware on 5900x using that tech at lest for 6900xt. You can take off 5% from AMD nuberz.



https://i.ibb.co/QK6CsM7/New-Way2.jpg


----------



## oreonutz

Yeah, Already jumped to x570 back when AMD First announced they wouldn't support Zen3 on x470, I panic'd and bought a Crosshair VIII Hero then, I just still haven't installed it, lol. But I am keeping my FTW3 3080 as well. 1) I worked WAY TO FREAKING HARD to get it. 2) As much as I loved this Announcement today, and am rooting Radeon on to succeed, I just have to wait to see how everyone elses experience is with the Drivers this go around. I got burnt with the last launch by recommending them to clients, and ended up having headache after bloody headache and had to RMA almost a dozen cards. Not making that mistake this go around, will just wait and see how it goes with everyone else, and if it turns out to be solid 2 months after launch, I will start recommending them again, and might consider one for myself.


----------



## goondam

hey guys having difficulty overclocking ram on this mobo

specs below
Ryzen 5 2600
asus crosshair x470 hero(latest bios)
B-die gksill 3600 cl16 32gb kit- (F4-3600C16D-32GTZR)

tried the timing from the calculator, safe or fast doesn't matter it either doesn't boot/post and bios resets its back to jedec speeds of 2133..

yes I also used soc and dram voltages


----------



## xeizo

goondam said:


> hey guys having difficulty overclocking ram on this mobo
> 
> specs below
> Ryzen 5 2600
> asus crosshair x470 hero(latest bios)
> B-die gksill 3600 cl16 32gb kit- (F4-3600C16D-32GTZR)
> 
> tried the timing from the calculator, safe or fast doesn't matter it either doesn't boot/post and bios resets its back to jedec speeds of 2133..
> 
> yes I also used soc and dram voltages


I have the same mobo and memory, with 2700X I only reached 3433MHz on the memory. With 3900X I've been stable at 3800MHz since forever, the IMC in the CPU plays a large role. With that said, you should be able to reach at least 3433MHz like I did.


----------



## goondam

xeizo said:


> I have the same mobo and memory, with 2700X I only reached 3433MHz on the memory. With 3900X I've been stable at 3800MHz since forever, the IMC in the CPU plays a large role. With that said, you should be able to reach at least 3433MHz like I did.


i understand that but i can't even get 3200 stable...
i could with my old ram kit
so either i am not using one of those high end oc settings or something else

ps: does 2600 and 2700 have the same mem controller??


----------



## crakej

goondam said:


> i understand that but i can't even get 3200 stable...
> i could with my old ram kit
> so either i am not using one of those high end oc settings or something else
> 
> ps: does 2600 and 2700 have the same mem controller??


Same controller - yes. Have you tried enabling GearDown mode?


----------



## xeizo

goondam said:


> i understand that but i can't even get 3200 stable...
> i could with my old ram kit
> so either i am not using one of those high end oc settings or something else
> 
> ps: does 2600 and 2700 have the same mem controller??


Yes, 2600 and 2700X have the same IMC, but 2700X is a higher binned SKU. Better silicon quality, but not that much better I imagine.

You should play with all the settings, one trick is to wire the case reset button to bios reset so you can easily start over with a freshly reset bios. Also, always save the last good settings on a USB stick so you don't have to retype all settings all over. That way you can change just one setting at a time and see what happens.

Myself I had no big luck with the calculator, I looked at what settings other people used instead. This thread is spanking full of settings, just go back in the thread.

edit. Yes, Ryzen likes Gear Down Mode very much and the performance penalty is small, it's like running 1.5T.

edit 2. B-Die gets very hot, don't run too high VDIMM unless the memory sticks are well cooled. I run 3800MHz with just 1.36V.


----------



## nick name

goondam said:


> hey guys having difficulty overclocking ram on this mobo
> 
> specs below
> Ryzen 5 2600
> asus crosshair x470 hero(latest bios)
> B-die gksill 3600 cl16 32gb kit- (F4-3600C16D-32GTZR)
> 
> tried the timing from the calculator, safe or fast doesn't matter it either doesn't boot/post and bios resets its back to jedec speeds of 2133..
> 
> yes I also used soc and dram voltages


Did you install into the correct RAM slots (A2 B2)?


----------



## goondam

ok i used some of the more oc options in the board, so now currently it has booted into windows successfully with oc setting from the dram calculator.

thanks to all who replied and offered their insight

now to test for stability wish me luck 😅

whats the overall a good benchmark to test for ram stability?


----------



## xeizo

goondam said:


> ok i used some of the more oc options in the board, so now currently it has booted into windows successfully with oc setting from the dram calculator.
> 
> thanks to all who replied and offered their insight
> 
> now to test for stability wish me luck 😅
> 
> whats the overall a good benchmark to test for ram stability?


The built in benchmark in the calculator is good, if the CPU can run it for a longer time pretty much everything else will be stable.

The ultimate test is real games, it can be benchmark stable but crash in games.


----------



## netman

a lot of Gigabyte B450 and X470 Boards got Bios with Agesa ComboAm4v2 PI 1.1.0.0 recently so one can use Zen3 with this boards, so i wonder how long the other manufacturers would need to get their bioses out for B450/X470.... 

but how i get to know asus bios support over the last 3 Years i would not bet we would see a zen3 enabled bios before Januar 2021


----------



## mimosoft

It's Asus so I would guess Feb. 2021


----------



## netman

i am afraid you could be right


----------



## nick name

I still don't see why folks are saying ASUS is slow with BIOS releases. The AGESA in this current BIOS was put out by ASUS before any other board manufacturers released theirs.


----------



## speedgoat

nick name said:


> I still don't see why folks are saying ASUS is slow with BIOS releases. The AGESA in this current BIOS was put out by ASUS before any other board manufacturers released theirs.


the 1.0.0.0.4 patch B was about a month and a half later than anyone else, and its not exactly true that ASUS was faster that anyone else on 1.0.0.6, MSI was but if i remember well for about a week or so


----------



## nick name

speedgoat said:


> the 1.0.0.0.4 patch B was about a month and a half later than anyone else, and its not exactly true that ASUS was faster that anyone else on 1.0.0.6, MSI was but if i remember well for about a week or so


It may have been in a beta BIOS here, but I'm pretty certain we had 1.0.0.6 before anyone else.


----------



## xeizo

netman said:


> a lot of Gigabyte B450 and X470 Boards got Bios with Agesa ComboAm4v2 PI 1.1.0.0 recently so one can use Zen3 with this boards, so i wonder how long the other manufacturers would need to get their bioses out for B450/X470....
> 
> but how i get to know asus bios support over the last 3 Years i would not bet we would see a zen3 enabled bios before Januar 2021


Cool, I've got Agesa ComboAm4v2 PI 1.1.0.0 for my Aorus M  I downloaded it.

Yes, Asus was against X470/B450, they'll surely be slow. However they released B450-II which will get Zen 3 support. My Asus B550-F got Agesa ComboAm4v2 PI 1.1.0.0 v2 two days ago, somewhat buggy but it's a first release and it has full Zen 3 support. I have no high hopes for my C7H this year, good thing it is extreme stable with my 3900X.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> It may have been in a beta BIOS here, but I'm pretty certain we had 1.0.0.6 before anyone else.


Yes, Asus was first on that one, even faster than MSI beta bios.


----------



## netman

yes with the unimportant Bios Updates Asus could sometimes be fast, but with the really important ones like for Example 1.0.0.4 B they were slow as fu** (nearly one month after all the other Boards) i am waiting eagerly to see how this develops with the new agesa for Zen3...

i still hope the best (to get a bios till 5th of November) but i expect the worst Janurary/February 2021 for our beloved ch7


----------



## crakej

I've had such a crappy year this year, 2 deaths, one of them my sisters (25yrs) son took his own life, and now I'm having to move house just before Lockdown 2 happens in the UK on Thurs!

Oh how lovely it would be to have a bios with FMax for us non-wifi boards to play with during said lockdown....

Once I have moved I'm going to service my machine, give it a clean and try tidy up my wiring a bit..

Anyone in the UK want my non-working CH7 for spares - might be repairable, there's one or 2 ceramic components been knocked off by me using unorthodox methods while fiddling (big heavy screwdriver where it shouldn't be). All I want is something to at least cover the post. I could have fixed it years ago but my hands are part numb, so not worth even trying!


----------



## elmor

crakej said:


> I've had such a crappy year this year, 2 deaths, one of them my sisters (25yrs) son took his own life, and now I'm having to move house just before Lockdown 2 happens in the UK on Thurs!
> 
> Oh how lovely it would be to have a bios with FMax for us non-wifi boards to play with during said lockdown....
> 
> Once I have moved I'm going to service my machine, give it a clean and try tidy up my wiring a bit..
> 
> Anyone in the UK want my non-working CH7 for spares - might be repairable, there's one or 2 ceramic components been knocked off by me using unorthodox methods while fiddling (big heavy screwdriver where it shouldn't be). All I want is something to at least cover the post. I could have fixed it years ago but my hands are part numb, so not worth even trying!


I'm so sorry to hear that. All I can do is wish you well from here on and give you my condolences. 

However I could possibly help you with your C7H troubles? Do you have a picture of the damage and the missing components? At least I should be able to tell you what they are and what they need to be replaced with.


----------



## Cedric205

crakej said:


> I've had such a crappy year this year, 2 deaths, one of them my sisters (25yrs) son took his own life, and now I'm having to move house just before Lockdown 2 happens in the UK on Thurs!
> 
> Oh how lovely it would be to have a bios with FMax for us non-wifi boards to play with during said lockdown....
> 
> Once I have moved I'm going to service my machine, give it a clean and try tidy up my wiring a bit..
> 
> Anyone in the UK want my non-working CH7 for spares - might be repairable, there's one or 2 ceramic components been knocked off by me using unorthodox methods while fiddling (big heavy screwdriver where it shouldn't be). All I want is something to at least cover the post. I could have fixed it years ago but my hands are part numb, so not worth even trying!


May God comfort you and your family in these hard times in Jesus name.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> I've had such a crappy year this year, 2 deaths, one of them my sisters (25yrs) son took his own life, and now I'm having to move house just before Lockdown 2 happens in the UK on Thurs!
> 
> Oh how lovely it would be to have a bios with FMax for us non-wifi boards to play with during said lockdown....
> 
> Once I have moved I'm going to service my machine, give it a clean and try tidy up my wiring a bit..
> 
> Anyone in the UK want my non-working CH7 for spares - might be repairable, there's one or 2 ceramic components been knocked off by me using unorthodox methods while fiddling (big heavy screwdriver where it shouldn't be). All I want is something to at least cover the post. I could have fixed it years ago but my hands are part numb, so not worth even trying!


I wish I could say something helpful. Hopefully you find some comfort in knowing there are people here who feel for you.


----------



## netman

@crakej
damn thats hard,difficult to find any words but i hope you found something for yourself to somehow overcome these deep valleys of life, i am with you in my thoughts, wish you all the best...


----------



## neikosr0x

nick name said:


> It may have been in a beta BIOS here, but I'm pretty certain we had 1.0.0.6 before anyone else.


Yea but, this time as an exception to be honest. The whole timeframe since i got its board Asus has been late 90% of the time, with old bugs popping up. I am pretty happy with this board tho.


----------



## neikosr0x

crakej said:


> I've had such a crappy year this year, 2 deaths, one of them my sisters (25yrs) son took his own life, and now I'm having to move house just before Lockdown 2 happens in the UK on Thurs!
> 
> Oh how lovely it would be to have a bios with FMax for us non-wifi boards to play with during said lockdown....
> 
> Once I have moved I'm going to service my machine, give it a clean and try tidy up my wiring a bit..
> 
> Anyone in the UK want my non-working CH7 for spares - might be repairable, there's one or 2 ceramic components been knocked off by me using unorthodox methods while fiddling (big heavy screwdriver where it shouldn't be). All I want is something to at least cover the post. I could have fixed it years ago but my hands are part numb, so not worth even trying!


Oh man! Sorry to hear that. May God comfort you and you and your family.


----------



## crakej

elmor said:


> I'm so sorry to hear that. All I can do is wish you well from here on and give you my condolences.
> 
> However I could possibly help you with your C7H troubles? Do you have a picture of the damage and the missing components? At least I should be able to tell you what they are and what they need to be replaced with.


Thanks Elmor - much appreciated!

I have photos and will post them in the morning, see what you think.


----------



## crakej

Can I just say how nice it was to come home this evening and find these kind words from you all!

It really makes a difference! We all must go through crap times - this helps restore some faith in the human-kind.....especially on the internet!

Thank you!


----------



## crakej

elmor said:


> I'm so sorry to hear that. All I can do is wish you well from here on and give you my condolences.
> 
> However I could possibly help you with your C7H troubles? Do you have a picture of the damage and the missing components? At least I should be able to tell you what they are and what they need to be replaced with.


Couldn't find photos, but I'll take new ones tomorrow, see what you can see!


----------



## WinterActual

netman said:


> i still hope the best (to get a bios till 5th of November) but i expect the worst Janurary/February 2021 for our beloved ch7


 Thats not gonna happen. They said Jan at best (wont happen also).


----------



## jimmyleggs

Hi everyone, new to the boards and read way too much information that is over my head. I have a quick question for anyone willing to answer. My first build, so be gentle . I'm going with a 3600, 16gb, 1TB NVME WD SN550. I have already purchased a Asus ROG Strix B550A board. For some reason which I can't explain I absolutely LOVE the look of this board. I paid the B550-A 180$ CAD and can purchase the ASUS Crosshair VII Hero (non wifi) for 199$ CAD. Would this be a mistake? The only changes I'll be making to my system for the foreseeable future is changing my 1080(non ti) to a 3070 or 6800. That's pretty much it. Does the quality of this board from reviews dated over a year ago still hold true? Build quality, VRMs, Bios features? Would I be investing in a board that is already outdated and End Of Life? Thank you so much in advance.


----------



## Keith Myers

You don't have to wait for an updated BIOS to use Zen 3 on that board. Will be quite a while before C7H has the required BIOS.


----------



## xeizo

As Keith said, C7H is extreme solid but bios support will take some time. Also, if you're going for the 6800 you probably want the SAM feature which is not supported on anything else than 5-series boards.

I have the C7H, running great with a 3900X and a 2070 Super, but I already have another rig with the ROG Strix B550-F because I don't want to wait.


----------



## crakej

elmor said:


> I'm so sorry to hear that. All I can do is wish you well from here on and give you my condolences.
> 
> However I could possibly help you with your C7H troubles? Do you have a picture of the damage and the missing components? At least I should be able to tell you what they are and what they need to be replaced with.


This is the best photo I could get before I have to move - you can see where I had a repair done, but it seems something else in the vicinity is gone.... CPU (white light?) comes on. I thought something else pinged off!


----------



## Asutz

Hello,

Guys whats your recommandation to replace the ch7 ? b550 is fine to me, no need for 570 here.
Dont need Wifi, shouldnt cost too much more than 240$

Stability and nearly same features as ch7 would be ideal.
Sometimes i have weird crackling sounds, idk if its the mobo or , latency and such is good too.best onboard sound without issues, thats my priority #1 thanks in advance


----------



## xeizo

Asutz said:


> Hello,
> 
> Guys whats your recommandation to replace the ch7 ? b550 is fine to me, no need for 570 here.
> Dont need Wifi, shouldnt cost too much more than 240$
> 
> Stability and nearly same features as ch7 would be ideal.
> Sometimes i have weird crackling sounds, idk if its the mobo or , latency and such is good too.best onboard sound without issues, thats my priority #1 thanks in advance


ROG Strix B550-F, it's a C7H on the cheap, I have both


----------



## smokin_mitch

looks like the crosshair viii dark hero has a unique feature with per ccx overclocking and being able to dynamically shift from normal boost mode for single core performance and OC mode for high manual per ccx overclocks for multicore work 




i might not wait for asus to give us a bios update for the C7H and just buy a crosshair 8 dark hero + a 5950x

he also gets 2000mhz fclk with his 5950x running 4000mhz ram


----------



## Keith Myers

Good luck even finding a listing for that board.  I didn't.


----------



## elmor

crakej said:


> This is the best photo I could get before I have to move - you can see where I had a repair done, but it seems something else in the vicinity is gone.... CPU (white light?) comes on. I thought something else pinged off!
> 
> 
> View attachment 2464385


I can't locate anything that really looks out of order. Maybe you can check the voltage here with a DMM? It should be 1.8V with the board powered on.


----------



## goondam

quick question do ch7 wifi bios not work with non-wifi variant??


----------



## WinterActual

Keith Myers said:


> Good luck even finding a listing for that board. I didn't.


As far as I know the Dark Hero is not for sale yet.


----------



## Dr. Vodka

Wrong thread, sorry.


----------



## nick name

Dr. Vodka said:


> Wrong thread, sorry.


It's ok. We're just happy you stopped by.


----------



## Nixtix

Anyone have any issues at post with the RTX 3080 (Strix) ? I get the B2 code with the white LED and 3-beeps, which indicates GPU issue from what I've read. It boots to Windows fine, but I am puzzled why it has an issue recognizing the GPU in the start.


----------



## nick name

Nixtix said:


> Anyone have any issues at post with the RTX 3080 (Strix) ? I get the B2 code with the white LED and 3-beeps, which indicates GPU issue from what I've read. It boots to Windows fine, but I am puzzled why it has an issue recognizing the GPU in the start.


Do you have CSM on or off?


----------



## Nixtix

nick name said:


> Do you have CSM on or off?


I have CSM on.


----------



## nick name

Nixtix said:


> I have CSM on.


Do you need it on for anything in your system?


----------



## Nixtix

nick name said:


> Do you need it on for anything in your system?


I'm not exactly sure, from what I've read you lose some legacy support like PS/2 right? Will I potentially not be able to boot my M.2 ?


----------



## VnnAmed

Nixtix said:


> I'm not exactly sure, from what I've read you lose some legacy support like PS/2 right? Will I potentially not be able to boot my M.2 ?


CSM off here, M.2 boots without issues.


----------



## FlanK3r

any info abut beta BIOS with support of Zen3 for C7H? For Asus B450 are beta BIOSes out ...


----------



## The Sandman

FlanK3r said:


> any info abut beta BIOS with support of Zen3 for C7H? For Asus B450 are beta BIOSes out ...


If you're asking if the B450 Bios' are available answer is yes AMD Ryzen 5000 Zen 3 Desktop CPUs Reportedly Running on A320 & X370 Motherboards, B450 Support Added


----------



## FlanK3r

About B450 BIOSes I know from Friday, but Im interesting for beta on C7H


----------



## VnnAmed

Does anyone here run 4000MHz or more frequency on RAM using BIOS above 2801? If so, which kit?


----------



## lordzed83

@VnnAmed emmm what would be point of that besides performance loose ?? I could run that on my 4133kit but no point.
Finally managed to grab 3080FE. Runs on C7H with 3900x like a dream. Funny enough my preorder from 17 september got shipped 3 hours after FE and both came same minute so my mate is having gigabyte LOL


----------



## Mandarb

Hey guys!
I am currently on the Crosshair VII Hero. I planned on upgrading to a 5900X in January and ordering arount there, but once I heard about the huge backlog with 3 months waiting times I went ahead and put in an order. That CPU is now scheduled to arrive next Monday. ^^
Plus my Vega died and I am planning to get a 6800XT, and now an upgrade to B550/X570 seems appealing additionally because of the lack of BIOS upgrade dates and SAM.

I first thought I'd just go for the X570 Crosshair VIII Hero, then I found out that it's $400+ in Europe, a huge price hike compared to the C7H and the US. Meanwhile the X570-E have about the same price level in both regions. Then I also found out that ASUS is prioritising the m.2 slots over the PCIe slots on the B550/X570 boards: I need Wifi (flat layout makes LAN impossible) and my Elgato 4K60 Pro II. According to my research the Elgate requires PCIe 2.0 x4 put populating any other PCIe x1 slot aside from the x4 slot will drop the x4 slot to x1 speeds. Which, as I see it, mandates that I chose a board with Wifi (I have an ASUS PCE-AX58BT card, which uses the Intel AX200 chip, same as the better motherboards, so there wouldn't be a change there) as I might not be able to use the Elgato otherwise. Unless I got it wrong and a X570 board is actually possible as PCIe 2.0 4x = PCIe 4.0 1x?
Prices in local currency, converted to US $.

*ASUS B550-E* ($260, CPU VRM 980A): my first choice until I saw ASUS decided to stratify the stack and basically exclusively put USB 2.0 boards on it. Got Wifi.
*ASUS X570-E* ($310, CPU VRM 720A): very nice board, but very expensive compared to the competition, low amount of USB ports. Got Wifi.
*ASUS C8H WIFI* ($430, CPU VRM 840A): even more ridiculously expensive compared to non-European countries
_non-ASUS choices:_
*Gigabyte Aorus B550 Pro* ($175, CPU VRM 600A): no Wifi, but I have the card anyways. No PCIe cap when using more than one slot, but x4 will be disabled if second m.2 slot is used. Which is a point against it in case I ever want a second m.2 drive
*Gigabyte Aorus B550 Master* ($290, CPU VRM 980A): has wifi, no slowdown on the chipset PCIe slots, but using a second or third m.2 drive will drop the main GPU slot from PCIe 4.0 16x to 8x, so no second or third m.2 really possible.
*Gigabyte Aorus X570 Pro* ($255, CPU VRM only 480A but runs very cool and efficiently according to reviews): no Wifi (Wifi version not available anywhere in my country), neither PCIe slots nor m.2 slots suffer bandwidth drops when fully populated (save GPU slot down to 8x if second slot is used, inconsequential)
*Gigabyte Aorus X570 Master* ($340, CPU VRM 600A): got Wifi, can use up to 3x m.2 SSD, losing only 2x SATA ports if third slot used

I'm currently gravitating towards the ASUS X570-E or Aorus X570 Pro/Master. ASUS has kind of put me off with their price policy and product stratification and even though I have exclusively used ASUS Mobos in my last 3 builds I am ready to try something new (MSI is a no-go due to their recent shenanigans. Also HQ burned down), and Gigabyte seems like a good option when stacked up. The unknown with Gigabyte for me are BIOS options and memory compatibility. Do I lose anything when moving away from ASUS? What would you do?


----------



## lordzed83

@Mandarb no ASRock on Yours list thats my pick besides asus
YAY passed 600w off wall  thats cb20 with superposition running at once for test


https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/757702194937069667/776160950633889802/IMG_20201111_190612.jpg


And thats what my 3900x with 3080fe on air scores. Could push more on card but was just quick test normaly im testing extreme.


----------



## crakej

crakej said:


> This is the best photo I could get before I have to move - you can see where I had a repair done, but it seems something else in the vicinity is gone.... CPU (white light?) comes on. I thought something else pinged off!
> 
> 
> View attachment 2464385





elmor said:


> I can't locate anything that really looks out of order. Maybe you can check the voltage here with a DMM? It should be 1.8V with the board powered on.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2464529


Thanks Elmor - I will check this out as soon as I find DMM. I will also try to find the other missing component.

As unbelievable as it is - another friend passed away this weekend..... so not able to concentrate on much just now!

On bright side, my move is finished and my rig set up, I will be playing lots during lock-down!

I'm ok as these things go - have lots of support from mutual friends - and online friends too.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Thanks Elmor - I will check this out as soon as I find DMM. I will also try to find the other missing component.
> 
> As unbelievable as it is - another friend passed away this weekend..... so not able to concentrate on much just now!
> 
> On bright side, my move is finished and my rig set up, I will be playing lots during lock-down!
> 
> I'm ok as these things go - have lots of support from mutual friends - and online friends too.


Man that sucks, know Myself 2 mates LOOGED OUT cause of lockdown and job problems it created... Lockdown whole Music industry bankrupcies ect.








Guitar Center may file for bankruptcy after missing $45 million payment


The venerable music gear retailer has apparently struggled during the pandemic.




consequenceofsound.net




Rave scene always been NR1 thing for me on every aspect and it got killed. One of mates that chercked out lost hes club and home he worked whole life for .

And Now we in UK are in second lockdown to finish off what surved


----------



## shamino1978

for the adventurous, vmr support test bios, pls use with discretion with the notion that its a test bios. known glitch with "user profiles" naming get warped.








ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0023.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## darkage

non wifi version no ?


shamino1978 said:


> for the adventurous, vmr support test bios, pls use with discretion with the notion that its a test bios. known glitch with "user profiles" naming get warped.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0023.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


----------



## FlanK3r

Thank you man, this is what I needed for my C7H


----------



## xeizo

shamino1978 said:


> for the adventurous, vmr support test bios, pls use with discretion with the notion that its a test bios. known glitch with "user profiles" naming get warped.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0023.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Always WiFi-versions only? ***!


----------



## nick name

Can someone clue me in as to what VMR is?


----------



## MacClipper

vmr = Vermeer


----------



## Brko

shamino1978 said:


> for the adventurous, vmr support test bios, pls use with discretion with the notion that its a test bios. known glitch with "user profiles" naming get warped.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0023.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


One more TEST BIOS for C6H X370, please  would gladly test it since can get Zen3 CPU


----------



## nick name

shamino1978 said:


> for the adventurous, vmr support test bios, pls use with discretion with the notion that its a test bios. known glitch with "user profiles" naming get warped.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0023.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Will there be any problem with reverting back to a previous BIOS after flashing this test BIOS?

Edit:
There wasn't -- it just had to be done with Flashback.


----------



## WinterActual

Wondering about this as well. SInce AMD stated multiple times that the update is one way.


----------



## nick name

WinterActual said:


> Wondering about this as well. SInce AMD stated multiple times that the update is one way.


I'm assuming that's for boards with smaller ROM capacities so I'm hoping that isn't the case here.

Edit:
I was able to revert back using Flashback.


----------



## Brko

As long as you have flashback button, l'd say you can revert to older version.


----------



## nick name

Brko said:


> As long as you have flashback button, l'd say you can revert to older version.


Well I flashed it so I'm gonna find out.


----------



## nick name

shamino1978 said:


> for the adventurous, vmr support test bios, pls use with discretion with the notion that its a test bios. known glitch with "user profiles" naming get warped.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0023.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Aida and CPU-Z don't show AGESA info.

First boot couldn't POST with previous RAM and FCLK speed and had to reduce to 1800MHz. Gonna reboot and try again.

I do like that Fmax field in PBO menu is now keyed in and not a drop-down selection.

Edit:
After going into the AMD OC menu and inputting voltage values there I was able to POST at 1900MHz though that could be coincidental. The previous failures to POST, however, make that feel less likely.
Edit 2:
Yeah, it wasn't inputting the voltage values into the AMD OC menu that did it. They system went back to failing to POST with an F9 code. I reverted back to the previous beta BIOS which required Flashback to do.


----------



## oile

shamino1978 said:


> for the adventurous, vmr support test bios, pls use with discretion with the notion that its a test bios. known glitch with "user profiles" naming get warped.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0023.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


I feel more than adventurous..a pioneer! And you can tell that because I bought the Crosshair hero VI back in 2017 trusting blindly AMD and ASUS 
Can you please build an alpha uefi with agesa 1.1.0.0 for us, crosshair VI users?
Please! Thank you so much for your support!


----------



## xeizo

@Shamino, not that you have to be in any hurry, 5950X looks to be on backorder for a loooooong time


----------



## strikez

Does the Wifi bios work on non wifi boards? Or are there other settings that will cause issues


----------



## xeizo

strikez said:


> Does the Wifi bios work on non wifi boards? Or are there other settings that will cause issues


It can't be installed, there is a switch in the bios prohibiting it. Even if technically it would probably work.


----------



## lordzed83

strikez said:


> Does the Wifi bios work on non wifi boards? Or are there other settings that will cause issues


You could try FORCE FLASH i know non wifi bioses work on Wifi motherboard flashed em few times.


----------



## lordzed83

xeizo said:


> It can't be installed, there is a switch in the bios prohibiting it. Even if technically it would probably work.


Incorrect You can force install in dos.


----------



## KryoZen

shamino1978 said:


> for the adventurous, vmr support test bios, pls use with discretion with the notion that its a test bios. known glitch with "user profiles" naming get warped.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-0023.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Great!

Got My Vermer CPU today...but I own the non wifi version 
I do feel adventurous


----------



## KryoZen

lordzed83 said:


> Incorrect You can force install in dos.


By dos you're meaning FreeDOS? or boot from USB using EFI\BOOT(+other efi files)?


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> Man that sucks, know Myself 2 mates LOOGED OUT cause of lockdown and job problems it created... Lockdown whole Music industry bankrupcies ect.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Guitar Center may file for bankruptcy after missing $45 million payment
> 
> 
> The venerable music gear retailer has apparently struggled during the pandemic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> consequenceofsound.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rave scene always been NR1 thing for me on every aspect and it got killed. One of mates that chercked out lost hes club and home he worked whole life for .
> 
> And Now we in UK are in second lockdown to finish off what surved


Yeah - we can't change these things. Sorry to hear you're losing people too. Many of us are.... it's justr been relentless for me this year!

I LOVED the rave scene, and so did my mate Paul when he discovered it. We used to go to Sterns (Interdance) in Worthing, then up to London.

Sorry for going off subject everyone!

While I'm here - I've had problems with my usb ports working, then not working. I've been in no mood l;ately for tracking down p[roblems - wondered if anyone else had had any similar problems? It was the eXtensible Host Controller that failed.....then worked.....then didn't....


----------



## crakej

KryoZen said:


> By dos you're meaning FreeDOS? or boot from USB using EFI\BOOT(+other efi files)?


Afuefix64.exe in EFI doesn't work. It gives an error something like 'platform id does not match'

From what I could work out, it's something in the bios preventing the use of Afuefix64.exe to write to our type of bios (the bigger ones). You can't even write a bios from the correct platform i.d. - it just doesn't do it right - I think it only does the 1st 16GB or something.

This is why bioses for Zen 2 and greater can ONLY be flashed using flashback. Doing it from the bios, EFI or (I wouldn't anyway) from Windows -doesn't completely write these newer bioses.

I haven't tried from dos - have a feeling you might get same result - but I'd love for someone to check it out!


----------



## KryoZen

crakej said:


> Afuefix64.exe in EFI doesn't work. It gives an error something like 'platform id does not match'
> 
> From what I could work out, it's something in the bios preventing the use of Afuefix64.exe to write to our type of bios (the bigger ones). You can't even write a bios from the correct platform i.d. - it just doesn't do it right - I think it only does the 1st 16GB or something.
> 
> This is why bioses for Zen 2 and greater can ONLY be flashed using flashback. Doing it from the bios, EFI or (I wouldn't anyway) from Windows -doesn't completely write these newer bioses.


Yes, I have read about people failing to use Afuefix64 on ASUS boards



crakej said:


> I haven't tried from dos - have a feeling you might get same result - but I'd love for someone to check it out!


Is there any program nowadays than can do it from DOS?


----------



## crakej

KryoZen said:


> Is there any program nowadays than can do it from DOS?


I'm not sure - there is a DOS equivalent, but not sure if it will do it either.


----------



## xeizo

crakej said:


> I'm not sure - there is a DOS equivalent, but not sure if it will do it either.


The Rufus program can create a DOS USB boot stick from within the program, if anyone is willing to try, don't know which executable to use for the actual flash not a 64-bit one anyway


----------



## crakej

xeizo said:


> The Rufus program can create a DOS USB boot stick from within the program, if anyone is willing to try, don't know which executable to use for the actual flash not a 64-bit one anyway


I may give it a go over next day or 2 if no one else does. Pretty sure it won't work but it's gotta be worth a try......

I'd be happy with a no wifi version of the last bios with FMax - any chance of that @shamino1978, or can you advise how we might force this bios to write properly on non-wifi boards?


----------



## KryoZen

crakej said:


> I may give it a go over next day or 2 if no one else does. Pretty sure it won't work but it's gotta be worth a try......
> 
> I'd be happy with a no wifi version of the last bios with FMax - any chance of that @shamino1978, or can you advise how we might force this bios to write properly on non-wifi boards?


Looking at the Bios I guess the strings (Motherboard and recovery name) must match with non wifi


----------



## lordzed83

@crakej Ye was talkinga bourt bootable bios version that how i flashex Non WiFi bios to my Wifi motherboard FEW TIMES. so Try using taht You can always flashback 
Well for You produced on C7H so on topic


----------



## KryoZen

xeizo said:


> The Rufus program can create a DOS USB boot stick from within the program, if anyone is willing to try, don't know which executable to use for the actual flash not a 64-bit one anyway


'The Stilt' has made a Ryzen modified flashrom.exe for DOS. It can backup/write BIOS on most boards (32MB chip's is not a problem).
Reading that thread it looks like the MAC adress, System UUID and Motherboard Serial number is also stored in the BIOS for some motherboards(looks like ASUS is doing this).









AGESA FW stack patched bioses for 3rd gen


I decided to put these under a separate thread, since there are already quite many bioses available. File naming: Original bios build (version), M = modified, FI (4649 ASCII, i.e. SMU 46.49). Besides the actual SMU FW, these files also contain up to date PSP, PMU (IMC) FWs, bootloaders and...




www.overclock.net


----------



## laczarus

Not lucky with the Fmax on the 5950X. From 25MHz to 200MHz every value causes instability


----------



## nick name

laczarus said:


> Not lucky with the Fmax on the 5950X. From 25MHz to 200MHz every value causes instability


What CPU voltage are you using and what level LLC?


----------



## skadi

Edit


----------



## laczarus

nick name said:


> What CPU voltage are you using and what level LLC?


+50mV offset and LLC level 3

CCD0 is set to -20 in the curve optimizer


----------



## Brko

https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/SocketAM4/ROG_CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-4001.ZIP



Non Wifi version - 4001. Looks like official "beta" BIOS. Note is "not to update with Zen2 or lesser CPUs, only with Zen3".

@shamino1978
Any luck for C6H?


----------



## neikosr0x

Brko said:


> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/SocketAM4/ROG_CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-4001.ZIP
> 
> 
> 
> Non Wifi version - 4001. Looks like official "beta" BIOS. Note is "not to update with Zen2 or lesser CPUs, only with Zen3".
> 
> @shamino1978
> Any luck for C6H?


So it can't be flashed with a Zen2 CPU?


----------



## xeizo

neikosr0x said:


> So it can't be flashed with a Zen2 CPU?


"It’s highly recommended not to update this beta BIOS when using AMD AM4 Socket for AMD Ryzen™ 3000 Series/ 2000 Series/ 1000 Series/ A-Series Desktop Processors. "

So it will probably work, but with cons


----------



## Martelele

Brko said:


> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/SocketAM4/ROG_CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-4001.ZIP
> 
> 
> 
> Non Wifi version - 4001. Looks like official "beta" BIOS. Note is "not to update with Zen2 or lesser CPUs, only with Zen3".
> 
> @shamino1978
> Any luck for C6H?


Have someone tried it and can confirm that it works with Zen 3? Or does someone know, if it's safe to flash with Zen 2 onboard, just to check Agesa version?


----------



## Dr. Vodka

neikosr0x said:


> So it can't be flashed with a Zen2 CPU?












All relevant AM4 microcodes are included in this BIOS (only thing that's missing is Bristol Ridge but who cares about non Zen based products). This BIOS should let any Ryzen AM4 CPU POST.

If things get weird with anything else than a 5000 series CPU, you can always flashback to something that works better.


----------



## neikosr0x

Dr. Vodka said:


> All relevant AM4 microcodes are included in this BIOS (only thing that's missing is Bristol Ridge but who cares about non Zen based products). This BIOS should let any Ryzen AM4 CPU POST.
> 
> If things get weird with anything else than a 5000 series CPU, you can always flashback to something that works better.


Thanks for the info.


----------



## nick name

If the 4001 beta BIOS is like the test BIOS Shamino posted earlier than you can try it with a Ryzen 3000 CPU and then use Flashback to revert to a previous BIOS. I couldn't really POST with my current FCLK speed so I reverted back. I didn't bother checking anything else out since I had to reduce FCLK to POST. 

I'll probably play with the new 4001 beta some too.


----------



## xeizo

Works with 3900X, not super performance but 3800MHz memory runs. This is PBO/Auto:


----------



## nick name

nick name said:


> If the 4001 beta BIOS is like the test BIOS Shamino posted earlier than you can try it with a Ryzen 3000 CPU and then use Flashback to revert to a previous BIOS. I couldn't really POST with my current FCLK speed so I reverted back. I didn't bother checking anything else out since I had to reduce FCLK to POST.
> 
> I'll probably play with the new 4001 beta some too.


I don't seem to have the same FCLK problem with 4001 as I did with the test BIOS so I'm gonna play with it a bit. 

I was hoping the Curve Optimizer would have been made available to use on Ryzen 3000, but it hasn't been.


----------



## KryoZen

Martelele said:


> Have someone tried it and can confirm that it works with Zen 3? Or does someone know, if it's safe to flash with Zen 2 onboard, just to check Agesa version?


First boot


----------



## fearnor

C7H Wi-Fi Beta BIOS is also available: https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-4001.ZIP


----------



## goondam

i'll be watching all your results with patience, as i plan to run zen 3(5950x) on ch7 hero
please do post details if you have any issues!!


----------



## Dude970

Running with PBO


----------



## Hepe

So has anyone tested yet if there are any bugs or quirks with the beta BIOS with a Zen 3 CPU? Are there any new features in the new AGESA or are there any features missing compared to the old versions? I'm very interested to see how this board works with Zen 3, especially on the memory overclocking front. My current plan is to grab a 5900X and get another 2x8 gigs of b-die at some point, so I'm very curious as to how well this board performs compared to X570.

Edit: Also I would just like to say that I'm very surprised that the beta BIOSes are released this soon, I was honestly fully expecting that we wouldn't see these this year. Kudos to ASUS I guess.


----------



## fearnor

I've flashed the BIOS on C7H WIFI and 3700X and I'm experiencing high idle temps due to idle clocks hovering around 4300MHz. I'm using the Ryzen Balanced power plan and did not have this issue on the latest stable BIOS.


----------



## xeizo

fearnor said:


> I've flashed the BIOS on C7H WIFI and 3700X and I'm experiencing high idle temps due to idle clocks hovering around 4300MHz. I'm using the Ryzen Balanced power plan and did not have this issue on the latest stable BIOS.


Turn on CPPC in the bios


----------



## fearnor

@shamino1978 The "Restore On AC Power Loss" option still does not work on beta BIOS 4001 i.e. no matter what value is selected the computer is not powered on after AC power is restored. I've had this issue since I bought the MoBo 1.5 years ago. Can you get this fixed please?


----------



## xeizo

Updated the Prime Pro with 1.1.8.0 too, works fine with a 2700X


----------



## klusek

For my 3700X the new bios 4001 does not work.It will boot ,but under load it will not boost , i have only 550 mhz.


----------



## nick name

klusek said:


> For my 3700X the new bios 4001 does not work.It will boot ,but under load it will not boost , i have only 550 mhz.


Did you turn on Fmax in the PBO menu? And did you enable Core Performance Boost?


----------



## klusek

nick name said:


> Did you turn on Fmax in the PBO menu? And did you enable Core Performance Boost?


Yes ,Core performence boost was allways on . The Fmax i tried it ,in on and off mode,same with PBO. Serveral cmos-resets and loded optimal setting in Bios were done . Flashed it in normal and second time via flashback mode.Same wired behavior. Back to 3103 and all is normal.


----------



## nick name

klusek said:


> Yes ,Core performence boost was allways on . The Fmax i tried it ,in on and off mode,same with PBO. Serveral cmos-resets and loded optimal setting in Bios were done . Flashed it in normal and second time via flashback mode.Same wired behavior. Back to 3103 and all is normal.


Well you're not missing out on anything. I'm seeing the same performance with no notable changes. I haven't gone back to a previous BIOS simply because I haven't had any problems. I'm hoping the Curve Optimizer eventually gets ported for Ryzen 3000 use.


----------



## crakej

At last something to play with!

What are the settings you need to use with FMax?


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> At last something to play with!
> 
> What are the settings you need to use with FMax?


I just turn it on and pair it with the PPT and TDC settings I had when using the EDC bug. Which were 147 and 120 respectively. Then I set LLC to 1 and add a positive CPU offest of .01250V.


----------



## Dude970

Nick name, what are your ram timings and Vs? Im going to try 3800 again


----------



## nick name

Dude970 said:


> Nick name, what are your ram timings and Vs? Im going to try 3800 again


DRAM 1.52V (droops to 1.504V)
SOC 1.1V
VDDG 1.05V
VDDP 1.0V

I installed 32GB and didn't feel like chasing max performance and then testing so I set 16-16-16-16. It will do 14-15-14-14 with a lower tRFC, but I didn't feel like testing for stability. 

Edit:
I forgot to check, but I now see the tRDWR tWRRD Auto bug is still there. I'm gonna go back and set those to 8 and 2. 



Spoiler


----------



## Dude970

Thank you, will give a try soon


----------



## nick name

Dude970 said:


> Thank you, will give a try soon


With this BIOS it sets tRDRDSD and tRDRDDD to different values when left on Auto. The same for tWRWRSD and tWRWRDD.


----------



## speedgoat

u guys are not seeing Fmax pushing it ? i just activated and it started acting a bit like an xt model.. 540 cpu-z single, never seen it that high before


----------



## smokin_mitch

speedgoat said:


> u guys are not seeing Fmax pushing it ? i just activated and it started acting a bit like an xt model.. 540 cpu-z single, never seen it that high before
> View attachment 2466642


what bios is that? the 4001 on asus website or the 0019 test bios shamino posted in this thread earlier?


----------



## speedgoat

smokin_mitch said:


> what bios is that? the 4001 on asus website or the 0019 test bios shamino posted in this thread earlier?


the one on the asus website


----------



## lordzed83

Quick test Scores about same as 0019 beta i had before.


----------



## lordzed83

Actually I think it scores tad faster than what i had


----------



## lordzed83

sam support works booted no problems.


----------



## speedgoat

i think im getting the best performance ever from this bios without a fixed OC, just with Fmax activated, PBO enabled and all votages on stock, it seems to be running consistenly at 4.5GHz SC and its pushing for 4.35ish MC. 
Only negative is that latency might have increased a little. 

also i found out the hard way after a few dozen crashes LLC is not compatible with Fmax


----------



## xeizo

Thanks for the head up on LLC, yes Fmax runs pretty well. Not as high performance as my Per CCX OC, but definetely a lot better than Auto. CB R23 now runs at 4250-4300MHz all cores vs 4050MHz on Auto. Not much benefit on single core scores though, Per CCX is a lot better. Maybe because Windows scheduler is crap. Best CCD now regularly boosts to 4600MHz even occasional 4625MHz. On Auto 4525MHz was the highest, so a 100MHz win.


----------



## neikosr0x

3900x Fmax on, PBO auto, Voltage Auto
ram at 3600 cl16
that was while playing forza 7 for 20 min


----------



## xeizo

Got my 5900X, tested first default and single core was as advertised, but after memory OC it went down. Still faster than almost all other CPU:s but something killed the edge. Multicore on the other hand, beats 5950X with a margin in Geekbench 5.2.5. Somehow a mystery, how will I find a setting that excels in both single- and multicore?

Everything is stable, no blackscreens and no WHEA errors. Temps are great, even Cinebench R23 couldn't go above 70C and that was with 150W package power.

Oh, and now when posting I have TWO cores that go to 5149MHz!


























Most difficult with the transition was I had to mount a extra 12V cable for when my RTX3080 arrives(whenever), but now it's just to swap the 2070 Super for it


----------



## laczarus

My SC tanked a little after enabling PBO with manual limits (EDC,TDC = 206) but MT went through the roof. Guess I'll keep it like this for now. Too bad I have a dud in terms of Fmax tho.


----------



## xeizo

Oh, and I eventually had ONE WHEA error, been running for 5-6 hours straight.

Have to figure out why single core is tanking with my custom settings, it was great using default all.


----------



## xeizo

Everyone, any testing with Curve Optimizer yet? I haven't dug into it so far and are still somewhat in the unknown about it.


----------



## laczarus

xeizo said:


> Everyone, any testing with Curve Optimizer yet? I haven't dug into it so far and are still somewhat in the unknown about it.


PBO manual limits: 
PPT 500 EDC 206 TDC 206

curve optimizer: 
best 2-3 cores on CCD0 -10 
the rest -25 or lower 

all core boost ~4.5GHz 
Single core on best cores max 5.05GHz


----------



## xeizo

laczarus said:


> PBO manual limits:
> PPT 500 EDC 206 TDC 206
> 
> curve optimizer:
> best 2-3 cores on CCD0 -10
> the rest -25 or lower
> 
> all core boost ~4.5GHz
> Single core on best cores max 5.05GHz


Thanks! A great tip!

I just did a quick test, before reading your post, +20 all tanked performance and -5 all improved both single and multi.
edit. And yes, with -5 even worst core boosts to 4800MHz, two best is 5150MHz. 1, 2, 3 and 5 are my best and all boosts to 5GHz or above.


----------



## xeizo

Talking 'bout Boost, 4723MHz allcore:

AMD Ryzen 9 5900X @ 4723.9 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR (x86.fr)









I did a simplified version of your tip, CCD0 = minus 10, CCD1 = minus 25


----------



## xeizo

Latency is good, and I haven't even tried 4000MHz yet










Boosting is lively


----------



## xeizo

Correction, minus 25 for CCD1 in Curve Optimizer was too much, I got black screen in low idle. Same as when under volting a Zen 2 too heavy. Raised to minus 20 instead, lets see if it holds. I had no black screen for 6 hours before I tried Curve Optimizer.


----------



## DDSZ

There was an option to only use one CCD on my 3900X, but I can't find it now with 4001 bios


----------



## crakej

I had problems flashing 4001.

I have a USB drive which sits in the USB connector used for FlashBack. I copied the file over and renamed it as usual (C7H.cap). It just wouldn't do it.

I decided to try the bios tool for updating bios - and it seems to have worked. This wasn't working for me since larger bioses came out, but it really does seem to have worked. I might check if Afuefifix is working again...


----------



## KryoZen

crakej said:


> I had problems flashing 4001.
> 
> I have a USB drive which sits in the USB connector used for FlashBack. I copied the file over and renamed it as usual (C7H.cap). It just wouldn't do it.
> 
> I decided to try the bios tool for updating bios - and it seems to have worked. This wasn't working for me since larger bioses came out, but it really does seem to have worked. I might check if Afuefifix is working again...


I had no problem using flashback and 4001.
Fat32 formated 4GB old Sandisk cruzer flash stick (update took less than 6 minutes)


----------



## t4t3r

Any of you Zen3 guys able to hit 4000 FCLK on your samples with the C7H?


----------



## xeizo

t4t3r said:


> Any of you Zen3 guys able to hit 4000 FCLK on your samples with the C7H?


Haven't had time, and the bios lost fan control completely today. Three fans spinning at 1800rpm ain't fun. Had to reset twice to get back to normal fan speeds, now it's nice and quiet. But in no mood to test memory speeds


----------



## xeizo

Now Geekbench shows respectable numbers, what I did? Turned of Lighting Service, a real CPU hog from what it seems.

System manufacturer System Product Name - Geekbench Browser 










Latency keeps improving


----------



## t4t3r

t4t3r said:


> Any of you Zen3 guys able to hit 4000 FCLK on your samples with the C7H?


Meant to type 2000 obviously, should’ve saved posting until I wasn’t half asleep.

Definitely some growing pains with zen3 and all these bios updates. 2000 IF seems relatively rare so far but it’s good to see some chips are doing it. I imagine we’ll see quality improve over time like Zen2, but I am itching to grab a 5900x even though I had planned to wait for it to mature a little. I picked up an x570 unify for cheap today so I will be comparing it to my C7H which is one of my favorite boards I’ve had. I’m also curious how many updates we’ll see from Asus for the C7H once they’re able to get a stable bios out that supports Zen3 given their track record.


----------



## xeizo

Regarding Curve Optimizer, CCD0 = minus 10 and CCD1 = minus 15 still gives occasional blackscreen, Now I'm testing CCD0 = minus 8 and CCD1 = minus 12, we'll see how long that holds before blackscreening on idle.


----------



## oreonutz

Did someone get the 5000 Series Working on the C7H??? I should have stopped here earlier. Got my 5900x weeks ago, but haven't installed it yet because I haven't had time to do the Mobo Swap from the C7H to the C8H. But if one of you guys have already done the work to get it working on the C7H, then I can just flash and install right now. I should have known one of you Guru's would be working on this! Now I just have to dig through the thread to find the link to the BIOS. You guys are awesome!


----------



## Deco

oreonutz said:


> Did someone get the 5000 Series Working on the C7H??? I should have stopped here earlier. Got my 5900x weeks ago, but haven't installed it yet because I haven't had time to do the Mobo Swap from the C7H to the C8H. But if one of you guys have already done the work to get it working on the C7H, then I can just flash and install right now. I should have known one of you Guru's would be working on this! Now I just have to dig through the thread to find the link to the BIOS. You guys are awesome!


You'll find the beta BIOS 4001 with Ryzen 5000 compatibility here: https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...VII-HERO/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-4001.ZIP


----------



## oreonutz

Deco said:


> You'll find the beta BIOS 4001 with Ryzen 5000 compatibility here: https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...VII-HERO/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-4001.ZIP


Appreciate it! I went through and found it after my post. Shamino comes through yet again! In the process of flashing now! Still not sure how I feel about going from 16 Cores to 12 Cores, but excited for this this Single Core Boost! Can't wait to pick up a 5950x to replace it!


----------



## crakej

This is my perf with FMax/PBO - no PE or anything else except memory at 3733MTs. I'm really impressed and have to experiment more, but this is how things should have worked at launch of Ryzen 3xxx.

*Sadly, the memory/sleep bug has returned* - I don't know how because I only use hybrid sleep which didn't used to be affected - but it is now.


----------



## oreonutz

crakej said:


> This is my perf with FMax/PBO - no PE or anything else except memory at 3733MTs. I'm really impressed and have to experiment more, but this is how things should have worked at launch of Ryzen 3xxx.
> 
> *Sadly, the memory/sleep bug has returned* - I don't know how because I only use hybrid sleep which didn't used to be affected - but it is now.
> 
> View attachment 2467235


Nice! I should have tested my system on my 3950x after the flash. I only booted to confirm it worked and to transfer the BIOS Settings TXT File to my Phone. But now I wish I would have taken a few minutes to see if Multi Threaded PBO Actually Worked with the FMax turned on, I had not done any of that testing since we had that ability.

I was too excited to get my 5900x in. I still don't like dropping from 16 Cores with my 3950x to 12 Cores with my 5900x, but, this single core Improvement is HUGE! Right now I have a lot going on in my Windows Build. I normally run a highly optimized version of Windows 10, but because I have been working on a crap ton of projects lately I haven't had the time to clean it back up since installing a bunch of new Software, so its gone to being pretty bloated again, and just before my upgrade I did run a CB R20 & CB R15 Test to get my Single and Multi Core Scores. I am stupid and didn't get a screenshot before, but did document them.

For Single Core on my 3950x running on Auto, I got 510 in CB R20 (Which is one of the highest scores I have received personally for a SC Score, I know most people saw higher, but I never did. And then for MC in CB R20 I got 9939. (I typically run a Per CCX OC, and with that I usually average around 10,300 to 10,400, with 10,469 being my personal best, but I wanted to compare auto to auto.) Only changes in BIOS are Memory manually set to 3600 CL16, with Timings, Secondary, and Tertiary all set manually. Performance enhancer set to Default, no Bias, PBO Set to Auto and on the 5900x FMax turned on, and thats it.

Now with the 5900x, of course my Multi Core score is lower due to losing 4 cores, but I was quite pleased with the Single Core Score, especially considering I am yet to mess with anything yet. I did get screen shots of those:




























What really Amazes me are Temps. On my 3950x and 3900x, even running CBR20 with a Room Temp of 25c Would Get me into the low 80s easy, even on Auto. In Fact with my Per CCX OC's My Temps were often lower because I would use much lower Voltage than Auto Would, but at best I was seeing about 79c after a 10 Minute back to back CB R20 Run. I just did the same Run, using the same exact Optimus Block, the only difference being that I now have a 5900x installed, and I switched from using Kryonaut paste to Kingpin Paste, and my Room Temp is actually 2c Higher than in my previous examples, during these tests it was sitting at between 26.6c and 27.5c. And During a 10 Minute back to back CB R20 MC Run I topped out at 68c! That is incredible to me, especially considering it appears to be using voltages close to what I was using Manually with my Per CCX Run. The Amps appear to be about 8amps less or so, which I am sure accounts for a lot of the temp difference, but a 10c Temp Difference is more than I would expect for only a few amps less power draw at about the same voltage.

Anyways, I am just barely getting starting with testing. This is just what I have noticed first.

Anyone else noticing temp reductions from their move from the 3000 series to the 5000 series?


----------



## lordzed83

This new bios very nice got cl14 working with bit of tweaking and got performance improvement.


----------



## speedgoat

i noticed if i activate Fmax with PBO on auto i get all cores reaching 4.55GHz whereas if i apply manual PBO numbers i see a few cores frequently hitting up to 4.65 and 2 cores are now limitted to 4.5.
i dont see any performance improvement though


----------



## lordzed83

And my 3080 founders edition is under water with my 3900x


----------



## davids40

yes  !!!


----------



## xeizo

davids40 said:


> yes  !!!


4007 is not downloadable yet, let's hope it will be soon. I have 5809 already running on my Prime Pro.

Regarding bios 4001, Fmax causes instability with 5900X, sudden blackscreens etc the only thing it does is "paper-boost" three cores to 5150MHz. And PBO actually tanks performance.

Best performance in all benchmarks/games with Zen 3 is from running everything on Auto except those few settings needed to get a high memory OC. Only VDDG/VDDP/VTT/SOC and the old VBOOT DRAM is needed to be adjusted to get high speed on memory. On Auto frequencies are lower, but performance is clearly better. Still boosts to 5075MHz on two cores though, even in 3DMark and games.

Oh, and Zen 3 doesn't like Global C-states, that should be on Auto as well like most settings.

edit. forgot to mention Curve Optimizer, yes it can boost multi but tanks single, not running any offset is best performance here too

edit 2. B550/X570 have got a bunch of Betas today:
[Übersicht] - Ultimative AM4 UEFI/BIOS/AGESA Übersicht (07.12.20) | Hardwareluxx

Some of my "Auto" scores:


----------



## Glazos

anyone still rocking a 1800x with this board ? does it make sense to upgrade bios to 4001 ??


----------



## WinterActual

Guys I got my 5600x today but my temps are kinda bad. 45-50 at idle, 70c during gaming? wut? All on auto + Arctic Liquid II 240. Are they normal for 5k?


----------



## xeizo

WinterActual said:


> Guys I got my 5600x today but my temps are kinda bad. 45-50 at idle, 70c during gaming? wut? All on auto + Arctic Liquid II 240. Are they normal for 5k?


Run Cinebench R23(multi) and check temps, it will never be warmer in gaming. If it is below 80C it is acceptable.

Idle temps are of no interest as they don't strain the hardware, it is only load that is interesting. Absolute max for 5000 that is harmless is 90C.


----------



## xeizo

Glazos said:


> anyone still rocking a 1800x with this board ? does it make sense to upgrade bios to 4001 ??


Agesa 1.1.8.0 made my 3900X run better than ever on B550-F


----------



## Paintface

So i got my 5600x and flashed new bios, all went smooth but overclocking or rather getting better scores seemed more difficult.
It is hard to beat the stock auto settings. PBO / FMAX hurt performance.
PBO2 with +200 gave 4.8ghz boost instead of 4.6ghz but scores went down.
Only curve optimizer gave better scores in some regards , I might have to tweak it more.
Any of you have more success? Any Bios settings im missing out on?
Below my benches in R20 single and multi


Stock ( all auto ) S: 581 - M: 4242
Memory tune safe S: 590 - M: 4339
PBO enabled, FMAX enabled S: 558 - M: 4128
PBO2 +200 S: 590 - M: 4298
Curve optimization ( -10 all cores ) S: 583 - M: 4400


----------



## xeizo

Paintface said:


> So i got my 5600x and flashed new bios, all went smooth but overclocking or rather getting better scores seemed more difficult.
> It is hard to beat the stock auto settings. PBO / FMAX hurt performance.
> PBO2 with +200 gave 4.8ghz boost instead of 4.6ghz but scores went down.
> Only curve optimizer gave better scores in some regards , I might have to tweak it more.
> Any of you have more success? Any Bios settings im missing out on?
> Below my benches in R20 single and multi
> 
> 
> Stock ( all auto ) S: 581 - M: 4242
> Memory tune safe S: 590 - M: 4339
> PBO enabled, FMAX enabled S: 558 - M: 4128
> PBO2 +200 S: 590 - M: 4298
> Curve optimization ( -10 all cores ) S: 583 - M: 4400


You're correct, Ryzen 5000 performs the best with stock settings. Just tweak the necessary to run high speed memory. VDDP, VDDG, VTT, SOC are pretty much the only settings needed to tweak.


----------



## fearnor

Both versions of BIOS 4007 are up although not listed on the ASUS website:

https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...VII-HERO/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-4007.ZIP
https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-4007.ZIP


----------



## xeizo

Thanks, downloaded, will check tonight!


----------



## WinterActual

Thank, downloaded and flashed. Everything works great! (besides the fan control, its still broken after so long lol). 

Anyway I fixed my temps. I just put -10 offset in the curve optimizer. Now my 5600x is 40c idle and 60-62 during gaming (with pbo and fmax enabled). Boosts nice to 4875 and stays there, all cores.


----------



## nick name

fearnor said:


> Both versions of BIOS 4007 are up although not listed on the ASUS website:
> 
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...VII-HERO/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-4007.ZIP
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-4007.ZIP


Don't forget that you can set OS to Others and the links will display.


----------



## xeizo

Bios 4007 looks good, I bettered some scores, it doesn't boost as aggressive in HWINFO64 but performance seems the best for 5000-series so far. I run most things on Auto, but have Auto PBO on with 200MHz override and Motherboard limits active(recommended by AMD). Looks great so far.

Regarding fans, I got my fans to behave the best if I skip F6 Fan tuning and only set Q-Fan at the bottom of the monitor page. CPU fan with zero ramp and 400rpm minimum, all other fans at Silent, 2.6s delay and 200rpm minimum. Gives a very comfortable sound profile.


----------



## WinterActual

I just use Argus Monitor at this point. The ASUS problem with the fans being limited to 60% is terrible.


----------



## speedgoat

i had to go and get myself a 5600X for the fun of it, i wont even admit how much i really paid for it...
im happy with how its boosting, this is only PBO enabled+ auto OC with very little time spent on it yet but i cant seem to get 1900IF stable atm, if anyone has any advise pls let me know, i went 1.125V soc and i left the rest on auto. with 1900IF it seems to be posting on windows for about 10 secs before it crashes to black screen.


----------



## oreonutz

speedgoat said:


> i had to go and get myself a 5600X for the fun of it, i wont even admit how much i really paid for it...
> im happy with how its boosting, this is only PBO enabled+ auto OC with very little time spent on it yet but i cant seem to get 1900IF stable atm, if anyone has any advise pls let me know, i went 1.125V soc and i left the rest on auto. with 1900IF it seems to be posting on windows for about 10 secs before it crashes to black screen.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2468909


NICE! I haven't tried shooting for 1900IF on Zen3 Yet, I just know on Zen2 I had to make sure Gear Down Mode was either on Auto or Enabled for me to post at 1900IF. Hopefully some others on Zen3 who have posted 1900IF or higher will respond and help you out, I am hoping to dig in later this weekend to see if I can get to 1900IF or above. Running pretty Much XMP with tighter Timings at the moment, just cuz it was easy to post (3600Mhz CL14).


----------



## xeizo

speedgoat said:


> i had to go and get myself a 5600X for the fun of it, i wont even admit how much i really paid for it...
> im happy with how its boosting, this is only PBO enabled+ auto OC with very little time spent on it yet but i cant seem to get 1900IF stable atm, if anyone has any advise pls let me know, i went 1.125V soc and i left the rest on auto. with 1900IF it seems to be posting on windows for about 10 secs before it crashes to black screen.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2468909


Nice! Btw that is a old version of AIDA64, gives wrong numbers for bandwidth,

To get 1900 to boot I set VTT 725mV VDDP 930mV and VDDG IOD/CCD 990mV, SOC is 1.1V also VBOOT DRAM is set to 1.42V.

edit I always use GEAR DOWN MODE enabled, it is enormously more stable and the performance impact is very small. It's like 1.5T.


----------



## speedgoat

thank you xeizo !! i ll try this to see if it works
its aida 6.25.5490 i think its fairly recent, not the latest


----------



## xeizo

speedgoat said:


> thank you xeizo !! i ll try this to see if it works
> its aida 6.25.5490 i think its fairly recent, not the latest


It's 6.30-series now, been several versions, they show quite different bandwidth numbers


----------



## speedgoat

xeizo said:


> It's 6.30-series now, been several versions, they show quite different bandwidth numbers


booted with your settings, not sure if its stable but im getting somewhere now.. im liking the new latency too 
thank you again !!


----------



## crakej

xeizo said:


> Nice! Btw that is a old version of AIDA64, gives wrong numbers for bandwidth,
> 
> To get 1900 to boot I set VTT 725mV VDDP 930mV and VDDG IOD/CCD 990mV, SOC is 1.1V also VBOOT DRAM is set to 1.42V.
> 
> edit I always use GEAR DOWN MODE enabled, it is enormously more stable and the performance impact is very small. It's like 1.5T.


Is this with your 3900x or 5xxx? And do you mean CLD0_VDDP or just VDDP?

Just going to try new bios now....

Edit: First thing I noticed about 4xxx bios versions have got rid of problem I had of bios setting CLDO_VDDP automatically, higher than VDDG. Interesting.....


----------



## xeizo

crakej said:


> Is this with your 3900x or 5xxx? And do you mean CLD0_VDDP or just VDDP?
> 
> Just going to try new bios now....
> 
> Edit: First thing I noticed about 4xxx bios versions have got rid of problem I had of bios setting CLDO_VDDP automatically, higher than VDDG. Interesting.....


5900X, now I'm running 950mV on all VDDP/VDDG. lower boost but better scores!


----------



## crakej

xeizo said:


> 5900X, now I'm running 950mV on all VDDP/VDDG. lower boost but better scores!
> 
> 
> Spoiler


I've never changed VDDP in the Advanced Menu - did I miss something?!

Did you change that on your 3900x as well? I think I might be having problems getting over 3733 because of my 4 dimms. I have a feeling if I removed 2 it would perform better. DOCP doesn't work like it used to - shame as I was getting interesting results. What a shame we have to sacrifice some performance to use more memory.

Excellent results! FOMO is setting in!


----------



## xeizo

crakej said:


> I've never changed VDDP in the Advanced Menu - did I miss something?!
> 
> Did you change that on your 3900x as well? I think I might be having problems getting over 3733 because of my 4 dimms. I have a feeling if I removed 2 it would perform better. DOCP doesn't work like it used to - shame as I was getting interesting results. What a shame we have to sacrifice some performance to use more memory.
> 
> Excellent results! FOMO is setting in!


I run 3900X on my B550-F now, it needs different settings than 5000-series, basically 5000 works best with almost everything on Auto

The 3900X has best scores ever though, with this new batch of bioses


----------



## crakej

xeizo said:


> I run 3900X on my B550-F now, it needs different settings than 5000-series, basically 5000 works best with almost everything on Auto
> 
> The 3900X has best scores ever though, with this new batch of bioses


And what about VDDP in the advanced menu?


----------



## WinterActual

I am getting random WHEA error, just one, after 10-12 hours of usage. Its just hard reset, no bsod no anything. The PC just resets itself. Do you guys think its the BIOS? Or my CPU is faulty? This is the error I get -> Event 18


A fatal hardware error has occurred.

Reported by component: Processor Core
Error Source: Machine Check Exception
Error Type: Cache Hierarchy Error


----------



## xeizo

WinterActual said:


> I am getting random WHEA error, just one, after 10-12 hours of usage. Its just hard reset, no bsod no anything. The PC just resets itself. Do you guys think its the BIOS? Or my CPU is faulty? This is the error I get -> Event 18
> 
> 
> A fatal hardware error has occurred.
> 
> Reported by component: Processor Core
> Error Source: Machine Check Exception
> Error Type: Cache Hierarchy Error


VDDG/VDDP, Curve Optimizer or Fmax could be culprits. My guess is Fmax because since I quit using it a few days ago I haven't had a single WHEA error. Also, using Motherboard Limits instead of tweaking PPT/TDC/EDC seems to stabilize things, and that is also the AMD recommendation for 5000.


----------



## WinterActual

I will try with disabling the fmax since my limits are set to motherboard already. 

But I assume this is a bios problem isn't it? Its not that my cpu is faulty.


----------



## karmal

Hello everyone I need help ... there is possibility to run 128 gb ram at 3600 mhz 4 banks of 32 gb hyperx fury certified by asus on crossfire hero viii with rayzen 3950x in a stable way i have the latest bios 3003 but I have occasional problems with reboots and ignition problems with docp activated by default .. same problems with previous bios there are some tricks I am a beginner I would not like to overclock but have a stable pc .. thanks for your help


----------



## xeizo

WinterActual said:


> I will try with disabling the fmax since my limits are set to motherboard already.
> 
> But I assume this is a bios problem isn't it? Its not that my cpu is faulty.


I don't think your CPU is faulty, the sudden reboot has been very common lately across vendors. I guess it comes from the AGESA code, and Fmax possibly worsen it


----------



## xeizo

karmal said:


> Hello everyone I need help ... there is possibility to run 128 gb ram at 3600 mhz 4 banks of 32 gb hyperx fury certified by asus on crossfire hero viii with rayzen 3950x in a stable way i have the latest bios 3003 but I have occasional problems with reboots and ignition problems with docp activated by default .. same problems with previous bios there are some tricks I am a beginner I would not like to overclock but have a stable pc .. thanks for your help


4 banks are harder to drive, I guess you need higher SOC like 1.1-1.15V and VDDP/VDDG 1.0V, also VTT 700-750mV. And, you need higher VDIMM, like 1.36-1.4V. And, 4 DIMMS at 3600MHz will get hot, you need good airflow towards the memory banks. For memory, 50C is hot as they starts spitting out errors at or slightly above that temp.


----------



## speedgoat

WinterActual said:


> I am getting random WHEA error, just one, after 10-12 hours of usage. Its just hard reset, no bsod no anything. The PC just resets itself. Do you guys think its the BIOS? Or my CPU is faulty? This is the error I get -> Event 18
> 
> 
> A fatal hardware error has occurred.
> 
> Reported by component: Processor Core
> Error Source: Machine Check Exception
> Error Type: Cache Hierarchy Error


i had a daily instant reboot after black screen during the summer, i was getting these messages "event 18" too. I was also only getting it when the pc was idling, never on workload. In my case, it was 100% related to IF instability and stepping down one click there would always disappear the problem. I think in my case it was eventually fixed by increasing Vsoc slightly, but then again i reinstalled windows, i updated the chipset, im not entirely sure how it went away


----------



## karmal

xeizo said:


> 4 banks are harder to drive, I guess you need higher SOC like 1.1-1.15V and VDDP/VDDG 1.0V, also VTT 700-750mV. And, you need higher VDIMM, like 1.36-1.4V. And, 4 DIMMS at 3600MHz will get hot, you need good airflow towards the memory banks. For memory, 50C is hot as they starts spitting out errors at or slightly above that temp.


before I had 4 banks from 16 gb to 3000mhz spread brand and everything went smoothly..
you say that with two banks from 32 gb to 3600 mhz I will have more stability?


----------



## xeizo

karmal said:


> before I had 4 banks from 16 gb to 3000mhz spread brand and everything went smoothly..
> you say that with two banks from 32 gb to 3600 mhz I will have more stability?


Two banks are more stable because the topology of memory slots, they are daisy chained, C6H/X370-Prime where the last Asus AMD boards that wasn't daisy chained


----------



## karmal

[QUOTE = "xeizo, post: 28692232, membro: 135656"]
Due banchi sono più stabili perché la topologia degli slot di memoria, sono daisy chain, C6H / X370-Prime dove le ultime schede Asus AMD che non erano daisy chain
[/CITAZIONE]
So do you advise me to leave only two banks of ram on crossfire hero viii with x570 chipset? and on which slot? to make them work by default at 3600mhz
while I'm writing I'm working with 4 full ram banks (128gb at 3600mhz and for a day it hasn't restarted boh.)


----------



## WinterActual

xeizo said:


> I don't think your CPU is faulty, the sudden reboot has been very common lately across vendors. I guess it comes from the AGESA code, and Fmax possibly worsen it


I also noticed that I get 350-400 points difference in CB20 if I have Fmax on. It scores worse with fmax on. I disabled it and we will see how it is.


----------



## xeizo

WinterActual said:


> I also noticed that I get 350-400 points difference in CB20 if I have Fmax on. It scores worse with fmax on. I disabled it and we will see how it is.


Ryzen 5000 seem to perform the best with Motherboard Limits for PPT/TDC/EDC, it's rather fruitless trying to extend those


----------



## speedgoat

so im a little bit confused again with this mobo.. i thought it wouldnt post 4x8GB at 1900IF because of the 4 sticks and i tried 2x8. It is not posting either at 1900IF with 2 sticks whatever i try 

But with the same settings it is not posting at 1900IF, it is actually posting at 2k IF, 4kc16. Im not really sure if its stable and i do not see an amazing performance uplift at this point, or maybe its the basic 1usmus timings that are not helping... yeah but in anycase the board is being a little weirdo as usually.


----------



## xeizo

speedgoat said:


> so im a little bit confused again with this mobo.. i thought it wouldnt post 4x8GB at 1900IF because of the 4 sticks and i tried 2x8. It is not posting either at 1900IF with 2 sticks whatever i try
> 
> But with the same settings it is not posting at 1900IF, it is actually posting at 2k IF, 4kc16. Im not really sure if its stable and i do not see an amazing performance uplift at this point, or maybe its the basic 1usmus timings that are not helping... yeah but in anycase the board is being a little weirdo as usually.
> View attachment 2469192


Raise VDDP to 950mV


----------



## speedgoat

xeizo said:


> Raise VDDP to 950mV


for 4x8GB or as it is now 2x8 ?


----------



## crakej

WinterActual said:


> I am getting random WHEA error, just one, after 10-12 hours of usage. Its just hard reset, no bsod no anything. The PC just resets itself. Do you guys think its the BIOS? Or my CPU is faulty? This is the error I get -> Event 18
> 
> 
> A fatal hardware error has occurred.
> 
> Reported by component: Processor Core
> Error Source: Machine Check Exception
> Error Type: Cache Hierarchy Error


I've had this happen since installing 4007 so looks bios related. Didn't do this on 4001.


----------



## goondam

what cpus are supported in 4007?


----------



## xeizo

goondam said:


> what cpus are supported in 4007?


At least 2000-series and forward, it's tested, I don't know if anyone tested a 1000-series. I would guess it's only elder APUs and Athlons that has been removed.


----------



## fearnor

goondam said:


> what cpus are supported in 4007?


Helpful info about microcodes: A320 보드 마이크로 코드 분석표(ASUS,Biostar 생존)

╔═══════════════════════════════════════════╗
║ MC Extractor v1.52.1 r169 ║
╚═══════════════════════════════════════════╝

C7HWIFI.CAP (1/1)

╔═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
║ AMD ║
╟────┬──────────┬──────────┬────────────┬────────┬───────────┬──────╢
║ # │ CPUID │ Revision │ Date │ Size │ Offset │ Last ║
╟────┼──────────┼──────────┼────────────┼────────┼───────────┼──────╢
║ 1 │ 00800F82 │ 0800820D │ 2019-04-16 │ 0xC80 │ 0x2A3000 │ Yes ║
╟────┼──────────┼──────────┼────────────┼────────┼───────────┼──────╢
║ 2 │ 00800F12 │ 08001250 │ 2019-04-16 │ 0xC80 │ 0x2A3D00 │ No ║
╟────┼──────────┼──────────┼────────────┼────────┼───────────┼──────╢
║ 3 │ 00800F11 │ 08001138 │ 2019-02-04 │ 0xC80 │ 0x2A4A00 │ Yes ║
╟────┼──────────┼──────────┼────────────┼────────┼───────────┼──────╢
║ 4 │ 00800F10 │ 0800100C │ 2017-01-31 │ 0xC80 │ 0x2A5700 │ Yes ║
╟────┼──────────┼──────────┼────────────┼────────┼───────────┼──────╢
║ 5 │ 00800F00 │ 0800002A │ 2016-10-06 │ 0xC80 │ 0x2A6400 │ Yes ║
╟────┼──────────┼──────────┼────────────┼────────┼───────────┼──────╢
║ 6 │ 00810F10 │ 08101016 │ 2019-04-30 │ 0xC80 │ 0x41C500 │ Yes ║
╟────┼──────────┼──────────┼────────────┼────────┼───────────┼──────╢
║ 7 │ 00820F01 │ 08200103 │ 2019-04-17 │ 0xC80 │ 0x41D200 │ Yes ║
╟────┼──────────┼──────────┼────────────┼────────┼───────────┼──────╢
║ 8 │ 00810F00 │ 08100004 │ 2016-11-20 │ 0xC80 │ 0x41DF00 │ Yes ║
╟────┼──────────┼──────────┼────────────┼────────┼───────────┼──────╢
║ 9 │ 00810F80 │ 08108002 │ 2018-06-05 │ 0xC80 │ 0x41EC00 │ Yes ║
╟────┼──────────┼──────────┼────────────┼────────┼───────────┼──────╢
║ 10 │ 00810F81 │ 08108109 │ 2019-04-17 │ 0xC80 │ 0x41F900 │ Yes ║
╟────┼──────────┼──────────┼────────────┼────────┼───────────┼──────╢
║ 11 │ 00810F11 │ 08101102 │ 2018-11-06 │ 0xC80 │ 0x420600 │ No ║
╟────┼──────────┼──────────┼────────────┼────────┼───────────┼──────╢
║ 12 │ 00A20F10 │ 0A201009 │ 2020-08-21 │ 0x15C0 │ 0x136BB00 │ Yes ║
╟────┼──────────┼──────────┼────────────┼────────┼───────────┼──────╢
║ 13 │ 00A20F00 │ 0A200025 │ 2020-01-21 │ 0x15C0 │ 0x136D100 │ Yes ║
╟────┼──────────┼──────────┼────────────┼────────┼───────────┼──────╢
║ 14 │ 00870F10 │ 08701021 │ 2020-01-25 │ 0xC80 │ 0x137E200 │ Yes ║
╟────┼──────────┼──────────┼────────────┼────────┼───────────┼──────╢
║ 15 │ 00870F00 │ 08700004 │ 2018-12-06 │ 0xC80 │ 0x137EF00 │ Yes ║
╟────┼──────────┼──────────┼────────────┼────────┼───────────┼──────╢
║ 16 │ 00860F00 │ 0860000E │ 2020-01-27 │ 0xC80 │ 0x14FBF00 │ Yes ║
╟────┼──────────┼──────────┼────────────┼────────┼───────────┼──────╢
║ 17 │ 00860F01 │ 08600106 │ 2020-06-19 │ 0xC80 │ 0x14FCC00 │ Yes ║
╟────┼──────────┼──────────┼────────────┼────────┼───────────┼──────╢
║ 18 │ 00A50F00 │ 0A50000B │ 2020-08-21 │ 0x15C0 │ 0x167BF00 │ Yes ║
╚════╧══════════╧══════════╧════════════╧════════╧═══════════╧══════╝


----------



## speedgoat

i closed a few background services and the new latency results make more justice to my awesome overclocking "skills"


----------



## hurricane28

Hi guys, 

How is this new 4007 BIOS for you? 

I'm tempting to flash it and i have no issues now and i certainly don't want them lol. Which is why i ask here first. 

Thnx.


----------



## xeizo

Works great with 5900X


----------



## crakej

I'm still getting one or two reboots daily - even with FMax disabled. Trying slightly higher SoC voltage.

Nothing in Event Viewer at all - just reboots.


----------



## Paintface

have you guys tried to turn on the spectre mitigations again with inspectre? ive seen some conficting benchmarks so i decided to turn them back on.

PBO limits = motherboard and curve optimizer -10 all cores resulted in 580 single core in R20

turning spectre mitigations back on i got 602


----------



## crakej

Paintface said:


> have you guys tried to turn on the spectre mitigations again with inspectre? ive seen some conficting benchmarks so i decided to turn them back on.
> 
> PBO limits = motherboard and curve optimizer -10 all cores resulted in 580 single core in R20
> 
> turning spectre mitigations back on i got 602


I have - my single core result was about 10 points better - but my chip is a bit rubbish, my best was only 517!? (7187 Multi).

This is interesting as Spectre requires elevated access at the bios/EFI level, which (as far as I'm aware) cannot be done remotely, requiring physical access to our machines. So unless your computer is somewhere where someone can do that - surely we don't need the mitigation?

The highest any of my cores performed was about 4.4GHz in the SC test, usually core 3


----------



## t4t3r

speedgoat said:


> i closed a few background services and the new latency results make more justice to my awesome overclocking "skills"
> View attachment 2469360


This has me tempted to open up the 5600x I bought at Microcenter last week, but it was mostly just an insurance plan as I’ve been holding out on trying to get a 5900x. Really want to get to running 2000 FCLK on either my x470 C7H or my X570 Unify.

Can 4007 still be flashed backward to older an older version, or is it actually one-way at this point?


----------



## WinterActual

Do you guys think we will get a new bios before Christmas?


----------



## xeizo

WinterActual said:


> Do you guys think we will get a new bios before Christmas?


No, AMD has announced AGESA 1.1.9.0 but that one is said to be ready for January

All the recent Asus bioses runs great for me though, on C7H/5900X/32GB 3800Mem/RTX3070, B550-F/3900X/32GB 3800 mem/RTX2070 Super and X470-Prime Pro/3700X/32GB 3133 mem/GTX1070


----------



## WinterActual

Whaat? So I am stuck with this whea crash bullshit until January? Omg I guess I'll just fill a RMA request.


----------



## xeizo

WinterActual said:


> Whaat? So I am stuck with this whea crash bullshit until January? Omg I guess I'll just fill a RMA request.


I bit the bullet and did a fresh install on C7H for 5900X, no WHEA errors, not a single one and not a single reboot


----------



## speedgoat

t4t3r said:


> This has me tempted to open up the 5600x I bought at Microcenter last week, but it was mostly just an insurance plan as I’ve been holding out on trying to get a 5900x. Really want to get to running 2000 FCLK on either my x470 C7H or my X570 Unify.
> 
> Can 4007 still be flashed backward to older an older version, or is it actually one-way at this point?


it seems as if you can flash back 3103, at least it reads it and prompts you to update to this but i cant be entirely sure.

4007 is a little buggy i guess, im getting the double post from cold issue occasionally, the mobo posts an "FF" error code contantly, im seeing a lot of Whea-Logger event 19 warnings when IF is over 1900, its not crashing but its producing a lot of them and i still cant post at exacly 1900IF but this could be just me.


----------



## WinterActual

xeizo said:


> I bit the bullet and did a fresh install on C7H for 5900X, no WHEA errors, not a single one and not a single reboot


What ram clock? Also is it with PBO on?


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

HEY GUYS, what is the last known BIOS on this board for a 2700x.

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## xeizo

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> HEY GUYS, what is the last known BIOS on this board for a 2700x.
> 
> Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


Latest 4007 works with 2700X too


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

xeizo said:


> Latest 4007 works with 2700X too


Thx, but isn't this bios only for ryzen 5000 series optimized .tell me if I'm wrong please. Btw if i update to it ,could it be reverted if something goes wrong? 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## xeizo

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> Thx, but isn't this bios only for ryzen 5000 series optimized .tell me if I'm wrong please. Btw if i update to it ,could it be reverted if something goes wrong?
> 
> Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


General bugfixes will still apply for older CPUs, those may be desirable


----------



## bushd0c

My new 5950x works like a charm on the 4007 Bios. Sadly my RAM does not support 4000 Mhz/CL16 so I had to drop it a notch, but hey I am happy so far!


----------



## xeizo

WinterActual said:


> What ram clock? Also is it with PBO on?


3800MHz, PBO with *motherboard limits *as recommended by AMD, and no Fmax, my experience is Fmax blackscreens randomly I don't use it. Also only moderate curve optimizer, -5 on the best cores and -10 on the worst.


----------



## harderthanfire

Motherboard limits loses me 1k points in CB R20 multi compared to manually set limits on my 5950x. Fmax is even lower than that and not stable. Running a -9 all core curve optimizer as any more was getting the odd blackscreen. Running 2000 on the IF no bother which is ace.


----------



## xeizo

harderthanfire said:


> Motherboard limits loses me 1k points in CB R20 multi compared to manually set limits on my 5950x. Fmax is even lower than that and not stable. Running a -9 all core curve optimizer as any more was getting the odd blackscreen. Running 2000 on the IF no bother which is ace.


Motherboard limits and Fmax disabled tanks single core a little for me, 1-1.5%, but well worth it for the stability. Still gets 8700/620 in CB R20 and 22.2k/1600 in CB R23.


----------



## DAM20

The latest bios is crashing my system, am I the only one?


----------



## xeizo

DAM20 said:


> The latest bios is crashing my system, am I the only one?


Works fine for me, Fmax should be disabled though(default is auto)


----------



## Logue

DAM20 said:


> The latest bios is crashing my system, am I the only one?


I've been using 4007 for a while now. I have FMax enabled and PBO with motherboard limits, ah, and a 3800X. So, last gen... I've had a few bugs I think in the beginning, but maybe it was with 4001. Now, however, everything is working great. No bugs.


----------



## WinterActual

I can confirm the 4007 bios was rock solid with my 3600 at 4.4 all core + the ram @3800 cl16 1:1:1, no problems.


----------



## speedgoat

something's not 100% right for me with this bios too, it double posts from cold, mostly after this it works straight away and i post at IF1933 1:1 correctly and its stable there, but every now and then i find that it posted at 1333MHz ram. At this point if i go back to bios and load my user profile again i find out this setting has been resetted and now im setting it back when loading my profile.
I guess the setting is in Advanced\Amd CBS\DDR Common Options\Dram Timing Configuration.. im not sure why this is going from auto to enabled


----------



## xeizo

Disable Fmax and double post is gone, at least for me


----------



## speedgoat

xeizo said:


> Disable Fmax and double post is gone, at least for me


not Fmax for me, i had it on disabled


----------



## 911rock

Same here (disabling Fmax didn't fix it), reverted back to 3103 via bios flashback, everything's good for now, waiting for a fixed bios


----------



## Logue

The only time my C7H double posted was when I had DRAM Vboot voltage set to anything other than Auto. Because it basically tests the DRAM before actually booting it or something like that?... So, maybe that's an option to try.


----------



## speedgoat

Logue said:


> The only time my C7H double posted was when I had DRAM Vboot voltage set to anything other than Auto. Because it basically tests the DRAM before actually booting it or something like that?... So, maybe that's an option to try.


wasn't this either for me now, but thank you 
im wondering if this bios is not doing well in general with 4 mem sticks


----------



## bushd0c

What bothers me with this 4007 Bios is, that I cannot Boot with FSB 1900, CLDP VDDP ist already at 0.950V ...
Does anyone have a suggestion?


----------



## thegr8anand

How are people's experience with running 5900x on C7H? I am planning to change from 3900x to 5900x.


----------



## xeizo

bushd0c said:


> What bothers me with this 4007 Bios is, that I cannot Boot with FSB 1900, CLDP VDDP ist already at 0.950V ...
> Does anyone have a suggestion?


I run both VDDP/VDDG 0.95V and SOC 1.05V, has booted 1900MHz every time, membench runs fine.


----------



## xeizo

thegr8anand said:


> How are people's experience with running 5900x on C7H? I am planning to change from 3900x to 5900x.


It's noticeably faster, and quite cool running without PBO. Using PBO you can see power consumption in the 180W range, meaning great cooling is needed. 
C7H benchmarks as fast as the best X570-boards I have seen, so no handicap from using X470, only real difference is less I/O and no PCIE4.0.


----------



## speedgoat

bushd0c said:


> What bothers me with this 4007 Bios is, that I cannot Boot with FSB 1900, CLDP VDDP ist already at 0.950V ...
> Does anyone have a suggestion?


try 1933 IF perhaps ? .. i find it impossible to boot at exactly 1900 too, but i get it seemingly stable at 2K


----------



## speedgoat

i had a eureka moment (its probably gonna go tits up too in the next few days) but with these settings its posting constantly my 4x8, no double posts, no mem errors, basically adjusted ProcODT


----------



## bushd0c

speedgoat said:


> try 1933 IF perhaps ? .. i find it impossible to boot at exactly 1900 too, but i get it seemingly stable at 2K


Yeah that's what I am using, too and it seems to work fine instead of the 1900. Do get some reboots once in a while, but I think it's related to getting 90°C in CPU stresstest with PBO enabled. Will change to an AIO from my old Noctua D14 in the coming weeks.Tried the D15 already, but it was too loud for me and a bit too big for my old case.


----------



## bushd0c

xeizo said:


> I run both VDDP/VDDG 0.95V and SOC 1.05V, has booted 1900MHz every time, membench runs fine.


Thanks! Will try out setting VDDG to 0.95V. Did you set VDDG IOD and CCD to 0.95V ?


----------



## t4t3r

Loaded 4007 and threw in my 3900x. No major issues except a couple of the typical WHEA Bus Interconnect ID 19 errors, but I did come back to a WHEA "Cache Hierarchy Error" after I had kicked off a quick CB 20 run. Figures it happened when I had walked away. CB 20 scores are up a little otherwise after running 3103 for the last ~6 months and has been 100% rock solid stable. I am seeing that Cache Hierarchy error referenced a lot for Ryzen 5000 chips - has anyone else seen that on their C7H especially with a Zen 2 chip?

Both of my 5900x's finally came in so I will throw one in the C7H later and see how it performs. I am pretty close to returning my X570 Unify since the BIOS is such a mess and I'm not sure I want to wait around for MSI to figure it out, but that Cache Hierarchy error gives me a little pause...


----------



## neikosr0x

For some reason, I am not able to boot over 3600/1800IF. Tried many things but couldn't any ideas guys? 5900x, x470 non-wifi 4007Bios, RAM: G.Skill F4-4000C18-8GTZR any help would be appreciated.


----------



## bushd0c

bushd0c said:


> Thanks! Will try out setting VDDG to 0.95V. Did you set VDDG IOD and CCD to 0.95V ?


okay, found my answer here: OC'ing T-Force 4133 cl18

@neikosr0x perhaps you'll find your answer in that post, too, give it a try!


----------



## neikosr0x

bushd0c said:


> okay, found my answer here: OC'ing T-Force 4133 cl18
> 
> @neikosr0x perhaps you'll find your answer in that post, too, give it a try!


Thanks bro I'll have a look.


----------



## Mosu

I have updated from on my 2700x to latest bios 4007 and everything was fine. After that i have upgraded to 5900x. with an noctua NH D15. 2x16gb 3200 cl 14 + 2x8gb 3200 cl14. on default motherboard was pushing up to 1.49 v on the cpu. so dialed in bios to run 4.5ghz on all core with an voltage of just 1.25 nothing else modified. down below i will post link to my youtube chanel with the upgrade.






and 

OC







P.S. Ive got my cpu for ~ 575 euro and now it retails in my country for ~ 540 euros


----------



## maw784

Just was able to snag a 5800x on best buys drop today,
coming 1/7/21, did ASUS release the official bios already? (wi-fi version)


----------



## t4t3r

4007 is available


----------



## maw784

Nice! thanks, also had 3080FE in checkout but would not ship and no store pick up within 250miles,
I hope I can keep this 5800x cool enough, didnt really need 12 cores 5900x, and did not want to go from 8 (2700x) to 6 cores (5600x)


----------



## Mosu

maw784 said:


> Just was able to snag a 5800x on best buys drop today,
> coming 1/7/21, did ASUS release the official bios already? (wi-fi version)


 Yes it released on 10.12.2020. And i ordered my cpu on 12.12.2020 and mounted on 14.12.2020. Worked from first boot. We have full stock on every 5000 series except 5950x.


----------



## t4t3r

I was able to grab a 3060Ti FE today for my gf's machine so I think I am finally all set on Ryzen 5000 and 3080s. I still have a couple of 5950x orders that I'm going to hang onto that may help some people out here locally still camping MC overnight.

5900x + C7H so far so good......More complete and functional BIOS than my X570 Unify in early testing, and benches are increased. Anything above 3800/1900 strap generates WHEA errors but boots up to 2000 with ease so probably just need more BIOS tweaking from Asus. Will post some additional thoughts after some more testing. 

My only concern is how much time will Asus spend on the C7H bios when they have X570/B550 boards to maintain.


----------



## maw784

I just hope my 280mm AIO can keep up does great on the 2700x, can't go any bigger in my case


----------



## thegr8anand

Guys got my 5900x up and running. Reading all the talks about using curve optimizer. Is it really better than running all-core?


----------



## nick name

maw784 said:


> Nice! thanks, also had 3080FE in checkout but would not ship and no store pick up within 250miles,
> I hope I can keep this 5800x cool enough, didnt really need 12 cores 5900x, and did not want to go from 8 (2700x) to 6 cores (5600x)


Leave something in your Best Buy cart that is cheap and readily available at your preferred store. That helped me sort out the site glitching at store pick-up options when I snagged an XBOX yesterday and it also got me the closet to getting a 3080 today. And if you're successful you can just cancel that unwanted item.


----------



## thegr8anand

No issues with ram as put in all my settings from before and its working the same. Now just need to start oc'ing the 5900x. Please share your stable overclocks and settings used.


----------



## Mosu

Be aware the new bios on auto sets PLL1.8V VOLTAGE TO 2.116V. So i manualy set it to 1.8v


----------



## nick name

Mosu said:


> Be aware the new bios on auto sets PLL1.8V VOLTAGE TO 2.116V. So i manualy set it to 1.8v


Do you have the LN2 switch on?


----------



## t4t3r

Mosu said:


> Be aware the new bios on auto sets PLL1.8V VOLTAGE TO 2.116V. So i manualy set it to 1.8v


1.8xx on mine according to HWinfo


----------



## nick name

t4t3r said:


> 1.8xx on mine according to HWinfo


Yeah, mine too. His sounds like it's in LN2 mode.


----------



## davids40

hello ✋
is there a way to improve C7H boot ?
it's so long 15-20 second to access bios 
thanks


----------



## villason

Hello

Just managed to order a 5950X. Plan to use it with my CH7. Any quick advice before I deep dive in this 600 pages thread? Any problems with this combo? Perf degradation vs X570 boards?

Cheers!


----------



## Deco

thegr8anand said:


> Guys got my 5900x up and running. Reading all the talks about using curve optimizer. Is it really better than running all-core?


After much experimentation with my 5900x with the curve optimiser, I can safely say it's better enabling it than keeping it disabled. Temperatures are a rough 1-2 degree drop, and clock speeds are actually higher (probably due to the scaling voltages). I anticipate it's something that will be refined in the future, particularly with CTR.


----------



## villason

bushd0c said:


> View attachment 2469748
> 
> 
> My new 5950x works like a charm on the 4007 Bios. Sadly my RAM does not support 4000 Mhz/CL16 so I had to drop it a notch, but hey I am happy so far!


How are your temps? OC default besides RAM? I just plan to set XMP for my 3200 CL14 kits and call it a day...


----------



## kratosatlante

4x8 4000cl16 trabajo, 1.53v Patriot Viper 4400










Sin embargo, no 4000cl14 obtener prueba de error 8


----------



## Mosu

nick name said:


> Do you have the LN2 switch on?


I am not at home right now. Will see after christmas. But thx for info. I never touched the jumper. Will see what is set for...


----------



## nick name

Mosu said:


> I am not at home right now. Will see after christmas. But thx for info. I never touched the jumper. Will see what is set for...


If you don't want to open the case and get a flashlight you can also check in BIOS. I think it's somewhere at the top of the first BIOS page.


----------



## Mosu

nick name said:


> If you don't want to open the case and get a flashlight you can also check in BIOS. I think it's somewhere at the top of the first BIOS page.


Its only 1 screw no biggie. Will change it when at the crime scene. Thx


----------



## laozixiazi

Guys, I'm upgrading to a 5600x or 5900x(both are coming, will see which one to keep) from a 2700x . main use case is 4k gaming pairing with an rtx3080. Do you guys think I should upgrade to a C8H. How much performance penalty will I be getting if I stay on C7H?


----------



## laozixiazi

villason said:


> Hello
> 
> Just managed to order a 5950X. Plan to use it with my CH7. Any quick advice before I deep dive in this 600 pages thread? Any problems with this combo? Perf degradation vs X570 boards?
> 
> Cheers!


wondering the same. planning to pair my C7H with a 5900x. Anyone?


----------



## xeizo

No worse performance than X570, only less I/O, depends if you need the extra I/O or ultra fast storage


----------



## thegr8anand

What settings do you guys use in DigiControl? Is it mostly auto except LLC or everything is manually set?

And what stability test do you guys consider stable? CBr23 is good for it?


----------



## neikosr0x

Deco said:


> After much experimentation with my 5900x with the curve optimiser, I can safely say it's better enabling it than keeping it disabled. Temperatures are a rough 1-2 degree drop, and clock speeds are actually higher (probably due to the scaling voltages). I anticipate it's something that will be refined in the future, particularly with CTR.


curve optimiser ? where in the bios is it?

EDIT: never mind found it, thanks.

5.1ghz Ryzen 5900x


----------



## crakej

I was just noticing that the Ryzen 5xxx CPUs use the same FCH and IMC revision (17.7) as 3xxx CPUs.

Why is it able to operate so much better on the newer CPUs? ( like with higher FCLK). Is it just the IMC firmware, or just the more mature process?

Looking back at my 1700x results - I had that thing running at higher than 1933 FCLK, something my 3900x won't do. I'm just interested on how these differences arise - even when using the same IMC.....

Merry Christmas everyone!


----------



## t4t3r

Zen 1 and Zen+ definitely did not run at 1933 FCLK.


----------



## crakej

t4t3r said:


> Zen 1 and Zen+ definitely did not run at 1933 FCLK.


Actually, yes, yes they did (if you were lucky) - there were a few that could run 3800:1900 on our Zen 1 and zen+ CPUs.... and as you can see, I was able to bench at 3866:1933

*







*


----------



## t4t3r

That is pretty crazy. I shouldn't have assumed that we were talking about stable fabric clocks but that is what I was referencing. But thanks for posting proof, pretty cool.


----------



## mc conor

Does anyone not have event viewer whea corrected bus errors running > 1600fclk using 4007?

I have these errors with 5800x and see this is quite common but interested to see if people have no event viewer errors with zen3 + crosshair vii + 4007 + fclk >1600.

There seems to be people reporting CPU replacement fixing these issues but I thought it was just buggy AGESA.


----------



## tUMi

mc conor said:


> Does anyone not have event viewer whea corrected bus errors running > 1600fclk using 4007?
> 
> I have these errors with 5800x and see this is quite common but interested to see if people have no event viewer errors with zen3 + crosshair vii + 4007 + fclk >1600.
> 
> There seems to be people reporting CPU replacement fixing these issues but I thought it was just buggy AGESA.


I have a 5800X up and running with my C7H (non-WiFi model, BIOS version 4007) and I had WHEA errors almost straight away once booted with 1933MHz FCLK (memory 3866MHz).

For some reason I couldn't get the system to boot at all with 1900MHz FCLK (memory 3800MHz), no matter what I did, funny thing is that I did get 1900MHz FCLK (memory 3800MHz) to boot with my old CPU (3700X), however it could not handle the 1900MHz FCLK (memory 3800MHz) as the system was not stable in Prime95 and RealBench (no errors in Karhu RAM Test and also no WHEA errors at all).

But surprisingly 1933MHz FCLK (memory 3866MHz) booted easily with 5800X and it even ran RealBench and Karhu RAM without problems until I looked HWiNFO64 more closely and discovered that HWiNFO reported from thousands of WHEA errors with 1933MHz FCLK (memory 3866MHz) so I pretty much gave up using the system on that FCLK. I have not tested 1800MHZ FCLK (memory 3600MHz) with 5800X but I'm pretty sure it won't cause WHEA errors on my system because 1867MHZ FCLK (memory 3733MHz) works just fine without any WHEA errors.

Until C7H gets another BIOS update, for now I have settled to use 1867MHz FCLK (memory 3733MHz) which is 100% stable in all stability tests and benchmarks I have tried so far on my system, also no WHEA errors. I will test the 1933MHZ FCLK (memory 3866MHz) again with the upcoming BIOS update to see if the WHEA errors have gone away. I'm pretty sure it's the BIOS/AGESA which causes the WHEA errors with my system when using 1933MHZ FCLK (memory 3866MHz). Of course chances are that my 5800X is not good enough sample to handle the FCLK higher than 1867MHz. I get zero errors on Karhu RAM Test when testing the memory at high speeds (3733MHz, 3800MHz and 3866MHz).


----------



## mc conor

Nice so you can run 1867 fclk with no whea corrected bus warnings?

I have a 2x32gb kit 3600c16 that I set at rated timings and left it with 1800fclk and noticed no issues until I checked event viewer.

Once I reduced to 1600fclk and set 3200c14 all was good.

Any higher than 1600 instant whea bus warnings.

I'm not too worried about the timings as my kit is dense, the latency is the same pretty much.

I'm just reading rumblings of people saying some of these CPUs could be defective.

Hopefully it is just AEGSA, although >3200 is overclocking technically.


----------



## Axaion

Well, tried updating bios and now i cant run over 3400 cl16, ran 3800cl16 before, with 1900fclk on a 3700x on .. 15th dec 2019 bios?, was posted somewhere here.

Awesome.


----------



## t4t3r

Zero errors at 1900 on my 5900x with all of the exact same settings I used with my 3900x that had also ran for ~6 months at 1900. Bios 4007. I can boot my 5900x at 2000 (and maybe higher) but a lot ID 19 WHEA errors as expected. At 1933 it errors far less but still more than zero.

I did get some weird behavior when I added my other 2 sticks of Viper 4400 and was running 3800 c14 4x8, but I chalked that up to stress on the board and IMC from 4x8 at those timings, and I didn't test it for very long. I could probably adjust SOC, VDDG, and timings to get it stable, but I plan to run 2x16 once I am able to get a high-quality bin for the right price. C7H on 4007 is actually outperforming other X570 boards I've tested - small sample size and bios updates will stabilize X570 with Ryzen 5000 eventually, but 4007 is a great first crack especially on an "old"  chipset and given the issues other manufacturers are having.


----------



## tUMi

mc conor said:


> Nice so you can run 1867 fclk with no whea corrected bus warnings?
> 
> I have a 2x32gb kit 3600c16 that I set at rated timings and left it with 1800fclk and noticed no issues until I checked event viewer.
> 
> Once I reduced to 1600fclk and set 3200c14 all was good.
> 
> Any higher than 1600 instant whea bus warnings.
> 
> I'm not too worried about the timings as my kit is dense, the latency is the same pretty much.
> 
> I'm just reading rumblings of people saying some of these CPUs could be defective.
> 
> Hopefully it is just AEGSA, although >3200 is overclocking technically.


Yes, you got it right. I'm currently running 1867MHZ FCLK (memory 3733MHz) stable with my 5800X without any ID 19 WHEA warnings (I assume this is the same warning you're referring to - "WHEA corrected bus warnings") which was the issue with the 1933MHz FCLK (with 1933MHz FCLK the system kept producing thousands of ID 19 WHEA warnings).

My memory kit is a trash binned Samsung B-Die 4x8GB G.Skill F4-3600C17Q-32GVK - XMP/D.O.C.P 3600MHz CL17-18-18-18-38-2T 1.35v. Currently I'm running this kit at 3733MHz CL16-17-19-17-36-1T-GDM 1.42v (like I already did with my old Zen 2 CPU, the 3700X).

I just checked the Event Viewer and the last date I was experiencing ID 19 WHEA warnings was December 22 (that was the day when I was previously testing the 1933MHz FCLK). So it's all looking good at the moment in the Event Viewer.

I have successfully been running 1867MHz FCLK and 3733MHz memory ever since I had my old Zen 2 CPU installed (3700X) on my C7H. My current Zen 3 CPU (5800X) doesn't make an exception to this and I am currently running 1867MHz FCLK fully stable with no WHEA warnings. I'm using almost the exact same BIOS settings that I used with my previous 3700X. With my 5800X I can run lower SOC/VDDP/VDDG voltages than with the 3700X and still keeping the system stable.

I highly doubt your CPU is defective, it might be something else that keeps preventing you using 1800MHz FCLK with your current CPU and your current memory kit. You mentioned that you have a 2x32GB 3600MHz CL16 kit which could be more tricky to overclock than the 4x8GB kit such as I'm using in my system. But I'm just speculating here.

It could also depend on your BIOS memory/voltage settings. Have you tested your 2x32GB kit earlier before you got your Zen 3 CPU? Does it performs the same with a Zen 2 CPU, for example? Did you set your memory timings, voltages and FCLK/memory speeds all manually or did you just used the D.O.C.P profile? If you used the D.O.C.P profile, it could be the culprit here. It didn't worked at all for my system which is why I had to set everything manually in the BIOS. I suggest you to do the same if you already didn't do that earlier.


----------



## mc conor

tUMi said:


> Yes, you got it right. I'm currently running 1867MHZ FCLK (memory 3733MHz) stable with my 5800X without any ID 19 WHEA warnings (I assume this is the same warning you're referring to - "WHEA corrected bus warnings") which was the issue with the 1933MHz FCLK (with 1933MHz FCLK the system kept producing thousands of ID 19 WHEA warnings).
> 
> My memory kit is a trash binned Samsung B-Die 4x8GB G.Skill F4-3600C17Q-32GVK - XMP/D.O.C.P 3600MHz CL17-18-18-18-38-2T 1.35v. Currently I'm running this kit at 3733MHz CL16-17-19-17-36-1T-GDM 1.42v (like I already did with my old Zen 2 CPU, the 3700X).
> 
> I just checked the Event Viewer and the last date I was experiencing ID 19 WHEA warnings was December 22 (that was the day when I was previously testing the 1933MHz FCLK). So it's all looking good at the moment in the Event Viewer.
> 
> I have successfully been running 1867MHz FCLK and 3733MHz memory ever since I had my old Zen 2 CPU installed (3700X) on my C7H. My current Zen 3 CPU (5800X) doesn't make an exception to this and I am currently running 1867MHz FCLK fully stable with no WHEA warnings. I'm using almost the exact same BIOS settings that I used with my previous 3700X. With my 5800X I can run lower SOC/VDDP/VDDG voltages than with the 3700X and still keeping the system stable.
> 
> I highly doubt your CPU is defective, it might be something else that keeps preventing you using 1800MHz FCLK with your current CPU and your current memory kit. You mentioned that you have a 2x32GB 3600MHz CL16 kit which could be more tricky to overclock than the 4x8GB kit such as I'm using in my system. But I'm just speculating here.
> 
> It could also depend on your BIOS memory/voltage settings. Have you tested your 2x32GB kit earlier before you got your Zen 3 CPU? Does it performs the same with a Zen 2 CPU, for example? Did you set your memory timings, voltages and FCLK/memory speeds all manually or did you just used the D.O.C.P profile? If you used the D.O.C.P profile, it could be the culprit here. It didn't worked at all for my system which is why I had to set everything manually in the BIOS. I suggest you to do the same if you already didn't do that earlier.


Yea I have 64GB 2x32 Crucial Ballistix 3600 16-18-18-38-58 1.35V kit.

Previously I was running a 2700x and 16GB Bdie @3400c14 so the only testing was on this CPU/RAM upgrade.

64GB is not rated on our boards but I was confident it would run as 32GB sticks weren't available then and the memory controller was responsible for this anyway so was confident it would work (which it does).

I set the timings manually at the rated speeds, timings and FCLK.

However the WHEA 19 bus interconnect corrected errors occur at any RAM speed, even 2133 as long as the FCLK is raised even slightly above 1600. I can run 3600 at 1800FCLK with the only noticeable symptoms of an issue being the Event Viewer WHEA 19 warnings.

I was anticipating some issues such as having to run at lower speed/timings as I am running a dense kit that is not supposed to be supported but this seems like a BIOS/CPU issue.

There is more people with similar issues here:


__
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/kkl7ov


----------



## bushd0c

villason said:


> How are your temps? OC default besides RAM? I just plan to set XMP for my 3200 CL14 kits and call it a day...


Temps are very low at idle, around 36°C. When using Prime they go up to 90°C with my noctua d14 and 88°C with d15


----------



## bushd0c

neikosr0x said:


> curve optimiser ? where in the bios is it?
> 
> EDIT: never mind found it, thanks.
> 
> 5.1ghz Ryzen 5900x
> 
> View attachment 2470898


Isn't the new curve optimizer enabled just by enabling PBO? Or did I miss a setting?


----------



## bushd0c

bushd0c said:


> Isn't the new curve optimizer enabled just by enabling PBO? Or did I miss a setting?


okay found it myself, for everyone else, here is a short video I found:


----------



## Logue

Hey guys, just to let everyone know, I've encountered a pretty rare but important bug:

I was playing Forza Horizon 4 last night and the PC would restart randomly while in the game. I have a 3800X and a NH-D15 so it's not temperature related. I've tried disabling FMax, disabling PBO, using PBO with manual and motherboard limits, nothing would help (also using a 5700XT). The only thing that did it was reverting back to BIOS 3103. I don't know why... Other games didn't have a problem and there were WHEA errors for each of the restarts (machine exception, something from the CPU I believe). Maybe it's a microsoft store games thing, but just to let everyone know.


----------



## mc conor

Logue said:


> Hey guys, just to let everyone know, I've encountered a pretty rare but important bug:
> 
> I was playing Forza Horizon 4 last night and the PC would restart randomly while in the game. I have a 3800X and a NH-D15 so it's not temperature related. I've tried disabling FMax, disabling PBO, using PBO with manual and motherboard limits, nothing would help (also using a 5700XT). The only thing that did it was reverting back to BIOS 3103. I don't know why... Other games didn't have a problem and there were WHEA errors for each of the restarts (machine exception, something from the CPU I believe). Maybe it's a microsoft store games thing, but just to let everyone know.


Strange that on 3103 you are still getting, have you had this issue before you updated to 4007/3103?


----------



## crakej

t4t3r said:


> That is pretty crazy. I shouldn't have assumed that we were talking about stable fabric clocks but that is what I was referencing. But thanks for posting proof, pretty cool.


I was stable at 3800 with my Viper Steel's (2x8GB).

I am going to go back and test with just 2x16GB as since adding the extra 2 dimms has made it harder to get better speeds - though more recent bios's I have had more problems with. I used to be able to boot at 4600MTs with these ram sticks - now can't even use DOCP speeds like previously....


----------



## lordzed83

Im stable with my BCLK settings they fixed it cause 4001 could not worjk with bclk oc. Also fixed IF stability problem as BCLK works on that problem if u make it work


----------



## Logue

mc conor said:


> Strange that on 3103 you are still getting, have you had this issue before you updated to 4007/3103?


I think you misunderstood... The issue only happened in 4007. I reverted back to 3103 and now everything works fine, I can play the game for hours with no weird system reset or crashes. I believe it's some sort of bug related to the frequency control and the new curve optimizer for ryzen 5000. Since I have a 3800X, maybe the MB is trying to do something that my CPU doesn't support or that breaks it somehow. Also, it only happened after a few minutes of gameplay (but not many, like 15~20 mins and it'd crash, everytime).

Since nothing else has changed since I reverted to 3103 and now all is fine, I'd have to assume that is some bug with 4007 specifically when using a CPU that's not Zen 3. Like I said, didn't matter if I disabled FMax, disabled PBO or enabled it using motherboard or custom default limits for the 3800X, it'd still crash. With 3103 no problems. More of a warning if there's anyone with Ryzen 2000 or 3000 and thinking about going to 4007... If you play Forza Horizon 4 or any Microsoft Store games (that's the only one I do), there may be issues.


----------



## mc conor

Logue said:


> I think you misunderstood... The issue only happened in 4007. I reverted back to 3103 and now everything works fine, I can play the game for hours with no weird system reset or crashes. I believe it's some sort of bug related to the frequency control and the new curve optimizer for ryzen 5000. Since I have a 3800X, maybe the MB is trying to do something that my CPU doesn't support or that breaks it somehow. Also, it only happened after a few minutes of gameplay (but not many, like 15~20 mins and it'd crash, everytime).
> 
> Since nothing else has changed since I reverted to 3103 and now all is fine, I'd have to assume that is some bug with 4007 specifically when using a CPU that's not Zen 3. Like I said, didn't matter if I disabled FMax, disabled PBO or enabled it using motherboard or custom default limits for the 3800X, it'd still crash. With 3103 no problems. More of a warning if there's anyone with Ryzen 2000 or 3000 and thinking about going to 4007... If you don't play Forza Horizon 4 or any Microsoft Store games (that's the only one I do), there may be issues.


Ah ok my bad. Glad it's working ok for you now.

Seems to be some instability with 4007 and the new zen3 compatible bios in general even from other manufacturers.


----------



## kamikatze13

hello there guys, long time no see

finally got my hands on a 5600X to play with (not mine but a mate's who gets upgraded from an i5 7600) and happy to report that thing runs 1900fclk/3800CL14 without whea errors in prime95 blend + [email protected] gpu only. 4007 bios.

2000 fclk / 4000CL16 boots but is producing cpu bus errors en masse and ram aint stable obviously

great start so far. and btw, it seems a beta bios 4101 with agesa 1.1.9.0 is live on the driver page - does that mean we get the curve optimizer treatment?


----------



## Deyjandi

Alert! alert!
New beta bios!!


----------



## nick name

Deyjandi said:


> Alert! alert!
> New beta bios!!


For those that don't see it select Other for the OS.


----------



## Glazos

my 1800x really liked the new bios (4007) it went from being stable at 4ghz with 1.44 to 1.4


----------



## WinterActual

Sometimes when I start the PC with the new bios I get the F9 error with white led (which indicates GPU problem). I never had this problem before. Very strange.


----------



## Rx4speed

3800x/c7h non-wifi, 32gb (4x8g) 3200c14.
Any reason for me to try 4007 or the new beta 4101?


----------



## bushd0c

Rx4speed said:


> 3800x/c7h non-wifi, 32gb (4x8g) 3200c14.
> Any reason for me to try 4007 or the new beta 4101?


don't think you'll need it on zen 2. only if you want to try out resizable bar feature. you'll have to disable csm for that, though.


----------



## xeizo

Bios 4101 runs fine, base performance is lower than 4007, but can be tweaked to same using Curve Optimizer. I expect better scores for those running AIO/custom, I run on air.

AMD Ryzen 9 5900X @ 4498.95 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR (x86.fr)


----------



## crakej

t4t3r said:


> That is pretty crazy. I shouldn't have assumed that we were talking about stable fabric clocks but that is what I was referencing. But thanks for posting proof, pretty cool.


I was stable at 3800 with my Viper Steel's (2x8GB).

I am going to go back and test with just 2x16GB as since adding the extra 2 dimms has made it harder to get better speeds - though more recent bios's I have had more problems with. I used to be able to boot at 4600MTs with these ram sticks - now can't even use DOCP speeds like previously....


----------



## t4t3r

crakej said:


> I was stable at 3800 with my Viper Steel's (2x8GB).
> 
> I am going to go back and test with just 2x16GB as since adding the extra 2 dimms has made it harder to get better speeds - though more recent bios's I have had more problems with. I used to be able to boot at 4600MTs with these ram sticks - now can't even use DOCP speeds like previously....


On 1700x right?

Going to load 4101 today and see how it does with my 5900x.
Edit: Actually going to wait for the time being, 4007 is running so well that I don't want to change anything right now.


----------



## mc conor

Just updated to 4101 with 5800x.

This has completely fixed my issue with WHEA errors above 1600 FCLK. I can now run up to 1867 1:1 with 2x32GB RAM.

However there is one issue I noticed, if you manually set Ai Overclock tuner BCLK to 100 and divider to 1 it will fail to post with 7A errors and another one to do with GPU. Leaving this at auto (which does the same thing anyway, I just usually set it manually out of habit) and its fine.


----------



## t4t3r

mc conor said:


> Just updated to 4101 with 5800x.
> 
> This has completely fixed my issue with WHEA errors above 1600 FCLK. I can now run up to 1867 1:1 with 2x32GB RAM.
> 
> However there is one issue I noticed, if you manually set Ai Overclock tuner BCLK to 100 and divider to 1 it will fail to post with 7A errors and another one to do with GPU. Leaving this at auto (which does the same thing anyway, I just usually set it manually out of habit) and its fine.


I ran into something similar earlier when messing with PBO settings on 4007 - I accidentally changed Ai Overclock to something other than the standard setting and I started getting a WHEA bus interconnect error every 20 minutes or so. Set that back to default and it went away.


----------



## Asutz

2700x User here, 4101 working very good, 4007 was also good, running 32gb 3600 cl14 Crucials stable.Tried them all, so for other older Zen User's, no need to be afraid.


----------



## Mosu

t4t3r said:


> On 1700x right?
> 
> Going to load 4101 today and see how it does with my 5900x.
> Edit: Actually going to wait for the time being, 4007 is running so well that I don't want to change anything right now.


I will wait as well for a stable. Runing stable at 4.5 all clock with 1.25 v.


----------



## xeizo

4101 behave very well, I'm on air and silent fan profile so no over generous cooling. Auto OC with curve optimizer.
I will soon switch to C8H WiFi which I have laying in a box here, just needs time to do it. But I expect any settings from C7H can more or less be set exactly the same on C8H, bioses looks identical. As far as I can see the only difference, and why I'm switching, is the more generous I/O on C8H.


----------



## ossimc

Hi

With the 4101 Bios the Bus clock cant reach 100Mhz anymore. In prior versionen you had to chnage it to "Auto" but it doesnt seem to work anymore


----------



## xeizo

ossimc said:


> Hi
> 
> With the 4101 Bios the Bus clock cant reach 100Mhz anymore. In prior versionen you had to chnage it to "Auto" but it doesnt seem to work anymore


I have 100MHz with 4101, see above post


----------



## davids40

🤲 hello

is it normal? 
first boot of the day, my C7H starts in 20 seconds (acces bios) and 15s more to windows10
during this time (boot) my video card (MSI 2060S gaming X) is max rpm !!! 

for me it's an asus bug ... not you ?

thanks


----------



## nick name

ossimc said:


> Hi
> 
> With the 4101 Bios the Bus clock cant reach 100Mhz anymore. In prior versionen you had to chnage it to "Auto" but it doesnt seem to work anymore


If you're using DOCP it droops, but if you set it to Manual then it should stay at 100.


----------



## Deco

davids40 said:


> 🤲 hello
> 
> is it normal?
> first boot of the day, my C7H starts in 20 seconds (acces bios) and 15s more to windows10
> during this time (boot) my video card (MSI 2060S gaming X) is max rpm !!!
> 
> for me it's an asus bug ... not you ?
> 
> thanks


This is normal behaviour for Ryzen processors.


----------



## davids40

Deco said:


> This is normal behaviour for Ryzen processors.


 thanks


----------



## lordzed83

davids40 said:


> 🤲 hello
> 
> is it normal?
> first boot of the day, my C7H starts in 20 seconds (acces bios) and 15s more to windows10
> during this time (boot) my video card (MSI 2060S gaming X) is max rpm !!!
> 
> for me it's an asus bug ... not you ?
> 
> thanks


And whats wrong with that ??


----------



## ossimc

nick name said:


> If you're using DOCP it droops, but if you set it to Manual then it should stay at 100.


ok i'll try. any downsides to this method? does it change any other settings i need to know of? cuz ive been messing around with the curve optimizer and ram timings(and subtimings).


----------



## lordzed83

New bios got BCLK overclocking bug again... aka not always applies multiplier on ddr so sometimes boots 2133 instead od 3800...


----------



## BoneCrusherXes

ossimc said:


> Hi
> 
> With the 4101 Bios the Bus clock cant reach 100Mhz anymore. In prior versionen you had to chnage it to "Auto" but it doesnt seem to work anymore


Same here, "Auto" used to give me a nice &clean 100 , not anymore. tried to compensate with 100.2Mhz but system became unstable and very slow(4x16Gb)
Had to flashback to 4007


----------



## nick name

ossimc said:


> ok i'll try. any downsides to this method? does it change any other settings i need to know of? cuz ive been messing around with the curve optimizer and ram timings(and subtimings).


If you already set your RAM speed, voltage, timings manually then you're gonna be fine.


----------



## bushd0c

For me 4007 works way better'n' stable than the new 4101 Beta. Had to revert back. With Precision Boost Overdrive 2 I do reach around 11633 pts in CB R20 even with a Noctua D14 with 4007.


----------



## octt22

bushd0c said:


> For me 4007 works way better'n' stable than the new 4101 Beta. Had to revert back. With Precision Boost Overdrive 2 I do reach around 11633 pts in CB R20 even with a Noctua D14 with 4007.


Hi! i have this mother and i updated to 4101 beta and my new temps are more hot than bios 4007. My quesion is , how can downgrade bios to 4007 ? Put .cap 4007 in a usb and install?? or need to do other things ?


----------



## nick name

octt22 said:


> Hi! i have this mother and i updated to 4101 beta and my new temps are more hot than bios 4007. My quesion is , how can downgrade bios to 4007 ? Put .cap 4007 in a usb and install?? or need to do other things ?


I'm not sure that you need to use Flashback to downgrade from 4101 to 4007, but Flashback will work.


----------



## WinterActual

I reverted to 4007 without using the flashback function. Just use the "update" bios option from the bios and it will update with the previous version. For me the new bios was not usable at all. I was getting GPU error code every 2nd time I tried to turn on the PC and every time when I try to shut it down. Very annoying.


----------



## bushd0c

octt22 said:


> Hi! i have this mother and i updated to 4101 beta and my new temps are more hot than bios 4007. My quesion is , how can downgrade bios to 4007 ? Put .cap 4007 in a usb and install?? or need to do other things ?


I always use the flashback way because you can get sure to completely clear all traces of the old bios version you want to get rid of.


----------



## ossimc

nick name said:


> If you already set your RAM speed, voltage, timings manually then you're gonna be fine.


ok so "manual" doesnt boot at all. no matter if i use my settings which run fine D.O.C.P or if i use optimal defaults and then set manual(with all other settings on stock). 

two questions here: how to set up the curve optimizer if my primary goal is singlecore or rather game performance. atm i set the golden and silver core to -10 and the rest to -20 (i get CB20 mc4700 and sc 643 with these settings on a 5600X). whats a proper tool or benchmark to determine the quality of each core. is it even worth bothering?


----------



## bushd0c

ossimc said:


> ok so "manual" doesnt boot at all. no matter if i use my settings which run fine D.O.C.P or if i use optimal defaults and then set manual(with all other settings on stock).
> 
> two questions here: how to set up the curve optimizer if my primary goal is singlecore or rather game performance. atm i set the golden and silver core to -10 and the rest to -20 (i get CB20 mc4700 and sc 643 with these settings on a 5600X). whats a proper tool or benchmark to determine the quality of each core. is it even worth bothering?


maybe this post might help you:

__
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/k1d6pg/_/ge6qdv8


----------



## villason

They pulled the last version from asus website. Anybody knows why?


----------



## WinterActual

I see both versions.


----------



## nick name

villason said:


> They pulled the last version from asus website. Anybody knows why?


Yeah, I don't see it anymore either. If they pulled it for a reason then they should probably state that reason if it was a strong enough reason to pull the version. Now those of us running that pulled version are simply wondering if we should be running it or not.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> Yeah, I don't see it anymore either. If they pulled it for a reason then they should probably state that reason if it was a strong enough reason to pull the version. Now those of us running that pulled version are simply wondering if we should be running it or not.


Shamino has said in the C8H thread why the new betas where pulled, supposedly they won't boot with some 3300X CPU:s and the fault is in the AGESA so this is cross vendor. Won't be solved until a new AGESA arrives. Until then, if you don't have a 3300X it's fine to continue to use the Beta.
(3300X is almost only OEM but anyway, I guess it was AMD who did the pull)


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> Shamino has said in the C8H thread why the new betas where pulled, supposedly they won't boot with some 3300X CPU:s and the fault is in the AGESA so this is cross vendor. Won't be solved until a new AGESA arrives. Until then, if you don't have a 3300X it's fine to continue to use the Beta.
> (3300X is almost only OEM but anyway, I guess it was AMD who did the pull)


Thanks for that.


----------



## maw784

just installed 5800x ryzen master keeps acting up, so far at stock temps are great never over 76c with cinebench r20, but my score is low, ram at 3800 cl16 1900flck


----------



## villason

xeizo said:


> Shamino has said in the C8H thread why the new betas where pulled, supposedly they won't boot with some 3300X CPU:s and the fault is in the AGESA so this is cross vendor. Won't be solved until a new AGESA arrives. Until then, if you don't have a 3300X it's fine to continue to use the Beta.
> (3300X is almost only OEM but anyway, I guess it was AMD who did the pull)


Thanks. I am running it and it works great.


----------



## xeizo

Not on the C7H anymore, running C8H/5900X, but the bios is practically the same(3101 vs 4101). What I've found is a haven't got a single WHEA error since I set PLL at 1.84V, worth messing around with.


----------



## crakej

posted in error - sorry guys..


----------



## Paddydapro

My aim these last few weeks has been to get over 700 score on the cpuZ single core bench test but am only able to get 690 / 13.000










> this score is with PBO1 disabled and PBO2 so the one with curve optimizer Enabled and dialed in -15 on best 1-3 cores -20 on best 4-6 cores and -25 on best 7-8 cores on both ccd's on my 5950x.


What triggers me is that I cannot give PBO2 more power than the 130-140Watts for all cores no matter what I dial in for power limits and motherboard or auto also does nothing for me, which is way too little power to get a decent single and a decent multi core score.


> Only when I also enable PBO1 will I get 675 / 13800 in the cpuZ benchmark single / multi core respectively but then as you can see the single core score goes down quite a bit.


My question: has anyone of you gotten over 700 single core score on cpuZ bench? what bios were u using well there are only 3 considering the new beta bios.

known over 700 even over 710 scores can be found here: (just select google auto translate to your language even tho benchmark screens will be in english anyway)
5950X配Curve和Dynamic OC模式的性能体现(附BIOS设置和2077频率) - 电脑讨论 - Chiphell - 分享与交流用户体验 (on page 1 and page 5 are screenshots of 2 people getting easily over 700 in singlecore)

I have tried so much different settings and PBO variables, does anyone have another idea what I could try?


----------



## bushd0c

Paddydapro said:


> My aim these last few weeks has been to get over 700 score on the cpuZ single core bench test but am only able to get 690 / 13.000
> View attachment 2472850
> 
> 
> 
> What triggers me is that I cannot give PBO2 more power than the 130-140Watts for all cores no matter what I dial in for power limits and motherboard or auto also does nothing for me, which is way too little power to get a decent single and a decent multi core score.
> 
> 
> My question: has anyone of you gotten over 700 single core score on cpuZ bench? what bios were u using well there are only 3 considering the new beta bios.
> 
> known over 700 even over 710 scores can be found here: (just select google auto translate to your language even tho benchmark screens will be in english anyway)
> 5950X配Curve和Dynamic OC模式的性能体现(附BIOS设置和2077频率) - 电脑讨论 - Chiphell - 分享与交流用户体验 (on page 1 and page 5 are screenshots of 2 people getting easily over 700 in singlecore)
> 
> I have tried so much different settings and PBO variables, does anyone have another idea what I could try?


have you tried fiddling with the scalar options?


----------



## Paddydapro

bushd0c said:


> have you tried fiddling with the scalar options?


actually I have tried 1x, 4x and 10x on most scenarios and have never seen any actual difference I really don't know what the skalar is supposed to do at this point but it's just my anecdotal experience


----------



## ossimc

Paddydapro said:


> actually I have tried 1x, 4x and 10x on most scenarios and have never seen any actual difference I really don't know what the skalar is supposed to do at this point but it's just my anecdotal experience


i also get to 689 sc in cpu-z. with 300mhz offset. i can also do 400mhz offset...and the cpu will boost abou 100mhz more...but the scores dont go up. Maybe clock stretching starts to occur?

anyhow. im pretty happy with that kind of free power on top


----------



## Paddydapro

ossimc said:


> i also get to 689 sc in cpu-z. with 300mhz offset. i can also do 400mhz offset...and the cpu will boost abou 100mhz more...but the scores dont go up. Maybe clock stretching starts to occur?
> 
> anyhow. im pretty happy with that kind of free power on top


I will change to the x570 unify today and see if I get better results there it just triggers me so much that I can't get the same results just because the boost is bugged also changing from win 10 ltsc 1809 to pro 2004


----------



## xeizo

Those with very high single CPUZ most likely used very large offset in Curve Optimizer, the con by doing this is that the PC will be too unstable for general use, possibly they used very good cooling as well as low ambient temp. And turned off a lot of background tasks.
One way I can think of apart from that is limiting EDC a lot to like 80 or something, so that the CPU doesn't heat up as much during the multi core test which runs first.

During normal conditions 680 is a good result and 689 is great.

More BO offset than 100MHz doesn't improve single core score as far as I can see, and can also contribute to unstable idle.


----------



## t4t3r

Paddydapro said:


> I will change to the x570 unify today and see if I get better results there it just triggers me so much that I can't get the same results just because the boost is bugged also changing from win 10 ltsc 1809 to pro 2004


Will likely be worse for now. My C7H is more stable and benches better than my x570 unify. MSI has a lot of work yet to do on that boards bios.


----------



## Paddydapro

t4t3r said:


> Will likely be worse for now. My C7H is more stable and benches better than my x570 unify. MSI has a lot of work yet to do on that boards bios.


well I will try and can always change back will sell one board in a month or so


----------



## harderthanfire

Anyone got a link to the beta bios that was pulled for the C7H wifi?


----------



## Logue

harderthanfire said:


> Anyone got a link to the beta bios that was pulled for the C7H wifi?


Here you go: ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-4101


----------



## hurricane28

There is an updated version of that 4102 here: ASUS ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) | ROG - Republic Of Gamers | ASUS USA


----------



## harderthanfire

hurricane28 said:


> There is an updated version of that 4102 here: ASUS ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) | ROG - Republic Of Gamers | ASUS USA


Swear I just checked the Asus site xD Thanks for the link though.


----------



## t4t3r

Looks like they replaced 4101 with 4102. Didn't someone say there was an AGESA bug with 1.1.9.0? That may be the reason for the quickly revised version (even though it's still a beta).


----------



## ossimc

I am a bit confused now? Does the new 4102 has a new agesa version or is it just a new labeled 4101?


----------



## villason

xeizo said:


> Not on the C7H anymore, running C8H/5900X, but the bios is practically the same(3101 vs 4101). What I've found is a haven't got a single WHEA error since I set PLL at 1.84V, worth messing around with.


Did you notice any difference between CH7 and CH8?


----------



## goondam

Like a lot I was having trouble hitting 100mhz bclk on this board
I messed around some load calibration and other power settings 
Now after doing that and manually putting 100 in bclk I get stable 100


----------



## ossimc

goondam said:


> Like a lot I was having trouble hitting 100mhz bclk on this board
> I messed around some load calibration and other power settings
> Now after doing that and manually putting 100 in bclk I get stable 100


how?. would u care to elaborate?


----------



## Paddydapro

I have a really strange issue with the 4102 bios on the c7 wifi board. I get 07 q-codes with my old profile but even Stock evrythinf just old timings and 3600 ram and all on auto I can't boot and get 07 codes doesn't even go to bios anymore and just bricks and have to cmos reset. but booting without timings then going directly into bios after 3800mhz no timings I can dial them in and instaboot like before and it works until i restart the pc... then I get 07 and brick again.. pretty ****ty tbh.


----------



## xeizo

villason said:


> Did you notice any difference between CH7 and CH8?


No, not really, they behave pretty identical. CH8 is only worth it for the extra I/O, if you need it. Only thing I noticed is Q-fan has a better behavior for controlling the fans same settings. It's a lot more quiet.


----------



## goondam

ossimc said:


> how?. would u care to elaborate?


its the power settings for cpu/ram, also where you find load line calibration 
can't remember which settings i picked, if you want i can take screenshots

i get 100 pretty much all the time, as the board does frequency modulation around 100 and it will sometimes dip or go above it.
i believe you can shut off this spread spectrum on x470 ch7


----------



## -jamez-

I've been having some issues with my new 5950X on the CH7. I seems to only be getting 630 single core and around 11700 multi for the CPU-Z bench with DOCP on for my ram (@ 3200mhz) and PBO enabled - which seems to be well under what they showed a stock 5950X performing at.

I also can't seem to find where they've moved Curve Optimizer on the new 4102 BIOS. Used to be under PBO setting in Advanced AMD Overclocking, but it doesn't seem to be there anymore.

Any ideas on what I should be tweaking? Or is this just BIOS teething issues from Asus

Edit: I've also got this under a custom loop for cooling, so that shouldn't be an issue.


----------



## xeizo

I consistently get 682/9850 with a 5900X on CH8, but it's a settings thing probably nothing wrong with your CPU. 

Here you can find my full current settings:
xeizo blogg: Current settings in bios Crosshair 8 WiFi


----------



## ossimc

goondam said:


> its the power settings for cpu/ram, also where you find load line calibration
> can't remember which settings i picked, if you want i can take screenshots
> 
> i get 100 pretty much all the time, as the board does frequency modulation around 100 and it will sometimes dip or go above it.
> i believe you can shut off this spread spectrum on x470 ch7


ok ill try this. but shouldnt it show straight 4100Mhz then?


----------



## goondam

ossimc said:


> ok ill try this. but shouldnt it show straight 4100Mhz then?


its because it sometimes will dip below 100 bclk, to remedy that you have to turn off spread spectrum
not sure how to do that


----------



## JD82

Is anyone else experiencing RAM issues with the latest 4xxx BIOS?

I have 3800X that was running without issues 2 sticks of Ballistix MAX 4000 16 GB @3733 MHz 16 17 17 17 35 1T 1.36V with BIOS 3103. But, since next week I should finally get a 5800X, I decided to update the bios to the 4xxx version, required by Zen 3, to check it out. I read online that someone got better performance and stability with this bios, on Zen 2 CPUs but, unfortunately, my experience is very different.

I tried versions 4007 and 4102 Beta and on both versions I am unable to run the RAM with my previous settings. The crazy thing is that I'm unable to run it even at 3600MHz using the certified timings for 4000 MHz! The system is unstable with the RAM running at 3600 MHz 18-19-19-39 1.36V, which are the SPD timings!

Currently I'm running with the Default profile (2333 MHz 20 19 19 19 43) because I don't want to spend time finding better settings since I should change CPU (and memory controller) in a couple of days but I am really surprised that 3600 MHz 18-19-19-39 1.36V was unstable, considering that with the BIOS 3103 I was rock solid with 3733 MHz 16 17 17 17 35 1T 1.36V.

Anyone else is experiencing this issue? Is there something I could try as a quick fix?


----------



## xeizo

JD82 said:


> Is anyone else experiencing RAM issues with the latest 4xxx BIOS?
> 
> I have 3800X that was running without issues 2 sticks of Ballistix MAX 4000 16 GB @3733 MHz 16 17 17 17 35 1T 1.36V with BIOS 3103. But, since next week I should finally get a 5800X, I decided to update the bios to the 4xxx version, required by Zen 3, to check it out. I read online that someone got better performance and stability with this bios, on Zen 2 CPUs but, unfortunately, my experience is very different.
> 
> I tried versions 4007 and 4102 Beta and on both versions I am unable to run the RAM with my previous settings. The crazy thing is that I'm unable to run it even at 3600MHz using the certified timings for 4000 MHz! The system is unstable with the RAM running at 3600 MHz 18-19-19-39 1.36V, which are the SPD timings!
> 
> Currently I'm running with the Default profile (2333 MHz 20 19 19 19 43) because I don't want to spend time finding better settings since I should change CPU (and memory controller) in a couple of days but I am really surprised that 3600 MHz 18-19-19-39 1.36V was unstable, considering that with the BIOS 3103 I was rock solid with 3733 MHz 16 17 17 17 35 1T 1.36V.
> 
> Anyone else is experiencing this issue? Is there something I could try as a quick fix?


I'm running the latest AGESA code on three motherboards, 3800MHz, 3800MHZ and 3200MHz, so no problem with frequencies(CH8/B550-F/X470-Prime Pro). BUT, it looks like these new bioses needs more juice for SOC, VDDG and VTT and possibly having PLL set instead of Auto. Otherwise pretty similar to the ones before.

I also have a CH7 on the shelf that ran the latest bios code with 3800MHz memory just fine before I replaced it with CH8.


----------



## JD82

xeizo said:


> it looks like these new bioses needs more juice for SOC, VDDG and VTT [...]


Could you give me some numbers? I just want to compare them with the value I'm currently using.



xeizo said:


> I also have a CH7 on the shelf that ran the latest bios code with 3800MHz memory just fine before I replaced it with CH8.


The lastest bios was released 2 days ago, do you remember the exact BIOS version or, at least, if it was one of the 4xxx?


----------



## xeizo

JD82 said:


> Could you give me some numbers? I just want to compare them with the value I'm currently using.
> 
> 
> The lastest bios was released 2 days ago, do you remember the exact BIOS version or, at least, if it was one of the 4xxx?


You had all my settings in my last post









ROG Crosshair VII overclocking thread


how?. would u care to elaborate? its the power settings for cpu/ram, also where you find load line calibration can't remember which settings i picked, if you want i can take screenshots i get 100 pretty much all the time, as the board does frequency modulation around 100 and it will...




www.overclock.net





I ran bios 4101 on the CH7 before I removed it from the case


----------



## JD82

xeizo said:


> You had all my settings in my last post


Oh sorry, I did not notice it.


----------



## neikosr0x

BTW have someone checked manually enabling just Auto OC +200 and CPPC =on and Global c states =on? A few days back I was playing around and 1 or 2 cores were jumping all the way to 5.175ghz on a Corsair AIO with no curve optimizer enabled. BIOS 4007, 5900x


----------



## toxick

Because I couldn't buy a Dark Hero yet, I brought CH7 to life thanks to* elmor*
.

















Some tests below:


https://www.3dmark.com/spy/17268616


----------



## JD82

xeizo said:


> I'm running the latest AGESA code on three motherboards, 3800MHz, 3800MHZ and 3200MHz, so no problem with frequencies(CH8/B550-F/X470-Prime Pro). BUT, it looks like these new bioses needs more juice for SOC, VDDG and VTT and possibly having PLL set instead of Auto. Otherwise pretty similar to the ones before.


Hey thanks a lot! After following your advice I greatly improved the RAM stability! It is still to early to say, but it looks like it's back at the same stability level I had with BIOS 3103!

This is what I changed:


Code:


CPU Load-line Calibration [Auto]
VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Auto]
VDDP Voltage [Auto]
VDDSOC Voltage Override 1.100v
VDDG CCD Voltage Control 1.050v
VDDG IOD Voltage Control 1.050v
VTTDDR Voltage 0.7250v

These are the full settings I'm using: https://pastebin.com/raw/j5xAUCTk

I have two questions:

Do you think this voltages (SOC, VDDP, VDDG, VTT) are safe for a 24/7 usage?








When I move from the 3800X to the 5800X should I keep the same SOC, VDDP, VDDG, VTT voltages or what should I do?


----------



## t4t3r

Started messing with CO this morning on 4007 with a 5900x. -30 offset caused a reboot after running a few benches so backed down to -20 and have been testing. Although I wasn't sure how much to expect, temps are much better in COD which could sometimes get close to 80c for some reason even though I don't see temps above 65-68 in other games, but that is a nice improvement. All-core load voltage (running CB20 MC) was down to around 1.14-1.15v as well which is probably the reason for the reduced temps.

At -20 with PBO on Auto and limits disabled, CB20 runs around 4.35-4.4ghz on multi which is about 200mhz higher than before. I bumped CO up to +125mhz and some cores are now boosting to 5-5.1ghz, so will try +200 next. I don't want to dig super far into it at this point as some others have done until there are a couple more BIOS revisions, but these little undervolt tweaks with CO are great so far.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

toxick said:


> Because I couldn't buy a Dark Hero yet, I brought CH7 to life thanks to* elmor*
> .
> View attachment 2473475
> 
> View attachment 2473481
> 
> 
> Some tests below:
> 
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/spy/17268616
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2473476


What happened to your board?

Btw updated my C7H to 4007 and very happy with it.

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## ossimc

t4t3r said:


> Started messing with CO this morning on 4007 with a 5900x. -30 offset caused a reboot after running a few benches so backed down to -20 and have been testing. Although I wasn't sure how much to expect, temps are much better in COD which could sometimes get close to 80c for some reason even though I don't see temps above 65-68 in other games, but that is a nice improvement. All-core load voltage (running CB20 MC) was down to around 1.14-1.15v as well which is probably the reason for the reduced temps.
> 
> At -20 with PBO on Auto and limits disabled, CB20 runs around 4.35-4.4ghz on multi which is about 200mhz higher than before. I bumped CO up to +125mhz and some cores are now boosting to 5-5.1ghz, so will try +200 next. I don't want to dig super far into it at this point as some others have done until there are a couple more BIOS revisions, but these little undervolt tweaks with CO are great so far.


-30 will cause reboots in idle/light taskes in most cases because the idle voltages will decrease accordingly. It will enhance the problem with Mhz+ offset. i dont know if it supposed to be that way

i got a pretty good piece of sillicon and can run +400mhz offset(curve -10 good core -20 bad ones) like prime, CB, modern games, stable but then i might get reboots just browsing the web. GTA5 dont like 400mhz offset(200mhz runs fine). so still testing to do

have anyone noticed that you get only half of the L3 Cache readings in Aida64 if you disable PBO1 compared to max limits(motherboard). why is that? Does it matter?
i get better results in SC and games when i disable PBO1


----------



## nick name

ossimc said:


> -30 will cause reboots in idle/light taskes in most cases because the idle voltages will decrease accordingly. It will enhance the problem with Mhz+ offset. i dont know if it supposed to be that way
> 
> i got a pretty good piece of sillicon and can run +400mhz offset(curve -10 good core -20 bad ones) like prime, CB, modern games, stable but then i might get reboots just browsing the web. GTA5 dont like 400mhz offset(200mhz runs fine). so still testing to do
> 
> have anyone noticed that you get only half of the L3 Cache readings in Aida64 if you disable PBO1 compared to max limits(motherboard). why is that? Does it matter?
> i get better results in SC and games when i disable PBO1


How do you know it's the CPU crashing GTA and not just GTA crashing GTA?


----------



## ossimc

nick name said:


> How do you know it's the CPU crashing GTA and not just GTA crashing GTA?


Well you are right. Gta5 can be a *****. But I was able to reproduce the crashes. 300mhz offset is fine but more will crash.


----------



## nick name

ossimc said:


> Well you are right. Gta5 can be a ***. But I was able to reproduce the crashes. 300mhz offset is fine but more will crash.


I've been getting so many crashes in GTA lately.


----------



## villason

We have new BIOS:

Version 4201 Beta Version

ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO(WI-FI) BIOS 4201
Update AMD AM4 AGESA V2 PI 1.2.0.0
Before running the USB BIOS Flashback tool, please rename the BIOS file (C7HWIFI.CAP) using BIOSRenamer.


----------



## Dude970

Nice, so far seems good. Im on a non wifi C7H


----------



## ossimc

What's new this time? Should I bother flashing?


----------



## hurricane28

Try and find out man, than tell us lol.


----------



## neikosr0x

Lol, my pc doesn't even boot pass post, on 100% stock setting on latest bios. This is sht non-wifi 5900x


----------



## DDSZ

4201 runs well with my 3900X, 3800 RAM & 1900 IF.
Still can't get BCLK back to 100. It is set to Manual = 100, but it is mostly 99.4, and sometimes 101.3


----------



## Asutz

did the flash, first look, everything seems fine but can only speak for myself, 2700x and using crucial ballistix with some tighter timings c14 3600mhz , memory stability improved over time since the ealier ones . cmo profiles working, could use whole 4xxx revisions i'v made.

i'm not sure, 4201, my whole system feels much more responsive, windows and usb keyboard / mouse input too. 
always load defaults and do severals clear cmos before flashing. 

share experiences, maybe its not just a placebo, cant messure smoothness, latencies were always good.


----------



## Tactix

Finally got an order in for the 5800x, hoping it arrives by next week. Excited to see how it pairs with this board and my new 3080.
Also wondering if ill be able to tighten the ram up some.

I was reading some were having issues with Temps on the 5800x's is this common or just OE?


----------



## mikochu

Went from rev 1201 to 4201 using FlashBack. I haven't fiddled with the BIOS in over 2 years. Whoa, I've been really missing out. DOCP/XMP profile POSTs my B-die without issue. However, with HCI MemTest Pro 7.0, I'm needing to bump the DRAM voltage to at least 1.38v so far. I may dabble with DRAM Calc when I have more time.


----------



## mc conor

What load line calibration settings do you guys use and why?

Does anyone know what auto is equivalent to on this board?


----------



## Deco

mc conor said:


> What load line calibration settings do you guys use and why?
> 
> Does anyone know what auto is equivalent to on this board?


The auto value will normally lock to 2 or 3, generally it's safe to lock the value to level 3.


----------



## DDSZ

DDSZ said:


> 4201 runs well with my 3900X, 3800 RAM & 1900 IF.
> Still can't get BCLK back to 100. It is set to Manual = 100, but it is mostly 99.4, and sometimes 101.3


But for some reason it booted 2133 RAM this morning, oof


----------



## Dude970

The new BIOS seems good. I was a little nervous about leaving a lot of things on Auto, but it works great. Temps are higher say when running Cinebench but acceptable (78C Multicore) but gaming is 50s to low 60s.

Where I seem to be doing better is Core speeds across all cores. The second deck when I manually entered everything ran a good bit lower all the time, like 200- mhz lower and the first half still hits 4.6 on several cores and only 50 to75 lower on the rest.

Haven't noticed a benefit from enabling Resize bar but still games great.

LLC is 3 and PE set to LVL 3, SOC LLC is lvl 2

Really think when I get my hands on a 5900X I will see more benefits


----------



## kratosatlante

bios 4201 work ok but, no work cpu max 200+ locked at 200, 5600x can only 4850 now


----------



## DDSZ

lordzed83 said:


> New bios got BCLK overclocking bug again... aka not always applies multiplier on ddr so sometimes boots 2133 instead od 3800...


Did you find why it does that? I am having the same issue on 4201, tho I don't do BCLK OC. Just set to Manual 100, but shows as 99.6, and sometimes goes to 101.3


----------



## lukatherealone

Dude970 said:


> The new BIOS seems good. I was a little nervous about leaving a lot of things on Auto, but it works great. Temps are higher say when running Cinebench but acceptable (78C Multicore) but gaming is 50s to low 60s.
> 
> Where I seem to be doing better is Core speeds across all cores. The second deck when I manually entered everything ran a good bit lower all the time, like 200- mhz lower and the first half still hits 4.6 on several cores and only 50 to75 lower on the rest.
> 
> Haven't noticed a benefit from enabling Resize bar but still games great.
> 
> LLC is 3 and PE set to LVL 3, SOC LLC is lvl 2
> 
> Really think when I get my hands on a 5900X I will see more benefits


Can you share your CPU Cooler fan profile? I've got the same cooler and I think my temps are a little bit higher.


----------



## ossimc

kratosatlante said:


> bios 4201 work ok but, no work cpu max 200+ locked at 200, 5600x can only 4850 now


thats a bummer. i can do 300mhz atm as daily settings. although from 200mhz to 300mhz SC scores go higher but MC scores drop. couldnt figure out why


----------



## kratosatlante

ossimc said:


> thats a bummer. i can do 300mhz atm as daily settings. although from 200mhz to 300mhz SC scores go higher but MC scores drop. couldnt figure out why


if you try curve optimizer this bios 4201 its better, and seems better for test ram oc, dont block if dont past post, in previos can do 4925 stable and 5025 with fmax 375 but no stable and less performance in general


----------



## Dude970

lukatherealone said:


> Can you share your CPU Cooler fan profile? I've got the same cooler and I think my temps are a little bit higher.


I run mine at 100%


----------



## ossimc

kratosatlante said:


> if you try curve optimizer this bios 4201 its better, and seems better for test ram oc, dont block if dont past post, in previos can do 4925 stable and 5025 with fmax 375 but no stable and less performance in general


"dont block if dont past post " what? i dont get what youre trying to say^^ Also your AIDA screenshot says BIOS "4007" so what bios is it you are using?

i will try the new bios next week. as daily settings i go only 200mhz offset anyway.

how much vsoc you need to get your RAM settings stable? 2 or 4 dimms?


----------



## lukatherealone

Dude970 said:


> I run mine at 100%


What RPM do you read on HWiNFO?


----------



## Dude970

lukatherealone said:


> What RPM do you read on HWiNFO?


----------



## kratosatlante

ossimc said:


> "dont block if dont past post " what? i dont get what youre trying to say^^ Also your AIDA screenshot says BIOS "4007" so what bios is it you are using?
> 
> i will try the new bios next week. as daily settings i go only 200mhz offset anyway.
> 
> how much vsoc you need to get your RAM settings stable? 2 or 4 dimms?


captura antigua con BIOS antiguo, ahora use 4102, por 3800/1900 necesita 1.083 vsoc(set 1.087 drop to 1.083), no pruebe 2 dimms, tenga 4, pero digo que 4 dimms necesitan más vdim, en bios 4007 y 4101 boot post blocke en error 7 si el sistema no pasa Publicar, solo se puede arreglar con cmos claros
4 dims 3800/1900 cl14 trfc 245 funcionan con 1.45v pero para dawn trfc de 245 se necesita mucho más voltaje trfc 234 1.5v trfc 228 1.55v, trfc 221 1.58v


----------



## neikosr0x

Well, yesterday I managed to get my PC to boot normally again and it is working just fine, but i had to go manually setting every RAM timing from start all over again 3600 CL16 on a 4000 cl18 ram kit from gskills, 4 dim... the CPU is running a bit hotter and also de ram but everything seems smooth just like before, curve optimizer it working a bit better tho. The only sh*/* I am facing is not being able to boot at higher than 3600 for some odd reason. I might need a whole day to do so. But so far the PC is running like a charm.

5900x
latest beta bios to date.
CH7 non-wifi.


----------



## Tactix

Quick question for those that upgraded to a 5000 series chip.
Did you just Bios update and plop the chip in or is more recommended like chipset/clean driver reinstall?
From previous experience a full windows reinstall was nearly mandatory but has that changed.
thank you


----------



## bushd0c

Tactix said:


> Quick question for those that upgraded to a 5000 series chip.
> Did you just Bios update and plop the chip in or is more recommended like chipset/clean driver reinstall?
> From previous experience a full windows reinstall was nearly mandatory but has that changed.
> thank you


I did flash the 4007 Bios via Flashback, uninstalled/reinstalled amd chipset drivers. and was good to go.


----------



## Tactix

bushd0c said:


> I did flash the 4007 Bios via Flashback, uninstalled/reinstalled amd chipset drivers. and was good to go.


Awesome! Chip should be here within a few hours thanks!


----------



## goondam

Anyone running 5950x on ch7?? i was wondering what you all were getting for cpu-z bench scores


----------



## neikosr0x

Tactix said:


> Quick question for those that upgraded to a 5000 series chip.
> Did you just Bios update and plop the chip in or is more recommended like chipset/clean driver reinstall?
> From previous experience a full windows reinstall was nearly mandatory but has that changed.
> thank you


it will work without reinstalling windows but if you want it to work as intended you should reinstall windows


----------



## Tactix

Ryzen 5800x
Bios 4201
[All stock]
- DOCP set XMP 16gbx2 3200mhz 16-18 -18-18
-Fan curves
Results (so far) not thrilled with temps with Corsair H110i


----------



## Tactix

neikosr0x said:


> it will work without reinstalling windows but if you want it to work as intended you should reinstall windows


It always comes to this doesnt it, ill finish a few more tests and play around a bit, but in the end ill reinstall EVERYTHING!


Also noticed the Ryzen Power plan is gone after reinstalling Chipset drivers, is this normal?


----------



## bushd0c

goondam said:


> Anyone running 5950x on ch7?? i was wondering what you all were getting for cpu-z bench scores


CB20: 11730 pts
cpuz: 684,9 / 13238,7
with pbo2/curve optimizer, all core -20 offset & Noctua NH-D15 (IF/RAM =1866 mhz)


----------



## ossimc

neikosr0x said:


> it will work without reinstalling windows but if you want it to work as intended you should reinstall windows


why? what is not working as intended if i dont?

i switched from 3700X without reinstalling windows. what am i missing out on? pls give us some facts


----------



## Tactix

ossimc said:


> why? what is not working as intended if i dont?
> 
> i switched from 3700X without reinstalling windows. what am i missing out on? pls give us some facts


Just went from 2700x to 5800x and its smooth sailing, was thinking from the past and considering a reinstall but everything "just works" ... but really tho.

Side note: enabling PBO in bios nets less performance for me, same as with the 2700x
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Does it also need enabling under AMD overclocking, and whats up with the Max boost being greyed out?

Edit: im sure most of this is covered in one of the many fantastic guides available but im tired and being lazy, ill figure it tomorrow.


----------



## Hepe

So how are the new BIOSes with Zen+ CPU's? I have ordered a 5900X but it'll probably take another month or two before I actually receive it, so I'm kinda wondering if it's worth it to upgrade the BIOS beforehand. 
Also, how are the Zen3 CPU's working with 4x DIMM's, I'm picking up another kit of of b-die for 4x 8GB, so what kind of results should I expect?


----------



## goondam

bushd0c said:


> CB20: 11730 pts
> cpuz: 684,9 / 13238,7
> with pbo2/curve optimizer, all core -20 offset & Noctua NH-D15 (IF/RAM =1866 mhz)


nice i am getting slightly lower single thread cpu-z score of 650
mind sharing your bios setting??

i am also on D-15
what tim did you use?


----------



## bushd0c

Tactix said:


> It always comes to this doesnt it, ill finish a few more tests and play around a bit, but in the end ill reinstall EVERYTHING!
> 
> 
> Also noticed the Ryzen Power plan is gone after reinstalling Chipset drivers, is this normal?


ryzen 5000 cpus no longer need the "special" ryzen balanced powerplan. just use the balanced power plan provided by windows 10.


----------



## ossimc

Tactix said:


> It always comes to this doesnt it, ill finish a few more tests and play around a bit, but in the end ill reinstall EVERYTHING!
> 
> 
> Also noticed the Ryzen Power plan is gone after reinstalling Chipset drivers, is this normal?


I call bullshit on that reinstalling thing. It's just make believe imo


----------



## Tactix

bushd0c said:


> ryzen 5000 cpus no longer need the "special" ryzen balanced powerplan. just use the balanced power plan provided by windows 10.


Nice, thanks


----------



## neikosr0x

ossimc said:


> I call bullshit on that reinstalling thing. It's just make believe imo


Actually, Windows has actually gotten better at recognizing the hardware. Yet every CPU is different, When I went from Zen+ to Zen2 I didn't reinstall windows for a few months and i was getting micro stutters when opening certain apps. Tried almost everything to solve the issue and the only thing that fixed it was reinstalling Windows.


----------



## nesty

my 5900x does very well @ stock @ BIOS 4007 with overkill cooling (window open, water temp 9C )

any chance of improving this on newer bios ?


----------



## ossimc

nesty said:


> my 5900x does very well @ stock @ BIOS 4007 with overkill cooling (window open, water temp 9C )
> 
> any chance of improving this on newer bios ?


If you haven't used the curve optimizer then yes...i would try the newest bios. I think you can squeeze an extra 100mhz out of the CPU and get to 650 points in cb20 single or more. Not to forget the chance of better ram OC. If you don't like it...just flash back to 4007


----------



## ossimc

neikosr0x said:


> Actually, Windows has actually gotten better at recognizing the hardware. Yet every CPU is different, When I went from Zen+ to Zen2 I didn't reinstall windows for a few months and i was getting micro stutters when opening certain apps. Tried almost everything to solve the issue and the only thing that fixed it was reinstalling Windows.


Ok when you run into obvious problems i would reinstall too. But some ppl just do it just so they can sleep better. I went from 2000 to 3000 and now to 5000 without reinstalling...all on ch7 mind you.


----------



## Tactix

nesty said:


> my 5900x does very well @ stock @ BIOS 4007 with overkill cooling (window open, water temp 9C )
> 
> any chance of improving this on newer bios ?
> View attachment 2474532
> View attachment 2474533


Any reason your using 4007 over the other newer ones ?

Also anyone know what the resize bar does? Says “Support for harnessing full GPU memory, and CSM (comparability support module) will be disabled.
but not sure what that means


----------



## Tactix

ossimc said:


> Ok when you run into obvious problems i would reinstall too. But some ppl just do it just so they can sleep better. I went from 2000 to 3000 and now to 5000 without reinstalling...all on ch7 mind you.


I agree, at least for a Ryzen cpu swap it seems fine. 
not sure it’s windows that’s gotten better or that upgrading a CPU on the same motherboard just wasn’t really a common thing before Ryzen.


----------



## -jamez-

goondam said:


> Anyone running 5950x on ch7?? i was wondering what you all were getting for cpu-z bench scores


My scores aren't great and I can't figure out why. Have PBO on with a +200mhz offset and CO of -30 on all cores.

Temps get to about 80C on the all core bench but that seems pretty normal for this chip.


----------



## DDSZ

Setting SVM=ON makes BCLK=99.4, even with Manual=100.
And for some reason I can run 3800C14/1900 (basically 3777/1888) with it ON, but can't even run 3666C14/1833 stable with it OFF.
Any ideas why that happens? Maybe it toggles some other hidden settings?


----------



## zatara79

hi guys. i read all of you years now and i have try alot of urs settings. in crosshair i start use x2700 ram at 3466cl 14 etc etc in x3800 ran 3800cl 15 etc etc i buy x5900 and i have really problem first i use bios 4007 and now i use the beta bios my ram pass prime stable 7 hours only at 3200cl 14 (3466 3600 3800 all is unstable at prime) curve -7 -9-11-15 all is unstable. really its first time i dont know what happent can any one have something to tell me to fix my problems??  and i have one more question where in bios you change the vddp and vddg?


----------



## ossimc

-jamez- said:


> My scores aren't great and I can't figure out why. Have PBO on with a +200mhz offset and CO of -30 on all cores.
> 
> Temps get to about 80C on the all core bench but that seems pretty normal for this chip.


your single core is too low...even for stock settings i would say. So somtin is limiting the bosst or clock stretching is hppening. Put everything back to default(and no offset of 200mhz). make a run with PBO disabled and then with enabled. then start with the curve optimizer. start mit -10 AC (-30 is probably too much in every situation anyway)


----------



## Paddydapro

-jamez- said:


> My scores aren't great and I can't figure out why. Have PBO on with a +200mhz offset and CO of -30 on all cores.
> 
> Temps get to about 80C on the all core bench but that seems pretty normal for this chip.
> 
> View attachment 2474636


Dude, I really wanna help you out because I had the same problem and it took ages for me to fix..

1. don't use fmax enhancer it will just clock stretch to infinity in my experience, set it to disabled
2. go to digi plus power control and set switching frequency for cpu, soc etc. to manual and set the maximum possible value, so 500mhz or so i think.
3. set Cpu vcore LLC to level 1 you want this because you want high voltage when the load is low (singlecore or 4 core load etc.) to get high frequency and to get a high droop (lower voltage) when there is a big multi core load on the cpu.
4. set stable ram settings so 3600c18 or so don't know if you have b-die chips. we only want to test cpu at first to make sure this one thing is stable.
5. I personally have cppc and cppc cores as well as power supply low idle current and c-states enabled so I would suggest that but it's more of a preference topic, but as a german I need my things to be efficient xD
6. set Vcore to auto
7. now you have 2 or 3 different pbo's hidden in the bios which is sad because it's just confusing the *** out of people. Set the pbo in the main menu where your vcore etc. is to auto i think but maybe I have it disabled, am not at pc right now sry.
8. go to advanced/amd overclocking where the curve is and set to manual limits. 

Set these to 200/200/200 for the first trial.
maximum boost clock override frequency to 0
scalar to auto
finally set curve allcore to negative 30 when it booted before if not, try it and if it doesn't boot just lower by 5 until it boots.
9. open cpuz and do a quick benchmark of multi and single (score should be around 660-710 single core now and multi core should be 13200-13900
10. if you want maximum cpuz singlecore to tell your friends how sick of an oc dude you are, go to hwinfo64 and look at what core has the number #1 out of all of your cores attached to it, set the curve for this core to negative 30, max boost clock to 200, open cpuz, set threads to 1, enable flight mode in windows, open task Manager, go to details, rightclick cpuz and set to high priority, rightclick cpuz in task manager and open core allocation menu, click all cores once so all checkmarks are gone then set the one best core you set to -30 in bios. remember core 4 in hwinfo should be core 8 if it starts at core 0 in task manager because you have hyper threading cores inbetween the normal cores. Now, dont click on ok ans close the menu just yet, run the 1 thread benchmark so just around 1 second is left in the bench and then press ok and close task manager so you have as little things runningas possible. let bench run and Score should be around 700-720 for 1 core


----------



## -jamez-

ossimc said:


> your single core is too low...even for stock settings i would say. So somtin is limiting the bosst or clock stretching is hppening. Put everything back to default(and no offset of 200mhz). make a run with PBO disabled and then with enabled. then start with the curve optimizer. start mit -10 AC (-30 is probably too much in every situation anyway)


Here's everything stock:










And with PBO on - no offset:


----------



## -jamez-

Paddydapro said:


> Dude, I really wanna help you out because I had the same problem and it took ages for me to fix..
> 
> 1. don't use fmax enhancer it will just clock stretch to infinity in my experience, set it to disabled
> 2. go to digi plus power control and set switching frequency for cpu, soc etc. to manual and set the maximum possible value, so 500mhz or so i think.
> 3. set Cpu vcore LLC to level 1 you want this because you want high voltage when the load is low (singlecore or 4 core load etc.) to get high frequency and to get a high droop (lower voltage) when there is a big multi core load on the cpu.
> 4. set stable ram settings so 3600c18 or so don't know if you have b-die chips. we only want to test cpu at first to make sure this one thing is stable.
> 5. I personally have cppc and cppc cores as well as power supply low idle current and c-states enabled so I would suggest that but it's more of a preference topic, but as a german I need my things to be efficient xD
> 6. set Vcore to auto
> 7. now you have 2 or 3 different pbo's hidden in the bios which is sad because it's just confusing the *** out of people. Set the pbo in the main menu where your vcore etc. is to auto i think but maybe I have it disabled, am not at pc right now sry.
> 8. go to advanced/amd overclocking where the curve is and set to manual limits.
> 
> Set these to 200/200/200 for the first trial.
> maximum boost clock override frequency to 0
> scalar to auto
> finally set curve allcore to negative 30 when it booted before if not, try it and if it doesn't boot just lower by 5 until it boots.
> 9. open cpuz and do a quick benchmark of multi and single (score should be around 660-710 single core now and multi core should be 13200-13900
> 10. if you want maximum cpuz singlecore to tell your friends how sick of an oc dude you are, go to hwinfo64 and look at what core has the number #1 out of all of your cores attached to it, set the curve for this core to negative 30, max boost clock to 200, open cpuz, set threads to 1, enable flight mode in windows, open task Manager, go to details, rightclick cpuz and set to high priority, rightclick cpuz in task manager and open core allocation menu, click all cores once so all checkmarks are gone then set the one best core you set to -30 in bios. remember core 4 in hwinfo should be core 8 if it starts at core 0 in task manager because you have hyper threading cores inbetween the normal cores. Now, dont click on ok ans close the menu just yet, run the 1 thread benchmark so just around 1 second is left in the bench and then press ok and close task manager so you have as little things runningas possible. let bench run and Score should be around 700-720 for 1 core


You legend. Its late for me here, but i'll go through all these steps and report back 

Edit: I have b-die: G.Skill Trident Z RGB 3200 CL16. However I can’t seem to get it to overclock like I could when I was running my 2700x on the same platform. Using Ryzen DRAM Calc for timings. Would be pretty stoked to get it to OC to 3600mhz.


----------



## nick name

There is a 4202 BIOS version now. It has AGESA 1.2.0.0


----------



## nick name

nick name said:


> There is a 4202 BIOS version now. It has AGESA 1.2.0.0


Annnnnnnd it's gone. It's back. 

Though 4201 with AGESA 1.2.0.0 is still up.


----------



## nick name

nick name said:


> Annnnnnnd it's gone.
> 
> Though 4201 with AGESA 1.2.0.0 is still up.


The link still works though.



https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/SocketAM4/ROG_CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO_WI-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-4202.ZIP


----------



## Paddydapro

-jamez- said:


> You legend. Its late for me here, but i'll go through all these steps and report back
> 
> Edit: I have b-die: G.Skill Trident Z RGB 3200 CL16. However I can’t seem to get it to overclock like I could when I was running my 2700x on the same platform. Using Ryzen DRAM Calc for timings. Would be pretty stoked to get it to OC to 3600mhz.


If you want, you can try to copy my old ram settings that had no whea's and also with b-die - should be a good starting point 
don't forget to enable gear down mode and disable power down mode
Ram was at 1.42V I believe but you can dial in 1.5V for testing no problem, ram is really robust even 2V is not that bad for benching sessions just so you know


----------



## Logue

Anyone has suggestions for RAM OC with different chips? I have two different kits of CMW16GX4M2C3600C18 (DOCP is 3600 MHz, C18-19-19-39). However, they're two kits of 16GB that were purchased in different times (2 years apart) and, despite all the 4 sticks being the same part number, only 2 of them are B-Die, the other 2 are Micron E-die. I've tried a mish mash of Ryzen DRAM Calc timings, trying to use Safe preset and the slowest timing between the two suggested settings, but either I get instant failure or weird stability issues (especially after some time of particular gaming loads - e.g. Forza Horizon 4). So, it's 2 kits of 16GB (2 x 8GB), which in total is 32GB (4 x 8GB) - same part number, different chip manufacturers. Basically I'd like to know if I can lower my timings without losing stability while using these two "different" kits.

Right now I'm running 3600MHz 18-19-19-19-39 @ 1.35V SET with beta BIOS 4201. Here's a screenshot:










Thanks!


----------



## tryout1

nick name said:


> The link still works though.
> 
> 
> 
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/SocketAM4/ROG_CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO_WI-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-4202.ZIP


Gonna try this, hope it fixes my random WHEA Error reboots i have maybe once every 3-5 days. I know it's primarily a Ryzen 5xxx issue but i have it on my 3900x.


----------



## xeizo

tryout1 said:


> Gonna try this, hope it fixes my random WHEA Error reboots i have maybe once every 3-5 days. I know it's primarily a Ryzen 5xxx issue but i have it on my 3900x.


From my experience, too much Curve Optimizer as good as always is a guarantee for sudden reboots. As a lot of CO seems popular here, I suppose a lot of sudden reboots are also common.
Mind you, the benchmarks run, no crashes. It's just the sudden reboots. Only way AFAIK to get rid of it is to be very conservative with CO and say no to benchmark records.

Also Fmax enabled is VERY unstable. Do not use it.

Ryzen 3000 is much more robust, only trigger for sudden reboots I've encountered is above Fmax enabled. Do not use it.


----------



## nick name

tryout1 said:


> Gonna try this, hope it fixes my random WHEA Error reboots i have maybe once every 3-5 days. I know it's primarily a Ryzen 5xxx issue but i have it on my 3900x.


None in Event Viewer so far with my 3900X.


----------



## Jewfro

tryout1 said:


> Gonna try this, hope it fixes my random WHEA Error reboots i have maybe once every 3-5 days. I know it's primarily a Ryzen 5xxx issue but i have it on my 3900x.


For what it's worth I've had a similar issue with my 3700x that only started recently. I tried rolling back to 4007 and I'm waiting to see if that fixed it. Already ruled out Fmax, resizable bar, and RAM.


----------



## xeizo

Jewfro said:


> For what it's worth I've had a similar issue with my 3700x that only started recently. I tried rolling back to 4007 and I'm waiting to see if that fixed it. Already ruled out Fmax, resizable bar, and RAM.


For what it's worth, I run my Ryzen 3000:s using positive offset for vcore on these new AGESA 1.2.0.0 bioses. They seem to starve the CPU a little, which is a recipe for sudden reboot.


----------



## tryout1

xeizo said:


> From my experience, too much Curve Optimizer as good as always is a guarantee for sudden reboots. As a lot of CO seems popular here, I suppose a lot of sudden reboots are also common.
> Mind you, the benchmarks run, no crashes. It's just the sudden reboots. Only way AFAIK to get rid of it is to be very conservative with CO and say no to benchmark records.
> 
> Also Fmax enabled is VERY unstable. Do not use it.
> 
> Ryzen 3000 is much more robust, only trigger for sudden reboots I've encountered is above Fmax enabled. Do not use it.


You will laugh but i use neither of that, i use my rockstable 1.268v settings, with bios 4007 everything was fine, i even upped VDDG CCD and VDDG IOD from previously stable 0.95v to 1v and SOC from 1.05v to 1.1v, subjectively it helped a bit but could be placebo. I don't even know where CO is located cause i never checked tbh, and i disabled PBO and Fmax, even Performance Enhancer is on default, but like you say it's pretty random and more in low load/idle situations, hell i even stress tested AVX2 for about 1hr without any problems with OCCT so i hope this bios remedies the issue.




Jewfro said:


> For what it's worth I've had a similar issue with my 3700x that only started recently. I tried rolling back to 4007 and I'm waiting to see if that fixed it. Already ruled out Fmax, resizable bar, and RAM.


Yep gonna see, but gonna get my 5900x this week so i'm gonna see what happens or 4007 it is.


----------



## xeizo

tryout1 said:


> You will laugh but i use neither of that, i use my rockstable 1.268v settings, with bios 4007 everything was fine, i even upped VDDG CCD and VDDG IOD from previously stable 0.95v to 1v and SOC from 1.05v to 1.1v, subjectively it helped a bit but could be placebo. I don't even know where CO is located cause i never checked tbh, and i disabled PBO and Fmax, even Performance Enhancer is on default, but like you say it's pretty random and more in low load/idle situations, hell i even stress tested AVX2 for about 1hr without any problems with OCCT so i hope this bios remedies the issue.
> 
> 
> 
> Yep gonna see, but gonna get my 5900x this week so i'm gonna see what happens or 4007 it is.


Then I would say you use too low vcore, nearly same things happens as with too much CO. I see you use 1.268V, I used 1.33V on my 3900X when I was using per CCD OC 4425/4425/4200/4200. It never crashed and never had a reboot for several months, I even folded on it for 11 weeks 24/7. I use it in my B550-F now and it doesn't seem to have degraded at all, performs as good as always but I use PBO with Auto and positive offset on it now.


----------



## tryout1

The only difference i noticed according to HWinfo64 is that the c-states seem to go lower now or voltage is getting lower in general, beforehand aka bios 4007 lowest voltage was about 0.9v now it's 0.2-0.3v at times but even some stock ryzen 5xxx suffers from that issue what i gathered from hwluxx.de so i still hope it's gone with the newest bios (AGESA 1.2.0.0) and gonna try stock voltage with stock boost behaviour for at least this week.


----------



## xeizo

tryout1 said:


> The only difference i noticed according to HWinfo64 is that the c-states seem to go lower now or voltage is getting lower in general, beforehand aka bios 4007 lowest voltage was about 0.9v now it's 0.2-0.3v at times but even some stock ryzen 5xxx suffers from that issue what i gathered from hwluxx.de so i still hope it's gone with the newest bios (AGESA 1.2.0.0) and gonna try stock voltage with stock boost behaviour for at least this week.


Interesting, I saw this 200mV thing for the first time today on my X470-Prime Pro. Hasn't happened before on any of my boards. The Prime Pro has the newest bios though, 5833 is of today and with the latest 1.2.0.0. My X570 and B550 also runs 1.2.0.0 but a few days older versions, no 200mV on them. No WHEA or reboot yet on the Prime Pro, but boost is improved for the 3700X I use on it. These are some nice numbers for a 3700X below.

edit. I double checked with my X570, it has been on for 10 hours straight and the lowest VID is 950mV and lowest actual vcore is 1.019V. So not the same behavior. Bios is 3202 from four days ago. And it is stable.

3700X boost:


----------



## goondam

ok i haven't tried curve optimizer or any other offset option on this board

quick question can you run it along with pbo??


----------



## xeizo

goondam said:


> ok i haven't tried curve optimizer or any other offset option on this board
> 
> quick question can you run it along with pbo??


Curve Optimizer is a part of PBO2, so yes you run it with PBO


----------



## goondam

ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO | ROG Crosshair | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG United Kingdom


Best AMD Ryzen X470 ATX motherboard with Aura Sync, ROG Audio, Dual M.2, Intel LAN, VR functionality, M.2 heatsink and USB 3.1 Gen 2



rog.asus.com





another new bios.....

@xeizo thanks for the info


----------



## -jamez-

Paddydapro said:


> Dude, I really wanna help you out because I had the same problem and it took ages for me to fix..
> 
> 1. don't use fmax enhancer it will just clock stretch to infinity in my experience, set it to disabled
> 2. go to digi plus power control and set switching frequency for cpu, soc etc. to manual and set the maximum possible value, so 500mhz or so i think.
> 3. set Cpu vcore LLC to level 1 you want this because you want high voltage when the load is low (singlecore or 4 core load etc.) to get high frequency and to get a high droop (lower voltage) when there is a big multi core load on the cpu.
> 4. set stable ram settings so 3600c18 or so don't know if you have b-die chips. we only want to test cpu at first to make sure this one thing is stable.
> 5. I personally have cppc and cppc cores as well as power supply low idle current and c-states enabled so I would suggest that but it's more of a preference topic, but as a german I need my things to be efficient xD
> 6. set Vcore to auto
> 7. now you have 2 or 3 different pbo's hidden in the bios which is sad because it's just confusing the *** out of people. Set the pbo in the main menu where your vcore etc. is to auto i think but maybe I have it disabled, am not at pc right now sry.
> 8. go to advanced/amd overclocking where the curve is and set to manual limits.
> 
> Set these to 200/200/200 for the first trial.
> maximum boost clock override frequency to 0
> scalar to auto
> finally set curve allcore to negative 30 when it booted before if not, try it and if it doesn't boot just lower by 5 until it boots.
> 9. open cpuz and do a quick benchmark of multi and single (score should be around 660-710 single core now and multi core should be 13200-13900
> 10. if you want maximum cpuz singlecore to tell your friends how sick of an oc dude you are, go to hwinfo64 and look at what core has the number #1 out of all of your cores attached to it, set the curve for this core to negative 30, max boost clock to 200, open cpuz, set threads to 1, enable flight mode in windows, open task Manager, go to details, rightclick cpuz and set to high priority, rightclick cpuz in task manager and open core allocation menu, click all cores once so all checkmarks are gone then set the one best core you set to -30 in bios. remember core 4 in hwinfo should be core 8 if it starts at core 0 in task manager because you have hyper threading cores inbetween the normal cores. Now, dont click on ok ans close the menu just yet, run the 1 thread benchmark so just around 1 second is left in the bench and then press ok and close task manager so you have as little things runningas possible. let bench run and Score should be around 700-720 for 1 core


That's looking better! Multi is still a little under your estimate.


----------



## CAKyPA

Logue said:


> Anyone has suggestions for RAM OC with different chips? I have two different kits of CMW16GX4M2C3600C18 (DOCP is 3600 MHz, C18-19-19-39). However, they're two kits of 16GB that were purchased in different times (2 years apart) and, despite all the 4 sticks being the same part number, only 2 of them are B-Die, the other 2 are Micron E-die. I've tried a mish mash of Ryzen DRAM Calc timings, trying to use Safe preset and the slowest timing between the two suggested settings, but either I get instant failure or weird stability issues (especially after some time of particular gaming loads - e.g. Forza Horizon 4). So, it's 2 kits of 16GB (2 x 8GB), which in total is 32GB (4 x 8GB) - same part number, different chip manufacturers. Basically I'd like to know if I can lower my timings without losing stability while using these two "different" kits.
> 
> Right now I'm running 3600MHz 18-19-19-19-39 @ 1.35V SET with beta BIOS 4201. Here's a screenshot:
> 
> View attachment 2474676
> 
> 
> Thanks!


Good timings would be minimal due to different chips.
BTW Corsair ver number in sticker differs the chips.





ram/ddr4 - overclocking


r/overclocking: All things overclocking go here. Learn to overclock, ask experienced users your questions, boast your rock-stable, sky-high OC and …




www.reddit.com


----------



## Mazahists

So i have C7H running 3900x, 32GB 3600CL16 RAM, with latest BIOSes i (AGESA 1.1.9.0+ ) ASUS managed to get my CPU performance to desired level (~7500 on CB R20, with Fmax and PBO, no CO), but one thing i can't get up un running is FLCK above 1800Mhz. I have tried auto timings, loose timings, strict timings, "Actual HW overclocking" suggested voltages that always get RAM to 3800Mhz (and 1900MHz FLCK) , in short it always end up with the same best result - System is rock stable for 8 to 12h, and then my USBs start flapping (keyboard, mouse, headphones all of them run through monitor USB hub) Happens with 1833, 1866 and 1900 FLCK. But default D.O.C.P RAM 3600/ FLCK 1800 is rock stable.

I done some reading here, the latest theory was that it is some sleep state issue, that suppose to be fixed in latest beta BIOSes, but had no effect for me.
Also in some other boards people speculated that BCLK Spread spectrum need to be enabled to fix USB issues, but as we all know- there is no such option in C7H BIOSes.

Does anyone has any ideas?


----------



## Paddydapro

-jamez- said:


> That's looking better! Multi is still a little under your estimate.
> 
> View attachment 2474748


Mhh, that is actually a little strange, what cooler are you using and what was the final curve optimizer number you were able to get? Also did you dial in ram at 3600 or 3800 yet? also what windows version are you using?

Would also be good to get a screenshot of all the Things that are running in the backgroundor at least in task manager what's in the autostart tab... steam, discord, epic launcher and all that can severely influence performance


----------



## DDSZ

Mazahists said:


> Also in some other boards people speculated that BCLK Spread spectrum need to be enabled to fix USB issues, but as we all know- there is no such option in C7H BIOSes.


As I mentioned couple of pages ago, enabling SVM (which toggles Spread Spectrum I think) helps me to get 3800/1900, while I can't even get stable 3733/1866 with it disabled 
So you should try


----------



## t4t3r

Started experiencing cache hierarchy WHEA errors on 4007 after tweaking CO/PBO settings. It seemed to run fine with CO at -20 and then after a couple days I got the WHEA reboot about once a day at idle. Turned off PBO completely and also got a couple but PBO off also gave me better CB20 benchmarks scores. I have gone back to completely stock CPU settings (PBO set to auto) to see if that stops them. Memory settings are tuned for my kit(s) of bdie, but not sure why CO was causing WHEA errors, and more so confused why PBO off also caused them. Chalking it up to bios issues that still need to be ironed out but I may try 4202 in the next couple days.


----------



## Mazahists

DDSZ said:


> As I mentioned couple of pages ago, enabling SVM (which toggles Spread Spectrum I think) helps me to get 3800/1900, while I can't even get stable 3733/1866 with it disabled
> So you should try


Thanks, i will test, but BCLK is still rock solid 100.0 even after i enabled SVM, so i'm skeptical.


----------



## xeizo

t4t3r said:


> Started experiencing cache hierarchy WHEA errors on 4007 after tweaking CO/PBO settings. It seemed to run fine with CO at -20 and then after a couple days I got the WHEA reboot about once a day at idle. Turned off PBO completely and also got a couple but PBO off also gave me better CB20 benchmarks scores. I have gone back to completely stock CPU settings (PBO set to auto) to see if that stops them. Memory settings are tuned for my kit(s) of bdie, but not sure why CO was causing WHEA errors, and more so confused why PBO off also caused them. Chalking it up to bios issues that still need to be ironed out but I may try 4202 in the next couple days.


I've found I have two bad cores, they have what it takes to kill CO while they work at stock. I isolated them with a much lower offset(-1) in CO than all the other cores, and now it looks stable. My bad cores are core 0 and core 1, which is a pity as CPUZ always runs core 0 for it's single benchmark. But, you better check if you have a couple of bad cores.


----------



## hurricane28

DDSZ said:


> As I mentioned couple of pages ago, enabling SVM (which toggles Spread Spectrum I think) helps me to get 3800/1900, while I can't even get stable 3733/1866 with it disabled
> So you should try


How is that possible? SVM is for virtualization only so how can it help overclocking? That is very weird.


----------



## DDSZ

hurricane28 said:


> How is that possible? SVM is for virtualization only so how can it help overclocking? That is very weird.


Yeah, that is weird. 
I was using Hyper-V (so had SVM enabled), and running 3800/1900 just fine.
Then I wanted to do some benchmarks, and disabled SVM (that was the only change I made in the bios) - the system didn't even POST. I was only able to boot at 3666/1833 with it disabled, leaving other settings as before.
The most obvious reason for me is spread spectrum - SVM=on makes spread spectrum=on, so MEM/IF are a bit lower. 
Thats it, I guess


----------



## hurricane28

DDSZ said:


> Yeah, that is weird.
> I was using Hyper-V (so had SVM enabled), and running 3800/1900 just fine.
> Then I wanted to do some benchmarks, and disabled SVM (that was the only change I made in the bios) - the system didn't even POST. I was only able to boot at 3666/1833 with it disabled, leaving other settings as before.
> The most obvious reason for me is spread spectrum - SVM=on makes spread spectrum=on, so MEM/IF are a bit lower.
> Thats it, I guess


Ye, i call bs on the SVM part in order to get higher clocks. It just has nothing to do with each other whatsoever. 

I tried yesterday to get 3800/1900 stable but anything above 1900 is not stable... Its hardcoded to not allow them to run higher than 1800 it seems because anything higher results in weird issues and instabilities. Im gonna try again to day with different settings but i have no high hopes. 

Im running 4.450 GHz CPU and 3600 CL16 RAM so i can't complain but more is more


----------



## xeizo

hurricane28 said:


> Its hardcoded to not allow them to run higher than 1800 it seems because anything higher results in weird issues and instabilities.


No, I run FCLK 1900 on 5900X, 3900X and 3700X on three different motherboards. It works well, just takes some tinkering. However, one has to be lucky, some CPUs doesn't have the I/O die for it. It's not hardcoded, it's luck of the draw.


----------



## hurricane28

xeizo said:


> No, I run FCLK 1900 on 5900X, 3900X and 3700X on three different motherboards. It works well, just takes some tinkering. However, one has to be lucky, some CPUs doesn't have the I/O die for it. It's not hardcoded, it's luck of the draw.


I hear ya. You are running a different CPU which is presumably also higher binned. I am running an 3600 which is an non x model so maybe its lower bin? 
I can do 4.450 GHz at 1.250 vcore stable so i shouldn't complain but i want 3800 MHz RAM to work. 

Would you mind share your voltages on your 3700x plz? And if its not to much to ask the rest of your settings? Maybe it can help me. 

Thnx.


----------



## Mazahists

xeizo said:


> No, I run FCLK 1900 on 5900X, 3900X and 3700X on three different motherboards. It works well, just takes some tinkering. However, one has to be lucky, some CPUs doesn't have the I/O die for it. It's not hardcoded, it's luck of the draw.


 Sure, silicon lottery is a thing, but in my case CPU/RAM operations are rock solid for 8-12h even under stress test, and then USB ports start to flap, so doesn't really look like silicon or temperature related issue. 1usmus rated my 3900x as silver.


----------



## xeizo

Mazahists said:


> Sure, silicon lottery is a thing, but in my case CPU/RAM operations are rock solid for 8-12h even under stress test, and then USB ports start to flap, so doesn't really look like silicon or temperature related issue. 1usmus rated my 3900x as silver.


The silver rating is for the CCDs, not so high FCLK depends on the I/O die which is not rated


----------



## xeizo

hurricane28 said:


> I hear ya. You are running a different CPU which is presumably also higher binned. I am running an 3600 which is an non x model so maybe its lower bin?
> I can do 4.450 GHz at 1.250 vcore stable so i shouldn't complain but i want 3800 MHz RAM to work.
> 
> Would you mind share your voltages on your 3700x plz? And if its not to much to ask the rest of your settings? Maybe it can help me.
> 
> Thnx.


These are the settings I run on the 5900X, but pretty much the same settings works fine on the 3700X and 3900X too on different motherboards:


----------



## hurricane28

xeizo said:


> These are the settings I run on the 5900X, but pretty much the same settings works fine on the 3700X and 3900X too on different motherboards:
> 
> View attachment 2474949



Thnx man, what was your voltages and CPU clock at?


----------



## hurricane28

Nope, 

No matter what voltage i simply cannot run 3800 MHz RAM and 1900 FCLK...

Man, all this tweaking cost me so much time for no increase in performance in any way.. A buggy of mine went to Intel due to this erratic behavior and no room for tweaking, i might do the same man. I had enough of this ****


----------



## lordzed83

hurricane28 said:


> Nope,
> 
> No matter what voltage i simply cannot run 3800 MHz RAM and 1900 FCLK...
> 
> Man, all this tweaking cost me so much time for no increase in performance in any way.. A buggy of mine went to Intel due to this erratic behavior and no room for tweaking, i might do the same man. I had enough of this ****


You been saying same xxxx for 3 years. Can You finally sell it and move on like You said You will and stop whining ??


----------



## hurricane28

lordzed83 said:


> You been saying same xxxx for 3 years. Can You finally sell it and move on like You said You will and stop whining ??


Ugh, this fruitcake again...Go troll somewhere else man.


----------



## tryout1

Found something funny or even buggy with bios 4201 and dunno if 4202 fixed it but got my 5900x yesterday and noticed the VDDG CCD and VDDG IOD settings ain't working under the "extreme tweaker" settings, like if i set e.g. VDDG CCD to 0.9v and VDDG IOD to 1.0v according to Zen timings 1.2.2 both are at 0.9v which results in alot of WHEA errors ofc, atm i'm running "auto" on both which sets VDDG CCD to 0.9v (0.8973v) and VDDG IO to 1.05v (1.0477v). Didn't try set these things in "AMD Overclocking" menu but will edit when something happens.

Edit: Setting VDDG CCD and IO via "AMD Overclocking" does nothing, set it to 950 and 1000 and it's still at "auto" values.


----------



## xeizo

tryout1 said:


> Found something funny or even buggy with bios 4201 and dunno if 4202 fixed it but got my 5900x yesterday and noticed the VDDG CCD and VDDG IOD settings ain't working under the "extreme tweaker" settings, like if i set e.g. VDDG CCD to 0.9v and VDDG IOD to 1.0v according to Zen timings 1.2.2 both are at 0.9v which results in alot of WHEA errors ofc, atm i'm running "auto" on both which sets VDDG CCD to 0.9v (0.8973v) and VDDG IO to 1.05v (1.0477v). Didn't try set these things in "AMD Overclocking" menu but will edit when something happens.
> 
> Edit: Setting VDDG CCD and IO via "AMD Overclocking" does nothing, set it to 950 and 1000 and it's still at "auto" values.


I managed to set them precise on the CH8, like "same" bios, I usually press F9 for search and search for VDDP and VDDG in the bios


----------



## goondam

does messing with load line calibration and other vrm options improve pbo behavior


----------



## Mazahists

DDSZ said:


> As I mentioned couple of pages ago, enabling SVM (which toggles Spread Spectrum I think) helps me to get 3800/1900, while I can't even get stable 3733/1866 with it disabled
> So you should try


No effect what so ever - all day everything was fine, as soon as i get to key bashing in evenings WoW raid, USBs start flapping...


----------



## lordzed83

hurricane28 said:


> Ugh, this fruitcake again...Go troll somewhere else man.


Trolling ?? You should learn what Troling is. Actually good advice for YOU. Pleas follow it.


----------



## lordzed83

tryout1 said:


> Gonna try this, hope it fixes my random WHEA Error reboots i have maybe once every 3-5 days. I know it's primarily a Ryzen 5xxx issue but i have it on my 3900x.


So far second day testing this new bios and the random ONE WHEA error is gone. Initially I'd say its best bios from last few ones. No problem with 3800:1900 bootups that i had not always applying memory multiplier. Reboots fast ect we will see. And Sure gpu score went up on Port royale but could be doue to H22 windows update on top.


----------



## tryout1

xeizo said:


> I managed to set them precise on the CH8, like "same" bios, I usually press F9 for search and search for VDDP and VDDG in the bios
> 
> View attachment 2475061


Yeah i already send ASUS a bug report in the hopes they will listen lol, but basically it looks like this


















I mean i could be wrong and didn't check but i don't think that ZEN3 is coupled again or else the auto settings would be the same too imho. Even updated from 4201 to 4202.



lordzed83 said:


> So far second day testing this new bios and the random ONE WHEA error is gone. Initially I'd say its best bios from last few ones. No problem with 3800:1900 bootups that i had not always applying memory multiplier. Reboots fast ect we will see. And Sure gpu score went up on Port royale but could be doue to H22 windows update on top.


Yeah the 1 day i used it on my 3900x it worked pretty well too before i upgraded to the 5900x but it would be a really far stretch to say it solved the random WHEA errors


----------



## xeizo

tryout1 said:


> Yeah i already send ASUS a bug report in the hopes they will listen lol, but basically it looks like this
> 
> View attachment 2475168
> 
> View attachment 2475169
> 
> 
> I mean i could be wrong and didn't check but i don't think that ZEN3 is coupled again or else the auto settings would be the same too imho. Even updated from 4201 to 4202.
> 
> 
> Yeah the 1 day i used it on my 3900x it worked pretty well too before i upgraded to the 5900x but it would be a really far stretch to say it solved the random WHEA errors


I change them under AMD Overclock and CBS too, VDDG is in like three places, that's why I said use F9 so you don't have to go through the whole bios. When I do like that the settings stick, that is on four different Asus AM4 motherboards.

Regarding WHEA, it has complete vanished when I identified my sole bad core and gave it a minimal offset compared to the other cores. No WHEA, not a single one.


----------



## tryout1

xeizo said:


> I change them under AMD Overclock and CBS too, VDDG is in like three places, that's why I said use F9 so you don't have to go through the whole bios. When I do like that the settings stick, that is on four different Asus AM4 motherboards.
> 
> Regarding WHEA, it has complete vanished when I identified my sole bad core and gave it a minimal offset compared to the other cores. No WHEA, not a single one.


Yeah so far my 5900x is WHEA free too, didn't play with anything yet but will try CO in the weekend.

Btw here is what happens if i set it here under "AMD Overclocking" there is only one option then which i could try and what i will do after reboot. Basically even after set up things here the board resets to auto settings


















Edit:

Yeah well third option sticks to auto settings too now i'm gonna try putting in all 3 locations lol



Spoiler























Edit2:

Well i tried putting 1.025v in every of the 3 locations and only VDDG CCD Voltage in "Extreme Tweaker" seems to dictate the voltage, just fyi


----------



## ossimc

Hey guys. Are there special usecases (rendering, gaming, office...lol etc.) when u encounter these WHEA errors? So far i have only been gaming (f.a. BF5 which is heavy on the RAM or 8 h straight COD Warzone^^ WiiU PS3 emulator stuff) and my system seems rock stable. 1h aida stress test is fine too.

i just wanna make sure im not missing anything


----------



## xeizo

ossimc said:


> Hey guys. Are there special usecases (rendering, gaming, office...lol etc.) when u encounter these WHEA errors? So far i have only been gaming (f.a. BF5 which is heavy on the RAM or 8 h straight COD Warzone^^ WiiU PS3 emulator stuff) and my system seems rock stable. 1h aida stress test is fine too.
> 
> i just wanna make sure im not missing anything


Rendering I would guess, Cinebench multi can trigger it, but usually it happens during idle when browsing and stuff. After too many you get a sudden reboot, and if you have a lot of them Windows will get corrupted. Running normal benchmarks usually doesn't trigger it at all. It´s when loads are low, or quickly shifting from high to low.

Games that could trigger it would be those with a very uneven load.

As it looks to be caused by one or more cores getting too little voltage vs their quality, using less or positive offset on that or those core/s in Curve Optimizer seem to remove the issue. But you loose a tiny little in benchmarks.


----------



## Logue

Just some heads up... Using 4202 with a 3800X, latest Windows version with all updates available applied (v. 19042.746 - 20H2). Last night I ran MemTestPro and left it running til this morning (it reached around 500% on all 16 threads). However, when I came back to the PC, there was a USB Device error. It's probably related to the Corsair Commander Pro I'm using, since the RGB lights were turned off at night but in the morning they were all lit up again without any interference. Basically the Commander Pro reset. There were no RAM errors (0 found) but there was this USB bug. No WHEA errors tho'. After I restarted Windows, everything was back to normal with no USB errors. I'm not sure why, but it seems that stressing the RAM does throw some errors around other areas in the system, particularly if they are (probably) poorly programmed software (which if you didn't know, Corsair's definitely is). PB Overdrive is OFF (only using the Precision Boost stock functionality - Core Performance Boost). Everything is basically on Auto except the timings below and FCLK (which is coupled, 1800MHz)


----------



## nick name

Logue said:


> Just some heads up... Using 4202 with a 3800X, latest Windows version with all updates available applied (v. 19042.746 - 20H2). Last night I ran MemTestPro and left it running til this morning (it reached around 500% on all 16 threads). However, when I came back to the PC, there was a USB Device error. It's probably related to the Corsair Commander Pro I'm using, since the RGB lights were turned off at night but in the morning they were all lit up again without any interference. Basically the Commander Pro reset. There were no RAM errors (0 found) but there was this USB bug. No WHEA errors tho'. After I restarted Windows, everything was back to normal with no USB errors. I'm not sure why, but it seems that stressing the RAM does throw some errors around other areas in the system, particularly if they are (probably) poorly programmed software (which if you didn't know, Corsair's definitely is). PB Overdrive is OFF (only using the Precision Boost stock functionality - Core Performance Boost). Everything is basically on Auto except the timings below and FCLK (which is coupled, 1800MHz)
> 
> 
> View attachment 2475281


I've found USB devices disconnecting to be a symptom of too low SOC voltage.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> I've found USB devices disconnecting to be a symptom of too low SOC voltage.


Could be, I have set SOC manual on all my AM4 boards. No USB issues. And I use USB gear on all, mice, keyboards, wireless, pro audio interfaces, musical keyboards, storage, USB switch etc


----------



## t4t3r

Logue said:


> Just some heads up... Using 4202 with a 3800X, latest Windows version with all updates available applied (v. 19042.746 - 20H2). Last night I ran MemTestPro and left it running til this morning (it reached around 500% on all 16 threads). However, when I came back to the PC, there was a USB Device error. It's probably related to the Corsair Commander Pro I'm using, since the RGB lights were turned off at night but in the morning they were all lit up again without any interference. Basically the Commander Pro reset. There were no RAM errors (0 found) but there was this USB bug. No WHEA errors tho'. After I restarted Windows, everything was back to normal with no USB errors. I'm not sure why, but it seems that stressing the RAM does throw some errors around other areas in the system, particularly if they are (probably) poorly programmed software (which if you didn't know, Corsair's definitely is). PB Overdrive is OFF (only using the Precision Boost stock functionality - Core Performance Boost). Everything is basically on Auto except the timings below and FCLK (which is coupled, 1800MHz)
> 
> 
> View attachment 2475281


Not much reason to run anything beyond 3103 for Zen 2 chips. Even 4007 which I'm running on my 5900x introduced some weird behavior and errors with my 3900x which had been completely stable on 3103 and some older versions. Save yourself the trouble until another non-beta bios is out and/or it's been tested to even be stable for Zen 3.


----------



## xeizo

Worth mentioning again, that for Zen2 there seem to have been no USB errors before the Zen3 beta bioses started to appear and people started to use them. Those who have issues have it with both Zen2 and Zen3. AGESA is still wonky for sure, even if creative settings may improve/remove the problem.

AND I hope AMD is working day and night to patch the AGESA for implementing a safeguard against sudden blackscreen/sudden reboot. It's super annoying for a lot of users. This one only affects Zen3 though, Zen2 seems unaffected.

BTW, if AMD doesn't fix this WHEA/sudden reboot problem, in effect they will loose all professional/semi professional users who simply can't have it. Very bad play in that case.

It's almost like it's an Intel employee writing the AGESA:s ....


----------



## goondam

i have no experience with zen 2 as i jumped from a zen 1+ to zen 3. my 2600 had no issues with usb or not, but the 4007 did make my ram a bit unstable ...

on 5950x i got no issues for now


----------



## xeizo

goondam said:


> i have no experience with zen 2 as i jumped from a zen 1+ to zen 3. my 2600 had no issues with usb or not, but the 4007 did make my ram a bit unstable ...
> 
> on 5950x i got no issues for now


AFAIK there was NO USB issues before the V2 bioses, neither on Zen+ nor Zen2. As I said, my USB works fine with the latest 1.2.0.0 bioses on Zen+, Zen2 and Zen3. But I too had them briefly on my B550-F with the first V2 bioses. USB audio interface was impossible to use.

But WHEA and sudden reboot is still a reality for Zen3 and requires extensive tweaking to minimize/remove. NO such issues on Zen+ and Zen2.


----------



## toxick

Hello,
And now with Asus Crosshair VII Hero my AMD Ryzen 9 5950X has boost to* 5.250GHz!!!!!!!*
I made changes to curve optimizer and cpu boost clock override.


----------



## xeizo

toxick said:


> Hello,
> And now with Asus Crosshair VII Hero my AMD Ryzen 9 5950X has boost to* 5.250GHz!!!!!!!*
> I made changes to curve optimizer and cpu boost clock override.
> 
> View attachment 2475565
> 
> 
> View attachment 2475566
> View attachment 2475567
> 
> View attachment 2475568
> 
> View attachment 2475579


I've had insane boost too, but impossible to maintain without any WHEA errors or any sudden reboots. Benchmarks where stable, but that doesn't matter when the PC as a whole wasn't stable.
BO of max 50MHz to have zero WHEA for me, to be fully stable during idle I need to use conservative settings. Stable during load has never been a problem.


----------



## toxick

xeizo said:


> I've had insane boost too, but impossible to maintain without any WHEA errors or any sudden reboots. Benchmarks where stable, but that doesn't matter when the PC as a whole wasn't stable.
> BO of max 50MHz to have zero WHEA for me, to be fully stable during idle I need to use conservative settings. Stable during load has never been a problem.


I made a custom view for WHEA, I don't have any errors.


----------



## crakej

I've had 2 reboots with latest bios..... WHEA error caused it - machine crashed 10 mins later. I was using a Virtual Machine on Virtualbox.

Don't know if it's connected, but when I booted up, I had no sound. Had to reboot again!


----------



## xeizo

toxick said:


> I made a custom view for WHEA, I don't have any errors.
> View attachment 2475588


You are very lucky to get what seems like a fully functioning sample(look at the WHEA thread). Congrats!


----------



## xeizo

crakej said:


> I've had 2 reboots with latest bios..... WHEA error caused it - machine crashed 10 mins later. I was using a Virtual Machine on Virtualbox.
> 
> Don't know if it's connected, but when I booted up, I had no sound. Had to reboot again!
> 
> View attachment 2475590


Sound is a on a bus which means it can be connected to each other, like the reported USB errors, too low VDDP, SOC or PLL all looks to trigger WHEA. And too high VDDG does the same.


----------



## crakej

xeizo said:


> Sound is a on a bus which means it can be connected to each other, like the reported USB errors, too low VDDP, SOC or PLL all looks to trigger WHEA. And too high VDDG does the same.


Interesting - I will have a play with my voltages later.... strange how voltage requirements change like this.....


----------



## xeizo

crakej said:


> Interesting - I will have a play with my voltages later.... strange how voltage requirements change like this.....


They changed with the V2 bioses as far as I can detect


----------



## hurricane28

Yeey, finally managed to get 4.4 GHz CPU stable at 3800 MHz RAM CL16  

One hour OCCT RAM, 1 hour of CPU linpack TM5 more than 1 hour. Than gaming for couple of hours. 

No issues other than sometimes mouse skips but i heard its due to the 1900 FCLK? Heard of more USB issues with high FCLK clocks.


----------



## goondam

another question for you all, is using the extra 4pin cpu connector on ch7 allow zen 3 cpus( particularly 5900/5950x) to boost higher on pbo??

how many of you are even using that extra 4pin cpu connector??


----------



## hurricane28

goondam said:


> another question for you all, is using the extra 4pin cpu connector on ch7 allow zen 3 cpus( particularly 5900/5950x) to boost higher on pbo??
> 
> how many of you are even using that extra 4pin cpu connector??


Nah man, that is only for LN2. I always plug it in due to my PSU cables but its not necessary.


----------



## Keith Myers

Well since the 24 pin connector has to supply +12V to the PCIE lanes also, if you run more than a single gpu, you should always plug in any auxiliary +12V supply that you can to lessen the chance of burning up the 24 pin connector. I run 3 or 4 gpus at minimum all the time and I look for motherboards that have an auxiliary +12V PCIE connector on the motherboard to augment/supply PCIE lane power.


----------



## Logue

t4t3r said:


> Not much reason to run anything beyond 3103 for Zen 2 chips. Even 4007 which I'm running on my 5900x introduced some weird behavior and errors with my 3900x which had been completely stable on 3103 and some older versions. Save yourself the trouble until another non-beta bios is out and/or it's been tested to even be stable for Zen 3.


Yeah, I think I'll stay with 3103 since random reboots have become a thing now (4202 with 3800X)... Thanks for the advice... I have all my voltages on Auto and SOC is reported as 1.1V (1.098...) which is kinda high, I used to run 3103 and before with 1.05 or lower.


----------



## Mazahists

xeizo said:


> Could be, I have set SOC manual on all my AM4 boards. No USB issues. And I use USB gear on all, mice, keyboards, wireless, pro audio interfaces, musical keyboards, storage, USB switch etc


What voltage values are we talking about here?


----------



## xeizo

Mazahists said:


> What voltage values are we talking about here?


SOC 1.1V
PLL 1.76-1.82V(depending on CPU, Zen+ likes low PLL, Zen3 needs high for high FCLK)
VDDP 0.95V
VDDG IOD 1.035V
VDDG CCD 1.010V
SB 1.05V
VTT 0.725-0.750 (depending on RAM, should be ~half of VDIMM)
LLC Auto
Vcore Auto, on Zen 3 no offset, on Zen 2 positive offset +0.0625V, on Zen+ negative offset -0.075-0.1V

These settings runs 3800MHz RAM/FCLK1900 on two rigs, and 3200MHz/FCLK1600 on two rigs, very different quality RAM.


----------



## lordzed83

Left that running overnight ye like this bios


----------



## crakej

xeizo said:


> SOC 1.1V
> PLL 1.76-1.82V(depending on CPU, Zen+ likes low PLL, Zen3 needs high for high FCLK)
> VDDP 0.95V
> VDDG IOD 1.035V
> VDDG CCD 1.010V
> SB 1.05V
> VTT 0.725-0.750 (depending on RAM, should be ~half of VDIMM)
> LLC Auto
> Vcore Auto, on Zen 3 no offset, on Zen 2 positive offset +0.0625V, on Zen+ negative offset -0.075-0.1V
> 
> These settings runs 3800MHz RAM/FCLK1900 on two rigs, and 3200MHz/FCLK1600 on two rigs, very different quality RAM.


Wow!

Checkout what my MB chooses for VDDP and VDDG automatically!


----------



## xeizo

crakej said:


> Wow!
> 
> Checkout what my MB chooses for VDDP and VDDG automatically!
> 
> View attachment 2475721


Looks high, I know on Zen3 at least having those settings does WHEA errors


----------



## hurricane28




----------



## hurricane28

I love this CPU and RAM dudes, This BIOS is good too for me!


----------



## xeizo

Yes, I think the AGESA 1.2.0.0 bioses works pretty well, I use them on four motherboards and all performs mint.

Particularly on my older rigs with worse RAM quality, I have new OC records for that specific RAM on two motherboards. I'm sitting at my 3700X rig right now, with X470-Prime Pro and bios 5833. It has four sticks of Hynix AFR, both single rank and dual rank mixed, it has never been possible to run them higher than 3000MHz, and even that was a struggle. Now they happily run at 3200c16 fully stable. Great bioses ....


----------



## tryout1

crakej said:


> Interesting - I will have a play with my voltages later.... strange how voltage requirements change like this.....





crakej said:


> Wow!
> 
> Checkout what my MB chooses for VDDP and VDDG automatically!
> 
> View attachment 2475721


VDDG Settings doesn't seem to work tho atm or at least i only noticed it on my 5900x, as you can see in my previous post, i got a reply from ASUS today that they escalated the issue, i sent them screenshots and a "how-to replicate" so to speak, but your's are truly high, VDDG IOD is 1.05v here too and VDDG CCD just 0.9v, on the other hand you can set the CLDO VDDP setting just fine which was 1.09v too for me but i set them to 0.9v like on my 3900x before, so far i'm still WHEA error free _knocks on wood_

Best thing i could recommend you to do is to go back to bios 3004 for ryzen 3xxx atm which was WHEA error free for my 3900x (3900x pushed out errors after 4002)


----------



## hurricane28

xeizo said:


> Yes, I think the AGESA 1.2.0.0 bioses works pretty well, I use them on four motherboards and all performs mint.
> 
> Particularly on my older rigs with worse RAM quality, I have new OC records for that specific RAM on two motherboards. I'm sitting at my 3700X rig right now, with X470-Prime Pro and bios 5833. It has four sticks of Hynix AFR, both single rank and dual rank mixed, it has never been possible to run them higher than 3000MHz, and even that was a struggle. Now they happily run at 3200c16 fully stable. Great bioses ....


Ye man, it seems that Asus and or AMD finally doing a good job. 

I think 4.4 GHz 3899 MHz CL16 is pretty amazing for an 3600 chip if you ask me. The calculator also said i have an golden sample, so im pretty happy with it. 
I can do 4.5 Ghz but at lower RAM speed.


----------



## crakej

tryout1 said:


> VDDG Settings doesn't seem to work tho atm or at least i only noticed it on my 5900x, as you can see in my previous post, i got a reply from ASUS today that they escalated the issue, i sent them screenshots and a "how-to replicate" so to speak, but your's are truly high, VDDG IOD is 1.05v here too and VDDG CCD just 0.9v, on the other hand you can set the CLDO VDDP setting just fine which was 1.09v too for me but i set them to 0.9v like on my 3900x before, so far i'm still WHEA error free _knocks on wood_
> 
> Best thing i could recommend you to do is to go back to bios 3004 for ryzen 3xxx atm which was WHEA error free for my 3900x (3900x pushed out errors after 4002)


I can confirm I didn't have these errors before, and 3xxx bios didn't use such high auto settings either. 2xxx bios had these high settings, but no errors.

I might contact AMD - I wonder if my CPU is iffy as I've not seen others with these problems/high voltages.


----------



## lordzed83

xeizo said:


> Yes, I think the AGESA 1.2.0.0 bioses works pretty well, I use them on four motherboards and all performs mint.
> 
> Particularly on my older rigs with worse RAM quality, I have new OC records for that specific RAM on two motherboards. I'm sitting at my 3700X rig right now, with X470-Prime Pro and bios 5833. It has four sticks of Hynix AFR, both single rank and dual rank mixed, it has never been possible to run them higher than 3000MHz, and even that was a struggle. Now they happily run at 3200c16 fully stable. Great bioses ....


Im like random WHE is fixed in this bios
aftere 12 hour stress test i posted HCI memtests ramtests Cinebench everyiything pass no reboots No crash No problems









WWWWWTTTTTTFFFFFF  Zero clue whats up with this 1 Random WHE im getting since the Zen3 bioses landed and by now I'w ran out of ideas tbh what is it. Others have actual problems like suuttering shot downs ect.
Nothing here ONE error and pc will run for a WEEK if i dont reboot it or anything no problems Wont get SECOND error just this 1. And everyone here knows my setup is overtesed to hell on every compoment.


----------



## hurricane28

Do these WHE errors also occur in event viewer or only in hwinfo?

I had them before and it was RAM or Soc voltage related.


----------



## crakej

tryout1 said:


> VDDG Settings doesn't seem to work tho atm or at least i only noticed it on my 5900x, as you can see in my previous post, i got a reply from ASUS today that they escalated the issue, i sent them screenshots and a "how-to replicate" so to speak, but your's are truly high, VDDG IOD is 1.05v here too and VDDG CCD just 0.9v, on the other hand you can set the CLDO VDDP setting just fine which was 1.09v too for me but i set them to 0.9v like on my 3900x before, so far i'm still WHEA error free _knocks on wood_
> 
> Best thing i could recommend you to do is to go back to bios 3004 for ryzen 3xxx atm which was WHEA error free for my 3900x (3900x pushed out errors after 4002)


I can confirm I didn't have these errors before, and 3xxx bios didn't use such high auto settings either. 2xxx bios had these high settings, but no errors.

I might contact AMD - I wonder if my CPU is iffy as I've not seen others with these problems/high voltages.


----------



## xeizo

lordzed83 said:


> Im like random WHE is fixed in this bios
> aftere 12 hour stress test i posted HCI memtests ramtests Cinebench everyiything pass no reboots No crash No problems
> View attachment 2475778
> 
> 
> WWWWWTTTTTTFFFFFF  Zero clue whats up with this 1 Random WHE im getting since the Zen3 bioses landed and by now I'w ran out of ideas tbh what is it. Others have actual problems like suuttering shot downs ect.
> Nothing here ONE error and pc will run for a WEEK if i dont reboot it or anything no problems Wont get SECOND error just this 1. And everyone here knows my setup is overtesed to hell on every compoment.


As said before, you can benchmark day and night and these don't happen, it's during idle or when going down from high load in a benchmark. Or in games, which shifts load regularly.

I seem to get rid of them using less optimistic settings and being content with slightly lower scores, also I've identified at least one bad core which I've adjusted for in Curve Optimizer. Haven't had one for a couple of days now, knock on wood.


----------



## Mazahists

Logue said:


> Yeah, I think I'll stay with 3103 since random reboots have become a thing now (4202 with 3800X)... Thanks for the advice... I have all my voltages on Auto and SOC is reported as 1.1V (1.098...) which is kinda high, I used to run 3103 and before with 1.05 or lower.


OK, i will test this theory, i have USB errors/flapping with >1800 FCLK, with Soc 1.1125V, on Auto it is reported 1.09V (BIOS 4202) i will set it to 1.05V


----------



## hurricane28

xeizo said:


> As said before, you can benchmark day and night and these don't happen, it's during idle or when going down from high load in a benchmark. Or in games, which shifts load regularly.
> 
> I seem to get rid of them using less optimistic settings and being content with slightly lower scores, also I've identified at least one bad core which I've adjusted for in Curve Optimizer. Haven't had one for a couple of days now, knock on wood.


Its only related to 5K series chips isn't it? 

I've been idling, playing games etc. etc. for weeks and even on the latest beta bios is have zero issues so far.

Imo, its the best BIOS for me on this board so far.


----------



## lordzed83

xeizo said:


> As said before, you can benchmark day and night and these don't happen, it's during idle or when going down from high load in a benchmark. Or in games, which shifts load regularly.
> 
> I seem to get rid of them using less optimistic settings and being content with slightly lower scores, also I've identified at least one bad core which I've adjusted for in Curve Optimizer. Haven't had one for a couple of days now, knock on wood.


But its on 3900x and it happens only ONCE a reboot and pc got no problems at all will work stable for a week rendering benching gaming ect lol  something with new bioses just cant figure out that one annoying error.









Was benching gaming mining over night ect still one as i said  NEver drops second. Could this be some Missread from HW info hmmm


----------



## t4t3r

It's just some very very minor instability at that FCLK and voltages for your particular chip and board. I've seen it with almost every other motherboard I've tried when paired with a 3700x I had - maybe a single WHEA 19, always at startup or sometimes coming out of sleep. I would almost guarantee that bumping down to 3733/1867 "fixes" it. Unless you sit in hwinfo64 or hawk your event viewer all day, I wouldn't worry about it.

Also, 4202 is running great. I would recommend anyone with Zen 3 to upgrade to 1.2.0.0.


----------



## Logue

Hey everyone! After a few days researching problems with my PC, I've finally found the guilty software: *Xbox Game Bar* for Windows 10... I was having random crashes so often I started to think my GPU went to hell, or my CPU or my MB or all of them. However, I could still play some games, just as demanding as the ones giving errors (mainly tested with Forza Horizon 4 and Doom/Doom Eternal and CS:GO and AC:Origins, the latter 2 being the only ones that I could play without instant crashes). Sometimes it showed me the BSOD but sometimes it was just black screen and straight reboot. Sometimes my GPU would even freak out and turn its fans all the way up to 100% and stay there until I got back into Windows and reset it. So, now I've not only disabled Xbox Game Bar but also uninstalled it completely using some Powershell command I found online. In the WHEA Event Viewer Log, I'd get these errors shown after each reboot: *"Machine Check Exception - Cache Hierarchy Error"* with different *Processor ID* codes everytime (I got about 50 of them since I reinstalled Windows and was starting to get worried about hardware failure as I said above) but always the same Event Identification number (18 in all cases). The Processor ID codes that were logged were all over the place: 0, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 (basically all possible!, lol, except for a few).

So, now I even think I might go back to trying the 4202 BIOS again, since I still had the issues from before with my current BIOS (3103). IDK what the hell is going on but those errors were hard to diagnose. I kept having them even when I loaded optimized defaults, RAM @ stock (2133), even Core Performance Boost (running static at 3.9) I disabled and the errors were still going. Also reinstalled video drivers to multiple previous WHQL-signed versions, also didn't help. Disabled Fast Boot, Secure Boot, TPM, CSM, everything I could possibly do in BIOS and nothing fixed it. Only after the god damn Xbox Game Bar was disabled/removed the errors went away and I could finally do things with my PC again. Also, weird AF since in all benchmarks everything was fine (Prime95 Blend torture test, Small FFTs, AIDA64, Cinebench R20 and R23 for 30 mins., etc.). They'd all pass but during gaming it'd crash again.

*EDIT: *Nevermind, the errors are back... I'm starting to doubt actual hardware failure... Or Forza Horizon 4 is a really badly programmed game, because it's throwing Machine Check Exception - Cache Hierarchy Errors all over the place.


----------



## Mazahists

xeizo said:


> SOC 1.1V
> PLL 1.76-1.82V(depending on CPU, Zen+ likes low PLL, Zen3 needs high for high FCLK)
> VDDP 0.95V
> VDDG IOD 1.035V
> VDDG CCD 1.010V
> SB 1.05V
> VTT 0.725-0.750 (depending on RAM, should be ~half of VDIMM)
> LLC Auto
> Vcore Auto, on Zen 3 no offset, on Zen 2 positive offset +0.0625V, on Zen+ negative offset -0.075-0.1V
> 
> These settings runs 3800MHz RAM/FCLK1900 on two rigs, and 3200MHz/FCLK1600 on two rigs, very different quality RAM.


Update - it looks like i finally have FLCK above 1800Mhz without USB flapping after 8-12h - i'm 3 days in now
I used your voltages to change mine (i had those from all the unsuccessful attempts to get FLCK above 1800Mhz)
so i changed

FLCK 1866Mhz, RAM 3733CL16 (from 3600CL16)

VTTDDR 0.675 V --> 0.7 V (RAM is at 1.4V now)
VDDP 0.90 V --> 0.96 V
VDDSOC 1.125 V --> 1.050 V
VDDG CCD 1.050 V --> 1.010 V
VDDG IOD 1.150 V --> 1.035 V
1.05V SB Auto --> 1.05V


----------



## KryoZen

4204 released

ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO BIOS 4204
1. Support AMD AM4 AGESA V2 PI 1.2.0.0.
2. Improve ReSizable BAR compatibility for NVIDIA RTX30 series graphics cards
3. Improve system performance

Before running the USB BIOS Flashback tool, please rename the BIOS file (C7H.CAP) using BIOSRenamer.


----------



## speedgoat

so the WHEA erros.. i get a few hundreds reported a minute with FCLK above 1900 but i never got a crash in 3 weeks now, and i wouldnt say they impede performance in general. Is this something we really should be worried about ?


----------



## xeizo

speedgoat said:


> so the WHEA erros.. i get a few hundreds reported a minute with FCLK above 1900 but i never got a crash in 3 weeks now, and i wouldnt say they impede performance in general. Is this something we really should be worried about ?


Windows can get corrupted, then you have problems


----------



## lordzed83

speedgoat said:


> so the WHEA erros.. i get a few hundreds reported a minute with FCLK above 1900 but i never got a crash in 3 weeks now, and i wouldnt say they impede performance in general. Is this something we really should be worried about ?


One a reboot no problems at mine. Hundreds ?? YE thats totally unstable system.


----------



## lordzed83

KryoZen said:


> 4204 released
> 
> ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO BIOS 4204
> 1. Support AMD AM4 AGESA V2 PI 1.2.0.0.
> 2. Improve ReSizable BAR compatibility for NVIDIA RTX30 series graphics cards
> 3. Improve system performance
> 
> Before running the USB BIOS Flashback tool, please rename the BIOS file (C7H.CAP) using BIOSRenamer.


No wifi version for a change


----------



## thegr8anand

Guys i only realized im having errors after reading here and checking hwinfo. Otherwise system seems to run fine and ram oc passes all tests too. Is it the ram oc that causes this issue?


----------



## xeizo

thegr8anand said:


> Guys i only realized im having errors after reading here and checking hwinfo. Otherwise system seems to run fine and ram oc passes all tests too. Is it the ram oc that causes this issue?


Not the RAM itself but likely FCLK


----------



## thegr8anand

I am only running 3733mhz.

So i tested everything stock and it ran fine. Tried cpu stock and ram oc and got errors. Now i have increased Soc from 0.95 to 1.1, VDDG CCD and IOD from 0.9 to 1.05, VDDP from 0.9 to 0.95 and hurrah! no errors!! So it was soc choking after all! Its only been 10 mins but i was having hundreds errors by now.


----------



## speedgoat

a ****eload of WHEA errors but i havent had one crashin the last 2 weeks.. well basically only gaming


----------



## thegr8anand

Can safely say issue has been resolved. @speedgoat increase your soc, vddg ccd/iod and vddp.


----------



## bushd0c

KryoZen said:


> 4204 released
> 
> ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO BIOS 4204
> 1. Support AMD AM4 AGESA V2 PI 1.2.0.0.
> 2. Improve ReSizable BAR compatibility for NVIDIA RTX30 series graphics cards
> 3. Improve system performance
> 
> Before running the USB BIOS Flashback tool, please rename the BIOS file (C7H.CAP) using BIOSRenamer.


Flashing via Flashback did not succeed. Did anyone flash it already?


----------



## kratosatlante

bushd0c said:


> Flashing via Flashback did not succeed. Did anyone flash it already?


work but same as other bios whea 1900+ and boost bloked to 200mhz
try clear cmos and then flashing or shut down power supply for 2min


----------



## lordzed83

kratosatlante said:


> work but same as other bios whea 1900+ and boost bloked to 200mhz
> try clear cmos and then flashing or shut down power supply for 2min
> View attachment 2476465


Christ is it me or them timings are all messed up like hell !!!


----------



## xeizo

lordzed83 said:


> Christ is it me or them timings are all messed up like hell !!!


No, me too, strangest timings I ever saw


----------



## Tactix

Only issue ive had so far upgrading to the 5800x on Bios 4202, i have gotten 2 CPU Fan errors during boot, pressing F1 and checking in bios everything looks good and these are brand new Noctua NF-P14 REdux's.
Thats Two post errors out of say 30 boot's so guessing its just a bug, i have noticed it take much longer on these new Bio's for the Fans to Spool up to my Set Profiles and curves, Temps and everything else look fine.


----------



## kratosatlante

lordzed83 said:


> Christ is it me or them timings are all messed up like hell !!!





xeizo said:


> No, me too, strangest timings I ever saw


its ok 1.575v in bios drop 1.537v









the best i get with all programs closed and more vsoc










curve optimizer stable bios 4201 -4 best -12 others, other bios from 4007 add latency









another with tras ,,,normal,,,So that they do not arise or can deal with existential concerns


----------



## lordzed83

kratosatlante said:


> its ok 1.575v in bios drop 1.537v
> View attachment 2476558
> 
> 
> the best i get with all programs closed and more vsoc
> View attachment 2476556
> 
> 
> 
> curve optimizer stable bios 4201 -4 best -12 others, other bios from 4007 add latency
> View attachment 2476557
> 
> 
> another with tras ,,,normal,,,So that they do not arise or can deal with existential concerns
> 
> View attachment 2476560


And that does not throw u WHEr ?? Then again almost 1.6 on memory not going there hahaha 1.5 is my 24/7 max


----------



## lordzed83

xeizo said:


> No, me too, strangest timings I ever saw


new bios still 1 WHE guess ill need to DEAL WITH IT lol. It's not something i can fix since new bioses for zen3 landed ill always have 1 ONE ERROR FOREVA !!!!1


----------



## lordzed83

xeizo said:


> No, me too, strangest timings I ever saw


new bios still 1 WHE guess ill need to DEAL WITH IT lol. It's not something i can fix since new bioses for zen3 landed ill always have 1 ONE ERROR FOREVA !!!!1
View attachment 2476578


----------



## lordzed83

Anyhow 4204 for Wifi is out and from what i noticed i HAD to bump vcore by 1 step up to regain stability. So if u crashing after update add tad vcore


https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/SocketAM4/ROG_CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO_WI-FI/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-4204.ZIP


----------



## nick name

lordzed83 said:


> new bios still 1 WHE guess ill need to DEAL WITH IT lol. It's not something i can fix since new bioses for zen3 landed ill always have 1 ONE ERROR FOREVA !!!!1
> View attachment 2476578


Yeah I get one during Windows start, but then never again.


----------



## bushd0c

Okay, went from 4007 to 4204. Had to set PBO2 All-Core (negative) 20 to 30 to achieve boosts known from 4007 and approx. same CB20 score as 4204.

But the temps went up by 5°C !!
On 4007 max. temps were like 85°C - 86°C.
With 4204 they easily go up to 90 in CB20.

Any hints to lower the temps without loosing performance on 4204 ?


----------



## Paddydapro

lordzed83 said:


> Christ is it me or them timings are all messed up like hell !!!


Haha, dude is running near 200trfc xD how does he do it


----------



## tryout1

Interessting just had my first random reboot while browsing amazon and exactly when clicking the "next" button reboot. No WHEA errors in "Event Viewer" logged, CPU still stock no PBO and no CO just 3800:1900 c16 settings, hope they fix that issue soon.


----------



## speedgoat

thegr8anand said:


> Can safely say issue has been resolved. @speedgoat increase your soc, vddg ccd/iod and vddp.


should i be pushing it even further ?


----------



## lordzed83

Paddydapro said:


> Haha, dude is running near 200trfc xD how does he do it


1.6 volts on ddr6 simple no magic there


----------



## kratosatlante

speedgoat said:


> should i be pushing it even further ?
> 
> View attachment 2476741


you can try gdm off, or cl 14


----------



## hurricane28

speedgoat said:


> should i be pushing it even further ?
> 
> View attachment 2476741



Have you tried the new BIOS yet? Maybe it give some more oomph. 

It did some nice things for me. I can do 4.4 GHz 1.250 vcore and 3800 MHz RAM with 1900 FCLK.


----------



## xeizo

New bios works well with the old 2700X, booted at first try with my OC settings and keeps on running. Crappy 2666MHz RAM @ 3133MHz. Runs all benchmarks, no errors of any kind.


----------



## Sumanji

xeizo said:


> New bios works well with the old 2700X, booted at first try with my OC settings and keeps on running. Crappy 2666MHz RAM @ 3133MHz. Runs all benchmarks, no errors of any kind.


Awesome to hear, I have the same CPU as you 

Question, what RAM are you running? I've always had trouble running my Sammy B-Die stable at rated speeds. Wondering if you have any tips? I know Zen+ doesn't have a strong IMC, so want to make sure everything else is ruled out before I "blame" that 

Su

(P.S. First time poster here, hello all!)


----------



## mikochu

Anyone experiencing sleep issues with the 420# firmwares? S3 shows up in powercfg -a and I can put my system to sleep manually. However, when my system is idle, my monitor sleeps, but my system never goes to sleep. Nothing shows up in powercfg -requests.


----------



## xeizo

Sumanji said:


> Awesome to hear, I have the same CPU as you
> 
> Question, what RAM are you running? I've always had trouble running my Sammy B-Die stable at rated speeds. Wondering if you have any tips? I know Zen+ doesn't have a strong IMC, so want to make sure everything else is ruled out before I "blame" that
> 
> Su
> 
> (P.S. First time poster here, hello all!)


I could never do over 2933MHz with that particular memory before so new bios looks good, it's low quality Hynix AFR. But I used to run my B-Die on that same CPU a long time ago, I got it running 3466MHz. Same B-Die on 3700X/3900X/5900X does 3800MHz on all, so yes the IMC is worse than Zen 2/ Zen 3 but not super bad.

But you could try to run similar settings as I run my B-Die on CH8, you won't get 3800MHz but 3400-3600MHz should be doable, voltages are the same with the CH7/Hynix AFR it's only the timings that are different:










PLL is 1.81V, VDIMM is 1.38V, VTT is 725mV, important to set VBOOT DRAM to 1.42V to pass boot and Proc ODT may possibly have to be higher on Zen+ maybe 60-80 Ohm. And possibly you may have to enable RttNom to RZQ/7.


----------



## xeizo

mikochu said:


> Anyone experiencing sleep issues with the 420# firmwares? S3 shows up in powercfg -a and I can put my system to sleep manually. However, when my system is idle, my monitor sleeps, but my system never goes to sleep. Nothing shows up in powercfg -requests.


There has been sleep issues since day one on Zen, I gave up and have had sleep turned off for a long time now, if anyone detect it is fully working I may enable it again. No high hopes though. The PC boots super fast so sleep is not really necessary.


----------



## Sumanji

Stupid question; where should I check for the WHEA errors that quite a few of you guys have been mentioning?


----------



## Deco

Sumanji said:


> Stupid question; where should I check for the WHEA errors that quite a few of you guys have been mentioning?


You can find WHEA error logs under Event Viewer.


----------



## Sumanji

xeizo said:


> PLL is 1.81V, VDIMM is 1.38V, VTT is 725mV, important to set VBOOT DRAM to 1.42V to pass boot and Proc ODT may possibly have to be higher on Zen+ maybe 60-80 Ohm. And possibly you may have to enable RttNom to RZQ/7.


Tbh this is way over my head haha. On my previous set of B-Die, I just used The Stilt's safe memory timing preset in the BIOS. It would pass Memtest and Prime95 all day at 3200MHz, but playing games would cause a hard lock or crash, which is super weird. I read that B-Die is quite sensitive to temperature, so I wonder if the additional heat from the GPU was pushing it over the edge for stability?

I've now replaced that old set of 2x8GB with a 2x16GB set, and I have set the timings manually using the 1usmus memory timing calculator (safe settings for dual rank RAM on A0 PCB). Am running Prime95 now and it seems fine... will test with games over the next few days and see if I get any crashes!

Any ideas what else I should watch out for, other than the suspected temperature issue?

Thanks,

Su


----------



## goondam

hi all,

I got one more question what tdc/edc/ppt values can I set with ch7 ?? I got a 5950x for reference.
can I use max values without seriously melting or overheating issues??
does anyone know what the max values are??

taking baby steps in getting max performance out of my cpu. once done I'll move to ram and hopefully I get 3800/1900 IF 1:1 ratio stable...


----------



## Paddydapro

goondam said:


> hi all,
> 
> I got one more question what tdc/edc/ppt values can I set with ch7 ?? I got a 5950x for reference.
> can I use max values without seriously melting or overheating issues??
> does anyone know what the max values are??
> 
> taking baby steps in getting max performance out of my cpu. once done I'll move to ram and hopefully I get 3800/1900 IF 1:1 ratio stable...


the thing is.. use low edc and you get pretty good efficiency but poor l3 Cache speed in aida.. use high edc and singlecore will tank in speed but l3 cache speed will be better.. from my experience just use lower edc and not care about l3.
I get really good results with 250ppt 150tdc 200edc skalar to 1 and curve optimizer per core highest negative offset you can do.. start with -20 allcore and just use it for a day in idle and games and the like.. if crash or random bluescreen, dial it back 5 points when finished try your best cores with higher numbers like negative 30 got me over 700 in cpuz singlecore and 13800 in multi


----------



## tUMi

New chipset drivers from AMD are now available, released today: https://www.amd.com/en/support/chipsets/amd-socket-am4/x470

I already have installed them over the old ones (didn't bothered to go to the route of uninstalling the old AMD chipset drivers, I always install on top of the old chipset drivers). The installation went without a hitch, however I haven't tested how they affect to the system.


----------



## Sumanji

Any change log (specifically for X470)?


----------



## tUMi

Sumanji said:


> Any change log (specifically for X470)?


None were included in the chipset driver download. But I did find out that when comparing this and the previous chipset driver package, two components in the driver package were updated with new versions: AMD Processor Power Management Support (6.0.0.9, old one was 6.0.0.7) and AMD PCI Device Driver (1.0.0.82, old one was 1.0.0.81).


----------



## hurricane28

Idk if its the board but i'm getting mouse stutter or lag issues sometimes. When i move the mouse too fast it seems that the cursor can't keep up at times. 
I did several benchmarks but performance is great. RAM isn't unstable nothing, Windows is not corrupt can't find anything related only the EC sensor being monitored again that can cause issues. 

That being said, i disabled from monitoring gives same performance results... I tried other USB ports etc. but i get some weird lag with the mouse. 

More people with the same problem? Could it be the new BIOS perhaps? I'm using Logitech G903 with the latest software.


----------



## Hepe

4204 BIOS released, I have to say I have been quite impressed with the frequency that ASUS has been pumping out these new BIOS revisions, isn't this already the fourth one within a month?
Anyways, how are the new BIOSes with 2000-series CPU's, I decided to order a 5600X since the 5900X I ordered a month a go probably isn't arriving until June. The 5600X should be arriving within two weeks so I was thinking about updating the BIOS beforehand, interested to see how much has changed since I'm still on the 1103 BIOS from November 2018.


----------



## kratosatlante

Hepe said:


> 4204 BIOS released, I have to say I have been quite impressed with the frequency that ASUS has been pumping out these new BIOS revisions, isn't this already the fourth one within a month?
> Anyways, how are the new BIOSes with 2000-series CPU's, I decided to order a 5600X since the 5900X I ordered a month a go probably isn't arriving until June. The 5600X should be arriving within two weeks so I was thinking about updating the BIOS beforehand, interested to see how much has changed since I'm still on the 1103 BIOS from November 2018.


first flash bios 4007 install 5600x and benchamak oc, try curve optimizer etc, then if you not stable flash bios 4204, i test 4007 a lot best for ram oc and try high fclk 2000 or more , 4101 (bug boot sometimes freeze ), 4102 (same 4101) 4201 ( same 4101) , 4202 less bugie better ram latency but not so god like 4007, 4204 only bugie boot when try high fclk 2000+, good ram latency
bios 4007 best all, but i have some freeze system (force to restart) in idle, boost unlock 200+ 5600x can do 5025mh stable, other bios loked boost to 200mhz 4850 limit


----------



## hurricane28

I think i solved the mouse issue. 

It was Bluetooth enabled... When i have the antenna connected it has very good range so it distorted my wireless mouse. Disabled BT all is good. 

Anyway, me too am surprised at how fast Asus ROG is coming with new BIOS's. They work well too, im at 4201 and maybe tomorrow im flashing 4204 to see how it works.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> I think i solved the mouse issue.
> 
> It was Bluetooth enabled... When i have the antenna connected it has very good range so it distorted my wireless mouse. Disabled BT all is good.
> 
> Anyway, me too am surprised at how fast Asus ROG is coming with new BIOS's. They work well too, im at 4201 and maybe tomorrow im flashing 4204 to see how it works.


I don't think I've seen any WHEA errors with 4204 on my 3900X. So that's nice.


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> I don't think I've seen any WHEA errors with 4204 on my 3900X. So that's nice.


That is nice. 

The weird thing is that i can't find any instability with several RAM testing programs etc. but i do get Windows corruptions, not WHEA errors in Hwinfo but in CMD sfc /scannow i see that the windows got corrupt. Might be Soc voltage or timing related.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> That is nice.
> 
> The weird thing is that i can't find any instability with several RAM testing programs etc. but i do get Windows corruptions, not WHEA errors in Hwinfo but in CMD sfc /scannow i see that the windows got corrupt. Might be Soc voltage or timing related.


Did you also run:
DISM.exe /Online /Cleanup-image /Restorehealth


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> I don't think I've seen any WHEA errors with 4204 on my 3900X. So that's nice.


Yes, but 3-series is virtually WHEA free compared to 5-series which throws them around like crazy. Probably because of much higher freq at same manufacturing node. With that said, these new **04-bioses are the best so far. I don't have any WHEA on my CH8/5900X for the time being. And the CH7 runs great with 2700X.


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> Did you also run:
> DISM.exe /Online /Cleanup-image /Restorehealth


Yeah man, repaired every thing.


----------



## lordzed83

Right I give You 1 WHE update so after it poped up after 12 or so hours after bootup i cleared HW info and not rebooted since









Thats constant rotation of rendering web browsing mining and gaming. Not had any stability problems at all Second error not poped up pc rock solid stable on 2204


----------



## xeizo

lordzed83 said:


> Right I give You 1 WHE update so after it poped up after 12 or so hours after bootup i cleared HW info and not rebooted since
> View attachment 2477550
> 
> 
> Thats constant rotation of rendering web browsing mining and gaming. Not had any stability problems at all Second error not poped up pc rock solid stable on 2204


You know that a lot of WHEA errors in HWINFO64 looks to have been because of a bug in HWINFO64, v.6.43+ is supposedly fixed from that.


----------



## lordzed83

xeizo said:


> You know that a lot of WHEA errors in HWINFO64 looks to have been because of a bug in HWINFO64, v.6.43+ is supposedly fixed from that.


aaaa Not heard that would make sence then why i just get that 1 and can run system for days as You see


----------



## BoneCrusherXes

guys, how do you set VDDG IOD correctly with v4204 ?
normal way does not seem to work, always gets reported the same value as VDDG CCD.
If i instead got to "AMD OC\VDDG Control" and change it there doesnt work aswell.
And if i just leave it on auto it gets pushed to 1,05v , but 1st coldboot always fails and i have to reset

Or is it just a reading error ? cause setting it to 1,05v manually the system boots up normally, but ZenTimings & RyzenMaster say 0,975v

And BLCK bug is still not fixed in 4204, right ?


----------



## xeizo

BoneCrusherXes said:


> guys, how do you set VDDG IOD correctly with v4204 ?
> normal way does not seem to work, always gets reported the same value as VDDG CCD.
> If i instead got to "AMD OC\VDDG Control" and change it there doesnt work aswell.
> And if i just leave it on auto it gets pushed to 1,05v , but 1st coldboot always fails and i have to reset
> 
> Or is it just a reading error ? cause setting it to 1,05v manually the system boots up normally, but ZenTimings & RyzenMaster say 0,975v
> 
> And BLCK bug is still not fixed in 4204, right ?


It's some post back in the thread, VDDG is in like three places. You need to set enough of them for the settings to stick. It works fine. The screenshot is from CH8, but it's virtually the same bios. However, CH7 has some funky boot behavior sometimes, CH8 always cold boots/reboots without a hitch.


----------



## lordzed83

xeizo said:


> It's some post back in the thread, VDDG is in like three places. You need to set enough of them for the settings to stick. It works fine. The screenshot is from CH8, but it's virtually the same bios. However, CH7 has some funky boot behavior sometimes, CH8 always cold boots/reboots without a hitch.
> 
> View attachment 2477598


 I cant even see all voltages on zentimings


----------



## xeizo

lordzed83 said:


> I cant even see all voltages on zentimings
> View attachment 2477600


Try the "L" for Legacy version, it's in the same archive

edit. There's a new version, before I had to use the L version but now the "normal" version works for me too:


----------



## BoneCrusherXes

xeizo said:


> It's some post back in the thread, VDDG is in like three places. You need to set enough of them for the settings to stick. It works fine. The screenshot is from CH8, but it's virtually the same bios. However, CH7 has some funky boot behavior sometimes, CH8 always cold boots/reboots without a hitch.


Well, id say for the CH7 it does not work.

As tryout1 said



tryout1 said:


> Well i tried putting 1.025v in every of the 3 locations and only VDDG CCD Voltage in "Extreme Tweaker" seems to dictate the voltage, just fyi


 VDDG CCD in Extreme Tweaker simply kills all other settings. 

I think i tried all other possible combinations without success, but if you have a working combination please let me know.
I also tried with F9, but where exactly is that 3rd option to be found ? Im not sure if a change to that option is actually saved


----------



## xeizo

BoneCrusherXes said:


> Well, id say for the CH7 it does not work.


I can't verify as I'm running a 2700X on my CH7 now, and it has a lot of settings absent anyway.

On CH8 everything works fine though


----------



## darkage

i all

does per CCX overclock still works well with this new bios?
thanks for any help


----------



## lordzed83

New version of chipset drivers is up sadly need to reboot NOOOOOO 









There u can see temps of my 3080 under water with max temps on mem when minimg. Thats before new pumop thats next to me and before liquid metal and pads upgrade.


----------



## tryout1

BoneCrusherXes said:


> Well, id say for the CH7 it does not work.
> 
> As tryout1 said
> 
> 
> 
> VDDG CCD in Extreme Tweaker simply kills all other settings.
> 
> I think i tried all other possible combinations without success, but if you have a working combination please let me know.
> I also tried with F9, but where exactly is that 3rd option to be found ? Im not sure if a change to that option is actually saved


Ok writing from phone so sry for some formatting issues, but the settings are there:

1. Extreme Tweaker > VDDG CCD/IOD Voltage Control
2. Advanced > AMD Overclocking > VDDG Voltage Control
3. Advanced > AMD CBS > NBIO Common Options > XFR Enhancment > VDDG Voltage Control

2 and 3 doesnt do anything sadly and 1 only does use VDDG CCD as "main control" for setting manual values, so that's why i think there may be hope for fclk over 1900

Gesendet von meinem GM1913 mit Tapatalk


----------



## bonomork

I'm going to fit a 3800XT on CH7, which BIOS version do you suggest please


----------



## lordzed83

tryout1 said:


> Ok writing from phone so sry for some formatting issues, but the settings are there:
> 
> 1. Extreme Tweaker > VDDG CCD/IOD Voltage Control
> 2. Advanced > AMD Overclocking > VDDG Voltage Control
> 3. Advanced > AMD CBS > NBIO Common Options > XFR Enhancment > VDDG Voltage Control
> 
> 2 and 3 doesnt do anything sadly and 1 only does use VDDG CCD as "main control" for setting manual values, so that's why i think there may be hope for fclk over 1900
> 
> Gesendet von meinem GM1913 mit Tapatalk


Ye same here i changed everything everywhere in bios and same thing.


----------



## bushd0c

Had two ugly freezes with the latest AMD chipset drivers (2.13.27.501) with BIOS 4204 and 4007. 
After returning to Version 2.10.13.408 everything is smooth again.


----------



## bushd0c

bushd0c said:


> Had two ugly freezes with the latest AMD chipset drivers (2.13.27.501) with BIOS 4204 and 4007.
> After returning to Version 2.10.13.408 everything is smooth again.


Hmm, seems the latest driver was not the problem. The problems started to occur when returning from 4204 to 4007, where I got better performance & better temps with my 5950x. Maybe the flashback did not succeed correctly. Trying 4204 again...


----------



## bushd0c

bushd0c said:


> Hmm, seems the latest driver was not the problem. The problems started to occur when returning from 4204 to 4007, where I got better performance & better temps with my 5950x. Maybe the flashback did not succeed correctly. Trying 4204 again...


Set 86°C as a Throttle Limit and Performance+Temps seem to be quiet the same to 4007 now. I hope the freezes don't come back. Seemed to occur only when idle. Always had to hard reset. Does that ring a bell with any of you, fellow overclockers?


----------



## ossimc

hey guys.
So im on bios 4201 for quiet so time now and i figured out a rockstable system with curve optimizer and ram OC (no random idle reboots

BUT

i encounter the (i belive) so called "sleep bug". I never had this problem with my old 3700X( plus older bios...cant remember). so i cant wake up the pc after it went to sleep (have to turn off pc and unplug from AC for while or clear cmos)

i never really read into the sleep issue. why is that and is there a fix?


----------



## nick name

ossimc said:


> hey guys.
> So im on bios 4201 for quiet so time now and i figured out a rockstable system with curve optimizer and ram OC (no random idle reboots
> 
> BUT
> 
> i encounter the (i belive) so called "sleep bug". I never had this problem with my old 3700X( plus older bios...cant remember). so i cant wake up the pc after it went to sleep (have to turn off pc and unplug from AC for while or clear cmos)
> 
> i never really read into the sleep issue. why is that and is there a fix?


I haven't had any sleep problems for the last few BIOS versions with my 3900X. The unplugging the PSU sounds like an odd issue that might be relevant. Which PSU?


----------



## tryout1

lordzed83 said:


> Ye same here i changed everything everywhere in bios and same thing.


Yeah sadly, i really hope it get's fixed, i send Asus even a Ticket about that and they more or less said they forward it to the team responsible. As i can boot and benchmark up to fclk 2033/4066 no problem but everything after 1900 fclk spits out quite some errors, and i even yoloed it with 1.25v SoC and 1.15v VDDG


----------



## bushd0c

ossimc said:


> hey guys.
> So im on bios 4201 for quiet so time now and i figured out a rockstable system with curve optimizer and ram OC (no random idle reboots
> 
> BUT
> 
> i encounter the (i belive) so called "sleep bug". I never had this problem with my old 3700X( plus older bios...cant remember). so i cant wake up the pc after it went to sleep (have to turn off pc and unplug from AC for while or clear cmos)
> 
> i never really read into the sleep issue. why is that and is there a fix?


Could you elaborate on sleep bug? Is it the freeze after idle problem? I solved this by setting PLL to 1.82V or at least I got no more freezes yet. 🤞


----------



## lordzed83

tryout1 said:


> Yeah sadly, i really hope it get's fixed, i send Asus even a Ticket about that and they more or less said they forward it to the team responsible. As i can boot and benchmark up to fclk 2033/4066 no problem but everything after 1900 fclk spits out quite some errors, and i even yoloed it with 1.25v SoC and 1.15v VDDG


Ye Think thats why i had to drop timings down on new bioses. cause cant put over 1000 and used to have 1060 on older bioses..


----------



## Tactix

I could Hug AMD and ASUS, this 5800x paired with this board, and the ease of the upgrade, quality of the bios> i know what brand has earned my respect (hint its both) but yeah, ill bee sticking with Asus in the future until they give me a good reason not to.
(hope this isnt considered sht post) just sharing `


----------



## Mazahists

Question about tRFC - Zen timings and DRAM calculator indicate that tRFC 653, tRFC2 486, tRFC4 299.
DRAM Calculator suggest to go tRFC is 489 now when i'm on 3733MHz
BIOS values on the other hand shows the following tRFC 312, tRFC2 192, tRFC 132

I assume that bios has "ns", but in calculators it is indicated as "cycles"
According to the internet - ns = 2000 * cycles / ddr_freq.

ns = 2000*653/3733 ~ 350ns (not 312ns that bios indicate) , to get the right numbers i need to use 1783 instead of 2000!!

anyone has any pointers to right way to convert calculator numbers to BIOS numbers?
i know this can be tested manually, this question is more for understanding.


----------



## ossimc

bushd0c said:


> Could you elaborate on sleep bug? Is it the freeze after idle problem? I solved this by setting PLL to 1.82V or at least I got no more freezes yet. 🤞


no idle problem. i just cant wake windows up after it went to sleep (i selected 30 mins) when i try the Q-code shows some random number and then it will stuck at 97 and fans are spinnig full speed(which tells me for sure that windows isnt gonna load) i set my PLL to 1.82V too after reading it here in this thread a while back.

there is a sleep bug with this mainboard cuz i have read it numerous times again and again. dont know how to fix it other than avoiding sleep in the first place


----------



## Tannah

A bit ago I tried upgrading the Bios on this Crosshair VII Hero from Bios 3103 to 4007 using the USB Flashback functionality, running Windows 10 pro 20H2. I noticed a few oddities, the biggest one was the computer intermittently hard rebooting. I looked though the settings tinkered with a few voltages and removing C-states, clearing the settings, loading optimized defaults. But it kept Randomly rebooting? I could not find any real rhyme or reason. I figured just a buggy Bios so I rolled back to 3103, and the computer went back to running fine.

So the other day I thought I would update the Bios to Version 4204, again from 3103. Updated the AMD chipset drivers, and ran sfv /scannnow before flashing the bios via usb flashback. After a bit It started doing the random hard reset's again? Setting the voltages for the Vcore +0.01360 and Ram 1.35v , and it ran fine for the next day while I ran varous bench marks: Unigine Heaven, Prime 95, Folding at home. I then went into the Bios to tweak the fan curves and low and behold It did the Hard reboot again while I was in the Bios? When it got into windows after login it hard reboot again, Then it started working fine again?
Looking though the event logs I see Kernal-Power "The system rebooted without cleanly shutting down first." and Eventlog showing:"the previous System Shutdown was unexpected" Ran SFC /Scannow and no issues found.
I'm really at a loss, It works fine on the older 3103 bios?

I've looked around but I haven't seen a post go into depth with this type of error, but is possible I'm blind.
I am intending on upgrading the CPU and Graphics card when they are back in stock.

System Specs:
ROG Crosshair VII Hero WiFi
Ryzen 3600x
16 GB Gskill F4-3866C18D-8GTZ Samsung B-Die
Corsair HX1000i
AMD Radeon R9 390X
NVME M.2 WD Black SN750

Anyone have any helpful insights?


----------



## garf333

I'm currently on the 4204 with a 3700X.

Noticed USB write speeds are horrible (3MB/s when it should be doing 100MB/s), but the previous 4007 had my RAM slightly unstable WRT to my overclock. Not in the mood to reflash over USB write speeds so I'm waiting for the next BIOS.

Just putting this out there should someone have the same experience.


----------



## lordzed83

Ok got some bug with this bios getting overtemperature reboots on this bios but NOT ALWAYS ***  Once boots up can work for week as You seen no problem constant load some times its just rebooting


----------



## Keith Myers

lordzed83 said:


> Ok got some bug with this bios getting overtemperature reboots on this bios but NOT ALWAYS ***  Once boots up can work for week as You seen no problem constant load some times its just rebooting


Hadn't had the CPU Overtemp warning in a long while. Got several after updating to 4204. Had to revert back to turning CPU Temp Monitoring to Ignore in the Monitoring section to get rid of the issue again. Had this problem for years with the 3000 series BIOS' until I figured out the cure.


----------



## lordzed83

Keith Myers said:


> Hadn't had the CPU Overtemp warning in a long while. Got several after updating to 4204. Had to revert back to turning CPU Temp Monitoring to Ignore in the Monitoring section to get rid of the issue again. Had this problem for years with the 3000 series BIOS' until I figured out the cure.


Yup maxing 10c below thermal limit and..... Not a clue. Thanks for workaround. I got not enough of cooling power i guess









HAHAAH


----------



## Paddydapro

lordzed83 said:


> Yup maxing 10c below thermal limit and..... Not a clue. Thanks for workaround. I got not enough of cooling power i guess
> View attachment 2479464
> 
> 
> HAHAAH


*** are you me?


----------



## Keith Myers

lordzed83 said:


> Yup maxing 10c below thermal limit and..... Not a clue. Thanks for workaround. I got not enough of cooling power i guess
> View attachment 2479464
> 
> 
> HAHAAH


Yes, a strange problem that nobody ever figured out when trying to help me. Thought it was just some weirdness with my specific motherboard and cpu. Never had the issue on another C7H and Ryzen. Glad to be able to offer a solution. I feel better that somebody else has stumbled onto the same problem now.


----------



## lordzed83

@Paddydapro You got new version


----------



## lordzed83

Keith Myers said:


> Yes, a strange problem that nobody ever figured out when trying to help me. Thought it was just some weirdness with my specific motherboard and cpu. Never had the issue on another C7H and Ryzen. Glad to be able to offer a solution. I feel better that somebody else has stumbled onto the same problem now.


Only started happening on new bios and i know You also 100% load cpu 24/7









got spare tempz here Had this cpu running for 1 hour at 100c just to see if survives and had no problems 80c temperature reboots im like ***


----------



## Keith Myers

lordzed83 said:


> Only started happening on new bios and i know You also 100% load cpu 24/7
> View attachment 2479498
> 
> 
> got spare tempz here Had this cpu running for 1 hour at 100c just to see if survives and had no problems 80c temperature reboots im like ***


Yes, mine always popped off around the 85° C. mark where the actual thermal restraint is at 95° C.








The latest was when I was pushing 83° C. when there was no north wind to evacuate the hot air out of the bedroom into the rest of the house. Wind was coming into the house from the south because of incoming wet weather. Always at 90-93% BOINC loading 24/7. I'm a few degrees hotter because I ran out of my Kingpin KPx paste when I cleaned the block last and had to resort to my old MX-4 standard paste.


----------



## elbubi

ossimc said:


> no idle problem. i just cant wake windows up after it went to sleep (i selected 30 mins) when i try the Q-code shows some random number and then it will stuck at 97 and fans are spinnig full speed(which tells me for sure that windows isnt gonna load) i set my PLL to 1.82V too after reading it here in this thread a while back.
> 
> there is a sleep bug with this mainboard cuz i have read it numerous times again and again. dont know how to fix it other than avoiding sleep in the first place


I have the exact same problem since ages (2700x under 1201 BIOS).
Couldn't figure what the hell it is, been using hybernate instead (still prefer sleep though)


----------



## xeizo

It's possible the latest bios could have fixed it, sleep works flawless on my X470-Prime Pro with the latest bios using OC settings. It's probably similar/the same code so it should work as good on the CH7. It could be, it requires a fresh Windows install which I have done on the Prime Pro. Also, I would not install Ryzen Master as it does things with the bios and is probably active during boot.


----------



## majestynl

Keith Myers said:


> Hadn't had the CPU Overtemp warning in a long while. Got several after updating to 4204. Had to revert back to turning CPU Temp Monitoring to Ignore in the Monitoring section to get rid of the issue again. Had this problem for years with the 3000 series BIOS' until I figured out the cure.


Hmm got this issue on the Dark Hero. Never had it before. For now i manually entered the over-temperature in the PBO menu. When it occurs again i will disable the monitoring! Ty!


----------



## crakej

Sleep: I haven't tested sleep for as long time now - it used to drop FCLK until reboot. I've always used hybrid sleep (hibernation) - but even thats not working right for me, it goes to hibernate, but something stops it happening all the time.

I've only installed 4204 today and my old reliable 3733 profile caused so many freezes/reboots I can't even watch a single tv show. Will experiment more tomorrow see whats going on...

Edit: I almost forgot, but my sound still fails to work after some boots - the driver is loaded and functioning, no errors showing at all. Increasing SoC does not help......


----------



## lordzed83

majestynl said:


> Hmm got this issue on the Dark Hero. Never had it before. For now i manually entered the over-temperature in the PBO menu. When it occurs again i will disable the monitoring! Ty!


So there is few of us with this i also added offset on cpu temp and seance mi. We know its not temps its this bios...


----------



## Victor Göhlin

Hi,

I've had my 5900x sitting in it's box since the beginning of december and have been waiting for a stable bios since alot of you guys have been reporting WHEA-errors, sleep issues and been required to do a lot voltage tweeking.

What's the overall experience now when bios 4204 have been out for a month?
I'm not that familiar with all the voltage tweeking you guys have been writing about, I'm quite unexperienced with tweeking and would just like to do a basic set up my RAM (4x8GB, 3600MHz, 1.4V, CL 14-15-15-35-50) and have the system just working without any hickups.

Currently running a 3800x with bios 3103 rock stable, should I do the swap or should I wait for a more stable factory bios where Asus have found the baseline voltages for a stable system experience?


----------



## YourMainD

I am running the 3800x with Samsung B-Die @ 3200 XMP (CL 14-14-14) Team Group RAM and have tried a bunch of the prior 4xxx bios updates. This latest is probably the most stable you're going to get Victor. Don't expect anymore CH7 releases ... my prediction. Asus was attentive but I suspect they will go quiet now.


----------



## lordzed83

YourMainD said:


> I am running the 3800x with Samsung B-Die @ 3200 XMP (CL 14-14-14) Team Group RAM and have tried a bunch of the prior 4xxx bios updates. This latest is probably the most stable you're going to get Victor. Don't expect anymore CH7 releases ... my prediction. Asus was attentive but I suspect they will go quiet now.


ye there are few bugs in latest bios like mentioned VDD not working sometimes.


----------



## Victor Göhlin

If I run into any problems so I have to tweak some voltages what is the baseline I should aim for if we summarize the posts regarding ryzen 5000?

I will run My 5900x at stock with some minor tweaked RAM settings for my 4x8GB G.Skill Trident Z 3600MHz CL15 1.35V @3600MHz CL14-15-15-35-50 1,4V and want to run safe voltages on soc, vddp, vddg and pll and I have no experience tweaking these before. Do I have to change LLC with CPU at stock for improved stability?

SOC: ?
VDDP: ?
VDDG: ?
PLL: ?

EDIT: Can we expect any new bios on the latest 1201 agesa?


----------



## lordzed83

@Keith Myers well still getting them xxxxx reboots even with monitoring off so started playign with T scew offset. God damn annoying bug...


----------



## xeizo

lordzed83 said:


> @Keith Myers well still getting them xxxxx reboots even with monitoring off so started playign with T scew offset. God damn annoying bug...


I haven't had a reboot for several weeks now on any of my Ryzen rigs all with the latest 1.2.0.0. bios, but I did put a lot of effort into tweaking them to satisfaction(stable but fast, and quiet) rather than world record OC


----------



## lordzed83

xeizo said:


> I haven't had a reboot for several weeks now on any of my Ryzen rigs all with the latest 1.2.0.0. bios, but I did put a lot of effort into tweaking them to satisfaction(stable but fast, and quiet) rather than world record OC


This ****in ogertemperature bug. Remember my riog is under172w cpuload 24/7....


----------



## lordzed83

@xeizo @Keith Myers 



 that good vid  there we go over 100c load no rpoblem and theis temp bug reboots outs cpus at 80c


----------



## YourMainD

T L ; D ... couldn't ... watch the whole thing. But thx!


----------



## Keith Myers

@lordzed83 I would like to know why the majority of people DON'T have this problem, but a few do?

Silicon quality? Some innocuous specific BIOS setting? Or totally rando?


----------



## shamino1978

lordzed83 said:


> This ****in ogertemperature bug. Remember my riog is under172w cpuload 24/7....


it is not a bug, merely too conversative a threshold specially for vermeer.
the message shows up when "Calibrated" temperature is above 75c during post
calibrated means it takes an average between tdie and onboard thermistor. the onboard thermistor is slow to react and thus lower temps slower while tdie is fast to rise and fast to drop.
it is not the cause but the effect of stress testing at unstable settings and then the reboot.
you can prove it by stress testing at lower stable clocks and hit 90+c and just press reset so its quick and gives no time for the thermistor to cool down.
this threshold will be raised in view of vermeers higher temps during stress tests.


----------



## Keith Myers

shamino1978 said:


> it is not a bug, merely too conversative a threshold specially for vermeer.
> 
> it is not the cause but the effect of stress testing at unstable settings and then the reboot.


No, it is a bug. Does not happen on reboot, but during sustained all-core loading, for instance when stress testing or in my case for my 24/7 distributed computing loading.

What it _causes_ is a spontaneous reboot and the Press F1 CPU Overtemp error.


----------



## 97pedro

After more than 1 year of just checking this thread I had to register to ask a question.

I have a c7h for a while now, used it with a 3700x for almost a year, running flare x 3200mhz cl14 2x8gb always overclocked to 3800mhz cl16 1900mhz fclk.

I upgraded to 5800x like a month ago and kept the same RAM and ran with the same overclock and fclk.

Then I decided to buy another 2x8gb kit of the same RAM, this is when THE NIGHMARE started.

I can boot fine into Windows but running prime95 blend test crashes some workers immediatly. Before used the ram at 1.4v, now its crashing even at 1.5v.

Only running 3666mhz cl16 and 1833mhz fclk I was able to get some sort of stability.

Im almost positive that the ram could do cl14 at 3600mhz the thing is, every memory setting below 3666mhz makes the bclk run at 99.81mhz instead of 100mhz, If I try to lock the bclk to 100mhz in bios the board wont even post.

So to sum it up, 4 dimms have been a nighmare to use.

Does anyone know a work around?

Running 4204 bios.

1.050v ccd and iod voltage and 1.1v soc.


----------



## Keith Myers

97pedro said:


> After more than 1 year of just checking this thread I had to register to ask a question.
> 
> I have a c7h for a while now, used it with a 3700x for almost a year, running flare x 3200mhz cl14 2x8gb always overclocked to 3800mhz cl16 1900mhz fclk.
> 
> I upgraded to 5800x like a month ago and kept the same RAM and ran with the same overclock and fclk.
> 
> Then I decided to buy another 2x8gb kit of the same RAM, this is when THE NIGHMARE started.
> 
> I can boot fine into Windows but running prime95 blend test crashes some workers immediatly. Before used the ram at 1.4v, now its crashing even at 1.5v.
> 
> Only running 3666mhz cl16 and 1833mhz fclk I was able to get some sort of stability.
> 
> Im almost positive that the ram could do cl14 at 3600mhz the thing is, every memory setting below 3666mhz makes the bclk run at 99.81mhz instead of 100mhz, If I try to lock the bclk to 100mhz in bios the board wont even post.
> 
> So to sum it up, 4 dimms have been a nighmare to use.
> 
> Does anyone know a work around?
> 
> Running 4204 bios.
> 
> 1.050v ccd and iod voltage and 1.1v soc.


You will struggle to get 4 sticks running because they work the IMC a lot harder than 2 sticks. You will have to likely sacrifice some clock speed for stability. More RAM voltage does not usually help it seems. Proper resistances and signal driving voltages are required. I never even attempted to go past 3600Mhz with my 4 8GB sticks. Fast enough for my workloads and stable.


----------



## 97pedro

Keith Myers said:


> You will struggle to get 4 sticks running because they work the IMC a lot harder than 2 sticks. You will have to likely sacrifice some clock speed for stability. More RAM voltage does not usually help it seems. Proper resistances and signal driving voltages are required. I never even attempted to go past 3600Mhz with my 4 8GB sticks. Fast enough for my workloads and stable.


I would happily use 3600mhz because I would probabily run at cl14, the thing is that anything below 3666mhz yelds a bclk of 99.81mhz and make cpu clock and memory clock with werid numbers.

Does anyone know a fix for this?


----------



## YourMainD

97pedro said:


> I would happily use 3600mhz because I would probabily run at cl14, the thing is that anything below 3666mhz yelds a bclk of 99.81mhz and make cpu clock and memory clock with werid numbers.
> 
> Does anyone know a fix for this?


4204 is going to limit your ability to push your system; it's essentially x570 code ported down (grandfathered...) to the x470 platform. Don't get hung up about bclks either, because you're simply fighting the i-Fabric. Let it do it's thing and aim for stability ... or get a newer mobo! CH7 was always a temperamental platform and only became more predictable with later 3xxx BIOSES. The 4xxx BIOS sets were a goofy run with 4204 finally resulting in marked stability at the sacrifice of moderate to extreme tweaking (highly dependent on what's in your hardware mix...). If you truly want the ultimate performance from the CH7 at this juncture, find some 3200 C14 Samsung B-die and prosper!


----------



## 97pedro

YourMainD said:


> 4204 is going to limit your ability to push your system; it's essentially x570 code ported down (grandfathered...) to the x470 platform. Don't get hung up about bclks either, because you're simply fighting the i-Fabric. Let it do it's thing and aim for stability ... or get a newer mobo! CH7 was always a temperamental platform and only became more predictable with later 3xxx BIOSES. The 4xxx BIOS sets were a goofy run with 4204 finally resulting in marked stability at the sacrifice of moderate to extreme tweaking (highly dependent on what's in your hardware mix...). If you truly want the ultimate performance from the CH7 at this juncture, find some 3200 C14 Samsung B-die and prosper!


Well I have flare x 3200 c14 eheh


----------



## lordzed83

shamino1978 said:


> it is not a bug, merely too conversative a threshold specially for vermeer.
> the message shows up when "Calibrated" temperature is above 75c during post
> calibrated means it takes an average between tdie and onboard thermistor. the onboard thermistor is slow to react and thus lower temps slower while tdie is fast to rise and fast to drop.
> it is not the cause but the effect of stress testing at unstable settings and then the reboot.
> you can prove it by stress testing at lower stable clocks and hit 90+c and just press reset so its quick and gives no time for the thermistor to cool down.
> this threshold will be raised in view of vermeers higher temps during stress tests.


As @Keith Myers said this started happening in 4xxx bioses. I had this rig ruinning for 24 hours 95c (220+w CPU PACKAGE) on cores NO PROBLEMS on older bioses :/
It can work for whole WEEK no reboot then reboot 3 times in a day. Looked around bios if I could totally remove Thermal protection Worst case i get 5000 cpu upgrade but cant find way to do it.


----------



## YourMainD

97pedro said:


> Well I have flare x 3200 c14 eheh


Then stick with D.O.C.P. xmp control and have stability.


----------



## crakej

97pedro said:


> I would happily use 3600mhz because I would probabily run at cl14, the thing is that anything below 3666mhz yelds a bclk of 99.81mhz and make cpu clock and memory clock with werid numbers.
> 
> Does anyone know a fix for this?


Just set AI Overclock Tuner to <auto> (or <manual>) and you'll get your 100mhz BCLK

I've been having regular reboots on 4204 with my regular bios setting for 3733MTs (4 dimms, used to work!)

I can't help wondering what's going on? I mean the 3xxx and 5xxx have the same memory controller - are both these CPUs on the same 7nm process?

When I had 2 simms, I could run them at DOCP 4400 and higher, can't do that AT ALL now with 4 simms. I may try pulling 2 to do some more tests see whats going on.

My board will still set CLDO VDDP at 1.09v on <auto> - I don't remember it doing that with 2 simms, but that was a few bios versions ago.

What I haven't had in ages, is the over-temp bug. Let's hope i'm not speaking too soon.


----------



## 97pedro

Well, I was able to find a stable setting.

What do you think?

3666mhz 1833mhz fclk 14-16-15-28 @1.48v.

At least it's stable.


----------



## crakej

97pedro said:


> Well, I was able to find a stable setting.
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> 3666mhz 1833mhz fclk 14-16-15-28 @1.48v.
> 
> At least it's stable.
> View attachment 2481448


I don't have a 5xxx, but it looks ok from here....Search for and download 'Zen Timings' which will show much more of your settings.... Mine (default) are currently:

*Scrub that!* Just noticed that my settings have changed after Hybrid Sleep - something that *SHOULD NOT HAPPEN!* The timings on the right are my 3733 settings - when they stick! *This bug wasn't happening a few bios versions ago!*


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> I don't have a 5xxx, but it looks ok from here....Search for and download 'Zen Timings' which will show much more of your settings.... Mine (default) are currently:
> 
> *Scrub that!* Just noticed that my settings have changed after Hybrid Sleep - something that *SHOULD NOT HAPPEN!* The timings on the right are my 3733 settings - when they stick! *This bug wasn't happening a few bios versions ago!*
> 
> View attachment 2481642
> View attachment 2481643


Told ya this bios got settings problem...


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> Told ya this bios got settings problem...


Indeed! This is actually WORSE than the previous 'sleep bug'! Also, had 2 reboots while just watching TV/YouTube with my 'stable' 3373 settings. What have AMD done?

SAME memory controler as 5xxx CPUs, but I'm starting to think (just like PCIE 4 removal) that they've done' something to, or are trying to cripple 3xxx mem controllers. Call me cynical - but then tell me why we have these problems with later, 'better' releases of AGESA?

Edit: I will experiment more with manual settings, but I'm not hopeful. It was running my memory at 2133 and CLDO_VDDP voltage of 1.09v!


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Indeed! This is actually WORSE than the previous 'sleep bug'! Also, had 2 reboots while just watching TV/YouTube with my 'stable' 3373 settings. What have AMD done?
> 
> SAME memory controler as 5xxx CPUs, but I'm starting to think (just like PCIE 4 removal) that they've done' something to, or are trying to cripple 3xxx mem controllers. Call me cynical - but then tell me why we have these problems with later, 'better' releases of AGESA?
> 
> Edit: I will experiment more with manual settings, but I'm not hopeful. It was running my memory at 2133 and CLDO_VDDP voltage of 1.09v!


For mea and @Keith Myers Cou redout bug. Also had the memory settings not apply liek at all. In bios all set up pc reboots at stock i enter bios its all there reboot works agin.
My solution for all them bugs is having pc on 24/7 at lest nicehash keps room warm

Once i run Nvidias SAM and test out i decide if im bothered with 4xxx bioses tbh Would rather get our pcie 4.0 back tbh


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> For mea and @Keith Myers Cou redout bug. Also had the memory settings not apply liek at all. In bios all set up pc reboots at stock i enter bios its all there reboot works agin.
> My solution for all them bugs is having pc on 24/7 at lest nicehash keps room warm
> 
> Once i run Nvidias SAM and test out i decide if im bothered with 4xxx bioses tbh Would rather get our pcie 4.0 back tbh


Well I tried turning off PE3 and the EDC 'bug' settings and have had 3 reboots since. The only way this thing stays running so far is with NO OC at all! I may well go back to the last bios with PCIE4 - at least it didn't do this!

Have more ram tests to do including taking 2 sticks out (really, shouldn't have to do that!), and might try from scratch, but not sure I wanna invest that time again!


----------



## 97pedro

Well I figured it out, I had locked to voltages for ccd, iod, 1.8 pll and 1.05 sb. After setting them to auto i AM completly stable without any restarts bugs whea errors, nothing, its rock solid stable now! I think the auto setting makes the 1.8 pll higher, but hey if it works it works, never seen a board die because of auto voltage lol


----------



## crakej

97pedro said:


> Well I figured it out, I had locked to voltages for ccd, iod, 1.8 pll and 1.05 sb. After setting them to auto i AM completly stable without any restarts bugs whea errors, nothing, its rock solid stable now! I think the auto setting makes the 1.8 pll higher, but hey if it works it works, never seen a board die because of auto voltage lol


Glad you got it working...

It would be interesting to see what voltages your bios has chosen....


----------



## 97pedro

I still get the same F9 error sometimes on a cold boot.

I never got the F9 error when I had 2 dimms.

Anyone know a fix? Its perfectly stable, only it sometimes fails to post and shows F9


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Well I tried turning off PE3 and the EDC 'bug' settings and have had 3 reboots since. The only way this thing stays running so far is with NO OC at all! I may well go back to the last bios with PCIE4 - at least it didn't do this!
> 
> Have more ram tests to do including taking 2 sticks out (really, shouldn't have to do that!), and might try from scratch, but not sure I wanna invest that time again!


I got my bios profiles for every bios version that cameout for this board saced on bios stick just need to flash load BOOM STABLE


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> I got my bios profiles for every bios version that cameout for this board saced on bios stick just need to flash load BOOM STABLE


I've got most of mine too - gonna do a few experiments on here see if I can find out what setting/s is borking things - but I won't spend too much time on this. I'll go back to 26xx or 27xx(modded, if it still has pcie 4.0) which have much more stable, and some faster profiles - was experimenting with speeds like 4466, 4533 back then as well as 3800:1900 which hasn't worked for me for ages..... 

In the meantime, i'll have to have default so I can get stuff done!


----------



## crakej

97pedro said:


> I still get the same F9 error sometimes on a cold boot.
> 
> I never got the F9 error when I had 2 dimms.
> 
> Anyone know a fix? Its perfectly stable, only it sometimes fails to post and shows F9


Not without your settings! Zen Timings?


----------



## lukatherealone

97pedro said:


> I still get the same F9 error sometimes on a cold boot.
> 
> I never got the F9 error when I had 2 dimms.
> 
> Anyone know a fix? Its perfectly stable, only it sometimes fails to post and shows F9


Same for me. Even with stock XMP settings, it shows random q codes related to memory.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> I've got most of mine too - gonna do a few experiments on here see if I can find out what setting/s is borking things - but I won't spend too much time on this. I'll go back to 26xx or 27xx(modded, if it still has pcie 4.0) which have much more stable, and some faster profiles - was experimenting with speeds like 4466, 4533 back then as well as 3800:1900 which hasn't worked for me for ages.....
> 
> In the meantime, i'll have to have default so I can get stuff done!


On New bioses i was never able to get Mem latency to levels from 27xxx bioses. And today ordered new System drive update that is pcie 4.0


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> On New bioses i was never able to get Mem latency to levels from 27xxx bioses. And today ordered new System drive update that is pcie 4.0


So, going back to pcie 4 goodness then? Let us know which bios you choose to settle on...


----------



## 97pedro

lukatherealone said:


> Same for me. Even with stock XMP settings, it shows random q codes related to memory.


Well I got my problems sorted by using 4007 bios instead of the most recent.
My problem is now the temperature of ddr4, as soon as you get 41c it starts having errors.


----------



## lukatherealone

97pedro said:


> Well I got my problems sorted by using 4007 bios instead of the most recent.
> My problem is now the temperature of ddr4, as soon as you get 41c it starts having errors.


My RAMs are running around 42-43 and I don't have any problems. Only strange problem I've got now is that my PC wouldn't boot correctly when doing a cold start. It gives all kinds of random Q codes. They are mostly related to memory and GPU. I recently modded my RX580's VBIOS so I had to use CSM. Everything was fine, one day I've got a crash. PC didn't boot up, I cleared CMOS multiple times and flashed latest BIOS, nothing fixed it. I tried to flash my GPU's stock BIOS that I've extracted from GPU-Z, I was able to use UEFI doing that without CSM. But my cold start problem was still there.

Any tips?


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> So, going back to pcie 4 goodness then? Let us know which bios you choose to settle on...


there is only 1 bios basidally 2606 last one with pcie 4.0 tho this date i consider 2703 as best C7h bios. Only problem with going back to 2606 is i dont have a singe mem stick that works with the xxx flashback on C7H.... and cant just flash it normally....


----------



## lordzed83

lukatherealone said:


> My RAMs are running around 42-43 and I don't have any problems. Only strange problem I've got now is that my PC wouldn't boot correctly when doing a cold start. It gives all kinds of random Q codes. They are mostly related to memory and GPU. I recently modded my RX580's VBIOS so I had to use CSM. Everything was fine, one day I've got a crash. PC didn't boot up, I cleared CMOS multiple times and flashed latest BIOS, nothing fixed it. I tried to flash my GPU's stock BIOS that I've extracted from GPU-Z, I was able to use UEFI doing that without CSM. But my cold start problem was still there.
> 
> Any tips?


no fix for coldboot since ryzen came out


----------



## lordzed83

97pedro said:


> Well I got my problems sorted by using 4007 bios instead of the most recent.
> My problem is now the temperature of ddr4, as soon as you get 41c it starts having errors.


install memory fan like everybody ??


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> So, going back to pcie 4 goodness then? Let us know which bios you choose to settle on...


Flashed 2606 pcie 4.0 works like a dream


----------



## lordzed83

@crakej gained 150 points in Port royale. Guess if u got 3080 you want to be on 2606 bios.


----------



## ossimc

Hi there

Back to square one for me. Switched from 5600X to 5900X

With everything on stock on CCD0 5 cores boost between 4925-4950Mhz 1 core is 4825Mhz
CCD1 however every core only hits 4725Mhz (PBO enabled/disabled no differences). Also CCD1 gets like 5-8° hotter under load(CB20)

Is this normal behaviour with the 2 chiplets Ryzen or may i got a potato-chip?^^

Anyhow...im gonna get to work with the curve optimizer...again


----------



## lordzed83

ossimc said:


> Hi there
> 
> Back to square one for me. Switched from 5600X to 5900X
> 
> With everything on stock on CCD0 5 cores boost between 4925-4950Mhz 1 core is 4825Mhz
> CCD1 however every core only hits 4725Mhz (PBO enabled/disabled no differences). Also CCD1 gets like 5-8° hotter under load(CB20)
> 
> Is this normal behaviour with the 2 chiplets Ryzen or may i got a potato-chip?^^
> 
> Anyhow...im gonna get to work with the curve optimizer...again


pelcome to potato chip owners. One ccd is always xxxx id assume 5950 is only cpu that will have best bins on both ccds


----------



## Keith Myers

My 3900X has better matched CCD's compared to the CCD's on my 3950X. Just the silicon lottery I guess.


----------



## Bart

lordzed83 said:


> pelcome to potato chip owners. One ccd is always xxxx id assume 5950 is only cpu that will have best bins on both ccds


Nah, we're in the same boat, one awesome CCD, and a slightly inferior second one.


----------



## garf333

Bart said:


> Nah, we're in the same boat, one awesome CCD, and a slightly inferior second one.


The inferior one is what they call the ****let ;D

I'm guessing the superior chiplet gets the core that boosts to max single core, and they purposely give you a worse 2nd chiplet so another CPU can get the good cores.

These things are crazy binned.


----------



## ossimc

So after a complete BIOS reset which changed f.a. c-state controll, CPPC and CPPC prefered core from enabled back to Auto the stock boost behaviour is now better
CCX0 every core 4950mhz
CCX1 every core 4850mhz (so an increase of about 100mhz)

dont realy know why that is

i try the CTR2.0 now. Anyone having experiences using this tool? is there any setting in the BIOS i need to look at other then the LLC levels?


----------



## bushd0c

ossimc said:


> i try the CTR2.0 now. Anyone having experiences using this tool? is there any setting in the BIOS i need to look at other then the LLC levels?


Not yet, but would like to know how it performed for you!


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> View attachment 2482296
> 
> @crakej gained 150 points in Port royale. Guess if u got 3080 you want to be on 2606 bios.


Very impressive! - and not missing any of the things like FMax? How are your CPU temps?

I do seem to remember 26xx being ok...

Edit: Hoping to get a decent monitor this year and upgrade my RX580 whenever cards are available!


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Very impressive! - and not missing any of the things like FMax? How are your CPU temps?
> 
> I do seem to remember 26xx being ok...
> 
> Edit: Hoping to get a decent monitor this year and upgrade my RX580 whenever cards are available!


I run only All core oc. So onoy thing im actually missing is /ccd overclock as im limitesd with one ****ty core. For me PBO ect its all just crap i dotn care about as my cpu is locked on 1.337volts on core as its max i can cool down due to constructions limitations. Temperature bug is gone.
Even if i haz 5900x i would run it on all core constant like im doing now.
If it goes for stability









Took some playing around but WE spend enough time uin Bios on every beta alpha that came out fpr this motherboard to know whats the deal. On top of that i'm on better bined mem kit. TRFC256 atm. Generally in benchamarks and games 2606 is just Faster if ya got pcie 4.0 hardware. Ill wait to see how this Nvidia SAM bar thing turns out and then decide. pcie4.0 vs BAR support.

PC. Bar support work for mining 100% it gives 2hash by looks of it. Reran benchmarks on nicehash 4 times scores 2 less on this bios even tho in games and benchmarks card is faster


----------



## kratosatlante

lordzed83 said:


> there is only 1 bios basidally 2606 last one with pcie 4.0 tho this date i consider 2703 as best C7h bios. Only problem with going back to 2606 is i dont have a singe mem stick that works with the xxx flashback on C7H.... and cant just flash it normally....


link the bios mod?, ch7wifi version?


----------



## lordzed83

kratosatlante said:


> link the bios mod?, ch7wifi version?


ITs not mod just asus onme and only wotks if u go full out manual settings and dont care about pbo and all this auto ****.


----------



## lordzed83

kratosatlante said:


> link the bios mod?, ch7wifi version?


IfYou dont know Memory and cpu inside out its not bios for You literary got everything on manual even in AMD CBS.


----------



## kratosatlante

lordzed83 said:


> IfYou dont know Memory and cpu inside out its not bios for You literary got everything on manual even in AMD CBS.


5600x and viper 4400 oc at 3800cl14 FINE overclok, only thinking try version of bios work pcie 4.0 to test new, gpu, 6900xt phantom gaming, in a few games see numers few fps dawn from reviewers


----------



## lordzed83

kratosatlante said:


> 5600x and viper 4400 oc at 3800cl14 FINE overclok, only thinking try version of bios work pcie 4.0 to test new, gpu, 6900xt phantom gaming, in a few games see numers few fps dawn from reviewers


How u want to try zen 3 on bios with no zen 3 support lol. Thats why I said its bios only for people that know their's ****


----------



## kratosatlante

The only bios that I remember with pcie 4.0 is 2406, that's why my question if it was a modified bios


----------



## Praetorr

Any of you all encountered infinity fabrics instability (theoretically) with perfectly stable RAM?

Recently upgraded to a 3080, and I'm getting BSODs in gaming workloads out the ass. GPU worked perfectly for 2 weeks in my brothers PC prior to this. 

I've come to think that my infinity fabric is actually slightly unstable, which is now manifesting as I'm constantly CPU limited in games. The RAM shows zero errors after 6000% Karhu, however. 

Am I grasping at straws here, or is it reasonable to think that it could be an infinity fabric issue? I bumped up VSOC (1.0 -> 1.025) and VDDG (.95 -> 1.0). Seeing if that stops it.... Wanted a sanity check from you all though, if anyone has any thoughts.


----------



## lordzed83

kratosatlante said:


> The only bios that I remember with pcie 4.0 is 2406, that's why my question if it was a modified bios


Nothing new only iold bioses.


----------



## lordzed83

Praetorr said:


> Any of you all encountered infinity fabrics instability (theoretically) with perfectly stable RAM?
> 
> Recently upgraded to a 3080, and I'm getting BSODs in gaming workloads out the ass. GPU worked perfectly for 2 weeks in my brothers PC prior to this.
> 
> I've come to think that my infinity fabric is actually slightly unstable, which is now manifesting as I'm constantly CPU limited in games. The RAM shows zero errors after 6000% Karhu, however.
> 
> Am I grasping at straws here, or is it reasonable to think that it could be an infinity fabric issue? I bumped up VSOC (1.0 -> 1.025) and VDDG (.95 -> 1.0). Seeing if that stops it.... Wanted a sanity check from you all though, if anyone has any thoughts.


Yup thats the main problem tbh Yours soc and VDDG volts are low as it is


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> I run only All core oc. So onoy thing im actually missing is /ccd overclock as im limitesd with one ****ty core. For me PBO ect its all just crap i dotn care about as my cpu is locked on 1.337volts on core as its max i can cool down due to constructions limitations. Temperature bug is gone.
> Even if i haz 5900x i would run it on all core constant like im doing now.
> If it goes for stability
> View attachment 2482615
> 
> 
> Took some playing around but WE spend enough time uin Bios on every beta alpha that came out fpr this motherboard to know whats the deal. On top of that i'm on better bined mem kit. TRFC256 atm. Generally in benchamarks and games 2606 is just Faster if ya got pcie 4.0 hardware. Ill wait to see how this Nvidia SAM bar thing turns out and then decide. pcie4.0 vs BAR support.
> 
> PC. Bar support work for mining 100% it gives 2hash by looks of it. Reran benchmarks on nicehash 4 times scores 2 less on this bios even tho in games and benchmarks card is faster


I'm back on 2606 - no crashes!

I'm also remembering some of the annoyances with it - but like you say, we know these bios versions well! Going to remove 2 of my sticks as think it will do even better - that's the plan anyway.... when i've got the time!


----------



## Praetorr

lordzed83 said:


> Yup thats the main problem tbh Yours soc and VDDG volts are low as it is


Thank you for confirming that I'm not going crazy, haha. It did always seem a little suspicious to me that I was getting away with such a low VSOC. I just figured it was perhaps a high-binned SOC. It never occurred to me before last night that a GPU upgrade would reveal this instability, however. You learn something new every day! 

Still no BSOD since I upped those voltages too. So it looks like it might be solved.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> I'm back on 2606 - no crashes!
> 
> I'm also remembering some of the annoyances with it - but like you say, we know these bios versions well! Going to remove 2 of my sticks as think it will do even better - that's the plan anyway.... when i've got the time!


WEll said em new bioses pass 2xxxx are not that good and 2703 is in my eyes best zen2 bios if u going for all core oc. And dont have pcie 4.0 hardware.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> I'm back on 2606 - no crashes!
> 
> I'm also remembering some of the annoyances with it - but like you say, we know these bios versions well! Going to remove 2 of my sticks as think it will do even better - that's the plan anyway.... when i've got the time!


Any news with back in time ride ??


----------



## xeizo

Meanwhile a lot of Asus B/X4** boards have PCIE 4.0 on the latest bios, not Crosshair though


----------



## Dude970

Probably will soon


----------



## 97pedro

xeizo said:


> Meanwhile a lot of Asus B/X4** boards have PCIE 4.0 on the latest bios, not Crosshair though


Which b450 or x470 have support for pcie 4.0 on the latest bios?


----------



## lordzed83

Dude970 said:


> Probably will soon


more like not happening


----------



## Dude970

lordzed83 said:


> more like not happening


Bummer


----------



## xeizo

97pedro said:


> Which b450 or x470 have support for pcie 4.0 on the latest bios?











Totally Awesome


So I own a ASUS Prime B450 Plus motherboard and I have been holding off on installing any Bios updates until this morning. Well I installed the latest version(3002), Which was released yesterday and I found it under Other in the ASUS choose the OS support. To get to the point, This is true; Some...




www.overclock.net


----------



## kratosatlante

xeizo said:


> Totally Awesome
> 
> 
> So I own a ASUS Prime B450 Plus motherboard and I have been holding off on installing any Bios updates until this morning. Well I installed the latest version(3002), Which was released yesterday and I found it under Other in the ASUS choose the OS support. To get to the point, This is true; Some...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


dont be sure


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> Any news with back in time ride ??


Apart from no crashes - not really! Not had a chance to really spend some time to see if I can get more from this bios performance-wise, especially with 4 sticks of ram (compared to more recent bios). It's just nice not having crashes all the time!

One thing I did notice, is that if my screens turn off, my windows are getting resized - very odd, I didn't expect this problem to be a bios problem, but it wasn't doing this on newer bios versions.

Edit: still wondering when I'll be able to get hold of a new PCIE4 GPU - guess i'll just have to join a queue - I'm not going to pay hundreds of £s over MRP - it's ridiculous!


----------



## crakej

kratosatlante said:


> dont be sure


I don't remember which B450 board(s) had/have PCIE 4.0 enabled, but pretty sure ASUS enabled it on at least one when B550 was taking so long to arrive....

It's interesting seeing this image above - recently AMD admitted there was a problem with USB on recent AGESA and 'PCIE 4.0 denial' or something like that. This could be why CPUz is showing 4.0...

If you look in the bios (4204) there is no way to enable PCIE 4.0.  I believe that removing PCIE 4.0 messed up some others stuff as it was designed to be PCIE 4.0 originally - maybe the cpu is still using it internally and they haven't been able to 'remove' it cleanly.

On bios 2606 and earlier, PCIE is FULLY enabled and works with GPUs AND M.2.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> I don't remember which B450 board(s) had/have PCIE 4.0 enabled, but pretty sure ASUS enabled it on at least one when B550 was taking so long to arrive....
> 
> It's interesting seeing this image above - recently AMD admitted there was a problem with USB on recent AGESA and 'PCIE 4.0 denial' or something like that. This could be why CPUz is showing 4.0...
> 
> If you look in the bios (4204) there is no way to enable PCIE 4.0. I believe that removing PCIE 4.0 messed up some others stuff as it was designed to be PCIE 4.0 originally - maybe the cpu is still using it internally and they haven't been able to 'remove' it cleanly.
> 
> On bios 2606 and earlier, PCIE is FULLY enabled and works with GPUs AND M.2.


Well ill see how this resizeable bar thing goes and decide what bios is starying


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> Well ill see how this resizeable bar thing goes and decide what bios is starying


It can only be enabled via bios right? Will be interesting to see the performance difference when you test. Does it not work for NVidia cards on 4204?


----------



## Deco

crakej said:


> I don't remember which B450 board(s) had/have PCIE 4.0 enabled, but pretty sure ASUS enabled it on at least one when B550 was taking so long to arrive....
> 
> It's interesting seeing this image above - recently AMD admitted there was a problem with USB on recent AGESA and 'PCIE 4.0 denial' or something like that. This could be why CPUz is showing 4.0...
> 
> If you look in the bios (4204) there is no way to enable PCIE 4.0. I believe that removing PCIE 4.0 messed up some others stuff as it was designed to be PCIE 4.0 originally - maybe the cpu is still using it internally and they haven't been able to 'remove' it cleanly.
> 
> On bios 2606 and earlier, PCIE is FULLY enabled and works with GPUs AND M.2.


This is because B450 supported PCIe 4.0, unofficially. Asus enabled the feature for X470 and B450 as it was not locked out by the AGESA at the time. CPU-Z reports that PCIe 4.0 is possible over the chipset, however it is never actually used due to AMD locking out PCIe 4.0 from X470 via the AGESA a while ago.

In regards to SAM (Smart Access Memory), also known as Resizable BAR, this fully works with version 4204, it will not work with the BIOS that has PCIe 4.0 fully enabled as SAM is a BIOS level implementation, and was not enabled in the 2xxx revisions.


----------



## YourMainD

As a side note...

The CH8 generation of boards are receiving this:

Version 3402 Beta Version
2021/03/23

ROG CROSSHAIR VIII HERO BIOS 3402
*"- Update AMD AM4 AGESA V2 PI 1.2.0.1 Patch A
- Fix USB connectivity issue*


Ever since the progression of the 4xxx CH7 bios releases I've experienced random USB related issues. I sure hope Asus throws some 'patches' our way!


----------



## Deco

YourMainD said:


> As a side note...
> 
> The CH8 generation of boards are receiving this:
> 
> Version 3402 Beta Version
> 2021/03/23
> 
> ROG CROSSHAIR VIII HERO BIOS 3402
> *"- Update AMD AM4 AGESA V2 PI 1.2.0.1 Patch A
> - Fix USB connectivity issue*
> 
> 
> Ever since the progression of the 4xxx CH7 bios releases I've experienced random USB related issues. I sure hope Asus throws some 'patches' our way!


The Crosshair VII Hero BIOS's are actually grandfathered from the Crosshair VIII Hero, they will most likely port it to the board eventually.


----------



## neikosr0x

Guys no workaround to get 100mhz bus clock? Latest Bios version boost isn't as good first couple of versions and the bus clock always boots at 99.8mhz any ideas? thanks.


----------



## Deco

neikosr0x said:


> Guys no workaround to get 100mhz bus clock? Latest Bios version boost isn't as good first couple of versions and the bus clock always boots at 99.8mhz any ideas? thanks.


This is normal behaviour. No clock can ever be 100% accurate, which is why there is a small deviation to account for clock inaccuracies. It causes no issues.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> It can only be enabled via bios right? Will be interesting to see the performance difference when you test. Does it not work for NVidia cards on 4204?


well need support from nvidia to check. I Know Mining got option to support bar


----------



## lordzed83

neikosr0x said:


> Guys no workaround to get 100mhz bus clock? Latest Bios version boost isn't as good first couple of versions and the bus clock always boots at 99.8mhz any ideas? thanks.


set 100mhz in bios manually ??


----------



## neikosr0x

lordzed83 said:


> set 100mhz in bios manually ??


The last time I tried it, my PC didn't boot xD 5900x for some odd reason. hahahahaha


----------



## lordzed83

neikosr0x said:


> The last time I tried it, my PC doesn't boot xD 5900x for some odd reason. hahahahaha


reason is **** BIOS


----------



## Cedric205

Does anyone know if the CH7 will be getting AGESA V2 PI 1.2.0.1 update? I see the x470 prime and x470 tuf boards have received the new bios update.


----------



## 97pedro

neikosr0x said:


> Guys no workaround to get 100mhz bus clock? Latest Bios version boost isn't as good first couple of versions and the bus clock always boots at 99.8mhz any ideas? thanks.


Just use version 4007, the cpu is 4c colder on average and you don't have the bclk problem


----------



## majsterz

What is the best bios for ryzen 3000 seriers(3800x) right now? Currently i`am using bios verios 3103 AGESA 1.0.0.6.


----------



## Dude970

majsterz said:


> What is the best bios for ryzen 3000 seriers(3800x) right now? Currently i`am using bios verios 3103 AGESA 1.0.0.6.


I would say 4204, but everyone's results can change. Try a few and see what works for you


----------



## Amhro

Anyone using 4 dimms of G.Skill's F4-3200C14D-16GTZRX (which is a dual kit) on C7H?
Does it run fine @ 3200/14?
I am thinking about getting a second pair of this RAM and I'm afraid that it would not run at 3200/14 - don't really want to lose performance on this.


----------



## nick name

Amhro said:


> Anyone using 4 dimms of G.Skill's F4-3200C14D-16GTZRX (which is a dual kit) on C7H?
> Does it run fine @ 3200/14?
> I am thinking about getting a second pair of this RAM and I'm afraid that it would not run at 3200/14 - don't really want to lose performance on this.


I'm pretty sure the board will run it, but the CPU and RAM may be the deciding factors. Which CPU? And how old is the first RAM kit? I would imagine worst case scenario is having to use a little more voltage.


----------



## Glazos

is resizable bar working on polaris ???
i got these results from it 

Result

left is on right is off


----------



## neikosr0x

97pedro said:


> Just use version 4007, the cpu is 4c colder on average and you don't have the bclk problem


I might, overall the pc runs very sable as it is, but the CPU isn't boosting as before... i was able to hit 4.95ghz in 5 cores with no issues and temps were close to what it is just now... Now with the latest bios only 2 cores manage to get to 4.94~. I might go back to older bios just to try and test hopefully RAM stability remains decent.


----------



## Amhro

nick name said:


> I'm pretty sure the board will run it, but the CPU and RAM may be the deciding factors. Which CPU? And how old is the first RAM kit? I would imagine worst case scenario is having to use a little more voltage.


I have 2700X at the moment. If I understand correctly, it may be harder with this CPU than with, let's say, 5800X, correct?
I got the RAM kit on 06/2018, so it's dated a bit. Does it matter?


----------



## Keith Myers

Amhro said:


> Anyone using 4 dimms of G.Skill's F4-3200C14D-16GTZRX (which is a dual kit) on C7H?
> Does it run fine @ 3200/14?
> I am thinking about getting a second pair of this RAM and I'm afraid that it would not run at 3200/14 - don't really want to lose performance on this.


Should work fine with two dual kits. That is what I did to get four sticks of G.Skill F4-3200C14D-16GTZ running at 3600CL14 currently with no issues.


----------



## Keith Myers

Amhro said:


> I have 2700X at the moment. If I understand correctly, it may be harder with this CPU than with, let's say, 5800X, correct?
> I got the RAM kit on 06/2018, so it's dated a bit. Does it matter?


Might be harder on a 2700X to get anything more than 3466 out them. That is all I can manage on my 2700X. The 3900X and 3950X have no issues running 3600.


----------



## Amhro

Keith Myers said:


> Should work fine with two dual kits. That is what I did to get four sticks of G.Skill F4-3200C14D-16GTZ running at 3600CL14 currently with no issues.


And even with four sticks it would be still dual channel, right?



Keith Myers said:


> Might be harder on a 2700X to get anything more than 3466 out them. That is all I can manage on my 2700X. The 3900X and 3950X have no issues running 3600.


I'm perfectly fine with 3200/14 as long as it runs.


----------



## Keith Myers

Amhro said:


> And even with four sticks it would be still dual channel, right?
> 
> 
> I'm perfectly fine with 3200/14 as long as it runs.


Yes, the platform is still dual channel. But your four sticks would use interleaved accesses that speeds up transactions.


----------



## xeizo

AGESA 1.2.0.1?



https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/SocketAM4/ROG_CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-4301.ZIP



edit. installed it, confirmed AGESA 1.2.0.1 but without patch A, runs my 2700X with same settings as before so at least working. More interesting with 5-series.


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> Well ill see how this resizeable bar thing goes and decide what bios is starying


I was just about losing hope lasst night of finding a gpu - I was looking at RX 6700XT, but after hours and hours found an RX 6800 *cheaper* then the 6700! £660 Will sell my XFX RX 580 at about the price I bought it to cover the cost. Tempted to get another one just to sell!

So, looking fwd to testing PCIE 4 on that when it arrives....


----------



## crakej

xeizo said:


> AGESA 1.2.0.1?
> 
> 
> 
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/SocketAM4/ROG_CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-4301.ZIP
> 
> 
> 
> edit. installed it, confirmed AGESA 1.2.0.1 but without patch A, runs my 2700X with same settings as before so at least working. More interesting with 5-series.


I think I'll be letting others test thins bios.... but thank you!


----------



## xeizo

crakej said:


> I think I'll be letting others test thins bios.... but thank you!


Something is changed, I couldn't undervolt as much, performance is good in Geekbench though. Impressive score for a 2700X:


----------



## neikosr0x

crakej said:


> I think I'll be letting others test thins bios.... but thank you!


Better boost behaviour on my CH7 5900x back to having my CPU boosting to 4.95ghz on 5 cores almost constant 4.9 on CB20 runs and about 75-100mhz better muticore frequency while getting a lower voltage. About 2-4C colder after a few runs of CB20. All settings were set manually after the update and using the same CPU/RAM settings as before. Happy OCing.


----------



## Katana1074

Testing this bios as we speak,not sure if its its had an effect on my optane drive Or its from changing to Windows 10 Insider Dev Channel
, Bios 4204:











Bios 4301:

Sorry for the cut off image , much Better Q1T1 Score


----------



## Hepe

I have now been using a 5600X for a couple of weeks now and I have to say that this was probably the most painless CPU upgrade I have ever done. I had to upgrade the BIOS in a couple of steps but my old 2700X worked just fine on 2404 and the CPU upgrade was literally just a drop in. Currently running my RAM at 3733MHz 16-16-16-16-36 with slightly tightened subtimings, FCLK 1867. Could probably go a bit higher but can't be arsed to fiddle with the settings.

What was surprising was that my PC is now noticeably faster in normal use than with the 2700X, somehow it just feels snappier. Anyway, I'm very happy with my 5600X, everything has been as smooth as smooth can be and the gains in certain games have been downright ******ed compared to the 2700X.


----------



## lordzed83

xeizo said:


> AGESA 1.2.0.1?
> 
> 
> 
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/SocketAM4/ROG_CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-4301.ZIP
> 
> 
> 
> edit. installed it, confirmed AGESA 1.2.0.1 but without patch A, runs my 2700X with same settings as before so at least working. More interesting with 5-series.


Ill test Nvbar support after work


----------



## Axaion

Well, that kinda sucks its not the patch A one with the USB fix.. 

Ive had my mouse disconnect quite a few times


----------



## lordzed83

xeizo said:


> AGESA 1.2.0.1?
> 
> 
> 
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/SocketAM4/ROG_CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-4301.ZIP
> 
> 
> 
> edit. installed it, confirmed AGESA 1.2.0.1 but without patch A, runs my 2700X with same settings as before so at least working. More interesting with 5-series.





http://imgur.com/XztExPm

Bar up and running but highly dubt it will be worth it. New bioses memory latency is **** on zen2 and on top of that losing pcie 4.0. I think it wont outweight the negatives.


----------



## Katana1074

lordzed83 said:


> http://imgur.com/XztExPm
> 
> Bar up and running but highly dubt it will be worth it. New bioses memory latency is **** on zen2 and on top of that losing pcie 4.0. I think it wont outweight the negatives.


Yeah but it may be possible to add BAR support to an older bios, im pretty much in the same predicament as you....


----------



## xeizo

lordzed83 said:


> http://imgur.com/XztExPm
> 
> Bar up and running but highly dubt it will be worth it. New bioses memory latency is **** on zen2 and on top of that losing pcie 4.0. I think it wont outweight the negatives.


Oh Noes, that is not the bios! You have fallen for the temptation and installed Windows Insider, Ryzen cache is f*ing bugged on the current Insider builds. Just install a official Windows build and cache will be back to normal, WITH the new bios.


----------



## Tactix

Cedric205 said:


> Does anyone know if the CH7 will be getting AGESA V2 PI 1.2.0.1 update? I see the x470 prime and x470 tuf boards have received the new bios update.


4301 released a few days ago ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO | ROG Crosshair | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG USA


----------



## lordzed83

xeizo said:


> Oh Noes, that is not the bios! You have fallen for the temptation and installed Windows Insider, Ryzen cache is f*ing bugged on the current Insider builds. Just install a official Windows build and cache will be back to normal, WITH the new bios.


Talking memory latency new bioses cant get below 63ns no matter what plus the random 1 windows error bug. But ye noticed cache hit...
Plenty of problems with this developer windows build.


----------



## Glazos

Sure it can 😁


----------



## Katana1074

dont think i`ll ever get below 63ns


----------



## hurricane28

Hi guys, new BIOS is out. anyone tried it yet?


----------



## Katana1074

yup already on 4301...


----------



## hurricane28

Me too i bought new ram and have huge issues regarding stability. On previous bios, hopefully this bios is better.

I got WHEA errors randomly when stressing with occt or when i do nothing..


----------



## Katana1074

No Stability issues on my gaming rig with the new bios, if anything things have got better, however my Ryzen 3600 on my media server chucked out a few WHEA errors, so had to dial back my memory over clock from 3600 to 3200.but i have b-die trash 16,18,18,38 running in it so was to be expected....


----------



## tryout1

hurricane28 said:


> Hi guys, new BIOS is out. anyone tried it yet?


Yes but sadly the same old things as previous bios on my 5900x, VDDG voltage ain't working anywhere. Is it a issue for me? Well not quite, auto defaults to 1.05v VDDG IOD and 0.95v VDDG CCD which is even a bit higher than before (VDDG CCD was 0.9v at auto, but still stable), but even before fclk 1900/3800 was perfectly stable with no WHEAs whatsoever, only issue is my CCD1 sucks and can't really go low on it with 3 cores with curve optimizer.


----------



## hurricane28

tryout1 said:


> Yes but sadly the same old things as previous bios on my 5900x, VDDG voltage ain't working anywhere. Is it a issue for me? Well not quite, auto defaults to 1.05v VDDG IOD and 0.95v VDDG CCD which is even a bit higher than before (VDDG CCD was 0.9v at auto, but still stable), but even before fclk 1900/3800 was perfectly stable with no WHEAs whatsoever, only issue is my CCD1 sucks and can't really go low on it with 3 cores with curve optimizer.



My problems started after i upgraded my SSD from Samsung 950 pro tpo Samsung 970 EVO plus 1TB and from my G.skill FlareX RAM to TridentZ Neo 3600 MHz B-die kit. 

I first was stable af at 3800 MHz cl15 even on my FlareX kit and could run the same on my Trident Z. I also tried 3800 MHz with both installed but that setup would only run at 3600 MHz because it will recognize 4 sticks as dual rank instead of single rank kits so its more difficult to OC. 

Later i tried only the Trident Z kit and all hell broke loose really. I copied Windows 10 from my 950 pro to my 970 EVO using Samsung cloning tool and all is well but these WHEA errors randomly started without me doing anything different. Sadly i sold the FlareX kit so i cannot test but that was 3200 MHz cl14 and this Trident Z is 3600 CL16 which is also B-die but maybe its worse quality? 

Im running DOCP now for testing and it this doesn't work i send this RAM back and get different kit although its Ryzen related it can be incompatible with my board or CPU and my retail store said the same as they seen similar issues with Ryzen and so called "Ryzen optimized RAM"


----------



## Axaion

2k flck.. kinda jelly.


----------



## hurricane28

I start to think there is something wrong with this RAM or its the board is acting up. 

Now when i set DOCP it doesn't apply all the settings and the latency is stupid high in the 70s... 

I tried so many settings for 3800 MHz RAM but nothing would boot... Is it possible that my CPU is degraded? I mean, where to find the source of the issue while there are so many variables... 

The ryzen RAM calculator suggested that this kit could do 4K MHz cl16... how reliable is that calculator come to my mind. 

Maybe i should RMA this set of RAM and get another one but maybe this is a good set and the next one is not as good... If i had any hair on my head i would pull it out now lmao.


----------



## xeizo

hurricane28 said:


> I start to think there is something wrong with this RAM or its the board is acting up.
> 
> Now when i set DOCP it doesn't apply all the settings and the latency is stupid high in the 70s...
> 
> I tried so many settings for 3800 MHz RAM but nothing would boot... Is it possible that my CPU is degraded? I mean, where to find the source of the issue while there are so many variables...
> 
> The ryzen RAM calculator suggested that this kit could do 4K MHz cl16... how reliable is that calculator come to my mind.
> 
> Maybe i should RMA this set of RAM and get another one but maybe this is a good set and the next one is not as good... If i had any hair on my head i would pull it out now lmao.


DOCP usually do not work on higher end memory, you have to go manual, and it's not easy to degrade the chip. I've been beating my 3900X and 3700X since those where launched and they still perform as when new.


----------



## hurricane28

xeizo said:


> DOCP usually do not work on higher end memory, you have to go manual, and it's not easy to degrade the chip. I've been beating my 3900X and 3700X since those where launched and they still perform as when new.


I saw that indeed. I had to set many settings manually. 

I am stable for now on 4.4 GHz 3800 MHz CL16 again leaving most voltages on auto settings... I loaded up the DOCP 3600 MHz settings and went from there. The profile already loads the correct values so i don't need to tinker with a lot of other voltages or settings. 

I'v been testing for 6 hours with a break in between with first stock CPU with no issues and now with 4.4 GHz CPU with no issues at all. This Ryzen stuff is weird man, Intel its just load up xmp and it works but with Ryzen its something else lol. If you have the patience its more fun but if you just want plug and play don't go Ryzen imo.


----------



## Katana1074

hurricane28 said:


> I saw that indeed. I had to set many settings manually.
> 
> I am stable for now on 4.4 GHz 3800 MHz CL16 again leaving most voltages on auto settings... I loaded up the DOCP 3600 MHz settings and went from there. The profile already loads the correct values so i don't need to tinker with a lot of other voltages or settings.
> 
> I'v been testing for 6 hours with a break in between with first stock CPU with no issues and now with 4.4 GHz CPU with no issues at all. This Ryzen stuff is weird man, Intel its just load up xmp and it works but with Ryzen its something else lol. If you have the patience its more fun but if you just want plug and play don't go Ryzen imo.


Yeah I would test every bench,and stress test out there if I was you, I Have found like you that ryzen can be a bit funky, one minute you think your stable,and then bam !

Currently testing 3800mhz ram 1900 infinity fabric clock, dont hold much hope as normally it fails pretty much straight away


----------



## ossimc

Amhro said:


> Anyone using 4 dimms of G.Skill's F4-3200C14D-16GTZRX (which is a dual kit) on C7H?
> Does it run fine @ 3200/14?
> I am thinking about getting a second pair of this RAM and I'm afraid that it would not run at 3200/14 - don't really want to lose performance on this.


 i run 4x8gb of this exact typ(14D-8GTZRX)...with 3800Mhz CL16. So there is plenty of OC potential


----------



## ossimc

Glazos said:


> Sure it can 😁


you cant compare 3000 series to 5000. There is a ~10ns reduction by default.

nice result though. may i ask the voltages you run the ram?


----------



## Amhro

ossimc said:


> i run 4x8gb of this exact typ(14D-8GTZRX)...with 3800Mhz CL16. So there is plenty of OC potential


Thanks! Unfortunately, 2700X vs 5600X will make a difference in the potential.


----------



## Praetorr

ossimc said:


> i run 4x8gb of this exact typ(14D-8GTZRX)...with 3800Mhz CL16. So there is plenty of OC potential


Any interest in sharing your settings? I've tried to get 3800mhz stable, but I never can.


----------



## ossimc

tru. with my ryzen 2700x i couldnt go beyond 3400cl14










trying 3933 atm...but not stable yet. 3800Mhz with these settings is rock stable though ram voltage is 1,45v

i will try the latest BIOS for 3933Mhz. maybe it will improve stability


----------



## hurricane28

Katana1074 said:


> Yeah I would test every bench,and stress test out there if I was you, I Have found like you that ryzen can be a bit funky, one minute you think your stable,and then bam !
> 
> Currently testing 3800mhz ram 1900 infinity fabric clock, dont hold much hope as normally it fails pretty much straight away
> 
> View attachment 2484979



Yeah man, i tested with OCCT for 3 hours, than let it rest for couple of hours and do some light work than start it again for 3 hours and no issues. This method is imo a good way as you can "shock the system" so to speak from some kind of sleep mode to full testing mode and if it passes that it is stable most of the time. TM5 is a good program but OCCT is better imo as it can trigger WHEA errors while you are stable in TM5 so yeah its better to run more programs to be sure, and do multiple passes of Aida64 cache mem bench. 

Nice result man, good CPU clock too. Im stuck at 4.4 GHz i think. I could do more but 4.4 GHz at 1.275v is pretty nice if you ask me, especially combined with 3800 MHz RAM. 

Here is my result so far: 










The trick is not to touch too many settings like voltage etc. it will cause more instability and leaving most thing on auto give the most results anyway as DOCP settings load the Ryzen optimized setting out of the box. 

Only thin i changed was RAM voltage is at 1.400v now instead of 1.350 and some timings but not that much really. Been stable so far.


----------



## hurricane28

@Katana1074 

Just like you said man, yesterday was fine and now i got WHEA error again when testing with OCCT... 

There must be something wrong with Windows 10 or its an CPU issue... What an clusterfuck of problems man.. 

Its not related to only 3000 serieus because even 5000 series CPU's have lots of issues man... A friend of mine switched to Intel a couple of months ago because of this and hes had not a single issue ever since he switched platforms.. 

I contacted my retail store and they said i could return the RAM but who's saying its an RAM issue? These problems did start when i switched to my new Samsung 970 EVO Plus SSD AND new G.Skill RAM... But if i test both i see no errors only interconnect according to WHEA....


----------



## nick name

I haven't gotten any WHEA errors with this new BIOS and hadn't seen any with the previous version. What I see now are just warnings saying "corrected hardware error occurred".


----------



## Katana1074

hurricane28 said:


> @Katana1074
> 
> Just like you said man, yesterday was fine and now i got WHEA error again when testing with OCCT...
> 
> There must be something wrong with Windows 10 or its an CPU issue... What an clusterfuck of problems man..
> 
> Its not related to only 3000 serieus because even 5000 series CPU's have lots of issues man... A friend of mine switched to Intel a couple of months ago because of this and hes had not a single issue ever since he switched platforms..
> 
> I contacted my retail store and they said i could return the RAM but who's saying its an RAM issue? These problems did start when i switched to my new Samsung 970 EVO Plus SSD AND new G.Skill RAM... But if i test both i see no errors only interconnect according to WHEA....


Are you overclocking your Bclk past 100?

Only reason i ask is my system doesnt like it at all,I would reflash your bios and load defaults then start from scratch and test docp timings 1st

Yeah i know what ya mean about ryzen being problematic, ive seen all the posts all over the net about it, it does make me wonder if there is some fundamental flaw somewhere

that maybe Amd are not letting on

Could be worse im sat here with the inlaws lenovo laptop that has shat its self,no backups ffs mind you its a ryzen 5 Ha !


----------



## lordzed83

Katana1074 said:


> makes me wonder if its worth going back to 2606....


only if you dont care about auto bullshit boosts and set basically everythingh on manual instead of auto.

Not had my old profiles so took me only 2 weeks to get settings back to sweet spots. So pc wont random reboot.


----------



## Katana1074

well i do use pbo and resizeble bar, id prob gain something back in pcie 4.0


----------



## neikosr0x

lordzed83 said:


> All them new bioses are ****ing waste of time on Zen3
> View attachment 2485081
> 
> 
> Zero Errors Reboots problems...


I have had ZERO WHEA errors on previous bios and ZERO with the new "latest" one. It might be something to do with people's RAM OC.


----------



## ossimc

lordzed83 said:


> All them new bioses are ****ing waste of time on Zen3
> 
> 
> Zero Errors Reboots problems...


pardon me...what do you mean exactly? i am on 4201 with 5900X and never experienced any problems. No WHEA error no USB problems...no nothing! am i just lucky or whats the fuzz all about?

makes me thinking if i should flash the newest bios^^


----------



## Katana1074

Im gonna stick out with bios 4301, ive had one WHEA error in the last 24 hours, more tweaking to come,...


----------



## hurricane28

Very strange that one is affected and the other is not.. This month there is a new BIOS coming that supposedly fix the USB issues people are having, i wait for that and and in the mean time i stay on 3103 as that was the best BIOS for me so far. Its just very poor AMD AGESA code and Asus or any other manufacturer cannot fix this as its on AMD side.. 

Im gonna look over on the AMD forums to see if i can get some explanation about this erratic behavior as i did everything to prevent or fix this with no result so far. Im testing the 3103 BIOS in the mean time too.


----------



## 97pedro

Well, I'm still on 4007 bios.

Seems to be the best for me.

Currently running a 5800x @4.8ghz 1.232v with the Der8aer OC Bracket max 63c on cinebench.

Ram running at 3600mhz 14-15-13-28 @1.43v Flare x B die.

Not a single issue, I think this is the best stability I got out of Ryzen.

The ram is stable at 3800mhz 16-16-16-36 but my gaming results are actually worse and sometimes I get the stupid F9 error on a cold boot. 3600mhz is perfectly stable and no F9 error.


----------



## lordzed83

ossimc said:


> pardon me...what do you mean exactly? i am on 4201 with 5900X and never experienced any problems. No WHEA error no USB problems...no nothing! am i just lucky or whats the fuzz all about?
> 
> makes me thinking if i should flash the newest bios^^


missclicked zen2 well new one as i see it is zen2+ Basically using 4000+ bioses on Zen2 is waste of space but they work fine on zen3. @Katana1074

Update on 2606 @crakej









55 hours constant 100% load zero oproblems zero errors

@hurricane28 its not STRANCE at all cause new bioses operate memory subsystem other way. Bioses pass 3000 will all be crap and theert is no point to use them bioses anyway cause they are slower on zen2. You reverted to old bios and you are testing ?? Why to **** u dont have profile that you had on that bios ??


----------



## hurricane28

On my end it has nothing to do With BIOS man.. there must be some compatibility issue or something as this WHEA error also occurs on 3103 BIOS now.. Never had this before. Or it could be Windows acting up. Strange thing is that my memory is perfectly stable and have no issues until the error pops up in hwinfo64 and i need to restart system because it becomes unstable... 

I read somewhere that 3000 series CPU's can go bad really quick and that this can cause these issues.. lets hope not as this CPU is pretty good OCer...


----------



## Glazos

ossimc said:


> you cant compare 3000 series to 5000. There is a ~10ns reduction by default.
> 
> nice result though. may i ask the voltages you run the ram?


thanks m8

1.15 SOC
1.45 dram
1.5 dram boot
rest is auto


----------



## hurricane28

Glazos said:


> thanks m8
> 
> 1.15 SOC
> 1.45 dram
> 1.5 dram boot
> rest is auto


Would you mind share your results and settings? Like a screenshot of zentimings? Thnx


----------



## Glazos

hurricane28 said:


> Would you mind share your results and settings? Like a screenshot of zentimings? Thnx





Glazos said:


> Sure it can 😁


timings and results quoted above 
will post complete bios settings when i get home if you want


----------



## hurricane28

Glazos said:


> timings and results quoted above
> will post complete bios settings when i get home if you want


Thank you, looking forward to it.


----------



## Logue

hurricane28 said:


> On my end it has nothing to do With BIOS man.. there must be some compatibility issue or something as this WHEA error also occurs on 3103 BIOS now.. Never had this before. Or it could be Windows acting up. Strange thing is that my memory is perfectly stable and have no issues until the error pops up in hwinfo64 and i need to restart system because it becomes unstable...
> 
> I read somewhere that 3000 series CPU's can go bad really quick and that this can cause these issues.. lets hope not as this CPU is pretty good OCer...


I've had similar issues with my 3800X. Whenever I'd start a game (3D graphics load only, any benchmark without it or "fake" loads wouldn't trigger it) my PC would run fine for a while and then after 15-20 min it'd restart with no blue screen in between and a bunch of WHEA errors logged in Windows' event viewer. I ended up rebuilding my PC, remounting the MB, the RAM and the CPU, cleaning everything and reinstalling Windows from scratch. No issues after that. I think there maybe were a few issues with the thermal paste bleeding into the socket (I didn't apply much back then, but I did try to clean my CPU multiple times and there was probably a point where I moved some dried thermal paste into the socket between the CPU edge and the MB pins). Other possibility is Windows got corrupted: I use a Kingston PCI-e 3.0 x2 (not x4) SSD and where I live sometimes the power goes out, who knows. Everytime I'd run sfc /scannow and it'd find some corruption or error in the system. Final possibility is compatibility with something you use in your PC, especially if you use any fan control or RGB software. In my case, I use a lot of those, actually. My PC is filled with RGB strips from Corsair and also Corsair RAM and keyboard, so it all syncs up through iCUE. It's a garbage program that eats single-threaded CPU cycles but it gives me the option to turn it all off if I want to (or change colors, tho' I rarely use it for that, most of the time is static - another reason why it shouldn't eat CPU cycles as much as it does). And I know some of these softwares use CPU (and even GPU, in case of iCue for example) and that can lead to incompatibility.

So, maybe if you have nothing to do due to the pandemic and are still at home, you could try rebuilding everything from scratch, reseating CPU/RAM, format Windows, etc. Not that it's the only solution (or even that it is, you might do all that and still have problems, who knows). Just sharing my experience. Now I use basically everything on Auto and some RAM timings manual, but everything else (including VRM control and PBO) are all set to Auto/Default or Disabled (PBO).

P.S.: I use this CPU to browse the web 90% of the time, studying and Zoom calls at most. So I don't care if I'm not hitting 4.35GHz all the time. Every now and again I do play games and now it doesn't crash anymore, but it is very limited. Also, I'm on 3103 now (having had these issues soon after using any of the 4000+ bioses). I'm waiting for the next AGESA update, so I'm not really keen to trying BIOS at random because of all that I've gone through - at some point I thought my 5700XT was dead and now it works perfectly normally).


----------



## hurricane28

Logue said:


> I've had similar issues with my 3800X. Whenever I'd start a game (3D graphics load only, any benchmark without it or "fake" loads wouldn't trigger it) my PC would run fine for a while and then after 15-20 min it'd restart with no blue screen in between and a bunch of WHEA errors logged in Windows' event viewer. I ended up rebuilding my PC, remounting the MB, the RAM and the CPU, cleaning everything and reinstalling Windows from scratch. No issues after that. I think there maybe were a few issues with the thermal paste bleeding into the socket (I didn't apply much back then, but I did try to clean my CPU multiple times and there was probably a point where I moved some dried thermal paste into the socket between the CPU edge and the MB pins). Other possibility is Windows got corrupted: I use a Kingston PCI-e 3.0 x2 (not x4) SSD and where I live sometimes the power goes out, who knows. Everytime I'd run sfc /scannow and it'd find some corruption or error in the system. Final possibility is compatibility with something you use in your PC, especially if you use any fan control or RGB software. In my case, I use a lot of those, actually. My PC is filled with RGB strips from Corsair and also Corsair RAM and keyboard, so it all syncs up through iCUE. It's a garbage program that eats single-threaded CPU cycles but it gives me the option to turn it all off if I want to (or change colors, tho' I rarely use it for that, most of the time is static - another reason why it shouldn't eat CPU cycles as much as it does). And I know some of these softwares use CPU (and even GPU, in case of iCue for example) and that can lead to incompatibility.
> 
> So, maybe if you have nothing to do due to the pandemic and are still at home, you could try rebuilding everything from scratch, reseating CPU/RAM, format Windows, etc. Not that it's the only solution (or even that it is, you might do all that and still have problems, who knows). Just sharing my experience. Now I use basically everything on Auto and some RAM timings manual, but everything else (including VRM control and PBO) are all set to Auto/Default or Disabled (PBO).
> 
> P.S.: I use this CPU to browse the web 90% of the time, studying and Zoom calls at most. So I don't care if I'm not hitting 4.35GHz all the time. Every now and again I do play games and now it doesn't crash anymore, but it is very limited. Also, I'm on 3103 now (having had these issues soon after using any of the 4000+ bioses). I'm waiting for the next AGESA update, so I'm not really keen to trying BIOS at random because of all that I've gone through - at some point I thought my 5700XT was dead and now it works perfectly normally).



thnx for your insight. 

the problem with Ryzen is that its just very very erratic due to poor AGESA code from AMD as far as i understand from reps. This results in poor BIOS an can cause multiple issues. 

The WHEA error can be caused by so many things. It can even be caused by .m2 nvme drives:

__
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cd7pqb

It can also be caused by CPU degradation or sudden breakdown.https://community.amd.com/t5/processors/whea-18-again-i-m-done/td-p/430145

It can be caused by so many things. The problem for me is the RAM i think as im running my M.2 in the bottom slot of my board which is the correct one and doesn't get lanes straight from the CPU but the chipset and my GPU stays as x16 instead of x8 in the top slot. Not that there is a huge difference between x16 and x8 but still. 

The WHEA error can also be caused by bad PSU, or RAM compatibility issue, the list is endless as it can be Windows update as well. Windows handles RAM very poorly so any slight misconfig can cause erratic behavior. 

The thing is that my current RAM is not faulty and there are no compatibility issus as far as i know so i can rule that out, RAM is also stable so there must be something else that is causing this. I test for hours and hour with TM5 without getting a single issue but testing with OCCT or letting the PC "rest" or light work might trigger another WHEA... 

It can even be caused by loading the DOCP settings... I really don't want to give up this platform but sometimes its just a clusterfuck of problems.


----------



## Tactix

hurricane28 said:


> thnx for your insight.
> 
> the problem with Ryzen is that its just very very erratic due to poor AGESA code from AMD as far as i understand from reps. This results in poor BIOS an can cause multiple issues.
> 
> The WHEA error can be caused by so many things. It can even be caused by .m2 nvme drives:
> 
> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cd7pqb
> 
> It can also be caused by CPU degradation or sudden breakdown.https://community.amd.com/t5/processors/whea-18-again-i-m-done/td-p/430145
> 
> It can be caused by so many things. The problem for me is the RAM i think as im running my M.2 in the bottom slot of my board which is the correct one and doesn't get lanes straight from the CPU but the chipset and my GPU stays as x16 instead of x8 in the top slot. Not that there is a huge difference between x16 and x8 but still.
> 
> The WHEA error can also be caused by bad PSU, or RAM compatibility issue, the list is endless as it can be Windows update as well. Windows handles RAM very poorly so any slight misconfig can cause erratic behavior.
> 
> The thing is that my current RAM is not faulty and there are no compatibility issus as far as i know so i can rule that out, RAM is also stable so there must be something else that is causing this. I test for hours and hour with TM5 without getting a single issue but testing with OCCT or letting the PC "rest" or light work might trigger another WHEA...
> 
> It can even be caused by loading the DOCP settings... I really don't want to give up this platform but sometimes its just a clusterfuck of problems.


Been running Ryzen since the launch of the 2700x and just upgraded recently to the 5800x, have had zero issues in all those years but i run things pretty much stock, are you trying for OC or are these issue's at stock settings?


----------



## neikosr0x

lordzed83 said:


> Man he got probnlems since 2017 and ONLY fix is moving to intel for him. I had every zen besides new ones all super stable on max silicone. People talk bullshit about degradation my 3900x is under load on 1.337vcore after drop soon will be two years no problems.


I had bought into all Zen gens, 1700x, 2700x, 3900x, 5900x. The 2700x and 3900x had decent OC on them and a lot of play around none got degraded after a year. Both CPUs are still been used atm the 2700x for my mum pc and the 3900x my GF uses it for 3d modeling and animations. Intel silicone might be more mature but TSMC is not trash lol. The only "problem" zen has is RAM compatibility and some chipset issues that aren't deal-breaker at least for the majority of people.


----------



## hurricane28

neikosr0x said:


> I had bought into all Zen gens, 1700x, 2700x, 3900x, 5900x. The 2700x and 3900x had decent OC on them and a lot of play around none got degraded after a year. Both CPUs are still been used atm the 2700x for my mum pc and the 3900x my GF uses it for 3d modeling and animations. Intel silicone might be more mature but TSMC is not trash lol. The only "problem" zen has is RAM compatibility and some chipset issues that aren't deal-breaker at least for the majority of people.


Same here, i bought he 1600x, 2600x and now the 3600 and soon i hope the 5600x or the 5800x. 

They all OC'd pretty well to be honest. My 1600x did 3.975 GHz, 2600x 4.250 GHz and now my 3600 does 4.4 GHz. The first ones could only get to 3200 MHz but later the 2600x could do 3466 MHz. Now my 3600 runs 3800 MHz. So yeah, performance wise i cannot complain. The trick was how to get there and the learning curve was quite steep and still is when it comes to RAM with Ryzen. 

The problems with ryzen were indeed RAM compatibility but they ironed it out and most modules run very well now. That wasn't the only problem though, CPU boost was also an issue which they resolved. 

As of my frustrations, its totally RAM related as most of the settings i have no clue what it does nor can i find something where to look for what these things do so i can tweak little more. 
Maybe i forgot where to look though lol. 

The Mus1Mus calculator works great but some setting simply will not do so you have to tweak manually.


----------



## Tactix

Was having odd audio issues with 4301, went back to 4204 and things are golden again.


----------



## lordzed83

Tactix said:


> Was having odd audio issues with 4301, went back to 4204 and things are golden again.


Odd how ?? what drivers u using newwest haxed ones ??


----------



## Tactix

lordzed83 said:


> Odd how ?? what drivers u using newwest haxed ones ??


I have an Asus Xonar Essence STX which has had a long standing issue of randomly Raping my Ears by sending the highest pitch max volume sound into my headphones, even did it on my old intel system at times.
Could be DPC or just the fact the drivers are garbage, either way for some reason with the 4301 Bios it was happening almost every day and the only major change i had made was the bios, so i flashed back and havent had it happen again yet. Crossing fingers


----------



## bushd0c

Tactix said:


> I have an Asus Xonar Essence STX which has had a long standing issue of randomly Raping my Ears by sending the highest pitch max volume sound into my headphones, even did it on my old intel system at times.
> Could be DPC or just the fact the drivers are garbage, either way for some reason with the 4301 Bios it was happening almost every day and the only major change i had made was the bios, so i flashed back and havent had it happen again yet. Crossing fingers


Have the same sound card. No problems so far with 4301. Never had any sound problems with it before, too, though.


----------



## Tactix

bushd0c said:


> Have the same sound card. No problems so far with 4301. Never had any sound problems with it before, too, though.


Guess I’ll consider myself lucky then lol, good to know it’s not the bios though I guess. I do know I’m not the only one with issues on that card as there are plenty of posts on the issue over at the Uni-Xonar drivers forums. Sure wish I could find an actual solution but I’d wager it’s just a goofy unit.


----------



## Cconhoj

Hello everyone, I've just pulled the trigger on a 5950x after missing out on 5900x on many, many occasions. I've currently got the 2700x, how many members in here have the 5950x? Would appreciate on any feedback or advice... Apologies. I can't seem to find the search function to search the entire thread... 

I've currently got the D15 on the 2700x, hoping to reuse it....

I've also got the c14 bdie gskill flare x 16gb kit... Thinking if I should upgrade the sticks or purchase another pair and have the 4 sticks run.

The x470 board is suffice I hope? I was a bit nervous in the x570 boards coming out with the chipset fan. Hoping the 5950x will be okay....


----------



## xeizo

I don't have the 5950X but I used to run the 5900X on CH7, it works just fine with NH-D15 too. 5950X doesn't get warmer than the 5900X, it's better silicon bin.
Now I run the CH8 and I can say there's no difference in performance. CH8 only has more I/O which I need.
PCIE 4.0 is negligble difference IRL.


----------



## bushd0c

Tactix said:


> Guess I’ll consider myself lucky then lol, good to know it’s not the bios though I guess. I do know I’m not the only one with issues on that card as there are plenty of posts on the issue over at the Uni-Xonar drivers forums. Sure wish I could find an actual solution but I’d wager it’s just a goofy unit.


I still use the old Asus Windows 10 drivers, never tried to uni-xonar ones. 🤷‍♂️


----------



## bushd0c

xeizo said:


> I don't have the 5950X but I used to run the 5900X on CH7, it works just fine with NH-D15 too. 5950X doesn't get warmer than the 5900X, it's better silicon bin.
> Now I run the CH8 and I can say there's no difference in performance. CH8 only has more I/O which I need.
> PCIE 4.0 is negligble difference IRL.


I second that. Using 5950x with NH-D15 on Crosshair VII works fine for me. CB20 score around 11650 pts with air cooling / 4301 bios.


----------



## Tactix

bushd0c said:


> I still use the old Asus Windows 10 drivers, never tried to uni-xonar ones. 🤷‍♂️


Ive used both, and they both have the issue, the main benefit to the UNI drivers is lower DPC latency and overall overhead, you can also grab XONAR switch and run with any driver and it allows hotkeys for switching between outputs, its the main reason i cant bring myself to switch to another card.


----------



## Tactix

Quick question, should I be clearing CMOS after bios flashback ?


----------



## xeizo

Tactix said:


> Quick question, should I be clearing CMOS after bios flashback ?


Shouldn't be necessary as flashback is a clear CMOS of sorts, it erases everything old. At least I have never done it and I have done flashback probably 100+ times.


----------



## Tactix

xeizo said:


> Shouldn't be necessary as flashback is a clear CMOS of sorts, it erases everything old. At least I have never done it and I have done flashback probably 100+ times.


That’s what I figured, thank you.


----------



## Asutz

Hello,

quick suggestion with cldo / vddg voltages ?
My soc voltage is fixed, others are auto settings and after a week of testing and regular usage System seems 99% stable, no whea's or other concering errors.Little Audio issues and after some research other voltages seems bit high.thanks in advance.


----------



## Deco

Cconhoj said:


> Hello everyone, I've just pulled the trigger on a 5950x after missing out on 5900x on many, many occasions. I've currently got the 2700x, how many members in here have the 5950x? Would appreciate on any feedback or advice... Apologies. I can't seem to find the search function to search the entire thread...
> 
> I've currently got the D15 on the 2700x, hoping to reuse it....
> 
> I've also got the c14 bdie gskill flare x 16gb kit... Thinking if I should upgrade the sticks or purchase another pair and have the 4 sticks run.
> 
> The x470 board is suffice I hope? I was a bit nervous in the x570 boards coming out with the chipset fan. Hoping the 5950x will be okay....


The board will run fine with the x470, it's already way overspecced in VRM capacity that it may aswell be able to operate Epyc-based CPU's (pin layouts aside).

The fan on x570 boards is actually down to the heat which PCIe 4.0 generates on the express lane (the x570s chipset is fanless by design), which the Crosshair VII Hero doesn't support anyways on Ryzen 5000 based BIOS revisions, so you'll be fine.


----------



## neikosr0x

Cconhoj said:


> Hello everyone, I've just pulled the trigger on a 5950x after missing out on 5900x on many, many occasions. I've currently got the 2700x, how many members in here have the 5950x? Would appreciate on any feedback or advice... Apologies. I can't seem to find the search function to search the entire thread...
> 
> I've currently got the D15 on the 2700x, hoping to reuse it....
> 
> I've also got the c14 bdie gskill flare x 16gb kit... Thinking if I should upgrade the sticks or purchase another pair and have the 4 sticks run.
> 
> The x470 board is suffice I hope? I was a bit nervous in the x570 boards coming out with the chipset fan. Hoping the 5950x will be okay....


x470 Hero VII VRM is more than enough and the latest bios works fine.


----------



## learner-gr

Here i'm with Version 4204 bios and wondering if would better to upgrade to latest bios or not. 
Cpu : 3700x
Ram : Crucial Ballistix 3600 c16 16gb


----------



## Katana1074

learner-gr said:


> Here i'm with Version 4204 bios and wondering if would better to upgrade to latest bios or not.
> Cpu : 3700x
> Ram : Crucial Ballistix 3600 c16 16gb


4301 Working well for me....


----------



## smokin_mitch

How is the latest bios releases working out for 5000 series owners here? I've just got a 5900x and a new gskill trident z neo ram kit 3600 14-15-15-35 on its way and not sure which bios i should start with? I'm currently on bios 2801 with my 3800x running at 4.5ghz with a 3800cl14 oc on a trident z royal 2x8 gb kit


----------



## xeizo

smokin_mitch said:


> How is the latest bios releases working out for 5000 series owners here? I've just got a 5900x and a new gskill trident z neo ram kit 3600 14-15-15-35 on its way and not sure which bios i should start with? I'm currently on bios 2801 with my 3800x running at 4.5ghz with a 3800cl14 oc on a trident z royal 2x8 gb kit


Use the latest 4301 bios, earlier bioses had two problems a. idle reboot and b. USB issues(with 5-series, not 3-series), sheer performance is less important than booth of those

Always use Bios Flashback when flashing a new bios


----------



## Katana1074

xeizo said:


> Use the latest 4301 bios, earlier bioses had two problems a. idle reboot and b. USB issues(with 5-series, not 3-series), sheer performance is less important than booth of those
> 
> Always use Bios Flashback when flashing a new bios


Well 4301 is based on agesa 1.2.0.1 which does have some usb fixes ,Hopefully the next release will be based on 1.2.0.2 so should fix all usb issues with ryzen 5000 series....


----------



## smokin_mitch

well my 5900x and new ram arrived, installed them and flashed to bios 4301 using flashback no issues so far


----------



## smokin_mitch

Started to tweak my ram I'm only at 3600 for now haven't tried to see how far I can push my fclk yet


----------



## smokin_mitch

I managed to get 3733cl14 and 3800cl16 ram working as well but the same old issue of fclk dropping out of sync after waking from sleep if running higher than 1800fclk is still present so I'm just gonna keep my ram at 3600cl14 for now, the last bios that didn't have the fclk dropping out of sync after waking from sleep was bios 2801


----------



## nick name

Has anyone experienced any issues with USB thumb drives failing to get recognized on the latest BIOS version?


----------



## smokin_mitch

nick name said:


> Has anyone experienced any issues with USB thumb drives failing to get recognized on the latest BIOS version?


no the few usb drives I use work fine as well as a couple of portable ssd drives


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

nick name said:


> Has anyone experienced any issues with USB thumb drives failing to get recognized on the latest BIOS version?


From time to time it wont recognize my Steelseries Stratos Duo or loose connection to it.

USB Drives and external HDD's working fine .


----------



## nick name

smokin_mitch said:


> no the few usb drives I use work fine as well as a couple of portable ssd drives





Wuest3nFuchs said:


> From time to time it wont recognize my Steelseries Stratos Duo or loose connection to it.
> 
> USB Drives and external HDD's working fine .


This was the first instance that it happened to me. Had to try different ports and several tries to get it recognized. First time that has happened to me so I thought it might be related to the latest BIOS. Also checked the thumb drive on my laptop and it worked every instance.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

@nick name sry forgot to post my biosversion : 4007


----------



## nick name

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> @nick name sry forgot to post my biosversion : 4007


Ahhh. I'm on the latest -- 4301.


----------



## hurricane28

Hi guys, 

I was wondering what would be a better upgrade for me. 

Getting an 5000 serie CPU or get the ROG Crosshair 8 x570? 

The CPU's obviously work fine on this board but i have heard that on x570 its works better due to better RAM overclocking?


----------



## Asutz

Would save the Money, even the cheapest Boards can run 3800 mhz.Mostly binning of the cpu it what is holding you back, sure a better board will help if u need very high voltages to run 4000+ stable wouldnt run that in a 24/7 environment.Switched to 5600x from 2700x on ch7 and after tweaking i run 3800 c16 100% stable without issues.
After Zen4 release or earlier there is still the option to upgrade to a 59xx, bigger upgrade is am5 and dd5 but i dont expect cheap prices, in my opinion ch7 is a very solid board for the rest of the am4 lifetime.


----------



## hurricane28

Asutz said:


> Would save the Money, even the cheapest Boards can run 3800 mhz.Mostly binning of the cpu it what is holding you back, sure a better board will help if u need very high voltages to run 4000+ stable wouldnt run that in a 24/7 environment.Switched to 5600x from 2700x on ch7 and after tweaking i run 3800 c16 100% stable without issues.
> After Zen4 release or earlier there is still the option to upgrade to a 59xx, bigger upgrade is am5 and dd5 but i dont expect cheap prices, in my opinion ch7 is a very solid board for the rest of the am4 lifetime.


 I hear ya.

So upgrading to an 5600x from an 3600 cpu would be better than x570 crosshair?

Im running 4.4 GHz 3800 cl16 stable too now after some weird issues. Turned out that the EC was monitored again and causing some stabilitie issues. Running better now. 

I think i will upgrade to 5600x and a new PSU since this one is already 8;years old and i want something more efficient.


----------



## smokin_mitch

hurricane28 said:


> I hear ya.
> 
> So upgrading to an 5600x from an 3600 cpu would be better than x570 crosshair?
> 
> Im running 4.4 GHz 3800 cl16 stable too now after some weird issues. Turned out that the EC was monitored again and causing some stabilitie issues. Running better now.
> 
> I think i will upgrade to 5600x and a new PSU since this one is already 8;years old and i want something more efficient.


I'd keep the C7H and upgrade to a 5000 series cpu, my C7H has been home to a 2700x, 3800x and now a 5900x and I have no real issues bar 1, on all bios releases after 2801 if you run higher than 1800 fclk and use sleep in win10 when waking from sleep it'll put your fclk/memclk out of sync and drop to 2:1 mode it's not a deal breaker though


----------



## smokin_mitch

Is PBO + curve optimizer + Auto OC not working on C7H correctly? My 5900x will not boost over 4.95ghz no matter what I do, all my cores will hit 4.95ghz peaks and I thought using PBO + curve optimizer + auto oc would allow my 5900x to boost to 5ghz+ under the right conditions?


----------



## Asutz

2700x to 5600x was worth it for me at least, little bit better multicore performance even with less 2 cores and bigger gains in singlecore, better compare the games you play and check some benchmarks if its worth it for you, jump from 3600 to 5600x isnt that big, 5600x dropped in price but still around 300 bucks for idk 10% gain ? but depends on how well your 3600 is tuned. so maybe gain is bit bigger, takes less power indeed but pricey.cant give recommandations.
if u dont need pcie4 there is no real arguement to go with x570 and even then for a gaming rig a solid b550 would be the better choice.

dont think am5 will run solid at the beginng, same with every new release,cpus will be much more expensive, ddr5 with good speeds and timings costs are unknown but i expect its around double the amount for 16gb than now for ddr4 or even more.possible that amd wont release 6 cores anymore and 8 cores are the new entry level so costs rise up even further.


----------



## Axaion

I wonder if were ever gonna get the bios with USB fix..


----------



## klusek

Did we need it? I thought it is only a Bug of X570 chipset.I have the HP reverb G2 and have never a connection problem on my CH7.


----------



## Axaion

We do, i for one have usb disconnections from time to time, only on this board


----------



## Asutz

First time usb trouble yesterday, usb connect/disconnect sound, keyboard, mouse and external hdd crazyness until all went black after severall reboots and shutdowns it went smooth again but maybe the issue was soc/vddp voltage tweaking that caused it.newer bios still would be good. slow this time.


----------



## smokin_mitch

smokin_mitch said:


> Is PBO + curve optimizer + Auto OC not working on C7H correctly? My 5900x will not boost over 4.95ghz no matter what I do, all my cores will hit 4.95ghz peaks and I thought using PBO + curve optimizer + auto oc would allow my 5900x to boost to 5ghz+ under the right conditions?


ok I seemed to have figured out how to get my 5900x to boost over 5ghz, you need to adjust the Auto OC in the Precision Boost Overdrive section on the Extreme Tweaker page in bios, not in the AMD overclocking section where the curve optimizer is as adding any offset to auto oc there does nothing at all

I've got cores boosting to 5.0-5.1ghz now


----------



## lordzed83

Asutz said:


> First time usb trouble yesterday, usb connect/disconnect sound, keyboard, mouse and external hdd crazyness until all went black after severall reboots and shutdowns it went smooth again but maybe the issue was soc/vddp voltage tweaking that caused it.newer bios still would be good. slow this time.


10000% Its the socand vddp i been having usb problems always as an oculus rift user that **** takes 4 usb ports alone its reason why im on C7H in first place.


----------



## Pakmara

Hi, 

I replaced my motherboard with a crosshair vii wi-fi (from crosshair vi), and i have a problem when I try to overclock my ryzen 3600 cpu.

When I set fix vcore voltage, the PC does not start during cold boot (It crach with 02 Q-code. ) only after restart. 

I checked every cable, replaced the PSU, the SSD. I use the newest (4301)bios, but I tried an older (4204) version too, I reinstalled Win10, nothing helped. 

With my old motherboard the cpu operated perfectly with 1.1375 core voltage on 4.2 GHz, the new does not start during cold boot with thise multiplier and 1,25 core voltage nor.

If I set fix vcore voltage, and CPU multiplier with CTR, everything is fine. Every stress test pass, no anomaly.

Any idea?

Thx, Pakmara


----------



## smokin_mitch

Pakmara said:


> Hi,
> 
> I replaced my motherboard with a crosshair vii wi-fi (from crosshair vi), and i have a problem when I try to overclock my ryzen 3600 cpu.
> 
> When I set fix vcore voltage, the PC does not start during cold boot (It crach with 02 Q-code. ) only after restart.
> 
> I checked every cable, replaced the PSU, the SSD. I use the newest (4301)bios, but I tried an older (4204) version too, I reinstalled Win10, nothing helped.
> 
> With my old motherboard the cpu operated perfectly with 1.1375 core voltage on 4.2 GHz, the new does not start during cold boot with thise multiplier and 1,25 core voltage nor.
> 
> If I set fix vcore voltage, and CPU multiplier with CTR, everything is fine. Every stress test pass, no anomaly.
> 
> Any idea?
> 
> Thx, Pakmara


try bios 2801 I found that to be the best bios for my 3800x, before I upgraded to a 5900x. I was running my 3800x at 4.5ghz 1.3375v with 1900fclk and 2x8gb 3800cl14 for nearly 2 years without issue


----------



## Pakmara

smokin_mitch said:


> try bios 2801 I found that to be the best bios for my 3800x, before I upgraded to a 5900x. I was running my 3800x at 4.5ghz 1.3375v with 1900fclk and 2x8gb 3800cl14 for nearly 2 years without issue


Thanks the tipp. The 2803 was ok, but was not perfect. When I pushed the power button, the pc started to boot, than shut down, than started again and boot successfully.

I tried other versions. The 3103 version seems good, i will tested.

Ty, Pakmara


----------



## lordzed83

Pakmara said:


> Thanks the tipp. The 2803 was ok, but was not perfect. When I pushed the power button, the pc started to boot, than shut down, than started again and boot successfully.
> 
> I tried other versions. The 3103 version seems good, i will tested.
> 
> Ty, Pakmara


I like them double boot bioses Less memory training problems.


----------



## smokin_mitch

Pakmara said:


> Thanks the tipp. The 2803 was ok, but was not perfect. When I pushed the power button, the pc started to boot, than shut down, than started again and boot successfully.
> 
> I tried other versions. The 3103 version seems good, i will tested.
> 
> Ty, Pakmara


I think the double boot happens if you set a boot dram voltage in the External Digi+ Power Control menu instead of having it on Auto


----------



## Asutz

Hm, i've set ccd voltage to 1000 and iod voltage to 1040mv in the tweaker section but after reboot zen timer showing both 0.99mv, which setting/section is the right onenin the bios to not make them synchronous? 
is it the soc/uncore oc mode.still after months its a rabbit hole for me and most of the settings are 3 times available in different menus.


----------



## minal

Still running BIOS 2203 with a 2700X here, on linux only, with a focus on stability and silence. Perusing the latest releases, I notice:



> Version 2304
> 
> 2019/05/17 14.67 MBytes
> 
> ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) BIOS 2304
> 1. Update AM4 ComboPI 0.0.7.2A for next-gen processors and to improve CPU compatibility
> 
> 2. Fixed an issue with Precision Boost values
> 
> 3. Improved memory compatibility
> 
> *4. Enhance system security*





> Version 2406
> 
> 2019/07/05 14.68 MBytes
> 
> ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) BIOS 2406
> * 1. Improve system stability.*





> Version 2703
> 
> 2019/08/23 14.73 MBytes
> 
> ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) BIOS 2703
> 1.Improve system performance.
> 2.Update AM4 Combo PI 1.0.0.3 Patch ABB
> a.Fixes a compatibility issue with Destiny 2
> *b.Fixes an issue with certain Linux distros*
> c.Removes Gen 4 support when using Ryzen 3000 CPUs
> 3.Improves EZFlash performance to reduce boot time.


Plus virtually every update mentions: "Improve system performance". Very enlightening.

Any point to updating?

Also, is it just me or is there no "search in thread" or "jump to first unread" option in this forum?


----------



## Takla

The "Improve system stability" is just their way of conditioning you for greater (number) is better. Straight up lies is what it is.


----------



## nick name

Soooo the CH7 Wifi has disappeared from the ASUS support site. So that's fun. Can anyone else navigate to it or am I just an idiot?

@shamino1978


----------



## smokin_mitch

nick name said:


> Soooo the CH7 Wifi has disappeared from the ASUS support site. So that's fun. Can anyone else navigate to it or am I just an idiot?
> 
> @shamino1978


ASUS ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) | ROG - Republic Of Gamers | ASUS USA


----------



## nick name

smokin_mitch said:


> ASUS ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) | ROG - Republic Of Gamers | ASUS USA


I'm an idiot.


----------



## Asutz

can u guys change iod / cdd voltage asynchronous?
tried it many times, ccd voltage setting in bios example 0.990 shows me 0.9xx in zen timing, iod voltage auto is around 1.047v setting something lower in the bios both in amd overclocking and tweaker section equals ccd and iod after.


----------



## bushd0c

Hi Guys, still fighting with the following problem:

When the CPU idles in WIndows sometimes Windows becomes completely unresponsive to the point that I have to perform a hard reset. Timings and Voltages are shown in the ZenTimings Screenshot. Do I have to change my Voltages? What do you think? RAM: 4x8 GB


----------



## xeizo

bushd0c said:


> Hi Guys, still fighting with the following problem:
> 
> When the CPU idles in WIndows sometimes Windows becomes completely unresponsive to the point that I have to perform a hard reset. Timings and Voltages are shown in the ZenTimings Screenshot. Do I have to change my Voltages? What do you think? RAM: 4x8 GB
> View attachment 2512362


When Windows freezes it's typically too much vcore minus offset, or too much minus curve optimizer. Your other voltages are not particularly low, I use much lower on all voltages and at 1900.

For some reason mine doesn't show VDIMM but it's at 1.38V. Been stable like this for months now.

edit. This is CH8, but CH7 and CH8 behave very similar, I don't have a 5-series CPU on my CH7.


----------



## bushd0c

xeizo said:


> When Windows freezes it's typically too much vcore minus offset, or too much minus curve optimizer. Your other voltages are not particularly low, I use much lower on all voltages and at 1900.
> 
> For some reason mine doesn't show VDIMM but it's at 1.38V. Been stable like this for months now.
> 
> edit. This is CH8, but CH7 and CH8 behave very similar, I don't have a 5-series CPU on my CH7.
> 
> View attachment 2512461


Thanks mate! I tried it out already. I reduced the negative curve optimizer values and it really seems to work!


----------



## AmaKatsu

About 2 years didn't update bios since version 2103 (no freeze/crash/bsod), today just decide to update and test on version 4301. 
Still able to use the same settings and not giving me a headache with RAM 8x4 like before.
Yet one small notice the PBO is boost 42.5x instead of 43.5x (like v.2103) but doesn't matter


----------



## nick name

AmaKatsu said:


> About 2 years didn't update bios since version 2103 (no freeze/crash/bsod), today just decide to update and test on version 4301.
> Still able to use the same settings and not giving me a headache with RAM 8x4 like before.
> Yet one small notice the PBO is boost 42.5x instead of 43.5x (like v.2103) but doesn't matter
> View attachment 2512583
> View attachment 2512584
> View attachment 2512585


Are you using the same EDC settings?


----------



## AmaKatsu

nick name said:


> Are you using the same EDC settings?


Normally I leave PBO menu to auto, only touch Performance Enhancer _LV1_

other CPU related are :: CPU LLC3, CPU Current Cap 130%, CPU Thermal Control 120 (all the same as bios v2103)

the weird is Performance Enhancer _LV1_ gave EDC 140A while Performance Enhancer _default _gave 150A


----------



## Takla

AmaKatsu said:


> )
> 
> the weird is Performance Enhancer _LV1_ gave EDC 140A while Performance Enhancer _default _gave 150A


Weird indeed. Level 1 on crosshair vi hero with 3900x gives 1000w/1000a/150a for ppt/tdc/edc


----------



## lordzed83

AMD Chipsatztreiber Download


Die aktuellen Chipsatztreiber für den Betrieb eines AMD-Mainboards. Deutsch, Freeware, kostenloser Download!




www.computerbase.de


----------



## Tactix

Went back to 4301 a month back, no longer having issues with my Xonar, but shrug - no f clue why it suddenly works other then the far off possibility it was a windows issue.


----------



## bonomork

I need your support, please check the screenshots. Is something wrong? (I remember a latency of 67ns with 2700X PE lvl 2 GDM ON and CR1) 
CPU 3800X
F4-3200C14D-16GTZRX 
Trident Z RGB (For AMD)
DDR4-3200MHz CL14-14-14-34 1.35V
16GB (2x8GB)


----------



## kratosatlante

bonomork said:


> I need your support, please check the screenshots. Is something wrong? (I remember a latency of 67ns with 2700X PE lvl 2 GDM ON and CR1)
> CPU 3800X
> F4-3200C14D-16GTZRX
> Trident Z RGB (For AMD)
> DDR4-3200MHz CL14-14-14-34 1.35V
> 16GB (2x8GB)


got to cl12 easy for your kit, gain fps in games


----------



## Takla

bonomork said:


> I need your support, please check the screenshots. Is something wrong? (I remember a latency of 67ns with 2700X PE lvl 2 GDM ON and CR1)
> CPU 3800X
> F4-3200C14D-16GTZRX
> Trident Z RGB (For AMD)
> DDR4-3200MHz CL14-14-14-34 1.35V
> 16GB (2x8GB)


It is 3200mhz. what do you expect? you should oc to 3600 if you want more. Also, your cpu is 3800xt, not x.


----------



## bonomork

kratosatlante said:


> got to cl12 easy for your kit, gain fps in games


cl12 with which settings?


----------



## bonomork

Takla said:


> It is 3200mhz. what do you expect? you should oc to 3600 if you want more. Also, your cpu is 3800xt, not x.


Yep, it's 3800XT. Just checking that the memory is not underperforming. I've not tried 3600 C16, I'll give a try, but after a BIOS update I've some trouble inserting the values on fields, i.e. sometimes 316 become 3166666666.


----------



## tcclaviger

Finally have a 5950x on the way from B&H to go in the C7. Super excited, been waiting ages to snag one at MSRP.

Been a long time since I've looked through here, is there an ideal bios to use other than what's posted on the Asus site?


----------



## Keith Myers

tcclaviger said:


> Finally have a 5950x on the way from B&H to go in the C7. Super excited, been waiting ages to snag one at MSRP.
> 
> Been a long time since I've looked through here, is there an ideal bios to use other than what's posted on the Asus site?


Congratz. I too had been waiting ages to snag a 5950X at MSRP. Finally did last week at Amazon. Replaced my 3950X on Monday and have it up and running now in the daily driver. Moved the old 3950X into the 3900X host yesterday. Now still waiting for my preorders for my Epyc 7443P cpu to come in. Those are still unobtainium. I will then move my Epyc 7402P into the TR 2920X host.


----------



## tcclaviger

Congrats yourself  Any issues with the update to the 5 series compatible bios on the C7H? Which version did you update to?


----------



## Keith Myers

tcclaviger said:


> Congrats yourself  Any issues with the update to the 5 series compatible bios on the C7H? Which version did you update to?


I was on 4204 but upgraded to 4301 BIOS. But I had all kinds of flaky things going on that caused me to swap gpus and revert back to 4204. Probably nothing to do with the BIOS. I thought that basically just dropping the 5950X into the existing 3950X host would be pretty painless. But that is not the case. Whole different beasts in my opinion. These Zen 3 cpus run HOT! Had to make some accommodations and adjustments. Still tuning actually. I am stable now but will attempt to get a little more out of it now that I understand it a bit better. Still have to swap the gpu back in to see if it was the real cause of the instability. That is the project for tomorrow.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

Hi all,
anyone here knows if this board has a built in tpm module(for the coming windows 11...its a requirement) or do i have to buy one extra? which one would you guys order

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## Keith Myers

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> Hi all,
> anyone here knows if this board has a built in tpm module(for the coming windows 11...its a requirement) or do i have to buy one extra? which one would you guys order
> 
> Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


Yes it does. See the manual for the fTPM configuration to Enable it.


----------



## hurricane28

My CPU degraded...  

First it wouldn't run at 3800 MHz RAM anymore and now it won't let me run 4.4 GHz anymore..

It doesn't crash or anything but i get mouse issues and WHEA errors en in OCCT it failed under PSU test. That test makes the CPU hot AF man! It made it run at 80c +! Never seen this temp before and within 20 min it failed . 

I am still thinking of what a better buy would be, new Asus rog x570 dark hero or 5000 CPU


----------



## dansi

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> Hi all,
> anyone here knows if this board has a built in tpm module(for the coming windows 11...its a requirement) or do i have to buy one extra? which one would you guys order
> 
> Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


i believe all ryzen 2000(zen+) and up have tpm2.0 built into the cpu. They called it ftpm
you do not need extra module or hardware on the motherboard.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

Keith Myers said:


> Yes it does. See the manual for the fTPM configuration to Enable it.





dansi said:


> i believe all ryzen 2000(zen+) and up have tpm2.0 built into the cpu. They called it ftpm
> you do not need extra module or hardware on the motherboard.


thank you guys !

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## xeizo

Windows 11 update confirmed working on all my AM4 boards, CH8 and Prime Pro has headers and needs switching to "firmware" under TPM in bios. B550-F and CH7 doesn't have a header and just needs "enable" in bios.


----------



## tcclaviger

Ok so 5950x went in today without any drama after 4301 update.

Full auto except ram timings and dram voltage goes to 5040 single core.

682 cpuz bench single
12693 all core.

If I understand right, haven't been paying attention to 5000, but best boost results will come from doing the per core undervolt right?

Is that in the AMD section? Didn't see it in extreme tweaker.

Sadly, fclk stability was better on 3900x, 1903 vs 1867 max.


----------



## Axaion

Well, since asus doesnt care about supporting a decently high end board, i went ahead and ordered a b550 unify-x, good luck guys - hopefully theyll drop another bios update sometime this year.


----------



## tcclaviger

Whelp, I found settings, things are progressing along nicely. Man this is easy on the 5950 lol.
IF 2000x 1966x 1933 all work, RAM works there at CL 14-14-13, however, 1900 doesn't work and the over 1900 settings all throw WHEA errors no matter what settings are adjusted to, so it's either legit a CPU IOD issue that cannot handle the frequency, or more likely, a BIOS issue imho. Zero crashes observed, zero aberrant behavior observed, but WHEA is not happy reports many errors.

PBO is:
PPT 200
TDC 200
EDC 200
Max Freq Override -100
Core Curve All Negative AT: 30 - 20 - 20 - 30 - 15 - 20 - 30 - 30 - 30 - 30 - 30 - 30 - 30 - 30 - 30 - 30

Found my final 24/7 curve settings resulting in a nice bump over my 3900x. Took #15 on PT10 all time systems without even pushing the 2080ti lol, ridiculous CPU is ridiculous, love it.:





ASUS System Product Name - Geekbench Browser


Benchmark results for an ASUS System Product Name with an AMD Ryzen 9 5950X processor.



browser.geekbench.com









ASUS System Product Name - Geekbench Browser


Benchmark results for an ASUS System Product Name with an AMD Ryzen 9 5950X processor.



browser.geekbench.com


----------



## lordzed83

Axaion said:


> Well, since asus doesnt care about supporting a decently high end board, i went ahead and ordered a b550 unify-x, good luck guys - hopefully theyll drop another bios update sometime this year.


Nothing new been like that since Elmor left


----------



## xeizo

AFAIK so has AMD forbidden board vendors to update B450/X470 boards past AGESA 1.2.0.1, so if you want newer AGESA you need B550/X570 as per AMD:s wish.

Of course, some vendor may break that and all others will follow, but it doesn't seem to have happened yet.

edit. Asus has already broken it, AGESA 1.2.0.3 patch A for X470-Prime Pro


https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/PRIME-X470-PRO-ASUS-5851.ZIP



Surely Crosshair VII will follow!


----------



## learner-gr

Hello. 
I would like to ask if you were given the ROG Strix X570-F Gaming and the ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO for free, which of the two would you keep and why? 
Thanks in advance.


----------



## xeizo

learner-gr said:


> Hello.
> I would like to ask if you were given the ROG Strix X570-F Gaming and the ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO for free, which of the two would you keep and why?
> Thanks in advance.


I would take the X570-F as it is newer and likely will have bios support a little longer


----------



## hurricane28

New BIOS: ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) | ROG Crosshair | Gaming Moederborden｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Nederland


----------



## CharliesTheMan

hurricane28 said:


> New BIOS: ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) | ROG Crosshair | Gaming Moederborden｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Nederland


It looks like the regular Crosshair VII Hero also got the new BIOS ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO | ROG Crosshair | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global


----------



## Synoxia

Guys with Matisse... can you post and have more than 3200 stable ram with 4301 and 4402 bios? I'm trying to figure out why i can't post more than 3200 (At 3266 and after that, it just spits out f9 code, i can post up to 1900 fclk tho)


----------



## Katana1074

Synoxia said:


> Guys with Matisse... can you post and have more than 3200 stable ram with 4301 and 4402 bios? I'm trying to figure out why i can't post more than 3200 (At 3266 and after that, it just spits out f9 code, i can post up to 1900 fclk tho)


Yup no problem here..


----------



## Synoxia

Katana1074 said:


> Yup no problem here..
> 
> 
> View attachment 2515973


Im going to try reverting to an older bios... i used to have 3600 ram fine

Ok, i've reverted to an old bios, loaded up my previously stable settings and they don't work anymore. I don't know what to think, it looks like rams are in the correct slots A2 B2 for the motherboard...


----------



## bushd0c

BIOS 4402 works well with me. Slightly better perfomance in CB20.


----------



## bushd0c

Synoxia said:


> Im going to try reverting to an older bios... i used to have 3600 ram fine
> 
> Ok, i've reverted to an old bios, loaded up my previously stable settings and they don't work anymore. I don't know what to think, it looks like rams are in the correct slots A2 B2 for the motherboard...


You should load "Optimized Default Settings" and enter every setting manually again. See if it works.


----------



## Synoxia

bushd0c said:


> You should load "Optimized Default Settings" and enter every setting manually again. See if it works.


I reseated ram and blow on it. Probably the contacts on my mobo went ****.


----------



## lordzed83

Wifi is out also. But TBH im done with new bioses rather have old tad buggy one and PCIE 4.0 


https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-4402.ZIP


----------



## bushd0c

lordzed83 said:


> Wifi is out also. But TBH im done with new bioses rather have old tad buggy one and PCIE 4.0
> 
> 
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-4402.ZIP


Yeah, would be nice if someone could tweak the bios and enable pcie 4.0 again. 😉


----------



## Katana1074

bushd0c said:


> Yeah, would be nice if someone could tweak the bios and enable pcie 4.0 again. 😉


yeah i`m looking into that one...........


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> Wifi is out also. But TBH im done with new bioses rather have old tad buggy one and PCIE 4.0
> 
> 
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-4402.ZIP


You're not tempted at all?

I'm not too excited to try it - bios i'm on is stable with good perf and PCIE4


----------



## Glazos

.


----------



## elbubi

crakej said:


> I'm not too excited to try it - bios i'm on is stable with good perf and PCIE4


Hi! Last known BIOS with PCIE4 would be 2606?
Thanks!


----------



## Synoxia

Hi guys, can you RGB sync with headers on this bios? i can't... it only detects gpu and ram, it's like the rgb headers are gone for good


----------



## CharliesTheMan

Synoxia said:


> Hi guys, can you RGB sync with headers on this bios? i can't... it only detects gpu and ram, it's like the rgb headers are gone for good


I had to download Armoury Crate to check it for you because I didn't have the Aura service installed, and Armoury Crate is what they're using now instead of Aura Sync or whatever it was called before. In Armoury Crate, it sees the motherboard RGB and controls it, and I believe it sees the headers but I don't have anything connected to mine to test it. I'm using different software to run most of my RGB because of the RGB controller that came with my corsair case.


----------



## Synoxia

CharliesTheMan said:


> I had to download Armoury Crate to check it for you because I didn't have the Aura service installed, and Armoury Crate is what they're using now instead of Aura Sync or whatever it was called before. In Armoury Crate, it sees the motherboard RGB and controls it, and I believe it sees the headers but I don't have anything connected to mine to test it. I'm using different software to run most of my RGB because of the RGB controller that came with my corsair case.


Maybe, can u connect something to the RGB header and test? please


----------



## xeizo

Synoxia said:


> Maybe, can u connect something to the RGB header and test? please


RGB header works fine on my C7H, have it connected to case candy


----------



## mauxie

Can anyone confirm if your DRAM QLED lights up at all during the boot sequence with 3000 or 5000 series? I thought my board had a weird issue cause swapping from a 1400 to 3600 or 5800x makes it so mine doesn't turn on for a half a second during boot like it used to, the vga, cpu, and boot qleds work fine. But I finally found a youtube video of someone with a VII hero and 5900x recording their startup and to my surprise his dram qled doesn't light up either. What about yall?


----------



## Synoxia

xeizo said:


> RGB header works fine on my C7H, have it connected to case candy


Can you sync RGBs? It works for me aswell but i cannot control it from software


----------



## xeizo

Synoxia said:


> Can you sync RGBs? It works for me aswell but i cannot control it from software


I will not install Armory Crate again, was a lot to remove the last time, I'm happy with default rainbow colors


----------



## crakej

elbubi said:


> Hi! Last known BIOS with PCIE4 would be 2606?
> Thanks!


That's right!


----------



## mauxie

Bump, would appreciate some help all I need is someone to watch their pc start up and let me know :/

Here is the video I found showing someone else's dram qled not lighting up with 5900x 



 @19:20


----------



## Logue

mauxie said:


> Bump, would appreciate some help all I need is someone to watch their pc start up and let me know :/
> 
> Here is the video I found showing someone else's dram qled not lighting up with 5900x
> 
> 
> 
> @19:20


So, I have 4 sticks of Corsair Vengeance RGB Pros (4x 8Gb of 3600MHz). If I restart my PC from Windows (which I just did), all the lighting stays on, including the DRAM (I also have RGB strips connected to Commander Pros, which I have 2 of). I'm on BIOS 4402 with a 3800X and a C7H *without* WiFi.

If the system is off, it takes about 1-2 seconds for all the LEDs to light up, and they do it all in sync (because all my strips are connected to Commander Pros and the DRAM is configured to light up without iCue running - that's only an option in Corsair RAM, I believe, I don't know since I only own their DRAM sticks...). However, by the time the screen is on, meaning, from the moment I press the power button, till all the Q-Codes are done and there's a display output, all the LEDs are lit up and they remain that way all the way through getting to the desktop in Windows, not turning off at all in this process. It's faster than that (like I said, 1-2 seconds max), but just to give an idea of the behavior I have on my system.

The other day I also found out I'm probably maxing out the current on my 5V rail on my PSU. I have a Corsair RM850i and it's showing 4.75V in that rail. If I turn off all RGB, it goes back to 4.99V (that's from a reading from the Commander Pros inside iCue but HWinfo64 also reports it in the ASUS WMI, the PSU is outputting 5V just fine, it's on the receiving end that there's a drop). Modern PSUs only have around 25A max in the 5V rail and with all the RGB I have going on, I'm probably in the verge or exceding max amperage supported by this PSU, lol.


----------



## mauxie

Logue said:


> So, I have 4 sticks of Corsair Vengeance RGB Pros (4x 8Gb of 3600MHz). If I restart my PC from Windows (which I just did), all the lighting stays on, including the DRAM (I also have RGB strips connected to Commander Pros, which I have 2 of). I'm on BIOS 4402 with a 3800X and a C7H *without* WiFi.
> 
> If the system is off, it takes about 1-2 seconds for all the LEDs to light up, and they do it all in sync (because all my strips are connected to Commander Pros and the DRAM is configured to light up without iCue running - that's only an option in Corsair RAM, I believe, I don't know since I only own their DRAM sticks...). However, by the time the screen is on, meaning, from the moment I press the power button, till all the Q-Codes are done and there's a display output, all the LEDs are lit up and they remain that way all the way through getting to the desktop in Windows, not turning off at all in this process. It's faster than that (like I said, 1-2 seconds max), but just to give an idea of the behavior I have on my system.
> 
> The other day I also found out I'm probably maxing out the current on my 5V rail on my PSU. I have a Corsair RM850i and it's showing 4.75V in that rail. If I turn off all RGB, it goes back to 4.99V (that's from a reading from the Commander Pros inside iCue but HWinfo64 also reports it in the ASUS WMI, the PSU is outputting 5V just fine, it's on the receiving end that there's a drop). Modern PSUs only have around 25A max in the 5V rail and with all the RGB I have going on, I'm probably in the verge or exceding max amperage supported by this PSU, lol.


Sorry I wasn't super clear, by DRAM QLED I mean the little troubleshooting LEDs next to the Q-code. On every ASUS motherboard I've had until now (including this one while it had a 1400) all three of the QLEDs (CPU,VGA,DRAM) cycled before BOOT turned green. But with a 3000 or 5000 series cpu installed this board is not lighting up the dram qled.

By the way thank you for the reply at least! hope you can check your qleds for me


----------



## Logue

mauxie said:


> Sorry I wasn't super clear, by DRAM QLED I mean the little troubleshooting LEDs next to the Q-code. On every ASUS motherboard I've had until now (including this one while it had a 1400) all three of the QLEDs (CPU,VGA,DRAM) cycled before BOOT turned green. But with a 3000 or 5000 series cpu installed this board is not lighting up the dram qled.
> 
> By the way thank you for the reply at least! hope you can check your qleds for me


LOL, sorry, that's what happens when you read one post about LEDs and forgets that it's talking about the Qled and not LEDs at all. Anyway, I'll check that for you soon, but IIRC they don't turn green at all. With mine, I believe they all light up at each phase of the POST process. There are 4 LEDs in the board in that region, from left to right looking straight on at the board: DRAM LED (yellow), CPU LED (red), VGA LED (white) and the BOOT LED (THIS IS THE GREEN ONE - if all is OK, it will light up, otherwise one of the previous 3 LEDs will be stuck turned on and the color of which one is on is what determines what went wrong with the POST). So, the only way you'll see a green LED lit up is if the system posts. They don't turn green since they're, each one, a single respective color precisely so that you can know which part of the system is not booting up according to the LED color that stays lit up in a failed boot.


----------



## tcclaviger

Have been testing windows 11 and the new Bios AGESA 1.2.0.3 - while it helped a ton with WHEA errors and Fclk stability, 1900 still has a hole. 1933-2000 still error city. Boost behavior is vastly sub-par to AGESA 1.2.0.1.

On 1201 was getting 4800 effective clock all core at 255 PPT loads using curve tuner and 5150 spikes holding 5075 single core.

On 1203 I'm getting no better than 4730 all core and 5075 spikes with 4950 holding single core.

Going to revert to 4204 bios and check win 11 compatibility, the 4301 was a problem and didn't play nice with 11, but 4402 does.


----------



## lordzed83

elbubi said:


> Hi! Last known BIOS with PCIE4 would be 2606?
> Thanks!


Me and @crakej said **** it. Them new bioses ect all got problem or with ram or if or something else on ou Zen3's so if we gonna be on bugged bioses we can roll back on 2606 get it stable and have pcie 4.0. Had old profile and years months of tweeking expirience was up and stable on max oc in a week with all core bclk overclock.


----------



## mauxie

Logue said:


> LOL, sorry, that's what happens when you read one post about LEDs and forgets that it's talking about the Qled and not LEDs at all. Anyway, I'll check that for you soon, but IIRC they don't turn green at all. With mine, I believe they all light up at each phase of the POST process. There are 4 LEDs in the board in that region, from left to right looking straight on at the board: DRAM LED (yellow), CPU LED (red), VGA LED (white) and the BOOT LED (THIS IS THE GREEN ONE - if all is OK, it will light up, otherwise one of the previous 3 LEDs will be stuck turned on and the color of which one is on is what determines what went wrong with the POST). So, the only way you'll see a green LED lit up is if the system posts. They don't turn green since they're, each one, a single respective color precisely so that you can know which part of the system is not booting up according to the LED color that stays lit up in a failed boot.


Yeah none of my Qleds will stick on and as far as I can tell there is no problem with the whole process itself, as in it posts no problem, loads windows no problem and is stable, and my bios settings are still saved. The only problem with my board is that the yellow DRAM LED is not lighting up during the post process, it just displays the qcodes and then skips to cpu, vga, boot. I hope some other people can check if their board is doing the same.


----------



## hurricane28

lordzed83 said:


> Me and @crakej said **** it. Them new bioses ect all got problem or with ram or if or something else on ou Zen3's so if we gonna be on bugged bioses we can roll back on 2606 get it stable and have pcie 4.0. Had old profile and years months of tweeking expirience was up and stable on max oc in a week with all core bclk overclock.
> 
> View attachment 2517115


Are you guys on 3000 or 5000 series CPU? I mean, the newer ones are designed for the newer generation. 
That being said, it could explain why i cannot get 3800 MHz stable anymore where i could on my previous ram kit and BIOS. 

I might flash back too and test. I recall they also said that if you flash too newest BIOS with newest AGESA you cannot flash back but idk if that is true.


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> Me and @crakej said **** it. Them new bioses ect all got problem or with ram or if or something else on ou Zen3's so if we gonna be on bugged bioses we can roll back on 2606 get it stable and have pcie 4.0. Had old profile and years months of tweeking expirience was up and stable on max oc in a week with all core bclk overclock.
> 
> View attachment 2517115


Very impressive!

Sadly, my RX 6800 never materialized ( got money back) so still on crappy RX 580. Even still, with no PCIE4 devices, I'd rather stay on this bios, new ones are very different!

My scores are
*Graphics score*
*4 313 (EEEEEEEEEEEeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeekkkk!)*
*CPU score*
*13 969*

I play mainly VR and this all works well....


----------



## Synoxia

xeizo said:


> I will not install Armory Crate again, was a lot to remove the last time, I'm happy with default rainbow colors


use aura lighting 0.84 bro... armory crate is full of bloat


----------



## nick name

In the latest BIOS I can't seem to be able to find where to disable one CCX on my 3900X. Am I missing something here or is it gone? Or was it never there before and I am imagining things?


----------



## Keith Myers

I don't think it was ever there. You can disable SMT on the cores, but I never remember seeing being able to disable a single CCX.


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> I don't think it was ever there. You can disable SMT on the cores, but I never remember seeing being able to disable a single CCX.


Well this doesn't bode well for my sanity.


----------



## Keith Myers

nick name said:


> Well this doesn't bode well for my sanity.


I do have downcore control in the BIOS of my Epyc host. I can turn off any number of cores which could accomplish the same thing as disabling a CCX. It's in CPU Configuration.

That would be the first place to look and next in AMD CBS cpu menus somewhere besides Global C-States and DF-C-States.


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> I do have downcore control in the BIOS of my Epyc host. I can turn off any number of cores which could accomplish the same thing as disabling a CCX. It's in CPU Configuration.
> 
> That would be the first place to look and next in AMD CBS cpu menus somewhere besides Global C-States and DF-C-States.


It's where I checked and it's been re-arranged in the latest BIOS. There are several new (or renamed) items and a few that I couldn't find that I swear were there before. But it's been many months since I really played in my BIOS beyond setting up a new version.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> It's where I checked and it's been re-arranged in the latest BIOS. There are several new (or renamed) items and a few that I couldn't find that I swear were there before. But it's been many months since I really played in my BIOS beyond setting up a new version.


Nah - you're not loosing your mind yet - here it is in my bios (2606)


----------



## Logue

Hey everyone, can anyone help me with an issue I've been having for the past year+ and with multiple BIOS? So, here's the problem: while playing CS:GO especifically, sometimes in the death replay where it shows who killed you, there are some green pixels shown in the screen, like errors for those frames. Is this GPU definetely? Or could this be some damage to the PCI-E area? I'll admit I may have mangled something there because I have a NH-D15 and my 5700XT sits really close to the cooler and I haven't always removed the cooler just to remove the GPU, then using a plastic stick in between the CPU cooler and the GPU to open the PCI-E slot and be able to remove it. Or could this be RAM OC problems? I've tested my settings with multiple RAM checking programs (TestMem5, MemTestPro and Karhu Ram Test) and it's always passed (or when it didn't it's precisely because I was overclocking and testing the limits) with a lot of test time, sometimes 24h. I really gave up tinkering with my PC because I haven't had the time and need it for work, but maybe it's worth taking to a technian to check. I'm just worried it's just a bug with CS:GO because I do have a lot of Corsair RGB crap in my system. Also my 12V rail shows 11.5V~11.6V, wondering if that's normal (in HWInfo). Another bug/problem: the GPU memory clock doesn't reach 1750MHz anymore. Under load, it either stays at 1746 or 1748, never 1750 (it did use to reach that normally just fine). To top it all off, I'm also using mismatched RAM. I'm using 4x8Gb sticks, they're the same part number but different chip manufacturers (2 of them are Samsung B-Die, 2 are Micron E-Die, all rated for 3600MHz CL18, from Corsair).

I'm on BIOS 4402 with a 3800X and a Sapphire 5700XT Pulse and using a 34" 1080p ultrawide.

So with all that in mind and I'm also gonna put some screenshots here, maybe someone can chip in and help? Suggestions, guesses, anything is appreciated. Thanks!


----------



## mauxie

Logue said:


> Is this GPU definetely?


Have you tried another GPU in the system?


----------



## tcclaviger

Tried CTR today, what a fing joke that trashware is. I have a "bronze" sample allegedly, I disagree. 1900 fclk hole, 1933, 1966, 2000, stable(ish) with whea 19s, 2066 boots, not stable.

Tinkering with settings and erm I guess I did a thing, not keeping these settings as they require 40f water temps (lower than dew point), tweaking basically everything in BIOS and some windows stuff, but kind of fun for benching single core stuff  Basically it boosts single core right to the 5150 limiter and holds it there, almost never wavering (effective clocks in HWinfo). Score efficiency is crap because bloated old win10 install but w/e.

Low PBO limits of
PPT 250
TDC 140
EDC 140






ASUS System Product Name - Geekbench Browser


Benchmark results for an ASUS System Product Name with an AMD Ryzen 9 5950X processor.



browser.geekbench.com









ASUS System Product Name - Geekbench Browser


Benchmark results for an ASUS System Product Name with an AMD Ryzen 9 5950X processor.



browser.geekbench.com











(Stingy 7 points wouldn't give it up...)


----------



## nick name

Spoiler






Logue said:


> Hey everyone, can anyone help me with an issue I've been having for the past year+ and with multiple BIOS? So, here's the problem: while playing CS:GO especifically, sometimes in the death replay where it shows who killed you, there are some green pixels shown in the screen, like errors for those frames. Is this GPU definetely? Or could this be some damage to the PCI-E area? I'll admit I may have mangled something there because I have a NH-D15 and my 5700XT sits really close to the cooler and I haven't always removed the cooler just to remove the GPU, then using a plastic stick in between the CPU cooler and the GPU to open the PCI-E slot and be able to remove it. Or could this be RAM OC problems? I've tested my settings with multiple RAM checking programs (TestMem5, MemTestPro and Karhu Ram Test) and it's always passed (or when it didn't it's precisely because I was overclocking and testing the limits) with a lot of test time, sometimes 24h. I really gave up tinkering with my PC because I haven't had the time and need it for work, but maybe it's worth taking to a technian to check. I'm just worried it's just a bug with CS:GO because I do have a lot of Corsair RGB crap in my system. Also my 12V rail shows 11.5V~11.6V, wondering if that's normal (in HWInfo). Another bug/problem: the GPU memory clock doesn't reach 1750MHz anymore. Under load, it either stays at 1746 or 1748, never 1750 (it did use to reach that normally just fine). To top it all off, I'm also using mismatched RAM. I'm using 4x8Gb sticks, they're the same part number but different chip manufacturers (2 of them are Samsung B-Die, 2 are Micron E-Die, all rated for 3600MHz CL18, from Corsair).
> 
> I'm on BIOS 4402 with a 3800X and a Sapphire 5700XT Pulse and using a 34" 1080p ultrawide.
> 
> So with all that in mind and I'm also gonna put some screenshots here, maybe someone can chip in and help? Suggestions, guesses, anything is appreciated. Thanks!
> 
> View attachment 2517439
> View attachment 2517440
> View attachment 2517442
> View attachment 2517445
> View attachment 2517449
> View attachment 2517450
> View attachment 2517451
> View attachment 2517452






I think the easiest thing to try would be to pull one set of RAM sticks and run with one matched set. 

I'd also suspect GPU drivers. 

Do you see any artifacts in any other games or media?


----------



## Synoxia

Guys, can you control the RGB headers with Aura or any other software?


----------



## tcclaviger

Synoxia said:


> Guys, can you control the RGB headers with Aura or any other software?


Yes, no issues with them, set it up about 18 months ago and haven't ever touched it since.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

hey all,

I plan to upgrade from a 2700x to a 3800x or 5800x and maybe someone here knows of issues with this board and a 3800x or 5800x .

greetings



Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## Keith Myers

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> hey all,
> 
> I plan to upgrade from a 2700x to a 3800x or 5800x and maybe someone here knows of issues with this board and a 3800x or 5800x .
> 
> greetings
> 
> 
> 
> Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


I had no issues upgrading from a 3950X to a 5950X on my C7H.


----------



## bushd0c

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> hey all,
> 
> I plan to upgrade from a 2700x to a 3800x or 5800x and maybe someone here knows of issues with this board and a 3800x or 5800x .
> 
> greetings
> Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


Upgraded from 2700x to 3700x and lastly to 5950x in january. No issues so far. You should configure PBO2 with the 5xxx line of CPUs manually, though for best performance.


----------



## lordzed83

crakej said:


> Very impressive!
> 
> Sadly, my RX 6800 never materialized ( got money back) so still on crappy RX 580. Even still, with no PCIE4 devices, I'd rather stay on this bios, new ones are very different!
> 
> My scores are
> *Graphics score*
> *4 313 (EEEEEEEEEEEeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeekkkk!)*
> *CPU score*
> *13 969*
> 
> I play mainly VR and this all works well....


Yup biosses changed allot since then and not sure if for better if ya like digging deap and to the max.


----------



## lordzed83

hurricane28 said:


> Are you guys on 3000 or 5000 series CPU? I mean, the newer ones are designed for the newer generation.
> That being said, it could explain why i cannot get 3800 MHz stable anymore where i could on my previous ram kit and BIOS.
> 
> I might flash back too and test. I recall they also said that if you flash too newest BIOS with newest AGESA you cannot flash back but idk if that is true.


Only flashback and u need to go all manual all core overclocking ect. And get all voltages in to stable range Manually.
@crakej how long did it take You to stabilise system??


----------



## Geezerman

anyone know if the wifi chip is user removable? I'm guessing it is not. Mine stopped working, and I would rather change it out rather than submit it in a RMA. No huge deal, but if I can change it myself I'd rather do that.
EDIT. I found a video where a dude takes off the wifi module on a Tuf X570. Pretty simple. I'm betting it's the same for the X470 Crosshair VII. The problem is finding the part.


----------



## ossimc

hi there,

two questions: 
1. when i enable DOCP(xmp) standard (first menu AI overclock if i recall correctly) does it introduces some biases which would lead to more complications when finetuning the timings? should i start with MANUAL setting or Default?

2. I got a 3080ti FE now. Whats the expected performance uplift when switching to the PCIe gen4 BIOS?


----------



## hurricane28

lordzed83 said:


> Only flashback and u need to go all manual all core overclocking ect. And get all voltages in to stable range Manually.
> @crakej how long did it take You to stabilise system??


Alright, should be no problem then as i run my settings manually anyway. 

Will try today as this newest BIOS is indeed buggy as hell...


----------



## hurricane28

Nope,

I tried to flash back from 4402 mto 2606 BIOS but its not possible for me.

I tried several USB sticks but the BIOS keeps saying that the 2606 BIOS is not an proper BIOS and won't let me flash it.

What can i do in order to flash the 2606 BIOS again?


----------



## nick name

ossimc said:


> hi there,
> 
> two questions:
> 1. when i enable DOCP(xmp) standard (first menu AI overclock if i recall correctly) does it introduces some biases which would lead to more complications when finetuning the timings? should i start with MANUAL setting or Default?
> 
> 2. I got a 3080ti FE now. Whats the expected performance uplift when switching to the PCIe gen4 BIOS?


The one thing I know DOCP does is introduce BCLK droop down to 99.8. So I set it to Manual and set 100 BCLK and it stays there. Beyond that I can't say I have encountered other issues using DOCP when tuning RAM, but it's been a very long time since I've used DOCP so I may just not remember.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Nope,
> 
> I tried to flash back from 4402 mto 2606 BIOS but its not possible for me.
> 
> I tried several USB sticks but the BIOS keeps saying that the 2606 BIOS is not an proper BIOS and won't let me flash it.
> 
> What can i do in order to flash the 2606 BIOS again?


I'd try another AGESA between those two versions. You may have to step down several times.


----------



## tcclaviger

Found new and probably final daily settings, absolutely satisfied with my 5950x "bronze" sample (lol CTR lol) 

Once I figured out that EDC is inversely proportional to how opportunistic boosting is, balanced the EDC value (182) vs +clock override speed (+75), CO values (mostly -29, a few -18, two -11 on prime cores), and added 101 Bclk in with Bclk override feature in Tweakers Paradise enabled, it all came together  Minimizing the SOC power picked up a good chunk of points, reducing it from 20w at idle down to 13w or so by starting with VDDG (both), and VDDP at 0.9v, SOC at 1.0v with LLC1, then slowly raised VDDP and SOC until they are where they are now, and eliminated all WHEA errors.

16000% Karhu stable
24 hours core cycler stable both SSE and AVX
Many blender, Lychee Slicer, Mesh Mixer and other nT heavy tasks without issue
multiple (8+ hr) days playing various games with not a single crash
sits idle doing windows spy telemetry at low power overnight, daily without any random reboots
















I truly don't see the point in static overclocks on the 5950x beyond very limited edge cases and along with that, I don't see the point in DCO on the C8DH, wouldn't get me anything more than well tuned CO does.


----------



## ossimc

guys...pls HELP
the board just dont want to boot anymore. yesterday i had a hole day gaming bukake without any issues

today i felt like tweaking RAM a bit more. so the ONLY thing i changed was one timing (tRFC from 252 to 232). ok after Q-code limbo it stuck at A2...no biggie happened thousend of times before...clear cmos and back to last working setting.

well no boot...ok loading defaults...no boot. Tried loading defaults a few times and eventually got tsee the qcode 8 (NOT 08). so i couldnt even get into the bios after cmos reset. ***. unplugged power cable for a while

turned pc on again...ok i can get into the bios again. loading deafults (or one of my working profiles) wont fkn work

POST screen also says "your system may not be fully stable" Press F1 to run setup. ALso when im in the UEFI, the mouse cursor is laggy as hell...never encountered that behaviour before.

have i bricked my board somehow? im kinda lost atm

update: post screens says "CPU Over Voltage Error"
update: ok after this i tried defaults again and somehow got into windows again...*** is going on here?


----------



## Synoxia

tcclaviger said:


> Yes, no issues with them, set it up about 18 months ago and haven't ever touched it since.


even with the new bios?


----------



## hurricane28

ossimc said:


> guys...pls HELP
> the board just dont want to boot anymore. yesterday i had a hole day gaming bukake without any issues
> 
> today i felt like tweaking RAM a bit more. so the ONLY thing i changed was one timing (tRFC from 252 to 232). ok after Q-code limbo it stuck at A2...no biggie happened thousend of times before...clear cmos and back to last working setting.
> 
> well no boot...ok loading defaults...no boot. Tried loading defaults a few times and eventually got tsee the qcode 8 (NOT 08). so i couldnt even get into the bios after cmos reset. ***. unplugged power cable for a while
> 
> turned pc on again...ok i can get into the bios again. loading deafults (or one of my working profiles) wont fkn work
> 
> POST screen also says "your system may not be fully stable" Press F1 to run setup. ALso when im in the UEFI, the mouse cursor is laggy as hell...never encountered that behaviour before.
> 
> have i bricked my board somehow? im kinda lost atm
> 
> update: post screens says "CPU Over Voltage Error"
> update: ok after this i tried defaults again and somehow got into windows again...*** is going on here?


You are on the latest BIOS i assume? 4402?


----------



## ossimc

hurricane28 said:


> You are on the latest BIOS i assume? 4402?


no still the prior (4301 i guess). like i said. i didnt change anything other then tried the tRFC 232 and the trouble begun.

is it possible to damage RAM? i never went beyond 1,55v(b-dies) thus only for a quick bench. mostly i stayed between 1,45-1,5v


----------



## ossimc

OK...runs again. Had to remove the battery for a while.

any idea how and why everything happened and how to prevent it?


----------



## hurricane28

sounds like a common Ryzen issue to be honest. I can run setups stable for months and out of the blue without changing anything it becomes unstable or erratic behavior.. 

I think its in the poor BIOS coding like other people also said, especially in the newer BIOS. Im struggling again too coming from months of stable issue less pleasure to erratic behavior and endless trouble shooting.. 

I might do the battery trick too as im stuck on the new BIOS and cannot change to anything else...


----------



## nick name

ossimc said:


> OK...runs again. Had to remove the battery for a while.
> 
> any idea how and why everything happened and how to prevent it?


I've seen this a couple times when going extreme on RAM timings. For whatever reason some weird settings stick after a reset and is easily fixed with a BIOS re-flash. 

Don't forget that you have a safe-boot button on the bottom of the mobo. Unless it's hard to get to in your case -- I'd recommend using it before resorting to clearing CMOS. It boots safe settings without changing your settings in the BIOS screens. So you can adjust only the problematic settings without losing the stable settings.


----------



## tcclaviger

Synoxia said:


> even with the new bios?


Newest bios is trash, rolled back to 4301. 4402 has major issues with FCLK and WHEA errors, anything over 1800/3200 on it throws a river of errors, no setting fixes it, but the same PC on 4301 or earlier.. no issues.

4402 is a non-update, 4301 will probably be the last update I do, aside from the inexplicable WHEA errors, AMD also neutered boosting, cutting 50-100mhz max effective clocks off single core boosts.

I remember this exact scenario occurring over time with the 3000 series too, AMD slowly and gradually neutered the chips via AGESA updates which "improved stability", not really explaining, they did so by cutting how aggressive the boosting behavior is.


----------



## lordzed83

ossimc said:


> OK...runs again. Had to remove the battery for a while.
> 
> any idea how and why everything happened and how to prevent it?


Its a Ryzen thing You cant do anything about it.


----------



## lordzed83

tcclaviger said:


> Newest bios is trash, rolled back to 4301. 4402 has major issues with FCLK and WHEA errors, anything over 1800/3200 on it throws a river of errors, no setting fixes it, but the same PC on 4301 or earlier.. no issues.
> 
> 4402 is a non-update, 4301 will probably be the last update I do, aside from the inexplicable WHEA errors, AMD also neutered boosting, cutting 50-100mhz max effective clocks off single core boosts.
> 
> I remember this exact scenario occurring over time with the 3000 series too, AMD slowly and gradually neutered the chips via AGESA updates which "improved stability", not really explaining, they did so by cutting how aggressive the boosting behavior is.


And thats why we rolled back to 2602 with @crakej i was not complainin g about that bios as much as the latest bioses that in my opinion suck for 3000 series cpu. MAybe full stock auto is better than ever but i dont use full auto never did..


----------



## lordzed83

hurricane28 said:


> sounds like a common Ryzen issue to be honest. I can run setups stable for months and out of the blue without changing anything it becomes unstable or erratic behavior..
> 
> I think its in the poor BIOS coding like other people also said, especially in the newer BIOS. Im struggling again too coming from months of stable issue less pleasure to erratic behavior and endless trouble shooting..
> 
> I might do the battery trick too as im stuck on the new BIOS and cannot change to anything else...


Nope Only Flashback from working mem stick will do that. Guess you dont hafe one working with this motherboard. Crosshair6 was more forgiving i had to buy 5 different ones before gotten ione working lol.


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> Only flashback and u need to go all manual all core overclocking ect. And get all voltages in to stable range Manually.
> @crakej how long did it take You to stabilise system??


You mean on 2606? It took me ages to get it just right - months! I don't have time to re-tune right from the start, which is what newer bioses seem to want...

I seem to have good CPU performance here that I don't want to lose, as well as retaining PCIE4 for when I eventually get a decent GPU, and/or PCIE4 NVMe.


----------



## hurricane28

lordzed83 said:


> Nope Only Flashback from working mem stick will do that. Guess you dont hafe one working with this motherboard. Crosshair6 was more forgiving i had to buy 5 different ones before gotten ione working lol.


Damn man.. so i put it on my USB stick and flash via USB port on the back of the board? When im in BIOS and want to read from it it says that its not proper BIOS so im scared to brick my board.

As of now its an totally potato with this BIOS anyway.. I could run 4.4 GHz all core ez and now i get WHEA error at 4.350 GHz at the same voltages.. 

I might flash this BIOS again as there is clearly something wrong or try to get to 2801 as i play Destiny 2 and it has a patch in it.


----------



## rdhoggattjr

I just bought a 3700x and in the process overclocking I decided to bring up ROG cpu-z and seen something that I have a question about. I'm on 4402 but it says I have PCIE 4.0. From reading this thread I believe the last one to support 4.0 was 2606.

Now it says my graphics interface is 3.0 because I have a GTX 1070ti so i can't test it.


----------



## Dude970

Yep, need 2206 to get PCIe 4.0


----------



## bushd0c

tcclaviger said:


> Found new and probably final daily settings, absolutely satisfied with my 5950x "bronze" sample (lol CTR lol)
> 
> Once I figured out that EDC is inversely proportional to how opportunistic boosting is, balanced the EDC value (182) vs +clock override speed (+75), CO values (mostly -29, a few -18, two -11 on prime cores), and added 101 Bclk in with Bclk override feature in Tweakers Paradise enabled, it all came together  Minimizing the SOC power picked up a good chunk of points, reducing it from 20w at idle down to 13w or so by starting with VDDG (both), and VDDP at 0.9v, SOC at 1.0v with LLC1, then slowly raised VDDP and SOC until they are where they are now, and eliminated all WHEA errors.
> 
> 16000% Karhu stable
> 24 hours core cycler stable both SSE and AVX
> Many blender, Lychee Slicer, Mesh Mixer and other nT heavy tasks without issue
> multiple (8+ hr) days playing various games with not a single crash
> sits idle doing windows spy telemetry at low power overnight, daily without any random reboots
> 
> View attachment 2518172
> 
> View attachment 2518173
> 
> 
> I truly don't see the point in static overclocks on the 5950x beyond very limited edge cases and along with that, I don't see the point in DCO on the C8DH, wouldn't get me anything more than well tuned CO does.


Good Job! 👏
What CPU Cooler do you use?


----------



## nick name

rdhoggattjr said:


> I just bought a 3700x and in the process overclocking I decided to bring up ROG cpu-z and seen something that I have a question about. I'm on 4402 but it says I have PCIE 4.0. From reading this thread I believe the last one to support 4.0 was 2606.
> 
> Now it says my graphics interface is 3.0 because I have a GTX 1070ti so i can't test it.
> View attachment 2518471


Mine says the same on BIOS 4402, but I also only have a 1070ti and my NVMe drive is only PCIE 3.0.


----------



## tcclaviger

bushd0c said:


> Good Job! 👏
> What CPU Cooler do you use?


Optimus Foundation block
Conductonaut TIM
15c water temps usually, it's refrigerated, no radiators.

Avatar pic is the old system.

Can go much lower but I've still not bothered to build my chill box to defeat condensation, so yolo sub zero runs are limited in duration by water buildup.

I did play a little today, tested speed scaling from 20c water down to 1c, every single degree shows multicore score improvement, single core is basically binary, if it hits the limit and holds it there, temp is irrelevant, for me single core max is achieved by 19c water temps.


----------



## tcclaviger

nick name said:


> Mine says the same on BIOS 4402, but I also only have a 1070ti and my NVMe drive is only PCIE 3.0.
> 
> 
> View attachment 2518514


The CPU and board remain PCIE 4 capable, but the enabled connections outside the CPU are throttled to 3 spec. 

Similar to how the SB-E CPUs and boards were all 3.0, but gimped by Intel to 2.0. In this case there's no easy defeat of it since it's an AGESA limitation.

Check GPU-Z and look at PCIE interconnect speed.


----------



## lordzed83

tcclaviger said:


> The CPU and board remain PCIE 4 capable, but the enabled connections outside the CPU are throttled to 3 spec.
> 
> Similar to how the SB-E CPUs and boards were all 3.0, but gimped by Intel to 2.0. In this case there's no easy defeat of it since it's an AGESA limitation.
> 
> Check GPU-Z and look at PCIE interconnect speed.


Ye AMD ****ed us over and took pcie4 out to lure upgrade im like ****.


----------



## CyborgD

tcclaviger said:


> Similar to how the SB-E CPUs and boards were all 3.0, but gimped by Intel to 2.0. In this case there's no easy defeat of it since it's an AGESA limitation.



Trying to make sense of this. I have the Crosshair VII Hero (non wifi) + 5800X running 4301 and have the following. Of course I'm running a PCI 4.0 capable device too.

CPU Z - AMD Ryzen 7 5800X @ 4498.95 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
GPU Z - TechPowerUp


----------



## tcclaviger

GPUZ Shows
PCIe x16 4.0 @ x16 1.1
PCIe x16 4.0 = Device is a 4.0 capable device (3090)
@x16 = coupling mode
1.1 = current PCIe speed (it's at 1.1 because of power saving features, click the question mark next to it and let the little window run the render and you'll see it pick up to its' full speed)

Having been in PCs so long, I've learned long ago, latest and greatest is not necessary for 99% of users, wanted, yes, needed absolutely not. Hell, the C6E is the perfect example, had AMD not screwed us over and given zen 3 support, I'd still be using my C6E, C7 has never been able to match the results I can get on the C6E, it's flat out a better board and a damn shame because I know if I could throw a 5950 in it, I would demolish C8DH results 

Very few people need 7000 capable NVME drives, for that matter very few even need 4000 that PCIe 3 provides. The new streaming content from UE5 is the only good argument I've seen, but even that only needs a decent PCIe 3 drive, according to UE engine developers.

GPUs once again, are way behind bandwidth available, even more so with the multi-GPU decline. 3090 and OC 6900xt at 1080 with e-sports being the only outliers, extreme fps scenarios actually do use more than 3.0 x16 provides, otherwise, it's all for naught. A plus side is you can shove a dual nvme card into the 2nd pcie 4x16 slot and have 3 nvme drives (2 card, 1 board) at 4.0 to the cpu without touching the chipset and ignore the 8x 4.0 on the gpu if you own anything aside from a 3090/6900xt or if you game at 2kUW or 4k, at high res it doesn't matter.


----------



## CyborgD

tcclaviger said:


> GPUZ Shows
> PCIe x16 4.0 @ x16 1.1
> PCIe x16 4.0 = Device is a 4.0 capable device (3090)
> @x16 = coupling mode
> 1.1 = current PCIe speed (it's at 1.1 because of power saving features, click the question mark next to it and let the little window run the render and you'll see it pick up to its' full speed)
> 
> Having been in PCs so long, I've learned long ago, latest and greatest is not necessary for 99% of users, wanted, yes, needed absolutely not. Hell, the C6E is the perfect example, had AMD not screwed us over and given zen 3 support, I'd still be using my C6E, C7 has never been able to match the results I can get on the C6E, it's flat out a better board and a damn shame because I know if I could throw a 5950 in it, I would demolish C8DH results
> 
> Very few people need 7000 capable NVME drives, for that matter very few even need 4000 that PCIe 3 provides. The new streaming content from UE5 is the only good argument I've seen, but even that only needs a decent PCIe 3 drive, according to UE engine developers.
> 
> GPUs once again, are way behind bandwidth available, even more so with the multi-GPU decline. 3090 and OC 6900xt at 1080 with e-sports being the only outliers, extreme fps scenarios actually do use more than 3.0 x16 provides, otherwise, it's all for naught. A plus side is you can shove a dual nvme card into the 2nd pcie 4x16 slot and have 3 nvme drives (2 card, 1 board) at 4.0 to the cpu without touching the chipset and ignore the 8x 4.0 on the gpu if you own anything aside from a 3090/6900xt or if you game at 2kUW or 4k, at high res it doesn't matter.











Ah thanks, makes perfect sense now. Wish they would unlock the feature for current Bios revisions, ohwell I guess im happy with performance anyway.


----------



## ossimc

Hey there

1. has anyone made experiments with the ASUS performance biases (CB15 gentle, Aida/geekbench etc.)

i made some testing with aida/geekbench option and run some benchmarks collecting data with capFrameX. The frametimes in RDR2 improved
what exactly does these biases do and is it wise to use them or do they interfere with manual RAM tweakings?

2. atm i run CCX OC 4.7/4.6 GHZ with CPPC prefered cores disabled. Now the cores that gets to do the most work happens to be the ones on the second CCD(the slower one with 4.6ghz). Why is that and can i change that? CPPC enabled is not an option cuz it tanks performance in most games because windows dont spread the workloads evenly across the threads (especially COD warzone runs into cpu bottleneck with CPPC)


----------



## nick name

ossimc said:


> Hey there
> 
> 1. has anyone made experiments with the ASUS performance biases (CB15 gentle, Aida/geekbench etc.)
> 
> i made some testing with aida/geekbench option and run some benchmarks collecting data with capFrameX. The frametimes in RDR2 improved
> what exactly does these biases do and is it wise to use them or do they interfere with manual RAM tweakings?
> 
> 2. atm i run CCX OC 4.7/4.6 GHZ with CPPC prefered cores disabled. Now the cores that gets to do the most work happens to be the ones on the second CCD(the slower one with 4.6ghz). Why is that and can i change that? CPPC enabled is not an option cuz it tanks performance in most games because windows dont spread the workloads evenly across the threads (especially COD warzone runs into cpu bottleneck with CPPC)


Those Performance Bias settings are tweaks to the CPU cache. 

I use CPPC without turning on CPPC Preferred cores. Though I haven't actually checked if it provides me any performance benefit.


----------



## ossimc

nick name said:


> Those Performance Bias settings are tweaks to the CPU cache.
> 
> I use CPPC without turning on CPPC Preferred cores. Though I haven't actually checked if it provides me any performance benefit.


ok i turn on CPPC and see if it makes a difference(leaving prefered cores off)

so the CPU cache thing...do i have to test it for stability in a specific way? i ran memtest and karhu, my ram tweaks are still stable with the bias.


----------



## nick name

ossimc said:


> ok i turn on CPPC and see if it makes a difference(leaving prefered cores off)
> 
> so the CPU cache thing...do i have to test it for stability in a specific way? i ran memtest and karhu, my ram tweaks are still stable with the bias.


I don't know of any instance where Performance Bias impacted RAM stability. The only thing I can think of is a change ASUS made to Performance Bias that impacted Ryzen 2000 series CPUs a while back, but only CPU performance.


----------



## hurricane28

Im tried again but when i read the BIOS in the BIOS it keeps saying that its not an proper BIOS... I flashed many times with this USB stick so its not that, its just the board being an.....

Now im scared to brick my board when i flash it via flashback on the back of the board.. Should i do it or wait for newer BIOS instead?


----------



## hurricane28

Finally i managed to flash back to BIOS 3103! Its much much better than 4402 BIOS. 

Lets hope for some better stability.


----------



## hurricane28

Nope, no stabilisatie at all... what the freck is going on...?! 

CPU is dying, RAM or BIOS is faulty? Idk anymore.. plz help as im out of options.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Nope, no stabilisatie at all... what the freck is going on...?!
> 
> CPU is dying, RAM or BIOS is faulty? Idk anymore.. plz help as im out of options.


BIOS 3103 isn't stable anymore?

What are you seeing? BSOD? Restarts?


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> BIOS 3103 isn't stable anymore?
> 
> What are you seeing? BSOD? Restarts?


I flashed back to 3103 and 3800 ram and 4.4 GHz CPU which was stable before but not anymore on any BIOS i tried so far.. 

I get WHEA errors after a short period of time and the system becomes unstable which begins with the cursor being erratic and laggy and than the whole system becomes unstable etc. 

I mean, this RAM set is rated for 3600 MHz so you would think it wouldnt even break sweat of doing 3800 MHz as this is b-die..


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> I flashed back to 3103 and 3800 ram and 4.4 GHz CPU which was stable before but not anymore on any BIOS i tried so far..
> 
> I get WHEA errors after a short period of time and the system becomes unstable which begins with the cursor being erratic and laggy and than the whole system becomes unstable etc.
> 
> I mean, this RAM set is rated for 3600 MHz so you would think it wouldnt even break sweat of doing 3800 MHz as this is b-die..


What is your SOC voltage?


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> I flashed back to 3103 and 3800 ram and 4.4 GHz CPU which was stable before but not anymore on any BIOS i tried so far..
> 
> I get WHEA errors after a short period of time and the system becomes unstable which begins with the cursor being erratic and laggy and than the whole system becomes unstable etc.
> 
> I mean, this RAM set is rated for 3600 MHz so you would think it wouldnt even break sweat of doing 3800 MHz as this is b-die..


And are you manually setting FCLK?


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> And are you manually setting FCLK?


Yes ofcos to 1900. Its stuck at 1800 so when i want to run ram at 3800 i need to manually set it. 

Here are all my BIOS settings:


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Yes ofcos to 1900. Its stuck at 1800 so when i want to run ram at 3800 i need to manually set it.
> 
> Here are all my BIOS settings:


What die type is your RAM?


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> What die type is your RAM?


Samsung B-die. I dont buy anything else except the best i can get. 

3600CL16 kit


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Samsung B-die. I dont buy anything else except the best i can get.
> 
> 3600CL16 kit


I've never tried timings as loose as yours so I don't know if your RAM voltage is sufficient, but my initial impression is that it's low. Have your tried more DRAM voltage? Also, I'd set Proc ODT to Auto as well as the other Rtt settings. My Proc ODT on Auto is 36.9 so yours seems high at 60. My settings are for a 3900X though. What CPU are you running?


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Samsung B-die. I dont buy anything else except the best i can get.
> 
> 3600CL16 kit


And with SOC at 1.1V and VDDG at 1.05V I think VDDP should be at 1.0V while your VDDP is set to .900V.


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> And with SOC at 1.1V and VDDG at 1.05V I think VDDP should be at 1.0V while your VDDP is set to .900V.


Ye i uppered the VDDP to 1.0 and procODT to auto. Same Proc as yours now. 

What are your settings for 3800 MHz RAM?


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Ye i uppered the VDDP to 1.0 and procODT to auto. Same Proc as yours now.
> 
> What are your settings for 3800 MHz RAM?


I run a 3800CL16 setup daily though these two kits together can run 3800 14-15-14-14. I have a 4400C19 and 3600C15 kit running together. 







DRAM Voltage is 1.52V and droops to 1.5V for CL16. I have to run higher for CL14 with tRFC 250.


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> I run a 3800CL16 setup daily though these two kits together can run 3800 14-15-14-14. I have a 4400C19 and 3600C15 kit running together.
> View attachment 2519751
> 
> DRAM Voltage is 1.52V and droops to 1.5V for CL16. I have to run higher for CL14 with tRFC 250.


Thnx!

That's a lot of voltage for RAM man. I know it can handle it but still. 

Are you having a fan blowing on the RAM sticks?


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Thnx!
> 
> That's a lot of voltage for RAM man. I know it can handle it but still.
> 
> Are you having a fan blowing on the RAM sticks?


I wouldn't worry about 1.5V on b-die at all. And yes, I run a fan for my RAM to keep it below 40*C as around 43*C, with tight timings, errors occur.


----------



## Hale59

hurricane28 said:


> Thnx!
> 
> That's a lot of voltage for RAM man. I know it can handle it but still.
> 
> Are you having a fan blowing on the RAM sticks?


I know this is not my mobo section, but here are my ram voltages and temps.
Sometimes I push my ram between 1.8 to 2v and temps don't go over 37 degrees C.
And yes, I use a ram air cooler.


----------



## nick name

Hale59 said:


> I know this is not my mobo section, but here are my ram voltages and temps.
> Sometimes I push my ram between 1.8 to 2v and temps don't go over 37 degrees C.
> And yes, I use a ram air cooler.


When I run 3800 14-14-14-14 tRFC 250 with other tight timings I use around 1.53V~1.55V (I can't really remember as it's been a while since I've run just one 16GB RAM kit). 

And I have also put voltages around 1.8V through my kits when really trying to push them.


----------



## Hale59

nick name said:


> When I run 3800 14-14-14-14 tRFC 250 with other tight timings I use around 1.53V~1.55V (I can't really remember as it's been a while since I've run just one 16GB RAM kit).
> 
> And I have also put voltages around 1.8V through my kits when really trying to push them.


My IMC does not take more than 3839/1919 1/1. Hence the 1919 in the picture circled in red.

I have 32GB ram kit, but my 16GB does better for benching.

And I push ram voltage when I run my tRFC in the 80's or 90s with tRAS on 21 and tRC on 29.

And the reason I don't watercool my ram, its because I am always changing ram kits. Now imagine having them watercooled, and going through the harder process of changing ram kits.


----------



## nick name

Hale59 said:


> My IMC does not take more than 3839/1019 1/1. Hence the 1919 in the picture circled in red.
> 
> I have 32GB ram kit, but my 16GB does better for benching.
> 
> And I push ram voltage when I run my tRFC in the 80's or 90s with tRAS on 21 and tRC on 29.
> 
> And the reason I don't watercool my ram, its because I am always changing ram kits. Now imagine having them watercooled, and going through the harder process of changing ram kits.


Yeah, I haven't really played with RAM in a while. I sold one 3600C15 b-die kit and then put both of my other kits in my PC and set the timings to "good enough". And I cool mine with a Noctua fan sitting on my GPU directly in front of the RAM. With four sticks in they are noticeably hotter, but they they still stay below 40*C under load.


----------



## hurricane28

Very nice guys! 

Thnx for the input, i will test more now.


----------



## tcclaviger

Where I settled for daily use, 1933 in 1:1 is 100% stable in testing at 14-15-8-12-22-34, but only if WHEA killer is used. Results do scale upwards as expected so it's not just masking real errors, but the practical difference between the 1866 settings and 1933 is very small.

Very odd memory configuration, yes, but having 48gb is nice for a variety of reasons where 32 is slightly too small for me. No, I don't recommend this configuration for others, it took a lot of time to get it working well. 28c max memory temps certainly helps (water).


----------



## hurricane28

Nope, i keep getting these goddamn WHEA errors no matter what voltage what setting... 

I think these RAM sticks are duds to be honest. I could get 3800 MHz stable on my FlareX easily... 

That or my CPU has degraded..


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Nope, i keep getting these goddamn WHEA errors no matter what voltage what setting...
> 
> I think these RAM sticks are duds to be honest. I could get 3800 MHz stable on my FlareX easily...
> 
> That or my CPU has degraded..


Have you tried more DRAM voltage? Something like 1.45V?


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> Have you tried more DRAM voltage? Something like 1.45V?



Yes, i tried even 1.5v on the Dram with 3800 CL16 loose timings and i still get this WHEA error...


----------



## crakej

hurricane28 said:


> Yes, i tried even 1.5v on the Dram with 3800 CL16 loose timings and i still get this WHEA error...


Are you still running a 2700X?


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Have you tried more DRAM voltage? Something like 1.45V?


Which bios are you running these days?


----------



## hurricane28

crakej said:


> Are you still running a 2700X?


Nope, never had the 2700x lol. 2600x and i sold it. 

Im running 3600 now. 



crakej said:


> Which bios are you running these days?


Im currently on BIOS 3103.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Which bios are you running these days?


I'm running 4402. I like it. I can run that Stilt PBO setting with this version whereas with other BIOS versions it wasn't stable. I don't know if something in the BIOS changed or if it's just coincidence though. 

I still get WHEA warnings, but no BSOD from an WHEA error yet. Also still getting occasional USB dropouts. Those dropouts tend to happen on boot and once or twice (that I've noticed) after boot.


----------



## hurricane28

Wauw...

















I don't get it man..

Im pushing 1.5v+ in to the RAM and it still won't be stable..

What could be the cause? I mean, i have no spare parts to test with as i sold my excellent FlareX kit unfortunately.. This is ridiculous imo.

Scores are good though.


----------



## hurricane28

Lol, what is this voodoo magic with Ryzen dudes? This only happens on Ryzen systems as far as i know. 

"corrected hardware error" what does that even mean? How can an hardware error be corrected in windows...?


----------



## nick name

Spoiler






hurricane28 said:


> View attachment 2520023
> 
> 
> 
> Lol, what is this voodoo magic with Ryzen dudes? This only happens on Ryzen systems as far as i know.
> 
> "corrected hardware error" what does that even mean? How can an hardware error be corrected in windows...?






I get those WHEA warnings too. It's not something I worry about unless they cause a BSOD. I don't think it's the RAM kit causing the problem. I'd imagine if you ran the kit at JEDEC 2133 you'd still see the same WHEA warnings.


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> I get those WHEA warnings too. It's not something I worry about unless they cause a BSOD. I don't think it's the RAM kit causing the problem. I'd imagine if you ran the kit at JEDEC 2133 you'd still see the same WHEA warnings.


I get no BSOD or anything. Just after a couple of minutes i see WHEA error and system gets unstable. But when i test with TM5 i can't find any errors as you can see in the screenshot in previous post. 

I don't get it man.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> I get no BSOD or anything. Just after a couple of minutes i see WHEA error and system gets unstable. But when i test with TM5 i can't find any errors as you can see in the screenshot in previous post.
> 
> I don't get it man.


I don't think anyone gets it. Not even AMD as they still haven't found a way to fix it. But it seems to be a "cosmetic" problem for most so it isn't a big deal to me.


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> I don't think anyone gets it. Not even AMD as they still haven't found a way to fix it. But it seems to be a "cosmetic" problem for most so it isn't a big deal to me.


I guess so. I asked in another forum as well, maybe they have some more info. 

What about The Stilt and Elmor (jon)? They also have no idea? They are engineers right?


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> I guess so. I asked in another forum as well, maybe they have some more info.
> 
> What about The Stilt and Elmor (jon)? They also have no idea? They are engineers right?


I'm not sure if either have looked into it.


----------



## Hale59

hurricane28 said:


> I guess so. I asked in another forum as well, maybe they have some more info.
> 
> What about The Stilt and Elmor (jon)? They also have no idea? They are engineers right?





nick name said:


> I'm not sure if either have looked into it.


Its an old problem that nobody solved.


----------



## hurricane28

Hale59 said:


> Its an old problem that nobody solved.


Ye, weird man. Maybe its on MS side?


----------



## Hale59

hurricane28 said:


> Ye, weird man. Maybe its on MS side?


I doubt it.

PM this member Veii
He might have more insight.


----------



## hurricane28

Hale59 said:


> I doubt it.
> 
> PM this member Veii
> He might have more insight.


Idk man, sounds like an AMD problem too.. Idk why people still recommend AMD over Intel even with all these issues AMD still has.. Will they ever solve this erraticness? 
I sure as hell hope so because it triggers my autism man. I cannot stand erraticness. I need to fix it otherwise i dont feel good. 

Intel doesn't seem to have so much issues do they?


----------



## Hale59

hurricane28 said:


> Idk man, sounds like an AMD problem too.. Idk why people still recommend AMD over Intel even with all these issues AMD still has.. Will they ever solve this erraticness?
> I sure as hell hope so because it triggers my autism man. I cannot stand erraticness. I need to fix it otherwise i dont feel good.
> 
> Intel doesn't seem to have so much issues do they?


Yes, AMD is more complex. Intel is more easier.
If it really affects your health, then move to Intel.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> Have you tried more DRAM voltage? Something like 1.45V?


Which bios are you running these days?


nick name said:


> I'm running 4402. I like it. I can run that Stilt PBO setting with this version whereas with other BIOS versions it wasn't stable. I don't know if something in the BIOS changed or if it's just coincidence though.
> 
> I still get WHEA warnings, but no BSOD from an WHEA error yet. Also still getting occasional USB dropouts. Those dropouts tend to happen on boot and once or twice (that I've noticed) after boot.


How much retuning did you have to do for these newer bioses? What changes have you noticed that you have had to change - ram and voltages?


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Which bios are you running these days?
> 
> How much retuning did you have to do for these newer bioses? What changes have you noticed that you have had to change - ram and voltages?


That's the good part. I didn't really do any re-tuning. With the Stilt PBO feature I run it as he recommends. Level 1 LLC with just a touch (.00625) of CPU positive offset. Now I can't add any headroom to it (if I try as little as a 25 offset on top of the 4.65GHz it will crash), but it's been completely stable at speeds up to 4.65GHz. Other BIOS versions wouldn't run high-speed, light loads with the Stilt feature enabled. For example: at the start of a CB20 run, right before the render starts, would crash the PC. And the added all-core speed is stable also. 

I did lower my DRAM voltage for my 32GB 3800 14-15-14-14 tRFC 250 setup down to 1.52V from 1.55V, but that may have been possible on other BIOS versions as I was too lazy to test. Also I haven't run 1.52V overnight to check its stability. And so far I've only tested daily usage, gaming, and a 30 min Karhu run. I do know that 32GB 3800 16-16-16-16 tRFC 300 won't run on 1.5V though. My DRAM droop is about .02V.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> That's the good part. I didn't really do any re-tuning. With the Stilt PBO feature I run it as he recommends. Level 1 LLC with just a touch (.00625) of CPU positive offset. Now I can't add any headroom to it (if I try as little as a 25 offset on top of the 4.65GHz it will crash), but it's been completely stable at speeds up to 4.65GHz. Other BIOS versions wouldn't run high-speed, light loads with the Stilt feature enabled. For example: at the start of a CB20 run, right before the render starts, would crash the PC. And the added all-core speed is stable also.
> 
> I did lower my DRAM voltage for my 32GB 3800 14-15-14-14 tRFC 250 setup down to 1.52V from 1.55V, but that may have been possible on other BIOS versions as I was too lazy to test. Also I haven't run 1.52V overnight to check its stability. And so far I've only tested daily usage, gaming, and a 30 min Karhu run. I do know that 32GB 3800 16-16-16-16 tRFC 300 won't run on 1.5V though. My DRAM droop is about .02V.


Which Stilt PBO feature do you mean?...... Its been that long I can't remember which tweak you're referring to!

Still, very interesting. Memory-wise, you have 4 x 8GB now? I have 4 sticks now and they won't run as fast as 2 x 8GB, though I'm pretty sure my 3733 CL14 settings are getting me decent performance. I've struggled to get my current settings working with the newer bioses............. maybe i'll bother to test 2 sticks with newer bios....

I have *ZERO* WHEA errors on this bios.


----------



## nick name

crakej said:


> Which Stilt PBO feature do you mean?...... Its been that long I can't remember which tweak you're referring to!
> 
> Still, very interesting. Memory-wise, you have 4 x 8GB now? I have 4 sticks now and they won't run as fast as 2 x 8GB, though I'm pretty sure my 3733 CL14 settings are getting me decent performance. I've struggled to get my current settings working with the newer bioses............. maybe i'll bother to test 2 sticks with newer bios....
> 
> I have *ZERO* WHEA errors on this bios.


It's the Fmax Enhancer under the PBO menu. It behaves the way the EDC bug does, but better.

My 4x8GB configuration runs at 14-15-14-14 where as my best b-die kit alone does 14-14-14-14, but I can't see a difference in performance between those two setups. Whereas running dual-rank gets a little bit of a boost. But really I'm running both kits because I have both kits and just having one kit sit around seems wasteful.


----------



## crakej

nick name said:


> It's the Fmax Enhancer under the PBO menu. It behaves the way the EDC bug does, but better.
> 
> My 4x8GB configuration runs at 14-15-14-14 where as my best b-die kit alone does 14-14-14-14, but I can't see a difference in performance between those two setups. Whereas running dual-rank gets a little bit of a boost. But really I'm running both kits because I have both kits and just having one kit sit around seems wasteful.


Ah yes - I remember

My ram is Patriot Steel 4400 4 x 8GB, b-die. I haven't found a way to get them to even run at their XMP profile as I could with 2 sticks.... hmmm. Seems best is dual rail 2 x 16GB. I also wonder what they did with 5000 series memory interface as it's the same controller as 3000 CPUs (as far as I can see). What are 3000 chips like on X570? It would be nice to make the most of my memory as my upgrade path to AM5 will be difficult!


----------



## lordzed83

Hale59 said:


> Yes, AMD is more complex. Intel is more easier.
> If it really affects your health, then move to Intel.


I told him 10 times+ to ****ing sell AMD and move to intel cause he cant stabilise system on any bioses EVER. In my eyes User error. While me and @crakej running crappy bugged pcie4.0 bios with ZERO PROBLEMS


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> Yeah, we all get WHEA warnings so no reason to assume he is doing anything wrong.



Ye, i was/am stable for months so i have no idea what this fool is talking about lol. 

I started to get WHEA errors when i got my new Trident Z NEO kit which requires a lot more voltage. The weird part is that i never got WHEA errors on my previous RAM kit, so its not that far fetched to think there is something wrong with the hardware. 

Anyway, the WHEA errors are just cosmetic as i got them already after 5min after post and get no performance issues so i ignore it from now on. 

Thnx for the info though.🤙


----------



## BIRDMANv84

hurricane28 said:


> It happens to me when i set 38090 MHz RAM and 1900 Fclk, anything lower it doesn't occur.
> 
> Anywho, what is your RAM clocked at and do you also see these WHEA errors? If so, are they always the same?


My old cpu wouldn't do 1900flck either, I got a new rma cpu can now do 1900flck with all 4 kits of memory I have here. I don't like the movie Groundhog Day so you would have to scroll back 6-8 months and see that I had the same cosmetic errors that you're supposedly ignoring now...


----------



## nick name

_snip_


----------



## hurricane28

BIRDMANv84 said:


> My old cpu wouldn't do 1900flck either, I got a new rma cpu can now do 1900flck with all 4 kits of memory I have here. I don't like the movie Groundhog Day so you would have to scroll back 6-8 months and see that I had the same cosmetic errors that you're supposedly ignoring now...



Im running 4.4 GHz CPU and 3800 MHz RAM with 1900 fclk perfectly fine man, no issues so far. 

Again, i had RAM instabilities and i got this WHEA error so i thought they were related.. that was not the case before. 
The messages stopped and returned as soon as i installed my Trident Z NEO kit. 

Anyway, enough about this topic, i know how and what and will not ask again about this, happy?


----------



## terranx

Anyone here familiar with PCD databases within the UEFI? I was reading through some of the Gigabyte leak stuff, and the agesa document caught my eye. Specifically if this byte can be flipped: 










I was digging through early Crosshair VI EFIs which had most of the GUIDs labeled, and there are modules labeled PcdDxe and PcdPeim, so I do wonder if some of these settings can be found in the equivalent modules on newer crosshair vii EFIs.


----------



## dreckschmeck

nick name said:


> That's the good part. I didn't really do any re-tuning. With the Stilt PBO feature I run it as he recommends. Level 1 LLC with just a touch (.00625) of CPU positive offset. Now I can't add any headroom to it (if I try as little as a 25 offset on top of the 4.65GHz it will crash), but it's been completely stable at speeds up to 4.65GHz. Other BIOS versions wouldn't run high-speed, light loads with the Stilt feature enabled. For example: at the start of a CB20 run, right before the render starts, would crash the PC. And the added all-core speed is stable also.
> 
> I did lower my DRAM voltage for my 32GB 3800 14-15-14-14 tRFC 250 setup down to 1.52V from 1.55V, but that may have been possible on other BIOS versions as I was too lazy to test. Also I haven't run 1.52V overnight to check its stability. And so far I've only tested daily usage, gaming, and a 30 min Karhu run. I do know that 32GB 3800 16-16-16-16 tRFC 300 won't run on 1.5V though. My DRAM droop is about .02V.


Hey nick name,
I have nearly the same setup with a Ryzen 9 3900 CH VII Wifi and 4x 8GB CL15 B-Die and S36 Celsius running push-pull
Do you mind posting your complete bios settings? I'd like to try running 3800 RAM and FCLK instead of 3600CL14. With the new uefi, system is already running really well. PE3 level pushes single and mutli core speed nicely. 
regards


----------



## nick name

dreckschmeck said:


> Hey nick name,
> I have nearly the same setup with a Ryzen 9 3900 CH VII Wifi and 4x 8GB CL15 B-Die and S36 Celsius running push-pull
> Do you mind posting your complete bios settings? I'd like to try running 3800 RAM and FCLK instead of 3600CL14. With the new uefi, system is already running really well. PE3 level pushes single and mutli core speed nicely.
> regards


Sure I'll do that and update this post. A major distinction between you and me is you are running PE and I am only using the Fmax enhancer under PBO settings.

And are you running a newer 3600C15 kit or the older kit? My newer kit runs a little better than my older kit did. Different b-die revisions.



Spoiler: BIOS Settings



[2021/08/19 14:30:23]
Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
BCLK_Divider [Auto]
Performance Enhancer [Auto]
CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
Performance Bias [Aida/Geekbench]
Memory Frequency [DDR4-3800MHz]
FCLK Frequency [1900MHz]
Core Performance Boost [Enabled]
SMT Mode [Enabled]
Core VID [Auto]
CCX0 Ratio [Auto]
CCX1 Ratio [Auto]
CCX0 Ratio [Auto]
CCX1 Ratio [Auto]
TPU [Keep Current Settings]
PBO Fmax Enhancer [Enabled]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
Max CPU Boost Clock Override [0]
Platform Thermal Throttle Limit [Auto]
Mem Over Clock Fail Count [5]
DRAM CAS# Latency [14]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [15]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [14]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [14]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [30]
Trc [44]
TrrdS [4]
TrrdL [4]
Tfaw [16]
TwtrS [3]
TwtrL [8]
Twr [12]
Trcpage [Auto]
TrdrdScl [3]
TwrwrScl [3]
Trfc [250]
Trfc2 [Auto]
Trfc4 [Auto]
Tcwl [14]
Trtp [8]
Trdwr [10]
Twrrd [2]
TwrwrSc [1]
TwrwrSd [6]
TwrwrDd [7]
TrdrdSc [1]
TrdrdSd [4]
TrdrdDd [5]
Tcke [1]
ProcODT [Auto]
Cmd2T [1T]
Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
Power Down Enable [Disabled]
RttNom [Auto]
RttWr [Auto]
RttPark [Auto]
MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
MemCkeSetup [Auto]
MemCadBusClkDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [Auto]
CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 1]
CPU Current Capability [140%]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
CPU Voltage Frequency [500]
CPU Power Duty Control [Extreme]
CPU Power Phase Control [Extreme]
CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 4]
VDDSOC Current Capability [140%]
VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed VDDSOC Switching Frequency(KHz) [600]
VDDSOC Phase Control [Extreme]
DRAM Current Capability [130%]
DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.52000]
Force OC Mode Disable [Disabled]
VTTDDR Voltage [Auto]
VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
VDDP Voltage [Auto]
1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
CPU 3.3v AUX [3.30000]
2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
PLL reference voltage [Auto]
T Offset [Auto]
Sense MI Skew [Disabled]
Sense MI Offset [Auto]
Promontory presence [Auto]
Clock Amplitude [Auto]
CLDO VDDP Voltage [1.000]
CPU Core Voltage [Offset mode]
CPU Offset Mode Sign [+]
- CPU Core Voltage Offset [0.00625]
CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
- VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.10625]
DRAM Voltage [1.52000]
VDDG CCD Voltage Control [1.050]
VDDG IOD Voltage Control [1.050]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
AMD CPU fTPM [Disable]
Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
PSS Support [Auto]
NX Mode [Enabled]
SVM Mode [Disabled]
Onboard LED [Enabled]
Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
SATA Mode Selection [AHCI]
NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
SMART Self Test [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
HD Audio Controller [Disabled]
PCIEX16_1 Bandwidth [Auto Mode]
PCIEX16_2 Bandwidth [Auto Mode]
M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
PCIEX8/X4_2 Mode [Auto]
PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
SB Link Mode [Auto]
Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
When system is in working state [Off]
When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [Off]
Intel LAN Controller [Disabled]
Intel LAN OPROM [Auto]
Wi-Fi Controller [Disabled]
Bluetooth Controller [Disabled]
ErP Ready [Disabled]
Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
Power On By RTC [Disabled]
Above 4G Decoding [Disabled]
SR-IOV Support [Disabled]
Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
SanDisk [Auto]
USB Device Enable [Enabled]
U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
U31G1_5 [Enabled]
U31G1_6 [Enabled]
U31G1_7 [Enabled]
U31G1_8 [Enabled]
U31G1_9 [Enabled]
U31G1_10 [Enabled]
USB11 [Enabled]
USB12 [Enabled]
USB13 [Enabled]
USB14 [Enabled]
USB15 [Enabled]
Network Stack [Disabled]
Device [Samsung SSD 850 EVO 1TB]
CPU Temperature [Monitor]
MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
PCH Temperature [Monitor]
T Sensor 1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Fan Speed [Ignore]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
5V Voltage [Monitor]
12V Voltage [Monitor]
CPU Fan Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
Fast Boot [Enabled]
NVMe Support [Enabled]
Next Boot after AC Power Loss [Normal Boot]
AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
Boot Logo Display [Enabled]
POST Delay Time [3 sec]
Bootup NumLock State [On]
Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
Launch CSM [Enabled]
Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
OS Type [Windows UEFI mode]
Setup Animator [Disabled]
ASUS Grid Install Service [Disabled]
Profile Name []
Save to Profile [1]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
BCLK Frequency [Auto]
CPU Ratio [Auto]
DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A1]
Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
CPU Frequency [0]
CPU Voltage [0]
SMT Control [Auto]
Overclock [Enabled ]
Memory Clock Speed [Auto]
Tcl [Auto]
Trcdrd [Auto]
Trcdwr [Auto]
Trp [Auto]
Tras [Auto]
Trc Ctrl [Auto]
TrrdS [Auto]
TrrdL [Auto]
Tfaw Ctrl [Auto]
TwtrS [Auto]
TwtrL [Auto]
Twr Ctrl [Auto]
Trcpage Ctrl [Auto]
TrdrdScL Ctrl [Auto]
TwrwrScL Ctrl [Auto]
Trfc Ctrl [Auto]
Trfc2 Ctrl [Auto]
Trfc4 Ctrl [Auto]
Tcwl [Auto]
Trtp [Auto]
Tcke [Auto]
Trdwr [Auto]
Twrrd [Auto]
TwrwrSc [Auto]
TwrwrSd [Auto]
TwrwrDd [Auto]
TrdrdSc [Auto]
TrdrdSd [Auto]
TrdrdDd [Auto]
ProcODT [Auto]
Power Down Enable [Auto]
Cmd2T [Auto]
Gear Down Mode [Auto]
CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
Infinity Fabric Frequency and Dividers [Auto]
ECO Mode [Disable]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
LN2 Mode [Auto]
SoC Voltage [0]
SoC/Uncore OC Mode [Enabled ]
VDDP Voltage Control [Auto]
VDDG Voltage Control [Auto]
VDDIO Voltage Control [Disabled]
VTT Voltage Control [Disabled]
NUMA nodes per socket [Auto]
LCLK DPM [Auto]
LCLK DPM Enhanced PCIe Detection [Auto]
Custom Pstate0 [Auto]
L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
Core Watchdog Timer Enable [Auto]
Core Performance Boost [Auto]
Global C-state Control [Auto]
Power Supply Idle Control [Low Current Idle]
SEV ASID Count [Auto]
SEV-ES ASID Space Limit Control [Auto]
Streaming Stores Control [Auto]
Local APIC Mode [Auto]
ACPI _CST C1 Declaration [Auto]
MCA error thresh enable [Auto]
PPIN Opt-in [Auto]
Indirect Branch Prediction Speculation [Auto]
DRAM scrub time [Auto]
Poison scrubber control [Auto]
Redirect scrubber control [Auto]
Redirect scrubber limit [Auto]
NUMA nodes per socket [Auto]
Memory interleaving [Auto]
Memory interleaving size [Auto]
1TB remap [Auto]
DRAM map inversion [Auto]
ACPI SRAT L3 Cache As NUMA Domain [Auto]
ACPI SLIT Distance Control [Auto]
ACPI SLIT remote relative distance [Auto]
GMI encryption control [Auto]
xGMI encryption control [Auto]
CAKE CRC perf bounds Control [Auto]
4-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
3-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
xGMI TXEQ Mode [Auto]
PcsCG control [Auto]
Disable DF to external downstream IP SyncFloodPropagation [Auto]
Disable DF sync flood propagation [Auto]
CC6 memory region encryption [Auto]
Memory Clear [Auto]
Overclock [Enabled]
Memory Clock Speed [Auto]
Tcl [Auto]
Trcdrd [Auto]
Trcdwr [Auto]
Trp [Auto]
Tras [Auto]
Trc Ctrl [Auto]
TrrdS [Auto]
TrrdL [Auto]
Tfaw Ctrl [Auto]
TwtrS [Auto]
TwtrL [Auto]
Twr Ctrl [Auto]
Trcpage Ctrl [Auto]
TrdrdScL Ctrl [Auto]
TwrwrScL Ctrl [Auto]
Trfc Ctrl [Auto]
Trfc2 Ctrl [Auto]
Trfc4 Ctrl [Auto]
Tcwl [Auto]
Trtp [Auto]
Tcke [Auto]
Trdwr [Auto]
Twrrd [Auto]
TwrwrSc [Auto]
TwrwrSd [Auto]
TwrwrDd [Auto]
TrdrdSc [Auto]
TrdrdSd [Auto]
TrdrdDd [Auto]
ProcODT [Auto]
Power Down Enable [Auto]
Disable Burst/Postponed Refresh [Auto]
DRAM Maximum Activate Count [Auto]
Cmd2T [Auto]
Gear Down Mode [Auto]
CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
Data Poisoning [Auto]
DRAM Post Package Repair [Default]
RCD Parity [Auto]
DRAM Address Command Parity Retry [Auto]
Write CRC Enable [Auto]
DRAM Write CRC Enable and Retry Limit [Auto]
Disable Memory Error Injection [True]
DRAM ECC Symbol Size [Auto]
DRAM ECC Enable [Auto]
DRAM UECC Retry [Auto]
TSME [Auto]
Data Scramble [Auto]
DFE Read Training [Auto]
FFE Write Training [Auto]
PMU Pattern Bits Control [Auto]
MR6VrefDQ Control [Auto]
CPU Vref Training Seed Control [Auto]
Chipselect Interleaving [Auto]
BankGroupSwap [Auto]
BankGroupSwapAlt [Auto]
Address Hash Bank [Auto]
Address Hash CS [Auto]
Address Hash Rm [Auto]
SPD Read Optimization [Enabled]
MBIST Enable [Disabled]
Pattern Select [PRBS]
Pattern Length(MTS) [3]
Aggressor Channel [1 Aggressor Channel]
Aggressor Static Lane Control [Disabled]
Target Static Lane Control [Disabled]
Worst Case Margin Granularity [Per Chip Select]
Read Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
Read Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
Write Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
Write Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
IOMMU [Auto]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [Auto]
FCLK Frequency [Auto]
SOC OVERCLOCK VID [0]
UCLK DIV1 MODE [Auto]
VDDP Voltage Control [Auto]
VDDG Voltage Control [Auto]
SoC/Uncore OC Mode [Enabled]
LN2 Mode [Auto]
ACS Enable [Auto]
PCIe ARI Support [Auto]
PCIe ARI Enumeration [Auto]
PCIe Ten Bit Tag Support [Auto]
Max Voltage Offset [Auto]
cTDP Control [Auto]
EfficiencyModeEn [Auto]
Package Power Limit Control [Auto]
APBDIS [Auto]
DF Cstates [Auto]
CPPC [Enabled]
CPPC Preferred Cores [Auto]
NBIO DPM Control [Auto]
Early Link Speed [Auto]
Presence Detect Select mode [Auto]
Preferred IO [Auto]
CV test [Auto]
Loopback Mode [Auto]
SRIS [Auto]


----------



## crakej

terranx said:


> Anyone here familiar with PCD databases within the UEFI? I was reading through some of the Gigabyte leak stuff, and the agesa document caught my eye. Specifically if this byte can be flipped:
> 
> View attachment 2521569
> 
> 
> I was digging through early Crosshair VI EFIs which had most of the GUIDs labeled, and there are modules labeled PcdDxe and PcdPeim, so I do wonder if some of these settings can be found in the equivalent modules on newer crosshair vii EFIs.


Very interesting! I haven't modded bioses for years, and can't off hand remember who might be able to make use of this information. I wonder if @elmor or @The Stilt are aware of this?

Anyone else remember who the modders were? Perhaps @Reous might know or be interested....


----------



## dreckschmeck

nick name said:


> Sure I'll do that and update this post. A major distinction between you and me is you are running PE and I am only using the Fmax enhancer under PBO settings.
> 
> And are you running a newer 3600C15 kit or the older kit? My newer kit runs a little better than my older kit did. Different b-die revisions.


Hey nick, thanks for sharing your settings.
I was running custom BIOS 2801 for 2 years or something. But never could go above 3600 mhz on RAM. Now at least 3733 are very stable with your settings.
Btw I'm running the older 3600CL15 RAM, G.Slkill Trident Z
Single core boost seems fine. low voltage during idle is working too. Nice low latency. Couldn't find any old bugs from the older bios versions in this one. 
At least for the Ryzen 3xxx CPUs this latest BIOS is working really well!


----------



## dreckschmeck

crakej said:


> Very interesting! I haven't modded bioses for years, and can't off hand remember who might be able to make use of this information. I wonder if @elmor or @The Stilt are aware of this?
> 
> Anyone else remember who the modders were? Perhaps @Reous might know or be interested....


I think my old 2801 modded Bios was from the user 
*mtrai*
He uploaded stuff to the ROG forum and cross referenced it back here.


----------



## nick name

dreckschmeck said:


> Hey nick, thanks for sharing your settings.
> I was running custom BIOS 2801 for 2 years or something. But never could go above 3600 mhz on RAM. Now at least 3733 are very stable with your settings.
> Btw I'm running the older 3600CL15 RAM, G.Slkill Trident Z
> Single core boost seems fine. low voltage during idle is working too. Nice low latency. Couldn't find any old bugs from the older bios versions in this one.
> At least for the Ryzen 3xxx CPUs this latest BIOS is working really well!
> View attachment 2522118


Do you think it's your CPU that can't do IF 1900MHz or your RAM? I'd imagine even older b-die can still do 3800MHz in a 4x8GB config though I wasn't able to try it as I only had one 2x8GB kit.


----------



## i_max2k2

I was trying to decide weather to upgrade from my 2700x to 5800x now or to wait for the 5000 series 3D cache chips, do we know if they will be supported by this board?


----------



## nick name

i_max2k2 said:


> I was trying to decide weather to upgrade from my 2700x to 5800x now or to wait for the 5000 series 3D cache chips, do we know if they will be supported by this board?


I saw improvements in games going from my old 2700X to a 3900X and going to a 5800X would probably net you even more gains. So I'd upgrade now as the new CPUs will require new boards.

Edit:
I've also seen some comparisons of a 2700X vs 5800X from Hardware Unboxed.


----------



## Keith Myers

i_max2k2 said:


> I was trying to decide weather to upgrade from my 2700x to 5800x now or to wait for the 5000 series 3D cache chips, do we know if they will be supported by this board?


All still speculation about the release date and whether they are compatible with existing boards. A BIOS update at minimum would be required.


----------



## nick name

I just had me a WHEA BSOD on my Intel laptop. Now I'm super curious as to what causes them.


----------



## nesty

Hi,
have anyone experienced LN2 mode being forced regardless of its jumper position ? 
It just happened, I was in desktop when I noticed it got really slow - [email protected] ..
After countless restarts, flashbacks, CMOS resets I noticed that it says LN2 mode enabled on top of OC tab.. 
that is probably why it pumps excessive iod/vddg/pll voltages and boots @ low frequency


----------



## nick name

nesty said:


> Hi,
> have anyone experienced LN2 mode being forced regardless of its jumper position ?
> It just happened, I was in desktop when I noticed it got really slow - [email protected] ..
> After countless restarts, flashbacks, CMOS resets I noticed that it says LN2 mode enabled on top of OC tab..
> that is probably why it pumps excessive iod/vddg/pll voltages and boots @ low frequency


Did you have the LN2 switch on the board enabled? Because I've done that before.

Edit:
I mean did you verify the LN2 switch wasn't in the enabled position? Because I have had it enabled without realizing it for I don't know how long. As far as enabled in the BIOS without touching it -- I've never experienced that.

Edit 2:
Though I never experienced any reduced speeds when it was enabled.  I'm not sure that we have a slow mode. I believe our LN2 mode simply boosts voltages like you said.
We do have a slow mode switch! I completely forgot!

Edit 3:
I had completely forgotten that LN2 mode is set with a jumper and that we have a slow mode switch. I guess that's why I was able to forget about setting the LN2 jumper (also because I used to overclock while drinking).


----------



## nesty

soo.. i just disassembled my loop, luckily no sign of leaks.
and despite not seeing any contamination/mechanical damage i took out board and cleaned whole bottom half with isopropyl and soft brush...

no LN2 mode with slow mode anymore ...
probably some low-resistance particle in the wrong place 

edit : for the record i have never used ln2 mode/slow mode .. also it appeared to kick in in desktop


----------



## nick name

nick name said:


> Did you have the LN2 switch on the board enabled? Because I've done that before.





nesty said:


> soo.. i just disassembled my loop, luckily no sign of leaks.
> and despite not seeing any contamination/mechanical damage i took out board and cleaned whole bottom half with isopropyl and soft brush...
> 
> no LN2 mode with slow mode anymore ...
> probably some low-resistance particle in the wrong place
> 
> edit : for the record i have never used ln2 mode/slow mode .. also it appeared to kick in in desktop


That makes sense with it being a simple jumper. 

As for the speed . . . have you tried double-checking what Maximum Processor State is set to under your Windows Power Plan? I used to have a problem with it randomly lowering itself below 100%.


----------



## sonic2911

i_max2k2 said:


> I was trying to decide weather to upgrade from my 2700x to 5800x now or to wait for the 5000 series 3D cache chips, do we know if they will be supported by this board?


Same boat  recently I got a 3070 and I know 2700x will drag it back, at 1440p. I'm thinking between 3700x or 5600x, not sure to keep this board or upgrade to B550 for 5000 series


----------



## wolfgang91

Hi guys,
I've just jump to BIOS 4402 and very happy with it. I've set PBO Fmax Enhancer to enabled and Precision Boost Overdrive set to enabled too. RAM 3600 mhz DOCP (not tweaked yet). Very good performance compared to stock settings (almost 200 pts more in CB20). But a small problem, when almost in idle (just surfing the internet with Chrome) I get BSOD, I think is due to low voltage in IDLE. No problems under load. I've tried to set a positive offset voltage (+ 0.00625) but that doesn't solve the problem... I use Ryzen Balanced Power Plan to get low voltages in IDLE (99% minimum processor state)
Any advices please?
Thanks in advance.


----------



## nick name

wolfgang91 said:


> Hi guys,
> I've just jump to BIOS 4402 and very happy with it. I've set PBO Fmax Enhancer to enabled and Precision Boost Overdrive set to enabled too. RAM 3600 mhz DOCP (not tweaked yet). Very good performance compared to stock settings (almost 200 pts more in CB20). But a small problem, when almost in idle (just surfing the internet with Chrome) I get BSOD, I think is due to low voltage in IDLE. No problems under load. I've tried to set a positive offset voltage (+ 0.00625) but that doesn't solve the problem... I use Ryzen Balanced Power Plan to get low voltages in IDLE (99% minimum processor state)
> Any advices please?
> Thanks in advance.


You might need a little more positive offset (+.01250). 

And I have PBO set to Auto and not Enabled. I don't know if that makes a difference. Are you running anything else in the PBO menu like Max CPU Boost? I'm not stable with anything added beyond 4.65GHz.


----------



## wolfgang91

nick name said:


> You might need a little more positive offset (+.01250).
> 
> And I have PBO set to Auto and not Enabled. I don't know if that makes a difference. Are you running anything else in the PBO menu like Max CPU Boost? I'm not stable with anything added beyond 4.65GHz.


Thanks nick name. I'm gonna try to set PBO to Auto and see what happens, and then increase the offset if that doesn't solve the issue. Nothing more tweaked in the PBO menu apart from that, Max CPU Boost should be at its default setting.
Cheers.


----------



## yugjooh

When I boot my PC with external harddrives plugged in through the USB boot is slowed. Is there a way to fix that instead of unplugging them before booting?


----------



## nick name

yugjooh said:


> When I boot my PC with external harddrives plugged in through the USB boot is slowed. Is there a way to fix that instead of unplugging them before booting?


I would try setting Windows as the number one Boot option under Boot Option Priorities and disable anything else in the list. Then go into Hard Drive BBS Priorities and USB Device Priorities and disable the drives in there. Those are my only guesses.


----------



## wolfgang91

wolfgang91 said:


> Thanks nick name. I'm gonna try to set PBO to Auto and see what happens, and then increase the offset if that doesn't solve the issue. Nothing more tweaked in the PBO menu apart from that, Max CPU Boost should be at its default setting.
> Cheers.


Hi, I've set PBO to auto and increased the offset and this has not solved the problem. Thanks anyway @_nick name_. I've noticed that when I have BIOS stock settings (with a negative offset of 0.0875) Idle voltage is around 1,038, but when I set PBO Fmax Enhancer to Enabled even with an positive offset of 0.012, Idle voltage is around 1.019 and I get those BSODs... Is there any way of increasing only that Idle voltage, apart from positive offset...? Something related to C-States perhaps? I don't know....
Thanks in advance.


----------



## nick name

wolfgang91 said:


> Hi, I've set PBO to auto and increased the offset and this has not solved the problem. Thanks anyway @_nick name_. I've noticed that when I have BIOS stock settings (with a negative offset of 0.0875) Idle voltage is around 1,038, but when I set PBO Fmax Enhancer to Enabled even with an positive offset of 0.012, Idle voltage is around 1.019 and I get those BSODs... Is there any way of increasing only that Idle voltage, apart from positive offset...? Something related to C-States perhaps? I don't know....
> Thanks in advance.


I would try Load Line Calibration Level 2 and then add that first step of voltage offset. If that doesn't work then try one more step of voltage offset. If that doesn't work then your CPU just may not be as good as you'd like it to be. 

You can always try the EDC bug if the Fmax enhancer isn't working out. It behaves very similarly.


----------



## yugjooh

nick name said:


> I would try setting Windows as the number one Boot option under Boot Option Priorities and disable anything else in the list. Then go into Hard Drive BBS Priorities and USB Device Priorities and disable the drives in there. Those are my only guesses.
> 
> View attachment 2523233


I tried having the boot manager be the only option and everything else disabled including in the HDD BBS and USB BBS, but still having time from boot to bios be 55 seconds compared to 20 without my external drives plugged in.


----------



## wolfgang91

nick name said:


> I would try Load Line Calibration Level 2 and then add that first step of voltage offset. If that doesn't work then try one more step of voltage offset. If that doesn't work then your CPU just may not be as good as you'd like it to be.
> 
> You can always try the EDC bug if the Fmax enhancer isn't working out. It behaves very similarly.


Thank you again. I'll try what you say and see what happens. My cpu was one of the first ones, so maybe the production process wasn't as refined as I would have liked...
Cheers


----------



## nick name

yugjooh said:


> I tried having the boot manager be the only option and everything else disabled including in the HDD BBS and USB BBS, but still having time from boot to bios be 55 seconds compared to 20 without my external drives plugged in.


It's something I've heard people with other PCs struggle with and I can't recall any solution so it might be worth a google to find what their solution was.


----------



## nick name

wolfgang91 said:


> Thank you again. I'll try what you say and see what happens. My cpu was one of the first ones, so maybe the production process wasn't as refined as I would have liked...
> Cheers


Fmax wasn't something that was stable for me before either and I thought it was the latest BIOS that fixed it, but I remembered there is one thing that I did with this latest setup that I hadn't before. I didn't mention it earlier because it doesn't seem like it would make a difference, but it was changing Power Supply Idle Control to Low Current Idle. In my head that doesn't seem like that would help, but it's the only variable I can remember being different from the times I tried using Fmax before. Also, my complete settings are listed several posts earlier in a Spoiler wrapper if you want to look at everything I have set.


----------



## nick name

wolfgang91 said:


> Thank you again. I'll try what you say and see what happens. My cpu was one of the first ones, so maybe the production process wasn't as refined as I would have liked...
> Cheers


I think trying to help you has jinxed me. I've had a couple restarts that point to nothing but insufficient CPU power.


----------



## wolfgang91

nick name said:


> I think trying to help you has jinxed me. I've had a couple restarts that point to nothing but insufficient CPU power.


I am sorry to hear that. I tried today with the high performance power plan and also had reboots, so I think it's not only because of the low voltage in IDLE with balanced power plan, as with the high performance plan the voltage doesn't drop in IDLE.

I think I will try just PBO without Fmax enhancer and see what happens.

Cheers.


----------



## nick name

wolfgang91 said:


> I am sorry to hear that. I tried today with the high performance power plan and also had reboots, so I think it's not only because of the low voltage in IDLE with balanced power plan, as with the high performance plan the voltage doesn't drop in IDLE.
> 
> I think I will try just PBO without Fmax enhancer and see what happens.
> 
> Cheers.


Try the EDC bug.


----------



## wolfgang91

nick name said:


> Try the EDC bug.


That's right, I forgot you mentioned it before.
Cheers.


----------



## BIRDMANv84

I’m using the same 4402 llc1 and 2 clicks of positive offset, I have cppc enabled and c states on and it’s been rock solid. I use 1usmus ryzen universal power plan, other than my memory timing and voltages I believe I only added a few weeks ago is I set the manual pbo values 160, 105, 160 for my 3900x. Before my ppt was 140 now it pulls 160 exactly and the temps are better than any auto or pbo I’ve used. I can post my bios settings later after work

*edit here is my BIOS settings


Spoiler: 3900xBIOS



Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
BCLK_Divider [Auto]
Performance Enhancer [Auto]
CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
Performance Bias [Aida/Geekbench]
Memory Frequency [DDR4-3600MHz]
FCLK Frequency [1800MHz]
Core Performance Boost [Auto]
SMT Mode [Auto]
Core VID [Auto]
CCX0 Ratio [Auto]
CCX1 Ratio [Auto]
CCX0 Ratio [Auto]
CCX1 Ratio [Auto]
TPU [Keep Current Settings]
PBO Fmax Enhancer [Enabled]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
Max CPU Boost Clock Override [Auto]
Platform Thermal Throttle Limit [Auto]
Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto]
DRAM CAS# Latency [14]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [15]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [14]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [14]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [28]
Trc [42]
TrrdS [4]
TrrdL [6]
Tfaw [16]
TwtrS [4]
TwtrL [12]
Twr [12]
Trcpage [Auto]
TrdrdScl [4]
TwrwrScl [4]
Trfc [288]
Trfc2 [192]
Trfc4 [132]
Tcwl [14]
Trtp [8]
Trdwr [8]
Twrrd [4]
TwrwrSc [1]
TwrwrSd [7]
TwrwrDd [7]
TrdrdSc [1]
TrdrdSd [5]
TrdrdDd [5]
Tcke [1]
ProcODT [43.6 ohm]
Cmd2T [1T]
Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
Power Down Enable [Disabled]
RttNom [Rtt_Nom Disable]
RttWr [RZQ/3]
RttPark [RZQ/1]
MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
MemCkeSetup [Auto]
MemCadBusClkDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [Auto]
CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 1]
CPU Current Capability [140%]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
CPU Voltage Frequency [500]
CPU Power Duty Control [Extreme]
CPU Power Phase Control [Extreme]
CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 3]
VDDSOC Current Capability [140%]
VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed VDDSOC Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
VDDSOC Phase Control [Extreme]
DRAM Current Capability [130%]
DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.42000]
Force OC Mode Disable [Disabled]
VTTDDR Voltage [Auto]
VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
VDDP Voltage [Auto]
1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
PLL reference voltage [Auto]
T Offset [Auto]
Sense MI Skew [Auto]
Sense MI Offset [Auto]
Promontory presence [Auto]
Clock Amplitude [Auto]
CLDO VDDP Voltage [Auto]
CPU Core Voltage [Offset mode]
CPU Offset Mode Sign [+]
- CPU Core Voltage Offset [0.01250]
CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
- VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.10625]
DRAM Voltage [1.41000]
VDDG CCD Voltage Control [Auto]
VDDG IOD Voltage Control [Auto]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
AMD CPU fTPM [Disable]
Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
PSS Support [Auto]
NX Mode [Enabled]
SVM Mode [Disabled]
Onboard LED [Enabled]
Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
SATA Mode Selection [AHCI]
NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
SMART Self Test [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
PCIEX16_1 Bandwidth [Auto Mode]
PCIEX16_2 Bandwidth [Auto Mode]
M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
PCIEX8/X4_2 Mode [Auto]
PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
SB Link Mode [Auto]
Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
When system is in working state [On]
When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [On]
Intel LAN Controller [Disabled]
Intel LAN OPROM [Auto]
ErP Ready [Disabled]
Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
Power On By RTC [Disabled]
Above 4G Decoding [Disabled]
SR-IOV Support [Disabled]
Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
PNY USB 2.0 FD PMAP [Auto]
USB Device Enable [Enabled]
U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
U31G1_5 [Enabled]
U31G1_6 [Enabled]
U31G1_7 [Enabled]
U31G1_8 [Enabled]
U31G1_9 [Enabled]
U31G1_10 [Enabled]
USB11 [Enabled]
USB12 [Enabled]
USB13 [Enabled]
USB14 [Enabled]
USB15 [Enabled]
Network Stack [Disabled]
Device [SPCC Solid State Disk]
CPU Temperature [Monitor]
MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
PCH Temperature [Monitor]
T Sensor 1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
5V Voltage [Monitor]
12V Voltage [Monitor]
CPU Fan Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
CPU Fan Step Up/Down [0 sec]
CPU Fan Speed Low Limit [Ignore]
CPU Fan Profile [Turbo]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 1 Step Up/Down [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Turbo]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 2 Step Up/Down [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 3 Step Up/Down [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Turbo]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Source [CPU]
High Amp Fan Step Up/Down [0 sec]
HAMP Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
HAMP Fan Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
Fast Boot [Disabled]
AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
Boot Logo Display [Enabled]
POST Delay Time [3 sec]
Bootup NumLock State [On]
Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
Launch CSM [Enabled]
Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
OS Type [Other OS]
Setup Animator [Disabled]
ASUS Grid Install Service [Disabled]
Load from Profile [3]
Profile Name [fmax3600water]
Save to Profile [4]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
BCLK Frequency [Auto]
CPU Ratio [Auto]
DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A2]
Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
CPU Frequency [0]
CPU Voltage [0]
SMT Control [Auto]
Overclock [Auto]
Power Down Enable [Auto]
Cmd2T [Auto]
Gear Down Mode [Auto]
CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
Infinity Fabric Frequency and Dividers [Auto]
ECO Mode [Disable]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Advanced]
PBO Limits [Manual]
PPT Limit [W] [160]
TDC Limit [A] [105]
EDC Limit [A] [160]
Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [Auto]
Max CPU Boost Clock Override [0MHz]
Platform Thermal Throttle Limit [Auto]
LN2 Mode [Auto]
SoC Voltage [0]
SoC/Uncore OC Mode [Enabled ]
VDDP Voltage Control [Manual]
VDDP Voltage Control [900]
VDDG Voltage Control [Manual]
VDDG CCD Voltage Control [950]
VDDG IOD Voltage Control [1000]
VDDIO Voltage Control [Disabled]
VTT Voltage Control [Disabled]
NUMA nodes per socket [Auto]
LCLK DPM [Auto]
LCLK DPM Enhanced PCIe Detection [Auto]
Custom Pstate0 [Auto]
L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
Core Watchdog Timer Enable [Auto]
Core Performance Boost [Auto]
Global C-state Control [Enabled]
Power Supply Idle Control [Auto]
SEV ASID Count [Auto]
SEV-ES ASID Space Limit Control [Auto]
Streaming Stores Control [Auto]
Local APIC Mode [Auto]
ACPI _CST C1 Declaration [Auto]
MCA error thresh enable [Auto]
PPIN Opt-in [Auto]
Indirect Branch Prediction Speculation [Auto]
DRAM scrub time [Auto]
Poison scrubber control [Auto]
Redirect scrubber control [Auto]
Redirect scrubber limit [Auto]
NUMA nodes per socket [Auto]
Memory interleaving [Auto]
Memory interleaving size [Auto]
1TB remap [Auto]
DRAM map inversion [Auto]
ACPI SRAT L3 Cache As NUMA Domain [Auto]
ACPI SLIT Distance Control [Auto]
ACPI SLIT remote relative distance [Auto]
GMI encryption control [Auto]
xGMI encryption control [Auto]
CAKE CRC perf bounds Control [Auto]
4-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
3-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
xGMI TXEQ Mode [Auto]
PcsCG control [Auto]
Disable DF to external downstream IP SyncFloodPropagation [Auto]
Disable DF sync flood propagation [Auto]
CC6 memory region encryption [Auto]
Memory Clear [Auto]
Overclock [Auto]
Power Down Enable [Auto]
Disable Burst/Postponed Refresh [Auto]
DRAM Maximum Activate Count [Auto]
Cmd2T [Auto]
Gear Down Mode [Auto]
CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
Data Poisoning [Auto]
DRAM Post Package Repair [Default]
RCD Parity [Auto]
DRAM Address Command Parity Retry [Auto]
Write CRC Enable [Auto]
DRAM Write CRC Enable and Retry Limit [Auto]
Disable Memory Error Injection [True]
DRAM ECC Symbol Size [Auto]
DRAM ECC Enable [Auto]
DRAM UECC Retry [Auto]
TSME [Auto]
Data Scramble [Auto]
DFE Read Training [Enable]
FFE Write Training [Enable]
PMU Pattern Bits Control [Manual]
PMU Pattern Bits [a]
MR6VrefDQ Control [Auto]
CPU Vref Training Seed Control [Auto]
Chipselect Interleaving [Auto]
BankGroupSwap [Disabled]
BankGroupSwapAlt [Enabled]
Address Hash Bank 2 ColXor [3f8]
Address Hash Bank [Auto]
Address Hash CS [Auto]
Address Hash Rm [Auto]
SPD Read Optimization [Enabled]
MBIST Enable [Disabled]
Pattern Select [PRBS]
Pattern Length(MTS) [3]
Aggressor Channel [1 Aggressor Channel]
Aggressor Static Lane Control [Disabled]
Target Static Lane Control [Disabled]
Worst Case Margin Granularity [Per Chip Select]
Read Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
Read Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
Write Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
Write Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
IOMMU [Auto]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [Auto]
FCLK Frequency [Auto]
SOC OVERCLOCK VID [0]
UCLK DIV1 MODE [UCLK==MEMCLK]
VDDP Voltage Control [Auto]
VDDG Voltage Control [Auto]
SoC/Uncore OC Mode [Auto]
LN2 Mode [Auto]
ACS Enable [Auto]
PCIe ARI Support [Auto]
PCIe ARI Enumeration [Auto]
PCIe Ten Bit Tag Support [Auto]
Max Voltage Offset [Auto]
cTDP Control [Auto]
EfficiencyModeEn [Auto]
Package Power Limit Control [Auto]
APBDIS [Auto]
DF Cstates [Auto]
CPPC [Enabled]
CPPC Preferred Cores [Auto]
NBIO DPM Control [Auto]
Early Link Speed [Auto]
Presence Detect Select mode [Auto]
Preferred IO [Auto]
CV test [Auto]
Loopback Mode [Auto]
SRIS [Auto]


----------



## wolfgang91

BIRDMANv84 said:


> I’m using the same 4402 llc1 and 2 clicks of positive offset, I have cppc enabled and c states on and it’s been rock solid. I use 1usmus ryzen universal power plan, other than my memory timing and voltages I believe I only added a few weeks ago is I set the manual pbo values 160, 105, 160 for my 3900x. Before my ppt was 140 now it pulls 160 exactly and the temps are better than any auto or pbo I’ve used. I can post my bios settings later after work
> 
> *edit here is my BIOS settings
> 
> 
> Spoiler: 3900xBIOS
> 
> 
> 
> Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
> BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
> BCLK_Divider [Auto]
> Performance Enhancer [Auto]
> CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
> Performance Bias [Aida/Geekbench]
> Memory Frequency [DDR4-3600MHz]
> FCLK Frequency [1800MHz]
> Core Performance Boost [Auto]
> SMT Mode [Auto]
> Core VID [Auto]
> CCX0 Ratio [Auto]
> CCX1 Ratio [Auto]
> CCX0 Ratio [Auto]
> CCX1 Ratio [Auto]
> TPU [Keep Current Settings]
> PBO Fmax Enhancer [Enabled]
> Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
> Max CPU Boost Clock Override [Auto]
> Platform Thermal Throttle Limit [Auto]
> Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto]
> DRAM CAS# Latency [14]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [15]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [14]
> DRAM RAS# PRE Time [14]
> DRAM RAS# ACT Time [28]
> Trc [42]
> TrrdS [4]
> TrrdL [6]
> Tfaw [16]
> TwtrS [4]
> TwtrL [12]
> Twr [12]
> Trcpage [Auto]
> TrdrdScl [4]
> TwrwrScl [4]
> Trfc [288]
> Trfc2 [192]
> Trfc4 [132]
> Tcwl [14]
> Trtp [8]
> Trdwr [8]
> Twrrd [4]
> TwrwrSc [1]
> TwrwrSd [7]
> TwrwrDd [7]
> TrdrdSc [1]
> TrdrdSd [5]
> TrdrdDd [5]
> Tcke [1]
> ProcODT [43.6 ohm]
> Cmd2T [1T]
> Gear Down Mode [Enabled]
> Power Down Enable [Disabled]
> RttNom [Rtt_Nom Disable]
> RttWr [RZQ/3]
> RttPark [RZQ/1]
> MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
> MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
> MemCkeSetup [Auto]
> MemCadBusClkDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [Auto]
> CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 1]
> CPU Current Capability [140%]
> CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
> CPU Voltage Frequency [500]
> CPU Power Duty Control [Extreme]
> CPU Power Phase Control [Extreme]
> CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
> VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Level 3]
> VDDSOC Current Capability [140%]
> VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Manual]
> Fixed VDDSOC Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
> VDDSOC Phase Control [Extreme]
> DRAM Current Capability [130%]
> DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
> DRAM Switching Frequency [Manual]
> Fixed DRAM Switching Frequency(KHz) [500]
> DRAM VBoot Voltage [1.42000]
> Force OC Mode Disable [Disabled]
> VTTDDR Voltage [Auto]
> VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
> VDDP Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
> CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
> 2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
> PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
> PLL reference voltage [Auto]
> T Offset [Auto]
> Sense MI Skew [Auto]
> Sense MI Offset [Auto]
> Promontory presence [Auto]
> Clock Amplitude [Auto]
> CLDO VDDP Voltage [Auto]
> CPU Core Voltage [Offset mode]
> CPU Offset Mode Sign [+]
> - CPU Core Voltage Offset [0.01250]
> CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
> - VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.10625]
> DRAM Voltage [1.41000]
> VDDG CCD Voltage Control [Auto]
> VDDG IOD Voltage Control [Auto]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> 1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
> AMD CPU fTPM [Disable]
> Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
> PSS Support [Auto]
> NX Mode [Enabled]
> SVM Mode [Disabled]
> Onboard LED [Enabled]
> Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
> SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
> SATA Mode Selection [AHCI]
> NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
> SMART Self Test [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
> PCIEX16_1 Bandwidth [Auto Mode]
> PCIEX16_2 Bandwidth [Auto Mode]
> M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
> PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
> PCIEX8/X4_2 Mode [Auto]
> PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
> M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
> M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
> SB Link Mode [Auto]
> Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
> USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
> When system is in working state [On]
> When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [On]
> Intel LAN Controller [Disabled]
> Intel LAN OPROM [Auto]
> ErP Ready [Disabled]
> Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
> Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
> Power On By RTC [Disabled]
> Above 4G Decoding [Disabled]
> SR-IOV Support [Disabled]
> Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
> XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
> PNY USB 2.0 FD PMAP [Auto]
> USB Device Enable [Enabled]
> U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
> U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
> U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> U31G1_5 [Enabled]
> U31G1_6 [Enabled]
> U31G1_7 [Enabled]
> U31G1_8 [Enabled]
> U31G1_9 [Enabled]
> U31G1_10 [Enabled]
> USB11 [Enabled]
> USB12 [Enabled]
> USB13 [Enabled]
> USB14 [Enabled]
> USB15 [Enabled]
> Network Stack [Disabled]
> Device [SPCC Solid State Disk]
> CPU Temperature [Monitor]
> MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
> PCH Temperature [Monitor]
> T Sensor 1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
> HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
> CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
> AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
> W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
> W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
> 3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
> 5V Voltage [Monitor]
> 12V Voltage [Monitor]
> CPU Fan Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> CPU Fan Step Up/Down [0 sec]
> CPU Fan Speed Low Limit [Ignore]
> CPU Fan Profile [Turbo]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 1 Step Up/Down [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Turbo]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 2 Step Up/Down [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 3 Step Up/Down [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Turbo]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> High Amp Fan Step Up/Down [0 sec]
> HAMP Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> HAMP Fan Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
> AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
> Fast Boot [Disabled]
> AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
> Boot Logo Display [Enabled]
> POST Delay Time [3 sec]
> Bootup NumLock State [On]
> Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
> Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
> Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
> Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
> Launch CSM [Enabled]
> Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
> Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
> Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
> Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
> OS Type [Other OS]
> Setup Animator [Disabled]
> ASUS Grid Install Service [Disabled]
> Load from Profile [3]
> Profile Name [fmax3600water]
> Save to Profile [4]
> CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
> VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> BCLK Frequency [Auto]
> CPU Ratio [Auto]
> DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A2]
> Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
> CPU Frequency [0]
> CPU Voltage [0]
> SMT Control [Auto]
> Overclock [Auto]
> Power Down Enable [Auto]
> Cmd2T [Auto]
> Gear Down Mode [Auto]
> CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
> CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
> Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
> Infinity Fabric Frequency and Dividers [Auto]
> ECO Mode [Disable]
> Precision Boost Overdrive [Advanced]
> PBO Limits [Manual]
> PPT Limit [W] [160]
> TDC Limit [A] [105]
> EDC Limit [A] [160]
> Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [Auto]
> Max CPU Boost Clock Override [0MHz]
> Platform Thermal Throttle Limit [Auto]
> LN2 Mode [Auto]
> SoC Voltage [0]
> SoC/Uncore OC Mode [Enabled ]
> VDDP Voltage Control [Manual]
> VDDP Voltage Control [900]
> VDDG Voltage Control [Manual]
> VDDG CCD Voltage Control [950]
> VDDG IOD Voltage Control [1000]
> VDDIO Voltage Control [Disabled]
> VTT Voltage Control [Disabled]
> NUMA nodes per socket [Auto]
> LCLK DPM [Auto]
> LCLK DPM Enhanced PCIe Detection [Auto]
> Custom Pstate0 [Auto]
> L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
> L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
> Core Watchdog Timer Enable [Auto]
> Core Performance Boost [Auto]
> Global C-state Control [Enabled]
> Power Supply Idle Control [Auto]
> SEV ASID Count [Auto]
> SEV-ES ASID Space Limit Control [Auto]
> Streaming Stores Control [Auto]
> Local APIC Mode [Auto]
> ACPI _CST C1 Declaration [Auto]
> MCA error thresh enable [Auto]
> PPIN Opt-in [Auto]
> Indirect Branch Prediction Speculation [Auto]
> DRAM scrub time [Auto]
> Poison scrubber control [Auto]
> Redirect scrubber control [Auto]
> Redirect scrubber limit [Auto]
> NUMA nodes per socket [Auto]
> Memory interleaving [Auto]
> Memory interleaving size [Auto]
> 1TB remap [Auto]
> DRAM map inversion [Auto]
> ACPI SRAT L3 Cache As NUMA Domain [Auto]
> ACPI SLIT Distance Control [Auto]
> ACPI SLIT remote relative distance [Auto]
> GMI encryption control [Auto]
> xGMI encryption control [Auto]
> CAKE CRC perf bounds Control [Auto]
> 4-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
> 3-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
> xGMI TXEQ Mode [Auto]
> PcsCG control [Auto]
> Disable DF to external downstream IP SyncFloodPropagation [Auto]
> Disable DF sync flood propagation [Auto]
> CC6 memory region encryption [Auto]
> Memory Clear [Auto]
> Overclock [Auto]
> Power Down Enable [Auto]
> Disable Burst/Postponed Refresh [Auto]
> DRAM Maximum Activate Count [Auto]
> Cmd2T [Auto]
> Gear Down Mode [Auto]
> CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
> CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
> Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
> Data Poisoning [Auto]
> DRAM Post Package Repair [Default]
> RCD Parity [Auto]
> DRAM Address Command Parity Retry [Auto]
> Write CRC Enable [Auto]
> DRAM Write CRC Enable and Retry Limit [Auto]
> Disable Memory Error Injection [True]
> DRAM ECC Symbol Size [Auto]
> DRAM ECC Enable [Auto]
> DRAM UECC Retry [Auto]
> TSME [Auto]
> Data Scramble [Auto]
> DFE Read Training [Enable]
> FFE Write Training [Enable]
> PMU Pattern Bits Control [Manual]
> PMU Pattern Bits [a]
> MR6VrefDQ Control [Auto]
> CPU Vref Training Seed Control [Auto]
> Chipselect Interleaving [Auto]
> BankGroupSwap [Disabled]
> BankGroupSwapAlt [Enabled]
> Address Hash Bank 2 ColXor [3f8]
> Address Hash Bank [Auto]
> Address Hash CS [Auto]
> Address Hash Rm [Auto]
> SPD Read Optimization [Enabled]
> MBIST Enable [Disabled]
> Pattern Select [PRBS]
> Pattern Length(MTS) [3]
> Aggressor Channel [1 Aggressor Channel]
> Aggressor Static Lane Control [Disabled]
> Target Static Lane Control [Disabled]
> Worst Case Margin Granularity [Per Chip Select]
> Read Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
> Read Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
> Write Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
> Write Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
> IOMMU [Auto]
> Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
> Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [Auto]
> FCLK Frequency [Auto]
> SOC OVERCLOCK VID [0]
> UCLK DIV1 MODE [UCLK==MEMCLK]
> VDDP Voltage Control [Auto]
> VDDG Voltage Control [Auto]
> SoC/Uncore OC Mode [Auto]
> LN2 Mode [Auto]
> ACS Enable [Auto]
> PCIe ARI Support [Auto]
> PCIe ARI Enumeration [Auto]
> PCIe Ten Bit Tag Support [Auto]
> Max Voltage Offset [Auto]
> cTDP Control [Auto]
> EfficiencyModeEn [Auto]
> Package Power Limit Control [Auto]
> APBDIS [Auto]
> DF Cstates [Auto]
> CPPC [Enabled]
> CPPC Preferred Cores [Auto]
> NBIO DPM Control [Auto]
> Early Link Speed [Auto]
> Presence Detect Select mode [Auto]
> Preferred IO [Auto]
> CV test [Auto]
> Loopback Mode [Auto]
> SRIS [Auto]


Hi, and thank you for the recommendations. I've tried your configuration (not everything, just the most important: positive offset, cppc, c-states, 1usmus power plan and PBO values) and it's really good. For now the IDLE problems seem to have disappeared. On the other hand, now I'm noticing a lack of voltage on load (Premiere has crashed while rendering a video), so I've raised the LLC to 2. At the moment the turbos are better than ever and I've got the highest scores in CB20 (both multi and single). Temperatures not bad.
Cheers.


----------



## nick name

wolfgang91 said:


> Hi, and thank you for the recommendations. I've tried your configuration (not everything, just the most important: positive offset, cppc, c-states, 1usmus power plan and PBO values) and it's really good. For now the IDLE problems seem to have disappeared. On the other hand, now I'm noticing a lack of voltage on load (Premiere has crashed while rendering a video), so I've raised the LLC to 2. At the moment the turbos are better than ever and I've got the highest scores in CB20 (both multi and single). Temperatures not bad.
> Cheers.


Ayyy. That looks pretty good. 

One thing I failed to mention and I don't know if you saw, but I have SenseMi Skew set to Disabled. I'm not sure it does anything anymore, but I figured I should mention it.

Edit:
Oh man I completely forgot about Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar also. Maybe that's worth exploring too as it seems to add more voltage.


----------



## wolfgang91

nick name said:


> Ayyy. That looks pretty good.
> 
> One thing I failed to mention and I don't know if you saw, but I have SenseMi Skew set to Disabled. I'm not sure it does anything anymore, but I figured I should mention it.
> 
> Edit:
> Oh man I completely forgot about Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar also. Maybe that's worth exploring too as it seems to add more voltage.
> 
> View attachment 2523786


Hi _nick name_ and thanks again for this and all the previous info. I think the main changes have come since I installed the 1usmus power plan, because my IDLE problems (reboots & BSODs) seem to have disappeared. When installing the 1usmus power plan I also configured the following in BIOS:

Global C-state Control = Enabled
Power Supply Idle Control = Low Current Idle _(as you advised me)_
CPPC = Enabled
CPPC Preferred Cores = Enabled
I don't really know if this is due to the power plan or the BIOS settings, but it seems to work fine. Now I've got higher voltage peaks on IDLE (1,48v - 1,5v)

Cheers.



Spoiler: BIOS Settings



[2021/09/05 19:22:46]
Ai Overclock Tuner [D.O.C.P. Standard]
D.O.C.P. [D.O.C.P DDR4-3603 16-16-16-36-1.35V]
BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
BCLK_Divider [Auto]
Performance Enhancer [Auto]
CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
Performance Bias [Auto]
Memory Frequency [DDR4-3600MHz]
FCLK Frequency [Auto]
Core Performance Boost [Auto]
SMT Mode [Auto]
Core VID [Auto]
CCX0 Ratio [Auto]
CCX1 Ratio [Auto]
CCX0 Ratio [Auto]
CCX1 Ratio [Auto]
TPU [Keep Current Settings]
PBO Fmax Enhancer [Enabled]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
Max CPU Boost Clock Override [Auto]
Platform Thermal Throttle Limit [Auto]
Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto]
DRAM CAS# Latency [16]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [16]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [16]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [16]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [36]
Trc [Auto]
TrrdS [Auto]
TrrdL [Auto]
Tfaw [Auto]
TwtrS [Auto]
TwtrL [Auto]
Twr [Auto]
Trcpage [Auto]
TrdrdScl [Auto]
TwrwrScl [Auto]
Trfc [Auto]
Trfc2 [Auto]
Trfc4 [Auto]
Tcwl [Auto]
Trtp [Auto]
Trdwr [Auto]
Twrrd [Auto]
TwrwrSc [Auto]
TwrwrSd [Auto]
TwrwrDd [Auto]
TrdrdSc [Auto]
TrdrdSd [Auto]
TrdrdDd [Auto]
Tcke [Auto]
ProcODT [Auto]
Cmd2T [Auto]
Gear Down Mode [Auto]
Power Down Enable [Auto]
RttNom [Auto]
RttWr [Auto]
RttPark [Auto]
MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
MemCkeSetup [Auto]
MemCadBusClkDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [Auto]
CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 2]
CPU Current Capability [140%]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
CPU Voltage Frequency [500]
CPU Power Duty Control [Extreme]
CPU Power Phase Control [Extreme]
CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Auto]
VDDSOC Current Capability [Auto]
VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Auto]
VDDSOC Phase Control [Auto]
DRAM Current Capability [100%]
DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
DRAM Switching Frequency [Auto]
DRAM VBoot Voltage [Auto]
Force OC Mode Disable [Disabled]
VTTDDR Voltage [Auto]
VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
VDDP Voltage [Auto]
1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
PLL reference voltage [Auto]
T Offset [Auto]
Sense MI Skew [Auto]
Sense MI Offset [Auto]
Promontory presence [Auto]
Clock Amplitude [Auto]
CLDO VDDP Voltage [0.950]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
- VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.05000]
DRAM Voltage [1.35000]
VDDG CCD Voltage Control [1.000]
VDDG IOD Voltage Control [1.000]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
AMD CPU fTPM [Disable]
Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
PSS Support [Auto]
NX Mode [Enabled]
SVM Mode [Disabled]
Onboard LED [Enabled]
Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
SATA Mode Selection [AHCI]
NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
SMART Self Test [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
HD Audio Controller [Disabled]
PCIEX16_1 Bandwidth [Auto Mode]
PCIEX16_2 Bandwidth [Auto Mode]
M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
PCIEX8/X4_2 Mode [Auto]
PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
SB Link Mode [Auto]
Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
When system is in working state [On]
When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [On]
Intel LAN Controller [Disabled]
Intel LAN OPROM [Auto]
Wi-Fi Controller [Disabled]
Bluetooth Controller [Disabled]
ErP Ready [Disabled]
Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
Power On By RTC [Disabled]
Above 4G Decoding [Disabled]
SR-IOV Support [Disabled]
Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
Flash [Auto]
SanDisk [Auto]
USB Device Enable [Enabled]
U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
U31G1_5 [Enabled]
U31G1_6 [Enabled]
U31G1_7 [Enabled]
U31G1_8 [Enabled]
U31G1_9 [Enabled]
U31G1_10 [Enabled]
USB11 [Enabled]
USB12 [Enabled]
USB13 [Enabled]
USB14 [Enabled]
USB15 [Enabled]
Network Stack [Disabled]
Device [Samsung SSD 850 EVO 500GB]
CPU Temperature [Monitor]
MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
PCH Temperature [Monitor]
T Sensor 1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
5V Voltage [Monitor]
12V Voltage [Monitor]
CPU Fan Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
CPU Fan Step Up/Down [0 sec]
CPU Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
CPU Fan Profile [Manual]
CPU Fan Upper Temperature [70]
CPU Fan Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
CPU Fan Middle Temperature [65]
CPU Fan Middle Duty Cycle (%) [40]
CPU Fan Lower Temperature [55]
CPU Fan Min Duty Cycle (%) [28]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 1 Step Up/Down [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Manual]
Chassis Fan 1 Upper Temperature [70]
Chassis Fan 1 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Chassis Fan 1 Middle Temperature [65]
Chassis Fan 1 Middle Duty Cycle (%) [60]
Chassis Fan 1 Lower Temperature [55]
Chassis Fan 1 Min Duty Cycle (%) [46]
Allow Fan Stop [Disabled]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 2 Step Up/Down [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Manual]
Chassis Fan 2 Upper Temperature [70]
Chassis Fan 2 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Chassis Fan 2 Middle Temperature [65]
Chassis Fan 2 Middle Duty Cycle (%) [40]
Chassis Fan 2 Lower Temperature [55]
Chassis Fan 2 Min Duty Cycle (%) [28]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 3 Step Up/Down [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Manual]
Chassis Fan 3 Upper Temperature [70]
Chassis Fan 3 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Chassis Fan 3 Middle Temperature [65]
Chassis Fan 3 Middle Duty Cycle (%) [40]
Chassis Fan 3 Lower Temperature [55]
Chassis Fan 3 Min Duty Cycle (%) [28]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
Fast Boot [Enabled]
NVMe Support [Enabled]
Next Boot after AC Power Loss [Normal Boot]
AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
Boot Logo Display [Enabled]
POST Delay Time [3 sec]
Bootup NumLock State [On]
Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
Launch CSM [Enabled]
Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
OS Type [Other OS]
Setup Animator [Disabled]
ASUS Grid Install Service [Enabled]
Profile Name []
Save to Profile [1]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
BCLK Frequency [Auto]
CPU Ratio [Auto]
DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A2]
Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
CPU Frequency [0]
CPU Voltage [0]
SMT Control [Auto]
Overclock [Auto]
Power Down Enable [Auto]
Cmd2T [Auto]
Gear Down Mode [Auto]
CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
Infinity Fabric Frequency and Dividers [Auto]
ECO Mode [Disable]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Advanced]
PBO Limits [Manual]
PPT Limit [W] [160]
TDC Limit [A] [105]
EDC Limit [A] [160]
Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [Auto]
Max CPU Boost Clock Override [0MHz]
Platform Thermal Throttle Limit [Auto]
LN2 Mode [Auto]
SoC/Uncore OC Mode [Disabled]
VDDP Voltage Control [Auto]
VDDG Voltage Control [Auto]
VDDIO Voltage Control [Disabled]
VTT Voltage Control [Disabled]
NUMA nodes per socket [Auto]
LCLK DPM [Auto]
LCLK DPM Enhanced PCIe Detection [Auto]
Custom Pstate0 [Auto]
L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
Core Watchdog Timer Enable [Auto]
Core Performance Boost [Auto]
Global C-state Control [Enabled]
Power Supply Idle Control [Low Current Idle]
SEV ASID Count [Auto]
SEV-ES ASID Space Limit Control [Auto]
Streaming Stores Control [Auto]
Local APIC Mode [Auto]
ACPI _CST C1 Declaration [Auto]
MCA error thresh enable [Auto]
PPIN Opt-in [Auto]
Indirect Branch Prediction Speculation [Auto]
DRAM scrub time [Auto]
Poison scrubber control [Auto]
Redirect scrubber control [Auto]
Redirect scrubber limit [Auto]
NUMA nodes per socket [Auto]
Memory interleaving [Auto]
Memory interleaving size [Auto]
1TB remap [Auto]
DRAM map inversion [Auto]
ACPI SRAT L3 Cache As NUMA Domain [Auto]
ACPI SLIT Distance Control [Auto]
ACPI SLIT remote relative distance [Auto]
GMI encryption control [Auto]
xGMI encryption control [Auto]
CAKE CRC perf bounds Control [Auto]
4-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
3-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
xGMI TXEQ Mode [Auto]
PcsCG control [Auto]
Disable DF to external downstream IP SyncFloodPropagation [Auto]
Disable DF sync flood propagation [Auto]
CC6 memory region encryption [Auto]
Memory Clear [Auto]
Overclock [Auto]
Power Down Enable [Auto]
Disable Burst/Postponed Refresh [Auto]
DRAM Maximum Activate Count [Auto]
Cmd2T [Auto]
Gear Down Mode [Auto]
CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
Data Poisoning [Auto]
DRAM Post Package Repair [Default]
RCD Parity [Auto]
DRAM Address Command Parity Retry [Auto]
Write CRC Enable [Auto]
DRAM Write CRC Enable and Retry Limit [Auto]
Disable Memory Error Injection [True]
DRAM ECC Symbol Size [Auto]
DRAM ECC Enable [Auto]
DRAM UECC Retry [Auto]
TSME [Auto]
Data Scramble [Auto]
DFE Read Training [Auto]
FFE Write Training [Auto]
PMU Pattern Bits Control [Auto]
MR6VrefDQ Control [Auto]
CPU Vref Training Seed Control [Auto]
Chipselect Interleaving [Auto]
BankGroupSwap [Auto]
BankGroupSwapAlt [Auto]
Address Hash Bank [Auto]
Address Hash CS [Auto]
Address Hash Rm [Auto]
SPD Read Optimization [Enabled]
MBIST Enable [Disabled]
Pattern Select [PRBS]
Pattern Length(MTS) [3]
Aggressor Channel [1 Aggressor Channel]
Aggressor Static Lane Control [Disabled]
Target Static Lane Control [Disabled]
Worst Case Margin Granularity [Per Chip Select]
Read Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
Read Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
Write Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
Write Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
IOMMU [Auto]
Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [Auto]
FCLK Frequency [Auto]
SOC OVERCLOCK VID [0]
UCLK DIV1 MODE [Auto]
VDDP Voltage Control [Auto]
VDDG Voltage Control [Auto]
SoC/Uncore OC Mode [Auto]
LN2 Mode [Auto]
ACS Enable [Auto]
PCIe ARI Support [Auto]
PCIe ARI Enumeration [Auto]
PCIe Ten Bit Tag Support [Auto]
Max Voltage Offset [Auto]
cTDP Control [Auto]
EfficiencyModeEn [Auto]
Package Power Limit Control [Auto]
APBDIS [Auto]
DF Cstates [Auto]
CPPC [Enabled]
CPPC Preferred Cores [Enabled]
NBIO DPM Control [Auto]
Early Link Speed [Auto]
Presence Detect Select mode [Auto]
Preferred IO [Auto]
CV test [Auto]
Loopback Mode [Auto]
SRIS [Auto]


----------



## nick name

wolfgang91 said:


> Hi _nick name_ and thanks again for this and all the previous info. I think the main changes have come since I installed the 1usmus power plan, because my IDLE problems (reboots & BSODs) seem to have disappeared. When installing the 1usmus power plan I also configured the following in BIOS:
> 
> Global C-state Control = Enabled
> Power Supply Idle Control = Low Current Idle _(as you advised me)_
> CPPC = Enabled
> CPPC Preferred Cores = Enabled
> I don't really know if this is due to the power plan or the BIOS settings, but it seems to work fine. Now I've got higher voltage peaks on IDLE (1,48v - 1,5v)
> 
> Cheers.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: BIOS Settings
> 
> 
> 
> [2021/09/05 19:22:46]
> Ai Overclock Tuner [D.O.C.P. Standard]
> D.O.C.P. [D.O.C.P DDR4-3603 16-16-16-36-1.35V]
> BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
> BCLK_Divider [Auto]
> Performance Enhancer [Auto]
> CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
> Performance Bias [Auto]
> Memory Frequency [DDR4-3600MHz]
> FCLK Frequency [Auto]
> Core Performance Boost [Auto]
> SMT Mode [Auto]
> Core VID [Auto]
> CCX0 Ratio [Auto]
> CCX1 Ratio [Auto]
> CCX0 Ratio [Auto]
> CCX1 Ratio [Auto]
> TPU [Keep Current Settings]
> PBO Fmax Enhancer [Enabled]
> Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
> Max CPU Boost Clock Override [Auto]
> Platform Thermal Throttle Limit [Auto]
> Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto]
> DRAM CAS# Latency [16]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [16]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [16]
> DRAM RAS# PRE Time [16]
> DRAM RAS# ACT Time [36]
> Trc [Auto]
> TrrdS [Auto]
> TrrdL [Auto]
> Tfaw [Auto]
> TwtrS [Auto]
> TwtrL [Auto]
> Twr [Auto]
> Trcpage [Auto]
> TrdrdScl [Auto]
> TwrwrScl [Auto]
> Trfc [Auto]
> Trfc2 [Auto]
> Trfc4 [Auto]
> Tcwl [Auto]
> Trtp [Auto]
> Trdwr [Auto]
> Twrrd [Auto]
> TwrwrSc [Auto]
> TwrwrSd [Auto]
> TwrwrDd [Auto]
> TrdrdSc [Auto]
> TrdrdSd [Auto]
> TrdrdDd [Auto]
> Tcke [Auto]
> ProcODT [Auto]
> Cmd2T [Auto]
> Gear Down Mode [Auto]
> Power Down Enable [Auto]
> RttNom [Auto]
> RttWr [Auto]
> RttPark [Auto]
> MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
> MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
> MemCkeSetup [Auto]
> MemCadBusClkDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [Auto]
> CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 2]
> CPU Current Capability [140%]
> CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Manual]
> CPU Voltage Frequency [500]
> CPU Power Duty Control [Extreme]
> CPU Power Phase Control [Extreme]
> CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
> VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Auto]
> VDDSOC Current Capability [Auto]
> VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Auto]
> VDDSOC Phase Control [Auto]
> DRAM Current Capability [100%]
> DRAM Power Phase Control [Extreme]
> DRAM Switching Frequency [Auto]
> DRAM VBoot Voltage [Auto]
> Force OC Mode Disable [Disabled]
> VTTDDR Voltage [Auto]
> VPP_MEM Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
> VDDP Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
> CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
> 2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
> PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
> PLL reference voltage [Auto]
> T Offset [Auto]
> Sense MI Skew [Auto]
> Sense MI Offset [Auto]
> Promontory presence [Auto]
> Clock Amplitude [Auto]
> CLDO VDDP Voltage [0.950]
> CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
> CPU SOC Voltage [Manual mode]
> - VDDSOC Voltage Override [1.05000]
> DRAM Voltage [1.35000]
> VDDG CCD Voltage Control [1.000]
> VDDG IOD Voltage Control [1.000]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> 1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
> AMD CPU fTPM [Disable]
> Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
> PSS Support [Auto]
> NX Mode [Enabled]
> SVM Mode [Disabled]
> Onboard LED [Enabled]
> Q-Code LED Function [Enabled]
> SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
> SATA Mode Selection [AHCI]
> NVMe RAID mode [Disabled]
> SMART Self Test [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> HD Audio Controller [Disabled]
> PCIEX16_1 Bandwidth [Auto Mode]
> PCIEX16_2 Bandwidth [Auto Mode]
> M.2_2 PCIe Bandwidth Configuration [Auto]
> PCIEX16/X8_1 Mode [Auto]
> PCIEX8/X4_2 Mode [Auto]
> PCIEX4_3 Mode [Auto]
> M.2_1 Link Mode [Auto]
> M.2_2 Link Mode [Auto]
> SB Link Mode [Auto]
> Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
> USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
> When system is in working state [On]
> When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [On]
> Intel LAN Controller [Disabled]
> Intel LAN OPROM [Auto]
> Wi-Fi Controller [Disabled]
> Bluetooth Controller [Disabled]
> ErP Ready [Disabled]
> Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
> Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
> Power On By RTC [Disabled]
> Above 4G Decoding [Disabled]
> SR-IOV Support [Disabled]
> Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
> XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
> Flash [Auto]
> SanDisk [Auto]
> USB Device Enable [Enabled]
> U31G2_EC3 [Enabled]
> U31G2_EA2 [Enabled]
> U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> U31G1_5 [Enabled]
> U31G1_6 [Enabled]
> U31G1_7 [Enabled]
> U31G1_8 [Enabled]
> U31G1_9 [Enabled]
> U31G1_10 [Enabled]
> USB11 [Enabled]
> USB12 [Enabled]
> USB13 [Enabled]
> USB14 [Enabled]
> USB15 [Enabled]
> Network Stack [Disabled]
> Device [Samsung SSD 850 EVO 500GB]
> CPU Temperature [Monitor]
> MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
> PCH Temperature [Monitor]
> T Sensor 1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
> HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
> CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
> AIO_PUMP Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W_FLOW Speed [Monitor]
> W_IN Temperature [Monitor]
> W_OUT Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
> 3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
> 5V Voltage [Monitor]
> 12V Voltage [Monitor]
> CPU Fan Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> CPU Fan Step Up/Down [0 sec]
> CPU Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> CPU Fan Profile [Manual]
> CPU Fan Upper Temperature [70]
> CPU Fan Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
> CPU Fan Middle Temperature [65]
> CPU Fan Middle Duty Cycle (%) [40]
> CPU Fan Lower Temperature [55]
> CPU Fan Min Duty Cycle (%) [28]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 1 Step Up/Down [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Manual]
> Chassis Fan 1 Upper Temperature [70]
> Chassis Fan 1 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
> Chassis Fan 1 Middle Temperature [65]
> Chassis Fan 1 Middle Duty Cycle (%) [60]
> Chassis Fan 1 Lower Temperature [55]
> Chassis Fan 1 Min Duty Cycle (%) [46]
> Allow Fan Stop [Disabled]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 2 Step Up/Down [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Manual]
> Chassis Fan 2 Upper Temperature [70]
> Chassis Fan 2 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
> Chassis Fan 2 Middle Temperature [65]
> Chassis Fan 2 Middle Duty Cycle (%) [40]
> Chassis Fan 2 Lower Temperature [55]
> Chassis Fan 2 Min Duty Cycle (%) [28]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 3 Step Up/Down [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Manual]
> Chassis Fan 3 Upper Temperature [70]
> Chassis Fan 3 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
> Chassis Fan 3 Middle Temperature [65]
> Chassis Fan 3 Middle Duty Cycle (%) [40]
> Chassis Fan 3 Lower Temperature [55]
> Chassis Fan 3 Min Duty Cycle (%) [28]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
> AIO_PUMP/W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
> Fast Boot [Enabled]
> NVMe Support [Enabled]
> Next Boot after AC Power Loss [Normal Boot]
> AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
> Boot Logo Display [Enabled]
> POST Delay Time [3 sec]
> Bootup NumLock State [On]
> Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
> Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
> Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
> Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
> Launch CSM [Enabled]
> Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
> Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
> Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
> Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
> OS Type [Other OS]
> Setup Animator [Disabled]
> ASUS Grid Install Service [Enabled]
> Profile Name []
> Save to Profile [1]
> CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
> VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> BCLK Frequency [Auto]
> CPU Ratio [Auto]
> DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A2]
> Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]
> CPU Frequency [0]
> CPU Voltage [0]
> SMT Control [Auto]
> Overclock [Auto]
> Power Down Enable [Auto]
> Cmd2T [Auto]
> Gear Down Mode [Auto]
> CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
> CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
> Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
> Infinity Fabric Frequency and Dividers [Auto]
> ECO Mode [Disable]
> Precision Boost Overdrive [Advanced]
> PBO Limits [Manual]
> PPT Limit [W] [160]
> TDC Limit [A] [105]
> EDC Limit [A] [160]
> Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [Auto]
> Max CPU Boost Clock Override [0MHz]
> Platform Thermal Throttle Limit [Auto]
> LN2 Mode [Auto]
> SoC/Uncore OC Mode [Disabled]
> VDDP Voltage Control [Auto]
> VDDG Voltage Control [Auto]
> VDDIO Voltage Control [Disabled]
> VTT Voltage Control [Disabled]
> NUMA nodes per socket [Auto]
> LCLK DPM [Auto]
> LCLK DPM Enhanced PCIe Detection [Auto]
> Custom Pstate0 [Auto]
> L1 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
> L2 Stream HW Prefetcher [Auto]
> Core Watchdog Timer Enable [Auto]
> Core Performance Boost [Auto]
> Global C-state Control [Enabled]
> Power Supply Idle Control [Low Current Idle]
> SEV ASID Count [Auto]
> SEV-ES ASID Space Limit Control [Auto]
> Streaming Stores Control [Auto]
> Local APIC Mode [Auto]
> ACPI _CST C1 Declaration [Auto]
> MCA error thresh enable [Auto]
> PPIN Opt-in [Auto]
> Indirect Branch Prediction Speculation [Auto]
> DRAM scrub time [Auto]
> Poison scrubber control [Auto]
> Redirect scrubber control [Auto]
> Redirect scrubber limit [Auto]
> NUMA nodes per socket [Auto]
> Memory interleaving [Auto]
> Memory interleaving size [Auto]
> 1TB remap [Auto]
> DRAM map inversion [Auto]
> ACPI SRAT L3 Cache As NUMA Domain [Auto]
> ACPI SLIT Distance Control [Auto]
> ACPI SLIT remote relative distance [Auto]
> GMI encryption control [Auto]
> xGMI encryption control [Auto]
> CAKE CRC perf bounds Control [Auto]
> 4-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
> 3-link xGMI max speed [Auto]
> xGMI TXEQ Mode [Auto]
> PcsCG control [Auto]
> Disable DF to external downstream IP SyncFloodPropagation [Auto]
> Disable DF sync flood propagation [Auto]
> CC6 memory region encryption [Auto]
> Memory Clear [Auto]
> Overclock [Auto]
> Power Down Enable [Auto]
> Disable Burst/Postponed Refresh [Auto]
> DRAM Maximum Activate Count [Auto]
> Cmd2T [Auto]
> Gear Down Mode [Auto]
> CAD Bus Timing User Controls [Auto]
> CAD Bus Drive Strength User Controls [Auto]
> Data Bus Configuration User Controls [Auto]
> Data Poisoning [Auto]
> DRAM Post Package Repair [Default]
> RCD Parity [Auto]
> DRAM Address Command Parity Retry [Auto]
> Write CRC Enable [Auto]
> DRAM Write CRC Enable and Retry Limit [Auto]
> Disable Memory Error Injection [True]
> DRAM ECC Symbol Size [Auto]
> DRAM ECC Enable [Auto]
> DRAM UECC Retry [Auto]
> TSME [Auto]
> Data Scramble [Auto]
> DFE Read Training [Auto]
> FFE Write Training [Auto]
> PMU Pattern Bits Control [Auto]
> MR6VrefDQ Control [Auto]
> CPU Vref Training Seed Control [Auto]
> Chipselect Interleaving [Auto]
> BankGroupSwap [Auto]
> BankGroupSwapAlt [Auto]
> Address Hash Bank [Auto]
> Address Hash CS [Auto]
> Address Hash Rm [Auto]
> SPD Read Optimization [Enabled]
> MBIST Enable [Disabled]
> Pattern Select [PRBS]
> Pattern Length(MTS) [3]
> Aggressor Channel [1 Aggressor Channel]
> Aggressor Static Lane Control [Disabled]
> Target Static Lane Control [Disabled]
> Worst Case Margin Granularity [Per Chip Select]
> Read Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
> Read Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
> Write Voltage Sweep Step Size [1]
> Write Timing Sweep Step Size [1]
> IOMMU [Auto]
> Precision Boost Overdrive [Auto]
> Precision Boost Overdrive Scalar [Auto]
> FCLK Frequency [Auto]
> SOC OVERCLOCK VID [0]
> UCLK DIV1 MODE [Auto]
> VDDP Voltage Control [Auto]
> VDDG Voltage Control [Auto]
> SoC/Uncore OC Mode [Auto]
> LN2 Mode [Auto]
> ACS Enable [Auto]
> PCIe ARI Support [Auto]
> PCIe ARI Enumeration [Auto]
> PCIe Ten Bit Tag Support [Auto]
> Max Voltage Offset [Auto]
> cTDP Control [Auto]
> EfficiencyModeEn [Auto]
> Package Power Limit Control [Auto]
> APBDIS [Auto]
> DF Cstates [Auto]
> CPPC [Enabled]
> CPPC Preferred Cores [Enabled]
> NBIO DPM Control [Auto]
> Early Link Speed [Auto]
> Presence Detect Select mode [Auto]
> Preferred IO [Auto]
> CV test [Auto]
> Loopback Mode [Auto]
> SRIS [Auto]


I wanna say I read Stilt mention not using C-States when discussing either the EDC bug or Fmax enhancer. I'll have to go back and look around for it. Keeping the CPU from dropping into lower performance states. But what I think is a memory of that would have been quite a while ago so I wouldn't rely on it.


----------



## wolfgang91

nick name said:


> I wanna say I read Stilt mention not using C-States when discussing either the EDC bug or Fmax enhancer. I'll have to go back and look around for it. Keeping the CPU from dropping into lower performance states. But what I think is a memory of that would have been quite a while ago so I wouldn't rely on it.


Yes, I thought so too since my problems were precisely in IDLE, but the truth is that this way I don't have any reboots at the moment.
Cheers.


----------



## nick name

wolfgang91 said:


> Yes, I thought so too since my problems were precisely in IDLE, but the truth is that this way I don't have any reboots at the moment.
> Cheers.


Not having access to your machine I might be wrong, but it isn't idle that's the problem. It's the initial amount of voltage needed right at the start of a single-threaded load running at full speed. I can't remember what the terminology is, but it's the voltage needed to get the load started and it's essentially the highest voltage the CPU needs (though it's not a lot of power). So I'm assuming the machine may seem idle, but there is some light one-thread load that wants to run full-speed which causes the crash. 

At this point I really only run into the problem if the room gets hot which causes the CPU to need more voltage. 

I can usually test it reliably with a CB20 run. It's right when the image turns black immediately before the start of the render.


----------



## wolfgang91

nick name said:


> Not having access to your machine I might be wrong, but it isn't idle that's the problem. It's the initial amount of voltage needed right at the start of a single-threaded load running at full speed. I can't remember what the terminology is, but it's the voltage needed to get the load started and it's essentially the highest voltage the CPU needs (though it's not a lot of power). So I'm assuming the machine may seem idle, but there is some light one-thread load that wants to run full-speed which causes the crash.
> 
> At this point I really only run into the problem if the room gets hot which causes the CPU to need more voltage.
> 
> I can usually test it reliably with a CB20 run. It's right when the image turns black immediately before the start of the render.


What you say makes a lot of sense. I don't know exactly what it could be, maybe having set the LLC to 2. It could also be because I have set CPPC Preferred Cores to Enabled, and that's why in single core loads they are sent to the best cores that perhaps need less voltage.
Cheers and thanks for all the info.


----------



## BIRDMANv84

Hello wolfgang91, This is after some Red Dead Redemption and iRacing last night, only difference I can see is my CCD1 boots a little better. Like I said I have no issues on my end, but if you find anything worth trying I wouldn't mind trying it out. I'm also on the latest chipset driver from AMD, I also have to put a fan over my memory since I swapped to my new case last week. They're usually around 40c max with a 120mm fan over the dimms


----------



## yugjooh

nick name said:


> It's something I've heard people with other PCs struggle with and I can't recall any solution so it might be worth a google to find what their solution was.


Yeah, every search result seems to end up with a dead end with nobody able to find a solution, and just conceding with unplugging before boot. I wonder if a motherboard that doesn't have this boot slow down with external drives even exists.


----------



## wolfgang91

BIRDMANv84 said:


> Hello wolfgang91, This is after some Red Dead Redemption and iRacing last night, only difference I can see is my CCD1 boots a little better. Like I said I have no issues on my end, but if you find anything worth trying I wouldn't mind trying it out. I'm also on the latest chipset driver from AMD, I also have to put a fan over my memory since I swapped to my new case last week. They're usually around 40c max with a 120mm fan over the dimms
> View attachment 2523961
> View attachment 2523962


Hi BIRDMANv84, fantastic results. Yes, your CCD 1 boosts a bit better. I have used many of your BIOS settings and I'm happy with the result. I'm gonna try to tweak the RAM now as at the moment I have it just with the DOCP. 
I haven't installed the latest version of the chipset drivers as the only thing that changes is this: _AMD PSP Driver 5.17.0.0 Critical security fixes_ and I'm not worried about that for now.
Let's see how the RAM performs. Now it's at 1.35 v and it doesn't get hot...
Thanks for all the info.
Cheers


----------



## mtrai

dreckschmeck said:


> I think my old 2801 modded Bios was from the user
> *mtrai*
> He uploaded stuff to the ROG forum and cross referenced it back here.


Ha thanks I am still around...just can't spend much time at all at the PC I developed both Carpal Tunnel Syndrome and Cubital Tunnel Syndrome. Was diagnosed a bit over a year ago. My doctors will not allow me to game or spend much time at all on any PC...just about 15 minutes or so a day.

Gonna look back through my notes about all that...but it will take me several days.

I turned my tinkering/gaming/overclocking PC into a mining machine since I really can't use it.


----------



## mtrai

Okay that bios that had it open was about 2 and 1/2 years ago and was a beta bios. Asus removed it. That bios did not support much newer CPU way back then if I remember correctly. I just took a look at some of my bios...I am not actually sure which one it was in TBH. It did actually unlock it. Also if I remember correctly ASUS kind of screwed up on the removal for several released bios with PCIe gen 4. If you left the bios on auto and had a pcie gen 4 gpu it would cause instabilities with the gpu eventually causing system lock ups and crashes. For 2 or 3 bios releases we had to set it to Gen 3 in the bios to avoid.

However that one beta bios worked.

So essentially it is a non useable bios today IMO.

Incidentally I just tried to check in amibcp with the latest bios for the c7h and of course since I was last looking at these actively amibcp has been updated. I no longer have the current amibcp so cannot see much of the newest.


----------



## smokin_mitch

new gpu and monitor arrived + pcie power cables bridged 8+8+8 pcie power cable from cablemod

quick timespy run NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 video card benchmark result - AMD Ryzen 9 5900X,ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) (3dmark.com)


----------



## asknask

Anyone here experience random BSODs with 4402?

I updated my BIOS a few days ago and also installed Wallpaper Engine. I'm not sure what's causing the BSODs but they're frequent (2-3 times a day), usually pointing to ntoskrnl.exe.

Ryzen 3600
3200MHz Corsair Vengeance at XMP
Crosshair VII Hero Wifi


----------



## smokin_mitch

asknask said:


> Anyone here experience random BSODs with 4402?
> 
> I updated my BIOS a few days ago and also installed Wallpaper Engine. I'm not sure what's causing the BSODs but they're frequent (2-3 times a day), usually pointing to ntoskrnl.exe.
> 
> Ryzen 3600
> 3200MHz Corsair Vengeance at XMP
> Crosshair VII Hero Wifi


no issues here been on 4402 for a while now


----------



## Logue

asknask said:


> Anyone here experience random BSODs with 4402?
> 
> I updated my BIOS a few days ago and also installed Wallpaper Engine. I'm not sure what's causing the BSODs but they're frequent (2-3 times a day), usually pointing to ntoskrnl.exe.
> 
> Ryzen 3600
> 3200MHz Corsair Vengeance at XMP
> Crosshair VII Hero Wifi


I've had some BSODs with my board for more than a year now, gaming is basically gone. I'm trying 4402 again, having some BSODs so far. 3103 was my last BIOS experience, it was kinda stable. 4402 has had BSODs with just regular idle activities, like video watching, browsing, etc. However, I have a 5700XT which is known to have problems and issues, specially with Ryzen. Maybe there are hardware problems from all the times I've put this rig together (mainly the PCI region comes to mind, since the NH-D15 I have makes it really hard to get access there). So, I'd say I'm not the best one to ask for. Also, my erros are basically all "machine check exception cache hierarchy" errors


----------



## asknask

smokin_mitch said:


> no issues here been on 4402 for a while now


It was my bad, _I think_. I had applied a negative offset of 0.1v. That might have been the culprit. Reverted that and haven't experienced a BSOD. If I don't get one for another two days, that must have been the reason



Logue said:


> I've had some BSODs with my board for more than a year now, gaming is basically gone. I'm trying 4402 again, having some BSODs so far. 3103 was my last BIOS experience, it was kinda stable. 4402 has had BSODs with just regular idle activities, like video watching, browsing, etc. However, I have a 5700XT which is known to have problems and issues, specially with Ryzen. Maybe there are hardware problems from all the times I've put this rig together (mainly the PCI region comes to mind, since the NH-D15 I have makes it really hard to get access there). So, I'd say I'm not the best one to ask for. Also, my erros are basically all "machine check exception cache hierarchy" errors


That's kinda sad, an AMD product having issues with another AMD product. I can game just fine. I play dota2 and the game hasn't crashed. Read above reply to see what might have caused my issue.


----------



## nick name

@Logue @asknask 

Are you guys talking about actual blue screens or just shut downs?


----------



## asknask

nick name said:


> @Logue @asknask
> 
> Are you guys talking about actual blue screens or just shut downs?


BSODs. A variety of them. Some with dumps available, others without any. Haven't gotten one since I reverted the negative offset.


----------



## Logue

Sometimes I do get the blue screen, but most of the time its either the screen turns black suddenly and the system is no longer accessible (ctrl + alt +del or ctrl + win + shift + b to reset graphics driver, both do nothing) or the system freezes but the screen doesn't turn off. In both of these I need to hard reset (via the case button). I reverted back to 3103 since my Corsair crap stopped recognizing some of the devices connected, probably USB issues. Also, sometimes I get a *d*3 (it's not *D*3) in the Q-code. Most of the times its on *9E* or *0C* (when using Per CCX overclocking - tried that to see if maybe it was the Precision Boost 2 algorithm getting crazy, didn't help much if at all - I'm not using *PBO* - just the Core Boost functionality/AutoOC). But I don't know man, there must be some hardware problem in this rig, maybe a cap or a transistor got ****ed up in some of the maintenance (rebuilding the entire PC once, lol), maybe it was a trace in the MB PCI-E region like I said before, maybe my CPU got something fried in it after all the experiments I've done with it (EDC bug, Ryzen Master/1usmus Clock Tuner for Ryzen, crazy high temp. Prime95 runs, etc.). Or maybe it's just some weird compatibility issue with iCue and the 5700XT (I know their software use the GPU for some stuff, or maybe their CPU monitoring has conflicts with the AMD Radeon Software CPU monitoring in the Metrics tab). Who knows at this point. I've accepted my PC only works for some games (and even then only for so long), browsing and consuming media. I don't miss it that much since these days I have a lot of stuff to do which I depend on this rig for (my one and only rig), so as long as it works for what I need and maybe some other time I can enjoy 30min of gaming, great. Until GPU prices come down, I don't have any expectation on buying one. Also, that will be a nice timing along with the next AMD socket release (AM5 is it?). Then I'll probably change the three main components: CPU, MB and GPU.


----------



## Logue

Curious here... I have a 6TB HDD and a 2TB SSD. For noise reasons, I'd like to keep my HDD disabled (actually turned off), unless I need to use it. In the BIOS I'm currently on (3103), I can't seem to be able to disable individual SATA ports. Is that normal? I leave a lot of my games installed on it, so I don't have to redownload them everytime (just some updates). However, since I don't need all my 6TB of games at all times and HDD noise is the loudest thing in my rig right now and I have the SSD for games that I'm currently playing, is there a way to permanently turn off the HD in the BIOS? I know you can set it to "Offline" in Windows Disk Management, but most of the time that still keeps it turned on (motor running -> noise).

I went to the SATA Configuration portion in the C7H BIOS (non WiFi - v. 3103) and all I can do there is completely disable ALL the SATA ports (one of the first options), some NVMe settings and, for the individual ports, the only settings there are Hot Plug (enable/disable - not what I'm looking for) and the name of the port which you can press Enter to rename. Am I missing something?

Right now I just have the HDD SATA power cable disconnected (SATA still plugged in for convenience). That's a bit more of a hassle tho', since I have to open the side panel with the 2 thumb screws and connect/disconnect the cable everytime I want to access something in that drive.

P.S.:

The manual for the board says it is an option, but I don't think it really is (the option refered to in the manual is the "Name" option I mentioned above)
Page 3-16 (78) of the PDF:



Spoiler















I only have Hot Plug and the SATA6G_(1..6) just changes the name of the port if you press Enter. No Enable/Disable setting. I'm not even sure if this would achieve my goal (turn off the HDD).


----------



## Synoxia

New bios out for C7Hero non wifi. For WI-fi no new bios. Any clues?


----------



## smokin_mitch

Synoxia said:


> New bios out for C7Hero non wifi. For WI-fi no new bios. Any clues?


there is a new bios for the C7H wifi v4603 same as the non wifi

ASUS ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) | ROG - Republic Of Gamers | ASUS USA


----------



## nick name

Ugh. I'm still annoyed that when leaving tRDWR and tWRRD on Auto they get set super high (18 and 7). It's been like this for a while and now I'm assuming it won't ever be fixed. 

And if you wonder why I wish it was fixed -- it's because previously when left on Auto the board would set the timings differently for each channel and I'm assuming there is a benefit to that versus settings both channels the same. They'd get set something like:
A B
tRDWR 8 - 7
tWRRD 2 - 3


----------



## nick name

There are also a couple new things I noticed. First are some new Q-Codes/POST Codes. 

Second is a new "Trusted Computing" settings under Advanced. I'm assuming it's in anticipation for the new Windows 11. (If it was in 4402 I didn't notice it.)


----------



## Synoxia

smokin_mitch said:


> there is a new bios for the C7H wifi v4603 same as the non wifi
> 
> ASUS ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) | ROG - Republic Of Gamers | ASUS USA


it wasn't present at the time i wrote that


----------



## xeizo

Hmm, dynamic OC doesn't work here, same settings using a 2700X. The board has decided I should use a fixed 4.2GHz all-core, well it works no crashes and excellent performance on par with a 3700X but it wouldn't have worked without the Noctua NH-D14 I have on that rig. The cpu maxes out at 83.5C during heavy load, but that would easily have been 100C with the stock cooler. I should revisit the settings, cause this is ridiculous LoL


----------



## xeizo

xeizo said:


> Hmm, dynamic OC doesn't work here, same settings using a 2700X. The board has decided I should use a fixed 4.2GHz all-core, well it works no crashes and excellent performance on par with a 3700X but it wouldn't have worked without the Noctua NH-D14 I have on that rig. The cpu maxes out at 83.5C during heavy load, but that would easily have been 100C with the stock cooler. I should revisit the settings, cause this is ridiculous LoL


That was easy to solve, I was still using a Ryzen Power Plan which seems to be depreciated in latest Windows and the latest chipset drivers. I just changed to Windows Balanced powerplan and frequency/vcore scaling started working again. Good to know the box is perfectly stable at 4.2GHz though ....


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

xeizo said:


> That was easy to solve, I was still using a Ryzen Power Plan which seems to be depreciated in latest Windows and the latest chipset drivers. I just changed to Windows Balanced powerplan and frequency/vcore scaling started working again. Good to know the box is perfectly stable at 4.2GHz though ....


hi there! what do you mean with frequency/vcore scaling? on a 2700x 4.2ghz is nice !!

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


----------



## xeizo

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> hi there! what do you mean with frequency/vcore scaling? on a 2700x 4.2ghz is nice !!
> 
> Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


I mean that freguency and vcore voltage goes up or down depending on load, which it should using PBO, apparently it only works using the Windows powerplan with the latest Windows and the latest AMD drivers. And the latest bios.


----------



## majsterz

Hello, i updated to the newest bios( from 3103 to 4603 ) and applied overclock to my memory, but CLDO VDDP voltage keep automatically set to 1,1V even if i adjust it manually to 0,9V. Is it save for Zen2(3800x) cpu? Right now i set it to auto but it still on 1,1V.


----------



## Deco

Synoxia said:


> New bios out for C7Hero non wifi. For WI-fi no new bios. Any clues?


There is one change which hasn't been immediately obvious as being exposed on the Advanced Menu and that is AMD GPU Driver Health, currently this seems to do nothing, but it's interesting nonetheless.


----------



## Tactix

What are thoughts on the latest bios?


----------



## majsterz

For me it it's completely unstable, random reboots, wifi card resets/disconnects. 3800x, ram overclocked(


http://imgur.com/HJ0ChS4

). I had to switch to older bios where everything is working fine.


----------



## Deco

majsterz said:


> For me it it's completely unstable, random reboots, wifi card resets/disconnects. 3800x, ram overclocked(
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/HJ0ChS4
> 
> ). I had to switch to older bios where everything is working fine.


These are Ryzen 5000 based BIOS's, they were never guaranteed to work correctly for Zen 2.



Tactix said:


> What are thoughts on the latest bios?


No issues whatsoever, runs fine.


----------



## majsterz

Deco said:


> These are Ryzen 5000 based BIOS's, they were never guaranteed to work correctly for Zen 2.


That's makes completely no sense, but maybe you are right.


----------



## bushd0c

Deco said:


> These are Ryzen 5000 based BIOS's, they were never guaranteed to work correctly for Zen 2.
> No issues whatsoever, runs fine.


What CPU do you use with this new bios?


----------



## Deco

bushd0c said:


> What CPU do you use with this new bios?


The 5900x.


----------



## nick name

majsterz said:


> For me it it's completely unstable, random reboots, wifi card resets/disconnects. 3800x, ram overclocked(
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/HJ0ChS4
> 
> ). I had to switch to older bios where everything is working fine.


Have you tested you RAM overclock?

And your voltages may also be a touch low. 
if SOC 1.1V
then CLDO VDDG (both) 1.05V
and CLDO VDDP 1.00V


----------



## nick name

Deco said:


> These are Ryzen 5000 based BIOS's, they were never guaranteed to work correctly for Zen 2.
> 
> 
> No issues whatsoever, runs fine.


Wut?

They are a culmination of previous changes for all supported CPUs. Recent changes are usually focused on the latest (5000) CPUs, but that doesn't mean that the improvements made in previous BIOS and AGESA revisions for previous CPUs are discarded.


----------



## Joe Flores

Just want to chip in and say I also have no issues at all with the new bios 4603. Ryzen 5800x. RAM at 3800 cl 16-16-16


----------



## bushd0c

Deco said:


> The 5900x.


Did you have to change/tweak any settings at all after upgrading from 4402 to 4603 or could you run the system with the old settings like RAM, Voltage, etc. ?


----------



## perpap

Coming straight from bios 3004 i haven't noticed any drawbacks so far with the bios 4603. As far as the 2700x performance is concerned, it seems to me that nothing has improved
significantly from bios 1201. The only reason for anyone with a 2000 series cpu to update is Windows 11 and/or 5000 series cpu installation.


----------



## ossimc

hi there. has anyone of you tried playing the BF 2042 Beta?

I get a horrible performance because the CPU causes extreme render-time spikes. I read in hardewareluxx forum that its a "thing" with 2 CCD Ryzen CPU's. Some got it fixed by disabling one CCD.
would like to know if you encounter the same issue

i think i will try a new bios cuz im still on 4301


----------



## smokin_mitch

ossimc said:


> hi there. has anyone of you tried playing the BF 2042 Beta?
> 
> I get a horrible performance because the CPU causes extreme render-time spikes. I read in hardewareluxx forum that its a "thing" with 2 CCD Ryzen CPU's. Some got it fixed by disabling one CCD.
> would like to know if you encounter the same issue
> 
> i think i will try a new bios cuz im still on 4301


yeah the beta runs poorly on my 5900x + 3090 @ 3440x1440 the full release should be much better


----------



## neikosr0x

ossimc said:


> hi there. has anyone of you tried playing the BF 2042 Beta?
> 
> I get a horrible performance because the CPU causes extreme render-time spikes. I read in hardewareluxx forum that its a "thing" with 2 CCD Ryzen CPU's. Some got it fixed by disabling one CCD.
> would like to know if you encounter the same issue
> 
> i think i will try a new bios cuz im still on 4301


The issue is still present kinda but there is a workaround till the patches comes out... I edit suggested here: ASUS ROG X570 Crosshair VIII Overclocking &amp... and ASUS ROG X570 Crosshair VIII Overclocking &amp... - went into bios and change CPPC options both to Enable and now the CPU is boosting on the best CCX plus better single-core behaviour I hope it helps you.


----------



## hurricane28

Hi guys, 

finally found the courage to upgrade from 3600 to 5600x lol. 

This is the result so far:










Not bad and stable so far  

Maybe i can lower timings a bit but if this is stable im happy AF


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> finally found the courage to upgrade from 3600 to 5600x lol.
> 
> This is the result so far:
> 
> View attachment 2528274
> 
> 
> Not bad and stable so far
> 
> Maybe i can lower timings a bit but if this is stable im happy AF


That looks fun.


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> That looks fun.



Thnx. and it is man. 

I dialed the 3800 MHz timings and it just worked on 4000 MHz too at even lower dram voltage. Instead of 1.500 i run 1.450V without issues so far. I can even run 2000 Mhz FCLK.. 

Stock the 5600x boosts up to 4.850 GHz too. Im happy so far but maybe i can get little more. 

So far no WHEA errors either for 2 days.


----------



## Logue

Question for those on BIOS 4603: I have a 3800X and for some reason, since installing 4603, my BCLK is no longer at 100.0MHz as per HWiNFO64 (v. 7.12-4580 latest non-beta). I'm using Snapshot CPU Polling, most of all other settings are default except for Corsair Support (I have it disabled cuz I run iCue). Doesn't matter if I set 100.0MHz Manual in the UEFI, if I leave all AUTO or if I leave Manual and the actual BCLK at Auto, HWiNFO just reports 99.3MHz. Previously, things worked normally (i.e., at 100MHz BCLK)


----------



## Logue

Logue said:


> Question for those on BIOS 4603: I have a 3800X and for some reason, since installing 4603, my BCLK is no longer at 100.0MHz as per HWiNFO64 (v. 7.12-4580 latest non-beta). I'm using Snapshot CPU Polling, most of all other settings are default except for Corsair Support (I have it disabled cuz I run iCue). Doesn't matter if I set 100.0MHz Manual in the UEFI, if I leave all AUTO or if I leave Manual and the actual BCLK at Auto, HWiNFO reports other values, like 98.6MHZ or 99.3MHz. Previously, things worked normally (i.e., at 100MHz BCLK)


I THINK I may have found the answer:

Recently I've enabled all security features available in Windows 10 via the Defender app. Most were already active, but I did enable one that wasn't called "Memory Integrity" (under Device Security -> "Core Isolation"). From what I understand it uses virtualization based security (VBS) to add another layer of security. I did enable this back when I first built this PC but it lead to multiple crashes in games and whatnot, so I disabled it back then. However,I've now followed a Microsoft tutorial (VBS Based Security Microsoft.com Tutorial). So, right now, I'm assuming I'm using a virtualized computer in some way and I believe that's whats messing up the HWiNFO64 readings from the BCLK. Just an FYI.


----------



## nick name

Logue said:


> I THINK I may have found the answer:
> 
> Recently I've enabled all security features available in Windows 10 via the Defender app. Most were already active, but I did enable one that wasn't called "Memory Integrity" (under Device Security -> "Core Isolation"). From what I understand it uses virtualization based security (VBS) to add another layer of security. I did enable this back when I first built this PC but it lead to multiple crashes in games and whatnot, so I disabled it back then. However,I've now followed a Microsoft tutorial (VBS Based Security Microsoft.com Tutorial). So, right now, I'm assuming I'm using a virtualized computer in some way and I believe that's whats messing up the HWiNFO64 readings from the BCLK. Just an FYI.


Whenever I enable CPU Virtualization my BCLK droops too.


----------



## harderthanfire

Anyone got any tips on getting rid of WHEA errors when using a FCLK of 2000? I tried upping the SOC voltage but it didn't help much. Not really sure what to tweak outside of dropping the FCLK and ram freq which I don't really want to do.


----------



## hurricane28

harderthanfire said:


> Anyone got any tips on getting rid of WHEA errors when using a FCLK of 2000? I tried upping the SOC voltage but it didn't help much. Not really sure what to tweak outside of dropping the FCLK and ram freq which I don't really want to do.


What CPU? I used to got them on 1900 fclk on my 3600 but now on my 5600x i am running 2000 and no issues. 

What does the error say? What event etc. and do you feel instabilities when you get them?


----------



## harderthanfire

hurricane28 said:


> What CPU? I used to got them on 1900 fclk on my 3600 but now on my 5600x i am running 2000 and no issues.
> 
> What does the error say? What event etc. and do you feel instabilities when you get them?


5950X it's event 19 and doesn't seem unstable but the suppression app thing to stop those showing up isn't working on win 11 for me


----------



## hurricane28

harderthanfire said:


> 5950X it's event 19 and doesn't seem unstable but the suppression app thing to stop those showing up isn't working on win 11 for me


I had the same on my 3600 CPU man. I also seen Intel related to this. Sometimes i t can even cause crashes or reboots. Some say CPU is going to die and others say its Windows itself.. On the ROG forum i seen several people complain about this and had to RMA their chip. Hopefully its not needed in your case.


----------



## Logue

harderthanfire said:


> 5950X it's event 19 and doesn't seem unstable but the suppression app thing to stop those showing up isn't working on win 11 for me


I've had this with my 3800X for some time, and since it comes and goes, I'm almost certain it's Windows. Lately, it's been stable as heck with BIOS 4603. It may also have something to do with driver compatibility (I have a 5700XT and it's notorious for presenting this issue). All my hardware works and passes almost all if not all tests/benchmarks. But in the past I've had experience with random reboots/black screens when gaming. I've tried every setting in the UEFI and nothing helped. Then, a few months later the issue would completely disappear. Then it'd come back after a while. Now it's been pretty stable for a few months now, no reboots and no Event 19 anymore (I used to have those daily, literally...). And I haven't changed anything about my setup (all parts are the same). I do believe my chip has some degradation (tho i've had it for a couple of years now so that's kinda to be expected - it doesn't boost to 4.4GHz in single core anymore, for instance). Although I don't care about 100 MHz anymore - don't get me wrong, I used to. Then I spent one year in this limbo space of having to daily drive an unstable rig which I also use for work due to the pandemic. I also believe it's somewhat specific to the setup, i.e. I do have a lot of iCue-related devices, like multiple LED strips, keyboard, RAM, etc. Also have lots of USB devices (webcam, microphone, mouse+keyboard, LS100 strips for my monitor, audio interface, bluetooth dongle, etc.). Some of those don't have the best driver implementation and that also links it more to the way Windows interacts with AMD CPUs and its respective chipsets. It's kind of a rabbit hole far deeper than I'd want to go today (after having peaked at it in the past like I said), because there are so so so many variables between software, drivers (VGA especially, in case of AMD's buggy as F*** video drivers), USB ports, internal USB ports, voltage drops, bugs in Windows etc. I'm just glad today everything just works. And no, I'm not planning on moving to Windows 11 anytime soon precisely because of all that I've mentioned.


----------



## harderthanfire

Dropped my FCLK down to 1866 for now and don't get the WHEA errors. It seems to get much worse when using virtualization along with a lot of devices which I need for my daily use. I'll probs mess around with it some more and go back up to 2000 at a later date. Doesn't seem to make any real world different perf wise anyway.


----------



## kratosatlante

hurricane28 said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> finally found the courage to upgrade from 3600 to 5600x lol.
> 
> This is the result so far:
> 
> View attachment 2528274
> 
> 
> Not bad and stable so far
> 
> Maybe i can lower timings a bit but if this is stable im happy AF


can you share screen zentimings? i try this bios today and 4000mhz, now run 3800cl 14


----------



## hurricane28

kratosatlante said:


> can you share screen zentimings? i try this bios today and 4000mhz, now run 3800cl 14


Sure thing man. 










🤙


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Sure thing man.
> 
> View attachment 2528987
> 
> 
> 🤙


Is this a b-die kit?


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> Is this a b-die kit?


I can't be 100% but for me the timings sure looks like B-die, only things differing from my 1900MHz is trc and trfc which is higher of course at 2000MHz. And I can do with only 1.4V at 1900MHz.


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> Is this a b-die kit?



Yes this is my G.Skill Trident Z NEO 3600 kit.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Yes this is my G.Skill Trident Z NEO 3600 kit.





xeizo said:


> I can't be 100% but for me the timings sure looks like B-die, only things differing from my 1900MHz is trc and trfc which is higher of course at 2000MHz. And I can do with only 1.4V at 1900MHz.


Yeah, I was pretty certain it was with that tRFC of 200, but there were some other timings that I run tighter on my kit. 

And I wish I had a 5900X to try my kits with so I could see if I could lower DRAM voltage with the same speed and timings on a different CPU.


----------



## nick name

Has anyone tried setting APBDIS to 1 and setting Fixed SOC Pstate to P0 when dealing with WHEA errors? Also, disabling DF Cstates? 








Edit:
I still get them occasionally, but am curious if it would help those that get them frequently.


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> Yeah, I was pretty certain it was with that tRFC of 200, but there were some other timings that I run tighter on my kit.
> 
> And I wish I had a 5900X to try my kits with so I could see if I could lower DRAM voltage with the same speed and timings on a different CPU.
> View attachment 2529112


I havent tinkered with the RAM for a while though. I just set it at 4000 MHz same timings and 2000 fclk and called it a day lol. I can run tighter maybe but idk, will test more tomorrow when i have more time. 

5600x seems to be the best deal out of all the 5000 series imo. Its good overclocker and in gaming it gives the most bang for the buck.


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> Has anyone tried setting APBDIS to 1 and setting Fixed SOC Pstate to P0 when dealing with WHEA errors? Also, disabling DF Cstates?
> View attachment 2529113
> 
> 
> Edit:
> I still get them occasionally, but am curious if it would help those that get them frequently.



WHEA errors mean that your CPU is dying or there is some kind of instability. Its random because instabilitie also comes random, one day you are stable the next not so much. I read from several other people that with ryzen 3000 they have this error and the CPU was going to die. They contacted AMD about it and they did an RMA and the problem never got back to them. 

During WHEA error i got instabilitie issues as well and now on my 5600x i have not encountered a single issue. Everything works like a charm how it should. 
I also heard horror stories about Ryzen 5000 so hopefully i get spared lol.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> WHEA errors mean that your CPU is dying or there is some kind of instability. Its random because instabilitie also comes random, one day you are stable the next not so much. I read from several other people that with ryzen 3000 they have this error and the CPU was going to die. They contacted AMD about it and they did an RMA and the problem never got back to them.
> 
> During WHEA error i got instabilitie issues as well and now on my 5600x i have not encountered a single issue. Everything works like a charm how it should.
> I also heard horror stories about Ryzen 5000 so hopefully i get spared lol.


Uh oh. I'm gonna have to check what the warranty is on a 3900X. I'm assuming it's run out.

Edit:
NVM. I didn't realize the warranty was 3 years. Shot off an e-mail to AMD and will see what they get back to me with.


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> Uh oh. I'm gonna have to check what the warranty is on a 3900X. I'm assuming it's run out.
> 
> Edit:
> NVM. I didn't realize the warranty was 3 years. Shot off an e-mail to AMD and will see what they get back to me with.


Good luck man. I am not saying that your CPU is dying though, i just read on the ROG forums and if you type this WHEA error i see several people end up with dead CPU's. 

I found another bug in Ryzen master too i think. When i open the program i see no golden star anymore that indicates witch ccx is the best or core. I can also not adjust the TDC, EDC and PPT... 
In BIOS everything is enabled to esure i can use this program. 

Its no big deal though as you can only get like 50 MHz more, so its not even worth the hassle though lol.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Good luck man. I am not saying that your CPU is dying though, i just read on the ROG forums and if you type this WHEA error i see several people end up with dead CPU's.
> 
> I found another bug in Ryzen master too i think. When i open the program i see no golden star anymore that indicates witch ccx is the best or core. I can also not adjust the TDC, EDC and PPT...
> In BIOS everything is enabled to esure i can use this program.
> 
> Its no big deal though as you can only get like 50 MHz more, so its not even worth the hassle though lol.


AMD got back to me and requested a picture of the CPU in the board, however, I use liquid metal and wasn't able to clean off the residue enough to read the writing on the IHS. So I'm gonna have to try something I found on YouTube tomorrow to clean it. Wish me luck. my biggest fear is having to remove the CPU to clean the IHS and then bending pins. That would make me very sad.


----------



## Dude970

Take your time, you got this


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> AMD got back to me and requested a picture of the CPU in the board, however, I use liquid metal and wasn't able to clean off the residue enough to read the writing on the IHS. So I'm gonna have to try something I found on YouTube tomorrow to clean it. Wish me luck. my biggest fear is having to remove the CPU to clean the IHS and then bending pins. That would make me very sad.



That alone shows proof that the WHEA errors can be related to an possibly defective CPU after all.. while others said its an false entry.. 

Is there perhaps an possibility that you by accident spilled some liquid metal in the socket or any place else on the board? 

I wish you luck man and hopefully you gonna solve it asap. 

I'm also dealing with a new problem though. (always something man lol) 

I'm getting qcode 8 errors and my system shuts down completely and i have to flip the PSU switch off and on in order to boot again... I think its Bluetooth related i also hope, otherwise it can be the board.. 

Let us hope it will end well for us both lol.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> That alone shows proof that the WHEA errors can be related to an possibly defective CPU after all.. while others said its an false entry..
> 
> Is there perhaps an possibility that you by accident spilled some liquid metal in the socket or any place else on the board?
> 
> -snip-


It appears that they're immediately accepting my RMA so you might be right. Though this may just be a first step to validating my ownership and more questions may follow after this step. 

Absolutely zero chance liquid metal spilled on the socket as the CPU has always stayed in the socket. And I'm 99.9% certain it never got on the board, but if it ever got on the board without me noticing is obviously something I can't account for. I can't know what I don't know and what not.


----------



## hurricane28

I might be yes, i hope for you that is the issue and it gets resolved with a new one. 

Ok, so you can rule that out almost.


----------



## hurricane28

Well, i got this qcode 8 error sometimes and i think i tracked it down.. 

Its the bluetooth receiver that is causing my PC to crash in qcode 8... That is a shame as i use the Bluetooth regularly..


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Well, i got this qcode 8 error sometimes and i think i tracked it down..
> 
> Its the bluetooth receiver that is causing my PC to crash in qcode 8... That is a shame as i use the Bluetooth regularly..


How odd.


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> How odd.


Yes, it happened after i installed the new BIOs though. Coincidence or maybe something wrong with the BIOS? 

I couldnt find anything about this so i guess my Bluetooth is broken..


----------



## nick name

nick name said:


> It appears that they're immediately accepting my RMA so you might be right. Though this may just be a first step to validating my ownership and more questions may follow after this step.
> 
> Absolutely zero chance liquid metal spilled on the socket as the CPU has always stayed in the socket. And I'm 99.9% certain it never got on the board, but if it ever got on the board without me noticing is obviously something I can't account for. I can't know what I don't know and what not.


AMD sent me a return shipping label for my 3900X. This all seems to be going smoothly _knock on wood_. Hopefully they won't have a problem reading the IHS when they receive it. Polishing off the liquid metal residue also removed the markings and what's left is only visible when the light hits the IHS right. I was able to take a picture of it just fine, but it took a few tries where the light illuminated all of the ghost markings. 

I bought a 5800X (didn't have a 5900X) to use in the interim and will sell that when I get a 3900X back from AMD.


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> AMD sent me a return shipping label for my 3900X. This all seems to be going smoothly _knock on wood_. Hopefully they won't have a problem reading the IHS when they receive it. Polishing off the liquid metal residue also removed the markings and what's left is only visible when the light hits the IHS right. I was able to take a picture of it just fine, but it took a few tries where the light illuminated all of the ghost markings.
> 
> I bought a 5800X (didn't have a 5900X) to use in the interim and will sell that when I get a 3900X back from AMD.


Very nice man! I hope you get sorted shortly. 

You gonna sell the 5800x and keep the 3900x? Better sell the 3900x man and keep the 5800x lol. 

5000 serie is much better than 3000 series in every way.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Very nice man! I hope you get sorted shortly.
> 
> You gonna sell the 5800x and keep the 3900x? Better sell the 3900x man and keep the 5800x lol.
> 
> 5000 serie is much better than 3000 series in every way.


That's a thought I will consider. Ultimately I wanted a 5900X but there wasn't one in-stock. So my thought was to get a 5800X and sell it after my use because I ultimately want a 5900X and selling the 5800X immediately after my brief use would net more than keeping it and waiting for the 5900X to become in-stock. And then there is also the new stepping that is rumored to have shipped already. 

The most honest answer is that I don't need more than my 3900X and I would honestly prefer a new GPU. So a new 5800X or new 5900X would only make more difficult my purchase of a new GPU. I am poor.


----------



## xeizo

Don't know if you game but 5800X is a lot better in gaming than 3900X, I would try to sell the 3900X no doubt


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> That's a thought I will consider. Ultimately I wanted a 5900X but there wasn't one in-stock. So my thought was to get a 5800X and sell it after my use because I ultimately want a 5900X and selling the 5800X immediately after my brief use would net more than keeping it and waiting for the 5900X to become in-stock. And then there is also the new stepping that is rumored to have shipped already.
> 
> The most honest answer is that I don't need more than my 3900X and I would honestly prefer a new GPU. So a new 5800X or new 5900X would only make more difficult my purchase of a new GPU. I am poor.



I hear ya, still would sell the 3900x and keep the 5800x man. 

OR sell them both and get 5900x. 

The 5000 series is just much much better in everything compared to the 3000 series, especially with RAM.


----------



## paturn

hurricane28 said:


> Yes, it happened after i installed the new BIOs though. Coincidence or maybe something wrong with the BIOS?
> 
> I couldnt find anything about this so i guess my Bluetooth is broken..


That is more than odd. Mine was hanging for awhile on boot and when I checked Device manager I saw the bluetooth error. I disabled it and all was good. Now I'm curious so I'll revert to 4402 out of curiosity.


----------



## ossimc

quick question. I know it has been answered probably a million times but i forgot: 

which M.2 slot should i use to NOT interfere with the PCI-Lanes of the Graphics. the one on top or below the graphicscard?


----------



## nick name

ossimc said:


> quick question. I know it has been answered probably a million times but i forgot:
> 
> which M.2 slot should i use to NOT interfere with the PCI-Lanes of the Graphics. the one on top or below the graphicscard?


Bottom of the board and not the one above the PCIe slots. The one directly below the CPU is secondary and shares lanes.


----------



## hurricane28

paturn said:


> That is more than odd. Mine was hanging for awhile on boot and when I checked Device manager I saw the bluetooth error. I disabled it and all was good. Now I'm curious so I'll revert to 4402 out of curiosity.


Strange indeed, i saw no bluetooth error though. Could it be the BIOS related after all?

Let me know how it went man


----------



## nick name

So I just installed the 5800X and with everything on Auto (LLC on Auto and also set to LLC2, voltage, PBO) the CPU gets up to 80*C running the CPU-Z benchmark. That's insane! My 3900X with those settings would never come close to 80*C running CPU-Z benchmark. If memory serves it wouldn't get past around 65*C.


----------



## Keith Myers

Yep, the Zen 3 dies run a lot hotter than the Zen 2 dies. But they also clock faster and do more work per clock cycle. More work = more heat. Turn the fans up a bit more.


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> Yep, the Zen 3 dies run a lot hotter than the Zen 2 dies. But they also clock faster and do more work per clock cycle. More work = more heat. Turn the fans up a bit more.


Fans are up. I just ran CB23 and it was hitting 92*C. 

Is that normal behavior that you've experienced?


----------



## Keith Myers

nick name said:


> Fans are up. I just ran CB23 and it was hitting 92*C.
> 
> Is that normal behavior that you've experienced?


Don't know about CB23 as I don't have Windows. But I hit 102° C. on the y-cruncher stress test runs on my 5950X They are mostly AVX2 tests which hammer the cpu hard as hell. Normally sit around 78-80° C. running 30 cores on my distributed computing workloads.


----------



## nick name

Keith Myers said:


> Don't know about CB23 as I don't have Windows. But I hit 102° C. on the y-cruncher stress test runs on my 5950X They are mostly AVX2 tests which hammer the cpu hard as hell. Normally sit around 78-80° C. running 30 cores on my distributed computing workloads.


I don't mind the heat . . . just wasn't expecting it. So if you're saying seeing hot is ok then I'm ok with it.


----------



## Keith Myers

nick name said:


> I don't mind the heat . . . just wasn't expecting it. So if you're saying seeing hot is ok then I'm ok with it.


I don't think the cpu minds the temps at all. I've been running mine for six months now non-stop on my BOINC crunching workloads. Just have all cores locked to 4425Mhz at 1.26V.


----------



## paturn

hurricane28 said:


> Strange indeed, i saw no bluetooth error though. Could it be the BIOS related after all?
> 
> Let me know how it went man


Reverted to 4402 and bluetooth reappeared. Then to 4502 no bluetooth. Then to 4603 no bluetooth. Back to 4402 no bluetooth. Back to 4603 but disabled wifi and blue tooth reappeared but would not connect to anything and then disappeared.

When I built this I guess 3 years ago, I changed the stock wifi/bluetooth card to what was at that time the latest Intel offering an AC9260. So yeah, kinda weird but to use the current buzz phrase 'correlation does not imply causation'

Time for an add in card. I have the latest AX210 in my drawer and the other in my wifes' laptop and it rocks.

C'est la Vie.


----------



## ossimc

nick name said:


> Bottom of the board and not the one above the PCIe slots. The one directly below the CPU is secondary and shares lanes.


ok i figured.
But why is my Radeon 6700 XT only using PCIe 3.0 with 8 lanes then?


----------



## MasterGamma12

ossimc said:


> ok i figured.
> But why is my Radeon 6700 XT only using PCIe 3.0 with 8 lanes then?
> View attachment 2530149


Well, 3.0 is normal on X470, you need a 500 series board for 4.0

Do you have something installed in the 8x slot? Card might also need to be reseated.


----------



## hurricane28

paturn said:


> Reverted to 4402 and bluetooth reappeared. Then to 4502 no bluetooth. Then to 4603 no bluetooth. Back to 4402 no bluetooth. Back to 4603 but disabled wifi and blue tooth reappeared but would not connect to anything and then disappeared.
> 
> When I built this I guess 3 years ago, I changed the stock wifi/bluetooth card to what was at that time the latest Intel offering an AC9260. So yeah, kinda weird but to use the current buzz phrase 'correlation does not imply causation'
> 
> Time for an add in card. I have the latest AX210 in my drawer and the other in my wifes' laptop and it rocks.
> 
> C'est la Vie.


So its a BIOS thing after all... 

Good to know, i though my board would die or something. 

Thnx for testing this 🤙


----------



## ossimc

MasterGamma12 said:


> Well, 3.0 is normal on X470, you need a 500 series board for 4.0
> 
> Do you have something installed in the 8x slot? Card might also need to be reseated.


This was it. I reseated the card and now its PCIs 3.0x16 like it supposed to be. thanks

funny i never encountered that problem before in my 20 years of PC...or i never noticed^^


----------



## MasterGamma12

ossimc said:


> This was it. I reseated the card and now its PCIs 3.0x16 like it supposed to be. thanks
> 
> funny i never encountered that problem before in my 20 years of PC...or i never noticed^^


I've come across the reseat issue many times, glad to help.


----------



## nick name

This 5800X has been fun to play with. Even before anything was set the CPU would boost to its max boost speed whereas my 3900X wouldn't go past 4.55GHz without the EDC bug or Fmax enhancer. And the all-core speeds on my 3900X would only hit around 4.2GHz with the EDC bug. This 5800X runs all-core much, much higher. And with curve optimizer it will run loads of CB20/23 at around 4.65GHz to 4.7GHz (depending on ambient temps). The 5800X also takes well to a 150MHz offest whereas my 3900X only boosts higher with the offset when using the EDC bug or Fmax enhancer. 

As far as FCLK . . . it will boot 2000MHz with ease when running 16GB of RAM (also one strap higher) however it streams WHEA errors above 1900 FCLK. As of this moment HWiNFO is reporting 408 409 510 correctable errors with around 9 minutes of current up-time.


----------



## hurricane28

I like my 5600x as well man. Handles much better than the 3600. Everything feels snappier and clock speeds are much higher too. Going from 4.4 GHz all core to 4.850 GHz all core  

from 3600/3800 MHz RAM to 4000 MHz at the same timings! 

Strange about the WHEA errors man, i havent had one with 4000 MHz RAM and 2000 FCLK.. 

What event ID do you see in Windows report?

And what voltages? Most things need to be left alone as they can cause lots of issues as well. I leave some settings alone as they caused me a ton of grief and they did not needed to adjust as the board will sort it out correctly anyway. 

ProcODT is one of them, leave it alone as it can cause lots of weird issues.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> I like my 5600x as well man. Handles much better than the 3600. Everything feels snappier and clock speeds are much higher too. Going from 4.4 GHz all core to 4.850 GHz all core
> 
> from 3600/3800 MHz RAM to 4000 MHz at the same timings!
> 
> Strange about the WHEA errors man, i havent had one with 4000 MHz RAM and 2000 FCLK..
> 
> What event ID do you see in Windows report?
> 
> And what voltages? Most things need to be left alone as they can cause lots of issues as well. I leave some settings alone as they caused me a ton of grief and they did not needed to adjust as the board will sort it out correctly anyway.
> 
> ProcODT is one of them, leave it alone as it can cause lots of weird issues.


Error ID in Windows is 19 and there are now a ton of them in Event Viewer. I'm not sure why it happens with anything above 1900 FCLK. The only thing I've really tried is to attempt several SOC voltages along with VDDG and VDDP. I've also tried leaving them all on Auto. Nothing seems to help. I haven't tried fiddling with other settings. Wait, I've also tried using a fixed CPU multiplier.

Edit:
I think I understand why you asked which event ID it is as I kept saying error. It's not the WHEA error, but the warning that happens. Sorry, I know the distinction is important and I failed to make it.


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> Error ID in Windows is 19 and there are now a ton of them in Event Viewer. I'm not sure why it happens with anything above 1900 FCLK. The only thing I've really tried is to attempt several SOC voltages along with VDDG and VDDP. I've also tried leaving them all on Auto. Nothing seems to help. I haven't tried fiddling with other settings. Wait, I've also tried using a fixed CPU multiplier.
> 
> Edit:
> I think I understand why you asked which event ID it is as I kept saying error. It's not the WHEA error, but the warning that happens. Sorry, I know the distinction is important and I failed to make it.


Hmm okay. I never got a lot of them, only one a day sometimes.

Its an corrected hardware error or incorrected?

What about more dram voltage?


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Hmm okay. I never got a lot of them, only one a day sometimes.
> 
> Its an corrected hardware error or incorrected?
> 
> What about more dram voltage?


They're all corrected WHEA. And I've tried "all the voltages". Everything above 1900 FCLK causes WHEA warnings.


----------



## elbubi

Hi!
I'm still on v1201 Bios on my 2700x (rock solid) and I'm about to ¿upgrade? to W11.
Would it be necessary to update Bios to newest version?
Regards and thanks in advance!


----------



## nick name

elbubi said:


> Hi!
> I'm still on v1201 Bios on my 2700x (rock solid) and I'm about to ¿upgrade? to W11.
> Would it be necessary to update Bios to newest version?
> Regards and thanks in advance!


I'm not sure. I would go into the BIOS and turn on TPM, turn off CSM, turn on secure boot and then run the Windows 11 tool that checks compatibility.


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> They're all corrected WHEA. And I've tried "all the voltages". Everything above 1900 FCLK causes WHEA warnings.



Weird man. Do you also get issues? Like stabilitie issues or weird things in Windows? 


Im running 2000 FCLK since i got 5600x and no issues so far.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Weird man. Do you also get issues? Like stabilitie issues or weird things in Windows?
> 
> 
> Im running 2000 FCLK since i got 5600x and no issues so far.


Yeah, running tests for stability fail.


----------



## elbubi

nick name said:


> I'm not sure. I would go into the BIOS and turn on TPM, turn off CSM, turn on secure boot and then run the Windows 11 tool that checks compatibility.


Thanks for your quick reply.
In terms of compatibility, it works as it is now, I've tried a dinamic update and no alerts about compatibily have risen (I have tpm enabled and secure boot already enabled)
Besides compatibility, my main concern is about performance & stability.
BIOS 4502 in support page states the following:


> ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) BIOS 4502
> "1. Support Windows 11 by default, no settings changes required in the UEFI BIOS.


But I don't want to fiddle with bios unless its extremely necessary. I've read a lot of negative things with newest bios and 2xxx series.

Regards once again!


----------



## nick name

elbubi said:


> Thanks for your quick reply.
> In terms of compatibility, it works as it is now, I've tried a dinamic update and no alerts about compatibily have risen (I have tpm enabled and secure boot already enabled)
> Besides compatibility, my main concern is about performance & stability.
> BIOS 4502 in support page states the following:
> 
> But I don't want to fiddle with bios unless its extremely necessary. I've read a lot of negative things with newest bios and 2xxx series.
> 
> Regards once again!


In newer BIOS settings the necessary Win 11 requirements are automatically turned on. If Windows says you're good to go then you are good to go.


----------



## hurricane28

That didn't last long lol. 

I got my first WHEA Error.. Its an Event 18 fatal error which is related to the CPU core while im running stock settings... (for the CPU that is) 

Today i got this event ID 18 error and short after that, after an reboot, i got qcode 8 and PC shuts down... 

Im going to flash the BIOS again and see if it happens again. Could this also be PSU related somehow? Or is this an Ryzen or BIOS thing?


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> That didn't last long lol.
> 
> I got my first WHEA Error.. Its an Event 18 fatal error which is related to the CPU core while im running stock settings... (for the CPU that is)
> 
> Today i got this event ID 18 error and short after that, after an reboot, i got qcode 8 and PC shuts down...
> 
> Im going to flash the BIOS again and see if it happens again. Could this also be PSU related somehow? Or is this an Ryzen or BIOS thing?


Completely stock? Does that also mean low LLC? You may also need to change PSU Idle setting to Typical. As far as the WHEA 18 it might perhaps be SOC LLC?


----------



## hurricane28

Except for RAM, yes. 

What is PSU idle setting? Never touched that. 

If it was voltage related, it would have shown in cinebench and other benchmarks too. I tried OCCT, Cinebench R20,R23 etc. no isues and nothing get too hot. It gets toasty, but nothing out of wack. 

I reflashed the BIOS and reseated the CPU block of my water loop. Sometimes when the cooler is screwed too tight on the CPU you get weird stuff to happen as well. 

Back to gaming and testing.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Except for RAM, yes.
> 
> What is PSU idle setting? Never touched that.
> 
> If it was voltage related, it would have shown in cinebench and other benchmarks too. I tried OCCT, Cinebench R20,R23 etc. no isues and nothing get too hot. It gets toasty, but nothing out of wack.
> 
> I reflashed the BIOS and reseated the CPU block of my water loop. Sometimes when the cooler is screwed too tight on the CPU you get weird stuff to happen as well.
> 
> Back to gaming and testing.


Heavy work loads can be fine when light loads at high frequency will not be. So LLC can help if it wasn't set. Something I've found to be a useful test for those light loads at high frequency is the AIDA RAM Copy test. 

And PSU Idle setting is under Advanced > AMD CBS > CPU Common Options.


----------



## hurricane28

yeah i know about LLC. I set level 3 which means that it gets good voltage all across the board. It doesn't droop that much under less load. What is your LLC at? 

I give that a try. im testing in OCCT and get no issues, except the CPU gets REALLY hot, even on my custom 360mm radiator loop. 

77.8c under full load of OCCT for over an hour now and no issues.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> yeah i know about LLC. I set level 3 which means that it gets good voltage all across the board. It doesn't droop that much under less load. What is your LLC at?
> 
> I give that a try. im testing in OCCT and get no issues, except the CPU gets REALLY hot, even on my custom 360mm radiator loop.
> 
> 77.8c under full load of OCCT for over an hour now and no issues.


I need to use at least LLC 3 or I will get clock-stretching, but am using LLC 4 due to my curve optimizer settings being at the edge.

And I'm not worried that you're stable under heavy load -- it's the light load at high frequency that I am suggesting to test. And the AIDA RAM Copy test seems to do that well.


----------



## hurricane28

Ok, llc3 is what i use since Ryzen 3600. I think that this new CPU is better with voltage so higher would net met worse results though. I can see that the voltage is quite stable when static overclocked. 

Im not overclocking it yet but i see that there is something with the boost as well, now it almost never boosts to 4.850 GHz anymore like it used to do.. 

Something is seriously wrong with these BIOS's man.. 

CPU runs hot as hell too in OCCT stress test. I see 78c on my custom 360mm loop which is too high imo. OR i need to overclock manually but that idk yet.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Ok, llc3 is what i use since Ryzen 3600. I think that this new CPU is better with voltage so higher would net met worse results though. I can see that the voltage is quite stable when static overclocked.
> 
> Im not overclocking it yet but i see that there is something with the boost as well, now it almost never boosts to 4.850 GHz anymore like it used to do..
> 
> Something is seriously wrong with these BIOS's man..
> 
> CPU runs hot as hell too in OCCT stress test. I see 78c on my custom 360mm loop which is too high imo. OR i need to overclock manually but that idk yet.


According to everything I've read -- the heat is normal behavior. Though, of course, lower temps mean more performance.

I tried using lower LLC and the CPU did try to use higher multipliers, but there was a lot of clock-stretching. But I was able to find those higher multipliers (without the clock-stretching) by tuning PBO and Curve Optimizer to get (I'm assuming) the most out of my CPU specimen.

You can leave PPT and TDC at Auto or increase them. I didn't see any difference adjusting these up. EDC I've set to 110 120. This induces higher n-core boost without losing peak single-core boost.

With Curve Optimizer I've set my two best cores to -12 and the other cores to -27. I could set more higher offsets for heavy workloads, but those will crash during high-frequency, light workloads. I've found that I can use AIDA RAM Copy benchmark to test high-frequency, light workloads.

Edit:
Welp. It appears that EDC at 110 might be too low. Increased to 120 and testing some more.

Edit 2:
Welp. It appears that EDC at 120 didn't fix it so I think it's probably my Curve Optimizer offsets. Gonna have to play with it to figure it out.


----------



## nick name

nick name said:


> AMD sent me a return shipping label for my 3900X. This all seems to be going smoothly _knock on wood_. Hopefully they won't have a problem reading the IHS when they receive it. Polishing off the liquid metal residue also removed the markings and what's left is only visible when the light hits the IHS right. I was able to take a picture of it just fine, but it took a few tries where the light illuminated all of the ghost markings.
> 
> I bought a 5800X (didn't have a 5900X) to use in the interim and will sell that when I get a 3900X back from AMD.


My replacement 3900X should arrive in the next few days. Kind of excited to see if it will actually boost past 4.55GHz without needing Fmax enhancer or the EDC bug. Then I'll have to decide if I want to keep the 3900X, 5800X, or 5900X. I haven't opened the 5900X so I can just return it if I decide to stay with my 3900X. I know the other CPUs are better in gaming, but with my 1070ti the only game that seems to get more frames with the 5800X is CSGO. And while getting more than 1000 FPS can be fun -- it isn't necessary.


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> According to everything I've read -- the heat is normal behavior. Though, of course, lower temps mean more performance.
> 
> I tried using lower LLC and the CPU did try to use higher multipliers, but there was a lot of clock-stretching. But I was able to find those higher multipliers (without the clock-stretching) by tuning PBO and Curve Optimizer to get (I'm assuming) the most out of my CPU specimen.
> 
> You can leave PPT and TDC at Auto or increase them. I didn't see any difference adjusting these up. EDC I've set to 110 120. This induces higher n-core boost without losing peak single-core boost.
> 
> With Curve Optimizer I've set my two best cores to -12 and the other cores to -27. I could set more higher offsets for heavy workloads, but those will crash during high-frequency, light workloads. I've found that I can use AIDA RAM Copy benchmark to test high-frequency, light workloads.
> 
> Edit:
> Welp. It appears that EDC at 110 might be too low. Increased to 120 and testing some more.
> 
> Edit 2:
> Welp. It appears that EDC at 120 didn't fix it so I think it's probably my Curve Optimizer offsets. Gonna have to play with it to figure it out.


Nah man, LLC level 3 is what you want on this board, anything less or more result in more heat and instability or if lower only instability. 

What is this so called clock-stretching? never heard of it. Thought these CPU's are smart so you don't need to fiddle with it that much lol. 

This is all you need to do to get best performance: 




I tried manual settings in PBO but nothing really result in better or higher clocks. 

Im curious too to your new CPU man, its an later sample so chances are high it will clock better than the other one but there is no guarantee ofcos.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Nah man, LLC level 3 is what you want on this board, anything less or more result in more heat and instability or if lower only instability.
> 
> What is this so called clock-stretching? never heard of it. Thought these CPU's are smart so you don't need to fiddle with it that much lol.
> 
> This is all you need to do to get best performance:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I tried manual settings in PBO but nothing really result in better or higher clocks.
> 
> Im curious too to your new CPU man, its an later sample so chances are high it will clock better than the other one but there is no guarantee ofcos.


Clock-stretching happens when the CPU isn't getting enough voltage to run at its current multiplier. The CPU essentially runs slower so that it doesn't crash. You can check this in HWiNFO by looking at Effective Clocks. 

And I use LLC 4 because I am running as aggressive Curve Optimizer offsets as I can and to do that I need a little more than LLC 3.


----------



## hurricane28

Ok, good to know, thnx. 

I always used LLC 3 on my 2600x and 3600. Maybe 5000 series benefit from level 4 though, i see similar voltages so i keep it at level 3 for now. level 4 gives too much voltage overshoot imo. 

I lower my core voltage to 1.275v and get 12c difference in temps! Stock gives waaay too much voltage man..


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Ok, good to know, thnx.
> 
> I always used LLC 3 on my 2600x and 3600. Maybe 5000 series benefit from level 4 though, i see similar voltages so i keep it at level 3 for now. level 4 gives too much voltage overshoot imo.
> 
> I lower my core voltage to 1.275v and get 12c difference in temps! Stock gives waaay too much voltage man..


I've never seen overshoot with LLC 4. Ever.


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> I've never seen overshoot with LLC 4. Ever.


You cannot see it in Windows tools but you need an oscilloscope for that. It can potentially be harmful on the long run as amps kill CPU's and with amps temps come too.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> You cannot see it in Windows tools but you need an oscilloscope for that. It can potentially be harmful on the long run as amps kill CPU's and with amps temps come too.


You've hooked up an oscilloscope?


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> You've hooked up an oscilloscope?


I am not but this guy did:


----------



## nick name

I wouldn't expect any sort of overshoot (if any) unless you were using the highest LLC setting on a board, but I know that on the CH7 there isn't a concern at LLC 4. In fact Buildzoid recommended using LLC 5 on the CH 7 in this video:


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> I wouldn't expect any sort of overshoot (if any) unless you were using the highest LLC setting on a board, but I know that on the CH7 there isn't a concern at LLC 4. In fact Buildzoid recommended using LLC 5 on the CH 7 in this video:


Very odd, this dude first said that running extreme llc is stupid and now he says that running llc level 5 (which is extreme for Asus) is an good idea.. 

I use my own common sense and its saying don't go over level 3 and if i remember correctly Elmor, Jon Sandstrom also said level 3 is best for this board.


----------



## lordzed83

nick name said:


> I wouldn't expect any sort of overshoot (if any) unless you were using the highest LLC setting on a board, but I know that on the CH7 there isn't a concern at LLC 4. In fact Buildzoid recommended using LLC 5 on the CH 7 in this video:


Ye LLC5 is fine been using it since i got this board over 2 years of constant load 24/7. Got no errors or any instability problems can leave pc running 2 weeks without single reboot while doing all sorts.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Very odd, this dude first said that running extreme llc is stupid and now he says that running llc level 5 (which is extreme for Asus) is an good idea..
> 
> I use my own common sense and its saying don't go over level 3 and if i remember correctly Elmor, Jon Sandstrom also said level 3 is best for this board.


Yeah, Buildzoid can be all over the place.


----------



## hurricane28

Yeah man, he is hard to follow too, same as for tech jezus. He is japping for 30 minutes strait on the same tone.


----------



## nick name

nick name said:


> My replacement 3900X should arrive in the next few days. Kind of excited to see if it will actually boost past 4.55GHz without needing Fmax enhancer or the EDC bug. Then I'll have to decide if I want to keep the 3900X, 5800X, or 5900X. I haven't opened the 5900X so I can just return it if I decide to stay with my 3900X. I know the other CPUs are better in gaming, but with my 1070ti the only game that seems to get more frames with the 5800X is CSGO. And while getting more than 1000 FPS can be fun -- it isn't necessary.


I received and installed the new 3900X and while it does boost to 4.6GHz without the EDC bug or Fmax enhancer the WHEA errors are sooooooo much worse. And this CPU suffers from USB dropouts too. It's a hot mess.


----------



## xeizo

nick name said:


> I received and installed the new 3900X and while it does boost to 4.6GHz without the EDC bug or Fmax enhancer the WHEA errors are sooooooo much worse. And this CPU suffers from USB dropouts too. It's a hot mess.


Wow, never had any of those on Zen 2, it has been a exclusive Zen 3 feature for me ...


----------



## nick name

xeizo said:


> Wow, never had any of those on Zen 2, it has been a exclusive Zen 3 feature for me ...


Yeah, this specimen is so weird. The WHEA crashes seem to only respond to CLDO VDDP at 1.1V, but don't stop completely. And the USB dropouts I can't figure out.


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> I received and installed the new 3900X and while it does boost to 4.6GHz without the EDC bug or Fmax enhancer the WHEA errors are sooooooo much worse. And this CPU suffers from USB dropouts too. It's a hot mess.


Wow, sorry to hear about that man..

How much do you get this time and what is the code for it? Correctable or incorrectable?


----------



## hurricane28

I agree that its an hot mess though. 

Stock my CPU runs 10c hotter than manual... Boost is also all over the place and is not consistent. I'm runing 4.8 GHz 1.275v and 4000 MHz cl16 RAM for now and call it a day. 

No WHEA errors or any other weird instabilitie issues.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> Wow, sorry to hear about that man..
> 
> How much do you get this time and what is the code for it? Correctable or incorrectable?


These are hard crashes if CLDO VDDP is less than 1.1V and the USB dropouts come and go, but can be brought on with heavy CPU loads. Voltage helps, but doesn't cure the problems.


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> These are hard crashes if CLDO VDDP is less than 1.1V and the USB dropouts come and go, but can be brought on with heavy CPU loads. Voltage helps, but doesn't cure the problems.


The same ones i had on my 3600 it seems. This is unacceptable man, send it back and claim a new one, if that one has the same problems you can claim your money back ast they tin to repair it but didn't succeed and give you a faulty product. 

What happens with these USB dropouts? I have some mouse stutters every now and then but not all the time and it depends on what day lol. One day its good and the other its not so much lol. 

AMD is stil a mess and remain so, Mark my words, Intel is coming back and AMD cannot keep up and falls behind again as people are fed up with issues like these and go back or going strait to Intel.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> The same ones i had on my 3600 it seems. This is unacceptable man, send it back and claim a new one, if that one has the same problems you can claim your money back ast they tin to repair it but didn't succeed and give you a faulty product.
> 
> What happens with these USB dropouts? I have some mouse stutters every now and then but not all the time and it depends on what day lol. One day its good and the other its not so much lol.
> 
> AMD is stil a mess and remain so, Mark my words, Intel is coming back and AMD cannot keep up and falls behind again as people are fed up with issues like these and go back or going strait to Intel.


The USB dropouts can be brief or persist. It's happened in BIOS, login screen, in Windows, etc.


----------



## hurricane28

nick name said:


> The USB dropouts can be brief or persist. It's happened in BIOS, login screen, in Windows, etc.


Ok, i thought they already fixed this in newer BIOS and or chipset drivers..


----------



## sonic2911

from 2700x to 5800x, everything changed -,- the menu in bios actually. Do you guys have any quick guide for zen3? Also I try CB R20 with stock, 85C is what I got, I don't think I have a good chip.


----------



## hurricane28

sonic2911 said:


> from 2700x to 5800x, everything changed -,- the menu in bios actually. Do you guys have any quick guide for zen3? Also I try CB R20 with stock, 85C is what I got, I don't think I have a good chip.


I heart ya. 

I would go for an manual overclock man. I tried auto settings but it uses waaay to much voltage, so much for smart huh lmao. 

I run 10-15c cooler manually. 

For RAM it doesn't really matter though. 

If i were you i would use Ryzen clock tuner in order to see what your chip is capable of, it gives you an start.


----------



## sonic2911

hurricane28 said:


> I heart ya.
> 
> I would go for an manual overclock man. I tried auto settings but it uses waaay to much voltage, so much for smart huh lmao.
> 
> I run 10-15c cooler manually.
> 
> For RAM it doesn't really matter though.
> 
> If i were you i would use Ryzen clock tuner in order to see what your chip is capable of, it gives you an start.


Are your running 5800x too? What is your setting?


----------



## hurricane28

sonic2911 said:


> Are your running 5800x too? What is your setting?


No 5600x.

4.8 GHz 1.275v and 4000 MHz cl16 RAM with 2000 fclk.


----------



## sonic2911

hurricane28 said:


> No 5600x.
> 
> 4.8 GHz 1.275v and 4000 MHz cl16 RAM with 2000 fclk.


And you did manually or rct? Afaik oc RAM is not necessary for ryzen 3 but mine is quite low, 3200 c14

My stock btw


----------



## nick name

sonic2911 said:


> from 2700x to 5800x, everything changed -,- the menu in bios actually. Do you guys have any quick guide for zen3? Also I try CB R20 with stock, 85C is what I got, I don't think I have a good chip.


I'm using a 5800X and the heat startled me at first, but the more I read and was told the better I felt about it. Even the newer 3900X I was sent as a warranty replacement let itself run hotter for more performance. It's not something to worry about. The new silicon behaves much better with heat than the old did. 

The best thing to do is utilize Curve Optimizer. It's found under Advanced > AMD Overclocking > Precision Boost Overdrive > Advanced. Check Ryzen Master for your two best cores and make note of those because they cannot tolerate as large a negative offset as the other cores. My two best cores can do a -12 offset and all the others are set to -24 offset. This allows for much higher n core speeds and also less heat. Then in the PBO menu I have PPT set to around 180, TDC set to around 120, and I set EDC to 110 ~ 120. Setting EDC lower than 140 also created higher n core speeds. 

Set Core voltage to Auto and CPU LLC to 3 or 4. I use 4 to make sure my Curve Optimizer settings don't crash with high frequency, light load scenarios. I use the Aida 64 RAM Copy benchmark to test this. What crashes during that benchmark is fine under heavy loads.

For RAM and FCLK I run 3800MHz and I'd bet a 3200CL14 kit could do this. I can easily POST with higher FCLK, but haven't found rock solid stability with any of the higher straps. I'd set your DRAM voltage to 1.5V and then set RAM speed to 3800 and FCLK to 1900 and see if your current RAM timings will scale with the voltage. Good chance it will. You may need additional cooling for your RAM sticks at that voltage and speed. I've found that tight timings and RAM temps higher than ~ 42*C will mean errors. I place a fan on my GPU directly in front of my RAM to cool them. 

SOC, CLDO VDDG and VDDP left to Auto will likely set to sufficient levels.


----------



## sonic2911

nick name said:


> I'm using a 5800X and the heat startled me at first, but the more I read and was told the better I felt about it. Even the newer 3900X I was sent as a warranty replacement let itself run hotter for more performance. It's not something to worry about. The new silicon behaves much better with heat than the old did.
> 
> The best thing to do is utilize Curve Optimizer. It's found under Advanced > AMD Overclocking > Precision Boost Overdrive > Advanced. Check Ryzen Master for your two best cores and make note of those because they cannot tolerate as large a negative offset as the other cores. My two best cores can do a -12 offset and all the others are set to -24 offset. This allows for much higher n core speeds and also less heat. Then in the PBO menu I have PPT set to around 180, TDC set to around 120, and I set EDC to 110 ~ 120. Setting EDC lower than 140 also created higher n core speeds.
> 
> Set Core voltage to Auto and CPU LLC to 3 or 4. I use 4 to make sure my Curve Optimizer settings don't crash with high frequency, light load scenarios. I use the Aida 64 RAM Copy benchmark to test this. What crashes during that benchmark is fine under heavy loads.
> 
> For RAM and FCLK I run 3800MHz and I'd bet a 3200CL14 kit could do this. I can easily POST with higher FCLK, but haven't found rock solid stability with any of the higher straps. I'd set your DRAM voltage to 1.5V and then set RAM speed to 3800 and FCLK to 1900 and see if your current RAM timings will scale with the voltage. Good chance it will. You may need additional cooling for your RAM sticks at that voltage and speed. I've found that tight timings and RAM temps higher than ~ 42*C will mean errors. I place a fan on my GPU directly in front of my RAM to cool them.
> 
> SOC, CLDO VDDG and VDDP left to Auto will likely set to sufficient levels.


Nice, thank you a lot.
For ram I would try 3466 cl14 as it worked best with my 2700x, I can't stable 3600 even cl16 before. And it's ss B-die, smh.
I'm researching about the CO and will try this way. Do we need to set offset for the cpu volt, like zen+ ?
And what power plan should I use? still stick with windows balance?


----------



## nick name

sonic2911 said:


> Nice, thank you a lot.
> For ram I would try 3466 cl14 as it worked best with my 2700x, I can't stable 3600 even cl16 before. And it's ss B-die, smh.
> I'm researching about the CO and will try this way. Do we need to set offset for the cpu volt, like zen+ ?
> And what power plan should I use? still stick with windows balance?


My 2700X would do 3600 at 14-15-14-14. Is that what you run?

And I have found the Curve Optimizer doesn't play well with a negative offset on CPU voltage. 

Power plan hasn't been something I've seen to impact stability when using CO so I'd recommend that you use what you like.


----------



## thegr8anand

Guys i want to upgrade my ram from 16gb to 32gb. I have an excellent OC on my 2x8gb ram 3733 @ 14-15-13-22 with GD enabled. 

Its hard to find another 2 of the same sticks. I can get these which look to have same clocks: https://www.amazon.com/TEAMGROUP-T-Force-3200MHz-288-Pin-Desktop/dp/B075HQDYDN

But is 4x8gb better or should i get 2x16gb instead. What works better for C7H and 5900x. Also are ram over 3800mhz giving any benefits? I have been away for almost a year so not up to date with the changes.


----------



## sonic2911

nick name said:


> My 2700X would do 3600 at 14-15-14-14. Is that what you run?
> 
> And I have found the Curve Optimizer doesn't play well with a negative offset on CPU voltage.
> 
> Power plan hasn't been something I've seen to impact stability when using CO so I'd recommend that you use what you like.





















This is what I got so far

Ram 3600 14-15-15-15-30 @1.45. Honestly It's much better on zen3, I can't get these numbers on my old 2700x
CPU 46.3-46.5 all cores, 49 SC, below 85C while running R20 R23. I did PBO CO -20 all cores and +50Hz override


----------



## hurricane28

sonic2911 said:


> View attachment 2532115
> 
> 
> View attachment 2532116
> 
> 
> This is what I got so far
> 
> Ram 3600 14-15-15-15-30 @1.45. Honestly It's much better on zen3, I can't get these numbers on my old 2700x
> CPU 46.3-46.5 all cores, 49 SC, below 85C while running R20 R23. I did PBO CO -20 all cores and +50Hz override


That's more like it man, manual CPU oc too?


----------



## nick name

sonic2911 said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2532115
> 
> 
> View attachment 2532116
> 
> 
> This is what I got so far
> 
> Ram 3600 14-15-15-15-30 @1.45. Honestly It's much better on zen3, I can't get these numbers on my old 2700x
> CPU 46.3-46.5 all cores, 49 SC, below 85C while running R20 R23. I did PBO CO -20 all cores and +50Hz override


Things to keep in mind while tuning your settings:

Clock stretching. Monitor Effective Clock in HWiNFO when running your benchmarks.
If you have AIDA 64 test your Curve Optimizer offsets with the RAM Copy benchmark. Heavy loads and light loads are different and you can't assume what is stable in Cinebench is stable in other tasks like gaming and browsing the internet.
The best CPU cores cannot run as large a Curve Optimizer offset as the worst cores. So if you're running at - 20 because that's all that is stable then identify if the best cores are what are crashing. This is because the other cores may be able to use a larger offset which will net you more performance.
You may be able to run more than +50MHz in PBO Boost Override. I can run +150MHz comfortably and I'd like to think you can do better than +50MHz.
With RAM you can likely run at 3800MHz comfortably at around 1.5V (completely safe for b-die and some kits are sold with XMP voltage of 1.6V). Moving to higher memory and FCLK straps are where the silicon lottery will come into play.
Don't forget to tune your PPT, TDC, and EDC. I tuned PPT and TDC higher and EDC lower. You want to set high limits in BIOS and then use Ryzen Master to move them around. What is set in BIOS is the ceiling in Ryzen Master. In Ryzen Master you need to select Auto Overclocking if you've set Boost Override. And you cannot change Boost Override in Ryzen Master without a restart.

The multi core score in Cinebench is very respectable and what I can achieve with lower ambient temps. While it is very nice you could likely improve it with more fine tuning in Curve Optimizer . . . which is awesome. Your single core I think you can improve upon with higher Boost Override. 

Another benchmark you should use (if you aren't) is the CPU-Z benchmark. It's super quick so tuning won't take as long. I use it to quickly test settings and then move on to the longer running benchmarks like CB20, CB23 10 minute runs, OCCT (I've found useful for testing FCLK stability and you don't have to run it to completion either), and again AIDA 64 RAM Copy to test light loads at higher speeds. Oh also Y-Cruncher seems to be useful for quick FCLK and RAM stability tests too.

And of course all the testing specific to RAM stability too. I prefer Karhu, but it's a paid application.


----------



## Logue

*THE SAGA RETURNS*

Started playing Forza Horizon 5 a few days ago (bought through Steam)... Today I experienced the first hard crash in months (using BIOS 4603, albeit I hadn't gamed much). WHEA Logger says it was "Fatal Hardware Failure: Machine Check Exception - Hierarchy Error - Processor ID: 8". Using a 3800X, iCue, playing with a controller (XBOX Series X, the new one) via Bluetooth (ASUS BT-400). Windows 10 (21H1 - 19043.1348 - not part of Windows Insider). Sapphire 5700XT Pulse at stock settings with the latest AMD Radeon Driver installed (21.11.2 - optional, not WHQL). BIOS settings are nothing crazy, with PBO disabled (auto-OC enabled tho'), 32GB (2x16 from Corsair) DDR4 @ 3600MHz 18-22-22-22-42-64-6-9-36-4-12-24-5-5-558-16-12-18-6-1-4-4-1-6-6-0 1T with GDM Enabled, BGS Alt Enabled, memory voltage @ 1.4V, CLDO_VDDP @ 1.000V, VDDG_IOD @ 1.05V and SOC @1.1V. Level 3 LLC. 3800X.* Any recommendations, things to try?*


----------



## hurricane28

Logue said:


> *THE SAGA RETURNS*
> 
> Started playing Forza Horizon 5 a few days ago (bought through Steam)... Today I experienced the first hard crash in months (using BIOS 4603, albeit I hadn't gamed much). WHEA Logger says it was "Fatal Hardware Failure: Machine Check Exception - Hierarchy Error - Processor ID: 8". Using a 3800X, iCue, playing with a controller (XBOX Series X, the new one) via Bluetooth (ASUS BT-400). Windows 10 (21H1 - 19043.1348 - not part of Windows Insider). Sapphire 5700XT Pulse at stock settings with the latest AMD Radeon Driver installed (21.11.2 - optional, not WHQL). BIOS settings are nothing crazy, with PBO disabled (auto-OC enabled tho'), 32GB (2x16 from Corsair) DDR4 @ 3600MHz 18-22-22-22-42-64-6-9-36-4-12-24-5-5-558-16-12-18-6-1-4-4-1-6-6-0 1T with GDM Enabled, BGS Alt Enabled, memory voltage @ 1.4V, CLDO_VDDP @ 1.000V, VDDG_IOD @ 1.05V and SOC @1.1V. Level 3 LLC. 3800X.* Any recommendations, things to try?*


Only in Forza Horizon 5?

I have it too and no issues man. Im running 5600x though. I think the quality of 3000 series CPU's is very low and due to this people get WHEA errors. 
I had them too on my 3600 but my 5600x i have no issues whatsoever.


----------



## Tactix

Running 4603 w/ 5800x no issue i can tell so far.
Curious how on chip security features came through an update tho

Also did anyone else updated get the Aura update after running 4603?


----------



## lordzed83

Tactix said:


> Running 4603 w/ 5800x no issue i can tell so far.
> Curious how on chip security features came through an update tho
> 
> Also did anyone else updated get the Aura update after running 4603?


Ye i updated for fun see how it is. Good bios by looks of it and yes also had aura updating


----------



## sonic2911

nick name said:


> Things to keep in mind while tuning your settings:
> 
> Clock stretching. Monitor Effective Clock in HWiNFO when running your benchmarks.
> If you have AIDA 64 test your Curve Optimizer offsets with the RAM Copy benchmark. Heavy loads and light loads are different and you can't assume what is stable in Cinebench is stable in other tasks like gaming and browsing the internet.
> The best CPU cores cannot run as large a Curve Optimizer offset as the worst cores. So if you're running at - 20 because that's all that is stable then identify if the best cores are what are crashing. This is because the other cores may be able to use a larger offset which will net you more performance.
> You may be able to run more than +50MHz in PBO Boost Override. I can run +150MHz comfortably and I'd like to think you can do better than +50MHz.
> With RAM you can likely run at 3800MHz comfortably at around 1.5V (completely safe for b-die and some kits are sold with XMP voltage of 1.6V). Moving to higher memory and FCLK straps are where the silicon lottery will come into play.
> Don't forget to tune your PPT, TDC, and EDC. I tuned PPT and TDC higher and EDC lower. You want to set high limits in BIOS and then use Ryzen Master to move them around. What is set in BIOS is the ceiling in Ryzen Master. In Ryzen Master you need to select Auto Overclocking if you've set Boost Override. And you cannot change Boost Override in Ryzen Master without a restart.
> 
> The multi core score in Cinebench is very respectable and what I can achieve with lower ambient temps. While it is very nice you could likely improve it with more fine tuning in Curve Optimizer . . . which is awesome. Your single core I think you can improve upon with higher Boost Override.
> 
> Another benchmark you should use (if you aren't) is the CPU-Z benchmark. It's super quick so tuning won't take as long. I use it to quickly test settings and then move on to the longer running benchmarks like CB20, CB23 10 minute runs, OCCT (I've found useful for testing FCLK stability and you don't have to run it to completion either), and again AIDA 64 RAM Copy to test light loads at higher speeds. Oh also Y-Cruncher seems to be useful for quick FCLK and RAM stability tests too.
> 
> And of course all the testing specific to RAM stability too. I prefer Karhu, but it's a paid application.












It's stable for couple hours with prime95, 1 error after 14 cycle testmem5. Not bad right?


----------



## nick name

sonic2911 said:


> It's stable for couple hours with prime95, 1 error after 14 cycle testmem5. Not bad right?


What are your RAM timings?

And it looks like you need to update your Window 11. You're L3 cache should be around 10 ~ 11.


----------



## Logue

hurricane28 said:


> Only in Forza Horizon 5?
> 
> I have it too and no issues man. Im running 5600x though. I think the quality of 3000 series CPU's is very low and due to this people get WHEA errors.
> I had them too on my 3600 but my 5600x i have no issues whatsoever.


I THINK so... Haven't had much time to game, so I just play that. I occasionally play some other games but those are all very simple and don't tax the hardware at all (simple puzzle games, some coop games etc - my PC fans don't even spin up since the GPU is at or below 55ºC). With FH5 it taxes everything a lot harder and then some failures can happen. But it's ok, I just accepted it already, lol. Hopefully the reboots/hard crashes are long enough apart that I can play enough of it each time.


----------



## sonic2911

nick name said:


> What are your RAM timings?
> 
> And it looks like you need to update your Window 11. You're L3 cache should be around 10 ~ 11.












I think the timing is not tight yet. It's windows 11? what do you mean update?


----------



## nick name

sonic2911 said:


> I think the timing is not tight yet. It's windows 11? what do you mean update?











Windows 11 update fixes Ryzen L3 perf bug


Microsoft officially releases a fix to restore Ryzen L3 cache performance.




www.pcworld.com


----------



## sonic2911

nick name said:


> Windows 11 update fixes Ryzen L3 perf bug
> 
> 
> Microsoft officially releases a fix to restore Ryzen L3 cache performance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.pcworld.com












Actually I just update the new version of AIDA64


----------



## sonic2911

Timing was optimized, I think I could live with it from now  thanks @nick name


----------



## hurricane28

These chips run hot man or there is something with my loop. 

Im running custom 360mm loop and this is what i get: 



























74.4c at only 1.275 vcore? Seems little off to me. 

Fans are at 100% and so is the pump.


----------



## nick name

hurricane28 said:


> These chips run hot man or there is something with my loop.
> 
> Im running custom 360mm loop and this is what i get:
> 
> 
> 74.4c at only 1.275 vcore? Seems little off to me.
> 
> Fans are at 100% and so is the pump.


That looks solid to me. A 30 minute run with a max at 74.4C is far lower than I would see. After one run at 4.65GHz with 1.275V (droop to 1.263V) I hit 80.6*C with a 24.7*C ambient temp and a 360 AIO. 

Can you run less vcore?


----------



## hurricane28

Okay, seems hot to mee lol.

Yeah, im running 4.650 GHz now as at 4.8 it wasnt that stable. Still running "hot" though.


----------



## Rx4speed

Hey fellas, 1st post. I have the Crosshair VII non-wifi. I originally had a 2700x, now i have a 3800x on BIOS 4301. I have a used 5800x gold sample coming today. I have 4-8gb sticks of 3200/14 RAM, 3070ti, 2-NVME's. My 3800x is not overclocked, the RAM is(just tight timings at 3200). Artic Liquid Freezer II (Rev 2.0) 280mm AIO also. Wish it were Rev 4 for the offset mounting but alas. 
I plan on installing the 5800x this afternoon. I play mostly Sim Racing titles(in VR and triples), VRChat (bruh it's gamer girl heaven!) and other games. This 5800x will help with VR and sim racing.
Any tips before or after install??
Do I need to upgrade my BIOS before or after the 5800x goes in or NOT AT ALL?
I have TPM 2.0 etc. enabled for Windows 11 but I'm still on Win10 because SteamVR is fubar on 11.
I really played around with my 2700x, but the 3800x I just left at stock mostly. I want to get the most out of this 5800x,but I really don't know what is important for the 5000 series CPUs.
Any help would be appreciated. And if anyone has time to kill this afternoon and wants to help me get get all the LLC, PBO etc tuned (maybe on Discord), that would be great.
Or maybe link me to a good 5000's OC guide.
Oh BTW, not a noob, I'm 53, and my 1st two PC's were TRS-80 and an Apple II Plus(and I still own my Apple II Plus, Amiga, and my original Atari 2600). Built every PC I've owned since it was a thing.
Thanks Fellas!!


----------



## nick name

nick name said:


> I'm using a 5800X and the heat startled me at first, but the more I read and was told the better I felt about it. Even the newer 3900X I was sent as a warranty replacement let itself run hotter for more performance. It's not something to worry about. The new silicon behaves much better with heat than the old did.
> 
> The best thing to do is utilize Curve Optimizer. It's found under Advanced > AMD Overclocking > Precision Boost Overdrive > Advanced. Check Ryzen Master for your two best cores and make note of those because they cannot tolerate as large a negative offset as the other cores. My two best cores can do a -12 offset and all the others are set to -24 offset. This allows for much higher n core speeds and also less heat. Then in the PBO menu I have PPT set to around 180, TDC set to around 120, and I set EDC to 110 ~ 120. Setting EDC lower than 140 also created higher n core speeds.
> 
> Set Core voltage to Auto and CPU LLC to 3 or 4. I use 4 to make sure my Curve Optimizer settings don't crash with high frequency, light load scenarios. I use the Aida 64 RAM Copy benchmark to test this. What crashes during that benchmark is fine under heavy loads.
> 
> For RAM and FCLK I run 3800MHz and I'd bet a 3200CL14 kit could do this. I can easily POST with higher FCLK, but haven't found rock solid stability with any of the higher straps. I'd set your DRAM voltage to 1.5V and then set RAM speed to 3800 and FCLK to 1900 and see if your current RAM timings will scale with the voltage. Good chance it will. You may need additional cooling for your RAM sticks at that voltage and speed. I've found that tight timings and RAM temps higher than ~ 42*C will mean errors. I place a fan on my GPU directly in front of my RAM to cool them.
> 
> SOC, CLDO VDDG and VDDP left to Auto will likely set to sufficient levels.





nick name said:


> Things to keep in mind while tuning your settings:
> 
> Clock stretching. Monitor Effective Clock in HWiNFO when running your benchmarks.
> If you have AIDA 64 test your Curve Optimizer offsets with the RAM Copy benchmark. Heavy loads and light loads are different and you can't assume what is stable in Cinebench is stable in other tasks like gaming and browsing the internet.
> The best CPU cores cannot run as large a Curve Optimizer offset as the worst cores. So if you're running at - 20 because that's all that is stable then identify if the best cores are what are crashing. This is because the other cores may be able to use a larger offset which will net you more performance.
> You may be able to run more than +50MHz in PBO Boost Override. I can run +150MHz comfortably and I'd like to think you can do better than +50MHz.
> With RAM you can likely run at 3800MHz comfortably at around 1.5V (completely safe for b-die and some kits are sold with XMP voltage of 1.6V). Moving to higher memory and FCLK straps are where the silicon lottery will come into play.
> Don't forget to tune your PPT, TDC, and EDC. I tuned PPT and TDC higher and EDC lower. You want to set high limits in BIOS and then use Ryzen Master to move them around. What is set in BIOS is the ceiling in Ryzen Master. In Ryzen Master you need to select Auto Overclocking if you've set Boost Override. And you cannot change Boost Override in Ryzen Master without a restart.
> 
> The multi core score in Cinebench is very respectable and what I can achieve with lower ambient temps. While it is very nice you could likely improve it with more fine tuning in Curve Optimizer . . . which is awesome. Your single core I think you can improve upon with higher Boost Override.
> 
> Another benchmark you should use (if you aren't) is the CPU-Z benchmark. It's super quick so tuning won't take as long. I use it to quickly test settings and then move on to the longer running benchmarks like CB20, CB23 10 minute runs, OCCT (I've found useful for testing FCLK stability and you don't have to run it to completion either), and again AIDA 64 RAM Copy to test light loads at higher speeds. Oh also Y-Cruncher seems to be useful for quick FCLK and RAM stability tests too.
> 
> And of course all the testing specific to RAM stability too. I prefer Karhu, but it's a paid application.


Here is some guidance I recently offered to another member. Sorry that I'm doing this the lazy way.


----------



## lordzed83

@hurricane28 hot ?? More like normal. Not like You hitting pass 80 on core thats hot


----------



## hurricane28

@lordzed83 Yes, hot is an perception indeed. 

I expected lower temps with my custom 360mm loop to be honest.


----------



## crakej

lordzed83 said:


> Ye i updated for fun see how it is. Good bios by looks of it and yes also had aura updating


Well, seeing as it has your approval, I might give it a go as well! Were your settings much different from earlier bios, and how much was your GPU slowed down by going back to PCIE 3.0?


----------



## sonic2911

Any ideas about this?


----------



## nick name

sonic2911 said:


> Any ideas about this?


My experience has been unstable IF. It could also be RAM, but if I remember correctly your RAM timings aren't crazy. So I'd check voltages for both IF and RAM.

Edit:
I just noticed the temp of your RAM. Were those max temps during your run? Because high RAM temp can cause errors.


----------



## Keith Myers

hurricane28 said:


> @lordzed83 Yes, hot is an perception indeed.
> 
> I expected lower temps with my custom 360mm loop to be honest.


The physical size or surface area of the IHS of Ryzen is the limiting factor in removing heat fast enough in a custom cooling loop. You can remove twice as much heat wattage out of a TR or Epyc cpu in a standard sized 360mm radiator fitted custom loop and not even break 60° because of the large transfer area of the SP3 processor IHS.


----------



## hurricane28

Keith Myers said:


> The physical size or surface area of the IHS of Ryzen is the limiting factor in removing heat fast enough in a custom cooling loop. You can remove twice as much heat wattage out of a TR or Epyc cpu in a standard sized 360mm radiator fitted custom loop and not even break 60° because of the large transfer area of the SP3 processor IHS.


Yeah, and my D5 pump was set too fast. I dialed it down to 50% and get better temps. The water has more time to cool off in the radiator this way.


----------



## hurricane28

Today it happened again only this time its WHEA error event id 18: 










This is stock settings, only RAM is overclocked...


----------



## 1devomer

hurricane28 said:


> Today it happened again only this time its WHEA error event id 18:
> 
> View attachment 2534271
> 
> 
> This is stock settings, only RAM is overclocked...


You are still running IF/Mem 2000Mhz?


----------



## hurricane28

1devomer said:


> You are still running IF/Mem 2000Mhz?


Yep. 

Running 4.8 GHz static now and no issues. I think its Bios related though as Intel is not affected by it. 
Maybe because of the power deviation bs motherboard manufacturers put in their bios on Ryzen.


----------



## 1devomer

hurricane28 said:


> Yep.
> 
> Running 4.8 GHz static now and no issues. I think its Bios related though as Intel is not affected by it.
> Maybe because of the power deviation bs motherboard manufacturers put in their bios on Ryzen.


Well, i switched from a R5 3600, no WHEA at 1900Mhz 1:1 C16, to a 10600K at 2000Mhz C19.
I tested extensively both, both have WHEA errors when heavily overclocked, so no it is not brand related.
Both cpu brands will give WHEA when unstable, because the cpu error correction is able to catch the error, make Windows kernel aware about, to be listed in the event viewer.

The difference between the 2 cpu is that on Intel, i know exactly at which load the cpu will WHEA, when stress testing with AVX2.
On AMD, my R5 3600 was so bad, that i couldn't test thoroughly with AVX2, so i was never really sure under which load it would give a WHEA.

I copy and paste my post from the other thread, maybe you can try testing the stability with this tool, quite heavy stuff.
I have WHEA errors when i run it, but from the last time i tested the stability with, i haven't experienced any crash or WHEA when playing BFV, Apex Legend, Halo Infinite.



> Someone asked how to assess the AVX2 stability, here is a good tool for that.
> 
> @Falkentyne suggested assessing the AVX2 the stability, with the chess engine StockFish, known to be used also as a cpu benchmark.
> You can get StockFish AVX2 here, one also needs the chess graphical user interface, able to run the chess engine, available here.
> 
> Then:
> -Extract Arena chess GUI.
> -Extract the StockFish engine into the Arena chess GUI engine folder.
> -Run Arena chess GUI, go to the _Engines_ tab, _Install New Engine._
> -Select the StockFish engine from the engine folder.
> -Then _Engine _tab again, _Manage_.
> -Load Stockfish, remove the other existing loaded engines.
> -Always in the _Engine Management_, _go to the UCI _tab.
> -Set your *n° of thread *with _the CPU Cores Settings, _at the bottom_._
> -_Apply_, now go to the _Levels _tab, click on _Infinite_.
> -Launch the test with the double arrows icon, or going into the _Game _tab, clicking onto _Demo_.
> -To stop the test, there is a small cross icon, or into the Game tab,_ Stop Calculating_.
> (-If _Infinite _is too heavy, one can try the _Blitz Levels_.)
> 
> The cpu will try to compute the next player move for an infinite amount of time, the raw cpu heat output is quite low, compared to the power used in this test.
> In my case, Prime95 AVX draw 200Watt, StockFish AVX2 185Watt, Prime95 NO AVX 167Watt, CB R23 AVX 166Watt.
> But the StockFish L0 error detection rate is quite high, compared to other test, altogether with running relatively cool cpu T°, compared to the output power.
> 
> My current 10600k will output L0 errors on AVX2 _Infinite _Level at 5Ghz, still it is able to deal with the daily and gaming tasks, without crashing or outputting L0 errors.


----------



## hurricane28

1devomer said:


> Well, i switched from a R5 3600, no WHEA at 1900Mhz 1:1 C16, to a 10600K at 2000Mhz C19.
> I tested extensively both, both have WHEA errors when heavily overclocked, so no it is not brand related.
> Both cpu brands will give WHEA when unstable, because the cpu error correction is able to catch the error, make Windows kernel aware about, to be listed in the event viewer.
> 
> The difference between the 2 cpu is that on Intel, i know exactly at which load the cpu will WHEA, when stress testing with AVX2.
> On AMD, my R5 3600 was so bad, that i couldn't test thoroughly with AVX2, so i was never really sure under which load it would give a WHEA.
> 
> I copy and paste my post from the other thread, maybe you can try testing the stability with this tool, quite heavy stuff.
> I have WHEA errors when i run it, but from the last time i tested the stability with, i haven't experienced any crash or WHEA when playing BFV, Apex Legend, Halo Infinite.


Interesting stuff. 

Never heard from Intel have this WHEA errors man. A friend of mine has switched to Intel due to the AMD erraticness and he has no issues anymore, hes on ocn as well. 
I will give that tool a try later though. Just addicted to Battlefield 2042 now lol.


----------



## 1devomer

hurricane28 said:


> Interesting stuff.
> 
> Never heard from Intel have this WHEA errors man. A friend of mine has switched to Intel due to the AMD erraticness and he has no issues anymore, hes on ocn as well.
> I will give that tool a try later though. Just addicted to Battlefield 2042 now lol.


Well, my old 3600 was bad, it was a Zen2 cpu launch sample.
But at the end, it is the same thing for all cpu, what matters is the cooling and the silicon quality.

I think it boils down to the fact that with AMD, users are privileging PBO usage, where on Intel, you set up the cpu at 5.0Ghz and simply forget about.
At least it is what i did, not an issue since i tested correctly, and my current 10600k is not the best sample either.

If you can compute without having too much WHEA, reboots with StockFish AVX2, with your current core voltage, you shouldn't get WHEA with other lighter applications.
Tho, running 2000Mhz IF may cause more instability, even if the cores are stable per se.

I really encourage AMD users to check StockFish and report how it behaves with Zen2, Zen3 cpu.


----------



## crakej

So been on the latest bios for a few days now, running the settings from my 2606 setup. No WHEA Errors.

Without tuning I got my highest ever CB R20 scores, and one of my lowest R15 scores. I will take some time to try tuning things up and report back.

Of course I lose my PCIE4, but then I can't get hold of a card anyway, so not too bothered about that for now...


----------



## gupsterg

Howdy folks, been a while!  , hope you're all well .

After COVID hit, I was snowed under with work. Any spare time was spent doing other things then frequenting forums. Just been recently getting back in the groove!

My C7HWIFI has been .

Setup was:-

R9 [email protected]
Crucial Ballistix 3200MHz C16 2x16GB @ 3800MHz C16 1.35V
RX Vega 64 (Mild core OC with 1100MHz HBM)
Intel 660P 1TB NVMe via M.2_1 slot on C7HWIFI
2x Adata SX8200 Pro 1TB NVMe via ASUS Hyper M.2 x16 v2
2x SATA HDD 2TB
CoolerMaster V850 PSU

Cooling was:-

Bykski A-Ryzen-ThV2-X, RGB connected to RGB_HEADER2
EK FC-Radeon Vega
EK XRES Revo 140 D5 PWM (PWM from W_PUMP+, powered by molex)
3x Arctic Cooling F12 PWM on top rad (PWM from CHA_FAN1, powered by molex)
4x Arctic Cooling F12 PWM on front rad (PWM from CHA_FAN3, powered by molex)
1x Be Quiet Silent Wings 3 140mm on near RAM PWM/Power from CPU_OPT
1x Be Quiet Silent Wings 3 140mm on rear of case PWM/Power from CPU_FAN

2x Barrow TCWD-V1 temperature probes connected to W_IN & W_OUT. IN shows water temp as it leaves GPU/CPU block to enter top rad and OUT measures water temp leaving front rad.
1X Temperature probe connected to T_SENSOR1 to give case air intake temperature

Plus I had 2x A-RGB 21 LED strips, connected to ADD_HEADER1. One strip by top rad and other by front rad.

Recently got a Sapphire RX 6800 XT Pulse, mounted a Bykski A-SP6800-X with back plate to it. I went A-RGB with it, so now ADD_HEADER2 is also in use. RGB is not my thing, I just have it on rig to see if I have issues with using as much of the board as I can.

Due to the sale on Aliexpress I spoiled myself with a Bykski B-VGA-SC-X to use with block.



Spoiler
















Due to wanting to give it full PCI-E lanes I had to make changes to storage. Swapped the Intel 660P 1TB to WD SN550 2TB. Removed ASUS Hyper card with 2x Adata SX8200 Pro 1TB, replaced with 2x MX 500 2TB SATA SSD. These storage changes meant I could also remove 1x SATA HDD 2TB, planning to remove the other so instead of 4x fans on front rad have 6x.

Current rig state photo in spoiler and settings I use for UEFI 4603 attached below.



Spoiler















My final update to rig will be to install a R9 5900X, yesterday I received batch code: BG 2143SUS. I hope it's a silicon lottery win, but won't have the time to try it for a few days, due to lack of time to pull apart rig.


----------



## The Sandman

gupsterg said:


> Howdy folks, been a while!  , hope you're all well .


OCN hasn't been the same without you man, WELCOME back!
Nice job on the build. I have to upgrade one of these days lol.


----------



## hurricane28

gupsterg said:


> Howdy folks, been a while!  , hope you're all well .
> 
> After COVID hit, I was snowed under with work. Any spare time was spent doing other things then frequenting forums. Just been recently getting back in the groove!
> 
> My C7HWIFI has been .
> 
> Setup was:-
> 
> R9 [email protected]
> Crucial Ballistix 3200MHz C16 2x16GB @ 3800MHz C16 1.35V
> RX Vega 64 (Mild core OC with 1100MHz HBM)
> Intel 660P 1TB NVMe via M.2_1 slot on C7HWIFI
> 2x Adata SX8200 Pro 1TB NVMe via ASUS Hyper M.2 x16 v2
> 2x SATA HDD 2TB
> CoolerMaster V850 PSU
> 
> Cooling was:-
> 
> Bykski A-Ryzen-ThV2-X, RGB connected to RGB_HEADER2
> EK FC-Radeon Vega
> EK XRES Revo 140 D5 PWM (PWM from W_PUMP+, powered by molex)
> 3x Arctic Cooling F12 PWM on top rad (PWM from CHA_FAN1, powered by molex)
> 4x Arctic Cooling F12 PWM on front rad (PWM from CHA_FAN3, powered by molex)
> 1x Be Quiet Silent Wings 3 140mm on near RAM PWM/Power from CPU_OPT
> 1x Be Quiet Silent Wings 3 140mm on rear of case PWM/Power from CPU_FAN
> 
> 2x Barrow TCWD-V1 temperature probes connected to W_IN & W_OUT. IN shows water temp as it leaves GPU/CPU block to enter top rad and OUT measures water temp leaving front rad.
> 1X Temperature probe connected to T_SENSOR1 to give case air intake temperature
> 
> Plus I had 2x A-RGB 21 LED strips, connected to ADD_HEADER1. One strip by top rad and other by front rad.
> 
> Recently got a Sapphire RX 6800 XT Pulse, mounted a Bykski A-SP6800-X with back plate to it. I went A-RGB with it, so now ADD_HEADER2 is also in use. RGB is not my thing, I just have it on rig to see if I have issues with using as much of the board as I can.
> 
> Due to the sale on Aliexpress I spoiled myself with a Bykski B-VGA-SC-X to use with block.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2535297
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Due to wanting to give it full PCI-E lanes I had to make changes to storage. Swapped the Intel 660P 1TB to WD SN550 2TB. Removed ASUS Hyper card with 2x Adata SX8200 Pro 1TB, replaced with 2x MX 500 2TB SATA SSD. These storage changes meant I could also remove 1x SATA HDD 2TB, planning to remove the other so instead of 4x fans on front rad have 6x.
> 
> Current rig state photo in spoiler and settings I use for UEFI 4603 attached below.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2535292
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My final update to rig will be to install a R9 5900X, yesterday I received batch code: BG 2143SUS. I hope it's a silicon lottery win, but won't have the time to try it for a few days, due to lack of time to pull apart rig.


Hey man, been a while indeed! 

Im well thnx. Recovered well from Covid luckily. 

How about you? Nice build btw man


----------



## gupsterg

The Sandman said:


> OCN hasn't been the same without you man, WELCOME back!
> Nice job on the build. I have to upgrade one of these days lol.


Thanks chap! 

I hadn't been looking at pricing of kit for a while. Was quite a shock to see the current state of affair with GPUs. Due to this aspect got decent money for the RX Vega 64. Then lucked out as I ordered a RX 6800, but OCuk had over sold it and gave me FOC upgrade to RX 6800 XT. I only got it a few weeks ago, stock levels have tanked more and prices have crept up some more . The Bykski block/plate/temp module cost ~￡95 delivered from China. Had been expecting it nearer Christmas, but arrived within 14 days of ordering/getting GPU.

Still got a set of Samsung B die to see how the R9 5900X behaves with them vs Micron E. But gotta say been so impressed with the Crucial Ballisitix Micron E kit. Bought them back in Feb 20 for about half the price of Samsung B die. The profile set back then has stuck, even through the UEFI updates.

Sorta feel treacherous swapping out the R9 3900X, this was best of 3 I purchased at the time. Has had nice temps across both CCDs, was decent stock clocks and the best IMC out of them. It can do 4x 8GB Samsung B die and 2x 16GB Micron E die @ 3800MHz with stock SOC/CLDO_VDDG/CLDO_VDDP/VDIMM. If I tweak BCLK it craps out around 191xMHz FCLK.

Hoping the R9 5900X is as sweet as the R9 3900X has been.



hurricane28 said:


> Hey man, been a while indeed!
> 
> Im well thnx. Recovered well from Covid luckily.
> 
> How about you? Nice build btw man


Thank you .

Glad to know you didn't suffer and recovery went well. Even though I and my partner have a lot of contact with public, we've both not had it.

That 5600X you've got has beast FCLK/UCLK  , nice to see C7H can eek the best from it for you.


----------



## hurricane28

Yeah well, what can you say man. If you ain't Dutch you ain't much lmao. 

Anyway, my chip is quite good indeed man. Im running 4.8 GHz and 2000 fclk with 4000 HMz RAM cl16. 
RAM speed doesn't do much really but its need that it can do it. 

4.650 GHz i was running before but i see no benefit in gaming when running 4.8 GHz to be honest but other applications will. Im GPU bound in games so if any i need more GPU powah. 

I also need more RAM, 16 gb is not gonna cut it in Battlefield 2042 and recording and other things running in the back ground.


----------



## lordzed83

@hurricane28 ofc going back from pcie 4.0 to pcie 3.0 had performance hit on NVME and GPU. But done with new world for now so not flashing back... YET haha. This latest bios is nice and stable pfc get 1 whea error like on all bioses pass 3xxx and it works for days no problems. To this day i got no idea why i geert that one error and how to fix it but system is stable. 
@crakej if u got 2604 stable dont bother i only flashed new one cause bios corupted on power surge and was like or flash that or check hows new going


----------



## crakej

> @crakej if u got 2604 stable dont bother i only flashed new one cause bios corupted on power surge and was like or flash that or check hows new going


It was stable, but not having my PCIE4 GPU I decided to try this bios out. Very stable so far unlike most of the others since 2604

Good to see you @gupsterg


----------



## gupsterg

@hurricane28

Dunno current prices of RAM kits, but the Crucial Micron E die 32GB kit I got was £99 back in Feb 20. Yes B die can tune further than it, but in every day use you wouldn't notice it IMO. And E Die seems less temperature sensitive. As even through the summer I didn't have issues.

@crakej

Thanks, hope you're all good chap .

@ fellow meddlers 

R9 5900X Batch: BG 2143SUS was installed yesterday evening  . Using UEFI 4603 with Crucial Ballistix Sport LT 2x16GB 3200MHz C16 kit (BLS2K16G4D32AESB).

Due to RAM density used, UEFI auto rule slammed SOC to 1.05V  . This doesn't occur if I used 1 stick or even 4x8GB single rank, only on 2x16GB dual rank.

Then I set 0.975V plus set CLDO_VDDP/CLDO_VDDG CCD & IOD at 0.901V, VDIMM 1.35V. Started at 3200MHz and worked up to 3733MHz with quick fire testing of:-

Does system POST.
Does OS load.
Does Kahru RAM Test show error (only testing to 100% at this point)
I was using timings previously used with R9 3900X for 3800MHz C16. At 3800MHz I needed to change SOC to 1.0V to pass RT for 100% without WHEA error on CPU showing in HWINFO. Called it a night at this point.

Yesterday I was seeing about average temperature of ~7C difference between CPU CCD1 (Tdie) and CPU CCD2 (Tdie) . TIM had been spread over IHS using a strip of plastic. Today I am seeing only ~3C  .

CPU has no issues getting to OS with upto 4000MHz RAM 1:1:1, even with relevant voltages at stock. But I get substantial WHEA errors . So I have currently settled to test 3800MHz. After some repeat & rinse testing today of Kahru RAM Test / Y-Cruncher / RealBench I am at SOC 1.025V with CLDO_VDDG CCD & IOD 0.951V.

Next plan is to see how Curve Optimizer goes. So far happy with R9 5900X, it's doing same RAM/FCLK MHz as R9 3900X. Also pretty much using same settings of voltages.


----------



## hurricane28

gupsterg said:


> @hurricane28
> 
> Dunno current prices of RAM kits, but the Crucial Micron E die 32GB kit I got was £99 back in Feb 20. Yes B die can tune further than it, but in every day use you wouldn't notice it IMO. And E Die seems less temperature sensitive. As even through the summer I didn't have issues.
> 
> @crakej
> 
> Thanks, hope you're all good chap .
> 
> @ fellow meddlers
> 
> R9 5900X Batch: BG 2143SUS was installed yesterday evening  . Using UEFI 4603 with Crucial Ballistix Sport LT 2x16GB 3200MHz C16 kit (BLS2K16G4D32AESB).
> 
> Due to RAM density used, UEFI auto rule slammed SOC to 1.05V  . This doesn't occur if I used 1 stick or even 4x8GB single rank, only on 2x16GB dual rank.
> 
> Then I set 0.975V plus set CLDO_VDDP/CLDO_VDDG CCD & IOD at 0.901V, VDIMM 1.35V. Started at 3200MHz and worked up to 3733MHz with quick fire testing of:-
> 
> Does system POST.
> Does OS load.
> Does Kahru RAM Test show error (only testing to 100% at this point)
> I was using timings previously used with R9 3900X for 3800MHz C16. At 3800MHz I needed to change SOC to 1.0V to pass RT for 100% without WHEA error on CPU showing in HWINFO. Called it a night at this point.
> 
> Yesterday I was seeing about average temperature of ~7C difference between CPU CCD1 (Tdie) and CPU CCD2 (Tdie) . TIM had been spread over IHS using a strip of plastic. Today I am seeing only ~3C  .
> 
> CPU has no issues getting to OS with upto 4000MHz RAM 1:1:1, even with relevant voltages at stock. But I get substantial WHEA errors . So I have currently settled to test 3800MHz. After some repeat & rinse testing today of Kahru RAM Test / Y-Cruncher / RealBench I am at SOC 1.025V with CLDO_VDDG CCD & IOD 0.951V.
> 
> Next plan is to see how Curve Optimizer goes. So far happy with R9 5900X, it's doing same RAM/FCLK MHz as R9 3900X. Also pretty much using same settings of voltages.



True but since i already have Trident Z neo i would like to have the same 8 gb x2 kit so i get 32 GB total and get some performance increase as Ryzen tin to like 4 sticks of 8 GB lol.


----------



## gupsterg

Decided to optimise based on fused best core than CPPC.



Code:


Fused    03 01 00 04 02 05 07 06 11 08 10 09

CO v1    05 05 11 12 12 12 15 15 15 15 20 20

Used stock PPT/TDC/EDC, scalar 1x. Above setup was first tinker with CO last night. Today's stability testing seems sound so far.

Below graph is RealBench stress test 15min run stock vs PBCO.



Spoiler















Kahru RAM Test is also showing gain on all cores.



Spoiler















Dunno if the CB23 is any good.



Spoiler















Current profile UEFI settings attached below.



hurricane28 said:


> True but since i already have Trident Z neo i would like to have the same 8 gb x2 kit so i get 32 GB total and get some performance increase as Ryzen tin to like 4 sticks of 8 GB lol.


It isn't case of Ryzen likes 4 sticks of 8GB.

8GB sticks tend to be single rank RAM, when you end up using 4 sticks your creating dual rank setup. Effectively you are using the motherboard slots to create 2x16GB dual rank.

The C7H is daisy chain memory topology, 2 slots are optimised. If you also use 2 dimms you will basically be in better position to tweak than 4x8GB. G.Skill kits can have differing PCB even if same model and RAM IC, see this post. So you could be creating variance. When aiming for best tinkering experience you wanna minimise variance.


----------



## hurricane28

gupsterg said:


> Decided to optimise based on fused core info than CPPC.
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> Fused    03 01 00 04 02 05 07 06 11 08 10 09
> 
> CO v1    05 05 11 12 12 12 15 15 15 15 20 20
> 
> Used stock PPT/TDC/EDC, scalar 1x. Above setup was first tinker with CO last night. Today's stability testing seems sound so far.
> 
> Below graph is RealBench stress test 15min run stock vs PBCO.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2535852
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kahru RAM Test is also showing gain on all cores.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2535853
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dunno if the CB23 is any good.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2535854
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It isn't case of Ryzen likes 4 sticks of 8GB.
> 
> 8GB sticks tend to be single rank RAM, when you end up using 4 sticks your creating dual rank setup. Effectively you are using the motherboard slots to create 2x16GB dual rank.
> 
> The C7H is daisy chain memory topology, 2 slots are optimised. If you also use 2 dimms you will basically be in better position to tweak than 4x8GB. G.Skill kits can have differing PCB even if same model and RAM IC, see this post. So you could be creating variance. When aiming for best tinkering experience you wanna minimise variance.



Exactly. I have 2 slots left and i want 32 GB so my logic is to get the "same" kit i already have so i can load DOCP and call it a day. OR if im lucky, i can get 3800 MHz but there is no need except for benchmarking to get faster ram or even overclock it for gaming alone. 

When i play Battlefield 2042 and record and have chrome open i end up using 98% of my RAM so i NEED more RAM and since the same kit i already have is cheaper than what i payed for it it seems like a no brainer.


----------



## gupsterg

@hurricane28

Cool, just wanted to make you aware  .

On another liking the R9 5900X, plus the Micron E die 2x16GB. So I reckon new year gonna sell off my R9 3900X and Samsung B die 4x8GB.


----------



## hurricane28

gupsterg said:


> @hurricane28
> 
> Cool, just wanted to make you aware  .
> 
> On another liking the R9 5900X, plus the Micron E die 2x16GB. So I reckon new year gonna sell off my R9 3900X and Samsung B die 4x8GB.


Ye i was aware of all that though, but thnx anyway. 

Okay cool. I really like my 5600x man, much better experience than my 3600 was to be honest. Higher clocks etc. Although the boost clocks are a bit iffy sometimes on auto settings. It boosts to 4.850 GHz but only for short period and i get high temps when i run auto. Manual 4.8 GHz nets me more performance all the way at lower voltage and temps. Auto setting just throws a lot of voltage at the CPU at a certain speed, its not what i call "smart" but okay lol. 

I do have some mouse tracking issues, not sure if its AMD USB related or 2000 fclk, still testing.


----------



## gupsterg

I liked the R5 3600 I had, nice clocks, responded to PBO and did 3800/1900. But gotta admit I like the Curve optimiser feature of 5000 series. Just nuts I have managed to use 2000 series, 3000 series and 5000 series with same board. I will have to dig up old screenies to see if I tried a 1000 series when got it first as I don't remember now. But how much polished Ryzen is compared with 1000 series! 

When I had FCLK/UCLK/MEMCLK too high and unstable (ie WHEA error). I would occasionality see mouse "hiccup". I could be moving a window and it would like spring back to place where it was just a moment ago and then mouse/window would continue moving, like catch up to reality. So far not had any USB dropout issues. I use 4 on rear and mobo header is connected to case IO, where I can add SSDs via an adaptor, besides USB stick.

So far 3800MHz with PBCO is working well for me. Not only did Kahru RAM Test and Realbench show gains on all cores boost, but Y-Cruncher (which is heavier/hotter load) is showing gains of MHz, but the momentary peaks of temp got bigger.



Spoiler


----------



## nick name

It looks like the chipset drivers on the ASUS support page are newer than the drivers on the AMD support page.


----------



## crakej

Any of you guys used CTR 2.1 to optimize CPU OC? Any good results from it?

I'm still figuring it out, but I've had CB20 scores of >7500, up from around 7100 using PE3 and EDC bug....


----------



## gupsterg

Yesterday ran Corecycler with P95 on PBO CO profile, lasted 2.33hrs then I aborted it, attached below log file. So far out of all uses only Y-Cruncher has nasty spike of temp, for extremely short times. Ran things like CPU-Z bench, CB15/20/23, AIDA64 RAM Bench, Realbench Stress & Bench mode, CoreCycler (P95 only so far), had little burst on GTAV last night.

Also tried CO profile with other tweaks to see if I could improve profile, it was slightly lower results than better. Tried cores 03 & 01 at 0, then reset them back to 05. Then set core 00 as 0 and reset back to 11.

Current:-



Code:


Fused    03 01 00 04 02 05 07 06 11 08 10 09

CO v1    05 05 11 12 12 12 15 15 15 15 20 20

I'll be honest my CO profile was purely set from a stab in the dark initially. Based on others share that keep smaller offset on best cores and larger on worse. Punched in 05 on best two, punched in 20 on worst 2, then went for 11 on 3rd best core and arbitrarily set 12 and 15 on others.

So seems gotta test if can increase the negative offsets of magnitude more, to gain anything. In CB23 current CO profiles nets ~4% on average more within stock PPT/TDC/EDC, doesn't affect single core by much (~0.6% on average) which I would discount as run to run variance. Plus I haven't added a FMAX offset so didn't think I'd gain anything on single core. Things like Kahru/Y-Cruncher/Realbench stress also show 100-140MHz improved all cores average effective clocks gains. All in all a nice little boost, the R9 5900X has fulfilled it's purpose for me. Scratched a HW update itch  , would have been disappointed if it didn't reach same FCLK/UCLK/MEMCLK as R9 3900X, CO tweaking is a nice bonus and big boon is IPC gains.

@crakej

Not used CTR, any version.

R9 3900X was stock, except FCLK/UCLK/MEMCLK 1900MHz, ~7200-7300 was what it nabbed in CB20 multi and ~51x to 520 in single. No OS/UEFI tweaks to aid it, daily usage OS/UEFI settings. The higher results where some PBO tweaks and IIRC the highest perhaps an all cores OC, these were not stability tested profiles. Just runs to see what I would be missing if OC'd CPU. I can't say I saw much gains or losses with OS/UEFI updates vs what it was when got it and they were older versions.



Spoiler















** Edit **

Moved on to tweaking CO using a method The Stilt highlighted to me when I asked him for tips via PM, I've posted info here. My current profile and test/bench data posted here.


----------



## Asutz

Is somebody in here using 4 Dimms on the Ch7, got an offer for F4-3600C15D-16GTZ, theese are singlerank but 4x8 gb.
not 100% sure if they will work without trouble. need bit of help. thanks


----------



## hurricane28

Asutz said:


> Is somebody in here using 4 Dimms on the Ch7, got an offer for F4-3600C15D-16GTZ, theese are singlerank but 4x8 gb.
> not 100% sure if they will work without trouble. need bit of help. thanks


Yes me. 

Im running 4 sticks of 8x4 GB 3600 MHz CL16 32 GB total. 

Running them at 3800 CL16 with no issues. Can do 4000 MHz but there is no gain whatsoever, not even from 3600 to 3800 to be honest lol. 

The cool thing when running this setup is that Ryzen sees it as double ranked so you get more performance theoretically.

If you can get a good offer on them i would do it man and see how it goes.


----------



## Asutz

Sounds good, yes it is quad Channel, its the same with 2x DR, Single Rank in theory is a bit better for higher clocks.
Think its fine then and gonna try 4x8gb, 3600 c15 32gb for around 200€ is good deal.i think.


----------



## Bart

Asutz said:


> Sounds good, yes it is quad Channel, its the same with 2x DR, Single Rank in theory is a bit better for higher clocks.
> Think its fine then and gonna try 4x8gb, 3600 c15 32gb for around 200€ is good deal.i think.


The only thing you might notice is that ram will kinda clock itself weird, the XMP won't actually run 15-15-15-35, it bumps it to 16-15-15-35 so it can run at 1T. At least that's the way my 2x8GB kit of that stuff works. Not a problem though, especially if you're going to be manually setting timings anyway.


----------



## nick name

Asutz said:


> Sounds good, yes it is quad Channel, its the same with 2x DR, Single Rank in theory is a bit better for higher clocks.
> Think its fine then and gonna try 4x8gb, 3600 c15 32gb for around 200€ is good deal.i think.


No, it's still only dual-channel. With all four slots populated with single-rank it does become dual-rank.


----------



## nick name

Bart said:


> The only thing you might notice is that ram will kinda clock itself weird, the XMP won't actually run 15-15-15-35, it bumps it to 16-15-15-35 so it can run at 1T. At least that's the way my 2x8GB kit of that stuff works. Not a problem though, especially if you're going to be manually setting timings anyway.


This happens with GDM on. If you disable GDM then you can run odd numbered tCL.


----------



## goondam

hurricane28 said:


> Yes me.
> 
> Im running 4 sticks of 8x4 GB 3600 MHz CL16 32 GB total.
> 
> Running them at 3800 CL16 with no issues. Can do 4000 MHz but there is no gain whatsoever, not even from 3600 to 3800 to be honest lol.
> 
> The cool thing when running this setup is that Ryzen sees it as double ranked so you get more performance theoretically.
> 
> If you can get a good offer on them i would do it man and see how it goes.


daisy chain on ch7 doesn't spaz out with 4 stick when you try to oc??

also how many boards on am4 are even T-topology


----------



## Keith Myers

Very few boards in fact. I think the were a few in the early day of AM4,


----------



## hurricane28

goondam said:


> daisy chain on ch7 doesn't spaz out with 4 stick when you try to oc??
> 
> also how many boards on am4 are even T-topology


Other than its harder to OC 4 sticks vs 2 i have no issues man. System runs smooth as butter. 

Ofcos when i try to tinker with RAM oc it gets wild but im happy for now lol. Takes too much time to be honest and you gain next to nothing with Ryzen.


----------



## jaxxxpaxxx

Got a question for you guys: what is currently your preferred bios version for stability? How is 4603 for you?


----------



## Asutz

If u mean "running out of the box" stability than it doesnt really matter i would say.If Co Settings are too aggressive its unstable, bios Versions will not help.
memory support got better over time more or less more helpful if u just use xmp, its way less finicky.Can only speak for the Kits i've used and anything over 3733Mhz needs most of the time manual tweaking and fiddling around with different Voltages and or resistances.memory training on this board is weird, idk if its intended but think its more or less the same compared to older versions.

Older Ones had Pci4 Support but no zen3 microcode in it if i remember correctly or higher pbo override was possible.settings that helped with idle restarts etc. could be used for ages but always prefer the newest ones.


----------



## Tactix

jaxxxpaxxx said:


> Got a question for you guys: what is currently your preferred bios version for stability? How is 4603 for you?


4603 is running well for me, although i never really had stability issues with any bios.


----------



## lordzed83

jaxxxpaxxx said:


> Got a question for you guys: what is currently your preferred bios version for stability? How is 4603 for you?


One of better of new bioses in my case. Very stable


----------



## hurricane28

Agreed, i have no issues so far to be honest.


----------



## minal

What is the maximum memory capacity for the C7H these days? I thought it was originally 64GB. I'm still on BIOS 2203 with my 2700X and I haven't been following this thread lately but just noticed 128GB mentioned on Asus' website. Did something change?



> *Memory*
> 
> *3rd and 2nd Gen AMD Ryzen™ Processors*
> 4 x DIMM, Max. 128GB, DDR4 3600(O.C.)/3466(O.C.)/3400(O.C.)/3200(O.C.)/3000(O.C.)/2933(O.C.)/2800(O.C.)/2666/2400/2133 MHz Non-ECC, Un-buffered Memory *








ASUS ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) | ROG - Republic Of Gamers | ASUS USA


ASUS ROG Crosshair VII Hero with WiFi - Powerful features + performance = the perfect balance for gamers and enthusiasts alike. Next level performance.



rog.asus.com





That would be awesome, but I didn't find 128GB mentioned in the QVL for either 2nd or 3rd gen CPUs.

Weirdly, there are some 8x 16GB listings in the QVL, and last I checked my motherboard didn't grow 4 extra DIMM slots.


----------



## yugjooh

I want to install an m.2 nvme. I'm going to install only one on the bottom nvme slot the m.2_1 slot, and not use the top one. So can I use the heatsink from the top m.2 slot for the bottom?


----------



## Keith Myers

yugjooh said:


> I want to install an m.2 nvme. I'm going to install only one on the bottom nvme slot the m.2_1 slot, and not use the top one. So can I use the heatsink from the top m.2 slot for the bottom?


Yes, the heat sink goes on either position. Just move it to the bottom slot.


----------



## vegetagaru

hello guys no news on bios updates since 4603 ?


----------



## Reous

Hero:


https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-4703.ZIP



Hero Wifi:


https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-4703.ZIP


----------



## Logue

Has anyone tried the 4703 BIOS yet? Is it worth upgrading?


----------



## Asutz

flashed 4703, it has the same **** Bug as 1.2.0.4 iod/ccd voltage max is 1v so if u want to get 3800 running u maybe need different voltages which works on 4603.
Other than that atm working without issues, they changed PBO / Curve optimizer Settings a bit but max Override still locked @+200, its sad, think that most 5600x could handle more.

Max Voltage the cpu can request, not tested, maybe locked @1.4v too. if u dont have issues with 4603, not worth to switch.


----------



## vegetagaru

Reous said:


> Hero:
> 
> 
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-ASUS-4703.ZIP
> 
> 
> 
> Hero Wifi:
> 
> 
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-4703.ZIP


Many thanks on this one 

what was your source ? i wanted to keep updated on this matter too since on official page only appears the old one :|


----------



## vegetagaru

Asutz said:


> flashed 4703, it has the same **** Bug as 1.2.0.4 iod/ccd voltage max is 1v so if u want to get 3800 running u maybe need different voltages which works on 4603.
> Other than that atm working without issues, they changed PBO / Curve optimizer Settings a bit but max Override still locked @+200, its sad, think that most 5600x could handle more.
> 
> Max Voltage the cpu can request, not tested, maybe locked @1.4v too. if u dont have issues with 4603, not worth to switch.


ive been having a headache with my 5900x(2step) and ram 4400 @ 3800/3600 i keep getting "WHEA 19 - APIC ID: 0" i tried to raise iod/ccd to 1 but games keep crashing to desktop, im using 0.91/0.9 now dosnt crash anymore but still have the warming very often.... also i checked on hwinfo and it counts as error (CPU all stock)

so i may give a try to this new one


----------



## Ryoz

vegetagaru said:


> Many thanks on this one
> 
> what was your source ? i wanted to keep updated on this matter too since on official page only appears the old one :|


It is from Asus product support page, as sometime the BIOS link will first show up on certain region like Global / US


----------



## vegetagaru

well my 5900x and my ram loved it... all my whea warmings are gone now X) but using stock cpu settings i will try to do some curve tuning and see about it


----------



## smokin_mitch

New bios 4703 AGESA V2 PI 1.2.0.6b is out!!!

anyone tried it yet?


----------



## Keith Myers

smokin_mitch said:


> New bios 4703 AGESA V2 PI 1.2.0.6b is out!!!
> 
> anyone tried it yet?


This new BIOS is because of AMD's request to remove overclocking from the BIOS for Ryzen 7 5800X3D cpus in the latest AGESA stack.


----------



## smokin_mitch

Keith Myers said:


> This new BIOS is because of AMD's request to remove overclocking from the BIOS for Ryzen 7 5800X3D cpus in the latest AGESA stack.


guess I'll just stick with 4603 then


----------



## 97pedro

Just flashed the brand new BIOS.

Everything seems rock solid as of now.

Getting really good scores with these memory settings.

Can't seem to get 3800mhz with 1900mhz fclk that much stable, it can't do it with the timings I'm using at 3600mhz at least.

3800mhz 14-17-15-28 gives me better latency scores, but from all my extensive testing, it's always worse in gaming, testing about 5x Tomb Raider benchmark with RTX 3070, we're only talking a small margin, but the 3600mhz setting always seems to win (Something that didn't happen with my 3800x, 3800mhz was always better than 3600mhz no matter the timings used).










Something strange also (and not do with this particular BIOS), sometimes the AIDA64 Cache and memory benchmark just restarts my system, I may have a unstable overclock yes, but this overclock passes everything I throw at it, can completly pass 10 minutes loop of Cinebench R23, I can game for how much time I feel like, I can run intensive cpu tasks, everything, but crashes doing a memory and cache benchmark.

Memory has been tested with TestMem5 with Anta777's Extreme1 Profile.

Might it be a problem with Aida64 itself?

Also, 2T GDM OFF is ALWAYS better than 1T GDM ON, in any scenario, we're taling small margins, but they're there.

Really can't wrap my head around about what's happening with AIDA64 random restarts.

Any idea?


----------



## ossimc

well...then its probably the new BIOS?


Who is thinking about testing with the new 5800X3D ??


----------



## VnnAmed

Hi, after waiting for what feels like forever I have finally pulled the trigger and swapped from 2700x to 5600x.
I have installed the 4703 while at it, because with 2700x I was at 2603 or something. I have 2 issues, first of them being a below average CPU score on my 5600x. I am running default settings with 3600 CL14 Teamgroup RAM. I expected it to be at least average with these sticks even at XMP.










The other one is this metric in hwinfo. It was there even on 2700x but never bothered me until now.









If you guys can comment on the 5600x score I would be greatful, I'm not sure whether I should buy a cheap b550 mobo or is my 5600x a complete dud. It doesn't boost over 4650 and I'm not sure if that's the correct behavior. It's a clean windows installation after the swap of course. Cooling is Kraken x63.


----------



## VnnAmed

VnnAmed said:


> Hi, after waiting for what feels like forever I have finally pulled the trigger and swapped from 2700x to 5600x.
> I have installed the 4703 while at it, because with 2700x I was at 2603 or something. I have 2 issues, first of them being a below average CPU score on my 5600x. I am running default settings with 3600 CL14 Teamgroup RAM. I expected it to be at least average with these sticks even at XMP.
> 
> View attachment 2552959
> 
> 
> The other one is this metric in hwinfo. It was there even on 2700x but never bothered me until now.
> View attachment 2552960
> 
> 
> If you guys can comment on the 5600x score I would be greatful, I'm not sure whether I should buy a cheap b550 mobo or is my 5600x a complete dud. It doesn't boost over 4650 and I'm not sure if that's the correct behavior. It's a clean windows installation after the swap of course. Cooling is Kraken x63.


Re-run the test today and now they are normal. Still don't understand the Power Reporting Deviation.


----------



## BIRDMANv84

VnnAmed said:


> Re-run the test today and now they are normal. Still don't understand the Power Reporting Deviation.


Copied from HWiNFO64 

“Power Reporting Deviation (Accuracy)
This value shows how accurately some of the power values (Core, SoC) are reported,
The BIOS plays an important role in ensuring how this mechanism works and if not properly configured it can result in large deviation from real power consumed.
100% means the power is accurately reported
100% means the BIOS uses settings that result in over-reporting of power, so the CPU thinks it runs at higher
power than it actually is

IMPORTANT NOTE: This value has a meaning under FULL CPU load only at default settings (no overclocking, offsets applied, etc.), in other conditions this value should not be taken into account.
Small differences from 100% are normal, but if the result is 110% it should be of concern
It is highly recommended to visit the HWINFO Forum for further details “


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## i_max2k2

Hi all, just upgraded from a 2700x as well to a 5800x. i was looking at some videos to do some’dynamic overlocking’ the guy in the video calls it ‘dos’, enabling a manual overlock to a certain point and then pbo after. He was using a 570 board which had an option in Core Cpu ratio per CCX submenu for dynamic overclocking, is this possible with the CH7? Sorry been out of the game for a while, the 2700x i had was a poor overclocker, held back my memory as well. Anyway i’m on bios 4402, i think there are a few more new ones available which i haven’t looked at. Below is the video in question:


----------



## ossimc

i_max2k2 said:


> Hi all, just upgraded from a 2700x as well to a 5800x. i was looking at some videos to do some’dynamic overlocking’ the guy in the video calls it ‘dos’, enabling a manual overlock to a certain point and then pbo after. He was using a 570 board which had an option in Core Cpu ratio per CCX submenu for dynamic overclocking, is this possible with the CH7? Sorry been out of the game for a while, the 2700x i had was a poor overclocker, held back my memory as well. Anyway i’m on bios 4402, i think there are a few more new ones available which i haven’t looked at. Below is the video in question:


nah, the CH7 dont have dynamic OC. Also its the other way around: with lighter workloads its running PBO and after a certain threshold (how much amps the cpu is pulling) it switches to Manual OC
in my experience the whole PBO curve optimizer skit is a huge waste of time an pain in the ass to test. And in the end you only get slightly better performance in a few very lightly threaded apps (maybe you play counterstrike all day...then go for it^^) and more points in cinebench single...plus higher powerdraw. In modern apps, which uses multiple cores, my manual OC always is faster or at least on par with PBO while pulling less power. Also a stable manual OC makes RAM OC easier for stability testing.

But if u wanna look into PBO try "project hydra" its a software based dynamic OC
greetz


----------



## crakej

I'm thinking of (down)grading to B550, maybe the B550 Prime Plus, MSI B550 A-Pro or (up?)grading to X570 Prime plus. Any opinions?

Money is tight and I could make a few quid by doing this and selling the C7H - as sad as that would be!

Will I end up disappointed, or happier with what 550,570 brings to the table?


----------



## crakej

Well guys, tomorrow I'll no longer have an ASUS board for my 3900x as I'm moving to an MSI MAG B550 Tomahawk tomorrow. I'll be keeping an eye out here though from time to time.

I'll be interested to see how a B550 board handles the same CPU and RAM as I have now. I previously updated to the CH7 from the X370 Prime taking my 1700X and ram with me - which did get me some gains, so be interesting to see what B550 brings to the table.

I'm sure I will have another ASUS board sooner or later - been good knowing y'all 😎😎😎

Edit: Hey guys, after receiving a not working MSI board I returned it and got instead - an ASUS TUF Gaming B550M Plus, so will be in B550 threads now. I have to say it's interesting moving platform with same ram, cpu, everything - there are differences, enough to make me want to investigate more including faster ram and better single core performance...


----------



## masterkaj

Anyone else drop a 5800X3D in this board? I’m having issues getting it to boost past 4450. Any ideas?


----------



## smokin_mitch

masterkaj said:


> Anyone else drop a 5800X3D in this board? I’m having issues getting it to boost past 4450. Any ideas?


yep I'm running a 5800x3d now to and the highest it boosts to is 4450mhz


----------



## masterkaj

smokin_mitch said:


> yep I'm running a 5800x3d now to and the highest it boosts to is 4450mhz


Seems like a bios issue then. Maybe there is some setting I am missing or bugged.


----------



## Asutz

5800x3d boost is advertised on amd's site with up to 4,5ghz, dont think those 4450 are that bad.Not sure, maybe to get 4,5ghz or more needs much better temps and or even more optimised agesas. cant test prices need to drop before ill get one.


----------



## ossimc

i'll get mine next week. i will try to get this thing running with BIOS 4603. i read somewhere this should work


----------



## masterkaj

Looks like a bunch of ASUS boards got the latest microcode update recently. Hopefully they update this mobo soon and it fixes the single thread boosting issue.


----------



## ossimc

What issue u talking about? With X3D? Mine is boosting to 4,55 on every core with very light app (boosttester). Games seems to cap at 4450mhz...but I haven't seen higher clocks in games on other users(without bclk oc)


----------



## masterkaj

ossimc said:


> What issue u talking about? With X3D? Mine is boosting to 4,55 on every core with very light app (boosttester). Games seems to cap at 4450mhz...but I haven't seen higher clocks in games on other users(without bclk oc)


Which bios version are you using? 4703?


----------



## ossimc

Right. The latest official with ages a 1206b
Everything runs fine so far although my cpuZ numbers seems to be quiet low


----------



## Tactix

does the new bios fix the FTPM stutter issue?


----------



## hurricane28

Whats that? Something new? Never heard of it. 

My CPU boosts fine too, up to 4.850 GHz all core sometimes.


----------



## CyborgD

Anyone had any issues with 5950X on this board? Recently got a brand new one and having nothing but issues so far. WHEA errors, Event Viewer error 41 (loss of power). Most of the time no bluescreen just a straight reboot, sometimes with a random artefact on display most of the time none. System is crazy stable when idle, prime95, OCCT and CB tests all run fine without an issue or crash. Its only when the systems under load do these crashes occur and I simply cannot narrow it down. 

Previous CPUs was a Ryzen 7 3700X fully stable no problem, upgraded to a launch 5800X with WHEA errors that were fixed by BIOS updates so I never replaced it. Now I have this and it seems something is terribly wrong. All components tested in another fully stable system without issue, Brand new PSU incoming from EVGA being replaced under warranty as I initially assumed it was a psu problem. Looking around different communities tells me its CPU problem but wanted to check here and see if it could be a MB problem instead.


----------



## Tannah

CyborgD said:


> Anyone had any issues with 5950X on this board? Recently got a brand new one and having nothing but issues so far. WHEA errors, Event Viewer error 41 (loss of power). Most of the time no bluescreen just a straight reboot, sometimes with a random artefact on display most of the time none. System is crazy stable when idle, prime95, OCCT and CB tests all run fine without an issue or crash. Its only when the systems under load do these crashes occur and I simply cannot narrow it down.
> 
> 
> Previous CPUs was a Ryzen 7 3700X fully stable no problem, upgraded to a launch 5800X with WHEA errors that were fixed by BIOS updates so I never replaced it. Now I have this and it seems something is terribly wrong. All components tested in another fully stable system without issue, Brand new PSU incoming from EVGA being replaced under warranty as I initially assumed it was a psu problem. Looking around different communities tells me its CPU problem but wanted to check here and see if it could be a MB problem instead.



I am running an:
Ryzen 9 5900x
Noctua NH-D15 
Crosshair VII Hero 
32gb of Gskill Samsung b die ram
Corsair HX 1000 PSU, 
Using Bios 4703

Its been running very smoothly, other than the PCI-E 4 being missing it matches the ROG Crosshair VIII Dark Hero. 
If you read though this thread you will come across several people running the Crosshair VII Hero with a 5950x.

I would suggest flash you computer to 4703 Bios using the Asus Flashback Functionality. Then in the Bios click load defaults. Then set your system setting like DOCP, (Don't overclock yet)
Install the Latest AMD chipset driver, and see what happens.

There are a multitude of possibility as to what is causing your crash and WHEA errors. You just have to work though them one by one.


----------



## CyborgD

Tannah said:


> I am running an:
> Ryzen 9 5900x
> Noctua NH-D15
> Crosshair VII Hero
> 32gb of Gskill Samsung b die ram
> Corsair HX 1000 PSU,
> Using Bios 4703
> 
> Its been running very smoothly, other than the PCI-E 4 being missing it matches the ROG Crosshair VIII Dark Hero.
> If you read though this thread you will come across several people running the Crosshair VII Hero with a 5950x.
> 
> I would suggest flash you computer to 4703 Bios using the Asus Flashback Functionality. Then in the Bios click load defaults. Then set your system setting like DOCP, (Don't overclock yet)
> Install the Latest AMD chipset driver, and see what happens.
> 
> There are a multitude of possibility as to what is causing your crash and WHEA errors. You just have to work though them one by one.



Thanks for the response,

I have tried flashing 4703 bios and even ran all bios all the way back to 4007 to varying results, mostly worst off unfortunately.

Things I have tried.
* D.O.C.P On still crashing during games.
* D.O.C.P Off and setting memory speed and FCLK manually along with a 1.35v (even tried 1.4v incase memory voltage was the problem)
* Manually setting a 1.125 (max) SoC Voltage
* Switching PBO off, this gave me about a solid 12 hours no crashing playing things like Destiny 2, V Rising, hosting a server locally on this same machine. I 
was a fool to believe the problem was solved until it hit me again lol!
* Setting DRAM current thingy to 110% also.
* LLC to level 3/4. crashing / reboot happened within about 20mins into a game. normally its alot later so this made things worse apparently.
* After a bios flash, I cleared CMOS just in case something didn't apply as default for whatever reason.
* Lastly, after everything set to default inside the bios I cleaned and reinstalled latest chipset driver from AMD Website for X470 (this board) to no joy.

My last resort now is to return and exchange the chip for another. My PSU is also ageing so that's also being replaced though I highly suspect something is wrong with this CPU and its boosting capability.


----------



## VnnAmed

Hi, does anyone know whether this board will get AGESA 1.2.0.7 with the fix for Windows 11 stuttering?


----------



## Conenubi701

VnnAmed said:


> Hi, does anyone know whether this board will get AGESA 1.2.0.7 with the fix for Windows 11 stuttering?


This is what I'm also waiting for.


----------



## smokin_mitch

VnnAmed said:


> Hi, does anyone know whether this board will get AGESA 1.2.0.7 with the fix for Windows 11 stuttering?


soon™


----------



## hurricane28

I think there is something wrong with the BIOS or i'm missing a setting but my CPU doesn't wanna boost like it used to be. Clocks are all over the place. 









It used to boot to 4.850 GHz across all cores but now they are all over the place as you can see. I disabled powersavings in BIOS and Windows..


----------



## xeizo

hurricane28 said:


> I think there is something wrong with the BIOS or i'm missing a setting but my CPU doesn't wanna boost like it used to be. Clocks are all over the place.
> View attachment 2564532
> 
> 
> It used to boot to 4.850 GHz across all cores but now they are all over the place as you can see. I disabled powersavings in BIOS and Windows..


 But then, what it boosts to during idle is rather uninteresting. Do a graph for CPU when gaming instead, it could actually be higher.


----------



## hurricane28

True, i have no issues really so i stay as it is. Was just wondering. 

Boost clocks are a bit lower but i don't notice any difference really.


----------



## BogdanR

smokin_mitch said:


> soon™


Have my doubts since the rest of the x470 boards already have the update.


----------



## xeizo

BogdanR said:


> Have my doubts since the rest of the x470 boards already have the update.


X470-I and B450-E/F/I still missing out as well


----------



## smokin_mitch

BogdanR said:


> Have my doubts since the rest of the x470 boards already have the update.


they were releasing agesa 1207 supposedly late May to early June looks like a few mobo's got missed including our C7H 

ASUS Releases 2nd wave UEFI BIOS Support & AGESA 1.2.0.7 for AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D & new AMD Ryzen 5000, 4000 Series CPUs for ASUS AM4 X570, B550, X470, B450, X370, B350, A520, and A320 motherboards* - 94 motherboards : Amd (reddit.com)


----------



## BogdanR

smokin_mitch said:


> they were releasing agesa 1207 supposedly late May to early June looks like a few mobo's got missed including our C7H
> 
> ASUS Releases 2nd wave UEFI BIOS Support & AGESA 1.2.0.7 for AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D & new AMD Ryzen 5000, 4000 Series CPUs for ASUS AM4 X570, B550, X470, B450, X370, B350, A520, and A320 motherboards* - 94 motherboards : Amd (reddit.com)


They were ... guess it's time to move to another brand. It's the second asus flagship mobo that i own to make it on the ignore list.


----------



## Jimmy8881

smokin_mitch said:


> they were releasing agesa 1207 supposedly late May to early June looks like a few mobo's got missed including our C7H
> 
> ASUS Releases 2nd wave UEFI BIOS Support & AGESA 1.2.0.7 for AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D & new AMD Ryzen 5000, 4000 Series CPUs for ASUS AM4 X570, B550, X470, B450, X370, B350, A520, and A320 motherboards* - 94 motherboards : Amd (reddit.com)


According to the comments from a Asus rep on Reddit, it seems the update is now scheduled for Q3 , most likely they are working on the x670 boards since they are being released soon. Here's a copy and paste



ASUSTechMKTJJ

Technical Product Marketing Manager
10d
As noted in the post formal rollout after BETA releases can take time and are dependent on numerous factors. The update will be issued most likely in Q3. Stay tuned for announcements or watch our UEFI update notes in our PCDIY group, here in the sub reddit or on Fridays our our PCDIY hardware stream


----------



## tim661taft

ASUS ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) | ROG - Republic Of Gamers | ASUS USA the "support" link does not work, It's not displaying the Drivers list or the Bios Updates list. C'mon Asus it's been 3 days now


----------



## Neoony

tim661taft said:


> ASUS ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI) | ROG - Republic Of Gamers | ASUS USA the "support" link does not work, It's not displaying the Drivers list or the Bios Updates list. C'mon Asus it's been 3 days now


works fine for me (firefox)
had no problems past few days

maybe try VPN / another browser?

If you cant see the support button, try:
Go to support at Official Support | ROG USA
select motherboards and put your model and then it will show the page with support button

Annoying yeah

EDIT:
Ah wait even that does not work right now
Worked 2 days ago
I did make it to downloads few minutes ago, but cant now


----------



## Conenubi701

I noticed it was gone a week ago but thought it was just an error. Guess they decided no more support for ch7 wi fi. There's a support page for non wi-fi.

Sad


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

Its a shame that we the VII owners dont get the 1.2.0.7 bios,Im done with asus. That was my last Motherboard from them.
ROG IS PREMIUM SEGMENT, IM SO DISSAPOINTED.

Gesendet von meinem SM-M526BR mit Tapatalk


----------



## smokin_mitch

Wuest3nFuchs said:


> Its a shame that we the VII owners dont get the 1.2.0.7 bios,Im done with asus. That was my last Motherboard from them.
> ROG IS PREMIUM SEGMENT, IM SO DISSAPOINTED.
> 
> Gesendet von meinem SM-M526BR mit Tapatalk


they better release the 1207 bios for the C7H wifi as I'm using a 5800x3d and win11 and the stuttering although doesn't happen often is annoying


----------



## Xuso

Asus Crosshair VII Hero Wifi bios update: https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-4901.zip

ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO(WI-FI) BIOS 4901
"1. Update AMD AM4 AGESA V2 PI 1.2.0.7.
2. Improve system stability
3. Fix AMD fTPM issue causes random stuttering.

Before running the USB BIOS Flashback tool, please rename the BIOS file (C7HWIFI.CAP) using BIOSRenamer."


----------



## VnnAmed

smokin_mitch said:


> they better release the 1207 bios for the C7H wifi as I'm using a 5800x3d and win11 and the stuttering although doesn't happen often is annoying


What are your temps? If I hit mine with Prime95 I get crazy numbers, and that's with 420 Liquid Freezer II









Also I'm not sure which of those are real temps anymore...


----------



## smokin_mitch

Xuso said:


> Asus Crosshair VII Hero Wifi bios update: https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO-WIFI-ASUS-4901.zip
> 
> ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO(WI-FI) BIOS 4901
> "1. Update AMD AM4 AGESA V2 PI 1.2.0.7.
> 2. Improve system stability
> 3. Fix AMD fTPM issue causes random stuttering.
> 
> Before running the USB BIOS Flashback tool, please rename the BIOS file (C7HWIFI.CAP) using BIOSRenamer."


yes finally installed and running good on my rig with 5800x3d + 3090 and 2x16gb dual rank b-die 3600cl14 with tight sub timings


----------



## smokin_mitch

VnnAmed said:


> What are your temps? If I hit mine with Prime95 I get crazy numbers, and that's with 420 Liquid Freezer II
> Also I'm not sure which of those are real temps anymore...


I haven't bothered to run any cpu heavy stress tests as you can't overclock the 5800x3d anyway I've only tuned my ram and used Tm5 anta777 extreme + karhu ramtest to test for stability

gaming my temps are fine sub 70c with an ek 360 aio with 6x120mm fans push/pull at low rpm


----------



## Conenubi701

WOOOO this is nice!!

5800x3d 32gb 4x 8gb 3200mhz cl14 and XTXH 6900Xt


System is running smoothly so far with negative voltage offset plus level 1 LLC to introduce vDroop


----------



## nick name

Conenubi701 said:


> WOOOO this is nice!!
> 
> 5800x3d 32gb 4x 8gb 3200mhz cl14 and XTXH 6900Xt
> 
> 
> System is running smoothly so far with negative voltage offset plus level 1 LLC to introduce vDroop


Any clock stretching?


----------



## slapchuck

Conenubi701 said:


> WOOOO this is nice!!
> 
> 5800x3d 32gb 4x 8gb 3200mhz cl14 and XTXH 6900Xt
> 
> 
> System is running smoothly so far with negative voltage offset plus level 1 LLC to introduce vDroop


Could you share your voltage offset value? Im upgrading to 5800x3d soon, maybe 5800x not positive yet.


----------



## Rush12049

Maybe someone can help me explain why my bios has a big black bar on top of the screen? Worked perfectly fine when i had my 5700XT GPU, upgraded to a 6700XT in May, and its been like this ever since. Tried different bioses, same issue. The buttons can still be used, I just can't see them. Anyone else have this issue? No issues once I get into Windows, everything works perfectly.


----------



## smokin_mitch

Rush12049 said:


> Maybe someone can help me explain why my bios has a big black bar on top of the screen? Worked perfectly fine when i had my 5700XT GPU, upgraded to a 6700XT in May, and its been like this ever since. Tried different bioses, same issue. The buttons can still be used, I just can't see them. Anyone else have this issue? No issues once I get into Windows, everything works perfectly.


have you tried connecting your display to a different port on your gpu or try different display cables?


----------



## Rush12049

smokin_mitch said:


> have you tried connecting your display to a different port on your gpu or try different display cables?


Just tried a different port, same issue. Will have to buy another cable to try out, will report back.


----------



## Conenubi701

nick name said:


> Any clock stretching?


At -0.1000mv no noticeable clock stretching(results for Firestrike and Timespy are within margin of error), but going to -0.18750mv there is some heavy clock stretching, 15% from CPU score on firestrike and 8.7% on Time Spy CPU Score


slapchuck said:


> Could you share your voltage offset value? Im upgrading to 5800x3d soon, maybe 5800x not positive yet.


I found my perfect balance is at -0.1000mv + LLC at level 1 on this board. This introduces heavy vDroop without dipping into the clock stretching that Ryzen has.

If you're gaming at 1440p/4k -0.18750mv is perfect with LLC at level 1. 

Keep in mind, this is not touching PBO at all, purely stock 5800x3D.


----------



## tim661taft

This new Bios version (4901) breaks Asus AI Suite 3. I had to downgrade bios to get AI Suite to work again.
My Rig is :
*ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI)*
*AMD X470 chipset
CPU Ryzen 7 2700X
Windows 10 x64*


----------



## Xuso

tim661taft said:


> This new Bios version breaks Asus AI Suite 3. I had to downgrade bios to get AI Suite to work again.


I have updated the bios and AI Suite 3 works fine. I have the latest version installed from the Asus support website.


----------



## smokin_mitch

tim661taft said:


> This new Bios version (4901) breaks Asus AI Suite 3. I had to downgrade bios to get AI Suite to work again.
> My Rig is :
> *ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO (WI-FI)*
> *AMD X470 chipset
> CPU Ryzen 7 2700X
> Windows 10 x64*


Is AI suite useful ? I though it was just Asus junkware


----------



## nick name

On my 5800X I cannot seem to reach the same boost clocks I did with the previous BIOS 4703. The other weird bit is that far greater negative offsets don't result in clock-stretching. It's odd. 
Edit:
NVM. I am an idiot and completely forgot about Curve Optimizer. I also forgot what my stable settings were though this BIOS does seem to suffer less from clock stretching.
Edit 2: It may not suffer less clock stretching. Trying to find the right Curve Optimizer settings (I forgot what they were) I have seen pretty similar behavior.


----------



## nick name

Did I do something to cause it or does this BIOS cap max voltage at 1.4V?

Edit:
It appears that when you manually set EDC it caps the voltage. So I was using an EDC of 142 and couple with a negative offset of .025 I was capped at 1.4V. When I changed EDC to Auto voltage went back to the normal max of 1.5V


----------



## bushd0c

BIOS 4901: Performance in CB20/Multicore (5950x/3733Mhz, latest chipset drivers) dropped by 200-300 Points with same Bios Settings as in 4703. Will revert to 4703 ...


----------



## nick name

bushd0c said:


> BIOS 4901: Performance in CB20/Multicore (5950x/3733Mhz, latest chipset drivers) dropped by 200-300 Points with same Bios Settings as in 4703. Will revert to 4703 ...
> 
> View attachment 2570276


I don't know if you did what I did, but I completely forgot to set Curve Optimizer when I flashed the BIOS.


----------



## smokin_mitch

bushd0c said:


> BIOS 4901: Performance in CB20/Multicore (5950x/3733Mhz, latest chipset drivers) dropped by 200-300 Points with same Bios Settings as in 4703. Will revert to 4703 ...
> 
> View attachment 2570276


does bios 4901 have the sleep bug which drops your fclk speed when above 3600 ram when waking from sleep?


----------



## bushd0c

nick name said:


> I don't know if you did what I did, but I completely forgot to set Curve Optimizer when I flashed the BIOS.


Thanks for the reminder, but I did not forget it, sadly. The strange thing is, even on 4703 with previous settings and chipset drivers, the performance does not go up again and in the AMD Curve Optimizer Settings there is a setting that is still different to the "old" 4703 after flashback (you can choose positive/negative impact on boost clock (up to 200). On 4703 you could only select a positive value... now after flashing back from 4901 to 4703, it's still there ...


----------



## bushd0c

smokin_mitch said:


> does bios 4901 have the sleep bug which drops your fclk speed when above 3600 ram when waking from sleep?


sry, didn't check. i don't use that feature.


----------



## bushd0c

Okay, tried 4901 again, optimized my PBO Settings (200/200/150) , and voila, back to former speeds. Will remain on 4901 for now.


----------



## SoulRipper

Hello,

I have a C7H + Ryzen 5950X, RTX 3090, NVMe SSD (bottom slot), Creative PCIe soundcard.

I would like to add a second NVMe SSD (top slot), but I think doing so will reduce the first PCI-E X16 slot to X8. 

Information I found in the manual & online are not clear.

Thanks!


----------



## smokin_mitch

SoulRipper said:


> Hello,
> 
> I have a C7H + Ryzen 5950X, RTX 3090, NVMe SSD (bottom slot), Creative PCIe soundcard.
> 
> I would like to add a second NVMe SSD (top slot), but I think doing so will reduce the first PCI-E X16 slot to X8.
> 
> Information I found in the manual & online are not clear.
> 
> Thanks!


yes adding an m.2 to the top slot will drop your gpu to x8


----------



## bushd0c

nevermind... already answered.


----------



## Joe Flores

smokin_mitch said:


> does bios 4901 have the sleep bug which drops your fclk speed when above 3600 ram when waking from sleep?


Hey were u able to find out if this sleep bug has been fixed in 4901 yet?


----------



## By-Tor

I have been running this MB along with a 3700X for years now and was still on the 2501 bios until I updated it today to 4901. A year or 2 ago I thought the MB died and ordered an Asus B550-F as it's replacement, but it turned out to be the PSU and never used the B550. Yesterday I ordered a 5700X to replace the 3700X.

Would it be best to stay with the CH7 or replace it with the B550?

Would like to hear your thoughts.

Mark


----------



## 97pedro

By-Tor said:


> I have been running this MB along with a 3700X for years now and was still on the 2501 bios until I updated it today to 4901. A year or 2 ago I thought the MB died and ordered an Asus B550-F as it's replacement, but it turned out to be the PSU and never used the B550. Yesterday I ordered a 5700X to replace the 3700X.
> 
> Would it be best to stay with the CH7 or replace it with the B550?
> 
> Would like to hear your thoughts.
> 
> Mark


Crosshair vii hero is not even comparable to the b550 f gaming.
Keep the crosshair


----------



## smokin_mitch

Joe Flores said:


> Hey were u able to find out if this sleep bug has been fixed in 4901 yet?


No I'm running 2x16gb 3600cl14 haven't been bothered to test 3800cl14 yet since I upgraded to a 5800x3d I don't think I'll gain much


----------



## Joe Flores

By-Tor said:


> I have been running this MB along with a 3700X for years now and was still on the 2501 bios until I updated it today to 4901. A year or 2 ago I thought the MB died and ordered an Asus B550-F as it's replacement, but it turned out to be the PSU and never used the B550. Yesterday I ordered a 5700X to replace the 3700X.
> 
> Would it be best to stay with the CH7 or replace it with the B550?
> 
> Would like to hear your thoughts.
> 
> Mark


I would stay on the C7H, no real reason to get b550 over it with next gen AM5 coming soon.


----------



## By-Tor

Joe Flores said:


> I would stay on the C7H, no real reason to get b550 over it with next gen AM5 coming soon.


I already have the B550, and not jumping on the AM5 for a while... My 5700X comes in tomorrow...


----------



## smokin_mitch

By-Tor said:


> I already have the B550, and not jumping on the AM5 for a while... My 5700X comes in tomorrow...


I'd keep the b550 if you intend to use a pcie gen 4 m.2 ssd or pcie gen 4 high really end gpu


----------



## By-Tor

smokin_mitch said:


> I'd keep the b550 if you intend to use a pcie gen 4 m.2 ssd or pcie gen 4 high really end gpu


I was thinking of just keeping it and the 3700X for a rainy day if it were to come. My Vega 64 after many years of service died a few weeks ago and I picked up a Sapphire Pulse 6700XT which is not high end, but it works great.

In real world work or play would you really notice a difference with PCI-e gen 4? I don't think I would...

Thanks


----------



## Joe Flores

Update for anyone curious: sleep bug still persists in 4901... guess it is never getting fixed.


----------



## smokin_mitch

Joe Flores said:


> Update for anyone curious: sleep bug still persists in 4901... guess it is never getting fixed.
> View attachment 2571616
> View attachment 2571617


sad face


----------



## Takla

Conenubi701 said:


> WOOOO this is nice!!
> 
> 5800x3d 32gb 4x 8gb 3200mhz cl14 and XTXH 6900Xt
> 
> 
> System is running smoothly so far with negative voltage offset plus level 1 LLC to introduce vDroop


LLC 0 (Auto) has the most vdroop. Do not use a negative voltage offset, use curve optimizer or enjoy your negative performance.


----------



## JV69

Can anybody explain briefly what is the sleep bug? I have a 5800x3d stock, ir afects me?


----------



## smokin_mitch

JV69 said:


> Can anybody explain briefly what is the sleep bug? I have a 5800x3d stock, ir afects me?


If you run your ram at greater than 3600 and Fclk greater than 1800 when you wake your pc from sleep it drops the fclk and mclk out of sync so no longer 1:1:1 and wrecks your performance/latency of your nicely tuned ram


----------



## DAM20

Anyone here was able to hit over 3466Mhz with a 2700X? I'm currently running 3466 C13 with all secondary tighten up, but I'm having a lot of issues to pass Anta777 Extreme with 3533+.


----------



## smokin_mitch

DAM20 said:


> Anyone here was able to hit over 3466Mhz with a 2700X? I'm currently running 3466 C13 with all secondary tighten up, but I'm having a lot of issues to pass Anta777 Extreme with 3533+.


when I had a 2700x I could only ever get 3466, anything above that I could never get stable


----------



## DAM20

smokin_mitch said:


> when I had a 2700x I could only ever get 3466, anything above that I could never get stable


Damn it, I tried a few years ago and I've found out that setting the power plan to 90% was somehow stabilizing my 3533-C15 setting, but was trash vs my daily 3466-C13... Now I'm trying again by playing with ProcODT and CAD_BUS, but I luck the knowledge on those, so far from what I read lower theoretically seems the best, but not sure. Last night I was able to pass 3 cycles of Anta777 Extreme with 3533 (14-15-14), that's my only accomplishment so far.


----------



## smokin_mitch

DAM20 said:


> Damn it, I tried a few years ago and I've found out that setting the power plan to 90% was somehow stabilizing my 3533-C15 setting, but was trash vs my daily 3466-C13... Now I'm trying again by playing with ProcODT and CAD_BUS, but I luck the knowledge on those, so far from what I read lower theoretically seems the best, but not sure. Last night I was able to pass 3 cycles of Anta777 Extreme with 3533 (14-15-14), that's my only accomplishment so far.


if your 3466 is stable I'd just run that, you are not gaining much at all past there


----------



## lordzed83

smokin_mitch said:


> if your 3466 is stable I'd just run that, you are not gaining much at all past there


You tried to oc this chip on our mb using bclk by any chance ?? Kinda tempted to jump from 3900x after iw seen what zen 4 offers. Since i dont render anything anymore just gaming pc seems like this chip with some oc like great optiion. Bclk of 101.8 should add like 100mhz to boost and system should still be stable


----------



## smokin_mitch

lordzed83 said:


> You tried to oc this chip on our mb using bclk by any chance ?? Kinda tempted to jump from 3900x after iw seen what zen 4 offers. Since i dont render anything anymore just gaming pc seems like this chip with some oc like great optiion. Bclk of 101.8 should add like 100mhz to boost and system should still be stable


I haven't tried bclk oc, last time I tried bclk oc on my old 3800x and 5900x I found my pc unstable, slower boot times and random crashes in games, the 5800x3d is a beast for gaming just running stock and with my 3600cl14 dual rank bdie kit


----------



## Tactix

5c average temp increase with stock settings on 4901 - 5800x


----------



## Tactix

Joe Flores said:


> Update for anyone curious: sleep bug still persists in 4901... guess it is never getting fixed.
> View attachment 2571616
> View attachment 2571617


Sleep works as expected for me, no clock bugs. on bios 4901


----------



## smokin_mitch

Tactix said:


> Sleep works as expected for me, no clock bugs. on bios 4901


sleep bug only happens when running higher than 1800mhz fclk as in 3733/3800 ram with 1867/1900 fclk


----------



## Tactix

smokin_mitch said:


> sleep bug only happens when running higher than 1800mhz fclk as in 3733/3800 ram with 1867/1900 fclk


Ah gotcha


----------



## intellitour

Is it possible to biosmod this motherboard to enable pcie gen4? Has anyone ever done it?


----------



## smokin_mitch

intellitour said:


> Is it possible to biosmod this motherboard to enable pcie gen4? Has anyone ever done it?


I wish this could be done also getting gen4 on the gpu and/or m.2 would be great


----------



## wolfgang91

Hi guys,
I have an unfortunate problem with my computer. It reboots continuously, at most every 5 min, reboot. I have updated BIOS and then reverted to the same (4402). I have mounted the memory modules in other slots, I have formatted. I have the default values in BIOS, all stock, and it continues to reboot. I have also raised the microphone voltage a bit (positive offset of +0.0125) and the same thing. I've had the computer with undervolt for a long time, without overclok, and it hasn't given me any problems until now. Any hardware changes in the last months...
Any idea what it could be?
Thank you very much in advance


----------



## curryloti

Check the voltages, the power supply could be failing.


----------



## Priller

DAM20 said:


> Anyone here was able to hit over 3466Mhz with a 2700X? I'm currently running 3466 C13 with all secondary tighten up, but I'm having a lot of issues to pass Anta777 Extreme with 3533+.


3533 at flat 14s was the best I could do with my 2700X. 3600 was possible but it would fail memory stress tests. For stability I eventually had to increase TWR.


----------



## DAM20

Priller said:


> 3533 at flat 14s was the best I could do with my 2700X. 3600 was possible but it would fail memory stress tests. For stability I eventually had to increase TWR.


Damn, could you also share your 3533 timings? I'm able to get 3533 flat 15, but 14 is getting problematic


----------



## Priller

DAM20 said:


> Damn, could you also share your 3533 timings? I'm able to get 3533 flat 15, but 14 is getting problematic


Same as posted except TWR had to come back to 26 or 28 IIRC. I was testing something else so I never finished trying to get tFAW down etc.


----------



## DAM20

Priller said:


> Same as posted except TWR had to come back to 26 or 28 IIRC. I was testing something else so I never finished trying to get tFAW down etc.


Was able to get flat 14 3533 stable, altho only with "safe" subs, at least now I have a good baseline, tnx for the pic, it made me want to restart from 0 with voltage and everything, it's working xd


----------



## Priller

DAM20 said:


> Was able to get flat 14 3533 stable, altho only with "safe" subs, at least now I have a good baseline, tnx for the pic, it made me want to restart from 0 with voltage and everything, it's working xd


Good to hear. It took me a while to get 3533 CL14 stable but I may be a bit lucky in that my 2700X will do 4x8GB 3400 CL14 stable.


----------



## wolfgang91

curryloti said:


> Check the voltages, the power supply could be failing.


Hi, thank you for your answer. No OC at the moment; all stock voltages. I've changed the power supply and the same fail occurs. I have replaced all components except the disk which is a Nvme Adata SX 8200 pro. 
I didn't think these restarts were possible because of Nvme..... Do you think this could be the cause?
Thank you!


----------



## curryloti

Maybe check the Event Viewer for clues.


----------



## wolfgang91

Hi, and thank for the answer. In the Event Viewer It says: Critical Error Kernel Power Event ID 41.
I know, this is related to power issues, but I've just replaced the power supply and all its cords.
Cheers

Enviado desde mi Mi A2 mediante Tapatalk


----------



## curryloti

wolfgang91 said:


> I didn't think these restarts were possible because of Nvme..... Do you think this could be the cause?


Still possible.

Remove the Adata, run everything at pure stock ie. no undervolting. Maybe try using a Linux USB boot drive and test for RAM stability too.


----------



## lordzed83

Finished overclocking my 5800x3d


----------



## Margatroid

Hey guys, I'm upgrading from a 2700X to a 5800X3D, and I'm wondering if I should use the most recent BIOS or an earlier one for more stability. What do you think is the best one right now?

It sounds like 4901 has some issues...


----------



## smokin_mitch

Margatroid said:


> Hey guys, I'm upgrading from a 2700X to a 5800X3D, and I'm wondering if I should use the most recent BIOS or an earlier one for more stability. What do you think is the best one right now?
> 
> It sounds like 4901 has some issues...


4901 is fine I'm using it with my 5800x3d no issues


----------



## Margatroid

smokin_mitch said:


> 4901 is fine I'm using it with my 5800x3d no issues


Alright, thanks man. I'll give it a shot.


----------



## lordzed83

smokin_mitch said:


> 4901 is fine I'm using it with my 5800x3d no issues


well for start VDDG voltage change does not work.... **** sake cant run higher mem speeds cause cpu is sitting on 1 volt :/


----------



## Priller

Asus X470 CH7 Bios Observations​
Testing Setup: CH7 Hero (NON WIFI) 5900X, CPB Disabled (PBO As Well) SAM Enabled, Aura Stealth Mode, All Unused Fan Headers Disabled. Ram Timings Tuned.

Bios Version: 4502
VDDG Voltage Control In AMD OC Ignored
VDDG Voltage Control Sets to 0.950 When Any Value Entered
Offset Voltage Show Static In HWInfo But No Voltage Increase On Ryzen Master
Offset Voltage Causes WHEA Errors Even While Increasing Vcore With Stock Clock And PBO Off
Manual CPU OCing Voltage Does Not Apply
CPU Core Voltage Sets to 1.363V When Manual Mode Selected In Auto With 1.200V Set In Manual OCing
Ram Decoupled Not Tested

Bios Version: 4603
Ram Decoupled Mode Begins at 3667Mhz. FCLK Remains at 1800, UCLK Goes To 2:1 Mode
Enabling LN2 Mode In BIOs with Mounted Switch Left Off, Shows LN2 Mode In BIOs Disabled But Allows The CPU To Boot at 1900 IF
VRM Spread Spectrum Disappears When Manually Setting VRM Switching Khz And Becomes Unsearchable
LN2 Mode Sometimes Boots At 3800/1900. Windows Crashes And BIOs Lockups Are Common
3866/1933 Much More Stable But WHEA Errors Are Constant
3866/1933 WHEA Errors Regardless Of Voltage. PBO Off, 1.2V SOC, 1.15V CLDO VDDP, 1.1V VDDG CCD & IOD, 1.55V DIMM, 1.918V PLL
Manual CPU OCing Voltage Does Not Apply. Set 1050V and get 1.1 Static
Offset Voltage Becomes static when not on auto 
P State VID Doesn’t Work And Becomes Static At 1.1
VDDP Voltage Ignored. Both in AMD Overclocking and In AMD CBS/XFR Enhancement

Bios Version: 4703
VDDG CCD & IOD Voltage Ignored in Extreme Tweaker. Must Be Set in AMD Overclocking
Voltage VID Down Clocks Better. Lows to 0.200V.
Voltage VID And Core Voltage Remain Above 1.0V when Memory Set To 3600 And Higher
VRM Spread Spectrum Disappears When Manually Setting VRM Switching Khz
Ram Decoupled Mode Begins at 3667Mhz. FCLK Remains at 1800, UCLK Goes To 2:1 Mode
3800/1900 Fails To Boot With 07 Code
LN2 Mode Sometimes Boots At 3800/1900. Windows Crashes And BIOs Lockups Are Common
3866/1933 Boots With Constant WHEA Errors
VDDP Voltage Uncontrollable In Both AMD Overclocking And AMD CBS/NBIO/XFR Enhancement
Manual CPU OCing Voltage Does Not Apply. Get 1.1 Static
CPU Voltage in AI Tweaker To Offset + Auto Still Ignores Voltage Set In AMD Overclocking
3866/1933 WHEA Errors Regardless Of Voltage. PBO Off, 1.2125V SOC, 1.15V CLDO VDDP, 1.1V VDDG CCD & IOD, 1.5V DIMM, 1.918V PLL
WHEA Errors Event ID: 19, APIC ID: 0 (Processor Core) Unknown Error Source.

Bios: 4901

VDDG CCD & IOD Voltage Ignored in Extreme Tweaker. Must Be Set in AMD Overclocking
VRM Spread Spectrum Disappears When Manually Setting VRM Switching Khz
Ram Decoupled Mode Begins at 3667Mhz. FCLK Remains at 1800, UCLK Goes To 2:1 Mode
3800/1900 Fails To Boot With 07 Code
3866/1933 WHEA Errors Regardless Of Voltage. 1.25V SOC, 1.125V CLDO VDDP, 1.1V VDDG CCD & IOD, 1.5V DIMM, 1.918V PLL.
Increasing CCD and IOD voltage increases the rate of WHEA 19 Errors
VDDP Voltage Uncontrollable

Positive: AMD Overclocking\PBO. CPU Boost Clock Override Can Be Set NEGATIVE.
Removing The 1.5ish Volts Seen Under Single Threaded Workloads.
I Did Not See This In Previous Bios Versions. Would Have To Go Back And Verify If It’s Only In AGESA 1.2.0.7.

Notes:​
Many Settings Duplicated. Different Bios Versions Will Require Settings To Be Set In Different Places.
Auto CPU Voltage sets to 1.1V And Seems To Override Other Voltage Settings
P State VID Doesn’t Work
VDDP Voltage Uncontrollable In All 3 Places On All Bios Versions Tested.

I'm sure there are plenty of things I missed like the EDC sleep bug but I was mainly looking for a fix to the 1900 FCLK hole or the ability to run FCLK at 1933 or above without WHEA 19s since I could boot as high as 4000/2000.

*EDIT:* Second 5900X has proven to be much better. 3800/1900 no problem using the exact same profile for daily settings I was using before. I only change ram speed and IF speed. No WHEA errors at all with only 1 error on test 11 in Testmem5 which Ill get sorted out.(I did have HWInfo open at the same time)
Strange observation. VDDP voltage now reports 0.174-0.218V. Previously this was showing just short of .700V. Same HWInfo install etc.


----------



## By-Tor

Re-size bar?

I'm running a 5700X on a Crosshair VII Hero with a 6700XT GPU.

When I set Re-size bar to on, enable above 4g decoding to enabled and resize bar support to auto and exit bios it keeps rebooting into bios and can't get into windows until I turn re-size bar off...

Ideas?


----------



## lordzed83

Priller said:


> Asus X470 CH7 Bios Observations​
> Testing Setup: CH7 Hero (NON WIFI) 5900X, CPB Disabled (PBO As Well) SAM Enabled, Aura Stealth Mode, All Unused Fan Headers Disabled. Ram Timings Tuned.
> 
> Bios Version: 4502
> VDDG Voltage Control In AMD OC Ignored
> VDDG Voltage Control Sets to 0.950 When Any Value Entered
> Offset Voltage Show Static In HWInfo But No Voltage Increase On Ryzen Master
> Offset Voltage Causes WHEA Errors Even While Increasing Vcore With Stock Clock And PBO Off
> Manual CPU OCing Voltage Does Not Apply
> CPU Core Voltage Sets to 1.363V When Manual Mode Selected In Auto With 1.200V Set In Manual OCing
> Ram Decoupled Not Tested
> 
> Bios Version: 4603
> Ram Decoupled Mode Begins at 3667Mhz. FCLK Remains at 1800, UCLK Goes To 2:1 Mode
> Enabling LN2 Mode In BIOs with Mounted Switch Left Off, Shows LN2 Mode In BIOs Disabled But Allows The CPU To Boot at 1900 IF
> VRM Spread Spectrum Disappears When Manually Setting VRM Switching Khz And Becomes Unsearchable
> LN2 Mode Sometimes Boots At 3800/1900. Windows Crashes And BIOs Lockups Are Common
> 3866/1933 Much More Stable But WHEA Errors Are Constant
> 3866/1933 WHEA Errors Regardless Of Voltage. PBO Off, 1.2V SOC, 1.15V CLDO VDDP, 1.1V VDDG CCD & IOD, 1.55V DIMM, 1.918V PLL
> Manual CPU OCing Voltage Does Not Apply. Set 1050V and get 1.1 Static
> Offset Voltage Becomes static when not on auto
> P State VID Doesn’t Work And Becomes Static At 1.1
> VDDP Voltage Ignored. Both in AMD Overclocking and In AMD CBS/XFR Enhancement
> 
> Bios Version: 4703
> VDDG CCD & IOD Voltage Ignored in Extreme Tweaker. Must Be Set in AMD Overclocking
> Voltage VID Down Clocks Better. Lows to 0.200V.
> Voltage VID And Core Voltage Remain Above 1.0V when Memory Set To 3600 And Higher
> VRM Spread Spectrum Disappears When Manually Setting VRM Switching Khz
> Ram Decoupled Mode Begins at 3667Mhz. FCLK Remains at 1800, UCLK Goes To 2:1 Mode
> 3800/1900 Fails To Boot With 07 Code
> LN2 Mode Sometimes Boots At 3800/1900. Windows Crashes And BIOs Lockups Are Common
> 3866/1933 Boots With Constant WHEA Errors
> VDDP Voltage Uncontrollable In Both AMD Overclocking And AMD CBS/NBIO/XFR Enhancement
> Manual CPU OCing Voltage Does Not Apply. Get 1.1 Static
> CPU Voltage in AI Tweaker To Offset + Auto Still Ignores Voltage Set In AMD Overclocking
> 3866/1933 WHEA Errors Regardless Of Voltage. PBO Off, 1.2125V SOC, 1.15V CLDO VDDP, 1.1V VDDG CCD & IOD, 1.5V DIMM, 1.918V PLL
> WHEA Errors Event ID: 19, APIC ID: 0 (Processor Core) Unknown Error Source.
> 
> Bios: 4901
> 
> VDDG CCD & IOD Voltage Ignored in Extreme Tweaker. Must Be Set in AMD Overclocking
> VRM Spread Spectrum Disappears When Manually Setting VRM Switching Khz
> Ram Decoupled Mode Begins at 3667Mhz. FCLK Remains at 1800, UCLK Goes To 2:1 Mode
> 3800/1900 Fails To Boot With 07 Code
> 3866/1933 WHEA Errors Regardless Of Voltage. 1.25V SOC, 1.125V CLDO VDDP, 1.1V VDDG CCD & IOD, 1.5V DIMM, 1.918V PLL.
> Increasing CCD and IOD voltage increases the rate of WHEA 19 Errors
> VDDP Voltage Uncontrollable
> 
> Positive: AMD Overclocking\PBO. CPU Boost Clock Override Can Be Set NEGATIVE.
> Removing The 1.5ish Volts Seen Under Single Threaded Workloads.
> I Did Not See This In Previous Bios Versions. Would Have To Go Back And Verify If It’s Only In AGESA 1.2.0.7.
> 
> Notes:​
> Many Settings Duplicated. Different Bios Versions Will Require Settings To Be Set In Different Places.
> Auto CPU Voltage sets to 1.1V And Seems To Override Other Voltage Settings
> P State VID Doesn’t Work
> VDDP Voltage Uncontrollable In All 3 Places On All Bios Versions Tested.
> 
> I'm sure there are plenty of things I missed like the EDC sleep bug but I was mainly looking for a fix to the 1900 FCLK hole or the ability to run FCLK at 1933 or above without WHEA 19s since I could boot as high as 4000/2000.


Well You wasted time cause some things that are not working for YOU are workling fine for me. And some working for You wont work for me. Its not only bios but also cpu that matter and combination of em both. there ya go set in places that are not working for You


----------



## Priller

lordzed83 said:


> Well You wasted time cause some things that are not working for YOU are workling fine for me. And some working for You wont work for me. Its not only bios but also cpu that matter and combination of em both. there ya go set in places that are not working for You
> View attachment 2582419


You talking about the VDDG voltages? If so that's strange different CPUs might flip where you need to enter values. It was the same for me on 5700X and 5900X.

Iif you're referring to VDDP voltage, I was not talking about CLDO VDDP. VDDP voltage would have to be shown on HWINFO/monitor etc. And for me would sit under .700 volt regardless.


----------



## lordzed83

Priller said:


> You talking about the VDDG voltages? If so that's strange different CPUs might flip where you need to enter values. It was the same for me on 5700X and 5900X.
> 
> Iif you're referring to VDDP voltage, I was not talking about CLDO VDDP. VDDP voltage would have to be shown on HWINFO/monitor etc. And for me would sit under .700 volt regardless.


Ye vddg works on 4703 but does not work on 4901 VDDP well its or stuck or not changing or reading wrong hard to say. Would think that Memory training would not pass with what its showing. Both of em bioses got problems and stuck with them sadly


----------



## gupsterg

I have deserted my C7HWIFI  ...

It had been a great board and have luv'd every tinkering time with it! Used R7 2700X/R5 3600/ R7 3700X/3x R9 3900X/ R9 5900X, but when I ordered a 5800X3D I jumped to C8DH! 

OC'ing I haven't seen a difference with C8DH, what I luv about X570 vs X470/X370 is the post times! It's like I'm back on 4 core Intel! Not getting any multiple posts even when power removed from board.

When I look back at when Ryzen 1000 series launch period experience and where it's got to, it has come along way. At the time I had a crazy clocking i5 4690K on a ASUS Hero, it did 4.9GHz all day long on air and could hit [email protected] (CPU-Z Validation link, the video).

So I'd like to say a big thanks to ASUS team for giving me the C7HWIFI to play with at launch! @[email protected] @shamino1978 @elmor @Silent Scone and most of all @The Stilt for all the pearls of wisdom!


----------



## Margatroid

Edit: I had a bunch of 4901 issues but I got it running. I wonder if running my RAM at 3200 vs 2400 is actually making it better. I noticed it seemed like it was smoother on startup at 2400. Any thoughts on this? Also wondering if there are any other voltage tweaks or other things you guys recommend. I'm seeing a big bump in speed already, and it feels nice!


----------



## majsterz

4901 - 5800x3d
Everything abote 3733MHz ram speed gives whea errors; in single core tests i never can get a boost to 4500-4550MHz as someone said i only saw these high clocks at first launch then its gone. in cinebench i can get 15100+ scores with pbo2 tuner on -30 all cores - so thats something.


----------



## I love my SUPP

Beta Bios 5001 for this motherboard if anyone want to test it out.

ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO/HERO (Wi-Fi) BETA BIOS 5001


----------



## smokin_mitch

I love my SUPP said:


> Beta Bios 5001 for this motherboard if anyone want to test it out.
> 
> ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO/HERO (Wi-Fi) BETA BIOS 5001


I think I'll wait for a final not beta, but I wonder if this includes curve optimizer for the 5800x3d in bios


----------



## majsterz

@smokin_mitch curve optimizer is not included in this beta bios or its disabled for 5800x3d chip.
The single core boost bug still persist and it only boost to 4500/4550 at the first startup. It may not boost that high because of memory oc - but it's pretty dumb to think of that.
I didnt get any whea errors on 3800MHz of ram but i couldnt stabilize tphyrdl timing so i downlocked to 3733MHz.
You still cant set VDDG CCD and IOD in extreme tweaker, but in advanced overclocking tab.


----------

